Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Neonchameleon" data-source="post: 5524647" data-attributes="member: 87792">Then possibly you'd care to deal with the clarification of my claim.&nbsp; What does a fighter bring to the table out of combat that an equal level commoner with equivalent gear doesn't?&nbsp; I am not denying that an additional warm body with the contacts and brain of a PC can be useful.&nbsp; Agreed.&nbsp; I also don't recall either Merlin or Gandalf creating walls of stone out of thin air or using long distance teleports.&nbsp; Merlin and Gandalf, as I said earlier, were Bards.&nbsp; The Wizards were something else.&nbsp; The only serious candidate I can think of in Lord of the Rings for the Wizard class is Sauron.&nbsp; And I can imagine Gandalf wishing he was a Wizard.Would they play a fighter if they did?And I seriously disagree here.&nbsp; In situations that don't involve sticking a pointy bit of metal into someone, the commoner is more useful than the fighter except in a drinking or poison swallowing contest.&nbsp; It has all the non-combat feat allowance, and a better skill list.&nbsp; The fighter gets nothing else.Indeed.&nbsp; Mascot characters can be great fun to play - and even without skills you can roleplay pseudo-diceless.&nbsp; I just wish that the fighter class was open in saying &quot;This class is weaker than almost all others with the possible exception of the Monk.&nbsp; And is challenging to build effectively for combat.&nbsp; If you want a challenge or simply don't care, play a fighter.&quot;</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Neonchameleon, post: 5524647, member: 87792"] Then possibly you'd care to deal with the clarification of my claim. [I]What does a fighter bring to the table out of combat that an equal level commoner with equivalent gear doesn't?[/I] I am not denying that an additional warm body with the contacts and brain of a PC can be useful. Agreed. I also don't recall either Merlin or Gandalf creating walls of stone out of thin air or using long distance teleports. Merlin and Gandalf, as I said earlier, were [I]Bards[/I]. The Wizards were something else. The only serious candidate I can think of in Lord of the Rings for the Wizard class is Sauron.[I] And I can imagine Gandalf [/I]wishing he was a Wizard[I].[/I] Would they play a fighter if they did? And I seriously disagree here. In situations that don't involve sticking a pointy bit of metal into someone, the [I]commoner[/I] is more useful than the fighter except in a drinking or poison swallowing contest. It has all the non-combat feat allowance, and a better skill list. The fighter gets nothing else. Indeed. Mascot characters can be great fun to play - and even without skills you can roleplay pseudo-diceless. I just wish that the fighter class was open in saying "This class is weaker than almost all others with the possible exception of the Monk. And is challenging to build effectively for combat. If you want a challenge or simply don't care, play a fighter." [/QUOTE]

Verification