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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Zaruthustran" data-source="post: 3969019" data-attributes="member: 1457">I'm not a fan of disadvantages. Instead of adding a penalty or weakness a class in the name of balance, I'd prefer to instead withhold advantages.So I think a "fair disadvantage" (to use your term) for a wizard would be that it does not start the game with the advantage of armor & weapon proficiencies. Disadvantage for a fighter, that class lacks the advantage of being able to deal damage with (essentially) a snap of the fingers--fighters need tools in order to do their job. Clerics have the advantage of magic and the advantage of armor & weapons; they're a hybrid class. So the "disadvantage" is that their magic advantage is not quite as good as the wizard's, and their armor & weapons advantage is not quite as good as the fighter's. The rogue is another hybrid: he can fight (but not as well as the fighter) and he can affect the world (though not with as much ease or flash as the wizard). Tangent alert: in 4e terms the rogue's skill list is, in a way, "magic" that draws power from a non-divine, non-arcane source. Whether you cast Charm Person or use Diplomacy, the challenge is resolved via getting the person to do what you want. Anyway, the rogue's "disadvantage" is that he's not as good a fighter as the fighter, and his magic (meaning, his skills) is not as good as the wizard's. Those are broad strokes. I think you can further refine (give the fighter an exclusive advantage of more hp) but that's the basic idea.</blockquote>

Verification