A critique and review of the Fighter class

[Vaalingrade]

So that's why Dexterity keeps getting more powerful over time when compare to Strength. Though I'm not sure why Intelligence is so...vestigial in 5e.

1) Sorry I removed the quote. It was supposed to be in the Armor thread.

2) I never said they were smart nerds. Just small and weak.

 

[Bill Zebub]

Okay so YOUR one game example proves it... what about my counter example of I 9 out of 10 times see either all martial or all caster parties?

I value one example we can all see more than 10 examples that somebody claims to have seen.

 

[Zubatcarteira]

Vecna has an at-will counterspell with no range limit and that cannot be countered, and three reactions a round, and five legendary resistances, so casters won't be too great against him. On the other hand, he's pretty squishy, a few martials together could kill him one turn.

 

[Vaalingrade]

Beating up a maimed, half-blind old man.

I mean, sounds like a good time.

 

[James Gasik]

Beating up a maimed, half-blind old man.

I mean, sounds like a good time.

D&D as Gygax intended!

 

[GMforPowergamers]

I value one example we can all see more than 10 examples that somebody claims to have seen.

you can value anything you want... 1 game is meaningless... it's like saying "I booted your computer fine and opened fire fox and got email" discounts "Every once in a while my windows goes to this blue screen for no reason"

 

[GMforPowergamers]

Beating up a maimed, half-blind old man.

I mean, sounds like a good time.

I mean ANYthing can sound bad when you say it like THAT...

#Nottheworstthingmyplayershavedone.

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

I will try... also I don't want it to either... my pitched fix is to break it up into 3 classes... 1 based on champion 1 based on eldritch knight and one based on battle master but with very diffrent feels. (I also am pro breakk up wizard )

That is basically what I did for my Warlord/blade hack: Expand upon BM maneuvers for a full class in the same way that the Wizard class expands upon the spells of an Eldritch Knight.

Sorry if I'm skipping over most of your post, but if casters are basically on par with fighters, why is this such a big issue? I keep pointing out why I don't think that there's much of a difference.

If you read my post and got "casters are basically on par with fighters" as the overall point for out of combat interactions, then you may have skipped a bit.
Casters are basically on par with fighters before you factor in spells was the point I was making about non-combat interactions. Thats . . . a little different.

There are very few spells that add a significant amount to social interactions - charm person has significant drawbacks. Familiars and a few spells help with exploration, but at the cost of limited resources. Disguise/alter self can be quite useful but can also be replicated with a hat of disguise or even a simple disguise kit for what it's normally used for.

Social interaction challenges are not limited to face to face, persuasion and insight checks, in which enchantment or detect thought etc spells might be usefully employed. Why are you talking to these people in the first place? Are you trying to get somewhere? Obtain information? Avoid combat?
With a little creativity, there are lots of spells that can help with these. If you go to bed knowing roughly what your group intends to try to achieve the next day, and can adjust your spells, you can help even more.

I'm not saying that casters get no benefits from spell outside of combat, obviously they do. They tend to be things that aid the party, there's nothing that makes the other PCs without spells pointless. That's not their role. But reasonably competent? Able to contribute to the group's goals?

No one is reasonably complaining that any PC is pointless. Every PC has access to ability checks and every player can roleplay amongst the party to improve the rest of the group's overall enjoyment.
But if that is all you get to do, and the other members of the group get to contribute more to the success of the party, then people can start feeling left out, or that you're not pulling your weight.

The sentiment I get is that unless fighter are the optimal choice for something outside of combat, they're worthless.

Could you possibly point out where you're getting that sentiment from please? I thought that I have read all the posts in this thread, and most of the similar ones, and I do not think that I have seen many people suggest that fighters should be the optimal choice for something outside of combat at all. It is possible that people have, but I just have them on ignore so haven't seen it.

I guess what it really comes down to is that this is just one of those things I've rarely encountered in an actual game. Most people have fun just trying to figure out solutions to obstacles, it doesn't really matter who actually does the thing to overcome the obstacle in the majority of cases. People recognize that different classes have different capabilities in and out of combat.

I have been on both sides of this. I have played a utility wizard, OK in combat, but mostly contributing in other situations, and was actually asked to tone it down. I was dominating most of the out of combat situations to the detriment of the fun of some of the other players simply because I was being so helpful and able to solve so many problems.
I have since made a point of trying out some fighters particularly at higher levels, to see if the group was actually justified in asking me that, and found out that there was a huge disparity in my experience between the two classes.
Now, it is entirely possible that my groups' playstyle (which does tend towards all three pillars fairly evenly rather than more combat) is just significantly different to the majority of other groups that our respective experiences just do not translate across.

So how are those going to be useful in, say, a social encounter? Friends lasts a minute and after the spell is over the target knows their mind was affected. That has no consequence in game? Charm person just makes you a friendly acquaintance and gives you advantage. Again, the target knows they were affected.

Again: why are you interacting with these people? What does your group want to achieve?

Some spells are obviously useful now and then. But it's not like they're useful or used in every out of combat encounter.

No single spell is useful for everything. But when you're a caster, you don't have one single spell, you have several. And each extra spell you are able to cast is a class ability that may be applicable to the situation above and beyond your ability checks.

I have no idea what you're getting at. Fighters have as many proficiency options as everyone but bard and rogue. If the proficiency option for something they want isn't on the list, that's what backgrounds are for. A dex based fighter with street urchin won't be as good as a rogue with expertise at opening locks unless they spend a feat, but they can still be decent at it.

If you roll a d4 and a d6 and pick the better roll ten times, are you likely to have higher numbers as often as if you just roll a d4 ten times?

 

[tetrasodium]

Level 11 you're looking at what? +10 to hit? Unless you're still just exclusively fighting zombies at that level, almost any attack in definitely not guaranteed to hit.

You are responding to a lot of people, this is where the larger number of attacks & higher damage shines. If a monster has an AC high enough to matter it hurts nonfighters more than fighters Any monster with AC high enough to be missed with any regularity is going to skew the numbers further & further towards the fighter because the classes with fewer chances and lower damage have a larger share of their action riding on each attack yet any monster with AC as low as zombies is already a situation setup to favor the fighter's higher damage. a d20 averages 10.5, not many monsters suitable for a level11 party are going to even have 20 ac let alone 20+ & monsters that are suitable for a level 11 party will tend to fall well short of 20 AC until the GM starts customizing monsters to fix the system's design.

 

[Bill Zebub]

you can value anything you want... 1 game is meaningless... it's like saying "I booted your computer fine and opened fire fox and got email" discounts "Every once in a while my windows goes to this blue screen for no reason"

I have a feeling I’m going to regret continuing to engage on this, but I will try.

I said I found the Vecna thread “interesting” and you responded “oh so that one case proves your point and yet my 10 examples…etc”

1. No, I did not say proves. I said it’s interesting. There is a big difference between evidence and proof.
2. Your examples are not evidence because they cannot be verified. If I responded to your 10 examples with a story about my 50 examples, would you find that persuasive? Think about that.

Then there are your analogies about iPhone issues and windows stability. You are comparing your perception/opinion of game design to objective problems with technology. The 5e fighter is not crashing. You are dissatisfied with it, but your dissatisfaction is subjective. So if you want to compare it to your phone, use something like UI design, which is subjective.

For example, one of my frustrations with my phone is that the button to switch to a call on hold is in the same place as the button to hang up. So if I say good-bye and switch to the call on hold, and the first call ends, the button changes and I end up accidentally hanging up on the second call. We can all agree that is a function of design, not buggy software. So then we can debate whether or not it’s good design.