D&D 5E When do you think the revised fighter will be released?

[DEFCON 1]

With ranger being fixed, the fighter is now the weakest class by a large margin. When do you think they will get an update?

June 23rd, 2020 at 9:26 pm and 43 seconds Mountain Standard Time.

Make sure you remember that 2020 is a Leap Year so you don't get mad that it seems like its a day late.

 

[MoonSong]

The last two Septembers have had a "revised ranger", and it doesn't look like the "official" version will come out until sometime after XGtE, so in the best case scenario, in which the December UA is "we have added the revised ranger to the basic rules", that would mean "revising" took a couple of years. So even if the fighter is up for revision (which is a big if), there is no reason to believe an "official" revised fighter would be available before 2020.

And sorcerer and monk would be revised first, but that isn't going to happen, so I wouldn't really expect any changes to fighter before 6e.

 

[Tony Vargas]

With ranger being fixed, the fighter is now the weakest class by a large margin. When do you think they will get an update?

Lowest-"Tier," anyway - 'weak,' when you have reasonably high DPR, AC & hps, and can optimize for STR with two extra ASIs, is an unfortunate choice of words.

Probably the fighter will get yet another update in 6th ed, and I can't pretend to be looking forward to it. The record of 'fixing' or 'improving' the fighter is pretty bleak, each edition comes up with something to try to perk the fighter up and make it equal to other classes, but it generally takes away the cool stuff the prior edition gave the fighter with the same objective, or spreads it out to other classes. Other class designs seem to build on prior editions - casting gets easier and easier, more slots, higher relative DCs, etc, etc. The fighter got % STR & rapid attack progression, then the % str is gone, the progression nerfed to itterative, but they get tons of feats, then everyone gets feats and the progression's gone, but they get powers & marking, then the powers & marking are gone, but they get action surge & extra attack... which is kinda full-circle, really.

And, to be fair, the 5e fighter does bear vestiges of prior edition goodies. It gets 2 bonus feats vs the 4 everyone gets rather than 11 bonus feats vs the 7 everyone got in 3rd. It gets Action Surge, Second Wind and up to a half-dozen maneuvers (locked in one sub-class) in place of over 400 powers. It gets Combat Style in place of Weapon Talents, Combat Challenge/Superiority, and weapon specialization. It gets indomitable in place of saves that actually get better with level across the board.

 

[Michael Silverbane]

if you needs to be told why the fighter is weak then you must play some pretty shallow games.

I do, in fact, play very shallow games. So... In what ways are the fighters weak?

 

[Flexor the Mighty!]

My players running fighters are having a great time, despite the setup of the OotA campaign really making the whole fights per rest thing a non entity. So yes some classes nova better, but the fighters are puling their weight and helping the party. The BM fighter is having a blast with Commanders Strike especially.

 

[Satyrn]

I do, in fact, play very shallow games. So... In what ways are the fighters weak?

I must, too.

Although my gnome battlemaster was indeed weak - with only an 8 strength! (Yes, he was weak. Now, he's dead)

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[jgsugden]

Paladins > Fighters > Barbarians > Rangers is my assessment on power levels between the classes. However, all are above the playable line and I don't give a flying %#$@ if they're not perfectly balanced.

I would like to see them revise the Paladin smite to only once per turn, but that is the only change I favor amongst these classes. Everything else is unnecessary.

I'd also like to see them redo the monk, but only because I think they can make a better version of the class, not for balance reasons.

 

[MechaTarrasque]

It seems like there are three steps to deciding to revise a class: 1) recognize there is a problem, 2) deciding that the problem can't be resolved with new subclasses and/or toys (fighting styles, feats, spells, etc.), and 3) deciding that the opportunity cost for revising the class is worth what be lost in building new things. 5e's design makes 2) a mile-wide chasm to cross. A year ago I might have agreed that the fighter had a bridge across the chasm, but when the devs gave themselves permission to add fluff to fighter subclasses, that pretty much burned the bridge down (harder to build low fluff subclasses than subclasses with fluff). 5e's release schedule makes opportunity cost a pretty big deal. It seems to me that 2) and 3) seem like a pretty insurmountable barrier for any class to get revised before 5.5 or 6e.