Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 7444814" data-attributes="member: 996">Y'know, it's not as true as all that.&nbsp; I mean, I've seen the 'wake me when the fight starts' type, plenty of times, but they aren't always playing fighters, and I've seen plenty of people play fighters who didn't fit the stereotype.&nbsp; For that matter, the player in my old group who was closest to fitting the stereotype thoroughly enjoyed both his 3.5 leap-attack fighter, and his 4e greatweapon fighter (who would throw down Rain of Steel, C&amp;GI, and Thicket of Blades with glee; and danced around using Footwork Lure) - and also played a Sorcerer at one point.&nbsp; Interestingly, I didn't see the 'wake me when the fight starts' type among new players coming into 4e.&nbsp; I think it's in part of self-fulfilling expectation.&nbsp; Fighters in D&amp;D have generally underperformed outside of combat and been fairly simplistic in the tactics you could use with them.&nbsp; Out of combat challenges prior to 3e were about wrangling with the DM, not the kind of thing new players would jump in to, and after that they were about skills that the fighter mostly sucked at.&nbsp; So if you go into the game wanting to play an archetype that the fighter is the only choice to represent, you have that experience of D&amp;D as being about combat and not that terribly engaging combat beyond big numbers - so you either give up the archetypes and try other classes, give up D&amp;D and try other games, fight the system the whole way, back out of the hobby entirely... or you start to look like the stereotype we're talking about.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Tony Vargas, post: 7444814, member: 996"] Y'know, it's not as true as all that. I mean, I've seen the 'wake me when the fight starts' type, plenty of times, but they aren't always playing fighters, and I've seen plenty of people play fighters who didn't fit the stereotype. For that matter, the player in my old group who was closest to fitting the stereotype thoroughly enjoyed both his 3.5 leap-attack fighter, and his 4e greatweapon fighter (who would throw down Rain of Steel, C&GI, and Thicket of Blades with glee; and danced around using Footwork Lure) - and also played a Sorcerer at one point. Interestingly, I didn't see the 'wake me when the fight starts' type among new players coming into 4e. I think it's in part of self-fulfilling expectation. Fighters in D&D have generally underperformed outside of combat and been fairly simplistic in the tactics you could use with them. Out of combat challenges prior to 3e were about wrangling with the DM, not the kind of thing new players would jump in to, and after that they were about skills that the fighter mostly sucked at. So if you go into the game wanting to play an archetype that the fighter is the only choice to represent, you have that experience of D&D as being about combat and not that terribly engaging combat beyond big numbers - so you either give up the archetypes and try other classes, give up D&D and try other games, fight the system the whole way, back out of the hobby entirely... or you start to look like the stereotype we're talking about. [/QUOTE]

Verification