Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="I'm A Banana" data-source="post: 6091216" data-attributes="member: 2067">Yes, and if they choose to get through the encounters in a way that is less efficient, they have failed at meeting their goals for the period between recharges. Which means that anything that lets them handle more challenges is required for efficient play. And if a cleric alone enables the party to have more challenges, the cleric is going to be required.It's only less fun if any of the players considers fiero to be important -- overcoming challenges and meeting goals. Which, I think, a significant enough number of players do that it would be a problem to have the basic game pretend like that's not going to happen. I'm working under that assumption because that assumption is true often enough to warrant working under it. If it didn't happen, I'd expect to see more dwarven bards and elven barbarians. Yet, in part because those are not optimal choices, those become rarer in play. This isn't a binary, of course, and not every group gives a flip, but it's a pressure that does exist. My problem is that forcing someone to choose between playing the character they WANT to play, and playing the character they feel the MUST play (or weaken the entire party and create a more difficult challenge for everyone) is an unfair choice to force someone -- especially a newbie -- to make. I don't think D&D players should have to choose between effective in mechanical terms and cool in their own minds. If the cleric is better than any other class, that's a choice we're forcing on them.</blockquote>

Verification