Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Savage Wombat" data-source="post: 760141" data-attributes="member: 1932">Maybe I missed it in an earlier post, but it seems to me that the &quot;golf-bag&quot; nay-sayers are missing a point.The game designers, to my mind, WANT you to carry a variety of weapons.Think back to the days of 1st and 2nd ed.&nbsp; You've got a limited supply of weapon proficiencies - choosing to specialize in one weapon denies you the use of others.In other words, the price of being a master of long sword is not being able to use an axe when one is needed.&nbsp; If the situation never arises where an axe is better than a sword, then it's not a price at all - it's a freebie.In 3rd ed., the proficiencies are (more-or-less) gone, but the idea remains.&nbsp; Weapon Focus and Weapon Specialization are optional feats, not assumed class abilities.&nbsp; Somewhere there should be fighters who find specializing in a single weapon to be a poor choice compared to others.A fighter who spends all of his feats mastering a particular weapon should have the disadvantage of not being as good if he can't use that weapon.&nbsp; But if the game never makes his favorite weapon a sub-optimal choice, he's never &quot;penalized&quot; for his choice.The game designers WANT the fighter to pull out his mace when fighting skeletons.&nbsp; To carry a silver dagger for fighting werewolves.&nbsp; To carry the one adamantine-tipped arrow for emergencies.&nbsp; They don't think that every problem should be solved by an application of GMW.&nbsp; In the same way that many consider Haste an over-powered spell, that no spell-caster can do without, WF and WS become over-powered feats that no fighter can do without if there's no situation where something else would have been better.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Savage Wombat, post: 760141, member: 1932"] Maybe I missed it in an earlier post, but it seems to me that the "golf-bag" nay-sayers are missing a point. The game designers, to my mind, WANT you to carry a variety of weapons. Think back to the days of 1st and 2nd ed. You've got a limited supply of weapon proficiencies - choosing to specialize in one weapon denies you the use of others. In other words, the price of being a master of long sword is not being able to use an axe when one is needed. If the situation never arises where an axe is better than a sword, then it's not a price at all - it's a freebie. In 3rd ed., the proficiencies are (more-or-less) gone, but the idea remains. Weapon Focus and Weapon Specialization are optional feats, not assumed class abilities. Somewhere there should be fighters who find specializing in a single weapon to be a poor choice compared to others. A fighter who spends all of his feats mastering a particular weapon should have the disadvantage of not being as good if he can't use that weapon. But if the game never makes his favorite weapon a sub-optimal choice, he's never "penalized" for his choice. The game designers WANT the fighter to pull out his mace when fighting skeletons. To carry a silver dagger for fighting werewolves. To carry the one adamantine-tipped arrow for emergencies. They don't think that every problem should be solved by an application of GMW. In the same way that many consider Haste an over-powered spell, that no spell-caster can do without, WF and WS become over-powered feats that no fighter can do without if there's no situation where something else would have been better. [/QUOTE]

Verification