>Play fighter
>Find it boring
>Too afraid of being seen as cringe for being a wizard as I don't want the cringe of being a magic caster
>Yet I get all these ideas for what spells I want to do.
>Go make a wizard
>Feel excited for the first time
>Go to /tg/
>See an anti-wizard thread
>Trash the sheet and just make another fighter
>Audibly sigh as I play my character
>DM gets worried
>Say it's nothing and say "I attack" during my turn
>Feel nothing
 |
 It's All Fucked Shirt $22.14 |
|
Ok.
H Y T N P D N D
solve this mystical puzzle for a solution to your quagmire!
bump
>>Say it's nothing and say "I attack" during my turn
Stick with playing a fighter, you probably wouldn't have any fun as a wizard with your level of creativity.
100% this. Wizards are just as boring if all you do is say "I cast Fireball at 3rd level" and roll the dice. Be descriptive, be creative. And anyone who says they're still boring even if you do that, you have no creativity do you? How is "I start to the left, feinting, before spinning my sword below and try to slabs across the enemy's chest as my first attack, then stop and stab deeper as my second attack" more boring than "I casr Fireball at 3rd level"?
>How is "I start to the left, feinting, before spinning my sword below and try to slabs across the enemy's chest as my first attack,
Because it doesn't do anything you absolute fricking moron.
And here we are at The Problem.
Fighters are good at Fighting. It's what they fricking do: They can dish out consistent damage faster and more reliably and longer than any other class. THe problem here is that while Fighters are great at dealing high amounts of damage, there's two weaknesses to this core of their design.
The first issue: Numbers often are the worst way to end an encounter.
If you're killing something through numbers alone, depending on edition, you're taking as long as possible to end your target. It's inefficient to hack your way through 200 HP when your wizard buddy could just pop them to another plane, or turn them to stone, or JUST PUT THEM TO FRICKING SLEEP. This is without even considering all the indirect murder spellcasters can muster simply by setting up logically deadly scenarios outside of RAW, like causing a massive cave in in a dungeon, or by dropping a massive cube of iron on them, or by tossing them out the window of a high tower with a spell LITERALLY MADE EXPLICITLY FOR THIS PURPOSE (seriously, who invented the Orb of Defenestration?)
The second issue: Swinging a sword just isn't as evocative as spellcasting. You can dress it up all you like, but unless you're pulling SSSmoking sick style combos, and we're not playing Exalted here, you're simply doing the same thing every single round. Certainly you have other manuevers, but they're all weaker, all less useful, and all of them less powerful than simply mowing through your opponent's HP pool. Maybe it makes your opponent less dangerous. For a round.
How do you solve this?
You play a different fricking game. Or you play an all-caster party. Or you play an all-martial party. The disparity is the issue. Or you could play a game where the entire premise is martials creatively killing casters...
>And here we are at The Problem.
Narrator Note: The Problem is not a problem at all, and is an intentional class design choice in order to allow lower IQ (50% of the general population, 70% of TTRPG players) to be able to have a class for them.
WotC designers have outright said it comes from playtesting and feedback multiple times, and 20 years later we still have gays on /tg/ who are a middling 105 and can't comprehend it.
Befouling a game for the sake of morons is the definition of a problem.
Then you have a whole class in the game that, to a significant part of your playerbase (according to you, ABOUT A WHOLE THIRD OF THEM) simply isn't satisfying or worth play. And to the rest, it's got the implication of being The Dumb People Class, for Dumbos, and really, who the frick wants to be the actual idiot of your group of friends?
Maybe they meant a simpler class, one that was easier to understand? But even then, you can make a mechanically simple class that is satisfying to use. It just has to be thematically fun, and have that thematic fun backed up by the system. But it's not. Even the Dumbo Dumb Dumb player is eventually going to realize he's doing the same thing in combat each turn, he's going to realize the other players keep getting more new toys than him, and he's going to realize, oh.
I don't even really contribute. Why am I here?
That's not very fun. I don't really give a flying frick what those playtesters saw in one game, two games, four. Eventually anyone who plays a Fighter will realize they could be doing the same thing, but better, with more cool shit, and more interesting abilities, playing literally any other class. Speaking as a DM, I don't want that for any player. I don't like wasting my player's time like that.
SO I do not allow that disparity. Either everyone is a caster (partial or whatever), or no one is. That's how I've always run my games, depending on what mood I'm in.
>Then you have a whole class in the game that, to a significant part of your playerbase (according to you, ABOUT A WHOLE THIRD OF THEM) simply isn't satisfying or worth play.
Please explain why having every option appeal to every player is desirable in the first place and then explain how it is possible.
There's no reason to go to a grocery store and start screaming at chunky peanut butter because you like creamy. The creamy is right there.
Because when you don't have a game like 3.5 where the devs straight up did not care, the opposite ends of the spectrum are watered down because they have to coexist, you stupid motherfricker.
>Please explain why having every option appeal to every player is desirable in the first place and then explain how it is possible.
It's not about having it *appeal*, per se, it's about having it *not be shit to play* for everyone. If I were to, say, play Magic The Gathering, I like to play Black or Red, because I like having direct answers and cool creatures and big pop-off turns. That's my personal enjoyment, my, as you might say, creamy peanut butter. However, I can also play Blue, Green, and White as well, win games, and enjoy myself to *some* extent, because those colors and play styles can play on an even playing field - Red isn't made to be explicitly bad to be simple, it's GOOD because it's simple, for example, and still has clever plays.
Everything should hit a base line minimum of enjoyability and playability, and Fighter doesn't.
The people who Fighter is made for are gatekept out of MTG by its complex design, so it has the benefit of not needing to be made for them.
>food analogy
If you want to play that game, then the correct answer would be to have both apples and bannanas, and then also apple and bannana flavored baby food. Then there's options for people who want an actual piece of fruit, as well as an option for those who are incapable to eat a piece of fruit properly.
Or to unpack that analogy, there should be a satisfying way to play as a fantasy warrior without being shackled to the designated moron-helmet class. Likewise, there should probably be a simplified version of a mage that only gets to shoot magic missiles or otherwise lets the moron players have the fun of pretending to be a spellcaster in a way that sacrifices complexity and versatility.
If the goal isn't to alienate the lowest common denominator, then it would also make sense for such classes to be clearly labeled, as presently a moronic or new player is reliant on somebody else telling them that Fighter is the baby-mode moron class, because otherwise that moron might do something moronic and pick something too complex for them to handle because they like the flavor of something other than a meathead warrior.
Then stop playing DnD.
To use your analogy here, you simply are not going to find the kind of food you want from this particular brand. They don't make it, and are clearly not interested in selling it, because every time they unveil new food, it isn't that kind. When people ask them, "Are you ever going to make this?" They always answer, "No, we don't plan to," or "No, we don't think our consumers want it." While the latter isn't true, it tells you their attitude about it. Simply put, you have to shop elsewhere.
>To use your analogy here, you simply are not going to find the kind of food you want from this particular brand.
Then to use
's analogy further, it's a lie to say 'the creamy is right there'. It isn't.
And going further up the reply chain, the solution to the Problem
proposed that
said wasn't a Problem was to play a different game, because as you've pointed out, WotC seems incapable or uninterested in the most basic possible solutions to that problem.
There's no need to discuss this further, since we all seem to agree on that fact.
There are literally 2 editions of D&D where there are perfectly fine Fighters or Fighter analogues and simplistic spellcasters to choose from. Frick off.
Then play those.
I do.
>then it would also make sense for such classes to be clearly labeled
>insulting people in a corporate product is good
No. People are much happier in ignorance, as you can tell from the popularity and mass appeal of the games.
Agree with the rest, and there usually is those means. People who really want to play a satisfying fantasy warrior can do so in almost every edition of D&D through optimization.
>insulting people in a corporate product is good
Labeled as in having a 'complexity rating' listed somewhere and explaining what that means. You don't need to explicitly call the designated moron classes moron classes in order to label them in a helpful manner.
>angry at food analogies
>"to unpack that analogy"
Why are you trannies so cringe and hateable? Why not just write like a normal person in a way that doesn't evoke loathing towards you?
You've never played a TRUE burn deck
I been playing fighter for over 20 years, and haven't realized that...
>what if we make the game worse, so more idiots can play?
This seems like a problem. A DnD specific problem.
I wish we could just say Capitalism instead. I prefer it as my meaningless term that means "thing I don't like."
>stupid people exist in great numbers and also want to play games? Have you tried not being in Capitalism?
>fighter and wizard are the only classes
>fighters have nothing but attacks
Play games before you talk about them.
You're missing the other 50% of the martial role, which is running defense when a monster inevitably passes its save and the wizard wastes a turn. Most 5e fighter subclasses have tools that let them play goalkeeper with slows, stuns, taunts, restraints and opportunity attacks, providing reliable battlefield control. A well set-up combat encounter will let them do that instead of just attacking 22 times in a row. There's plenty of room for fun fighters at a mixed table, so it's sad that unimaginative GMs like you just ban them instead of getting good at encounter design.
>GMs like you just ban them instead of getting good at encounter design.
I don't, though?
An all-martial party will more than likely have a Fighter, and often has two. I just don't like mixing parties of martials and nonmartials.
>Most 5e fighter subclasses have tools that let them play goalkeeper with slows, stuns, taunts, restraints and opportunity attacks,
They don't, and what they do have either requires feats like Sentinel or spending superiority die to activate while being less effective than the other maneuvers due to shit DCs.
>with slows, stuns, taunts, restraints and opportunity attacks, providing reliable battlefield control
What game are you playing? It isn't D&D.
>200 HP
>Sleep
Are you moronic? Even if your issue here wasn't nothing (which it is), why didn't you just play an Eldritch Knight Fighter or Paladin? Or take the feats that give you spells? You know, any of the many options that would allow you to play a fighter while also doing the thing you apparently want to do "without being seen as cringe." (Or the reverse, a Bladesinging Wizard or Hexblade Warlock, etc. etc. etc., it really isn't that hard.)
>Playing 5e
Worse than death
There are some players who really shouldn't be playing a Wizard, and I honestly think you're one of them.
OP is once again a homosexual, but I saved your reaction image, so have a (You) I guess.
also, you absolute fricking child, just be cringe
its so goddamn liberating that you TOO will be surprised by what happens
cringe with joy is alabama cousins with True Cool
>Too afraid of being seen as cringe
You're playing RPGs. You ARE cringe.
Why are you letting morons decide what's cringe?
>Being such a spineless loser that seeing a meme thread on Ganker dissuades you from playing a game with your friends how you want to.
I am honestly speechless.
>Play wizard
>See an anti-wizard thread
>Call them gay Black folk then respond to myself saying wizards are shit
>Have fun as the only competent class in D&D
You have earned your emptiness.
Continue sitting at daddy DM's table of his own personal gratification, or play a game.
Option A or option B, it isn't hard.
>>Too afraid of being seen as cringe
I found your bug.
get over it
>Too afraid of being seen as cringe for being a wizard as I don't want the cringe of being a magic caster
Delete this post, delete your existence from life, and please move on to make everything better for and please move on to make everything better for us
So something you need to understand, you fugly loser, is that wizards in DnD don't work like wizards in fantasy fiction do. Spellcasting is not a nuanced and mystical process that matches up with any historical magic. It's just Spell Legos. You have slots and those slots burn up your magic because Vancian caster brain juices are all set to quick shot mode. You will not have fun playing a wizard, or playing most casters, because you will be forced to make a character that fits this idiotic, unjustified, alienating narrative niche.
HYTNPDND?
You will never be a real wizard. You have no intelligence, you have no wit, you have no arcane power. You are a weak fighter twisted by training and card tricks into a crude mockery of arcane power. All the "validation" you get is two-faced and half hearted. behind your back people mock you. Your party are disgusted and ashamed of you, your "friends" laugh at your stupidity behind closed doors. Other wizards are repulsed by you. Thousands of years of arcane advancement have allowed true wizards to sniff out charlatans with incredible efficiency. Even "apprentices" who manage to trick and lie have no shred of arcane legitimacy to a wizard. Your muscles are a dead give away. And even if you manage to get a drunk wizard to study with you, he'll turn tail and bolt the second he reads your incomprehensible "spellbook". You will never cast spells. You wrench out a fake cantrip every single morning and tell yourself it's going to be ok, but deep inside you feel the depression creeping up like a weed, ready to crush you under the unbearable weight. Eventually it'll be too much to bear - you'll buy a rope, tie a noose, put it around your neck, and plunge into the cold abyssal gate. Your party will find you, heartbroken but realized that they no longer have to live with the unbearable shame and disappointment. They'll burry you with a headstone marked with your sword, and every passerby for the rest of eternity will know a fighter is buried there. Your body will decay and go back to the dust, and all that will remain of your legacy is a sword that is unmistakably a warrior's, this is your fate. This is what you chose. There is no turning back. YWNBAW
There are other classes besides fighter and wizard
The wizard has the most spells and most spell slots of all the casters, plus can learn spells just by copying them down, so there's no reason to choose other casters. Just "refluff" it to "feel" like another class.
The fighter is the best at using weapons than the other non-caster classes, which makes them passable until level 8, around the time everything that isn't magic falls off.
There might "be other classes", but they are weaker and redundant by comparison.
Don't sorcerers have more spellslots
The secretary at a psychiatrist's office can help you come up with an affordable payment plan.
>Play stupid game
>Win stupid prizes
>actual npc who cares about the opinions of anonymous users on a laotian photography forum
hilarious, thanks for the giggle.
>me
>has taken the solo pill because there's no such thing as a bad game if you just rewrite what you don't like
>classes are partially race-based, and partially category-based, instead of covering wide and senseless swaths like "the weapon guy" or "the magic guy"
>I could have a cat-like character with claw skills unique to that race, and then have her start with a shield to offer protection and blunt attacks, with fire magic as a supplement for ranged attacks with high power and possibility of burning
>these abilities all have combined skills that merge concepts of both parts, such as shield+fire offering protection from fire or burning disk attacks, or shield+claw to enable furious counter-attacks with both as a result of properly blocking
>it doesn't matter who sees it as cringe; it is my game and I'm writing what I like instead of trying to bandage a broken system that also can't do what I want
>because I made what I want, I don't have any options I get bored with
>because my game's skills are so varied, there is never a time where I just say "I attack"; every attack has a variety of results and costs to consider, as well as traits to compare against the enemy, maximizing my engagement
>>has taken the solo pill
>not >have taken the solo pill
that ain't very bussin'-bussin' tbh
If you want creativity and complexity, start learning to use various combat maneuvers. It's not like you're only allowed to swing your weapon at people. Bullrush them, trip somebody, use an improvised weapon in a clever way, ANYTHING.
You do know you dont have to do what other people tell you. Right?
Go jump off a tall
cake.
Whenever I read these threads it makes me thankful to have DM who actually wants the martial characters to do cool stuff besides just "I attack"
Stuff like Cutting the rope on a sailboat to swing across and attack everyone along the way, shooting the Mcguffin out of the bad guys hand or doing cleaving attack that can hit all enemies in range in exchsge for a reduced attack bonus.
So how can DnD make fighters/melee fighting fun again?
Currently its dogshit for many reasons, like the lack of abilities vs magic, boring effects unlike magic, ect, how do you fix this without totally re designing DnD?
You play PF2e. It's that simple. Great game.