D&D 5E The Fighter/Martial Problem (In Depth Ponderings)

[Minigiant]

From experience and from some of the videos I posted earlier, you can see it works great at high levels too. It just is not as powerful as other available classes.

The problem is the other classes. A player who uses the features of some classes at high levels to half their potential warps the high level game to the point when the fighter and some other martials are minimized,forcing the DM to add or change rules.

The breakdown is that 5e expect you to play just stronger versions of your lower level selves but gives some more versatility and ignorance of restriction while getting 10 times as complex.

Let's Plays tend to rely on gentleman's agreement to play a certain way to be better watchable content. AKA no Player cheese. No DM anti-cheese or gotchas.

 

[ECMO3]

Yes, there's an occasional module or game that hands out really strong magic weapons really early. Neither those nor Solasta are average in this regard.

The average 5E adventure has magic items early. The original LMOF offered a magic staff at level 1 or 2. From memory I think Tyranny of Dragons offered a dragontooth dagger and a really awesome sword by level 6 or so. Descent into Avernus offered a Mace that did an extra 1d6 at level 2 or 3, a very rare shield at level 5 and a legendary sword late in game.

I don't think it is that uncommon at all. Some of those magic items are flat overpowered at the levels you get them.

Now what is uncommon is getting magic items that play into the narrow fighter builds a lot of "optimizers" tend to build to. A GWM-PAM build for example, but that is a choice someone makes when they choose those feats.

Nearly no tables uses 5e flanking rules.

Flanking sucks as a rule IMO and in my experience about 1 in 4 tables use it. However it undoubtedly makes melee characters do more damage and it is available to those that want it.

Just like I have never actually played as a player on a table that used the optional marking rule (I have used it as a DM), but that rule is there.

If want martials to be more powerful I think the starting point should be rules like these that already exist and make them more powerful. If you are not willing to use these rules that make martials more powerful then why is it imperative to make them more powerful in the class mechanics?

 

[Vaalingrade]

If the problem is 'attack attack attack is boring', the solution isn't 'attack attack attack with advantage'.

 

[ECMO3]

Do the problems with the Ranger and the desire for a non-magical ranger similarly not exist due to some people still playing Rangers?

I play more Rangers than any other class. lMO asking for a non-magic ranger is like asking for a non-magic Wizard. It just makes no sense for that class to me. If you want a non-magic wilderness explorer make it a subclass on another class or its own stand alone class.

Magic is an integral part of the Ranger IMO. The Tashas options that made them more magical were a great start, but what Rangers really need as a class are more arcane oriented spells. Things like Magic Missile, Shield, Cause Fear, Charm Person and Misty Step should all be on the Ranger spell list.

If I were going to change the Ranger I would take away extra attack, give them D12 hit dice and give them more arcane spell options.

 

[ECMO3]

If the problem is 'attack attack attack is boring', the solution isn't 'attack attack attack with advantage'.

I agree with this. I don't think this is a class problem it is more of a build problem or a player problem.

A player purposely and intentionally builds a character that can't do anything well except attack and take damage.

Then they take that poorly designed "opitmized" character and bring no creativity and do nothing except attack, attack, attack when it comes to game time.

 

[Vaalingrade]

IMO asking for a non-magic ranger is like asking for a non-magic Wizard. It just makes no sense for that class to me. If you want a non-magic wilderness explorer make it a subclass on another class or its own stand alone class.

They literally want to play Aragorn. Y'know, the Ranger. Who was a non-magic wilderness explorer.

Magic is an integral part of the ranger IMO. The Tashas options that made them more magical were a great start, but what Rangers really need as a class are more arcane oriented spells. Things like Magic Missile, Shield, Cause Fear, Charm Person and Misty Step should all be on the Ranger spell list.

Why should the fighty druid or the wilder rogue get wizard things?

If I were going to change the Ranger I would take away extra attack, give them D12 hit dice and give them more arcane spell options.

I mean the trend is for every attempt to fix the ranger somehow make them worse. Why break an almost 25 year streak?

 

[Vaalingrade]

I agree with this. I don't think this is a class problem or even a build problem as much as it is a player problem though.

It's a design problem.

We can't just keep porting all the actual issues of the game onto the backs of players and DMs.

 

[ECMO3]

It's a design problem.

We can't just keep porting all the actual issues of the game onto the backs of players and DMs.

It is not a design problem it is a player making poor build choice problem and then following those poor build choices with poor in-game choices.

I posted earlier about a Drow Fighter I plan to play in a future campaign. On point buy, at 8th level she will have a 20 Charisma and the following spells as single-classed fighter:

Eldritch Blast (magic initiate)
Green Flame Blade (magic initiate)
Dancing Lights (Drow)
Booming Blade (Eldritch Knight)
Friends (EK)
Cause Fear (magic initiate)*
Hex (Fey Touched)*
Faerie Fire (Drow)*
Detect Magic (DHM)*
Protection from Evil and Good (EK)
Shield (EK)
Absorb Elements (EK)
Alarm (EK)
Darkness (Drow)*
Levitate (DHM)*
Blur (EK)
Rope Trick (EK)
Dispel Magic (DHM)*

All of the spells with a * are cast once a day for free except Detect Magic which is at will as an action.

I plan to start with a Greatsword and a Warhammer as my backup and blind fighting fighting style (which pairs well with darkness). I will see where the campaign goes though, maybe I will end up sword and board if we find a good shield or single-handed weapon (recognizing the conflicts with shield spell and Hex) and maybe I will switch to superior technique, defense dueling or something else later on.

She will also have a Raven familiar (unless it dies between level 6 and 8) and proficency in Deception, Intimidation and Persuasion.

That is all on a single-class fighter chassis. I have not played this build before, maybe it will be the bomb, maybe it will be a dud, but on paper it looks darn promising and I can say for a fact whether it is great or it sucks I will have fun playing it.

 

[ECMO3]

The problem is the other classes. A player who uses the features of some classes at high levels to half their potential warps the high level game to the point when the fighter and some other martials are minimized,forcing the DM to add or change rules.

I don't see that in any of the tables I play, or in any of the streaming videos I posted earlier.

I do see PCs minimized, but that does not track with a specific class and some of those in the videos getting a smaller share of play are full casters.

 

[Warpiglet-7]

It is not a design problem it is a player making poor build choice problem and then following those poor build choices with poor in-game choices.

I posted earlier about a Drow Fighter I plan to play in a future campaign. On point buy, at 8th level she will have a 20 Charisma and the following spells as single-classed fighter:

Eldritch Blast (magic initiate)
Green Flame Blade (magic initiate)
Dancing Lights (Drow)
Booming Blade (Eldritch Knight)
Friends (EK)
Cause Fear (magic initiate)*
Hex (Fey Touched)*
Faerie Fire (Drow)*
Detect Magic (DHM)*
Protection from Evil and Good (EK)
Shield (EK)
Absorb Elements (EK)
Alarm (EK)
Darkness (Drow)*
Levitate (DHM)*
Blur (EK)
Rope Trick (EK)
Dispel Magic (DHM)*

All of the spells with a * are cast once a day for free except Detect Magic which is at will as an action.

I plan to start with a Greatsword and a Warhammer as my backup and blind fighting fighting style (which pairs well with darkness). I will see where the campaign goes though, maybe I will end up sword and board if we find a good shield or single-handed weapon (recognizing the conflicts with shield spell and Hex) and maybe I will switch to superior technique, defense dueling or something else later on.

She will also have a Raven familiar (unless it dies between level 6 and 8) and proficency in Deception, Intimidation and Persuasion.

That is all on a single-class fighter chassis. I have not played this build before, maybe it will be the bomb, maybe it will be a dud, but on paper it looks darn promising and I can say for a fact whether it is great or sucks I will have fun playing it.

I am all for taking social skills with fighters…and why not?

I am about to play a duergar battlemaster. We will see how that goes. I am
Leaning into maneuvers that move people around.

I also was think g about taking criminal and medium armor for stealth potential but I am still getting his character right.

Sans magic that is not innate, I was hoping to have some stealth and explorations options along with smacking enemies around.