D&D 5E So what's exactly wrong with the fighter?

[Imaro]

I'm playing a game where 1 fight per day is about the norm. It makes sense in the context of the game (we are pirates and so multiple fights per day is weird), but I think we've had a short rest 2 maybe 3 times after 15+ encounters. I'm playing a dex-based fighter with two-weapon combat as his thing (dual rapiers). Thankfully we don't have any full standard casters (barbarian, ranger, fighter, warlock) so the balance isn't too far off but the barbarian always rages and the ranger always has a mark up and doesn't hesitate to put it up again if it gets dropped.

At 5th level I find my action surge is pretty potent and keeps up in effectiveness with all but the warlock (hard to beat a fireball at 5th level).

That said, the thing I feel is missing is out-of-combat usefulness. The free prof. with a set of tools at 3rd level was cool but not hugely useful as we don't seem to _need_ a carpenter as much as a ship would in the real world. I think more skill prof. would be nice, but I'd really like to see something else fun. Problem is, I'm not sure what else would make sense for a fighter to _have_. Maybe an extra non-combat option that is divorced from the sub-class. Say 3 options: one focused on Int, one on Wis, and one on Chr. The Int one might throw around some int-based skill prof. at higher levels and maybe the ability to use a very limited set of rituals. The Wis one might provide bonuses to insight and perception with respect to combat issues and perhaps some access to a cleric ritual or two. The Chr one might provide Chr-skill prof and some type of leadership/presence bonus that helps calm/rally weaker NPCs (townspeople) and intimidate large groups of weak enemies?).

But yeah, the no-short-rest thing hurts.

Are you playing with feats? I ask because if so, you could use one of your extra ones to take skilled for your first extra feat... that would cover the proficiency part you are asking for (or sub out skilled for Alert for those combat bonuses to perception) and either ritual master (to cover your Int/Wis suggestions)... The Cha option is hard to replicate exactly but Inspiring Leader would work on any allies, including NPC's or take Magic initiate with Bane or Bless as one of your spells and reskin it...

 

[Tony Vargas]

Not sure why you addressed this to me. If you want to create a realistic fighting style that gives defensive and offensive options and special tricks against specific foes instead of one generic bonus, I have no objection. You can import krav maga into D&D and I don't care. I just objected to the absurdity of resetting your fighting style on a long rest: "yesterday I was a shield expert, and today I know krav maga but not shield fighting."

That's the kind of thing that might be done as a concession to the needs of the game. Like rest-recharge requirements, the justification would be that a character who knew several styles might be overpowered if he could mix them freely moment-to-moment, or use their best options without limitation, or that it might tend to leave characters undifferentiated as the best elements of the best styles crowded out everything else.

Well, since the latest rules update, fighter abilities don't work when the fighter is unarmed, which is stupid. The fighter should be all about killing you with whatever is available, not helpless the moment you take his favorite toy away from him. You don't learn how to kill something with a sword without learning how to kill them with your bare hands too.

Sounds like niche-protection for the Monk. Nothing new.

People want to feel like their character is unique. If you could change that every long rest, they would feel about as unique as a person's white shirts.

That's long been an issue with prepped casters. One of the things I found great about the 3.0 Sorcerer was that it couldn't change it's definitive magical abilities overnight. Very cool for creating an interesting character - less useful from dominating play, which is why the Sorcerer was only Tier 2, and subjected to almost as many 'SUX threads' as the benighted fighter.

I want a fighting man to feel like a fighting man. I don't want anime figures in my sword and sorcery fantasy. I don't care if martials are provided with additional options as long as the options feel like fighting maneuvers that he learned over years of training and time. The wizard learns arcane arts over time. He pursues mastery of magic for battle and utility. The fighter should be the same with fighting skills. Some of those should be non-combat.

Feel gets very subjective, though. You're on record as wanting even low-level castes to be strictly superior to even high-level martials, so what 'feels' right for a martial to you in an S&S context is very different from someone who wants martial characters who can leap across the room and cut a sorcerer in half before he can mumble any spells, like Conan was notorious for doing (even though he really didn't do it that often in REH's works). And, both ideas of proper S&S (or broader fantasy) 'feel' are problematic for an actual game. Class balance is a good compromise, because it at least puts reasonable choices out there for everyone. You might not be happy that the next guy's fighter has a limited-use ability that restores hps ('like a spell'), and he may not be happy that your Wizard gets a reasonable number of hps and the same bonus for proficiency as he does, but at least you can play the same game.

In 5E you can multiclass. So if you want to make some strange combination of fighting man with skills and magic, you can do. Why limit yourself to a fighter when you can mix and match to make something extremely unique?

Maybe because your concept doesn't call for magic?

 

[brehobit]

Are you playing with feats? I ask because if so, you could use one of your extra ones to take skilled for your first extra feat... that would cover the proficiency part you are asking for (or sub out skilled for Alert for those combat bonuses to perception) and either ritual master (to cover your Int/Wis suggestions)... The Cha option is hard to replicate exactly but Inspiring Leader would work on any allies, including NPC's or take Magic initiate with Bane or Bless as one of your spells and reskin it...

Yeah, problem is that without the short rests I'm already average or less in terms of contributions during combat. So I'd have to trade the combat pillar against the other ones and end up with a bit there (frankly prof. in 5e just isn't that much until 9th level...) with a significant drop in combat effectiveness. So I _could_ do that (and I've thought about skilled and would probably take it if it was something like expertise in 2 skills and prof. in one), but I likely won't.

As far as I know, no other class has to trade off the combat pillar against the others quite so much (knowledge cleric maybe).

 

[ZenGhost]

I like it, but I also like a more streamlined battle.

 

[Salamandyr]

Sounds like niche-protection for the Monk. Nothing new.

Not new, but still bad design. And disappointing that they changed it in the one edition that previously had gotten it right.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

Not new, but still bad design. And disappointing that they changed it in the one edition that previously had gotten it right.

What change do you refer to?

 

[Salamandyr]

What change do you refer to?

Originally unarmed attacks were considered simple weapons, which meant fighter abilities that required "weapons" worked. The recent rules update changed it so now unarmed attacks are specifically "not" weapons, so fighter abilities explicitly do not work with them.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

Originally unarmed attacks were considered simple weapons, which meant fighter abilities that required "weapons" worked. The recent rules update changed it so now unarmed attacks are specifically "not" weapons, so fighter abilities explicitly do not work with them.

Like what?

Note that they still count as melee weapon attacks even though an unarmed strike is not a weapon. The only impact I can see is that an Eldritch Knight can no longer enchant his fist with Magic Weapon. Am curious if there are other effects.

Edit: whoa, it looks like the errata was revised again! It now explicitly says that unarmed strikes do not count as weapons. So yeah, looks like you probably can't use battlemaster maneuvers unarmed. Lame.

 

[Bluenose]

3E was definitely better for designing fighting styles. You could crush a troll in one round in 3E. You could crush multiple trolls in 3E as a martial. You could kill a group of giants. Martials at high level were sick damage dealers. They had some serious capabilities for destroying enemies. Whirlwind Stunning Strike was ridiculous.

I have forgotten what point 3.5 reached. Pathfinder martials seem right up the alley of people wanting powerful martials. You could make all kinds of martials effective. They had ridiculously powerful capabilities and access to amazing magic items. Mythic Adventures took martials into unreal territory. You want to be like Gilgamesh or Cu Chuliain, Mythic Adventures Pathfinder made it happen. I was running characters using those rules, they were mowing down groups of Vrock and Hezrou at level 7. It was pretty ridiculous.

Do you note the common factor in your examples in the first paragraph? Big dumb brutes fighting, and the one with the bigger numbers wins. Anything more sophisticated, well that's what magic is there for. Except magic is equally as good at dealing with the big dumb brutes. Congratulations, Fighter-guy can be Captain Superfluous to Requirements.

And then we get Mythic Adventures, with it's rather narrow limits to what Fighters would get, where you describe abilities than any high-level martial should have access to - they're high level abilities, if not particularly impressive ones compared to what the casters get - as doing things you consider "pretty ridiculous". That's high-level casters too.

 

[Celtavian]

That's long been an issue with prepped casters. One of the things I found great about the 3.0 Sorcerer was that it couldn't change it's definitive magical abilities overnight. Very cool for creating an interesting character - less useful from dominating play, which is why the Sorcerer was only Tier 2, and subjected to almost as many 'SUX threads' as the benighted fighter.

They had a mechanic for limiting wizards. No one usually followed it. You were supposed to limit the number of spells the wizard had in his spellbook. Cost also somewhat limited the wizard at lower level. At higher levels cost became miniscule compared to resources. You often found a few opponent spellbooks that filled out your book quite nicely. 5E takes more proactive measures limiting casters with the Concentration mechanic and a much more limited spell selection on each list at this point. 5E wizards are much more limited in versatility.

Feel gets very subjective, though. You're on record as wanting even low-level castes to be strictly superior to even high-level martials, so what 'feels' right for a martial to you in an S&S context is very different from someone who wants martial characters who can leap across the room and cut a sorcerer in half before he can mumble any spells, like Conan was notorious for doing (even though he really didn't do it that often in REH's works). And, both ideas of proper S&S (or broader fantasy) 'feel' are problematic for an actual game. Class balance is a good compromise, because it at least puts reasonable choices out there for everyone. You might not be happy that the next guy's fighter has a limited-use ability that restores hps ('like a spell'), and he may not be happy that your Wizard gets a reasonable number of hps and the same bonus for proficiency as he does, but at least you can play the same game.

How can a martial not leap across the room and cut down a sorcerer? Unless you're talking some insane 30 foot leap in the air? I don't want that. A warrior in 5E can run across the room, leap about 10 feet, and cut down a caster pretty easily. As I stated in another thread the caster-martial disparity in 3E was martials standing at the bottom of a mountain with wizards on top, in 5E the caster-martial disparity is the wizards having an exclusive room across the hall. That's about as balanced as I want it.

I want this game to mirror the fantasy genre. In the fantasy genre casters are mysterious and powerful figures feared by the martials, though still used by them because casters have trouble finding servants because magic is feared. I want those conventions in place. Power does not necessarily mean a fighter can't kill a caster. So let's stop with that false supposition. Even in 3E if a martial got hold of a caster, the caster was going to die in a round more than likely. The only defense a caster has is to not let Conan get to him. That same level of power does not exist in 5E. It is extremely easy for a 5E martial to kill a 5E caster. The difference in power is breadth of power. That is what keeps casters useful as it does in fiction. Even Merlin at times wasn't trusted or liked by the martials in the world, but he was tolerated because he was useful and avoided because he was feared. That's about where 5E is right now.

Maybe because your concept doesn't call for magic?

Play a game that caters to mythically powered martials. Ones like Hercules. That game isn't D&D. And won't be until they release some mythic or epic materials. That will probably be a while. Took them while a to release such material in Pathfinder as well.