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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Minigiant" data-source="post: 5814512" data-attributes="member: 63508">When I was pondering the combat ability of the fighter, the cleric, the rogue, and the wizard; I came upon a question: What make the fighter a better fighter than the other classes?Does he have bigger numbers?Does his attacks and defense have more and better properties?Does he have access to more or better tactical options?Numbers:Does the fighter have a higher attack bonus, damage bonus, armor class and hit point total than the cleric and rogue?Do full casters have double the spell slots a partial caster? The numbers option is how pre-4e handled it. The fighter had higher attack and a bigger HD. The wizard had more caster levels than a paladin. Simple and easy. As long as the designer do screw up the numbers with stacking bonuses and spells replacing balancing factors it works fine. Though that last sentence is often not so easy.Properties:Do the warrior classes hit approaching enemies with their spears and polearms whereas the nonwarriors only spear attack (or only attack well) on their turn?Does the cleric's cure light wounds wounds heal HP damage and remove poisons unlike the bard, ranger, and cleric CLW only heal damage.This is sorta the 4e method with 3e doing this a bit too. Better mean more stuff happens. This method breeds complexity and system mastery. Some like that. Some don't. Versatility: Can the Fighter switch between archer, defender, brawler, and skirmisher on the fly while the paladin is stuck as a melee smasher and the rogue as mobile striker?Does the wizards have spells of all different types while sorcerer's are just blasters?Tactical roles and strategic builds. The good have more than the bad. It is easier to match fluff this way but it does limit how a player or DM can build their characters.What should characters that are good at something have over characters who aren't as skilled?</blockquote>

Verification