Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Minigiant" data-source="post: 8317579" data-attributes="member: 63508">Who said any of that.I said "Archetypes can be expressed as background and class."You can be a thief by taking the criminal background or the rogue class.You can be a guitarist by taking the entertainer background or the bard class.Class is just a stronger extension of the idea than background.If you say "we have no need for a noble class since we have the noble background" someone else can say "we don't need the cleric class we have the acolyte background." Then you are back to the "how many classes" fight.How do 5e maneuvers display his intuition and insight AKA wisdom in this "game built on ability checks"?No, the fighter is a big violent ball of stupid. You can just choose to weaken your fighter in combat to make it not play to its strengths.It gets one of the lowest amounts of mental class skills and have no base class features that benefit from it having a positive mental score.Here's a pair of questions.1) Do you think the Fighter should have Persuasion as a class skill to represent the common trope of fighters of merchant, noble, and royal social class?2) Do you think the Fighter should have a base class feature based on Charisma that boosts the morale of allies to represent the natural leadership D&D claims mid-level fighters possess?Divine power strengthen by brainpower.No one says that people shouldn't use them.People are saying that fighters are naturally bad at those things even if you take those skills and feats. And if you attempt to make a fighter good at noncombat,you are either nerfing your fighter or the feats/skills come in power so late that you likely never get to play your concept in the campaign.AKA WOTC made it take 12 levels of play to create a proper knight</blockquote>

Verification