5E Fighter Variant - Light Fighter (experiment)

[Khaalis]

I have just uploaded 5E Fighter Variant - Light Fighter (experiment) to the downloads area.

On a variety of threads here, there have been a number of debates over Light Fighters, their neglect or half-baked attempts to "fix" the neglect in older editions as well as to whether or not the current Fighter class does the archetype justice. As an experiment I attempted a Light Fighter Duelist subclass first. Its "meh". The next step was to experiment with making an ALT-Fighter class - Light Fighter.

The Light Fighter is an archetype often misunderstood or woefully ignored in basic fantasy settings. Many simply hand wave them as rogues, which does the archetype a strong disservice.

Heavy warriors are your classic plate-bound tank warriors who are most at home on large battlefields or delving deep within some old dungeon. They favor brute force and stamina to carry them through challenges.

Light Fighters on the other hand prefer to rely on their quickness, agility, finesse, daring and wit. They are most often found in campaigns that focus on urban adventuring, where heavily armored knights are often banned on the streets. They also dominate in campaigns with a more renaissance focus to the fantasy genre, as well of course as in any campaign based on the high seas, where a heavy fighter becomes a high liability.

This is a lightly modified fighter class that swaps around some abilities, gives up medium and heavy armor and includes:
* 6 Archetypes: Brawler, Corsair, Duelist, Gallant, Musketeer and Swashbuckler.
* 3 New Fighting Styles: Brawling, Firearms, Precision
* 4 New Maneuvers: Jibing Insult, Plunging Strike, Stunning Strike


D&D 5E - Light Fighter (EnWorld safe) version

PM me if you would like a full text version.

You can find the file here in the downloads section. Please use this thread for comments.

 

[RhaezDaevan]

A few comments:

Why do they get 2 good saves? Everyone gets one of (con, dex, wis) and one of (str, int, cha). I'd switch out con saves for either int or cha saves.

Brawler keeps mentioning a fist weapon in addition to unarmed strikes. What's a fist weapon? Do you mean like a cestus? Do you have stats for a fist weapon?

The firearms style just seems like archery with an additional feature. Just like fist weapons being missing, I don't see firearms anywhere. I'll reserve judgment until I see just how powerful firearms are compared to ranged weapons in the PHB/Basic doc, but the +2 bonus to hit may be too much.

I do like what you're trying to do overall. Just needs some tweaking.

 

[Khaalis]

Thanks for the comments.

Why do they get 2 good saves? Everyone gets one of (con, dex, wis) and one of (str, int, cha). I'd switch out con saves for either int or cha saves.

My bad, I missed the split between "good" and "fair" saves when I did the quick edit from the Fighter. However, considering the focus of the Light Fighter, it should likely be DEX & INT.

Brawler keeps mentioning a fist weapon in addition to unarmed strikes. What's a fist weapon? Do you mean like a cestus? Do you have stats for a fist weapon?

Yes, typical fist weapons. I have added an Appendix with my current stats for fist weapons to the updated download. They may need some tweaks but its the first pass at conversion from d20.

The firearms style just seems like archery with an additional feature. Just like fist weapons being missing, I don't see firearms anywhere. I'll reserve judgment until I see just how powerful firearms are compared to ranged weapons in the PHB/Basic doc, but the +2 bonus to hit may be too much.

I've attached the current firearms info I'm using including links to the footnoted sources. That said, weapons are pretty simple to customize.

 

[RhaezDaevan]

Alright, looks better now, though I question one more thing.

The Firearms fighting style lets you use your bonus action to reload, but firearms take 2 or 3 actions to reload. Did you mean for the fighting style to change it from 2-3 actions to a single bonus action, or is it supposed to mean a combination of actions and bonus actions that add up to 2 or 3?

 

[Khaalis]

The Firearms fighting style lets you use your bonus action to reload, but firearms take 2 or 3 actions to reload. Did you mean for the fighting style to change it from 2-3 actions to a single bonus action, or is it supposed to mean a combination of actions and bonus actions that add up to 2 or 3?

Argh. Damn it. I thought I fixed this. The issue was drawing material from 2 sources and being lazy in not reinventing the rules myself. /kicks self

I need to go back and fix "Slow Load" now that I really look at it again.

Slow Load
I like that Proficiency makes the weapon easier to load. So with that if Non-Proficiency requires 3 actions, then Proficiency by all accounts should reduce it to 2 actions.

By RAW, this means 2-3 "actions" not "actions or bonus actions", thus 2-3 turns to reload. Makes sense.

However, there is then the question of the pistol, which is in reality quicker to load (no use of the ramming rod). So that would mean Non-Proficiency requires 2 actions and Proficiency requires 1 action (the same as a crossbow).

Also, going back and rereading the existing PHB feats, I feel we need to remove the reference to Sharpshooter as the source for improved load. In fact, this should actually require a new feat.

So this bring us to the following changes.

Slow Load. This property is the same as Loading (p147 PHB), except that two-handed weapons with this property require 3 actions to reload if the individual is not proficient in their use or 2 actions if proficient. Light weapons with this property require 2 actions to reload if the individual is not proficient in their use or 1 action if proficient, thus turning Slow Load into simply the Loading quality.


FIREARMS EXPERT
Thanks to extensive practice with the firearms, you gain the following benefits:
* You reduce the number of actions required to load a firearm by 1. In the case of proficient users, this turns Slow Load into Loading (p147 PHB) for two-handed firearms and allows you to ignore the Loading quality of Light firearms.
* Being within 5 feet of a hostile creature doesn't impose disadvantage on your ranged attack rolls.
* When you use the Attack action and attack with a one-handed weapon, you can use a bonus action to attack with a loaded Light firearm you are holding.


The Firearms Fighting Style remains the same. As it is worded it now, it allows you to use a "Bonus Action" as if it were an "action" for the purposes of loading. Thus a fighter with this style can reload a two-handed firearm in 1 turn by using an Action and a Bonus Action to do so, or reload a Light firearm as a Bonus Action each round.

 

[RhaezDaevan]

A lot more clear, thanks.

 

[Connorsrpg]

This looks great. I too LOVE Dex-based fighters and it always seems odd to have to 'forget' armor profs or leave behind what you started as.
This seems a very good compromise. I am very impressed with the many archetypes. Another that could easily be added is the kensai for Oriental Adventures (but any game would benefit from a pure weapon expert).

Not sure class features should be like Background ones?

And, I am not sold on the name. What about 'Unfettered'? In fact, I was about to start work on an Unfettered when i came across your work. I think 'Light Fighter' sounds odd.

A well set out PDf too. Did you do all the layout yourself?

 

[Khaalis]

See, the problem I have with Kensai is that its become rather muddled in the last few years in gaming. Kensai is a practitioner of Kenjutsu which is an encompassing term for all Koryu schools of Japanese sword fighting (especially Kendo and Iaido). It originated with the Samurai class of feudal japan and it means "the method or technique of the sword".

I really do not understand where the unarmored aspect got tied to the Kensai in gaming. Kenjutsu practitioners do were armor, just not usually in practice (same as many fighting styles including western). From a gaming point of view I've seen them given classes, prestige classes and even archetype or the Magus. I'm not sure how If I had to pin down Kensai to D&D 5 I would call them a Battle Master Fighter. I think the concept needs to be looked at a little more closely before assigning it.

Can you explain what you meant by "Not sure class features should be like Background ones?" Been a long night at work and this just isn't clicking for me.

As for the layout, yes I do all my own layout work. Its pretty amateurish but its not as bad as some I've seen tossed out. I like my files to at least bear some resemblance to the current core book layout.

As for the name, I had thought about Unfettered but that name is one of Monte Cook's Arcana classes so wasn't sure I wanted to tread there. It is also technically an ALT-Fighter and not an entirely new class. Not opposed to giving it a name but I didn't think it was that necessary since most people "name" their class based on their subclass. For instance people are more likely to say "I'm a Battle Master" than "I'm a Fighter Battle Master", JMHO.

If Monte wouldn't take afront, Unfettered is a good name.

 

[Connorsrpg]

So true re Kensai (as I think it first appeared in an OA ). Whatever the historical significance on the term, I still just LOVED the class that has been traditional to D&D. (It is not like D&D to mess with actual meanings of words, right? Gorgon ). Just saying, I like the class - It has always been a fav.

Even if you took the actual Weapon Expert part. D&D 5E doesn't really do that right now.

A member of our group also added to the BG idea I so briefly put. What I was getting at, was don't archetypes mostly have actual rules, modifiers, etc. BGs have those RP-only features. You have included them here and it seems to overlap with BGs.

Other member of our group made it clearer. These archetypes seem to many and cover the same space. Isn't it really BG that separates a Gallant or Corsair from other Swashbucklers? ie: Noble and the sailor one? Meaning, what BGs would these guys take if BG is baked into archetype? If an archetype doesn't mix well with several BGs, then I am not sure it needs its own archetype.

I mean what BGs would a Gallant take? It is pretty clear really. He already has BG according to your write-up.

I reckon you could merge a few archetypes, and differentiate them with BGs basically. (Even though I love the fluff and ideas here).

 

[Khaalis]

As to the Kensai, if you really want to stick to the older D&D visions of the class, it really is likely to need its own class treatment, or should be a true subclass of Fighter rather than Light Fighter. As it stands now, the closest thing to Kensai in the core is a Champion Fighter, where the Critical strike focus is the embodiment of the weapon expert of the Kensai. It just isn't limited to 1 weapon.

Now as to the Light Fighter archetypes...

Now technically YMMV, and you could trim the subclasses, but each one is different mechanically and has a different mechanical focus.
* Brawler = Unarmed light fighter. Basically a Monk dabble MC Subclass.
* Corsair = Sea campaign oriented for those who specifically want a Sea oriented fighting class.
* Duelist = Disciplined light fighter geared mechanically towards a one-on-one fighting style revolving around mobility, precision attacks and taunts.
* Gallant = Geared toward more political or courtly style campaigns. An educated light fighter focusing mechanically on more subtle campaigns.
* Musketeer = Specifically designed to fill the niche of sword and gun wielding elite soldier style of light fighters in a renaissance genre.
* Swashbuckler = Designed as the "Generic" rapier and buckler, bantering while fencing style of light fighter.

Now keep in mind, not all games will use all subclasses, but the point of the experiment was to Provide a class and subclasses to fill all of the possible Light Fighter genres needs. If you don't want Gallants (aka Fops) in your game, don't use them if they don't fit the genre of your campaign. The same can be said of Musketeers which are specifically geared toward Renaissance level campaigns.

As to their being RP Background features in the classes, I don't see this. Every subclass in the PHB has an opening paragraph of Fluff about the archetype and the roles they normally fill in the genre of the campaign. Light Fighter Archetypes are no different, though possibly slightly more specific in nature as they were meant to be. However, I don't necessarily agree that there are too many or that they step on the toes of Backgrounds in most cases.

As we already know not all backgrounds are really meant for all classes, but could be stretched and forced is necessary such as say an Acolyte Barbarian.

Now as to your specific examples:
* What separates a Gallant from a Corsair from a Swashbuckler.... As I mentioned above, they have different niches and different campaign focuses. They are mechanically different as well. Different fighting style focuses and different key defining abilities that formulate the fighting style of that particular subclass. Do you need all 3 in the same game? That totally depends on the game you are running, but technically you Can have all three.

Now here are some examples of how they can still differ using Backgrounds and the three archetypes you seem to think are redundant.

Lets start out with the CRIMINAL:
Criminal Corsair - You learned your fighting trade on the seas. Perhaps you were a merchant marine, a sailor in the navy or just an outright pirate. Examples: Jack Sparrow, Barbossa, Captain Hook, Errol Flynn's Captain Blood.
Criminal Gallant - You may be of noble birth, but you are not the shining example of the best the nobility can offer. Whether you really are evil or if you are just looking for something more exiting than court life, you've spent more than your share of time in the criminal world. Example: Count Rugen, Count Rochefort
Criminal Swashbuckler You are trained in the arts of Swashing the Buckle whether from a military stint or through an academy or a personal master. However, you use your skills for ill ends. Example: Amanda (Highlander)

You state what can a Gallant take as a background? Ok...
Acolyte Gallant - you are a lesser noble trained in the light fighting arts but spent your early years training in the service of a temple of the war god.
Charlatan Gallant - Your a noble gallant but spent your early years reveling in using your intellect and stratagem you learned in fighting school and applying them to swindle your fellow nobles. You may take over the family business some day.
Entertainer Gallant - You're a noble and what better class to have access to best of arts and culture. You spent any time not learning the sword performing. Or perhaps you blended the two - Celtic Sword Dance anyone?
Folk Hero - Dear gods this one is easy. You are of noble birth but choose to fight for the common folk. Let me just say two names - Robin of Loxley (Robin Hood) and Don Diego de la Vega (Zorro).
Guild Artisan Gallant - You are of noble birth and your family business is the Guild. You spent as much time learning guild business as you did swordplay.
Hermit Gallant - Little more of a stretch but either you felt a need to go off on a hermitage, or perhaps you were kept as a prisoner (aka a hostage for those of noble birth).
Noble Gallant - Yes you are an epitome of what it is to be noble. Perhaps the first son of a noble house, perhaps even royalty. Your entire education has been focused upon what it is to be noble.
Outlander - You are of noble birth but your family is very old school and has not lost their roots. Perhaps you were sent off to experience life in another part of the world as part of your education, so that you would bring this knowledge back with you as a lesson when you again return to your noble surroundings, or perhaps you were like Oliver Queen, lost and thought dead until you returned home.
Sage Gallant - Knowledge is power. You are not just a student of the light fighting arts but a renaissance man who finds educating the mind is just as important as educating the body.
Sailor Gallant - Unlike corsairs, you training in the sailing arts is an education or a short term profession rather than a lifestyle. Perhaps as a noble, you served in the royal navy as a low ranking officer. Perhaps your family are sailor merchants and you had to learn the family business. Or perhaps you were given a letter of marquise making you a privateer allowed to commit piracy on the ships of enemies to the crown.
Soldier Gallant - Perhaps you are a lesser son of your house so instead of the family business you were set up with a military commission. Or perhaps your family values military training in its endeavors or has deep military ties or is devoted to a deity of war and conquest.

So I hope that answers your question. The "Fluff" in being a gallant (or any other subclass for that matter) doesn't step on the toes of the Backgrounds. It merely adds more flavor and focus to the concepts of the backgrounds.

As another example... lets take Dumas's Musketeers...
(Assuming Musketeer as the subclass)
* Athos = Noble Musketeer
* Aramis = Acolyte Musketeer
* Porthos = Sailor (or Criminal) Musketeer
* d'Artagnan = Folk Hero Musketeer

If you want to be more loose about it and say not are all fitting of the "Musketeer" subclass
* Athos = Noble Gallant
* Aramis = Acolyte Musketeer
* Porthos = Sailor (or Criminal) Swashbuckler
* d'Artagnan = Folk Hero Duelist

So I hope this goes to show that the minor fluff in the Subclass descriptions does little to hinder the use of the background system. It just makes you think a little more deeply about the character and how you see them and their current and past influences.