Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Wolfen Priest" data-source="post: 632058" data-attributes="member: 3909">I am saying get rid of the favored classes.&nbsp; If you want to play a dwarven druid, go ahead.&nbsp; If you want to play an elven ranger with a few druid levels, go ahead.&nbsp; And, I believe, if you want to play a half-elf with any combination of levels in any base class, go ahead (that's what half-elves are good for, circa Second Edition or earlier).Either way, whatever class is your highest level will be your favored; it gives more choices to players, so if I want to play a dwarf from the mountains who is more of a druid than a fighter, what of it?&nbsp; I don't see how this could possibly ruin or even imbalance the game.&nbsp; As it stands, I could argue that humans are broken, since almost everyone plays one almost all the time (getting a free feat and +4 skill points at first level *is* a big deal).&nbsp; I think that since 3e, the half-elf has officially become the least played race of all time.Maybe I should have added that I'm also for making point-buy the standard char-gen method.&nbsp; Problem solved.I should have been more clear; I meant that I think a druid should get choice of two of those domains, just like clerics.&nbsp; I mean let's face it: druids' spells are weaker than clerics (especially when you take into account spontaneous casting), their weapons and armor are obviously way worse, and their special abilities don't make up for it, IMO.&nbsp; they need to be made stronger, probably by ditching their weapon restrictions (or just giving them a better, broader list), and giving them access to two domains.&nbsp; If clerics can have it without breaking them, why in the world would it break druids?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Wolfen Priest, post: 632058, member: 3909"] I [i]am[/i] saying get rid of the favored classes. If you want to play a dwarven druid, go ahead. If you want to play an elven ranger with a few druid levels, go ahead. And, I believe, if you want to play a half-elf with any combination of levels in any base class, go ahead (that's what half-elves are good for, circa Second Edition or earlier). Either way, whatever class is your highest level will be your favored; it gives more choices to players, so if I want to play a dwarf from the mountains who is more of a druid than a fighter, what of it? I don't see how this could possibly ruin or even imbalance the game. As it stands, I could argue that humans are broken, since almost everyone plays one almost all the time (getting a free feat and +4 skill points at first level *is* a big deal). I think that since 3e, the half-elf has officially become the least played race of all time. Maybe I should have added that I'm also for making point-buy the standard char-gen method. Problem solved. I should have been more clear; I meant that I think a druid should get choice of two of those domains, just like clerics. I mean let's face it: druids' spells are weaker than clerics (especially when you take into account spontaneous casting), their weapons and armor are obviously way worse, and their special abilities don't make up for it, IMO. they need to be made stronger, probably by ditching their weapon restrictions (or just giving them a better, broader list), [i]and[/i] giving them access to two domains. If clerics can have it without breaking them, why in the world would it break druids? [/QUOTE]

Verification