Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Asisreo" data-source="post: 8550208" data-attributes="member: 7019027">There's a difference between not using rules and not picking options that don't fit your character. That's like being mad that your dwarf cleric has to take the stats of a dwarf because you wanted your dwarf to be an elf. Just choose the elf. That's just from your perspective. Also, using your metaphor, most people absolutely like steak with no sides at equal price to a sandwich with soup and salad. Because they get to enjoy their steak and they didn't need the soup or salad or anything outside the water. Especially if the steak is well-made. Bringing it back. You assume we shouldn't be fine with the fighter's design, but I've given my reasons why I enjoy how the fighter is designed. Sure, maybe some damage buffs for the champion fighter, but outside of that, I like the fighter and its more lax game play style. They are compromises because they didn't need to exist nor did they need to fulfill the role given to them. What you want is so specific. You don't want a martial with utility. You don't want a martial with utility that doesn't use magic. You don't want a martial with utility that doesn't use magic with fantastical contributions. You want a fighter with utility that doesn't use magic with fantastical contributions. Compromising means some of those things don't get precisely added. I don't understand why you're so vehemently on the hill of taking away the current Fighter. People actually enjoy it. You might not, but I don't see why that gives you the need to want to take away from the things others like. No. I didn't ask for examples. I already understand what you want. I don't understand why you want it so badly. I still don't understand what exactly you're missing by not playing that character you want in D&D. And how missing that is gamebreaking for you rather than just a mild inconvenience. What makes this a big deal? Despite how it sounds, I have faith that there must be some reason why the absence of this theoretical fighter causes such a huge stir in the community. But I can't tell if that reason is something I should be rallied behind or not. People come up with huge arguments sometimes to put others down. I don't really care about the well-being of WoTC but I'm not going to blindly rally behind some argument that was generated for no purpose than to express hate to it. That's just not very motivating to me.People get so mad about this, but for what? Where's the anger coming from. How is it this frustrating that even a thread that started with an innocent basis goes up to 45 pages in less than a week? Not to mention, If I were to make a homebrew class with a martial, this debate would seep into the homebrew idea. You said it yourself, the critics can tear the homebrew apart. But why? Why can't I just make my contest-based martial without it being the "fix" to the martial debate?</blockquote>

Verification