Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Sunseeker" data-source="post: 6063043">I think the point is though that while people can be better or worse in certain aspects of adventuring, unless one adventurer is grossly more experienced than another, their power levels should not be far off.&nbsp; &quot;Better&quot; is a matter of opinion, yes, your character hits more often, mine does more damage, his has more skills, etc...&nbsp; It's reasonable for certain characters to be &quot;better&quot; than others in this manner and for the game to allow this kind of building.&nbsp; &quot;Better&quot; in the sense that my character can do everything yours can 100 fold for no reason other than the rules make Clerics superior to Fighters is dangerous.&nbsp; Even gamists are likely to agree that there's no glory in building a better character when there's no real risk of competition, you have to realistically be able to be challenged, otherwise there's no real skill involved.If we suppose that the baseline of character power is set at &quot;5&quot;, that the default options you get with Core materials will hover around this line, with some being a 6 and others being a 4 at times, then there is reasonable range over time with the introduction of splat to build a 10 or a 1.&nbsp; But the range of 1-10 must exist for most classes, though not necessarily most concepts.So again, it's reasonable and expected for characters to be better than others in specific areas, but is unusual and unexpected for characters of the same level to grossly exceed the skills of another.&nbsp; If we consider LOTR as a party, the hobbits are grossly exceeded because they're all 1/2 level commoners, while Aragon is a high-level Ranger, Boromir a high-level fighter, Gandalf is gestalt and so on and so forth.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Sunseeker, post: 6063043"] I think the point is though that while people can be better or worse in certain aspects of adventuring, unless one adventurer is grossly more experienced than another, their power levels should not be far off. "Better" is a matter of opinion, yes, your character hits more often, mine does more damage, his has more skills, etc... It's reasonable for certain characters to be "better" than others in this manner and for the game to allow this kind of building. "Better" in the sense that my character can do everything yours can 100 fold for no reason other than the rules make Clerics superior to Fighters is dangerous. Even gamists are likely to agree that there's no glory in building a better character when there's no real risk of competition, you have to realistically be able to be challenged, otherwise there's no real skill involved. If we suppose that the baseline of character power is set at "5", that the default options you get with Core materials will hover around this line, with some being a 6 and others being a 4 at times, then there is reasonable range over time with the introduction of splat to build a 10 or a 1. But the range of 1-10 must exist for most classes, though not necessarily most concepts. So again, it's reasonable and expected for characters to be better than others in specific areas, but is unusual and unexpected for characters of the same level to grossly exceed the skills of another. If we consider LOTR as a party, the hobbits are grossly exceeded because they're all 1/2 level commoners, while Aragon is a high-level Ranger, Boromir a high-level fighter, Gandalf is gestalt and so on and so forth. [/QUOTE]

Verification