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
Martials should just get free feats
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="EzekielRaiden" data-source="post: 8993962" data-attributes="member: 6790260"><p>In fairness, there is a <em>little</em> the Rogue offers that the Trickery Cleric doesn't. Expertise and Reliable Talent, for example.</p><p></p><p>But you get the former from Bard, and Reliable Talent isn't as good as Bardic Inspiration, which you can use on yourself. If you go Lore, you also get Magical Secrets early on, <em>and</em> you can make your own Bardic Inspiration even better.</p><p></p><p></p><p>There is technically a further ASI at 6th level, if we are trying to be completely thorough.</p><p></p><p>But at this point, I'm done. ECMO3 has repeatedly turned "we need to give the Fighter something special so that it isn't LEFT BEHIND" into "we need to punish the poor, beleaguered Wizard who only has phenomenal cosmic power AND the ability to almost completely match the Fighter in combat prowess if they so choose."</p><p></p><p>The point is to increase the <em>relative</em> power of the Fighter (and similar classes), because the <em>relative</em> power of the Fighter(+etc.) is <em>too far below the curve.</em> You cannot meaningfully increase their <em>relative</em> power by giving identical benefits to the classes that are <em>already the furthest ahead.</em></p><p></p><p>Wizard is already TOO powerful. It is absolutely unacceptable to give MORE power to an already too powerful class. Fighter is already weak. It is absolutely unacceptable to never give anything UNIQUE to a weak class in order to bridge the gap between it and the classes that exceed it. The <em>whole point</em> is to close the gap. You cannot close a gap between thing 1 and thing 2 by pushing both things equally far ahead. That's not, AT ALL, about "punishing" or "gatekeeping" or whatever the hell else. It's about doing <em>something</em> to make it so Fighter is not so far behind Wizard. The proposed idea is limited, but it's meant to be an easy and simple houserule, because actually rewriting the game (which is what you would need to do in order to practically close the gap) is not a workable solution for any of various reasons.</p><p></p><p>No one here, <em>not even ECMO3,</em> denies that the Fighter is weak and the Wizard is strong. Giving Fighters spells is unacceptable to most. Hence, we must give them something else. Rewriting the game is not a practical option. Hence, we must use only the structures that already exist within the game to address the gap. The only source of greater character power present in the game that is not spells or class features (since those are off limits) is feats. Therefore, giving Fighters, and to a lesser extent Rogues, Monks, and Barbarians, one or more extra feats is a sensible, practical means for addressing the recognized state of affairs, that Fighter-like characters are too weak and full-spellcaster characters are too strong.</p><p></p><p>Giving more benefits to everyone equally does not solve the problem. As noted up thread, it is in theory possible for this to eclipse the gap if you give <em>enough</em> bonuses to everyone, but in practice this requires giving <em>so much</em> that it is not a valid solution all on its own (though it <em>can</em> be used to simplify or augment a solution that does give benefits only to those classes that are currently disadvantaged.)</p><p></p><p>And it is patently ridiculous to argue that the Wizard is getting shortchanged because they cannot choose to have combat prowess nearly equivalent to a Fighter <em>and lots of extra spells too</em>, but the Fighter <em>as it currently exists</em> is perfectly fine even though it cannot, even in principle, gain more than the <em>tiniest fraction</em> of what a Wizard can do even if trying.</p><p></p><p>Every class—Wizard and Fighter included—should be good enough that people genuinely ask, "Should we bring a Wizard, or would it be better to have a Fighter? They're both so powerful, it's hard to tell." Every Fighter subclass should be good enough that people genuinely ask, "Ooh, should I do this, or should I do magic? They're both so good, I can't decide!"</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="EzekielRaiden, post: 8993962, member: 6790260"] In fairness, there is a [I]little[/I] the Rogue offers that the Trickery Cleric doesn't. Expertise and Reliable Talent, for example. But you get the former from Bard, and Reliable Talent isn't as good as Bardic Inspiration, which you can use on yourself. If you go Lore, you also get Magical Secrets early on, [I]and[/I] you can make your own Bardic Inspiration even better. There is technically a further ASI at 6th level, if we are trying to be completely thorough. But at this point, I'm done. ECMO3 has repeatedly turned "we need to give the Fighter something special so that it isn't LEFT BEHIND" into "we need to punish the poor, beleaguered Wizard who only has phenomenal cosmic power AND the ability to almost completely match the Fighter in combat prowess if they so choose." The point is to increase the [I]relative[/I] power of the Fighter (and similar classes), because the [I]relative[/I] power of the Fighter(+etc.) is [I]too far below the curve.[/I] You cannot meaningfully increase their [I]relative[/I] power by giving identical benefits to the classes that are [I]already the furthest ahead.[/I] Wizard is already TOO powerful. It is absolutely unacceptable to give MORE power to an already too powerful class. Fighter is already weak. It is absolutely unacceptable to never give anything UNIQUE to a weak class in order to bridge the gap between it and the classes that exceed it. The [I]whole point[/I] is to close the gap. You cannot close a gap between thing 1 and thing 2 by pushing both things equally far ahead. That's not, AT ALL, about "punishing" or "gatekeeping" or whatever the hell else. It's about doing [I]something[/I] to make it so Fighter is not so far behind Wizard. The proposed idea is limited, but it's meant to be an easy and simple houserule, because actually rewriting the game (which is what you would need to do in order to practically close the gap) is not a workable solution for any of various reasons. No one here, [I]not even ECMO3,[/I] denies that the Fighter is weak and the Wizard is strong. Giving Fighters spells is unacceptable to most. Hence, we must give them something else. Rewriting the game is not a practical option. Hence, we must use only the structures that already exist within the game to address the gap. The only source of greater character power present in the game that is not spells or class features (since those are off limits) is feats. Therefore, giving Fighters, and to a lesser extent Rogues, Monks, and Barbarians, one or more extra feats is a sensible, practical means for addressing the recognized state of affairs, that Fighter-like characters are too weak and full-spellcaster characters are too strong. Giving more benefits to everyone equally does not solve the problem. As noted up thread, it is in theory possible for this to eclipse the gap if you give [I]enough[/I] bonuses to everyone, but in practice this requires giving [I]so much[/I] that it is not a valid solution all on its own (though it [I]can[/I] be used to simplify or augment a solution that does give benefits only to those classes that are currently disadvantaged.) And it is patently ridiculous to argue that the Wizard is getting shortchanged because they cannot choose to have combat prowess nearly equivalent to a Fighter [I]and lots of extra spells too[/I], but the Fighter [I]as it currently exists[/I] is perfectly fine even though it cannot, even in principle, gain more than the [I]tiniest fraction[/I] of what a Wizard can do even if trying. Every class—Wizard and Fighter included—should be good enough that people genuinely ask, "Should we bring a Wizard, or would it be better to have a Fighter? They're both so powerful, it's hard to tell." Every Fighter subclass should be good enough that people genuinely ask, "Ooh, should I do this, or should I do magic? They're both so good, I can't decide!" [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Martials should just get free feats
Top