NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Clint_L" data-source="post: 9137784" data-attributes="member: 7035894">That is not proof. That is not even anything like proof. I don't think you understand what proof is. What you have is an untested hypothesis. And probably an untestable hypothesis, given the vagueness of your terms.Stop making claims about what other people want - it is not helping your case. Just argue about what you, personally, want. Make a good argument instead of undermining yourself with these absurd claims about "the 5e community" and "proof."Here is my opinion: fighters are currently a strong, well-balanced class that can be basic or quite distinct, depending on the choice of subclass and the choice of feats, which they have far more access to than other classes, making them relatively customizable. I do think they could use a bit more of a unique niche in the 2024 PHB, especially given that weapon mastery is fast becoming ubiquitous. WotC has floated "tactical mind" as one way of achieving this; I think it is an interesting idea, though I would tweak it.I think singling out fighters and wizards for comparison, as the debate always seems to do, is not really productive, nor is focusing on very high level play, which for 99% of games is aspirational. Both classes are strong; fighters are generally simpler with higher on-demand damage and survivability, and wizards more complex and flexible. Evidently, both are popular choices in all the data we are given, fighters in particular, so there is not a crisis around either class.I also think fighters compare favourably to other melee-oriented classes, with the exception of paladins. I think paladins are slightly OP.</blockquote>

Verification