How many ways to play the Fighter from the Starter Set? (Warning: Spoilers)

[Ardantis]

WARNING SPOILERS FOR THE STARTER SET DO NOT READ IF YOU WANT TO BE SURPRISED BY THE STARTER SET

The Fighter from the Starter Set is actually surprisingly well layered.

Human Champion Fighter
Archery Fighting style
Weapons: Greatsword, Longbow
Alignment: Lawful Good
Background: Folk Hero

His personality is persistent and a little braggadocio. His ideal is sincerity, and he's committed to rescuing his hometown of Thundertree (and having a statue of him put up in the square.)

Most interestingly, his weakness is that he has unerring faith and blindness to shortcomings in his own destiny to become a great hero by driving the green dragon out of Thundertree Keep.

The way I see it, this character was the "hero" or "main character" of the starter set. I mean, come on, he's a wannabe DRAGON SLAYER.

But at the same time, he's also DELUSIONAL, at least for a first level character.

How do you play him?

[Ardantis]

My player made the choice for me.

When presented with a character whose hometown had been taken over by a dragon, his first response was "I'm gonna tame that dragon."

Is that evil? I think that's evil. Anyone who knows Lost Mines of Phandelver- is taming the dragon evil?

[Tenmujiin]

My player made the choice for me.

When presented with a character whose hometown had been taken over by a dragon, his first response was "I'm gonna tame that dragon."

Is that evil? I think that's evil. Anyone who knows Lost Mines of Phandelver- is taming the dragon evil?

Well I wouldn't call it evil, its not a good act. That being said it is a STUPID act as the dragon is meant to be a seriously over the top fight that seems to be 50/50 on TPKs

[Longcat]

My player made the choice for me.

When presented with a character whose hometown had been taken over by a dragon, his first response was "I'm gonna tame that dragon."

Is that evil? I think that's evil. Anyone who knows Lost Mines of Phandelver- is taming the dragon evil?

Is the player aware of the dragon's color, or do they know that dragons in D&D are color coded by alignment?

I'd say taming is not an inherently evil act, since while certain dragons are evil by nature, said nature can be overcome through nurture if you as the DM allow it. I think it can be interesting!

Then again, I am a sucker for How to train your dragon, so take my words with a grain of salt :smallwink:

[kaoskonfety]

Not evil... arrogant as all get out. Foolish in the extreme. Likely to get themself and others killed.

It might BECOME evil if as you highlight the risks to everyone they opt to disregard their safety and lives in favour of making a great thinking beats submit to their will... It could be argued "good" is they mean to reform the dragon to a life of, if not virtue, then at least not wanton evil and destruction and they do so carefully with the goal of "sparing the beast and saving the countryside".

Either way its biting off WAY more than most DM's would allow them to chew.

Hubris is *casually*, far and away, my favourite way to have PC's die. They do all the work themselves, I just have to watch with a widening grin and glee.

I love this guys plan.

[DrBurr]

I've actually played the Starter Set twice, once as the Fighter and once as a DM. And my iteration of the Fighter and my player's iteration were fairly different.

When I played, I set myself up as a kind of Ranger light, I was played the character more meticulously, planning how was going to fight Klarg and taunting him to draw his attention. I took pride in my kills even fashioning a coat from the Wolf which I took out with a Crit during the first round.

My friend Walter on the other hand played the Fighter as a self titled hero, he was incredibly egotistical constantly talking about his own legacy and rushing head first into combat. Even with the Archery focus I from what I remember he used the Great Sword most of the time, probably because he wanted a change of pace seeing as he normally plays Ranger.

[TopCheese]

WARNING SPOILERS FOR THE STARTER SET DO NOT READ IF YOU WANT TO BE SURPRISED BY THE STARTER SET

The Fighter from the Starter Set is actually surprisingly well layered.

Human Champion Fighter
Archery Fighting style
Weapons: Greatsword, Longbow
Alignment: Lawful Good
Background: Folk Hero

His personality is persistent and a little braggadocio. His ideal is sincerity, and he's committed to rescuing his hometown of Thundertree (and having a statue of him put up in the square.)

Most interestingly, his weakness is that he has unerring faith and blindness to shortcomings in his own destiny to become a great hero by driving the green dragon out of Thundertree Keep.

The way I see it, this character was the "hero" or "main character" of the starter set. I mean, come on, he's a wannabe DRAGON SLAYER.

But at the same time, he's also DELUSIONAL, at least for a first level character.

How do you play him?

The character is well layered, the fighter is not. There is a difference between character and class.

However I would play him as Gaston from beauty and the beast. He wasn't really a bad guy in the movie when you look at the movie from his point of view (or if you realize that Stockholm sydrome is a thing and how screwed up the movie really is).

He's the typical bro who is riding out his high school glory days of being head quarterback. Except change high school quarterback to whatever small thing made him a folk hero.

Yeah he wants to drive out the Dragon but will probabaly fall off the castle and be remembered as the bad guy.

[Coidzor]

Most interestingly, his weakness is that he has unerring faith and blindness to shortcomings in his own destiny to become a great hero by driving the green dragon out of Thundertree Keep.

The way I see it, this character was the "hero" or "main character" of the starter set. I mean, come on, he's a wannabe DRAGON SLAYER.

But at the same time, he's also DELUSIONAL, at least for a first level character.

How do you play him?

That's interesting. I'm just trying to reconcile that flaw with what he's doing involved with Gundren, then. Doing some smaller adventuring work to build up power and gain allies before tackling the dragon would make sense, but if he thinks he can kill or drive out the dragon just from the get-go, then it raises some serious questions about what he's doing in the party. :smallconfused:

If it weren't for that particular flaw, I'd probably have him looking to build bonds, increase his strength, and then come up with a plan on how to defeat the dragon. Depending upon how things play out, he might find the Dragon can be convinced to move elsewhere without violence, such as that handy-dandy ruined castle that the party will depopulate. I haven't read the full details for Venomfang, though, and when I played through the adventure the DM departed from the base adventure when it came to Thundertree.


My player made the choice for me.

When presented with a character whose hometown had been taken over by a dragon, his first response was "I'm gonna tame that dragon."

Is that evil? I think that's evil. Anyone who knows Lost Mines of Phandelver- is taming the dragon evil?

Taming a dragon? Unclear. Depends heavily on what's meant by "taming."

Enslaving a dragon? Depends, do dragons count as free-willed creatures or as archetypes of their alignments in this edition? Because enslaving a free creature is morally grey at best, typically. While bending an evil creature to your will to serve good ends is morally grey at worst.

From what I recall of 2e and 3e, enslaving a dragon would be an evil act, even if it was evil. Probably would have been an evil act in 4e as well.

[ChelseaNH]

is taming the dragon evil?

Speciesist assumption. The dragon has higher INT and WIS. Furthermore, as green dragons are very manipulative, it is far more likely to "tame" the fighter than vice versa.



He wasn't really a bad guy in the movie when you look at the movie from his point of view

I think fiction is a lot more interesting when villains see themselves as the heroes of the story. But Gaston had an outsized sense of entitlement, so no way am I rooting for him.



if he thinks he can kill or drive out the dragon just from the get-go

My interpretation is that he's confident of his eventual success, not his immediate success. Gathering a band of loyal companions seems consistent with the mythos of a folk hero.

[TopCheese]

Speciesist assumption. The dragon has higher INT and WIS. Furthermore, as green dragons are very manipulative, it is far more likely to "tame" the fighter than vice versa.



I think fiction is a lot more interesting when villains see themselves as the heroes of the story. But Gaston had an outsized sense of entitlement, so no way am I rooting for him.



My interpretation is that he's confident of his eventual success, not his immediate success. Gathering a band of loyal companions seems consistent with the mythos of a folk hero.

Can you blame the guy? In a world where monsters are real and you keep a place safe and are regarded as a hero... No wonder he feels so entitled.

Hell, everyone else in the village made fun of Belle, but Gaston saw her as perfect. Sure he sucked at expressing himself to someone he knows is better than him due to how the village treated him all those years, but he is the only one to try and help Belle. Selfish? Sure but he is a product of his environment. The important part is that he is trying.

He doesn't feel entitlement just because he is a good guy, like many other Disney characters, but because he has actually earned that entitlement. Not with games, songs, and dance but with being a protector of the people.

He doesn't really do anything evil the entire movie. He is pretty much every Prince charming in the Disney world except he isn't royalty.

Gaston is the hero that failed.

[Roderick_BR]

If he means "taming the dragon" as "I'll show him the wrongs of his ways", that's more like trying to redeem a BBEG instead of just slaying it. That would be a VERY difficult, but noble goal.
If he means it as in, enslaving it to serve under his(PC) will, then it may be evil.

As for the character. Seems like he's a wide-eyed idealist, looking ways to increase his power and gather powerful allies so he can free his hometown from the monster. He knows he is no match, so he's on a self-quest to find a solution. Imagine if instead of a dragon it was an evil empire thing.

[ChelseaNH]

He doesn't feel entitlement just because he is a good guy, like many other Disney characters, but because he has actually earned that entitlement. Not with games, songs, and dance but with being a protector of the people.

If you think being a protector of the people entitles you to claim any of those people for yourself, then we should just agree to disagree right now.

[Ardantis]

Well, my player just graduated from the likes of Pokemon and Yu-gi-oh, where the "pet" mentality is strong. So that's his game culture bias right there. It was his first reaction to "a dragon rules my hometown." And yes, it is incredibly specieist (and ignores the dragon's superior mental stats).

I read a walkthrough of LMoP online, and that DM gave the Dragon Cultists of Thundertree a dragon-sized necklace of teeth which would enslave the dragon. Now that's CLEARLY an evil way of taming the dragon. It's not in the actual module, but it's an easy stretch, and it might be useful as a counterpoint to illustrate for my player what "taming" could actually be.

My player also grew up in a small town, so he understands the fact that a dragon would turn his small world inside-out. I've emphasized to him the characters' need to be a hero, so that questing with others isn't seen as a waste of time (when there's a dragon to tame).

I imagined this fighter as sort of a Gaston character, to be honest. I love the fact that he could be played straight heroically or as a craven narcissist- in fact, each of the starter characters is easy to play on the straight path or on the dark path, depending on your choice of attitude. (Dwarf Cleric as conscience-driven individualist or cowardly deserter, Elf Wizard as reverent historian or obsessive and power-mad zealot, Halfling Rogue as reformed criminal or two-faced and vengeful charlatan, Noble Fighter as elevated upstanding social paragon or desperate, greedy and money-grubbing second-son).

I like to think my player is going for the wide-eyed idealist approach, too.