I would consider giving mythic to tier 4-5 characters, but instead of mythic feats I would only let them take path abilities.
Why not both?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
First a Fighter should not need to spend feats and have to have a magic bow to hit a monster. They are a full BAB class. And running flying Monster whose BAB so high that a fighter cannot hope to hit it with a Bow is the same as running a flying monster with so much magic resistance that he will bounce all spells and make Arcane classes useless. And at these levels a fighter and other martial should have magic bows, or Javelins of Lighting, or Dwarf throwing hammers, Or a way to fly. That the way the game is designed to be played. Heck fighters have enough feats that its nothing to spend one just to be able to use a black powder weapons.
I might point out I like fighters, and play them often with no big problems. but before you say fighters need X, think about how is X is going to work out on a fully buffed well equipped fighter.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think you need to extend the number of encounters between 8 hour rests. Sure if you take a single combat situation then magic is crazy powerful. But take the group give them 9 encounters that they have to deal with and I think the martial would come out ahead...slow and steady vs fast and flashy. Spell casters have the hard limit "number of spells a day" and fighter does not.
Extend the the game between rests, allow for more baddies on the map and make the spell casters pick and choose where and when they use their awesome power. While the fighter just keeps hitting things with his stick every round :).
I think that is the key to balance in this game, understand your party and challenge them accordingly.If you make the melee deal out the same damage as a caster then you would have to put a limit on it...maybe like a daily power [that worked so well last time :)]...lets not do that again.
The martial will die if those 9 encounters are remotely level appropriate.
Just this. After some levels, without heavy magic support the Fighter will just die in combat, while the rest of the group will run like crazy.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yes, martials really do need better things. Wow this was a little too easy. If only someone would create a thread that posed the question of WHY martials need better things.. Then we'll really be cooking with gas.
I have seen eidolons outperform purely martial classes in combat situations and they even get more skillpoints per level than a fighter. Evolutions alone bring more benefit to combat and flexibility than the entire pool of fighter bonus feats. The fighter gets shown up by a class feature of a class feature. If that doesn't indicate poor class design then i don't know what does.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
First a Fighter should not need to spend feats and have to have a magic bow to hit a monster.
"Should" and "do" are two different things.
They are a full BAB class. And running flying Monster whose BAB so high that a fighter cannot hope to hit it with a Bow is the same as running a flying monster with so much magic resistance that he will bounce all spells and make Arcane classes useless.
Where are you getting the idea that simply being full BAB is enough and monsters with higher AC than that are some sort of deviation from the expected norm?
Open your Bestiary. Check out the guidelines for monster AC, and you'll discover that their AC scales up by more than 1 point per level. Since BAB only goes up by 1/level, that means that one of two things is the case:
1) The fighter is meant to get less and less likely to hit his targets as he levels up; or
2) The game's default assumption is that even the full BAB classes will be accruing additional bonuses as they level up, outside of BAB itself.
I think you know that #1 is ridiculous, so that leaves #2. So if the fighters in your games only need their BAB in order to hit their targets, then your games are the exception, not the expectation.
That the way the game is designed to be played.
I'm quickly becoming convinced that you do not at all know how "the game is designed to be played".
That's a bit much, don't you think? It's hardly focusing or specializing at that point, plus it's less a feat choice and more an 'obviously you MUST take this because it blows everything else out of the water'. Pathfinder has too many "plus this number to this specific thing" options as it is.
The thing is, weapon specialization is detrimental to the game.
Having Weapon Focus and Weapon Specialization work with an entire fighter weapon group would be better.
How so? Most weapons in a weapon group are pretty much the same, and then there are the odd ones out that contain vastly different weapons.
It's not that martials (specially Fighters) have zero options...
It's just that far more often than not, martials (specially Fighters), have to invest a disproportionately high amount of resources just to be mediocre.
Let's take my ol' friend Dr. Fighty McCharming... He's is a Fighter. With no archetypes. And Cha 7.
And yet, he's a pretty good party-face, with good bonuses in Diplomacy, Intimidate and Sense Motive.
In order to do that, all he had to do was...
- Invest 2 attribute points in an attribute he has no use for.
- Use a feat (in this case, a racial feat) to boost Diplomacy.
- Use another feat to boost Intimidate.
- Spend his favored class bonus on skill points.
After all of that... Dr. Fighty McCharming isn't an amazing party-face. Just a decent one. And he's bad at every other skill role there is. That's a lot of investment just to be not-awful...
He can talk to people and he can hit stuff. At great cost. And he's still far more versatile than a typical Fighter...
But take the group give them 9 encounters that they have to deal with and I think the martial would come out ahead...
Nine encounters in a single day is absolutely ridiculous.
- Several posters that have already covered that the martials are likely to die in that case.
- It takes about 21 encounters at CR=APL to level on medium XP progression. Assuming your 9 encounters end up averaging out to about CR=APL, you're looking at a party going from 1 to 20 in a bit over 6 weeks of adventuring.
- Especially once you get to higher levels, the sheer amount of time you'd spend resolving combat would be inane. You really don't want to end up in a situation where it takes 3 sessions to get through a single in game day. "Okay, we've been in the ruins for a whole day now. Does anyone remember why we're here?" "I dunno, it's been like a month since we got the quest hook."
One single round of combat with 10 people fighting in level 15+/- takes like forever, even more if you have a Full Caster that loves Summons.
I think this feat should be built into the rules from level 1 with no feat. The degree of specialization for all classes is silly.That's a bit much, don't you think? It's hardly focusing or specializing at that point, plus it's less a feat choice and more an 'obviously you MUST take this because it blows everything else out of the water'. Pathfinder has too many "plus this number to this specific thing" options as it is.
Having Weapon Focus and Weapon Specialization work with an entire fighter weapon group would be better. We could then add in some other features that scale with level. The feats should provide simple, cool, and decently power combat boons. Things like being able to reroll a natural 1 so many times a day, or getting the ability to ignore an attack of opportunity made when using that weapon once a round, or being able to auto-roll maximum damage in some cases. Honestly, ALL the fighter feats could probably do with this treatment.
That's not too far from the way I run things. I automatically give fighters exotic weapon proficiency in all exotic weapons which fall into his weapon groups, and let a fighter's weapon focus/specialization apply to all weapons in the weapon groups in which he has WT.
I also let all characters buy individual weapon proficiencies for a single skill point, and in the case of the fighter, buying a weapon proficiency for one skill point allows him to apply his weapon training (at +1 level), plus WF and/or WS if he has them to the new weapon. I like the fighter to be able to just pick up any old beatstick and go to town, and this system means he's never more than one skillpoint away from being very competent with any given weapon.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think there comes a point when you have to accept that an awesome and diverse fighter who can deal with unique and novel situations, can't be the same fighter who is the totally mundane guy with no access to supernatural power.
The Tome of Battle in 3.5 was, in my opinion, an amazing book which gave 'martial' characters access to a lot of unique and interesting options. But they weren't fighters.
You could give a fighter all good saves, you could give them improved iron will, and the like as bonus feats. You can also give him access to 4/6 skill points per level. But if you really want them to be able to compete with magic, you have to either make them significantly less mundane and thus, lose some of the 'flavour' of a fighter or you have to stomp magic into the dust. You could limit all spellcasters to being 6th level casters, but they're still going to be better than a fighter at solving problems.
As it stands though, a fighter may as well be an NPC class, when you compare it with every other full BAB class on the market.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Magical healing and condition removal only happens at level 15+? Wow, that's news to me.
I think there comes a point when you have to accept that an awesome and diverse fighter who can deal with unique and novel situations, can't be the same fighter who is the totally mundane guy with no access to supernatural power.
The big problem is that in 3.x magic became much more easier, safer, abundant and reliable. So the pure mundane guy became useless.
The Tome of Battle in 3.5 was, in my opinion, an amazing book which gave 'martial' characters access to a lot of unique and interesting options. But they weren't fighters.
Sure. It's a way better balanced, fun and interesting class that a 8-year old can write a bot on how to play.
As it stands though, a fighter may as well be an NPC class, when you compare it with every other full BAB class on the market.
The Fighter is a NPC class (Warrior) with some minor boosts. IF combat feats where more meaningful and valuable and on pair with magic, MAYBE the Fighter could be a valuable class, but it's totally outshined inside batlle by the Barbarian and by ALL the other classes out of it.
I think you need to extend the number of encounters between 8 hour rests. Sure if you take a single combat situation then magic is crazy powerful. But take the group give them 9 encounters that they have to deal with and I think the martial would come out ahead...slow and steady vs fast and flashy. Spell casters have the hard limit "number of spells a day" and fighter does not.
Extend the the game between rests, allow for more baddies on the map and make the spell casters pick and choose where and when they use their awesome power. While the fighter just keeps hitting things with his stick every round :).
I think that is the key to balance in this game, understand your party and challenge them accordingly.If you make the melee deal out the same damage as a caster then you would have to put a limit on it...maybe like a daily power [that worked so well last time :)]...lets not do that again.
I tend to uses hordes of low level mobs that come at the party in waves. Hitting a party with 3 waves of 20 hobgoblins each, who know better then to bunch up so one fireball does not take out more then 3,Followed by six ogres and an Ogre Magi and finally the Hobgoblin elite requires different strategy then fighting a single large mob.
And yes I can run that many mobs smoothly. Not that hard if you prepare.
First a Fighter should not need to spend feats and have to have a magic bow to hit a monster."Should" and "do" are two different things.
They are a full BAB class. And running flying Monster whose BAB so high that a fighter cannot hope to hit it with a Bow is the same as running a flying monster with so much magic resistance that he will bounce all spells and make Arcane classes useless.Where are you getting the idea that simply being full BAB is enough and monsters with higher AC than that are some sort of deviation from the expected norm?
Open your Bestiary. Check out the guidelines for monster AC, and you'll discover that their AC scales up by more than 1 point per level. Since BAB only goes up by 1/level, that means that one of two things is the case:
1) The fighter is meant to get less and less likely to hit his targets as he levels up; or
2) The game's default assumption is that even the full BAB classes will be accruing additional bonuses as they level up, outside of BAB itself.I think you know that #1 is ridiculous, so that leaves #2. So if the fighters in your games only need their BAB in order to hit their targets, then your games are the exception, not the expectation.
That the way the game is designed to be played.I'm quickly becoming convinced that you do not at all know how "the game is designed to be played".
Do you have a need to insult everone who disagrees with you?
And this may be a big shock but there is no right or wrong way to play a role playing game. If the players are having fun, its the right way.| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I tend to uses hordes of low level mobs that come at the party in waves. Hitting a party with 3 waves of 20 hobgoblins each, who know better then to bunch up so one fireball does not take out more then 3,Followed by six ogres and an Ogre Magi and finally the Hobgoblin elite requires different strategy then fighting a single large mob.
And after 3 hours, the full casters are empty of spells and the fighter is very dead in the ground. Cool story, bro. :p
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Or you ditch the fighter, get a druid, and still laugh,...
Or say screw it and bring a witch,,,
Oh! Or a Kineticist...
And after 3 hours, the full casters are empty of spells and the fighter is very dead in the ground. Cool story, bro. :pI tend to uses hordes of low level mobs that come at the party in waves. Hitting a party with 3 waves of 20 hobgoblins each, who know better then to bunch up so one fireball does not take out more then 3,Followed by six ogres and an Ogre Magi and finally the Hobgoblin elite requires different strategy then fighting a single large mob.
Not really. fighters are very good in these mob action if they have good armor, decent hit points and any DR.A fighter might go through the first wave and take only one or two hits if lucky. But caster do tend to run out of spells. Don't your melee types want to be like Legolas and Gimili at Gondar saying I got 21 no I got 22,.
Running a huge horde of a hundred goblin or Orc Mooks( Mooks are one hit point wonders, do 1d6 and no BAB and no brains).)make my player feel like heroes| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
If you send floods of 1 HP mobs at your players, then I think your experiences are going to be out of wack with what most people on the boards see.
So, basically, you have to cheat to make your players feel like heroes. Nothing against it, but to this discussion stand we need to reach the common place, on wich monsters don't have 1 HP and large quantities can crit fish very well...
Let me tell ya, you fight at least 50 standard sahuagins one after another, and one of those buggers is bound to roll enough nat 20s to kill you.
Granted, the DM was using a house rule that if you got a nat 20 on the confirm roll, you could confirm the hit again. Sahuagin got a third nat 20, and the DM decided my character should just croak.
Nat 20s also apparently ignore mirror images and blur completely, who knew! (I did, it sucked.)
But regardless
In the game of numbers, if you have more than 20 monsters on the field, they WILL start getting nat 20s regularly, and the Fighters AC will most certainly mean bupkis.
The thing is, weapon specialization is detrimental to the game.
If by that you mean "it does nothing to make the game more interesting", I agree. Otherwise...meh. Not really hurting a fighter to take it instead of, say, Disrupting Shot.
How so? Most weapons in a weapon group are pretty much the same, and then there are the odd ones out that contain vastly different weapons.If by "odd ones out" you mean "every other pair you can think of in every single weapon group", yes. There's a fairly significant difference between...
- a light pick and an orc double axe
- a shortbow and a composite longbow
- a sap and a wushu dart
- a bo staff and a double walking stick katana (my GOD that's an awesome name)
- a derringer-type pistol and a siege cannon
- a mere club and a tetsubo
- a mancatcher and a nodachi
- a lasso and a trident
These pairs, all the same weapon groups.
That's not too far from the way I run things. I automatically give fighters exotic weapon proficiency in all exotic weapons which fall into his weapon groups, and let a fighter's weapon focus/specialization apply to all weapons in the weapon groups in which he has WT.
I also let all characters buy individual weapon proficiencies for a single skill point, and in the case of the fighter, buying a weapon proficiency for one skill point allows him to apply his weapon training (at +1 level), plus WF and/or WS if he has them to the new weapon. I like the fighter to be able to just pick up any old beatstick and go to town, and this system means he's never more than one skillpoint away from being very competent with any given weapon.
The weapon proficiency feats are pretty lame. At least with the armor training ones you don't have to take it once for scale mail, once for chain mail, once for breastplate, etc. One or two skill points a pop sounds fairly reasonable.
Has anyone experimented with just giving the fighter ALL the fighter-specific feats he qualifies for and seeing if that helps at all?
I've experimented with giving Fighters two bonus combat feats per Fighter Level [along with all good will saves and increased skill points per level and a few other things.]
It helped.
EDIT: granted I ALSO allowed access to 3.X feats, which frequently offer more utility than Paizo Pathfinder feats do [in the category of feats martial characters can take anyway. Caster feats in PF have some pretty awesome stuff.]
The extra feats really will not help unless you have feats available at 12th level that are on par with 6th level spells.
The extra feats really will not help unless you have feats available at 12th level that are on par with 6th level spells.I've experimented with giving Fighters two bonus combat feats per Fighter Level [along with all good will saves and increased skill points per level and a few other things.]
It helped.
EDIT: granted I ALSO allowed access to 3.X feats, which frequently offer more utility than Paizo Pathfinder feats do [in the category of feats martial characters can take anyway. Caster feats in PF have some pretty awesome stuff.]
I imagine it would help. A fighter being able to both use a bow well and kick sand into someone's face effectively is an improvement. It's pathetic compared to Suffocate, Confusion, Teleport, Overland Flight and Dazing Rime Fireballs, but it's still a step up.
For the sake of a thought experiment, please give me a fighter concept/theme to work with Thorin.
Let's go with iconic sword and board.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Lets go through and address this bit by bit.
Do martial characters really need better things?No. People on these forums have horribly warped ideas of game experience and optimization to the exclusion of anything else. They're the type who think every Fighter has to have a 7 CHA and a 7 INT and wonder why their character is so boring and stupid. I may be exaggerating some here, but the point stands.
The issue is more that the painfully high cost of having a good Cha and Int doesn't actually get you that much. Int can be worth having respectable numbers in with some op-fu, but Cha is usually a trap. The fighter lacks enough skill points to turn a decent Cha into good face skills, and it's so bad that a high Int Fighter will be a better face than a high Cha Fighter and be better at non Cha skills too. If you aren't willing to jump through the hoops to make the fighter decent at a handful of skills, then unless you need it for prereqs Int is doing nothing, so you might as well dump it along with Cha.
The Fighter class is noticeably vanilla and focused on martial ability to the exclusion of anything else, and that is how the class is meant to work. It kicks ass, sure, and excels at certain weapons or tactics, but there is a cost for that.
It doesn't kick ass at martial ability. Doing the job of a melee based martial involves getting to the target, staying next to the target and killing the target with damage while surviving both return swings and magical attacks. The fighter can only do the killing the target and possibly the surviving return swings bits well without lots of op-fu.
Personally, I prefer to use the Fighter class as a dip of anywhere from 1-7 levels (although that might vary if an archetype is selected, and depends on the other class you mix with), and the rest to go into a different class which offers more versatility, and/or a prestige class.You certainly can take a Fighter to 20, although I probably wouldn't.
If you don't consider it worthwhile sticking with a single class fighter past a certain point, doesn't that indicate a problem, considering the fact that this isn't the case for most classes.
Everyone complaining about how a Fighter needs gear to function, well, that's an assumed part of the game and an assumed accessible part of your character. You might as well complain that a Wizard is useless without his spellbook. Yes, there might be limited scenarios a DM might employ to take away your armor and sword, or rob you of your spellbook, but they are NOT the assumed standard, and they should be limited and temporary at best. In fact a Wizard is FAR more vulnerable considering the spellbook restriction (which is one of the reasons my Wizard characters are always a bit paranoid and take planned measures to protect their spellbooks). Then again, the spellbook is also assumed to be accessible as part of your character.
The fighter has a far higher dependency on items than most classes. Most classes with full-casting and many 6th level casters are deadly threats wearing nothing but a holy symbol tattoo and a spell component pouch. Some of them need an item or familiar to stay useful the next day. The fighter needs a weapon, like most martial type classes do, but they need a specific weapon or their effectiveness is greatly reduced, and they need armor if they don't want to be pulped in melee rapidly (not as much of an issue for classes like barbarians and paladins), and they need save boosters to not die horribly to anything that is "Will negates" (one again,, not a problem for barbarians and paladins). If the thing they are fighting has abilities that can hinder attacking, then the fighter probably can't do anything about it. The majority of full casters and many partial casters can work around it. Martials are a lot more spotty here in general, but you still have things like spell sunder as an option. The only way around this for the fighter without silliness like triple archetyping is to have items that let them fake magical aptitude. So, no, it's not anywhere near complaining that a wizard can't function without a spell book. Give the wizard their spell book, and give the fighter a mace, some breastplate and a shortbow, and see who is crippled more by lacking expensive gear. Hint: It's not the wizard.
The biggest complaint I can see is that a Fighter has to invest a reasonable amount of wealth into their armor and weapon, and then has the rest to afford utility or other gear, while a Wizard can typically go without armor or weapons, and invest everything in utility or other gear. Of course, the flip side is that a Wizard will typically invest a lot of gold into purchasing scrolls so that they can build their spellbook, and will also probably invest in other defensive gear, and could arguably invest in wands, staves, or scrolls as "weapons". So they could very likely spend the same amount in each role, but only the Wizard can relatively simply forgo spending anything in weapons or armor.
The wizard generally can get by without spending much gold but still perform their role properly. The fighter generally can't. That's the problem. Fighters need a large flow of wealth to be effective. The wizard works great in a low wealth campaign (as full-casters generally do). Which is really screwy considering the fact that the fighter is supposed to be the mundane bad-ass but needs giant piles of magic to do their job, while the wizard can get by with just the magic they can cram into their head.
Sometime I wonder why I ever should go Fighter when there's the Slayer that with slightly less martial prowess gets much much more out of combat utility. Same with the Ranger if the flavor is pertinent and you want to go Core.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Sometime I wonder why I ever should go Fighter when there's the Slayer that with slightly less martial prowess gets much much more out of combat utility. Same with the Ranger if the flavor is pertinent and you want to go Core.
Because Slayers can't grow bat wings while picking combat feats on the fly and sharing them with their pet battlehawk?
Oh, you mean fighters that don't have literally no fighter class features until level four...ahhh....you like combat maneuvers? No wait, you should still trade out most of the crap then too...
...You are a traditionalist, hate our new fangled "hybrid classes", "archetypes" and "feats" and wish the class was still called "Fighting Man"? Could that be a good enough reason?
The problem isn't "I didn't bring a bow". Bringing a bow is easy. And ineffective.
Unless it's an expensive enchanted bow and you've invested in the Dex and feats to use it well. In which case you might as well just have built yourself as a dedicated archer to start with.Precisely. The wealth system is a huge handicap on martial power despite certain posters claiming it's actually a boost to their versatility.
To this end i was thinking about making weapon and armor enhancement bonuses mundane in nature (a +5 sword is not magical but a legendarily well-made and well-hone sword) and cut the cost quite a bit by calculating the price for the mundane enhancement and the price equivalent of the enchantment separately. Basically a +5 enhancement with vorpal would cost 100.3k (+5 enhancement at 50k + +5 enchantment at 50k) for instead of 200.3k (+10 enchantment at 50k).
I was even considering dividing the enhancement's cost by 10. Making the above example a 55.3k weapon. but that might go too far.
Either way I am unlikely to implement this because I'll go with unchained's automatic bonus progression which already relieves martials a little bit (sure you only get half the gear but more than what you lost in WBL you will get back in automatic bonuses which casters will also take even though not all of them are as useful as to a martial) meaning you can actually focus on getting more utility focussed items, like winged boots.
I played a fighter specializing in close weapons and acrobatics, in an attempt to pull Captain America: The Winter Soldier type stunts. Wanted him to be as mundane as possible. Ran in it in a low magic campaign where I couldn't do the magic mart thing. Rolled stats, and between needing the STR to hit things, the DEX to jump around, and the CON not to die, most of my mental stats weren't great. I took a level in monk, which at least helped the skills and saves a little.
In a team setting, he sorta sucked. I could rip stuff up in combat far better than my teammates, but the DM struggled to challenge my guy without killing my teammates.
Out of combat? I struggled to do ANYTHING. I had played an oracle in the same campaign before and I was constantly coming across situations where a Detect Magic, or Stone Shape, or Wings of Darkness would have saved the day. And my skills were too limited to focus on anything beyond "jump good" and "be scary" which has very limited utility in a group setting.
Ironically, for all the fighter theoretically emphathizes that this is a team game, my fighter functioned better when the DM ran him through one shot adventures where I could leap into situations without worrying about endangering my teammates, or use acrobatics to bypass threats without leaving people behind.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
First a Fighter should not need to spend feats and have to have a magic bow to hit a monster."Should" and "do" are two different things.
They are a full BAB class. And running flying Monster whose BAB so high that a fighter cannot hope to hit it with a Bow is the same as running a flying monster with so much magic resistance that he will bounce all spells and make Arcane classes useless.Where are you getting the idea that simply being full BAB is enough and monsters with higher AC than that are some sort of deviation from the expected norm?
Open your Bestiary. Check out the guidelines for monster AC, and you'll discover that their AC scales up by more than 1 point per level. Since BAB only goes up by 1/level, that means that one of two things is the case:
1) The fighter is meant to get less and less likely to hit his targets as he levels up; or
2) The game's default assumption is that even the full BAB classes will be accruing additional bonuses as they level up, outside of BAB itself.I think you know that #1 is ridiculous, so that leaves #2. So if the fighters in your games only need their BAB in order to hit their targets, then your games are the exception, not the expectation.
That the way the game is designed to be played.I'm quickly becoming convinced that you do not at all know how "the game is designed to be played".Do you have a need to insult everone who disagrees with you?
And this may be a big shock but there is no right or wrong way to play a role playing game. If the players are having fun, its the right way.
I can see (in retrospect) how that last line of mine sounds kind of insulting. I'm sorry. I only meant to matter-of-fact-ly assert that you're wrong about "how the the game was designed to be played".
I agree with you that the most important thing is that a given group is having fun with their own gaming method. In fact, I took that as a given before even reading your post. I thought you and I were speaking about the baseline expectations of the system (what you called "how the game was designed to be played") rather than any particular set of houserules. For instance, if you find that throwing waves of tiny mooks at your players creates a fun game, that's great! However, that is outside the game's baseline expectation. In fact, it even says that PCs shouldn't get XP for a fight like that. So when speaking in the abstract about the merits or flaws of the system, different people's adjustments prove that the system needed changing, not that the system was fine to begin with.
Does that make sense?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think people's argument that "the fighter is supposed to be gear dependent and that's how you're supposed to shore up the failings" is only a good argument if the fighter had more money to spend on gear than any other class.
I think people's argument that "the fighter is supposed to be gear dependent and that's how you're supposed to shore up the failings" is only a good argument if the fighter had more money to spend on gear than any other class.
Adjusting WBL by class would be one way to fix game imbalances. It feels quite unnatural and could lead to some serious complaining when it's time to divide loot, but it would be a simple and systematic way to address the martial/caster disparity. Reminds me of the different XP tracks back in AD&D. All in all, not a bad idea, but I'm sure it would be poorly received.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think people's argument that "the fighter is supposed to be gear dependent and that's how you're supposed to shore up the failings" is only a good argument if the fighter had more money to spend on gear than any other class.Adjusting WBL by class would be one way to fix game imbalances. It feels quite unnatural and could lead to some serious complaining when it's time to divide loot, but it would be a simple and systematic way to address the martial/caster disparity. Reminds me of the different XP tracks back in AD&D. All in all, not a bad idea, but I'm sure it would be poorly received.
It makes sense that it would remind you of the different XP tracks, considering that wealth in 3.X is an XP track. ;)
Anyway, you're right; skewing gear availability in martials' favor so that they can fill in the gaps in their capabilities would probably alleviate things quite a bit.
On the other hand, considering how many threads there are which decry the evils of the "magic-mart" and/or label any significant understanding of the wealth progression system as "player entitlement", I'm afraid you're also right that it would be poorly received.
And that's to say nothing of the headache-inducing narrative issues introduced by any kind of wealth-by-class paradigm. *shudder*