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="Alexemplar" data-source="post: 7250422" data-attributes="member: 6874182"><p>That was definitely more the case with the 3e Warlock as compared to the 3e Fighter, which I think is part of why it ended up being really popular. Fighter chose a bonus feat at 1st level and Warlock chose a single invocation at 1st level. That was it. You could easily jump into the Warlock without having any real understanding of how D&D spellcasting mechanics really worked, spend every turn using your default attack and the class would still work.</p><p></p><p> That's why I was a little disappointed to see the 5e version become more complex with the addition of cantrips and spell slots (of which there are dozens and more varied than 3e invocations. They don't even get Eldritch Blast automatically anymore. They gave the players a lot more choice in how to build their Warlock.</p><p></p><p> Meanwhile the Fighter class got *fewer* choices compared to 3e.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p> My issue is that those lack of class options is tied almost exclusively tied to the only class that really does non-magical warrior. Want to be that guy? Better be happy with only 1 decision point at first level, all of which are focused on how much more/less damage you do/take.</p><p></p><p> Want to play someone who just blasts stuff with energy? The closest you get is a class that also saddles you with having to choose a greater power to bind yourself to, a couple of damage/utility spells from a dozen options and another couple spells from a list that's even longer. Also, don't foorget that you have to specifically choose the blasty spells. They aren't assumed, and you can easily build a character with nothing but utility spells.</p><p></p><p> Heck, I'd be thrilled if D&D introduced a new class that was pretty much a non-magical warrior, but with some more utility in the other pillars. Call it whatever you want. Unfortunately, this has tended to be a divisive thing whenever it appears in D&D.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p> Not entirely. Often times, being able to do stuff like speak/understand rare or unusual languages, being able to make decent knowledge checks related to the matter at hand, having useful utility powers, or being able to perform tricks like inducing various states of fear/charm/confusion can help where a simple Deception/Diplomacy/Insight check would not. </p><p></p><p> One reasons I really like Know Your Enemy is because it gives the Fighter an incentive to actually stop and at least talk to/interact with something. As mentioned before (or was it another thread) I really think it would have made a great 1st level Fighter feature.</p><p></p><p> And then there's exploration.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Alexemplar, post: 7250422, member: 6874182"] That was definitely more the case with the 3e Warlock as compared to the 3e Fighter, which I think is part of why it ended up being really popular. Fighter chose a bonus feat at 1st level and Warlock chose a single invocation at 1st level. That was it. You could easily jump into the Warlock without having any real understanding of how D&D spellcasting mechanics really worked, spend every turn using your default attack and the class would still work. That's why I was a little disappointed to see the 5e version become more complex with the addition of cantrips and spell slots (of which there are dozens and more varied than 3e invocations. They don't even get Eldritch Blast automatically anymore. They gave the players a lot more choice in how to build their Warlock. Meanwhile the Fighter class got *fewer* choices compared to 3e. My issue is that those lack of class options is tied almost exclusively tied to the only class that really does non-magical warrior. Want to be that guy? Better be happy with only 1 decision point at first level, all of which are focused on how much more/less damage you do/take. Want to play someone who just blasts stuff with energy? The closest you get is a class that also saddles you with having to choose a greater power to bind yourself to, a couple of damage/utility spells from a dozen options and another couple spells from a list that's even longer. Also, don't foorget that you have to specifically choose the blasty spells. They aren't assumed, and you can easily build a character with nothing but utility spells. Heck, I'd be thrilled if D&D introduced a new class that was pretty much a non-magical warrior, but with some more utility in the other pillars. Call it whatever you want. Unfortunately, this has tended to be a divisive thing whenever it appears in D&D. Not entirely. Often times, being able to do stuff like speak/understand rare or unusual languages, being able to make decent knowledge checks related to the matter at hand, having useful utility powers, or being able to perform tricks like inducing various states of fear/charm/confusion can help where a simple Deception/Diplomacy/Insight check would not. One reasons I really like Know Your Enemy is because it gives the Fighter an incentive to actually stop and at least talk to/interact with something. As mentioned before (or was it another thread) I really think it would have made a great 1st level Fighter feature. And then there's exploration. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
The Fighter Extra Feat Fallacy
Top