Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon 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 Next
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
*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!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
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
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
D&D Older Editions
Keith Baker on 4E! (The Hellcow responds!)
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="Remathilis" data-source="post: 4125270" data-attributes="member: 7635"><p>See, that changes the dynamic. Conan is classically a brute warrior (abit a cunning one) but a noble savage and much more (in D&D terms) a warrior with a smattering of other odd skills. Indy is primarily a scientist who can also punch out Nazis. Stephen Hawking is a BRILLIANT mind who can mentally solve even the most difficult physics problems, but can't move out of his chair.</p><p></p><p>If I were at a quiz-bowl, I'd want Mr. Hawkings. If I were in a barfight, I'd want Conan. If I didn't know which I was walking into, I'd want Dr. Jones. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>The rapier-wielding fighter is a great concept, but fails at its assigned role: dealing damage. It probably can't tank either, leaving his allies in an uncomfortable spot: he's a fighter thats not good at fighting (though technically better than his closest compatriot, the rogue) and effectively doesn't contribute to the group what a greatsword-wielding plate-armored gentry knight would. </p><p>The Pacifist Cleric starts out by cutting a huge swath out of his spell selection (flame strike, holy word, sound burst) and could theoretically extend beyond those direct damage spells depending on his ethos (bull strength on the fighter is aiding in killing, ditto hold person to attack a defenseless foe). In reality, a healer (mini's HB) is a worse example of this: a cleric who has crippled spell access (healing spells, that's all) and poor combat ability to boot. </p><p>The Diviner (a stretch, I'll give you it) should represent the mage who fills his spell slots with neat utility magic (fly, grease, rope trick) but lacks any offensive magic to harm foes the fighter is incapable of (fireball, magic missile). Against foes with high AC and DR, the wizard is a great equalizer, a wizard who cannot harm those foes are effectively crippling their party, no matter how useful having Knock memorized is...</p><p>The diplomacy rogue (and really, the floofy bard) are the non-aggressive skill masters who focus on an out of combat role (social skills, performance, con-artistry, etc) at the expense of any real ability to work in combat (run a social-heavy rogue in a tomb-based dungeon to feel the power of uselessness). </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>If your game is built around the premise that non-combat characters are viable and indeed preferable (see Lizard's post) I agree. The problem comes with the mixed bag element of most D&D. This week we're solving the murder mystery du jour, next week we're sacking the old catacombs near town. I want a group of PCs that have something to say in BOTH those adventures, not a bored fighter sitting around while the rogue rolls skill checks only to have next week watch the fighter rocking hard against some monstrous foes while the rogue is sitting there praying for a twenty. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I've played SW Saga. Its nearly IMPOSSIBLE to make a character that sucks in combat (well, its possible, but you have to work at it). However, most of our SW games don't involve a lot of combat. Even my PC (a solider working the mandelorian/Boba Fett angle) is a great pilot, field medic, and steely-eyed scout. The scoundrel (a verpine tech mechanic) has all sorts of abilities out of combat from fixing the hyperdrive to modifying equipment, but he can also knock a foe on his butt with a well-aimed blaster-bolt. The closest we have no a non-combatant is our Noble/healer PC, and she can still hit with her pistol with some regularity. We all add something to combat, we all add something out of combat. No one feels useless.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Remathilis, post: 4125270, member: 7635"] See, that changes the dynamic. Conan is classically a brute warrior (abit a cunning one) but a noble savage and much more (in D&D terms) a warrior with a smattering of other odd skills. Indy is primarily a scientist who can also punch out Nazis. Stephen Hawking is a BRILLIANT mind who can mentally solve even the most difficult physics problems, but can't move out of his chair. If I were at a quiz-bowl, I'd want Mr. Hawkings. If I were in a barfight, I'd want Conan. If I didn't know which I was walking into, I'd want Dr. Jones. The rapier-wielding fighter is a great concept, but fails at its assigned role: dealing damage. It probably can't tank either, leaving his allies in an uncomfortable spot: he's a fighter thats not good at fighting (though technically better than his closest compatriot, the rogue) and effectively doesn't contribute to the group what a greatsword-wielding plate-armored gentry knight would. The Pacifist Cleric starts out by cutting a huge swath out of his spell selection (flame strike, holy word, sound burst) and could theoretically extend beyond those direct damage spells depending on his ethos (bull strength on the fighter is aiding in killing, ditto hold person to attack a defenseless foe). In reality, a healer (mini's HB) is a worse example of this: a cleric who has crippled spell access (healing spells, that's all) and poor combat ability to boot. The Diviner (a stretch, I'll give you it) should represent the mage who fills his spell slots with neat utility magic (fly, grease, rope trick) but lacks any offensive magic to harm foes the fighter is incapable of (fireball, magic missile). Against foes with high AC and DR, the wizard is a great equalizer, a wizard who cannot harm those foes are effectively crippling their party, no matter how useful having Knock memorized is... The diplomacy rogue (and really, the floofy bard) are the non-aggressive skill masters who focus on an out of combat role (social skills, performance, con-artistry, etc) at the expense of any real ability to work in combat (run a social-heavy rogue in a tomb-based dungeon to feel the power of uselessness). If your game is built around the premise that non-combat characters are viable and indeed preferable (see Lizard's post) I agree. The problem comes with the mixed bag element of most D&D. This week we're solving the murder mystery du jour, next week we're sacking the old catacombs near town. I want a group of PCs that have something to say in BOTH those adventures, not a bored fighter sitting around while the rogue rolls skill checks only to have next week watch the fighter rocking hard against some monstrous foes while the rogue is sitting there praying for a twenty. I've played SW Saga. Its nearly IMPOSSIBLE to make a character that sucks in combat (well, its possible, but you have to work at it). However, most of our SW games don't involve a lot of combat. Even my PC (a solider working the mandelorian/Boba Fett angle) is a great pilot, field medic, and steely-eyed scout. The scoundrel (a verpine tech mechanic) has all sorts of abilities out of combat from fixing the hyperdrive to modifying equipment, but he can also knock a foe on his butt with a well-aimed blaster-bolt. The closest we have no a non-combatant is our Noble/healer PC, and she can still hit with her pistol with some regularity. We all add something to combat, we all add something out of combat. No one feels useless. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
D&D Older Editions
Keith Baker on 4E! (The Hellcow responds!)
Top