D&D General When Was it Decided Fighters Should Suck at Everything but Combat?

[Scribe]

Each handhold is a little much perhaps, but there are D&D variants that are more granular than WotC 5e (either version). I play and/or appreciate several of them.

Sure, but are any of them implementing systems for checks that are even close to Combat?

Again there is an expectation, traditionally reinforced, in Combat being the crunch part of the game, but I just find it hard to believe having the whole game at that level would be of benefit.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Sure, but are any of them implementing systems for checks that are even close to Combat?

Again there is an expectation, traditionally reinforced, in Combat being the crunch part of the game, but I just find it hard to believe having the whole game at that level would be of benefit.

And that is of course your right. I use a variety of subsystems in my preferred 5e, Level Up, some first party and some 3pp, and while I wouldn't necessarily say that they bring other areas of the game quite to the complexity level of combat, they do add complexity, and more importantly depth, to all areas of play that I appreciate.

 

[Scribe]

And that is of course your right. I use a variety of subsystems in my preferred 5e, Level Up, some first party and some 3pp, and while I wouldn't necessarily say that they bring other areas of the game quite to the complexity level of combat, they do add complexity, and more importantly depth, to all areas of play that I appreciate.

Right, but we are going off the rails here.

You can of course add whatever complexity you like, but the question at hand is, does the game improve if climbing, has the same level of granularity and crunch, as Combat?

For some, perhaps. I would argue they are a rounding error minority, but sure.

"When was it decided Fighters suck...at Climbing."

With the introduction of Skills. With the introduction of granularity into a system that frankly didnt need it.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Right, but we are going off the rails here.

You can of course add whatever complexity you like, but the question at hand is, does the game improve if climbing, has the same level of granularity and crunch, as Combat?

For some, perhaps. I would argue they are a rounding error minority, but sure.

"When was it decided Fighters suck...at Climbing."

With the introduction of Skills. With the introduction of granularity into a system that frankly didnt need it.

Whether or not more granularity in RPGs is desired is subjective. You can't legitimately just say it shouldn't be there, only that you don't want it. There are lots of things I don't want in RPGs, but I would never say they shouldn't exist.

 

[Scribe]

You can't legitimately just say it shouldn't be there, only that you don't want it.

Correct, but I can say that is the point at which a previously working iteration, worked a little bit worse.

 

[TheSword]

Right, but we are going off the rails here.

You can of course add whatever complexity you like, but the question at hand is, does the game improve if climbing, has the same level of granularity and crunch, as Combat?

For some, perhaps. I would argue they are a rounding error minority, but sure.

"When was it decided Fighters suck...at Climbing."

With the introduction of Skills. With the introduction of granularity into a system that frankly didnt need it.

Fighters don’t suck at climbing. They are now probably the best class at climbing. As long as they get a short rest beforehand.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Correct, but I can say that is the point at which a previously working iteration, worked a little bit worse.

I don't think so, honestly. It just worked a little bit worse for you. I like granularity and subsystems that provide more depth to things other than combat. Having those things makes the previously working iteration work better for me. Hence, subjective.

 

[Scribe]

Fighters don’t suck at climbing. They are now probably the best class at climbing. As long as they get a short rest beforehand.

Heavy emphasis on 'now'. The arc of the thread is not arriving at 5, or 5.5, at least how I read it, but starting in the shrouded mists of the games history, and asking 'what was the inflection point'.

Now, 5.5, I'll take your word for it.

 

[Scribe]

I don't think so, honestly. It just worked a little bit worse for you. I like granularity and subsystems that provide more depth to things other than combat. Having those things makes the previously working iteration work better for me. Hence, subjective.

No, it worked worked worse for Fighters. The point of the thread.

 

[Micah Sweet]

No, it worked worked worse for Fighters. The point of the thread.

I disagree. Fighters get to choose what they're good at just like everybody else. If some versions of the game give them fewer choices than other classes, and that doesn't fit setting logic in your view, that's the fault of those specific rules, not the whole concept of a skill system, and they should IMO be changed in your campaign.