Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
When did the Fighter become "defender"?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Neonchameleon" data-source="post: 5908773" data-attributes="member: 87792"><p>No. But you were geared towards being a healer. Not the monstrosity a cleric can be if you go all out. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Merlin was a wizard. One who in most myths actually cast very few spells. And as all the Knights of the Round Table were knights, calling them 'knight guy' is functionally useless. Roles aren't about who someone is but what they bring to the group.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>And that isn't a role. It isn't even close to a role. It's too broad. A pure focussed specialist in Evocation who only ever takes Evocation direct damage spells is performing a completely different role from a specialist diviner who specialises in scrying, information, and transportation. The role is what you do for the party - how you do it is more or less irrelevant.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>What level are you at? The reason it's a trap is because so many skills are made simply irrelevant by magic at higher levels. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>The fighter class leaves a lot to be desired.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>And? The classes aren't quite the same as they used to be. And no edition has kept the classes all the same. The 4e fighter is doing the dominant role of the fighter from any edition.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>This is a complete and utter fabrication. What had the axe put to it was <em>downtime</em> mechanics. (And annoying skills that actively subtract from assumed competence, like Use Rope).</p><p></p><p>The 4e rogue has more competence, more flexibilty, and more out of combat ability than the 3e rogue. This is because the 4e rogue not only gets decently trained skills (and effectively more of them - 6 out of 17 skills beats 8+Int out of 36), he gets utility powers allowing him to excel at skills in a way the 3e rogue can't.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>And I found it aggravating. To me it matters more that I can make a good call and keep the game flowing than that there are 250 separate rules I feel pressured to memorise and possibly even look up at the table. I find too detailed mechanics pressurising rather than reassuring.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Social skills?</p><p></p><p>3.X has Bluff, Diplomacy, Sense Motive, Gather Information, and Disguise.</p><p>4e has Bluff, Diplomacy, Insight, and Streetwise - with Disguise explicitly being a subset of the Bluff skill.</p><p></p><p>A grand total of <em>one</em> social skill has been removed from 4e - and that has <em>explicitely</em> been wrapped up under another skill. Two have changed name but remained.</p><p></p><p>What's gone are things like the <a href="http://www.d20srd.org/srd/skills/diplomacy.htm" target="_blank">hard coded diplomacy god mode rules</a>. That said, I wish they had kept the five point scale for diplomacy.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>The interaction pillar is about as well supported in 4e as in 3.X. And doesn't have magical support trampling all over it. Exploration? There you have a point - 4e really needs a Wilderness Survival Guide. And possibly an urban one.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>This from someone claiming Monkey Grip is a good feat.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I've been through this on another thread. Fifteenth level PF fighter versus d3+1 summonable Celestial (or Fiendish) Dire Tigers, d4+2 Celestial (or Fiendish) Anklyosauri, or d4+2 Bralani Azata. Which would you prefer on your side in combat? The fighter, or your choice of the others?</p><p></p><p>Because that's a 15th level fighter vs one standard action from an Eidolon-less 13th level summoner.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>It isn't a sin to accept buffs. That's what buffs are for. It is, however, false accounting to allocate the effectiveness from buffs to the buffee rather than the buffer. As for can't do your job with your own abilities, <em>that is the problem</em>.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Ah, OK. I defend many things about 4e - but the presentation in the PHB isn't one of them.</p><p></p><p>[quote[The responses of "OMG Eldritch, you don't know anything about 4e!" are uncalled for, because I'm talking about why people I've talked to have dropped for 4e based on roles, not making any claims as to those perceptions being correct at all.</p></blockquote><p></p><p>OK <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" /> And I think we can agree that the presentation of the PHB sucks. It plays much better than it reads.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>And with the exception of bows, so do 4e characters <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" /></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Absolutely not. I think it's pure consistency. You are saying what didn't show up in the 4e PHB. And I'm saying that needs comparing with equivalent PHBs. If you want to reference UA and the Complete Barbarian's Handbook then for consistency you should reference 4e splats. If you want to reference just the PHB then you should reference just the PHB.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>The single most defining attribute of the UA Barbarian was <em>hatred of magic</em>. Hatred of magic made it different from any other class in the game. And they were explicitely granted a large amount of power to make up for not wanting to be near magic including magic items. The most defining attribute for a 3.X barbarian was <em>rage</em>. And if you want to talk about "flip out and kill things" without rage then the fighter does likewise.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>No it isn't. The problem is that outside combat the 20th level fighter's abilities are almost entirely irrelevant. Inside combat with high level spells flying around he's still a man waving a pointy piece of metal - and in the fighter's case with a will defence that sucks. And a cleric who can be bothered can outfight the fighter.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I don't know why people are trying to say that anyone thinks that individual fighters can't be better at combat than individual clerics. Hogtie the fighter and the wizard's better at combat than the fighter. If the cleric doesn't care about being good at melee, the fighter will outfight the cleric - because the cleric has better things to do (see Ars Magica).</p><p>[/QUOTE]</p>
[QUOTE="Neonchameleon, post: 5908773, member: 87792"] No. But you were geared towards being a healer. Not the monstrosity a cleric can be if you go all out. Merlin was a wizard. One who in most myths actually cast very few spells. And as all the Knights of the Round Table were knights, calling them 'knight guy' is functionally useless. Roles aren't about who someone is but what they bring to the group. And that isn't a role. It isn't even close to a role. It's too broad. A pure focussed specialist in Evocation who only ever takes Evocation direct damage spells is performing a completely different role from a specialist diviner who specialises in scrying, information, and transportation. The role is what you do for the party - how you do it is more or less irrelevant. What level are you at? The reason it's a trap is because so many skills are made simply irrelevant by magic at higher levels. The fighter class leaves a lot to be desired. And? The classes aren't quite the same as they used to be. And no edition has kept the classes all the same. The 4e fighter is doing the dominant role of the fighter from any edition. This is a complete and utter fabrication. What had the axe put to it was [I]downtime[/I] mechanics. (And annoying skills that actively subtract from assumed competence, like Use Rope). The 4e rogue has more competence, more flexibilty, and more out of combat ability than the 3e rogue. This is because the 4e rogue not only gets decently trained skills (and effectively more of them - 6 out of 17 skills beats 8+Int out of 36), he gets utility powers allowing him to excel at skills in a way the 3e rogue can't. And I found it aggravating. To me it matters more that I can make a good call and keep the game flowing than that there are 250 separate rules I feel pressured to memorise and possibly even look up at the table. I find too detailed mechanics pressurising rather than reassuring. Social skills? 3.X has Bluff, Diplomacy, Sense Motive, Gather Information, and Disguise. 4e has Bluff, Diplomacy, Insight, and Streetwise - with Disguise explicitly being a subset of the Bluff skill. A grand total of [I]one[/I] social skill has been removed from 4e - and that has [I]explicitely[/I] been wrapped up under another skill. Two have changed name but remained. What's gone are things like the [url=http://www.d20srd.org/srd/skills/diplomacy.htm]hard coded diplomacy god mode rules[/url]. That said, I wish they had kept the five point scale for diplomacy. The interaction pillar is about as well supported in 4e as in 3.X. And doesn't have magical support trampling all over it. Exploration? There you have a point - 4e really needs a Wilderness Survival Guide. And possibly an urban one. This from someone claiming Monkey Grip is a good feat. I've been through this on another thread. Fifteenth level PF fighter versus d3+1 summonable Celestial (or Fiendish) Dire Tigers, d4+2 Celestial (or Fiendish) Anklyosauri, or d4+2 Bralani Azata. Which would you prefer on your side in combat? The fighter, or your choice of the others? Because that's a 15th level fighter vs one standard action from an Eidolon-less 13th level summoner. It isn't a sin to accept buffs. That's what buffs are for. It is, however, false accounting to allocate the effectiveness from buffs to the buffee rather than the buffer. As for can't do your job with your own abilities, [I]that is the problem[/I]. Ah, OK. I defend many things about 4e - but the presentation in the PHB isn't one of them. [quote[The responses of "OMG Eldritch, you don't know anything about 4e!" are uncalled for, because I'm talking about why people I've talked to have dropped for 4e based on roles, not making any claims as to those perceptions being correct at all.[/quote] OK :) And I think we can agree that the presentation of the PHB sucks. It plays much better than it reads. And with the exception of bows, so do 4e characters :) Absolutely not. I think it's pure consistency. You are saying what didn't show up in the 4e PHB. And I'm saying that needs comparing with equivalent PHBs. If you want to reference UA and the Complete Barbarian's Handbook then for consistency you should reference 4e splats. If you want to reference just the PHB then you should reference just the PHB. The single most defining attribute of the UA Barbarian was [I]hatred of magic[/I]. Hatred of magic made it different from any other class in the game. And they were explicitely granted a large amount of power to make up for not wanting to be near magic including magic items. The most defining attribute for a 3.X barbarian was [I]rage[/I]. And if you want to talk about "flip out and kill things" without rage then the fighter does likewise. No it isn't. The problem is that outside combat the 20th level fighter's abilities are almost entirely irrelevant. Inside combat with high level spells flying around he's still a man waving a pointy piece of metal - and in the fighter's case with a will defence that sucks. And a cleric who can be bothered can outfight the fighter. I don't know why people are trying to say that anyone thinks that individual fighters can't be better at combat than individual clerics. Hogtie the fighter and the wizard's better at combat than the fighter. If the cleric doesn't care about being good at melee, the fighter will outfight the cleric - because the cleric has better things to do (see Ars Magica). [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
When did the Fighter become "defender"?
Top