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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Umbran" data-source="post: 1217343" data-attributes="member: 177">Which is why I kept prefacing with "I haven't read it" and "by description".  The details of the Unfettered were not the issue, so much as why the class was being used, in terms of design philosophy.  It was the handy example, not a sticking point in and of itself.The Unfettered was being touted because it was clean, had lost baggage, and was in general more focused and optimal.  My thought was that this is what Prestige Classes are for - that's where one is supposed to introduce classes with more focus.  Core classes are supposed to have some cruft, it is there to make them flexible.  The major problems I see people griping about with the Paladin, Ranger, Monk, and Bard are that they are too focused to be core classes.  I'm not sure I agree, but I don't see proliferation of separate core classes to be motion in the right direction either.The main point of using the Unfettered seems to have been that it is not laden down with things it doesn't need, unlike the fighter/rogue.  But nobody seems to have clued in that even the supposedly "optimal" fighter has stuff he isn't using.  If you're going to clean up the fighter/rogue, why aren't you also cleaning up the fighter and rogue individually?  Probably because that way lies madness - a core class for every imaginable role?In game design, looking for everything to be optimal is a pipe dream.  Aside from the whole thing being too complex for that, the definition of "optimal" is subjective.  The target should be more broad.  Instead of optimal, you look for "effective enough to be satisfying and interesting."  That goal is far more realistic and useful.In the end, as I originally stated, I don't mind a little modding here and there.  I'd prefer not to modify classes when the core rules already have an option for the same thing - I probably wouldn't be bringing the Unfettered into a game that has fighter/rogue multiclasses.  Nor would I be likely to bring a Fighter into a game that has the Warmain and Unfettered.The thing I'm more holding against is Mr. Dyal's "I don't like most of what's here, so I may have to modify everything" approach.  I'm a "use the right tool for the job" kind of guy.  If the game needs extensive modifications to satisfy you, you'll probably be better off finding another game than trying to bash one into a wholly new form.Honestly, I find Mr. Dyal's position... excessively picky.  He clearly states that "close enough" isn't good enough for him.  He wants things modded up to his precise specifications.  You know what happens, though?  You mod things up specially for one person, and all the other players have to go, "Oh well, it's close enough".  How fair is that?  If you want the classes so closely tailored, what next?  All the magic items must be exactly what you want, and the storyline and plots must be perfect for you individually as well?  I know, that's reductio ad absurdum, but still demonstrative.  At some point, as part of a cooperative group playing a game, a player or DM must say, "that's close enough".The simple fact of the matter is that no game system does everything perfectly, and you can't fit everyone's dream exactly all the time.  There are other systems out there that have more flexibility in character creation, or use different base icons.  GURPS and d20 Modern come to mind.  However, they have other issues you may not like.  Life's imperfect.</blockquote>

Verification