D&D 5E The Fighter/Martial Problem (In Depth Ponderings)

CreamCloud0 said:

is there any reason why it has to be divine magic? sure it might be power from the gods or belief but why does it have to take the form of magic specifically?

Click to expand...

It doesn't. But either it takes that form or not.

Crimson Longinus said:

I really don't like duplicate classes that represent the same concept, even if they did it differently. To me that is thematically confused. Either paladins in this setting are just nutters, or they gain actual divine magic. Pick one.

Furthermore, I don't think "zealous fighter" is nearly enough for basing an entire class around it. Subclass perhaps, though it mostly seems just like a personality quirk.

Click to expand...

5e already passed that point.

Embrace the mechanical!

Minigiant said:

5e already passed that point.

Embrace the mechanical!

Click to expand...

No thanks. If we are not using classes to evoke thematic archetypes then I have no use for a class system.

MuhVerisimilitude said:

That's exactly what I'm saying. I'm saying that you could actively take away class features and options from the fighter and it would still be popular. You could make it the objectively worst class in the game, and it would still be popular just like it was still popular when it much better balanced (in 4E).

Click to expand...

Yet another meaningless strawman with no basis in fact. On the other hand we do have some facts. People don't play what they don't enjoy. They may try it once or twice but they aren't going to be repeat customers. Fighters are the most popular class which would not happen if people tried them and disliked them.

Therefore all evidence we have indicates that people enjoy playing fighters and play them more than once. If they didn't they couldn't sustain popularity. I know I enjoy playing fighters, the people I actually play with enjoy them.

MuhVerisimilitude said:

The popularity of the class has nothing to do with whether or not the class is balanced. This is exactly why you cannot say that the class is well designed in terms of balance as is, because people will play it no matter what.

Click to expand...

Whether people give a furry rat's ass about so-called balance is beside the point. People have plenty of options yet they choose to play fighters over every other class. For what it's worth, fighters in every game I've ever played contributed just as much as every other class, they just have a slightly different role than wizards. Thank goodness for that last bit, I like having the options.

It's one thing to say "I don't like X". It's another thing to claim "Nobody really likes X, or wouldn't if they weren't so ignorant, because I don't like X. It's bad design because I say so and other people's opinions are just wrong." Which is why I have an issue with this never-ending argument. A handful of people don't like fighters. That's to be expected, nothing can work for everyone. It's the repeated excuses made to support an opinion that is contraindicated by the data that we do have. So there have to be more excuses why the data is misleading. It never ends.

Don't like fighters? Don't play them or find some 3PP alternative. Maybe, just maybe, accept that other people have different preferences and that a lot of people both old and new players actually like playing the class.

Minigiant said:

Zeal. The nonmagical paladin... is crazy. Their religious fervor lets them tap into their body's full potential, breaking the limits the brain pus on muscle.

Sorta like the monk but less discipline and more "So lawful stupid you are unstoppable".
Probably going back to the old mechanics where the avenger had to target certain enemies in order, except you choose the order and you get bonuses if you stick to those targets.

This is a system where Rage isn't barbarian exclusive. 3 martial classes would have rage but use them in different ways.

Click to expand...

Sounds like a vengeance paladin to me. Or a personality trait. Neither of which need a new class.

Crimson Longinus said:

No thanks. If we are not using classes to evoke thematic archetypes then I have no use for a class system.

Click to expand...

That's okay if the community wasn't biased as heck.

Guy 1: I have an new idea for a martial class.
Community: It's similar to the fighter, barbarian, or monk in some way. Class bloat. We don't need it.

Guy 2: I have an new idea for a full spellcaster.
Community: It's like the necromancer. Print it. I want.

Guy 3: I have an new idea for a warrior who goes magic that's already in the game.
Community:

In 2035, there will be 50 types of magical fighter subclasses in D&D.

CreamCloud0 said:

is there any reason why it has to be divine magic? sure it might be power from the gods or belief but why does it have to take the form of magic specifically?

Click to expand...

Depends on whether or not your issue is with spells, or supernatural power.

Micah Sweet said:

Depends on whether or not your issue is with spells, or supernatural power.

Click to expand...

While the paladin spells are labeled divine, they are gained through the paladin's conviction to their oath not directly granted by the gods.

Minigiant said:

Religious fervor literally can overcome biology.

Click to expand...

I don't really think that is true. It is what the crusaders said before the battle of Hattin when their faith was supposed to overcome their need for water. It turned out disasterous for them.

ECMO3 said:

I don't really think that is true. It is what the crusaders said before the battle of Hattin when their faith was supposed to overcome their need for water. It was disasterous for them.

Click to expand...

Meditation can change your body temperature, but most physical limitations are there for a reason. Doesn't matter if you can temporarily increase strength if you rip tendons and break bones.