What's on your mind?
+ Log in or register to post
Results 41 to 50 of 114
Tuesday, 4th September, 2012, 12:50 PM #41
A 1e title so awesome it's not in the book (Lvl 21)
I think I have a different view on two points. First, I'm not sure about the "mechanically light" thing - a lot of social interaction in D&D is (in a certain sense, at least) mechanically heavy (eg the use of a Charm or Suggestion spell), and I'm not sure "mechanically light" fits well with "balancing classes around the three pillars".
Second, I'm not sure that similar structure in a mechanically heavy domain precludes unique shining. It seems to depend heavily on what the content of the structure is.
But happy to hear more from you about what I'm missing in the above, or where I've gone wrong!
- EN World
- has no influence
- on advertisings
- that are displayed by
- Google Adsense
Tuesday, 4th September, 2012, 02:06 PM #42
Guide (Lvl 11)
I agree that the areas I highlighted don't have to be mechanically light, but even in a strict D&D game in which the outcomes of interactions are heavily dice-based, they are nothing like the mechanical depth of tactical combat. I guess I mean that, probably because we understand social and exploration in real life, there is less need to pin every aspect down with a number/rule. I would be amused to see 'Social AC' though, the number you need to hit with a diplomacy check to change someone's mind - SAC 20 being an old curmudgeon and SAC10 being a child.
Anyway, yes, the structure of the heavy system does determine how and what shining involves. I think 4E tried hard to give classes (well, more roles) their unique shiny thing, but (it's the usual complaint) the similarity factor was too high for my liking. It's possible to design things to do the same job but behave very differently, and I think they too often opted for sameness to prevent silliness down the line.
Everyone is weird, but those who are weird in the same way call themselves normal.
Tuesday, 4th September, 2012, 02:41 PM #43
Magsman (Lvl 14)
Tuesday, 4th September, 2012, 04:49 PM #44
Guide (Lvl 11)
Tuesday, 4th September, 2012, 06:55 PM #45
Enchanter (Lvl 12)
Tuesday, 4th September, 2012, 07:45 PM #46
Cutpurse (Lvl 5)
- Join Date
- Aug 2006
- City of Champions
- Read 0 Reviews
ø Ignore Shadeydm
Tuesday, 4th September, 2012, 08:21 PM #47
Spellbinder (Lvl 16)
casters were ahead of everyone else in 3e.
Basically a known weakness of 3e - it removed the downsides of casters while also improving them, which has spawned far too numerous discussions of ways to reign them back in, or buff non-casters. It's good for the folks in charge to keep an eye on such things while planning D&D Next.
Tuesday, 4th September, 2012, 08:24 PM #48
Enchanter (Lvl 12)
Tuesday, 4th September, 2012, 08:53 PM #49
Thaumaturgist (Lvl 9)
Yeah, mentioning Caster Dominance in 3E is like mentioning how terribly Utility Powers are implemented in 4E. It's a known weakness of the system that no one has ever managed to patch out no matter how hard they tried (Book of Nine Swords, Skill Utility Powers).
If you think your preferred gaming system has no weaknesses, you're probably wrong (or have discovered the Holy Grail)
Tuesday, 4th September, 2012, 09:08 PM #50
Superhero (Lvl 15)
Even people who don't run into the problem of caster dommanance atleast have heard of it...
And it is a sticking point for alot of us, if I feel the unafishal rule of 5e is the same as 3( fighters cant have nice things) then I will not support it
I'm with D&D...Any Edition