Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Arial Black" data-source="post: 7494496" data-attributes="member: 6799649">You mean....we did this back when there were only three classes: fighting man, magic-user and cleric? That was before I started playing. When I started it was AD&D 1e, and I can't remember any player of a fighter complaining that the players of rangers or paladins were 'taking their fun away' because they could also have 18/% strength.  The game has included more than three or four classes, and multiclassing, since the mid '70s. Forty years later, why would any player of 5e (especially one who's D&D experience only includes 3e and after) be upset that more than one class relies on strength?There are many RPGs that do not have the concept of 'character class' as part of their mechanics. The phenomenon you described could only exist pre-AD&D, and even then only if there were two players to start with and a new player chose your class instead of the third class.So, today, I join a party of five players and the barbarian's player gets upset if I play a fighter on the grounds that I might have a higher strength?At some point we have to recognise that although some upsets are justified, some are not.</blockquote>