Is action movie combat practical on tabletop?

Omega · August 27, 2016, 02:21:38 AM

Quote from: Christopher Brady;915637What class? Never mind, several break the chain of 1 per 4 levels.

Interesting. Thanks.

So 5e follows a vaugly simmilar pattern. All classes except the Fighter and Rogue get 5. The fighter gets 7 and the Rogue gets 6. Though of course Feats are optional both as even existing, or being desirable to get every tick. Option Human gets one more. But might not be allowed. Kefra so far has been dropping all her ticks into stat points. Jan picked up one feat and has been going stats thereafter I believe.

Omega · August 27, 2016, 02:22:55 AM

Quote from: Willie the Duck;915643I really don't see how any of this relates to Pundit's point.

It might not. I was just curious the loadout 3e got.

But according to your tally. 3e characters get access to a fair number of ticks that they dont have to decide whether to spend on stat points or feats.

Christopher Brady · August 27, 2016, 02:25:58 AM

Quote from: Willie the Duck;915643That doesn't conform to 3e as I know it. Characters get 1 at 1st, and then 1 every 3. So 4 by 10, and 7 by 20. Add one more for human. Fighters get 11 more over 20 levels, wizards 5 more.

I really don't see how any of this relates to Pundit's point.

Every three? Sorry, remembered incorrectly. But I was responding to Omega.

As for Pundit's point, the real biggest issue was Monte Cook and his incorrect belief that D&D Magic was the whole point of the game (If that's the case, why not go the whole Ars Magica route and turn non-magic users into supporting characters, but the PC's get to be the Wizards and Clerics only, who can do it all anyway) and his misunderstand as to who Magic: the Gathering worked and the term 'Trap Card'. Which he then turned most feats into his understanding of making them bad decisions to choose, hence why the Fighter sucks as a class in general in 3.x

RPGPundit · August 30, 2016, 05:09:12 AM

Quote from: Christopher Brady;915647As for Pundit's point, the real biggest issue was Monte Cook and his incorrect belief that D&D Magic was the whole point of the game (If that's the case, why not go the whole Ars Magica route and turn non-magic users into supporting characters, but the PC's get to be the Wizards and Clerics only, who can do it all anyway) and his misunderstand as to who Magic: the Gathering worked and the term 'Trap Card'. Which he then turned most feats into his understanding of making them bad decisions to choose, hence why the Fighter sucks as a class in general in 3.x

That sounds about right.

Is action movie combat practical on tabletop?

Omega

Omega

Christopher Brady

RPGPundit