Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="FrozenNorth" data-source="post: 9178282" data-attributes="member: 7020832">This is true.  It is what I do as well.  But you (and I mean this as a compliment) are not shy about trumpeting your preferences and explaining why you support them.  Same for those who want more versatile and competitive fighters.5e generally does a poor job supporting martials and fighters in particular.  My homebrew fixes this in games that I DM.But:<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">a lot of people complaining online may move the needle for WotC in 2024;</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">these posts serve as a warning to new DMs that they need to pay attention to martial/caster balance;</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">I don’t expect a DM I play with to adopt my system, so it might be nice to be able to play a martial character and not worry about being overshadowed by casters.</li> </ul>Finally, for the claims that « WotC doesn’t check these boards so complaining about fighters is just spitting in the wind », it seems to me that the loudest voices for keeping the fighter as it is wouldn’t be posting so loudly UNLESS they were worried that WotC might change the fighter substantially to deal with low satisfaction.  After all, Tasha’s already contained a rebalancing of short rest to long rest rest abilities.</blockquote>