mostundesired

I think part of this stems from a a warped call for verisimilitude, where they can see someone who can change the fabric of reality having enough time to dabble in swordplay (implying swordplay is easy to learn), but it's unreasonable for the trained swordsman to learn a bit about magical components needed to cast spells (implying it's impossible to understand unless you commit all of your time to learning everything about it). I think what everyone wants is that little bit of specialization to say that yes, my character spent a little more time to learn swordplay better than most. And I'm fine with that, but the logical equivalence would be the ability to pick up a couple spells, abilities, or what have you from other classes. Like "My fighter is a master with sword and shield, but also is a bit religious and can cast bless." I don't think anyone's opposed to that, but neither are they clamoring for it. Frankly, I hate playing as casters, so I'm fine giving passives to everyone so long as Fighters and the like get something more unique to them. But if we're talking about balance, this is definitely skewed.

Bit of an overstatement. It should be a benefit to both sides of the fight. If there's no punishment for being engaged, there's no point in having it at all.

As I illustrated before, that's already an issue. Although I prefer engagement over taunts in this regard. That's what healers and potions are for. Still, agreed that it shouldn't be all or nothing. In Dragon Age, this was made into one ability for all, and one for individual. Agreed, don't care for this. Although I would like to have options to deal with the latter situation.

That was rather sly phrasing you used just now. kanisatha said buffing, not self-buffing. Those aren't quite the same thing. Although, I think buffing the party is a priest and chanter thing, not a wizard thing, but at that point it's just being nitpicky. The point being made was that if other classes can have qualities that were defined as "For the Fighter." If those qualities are now being given to everyone, then it should be that qualities that are "For the Wizard" or "For the Priest" or what have you are available to fighters. Not that I agree with that. I'm much more looking forward to defining "For the Fighter" with more interesting passives, like the ones mentioned prior.

Bad at multitasking as I am, I went at it with two min maxed characters, one tank(crusader) and one DPS(scout). Engagement became useless only if someone decided to go after my scout instead of my crusader, but that scenario tended to happen only when they were too far from my crusader, in which case my scout have to run around my crusader and hope he catches them before they catch my scout, or my scout was in melee combat and the enemy just turned around to attack her, in which case I just have to use one of the disengagement abilities. The former is the real problem. There isn't a way to actually encourage enemies to go after my tank. Stay on my tank, sure, but aggro management isn't a thing. Which I'm okay with, honestly, and doesn't reflect a problem with the engagement system. As for when enemies disengaged when my scout did high damage from range, disengagement attacks only mattered if the crusader did enough damage to make it a non-issue, or if he could knock them prone. Which he couldn't, by the way, because that ability isn't available to crusaders until level 10. Still, thise occasions are rare and I just need to work around them when they come up. TL;DR Engagement is pretty good, disengagement attacks aren't inherently valuable unless they're high damage or inflict a status to make the disengaging enemy less of a threat, and that's good enough for me so long as I have options on how to deal with that. **EDIT** Failed to emphasize, the hard part isn't holding engagement, the hard part is getting enemies to engage you in the first place, and that only gets harder as the fight goes on. It's not very hard if you use the right abilities and positioning, but as the encounter goes on, and you use up your abilities, it approaches impossibility. Especially if more enemies join in halfway through the fight.

Finally caught up with this thread. I like the suggestion of giving fighters further, different weapon bonuses as a replacement (like turning grazes to misses for sword and shield, adding penetration to two-handed, etc.) But what about other classes? What replaces the Rogue's Deep Pockets? The Ranger's Gunner and Marksman? Mostly asking as a thinking exercise so that devs might consider it if they chance upon it.

I'll throw my hat in. I think the problem with the injury system is the fact that it exists for the sole purpose of forcing you to rest. Ideally, injuries should be balanced not to force you to rest; resting should be something you do to keep your characters from getting to worn out. That sounds contradictory, but I guess what I'm saying is that as is, it's too straight forward. For one, it's unreasonable for injuries to be healed from resting and eating food. I'm not usually one to argue for realism in a game, but I think it's pertinent in this case. It's too easy to do, and virtually negates the decision of "do I rest, or do I press on?" Of course, you rest, at different times depending on how much of a health penalty you can handle. I think that instead, if you get an injury, it should slow you down until you get it treated. Food doesn't treat an injury, it gives you energy (i.e., endurance). Bandages, stitches, and giving the injured body part a rest, that's how you treat an injury. For the sake of both verisimilitude and balance, what if you can offset the endurance decrease with food, but the actual injury type itself (bruised ribs, concussions, etc.) stays until you rest it off with bandages or some such? Of course, for that to work, you'd have to make injuries give a severe enough debuff that after two or three, you're strongly encouraged to rest. I also think it would make sense to keep the stacking of four injuries = death system they have currently. TL;DR, I think they should make the process of removing the health decrease different from the process of removing an injury like a concussion, and make the latter have a more severe effect on combat. This way, it's less of an obligation and more of a decision. I can tell you right now, most people would decide to rest than to press on, even taking skill level into account; some people just don't like working with characters that aren't at 100%. Anyone who doesn't mind is already much less likely to rest, even with the system as is, as can be seen in this very thread.

If that were the case people are going to be disappointed because they still need to deal with a pet which has to be summoned or they face the penalty. I'm pretty late to the party, but this doesn't seem to be the case. I haven't gotten very far, and I've just been testing abilities on civilians, so I might be wrong, but according to both the description of the subclass and my own testing, there's no penalty for not summoning your pet.