D&D (2024) Fighter (Playtest 7)

[W'rkncacnter]

I believe in that world. A Fair and Just world where children grow up safe and happy and well fed, where the old live out their twilight years in dignity, and where Fighters are all fun to play.

i think this is the first time i've seen you post something that so thoroughly fits your profile picture.

 

[Tony Vargas]

???

I mean, what I'm getting is you want Monk to be a Fighter subclass? I guess. Anything is better 1970s Monk continuing to exist.

Yeah, the Monk was a mistake ...an understandable mistake in the 70s, with David Carradine on Kung Fu, and Bruce Lee showing at the local grindhouse, but a mistake.

It's just when you try to make something like a Brawling fighter, you run up against the Monk's niche protection and it just brings that mistake to the fore, again.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Yeah, the Monk was a mistake ...an understandable mistake in the 70s, with David Carradine on Kung Fu, and Bruce Lee showing at the local grindhouse, but a mistake.

It's just when you try to make something like a Brawling fighter, you run up against the Monk's niche protection and it just brings that mistake to the fore, again.

Absolutely agree 100%.

 

[Vaalingrade]

i think this is the first time i've seen you post something that so thoroughly fits your profile picture.

All Fred really would get passionate about something like D&D instead of Justice or Saving Lives wouldn't he?

 

[Neonchameleon]

So here is the list. Lets look at a 10th level battlemaster 2014 vs 2024.

Don't forget the feat buffs and the stat shift. A level 8 fighter should be STR 20 with three good feats (and the GWM nerf is minor unless you have an accuracy buff) - about two feats ahead.

But WotC have no vision as to what a T3 or T4 fighter is and how it's different from T2

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

Is anyone else reading Brawler's Improvised specialist ability as using two mastery properties at the same time?
So they could sap and vex with one swing of an improvised weapon for example.

Your example is about ongoing damage or damage reduction buffs against an opponent with the same HP and damage profile as a PC in a one on one duel. None of which are common circumstances in a D&D encounter.

Let's look at your example, but instead of ongoing +1 damage or +1 damage reduction, let's look at a 1d10 damage boost or a 1d10 heal in a fight you'll lose if you don't use it. With the heal you have to wait until you're almost dead, use it, and hope it buys you the extra turn or two needed to win. You'll probably win, but it takes a long time and you take a lot of damage. If you use it as a damage boost, you can win on the first turn without taking any damage, and freeing your future actions to go support your other party members.

That's the power of burst damage. It kills targets faster, which means you take less damage and gain more advantage in the action economy. Unless you're in a long boss fight, and I mean long, in equal amounts burst damage is always better than combat healing. For combat healing to be a thing it either has to be way cheaper or you need a dedicated healer whose damage is lower value. Which is not the paradigm that D&D works with.

Indeed. This is why nova classes like Paladins and full spellcasters are considered more effective than martials and warlocks, despite doing less total damage when averaged out over the course of a full adventuring day. Being able to drop that boss, or halve the encounter right at the start saves the party a very significant amount of incoming damage.

 

[Stalker0]

Is anyone else reading Brawler's Improvised specialist ability as using two mastery properties at the same time?
So they could sap and vex with one swing of an improvised weapon for example.

I'm actually not sure how else you could read it to be honest.

 

[Sacrosanct]

Your example is about ongoing damage or damage reduction buffs against an opponent with the same HP and damage profile as a PC in a one on one duel. None of which are common circumstances in a D&D encounter.

Let's look at your example, but instead of ongoing +1 damage or +1 damage reduction, let's look at a 1d10 damage boost or a 1d10 heal in a fight you'll lose if you don't use it. With the heal you have to wait until you're almost dead, use it, and hope it buys you the extra turn or two needed to win. You'll probably win, but it takes a long time and you take a lot of damage. If you use it as a damage boost, you can win on the first turn without taking any damage, and freeing your future actions to go support your other party members.

That's the power of burst damage. It kills targets faster, which means you take less damage and gain more advantage in the action economy. Unless you're in a long boss fight, and I mean long, in equal amounts burst damage is always better than combat healing. For combat healing to be a thing it either has to be way cheaper or you need a dedicated healer whose damage is lower value. Which is not the paradigm that D&D works with.

It was an example to prove a point. You're missing the forest through the trees. There are a ton of possible scenarios in the game. The point was that offense isn't always the best option. You're hung up on that specific example as if there aren't an infinite amount of others. Modifying the scenario I gave doesn't matter or take away from my point unless I was trying to argue that defense is always best. Which I didn't do. You're the one arguing offense is always better, and I'm sorry, but math disagrees with you. Some cases? Sure. Always? Nope.

 

[Kinematics]

For the Eldritch Knight, War Magic and Improved War Magic should be folded together at 7th level. Why restrict their fun ability to the virtually unplayed 18+ levels?

Part of the point is that you're using up weapon attacks for a spell. You get the cantrip for 1 attack at 7th level (post-level 5), when it means even after casting the cantrip you still have an attack to spare. So the Improved War Magic should be at least level 11, so you can spend 2 attacks for a spell and still have an attack left over. Before then, it's no different than just using a magic action to cast a spell.

So no, don't fold them together, but yes, it should probably be at a much lower level than 18. Maybe 13. Unfortunately the subclass feature progression levels doesn't make that easy.

 

[Kurotowa]

You're the one arguing offense is always better, and I'm sorry, but math disagrees with you. Some cases? Sure. Always? Nope.

You can't just design a highly unrealistic and specific scenario that's not like the actual game in any way and say "the math proves I'm right" as if the math is somehow objective. General arguments are one thing, but if you want the math to be on your side you have to account for complicating factors. Stuff like how like not every attack is a success so getting more out the hits you land is useful, and how many enemies have special abilities so killing them before they can use them is powerful, or the synergistic effect of an entire party of PCs going nova at once to end a fight immediately.

I'm perfectly willing to enter into a debate on the relative value of offensive and defensive abilities sharing the same resource pool, but don't create a nonsense example that's nothing like the topic at hand and tell me the math proves me wrong. You might as well say, "Rocks fall when you drop them, therefore science proves that it's impossible for humans to fly."