Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="mlund" data-source="post: 6051324" data-attributes="member: 50304">No. What you have proposed is a Fighter with bolted-on extras to be the &quot;Paladin&quot; in this edition. &quot;Silliness&quot; is a polite way of putting it. Taking most (if not everything) the Fighter gets and then getting MOAR for being a Paladin is unbalanced - greased skids straight to Munchkin Land. Seriously, what are you going to put back to fit the whole &quot;Paladin&quot; thing into your class budget? You can't put back the Swords, the Armor, or the Hit Dice (good-bye knight-in-shining-armor). Once you take the Expertise Dice you've got the whole dang Fighter class and THEN bolt on Paladin powers and tell me that's in any way balanced and fair?Stop trying to drink everyone else's milkshake already.Nobody is going to get anywhere by resorting to fallacious appeals to &quot;inclusiveness&quot; whenever ideas run afoul of fundamental class design goals for the edition (balance, distinctiveness, enjoyment, ease of access). An unqualified &quot;I should be able to play however I want,&quot; doesn't get us anywhere.You can't build a game including all the mechanics of prior editions, period. There were a lot of bad mechanics, balance mistakes, and incompatible visions between the editions. They want to get the good parts of the &quot;feel&quot; of various editions built into the options for Next, not inherit 30 years of baggage in a dysfunctional jumble.The way to do that is to measure each idea against the big-picture Design Goals and then see if it can be adapted to a place where you aren't abandoning any of your fundamentals. The whole mentality of &quot;Ooh, that's shiny, I'll have what he's having too!&quot; runs you right off the rails of Balance and Distinctiveness.- Marty Lund</blockquote>

[QUOTE="mlund, post: 6051324, member: 50304"] No. What you have proposed is a Fighter with bolted-on extras to be the "Paladin" in this edition. "Silliness" is a polite way of putting it. Taking most (if not everything) the Fighter gets and then getting [b]MOAR[/b] for being a Paladin is unbalanced - greased skids straight to Munchkin Land. Seriously, what are you going to put back to fit the whole "Paladin" thing into your class budget? You can't put back the Swords, the Armor, or the Hit Dice (good-bye knight-in-shining-armor). Once you take the Expertise Dice you've got the whole dang Fighter class and THEN bolt on Paladin powers and tell me that's in any way balanced and fair? Stop trying to drink everyone else's milkshake already. Nobody is going to get anywhere by resorting to fallacious appeals to "inclusiveness" whenever ideas run afoul of fundamental class design goals for the edition (balance, distinctiveness, enjoyment, ease of access). An unqualified "I should be able to play however I want," doesn't get us anywhere. You can't build a game including all the mechanics of prior editions, period. There were a lot of bad mechanics, balance mistakes, and incompatible visions between the editions. They want to get the good parts of the "feel" of various editions built into the options for Next, not inherit 30 years of baggage in a dysfunctional jumble. The way to do that is to measure each idea against the big-picture Design Goals and then see if it can be adapted to a place where you aren't abandoning any of your fundamentals. The whole mentality of "Ooh, that's shiny, I'll have what he's having too!" runs you right off the rails of Balance and Distinctiveness. - Marty Lund [/QUOTE]

Verification