Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Quickleaf" data-source="post: 6362625" data-attributes="member: 20323">Yeah integrity of character concept is an important consideration, and all those abilities of a sword fighter can reasonably be expected by a D&D player running a fighter.Related to the issue of spellcasting options is also niche protection, letting each class solve problems in meaningfully different ways. For example, a caster using the very loud Knock vs. a rogue quietly picking a lock.I think some fighter players just want more options because some players find more options more fun. You can look at it thru the lens of "entitlement" or not. Wizards are just used as a common point of comparison because they have a whole lot of versatility.Also, I should reiterate that the argument I'm making isn't that fighters should be able to do everything wizards can do, nor vice versa. It's that both should have unique choices that adjust to the play complexity a player prefers.I've been in games that went both ways (reactive/restocking enemies & 5 minute workday dungeons). But I think you raise a really important point that has been resurfacing a lot on the forum recently: That D&D's class design lends the game to a certain kind of adventure design. Exploring that point more might help clarify the vastly differing opinions that are held on the QWLF issue.</blockquote>