D&D (2024) 4/26 Playtest: The Fighter

[Chaosmancer]

A lot of people, most of which aren't on the forums, disagree. It's popular because it's simple.

Don't get me wrong. I still want a warlord. But we need the simple option, and this is it for this edition.

Why do we need the Fighter to be the simple class? Why not just have simple options for each class?

 

[Asisreo]

They aren't? Medium Armor, Shields, and d10 HD, along with the ability to turn invisible and give themselves free Temp HP... they seem pretty tough. My apologies though, I thought I had brought them up.

They don't have Heavy Armor, which had received quite a big buff as the Heavy Armor Mastery feat now lets martials reduce all incoming BPS damage by their PB for every hit. The Ranger would need 2 feats for that. As well as the natural advantages of having higher possible AC with heavy armor.

And both paladins, fighters, and barbarians gave far more effective damage mitigation built into them making them much harder to down.

This is changing the argument. You claimed that fighters were "well-rounded specialists" who can "drop their primary mode of attack and switch when it isn't effective." Your example was pulling a bow to fight a flying dragon.

And that is something every single martial can do. Heck, if you have Sharpshooter, you don't even need to drop your bow in melee and so you are at max efficiency for the Ranger, Paladin, and Fighter. So, if this "switching it up when absolutely needed" is the fighter identity... we have a problem of that being a martial identity in general.

Tbf, that was the PHB's description of fighter.

Plus, what I mean isn't that fighters are the only class that can just pull out a bow, but that they are more effective outside of their preferred build than the other classes.

The new Paladin does kinda mess with that fantasy.

 

[Vaalingrade]

Why do we need the Fighter to be the simple class? Why not just have simple options for each class?

Because it sure is hell ain't gonna be that casters.

The wizard gets to be a junior game designer. You can't take that away from them.

 

[Neonchameleon]

What i missed was that you could chose graze after you saw the attack roll. I'm not sure that's intended, but seems to be RAW as of now.

Also, he said new fighter with advantage is 70 DPR (40% more). Not 70% more.

Ah, that makes a lot more intuitive sense that the proportional gap dropped slightly but not as much as expected. Thank you.

 

[mellored]

Why do we need the Fighter to be the simple class? Why not just have simple options for each class?

Classes should be different, and we don't need 12 different simple options.

As for why the fighter? Tradition i guess.

Flavor wise, making the barbarian the simple class and let the fighter be the weapon master/warlord would make more sense IMO. But that's going to require a new edition.

 

[Neonchameleon]

This is what we're trying to avoid:

View attachment 283418

Yeah. The "normal" combination is one ranged set (bow/crossbow/javelins/throwing axes etc.) And one melee set (two handed weapon/sword and shield/two weapons/one big weapon).

These weapon mastery rules by contrast encourage nonsense like dropping your second weapon in melee to attack with a third within a round. And I don't mean "TWF Retiarius throws their net, follows it up with a topple attack, and then draws their off-hand nick weapon for the extra attack and continues as a two weapon fighter"

 

[Vaalingrade]

Classes should be different, and we don't need 12 different simple options.

Let's make the wizard the incapable one for a few decades than. Fun and fair for everyone, right?

 

[Neonchameleon]

Let's make the wizard the incapable one for a few decades than. Fun and fair for everyone, right?

Or at least have a simple caster.

 

[mellored]

Or at least have a simple caster.

If we are doing a 6e wish list...

Remove ability scores.
Fighter is a warlord/tactician/weapon master.
Barbarian is the simple big numbers martial
Rogue is a mix. Ranger is just a nature rogue.

Wizard is the prepared caster, mostly focused on utility with less damage. Can cast any spells from his book as a ritual. Druid and Cleric are just variants.
Sorcerer is the simple blaster, using spell points/mana. Monk is here too.
Warlock is a mix. But focused around curses and invocations.

*class giving about 50% of their power, and 50% is customizable.

 

[Minigiant]

Each weapon is supposed to be different. And putting Vex on Dex weapons while cleave is on heavy ones makes it feel different.

Quick math, assuming 50% to-hit, and ignoring crits.

Graze: +4 damage, 50% of the time, means +2 on average.

Vex: 1d8+4 * (.75 chance to hit this attack * .25 increase in accuracy next attack) 0.1875 = +1.59375 damage
*you also don't get this in the first attack.

Flex: +1 damage, +.5, is +0.5

But it doesn't make weapons different.

It makes weapon styles feel different.
Weapon styles feel different already.

At level 7, a longsword and battleaxe are the same for a fighter.