|
13 months ago ::
May 30, 2012 - 3:37AM
#1
|
Date Joined:
May 25, 2011
|
I've been kicking some ideas about the fighter around and I keep coming back to the same question. Why does "Fighter" inherently have to translate to "Conan" style of combatant. From everything that we've read about the Dev Team's vision of what makes a fighter a fighter, they are not just the "grab something big and heavy and hit the bad guy relentlessly" that we picture a Barbarian being. I get the impression that they exist more in the "Trained and highly disciplined warrior, deadly in his craft". A professional warrior. That said, I considered the above idea along side the Wizard and Cleric, the two classes most commonly juxtaposed against the fighter for the purpose of saying "See! He's boring!" Wizards are professionally trained magic users, taught their powers by masters, often focusing in a given school of magic. Clerics are professionally trained workers of divine power, taught to channel their powers in monasteries, often focusing in a given domain that represents the glory of their deity. Fighters have Domains/Schools as well, they're just called Fighting Styles. Just because two people are trained in the use of the sword, doesn't mean they know the same moves and combat styles. A florentine fencer is not going to fight the same way as a strict saber fencer. Just because a florentine fencer uses two weapons doesn't mean he'll share ANY technique or attack patterns as someone trained in Niten Ichi-ryu (the two-sword style developed by Musashi Miyamoto). There are aggressive styles, defensive styles, flashy styles. If the Fighter is the master of the disciplined weapon, why not make that part of their class creation and design/incorporate the same idea of Domains/Schools, but have them define what style of combat they were trained in. There's been talk of an interview/article where it was mentioned that Fighters may potentially be able to choose two different themes. I love it, but make it simple, one of them is limited to a group of themes that ONLY the Fighters can take that decides their combat style. This style should define the basic "Core" mechanics of that particular fighter when in combat. You could possibly consider them "Fighter Cantrips" in the sense that just like Cantrips are what a Wizard has done SO many times by training that they're just second nature, these... let's call them Style Techniques, are what a fighter trained in a particular style is capable of just doing, perhaps even reflexively in certain cases. I think something like that would give some options, versatility, and freedom to the Fighter that a lot of people seem to really be upset about missing, while still fitting in thematically and not just making them do magical stuff with a sword (shockwaves, energy blades, etc). I don't think anyone is wanting to see Fighter's throwing vaccuum blades when they swing. 
|
|
|
|
13 months ago ::
May 30, 2012 - 5:22AM
#2
|
Date Joined:
Jan 10, 2012
|
I believe it has been stated somewhere that Combat Maneuvers are coming later. That would help in diversifying the Fighter.
|
|
|
|
13 months ago ::
May 30, 2012 - 5:42AM
#3
|
Date Joined:
May 24, 2012
|
That's not a bad idea at all, actually. However, I think the themes are essentially going to be doing the same thing, i.e. "Slayer" is just one of the (hopefully) many, others giving their own distinct flairs to the fighter. So maybe there is something like a "fencer" or "duelist" theme etc.
|
|
|
|
13 months ago ::
May 30, 2012 - 5:48AM
#4
|
Date Joined:
Sep 19, 2008
|
That's not a bad idea at all, actually.
However, I think the themes are essentially going to be doing the same thing, i.e. "Slayer" is just one of the (hopefully) many, others giving their own distinct flairs to the fighter. So maybe there is something like a "fencer" or "duelist" theme etc.
Yeah, but what does the FIGHTER CLASS bring to the table alongside Slayer?
NOTHING.
Edit: Clarity
Ahh, so THIS is where I can add a sig.
Remember: Killing an ancient God inside of a pyramid IS a Special Occasion, and thus, ladies should be dipping into their Special Occasions underwear drawer.
|
|
|
|
13 months ago ::
May 30, 2012 - 5:55AM
#5
|
Date Joined:
May 24, 2012
|
That's not a bad idea at all, actually.
However, I think the themes are essentially going to be doing the same thing, i.e. "Slayer" is just one of the (hopefully) many, others giving their own distinct flairs to the fighter. So maybe there is something like a "fencer" or "duelist" theme etc.
Yeah, but what does the FIGHTER CLASS bring to the table alongside Slayer?
NOTHING.
Edit: Clarity
Oh I don't know, maybe having a durable front-line fighter able to dish out tons of damage rather consistently is a nice thing to have around?
|
|
|
|
13 months ago ::
May 30, 2012 - 6:20AM
#6
|
Date Joined:
May 24, 2012
|
Oh I don't know, maybe having a durable front-line fighter able to dish out tons of damage rather consistently is a nice thing to have around?
The problem with that is that both Clerics are more durable and hit nearly as hard. Factor in Spiritual Hammer and Crusader's Strike, respectively, and they hit harder.
Also, the Fighter's reliability isn't baked into the class. It's the Theme that makes him dependable.
|
|
|
|
13 months ago ::
May 30, 2012 - 6:25AM
#7
|
|
|
Alas, themes aren't class-dependent, leading to weird situations where a cleric (or wizard, if you really wanted to?) could be a better defender than the fighter. But I can picture either fighter-only themes, or something similar but just for fighters.
I can picture an Archer theme that takes away Cleave and gives you something ranged instead, for instance.
|
|
|
|
13 months ago ::
May 30, 2012 - 6:30AM
#8
|
Date Joined:
May 24, 2012
|
Oh I don't know, maybe having a durable front-line fighter able to dish out tons of damage rather consistently is a nice thing to have around?
The problem with that is that both Clerics are more durable and hit nearly as hard. Factor in Spiritual Hammer and Crusader's Strike, respectively, and they hit harder.
Both of which are expendable resources you can use only a few times per day, while the fighter just keeps on trucking. Also, 1d10 +2, is nowhere even near as good as 2d6+7. Expected (average) damage value for the cleric is 7.5, whereas for the fighter it's a whopping 14, i.e. almost twice as much and he can just keep swinging all day long. So no, the cleric most certainly doesn't hit as hard, not even close.
Also, the Fighter's reliability isn't baked into the class. It's the Theme that makes him dependable.
Yeah, it kinda is, fighter has a high attack bonus, high average damage, great durability and they aren't dependent on any resource (such as spells per day or rage), this equals consistent and dependable damage.
|
|
|
|
13 months ago ::
May 30, 2012 - 7:46AM
#9
|
Date Joined:
Aug 31, 2007
|
I like the idea of fighters getting a fighting style option to balance with cantrips and schemes. The designers have talked about giving fighters two themes at first level, but that actually worries me a bit. If they do it wrong there will be a lot of people taking 1 level of fighter just for the extra theme and harkens back to the old 3e problem where the fighter got more feats but no class powers that where unique to fighters. Alas, themes aren't class-dependent, leading to weird situations where a cleric (or wizard, if you really wanted to?) could be a better defender than the fighter. But I can picture either fighter-only themes, or something similar but just for fighters.
That that other characters can be a better defender then a fighter is to be expected. 5e is harkening back to the older character concepts, and Fighters are not naturally defenders now, they are strikers. You are going to have to take a theme or some other option to make a defender fighter in 5e.
The designers have said that themes should be universal, but I would be surprised if there are not class specific themes. The first PHB is likely to avoid them, picking the most generally useful themes for the initial list, but they will turn up shortly there after unless the designers lay down a strict rule against class specific themes.
|
|
|
|
13 months ago ::
May 30, 2012 - 8:40AM
#10
|
Date Joined:
May 25, 2011
|
Alas, themes aren't class-dependent, leading to weird situations where a cleric (or wizard, if you really wanted to?) could be a better defender than the fighter.
I did want to throw out that as it currently stands, I don't see a Wizard ever being able to make a better front-line defender, just by simple nature that they lose the ability to cast even their cantrips if they put on any armor whatsoever. The cleric however, that probably wouldn't be too hard to pull off, but getting back to the original idea of the Fighting Style, if your Fighter specifically takes a style that is more defensive, he should still be capable of being a better draw/soak point for enemy attacks than the Cleric.
Also, it was asked what does the Fighter CLASS bring to the table alongside Slayer? Well, hopefully if they go with a 2-Theme option for the fighter and require one of them to be a Fighting Style, then it would bring as much to the table as a Cleric choosing their Domain abilities or a Wizard choosing their school abilities.
When I talk about Fighter Cantrips/Style Techniques, more specifically I imagine something like, if they take a style that emphasizes footwork, positioning, and striking when the opponent is vulnerable, as any number of the various schools of fencing or dueling might, then they might get, as examples: (2 assumptions about the following example. 1. As a nimble style, the Fighter would be using a Finesse weapon, likely Rapier. 2. The math and mechanics are purely for illustrative purpose here.)
The Salute - As a Move, you directly challenge and draw the attention of an enemy adjacent to you. This is considered in effect until the start of your next turn.
Parry - When an enemy you have Saluted attacks you, as a Reaction you may make a Dex check and add 1/2 of your result to your AC for the purposes of determining whether or not the enemy's attack hits.
Bad Form - If an enemy you have Saluted attacks one of your allies without attacking you or move's away from you without attacking, you may use a Reaction to make a weapon attack against it.
I know those sound and look exactly like 4e fighter Mark powers, but if we're discussing the idea of the Class choices defining how the Fighter works, then it's easiest to work from a simple point of reference.
By tying simple core mechanics or powers to a particular fighting style, and ensuring that EVERY Fighting Style that is an option is properly designed, it allows the Fighter to have a simple core design, but then have their Fighting Style choice define their exact function and role as much as the Cleric's choice of Deity defines their function and role.
|
|
|
