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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 5886940" data-attributes="member: 996">Very nearly the same, yes, perhaps even 'similar,' but /particularly/ with dailies.  I don't just feel that way because it makes sense, but because nothing else D&D has tried to balance the classes has ever come close to working.Roughly the same resources, roughly equal footing, yes.  Makes a certain amount of sense, doesn't it.Radically different resources, say T1 vs T3, radically imbalanced.Use the one that works for you at the time."That's not a bug, it's a feature!"  <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />  Seriously, it is.  Rather than presenting exploits with one fixed rationale, and baking that into the power at the expense of mechanical consistency, playability, and balance, 4e just has exploits that are mechanically functional and balanced.  The represent what the player wants them to represent, in game.  It's a minor exercise in creativity, and I suppose, rationalization.  It lets one set of mechanics cover many different concepts of what a martial character can be.Same goes for divine, and arcane (except, maybe, for the wizard).I'm not saying it's what you want.  I'm saying that taking away martial dailies will leave the source under-powered and probably non-viable at many levels.  And, yes, that'd make playing one boring much of the time.  See my notes, above, about modularity and the possibility of doing both.Systems are just abstract mechanics.  Making two things use different mechanics doesn't make them different in-game.  If one character has a katana that does 1d10 damage, and another had a katana that does 1d8 brutal 2, they both have katanas, and, for that matter, they both do 5.5 points of average damage.  The mechanical difference adds nothing, it's just an abstraction.By the same token, a character can have a broadsword (+2, 1d10) or a warhammer (+2, 1d10) or a battleaxe (+2, 1d10), and the only mechanical difference is a keyword.  For that matter, one character could have a 'Saber' (+2, 1d8, high crit, heavy blade) and another a 'Backsword'  (+2, 1d8, high crit, heavy blade), and there's no mechanical difference, but they are historically different weapons - both modest 1-handed blades used by cavalry, though. Weapon vs Implement, yes, they're quite distinct.  And using weapons doesn't have to limit the martial source quite as much as it actually does in 4e.  4e was actually a little conservative in that regard.With the exception of CON damage, which is a mechanic that simply doesn't exist in 4e, exploits do just about all of that, too.  "No daily mechanics" would also mean no Vancian casting, which'd be lovely.  The game would be even easier to balance if no one had dailies.But that's not it.  It's "No daily mechanics for the martial source, specifically."  And, yes, that relegates the martial source to inferiority, hypothetical systems that the nostalgia-mandated 5e is unlikely to adopt notwithstanding.The way you're arguing for it won't achieve that.  What you will get is a 'unique play experience' of wondering why you're not playing a caster and being effective like everyone else.  Again, by all means, ask, argue for, even demand additional options for the martial classes, over and above martial dailies that are balanced with the returning vancian casting.  There are a lot of us playing 4e martial classes and quite enjoying have the peak power and 'plot power' of dailies.  Please, stop trying to make us choose between continuing to play such characters, and adopting 5e.</blockquote>

Verification