D&D 5E Homebrew: 2 ideas to improve fighter out of combat effectiveness

[Hillsy7]

Personally, I think the fighter is a great class for Exploration and Social in certain types of games – they are the class that allows the maximum character input, and where backstory has the largest narrative effect. The structure of the class simply does not get in the way of the character and their backstory in the same way a Warlock of Rogue does – and mechanically, most choices are socially equal, and exploration wise Athletics is gold in a lot of situations (Albeit this does need the GM to pitch exploration challenges above cantrip, but below physically impossible, so that the fighter’s athletics remains relevant and not-trivialised).

However, all that aside I can see *some* argument for this, so I’ll toss in some softcore options just to try and redress the balance a bit, mainly focused on bringing out the benefits of a Fighter as a class defined by its character, rather than it’s abilities.

1) The Human has a +1 to all stats to reflect their diversity and variety, so how about a Fighter having a flat +1 to all skill checks, or a flat +2 to all background Skills?
2) Replace one of the ASIs with a +2 to WIS/INT/CHA
3) The fighter can draw from 2 backgrounds (Or double down on one). While the other classes were learning to be their class, the fighter was learning to be a badass [insert second class here]
4) Give them a special pool of inspiration dice that they can apply to any skill check related to their background
Just some ideas to support the versatility of the Fighter as a character

 

[Li Shenron]

1. Add special fighter only feats that a fighter can take when he gets his level 6 and level 14 ASI. These feats will do many more things than feats for regular characters. A list of possible feats would need created. Each feat could add nice out of combat benefits as well as a combat benefit.

Dislike for two reasons.

1. If these Fighter-only feats are more powerful than normal feats (not sure, but sounds like that), it's an unfair boost to the Fighter class. It is also unfair to other Fighters who are interested in taking a PHB feat because they in such case they are giving up the chance to take one of the better feats instead.

2. I see no in-game reason why such feats shouldn't be available to non-Fighters also.

2. Give fighters a special "archetype overlay" chosen at level 1 that adds special bonuses at certain levels and have their out of combat benefits primarily derive from the overlay. A few example overlay concepts would be "commander of men (charisma and social focused)", "scout (dexterity and exploration focused) ", "advisor (intelligence and social focused)", "crusader (religion focused with a mix of social and exploration benefits), etc. Each overlay would get some useful out of combat abilities that fit the "archetype overlay". Speaking of can someone come up with a better name?

Dislike for two reasons.

1. This is a boost that the class doesn't deserve, requires something equivalent to all classes to keep balance.

2. This actually forces out-of-combat abilities also to players who don't want them.


---

Overall comments IMHO.

BAD: this is not good design from a balance point of view, unless these feats are not more powerful than PHB feats AND other classes get a similar boost.

GOOD: feats are generally a very good mechanic (if not the best one) to improve a PC in one "pillar" thanks to their modularity, so that nobody is forced to pick something from every pillar.

My conclusion is that you should continue your design of non-combat feats, just don't make them Fighter-exclusive without a strong narrative reason, don't make them more powerful than PHB feats, and don't give more of them for free to the Fighter alone.

 

[clearstream]

1. Add special fighter only feats that a fighter can take when he gets his level 6 and level 14 ASI. These feats will do many more things than feats for regular characters. A list of possible feats would need created. Each feat could add nice out of combat benefits as well as a combat benefit.

2. Give fighters a special "archetype overlay" chosen at level 1 that adds special bonuses at certain levels and have their out of combat benefits primarily derive from the overlay. A few example overlay concepts would be "commander of men (charisma and social focused)", "scout (dexterity and exploration focused) ", "advisor (intelligence and social focused)", "crusader (religion focused with a mix of social and exploration benefits), etc. Each overlay would get some useful out of combat abilities that fit the "archetype overlay". Speaking of can someone come up with a better name?

I would love to hear any design ideas about either of these concepts. Criticisms are welcome but we have enough threads arguing over fighters and their out of combat usefulness in general, let's try to avoid that here. In other words, state your opinion on that matter if you must but don't try to discuss / argue / debate others about their opinion on the matter here. There's numerous other threads where you can already do that.

Okay. One fear I have is the debate about Expertise. For me, "the skill classes should be best at skills". With backgrounds, fighters can already pick up important skills that are core to skill classes. How do we do what you suggest without missing our target (casters) and hitting innocent bystanders (the skill classes)?

 

[Xeviat]

I am starting to really like the idea of giving the Battle master’s sizing up opponents abilities to all Fighters at 1st level. Fighters don’t have a ribbon. They could use one, and this suits Fighters.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Tony Vargas]

Okay. One fear I have is the debate about Expertise. For me, "the skill classes should be best at skills". With backgrounds, fighters can already pick up important skills that are core to skill classes. How do we do what you suggest without missing our target (casters) and hitting innocent bystanders (the skill classes)?

Part of the problem is that, very early on, the 'skill class,' the Thief, was broken out from the fighter, creating 'exploration pillar' incompetence in the fighter (almost 40 years before the pillars were even articulated), and an inferior class that gained relevance only through blatant niche protection.

Over the decades, the Thief has been built up into the Rogue, a DPR-contributing 'glass cannon' class with a lot of out-of-combat skill options. The fighter, OTOH, has mostly tread water. Which build was optimal, what weapon it was holding, whether it was DPR or Defender, it's milled about a bit, but it's stayed single-pillar class in a game of multi-pillar classes that can be competitive in it's pillar, as well.

The Thief can't be erased, but neither is niche protection much of a thing anymore. The fighter can join the ranks of 'skill classes' without making things worse for them.

 

[FrogReaver]

Dislike for two reasons.

1. If these Fighter-only feats are more powerful than normal feats (not sure, but sounds like that), it's an unfair boost to the Fighter class. It is also unfair to other Fighters who are interested in taking a PHB feat because they in such case they are giving up the chance to take one of the better feats instead.

2. I see no in-game reason why such feats shouldn't be available to non-Fighters also.



Dislike for two reasons.

1. This is a boost that the class doesn't deserve, requires something equivalent to all classes to keep balance.

2. This actually forces out-of-combat abilities also to players who don't want them.


---

Overall comments IMHO.

BAD: this is not good design from a balance point of view, unless these feats are not more powerful than PHB feats AND other classes get a similar boost.

GOOD: feats are generally a very good mechanic (if not the best one) to improve a PC in one "pillar" thanks to their modularity, so that nobody is forced to pick something from every pillar.

My conclusion is that you should continue your design of non-combat feats, just don't make them Fighter-exclusive without a strong narrative reason, don't make them more powerful than PHB feats, and don't give more of them for free to the Fighter alone.

Not going to debate it but just wanted to note that what you view as unfair I view as correcting the unfairness that's already present. What you are viewing as detrimental to balance I see as fixing the lack of balance. The point is that we obviously start out with different beliefs about the game and fighters in general and that influences what we see as balanced and what we do not see as balanced.

So if my belief is that fighters are unbalanced already then obviously that is fixed by giving them something extra that they don't already get. If I just give that something extra to every other class then I've just made everything better in which case while he became objectively better than the previous fighter he gained no actual ground in relation to the other classes I was trying to balance him against.

I guess the point I am making is that what I'm suggesting isn't bad design of itself. It only becomes bad design when the belief that fighters are already balanced is held.

Maybe it would be appropriate to ask this question. Suppose you had a class that was comparable to a rogue at exploration but did terrible damage and had no social benefits. What do you do to balance that class? Do you give combat feats that anyone can take? Do you make kits that everyone can take? Or do you make something that only benefits that class?

 

[FrogReaver]

The main problem I see with these approaches is that they are much more complex, and require you to generate a lot of content. Even after you put in all of the work that's required, you're very likely to introduce something that's unbalanced when taken in combination with something else out there.

A secondary problem is that it only addresses the issue for Fighters, specifically. Even if Fighters become as effective as Rogues and Bards in terms of exploration and interaction, that just means the Barbarian gets to be the new iconic skill-less monkey.

Yea, that's a concern of most any game that doesn't have a pure class system. Options increase complexity nearly exponentially. However, I'm confident that the non-combat and non-magical focus of such abilities will severely limit the combination problem. Just avoid stacking bonuses and advantage and we should pretty much be good.

Well hopefully the concept we choose to buff the fighter in non-combat can easily be applied to the barbarian or any other underperforming class as well. That said, if the fighter even got as much as the barbarian (totem subclass specifically) does for out of combat then IMO that would help a lot.

 

[Ancalagon]

The fighter can join the ranks of 'skill classes' without making things worse for them.

And that can be easily done by giving them one or two extra skills, as [MENTION=6802951]Cap'n Kobold[/MENTION] and I suggested. To protect the niche of the rogue (and ranger) I wouldn't go beyond that - no "expertise" or anything like that...

 

[Tony Vargas]

And that can be easily done by giving them one or two extra skills, as [MENTION=6802951]Cap'n Kobold[/MENTION] and I suggested. To protect the niche of the rogue (and ranger) I wouldn't go beyond that - no "expertise" or anything like that...

Niche protection really isn't a thing in 5e, and shouldn't become one, IMHO. Yes, 'entering the ranks of the skill classes' would mean Expertise, or something very like it.

For instance, 'Remarkable' Athlete stacking with proficiency (but not Expertise) - so it's 'half-expertise,' but doesn't require prof, a fair trade-off. Sure, the Rogue can still literally be a better Athlete than the Champion, but it'd be a step in the right direction.

Or, the BM spending CS dice to add to checks out of combat. Maybe each maneuver could have an associated skill or two.

Those might make more impact in the Exploration pillar.

Another idea, not sure if was here or on another thread, is that Fighters are the class most relatable/least-off-putting to most non-Adventurers, so they should receive some benefits in most social situations. It would be some support for the old truism that Fighters gravitate towards positions of fame and leadership, like 'Lords...'