Community

Jan 31, 2013 -- 10:05AM, souldoubt wrote:

Jan 30, 2013 -- 10:38PM, Chris_Lee66 wrote:

Jan 30, 2013 -- 3:04PM, Mand12 wrote:

I do believe that fighters need the equivalent of domain/tradition.  Fighting style was allegedly supposed to be that, but domain for example means so much more than just a list of spells that your Cleric has access to.  There needs to be that level of depth to the Fighter, somehow, someway.

I completely agree with this assertion, but would hope that in doing so they don't unecessarily pidgeon fighters into particular weapon or style choices.  I don't believe that these sorts of choices are necessary to accomplish the above.

I agree.  It would be a step in the right direction to give the Fighting Styles some more depth to counterbalance the fighter's huge breadth.

Jan 31, 2013 -- 7:03AM, arderkrag wrote:

And that's how little point buy systems are born, kids. One person and a set of dice hate each other very much, and complaining of imbalance happens.

I beg to differ.  My gaming group started using point buy after I rolled really well two games in a row, and was at turns bored and frustrated, because everyone else was getting the tar kicked out of them and I kept having to save their bacon without ever feeling threatened.  Nobody was happy with the situation, so point buy was an easy concensus.

In my experience, rolling really well can be as bad as rolling poorly if there's no consistency between characters, and it's group annoyance with the gap in character ability that begets point buy, not one gamer with dice-rage.  I've never played with a DM who wouldn't let you reroll a truly crappy array (and what a jerk move that would be), so rolling low scores is kind of a non-issue; it's rolling really high scores that can cause problems, especially if everyone else only rolled on par with the standard array.  Again, I'm speaking as the guy who rolled really well.

All that said, I do like the random feel of rolling, so in the D&DN playtest I'm running I let my players roll and reserved the right to veto scores that were too high or let them take the standard array if their scores were too low.

The "Every class and player must be equal and blanced" is a notion I find completely repugnent.

I remember when I use to roll 3d6 straight and then build my character according to those stats, if I had a 6 Constitution OH well, better keep potions handy and stay behind the fighter.

It's a Role Playing Game, you play a ROLE. Some of the greatest heroes in fantasy literature are often well meaning clutzes, or butterfingered fighters, or rogues with absolutely no willpower. Now the idea of a RPG hero is BLAST, ONE SHOT, feats feats and more feats, invulnerability. Disgust me really.

I gave up on D&D for a very Looong time, opting instead for my own homebrew systems, when I saw that DnD Next was permitting an open playtest, I figured I should at least get involved, get my and the feedback of my players in there and just HOPE this brings back the glorydays. (a lot to hope for I know)

Jan 31, 2013 -- 10:16AM, lordpoee wrote:

The "Every class and player must be equal and blanced" is a notion I find completely repugnent.

The Its ok for there to be haves and have nots in a game I find repugnant

Alright Brightmantles true 3.5 story.
              No this does not begin with "There was this one time back at band camp". I love to play Paladins. I really dig the Holy warrior and Templar type character facing down evil and being the ultimate shining example of good- so I created Angrem Brightmantle whom I really dug. This happened to occur on NWN2 which is a 3.5 engine MMo made by ATARI. Meh, so I slogged my way up the leveling system I gashed the Goblins, I knocked the Gnolls, I whowranged the Ogres, and I smashed the Gouls and Stomped the skelital warriors. I was king crap once I reached level 11 or so I thought. Then there came this certain other p.c. who happened to be playing a mage. I had protected his hind end through the low to mids and had even helped him to do a few missions- undetectable alignment is a real S.O.B. So he decides one day to burn down a forest to kill a local druid that he had been in a scrape with. I try to talk him out of it but to no avail. So he and a group of peasants is lighting trees on fire and I am forced to try and stop him. He's planned for this and the D.M. is running the peasants. Heroes start showing up from all over the server when they see the smoke so I am getting allies to help me out. He forces a strait up fight and I am armed with my trusty Bastard sword+1 +1 holy damage, and shield. I have focus, Improved Crit, power crit, power attack, cleave exet. you get the point. He's Bad ass. My b.a.b is like +14. 
             Combat ensues between my paladin, 3 other characters including a high level druid, and the mage. I die on round three after he polymorphs into a friggin Iron golem and smashes my dome in two attacks. So there's a dead zone in the game and I'm chillin there biting my bottom lip when all the good guys pop in in 10 rounds or less. Ya after that I was aware of the Caster Non Caster disparity. And my ideas on balance kind of changed.