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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ahnehnois" data-source="post: 6194212" data-attributes="member: 17106">The tier system is an opinion that someone made up. It is not an analysis, it does not have thousands of authors, and it is a minority opinion.We're back to the dirt farmer/demigod example. Is that distinction just "fluff" too?In any case, it's not rules. "Fighter" and "wizard" are different classes. That's in the rules. This notion you have that they should be equal in some way is not in any rule I'm aware of.  It's just "fluff" so to speak.I'm not opposed to the idea of fixing balance. I'm opposed to the idea of creating your definition of balance. I fix things for balance all the time.No, I'm adamant that the one "flaw" you're harping on is distinct from the actual flaws that do need to be fixed. Of which there are plenty.Yes, but most of them have definitions of balance that don't require fighters to be able to cast spells, and most of them aren't hung up on this one ludicrous issue that you are.Except for, you know, most of it.As I thought. Anyone who didn't write the tier system and is currently playing an ongoing and satisfactory game of 3e, PF, or any of its derivatives (or any earlier D&D, or basically any rpg that doesn't meet your definition of balance) is apparently irrelevant. In other words, essentially the entire gaming community.I don't need to meet them or have a nuanced understanding of their experience to know that they exist. In this context, not having a fanatical desire to force equality on all characters is a default; a null hypothesis. In the absence of compelling evidence to the contrary, I assume that anyone who plays D&D and hasn't expressed an opinion that D&D is "broken" does not have said opinion.Just because you see it doesn't mean it is.Thankfully not.</blockquote>

Verification