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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="WalterKovacs" data-source="post: 4682846" data-attributes="member: 63763">Even with an increase to starting with 3 encounters, a character will eventually cap out at 6 encounter powers. If the assumption is 12 round encounters, at BEST, you have 50% at-will [a bit less when dailies are used, but rarely would you use more than 1 daily per encounter]. So, at least half the time ... EVERY CLASS ATTACKS THE SAME. The only difference is weapon selection, which is limited to: (a) STR or DEX, (b) +2 or +3 prof, (c) 1-H or 2-H. Which weapon you use will be based in part by whether you want to spend a feat to get the "best" weapon, or you just stick with what you have. Of course, in that system, there are a LOT of weapons that wouldn't get used. Part of the reason to restrict weapon types for certain characters is to encourage archetypes to use those weapons. Few people would actually use a dagger, but it's a solid option for a rogue.  Ultimatly, it would seem to hurt a lot of archetypes if every character was "what weapon do you use half the time?". And, having basic attacks that do LESS than at-wills will only make the encounters longer, making a larger percentage of your attacks into basic weapon based attacks and thus making every character EXACTLY the same, with a few cool things it can do on occaision. The number of spells that wizards and clerics had in 3x allowed them to eventually move away from being weapon wielders if they wanted to (in the case of the cleric, both then, and now, you had the option of being a weapon wielding type or not.) Heck, they introduced feats to allow wizards access to at-will magical powers (reserve feats). They created the warlock with it's eldritch blast. Now, in those cases the touch attacks usually required Dex based attacks, but there were a number of other issues at work (BAB wasn't the same across all classes, touch AC could be a lot lower than actual AC, etc).  Basically, removing at-wills makes more characters with MAD, and limits any "archetypes" to "stuff I do less than half the time in any given fight". Every character is EITHER: STR/DEX based, or forced to be a gish of some type. There are no wizards, only fighters/crossbowmen who occaisionally use magic. No matter what level you get to, unless there is a ridiculous bloat of daily and encounter powers, you will have a significant portion of time spent using a weapon. So, ANY class that has a primary attack stat and secondary stat that doesn't have one of them as STR or DEX, you've completely neutered them. A warlock, for example, can't be CHA/INT or CHA/CON or CON/INT because they'll be completely ineffective half of the battle. Now, you can have EVERY build for EVERY class have STR and/or DEX involved, but then you have an effect on the balance of races, and make all the classes much more similar. More classes, more at-will choices for those classes, THAT is what gives you more archetypes. Does it really matter if it's a CLERIC wielding a bow, and not a ranger MC'd into cleric to get a few Cleric powers? That person would be using the bow most of the time, and would have a limited number of encounter powers. In fact, what you'd probably want to do with this: All the non-martial classes are multiclass only. That is sort of what this would look like. Everyone would be something like a warlord, fighter, ranger or rogue. Then there is the wizard who would be a multiclass martial/wizard that starts with less than any martial class gets.</blockquote>

Verification