|
1 year ago ::
May 02, 2012 - 8:10PM
#41
|
Date Joined:
Apr 24, 2012
|
@Garthanos, are you in the military?
and actually I think Sargeant goes back to medieval france? It looks like a french word.
EDIT: Yeah I just googled it. circa 1200 France. Means non-commissioned military officer.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
May 02, 2012 - 8:41PM
#42
|
Date Joined:
Jan 15, 2009
|
@Garthanos, are you in the military?
Dad was...
and actually I think Sargeant goes back to medieval france?
Feels to modern to me.. origins of every modern world are techically very old, but the implied well context of a word give it distinction.
The Words Martial Prowess... have an old ring to them... where as military power does not? The distinction is kind of one of poetry.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
May 02, 2012 - 8:47PM
#43
|
Date Joined:
Jan 15, 2009
|
Whats in a name?
In a game where attributes are called abilities and feats are called powers and perquisities are called feats?
At least skills are skills... but that'll probably change with 5E.
I think talents are called feats.
But yes spot on with feats being called powers.
Actually the skills in 4e are already referring to something broader than most consider skills.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
May 02, 2012 - 11:39PM
#44
|
Date Joined:
Mar 19, 2004
|
Serjeants (as termed by the french) often referred to the highest rank available to men-at-arms, and functioned much like knights in all but name and social status.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
May 03, 2012 - 9:02AM
#45
|
Date Joined:
Jan 13, 2012
|
I do think that the fighter should be the preeminent default melee class in D&D 5e and I would like to see them based upon Tome of Battle: The Book of Nine Swords. I think the fighter should have as many combat options as possible I am in favor of a more complex fighter with more options in combat.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
May 03, 2012 - 11:03PM
#46
|
Date Joined:
Jun 23, 2008
|
The fighter being best at fighting is such a broad term. What does that even mean? I don't think he should be more scary than a raging Barbarian, durable than a Paladin with access to Lay on Hands, or more mobile than a Ranger. It would seem to me that the Fighter should be somewhere between the three, able to trade blows toe-to-toe for a long period of time without losing effectiveness. I think a Rogue who jumps him in a dark alleyway should still be an extreme danger to him during the short window of time before the Fighter gets his bearings.
I'm fine with the Fighter being a great well rounded and dangerous melee bruiser but if a game contains little to no traps, tracking, or social intrigue and is quite combat heavy then other classes like the Rogue, Ranger, Paladin, and Barbarian should still have a definite niche in a battle instead of just being straight out-classed by the Fighter.
|
|
|
