D&D 5E Fixing the Fighter

[ForeverSlayer]

Charm Person, lastly, can be used at level 1 and in the middle of combat if needed and contrary to what everyone in this topic has been saying actually DOES allow you to give commands to the charmed person and tell them what to do. Sometimes it requires a paltry charisma check in the case of fighting its own allies, but unless your DM is cheating then it does exactly what the spell says it does and the creature will do what you say so long as you don't order it to smash it's own head into a wall. Beyond that, Charm Person lasts a whopping 1 hour per level, meaning even a level 1 caster using the spell gets far more mileage out of it than anyone with an infinite diplomacy and intimidate bonus. At very very worst Charm Person can be used as a combat trick to remove an enemy from a fight. A level 1 save or suck with an unfavorable saving throw bonus. That only unravels a fight. A better usage by far is to gain control over a crucial NPC and unravel the DMs entire plot. At level 1.

Incorrect, at least as far as Pathfinder is concerned.

Charm Person does "not" allow you give some commands. The DM has the final say so as to what the "charmed" person will do and what is considered "against their nature". There has been a really big misconception with regards to the spell.

 

[Sekhmet]

@Obryn The Fighter pins his opponent and places a blindfold on his opponent. No resources are used. [MENTION=87596]Charm[/MENTION] Person quandaries: http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic/all-spells/c/charm-person If your orders are against the target's interests, an opposed Charisma check will force them to perform the desired non-suicidal or harmful task.
"Hey, Elminster, give me your spellbook."
"Uhhh..."
Natural 20.
"Sure thing, man."

My question is whether or not the Fighter must be able to perform the same feats as a Wizard? They are separate classes for a reason, ladies and gentlemen. The Fighter is a mundane class, and should have mundane abilities. Wizards are a magical class, and should have magical abilities.

If you want to bend time and space, you play a caster. If you want to use your training, skill, and expertise to perform extraordinary feats, you play a non-caster.

I say again, "Why must they be able to do the same things?"

 

[ForeverSlayer]

Let's take an easy example. A Fighter and a Wizard want to blind an enemy.

The Wizard casts Blindness or Glitterdust or (depending on the edition) Light.

How does the Fighter blind an opponent? Mechanically-speaking, here.

-O

Why do both classes need to be able to do this?

Also, if I am not mistaken I think there is such a thing as blinding powder but what I think you are most concerned with is having it be a "fighter only" option.

 

[Obryn]

[MENTION=11821]Obryn[/MENTION] The Fighter pins his opponent and places a blindfold on his opponent. No resources are used.

My question is whether or not the Fighter must be able to perform the same feats as a Wizard? They are separate classes for a reason, ladies and gentlemen. The Fighter is a mundane class, and should have mundane abilities. Wizards are a magical class, and should have magical abilities.

If you want to bend time and space, you play a caster. If you want to use your training, skill, and expertise to perform extraordinary feats, you play a non-caster.

I say again, "Why must they be able to do the same things?"

You don't see ways to blind your for in combat with a sharp weapon or eye-gouge?

I'm not saying the Fighter should throw fireballs. Nonetheless, stuff like stunning, blinding, and battlefield control should all be at least somewhere in the repertoire. Why? Because the Fighter's just that good at fighting and should be able to do more than carve through HP tofu.

Why do both classes need to be able to do this?

Also, if I am not mistaken I think there is such a thing as blinding powder but what I think you are most concerned with is having it be a "fighter only" option.

Why? See above. Because a master of combat should have a repertoire of tricks.

And I never said Fighter-only. Not sure where you got that.

-O

 

[Remathilis]

Let's take an easy example. A Fighter and a Wizard want to blind an enemy.
The Wizard casts Blindness or Glitterdust or (depending on the edition) Light.
How does the Fighter blind an opponent? Mechanically-speaking, here.
-O

Dirty Trick
You can attempt to hinder a foe in melee as a standard action. This maneuver covers any sort of situational attack that imposes a penalty on a foe for a short period of time. Examples include kicking sand into an opponent's face to blind him for 1 round, pulling down an enemy's pants to halve his speed, or hitting a foe in a sensitive spot to make him sickened for a round. The GM is the arbiter of what can be accomplished with this maneuver, but it cannot be used to impose a permanent penalty, and the results can be undone if the target spends a move action. If you do not have the Improved Dirty Trick feat or a similar ability, attempting a dirty trick provokes an attack of opportunity from the target of your maneuver.
If your attack is successful, the target takes a penalty. The penalty is limited to one of the following conditions: blinded, dazzled, deafened, entangled, shaken, or sickened. This condition lasts for 1 round. For every 5 by which your attack exceeds your opponent's CMD, the penalty lasts 1 additional round. This penalty can usually be removed if the target spends a move action. If you possess the Greater Dirty Trick feat, the penalty lasts for 1d4 rounds, plus 1 round for every 5 by which your attack exceeds your opponent's CMD. In addition, removing the condition requires the target to spend a standard action.

OR

Blinding Critical (Combat, Critical)
Your critical hits blind your opponents.
Prerequisites: Critical Focus, base attack bonus +15.
Benefit: Whenever you score a critical hit, your opponent is permanently blinded. A successful Fortitude save reduces this to dazzled for 1d4 rounds. The DC of this Fortitude save is equal to 10 + your base attack bonus. This feat has no effect on creatures that do not rely on eyes for sight or creatures with more than two eyes (although multiple critical hits might cause blindness, at the GM's discretion). Blindness can be cured by heal, regeneration, remove blindness, or similar abilities.

Take your pick. Or use both.

 

[Tovec]

Holy cow. I just can't stop this derail.

The point is that, through a spell, a caster is declaring "There is now a big fireball here" or "Joe Barkeep loves me". I am not arguing this is a bad thing - quite the opposite, in fact. I am arguing that similar levels of player-driven narrative fiat should not be the casters' sole prerogative.

-O

This is where the argument falls apart for me.

Are you saying the fighter should ALSO be able to cast an area burst effect for Xd6 fire damage?

If the wizard has teleknesis should they be the only one in the party or should everyone have the power to levitate objects from across the room without strings with the power of their mind?

Or, equally bad in my opinion, are you talking about effects that are the same as these effects so that everyone can move objects - the wizard with teleknesis and the fighter with a lasso or rope?
If it is this final case then I definitely disagree, as I don't see those skills as needing to be transferred. If a fighter wants to pick up charm person then they should take levels in wizard - as far as I'm concerned.

 

[Sekhmet]

[MENTION=11821]Obryn[/MENTION] You're asking for Called Shots to be re-implemented again, effectively making every turn "I target the head." This doesn't increase options, it effectively reduces them.
You may ask "How?"

Fighter A has five options available to him. Attack (deal damage), Trip (deal damage, make opponent prone), Disarm (remove opponent's weapon), Grapple (make opponent unable to act), or target the head (blind, deafen, disorient, and kill opponent).

Which does he do every round?

 

[Remathilis]

In Next, it might look like.

Spend an Expertise Dice. If your next attack hits, your opponent is blinded for 1d4 rounds or until he gets magical healing.

 

[ForeverSlayer]

@Obryn The Fighter pins his opponent and places a blindfold on his opponent. No resources are used. @Charm Person quandaries: http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic/all-spells/c/charm-person If your orders are against the target's interests, an opposed Charisma check will force them to perform the desired non-suicidal or harmful task.
"Hey, Elminster, give me your spellbook."
"Uhhh..."
Natural 20.
"Sure thing, man."

My question is whether or not the Fighter must be able to perform the same feats as a Wizard? They are separate classes for a reason, ladies and gentlemen. The Fighter is a mundane class, and should have mundane abilities. Wizards are a magical class, and should have magical abilities.

If you want to bend time and space, you play a caster. If you want to use your training, skill, and expertise to perform extraordinary feats, you play a non-caster.

I say again, "Why must they be able to do the same things?"

From the core rulebook:

The spell does not enable you to control the charmed person as if
it were an automaton, but it perceives your words and actions in the
most favorable way. You can try to give the subject orders, but you
must win an opposed Charisma check to convince it to do anything
it wouldn’t ordinarily do. (Retries are not allowed.) An affected
creature never obeys suicidal or obviously harmful orders, but it
might be convinced that something very dangerous is worth doing.
Any act by you or your apparent allies that threatens the charmed
person breaks the spell. You must speak the person’s language to
communicate your commands, or else be good at pantomiming.

The DM gets to decide what exactly "harmful" means, not you the player. It also says you can try to give the person an order and you must win an opposed check to convince the person, which is still going to be up to the DM so the spell isn't fullproof I'm afraid. Also, the first line of the spell says it all.

 

[Ahnehnois]

And I never said Fighter-only. Not sure where you got that.

The title of the thread kind of suggests it.

I'm not saying the Fighter should throw fireballs. Nonetheless, stuff like stunning, blinding, and battlefield control should all be at least somewhere in the repertoire. Why? Because the Fighter's just that good at fighting and should be able to do more than carve through HP tofu.

Now it sounds to me like you're saying that the rules should describe nonmagical actions (specifically combat actions) and their effects in more detail, such that rather than simply attacking, a character could call shots or dictate things like the speed and forcefulness of attacks, more detailed feinting and taunting, and so on.

As [MENTION=7635]Remathilis[/MENTION] points out, however, what you're talking about at that point is maneuvers and stunts which are not class abilities (and have to some extent been implemented successfully in PF; we've yet to see much of this in the 5e drafts). While they benefit the fighter, they are not specific to one class.