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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="JoeGKushner" data-source="post: 3731847" data-attributes="member: 1129">Have to take the old grain of salt here. Reading and playing are two huge different things.When the PHB first came out, you might've had a point. Throw in substitution levels, replacement abilities (simliar yet seperate mechanics), tricks (skill point sacrifice for minor feats), and the huge variety of PrC/Feats out there, the GM must keep an even closer eye on PC design. There is no underlying equality in D&D and feats and abilities vary tremendously in power. The eldrtich knight would be a great example of a simple concept, fighter mage, that compared to the hosts of fighter mages that have come out afterwards, is a 'loser' class. Poor hit dice, poor abilities and good only for the 'basicness' of it.In many campaigns, we still have those things. They're called the Seven Sisters, Elminster, etc...  And D&D, despite it's more intensive book keeping nature than some other games, still doesn't follow things to their logical conclusions, especially high level rulers of lands whose access to super high levels of gold would allow them to have numerous magic items/artifcats. And yet, if it was used the right way, probably wouldn't be that much of a problem. Some designer was talking about the terrible trials of advancing an ogre to get heavy armor proficiency instead of just giving that sucker a level of fighter. The PC appropriate mind flayer isn't that much of a 'problem' for most GMs I've played with so I'm back to ya.</blockquote>

Verification