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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ahglock" data-source="post: 4041719" data-attributes="member: 56725">Well fighter powers may go well beyond something that is capable by a stunt.   Maybe a stunt can pull off a crappy human shield ability where as a fighter power is more like attack everyone within 4 squares or omni-slash.  Also I don't really see how a wizard being so sucky at something he can't actually do something in play really encroaches in on the fighter niche.  Just because a fighter can't cast a spell and a wizard can try but has a success rate of basically 0 at martial stunts is a fighters niche encroached.  though quite frankly I'd have no problem with not allowing  a wizard to perform a wide range of stunts that have a martial bent.     Also this may be a problem with a free-form stunt system  but a stunt system with pre-reqs would have more niche protection.  Such as you need the grappling feat in order to perform grappling stunts with a DC higher than 10, the grappling and iron grip feats to perform grappling stunts with a DC higher than 15.  Further more whose niche is being protected here, the bug-bears?? How is it wrecking a marital characters niche by giving him access to more abilities?   I'm ok with monster rules and player rules being different, but this seems like a situation where the game would benefit if there was some crossover.  Having the monster rules and the PC rules being identical may be bad, but I suspect completely separating the rules is just as bad.  Where there are obvious places where an ability would be fun, useful, balanced, and makes some degree of sense for both the PCs and the DM the ability or rule should be designed in such a way that it works for both.</blockquote>

Verification