D&D General Chris just said why I hate wizard/fighter dynamic

So, since rogues as skill monkeys can also contribute to combat, and casters can contribute to--well, everything with the right spells... how do you feel Fighters can't?
Rogues don't just "contribute" to combat, they're great at it. Just in a different way than fighters. That's part of the issue, sure fighters are great at combat, but there are no 5e classes that are bad at it.

Are fighters better at exploring than rangers? No, that is their "thing", but fighters can still explore pretty darn well with the right skills. They can intimidate well (especially if you use the variant STR-based instead of CHA-based skill).

I wonder if your fighters aren't contributing as much because of your play style more so than the class??
No, I don't think so. I just see that outside of combat, I have to be careful to make the fighter have something to contribute (as in more careful than the other classes).
 

log in or register to remove this ad

It seems like the no-magic Fighter fans are ok with powerful magic items.

So: give high level Fighters powerful magic items as their class features.

That way, Fighters can cast spells, albeit, it is their gear that allows them to do it.

It is the difference between Batman with magical gear versus Superman with innate powers.
 


Rogues don't just "contribute" to combat, they're great at it. Just in a different way than fighters. That's part of the issue, sure fighters are great at combat, but there are no 5e classes that are bad at it.
Again, so that is more a problem IMO. I would LOVE to see the next D&D designed so not everyone is equally able to contribute to combat...

No, I don't think so. I just see that outside of combat, I have to be careful to make the fighter have something to contribute (as in more careful than the other classes).
Fair enough. I agree fighters do have to use skills to contribute outside of combat since they lack features to enable them to do so, making those choices more important if you want to be more than a combat monkey.
 

tbh Bo9S and 4e where the best times to play martial characters in my mind... but 3e was already falling apart and 4e got a bad wrap and hit with the only split past edition retroclone out with it... and it STILL was the best selling system before 5e.

I wish 5e had more 4e in it..
I skipped 4e altogether. But I do wish that 5e had more of 4e's fighter in it.
 

It doesn't matter in game play (which i assume is what you're focusing on), but it does mean your explanation isn't necessarily valid. Story matters, and if you want to make a big change, you need an in-universe reason that people will accept. If that means to you that I believe, "fighters can't have nice things", then so be it.
Okay, so if the fighter in YOUR game takes it they have to have a story beat to go with it. That's cool but is that a reason not to let anyone have it? I can come up with plenty of story beats for foresight.

I meditated for 6 months with a master to learn to anticipate my enemies every move...
 



I meditated for 6 months with a master to learn to anticipate my enemies every move...
This reminds me a sort of Battle Mediation feature or something.

I could see this offering limited enhancements, but for 8 hours like the spell is just too much for me, personally. Something that could help for a single battle once / long rest, like a 1 minute duration, or limit the affects to one aspect instead of 4 or 5 benefits...
 


Remove ads

Top