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

[Lanefan]

Yes, this. It's how I feel about secret doors, too. If knowledge/secrets are gated behind a random roll, as opposed to there being hints and clues that the players could find, then it must mean that it's entirely optional. And if it's entirely optional then it's not critical to the story. And if not's critical to the story then why not let the players have it?

The bolded is a false premise.

Something that the PCs may or may not find or know - i.e., it's optional - can be critical to the story in many ways: they miss something big and maybe have to come back later; their way forward becomes far easier that it otherwise would have been; they find (or miss) something irrelevant now but important later; they find (or miss) major treasure or information, etc. etc.

"The story" is a malleable and ever-changing thing in an RPG, and the finding or missing of an optional element along the way can change the course of that story significantly.

 

[soviet]

The bolded is a false premise.

Something that the PCs may or may not find or know - i.e., it's optional - can be critical to the story in many ways: they miss something big and maybe have to come back later; their way forward becomes far easier that it otherwise would have been; they find (or miss) something irrelevant now but important later; they find (or miss) major treasure or information, etc. etc.

"The story" is a malleable and ever-changing thing in an RPG, and the finding or missing of an optional element along the way can change the course of that story significantly.

Critical and important or useful are different words.

 

[Corinnguard]

If you have five role-playing groups playing the same 5e adventure, they aren't going to be played in quite the same way and have completely different outcomes. It's a multiversal thing in D&D.

 

[W'rkncacnter]

Isn't that what [...] feats are for? [...] Even in 2014 the fighter gets a bonus feat at level 6 which can be used to customise the class but everyone seems to end up only picking up combat skills instead of a feat that makes them a little more well rounded. At some point I think it is less the class and more the player that is pigeonholing the fighter.

i mean, i think james really put it best:

In theory, you could use your bonus Feats to further develop your secondary interests, but you don't get a lot of these, and having to dip into the same reserve for ability improvements, combat power, lasting power, and out of combat ability is a particularly dumb design decision and has been for some time- the typical D&D play loop has become one where combat isn't a "fail state", it's an inevitability. As a result, it simply makes sense to use your limited Feat choices to be better at winning (and thereby surviving) combats.

edit: removed the part of the quote about backgrounds because i think at least 2014 backgrounds are fine as is, honestly, and i only took the part james said about feats anyway

 

[Moving Pictures]

I've skimmed/scanned the posts here and will offer a perhaps unpopular opinion:

Fighters really suck because too many stupid magic/feats other BS have been given to other classes.

I run a skill points system, and fighters gain a crap ton - allowing for customization. Curtailed the stupid stuff given to other classes. Cut down on "everyone gets magic."

 

[cbwjm]

i mean, i think james really put it best:

edit: removed the part of the quote about backgrounds because i think at least 2014 backgrounds are fine as is, honestly, and i only took the part james said about feats anyway

I guess the issue I have with his statement is that you really doesn't make sense (to me) to spend all your feats on combat abilities especially if you want a more well-rounded character for out-of-combat. 5e is one of the most forgiving versions of the game so spending a single feat on out-of-combat ability really isn't going to hinder you or the party.

I can understand that some people might want to get a specific combat feat combo online a bit earlier, in which case use that level 8 feat to round out your character a bit.

I do agree with his bit about everything being on the feat train though, I feel like stat boosts would be better off as a seperate track.

 

[W'rkncacnter]

I do agree with his bit about everything being on the feat train though, I feel like stat boosts would be better off as a seperate track.

word

 

[Lanefan]

Critical and important or useful are different words.

Indeed, but in this case they all mean pretty much about the same thing.

 

[James Gasik]

I guess the issue I have with his statement is that you really doesn't make sense (to me) to spend all your feats on combat abilities especially if you want a more well-rounded character for out-of-combat. 5e is one of the most forgiving versions of the game so spending a single feat on out-of-combat ability really isn't going to hinder you or the party.

I can understand that some people might want to get a specific combat feat combo online a bit earlier, in which case use that level 8 feat to round out your character a bit.

I do agree with his bit about everything being on the feat train though, I feel like stat boosts would be better off as a seperate track.

If you got Feats more frequently, perhaps. But the fact is, waiting four levels to customize your character in any direction, when you only get so many such choices, is problematic. If a 5th level character finds that they really could use, say, expertise on a skill in order to have more to do outside of combat, waiting three whole levels to do anything about it (or, alternatively, ditching their class for some other class entirely to get what they want) is a big ask.

Feats maybe should have been designed to have both combat and out of combat utility in such a model.

 

[Tesral]

Isn't that what backgrounds and feats are for? The class skills might represent skills that complement the class and the background can grant you those intelligence skills or the background feat can let you pick up skilled for extra skills. Even in 2014 the fighter gets a bonus feat at level 6 which can be used to customise the class but everyone seems to end up only picking up combat skills instead of a feat that makes them a little more well rounded. At some point I think it is less the class and more the player that is pigeonholing the fighter.

Building Fighters in 3e I find that you have more feats available than usable combat feats. You might as well diversify. Other classes have too few.