Yes they are.
Before comparing them to other classes, let's take a look at other versions of D&D.
In AD&D, fighters have several abilities that are ignored in B/X:
- 1d10 HD.
- Better attack progression.
- Better types of ordinary armor.
- A few perks if they have high abilities (more HP, damage, etc.)
- Extra attacks as you level up.
- Extra attacks against low-HD foes.
AD&D came before B/X, but BECMI came soon after.
Arguably, BECMI "fixed" many things in B/X I perceive as flaws (e.g., the cleric), and it also added several toys for fighters: weapon maneuvers, proficiency, etc.
All other editions (2e, 3e, 4e, 5e, and even 0e) have fighters that are stronger and more varied than B/X. Even some basic-inspired games such as DCC and LotFP make fighters more "special".
The fighter is DISAPPOINTED!
Now lets quickly compare a B/X fighter with other classes.
Cleric
- A cleric with 50,000 XP can raise the dead once a day. He gets the equivalent of "THAC0 17" and 7d6 HP.
- A high level cleric might have fewer HP than a fighter, but he can heal himself compeltely in three or four days of rest, while the fighter may take weeks.
- A fighter with the same XP has the same THAC0, 6d8 HP, and worse saves. His THAC0 improves significantly at 64,000 XP. Which is nothing compared to raising the dead.
- If both reach maximum level, their THAC0 is nearly identical and fighter saves are slightly worse. The cleric can now raise dead four times a day, AND requires fewer XP to get there.
Magic-user
- A magic user is frail when compared to a fighter, but has lots of firepower. A 1st level MU can put multiple fighters to sleep; a 10th-level MU can memorize three 10d6 fireballs, or even better- summon a 16 HD fire elemental, which will give ANY single fighter a difficult fight. If he wins initiative, he cannot be stopped.
- Even with an awesome magic sword, the fighter cannot deal this kind of damage.
Dwarf
- Dwarves stop their careers at level 12... ONE SINGLE HP short of a 14th-level fighter, and with better saves, fewer XP needed, plus infravision. They have no restrictions on using swords. Dwarves are simply better fighters that require 10% more XP.
The thief is debatable - he often hits as hard as a fighter of similar XP, but is much frailer. I do not think the thief is a strong class in B/X (and it is even worse in BECMI). Halfings are not great either because their level cap is a significant limit.
Elves are more powerful than fighters because of magic, but slightly frailer in HP and saves. Overall, I find them much stronger than fighters.
How to fix that?
Well, that's the subject of the next post (I use feats, mostly; you might as well use the AD&D perks described above).
This one is about illustrating how the B/X fighter is weak compared to other fighters (0e, BECMI, 1e, etc.) and other B/X classes.
In practice, the B/X fighter tends to be both more effective and durable (well, as 'durable' as characters get in B/X) than any other class type, due to their equipment. Even a fighter of average starting wealth (100 g.p.) should be able to afford plate mail, sword, and shield, and they are generally assured of melee bonuses for 13+ STR due to the ability to raise their prime requisite. With a 16+ STR (not unusual) they strike as if they were three levels higher than actual...they hit harder and more often than any other class. Similarly, the combination of good HPs and high AC act as 'survival multipliers:' they are hit less often and can sustain more damage than any other class, save dwarves...if they possess a CON or DEX in excess of 13+ this only gets better.
ReplyDelete[also, if you run B/X without the variable weapon damage (i.e. with all weapons doing 1d6 damage), those d8s for hit dice become a lot more exceptional]
Considering that there are plenty of magic arms and armor in your average B/X game, the fighter's ability to withstand damage and dish it out only increases. In my experience, it's not unusual to see a fighter that survived B2 having a negative AC by 3rd level and sporting an attack/damage bonus of +4.
The lack of multiple attacks DOES sting a bit, especially at high levels. But B/X was designed as an introductory edition of the game...it's not built for sustained, long-term play (of the kind that would see high level characters in action). For what it is, it's a great introduction and fighters generally hold their own...when I play B/X, they are generally my "first choice" of character.
I never ran B/X with feats, but I have invented rules to add a little variety to the Basic game. One is "exceptional traits" (a bit like feats, but random). Another was "combat maneuvers" (specifically for fighters). Just in case you're interested:
https://bxblackrazor.blogspot.com/2010/08/exceptional-traits-for-bx-oh-crap.html
https://bxblackrazor.blogspot.com/2013/08/fighter-love-2-combat-stunts.html
You make some good points - AD&D armor is a bit better, but more expensive IIRC.
DeleteI hadn't considered raising Strength; although the dwarf can also do this IIRC, it does add some power to the fighter, although nothing comparable to a fireball.
Magic armor is good but the cleric (and elf, dwarf, etc.) has the same access. The cleric also can heal himself everyday while the fighter has more HP but takes a LOT longer to recover without a cleric.
Not sure about B/X being introductory - I usually play for the first 10 levels, so I don't have much use for levels 11-36 (which I find a bit "stretched" TBH), and B/X gives most of the stuff I need.
Your fits and maneuvers are awesome, BTW!
I might write a few of my own, but I'm inclined to use a -4 penalty (and maybe a save) rather than 2d20.
AD&D armor has class has a greater spread (starting at AC 10, rather than AC 9), with greater granularity of armor types, but its effectiveness is pretty much the same. Yes, it IS...somewhat...more expensive, putting the high end pieces (like plate) outside the reach of 1st level characters...but they should be able to afford it pretty quickly.
DeleteAD&D characters are also more durable, having greater hit dice (d10s for fighters), more access to healing magic (clerics generally have three cure light wounds spells at 1st level), and a negative hit point "buffer" that means characters aren't automatically killed at 0 HPs. In AD&D, all characters are restored to FULL HEALTH after four weeks of rest, regardless of HP totals (DMG p.82)...no fighter ever needs more than a month to recover.
The Basic games were originally written specifically to introduce players to core concepts with the idea they'd move onto the "greater" game shortly thereafter. Holmes Basic was the first version of this; Moldvay's Basic (B/X) was a rewriting of Holmes that is, more-or-less a streamlined version of the original LBB's + some content from the Greyhawk supplement. It's "Expert rules" were written for use with both Holmes's Basic and Moldvay's.
Mentzer's Basic BECMI was slightly different: the BE rewrote B/X but then took the hastily sketched "Known World" of Cook/Marsh and fattened it up, creating the town of "Threshold" in Karameikos (the original "starting town" was implied to be Luln near the border to the Black Eagle Barony)...and this filled out setting became popular! The Companion set (first mentioned/promised in B/X) was soon published by Mentzer and provided even more Known World information (now you could go to war with the Black Eagle Barony!), fleshing out the Known World in a way that would sound become known as the setting Mystara. For some reason TSR also decided to break up the Companion into two boxes (the "Master set" included rules from 26-36, which were originally supposed to be in the Companion rules)...perhaps because selling two boxes made more money than one...and launched new lines of adventure modules for each (the CM series for Companion-level adventures and the M series for Master level). Writing the Immortal set and the I-series of adventures was a logical progression.
But that had not been the original purpose of the Basic sets...they just morphed into it due to the popularity of what was selling and some sharp designers making interesting Mystara-fare...and it SHOWS when played out over time. Streamlined systems - designed to not confuse newbies learning the game - lose functionality as characters reach higher levels due to the lack of checks & balances in the simplified rules.
FOR EXAMPLE: the bulk of x.p. awarded in B/X comes from monetary treasure, necessitating larger and larger piles of gold to increase in level (leveling being necessary to "open content"). However, there's little to spend such treasure on. Whereas in AD&D, x.p. is awarded also for magical items (thus requiring less monetary treasure) plus there are costs to train (i.e. advance in level) and monthly expenses that must be paid, both for PCs and their henchfolk (retainers), based on level of experience.
Because of AD&D's more robust system, it can be played into high levels without a loss of functionality, extending heroic adventure play without becoming cartoony like some superheroic anime RPG.
B/X caps out its functionality circa level 12, in my experience. But it can be a slog to even get that far (due to durability issues) unless handing out huge steaming piles of coin and magical items...which is how we played as kids (ages 9-11). AD&D (1E) provides for more serious game play, and encourages actual world building...though some people prefer the more "wahoo" style of OD&D (which still starts to lose functionality around 10th level).
I'm glad you liked my maneuvers and such...if they found something to inspire your own game play, well, that's why I was writing those posts. Have fun!
; )
such an awesome explanaiton JD. I'd like to point that the ability to inflate STR alone is very undervalued, really broken
DeleteAwesome explanation indeed!
Delete