Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Neonchameleon" data-source="post: 5969317" data-attributes="member: 87792">4e is not in any way, shape, or form gonzo.  The gonzo was left behind in 3.X.  What 4e is  is low power mythic. I think a low power bard would do something else to their pantaloons at the thought of fighting a dragon in melee <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />  But seriously, the big thing a fighter gets to do out of combat is be a low power bard???And the fighter is still more or less irrelevant except as a mobile wall. Although come to think of it you've removed the cleric from the battle line...   The problem is that the fighter can not get to the wizard.And I say unto you nonsense!  Some fighters are that way.  But the archetype of fighter is the guy who takes point and holds the line.You miss my point <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />I've never seen the rogue do anything unequivocally magical.  I mean seriously.  He's been locked in that room all the time.  And there's no way out except past me and it only opens from the outside.  And ... damnit!  Where did he go?  And... my wallet's missing.  As are my keys...  But I still haven't seen him do anything magic! That's the point.  Fighters are about physical force.  Which means that given what they face they need to violate the laws of physics.  Rogues are about cunning and misdirection.  It's a lot harder to pinpoint something the rogue does that says "You have to be magical to do this"I've argued in the past that rogues should get something like the following talent from Spirit of the Century:<a href="http://bzr.mausdompteur.de/fate3/fate3.html#id444" target="_blank">✪ Master of Disguise [Deceit]</a> Requires Clever Disguise and Mimicry.The character can convincingly pass himself off as nearly anyone with a little time and preparation. To use this ability, the player pays a fate point and temporarily stops playing. His character is presumed to have donned a disguise and gone “off camera”. At any subsequent point during play the player may choose any nameless, filler character (a villain’s minion, a bellboy in the hotel, the cop who just pulled you over) in a scene and reveal that that character is actually the PC in disguise! The character may remain in this state for as long as the player chooses, but if anyone is tipped off that he might be nearby, an investigator may spend a fate point and roll Investigate against the disguised character’s Deceit.  If the investigator wins, his player (which may be the GM) gets to decide which filler character is actually the disguised PC (“Wait a minute – you’re the Emerald Emancipator!”). Is that ability magical or not?  I could make the case either way.  It doesn't matter.  But I think no one would argue that the ability wasn't special.Oh ffs.  People will break the boundaries.  But the problem is that in a robust system it's easy to see when they've broken the boundaries.  Seriously, Paks is IMO the best D&D fiction ever written.  <a href="http://www.baenebooks.com/p-100-the-deed-of-paksenarrion.aspx" target="_blank">It's also only $6 for a three novel omnibus e-book if anyone hasn't read it</a>.  Or you can legally <a href="http://www.baenebooks.com/p-587-sheepfarmers-daughter.aspx" target="_blank">read the first of the three books for free</a>.Anyone who can take a blow from a hill giant without turning into strawberry jam, or can take breath from a dragon without turning into a cinder needs to be magic.  Second spearman from the left probably doesn't have magic - and neither does the level 2 PC fighter.  (Other than minor rituals but that's a setting issue).High level characters are all special.  It's part of being high level.I think the cap is below that.  But yes.  Yes it would.  If you tell people starting to play a fighter that "This class caps at level 10" I would have no problem.  People would probably stop playing it so much.  But the class would no longer be presenting false information and pretending to be a match for other high level classes.If you want a class that does that I'm in full agreement at least as long as people have a way to either get round the cap or use a parallel class (as your warrior idea is).... Seriously?  If I'm facing an invading army, the fighter is the last person I'm going to call.  I want logistics (wizard).  I want to shatter their morale and leave them running round in circles not knowing which orders to follow or who to trust (bard).  I want to raise the whole countryside up against them (druid).  What I don't need is someone who can very simply be buried under a mound of bodies.The time I call the fighter is when there's an invading dragon.</blockquote>

Verification