Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Cadfan" data-source="post: 4526186" data-attributes="member: 40961">Alright, I'll let Fifth Element pursue his argument to the logical conclusion... I can see where its leading him...But I'll put the outcome in spoilers in case anyone wants to read it now.&nbsp; <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&nbsp; &nbsp; :-)"&nbsp; data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":-)" />[SPOILER]You can't create non combat roles that work similarly in all kinds of different non combat encounters.&nbsp; Imaro's idea of a &quot;defender&quot; who mitigates negative effects falls apart when you realize that there's no common theme between a character who can protect others from traps, protect others from failed skill checks, and protect others from negative NPC attitudes.&nbsp; The other ideas fail similarly.&nbsp; Even if you came up with a mechanical reason for how these things would work, it doesn't make sense in terms of the logic behind the in-game characters.You can, however, have different roles within a particular type of encounter.&nbsp; In a social encounter situation, for example, one character might be the convincing one, one might be the liar, one might be the intuitive one, and one might be the intimidating thug.&nbsp; Or in an encounter involving physical challenges, one character might be the agile climber and acrobatic athlete, while another might be strong and able to destroy obstacles, while another might have useful spells for telepathy or teleportation.The only way to accomplish this is to vary class skill lists and utility powers.The game already varies class skill lists and utility powers.So, if you define &quot;non combat roles&quot; in this manner, they already exist in 4e.[/SPOILER]</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Cadfan, post: 4526186, member: 40961"] Alright, I'll let Fifth Element pursue his argument to the logical conclusion... I can see where its leading him... But I'll put the outcome in spoilers in case anyone wants to read it now. :-) [SPOILER]You can't create non combat roles that work similarly in all kinds of different non combat encounters. Imaro's idea of a "defender" who mitigates negative effects falls apart when you realize that there's no common theme between a character who can protect others from traps, protect others from failed skill checks, and protect others from negative NPC attitudes. The other ideas fail similarly. Even if you came up with a mechanical reason for how these things would work, it doesn't make sense in terms of the logic behind the in-game characters. You can, however, have different roles [I]within a particular type of encounter.[/I] In a social encounter situation, for example, one character might be the convincing one, one might be the liar, one might be the intuitive one, and one might be the intimidating thug. Or in an encounter involving physical challenges, one character might be the agile climber and acrobatic athlete, while another might be strong and able to destroy obstacles, while another might have useful spells for telepathy or teleportation. The only way to accomplish this is to vary class skill lists and utility powers. The game already varies class skill lists and utility powers. So, if you define "non combat roles" in this manner, they already exist in 4e.[/SPOILER] [/QUOTE]

Verification