Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Has the wave crested? (Bo9S)
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Nepenthe" data-source="post: 3534264" data-attributes="member: 52256"><p>Well, in the transfer from 2e to 3e, warrior types lost their main defining combat ability (multiple attacks). Making multiple attacks an automatic result of having certain BAB (and tying it to full attacks only, removing mobility) significantly boosted the melee power of the following tier of melee fighters (clerics etc.). </p><p></p><p>The designers' intention apparently was that the addition of bonus feats/smites/weapon styles would even this change out... which brings us to the core problem, the fighter. The problem with feats is that, like the new multiple attacks, they are basically available to anyone. Wizards has been unwilling to make "fighter only" feats (and I fail to see why, plenty of spells seem to carry "cleric", "wizard" or "paladin" in them without creating any problems). To make feats viable only for fighters, they've added either high BAB requirements or made extremely long feat chains that give you a plus here and there. High BAB feats are good and well, but they are only available to higher level fighters, leaving the mid-level fighter to nab up his ~15 feat weapon mastery feat tree... And I don't think that weapon specialization and its effects are even close to what they were in 2e.</p><p></p><p>The second problem the fighter has relates to his skills... Not only does he get a meager 2+int in skill points every level, he is doubly punished by having an absurdly poor skill selection. It's been a while since I played 2e, but I am under the impression that the fighter got the same amount of non-weapon proficiencies as everybody else did.</p><p></p><p>These two combined lead to a situation where the fighter is simply not as much fun to play as other classes. Especially if your campaign features heavy skill-use over straight combat, the fighter is indeed completely shafted. And in combat, his choices are either the infamous "I full attack again!" or using one of the special combat maneuvers... that everybody else can do as well, albeit with a penalty of some kind unless they have spent one of their fewer feats on it (unlikely, since they have dozens of better feats to use that build on their strengths).</p><p></p><p>What I see in ToB (and what is the reason for that particular book bringing me back last summer 4 years after "quitting" D&D) is that it just adds _fun_ to the melee types. This is not just "anime combat" as some fans and detractors like to point out (There is "anime" in the warblade and crusader only if you choose to put it there), it also adds to warrior-types as characters via the boosted skill points and skill selections.</p><p></p><p>Power wise... Yes, it does add to the power of the melee classes, mostly by improving their possibilities to deal out damage and move at the same time. Is this bad? In my opinion, it is an overdue fix for a problem that has existed since the birth of 3e. Is this the right way of fixing it? Maybe not, adding warblade skills and skillpoints with the same martial progression to a straight fighter might have fixed both, currently even I, a massive fan of the book, have some trouble swallowing all of the warblade's special abilities (it's the one class I've spent most time looking at, since it seems to be the one at the heart of most controversy).</p><p></p><p>Is the book perfect? No, and I get the feeling that it has at least some cut material (and the inclusion of the legacy weapons is just... not good, web enhancement material if I ever saw it). It would certainly benefit from a more in-depth guide into creating new disciplines and maneuvers. As for the way the maneuvers and their recovery is handled... well, at least it does differentiate them from spells a bit. I'm not sure if its the correct way of handling it, but at least it doesn't just create another type of caster with recovery identical to the base caster classes.</p><p></p><p>/N</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Nepenthe, post: 3534264, member: 52256"] Well, in the transfer from 2e to 3e, warrior types lost their main defining combat ability (multiple attacks). Making multiple attacks an automatic result of having certain BAB (and tying it to full attacks only, removing mobility) significantly boosted the melee power of the following tier of melee fighters (clerics etc.). The designers' intention apparently was that the addition of bonus feats/smites/weapon styles would even this change out... which brings us to the core problem, the fighter. The problem with feats is that, like the new multiple attacks, they are basically available to anyone. Wizards has been unwilling to make "fighter only" feats (and I fail to see why, plenty of spells seem to carry "cleric", "wizard" or "paladin" in them without creating any problems). To make feats viable only for fighters, they've added either high BAB requirements or made extremely long feat chains that give you a plus here and there. High BAB feats are good and well, but they are only available to higher level fighters, leaving the mid-level fighter to nab up his ~15 feat weapon mastery feat tree... And I don't think that weapon specialization and its effects are even close to what they were in 2e. The second problem the fighter has relates to his skills... Not only does he get a meager 2+int in skill points every level, he is doubly punished by having an absurdly poor skill selection. It's been a while since I played 2e, but I am under the impression that the fighter got the same amount of non-weapon proficiencies as everybody else did. These two combined lead to a situation where the fighter is simply not as much fun to play as other classes. Especially if your campaign features heavy skill-use over straight combat, the fighter is indeed completely shafted. And in combat, his choices are either the infamous "I full attack again!" or using one of the special combat maneuvers... that everybody else can do as well, albeit with a penalty of some kind unless they have spent one of their fewer feats on it (unlikely, since they have dozens of better feats to use that build on their strengths). What I see in ToB (and what is the reason for that particular book bringing me back last summer 4 years after "quitting" D&D) is that it just adds _fun_ to the melee types. This is not just "anime combat" as some fans and detractors like to point out (There is "anime" in the warblade and crusader only if you choose to put it there), it also adds to warrior-types as characters via the boosted skill points and skill selections. Power wise... Yes, it does add to the power of the melee classes, mostly by improving their possibilities to deal out damage and move at the same time. Is this bad? In my opinion, it is an overdue fix for a problem that has existed since the birth of 3e. Is this the right way of fixing it? Maybe not, adding warblade skills and skillpoints with the same martial progression to a straight fighter might have fixed both, currently even I, a massive fan of the book, have some trouble swallowing all of the warblade's special abilities (it's the one class I've spent most time looking at, since it seems to be the one at the heart of most controversy). Is the book perfect? No, and I get the feeling that it has at least some cut material (and the inclusion of the legacy weapons is just... not good, web enhancement material if I ever saw it). It would certainly benefit from a more in-depth guide into creating new disciplines and maneuvers. As for the way the maneuvers and their recovery is handled... well, at least it does differentiate them from spells a bit. I'm not sure if its the correct way of handling it, but at least it doesn't just create another type of caster with recovery identical to the base caster classes. /N [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Has the wave crested? (Bo9S)
Top