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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 7247055" data-attributes="member: 996">I made no such claim. Which makes you continuing to do exactly that in this thread ...odd.Not everyone you want to label 'gamist' so you can discount everything they say /is/ gamist, either.  GNS is just a set of three arbitrary boxes.  People & games don't actually neatly and exclusively fit in one or another of them. Maybe not the whole world in theory 24/7, but you can be Teller to the face's Penn when social checks are being made if you really want to, I suppose.  <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />  Having a 'point man' in many situations isn't exactly unreasonable, either.It's not great for actual play, though, because it's like a mini version of netrunner syndrome:  you have the specialized/niche-protected character doing stuff and everyone else more or less left out.  The single-check resolution generally employed by D&D out of combat definitely encourages that, which is unfortunate.  In combat, D&D switches to turn-based initiative and, simply, more roles to resolve the conflict.  One reason D&D is unfairly characterized as a violent game is that its combat mechanics are its most participative.  Optimization, itself, can be quite a creative exercise, especially the concept part of a build-to-concept.  Simply lifting an optimized build from someone else may not be, but that's not an indictment of system mastery in general, let alone everyone who might have acquired some.  I'm not sure how it went off the rails, nor where it's heading, now.  Optimized fighters came up to illustrate that the fighter wasn't necessarily under-powered in terms of DPR, now people are railing against optimization ...in defense(?) of the fighter..?:shrug: As 'LeFay' suggests, Morgan was at most half-human, so like a D&D elf, might be 'young' but had centuries to study magic.  Circe wasn't even human, but the daughter of a deity & an nymph.But, it's mostly just the questionable aesthetics of are our culture that makes wizards old and sorceresses young.   A really active adventurer can zip from 1 to 20 in hardly more than a month, by the exp tables and expected encounters/day given in 5e.   So, yeah.  OTOH, when you throw in detailed aging rules, you might find other choices being made. The fighter gets two and the Rogue one, IIRC.  They also both got two non-casting archetypes and one wizard-lite archetype in the PH.  There's some parallels in their design.  ...IDK.  I suspect the bonus ASIs for the fighter was a small nod to the bonus feats of the 3.x fighter... and the bonus ASI for the rogue? maybe a matter of it being a non-caster class, so throw it that same bone?</blockquote>

Verification