D&D 5E Fixing the Fighter

[Obryn]

So you want an ability to once per day/encounter blind a foe, no save, along with his normal complement of attacks? And you don't want to pay for it with feats either?

There's an edition of D&D that already does that. It sold miserably. If you have fun with it, bonus for you. The last thing WotC needs to to do is sell us ADEU powers with a different name.

Holy unnecessary edition-crapping, Batman!

4e had one solution to these issues. There are others which are possible, and all - 4e's included - have strengths and weaknesses. PF's doesn't go far enough for me. 4e goes too far for you. Is there a middle here or do you just want to dump on 4e?

-O

 

[Obryn]

Absolutely nothing about charm person limits the DM roleplaying choices in any meaningful way. All that it says is that the target treats you like a friend.

Its very simple to say this person is just still chincy with his friends. People tell their friends NO all the time, even over very minor, completely reasonable things.

Your other example "color spray" doesnt control the narrative anymore then some other class throwing a tanglefoot bag at a target and saying you want them to not move anymore. Or throwing oil on them and saying you want them to be on fire now.

Your vastly, vastly, over stating the ability of casters to control the game.

We can continue the Charm Person derail elsewhere if you'd like.

Your other examples are mall about equipment. I'm talking about intrinsic abilities.

-O

 

[Sekhmet]

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.

This is the reason for my link, the errata makes some clarification.

[MENTION=11821]Obryn[/MENTION]
I'm very confused. I can understand a caster being limited in his ability to summon the forces that bind the universe together, or channel divine energy from their Gods. I'm a pugilist, myself, and aside from being physically restrained in some fashion, I could gouge a person's eyes out all day. A wizard, at level 13 (3.5) can grapple his opponent with supernatural force, whereas I; a level one or two fighter, can do it at will.

The entire idea of a mundane class is that they can perform every one of their abilities at any time, because every living human can perform these kinds of tasks without hindrance.

 

[timASW]

For me I was happy with where the 5e fighter was going. Then they decided to give everyone else his schtick too. So now while it still looks good by itself its no longer the very best at front line fighting (which is what I want, not defending, fighting) compared to everyone else.

So my "fix" would be to take martial damage away from everyone else, take the damage bonus away from other classes and leave it as a just a fighting mechanic. Then flesh out some of the maneuvers and I'd consider it just fine to stop right there.

 

[functionciccio]

There's more than one way to accomplish this, you know. I don't need a rewrite of 4e. I do however want a well-designed system where the "mundane" classes aren't left behind.

I understand what you're trying to say, and I agree with you.
It's obvious that the Fighter should not emulate "Charm" effects (or the like) via his martial mechanics. But if the Wizard can cast "Finger of Death" or "Power Word Kill", then high level Fighters should be able to use more hardcore maneuvers like "Vorpal Strike" or "Death Blow". The Martial Damage Dice mechanic should accomodate something like that.

By the way, right now, the 4E Fighter is light years ahead compared to the Next Fighter. So, as far as martial classes go, please incorporate as much 4E tech as possible.

 

[Remathilis]

Holy unnecessary edition-crapping, Batman!

4e had one solution to these issues. There are others which are possible, and all - 4e's included - have strengths and weaknesses. PF's doesn't go far enough for me. 4e goes too far for you. Is there a middle here or do you just want to dump on 4e?

-O

Expertise Dice. Expertise Dice. Expertise Dice. Have I made myself clear?

Trade X dice, get Y ability. For the cost of 2 dice, you can blind a foe for 1d4 rounds (if opponent fails his Con save). Done. Simple.

 

[timASW]

We can continue the Charm Person derail elsewhere if you'd like.

Your other examples are mall about equipment. I'm talking about intrinsic abilities.

-O

What your doing is confusing the issue. It doesnt matter whether its a class ability or not. As long as its an easy to do ability, and buying non-magical equipment IS very easy to do then its perfectly fine.

 

[Ahnehnois]

Dunno! What happens when the Wizard doesn't have that spell ready?

Same answer for both - when your fiat runs out, it's back to asking permission through improvisation.

Well, I guess at this point it's clear we're talking about the player rather than the character. I'm not a big believer in that approach.

 

[timASW]

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

Marvelous, the game has already given you your wish. The fighter declares "I want that barkeep to be dead now" and then makes an attack roll killing the barkeep. He has made a narrative change.

 

[Bedrockgames]

Holy unnecessary edition-crapping, Batman!

4e had one solution to these issues. There are others which are possible, and all - 4e's included - have strengths and weaknesses. PF's doesn't go far enough for me. 4e goes too far for you. Is there a middle here or do you just want to dump on 4e?

-O

I dont really want a middle ground with 4E. That edition had zero appeal to me, particularly with how it turned fighters into resource management classes ike wizards. For me personally, that just didn't work.

I would be okay with a robust manuever system, like the maneuver options they develed in 2E (though they would need to be greatly refined). I would also be okay with class features that are still mundane but gives the fighter an edge in various. What I don't want is daily or encounter powers for fighters. I should be able to try to throw sand in the guys face all day long. I dont want to get it once per encounter. And whatever the effect is, I want the mechanic and flavor to flow together smoothly.