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
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Vote Up a 5e-Alike: Fighter Draft 2, plus Archetypes (and a poll)
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="Lanefan" data-source="post: 9193989" data-attributes="member: 29398"><p>Wow - you put a lot of thought and work into this!</p><p></p><p>Eaerly thoughts: There's room for maybe six classes within the Fighter/Warrior sphere. Three (Ftr-Pal-Bar) is too few, but all those archetypes - which are in effect subclasses by a different name - are too many. Fighter-Knight-Berserker-Swashbuckler-Archer-(Paladin?) is probably all you need; and there's a case to be made for dropping Paladin and splitting its niche between Knight and (War) Cleric.</p><p></p><p>WAY too many maneuvers! That's analysis paralysis waiting to happen. Can some of those be combined?</p><p></p><p>In my view, Fighter should be a simple wind-'em-up-and-let-'em-go class where the player doesn't have to worry about remebering maneuvers, abilities, and so forth (in contrast with a rogue-type or any caster). When playing any warrior-types in 3e my biggest headache was remembering all the maneuvers (feats in 3e) that I had at my disposal; this annoyed me to no end as the game was balanced on the assumption the warriors would use their feats where as player all I wanted to do was wade in and swing my weapon on the assumption that's what the game expected.</p><p></p><p>The baked-in (sub)class features look good in general, except for Archer. Sharpshooter comes online too early and point-blank too late; maybe tone down point-blank a bit and switch their places in the sequence? Also, allowing called shots for archers opens the door to allowing it for everyone (reasonable player argument: "if my archer can call a missile shot, his fighter ought to be able to call his shot when swinging in melee"), which may or may not be desirable; I've no real opinion either way. And, "versatile" is bad in that allowing strength for damage on non-thrown missile weapons bakes in an assumption that the character has a bow that can deliver that punch; yet "strength bows" are usually expensive and specialized pieces of equipment.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Lanefan, post: 9193989, member: 29398"] Wow - you put a lot of thought and work into this! Eaerly thoughts: There's room for maybe six classes within the Fighter/Warrior sphere. Three (Ftr-Pal-Bar) is too few, but all those archetypes - which are in effect subclasses by a different name - are too many. Fighter-Knight-Berserker-Swashbuckler-Archer-(Paladin?) is probably all you need; and there's a case to be made for dropping Paladin and splitting its niche between Knight and (War) Cleric. WAY too many maneuvers! That's analysis paralysis waiting to happen. Can some of those be combined? In my view, Fighter should be a simple wind-'em-up-and-let-'em-go class where the player doesn't have to worry about remebering maneuvers, abilities, and so forth (in contrast with a rogue-type or any caster). When playing any warrior-types in 3e my biggest headache was remembering all the maneuvers (feats in 3e) that I had at my disposal; this annoyed me to no end as the game was balanced on the assumption the warriors would use their feats where as player all I wanted to do was wade in and swing my weapon on the assumption that's what the game expected. The baked-in (sub)class features look good in general, except for Archer. Sharpshooter comes online too early and point-blank too late; maybe tone down point-blank a bit and switch their places in the sequence? Also, allowing called shots for archers opens the door to allowing it for everyone (reasonable player argument: "if my archer can call a missile shot, his fighter ought to be able to call his shot when swinging in melee"), which may or may not be desirable; I've no real opinion either way. And, "versatile" is bad in that allowing strength for damage on non-thrown missile weapons bakes in an assumption that the character has a bow that can deliver that punch; yet "strength bows" are usually expensive and specialized pieces of equipment. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Vote Up a 5e-Alike: Fighter Draft 2, plus Archetypes (and a poll)
Top