Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Chaosmancer" data-source="post: 7098491" data-attributes="member: 6801228">I’d disagree, and I’m curious why you don’t because of the bolded.If the Barbarian is near constantly being attacked at advantage and has a lower AC, I find it reasonable to assume they are getting hit more than twice as often.  This is compounded with my experience that Barbarians in my groups tend to be in the single digits after most fights, because their resistance makes them feel tougher than they actually are and they wade into the middle of groups of enemies and take 3 or 4 attacks where the other characters strip enemies from the edges and only get attacked 1 or 2 times. I find higher AC is a slightly different part of the metric (at the table) than survivability, because an attack that misses is 0 damage, and being missed more often is better than taking 1/2 damage from every hit.This is difficult for me to answer, because I try very hard to wipe the slate clean with all the classes. I think this is the core of it though.A wizard can have any backstory they want, but they had to study magic at some point.A Paladin can have any story they want, but they had to make their oath at some point.A Cleric can have any story they want, but they have to have some connection to a Diety. A Rogue can have any story they want, but they are stealthy and shady most likely, or highly charismatic "playa's"A fighter can have any story they want, but they had to learn to fight. Any class can follow any path to get to "and now I'm an adventurer" but most of them need some element in their story to explain their awesome powers. The rogue seems to have more of a story, because most of us want them for stealthy missions and thieves tools, but honestly they can be built without any of that. Fighters just need to have been fighting, and with all of humanity and it's stories to choose from, that is a fairly easy thing to tie in. It literally can be represented by almost anything. However, that doesn't mean that the fighters have no identity at all. Battlemasters are highly skilled combatants who also take up an art (calligraphy, painting, sculpting, ect). This calls to mind the renaissance man style warriors, the french nobility or the Samurai of the Far East. Warriors who were devoted warriors but also men of culture, intelligence, and good breeding. Eldritch Knights had to have studied magic, and a particular brand of magic that combines spell and steel into a single form. Champions have the simplest stories, but they could also represent the simple folk. The Rambo or Stallone style of fighter who just brutally beats down those in their way (I know Rambo's skills and psyche is closer to barbarian, but he could also be a champion fighter with high dex and stealth skills, plus lots of good roleplaying). In fact, I built a champion for conventions who is a tough hide shifter, lots of AC, lots of health, and was left wondering the plains in the middle of a gnoll horde killing everything. Spent years just fighting to survive, no training, no fancy moves, just killing things. The identity of the fighter seems generic, because war and fighting are generic to a game with as much combat as DnD, but that just leaves room. It allows us who already try and work from a blank slate that last bit of space, that part we can't erase from other classes is usually a focus, for fighters it is not necessarily their focus.</blockquote>

Verification