Fighter design goals . L&L April 30th

[Crazy Jerome]

During the time between the writing of design goals and the delivery of the product, design goals are, by definition, unmet. The purpose of providing them early is to inform those testing so that their criticism can be more constructive.

 

[Sunseeker]

Points 2&3= Fantastical Realism FTW.

Points 4, like point 1, does make me worry a bit. We're angling for a flatter math system, so I'm expecting "better" meaning no more than a +2 at the best of times(without buffs) when compared to other "fighting" classes. But still, while the Fighter should be the best at fighting, I don't want that to come at the expense of other classes. IE: Buff the fighter, don't nerf other classes to make the fighter feel good about sucking.

Again, Point 5 has the same problem as Point 1 and 4. As long as they can make the fighter better without having to drive other fighting classes into the ground, great. To some extent, there's still some concern, if a specialized, two-handed weapon fighter still gets high armor bonuses, while a Barbarian, who can only use two-handed weapons and no armor, well how does that work out? Flatter math will mean dex bonuses aren't as impressive.

In short: if a Fighter can specialize and be significantly stronger than a class who is pre-specialized, what's the point of those alternate classes?

Yay for point 6! Now, it's important to note that they're equal in different ways, the way I read this post, casters will be "bursty" and fighters will be "slow and steady", but on the whole, be more powerful than they were before. There'll probably be balance issues related to smaller encounters, but over the length of a boss-fight or fending off an invading army, both classes should get to shine to their fullest, in different ways.

 

[Alaxk Knight of Galt]

Fly and Protection from Arrows. At that point ordinary 3.X orcs only hurt him on a crit. He does this before rolling initiative. At this point he can plink away with a crossbow if he wants.

You further my point (and I agree with you). The Wizard has lots of ways to completely negate hundreds of orc attacks by the application of just a few spells. The effectiveness of the wizard goes up drastically with the time he has to prepare for an encounter compared to a fighter.

I'm not sure how you make a fighter equal to a wizard on the battlefield (short of what was done with 4th edition). That's why Mearls gets the big bucks

 

[thecasualoblivion]

The article has a lot of words, but says very little to me. It sounds like a bunch of non-committal corporate mumbo jumbo, that's aimed to make people excited.

First of all, the play test being only pregenerated characters, is very disappointing to me. Honestly, they don't need "us" to test and see if the system works with a bunch of canned characters. They can do that themselves, and see what works, what doesn't. Closed betas are more than sufficient for this process. What they need the masses for, is stress testing. Where does the system break? What are emerging trends in tactics or builds, that need to be examined? Is everyone suddenly playing ranged characters and ignoring melee? Is everyone playing a dwarf? Why does no one even look at playing a halfling? These are the things that need to be nailed down in public play test with a large pool of players. So releasing pregenerated characters for play test is just advertisement and a way to keep people involved, but is not really all that encouraging of a step for system development.

Second, outside of conventions, people rarely play D&D with pregenerated characters. Creating your character is a major part of the D&D experience, and the part that's going to get the most heated feedback.

Third, putting the combat system through some ringer and setting it in stone, is the mistake that 4.0 did. As the system evolved, they ended up having to make significant changes, from introducing expertise feats, to adjusting numbers on all monsters. So the combat system cannot be designed independent of the capabilities of characters.

I don't think the playtest at this point is so much as to make sure the system works as it is to see if it achieves the goal of uniting the community. Testing to see whether or not edition warriors of any given stripe declare jihad on it.

 

[Neonchameleon]

People keep forgetting that there's a lot more to this game than attack and damage rolls.

You want the dragon slayed? Fighter's gonna do the heavy lifting, there.

You want the ancient text deciphered? Wizards. Oh yes.

You want the lock opened? Rogue! Get up here!

You want the townsfolk quieted? Cleric, please remind them how much they love to be alive, and who, ultimately, is responsible for that.

As long as it ends up as that and not:

You want the dragon slayed? Wizard's gonna blind it with glitterdust or lock it in a force cage to turn it into a mopping up excercise, thus doing all the heavy lifting.

You want the ancient text deciphered? Wizards. Oh yes.

You want the lock opened? Wizard? Do you have a Knock scroll or spell? Or should we let the thief have a go first?

You want the townsfolk quieted? Wizard. Either use a couple of illusions to put on a dog and pony show, charm the lot of them, or scare them off.

The less combat the more the wizard's versatility puts him ahead of the mundane classes.

 

[hemera]

Personally, I kind of hope for a sort of hybrid 3e/4e kind of fighter. Kind of like he is the best at fighting in the sense that he has the most options. Like combat feats for better combat maneuvers or straight up 4e style powers to supplement his basic attacks. That kind of versatility could put him ahead of the other basic fighting classes like the ranger and paladin. Just a thought.

 

[I'm A Banana]

As long as it ends up as that

The article linked in the OP said that fighters are best at combat (as a design goal). If they succeed in that design goal, all this "OVERPOWERED WIZARD OHNOES!" paranoia will, at least for combat, be shown as unnecessary.

I, for one, generally trust them to meet their goals. I haven't seen WotC not meet goals, generally speaking, though I have seen them set the wrong goals.

The less combat the more the wizard's versatility puts him ahead of the mundane classes.

Only under certain conditions which need not be true in the 5e development.

 

[Szatany]

Some things I didn't see addressed.

The Three Pillars approach - Combat, exploration, roleplay.
They have said that some characters will be better at one of those than the other, but all will have core competence in each.

As you said yourself: they have said that some characters will be better at combat, expl., or roleplay, not some classes.

 

[Incenjucar]

The actual quote is...

"Even if a wizard unleashes every spell at his or her disposal at a fighter, the fighter absorbs the punishment, throws off the effects, and keeps on fighting."

So, no... saying that the fighter is IMMUNE to ALL MAGIC is an assumption that is in no way accurate. It says he will absorb the punishment. He takes the punishment from the magic. He doesn't ignore it. He takes it.

He then throws off the magic effects. Does that therefore mean NO magic effect affects him EVER? Not at all. "Throwing them off" might require a round, maybe two rounds. Who knows? "Throws off" is not a synonym for "Ignores", unless you assume further than you probably should.

And he keeps on fighting. But do we know HOW WELL he keeps on fighting? Nope. No indication AT ALL what "keeps on fighting" actually means. For all we know... Cleric throws that "Hold Person" spell at the fighter and the fighter gets Held for two rounds. He then soaks up the damage the cleric deals to him while he's paralyzed. He then throws off the effect of the Hold, and maybe he's Slowed for a round or two after that, or perhaps he has some penalties to combat? Again, we don't know.

But that is a perfectly fine interpretation of what Mearls' said, without going so far afield as to actually believe the Hold Person or Wish spells have been stripped from the game as you assumed.

There's a very good chance that the fighter will be based on the 4E slayer, or at least the design goals that led to the 4E slayer. The 4E slayer gets a whole bunch of save and defense bonuses as it gains levels, which might show up again in the 5E fighter.

 

[Szatany]

dopuble post, please delete