Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Celtavian" data-source="post: 6662449" data-attributes="member: 5834">Did you play Pathfinder? They were impressive ones. Quite impressive. I ran those characters, extremely powerful. Harder to deal with than a caster up to level 12 to 14.In Patfhinder, you didn't play a fighter if you wanted to be something other than a focused brute. Other classes were built to be the martial equivalent of something else. Why does the fighter have to be provide the same capabilities as a ranger or swashbuckler or magus? Why do you feel other base classes or archetypes can't fill different roles for someone want to play a martial that does other things? Why are you insisting the fighter must do all of this when the fighter is the class made to emulate the mundane fighting man. If you want other capabilities, play a different class or archetype.Don't sell me on falsehoods. Mythic Adventures gave better abilities to martials than casters. They absolutely hammered what they fought. They had non-combat abilities to take if you wanted them. Guess what, most players don't want them. Combat is the majority of the fun for them. They want to be the most powerful killers. They took the abilities that made them powerful killers rather than stuff like Mythic Leadership or Mythic skills.You seem to want something that that the majority of players don't give a flying crap about: non-combat utility abilities. Why don't you poll martial players and see if they would be willing to give up their killing power for breadth of capability. I'd love to see if others are agreeable. My experience is martial players like to kill things. They don't care about all the little fiddly social and exploration pillars. People that like those pillars choose classes that excel in those areas, they don't expect a class sold to them as a martial killer like a fighter to be good at the social and exploration pillars. Their eyes often glaze over during those periods. That's why I'd like to know exactly what you're talking about. I haven't played an edition of D&D where the martials didn't have lots of combat power. I haven't played an edition of D&D where my martial players said things to me like, "Gee, I'm really unhappy I didn't get to charm someone or pick the lock. Damn." I'm not quite understanding what you're asking for. If it's the same breadth of power as the wizard, that is something I never want to see again in a game that claims to mirror fantasy. I don't care how many people try to prove it, even Conan did not have the breadth of power of the few wizards he fought against. He was a simple fighting man that handled most things with his sword. That is accurately mirrored in D&D.</blockquote>

Verification