Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Hussar" data-source="post: 6835395" data-attributes="member: 22779">There seems to be a couple of conversations going on.  Having magical abilities in a given class doesn't really make a character a caster does it?  The 1e monk is mentioned, with speak with animals at 3rd level and speak with plants at 8th.  Paladins and rangers getting spells at 8th or 9th level as well.Thing is, we do have to look at this in context.  Rangers and Paladins gaining one or two spells per day at around name level isn't really going to have a large effect on how those classes play.  It's not like the Ranger, hitting 9th level and getting Magic Missile once per day is going to start shooting nothing but magic missiles all day long.  Realistically, the character will play pretty much exactly the same as it did at 7th level.  Gaining a couple of first level spells is cool and all, but, it's not radically altering how the class works.I'd argue the same for Speak with Animals.  Ok, sure, it's handy and whatnot, but, remember, this is a system that lacks any social mechanics, so, it's entirely freeform what happens.  But, at the end of the day, the monk is still going to play pretty much the same.  It's not like he's suddenly controlling animals (which would be a major change in how the class plays) or gaining a pet or anything like that.  He can simply chat with animals.  Cool, but, not game changing.Now, look at a 5e druid.  It's not unreasonable to think that a 5e druid is going to have a 12 or 14 Str score.  Same with Dex.  So, that druid with a scimitar has about a +5 (ish) bonus to hit and does a d8+1 or 2.  Or, he can go with Produce Flame, using his likely 18 Wis score for a +6 or 7 to hit and dealing d8 or 2d8 (by 5th level) damage.  As I said, the mechanics very much favour using cantrips over attacks.  Can I make a druid that stands up and fights?  Sure.  Likely you'd go with Moon Druid and do most of your fighting in Wild Shape.  A Land Druid though?  That's a wizard in leather armour.  This is the issue that I'm having with 5e magic.  Because it has become so ubiquitous, and so easy to use, it turns all the casters into wizards.  They're doing the same thing, by and large, as what traditionally wizards did.  Unless you play a Warpriest, there's no particular reason for your priest to stand in combat.  What's the point of having heavy armour proficiency for a character whose abilities pretty much tell the player to play a ranged combatant?The other issue that I'm having is that so much of this is hard wired into the base class.  It's not that druids and clerics and bards are gaining all these combat spells when they choose their subclass.  If that were true, I'd have a lot less issues.  The Eldritch Knight doesn't phase me at all.  It's that most of these very common spells, that are stand ins for actual physical attacks, are added to the classes from first level.  Why is a druid, bard or cleric blasting with spells?  Since when was that the niche for these classes?  All three were support, front line combatants.  At least, in 1e, a Bard was a full on fighter.  Your character didn't have ANY spells until about 7th level or so, when you managed to become a full bard (bard was a prestige class).  2e bards could be made into pretty decent secondary combatants.  But, now, there's no real reason for a bard to even pick up a weapon.  Doesn't "Jack of all Trades" include fighters?  I always kinda pictured a bard as a swashbuckler with some magic, not a singing wizard.</blockquote>

Verification