Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Ourph" data-source="post: 3381200" data-attributes="member: 20239">I think it's a combination of the way a player approaches the character and the way the rules envision the Fighter.&nbsp; The Fighter class, unlike almost any other class in the game, is a blank slate &quot;generic&quot; combat class.&nbsp; The player must create the Fighter &quot;feel&quot; by choosing feats.&nbsp; The way the rules are set up, the easiest and most obvious option is to simply max the Fighter out for melee or ranged attacks.&nbsp; This is fine at lower levels, but then the Fighter is left behind after about 10th level.&nbsp; The class would be better if it were redesigned to give the Fighter something extra at about this time.&nbsp; In older editions, this was access to a small army - and that worked pretty well.There are lots of options that play to that character type amongst the various base classes, you don't NEED the Fighter class to play a loner or a vagabond.Which is why the typical soldier remains a Warrior rather than a Fighter as he advances in level.&nbsp; The Fighter WAS intended at one point to represent the heroic fighting men of legend and fantasy literature.&nbsp; That archetype is definitely associated with leadership qualities.&nbsp; It seems to me that the Barbarian class fills the niche of the &quot;no leadership qualities, smash-em-to-a-pulp melee type&quot;.&nbsp; The Fighter doesn't need to fill that role too.&nbsp; Returning the Fighter to his original role as battlefield leader (and giving him the means to do so effectively) sets him apart from the other classes that are currently competing him out of his &quot;turf&quot;.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Ourph, post: 3381200, member: 20239"] I think it's a combination of the way a player approaches the character and the way the rules envision the Fighter. The Fighter class, unlike almost any other class in the game, is a blank slate "generic" combat class. The player must create the Fighter "feel" by choosing feats. The way the rules are set up, the easiest and most obvious option is to simply max the Fighter out for melee or ranged attacks. This is fine at lower levels, but then the Fighter is left behind after about 10th level. The class would be better if it were redesigned to give the Fighter something extra at about this time. In older editions, this was access to a small army - and that worked pretty well. There are lots of options that play to that character type amongst the various base classes, you don't NEED the Fighter class to play a loner or a vagabond. Which is why the typical soldier remains a Warrior rather than a Fighter as he advances in level. The Fighter WAS intended at one point to represent the heroic fighting men of legend and fantasy literature. That archetype is definitely associated with leadership qualities. It seems to me that the Barbarian class fills the niche of the "no leadership qualities, smash-em-to-a-pulp melee type". The Fighter doesn't need to fill that role too. Returning the Fighter to his original role as battlefield leader (and giving him the means to do so effectively) sets him apart from the other classes that are currently competing him out of his "turf". [/QUOTE]

Verification