A critique and review of the Fighter class

[doctorbadwolf]

Why not

It just requires compromise.


Sure. I've been hoping for someone to design the "Lordly Fighter", "Anime Fighter", and "Action Movie Fighter" allat once in order to mantain balance. But it's creeping to "Yeah Well I'm Going To Build My Own Subclasses... With Blackjack and Hookers"

Yeah I have a couple baseline ideas that improve the basic versatility of the class, but I keep going in circles on the best way to have more out of combat oomph.

The thing I’ve come to is that maybe the fighter needs a 1/tier secondary choice along the lines of warlock pact boons, with the dirt simple options being stuff like proficiency in 2 skills or 1 saving throw, and more complex options being stuff like beefed up background features, like retainers who can do downtime tasks for you and are experts in something. But it would all have thematics tied to the fighter’s place in the world, how they relate to people, where and how they were trained, etc.

Either that or make superiority dice a base class feature that can add to an ability check, saving throw, or damage roll, PB/LR, and leave the above at a closer to ribbon level of power.

Then there’s system level stuff like making spears good and the like.

Then expand fighting styles.

 

[James Gasik]

I guess there is a point about telling people they only get half the game to play with. I've just had to hear a lot of "old school types" (ironic since, I think by now, I'm considered an old school type) go on about how the game is best if it never gets to anything close to high level, and of course, the fact that most games never get to high level anyways.

I shouldn't express the idea that people who want "regular guy Fighter" should be excluded from high level play, sorry about that. But it does feel like at some point, "regular guy" should stop being regular guy, as he is exposed to the wacky weirdness of the typical D&D setting, strange training routines, artifacts, buff spells warping his flesh, and the typical Gygaxian tricks and traps changing his alignment, abilities, and maybe even his gender!*

Or, if you were around during the 3e days, all the people touting E6 as balanced game play. Personally, I would have made the "classic Fighter" a subclass, not the chassis of the class. Certainly, we see most Fighter subclasses are all about doing things that are out of the ordinary, but they are limited by subclass design usually only granting 3ish main abilities and a ribbon or two.

*Disclaimer: only with the permission of the player. I outgrew thinking the whole "haha, your Fighter has breasts now" was funny by the 8th grade.

 

[tetrasodium]

Are you saying this is a good thing? Because RIFTS is the posterchild for WILDLY different power levels.

IF you play you MUST set baseline assumptions for the group or there WILL be not only ridiculous power imbalances but even basic skill imbalances (some OCCs are just flat better with their skills than others, regardless of combat prowess).

Also I'm not sure how this applies to his answer or tiers? Tiers is accepting that level 1-4 is very different form 5-10 is different from 11-15 etc.

With RIFTS the PCs are completely imbalanced from moment 1 and stay that way (despite having a leveling mechanic, most of the time level doesn't actually mean all that much with a few, usually magic using, classes being the exception).

No it is not at all a good thing & even fans of the system can usually admit that it's kinda bonkers . I remember running & playing rifts wayyy back in the day & sure it was kinda fun short term but it was completely bonkers. I can't imagine any company intentionally copying that kind of spread & even the savage worlds rifts fork tries to do a somewhat better job of settling on one power scale. I wanted to list off the differences just in starting health/credits/etc across a few classes but it's just too bonkers to explain without going deep into the weeds


Edit: it's WORSE than I described earlier

 

[HammerMan]

Huh. How is one class…or really one game…going to satisfy somebody who thinks the fighter should be within normal human limits, and somebody who thinks they should be capable of superhuman feats?

Split the class. Have a fighter a sword sage a warlord.

 

[Bill Zebub]

Split the class. Have a fighter a sword sage a warlord.

And the first one, the Fighter: is it normal human or superhuman? Seems that one group or the other is still unhappy.

 

[James Gasik]

I guess what really needs to be examined is why the myth that an ordinary man can take on demigods persists. In mythology, heroes who have to fight monsters are routinely given special powers to explain how they go about. Not always, I mean, there's always my man, Odysseus, who somehow makes do by being very, very wily (to the point that his craftiness is almost a legitimate superpower!), but often.

Maybe it's special training from Scathach. Maybe you're half or even 2/3 God. Maybe it's some cool magic swag* (yeah, maybe Perseus is half god, but he doesn't seem to have any powers like his half-brother Herakles).

But it's usually something, a special destiny, something that sets them apart and makes them a legend.

People will point at Conan, for example, but it's basically true that Conan has some very high ability scores and pushes the boundaries of human ability himself. I could mention Batman, but his powers have gone so far beyond belief (depending on the writer) that it would be hard to call him human at all. Even the 2e description of the Fighter class compares him to some legendary figures. Even "Fighters" who actually lived, like George Washington or Miyamoto Musashi, have some crazy stories attached to them that defy belief.

Ok, I'll give you Simo Hayha. But until I read a story about him taking on Koschei the Deathless, he never had to fight monsters. And if he did, well, maybe he was blessed by Ukko. You can't prove he wasn't!

But for the most part, these archetypical Fighters from legend who fight against the sorts of challenges a mid-to-high level Fighter face are pretty much all paragons if not demigods in their own right.

So why is the D&D Fighter held to a different metric? Because...tradition?

*In the old days, yeah, a high level character would have a ton of magic swag, just like how legendary figures occasionally are just as famed for their possessions as their deeds (Like King Arthur). But we've let that aspect of the game fall away, to the point that magic items are optional, and even if used, those optional rules further limit people to three attunement slots. If we can let such a fundamental part of the game, finding cool magic items in deep dungeons to bolster one's power go, why does "Joe Normal, Slayer of Beasts" linger?

 

[Minigiant]

I guess what really needs to be examined is why the myth that an ordinary man can take on demigods persists. In mythology, heroes who have to fight monsters are routinely given special powers to explain how they go about. Not always, I mean, there's always my man, Odysseus, who somehow makes do by being very, very wily (to the point that his craftiness is almost a legitimate superpower!), but often.

Maybe it's special training from Scathach. Maybe you're half or even 2/3 God. Maybe it's some cool magic swag* (yeah, maybe Perseus is half god, but he doesn't seem to have any powers like his half-brother Herakles).

But it's usually something, a special destiny, something that sets them apart and makes them a legend.

People will point at Conan, for example, but it's basically true that Conan has some very high ability scores and pushes the boundaries of human ability himself. I could mention Batman, but his powers have gone so far beyond belief (depending on the writer) that it would be hard to call him human at all. Even the 2e description of the Fighter class compares him to some legendary figures. Even "Fighters" who actually lived, like George Washington or Miyamoto Musashi, have some crazy stories attached to them that defy belief.

Ok, I'll give you Simo Hayha. But until I read a story about him taking on Koschei the Deathless, he never had to fight monsters. And if he did, well, maybe he was blessed by Ukko. You can't prove he wasn't!

But for the most part, these archetypical Fighters from legend who fight against the sorts of challenges a mid-to-high level Fighter face are pretty much all paragons if not demigods in their own right.

So why is the D&D Fighter held to a different metric? Because...tradition?

*In the old days, yeah, a high level character would have a ton of magic swag, just like how legendary figures occasionally are just as famed for their possessions as their deeds (Like King Arthur). But we've let that aspect of the game fall away, to the point that magic items are optional, and even if used, those optional rules further limit people to three attunement slots. If we can let such a fundamental part of the game, finding cool magic items in deep dungeons to bolster one's power go, why does "Joe Normal, Slayer of Beasts" linger?

That's why I say there are many types of Tier 3+ fighters.

The Classic Fighter were what I call the "Lord" and the "Super Soldier" where the fighter plateaus in physical ability and makes up for it with henchman and magic items.

But there are other options like the "Action Hero", "Ascendent" , "Brute", "Demigod", "Knight:, "Warlord", and "Weaponmaster"

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

And the first one, the Fighter: is it normal human or superhuman? Seems that one group or the other is still unhappy.

If there were martial classes with varied tactical options in combat, and interesting features allowing them to contribute out of combat, which scale with tier, then I think that the majority of people pointing out issues with the Fighter class would be happy with those.
Then the fighter can be left as it exists now, as a normal human, for the people who prefer that.

There currently is no sword sage/warblade or Warlord class, so conceptually the Fighter class appears to be the only martially-capable and skilled class, but its mechanics do not match with the concept in many people's minds. Adding one or two classes which do match those concepts would remove the issues with the Fighter, since the Fighter would no longer be the best match for the concept.

 

[James Gasik]

That's why I say there are many types of Tier 3+ fighters.

The Classic Fighter were what I call the "Lord" and the "Super Soldier" where the fighter plateaus in physical ability and makes up for it with henchman and magic items.

But there are other options like the "Action Hero", "Ascendent" , "Brute", "Demigod", "Knight:, "Warlord", and "Weaponmaster"

Though to be fair, the AD&D Fighter had something incredible about him compared to the current 5e Fighter. Weapon Specialization was a pretty big bonus in a game sparse with them, and the extra half attack was godly. But more importantly, those excellent Warrior saving throws at higher levels, which the 5e Fighter sorely needs, IMO.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

And then starts the back and forth of:
Person 1 ‘I want the fighter to be capable of beyond human actions without requiring supernatural support’
Person 2 ‘I find it extremely unrealistic that an ordinary person could achieve these feats without explicitly using magic/ect’
Person 1 ‘I find it extremely unrealistic that you consider real world standards the limits of a person in a world that also contains things like elves and dwarves, wizards and clerics, dragons and beholders, gods and demons, It’s fantasy’

yeah and when someone points out that Olympic athletes can often out perform 20th level fighters the argument becomes "well they might have other things that should penalize them so someone without those penalties can't do it either..."