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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="AmerginLiath" data-source="post: 7382982" data-attributes="member: 777">By the book, combat is literally a THIRD of the game. In most cases, it’s actually far less because of the detail involved in dungeon crawling and social engagement. If your game is spending that much time in combat, you’re going to shortchanging a number of the classes in the same way that a game that spent 50-90% of game play canoodling in noble salons would be shortchanging the fighter and barbarian. The rogue is built, alongside the Ranger, to have the sort of extra strength in the Exploration Pillar that classes like the Fighter does in the Combat Pillar and the Bard or Paladin does in the Interaction Pillar. Yes, every class is competent in battle, but you’re ignoring their competing competancies elsewhere in the system and acting as if different levels of combat ability is the only factor in class design.In the same way that ignoring the CR rules are going to result in encounter that run differently than the game’s design expects, so too does running a game almost entirely in one style/Pillar of play result in a game that runs differently and changes the power dynamics between classes that are meant to be balanced overall in how they contribute differently across different sorts of encounters. As much as I loathe to use the phrase...you’re playing it wrong.(and it’s your right to do so, being your table; but you can’t then make an argument against the system-as-designed if you’re ignored that system-as-designed to emulated a different mode of game)</blockquote>

Verification