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
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Martials should just get free feats
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="NotAYakk" data-source="post: 8974261" data-attributes="member: 72555"><p>This is a trap and a mistake!</p><p></p><p>If you add something that both a wizard and a fighter get, and using that feature is an alternative to (say) casting a spell, this can make fighters better than they where but have almost no impact on wizard capabilities!</p><p></p><p>In short, in a game where some PCs have "I can change reality with magic", making skills better <strong>for everyone</strong> actually closes the utility gap. Even if wizards can also use skills.</p><p></p><p>The size of the gap <strong>matters</strong>. Imagine a game where everyone had near-wizard spellcasting, near-rogue skills, etc. And the wizard got slightly better spellcasting, the rogue got slightly better skills, and the fighter got 4 attacks per turn. The lower gap in areas <strong>besides</strong> attacks per turn reduces (and maybe reverses) the gap between fighters and other classes.</p><p></p><p>I am belabouring this point because if you hold it as an axiom, you miss entire ways to solve design problems and you discard viable fixes as irrelevant.</p><p></p><p>So yes, background skills actually boost the fighter more than they boost the rogue. Despite the fact the rogue has access to the skill as well. Having more baseline options to interact with the world boosts non-spellcasters more than it does spellcasters. Despite the fact that they are available to spellcasters as well.</p><p></p><p>In both cases, the diminishing marginal returns kicks in, and reduces the benefit to the "richer" party.</p><p></p><p>And if enough of it is done, the fighter doesn't have to be <strong>that much better</strong> at combat to make up for being poorer in other areas.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="NotAYakk, post: 8974261, member: 72555"] This is a trap and a mistake! If you add something that both a wizard and a fighter get, and using that feature is an alternative to (say) casting a spell, this can make fighters better than they where but have almost no impact on wizard capabilities! In short, in a game where some PCs have "I can change reality with magic", making skills better [b]for everyone[/b] actually closes the utility gap. Even if wizards can also use skills. The size of the gap [b]matters[/b]. Imagine a game where everyone had near-wizard spellcasting, near-rogue skills, etc. And the wizard got slightly better spellcasting, the rogue got slightly better skills, and the fighter got 4 attacks per turn. The lower gap in areas [b]besides[/b] attacks per turn reduces (and maybe reverses) the gap between fighters and other classes. I am belabouring this point because if you hold it as an axiom, you miss entire ways to solve design problems and you discard viable fixes as irrelevant. So yes, background skills actually boost the fighter more than they boost the rogue. Despite the fact the rogue has access to the skill as well. Having more baseline options to interact with the world boosts non-spellcasters more than it does spellcasters. Despite the fact that they are available to spellcasters as well. In both cases, the diminishing marginal returns kicks in, and reduces the benefit to the "richer" party. And if enough of it is done, the fighter doesn't have to be [b]that much better[/b] at combat to make up for being poorer in other areas. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Martials should just get free feats
Top