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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="TwinBahamut" data-source="post: 5975292" data-attributes="member: 32536">I think the best way to do this is to simply create gaps in the abilities of any one class, while allowing other classes to excel to an unmatched degree in that same area.For example, some classes should be extremely capable at moving around and reaching hard-to-reach areas, while other classes should have trouble. For example, if an enemy is shooting arrows at the party from the top of a castle's wall, some character should be able to help allies reach that enemy, while others should need help reaching that enemy, while others are just fine making ranged attacks and shouldn't need any help (not every situation should require interdependence for everyone, after all). In that example, a melee-focused Barbarian with no ranged combat ability may need the help, while a Rogue can climb up and lower a rope, a Paladin with a flying mount may be able to carry the Barbarian up there, and the Wizard and the Ranger might not be able to get up but are fine launching ranged attacks. At higher levels this situation might play out the same, though "standing on a castle wall" might be replaced with "hovering in the center of a tornado" and the exact methods of reaching the enemy may differ.The problem that threatens this is when a class that should be the best at something is instead forced to rely on a class that should need help. This is exemplified by the Rogue's skill at climbing or sneaking being obsoleted by a Wizard's ability to cast Fly and Invisibility. The Wizard isn't supposed to be the mobile, sneaky character, yet is instead more mobile and more sneaky than the specialist in being mobile and sneaky. If a wizard's ability to move or sneak around ever matches that of the Rogue, even with a significant expenditure of resources, then the interdependence of the team is completely lost. Similarly, if the Fighter is supposed to be the "breaking stuff" character, then no other class should be able to break anything as well as the Fighter (so spells that dig through rock and dispel force walls step on the Fighter's toes).Basically, you need to focus entire classes rather strongly on particular abilities, and protect that niche very, very rigidly as the stakes raise at higher level. Flight is simply a higher-level form of climbing and jumping, so characters who climb and jump well are the ones who should progress to flying. Smashing force walls is a higher-level form of smashing wooden doors, so the guy who smashes doors should move on to smashing force walls. The problem before was that non-spellcasters never progressed to higher levels of their own specialization, while spellcasters went from having no ability to having every high-level ability. As long as that is avoided, interdependence should function more effectively.Of course, you can go a step past this by forcing interdependence. For example, you can give the Fighter an attack that will deal double the normal amount of damage if it hits a foe who is currently frozen in ice. If the Fighter doesn't have the ability to freeze enemies in ice on his own, then he has no choice but to depend on an ally who can do so in order to make the best use of that attack. In this case, a Fighter who is good at smashing ice and a Wizard who is skilled at freezing enemies would be much more effective as a team then apart (so long as the fighter doesn't learn how to freeze and the Wizard doesn't learn how to smash ice).</blockquote>

Verification