Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Clint_L" data-source="post: 9328149" data-attributes="member: 7035894">I don't see this. When you play a fighter, you are choosing to have some strengths (particularly damage dealing and soaking) and some limitations, which you can choose to address via sub-class if they are a big deal to you. Like, if you wanna play a fighter and are really, really worried about &quot;big gaps,&quot; play an Echo Knight. Choices make the game interesting.I'm not finding that fighters and rogues who don't pick a supernatural sub-class suck. And I note that Battlemasters are widely considered the best fighter subclass (Echo Knight aside, probably), and fighters themselves are generally considered one of the stronger classes. As well as being by far the most popular. To you, they might suck, but that certainly does not appear to be the widespread opinion.Fireball is fantastic when you have lots of low level enemies clumped together, no doubt. It generally does't do much for you against a typical BBEG, but it'll often be great against the guards. Against the BBEG, it will usually be much handier to have a pure damage dealer. Like a fighter.As far as battles go, spell casters, in my experience, are a good choice for when you are into gambling a bit more. You'll have some fights where you absolutely kick butt - you chose just the right spells for the right situation, a key saving throw was failed, and so on. And you will also have some fights where you absolutely suck. You're out of your best spells, or you chose the wrong one for the situation, or the DM keeps rolling their saves (c.f. the recent Critical Role episode 91). Martial classes tend to be much more reliable. There are still occasions where a &quot;big gap&quot; etc. is a serious problem, but mostly you have a pretty reliable impact on combat.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Clint_L, post: 9328149, member: 7035894"] I don't see this. When you play a fighter, you are choosing to have some strengths (particularly damage dealing and soaking) and some limitations, which you can choose to address via sub-class if they are a big deal to you. Like, if you wanna play a fighter and are really, really worried about "big gaps," play an Echo Knight. Choices make the game interesting. I'm not finding that fighters and rogues who don't pick a supernatural sub-class suck. And I note that Battlemasters are widely considered the best fighter subclass (Echo Knight aside, probably), and fighters themselves are generally considered one of the stronger classes. As well as being by far the most popular. To you, they might suck, but that certainly does not appear to be the widespread opinion. Fireball is fantastic when you have lots of low level enemies clumped together, no doubt. It generally does't do much for you against a typical BBEG, but it'll often be great against the guards. Against the BBEG, it will usually be much handier to have a pure damage dealer. Like a fighter. As far as battles go, spell casters, in my experience, are a good choice for when you are into gambling a bit more. You'll have some fights where you absolutely kick butt - you chose just the right spells for the right situation, a key saving throw was failed, and so on. And you will also have some fights where you absolutely suck. You're out of your best spells, or you chose the wrong one for the situation, or the DM keeps rolling their saves (c.f. the recent [I]Critical Role[/I] episode 91). Martial classes tend to be much more reliable. There are still occasions where a "big gap" etc. is a serious problem, but mostly you have a pretty reliable impact on combat. [/QUOTE]

Verification