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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="DEFCON 1" data-source="post: 5996723" data-attributes="member: 7006">You might as well add Cleric and (soon to be) Druid to that list... because ALL spellcasters pretty much work similarly.  And that's because Magic is just one mechanic.  You have a list of special abilities that break the rules of "reality"... and each spellcasting class gets to use those Magic abilities in a particular form and fashion (through unique acquisition and use mechanics, and unique story as to how/why they do so.)  Whether it's fire and forget, spell points, Vancian, non-Vancian, pseudo-Vancian, at-will, encounter-based, willpower-based etc. etc... those are all just different ways of using the universal mechanic of Magic.So it stands to reason that those classes of non-magical bent have a similar core concept mechanic... IE "Weapon Combat".  As it stands right now... their core Weapon Combat mechanic is "wield a weapon, swing a weapon, do X amount of hit point damage".  Which is fine for a baseline core mechanic... but which lacks a more interesting bent that the Magic-using classes get-- the ability to do more than JUST "do X amount of damage".  And in order for the martial classes to get that, there should be SOME type of mechanic to do so... whether that be "tactical maneuvers" or "combat superiority" or whatever you come up with.  But in any case... it is much easier to run and remember and understand and balance if there is ONE mechanic that all different martial classes opt into in different ways (just like the spellcasting classes do with Magic) than it is to try and invent SEVEN completely different mechanics (for the Fighter, Rogue, Ranger, Paladin, Warlord, Monk and Barbarian).It's not done for Magic... I don't know why it would be done for Weapon Combat.</blockquote>

Verification