Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon 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 Next
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
*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!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
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
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
The Playtest Fighter
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="Lord Zardoz" data-source="post: 5922247" data-attributes="member: 704"><p><strong>Not pleased with it at all</strong></p><p></p><p>The apparent implementation of the fighter is not an implementation that I like at all, especially considering how barebones / minimalist the basic ruleset seems to be.</p><p></p><p>The fighter as written right now is basically able to make attack rolls using his weapon. And not much else. Once in a while he can make an extra attack. His only tactical options are move, and attack.</p><p></p><p>I am sure that the fighter is mechanically balanced an that on a raw damage output comparison he is balanced. The downside is that there just does not seem to be a whole lot of room for customization. While it is dangerous to assume that this is the 'be all end all' for a fighter, it is pretty clear that the only thing you can do as a fighter is make attacks.</p><p></p><p>This is exactly the reason I fell in love with 4th edition. This is exactly the kind of character design I hate. It is also why I refuse to let D&D Essentials material into my campaign. I am convinced that most of the feats and backgrounds and traits that apply to fighters are going to amount to +X to damage or to attack if Y is true.</p><p></p><p>I know that some may say 'this is just early beta', but this is a very clear indication of the direction they want to go with this class. I am sure it will please everyone who was *ahem*, vocal about not liking the At Will / Encounter / Daily implementation that 4th Edition had. But I have some serious complaints about it.</p><p></p><p>The first is that the class as written is going to be extraordinarily vulnerable to min/max or hyper optimization through equipment. With only one tactical option that must be kept in balance, it wont be hard to come up with ways to hyper optimize it.</p><p></p><p>The second is that I am not at all sure how the designers avoid the old problem of high level play breaking down rather badly when other classes will likely gain more options as new sourcebooks are released.</p><p></p><p>I figure I have a strong chance of being wrong, but if the playtest materials are any indication, I am probably going to strongly dislike the basic / core portion of 5th edition.</p><p></p><p>END COMMUNICATION</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Lord Zardoz, post: 5922247, member: 704"] [b]Not pleased with it at all[/b] The apparent implementation of the fighter is not an implementation that I like at all, especially considering how barebones / minimalist the basic ruleset seems to be. The fighter as written right now is basically able to make attack rolls using his weapon. And not much else. Once in a while he can make an extra attack. His only tactical options are move, and attack. I am sure that the fighter is mechanically balanced an that on a raw damage output comparison he is balanced. The downside is that there just does not seem to be a whole lot of room for customization. While it is dangerous to assume that this is the 'be all end all' for a fighter, it is pretty clear that the only thing you can do as a fighter is make attacks. This is exactly the reason I fell in love with 4th edition. This is exactly the kind of character design I hate. It is also why I refuse to let D&D Essentials material into my campaign. I am convinced that most of the feats and backgrounds and traits that apply to fighters are going to amount to +X to damage or to attack if Y is true. I know that some may say 'this is just early beta', but this is a very clear indication of the direction they want to go with this class. I am sure it will please everyone who was *ahem*, vocal about not liking the At Will / Encounter / Daily implementation that 4th Edition had. But I have some serious complaints about it. The first is that the class as written is going to be extraordinarily vulnerable to min/max or hyper optimization through equipment. With only one tactical option that must be kept in balance, it wont be hard to come up with ways to hyper optimize it. The second is that I am not at all sure how the designers avoid the old problem of high level play breaking down rather badly when other classes will likely gain more options as new sourcebooks are released. I figure I have a strong chance of being wrong, but if the playtest materials are any indication, I am probably going to strongly dislike the basic / core portion of 5th edition. END COMMUNICATION [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
The Playtest Fighter
Top