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

[DND_Reborn]

The doubly hilarious thing being that they upvoted Champion. You know...one of the worst subclasses in the game.

Actually, one of the BEST!

 

[DND_Reborn]

I'm the inverse. I don't really like psionics in D&D, never have...but I think the 5E implementation might change my mind.

Well, I'm glad it works for you. IME people either seem to really like it OR really not...

 

[Vaalingrade]

Actually, one of the BEST!

Nope.

It's pretty much the worst thing 5e has done.

It might have a shot at top ten of worst things D&D has done, depending on if the Books of Exalted Darkness and Vile Deeds count as 1 and if anyone remembers that class with a mechanic that made it impossible to cast its spells.

 

[CleverNickName]

Well, I'm glad it works for you. IME people either seem to really like it OR really not...

Yeah, that's a fact. But that's been the case for decades...

 

[EzekielRaiden]

Actually, one of the BEST!

It fails mechanically to do what it was designed to do, while simultaneously falling short thematically of what it was designed to do, as admitted by the lead designer himself (he very specifically said that the Fighter was one of his few regrets regarding 5e, and in specific, its total lack of flavor.)

The Champion continues the longstanding (apart from 4e) tradition of making simple Fighters suck mechanically and provide no input thematically, not even to the limited extent of being better thematically at fighting. Remarkable Athlete is trash (its only benefit is boosting Initiative, which has nothing to do with being an athlete!), a second fighting style is nearly worthless because almost all fighting styles are incompatible by design and support completely different playstyles and weapons, and the increased critical requires an enormous slog of combats to even have a chance of catching up to the Battlemaster, to say nothing of classes like Paladin.

Champion sucks. Pure and simple. It could have been good, good without even needing fancy features and complexity, but 5e's designers were allergic to giving "always-on" classes anything that looked even remotely like actual power. Same issue with Warlock, the only "full caster" that falls on the weak side because it's a semi-"always-on" class and thus had to be kept weak 'cause we can't risk them ever even potentially overshadowing the Wizard or Cleric or Druid!

 

[Corinnguard]

It would be nice if the Fighter archetypes were modeled after the Fighting styles. Two-Weapon Fighting in first edition Pathfinder has the Two-weapon warrior archetype. Archery seems to be the only Fighting style that has an archetype (the Sharpshooter) that was made for it.

 

[DND_Reborn]

Look, everyone, you like your stuff, and I like mine. Arguing about it is pointless.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Oooh! Clever! Not a bad idea.

Personally I'd rather use less potent ability more often than be super limited in powerful abilities.

If you only get 2 shots per rest, it means you only get to FEEL like an Arcane Archer for what is essentially 12 seconds every other hour or so. The shots ARE good, but the subclass needed something that's always on, just for the feel of it. And they needed to get more shots as they progressed.

Yeah they basically needed to make a 1/3rd caster and hide that it’s a caster. Including a couple at-will abilities.

 

[Ancalagon]

It fails mechanically to do what it was designed to do, while simultaneously falling short thematically of what it was designed to do, as admitted by the lead designer himself (he very specifically said that the Fighter was one of his few regrets regarding 5e, and in specific, its total lack of flavor.)

The Champion continues the longstanding (apart from 4e) tradition of making simple Fighters suck mechanically and provide no input thematically, not even to the limited extent of being better thematically at fighting. Remarkable Athlete is trash (its only benefit is boosting Initiative, which has nothing to do with being an athlete!), a second fighting style is nearly worthless because almost all fighting styles are incompatible by design and support completely different playstyles and weapons, and the increased critical requires an enormous slog of combats to even have a chance of catching up to the Battlemaster, to say nothing of classes like Paladin.

Champion sucks. Pure and simple. It could have been good, good without even needing fancy features and complexity, but 5e's designers were allergic to giving "always-on" classes anything that looked even remotely like actual power. Same issue with Warlock, the only "full caster" that falls on the weak side because it's a semi-"always-on" class and thus had to be kept weak 'cause we can't risk them ever even potentially overshadowing the Wizard or Cleric or Druid!

The brute is so much better - it's only weakness is it's description. Make it more "championy" and it's great.

The Warlock could be better yes, but it's still a lot of fun to play.

 

[Ancalagon]

So what's wrong with the Psi Knight?

The Psi Knight is so easy to reflavor though. It can be "ancient techniques", "ki", the force... I've played it for a few levels, it's a fun class.

Edit: the notion that the psi warrior might go before the champion or the purple knight is ... wow.