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: 6237119" data-attributes="member: 17106">True, but the singular anecdote is definitely not data. Are there any data that back up your rather radical and unique perspective? If so, you've never presented any.More like three hundred. Of course, my experience matches the conclusions of the people who wrote the game and did all that fancy research. For example, the books note that a racial bonus to Strength is worth double anything else, and one common thread about actual balance problems that 3e creates in play is that they revolve around high strength.  Half-ogres, frenzied berserkers, even the rare examples of legitimate caster issues like Divine Power and polymorph abuses all revolve around high strength, because it isn't a trick and it's reliably effective. Every actual analysis I've ever read of 3e, from what WotC put out in its various DM books to Trailblazer to chatter on its own forums agrees that "spine numbers" are what matter and that the various martial classes, despite some legitimate need for revisions, have numerous fundamental advantages.It was also a constant throughout my local rpg community from 2e through 3.0 to 3.5, regardless of rules. Fighters and rangers are top dog heroes, rogues/thieves are the thinking man's character, playing a cleric is something of a type B choice for someone who just wants to talk and help others without having much responsibility, and playing a mage/wizard is for a certain adventurous type who likes poring over spell text for hours and doesn't care if people laugh at him when his character dies. I've literally never run a single campaign where a cleric or wizard was the most powerful character, and my own best PC was my rogue, not my cleric, my sorcerer, or my druids.Of course, around 2008 all the stores closed and the community became a lot less communal, but even these days with the people who haven't switched games or quit rpgs altogether and are running modded 3.X (PF is for old people), the conclusion has remained the same. Suggesting that martial characters aren't the best is a joke, at least among Gen Y in my geographical area, though from what I can tell there are online forums full of old-schoolers that feel the same way.But all the companies who've done analyses and playtests and made attempts to revise the game (like TB and PF) found pretty much the same thing that I have and acted accordingly.But then what interest do you have in a roleplaying game? Seriously, if those little stat blocks don't on some level represent a person, what is the game that you're playing? To me, it sounds like what  you have no interest in is D&D, which is fine but certainly doesn't suggest that you should be complaining about it.It's right there in the name: non-player character. Not plot device. Not prop. Character.The only lesson I got out of that is that a lack of imagination is a recipe for failed campaigns.Someone ought to publish the "tier system of classes' effectiveness in actual play". Magic really just isn't that great.Gasp!Well, nothing happened to it, for most of us.</blockquote>

Verification