NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 6837114" data-attributes="member: 996">Extra Attack, Actions Surge, Cunning Action, Rage, Ki, CS dice & maneuvers, and, most of all, Spells & slots (since they are the most common of class abilities), are not just rules mechanics, they're bundles of concept/fluff and mechanics that help define not just what a class can do, but what it is.  That approach has been key in helping 5e capture the feel of the classic game, and 5e has been very successful, arguably as a result of that feel.Not really, no - fire was very strongly associated with Druids, too, and with religion in general.  The gods received burnt offerings, temple priests tend eternal flames, &c.  Humans are just big on fire.  Yep, the 1e Druid was on good terms with fire, too:   Faerie Fire, Produce Flame, Heat Metal, Protection f/Fire, Produce Fire, Wall of Fire, Fire Seeds, Conjure Fire Elemental (specifically, as opposed to the Wizard's Conjure Elemental - at higher level, the Druid could also Conjure Earth Elemental), Fire Storm, and, of course, the flashy Chariot of Sustarre.    It is?  In D&D?  I didn't notice you showing any such things, I saw you say this:Straight-up insulting someone you disagree with ... ...before getting to a couple of points that were far from conclusively showing anything:  OK, in some editions the wizard did have skills and feats, but, then, so did everyone in those same editions, including commoners.  In other editions, it didn't.  In 3.x, for instance, the Wizard bereft of magic had d4 HD, like a commoner, and 1/2 BAB like a commoner, and no armor proficiency, like a commoner, and a pretty poor choice of weapons, only arguably better than the commoner's choice of one (IIRC).  Sure, the wizard had a high INT so more skill points, and the wizard and commoner had different skill lists (some pretty useful skills were on each, though, the Commoner even had the coveted Spot & Listen, while the Wizard had every KS).  So it's really a pretty fair analogy.  In that edition.  Other editions didn't have a Commoner class.and:I don't recall the time you needed in 2e, but in 1e it was 4hrs rest to be able to memorize lower level spells, plus 15 min spell/level.  That's not as long as a night's sleep, but longer than a 'short rest' in 5e, and the need to be 'strategic' was because you had limited spell resources, so if you weren't running out, you were being careful with them, and doing something other than casting on a lot of rounds.  In 1e that might be throwing darts - or throwing fireballs if you lucked into the right wand.  Of course, as you leveled up you got more and more spells until you could cast virtually every round if you wanted to, which, well, did make you 'more of a Wizard.'</blockquote>

Verification