Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Celebrim" data-source="post: 3798159" data-attributes="member: 4937">akaddk: Your post reads alot like disagreement for the sake of disagreement.  Alot of it doesn't make sense.Did you even read my 5:08 post.  I don't deny in the slightest that all the pure spellcasters - Wizard included - are too powerful at around 13th level and higher.  Believing that however in no way forces me to think that this suggested solution is the best one or even necessarily that it is an improvement.Sword?  Narrow pool?  What are you talking about?  There are at least four viable weapon builds for a fighter - more if tone down power attack and give some alternative weapon feat trees.  There are thousands of potential feats for building fighters of every sort.  Try this.  Imagine you are designing a side scrolling fight game along the lines of Street Fighter II or Soulcaliber.  Think of all the different fighting styles, body types, and special manuevers you can have.  See alot of variation?  Now, just invent the feats to match what is in your imagination and try not to churn out anything broken.In theory, you don't need them.  But in practice, there is a point at which what you are trying to achieve becomes sufficiently different from other things in the same class that its easier to break that archetype off and make it a separate class.  You end up with some overlap around the edges, but its easier to have a covering space of all archetypes and still be balanced with more classes.   But, there is a limit to that.  Eventually the number of classes increases to the point where you have alot of overlap, alot of conceptual complexity (which class best achieves the concept I'm going for), and alot of playtesting and balance issues especially if you allow multiclassing.  Too many options, and you just can't test everything (this is one of the many problems with PrCs).  I don't know how many classes are idea, but if system theory is correct then its somewhere between 5 and 15.  Eight is a very good number - the trick is choosing those eight well.  Clearly, the designers are not students of system theory.Because the fighter doesn't need to be toned down.  If anything, it needs to be toned up.  All the classes experience exponential increases in power as they level, but in comparison to spellcasters, a fighter's increase in power is almost linear.  It's Fighter's had a power curve of O(n^2) + C and Wizards and other spellcasters have a power curve of O(n^3).  At some point, the fighter just gets flat left behind even if it has a head start.  So I don't need to target the fighter's flexibility or its high level attacks.  In fact, I need to increase the fighter's flexibility to achieve balance.  I could alternately try to increase a fighter's raw power, but that would move us toward the situation where initiative was a 'save or die' throw - which isn't far from the truth already.</blockquote>

Verification