A critique and review of the Fighter class

[lingual]

There are some people who simply can't wrap their heads around the fact that not everyone has the same tastes as them. They accordingly look at D&D most popular class (measured both by D&D Beyond and WotC surveys) and declare that because it's not their flavor of fun, it must be defective. They'll deny other tastes exist, denying that the WotC surveys are valid and (as seen earlier in this thread) claiming that fighters are only popular on D&D Beyond because people are being forced to play them. If you point out to them that they're perfectly free to choose from a dozen other classes to play something more to their taste, they will complain that you're being dismissive, because if someone doesn't truly understand that tastes vary, they conclude that in a good game design every option should be tailored to their own taste.

These thread work better when the initial take isn't "fighters are broken" , "the game devs are bad", etc. etc.

 

[Oofta]

Casters are just as good as fighters without using their spells. Wizards are made significantly better than fighters at out of combat scenarios because of their spells.

Has your group made any changes to their games to limit the power of casters at all?

How is that relevant? Even if a caster has only a 25% chance of having a relevant spell that they are willing to apply to a situation, that is still 25% better than not having spells.

Once again, where Y is never negative, X + Y is always going to average higher than X.

I am of my own opinions, but if you have to lump me into a side, it would be on the "Fighters have less out of combat class abilities than other classes" rather than the "Four skills, a background feature and nothing else is just as useful as four skills, a background feature, and fifteen potentially useful class features".

I do not feel that "Perfection is unattainable" is an adequate excuse to not seek improvement.

We simply disagree, I don't know what else to say. I think the fighter can have secondary role in multiple niches and be decent at it. I wouldn't be the most popular class if it didn't work for a lot of people.

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

i have laid out at 10th and at 20th what fighters have over martial casters and again and again no one can show me any individual ability equal to a 6th level spell... but they can't even find a combination of feat + feature that can

edit: let alone the versatility some classes have with spell slots... a sorcerer/wizard/cleric/bard/druid would not need to have A 6th level spell like a warlock would

Disintegrate is probably equivalent in damage to a level 11+ action surge if you take into account the sort of target you would use it on and ignore its other uses.
Actually, Blade Wind Strike is probably closer in concept and mechanics to a Tier 3 fighter's action surge, if you dropped its damage a bit.

 

[Jefe Bergenstein]

There are some people who simply can't wrap their heads around the fact that not everyone has the same tastes as them. They accordingly look at D&D most popular class (measured both by D&D Beyond and WotC surveys) and declare that because it's not their flavor of fun, it must be defective. They'll deny other tastes exist, denying that the WotC surveys are valid and (as seen earlier in this thread) claiming that fighters are only popular on D&D Beyond because people are being forced to play them. If you point out to them that they're perfectly free to choose from a dozen other classes to play something more to their taste, they will complain that you're being dismissive, because if someone doesn't truly understand that tastes vary, they conclude that in a good game design every option should be tailored to their own taste.

Because raw numbers of fighters created in a system that charges you for options is meaningless beyond "what is created the most on a limited character generator". You guys keep posting numbers of the system that originally ONLY let you make a Life Cleric, Evoker Wizard, Thief Rogue and Champion fighter as though it is the same thing as people's favorite. Water is the most consumed beverage, but how many are likely to say it is their favorite? Even if you want to use those results, it should also be noted that "caster" is created far more than "non-caster".

Has WOTC actually posted the character class survey results? I know they have done a number of surveys but I cant seem to locate any outcomes.

 

[Minigiant]

Again, I think much of the problem are

1. Out of Combat mechanics are dominated by Intelligence, Wisdom, and Charisma. Scores Fighter has as Tertiary and do not get direct benefits from.
   1. And the classes hare have INT/WIS/CHA as primary and secondary have spells that offer additional avenues in these pillars
   2. Strength and Dexterity in Exploration and Social encounters lead heavily to group rolls in which spotlightt is shared.
2. An anti-jock mentality of seeing Fighters as dumb brutes although a majority fighters in a generic setting would be knights, nobles, military generals, lifted freemen, priests, bourgeois, and other forms of educated upper and upper middle class in order to afford and attract a combat trainer.
3. The d20 being the main resolution die in exploration and social interaction. The wide range of outcomes makes a fighter who lacks many of the combinations of the proper ability score, proficiency, and a class based bonus to mitigate the randomness of the die.
   1. Not only is the d20 the main die, exploration and social interaction in the default play is often single roll of single PC. So fighter often

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

I understand players wanting more than what the class (or rules) give. To the player, it feels as if their fighters are inadequate when compared to other PC classes. And they can feel that way. But, since many many players don't feel that way, wouldn't it be better to discuss it as a houserule, and its possible outcomes, rather than a complaint?

That said, in my experience, those players will always want more. Regardless of a change, a houserule, or issuance of a magic item. They will always feel their character is underperforming.

Agreed. I would actually think a house rule discussion would be interesting. But starting from a position that the fighter isn’t even viable, and that this is an incontrovertible fact, doesn’t exactly invite participation.

There have been threads that were started with the intention of discussing potential house rules that those who found the fighter's out of combat performance lacking could use.
I seem to recall both of you posting in those as well.
Absolutely constructively and definitely not saying that this wasn't an issue needing additional rules of course.

 

[Minigiant]

We simply disagree, I don't know what else to say. I think the fighter can have secondary role in multiple niches and be decent at it. I wouldn't be the most popular class if it didn't work for a lot of people.

Like I keep saying You can be a fan of something and think it is terrible in execution.

I'm a New York Giants fan. There are millions of us. It's the third most valuable team in the Lee. The team has been trash for years. And we are vocal about it.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Perfect balance is an illusion. Rules that will work for all tables under all scenarios is an impossible goal.

You gotta know that no one is demanding either of those things. Right?

I think fighters work fine as they are

Like I don't even disagree with this. I don't really like the fighter for design reasons that I don't pretend are anything but preference, but sure, they work fine. For some people. Maybe even for most people.

But enough people are dissatisfied with objectively getting less in two of the three pillars of the game than nearly any other class, while not actually getting more in combat than anyone else, that wotc has tried to address it with subclasses and new battlemaster maneuvers.

There just isn't a good reason to keep the fighter the way it is, when it has plenty of room for a couple simple features that aren't shared with every single other class that related primarily to the two non-combat pillars of the game. Doing so wouldn't take anything away from you or anyone else.

 

[tetrasodium]

Disintegrate is probably equivalent in damage to a level 11+ action surge if you take into account the sort of target you would use it on and ignore its other uses.
Actually, Blade Wind Strike is probably closer in concept and mechanics to a Tier 3 fighter's action surge, if you dropped its damage a bit.

Not quite

• disintegrate, 10d6+40 or 75
• 3 attack+action surge w/20 strength & a greatsword... (2d6+5)*6=12d6+30 or 72
• add a +1 wand & a +1 greatsword so you have something approaching the low end of realistic common gameplay at the levels where , you have:
  • Thesame 75 for disintegrate
  • the action surge jumps to 78
• Add a single crit to that +1 wand/greatsword and:
  • disintegrate is still 75
  • the action surge +1 greatsword jumps to 85
• Add resist nonmagical bludgeoning piercing slashing to either of the last two scenarios & you have the exact same numbers
  • Add magic resist & the target is making a save for no damage save with advantage potentially resulting in a fighter with the same as the two from the last entry compared to a caster who now has a much better chance of spending their action & single 6th level spell slot to do nothing.
  • Add legendary resist & the action surge is still unaffected but there is now a 100% chance of doing nothing even if the target fails a save that has a very good chance of being made with advantage.
• Add a short rest before the next fight & the 6th level slot is still gone but action surge has returned for a second use to further widen the already substantial gap.

The two are not at all similar let alone equivalent.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

I understand players wanting more than what the class (or rules) give. To the player, it feels as if their fighters are inadequate when compared to other PC classes. And they can feel that way. But, since many many players don't feel that way, wouldn't it be better to discuss it as a houserule, and its possible outcomes, rather than a complaint?

That said, in my experience, those players will always want more. Regardless of a change, a houserule, or issuance of a magic item. They will always feel their character is underperforming.

i guess it depends... if it was just my group, if I came on here and found out our group was such an outlier... then yeah we would just stick to house rules... but what I found is a not insignificant number of posters that had the exact or very similar experiences. At that point I think we are beyond house rules.