D&D 5E Fixing the fighter (I know...)

[GlassJaw]

The fighter is fine in the combat pillar. The Champion is boring but that's the point. Either way, the fighter isn't lacking in combat.

The fighter needs something in the social and exploration pillars though. This has been discussed at length in other threads. The fighter doesn't have anything in either of those pillars that is unique, and in addition, they are typically outshone by other classes in those pillars of the game.

 

[Sacrosanct]

The fighter is fine in the combat pillar. The Champion is boring but that's the point. Either way, the fighter isn't lacking in combat.

The fighter needs something in the social and exploration pillars though. This has been discussed at length in other threads. The fighter doesn't have anything in either of those pillars that is unique, and in addition, they are typically outshone by other classes in those pillars of the game.

They do have options outside of combat though. They get two extra feats no one else does. And when I looked, there was nothing in the book that said those feats had to be used in combat feats. There is nothing stopping you from taking the actor, or dungeon delver, or ritual caster, or magic initiate feat. Because people choose to use those extra feats on extra combat doesn’t mean the fighter doesn’t have them. It means you (general you) chose not to use them that way.

Also, isn’t having the choice in how to use those two extra feats better then having them replaced with a hard baked in out of combat ability that you have to take?

If the fighter had a built in feature that gave them the ability to cast several ritual spells instead of an ASI at level 6, no one would say they have no out of combat abilities. But give someone the choice to do that or a dozen other choices, and all the sudden people decry how the fighter doesn’t have anything. It makes zero sense. It’s there to choose. You just dont. That’s on you, not the fighter design.

Also also, no, a fighter isn’t forced to used those two extra feats on combat to stay relevant in combat. That’s a myth, before someone brings it up.

 

[Undrave]

They do have options outside of combat though. They get two extra feats no one else does. And when I looked, there was nothing in the book that said those feats had to be used in combat feats. There is nothing stopping you from taking the actor, or dungeon delver, or ritual caster, or magic initiate feat. Because people choose to use those extra feats on extra combat doesn’t mean the fighter doesn’t have them. It means you (general you) chose not to use them that way.

Also, isn’t having the choice in how to use those two extra feats better then having them replaced with a hard baked in out of combat ability that you have to take?

If the fighter had a built in feature that gave them the ability to cast several ritual spells instead of an ASI at level 6, no one would say they have no out of combat abilities. But give someone the choice to do that or a dozen other choices, and all the sudden people decry how the fighter doesn’t have anything. It makes zero sense. It’s there to choose. You just dont. That’s on you, not the fighter design.

Also also, no, a fighter isn’t forced to used those two extra feats on combat to stay relevant in combat. That’s a myth, before someone brings it up.

Because those extra feats come in too late for most campaign.

You'll need your first ASI or two to keep up your attack stat because it's important to stay relevant in combat. And then most people have a core thematic combat feat they want to make their build perform like they imagine it to perform.

After that, you probably already have someone on the party who'd been doing what you now want to do since the begining of the campaign and has been doing it better since the start than you can do it at this point in the game.

Non-combat feat are probably the reason why the human variant is so popular, so you can use your first level feat on character defining stuff like Ritual Caster or Actor or Delver or Skilled or Linguist or Keen Mind.

Not all feat are sadly created equal and Combat stuff WILL be prioritised, like it or not, because that's a major focus of the rules and it's the only way to spice up the combat performance certain builds...

And while Spellcasters get extra spells in every book with player content it seems like feats (and Battlemaster maneuvers) aren't being developped much with Xanathar only having Racial Feats as far as I can tell.

Plus those Feats aren't unique to the Fighter.

 

[Undrave]

Heck, Polearm Master, Heavy Armor Master, Great Weapon Master, Sharpshooter, Shield Master and Sentinel are basically Fighter class features hiding amongst feat. And then some...Even Inspiring Leader could be one.

A few of these are basically "Advanced Fighting Styles" and if you'd get to pick one of those as well as a Feat you can bet your pommel you'd see stuff like Actor and Keen Mind being used more often.

 

[TheCosmicKid]

The champion is fine as far as design goals go -- people who want to make it more complex in either the combat pillar or the exploration/social pillars are missing the point. But it is just a bit underpowered. Players might not care, but they might notice that they're just not putting out as much damage as their battlemaster teammate. And there's no reason why that has to be the case. So I think the brute's extra damage is a better idea than the champion's expanded crit. (And Mearls' weapon master from the Happy Fun Hour put this bonus damage in a more broadly appealing package than the "brute".) Also, Remarkable Athlete, as has frequently been noted, can stand to be buffed quite a bit.

 

[Sacrosanct]

Because those extra feats come in too late for most campaign.

You'll need your first ASI or two to keep up your attack stat because it's important to stay relevant in combat. And then most people have a core thematic combat feat they want to make their build perform like they imagine it to perform.

After that, you probably already have someone on the party who'd been doing what you now want to do since the begining of the campaign and has been doing it better since the start than you can do it at this point in the game.

Non-combat feat are probably the reason why the human variant is so popular, so you can use your first level feat on character defining stuff like Ritual Caster or Actor or Delver or Skilled or Linguist or Keen Mind.

Not all feat are sadly created equal and Combat stuff WILL be prioritised, like it or not, because that's a major focus of the rules and it's the only way to spice up the combat performance certain builds...

And while Spellcasters get extra spells in every book with player content it seems like feats (and Battlemaster maneuvers) aren't being developped much with Xanathar only having Racial Feats as far as I can tell.

Plus those Feats aren't unique to the Fighter.

You get the extra feat at level 6. That’s not way past most campaigns. And you don’t have to spend it on combat. There are three pillars of the game. If you choose to only focus on combat, that’s on you. Not the game. Fact is, they have the option. Which means they have the option to have out of combat functionality that is pretty significant. You need to stop acting like your playstyle is the only way the game is played, or how it is designed. You’re objectively wrong. Basically, your entire argument is they don’t have the functionality the way you want it, so they don’t have it at all. That’s demonstratively false.

“Fighters don’t have anything out of combat.”
“Yes they do, here is a list.”
“Well, I don’t play that way, so they don’t have it”

 

[FrogReaver]

You get the extra feat at level 6. That’s not way past most campaigns. And you don’t have to spend it on combat. There are three pillars of the game. If you choose to only focus on combat, that’s on you. Not the game. Fact is, they have the option. Which means they have the option to have out of combat functionality that is pretty significant. You need to stop acting like your playstyle is the only way the game is played, or how it is designed. You’re objectively wrong. Basically, your entire argument is they don’t have the functionality the way you want it, so they don’t have it at all. That’s demonstratively false.

“Fighters don’t have anything out of combat.”
“Yes they do, here is a list.”
“Well, I don’t play that way, so they don’t have it”

Then maybe this would help...

What do fighters get for out of combat before level 6? It seems to me that not getting any out of combat abilities before level 6 is a problem that needs fixed

 

[cbwjm]

I honestly don't think the fighter needs anything else to help outside of combat, I can just leverage my skills for that, no class ability or spell needed.

 

[Sacrosanct]

If you want a class to have a significant out of combat ability set above the normal stat and prof bonuses, why are you choosing the champion fighter? That’s the better question. I mean, you have a ton of choices. I mean, the social pillar, and even exploration pillar abilities (non spells) for most classes at below level 6 aren’t that far apart in success chance anyway. Those come with higher class level abilities. At which point you’d have the extra feat...

 

[Mistwell]

Then maybe this would help...

What do fighters get for out of combat before level 6? It seems to me that not getting any out of combat abilities before level 6 is a problem that needs fixed

Action Surge for all subclasses.

Let's go through the rest of the subclasses except Champion:
Arcane Archer gets proficiency in either the Arcana or the Nature skill, and either the prestidigitation or the druidcraft cantrip
BattleMaster gets proficiency with one type of artisan’s tools of your choice.
Cavalier gets proficiency in one of the following skills of your choice: Animal Handling, History, Insight, Performance, or Persuasion, or a language, plus mount skills.
Eldritch Knight gets two wizard cantrips and a spell of their choice
Samurai gets proficiency in one of the following skills of your choice: History, Insight, Performance, or Persuasion, or a language.

Does that help?