Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Aldarc" data-source="post: 9175538" data-attributes="member: 5142">I have to agree with [USER=6807152]@Scribe[/USER] here. And I think that we have to be careful about not equivocating here in your statement. There is a difference between saying &quot;there is a common problem in D&amp;D&quot; and &quot;the problem is D&amp;D itself.&quot; Trying to insinuate that people are arguing the latter is potentially inflammatory, as it implies people just hate D&amp;D. I don't think that's the case. There are many D&amp;D Diehards on this forum who have criticized spellcasting and &quot;restrictions&quot; with spellcasters as being too easy in D&amp;D 5e. I don't think that they hate D&amp;D or believe that the problem is D&amp;D. I don't believe that the issue is &quot;D&amp;D&quot; because &quot;D&amp;D&quot; has throughout time and editions had ways to curb the power of spellcasters: e.g., interrupted spells, AoO, concentration, prepared Vancian casting, armor casting penalties, discovering new spells, different XP progression, lack of at-wills, utility spells as out-of-combat rituals, etc. These past editions are very much as D&amp;D as 5e D&amp;D.However, these are things that have been increasingly rolled back to make spellcasting easier: e.g., improved HP, neo-Vancian, at-will cantrips, rituals, abilities for regaining spell slots, no armor casting penalties, etc. That's fine, but there has been relatively little to no counter-cost to spellcasting for what benefits spellcasters have increasingly gained.There are a number of ways that WotC could curb the on-demand power of spellcasters while still very much being D&amp;D or even without being 4e, if that is your suspicion.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Aldarc, post: 9175538, member: 5142"] I have to agree with [USER=6807152]@Scribe[/USER] here. And I think that we have to be careful about not equivocating here in your statement. There is a difference between saying "there is a common problem in D&D" and "the problem is D&D itself." Trying to insinuate that people are arguing the latter is potentially inflammatory, as it implies people just hate D&D. I don't think that's the case. There are many D&D Diehards on this forum who have criticized spellcasting and "restrictions" with spellcasters as being too easy in D&D 5e. I don't think that they hate D&D or believe that the problem is D&D. I don't believe that the issue is "D&D" because "D&D" has throughout time and editions had ways to curb the power of spellcasters: e.g., interrupted spells, AoO, concentration, prepared Vancian casting, armor casting penalties, discovering new spells, different XP progression, lack of at-wills, utility spells as out-of-combat rituals, etc. These past editions are very much as D&D as 5e D&D. However, these are things that have been increasingly rolled back to make spellcasting easier: e.g., improved HP, neo-Vancian, at-will cantrips, rituals, abilities for regaining spell slots, no armor casting penalties, etc. That's fine, but there has been [I]relatively little to no counter-cost to spellcasting[/I] for what benefits spellcasters have increasingly gained. There are a number of ways that WotC could curb the on-demand power of spellcasters while still very much being D&D or even without being 4e, if that is your suspicion. [/QUOTE]

Verification