Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="HeapThaumaturgist" data-source="post: 3191712" data-attributes="member: 12332">See, that's the essential dillema between what I'll call &quot;my side&quot; and what I'll call &quot;your side&quot; is that, on my end, I don't think the Fighter should be replaced.For several reasons:It's a core class.&nbsp; When people get &quot;D&amp;D&quot; they get the core three books.&nbsp; When people play &quot;D&amp;D&quot;, the base assumption, the 'fundamentals', if you will, is that they'll be playing with, if nothing else, the stuff in the PHB.I think that when options are released for the game ... a big thing, a big part, should be that those options do not supercede things in the PHB.&nbsp; Add to them, sure.&nbsp; Offer additional &quot;options&quot;, of course.&nbsp; If there's a power increase, it should be across the board or to address increases at other points.&nbsp; It shouldn't be:&nbsp; &quot;Spellcasters either trump Fighters in power or in fun, so we'll replace the Fighter with something more powerful and more fun!&quot;It should be:&nbsp; &quot;We'll add to the Fighter and make it more powerful and more fun!&quot;In some ways, they seemed to try to do that in ToB ... that's a flag for me.&nbsp; It has multiclassing rules that are patently different than anything else in the game ... the &quot;old&quot; classes can &quot;buy in&quot; to the new classes at a 1-for-2 exchange if they'd like to switch.&nbsp; Your crappy old Fighter 6 can get powers like a Warblade 4 when he takes that WB level when they hit 7th level.It's sort of a:&nbsp; &quot;Yea, we trumped the Fighter, so ... here's a free gift if your GM buys this book after you already started playing a Fighter.&quot;I like the ideas.&nbsp; Don't get me wrong.&nbsp; But I don't like what they did to the Fighter.So, if I were to run a D&amp;D game where I used the ToB (may be in the far dang future at this point) I'd probably refit the Fighter to bring him back in and tone back the Warblade.I shouldn't have to, however, and that's a ding on the folks that authored the book and WotC in general.&nbsp; I don't pay them to put together crap I have to spend hours wrangling over and fixing in the toolshop before it's playworthy.&nbsp; I don't pay them to screw up game balance and increase power levels.&nbsp; I can do that on my own, for free.Right now I'm comparing the classes and putting together a bolt-on package for the Fighter.&nbsp; Even then, I'd probably strip some of the stuff off the WB.&nbsp; I need to examine the Swordsage a little closer, but the Crusader doesn't seem over the top when you realize that his maneuvers are doled out at random and then rebooted, so he sort of has to burn them fast and sloppy or they go away.--fje</blockquote>

[QUOTE="HeapThaumaturgist, post: 3191712, member: 12332"] See, that's the essential dillema between what I'll call "my side" and what I'll call "your side" is that, on my end, I don't think the Fighter should be replaced. For several reasons: It's a core class. When people get "D&D" they get the core three books. When people play "D&D", the base assumption, the 'fundamentals', if you will, is that they'll be playing with, if nothing else, the stuff in the PHB. I think that when options are released for the game ... a big thing, a big part, should be that those options do not supercede things in the PHB. Add to them, sure. Offer additional "options", of course. If there's a power increase, it should be across the board or to address increases at other points. It shouldn't be: "Spellcasters either trump Fighters in power or in fun, so we'll replace the Fighter with something more powerful and more fun!" It should be: "We'll add to the Fighter and make it more powerful and more fun!" In some ways, they seemed to try to do that in ToB ... that's a flag for me. It has multiclassing rules that are patently different than anything else in the game ... the "old" classes can "buy in" to the new classes at a 1-for-2 exchange if they'd like to switch. Your crappy old Fighter 6 can get powers like a Warblade 4 when he takes that WB level when they hit 7th level. It's sort of a: "Yea, we trumped the Fighter, so ... here's a free gift if your GM buys this book after you already started playing a Fighter." I like the ideas. Don't get me wrong. But I don't like what they did to the Fighter. So, if I were to run a D&D game where I used the ToB (may be in the far dang future at this point) I'd probably refit the Fighter to bring him back in and tone back the Warblade. I shouldn't have to, however, and that's a ding on the folks that authored the book and WotC in general. I don't pay them to put together crap I have to spend hours wrangling over and fixing in the toolshop before it's playworthy. I don't pay them to screw up game balance and increase power levels. I can do that on my own, for free. Right now I'm comparing the classes and putting together a bolt-on package for the Fighter. Even then, I'd probably strip some of the stuff off the WB. I need to examine the Swordsage a little closer, but the Crusader doesn't seem over the top when you realize that his maneuvers are doled out at random and then rebooted, so he sort of has to burn them fast and sloppy or they go away. --fje [/QUOTE]

Verification