|
5 months ago ::
Dec 30, 2012 - 12:53PM
#51
|
Date Joined:
Jan 29, 2005
|
Yep. Quite often there are much more effective ways to be effective than pure damage. That's a far cry from the character passing his turn to hide. 
Tell that to the people who think that the only want the fighter to be damage, because that will make them "best at combat".
|
|
|
|
5 months ago ::
Dec 30, 2012 - 1:01PM
#52
|
Date Joined:
May 14, 2010
|
Contributing in combat is not necessarily killing things... ummm duh.
For instance inspiring your allies to protect you more agressively(see princess build warlords) is a perfectly fine non-combatants battlefield contribution, and 4e lets me do that.
There is a lot of ways you can contribute besides killing monsters. You can.....
1. Make potions so you can heal your party members outside of combat.
2. Use your smooth talking pimp skills to influence the next coming battle.
3. Sneak on the other side of the camp try to distract half the mob while the party comes in and easily wipe out the other half.
4. Successfuly disarm a trap and use it against your next encounter. Golem? What Golem?
5. Neutral cleric makes a zombie. Make a suicide bomb vest. Profit.
6. Control one of their biggest dumbest hitters. Watch it kill all of them.
7. Heal heal heal heal heal.....
8. Sneak behind the enemy mage. Grab him and make him surrender or you gonna *dialogue can't be use here*. Success!
9. See guards guarding the gate. Get a fast character to gangyam style naked until they chase him. Ambush the guards, then repeat and rinse.
10. Tell the dragon there even a bigger pile of gold then the one he is standing on. Watch dragon leaves the room. Loot the room and run for your life.
11. Bribe. Tell them they can make a killing highway robber career if they stand on that bridge on there. Ambush them the next day. Get your gold back.
I can think dozen of ways to contribute without fighting.
|
|
|
|
5 months ago ::
Dec 30, 2012 - 2:30PM
#53
|
Date Joined:
Dec 10, 2010
|
It`s all about combat! That seems to be what balanced meens now!
No fact is wizards are too potent outside of combat and fighters have no class features that arent combat how does that sound like its all about combat... to you in other words your first and main point is categorically wrong.
No, you are validating my point! Wizards are more potent outside of combat, but when people talk about balance in the game it is mostly about being equal combat and not taking anything else into account! Get what I`m saying?
|
|
|
|
5 months ago ::
Dec 30, 2012 - 2:33PM
#54
|
|
|
It`s all about combat! That seems to be what balanced meens now!
No fact is wizards are too potent outside of combat and fighters have no class features that arent combat how does that sound like its all about combat... to you in other words your first and main point is categorically wrong.
No, you are validating my point! Wizards are more potent outside of combat, but when people talk about balance in the game it is mostly about being equal combat and not taking anything else into account! Get what I`m saying?
Yes, we just think you're wrong. EVERY character should be able to participate meaningfully in EVERY facet of the game. If they do not, it should be because of the choices of the player, not dictated by the game system. 'Rogues are great out of combat, suck in combat; fighters suck out of combat, great in combat' is not acceptable. Rogues should be able to be designed to be good or bad in and out of combat; same with fighters.
Another day, another three or four entries to my Ignore List.
|
|
|
|
5 months ago ::
Dec 30, 2012 - 2:39PM
#55
|
Date Joined:
Jan 29, 2005
|
It`s all about combat! That seems to be what balanced meens now!
No fact is wizards are too potent outside of combat and fighters have no class features that arent combat how does that sound like its all about combat... to you in other words your first and main point is categorically wrong.
No, you are validating my point! Wizards are more potent outside of combat, but when people talk about balance in the game it is mostly about being equal combat and not taking anything else into account! Get what I`m saying?
Yes, we just think you're wrong. EVERY character should be able to participate meaningfully in EVERY facet of the game. If they do not, it should be because of the choices of the player, not dictated by the game system. 'Rogues are great out of combat, suck in combat; fighters suck out of combat, great in combat' is not acceptable. Rogues should be able to be designed to be good or bad in and out of combat; same with fighters.
In other words:
Nobody should be reduced to a spectator in any of the pillars. "Go watch tv until a fight starts" is no way to design a class.
|
|
|
|
5 months ago ::
Dec 30, 2012 - 2:42PM
#56
|
Date Joined:
May 14, 2010
|
It`s all about combat! That seems to be what balanced meens now!
No fact is wizards are too potent outside of combat and fighters have no class features that arent combat how does that sound like its all about combat... to you in other words your first and main point is categorically wrong.
No, you are validating my point! Wizards are more potent outside of combat, but when people talk about balance in the game it is mostly about being equal combat and not taking anything else into account! Get what I`m saying?
Yes, we just think you're wrong. EVERY character should be able to participate meaningfully in EVERY facet of the game. If they do not, it should be because of the choices of the player, not dictated by the game system. 'Rogues are great out of combat, suck in combat; fighters suck out of combat, great in combat' is not acceptable. Rogues should be able to be designed to be good or bad in and out of combat; same with fighters.
Fighters being good out of combat? Please explains?
A CHA fighter just average compare what the rogue can do outside of combat.
|
|
|
|
5 months ago ::
Dec 30, 2012 - 2:44PM
#57
|
Date Joined:
Jan 29, 2005
|
It`s all about combat! That seems to be what balanced meens now!
No fact is wizards are too potent outside of combat and fighters have no class features that arent combat how does that sound like its all about combat... to you in other words your first and main point is categorically wrong.
No, you are validating my point! Wizards are more potent outside of combat, but when people talk about balance in the game it is mostly about being equal combat and not taking anything else into account! Get what I`m saying?
Yes, we just think you're wrong. EVERY character should be able to participate meaningfully in EVERY facet of the game. If they do not, it should be because of the choices of the player, not dictated by the game system. 'Rogues are great out of combat, suck in combat; fighters suck out of combat, great in combat' is not acceptable. Rogues should be able to be designed to be good or bad in and out of combat; same with fighters.
Fighters being good out of combat? Please explains?
A CHA fighter just average compare what the rogue can do outside of combat.
That's the problem. The Fighter should be given some tools to use outside of combat so they don't have to sit back and watch everyone else use their toys to participate.
Give fighters nice things outside of combat, as well. No class should be completely useless in any pillar.
|
|
|
|
5 months ago ::
Dec 30, 2012 - 2:49PM
#58
|
Date Joined:
Dec 10, 2010
|
I`m not saying combat balance or anything is wrong. If you want everyone to be able to contribute equally in all facets of the game, fine, that is a valid opinion! But from another point of view, you might want to tell a story with characters that make sense in that story! I see your point, I do, try to see mine! In some areas of the game, some characters are bound to be spectators! If everyone shines just as much in all sitution, how does any character and class really feel any special at all? I love 4e and the smooth system, but this is supposed to be a new and modular edition, lets explore the different possibilities a bit.
|
|
|
|
5 months ago ::
Dec 30, 2012 - 2:52PM
#59
|
Date Joined:
Jan 29, 2005
|
Classes feel special by being different from one another. Nobody is asking for them to be 100% equal in all facets of the game, either. They do, however, need to be viable. Being useless isn't fun. Not having the ability to participate in 1/3 of the game leads to boredom. All classes need to be viable in all 3 pillars. Some might pull weight slightly more in certain areas, but no class should completely dominate anything or be completely useless.
|
|
|
|
5 months ago ::
Dec 30, 2012 - 2:54PM
#60
|
Date Joined:
May 14, 2010
|
but that actually how pillars are design in D&D.
The fighter is only good at one thing, which is to kick ass. Nothing more, nothing less.
The best thing he can do outside of combat is focus on Cha and use intimidate or even become a mercenary captain.
The rogue on the other hand can be specialize in outside combat. He can disguise, learn languages, read lips, sneak, and etc. This is something the fighter can never do.
Now the rogue can work on combat without sacrificing much of his other stuff.
The rogue can also make the fighter's bark worse then his bite and might change the enemy mind not to fight them. So the fighter ain't completely useless outside of combat. :P
|
|
|
