Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="The_DarkAngel" data-source="post: 1121557" data-attributes="member: 14194">Thats a very good way and easy way to judge things FranktheTroll, gj dood. Anyhow, I think some of us are also ignoring this one fact:the fighter is suppossed to be the most diversified class (saids so in DM giude and PH! (peeps love to ingnore this fact). Like I have already said 3-4 times, the Fighter can also be a archer, a cavalier, a swashbuckler, ect, ect. No were does it say that the class is suppossed to be played by stupid idiot characters with heavy armor who only hack and slash. That is what Orcs are for. Doh!The boys a WOTC have said (especially Montecook), that not everything is balanced and to use use your best judgement. Infact its Montecook who has said a great deal of unbalancing is found with prestige classes as an example. Apperently even Dragon magazine has done some Fighter class tweaking.Furthermore, no one can dispute that if peeps in thier campaign are avoiding the fighter class or only using it to multi-class, theres something wrong with the class.So if we all take a min to think &quot;outside of the box&quot; and do some comparisons as FranktheTroll did, you can see hence forth the Fighter is lightly unbalanced. I also find the sorcerer lightly lacking too but Ill save that one for another day.DAP.S. I think that it was Psiblade who said Dragon magazine made an alternate Fighter, can anyone send me that info, or the info on this complete Fighter thing? Thx ahead of time!</blockquote>

[QUOTE="The_DarkAngel, post: 1121557, member: 14194"] Thats a very good way and easy way to judge things FranktheTroll, gj dood. Anyhow, I think some of us are also ignoring this one fact:the fighter is suppossed to be the most diversified class (saids so in DM giude and PH! (peeps love to ingnore this fact). Like I have already said 3-4 times, the Fighter can also be a archer, a cavalier, a swashbuckler, ect, ect. No were does it say that the class is suppossed to be played by stupid idiot characters with heavy armor who only hack and slash. That is what Orcs are for. Doh! The boys a WOTC have said (especially Montecook), that not everything is balanced and to use use your best judgement. Infact its Montecook who has said a great deal of unbalancing is found with prestige classes as an example. Apperently even Dragon magazine has done some Fighter class tweaking. Furthermore, no one can dispute that if peeps in thier campaign are avoiding the fighter class or only using it to multi-class, theres something wrong with the class. So if we all take a min to think "outside of the box" and do some comparisons as FranktheTroll did, you can see hence forth the Fighter is lightly unbalanced. I also find the sorcerer lightly lacking too but Ill save that one for another day. DA P.S. I think that it was Psiblade who said Dragon magazine made an alternate Fighter, can anyone send me that info, or the info on this complete Fighter thing? Thx ahead of time! [/QUOTE]

Verification