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
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
When did the Fighter become "defender"?
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="Herschel" data-source="post: 5907598" data-attributes="member: 78357"><p>Which is really, absolutely NO different unless you're edition warring. It's also NOT the way many (most?) people design characters. </p><p> </p><p>Starting with a schtick, there's really no difference. I have a heavy-armored, two-weapon fighting dwarf who does damage that's "ported" over from a previous character. In this case, he's a Ranger because it worked better for the concept.</p><p> </p><p>I also have a Bow-using battlefield commander character who generally stays back and surveys the battle field, lending a hand wherever it's most needed and can step in to melee as well. In this case, he's a Warlord.</p><p> </p><p>I have a light-armored, sword-wielding character who also casts magical wards and spells and is more a mobile rescue ranger than a "tank". In this case he's a Swordmage.</p><p> </p><p>I can still do these concepts with the Fighter class, but they work better for me using a different class. The pont is though that I can do the schticks you talked about easily enough because 4E gave me the tools to do them, just like earlier editions. </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>Again, this is a gross misrepresentation of the issue. </p><p> </p><p></p><p> </p><p>Again, flat out WRONG. You can have both of those things very easily, it's just that op-cheese thinking tells you the double attacks are "better" for a Ranger. You can create a perfectly viable weapon/board Ranger, he's just not spamming Twin Strike and Twin Strike + powers. </p><p> </p><p></p><p> </p><p>Again, you start with the defender chassis because you want to play a defender. Regardless of system, the best way to play the character you want is to decide your schtick and build from there. "Being a Fighter" is NOT a schtick, it's just one character element of whichever schtick you want. </p><p> </p><p></p><p> </p><p>Then those people are illogically impatient at best, otherwise just plain unrealistic. NO previous edition had everything up-front. 3.x had numerous years of splatbooks and additions. 4E was no different. Nor will 5E/DDN be. TBH, the people that complain about not having everything "up-front" aren't worth marketing to because they will NEVER be happy. </p><p> </p><p></p><p> </p><p>Again, what's the difference? <strong>Class and Role really are moot because the only thing schtick should be based on is SCHTICK</strong>. Class and Role are both just elemental means to an end. It's meaningless semantics. </p><p> </p><p>And you can choose to do different things, at least w/ 4E standard. Essentials is generally much more limiting and is preferred by many "old schoolers" and maybe closer to what you say, but it's also MUCH more restrictive.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Herschel, post: 5907598, member: 78357"] Which is really, absolutely NO different unless you're edition warring. It's also NOT the way many (most?) people design characters. Starting with a schtick, there's really no difference. I have a heavy-armored, two-weapon fighting dwarf who does damage that's "ported" over from a previous character. In this case, he's a Ranger because it worked better for the concept. I also have a Bow-using battlefield commander character who generally stays back and surveys the battle field, lending a hand wherever it's most needed and can step in to melee as well. In this case, he's a Warlord. I have a light-armored, sword-wielding character who also casts magical wards and spells and is more a mobile rescue ranger than a "tank". In this case he's a Swordmage. I can still do these concepts with the Fighter class, but they work better for me using a different class. The pont is though that I can do the schticks you talked about easily enough because 4E gave me the tools to do them, just like earlier editions. Again, this is a gross misrepresentation of the issue. Again, flat out WRONG. You can have both of those things very easily, it's just that op-cheese thinking tells you the double attacks are "better" for a Ranger. You can create a perfectly viable weapon/board Ranger, he's just not spamming Twin Strike and Twin Strike + powers. Again, you start with the defender chassis because you want to play a defender. Regardless of system, the best way to play the character you want is to decide your schtick and build from there. "Being a Fighter" is NOT a schtick, it's just one character element of whichever schtick you want. Then those people are illogically impatient at best, otherwise just plain unrealistic. NO previous edition had everything up-front. 3.x had numerous years of splatbooks and additions. 4E was no different. Nor will 5E/DDN be. TBH, the people that complain about not having everything "up-front" aren't worth marketing to because they will NEVER be happy. Again, what's the difference? [B]Class and Role really are moot because the only thing schtick should be based on is SCHTICK[/B]. Class and Role are both just elemental means to an end. It's meaningless semantics. And you can choose to do different things, at least w/ 4E standard. Essentials is generally much more limiting and is preferred by many "old schoolers" and maybe closer to what you say, but it's also MUCH more restrictive. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
When did the Fighter become "defender"?
Top