Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Voadam" data-source="post: 4935099" data-attributes="member: 2209">Hussar can you identify a noncombat concept in 3e that requires being balanced by knocking down combat effectiveness? It might not be a style of comat effectiveness you like style wise (your social skill rogue or spell casting classes for your speachmaker example) but you usually get something that is still combat ready (big exceptions being many variations of multiclassing casters).I agree that in 3e RAW some classes suck at skills in general (fighters stand out) and that going against specific class archetypes for skills is tough and disparately so depending on the class and concept.I don't think they used this as part of their design balance though. I don't think fighters were given fewer skills and skill points than barbarians because the designers felt fighters were better at combat. In 3e I believe classes are designed to be balanced in combat. Out of combat though I believe classes are designed to fit into their archetypes and that non combat is not designed to be as balanced as combat is but more to fit D&Dism archetypes.</blockquote>