D&D General Payn's Ponderings: The Fighter's identity; or, what's left after the combat pillar?

[Yaarel]

give them some cool combat things too... death blow (save or die) knee cap (slow)

I feel EVERY save-or-suck (including spells and nonmagic features) should be impossible until the target is at least bloodied at half hit points.

Until then, the targets guard is up. Only after bloodied, does one notice that the target is getting sloppy and leaving openings at times.

 

[payn]

I feel EVERY save-or-suck (including spells and nonmagic features) should be impossible until the target is at least bloodied at half hit points.

Until then, the targets guard is up. Only after bloodied, does one notice that the target is getting sloppy and leaving openings at times.

I do like the idea of having some security from SoS stuff until bloodied. That said, I wouldn't be opposed to vorpal just being something Fighters get at some level.

 

[ART!]

By the way, the "exploration pillar" is when the DM describes where the players are (sights, sounds, smells) and asks what they want to do.

It can be so, so much more than that, although obviously interest levels vary from table to table. Level Up's Trials and Treasures has page after page of exploration challenges, for instance.

Different subclasses of fighters might be better at some kinda of exploration than others. A soldier-y type would be better at long hauls, for instance.

 

[Yaarel]

I do like the idea of having some security from SoS stuff until bloodied. That said, I wouldn't be opposed to vorpal just being something Fighters get at some level.

Even then, I want to see the target bloodied as a requirement before anything like vorpal, forced surrender, stun, or anything else that removes a creature from play. This goes for spells like Forcecage too. (I visualize the Forcecage as telekinetic and needing to wear down the target mentally before being effective.)

 

[Yaarel]

It can be so, so much more than that, although obviously interest levels vary from table to table. Level Up's Trials and Treasures has page after page of exploration challenges, for instance.

Different subclasses of fighters might be better at some kinda of exploration than others. A soldier-y type would be better at long hauls, for instance.

Yeah.

At the same, just like the DM roleplaying an NPC is the essence of the social pillar, the DM describing the surroundings is the essence of the exploration pillar.

Then, the players can utilize many different mechanics to interact socially or exploratorily.

 

[S'mon]

In past editions, fighters eventually become squires and knights and leaders of people. That idea has almost entirely been abandoned in modern D&D.

I definitely think that's a problem. Fighters should be the top class for military leadership and in many forms of rulership. That stuff fits well in a sandbox campaign, but is unfortunately ignored/not part of many linear campaigns. Or else systems are used that make eg Bards the best leaders.

 

[payn]

I wouldnt mind some bonuses or mechanics around a fighter knowing how to infiltrate or siege a stronghold/dungeon. Perhaps even a mechanic where they can knock out a sentry or guard undetected. Some of this treads a little on rogue territory but the fighter could really use some of these things.

 

[Savage Wombat]

I like the idea of fighters getting more combat maneuvers, but I foresee a problem that would basically require the rule-makers to stick to their guns. Namely, that once you give fighters (for the sake of example) a called shot ability, you have to steadfastly resist the arguments of people who say "why can't my paladin make a called shot? why can't I firebolt the dragon's eye? not fair!"

 

[Yaarel]

I wouldnt mind some bonuses or mechanics around a fighter knowing how to infiltrate or siege a stronghold/dungeon. Perhaps even a mechanic where they can knock out a sentry or guard undetected. Some of this treads a little on rogue territory but the fighter could really use some of these things.

Masons Tools, knows how to evaluate and sap a stronghold. There might also be something like "tool feats" that a Fighter can choose from.

Normally, to "knock out" a target means reducing the target to zero hit points while making it nonlethal damage. That said, a special Fighter feature that only needs to bloody, then allows a save or be unconscious, seems fair.

 

[FrogReaver]

I like the idea of fighters getting more combat maneuvers, but I foresee a problem that would basically require the rule-makers to stick to their guns. Namely, that once you give fighters (for the sake of example) a called shot ability, you have to steadfastly resist the arguments of people who say "why can't my paladin make a called shot? why can't I firebolt the dragon's eye? not fair!"

It’s also just more combat stuff, which seems a bit off for this thread. IMO.