D&D 5E Can mundane classes have a resource which powers abilities?

[Minigiant]

What about mental fatigue?

A warrior could get mentally tired and forget what attack counters the defense the orc is using.

Happens all the time for us gamers. Mental fatigue causing a brain dart and wasted opportunities.

 

[ExploderWizard]

Couple things here that need some serious clarification as I see anaerobic exercise and metabolsim/endurance mistakenly conflated with aerobic exercise and metabolism/endurance regularly. What you have depicted in the first paragraph contrasts phenomena that are all but completely compartmentalized. An MMA fighter has world class anaerobic endurance but, unless he relentlessly trained his aerobic endurance in the same proportion, he would have no hope of running a marathon. The inverse is also true for a marathon runner attempting to not "gas out" in the first minute of a 5 minute combat interval.

Anaerobic exercise is short burst, high intensity activity, typically ranging from a few seconds to a few minutes, that is associated with (almost exclusively) fast twitch muscle use. The metabolic process that powers this activity releases high energy phosphates stored in limited quantity in muscles. This is because the process of aerobic metabolism (which involves the uptake of oxygen generating the energy necessary for prolonged, low-intensity exercise) is insufficient to the task of supplying the energy needed at the required rates to power the short burst, high intensity activity of anaerobic activity.

Also, anaerobic metabolism includes rapid glucose breakdown which produce lactic acid, localized muscular fatigue and/or failure (when lactate levels are really high).

Aerobic exercise is an entirely different metabolic process, requiring an entirely different training regime to improve aerobic endurance. A long distance runner is a different beast altogether than an MMA Fighter. As such, I'm entirely of the opinion that given the inherent nature of martial activity (both the metabolism/endurance and the dynamic, high intensity, burst exchanges where openings are observed, oriented, decided upon, and executed in split-seconds), it makes complete sense for a short term (encounter) based resource scheme to be in play for warriors to tactically ration and deploy. To the point, anaerobic metabolism/endurance and OODA Loop dynamics completely legitimize a short-term resource and opening/reaction system.

How does that interact with with a fighter's "gas" being HP? If we say that burst energy is some other pool then what are HP then? Do they become strictly wounds?

 

[EnglishLanguage]

Combat maneuvers, attack and damage, AC.

Combat maneuvers=turns your spending not attacking. 9 times out of 10, any turns you spent tripping/grabbing/bull rushing enemies are turns better spent making them dead faster. This is also before getting into the penalties you suffer for attacking enemies bigger than you, how DCs are higher because most enemies you'd spend the turn using maneuvers on have better stats than you, and how many enemies are outright immune to those maneuvers(which is typically enemies that can fly and teleport, or have access to freedom of movement). That and the number of feats you need to take to make the maneuver worthwhile means those things are incredibly commonplace by the time the maneuver's actually useable and by then you've dedicated your whole build to that now useless maneuver.

Attack and Damage=As I've said, damage is easily the least effective way of dealing with enemies. Yes, the Fighter does eventually get enough damage to ground pretty much anything into paste by round 2, and that's never been the Fighter's problem. His biggest problem has always been his lack of narrative power, and by the time the Fighter's finally learned how to trip people reliably, the Wizard's starting to make his own Demiplanes and Druids are turning into a Dire Bear with his Dire Bear companion and maul a group of enemies with his additional Dire Bear summons

No I'm not. Peruse any charop board for builds. Those first two levels of fighter are easily the most popular two levels of any class.

The fact that the Fighter's only use is grabbing the first levels for proficiencies and a bonus feat or two is sad.

Plus I know about 12 different Char-Opers who's response to anyone telling them he Fighter's fine because they have attack and maneuvers would just laugh at you and assume you're joking. The 3.5 Fighter is not fine at all.

Even people that don't like the fighter surely have to admit that it's a great dip for two or four levels before you multiclass and/or prestige. The problem is the levels where you don't get feats, not the ones where you do. Bonus feats are extremely powerful, more so than almost any of the exclusive class abilities which one might compare them to.

The PF fighter, of course, is just like the 3e version, but with some useful bonuses instead of those pesky dead levels (and no exclusive actions or resources). Seems to be doing fine.

The Pathfinder Fighter is actually a flat nerf from the 3.5 Fighter believe it or not. The lack of flaws for feats means that the PF Fighter doesn't get as many feats as the 3.5 Fighter can until at least level 10, the good maneuver feats you're so fond of have all been broken down into other feats, and the Fighter's damage potential was kneecapped so his ability to beat enemies into paste on round 2 is no longer possible.(Pathfinder actually pretty heavy handidly nerfed martials and buffed casters altogether, but that's it's own rant I'm not getting into right now).

 

[Ahnehnois]

Combat maneuvers=turns your spending not attacking.

Unless, of course, you take the feats that let you do both in one turn.

Attack and Damage=As I've said, damage is easily the least effective way of dealing with enemies. Yes, the Fighter does eventually get enough damage to ground pretty much anything into paste by round 2, and that's never been the Fighter's problem. His biggest problem has always been his lack of narrative power, and by the time the Fighter's finally learned how to trip people reliably, the Wizard's starting to make his own Demiplanes and Druids are turning into a Dire Bear with his Dire Bear companion and maul a group of enemies with his additional Dire Bear summons

The fighter has learned to trip effectively at level 1 (because of...bonus feat), while the wizard is making magic missiles in between inept crossbow attacks and the druid is hiding behind his pet wolf clinging tightly to his mistletoe branch in fear.

And it seems to me that attack and damage are pretty effective ways of dealing with enemies. What's the alternative? Diplomacy? This is D&D we're talking about.

The fact that the Fighter's only use is grabbing the first levels for proficiencies and a bonus feat or two is sad.

True. But it doesn't mean that those things are bad. After all, the sorcerer's only use is grabbing a few levels of spellcasting before entering a prestige class, and you're not claiming spells are bad (I assume). Heck, none of the PHB classes really compares to the prestige options out there past the first few levels. Which is a problem, but does not indicate that the good levels of fighter are a mirage; there just aren't enough of them.

The 3.5 Fighter is not fine at all.

Working fine for me. It's certainly the best class in the player's handbook.

If you start talking about building high-level characters with all the supplements then the entire PHB can start to look obsolete. But none of that suggests that having the fighter be the best at basic fighting techniques is not a viable approach. It actually seems rather obvious.

The Pathfinder Fighter is actually a flat nerf from the 3.5 Fighter believe it or not. The lack of flaws for feats means that the PF Fighter doesn't get as many feats as the 3.5 Fighter can until at least level 10, the good maneuver feats you're so fond of have all been broken down into other feats, and the Fighter's damage potential was kneecapped so his ability to beat enemies into paste on round 2 is no longer possible.(Pathfinder actually pretty heavy handidly nerfed martials and buffed casters altogether, but that's it's own rant I'm not getting into right now).

And they also cut back a few problem spells and, presto, a perfectly viable set of classes.

 

[Grydan]

Which is not a problem! That's what makes the fighter work; it isn't very specific. That's also true of the other members of the "big four". Wizards comprise everything from blasters to summoners to sages to generalists. Clerics are really a function of what they're worshipping. Rogues are as generic as it gets.

I've written on this before, but I rather emphatically disagree that the 'big four' are non-specific.

Wizards, Clerics, and Rogues are not lacking in identity the way that the Fighter is, the way that @EnglishLanguage is talking about.

Wizards are a very specific archetype, incorporating a specific-to-D&D interpretation of what wizardry is that fails to cover even a significant fraction of what wizard means to the general public. Merlin, Gandalf, Dumbledore, Dr. Strange, Dr. Fate ... not a single one, or any of the vast array of wizards appearing in Saturday morning cartoons, comicbooks, fables, myths, or legends maps onto the narrowly defined D&D wizard, outside of those appearing in D&D-derived material and maybe the works of Jack Vance.

Clerics are an incredibly specific archetype, something that did not exist in any shape or form prior to its publication in D&D. There's no long tradition of spell-casting, armour-wearing, undead-repelling, specific-god-from-a-pantheon-worshipping, blunt-weapon-using magical warrior healers found anywhere. Heck, there's not even a single individual example of that archetype that I'm aware of that predates D&D. It's cobbled together from a variety of largely unrelated sources. Even the divine/arcane split is fairly unique to D&D, as any distinction between the two I'm aware of in pre-D&D material would treat the arcane as unholy work of the devil.

Rogues are only slightly broader in concept than the class they replaced, which was a fairly narrow archetype covering the tomb-raiding thief. They're nimble, sneaky, opportunistic, pick-pocketing, lock-picking, trap-disablers.

And yet the fighter is treated as if it should cover every non-magical warrior that isn't covered by a more specific class. Samurai and street thug, knight and pirate, swashbuckler and tribesman, archer and pugilist, soldier and farm boy.

Where the other classes are broad are in precisely the area where the fighter is narrowest: the tool-set they're given to bring their archetypes to life. This is where your wizard is 'non-specific': those 'non-specific' wizards can be blasters and summoners and sages and generalists, with where they fall depending on what spells they decide to prepare today.

 

[Manbearcat]

How does that interact with with a fighter's "gas" being HP? If we say that burst energy is some other pool then what are HP then? Do they become strictly wounds?

Just like armor class, to hit (target number), saving throws (or defenses) can remain an abstract amalgamation of various things (while reacting with the other systems and having no requirement of being focused or refined into one thing), HPs can retain their abstraction of heroic staying power (which includes some tacit not to a vague notion of "stamina"). The fluffy narrative components of Armor Class have overlap with HP (skill, luck, divine protection, et al). I don't see why there would be any issues with a focused martial combat resource/trigger system having some kind of overlap with the hand-wavey pile of amorphous goo (whatever the moment calls for to justify the narrative) that is HP.

Any sort of scene/encounter resource scheme or any sort of "exploit openings" mechanic can be much more focused and not be problematic for HP. 13th Age's Momentum (for Rogues) and the upcoming Monk "Flow" system each do a good job of conveying the latter part; accrue a resource or establish a maneuver pattern that opens up new triggers/opportunities which require either the maintenance of the prior resource to enact or can be acted upon by the expenditure of the prior accrued resource. 4E's Encounter Martial Exploits work off the same narrative premise, albeit abstracted and providing the player with some author stance capability with the Exploits that don't require a pre-specified trigger. 5e's Fighter Superiority Dice works off, roughly, the same paradigm.

 

[Ahnehnois]

I've written on this before, but I rather emphatically disagree that the 'big four' are non-specific.

Wizards, Clerics, and Rogues are not lacking in identity the way that the Fighter is, the way that @EnglishLanguage is talking about.

I think you're confusing the one build that is usually best supported by the rules with the conceptual space the class is supposed to cover. The cleric, for example, has almost always had mechanical abilities representing some warrior priest, but in practice serves to cover a wide range of characters, some of whom don't even worship deities and many of whom never use weapons or armor. Likewise, rogues all have sneak attack, but many of them don't actually use it because they're more spies, scouts, or something else entirely; it's an odd mechanical artifact rather than a central defining feature.

Where the other classes are broad are in precisely the area where the fighter is narrowest: the tool-set they're given to bring their archetypes to life.

This is true, but misleading. Where the other classes are broad is where they have mechanical subsystems that have been built around them, that they then tap into (skills and spells). Because the basic combat mechanics for D&D are too simple (AC vs attack, hp damage, and...well what else is there) there isn't enough design space to create the fighter abilities you crave.

And yet whenever a more robust health system is brought up, people start complaining of death spirals. Whenever AC is replaced with blocking and dodging, all the people who didn't care about tracking resources are suddenly concerned that these reactions take too long. Whenever a new combat action is proposed, people start complaining that it will be spammed constantly.

The problem is that while everything else has been innovated, the core combat mechanics of D&D are composed largely of sacred cows that even the 4e "reformers" didn't dare touch. Thus, the class that is built around them hasn't been innovated much either. It works as it is, but a fighter that leverages an injury system and reactions would definitely be better. (And it is, IME).

Cherry-picking spells is also kind of a problem, one simply fixed by giving them prerequisites like what feats have.

 

[EnglishLanguage]

Working fine for me. It's certainly the best class in the player's handbook.

This is only true if you also discount every caster class in the PHB, and being the best when you eliminate half the competition doesn't seem to be very good a metric.

If you start talking about building high-level characters with all the supplements then the entire PHB can start to look obsolete.

Doubtful, core-only Druid and Clerics are still extremely powerful and much better choices than the Fighter.

while the wizard is making magic missiles in between inept crossbow attacks and the druid is hiding behind his pet wolf clinging tightly to his mistletoe branch in fear.

I'm not sure why the Druid would be cowering in fear when he's far more effective than the Fighter in melee combat(in addition to having a pet Fighter as a class feature).

The Wizard assumes you're dealing damage, which as I've said is a very ineffective way of dealing with enemies when you have Save-or-Suck/Save-or-Lose spells like Grease(watch them slip and slid around while you plink them to death with a crossbow), Color Spray, Sleep, and Charm Person handy to simply remove enemies from the fight.

 

[MichaelSomething]

Unless, of course, you take the feats that let you do both in one turn.

The fighter has learned to trip effectively at level 1 (because of...bonus feat), while the wizard is making magic missiles in between inept crossbow attacks and the druid is hiding behind his pet wolf clinging tightly to his mistletoe branch in fear.

And it seems to me that attack and damage are pretty effective ways of dealing with enemies. What's the alternative? Diplomacy? This is D&D we're talking about.

At level one, the Fighter trips and the Wizard casts Magic Missle. That's cool and balanced.
At level eighteen, the Fighter trips while the Wizard casts Wish. That's not cool and balanced.

 

[EnglishLanguage]

At level one, the Fighter trips and the Wizard casts Magic Missle. That's cool and balanced.
At level eighteen, the Fighter trips while the Wizard casts Wish. That's not cool and balanced.

Bit of an unfair comparison though.

What exactly is a Fighter going to be able to trip at level 18 that'll actually affected by it and not just teleport/fly away afterwards?