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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="empireofchaos" data-source="post: 6777259" data-attributes="member: 6800918">In this one regard, my position (as a proponent of classes) is actually closer to that of the other side. It's very difficult to know, in a quantifiable way, how often a character "hits". There was a great paragraph in the 1e PHB (or maybe DMG, I can't exactly recall) describing what happens when you beat down a high level fighter who has 90 HP. By the time he's been reduced to about half that number, he is covered with lots of bumps and bruises. That means that a lot of the "hits" are not actually hits that penetrate armor and cause bleeding. You are just wearing the guy down, and setting him up for the coup de grace, which may be the only thing that looks like an actual "hit".Obviously, a high-level combatant is going to have more of these hits (and will be more successful in general), but it's highly unlikely (to put it mildly) that there is someone in the game-world with a sophisticated enough knowledge of statistics to be able to glean, from long-term observation and recording of data, what level and class someone is on the basis of "hitting".On the other hand, there are certainly styles, and if classes have reality, it wouldn't be terribly complicated for the initiated to be able to quickly glean one's class, archetype and level from watching you fight (rather than "hit"). Per day or per rest powers (like spells) would be somewhat easier to observe - but again, for the initiated. Wizards likely take great care in obscuring their abilities with a veil of mystery, and only those who belong to their school would likely be able to penetrate this veil (and live). Yeah, the semantic aspects kept being brought up (as a red herring), but they didn't make a terribly useful contribution to the discussion. I used an example similar to that of your proverbial gamer involving physicists and chemists. Just because most people (including, occasionally, those who bear those titles) can't always tell the difference, doesn't mean the distinctions don't really exist.If you want to have Sailor Moon holy-roller barbarians in your world, more power to you. To me, different fluff would be be better fit with a different archetype (since "berserker" literally mean "bear shirter" - and refers to an animal-like rage which does not really resemble your "battle trance" that closely). To me, the fighting styles of these two characters would be completely different, and it would hardly enter anyone's mind to compare them. I doubt the aesthetics of this type of character would accord with my vision so that I would allow it and build an archetype around it, but I might if it were described in a way I could anchor to some group or another (and that's what would make the character identifiable with a particular class).</blockquote>

Verification