Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Neonchameleon" data-source="post: 5526854" data-attributes="member: 87792">The problem here is that you're conflating &quot;fighter&quot; with &quot;3E fighter&quot;. In 1e or 4e I'd agree with you that they are generally fighters. (This includes Slayers and Knights).&nbsp; In 3e, the Warblade class does a far better job of mythological fighters than the fighter does.&nbsp;&nbsp;Fine. I simply know more more modern military history. How about Julius Caesar (a politician as much as a general), Belisarius, Subodai, Charlemeign (sp?), Hannibal? Being a general in antiquity was more about being a politician than being a fighter.&nbsp;&nbsp;To put this into perspective, first it's not every single wizard. It's every single PC wizard. NPC wizards use whatever rules the DM likes. And second, the rate you gain ability is slow. A first level PC with skill training and a 18 basic stat has +9. (E.g. a 1st level thief). A wizard with dex 10 and no training needs to reach level eighteen before he can match that thief. I fail to see why it's a problem that an 18th level wizard can point at a simple lock and order it to open. Or why the charisma 10 fighter who has literally been through hell and back and can take on half the enemy army single handed shouldn't inspire people by his very presence as much as the sociable first level bard. The fighter is after all a living legend by that point and having him on their side should be incredibly inspiring.&nbsp;These skills don't come up in play because there's always someone in the party who can actually do it well. But I feel the character is more rounded for having them.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Neonchameleon, post: 5526854, member: 87792"] The problem here is that you're conflating "fighter" with "3E fighter". In 1e or 4e I'd agree with you that they are generally fighters. (This includes Slayers and Knights). In 3e, the Warblade class does a far better job of mythological fighters than the fighter does. Fine. I simply know more more modern military history. How about Julius Caesar (a politician as much as a general), Belisarius, Subodai, Charlemeign (sp?), Hannibal? Being a general in antiquity was more about being a politician than being a fighter. To put this into perspective, first it's not every single wizard. It's every single [I]PC[/I] wizard. NPC wizards use whatever rules the DM likes. And second, the rate you gain ability is slow. A first level PC with skill training and a 18 basic stat has +9. (E.g. a 1st level thief). A wizard with dex 10 and no training needs to reach level [I]eighteen[/I] before he can match that thief. I fail to see why it's a problem that an 18th level wizard can point at a simple lock and order it to open. Or why the charisma 10 fighter who has literally been through hell and back and can take on half the enemy army single handed shouldn't inspire people by his very presence as much as the sociable first level bard. The fighter is after all a living legend by that point and having him on their side should be incredibly inspiring. These skills don't come up in play because there's always someone in the party who can actually do it well. But I feel the character is more rounded for having them. [/QUOTE]

Verification