Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="StreamOfTheSky" data-source="post: 2785549" data-attributes="member: 35909">I completely agree.&nbsp; I never just make a &quot;fighter&quot;.&nbsp; I have my own vision of how he fights, and to achieve that, it may require levels in fighter/swashbuckler/blade bravo, or fighter/ranger/order of the bow initiate/arcane archer, or whatever else.Instead of just taking abilities away from the non-spellcasting classes (widely and rightly considered underpowered to spellcasters at higher levels), why not just give them more abilities at mid and higher levels to encourage players to play single class?&nbsp; The fighter especially could use help there.By taking a level in ranger, you fall behind in the abilities of your bard or rogue class.&nbsp; Being behind a level in access to the next spell level hurts a lot, just ask a sorceror.&nbsp; And yes, the wepon groups system is a pretty good idea.The reason for 4x skill points at first level is that at first level, your max ranks are...4!&nbsp; And every level after that, +1.&nbsp; If you take the x4 away you make it MUCH harder to keep all the player's important skills maxed, or at least close to max.&nbsp; And, skill rich as the rogue is, he doesn't get enough points to cover all the skills he needs and the party counts on him for (tumble, move silently, hide, spot, search, listen, bluff, use magic device, disable device, and open locks at the bare minimum).&nbsp; The best points per # of class skills class is probably monk.&nbsp; Oh, and as for the max HP at first level, without that, players could very easily die in one hit at first level.Curiously though, what CR does the DM in that came count you as at third level?&nbsp; The characters sound a little underpowered to be facing CR 3 monsters.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="StreamOfTheSky, post: 2785549, member: 35909"] I completely agree. I never just make a "fighter". I have my own vision of how he fights, and to achieve that, it may require levels in fighter/swashbuckler/blade bravo, or fighter/ranger/order of the bow initiate/arcane archer, or whatever else. Instead of just taking abilities away from the non-spellcasting classes (widely and rightly considered underpowered to spellcasters at higher levels), why not just give them more abilities at mid and higher levels to encourage players to play single class? The fighter especially could use help there. By taking a level in ranger, you fall behind in the abilities of your bard or rogue class. Being behind a level in access to the next spell level hurts a lot, just ask a sorceror. And yes, the wepon groups system is a pretty good idea. The reason for 4x skill points at first level is that at first level, your max ranks are...4! And every level after that, +1. If you take the x4 away you make it MUCH harder to keep all the player's important skills maxed, or at least close to max. And, skill rich as the rogue is, he doesn't get enough points to cover all the skills he needs and the party counts on him for (tumble, move silently, hide, spot, search, listen, bluff, use magic device, disable device, and open locks at the bare minimum). The best points per # of class skills class is probably monk. Oh, and as for the max HP at first level, without that, players could very easily die in one hit at first level. Curiously though, what CR does the DM in that came count you as at third level? The characters sound a little underpowered to be facing CR 3 monsters. [/QUOTE]

Verification