Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 6650907" data-attributes="member: 996">True enough, AFAICT, since I can't read Abdul's mind to be certain what he meant.&nbsp; Not relevant, but true.&nbsp; It doesn't exactly contradict it, though.&nbsp; In both cases, it's a matter of Bounded Accuracy.&nbsp; In my case, a feature - non-specialist characters can remain somewhat relevant when making checks.&nbsp; In his a perceived bug - characters aren't numerically superior enough to ordinary folk to be 'heroic.' &nbsp;&nbsp;In this case, though, I do know what I was talking about.&nbsp; Being able to perform as well as good-stat, proficient character anywhere from a quarter, to perhaps as little as a 10th of the time, is I think, &quot;really not that bad.&quot;&nbsp; You might as well try any reasonable task, unless there's a severe enough penalty for failure, or it can only be done by one person at a time.Now, if you want to disagree, I'd understand.&nbsp; &quot;Really not that bad&quot; is really not that precise.&nbsp;I'd say general out-of-combat inferiority is part of it.&nbsp;Sounds kinda inferior.&nbsp;Not the part of the argument I'd prefer to get into.&nbsp; But, as to a 'fix,' there's all sorts of possibilities.From the player side, very simply, don't play a fighter if it doesn't do enough to keep you entertained. From the DM side, the possibilities are endless:&nbsp; You could re-write the fighter class, or the skill system.&nbsp; You could also just arbitrarily rule the fighter succeeds much of the time.You could hammer the limits faced by casters - for instance, by forcing 'long' adventuring days.You could (and, generally, IMHO, should) keep challenges highly varied - it keeps the game 'fresh,' makes it harder for prepped casters to anticipate the best spells for the day, and forces players to mix up their tactics.&nbsp;Pixie summoning is still, like, totally broken.&nbsp; Little buggers have no ethical restraints, y'know.&nbsp;You can take your fighter EK for arcane magic, or play a Paladin for a divine-magic-using knightly fighter, or a ranger for a nature-magic woodsy one.&nbsp; There's no Fighter-Sorcerer or Fighter-Warlock (Hexblade!), but there's always MCing if your DM uses it.&nbsp; I think bringing in magic as the solution to magic being too good is certainly a viable option.&nbsp;I'm afraid to ask, but what would that be?&nbsp; Up&nbsp; until the 5e EK (the 3.5 EK was a PrC, the 4e EK was a Theme), the fighter class, itself, never cast spells. What would 'fightery magic' be that isn't covered by the EK?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Tony Vargas, post: 6650907, member: 996"] True enough, AFAICT, since I can't read Abdul's mind to be certain what he meant. Not relevant, but true. It doesn't exactly contradict it, though. In both cases, it's a matter of Bounded Accuracy. In my case, a feature - non-specialist characters can remain somewhat relevant when making checks. In his a perceived bug - characters aren't numerically superior enough to ordinary folk to be 'heroic.' In this case, though, I do know what I was talking about. Being able to perform as well as good-stat, proficient character anywhere from a quarter, to perhaps as little as a 10th of the time, is I think, "really not that bad." You might as well try any reasonable task, unless there's a severe enough penalty for failure, or it can only be done by one person at a time. Now, if you want to disagree, I'd understand. "Really not that bad" is really not that precise. I'd say general out-of-combat inferiority is part of it. Sounds kinda inferior. Not the part of the argument I'd prefer to get into. But, as to a 'fix,' there's all sorts of possibilities. From the player side, very simply, don't play a fighter if it doesn't do enough to keep you entertained. From the DM side, the possibilities are endless: You could re-write the fighter class, or the skill system. You could also just arbitrarily rule the fighter succeeds much of the time. You could hammer the limits faced by casters - for instance, by forcing 'long' adventuring days. You could (and, generally, IMHO, should) keep challenges highly varied - it keeps the game 'fresh,' makes it harder for prepped casters to anticipate the best spells for the day, and forces players to mix up their tactics. Pixie summoning is still, like, totally broken. Little buggers have no ethical restraints, y'know. You can take your fighter EK for arcane magic, or play a Paladin for a divine-magic-using knightly fighter, or a ranger for a nature-magic woodsy one. There's no Fighter-Sorcerer or Fighter-Warlock (Hexblade!), but there's always MCing if your DM uses it. I think bringing in magic as the solution to magic being too good is certainly a viable option. I'm afraid to ask, but what would that be? Up until the 5e EK (the 3.5 EK was a PrC, the 4e EK was a Theme), the fighter class, itself, never cast spells. What would 'fightery magic' be that isn't covered by the EK? [/QUOTE]

Verification