Recent content by ECMO3

I will point out that Americans regularly buy impractical gas-guzzling sports cars that are impractical for anything they do with them, and this is not that they are not informed as the fuel mileage is listed right there on the window sticker.

And a Wizard needs to spend more resources to get extra attack and a fighting style. Even with rages a fighter is more capable than a Barbarian at most levels.

It is objectively true that the game is more popular since 3E.

Well to be fair a fighter can do all that too if he wants to, either through a subclass or a feat.

There is no reason all classes should be equally powerful and there is a disclaimer of sorts as the PHB states that Wizards are Supreme or something similar. And it is hardly stupid design when it is immensely popular and fun to play. Don't count for what. Then why are you worried about the...

Yes. The whole game is more fun for it. More fun for the player playing the Fighter, more fun for the player playing the Bard, more fun for the player playing the Cleric and more fun for the DM. There is a reason 5E in general and the 5E Fighter in particular are so popular.

But even if true (and I would say it is doubtful) the absolutely refutes the idea that big muscles = strength because the guy with the biggest muscles is nowhere close to being the strongest.

The 5E game and the 5E fighter is awesome for a number of reasons. One of those is a common baseline across weapons, weapons do largely the same thing for every class unless you bring magic or subclass abilities into the game. You may call that "terrible" but I find it awesome when I play...

No 3E is not very fun. 5E is. One of the many reasons 3E was not very fun is all the stupid crap that fighters could do with weapons because of their ridiculous number of feats. I don't know what you mean by "the class I favor". I play most classes (all except Barbarian and Druid). I play...

Non-caster classes are not as good as fighters, they are worse than fighters at most levels.

Because every martial class should be equal with weapons, or at least nearly equal and the non-martial classes should have similar mechanics with fewer attacks. That is what is most fun. Why isn't it? I think the argument to give fighters more is pretty weak though when they are already the...

No they should strike out to make the game fun and popular and the 5E rules ad the fighter class have that in spades.

And likely a Wizard who did not put ASIs and feats toward that would not match a fighter, but if he did he absolutely should. If my Wizard takes dex ASIs and a subclass that offers extra attack and sharpshooter he should be as good at shooting a rabbit as the fighter that does the same. If my...

Like I said they do get a few unique things and their subclasses or very unique and the point of playing any class is that you want to play that class. Lots and lots of people play fighters. We are talking about mechanics aren't we? If you want unique concepts just read the PHB " perhaps...

It is not worse than anyone else. It is better than Monk, Barbarian and arguably Rogue at most levels, especially if you choose a good subclass. Moreover you would play it because that is what you wanted to play, and if you wanted to play a more powerful class you would play a more powerful...