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

[mellored]

It does in 2014.

but now it's 1/day with big bonus to the save.

And at level 17, it's suddenly 5/day (effectively). Including the +17 to the save.

Kind of think it could scale a bit smoother.

Suggestion for this.

Indomitable: you can expend a use of your second wind to reroll a saving throw, with a bonus to the save equal to your level. You do not gain any healing.

Unconquerable: When you use indomitable, you do gain healing from second wind.

1 less thing to track, and smooths out the scaling.

 

[mellored]

Where is it? There is no extra damage built into the class. That would make the statement a lie.

Topple. Once prone, the rest of your attacks have advantage. So do allies.

Push. Into spiked growth or a firewall, for more damage.

Vex: more advantage, more damage.

Nick: more attacks, more damage.

Graze: damage on a miss

Cleave: more attacks, more damage

Flex: more damage (though clearly the weakest of the bunch)

Sap and slow are the only options that don't increase damage.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

I wished, they would keep PB uses per long rest and only have one set of PB uses you use to fuel your abilities. That would balance multiclassing even further by not adding more and more uses of abilities but only by versatility. Then the scaling in power could also be by prof bonus so you always have a limited use of powerful abilities.

 

[Undrave]

I think the biggest folly of the design team right now is that they're balancing around multiclassing. It's an optional rule, and a currently flawed one at that. The game should first and for most be balanced for itself, and multiclassing should be balanced around the base game, not the other way around.

IMO multiclassing just needs a rework and they need to stop working around it.

Agree. A lot of Warlock complaint disappear if you just don't use mc rules.

I respectfully disagree. Multiclassing is a gem of 5e, making building characters fun after level 3.

The base game would need a big overhaul if they intended to remove multiclassing. I would call that 6e.

For that matter, I have not seen a single satisfying solution for multiclassing in a d20 based game other than the 5e one.

Multiclassing has the potential to make overpowered OP characters... or absolute garbage ones. There's too much system mastery to it. I'd rather subclass with some feat support be the way to produce characters that mix the themes of multiple classes. At least as the default option used to design the game.

Just move the classic MC rules to the DMG's optional rules section.

 

[tetrasodium]

Flex: more damage (though clearly the weakest of the bunch)

Flex is pretty good for certain niche builds. Take the simple weapons with flex (spear & quarterstaff). Those are the only d6/d8 simple weapons that can be used one handed & one of them is also a thrown weapon. If you go over to martial melee weapons though nearly all of the non-flex are heavy d6 or flex with the exception of the problem children rapier(vex & d8) & trident(Topple & thrown d8/d10) to screw things up. I wouldn't be surprised to see some of the weapon using expert/mage classes to wind up with some of their archetypes giving them an ability to unlock mastery for flex nick or vex as appropriate to the archetype

 

[Mirrorrorrim]

Topple. Once prone, the rest of your attacks have advantage. So do allies.

Push. Into spiked growth or a firewall, for more damage.

Vex: more advantage, more damage.

Nick: more attacks, more damage.

Graze: damage on a miss

Cleave: more attacks, more damage

Flex: more damage (though clearly the weakest of the bunch)

Sap and slow are the only options that don't increase damage.

You're so right, @mellored. Even the non-damage control effects mitigate the race to deal damage between the heroes and their enemies.

• Push can knock them off a cliff in addition to the hazards that Mello mentioned.
• Slow can slow down the enemies' ability to get to their target within a single round of movement, requiring them to dash to get close rather than attack. All the fighter's allies get to take another action while the enemy had to waste theirs.
• Sap can negate an entire attack in the race to out-damage each other.
• Also, the Great Weapon Mastery feat does still have some damage still built into it, so that is still part of the equation. And it removes the -5 penalty trap option.

I am currently playing a maul-wielding totem warrior barbarian and I switched to the new version of Great Weapon Mastery (on purpose to playtest) and I'm doing just fine. I can't wait to start using the Topple mastery so I can knock the enemy prone regularly to give my allies advantage that way. This will let me test switching away from my Wolf totem ability which gives my allies advantage, to the Bear ability to get better damage resistance and be an even better tank.

 

[mellored]

Flex is pretty good for certain niche builds.

It's litterally just +1 damage die size...

Math time:
Assuming 50% chance to hit
2 attacks

Flex: 1d10+4 * .5 *2
= 9.5 damage

Vex: 1d8+4 * .5 = 4.25
(.5 + .75)/2 = .625
1d8+4 * .625 = 5.4
= 9.75 damage.

So even at 2 attacks, Vex is better. And it will improve even more as you make more attacks.

And if you have allies, topple could give them advantage too.

I really don't know what character is going to use simple weapons, spend a feat for mastery, and only attack once.

 

[tetrasodium]

It's litterally just +1 damage die size...

Math time:
Assuming 50% chance to hit
2 attacks

Flex: 1d10+4 * .5 *2
= 9.5 damage

Vex: 1d8+4 * .5 = 4.25
(.5 + .75)/2 = .625
1d8+4 * .625 = 5.4
= 9.75 damage.

So even at 2 attacks, Vex is better. And it will improve even more as you make more attacks.

And if you have allies, topple could give them advantage too.

I really don't know what character is going to use simple weapons, spend a feat for mastery, and only attack once.

Bard warlock & sorcerer only has simple weapons. Also +1 is still a pretty nice ribbon for an archetype to give at low level

I'm not saying that it's a great thing oozing with potential for top tier builds, just that it's reasonable for certain builds to choose them just because they can make use of it.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Agree. A lot of Warlock complaint disappear if you just don't use mc rules.

Multiclassing has the potential to make overpowered OP characters... or absolute garbage ones. There's too much system mastery to it. I'd rather subclass with some feat support be the way to produce characters that mix the themes of multiple classes. At least as the default option used to design the game.

Just move the classic MC rules to the DMG's optional rules section.

No. I am totally against that.

If you interpret the multiclass rules differently (it is not stated that you can use pact magic slots to fuel class abilities) then multiclassing works more than fine.

Other people act if their lolly was taken away for other things, I do so when people want them to remove multiclassing.

 

[Undrave]

If you interpret the multiclass rules differently (it is not stated that you can use pact magic slots to fuel class abilities) then multiclassing works more than fine.

I guess that’s also acceptable. Maybe the ‘slots’ given by Pact Magic could just… NOT be ‘Spell Slots’? Be called something like ‘Eldritch Charges’ or something? That would cut down on ambiguity and would probably stop a lot of whining.