Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Quickleaf" data-source="post: 6272226" data-attributes="member: 20323">It's interesting how a lot of people who oppose fighters with non-combat utility tend to be be old school gamers. I think the main criticism can be explained simply as: we don't need rules for role-playing or exploration. Which is a totally valid criticism, but tends to be limited to very very early play styles only a few stages removed from war-gaming.Anyhow, I have been tinkering with ideas for non-combat utility in my redesign of fighters using house rules, and it is really turning out nicely. I think turning up the overall utility of fighters and tuning down wizards' utility (as compared to 3e/Pathfinder) is a good step that can help the two classes meet in the middle.I love fighters and have a blast role-playing them (the RP contribution should never go overlooked). But have I ever played a version of a fighter which satisfied me in terms of its mechanics? No, not really.There are lots of great ideas tossed around in this thread by folks who (I think) feel the same way and have been house-ruling fighters in their home games.</blockquote>