Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Kzach" data-source="post: 4455333" data-attributes="member: 56189">I don't see what the problem is.I consider everyone at the table when making up my character. I don't selfishly make whatever character I want just to suit my own needs and wants.The fact is, if you are the sole defender in your group, then you have a responsibility as a person outside of the game, to fulfil that role for everyone else at the table. Not doing so affects everyone at the table in a negative fashion, because your character is taking up more resources of the group to do the job he's supposed to do.Currently, 2HF lose too much and gain too little. That +2 to AC and Reflexes is pretty huge, and I'd expect players with a fighter who are the sole defenders, to also take plate mail as their first feat.If 2HF did slightly more damage, then things wouldn't be so askew. The balance would be restored by opponents being dropped significantly quicker. And therefore, the fighter player would be fulfilling their role, albeit in a slightly varied manner. They would be a benefit rather than a drain on the group.It's all very well and good to allow roleplaying to be a primary concern, but that doesn't change how the system works. If your DM doesn't adjust the game for the make-up of the group, then the group is detrimentally affected if the primary roles aren't being fulfilled in an optimised manner.An unoptimised group will find it difficult to finish modules and get through encounters, slowing the game down and possibly even resulting in dead characters. Whether you like that or not, doesn't change it from being true.Now that all assumes that the DM doesn't alter the game to cater to the player's group make-up, which most decent DM's will do. However I'm talking about the stock, standard, unaltered system without compensation for suboptimal build choices and group configurations.</blockquote>

Verification