D&D 5E Companion thread to "5E Survivor - Subclasses (Part VI: Fighters)"

CleverNickName

Limit Break Dancing
"Historical" is a stick to beat the DM over the head with.
My DM (and wife) is a historian, so this feels very weird to me.

But I do agree with you about the Gunslinger...that rate of fire is ridiculously fast, especially if he's using a flintlock. It's still a lot more reasonable than all wounds and injuries healing themselves completely after 8 hours of sleep, but no DMs have been bludgeoned over it (that I know of.)
 

log in or register to remove this ad

It's still a lot more reasonable than all wounds and injuries healing themselves completely after 8 hours of sleep, but no DMs have been bludgeoned over it (that I know of.)
True. And I've seen a lot of complaints about it from people who want simulationism.

But I find I'm budgeoning myself if I try to be historical in my DMing. I'm know just enough to be aware I'm getting it wrong.
 

CleverNickName

Limit Break Dancing
The fighter's Second Wind ability was always a head-scratcher for me.

Fighter: Hold up, let me get rid of this stab wound right quick. (kisses bicep) There.
Wizard: Wait a minute. You can just decide to not be injured?
Fighter: You can't? I thought everyone could.
Wizard: No! I have to beg the cleric for healing!
Fighter: But you're a magic-man. Can't you just like, do a spell or something?
Wizard: I do arcane magic! I command the elements, not that wimpy church-stuff.
Cleric: Big talk, from the guy who can't apply his own bandages.
Wizard: I am a game-breaking demigod! (sniffles) None can compete with my power!
Fighter: Of course you are, buddy. (pats him on the shoulder) Of course you are.
 
Last edited:


IME, "historical" is a stick the DM uses the beat players over the head with.
Potentially, I can believe that. Although, in my case, I know far more about history than my players, so it's only me that frets about it.

I've been known to pick holes in historical novels too. Did you know that Brother Athelstan (P C Doherty) had a telescope in 1376?
 

DND_Reborn

The High Aldwin
Right. (Well, other than the "guns was only early 14th century." Guns appeared in the early 12th century.) The former thing is what "plate" armor refers to. The latter is some kind of lamellar armor, not plate--and also dates to the 1400s or later, after guns had reached Europe. "By 1338 hand cannons were in widespread use in France." "Plate armor" didn't exist until the early 1400s either. Meaning a century after "hand cannons" had been introduced to Europe.
(bold added)

NOT in Europe.

Let's be clear about this (since I really don't want to bother arguing with you again further) plated mail is what I use as plate in 5E. It is plate on chain backing, not FULL plate like shown in the image. So, yes I have AC 18 "plate" because it is better than splint (plates on leather, not chain).

So: Do you forbid your players from using plate armor? Because plate armor--armor actually made of segmented metal plates covering the entire body--did not exist until after guns did.
But I have always forbade guns in D&D and will continue to do so. As I said in the other post--no gunpowder, no cannons, etc. I really don't know why you are making an issue of it. D&D has always been a mixture of technologies from different ages and cultures, and DMs typically disallow certain items. As a final point, I've never met a DM who did allow guns in their game that I've seen outside of the rare cross-over adventure (lost space ship found and laser guns is the closest).
 

DND_Reborn

The High Aldwin
I don't get ithat last one. How are they a pain to track? When I play a Battlemaster I bring out my red D8s (that I bought for that exact purpose!) and I lay them down on one side of my character sheet and when I use a maneuver I physically take the dice from my reserve, roll it and put it on the other side. I keep Ki points with my Monk using M:TG counter beads in the exact same manner.
It's still fiddly and annoying and makes no sense that their maneuvers should be limited use and require a "rest" to restore them.

But in principle: Maneuvers as at-will things without the bonus damage dice would be way more fun.
IMO and IME it is. ;)
 

(bold added)

NOT in Europe.

Let's be clear about this (since I really don't want to bother arguing with you again further) plated mail is what I use as plate in 5E. It is plate on chain backing, not FULL plate like shown in the image. So, yes I have AC 18 "plate" because it is better than splint (plates on leather, not chain).
I gave you citations. Things even remotely like actual PLATE armor appear in the 15th century. The game already offers splint armor for what you describe (overlapping strips or plates of armor on some kind of backing, usually leather, with chain at the joints for flexible protection.) The explicit description of Plate Armor is: "Plate consists of shaped, interlocking metal plates to cover the entire body. A suit of plate includes gauntlets, heavy leather boots, a visored helmet, and thick layers of padding underneath the armor. Buckles and straps distribute the weight over the body." This type of armor did not exist until 1420. Hand cannons were common in France, as I cited (a Wikipedia link, but it cites an actual history book in turn), by 1338. Guns predate anything like "plate armor," and the plate armor item explicitly IS the full 15th century suit.

The only way around this dilemma is to literally be using the term "plate armor" in a factually incorrect way. It is literally not possible to include "plate armor," in the phrase's actual, historical meaning, and yet exclude hand cannons. Either you must accept both (aka, use 15th century as your tech basis), or you must actually reject both (aka, use 12th century or earlier as your tech basis), or you must accept hand cannons and not plate armor (aka 14th century tech basis), or you must use words to mean things they don't actually refer to historically (aka calling lamellar armor "plate" armor when it just...isn't, in complete defiance of history.)

The reason I push back so hard on this is that I don't like when someone claims a high horse and then blatantly disregards their alleged standard. Your game isn't historical. You forbid a real and extant medieval technology, hand cannons, while embracing a technology which came later, under the pretense of it being a different armor type already present in the rules. If you just want to say, "I hate guns and think plate armor is cool, I don't really care if that's historically accurate, it's what I want," that's absolutely fine. If you want to say, "I don't like guns, so to make my game historically accurate I don't include technology that appeared after roughly 1250 AD, meaning I forbid both guns and plate armor," that's fine too. It is the claim that because of historical accuracy you forbid guns but let "plate" be lamellar armor that is sticking in my craw.

But I have always forbade guns in D&D and will continue to do so. As I said in the other post--no gunpowder, no cannons, etc. I really don't know why you are making an issue of it. D&D has always been a mixture of technologies from different ages and cultures, and DMs typically disallow certain items.
As I said: if you do this because you feel like it, sure, fine, whatever lifts your luggage.

Just don't go around claiming it's about being super historically accurate and that you could never permit such an inaccurate thing as guns in pseudo-medieval faux-Europe.

As a final point, I've never met a DM who did allow guns in their game that I've seen outside of the rare cross-over adventure (lost space ship found and laser guns is the closest).
I've met plenty. Guns are hardly different from bows in most games. Often worse, actually, because medieval weapons usually take forever to load.

Also? I allow guns in my game. They're rare and not widely made, at least not at present, in the region where the game is set. This puts the onus on the player (spellslinger, a gun-toting artificer-wizard hybrid) to come up with ways they can get better equipment. Thus far they have done things like looking for engraved plates to rivet to the sides of their primary gun (which is essentially a revolver, very Lone Ranger vibes; they keep a set of one-shot flintlocks if needed), finding new alchemical formulations for their powder, and looking for gadgets and magical effects to improve the gun they already have. The character's presence and activity has highlighted these weapons to certain groups, causing potentially unwanted attention, and the character is very careful not to let actual Waziri mages anywhere near that primary weapon, because Waziri mages primarily learn new magic via destructive analysis of existing spells or magic items. They covet that gun and the character isn't about to satisfy their interests any time soon.
 



Sure there is: no potash.

/science.
Because a world completely lacking in potash is highly historical.

No more potassium fertilizers, and people don't burn broadleaf wood anymore. Very strange world, that. I do wonder how they get much done!

Probably would have been better to go after the sulfur. Raw elemental sulfur is much less vital to life and living than potash or nitrates. It's pretty common in Earth's crust but doesn't have to be.
 


Because a world completely lacking in potash is highly historical.

No more potassium fertilizers, and people don't burn broadleaf wood anymore. Very strange world, that. I do wonder how they get much done!

Probably would have been better to go after the sulfur. Raw elemental sulfur is much less vital to life and living than potash or nitrates. It's pretty common in Earth's crust but doesn't have to be.
Doesn't matter which element you go after. Doesn't have to exist in a fantasy world. Even local scarcity would be sufficient to explain the non-discovery of gunpowder.
 


CleverNickName

Limit Break Dancing
What if there wasn't a Battle Master? Like, what if all the Battle Master's maneuvers and bonus dice were baked in to the Fighter base class, instead of locked behind a subclass? It could be pretty interesting if the much-maligned Arcane Archer and Sharpshooter also had a handful of maneuvers...

I wouldn't be surprised if we see something along these lines in a OneD&D playtest.
 

Vaalingrade

Legend
What if there wasn't a Battle Master? Like, what if all the Battle Master's maneuvers and bonus dice were baked in to the Fighter base class, instead of locked behind a subclass? It could be pretty interesting if the much-maligned Arcane Archer and Sharpshooter also had a handful of maneuvers...

I wouldn't be surprised if we see something along these lines in a OneD&D playtest.
CleverNickName, between this and the competently designed eldritch Knight you envisioned, you should be working on the fighter.

Also, that's pretty much the playtest fighter.
 

RealAlHazred

Frumious Flumph
Look, I have only a few historical FACTS that I rigidly enforce in my games, to make sure immersion isn't broken:
  • Mermaids are blue- or green-skinned. There are no black mermaids! Or white mermaids for that matter!
  • The flute exists, but the only person who can play it is James Madison, and since he's dead and doesn't exist in my setting, nobody else gets to play one.
  • Everybody speaks American English.
 

CleverNickName

Limit Break Dancing
CleverNickName, between this and the competently designed eldritch Knight you envisioned, you should be working on the fighter.

Also, that's pretty much the playtest fighter.
I admit, I'm not following the OneD&D playtests very closely. The only one I've even read was the "expert" one that dropped recently, and I kinda just skimmed it and made a few notes. Sounds like I should pay a little more attention?

But now that this idea is in my head I can't stop.

Hack Your Fighter
Want to take one of the Fighter subclasses for a spin, but worry about a lack of versatility? Here's a minor tweak that you can make to the Fighter class to make other subclasses more appealing. This is not, nor is it intended to be, a complete rebuild of the Fighter class; this is just a small adjustment you can make in your home game on an as-needed basis.
1. The Fighter class gains the Combat Superiority feature at 3rd level.

Done. What, you were expecting this to be complicated?

Well, I suppose that if you're still not satisfied, you could go a couple of steps further but that's a matter of preference:
2. The Fighter class gains the Improved Combat Superiority feature at 10th level.
3. The Fighter class gains the Relentless ability at 15th level.

That's about it. The Fighter gains superiority dice and maneuvers regardless of subclass, and the Battle Master becomes functionally obsolete because it is now part of the core Fighter class...but that's the way it should have always been from the start (in my opinion).
 
Last edited:

RealAlHazred

Frumious Flumph
What if there wasn't a Battle Master? Like, what if all the Battle Master's maneuvers and bonus dice were baked in to the Fighter base class, instead of locked behind a subclass? It could be pretty interesting if the much-maligned Arcane Archer and Sharpshooter also had a handful of maneuvers...

I wouldn't be surprised if we see something along these lines in a OneD&D playtest.

That's the Variant Fighter I posted previously.
 


An Advertisement

Advertisement4

Top