Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Manbearcat" data-source="post: 6666362" data-attributes="member: 6696971">Well, my current game doesn't have a Fighter so I haven't GMed the class for about 2 years.&nbsp; However, in the game in which I did (1-7), the Dwarf Fighter had both Heirloom and Through Death's Eyes.&nbsp; They were both awesome in that game and I guarantee that folks like&nbsp; [MENTION=6774887]Ashkelon[/MENTION],&nbsp; [MENTION=22779]Hussar[/MENTION], yourself and others (who are or would be inclined to play a PC in 5e) would truly enjoy a 5e analogue for the Fighter.&nbsp; However, knowing the history and looking at the thread, its mere existence (even if it could be, as default, entirely excised from others' play experience) would cause controversy and possibly hyperventilating and hand-wringing accusations of &quot;powers&quot; and &quot;supers&quot; and all that rot.&nbsp; Whether externally located sponsorship of a Fighter allows him to maintain his &quot;purely martial cred&quot; (when said sponsorship is supernatural - eg spirits and Death) is possibly up for debate.&nbsp; I mean, does Lion-O's possession and usage of the Sword of Omens for &quot;Sight Beyond Sight&quot; spoil his martial cred?&nbsp; Further, it was implicit that divine sponsorship/plot protection was an inherent part of the &quot;Saving Throw Goo&quot; in AD&amp;D.&nbsp; That didn't make Fighters (with the best saves which made them truly implacable foes...unlike in 5e) lose their martial cred in AD&amp;D.&nbsp; In the same sense, it seems that distant sponsorship by whatever incarnation of Death (God, primordial force or other) exists in a campaign world for mortal avatars of Death (eg Fighters) would be sensible (from an internal consistency perspective...yeah, high fantasy heroic internal consistency...) and certainly genre appropriate.The question then becomes how to iterate them on the 5e chassis and then how to schedule them.&nbsp; Likely another area of controversy (for people who don't have to include it in their games).Beyond that, there is the question of &quot;should a level 17 (for 5e) martial hero ascend beyond mere mortal trappings in the heroic fantasy genre?&quot;&nbsp; In a game where a large number of canonical creatures break physical laws (the same laws that we stridently, and with ironic duplicity, bind our martial heroes by), seemingly on the back of sheer (impossible?) biology or inexplicable exceptions to atmospheric drag and gravity, it has always struck me as odd (and pretty much untenable) that answer to the question would be a stern &quot;no&quot; and the reasoning would be &quot;proud nail&quot;.&nbsp; Especially so when they're somehow expected to physically tangle with and slay creatures so far beyond the realm of human possibility (for a legion of medieval men, let alone A, singular, man).&nbsp; The fact that &lt;this thing&gt; or &lt;that thing&gt; is jarring but that somehow isn't jarring...well, it jars me.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Manbearcat, post: 6666362, member: 6696971"] Well, my current game doesn't have a Fighter so I haven't GMed the class for about 2 years. However, in the game in which I did (1-7), the Dwarf Fighter had both Heirloom and Through Death's Eyes. They were both awesome in that game and I guarantee that folks like [MENTION=6774887]Ashkelon[/MENTION], [MENTION=22779]Hussar[/MENTION], yourself and others (who are or would be inclined to play a PC in 5e) would truly enjoy a 5e analogue for the Fighter. However, knowing the history and looking at the thread, its mere existence (even if it could be, as default, entirely excised from others' play experience) would cause controversy and possibly hyperventilating and hand-wringing accusations of "powers" and "supers" and all that rot. Whether externally located sponsorship of a Fighter allows him to maintain his "purely martial cred" (when said sponsorship is supernatural - eg spirits and Death) is possibly up for debate. I mean, does Lion-O's possession and usage of the Sword of Omens for "Sight Beyond Sight" spoil his martial cred? Further, it was implicit that divine sponsorship/plot protection was an inherent part of the "Saving Throw Goo" in AD&D. That didn't make Fighters (with the best saves which made them truly implacable foes...unlike in 5e) lose their martial cred in AD&D. In the same sense, it seems that distant sponsorship by whatever incarnation of Death (God, primordial force or other) exists in a campaign world for mortal avatars of Death (eg Fighters) would be sensible (from an internal consistency perspective...yeah, high fantasy heroic internal consistency...) and certainly genre appropriate. The question then becomes how to iterate them on the 5e chassis and then how to schedule them. Likely another area of controversy (for people who don't have to include it in their games). Beyond that, there is the question of "should a level 17 (for 5e) martial hero ascend beyond mere mortal trappings in the heroic fantasy genre?" In a game where a large number of canonical creatures break physical laws (the same laws that we stridently, and with ironic duplicity, bind our martial heroes by), seemingly on the back of sheer (impossible?) biology or inexplicable exceptions to atmospheric drag and gravity, it has always struck me as odd (and pretty much untenable) that answer to the question would be a stern "no" and the reasoning would be "proud nail". Especially so when they're somehow expected to physically tangle with and slay creatures so far beyond the realm of human possibility (for a legion of medieval men, let alone A, singular, man). The fact that <this thing> or <that thing> is jarring but that somehow isn't jarring...well, it jars me. [/QUOTE]

Verification