Does a Fighter really only have one action, basic attack?

So I am genuinely asking if I'm missing something... it seems a fighter can only do a basic attack, over, and over, and over again?  Am I missing something?
At the moment, at least, yes.  It's possible that the full rules may include maneuvers, powers, and other things.  But for now, say Hi to the new fighter, same as the old fighter.
Another day, another three or four entries to my Ignore List.
Well, at level 2, he can make TWO basic attacks... twice per day.

I have to admit, I am greatly, greatly dismayed by the huge step backwards with the Fighter.  Martial "powers" may not have been everyone's cup of tea, but they were such a huge improvement.
I saw a +3 to intimidate but no currently rules towards intimidate despite a off hand comment in improvising.  Thought I may have missed something there.

In all honesty without more options for a fighter to do something this feels like a pre-playtest version of the fighter.  Maybe there's been no fighter love (that's releasable) yet?  Since the wizard seems to have lots of good options, dailies and at-wills are a nice touch.  I'm hoping this is truly just pre-fighter attention and not the 5e vision of what a fighter will be.
As much as I do like the new core rules, the fighter is a meh for me. I do hope for more maneuvars and such. Now, the thing to do remember is that this first playtest isn't about showcasing character classes; it's about testing the core rules. So that's the main thing I've been studying is how the rules themselves work. Character classes and monsters definititely still need balanced. 

I keep saying it all over the forums, but in reality this is no preview. This is game development. We're working hot steel here boys, not looking at a brand new sword. Make sure you provide feedback. If it all goes as planned, it'll be good.

Top of my list will definitely be, "Moar martial tricks and stuff." 
I saw a +3 to intimidate but no currently rules towards intimidate despite a off hand comment in improvising.  Thought I may have missed something there.

In all honesty without more options for a fighter to do something this feels like a pre-playtest version of the fighter.  Maybe there's been no fighter love (that's releasable) yet?  Since the wizard seems to have lots of good options, dailies and at-wills are a nice touch.  I'm hoping this is truly just pre-fighter attention and not the 5e vision of what a fighter will be.



Hate to double post but the skill checks and stuff, at least from what I saw, are in the DM Guidelines section. They have them divided into categories like social and physical and stuff.
Ahh thanks, that section doesn't really clarify, though it does include a bit more information.  I guess the fighter is a pure impromptu roleplay class at this point or an only basic attack class.

I do get that they want to refine the core rules, though you can't refine the core rules in my opinion without actually have fairly rounded out core classes (even if only the first level, or first three levels).  For example if how a fighter plays changes dramatically then the core rules refinement done now won't mean much.  Plus much of the core rules I'm seeing are pretty much the existing rules from 3.5 with very little change (though I might be missing some things).
Ahh thanks, that section doesn't really clarify, though it does include a bit more information.  I guess the fighter is a pure impromptu roleplay class at this point or an only basic attack class.

I do get that they want to refine the core rules, though you can't refine the core rules in my opinion without actually have fairly rounded out core classes (even if only the first level, or first three levels).  For example if how a fighter plays changes dramatically then the core rules refinement done now won't mean much.  Plus much of the core rules I'm seeing are pretty much the existing rules from 3.5 with very little change (though I might be missing some things).



I think the thing is, these aren't set in stone rules. They probably want a much more solid core rules set before balancing and adding complexity to the classes. That's my thought, anyway. Only time will tell. I love Paladins and Fighters (definitely snagging that Knight background every chance I get), so if when 5e comes out they're like 3e fighters and paladins at first level, I'll be a very sad panda. Fortunently, I am fairly optimistic this won't be the case.
The fighter looks pretty cool to me. 2d6+7 damage is pretty impressive, and he has the reaper option to where he does str score worth of points of damage even on a miss. Most  kobolds will die even if he dosnt hit. Then already at level two he basically gets two action points per day, (its not extra attack, its "extra action") So he could double move and attack, or kick in a door, move  his speed, and attack, or, move and attack twice, or drink a potion, move, and attack. For second level there are alot of options and flexibility opened up to him. Then at level three he has cleave. So, if he is figthing something like kobolds, he could attack/kill, cleave /attack/kill, move and attack again/kill, and he could miss with every single attack. Imagen that, dosnt even have to roll, and three monsters dead, compaired to the wizards sleep where saves are granted (though burning hands would do the trick even with a low roll and succesful saves). 

You could also try doing this, swap out his slayer theme for the clerics guardian them. Now at level one instead of the damage on a miss, you can give disadvantage to an attack against an ally, still get the extra acation twice a day at level 2, then at level three you can auto stop movment of an enemy that moves into your space. Now you are a defending fighter. I am sure there will be choices for push/pull type themes, but for this they wanted to go with the pure damage dealing monster of a dwarven fighter. I think there will be alot of options for building different types of fighters.

Edit: and its not really "basic attack" if it pretty much mirrors the 4th ed at will power which I think was called cleave, where even on a miss you do half ability mod damage (except against one hp minions, so this version is even stronger than the 4th ed version)
The fighter looks pretty cool to me. 2d6+7 damage is pretty impressive, and he has the reaper option to where he does str score worth of points of damage even on a miss. Most  kobolds will die even if he dosnt hit. Then already at level two he basically gets two action points per day, (its not extra attack, its "extra action") So he could double move and attack, or kick in a door, move  his speed, and attack, or, move and attack twice, or drink a potion, move, and attack. For second level there are alot of options and flexibility opened up to him. Then at level three he has cleave. So, if he is figthing something like kobolds, he could attack/kill, cleave /attack/kill, move and attack again/kill, and he could miss with every single attack. Imagen that, dosnt even have to roll, and three monsters dead, compaired to the wizards sleep where saves are granted (though burning hands would do the trick even with a low roll and succesful saves). 

You could also try doing this, swap out his slayer theme for the clerics guardian them. Now at level one instead of the damage on a miss, you can give disadvantage to an attack against an ally, still get the extra acation twice a day at level 2, then at level three you can auto stop movment of an enemy that moves into your space. Now you are a defending fighter. I am sure there will be choices for push/pull type themes, but for this they wanted to go with the pure damage dealing monster of a dwarven fighter. I think there will be alot of options for building different types of fighters.

Edit: and its not really "basic attack" if it pretty much mirrors the 4th ed at will power which I think was called cleave, where even on a miss you do half ability mod damage (except against one hp minions, so this version is even stronger than the 4th ed version)



I don't really have much to add. You summed my feeling on the pre-gen fighter perfectly. So here's a cookie instead 

wotc hasn't forgotten how much of their player based loves their fighter's maneuvers, you'll get them (in one form or another). 
Show
I am White/Black
I am White/Black
Take The Magic Dual Colour Test - Beta today!
Created with Rum and Monkey's Personality Test Generator.
I'm both orderly and selfish. I act mostly for my own benefit, but I respect and help my community - Specially when it helps me. At best, I'm loyal and dedicated; at worst, I'm elitist and shrewd.
What Clan are you? There is no equality. There exists only equity.
But you still only get a single attack as a fighter... sure you can move and attack, a wizard can move and cast.  The fighter is a one trick pony right now... 
I'm not sure why anyone is surprised by this, because they said exactly that this was the sort of fighter that was coming in this round of the playtest.  More will be coming later.  More classes are also coming later, and races.  We're getting a very limited sliver of things, for now.
D&D Next = D&D: Quantum Edition
To better represent my argument you mentioned cleave is like a 4e at will.... so by level 3 a fighter in this playtest has one of the mulitple options a 4e fighter has at level 1... hence my dissapointment.  While the wizard has a great deal of options from the get-go.  I do hope I'm proven wrong as we get more info though.
A suggestion I posted on a different thread: why not have a fighter class feature be that the Fighter can give up half their damage on an attack to try a Bull Rush, Disarm, Grapple, Overrun, Sunder, Trip, or Feint (without giving advantage) as part of the attack? (Following the theme that rolling multiple d20s is viscerally fun)

This would give the core fighter a unique strategic role by giving them the capacity to affect the movement and combat potential of the enemy, while still allowing newbies to hack away and still contribute fully to the party.
Race for the Iron Throne - political and historical analysis of A Song of Ice and Fire.
So I am genuinely asking if I'm missing something... it seems a fighter can only do a basic attack, over, and over, and over again?  Am I missing something?


In the live chat they said you'd be able to spend a feat to buy an entire suite of abilities.  IDK, if you knew about that or not.

There are a great many problems that can be circumvented by players and DMs having a mature discussion about what the game is going to be like before they ever sit down together to play.

 

The answer really does lie in more options, not in confining and segregating certain options.

 

You really shouldn't speak for others.  You can't hear what someone else is saying when you try to put your words in their mouth.

 

Fencing & Swashbuckling as Armor.

D20 Modern Toon PC Race.

Mecha Pilot's Skill Challenge Emporium.

 

Save the breasts.

For comparisson I don't like the 3.5 Fighter but I do like the 3.5 Warblade:

www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/ex/200...

At level one they have three manuevers, and they have many options for those three manuevers they can choose.  That sort of thing is what I'm hoping for.
the fighter does what he does best: he FIGHTS.

27 hours into a dungeon, no rest, no sleep like other men, he is still FIGHTING and dealing his 1d12+X damage each round. The wizard has been out of spells since hour 17. what's he doing? Spamming minors and X at-wills.

To paraphrase Skyrim, "...Simple and Strong..." is sometimes the way to go.

As a fighter, you are a HULK. You can take a massive amounts of damage while dishing out massive amounts of damage, and like that annoying bunny just keep going and going.

There are people out there that enjoy this play style, and they will play it because THEY WANT TO. ;)

I've played all types of characters in all types of games, but sometimes it is the most fun to just SMASH things over and over again.

Ronon from Stargate: Atlantis anyone?

and i am sure when the classes part of the playtest is released, we will all get more warrior-love and smash/hack/kill/bloody goodness. All in the name of Science, of course.
IMAGE(http://dragcave.net/image/HEXd.gif)
So I am genuinely asking if I'm missing something... it seems a fighter can only do a basic attack, over, and over, and over again?  Am I missing something?



Yes.  They have already said that they havn't gotten to the fighter to give him his goodies yet.  You're just seeing the basic fighter without any of his extras.  This won't be how fighters end up.
the fighter does what he does best: he FIGHTS.

27 hours into a dungeon, no rest, no sleep like other men, he is still FIGHTING and dealing his 1d12+X damage each round. The wizard has been out of spells since hour 17. what's he doing? Spamming minors and X at-wills.



WHich means nothing unless you are fighting 24 hours a day. The "I cna do this all day" point is kinda moot when 2 fights in everyone needs to stop to recharge their spells, leaving you to either wait with them or go ahead alone and get killed horribly.

I do think Fighters are getting lots of maneuvers and cool stuff in the future, either in core rules or as modules, I´m quite sure they won’t let fighter only with basic attacks.

But one thing I must say, this version is easier for new players than 4th edition. The whole tactical thing and powers are sometimes difficult to understand for new players. Playing in several tables with new players, they got much more engaged in the role playing part of the game rather than the tactical aspect. I like the way stuff is explained for new players, although I would like to see some complexity thrown in the game. I would love to have some maneuvers and power like options for fighters. But that could come in the optional modules.

The simplicity of the characters and rules reminds me of my old basic set form 1991, I think it´s great for new players, really great.




So I am genuinely asking if I'm missing something... it seems a fighter can only do a basic attack, over, and over, and over again?  Am I missing something?



Yes.  They have already said that they havn't gotten to the fighter to give him his goodies yet.  You're just seeing the basic fighter without any of his extras.  This won't be how fighters end up.



Thanks, glad to hear.  I missed that so I definitley need to catch up on some posts I've missed from them.
the fighter does what he does best: he FIGHTS.

27 hours into a dungeon, no rest, no sleep like other men, he is still FIGHTING and dealing his 1d12+X damage each round. The wizard has been out of spells since hour 17. what's he doing? Spamming minors and X at-wills.



WHich means nothing unless you are fighting 24 hours a day. The "I cna do this all day" point is kinda moot when 2 fights in everyone needs to stop to recharge their spells, leaving you to either wait with them or go ahead alone and get killed horribly.



A good point, plus constant fighting doesn't mean 1 attack ability.  The link I posted is the Warblade in 3.5 that does a whole lot of fighting but also has some options.  
Don't forget that you can always use your actions to do things like swing from a chandelier, flip over a table, wrestle an enemy to the ground or pick up a keg of ale and chuck it at someone. Simply tell the DM what you want to do, the DM then asks for a check. The fighter will have the best physical ability scores which means he/she is much more likely to pass these checks. With this old school approach you are only limited by your imagination, not by the power cards.

WotC should really release a video of an inhouse play test so that people can see what this style of play is like. People who've only ever played 4e might not realize how different this style of play is.

for the record: I play Basic D&D and 4e on a regular basis. Love 'em both!
So I am genuinely asking if I'm missing something... it seems a fighter can only do a basic attack, over, and over, and over again?  Am I missing something?



Yes.  They have already said that they havn't gotten to the fighter to give him his goodies yet.  You're just seeing the basic fighter without any of his extras.  This won't be how fighters end up.



Thanks, glad to hear.  I missed that so I definitley need to catch up on some posts I've missed from them.



There was a livechat a while back (read: week ago?) where Mearls said that fighters will definitely get the option of adding maneuvers and the like to their repetoire. They just haven't figured out whether it's through bonus feats, basic level up mechanics, or what. It's coming, but it's just not here yet.

They were toying with the option of forgoing things like new maneuvers for some more general static bonuses so that each edition's supporters can run the fighter that they wanted. 
Show
I am White/Black
I am White/Black
Take The Magic Dual Colour Test - Beta today!
Created with Rum and Monkey's Personality Test Generator.
I'm both orderly and selfish. I act mostly for my own benefit, but I respect and help my community - Specially when it helps me. At best, I'm loyal and dedicated; at worst, I'm elitist and shrewd.
What Clan are you? There is no equality. There exists only equity.
Don't forget that you can always use your actions to do things like swing from a chandelier, flip over a table, wrestle an enemy to the ground or pick up a keg of ale and chuck it at someone. Simply tell the DM what you want to do, the DM then asks for a check. The fighter will have the best physical ability scores which means he/she is much more likely to pass these checks. With this old school approach you are only limited by your imagination, not by the power cards.

WotC should really release a video of an inhouse play test so that people can see what this style of play is like. People who've only ever played 4e might not realize how different this style of play is.

for the record: I play Basic D&D and 4e on a regular basis. Love 'em both!



The only problem with that is it makes it sound like the Fighter is required to constantly being creative, inventive, etc to be comparable to magic users, who can probably use magic to do whatever the Fighter's giving up his attack to do, much more effectively, possbly more damage, and can still be just as creative as the Fighter's player.
I think proving that a simple fighter is ok and part of the game right off is a good move.  More will be added on later I am sure.  

I definitely think I could play this simple fighter and have plenty of fun.  Would I refuse to use anything extra? Of course not.  I'll wait and see what comes  out.  I'm sure there will be some things that are interesting for fighters that I like.  On the other hand, I am not forced into the 4e complex daily martial fighter which is what happened at the beginning of 4e.  Everyone has been promised and knows complexity is coming.  I was never promised simplicity until Essentials.

 
Don't forget that you can always use your actions to do things like swing from a chandelier, flip over a table, wrestle an enemy to the ground or pick up a keg of ale and chuck it at someone. Simply tell the DM what you want to do, the DM then asks for a check. The fighter will have the best physical ability scores which means he/she is much more likely to pass these checks. With this old school approach you are only limited by your imagination, not by the power cards.

WotC should really release a video of an inhouse play test so that people can see what this style of play is like. People who've only ever played 4e might not realize how different this style of play is.

for the record: I play Basic D&D and 4e on a regular basis. Love 'em both!



The thing being I've played both 3.5 and 4e extensively and I do all those sorts of things in every 4e campaign I've played.  Maybe people like you might not realize that all that stuff outside of what the mechanics specifically detail can just as easily be done in 4e as 3.5, skills exists in both and some basic examples of skill checks exist in both.  I see nothing in 5e that improves improvised sort of skill checks... so yes a fighter could do all that sort of stuff while a wizard can do all that sort of stuff on top of having in game mechanic options.
Don't forget that you can always use your actions to do things like swing from a chandelier, flip over a table, wrestle an enemy to the ground or pick up a keg of ale and chuck it at someone. Simply tell the DM what you want to do, the DM then asks for a check. The fighter will have the best physical ability scores which means he/she is much more likely to pass these checks. With this old school approach you are only limited by your imagination, not by the power cards.

WotC should really release a video of an inhouse play test so that people can see what this style of play is like. People who've only ever played 4e might not realize how different this style of play is.

for the record: I play Basic D&D and 4e on a regular basis. Love 'em both!


I'm bolding the parts where I think you are either trying to stoke an edition war, or haven't actually read the rules, especialy the DMG for the edition you are implying is so straight-jacketing.

I've been DMing since AD&D, 4E was the first time I saw any coherent guidlines for ad'hoc effects in improvisation in combat in the initial book offerings. Every other edition had waved it off as pure DM fiat, or had rules tucked in supplementary products well removed from the initial release.

I'm sorry if your 4E DM was illiterate, or hadn't read the DMG. However, the straight-jacket was at your table, not in the books. 
I have an answer for you, it may even be the truth.
Don't forget that you can always use your actions to do things like swing from a chandelier, flip over a table, wrestle an enemy to the ground or pick up a keg of ale and chuck it at someone. Simply tell the DM what you want to do, the DM then asks for a check. The fighter will have the best physical ability scores which means he/she is much more likely to pass these checks. With this old school approach you are only limited by your imagination, not by the power cards.

WotC should really release a video of an inhouse play test so that people can see what this style of play is like. People who've only ever played 4e might not realize how different this style of play is.

for the record: I play Basic D&D and 4e on a regular basis. Love 'em both!


I'm bolding the parts where I think you are either trying to stoke an edition war, or haven't actually read the rules, especialy the DMG for the edition you are implying is so straight-jacketing.

I've been DMing since AD&D, 4E was the first time I saw any coherent guidlines for ad'hoc effects in improvisation in combat in the initial book offerings. Every other edition had waved it off as pure DM fiat, or had rules tucked in supplementary products well removed from the initial release.

I'm sorry if your 4E DM was illiterate, or hadn't read the DMG. However, the straight-jacket was at your table, not in the books. 

I love 4E too, but you must agree, many powers have mechanical descriptions that are an end in itself. Of course you can work around it and think of how that works in the real world, but actually, most of the players I have met in conventions and stuff don´t do it that way, most of them simply play powers somehow disconnected on how it would actually happen in the "game world" . not that it happens in every table, probably not in youers, neither in mine, but it happens a lot. I think that´s one thing they are trying to avoid now.

I'm bolding the parts where I think you are either trying to stoke an edition war, or haven't actually read the rules, especialy the DMG for the edition you are implying is so straight-jacketing.

I've been DMing since AD&D, 4E was the first time I saw any coherent guidlines for ad'hoc effects in improvisation in combat in the initial book offerings. Every other edition had waved it off as pure DM fiat, or had rules tucked in supplementary products well removed from the initial release.

I'm sorry if your 4E DM was illiterate, or hadn't read the DMG. However, the straight-jacket was at your table, not in the books. 




GRIN  .... I am the DM   No worries, players in my 4e games get to have all kinds of improvised fun. I am fully aware of how powerful 4e can be for using skills to do great and wonderful things. Last week we had half the party riding down a flight of stairs in a wheelbarrow while the other half tried to use tablecloths as parachutes. Lots of improvised fun was had by all. No illiterate DM straightjackets here

I also DM encounters, lair assault, and LFR and get to see all kinds of other DM's running tables. I've seen some fantastic DM's and players make their game sessions the best improvisational games I've ever seen. But I've also seen too many DM's and players who get power card hypnosis: they get fixated on what's on their power cards and don't think outside the power card box.

I'm not trying to stoke an edition war, I'm just saying that are many players who might not realize that D&D Next fighters can do a lot more than just hit things with their sword which is what this thread has been about. When people say "all I can do is attack?" I think that WotC needs to do a better job in getting the message out about improvisational play.

I think a lot of people are missing the point that because fighters have the best physical ability scores, they are far more likely to pass physical skill checks which means a fighter's improvised actions and attacks are more to be successful than a wizard's or a cleric's. Yes a wizard can also try to flip the table over onto the bad guys, but he's probably going to fail at it. It's a more realistic action for the fighter to attempt because of his ability scores.
I love 4E too, but you must agree, many powers have mechanical descriptions that are an end in itself. Of course you can work around it and think of how that works in the real world, but actually, most of the players I have met in conventions and stuff don´t do it that way, most of them simply play powers somehow disconnected on how it would actually happen in the "game world" . not that it happens in every table, probably not in youers, neither in mine, but it happens a lot. I think that´s one thing they are trying to avoid now.


I don't actually love 4E, it had ups and downs. My comment there was mostly derived from page 42 of the DMG. 
I've been to conventions and watched people play 7th Sea as a tactical miniatures game more often than not. If you aren't familiar with that game, that statement won't have the same impact.
A more generalized explanation: I have rarely seen  convention or other organized play event end up as anything more than some people putting flavour text over pure mechanical actions, while the others grow bored and wish to continue their tactical mini's game.
Theatre of the Mind has been hedged out of D&D since Combat and Tactics for AD&D. 3+ has been written, in the mechanics section, with the assumption of a tactical mat. 
I have seen few things kill player immersion like laying out a mat or dungeon grid, making people put out their minis in neat squares that represent a 5x5 space and then telling them which minis or coins represent what creature that they look maybe a little like. 

I will be early and loud to argue that 4E presentation needed help and that pg 42 of the DMG should have appeared in the Combat section of the PH as well. That some rules clarifications later indicated one could not actually start a fire using fire keyword powers gave me a solid weekend of rage. However, I blame that on the "patch" system of monthly errata, and some very... unique and valid to them... choices by those who answer offical questions.

I have an answer for you, it may even be the truth.
Absoultely. And maybe now they are trying to fix this. I hope.

I´m sorry I´m not aware of 7th Sea. Laughing
  Yes a wizard can also try to flip the table over onto the bad guys, but he's probably going to fail at it. It's a more realistic action for the fighter to attempt because of his ability scores.



Wizards improvising too my favorite is an I heat there weapons ... or givem a hot foot.. damn mage hand alone.. sheesh.
  Creative Character Build Collection and The Magic of King's and Heros  also Can Martial Characters Fly? 

Improvisation in 4e: Fave 4E Improvisations - also Wrecans Guides to improvisation beyond page 42
The Non-combatant Adventurer (aka Princess build Warlord or LazyLord)
Reality is unrealistic - and even monkeys protest unfairness
Reflavoring the Fighter : The Wizard : The Swordmage - Creative Character Collection: Bloodwright (Darksun Character) 

At full hit points and still wounded to incapacitation? you are playing 1e.
By virtue of being a player your characters are the protagonists in a heroic fantasy game even at level one
"Wizards and Warriors need abilities with explicit effects for opposite reasons. With the wizard its because you need to create artificial limits on them, they have no natural ones and for the Warrior you need to grant permission to do awesome."

 

So I am genuinely asking if I'm missing something... it seems a fighter can only do a basic attack, over, and over, and over again?  Am I missing something?


In the live chat they said you'd be able to spend a feat to buy an entire suite of abilities.  IDK, if you knew about that or not.




....So.....


Feat tax? 
http://i1003.photobucket.com/albums/af156/Tom_Shambles92/DrSeuss.jpg http://www.last.fm/user/Pogo92 Endorsed by the C.C.A.A. Booty Patrol. "If all the classes can compete on equal footing in a combat situation then it becomes less about "Which is the best" and more about "Which conveys the character I want to play"." - Areleth
GRIN  .... I am the DM   No worries, players in my 4e games get to have all kinds of improvised fun. I am fully aware of how powerful 4e can be for using skills to do great and wonderful things. Last week we had half the party riding down a flight of stairs in a wheelbarrow while the other half tried to use tablecloths as parachutes. Lots of improvised fun was had by all. No illiterate DM straightjackets here

I also DM encounters, lair assault, and LFR and get to see all kinds of other DM's running tables. I've seen some fantastic DM's and players make their game sessions the best improvisational games I've ever seen. But I've also seen too many DM's and players who get power card hypnosis: they get fixated on what's on their power cards and don't think outside the power card box.

I'm not trying to stoke an edition war, I'm just saying that are many players who might not realize that D&D Next fighters can do a lot more than just hit things with their sword which is what this thread has been about. When people say "all I can do is attack?" I think that WotC needs to do a better job in getting the message out about improvisational play.

I think a lot of people are missing the point that because fighters have the best physical ability scores, they are far more likely to pass physical skill checks which means a fighter's improvised actions and attacks are more to be successful than a wizard's or a cleric's. Yes a wizard can also try to flip the table over onto the bad guys, but he's probably going to fail at it. It's a more realistic action for the fighter to attempt because of his ability scores.


Ah, I appreciate your no worries comment. I aught apologize regardless, download errors are... frustrating, still not an excuse for incivility. 

Oh dear heavens yes, the tunnel vision that some people developed with regards to their powers was horrifying. One of the reasons I really think that (an edited) pg42 of the DMG should have also been in the PH.

Fighters will, of the four centrals currently shown, likely have the highest physical ability scores, but how will that hold up in the face of the Ranger and Barabrian? Mind you, all three of these classes I would expect to see engaging in far more athleticism in combat than, say, a Bard.


So, on an aside, 7th Sea was a Swashbuckling game, very Three Musketeers or Princess Bride. The game was very very narrative and few hard and fast mechanics. It explicitely did not use limit (beyound reason and elevation) of a pc's movement, had no concept of anything like an attack of opportunity, and  rather than requiring rolls to swing on a chandelier (as some DMs require, YMMV), it was assumed to just happen and you got that games equivalent of an action point for it. For fights, they had a minon mechanic called a Brute Squad (see Princess Bride), that you basically just raised the number you were trying to roll on your attack to take multiples out, so you could get to the heart of combat, which was either the chase or the duel. The point being, this is not a game for tac mats. Yet more often than not, there I saw it, layed out on a grid with all manner of impomptu restricted movement and unorthodox movement penalties tacted on.  

Back to the point, presentation of the nifty fun options that aren't just "I hit it with my weapon" ad nauseum needs to be effective.
Mind you, there is nothing wrong with someone who just wants to thok until squish, but it should not even appear to be the only choice. 
I have an answer for you, it may even be the truth.
  Yes a wizard can also try to flip the table over onto the bad guys, but he's probably going to fail at it. It's a more realistic action for the fighter to attempt because of his ability scores.



Wizards improvising too my favorite is an I heat there weapons ... or givem a hot foot.. damn mage hand alone.. sheesh.




Give me your keys, Garthanos. You've had a bit too much fun today, me thinks.
http://i1003.photobucket.com/albums/af156/Tom_Shambles92/DrSeuss.jpg http://www.last.fm/user/Pogo92 Endorsed by the C.C.A.A. Booty Patrol. "If all the classes can compete on equal footing in a combat situation then it becomes less about "Which is the best" and more about "Which conveys the character I want to play"." - Areleth
I think everyone is forgetting that the thief has only basic attack as well >.> It may be able to add sneak attack dice, but the fighter deals damage on a miss so that argument is null.
My two copper.
If the fighter's only going to have basic attacks, it might be really convenient to create a small rules blurb describing the rules for Tripping, Grapples, and that sort of business.  Fighters will really need to be aware of their options in 5e if this stays the same.
If the fighter's only going to have basic attacks, it might be really convenient to create a small rules blurb describing the rules for Tripping, Grapples, and that sort of business.  Fighters will really need to be aware of their options in 5e if this stays the same.



I don't think those specific rules will exist in the core. They'll be put into optional modules for people who prefer more rules heavy approaches. The idea with the core rules is to let the DM decide by using simple ability based skill checks. The player says "I want to trip the orc" and the DM asks for a strength or dex check. Simple, quick, no need to look up tables. BUT very much up to the DM to control the improvisation. The core rules require a good DM who can be fair and balanced. Just like old school D&D. It can be good and bad, it really depends on your play group.
A big part of the point of the layered approach to "Somewhere between 4th and 6th edition" is that you start low and simple. You got one choice. Add layers, you probably still have only one you can use, but you can choose options. And mr. straight from the box should still keep up.



 
I think trip and feint and stuff will be added; the rules already mentioned grappling.

Also, I think multiple attacks per attack may be allowed due to the wording of cleave, but level 3 doesn't show that off yet.

Regardless, I like that the fighter remembered that it is a fighter and not a warlock.  I certainly loved fighters in all editions except 4E.
Sign In to post comments