D&D 5E Why does 5E SUCK?

[Tony Vargas]

First off, while yes the fighter gets 2 more ASIs than anyone else, they don't gain their first until level 6, and their second until level 14. So for the first 5 levels of the game, you have just as many stats as everyone else. For levels 6-13, you only have +2 stats compared to everyone else.

In essence, the fighter gets his second-choice ASI (or feat, if feats are used), two levels early, his 5th choice in ASI/feat 5 levels early, at 14th, and then, at 16th and 19th, actually gets ASI/feats that he would never have gotten, had he not been a fighter.

Secondly, with ability scores capped at 20, the fighter is no better at improvising STR related tasks than a STR valor bard, a STR bladelock, or anyone else who decided to go for a 20 Strength.

He might hit 20 two levels earlier, though, thanks to that 6th level ASI, so for two levels, he'll have a +1 advantage.

And, if he's a Champion, it'll nicely match his tiny bonus from 'Remarkable' Athlete.

Third, many classes gain ways to outshine the fighter at STR related tasks. Any cleric with guidance can actually better at strength checks than you.

Assuming the d4 beats the bonus for RA at the given level - pretty likely when RA is +1.

So, all in all, the fighter really doesn't win out all that much with the whole "more ASIs than anyone else" thing. At best, he gets a +1 bonus to his STR rolls a little bit faster or a +1 bonus to DEX rolls when he has maxed out STR. Hardly what I would consider being better at everyone else when it comes to improvising.

'Better' is better, even if it's only a +1, over a few levels - /slightly/ better. Of course, "Improvising" isn't all STR/DEX/Con checks, either.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

Champion Fighters gain a small bonus to untrained ability checks, with 3 out of six abilities. That's not very significant.

Within the context of Bounded Accuracy, where your bonus is never going to overtake the variability of the die, a +1 or +2 bonus is supposed to be significant.

 

[Tony Vargas]

Within the context of Bounded Accuracy, where your bonus is never going to overtake the variability of the die, a +1 or +2 bonus is supposed to be significant.

It's all relative. Ability checks are going to run the gamut from -1 to +17 and higher. Fighter's never going to have that +17.

Whether you have a tight, big numbers treadmill, or bounded accuracy, any +1 is golden once you've maxed out the expected stuff, of course.

Thing is the fighter's tiny bonus is never going to be that. His extra ASI gets him to a max stat two levels early. RA gives the Champion a +1 up to +3 - in lieu of a +2 to +6 for proficiency.

Niether of those is near as good as having the max stat, proficiency, and the Expertise, or even Guidance, on top.

 

[Mistwell]

Secondly, with ability scores capped at 20, the fighter is no better at improvising STR related tasks than a STR valor bard, a STR bladelock, or anyone else who decided to go for a 20 Strength.

He gets to 20 much faster (remember you only start at a 16 or 17 at best using the basic rule). And once he gets there, he can get other stats to 20 much faster as well. You can't simultaneously ignore the most unique feature of the Fighter (more ability increases than any other class) and decry the lack of unique features. This is their unique feature, it has a definite impact on skill checks and ability checks out of combat, and it should be acknowledged and not minimized or ignored to try and win an argument point. It might not be as unique and interesting and useful as you want it to be, but by pretending it has no impact you make your own argument look weaker in the process.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

Thing is the fighter's tiny bonus is never going to be that. His extra ASI gets him to a max stat two levels early. RA gives the Champion a +1 up to +3 - in lieu of a +2 to +6 for proficiency.

Niether of those is near as good as having the max stat, proficiency, and the Expertise, or even Guidance, on top.

It's arguably better than just Guidance, which comes with action-requirement and concentration baggage. Where the Fighter really shines (relatively speaking) is with a physical ability check where no skills apply. If the DM calls for a pure Strength or Dex check, without benefit from Athletics or Acrobatics, the fighter gets those 1-3 points that the rogue lacks.

So I guess that makes the ability circumstantial, based on how often your DM calls for pure stat checks relative to skill checks.

 

[pemerton]

While these do not exactly set the world alight & culd be more potent (except the last) I am not sure what would constitute a Fightery exploration/interaction pillar ability.

Please suggest some?

Some examples have been given upthread by [MENTION=6774887]Ashkelon[/MENTION].

Other possibilities would include an ability to ignore difficult terrain, to ignore (or overcome) fatigue, to instil fear into ordinary people (an interaction ability), to remove the frightened condition from allies (or perhaps allied troops), etc.

The general structure of these abilities might (i) exemplify what [MENTION=996]Tony Vargas[/MENTION] has been stressing in this thread, namely, rationed abilities that bring the fighter player into the resource-management aspect of gameplay, and (ii) be able to be auto-successes rather than skill checks, because they are rationed and hence can occupy the same functional and mechanical space as other no-at-will abilities.

 

[pemerton]

your typical hero, even if he doesn't cast spells or have some sort of supernatural powers or mcguffin, tends to be really good at anything he turns his hand to. He won't just be tough in a fight, he'll be rallying the people, sneaking into heavily guarded dungeons to rescue the princess, scouting about in the woods, retrieving an artifact from a fiendishly trap-infested tomb, and so forth.

this is a big part of why heroes-in-fiction are usually not very good fits for heroes-in-games, except as loose conceptual archetypes to emulate

Conan, Elric, and Drizzt all fall into this category. In game terms, this usually means that they have ridiculously good stats and they are bordering on epic level.

You often get that when trying to model them in game, but it's really just illustrating the issue.

I quite strongly agree with Tony Vargas on this issue.

The difficulty of modelling fictional heroes in D&D - especially non-wizardly ones - doesn't shed any light on the contrast between fiction and RPGs. It sheds light on idiosyncracies of D&D's mechanics. For instance, the Marvel Heroic RPG does an excellent job of modelling the fictional characters (Marvel superheroes) that players play in that system.

I think 4e can do a reasonable job of modelling Conan. At low levels he would be a STR ranger with a rogue multi-class. At paragon tier he would be a fighter (or perhaps hybrid fighter-ranger) with a warlord multi-class. His second stat would be DEX. His trained skills would be Acro, Athletics, Endurance, Nature, Perception and Stealth. Maybe at higher levels train out Nature for Streetwise, and pick up Intimidation.

There are oddities of trying to run Conan in 4e because he is generally a solo-protagonist and 4e is not ideal for solo play; but PC build isn't part of the problem, I don't think, and nor is general action resolution.

The typical hero is a power-trip wish-fulfillment mary-sue type, who is awesome at everything and has no discernible weakness.

<snip>

They stand out because they're better than everyone else around them

The broad competence typically displayed by heroes in genre is hardly on the same level of 'wish fulfillment' as powered super-heroes or the reality-bending of magic-wielders - or the D&D casters that over-deliver on the corresponding archetypes.

Conan has discernible weaknesses. He gets taken down by magic. He can be swarmed by enemies. His horse can fall beneath him if shot. Etc.

What he does have, though, is a relatively broad range of competence that is not trivially outshone by specialists or magicians.

 

[Tony Vargas]

So I guess that makes the ability circumstantial, based on how often your DM calls for pure (STR, DEX or CON) checks relative to skill (& INT, WIS or CHA) checks.

And Guidance is circumstantial because, even though it works on any pure stat check and any skill check, it does take that action, and concentration to set up. Obviously, in combat is when those limitations are most onerous.

So, relatively speaking, even the Champions one out-of-combat-seeming ability actually stacks up better in combat.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

For instance, the Marvel Heroic RPG does an excellent job of modelling the fictional characters (Marvel superheroes) that players play in that system.

Maybe I'm thinking of a different Marvel RPG, but if it's the one I'm thinking of, then it doesn't even try to model the fictional characters. Instead, it tries to model the narrative structure of a comic book, which is counter-productive to the goal of accurately modeling the characters.

Instead of figuring out what their stats actually are, so we can objectively determine what happens when the Hulk punches the Punisher, the rules try to reflect their plot armor and rules of drama, which are entirely external to the setting and thus should be incapable of affecting the narrative.

It's pure meta-game drivel. Shenanigans of the highest order. Just skimming through the book made me nauseous.

 

[tyrlaan]

It's pure meta-game drivel. Shenanigans of the highest order. Just skimming through the book made me nauseous.

Or, you know, a completely acceptable RPG that just happens to not be your cup of tea.