Oh, I get it now, Fighters /should/ have spells.

[Username17]

What if then, if the non-magical, fighting men classes start giving up attribute increases like candy? If by level 10 the fighter has Str 26* and by level 20 something like Str 60*, a lot of tall tales exploits should start becoming viable by trivializing high DC Strength checks. It would also combat the effects of hp inflation.

The superman strengh route works better for a "barbarian" kind of fighting man that ends becoming He-Man/Hercules. Other kinds of "skilled" fighters could get massive Dex increases, or maybe extra BAB to get pretty much the same bonus the strong guy gets. So a samurai by level 20 could have like BAB +70*. He'll hit anything, make the most impossible called shots and with power attack and expertise he actually has a huge number pool he can allocate to damage and/or AC as needed.

Well, bonus escalation provides its own problems. Namely that the game becomes a game of counters. If Dr. Swordopolis is so deadly with a sword that any monster standing next to him is red mist, then the only worthwhile challenges are ones that can stay out of swording range. If Dr. Swordopolis can't fly then flying opponents matter, and if he can fly then only faster or incorporeal or whatever enemies matter. Essentially what you've written is a character like Cyclops in the X-Men movies: his blasts would end any combat so the only combats you even notice are the ones where his powers get arbitrarily neutralized by something.

Very large bonuses are not - by themselves at least - sufficient to make high level feel high level.

-Username17

[hogarth]

Well, bonus escalation provides its own problems. Namely that the game becomes a game of counters.

D&D is bad enough at that already (e.g. Death Ward, Mind Blank, Heroes' Feast).

[Username17]

Well, bonus escalation provides its own problems. Namely that the game becomes a game of counters.

D&D is bad enough at that already (e.g. Death Ward, Mind Blank, Heroes' Feast).

This is true. But the point is that raising the bonuses very makes the need for counters much greater.

For example: Death Ward makes you arbitrarily immune to Finger of Death. And if you don't have Death Ward, Finger of Death can affect you. If the DC for Finger of Death is like 19 or 21 or something, a casting of Finger of Death is deadly but not necessarily world ending if you don't have Death Ward. If the DC for Finger of Death is 38 or something stupid, you have to have Death Ward or you are going to fucking die.

As the rockets become more effective, people are required to have more "Fuck You" defenses.

-Username17

[nockermensch]

Well, bonus escalation provides its own problems. Namely that the game becomes a game of counters.

D&D is bad enough at that already (e.g. Death Ward, Mind Blank, Heroes' Feast).

This is true. But the point is that raising the bonuses very makes the need for counters much greater.

Isn't this kind of obvious? In the so called typical adventuring party you have two guys already playing Rocket Tag with team monster. If we give level appropriate rockets to the other two guys, the game gets 100% more rocketty.

So the Lich doesn't have to worry just about the wizard's Polymorph Any Object or the Cleric's Holy Word, but also with becoming bone mist if the Fighter comes close (which is how uberchargers contribute in combat already). At least it seems that everybody would be playing the same combat minigame.

Now, if you want an end-game that's LESS rocket-tag, I agree that that's a worthwhile goal. Then you'd need to rein-in a lot of high level insanity (and I think, tone down the monsters too, their HD should be tied to CR) so that we could have more reasonable numbers in general.

[Lago PARANOIA]

So the Lich doesn't have to worry just about the wizard's Polymorph Any Object or the Cleric's Holy Word, but also with becoming bone mist if the Fighter comes close (which is how uberchargers contribute in combat already).

The thing is that the melee fighter is like the easiest standard party archetype to counter. You can see this in games like, oh, every superhero TTRPG ever made. Even before we get into Yu-Gi-Ohesque 'I counter the counter of your trap card with SOLEMN JUDGMENT!' shenanigans, the melee character is already behind because they have to burn some of their counter resources on just protecting their archetype.

Now, while pretty much any game that uses melee combat has to provide melee specialists with bonus anyway -- thus making the Attack of Opportunity one of the greatest unsung innovations of 3E -- naked bonus accumulation fucks them over at an even greater rate than ranged specialists/spellcasters/troop leaders.

[Kaelik]

So the Lich doesn't have to worry just about the wizard's Polymorph Any Object or the Cleric's Holy Word, but also with becoming bone mist if the Fighter comes close (which is how uberchargers contribute in combat already). At least it seems that everybody would be playing the same combat minigame.

Except the whole point is that PaO requires a save, and Holy Word is bad because it is either useless or too strong, because of the no save aspect. (It's fine for evil outsiders, because it has a save.)

The point is that a rocket that hits 50% of the time with no countermeasures, and can be chaffed, is what the spellcasters have (or should have). And so if you give the fighter a 100% kill with no countermeasures, which is what every fighter buff ever does, then it just makes chaff for the fighter mandatory.

If I can look at the monsters character sheet before hand and say:

"Oh, this Formian Queen has Wall of Force and Teleport, and therefore the Fighter will never matter." or "Oh, this Tarrasque has no fighter chaff, so the fighter is going to full attack it for infinity damage and kill it in one round"

That is fundamentally different and worse than "Oh, the Wizard has PaO and Finger of Death, which will be the enemy if they fail their save, unless of course they have the shapechange subtype or are immune to death effects, in which case he has to pick the right one." or "This Balor doesn't have the Shapechange subtype or death effect immunity. So I guess he needs to make the save."

In one of those, all battles are a foregone conclusion (at least as far as fighter usefulness) whereas in the other, the Wizard doesn't auto win any fights, and doesn't auto sit out any fights.

Fighter fixes need to make the fighter have more things to do in a combat, and not make the one thing they do better.

[nockermensch]

The thing is that the melee fighter is like the easiest standard party archetype to counter. You can see this in games like, oh, every superhero TTRPG ever made. Even before we get into Yu-Gi-Ohesque 'I counter the counter of your trap card with SOLEMN JUDGMENT!' shenanigans, the melee character is already behind because they have to burn some of their counter resources on just protecting their archetype.

What I get here that screws melee combat:
1 - Melee is ubiquitous. In D&D terms, every creature (barring the funny exceptions) have a BAB and a "weapon damage" lines. Compare with how many creatures who have Caster Levels. It's almost as if melee is the boring last resort that everybody falls back to when they cannot really contribute. The melee specialist then, has to deal with overcrowding in their element, while spellcasters live in a relative competition free environment.

2 - HP is depleted on like, every round of combat. Fighters need to spend resources just to fix this. In D&D, a fighter who does his job successfully will be hit. A wizard who does his job successfully won't. Just by this fact, is already stupid and unfair that both classes have the same HP regeneration mechanic. The fighter is punished by doing his job (if not the fighter, the cleric is, by being relegated to a MMO Healer mindset).

Now, while pretty much any game that uses melee combat has to provide melee specialists with bonus anyway -- thus making the Attack of Opportunity one of the greatest unsung innovations of 3E -- naked bonus accumulation fucks them over at an even greater rate than ranged specialists/spellcasters/troop leaders.

The melee specialist needs level appropriate defenses to remain viable. While my previous post talked about huge attack bonuses, that's only part of the picture. With only that, you obviously only gets glass cannons. Another landmark quality of melee heros is that they are too fucking stubborn, dumb or just hardcore to know they're dead, so they keep standing back to fight again. Again, boys' manga, superhero comics and action movies can't exist without these tropes, which go back to badass mythological and/or high fantasy heroes (from the top of my mind I remember that Balrogs had to dogpile Feanor to finally kill him).

If the high level hero is supposed to finally die over a huge pile of fallen enemies (or other suitably epic display of "oh shit, guy was hardcore"), then the rules should support that. They don't, currently. We know that a fighter "as is" is not even a challenging fight to ONE level appropriate foe after, say, level 7. As I understand, this shit started way back in the wargaming origins of D&D (where the fighting man seems to be directly ported from 'a soldier, like the other 79 in his company') with time, they kind of figured that that single soldier was supposed to be Conan and then King Arthur and then Hercules, but they never went about implementing it successfully.

D&D has suffered too long from a "you need to be a spellcaster this tall to play here" syndrom. Yet again, I think this has to do with its very origins, where the designers all played spellcasters and gave them the cool stuff while the fighting men subsisted on DM pity. This in turn may have poisoned a lot of derivative material, which in case of D&D, is pretty much everything else.

TL;DR; I'm saying that your assertion that melee fighters are "the easiest standard party archetype to counter", while undeniably true today, is something born from like 40 years of fapping too hard to Gandalf derivatives. And while the conclusion you arrives about that (the melee fighter is too poisoned to be salvageable) is perfectly valid, it's by no means the only one.

[Sashi]

TL;DR; I'm saying that your assertion that melee fighters are "the easiest standard party archetype to counter", while undeniably true today, is something born from like 40 years of fapping too hard to Gandalf derivatives. And while the conclusion you arrives about that (the melee fighter is too poisoned to be salvageable) is perfectly valid, it's by no means the only one.

No. The Melee Fighter is the easiest to counter because he is countered by movement. Things don't even need exotic movement modes like fly or burrow. They can just win through the magic of having a ranged attack and being faster (which isn't difficult, since fighters are expected to wear movement-restricting armor).

This is why chargers have so much more staying power than DMF's, hopping on a pegasus and doing a rideby attack actually lets you move faster than most creatures while still attacking.

Until the DMF gets some ability to turn off alternate movement modes bend the terrain into an American Gladiators style Joust Platform (which is basically what 4E did for everyone) the DMF is at a major disadvantage.

[nockermensch]

Except the whole point is that PaO requires a save, and Holy Word is bad because it is either useless or too strong, because of the no save aspect. (It's fine for evil outsiders, because it has a save.)

I had picked these two spells in particular because the Lich won't make his Fortitude save (unless we're using some reasonable house rule like giving Charisma to HPs / fort saves) and because Holy Word is usually put out together with some shenanigans for CL abuse to turn it into an automatic enemy destroyer. I was trying to point that arcane and divine magic have their win buttons already.

That is fundamentally different and worse than "Oh, the Wizard has PaO and Finger of Death, which will be the enemy if they fail their save, unless of course they have the shapechange subtype or are immune to death effects, in which case he has to pick the right one." or "This Balor doesn't have the Shapechange subtype or death effect immunity. So I guess he needs to make the save."

In one of those, all battles are a foregone conclusion (at least as far as fighter usefulness) whereas in the other, the Wizard doesn't auto win any fights, and doesn't auto sit out any fights.

Fighter fixes need to make the fighter have more things to do in a combat, and not make the one thing they do better.

Conversely, Wizard/Cleric fixes need to make them have less things to do in a combat, because currently they can do everything. Speaking of role protection, it's like the Tier 1 casters dominate the "I WIN D&D" niche already.

Of course that the ideal for a RPG is to have a collaborative effort. I don't want the fighter overshadowing the wizard anymore than I want the current situation. Ideally, both casters and non casters need to have level appropriate attacks and defenses so that both party and team monster can plan actual strategies and then make meaningful tactical decisions during combat time.

An ideal game would be the one in which every PC had about the same % of encounters where he's the MVP. And no, the caster sitting back so that the fighter can be the MVP in the inconsequential mook fight doesn't count. Everybody has to fight mooks and everybody needs to collaborate on boss fights.

[nockermensch]

No. The Melee Fighter is the easiest to counter because he is countered by movement. Things don't even need exotic movement modes like fly or burrow. They can just win through the magic of having a ranged attack and being faster (which isn't difficult, since fighters are expected to wear movement-restricting armor).

This is why chargers have so much more staying power than DMF's, hopping on a pegasus and doing a rideby attack actually lets you move faster than most creatures while still attacking.

Until the DMF gets some ability to turn off alternate movement modes bend the terrain into an American Gladiators style Joust Platform (which is basically what 4E did for everyone) the DMF is at a major disadvantage.

True that. The solutions for that aren't obvious. Even Kenpachi Flies and Dimension Doors (and Plane Shifts) like the other guys of his level.

We could give the fighter these higher movement modes at the right times, but then it'd be too animay.

We could give them some kind of "shout challenge" skill that made people charge at them.

We could give them enough HP regeneration that they can sit there all day being plinked and they still don't care. This wouldn't let them win all encounters, but would let they hold the position when that's what matters.

We could give them a bow, a bunch of javelins, Throw Stone like a giant of comparable strength.


This also ties to what I answered to Kaelik. D&D is supposed to be a collaborative game. I don't think the DMF needs to provide the solution for all problems, in exactly the same vein that I don't like when the spellcasters CAN provide the solution for all problems. If "providing movement solutions" still remains the province of spellcasters but the DMF is deadly enough that now is an excellent idea to send him against the flying dragon (instead of what happens today, where the wizard paradoxically has a better chance of doing the job himself), then that's fine for me, too.

I mean, the team effort should be always be the the best way to succeed. Ideally, against a level equivalent flying dragon, a DMF would be forced to pick a bow and fight at a fraction of his skill, he'd probably lose, or win at a great cost. Likewise, a lone wizard should be at pretty much the same predicament (because in his case the dragon would swoop in and grapple and no, Freedom of Movement is not an acceptable spell in its 3.X incarnation). By working on a team, covering each other's asses, the fighter and the wizard should have the dragon for dinner.

[Seerow]

The problem is "Movement solutions" is the heart of melee combat. I mean, at the core, melee combat is all about finding ways to get into melee and stay there. That means that a melee warrior needs ways to get into melee and stay there without relying on other party members, or he is failing at his job.

That means increased move speed, flight speed, burrow speed, swim speed, and even teleportation are things that the melee warrior should either get by default, or have a direct counter towards. Whether it's the ability to fly or throwing his hammer so hard he knocks the flying target to the ground and keeps him there, the melee warrior needs to counter flight. Whether it's "Within Xft of me, no teleporting" or the ability to teleport at will, the melee warrior needs a way to counter teleportation. And so on down the list. Because a melee warrior who lacks the capability to keep enemies within melee isn't a contributing party member.

[deaddmwalking]

In the fantasy heartbreaker I'm working on, everyone has a Caster Level, and everyone can access a small number of spells pretty easily. To learn a large number of spells, and to have the highest level spells, you'd do well to be a Wizard.

Essentially, the Warrior has 'real abilities' besides 'hit things with sword', but most of them are combat related. Some are defensive (ie, negate an attack - even a spell that targets you), some are offensive (stun/blind/other bad effect opponent when you hit them), etc. They also have full access to skills and can be as good at skills as any other class (I reject the paradigm that skill monkey is a protected role - everyone has access to combat and everyone has access to skills). The Warrior has to spend some resources to learn spells, which they can do easily at 3rd level, or at a bit of a premium beginning at 1st.

In several iterations of the playtest, we've found that Warriors largely feel like warriors, even if they decided to learn a handful of spells. Likewise, the rogue feels like a rogue, even if he's decided to learn invisibility. Essentially, spells are another 'skill' that anyone can learn - but casters learn more for free and they gain more 'spell slots'.

The discussion here has been helpful to me in terms of clarifying quite a lot of my thinking. It should be noted that the power-level of this game is decidedly lower than 3.5 - class levels go up to 12 - while classes start out a little more powerful than in 3.5 they scale pretty smoothly up to 12 (no major jump at 2nd level, for instance).

So my question is, if spells are something that anyone can learn if they spend resources to do so, just like anyone can learn to track or climb, do you think it's possible to have a 'mundane fighter' that actually casts spells? Or at least COULD. Most Fighters tend to eschew them so far (in a very limited playtest) because they're having more fun hitting things in satisfying ways (special attacks, and such)...

[Seerow]

So my question is, if spells are something that anyone can learn if they spend resources to do so, just like anyone can learn to track or climb, do you think it's possible to have a 'mundane fighter' that actually casts spells?

I'm pretty sure once the Fighter starts casting spells, he's no longer considered "mundane" so your question is a moot point.

[DSMatticus]

Ideally, against a level equivalent flying dragon, a DMF would be forced to pick a bow and fight at a fraction of his skill, he'd probably lose, or win at a great cost. Likewise, a lone wizard should be at pretty much the same predicament (because in his case the dragon would swoop in and grapple and no, Freedom of Movement is not an acceptable spell in its 3.X incarnation). By working on a team, covering each other's asses, the fighter and the wizard should have the dragon for dinner.

I do not think playing football using the D&D fighter as the football is fun. It isn't fun for the fighter, who gets to feel like a helpless tool while the rest of the party carries him to the end zone, and it isn't fun for the casters, who instead of getting to fight the monster themself have to shove this legless dumbass with a freakishly strong arm around until he can cut the dragon to pieces.

Making the fighter depend on casters for mobility buffs is bad, and making the wizard depend on fighters in order to be able to deal with enemies is bad. Synergy is a wonderful part of tactical games and it should be supported. Jigsaw puzzle style teamplay where everyone has to fit together in order to be useful at all is a terrible idea. Two fighters should have a chance against level appropriate opposition. Two wizards should have a chance against level appropriate opposition. A wizard and a fighter should have a chance against level appropriate opposition.

Wizards and clerics should have options that support fighters (healing, buffing). And fighters should have options that support their wizard and cleric buddies (defensive tanky abilities, taking hits, blocking opponents). But ultimately, everyone needs to be self-sufficient in their given role. And the role a level 10+ melee fighter has is "getting into and staying within melee range of creatures with wings and sometimes at-will teleport." If a fighter can't actually do that, he's at best the football everyone has to lug around to score. At worst, he's the pawn hanging out with the rook, bishop, and knight and everyone is afraid to tell him he doesn't actually matter.

[Kaelik]

I had picked these two spells in particular because the Lich won't make his Fortitude save (unless we're using some reasonable house rule like giving Charisma to HPs / fort saves) and because Holy Word is usually put out together with some shenanigans for CL abuse to turn it into an automatic enemy destroyer. I was trying to point that arcane and divine magic have their win buttons already.

1) You underestimate saves. 2) The point is that those abilities (well, the one that actually works on everyone, instead of just on one type of enemy) are bad for the game for the exact reason that Frank is describing would be the problem with fighters.

No one likes Holy Word precisely because if you don't have Silence or the right alignment, you fucking die, and that's fucking shit. It's a problem that Clerics have that exactly like it's a problem with the Fighter if he can instant murder.

Conversely, Wizard/Cleric fixes need to make them have less things to do in a combat, because currently they can do everything.

No, them having too many things to do is not a fucking problem. Them having one thing that is too good is the problem.

A Wizard that memorizes Black Tentacles, Orb of Fire, Glitterdust, Control Winds, Wall of Stone is fundamentally not a problem for the game.

A Wizard that memorizes A weirdly metaed Orb of Fire that does over 600 untyped damage X5 is fundamentally a huge fucking problem for the game, because if you don't have Ray Deflection or an absurd touch AC, you insta die.

The fix needs to be removing the stupid shit that either always works or never works, and not giving the fighter the ability to always work unless chaffed.

(Unless you want a game that is 100% about counters, but that's bad, because PCs aren't going to be able to counter everything, so what it comes down to, is the beat all the monsters until they all fucking die.)

the Tier 1 casters

Shut up and go away.

[Midnight_v]

A bit of dialogue from the home front.
A few seconds ago, my brother walks in...

Molochio: Ah, brother, what do the people have to say today?
MV: You know the never ending battle...
Mlo: What, the fighter can't have nice things? (Lol)
MV: Well, yeah. . . *grumble*
Mlo: You know, I've not been on the boards very much, but honestly I've given the things I read there quite a bit of thought. You know people can't conceptualize "The fighter" really.
MV: Well, NO SH--
Mlo: Listen, the thing is that for MANY people the fighter can't have "nice things" because then he's technically not a fighter anymore. The second he does something like teleport or starts shooting back, he's not a fighter to many people. You're not "slugging it out" or "fighting" as nebulous as that may sound you'll likely run into LOTs of that. Here's the deal: "The second you put Captain America in an Iron Man suit, he's not captain america anymore*, he's an Iron man. Thusly, no longer a fighter because he now has "nice things".
MV: Well... what about thor?
Mlo: Thor's a God.
MV: Right but what does he do?
Mlo: "Mighty Punish" (SfvCapcom's thor attack)
Mv: Seriously, thor is a fighter. I mean mythologically, he was an Aesir, but really his whole "nice things" powerset come from Mjolnir, Menginjora, and Jarngreipr... I'm not even sure he ever called down the lightning in a single story ever, thats more zeus. If we're talking Marvel ...
well here's the hammer: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mjolnir_(c ... _abilities
In the ultimate comics... Sometime thor is straight up wearing some tech suit, but a HUGE amount of power that thor is weilding come from his gear.

MV: People been modeling the high level thor as a fighter forever, anyway, maybe we can write the fighter as a class that actually, pours his soul into his weapon and it levels with him providing him "Nice things" without making him "Anime", and letting his primary thing be:
"This is my Greataxe, there are many like it bu this one is mine..."
Mlo:... maybe, but, keep in mind people are going to find what you're doing unsatisfying on the internet no matter what you do. Its just numbers.
Mv: well I'll present the idea.

So... there you go, the fighters weapons gain XP when he fights with them, as does his armors, bit by bit. This is represented by a pool of nice things that do the same shit that mjolnir, menginjora, and jarngriepr could do. Though instead of getting shitty static bonuses like the Belt of Giants strength, and gauntlets of ogre power... you get:
Nice things
Choose your "Nice things" bonus from a pool of nice things that come on at a level appropriate level.
This is not complex or new, you now staple nice things onto what ever the hell you build and put the name "Fighter" on. Tome, Warblade, or phb fighter. You get whatever that class gets at level 1 and a weapon with a nice thing, aprorpo to level 1. You never stop getting to chose these things as you level, and make sure that we do the smart thing like mtg, and ensure that you can never use them to circumvent "cost".
Longwinded I know but... "thoughts"?

[nockermensch]

@ Seerow, DSMatticus Re: Lack of advanced movement options for the fighter

You're right. A well designed DMF class needs movement options compatible with the level appropriate opposition, probably a mix of enhancement movement modes and ruining the opposition advantage (a long range touch attack that cancels flight/teleport, or something like that)

---

@ DSMatticus Re: Collaboration

You're right that a party of only fighters should be able to compete just as a party of only casters can do, right now. My vision, however, is that an iconic party with mixed roles should be the ideal, and their synergies should work better. (meaning: two fighters working alone = two wizards working alone << two fighters working together = two wizards working together <= a fighter and a wizard working together)

---

@ Kaelik Re: NO U.

I wasn't aware that the Den hated the Tier theory. In retrospect, it's kind of obvious.

I get that you hate win buttons, and I agree. Your "wizard that's not a problem to the game" got spells intended for team playing. The wizard with the weird metamagic orbs is intending to solo boss encounters and that is a shitty mindset. Of course, if the casters aren't playing with win buttons in your game, then the fighter also doesn't need them.

However, I still take offense with how many things a spellcaster does in D&D. The wizard and the cleric have toolboxes right now that allows them to fill a "Solve Problems" niche that's just too general. Travel? Managing difficult terrain? Investigation? Exploration? Mook Fights? Boss Fights? Countermeasures? All covered with spells already. With classes like this existing, any other classes will necessarily feel small in the pants.

Unless your idea for a good game is one where every class is filling the "Problem Solver" niche, and the differences are in flavor only. So the wizard would be the guy who can do basically everything with arcane spells, the cleric with divine spells and the fighter with, uh, maneuvers, whatever. Wouldn't this kind of game end up producing the same "but all the classes feel the same!" complaint 4E caused?

[Kaelik]

However, I still take offense with how many things a spellcaster does in D&D. The wizard and the cleric have toolboxes right now that allows them to fill a "Solve Problems" niche that's just too general. Travel? Managing difficult terrain? Investigation? Exploration? Mook Fights? Boss Fights? Countermeasures? All covered with spells already. With classes like this existing, any other classes will necessarily feel small in the pants.

Nope. They are subject to the limit that they can only have X spells prepared a day, and when they prepare 1 Black Tentacles, and then face two encounters where it would be the best, they can only cast it once.

Yes, they get access to everything, but they don't get access to everything at once, and that's a big difference. There is no reason for a Storm Lord to feel bad in a party with a Wizard, or a SnowSoul, or a Force Potentate.

People with cool shit that stays constant but is generally applicable don't complain about Wizards having a lot of cool things they could theoretically do, because in practice, on any given day they will both be awesome.

The people that complain are shitty classes with nothing, like the fighter. And fuck those guys.

[Stubbazubba]

@MV: Mjolnir as a class feature? So, kind of like the Tome Samurai but with a lot more horizontal expansion for your weapon which lets you lightning other guys x times/day or cast Fly on yourself or group x times/day or cast Scrying x times/day, etc., and still be a Fighter? So, kind of taking the DM pity magic items and incorporating them into the fundamental assumptions of the class? I mean that in a good way. Because that would work fairly well. Wizards would still do everything better, if you're just going to make a class, so it's not a fix for Fighters as-is. But in a theoretical new game, which addresses spellcasters' omni-competence, that might be an interesting path to take the fighter down. People will ask why everyone can't just do that, then, and the answer is that only a warrior, devoted to the art of combat, can bond his soul to his enchanted/ancestral weapon and unlock its wrathful powers. Also, the same reason that only a Barbarian can rage. Get over it.

[Lago PARANOIA]

People with cool shit that stays constant but is generally applicable don't complain about Wizards having a lot of cool things they could theoretically do, because in practice, on any given day they will both be awesome.

You had a great thread several years ago where you made a very keen argument that thematic protection is more important than role protection once you get people contributing at around the same amount. I wish I could find it again. Fucking search engines.

[Previn]

So like a working Weapons of Legacy? People would totally get behind that.

[violence in the media]

@ DSMatticus Re: Collaboration

You're right that a party of only fighters should be able to compete just as a party of only casters can do, right now. My vision, however, is that an iconic party with mixed roles should be the ideal, and their synergies should work better. (meaning: two fighters working alone = two wizards working alone << two fighters working together = two wizards working together <= a fighter and a wizard working together)

I disagree with this, just because I don't want the classic party to be encouraged or enforced. This is evocative of the old situation where the new guy got stuck with the heal-bot because all the interesting classes were taken. If the community generally decides that bards (or whatever) suck, I don't want to be compelled to bring one along just because it is the most synergistically sensible choice.

I agree that different party compositions should tackle challenges in different ways, but I really don't want there to be One True Way to successful adventuring.

[Red_Rob]

Yes, they get access to everything, but they don't get access to everything at once, and that's a big difference. There is no reason for a Storm Lord to feel bad in a party with a Wizard, or a SnowSoul, or a Force Potentate.

People with cool shit that stays constant but is generally applicable don't complain about Wizards having a lot of cool things they could theoretically do, because in practice, on any given day they will both be awesome.

Imagine there are four classes in a game: A, B, C and X. Class X can choose each morning to be either class A, B or C. Is class X good for the game? Is it balanced with the other classes?

[Kaelik]

Yes, they get access to everything, but they don't get access to everything at once, and that's a big difference. There is no reason for a Storm Lord to feel bad in a party with a Wizard, or a SnowSoul, or a Force Potentate.

People with cool shit that stays constant but is generally applicable don't complain about Wizards having a lot of cool things they could theoretically do, because in practice, on any given day they will both be awesome.

Imagine there are four classes in a game: A, B, C and X. Class X can choose each morning to be either class A, B or C. Is class X good for the game? Is it balanced with the other classes?

Which is why the Wizard cannot choose to be a Storm Lord/Force Potentate/SnowSoul.

Your argument would be relevant if it could.

That is why the Wizard can't be a snowmage as well as a snow mage, a stormmage as well as a stormmage, ect.

You make the classes so that the fact the Wizard can mixnmatch allows him to be relevant by synergizing his not as good icemagic with his not as good forcemagic to get something as good as the forcemage who is a better forcemage and the snowmage who is a better snowmage.

No one has ever advocated that some classes should have exactly as many spells per day as a Wizard, but only be able to choose spells off the Wizard list with descriptor X.

People advocate classes that have shit the Wizard cannot have, or they have shit the Wizard can have at will or for actually level appropriate damage, or both.

[Midnight_v]

@MV: Mjolnir as a class feature? So, kind of like the Tome Samurai but with a lot more horizontal expansion for your weapon which lets you lightning other guys x times/day or cast Fly on yourself or group x times/day or cast Scrying x times/day, etc., and still be a Fighter? So, kind of taking the DM pity magic items and incorporating them into the fundamental assumptions of the class? I mean that in a good way. Because that would work fairly well. Wizards would still do everything better, if you're just going to make a class, so it's not a fix for Fighters as-is. But in a theoretical new game, which addresses spellcasters' omni-competence, that might be an interesting path to take the fighter down. People will ask why everyone can't just do that, then, and the answer is that only a warrior, devoted to the art of combat, can bond his soul to his enchanted/ancestral weapon and unlock its wrathful powers. Also, the same reason that only a Barbarian can rage. Get over it.

Yes, exactly like that...

So like a working Weapons of Legacy? People would totally get behind that.

I honestly never took the time to familiarize myself with the book, but I went and gave it a glance, and yeah you pretty much hit it on the head. I'm not sure why that product was so bad, but I trust that everyone was right and it didn't so if we could get a working version it'd be great.

Finally all that "shotgun writing" is starting to pay off, I guess. I originally conceptualized this as the "Soldier" class from the other thread not to long ago. Though it works fine as fighter.

The theory of it works "BEST" if used in some new system, I admit... but I don't think i'd be impossible to adhoc it into regular D&D. Since as is mentioned many times, that's what's been going on all along, we can codifiy it and make it actually "Good" and "Relavant".

I wanted to stress that in my head the class can do this with pieces like a revolving battle rainment, "Hammer, Girdle, Iron Gloves, but I realized what I really want to say is "No you can't take the toy".
Its not a spell book, so that fuckery where they steal the fighters weapon in the night doesn't straight up doesn't work. The thing where they sunder or disentegrate/shatter/Magic it out of th picture can't work either.
It's a "mjolnir" so most people can't even pick it up much less fuck it off.
Forgive me, now I'm musing again....

Really though this is the point of the thread in some ways, finding non-offensive/intrusive methods to give the fighter "spells".