D&D 5E Fixing the fighter (I know...)

[BookBarbarian]

Personally I would rather get an ASI or Feat option than many of the 6th level class features out there. I just listed a bunch up above. But even the combat 6th level features for many classes to me are sub-par to Feat options.

I would totally take MIndless Rage, Fanatical Focus, Aura of Protection, or New circle of the Moon forms over an ASI. But since I pretty much only play non-casters to half-casters I'm certainly no expert on all the features.

 

[Mistwell]

1. What does an anecdote of my play experiences actually prove

That you're playing the game and are routinely encountering an actual rather than theoretical problem, and have the experience to relate precisely how that problem manifested in an actual game. And I am assuming from the way you answered this you do not play the game much, are not running into this problem in actual play very often, and are complaining about it theoretically only.

Which, for me, is super relevant. Because I care far less about you reading rule books in your spare time and imagining how it might play out, than I do about people encountering an actual problem at their tables, and coming here asking for help so they can try to solve it so that their players are having a good time.

White room theorycrafting, at least for me, became a lot less attractive of a hobby near the end of 3e. After time, as I played the game more, I found the theorycrafting very rarely matched the actual play experience.

3. So what do you propose would be the kind of evidence that would be convincing? If you have no legitimate recommendations - then aren't my damage comparisons the best objective measure we have?

I think this point must be directed at someone else?

 

[FrogReaver]

That you're playing the game and are routinely encountering an actual rather than theoretical problem, and have the experience to relate precisely how that problem manifested in an actual game. And I am assuming from the way you answered this you do not play the game much, are not running into this problem in actual play very often, and are complaining about it theoretically only.

Which, for me, is super relevant.



I think this point must be directed at someone else?

It was at you - you quoted my post asking about what evidence was needed. I answered your questions - surely you can answer mine from the post you quoted me.

 

[Mistwell]

It was at you - you quoted my post asking about what evidence was needed. I answered your questions - surely you can answer mine from the post you quoted me.

Uh, what? I said it looked like his standard was just fine, and explained why. As a reminder, his standard started with, "Actual play experience where all class/sub-class combos not only showed itself to be doing so little as to be more nuisance than adversary, unable to conttibute other desired combat effects and repeated dissatisfaction by those playing it in the other pillars as well. These should over time show it as not being taken as a class by players."

You're not actually playing the class. So I find your white room theorycrafting about it kinda irrelevant.

 

[FrogReaver]

Uh, what? I said it looked like his standard was just fine, and explained why. As a reminder, his standard started with, "Actual play experience where all class/sub-class combos not only showed itself to be doing so little as to be more nuisance than adversary, unable to conttibute other desired combat effects and repeated dissatisfaction by those playing it in the other pillars as well. These should over time show it as not being taken as a class by players."

You're not actually playing the class. So I find your white room theorycrafting about it kinda irrelevant.

Why would I play a Champion when I already know they won't be something I will enjoy - because I already know they suck out of combat and barely keep up in combat?

His standard was like requiring video evidence before he would convict - it's an impossible standard because the kind of evidence he is asking for doesn't exist.

 

[Salthorae]

Why would I play a Champion when I already know they won't be something I will enjoy - because I already know they suck out of combat and barely keep up in combat?

Champion only sucks out of combat if you want it to.

As to all the other ridiculous things you replied to my previous post... I can't even.

I'm convinced at this point that you willfully misunderstand people's posts because... I don't know. Maybe trolling is fun for you.

 

[5ekyu]

My definition of evidentiary standard was defined as the evidence you would require to convict someone in a criminal trial - which is an impossible evidentiary standard because not all crimes have video evidence. That is in the general case it's not reasonable to expect video evidence of a crime before you convict - because video evidence might not exist.

Just like in this case it's not reasonable to expect me to provide the evidence you claimed you would need - because that evidence just doesn't exist.

Sounds like you were the one confused.

Ok so I do confess, I am confused by your responses.

You ask about what evidence would be enough to show extreme underpowered... but then attack the responses as if it was asking about just "underpowered". Its confusing why one would ask about an extreme case and then go after thexresponse for not applying to more general, less extreme cases and kinda keep ignoring that part? That is really confusing me.

You also take the response, provide an example of what you call an impossible standard metaphorically and then again pivot from impossible to not universally applicable.

Why keep starting at extremes only to then attack the responses for addressing only the extremes you first put forth instead of widely applicable ones?

That seems quite confusing... to me at least.

So, yes, I am indeed confused by your choices so far as to how to discuss this.

Do you find it unreasonable or an impossible standard to meet to expect or require for a popular class seen in play numerous times at many tables that for it to be considered "extremely underpowered" in one of if not the most common pillar (combat) to see in actual play compelling evidence from both player side and GM side that it's bad enough to cause so much trouble the players move away from choosing it and the GM cannot hang key moments on its class features?

Now, if you wanted to discuss really the standards for "maybe a little underpowered" or "maybe need a little tweaking" etc, or more broad standards for evidence not just impossible ones, then by all means, i suggest you ask another question.

 

[5ekyu]

That you're playing the game and are routinely encountering an actual rather than theoretical problem, and have the experience to relate precisely how that problem manifested in an actual game. And I am assuming from the way you answered this you do not play the game much, are not running into this problem in actual play very often, and are complaining about it theoretically only.

Which, for me, is super relevant. Because I care far less about you reading rule books in your spare time and imagining how it might play out, than I do about people encountering an actual problem at their tables, and coming here asking for help so they can try to solve it so that their players are having a good time.

White room theorycrafting, at least for me, became a lot less attractive of a hobby near the end of 3e. After time, as I played the game more, I found the theorycrafting very rarely matched the actual play experience.



I think this point must be directed at someone else?

"White room theorycrafting, at least for me, became a lot less attractive of a hobby near the end of 3e. After time, as I played the game more, I found the theorycrafting very rarely matched the actual play experience."

Yup.

To me, my experiences, white room excel crafting barely rises beyond the level as far as convincing or evidence as do the conspiracy theories we see around everywhere IRL. Often as not, its put forth as if "prove me wrong" instead of actually proving anything about actual play. It also tends to jump to extremes way too quickly for my tastes.

The number crunching has its place at design and at many places but it does not hold up as the lion's share overriding and trumping actual play and other game considerations.

Simply put a lot of the elements that matter an awful lot in actual gameplay and actual results and actual enjoyment are not numerically represrntable and suited to be judged by equations- and do tend to be dropped by the white room excel conspiracists.

 

[FrogReaver]

"White room theorycrafting, at least for me, became a lot less attractive of a hobby near the end of 3e. After time, as I played the game more, I found the theorycrafting very rarely matched the actual play experience."

Yup.

To me, my experiences, white room excel crafting barely rises beyond the level as far as convincing or evidence as do the conspiracy theories we see around everywhere IRL. Often as not, its put forth as if "prove me wrong" instead of actually proving anything about actual play. It also tends to jump to extremes way too quickly for my tastes.

The number crunching has its place at design and at many places but it does not hold up as the lion's share overriding and trumping actual play and other game considerations.

Simply put a lot of the elements that matter an awful lot in actual gameplay and actual results and actual enjoyment are not numerically represrntable and suited to be judged by equations- and do tend to be dropped by the white room excel conspiracists.

This sounds fair enough - so why do you assume that champions are sufficiently balanced? It sounds like there's no evidence you would have for that stance either given your stated standard?

 

[FrogReaver]

Champion only sucks out of combat if you want it to.

Prove it.