Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Minigiant" data-source="post: 8569823" data-attributes="member: 63508">The complaints are not that fighters must optimize and trade power from one place to gain power from somewhere else.The complaints happen because the rate of return for tradeoffs for warriors classes are a lot worse that those for casters because the fighters are usually designed to use simple inflexible mechanics. As an edition ages, the warriors get more complex and the tradeoffs become more efficient. Then you get another complaint of why the warrior classes weren't made complex at the start.This is usually due to Ability Score Dependency. In the olden days, every basic class was Single Ability Dependent (SAD) and the more powerful subclasses were Muliple Ability Dependent (MAD).Then 3e realigned the classes and standardized the ability scores. So the warriors were MAD and spellcasters were SAD. And ability to adjust or increase the were lower.Then 4e made every class have MAD and SAD options. As long as you rolled a good Prime, you can but your second highest score anywhere.And in 5e, the game revert to 3e style SAD and MAD issues but not as drastic. Although technically every class is SAD, DEX and CON are too important for warrior classes to ignore without the DM playing favorities..</blockquote>