They also said that exit wounds can have benefits, though they didn’t get into it nearly enough. I’m imagining that two wounds, especially on opposite side of a person, are going to be a lot harder to deal with and the increase blood loss potential while also distracting anyone trying to help them has a lot of benefits.
Also I say benefits, but yuck.
Open-eneded because in comparison to something like a Warlock you’re simply handed a guy who hits real good and in comparison to a ranger there are no weapon specific stereotypes. You can be pretty much anything you want and there isn’t much distraction in the flavour text, even. Now, I personally don’t pay much heed to flavour text and roleplay things however the hell I want but I do know a lot of people get bogged down by the idea that rogues need to be theives and paladins need to be good and that 95% of the community still doesn’t know what “lawful” means and they should really change the word to “principled” to square that away.
The reason I said “stricter framework” was in response your comment where it seemed as though you were saying that the 5e fighter required creativity to make it fun and I assumed that meant that what you wanted was for other systems to lay things out for you a little more. I assumed that because nothing I was suggesting required building your own class and mechanics, it was all just fairly high-level rules found in the books(minus the Eldritch Knight, I thought I’d seen it elsewhere).
Oddly enough, though, the fighter in PF2e, I would imagine, requires much more thinking since much of its power appears to come from feats that you need to choose at every level. I love that idea, and technically you can do a similar thing in 5e with the optional feat rule, but I’m struggling to figure out where you’re coming from saying that it’s easier or that dedications are safe from bad choices. I don’t find it as daunting as an experienced player but it’s certainly a lot more opportunity to accidentally build poorly. Also 5e multiclassing really is not that difficult, though there are small details that I think should be ironed out(maybe there were in 2024, I don’t know at this moment).
End of the day, 5e Fighter may be a bit of a blank slate but that’s precisely why I love them. They aren’t at all boring if you bring your creativity and roleplay skills to them and that also depends on what kind of game you want to play. I also play a Warlock now that I’ve made fairly unique and love the amount I can do with him so it’s not like I’m scared of classes with more complexity to offer, either, I just see the value in all of them and play to their strengths and weaknesses appropriately.
I’m aware of what I said, but the other point I made is that fighters are not the boring easy class everyone makes them out to be. They are very open-ended and that can be a lot for people but it’s not a sign that they’re bad. They also have the echo knight and eldritch knight subclasses if you want a little help/inspiration/spice built into the class itself. I have an echo knight minotaur I played for a bit who was great fun to play in combat.
If we’re talking about complexity being the issue then you can back right the heck up with that “just play Pathfinder” nonsense. I really want to try PF2e, actually, but to act like it’s simpler than a 5e multiclass is something you must surely know is not going to fly. I made a PF1e barbarian once and the amount of choices I had to make as an experience 5e player was within my skill level but for your hypothetical new player it would be far more daunting a task.
Also “without needing to get creative” is such a tell. It’s really not that complicated, and it’s not 5e’s fault that someone might need a stricter framework. You’re not a worse person for it, necessarily, but the whining about it sure isn’t a good look.
And yet they still have lots of features in their subclasses, work great with quick multiclass options, and can just, ya know, wield a magic weapon.
My battlemaster fighter had a few levels in Battlesmith artificers and I had sooo many things I could do even though the only spells I really ever cast were Shield and Arcane Weapon. I had my steel defender doing all kinds of fun stuff, and even though being ranged took some flavour out I was still able to be creative. It was also awesome to have such a clean base to build my roleplay on top of and by the end he was the least background-heavy character yet still had tonnes of depth and character.
The only “issue” with them is that the burden of creativity lies much more heavily on the player and it’s more difficult to rest on cheap stereotypes. I’m playing a warlock now, the plot class, and I still took it several steps further all on my own because I can. The pathfinder fighter looks interesting, for sure, but come now.
Unless you have something specific, and you should let your DM know ahead of time, for wisdom rolls specifically blind rolls can be pretty fun.
That said, if you roll a nat1 and you DM says someone is trustworthy then that also doesn’t mean they’re lying, so it’s not a huge deal.
Vox Machina, and there is a new season.
There is a stark difference between something we’ve literally observed in nature and claiming that a drow woman would derive sexual pleasure from it. And don’t try and tell me “lol can’t have pregnancy without sex” as if you’re that daft that you actually think that argument isn’t 100% garbage in this case.
Come on, be serious.
Literally talking to my DM about this right now. You have to grade on a curve but absolutely good, kind, even in control people can be barbarians. Frankly the entire self-limitation people put on themselves by forcing a class based on tropes is getting tiring.
Hell, I had an idea for a barbarian that doesn’t get bad but instead just locks in. Just goes real quiet and fuck’s shit up.
You can also make a paladin that doesn’t wear plate armour, who uses a bow, and who’s oath is to protect their village or simply they just love their wife a lot and it’s their wedding vows.
Hell yes, Abserd-style multiclass incoming.
Looool
Ah, but you see, arithmetic is scary.
The only time I get too much to deal with is when I’m rolling four dice per attack, twice per round, and want to have a high level of confidence in my answer while also not taking up everyone’s time. For that I just made a spreadsheet and moved on with it.
I’ve never looked at a number-on-top d4 and thought “ouchy if only there was an easier way”. Not once. Whether or not I agree with you, the fact that there is a noticeable difference to you, which crosses a particular threshold, is wild.