-
2012-03-19, 09:18 AM (ISO 8601)
-
Top
-
End
-
#17
Re: Questions regarding Fighters and Combat (3.5)
A few points:
As of 3rd edition, there was a vague assumption that the fighter was meant to be elite -- essentially the fantasy cultural equivalent to a knight or a samurai (this is one reason why neither of those classes actually offered anything of value to the game).
Particularly if you might be a samurai, you want your fighter to be proficient in a wide range of weapons and fighting styles, not just one or two -- you can still specialise, but you should still be damned good no matter what you use.
Classical knights weren't too keen on ranged weapons (see also: the earlier parts of the hundred years war), but that shouldn't really be reflected in a D&D fighter (who is a fantasy cultural equivalent, with different needs and a different world view).
Finally, try to concentrate on giving your character building blocks that can be combined, rather than packaged, concrete abilities. I think that's probably going to be the easiest way to give the class variety without overwhelming players who probably want to play a fighter because they don't like bookkeeping or micromanagement.