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

[CleverNickName]

It went out first, how is that getting robbed? That's exactly what was supposed to happen, wasn't it? I thought it was the plan all along...

Well I don't know about that, but it does help explain why Wizards of the Coast didn't include a Psion class in Xanathar's Guide to Everything, despite all the Unearthed Arcana playtests leading up to it.

 

[DND_Reborn]

Well I don't know about that, but it does help explain why Wizards of the Coast didn't include a Psion class in Xanathar's Guide to Everything, despite all the Unearthed Arcana playtests leading up to it.

As divided as some topics are in DND, I think psionics is one of the worst. Some people want classes and/or races built around it, others want it random for PCs or creatures, still others don't want it at all. And then there is the implementation of it: spell-like, psi-points, etc.

There is just too much dispute on it IMO for it to ever be well accepted by "most" players.

I (for one) don't like the psi-classes in their design, I also prefer psionics (if any) to be a random power (as much a curse as a blessing!), so I was very pleased to Psi Warrior out before my beloved Champion.

 

[Vaalingrade]

I know very little about psionics but my time on this site has taught me that it is a contentious thing. Replace the Psi part of Psi Warrior and it would have done better. The mechanics are pretty good in a void but if you don't think they represent psionics well then how well they work won't matter.

That is WHY it got robbed, yes.

But no class deserves to be out before the Champion.

 

[RealAlHazred]

Usually in a Survivor thread, when someone says "the worst" they simply mean "the one I don't like." (Except bards, which everyone agrees are categorically the worst thing in D&D.) Smack-talking and exaggeration are supposed to be part of the fun.

I think the Battle Master is one of the most versatile Fighter classes, and it's one of my favorites. But objectively, most of its schtick is just rolling more dice, and I can see how some folks might want a little more than just "randomized bonus to X." So I prefer the Gunslinger or the Echo Knight over all others, but I can happily settle for Battle Master.

One of the improvements I liked in the Variant Fighter is that it also got rid of Superiority dice. Each maneuver has a "Superiority" version of the move, and you can do a limited number of those a day. But the "Superiority" versions are basically improved or slightly modified versions of the core maneuver. It's less dice-rolling.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

Well I don't know about that, but it does help explain why Wizards of the Coast didn't include a Psion class in Xanathar's Guide to Everything, despite all the Unearthed Arcana playtests leading up to it.

5e has always been the edition designed skittishly, rather than confidently. That's been the case since the middle of the D&D Next playtest, when they came out swinging with the legitimately awesome Sorcerer and Warlock, and when they didn't get absolutely universal acclaim they canned them.

Then we got crappy half-baked versions instead, because they never revisited those classes during the playtest.

And people wonder why I say that the D&D Next playtest wasn't particularly effective and wasted a ton of time...

 

[EzekielRaiden]

That is WHY it got robbed, yes.

But no class deserves to be out before the Champion.

I could see an argument for maybe one of the abandoned UA options. But yeah. The Champion objectively shouldn't exist. It is bad. It punishes people who like simple mechanics and forces a specific and widely-disliked playstyle just to function semi-normally.

I know DnD_Reborn isn't responding to my messages anymore, but I do genuinely have to wonder, for fans of the Champion, do they like it because of the specific mechanics it has? Or do they like it because it's the subclass trying to be simple? Because if the latter, there are FAR better ways to achieve that.

 

[CleverNickName]

5e has always been the edition designed skittishly, rather than confidently.

They come by it honestly. The D&D brand wasn't in the best shape when 5e was being written... they were doing a lot of damage control.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

I just think removing sulfur is quite a bit more sensible than removing potassium nitrate, aka one of the most important fertilizers known to man (a fertilizer we knew about long before we knew what "potassium" or "nitrate" were.)

I've seen a lot more characters using guns in D&D than I have seen using phosphate fertilisers!

 

[EzekielRaiden]

They come by it honestly. The D&D brand wasn't in the best shape when 5e was being written... they were doing a lot of damage control.

Whether they come by it "honestly" or not is irrelevant. They design from a position of fear, and it pervades the entire edition.

 

[Ancalagon]

It was 100% my opinion. I just don’t care for it at all as I find it boring and doesn’t evoke any desire to play or create a character using the subclass. I’d much rather play a Psi-Knight or a Gunslinger or a Rune Knight or an Echo Knight.

Grant it I’m also the one who’s least favorite class is Wizard as I also find all their subclasses except maybe the Bladesinger to just be so boring and uninspiring, I’d much rather play a Sorcerer or Warlock.

I have weird opinions, I know.

So when you say "uninspiring" - is it because it has no "fluff", no "flavor"?

In a way, I kind of like that feature. A while back I made a swashbuckler (the concept, not the rogue subclass) and played him for about 5 levels - a dex build, melee specialized battlemaster. I had to "inject" the flavor into it (the daring swashbuckler), and because the battlemaster is such a blank slate, it didn't "interfere" with the concept.

However, I can totally see why for some it would be off-putting...