• The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!

D&D 5E Do Fighters Still Suck?

Zardnaar

Legend
As the title says. I have not seen a fighter rolle dup since late 2014 and we play a lot of D&D- 14 hours worth in the last week and sometimes 3-5 sessions a week with 3-4 DMs. The players who like fighter types are starting to gravitate towards Paladins and Rangers with some of the more adventurous making gish type PCs (Favoured Souls and Warlock/Valor Bard builds). I thought it may have just been my group but other groups seem to be doing it as well. This seems to be for the following reasons.

1. The fighter has no damage dealing advantage over the other martial classes and is probably inferior to things like Barbarians. Rangers and Paladins tend to be using hunters quarry and colossus slayer/horde breaker to actually deal more damage than the fighters.

2. Strength based PCs suck at range being reduced to throwing javelins often at disadvantage. As a further kick in the balls they can only make 1 attack a round since you can only draw 1 weapon a round. Paladins can cast bless on the ranged PCs or moonbeam if they are the Oath of the Ancients. Gish PCs do not care to much at the worst resorting to cantrips or just lobbing a fireball.

3. Dex based melee tends to be underpowered along with dual wielding which uses the bonus action. That bonus action is often better off used for Polearm Mastery, Great Weapon Fighting, or moving around hunter mark/hex or casting quickened hastes or whatever.

4. Most classes casting spells.

5. Other classes tend to be better targets for haste/twinned haste. THis is due to spells like hex/hunters mark and advantage to hit that Barbarians and Avenger Paladins can easily get.

Sure fighters have other class abilities as well but something like action surge tends to pail against Paladins auras to saves which in effect makes Paladins proficient in all saves at level 6.

Party number 1. My Group lvl 8.

1 Favoured Soul (tempest domain) Mountain Dwarf.
2. Oath of the Ancients Paladin
3. Ranger (tempest)
4. Warlock (tomelock fiend pact)
5. Cleric1/Lore Bard 7
6. Valor Bard.

Party number 2, level 3.

1. Barbarian
2. Paladin (avenger, my PC)
3. Rogue
4. Wizard (abjurer)
5. Sorcerer (Dragon: fire)
6. Warlock

And as I said the last fighter I saw rolled up was late 2014 and that was a crossbow expert+sharpshooter combo build. The highest DPR type min/max builds are also ranged with CE+SS combo for martials and Sorlock (Warlock 2/SorcererXYZ) leading the charge there.

We have also tried no feats game and almost everyone went dex based including things like clerics. The Battlemaster fighter seems to be the best one over all, the Eldritch Knight might be the best fighter at higher levels and the Champion seems to be the worst one of the bunch as it is just damage and it is not even really that good at that. Sure the fighter does technically get a 3rd attack at level 11 but at those levels spell effects start to kick in more for Paladins/Rangers (haste, swift quiver, destructive wave etc) or class abilities like charisma to damage+hex for bladelocks and at higher levels several of the gish classes can also cast foresight along with hasting themselves. Or you know not suck at range with spells anyway. Since combat doesn't always take place in a 10' by 10' room.
 
Last edited:

log in or register to remove this ad

Sacrosanct

Legend
This thread screams to me of troll bait (you could just look at any of the other number of threads on the exact same topic that's been argued to death). So I'll just say, "No. The fighter does not suck. Never has." rather than argue point by point and have the same argument all over again. What's your opinion on the Warlord class, while we're at it?
 

Zardnaar

Legend
I did provide a few examples of why I don't think the fighter is very good Sucks might be the wrong term obsoleted by better classes might be more accurate.

The is a warlord subforum my opinion on warlords is post there.
 

JediGamemaster

First Post
Fighters are the best there is at what they do... what they do is fight. I do sometimes wonder if the designers want most well rounded non caster to be fighter/thief multi class
 

Istbor

Dances with Gnolls
I have seen a couple of fights so far, however my amount of playtime is far far less than yours. 14 hours a week? Really? Anyhow, back on topic.

One Battlemaster fighter and one Eldritch Knight. Both seemed to contribute plenty to their respective campaigns. One had thought about multi-classing into bard but ended up staying full fighter (to level 13).

I always wonder though Zard, your groups just seem to DPR centric. I don't have that feel at any of my tables. I haven't even seen one person go for a polearm weapon to get the feat eventually. Something that I think is pretty strong for melee as you have also said.

The battlemaster did take Great weapon mastery though and kicked some pa-toot with it. Fights that he took out all the stops, he did large amounts of damage in.

In terms of what other melee classes are played, I am seeing a lot of barbarians. People seem all over the resistances to damage. Kind of say honestly, I want to see at least one berserker...

I did see both a ranger and a paladin played in my groups. The ranger (lvl 7) did very well and very much enjoyed his character. The paladin(lvl 7), I think there was a disconnect with how the paladin worked for that player. He came away not liking it a lot. In contrast, I enjoyed it greatly while playing in Iserith's Roll20 transcript campaign.

I do have a rogue in the Out of the Abyss campaign that I just started running. Already did a sweet sneak attack and he is fully enjoying it (lvl 2).

Party one: (lvl 7)
Paladin (devotion)
Ranger (Hunter)
Fighter (battlemaster)
Sorcerer (dragon)
Cleric (tempest)
Barbarian (totem)

Party 2: (finished at lvl 11)
Barbarian (totem)
Fighter (Eldritch)
Warlock (blade)
Ranger (Hunter)

Party 3: (lvl 2)
Bard
Barbarian (plans on totem)
Fighter
Rogue
Druid

My opinion is that it doesn't suck, nor does it outshine any other class. I have seen a lot more of class testing going on than in previous editions. Melee comfortable players are playing spell casters and ranged heroes. The same can be said with players that I have seen traditionally gravitate to ranged or magic using classes.

Again though, seeing a lot more of the barbarian class than ever before.

I agree with your point on two-weapon fighting also. Not seeing a lot of use. Makes me sad, that was one of my old favorites and it just feels very 'Meh' once you obtain a certain lvl, and especially if you have other valuable things to spend bonus on.
 

Paladins can outshine fighters when they "nova" their smites. Barbarians are harder to kill. But nobody out-damages the fighter in the long term. Fighters can keep up the damage-dealing far longer and more consistently.

Now, that's just fine if you run the game under the standard "many smaller combats" assumption. If you run fewer, larger combats, it's easier for the limited resource martial classes, like the paladin, to start to pull ahead. But there are always going to be adjustments when the game is tweaked.

All IME, of course.
 

Pssthpok

First Post
Troll thread?

Fighters have never sucked.They're the long-haulers, the "I only need hit points" guys, the salt of the tabletop.
 


pming

Legend
Hiya!

As the title says. I have not seen a fighter rolle dup since late 2014 and we play a lot of D&D- 14 hours worth in the last week and sometimes 3-5 sessions a week with 3-4 DMs. The players who like fighter types are starting to gravitate towards Paladins and Rangers with some of the more adventurous making gish type PCs (Favoured Souls and Warlock/Valor Bard builds). I thought it may have just been my group but other groups seem to be doing it as well. This seems to be for the following reasons.

***SNIP***


I think it's because you're playing the game wrong.

;)

Seriously though, I'd like to hear how your "typical" game goes. In that 14 hours of gaming, how many "combats" did you have? In my game, over 14 hours, while they were in the "Ruined Citadel of the Dwarven Kingdom of Kuln" (a rather large mini-mega-dungeon...?...5 levels, maybe 150 rooms or so total), I'd say my group of PC's would go through about 20 to 22 combats. Out of the dungeon, same amount of time...maybe 11 or 12, tops.

Now, if your game has "only big, epic, fights...otherwise, why bother?" type of an attitude.... then yeah, Fighters are going to fall by the wayside. Why? Because you, as DM, are giving them (PC's) ample opportunity to 'recharge' all the special abilities that make those other classes shine. Take that away and make the players conserve their 'kewl powerz', and I guarantee that the "sucky Fighter" will start to shine like a super-nova. Basically, when the Barbarian runs out of Rage, the Cleric runs out of spells and turning, the Warlock runs out of all of his abilities, and the Bard has no more Inspirations, spells and whatnot...they all become sucky Fighters (or really sucky Fighters!). The fighter though? He runs out of action surge and second wind, and....yeah, that's pretty much it. All his other key abilities (good armor, good hp, good attacks, good defense) just keep on going. Rest one hour and bingo! He's good as new, ready to keep on keepin' on. A lot of the other classes 'special abilities' recharge after a Long rest...not short. Pretty much all the Fighters recharge after a Short rest.

So, no. Fighters don't suck. Fighters are probably, in my game at least, one of the most consistent and persistent character classes when in a dungeon. You want at least one fighter in the group. When my players had no Fighter...they felt it. Big time! Sure, the barbarian rage machine was a sight to behold, but after he 'blew his wad of rage'...he had nothing but decent hp's (high Con and good rolls). He went down multiple times. The Fighter(s)? Consistent damage output, damage mitigation, and 'ability recovery'. The next session? Someone made a Fighter. :)

^_^

Paul L. Ming

PS: Sorry if someone already covered this ground; I didn't read the whole thread.
 


Voidrunner's Codex

Remove ads

Top