D&D 5E (2014) The Fighter Extra Feat Fallacy

[hawkeyefan]

That explains why you're a Hawkeye fan! All he ever does is shoot arrows at things!

Or tells jokes and drinks from his still. I'm not actually sure which Hawkeye you mean.

Pretty much all of them. Those two for sure, and also Nathaniel from the Leatherstocking Tales.

 

[smbakeresq]

By the way, two data points indicate the fighter is the most popular class in 5e.

The first from WOTC's survey results.
The second from 538's culling of DnDBeyond's database.

I wouldn’t trust the results too much. I built a human fighter to test the CB and realized I didn’t like the way the CB worked. Never built another PC there.


Sent from my iPhone using EN World mobile app

 

[shoak1]

ok, since we're playing the pedantry game:

1. It sounds like you're assuming we're all adult males. Why?

No, I was merely saying that the onset of puberty is what accelerates testosterone levels in males. Testosterone promotes agressive and competitive behavior (as opposed to creative and sensitive behaviors). Thus breaking balls is more common in adults. I make no assumptions about the age levels of those on this forum.

2. Does anyone ever break balls with strangers? Over the internet? On discussion forums about D&D? I mean, what would be the point? It's not like we're doing male bonding rituals or whatever.

Every human interaction is "bonding" to some extent, so yes, though etiquette demands one to be more modest in such displays.

3. I mean, I get it, maybe you're only kidding with us, but sometimes you don't sound like you're kidding, you know.

Yes, I get it - and my sincere apologies if I offended anyone. In my table we break balls prolifically. But if someone ever gets hurt (a rare occurrence), we let them know we were just kidding and take it easy. As socialized adults, we get when someone is hurt by such behavior and modify our actions accordingly.

Breaking balls is inherently neither good nor bad, its merely a natural behavior/ritual spawned by testosterone that serves to increase optimization through competitive interaction. If you suck, you will be told - to avoid this, you are motivated to do better ("better" being defined partially through logic and partially through conformity).

Examples of ball breaking are prolific throughout society, especially in competitive sports https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ry4cfm5ap6s. Call it "trash talking," "busting chops," "smack talk," its all the same stuff https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TwhhNgjxkp8. And it serves a function when done correctly - to unite and improve performance. Done callously or indiscriminately, its NOT COOL (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G_FAFAOExjQ).

Political correctness has been pushing this behavior out of the public eye for years. But gather men around a poker table, football field, game, or virtually anywhere else private, and odds are better than even you will see it to some extent. Our bodies are evolved for it - its physiological.

****** DISCLAIMER: I am NOT saying this behavior defines "manhood" nor does disliking this behavior make you less of a "man." Manhood does not equate to testosterone. Being sensitive or creative does NOT make you less of a man nor does breaking balls make you more of a man.

 

[hawkeyefan]

Hawkeye is actually a really good representative of the classic fighter, because he or she has the valid option of choosing a different weapon for each round of combat. Not only does he or she have trick arrows, but Hawkeye is also surprisingly good with martial arts or a sword if it ever comes down to it.

Yeah, I'd put him in the Fighter category for sure. With the Archery Style, obviously.

Honestly, the Fighter class is probably the broadest class in the game, with so many examples from fiction that I can't understand all the insistence in this thread that the class is/must be superhuman or supernatural and so on. Surely such determinations are more about the campaign and setting, and the style of game that the group is going for.

And I think that's one of the things that makes the Fighter shine. I mostly DM, but my favorote character when I do get to play is a fighter. I wouldn't say I've optimized him, but I've been playing for years, so he's certainly effective in combat. And he's also effective in social situations because of his background and also because of....the way I play him! Crazy right?

To me, a Fighter becomes a memorable character because of what the player brings to him, not necessarily what the mechanics bring to him. This is true for all classes of course, but the player of a Fighter has far less cool game mechanics upon which he can lean, so it's pretty much up to the player.

 

[Mistwell]

I wouldn’t trust the results too much. I built a human fighter to test the CB and realized I didn’t like the way the CB worked. Never built another PC there.


Sent from my iPhone using EN World mobile app

Their consistency with prior trustworthy data from the WOTC survey indicates it's probably pretty reliable in terms of roughly where the percentages fall.

 

[smbakeresq]

Their consistency with prior trustworthy data from the WOTC survey indicates it's probably pretty reliable in terms of roughly where the percentages fall.

I believe their data, buy it wasn’t controlled for anything, for example people like me or multi class. A survey here would be better.


Sent from my iPhone using EN World mobile app

 

[smbakeresq]

No, I was merely saying that the onset of puberty is what accelerates testosterone levels in males. Testosterone promotes agressive and competitive behavior (as opposed to creative and sensitive behaviors). Thus breaking balls is more common in adults. I make no assumptions about the age levels of those on this forum.



Every human interaction is "bonding" to some extent, so yes, though etiquette demands one to be more modest in such displays.



Yes, I get it - and my sincere apologies if I offended anyone. In my table we break balls prolifically. But if someone ever gets hurt (a rare occurrence), we let them know we were just kidding and take it easy. As socialized adults, we get when someone is hurt by such behavior and modify our actions accordingly.

Breaking balls is inherently neither good nor bad, its merely a natural behavior/ritual spawned by testosterone that serves to increase optimization through competitive interaction. If you suck, you will be told - to avoid this, you are motivated to do better ("better" being defined partially through logic and partially through conformity).

Examples of ball breaking are prolific throughout society, especially in competitive sports. Call it "trash talking," "busting chops," "smack talk," its all the same stuff. And it serves a function when done correctly - to unite and improve performance. Done callously or indiscriminately, its NOT COOL (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G_FAFAOExjQ).

Political correctness has been pushing this behavior out of the public eye for years. But gather men around a poker table, football field, game, or virtually anywhere else private, and odds are better than even you will see it to some extent. Our bodies are evolved for it - its physiological.

****** DISCLAIMER: I am NOT saying this behavior defines "manhood" nor does disliking this behavior make you less of a "man." Manhood does not equate to testosterone. Being sensitive or creative does NOT make you less of a man nor does breaking balls make you more of a man.

I almost feel like this is a Alex Jones alt account posting.


Sent from my iPhone using EN World mobile app

 

[Tony Vargas]

I wouldn’t trust the results too much. I built a human fighter to test the CB and realized I didn’t like the way the CB worked. Never built another PC there.

They are in line with history.
Fighter has been the most popular class since the only thing it had going for it was being able to both wear armor and use a long sword (Magic-user: neither; Cleric: armor but no sword; no other choices). It was the most popular class when it got % strength. It was the most popular class when it got weapon specialization. It was the most popular class when it had lost all that, was Tier 5 and required complex 20-level builds to be remotely competitive. It was the most popular class when it was relegated to the 'Defender' role and couldn't even use a bow effectively and had more maneuvers than the wizard had spells.
It's not a bit surprising that it's still the most popular class, now.

Same goes for human's seemingly-automatic status as most popular race. Humans want to play humans? Not shocking.

I believe their data, buy it wasn’t controlled for anything, for example people like me or multi class.

The fighter does seem an optimal choice for 'dipping' in more than a few builds, and variant human, likewise, optimal for builds leveraging feats.

A survey here would be better.

We skew over-opinionated grognard, here. An' I'm not just say'n that 'cause I am one...

::insert old-man joke here::

 

[Mistwell]

I believe their data, buy it wasn’t controlled for anything, for example people like me or multi class. A survey here would be better.


Sent from my iPhone using EN World mobile app

This site has, for better or worse, shown to be an outlier for most things. In fact I seem to recall one of Mearls or Crawford even mentioned the message boards are outliers. We're the people who like to discuss the rules the most and so our opinions tend to be more on an extreme end of the rules oriented opinions.

 

[Greg Benage]

It was the most popular class when it was relegated to the 'Defender' role and couldn't even use a bow effectively and had more maneuvers than the wizard had spells.

Hard to say this without edition warring, but I'll try (and probably fail). I'll accept that the fighter was the most popular class during this period (I have no reason to doubt it), but granting that, it was the most popular class among players who didn't simply quit the game for a different game/edition or skip it entirely. And I gather that the design of the fighter was a fairly common reason players offered for why they were quitting or skipping the game. I understand there was sufficient concern about this that Wizards even tried to "fix" it in the middle of the product cycle.

If this is more-or-less accurate, it suggests that:

1. The fighter is really important to D&D.
2. You can, in fact, design a fighter that many players don't want to play, and
3. Because of #1, those players won't just opt not to play a fighter, they'll opt not to play the game at all.

(Disclaimer: I skipped that edition because I was on hiatus when it launched, and I therefore missed all the edition warring, too. My sense of what happened is cobbled together after the fact.)