Fighter

[Yunru]

I like the idea of making a half-casting arcane fighter. Though I really have no idea if what you've provided is balanced.

Feedback? FEEDBACK!
*Pounces like a starved lion*

*ahem*
Balance-wise the scale should tilt more towards less-powerful than more, just due to the nature of extra attack being a force multiplier. The exception here is the champion, but that could use a boost.

Hopefully by putting more of the power into the subclasses and away from the core, each subclass should have a more unique playstyle.

 

[JPicasso]

I like the attention to the fighter, doing some similar tweaks for my own game. One thing I would change, is revert back to the class progression as outlined in the PHB. Getting your archetype a level sooner really throws things out of whack with the other classes. It feels too much like a kludge from the start, rather than a tweak to help out a class.

Another thing I would suggest is highlighting the things that you've changed, so that we can compare how these improvements have changed the archetype. It would be nice not to have to drag out our PHB and follow along in two places.

Comments on the Champion

So the major changes are improving the crit range and ... Is that it? Probably all that is needed. Champions are touted as being pretty effective anyways. So cool.
*personally* I would take out the INT based crit and just give incremental bonus to end the class with total crit range at 16-20 or 17-20. The Eldritch Knight is already fills the INT-Fighter.

One thing that I gave my Champions is Savage Attack Feat and Savager Attack. 3rd level gain Savage Attack (which is about the equivalent of +1 damage)
And at 5th level, when they get their second attack, they gain Savager Attack which is all weapon attacks can be re-rolled. (This helps TWF a bit) Savage attack is really minor, but for the player, it makes rolling damage more "fun".

on my lunch break, I"ll look at the other two this weekend.

 

[Yunru]

I like the attention to the fighter, doing some similar tweaks for my own game. One thing I would change, is revert back to the class progression as outlined in the PHB. Getting your archetype a level sooner really throws things out of whack with the other classes. It feels too much like a kludge from the start, rather than a tweak to help out a class.

I'm afraid that's impossible with Spellcasting as a 1/2 class. Besides, the father class, the Wizard has their specialisation at 2nd level

Another thing I would suggest is highlighting the things that you've changed, so that we can compare how these improvements have changed the archetype. It would be nice not to have to drag out our PHB and follow along in two places.

Anything unchanged is italics. If it's not in italics, it's either in a different position or new. I may get around to a changelog though.

So the major changes are improving the crit range and ... Is that it? Probably all that is needed. Champions are touted as being pretty effective anyways. So cool.

Well now they're the only ones to get more than two attacks per action also.

 

[Xeviat]

To the original point of the thread, that the Fighter has too much power in their class and not enough in their subclass, I think that's completely wrong. Subclasses mostly amount to 4 to 6 feat-level features. The Battle Master and Eldritch Knight gain features that seem to be above and beyond those. At least to me.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[snickersnax]

I like the EK as a wizard half-caster, fits so well with Paladin as a cleric half-caster and ranger as a druid half-caster, too bad EK doesn't have unique spells like the other two.

I wish remarkable athlete were more remarkable, something like expertise in Athletics, so that champions could actually have a chance to win an event in the non-magical Olympics. Otherwise bards, rogues, barbarians and monks have the potential a lot more remarkable in every athletic competition.

I'm a little worried for the Champions with 8-13 intelligence, it seems like your rules are a nerf for them and I don't think intelligence is that important for crits (watch big cats or even small ones hunting and they know what the vulnerable areas are and target them heavily).

 

[CapnZapp]

The Fighter's a fine class, but in terms of play with subclasses, the core build has far too much power.

Agreed



Sent from my C6603 using EN World mobile app

 

[JPicasso]

The Fighter's a fine class, but in terms of play with subclasses, the core build has far too much power.

Hmmm, I think I am in the camp that disagrees with this. As I try and move more things to the fighter archetypes, I keep wanting to put them into every fighter archetype, effectively putting them into the core class. So as I try and objectively look at your breakdown, and it's obvious you put plenty of thought in, I keep thinking that you're deviating too far from the other core classes for my taste. Especially the part of getting your Archetype at 2nd level, does not sit well with me. So, I don't think I have anything constructive so say about that.

However, your reply to that concerns a 1/2 caster fighter. And I agree, that the Eldritch Knight fills the Fighter/Mage role pretty well, with the emphasis on Fighter. A Bard fills this role, but the musical flavor element is too strong to diversify much. Bard is not the answer. So while I think the Fighter class can be left alone, I think it would be nice to have a 1/2 caster class who's archetypes gain parts of the other classes.

So. I might suggest a new class that is a 1/2 caster but whose archetypes take on attributes of other classes. So you can have effectively a Mage/Fighter with emphasis on Mage, a Mage/Thief (does anyone actually play arcane trickster?) maybe a Mage/Cleric with some limited Cleric casting, etc. I would think this adventuring mage would borrow heavily from the structure of the bard, but keeping the musical shtick out of the picture. I think your Spell Knight would make a perfect candidate for this, as would a Spell Sneak, or a Spell Hunter (Mage/Ranger?)

If that's not the direction you want to go with this thread, say something, maybe we can have a different thread on this aspect.