D&D General The Crab Bucket Fallacy

[Tony Vargas]

I double-dog dare you to describe how totally awesome your favorite (game/playstyle) is, WITHOUT comparing it to any others.

I first encountered D&D in the summer of '79. My best friend had started running it and tried to teach me. (I realized later, he didn't understand the game, at all, none of us did.)
I was immediately taken with some of the monsters and how you defeated them, like, the black pudding couldn't just be hit with weapons, you had to use fire.. They reminded me of the old B&W monster movies (like the Blob, though it was defeated by cold, not fire) that I'd always enjoyed - and, in the case of skeletons, the amazing Ray Harryhausen scene in Jason & the Argonauts. I was also immediately disappointed that I couldn't play a character with wings (lol), but I got over that quickly. Sadly that circle of friends had lost interest in the game by the end of the summer, so I finally went out and purchased my own books, starting with the Players Handbook, for 11.99, and, after debating because it was more expensive at 14.99, the DMG (OMG, 70s hyperinflation).
I started to understand the mechanics of the game, and, after playing at a local store every weekened, and finding a new, older friend who sort of mentored me as a DM, I started running games a few years later - terrible, at first, but with her help I got better.
I also came to understand the appeal of the game. Getting to imagine experiences from the pov of someone different from yourself (tho some DMs would sabotage that). Creating the kinds of 'scenes' you'd read in a fantasy novel or see in a movie (not always easy, admittedly) - or subverting such scenes, for that matter. The sense of accomplishment by advancing thru finding magic items and gaining levels. Even creating a world of your own for other players to experience.

 

[Oofta]

Every single statistic I have seen has fighters as the most popular class, from D&D Beyond to WoTC's release of information to polls taken at other places.

Every single table I have ever played at or run has had fighters as the most popular class.

Every time this comes up, we hear constant reports of people discussing how common fighters are at their table.

In short, there is abundant evidence regarding the popularity of fighters. Now, if you have evidence that fighters are not the most popular (most commonly-played) class, feel free to share it.

It always kind of baffles me that people always respond to "More people play fighters than any other class" always gets the retort something along the lines of "But that doesn't mean people actually like playing them." Now, if you were to tell me that a lot of people don't like playing bards, that I could agree with. Which is odd because they are the best at the vaunted social skills that apparently is the measure of effectiveness of a PC outside of combat.

People play what they enjoy playing. The game has been around long enough that if it were a trap option people would know better.

 

[Minigiant]

I mostly skipped 4e and don't really have any positive neutral or negative feelings strong or weak about the warlord but think there is a second reason. 5e is the edition that tried so hard to ensure nothing was a thing the group would consider a required thing for someone to play or specialize in. In a lot of ways that went far enough to also make it rather hostile to the concept of support classes and other reciprocity laden character concepts. The warlord's sin against 5e is the same as support casters and such, namely that it's focus was on reciprocity rather than DP/R

The warlord was also given a cheapened treatment.

It's like if the 5e wizard was a half caster variant of the 5e rogue. Yeah it's magic but not not what any fan wanted.

 

[Tony Vargas]

How are the surveys any more representative of the player base than D&D Beyond is? Likely both are a small fraction.

The Fighter - heck, the human fighter - has always been the most popular class. I don't think that's controversial (I mean, it's kinda amazing that something can be not-controversial around here, since, like even the existence of game balance becomes controversial when you point out D&D lacks it).
But, seriously, it's not the most popular because the vast majority of D&D fans are hardcore system-mastering optimizers who have carefully analyzed all the classes and dispassionately chosen fighter as the 'best.'
According (again, I'm sorry) to WotCs own surveys, something like 70% of their fans don't actually play the game. Even if you don't trust the surveys, surely you have some games on your shelf you never played, or have a friend who likes a game he can never convince the rest of you to try? Also, more WotC surveys, those that do don't play to 'high' (like double-digit) levels, indeed, first is by far the most commonly-played level, and those hordes of Human Fighters on DDB, making it the most popular class- mostly 1st level.

No, none of that. Human is simply the most relatable race, and fighter (knight, warrior, etc.. Hero, essentially) the most relatable fantasy archetype. In original D&D, the fighting-man was lacking even in differentiation from the other two classes, it could use any magical weapon, that was about it. In early AD&D & B/X it was certainly the simplest class, and the second worst of the 'big 4' out of the lowest levels, after the poor Rogue. Later in the TSR era, it became a dual-wielding/weapons-specializing DPR machine, as long as you played it that one way, it was potent. In 3.x, that loophole was closed, so building a decent fighter was difficult, and making/playing an optimal one could be complicated, indeed, (the Barbarian made a better simple/introductory class). But, the Fighter was like, Tier 5. In 4e, it was one of the more challenging classes to play (an Archer-Ranger was the simplest to play), and the classes were as nearly-balanced as they were ever going to get. In Essentials it was simplified and stripped of options. In 5e, even more so.

The fighter has varied considerably over the decades in it's mechanics and relative simplicity or/and effectiveness.
It has not varied in its concept nor in its popularity.

 

[Tony Vargas]

The warlord was also given a cheapened treatment.

It's like if the 5e wizard was a half caster variant of the 5e rogue. Yeah it's magic but not not what any fan wanted.

"Hi, welcome to the game, the full casters are all banned. If you want to play a Wizard, just take an Arcane Trickster with the Sage background. It's everything you could want from a wizard. Cleric? Paladin with the acolyte background and a mace. Druid, Ranger. Bard, AT, again, with the Entertainer background. Seriously, you can still play whatever you want."

 

[Neonchameleon]

Does not follow. As pointed out in this thread (or one of the other very similar threads), fighters have a high representation on D&D Beyond, that’s where the “most chosen” comes from. It’s worth pointing out D&D Beyond is not the whole community. Further, making a character on D&D Beyond does not equate to actually playing it in a game nor liking the class. Fighters have a high dissatisfaction according to the survey reports from Crawford.

This makes sense. The idea of the fighter getting by on grit and determination is an appealing one. The reality of the fighter class in D&D 5e falls short of the promise. I'd argue that there have only been two different fighters that were good - the 2e (with Weapon Specialisation) and the 4e lockdown monster.

 

[Oofta]

The Fighter - heck, the human fighter - has always been the most popular class. I don't think that's controversial (I mean, it's kinda amazing that something can be not-controversial around here, since, like even the existence of game balance becomes controversial when you point out D&D lacks it).
But, seriously, it's not the most popular because the vast majority of D&D fans are hardcore system-mastering optimizers who have carefully analyzed all the classes and dispassionately chosen fighter as the 'best.'
According (again, I'm sorry) to WotCs own surveys, something like 70% of their fans don't actually play the game. Even if you don't trust the surveys, surely you have some games on your shelf you never played, or have a friend who likes a game he can never convince the rest of you to try? Also, more WotC surveys, those that do don't play to 'high' (like double-digit) levels, indeed, first is by far the most commonly-played level, and those hordes of Human Fighters on DDB, making it the most popular class- mostly 1st level.

No, human is the most relatable race, and fighter the most relatable class concept. In original D&D, the fighting-man was lacking even in differentiation from the two classes, it could use any magical weapon, that was about it. In early AD&D & B/X it was certainly the simplest class, and the second worst of the 'big 4' out of the lowest levels, after the poor Rogue. Later in the TSR era, it became a dual-wielding/weapons-specializing DPR machine, as long as you played it that one way, it was potent. In 3.x building a decent fighter was difficult, and making/playing an optimal one could be complicated (the Barbarian made a better simple/introductory class), but it was like, Tier 5 . In 4e, it was one of the more challenging classes to play (an Archer-Ranger was the simplest to play), and the classes were as nearly-balanced as they were ever going to get. In Essentials it was simplified and stripped of options. In 5e, even more so.

The fighter has varied considerably over the decades in it's mechanics and relative simplicity or/and effectiveness.
It has not varied in its concept nor in its popularity.

.

Is any of that indicative of an issue? D&D 5E is not a grognard's game. That's a big part of it's appeal and ongoing (and growing) popularity.

 

[FrozenNorth]

In order to give someone advantage on a check, you have to also be proficient in the skill. So doubling up may not be a bad idea in many cases.

No, you don’t. That’s a house rule.

Help action (5e SRD)

Help​

You can lend your aid to another creature in the completion of a task. When you take the Help action, the creature you aid gains advantage on the next ability check it makes to perform the task you are helping with, provided that it makes the check before the start of your next turn.

Alternatively, you can aid a friendly creature in attacking a creature within 5 feet of you. You feint, distract the target, or in some other way team up to make your ally's attack more effective. If your ally attacks the target before your next turn, the first attack roll is made with advantage.

 

[Micah Sweet]

This makes sense. The idea of the fighter getting by on grit and determination is an appealing one. The reality of the fighter class in D&D 5e falls short of the promise. I'd argue that there have only been two different fighters that were good - the 2e (with Weapon Specialisation) and the 4e lockdown monster.

Oh, for the halcyon days of 2e!

 

[Micah Sweet]

Is any of that indicative of an issue? D&D 5E is not a grognard's game. That's a big part of it's appeal and ongoing (and growing) popularity.

It was designed as what WotC thought of as a grognard's game, and that's what it was when it became super-popular.