D&D (2024) Fighter (Playtest 7)


log in or register to remove this ad


You take a battlemaster and give them the Commander's strike and Rally maneuvers....and to me you have the bulk of the "warlord" that has been shown in 4e.
That's like saying the Eldritch knight can take shield and fireball and is the bulk of a wizard.

It's not.

Battle master is a fighter who dabbles in warlord.

Though now you can now use commander's strike multiple times on a turn, which is nice.
 
Last edited:


Or they were not great movies, the Reality shows were higher quality than you think, they're not bad politicians, etc.. You're just substituting your preferences for "right," while saying others doing that with those things are "wrong" because...their tastes are not yours?
Fine. The Dungeon & Dragons movie was crap, Keeping Up with the Kardashians is high art, and Richard Nixon was a great president. Is that your take? There can be no objective measure of quality except popularity?
 

Fine. The Dungeon & Dragons movie was crap, Keeping Up with the Kardashians is high art, and Richard Nixon was a great president. Is that your take? There can be no objective measure of quality except popularity?
I think popularity is also not a measure of quality. It's a subjective topic. It's high art to some and low art to others, and entirely depends on the perspective of the viewer. Saying people have a bad track record based on their gut instincts is just another way of saying your tastes are superior. They're not. All tastes are equal. Popularity is just measuring what portion of people have similar tastes.

I've seen your argument used countless times in the nerd field to denigrate novels for example. I've seen people say the Harry Potter books are trash because they're not written a certain way. I've seen people say the Twilight novels are trash because they're not written a certain way. I've even seen people say the Lord of the Rings are trash because they're not written a certain way. Every time I find it to be a nasty elitism argument, where some nerds like to think of themselves as superior to other nerds based on some standard which ultimately comes down to personal taste.

Tastes are equal. Popularity measures how many people have similar tastes.
 


While we're on the subject of improvised weapons, there is a very good Taiwanese / Japanese puppet animation TV show called Thunderbolt Fantasy. It's really good, and it has an amazing use of improvised weapons, I'll have to enclose this in spoiler tags just in case (though it's not that big of a spoiler). Alas the concept itself doesn't really make sense in D&D terms, but it's so cool I wish it did o_o

The main character, Shou, uses a katana as his primary weapon. His party does not have that much confidence in his talents, especially being highly critical of the quality of his cuts, and his swordsmanship (though they admit he is quite strong because they've seen him fight and he's not bad). They complain the cuts are dull and uneven, and a particularly dramatic moment they have lost faith in him so they insult him by giving him the nickname "Dull Blade".

At that moment they're attacked by bad guys. In a dramatic scene Shou loses his sword and finds himself unarmed. His sword, having flown quite a distance, lands at the feet of another member of his party. This companion picks up the sword and with amazement comments: "But it's a wooden sword! It's just been painted silver!"

At that point Shou picks up a stick from the ground, uses the stick to absolutely demolish the enemies, including cutting another guy's sword in half.

Any tool no matter how dull becomes a sharp blade in his hands
 

I think popularity is also not a measure of quality. It's a subjective topic. It's high art to some and low art to others, and entirely depends on the perspective of the viewer. Saying people have a bad track record based on their gut instincts is just another way of saying your tastes are superior. They're not. All tastes are equal. Popularity is just measuring what portion of people have similar tastes.

I've seen your argument used countless times in the nerd field to denigrate novels for example. I've seen people say the Harry Potter books are trash because they're not written a certain way. I've seen people say the Twilight novels are trash because they're not written a certain way. I've even seen people say the Lord of the Rings are trash because they're not written a certain way. Every time I find it to be a nasty elitism argument, where some nerds like to think of themselves as superior to other nerds based on some standard which ultimately comes down to personal taste.

Tastes are equal. Popularity measures how many people have similar tastes.

Tastes are not equal in all things. A lion's and gazelle's tastes in dinner doesn't mean a happy dining experience for both. Designing a game by committee might be popular, but the whole is less than sum of its parts.
 

Tastes are not equal in all things. A lion's and gazelle's tastes in dinner doesn't mean a happy dining experience for both. Designing a game by committee might be popular, but the whole is less than sum of its parts.
The game isn't being designed any more or less "by commitee" than any prior version of the game. It is being designed using big data focused on user desires, which is a sound approach to producing a design that works for users.
 

Remove ads

Top