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
The Fighter Extra Feat Fallacy
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="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 7256270" data-attributes="member: 996"><p>technically, can only be used when initiative has been rolled and play is progressing in turns. That and it has very little potential use out of combat, while being a very limited resource that's very potent in combat. Hussar gave you very clear examples of how other classes can wildly out-perform the tiny, infrequent edge Action Surge might theoretically give the fighter in some corner cases. That's just logic. Popularity can turn on a great many things, some of them wildly irrational. To make the case that the fighter's popularity stems from it being well-designed, you'd have to actually demonstrate the quality of the design, which is tough row to hoe, since you're resorting to the ad populum fallacy in the first place, for want of strong enough evidence to counter the observations that the fighter is inadequate out of combat. </p><p></p><p> Popularity is just personal preference over a larger population. :shrug: You can ignore 'good' or 'bad' and stick to the realities of the design, reserving judgement. </p><p></p><p>The fighter dukes it out with the barbarian for last place when it comes to out of combat contributions. That can be considered 'good design' if you consider making players sit out much of the play centered around 2 out of 3 pillars based upon the concept they chose to play, to be desirable in the context of D&D. While you might not care to put it that way, it's how D&D has been for a very long time, so it's an understandable expectation, and even preference, for being so long-accustomed. OTOH, it could also be judged 'bad design' if the ideal held up is 'balance' and more-nearly-equal participation from players throughout the game and it's 'pillars.' </p><p></p><p>(Hmm... a related thought: there may not really have been much point to articulating the pillars, if there wasn't going to be a design intent to make some classes specialized in only one pillar. So that also points to it being intentional, or even 'good' if judged by success in delivering on that intent.)</p><p></p><p> Agreed. 5e does not seem to have much gone in for 'niche protection' this time around. Any class can poach a bit of some other classes' traditional niche. Anyone can take the criminal background and go about picking locks on chests. The Rogue's Expertise is a major way it shines out of combat, but it's not unique, the Bard also gets it.</p><p></p><p>In Hussar's example, above, of the Rogue out-doing the fighter's 1/rest Action Surge with an at-will feature of it's own, it's not the lack of uniqueness that's a problem, but the stark inferiority. The fighter doesn't need /unique/ ways to contribute out of combat, so much as concept-appropriate and effective ways - and more versatile - ways. Expertise, for instance, would not be out of place in a fighter sub-class.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Tony Vargas, post: 7256270, member: 996"] technically, can only be used when initiative has been rolled and play is progressing in turns. That and it has very little potential use out of combat, while being a very limited resource that's very potent in combat. Hussar gave you very clear examples of how other classes can wildly out-perform the tiny, infrequent edge Action Surge might theoretically give the fighter in some corner cases. That's just logic. Popularity can turn on a great many things, some of them wildly irrational. To make the case that the fighter's popularity stems from it being well-designed, you'd have to actually demonstrate the quality of the design, which is tough row to hoe, since you're resorting to the ad populum fallacy in the first place, for want of strong enough evidence to counter the observations that the fighter is inadequate out of combat. Popularity is just personal preference over a larger population. :shrug: You can ignore 'good' or 'bad' and stick to the realities of the design, reserving judgement. The fighter dukes it out with the barbarian for last place when it comes to out of combat contributions. That can be considered 'good design' if you consider making players sit out much of the play centered around 2 out of 3 pillars based upon the concept they chose to play, to be desirable in the context of D&D. While you might not care to put it that way, it's how D&D has been for a very long time, so it's an understandable expectation, and even preference, for being so long-accustomed. OTOH, it could also be judged 'bad design' if the ideal held up is 'balance' and more-nearly-equal participation from players throughout the game and it's 'pillars.' (Hmm... a related thought: there may not really have been much point to articulating the pillars, if there wasn't going to be a design intent to make some classes specialized in only one pillar. So that also points to it being intentional, or even 'good' if judged by success in delivering on that intent.) Agreed. 5e does not seem to have much gone in for 'niche protection' this time around. Any class can poach a bit of some other classes' traditional niche. Anyone can take the criminal background and go about picking locks on chests. The Rogue's Expertise is a major way it shines out of combat, but it's not unique, the Bard also gets it. In Hussar's example, above, of the Rogue out-doing the fighter's 1/rest Action Surge with an at-will feature of it's own, it's not the lack of uniqueness that's a problem, but the stark inferiority. The fighter doesn't need /unique/ ways to contribute out of combat, so much as concept-appropriate and effective ways - and more versatile - ways. Expertise, for instance, would not be out of place in a fighter sub-class. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
The Fighter Extra Feat Fallacy
Top