Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="VinylTap" data-source="post: 6010417" data-attributes="member: 6697217">The rogue has had a version of this mechanic for a long time. It was just damage only and positionally restrictive. And while its fairly different in application (obviously CS is about options), I can't see there being a huge problem is allowing him to spend some of these 'backstab' dice for another effect (blind, debuff etc). It fits fell into the system already. What other &quot;physical&quot; class could you give it to ? A ranger (already supported with the fighter)... and the monk maybe? I guess the Barbarian. Paladins and Druids will have magic, so they don't need the mechanic.I think spreading this mechanic around a little is less of a huge deal then people are suggesting. And you don't want to get into a situation where the Ranger-fighter is significantly better than a module'd ranger. The ranger/fighter already really feels like an early play-test of the ranger class.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="VinylTap, post: 6010417, member: 6697217"] The rogue has had a version of this mechanic for a long time. It was just damage only and positionally restrictive. And while its fairly different in application (obviously CS is about options), I can't see there being a huge problem is allowing him to spend some of these 'backstab' dice for another effect (blind, debuff etc). It fits fell into the system already. What other "physical" class could you give it to ? A ranger (already supported with the fighter)... and the monk maybe? I guess the Barbarian. Paladins and Druids will have magic, so they don't need the mechanic. I think spreading this mechanic around a little is less of a huge deal then people are suggesting. And you don't want to get into a situation where the Ranger-fighter is significantly better than a module'd ranger. The ranger/fighter already really feels like an early play-test of the ranger class. [/QUOTE]

Verification