Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Classes that Suck
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Ashrym" data-source="post: 8060639" data-attributes="member: 6750235"><p>Apologies for the long post. Just catching up.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Not really. That only works for the paladins on a 5mwd and smites eat slots fast for spike damage.</p><p></p><p>PDK/bannaret or samurai still spikes with action surge and multiple attacks. Either can be built with a diplomancer style with PDK being easier.</p><p></p><p>A person can go battle master and still do something similar because they are less MAD than a paladin with more ASI's.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I don't know why you think a fighter sucks at fighting by not going battle master. To me, that just looks like "if you're not first you're last". All fighters are good at combat from a solid chassis. </p><p></p><p>As for low charisma, the premise is we want a social fighter. If the goal is social aspects it doesn't make sense to avoid charisma. It's generally a 14 or 16 with that focus IME so a player can gauge the likelihood favor requests succeed.</p><p></p><p>It's slower than a rogue or bard focused in the same area but still good. It's high level where this feature flourishes.</p><p></p><p>I would actually argue the long rest isn't really needed for the paladin, though. </p><p></p><p>The smites fall behind in damage as the day and number of encounters increases (outside of good spikes) but they have enough spells known and slots that they can fit in some utility spells. I just don't think it's enough compared to at-will persuasion for favors using free expertise.</p><p></p><p>The point was the more one is used for the paladin the less there is of the other. My game days mix different types of encounters so the long rest is moot IME.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Which is why it's rated so high in the guides and prominent in most discussions on utility? ;-)</p><p></p><p>I kid. I agree it's useful. It's also available to anyone who wants it with a feat (to be clear, feats are limited -- it's still a trade off).</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I'm repeating myself here. The PDK has no reason not to invest because the premise is social ability.</p><p></p><p>A battle master who went 20 charisma would still be behind a PDK who went 10 CHA even if this were the case, and in doing so the PDK would have the opportunity to apply that investment in another ability score or feats, and would still be up one skill proficiency.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Because STR, athletics, and equipment aren't common on a fighter?</p><p></p><p>Fighters can help with the action or contribute via group checks at the very least.</p><p></p><p>The PDK example easily succeeds DC 15 favor requests regularly. </p><p></p><p>Fighters don't have a lot of options, granted, but they always have options. The lack is in unique options.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Except "social class" isn't a game term. It's a player perception based on the preconception that CHA synergy is required to make a social character. It's not. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Rolling isn't necessary every time. That's a basic 5e concept.</p><p></p><p>Making a high bonus only requires investment. Some CHA, a bonus proficiency, and expertise is available on PDK's. Samurai add WIS bonus.</p><p></p><p>The DM doesn't need to bend over backwards if the player actually invests in these traits he or she wants.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I'm going to point out that I never take persuasion expertise on a bard. Proficiency plus CHA bonus plus JoaT us more than enough. Sorcerers and Warlocks don't get free expertise like PDK (or the samurai bonus). </p><p></p><p>PDK expertise puts the fighter in the same ball park even without a CHA bonus. Persuasion expertise is the reason to okay a PDK.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>No one falls to their deaths because the standard for failure is not progressing. A climbing kit prevents falling even if a DM adds a falling condition for a low check </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>See above. It's a waste of expertise given then existing bonuses already. Use expertise where it'll do more good shoring up a low ability score.</p><p></p><p>Not your point, of course, but the glamour bard has the advantage of charm still. The attitude shift is faster that way.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Social abilities for fighters have been mentioned in this thread. They clearly exist. The argument is players choose not to make use of them.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I agree. There should have been more page count invested in skills. </p><p></p><p>DM empowerment also creates inconsistencies between tables.</p><p></p><p>I use ability checks on fighters all the time. Even perform. ;-)</p><p></p><p>The open nature of ability checks is something I really like but the consistency issues do exist, and the open nature leads to DM's and players not knowing what they might be capable big in that system.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Yes. I was going to mention this too but you beat me to it. I find several languages pointless for social checks because those beings all speak common anyway.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Ashrym, post: 8060639, member: 6750235"] Apologies for the long post. Just catching up. Not really. That only works for the paladins on a 5mwd and smites eat slots fast for spike damage. PDK/bannaret or samurai still spikes with action surge and multiple attacks. Either can be built with a diplomancer style with PDK being easier. A person can go battle master and still do something similar because they are less MAD than a paladin with more ASI's. I don't know why you think a fighter sucks at fighting by not going battle master. To me, that just looks like "if you're not first you're last". All fighters are good at combat from a solid chassis. As for low charisma, the premise is we want a social fighter. If the goal is social aspects it doesn't make sense to avoid charisma. It's generally a 14 or 16 with that focus IME so a player can gauge the likelihood favor requests succeed. It's slower than a rogue or bard focused in the same area but still good. It's high level where this feature flourishes. I would actually argue the long rest isn't really needed for the paladin, though. The smites fall behind in damage as the day and number of encounters increases (outside of good spikes) but they have enough spells known and slots that they can fit in some utility spells. I just don't think it's enough compared to at-will persuasion for favors using free expertise. The point was the more one is used for the paladin the less there is of the other. My game days mix different types of encounters so the long rest is moot IME. Which is why it's rated so high in the guides and prominent in most discussions on utility? ;-) I kid. I agree it's useful. It's also available to anyone who wants it with a feat (to be clear, feats are limited -- it's still a trade off). I'm repeating myself here. The PDK has no reason not to invest because the premise is social ability. A battle master who went 20 charisma would still be behind a PDK who went 10 CHA even if this were the case, and in doing so the PDK would have the opportunity to apply that investment in another ability score or feats, and would still be up one skill proficiency. Because STR, athletics, and equipment aren't common on a fighter? Fighters can help with the action or contribute via group checks at the very least. The PDK example easily succeeds DC 15 favor requests regularly. Fighters don't have a lot of options, granted, but they always have options. The lack is in unique options. Except "social class" isn't a game term. It's a player perception based on the preconception that CHA synergy is required to make a social character. It's not. Rolling isn't necessary every time. That's a basic 5e concept. Making a high bonus only requires investment. Some CHA, a bonus proficiency, and expertise is available on PDK's. Samurai add WIS bonus. The DM doesn't need to bend over backwards if the player actually invests in these traits he or she wants. I'm going to point out that I never take persuasion expertise on a bard. Proficiency plus CHA bonus plus JoaT us more than enough. Sorcerers and Warlocks don't get free expertise like PDK (or the samurai bonus). PDK expertise puts the fighter in the same ball park even without a CHA bonus. Persuasion expertise is the reason to okay a PDK. No one falls to their deaths because the standard for failure is not progressing. A climbing kit prevents falling even if a DM adds a falling condition for a low check See above. It's a waste of expertise given then existing bonuses already. Use expertise where it'll do more good shoring up a low ability score. Not your point, of course, but the glamour bard has the advantage of charm still. The attitude shift is faster that way. Social abilities for fighters have been mentioned in this thread. They clearly exist. The argument is players choose not to make use of them. I agree. There should have been more page count invested in skills. DM empowerment also creates inconsistencies between tables. I use ability checks on fighters all the time. Even perform. ;-) The open nature of ability checks is something I really like but the consistency issues do exist, and the open nature leads to DM's and players not knowing what they might be capable big in that system. Yes. I was going to mention this too but you beat me to it. I find several languages pointless for social checks because those beings all speak common anyway. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Classes that Suck
Top