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

Mistwell said:

One subclass of fighter gets spells, and all classes can take feats which grant spells, therefore we can say all classes get spells it's just that some get more. Getting more feats is SUPER MEANINGFUL. It's not something available to everyone else - nobody else gets as many. Much like Fighters can't get many spells, but they can get a few. If we filled some of those feat slots with fixed abilities which duplicated some feats, suddenly you wouldn't be able to make this argument, even though it would DECREASE the flexibility of the fighter. You have to actually address that feat argument with something more than a hand waive dismissal of "but yeah everyone gets feats" because it's not really addressing the point made. And to call out that it's optional is fine, but any official "fix" would almost certainly be optional as well so not sure why that's a good point? We're going to deal with the realm of optional anyway, so let's talk about the current options in a real way. Which means looking at the reality of what "gets more feats" means for this topic.

Click to expand...

Right, I recognized feats earlier in the thread as a feature that helps, but the fact is most players don’t use them.

The rest of the arguments in this thread, esp the “just roleplay” argument, range from weak to outright spurious. You’re going to have to make dice rolls eventually, and when you do, that role playing isn’t going to change that you have absolutely nothing backing up the concept of being good at something. For most skills, you’ll be half as good as a trained character, if you don’t have proficiency, if not worse than that. The idea this doesn’t matter because you can just make roleplaying decisions that obviate skills is...nonsense, IME. What DM is just letting you obviate whole skills regularly by describing how you do the thing the skill pertains to? How is that a good solution?

doctorbadwolf said:

Right, I recognized feats earlier in the thread as a feature that helps, but the fact is most players don’t use them.

The rest of the arguments in this thread, esp the “just roleplay” argument, range from weak to outright spurious. You’re going to have to make dice rolls eventually, and when you do, that role playing isn’t going to change that you have absolutely nothing backing up the concept of being good at something. For most skills, you’ll be half as good as a trained character, if you don’t have proficiency, if not worse than that. The idea this doesn’t matter because you can just make roleplaying decisions that obviate skills is...nonsense, IME. What DM is just letting you obviate whole skills regularly by describing how you do the thing the skill pertains to? How is that a good solution?

Click to expand...

If a player sees a problem in what his character does or can do as far as skills and made the choice to not use feats to address it or apparently ability scores - or apparently backgrounds - that would not seem to be a system issue or a class issue. There is a reason you get all those choices including customizing some from the ground up.

I myself do find the responses to the fist of "just find ways to do what you want that dont use character traits" less than helpful, but it's that same old hymn we get on this forum from the usuals.

But as to your focus on not being as good as... so what? This seemed to be about not having stuff you can do outside of combat - not being better at what that other guy does. There are lots of things where you dont ne to be the optimimaxed-guy to go fo it and usually be successful.

*Deleted by user*

CleverNickName said:

When I first started playing 5E, I rolled up a fighter...and this was my exact experience. Unless initiative had been rolled, my character was in the way. We already had a Face in the party to handle social interactions, we already had a Sneak to handle the scouting and locks, we already had a Healer and a Buffer, etc., etc. My fighter basically just sat around watching everyone do everything else except fight.

Click to expand...

This issue can be cured by the DM if they take the advice of the Engaging the Players section, DMG p 246:

If a couple of players are dominating the conversation, take a moment now and then to involve the others. You can do this in character if you like: "And what about your hulking friend? Speak, barbarian! What will you pledge in exchange for my favor?" Or just ask the player what his or her character is doing while the conversation is going on. The first approach is better for players who are already comfortable speaking in their characters' voices. The second approach works better for players who need encouragement to engage in a roleplaying scenario.

Click to expand...

BacchusNL said:

This will probably rub some people the wrong way...

Click to expand...

Not at all! We are all entitled to our preferences and opinions.

I just hope it doesn't rub you the wrong way that I hope WotC doesn't try to jazz up the fighter. I like it the way it is.

CubicsRube said:

Socially, a fighter should be one the most socially relatable classes imo. Warlocks and druids and even uppity paladins might put off the city guard and common folk, but a fighter should know how to talk to other soldiers and mercenaries, and should be able to blend in with society quite easily.

Click to expand...

That's a great idea! And the best part of it is that you can play that way with no changes to the rules.

I seriously think much of the contention here is that many people are in the mindset of earlier editions, where something has to be explicitly stated in the rules or...or the DM won't allow it? Or something?

*Deleted by user*

doctorbadwolf said:

Feats are something everyone gets, and fighters just get more of. It’d be nice if the core class, without using optional rules that most players don’t use, had some kind of benefit in the other two pillars. The optional rule you reference is just as available to everyone else.

Click to expand...

I'm hesitant to accept that most people don't use feats - I know someone from Wizards said it without showing their sources but I've never seen a game run without using them. I'll address it, but I don't think it's "most people", or even a majority.

Fighters get extra ASI/feats - that's exactly my point. They can "keep up with the Jones" in terms of ASI/feat usage as still have a whole set of ASI/feats for use for other improvement. I think you'd find that people would rate the fighter differently if you took away all the extra ASIs. It's like ignoring the difference between a d12 HD and d6 because "everyone gets HPs". It adds up over time. If the player of a fighter choses to use those extra feats only on the combat pillar of play that's not a lack in the class.

Now, if there are feats there are many obvious options. But even without feats, those extra ASI means that fighters can be better at ability checks then anyone not focused. As a matter of fact, in featless games with little else to spend those ASI on, they are pretty much forced to do so. They can have a better CHR except those who have it as a casting stat. They can have a better INT except for those that have a casting stat. They can have a better WIS except for those who use it as a casting stat. Whatever they want to focus on on, plus being top tier DEX or STR natively. So in a game without feats, they still have ability to improve ability checks. +1 to 3-5 skills each time they do so is not an inconsiderable advantage.

DM Dave1 said:

This issue can be cured by the DM if they take the advice of the Engaging the Players section, DMG p 246:

Click to expand...

Absolutely true, our DM could have changed the way he runs the table to engage my character more. Nothing wrong with that, except we have a rather large gaming group (7 players), and he's already stretched pretty thin just trying to get everyone to pay attention when he's talking.

The solution that worked for me was to play a different class. So that's the one I recommend.

CubicsRube said:

Ok. Here's a go at a class feature.

This replaces the extra feat at 6th level. Choose either inspiring presence or menacing presence

INSPIRING PRESENCE at 6th level you exude a natural air of confidence and bravery that inspires others to your cause. When making a persuasion roll to convince someone to ally with your cause you may make the roll with advantage. If you are not proficient in persuasion, you are considered proficient for this roll.

One you use this feature you cannot use it again before you finish a long rest

MENACING PRESENCE at 6th level your demeanour overpowers others and instills instinctive fear should you choose it to. When making an intimidation roll to convince someone to do as you say you may make the roll with advantage. If you are not proficient in persuasion, you are considered proficient for this roll.

One you use this feature you cannot use it again before you finish a long rest

Click to expand...

Giving up an ASI/feat for advantage on one check once per day?

You're killing the fighter.