Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="cwhs01" data-source="post: 4268163" data-attributes="member: 18388">A list of things people dislike is interesting enough, but i'd very much like to hear some of the well reasoned and thougtout arguments as well. Some of the points on the lists seem to me to be mostly personal taste and bitterness. ie. (i think i mostly quoted Hawken for this) invisibility lasts one round... unless its sustained w. a minor action.power attack is -2/+2(+3)... and?damage on a miss... And? Maybe it isn't a total miss, a little like how a fireball spell did half damage on a save in 3e.  no monks... fair enough, but tell me WHY it's a problem. no spells only powers and rituals... yes and no. wizards powers are called spells, just as a fighters powers are called exploits. And exactly why is this a problem?Everyone has powers... why is this a problem? Should only spellcasters get to have these kinds of choices, as in previous dnd incarnations? why? would it be a better game?Dwarves must use a feat to get +1 ac vs giants... actually its +1 against all creatures larger than the dwarf, not just giants. So what?Wizards are no longer the undisputed masters of magic and their spells suck more now than in any other edition... why is this a bad thing? Why is getting wizards in line with the other classes bad?etc.And please, never ever use the "but its a sacred cow" argument. Unless you explain why keeping the particular sacred cow in is good.</blockquote>