Re: What do you think a Fighter should be?
Obviously a fighter should be a character that is highly skilled in combat. I would dare say a fighter should be the best at fighting. But unfortunately thatís not really the case.
In order for the fighter to be the best at fighting he needs to be able to perform well in combat. What I mean is that combat should come easily to the class. He needs to have combat options, be it in TOB psudo-magic, 4E powers, or whathaveyou. To put it simply a fighter needs to be versatile .
For example dnd 3.5 offers several combat maneuvers (not to be confused with TOB maneuvers), Iím talking about bull rush, disarm, sunder, trip etc. These maneuvers give the fighter a fair bit of options, but they are [i] difficult [i/] to perform. Therefore a fighter either spends his limited resources on making himself ok at doing those maneuvers, or he focuses on basic attacks and the now classic power attack (being mathematically the best option available, but this quickly becomes feat intensive). This is not good for the fighter because he does not have the options to actually be strong in combat. His options are few, too resource intensive, and too focused on one thing. In effect, a fighter is either very good at one thing (a one trick pony), or mediocre at everything.
Now 4E almost had this problem fixed, what with the power system and all. But the encounter/at will/ daily system really did ruin it. Because instead of it being versatile, it was really routine oriented, and not exactly what I had hoped for when I first got to mess around with the system.
Last edited by TheThan : 09-29-2012 at 01:09 AM.