|
6 months ago ::
Nov 19, 2012 - 2:27PM
#1
|
Date Joined:
Jun 17, 2010
|
So, this is simple. Fighters shouldn't have a monopoly on defensive, protect-your-friends type characters. The idea of moving Parry to being fighter-only is something I don't agree with. Yes, I'm aware that this doesn't solve the "how do we make the fighter unique" problem, but that problem shouldn't be arbitrarily solved just for the sake of solving it, there should be a reason behind it.
Other classes than Fighter deserve to be in this category. From the 'core' list, we have the Fighter and Paladin that I think everyone can agree on.
But to that list, I would also like to add Monk. It would be a different style, no doubt, but the results should be effective. Distraction and disruption of enemies, supreme dodgyness, and really really fast hands are the order of the day. Ideally, this could be done in a way such that it feels different from the Sword&Board styles that Fighters and Paladins might employ.
I'd also like to make the case for the Druid. There are a lot of really tough creatures out there, and with Wild Shape you should be able to become them, not just the typical attack-predator types. Have it be a bit more balanced than it was in 3.5, but more effective at being defensive than it was in 4e. Emphasize the protect-your-friends aspect, because friendness is something I associate with Druids.
There's also plenty of room for the defensive arcanist, whatever class you want to call that - abjurer, swordmage, the name isn't all that critical. The point is that the existence of defensive magic - shields, resistance, mage armor - can and should lead to people who specialize in it, and use it in much the same way that fighters use armor and shields made of metal.
If we go into the psionics realm, then there's a parallel with them for the same reasons as an arcanist - defensive psionics are a thing, therefore there will be people who become specialists at it.
Bottom line, it's an incredibly enjoyable way of playing, to me, and I'd really hate it if only Fighters could do it.
D&D Next = D&D: Quantum Edition
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Nov 19, 2012 - 2:29PM
#2
|
|
|
You know moving parry to fighter only is not the Devs saying that they wont have defensive support for other classes right? The ability alone does not a protective character make  There's plenty of room for defensive clerics, rogues, and wizards!
My two copper.
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Nov 19, 2012 - 2:31PM
#3
|
Date Joined:
Jun 17, 2010
|
You know moving parry to fighter only is not the Devs saying that they wont have defensive support for other classes right? The ability alone does not a protective character make There's plenty of room for defensive clerics, rogues, and wizards!
Yes, I know that they're not saying that they won't. This is not objecting to anything they've done, but rather a suggestion for something they should do.
Also, there are more classes than clerics, rogues, and wizards. Not a single one of those I expect to have a defensive style anywhere near as effective as a Fighter. If you're a "core four" adherent, you will not find any common ground here.
D&D Next = D&D: Quantum Edition
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Nov 19, 2012 - 2:35PM
#4
|
Date Joined:
Nov 19, 2007
|
I agree with the concept, Mand12. If someone's familiar with fighting at all, he knows something about defence. There shouldn't be anything stopping a PC from "specialising" if you will, in defence rather than attack. In our last playtest, the Protector fighter tried to do that as much as he could (at least, when his buddies were nearby ).
In memory of wrecan and his Unearthed Wrecana.5e should strongly stay away from "I don't like it, so you can't have it either."
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Nov 19, 2012 - 2:35PM
#5
|
|
|
Needs a cape wearing rogue that can redirect attacks and confuse enemies with it. That would be an epic defensive character.
Mystical Disarm Technique: When an enemy attacks the rogue or an ally adjacent to the rogue, as a reaction the rogue can spend 3 expertise dice to make an attack roll with his cape. If he succeeds he wraps the target's arm in his cape and uses it to disarm the opponent. The weapon drops in a space adjacent to the opponent. The attack is interrupted this way.
Horrible wording because it just came off the top of my head :P
My two copper.
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Nov 19, 2012 - 2:54PM
#6
|
Date Joined:
Aug 25, 2007
|
well the parry manuver only reduces damage on yourselve it is it is the protect manuver that prevents damage to others.
It makes the fighter the tough guy being able to take lots of damage by reducing it.
I don't know if i see the rogue or monk to be as though as the fighter.
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Nov 19, 2012 - 5:00PM
#7
|
Date Joined:
Feb 24, 2008
|
I agree for the most part.
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Nov 19, 2012 - 5:37PM
#8
|
|
|
So, this is simple. Fighters shouldn't have a monopoly on defensive, protect-your-friends type characters. The idea of moving Parry to being fighter-only is something I don't agree with. Yes, I'm aware that this doesn't solve the "how do we make the fighter unique" problem, but that problem shouldn't be arbitrarily solved just for the sake of solving it, there should be a reason behind it.
Other classes than Fighter deserve to be in this category. From the 'core' list, we have the Fighter and Paladin that I think everyone can agree on.
But to that list, I would also like to add Monk. It would be a different style, no doubt, but the results should be effective. Distraction and disruption of enemies, supreme dodgyness, and really really fast hands are the order of the day. Ideally, this could be done in a way such that it feels different from the Sword&Board styles that Fighters and Paladins might employ.
I'd also like to make the case for the Druid. There are a lot of really tough creatures out there, and with Wild Shape you should be able to become them, not just the typical attack-predator types. Have it be a bit more balanced than it was in 3.5, but more effective at being defensive than it was in 4e. Emphasize the protect-your-friends aspect, because friendness is something I associate with Druids.
There's also plenty of room for the defensive arcanist, whatever class you want to call that - abjurer, swordmage, the name isn't all that critical. The point is that the existence of defensive magic - shields, resistance, mage armor - can and should lead to people who specialize in it, and use it in much the same way that fighters use armor and shields made of metal.
If we go into the psionics realm, then there's a parallel with them for the same reasons as an arcanist - defensive psionics are a thing, therefore there will be people who become specialists at it.
Bottom line, it's an incredibly enjoyable way of playing, to me, and I'd really hate it if only Fighters could do it.
+1 to this. Let Fighters keep unique offensive abilities. Let other classes have the desired and needed defensive abilities.
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Nov 19, 2012 - 5:58PM
#9
|
Date Joined:
Oct 23, 2012
|
+1 Mand12
Also I love parry as normal at-will ability, but its not a sexy special ability for fighter class.
I say, make the unique abilities for fighters attached to their style, so my archer can feel like an archer and not a fighter using a bow.
My mind is a deal-breaker.
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Nov 19, 2012 - 6:30PM
#10
|
Date Joined:
Dec 21, 2011
|
Why not give fighters the ability to mark opponents again or allow them to do more effective or multiple AoO? That would give them more of the combat field superiority they need to work the battle and protect the rest of the party and deal more damage when the situation works for them. That would give the fighter something unique that other classes just couldn't do.
|
|
|
