TOPIC: Re: Dragonscale

<br />Well, currently the only one with an 18 is the druid.  (Along with a 16, 14 and 14)  I would love to play a character with those stats.<br />

<br /><br />Go ahead and play him  =)

That would be an idea. Take the druid stats but apply them to the class of your choice.

<br />That would be an idea. Take the druid stats but apply them to the class of your choice.<br />

<br /><br />I was saying - play the Druid, not apply the stats elsewhere.  If you could do that, you should also be able to give the Druid (or any other character) the best armor, weapons, spells, and abilities any other class has.  And obviously that is unworkable. 

Don't see why. It dosen't necessarily follow that to do one you would need to do the other. It might be interesting to simply have one set of stats and apply them to each class with the numbers slotted where it makes sense.

<br />

<br />That would be an idea. Take the druid stats but apply them to the class of your choice.<br />

<br /><br />I was saying - play the Druid, not apply the stats elsewhere.  If you could do that, you should also be able to give the Druid (or any other character) the best armor, weapons, spells, and abilities any other class has.  And obviously that is unworkable.  <br />

<br /><br />This is one of the most common responses in Multiplayer games when someone starts complaining that another class is overpowered.  Tell them to "Go play the overpowered class".  The nice thing about TD is you don't have to spend 6 months leveling up the class you think is so good, just pick it.  <br /><br />Until most groups have druids, it seems obvious that most players don't think druids have an advantage. 

I still don't get that arguement. If every party did have a druid, would that mean we then adjust it? I'm sure every single party has a fighter right now. Would you then suggest that fighters should be downgraded?

<br />I still don't get that arguement. If every party did have a druid, would that mean we then adjust it? I'm sure every single party has a fighter right now. Would you then suggest that fighters should be downgraded?<br />

<br /><br />No what I am saying is that most parties do not feel the Druid are that advantaged over other characters.  If they did, would pick Druids ahead of something.  They might not pick them first or second but they are not even getting picked fifth, sixth or seventh.  <br /><br />As you are saying every party seems to takes a fighter, therefore every party must think fighters are pretty good.  I am not aware of any party who took a Druid and didn't take a fighter, so I would say people rate fighters as more valuable.  <br /><br />Given as rarely as Druids are being picked perhaps we need to give them even more ablities. 

<br />

<br />I still don't get that arguement. If every party did have a druid, would that mean we then adjust it? I'm sure every single party has a fighter right now. Would you then suggest that fighters should be downgraded?<br />

<br /><br />No what I am saying is that most parties do not feel the Druid are that advantaged over other characters.  If they did, would pick Druids ahead of something.  They might not pick them first or second but they are not even getting picked fifth, sixth or seventh.  <br /><br />As you are saying every party seems to takes a fighter, therefore every party must think fighters are pretty good.  I am not aware of any party who took a Druid and didn't take a fighter, so I would say people rate fighters as more valuable.  <br /><br />Given as rarely as Druids are being picked perhaps we need to give them even more ablities.  <br />

<br /><br />Errr, what?<br /><br />1) Have you actually seen the class pick stats for this year? To my knowledge, they haven't been disclosed. <br /><br />2) Why in the world do you think people pick classes based on power alone or primarily? I would think the main reason to have a fighter is simplicity. Most people absolutely refuse to play memorization classes for instance. In my group, everyone else refuses to play rogue because they don't want to do rogue traps.<br /><br />3) Again, assuming I'm wrong and you have seen stats for class picking that I've missied somewhere, was druid the lowest of all the classes? I would have wagered personally on monk, but the numbers are the numbers. I would also have guessed small numbers for other classes before druids. Could you repost the numbers or link to them? That aside, I would think it would be a poor idea to pump up those classes that are least picked. That dosen't seem like a good policy decision. I'm interested in finding out why you feel that would be a good way to judge classes. Wouldn't it mean shifts from year to year as choices change? How would that affect stability?

As a DM, I didn't notice a significant lack of druids.  However, my room was a puzzle room without a trap, so there were few opportunities for class specific actions, other than detect magic cast by wizards and bards.<br />

I think the lack of Druids isn't because of their power.  It's because:<br /><br />1) the Druid is a new class, <br />2) People don't understand what the Druid is capable of<br />3) the Druid isn't a "core" class (Fighter, Cleric, Wizard, Thief)<br />  This last one is the reason that despite being the weakest class (pre-boost) that the Wizard was selected so often.<br /><br />The Druid is a powerful class, no doubt (second most in my opinion).  The only thing that I am saying is that for most groups, it isn't "off the charts" in power or unbalancing for a group that has a Druid.  With several out of print URs, the Druid is capable of having the best Armor Class but AC is only one very small aspect of a characters power and only deals with personal survival and only from physical attacks and only when you are targeted, not trap damage.  This doesn't seem like a good reason to nerf a class.  <br /><br />The Cleric with 50 points of healing, however, in my opinion is unbalancing for a group.  And imagine how powerful the Cleric would be with the Druids stats.  :O

How is one character unbalancing for a group exactly?<br /><br />Isn't the Cleric using those healing points on the entire group?<br /><br />I think H is right - you line up all the individual stats and tell me something is not unbalanced.

<br />How is one character unbalancing for a group exactly?<br />Isn't the Cleric using those healing points on the entire group?<br />

<br /><br />Exactly.  The Cleric is using his healing on the group.  This makes the GROUP significantly more powerful.  Its like adding 3 more people to the group for damage sponges.  Its like loaning a player 2 Common, 2 Rare, and 2 Ultra Rares healing tokens for free if they chose a class that has one of the best ACs in the game and does decent damage.  And if the Cleric only used the healing on themselves?  They have the equivalent of what, 66HPs?  A Cleric who chooses to be is basically invulnerable.<br /><br />Its less of an issue because nearly every group takes the Cleric so the dungeon can be designed assuming the Cleric is there.  But if a group ever decided not to pick a Cleric?  Ouch!  They would seriously feel the pain more so than missing any other class, including the Druid.<br />