Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="ouini" data-source="post: 1513235" data-attributes="member: 3506">Rangers? Blech.I admit I don't have a great grasp of the new vs. old Rangers, except that the old core Rangers are terribly front-loaded, and I wouldn't expect them to work in any point-system which approaches linear or level-for-level balanced. In fact, I'd be very worried if I had a system in which core Fighters and Rangers, or Rogues and Rangers, turned out to cost the same at first level.RE: BarbariansI don't know if I think of Fast Movement as part of an ability chain or not. What is it chained to? The most obvious answer is "Rage", as it was obviously made part of the Barbarian class because Rage doesn't do you any good unless you can get to your enemy quickly.For some reason I got the impression it was already a feat? If so, a non-fighter feat is four points, and 1st level Barbarians still come in as way too expensive (eight points over).But okay. If Fast Movement is part of an ability chain, then it's even worse, and there's some rework to do. Over several levels, Barbarian cost drops down below that of Rogues, but in the early levels, they're costly.What it comes down to, I think, is two things. Core seems fine with giving low-level classes a passel of highly-related abilities, so long as:1 - none of them are unbalancing, and 2 - later on, the class suffers a good dry spell of abilities. (That's actually one of the things I don't like about playing classes -- there are many levels in a row where it's boring to advance a high level Paladin, or Ranger, or Barbarian, or even Rogue unless you're heavily into avoiding traps.)What to do? Well, some options might be:- somehow *borrowing* points from your later levels (very core-like, but BLECH!)- lowering the cost of co-requisite skills at low levels (not *pre*requisite).I'll think about it.</blockquote>

Verification