|
12 months ago ::
Jun 28, 2012 - 9:59AM
#221
|
Date Joined:
May 28, 2012
|
You're metagaming. Right there. You're assuming your knowledge automatically transfers to the character you're playing and that all of your enemies have the same information. What if the Wizard is an enchanter or diviner? We don't "all know" the full spectrum of tactical abilities in a party, or the level of tactical understanding the monsters have. I know that trolls are vulnerable to fire/acid. My character, encountering them for the first time, has no idea.
|
|
|
|
12 months ago ::
Jun 28, 2012 - 3:59PM
#222
|
Date Joined:
May 19, 2011
|
You're metagaming. Right there. You're assuming your knowledge automatically transfers to the character you're playing and that all of your enemies have the same information. What if the Wizard is an enchanter or diviner? We don't "all know" the full spectrum of tactical abilities in a party, or the level of tactical understanding the monsters have. I know that trolls are vulnerable to fire/acid. My character, encountering them for the first time, has no idea.
If they're fighting mindless monsters(like spiders, oozes, golems, etc), then yeah, they're not exactly the Navy Seals in terms of combat strategy.
But intelligent monsters or monsters with pack tactics are a different story.
Kobolds for example are very intelligent militaristic creatures. They KNOW casters are bad news. It's incredibly metagamey to assume these intelligent monsters are going to sit there and wail on someone they have trouble hurting and can wipe them out in a single hit. They may have a few of them sit there to distract the Fighter while they're ranged guys pick off the Wizard and Cleric(if he's wearing robes, a heavy armor Cleric has slightly less priority because he's also difficult to hurt) or feign a retreat to get the melee attackers further away while others flank the casters.
Or animals like Wolves and Lions who specialize in pack tactics. In nature animals like them always go for the old, sick, and weak animals because they are the easiest targets, and onyl go for the tougher and bigger game when they're all that's left or if the pack is desperate. The casters aren't always sick or old, but weak(physically anyways) and squishy, they are. SO chances are they're going to want to kill the casters asap.
It all depends on the monster they're fighting.
|
|
|
|
12 months ago ::
Jul 01, 2012 - 3:44AM
#223
|
|
|
Why attack the fighter? A few good reasons:
1. He came charging into the room with a lit torch, screwing up the hobgoblins night vision so he is the only one they can see.
2. He just threw a javelin at you, adding his strength to his attack and damage.
3. He just fired a Crossbow at you, again adding his strength to attack and damage(as its in the current rules).
Fighters are masters of all forms of combat. This includes ranged. The argument that a fast monster can out run a well prepared fighter falls apart quickly. Especially since you can draw a weapon as a free action. Throwing something at a fleeing monster is pretty easy when your strike and damage bonuses are so good.
In our play test, the player running with the reaver picked up a crossbow at first opportunity, so he didn't have to give up position to bring the pain.
Personally, I was relieved that attacks of opportunity were removed from the game. In 3.5 I would put ranks in the tumble skill no matter what class I was. I hated having to be meticulous about moving my figure around the grid to avoid extra damage. It made even small battles take hours to get through, even for experienced players.
If its the fighters priority to protect his buddies, let him ready an action. If he wants to be better at it, let him expand his abilities as he levels up. The Knight(cleric) has a great ability to stop enemies from his theme. Lets hope there are more options for protective fighters in the future.
A low level (1-3) fighter is not going to throw himself on a goblin hand grenade to save the party. Even if that's his job, it takes balls. Maybe a veteran fighter(level 5 up), would have this reflex. I just think we are expecting to much from a low level fighter, to somehow trap a well organized band of hobgoblins. Even a brilliant player is limited by the limitations of the character they play.
The point was made that hobgoblins are a mighty challenge to a low level party. I agree with this. They don't hesitate to throw javelins at whomever is in range in an attempt to bait the fighter out into the open. A four man team is probably too few to cover all your flanks so your wizards can stay safe, no matter what the fighter does.
|
|
|
|
12 months ago ::
Jul 01, 2012 - 5:16AM
#224
|
Date Joined:
May 19, 2011
|
1. He came charging into the room with a lit torch, screwing up the hobgoblins night vision so he is the only one they can see.
WHat? Torches don't blind anythign with night vision.
..."window.parent.tinyMCE.get('post_content').onLoad.dispatch();" contenteditable="true" />
Fighters are masters of all forms of combat. This includes ranged. The argument that a fast monster can out run a well prepared fighter falls apart quickly. Especially since you can draw a weapon as a free action. Throwing something at a fleeing monster is pretty easy when your strike and damage bonuses are so good.
This has either been not true or incredibly difficult in previous editions. The Fighter was a pure melee combatant in 4th, while in 3.5 he either needed to eb all ranged focus or all melee focus. Splitting between the two left him mediocre in both.
Personally, I was relieved that attacks of opportunity were removed from the game. In 3.5 I would put ranks in the tumble skill no matter what class I was. I hated having to be meticulous about moving my figure around the grid to avoid extra damage. It made even small battles take hours to get through, even for experienced players.
Idk, I play 4e and my battles don't take very long. It's incredibly gamey and immersion breaking for me to believe everyone's just going to stand there with a dopey look on their face while enemies run circles around them and just watch.
If its the fighters priority to protect his buddies, let him ready an action. If he wants to be better at it, let him expand his abilities as he levels up. The Knight(cleric) has a great ability to stop enemies from his theme. Lets hope there are more options for protective fighters in the future.
I don't like the fact I should give up my action to do something I should be able to do anyways. And the problem with theme is they cna only stop a single enemy once every round. So a mass of hobgoblins rushing past is going laugh at you and maul your Wizard.
|
|
|
|
12 months ago ::
Jul 02, 2012 - 12:06AM
#225
|
|
|
Dwarfish low light vision is defined as such:
"If there is no light within 30 feet of you, you treat shadows in that radius as normal light, and you treat darkness in that radius as shadows."
Therefor a fighter with a torch or other light source might eliminate the low light vision of his enemies. In a dark cave, this could be exploited to keep part of the party in a less descriptive field of vision. So the enemy may not realize that shadowy blob is actually a wizard and not another warrior.
I can't compare this fighter to 4.0, sorry never played it. In 3.5, even if you specialized in melee, your high base attack bonus always made it worth while to carry a ranged weapon. On one occasion our dwarven fighter shot a wizard out of the sky with his sling; using nothing but his base attack bonus to hit and strength bonus to damage.
A low level fighter may only be able to stop the attack of one enemy per turn, while a high level fighter may be able to stop even more. It's hard to say with the narrow glimpse at the build options. It feels as if they are letting the fighter build their character around offense or defensive maneuvers. I am hopeful that crowd control will be a possibility for higher level fighters. So long as it is not the norm for every kobald with a butter knife.
|
|
|
|
12 months ago ::
Jul 02, 2012 - 12:19AM
#226
|
Date Joined:
Nov 22, 2007
|
Just realized something.
It's not that the Fighter isn't the best at fighting, or that they aren't complex enough. It's that the fighter is great at fighting, but pants at everything else; and recent editions of the game robbed the Fighter of his "edge" in later levels.
In 1e and 2e, fighters were best at fighting, period. They had multiple attacks and later on weapon specialization. When wizards and the like started getting their dramatically terrifying spells, Fighters got a horde of followers; a literal small army. Sure, a wizard to could do a lot of damage, but 60-120 warriors lead by a high level fighter and his mid level sidekick were a serious threat. They also had the best saves at higher levels.
In 3e/3.5e, the Fighter lost almost all of what made him special. Everyone got multiple attacks and he lost his followers, his saves became some of the worst in the game, and while you got lots of feats, they never really added up to equal the powers everyone else was rocking.
In 4e, the Fighter was perfectly balanced with everyone else, but pidgeonholed into a very specific role within the party. This was also the debut of the "sticky" mechanics; where attacks of opportunity were an incovienience, the fighter could now force opponents to face him. Still though, not quite the equal of his peers, typically doing less damage per round than everyone else. No followers here either.
To fix this, I like what Valdark was getting at. A more controlled combat round. Trade extra damage for effects. I also think taking a page from Pathfinder might be an idea, giving them bonuses to certain saves and less armour penalties. A larger non-combat skillset would be nice to (even if it meant going back to weapon proficiences).
Sadly, the biggest problem (especially when compared to Rangers, Paladins and Clerics, the other "frontliners"), is that the Fighter is great at fighting, but is being compared to classes that are good or okay at fighting, but are also good at other things. In a world were players are used to WoW, Eldar Scrolls and FF style character ideals, where everyone gets a bit of everything powerwise and skillwise, the Fighter is out in the cold. Their old advantage, that they used to have a horde of followers, is gone.
Finally, as to why monsters don't simply run past the fighter and kill everyone else: because it's a bad idea. Sure, you might get a hit in or two, but now your back is to the Fighter, who is going to turn around and tune you up. Also, it's D&D. The DM shouldn't need a mechanic to make his monsters fight a certain way; they fight the way you, as the DM want them to. So if they want to run past the fighter to kill the mage.... bad luck mage.
Excellent points on the 2e fighter as well as the difference between being the better fighter and being the better "tank". I have never tanked as a fighter in any edition except for 4e and I disliked that role for my warrior just as much as I disliked playing a combat heavy rogue who lacked in his more traditional fields.
Brave Knights of W.T.F. Gryphon Helm Winner.
Edition wars kill players, this will kill Dungeons and Dragons.
|
|
|
|
12 months ago ::
Jul 02, 2012 - 12:21AM
#227
|
Date Joined:
Nov 22, 2007
|
You're metagaming. Right there. You're assuming your knowledge automatically transfers to the character you're playing and that all of your enemies have the same information. What if the Wizard is an enchanter or diviner? We don't "all know" the full spectrum of tactical abilities in a party, or the level of tactical understanding the monsters have. I know that trolls are vulnerable to fire/acid. My character, encountering them for the first time, has no idea.
If they're fighting mindless monsters(like spiders, oozes, golems, etc), then yeah, they're not exactly the Navy Seals in terms of combat strategy.
But intelligent monsters or monsters with pack tactics are a different story.
Kobolds for example are very intelligent militaristic creatures. They KNOW casters are bad news. It's incredibly metagamey to assume these intelligent monsters are going to sit there and wail on someone they have trouble hurting and can wipe them out in a single hit. They may have a few of them sit there to distract the Fighter while they're ranged guys pick off the Wizard and Cleric(if he's wearing robes, a heavy armor Cleric has slightly less priority because he's also difficult to hurt) or feign a retreat to get the melee attackers further away while others flank the casters.
Or animals like Wolves and Lions who specialize in pack tactics. In nature animals like them always go for the old, sick, and weak animals because they are the easiest targets, and onyl go for the tougher and bigger game when they're all that's left or if the pack is desperate. The casters aren't always sick or old, but weak(physically anyways) and squishy, they are. SO chances are they're going to want to kill the casters asap.
It all depends on the monster they're fighting.
And how does a 4e fighter approach negate any of these tactics?
Brave Knights of W.T.F. Gryphon Helm Winner.
Edition wars kill players, this will kill Dungeons and Dragons.
|
|
|
|
12 months ago ::
Jul 02, 2012 - 8:34AM
#228
|
Date Joined:
May 19, 2011
|
You're metagaming. Right there. You're assuming your knowledge automatically transfers to the character you're playing and that all of your enemies have the same information. What if the Wizard is an enchanter or diviner? We don't "all know" the full spectrum of tactical abilities in a party, or the level of tactical understanding the monsters have. I know that trolls are vulnerable to fire/acid. My character, encountering them for the first time, has no idea.
If they're fighting mindless monsters(like spiders, oozes, golems, etc), then yeah, they're not exactly the Navy Seals in terms of combat strategy.
But intelligent monsters or monsters with pack tactics are a different story.
Kobolds for example are very intelligent militaristic creatures. They KNOW casters are bad news. It's incredibly metagamey to assume these intelligent monsters are going to sit there and wail on someone they have trouble hurting and can wipe them out in a single hit. They may have a few of them sit there to distract the Fighter while they're ranged guys pick off the Wizard and Cleric(if he's wearing robes, a heavy armor Cleric has slightly less priority because he's also difficult to hurt) or feign a retreat to get the melee attackers further away while others flank the casters.
Or animals like Wolves and Lions who specialize in pack tactics. In nature animals like them always go for the old, sick, and weak animals because they are the easiest targets, and onyl go for the tougher and bigger game when they're all that's left or if the pack is desperate. The casters aren't always sick or old, but weak(physically anyways) and squishy, they are. SO chances are they're going to want to kill the casters asap.
It all depends on the monster they're fighting.
And how does a 4e fighter approach negate any of these tactics?
Because at least if they can't stop an enemy from getting past, they can punch them in the face as they go past and slap a penalty to attack anyone but them in the form of a mark. The mark doesn't force the enemy to attack the Fighter(except in rare cases where he uses a power that does specifically that).
And he can also do the same to the enemy if they have any squishes, then beat the crap out of the squishies if they try to get away, or tie down some of the stronger enemies trying to go for his squishies by smacking them if they try to move away from him.
|
|
|
|
11 months ago ::
Jul 08, 2012 - 10:36AM
#229
|
Date Joined:
Sep 19, 2006
|
You're metagaming. Right there. You're assuming your knowledge automatically transfers to the character you're playing and that all of your enemies have the same information. What if the Wizard is an enchanter or diviner? We don't "all know" the full spectrum of tactical abilities in a party, or the level of tactical understanding the monsters have. I know that trolls are vulnerable to fire/acid. My character, encountering them for the first time, has no idea.
If they're fighting mindless monsters(like spiders, oozes, golems, etc), then yeah, they're not exactly the Navy Seals in terms of combat strategy.
But intelligent monsters or monsters with pack tactics are a different story.
Kobolds for example are very intelligent militaristic creatures. They KNOW casters are bad news. It's incredibly metagamey to assume these intelligent monsters are going to sit there and wail on someone they have trouble hurting and can wipe them out in a single hit. They may have a few of them sit there to distract the Fighter while they're ranged guys pick off the Wizard and Cleric(if he's wearing robes, a heavy armor Cleric has slightly less priority because he's also difficult to hurt) or feign a retreat to get the melee attackers further away while others flank the casters.
Or animals like Wolves and Lions who specialize in pack tactics. In nature animals like them always go for the old, sick, and weak animals because they are the easiest targets, and onyl go for the tougher and bigger game when they're all that's left or if the pack is desperate. The casters aren't always sick or old, but weak(physically anyways) and squishy, they are. SO chances are they're going to want to kill the casters asap.
It all depends on the monster they're fighting.
And how does a 4e fighter approach negate any of these tactics?
Because at least if they can't stop an enemy from getting past, they can punch them in the face as they go past and slap a penalty to attack anyone but them in the form of a mark. The mark doesn't force the enemy to attack the Fighter(except in rare cases where he uses a power that does specifically that).
And he can also do the same to the enemy if they have any squishes, then beat the crap out of the squishies if they try to get away, or tie down some of the stronger enemies trying to go for his squishies by smacking them if they try to move away from him.
To add what EnglishLanguage said, Fighters also have the ability to mark multiple enemies if they have an ability/power/exploit that allows multiple attacks. That's HUGE for making monsters focus on you instead of your allies.
Also, Paladins have the ability to mark enemies and slap them with something called Divine Sanction in which they take penalties to attack rolls and damge if they do target other allies. So it's not just a Fighter thing, it's a Defender thing that I feel should be present with DD:N rules.
|
|
|
|
11 months ago ::
Jul 08, 2012 - 4:12PM
#230
|
Date Joined:
May 19, 2011
|
Paladins get truly terrifying when they hit EPic and take the Weakening CHallenge feat. If the enemy ignores the Divine Challenge, the attack does half damage.
|
|
|
