Search results

(I hope this is the right place for this.) I started a LoL channel. I will be uploading my games once in a while, or until I get bored of it. Note that my first video is 720p because I wanted to record something as soon as possible so I didn't even look at recording options. There was also lag...

http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=322041

Balance isn't bad. Balance is Art.

Both of which are made by the Wizard. And Wizard isn't dependent on having scrolls, but the Fighter does need a magic sword to keep up. So yeah. That common comment only helps our point.

Actually it can and is both. Why would I look for other rabletop games when D&D works just fine?

The character isn't the one choosing, so that's irrelevant.

I never said that. I did, you just ignored it. Speaking of ignoring. I warned you. I ask "stop with the strawmans". You didn't listen. So welcome to my ignore list.

Because D&D is primarily about combat. 90% D&D rules are for combat. How can you not get that simple fact? Well, yeah. There's zero faulty logic in my words, only you constructing strawmans. Um, no. I commented on a specific thing you said. I want a swashbuckler. Fighter sucks as a...

You really should stop that. The strawmans and putting words in peoples mouths, I mean. If you keep on with it I will be forced to conclude that discussion with you is a waste of time and put you on ignore. No. You said fight, not duel. I responded to you, not Pemerton. And I meant it in...

That's supposed to prove... what exactly? That people play D&D in different ways? That's great! Has nothing to do with what I said.

No. What I actually was "complaining" about is that he can't fight. I said nothing about any duels. Someone good in a fight who's witty, agile, outspoken, resourceful, ladies man. Think of Zorro, Robin Hood or The Three Musketeers. Must. That word. I don't think I ever said anything like...

Um, no they're still the same. I didn't change what I want in the slightest.

I dunno about Rogues, but swashbucklers are assumed to be good fencers. Flanking isn't the only way to gain sneak attack. Also I said nothing about winning duels. I want a swashbuckler. Show me where I said that. SHOW ME.

And then you tell me that I have to build a more competent character... >.> You're contradicting yourself.

Because that's what a swashbuckler is? If don't get it then I can't really help you there, bud. It should be fairly obvious that a game with 90% combat rules is about combat. >.>

It would be nice if he would be at least competent at what defines him, no? "D&D".

Sure. I'll even do you better and quote multiple: "Dungeon Master's Guide", "Player's Handbook", "Monster Manual", etc. Never said that. It's just a big part of the game.

And nothing prevents a player to play a Wizard wih 8 Int and no spellbook. No, the game. D&D. Do you even know the rules of D&D? Because you're talking like you don't. In combat, yes.

The problem here is that the Rogue makes a better swashbuckler, flavor-wise, than the actual class. It sucks that you have to sacrifice effectiveness for flavor. Not to mention that you lose out on flavor, because what kind of a swashbuckler are you if yo suck at an important part of being a...

Yes, becasue D&D is a game primarily about combat, whether you like it or not, just like football is about running with a ball and not dancing. "Not as good as the Fighter" isn't the same as "completely ineffective".