Fighter design goals . L&L April 30th

[Herremann the Wise]

I think this was the article quite a few people were really looking to see from Wizards; and anything that pulls people in should be a good thing. Congratulations Mike!

About my only quibble is that I would like to see the option for the charismatic fighter and leader of a party. I suppose compressing the warlord into the fighter is the direction I'm thinking of, although as an additional alternative, I wish the fighter would kill the rogue and take his stuff. I suppose I would like to think of the "fighter" as a triangle, with the pillars at each vertex being fighter, warlord and rogue and being able to stretch anywhere within that triangle.

I suppose I hope the fighter can do lots of things outside of combat as well as within.

Best Regards
Herremann the Wise

 

[WheresMyD20]

"attaining balance is something that we must do to make D&D fit in with fantasy, myth, and legend"

I'd like to know exactly which myths and legends Mearls is referring to.

 

[pauljathome]

I'm pretty sure that I don't want even a high level fighter to be taking down waves of orcs each round. I've always seen the role of the high level fighter being more taking down tough opponents quickly (ie, doing insane amounts of damage).

And I'm even more sure that such a fighter will NOT be what I'll consider mundane.

As described, the fighter sounds likely to be over the top to me. Best AC, best hit points, best at taking down waves of opponents, best at dealing damage. So what exactly are the others doing? Having the wizard hold the fighters cape isn't really any better than having the fighter hold the wizards cape

 

[MacMathan]

#6 is the key for me personally.

It is something only 4e achieved IMO out of the entire history of D&D.

Make that possible in type 5 and I will most likely love the edition given the underlying mechanics and issues that are required for it to happen.

 

[GX.Sigma]

So, from this, we know that the playtest packet due in May isn't really more than a "play this adventure for us." Exactly what I didn't want to hear. So, like before, they're going to let us actually have the rules when it's too late to have input on them?

You're absolutely right. Everything you've heard about D&D Next has been a gigantic conspiracy created by an organization of evil geniuses who secretly want to create a terrible game.

Or it's just really early on and large parts of the game haven't been made yet.

 

[thecasualoblivion]

"attaining balance is something that we must do to make D&D fit in with fantasy, myth, and legend"

I'd like to know exactly which myths and legends Mearls is referring to.

The myths and legends where the guy with the sword is the star of the show, often killing the guy in robes with glowing hands?

 

[Janaxstrus]

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...how are they equal if the wizard is incapable of beating the fighter?
If a 20th level fighter can take every spell a 20th level wizard can throw and continue to fight on, it sounds like a 20th level fighter is nigh-unkillable or they are going anti-3.5 and making the fighter (the easiest class and one of the more powerful to play at low levels through most editions) also the most powerful at high end.

Fun.

 

[Quickleaf]

I express the following concern simply because previous editions have never made it an option with the core rules.

I like heavily armored, tough fighters, but I also want lightly armored agile fighters, and even unarmored magically-enhanced fighters, to be viable options from the start of the game. If you're in a desert or at sea, you should still be able to hold your own as a fighter without needing heavy armor. If you want to make a character who uses a little magic to enhance your combat abilities, you should be able to give a heavily armored fighter a solid challenge.

They haven't said anything explicitly to imply you can't do that, but I've yet to see it work in earlier editions.

Does 4th edition's tempest fighter not qualify as a lightly armored agile warrior?

 

[Quickleaf]

"attaining balance is something that we must do to make D&D fit in with fantasy, myth, and legend"

I'd like to know exactly which myths and legends Mearls is referring to.

What about this is ambiguous exactly?

3. The Fighter Exists in a World of Myth, Fantasy, and Legend

Keeping in mind the point above, we also have to remember that while the fighter draws on mundane talent, we’re talking about mundane within the context of a mythical, fantasy setting. Beowulf slew Grendel by tearing his arm off. He later killed a dragon almost singlehandedly. Roland slew or gravely injured four hundred Saracens in a single battle. In the world of D&D, a skilled fighter is a one-person army. You can expect fighters to do fairly mundane things with weapons, but with such overwhelming skill that none can hope to stand against them.

 

[FinalSonicX]

All of these design goals sound good to me except #1 and #5. #1 just sounds terribly vague (I do want fighters to be the best at fighting, but I also want all other classes to be able to contribute, particularly the other more mundane classes like rogue, ranger, paladin, and barbarian). #5 is only concerning because my experience with Barbarians is that they tend to have the largest health, but I also note that there was mention of rangers and paladins but no barbarians (some kind of implication that barbarian is a background/theme rather than a player class?).

Also, the comment about mythic or legendary feats of heroism by fighters is a little tiny bit worrying. I love it when fighters can do heroic things like Beowulf, but I don't necessarily want this tone to be pervasive in the system itself until epic levels. Just a personal preference in tone and capability. Perhaps modules will be able to make up for anything I don't particularly like in this regard. I remain hopeful.

Otherwise looks good. Obviously the article is pretty light on details and are really just comments on what the designers would like to accomplish - no telling if they'll actually pull it off until we see the rules.