D&D 5E [+]What does your "complex fighter" look like?

[DND_Reborn]

Which do you regard as a feature: the ability to do something new, or when you get to use an ability an additional time?
From here, it looks like the former. So when you pick a Fighting Style or a 1st level spell counts, but you don't count when you get an additional action surge or your 3rd 5th level spell slot for example?

Overall, I don't think I would count additional uses, just new uses.

This is why I said you could count Spell Mastery as possibly two (two different at-will spells) and Signature Spell as two, so the range was 15-17 because of this.

So, I am not counting additional uses of Action Surge or Indomitable, nor more spell slots since Spellcasting really is the feature.

I suppose technically you could also count proficiencies as features as well:

Fighter: +10 (three armors, shields, simple weapons, martial weapons, two saves, two skills) vs.
Wizard: +5 (some weapons, two saves, two skills).

Which, if you count access to each new spell level as a separate feature, would bring the totals to:

Fighter: 29
Wizard 28-30

Pretty darn even by that reckoning anyway...

 

[DND_Reborn]

By tiers you are referring to levels 11-15 and 16-20?

Yes, but 11-16 and 17-20 are the actual tiers.

(That's when Trinity was running along the floor and then ran up the wall, almost like she changed gravity's vector.)

Yeah, something like this to me could easily be non-magical. I mean, just some of the stuff Jackie Chan does (among others!) is pretty darn close!

I see levels 1-10 as pretty much exclusively mundane, with 11-20 being "heroic" in the sense of the Matrix, Hercules/Xena, etc.

Yes, the Green Destiny was the sword everyone was after.

I don't recall, did it DO anything???

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

Overall, I don't think I would count additional uses, just new uses.

This is why I said you could count Spell Mastery as possibly two (two different at-will spells) and Signature Spell as two, so the range was 15-17 because of this.

So, I am not counting additional uses of Action Surge or Indomitable, nor more spell slots since Spellcasting really is the feature.

I suppose technically you could also count proficiencies as features as well:

Fighter: +10 (three armors, shields, simple weapons, martial weapons, two saves, two skills) vs.
Wizard: +5 (some weapons, two saves, two skills).

Which, if you count access to each new spell level as a separate feature, would bring the totals to:

Fighter: 29
Wizard 28-30

Pretty darn even by that reckoning anyway...

Ah. I think ECMO3 did a similar reckoning. He pointed out that Fighters' weapon and armour proficiencies actually break down into dozens of different choices. Therefore fighters did in fact have an equivalent number of choice of class feature as wizards do.

 

[Baron Opal II]

Yes, but 11-16 and 17-20 are the actual tiers.

I see.

Yeah, something like this to me could easily be non-magical. I mean, just some of the stuff Jackie Chan does (among others!) is pretty darn close!

I see levels 1-10 as pretty much exclusively mundane, with 11-20 being "heroic" in the sense of the Matrix, Hercules/Xena, etc.

Okay. I see it as 1-4 / 5-12 / 13+ for me. But, I'm heavily influenced by earlier editions.

I don't recall, did it DO anything???

Well, yes and no. I think it was a great example of a +3 sword in a campaign without many magic items. Some people would have some +1 items, but this was a +3 sword. So, it didn't grant any powers, and the wise mentor with a stick schooled the hot-headed youngster with Green Destiny. However, the hot-head was hacking through the weapons of both the local thugs and the experienced fighter, who was still junior to the mentor character. Seemingly, it tips the balance in your favor if you are superior or proximate to the skill of your opponent.

 

[Art Waring]

I don't recall, did it DO anything???

It cut through conventional steel weapons like butter, and was flexible and could be used to make "unnatural" strikes.

 

[Haplo781]

Ah. I think ECMO3 did a similar reckoning. He pointed out that Fighters' weapon and armour proficiencies actually break down into dozens of different choices. Therefore fighters did in fact have an equivalent number of choice of class feature as wizards do.

Holy false equivalence, Batman!

Picking between a longsword and a rapier is not comparable to having multiple level 1 spells let alone higher levels.

 

[DND_Reborn]

Ah. I think ECMO3 did a similar reckoning. He pointed out that Fighters' weapon and armour proficiencies actually break down into dozens of different choices.

IMO if you are counting access to higher spell levels, you should count access to better armors and weapons as well.

Should it be a 1-1 ratio, though? Who knows...

Therefore fighters did in fact have an equivalent number of choice of class feature as wizards do.

Well, I wouldn't go THAT far. Wizards have hundreds of spells, while fighters have only dozens of armors & weapons, not to mention the power of a spell can be more or less than a weapon or armor, but in general I would think more.

Okay. I see it as 1-4 / 5-12 / 13+ for me. But, I'm heavily influenced by earlier editions.

Sure, I can see that. I find the tier distribution a bit odd with 4-6-6-4 levels instead of 5-5-5-5.

Well, yes and no. I think it was a great example of a +3 sword in a campaign without many magic items. Some people would have some +1 items, but this was a +3 sword. So, it didn't grant any powers, and the wise mentor with a stick schooled the hot-headed youngster with Green Destiny. However, the hot-head was hacking through the weapons of both the local thugs and the experienced fighter, who was still junior to the mentor character. Seemingly, it tips the balance in your favor if you are superior or proximate to the skill of your opponent.

It cut through conventional steel weapons like butter, and was flexible and could be used to make "unnatural" strikes.

Hmm. I could see such a weapon giving advantage on "sunder" attempts (if they were still in 5E). So, it makes you better, but the better you are the more it helps (being +5 with advantage vs. being +10 with advantage).

 

[Art Waring]

Hmm. I could see such a weapon giving advantage on "sunder" attempts (if they were still in 5E). So, it makes you better, but the better you are the more it helps (being +5 with advantage vs. being +10 with advantage).

That sounds good, If I could I would add the ability to treat the weapon as a monks weapon, monks could probably benefit from using such a weapon.

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

Holy false equivalence, Batman!

Picking between a longsword and a rapier is not comparable to having multiple level 1 spells let alone higher levels.

I'm not saying that I agreed with them. But I would make an equivalence between picking a fighting style and choosing a cantrip or spell as a discrete choice of a new class feature.

 

[Haplo781]

IMO if you are counting access to higher spell levels, you should count access to better armors and weapons as well.

Should it be a 1-1 ratio, though? Who knows...


Well, I wouldn't go THAT far. Wizards have hundreds of spells, while fighters have only dozens of armors & weapons, not to mention the power of a spell can be more or less than a weapon or armor, but in general I would think more.


Sure, I can see that. I find the tier distribution a bit odd with 4-6-6-4 levels instead of 5-5-5-5.



Hmm. I could see such a weapon giving advantage on "sunder" attempts (if they were still in 5E). So, it makes you better, but the better you are the more it helps (being +5 with advantage vs. being +10 with advantage).

Sunder and disarm are bad. Either they completely negate the target's attacks or they do nothing.

I'm glad they're gone.