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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 6729881" data-attributes="member: 996">It was maybe talked up a bit much as the 'complex fighter option,' (which, in a way, has been nonsense the whole time, nobody /wants/ complex for its own sake, they want option-rich, versatile, and interesting, and are willing to pay a high price in putting up with complexity).  The Battlemaster is still a fighter, and between the bone-simple Champion and modest-complexity EK - all clearly behind even comparatively 'simple' full casters like the Warlock or Sorcerer.  The game could use a more interesting/flexible/versatile martial class, not because the 5e fighter sucks, but because it does such a great job as a 'training wheels' class for new players, and a simple class option for players who want that.Sure, the Monk is there for players who want more than the fighter has to give.  Which isn't an objection to the class, just an objection to playing it if you want more options as you level - casters give you that in spades, so if concept isn't important, just play a caster, if concept is important, then you don't have an objection to the BM fighter, you have a reason to want a new martial class with more options, like a Warblade or Warlord or Sword Sage or 3.5-style fighter or 4e-style fighter (neither of which filled the need for a simple/training-wheels class).If you prefer something with orders of magnitude fewer options, it's not unreasonable to conclude that you are indifferent to the number of options available through the class, or, alternately, that you have an aversion to options, or of course, that you simply like the concept so much that the implementation is secondary.  The first appears to be the case:  you delight in manufacturing your own options be declaring actions that have no established formal resolution, so you are indifferent to the number of options presented by the class.  Case closed, AFAICT.  Not sure what you two are going on about at this point, other than whose preference is somehow 'right.'  (Hint: it's a preference.)</blockquote>

Verification