Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Deadboy" data-source="post: 5781337" data-attributes="member: 61779">But isn't it a problem if a DM has to DESIGN AROUND a particular&nbsp; character to keep them from shining too much or another character to&nbsp; keep them from shining too little? Shouldn't each class have the&nbsp; capability to shine ON THEIR OWN without being coddled by the DM? That's&nbsp; the heart of the Oberoni fallacy. A DM shouldn't have to design&nbsp; adventures around poor character class design, he should be able to&nbsp; design adventures as he chooses and still know that the characters can&nbsp; find ways to conquer them while each shining in their own way.My favorite thing to do as a DM is sling an encounter at a group of PCs while thinking, &quot;I can't WAIT to see how they get out of this one.&quot; It's way harder to do that if I also have to figure out ways to neuter the Wizard and coddle the fighter.I must also point out another reason why I think balance is so important - my time playing a 3.5 Fighter was literally the only time I've ever been outright bored playing an RPG. By 8th level, my low intelligence, low skill points and limited skill list meant I had little to offer the party out-of-combat besides climbing walls; and in combat, if I didn't get lucky and roll a high initiative, one of the parties two casters would either outright win or at least marginalize the entire combat before I could go. Even if I won initiative and charged a monster, I was usually doing the party a disservice because now I was just in the casters' way.[MENTION=36874]Giltonio_Santos[/MENTION]: I pretty much told my game group that if we weren't going to play 4e I would play 2e or even 1e before I would consider playing 3.5/Pathfinder.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Deadboy, post: 5781337, member: 61779"] But isn't it a problem if a DM has to DESIGN AROUND a particular character to keep them from shining too much or another character to keep them from shining too little? Shouldn't each class have the capability to shine ON THEIR OWN without being coddled by the DM? That's the heart of the Oberoni fallacy. A DM shouldn't have to design adventures around poor character class design, he should be able to design adventures as he chooses and still know that the characters can find ways to conquer them while each shining in their own way. My favorite thing to do as a DM is sling an encounter at a group of PCs while thinking, "I can't WAIT to see how they get out of this one." It's way harder to do that if I also have to figure out ways to neuter the Wizard and coddle the fighter. I must also point out another reason why I think balance is so important - my time playing a 3.5 Fighter was literally the only time I've ever been outright bored playing an RPG. By 8th level, my low intelligence, low skill points and limited skill list meant I had little to offer the party out-of-combat besides climbing walls; and in combat, if I didn't get lucky and roll a high initiative, one of the parties two casters would either outright win or at least marginalize the entire combat before I could go. Even if I won initiative and charged a monster, I was usually doing the party a disservice because now I was just in the casters' way. [MENTION=36874]Giltonio_Santos[/MENTION]: I pretty much told my game group that if we weren't going to play 4e I would play 2e or even 1e before I would consider playing 3.5/Pathfinder. [/QUOTE]

Verification