Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Obryn" data-source="post: 6070005" data-attributes="member: 11821">...because...?I mean, in this thread, there's folks who like 4e and folks who don't, and the majority opinion seems to be, &quot;Yeah, Fighters should get to do stuff above and beyond dealing hit point damage.&quot;&nbsp; I've been assured - repeatedly - that Fighters in PF do just that.&nbsp; I know that Fighters in 4e certainly do.Okay.&nbsp; Where to start.&nbsp; First off, leaving off the X-men thing because if you still want to argue &quot;fightars with powerz = magic&quot; then it's just pointless, because absolutely nobody in this thread is suggesting superpowers, magic, etc. are appropriate and thematic.My own thought is that - regardless of mechanics - a player picking a Fighter wants to do neat fighting stuff.&nbsp; &quot;Hacking away at HP tofu&quot; is part, but does not suffice.&nbsp; We can go on and on about the best way to implement doing more, but IMO it absolutely has to be there.As for picking a simple, mundane class?&nbsp; Well, I certainly hope the dirt-simple hack-it-with-a-sword-type, a dirt simple shoot-it-with-arrows type, and a dirt-simple burn-it-with-magic-type are options.&nbsp; I don't begrudge anyone any of those.&nbsp; It's making any of the above the only exemplar of a certain class or archetype that I disagree with.-O</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Obryn, post: 6070005, member: 11821"] ...because...? I mean, in this thread, there's folks who like 4e and folks who don't, and the majority opinion seems to be, "Yeah, Fighters should get to do stuff above and beyond dealing hit point damage." I've been assured - [I]repeatedly[/I] - that Fighters in PF do just that. I know that Fighters in 4e certainly do. Okay. Where to start. First off, leaving off the X-men thing because if you still want to argue "fightars with powerz = magic" then it's just pointless, because [I]absolutely nobody in this thread[/I] is suggesting superpowers, magic, etc. are appropriate and thematic. My own thought is that - regardless of mechanics - a player picking a Fighter wants to do neat fighting stuff. "Hacking away at HP tofu" is part, but does not suffice. We can go on and on about the best way to implement doing [I]more[/I], but IMO it absolutely has to be there. As for picking a simple, mundane class? Well, I certainly hope the dirt-simple hack-it-with-a-sword-type, a dirt simple shoot-it-with-arrows type, and a dirt-simple burn-it-with-magic-type are [I]options.[/I] I don't begrudge anyone any of those. It's making any of the above the [I]only[/I] exemplar of a certain class or archetype that I disagree with. -O [/QUOTE]

Verification