D&D 5E The Legacy of the Fighter in 5 to 10 years

[Sacrosanct]

Clearly Tony, you don't have the first understanding of how "supporting material" for a claim works. Ashkelon made a claim that you had to have X in order to emulate Y. All I need to do is prove just one example to show how that's not correct. Just one. I gave a whole list. Just because one or two examples off that list may be adjusted off, doesn't mean I still didn't prove his claim is factually wrong as long as just one of those examples are true.

So unless you, or Ashkelon, or anyone can give examples where every single person on that list was doing things that a 5e fighter can't do, I have proven my point.

 

[Minigiant]

The strength and legacy of the fighter is that it is good with all weapons, right? That isn't really true in 5e though. From levels 1-10 the fighter is not meaningfully better with all weapons than the barbarian, paladin, or ranger.



I also showed that even using the games base assumptions for number of encounters and number of rests, the fighter isn't meaningfully ahead of the barbarian, paladin, or ranger in terms of DPR or survivability.

I also proved both of those mostly false outside of very specific build which ignore most of the flavor of the classes.

Which is of course why we are saying leave the 5e fighter as is and give us a "mythic warrior" class. The developers have even hinted that such a class is potentially on the horizon when they asked about martial adepts.

Again, which is why I would rather see a separate class. That way everyone who want the generic and mundane fighter can have what they want, while everyone who wants their mythic warrior can get that too.

Which is fine. Has nothing to do with the fighter's legacy nor tradition.

Unlikely. Giving the fighter expertise in STR checks wouldn't come close to matching the utility of the rogues expertise in 2 skills, 2 extra trained skills, reliable talent, and cunning action.

No need for Str proficiency. Fighters do Strength fine and can switch to Dex if they have a Str rogue in party.

And aside from that, why is it a problem if the fighter steps on the rogues toes a little outside of combat. The rogue can dish out similar damage to the fighter in combat, isn't that stepping on the fighter's toes? The rogue can actually be an exceptional combatant at both melee and range at the same time, something the 5e fighter currently struggled with.

Rogues are squishy, can't defend, and suck at dealing with hordes. Skills and stealth are all they have. There is plenty of obvious design in 5e design to protect that niche.

Doesn't shorter adventuring days mean more powerful casters? Same number of spells per day but fewer rounds of combat leads to higher spell utilization.

Exactly. Many people who complain about the fighter run too few encounters a day and don't adjust "at will" heavy classes.

not even sure what you are trying to say here. Are you saying that jumping further and lifting more are abilities that are too complicated for players? You do realize such abilities exist in game already (Bull' Strength spell, jump spell, bear totem feature, Goliath racial, monk step of the wind, etc).

I mean how high STR or CON should give you cumulative increases in speed. Or a high Intelligence fighter should be crazy hard to hit. But simplicity.

How? How did any of the suggested abilities pertain to combat in a way that would help defeat a spellcaster?

In reality if a hostile armed and armored veteran dragonslaying warrior came within 2 feet of a scholar in a robe, the mage either magics himself a defense or dies. You can justify a warrior surviving another warriors onslaught easier. D&D protects PCs for the game to function.

But who wants to see every level 11+ fighter swing thrice and say "say or die" over and over with every weapon in the game, chairs, tables, rocks, and teacups.

 

[Eric V]

Boiling down to another instance of "caster supremacy" preference vs. not, no surprise there...with people being all superior and rude about it, again no surprise round (ala 5e). That's really too bad, but at least there are features on the forum to limit witnessing that sort of thing.

To get back on topic, Mearls thinks the legacy will be extra actions and self-healing. Ok, I guess he's right, to a point; no one else gets more than 3 attacks per round without using a bonus action, and no one else gets action surge. There are definitely classes that can self-heal, of course.

So, it really boils down to extra actions. I guess that's not bad. It still gets stepped on by haste I suppose, but maybe that's niche enough.

I would have said the fact that it can outlast others in terms of # of encounters per day (since it has so few daily resources) might have been its defining feature, but since the rest of the group likely does have people who can't last as long, it probably won't come into play much (i.e. the party rests when casters are depleted, even if technically the fighter could go on longer); it remains theoretical, unless it's a party of similar-resource managed characters.

 

[Ashkelon]

I also proved both of those mostly false outside of very specific build which ignore most of the flavor of the classes.

No...you didn't. You didn't use numbers or analysis at all. You stated them entirely as fact with nothing to back it up. A level paladin only using his spells to smite gets 25d8 bonus damage. A battlemaster with 2 short rests per day gets 15d10 superiority dice. 25d8>15d10. Everything else about those classes is pretty much equal. This is using your suggestion of 2 rests and 6-8 encounters!!! Your argument simply fails to hold up.

I also showed that for ranged combat the classes are all within about 1 DPR of each other.

Which is fine. Has nothing to do with the fighter's legacy nor tradition.

And... How is that relevant. I'm not trying to change the fighter's legacy or tradition here. Why are you getting upset about the possibility of some other martial class?

No need for Str proficiency. Fighters do Strength fine and can switch to Dex if they have a Str rogue in party.

clearly you haven't been paying attention to the arguments. A STR 18 war cleric is just as good at STR related tasks as a fighter. Better actually because of guidance.

Rogues are squishy, can't defend, and suck at dealing with hordes. Skills and stealth are all they have. There is plenty of obvious design in 5e design to protect that niche.

rogues are only 1 HP per level worse off than the fighter. But they also have evasion and uncanny dodge. Cunning action allows them to easily escape from and skirmish around hordes. Fighter's also aren't all that great at taking on hordes of enemies either. Yes they have multiple attacks, but only more than most other PCs starting at 11. The rogues mobility and ranged capability make it better at dealing with horses in many situations.

Exactly. Many people who complain about the fighter run too few encounters a day and don't adjust "at will" heavy classes.

Most people can't run the suggested number of encounters because Hp and spells run out...

I mean how high STR or CON should give you cumulative increases in speed. Or a high Intelligence fighter should be crazy hard to hit. But simplicity.

I never suggested that....

In reality if a hostile armed and armored veteran dragonslaying warrior came within 2 feet of a scholar in a robe, the mage either magics himself a defense or dies. You can justify a warrior surviving another warriors onslaught easier. D&D protects PCs for the game to function.

But who wants to see every level 11+ fighter swing thrice and say "say or die" over and over with every weapon in the game, chairs, tables, rocks, and teacups.

how is this relevant to anything I have been taking about?

 

[Tony Vargas]

Ashkelon made a claim that you had to have X in order to emulate Y. All I need to do is prove just one example to show how that's not correct. Just one.

IIRC, Ashkelon wanted D&D fighters to be able to emulate the kinds of things characters in genre/myth/legend could do, and claimed that the fighter couldn't do all those things. Now, that admits that it can do some, like perhaps slay a dragon, for instance, an example he used, himself.

That's not the kind of claim that can be disproven with a counter-example.

In fact, the burden of proof was really on him, initially. You can't prove the negative: that there is no ability displayed by any character in genre/myth/legend that can't be done by a D&D fighter. You'd have to examine every such character ever conceived, and that's impractical in the extreme.

Ashkelon, OTOH, just needed a few examples, or better yet, perhaps, established 'tropes,' that illustrate his claim. Those have been provided in this thread (and should be familiar from others).

Even so, you gave a list that included characters who displayed super-human abilities, a few of them, quite a lot of the time, /and/ included historical figures who were not from genre/myth/legend at all. I don't want to mis-characterize whatever claim you thought you were supporting or refuting with that list, but it can't be a claim that refutes the display of super-human feats, or that is about characters taken only from genre/myth/legend.

Boiling down to another instance of "caster supremacy" preference vs. not, no surprise there...

To get back on topic, Mearls thinks the legacy will be extra actions and self-healing. Ok, I guess he's right, to a point; no one else gets more than 3 attacks per round without using a bonus action, and no one else gets action surge. There are definitely classes that can self-heal, of course.

So, it really boils down to extra actions.

Multi-attacking more than any other class, and consequently more potential to maximize DPR from static bonuses, mechanically.

Is that really a legacy of the 5e fighter, though? The 2e fighter got more attacks/round than other classes, and was able to generate a lot of damage with them.

Hmm... to really think about the original topic, what does the 5e fighter do that's new or unique?

The 5e fighter...

...gets multiple attacks as it levels... so did the AD&D fighter.

...self-heals (second wind)... so did the 4e fighter (really, everyone got 'second wind).

...gets a limited Extra Action resource... so did the 4e fighter (really, everyone, via Action Points).

...gets two bonus ASIs that could be used for feats... the 3e fighter got 11 bonus feats.

...the Champion gets enhanced criticals... so did the 3e fighter (Improved Critical feat).

...the Battlemaster gets a few limited-use maneuvers... the 4e fighter got many more.

...the Eldritch Knight casts spells... so did the 3.5 Eldritch Knight (though it was a PrC).


...?

 

[Eric V]

...?

I'm guessing Mearls meant "When we think of the 5e fighter in 10 years, what will stand out for it?" vs. "What did the 5e version of the fighter bring that was original and innovative?"

The answer to the first is "Extra Actions" but the answer to the second is "Nothing." Which, to be sure, isn't a surprise considering the "Greatest Hits" type of edition 5e is.

 

[Tony Vargas]

I'm guessing Mearls meant "When we think of the 5e fighter in 10 years, what will stand out for it?" vs. "What did the 5e version of the fighter bring that was original and innovative?"

The answer to the first is "Extra Actions" but the answer to the second is "Nothing." Which, to be sure, isn't a surprise considering the "Greatest Hits" type of edition 5e is.

Fair enough.

Though I think it'd be just as fair to say that the fighter's Action Surge mechanic is really a legacy of Action Points.
Which started not in 4e, but with the original Ebberon, wasn't it?

 

[Eric V]

Fair enough.

Though I think it'd be just as fair to say that the fighter's Action Surge mechanic is really a legacy of Action Points.
Which started not in 4e, but with the original Ebberon, wasn't it?

It is absolutely a legacy of action points, yes.

I miss action points... :/

 

[Ashkelon]

Fair enough.

Though I think it'd be just as fair to say that the fighter's Action Surge mechanic is really a legacy of Action Points.
Which started not in 4e, but with the original Ebberon, wasn't it?

In 3e the Factorum had cunning surge, which allowed it to spend 3 inspiration points to take an extra standar action. That seems to be the common ancestor to 4e action points and 5e action surges.

Note: Inspiration points were a resource that was renewed at the start of each battle.

 

[Remathilis]

Which started not in 4e, but with the original Ebberon, wasn't it?

Eberron Action Points (which are the UA Action point and actually are based off d20 Modern Action Points, which are a variant of Star Wars Force Points) are very different than 4e Action Points. The Hero Points in the 5e DMG reflect these earlier forms of Action Points.

Long story short; they add 1-6 to a d20 roll, not an extra action.