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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="BryonD" data-source="post: 3108794" data-attributes="member: 957">You say not necessarily that the valuation is wrong and then you end by saying it isn't accurate?????I certainly agree that there are many cases where it is difficult to do this sort of assessment because the abstract nature of the class features.  The monk is a good example of that.The WB is not.  There is nothing abstract about more HP is better than less HP and more SP is better than less SP.  I still don't see anyone arguing that the feats are at all better than the stances and manuevers, much less SIGNIFICANTLY better (the ability to cusotmize is included here).    Once that apparent total concensus is accepted then your are left with a bunch of WB bonuses stacked up against nearly nothing for the fighter.  There is nothign abstract left to assess.  It gets real accurate under these conditions.That is wrong because while the CLASS allows customization, a given fighter character is fixed once built.  You can not change the options a particular fighter has selected so that adds no effectiveness to the character in terms of potency during game play.Again, just claiming this does not make it true.  I've listed a basis for my position.Your preference for ignorning it does not invalidate it.Are you now stepping up to be the first person to actually claim that the manuevers and stances are worth significantly less than the fighter feats?  If you are you are in a very lonely position and so be it.  If you are not then exactly WHAT are you basing this statement on?Please point me to a post that comes remotely near actually SHOWING that it is a wash.Just saying it does not make it true.Feats = Stances + Manuevers (I still claim that this is being quite favorable to the fighter side, but I'm willing to allow it for arguments sake)The fighter gets heavy armor and ranged weapons.  I've seen plenty of very solid fighter build that do not rely on either of these aspects do I don't see how they can have a really significant weight.  The WB gets more HP, more SP, better skill selection, several bonus feats and a list of other abilities.  To simply claim that these total up to no more than heavy armor + ranged weapons does nto stand up to reason.  Heck, if you DM'ed for me and let me be a fighter that lost heavy armor but just gained +1 SP per level and tumble as a class skill in exchange, I'd readily call that a deal right there.  Now make my character an elf and the ranged weapons issue dies and there is nothing left to compare to.  If this is a WB instead of a fighter my character now has the fighter covered AND has another SP and HP and special abiltities and feats, all without counting the manuevers and stances that cancel out the fighters feats.  (And if you go back to just customization, then please note that a WB has a pretty decent selection of manuevers to work with).Let me try to bring you with one other line of reasoning.The only solid claims you have made are that the WB does not gain heavy armor, the ability to customize with feats, ranged weapons and is two levels later getting the special fighter feats.Well, what if I invented a new class that was exactly the WB except I remove the manuevers and stances.  I replace these features with full sorcerer spellcasting and no arcane spell failure in medium or light armor.  Would you consider this balanced?  I would certainly hope that no reasonble person would.And yet every point you have made to show that the fighter is balanced with the WB would apply equally well in the case here.  This Sorcery Warblade would not gain heavy armor, the ability to customize with feats, ranged weapons and is two levels later getting the special fighter feats.  So if that arguement shows balance, then this class is clearly balanced.  Clearly this class is NOT balanced, so clearly that arguement does not establish proof.How would you prove that this class is not balanced?  You must at some point get into the details of the class features.If you accept that full sorcery spells are superior to the fighters feat chain then the issue is settled.  But if you dispute that then you have a very heavy burden of proof before you.The manuevers and stances of a WB are certainly worth less than sorcerer spells.  But to claim that they are worth less than the fighter feats (customization included) still brings a very heavy burden of proof and is certainly the opposite of what is commonly accepted.If you want to show it is a wash, then show it.But if you are just going to claim it then that is fine, but it won't stand up to much scrutiny.Balance is not automatically critical to fun.If someone is having fun playing in a game with 3 bards and a double gestalt cleric/sorcerer/fighter, then great.  They are having fun and that is all that counts.  But in the majority of cases I doubt that the three bards players would find this very fun.  So I still consider balance inportant.</blockquote>

Verification