How do we get rid of the Fighter

[zugschef]

comparing crpgs to ttrpgs? srzly?

[Avoraciopoctules]

They are "a source material that gives you level 11+ Fighters". They're even level 11 D&D fighters. What's the problem?

[John Magnum]

Heck, why not go all the way and point out how D&D 4e is source material that gives you level 30 Fighters?

[sabs]

So..
You think that the right way to balance fighters, is to have more creatures that are immune to magic? So basically, for the fighter to be relavent, we have to say Fuck You to all the other classes in the game?

[Avoraciopoctules]

No. I think that there is source material where level 11 fighters exist, and have a meaningful impact on the game. That is the only point I want to make.

[Kaelik]

No. I think that there is source material where level 11 fighters exist, and have a meaningful impact on the game. That is the only point I want to make.

Implicit in all source material arguments (which are all stupid) is "source material worth replicating."

For your point to apply at all, you have to believe that the part of the game where the Wizard characters stand in the corner doing nothing is a good thing to replicate in a cooperative TTRPG.

It is not, because 1) You control all the characters in the game. 2) Computers do the fightery math part much faster, thus drastically reducing the time the Wizard stands in a corner.

[Avoraciopoctules]

Some people use computer programs to streamline their games.

Wizards can do plenty of stuff in the source material I referenced. You can summon blockers, buff direct combatants, wipe out magic-vulnerable types the beholders are using as ablative armor.

Some people are directly inspired to play tabletop RPGs by videogames, and they will be the primary source material these groups seek to emulate.

[Kaelik]

Some people use computer programs to streamline their games.

Which do not do enough for that to be okay.

Wizards can do plenty of stuff in the source material I referenced. You can summon blockers, buff direct combatants, wipe out magic-vulnerable types the beholders are using as ablative armor.

And the question is, is being the Fighters bitch monkey as fun as playing the game? And the answer is no. So you don't make 90% of the monsters including all the important ones into Golems because that shit is crap for the people playing the game as anything but the fighter.

Some people are directly inspired to play tabletop RPGs by videogames, and they will be the primary source material these groups seek to emulate.

Some people are directly inspired by books. That doesn't mean we should give their characters a class ability that allows them to make everyone else in the party their sidekicks. Things that make one person have fun at the expense of others are not okay in TTRPGs. They are okay when only one person is engaging with the material. That is the bottom line. Any suggestion to make one person have fun by shooting another person in the balls is rejected immediately.

[Avoraciopoctules]

Getting sidelined for a fight can certainly feel lame, Kaelik, that's a valid point. However, there are gamers willing to play in games like that. Keeping with the example of D&D computer games, people are still playing Neverwinter Nights multiplayer campaigns.

Here, you have encounters that can feature monsters resistant to most spell-based attacks. And resting to regain spells takes real-life time (though its only a couple minutes, people can do meaningful stuff in that time, and you need to be out of combat to rest in the first place.) Wizards are valuable as support casters, but there are many situations where a fighter would be more of an asset to the group.

People play in these games. And they might quite conceivably take inspiration from them if they are designing tabletop RPGs. So my point remains, and there is source material out there with level 11+ fighters that people might use.

[nockermensch]

Any suggestion to make one person have fun by shooting another person in the balls is rejected immediately.

Thanks for helping me to see the light, Kaelik. I'll be removing DR, etherealness and flight from my games because shit like this immensely ruins the enjoyment some people derive from the game.

[Drolyt]

Getting sidelined for a fight can certainly feel lame, Kaelik, that's a valid point. However, there are gamers willing to play in games like that. Keeping with the example of D&D computer games, people are still playing Neverwinter Nights multiplayer campaigns.

Here, you have encounters that can feature monsters resistant to most spell-based attacks. And resting to regain spells takes real-life time (though its only a couple minutes, people can do meaningful stuff in that time, and you need to be out of combat to rest in the first place.) Wizards are valuable as support casters, but there are many situations where a fighter would be more of an asset to the group.

People play in these games. And they might quite conceivably take inspiration from them if they are designing tabletop RPGs. So my point remains, and there is source material out there with level 11+ fighters that people might use.

I agree there is source material for level 11+ fighters, but I cannot emphasis enough how not okay it is for certain characters to be sidelined for an encounter, for two reasons. First, combat takes significant real world time in most TTRGPs. A single magic immune monster can keep a player from contributing for a half hour or more of real time and that is bad. Second, TTRGPs are much more social than any CRPG. TTRPGs are supposed to be cooperative, and that doesn't work unless the characters are working together. Now, there might be occasional puzzle monsters that make a certain characters shtick less effective, but they should still be able to contribute somehow, and that really shouldn't be used as a balancing factor.

[Kaelik]

People play in these games. And they might quite conceivably take inspiration from them if they are designing tabletop RPGs. So my point remains, and there is source material out there with level 11+ fighters that people might use.

The existence of computer games where people sit out for a very short amount of time does not mean we should emulate that source material in a TTRPG.

Either balls up and say "I think we should emulate the system where people sit out large parts of the game" or shut the fuck up about how the source material exists.

Of course the source material exists. 2e D&D operated on that premise. And it was shit, and that is one of the reasons people like 3e more. So either stop talking about the source material for X or say you want to emulate the source material.

There is source material for shitting in peoples mouths. That doesn't mean we should emulate it in a TTRPG unless it would make the game more fun.

[Avoraciopoctules]

Getting sidelined for a fight can certainly feel lame, Kaelik, that's a valid point. However, there are gamers willing to play in games like that. Keeping with the example of D&D computer games, people are still playing Neverwinter Nights multiplayer campaigns.

Here, you have encounters that can feature monsters resistant to most spell-based attacks. And resting to regain spells takes real-life time (though its only a couple minutes, people can do meaningful stuff in that time, and you need to be out of combat to rest in the first place.) Wizards are valuable as support casters, but there are many situations where a fighter would be more of an asset to the group.

People play in these games. And they might quite conceivably take inspiration from them if they are designing tabletop RPGs. So my point remains, and there is source material out there with level 11+ fighters that people might use.

I agree there is source material for level 11+ fighters, but I cannot emphasis enough how not okay it is for certain characters to be sidelined for an encounter, for two reasons. First, combat takes significant real world time in most TTRGPs. A single magic immune monster can keep a player from contributing for a half hour or more of real time and that is bad. Second, TTRGPs are much more social than any CRPG. TTRPGs are supposed to be cooperative, and that doesn't work unless the characters are working together. Now, there might be occasional puzzle monsters that make a certain characters shtick less effective, but they should still be able to contribute somehow, and that really shouldn't be used as a balancing factor.

Okay, I can definitely agree that the time consumed by encounters is a major issue here. If a battle where someone cannot contribute effectively takes half an hour of real time, that is really lame.

However, if you want to foster cooperation, isn't a paradigm where sometimes the players will perform optimally if they focus on boosting another team member's effectiveness a good thing? If I roll up to Mephistopheles Castle and realize that I'd do better by using magic walls to hold off the devil army while the guys with the swords turn the devil king into cube steak, I still contributed, even though the boss was immune to all my good debuffs and took half damage from my blasting spells.

[nockermensch]

However, if you want to foster cooperation, isn't a paradigm where sometimes the players will perform optimally if they focus on boosting another team member's effectiveness a good thing? If I roll up to Mephistopheles Castle and realize that I'd do better by using magic walls to hold off the devil army while the guys with the swords turn the devil king into cube steak, I still contributed, even though the boss was immune to all my good debuffs and took half damage from my blasting spells.

If there are situations that can only be solved with magic, that's good game design.

If there are situations that can only be solved by attacking with weapons, that's shitty game design.

Learn the difference, it could save your life!

[Avoraciopoctules]

Could you expand on your point a little, nockermensch? I'm not sure I understand.

From my perspective it is totally rad when the party sniper takes out Dagolar's teleporting lieutenant with arrows after he mocks them with his multilayered spell mantle. It means you don't have to deal with stripping away his magical defenses using dispels or keep chasing him around the dungeon until he runs out of spells and hides in the final room with his squishy psionicist boss.

[Mistborn]

If there are situations that can only be solved with magic, that's good game design.

If there are situations that can only be solved by attacking with weapons, that's shitty game design.

Learn the difference, it could save your life!

This sort of thinking is reason A that the fighter needs to stop existing. Swording thing is straight up not enough to carry a high level character in a world with.

• Monsters that are immune to swords and arrows because they are an uncountable number of bees or something and literally ignore anything that isn't an AoE.
• Monsters that are immune to swords and arrows because they are not solid.
• Monsters that are effectively or actually immune to swords and arrows unless they fulfill some arbitrary criteria like "being silver" or "being lawfully aligned".
• Monsters that are immune to swords and arrows because they are on another plane of existence.
• Monsters that are immune to swords and arrows because they are under water or ground.
• Monsters that are effectively immune to swords and arrows because they are only modestly slowed down by death (body jumpers, reforming vampires, and so on).
• Monsters that are immune to swords and arrows because you fight them in a completely different context like dream worlds or magic chess matches or psionic conflict.

D&D Casters are almost guaranteed to have the conceptual tools to deal with that sort of shit by the sheer breath and depth of their ablity lists. Fuck conceptually they shouldn't blink at facing down monsters with magic immunity if they have half a brain.

[nockermensch]

Could you expand on your point a little, nockermensch? I'm not sure I understand.

From my perspective it is totally rad when the party sniper takes out Dagolar's teleporting lieutenant with arrows after he mocks them with his multilayered spell mantle. It means you don't have to deal with stripping away his magical defenses using dispels or keep chasing him around the dungeon until he runs out of spells and hides in the final room with his squishy psionicist boss.

This is a beginner's mistake to make. See, it's not "rad" because the party sniper is shitting on the game's soul by not playing a character with a power source. If you didn't have a warm mother-like GM coddling you, the lieutenant would have a "Fuck You" AC score.

Now go suck a barrel of cocks.

[sabs]

*cough*

Yes, if only there was some way to protect yourself from arrows, by 4th level, in D&D.

[Kaelik]

See this. Here is a thread about trying to incorporate the magic needed to be a high level character onto a fighter frame, and while I personally hate the Elothar version of trying that, is at least an attempt.

An attempt that is derailed by one asshole saying "No, Swording only" and another asshole who thinks it the answer is swording only whining sarcastically.

Thank you for proving the point that any time someone wants to make a fighter actually live up to the standards set, you have to jump in and try to sabotage it nockermensch and Avi.

[nockermensch]

See this. Here is a thread about trying to incorporate the magic needed to be a high level character onto a fighter frame, and while I personally hate the Elothar version of trying that, is at least an attempt.

An attempt that is derailed by one asshole saying "No, Swording only" and another asshole who thinks it the answer is swording only whining sarcastically.

Thank you for proving the point that any time someone wants to make a fighter actually live up to the standards set, you have to jump in and try to sabotage it nockermensch and Avi.

By this point, Kaelik will Super Ignore me.

EDIT:

*cough*

Yes, if only there was some way to protect yourself from arrows, by 4th level, in D&D.

Please. We're talking about magical grown-up arrows here.

[Drolyt]

However, if you want to foster cooperation, isn't a paradigm where sometimes the players will perform optimally if they focus on boosting another team member's effectiveness a good thing?

Sure, so long as it is only sometimes. However in the examples given that isn't what is happening. In those cases the only reason fighters contribute is because most enemies are immune to magic. That is terrible. But forcing spellcasters to change tactics occasionally and/or rely on other party members? That's fine, it just can't happen all the time.

*cough*

Yes, if only there was some way to protect yourself from arrows, by 4th level, in D&D.

Right. Because a 4th level archer won't have a +1 bow.

[Midnight_v]

lunatic assholes like nocker and Midnight whining about how the fighter must stay

Go blow a strawman full of dicks. That's not my fucking position at all.
Frank, retorted to what my basic argument was which is its been 2-7 years of people wanting to change that shit. Its still here, all this bitching doesn't get rid of the fighter. It has too much traction with too many people.
That may be wrong.... but for every Kaelik, and Lago, and Myst, there seem to be 100 *grogs saying "fuck no".

Not that I particularly care, but to me it's a bunch of silly shit, but my position is that all this rage you guys have against the fighter is a waste of fucking time. I'd be really fucking impressed if you can start this shit anywhere but he den and get 15 posts out of 100 that agree with "us", from powersourcing to erasing the fighter, you first have to mount an argument to people OTHER THAN US, on the internet, or maybe at a gaming convention that 1) there's a problem. 2) they should give shits about said problem if only a few people noticed.

*I"m not one of those fucking people.
I was the guy who got lambasted for saying "give them a goddamned artifact weapon as a class feature" or basically, as is in the tome...

Named Blade At Level 6, you get a sorcerer companion, 2 levels lower than you who travels with you and cast spells on your behalf, with its own actions.
This sorcerers name is "Mjolnir", "Stormbringer", "Sou'unga", Khazid'hea, Ful-grim, or even souledge (pick your own). This weapon has the "cursed" enchantment and thus can be willed to your hand as a swift action, and has an enhancement bonus = 1/3 char level.
This weapon possesses all construct traits, and will follow your orders, as well as act independently in it's owners interest should the need arise
If your "Named Blade" is ever destroyed you can designate another named blade with a ritual that takes 24 hours. ... levels up when you do. etc.

That what I was trying to get at with the whole "Midnight_v's drunk posting" again shit started.

Which isn't a shit idea, its what's been happening all along, but the fact that some people don't want that shit printed in the class itself offends me. Though I recognize that it is apparently true.
I've never been and advocate of: Leonidas vs Galactus. That's not what I've been arguing... ever.

[Kaelik]

lunatic assholes like nocker and Midnight whining about how the fighter must stay

Go blow a strawman full of dicks. That's not my fucking position at all.

...

[M]y position is that all this rage you guys have against the fighter is a waste of fucking time.

So your position isn't that we shouldn't get rid of the fighter, it is that we shouldn't get rid of the fighter because some other people who are not you will cry.

Guess what, that is still the position being ascribed to you. You are saying don't do X. Now, your reason is definitely stupid, but no matter what the reason you are advocating for not X (and attempting to sabotage X anytime someone else tries to do it), the statement that you oppose X is still accurate.

[Midnight_v]

My position is "I don't think you can" which is often followed by "eat baboon, ass Kaelik" because you seem to have a listening problem, in addition to being an asshole. So not people, just you.
Basically, you're a loudmouth who I never see put forth any actual solutions. A critic. You can't even get people who are on the same page about the fighter to agree on something, because you're such a fucking blowhard.
Now, frank did post some relevant shit about the people in charge of D&D got the jobs and when you see how pathfinder came to power... hell maybe "we" collectively CAN do something push "SOMETHING" on some devs someday, but when you start talking about "How to get rid of the fighter" you have to have things like ... "an alternative" that works better.

Since the vast majority of D&D game start at low level, and reach "Mid-levels", (and to be sure thats judging off available data but still) most people don't know there's a problem.
ugh. ... fuck. Its just such a waste.

All the bullshit between you and I aside... 4th edition already did the power sourcing past X level thing. So, it's not like the shits unheard of...
but where the hell are you even trying to get rid of the fighter "FROM"?
D&D? Over and over again people keep saying its a "Decidedly low-level concept" so... people are playing it at low levels. Now, unless there's some reason you're forced to play with someone who insists on playing as: LUKE CAGE or Colossus in your "Galactus is coming" campaign. What the fuck is the point of all this wankery?

Finally, its a tired litany, but neither you nor, lago, nor mystborn, seem to producing anything for any game that supports the situation.
Its just endless critique that does little good to anyone.

[Mistborn]

Finally, its a tired litany, but neither you nor, lago, nor mystborn, seem to producing anything for any game that supports the situation.
Its just endless critique that does little good to anyone.

Eat a dick. The idea that we can't change things by arguing on the internet is a fallacy. Like Frank said the entire reason "Fighter<Wizard" is acknowledged as a thing is because their were arguments on the internet, arguments that were decisively won. What we want is to have the same thing happen for "mundane sword-guy can't be viable for all 20 levels". Now how do we make that happen? Answer that motherfucker, otherwise GTFO.