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
Impact of "fixing" the MAD classes?
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="AbdulAlhazred" data-source="post: 4730546" data-attributes="member: 82106"><p>Sort of seems like if you go that way then you just did away with the 4 'V shaped' classes. That might have been the best design from the start, but in essence that is result, all classes become single stat secondary. It really is much of a minor detail as to which stat you use, except if it is a choice then the choice is clear, nobody would CHOOSE to be a Chaladin since WIS and CHA stack on WILL defense and STR is kind of that stat that anyone who ever swings a weapon at all pretty much has a use for. </p><p></p><p>The situation may not be so clear cut with the warlock builds, but it does kind of wash out the flavor of the various pacts. Not a disaster of course.</p><p></p><p>In the case of rogues and rangers I think you actually are loosing a good bit though, and some other problems arise. High damage ranged attack capability is a VERY powerful feature for a character to have. The Archer ranger and the Sniper rogue pay for that with a significant loss of melee combat capability. If you merge the two halves, then you obliterate that disadvantage. Nobody would ever play a STR ranger if they can use DEX universally in place of STR, and if a rogue can have all rogue powers and not have to worry about CHA, then you'll have rogues that are universally max pumped in STR/DEX every time and fight equally with all weapons as well.</p><p></p><p>Granted there are secondary effects of various powers that your feat doesn't obliterate the distinctions for, but if a character can have really superior fighting skill, they'll pretty much always ignore that.</p><p></p><p>The final weakness with that is that rogue and ranger are the MC choices par-excellence. Monkeying with the stat balance of how their powers work is likely to create a whole bunch of nasty combos. A proper feat prereq can deal with that on the MC into those classes side, but on the side of MC out of them, it could get ugly.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="AbdulAlhazred, post: 4730546, member: 82106"] Sort of seems like if you go that way then you just did away with the 4 'V shaped' classes. That might have been the best design from the start, but in essence that is result, all classes become single stat secondary. It really is much of a minor detail as to which stat you use, except if it is a choice then the choice is clear, nobody would CHOOSE to be a Chaladin since WIS and CHA stack on WILL defense and STR is kind of that stat that anyone who ever swings a weapon at all pretty much has a use for. The situation may not be so clear cut with the warlock builds, but it does kind of wash out the flavor of the various pacts. Not a disaster of course. In the case of rogues and rangers I think you actually are loosing a good bit though, and some other problems arise. High damage ranged attack capability is a VERY powerful feature for a character to have. The Archer ranger and the Sniper rogue pay for that with a significant loss of melee combat capability. If you merge the two halves, then you obliterate that disadvantage. Nobody would ever play a STR ranger if they can use DEX universally in place of STR, and if a rogue can have all rogue powers and not have to worry about CHA, then you'll have rogues that are universally max pumped in STR/DEX every time and fight equally with all weapons as well. Granted there are secondary effects of various powers that your feat doesn't obliterate the distinctions for, but if a character can have really superior fighting skill, they'll pretty much always ignore that. The final weakness with that is that rogue and ranger are the MC choices par-excellence. Monkeying with the stat balance of how their powers work is likely to create a whole bunch of nasty combos. A proper feat prereq can deal with that on the MC into those classes side, but on the side of MC out of them, it could get ugly. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Impact of "fixing" the MAD classes?
Top