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

[Ashkelon]

I'm genuinely interested in this topic. If this thread produced some ideas of what these could be, the thread would be 1000 times more interesting and useful.

Most of the distinct non-combat martial abilities I've seen are very low level and not that interesting. Like - "You can request lodging at a village".

We need higher level examples like:

Little Birds (10th level) - You have developed a network of spies throughout the country. At 15th level this extends to the entire world. [a powerful feature that lets you influence politics, find out secret information better than scrying, etc.]

This is just one avenue that 'mundanes' could have as distinct niche-- automatic features that allow for more societal power.

Any ideas?

I posted this a while ago, but certain people seemed to ignore it.

I had an idea for "non-weapon proficiencies" that work kind of like 2e NWPs, 3e skill tricks, 4e skill utility powers, and 4e ranger knacks? (i forget what they were called).

Basically they would be abilities PCs could learn that either enhance how skills work or provide new abilities that aren't quite potent enough to deserve costing a feat. A player would learn these in the same manner one learns other non-skill proficiencies (aka downtime). Certain classes may gain free ones at specific levels.

Here are some examples:

Mighty Leap
Requirement: proficiency with Athletics, STR 13+
Benefit: When you take the Dash action, double the distance of any jump you make this turn

Blindfighting
Requirement: WIS 13+, proficiency with Perception
Benefit: You do not suffer disadvantage on your attack rolls as a result of darkness or when attacking invisible creatures.

Escape Artist
Requirement: Dex 13+, proficiency with Acrobatics
Benefit: You can attempt to escape a grapple or break free from being restrained as a bonus action

Lip Reading
Requirement: WIS 13+, proficiency with Perception
Benefit: You can read a creatures lips to understand what it is saying even if you cannot hear it. You must be able to see the creature and you must know the language it is speaking to use this ability.

Demolisher
Requirement: Level 5+, STR 15+
Benefit: You deal double damage to objects and structures.

Endurance
Requirement: level 5+, Con 15+
Benefit: You gain proficiency with Constitution checks.

Powerful Swimmer
Requirement: Level 5+, proficiency with Athletics, STR 15+
Benefit: You gain a swim speed equal to your speed.

Expert Climber
Requirement: Level 5+, proficiency with Athletics, STR 15+
Benefit: You gain a climb speed equal to your speed.

Strength of Heroes
Requirement: level 5+, STR 15+, proficiency with Athletics
Benefit: You gain proficiency with Strength checks and you your carrying capacity is equal to 30 times your Strength score (instead of 15 times your Strength score).

Leap of the Clouds
Requirement: Level 11+, proficiency with Athletics, STR 13+
Benefit: The distance of your high jumps is equal to your Strength score instead of 3 + your Strength modifier.

Rock Hurling
Requirement: level 11+, STR 17+, proficiency with Athletics
Benefit: you gain proficiency with improvised thrown weapons. You can use your STR instead of your Dexterity for the attack and damage of such weapons. Such weapons use a d6 for damage instead of a d4.

Strength of Legends
Requirement: level 11+, STR 17+, Strength of Heroes, proficiency with Athletics
Benefit: You have advantage on Strength checks and your carrying capacity is equal to 60 times your Strength score (instead of 30 times your Strength score).


These examples are primarily related to STR based PCs mostly because that what this thread is discussing for the most part. But there is room in this idea for tricks related to handling animals and nature, stealth, exploration, dungeon delving, investigation,and social interaction.

 

[Imaro]

BM maneuvers don't scale or level up, they just layer on top of his attack - they're exactly the same at 3rd level as at 10th. Really, discounting higher levels just puts the 5e fighter further behind the curve. He gets only 1 bonus feat by 10th level, for instance, and misses out on his later extra attacks, as well.

Say what... see this is exactly what I mean about you just stating things with no proof... this is objectively wrong and for someone whose debating the merits of a BM vs. other fighters a pretty big mistake to make...

The DC's to resist a BM's maneuvers are 8+ your proficiency modifier+Str or Dex modifier... prof. modifier is what scales it...

EDIT: I also notice your argument has once again resorted to sliding goalposts... first we were debating the 3.x fighter but now all of a sudden the 4e fighter has been brought into it as well. I'm not speaking to the 4e fighter I was talking about 3.x but nice try...

 

[Jefe Bergenstein]

Say what... see this is exactly what I mean about you just stating things with no proof... this is objectively wrong and for someone whose debating the merits of a BM vs. other fighters a pretty big mistake to make...

The DC's to resist a BM's maneuvers are 8+ your proficiency modifier+Str or Dex modifier... prof. modifier is what scales it...

EDIT: I also notice your argument has once again resorted to sliding goalposts... first we were debating the 3.x fighter but now all of a sudden the 4e fighter has been brought into it as well. I'm not speaking to the 4e fighter I was talking about 3.x but nice try...

The effects dont significantly scale. He's exactly right comparing it to a wizard who only gets to memorize 1st level spells. And before you point out that their dice scale, whoopdy fart. An extra point or two of damage. That sure is comparable the scaling casters see in the types of effects they can produce at 1st vs 20th level.

 

[Imaro]

The effects dont significantly scale. He's exactly right comparing it to a wizard who only gets to memorize 1st level spells. And before you point out that their dice scale, whoopdy fart. An extra point or two of damage. That sure is comparable the scaling casters see in the types of effects they can produce at 1st vs 20th level.

The maneuvers scale through DC difficulty and the damage dice (whether it's significant or not with bounded accuracy in play is debatable, show me some math on why it needs to scale more with the Fighter's already formidable damge)...so both difficulty to resist and effect actually do scale. You don't like how it happens, that's fine but saying it doesn't happen is wrong... plain and simple.

EDIT: I'd love to see a damage comparison between a fighter and a caster that shows the BM's damage or effects need to scale up more than they already do, especially since the maneuvers are on top of regular attacks/damage of which the fighter gets multiples a round... So... show me.

EDIT 2: Zen moment... Whether the fighter has a problem or not is so subjective that I don't see a consensus ever being reached, so I say more power to those that want to "fix" it... in fact hey that's what rpg's are all about imagination and home brewing... so why not go start a thread in that area of the forums and put something together... In fact I might even be surprised and find it useful for my 5e game. I and my players don't have a problem with the 5e fighter, but if you do just go create something. How does a never ending discussion about whether your opinion or mine is correct benefit those who are unhappy with the fighter? It seems like that tme and energy would be better spent brainstorming a solution...

 

[tyrlaan]

So?

I get tired of seeing this argument.

Then maybe you shouldn't have started this thread? I mean, after all, the complaint that the fighter is lacking distinct non-combat options was the argument back in the "why does 5e suck" thread, so it should come as little surprise that the same complaint has appeared in this thread.

Frankly, this thread has opened up a whole barrel of monkeys of fighter-related complaints. There were less before this thread it seems.

So what do we only have classes that have full niche protection to the point where nobody can do anything else another class can do? At the moment all classes can cast spells, learn martial maneuvers, learn and use any skill so basically the question becomes this. Why are you playing 5th edition D&D then? There is nothing wrong with the classes, it's a personal problem and not a design problem. This just obviously isn't your game because you want to be the kid on the block that has the only game console. You keep moving the goalposts back and forth because several people here have proven your overall argument wrong and have posted examples. The fighter is designed to be a combat oriented class with the ability to take away some of that combat and focus a bit more on the noncombat, that is not a flaw but by design. If you don't like it then play another class. There is nothing stopping you from playing a Strength based rogue and taking the Martial Adept feat to pick up some superiority dice along with two maneuvers and take the Arcane Trickster subclass so you can have skills, maneuvers and spells.

Has anyone raising this complaint said they won't play 5e because of it, such that it warrants your response to suggest that people with this complaint should play a different game?

Is it safe to assume at this point, since you're counterpoint is "so", that you see the point but just do not find it to be an issue for you?

And ultimately, why does this bother you so much?

 

[Corpsetaker]

Then maybe you shouldn't have started this thread? I mean, after all, the complaint that the fighter is lacking distinct non-combat options was the argument back in the "why does 5e suck" thread, so it should come as little surprise that the same complaint has appeared in this thread.

Frankly, this thread has opened up a whole barrel of monkeys of fighter-related complaints. There were less before this thread it seems.



Has anyone raising this complaint said they won't play 5e because of it, such that it warrants your response to suggest that people with this complaint should play a different game?

Is it safe to assume at this point, since you're counterpoint is "so", that you see the point but just do not find it to be an issue for you?

And ultimately, why does this bother you so much?

My point is very valid because what you are looking for is not part of the design of 5th edition.

If we go your route then basically the Warlock, Wizard, Cleric or Bard, and Rogue need not exist because other classes can fill those spaces. 5th edition was not designed around niche protection. If that is what you are looking for then you truly are better off playing another game.

There have already been multiple examples of creating a martial character that can do lots of different things besides fight. There have also been examples of creating a martial type class using another class plus feats, if it makes you feel better then write "Fighter" in the class spot on your sheet.

This edition wasn't designed around looking for a specific power that gives you permission to do something. Hold on and let me find that negotiation power. It is a very open system that allows different things to happen across multiple tables. It is not hard coded where something will work at all tables. Certain aspects yes, but when it comes to using the current skill system, it's just using your imagination.

This isn't the "powers" edition.

 

[Hussar]

My point is very valid because what you are looking for is not part of the design of 5th edition.

If we go your route then basically the Warlock, Wizard, Cleric or Bard, and Rogue need not exist because other classes can fill those spaces. 5th edition was not designed around niche protection. If that is what you are looking for then you truly are better off playing another game.

There have already been multiple examples of creating a martial character that can do lots of different things besides fight. There have also been examples of creating a martial type class using another class plus feats, if it makes you feel better then write "Fighter" in the class spot on your sheet.

This edition wasn't designed around looking for a specific power that gives you permission to do something. Hold on and let me find that negotiation power. It is a very open system that allows different things to happen across multiple tables. It is not hard coded where something will work at all tables. Certain aspects yes, but when it comes to using the current skill system, it's just using your imagination.

This isn't the "powers" edition.

This is all your issue though because no one is actually saying this.

No one is saying that it's a bad thing that we have simple fighters. Simple fighters are fine. They work and they do what's written on the tin.

What we want is a more complex OPTION for fighters. Something that is about as complex as a caster. Which means adding in options for non-combat "manoeuvres" and other design space options which are currently covered by spells, but, could easily be covered by "manoeuvres".

is that clear enough?

 

[Corpsetaker]

This is all your issue though because no one is actually saying this.

No one is saying that it's a bad thing that we have simple fighters. Simple fighters are fine. They work and they do what's written on the tin.

What we want is a more complex OPTION for fighters. Something that is about as complex as a caster. Which means adding in options for non-combat "manoeuvres" and other design space options which are currently covered by spells, but, could easily be covered by "manoeuvres".

is that clear enough?

The fighter right now isn't simple so I'm not sure what you are talking about. Casters aren't complex in this edition.

There is always the Eldritch Knight. Look, there have been many examples showing a fighter can do what you are asking for.

 

[tyrlaan]

My point is very valid because what you are looking for is not part of the design of 5th edition.

If we go your route then basically the Warlock, Wizard, Cleric or Bard, and Rogue need not exist because other classes can fill those spaces. 5th edition was not designed around niche protection. If that is what you are looking for then you truly are better off playing another game.

There have already been multiple examples of creating a martial character that can do lots of different things besides fight. There have also been examples of creating a martial type class using another class plus feats, if it makes you feel better then write "Fighter" in the class spot on your sheet.

This edition wasn't designed around looking for a specific power that gives you permission to do something. Hold on and let me find that negotiation power. It is a very open system that allows different things to happen across multiple tables. It is not hard coded where something will work at all tables. Certain aspects yes, but when it comes to using the current skill system, it's just using your imagination.

This isn't the "powers" edition.

This actually answers zero of the questions I posed and you quoted. I'll reiterate them below for your convenience, though I'm adding one more at the end.

From original post

Has anyone raising this complaint said they won't play 5e because of it, such that it warrants your response to suggest that people with this complaint should play a different game?

Is it safe to assume at this point, since you're counterpoint is "so", that you see the point but just do not find it to be an issue for you?

And ultimately, why does this bother you so much?​

New question - I'm not sure we're understanding each other. Could you please repeat back to me what complaint I am expressing?

 

[Celtavian]

The fighter right now isn't simple so I'm not sure what you are talking about. Casters aren't complex in this edition.

There is always the Eldritch Knight. Look, there have been many examples showing a fighter can do what you are asking for.

Casters are a lot more interesting than fighters. Even when you add casting to the fighter, you have a more interesting class. The difference between myself and the other folks is I don't mind the fighter having to multiclass or take the caster path to have more interesting options. If you choose a mundane fighter option, you should be more limited. If you choose a caster option, you should be more powerful.

The Battle-master is the mundane master of fighting maneuvers. About the only thing I'd change is not requiring Superiority Dice, so he could do his maneuvers all the time. Maybe allow Superiority Dice to boost his success with maneuvers rather than require them to use maneuvers.

I specced out a few fighters. It's more interesting to play an EK past the low levels than a BM. The shield spell alone is more interesting than the vast majority of BM maneuvers. That's kind of sad. A defensive BM fighter has some nifty options later on, but none of them match the simple Defensive Fighting Style with plate armor and shield and a shield spell raising your AC to 26 when you need it. Casting haste on yourself past level 13 is better than any BM maneuver and it lasts for a minute. For a minute you get an extra attack and +2 to AC and increased movement. Even some of the cantrips are better than BM maneuvers. Being able to cast bladeward while taking an attack can be pretty nice for a defensive fighter build.

They could have at least given some higher level BM maneuvers that do high damage. Like maybe an eviscerate ability that allowed a fighter to do a high damage attack like 10d10 or something killing attack by spending three superiority dice or Cleaving Flurry where he attacks everyone in a short radius for a Superiority Die at higher level. Throw in some maneuvers that look extremely that at least match some of the spell effects at higher level. Give the fighter something to look forward to that gives them something amazing if playing a BM. Though if you do this, you gotta do something with the Champion too.

Right now if you're min-maxing a fighter, you're taking EK in the long run. BM fighter can be interesting. It won't match an EK at higher level whether you're going offense or defense.