Dear Unregistered! We notice you don't currently have a silver subscription here on EN World. We'd love to encourage you to give it a try, so we've made this coupon for $5 off your first 4-month Silver Subscription. Simply go to the subscription page and enter coupon code SILVER. With that subscription you get access to TWO adventure paths, which between them cover D&D 3.5, Pathfinder, and D&D 4th Edition - War of the Burning Sky (which has been completed) and ZEITGEIST: The Gears of Revolution (which is currently ongoing). You also get a whole bunch of site perks and features here on EN World, including access to the Search function, images and links in your forum signature, a larger PM box, give out more XP at a time, and more. Please give a try; we're proud of our adventure paths, and we're sure you'll love them both!
New Horizons: The Upcoming Edition of D&DD&D 5th Edition, D&D Next - whatever you want to call it, talk about it here!
All the latest EN World
official reviews, columns, and subscriber articles here.
Don't have your subscription yet? It's only $3 a month and you can grab
it right
here!
Hmmm, biggest problem with voting is that I don't really feel all of those options are mutually exclusive.
Fighters IMO should be highly customizable, but they are first and foremost, melee characters. While they can use ranged weapons, that is not their specialty, and I don't mind the ability to choose to be defined by my weapon choice.
In the end I had to vote for "accomate all styles", because really I want a highly versatile fighter with few limitations on style/theme/play.
I find myself looking back to the 3rd Edition fighter with a great deal of fondness. I liked how a player could customize the fighter in any way he or she wanted. All the decision points helped fighters grow in an organic fashion, evolving through game play to match the player expectations. As well, a player who wanted to be a damn good archer could just go to the fighter without having to embrace the ranger’s narrative (and attendant features). Likewise, if I wanted to make a tough knight, I didn’t have to look to the paladin to fill that need (although, I know the Player’s Handbook 2 from 3rd Edition did have a knight class).
I find it interesting that he's being so positive about the 3e fighter, given how strongly the 4e crowd seems to dislike everything about the 3e fighter.
Hopefully, they'll find a way to make it customizable but given it a little more "special-ness" than just bonus feats.
Doesn't say much, beyond observing that the fighter has long been tied to a particular weapon choice.
I'll disagree about 4e being more limiting in weapon choice than 3e though. (And I say this as a 3e fan.) Frankly the weapon specific benefits in 4e didn't impress me that much, and they are only present at a few levels.
In 3e on the other hand, feat selection would gradually tie you closer and closer to a single optimized weapon style. Focus, specialization, style feats, weapon mastery, etc, all meant that you were much, much more effective with the right sword in your hand than you were with a mace or kama.
And of course in earlier editions fighter style specializations would tie you to specific weapons just as strongly by giving you extra attacks, which you had to be crazy to give up.
Anywho my personal preference would be to reduce the focus on specific weapons a bit and make that one of a few options.
The fighter should be tough, skilled with all "martial" kit, and the best guy in a fight, if the barbarian isn't raging.
__________________ -Andor
"Congratulations. You just invented 'negligent regicide.'" - Schlock Mercenary
While it may not be the whole point of the blog, it does present a veritable Straw Man of the 4e fighter.
It points out that the 4e fighter is a defender and (like most defenders) melee-focused. It makes it sound like that's the only thing 4e did with the fighter, force it into a Role (like very other 4e class).
A much more momentous thing happened to the fighter in 4e. It stopped sucking. It became the equal of other classes. It was as good (at least) a defender as the Paladin or Swordmage. It was on the same playing field as casters, able to bring some round-by-round versatility in combat, and some peak-power when really needed. Able to 'nova' in those benighted 5-minute workdays. That balance and near-parity was something the fighter never had before. Never.
And it's not even acknowledged, let alone valued.
Last edited by Tony Vargas; 10th February 2012 at 10:55 PM..
I too want a highly versatile fighter, but what I want more out of this edition is the ability for a fighter to use any weapon (or at least a group of weapons, sword/axe/hammer) without penalty. I want my 5E fighter to be able to use a greatsword, but when a really cool axe drops, I dont feel its wasted because I'm at some penalty to use it. I want to be able to use it, even if i cant use my 'sword' training with it.
I want the 5E fighter to get lots of customization through choices, but I dont want the class to be like 3E (bonus feat, bonus feat, 1 ability). I also dont think the 3e ranger 'styles' are a good way to go either.
I would prefer something like this:
Fighter Hit Die - best (d10/12)[could save d12 solely for barb] Class bonus +1 STR at lvl 1, 8, 16. Class skills: whatever goes here (athletics, intimidate, etc) Class features:
Weapon training: 1st, 5th, 10th, 15th (gain familiarity with a chosen weapon group, axes, swords, etc.)
Fighter manuevers: 1st and every other level gain XXX maneuver, or bonus feat (whichever you prefer).
Sub theme: Upon reaching 5th, 10th, or 15th level a fighter may take a subtheme if desired (think kits/prestiges)
Core abilities: 1st, 6th, 12th, 18th: Gain an ability (say 1 of 3 options at each tier that are core to all fighters. Abilities normally on par with class abilities, more powerful and broader than feats.)
Some of these designers have an awfully distorted and negative view of the Fourth Edition. But this writer contradicts his negative comparison of 4e with his own facts:
"In 4th Edition, the fighter’s focus shifted from total customization and instead grounded the fighter into a particular niche—a role that would continue until the slayer came along in the Essentials products. Again, the class focused on weapons, distinguishing them into two broad groups: two-handed weapons and sword-and-board. Later supplements expanded the fighter builds to allow berserkers (battleragers), two-weapon wielders (tempests), brawlers, and so on."
So he says Fighters were limited and then lists six very different builds. What he also does not realize is that those Fighter builds which have decent dexterity are as good an archer as any Fighter from a previous edition. And in fact the designers made magical throwing weapons very useful, so that every strong character had a good ranged weapon.
__________________ Member of Grognards for 4th Edition.
4e's "powers" system was an effort to even the playing field at all levels, and to give fighters (especially) something cool to do to keep up with the casters. I personally prefer allowing fighters (pure fighters, not paladins, etc.) the use of "feats" (maybe they should be called tactics?) These would be things that Only fighters could do, due to their extreme focus and training with a particular weapon (or group of weapons). This could be similar to 1e Unearthed Arcana's original concept of weapon mastery, which was only available to fighters (or cavaliers.. a whole nother story), unless you still want to give Rangers the 2-weapon fighting thing.
The thing that worries me about the 3e talk is that level by level customization usually meant +1 to this, +2 to that, +1 to the other thing, etc.
I really hope they make the baseline fighter have broadly applicable bonuses which can be given up for maneuvers or situation-specific bonuses. And by situation-specific, I absolutely don't mean weapon-specific, which is functionally equivalent to just giving bigger bonuses all the time.
As I said at TBP I'm glad I have no dog in this hunt, but if pushed I think they should kill the Warlord take his stuff and give it to the Fighter. Also give him some skills outside direct physical stuff with more than 2 skill points a level for christsake!
I voted "Other" the choices presented were too narrow for how I envision a "Fighting Man".
Last edited by marleykat; 9th February 2012 at 10:54 PM..
Recent News
Linear Mode
