A critique and review of the Fighter class

[Bill Zebub]

Again it's backloaded.

Let's compare it with another class that does something similar. The Beast subclass. The beast subclass, of course, needs to be one handed but as such can use a shield. It doesn't have to go in with the extra attack; instead it can tank - but when it does go all out on damage it gets an extra attack on the turn it rages. Or when it tanks it has a reactive AC bonus on top of the shield. At T1 the claws barbarian takes until about round 4 for the frenzied barbarian to overtake. Which is longer than many fights go on - but the claws barbarian can do this every fight.

Or let's look at the Zealot. The first foe the barbarian hits each round takes an extra d6+ half level damage. Which is about half the damage of an extra attack with a two handed weapon. Round 1 the zealot will be ahead, and round 2 it will be about break even. Again it takes the third round of the fight before the berserker takes the lead (and that if e.g. great weapon master's bonus attack doesn't proc). T2+ this of course scales better than the bonus action attack and you've two rather than one chances of proccing it.

So yeah, by the time the fight is over the berserker may have done more damage than a high damage barbarian from another path. Once per day - and it will have been slower out of the starting blocks. And that's only if the berserker frenzies while the beast and the Zealot are doing this every rage.

Your defence seems to be that in the specific situation of a boss with no minions (that is going to be torn apart by the action economy). So it's an edge case.

This argument seems to be using the most powerful subclass and the most powerful feat as baseline.

Rogues get very little benefit from Defensive Duelist feat, but I don’t hear anybody crying about how Evasion is bad design, or that novices will take the feat (which reads as if it is designed for Rogues) without understanding the overlap.

And, no, it’s not only useful on boss fights with no minions. It’s most useful when fights are longer, and you’re not one-shorting nooks.

Maybe our table is different but we have 5-10 round combats nearly every session. We have 1-minute spell effects wear off on their own. I love Frenzy, and happily pay the exhaustion cost.

 

[Bill Zebub]

Especially since we're looking at this from the eyes of a new player who is somehow comparing the first subclass to all the others, then, having read the others, goes back to the first one and fails to read it in it's entirety to realize "hey, this one isn't like the others, so if I want an always-on benefit, I shouldn't take this one".

The confusion at this point is the player's own fault.

I just can’t take seriously the argument that this potential point of confusion is that big of a deal.

 

[James Gasik]

This argument seems to be using the most powerful subclass and the most powerful feat as baseline.

Rogues get very little benefit from Defensive Duelist feat, but I don’t hear anybody crying about how Evasion is bad design, or that novices will take the feat (which reads as if it is designed for Rogues) without understanding the overlap.

And, no, it’s not only useful on boss fights with no minions. It’s most useful when fights are longer, and you’re not one-shorting nooks.

Maybe our table is different but we have 5-10 round combats nearly every session. We have 1-minute spell effects wear off on their own. I love Frenzy, and happily pay the exhaustion cost.

Out of curiosity, what is going on for your combats to last that long? Large numbers of weaker opponents? Large battlefields with lots of terrain to navigate or traps to avoid? Or just a larger percentage of the xp budget per fight?

 

[Scott Christian]

Ok, sure. But that's irrelevant. Unless you're putting a thumb on the scales, such factors will naturally weigh in equally over time for all classes. This mayor is a retired soldier, so naturally bonds with the Fighter. The next mayor is a gifted public speaker who loves the attention and adulation, and naturally takes to the Bard. The one after him is a retired scholar and bonds with the Wizard, etc....

Since the Fighter does not have some mechanical "Natural Leader" feature, what you were talking about doing there was effectively backdooring one by DM fiat. "Hmm. My Fighter character is always left out of the spotlight in social situations since other party members have Charisma as a main stat and/or skill expertise in applicable skills. Guess I'll make an important NPC who's only really interested in talking with them to compensate"

Sorry, but I am not backdooring anything. As many tables choose where they go, and sometimes they may choose not to go. Hence, there is no backdoor because of random chance. The same random chance that allows your fighter to roll well and outshine the cute halfling bard. And speaking of rolling...
How many rolls do you make for your persuasion of important NPCs? One? Maybe two? Maybe three or four over the course of a campaign? The probability of that cute halfling having a higher outcome than the fighter is higher, but a d20 makes it that a +6 vs a +3 is only better 15% of the time. I just made a fighter that has a +1 charisma and is skilled in persuasion. It was pretty easy to do. I am okay with the bard being better 15% of the time - because they are generally the face of the group! (For the record, I am 10% better than out paladin, 15% better than our druid, and equal to our warlock.)
Looking at it like that, it is not the travesty people make it out to be.

 

[Scott Christian]

speed metal is magic with no +... if you attack 2 or more times with it then as no action you get to make an attack with disadvantage... if that attack hits you can follow it up with another attack at disadvantage ect up to a max # of extra attacks equal to your prof (so right now 5) BUT you don't add your stat mod (dex in the case of this character) to damage with these attacks.

That is cool. Great idea.

 

[Oofta]

Sorry, but I am not backdooring anything. As many tables choose where they go, and sometimes they may choose not to go. Hence, there is no backdoor because of random chance. The same random chance that allows your fighter to roll well and outshine the cute halfling bard. And speaking of rolling...
How many rolls do you make for your persuasion of important NPCs? One? Maybe two? Maybe three or four over the course of a campaign? The probability of that cute halfling having a higher outcome than the fighter is higher, but a d20 makes it that a +6 vs a +3 is only better 15% of the time. I just made a fighter that has a +1 charisma and is skilled in persuasion. It was pretty easy to do. I am okay with the bard being better 15% of the time - because they are generally the face of the group! (For the record, I am 10% better than out paladin, 15% better than our druid, and equal to our warlock.)
Looking at it like that, it is not the travesty people make it out to be.

Another aspect of this is that a certain point, the bard will likely just have such a high bonus that the extra 15% doesn't really matter in many cases. If the target DC is 15 and you get a 30, it doesn't affect the outcome. Other than bragging rights, very high bonuses don't have as much impact on games as some people seem to think. Even in cases where there's a very hard DC (25+) in most games it's only there because there's someone in the group that regularly hits those numbers.

 

[Bill Zebub]

Out of curiosity, what is going on for your combats to last that long? Large numbers of weaker opponents? Large battlefields with lots of terrain to navigate or traps to avoid? Or just a larger percentage of the xp budget per fight?

Honestly I don’t know why other people’s combats are so short. We play a lot of WotC adventure paths so it’s standard content.

I wonder if other people are having monsters just charge in and fight to the death. We run our NPCs smart: they use cover, disengage, try to break PC concentration, heal each other, etc.

 

[Minigiant]

But this whole “it’s different from other barbarian subclasses and people will be confused” argument strikes me as grasping at straws.

I'm not saying people are confused on how the Berserker works. I'm saying people are confused on why WOTC designed the Berserker that way and kept it so.

And the fact that the Berserker isn't the most popular Barbarian by a lot even though it is the free basic one is telling. The Berserker being "bad" or not being how the players wants is a D&D Meme.

I feel WOTC missed the fan's expectations and wishes for the subclass, missed an oppurtunity to make a popular simple noob build without affecting the base class within, AND because they wanted the PHB to be evergreen are stuck with their choices.

 

[Bill Zebub]

I'm saying people are confused on why WOTC designed the Berserker that way and kept it so.

Ah....ok.

I guess that's too meta for me to waste a lot of time thinking about it. I thought we were talking about the effectiveness of the mechanics, not the design intent behind them. (Personally, I don't find it confusing, but of course I could also be wrong about what they were thinking.).

If people are confused about design intent, and that bothers them, they should ask on Twitter.

 

[Bill Zebub]

I will add that what is different, not just compared to other barbarian features but to the whole game, is an ability that comes with a cost. I wish more of the game were designed that way. I wish casters could push themselves beyond their daily slots, but at the risk of bad things happening.