A critique and review of the Fighter class

[tetrasodium]

I mean, that's how things worked in the old days. Monsters attacked whoever was closest to them, who needs defender mechanics? Bah!

Man I miss those defender mechanics.

It's bizarre that the Barbarian is likely the best defender in 5e, since when Rage is up, they take less damage, but enemies can't afford to ignore them. And if they're using Savage Attacker, who can turn down that nice juicy advantage to hit?

There was a reason for that though.

Spoiler: There was a severe cost to doing otherwise

1st & 2nd edition were a little different in a lot of ways but also much more deadly so anyone not trying to be the tank was going to make every effort they could to not be in reach. 5e gets rid of the tactical reason and the deadliness so that no player really gives a fig if they are in easy reach & to top things off it's trivial getting into reach to pummel a desired target even with hostile enemies who that target considers allies in the mix.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

1st & 2nd edition were a little different in a lot of ways but also much more deadly so anyone not trying to be the tank was going to make every effort they could to not be in reach. 5e gets rid of the tactical reason and the deadliness so that no player really gives a fig if they are in easy reach & to top things off it's trivial getting into reach to pummel a desired target even with hostile enemies who that target considers allies in the mix.

in 2e there were not "Opp attacks" but there was a rule about getting an attack if someone tried to move out of melee range...I want to say it was either optional or hidden in the DMG though

 

[Willie the Duck]

Although whether or not DM's used random magic tables is subject to debate.

Fundamentally, this is an issue with TSR-era D&D (and use in discussions surrounding balance particularly) -- it seems no one used all the rules, a lot of the rules which were oft-not-used are ones which helped balance out classes (since 'balance power against making it annoying' seemed an accepted design mechanic, and lo-and-behold people tend to want to get rid of annoying stuff), and thus class balance would be very table-by-table. In addition to magic item drop rates, balance would be influenced by alternative initiative rules (influencing how easy it was to get spells cast), whether to include low-level squad leader/high level dominion play, whether one could introduce new characters at > level 1 (switching to play a Magic User at level 5+ took a lot of the nuisance out of playing one), and basics like whether you were actually playing in 10' corridor dungeons most of the time (/general ability of the squishy character types to stay away from the front lines).

And of course, while magic weapons were common, there is still the possibility that the weapon isn't the type your Fighter had proficiency with, let alone specialization...

Yeah. “Gee my DM used random roll to balance” made specialization hard. “I’m weapon master in long sword and we rolled a short sword a kopesh and a broad sword”

I do think that this (along with the notion that most groups weren't using the WvsAC tables) was a circle that TSR never got around to squaring. Once weapon proficiencies were introduced, switching out weapons for optimal use vs opponent became harder, and a +3 khopesh isn't too useful when you may have to wait 3 levels to get another proficiency slot (by which time who knows what other neat weapon you might find), to say nothing of specialization, as you mention. It very thoroughly pushed people to focus on longsword, composite longbow, warhammer or mace (for skeletons), and perhaps dagger and one polearm (if and only if the DM enforced small weapons in tight places and first-attack to longer weapons, respectively).
AD&D 2e eventually added weapon-group proficiencies (say, 'longer swords' or 'crushing and cleaving weapons') which lessoned this considerably (along with fighting styles and other ways to boost weapons other than specialization). At the same time, though, they started introducing new weapons that never made it onto the magic item charts, making it pretty clear that post-core 2e was very much a 'your DM will have to adjust this to playstyle anyways' situation.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

AD&D 2e eventually added weapon-group proficiencies (say, 'longer swords' or 'crushing and cleaving weapons') which lessoned this considerably (along with fighting styles and other ways to boost weapons other than specialization). At the same time, though, they started introducing new weapons that never made it onto the magic item charts, making it pretty clear that post-core 2e was very much a 'your DM will have to adjust this to playstyle anyways' situation.

we used to call it bladesx3 and all our fighters took that at 1st level (dagger and swords) one of the things I liked and hated about modern WotC fighters is prof in all weapons

 

[James Gasik]

in 2e there were not "Opp attacks" but there was a rule about getting an attack if someone tried to move out of melee range...I want to say it was either optional or hidden in the DMG though

The free attack for retreating was fairly open. There was a rule (in 1e, at least) that forced you to engage in melee if you came within 10' of an enemy, as I recall, although a canny (ie, jerk) DM could have enemies deliberately go around a Fighter if they had a large enough room. I had it done to me in a 30 x 30 room once, where some Hobgoblins engaged the Fighter, then the others maneuvered around him to come at the back line.

Generally the main way pre-3e Fighters "tanked" was just by being the first guys inside a dungeon room, so there was nobody else for melee to attack in the first place. At least 3e gave us the first "lockdown" Fighter builds, like the chain tripper (though they were quickly the target of DM scorn for daring to actually keep enemies from targeting the lower AC guys!). And by the time we got real defenders (the Knight and later, the Crusader and Warblade), the devs were like "well, we did everything we possibly could, let's go make a new game with all we've learned!"...before a large chunk of their player base was ready for it.

 

[Garthanos]

And of course, while magic weapons were common, there is still the possibility that the weapon isn't the type your Fighter had proficiency with, let alone specialization...

Being a AD&D fighter was proficiency in all weapons and specialization was not a 1e thing unless it was in some expansion.

 

[James Gasik]

Being a AD&D fighter was proficiency in all weapons and specialization was not a 1e thing unless it was in some expansion.

1e didn't have proficiencies, you either could use a weapon or you couldn't, based on your class. Of course, until Unearthed Arcana came out, there wasn't any weapon specialization either...

 

[Irlo]

Being a AD&D fighter was proficiency in all weapons and specialization was not a 1e thing unless it was in some expansion.

1e fighters could be proficient in any weapon, but they were limited in the number of weapon proficiencies based on level. Specialization was introduced to 1e in Unearthed Arcana, and it took extra proficiency slots to use it.

 

[Garthanos]

I mean, that's how things worked in the old days. Monsters attacked whoever was closest to them, who needs defender mechanics? Bah!

Every DM I knew practiced an Attack the casters first so unless they could not reach your casters, bleck the fighters job as Gygax declared it just did not really happen

 

[Willie the Duck]

Being a AD&D fighter was proficiency in all weapons and specialization was not a 1e thing unless it was in some expansion.

1e didn't have proficiencies, you either could use a weapon or you couldn't, based on your class. Of course, until Unearthed Arcana came out, there wasn't any weapon specialization either...

AD&D 1e PHB p. 36 and 37 detail weapon proficiencies, when you get them, and what penalties there are for using weapons in which you are not proficient.