Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Remathilis" data-source="post: 6522773" data-attributes="member: 7635">The problem I'm seeing with the scale is the criteria seems arbitrary. Martial seems to have two scales: how good are you at combat, and how mundane (IE non-magically powered) are your abilities. These do not seem to 1:1. Similarly, Magical seems to imply 9 level spellcasting and no combat ability, which again doesn't seem 1:1 (a wild mage sorcerer is less magical than an evoker wizard exactly why?) The real problem comes when things like mountain dwarves (which add armor proficiency, so that makes them... less magical?) try to move the scale. Just as an example of why this can't work: imagine WotC created a Blunder and gave a class full wizard spellcaster but also martial weapons, armor, and d10 HD. Is it closer to the Martial (good combat) or magical (awesome spells) side? If you had two charts: one that measured magical - mundane, and then one that measured good combat - poor combat, then you might be able to make these changes. But together, too many variables are mucking up the data.</blockquote>