TwoSix
Everyone's literal second-favorite poster
I want to, but balance makes me break out in a rash in a place Eric's grandmother never told me about.You have obviously never played 4e
D&D 5E And Lo, the Fighter Did Get a Shtick of his Own... COMBAT SUPERIORITY!
- Thread starter Wizards of the Coast
- Start date
Jack99
Adventurer
Fair enough. So you will just have to trust me when I say that in 4e, the dnd fighter finally became awesome beyond level 4.
Ahnehnois
First Post
I don't want anything to be an exclusive mechanic to anything.
The looser the class structure the better; I'd even prefer it if D&D was the sort of game where all characters could learn a spell or two if they trained at it. Likewise, anyone should gain advantages for stabbing people in the back when they can't see you. Until 4e, D&D was gradually but slowly moving in this direction, as many mechanics were allowed to multiple character types, but some were still restricted. A class should be a convenient way of packaging abilities, not a straitjacket.
In this particular case, as they've said the dice are really just a more flexible and fun substitute for static bonuses and maneuvers. Would it fly if they said that only fighters could gain static bonuses to attack and or/damage and/or maneuvers? No. This isn't any different.
I'm not 100% sure what Chris_Nightwing has in mind, but I had the spamming thought also.
It's a bit like 4e psionics - instead of a suite of encounter powers, you have a range of encounter options to choose from, but if one of them is the best then there's nothing to stop you spamming that one over and over.
To some extent, at least, 4e encounter powers don't need to be precisely balanced just because they are rationed. Combat superiority sounds like the options are not rationed, and hence do need to be precisely balanced - without thereby becomeing uninteresting.
I don't think that's impossible, but I don't think it's trivial either.
Either your jokemeter has failed, or mine has (because you're being more straightfaced than I'm allowing for).
Anyway, TwoSix knows 4e pretty well, I think, and is (to at least some extent) a fan of it.
TwoSix
Everyone's literal second-favorite poster
I had a witty reply, but I got distracted by your avatar.
TwoSix
Everyone's literal second-favorite poster
I am. I'm certainly willing to say it didn't accomplish everything I wanted, which is why I regret the loss of development time that could have made it closer to something I desired.
But the 4e fighter is 99% perfect. (The 1% is for possible improvements I'm not clever enough to think of.)
KidSnide
Adventurer
This is an interesting idea.
That said, I hope fighter's don't lose the Fighter's Surge ability (or something similar). I don't want fighters to have a complicated or involved daily power, but I do like the idea that fighters have some ability to "pull out all the stops" on a difficult encounter. I also think a limited daily capability helps balance out a wizard's "nova" ability in games with limited numbers of fights.
-KS
That said, I hope fighter's don't lose the Fighter's Surge ability (or something similar). I don't want fighters to have a complicated or involved daily power, but I do like the idea that fighters have some ability to "pull out all the stops" on a difficult encounter. I also think a limited daily capability helps balance out a wizard's "nova" ability in games with limited numbers of fights.
-KS
Bedrockgames
I post in the voice of Christopher Walken
Personally I am not into these sort of subsystems. It seems people are pretty equally divided over the whole "fighter not having enough options" debate, so I would suggest this be an optional add on, not a core assumption of the system. This, combined with stuff like HD and the fighter surge, definitely make me less interested in Next.
Similar Threads
