CrabSage's page

Aratrok wrote:

...flavor? You understand that flavor is mutable right? A monk (especially with archetypes) could just as easily be a bouncer, wrestler, or really any unarmed fighter, right?

Banning a class because you don't like their flavor is ludicrous.

What an interesting comment. Do you actually believe this...that every class/mechanic fits into every setting? Just fyi, all of the unarmed fighting classes are removed from my world, and all for the same reason: it's a corny cinematic trope that I don't much care for.

I threw the samurai out (to go along with the Cavalier and the entire Intimidate skill) because I hate the silly "non-magical buff/debuff" mechanics of stuff like Demanding Challenge and Greater Banner.

The ninja, I guess I just don't have for the sake of completeness, though if someone wanted to play a ninja as a sort of re-skinned thief/mage, I wouldn't have any problem with it.

I'm not sure what to say to that.

hhhmm...people criticized the last blog post for only covering a negative change

Now people criticize this post for only showing positive changes

Man, Paizo can't win.

Bloodrager didn't have any negative changes. This however kept the most overpowered class in the play-test still ridiculous.

The best advice I can offer you is to not try and force another player in your group to have fun your way.

After all, your playing a Ranger with more HP and a better attack bonus, why don't you "drop the bow and grab a sword weapon"?

-Skeld

He has somewhat taken up the sword. Being a "switch hitter" means he is both melee and range. Also he doesn't seem to want to force the player to do this. It seems he is worried about making the other player feel inadequate due to his Ranger easily outclassing him.

The best advice I can give into the situation is to let him keep going with archery until he does want to switch. Then when and if he does offer him help with going melee.

Beacuse that's the flavor of the setting it was made for. No mechanical reason.