D&D 5E Are Wizards really all that?

[ECMO3]

And if the fighter was the undisputed king of combat, that would make it OK to not have anything else unique to contribute. OD&D got that right by giving the fighter more hit points, higher attack bonuses, and the ability to use any weapon or armor in a game where acquiring random magic items was the key factor of character growth. Since modern D&D eschews that model, the fighter needs to diversify, or at least classes that support the "skilled warrior" trope be added.

They are the undisputed king of attacks getting 3 and 4 when other martials are capped at 2 and the classes you mention raising/possessing the king (Wizard, Cleric) only get one attack.

If you give the fighter more you should take away extra attack. I would be ok with having an optional rule to get 2 more skills and a tool, along with expertise in 2 skills and a second fighting style in exchange for limiting them to 1 attack a turn. They could add one more expertise at level 11 and a 3rd fighting style level 20. They would be a lot more versatile then, but my guess is those who want a more versatile fighter want to have extra attack too.

OD&D was awful and far less balanced then 5E with Fighters being WAY to OP.

 

[Fanaelialae]

Indomitable doesn't count? It's not legendary resistance, but that's reserved for monsters.

So they need Hulk or Superman levels of strength? Able to throw tanks like they were frisbees?

Can any class do that? Exactly what kind of power would this be? It's quite situational, but you're talking about what ... super intimidate?

You clearly have a different definition of powerful than I, or people I play with, do. What you're talking about is mythic level/comic book superhero. You want demigods, I want mortals who are fighters of legend but still ultimately mortal. I've played martial types to 20th level and they felt plenty powerful to me.

I agree that your suggestions would make them powerful. I have no idea how you'd balance it out. I also don't see how it would fit D&D.

A 20th level fighter can square off against a grizzly bear while unarmed and completely naked, and reasonably expect to kill the bear (with their bare hands) within 6-12 seconds, with no meaningful harm to the fighter. I don't see how you can know that but also protest the idea that there should be anything remotely superheroic about a high level fighter.

And no, being able to solo a grizzly like this at 20th level, while basically impossible from a real world perspective, isn't all that impressive by the standard of a high level character. The monk could do the same thing, but even more effortlessly. Everyone knows it's a low CR creature.

A mythic martial would make the fighter basically obsolete , but it would be easy to balance in comparison to the wizard. It's why my default position is to improve the fighter.

 

[TwoSix]

If you give the fighter more you should take away extra attack. I would be ok with having an optional rule to get 2 more skills and a tool, along with expertise in 2 skills and a second fighting style in exchange for limiting them to 1 attack a turn. They could add one more expertise at level 11 and a 3rd fighting style level 20. They would be a lot more versatile then, but my guess is those who want a more versatile fighter want to have extra attack too.

Personally, I would rather not have martials with Extra Attack at all, I would rather them at-will fighting techniques that scale damage with level and have rider effects. Like Tide of Iron that was mentioned above.

The warlock is actually the closest model to what I would want to see a "Complex Warrior" look like. A robust at-will attack with optional riders, a 2-3/SR resource spent on powerful abilities, and a menu of selectable utility options for both in and out of combat. Have the Pact Magic slots be used for a short list of useful abilities, like Action Surge, and then a menu of martial themed "Invocations".

OD&D was awful and far less balanced then 5E with Fighters being WAY to OP.

This really seems like you're saying it's good that wizards are too strong in 5e (as you've been arguing in earlier posts), but bad that fighters are too strong in OD&D.

 

[Krachek]

For me, I didn’t find myself especially smart, proud or better than the other players when I simply read a spell description and apply it. Even if it teleport the party to the other side of the world, that’s it, it’s done, no need to cheer up!

 

[Minigiant]

The mythical martial only eclipses the fighter because the fighter is not a weaponsmaster and too much of it is abstacted due to bounded accuracy.

It's like if wizards only got 1st level spells but all their slots.

 

[SakanaSensei]

Thought experiment: you're playing a fighter and your DM offers you the ability to trade off your Extra Attack feature for the ability to, once per short rest, move incredibly quickly and strike all enemies in a 40 foot line, causing them to need to make a dexterity saving throw against 8 + your PB + your Strength or Dexterity. Anyone who fails the saving throw takes 8d6 damage, anyone who passes takes half damage.

Is giving a martial themed lightning bolt to the fighter fundamentally broken? Or do we need to keep dealing with fighters who walk forward and give 'em the bonk?

 

[FrogReaver]

Thought experiment: you're playing a fighter and your DM offers you the ability to trade off your Extra Attack feature for the ability to, once per short rest, move incredibly quickly and strike all enemies in a 40 foot line, causing them to need to make a dexterity saving throw against 8 + your PB + your Strength or Dexterity. Anyone who fails the saving throw takes 8d6 damage, anyone who passes takes half damage.

Is giving a martial themed lightning bolt to the fighter fundamentally broken? Or do we need to keep dealing with fighters who walk forward and give 'em the bonk?

They did that in 4e. While not everyone agreed a reoccurring theme was that doing such turned fighters into wizards. I mean you completely modeled your idea off the lightning bolt spell it sounds like which also kind of gives even more credence to such a complaint.

In terms of power - it depends on what you mean by trade off your extra attack feature.

 

[SakanaSensei]

They did that in 4e. While not everyone agreed a reoccurring theme was that doing such turned fighters into wizards. I mean you completely modeled your idea off the lightning bolt spell it sounds like which also kind of gives even more credence to such a complaint.

In terms of power - it depends on what you mean by trade off your extra attack feature.

I probably wouldn't put that into the game as is, personally, but I feel like it does a good job of showing just how big the disparity is unless people start purposefully throttling themselves.

I meant that "instead of getting two attacks per Attack action, you instead get this slashing-damage lightning bolt," which again, I wouldn't do. I think there are more unique, interesting ways to buff our martials. But when they can be overshadowed in a combat, which is all they have going for them really, then something's wrong.

 

[ECMO3]

Personally, I would rather not have martials with Extra Attack at all, I would rather them at-will fighting techniques that scale damage with level and have rider effects. Like Tide of Iron that was mentioned above.

That makes no sense and the 4E stuff that had similar to that was unpopular. If you want that just give them spells.

This really seems like you're saying it's good that wizards are too strong in 5e (as you've been arguing in earlier posts), but bad that fighters are too strong in OD&D.

It is not too strong. I think it is about just right. It is good that it is more powerful than the other classes though. I think it makes sense thematically and makes the story better.

Having fighters be the strongest class is non-sensical. Fighters are people. Wizards are people with actual magic physics-breaking abilities.

 

[ECMO3]

Thought experiment: you're playing a fighter and your DM offers you the ability to trade off your Extra Attack feature for the ability to, once per short rest, move incredibly quickly and strike all enemies in a 40 foot line, causing them to need to make a dexterity saving throw against 8 + your PB + your Strength or Dexterity. Anyone who fails the saving throw takes 8d6 damage, anyone who passes takes half damage.

No I think that is stupid

Is giving a martial themed lightning bolt to the fighter fundamentally broken? Or do we need to keep dealing with fighters who walk forward and give 'em the bonk?

In general at the basic level fighter and a wizard should be able to try the same things with a weapon. They are both people, they both have arms and legs and use weapons the same way. The fighter is better trained at that sort of thing, should be able to use more weapons and generally be better at it, but not in general able to do or at least try to do things the wizard can't.

I think of it this way - a Modern soldier is a :real life archetype of what a fighter should be. IRL a professional soldier is darn good at wielding weapons and warfare, but any couch potato in the world could pick up a rifle and use it or try to drive a tank etc. They would not be as accurate, they would not know how to move and fire. But it is not like a soldier can defy physics and do the impossible. The rifle fires just as fast, the tank drives just as fast regardless of who is holding it.