D&D (2024) Fighter Class rewrite

[Garthanos]

I like a lot of what you are proposing, but I haven't reviewed it in detail. One of the things I think a fighter needs to do is be the best at fighting. So I think it needs some benefits that are combatants don't get.

I am probably odd but I have started to think the best "balanced" way to make a fighter best at fighting is to make them what would be fully role flexible in 4e terms. But even in that I do think increasing the number of allowed opportunity attacks to match the extra attacks would help.

 

[Garthanos]

I like Warrior’s Multiattack
quite a bit however because I can build a 4e fighter who sort of does all three *(The against the horde functionality in 4e takes picking specific powers and some are pretty significant/very cherry ones. )

So in this idea what if Against the Horde was just a battlemaster maneuver. You only situationally ever need this.

Combine that with a universal rule of just letting anyone who has extra attack to be able to perform as many as they have extra attacks without spending their reaction as long as they still have their reaction.

Opportunity attacks also only occurs situationally. Though there is still that Sentinel feat to finish the Defender look and you may have been shooting for without feats.

Action Surge is the only reliable one of the three options you present there in my opinion.

And the above would in effect grant all three options.

 

[dave2008]

I am probably odd but I have started to think the best "balanced" way to make a fighter best at fighting is to make them what would be fully role flexible in 4e terms. But even in that I do think increasing the number of allowed opportunity attacks to match the extra attacks would help.

I wasn't thinking about increasing the number of attacks, but instead of allowing more things to trigger OA for the fighter. So casting, ranged attacks, and getting up from prone would trigger OA from the fighter, to name a few. I would possible include entering reach, but that steps on a feats toes.

 

[Garthanos]

I wasn't thinking about increasing the number of attacks, but instead of allowing more things to trigger OA for the fighter. So casting, ranged attacks, and getting up from prone would trigger OA from the fighter, to name a few. I would possible include entering reach, but that steps on a feats toes.

I figured you did actually there was a feat in 3x that allowed one opportunity attack per dex bonus. 4e had fewer ways to trigger them but the limit was a simple one per turn. I think associating the number you can respond to with your extra attack is very appropriate and scales well (kind of silly if I can attack 4 times normally but only 1 when someone hands me an opportunity?) regardless of whether you open up events that trigger them.

 

[dave2008]

I figured you did actually there was a feat in 3x that allowed one opportunity attack per dex bonus. 4e had fewer ways to trigger them but the limit was a simple one per turn. I think associating the number you can respond to with your extra attack is very appropriate and scales well (kind of silly if I can attack 4 times normally but only 1 when someone hands me an opportunity?) regardless of whether you open up events that trigger them.

Well that is just a difference in what we want. I already don't like the 4 attacks and would find it more ridiculous if fighter could take 4 reactions as well (for 8 possible attacks). I think what I find ridiculous you see as closer to epic. I would be fine with allowing extra reactions at the expense of actions/bonus actions on your next turn or something like that though ( I know, I know - I'm no fun).

 

[Garthanos]

Well that is just a difference in what we want. I already don't like the 4 attacks and would find it more ridiculous

I know there are real life people shooting four full draw arrows in 6 seconds, and others shooting many more using snap shot and multi-draw techniques ... your oh gosh how ridiculous is pretty close to reality, wait no your dont like is reality.

And a weapon stroke does not necessarily involve as much investment (and even less so when it is an opportunity action)

When you are doing 4 attacks you are supposed to be legendary and epic like Hiawatha and not mundane.

Might as well play a game without spell casters... yup no fun in 5e.

 

[dave2008]

I know there are real life people shooting four full draw arrows in 6 seconds, and others shooting many more using snap shot and multi-draw techniques ... your oh gosh how ridiculous is pretty close to reality, wait no your dont like is reality.

And a weapon stroke does not necessarily involve as much investment (and even less so when it is an opportunity action)

When you are doing 4 attacks you are supposed to be legendary and epic like Hiawatha and not mundane.

Might as well play a game without spell casters... yup no fun in 5e.

Not sure what the point if your response is, it just comes off as if you are trying to say that I am playing the game wrong. Don't know if that is your intent, but if it is that us more ridiculous than having 4 reactions in 1 round!

5e works great for us. It is OK that I like to play the game different than you, that my fantasy is different than yours.

 

[Garthanos]

Not sure what the point if your response is, it just comes off as if you are trying to say that I am playing the game wrong. Don't know if that is your intent, but if it is that us more ridiculous than having 4 reactions in 1 round!

Oh no I am sure you are playing rules as written and implied and any other form of unwrong you want to pick

5e works great for us. It is OK that I like to play the game different than you, that my fantasy is different than yours.

I was saying you seem to be applying "realism" standards to something that is both not supposed to be realistic and there are indications that the game as it stands is less extraordinary than real life.

I mean at level 5 having standards be high end quasi-realistic seems reasonable to me but not so much after level 10

 

[ECMO3]

I do not think more than 1 OA would work well for 5E because it breaks action economy and that would I believe severely unbalance the game because of the effect of bounded accuracy (more attacks means a much higher mean damage against a given AC and outrunning the intentional limits put in place with BA).

I think a better option is to base new abilities around the structures and mechanics already in place and in that respect have limited-use abilities to add damage or effects to provide that "epic feel".

 

[Garthanos]

I do not think more than 1 OA would work well for 5E because it breaks action economy

you mean like what the cavalier has they have increased number of opportunity attacks and progressively more as they get higher levels.

The original post suggests being able to use a somewhat similar for the core fighter it is not radical as an option replacing action surge (which makes it worse than taking the Cavalier and completely inferior by endgame but allows one flexibility of still taking a subclass). Arguably the original post enables 3 different approaches without switching to a subclass. Spell casters get many many more choices of that ilk based on their spell selection.

Extra opportunity attacks really only makes someone better able to "thou shall not pass" also remember enemies do not have to trigger them.

There was a UA that had completely open ended opportunity attacks but that was immediately instead of scaled

I actually suggested fewer than in the OP... it makes more sense to limit extra OA to a number like your normal extra attacks.

The cavalier at level 18 has an indefinite number of opportunity attacks even.