Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 7072488" data-attributes="member: 996">To be fair, there are a number of thrusting weapons - one, the rapier, is even an optimal weapon for many builds - and excellent ranged options, as well.&nbsp; Besides, there is no 'martial class' that cannot also use spells to some degree in at least one sub-class.&nbsp; That'd defeat(npi) the purpose of the 'simple fighter' concept.&nbsp; &nbsp;Well, sure, and spells are more complex and varied than weapons in the first place.&nbsp; Most of the game's complexity exists in it's several magic systems, afterall.&nbsp; The thing is, if you want options an complexity, you play a full neo-Vancian caster like a Wizard, Cleric, or Druid.&nbsp; If you want a simple character, you play a Champion fighter, slightly less simple, a Berserker, BM, Thief, or Assassin.&nbsp; The other classes and sub-classes (and optional Multi-classing) fill in the continuum between, if not exactly evenly.&nbsp; &nbsp;Remember the outrcy.&nbsp; It started in 2008 and hardly let up for years.&nbsp; You can still here it echoing in the Warlord threads.&nbsp;There's no reason you can't, other than tradition, and expectation.&nbsp; 3.x, for instance, had item-crafting rules that allowed you to graft any enchantment onto any weapon.&nbsp; You could have a holy avenger whip or a life-stealing sap or whatever.&nbsp; 5e doesn't go there - though it doesn't tell you can't go there, it also doesn't point out that there's a 'there' there for you to go to.;|</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Tony Vargas, post: 7072488, member: 996"] To be fair, there are a number of thrusting weapons - one, the rapier, is even an optimal weapon for many builds - and excellent ranged options, as well. Besides, there is no 'martial class' that cannot also use spells to some degree in at least one sub-class. That'd defeat(npi) the purpose of the 'simple fighter' concept. Well, sure, and spells are more complex and varied than weapons in the first place. Most of the game's complexity exists in it's several magic systems, afterall. The thing is, if you want options an complexity, you play a full neo-Vancian caster like a Wizard, Cleric, or Druid. If you want a simple character, you play a Champion fighter, slightly less simple, a Berserker, BM, Thief, or Assassin. The other classes and sub-classes (and optional Multi-classing) fill in the continuum between, if not exactly evenly. Remember the outrcy. It started in 2008 and hardly let up for years. You can still here it echoing in the Warlord threads. There's no reason you can't, other than tradition, and expectation. 3.x, for instance, had item-crafting rules that allowed you to graft any enchantment onto any weapon. You could have a holy avenger whip or a life-stealing sap or whatever. 5e doesn't go there - though it doesn't tell you can't go there, it also doesn't point out that there's a 'there' there for you to go to. ;| [/QUOTE]

Verification