Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Building a better Fighter
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="steeldragons" data-source="post: 7147194" data-attributes="member: 92511"><p>The Fighter is, and kind of has been since 2e-ish, a catch 22.</p><p></p><p>They are the character with the least amount of "built-in flavor"...They are the class that fights. It's what they do. They're the best at it. </p><p></p><p>Sword and shield? Mounted knight in shining armor (when you didn't want the "holy baggage" of the paladin)? Throwing axes in studded leather woodsman (when you didn't want the "Aragorn-baggage" of a ranger)? Chain wearing battle-axe wielding madman? Swashbuckler/buccaneer/pirate? Cavalier/chevalier/knight (before and even after there was a Cavalier)? Mercenary/solider/guardsman? Amazon/Valkyrie...Xena? Samurai? WWF-inspired wrestler/brawler? Kid with a borrowed (or stolen) sword who'd never left the farm before? Hercules and Perseus. Conan and Lancelot. Blackbeard and Gilgamesh.</p><p></p><p>The Fighter was, purposefully, left to handle all of these (and many more) archetypes. And, through the majority of the editions (and iterations of fantasy TTRPG clones), this is what they have been. The Fighter has been a class of its mechanics devoid of any true single core "identity" of flavor and story to fall back upon.</p><p></p><p>5e is no different. They built the Fighter and their subclasses around mechanics, not story. The "simple" fighter. The "slightly more complex/mechanically interesting" fighter. And the "slightly more complex than <em>that</em> because it involves magic (spell progression, spells known, and all that)" fighter.</p><p></p><p>Is an Eldritch Knight a literal "knight" in plate mail that belongs to a sanctioned (or unsanctioned) order of arcane adepts? Is it just an elfin warrior-mage trained in the skills of both because that's what elves (or elves of a certain social standing) can do? Is it a tribal warrior who has learned just enough of this shaman's teachings to generate magical effects to assist his fighting? Or Elric of Melnibone mixing innate ancestral magical ability with swordplay to conquer the known world? </p><p></p><p>The answer is "Yes." It is all of those things. On purpose. By design. As is the Battlemaster. As is the Champion. The fighter is the class in which you get to make the MOST story for your character, because other than "the Fighter fights [with weapons]" the class is given (and has) no single story of its own. </p><p></p><p>So, you come to the issue of, "The Fighter has no identity. It doesn't have any interesting/fun mechanics like paladins or druids or warlocks get. It's just boring." </p><p></p><p>When, at its core, the Fighter's "lack" of identity <em>IS</em> its identity.</p><p></p><p>The Fighter fights. That is the extent of their story and, simultaneously, the root mechanical framework upon which you can paint your greatest heroes and villains as you see fit.</p><p></p><p>If the Fighter "needs" anything, and I do not ascribe that it does, it would be a "fully/very complex" subclass option, with multiple moving parts and player choice options (a la a warlock), that are not "magic" upon which people that prefer a "later editions style of play" can have their "superheroic -but its not with magic- warrior." That would fill the Fighter class, as far as subclass options. Simple. Simple +1 special mechanic. Simple +Magic. Simple +2 (or more) special mechanics (a.k.a. "Not Simple").</p><p></p><p>It is a curiosity, that of all of the classes that have been developed over the years, all of the nooks and crannies of mythologies and legends and histories and cultures from which D&D has drawn PC classes...the Fighter, a warrior guy who can swing a sword, <em>still</em> is just the tabula rasa class that you can style however you like. No other class has this distinction.</p><p></p><p>Starting, arguably, from the Magic-user or at least from the original Thief/Rogue concept on down, every class that had come after, the built-in fluff/story of a class have become more and more specific and narrow. Some open up and some narrow further, here and there, from edition to edition. But always, there is some degree of an assumed (and generally accepted) backstory to go along with the class.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="steeldragons, post: 7147194, member: 92511"] The Fighter is, and kind of has been since 2e-ish, a catch 22. They are the character with the least amount of "built-in flavor"...They are the class that fights. It's what they do. They're the best at it. Sword and shield? Mounted knight in shining armor (when you didn't want the "holy baggage" of the paladin)? Throwing axes in studded leather woodsman (when you didn't want the "Aragorn-baggage" of a ranger)? Chain wearing battle-axe wielding madman? Swashbuckler/buccaneer/pirate? Cavalier/chevalier/knight (before and even after there was a Cavalier)? Mercenary/solider/guardsman? Amazon/Valkyrie...Xena? Samurai? WWF-inspired wrestler/brawler? Kid with a borrowed (or stolen) sword who'd never left the farm before? Hercules and Perseus. Conan and Lancelot. Blackbeard and Gilgamesh. The Fighter was, purposefully, left to handle all of these (and many more) archetypes. And, through the majority of the editions (and iterations of fantasy TTRPG clones), this is what they have been. The Fighter has been a class of its mechanics devoid of any true single core "identity" of flavor and story to fall back upon. 5e is no different. They built the Fighter and their subclasses around mechanics, not story. The "simple" fighter. The "slightly more complex/mechanically interesting" fighter. And the "slightly more complex than [I]that[/I] because it involves magic (spell progression, spells known, and all that)" fighter. Is an Eldritch Knight a literal "knight" in plate mail that belongs to a sanctioned (or unsanctioned) order of arcane adepts? Is it just an elfin warrior-mage trained in the skills of both because that's what elves (or elves of a certain social standing) can do? Is it a tribal warrior who has learned just enough of this shaman's teachings to generate magical effects to assist his fighting? Or Elric of Melnibone mixing innate ancestral magical ability with swordplay to conquer the known world? The answer is "Yes." It is all of those things. On purpose. By design. As is the Battlemaster. As is the Champion. The fighter is the class in which you get to make the MOST story for your character, because other than "the Fighter fights [with weapons]" the class is given (and has) no single story of its own. So, you come to the issue of, "The Fighter has no identity. It doesn't have any interesting/fun mechanics like paladins or druids or warlocks get. It's just boring." When, at its core, the Fighter's "lack" of identity [I]IS[/I] its identity. The Fighter fights. That is the extent of their story and, simultaneously, the root mechanical framework upon which you can paint your greatest heroes and villains as you see fit. If the Fighter "needs" anything, and I do not ascribe that it does, it would be a "fully/very complex" subclass option, with multiple moving parts and player choice options (a la a warlock), that are not "magic" upon which people that prefer a "later editions style of play" can have their "superheroic -but its not with magic- warrior." That would fill the Fighter class, as far as subclass options. Simple. Simple +1 special mechanic. Simple +Magic. Simple +2 (or more) special mechanics (a.k.a. "Not Simple"). It is a curiosity, that of all of the classes that have been developed over the years, all of the nooks and crannies of mythologies and legends and histories and cultures from which D&D has drawn PC classes...the Fighter, a warrior guy who can swing a sword, [I]still[/I] is just the tabula rasa class that you can style however you like. No other class has this distinction. Starting, arguably, from the Magic-user or at least from the original Thief/Rogue concept on down, every class that had come after, the built-in fluff/story of a class have become more and more specific and narrow. Some open up and some narrow further, here and there, from edition to edition. But always, there is some degree of an assumed (and generally accepted) backstory to go along with the class. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Building a better Fighter
Top