Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
The Cleric, The Paladin, and Multisysteming
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Tovec" data-source="post: 5867320" data-attributes="member: 95493"><p>No debate necessary. It is my personal feelings and experience with TOB that is the issue. An issue that will not be solved by laying out the deficiencies or extremities involved in an argument. I will clarify the "unbalancing" and "odd" statements as there seems to be some confusion.</p><p></p><p>When used together, TOB is designed to elevate fighters to the wizard or cleric level. They greatly increased the power of these martial characters and made them superheroes in adventurers clothing.</p><p>I had a character named Dusty who happened to happened to trip like no ones business. He would trip you all day long and there was nothing you could do about it. He was by far the most powerful damage dealer, he could control the field with trips and he could soak whatever got through because he was a fighter too. That is what I mean.</p><p></p><p>Now, used in pieces. There is no other mechanics of DnD that resemble fighter stances. The wizard does not have to go into a fireball stance, the rogue does not need to perform the flying dungeon kick maneuver to sneak attack. They just do it and there is no naming needed. So when used, not as as whole book, but in pieces instead then it becomes odd to see the fighter become a shaolin monk while everyone else is a regular adventurer.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>This confusion was caused by you NOT mentioning 4e's knight and slayer stances but instead raising Bo9S. </p><p></p><p>Also, I didn't say martial classes should be bound by reality ... but they SHOULD. All things should be bound by reality. Magic should be the trump card which violates reality for a short time. Believe me, go look at my other posts if you don't, I think that mages need a serious power downgrade. What I saw in Bo9S was the opposite. Instead of reigning in the insanity of the casters they increased the insanity of non-casters. They made non-magic into magic, in order to balance things out. This is actually my root problem with 4e too.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Exactly, you didn't fight on horseback, because it is really (overly?) difficult. We absolutely agree on this charge. My problem with you, that you quoted, was that nearly all my games take place outside a dungeon where having a horse would be monumentally helpful. I would LOVE to see some light shined on mounted combat in the future as it is unnecessarily difficult to use mounts.</p><p></p><p>If that were the case, if they were so limiting and required so much training then, as I said, cavalry would be all but unheard of in history. But, as with better armor and weapons, horses were a staple to those who could afford them. They would serve countless functions in combat as well as outside them.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>While I'm sure we differ on HOW those things are achieved I can't imagine that we disagree that those are priorities. I would love to discuss, perhaps in PM, how those goals are best represented. It seems clear to me, as per your first post, that you think it is best achieved by stances and maneuvers and that I disagree with these assessments.</p><p></p><p>I also agree that casters need to be toned down in one sense or another but I do not want to see fighters and wizards to have similar powers and power levels. That goes to creating balance but at the expense of interest.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Tovec, post: 5867320, member: 95493"] No debate necessary. It is my personal feelings and experience with TOB that is the issue. An issue that will not be solved by laying out the deficiencies or extremities involved in an argument. I will clarify the "unbalancing" and "odd" statements as there seems to be some confusion. When used together, TOB is designed to elevate fighters to the wizard or cleric level. They greatly increased the power of these martial characters and made them superheroes in adventurers clothing. I had a character named Dusty who happened to happened to trip like no ones business. He would trip you all day long and there was nothing you could do about it. He was by far the most powerful damage dealer, he could control the field with trips and he could soak whatever got through because he was a fighter too. That is what I mean. Now, used in pieces. There is no other mechanics of DnD that resemble fighter stances. The wizard does not have to go into a fireball stance, the rogue does not need to perform the flying dungeon kick maneuver to sneak attack. They just do it and there is no naming needed. So when used, not as as whole book, but in pieces instead then it becomes odd to see the fighter become a shaolin monk while everyone else is a regular adventurer. This confusion was caused by you NOT mentioning 4e's knight and slayer stances but instead raising Bo9S. Also, I didn't say martial classes should be bound by reality ... but they SHOULD. All things should be bound by reality. Magic should be the trump card which violates reality for a short time. Believe me, go look at my other posts if you don't, I think that mages need a serious power downgrade. What I saw in Bo9S was the opposite. Instead of reigning in the insanity of the casters they increased the insanity of non-casters. They made non-magic into magic, in order to balance things out. This is actually my root problem with 4e too. Exactly, you didn't fight on horseback, because it is really (overly?) difficult. We absolutely agree on this charge. My problem with you, that you quoted, was that nearly all my games take place outside a dungeon where having a horse would be monumentally helpful. I would LOVE to see some light shined on mounted combat in the future as it is unnecessarily difficult to use mounts. If that were the case, if they were so limiting and required so much training then, as I said, cavalry would be all but unheard of in history. But, as with better armor and weapons, horses were a staple to those who could afford them. They would serve countless functions in combat as well as outside them. While I'm sure we differ on HOW those things are achieved I can't imagine that we disagree that those are priorities. I would love to discuss, perhaps in PM, how those goals are best represented. It seems clear to me, as per your first post, that you think it is best achieved by stances and maneuvers and that I disagree with these assessments. I also agree that casters need to be toned down in one sense or another but I do not want to see fighters and wizards to have similar powers and power levels. That goes to creating balance but at the expense of interest. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
The Cleric, The Paladin, and Multisysteming
Top