D&D (2024) Fighter (Playtest 7)

[Pauln6]

A what in their backpack?

Genuine query:- how does one carry a spear or pole arm or quarterstaff if one is not wielding it? Javelins are short enough to store in a carrier. I'm not even sure how to sheath a great sword tbh.

 

[W'rkncacnter]

Genuine query:- how does one carry a spear or pole arm or quarterstaff if one is not wielding it? Javelins are short enough to store in a carrier. I'm not even sure how to sheath a great sword tbh.

genuine answer...horse. if you don't have a horse, then trick question - it's always in your hands. they're simply too large and/or awkwardly shaped to put in a sheathe.

 

[Pauln6]

genuine answer...horse. if you don't have a horse, then trick question - it's always in your hands. they're simply too large and/or awkwardly shaped to put in a sheathe.

I think my fighter players would just ditch their thrown weapons. In 1e you would throw your spear while closing and then draw your sword but that seems out of vogue.

 

[fluffybunbunkittens]

A what in their backpack?

A lance, a halberd, 20 fragile alchemical potions, 2 dead halflings and an ancient artifact that is central to the plot but which you've forgotten you picked up 4 sessions ago.

 

[fluffybunbunkittens]

No, he can't. The Brawler can swap Mastery effects on each attack roll. Unless you're letting "any warrior-type" dig around in his backpack and swap weapons in the middle of his turn, he can't Cleave an opponent and then use the attack roll granted by Cleave to Topple a second. The Brawler can do that.

Rules let you switch weapons when attacking. You just switch from lance to halberd.

Look, there is realistically no comfortable way to carry multiple huge weapons on you, but the rules which we are discussing do not interact with that at all, so you can have 10 lances on your back for all the game cares.

So, of course, the sensible thing here is for the Brawler to go and find an object that is similar to a maul (ideally), or maybe just a warhammer, and carry that around

Which is valid, because we don't have rules for objects breaking in use. So once you find a tall candelabra or a giant's rib bone, you're admittedly set for life. And you spent your subclass pick on using this unmagical weapon...

What keeps a Brawler up with magic weapons is the magic items mentioned in the Design Note on p.14. The place to make sure Brawlers, monks, and College of Dance bards keep up with magic weapons is there, not in subclass features.

So... to make a subclass work, you need to rely on DM goodwill even more? When you could just pick a subclass that doesn't rely on outside assistance to do its job?

 

[fluffybunbunkittens]

Stupid thing is, I like the concept of the Brawler. So I want it to be a valid pick. I'm not seeing it here, when its main gift to the world is using a reach/topple or reach/cleave, which, even in the strictest campaign with a DM who doesn't let you swap big weapons on the fly, you could instead be an Eldritch Knight who switches between his bonded weapons with a bonus action as needed, no questions asked because that is what his subclass says he can do.

I also think the fantasy of 'use improvised weapons' is not 'use the same one improvised weapon forever', but more like... when you smack someone with a table, it instantly breaks in a shower of splinters and deals like 2d6 aoe damage, so on the next turn you need to come up with something else, like apply the Restrained condition by using the nearby wall hangings to wrap around someone's head, repeat. A creative martial controller type.

 

[Weiley31]

Which is valid, because we don't have rules for objects breaking in use. So once you find a tall candelabra or a giant's rib bone, you're admittedly set for life. And you spent your subclass pick on using this unmagical weapon...

I've played Ninja Gaiden: A dragon's Fang will do mighty fine in carrying you through three games and a spin-off.

 

[mamba]

Monk might as well be a Fighter sub-class.

yes, it should be. The only reason we have monks at all in 5e is that WotC has some unreasonable sacred cows they will never tackle

Would spare us from the brawler nonsense too, two birds with one stone

 

[Minigiant]

yes, it should be. The only reason we have monks at all in 5e is that WotC has some unreasonable sacred cows they will never tackle

Would spare us from the brawler nonsense too, two birds with one stone

Much like Simple vs Complex fighters, the Monk class should be the Monk class.

A focus on ki- spiritualism and using ki to affect mind, body, soul, and reality.

"Good at Unarmed Martial Arts" should be in the fighter as a Fighting style.

The "Unarmed Monk" should be a subclass choice in Monk to focus ki into the body. Sorta like the Taijutsu, Genjutsu, and Ninjutsu foci in the Naruto series.

Maybe in 6e.

Edit: I even guess with proper multiclassing rules you can get the old monk via Fighter/Monk.

 

[Charlaquin]

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.

What? It very explicitly says you choose one.

whenever you attack with an Improvised Weapon, you can give it one of the following Mastery properties for that attack, depending on whether it can be wielded in one hand or two:

You do get to choose one every time you attack with it though, so that’s pretty cool, especially with fighters getting to make so many attacks in one turn.