Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="ECMO3" data-source="post: 9342550" data-attributes="member: 7030563">Only if you assume a whiteroom with no other PCs and pick your enemy to back up that choice.Doorway dodging is a thing and it is the optimal thing quite often.Yes absolutely.  A Bladesinger who never uses a spell that targets an enemy can be an extremely effective tank.I would not say that is "better" or more optimal than a Wizard who uses control spells, but at most levels it is "better" at combat than a Fighter or Paladin or Barbarian that relies on weapons to damage enemies.Barbarians are bottom of the barrel.  They are the weakest class overall if you look across levels 1-20.  Monks are not particularly strong and are arguably the weakest at portions of the game, say levels 4-7 or so.Also it is not only possible to win, you are likely to win with non-optimal choices.  The game design is actually dependent on people taking non-optimal choices to be even the least bit challenging.  If everyone in the party played an optimized full caster you would breeze through combat encounters.No that is not what I said.  When I say purposefully build a bad character I am talking about a fighter who dumps strength and wields a greatsword or a Rogue who wields a longsword.  That is what I mean - taking the rules and purposely building a character to be bad to prove a point.</blockquote>