You know, inching in on the territory of the Barbarian, Bard, monk, paladin, and ranger might be okay, as an option for people who want to play an archetype that leans that way but without the magic.
I don't feel like a STR/dex melee concept lends itself to an archetype, though. Those archetypes feel better served by the Rogue. I'm seeing a fast striking melee warrior, someone who lacks the weapon master's artful techniques and focus, but that isn't screaming a character to me, just a mechanic. Unless "warrior" feels like an archetype separate from a big brute.
Actually a Guard - who's actually good at his job for the first time in D&D history - would be a possibility. A sniper also makes sense - about calm, deliberate attacks and spotting targets.
It is interesting how Action Surge and Extra Attack 3 and 4 really do lock the fighter in to a specific play style. The fighter could have been better suited with bigger subclasses and a little less on the core chasis, hu?
9 levels of spellcastingHey, one thing the Fighter is definitely missing is non-combat and ribbon options. What do we give the various subclasses to round them out?
Sure, if a fighter can do it, clearly everyone should be able to do it. Check me out, I'm an INT-based Commoner, I work for Realmsoft.it occurs to me that you could do this with other classes, too.
Ogg very proud he invent magic, but get very tired of carrying huge stone tablets everywhere.What's a STR-based wizard like?
"I Theologize him to death!"An INT-based Paladin?
A temple dancer.A DEX-based Cleric?
Maybe someone has mentioned this already, but it occurs to me that you could do this with other classes, too. What's a STR-based wizard like? An INT-based Paladin? A DEX-based Cleric?
Hey, one thing the Fighter is definitely missing is non-combat and ribbon options. What do we give the various subclasses to round them out?
I struggled with a strong concept for WIS. Are these so close that maybe it should be a single subclass that can trigger of INT or WIS for it's features?