D&D has its roots in squad level wargames, the classes are designed to fill a necessary combat role (optional classes like ranger, paladin or bard may fill multiple roles with varying degrees of proficiency): There really weren't any character classes that could hack it for very long on their own, if you just dropped them in a module not specifically designed for them. If a DM were to make his own adventures for a single player, they would be tailored around that player's needs. The kind with no DM were really just glorified gamebooks) were balanced for a specific class, they usually had names like "Fighter's Challenge" or "Thief's Challenge" just to make it more obvious. The second edition solo play modules (by solo play I mean one on one.
Why restrict which class someone could pick, just because it might be harder to play that way? Either way any unbalance is from the core rules, not this game, or this games use of the rules. Its also trying to be a Dungron Crawl game, like Nethack and the like but with a first person graphics. Its a game for people who love/loved AD&D and want to play a computer game of it, in the style of Lands of Lore or Eye of the Beholder but with more depth in the use of the rules.i.e using all of the rules.
No one forced you not to play a Wizard or Rogue, the option was always there, but by doing so you would have a harder time.Īs additional information at the time TSR and SSI were all apart of the D&D company.this game is made by the same company who made the books. This is true both for the game and for the Single Play modules they had out there for AD&D. Playing with a single character is a viable option with all the characters, some are just harder to do, others are easier. It's not inappropriate use of them, this is what D&D is all about, doing what you want in a fantasy world.
0 kommentar(er)
