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

[DND_Reborn]

@FrogReaver : I think this thread stopped being about the Fighter class several pages ago.

And unfortunately the time I lost reading it all I can never get back... sigh. I was hoping this thread had actually developed into something more than back-and-forths. Sure, there has been an occasional suggestion here and there, but sadly that was all.

Maybe there will be better posts in the morning...

 

[Sacrosanct]

I never said your original post was a strawman. As such this post by you is a strawman. What I said was you have to actually state your problem or you force everyone to else guess what your actual issue with the champion sub-class is which forces us to make strawman posts. That's not the same thing. If you think there is a "cognitive dissonance" in my post its likely because you didn't read or understand my post. Please, Read it (again?) and ask for clarification if you need more information... that's what I did. Ask for clarification. Instead of making personal attacks. I am full aware of what I said and what you said, my point was that you stated your point of view that there is a problem but failed to describe what the actual problem is that we are supposed to be addressing. As such readers are forced into arguments like this... because you just did, EXACTLY what I said you would do in my post.... proving me right. Ta da!

Do you care to actually explain your issues with the champion sub-class, instead of ineffective and unusable generaltities?

My point about cognitive dissonance was about you saying no progress can be made, and how you can’t have further discussion, and then literally post several paragraphs of discussion that you just said you couldn’t have.

You also seem to be under the impression that unless I personally have grievances, I can’t offer solutions to people who do. So I go back to my initial response to you. The grievances folks have had re the fighter and lack of out of combat abilities are well documented. The exist even in this very thread. So for you to say I must state them in detail or you have no idea what I’m talking about is either incredible ignorance on your part about this topic, which I don’t believe, or you’re willfully ignoring the point to take pot shots or trolling. I’m guessing it’s the latter by your immediate dismissal of my suggestions as ineffectual and unusable (your opinion is hardly objective truth)

So good day. If you don’t have any further suggestions in how we can add out of combat functionality to the fighter while maintaining the requirements I outlined in the first post, I’ll kindly ask you to stop threadcapping.

 

[FrogReaver]

I never said your original post was a strawman. As such this post by you is a strawman. What I said was you have to actually state your problem or you force everyone to else guess what your actual issue with the champion sub-class is which forces us to make strawman posts. That's not the same thing. If you think there is a "cognitive dissonance" in my post its likely because you didn't read or understand my post. Please, Read it (again?) and ask for clarification if you need more information... that's what I did. Ask for clarification. Instead of making personal attacks. I am full aware of what I said and what you said, my point was that you stated your point of view that there is a problem but failed to describe what the actual problem is that we are supposed to be addressing. As such readers are forced into arguments like this... because you just did, EXACTLY what I said you would do in my post.... proving me right. Ta da!

Do you care to actually explain your issues with the champion sub-class, instead of ineffective and unusable generaltities?

Well done shortening these posts down to a reasonable reading length!

Great analysis of what's going on here!

 

[FrogReaver]

My point about cognitive dissonance was about you saying no progress can be made, and how you can’t have further discussion, and then literally post several paragraphs of discussion that you just said you couldn’t have.

You also seem to be under the impression that unless I personally have grievances, I can’t offer solutions to people who do. So I go back to my initial response to you. The grievances folks have had re the fighter and lack of out of combat abilities are well documented. The exist even in this very thread. So for you to say I must state them in detail or you have no idea what I’m talking about is either incredible ignorance on your part about this topic, which I don’t believe, or you’re willfully ignoring the point to take pot shots or trolling. I’m guessing it’s the latter by your immediate dismissal of my suggestions as ineffectual and unusable (your opinion is hardly objective truth)

So good day. If you don’t have any further suggestions in how we can add out of combat functionality to the fighter while maintaining the requirements I outlined in the first post, I’ll kindly ask you to stop threadcapping.

All I've seen from you is denying that any grievances are real

 

[Umbran]

Mod Note:
Good gods, what a mess. Let us try a few new ground rules:

1) The next persons to use the word "strawman" (or reasonable facsimile thereof), or to accuse another of trolling, can expect to get booted out of the thread.

2) If your argument is of the form, "the fighter is just fine, and you should do nothing to change it", please just leave the thread entirely. You are the dad from the LEGO movie - insisting that the toys must be used in only one way. You are getting in the way of building stuff. Please stop.

2a) If your argument is that you feel the fighter is just fine for you, but you understand others might not see it your way, and you want to help - you are okay, and can stay. Helping may take the form of making others aware of things about the fighter that they seem to be overlooking, but again, if you being to badger anyone about things... out you are going to go.

3) All board rules still apply - be respectful at all times. If you see someone breaking these addendums, please report them, rather than get into an argument. Also, consider using the ignore feature - you can just choose to not see posts from folks who are just getting in your way. But if you do so, don't make a public announcement. Just do it, and carry on with your life.

 

[Sacrosanct]

All I've seen from you is denying that any grievances are real

Like my very first post, and the whole point I opened this thread, and my response to Mistwell when I said they do exist, and my response to Clayton just above where I completely acknowledged how even if something is fine with me I know other people can have it (the part where I disagreed that unless I had them personally I couldn’t offer suggestions)? Seriously you’re gonna say something like this? If you think this, maybe you need to start rereading the thread, starting with my very first post. Is this Opposite Day and no one told me or something?

 

[FrogReaver]

Me saying white room analysis is unreliable doesn’t remotely mean you can’t do analysis of DnD at all. Come on now.

I'm not sure how you would categorize unreliable analysis but I'd categorize that in the not doing analysis category. I mean what's the point of doing unreliable analysis?

And I created this thread honestly,to address issues some people seem to have. That’s why I offered and asked for suggestions. And saying the fighter currently is fine also doesn’t mean there is no room for improvement or nothing needs to be done.

I once had a girlfriend that got quite upset when I replied fine after she asked me how she looked. I learned then that fine can also mean "could be better" and if that's the connotation your using for fine then I think I understand.

That said - when I say the fighter needs fixed I don't mean he's so broken that he's unplayable or even unfun to play. I really mean he "could be better".

So possibly semantics here?

You really need to get out of this “it’s my way or it’s wrong” attitude. There is a ton of grey area, and things can both be fine and also be improved without needing to be optimized or they’re trash

I think the same can be said of you. Afterall, there is a lot of grey area, and things can still need fixed while being fun to play.

 

[FrogReaver]

Like my very first post, and the whole point I opened this thread, and my response to Mistwell when I said they do exist, and my response to Clayton just above where I completely acknowledged how even if something is fine with me I know other people can have it (the part where I disagreed that unless I had them personally I couldn’t offer suggestions)? Seriously you’re gonna say something like this? If you think this, maybe you need to start rereading the thread, starting with my very first post. Is this Opposite Day and no one told me or something?

Well, you say that but then you say things like "why play a champion fighter if you want out of combat ability"

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?

You do see why your other stances like the one I quoted kind of seem to undermine your OP and other statements about there being valid grievances right?

 

[Salthorae]

Thanks for the reset @Umbran!

@Sacrosanct - I'd intended to go back to the OP tonight and re-read it again anyway, but Umbran's post really drove that need home

Specifically for the Champion, I think the classes apparent "lack" is just more that the features feel lackluster when you get them, regardless of what they are mechanically or not.

Many of the fighter subclasses give you bonus skill proficiency options. So that would be an easy start to boosting the perceived benefits of the subclass.

The archetypal Champion focuses on the development of raw physical power honed to deadly perfection. Those who model themselves on this archetype combine rigorous training with physical excellence to deal devastating blows.

So at 3rd level, I would say we could offer proficiency in either Acrobatics or Athletics and expertise in one of those skills of your choosing.

At 7th level, with remarkable athlete add expertise in the other skill (this kind of presumes that a fighter takes one of them to start with from Fighter skills I guess?)

I don't mind the extra fighting style at 10th. I would always be open to another one of those frankly and wish more fighters got that as an option.

The theme of the subclass is to deal devastating blows. I'm not feeling a 19-20 Crit at 3rd and a 18-20 at 15th is really embracing that concept.

Maybe double down on the Critical hit focus of the Subclass as well? Give them a brutal critical type thing where when they do crit, they do +1 weapon damage die on top of the normal crit. Maybe also expand the crit ranges? so at 3rd make it 18-20, at 15th make it 17-20?

 

[FrogReaver]

@Salthorae

2nd Rogue Build - should meet your requirements




Variant human (Actor) Rogue + TWF Shortswords

Wow, look at this. Get's to take an out of combat feat and be better than the fighter you are proposing at combat (not by a lot but 10-15% and even better out of combat)

View attachment 114653

@Salthorae

You said:

If the rogue invested in being more rogue-ish than improving their combat ability and they were on par with the fighter damage or better, that would bother me.

I provided you a rogue where these things were true when compared with your proposed fighter. Does that mean the fighter bothers you?