NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Remathilis" data-source="post: 9664184" data-attributes="member: 7635">Bear in mind that the difference between prescriptive and descriptive if it is diegetic in the fiction. Bob would call himself a knight, a soldier, a bandit, or a marshal, but at no point would he call himself a "fighter", while Sir Charles would absolutely use the term "paladin" to describe his profession. It doesn't matter if a bandit and a knight have the same fighter chassis*, the point is that Bob wouldn't call "fighter" a profession the same way "paladin" or "ranger" are. All that said, I don't think you could really do any better in a class-based system with niche protection. Whether fighter is an actual concept in the world or merely a description of the archetype the class is supposed to invoke, It's going to protect to have to fill its niche as the nonmagical combat class. Even in Basic, the fighter isn't able to fill the niche of the smuck commoner who knows a lot about gardening and not war. The only reason it looks like that is the Basic Fighter isn't getting anything new aside from combat # improvements for the majority of its lifetime. The minute you start giving the fighter anything, you begin the process of justifying it. Doesn't matter if its weapon specialization, bonus feats, martial maneuvers, or weapon masteries. The best way your idea would work is in a classeless system where the Baker starts out spending all his skill points on mundane skills and then as he levels up begins to spend skills on combat or magic or adventuring skills if he wants. Everything else is going to end up with specialists protecting their specialty niches.</blockquote>

Verification