Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Ahnehnois" data-source="post: 6295045" data-attributes="member: 17106">With a rogue, you'd lose out on stealth an perception, meaning you'd have no scout and be vulnerable to attack. You'd also be down some nice damage on occasion, and your party wouldn't have the handy ability to evade area attacks. If you were in a situation with traps and secret doors and that kind of thing, you'd be struggling to cover it. A rogue is relatively easy to do without (easier in PF because class skills don't mean much), but still useful.Swapping a druid for a fighter is a quality for quantity swap in combat terms. You'd run the risk of being helpless against opponents with high spine numbers (AC and attack), because it's almost impossible to duplicate what a fighter can do in that regard. In almost any combat situation, someone will have to be actively engaged in melee, and without a martial character you're at a huge disadvantage. If the druid takes an animal companion and really focuses on defensive enhancements for himself and the animal, they might be able to soak damage effectively, but they'll struggle to contribute offensively, so the rest of the party has to cover the slack.Of course, you can run a game with any party composition and make it work. A balanced party is just a bit better.Or, simply, healing surges, sudden bursts of damage, and all the garden-variety abilities. Even the text that was quoted seems to have a message of something like &quot;martial is 'non-traditional' magic&quot;.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Ahnehnois, post: 6295045, member: 17106"] With a rogue, you'd lose out on stealth an perception, meaning you'd have no scout and be vulnerable to attack. You'd also be down some nice damage on occasion, and your party wouldn't have the handy ability to evade area attacks. If you were in a situation with traps and secret doors and that kind of thing, you'd be struggling to cover it. A rogue is relatively easy to do without (easier in PF because class skills don't mean much), but still useful. Swapping a druid for a fighter is a quality for quantity swap in combat terms. You'd run the risk of being helpless against opponents with high spine numbers (AC and attack), because it's almost impossible to duplicate what a fighter can do in that regard. In almost any combat situation, someone will have to be actively engaged in melee, and without a martial character you're at a huge disadvantage. If the druid takes an animal companion and really focuses on defensive enhancements for himself and the animal, they might be able to soak damage effectively, but they'll struggle to contribute offensively, so the rest of the party has to cover the slack. Of course, you [I]can[/I] run a game with any party composition and make it work. A balanced party is just a bit better. Or, simply, healing surges, sudden bursts of damage, and all the garden-variety abilities. Even the text that was quoted seems to have a message of something like "martial is 'non-traditional' magic". [/QUOTE]

Verification