D&D 5E The Fighter/Martial Problem (In Depth Ponderings)

[Trasvi]

It is not close to +100% damage unless you started with a 20 in strength.

Maybe I wasn't clear, but I was talking specifically about Duelling + PAM spear.
Base fighter with Spear as Str16 is doing D6+5 once per turn.
Adding PAM you're doing (D6+5) +(D4+5) +often another (D6+5).
For very low investment it's a solid DPS and tank in the early game.
I'm under no illusions that it's the best and didn't mean to make it seem like I did.

Also using your free feat for Magic Initiate with Hex, Booming Blade and possibly Green Flame Blade is going to be competitive at 4th level.

My deepest desire for DnD is for it to support non-magical characters equal in gameplay engagement and power to magical characters. I want to play the ascended common soldier or knight. I think there's a lot of evidence that other people feel the same way.
Taking cantrip feats is admitting defeat and joining the enemy .
I know currently eschewing magic entirely on a fighter is going to be suboptimal , but my current character is doing just that- partially to set a personal challenge in a party of non-optimisers, and partly to explore just how much worse it is.

Sure if that is what is fun for you. It is not for most players I see play fighters. I think most of them would rather use a bonus action to throw a net on an enemy once a fight, even if they are sticking to non-magic stuff.

Hence why I play a battlemaster?
Actually I'm playtesting the OneDnD battlemaster currently, it's overall in a better sport but it seems that quick toss didn't make the cut for the new edition.

 

[ECMO3]

There are rules for how to craft magical items in the DMG and other books. It is the default option in the game.

RAW very few campaigns are going to afford fighters the opportunity to craft anything beyond uncommon items. You might be able to squeeze in 1 rare item over 10-15 levels, working for a while, then adventuring, but even that is situational.

RAW to make this work you a need:
1. proficiency either in Arcana or a tool set you use to craft (situational).
2. You have to find the ingredients (not that hard but has to be built into the plot and the rest of the party need to agree)
3. get the cash (not hard in most campaigns)
4. Find the downtime (almost never available for anything beyond uncommon items and again requires party agreement).

Also consider, this thread is centered on the idea that Fighers are limited, especially in non-combat pillars. RAW if you have downtime to craft very rare magic items for high level play then you also have downtime for skill training.

Some DMs remove these options, but I've played with a lot of DMS - and it is rare, and usually setting specific, when it does.These feats add to your tool belt. They do not restrict it. They also do not stand alone. They combine with your subclass abilities, and present other options. When I use a polearm, I am very cognizant that I am holding a long metal rod that can manipulate the environment up to 10 feet away. While people till continue to tend towards attacking with good attacks, you also need to consider the control elements this combo brings.

You can bring more control with other feats. Magic Initiate, Fey Touched, Crusher, Slasher and Shadow Touched come immediately to mind.

It has been lauded, since the start of 5E, as one of the only real 'defender' control tricks out there (especially when combined with sentinel).

By people on message boards and in a whiteroom. And I am not saying it is aweful, but it is not great either. With Sentinel you are now talking 3 feats GWM/PAM/Sentinel on this hyper-optimized, narrowly focused build and you are gobbling up your bonus actions and reactions while not taking a single ability increase until level 12 (or level 8 if you got a 1st level feat.

You're assuming this has to limit options when that remains entirely in player hands.Superior Technique is not an alternative to a feat - it uses a different resource.

Martail Adept is an alternative to PAM. It is not a great feat. When combined with Superior Technique as a fighting style it is going to bring more control than PAM+GWF will.

Martial Adept + Superior Technique means you can use a maneuver in every fight if you follow the two fights a short rest pacing. More than that if you do more short rests like most campaigns.

Regardless, having two superiority dice from these approaches can be fun for 2 attacks per short rest.

Which is generally once every fight with standard pacing. If your aveeerage fight is 4 rounds you are talking about being able to use a maneuver on 25% of your turns.

I think that is more often than you are going to be able to use the PAM-Sentinel AOO, will provide more powerful effects when you use it, and it costs one feat less.

. I'm not saying it isn't a good idea ... just one that diminishes in utility over the phases of the class. I've seen Battlemaster be popular at lower levels, but it is common for higher level players to struggle with 5 or 6 superiority dice when they're making so many attacks.

Battlemaster is not a great subclass in terms of combat power IMO.

Battlemaster dice compare well to feats like PAM or Martial Adept. They do not compare well to the better subclass abilities from fighters or to better Feats.

Battlemaster is popular but the fundamental problem at high level is the superiority dice do not keep up with the abilities from the other subclasses. It is a power problem, not a dice problem IMO.

 

[nevin]

All any martial PC needs to effectively use their abilities is a non-magical weapon of the type they specialized into. If they encounter an enemy that requires a magical weapon to bypass then they need a magical weapon for that as well (at least at some point), but It doesn't even have to be the one they specialized into. It can be a measly +1 dagger. Your specialized weapon doesn't have to apply to every round of every combat ever.

What you are looking for isn't simply for them to use their abilities effectively - it's quite a bit more than that.


IMO. Catering = feeling the need to place specific types of stronger magical weapons for a particular player because they won't enjoy the game if you don't.

I mean what's the difference in kind between someone telling the DM i won't enjoy the game if I don't get a flametongue shortsword @ level 1 and someone saying they won't enjoy the game if their Crossbow Expert, Sharpshooter Fighter doesn't find a strong magical hand crossbow. I think it's a difference of degree - but not kind.

no one or at least not me ever said if you don't get a magic sword at level one. But I responded to the post that clearly said DM didn't ever have to feel obligated drop stuff for the character's specilization so yeah if by level 5 or so you still haven't found an appropriate magical weapon for the game your playing then I stand by my statement that it's just a passive aggressive naughty word you to the player the DM is punishing for picking the "wrong stuff" But nice attempt to try and say I inferred everyone get's it all at 1st level.

 

[ECMO3]

Maybe I wasn't clear, but I was talking specifically about Duelling + PAM spear.
Base fighter with Spear as Str16 is doing D6+5 once per turn.
Adding PAM you're doing (D6+5) +(D4+5) +often another (D6+5).

Yeah but that is not even 100% higher (let alone 200% higher) than an alternative. That is 16 average damage. A Maul and 18 strength is 11 and is hitting more. Dueling and a Lance and an 18 strength is 12.5 and both those still have bonus actions available and higher attack rolls.

Hand Axes, Two Weapon Fighting and Thrown Weapon Fighting has the same attack roll and is doing 17 DPR.

It is less than 30% on all 3 of those examples.

For very low investment it's a solid DPS and tank in the early game.

It is a good DPS tank, I will give you that. I don't think it is better at this than Sword and Board and defense though.

 

[FrogReaver]

no one or at least not me ever said if you don't get a magic sword at level one.

No one said you did.

But I responded to the post that clearly said DM didn't ever have to feel obligated drop stuff for the character's specilization so yeah if by level 5 or so you still haven't found an appropriate magical weapon for the game your playing then I stand by my statement that it's just a passive aggressive naughty word you to the player the DM is punishing for picking the "wrong stuff" But nice attempt to try and say I inferred everyone get's it all at 1st level.

That wasn’t my inference nor my point. I am sorry if thats how you took it.

My point was that whether level 1 or 5 it’s the same type of thing being done. That said, type isnt the only important parameter, degrees matter. It’s just value judgments around degree are typically arbitrary - why is it okay to do that type of thing at level 5 but not level 1. The answer isn’t complicated, it’s all because of our expectations that are derived from social norms.

So if the social norm is the DM gives out build matching magical weapons by level 5 and this one has not then the issue is that the social expectation has been violated by the DM.

Likewise if the social expectation is the dm won’t ensure magic weapons match character build choices then a player complaining that he doesn’t is the one violating social expectations.

What we are seeing here is the meeting of 2 different social expectations - neither one being inherently righter or better than the other.

 

[Micah Sweet]

no one or at least not me ever said if you don't get a magic sword at level one. But I responded to the post that clearly said DM didn't ever have to feel obligated drop stuff for the character's specilization so yeah if by level 5 or so you still haven't found an appropriate magical weapon for the game your playing then I stand by my statement that it's just a passive aggressive naughty word you to the player the DM is punishing for picking the "wrong stuff" But nice attempt to try and say I inferred everyone get's it all at 1st level.

And I stand by it. The DM is not obligated to drop stuff for a PCs specialization. As I said above, the PC can look for it, quest for it, make it, or commission it. Opportunities for such activities would be available in the sandbox games I prefer. Or they can wander around on other business and hope it falls into their lap (so to speak). I know what I'd do, if a magical ranseur (or any other specific piece of magical gear) was so important to my character concept that I somehow can't have fun without one.

I understand that to you this makes me a jerk and a bad DM. I accept that you feel this way, but I strenuously disagree.

 

[ezo]

And I stand by it. The DM is not obligated to drop stuff for a PCs specialization. As I said above, the PC can look for it, quest for it, make it, or commission it. Opportunities for such activities would be available in the sandbox games I prefer. Or they can wander around on other business and hope it falls into their lap (so to speak). I know what I'd do, if a magical ranseur (or any other specific piece of magical gear) was so important to my character concept that I somehow can't have fun without one.

I understand that to you this makes me a jerk and a bad DM. I accept that you feel this way, but I strenuously disagree.

This is the way we play as well. I've seen players quest to create magic items many times over the years in different editions.

 

[ECMO3]

no one or at least not me ever said if you don't get a magic sword at level one. But I responded to the post that clearly said DM didn't ever have to feel obligated drop stuff for the character's specilization so yeah if by level 5 or so you still haven't found an appropriate magical weapon for the game your playing then I stand by my statement that it's just a passive aggressive naughty word you to the player the DM is punishing for picking the "wrong stuff" But nice attempt to try and say I inferred everyone get's it all at 1st level.

No it is not passive aggressive. As a DM I don't worry about the magic I give my players at all. That is not my job as DM. My job is to build the story and world and populate it if I made it.

With the exception of plot items, the magic they get is either what is in the published adventure that WE ALL agreed to play or what I chose or rolled to put in an adventure I developed.

So yes I don't cater to players, but I also don't get in their way. I had a Bladesinger with a 30 AC from AC boosting items that were in the adventure before the Bladesinger was in the adventure. I didn't pull those items because they complimented her character either. I had another character get infected with Wererat and be completely immune to most enemy attacks for several levels. I did not start throwing tougher enemies at them to make up for this.

It is your job as a player to build a viable PC, not my job to bend the adventure to make sure she is viable and if the DM is doing that, the other players are going to notice and the game will be less fun for everyone including the PC you are babying.

Should I change the Green Dragon in the adventure to a Red Dragon just so you feel better about choosing a Tiefling with Fire Resistance?

 

[ECMO3]

And I stand by it. The DM is not obligated to drop stuff for a PCs specialization. As I said above, the PC can look for it, quest for it, make it, or commission it.

This is part of the session 0 discussion and other players have a say. This might work well in 1-on-1 games but I think it rarely will work in games with multiple players.

Other PCs are very rarely going to want a play a campaign where they spend their time questing for your favorite magic item and most are also not going to play a game where you get enough downtime to make good magic items. The only one of these that is generally viable on most tables is purchasing it, but even that is sketch depending on the story.

Finally, what if my 1st level Wizard tells you "I am incomplete and not having fun without a Staff of Power, so either drop one, tell me how to quest and get it, let me make it or let me commission it" if you are the DM, what do you do with that request, keeping in mind your statement above?

Here is a another one - What if my Bladesinger wants to do melee only, and she is already one of the best in the party at it, but she wants you to drop bracers of defense for her, because if you do that enemies will need a double 20 with disadvantage to hit her. She could choose and cast a few offensive spells instead, but that is her specialization and build choice. Do you honor it?

 

[Trasvi]

This is part of the session 0 discussion and other players have a say. This might work well in 1-on-1 games but I think it rarely will work in games with multiple players.

Other PCs are very rarely going to want a play a campaign where they spend their time questing for your favorite magic item and most are also not going to play a game where you get enough downtime to make good magic items. The only one of these that is generally viable on most tables is purchasing it, but even that is sketch depending on the story.

Finally, what if my 1st level Wizard tells you "I am incomplete and not having fun without a Staff of Power, so either drop one, tell me how to quest and get it, let me make it or let me commission it" if you are the DM, what do you do with that request, keeping in mind your statement above?

Here is a another one - What if my Bladesinger wants to do melee only, and she is already one of the best in the party at it, but she wants you to drop bracers of defense for her, because if you do that enemies will need a double 20 with disadvantage to hit her. She could choose and cast a few offensive spells instead, but that is her specialization and build choice. Do you honor it?

Kinda crazy how a point that "some martial/fighter class features cause lock in to certain weapon types" got wilfully misinterpreted to "If I dOnT gIvE mY wIzArD A StAfF oF PoWeR aT lEvEl OnE Am I bad Dm!?". You guys are ridiculous