Thanks, guys, you've ruined Haste for the rest of us.

[WizarDru]

WizarDru: you forgot that my monk took Weapon Finesse

Hell, I just plain forget your monk, period. But then again, I forget most of the info on the beta characters, other than purely inconic information. Mostly, I think of your monk as the guy who pushes heavily-armored foes down into deep, deep holes.

 

[LuYangShih]

I haven't read the entire thread yet, so if this was already brought up, too bad. Why the hell should a Wizard do as much damage as a Fighter? The entire PURPOSE of the Fighter is to be the best at combat.

Wizards already have massive utility purposes a Fighter could never hope to match, a better main statistic, way better skill list and amount of skill points, AND extreme power in combat. And you want them to do MORE?!

I don't get the argument that Haste is neccessary for damage based Wizards to succeed, either. From what I've seen of Wizards in my campaign, they use Haste, and then use two save or die spells. Furthermore, Wizards SHOULDN'T be able to equal or surprass the damage a Fighter does.

I already think they're too effective in that area, as they can still blow away large groups more effectively than a Fighter, AND take out the big enemies with save or die spells, thus making more useful in the other area of combat as well.

Fighters should be the absolute best in combat output and capability, because frankly, they don't have anything else. Watch a campaign in which the hack'n'slash isn't constant, and the Fighters weaknesses really start to come out. Even in a pure hack'n'slash game, Fighters aren't really any more impressive than most Wizards and especially most Clerics.

I find it extremely irritating that people complain about Wizards not being able to do as much damage as Fighters when they have so many other useful/cool things they can do a Fighter can't even come close to.

 

[Quinn]

I haven't read the entire thread yet, so if this was already brought up, too bad. Why the hell should a Wizard do as much damage as a Fighter? The entire PURPOSE of the Fighter is to be the best at combat.

A lot of folks think that the way to compare two classes is by their total damage per round. It's a by-product of DMs who encourage that thinking by throwing bigger and badder monsters with an ever-increasing amount of hit points at players who need to keep up.

 

[Pax]

A lot of folks think that the way to compare two classes is by their total damage per round. It's a by-product of DMs who encourage that thinking by throwing bigger and badder monsters with an ever-increasing amount of hit points at players who need to keep up.

The proper fix to which, of course, is to have a balance between fights with one or two BBEGs, and a swarm of minions-and-peons. With the occasional "BBEG with minions" mixed-bag thrown in.

The fighters whale on the BBEGs, teh wizards sweep tha minions away like dust, and it's all good.

 

[Merlion]

A lot of folks think that the way to compare two classes is by their total damage per round. It's a by-product of DMs who encourage that thinking by throwing bigger and badder monsters with an ever-increasing amount of hit points at players who need to keep up.

At last someone addresses this! this thread AND the DR thread seem to contain mainly damage ratios and numbers crunching. No one seems to give any thought or mention to non-combat situations, roleplaying, storyline, character concept or attempts to make the game better represent mythology and literature.

Thank you Quinn

 

[Petrosian]

At last someone addresses this! this thread AND the DR thread seem to contain mainly damage ratios and numbers crunching. No one seems to give any thought or mention to non-combat situations, roleplaying, storyline, character concept or attempts to make the game better represent mythology and literature.

Thank you Quinn

I'm sorry but what do non-combat situations have to do with DR values and bypasses?

Both the haste and the DR thread are ABOUT rules that impact combat situations. One would expect those issues to be first and foremost a part of said discussions.

If this thread were about "good roleplaying practices" or about "resolving non-combat skill usage" then i would expect THOSE aspects to be at the forefront... but not here.

Right?

 

[Petrosian]

A lot of folks think that the way to compare two classes is by their total damage per round. It's a by-product of DMs who encourage that thinking by throwing bigger and badder monsters with an ever-increasing amount of hit points at players who need to keep up.

So, do you throw first level kobolds with 2-4 hp at your 12th level PCS or has the average hp and defenses of your bad guys increased as well?

The average HP of MM character increases with the CR... average mind you, there are exceptions since there are many types of creatures and only some use HIGH HP as their main defense.

The average Hp of NPC character goes up with level increases and thus CR increases.

I would not be looking at the Gm for having as a common thing the element that bigger threats have more HPs than weaker ones on average.

 

[Merlion]

The new damage reduction has been inserted, in my opnion, to better represent mythology/literature in the game...and to actualy have creatures that are both diffacult or impossible to harm via mundane means AND to have that actualy some times be a factor for magic weapon wielding PCS
Spell choice is a roleplaying/character concept area as to the haste part.
Taken in context you'd see that I and Quinn were commenting more on that fact that many, many of the people in thease threads seem to view DnD as a live action version of Diablo or Everquest, and seem only to consider a new rules impact on there damage per round.

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

None of the rogues in those games took Weapon Finesse, although a bard did.

Yikes! They didn't like landing blows in combat? Seriously, Weapon Finesse on its own makes 3e rogues so much better than their 2e "thief" counterparts.

Was there a reason why they didn't take the feat?

 

[LokiDR]

At last someone addresses this! this thread AND the DR thread seem to contain mainly damage ratios and numbers crunching. No one seems to give any thought or mention to non-combat situations, roleplaying, storyline, character concept or attempts to make the game better represent mythology and literature.

Thank you Quinn

Make the rules work first, then worry about roleplaying, storyline, concept, ect.

I have said before, either here or the DR thread, that a good DM with a good group can make up for bad rules and still have fun. That isn't why the rules are there. The rules attempt keep characters in line with each other and the world in line with the characters. Once that matter is ballance, you decided what you want for flavor. If you don't balance the rules first, it only takes a small disscussion about an overpowered PC or a useless abiltiy before a game falls to ruin.