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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="EzekielRaiden" data-source="post: 6828374" data-attributes="member: 6790260">[MENTION=2067]I'm A Banana[/MENTION]While I definitely think that was an analysis worth doing, I'm not sure it really captures the core of several classes--particularly the heaviest spellcasters. I mean, Arcane Recovery? *That's* the thing that makes a Wizard special and unique, standing out from others? No. It's the spells, and being able to learn the whole damn list if they work for it. Same for Cleric--Paladins also get Channel Divinity, you know, and in more-or-less comparable ways (but for Clerics, it's the Domain that matters--it's all about the subclass).But I do think this highlights something, which Mearls had referenced but didn't give specific explanation of. That is, under this analysis, the core thing Fighters can do...is very light in flavor. Metamagic, Divine Smite, Ki, Rage, Wildshape...all of these things have a pretty strong, distinctive flavor to them. You can refluff them in various ways, sometimes, but you can't really get away from them having a particular "feel" to them.In fact, I think we could divide this selection of classes up into three distinct groups. You have the Flavorful Core, where there's a key mechanic that underlies the class and supports its unique identity in a strong but more-or-less balanced way (Barb, Druid, Monk, Pally, Rogue, Sorcerer, Warlock). You have the Prime Casters, whose strength is not any particular feature, but rather their approach to the ultimate of class features, spellcasting (Bard, Cleric, Wizard). And then you have the...other classes. Fighters are certainly capable, but the flexibility of their core features (Action Surge, but also bonus ASIs and feats) is precisely what makes them lack a core identity, a clear flag that says "look at me, I'm a FIGHTER and I'm AWESOME."* And Rangers have plenty of flavor...they just don't have a potent core feature the way Fighters do.Is it any wonder, then, that Ranger is the class that's gotten the most dissatisfied reviews? And that Fighter is so contentious, between those who love the "freedom" of no identifying feature, and those who feel like there's nothing "special" the Fighter can do?*It should, but sadly does not, go without saying that some people think it's great that Fighters have nothing that clearly identifies them as Fighters, unlike pretty much every other class. I, personally, think this was a weakness--and it would seem Mearls does, too. Probably one of the few places he and I are of the same mind about much of anything, when it comes to game design!</blockquote>

Verification