D&D 5E yes, this again: Fighters need more non-combat options

Sacrosanct said:

Please provide the quotes of people saying you aren't allowed to modify your games to what you prefer. Or did you mean you want an official change to the class based on your preferences? Because that would be pretty ironic, you complaining about how you feel like people are telling you that your preference isn't allowed, but demanding official changes to the game that would do the exact same thing you're complaining about to a bunch of other players

Click to expand...

Elfcrusher said:

I'm mostly in agreement with you in this thread, but I think this particular argument is B.S. We are all discussing what we think our ideal game would look like. Any opinion about that could be criticized...if one really wanted to go that route...as trying to force one's preferences on other people.

Click to expand...

Quickleaf said:

To follow-up on my previous post, years ago I did a comparison of the 5e classes looking for abilities absolutely unique to each class – my thinking was that these abilities would shine a light on the "high concept" for each class. Ideally, the narrative identity and the mechanics would embrace and be mutually reinforcing. Here's what I found...

While it's not strictly about number of unique features – for example, some features may contribute more to illuminating narrative identity than others – I do think that this analysis shines a light on (a) how strong a class's narrative/identity/concept is, and (b) how closely the mechanical features map to that narrative/identity/concept.

Click to expand...

Quickleaf said:

EDIT: I've noticed very few single-class fighters playing & DMing 5e, compared to other classes which I've seen many single-classed PCs. My hunch is this phenomenon has to do with many players wanting identity & a lens providing connection to the world to be part of their PC, and that they often look to the character classes to supply that. Not finding it in the Fighter, they then multi-class. Or, worse, they "dip" into Fighter for a mechanical benefit.

Click to expand...

Gladius Legis said:

And I see single-class Fighters all the time when I play or DM. You can't use your own anecdotal evidence to make your point.

Click to expand...

Gladius Legis said:

And I see single-class Fighters all the time when I play or DM. You can't use your own anecdotal evidence to make your point.

Click to expand...

Gladius Legis said:

I'd say that analysis shouldn't be about number of features at all. It's just a list that doesn't take into account whether said features contribute to "narrative" or "concept" or whatever, or are even mechanically useful.

Like that same list has Rangers with 9 "unique" features, which is supposedly a good number, yet a lot of the Ranger's features on that list are straight trash that fail not only to be effective, but fail to express the intended narrative or concept of the class.

This list also, conveniently, leaves out subclasses. Some classes have more of their "narrative" or "concept" relegated to the subclasses, and I'd say the Fighter (and for that matter the Ranger) are definitely among those classes that do.

Click to expand...

Blue said:

But as far as I know, they haven't called out that the games are featless, which is what you are suggesting. As a matter of fact, the point about humans having more feats suggest that they are monitoring if characters have feats, which is a COMPLETELY different question and one that does not support that fighters can't take feats.

I'd say that the vast majority of my characters before their second ASI have no feats is true, yet I have never played in a featless game. I could take feats.

Click to expand...

CleverNickName said:

What about mixing subclasses?

Say we let the Fighter also use some of the Rogue's subclasses...you know, add Mastermind, Scout, and Inquisitive to the list of subclasses available to the Fighter.

• A Mastermind fighter would make for a very interesting and fun social character, sort of a pulp fiction "man of action."
• Most of the Scout's features and abilities would lend themselves well to a lightly-armored, skirmisher-type fighter also (but Sudden Strike will need to be adjusted because sneak attack.)
• An Inquisitive fighter would check all the boxes for Social and Exploration, too (but again, the 17th level ability would need to be adjusted because sneak attack.)

(shrug) Just throwing ideas at the wall, seeing if any stick.

Click to expand...