Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="EzekielRaiden" data-source="post: 6690840" data-attributes="member: 6790260">Although I agree that the Fighter would sound like the best option, if someone were just generically describing the classes to me while AFB, I'm...*VERY* hesitant. In terms of whether I'd enjoy my 5e experience or not, it's a pretty big gamble: if I DID end up liking it, my opinion of 5e would change significantly, but if I end up disappointed, I'll feel like all my criticism of the class and the game as a whole have been vindicated. Hence why I'm trying to find something that really speaks to my interests on its own. It's...metaphorically speaking, I'm trying to find the "olive branch" options, the places (which seem frustratingly rare) where 5e is already doing something that I can reasonably predict I'll enjoy. As it stands, I'm not much of a fan, often the opposite, and I'd really like the game to at least somewhat meet me in the middle. As a little bit more background: 4e is definitely my favorite system, but the system I have the most experience actually playing is Dungeon World. DW is a lovely system for encouraging fiction-first, high-drama story. It's also about the absolute bare minimum of crunch I can handle without going completely, table-gnawing crazy. The story is always awesome, that much never changes, and I'm always deeply engaged when my DW group is deep in our most recent hijinks. But as a mechanical structure, a game framework I can take hold of, kick the tires, give a test drive? It tends to fall pretty flat, especially in combat. To my chagrin, I find myself frequently tuning out during fights that aren't specifically made to be a complex and dynamic event, as I need barely pay any attention at all due to the loosey-goosey positioning and the general lack of anything to do when my turn does come up. Hit things until they fall down and move to a new thing when they do, maybe run to an ally in the (now rare) event that someone gets seriously hurt, very rarely cast a spell that may or may not make any difference even if it succeeds (I play a Paladin with the "cast as a Cleric of one level lower" move, but even fighting demons and undead didn't make my spells feel useful in-combat, other than pinch heading.)When I look at 5e, and especially the Fighter...well, I see a very similarly combat-simple class, yet one that lacks the (IMO) significantly interesting moves available to the DW Fighter, *especially* when it comes to non-combat stuff (and the DW Fighter it's pretty slim on that to begin with).So yeah. The 5e Fighter, in any form, is...a bit too risky. It's just...it feels like it has such a high chance for disappointing me, which would really suck.I wasn't aware that there were any reasons at all to grapple/grab things, almost nobody talks about it. The few opinions I've seen were decidedly mixed (one person was defending it in the abstract, a few others were...less enthused) and...I honestly don't remember seeing anything about it in the rules, anywhere. Not saying it's not there, just that whatever is there completely escaped my notice.I've noticed the frequent Valor Bard suggestions. Since it's very likely that another player will have a Bard as well, I'm hesitant (probably a lingering DW influence: it explicitly recommends avoiding doubled-up classes because they will be too similar). For those suggesting it, how would you recommend building to avoid excessive/obvious overlap? Would you bother doing anything at all, or is it a non-issue?</blockquote>

Verification