Seems to me since the public playtest has closed, we have been getting a bit more 4th edition type mechanics slipped into the game. I would like to point out somethings from the L&L article.
"When you're relegated to serving as the baseline, it's hard to acquire a distinct flavor. 4th Edition was the first version of D&D to give the fighter a truly unique mechanic. Before that, combat feats in 3e created lots of options for the fighter but were available to other classes as well. Weapon specialization was an optional rule in 2nd Edition, but it did a great job of making it clear that fighters were the best warriors. Even better, it was a fairly simple rule to understand."
I honestly think Mike Mearls relies too much on mechanics to identify a class. Not sure about you, but the fighter from Pathfinder can vary from being a master of archery, to a light armored quick step fighter, to an unarmed brawler, to a heavy armor wearing tank, to a tactitian, or even a simple two handed fighter. Most of these just involved investing in certain feats and choosing certain types of equipment along with a description from the player. BAM!! There is your flavor.
"Playtest feedback for D&D Next has consistently painted the fighter as one of the most satisfying and powerful classes in the game. We also know that though a simple fighter is great for many players, others want more options for the class."
Playtest feedback shows the fighter as the most satisfying and powerful classes in the game so why can't Mike just stop there? If it's the most successful class in the game, why continue to tinker with it?
A lot of things, people I know, didn't like about 4th edition are being integrated into the current rules at a time where there is no survey or ability to give direct feedback. I don't mind fighters being able to trip, or shield bash, or use a whip to capture or anything like that, but from Mike's own fingers, he said they managed to capture the concepts of 4th edition fighter powers and create maneuvers. Not sure if Mike has a personal agenda here, but he should be careful what he decides to add into the game this late in it's creation stage.
I would just like to go back to the fighter class being successful again. Says here in the article that characters should be able to function at 1st and 2nd level, but they already do function at those levels so I'm not sure what he is on about. Sounds to me like he is just finding BS reasons to start throwing in powers. It also seems that Mearls is applying at wills to the wrong types of classes and same with the dailies and encounters.
I can tell you from my personal feelings that I would have trouble playing in a game along side a character that uses 4th edition style mechanics.
"When you're relegated to serving as the baseline, it's hard to acquire a distinct flavor. 4th Edition was the first version of D&D to give the fighter a truly unique mechanic. Before that, combat feats in 3e created lots of options for the fighter but were available to other classes as well. Weapon specialization was an optional rule in 2nd Edition, but it did a great job of making it clear that fighters were the best warriors. Even better, it was a fairly simple rule to understand."
I honestly think Mike Mearls relies too much on mechanics to identify a class. Not sure about you, but the fighter from Pathfinder can vary from being a master of archery, to a light armored quick step fighter, to an unarmed brawler, to a heavy armor wearing tank, to a tactitian, or even a simple two handed fighter. Most of these just involved investing in certain feats and choosing certain types of equipment along with a description from the player. BAM!! There is your flavor.
"Playtest feedback for D&D Next has consistently painted the fighter as one of the most satisfying and powerful classes in the game. We also know that though a simple fighter is great for many players, others want more options for the class."
Playtest feedback shows the fighter as the most satisfying and powerful classes in the game so why can't Mike just stop there? If it's the most successful class in the game, why continue to tinker with it?
A lot of things, people I know, didn't like about 4th edition are being integrated into the current rules at a time where there is no survey or ability to give direct feedback. I don't mind fighters being able to trip, or shield bash, or use a whip to capture or anything like that, but from Mike's own fingers, he said they managed to capture the concepts of 4th edition fighter powers and create maneuvers. Not sure if Mike has a personal agenda here, but he should be careful what he decides to add into the game this late in it's creation stage.
I would just like to go back to the fighter class being successful again. Says here in the article that characters should be able to function at 1st and 2nd level, but they already do function at those levels so I'm not sure what he is on about. Sounds to me like he is just finding BS reasons to start throwing in powers. It also seems that Mearls is applying at wills to the wrong types of classes and same with the dailies and encounters.
I can tell you from my personal feelings that I would have trouble playing in a game along side a character that uses 4th edition style mechanics.
