D&D 5E The Fighter Extra Feat Fallacy

[Sacrosanct]

Well, a few more observations after several pages of new posts

* Any talk about mechanics isn't optimization. It's talk about mechanics. I can talk about cars without talking about how to make them all the fastest
* Any player who feels afraid to participate in one or more pillars in the game means you are playing the game wrong. There are very few things that can truly be said that fit the "you are playing wrong" description, but that's one of them. The game is meant to have fun with friends. And if your friends feel afraid to participate in one or more areas, then you're missing the whole point of the game.
* I am reminded why I don't like array or point buy. Because according to some people, it results in every PC of a certain class looking exactly like every other PC/NPC of the same class. Barf. No thank you. It's a role playing game. That means go nuts with concepts as long as you're having fun and explore the myriad of roles one can play. Not every fighter has to max out on STR/DEX and CON. Some of my more memorable experiences gaming over the decades are with PCs who didn't fit the char op mold. And seeing as how I hardly remember who had the most DPR, but I do remember those times where someone did something creative, I know which ones are important for me.

 

[smbakeresq]

Well I definitely would rather be the DM at your table than a player. Deciding to make each player shine in an encounter kinda makes the whole character creation/stat.build process moot. Give your Wizard 18 CHA, he gets rewarded...give him 18 WIS, he gets rewarded, give him 18 DEX, he gets rewarded.....Now not to be offensive, but why even play a game like D and D with stats if all you care about is "fun" and story time?

And why bother commenting on a character optimization thread? Its kind of like me responding to a thread about character story ideas with "OMG make a pally with 14 CON, 18 STR and give him such and such feat"....Just seems out of place.

You just missed the whole point. Went right over your head. The idea is that its a group setting, you can't go through the game world with "no one speaks except the PC with the highest charisma, no one touches anything without the rogue searching everything for traps, I optimized my fighter using CE and SS therefore if you use fog cloud to shut me down for one combat its unfair," attitude. The idea is to reward the players for being creative with a PC idea that isn't just a direct optimization of a PC, often using the forums here. CREATIVITY will be rewarded, you can actually play whatever you want.

I guess you are like the guy who said if your not optimizing your PC you cant play in his game and really don't deserve to play the game at all.

Do you guys run D&D adventures or mathematical simulation study groups? Why do you play if you have it worked out in the beginning, its down to a percentage chance, with the DM having no say whatsoever except to be read the adventure locations for you and roll the dice for the bad guys. Have you heard of Leroy Jenkins, do you get what makes it a famous meme is that the die hard optimizers panic and lose their with no sense of humor at all (and get no chicken)?


And this isn't a Fighter Optimization thread - its about how the fighter is UP compared to other options in the game and needs to be improved. However it still got derailed, of which I am somewhat at fault.

 

[smbakeresq]

Well, a few more observations after several pages of new posts

* Any talk about mechanics isn't optimization. It's talk about mechanics. I can talk about cars without talking about how to make them all the fastest
* Any player who feels afraid to participate in one or more pillars in the game means you are playing the game wrong. There are very few things that can truly be said that fit the "you are playing wrong" description, but that's one of them. The game is meant to have fun with friends. And if your friends feel afraid to participate in one or more areas, then you're missing the whole point of the game.
* I am reminded why I don't like array or point buy. Because according to some people, it results in every PC of a certain class looking exactly like every other PC/NPC of the same class. Barf. No thank you. It's a role playing game. That means go nuts with concepts as long as you're having fun and explore the myriad of roles one can play. Not every fighter has to max out on STR/DEX and CON. Some of my more memorable experiences gaming over the decades are with PCs who didn't fit the char op mold. And seeing as how I hardly remember who had the most DPR, but I do remember those times where someone did something creative, I know which ones are important for me.

This 1000x. What scares a lot of people about rolling for stats is 1) they will be forced to play a PC without perfectly optimized stats, they simply would never play a character with a flaw or odd stat or, 2) someone might get lucky and roll better than them and thus be "more optimized."

 

[Sacrosanct]

This 1000x. What scares a lot of people about rolling for stats is 1) they will be forced to play a PC without perfectly optimized stats, they simply would never play a character with a flaw or odd stat or, 2) someone might get lucky and roll better than them and thus be "more optimized."

That's the other thing I don't get. I've heard people mention over the years how they can't stand to have another PC have a higher stat than them. It's a team game, not PC vs PC. You don't see one team member complain that it's not fair that another person on their team is faster, or a better shot. And extra +1 or +2 here or there makes no real significant difference, IME, and if it helps the party survive and reach the goal because someone else got a higher roll, great.

 

[James Gasik]

I don't know about Tika's supposed thieving skills, I don't recall her robbing anyone in the books, but it's been awhile since I read Dragons of Autumn Twilight. On the other hand, I do remember that she actually gained combat training later in the series- I recall that one of the characters comments that she's not very good with a sword, but had great talent with shield maneuvers (shield bash especially).

The D&D classes have always had a bit of oddness about them when it came to "qualifying" for them. Wizards especially were implied to require years of training, so that the archetype usually included old men- Merlin and Gandalf and Dumbledore (and women- I didn't forget you, Bavmorda). But it also had to include beautiful (possibly evil) women- Morgan LeFay, Circe, Polgara. Sure the implication could be that they use magic to look young and pretty, but the archetype also has to include the bumbling yet possibly talented young apprentice- Ged, Skeeve, Mickey Mouse (lol).

This creates a strange disconnect when one member of a group thinks that it should take years to learn how to cast magic missile, and another is a big Harry Potter fan.

But enough about Wizards, you see this with characters who are obviously "Fighters" as well. I could list examples of young warriors for days (Parn, Mark, Arthur Pendragon, Rand Al Thor, etc. etc.). Sure, they don't have the experience of a veteran, and that's never ignored, but they have enough raw talent (or backup) to survive and become great warriors. Again, it's strange to have the game tell us that Bruenor Battlehammer, an aged dwarf and Tika Wayland, a teenaged girl are both valid 1st-level Fighters, but since D&D is a game that allows you to play (within reason) whatever kind of character you want, then yes, "Warrior Princess Jenny" and "Oldfist MacOldbeard" can both be 1st-level Fighters in the same party.

And it's up to the players and the DM to make sense of that.

Wow, um, we have strayed a bit from the "bonus Feats" argument. And I'm partially to blame, my apologies. Something I think we need to consider is the Rogue. So the Fighter has mostly combat class features, and a few extra ASI's to round him out. But the Rogue has all kinds of class features that cover all three pillars of play- a Rogue can throw a bucket of dice at you, withdraw or hide as a bonus action in combat, have expertise on any skill they like, reduce damage taken from sword or spell, even get proficiency in an extra save (eventually)! And yet, they ALSO get bonus ASI's...

If the bonus ASI/Feat argument says that's enough to make the Fighter able to contribute outside of combat, then what's the Rogue doing with bonus ASI's/Feat's? They're already able to contribute in all three pillars of play (and that's not even taking subclasses into account).

EDIT: for some reason I thought Rogues got 2 extra ASI's, just at later levels. Nope, it's just 1. I don't think that changes my point though; we got one class with few toys and mostly abilities that apply to 1 pillar, and people say "it's ok, he has two bonus ASI's", and another class with lots of toys and abilities that apply to all 3 pillars, AND a bonus ASI...

 

[Ancalagon]

* I am reminded why I don't like array or point buy. Because according to some people, it results in every PC of a certain class looking exactly like every other PC/NPC of the same class. Barf. No thank you. It's a role playing game. That means go nuts with concepts as long as you're having fun and explore the myriad of roles one can play. Not every fighter has to max out on STR/DEX and CON. Some of my more memorable experiences gaming over the decades are with PCs who didn't fit the char op mold. And seeing as how I hardly remember who had the most DPR, but I do remember those times where someone did something creative, I know which ones are important for me.

This is why I heartily recommend this:

The Redrick stat roller:
http://aramis.hostman.us/dnd/RedrickRoller.html

Basically it randomly generates a 27 point stat set. I would allow re arranging the order of the rolls, but anyway you end up with no one that has "God stats" but still variability.

I used it to generate a dex based melee fighter for a pbp game and it's fun to have 14 wisdom, 12 int and 10 cha as a fighter... ( I'm also the smartest in the group!)

Sent from my SM-G930W8 using EN World mobile app

 

[smbakeresq]

This is why I heartily recommend this:

The Redrick stat roller:
http://aramis.hostman.us/dnd/RedrickRoller.html

Basically it randomly generates a 27 point stat set. I would allow re arranging the order of the rolls, but anyway you end up with no one that has "God stats" but still variability.

I used it to generate a dex based melee fighter for a pbp game and it's fun to have 14 wisdom, 12 int and 10 cha as a fighter... ( I'm also the smartest in the group!)

Sent from my SM-G930W8 using EN World mobile app

The problem is its essentially still point buy. You will still be constrained for no reason. Just roll a 4d6 and drop the lowest an go from there. You do it at the first session so no one can be accused of cheating (although why would you play with a player you would think cheats?) SO what if someone gets lucky and gets an 18 in their primary, it wont kill the game at all.

 

[TwoSix]

The problem is its essentially still point buy. You will still be constrained for no reason. Just roll a 4d6 and drop the lowest an go from there. You do it at the first session so no one can be accused of cheating (although why would you play with a player you would think cheats?) SO what if someone gets lucky and gets an 18 in their primary, it wont kill the game at all.

I feel like you're looking for this thread...1100 posts of roll versus point buy fun. http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?578033-Point-Buy-vs-Rolling-for-Stats

 

[James Gasik]

Yeah, the point buy vs. rolling debate is probably never going to end. Point buyers will crow about being able to make the character you want* and that point buy is more balanced**, and anyone who likes rolling for stats is just a dirty power gamer who wants 18's in everything***.

*well, as long as that character only needs a few high stats, most likely.
**again, as long as your character only needs a few high stats. Wizards generally do ok, but Monks might have some problems.
***I can't say I've ever met a player who would turn down all 18's, if they had the option. Then again, a Fighter gets less use out of an 18 Intelligence than the Wizard, and the Wizard isn't likely to be really excited by an 18 Strength. YMMV.

 

[Hillsy7]

Yeah, the point buy vs. rolling debate is probably never going to end. Point buyers will crow about being able to make the character you want* and that point buy is more balanced**, and anyone who likes rolling for stats is just a dirty power gamer who wants 18's in everything***.

*well, as long as that character only needs a few high stats, most likely.
**again, as long as your character only needs a few high stats. Wizards generally do ok, but Monks might have some problems.
***I can't say I've ever met a player who would turn down all 18's, if they had the option. Then again, a Fighter gets less use out of an 18 Intelligence than the Wizard, and the Wizard isn't likely to be really excited by an 18 Strength. YMMV.

I'd disagree with that. Flaws and low stats can often be more fun - I'd certainly turn down 6 18s. A dragonborn with 6 dex? That's just slapstick gold right there. And if you haven't played a character with 7 or less in wisdom, you haven't lived.....hehe