Tony Vargas
Legend
This is really a very simple question with a very simple answer: As a PC class, a fighter should be viable along side other classes of the same level, and able to contribute meaningfully to the party's success in whatever sorts of challenges the DM decides to put in the party's way.The fundamental question here is 'what is a fighter?' But I'll focus on a different question first:
"What should a fighter be able to do?"
Of course, that's the same answer as for all classes. The only question is how do you get the fighter there given the concept. And that gets back to the 'what is a fighter' question - but, it gives you a helpful parameter for answering that question: if it can't result in a viable PC, it's not an acceptable answer.
Is that a 'gamist' reason? Well, sure, in the sense that D&D is a game, and games need to be reasonably fair and engaging to all players.
And there's the double standard, again. You accept the wizard as a character in a fantasy world, a world not subject to the 'realistic' laws of our world, yet you refuse to accept that the fighter is in the same world, and also subject to the same laws as the wizard, not the laws of our world.There really seems to be two sides to this argument; those who want the fighter to remain mortal, albeit highly trained, and those who want him to transcend the abilities of mortal man. I can easily accept wizards bending the rules of physics, because they're utilizing an imaginary force (magic) to do so.
Last edited: