D&D (2024) Fighter (Playtest 7)

[Parmandur]

sure, but Jackie then gets attacked by the local scumbags no matter where he happens to be and just happens to best them, he is not an adventurer either.

The brawler to me is the unprepared town drunk who trundles along and has to grab the nearest branch as a club because he did not prepare for what the rest of party set out to do. As I said, not an adventurer.

Sometimes Adventure finds you.

You seem awfully caught up in the word "brawl" here, when it just means "unarmed and improv combat." Which is something I have seen people ask for, constantly, for years on various forums. Guess WotC got the memo?

 

[Minigiant]

I mean sure, that’s totally valid, but the game certainly allows the other way.

Sure but is not a major archetype. Not PHB level.

The adventurer might kick, an offhand jab, pommel strike, or throw an small item to end him rightly. But it is just a sometimes thing.

 

[Charlaquin]

The problem with brawler isn't at the 7+ level, I actually think there is some cool stuff there. Its at 3rd....brawler realistically gets nothing that a fighter with a couple of weapons doesn't already have....but then that fighter actually gets something from their subclass. That's the area that needs adjustment.

But yeah at the higher levels when you can use 2 masteries at the same time and some other things, ok yeah that's cool and gives it a power scale all its own.

At 3rd level you can have a pair of light weapons that can each apply one of sap, slow, or vex, and you can choose which one each time you attack. That’s very close to having perma-advantage and a mini-blur. Or with a two-handed weapon with reach and your choice of cleave, push, or topple. I think that’s less good, especially if you can’t convince the DM to let you get at least a d8 damage die on it, but it’s still pretty solid with Sentinel (or did that feat get nerfed? I can’t remember.)

 

[Parmandur]

At 3rd level you can have a pair of light weapons that can each apply one of sap, slow, or vex, and you can choose which one each time you attack. That’s very close to have perma-advantage and a mini-blur. Or with a two-handed weapon with reach and your choice of cleave, push, or topple. I think that’s less good, especially if you can’t convince the DM to let you get at least a d8 damage die on it, especially with Sentinel (or did that feat get nerfed? I can’t remember.)

If they are going harder into this sort of approach, with adding Dance Bards and Brawler Fighters, hopefully some more detailed guidance on improvised weapons gets provided.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

I think people are seriously underestimating Brawler.

With genuine respect @Charlaquin has there ever been a subclass where someone didn't say "I think people are seriously underestimating [subclass]?" Because I've even seen it said of Purple Dragon Knight and er... the crummy elemental Monk one.

I don't think we are. I think we're skeptical for good reason. It's a class reliant on two things which are unproven:

1) Weapon masteries - you are right that that factors in, but I give high odds Weapon masteries get ULTRA NERFED before they go live. Like nerfed to the point where most of them might as well not exist and just add needless extra book-keeping. You seem to be believing they're going to go live in or very close their current. I do not believe that. If they do, then yes, things look up a fair bit for the Brawler and for martials in general in combat - in fact martials might even get slightly OP in combat (honestly fine and fair given the decades for which that wasn't true!).

2) Reliance on non-existent magical items. This is a big one. WotC have failed to deliver on most of their claims/promises/intentions so far, I'd suggest, with this series of UAs specifically (less so in general - but DND Next had the same pattern).

They keep saying "We want to do X" and then they do Y, instead and X is never mentioned again. And there's no press to ask them "Yo what happened to X?" because they don't talk to the press, by and large, outside of emergencies or pet people like Todd Kenreck (who don't get me wrong, seems like a genuinely great dude, but who has never, ever, to my knowledge, asked a hard question, or even question that wasn't kind of obviously prepared for, of a WotC employee). Genuinely ENworld and Linda Codega are the only people positioned to do so even, but I don't think ENworld has the access (sadly) and Linda's primary beat is indie RPGs, not hold WotC to account - that sort of started by accident.

If, and it really is an if, these magic items appear, even then, because this is 5E, not 3E (where you could make them) or 4E (where you could basically suggest them to the DM), you're reliant 100% on the DM being nice enough to give you a specific novel item. Something my experience is that a lot of D&D DMs are loathe to do, sad to say.

(Weirdly I often end loaded down with huge numbers of magic items in 5E games I've played in, but like, none I wanted and often ones that don't help or further the theme of my class at all. I still get good use out of them where I can, but like, I worry.)

Whether a character gets an appropriate magic item for combat is equally dependent on the DM whether the item in question is a "magic weapon" or an item "that enhance{s} Unarmed Strikes and Improvised Weapons".

No. Sorry. Not true.

There's a huge difference between a class reliant a singular, specific item, like "Gloves of Brawling" or whatever, and a class that can benefit from any magical weapon, potentially. Certainly any martial one.

The latter is going to be drastically more common, and absolutely @fluffybunbunkittens is 100% right to point out DM goodwill is going to who gets what in 5E.

So I'm sorry that equivocation is just not valid.

 

[Parmandur]

At 3rd level you can have a pair of light weapons that can each apply one of sap, slow, or vex, and you can choose which one each time you attack. That’s very close to having perma-advantage and a mini-blur. Or with a two-handed weapon with reach and your choice of cleave, push, or topple. I think that’s less good, especially if you can’t convince the DM to let you get at least a d8 damage die on it, especially with Sentinel (or did that feat get nerfed? I can’t remember.)

Also, thinking about it, yes, the Improvised weapon is the main power factor at Level 3: the unarmed combat portion is cool, but only about half a fighting style (Tasha's Unarmed Combat Specialist style gives the same benefit, plust 1d4 damage to a grappled opponent at the start of a turn). Thst more comes online later with the grapple benefits.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Sure but is not a major archetype. Not PHB level.

The adventurer might kick, an offhand jab, pommel strike, or throw an small item to end him rightly. But it is just a sometimes thing.

Disagree - people like Madmartigan are basically the brawler archetype. Constantly punching and kicking as well as their normal attacks, smashing pots on people, that sort of thing. The only problem, design-wise, is that someone at WotC was too precious to let them use the bonus action unarmed attack to make an unarmed attack, which is just such a ludicrous, laughable WotC-ism.

It's just as major an archetype has half the other subclasses. If you want it to go on "Insufficiently known", we have to delete genuinely most subclasses on the same basis.

 

[Charlaquin]

With genuine respect @Charlaquin has there ever been a subclass where someone didn't say "I think people are seriously underestimating [subclass]?" Because I've even seen it said of Purple Dragon Knight and er... the crummy elemental Monk one.

True, it’s entirely possible I’m the one over-estimating it. Obviously I don’t think I am (cause if I did I wouldn’t think it), but also by my own logic, if most people think it’s underpowered it probably needs a buff regardless of what the math says.

I don't think we are. I think we're skeptical for good reason. It's a class reliant on two things which are unproven:

1) Weapon masteries - you are right that that factors in, but I give high odds Weapon masteries get ULTRA NERFED before they go live. Like nerfed to the point where most of them might as well not exist and just add needless extra book-keeping. You seem to be believing they're going to go live in or very close their current. I do not believe that. If they do, then yes, things look up a fair bit for the Brawler and for martials in general in combat - in fact martials might even get slightly OP in combat (honestly fine and fair given the decades for which that wasn't true!).

I mean, yeah, if it gets nerfed it will be worse. That’s almost tautological. But I’m not going to evaluate playtest material based on the assumption that it’s going to be worse than what we’re actually being asked to playtest.

2) Reliance on non-existent magical items. This is a big one. WotC have failed to deliver on most of their claims/promises/intentions so far, I'd suggest, with this series of UAs specifically (less so in general - but DND Next had the same pattern).
They keep saying "We want to do X" and then they do Y, instead and X is never mentioned again. And there's no press to ask them "Yo what happened to X?" because they don't talk to the press, by and large, outside of emergencies or pet people like Todd Kenreck (who don't get me wrong, seems like a genuinely great dude, but who has never, ever, to my knowledge, asked a hard question, or even question that wasn't kind of obviously prepared for, of a WotC employee). Genuinely ENworld and Linda Codega are the only people positioned to do so even, but I don't think ENworld has the access (sadly) and Linda's primary beat is indie RPGs, not hold WotC to account - that sort of started by accident.

If, and it really is an if, these magic items appear, even then, because this is 5E, not 3E (where you could make them) or 4E (where you could basically suggest them to the DM), you're reliant 100% on the DM being nice enough to give you a specific novel item. Something my experience is that a lot of D&D DMs are loathe to do, sad to say.

(Weirdly I often end loaded down with huge numbers of magic items in 5E games I've played in, but like, none I wanted and often ones that don't help or further the theme of my class at all. I still get good use out of them where I can, but like, I worry.)

I tend to roll with the “magic items aren’t an assumed part of progression” thing. If nobody gets any magic items, I think the brawler will do fine. If weapon and magic using characters do get magic items, I think it’s safe to assume the brawler will too. Probably there will be some campaigns where that doesn’t hold true, but in the absence of actual guidance about how to award magic items, I don’t think we can account for that.

Also, haven’t they said there is going to be more guidance on how to award magic items in the new DMG? Or was that wishful thinking on my part?

 

[Parmandur]

True, it’s entirely possible I’m the one over-estimating it. Obviously I don’t think I am (cause if I did I wouldn’t think it), but also by my own logic, if most people think it’s underpowered it probably needs a buff regardless of what the math says.

I mean, yeah, if it gets nerfed it will be worse. That’s almost tautological. But I’m not going to evaluate playtest material based on the assumption that it’s going to be worse than what we’re actually being asked to playtest.

I tend to roll with the “magic items aren’t an assumed part of progression” thing. If nobody gets any magic items, I think the brawler will do fine. If weapon and magic using characters do get magic items, I think it’s safe to assume the brawler will too. Probably there will be some campaigns where that doesn’t hold true, but in the absence of actual guidance about how to award magic items, I don’t think we can account for that.

Also, haven’t they said there is going to be more guidance on how to award magic items in the new DMG? Or was that wishful thinking on my part?

Perkins dropped a video a few months ago that outlined the new DMG. He basically indicated.that everything in there is getting revamped, overhauled or even outright replaced.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

I mean, yeah, if it gets nerfed it will be worse. That’s almost tautological. But I’m not going to evaluate playtest material based on the assumption that it’s going to be worse than what we’re actually being asked to playtest.

I feel like that's just too naive for me, imho, given it's WotC. If this was a videogame I would, and have indeed, done that when playtesting. WotC just has burned me on this too many times.

I tend to roll with the “magic items aren’t an assumed part of progression” thing. If nobody gets any magic items, I think the brawler will do fine. If weapon and magic using characters do get magic items, I think it’s safe to assume the brawler will too. Probably there will be some campaigns where that doesn’t hold true, but in the absence of actual guidance about how to award magic items, I don’t think we can account for that.

On the exact contrary, we must account for that for the precise reason that there is no guidance, I would say.

If there was guidance, and people were wilfully ignoring it, absolutely we just dismiss that as "those people are choosing not to do it right".

But my experience, even relatively good DMs, is that magic items are not handed out evenly, and magic items that specialized to benefiting one particular character-type and only that are extremely rarely handed out. So I think the lack of guidance really means we have to think "What is actually going to happen".

Is that tea-leaf-reading? Yeah it is a bit, but also it's just a case of past performance shows likely future behaviour. And WotC's behaviour here... not great.