D&D (2024) 4/26 Playtest: The Fighter

[Incenjucar]

There are only two base classes in the entire game that are non-magical: rogue and fighter.

Monks go astral. Playtest barbarians are getting primal ability boost magic.

 

[W'rkncacnter]

If the character outright dies like by taking damage that's more than their current hp+maximum, the DM can flavor that however they want.

except that revivify and raise dead - the two most common resurrection spells - only work if the body is intact (or, more specifically, if the body isn't missing any vital parts). so your "flavour" has suddenly either @#&$ed the cleric's ability to revive that creature or else made it considerably more expensive, depending on their level.

that's not flavour. that's a house rule. and what sounds like a very frustrating one at that.

 

[Jefe Bergenstein]

You say this like I don't play martials, but I play martials more than the other classes. I just think that we can achieve a balance without swinging to the side of absurdity.

I also find it a little ironic that there are people who are okay with discarding the fantasy of others because theirs are "lame" but are offended when asked to set aside their own fantasy.

Because if you don't want to do fantastic abilities you can simply not use them, whereas the people who want fantastic abilities can't get them otherwise. "I don't want steak so no one can have steak" vs "I want steak on the menu".

Because, honestly, if all characters were magical and cast spells, I wouldn't have a problem with it whatsoever. But because they wouldn't be able to play their nonmagical martial (without reflavoring because they can reflavor spells to be nonmagical), they shut that idea down.

Even though that idea aligns far more with what even WoTC would likely want and is probably being held back because that's what they've been doing. Look back at 5e. I dare you to name a single class that doesn't have native ability to cast magic either within their base class or subclass.

Why does everything fantastic have to be a spell? Dragonborn don't cast "Dragonborn Breath". The ancestral protectors, spirit shield, etc of the Ancestral Guardians Barbarian aren't spells. Letting a fighter throw a colossal creature shouldn't require a spell (that casters therefore get) either. The spell format takes up more room, has components, and allows poaching by other classes.

 

[Asisreo]

except that revivify and raise dead - the two most common resurrection spells - only work if the body is intact (or, more specifically, if the body isn't missing any vital parts). so your "flavour" has suddenly either @#&$ed the cleric's ability to revive that creature or else made it considerably more expensive, depending on their level.

that's not flavour. that's a house rule. and what sounds like a very frustrating one at that.

Because heaven forbid the cleric is inconvenienced for once in the game. Its not really a house rule that the DM arbitrates how dying works. Unless now barbarians can no longer cleave goblins in half, why couldn't an NPC do so?

Plus, the paladin example wasn't necessarily about a PC's death to begin with. It could be an NPC in which case I'm sure there's plenty of times NPC's at your tables have been killed in more complex manners than bleeding to death.

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

I do get the point, but I see this argument a lot....this assumption that wizards can just fly around however and whenever they feel like it. And its not quite true.

First, you have to have Fly as a prepared spell. (and fly is a good spell don't get me wrong, but there are a LOT of good 3rd level spells).
Then you have to use a 3rd level slot (which is still pretty rare until you get to double digit levels).
And that fly is by no means safe. If you take any proning effect, or the effect gets dispelled, you basically fall to your death.

At high levels I can see the argument, but a 5th level mage doesn't just fly around at will whenever they feel like it, and certainly not without risks.

Flight confers immunity to damage from a significant chunk of the Monster Manual.
It automatically bypasses many challenges that others might fail through skill checks, or even be ruled impossible using mere skill.

5th level is not where Fly becomes problematic.

Martials should fulfill a role magic simply cannot fulfill and I think that should be reliability.

How would you reflect that in the system where skills are rolled and therefore have a chance to fail, whereas most utility spells just work automatically.

Cap is a Fighter/Battlemaster with military leadership abilities.
Widow is a Rogue/Assassin with military leadership abilities.
Hawkeye is a Ranger/Hunter with military leadership abilities.
Black Panther is a Monk/Way of the Panther with military leadership abilities.
So many heroes are a [enter class here] who can lead, inspire, and command tactically. Doesn't make them Warlords.

Cap is not only physically superior to any Fighter/Battlemaster, he has also shown genuine tactical and leadership abilities.
Widow and Hawkeye, despite being personable and persuasive have not. Neither has Black Panther to be frank: he has leadership of his people because he was born into the ruling family, rather than showing any particular tactical genius.

 

[Stalker0]

So a DnD fighter can leap into a 3rd story window? Oh, wait, no...

They can grab and hold a huge or larger flying creature and prevent it from flying? Oh, wait... no....

Can hold and lift building sized chunks of stone? Again.. no

Can dodge lightning without getting singed? No

Can easily survive a 10 mile air drop? (Not unless you cap the fall damage).

Ignores cold weather and hot weather? No.


So, how exactly are DnD fighter's like Captain America again?

And maybe we won't see sweeping changes. But we will never see them unless we consistently fight for them.

Are you referring to cap versus the helicopter? Because that thing was large at best, and with a good athletics check for the grapple (or shove) could absolutely pull it in or make it prone.

20 strength can lift 600 lbs. Bear totem can lift 1,440 lbs. Cap's max strength is ~800 lbs by most sources, so we are in the ballpark, though not quite there unless your a barbarian.

Fighters dodge fireballs and lightning bolts all the time. Sure they take "hp damage", but hps aren't just meat points. You could argue that when Cap dodges these various attacks he is "taking HP damage" as well. And again champions at low hp just start healign them back up, so give them a bit of recovery time (say a minute) and they can take fireball after fireball. They can literally "do this all day".

Falling damage is capped (because there is a max speed you fall in air). Its 20d6, perfectly survivable for any high level martial.


Now in terms of durability, a high level Champion (from our new OneDnd) can take an arrow to the body every round FOREVER, and not die. They also have a 62% chance of waking up from unconsciousness while someone is literally standing there trying to beat them to death.

 

[Asisreo]

Because if you don't want to do fantastic abilities you can simply not use them, whereas the people who want fantastic abilities can't get them otherwise. "I don't want steak so no one can have steak" vs "I want steak on the menu".

If we extend that logic to its natural conclusion, all characters should be able to do everything and the player self-limits their abilities. Except that's not how that works. Players will default to whatever the default of the game is, with all the abilities they have access to.

I've never seen a wizard that refused to cast spells, because its a weird self-limitation.

And, again, I said it was fine if it was added as an optional rule. I just don't want it to be the default. Just think of it being on the special menu that you can order if you know what to call it.

Why does everything fantastic have to be a spell? Dragonborn don't cast "Dragonborn Breath". The ancestral protectors, spirit shield, etc of the Ancestral Guardians Barbarian aren't spells. Letting a fighter throw a colossal creature shouldn't require a spell (that casters therefore get) either. The spell format takes up more room, has components, and allows poaching by other classes.

I'm fine with all that but that's clearly magic as well. And I'm fine with magic imbued in all of the martial classes. I have no affinity to the mundane. The fighter is recognized by the god of combat and can now magically summon flying blades or can grow multiple arms. Awesome! What I don't want is for those things to happen because "that's just how skilled he is in combat."

How would you reflect that in the system where skills are rolled and therefore have a chance to fail, whereas most utility spells just work automatically.

We can have an official bound for what a DC30 is, then make some skills or ability checks automatically hit those bounds.

For example, we could have a DC30 check increase jump distance by a mile. Then, we give the Barbarian the ability to succeed in all strength checks. Suddenly we have a Barbarian that can jump a mile reliably while a wizard would have to cast multiple fly spells or teleport spells. So now its the wizard trying to do what the Barbarian can automatically do but at the expense of spell slots.

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

"As the paladin falls, decapitated, the cleric runs to his side. With tears flowing down their face, they begin casting a spell and in a flash of light, the paladin rises with his head intact. Weakened, the cleric falls to his knees."

"How did you do that?!" The rogue player asked.

"My deity saw my faith and answered my prayer. With divine intervention, they were able to heal."

Vs

"As the paladin falls, decapitated, the rogue runs to his side. With tears flowing down their face, they begin to pull out their surgical equipment and in a few moments, the paladin rises with his head intact. The rogue swipes sweat from his eyebrows."

"How did you do that?!" The cleric player asked.

"Oh, I'm just really good at medicine."

...

Nah, sorry, can't do it. That'd just kill the moment.

Because heaven forbid the cleric is inconvenienced for once in the game. Its not really a house rule that the DM arbitrates how dying works. Unless now barbarians can no longer cleave goblins in half, why couldn't an NPC do so?

Plus, the paladin example wasn't necessarily about a PC's death to begin with. It could be an NPC in which case I'm sure there's plenty of times NPC's at your tables have been killed in more complex manners than bleeding to death.

If you compose a situation in order to mock the point of view of another person, you should absolutely expect to be called on its logical inconsistencies.

You declared that the Paladin's head was severed in order to bolster your argument that restoring an immediately dead person to life should not be within the capabilities of a legendary master doctor. That is fine, and I don't think that many people even wanting mythically-skilled characters would argue if that might require an operation of several hours given that the Cleric obviously needed a Wish spell to restore the Paladin.

You put that goal post down where you wanted. When someone scored against you despite that, you shouldn't declare that actually, it should be over there instead.

 

[Zubatcarteira]

The Rogue just sneaked in from Pathfinder.

 

[Asisreo]

If you compose a situation in order to mock the point of view of another person, you should absolutely expect to be called on its logical inconsistencies.

You declared that the Paladin's head was severed in order to bolster your argument that restoring an immediately dead person to life should not be within the capabilities of a legendary master doctor. That is fine, and I don't think that many people even wanting mythically-skilled characters would argue if that might require an operation of several hours given that the Cleric obviously needed a Wish spell to restore the Paladin.

You put that goal post down where you wanted. When someone scored against you despite that, you shouldn't declare that actually, it should be over there instead.

His response to mine wasn't about the logical consistency of the scenario of a paladin's head being cutoff. It was about the game mechanics behind how that would happen. I hadn't revealed how that had happened at all, I'm just explaining that the DM is within their right to treat PC's as NPC's are treated upon death and reminding him that I never said that the even if they disagree with that, the Paladin was never stated to be a PC or NPC.

So the goalpost I set was about the absurdity of the rogue's abilities. Not on the situation itself in the context of the D&D game. I was addressing a tangent, not moving a goalpost.