Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Ferrous" data-source="post: 4270783" data-attributes="member: 61796">Yup, I made the same point about Fighters earlier. I think the problem is that the weapons are more or less balanced until you add in the proficiences given away at first level, and then the oppotunity cost of having to take a feat (or ignore two feats that you have been given) means that certain choices are less viable. In this way the game restricts choice.&nbsp; &nbsp;Warlords are leaders and they get light shield proficiency. For them two-handed weapons or one-handed weapon and shield are both viable options and it is the style of the warlord that is important i.e a roleplaying choice rather than a mechanical choice foisted on them.P.SYup I meant the defender and leader classes should have the choice of one-handed weapon or two-handed weapon without there being a mechanical advantage to either choice. P.P.STo be fair this is a fairly minor issue. Clerics are not less powerful per se from it being optimal for them to take two-handed weapons. What bothers me is that it was unecessary. With a few minor tweaks everyone is happy. I feel that this was a poor design choice as it restricts player choice without being necessary from either a balance or flavour viewpoint. It becomes surreal when you realise that due to the restrictions on feats gained that are not a class feature, a cleric needs a 13 Str to wield a lLght Shield but has no such restrictions on swinging away with a Maul (if similary purchased through a feat)! What were they thinking?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Ferrous, post: 4270783, member: 61796"] Yup, I made the same point about Fighters earlier. I think the problem is that the weapons are more or less balanced until you add in the proficiences given away at first level, and then the oppotunity cost of having to take a feat (or ignore two feats that you have been given) means that certain choices are less viable. In this way the game restricts choice. Warlords are leaders and they get light shield proficiency. For them two-handed weapons or one-handed weapon and shield are both viable options and it is the style of the warlord that is important i.e a roleplaying choice rather than a mechanical choice foisted on them. P.S Yup I meant the defender and leader classes should have the choice of one-handed weapon or two-handed weapon without there being a mechanical advantage to either choice. P.P.S To be fair this is a fairly minor issue. Clerics are not less powerful per se from it being optimal for them to take two-handed weapons. What bothers me is that it was unecessary. With a few minor tweaks everyone is happy. I feel that this was a poor design choice as it restricts player choice without being necessary from either a balance or flavour viewpoint. It becomes surreal when you realise that due to the restrictions on feats gained that are not a class feature, a cleric needs a 13 Str to wield a lLght Shield but has no such restrictions on swinging away with a Maul (if similary purchased through a feat)! What were they thinking? [/QUOTE]

Verification