A critique and review of the Fighter class

[Neonchameleon]

It's not about historic accuracy. It's about fantastic fun.

If the elite hoplite or the romantic knight or the smart tactician are warrior archetypes and D&D 5th edition states that these archetypes are supported, then 5th has to support them as advantageous choices from Tier 1 to Tier 4.

Who said that the "Elite hoplite" was a specific warrior archetype that 5e specifically stated it supported? It's not in the PHB - is it somewhere in Mythic Odysseys of Theros?

I'm not even sure that an Elite Hoplite was a thing. But I have no problem with the "Elite Hoplite" in tier 1 fighting with the actual realistic and appropriate weapons they'd have used to skirmish with - and in tier 2 fighting with a more gonzo and ahistoric choice.

Now I'm not claiming the 5th edition design team were incompetent like some claim people are stating. I am stating that the design, test, and development teams' were leaned too heavily to classic and traditional views of the class and therefore they put little emphasis on anything but heavy swordsman, dual wielder, archer, and dextrous duelist. So they were caught of guard when people wanted a fighter who could throw a punch, talk eloquently, throw 3 axes, or come up with tactics.

Agreed. One reason I far prefer the post-Tasha's fighters. I just think "Elite Hoplite" is a bad example both because it wasn't promised and because it was covered.

 

[Neonchameleon]

yeah i am not adding your 1 and only class feature at level 1 well ignoring the wizard gets spells

So show me those spells that add to your hit points. Are you talking about Wither and Bloom?

no they get ac buffing options and abilities glore that can be swapped out

And their ACs start far below those of a fighter.

Given that you are openly ignoring fighter class features even when they are directly relevant and when I have explicitly cited them I see no point in continuing this.

 

[Minigiant]

Who said that the "Elite hoplite" was a specific warrior archetype that 5e specifically stated it supported? It's not in the PHB - is it somewhere in Mythic Odysseys of Theros?

The class picture of the fighter is a man in armor with a longsword, a large shield, and a spear/pike.

 

[James Gasik]

False Life, perhaps?

 

[Neonchameleon]

The class picture of the fighter is a man in armor with a longsword, a large shield, and a spear/pike.

Doesn't even vaguely look like a hoplite to me. Completely different armour and shield type (and helmet) - and that is nowhere near long enough to be a pike. To be honest that shield seems to be a weird hybrid of a nguni shield and a round wooden shield. I'm not sure whether I'd count that spear in the shield (the design I think it's based on uses a stick) as a spear but only when in main hand, a shield spike, or say that that spear's a javelin and it's being held that way so you can carry the spear and shield in one hand and the javelin is actually inside the handle rather than being gripped directly.

And a javelin makes perfect sense for a strength-based fighter. It's the longest range and joint highest damage thrown weapon, meaning that carrying one or two for when you can't reach the foes makes perfect sense.

And clearly from the way he's standing that sword is his primary offensive melee weapon. So yes, barring some weirdness with the shield (to the point I'm fairly sure that that hand passes through the javelin/handle) you could play him as a decent choice.

 

[Minigiant]

Doesn't even vaguely look like a hoplite to me. Completely different armour and shield type (and helmet) - and that is nowhere near long enough to be a pike. To be honest that shield seems to be a weird hybrid of a nguni shield and a round wooden shield. I'm not sure whether I'd count that spear in the shield (the design I think it's based on uses a stick) as a spear but only when in main hand, a shield spike, or say that that spear's a javelin and it's being held that way so you can carry the spear and shield in one hand and the javelin is actually inside the handle rather than being gripped directly.

View attachment 252347

And a javelin makes perfect sense for a strength-based fighter. It's the longest range and joint highest damage thrown weapon, meaning that carrying one or two for when you can't reach the foes makes perfect sense.

And clearly from the way he's standing that sword is his primary offensive melee weapon. So yes, barring some weirdness with the shield (to the point I'm fairly sure that that hand passes through the javelin/handle) you could play him as a decent choice.

Again. Not historic accuracy. Fantastic fun.

Don't show me pointy stick and shield in the class page then tell me I can't use pointy stick and shield (pike and shield) or that pointy stick and shield is not for my class (spear and shield) or that pointy stick and shield isn't supported yet wait 5 years (javelin and shield).

 

[Neonchameleon]

Again. Not historic accuracy. Fantastic fun.

Don't show me pointy stick and shield in the class page then tell me I can't use pointy stick and shield (pike and shield) or that pointy stick and shield is not for my class (spear and shield) or that pointy stick and shield isn't supported yet wait 5 years (javelin and shield).

You can use pointy stick and shield. Pointy stick and shield works very well with a fighter (both javelin and spear). You haven't been shown ultra-long pointy stick and shield. That isn't a pike so I'm not sure why it's relevant. Spear works very well with fighter thanks to the feat support available.

Javelin and shield has always been supported. For that matter multiple javelins have been supported as long as you start with one in hand.

What hasn't always been supported is javelin and shield as primary weapons. Good job he is very clearly carrying a sword as his primary weapon.

 

[Garthanos]

Since I have seen full casters tank for 7 years now I just plane don't this to be in any way shape or form true.

Yes the best tank/defender is multiclass caster (maybe a dabble other wise) .... its the irony of the edition.

 

[Minigiant]

You can use pointy stick and shield. Pointy stick and shield works very well with a fighter (both javelin and spear). You haven't been shown ultra-long pointy stick and shield. That isn't a pike so I'm not sure why it's relevant. Spear works very well with fighter thanks to the feat support available.

Javelin and shield has always been supported. For that matter multiple javelins have been supported as long as you start with one in hand.

What hasn't always been supported is javelin and shield as primary weapons. Good job he is very clearly carrying a sword as his primary weapon.

But again, you can't get feats until level 4 AND feats were supposed to be optional.

But that's beside the point. The point is that if you look at the builds Post Tasha's suggests 7 work before Tasha's (Archer, Bodyguard, Duelist, "Gladiator", Lancer, Outrider, Shock Trooper), 5 don't (Brawler, Hoplite, Pugilist, Skirmisher, Strategist), and many others don't function in any compacity in Tier, 1, Tier 2 or or at all.

The Fighter section in PHB lists a trident and net gladiator that isn't supported in the book and still not supported.

And that's all before you get to bog-standard STR and DEX builds with heavy noncombat aspects that were not supported in the PHB and only somewhat supported now.

And that all comes down to the design team leaning too hard on tradition. They never expected 5e players to want a fighter to throw a punch or talk or be a tiefling.

 

[Shardstone]

OK. You're talking about "being able to do an attack and a cantrip". This means that you must be at least level 6. You're replying to a comment referring to at or below level 5.

Bladesingers are skirmishers - but a big question is how much you value first level spells and even second to prevent hits by casting Shield. For a 7th level with fourth level spells first level slots are almost trivial and second level are minor. By contrast at tier 1 a first level slot is significant and tanking is much much more costly. This is part of the scaling issue.

But isn't the whole point of the critique against the fighter how its early foundation doesn't translate to mid game, let alone late game?