+ Log in or register to post
Results 121 to 130 of 250
Thursday, 10th May, 2012, 02:19 PM #121
Magsman (Lvl 14)
- EN World
- has no influence
- on adverts that
- are displayed by
- Google Adsense
Thursday, 10th May, 2012, 02:21 PM #122
Magsman (Lvl 14)
This criticism of 4E appears to be a criticism of D&D in general.
Thursday, 10th May, 2012, 02:32 PM #123
Superhero (Lvl 15)
Now if someone makes a specific claim like the fighter is a bodyguard because he does less damage over an encounter than a striker can, and yiu can show that the striker cant do more damage over an encounter, then yes you have a claim to truth there. But the golden mean fallacy doesn't really apply to subjective judgment calls about how cool a class is or how well it fits a particular role.
Thursday, 10th May, 2012, 02:58 PM #124
Orcus on an Off-Day (Lvl 22)
In any case, role should not be something that is stamped onto a class with a standardized mechanic. It should be a design focus that shapes the class from the start, and each class should have its own take on that focus. Just because fighters mark does not mean paladins have to do the same.
Last edited by Dausuul; Thursday, 10th May, 2012 at 03:40 PM.
Originally Posted by Agent Elrond
Thursday, 10th May, 2012, 03:12 PM #125
And the retort is that, while any given player may choose to play their fighter like that, there is no mechanical support for playing a 4e fighter in that way (eg the fighter doesn't get many immediate actions which would support such an approach, unlike the paladin) and there is a huge mechanical incentive for the player of a fighter to get into the fray: namely, it's the only way (i) to mark, and (ii) to enforce your mark.
There is a genuine difference of perspective here, but in my view it has very little to do with thresholds. It's to do with those who regard the mechanics as constitutive of the game, and those whose outlook is in some fundamental way that of freeforming, with social contract carrying a huge burden of both PC build and action resolution (but they still use the mechanics sometimes, for some things, although I'm not entirely clear what).
But in my view there can be no legitimate perspective on 4e's fighter mechanics that suggest that the 4e fighter is not mechanically well suited to being in the thick of melee. Between AC, hp, marking rules, and the almost complete absence of non-melee/close burst attacks, being in melee is the only way a fighter can bring any of his/her mechanical features and attributes to bear.
Saying that 4e's fighter mechanics encourage bodyguarding is as absurd as saying that AD&D's wizard mechanics encourage being a frontline melee combatant.
Thursday, 10th May, 2012, 03:12 PM #126
The classic adventuring party includes one character of each role: wizard, fighter, cleric, and rogue.
Character roles identify which classes can stand in for each other. For example, if you don’t have a cleric in your party, a warlord serves just as well in the leader role.
Roles also serve as handy tools for building adventuring parties. It’s a good idea to cover each role with at least one character. . . If you don’t have all the roles covered, that’s okay too—it just means that the characters need to compensate for the missing function.
4e is not geared towards a certain party composition. In fact, I would say it is very robust across a wide range of party compositions. Part of the logic of its flexible PC buid rules, retraining rules, magic item wishlists, etc is to put a good deal of the onus on the players to build PCs that they find mechanically satisfying.
That said, the DMG does give good advice on the mechanical side of party building, including how different sorts of terrain affect different PC roles. This is one respect in which the 4e DMG is not at all deficient.
Thursday, 10th May, 2012, 04:09 PM #127
Magsman (Lvl 14)
This is not a subjective judgment. This is being wrong about how the fighter works mechanically.
Thursday, 10th May, 2012, 04:12 PM #128
Cutpurse (Lvl 5)
More to the point not every combination is covered with the release of the early books, this was true in all of the editions i have played. It will be true of 5e also some races and class concepts will not make the cut for the initial year otherwise the first books would be 800 pages.
Ronald the English Mastiff 1999-2007
Always in Our Hearts
The Mountain That Woofs
Thursday, 10th May, 2012, 04:15 PM #129
Thursday, 10th May, 2012, 04:23 PM #130
You know, I'm curious... is there another defender class that can stop movement with their defender mechanics like the fighter can? I think this might be part of the reason for the "bodyguard" feel some people experience with the fighter.
If a player wants to use that ability in an optimally tactical way he doesn't get to just run off into the fray and fight whoever he wants while leaving the squishier party members open to enemies that can now get around him. He probably positions himself as a sort of "bodyguard" in a way that allows him to block enemies from getting to the other party members. Do the mechanics force this... no. Do they encourage it... in many combat situations I would say yes.