Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
I dont get the argument that you can do any concept with just core rules.
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="two" data-source="post: 3003913" data-attributes="member: 9002"><p>We pretty much agree on the basics, it's just terminology getting in the way.</p><p></p><p>I guess I don't see the arbitrary nerfing of throwing concepts in the core rules as anything other than a mechanical deficiency.</p><p></p><p>It would be very easy to fix, with no balance issues.</p><p></p><p>I think a cool character concept that gets screwed over by core mechanics is really, really, really lame. Exactly because it punishes the people you don't want punished -- the players that are not simply trying to maximize everything.</p><p></p><p>As I said before, I simply want parity for the thrower. I don't think, and still don't think, your unnamed thrower build fits the bill. You simply have too many core rules to fight against. Plus "in your element" seems to be a corridor less than 5' high...which, well, is a little specific. You need THAT to acheive parity? How often do you run across those <5' corridors that still allow you line of sight to use ranged weapons?</p><p></p><p>And the beginning, middle, and end of the day, D&D rewards combat prowess with XP. There are non-combat awards too... they are about 1/10 as common, if that.</p><p></p><p>No. In D&D a "viable" build is not a swimming specialist. In a game that is not so focussed on combat -- maybe. But if you PC spends all their $ and is totally focussed on...swimming... that's great. But it's not a viable build for D&D. The PC is in fact an anchor most of the time (and a boring one-trick pony at that).</p><p></p><p>Similarly a throwing master using core rules burns up millions of feats and $ in an attempt to simply do average archery damage, some of the time. He too, will be a bit of an anchor to the party (a one trick pony that's not even that effective).</p><p></p><p>It's a shame. I wish it were not so. But I think it is.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="two, post: 3003913, member: 9002"] We pretty much agree on the basics, it's just terminology getting in the way. I guess I don't see the arbitrary nerfing of throwing concepts in the core rules as anything other than a mechanical deficiency. It would be very easy to fix, with no balance issues. I think a cool character concept that gets screwed over by core mechanics is really, really, really lame. Exactly because it punishes the people you don't want punished -- the players that are not simply trying to maximize everything. As I said before, I simply want parity for the thrower. I don't think, and still don't think, your unnamed thrower build fits the bill. You simply have too many core rules to fight against. Plus "in your element" seems to be a corridor less than 5' high...which, well, is a little specific. You need THAT to acheive parity? How often do you run across those <5' corridors that still allow you line of sight to use ranged weapons? And the beginning, middle, and end of the day, D&D rewards combat prowess with XP. There are non-combat awards too... they are about 1/10 as common, if that. No. In D&D a "viable" build is not a swimming specialist. In a game that is not so focussed on combat -- maybe. But if you PC spends all their $ and is totally focussed on...swimming... that's great. But it's not a viable build for D&D. The PC is in fact an anchor most of the time (and a boring one-trick pony at that). Similarly a throwing master using core rules burns up millions of feats and $ in an attempt to simply do average archery damage, some of the time. He too, will be a bit of an anchor to the party (a one trick pony that's not even that effective). It's a shame. I wish it were not so. But I think it is. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
I dont get the argument that you can do any concept with just core rules.
Top