|
3 months ago ::
Feb 14, 2013 - 4:22PM
#771
|
Date Joined:
Mar 25, 2007
|
The latest Q&A as i read it says the fighter is supposed to be combat powerhouse, and if he wants to do things out of combat, there are backgrounds/skills to be taken for that purpose.
No bonus skills for fighters out the gate = working as intended.
How do PCs get 2 backgrounds by the way - what are some classes getting double skills, that sounds too much?
|
|
|
|
3 months ago ::
Feb 14, 2013 - 4:27PM
#772
|
Date Joined:
May 19, 2011
|
No bonus skills for fighters out the gate = working as intended.
WOrking as intended doesn't always mean it's a good idea.
|
|
|
|
3 months ago ::
Feb 14, 2013 - 4:30PM
#773
|
Date Joined:
Mar 25, 2007
|
True enough, but it's clear that it wasn't an oversight or mistake, fighters are designed to have less skills.
But then that's what this testing is for i guess! Its pretty cool actually this whole playtesting
|
|
|
|
3 months ago ::
Feb 14, 2013 - 4:53PM
#774
|
|
|
Am I the only person who remembers soundly rejecting two backgrounds for the fighter as an acceptable solution to their lack of interactive abilities or am I conflating something from when I had friends and family access? Mand? Plague? Ankiyavon?
|
|
|
|
3 months ago ::
Feb 14, 2013 - 4:57PM
#775
|
|
|
I think they originally stated that fighter's would get 2 themes as the way to make them "cool". This was before maneuvers existed. Everyone said this was simply a boring rehash of the 3.x idea of fighter's get more of the same in the form of bonus feats.
While 2 backgrounds is certainly uncreative, it would at least put fighter's at about 65% of non-combat capability of rogues, wizards, and clerics.
|
|
|
|
3 months ago ::
Feb 14, 2013 - 5:01PM
#776
|
|
|
OK, that's right.
Still don't like the idea (even if it allows the fighter to get a background in a game where other classes do not get a background option).
|
|
|
|
3 months ago ::
Feb 14, 2013 - 5:19PM
#777
|
- Forum Guide
- Hero Craftsman Gold Medalist
- Master Dungeon Master
Date Joined:
Jun 23, 2005
|
I don't like it for a variety of reasons, not the least of which is there simply aren't enough skills to go around to differentiate characters in non-combat when classes are getting bonus skills.
But even that would be better than what the Q&A is suggesting, which is to pound sand (imaginitvely)
|
|
|
|
3 months ago ::
Feb 14, 2013 - 5:51PM
#778
|
|
|
I don't like it for a variety of reasons, not the least of which is there simply aren't enough skills to go around to differentiate characters in non-combat when classes are getting bonus skills.
But even that would be better than what the Q&A is suggesting, which is to pound sand (imaginitvely)
If your main issue is the that the fighter is not able to meaningfully contribute mechanically to the social pillar then I understand. I do not agree - at all. I still think it is a matter of how tables play. They may not be as good as you want them to be, but by no means does that make them useless. Is it that you play with perfectly well rounded parties where everyone picks there class based on other people's decisions. You know, like: "Oh, we have a thief and cleric, someone needs to make a controller and a tank." If that's the case then I understand your gripe.
Most peope I see play make their character then show up. This means they would be picking their backgrounds and specializations without guided input. Even if they got together for character creation, they would be building using a little secrecy (except for die rolls) so they could introduce their characters with fun or flair or with guarded mysteriousness.
I think another poster hit the nail on the head. This is such a small issue to such a small number of people (even more so during play as opposed to outside thinking like a designer).
Also, in all fairness, I didn't tell you I was satisfied with the status quo. I didn't tell you to go pound sand. I presented an option that I thought would be viable judging from your complaint. If you didn't like it, I understand. But, I was only trying to help. I personally think that writing backstories and describing three key skills one may have learned in them is fair. Then keeping a summary of skills rolled during the adventure is fair. This way all the DM has to do is use that and not worry about the scout's insane bonus, etc. It all just comes from what your character does during roleplaying.
|
|
|
|
3 months ago ::
Feb 14, 2013 - 6:16PM
#779
|
- Forum Guide
- Hero Craftsman Gold Medalist
- Master Dungeon Master
Date Joined:
Jun 23, 2005
|
But even that would be better than what the Q&A is suggesting, which is to pound sand (imaginitvely)
Also, in all fairness, I didn't tell you I was satisfied with the status quo. I didn't tell you to go pound sand.
Unless you are Rodney Thompson, I didn't accuse you of such a thing.
|
|
|
|
3 months ago ::
Feb 14, 2013 - 6:22PM
#780
|
|
|
As has been pointed out, even though you label dancing, beer drinking, intimidation, starting bar fights, engaging in a name calling contest, lying, etc. all "meaningful" quibble, doesn't mean it's not a meaningful.
The issue is not whether an activity is "meaningful". The issue is whether the character's ability to contribute in a mechanical means is meaninigful.
All characters can roleplay. If mechanics never come into play then it's not an issue. But once mechanics determine outcomes in a pillar (such as Interaction) then all characters should have a meaningful way to contribute mechanically.
It may not be to you and your group. To others, it is. There is nothing you can write, no polemic you can put together that disputes this.
What si there to dispute? You haven't addressed the issue. Instead you deflect it by pointing out that some tables might resolve Interaction without resort to mechanics. Well, there are tables who might decide to narrate exploration or combat. So what? All you're saying is that we should turn D&D into a game of pure "make-believe" with no mechanics.
But if there are to mechanics, then those mechanics should allow all characters to participate meaningfully.
You can say, they don't do it as well as the other classes and therefore should get more of a bonus than they already do.
I can say a lot of things, but I'd appreciate it if you would simply address the arguments I do say instead of inventing straw men for you to knock down. Thanks!
My suggestion to you would be for you and your group to just not use any bonus for skills
My suggestion for you is to try to actually understand my issues before suggesting solutions to them. Because what it sounds like to me is your response is "I like the status quo so you should go pound sand."
This is a conversation we had. I bolded the part I was referring to.
|
|
|
