![]() Some games emphasize system mastery for a range of outcomes between competence and pro-level play. Someone mentioned upthread that 5e seems to attract a lot of casual gamers, and I think the difference in philosophy comes down to that. I got you, but I think some of it goes to illustrative of the differing design philosophies. Not saying that analogy is 1:1 for all classes, but they seem less akin to a 3.5e feat than I first asserted. In other words, it looks like these class features are more akin to the builtin abilities you would have had to begin with in an OD&D game, or leveled into through spells. Wanted to clarify this as a misunderstanding on my part. Didn't want this to derail this into a 3e vs 5e, my original comment was about the inhibiting effect of having a limited list of "feats" pushed on you, thinking (musing) that this would limit character development by telling you not only what you can do, but also what you can't.īUT after looking closer at the PHB, these "feats" (again in quotes) really look more like class refinements or expansions of the class. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |