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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Dan'L" data-source="post: 4754781" data-attributes="member: 68954">Point of fact, he did.  It was in the very words he used.  Just because you did not read them clearly, doesn't mean he needed to to state it separately.  And just because he followed your redirection of the converstaion to discuss the separate issue of power creep within the Fighter class doesn't mean his original statement is any less correct.Okay, now you're getting off again.1) There are no PHB II Fighters.  No one here, therefore, can have been making any claims about them.  There are two fighter class builds in the MP book, but discussing these builds does nothing to address issues of power creep from PHB II, only perhaps power creep from MP.2) If you read his statement, he very clearly is comparing Defender classes, not class builds of the Fighter class.  He was claiming that Fighters were stickier/tougher than other Defender classes, as I pointed out and he confirmed.  You misunderstood him; nothing wrong with that.3) Therefore, if you take the Fighter class as it existed before PHB II's release, examine it as fulfilling the Defender's role vis-a-vis stickyness & toughness, you will find that the PHB II did nothing to upset the Fighter class' ability to be the stickiest/toughest defender.  So, in this one respect at least, PHB II did not increase the stakes....Now, the separate discussion about Fighter builds from MP v. PHB I is bound to be an internet grumbling from here until 5th Edition.  Power creep?  Only time & playing will truly tell.-Dan'L</blockquote>

Verification