D&D 5E Truly Understanding the Martials & Casters discussion (+)

[Aldarc]

Foresight as a high level fighter ability is exactly it. An ability that can easily be flavored in a completely non-magical way. Is it powerful - yes, absolutely - and that's the point.

To be clear, I don't think that a Fighter necessarily needs an ability that exactly copies Foresight as Foresight has an eight hour duration. It could be a once or twice per day ability that lasts for several minutes, which is generally the duration of a combat encounter.

I still do not think that this solves the over-arching issue of mechanical agency in non-combat pillars of the game, as per my earlier point, but it is the sort of epic feat that I suspect many could reasonably see epic warriors performing.

 

[Neonchameleon]

Not every person who picks up a spell book can become a wizard. Not every priest at the temple is a cleric. Not every plainsman is a barbarian. I'm fine with a fighter tapping into some supernatural source to get thier superhuman abilities. Birthright is one example, you could say they got a godly blessing, drank super-soldier serum, dipped in the magic river as a babe, or discovered the magic of Muscle Power. But if we do so, we are giving up the idea that PCs are ever average people. All PCs are Magical in some way.

With all due respect no we aren't. If "Not every person who picks up a spell book can become a wizard." but we allow the wizard class freely then we've already given up on the idea that players have to play average people if they do not want to. If the wizard, just by being a wizard is not an average person then the player of the fighter should be able to opt out of playing an average person just as easily. Or playing an average person should be opt-in.

For that matter I wouldn't call the fighter class the right one to play a "normal" person in a D&D game. Instead I'd pick the class that specialises in not being in the way to be hit and in knowing where to strike with their more average strength blades. In other words the rogue.

 

[Vaalingrade]

Not every person who picks up a spell book can become a wizard.

They can if their player picks the class.

Or just yes in general. Nothing in the game says there's something preventing people from having a class.

Not every priest at the temple is a cleric. Not every plainsman is a barbarian.

This is a different question entirely. Some of those folks are paladins or filler characters the PCs will never take seriously.

 

[HammerMan]

With all due respect no we aren't. If "Not every person who picks up a spell book can become a wizard." but we allow the wizard class freely then we've already given up on the idea that players have to play average people if they do not want to. If the wizard, just by being a wizard is not an average person then the player of the fighter should be able to opt out of playing an average person just as easily. Or playing an average person should be opt-in.

For that matter I wouldn't call the fighter class the right one to play a "normal" person in a D&D game. Instead I'd pick the class that specialises in not being in the way to be hit and in knowing where to strike with their more average strength blades. In other words the rogue.

yeah, what is the prereq to being a wizard? as far as I know I can roll up a 15 str 6 int farm boy say I got a spellbook and boom be a wizard. (my save DC and attack rolls will suck)

 

[Mort]

My point was that I feel like the rogue has been beefed up in combat while the fighter hasn't gained anything in the skills section. That and I'd be okay with a rogue being nearly effective at DPR if they were more of a glass cannon, but they aren't. My wife's rogue has the best AC in the group, which in part is because she cares about that kind of stuff but also because dex is simply too powerful IMHO. I would also say that fighters get combat options and roles that the rogue does not. Attacks can be used for other things than swinging a sword. Maybe they (or at least some subset) should get a good charge ability or similar, but I don't think that's what this thread is about.

The problem is even if you gave fighters more options for skills, such as specialization similar to rogues but fewer, some people would still claim it's not enough because in their games the only things that matter are the big flashy spells. I try to make sure that I balance things out, I have a "cheat sheet" with what people are proficient and good in to remind myself to call for things other than perception, history or arcana checks. On a couple of occasions the fighter has made mighty leaps that others could not have with an athletics check and that exceeded the strength times 10 rule. But that's all in the hands of the DM. Same way with the repercussions of spells, it's pretty much left in the hands of the DM. For example my players know that charming someone may come back to bite them (I'll remind them the target knows they were charmed if I think they don't already know) so they're more careful in their usage.

In any case, we're not adding much here. I agree fighters could use a bit of a boost on the skill side, I'm just not sure how much of a difference it would make. It certainly seems like it wouldn't be enough for some people. Without giving them explicitly supernatural capabilities that I think goes against the nature of the fighter unless you're talking about a specific archetype, I'm not sure what can be done. Then again I didn't see the problem when I played a fighter and don't see it now. Running a wizard or even a more complex fighter isn't for everyone, sometimes people just want to run a PC that bashes head in and drinks ale on their off hours.

You can't possibly satisfy "everybody." But some steps can be taken to satisfy more people - heck WoTC could release an Unearthed Arcana to test the waters and see what happens.

 

[Asisreo]

And that doesn't matter nearly as much as the question of: why do you personally not want me to play such a character in D&D?

I don't have any opinion for or against it. I want to know your POV of this, because right now, if WoTC didn't cater to you, I wouldn't really feel any way. I can't feel motivated to rally behind a cause that I don't understand. It's said that it's a huge problem, but I don't see it. And so far, the only confirmation that it is a problem is from a total of...5 people online that have told me it's a problem, but aren't exactly telling me why.

 

[Guest 7034872]

You can't possibly satisfy "everybody." But some steps can be taken to satisfy more people - heck WoTC could release an Unearthed Arcana to test the waters and see what happens.

I think that would be an excellent approach. That way they'll have thousands of volunteer playtesters instead of a single room full. I'd use it in my games.

 

[Mort]

To be clear, I don't think that a Fighter necessarily needs an ability that exactly copies Foresight as Foresight has an eight hour duration. It could be a once or twice per day ability that lasts for several minutes, which is generally the duration of a combat encounter.

Sure, it's just a level to strive for. Tweaks can always be made as needed. Heck you could say that keeping such a state of awareness is exhausting - for every 10 minutes a fighter keeps it up they have to make a constitution saving throw (starts at 10 and increases by 5 every 10 minutes up or some such) failure = 1 level of exhaustion. Resets after a short or long rest. Easy.

I still do not think that this solves the over-arching issue of mechanical agency in non-combat pillars of the game, as per my earlier point, but it is the sort of epic feat that I suspect many could reasonably see epic warriors performing.

It's just one idea. In the social pillar, for example, a "High level" fighter feat could be that the fighter gets a glibness effect x number of times per long rest.

 

[Aldarc]

I don't have any opinion for or against it. I want to know your POV of this, because right now, if WoTC didn't cater to you, I wouldn't really feel any way. I can't feel motivated to rally behind a cause that I don't understand. It's said that it's a huge problem, but I don't see it. And so far, the only confirmation that it is a problem is from a total of...5 people online that have told me it's a problem, but aren't exactly telling me why.

I don't think that people who feel this way are necessarily expecting that you should rally to their cause. A good first step is extending a sympathetic ear. I also think that some of your questioning can also be antithetical to your previously stated goals of understanding others and achieving a fruitful discussion, as it can be off-putting and put these people on the defensive, that their cause has to be justified and rationalized in full before you can even extend sympathy or consideration in part.

 

[DND_Reborn]

Ok, so I got on the forum to see over 100 new posts to the thread, so my apologies if any of this has already been brooched:

I have to say - this is the first time anyone has mentioned taking fighters back to the very old school leadership role. Since it's never been mentioned before, I'm assuming the old school "gain men at arms" from previous editions.

FWIW, it has actually been mentioned a few times in the various threads. Given how the threads have grown so rapidly, it isn't surprising if you just missed it. It happens.

But if people are looking for something that looks, sounds, smells and acts like magic. Maybe the solution is to have magic.

Because they don't want something that can be counterspelled or uses the Cast a Spell action?

I get your point, but a big part of it depends on just how far you want your fighter too exceed IRL limits. I (personally) am fine with fighters being able to do things that are beyond real life ability via "adrenaline" or "skill" or both, etc. without it being a different form of "magic."

The list below is a perfect example: how far are heroic leaps? how huge are the things being lifted and thrown?

Big Heroic Leaps
Mighty feats of strength
Crashing blows that throw enemies around
clobbering hordes of cannon fodder critters around you in one great sweep.
Taunts, staredowns, battlecries that unnever, goad or terrify enemies.
smashing walls
lifting and throwing huge things
grabbing one guy and hitting his friend with him
being a danger to anyone in a room with both you and matter like Jackie Chan.
running down wild animals like Tarzan.
executing basic battlefield tactics with allies including rallies
having some kind of danger sense
not being threatened by sad goblins when they are the pinnacle of mortal existence

IMO this is the biggest hurdle. Some people want real life limits, others want heroic (beyond real like, but plausible via skill or adrenaline), and others want superheroic levels. Because those different limits (or lack thereof) exist, it makes creating a single system much harder.

Another issue as I see it is that if the fighter can do such things, why can't other non-caster classes? Why can't the rogue run down a wild animal? With cunning action can they already do it? What about the monk and their speed increases? Is that "magical" or just part of the monk's training and benefit from focused ki (does ki alone make it magical?)?

Many classes or subclasses already have features which allow them to do some of the things in the list, but they aren't the fighter generally who can do them. Also simple changes would allow that list to be accomplished or narrow the gap significantly, even if the fighter isn't the class that gets it.

For example, take Rage. When a barbarian Rages, they get advantage on Strength checks. Why not also allow them to lift, carry, etc. double their normal weight or more? Perhaps a multiplier equal to their proficiency bonus? So, a Primal Champion STR 24 barbarian could lift SIX times his normal amount while raging: or over 4000 lb.!!!

Sure, it isn't the "fighter" who gets to do that, but this really isn't (or shouldn't be IMO) JUST about the fighter. While other martial classes have some stuff, much of what even they can do doesn't rival the power or shenanigans of full-casters, particularly in tiers 3 and 4.

At any rate, the wheel goes round and round.

Do we even need it? Yes, no, maybe?
Who needs it? Fighter, others, no one?
How do we do it? Magic-like features, magical items, incredibly exceptional awesomeness skill? Something else like nerfing casters a bit?
How far do we go with it? Real-life, more than real-life, superheroic, or somewhere in-between?
etc.

While I appreciate the focus of the thread (to understand the other POV not argue against it), to me that isn't the issue so much as reaching a consensus that answers those questions outlined above (and others...). I mean, I can think up all sorts of features, mechanics, and methods to be play-tested for balance to reach whatever a person wants, but that only helps one person, not the numbers who want something more.