|
2 months ago ::
Mar 24, 2013 - 12:20AM
#141
|
|
|
Rolled my first toons last night. I rescind my concerns about the Druid. They may be more versatile, but the spell choices preclude the same functionality as a Wizard. Only beef (other than the Feats) is trap options. Giant Killer is the clearest choice for Rangers (other powers less useful), like Scholar was for Wizards. Certain races are clear choices for certain classes, and certain backgrounds are all but demanded for typical adventuring (Guide being the most notable). This has the net effect of penalizing people who choose something for RP purposes.
It's ok for some options to be better than others. Of all options in the game atm I think dwarf wizard is the only one that makes you heads and tails better than others.
My two copper.
|
|
|
|
2 months ago ::
Mar 24, 2013 - 11:33AM
#142
|
|
|
Why do you keep comming back if you feel a "monumental lack of interrest" with this "steaming turd of a game" that is "never gonna get published" ?
Because they don't get to move the game in such a crappy direction without hearing about it. I'll stop coming here and ripping on the game when they quit and turn it over to a better design team.
Which you know is not gonna happend.
You want to be heard? answer the surveys, formulate constructive criticism, make your money do the talking by buying some other game.
What you are doing is not helping anyone achieve anything.
They're reading the forums too. They've said so on multiple occasions, and idea from the forums have made it into packets numerous times.
Everyone who loves DnD and dislikes next so far should be doing everything you said and posting their opinion on the forums.
More sex and gender equality and racial equality shouldn't even be an argument--it should simply be an assumption for any RPG that wants to stay relevant in the 21st century.
I could say anything in D&D is silly though, because it's a silly game and we are silly people.
|
|
|
|
2 months ago ::
Mar 24, 2013 - 1:49PM
#143
|
Date Joined:
Apr 14, 2004
|
Rolled my first toons last night. I rescind my concerns about the Druid. They may be more versatile, but the spell choices preclude the same functionality as a Wizard. Only beef (other than the Feats) is trap options. Giant Killer is the clearest choice for Rangers (other powers less useful), like Scholar was for Wizards. Certain races are clear choices for certain classes, and certain backgrounds are all but demanded for typical adventuring (Guide being the most notable). This has the net effect of penalizing people who choose something for RP purposes.
It's ok for some options to be better than others. Of all options in the game atm I think dwarf wizard is the only one that makes you heads and tails better than others.
Yep, I'll NEVER roll up a wizard that isn't wearing scale. The AC difference is HUGE.
|
|
|
|
2 months ago ::
Mar 24, 2013 - 4:06PM
#144
|
Date Joined:
Apr 10, 2009
|
Rolled my first toons last night. I rescind my concerns about the Druid. They may be more versatile, but the spell choices preclude the same functionality as a Wizard. Only beef (other than the Feats) is trap options. Giant Killer is the clearest choice for Rangers (other powers less useful), like Scholar was for Wizards. Certain races are clear choices for certain classes, and certain backgrounds are all but demanded for typical adventuring (Guide being the most notable). This has the net effect of penalizing people who choose something for RP purposes.
It's ok for some options to be better than others. Of all options in the game atm I think dwarf wizard is the only one that makes you heads and tails better than others.
Yep, I'll NEVER roll up a wizard that isn't wearing scale. The AC difference is HUGE.
I think that the dwarf AC racial benefit is too good. It is heads and shoulders above any other racial benefit (for the wizards and armor-less clerics).
I'd prefer to see it grant you one better proficiency step instead. I.e. - if you can use light armor, you gain medium armor and if you can use no armor, you gain light armor. I'd even be Ok with it giving you heavy armor if you already have medium armor.
But I think taking classes from no armor all the way up to medium armor +1 is too big a benefit compared to the other racial benefits.
Carl
|
|
|
|
2 months ago ::
Mar 25, 2013 - 5:36PM
#145
|
Date Joined:
Oct 23, 2012
|
Rolled my first toons last night. I rescind my concerns about the Druid. They may be more versatile, but the spell choices preclude the same functionality as a Wizard. Only beef (other than the Feats) is trap options. Giant Killer is the clearest choice for Rangers (other powers less useful), like Scholar was for Wizards. Certain races are clear choices for certain classes, and certain backgrounds are all but demanded for typical adventuring (Guide being the most notable). This has the net effect of penalizing people who choose something for RP purposes.
It's ok for some options to be better than others. Of all options in the game atm I think dwarf wizard is the only one that makes you heads and tails better than others.
Yep, I'll NEVER roll up a wizard that isn't wearing scale. The AC difference is HUGE.
I think that the dwarf AC racial benefit is too good. It is heads and shoulders above any other racial benefit (for the wizards and armor-less clerics).
I'd prefer to see it grant you one better proficiency step instead. I.e. - if you can use light armor, you gain medium armor and if you can use no armor, you gain light armor. I'd even be Ok with it giving you heavy armor if you already have medium armor.
But I think taking classes from no armor all the way up to medium armor +1 is too big a benefit compared to the other racial benefits.
Carl
I agree, its the reason why everytime I make a spell caster I end up making him mountain dwarf, can;t control the AC compulsion. I could be just +1 ac (in the form of Iron skin feat) as a static bonus also. Still very good, but not expoinentially for wizards and paper clerics.
My mind is a deal-breaker.
|
|
|
|
2 months ago ::
Mar 25, 2013 - 5:45PM
#146
|
Date Joined:
Mar 25, 2007
|
Agree - mountain dwarf armour proficiency is waaaaaaaaay OP for wizards and other light armour classes. It should definitely be changed to a simple +1 AC bonus - still great for any class, but not silly good.
|
|
|
|
2 months ago ::
Mar 25, 2013 - 5:45PM
#147
|
|
|
I think we'll really have to wait a bit to evaluate that racial, because there STILL are no feats for weapon/armor proficiency to judge them against.
If they just copy the 3e feats (Medium Armor Proficiency requires Light, Heavy requires Medium), then this is a ridiculously overpowered racial.
But I expect armor prof feats to work more like the polearm and sniper feats that give you proficiency plus some other benefit that's arguably worth the feat even if you already have the proficiency. Probably not overly tiered either - a wizard won't need two feats to get medium armor, I wouldn't think.
Multiclassing might be relevant too - if you can dip a single level in Fighter or Cleric or the upcoming Swordmage to get armor proficiency plus some other class abilities, might that not be more appealing for wizards who want to cart around heavy armor?
|
|
|
