D&D 5E Martials should just get free feats

[Micah Sweet]

you can argue that all you want. If I am going to spend time and money to find new systems it will not be a D&D like one.

By all means, go for it. I just see trying to get WotC to change their "bland kind of backwards-compatible simplicity" stance as something of a waste of effort. IMO, there are better ways to get a better D&D for your table then trying to get the masses of potential that are all WotC care about to demand change.

 

[Micah Sweet]

And the Champion doesn't do that already?

I kind of think it does, yes. The champion is garbage and the effort spent making it would have been better spent coming up with more battlemaster maneuvers and creating numerous pre-made examples for new players to choose from.

 

[Clint_L]

Fighter and barbarian are already extremely popular choices that are considered top tier classes. They are great at two really important aspects of the game: delivering and absorbing damage. I don't think they need a buff. So if we are talking about giving them more stuff, such as extra feats, then I think you would need to balance that out by reducing their damage and/or tankiness. I think lumping them in with rogues, and especially monks, is a mistake.

Look at how little attention this thread has paid to monks, a class that is legitimately weak.

The thing with a bunch of extra feats is that it will primarily benefit fighters and barbarians, two classes who need it the least.

 

[James Gasik]

You can't fix Monks. Even worse than Fighters, you can mathematically prove Monks are terrible, and not only do defenders of the class go on about their incredible value as skirmishers and damage dealers, you'll have DM's with horror stories of their entire campaigns being ruined by a Monk player calling for the blood of anyone who would dare give them even a minor buff.

Even WotC knows the class is in bad shape, when Tasha's gives them "alternate abilities" that the DM can decide to just give them for free, without any cost!

 

[GMforPowergamers]

By all means, go for it. I just see trying to get WotC to change their "bland kind of backwards-compatible simplicity" stance as something of a waste of effort. IMO, there are better ways to get a better D&D for your table then trying to get the masses of potential that are all WotC care about to demand change.

I don't think I am wasting my time

 

[Micah Sweet]

I don't think I am wasting my time

Fair enough, I'll let it go.

 

[Krachek]

you know how you attract people to your cause... you talk about it (here, tick toc, facebook, game stores, cons)

so if I get the two guys that run games that talk about mechanics (the one that ran the spell jammer WotC game and the one that runs the CR game) to talk about caster supremacy and the need for a complex warrior class I just win then right?

Of course you win, it’s your sole option.

 

[ECMO3]

this is why I want a class (we can call it fighter) based off the champion fighter but ALSO a more complex warrior class (call it warblade, or warlord, or swordsage, or animeswordguy) and as long as we are spliting the class give us a half caster magus/swordmage/bladesinger/eldtrichknight

I would be ok with that, although we need to keep the Bladesinger as a full caster. We could get another class as a half caster if people need that.

 

[ECMO3]

You can't fix Monks. Even worse than Fighters, you can mathematically prove Monks are terrible, and not only do defenders of the class go on about their incredible value as skirmishers and damage dealers, you'll have DM's with horror stories of their entire campaigns being ruined by a Monk player calling for the blood of anyone who would dare give them even a minor buff.

Even WotC knows the class is in bad shape, when Tasha's gives them "alternate abilities" that the DM can decide to just give them for free, without any cost!

I like Monks, but I don't think they are good skirmishers or good damage dealers. They are fast though and they are pretty tough as long as you reserve kid for patent defense and don't waste it spamming stunning strike or flurry of blows.

While most Monks are pretty tough, Long Death is near unkillable at 11th level. They can keep up with any martial and are probably last longer than any martial at that point (again as long as you don't blow your ki on SS and FOB). You could have 1hp left and take 11 more hits, regardless of damage, and still be standing ... and do that after every single long rest. At that level that is about the equivalent of an extra 250hps .... more against spellcasters or AOE effects that do a lot on one hit. The free frightened within 30 feet is pretty awesome too, especially on a Shaddar-Kai or Eladrin.

I find a lot of players don't like that long-game play style where they want to wear down their enemy though. They want to do a lot of damage up front and a Monk is not good at that.

 

[Clint_L]

Yeah, monks are great by level 14 or so. Unfortunately, 96% of campaigns apparently wrap by level 10.