Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Enkhidu" data-source="post: 6666126" data-attributes="member: 351">As I read it, you were the one who linked them together in the martial character bucket. The mechanics idea was an attempt by me to understand why you did so; my assumption was that is was since the common design theme with all of them is that their martial abilities were mechanically similar to spells-sourced abilities. I even asked you to correct me if my assumption that those classes met with your approval was incorrect (which then brings us to...)So does that mean that you actually have the same complaints, or just that you could see someone making them? Aside from the delivery on this one (and please - some politeness here would be appreciated) I absolutely agree with the bolded sentence. There's even a pre-existing method to dole those abilities out at level appropriate times (the monk's way of four elements). All that would be required is a few more battlemaster abilities to choose from (and, due to the larger pool, the ability - akin to the stances already mentioned above - the ability to prepare a different set after a long rest).If you want to talk specifically about out of combat, I'll ask this two part question: Is the fighter actually the best at defeating enemies in combat, and if so is the amount they they are better than other classes equal to the out-of-combat gap between fighters and other classes? I'd say that if the fighter is indeed better at fighting, then its OK for the fighter to play 2nd fiddle in non-combat situations, as long as the gaps line up.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Enkhidu, post: 6666126, member: 351"] As I read it, you were the one who linked them together in the martial character bucket. The mechanics idea was an attempt by me to understand [I]why[/I] you did so; my assumption was that is was since the common design theme with all of them is that their martial abilities were mechanically similar to spells-sourced abilities. I even asked you to correct me if my assumption that those classes met with your approval was incorrect (which then brings us to...) So does that mean that you [I]actually have[/I] the same complaints, or just that you could see someone making them? Aside from the delivery on this one (and please - some politeness here would be appreciated) I absolutely agree with the bolded sentence. There's even a pre-existing method to dole those abilities out at level appropriate times (the monk's way of four elements). All that would be required is a few more battlemaster abilities to choose from (and, due to the larger pool, the ability - akin to the stances already mentioned above - the ability to prepare a different set after a long rest). If you want to talk specifically about out of combat, I'll ask this two part question: Is the fighter actually the best at defeating enemies in combat, and if so is the amount they they are better than other classes equal to the out-of-combat gap between fighters and other classes? I'd say that if the fighter is indeed better at fighting, then its OK for the fighter to play 2nd fiddle in non-combat situations, as long as the gaps line up. [/QUOTE]

Verification