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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="I'm A Banana" data-source="post: 5705765" data-attributes="member: 2067">One niche CharOps build in 3e doesn't negate the general idea of "everyone contributes to success." <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f61b.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":p" title="Stick out tongue    :p"  data-smilie="7"data-shortname=":p" /> That IS annoying, but what causes it is actually a bit of a multi-headed hydra, not just the idea that everyone contributes (though that plays a role). The rigors of the powers structure, the mandate that everything be a combat power, the mechanical sameness of the ADEU mechanics, making the encounter more important than the adventure, infatuation with conditions, etc., etc.It's a problem, but it's one clever design can avoid, even if everyone essentially contributes to the adventure.I'm also not entirely sure I grok your character concept idea of a "tactical, non-damaging specialist" who doesn't buff or debuff (therefore basically raising and lowering some number). <img src="http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/ponder.png"  class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":hmm:" title="Hmmm    :hmm:" data-shortname=":hmm:" /> Even walls and stunlocks boil down to "how much damage did the enemy party do this round?" ultimately. If there's 5 goblins dealing an average of 5 hp of damage each on each round, making one unable to attack is basically the same as making one miss (by buffing AC) or healing 5 hp, functionally.So I apologize if I'm not quite addressing your central issue here. In my mind, a lot of this particular issue is bigger than 4e can currently talk about, because 4e is currently married to a class and adventure design that highlights and makes frequent use of minis combat.When you get away from minis combat, and you get away from the specific encounter, and you broaden your field of view to the entire adventure, you get a different sort of "class balance" than you do when you're looking at combat alone. You find that the bard who charmed the tavern wench who told you about the white dragon's weakness to fire is just as important as the rogue who snuck past the traps in the tomb of the old king to abscond with his Flametounge Sword, and they both contribute about as much as the fighter who can handle the 30 frost giants working with the white dragon. And if the party is only bards and rogues, then they sneak past the giants, or they convince the giants to ally with them against the dragon. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" /> If you were go back to a more 1e-esque style of class balance, you wouldn't give everyone healing and defending and striking and controlling powers. You'd just give everyone some way of getting past all the threats in the adventure -- there'd be SOME way to get the knowledge, some way past the traps, some way to thwart the giants, and some way to kill the dragon, without requiring any one particular method to work (maybe allowing either combat, or exploration, or social interaction to be the method that works, opening a tripartate adventure roles system). The 4e method as it is necessarily focuses on combat. To move the focus from that is to dramatically shift the nature of what balance means to the game. I'd love to do that, though. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /></blockquote>

Verification