D&D 5E Buffing the Champion Fighter

[Sacrosanct]

Also, in 2e, a high level fighter would succeed at most saves on a roll of 4+. In 5e, a level 17 fighter with a 10 wisdom and proficiency in Wisdom saves still only succeeds on Wis saving throws against the fear of an adult red dragon on a 13+. That's hardly being remarkable at saving throws. Even if the high level fighter had double proficiency to all saves by level 20 they would still be worse off than their 2e predecessors.

The problem with your analysis here is you're comparing a 17th level 2e fighter with a 17th level 5e fighter. That's inherently flawed because the games were designed much differently. In AD&D, you reached name level at 9th level, and PCs were considered high level at any point past that. And if you consider 10th level high level in AD&D, the fighter succeeds about half the time. Also, if you're using the 17th level fighter in 2e, he's probably fighting the oldest dragon, which would impart a -4 penalty to that petrification saving throw. So either way, they succeed roughly half the time (10th level against adult dragon), or a little better than half the time (17th level vs great wyrm dragon). In either case, apples and oranges.

*Edit* Also, it's important to note the fundamental difference saving throws had in AD&D compared to 5e. Fail a save in 5e, and it sucks for a round. Or maybe a couple until you make that save. Fail a save in AD&D, and you're dead. At the very least you suffer the full effects of the spell/power/etc for as long as it lasts. So even if the rate of success is slightly better than 5e, the penalties for failure are much worse.

 

[Tony Vargas]

Also, in 2e, a high level fighter would succeed at most saves on a roll of 4+. In 5e, a level 17 fighter with a 10 wisdom and proficiency in Wisdom saves still only succeeds on Wis saving throws against the fear of an adult red dragon on a 13+. That's hardly being remarkable at saving throws.

17th was the last save break-point in 1e, coincidentally, 17th is also the level that proficiency tips out at +6 in 5e.

So that's a surprisingly apt comparison.

Even if the high level fighter had double proficiency to all saves by level 20 they would still be worse off than their 2e predecessors.

Some of that is bounded accuracy, and scaling save DCs instead of high-level spells/monsters/etc imposing save penalties. Though, in 1e, you were also very likely to have save bonuses from items.

Anyway, proficiency in all saves would still be an improvement.

 

[JeffB]

I've not followed this whole thread, but I started my own similar one awhile back.

Some ideas..

There is a fan made 13th Age " companion character" supplement @ www.13thage.Org with an excellent simplified champion style fighter class called the Master of Arms. On a successful hit, the MoA can do one of the following

impose the dazed condition
do a power attack (double the damage bonus)
gain some temp hp (only once per encounter)
push an enemy "a short distance" (abstract ranges in 13A)
Can disengage from melee "for free" (no opportunity attack-normal disengage requires a successful roll).

He also gets a free "stunt" once per battle..he can shatter a shield, dismount a rider, make an incredible bow shot, etc.

It is a fun simple badass in combat where almost everything is an "at will", and no resource management...which is where I think fighters should be. Might provide some inspiration (Other simplified classes are fun too)

13th-age-companions

Another option is allowing the champion fighter to use the proficiency dice optional mechanic, and allowing them to "stunt" like the DCC RPG warrior class. In DCCRPG , the warrior stunts when hit is successful and "proficiency die" (called a "deed die" ) is 3 or better. Obviously as the die step increases, "stunts" will be more commonplace.

As for something that could also be used out of combat, why not make indomitable an auto save 1x per short rest instead of a re-roll.. Or a "recharge" ability.

 

[Tony Vargas]

There is a fan made 13th Age " companion character" supplement @ www.13thage.Org with an excellent simplified champion style fighter class called the Master of Arms. On a successful hit, the MoA can do one of the following

Is which one based on the natural for roll, like the 13A fighter? Or does it have more agency than the PC class?

As for something that could also be used out of combat, why not make indomitable an auto save 1x per short rest instead of a re-roll.. Or a "recharge" ability.

Not a huge out of combat thing, but a small improvement.

 

[JeffB]

Is which one based on the natural for roll, like the 13A fighter? Or does it have more agency than the PC class?

Not a huge out of combat thing, but a small improvement.

No. The "13A companions" are based off 4e companion characters. They don't have the more complex mechanics as their full 13A class counterparts (but are alot more interesting than 4e companions).

 

[Tony Vargas]

No. The "13A companions" .. don't have the more complex mechanics as their full 13A class counterparts

Sorry, in my compulsive snarking at the 13A fighter ( I played one once, once ), I pharsed that question badly.

So the Master at Arms can choose which of several riders to use on a hit?

That does sound pretty good, simpler than CS dice, but still a step up from the basic beatstick.

 

[JeffB]

Sorry, in my compulsive snarking at the 13A fighter ( I played one once, once ), I pharsed that question badly.

So the Master at Arms can choose which of several riders to use on a hit?

That does sound pretty good, simpler than CS dice, but still a step up from the basic beatstick.

I understood what you meant regarding the 13A fighter and his attacks.... "on a natural even or odd hit or miss that is performed on a tuesday before the winter solstice , you may perform a free rally in addition to your attack as long as escalation die is at 3 or higher. If it is any day after tuesday but still before the winter solstice, and /or the escalation die is at 2 or lower, you may bang your head against the table until the end of your character's next turn..

Sundays, on the other hand...."




Yes, MoA hits, chooses effect.. check out the link.

 

[Quickleaf]

[MENTION=57494]Xeviat[/MENTION] thanks for starting this discussion - lots of interesting points of view!

[MENTION=6777737]Bacon Bits[/MENTION] I appreciated your actual play report of a champion fighter you ran though 16th level. Very insightful.

[MENTION=15700]Sacrosanct[/MENTION] I think I'm close to "target audience" for the champion fighter – I like simple design & the feel of a classic fighter – but even with my old school aesthetics, I find it... uninspiring. I'm going to come at this from a different direction. Some of my fondest memories of D&D were of friend J. playing a fighter in AD&D2e and just coming up with all sorts of wild ideas based on knowledge of a whole range of topics (he was a SCA guy and very crafty and well-educated). Very little of the awesome stuff had to do with the game system...maybe the "multiple attacks against hordes" played into a few sessions...as did the Planewalker Fighter kit IIRC... but most of the cool stuff happened in spite of his fighter being kind of mediocre compared to the wizard.

What stood out to me was how we embraced creativity. It's true I also embraced creativity for the wizard player...but there was something integral to J.'s playing a fighter armed only with wits and blade that lent itself to a creative/improvisational style where he was constantly looking for ways to:

• turn enemies against one another.
• turn the environment against enemies.
• optimize equipment against enemies.
• argue for maneuvers or advantages apropos of the situation.

To me "old school" fighter design has two parts.

The first is simplicity. Here the champion fighter succeeds (and may indeed be too complex due to the 5e fighter chassis with action surge, second wind, and indomitable to keep track of).

But the second would be supporting that old school creative/improvisational style in a way unique from other classes (esp. spellcasting classes). The champion fighter doesn't do that, and I think it's a shame. An example of supporting that style would be the rogue's Cunning Action – lots of ways to have fun with that.

To me, that's an interesting design challenge!

 

[Coroc]

General rules for feats. Second paragraph on PHB 165, "You can take each feat only once, unless the feat's description says otherwise."

There's exactly one feat that you're allowed to take more than once: Elemental Adept.

My bad, sorry I overread this, you are right of course.

 

[Tony Vargas]

What stood out to me was how we embraced creativity. It's true I also embraced creativity for the wizard player...but there was something integral to J.'s playing a fighter armed only with wits and blade that lent itself to a creative/improvisational style

I have frequently heard this - actually, frequently heard more extreme characterizations of it, that a choiceless build like an old-school fighter, slayer or Champion virtually guarantees brilliant improvisation, while a build with many choices - casters in any edition - is just button-mashing.

IMX, the more different things a character can do, the more basis it has for improvising, especially when you get into things that play with reality, like spells tend to.
There are simply more tools to work with.

(Then there's the RP impetus to play a high-INT wizard as cleverer than a low-INT fighter...)

To me "old school" fighter design has two parts.

The first is simplicity. Here the champion fighter succeeds (and may indeed be too complex due to the 5e fighter chassis with action surge, second wind, and indomitable to keep track of).

It is quite simple in some ways (minimizing the choices faced by the player both at chargen and in play), and I don't think it's three recharge abilities much hurt that. It helps, for instance, that there's no 'spontaneous casting' involved, you use Second Wind when you're hurt, Action Surge when you need that can of whoop-ass - you never have to worry about saving the one because you might need the other.
OTOH, making a critical choice like Style at 1st level is almost more of an issue - but, conveniently, the Champion gets a second style choice eventually.

But the second would be supporting that old school creative/improvisational style in a way unique from other classes (esp. spellcasting classes). The champion fighter doesn't do that, and I think it's a shame. An example of supporting that style would be the rogue's Cunning Action – lots of ways to have fun with that.

Cunning Action still does some defined things with a bonus action. I suppose it lets you get more creative in the sense that you can do something that the DM rules would require two actions, if one of those two actions is available via Cunning Action....

But, you do feel that the old-school fighter /did/ support such things? It's not like it had anything like cunning action?