|
13 months ago ::
May 27, 2012 - 9:25AM
#21
|
Date Joined:
Jul 18, 2007
|
I like the options given by improvisational attacks. I feel as though multiple attacks per round would help balance if it allowed multiple types of attacks per round like the current fighter surge, perhaps. Aside from that, trip, grapple, disarm; these all gave the fighter more options while allowing you to be a straightforward fighters; they were options, but you were still, at core, a killing machine.
Oh, you've opened a can of worms now. The number-crunching crowd will be here soon with math that supposedly proves how inferior multiple attacks are.
|
|
|
|
13 months ago ::
May 27, 2012 - 9:29AM
#22
|
Date Joined:
Aug 24, 2010
|
I didn't say multiple attacks, I said multiple types of attacks per round. The ability to knock somebody over and then attack them or the ability to double move and still get an attack in like the fighter suge would be excellant. Imagine if at, say 11th level, fighter surge became either constant or at will with a cool-down.
|
|
|
|
13 months ago ::
May 27, 2012 - 9:36AM
#23
|
Date Joined:
Jul 18, 2007
|
I didn't say multiple attacks, I said multiple types of attacks per round. The ability to knock somebody over and then attack them or the ability to double move and still get an attack in like the fighter suge would be excellant. Imagine if at, say 11th level, fighter surge became either constant or at will with a cool-down.
Ah, yes. I said in another thread somewhere around here that I' d be good with fighters getting access to status effects that they can apply to attacks on the fly. So at level 1-4, you just get a basic attack. At level 5, you choose to learn how to push or pull as part of your normal attacks. At level 8, trip or disarm. And so forth. Furthermore, certain classes of weapons could provide a bonus to using the appropriate maneuver - Polearms get a +1 to hit if you know trip, while clubs/maces/hammers could get bonuses to dazing attacks.
Edit, crossposting some of these thoughts to my blog.
|
|
|
|
13 months ago ::
May 27, 2012 - 9:46AM
#24
|
Date Joined:
Oct 26, 2004
|
I didn't say the fighter sucked I said that designing it so that they only get to be amazing when the other classes run out of juice is bad.
This slayer isn't designed like that. It's subtle but it'll be able to keep up for now, the surge, cleave, and such keep them on fairly solid footing.
My objection is to the idea that it's ok to balance a class's performance against what happens when other classes run out of juice/are otherwise nerfed, it's not.
|
|
|
|
13 months ago ::
May 27, 2012 - 10:04AM
#25
|
Date Joined:
Aug 25, 2007
|
I didn't say the fighter sucked I said that designing it so that they only get to be amazing when the other classes run out of juice is bad.
This slayer isn't designed like that. It's subtle but it'll be able to keep up for now, the surge, cleave, and such keep them on fairly solid footing.
My objection is to the idea that it's ok to balance a class's performance against what happens when other classes run out of juice/are otherwise nerfed, it's not.
It kind of depend on how the out of juice thing is implemented. In many editions wha it meant was a spellcaster would usually have a round or 2 of awesome where the fighter would be a consistent strong preformer. In a 4 round fight 2 rounds of awesome with 2 rounds of suckking basically balances with 4 rounds of strong performance. The strong performance might actually be more useful overall it just doesn't have as many oh awesome moments. I would normally say I don't think anyone is sugeting that the fighter should suck and the only time he does not suck is when the mage is out of juice and so he sucks more, but I've been on these boards too long and there are people who do suggest that. So I'll just say there is nothing wrong IMO with one class having spiky performance and another class having consistent performance as long as the overall performance is in the same general area.
|
|
|
|
13 months ago ::
May 27, 2012 - 10:04AM
#26
|
Date Joined:
Jan 15, 2008
|
I didn't say the fighter sucked I said that designing it so that they only get to be amazing when the other classes run out of juice is bad.
This slayer isn't designed like that. It's subtle but it'll be able to keep up for now, the surge, cleave, and such keep them on fairly solid footing.
My objection is to the idea that it's ok to balance a class's performance against what happens when other classes run out of juice/are otherwise nerfed, it's not.
I think the idea is that the Fighter is consistant. Slow and steady vs Fast and Bursty. A fighter can deal the same damage for hours, a wizard can do alow in seconds in seconds but sacrifices the consistancey a fighter has for moments of excellence.
|
|
|
|
13 months ago ::
May 27, 2012 - 10:11AM
#27
|
Date Joined:
May 24, 2012
|
So far, yes I like the class a lot, all of them
|
|
|
|
13 months ago ::
May 27, 2012 - 10:14AM
#28
|
Date Joined:
May 19, 2011
|
I think it has a solid foundation. Hopefully it gets better once they start adding in the rest of the Fighter's options.
|
|
|
|
13 months ago ::
May 27, 2012 - 10:17AM
#29
|
Date Joined:
Aug 16, 2007
|
I liked the way the fighter played.
I think the need for "complex" fighters comes from the play expectations people have developed. When character death is never really an option and killing things is the best way to get XP, combat becomes the focus in its own right, and people understandably want interesting options to keep yet another meaningless fight feeling "fresh".
If combat was the last resort that it should be (IMO, sure) Fighters would be thankful for their reliable damage and would thank whatever pagan deities that they had a quadratic wizard at thier backs.
As I've said elsewhere, I think this is also exascerbated by the fact that the game doesn't really change as you level. Level 20 plays the same as level 1, you're just fighting bigger monsters in bigger places. I think if there was something like the followers and stronghold-building options of earlier editions (or, you know, something), people would look beyond the combat and see the bigger picture (more often, at least).
I suspect that might help. Honestly, adventuring has felt like an XP treadmill as of late. Maybe 5e will address these things.
|
|
|
|
13 months ago ::
May 27, 2012 - 10:19AM
#30
|
Date Joined:
Oct 26, 2004
|
YEah, for example I'd like to try switching the themes around a bit.
See what happens when we swap the fighter's slayer theme for the cleric's gaudian, or maybe the rogue grabs mystic?
Also I don't mind if the fighter is consistent, vs the wizard's spiky, I just want the fighter's consistent to take into account the wizard's spikes not just be compared to the wizard's cantrips. Which i think this fighter does, so far.
|
|
|
