Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="5ekyu" data-source="post: 7552577" data-attributes="member: 6919838">uhh... uhh... uhh...&quot;We don't see many threads about the superiority of the strength-based fighters &quot;Have you missed the tons of GWM heavy weapon fighters threads, PAM threads, Glaive-reach-sentinel threads...As others have stated and asked&nbsp; - because it doesn't seem to actually yield solid excesses in play - the rapier thing often seems more to be a &quot;this bugs me&quot; theorycraft thing than it is an actual in-play excess of outcome issue.thats why you get multiple folks asking &quot;is this in play and if so what were the circumstances and problems experienced.&quot;Historical aside...Honestly, one of the most fun games i was in as a player was back in 1e and we had a party of like two mages, a thief, a cleric/thief and a monk maybe - and as such it was a pretty dex heavy group without a lot of high power bash and stand and take it power... so we chose tactics to fit that - lots of hit and run - lots of sneak - etc. Was a great summer game.&nbsp; Through edition after edition and game system after game system - we saw lots of changes in parties from one campaign to another and never saw it as a &quot;problem&quot; that we did not have a perfect balance of styles in each group in each game - but instead saw it as opporunities to play differently and try for different solutions to different challenges.right now my group of players chose a pair of bards, a ranger, a barbarian and a druid. The last group was a pair of clerics, a paladin, and a sorcerer. One before that was a pick-up semi-campaign with some turn-over at the FLGS table but the core start was three rogues, one cleric, one sorc, one bard. needless to say those groups played way differently as far as Ac. HP, strengths and weaknesses and had very different levels of &quot;dex vs str&quot; focus. But none of them were noticably skewed in terms of performance by &quot;what ability score is top&quot; more than anything seen in play driven by player choices.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="5ekyu, post: 7552577, member: 6919838"] uhh... uhh... uhh... "We don't see many threads about the superiority of the strength-based fighters " Have you missed the tons of GWM heavy weapon fighters threads, PAM threads, Glaive-reach-sentinel threads... As others have stated and asked - because it doesn't seem to actually yield solid excesses in play - the rapier thing often seems more to be a "this bugs me" theorycraft thing than it is an actual in-play excess of outcome issue. thats why you get multiple folks asking "is this in play and if so what were the circumstances and problems experienced." Historical aside... Honestly, one of the most fun games i was in as a player was back in 1e and we had a party of like two mages, a thief, a cleric/thief and a monk maybe - and as such it was a pretty dex heavy group without a lot of high power bash and stand and take it power... so we chose tactics to fit that - lots of hit and run - lots of sneak - etc. Was a great summer game. Through edition after edition and game system after game system - we saw lots of changes in parties from one campaign to another and never saw it as a "problem" that we did not have a perfect balance of styles in each group in each game - but instead saw it as opporunities to play differently and try for different solutions to different challenges. right now my group of players chose a pair of bards, a ranger, a barbarian and a druid. The last group was a pair of clerics, a paladin, and a sorcerer. One before that was a pick-up semi-campaign with some turn-over at the FLGS table but the core start was three rogues, one cleric, one sorc, one bard. needless to say those groups played way differently as far as Ac. HP, strengths and weaknesses and had very different levels of "dex vs str" focus. But none of them were noticably skewed in terms of performance by "what ability score is top" more than anything seen in play driven by player choices. [/QUOTE]

Verification