Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="mlund" data-source="post: 6065551" data-attributes="member: 50304">Let's not confuse the issue. There were enemies that were immune to piercing damage and Kerrek always kept a good dagger and a club as back-up, even putting low-grade enchantments on them as he leveled. He never just said, &quot;Hey, this Axe is way better than my chain. I guess its time to be Kerrek the Axe.&quot;There's no need to reward such a decision, but there's definitely no reason to punish such a decision either. In fact, if the idea is to appeal to a broad swath then you really ought to accommodate classic fantasy tropes like By My Father's Sword in your core design.&nbsp;The perception that such a thing ought to be treated as a disadvantage is where we make a wrong term at the outset, IMO.&nbsp;Actually, the generalist fighter was pretty rewarding to play in 4th Edition, barring the Expertise Feat Tax. It definitely wasn't as severe as prior editions. Once they printed &quot;Master At Arms&quot; that problem was completely bypassed (other than the general Expertise problem).I think we'll see less &quot;I can't fight without my specific magic gizmo&quot; scenarios for Fighters thanks to flatter math and class-driven damage. I also think we'll see missed opportunities for player adoption if the game brazenly says, &quot;Want to focus on X, Y, or Z weapons-based tropes as part of your character vision? Mr. D% says you can suck eggs!&quot;Professional soldiers trained with the weapons appropriate to their battlefield role. Knights definitely had a handle on the relevant martial weapons of the day that fit their station&nbsp; (swords, lance, dagger, bludgeon-de-jour, possibly ax), but they were used primarily as cavalry. Specialty pole-arms and bows weren't their bag. An infantry man-at-arms probably had a more broad spectrum of weapon skills with a deficiency in cavalry weapons like the lance or the horseman's ax / mace / flail.But fighters aren't real-life soldiers either. They are adventurers - exceptional fantasy (low, high or otherwise) protagonists. It isn't like Perseus or Aeneas stopped and went &quot;You know, I really never took time to learn the bow. It just never came up. Sorry.&quot;- Marty Lund</blockquote>

[QUOTE="mlund, post: 6065551, member: 50304"] Let's not confuse the issue. There were enemies that were immune to piercing damage and Kerrek always kept a good dagger and a club as back-up, even putting low-grade enchantments on them as he leveled. He never just said, "Hey, this Axe is way better than my chain. I guess its time to be Kerrek the Axe." There's no need to reward such a decision, but there's definitely no reason to [B]punish[/B] such a decision either. In fact, if the idea is to appeal to a broad swath then you really ought to accommodate classic fantasy tropes like By My Father's Sword in your core design. The perception that such a thing [B]ought[/B] to be treated as a disadvantage is where we make a wrong term at the outset, IMO. Actually, the generalist fighter was pretty rewarding to play in 4th Edition, barring the Expertise Feat Tax. It definitely wasn't as severe as prior editions. Once they printed "Master At Arms" that problem was completely bypassed (other than the general Expertise problem). I think we'll see less "I can't fight without my specific magic gizmo" scenarios for Fighters thanks to flatter math and class-driven damage. I also think we'll see missed opportunities for player adoption if the game brazenly says, "Want to focus on X, Y, or Z weapons-based tropes as part of your character vision? Mr. D% says you can suck eggs!" Professional soldiers trained with the weapons appropriate to their battlefield role. Knights definitely had a handle on the relevant martial weapons of the day that fit their station (swords, lance, dagger, bludgeon-de-jour, possibly ax), but they were used primarily as cavalry. Specialty pole-arms and bows weren't their bag. An infantry man-at-arms probably had a more broad spectrum of weapon skills with a deficiency in cavalry weapons like the lance or the horseman's ax / mace / flail. But fighters aren't real-life soldiers either. They are adventurers - exceptional fantasy (low, high or otherwise) protagonists. It isn't like Perseus or Aeneas stopped and went "You know, I really never took time to learn the bow. It just never came up. Sorry." - Marty Lund [/QUOTE]

Verification