Do fighters need to have more back story then other classes, if your starting your campaign at level 1? The description suggests that the fighter should be a veteran already, especially when you rule out the village militia option.
Not necessarily. The only rule with backstory is it should be as in depth as you and your DM agree on. Some people like to write 2,000 word backstories, some people like to say, I was a soldier in the war, and now I'm not. Some people like to say I'm Bob the fighter, let's go. None of these are more valid than any others. It all comes down to what you personally enjoy. If your DM asks for something specifically, then you should work with them as best you can (though they should also understand not to ask for more than you really want to do).
Also, to answer your question more directly, clerics probably spent years learning about their god, while wizards spent years studying at a school or under a master wizard. Even barbarians spent years learning how to fight for their tribe. Any class at 1st level has put in a good amount of time training. That's why they can do things your typical farmer or shopkeeper can't even imagine.
Not necessarily. The only rule with backstory is it should be as in depth as you and your DM agree on. Some people like to write 2,000 word backstories, some people like to say, I was a soldier in the war, and now I'm not. Some people like to say I'm Bob the fighter, let's go. None of these are more valid than any others. It all comes down to what you personally enjoy. If your DM asks for something specifically, then you should work with them as best you can (though they should also understand not to ask for more than you really want to do).
Also, to answer your question more directly, clerics probably spent years learning about their god, while wizards spent years studying at a school or under a master wizard. Even barbarians spent years learning how to fight for their tribe. Any class at 1st level has put in a good amount of time training. That's why they can do things your typical farmer or shopkeeper can't even imagine.
I would like to also add that at level 1, your character might not be as well versed as you'd like; a level 1 wizard is merely an initiate that hasn't even devoted themselves to a school, a level 1 paladin is someone preparing for their oath, and a level 1 warlock might have just formed their pact a day or two ago before the campaign starts. Certainly they are extraordinary, but just barely so. Really depends on you.
But on OP's question, I don't think it matters as long as the DM says its fine and it vaguely explains your character.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
It's ok Ranger, you'll always be cool to me.. Unless druid gets another use for its wild shape charges.
Not every member of the city watch, the village militia, or the queen’s army is a fighter. Most of these troops are relatively untrained soldiers with only the most basic combat knowledge. Veteran soldiers, military officers, trained bodyguards, dedicated knights, and similar figures are fighters.
If so, I think that's a description of the class as a whole, not necessarily the class at level 1. At level one you might be just at the start of this journey - a competent city watchman with a natural flare to develop into something more, for example.
I would imagine a fighter is a competent Non-commissioned officer, not a rank-and-file soldier. In the modern army Sergeants are Veterans. They lead troops, albeit a small group of troops to a very large group of troops.
When I populate a town I will have some number of militia or at least a town watch. If the militia has any sophistication at all, they will have a fighter in charge, maybe a lvl 1 or a lvl 2 fighter, but a fighter. If the town is large enough to have a force as large as 30 soldiers, I have a lvl 3 fighter (or paladin or ranger) in charge as an officer. I consider lvl 4 to be about the equivalent of a captain. Level 5 is a major, level 6 is a LtC and then we're almost always going to have titled nobles at lvl 7 leading any combat troops, because you're talking about a force of 500 or more. I believe only a noble would lead a force this size in my world.
Nobles would occupy posts from level 3 on up. A young knight might command 30 troops or half as many trained mounted warriors. But a force this size might also be commanded by a "professional" soldier, who is likely skilled at level 3.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Cum catapultae proscriptae erunt tum soli proscript catapultas habebunt
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Do fighters need to have more back story then other classes, if your starting your campaign at level 1? The description suggests that the fighter should be a veteran already, especially when you rule out the village militia option.
Not necessarily. The only rule with backstory is it should be as in depth as you and your DM agree on. Some people like to write 2,000 word backstories, some people like to say, I was a soldier in the war, and now I'm not. Some people like to say I'm Bob the fighter, let's go. None of these are more valid than any others. It all comes down to what you personally enjoy. If your DM asks for something specifically, then you should work with them as best you can (though they should also understand not to ask for more than you really want to do).
Also, to answer your question more directly, clerics probably spent years learning about their god, while wizards spent years studying at a school or under a master wizard. Even barbarians spent years learning how to fight for their tribe. Any class at 1st level has put in a good amount of time training. That's why they can do things your typical farmer or shopkeeper can't even imagine.
I would like to also add that at level 1, your character might not be as well versed as you'd like; a level 1 wizard is merely an initiate that hasn't even devoted themselves to a school, a level 1 paladin is someone preparing for their oath, and a level 1 warlock might have just formed their pact a day or two ago before the campaign starts. Certainly they are extraordinary, but just barely so. Really depends on you.
But on OP's question, I don't think it matters as long as the DM says its fine and it vaguely explains your character.
It's ok Ranger, you'll always be cool to me.. Unless druid gets another use for its wild shape charges.
I guess you are referring to this passage?
If so, I think that's a description of the class as a whole, not necessarily the class at level 1. At level one you might be just at the start of this journey - a competent city watchman with a natural flare to develop into something more, for example.
I would imagine a fighter is a competent Non-commissioned officer, not a rank-and-file soldier. In the modern army Sergeants are Veterans. They lead troops, albeit a small group of troops to a very large group of troops.
When I populate a town I will have some number of militia or at least a town watch. If the militia has any sophistication at all, they will have a fighter in charge, maybe a lvl 1 or a lvl 2 fighter, but a fighter. If the town is large enough to have a force as large as 30 soldiers, I have a lvl 3 fighter (or paladin or ranger) in charge as an officer. I consider lvl 4 to be about the equivalent of a captain. Level 5 is a major, level 6 is a LtC and then we're almost always going to have titled nobles at lvl 7 leading any combat troops, because you're talking about a force of 500 or more. I believe only a noble would lead a force this size in my world.
Nobles would occupy posts from level 3 on up. A young knight might command 30 troops or half as many trained mounted warriors. But a force this size might also be commanded by a "professional" soldier, who is likely skilled at level 3.
Cum catapultae proscriptae erunt tum soli proscript catapultas habebunt