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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Scott Christian" data-source="post: 9143789" data-attributes="member: 6901101">I am not missing the math. Not at all. I would like to say you are actually missing the big-picture math. Again, I understand the math. I get that the strength plus goes toward "to hit" and damage. Isn't this the same rub you use against having abilities that are more powerful than others. Charisma affects four separate skills, all of them associated with roleplay, you know, one of the other pillars. You just increased an entire pillar of play by giving yourself that charisma. And if you took some of those skills, wowsa! You improved that pillar by 25%!Of course that doesn't matter, does it? Because the character you want should have the 25% in that roleplay pillar, and the best combat ability too. You see, it is never about tradeoffs, and that is why it is an impossible argument - because one side wants it all, and the other side thinks there should be tradeoffs because...Rant - (IMHO) The tradeoff players understand the game is not played in isolation. Every single argument team I-want-it-all proposes boils down to isolating a literal extra +1 or +2 to damage without ever looking at the big picture. It is about attacking every round and getting as much damage as you can. In isolation. It never considers how the game is actually played. I honestly have to ask if your combats are like this? I mean, maybe they are (all the more reason to watch a video of you guys playing). If you play a fighter, do you get to attack every round? Are you always in range? Do you never have anything else to do during combat? Do you never try something that might not work that isn't an attack? Do you always see your opponent clearly? Does no one ever try to shut you down with a spell? (Which, by the way, that charisma might help against.) No. To team I-want-it-all, the fighter loses 10%-20%. The fighter does not gain a pillar. The fighter does not increase one or two of their saving throws. The fighter doesn't even have anything else to do other than hit something. To me, that is either your DM's fault or the player's. My fighter has had to hold onto a rope that was attached to a griffon instead of attacking. My fighter has had to protect a little girl. My fighter has had to try and keep a door shut. My fighter has had to run over to give a potion to a felled PC. My fighter has had to chase someone leaving. My fighter has had to watch an opponent to see if they can figure out what their motive/weakness was. My fighter has made intimidation checks? My fighter has had to catch a breakable bobble we needed that was about to burst? My fighter has had to hold an opponent down. My fighter has had to brush acid off another player. My fighter has tried to mitigate lair effects. My fighter has used boatloads of equipment during combat encounters: perfume, chalk, sails, etc. etc. etc. Do the fighters at your tables never have to do these things? Do they whine if they have to do one of these things and don't get to complete their perfect damage every round? I honestly feel as though the players that complain about this are really ones that don't play as players, but rather DM. Or they don't play 5e at all. They play video games, where you do attack every round, and all the pillars are separated like chapters in a book. But at our table, and every table I've played at for the past thirty years, it doesn't work like that. Pillars are mixed and meshed, they are spliced and knotted. And those knots allow you to use that extra charisma that you scoff at. Maybe it's just me. But skills and equipment and saves and movement are all pretty integral parts of combat. It is never just attack & damage. And something far worse than this also occurs in this argument: They pretend their character is playing a solo game. They do this in two ways: One, they always compare themselves against the other players. "No spotlight during a combat encounter for the fighter!" "The game is broken!" Two, they seem to refuse to acknowledge that the game's other PCs affect them constantly, thus altering the equation of doing X damage per round. I mean, a spell like faerie fire increases a fighter's chance to hit by a lot more than +1. And heaven forbid you have a fighter that crits on a 19 or 20. Damage output, am I right? So I guess by their logic, the PC not casting faerie fire is really trying to minimize the spotlight on the fighter. This willful ignoring of the big picture, and the isolation of looking at a fighter through a micro-lens does not do the class any help. It just perpetuates some silly argument that a player should be able to make a character that is best in all things, all the time. And if they aren't, then the class is broken.</blockquote>

Verification