Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Chaosmancer" data-source="post: 7245479" data-attributes="member: 6801228">I am in no way saying that the Fighter cannot be good at exploration. I will say it is not the Fighters purview to be the best, or even top tier in exploration but that is an entirely side issue to what I am saying. If you were to ask me to give a one word answer to the question "What is the key component of a Scout" my answer would be "Stealth". No matter what else you may want to layer on, no matter if it is the deep woods, caves, or back alleys, Stealth is the key to a scout. Look between the two classes, Fighter and Rogue, which one leans more heavily into the concept of Stealth? The Rogue has always been the stealth class (amongst other things), and traditionally the fighter has been less good at stealth, sometimes they are even utterly abysmal at it. So, if you are going to pick a more natural fit between those two, the Rogue is the more natural fit. To make a bad analogy it would be like asking which is the better passenger plane, a Jumbo Jet or a Bomber. Sure, you can redo the bomber so it can carry people, and do the same with the Jet to carry explosives, but they were built for certain jobs and if I'm making a better passenger plane, I'm going to look at Jumbo Jets first for my design. All of the rest of it doesn't really have anything to do with my other points, but...I don't think asking for a magic-less ranger is asking for too much. In fact, a slightly bitter part of me which wants a more magical ranger hopes you guys finally get your magic-less ranger so you'll stop bringing it up. Maybe if you guys get that I can get a more magical ranger since they won't feel the need to split the difference anymore. I don't find magic to be "a lazy way out in design". It can be a lazy way out, but it can also be a very intriguing and interesting design space to work within. I also think that many of the Fighter Sub-classes are evocative, at least for me. The Battlemaster is great for my conception of a duelist, someone who has a bunch of sword tricks because they've devoted themselves to the blade. Eldritch Knight is great for the "combining spell and sword" space, which granted is a huge space, but the idea of a bonded weapon goes a long way for me. Bannerets are super cool, a little mechanically lacking though, as the warrior who inspires others to grit their teeth and fight on harder, the standard bearer fighting on the front lines, I like it a lot. And of course, the defending Knight, the warrior spirit fueled Samurai, and the Arcane Archer all inspire different characters and ideas within me. And, since we are talking about evocative subclasses, how is the Scout anymore or less evocative than the Banneret, Knight, or Samurai?</blockquote>

Verification