Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Zaruthustran" data-source="post: 1120710" data-attributes="member: 1457">Not true at all. At least, if you take the normal definition of the word "Broken". It may, as you say, be unfun *for you* to play. But it's not broken/nonfunctional.That's because... he's... a Fighter. He fights. That's what he does. That's *all* he does.If you want a skilled guy that uses weapons, pick a ranger or barbarian. If you want a holy guy that uses weapons, pick a paladin. Or multiclass. But if you want a guy that fights and only fights, guess what? You should pick a Fighter.Again with the misuse of "broken". Stop that.Look: the Fighter's role is fighting. The class is designed to do one thing well: fight. The class does one thing well: fight. The class successfully fills the role for which it was designed. It is not broken.Your argument is that the Fighter class--a class intended to be good at fighting and nothing else--should be good at skills as well as fighting. Your argument is broken. The class is not.I covered this in my first post. D&D is a party-based game. The Fighter is a class that fulfills one role in the party: that of the person who fights. It is designed so that it needs support from other characters, characters with skills. And those skilled characters that the Fighter needs also need the Fighter, because the skilled characters can't fight as well as the Fighter.This is balanced and good design.What--is your next argument going to be that Wizards should get d12 hit die, armor proficiency, and +1BAB/lvl? After all, wizards suck at melee combat--a major part of the game. They've got the "Magic Schtick" and that's it. Surely wizards are broken.Because then the Fighter wouldn't need party members. Because then the Fighter is too powerful. Becuase then the Fighter would not meet it's designed role. Because then the Fighter would be broken.I do recall that. And guess what? All those classes still need the Fighter. None of them fight as well as the Fighter, by design. Before you reply to this, recall that D&D is designed to be a 5 player game (a DM player and four players of characters). If the any one class can do everything as well as a specialist, then you break the game concept because there is no need or role for the other three players. -z</blockquote>

Verification