From R&C: Fighters & Armor

[Irda Ranger]

Appears that fighters are meant to melee. If you want to focus on a ranged weapon, I think you're supposed to choose a different class. Makes sense--'ranged' and 'defender' don't really go together.

I think this makes a lot of sense. A Fighter that can do "any kind of fighting" only makes sense in a game with a very condensed class list (like the UA 'basic classes'). D&D classes are a bit more specialized that that.

Mentions "it would be possible to include support for the dancer fencer or the two-weapon fighter."
I take this to mean that these won't be directly supported in the 1st PHB.

From what I hear about the Rogue, I don't even see the point in a "dancer fencer" type. A Rogue with a bit of "Fighter Training" seems to get you what you need there.

As for TWF ... well, I've never been a big fan of it, but I'm sure there will be much wailing and gnashing of teeth from those who are. Oh well. WotC'll get around to it.

Then, builds usually follow one of these three: assault (goes with the 2H), defense (w/ sword/shield), and control (to hinder and constrain the enemy.)

What type of equipment is associated with "control"? (please don't say "spiked chain", please don't say "spiked chain", please don't say "spiked chain")

Armor Categories (in order):
Heavy Clothes
Leather
Hide
Chain
Scale
Plate
(each category has neat options, like feyweave, razorscale, etc.)

Wow. This is a "out of left field" change. We went from three categories of armor to six? I have no idea at this time if this is good or bad, but it is certainly interesting.

Somehow I doubt my personal quirk will be accomodated, but I wonder if under the "unusual materials" section for armor in addition to "mithril" and "adamantium" or whatever they'll have rules for bronze and iron armor and weapons. With the introduction of the Fey and the Feywild as major parts of the game, non-iron/steel weapons may become more prevalent, and they can't all be mithril ...

Shields appear to be slabs of awesome! Maybe I can finally make the Warduke type character I wanted in high school--helmet, shield, and tighty-whiteys is all I need for protection!

Good to hear about the shields. They've never gotten enough love. Anything more specific to add so that we can have a discussion?

No comment on the sophomoric desires to run around in your underwear.

Weapons:
Simplest--maces and spears
massive damage-- warhammer, maul
less damage, better accuracy--swords
in between those two--axes
finesse (rogues, rangers)--short sword, scimitar, rapier

Again, an increase in the number of categories. One thing I think this change (and the change to armor categories) will allow is more refined distinction between which classes gain access to which armor types. With only Light, Medium and Heavy, you could only slice it so many ways. Now perhaps only Fighters and Paladins have access to Plate Armor (Clerics and Warlords top out at Scale) and the "massive damage" weapons.

(there is mention of twin scimitars here, so I take it TWF will be an option, but maybe not a fully fleshed out one?)

I think a problem they are facing is how to deal with multiple attacks. If they have removed the "full attack" option, then everyone gets one attack per round - except the TWF guy. He "breaks the rules" in a way that could seriously mess with class balance.

For instance, the TWF guy might superficially seem similar to the THW guy - lower defense relative to Shield-guy, but more damage. But, that's only from a damage point of view. If you have an ability that works on a hit (say, a Knockdown effect, or a Stun effect) you are twice as effective with these "special effects" as either of the other two guys. You could start making odd rules to address this, but it makes a game a lot more complicated. Would it be worth it? I can't say, but there's the problem as I see it.

I just hit the discussion points... there are plenty more juicy tidbits about each one of these topics (4 full pages!) that you need to read yourself!

Hmm. Maybe we need to establish a forum (not necessarily here at EN World) for people who have it ...

I know that when I get my copy (later this week, hopefully) I will want to discuss ALL of it.

 

[ZappoHisbane]

Oh, good. I would hate for a poor, inexperienced character to have to start with chainmail and a decent sword. A 1st level PC shouldn't be leaving the house without feyrazor-woven mithradamantite astral battleplate and a talking, hellforged sword the size of a Boeing 747.

Wow. Epic ranks in your Jump to Conclusion skill, impressive.

 

[Irda Ranger]

Oh, good. I would hate for a poor, inexperienced character to have to start with chainmail and a decent sword. A 1st level PC shouldn't be leaving the house without feyrazor-woven mithradamantite astral battleplate and a talking, hellforged sword the size of a Boeing 747.

Your attitude is not appreciated. Yours was not a constructive or helpful post.

Obviously these are "upgrades" to normal armor that you acquire or earn at higher levels, not something you start with at 1st level.

 

[Gloombunny]

What type of equipment is associated with "control"? (please don't say "spiked chain", please don't say "spiked chain", please don't say "spiked chain")

Perhaps control abilities are equally accessible to shield-users and two-handers.

Wow. This is a "out of left field" change. We went from three categories of armor to six? I have no idea at this time if this is good or bad, but it is certainly interesting.

Yeah... on the one hand I like simplicity, but on the other hand this way the various armors might all see use, instead of everyone just grabbing the best one out of whichever category.

I think a problem they are facing is how to deal with multiple attacks. If they have removed the "full attack" option, then everyone gets one attack per round - except the TWF guy. He "breaks the rules" in a way that could seriously mess with class balance.

I think they've already mentioned other ways to gain extra attacks, like a special sword power?

Also, TWFing can be represented in more ways than just gaining extra attacks with the second weapon.

 

[TwoSix]

Oh, good. I would hate for a poor, inexperienced character to have to start with chainmail and a decent sword. A 1st level PC shouldn't be leaving the house without feyrazor-woven mithradamantite astral battleplate and a talking, hellforged sword the size of a Boeing 747.

Now that's just being ridiculous.



Now, if you had said "school bus," instead of Boeing 747, I would have been right with you.

 

[Badkarmaboy]

Wow. Epic ranks in your Jump to Conclusion skill, impressive.

I must lol! You took the words out of my mouth and made them into pure awesome.

 

[dystmesis]

TWF should just be treated the same as a two-handed weapon but with different flavor and maybe a feat.

 

[BASHMAN]

Well I am glad to see more respect for the Sword & Board style. 3.x didn't start addressing making the shield useful until PHII-- which sadly, we didn't have long enough before 4e was announced.

 

[Gloombunny]

Well I am glad to see more respect for the Sword & Board style.

I dunno. I mean, I'm really glad to see they're treating shields seriously, but now I'm a little worried that they'll be pushing the "shields for defense, two-handers for offense" thing too hard. Sword-and-board shouldn't be relegated to tanking. :/

 

[Reaper Steve]

Shields are mentioned as turning aside spears, arrows, and fireballs.

Other weapons that don't fit into the listed categories are briefly mentioned. There are polearms.

The special material armor is upgrades, not out the gate. Point is, there need to be interesting robes, leather, etc, for higher-level characters beyond leather +1

No weapons directly associated with control. I also don't think that a sword/shield guy has to be a defense guy, he could be a sword/shield assaulter or controller. But it does seem the ultimate defender is fighter w/ sword/shield and defensive build.