Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Remathilis" data-source="post: 6239508" data-attributes="member: 7635">This seems less a problem of balance and more an idea of &quot;competing concepts&quot; of what a swashbuckler is. D&amp;D has had a problem since probably its inception about what traits define a class and whether a class adequately reflects its supposed archetype. Go re-read any D&amp;DN thread about a class and you'll see it in action. For some, a fencer with his thin blade and leather jerkin is no match for a knight armed with a greatsword and wrapped in steel. For others, the two should be totally comparable numerically and the fiction explains away the perceived differences (the fencer's agility and ability to poke between plates of steel win him equal footing against the knight). For some, the rogue is not a combat machine and is best served avoiding combat (or striking a dirty blow when presented) while others see him as an agile combatant full of acrobatic maneuvers and stunning redirections.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Remathilis, post: 6239508, member: 7635"] This seems less a problem of balance and more an idea of "competing concepts" of what a swashbuckler is. D&D has had a problem since probably its inception about what traits define a class and whether a class adequately reflects its supposed archetype. Go re-read any D&DN thread about a class and you'll see it in action. For some, a fencer with his thin blade and leather jerkin is no match for a knight armed with a greatsword and wrapped in steel. For others, the two should be totally comparable numerically and the fiction explains away the perceived differences (the fencer's agility and ability to poke between plates of steel win him equal footing against the knight). For some, the rogue is not a combat machine and is best served avoiding combat (or striking a dirty blow when presented) while others see him as an agile combatant full of acrobatic maneuvers and stunning redirections. [/QUOTE]

Verification