Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="BSF" data-source="post: 1478036" data-attributes="member: 13098">My default interpretation is not negative.&nbsp; Actually, I often enjoy reading your posts.&nbsp; However, there is something about your posts in this thread that grates on me in a manner that is, apparently, contrary to what you intend.&nbsp; I'm not sure what it is, nor am I going to spend too much time looking for it.&nbsp; If you say that you are not trying to be inflamatory, I will keep that in mind.&nbsp; Back on topic ...Classes are inherently limited.&nbsp; You are pointing out that there are not many options available to make Paladins, Barbarians and Monks different from each other.&nbsp; I understand some of what you are saying, but I am not entirely sure I agree that we need a &quot;Fix&quot; from WotC.&nbsp; One of the strengths of the D20 license, and the OGL, is that third party publishers can provide this flexibility.&nbsp; If you want to argue that the classes are too limited, I can accept that.&nbsp; But, only as a blanket statement.&nbsp; As an example, take a Rogue.&nbsp; If you want a character that has oodles of social skills, a Rogue is one of the best builds.&nbsp; But, what if I want somebody with oodles of social skills, without any magic, without trapfinding, and without sneak attack?&nbsp; What options do I have?&nbsp; Just ignore the trapfinding and the sneak attack and use Rogue?&nbsp; Well, that would work.&nbsp; It's not quite what I am looking for, but it would be closer than the Bard because I get more skills and I don't have magic.&nbsp; Should WotC create a list of alternate abilities for the Rogue so I can get what I want?&nbsp; What if I want to have a fighter type that is quick and dextrous?&nbsp; Sounds kind of like a swashbuckler.&nbsp; Complete Warrior has one, that sorta works, but it isn't Core.&nbsp; Should WotC also break it down so I can purchase different saves and scrap Armor proficiencies for a static AC bonus?&nbsp; Neither of these scenarios is theoretical.&nbsp; I have had players that were looking for these types of builds.&nbsp; Fortunately, there are thrid party options out there that I can refer to.&nbsp; Or, I can do the work myself.&nbsp; Or, I can go back to a pure point-buy system like HERO.&nbsp; (Or, I can wait for the Sigil to finish Buy the Numbers.)&nbsp; I like the class system because it is relatively easy for a newcomer to understand.&nbsp; There is still a lot of room for customization in each character.&nbsp; There is now room for expansion on those concepts with add-on books, either from WotC or from somebody else.&nbsp; Sure, giving a few more options on whether you want a Paladin's Mount, or if you want to have some other ability, might be nice.&nbsp; But, I am not convinced that I want to see it as part of the Core rules.&nbsp; Not because I am against it, but because those options increase the size of the books and make it more expensive and more difficult for a beginner to understand.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="BSF, post: 1478036, member: 13098"] My default interpretation is not negative. Actually, I often enjoy reading your posts. However, there is something about your posts in this thread that grates on me in a manner that is, apparently, contrary to what you intend. I'm not sure what it is, nor am I going to spend too much time looking for it. If you say that you are not trying to be inflamatory, I will keep that in mind. Back on topic ... Classes are inherently limited. You are pointing out that there are not many options available to make Paladins, Barbarians and Monks different from each other. I understand some of what you are saying, but I am not entirely sure I agree that we need a "Fix" from WotC. One of the strengths of the D20 license, and the OGL, is that third party publishers can provide this flexibility. If you want to argue that the classes are too limited, I can accept that. But, only as a blanket statement. As an example, take a Rogue. If you want a character that has oodles of social skills, a Rogue is one of the best builds. But, what if I want somebody with oodles of social skills, without any magic, without trapfinding, and without sneak attack? What options do I have? Just ignore the trapfinding and the sneak attack and use Rogue? Well, that would work. It's not quite what I am looking for, but it would be closer than the Bard because I get more skills and I don't have magic. Should WotC create a list of alternate abilities for the Rogue so I can get what I want? What if I want to have a fighter type that is quick and dextrous? Sounds kind of like a swashbuckler. Complete Warrior has one, that sorta works, but it isn't Core. Should WotC also break it down so I can purchase different saves and scrap Armor proficiencies for a static AC bonus? Neither of these scenarios is theoretical. I have had players that were looking for these types of builds. Fortunately, there are thrid party options out there that I can refer to. Or, I can do the work myself. Or, I can go back to a pure point-buy system like HERO. (Or, I can wait for the Sigil to finish [i]Buy the Numbers[/i].) I like the class system because it is relatively easy for a newcomer to understand. There is still a lot of room for customization in each character. There is now room for expansion on those concepts with add-on books, either from WotC or from somebody else. Sure, giving a few more options on whether you want a Paladin's Mount, or if you want to have some other ability, might be nice. But, I am not convinced that I want to see it as part of the Core rules. Not because I am against it, but because those options increase the size of the books and make it more expensive and more difficult for a beginner to understand. [/QUOTE]

Verification