Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Capricia" data-source="post: 6361652" data-attributes="member: 6777135">Yes, it requires assumptions.&nbsp; I was very upfront with the assumptions I made, and I purposefully biased those assumptions in favor of the fighter.&nbsp; Even with those assumptions, even with the bard forced to run out of spells every day and run on fumes instead of being able to nova and rest after five minutes, the bard was still well ahead.Every class breaking the game in some way sounds awesome.&nbsp; Only the fullcasters breaking the game while other classes get more feats and +1 bonuses? Not so awesome.&nbsp; As for the sweet spot being levels 3-6...that's an assumption from 3e, and I see it as a general failure of the game that 80% of the content is inferior.&nbsp; 5e is not the second edition of third edition, no matter how much people might want to be, including its own designers.&nbsp; The game having a four level sweetspot is not something you should assume.As for what the fighter used to have...Indomitable used to be &quot;you have advantage on every single save&quot;.&nbsp; It was simple and it was powerful.&nbsp; They also had Defy Death, which let them resist dropping past 1 hp by passing a con save, which they had proficiency and advantage on.&nbsp; Both abilities were powerful, both scaled with level, and both fit the flavor of the fighter while still being mechanically effective and fun.&nbsp; And wotc got rid of them.&nbsp; Then buffed the wizards.There are ways to make each class extremely unique and still powerful.&nbsp; If you think that &quot;fighter as powerful as a wizard&quot; is incapable of being anything but &quot;fighter that is actually a wizard&quot; though, I don't think there's anything that anyone could say to change your mind.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Capricia, post: 6361652, member: 6777135"] Yes, it requires assumptions. I was very upfront with the assumptions I made, and I purposefully biased those assumptions in favor of the fighter. Even with those assumptions, even with the bard forced to run out of spells every day and run on fumes instead of being able to nova and rest after five minutes, the bard was still well ahead. Every class breaking the game in some way sounds awesome. Only the fullcasters breaking the game while other classes get more feats and +1 bonuses? Not so awesome. As for the sweet spot being levels 3-6...that's an assumption from 3e, and I see it as a general failure of the game that 80% of the content is inferior. 5e is not the second edition of third edition, no matter how much people might want to be, including its own designers. The game having a four level sweetspot is not something you should assume. As for what the fighter used to have...Indomitable used to be "you have advantage on every single save". It was simple and it was powerful. They also had Defy Death, which let them resist dropping past 1 hp by passing a con save, which they had proficiency and advantage on. Both abilities were powerful, both scaled with level, and both fit the flavor of the fighter while still being mechanically effective and fun. And wotc got rid of them. Then buffed the wizards. There are ways to make each class extremely unique and still powerful. If you think that "fighter as powerful as a wizard" is incapable of being anything but "fighter that is actually a wizard" though, I don't think there's anything that anyone could say to change your mind. [/QUOTE]

Verification