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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="HeapThaumaturgist" data-source="post: 3193388" data-attributes="member: 12332">It's really hard to engage in a debate about whether or not a particular class is overpowered, in a D&D game, if the real basis of the counterargument is:  "Well all of the core classes really suck, anyway."The Fighter needs more skill points and less focus on feats and should be a Warblade or Swordsage anyway.The Wizard should have better HD and armor anyway.It's kind of hard to make any sort of comparison if the final answer is going to be that anywhere it may be overpowered, it's really because we aught to change everything else about D&D to bring it in line with a new class.Then we're not playing D&D ... we're playing "I liked the Bo9S so we made an RPG for it."Making a core-class character shouldn't be shooting oneself in the foot.  And it isn't.  I can build fun, interesting, extremely playable Fighters without any difficulty whatsoever.  That they're then beaten to death in an allyway for their class abilities by a Warblade doesn't mean that I decided to play an Expert.    Somebody can't air real-world issues and grievances without being told they should suck it up and they're playing the game wrong anyway.  So if a guy with a Wizard says he's having problems, did he decide to play an Aristocrat and shoot himself in the foot because his hit die really should have been higher?  The guy playing the Bard might as well have played a Commoner?Maybe so, really.  But that's the game people purchased when they bought D&D.  If Bo9S means that the core classes are now NPC classes, the prosecution rests its case, eh?--fje</blockquote>

Verification