Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Mistwell" data-source="post: 6177595" data-attributes="member: 2525">That's not all you said.&nbsp; You said, &quot;I am strongly against the idea that it's okay for a class to suck at combat if they're good at social interaction or exploration&quot;.And if a player wants to choose options so that they focus on non-combat at the expense of combat, you've made it clear you don't want the rules to support that.That is a different argument though.&nbsp; It's pretty easy to explain in the rules &quot;choose this option if you want to be good at non-combat at the expense of combat competency&quot;.&nbsp; It's not a &quot;trap&quot; if it says that up-front. That's different than the rules simply not supporting a non-combat focused set of options.A &quot;common feature&quot; for all rogues is my vote as well.&nbsp; I support the base rules having SA, but the option however to support a non-combat focused rogue, perhaps in an expansion book or module.&nbsp; You, on the other hand, are the only one who has outright stated, &quot;I am strongly against the idea that it's okay for a class to suck at combat if they're good at social interaction or exploration&quot;.&nbsp; You are the only one who wants there to be no option for those players.&nbsp; So you're the guy I am responding to.&nbsp; If others want to take that position, I will respond to them as well.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Mistwell, post: 6177595, member: 2525"] That's not all you said. You said, "I am strongly against the idea that it's okay for a class to suck at combat if they're good at social interaction or exploration". And if a player wants to choose options so that they focus on non-combat at the expense of combat, you've made it clear you don't want the rules to support that. That is a different argument though. It's pretty easy to explain in the rules "choose this option if you want to be good at non-combat at the expense of combat competency". It's not a "trap" if it says that up-front. That's different than the rules simply not supporting a non-combat focused set of options. A "common feature" for all rogues is my vote as well. I support the base rules having SA, but the option however to support a non-combat focused rogue, perhaps in an expansion book or module. You, on the other hand, are the only one who has outright stated, "I am strongly against the idea that it's okay for a class to suck at combat if they're good at social interaction or exploration". You are the only one who wants there to be no option for those players. So you're the guy I am responding to. If others want to take that position, I will respond to them as well. [/QUOTE]

Verification