|
7 months ago ::
Nov 16, 2012 - 6:41PM
#111
|
Date Joined:
Sep 26, 2001
|
I wouldn't say it is boring per se, it just doesn't feel unique, or at least not unique enough. We now have three classes that have maneuvers and expertise dice. One class has clear class abilities that help evoke the feel the class is trying to Evoke (the Monk), one class has one class ability that tries to get across the feel the class is trying to evoke (the extra skills on the Rogue), and one class only has maneuvers. Eventually, we might even see Rangers and Warlords and maybe even Paladins and Barbarians all using maneuvers and expertise. This really helps diffuse the "unique-ness" of the mechanic and that is what people are trying to have for the Fighter.
I see what you mean, I just disagree. XD is a sytem that provides for the use of unique abilities. The fact that all characters use the same 6 attributes doesn't reduce the individuality of the classes.
True, in the same way that all classes using AEDU in 4e didn't reduce the individuality of those classes.
However, it's become an article of faith or a compromise or a lie repeated so often it's become the truth, that classes must have unique mechanics to be different.
That doesn't mean 'XD' can't be a uniquitous system, like HD or like BAB in 3.5 - but it does mean the fighter will need a unique mechanic of it's own.
The problem with keeping XD for just fighters, is that it prevents other classes from enjoying its brilliant versatility. Who wants to play Monk when a fighter gets so much tactical decision making?
That's kind of the idea. Each class has their snowflake mechanic, so you can ask "why be class A, when class B has this snowflake, and class A doesn't?" And vice-versa, of course.
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
|
|
|
|
7 months ago ::
Nov 16, 2012 - 7:49PM
#112
|
|
|
So let's see... on one hand we have people complaining that the Fighter's formerly-unique mechanic is now heavily pilfered by other classes and now seems to be the standard-bearer for all martial classes. On the other hand we have people insisting that the Fighter is fine because the Fighter does supposedly have unique class features that make him a better combatant than anyone. From where I'm standing on the issue, I see a couple of things about the whole discussion:
- Currently the Fighter is "unique" because he has
- higher hit dice (d10 HP)
- greatest accessibility to equipment
- an extra attack at level 6
- a bonus damage-dealing maneuver at level 1
- highest accuracy
- The problems with the "unique" factors are that
- classically the Fighter is not the guy with the highest hit dice
- that award goes to the Barbarian at d12
- a lot of combat-centric classes [Ranger, Paladin, Blackguard, etc.] bounce around in the d8 and d10 category
- rolled HP means that there's a good chance that the Fighter gets exactly the same HP as a d8 character
- static HP means that the Fighter is only better HP-wise by up to 10HP at level 10
- the equipment themselves are nondescript
- sure if you go for IMAGINATION they're different and exciting, but at the end of an attack roll you're looking at AC, not armor quality and other details like metal malleability or brittleness that could spell the difference between a completely harmless "twang!" and a totally fatal "urgh!" with bruises and broken bones galore in-between
- for a game that is rife with extra attacks regardless of edition (4E being the only one that reduces it to "one attack unless a power says otherwise") this is a boring class feature, and something that'll likely get pilfered later as other classes are added
- to be honest though, the fact that you make two attacks per round combined with Expertise Dice makes the class excessively complicated and boring if you ask me. Reason: you now have the option of either splitting the Expertise Dice between the two attacks or allocating all to one of the attacks (additional complexity) while there's nothing better for you to do as an alternative to attack, which almost brings us back to the boring nature of Full Attack -- almost only because you're allowed to move as part of the action to make two attacks
- currently the Monk can gain Deadly Strike at level 4, which in addition to the fact that he gets a far better mechanic than Whirlwind Attack (Flurry of Blows), mobility that beats anything a Rogue can do (Step of the Wind), and the ability to stun any opponent of any level, all at level 1 means that the only thing that makes the Fighter "better" is the fact that he has access to a wider array of weapons and armor... although unfortunately, 1d6+3d10 vs. 2d6+3d10 makes the Monk only inferior by 3 damage on average -- and it takes a lot to get to 2d6 damage in the first place -- while plate + shield is at best 10% better than 18 DEX + 16 WIS
- which means that it takes a significant amount of System Mastery(c) and a generous DM to make sure that the Fighter is better than the Monk
- we haven't even begun re-comparing Sneak Attack to Deadly Strike, as well as other comparable maneuvers
- the one maneuver that was supposed to make the Fighter almost as flexible out of combat as the Rogue -- Mighty Exertion -- is also a Monk maneuver
- currently the Monk has the same accuracy progression as the Fighter
As a result:
A) while the Fighter fluff-wise has a variety of things going on, he currently has only one thing going on for him -- extra attack -- and he gets that at level 6, with the likelihood that other classes could eventually get it
B) where mechanics are concerned, the Monk overall (as it stands) makes for a better Fighter than a Fighter for a good 50% of the core game
(the Rogue? What Rogue? Oh that guy with the whole array of "extra skills" as his special snowflake)
I wonder why it would hurt so bad to get the Warblade from Tome of Battle, translate his features into D&D Next, and then presenting him as the D&D Next Fighter.
|
|
|
|
7 months ago ::
Nov 16, 2012 - 8:37PM
#113
|
|
|
I propose the following "errata" for the Fighter:
- replace the last paragraph of "Level 1: Expertise" with the following:
- At 1st level, you gain a free maneuver in addition to what your fighting style normally grants you. It's recommended that you take Deadly Strike.
- add the following class features:
- Level 1: Weapon Aptitude. You specialize in the use of a particular weapon or weapon type. Choose a weapon type from what is normally available. You gain a +1 to hit when making attacks with that type of weapon. In addition, you can choose to specialize in a specific weapon, as opposed to just any weapon type. If you do so, you gain a +1 to hit as well as an additional expertise die, but only when making attacks with that weapon only; you lose the bonus expertise die and to-hit while not using that weapon.
- Level 3: Uncanny Dodge. Once per day, you can force a physical attack against you to be rolled with disadvantage.
- Level 5: Battle Cunning. Once per round, whenever you roll your expertise dice to deal damage to an opponent, you can choose to roll a single expertise die that resulted in a natural 1. If you are using a weapon whose type is what you specialized in, you can instead roll a single expertise die of any value. If you chose to specialize in a single weapon instead of a weapon type, you can instead roll any or all expertise dice, but still only once per round.
- Level 7: Battle Ardor. Treat natural 19s on attack rolls as if you rolled natural 20s instead.
- Level 9: Battle Mastery. You can take a second reaction each round.
|
|
|
|
7 months ago ::
Nov 16, 2012 - 10:18PM
#114
|
Date Joined:
Jan 15, 2009
|
I wonder why it would hurt so bad to get the Warblade from Tome of Battle, translate his features into D&D Next, and then presenting him as the D&D Next Fighter.
Well nudge, nudge.
I have read some of the Tome of Battle but dont own it what would it look like.
|
|
|
|
7 months ago ::
Nov 16, 2012 - 10:52PM
#115
|
Date Joined:
Sep 26, 2001
|
Good analysis, chaosfang. What it comes down to is that the fighter has slightly better numbers, just slightly more damage, just slightly more AC, just slightly more attacks hitting (thanks to an occassional 'extra' attack).
That's where the fighter was in the first playtest.
Guess the fighter needs some new new unique mechanic to make it interesting and differentiate it from the other classes, huh?
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
|
|
|
|
7 months ago ::
Nov 16, 2012 - 11:16PM
#116
|
|
|
Good analysis, chaosfang. What it comes down to is that the fighter has slightly better numbers, just slightly more damage, just slightly more AC, just slightly more attacks hitting (thanks to an occassional 'extra' attack).
That's where the fighter was in the first playtest.
Guess the fighter needs some new new unique mechanic to make it interesting and differentiate it from the other classes, huh?
They should wait till that last minute to give them their unique stuff so there isn't enough time to give it away to everyone other class.
Love 4e? Concerned about its future? join the Old Guard of 4th EditionReality Refracted: Social ContractsD & D: A Documentary Kickstarter ( http://kck.st/SyKNzf) 
Dreaming the Impossible Dream
Show
Imagine a world where the first-time D&D player rolls stats, picks a race, picks a class, picks an alignment, and buys gear to create a character. Imagine if an experienced player, maybe the person helping our theoretical player learn the ropes, could also make a character by rolling ability scores and picking a race, class, feat, skills, class features, spells or powers, and so on. Those two players used different paths to build characters, but the system design allows them to play at the same table. -Mearl
|
|
|
|
7 months ago ::
Nov 16, 2012 - 11:22PM
#117
|
|
|
I wonder why it would hurt so bad to get the Warblade from Tome of Battle, translate his features into D&D Next, and then presenting him as the D&D Next Fighter.
Well nudge, nudge.
I have read some of the Tome of Battle but dont own it what would it look like.
community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/758...
Took most of the ideas from Tome of Battle's Warblade, condensed it and allocated the features so that we end up with zero dead levels for the Fighter 
I honestly don't see why they should have a design philosophy involving "giving the Fighter cool stuff, then if everyone likes it give it to all other classes even if it makes the Fighter bland". It's happened to feats, and it's now happening to maneuvers.
I look at both 4E and 13th Age, and even though they handle the Fighter differently, they both keep the class both "cool" and unique, at least IMHO.
|
|
|
|
7 months ago ::
Nov 16, 2012 - 11:23PM
#118
|
Date Joined:
Sep 26, 2001
|
Good analysis, chaosfang. What it comes down to is that the fighter has slightly better numbers, just slightly more damage, just slightly more AC, just slightly more attacks hitting (thanks to an occassional 'extra' attack).
That's where the fighter was in the first playtest.
Guess the fighter needs some new new unique mechanic to make it interesting and differentiate it from the other classes, huh?
They should wait till that last minute to give them their unique stuff so there isn't enough time to give it away to everyone other class.
That's what supplements are for.
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
|
|
|
|
7 months ago ::
Nov 16, 2012 - 11:50PM
#119
|
|
|
I wonder why it would hurt so bad to get the Warblade from Tome of Battle, translate his features into D&D Next, and then presenting him as the D&D Next Fighter.
Can we do this? Please?
|
|
|
|
7 months ago ::
Nov 16, 2012 - 11:52PM
#120
|
Date Joined:
Jul 29, 2012
|
- Currently the Fighter is "unique" because he has
And the Monk.
|
|
|
