D&D 5E Class Analysis: Fighter and Bard

[Jack the Lad]

To be a bit more nuanced, i do think it's fair to say, "if you want to do clearly supernatural things, like punch through iron doors and leap half a football field, don't play the two "badass normal" classes (fighter and rogue)."

I don't think that's fair to say.

'Badass Normal' has an entirely different meaning in D&D, and there's no basis for the apparently widespread belief that characters who can't cast spells should be unable to go beyond real world human limits.

Nobody in the real world could kill a dragon with a sword. Nobody in the real world could stand there while someone hit them in the face with an axe 50 times.

But we draw the line at punching through iron doors and jumping long distances? That makes no sense to me whatsoever.

 

[Andor]

For me, the answer to your question is that it becomes hard to play a powerful but non-magical character. (A long the lines of, say, Conan, or Boromir.)

My answer to that is you can. Conan was blessed with plot armour. I don't know too many game systems where tossing a stool is going to kill anyone in one hit, let alone before a readied action can go off. As for Boromir he demonstrated tremendous strength, endurance and courage. When it came to it he single-handedly killed dozens of orcs before he was finally felled by massed archers, buying his companions time to escape. That sounds exactly like what would happen to a high level champion without magical backup in that same scenario. Where does the problem lie?

I have to agree with this. 'If you want to be powerful, maybe you should play something other than a Fighter' is not a helpful or constructive argument.

Define powerful. A high level fighter is worth dozens of lesser men in combat. He can chop a warhorse in half in a single blow and jump off a building without even slowing down. He is about on par with Captain America and maybe even Wolverine.

The problem is not that the fighter isn't powerful. It's that punching someone in the face is not as deadly as shooting them wih a LAW. So you're looking at Captain America and wondering why he doesn't get to use the cool toys. He does, he just has to get trained in them first, just like you can't fly a plane without training.

Or he has to go out and get the cool toy. The DMG is probably going to include classic D&D items like flying carpets and brooms. Why would you give those to the Mage who can already fly? Kit like that goes to the fighter. And a fighter with a flying carpet, a +1 bow, and a barrel of arrows can kill the Terrasque without risk.

Whither balance?

 

[ZombieRoboNinja]

I don't think that's fair to say.

'Badass Normal' has an entirely different meaning in D&D, and there's no basis for the apparently widespread belief that characters who can't cast spells should be unable to go beyond real world human limits.

Nobody in the real world could kill a dragon with a sword. Nobody in the real world could stand there while someone hit them in the face with an axe 50 times.

But we draw the line at punching through iron doors and jumping long distances? That makes no sense to me whatsoever.

First off, that's not how I interpret hp to work, but let's not go down that rabbit hole.

The point is, many people do want to play that way. Telling them it's unrealistic or silly won't get you far. So they get, by my count, 5 out of the 40+ subclasses in the PHB to work with. If you want a mythic supernatural warrior, totem barbarian, monk and ranger are exactly that.

 

[Andor]

But we draw the line at punching through iron doors and jumping long distances? That makes no sense to me whatsoever.

It doesn't have to. It has to make sense to the bulk of the target market, not to you. Most people can grasp that Boromir is closer to Captain America than the Hulk. If you want to play Chu Chullanin (who was trained by the Sidhe iirc and therefore magic) you can. You just can't pretend he's not magic.

What you're not getting is that you are pointing at the guys who would rather play Dartanian than Beowulf and telling them they want badwrongfun. If you want to play medieval superheroes you can. You can do it in any number of game systems like Hero or Exalted, you can even play them in this one. What you don't get to do is tell other people that superheroes in chain mail is the only right way to play.

 

[Uskglass]

If you want a mythic supernatural warrior, totem barbarian, monk and ranger are exactly that.

Those may have some good fluff for that, but in terms of balance at higher levels they don't do any better than the fighter I'm afraid.

 

[Capricia]

My answer to that is you can. Conan was blessed with plot armour. I don't know too many game systems where tossing a stool is going to kill anyone in one hit, let alone before a readied action can go off. As for Boromir he demonstrated tremendous strength, endurance and courage. When it came to it he single-handedly killed dozens of orcs before he was finally felled by massed archers, buying his companions time to escape. That sounds exactly like what would happen to a high level champion without magical backup in that same scenario. Where does the problem lie?

Really? You should look at a few non-d20 systems. Oneshotting someone with a stool is super easy in Fate Core, for example, with the math still being balanced. As for Boromir defeating dozens of orcs...that was possible in 3e and 4e, but with bounded accuracy, even a dozen orcs can be incredibly deadly for a fighter. A high level champion would go out like a chump in such a situation. A high level wizard would cast meteorswarm or forcecage or teleport or...well, you get the point.

Define powerful. A high level fighter is worth dozens of lesser men in combat. He can chop a warhorse in half in a single blow and jump off a building without even slowing down. He is about on par with Captain America and maybe even Wolverine.

Powerful. The kind of fighter that can, as you say, be worth dozens of lesser men in combat. Two dozen guys with simple weapons could easily overwhelm a fighter. The kind who can chop a warhorse in a single blow. A highlevel fighter does 2d6+5 damage on a hit, averaged at 12. A warhorse has 19 hp. The kind of fighter who can jump off a building without even slowing down. Any fall of 10 feet or greater inflicts damage and knocks you prone. In every single one of your examples, you name something that a wizard can do (fireball, sorching ray, featherfall) but a fighter can't. That's...that's kind of impressive, in a weird way.

As for being on par with Captain America...which Cap are we talking about? The 616 Captain America who can outfight Hulk, Spider-man, and just about everyone else? The Ultimate Captain America who uses 60-ton tanks as bludgeoning weapons? The cinematic Captain America who can take down a science fiction warplane in a single round? Yeah, I wouldn't mind playing any of those guys.

The problem is not that the fighter isn't powerful. It's that punching someone in the face is not as deadly as shooting them wih a LAW. So you're looking at Captain America and wondering why he doesn't get to use the cool toys. He does, he just has to get trained in them first, just like you can't fly a plane without training.

Flying a plane /= casting a spell

Seriously. This forced analogy that magic is equal to technology is ridiculous. It's an analogy whose premise is challenged immediately, and if all parties can't agree on that, it really doesn't have any weight in an argument.

Or he has to go out and get the cool toy. The DMG is probably going to include classic D&D items like flying carpets and brooms. Why would you give those to the Mage who can already fly? Kit like that goes to the fighter. And a fighter with a flying carpet, a +1 bow, and a barrel of arrows can kill the Terrasque without risk.


Whither balance?

Yes, yes, if you give the fighter magic items, he can almost do things like a wizard. This is silly.

First off, that's not how I interpret hp to work, but let's not go down that rabbit hole.

The point is, many people do want to play that way. Telling them it's unrealistic or silly won't get you far. So they get, by my count, 5 out of the 40+ subclasses in the PHB to work with. If you want a mythic supernatural warrior, totem barbarian, monk and ranger are exactly that.

There is a fundamental difference between calling something supernatural and mythical and it actually being supernatural and mythical. Yes, monks have mystical flavor, but they're weaker in combat than a fighter and their "supernatural" abilities are either inferior spellcasting of the least useful abilities or minor, super specific benefits like "you don't age, but you still die of old age" while a wizard has, again, hundreds of spells and can even become immortal through reincarnation.

 

[Uskglass]

What you don't get to do is tell other people that superheroes in chain mail is the only right way to play.

But apparently superheroes in pijamas is.

 

[pemerton]

Conan was blessed with plot armour. I don't know too many game systems where tossing a stool is going to kill anyone in one hit, let alone before a readied action can go off.

A system can be designed in which the fighter-player spends a token to act first (4e gives models for this, with its various no action/free action abilities to boost initiative); and if the system allows SoD, the same (or similar) tokens can permit the fighter-player to trigger a SoD.

(Rolemaster also can allow for a throw that is both quick and deadly, but it does it via a somewhat complicated system of continuous initiative/action - rather than turn-by-turn - and applying modifications to the crit roll.)

Boromir he demonstrated tremendous strength, endurance and courage.

So why isn't the fighter immune to fear? (Two classes in 1986's OA had this - Samurai and Kensai.) Why can't the fighter cause lesser foes to fall back in fear? (The same two classes had that ability, too, allowing a save vs Dragon Breath, which on the AD&D tables for 1 HD creatures is close to auto-success for the fighter.) And why can't the fighter inspire his/her friends?

This is one way it is, at least in principle, quite easy to give the fighter useful abilities in the exploration pillar - when the party has to climb a mountain, struggle through a snowfield, etc, they should be less likely to fail if the insipiration of their Boromir-like companion keeps them going. There is no reason, as far as genre and verisimilitude are concerned, why inspiration should be the soul province of priests (Bless, Guideance) or performers (Bardic inspiration).

 

[ZombieRoboNinja]

A system can be designed in which the fighter-player spends a token to act first (4e gives models for this, with its various no action/free action abilities to boost initiative); and if the system allows SoD, the same (or similar) tokens can permit the fighter-player to trigger a SoD.

(Rolemaster also can allow for a throw that is both quick and deadly, but it does it via a somewhat complicated system of continuous initiative/action - rather than turn-by-turn - and applying modifications to the crit roll.)

So why isn't the fighter immune to fear? (Two classes in 1986's OA had this - Samurai and Kensai.) Why can't the fighter cause lesser foes to fall back in fear? (The same two classes had that ability, too, allowing a save vs Dragon Breath, which on the AD&D tables for 1 HD creatures is close to auto-success for the fighter.) And why can't the fighter inspire his/her friends?

This is one way it is, at least in principle, quite easy to give the fighter useful abilities in the exploration pillar - when the party has to climb a mountain, struggle through a snowfield, etc, they should be less likely to fail if the insipiration of their Boromir-like companion keeps them going. There is no reason, as far as genre and verisimilitude are concerned, why inspiration should be the soul province of priests (Bless, Guideance) or performers (Bardic inspiration).

There's a feat for that, Inspiring Leader. You can scare people with a battle master maneuver too. We could certainly use more, but they're not nonexistent.

 

[ZombieRoboNinja]

There is a fundamental difference between calling something supernatural and mythical and it actually being supernatural and mythical. Yes, monks have mystical flavor, but they're weaker in combat than a fighter and their "supernatural" abilities are either inferior spellcasting of the least useful abilities or minor, super specific benefits like "you don't age, but you still die of old age" while a wizard has, again, hundreds of spells and can even become immortal through reincarnation.

Just for clarity, which are the overpowered classes and which are the hopelessly underpowered ones? Wizards, bards, and clerics are overpowered, while fighters are underpowered. I guess rogues, rangers, monks, barbarians, and paladins are all trash too? How about sorcerers, who certainly aren't using many of the 15 spells they'll ever know on Knock or Jump? Certainly not warlocks, right?