Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Aldarc" data-source="post: 7925072" data-attributes="member: 5142">Yes, and notice what you emboldened: &quot;broadly describes&quot; and NOT narrowly prescribes, as per your treatment of the words. Also notice that it does not say or suggest in any sort of legalese that these fluffs are indicative of rules. Furthermore, the DMG has a section dedicated to modifying classes. It does not say that if the DM modifies a class that is ceases to be the prior class. It says that how a class is understood can vary from table to table or campaign setting to campaign setting and that the DM/table can modify the features or flavor of the class as appropriate to their needs or tastes. It even says that paladins in a hypothetical campaign setting may not swear oaths to ideals but powerful sorcerers. Nowhere does the DMG say, much less suggest, that this means that they cease being the paladin class. So maybe it's time for you to admit that your opinion is not necessarily as attached to the given rules and guidelines of 5e as you believe it to be, and, in fact, dare I say, you may be actually more further detached from the rules than the people who are arguing that the class fluff can be changed without invalidating its existence as said class.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Aldarc, post: 7925072, member: 5142"] Yes, and notice what you emboldened: "[B]broadly describes[/B]" and NOT narrowly prescribes, as per your treatment of the words. Also notice that it does not say or suggest in any sort of legalese that these fluffs are indicative of rules. Furthermore, the DMG has a section dedicated to modifying classes. It does not say that if the DM modifies a class that is ceases to be the prior class. It says that how a class is understood can vary from table to table or campaign setting to campaign setting and that the DM/table can modify the features or flavor of the class as appropriate to their needs or tastes. It even says that paladins in a hypothetical campaign setting may not swear oaths to ideals but powerful sorcerers. Nowhere does the DMG say, much less suggest, that this means that they cease being the paladin class. So maybe it's time for you to admit that your opinion is not necessarily as attached to the given rules and guidelines of 5e as you believe it to be, and, in fact, dare I say, you may be actually more further detached from the rules than the people who are arguing that the class fluff can be changed without invalidating its existence as said class. [/QUOTE]

Verification