Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Jefe Bergenstein" data-source="post: 6655196" data-attributes="member: 31506">They largely did away with &quot;suck at level 1, rule at level 20&quot; design. Other editions did focus on this, such as humans getting effectively NO benefit in 1st/2nd edition but the ability to reach high levels, when you werent even guaranteed to play that long. Or multiclassing, which only cost you (roughly) 1 level of experience because of the way the exp tables ramped up. So you could be a 5th level fighter. Or you could be a 4th level fighter/6th level cleric, with better saves, spells, and all but guaranteed to find a god whose beliefs corresponded with the personality type you were going to play anyways. So a lot of players are rightly apprehensive about a class being balanced assuming a 4th attack at 17th level, because they dont get there. Classes are supposed to be (roughly) balanced across all play. Yeah, you get weird stuff like how durable the druid is at 2nd level, but that does zip by pretty fast. Getting to 11th or 17th on the other hand...Plus, sure the Fighter gets his 3rd attack at 11. But the paladin is also adding d8 radiant damage on a hit, can nova pretty hardcore with smites, is sitting on a pool of 55 extra HP (or 11 condition removals) per day with lay on hands, plus adds party considerable party utility. The fighter gets considerably less in utility. IMO, they pay too much of a premium in breadth of abilities for their supposed mastery in combat.&nbsp; Most paladins are also rocking charisma secondary, which adds a lot in the social pillar of the game. A fighter CAN invest in charisma, they just get a lower rate of returns, since it doesnt also upgrade their combat game.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Jefe Bergenstein, post: 6655196, member: 31506"] They largely did away with "suck at level 1, rule at level 20" design. Other editions did focus on this, such as humans getting effectively NO benefit in 1st/2nd edition but the ability to reach high levels, when you werent even guaranteed to play that long. Or multiclassing, which only cost you (roughly) 1 level of experience because of the way the exp tables ramped up. So you could be a 5th level fighter. Or you could be a 4th level fighter/6th level cleric, with better saves, spells, and all but guaranteed to find a god whose beliefs corresponded with the personality type you were going to play anyways. So a lot of players are rightly apprehensive about a class being balanced assuming a 4th attack at 17th level, because they dont get there. Classes are supposed to be (roughly) balanced across all play. Yeah, you get weird stuff like how durable the druid is at 2nd level, but that does zip by pretty fast. Getting to 11th or 17th on the other hand... Plus, sure the Fighter gets his 3rd attack at 11. But the paladin is also adding d8 radiant damage on a hit, can nova pretty hardcore with smites, is sitting on a pool of 55 extra HP (or 11 condition removals) per day with lay on hands, plus adds party considerable party utility. The fighter gets considerably less in utility. IMO, they pay too much of a premium in breadth of abilities for their supposed mastery in combat. Most paladins are also rocking charisma secondary, which adds a lot in the social pillar of the game. A fighter CAN invest in charisma, they just get a lower rate of returns, since it doesnt also upgrade their combat game. [/QUOTE]

Verification