A critique and review of the Fighter class

[GMforPowergamers]

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

the biggest problem is this is DAMAGE... the ONE thing we all agree is the fighter thing... and as you see a wizard CAN just prep for damage and keep up... but they can the next day prep for social and the day after that for intrigue. (Or in my experience half combat half non combat most days)

 

[Neonchameleon]

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

Just to add to this:
1: I think dexterity is pretty important in exploration, especially for Stealth - but thieves' tools also help. And there are classes that can use dexterity extremely well
1 (again): The role of strength in exploration is almost redundant after low levels. There's the portable hole/handy haversack for carrying capacity, climb and swim speeds and fly for athletics, and plenty of ways of lifting or otherwise removing obstacles.

3: Casters even in 5e often get to sidestep the roll of the d20.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Define "enough people".

I did. In the text you quoted.

 

[bedir than]

I remain confused as to how adding a second background or two sets of tools would change the fighter so much that the current players would never play it again

 

[CreamCloud0]

I think what the Fighter really needs, Is to not be THE Fighter, trying to be none and all of the archetypes at the same time, it needs to be divided up to specialise in different areas, my choices for how to divide it up would be as The Brawler, The Weaponmaster and The Knight, in a power, skill and defense specialty for each respectfully, they each also get a mental stat to focus on as their secondary.
The Brawler: A streetwise powerhouse, kills things good by hitting them-alot and with bonuses to damage, the champion fighter of the three: simple but efficient, WIS secondary represents them fighting smart or dirty, outside of battle they have the ‘bend bars, break crates’ style of fighter features but also proficiency in things like perception, insight, intimidation and acrobatics, with some features based on those things too.
The Weaponmaster: knows how to use all the weapons to their fullest and many techniques for them in a fight, the battlemaster or eldritch knight of fighters with special manoeuvres to use, INT secondary is them being highly trained but also educated on their foes and how to take them down, gets more skills than the other two outside of battle, athletics, history, nature, survival, arcana, has skills to study and research their foes or environmental from books or in battle for bonuses on them.
The Knight: doesn’t deal the most damage but will be leading the charge and blocking incoming attacks all day and protecting their allies, they’re protectors, the guy with shining armour and a reassuring tone of voice, CHA secondary to show how they lead and inspire teammates, able to rally crowds for their cause and win over the hearts of the people getting help from them, skills include persuasion, performance, medicine, animal handling.

 

[lingual]

I remain confused as to how adding a second background or two sets of tools would change the fighter so much that the current players would never play it again

To be fair. No one said that. Heck some here would think an extra background and tools is not enough. They want that "unique" Fighter ability so that Bards and Wizards who can cast Wish don't outshine them.

 

[Bill Zebub]

From the position of thinking that the Fighter is fine, but that the criticism also has some merit (if delivered with way too much hysteria and hyperbole and anguish) here is my good faith effort at a house rule:

Hero Points
At first level, pick one attribute. When you fail an ability check with that attribute, you may re-roll the d20, and you must use the new result. You may do this as many time as your proficiency bonus, and you regain all uses after a long rest.

Each time your proficiency bonus increases, you may pick an additional attribute to use. You may also swap out an existing attribute for a new one.

 

[Minigiant]

I remain confused as to how adding a second background or two sets of tools would change the fighter so much that the current players would never play it again

A second background of set of tools actually wouldn't work because it doesn't solve the problem nor matches the lore.

A large amount of the community would have to agree to what the fighter adds to the social conversation or the exploration sequence.

Books, tv shows, movies, and comics have figured it out. Fantasy gaming hasn't though.

 

[bedir than]

A second background of set of tools actually wouldn't work because it doesn't solve the problem nor matches the lore.

A large amount of the community would have to agree to what the fighter adds to the social conversation or the exploration sequence.

Books, tv shows, movies, and comics have figured it out. Fantasy gaming hasn't though.

You don't think the Soldier or City Watch backgrounds would be considered acceptable by lore-centered fans?

 

[Older Beholder]

My biggest issue with the video is the idea that a character being good at the social pillar is the same thing as roleplaying.
There's plenty of roleplay potential of a fighter because it is a lot more open than most the other classes.

I've never really seen an issue with the fighter in the social pillar, personally.
There are plenty of ways to build a socially adept fighter, by using backgrounds, feats, subclasses or multiclassing.
It seems a bit rough to say, if you exclude all these options you have for making a social fighter than there's no way to make a social fighter.

Also, being bad at the social pillar usually just leads to more fights, so a socially inept fighter is in itself a win win.