You know why fighter sucks?
Not because linear vs quadratic - D&D is Ivory Tower, so it is understandable that there is a class that has less options, but is easier to play. It's not even magic vs mundane, because this dilemma hurts the system as whole, not just classes.
Fighter sucks because he has no substance, period.
Look at the goddamn name of this class - fighter, a person who fights. Any creature that lives through aggression is a fighter - barbarian is a fighter, even blaster caster is a fighter, they fight for a living after all. I could never understand why such a generic term is applied to a PC class, yet more appropriate "Warrior" is the name of NPC class, which is generic flavor- and crunch- wise. PC class should be a professional combatant, like soldier or mercenary, more to do with a warcraft, not simply a guy who wields a sword.
Same goes for his mechanics. His "menu" is feats, but everyone has those, it's just he can hoard more of them. There is nothing peculiar about this class, he has no rage, no favored enemy. His training bonuses are just that - flat numbers mostly, no interesting tricks or special abilities. Yes, as I said, fighter should be straightforward to play, but it doesn't mean he shouldn't have his own shtick. Something akin to rogue talents, but more combat-oriented, perhaps?
>>47641941
>needing all this fancy mumbo jumbo shit
Fighter is the pure essence of violence distilled to perfection and given form. Fighter is fight.
Everyone else like wizards and bards just make play at fighting.
>>47641962
>he thinks chopping up a few fleshbags at a time with a sharp piece of metal is violence perfected
haha don't mind me, ill just be exploding entire armies at once
>>47641999
>needing magical mystical bullshit to kill enemies
>not cutting down entire armies by yourself
Casters are just tools of the mystical. Fighters are the ones who wield their weapons.
>>47641999
>spontaneous exploding
>more violent than primal man on man aggression and conflict
Nigger that's like saying a heart attack is more in your face than literally punching someone in the face and then ripping out their heart.
>>47641941
Daily reminder it's 2016
>>47641962
No fancy mumbo jumbo, just his own thing.
Heck, I wouldn't mind flat bonuses if they were more broadly applied, like for specific maneuvers, on saving throws, etc.
>>47641941
>D&D is ivory tower
3.5E is and it's not D&D in essence even if in name.
>>47642015
something something sorcerors
>>47641999
>chopping up a few fleshbags at a time
>a few
>>47642022
ok but why just spontaneous exploding? I mean, can't wizards do literally anything in d&d? I've never played the game myself but like, can I not just wish an entire asteroid into existence and blow up the entire planet we're on?
>>47641941
Fighters should get to move and full attack, move and attack everyone along the way, and move and full attack everyone along the way. (For archers: shoot everyone in sight as a full attack.)
I would also suggest that they get swift action attacks, spell resistance, and spells-that-dont-allow-spell-resistance resistance, fear effects, fear immunity.
Then I'd throw in some abilities to help them get to the fighting, such as being able to jump 200ft, smash through walls of force/ice/bullshit, free movement across slippery surfaces, spider webs, balance beams, etc.
In addition to the even-level permanent feats that define personal combat style, there should be odd-level floating feats that can be reselected with an hour's training that describe situational practice.
>>47642026
3.5 and PF are still popular as hell.
>>47642022
... nigger you're trying to tell me being in a dude's face in violent? being in a dude's face is being in a dude's face, now don't get me wrong ripping a dude's organs out is violent but i don't know how you gonna tell me it is more violent than exploding that dude and also every other dude hard enough you couldn't find their organs if you tried
>>47642015
>Fighters are the ones who wield their weapons.
Yes, fighters are the ones who wield magical weapons created by the casters.
>le fighta iz bad cause he's got only feats
>every other pure martial (at ex barb)is as weak as him despite having unique abilities
Makes perfect sense
>>47642130
It's not about weak or strong.
>>47642130
in PF at least barbs are flat-out better than fighters despite still being low-tier because they have at least some utility - but they're still designed with the notions of "balance" and "realism" in mind while casters...aren't
That is the problem really, martials are at the mercy of a game designer playing with a corded mouse trying to decide whether yanking a weapon cord should be a swift action or a standard one, while wizards get to create a demiplane of nukes populated by neutronium golems at will because "well they're wizards!"
>>47642130
Fighter was always always always the bottom of the barrel in 3.PF, right up until recently when they started getting decent shit.
Rogue is much in the same boat desu so maybe you got a point there.
>>47641999
I'm sorry to hear you're too weak to RIP AND TEAR, casterfag.
>>47641941
>Fighter sucks because he has no substance, period.
No, fighter also sucks because he has really fucking massive gear dependency, and his shtick is highly counterable in non-fighter ways.
Make the mage similarly gear-dependent and counterable in non-mage ways, and the situation improves.
We've taken for granted too long that when the mage casts (insert buff) then his buff is up and everyone else just has to suck it up unless they are another mage who took Dispel Magic, which sucks. So here's a fix to this: Each buff requires a separate focus/talisman/channel/holy symbol/etc. Focus must be worn to keep buff up. Focus is not itself affected by buff. Focus has a minimum size and visibility. Focus is destructible. Focus is expensive to buy/create. Focus is attuned to a specific spell - want a different buff, get a new focus. Experienced mages look like pic related, decked out in spell-supporting bling.
Mages who can buff with Immunity to Everything, Protection from Everything, and Animal's Everything shouldn't be possible to mistake for commoners any more than Greatsword Mithrilplate Towershield Guy. And their spells shouldn't be immune to fighter removal any more than fighter's gear is conveniently exempt from mage removal. A mage with Death Ward up has his skull-bling glowing bright silver, and the fighter can sunder, disarm, or just shoot the damn thing off. Fly? Shot off, hope you packed featherfall. OH WAIT, I JUST SHOT YOUR FEATHERFALL FOCUS TOO, ENJOY THE FALLING DAMAGE.
(Protection from Arrows? Okay, shoot the PfA focus first; this is why focuses are not themselves affected by their own buffs. No, you can't cast a buff twice to have each focus cover the other.)
>>47642190
*casts Haste, Bull's Strength, Giant Form, Iron Body*
*teleports behind u*
heh...too slow kid
>>47642219
Goddamn, it is not Casters vs Martials thread!
>>47642219
that makes no sense. if the focus is just a small object, how is it not protected from arrows? just that one fucking spot on your robe is not protected?
also despite not making sense, it's funny because if everything you described was in the game, wizards would still be bullshit
>>47642228
>this entire post, interpreted unironically, is literally casters doing what casters do in the game known as "dungeon dragons three and a half"
wish i played that vampire edge game instead cuz evidently dnd is edge central with mages unsheathing their double buffs and teleporting behind u
>>47641941
But anon, martials having abilities is:
a) anime
b) MMO
c) just making martials casters
A martial should ONLY ever be able to stand in front of the enemy and swing his sword around for six seconds at a time. A person with supposed nigh-superhuman levels of physical fitness and martial skill being capable of tripping enemies, throwing his sword or employing different combat maneuvers and tactics without building entirely around one ability and sacrificing everything else? That's some weeb anime shit brah!
>>47642238
As if it was ever going to be anything else. Fighters don't suck in a void. Fighters suck because you're mentally benchmarking them against god tier casters with a million options and no dependencies (well, sometimes the spell component pouch, which is sixteen kinds of bullshit).
Not that >>47642219 is doing shit to fix the problem other than give casters a place to spend money though.
>>47641941
>>47642306
uh HELLO my friends are all NORMIES I couldn't get them to play fucking REAL GAMES if my livelihood depended on it
>>47642240
Think of the spell focus like an umbrella: it can keep you out of the rain, but it can't then keep itself out of the rain.
>>47642315
Just give them something with very few rules and see what happens. "normies" usually means people with a good sense of humor and enjoyable to be around so they'd probably take to easier things like Everyone Is John, Barbarians of Lemuria, Risus, or Fiasco well.
>>47642322
so, can it block arrows from behind you?
>>47642334
we play a lot of fiasco and also party games like everyone is john. but i was actually lying about the part where i implied my friends play dnd with me, i don't play hardcore tabletops with anyone anymore. fucking normies
>>47642283
>Fighters suck because you're mentally benchmarking them against god tier casters with a million options and no dependencies
>Not because linear vs quadratic - D&D is Ivory Tower, so it is understandable that there is a class that has less options, but is easier to play.
>>47642280
Are you being ironic?
>>47642376
yes he is being ironic you fucking dipshit
>>47642376That you have to ask is by itself indicative of the problem. Yes that was ironic.
>>47642363
Suppose Loki shows up doing some lulz, and offers me a choice between fifty million dollars and twenty million pocky packets (the pocky packets cost $2.50 each in a store).
I'm taking the money, because it represents more options. With the money, I can buy enough pocky to enjoy and still do a lot of stuff other than pocky. Asking why the fighter sucks and saying it's not because they have less options is like asking why taking the pocky sucks, and you're not allowed to compare it to money.
>>47642387
>>47642399
Hold your horses - on multiple occasions I saw posters who actually were serious with those claims.
>>47641941
I always pictured fighters as the pragmatic, down-to-earth types of the martials. No higher calling, no obsequious moral codes, no loyalties, just someone trying to get ahead with the tools they've been given.
This is why other apellations fail. A warrior fights for glory. A soldier fights for their country. A knight fights for their Lord. What does a fighter fight for?
A fighter fights to survive. A fighter fights to get by, day by day, in a world where security and sustenance is paid for in bloodshed. A fighter fights because when your so-called brothers-in-arms shun you, and your country forsakes you, and your Lord or King or God or whoever else you foolishly gave your body in service to betrays you, he is sure of one thing: everything bleeds /somehow/.
A fighter fights because the day he stops is the day he lays down in the street and finally lets this wretched, perverse world tear him apart. And that day is /not today/.
>>47642054
easy there Sephiroth
>>47642506
Yes, fighter weaker than the wizard, we all know that, thank you.
Yet I never tried to compare the two in my post.
>>47642572
The thing is - it can be applied to a lot of different classes.
>>47642306
wrong pic
>>47642054
Meteor spell is shit.
Much better to create your own plane, mass teleport everyone there and turn them into your slaves.
>>47642219
>Fly? Shot off, hope you packed featherfall. OH WAIT, I JUST SHOT YOUR FEATHERFALL FOCUS TOO, ENJOY THE FALLING DAMAGE.
So how does one do "a wizard that is threat to the region" now?
I'm inclined to agree. I genuinely hate the fighter class. I wish we only had social class-classes
>>47641941
I give you a 4 out of 10 for subject matter inventiveness, 3 out of 10 for subtly, but 6 out of 10 for the amount of effort that went into writing all that at least.
Tips for next time; pick either a subject that doesn't come up over and over and over again and automatically sparks heated arguments and thus is an easymode target, or be subtler about your initial presentation.
My suggestion is the subtly first; it's sometimes pretty hard to come up with truly original troll topics but a good amount of subtly can really improve the overall quality of the trolling effort in general.
Your level of writing effort is really good though, that shows a lot of overall promise I think.
A big reason why fighters suck is a lack of knowledge on the part of both the players and, at least apparently, the developers of how awesome pure martial heroes can be. Western mythology is filled to the brim with pure martial warriors who through sheer grit, strength and skill could do impossible feats without an ounce of magic or divine blood.
Fighters should take inspiration from the Fianna, the elite warrior bands from irish mythology. These are the conditions to be admitted into the Fianna:
>No man was taken until he could defend himself from within a large hole in the ground up to his belt, with only his shield and a length of hazel rod. While nine warriors having nine spears and being a distance of ten furrows away from him let fly at him together. If he let anything past his guard and got hurt he was not accepted.
>No man was taken until he had woven his hair into many braids and he was set at a run through the woods, while the ones seeking to wound him were sent after him there having been just one forest bough between them at first. If he was overtaken and wounded he was not allowed entry, If his weapons had quivered in his hand he was not taken, If his hair was disturbed in any way out of its braiding he was not taken. If he cracked a dry stick under his foot as he ran he was not taken. He also had at full speed to jump a branch level with chest and stoop under one level with his knee without breaking stride or else he was not accepted. Also he had to extract a thorn from his foot without pausing in his stride or else he was not taken.
Again, this is just to get into the Fianna; they could all do this stuff, as like, a baseline, purely through training and physical prowess. That's what fighters should be like. They should have the same breadth of options as a wizard, but rooted in physical ability.
Go look up Kirthfinder.
Thank me later.
For all the bawling people do about 4e being the "video game edition" of D&D, it's always struck me that 3.X was more blatant about it.
Why? Because Feats are basically Perks from Fallout, if 90% of them sucked. It's basically a gamey mechanic that took away all the nifty things martials could do and locked them away.
>>47643089
>Western mythology is filled to the brim with pure martial warriors who through sheer grit, strength and skill could do impossible feats without an ounce of magic or divine blood.
Nah, they are always at least partially gifted with something more than usual and if not it's incredible plot armor and luck working towards their favor.
>Fianna
Fianna can't defeat wizards that can warp reality and create planes.
>>47643345
>Nah, they are always at least partially gifted with something more than usual and if not it's incredible plot armor and luck working towards their favor.
Yeah, and the wizard who is just a smart guy who studied magic at an arcane college doesn't really exist in mythology. It's basically a modern invention. Which is fine if you're willing to admit that DnD is a game that's become utterly divorced from its supposed literary and mythological precedents.
>Fianna can't defeat wizards that can warp reality and create planes.
That's because wizards can't do those kinds outside of Dungeons and Dragons and the literary realms spawned by it. It reshaped the way that people view wizards in the collective consciousness.
>>47643345
>Nah, they are always at least partially gifted with something more than usual and if not it's incredible plot armor and luck working towards their favor.
Also, there's no explaining Beowulf with that logic. Dude was just that ridiculous.
Cu Chulainn almost gets away with it, but he's technically descended from the Irish God of Light, even though he had human parents.
>>47643345
They beat the tuatha dé danann so hard they had to settle for a peace treaty where they got to live in the half of Ireland that was under the ground. And those were magicians powerful enough to make the underground a livable environment. Which is creating a plane, in DnD terms, because what's a door in the side of a hill that only fairies can open if not a portal to the feywild?
>>47643345
Gimme examples of mythological wizards that could do this shit.
>>47641941
There are plenty of goddamn games that have a fighter or warrior class whose entire gimmick is killing things with weapons and yet manage to have lots of cool abilities that are fun to use. Stop talking about this like it's still something that needs to be proved.
>>47643427
even pagan gods were kind of weaksauce compared to DnD wizards
>>47643410
>digging tunnels is creating a plane
>>47642228
>Fighter wins initiative
>Intereupts your spell
>Proceeds to double power attack your d4 ass
Frankly I think 4e did it right with the Fighter. You can argue that 4e screwed up Wizards royally, and that's a valid point of view, but there's no reason why you can't have a 4e Fighter in a game along with a 5e Wizard, except for the Wizard player feeling emasculated that he's no longer the start of the party at high levels.
>>47643491
Doesn't mean it's fair in a game where two people at level 7 should be of equal usefullness regardless of class.
>>47643449
You try digging your way into the halls of the sidhe.
>>47643392
>Yeah, and the wizard who is just a smart guy who studied magic at an arcane college doesn't really exist in mythology. It's basically a modern invention.
A wizard who is gifted by Gods and has secrets of the universe is a thing in mythology, hell even sorceresses is a thing. Their typical powers are more, curses, predicting future, alchemy, shapeshifting and blessings instead of fireballs though.
>Which is fine if you're willing to admit that DnD is a game that's become utterly divorced from its supposed literary and mythological precedents.
You were the one that brought analogy to mythology, I don't need to be told that modern fantasy has nothing to do with it other than some root connections.
>That's because wizards can't do those kinds outside of Dungeons and Dragons and the literary realms spawned by it.
Which is all of modern fantasy. Even in LOTR if Maiar are given freedom to fuck around they are basically nigh omnipotent angels.
>>47643549
>Which is all of modern fantasy. Even in LOTR if Maiar are given freedom to fuck around they are basically nigh omnipotent angels.
Maiar aren't mortals, though. There's a big difference between the divine and the mundane.
>>47643549
No caster in mythology, ever, is not descended from gods, devils, demons, or other inhuman sources.
>>47641941
Fighter's just a poor boy.
Though his story's seldom told,
He has squandered his resistance
To a thread full of mumbles,
Such are the posts
All lies and jest
Still, a man hears what he wants to hear
And disregards the rest.
Never left his home
Nor his family,
He was no more than a boy
In the company of strangers
In the quiet of the local game store,
Playing scared,
Playing slow,
Seeking out the poorer tables
Where the newbie players go,
Finding just the That Guys
Only hell could grow.
Asking only for some pages
He came looking for a game,
But he gets no offers,
Just a come-on from the whores
Of some twisted homebrew
I do declare,
There were times when I was so
lonesome
I played some homebrews there.
Then he's laying out his larping clothes
And wishing he was gone,
Going home
Where the Wizards of the Coast
Aren't bleeding him,
Leading him,
Going home.
In the store still stands a fighter,
A warrior by his trade
And he carries the reminders
Of ev'ry spell that knocked him down
And killed him till he cried out
In his anger and his shame,
"I am leaving, I am leaving."
But the fighter, still he games
>>47643427
I didn't bring the mythology comparison
>>47643549
But there are wizards like Väinämöinen, obviously they can not create planes, but "planes" was not a thing for many cultures much less creation of fucking planes. Again there are wizards that can manipulate weather time and luck, bless and curse fields and bring back people to life, shapeshift etc.
>>47643587
>Fighter's just a poor boy.
From a poor family.
>>47643585
Of course all of the wizards have some divine providence or some form of a blessing, they are magical after all, but magical talent is also a thing in most of the settings.
Merlin is not technically descendant from any sort of outright divine deity and same goes for a lot of mages from literally.
Magic as a concept was not even a thing back then, but again wizards in most of the settings are special, they are almost never people who learn magic from just reading books and have some form of arcane talent and often times literally only certain people can be wizards.
>>47643602
>Väinämöinen
literally a god
>>47643643
>Merlin is not technically descendant from any sort of outright divine deity and same goes for a lot of mages from literally.
Merlin is the offspring of a human woman and a demon.
The point I'm trying to make here is that over time the concept of wizard has gone from "wise dude who has prophetic visions and can maybe brew a love potion" to "almighty conduit of cosmic power", while Fighter has basically stayed the same from Basic to 5e, with 4e being a shining exception.
There's nothing wrong with a Wizard having that kind of power, but the Fighter (and for that matter other martial classes) should be equally elevated at high levels. A high level fighter should be able to salmon-leap over a gorge or fight underwater for a full day or be so physically mighty that his body radiates heat enough to turn water to steam.
>>47643727
I am okay with this, majority of fighter players are not okay with this though.
They want Fighter to both be absolutely mundane and somehow be able to lift a mountain.
If fighters become okay with being magical than sure.
>>47643762
>They want Fighter to both be absolutely mundane and somehow be able to lift a mountain.
Only caster players want fighters to be mundane. I have no problem with weeaboo fightan magic or demigod bloodlines
>>47643345
In the Bible, there was Samson, who was a regular dude that murdered a thousand soldiers using only the jawbone of a donkey.
>>47643792
>>47643762
They need to shift their perceptions then.
The stuff I'm describing is not "magical" in the sense of how magic in DnD works. Magic in DnD is the product of a spell cast by a dude who has learned magic or is somehow inherently magical, or is from a divine being. The abilities I'm describing are physical abilities honed by otherwise non-magical dudes who were just that powerful.
>>47643800
The argument against Samson is that his strength was divine in origin. He's like some sort of hybrid Fighter-Cleric. In 4e maybe he'd be an Avenger.
>>47641941
>Fighter sucks because he has no substance, period
That's kinda inevetible when the fighter's options boild down to "I hit it with my weapon". Which is not quite what happens in tabletop because we always can improvise, but fighters generally have less mechanical options than casters.
I'm not that well versed with different tabletop systems, so I'll use videogames as an example.
Look at early JRPGS, where the only option for a fighter is to select the "attack" option in the menu. The caster on the other hand has an entire toolbox behind the "magic" command.
Now look at modern action rpgs like Dark Souls or Dragon's Dogma. Here fighters have much more option because different attacks are faster and can hit different parts of the enemy. And the caster can also be disadvanteged because their lightning strike doesn't hit the vulnerable belly of the enemy, but it's back.
If you want fighters to be balanced, you need to give them the options to be adaptable to the situation. Because you're other option is to give them absurdly high numbers while the mages get the versatility for everything that isn't combat.
If fighters have a similiar number of options to casters in the field, not just in making the characte build, then you can fine tune either of them much more easily. Though I have no idea how to implement that in tabletop without overloading the system with crunch.
>>47643848
>He's like some sort of hybrid Fighter-Cleric
I realized I just described a Paladin. I'm dumb.
>>47643800
>>47643848
samson was definitely a barbarian mechanically. he would just be some kind of divine subclass of the barbarian, like a totem warrior but with god.
>>47641941
Recently it occured to me that instead of more feats the fighter class should get a spell list uniquely their own. Earthquake, or sundering strike, or a tornado they form with their weapon. Maybe a screech to disrupt spellcasting. If a fighter can attack 4 times in 6 seconds I don't see any of this being a problem.
>>47643971
This is basically the DnD 4e Fighter, and he's awesome.
>>47641941
I agree the fighter is a bad concept for a class. Every class is a fighter, the fighter is the only one who is stuck ONLY being a fighter.
The current "fighter" should really be a subtype of a broader class.
>>47643800
>>47643903
He was very clearly divine powered because cutting his hair literally made him lose powers
>>47641941
Fighters doesn't suck.
Class systems suck.
>>47643848
>The abilities I'm describing are physical abilities honed by otherwise non-magical dudes who were just that powerful.
You are describing something that does not exist in a DnD as a setting. It is literally impossible for a human being to become skilled enough to lift mountains.
I am fine with class becoming stronger via shit that is in the setting, but what you are saying is an absolutely different fucking setting.
Go play exlated or something.
>>47644135
i (>>47643903) didn't say otherwise. but he wasn't a spellcaster and his abilities are basically the same as a barbarian, which is why a divinely-empowered barbarian would be more suitable than giving him cleric levels.
>>47644155
DnD is a system, not a setting. Eberron and Dark Sun are settings. DnD is a system for exploring a fantasy world and killing fantasy monsters and taking their gold. Granted it's a system that's designed around a specific range of settings, but the point I'm getting at is that the system itself is wanting because it doesn't embrace the totality of human fantasy and mythology.
For the record, "lifting mountains" isn't something a fighter should be able to do, but by the same token high level wizards shouldn't be able to do a lot the stuff they're capable of either, at least in my book. But I'm willing to let that slide for tradition sake.
I think there's a clear difference between "can literally lift mountains bare handed" and "fighting so hard that you cause a river to change its course". One is in actuality a godlike feat, the other is exceptionally mighty.
And for the record, here's the reference to that, from the fight between Cuchulainn and Ferdiad:
>Such was the closeness of the combat they made, that they forced the river out of its bed and out of its course, so that there might have been a reclining place for a king or a queen in the middle of the ford, and not a drop of water was in it but what fell there with the trampling and slipping which the two heroes and the two battle-warriors made in the middle of the ford.
>>47643549
>>47643602
But here's the thing. While there might be examples of mythological wizards doing all sorts of things, rarely is there an example of one wizard doing all the things.
One might be really good at charms and hexes, while another might only really be good at controlling the whether.
A D&D Wizard is good at literally any type of magic he picks up, and can swap each day. One day he can be the greatest seer in the realm, and the next he's a master pyromancer. He can easily swap between summoning the beasts of the forest, summoning demons at little cost, conjuring walls of metal, and tricking people with illusions all in the same day.
Even specialty wizards tend to have insanely broad skillsets compared to most fictional examples.
>>47644287
>One is in actuality a godlike feat, the other is exceptionally mighty.
That's still a demigod worthy feat. especially since Cu'Chulainn is a fucking both incarnation of a God and son of a God.
>>47644386
There are several systems and settings that deal with this.
Settings where everyone is extremely magical and strong enough fighter can legit lift mountains because he is magical, to the point where people are born with certain spells like Elder Scroll.
Settings where wizards can do only specific shit which is easy to do even in DnD and you can both homebrew it or find a book that suits your type of magic since it's the most widely supported game out there.
There are settings where characters are basically gods like Exalted.
There are settings where classes are basically their own games, like World of Darkness so despite Mage being objectively stronger, you won't have to deal with it.
etc.
Caster vs Martial problem in DnD is not a problem because there are billion solutions out there.
>>47644155
Friendly reminder that DnD is not based in a setting. It has several settings based on it, but it is merely a ruleset, which is why they can add races to it wily nilly and the settings have to come up for reasons why these races are suddenly a thing.
>>47644427
>It's not a problem because their are a billion solutions
Except if you have to SOLVE it, it is a problem by definition.
>>47644393
ferdiad wasn't though
>>47644450
YOU have to solve it, I've never had any problems with any DnD edition ever.
>>47643989
Not exactly. The triumph of the 4e Fighter was that it didn't do any obviously supernatural shit, and yet was effective and fun to play at all levels.
>>47644393
Yeah but Ferdiad was just a dude, and he almost killed CuChulainn until CC's bros showed up to heal him and back him up, before Ferdiad killed them too in 3-on-1 combat.
It kinda reminds me of Arjuna and Karna, where Arjuna is the hero and favored of the gods and Karna is ostensibly the villain in the story, but Karna is actually a much better fighter and Arjuna only wins by cheating.
>>47644475
Ignoring a problem doesn't mean it doesn't exist
>>47644499
It's not a problem for me or my party because it was sort of natural in our minds that
>yeah, wizards should be more powerful than martials in this game
I guess we played 3.5 too much back in the day.
That being said you are forgetting the other more logical solution to lategame fighter that ADnD had.
Make Fighter basically a lord with an army.
>>47642774
Honestly, I never tried to boil it down to MUH CASTERS, I'm pretty sick of this stuff myself.
I had some complaints about this peculiar class, I didn't try to compare it, or something like that, just wantet to discuss the fighter.
Yet those faggots and their wizard...
>>47644525
>Make Fighter basically a lord with an army.
Did ADnD actually have rules for how this was supposed to work though? Or was it basically "Okay now play Chainmail", since that's what DnD evolved from in the first place.
Back in ADnD it wasn't a problem anyway since Wizards weren't all that powerful in the first place.
Why do we keep having this same thread over and over again?
...
Why do I keep reading them.
>>47644584
Sort of. I remember there being tables for Fighters getting men at 9th level.
>>47644525
You misunderstand. I'm not suggesting fighters should be demi-gods, and having an army pales in comparison to things high level casters can do in 3.5, and doesn't fit every character.
What I'm trying to point out is that the idea that wizards should be as strong as demi-gods just because of magic is flawed thinking.
You can easily have wizards not be that in order to have them be even with fighters. Imagine if the Wizard class only learned two low-level spells, but still got as many spell slots. They could do two amazing, fantastical, but still relatively weak effects many, many times per day.
Would that not be a wizard in your eyes? Do wizards have to be synonymous with unlimited cosmic power for them to seem realistic to you?
>>47644596
I like these because I could talk about how awesome mythological martial heroes are all day. You don't even need to go all anime about it, it's embedded in the misty origins of western culture.
>>47644621
>Do wizards have to be synonymous with unlimited cosmic power for them to seem realistic to you?
No, wizards are not that of course but I love there to be wizards like that out there, same way I love some fighters imbued with cosmic power to be out there.
Here comes the biggest difference probably, while I love low level plays often time than not me and my group and up playing super high fantasy shit because we love the antics of blowing up buildings and hurling mountains if possible.
>>47644655
And that's exactly why if the system sacking forces wizards to become demi-gods, it should do the same to fighters. It shouldn't have one quickly become one while the other lags behind.
>>47644621
There's no need to curtail other player's power fantasies. If the wizard player wants to have that kind of ability and it's fine with the GM, then there's no reason why he shouldn't be able to do it.
The problem comes in begrudging the guy playing the Fighter the same rights because it doesn't fit into the Wizard player's worldview.
The argument that "magic is rare but swords are common" is invalid because even if only 1 out of 100,000 people in a setting can be a wizard, that hardly matters when every party of player characters probably has at least one Wizard.
How fast does a martial need to be to realistically beat a wizard? Is it possible or practical to go for speed over power?
>>47642080
I always thought the Monk was a good example of what the Fighter should be in a world in which magic is shooting out of everyone's ass and most of the classes have spellcasting.
You train so hard at beating the shit out of dragons, demons, and wizard that you get awesome saving throws, the ability to bypass damage reduction with your fists, win a wrestling matcch with a giant while buck naked, ability to survive falls from great heights, and the ability to just flat out hit a guy so hard that he dies.
>>47642184
>Rogue is much in the same boat desu so maybe you got a point there.
Rogues at least get assloads of skills so they can effectively do more in the game than "I roll to hit/do damage."
>>47644706
It needs to pick one or the other. Personally, I would suggest bringing down Wizards quite a bit from where they are in 3.5, as that level of power leads to some really difficult times for the DM.
That's not to say they should be at Fighter level though, as Fighters should also be brought up to be more suitably heroic.
This is mostly a matter of taste about power levels at that point, but they should at least pick one and stick with it. If the game is going to present mundane, realistic fighters as a viable class option, the magic level of the setting should line up with that.
>>47642219
>Called shots in D&D
Also, 5e introduced concentration, so the whole issue of stacking buffs that can never be removed is essentially gone.
>>47644721
This. Monks have always bothered me because they basically gain superpowers through thinking about shit. If the monk isn't bound by the constraints of reality why should any of the other martial classes?
>>47644733
rogues were passable in 3e (compared to other martials) but ended up really shitty in pathfinder
>>47644721
>and the ability to just flat out hit a guy so hard that he dies.
This drives me crazy. If a wizard can cast a save-or-die spell on a dude, shouldn't a Fighter be able to force a save-or-die against being hip-to-shoulder bisected?
>>47644720
Depends on the wizard and the nature of the fight.
>>47643451
> implying that the wizard doesn't have a Contingencied Teleport ready to take him back to his base when a puny martial tries to hit him with a slab of iron
>>47645242
>Wizard sets contingency to teleport him home whenever he gets attacked
>Fighter hires kids to throw rocks at him whenever they see him
>>47645269
>Wizard uses invisibility
>Now the kids can't see him
>>47645269
>>47645310
Better yet:
>Disguise Self as Fighter
>Find kids
>Insult them, spit in their faces, tell them the deal is off.
>>47645310
>Wizard has to hide from children for fear of being sent home
Alternatively surprised and teleported out by his own spell since he has no idea it's meant to happen. I honestly wouldn't be worried about a guy I can send packing by shooting a single arrow his way.
>>47645345
>Do this after the fact
>Still got sent packing by a bunch of kids
>Also a massive dickhead
>>47645310
>kids just start throwing rocks at everyone because fuck it they're getting paid
>>47641941
>You know why fighter sucks?
Because their total physical supremacy and mastery of their own body makes them literal gods of sucking?
>>47645359
>Paying children to throw rocks at people you dislike for being better than you
>Not being a massive dickhead
>>47645415
Not really though. No motivation given for the fighter, and the rocks don't do anything beyond show the guy what a dumb option he chose for contingency.
>>47645242
>implying contingency teleport doesn't trigger after the triggering event
>Wizard still has a fucked up sword wound and now can't do whatever he was in town to do
>>47645443
>>47645482
This is why the better option is a contingencied Time Stop to trigger when somebody targets you with an attack.
Then you have a couple turns to react to the problem, leave behind a suitable answer, and then teleport away if you're in danger.
>>47645443
And no motivation was given for the wizard. I think disguising himself as the fighter and firing them rudely is a perfectly reasonable response.
You don't get to hire kids to throw rocks at people and then complain when someone tricked your rock-throwing squad into hating you.
>>47645502
>This is why the better option is a contingencied Time Stop to trigger when somebody targets you with an attack.
First of all doesn't work, max level 6 spell for contingency. Second 'targetting you with an attack' isn't a thing in universe. Your character's setting the requirements, not you.
A better option is contingent Resilient Sphere, protecting you with a Wall of Force, albeit at the cost of not being able to cast through it.
>>47645548
Not complaining, wizard's still a bellend though.
>>47645569
>Your character's setting the requirements, not you.
Oh good. Then I have my character with their superhuman 20+ intellect draft up a contingency phrase that functions exactly how I want it to.
>>47645569
>wizard's still a bellend though
Less than the fighter, who tried to stab him, got upset when it didn't work, and spent money to ruin that guy's day.
If anything, the Wizard is just showing the kids how big of an asshole the Fighter is. He could do much, much worse.
>>47645614
Alrighty, so you still can't metagame and thus the contingency still doesn't trigger when someone targets you, or the wizard drafts up a complicated phrase to that effect, in which case it may fail too, as per the Contingency spell.
On top off that, 'attack' might not even be a clear enough term in universe, though I'm not gonna use that as an argument here. Food for thought though.
Honestly I will never understand why anyone would want to play a fighter.
Every other class has some interesting feature like stealth, pickpocketing, backstabbing, animal companions, spellcasting, turning undead, shapeshifting etc...
The fighter? He just hits stuff with his sword.
How boring.
>>47643532
This idea of fairness and equal outcomes is cancer, and I don't understand it.
In 2nd ed (Best Edition Desu!)
classes had different powers... and different experience required to go up levels.
Sure, it sucked that the rogue hitdie was only d6 but he needed half the xp to get to level 2 than the wizard.
So when the wizard is level 4, the rogues floating around lvl 6.5, and has an extra couple of hit dice, and suite of class powers....
Why do they have to be balanced, I really don't understand.... is this everybody gets a prize day?
>>47645715
Dungeoncrashers are fun as all hell. Rugby tackle guys into walls all day erry day, snap doors like twigs, so on so forth. Fighters in general are fun because of being able to do a lot of stuff like Decisive Strike, tripping, resisting grapples, ubercharging etc.
While with the exception of Decisive Strike and dungeoncrasher most other classes can do the same, fighters can do more of them.
>>47645734
Why are you giving an example of balance/fairness/equal outcomes or whatever you want to call it, talking as if it's a good thing, then arguing that balance is a bad thing?
>>47645734
Because it's a cooperative pretend game, not a busienss transaction or a sporting even. The goal of a game is for the players to have fun. Is it possible to have fun in an inherently unbalanced system? Sure is. Is it more likely that one player A will have less fun than player B because the rules are stacked against him? Absolutely.
If four people are all playing on the same side and they're all contributing to the game, then yes they should all get a prize. To say otherwise is grognardism of the basest caliber.
>>47645734
This cancerous mentality comes from kids being raised on WoW and esports.
Everything has to be balanced or they'll cry about it on the internet.
The result is that everything is homogenised and casual friendly garbage. Look what happened with 4e
>>47645715
With the rules-as-written in most editions of DnD, I absolutely agree with you. There's little reason to play the Fighter because they're not interesting and badly designed.
The argument being made here is that they could be so much better, and there's no reason for them not to be except for stodgy old nerds who refuse to believe that a guy who is a master of weaponry and physical training should have anywhere near the ability of a student of magic.
>>47645813
Yeah nobody had fun on OD&D
The only people who let balance get in the way of their fun are powergaming twats who need GTFO of the hobby
>>47645734
>the idea of balance is cancer
>here's an example of how things used to be balanced
>see how balance is bad now?
>>47645849
>Look what happened with 4e
We got a reasonable teamwork based system where all the characters had similar capabilities, but different abilities?
Sure it was a lot more combat-oriented than other editions, but wasn't too many out of combat rules and not enough abstraction one of 3.5's many failings?
>>47645734
Because levels should be of equal value, otherwise it's a useless term. A level 4 rogue should add just as much value as a level 4 wizard. Otherwise how to you construct a party?
"Ok guys, I want to start the game at about midlevel so we can skip the boring quests. Everyone start at level 7."
"Ok guys, I want to start the game at about midlevel so we can skip the boring quests. Rogues start at level 8, fighters start at level 9, barbarians start at level 7, wizards start at..." and so on.
>>47645734
Because in 2e, while levels weren't equal, experience levels were. That is also a viable option.
I'd you present a level of one class as more valuable than a level in another, then it can work itself out. People think 'oh, obviously a level 3 wizard is better than a level 3 the if, because his levels are worth more XP'
The issue is when the game tries to pitch all levels in all classes as relatively even, and it's reflected in all the rules that was the intent, but there's a massive discrepancy. Nobody wants to play a game that sells itself as a teamwork dungeon crawl only for the Druid to solve all their problems
>>47645874
First off, it's not as if anyone had a choice back with OD&D, because it was the only game of its kind for years.
Secondly, OD&D is actually pretty well balanced, in the sense that everyone (except the fighter, ironically) was kind of terrible. Getting into a fight in that game was usually not ideal because it usually didn't really give you anything, since XP was Gold back then.
Sure, the Fighter could only attack, but he had the most Hit Dice and was the only class who got bonuses from STR and CON. The Wizard could do cool stuff but his access to spells was completely random and utterly up to the whim of the GM. Rules-as-written wizards had no control over what spells they knew-- their starting spells were random or decided by the GM, and learning new spells was dependent upon finding scrolls or whatever, which again was random or up to the GM.
Spells like Sleep weren't the Wizard going "guys stand back I got this", it was "Oh crap there's a beholder behind that door and we're all mostly dead, we need to leave this dungeon NOW."
>>47645855
Even if you made fighters invincible, it's still just a guy hitting things with a sword. They don't do anything else.
Fighters are just boring from both a flavour and gameplay perspective.
Hell, if you want to play an interesting martial class then play a Ranger or a Pally. At least they get spells, animal companions and have some lore behind them.
>>47645918
Not him, but for 2e the answer would be starting everyone at the same XP value. If you have them all begin at 700 or something, the thief might be level 5 while the wizard is level 3.
Levels only have to be even when experience is also even
>>47645954
OD&D is better than anything that's published these days.
>>47645954
Fighters also had the best saves back then, which meant they were way better at tanking through everything.
You also had Wizards casting multi-round spells that were easy to interrupt, so while they could solve things, a single guy throwing darts could seriously shut them down.
>>47645978
This is hyperbolic, but the thing is that OD&D is still kind of great. It's full of dumb broken rules and ridiculous stuff that nobody would actually, like the designated party caller, but there's beauty in its relative simplicity.
>>47645896
4e is just as ivory tower based as 3.5
Unfortunately, D&D these days just attracts power gamers and that guys.
Ask yourself when was the last time you had a D&D session where no combat occured?
>>47645978
No it's not.
>>47646045
Prove me wrong. 3.PF and 4e are shit.
>>47646023
>4e is just as ivory tower based as 3.5
Not really, since most options are fairly evenly balanced with one another.
I agree that dnd in general is mostly combat, but simultaneously some want rules for *everything* beyond just 'make up a skill challenge', and that's where 4e falls flat. It doesn't bother me personally, but I can see it as a criticism.
>>47646023
>4e is just as ivory tower based as 3.5
Not even remotely. A new player building their character alone, just using the options the book suggests without really optimizing, will still end up with a solid character that can contribute.
Someone doing the same in 3.5 could easily end up with something useless.
Similarly, optimizing in 4e gives you a nice boost, but it's still not the sort of thing that will break the game over its knee. Strikers might do more damage, and others might have picked more useful buffs and conditions, but it's not some massive gulf like in 3.5
>>47646064
All of D&D is shit, including the glorified ancient turds that came out before 3.PF. Prove me wrong.
>>47646088
>>47646089
If all the options are equally balanced, what's the point of having options?
>>47646145
So you can make characters that do different things or excel in different ways?
I'm also not saying the balance is perfect. There are things in 4e that stand out as strong or weak. My point was that it's jot nearly to the same level as 3.5, since all the 4e classes can would easily fall within the same tier in 3.5
Fighters are fun. I enjoy picking feats which reflect the type of fighter my character is. I enjoy playing a relatively average Joe. I enjoy performing cool feats of strength and skill.
>>47645955
Because maybe someone might want to play a character who doesn't need magic or divine influence or a pet direwolf to do his fighting for him? Maybe he wants to kill dudes by chucking sling-stones through their brains or jumping across a river and landing on top of their shield before batting their heads off. Maybe that would be kinda cool.
The thing about DnD is that there are multiple classes, and it would be nice if they could all do cool things.
>>47646145
If 90% of the options in a game aren't worth taking, then why are they options at all?
>>47646145
Fuck, are you serious? You can't be serious.
>>47646212
I honestly don't understand why fighters are even still in the game.
When I think of martial archetypes...
>Barbarians are your brute strength Conan-types
>Paladins are your noble knights in shining armour
>Rangers are your archer archetype for the Legolas kiddies
Where exactly do fighters come in?
I honestly think that they should just remove fighters from the game. They really don't add anything to the game and don't really stand out or excel at anything.
>>47646272
Warlords?
Two ways about it
A) force wizards to rely on their spellbooks, wands and staffs., whatever they need to cast it. Once that source is gone they cannot cast said spell until they a new one. If the spell is chanted then allow them to remember only x amount of spells off by heart, wisdom increasing this.
B) sure you may have the xp to learn a spell, but you dont have the knowledge and preperation for it. Much like WOD wizards must spend a ton of time learning their new spells. Youre scholars not sorcerers.
>>47645955
So give the fighter something to make them interesting? It's almost like that's what the issue is. I said awhile back give them abilities like seismic stomp, or debilitating screech, or tornado. Hell, "shoot a piercing arrow in a direction: does damage to all enemies in a line" should be obvious.
>>47646104
INSULTS I CHOOSE YOU
>>47646286
Warlords aren't in 5e.
>>47645955
>Even if you made fighters invincible, it's still just a guy hitting things with a sword. They don't do anything else.
False. See dungeoncrasher/zhentarim fighter in 3.5. Yes they only do fighting, no they're not limited to just hitting things with a sword.
>Fighters are just boring from both a flavour and gameplay perspective.
That's more a mindset issue than anything. Gameplay they've got options (if only in combat), fluff wise playing a god of war who can surpass the paladin and the ranger with just their own skills can be fun in its own right.
I'm assuming 3.5 for this, please clarify if mean something else.
>>47645955
Try playing Kingdoms of Amalur. Martial in this vidya is done very right
>>47646314
Sounds like those abilities would better fit the Barbarian or the Ranger.
The Fighter is a redundant class.
>>47641941
Why do people still play 3.PF?
>>47646360
Look at this thread. As you can see, 3pfags have brain cancer.
>>47646378
It's hilarious how mad people get at the notion of people liking things they don't like.
>>47646272
Fighters are supposed to be Achilles.
Barbarian is Ajax.
Ranger is woodsman first, combatant second.
Paladin is defensive tank.
>>47646360
Because some people find itfunand pursuit offunis all that matters to some, with whether their game offers the right kind offunbeing unimportant.
You can't convey the intricacies of melee combat on a rpg if you don't want to waste 5 minutes explaining what exactly your character is doing that round
Learning to use a sword properly can take over a decade in real life. Using certain longbows physically REQUIRES years of practice so that you'll even develop the right muscles and strengthen your skeleton enough to draw it correctly
>>47646286
Thats barbarian or paladin territory
Fighters should be like the finesse swordsmen. Masters of specfic combat styles to the point where they can do ridiculous feats with them.
Like cutting arrows in half, parrying the deadliest of projectiles.
What should be the difference is that barbarians go on a nonstop rampage slaughtering everything near them.
Paladins should be gods tanks so righteous that trying to kill them is the like trying to cross no-mans land. They hit slow but hard.
A fighter should be someone so skilled in their art that trying to do damage to them is a fucking nightmare.
A fighter is effectively what a barbarian would be if he went full defense.
>>47646407
What's the difference between Achilles and Ajax in terms of gameplay?
>>47646450
Achilles was a master warrior-- untouchable in combat due first to his exceptional skill, but also literally untouchable because his body was 99% immortal.
Ajax was a madman, a berzerker who rushed headlong into battle and overwhelmed his foe with sheer aggression.
>>47646355
That's because you have weird ideas about those classes. A barbarian has no skill or class, he just flails about. But his flailing is so strong that it's effective anyway. Rangers are not masters of the bow. Hell, they arent even masters of combat. A ranger is a master of his environment and of knowing his enemy, both of which he uses to defeat opponents. A fighter surpasses them both in combat. A barbarian may take out three people in one turn, but the fighter will do the same without getting hit in the process. A ranger might shoot a guy through a gap in his armor, killing him, but a fighter will shoot through the armor, through the guy, and hit the guy behind him with lethal force.
I find it ironic you think barbarian is a legit class over fighter when barbarian used to be a subclass of fighter.
>>47646360
OP never mentions 3.pf. Way to read into things.
>>47646446
But if you argue that Fighters should be more agile and dextrous combattans then you're just turning them into Rogues.
I guess some people might want to make a samurai or something and pick the Fighter class but really that feels like it should be its own class in its own setting.
I honestly don't see where fighters fit in. There's nothing they can do that some other class doesn't do better.
>>47643989
But 4e just made everyone casters
>>47646503
I think the big thing is that Fighter used to ba a big overatching class that had any sort of similar things as variants and subclasses, while Wizards had a similar thing going.
It's just that the Fighter slowly got stuff removed and splintered off to make new classes and subclasses, while Wizards just kind of stayed as a class encompassing all mages forever.
>>47646538
>if you repeat a meme enough times, it becomes true.
>>47646503
>A barbarian has no skill or class
*tips fedora*
Sorry I couldn't help myself.
I'm getting what you're saying though. I think the main reason fighters are so boring is because weapons in D&D don't really feel different.
I feel like combat should feel different if you're wielding a rapier than if you're using a spear or a greatsword. That might make the fighter intersting as being a sort of "weapons master" of sorts.
But seriously, just giving the fighter spells like 4e did is not the way to go.
>>47646538
Low effort trolling.
>>47646355
I think barbarian and ranger should be made fighter subclasses
>>47646538
Nice meme
>>47645734
>In 2nd ed (Best Edition Desu!)
1. You never played 2e. Stop lying.
2. 2e is a clusterfuck of awful rules.
This thread is why I like REIGN as a system (and a setting), because it makes a much better go at balancing Martials vs Casters. A REIGN sorceror can grow wings or turn his bones into iron or do all sorts of crazy stuff, but still get his face kicked in by a skill fighter with enough points in his Counterspell Skill.
>>47646713
found the 4e babby
>>47646585
>I think the main reason fighters are so boring is because weapons in D&D don't really feel different.
it's partially this and partially because in 3.x/pf "different weapon styles" boil down to different sets of numbers on your full attacks via interminable feat trees that don't really interact with each other and often straight up stop working vs. most things you face at certain levels
in general though giving one class the ability to shit out all their super powerful limited shit in short succession vs. limiting a fighter to measured at-will stuff is very, very hard to keep equitable. one of these characters can react to situations that are lighter/heavier than normal and the other simply can't
also switching up weapon styles is arranging deck chairs on the titanic if the wizard can tell reality to go fuck itself with a 100% success rate in the space of 6 seconds
I play D&D for some time now and I never had this problem of caster overshinning anyone. Even during the 3.5 times.
The problem with these discussions is that everyone assumes that the wizard will always have the best spells prepared at any given time, like some kind of spell-Batman.
I can't count how many times a wizard got rendered useless by a lack of a spell in a given time, or got itself pinned under the paw of a giant creature.
This is a problem only if your DM is slow.
>>47646802
Keep pretending you enjoy that schizofrenic system.
Also, I find 4e garbage.
>>47644596
Because martial tears are delicious anon
>>47646713
I've played every edition of DnD, and 2e is up there. Once you get past THAC0, it's actually quite simple. There are optional supplements, but there isn't much to learn
>>47646805
Two words: Animal Companion
>>47646907
The problem with 2nd is that it doesn't have a ruleset. It has an 'exception-set'.
Every little thing has its own mechanism. It's borderline funny.
>>47646803
This is why you can never have a constructive discussion with martialfags.
You suggest ways to make martials more interesting but they just cry about casters.
Fighters just resent wizards and won't be happy until wizards are completely useless except for reading runes and lighting their staff to act as a torch.
>>47646950
Give some examples, because I'm struggling to thin of many things in 2e that are heavily defined like that
>>47646962
>Give bread an water to a starving man
>He still resents the fat man sitting next to him stuffing his face
>>47646981
>You roll for extraordinary strength, but there's no such thing as extraordinary intelligence or dexterity.
>Some races only go as high as that level in such class.
>Only humans can dual-class, only non-humans can multi-class.
>A lot of the ability scores don't matter unless they're very high.
>The combat maneuvers are very weird and each take at least 2 paragraphs to explain. They're all useless.
And so on. If you read the rules today you'll keep asking yourself 'why?' a bunch of times.
>>47646962
There's being useful and then there's being better at everyones job than they are.
>>47641941
Welcome back to 2003
>>47647137
a direct 3.x descendant is still one of the most major forces in tabletop design thought, we never left
>>47646962
Hey I'm all for wizards being able to do whatever they want, as long as fighters are similarly elevated. You can create planes or travel the multiverse or whatever, but let me fight uninterrupted for 72 hours, cleave boulders in twain, leap across canyons and melt ice instantly with my body heat.
>>47647068
Really? I never saw any of that as odd. Extrodinary strength gives a point between human and monstrous strength. Racial level limits assume you'll get to that point and the DM not just telling you to ignore it. Stats not having major effects with every point I really like, because it means the difference between 8 dex and 12 dex can be minor, rather than crippling.
I guess if you're working from a 3.5 mindset where rules are codified law it might get confusing, but it's very easy to adjust to.
>>47642129
>Casters are such cucks that they create weapons for alpha fighters
>Alpha fighters don't create anything for casters because fighters are not bitch boys
>>47647203
This is a pretty good point. Exhaustion could be worked into a checks and balances mechanic. Combat classes ignore it while everyone else suffers from overdoing it. You just cast 4 level 7 spells in a row? Your ass is exhausted from the effort. Meanwhile barbarians and fighters are on hour 37 of nonstop combat and still feeling fine, if a little bruised.
>>47647206
>it's very easy to adjust to.
And here's your problem. If you have to adjust the system (or to the system), I don't believe it's very good in the first place.
>Extrodinary strength gives a point between human and monstrous strength
Why not have a point between human and monstrous constitution?
>You can ignore racial limits
Why are they there in the first place then, if it's going to be ignored?
>Dex 8 and 12 are the same
Then why do they have such a huge gap?
It's the result of a mish-mash of diferent ideas and concepts old and new. The 3rd edition has more of a stronger personality.
2nd ed. is just silly.
>>47642685
the same way a single man can be a threat to a whole region: he wields a metric fuck ton of influence.
>>47647284
Exactly. 4e kind of tried this with the Healing Surges system but it wasn't well implemented and even more poorly explained, such that everyone playing thought that every character could just healing magic themselves up, not that surges represented one's supply of stamina.
>>47647284
this would definitely help as long as one spell isn't enough to effectively end an encounter, and as long as it's difficult to pop out to rest
>>47647331
a lot of that is that "healing surge" is a really shit name for it. 13th age just called them recoveries which is far more understandable from the word go
>>47645734
>So when the wizard is level 4, the rogues floating around lvl 6.5, and has an extra couple of hit dice, and suite of class powers....
Then it is balanced. It's just a 6.5 Rogue = a 4 Wizard.
>>47647331
Surges worked perfectly fine in game. The implementation was not at all the problem, though the presentation apparently was if everyone totally misconstrued their function and purpose.
Though 5e's hit dice do exactly what everyone thought healing surges did and no one bats an eye. I don't get it at all.
>>47641941
Mages master magic.
Monks master themselves.
Rangers master there enemy.
Berserkers master there rage.
Fighters master the fight.
>>47647540
4e's "flaws" were entirely in presentation. I've little doubt that the Powers and Marking systems would have largely been accepted had they been described in more flowerly, TSR-era language rather than as clean, bare mechanics. WotC severely misjudged their fanbase's need to feel like they're peering into a moldy tome of esoteric knowledge as opposed to the rulebook for a game.
>>47647644
>there
Stop that
>>47641941
The issue is that you think that the Fighter class is just for the new guy who can't understand the system. The Fighter class is for the inventive face of the party. The Fighter is your Star Killer or Captain America. The reason he is weaker is because if the player WAS a mage he would be too nuts and powerful. The Fighter should be the leader.
>>47647652
4e definitely has mechanical flaws but they're mostly in shit like feat taxes and not in AWED power structure or defining roles for classes
agreed that wotc definitely underestimated their fanbase's need for toilet reading. also the marketing around 4e was total garbage and wasn't taking into account paizo's counter-marketing
>>47647689
Sorry man English is my second language.
>>47641941
Fighter is different in the fact that it isn't special.
I'm currently playing a fighter for just that. I don't want my character to be magic, have a favored enemy, have rage, or any of this other shit. I want them to be an average joe who had to start fighting.
>>47647068
>You roll for extraordinary strength, but there's no such thing as extraordinary intelligence or dexterity.
I has nothing to say about it except that maybe str is the only tied to dmg so they needed for the fighter to do more dmg without being a carrying equipment monster? And without auto success in str abilities?
>Some races only go as high as that level in such class.
in ad&d2 that wasnt around? i dont remember clearly but yep it was stupid
>Only humans can dual-class, only non-humans can multi-class
Thats because demi human had long lives or some shit while humas were short lived but adaptable, but yeah that was because"muh realism" shit.
>A lot of the ability scores don't matter unless they're very high.
I actually enjoy this because you are gonna be able to play a carismatic figther without losing too much in fighting skills. Cos the weight of your ability is tied to your class.
>The combat maneuvers are very weird and each take at least 2 paragraphs to explain. They're all useless.
I liked more the AD&D combat stuff and is more simple that 3.5
Attack-> i attack
Parry i dont use an attack to do a contested roll to parry some guy.
And the others were simply -> you take a -4 to hit and the oponent do a ability roll or a sav roll.
Combat styles is the same:
Two handed weapon, more weapon speed.
Shield and sword: aditional attack with shiled ,can be a bash or extra parry, can parry arrows.
Two weapons: extra attack.
Bladesinging: weaboo elf swordmanship that cost points but let you change your tactics.
Honestly i found the 3,5 rules much more confusing at first.
>>47643800
Bad example, since his abilities were explicitly divine gifts.
A better example might be the Biblical figure Shamgar. Killed 600 Philistines with an ox goad. Though I suppose it's implied God aided him.
>>47647864
I'm not saying it's a bad system but please let's take off our nostalgia goggles. AD&D was a weird thing.
>>47647940
Every Hebrew warrior of epic power had God backing him up. That was sort of the point: they were supposed to rely on him instead of their own ability.
There were some decided non-epic guys who were probably excellent fighters like Joab, but they're most definitely the exception instead of the rule.
>>47641941
As disliked as it may be by some, PF Fighter got some neat improvements with the advanced weapon training
I was able to make pic related with the mutation warrior archetype wielding bastard swords pretty easily
>>47646023
Are you implying that if a group has combat every session, it's bad? What's wrong with combat?
>>47648107
Nothing is inherently wrong with combat. It's just that 4e focuses on combat almost exclusively.
Players are now rewarded for killing monsters wheras it used to be that you would gain far more experience for finding treasure, solving puzzles and actually roleplaying your character.
Combat was generally something you tried to avoid. Now players just look at the monster you're describing and see him as free XP because, after all, he must be balanced to their CR right, otherwise they wouldn't have encountered him.
D&D is meant to be more than just a miniature wargame.
>>47646515
the rogue was originally more of a thief, it has increasingly turned into a sneaky fighter. that's part of the problem really, the system has all the elements of a good fighter but they're spread across several different classes.
the fighter and rogue could be a single class, the system just draws an arbitrary distinction between combat skills and every other kind of skill.
>>47646145
There's this thing called "variety"
>>47648221
>D&D is meant to be more than just a miniature wargame.
lol
the same cr stuff applies to 3e too btw
Serious question, because this always kind of bugged me about the fighter vs wizard thing
Back in the earliest editions of D&D, if I remember correctly, the Fighting Man got himself a group of personal followers at higher levels. Once he reached epic level, he had his own steadying and was commanding around a small army of men loyal to him.
Why did later editions get rid of this? This always struck me as the obvious solution to how you match power with the casters at high level, but if anything each subsequent edition has moved away from this approach. Wouldn't it make sense to give the fighter his own retinue of soldiers and knights once he became a warrior of enough renown?
>>47648249
>the rogue was originally more of a thief, it has increasingly turned into a sneaky fighter
That's because D&D has increasingly become combat focused and, as a result, they needed to make the thief capable of doing more than just his initial backstab.
>>47648338
Why is that funny?
It shoudn't come as a surprise that some people want more focus on the narrative and immersion in a roleplaying game.
>>47648221
>Players are now rewarded for killing monsters wheras it used to be that you would gain far more experience for finding treasure, solving puzzles and actually roleplaying your character.
According to 4e's DMG you are rewarded xp for killing, tricking, sneaking past or otherwise overcoming monsters, succeeding at skill challenges, disarming traps, getting treasure or completing any given objective, or generally succeeding at any encounter where there is a risk of failure.
>>47648378
3e got rid of that sort of thing because 3e's major marketing gimmick initially was "back to the dungeon" ie stripping out all the management stuff
>>47648448
because of how much of the game pre-4e is centered around being a miniature wargame. most of the noncombat rules are an afterthought at best.
>>47648378
D&D was initially an addon to a wargame, so being able to control more units as you advance made sense. In later editions as the game got more focused on individual heroics, having a horde of minions was no longer thematically appropriate or even mechanically compatible.
>>47648221
Ah, but now you're abutting up against the thematic dissonance that's welled-up within DnD.
DnD was originally a homebrew spin-off from Chainmail, which was indeed a minatures game. The expected way you played was for the party to move their figures across the dungeon map, which one of the players (the mapper) would draw out as they progressed, based on the details given by the DM.
Combat didn't take place on a separate map, and it was pretty much all theater-of-the-mind. The game was basically about navigating the dungeon to get treasure. Monsters were pretty much obstacles, and fighting wasn't always the best solution.
As time went on, the DnD experience broadened in some areas but kept lingering relics of that origin on board. Distances were still measured in inches or squares I believe through 4e, though rules have always been included to convert them into feet or whatever. Thing is as time went on and more tools were developed for the player characters, emphasis was taken away from avoiding combat to winning it, probably because TSR and then WotC realized that it was more fun that way.
4e brought that to the forefront in realizing that a.) most players like fighting monsters and b.) you can do a lot with a battle map. It's goal was to be the best tactical combat system it could be, and I think they by and large succeeded. DnD has never had very good rules for non-combat challenges, because barefaced, pass/fail d20 isn't very good for diplomacy and other stuff, and Skills have always been an afterthought further marginalizing martial characters.
4e laid bare some truths about DnD that a lot of people resisted, that at its heart it is still best played as a miniatures game. 5e in large part is an attempt to distance the brand from that, at the cost of jettisoning everything from 4e, even the cool stuff that would have fit in just fine in 5e.
>>47648493
That also applies to 3e as well, where it says you are rewarded for "overcoming challenges". Unless I missed something, nowhere does it say that things magically drop EXP on death.
Disarming a bandit, kicking him in the balls, and walking off as he groans in pain is just as much experience as running him through.
>>47648616
>5e in large part is an attempt to distance the brand from that, at the cost of jettisoning everything from 4e, even the cool stuff that would have fit in just fine in 5e.
Name one thing that originated in 4e that was worth keeping.
>>47648001
Yeah, there are some weird design decisions, but in play it'd rather light on rules and still functions well.
>>47648679
>Name one thing that originated in 4e that was worth keeping.
The monster statblock being absolutely everything you need to run the monster. No looking up feats by any name, no looking up weapon rules, no looking up individual skills, no looking up jack fucking shit.
4e is the only game I know that well and truly does that.
>>47648679
Healing Surges if Hit Die are any indication
>>47648679
healing surges.
hit dice a shit.
>>47648679
Marking
Martial exploits
Warlords
Healing Surges, which pretty much are still in the game with a different name
Clear, easily readable mechanical descriptions of character abilities
>>47648679
Unlimited opportunity attacks. Made fighters a lot better at holding an area
>>47641941
HITSTUFF WEAPONDUDE
>>47648679
Bonus action ranged healing that didn't eat into other resources. Don't have to choose between healing and doing something cool.
>>47648581
But can't wizards and druids still summon minions?
about 3 sessions ago the Druid summoned an earth elemental and a centipede or something like that. is there a cap on these summoned creatures or other restrictions that I should be aware off?
>>47648732
>>47648749
>healing surges
Cancer. Why should everyone be able to heal themselves?
>>47648770
>>47648774
>muh fighting men ;_;
Martialfags pls
>>47648729
This is the only reasonable suggestion.
For the most part I'm glad 4e is dead and we can forget it ever happened.
>>47648904
>Cancer. Why should everyone be able to heal themselves?
i dont think you understand healing surges at all
>>47648873
Depends on edition. But too many minions running around in any edition will both slow the game and unbalance encounters.
But it's okay for casters to do things that break the game because magic.
>>47648904
What do you think of 5e's hit die?
>>47648904
>Martialfags pls
I've already admitted that I like martial characters and want them to be strong and interesting and relevant along side magic users, so you just sound like a retard.
