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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Hussar" data-source="post: 5909134" data-attributes="member: 22779">I'm not sure how subjective it is.  After all, 24 hours later, the naked fighter is still naked, while the caster now has all his spells back.  Sure, if you take away the wizzie's spellbook, he's pooched, but, the other casters are fine.And, the fighter doesn't even have to be butt naked.  That's just hyperbole.  Give him a full load of mundane equipment and do the same thing for the wizard and the cleric.  Now watch how far behind the fighter is.The point here is that for people who are arguing class parity, two characters with exactly the same level of equipment should be roughly on par with each other.  Not exactly the same, that's hyperbole again and no one is arguing that.  But, at least in the same ballpark.But, the mundane equiped fighter is basically pooched.  He cannot fly, everything he's going to be facing at high levels has DR and an AC that is high enough that it makes things like Power Attack less useful and his weaknesses (low Will being primary here) are SO pronounced that he's virtually an autofail vs anything that tries to charm him.Would the mundane equipped caster be weaker?  Well certainly.  That's a given.  But, the mundane equipped caster is still miles ahead of the muggle classes.Again, though, you're arguing from a position of extreme.  Sure, I might need the fighter to bat cleanup after the wizard Stinking Clouds the bad guys.  But, what does that say about the fighter?  The question in my mind is, how often is the fighter actually needed?  How often is it better to have a fighter in the group than, say, a cleric or a druid?Not very often is the answer I keep coming up with.There's absolutely nothing wrong with not liking a system.  Totally get that.  I'm not a fan of 1st edition and that's something I've never made a secret of.  But, I will admit, that a number of the criticisms I had of 1e were based on a completely misread of the system.  Now, the remaining issues (lack of skills, class balance issues, and a few other things) are enough that I'm still not a fan, but, at least now my criticisms are generally grounded in fact, rather than what I think is fact.When fans of the system can point to chapter and verse where someone is mistaken about a system, it's better, IMO, to realize that fans likely have a better grasp on the mechanics than I do, rather than try to claim that my misreading of the rules is somehow the right one.</blockquote>

Verification