Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 7846264" data-attributes="member: 996">Well, by the same token the Wizard might use his sixth-sense and awakened will to slip his dagger past an opponent's guard.The fighter's d10 HD has always been a non-trivial part of his being 'bettter' at combat than the wizard, with his d4 or thief with his d6.&nbsp; Though that's now d6 and d8, respectively.The ironic thing is, that, they were trying to fix a problem that 3e caused by having too-rapid progression, to too-big numbers, that was too varied (+1/level BaB v half-BAB, 3+1/level ranks, vs half cross-class ranks, etc), that was fixed in 4e with less-varied progression (still fast &amp; to big numbers), and 'fixed it harder,' as it were, by making it identical progression, very slow, to very low numbers. Kinda overkill, really.&nbsp; Just smaller numbers, alone, would've covered it.&nbsp; Heck, giving fighters some sort of expertise in combat wouldn't exactly break the game.&nbsp; Like trade in one of your extra attacks to gain doubled proficiency with one of your other attacks - that'd be simple enough, and it'd make the superiority implied by extra attack more broadly meaningful.&nbsp; &nbsp;It still is, it just becomes meaningful over a longer day - 6-8 encounters, is the party line - and doesn't leave the wizard 'useless,' just under-contributing.&nbsp;Proficiency starts at +2 across the board.&nbsp; It could be +0, 1, or 2, instead.&nbsp; (or +1, 2, or 4, I suppose...)&nbsp; But, yeah, just enough of a difference that you can conceptually be 'better' at fighting than the class traditionally worst at it.&nbsp; Y'know, just like the wizard is really only a little better at casting spells than the Fighter.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Tony Vargas, post: 7846264, member: 996"] Well, by the same token the Wizard might use his sixth-sense and awakened will to slip his dagger past an opponent's guard. The fighter's d10 HD has always been a non-trivial part of his being 'bettter' at combat than the wizard, with his d4 or thief with his d6. Though that's now d6 and d8, respectively. The ironic thing is, that, they were trying to fix a problem that 3e caused by having too-rapid progression, to too-big numbers, that was too varied (+1/level BaB v half-BAB, 3+1/level ranks, vs half cross-class ranks, etc), that was fixed in 4e with less-varied progression (still fast & to big numbers), and 'fixed it harder,' as it were, by making it identical progression, very slow, to very low numbers. Kinda overkill, really. Just smaller numbers, alone, would've covered it. Heck, giving fighters some sort of expertise in combat wouldn't exactly break the game. Like trade in one of your extra attacks to gain doubled proficiency with one of your other attacks - that'd be simple enough, and it'd make the superiority implied by extra attack more broadly meaningful. It still is, it just becomes meaningful over a longer day - 6-8 encounters, is the party line - and doesn't leave the wizard 'useless,' just under-contributing. Proficiency starts at +2 across the board. It could be +0, 1, or 2, instead. (or +1, 2, or 4, I suppose...) But, yeah, just enough of a difference that you can conceptually be 'better' at fighting than the class traditionally worst at it. Y'know, just like the wizard is really only a little better at casting spells than the Fighter. [/QUOTE]

Verification