Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="ExploderWizard" data-source="post: 5651641" data-attributes="member: 66434">I'm not so sure about this. &nbsp;Adventuring parties were at one time groups of competent individuals who banded together for mutual benefit. Fighting men, clerics, magic users, &amp; thieves all had different things they were good at. The fighting man excelled at combat. At range or up close, this was the go to guy for violence. &nbsp;Enter, weapon specialization. Suddenly the fighter was considered really good only with whatever weapon got a specialization bonus. A fighter that had double spec. in the longsword was suddenly useless in ranged combat despite not losing any abilities in that area (aside from possibly being non-proficient of course). &nbsp;Now you could have fighters who specialized in ranged and melee in the same party. If the adventure featured lots of close quarters battle in tight caves the bow specialist got to sulk and play Robin to the melee fighter's Batman. During wilderness encounters where engagements might begin hundreds of yards apart the bow specialist would shine and the melee fighter got to feel barely adequate. &nbsp;Eventually this kind of specialization became available to all classes and character types. These days an adventuring party more closely resembles a colony of highly specialized insects. Each drone has thier own thing at which they excel. The divide between the one narrow aspect of expertise and anything else is so huge so as to make attempting actions outside the chosen aspect mathematically laughable. &nbsp;A character has become a member of a team of one trick ponies. This is combined by an ever increasing sense of player entitlement. After all, if the rules support building a (insert specialization here) monster then why shouldn't a player expect to use that ability to full potential in most if not all situations? &nbsp;This design concept and implementation sucks donkey balls.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="ExploderWizard, post: 5651641, member: 66434"] I'm not so sure about this. Adventuring parties were at one time groups of competent individuals who banded together for mutual benefit. Fighting men, clerics, magic users, & thieves all had different things they were good at. The fighting man excelled at combat. At range or up close, this was the go to guy for violence. Enter, weapon specialization. Suddenly the fighter was considered really good only with whatever weapon got a specialization bonus. A fighter that had double spec. in the longsword was suddenly useless in ranged combat despite not losing any abilities in that area (aside from possibly being non-proficient of course). Now you could have fighters who specialized in ranged and melee in the same party. If the adventure featured lots of close quarters battle in tight caves the bow specialist got to sulk and play Robin to the melee fighter's Batman. During wilderness encounters where engagements might begin hundreds of yards apart the bow specialist would shine and the melee fighter got to feel barely adequate. Eventually this kind of specialization became available to all classes and character types. These days an adventuring party more closely resembles a colony of highly specialized insects. Each drone has thier own thing at which they excel. The divide between the one narrow aspect of expertise and anything else is so huge so as to make attempting actions outside the chosen aspect mathematically laughable. A character has become a member of a team of one trick ponies. This is combined by an ever increasing sense of player entitlement. After all, if the rules support building a (insert specialization here) monster then why shouldn't a player expect to use that ability to full potential in most if not all situations? This design concept and implementation sucks donkey balls. [/QUOTE]

Verification