Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 6650828" data-attributes="member: 996">The 5e and AD&amp;D fighters are pretty similar, in that both do a lot of damage in combat (AD&amp;D with a correct choice or two, 5e fighters almost inevitably), and have little to do outside combat, yes.&nbsp; That's the point being made, that the 5e fighter contributes almost exclusively in combat, and is lackluster in the other two Pillars, trivial bonuses like RA notwithstanding.&nbsp; &nbsp;That, however, is less in keeping with 5e design goals.&nbsp; It was meant to be a more inclusive game, not a majority-rules, lowest-common-denominator one.&nbsp; So you should really be looking at some of the other options presented, including the relative acceptability of house-ruling, when you find the default version of a game element doesn't fit your needs, rather than to just throw up you hands and conclude you don't deserve it, because you're a 'minority.'&nbsp;Really, they both are.&nbsp; Both give actions on your turn.&nbsp; Turns only happen in combat.&nbsp; That's actually how I'd be inclined to rule, myself, both because it makes sense, and because it discourages 'wasting' the latter (it's much more valuable in combat, where the fighter's actions are higher-value due to multiple attacks) or spamming the former.&nbsp; But, for sake of argument, if you can shoehorn one into non-combat, by rolling initiative and calling out turns, you can do the other, because you've essentially made a time-important non-combat challenge a 'combat.'&nbsp; Similarly, Haste is likely to be cast only in combat, because it's such a valuable spell, but it can certainly be used out of combat.&nbsp;It's strictly inferior to proficiency (or any stacking bonus), and vastly inferior to Expertise. Where the DM rules /no/ proficiency can apply to a physical check, it's a bit more relevant, but at +1 to 3 over 20 levels, it doesn't stack up that well, even compared to a +1d4 bonus from Bless or the Guidance cantrip.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Tony Vargas, post: 6650828, member: 996"] The 5e and AD&D fighters are pretty similar, in that both do a lot of damage in combat (AD&D with a correct choice or two, 5e fighters almost inevitably), and have little to do outside combat, yes. That's the point being made, that the 5e fighter contributes almost exclusively in combat, and is lackluster in the other two Pillars, trivial bonuses like RA notwithstanding. That, however, is less in keeping with 5e design goals. It was meant to be a more inclusive game, not a majority-rules, lowest-common-denominator one. So you should really be looking at some of the other options presented, including the relative acceptability of house-ruling, when you find the default version of a game element doesn't fit your needs, rather than to just throw up you hands and conclude you don't deserve it, because you're a 'minority.' Really, they both are. Both give actions on your turn. Turns only happen in combat. That's actually how I'd be inclined to rule, myself, both because it makes sense, and because it discourages 'wasting' the latter (it's much more valuable in combat, where the fighter's actions are higher-value due to multiple attacks) or spamming the former. But, for sake of argument, if you can shoehorn one into non-combat, by rolling initiative and calling out turns, you can do the other, because you've essentially made a time-important non-combat challenge a 'combat.' Similarly, Haste is likely to be cast only in combat, because it's such a valuable spell, but it can certainly be used out of combat. It's strictly inferior to proficiency (or any stacking bonus), and vastly inferior to Expertise. Where the DM rules /no/ proficiency can apply to a physical check, it's a bit more relevant, but at +1 to 3 over 20 levels, it doesn't stack up that well, even compared to a +1d4 bonus from Bless or the Guidance cantrip. [/QUOTE]

Verification