Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Crazy Jerome" data-source="post: 5579421" data-attributes="member: 54877">I agree about presentation itself, but to the extent that thinking about presentation informs your ideas about organization, I think it helps.&nbsp; It is analogous to doing an outline for a paper.&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;For me, it is the work you put in to make the thief things obviously special cases of where the thief's skill supersedes what normal people can all do, thus preserving that normal people can do it.&nbsp; Similar distinctions in the other classes would be fun.&nbsp;Sure, even in the original, the fighter used weapons better than anyone else, but it was primarily a case of bigger numbers in the end--more to hit, more damage, more protection.&nbsp; Even multiple attacks mostly diminishes to &quot;more damage&quot;.&nbsp;&nbsp; Let's say for sake of argument that somewhere in the combat system, if a character attacks with a weapon, this seriously impedes movement options for the target (not unlike 4E fighter marking), and anyone can do this.&nbsp; Well, the fighter still is the best at this due to the higher numbers, but suddenly multiple attacks is a difference in kind, not just degree.&nbsp; The fighter is far more able to hold a gap.&nbsp; Things like that.&nbsp;For the wizard (and cleric), you'd have to make some basic magic options (if only with equipment) a bit more available to non-casters than traditionally was the case.&nbsp; So everyone can do &quot;magic&quot;.&nbsp; Then wizards and clerics get ways of doing it that make it capable of amazing results.&nbsp; Perhaps combat magic is one of those &quot;thiings&quot;.&nbsp; I don't know exactly, because it would depend upon how far you wanted to move the baseline for &quot;things everyone can do&quot;.&nbsp;Of course, this probably ties into a long-held bias against niche protection designed around, &quot;I'm decent at this, everyone else can't do it at all,&quot; versus, &quot;Anyone can at least try to do the simple stuff in this, but I'm really good at it.&quot;.&nbsp; In addition to the usual objections, I dislike the former because it causes all kinds of inelegance in customization.&nbsp; (Exhibit A:&nbsp; 3E prestige classes getting screwed up because there wasn't much to take away from a wizard in return for something else.)&nbsp; I'm biased for setting it up so that, &quot;My guy can't do X worth a darn,&quot; being an option, not the default.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Crazy Jerome, post: 5579421, member: 54877"] I agree about presentation itself, but to the extent that thinking about presentation informs your ideas about organization, I think it helps. It is analogous to doing an outline for a paper. For me, it is the work you put in to make the thief things obviously special cases of where the thief's skill supersedes what normal people can all do, thus preserving that normal people can do it. Similar distinctions in the other classes would be fun. Sure, even in the original, the fighter used weapons better than anyone else, but it was primarily a case of bigger numbers in the end--more to hit, more damage, more protection. Even multiple attacks mostly diminishes to "more damage". Let's say for sake of argument that somewhere in the combat system, if a character attacks with a weapon, this seriously impedes movement options for the target (not unlike 4E fighter marking), and anyone can do this. Well, the fighter still is the best at this due to the higher numbers, but suddenly multiple attacks is a difference in kind, not just degree. The fighter is far more able to hold a gap. Things like that. For the wizard (and cleric), you'd have to make some basic magic options (if only with equipment) a bit more available to non-casters than traditionally was the case. So everyone can do "magic". Then wizards and clerics get ways of doing it that make it capable of amazing results. Perhaps combat magic is one of those "thiings". I don't know exactly, because it would depend upon how far you wanted to move the baseline for "things everyone can do". Of course, this probably ties into a long-held bias against niche protection designed around, "I'm decent at this, everyone else can't do it at all," versus, "Anyone can at least try to do the simple stuff in this, but I'm really good at it.". In addition to the usual objections, I dislike the former because it causes all kinds of inelegance in customization. (Exhibit A: 3E prestige classes getting screwed up because there wasn't much to take away from a wizard in return for something else.) I'm biased for setting it up so that, "My guy can't do X worth a darn," being an option, not the default. [/QUOTE]

Verification