The Goal of The Linear Fighters: A Retrospective

When Gary wrote the game, he never intended for the players to focus only on combat in the dungeons slaying dragons.  Even though that is tottally the name of the game.  What he had introduced into those wild west era that no one seems to bare light on was Name Level Game.  OR what your characters did once they got to the lofty position of 9+.   No longer struggleling to earn gold, or to slay monsters most encounters just amounted to what new rediculous reality shattering horror came next.    When back in 6 and 7th level the beholder was something that every one feared.  But what if thats not what the point was.  Fighters were fighting men, they were also the Military Leaders, and Landed Nobility if they got to level 9.  Why was this, well at level 9 Fighters got the oppertunity to gain followers if they constructed a fortress.  Thieves at level 9 could start thier own guilds.  Mages told every one to leave them alone as they unraveled the secrets of the arcane.  In other words, characters at lv 9+ became movers and shakers in the land, at higher levels they affected larger arenas.  The game shifts gears yes, but its no longer just about the adventure, its about the investments your character makes, no longer are they grubbing for gold coins at the behest of some Jerk of a Noble, no they are the Jerk... err noble now.  Back in the day, if you acctually read your class features, and remembered that tidbit about followers the value of a fighter comes into focus,  Fighters are no longer just one guy but a commander, now you can lay siege on cities or that Orc Infested valley for fame and glory.  In the old Darksun campaigns once a fighter got to the high levels they pretty much became Warlords with mastery in bizzare war machines, ment to carve out sections of the land ot become ruler of a new city.

Why not bring that in rather than the wacking  the bigger mole on the next hill.    Have your adventureing party discover the dangers of authority and become a new court.   The high level fighter was a badass back in the day, not because he only got 5 attacks over 2 rounds, or a bag of weapons to choose from, but because he had a freaking army behind him, loyal to a fault and the ability to use it.  The wizard by the way, he got a tower and no followers.

So Fighters were never Linear, they are Lateral.  Sure they went up in level and got to hit people harder but they also got prestige and noble authority, and the Right of To Wage War.  What that means is you can hoist your colors, March your army, and the King would merely stick his head out the window to ask "I say, may I ask where you are going with that army"  And if you told him to take out the Warlord Cheesehead, he'd be all "Jolly good, By the way on your way there tell, Phillipe that I shall go to his ball"  Why because that is your inclass ability.  IF a wizard hires a band of mercs well, he would have a lot of heat on his head, fighters dont get that heat.
The high level fighter was a badass back in the day, not because he only got 5 attacks over 2 rounds, or a bag of weapons to choose from, but because he had a freaking army behind him, loyal to a fault and the ability to use it.


And what stops a spellcaster from getting these?

IF a wizard hires a band of mercs well, he would have a lot of heat on his head.


Why?
IF a wizard hires a band of mercs well, he would have a lot of heat on his head.


Why?

Because he stupidly wasted time and money hiring mercs instead of summoning, making, or charming/dominating them.

I'm sorry, I don't want to play Dungeons and Sieges.  I have no interest in leading an army.  I want to be awesome by myself and do it without magic.

IF a wizard hires a band of mercs well, he would have a lot of heat on his head.


Why?

Because he stupidly wasted time and money hiring mercs instead of summoning, making, or charming/dominating them.

I'm sorry, I don't want to play Dungeons and Sieges.  I have no interest in leading an army.  I want to be awesome by myself and do it without magic.



I agree completely.

I'm just curious why he seems to be claiming it's a plus for the Fighter while thee Wizard could never pull the same stunt.
IF a wizard hires a band of mercs well, he would have a lot of heat on his head.


Why?

Because he stupidly wasted time and money hiring mercs instead of summoning, making, or charming/dominating them.

I'm sorry, I don't want to play Dungeons and Sieges.  I have no interest in leading an army.  I want to be awesome by myself and do it without magic.



I agree completely.

I'm just curious why he seems to be claiming it's a plus for the Fighter while thee Wizard could never pull the same stunt.





+2
The essential theme song- Get a little bit a fluff da' fluff, get a little bit a fluff da' fluff! (ooh yeah) Repeat Unless noted otherwise every thing I post is my opinion, and probably should be taken as tongue in cheek any way.
I'd wager that it's because the fighter has a mechanical force of personality that enables him to command hundreds of men, while the mechanics for a wizard would dictate he's unfit and unable to sway and command more than a handful of people. Charisma ceilings and class features, ect.
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
Why not bring that in rather than the wacking  the bigger mole on the next hill.    Have your adventureing party discover the dangers of authority and become a new court.



I agree.  I hate the treadmill of killing monsters to gain experience, to level up so I can kill bigger monsters and gain experience, to level up so I can kill bigger monsters and gain experience, to level up so I can kill bigger monsters and gain experience, ad nauseum.

Member of the Axis of Awesome

Show
Homogenising: Making vanilla in 31 different colours
while the mechanics for a wizard would dictate he's unfit and unable to sway and command more than a handful of people. Charisma ceilings and class features, ect.


What mechanics do that? What exactly makes a Wizard inferior to a Fighter when it comes to commanding an army? Hell, a Wizard's high Intelligence make sit mor elikely he's lead an army much more efficiently than a Fighter.
While I don't claim to know what the original intent of the high level fighter was, I will say that I've never seen any mechanics in DnD the would support that game-style (large scale combat, building fortresses, ruling cities etc). Personally, I'd rather play the action hero kicking ass on the front lines than the commander hanging out in the back figuring out supply logistics for his army.
IF a wizard hires a band of mercs well, he would have a lot of heat on his head.


Why?

Because he stupidly wasted time and money hiring mercs instead of summoning, making, or charming/dominating them.

I'm sorry, I don't want to play Dungeons and Sieges.  I have no interest in leading an army.  I want to be awesome by myself and do it without magic.




Win.

Look, there's nothing wrong with playing that kind of game if everybody wants to, but that can't be the only avenue of "epic" advancement for a character. There's two reasons for that: #1 a lot of people idea of "being epic" or "winning the game" isn't to quit adventuring and settle down with a day job as a bureaucrat. #2 an army of conventional soldiers is worth beans when you're trying to fight the kind of entity that can destroy the world. Armies are great at fighting other armies, but they're not great at fighting beings of phenomenal godlike power. That's the province of heroes, and if you can't do that yourself or at the very least contribute as much as anybody else, then you're just not as heroic as the next guy, are you?

while the mechanics for a wizard would dictate he's unfit and unable to sway and command more than a handful of people. Charisma ceilings and class features, ect.


What mechanics do that? What exactly makes a Wizard inferior to a Fighter when it comes to commanding an army? Hell, a Wizard's high Intelligence make sit more likely he's lead an army much more efficiently than a Fighter.


In AD&D, the books told the Fighter that he could keep a Keep and some men once he got to 9th level.  If he did a bunch of stuff, such as actually going out and getting a Keep, clearing the monsters out of the area and paying the men.  The books did not explicitly tell wizards the same thing, so if they got a keep, they'd have to convince the DM to let them keep that keep.  And soldiers wouldn't automatically come to serve them.  If he paid them.  Or he could just sit back and reap the benefit of the fighter's keep.  It was more of a decent squad than an army, though.   And the fighter didn't get bonuses to charisma for it or anything, not that I recall.  Mainly it was that he didn't have to go out a-hirin', they came to him.

Also clerics could start churches in pretty much the same way.  
Seriously, though, you should check out the PbP Haven. You might also like Real Adventures, IF you're cool.
Knights of W.T.F.- Silver Spur Winner
4enclave, a place where 4e fans can talk 4e in peace.
while the mechanics for a wizard would dictate he's unfit and unable to sway and command more than a handful of people. Charisma ceilings and class features, ect.


What mechanics do that? What exactly makes a Wizard inferior to a Fighter when it comes to commanding an army? Hell, a Wizard's high Intelligence make sit more likely he's lead an army much more efficiently than a Fighter.


In AD&D, the books told the Fighter that he could keep a Keep and some men once he got to 9th level.  If he did a bunch of stuff, such as actually going out and getting a Keep, clearing the monsters out of the area and paying the men.  The books did not explicitly tell wizards the same thing, so if they got a keep, they'd have to convince the DM to let them keep that keep.  And soldiers wouldn't automatically come to serve them.  If he paid them.  Or he could just sit back and reap the benefit of the fighter's keep.  It was more of a decent squad than an army, though.   And the fighter didn't get bonuses to charisma for it or anything, not that I recall.  Mainly it was that he didn't have to go out a-hirin', they came to him.

Also clerics could start churches in pretty much the same way.  


So mostly DM Fiat? :\
Gimme a minute, I'll put up some book quotes.
Seriously, though, you should check out the PbP Haven. You might also like Real Adventures, IF you're cool.
Knights of W.T.F.- Silver Spur Winner
4enclave, a place where 4e fans can talk 4e in peace.
Alright then
@ mons So what your saying is the rules didn't drop them into the fighters hands, rather they just were said that "you can if you want". So back then did you need a rule for your char to pick her nose too or?...

The essential theme song- Get a little bit a fluff da' fluff, get a little bit a fluff da' fluff! (ooh yeah) Repeat Unless noted otherwise every thing I post is my opinion, and probably should be taken as tongue in cheek any way.
@ mons So what your saying is the rules didn't drop them into the fighters hands, rather they just were said that "you can if you want". So back then did you need a rule for your char to pick her nose too or?...




No, but you need a rule to pick somebody else's nose!
Alright, I'ma spoiler these, just for formatting's sake.  And I'm not declaring a stake in this argument just yet, I'm just fielding info.  This is all going to be core book stuff though, so while there is probably something on the subject in some issue of Dragon or campaign guide or something, that is for someone else to post.  I'm also only going to do the Fighter's stuff here, because transcribing it for Rangers and Clerics and Thieves and etc. is a lot more transcribing.  If someone really wants it for comparison purposes and asks pretty please, I'll consider it.

AD&D1e

"When a fighter obtains 9th level (Lord), he or she may opt to establish a freehold. This is done by building some type of castle and clearing the area in a radius of 20 to 50 miles around the stronghold, making it free from all sorts of hostile creatures. Whenever such a freehold is established and cleared, the fighter will: 

1. Automatically attract a body of men-at-arms led by an above- average fighter. These men will serve as mercenaries so long as the fighter maintains his or her freehold and pays the men-at-arms; and 

2. Collect a monthly revenue of 7 silver pieces for each and every inhabitant of the freehold due to trade, tariffs, and taxes."  

~AD&D1e PHB, page 22


This body of men-at-arms is described in the DMG(pages 16-18, for those reading along at home!) thusly:

"FOLLOWERS FOR UPPER LEVEL PLAYER CHARACTERS
Your players know that upon reaching certain levels and doing certain things (such as building a stronghold)they will be entitled to attract a body of followers. These followers might be fanatically loyal servants of the same deity (or deities) in the case of clerics, stalwart admirers of fighters, or whatever. Your players will eventually turn to you for information on who or what they gain - and, when the time actually comes and they have reached the level and done the right things, you will be able to quickly inform each and every one concerned of what fate has decreed by way of followers:"

Then follows a number of tables.  The Fighter's table is:

"Fighters: Roll once for leader type, once for troops/followers (all are 0 level men-at-arms). 

Leader:
01 -40: 5th level, plate mail & shield; +2 magic battle axe 
41-75: 6th level, plate mail & +1 shield; +1 magic spear and +1 dagger 
76-95: 6th level, + 1 plate mail & shield; arms as above: lieutenant 3rd level, splint mail & shield; crossbow of distance 
96-00: 7th level, +1 plate mail 8, +1 shield; +2 magic sword (no special abilities); rides a heavy warhorse with horseshoes of speed 

Troops/Followers: 
01-50: company of 20 light cavalry, ring mail 8 shield; 3 javelins, long sword, hand axe; and company of 100 heavy infantry, scale mail; pole arm* and club
51-75:company of 80 heavy infantry - 20 with splint mail, 60 with leather armor; 20 with morning star and hand axe, 60 with pike and short sword
76-90: company of 60 crossbowmen, chain mail; 40 with heavy crossbow and short sword, 20 with light crossbow and military fork
91-100: company of 60 cavalry- 10 with banded mail and shield, 20 with scale mail and shield, 30 with studded leather and shield; 10 with lance, bastard sword, and mace, 20 with lance, long sword and mace, 30 with lance and flail
* Select type or types randomly or assign whichever you desire."


Note that there is no difference between the fighter and the wizard in terms of Charisma and its effects.  


AD&D2e


This time the troop table is in the PHB!

"When a fighter attains 9th level (becomes a "Lord), he can automatically attract men-at-arms. These soldiers, having heard of the fighter, come for the chance to gain fame, adventure, and cash. They are loyal as long they are well-treated, successful, and paid well. Abusive treatment or a disastrous campaign can lead to grumbling, desertion, and possibly mutiny. To attract the men, the fighter must have a castle or stronghold and sizeable manor lands around it. As he claims and rules this land, soldiers journey to his domain, thereby increasing his power. Furthermore, the fighter can tax and develop these lands, gaining a steady income from them. Your DM has information about gaining and running a barony. In addition to regular men-at-arms, the 9th-level fighter also attracts an elite bodyguard (his "household guards"). Although these soldiers are still mercenaries, they have greater loyalty to their Lord than do common soldiers. In return, they expect better treatment and more pay than the common soldier receives. Although the elite unit can be chosen randomly, it is better to ask your DM what unit your fighter attracts. This allows him to choose a troop consistent with the campaign.

Table 16: FIGHTER'S FOLLOWERS 
Roll percentile dice on each of the following subtables of Table 16 once for the leader of the troops, once for troops, and once for a bodyguard (household guard) unit.

Leader Table:
1-40: 5th-level fighter, plate mail, shield, battle axe +2
41-75: 6th-level fighter, plate mail, shield +1, spear +1, dagger +1
76-95: 6th-level fighter, plate mail +1, shield, spear +1, dugger +1, plus 3rd-level fighter, splint mail, shield, crossbow of distance
96-99: 7th-level fighter, plate mail +1, shield +1, broad sword +2, heavy war horse with horseshoes of speed
00: DM's Option

Troops(all level 0):

1-50: 20 cavalry with ring mail, shield, 3 javelins, long sword, hand axe; 100 infantry with scale mail, polearm *, club
51-75: 20 infantry with splint mail, morning star, hand axe; 60 infantry with leather armor, pike, short sword
76-90: 40 infantry with chain mail, heavy crossbow, short sword; 20 infantry with chain mail, light crossbow, military fork
91-99: 10 cavalry with banded mail, shield, lance, bastard sword, mace; 20 cavalry with scale mail, shield, lance, long sword, mace; 30 cavalry with studded leather armor, shield, lance, longsword
00: DMs Option (Barbarians, headhunters, armed peasants, extra-heavy cavalry, etc.)

*Player picks type

Elite Bodyguard:

1-10: 10 mounted knights: 1st-level fighters with field plate, large shield, lance, broadsword, morning star, and heavy war horse with full barding
11-20: 10 1st-level elven fighter/mages with chainmail, longsword, longbow, dagger
21-30: 15 wardens: 1st-level rangers with scale mail, shield, longsword, spear, longbow
31-40: 20 berserkers: 2nd-level fighters with leather armor, shield, battleaxe, broad sword, dagger(berserkers receive +1 bonus to attack and damage rolls)
41-65: 20 expert archers: 1st-level fighters with studded leather armor, longbows or crossbows (+2 to hit, or bow specialization, if using that optional rule)
66-99: 30 infantry: 1st-level fighters with plate mail, body shield, spear, short sword
00: DM's Option (pegasi cavalry, eagle riders, demihumans, siege train, etc.)

The DM may design other tables that are more appropriate to his campaign. Check with your DM upon reaching 9th level. A fighter can hold property, including a castle or stronghold, long before he reaches 9th level. However, it is only when he reaches this level that his name is so widely known that he attracts the loyalty of other warriors."  ~AD&D2e PHB, pages 26-27.

I kinda wanna know what a siege train is, it sounds badass.
 
 
I also found this little nugget in the Fighter intro on page 26(2e PHB).  Have fun quoting it:
nugget
The Fighter is a warrior, an expert in weapons and, if he is clever, tactics and strategy. There are many famous fighters from legend: Hercules, Perseus, Hiawatha, Beowulf, Siegfried, Cuchulain, Little John, Tristan, and Sinbad. History is crowded with great generals and warriors: El Cid, Hannibal, Alexander the Great, Charlemagne, Spartacus, Richard the Lionheart, and Belisarius. Your Fighter could be modeled after any of these, or he could be unique. A visit to your local library can uncover many heroic fighters.
Seriously, though, you should check out the PbP Haven. You might also like Real Adventures, IF you're cool.
Knights of W.T.F.- Silver Spur Winner
4enclave, a place where 4e fans can talk 4e in peace.
Yeah, I've been quoting that nugget for a couple weeks now. Apparently modeled doesn't mean you should actually be able to model it, and Hercules, Cuchulain et al. are only cool because of their race, not their class. 

Regarding the OP: the problem is that even if we added Keeps and whatnot into the Fighter class, A. it substantially changes the nature of the game into more of a strategy/resource management game than an rpg centered around an individual character (and some people don't like that playstyle), and B. it doesn't really scale that well. Having an army is significant at level 9, but at level 18 or 20 or 30, it isn't really important anymore. 
Race for the Iron Throne - political and historical analysis of A Song of Ice and Fire.
When Gary wrote the game, he never intended for the players to focus only on combat in the dungeons slaying dragons.  Even though that is tottally the name of the game.  What he had introduced into those wild west era that no one seems to bare light on was Name Level Game.  OR what your characters did once they got to the lofty position of 9+.   No longer struggleling to earn gold, or to slay monsters most encounters just amounted to what new rediculous reality shattering horror came next.    When back in 6 and 7th level the beholder was something that every one feared.  But what if thats not what the point was.  Fighters were fighting men, they were also the Military Leaders, and Landed Nobility if they got to level 9.  Why was this, well at level 9 Fighters got the oppertunity to gain followers if they constructed a fortress.  Thieves at level 9 could start thier own guilds.  Mages told every one to leave them alone as they unraveled the secrets of the arcane.  In other words, characters at lv 9+ became movers and shakers in the land, at higher levels they affected larger arenas.  The game shifts gears yes, but its no longer just about the adventure, its about the investments your character makes, no longer are they grubbing for gold coins at the behest of some Jerk of a Noble, no they are the Jerk... err noble now.  Back in the day, if you acctually read your class features, and remembered that tidbit about followers the value of a fighter comes into focus,  Fighters are no longer just one guy but a commander, now you can lay siege on cities or that Orc Infested valley for fame and glory.  In the old Darksun campaigns once a fighter got to the high levels they pretty much became Warlords with mastery in bizzare war machines, ment to carve out sections of the land ot become ruler of a new city.

Why not bring that in rather than the wacking  the bigger mole on the next hill.    Have your adventureing party discover the dangers of authority and become a new court.   The high level fighter was a badass back in the day, not because he only got 5 attacks over 2 rounds, or a bag of weapons to choose from, but because he had a freaking army behind him, loyal to a fault and the ability to use it.  The wizard by the way, he got a tower and no followers.

So Fighters were never Linear, they are Lateral.  Sure they went up in level and got to hit people harder but they also got prestige and noble authority, and the Right of To Wage War.  What that means is you can hoist your colors, March your army, and the King would merely stick his head out the window to ask "I say, may I ask where you are going with that army"  And if you told him to take out the Warlord Cheesehead, he'd be all "Jolly good, By the way on your way there tell, Phillipe that I shall go to his ball"  Why because that is your inclass ability.  IF a wizard hires a band of mercs well, he would have a lot of heat on his head, fighters dont get that heat.



Well said.  This is what's been lost today to the pew-pewers they tried to pull from magic the gathering.  I also want it back.

Well said.  This is what's been lost today to the pew-pewers they tried to pull from magic the gathering.  I also want it back.


Does it get tiresome trying to chase kids off your lawn?
Seriously, though, you should check out the PbP Haven. You might also like Real Adventures, IF you're cool.
Knights of W.T.F.- Silver Spur Winner
4enclave, a place where 4e fans can talk 4e in peace.
IIRC (unless my age-addled brain has given me false data) back in the day a character couldn't level up unless they paid for training and non-humans had maximum level restrictions for most classes other than thief.

Since the "old ways" are obviously better then I suggest we bring back these ideas too!!

That thought makes you feel ill? No worries, I think I have some leeches handy . . . that'll cure what ails you!

; )
Ok, so by the rules (2e, the ones Pash quoted), once a Fighter has a keep, they can start attracting minions for free.

Why can't a Wizard, once s/he gets a keep, toss some gold at a Human Resources person who then goes on a marketing campaign to recruit soldiers? Hell, he's a Wizard. Its not like he'll be short gold. 

Gold is for the mistress, silver for the maid

Copper for the craftsman, cunning at his trade.

"Good!" said the Baron, sitting in his hall,

"But Iron -- Cold Iron -- is master of them all." -Kipling

 

Defenders: We ARE the wall!

 

I've replaced the previous Edition Warring line in my sig with this one, because honestly, everybody needs to work together to make the D&D they like without trampling on somebody else's D&D.

 

Miss d20 Modern? Take a look at Dias Ex Machina Game's UltraModern 4e!

 

57019168 wrote:
I am a hero, not a chump.
Ok, so by the rules (2e, the ones Pash quoted), once a Fighter has a keep, they can start attracting minions for free.

Why can't a Wizard, once s/he gets a keep, toss some gold at a Human Resources person who then goes on a marketing campaign to recruit soldiers? Hell, he's a Wizard. Its not like he'll be short gold. 


*shrugs* I'm curious about that too. It's not like that small army of his is going to be any help when he's busy dying from a Balor.
Well said.  This is what's been lost today to the pew-pewers they tried to pull from magic the gathering.  I also want it back.


Does it get tiresome trying to chase kids off your lawn?



But he has to keep his lawn kid free for 2d20 yards before attracting those low level fighters with their mid level fighter leader to work for him as mercenaries.

Honestly if I were:

a) living in 4E world I would chose to follow a Warlord he can heal me, buff me and nominally if I die in combat he's screwed so he'll try to avoid that, or failing that any Leader class because maybe just maybe they'll heal me those with superior CHA having the advantage.

b) living in a 3.5 world I would swear fealty to a Sorceror great CHA so he'll be able to talk me into following anyway, real power I mean real, also there's a greater chanche his descendant will also be a sorceror so a aristocracy might actually work i.e. produce people who will at least be capable of doing something.
IIRC (unless my age-addled brain has given me false data) back in the day a character couldn't level up unless they paid for training and non-humans had maximum level restrictions for most classes other than thief.

Since the "old ways" are obviously better then I suggest we bring back these ideas too!!

That thought makes you feel ill? No worries, I think I have some leeches handy . . . that'll cure what ails you!

; )



Also cost of training was variable based on how well you adhered to your alignment and ramped up fairly quickly if you varied at all (according to your dm).  This is all based on poorly remembered recollections of rules we never used mind you as even then we recognized that some of the ideas that they had in earlier editions were stupid and or not fun.

 
i disagree with the OP.

if i wanted to play a game of city/keep/village mangement, i'd play Simcity. not a game that says "you can play as Hercules1" with the footnote buried somewhere that states "1if Hercules decided to give up somewhere after the 6th trial because he found taxes absolutely riveting."

i agree that after a certain point the scope of the game should change, but going from Dungeons & Dragons to Banks & Bureaucrats is hardly the right way to go, regardless of what gygax (a man i have never gamed, talked to or even met) is implied to have said.

it's simply a far too weird a change in the expected gameplay.
3rd ed SRD, character sheets, errata & free modules 4th ed test drive - modules, starter rules, premade characters and character builder & character sheet, errata Free maps and portraits, dice, printable graph paper, campaign managing website, image manipulation program + token maker & zone markers

"All right, I've been thinking. When life gives you lemons, don't make lemonade. Make life take the lemons back. GET MAD! I DON'T WANT YOUR **** LEMONS! WHAT AM I SUPPOSED TO DO WITH THESE?! DEMAND TO SEE LIFE'S MANAGER! Make life RUE the day it thought it could give CAVE JOHNSON LEMONS! DO YOU KNOW WHO I AM?! I'M THE MAN WHO'S GONNA BURN YOUR HOUSE DOWN! WITH THE LEMONS! I'm gonna get my engineers to invent a combustible lemon that's gonna BURN YOUR HOUSE DOWN!" -Cave Johnson, Portal 2
I would be very intrested in a "Castles and Conquests" *module*

Something that is:
a) optional 
b) not a crude fix to wizard/fighter disparity in power at higher levels

I find "political rpg" fascinating but not everybody does or should.
Whats interesting is this stuff is so easily kept separate and used in any game of D&D that it's no big deal.  I've had castles, guilds, etc... in my games all along.  The rules disappeared but me playing that way did not.

Also just because you build an castle and start caring about your "domain", doesn't mean you don't adventure.  Instead you are often motivated to adventure because of a threat to your domain or because you have an idea for improving the lot of your people.

 
Why not bring that in rather than the wacking  the bigger mole on the next hill.    Have your adventureing party discover the dangers of authority and become a new court.



I agree.  I hate the treadmill of killing monsters to gain experience, to level up so I can kill bigger monsters and gain experience, to level up so I can kill bigger monsters and gain experience, to level up so I can kill bigger monsters and gain experience, ad nauseum.



www.darklegacycomics.com/346.html
D&D Next = D&D: Quantum Edition
while the mechanics for a wizard would dictate he's unfit and unable to sway and command more than a handful of people. Charisma ceilings and class features, ect.


What mechanics do that? What exactly makes a Wizard inferior to a Fighter when it comes to commanding an army? Hell, a Wizard's high Intelligence make sit mor elikely he's lead an army much more efficiently than a Fighter.

Einstein has a very high intelligence.  I don't see him leading armies.
Ok, so by the rules (2e, the ones Pash quoted), once a Fighter has a keep, they can start attracting minions for free.

Why can't a Wizard, once s/he gets a keep, toss some gold at a Human Resources person who then goes on a marketing campaign to recruit soldiers? Hell, he's a Wizard. Its not like he'll be short gold. 



Because it was a class feature of being a fighter that kicked in at a certain lv.

You might as well cry about the fighter not being able to cast spells like a wizard or cleric or whatever(without duel/multi-classing)....
Oh, wait.  There's a recently dead edition that allowed just that.

I don't ever want to play Hercules as a fighter.  Hercules is a god or a superhero.  If I want to play superheroes I will play Mutants and Masterminds.  I want to play charactes like the Mouser, Conan, Solomon Kane.  Not a character with superstrength, superspeed, leaping 5 miles.  And yes that can be done at high levels too.  If I want to read about people who throw trucks I'll read marvel comics, if I want to read about a badass swordsman who uses skill and wit to overcome his problems I'll read sword and sorcery novels.  Magic is fine, leave that to the magic users.
While I don't claim to know what the original intent of the high level fighter was, I will say that I've never seen any mechanics in DnD the would support that game-style (large scale combat, building fortresses, ruling cities etc). Personally, I'd rather play the action hero kicking ass on the front lines than the commander hanging out in the back figuring out supply logistics for his army.



Then your bookshelf isn't complete.
You'll find those rules in the D&D Companion set (or was it the Masters set?), the AD&D 1e Battle-Sytem (I seem to recall it being a boxed set - you needed it to finish playing the Bloodstone modules), And the 2e Battle-Sytem book.
And there's building costs in the 1e DMG.  
You might as well cry about the fighter not being able to cast spells like a wizard or cleric or whatever(without duel/multi-classing)....
Oh, wait.  There's a recently dead edition that allowed just that.



Did I miss an edition somewhere?

I remember the edition that started it all.
I remember one that removed all reference to demons and devils in an effort to create a better image for D&D
I remember one that rewarded the best rules lawyers with some seriously unbalanced options
I remember one that tried to achieve class balance with mechanics that were too similar

What edition gave Fighter's spells?!?
While I don't claim to know what the original intent of the high level fighter was, I will say that I've never seen any mechanics in DnD the would support that game-style (large scale combat, building fortresses, ruling cities etc). Personally, I'd rather play the action hero kicking ass on the front lines than the commander hanging out in the back figuring out supply logistics for his army.



Then your bookshelf isn't complete.
You'll find those rules in the D&D Companion set (or was it the Masters set?), the AD&D 1e Battle-Sytem (I seem to recall it being a boxed set - you needed it to finish playing the Bloodstone modules), And the 2e Battle-Sytem book.
And there's building costs in the 1e DMG.  

It was the D&D companion boxed set for basic and the Rules Compendium for basic.  There was also an AD&D 2nd edition handbook called Castles that was like the race and class handbooks.  There were additional supplements too.  But the Compandion Boxed set was my favorite.
You might as well cry about the fighter not being able to cast spells like a wizard or cleric or whatever(without duel/multi-classing)....
Oh, wait.  There's a recently dead edition that allowed just that.



Did I miss an edition somewhere?

I remember the edition that started it all.
I remember one that removed all reference to demons and devils in an effort to create a better image for D&D
I remember one that rewarded the best rules lawyers with some seriously unbalanced options
I remember one that tried to achieve class balance with mechanics that were too similar

What edition gave Fighter's spells?!?



That last one, 4th.

All you have to do is spend a feat & pick up ritual casting (and buy any desired rituals).  Now you've got a chunk of the Magic-Users schtick.  Won't likely be any use during combat, but your still casting spells....

That last one, 4th.

All you have to do is spend a feat & pick up ritual casting (and buy any desired rituals).  Now you've got a chunk of the Magic-Users schtick.  Won't likely be any use during combat, but your still casting spells....



So, casting spells wasn't an actual feature of the fighter class, but an option that a player could choose.

Kind of like multi-classing. In fact I believe that the feats you're referring to were all Multi-class feats.
Elves were considered fighter/magic users in earlier editions.  Plus they got to build a stronghold in the woods at higher levels.

Try picking up a D&D Rules Cylcopedia for some interesting mass combat rules.  Caution.  Some heads have exploded from reading those rules.

"The Apollo moon landing is off topic for this thread and this forum. Let's get back on topic." Crazy Monkey



So, casting spells wasn't an actual feature of the fighter class, but an option that a player could choose.

Kind of like multi-classing. In fact I believe that the feats you're referring to were all Multi-class feats.



Yes and no, multiclassing on 4e is diferent, if you qualify for that, you can select a Multiclass feat, you can only take multiclass feat for a single class (except bards can select as many mc feats from diferent classes as he wants), you get training in a skill related to that class and a feature from that class or a limited version of it, as well as having access to class feats from that class you qualify.

Some of those mc feats gives you ritual caster feat,  you can also learn ritual caster by a non-mc feat, but you require training in arcana or religion.
Yes and no, multiclassing on 4e is diferent.



@mexrage - Thanks for a reasoned response, I do know how multiclassing works in 4E (and all the other editions too - 30+ years with the game).

I'm one of those old timers that actually liked a good chunk of what 4E tried to accomplish. That said, I'll be the first to admit that the AEDU mechanic created too much "sameness" across many of the classes.

Sameness is not the same as "Fighters casting spells", I find that statement to be version of "The Edition Wars" and will almost always post back with thinly veiled sarcasm.

There have been good and bad things with each and every edition that's been released. If D&D Next ignores that then it will become an inferior product. I'm okay with people stating what they did and didn't like about a particular edition, but it shoud be constructive criticism rather than inflammatory statements.
I would also like to point out in the Darksun Campaign setting 1991, Fighters would start to gather followers at level 10 ,page 23,  these followers would be made up of a Unit, 1 unit would be made up of (2-20) Stands, a Stand is 10 individuals of simmiular background ie human men at arms, or Human Archers.  These followers gathered automatically, whether there was a stronghold or not.  But then Darksun was not about slaying gods or dragons (the gods are dead,there is one dragon but he is atleast a level 50 beast who took part in the world's destruction).  

And running a army or keep is not being a beuracrat.  I would also like to point out that no dungeons and dragons videogame has ever come close to covering this facet of the game, as the technology of the time could only emulate one part of  what is this game.  And lets not even talk about DDO.