Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Jester David" data-source="post: 6675155" data-attributes="member: 37579">The catch with relying on feats is it spreads out the option. Rather than a simple &quot;take this, it's obvious by the name&quot; you need to make two or three choices that are unclear and then a feat in a different part of the book and a skill you might not have realized you needed to take at character creation. And as I said earlier, when you sit down at a table with an evoker wizard, thief rogue, and life cleric you have a good idea what all those characters are and can do. It doesn't matter if the evoker is a wizard with a thick grimoire, a human who parlays with elemental spirits for power, an angelic being in the form of a human, or a defiler that sucks the life energy of plants to power their magic. But there's certainly room to do all those, and that can be explored in play, but you know what to expect. When you say battle master fighter you could be heavily armoured or a swashbuckler or have a giant sword, or anything. It's not a useful description. It could just as easily be the dnkgduhdkghdb fighter, opposed to the more simple yruyeryewr fighter.&nbsp; For example, someone wants to make the archetypal knight, what subclass should they take? It doesn't matter. It's not clear. Their choice isn't any easier. When someone makes a wizard, what they want to do in the game leads them to their subclass choice. When someone says &quot;I wanna blow things up&quot; then you point them to evocation, but if they want to be more tricky you go to illusion or enchantment. No detailed reading of the subclass is needed. When someone makes a fighter, the choice of &quot;I want to be a great knight&quot; or &quot;I want to use a spear like the Oberyn Martell&quot; or &quot;I want to take the hits like a boss&quot; then you need to read and re-read the options. Similarly, reflavouring only goes so far. Someone wants to make a Madmartigan or Indigo Montoya and be great with a sword. Saying &quot;great, just pretend you're the best swordsman in the land&quot; isn't as satisfying as having something, anything to make that actually true. When you're walking a new player through character creation, with every other subclass you ask &quot;what do you want to do?&quot; With the fighter you don't ask that but instead ask &quot;how do you want to do what you want to do?&quot; Which isn't very easy or intuitive...</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Jester David, post: 6675155, member: 37579"] The catch with relying on feats is it spreads out the option. Rather than a simple "take this, it's obvious by the name" you need to make two or three choices that are unclear and then a feat in a different part of the book and a skill you might not have realized you needed to take at character creation. And as I said earlier, when you sit down at a table with an evoker wizard, thief rogue, and life cleric you have a good idea what all those characters are and can do. It doesn't matter if the evoker is a wizard with a thick grimoire, a human who parlays with elemental spirits for power, an angelic being in the form of a human, or a defiler that sucks the life energy of plants to power their magic. But there's certainly room to do all those, and that can be explored in play, but you know what to expect. When you say battle master fighter you could be heavily armoured or a swashbuckler or have a giant sword, or anything. It's not a useful description. It could just as easily be the dnkgduhdkghdb fighter, opposed to the more simple yruyeryewr fighter. For example, someone wants to make the archetypal knight, what subclass should they take? It doesn't matter. It's not clear. Their choice isn't any easier. When someone makes a wizard, what they want to do in the game leads them to their subclass choice. When someone says "I wanna blow things up" then you point them to evocation, but if they want to be more tricky you go to illusion or enchantment. No detailed reading of the subclass is needed. When someone makes a fighter, the choice of "I want to be a great knight" or "I want to use a spear like the Oberyn Martell" or "I want to take the hits like a boss" then you need to read and re-read the options. Similarly, reflavouring only goes so far. Someone wants to make a Madmartigan or Indigo Montoya and be great with a sword. Saying "great, just pretend you're the best swordsman in the land" isn't as satisfying as having something, [I]anything [/I]to make that actually true. When you're walking a new player through character creation, with every other subclass you ask "what do you want to do?" With the fighter you don't ask that but instead ask "how do you want to do what you want to do?" Which isn't very easy or intuitive... [/QUOTE]

Verification