Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 7171542" data-attributes="member: 996">Extra Attack is all over the place, feats are universal (if they're opted into), fighting styles are shared with other classes.  Action Surge and Second Wind are the two obvious ones. Nonsense.  The fighter starts out as a hard-coded idiot-specialist in tanky DPR, immediately has to lock in a Style, then a sub-class.  Virtually all it's features point at combat.  It's the least versatile class in the game.  Ironically, it's still head & shoulders above the AD&D Weapon Specialist fighters in terms of versatility - you can at least swap out the weapon in your hand without losing the only unique mechanic benefit you'll ever have. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />  Conceptually, it's light-years behind the versatility (actually just build customization) of the 3.x fighter with his 11 'small' bonus feats.  And while it's not formally locked into the Defender Role (it's functionally a striker, like the Essential Slayer) like the 4e fighter, it's also stuck covering the ground of the 4e Warlord and Ranger, as well... Sadly true.  Prior to 2e C&T, that was mostly attack.  Sure, there were obscure foot-notes on the PH table that you might actually use once in a blue moon to disarm an enemy or dismount a rider, and you certainly might set a spear to receive a charge - and there were even more-obscure DMG alternatives, that were mostly pretty bad, like parrying for a +1 AC.  <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />  In 3e there were finally a basic range of combat maneuvers - most of them were bad options unless you sank feats into them, but at least they existed.  In 4e, briefly, the fighter had a range (though not breadth) of maneuvers available as he leveled comparable to what the casters in the party would have as spell choices.  Then it was demoted to the Knight & Slayer.  The 5e fighter has fewer basic combat options than the 3.x fighter, and only one sub-class has maneuvers, all of which are fairly basic, and 3rd-level-appropriate.  The 5e fighter is a beatstick, as he levels, he beats you with that stick more often each round.  That's about it. Certainly how it felt in 3.0 - you had 11 bonus feats, on top of the 7 feats everyone got, that defined your fighter (or his 'build' I suppose), that was on top of Full BAB, good FORT saves, and broad weapon & armor proficiencies - and crap for skills, of course, mustn't forget that.And that was the high-water mark of customization.  In 4e you could do lots of different things, by picking the right powers and/or re-skinning them, and be this very solid contributor as a 'defender' but it wasn't the same - it took two more classes (and there really should have been a fourth, a 'controller') to do justice to the fighter archetype.But 5e, it's forgotten everything that happened after the Complete Fighter's Handbook.</blockquote>

Verification