D&D Alumni: Fighting-Men - Downloaded from the Wizards Community, all coding removed by Solauren

D&D Alumni: Fighting-Men

Post/Author/DateTime Post
#1
asmodeuslore
Nov 06, 2008 23:31:27 D&D Alumni
Fighting-Men
by Bart Carroll

4th Edition's Starter Set releases this month, so what better time to look back—with great fondness—at starter sets of past editions?

Talk about this article here.

IMAGE(http://www.wizards.com/dnd/images/alumni_fighter1.jpg)
#2
GMforPowergamers
Nov 06, 2008 23:46:07 I don't know why but I felt it did a disservice to 2e and 1e fighters...I remember them being a great class, although more used for demi human multi classing...it wasn't intill 3.5 I really remeber them sucking
#3
SoulCatcher78
Nov 07, 2008 6:20:07 I agree, I just don't remember Fighters being that bad of a class in earlier editions. Maybe we just adopted the idea behind different types of fighters (as represented with Kits in 2E) sooner. Later editions removed the need to have houserules (as they provided rules in the form of kits and later, the complete books) but I don't know if that was a good thing or not.
#4
rutherfordr
Nov 07, 2008 10:31:43 I don't think that fighters were necessarily a bad class in earlier editions; I think that all the other classes were so BAD at going toe-to-toe with the monsters that the fighters were really necessary, and always got their chance to shine despite their lack of special powers.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 asmodeuslore Nov 06, 2008 23:31:27	D&D Alumni Fighting-Men by Bart Carroll 4th Edition's Starter Set releases this month, so what better time to look back—with great fondness—at starter sets of past editions? Talk about this article here.
#2 GMforPowergamers Nov 06, 2008 23:46:07	I don't know why but I felt it did a disservice to 2e and 1e fighters...I remember them being a great class, although more used for demi human multi classing...it wasn't intill 3.5 I really remeber them sucking
#3 SoulCatcher78 Nov 07, 2008 6:20:07	I agree, I just don't remember Fighters being that bad of a class in earlier editions. Maybe we just adopted the idea behind different types of fighters (as represented with Kits in 2E) sooner. Later editions removed the need to have houserules (as they provided rules in the form of kits and later, the complete books) but I don't know if that was a good thing or not.
#4 rutherfordr Nov 07, 2008 10:31:43	I don't think that fighters were necessarily a bad class in earlier editions; I think that all the other classes were so BAD at going toe-to-toe with the monsters that the fighters were really necessary, and always got their chance to shine despite their lack of special powers.