A critique and review of the Fighter class

[GMforPowergamers]

So show me those spells that add to your hit points. Are you talking about Wither and Bloom?

wither and bloom and false life

And their ACs start far below those of a fighter.

not really, it depends Mage armor is 3pts of armor and most fighters I see start with chain shirts or breast plates so 1 or 2 pts

Given that you are openly ignoring fighter class features even when they are directly relevant and when I have explicitly cited them I see no point in continuing this.

if you don't want to continue that is fine, but I did concead that it was equal to 1 1st level spell slot, I will not count it as BOTH more hp AND a spell slot

 

[GMforPowergamers]

Yes the best tank/defender is multiclass caster (maybe a dabble other wise) .... its the irony of the edition.

oh yes... and I do see the fighter class used for level dips. I have seen more then my share of 'fighter 2 caster X' where the caster is 7-12 levels by the end. Now not when it is a hexblade, but cleric, bard and bladesinger I have seen take the 3rd fighter level cause you get 1 more d10 HD and can take eldritch knight to pick up more 1st level spells and it still adds to caster level.

although my personal best was with a 3rd party barbarian subclass that made you a half or 1/3 caster going up to level 7 by 19th level character (the rest were wizard bladesinger) I think it had to be 1/3 caster because I only had 1st level druid spells. I also had the best AC and HP in that party... but that wasn't saying much since our cleric of magic/wizard had an 8 con to start and our Undying tome warlock had a 10 con... so out of the 4 of us only 2 had any Con score to speak of.

 

[HammerMan]

it could be a case study... the fighter/rogue was dex/con/cha the druid was Wis/Con/CHa but then the druid could wild shape...

Okay I didn’t think of the ho of the wild shape. Yeah I guess druid would work.

 

[Garthanos]

oh yes... and I do see the fighter class used for level dips. I have seen more then my share of 'fighter 2 caster X' where the caster is 7-12 levels by the end. Now not when it is a hexblade, but cleric, bard and bladesinger I have seen take the 3rd fighter level cause you get 1 more d10 HD and can take eldritch knight to pick up more 1st level spells and it still adds to caster level.

Part of the problem may be how easily stolen martial ability is but spells web/hypno pattern even shield can protect an ally, etc that arguably "defend" the party better than any of these low target count short range martial abilities can do and the caster does NOT have to be role stealing... so to speak

 

[James Gasik]

Yeah, it's a simple matter to staple Fighter-esque abilities to a full caster without even batting an eye, but giving the Fighter spells? "Oh, you have to be a 1/3 caster otherwise it would be broken!".

 

[Mort]

Yeah, it's a simple matter to staple Fighter-esque abilities to a full caster without even batting an eye, but giving the Fighter spells? "Oh, you have to be a 1/3 caster otherwise it would be broken!".

Or propose a solution that's not expressly "magic" and the teeth gnashing REALY starts.

 

[James Gasik]

Or propose a solution that's not expressly "magic" and the teeth gnashing REALY starts.

Yeah, keep your "hoo-ha superhero nonsense away from my Fighter!". Usually accompanied by 'Guy at the Gym' fallacies.

Look, if someone likes the narrative of "the ordinary guy who fights monsters", the John McClane of D&D, more power to them. But it's worth noting that, as the Die Hard franchise continues, John becomes more and more capable of unbelievable feats such as taking out helicopters with cars and resisting high levels of radioactivity, to the point that he's no longer an "ordinary guy in an extraordinary situation".

I think continuing to treat any class as such for more than a handful of levels runs counter to living in a world of strange magic and terrifying monsters. But hey, you still find medieval castles in D&D worlds, despite the existence of so many threats that make their defenses moot, so maybe this is just an example of the weird schizo tech most settings run on. The Gods want castles, articulated plate, and regular soldiers with 200 hp, whether or not it makes any sense in a world of giants, dragons, and 40-level megadungeons.

 

[Bill Zebub]

Popping back in to mention another great benefit of Frenzy, that I've used numerous times: you can use your action to do something other than attack (dash, disengage, dodge, drink a potion, etc.) but still make an attack to avoid losing Rage. The only one I've actually used is dash (gap closer), but again have done so quite frequently. GWM doesn't let you do that.

 

[CreamCloud0]

Yeah, keep your "hoo-ha superhero nonsense away from my Fighter!". Usually accompanied by 'Guy at the Gym' fallacies.

Look, if someone likes the narrative of "the ordinary guy who fights monsters", the John McClane of D&D, more power to them. But it's worth noting that, as the Die Hard franchise continues, John becomes more and more capable of unbelievable feats such as taking out helicopters with cars and resisting high levels of radioactivity, to the point that he's no longer an "ordinary guy in an extraordinary situation".

I think continuing to treat any class as such for more than a handful of levels runs counter to living in a world of strange magic and terrifying monsters. But hey, you still find medieval castles in D&D worlds, despite the existence of so many threats that make their defenses moot, so maybe this is just an example of the weird schizo tech most settings run on. The Gods want castles, articulated plate, and regular soldiers with 200 hp, whether or not it makes any sense in a world of giants, dragons, and 40-level megadungeons.

And then starts the back and forth of:
Person 1 ‘I want the fighter to be capable of beyond human actions without requiring supernatural support’
Person 2 ‘I find it extremely unrealistic that an ordinary person could achieve these feats without explicitly using magic/ect’
Person 1 ‘I find it extremely unrealistic that you consider real world standards the limits of a person in a world that also contains things like elves and dwarves, wizards and clerics, dragons and beholders, gods and demons, It’s fantasy’

 

[Bill Zebub]

And then starts the back and forth of:
Person 1 ‘I want the fighter to be capable of beyond human actions without requiring supernatural support’
Person 2 ‘I find it extremely unrealistic that an ordinary person could achieve these feats without explicitly using magic/ect’
Person 1 ‘I find it extremely unrealistic that you consider real world standards the limits of a person in a world that also contains things like elves and dwarves, wizards and clerics, dragons and beholders, gods and demons, It’s fantasy’

Yeah it's another one of those debates where people want to justify their preference by 'realism' arguments, when it's all really just preference. Some people like non-magical superhuman exploits, some don't. There's no right and wrong.

But it might not be possible to design a game to completely satisfy both.