Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Tywyll" data-source="post: 1101215" data-attributes="member: 8360">Please, could you be any more full of your self?  Your commentary and tone, much like now, was rude, not your disagreeing with me.  And that has nothing to do with how faulty and incorrect your conclusions were.Yeah, pretty much so. Actually, there is no reason to assume much about the fighters.  As the most variable class in Core rules, Fighters are supposed to represent all different kinds of concepts, from the heavily armored tank to the swashbuckler, to the non-mystic martial artists, to the king's guards.  Whether the class succeeds at this endeavor is irrelavent, but since its can represent concepts beyond your limited options, a justifiable and defendable argument could be made for them having most skills, under the right situations.Furthermore, as the only class that spends a good time of its appreticeship (using your fighter barracks/militant temples/army life example) on sentry duty, dnd's lack of granting spot to fighters can only lead one to imagine how poorly defended most camps and bases are.  As body guards are the ones that defend the nobility and powerful of any world, fighters are the ones who spend the MOST time looking for assassins and hidden enemies.  But, you are nitpicking an offhand remark to avoid the real thrust of the conversation.  I would like to return to a comment you made earlier:So, um, you are removing the skill because its so useful, and paladin's don't need it?  Its so useful....so you are taking it away?  Where is the logic? So you are rude AND psychic?I love that you keep going off on what was intended by the designers of DnD.  This class doesn't have spot because blah and this class has it because of blah.  Never mind the fact that Monte Cook actually was a designer of 3rd edition so he probably has good reason for doing what he did.  Not that I agree with all his choices or anything, but a class skill doesn't seem that worth nitpicking.  As for what functions they perform.... please.  Since the causes are so wide and varied, and since the rules for creating new causes is a part of the class, trying to equate them to paladins or clerics is simply weak.  Furthermore, with the text write up as given, they serve multitudes of functions and causes beyond that having anything to do with religion or churches.  This disagreement goes back in part I think to you nerfing the class down to making them a loner class (losing the heartening cry, reducing the 50% critical reduction ability granted to allies, etc).  You are trying to shoehorn them into a role defined by another class rather then seeing them for what they are and can be.  And we are arguing about converting a non-core class to core.  YOu still didn't answer the question: if you brought over akashics would you limite them so arbitraily?  Oh, you have Heavy Armor Prof, so you can't take X, Y, and Z?  That's fine.  Unneccesary in my opinion, but no big deal either way. Logical fallacy, appealing to outside support.  It doesn't validate your opinion any more or less then mine.  When I got the book, I thought the same thing, specifically about the casting classes. Having now played many different classes from AU at many different levels, I have found that many are much weaker then their core equivalents (specifically the casters).  As it is, with their 'rage' being an enhancement bonus (topping out with you at +6 at high level) by the time they can do it, they should already have access to items that grant them said bonus if not better.  At least as written the +8 enhancement bonus as the top end is 2 better then the item that the high level Champion undoubtedly possesses already.  Since you see the Champion as lumbering fighter types, we must assume that they will have +6 X of Strength and probably Charisma as well, at top end.  So now they have an ability that grants them DR and Fast Healing, basically, and that's about all.  Not to say the DR isn't worthwhile, but you have made their top end power the equivalent of having the party wizard cast Stoneskin and a Druid hit them with X Regeneration spell.  Wheeeee.....We are coming at this disagreement in two different directions.  You didn't originally post this as: A better Core Champion that will replace the Paladin.  I would have understood your viewpoint from the beginning.  Disagreed with needing to make such a shoehorning change, but understood the limited role you wanted the class to perform.  I am coming at it from the standpoint of the class as it was intended, a not-necessarily-religious figure that fights for a cause.Regardless, my opinion still stands: with the bonuses being enhancement, and the benefits being reduced in numerical value, the class is too weak.</blockquote>

Verification