Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="woodelf" data-source="post: 938870" data-attributes="member: 10201">i think they miss a bet by using combat as the baseline when balancing.&nbsp; Frex, the new druid looks, tentatively, less interesting to me.&nbsp; One of the things i like about druids is i can have cool stuff to do and be useful to the group *without* being useful in combat.&nbsp; I don't care if druids are underpowered in combat (not that that's ever been my experience in any edition...), i want them to be flexible. I understand that this is D&amp;D, and that combat needs to be factored in, i just don't think it should be the *only* thing they consider, or even the overriding.edit: Oh, just as anecdotal counter-evidence: i've had players choose not to play a character because they were [perceived as] under-powered.&nbsp; But i've had a lot more players choose not to play a class because they were seen as non-flexible.&nbsp; Frex, never seen a PC fighter under 3E, though those were plenty popular in earlier editions.&nbsp; Even those who want to fight aren't generally willing to give up *everything* else (and with the paucity of non-combat feats available to the fighter in core 3E, combined with the skills issue, they really can't do much of anything else) just to do so--they play barbarians or rangers, or paladins. Or a cleric, in one case.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="woodelf, post: 938870, member: 10201"] i think they miss a bet by using combat as the baseline when balancing. Frex, the new druid looks, tentatively, less interesting to me. One of the things i like about druids is i can have cool stuff to do and be useful to the group *without* being useful in combat. I don't care if druids are underpowered in combat (not that that's ever been my experience in any edition...), i want them to be flexible. I understand that this is D&D, and that combat needs to be factored in, i just don't think it should be the *only* thing they consider, or even the overriding. [i]edit:[/i] Oh, just as anecdotal counter-evidence: i've had players choose not to play a character because they were [perceived as] under-powered. But i've had a lot more players choose not to play a class because they were seen as non-flexible. Frex, never seen a PC fighter under 3E, though those were plenty popular in earlier editions. Even those who want to fight aren't generally willing to give up *everything* else (and with the paucity of non-combat feats available to the fighter in core 3E, combined with the skills issue, they really can't do much of anything else) just to do so--they play barbarians or rangers, or paladins. Or a cleric, in one case. [/QUOTE]

Verification