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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Alzrius" data-source="post: 5966852" data-attributes="member: 8461">There are two major problems with this. The first is that most of these are either incredibly limited in "preventing" the fighter from dealing damage (e.g. grease; don't step there, or just make the check to move out of the area) - that's when they function at all, since they have saves or attack rolls - to the point where they're not at all the sort of "absolute" that they're made out to be.The second issue is that many of these don't "prevent" the fighter from dealing damage, but rather lessen the amount dealt (e.g. reduce person). Functionally, that's no different than just wearing armor (the big difference being that armor affects the overall damage dealt by lowering the percent chance of hitting, whereas spells that add damage penalties leave the overall chance of hitting the same, but lower the average damage dealt - functionally, it's the same).This is also overlooking the much broader problems that I listed previously. If a "tier 1" character has already expended these spells, for instance, or simply doesn't have them available, then these so-called solutions effectively no longer exist.I disagree strongly with this. Besides the idea that fighters have a "niche style" (killing things has long been labelled, albeit humorously, as the point of the game), he's certainly not useless. If you "take away" his weapon, he can trip with his bare hands. If he can't grapple you, he can just hit you. Or bull rush you, or ready an action to disrupt your spells, or disarm you of a magic item or material component, or aid another to hit you, etc.Actually, what's really telling is how many people believe that a single standard action can replace another character's role entirely. It's self-evident that that's not true.People have come to see any sort of overlap as replacement, when in fact that's false; the simple economy of actions proves that. A standard action can't replace another character, role or not, simply because another character would get a full-round's worth of actions.Even leaving that aside, a damage-dealing spell doesn't replace a fighter's role in the game any more than a fighter with Disable Device replaces the rogue's role in the game. Or any more than a rogue with a high Use Magic Device skill and some scrolls replaces the wizard in the game.Okay, I'll quote from <a href="http://thealexandrian.net/wordpress/2050/roleplaying-games/revisiting-encounter-design" target="_blank">The Alexandrian</a> again:Actually, it's more correct to say that your "tier 1" characters will eventually have to choose between using their "big guns" on such a fight, and thus not have them later, or not use them and in doing so voluntarily removing them from the fight anyway. Hence, they get less "bang for their spell's buck."</blockquote>

Verification