|
11 months ago ::
Jul 30, 2012 - 6:18AM
#11
|
|
|
Fighters deserve and require a unique functionality and mechanic.
Complaining that they're sucking up cool things that other classes will use is not something I will ever get behind, because the fight so far has been getting them to have something unique at all.
There's plenty of other ways to get cool-weapon-user things to other classes, but the fighter does need to have its shiny toys.
I tend to disagree. While I'm a big proponent of Fighter's getting nice things, Fighter's aren't the only classes with an issue. Rogues and Rangers were only marginally ahead of the Fighter in 3.5. Barbarians, Knights, and other mundane classes were all also similarly limited.
While yes, the Fighter should have something unique, everyone should be able to do cool things. Right now they're saying they want a unique mechanic for each class, but are we counting on 20 levels worth of rogue tricks, and Barbarian Rages, etc, to let them keep pace as well?
Personally I'd much rather have the Combat Superiority mechanic baseline for all mundanes, in the same way that spells per day is baseline for all casters. The Fighter's unique thing would be in maneuvers that utilize it that are exclusive to him (and other classes should similarly have their own unique maneuvers); and possibly progression (for example the Fighter might have the highest progression, giving him more CS dice than other classes) or refresh rate (for example while the Fighter might refresh automatically each round, a rogue might refresh when he attacks someone with advantage)
|
|
|
|
11 months ago ::
Jul 30, 2012 - 6:27AM
#12
|
Date Joined:
Jun 17, 2010
|
The flaw is that trading in something that makes you level-apropriate for something 'interesting' leaves you behind the curve when you do so.
So, when a Wizard uses Hold Person instead of Fireball, does that put them "behind the curve" ?
D&D Next = D&D: Quantum Edition
|
|
|
|
11 months ago ::
Jul 30, 2012 - 7:31AM
#13
|
|
|
I tend to disagree. While I'm a big proponent of Fighter's getting nice things, Fighter's aren't the only classes with an issue. Rogues and Rangers were only marginally ahead of the Fighter in 3.5. Barbarians, Knights, and other mundane classes were all also similarly limited.
While yes, the Fighter should have something unique, everyone should be able to do cool things. Right now they're saying they want a unique mechanic for each class, but are we counting on 20 levels worth of rogue tricks, and Barbarian Rages, etc, to let them keep pace as well?
Personally I'd much rather have the Combat Superiority mechanic baseline for all mundanes, in the same way that spells per day is baseline for all casters. The Fighter's unique thing would be in maneuvers that utilize it that are exclusive to him (and other classes should similarly have their own unique maneuvers); and possibly progression (for example the Fighter might have the highest progression, giving him more CS dice than other classes) or refresh rate (for example while the Fighter might refresh automatically each round, a rogue might refresh when he attacks someone with advantage)
Yes, all classes should be designed with cool things to do at all levels.
And those cool things should be distinctive to the class. Barbarians should have exclusive use of Rage, Rogues Sneak Attacks and tricks, Rangers traps and stalking, and so forth. Minor shadings on the same mechanic are less flavorful.
|
|
|
|
11 months ago ::
Jul 30, 2012 - 5:33PM
#14
|
Date Joined:
Sep 26, 2001
|
The flaw is that trading in something that makes you level-apropriate for something 'interesting' leaves you behind the curve when you do so.
So, when a Wizard uses Hold Person instead of Fireball, does that put them "behind the curve" ?
In 3e the 'curve' wasn't damage, it was BAB or save DCs. Using Hold Person instead of Fireball didn't forfiet the scaling save DC from spell level, so no. In 4e, the 1/2 level attack bonus was the scaling element and using one spell rather than another didn't forfiet any of that, either. In 5e, who knows, we haven't seen Fireball yet...
Love 4e? Concerned about its future? Join the Old Guard of 4e"You want The Tooth? You can't handle The Tooth!" - Dahlver-Nar. "If magic is unrestrained in the campaign, D&D quickly degenerates into a weird wizard show where players get bored quickly" - E. Gary Gygax
|
|
|
|
11 months ago ::
Jul 30, 2012 - 5:47PM
#15
|
Date Joined:
Jun 17, 2010
|
The flaw is that trading in something that makes you level-apropriate for something 'interesting' leaves you behind the curve when you do so.
So, when a Wizard uses Hold Person instead of Fireball, does that put them "behind the curve" ?
In 3e the 'curve' wasn't damage, it was BAB or save DCs. Using Hold Person instead of Fireball didn't forfiet the scaling save DC from spell level, so no. In 4e, the 1/2 level attack bonus was the scaling element and using one spell rather than another didn't forfiet any of that, either. In 5e, who knows, we haven't seen Fireball yet...
Well, considering both BAB and automatic save DC progression are gone...wouldn't that put your conclusions in question, at the very least?
D&D Next = D&D: Quantum Edition
|
|
|
|
11 months ago ::
Jul 30, 2012 - 5:53PM
#16
|
Date Joined:
Sep 26, 2001
|
The flaw is that trading in something that makes you level-apropriate for something 'interesting' leaves you behind the curve when you do so.
So, when a Wizard uses Hold Person instead of Fireball, does that put them "behind the curve" ?
In 3e the 'curve' wasn't damage, it was BAB or save DCs. Using Hold Person instead of Fireball didn't forfiet the scaling save DC from spell level, so no. In 4e, the 1/2 level attack bonus was the scaling element and using one spell rather than another didn't forfiet any of that, either. In 5e, who knows, we haven't seen Fireball yet...
Well, considering both BAB and automatic save DC progression are gone...wouldn't that put your conclusions in question, at the very least?
At the 'risk' of repeating myself:
Remember that 5e's bounded accuracy leaves damage as the key thing that scales our combat effectiveness as you level. The article makes it clear that Combat Superiority dice are gained as you level, so it's a scaling damage mechanic for the fighter.
The question is, is it the fighter's only scaling damage, or is it over and above level-apropriate damage? If it's just how the fighter keeps up, then spending feats or taking a theme to get the privilege of giving it up for a little versatility isn't that attractive. If it's over-and-above, then the fighter is a pretty butch striker...
Love 4e? Concerned about its future? Join the Old Guard of 4e"You want The Tooth? You can't handle The Tooth!" - Dahlver-Nar. "If magic is unrestrained in the campaign, D&D quickly degenerates into a weird wizard show where players get bored quickly" - E. Gary Gygax
|
|
|
|
11 months ago ::
Jul 30, 2012 - 7:01PM
#17
|
Date Joined:
Nov 19, 2001
|
In 4e terms I hope it will be like this. You can make the fighter a:
1. Defender: Less damage but still on the curve.
2. Specialist: (Swashbuckler, Archer etc). Could be Striker damage (above the curve) but in cool ways, examples would be more or off turn attacks. Or could be less but more tactical (controlling options, disarm, push, slide, prone etc). Depending on how to dial it, Defender damage but still on the curve.
3. Pure Damage (the striker)
4. Any combination of the above (examples of this could be mainly high damage with some Defenderish options, or primarily a Striker but with a few Dualist abilities).
Just because you have options doesn't mean your damage will go down. I good mix of off-turn attacks and the tactics to get the most out of these will probably be more damage than the player who says me attack with big axe and lots of damage dice, but if the system is good the expert fighter will not completely outshine the simple one.
I feel there will be built in damage increase no matter what options you take. The default will be the fighter doing striker damage with little stickiness. You can exchange some of this extra striker damage to make a Defender, A Speciallist (I would call this soft control) or a Striker with more optoins than just pure damage.
I know the playtest was only 3 lvls, but if I had to give the playtest Fighter a role I would say Striker hands down so I feel that in 5e the fighter will be a default Striker (above the curve damage) with option to tone this down for options.
|
|
|
