D&D General The Case For High INT Fighters in Dungeons and Dragons

[EzekielRaiden]

i feel this thread is discussing alot the potential of warlord as filling the 'smart fighter' position, personally to me the warlord is not the 'smart fighter', or rather they are that in the same way that the barbarian is the 'brute fighter', the two non-fighter classes have different tools and design and serve a different role because of that, a barbarian is a damage sponge who trades off increased chances to hit for both themselves and their opponent, that is not the fighter's methods-the fighters methods are skill and tactics(fighting styles and manuvres) to improve their to-hit without sacrificing their own defences, a warlord uses their inteligence to protect, support and better position their team, that is not the fighter's methods-the fighters methods are using their inteligence to defend themselves, plan their own attacks and target weak points.

or to put more simply, the warlord concept is a martial designed for a support/defense role, the fighter concept is designed for striker/defense role, adding greater emphasis to how their inteligence factors into that doesn't fundamentally change their role IMO.

My biggest problem is that I don't really see a great mechanical niche for the use of intelligence to "defend [one]self, plan [one's] own attacks, and target weak points" that would not be subclass specific.

 

[mellored]

As for your questions: yes because ki is explicitly called magical;

Per the playtest, there is no mention of "magical" anymore.

"extraordinary, even supernatural"

 

[CreamCloud0]

Not magic. Supernatural, but not magic--a distinction the fandom refuses to acknowledge.

i find the aesthetics of supernatural abilities tend to edge far too close to magical end of the scale than the extraordinary end to want martials to be consistently using them as their baseline, if i were to try assign references to the various descriptors and my justifications of their positions (using MCU as i feel that's a fairly common reference point), in DnD i'd want my martials floating around hawkeye-to-extraordinary at lower levels and enhanced-to-hulk at higher ones.

Full Magic Aesthetic - Dr Strange (spell circles and somantic gestures, energy blasts, manipulating forces of reality)
- Scarlet Witch (below Strange due to more freeform casting)
Supernatural - Thor (flight, producing lightning, superfast healing,(yes i realise some of this is a byproduct of moljnir/stormbreaker but i'm considering them as one for the example))
- Hulk (visible transformation, superhuman strength and toughness but no 'powers' per se)
Enhanced - Spider-man (beyond human strength, supersenses, quickened healing, wallcrawling as a supernatural extrapolation of an ordinary skill)
- Daredevil (supersenses, increased spatial awareness, lie detecting)
Extraordinary - Bucky Barnes (notably enhanced physical ability)
- Hawkeye (supposedly 'perfect' aim with ranged weapons)
Full Martial Aesthetic - Cap America ('peak human' physical conditioning)

some elaboration: daredevil beats out the physically stronger bucky due to possessing senses not found in baseline humans but hulk beats out spider-man who possesses more of those 'unnatural abilities' due to the sheer scale of his power and the transformation aspect from banner to hulk.

 

[CreamCloud0]

My biggest problem is that I don't really see a great mechanical niche for the use of intelligence to "defend [one]self, plan [one's] own attacks, and target weak points" that would not be subclass specific.

you don't see those as things that any well trained(adventuring grade) fighter should be doing? that an eldritch knight wouldn't know how to study and identify the weaknesses of their enemy as they trade blows?('they are strong but lack mobility, i should target their dexterity'), that a battlemaster cannot plan out an assault on an enemy camp?('you attack from behind from the south where their guard is weak as i provide a distraction at the northeast bridge'), that a psi warrior has not mastered multiple fighting styles to account for different situations?(dueling is better as i engage the lone target as i can benefit from my shield but i will swap to greatweapon style as i dispatch the pack of wolves to take them each out in a single hit)

 

[Paul Farquhar]

The proposal is, "make 100% of Warlords magical."

That class already exists, and is called “bard”.

Would you accept Champions being classified as magical, people who innately have magical powers that nobody really knows where they come from?

I wouldn’t care.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

you don't see those as things that any well trained(adventuring grade) fighter should be doing?

Defending yourself, planning your attacks, and targeting weak points? Yes, absolutely. Doing so with Intelligence? No.

That class already exists, and is called “bard”.

So...you're okay with a Warlord that isn't sold as inherently magical? That doesn't use the word "magic" to describe its abilities? Because that's what mellored was saying. That it needs to have the word "magic[al]" in there in order to get around the reluctance to allow the class in the first place.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

Per the playtest, there is no mention of "magical" anymore.

"extraordinary, even supernatural"

Then you shouldn't have called it "ki," because "ki" doesn't exist in 5.5e. "Focus" does--and, as you say, "focus" avoids the use of the word "magic[al]" and is thus not magic.

But--again--your proposal required that word, emphasis added:

I bet if warlords lightly opened up the possibility of magical (not spells) effects, things would flow a lot more smoothly for people.

I.e.
While any intelligent beast can predict the trajectory of a rock flying though the air, and any intelligent humaniod can make and communicate dinner plans, the Tacticians take that to an whole new level. They are able to predict enemy an ally movements alike and devise stratagems that many call prescient. Fortunately for the rest of the world, too much analyzing will tire the warlord out.

How a Tacticians achives this remains a mystery even to themselves. Some say there is a divine spark leading them to a destiny, other say they can see the weave of fate or are imbued with divination magic, and others insist that it was just years of hard study and endless hours think of the best stratagems, honing their minds into a razor sharp edge.

Tacticians are nearly always draw to adventure, as mundane life becomes too predictable and boring. Having often played and beaten everyone they know in any strategy game, they often seek out the challenge of battles in order to stretch their abilities to the limits.

Good aligned Tacticians see themselves as protectors and guides. Using their abilities to increase the total amount of good in the world. Evil aligned Tacticians may even start wars if they can't find any to join, playing with lives as pieces on a game board just to alleviate their boredom. Though any good game player knows that even a pawn can be value if used correctly.

Yes.

Mostly because if you add the word "magic" then everyone will stop complaining about verisimilitude and let them do cool stuff.

No complaining about how healing herbs would take days for a wound to heal while the Cleric waves his hand and beings someone back from the dead.

Not my preference, but if you can't beat them, join them.

If the description uses the word "magic"--which you have explicitly said it must, in order to get certain people on board with it--then it is, by rules definition, something that functions the way spells do, and fails to work inside an antimagic field.

 

[CreamCloud0]

Defending yourself, planning your attacks, and targeting weak points? Yes, absolutely. Doing so with Intelligence? No.

care to elaborate why not? how that kind of tactical thinking would not be inteligence based?

the fighter should be allowed to be more than the farmboy with their grandfather's old sword.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

care to elaborate why not? how that kind of tactical thinking would not be inteligence based?

Because "defending yourself" is a physical action, not a mental one. Planning attacks is something the player personally does, that's...literally the point of having choices in combat and learning how to make better choices over time. "Targeting weak points" is not meaningfully supported by the game's rules, and every system I've seen attempt to do so is far too fiddly to actually be worth engaging with.

I'm not saying it's not possible to have Int-based mechanics for purely martial characters, even Fighters. I'm saying all the ones I've ever seen that would actually be enjoyable to use and play around with only really make sense as a subclass-specific thing, not as something absolutely every Fighter can access.

And, as has been noted multiple times in this thread, whatever the mechanic is, you have to lock it behind at least 2 (and preferably 3-4) Fighter levels, otherwise people will just dip for it. Heck, there's a whole category of builds that start with Fighter 1 before going fully focused on a caster thereafter, with Bladesinger Wizard being a prime pick. And if you're already going to put it behind Fighter 3...is it really that much of an issue for it to be a subclass-specific thing? Perhaps different options for Battlemasters and a hypothetical Int-focused subclass, to represent how there are different ways for Int to be useful in combat?

the fighter should be allowed to be more than the farmboy with their grandfather's old sword.

I completely agree. I just don't see that allowance manifesting as something absolutely every Fighter gets and does.

 

[Pauln6]

care to elaborate why not? how that kind of tactical thinking would not be inteligence based?

the fighter should be allowed to be more than the farmboy with their grandfather's old sword.

I think the problem is that some people struggle to view stats as more than the benefits they can provide, especially where points buy is the default. Your stats should conjure the mental image of your character. A5E does hark back to 1e by allowing training in extra languages and knowledge skills.

Because "defending yourself" is a physical action, not a mental one. Planning attacks is something the player personally does, that's...literally the point of having choices in combat and learning how to make better choices over time. "Targeting weak points" is not meaningfully supported by the game's rules, and every system I've seen attempt to do so is far too fiddly to actually be worth engaging with.

I'm not saying it's not possible to have Int-based mechanics for purely martial characters, even Fighters. I'm saying all the ones I've ever seen that would actually be enjoyable to use and play around with only really make sense as a subclass-specific thing, not as something absolutely every Fighter can access.

And, as has been noted multiple times in this thread, whatever the mechanic is, you have to lock it behind at least 2 (and preferably 3-4) Fighter levels, otherwise people will just dip for it. Heck, there's a whole category of builds that start with Fighter 1 before going fully focused on a caster thereafter, with Bladesinger Wizard being a prime pick.


I completely agree. I just don't see that allowance manifesting as something absolutely every Fighter gets and does.

You could put the same argument forward for Barbarian Constitution or Monk Wisdom, I suppose.