D&D General Requesting permission to have something cool

[Minigiant]

You are the one who turned it into that discussion.

The thread is about requesting permission.

Requesting permission to do what?

 

[Reynard]

I mean, you're literally telling the people who are dissatisfied with the Champion that it's their fault for choosing to play Champion. What else am I supposed to think?


I didn't say that though. You said someone who kills a lot of people and controls a battlefield. That sounds like something a warrior should be doing to me!


The manual tells them that Champions are just as good as any other subclass and that Fighters should be Wizards' peers, equally valuable to whatever group they join. This is false.


I have. Repeatedly. It presents the Berserker and Champion (which WotC's own data shows are DEEPLY disliked despite being played--because play-rate does not directly correspond to satisfaction rating!) as being just as good as, say, Battle Master and Totem Warrior.

Show me where it tells the player that Champions are weaker than other subclasses! I would love it if 5e were actually honest about that sort of thing. It wouldn't be an improvement of game design, but it would at least be speaking honestly with the player.

What I am saying is that the Champion Fighter is not an archetype that someone wants to play. It is a set of game mechanics that do some stuff (and not particularly well). Players need to play the thing that actually has the mechanics that support their preferred playstyle, class fantasy, whatever. If you want to play a swashbuckler who moves around the battlefield and stabs people in their squishy bits, you don't bemoan the lack of a swashbuckler subclass, you play a rogue. If you want to play a super powered mutant with a few intense abilities, you don't complain there is no mutant class,you play a warlock.

Or, you reach into the essentially bottomless well of creativity that is the 3PP community -- pro and fan -- and find just the right thing.

 

[Reynard]

The thread is about requesting permission.

Requesting permission to do what?

To fulfill their playstyle preferences. These things are present in the game, but people are gating themselves behind class names and fluff and "officialness." If you can't find a way to play the character you want in 5E, it's because you aren't trying hard enough.

 

[Micah Sweet]

The thread is about requesting permission.

Requesting permission to do what?

I actually don't really see how this thread's title is related to the OP, which is what I've been responding to.

 

[Corinnguard]

It isn't a fighter subclass. It's a fighter rewrite.

The Level Up Fighter is definitely a rewrite. The base version now has class features that add in a degree of exploration and social interaction. What's not to love?

 

[Vaalingrade]

So play a monk and call it a "fighter." That's what I am talking about: choose a character based on what you want to do in play, not what it is called or what it's fluff reads

You mean a class with literally the same problem I described with not having enough ability to do interesting things due to the attrition mechanic?

You're trying to present gasoline as a solution to a fire and I'm not sure how it's meant to help your rhetorical point.

 

[Vaalingrade]

To fulfill their playstyle preferences. These things are present in the game, but people are gating themselves behind class names and fluff

Nope.

That is a new made-up thing that only just showed up as a hedge against very real concerns in this thread.

 

[Reynard]

You mean a class with literally the same problem I described with not having enough ability to do interesting things due to the attrition mechanic?

You're trying to present gasoline as a solution to a fire and I'm not sure how it's meant to help your rhetorical point.

And you have staked a position and refuse to actually think about solutions. What can we do?

 

[Oofta]

if a fighter is multiclassing to even things up then isn't that inherently saying that the fighter by itself isn't enough?

I said if it matters. Considering that the fighter can easily have double the HP of a wizard it may not to many players. Of course if you really want to win the AC race and don't want to hassle with multi-classing, do an eldritch knight with a shield. But a sword-and-board fighter will typically have a better AC even after shield in most games. Unless of course the wizard gets all the magical AC bonus items stacked on them.

 

[Scribe]

The Level Up Fighter is definitely a rewrite. The base version now has class features that add in a degree of exploration and social interaction. What's not to love?

Not only that, but its based on the exact same open source material that everyone else has access to.

And you have staked a position and refuse to actually think about solutions. What can we do?

One I drop on my son when he's feeling particularly in the mood to gripe.

"Well you've tried nothing, and it hasnt worked, whats next?"