A critique and review of the Fighter class

[GMforPowergamers]

I expect a tier 1 fighter to use the best items of their style in the best manner available to them.

If a nation uses tier 1 hoplites then a tier 1 spear and shield infantry has to make sense as an option over a tier 1 sword and shield and a tier 1 axe and shield infantry.

By making spear 1d6, 5e made Tiers 1 spearman suboptimal to almost every martial, one handed weapon

I agree mostly. I will play a bit of (to be fair) and say that cost and availability should play into it too. If it is cheaper and easier to get 10 spears and 10 shields with 10 leather armors then it is to get 10 swords 10 shield and 10 leather armors that can make sense too

 

[tetrasodium]

yes a fighter with a magical buff is better then a wizard without a magical buff.

what are you even talking about?

1d8+5 is an average of 9.5 with a min/max of 6/13. 1d10+nothing is an average of 5.5 with a min/max of 1/10. The fighter is better was off the rack & when you add a practically off the rack +1 weapon/focus both hit the same slightly better odds but the fighter is even better by virtue of dealing more raw damage and bypassing resistance while the wizard does not add to damage or bypass resistance. +n focus items do not add to damage like +N weapons

Don't forget the longbow came up because of the complaint that a spear's thrown range is only 20' compared to 120ft firebolt here. It's not like the fighter has any troublre carrying both weapons

 

[James Gasik]

Well except when the time comes to switch weapons. Since you only get one free "Use An Object Action" each turn, you're using that to stow whatever you're currently wielding* and then your action to ready the bow.

*Unless you don't mind throwing a weapon on the ground, that is.

And Gygax help you if you use a shield! And while it's a trivial matter for most characters, there is the fact that you have to throw money at your enemies to fire said ranged weapon to consider as well.

Also, the elemental damage or rider benefits of attack cantrips have their place as well, especially if you don't have a magic bow (having played an archer in AL who had to wait a very long time to get a magic bow, it's really annoying when you keep encountering resistant foes).

And of course, this is all assuming that your Dexterity is close enough to your Strength, and you aren't built around using a particular Fighting Style/Feat setup, that you don't lose a lot of effectiveness by switching to a bow.

A problem the caster doesn't have, since no matter what spell they toss out, it's effectiveness is based on one ability score.*

*Unless you're a Dexterity-based Fighter, of course.

 

[Neonchameleon]

I'm not sure how it is cherry picked, but let me explain...
at out tables we have found that when someone wants to play a fighter (concept/fluff) they almost always go either Hex blade or one of the bard subclasses that get a second attack. Since it is what I watch people play that would WANT a 4e fighter or warlord that is what I go with.

It's cherry picked because the Hexblade is probably the most broken subclass in the game at level 1 and second most broken (behind the moon druid) at level 2. It's the multiclasser's favourite for a single level dip because of this.

I can do Bard or CLeric if you prefer... or Druid. at levels 1 and 2 I can't really do bladsinger wizard but 3rd+ I can.

The two melee bard subclasses are IMO fine. The Swords bard doesn't get shields and doesn't have two handed weapons while the valor bard lacks a fighting style. (And neither gets heavy armour or to attack with charisma). Essentially they are both fighting one handed and normally on their secondary stat. Likewise the bladesinger with its low HP and no self-healing; they're a one handed skirmisher. Bladesingers actually get good when you have slots to burn on Shield and when you have a cantrip plus an attack as your melee damage to compete with two attacks with a fighting style.

Are these three better at many things than the fighter? Definitely. Is straight up fighting one of them? Generally not. Do they scale beyond the fighter? Yes of course - they are full casters and the fighter scales slowly at tier 2 and basically stops scaling after you get the third attack.

second wind might equal a 1st level slot... Okay I can see that.

It's essentially a self-targeted slightly higher healing healing word. Which works well when you're expected to be the one tanking and have a high DPR. The second reason Second Wind is actually pretty useful is that it means that with enough short rests you can fully restore your HP.

I would prefer if every class just attacked with there best stat... I don't even mean 'fighter=str' i mean like if I build a 16 wis fighter I use my wisdom to hit and damage and we just have flavor text for "You keen insight and perception lets you strike"

I too miss 4e

the fighter gets 1 extra feat in the first 11 levels (where most play) and at that it is at best your 3rd best feat/asi for your character.

As I have said repeatedly the impact of an ASI/feat is multiplicative so each one you pick that's in the first wave makes all the other ones more valuable. A stat boost is basically +1 to hit and +1 to damage. Your second ASI has its to hit boost increase the value of the damage boost because you're more likely to actually land that damage - and its damage boost increases the value of the to hit boost provided by the first ASI because you now land more damage if you hit. Also, simplifying slightly, Polearm Master gives you 50% more attacks - which increases the value of your to hit and damage boosts from your ASIs by 50% because you're making attack and damage rolls 50% more often.

Of course not all feats synergise; there is for example no synergy between Polearm Master and Sharpshooter than I can think of. And sometimes feats that look as if they might synergise interfere; both Polearm Master and Great Weapon Fighter give you bonus action attacks and you can only use one. And then there are cases like Great Weapon Fighter and Sentinel that are fine; pretty much no synergy but no interference and both synergise with stat boosts and you can use both together.

The first three ASIs/feats from a fighter (first four if you're going with Sharpshooter/Crossbow Expert and a hand crossbow or a couple of other choices) therefore should all make each other more valuable. The problem is that once you've filled these first three (or four) slots you've hit the Str or Dex cap and don't have anything that increases the value of your other feats/ASIs this way.

So the fighter's 4/6/8 feat triad is excellent at Tier 2. Each in most fighter builds makes the others more valuable. It's your fourth choice that's a whole lot less valuable than the first three because you're out of feats that multiply with all your other ASI/Feat choices. And by level 12 the paladin can have +4 Str and Polearm Master, having their own complete triad. (And it's more valuable on a paladin because Improved Divine Smite works really well with extra attacks while the third attack has no synergy with PAM).

You know what those subclasses almost all have in common? magic or mystical abilities

Yup. There's a reason I really like the post-Tasha's battlemaster design; it's a simple fighter with options that don't need to be magic. Not something WotC is good at (and again it doesn't scale much past tier 2).

 

[tetrasodium]

Well except when the time comes to switch weapons. Since you only get one free "Use An Object Action" each turn, you're using that to stow whatever you're currently wielding* and then your action to ready the bow.

*Unless you don't mind throwing a weapon on the ground, that is.

And Gygax help you if you use a shield! And while it's a trivial matter for most characters, there is the fact that you have to throw money at your enemies to fire said ranged weapon to consider as well.

Also, the elemental damage or rider benefits of attack cantrips have their place as well, especially if you don't have a magic bow (having played an archer in AL who had to wait a very long time to get a magic bow, it's really annoying when you keep encountering resistant foes).

And of course, this is all assuming that your Dexterity is close enough to your Strength, and you aren't built around using a particular Fighting Style/Feat setup, that you don't lose a lot of effectiveness by switching to a bow.

A problem the caster doesn't have, since no matter what spell they toss out, it's effectiveness is based on one ability score.*

*Unless you're a Dexterity-based Fighter, of course.

It costs nothing to drop one weapon & switch to the other with your free interaction. 5e is not like 3.x where monsters with an ememental resist/immune regularly had a vuln. Sure it might switch off a troll/revenant/mummy regen but monsters are so pathetic in 5e thanks to the expectation that basically every attack will hit that the paltry regents barely a concern if the monster even lasts long enough. Very few cantrips have a secondary effect let alone one worth noting like you are weighing it & those that do tend to be shorter range with d6 plus nothing or d4 plus nothing damage.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

It's cherry picked because the Hexblade is probably the most broken subclass in the game at level 1 and second most broken (behind the moon druid) at level 2. It's the multiclasser's favourite for a single level dip because of this.

but it is the most effective melee class and a fullish caster... yeah it's broken. that's the thing people who want to play non casters and have to compare toward this.

The two melee bard subclasses are IMO fine. The Swords bard doesn't get shields and doesn't have two handed weapons while the valor bard lacks a fighting style. (And neither gets heavy armour or to attack with charisma). Essentially they are both fighting one handed and normally on their secondary stat.

yes and no most melee centric bards I see are str and con (or dex and con more often) then cha, then they just don't use alot of save or attack spells.

Likewise the bladesinger with its low HP and no self-healing; they're a one handed skirmisher. Bladesingers actually get good when you have slots to burn on Shield and when you have a cantrip plus an attack as your melee damage to compete with two attacks with a fighting style.

yeah by 5th level the bladesinger is way better then teh fighter.

I too miss 4e

the funny part is I am saying 4e didn't go far enough. I want a Int attacking rogue and a Wis attacking fighter and a Cha attacking paliden to be as useful as a str or dex build

 

[Neonchameleon]

I expect a tier 1 fighter to use the best items of their style in the best manner available to them.

If a nation uses tier 1 hoplites then a tier 1 spear and shield infantry has to make sense as an option over a tier 1 sword and shield and a tier 1 axe and shield infantry.

By making spear 1d6, 5e made Tiers 1 spearman suboptimal to almost every martial, one handed weapon

This doesn't follow at all and the Hoplite is an excellent illustration of why. The Dory carried by hoplites would be long enough to be considered a pike - at 2.5-3m it was certainly a reach weapon. And trying to wield pike and shield as a combination is utterly useless in single combat to the point 5e doesn't allow it.

The reason the pike swept the battlefield both for the Hoplites and later in the Pike & Shot era is that you used them in dense blocks. Because they were longer than anything else they'd attack first - and the second rank would get free attacks for anyone that stepped past the first rank. But the pike (and with it the hoplite) worked because it was a formation weapon; with pikes the reach allowed the rear ranks of the pike block to fight.

Or to put things another way if three hoplites were confronted by three people with sword and shield their best plan would be to drop their pikes and draw their swords - otherwise they would probably lose hard. On the other hand if a hundred formed up hoplites with spear and shield, and their flanks protected, were confronted by three hundred people with sword and shield the best thing the swordsmen could do would be to retreat, preferably onto broken ground where the hoplites couldn't keep formation (which is a summary of how the Legions won at both Cynoscephalae and Pydna).

The hoplite is a good member of a formation - but not a good individual fighter. And if they are trying to fight as individuals it should be with either thrown javelins or their sword.

And by making the spear a simple weapon 5e made the spear the weapon of militia and conscripts. By giving it a feat they also made it a weapon of the elite. Meanwhile skirmishers with money carry and use swords - which is all pretty accurate. (Swords were in reality mostly sidearms and are great weapons for carrying easily).

 

[GMforPowergamers]

Very few cantrips have a secondary effect let alone one worth noting like you are weighing it & those that do tend to be shorter range with d6 plus nothing or d4 plus nothing damage.

chill touch, the bard make fun of you one, and mind sliver all see heavy use. Shocking grasp and ray of frost way less. to be honest eldritch blast is most likely able to be counted as better then any 2 cantrips put together if you just compare 'how often used'

I can't remember if it was a feat or a class feature that allowed you to shove attack with mage hand but that was atleast flavorful.

Toll the dead, flame bolt are both the runner ups (but not close) to eldritch blast

 

[Neonchameleon]

yeah by 5th level the bladesinger is way better then teh fighter.

Yeah. no. They aren't. They still suffer from the worst hit dice in the game meaning they go down like Jaques Cousteau. And they haven't even gained their second attack at this point (they will next level admittedly). They are definitely better out of combat - but a bladesinger who thinks they are a fighter and tries tanking on a regular basis is soon going to be a corpse. And that's before we get into feats, whether great weapon master or polearm master. A bladesinger is a wizard who sometimes hits enemies who get too close rather than someone who gets into the thick of it.

This isn't to say that the bladesinger is bad. It's very effective and far less of a glass cannon than your average wizard. But a fighter it isn't. (I'd have a lot more sympathy if you compared it to a monk).

 

[Neonchameleon]

chill touch, the bard make fun of you one, and mind sliver all see heavy use.

Vicious Mockery only does 1d4 damage and Mind Sliver 1d6. They're basically all about the secondary effect.

to be honest eldritch blast is most likely able to be counted as better then any 2 cantrips put together if you just compare 'how often used'

Pretty much - but that's because it has Agonizing Blast backing it. A level 5 Eldritch Blast + Agonizing blast is very close in damage output to Scorching Ray.

Toll the dead, flame bolt are both the runner ups (but not close) to eldritch blast

Yeah - and they both do a little more than half the damage of EB + AB.

Eldritch Blast with Agonizing Blast is far closer to a weapon attack than it is to a normal cantrip.