Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Kavon" data-source="post: 5949957" data-attributes="member: 9822">I wonder if we really need the Fighter if there is nothing that makes the Fighter 'the Fighter'.If the entire class is based on something *every* class can do, which in this case is basic attack with improv. to keep things somewhat interesting, there really isn't that much going on.I'm not sure that "uses heavy armor" or "uses weapons" is something that really makes it a seperate class from all the other ones that do basically the same (and more).So, other martial classes (or otherwise similar classes) mug the Fighter and leave him in a ditch, or you give the Fighter something to defend itself in that dark alleyway. Seeing as it's D&D we're talking about, I don't see the Fighter class getting scrapped.Even if we're only talking about 'simple' versions of classes, other similar classes have something that make them not-Fighter. Not even the Thief was ever only the skills guy (I might be wrong, my knowledge about pre-2e isn't hands on), right?I'd be more interested in seeing a Fighter that is very tough and dangerous without having it be given simply the most HP, the highest attack rating, AC and damage (which isn't interesting - much like leveling up and only getting some HP and maybe an attack boost isn't interesting, more of the same - getting a new class feature is, though).Instead of 2 more HP compared to the other melee guy, give the Fighter something to shrug off/ignore some damage, somehow. To make the Fighter more dangerous, instead of more baseline damage or attack bonus, give it something to boost its damage or attack. This gives it something more interactive to play with.Now, of course there will be people that most likely disagree that all of this is necessary. The fact that there are discussions about the issue says that it needs to be supported in some fashion.</blockquote>

Verification