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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Asisreo" data-source="post: 8049519" data-attributes="member: 7019027">Alright, alright. I was just being tongue-in-cheek with that last sentence, geez. can't say anything in these forums, I swear.Though my point still stands that the implications of being a leader shouldn't be ingrained into being a fighter. Only a player that builds it as such and a group that is okay with a spotlight having character should have to deal with the burdens of being a natural leader, as not everyone who plays fighter wants to be a leader. Fighters have 2 extra ASI's which they can use as they see fit as early as level 6. They can pick up feats like Actor, or just add to their Charisma score. It's sacrificing combat effectiveness, but that's a choice on the player to fulfill what they want. They can't actually build to be good at it, in default 5E though, unless they have rolled stats and CHA to spare. Assuming they need STR or DEX and CON as primary and secondary (and they pretty much do), with other stat methods, whatever is left for CHA is likely to be pretty low, and then all you have is maybe Persuasion and one of Deception or Intimidate.And any CHA-based character is going to do nearly as well untrained, and better if trained.I never said that other characters aren't mercenaries, because they all are. The fact that a stereotypical adventurer goes on a quest to fight something for money makes them a mercenary in my eyes. The fighter is just the rugged, practical type of mercenary. A wizard is a tactical type. A bard is the type to keep the mercenaries together but not necessarily being the leader.Of course, your character needn't actually be mercenaries, but when I picture a typical adventuring group, it's a bunch of combat-ready personnel with a license to kill being paid for their services.</blockquote>

Verification