Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="timASW" data-source="post: 6070012" data-attributes="member: 6698787">Problem 1. Thats a completely false choice that not only hasnt existed since the skills and powers book came out lo those many decades ago, but its also a complete strawman often put forward by 4e players who think making a choice between a status effect and damage is bad design. Its not. Problem 2. Plenty of people who play fighters DO just want to hit stuff. They may want to take power attack so they can hit stuff really hard, or whirlwind attack so they hit lots of stuff at once but it boils down to being perfectly happy being the character who just hits stuff. Sorry but the hyperbole goose is good for the hyperbole gander. 4e'ers who dont like it probably shouldnt have been throwing so much of it around since 2008. 1. It IS there. And it has been since skills and powers. 2. Most of this is because you dont like fighters as previously written.   Most of this boils down to certain 4e advocates simply not liking simple fighters and trying to turn them into a class they do like.  Thats bad design to follow. The next team could take their likes, make them fit into the games conceits and give those guys a martial class, but it cant be fighter, call it whatever you want. But not fighter.  Good design would be deciding what edition they want to most closely hew to and asking people who LIKED the fighter in that edition why they liked it. And designing around the essence of that. Thats most likely going to be 1e or 3.5. And the 1e fighter is a little too simple to fit in with other classes so it has to be the 3X version. Make some changes sure, use the PF fighter as a template instead of the 3X one for a start. But do not violate the essence of that class the way that 4e did or they will just keep everyone who didnt like 4e turned off and tuned out.</blockquote>

Verification