Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Classes that Suck
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Chaosmancer" data-source="post: 8059628" data-attributes="member: 6801228"><p>And all of that stuff can be done by the paladin, or the sorcerer, or the bard, all who have potential mechanics to back them up, while the Fighter is solely at the mercy of the DM and a potential flat roll. </p><p></p><p>I agree, players play and be clever, but saying "well anyone can try to climb the mountain" kind of ignore the point of one person is likely to fall to their death, and the other has a climb speed so it is exactly the type of thing they are supposed to be doing.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>But what about the people who do have the mechanics? </p><p></p><p>This is the problem. Let us say the DM lets the fighter just be charming and work the social scene, because this is a rare dice game. Then what was the use of the Bard putting their expertise in persuasion and playing a glamour bard to charm people? The fighter is doing their job, with no mechanics, so why invest in the mechanics? </p><p></p><p>It is a bit of a catch-22, either the people who invested mechanics into it feel like they wasted their time, or the people who don;t have the option to invest in mechnics feel left out. </p><p></p><p>And if it was an easy problem to solve, it wouldn't come up in every single edition of the game.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I'm curious why [USER=7019027]@Asisreo[/USER] liked your comment when this goes exactly against what they were saying. The bolded part is exactly what we are saying, and exactly what he pushed back against. </p><p></p><p>And there were consequences. Failing the mission. The scenario I am thinking of in particular involved us sneaking into a party. We split the group, half going in the front and half going in the back. I was in the back group with a disguise as a chef, which my character was a chef, carrying supplies for the kitchen.... and I failed the roll because I had a +0 mod. And that would mean an alarm would be raised, and we couldn't get in, and we would fail the mission, because we were actually meant to do the more important part. </p><p></p><p>So the DM had to give me retroactive advantage (play by post game, so the other players with me hadn't spoken up for the help action and he had an NPC do it) to barely pass... and I promptly did the exact same thing five minutes later when we encountered a second set of security. </p><p></p><p></p><p>And the thing that was making the whole situation worse, was that we knew we could fight and win. We could have slaughtered everyone in that building and gotten what we needed, because we are decently high level and we were at full strength, but we had been specifically ordered not to fight anyone. </p><p></p><p></p><p>But, to your point that if I want to be involved in the consequential social scenes, I should build for that, there is a problem. Most classes don't get anything to help with that. </p><p></p><p>Barbarian, Fighter, Ranger, Druid, and Monk get nothing to really affect social scenes. Wizards only get by because charm person and other obvious magics, but they usually can't do anything either. That is half of the classes. And, if they aren't viable for building to be involved in both combat and social situations, well, we just end up building more Paladins, Warlocks, Bards and Rogues who can do 2/3rds of the game instead of 1/3rd</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>And again, if the dwarf can speak common, like most dwarves do?</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Chaosmancer, post: 8059628, member: 6801228"] And all of that stuff can be done by the paladin, or the sorcerer, or the bard, all who have potential mechanics to back them up, while the Fighter is solely at the mercy of the DM and a potential flat roll. I agree, players play and be clever, but saying "well anyone can try to climb the mountain" kind of ignore the point of one person is likely to fall to their death, and the other has a climb speed so it is exactly the type of thing they are supposed to be doing. But what about the people who do have the mechanics? This is the problem. Let us say the DM lets the fighter just be charming and work the social scene, because this is a rare dice game. Then what was the use of the Bard putting their expertise in persuasion and playing a glamour bard to charm people? The fighter is doing their job, with no mechanics, so why invest in the mechanics? It is a bit of a catch-22, either the people who invested mechanics into it feel like they wasted their time, or the people who don;t have the option to invest in mechnics feel left out. And if it was an easy problem to solve, it wouldn't come up in every single edition of the game. I'm curious why [USER=7019027]@Asisreo[/USER] liked your comment when this goes exactly against what they were saying. The bolded part is exactly what we are saying, and exactly what he pushed back against. And there were consequences. Failing the mission. The scenario I am thinking of in particular involved us sneaking into a party. We split the group, half going in the front and half going in the back. I was in the back group with a disguise as a chef, which my character was a chef, carrying supplies for the kitchen.... and I failed the roll because I had a +0 mod. And that would mean an alarm would be raised, and we couldn't get in, and we would fail the mission, because we were actually meant to do the more important part. So the DM had to give me retroactive advantage (play by post game, so the other players with me hadn't spoken up for the help action and he had an NPC do it) to barely pass... and I promptly did the exact same thing five minutes later when we encountered a second set of security. And the thing that was making the whole situation worse, was that we knew we could fight and win. We could have slaughtered everyone in that building and gotten what we needed, because we are decently high level and we were at full strength, but we had been specifically ordered not to fight anyone. But, to your point that if I want to be involved in the consequential social scenes, I should build for that, there is a problem. Most classes don't get anything to help with that. Barbarian, Fighter, Ranger, Druid, and Monk get nothing to really affect social scenes. Wizards only get by because charm person and other obvious magics, but they usually can't do anything either. That is half of the classes. And, if they aren't viable for building to be involved in both combat and social situations, well, we just end up building more Paladins, Warlocks, Bards and Rogues who can do 2/3rds of the game instead of 1/3rd And again, if the dwarf can speak common, like most dwarves do? [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Classes that Suck
Top