D&D 5E yes, this again: Fighters need more non-combat options

[Guest 6801328]

[MENTION=6801328]Elfcrusher[/MENTION]: when you are hanging out with a small group of close friends who know each other, you can make any jokes you want. There is no reality where a joke about a specific type of victim is acceptable in an environment where it is entirely possible that some of the members are secretly victims of that sort. People who think they have the right to force such jokes on others instead of making their jokes in appropriate environments cause misery in the world.

I'm sorry, but I still disagree with you.

I do agree it's unwise to find levity in sensitive issues, because others will make the same assumptions you did. And it's impolite, because there seems to be a rule against that sort of thing. And it's probably inconsiderate, since there may be listeners who are unable to discern humor from denigration and will assume the latter. And for all of those reasons it may be best to just not bother.

But...that feels like acquiescence.

I disagree that it undermines a cause to find humor in it. I disagree that one cannot support the cause while finding humor in it.

However, I will tell you what I do believe, very sincerely and very strongly: binary tribalism, the belief that one must be either 100% for something or 100% against it, with no middle ground, no sense that the world is complicated and multiple "sides" might have valid opinions...of which:

Either you think the sheer percentage of women who have been sexually assaulted is a horrific statistic, or you are a garbage human being who thinks that it’s no big deal that women are sexually assaulted

appears to be a textbook example...this is indeed the root cause of most of the misery in the world.

 

[Cyber-Dave]

If the fighter came with 3-4 tool proficiencies, would that make sense? Does "tool user" fit the fighter theme in people's perceptions of that class?

I also think that, with 5e’s system of spotlight balance, giving the fighter more interactive power outside of combat would overpower the class...

 

[cbwjm]

If the fighter came with 3-4 tool proficiencies, would that make sense? Does "tool user" fit the fighter theme in people's perceptions of that class?

It doesn't really fit my perception of the class, I think that's more of a background/subclass.

If I was going to go with a specific theme for a fighter, I might say physical perfection. Where a barbarian focuses on raw strength and a rogue focuses on nimbleness and precise strikes, a fighter focuses on honing his whole body to the warrior ideal, something of a jack of all trades for the physical scores. A good first step would have been to have remarkable athlete in the base class at level 1 or 2. I don't know how many others would agree with me, but if I was going to focus on changing the fighter somewhat, that might be where I would start.

 

[Maxperson]

Again, still the first option. You can think it’s ok to crack jokes that in any way, shape, or form belittle the victims of sexual assault.

This is where you are going wrong. Nobody is belittling victims of sexual assault in any way, shape or form with that joke. It's not about them or aimed at them.

You can think it doesn’t belittle such victims. It’s irrelevant. They get to choose. Not you.

I'm not responsible for their choices, though. If they choose to be upset at something that is not about them or aimed at them, that's on them. There is literally nothing in this world that doesn't upset somebody. Movies portray murder, kidnapping, assault, battery, rape and more all the time and it's accepted just fine for the most part. Why is it okay for that form of entertainment, but not humor?

 

[Guest 6801328]

This is where you are going wrong. Nobody is belittling victims of sexual assault in any way, shape or form with that joke. It's not about them or aimed at them.

I think this is an important point. This isn't the case of making fun of somebody for being the victim of assault. It's repurposing the motto of a movement (that happens to be about a combination of sexual assault, disempowerment, and workplace discrimination) to say "I'm a victim, too!", but in a way that has nothing to do with that movement.

Which was kinda funny, largely because #metoo is so ubiquitous currently.

Honestly not funny enough to derail a thread...even a thread as badly in need of derailment as this one...but kinda funny.

 

[Guest 6801328]

Actually, I just thought of another reason...probably the best reason...to not make jokes of this sort: while it's true that nutcases on one end of the spectrum will take offense, crazies on the other end of the spectrum will assume you're on their side. It's the latter I really can't abide.

 

[Maxperson]

Actually, I just thought of another reason...probably the best reason...to not make jokes of this sort: while it's true that nutcases on one end of the spectrum will take offense, crazies on the other end of the spectrum will assume you're on their side. It's the latter I really can't abide.

You have a point there.

 

[Cyber-Dave]

This is totally off-topic, but, out of curiosity, how does the block function here work? Is it two way, a la Facebook, in that after you block someone they cannot see your posts either? Or, is it more like a classic forum where you can no longer see what they post, but they still see yours? (Just trying to get a better sense of what the poster was doing when he would respond and then block.)

 

[FrogReaver]

This is totally off-topic, but, out of curiosity, how does the block function here work? Is it two way, a la Facebook, in that after you block someone they cannot see your posts either? Or, is it more like a classic forum where you can no longer see what they post, but they still see yours? (Just trying to get a better sense of what the poster was doing when he would respond and then block.)

2-way. Though people you block can still see what you say when someone else quotes you and they can also log out and see what you say too.

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

If the fighter came with 3-4 tool proficiencies, would that make sense? Does "tool user" fit the fighter theme in people's perceptions of that class?

I'd go with maybe Skills or Tool proficiencies, to represent a wide range of life experience picked up alongside combat training. However just tool proficiencies seem to push the class into "craftsman" niche, and I don't think that fits all fighter concepts so well.

Making the fighter into the "relies on training" class for both combat skills and non-combat proficiencies fits the concept pretty well. (Although without the intense focus on a few aspects that Rogues and Bards can bring.) Just tools however would be something that I might associate with the Artificer rather than Fighter.

This is totally off-topic, but, out of curiosity, how does the block function here work? Is it two way, a la Facebook, in that after you block someone they cannot see your posts either? Or, is it more like a classic forum where you can no longer see what they post, but they still see yours? (Just trying to get a better sense of what the poster was doing when he would respond and then block.)

Ugh. The block function on here is several different flavours of messed up, and has been the subject of quite a few discussions.
In short however, blocking someone has the intended*result of you can't see their posts/threads and they cannot see yours.

So in the context of the question asked earlier in the thread, responding to someone's post and then blocking them means that they will get the notification that you have quoted them, but not be able to see the post in which you did so.

*Unintended results are messing up page counts and links so that for example, trying to follow a notification for any post in a thread in which some posts are blocked or blocking you won't take you to the post, and may not even take you to the right page.
Among others.