Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Why the claim of combat and class balance between the classes is mainly a forum issue. (In my opinion)
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 6239524" data-attributes="member: 42582"><p>What Mistwell said.</p><p></p><p>I will requote my post:</p><p></p><p>Nothing in that implies that a swashbuckler wins every fight s/he is in. It asserts (unambiguously) that a swashbuckler has a certain competence with the rapier, and that a so-called swashbuckler who has no reaslistic prospect of winning a duel against a typical duelist is a poor fencer.</p><p></p><p>I also put forward some hypothetical numbers to illustrate the point.</p><p></p><p>Because you haven't posted your conception of a typical 3E duelist, I don't have actual numbers to work with - hence my hypotheticals. But whether the numbers are hypothetical or actual, the point remains that a character who has no realistic prospect of winning a duel against a typical duelist is a poor fencer. Hence, you cannot divorce your conception of a character as a swashbuckler from the mechanical expression of that conception via attack statistics.</p><p></p><p>It would be equally absurd to have a conception of one's character as a great orator, and then have an 8 in CHA and no skill bonus in Diplomacy; or to have a conception of one's character as a scientist on a par with Newton and then to have a 6 INT and no skill bonus in mathematics.</p><p></p><p>Here you actually seem to take for granted what I am asserting, namely, that a character cannot exemplify a concept indpendent of the details of its mechanical build. Given that, I don't know why you are disupting my claim (which is really just a reiteration of points made by others upthread).</p><p></p><p>I think this is a separate issue. In my example I simply posited hit point and damage numbers (extrapolated roughly from a 6th level fighter and a 6th level rogue). I didn't say anything about armour or other weapons.</p><p></p><p>My personal view is that, if the game is going to make fencers mechanically inferior to knights, it shouldn't beat around the bush and create an illusion to the contrary in its presentation of options.</p><p></p><p>And this is also a separate issue (although it can become tangled up with the knight vs swashbuckler thing). If the rogue is not meant to be played as a swashbuckler, then I agree with [MENTION=67338]GMforPowergamers[/MENTION] that the rules shouldn't create an illusion to the contrary (by presenting a class loaded up with swashbuckling options like sneak attack, evasion, uncanny dodge, etc).</p><p></p><p>If the fighter is mechanically most optimal built as a knight, <em>and</em> the rogue is not meant to be played as a swashbuckler, the upshot will be something like classic D&D.</p><p></p><p>4e of coures takes the other tack: the fighter is mechanically most optimal built as a knight (at least until some of the Martial Power options), but the rogue is a viable swashbuckler.</p><p></p><p>Either is a viable path to go down (though I think the 4e path probably increases the overall appeal of the game). It is the path that creates the illusion that swashbucklers are viable when in fact they're not which I think should be avoided.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 6239524, member: 42582"] What Mistwell said. I will requote my post: Nothing in that implies that a swashbuckler wins every fight s/he is in. It asserts (unambiguously) that a swashbuckler has a certain competence with the rapier, and that a so-called swashbuckler who has no reaslistic prospect of winning a duel against a typical duelist is a poor fencer. I also put forward some hypothetical numbers to illustrate the point. Because you haven't posted your conception of a typical 3E duelist, I don't have actual numbers to work with - hence my hypotheticals. But whether the numbers are hypothetical or actual, the point remains that a character who has no realistic prospect of winning a duel against a typical duelist is a poor fencer. Hence, you cannot divorce your conception of a character as a swashbuckler from the mechanical expression of that conception via attack statistics. It would be equally absurd to have a conception of one's character as a great orator, and then have an 8 in CHA and no skill bonus in Diplomacy; or to have a conception of one's character as a scientist on a par with Newton and then to have a 6 INT and no skill bonus in mathematics. Here you actually seem to take for granted what I am asserting, namely, that a character cannot exemplify a concept indpendent of the details of its mechanical build. Given that, I don't know why you are disupting my claim (which is really just a reiteration of points made by others upthread). I think this is a separate issue. In my example I simply posited hit point and damage numbers (extrapolated roughly from a 6th level fighter and a 6th level rogue). I didn't say anything about armour or other weapons. My personal view is that, if the game is going to make fencers mechanically inferior to knights, it shouldn't beat around the bush and create an illusion to the contrary in its presentation of options. And this is also a separate issue (although it can become tangled up with the knight vs swashbuckler thing). If the rogue is not meant to be played as a swashbuckler, then I agree with [MENTION=67338]GMforPowergamers[/MENTION] that the rules shouldn't create an illusion to the contrary (by presenting a class loaded up with swashbuckling options like sneak attack, evasion, uncanny dodge, etc). If the fighter is mechanically most optimal built as a knight, [I]and[/I] the rogue is not meant to be played as a swashbuckler, the upshot will be something like classic D&D. 4e of coures takes the other tack: the fighter is mechanically most optimal built as a knight (at least until some of the Martial Power options), but the rogue is a viable swashbuckler. Either is a viable path to go down (though I think the 4e path probably increases the overall appeal of the game). It is the path that creates the illusion that swashbucklers are viable when in fact they're not which I think should be avoided. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Why the claim of combat and class balance between the classes is mainly a forum issue. (In my opinion)
Top