Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
The Fighter Extra Feat Fallacy
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Stalker0" data-source="post: 7245947" data-attributes="member: 5889"><p>I think one of the disagreements we are having is the following:</p><p></p><p><strong>Mechanically Forgiven Choices vs Mechanically Re-Enforced Choices</strong></p><p></p><p>Again we will use the Fighter vs Paladin as an example. Many have argued that there is nothing stopping a fighter from putting some points in Charisma and picking up Persuasion without seriously compromising his fighting prowess. This is the notion of Mechanically Forgiven Choices. The fighter can make what at first glance is a non-optimal choice, but he "gets away with it" because the rules are forgiving enough or the base class is strong enough.</p><p></p><p>Some in this thread though are arguing the need for <strong>mechanical reinforcement</strong>. In other words, don't just allow my option, but actually encourage it.</p><p></p><p>So in looking at the paladin, a high charisma gives them strong spells and very nice saves (that they can share with the party). If a player brought in a paladin with maximized charisma but sacrificed some strength and/or con....well he is still optimized in his own way. The party will appreciate his strong social skills as well as his incredible defensive benefits (that again they get to share in too).</p><p></p><p>In this arena, the fighter doesn't offer much innately. There are some feats to encourage this (like the inspiring leader feat as one example).</p><p></p><p></p><p>So I think this is where a lot of debate is occurring. Some players say "as long I can do X with my character but still look pretty good in my main job, that is enough", while others say "if a class doesn't give you a benefit for doing X than that class cannot be considered good at X...its just pulling away from optimized play".</p><p></p><p>I personally fall a bit in the middle. I personally think the fighter (especially the BM) is a fine class. That said...I do think it was a really missed opportunity not to allow certain maneuvers to utilize int, wis or cha...to give just a bit of mechanical perk to those fighters who want to play a more "mental" style.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Stalker0, post: 7245947, member: 5889"] I think one of the disagreements we are having is the following: [B]Mechanically Forgiven Choices vs Mechanically Re-Enforced Choices[/B] Again we will use the Fighter vs Paladin as an example. Many have argued that there is nothing stopping a fighter from putting some points in Charisma and picking up Persuasion without seriously compromising his fighting prowess. This is the notion of Mechanically Forgiven Choices. The fighter can make what at first glance is a non-optimal choice, but he "gets away with it" because the rules are forgiving enough or the base class is strong enough. Some in this thread though are arguing the need for [B]mechanical reinforcement[/B]. In other words, don't just allow my option, but actually encourage it. So in looking at the paladin, a high charisma gives them strong spells and very nice saves (that they can share with the party). If a player brought in a paladin with maximized charisma but sacrificed some strength and/or con....well he is still optimized in his own way. The party will appreciate his strong social skills as well as his incredible defensive benefits (that again they get to share in too). In this arena, the fighter doesn't offer much innately. There are some feats to encourage this (like the inspiring leader feat as one example). So I think this is where a lot of debate is occurring. Some players say "as long I can do X with my character but still look pretty good in my main job, that is enough", while others say "if a class doesn't give you a benefit for doing X than that class cannot be considered good at X...its just pulling away from optimized play". I personally fall a bit in the middle. I personally think the fighter (especially the BM) is a fine class. That said...I do think it was a really missed opportunity not to allow certain maneuvers to utilize int, wis or cha...to give just a bit of mechanical perk to those fighters who want to play a more "mental" style. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
The Fighter Extra Feat Fallacy
Top