Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="JamesonCourage" data-source="post: 5958660" data-attributes="member: 6668292">[/sblock]I really agree with this part. These are important to think about when designing balance, especially for a game where &quot;support your play style&quot; is important to it.I think you're missing some of the counterpoint that DogBackward made: Neonchameleon is complaining that players of 4e may not like the direction of 5e for&nbsp; [list of reasons], one of which is in the quote above this (&quot;Wizard and Cleric get utility spells, Fighter gets to kill things better&quot;). Replying with &quot;well, Fighters in 4e can kill things better!&quot; doesn't really counter what DogBackward said (&quot;all of their powers equate to 'Kill More Stuff' or 'Be Hard to Kill'&quot;).Yes, the 4e Fighter has more options in combat. Neonchameleon was commenting on balance, and on what 4e had that 5e doesn't. DogBackward was pointing out that 4e doesn't really have it, either, so it's probably not best to include that in an argument where the logic is based on &quot;I like these things that 4e had, and want them in 5e.&quot;I'm unfamiliar with a lot of 4e. What utility powers will make them leaps and bounds better socially than, say, having Intimidate trained? Will it just give them better Intimidate? Basically, what utility power expands their breadth of options (into social and exploration), rather than the depth of the options they already have (combat). I'm genuinely curious, not trying to play &quot;gotcha&quot; (a quick look online for best Fighter utility powers came up with low level powers useful in combat, so I'm not sure on this at all). As always, play what you like <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)"&nbsp; data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /></blockquote>

[QUOTE="JamesonCourage, post: 5958660, member: 6668292"] [/sblock]I really agree with this part. These are important to think about when designing balance, [I]especially[/I] for a game where "support your play style" is important to it. I think you're missing some of the counterpoint that DogBackward made: Neonchameleon is complaining that players of 4e may not like the direction of 5e for [list of reasons], one of which is in the quote above this ("Wizard and Cleric get utility spells, Fighter gets to kill things better"). Replying with "well, Fighters in 4e can kill things better!" doesn't really counter what DogBackward said ("all of their powers equate to 'Kill More Stuff' or 'Be Hard to Kill'"). Yes, the 4e Fighter has more options in combat. Neonchameleon was commenting on balance, and on what 4e had that 5e doesn't. DogBackward was pointing out that 4e doesn't really have it, either, so it's probably not best to include that in an argument where the logic is based on "I like these things that 4e had, and want them in 5e." I'm unfamiliar with [I]a lot[/I] of 4e. What utility powers will make them leaps and bounds better socially than, say, having Intimidate trained? Will it just give them better Intimidate? Basically, what utility power expands their [I]breadth[/I] of options (into social and exploration), rather than the [I]depth[/I] of the options they already have (combat). I'm genuinely curious, not trying to play "gotcha" (a quick look online for best Fighter utility powers came up with low level powers useful in combat, so I'm not sure on this at all). As always, play what you like :) [/QUOTE]

Verification