D&D (2024) Fighter brainstorm

[Krachek]

5ed is build on an assumption of collaborative play.
DM playing god is not collaborative.
Players playing childish is not collaborative.
In any cases if anyone go out of the collaborative play DND won’t ever have enough rules to manage that!

 

[Incenjucar]

It doesn't punish anyone unless one player is given freedom while others are denied it. Not everyone is a glory hog. I love seeing my team mates succeed. No matter what is written in the rules, this is how some people love to play. You can't be the enjoyment police. Magic item distribution has a way bigger impact than this.

There are many players who have difficulty working outside of their sheet, and many players who can talk a DM into breaking the game in their favor. It's been a well-known issue since at least the 80s.

 

[CreamCloud0]

It doesn't punish anyone unless one player is given freedom while others are denied it. Not everyone is a glory hog. I love seeing my team mates succeed. No matter what is written in the rules, this is how some people love to play. You can't be the enjoyment police. Magic item distribution has a way bigger impact than this.

yea, but the issue is fighters are being denied freedom, the freedom to have fiat abilities that they can just declare and have happen without any filtering through the GM, you're saying we can't be the enjoyment police but you're doing it just as much from your distaste of 'button pushing' for the people who aren't having fun because they don't have codfied abilities to use, you can always choose to not use abilities and be inventive with your skills and gear, but it doesn't work the other way, you can't use abilities rather than inventiveness if you prefer to play that way if you don't have abilities to use in the first place.

 

[Pauln6]

yea, but the issue is fighters are being denied freedom, the freedom to have fiat abilities that they can just declare and have happen without any filtering through the GM, you're saying we can't be the enjoyment police but you're doing it just as much from your distaste of 'button pushing' for the people who aren't having fun because they don't have codfied abilities to use, you can always choose to not use abilities and be inventive with your skills and gear, but it doesn't work the other way, you can't use abilities rather than inventiveness if you prefer to play that way if you don't have abilities to use in the first place.

Actually no, I would like more codified combat abilities too. I am more rigid than I want to be and I struggle with the right balance to satisfy myself personally. I just don't think it's right to polarise the discussion. The problem I have is that some players are better at self-limiting than others. Is saying, no you can't decapitate a cloud giant on a natural 20, wrong? There have to be parameters and they are nebulous. But at the same time having too many codified abilities can significantly slow play. The balance is finding enough codified abilities to make it interesting but not so many as to make it a quagmire that discourages inventiveness.

Level up uses twice your proficiency bonus as a base (so 4 uses per short rest for starters) with 3 abilities but ways to increase that number as you level. That's not much more than battlemasters so might not be enough for some people (albeit Level Up offers more interesting thematic class features too).

 

[Scott Christian]

Never seen the ref decide the forward pass and the position of tight end aren't allowed.

Man, Now I'd like to see them try just being referees and the narrator.

Honest question, since you are replying to my statements that state D&D is a collaborative storytelling game and the DM is a referee - have you read the 5e Dungeon Master's Guide? On, what is technically, the very first page it states:
"As a storyteller... As an actor... As a referee." (Pg. 4)

Except for casters who have convenient packets of autonomy.

Here, you are responding to my statement that the DM declares what is valid and invalid, what is success and failure. I fail to see how you don't understand this statement. You bring up casters. The DM still declares these things with casters. There are hundreds of "Mother may I's" used with spells too.

Oh hell no.

And, I guess you also disagree with them saying what is right and wrong, even though they specifically create the world the PCs inhabit. (That's on the first page of the DMG too.) So you feel they don't set the morals and laws of the land? Ones that players can choose to go with or against?

Except all that god complex and power trip just listed.

I have no idea with whom the people you play with, but judging by your reactions, they must all be awful. But the hundreds I have played with have all been fine. They understand the story needs a referee and a storyteller and someone to create the world and someone to tell us how to build the character for their campaign. None of those are god complexes. I feel sorry for you if this has been your experience, but I assure you, it's not how normal D&D is between adults.

So let's talk about the fighter. There should be a very simple fighter because it can often open up options and playstyles for both seasoned and novice players. The Champion is near perfect for this.

To say the above, in no way shape or form, indicates I am against having fighters with codified movements and a more diverse power range. I do think there is a balance that needs to be negotiated though.

 

[Scott Christian]

If the warlock is the fighter-complexity version of spellcasters, surely they can give us the wizard-complexity of fighters.

Yeah, I agree, they should. Never said otherwise. The question is, for OneD&D, how many codified powers for this type of fighter would you prefer? Do you want it to be like a list of choices found under the wizard's spell list? Do you want it to look a list of feats?

By the way, what I said originally was - their should be a fighter that is simple in its mechanics because that sometimes opens options for players they may not have noticed before. Perhaps that needed to be clarified.

 

[Incenjucar]

Yeah, I agree, they should. Never said otherwise. The question is, for OneD&D, how many codified powers for this type of fighter would you prefer? Do you want it to be like a list of choices found under the wizard's spell list? Do you want it to look a list of feats?

By the way, what I said originally was - their should be a fighter that is simple in its mechanics because that sometimes opens options for players they may not have noticed before. Perhaps that needed to be clarified.

Fighters and other non-magical martials mostly need a list of conditions they can apply and a few "chess move" actions they can pull off. Nothing bonkers or complicated, but enough to make them able to apply some tactics beyond "stand here and subtract hit points".

 

[Minigiant]

By the way, what I said originally was - their should be a fighter that is simple in its mechanics because that sometimes opens options for players they may not have noticed before. Perhaps that needed to be clarified.

There should be a simple caster as well where the player can just make up magic on the fly.

The core pillar behind these issues is the lack of symmetry when the reasoning for why things are the way they are can apply to other aspects of the game.

 

[Scott Christian]

There should be a simple caster as well where the player can just make up magic on the fly.

The core pillar behind these issues is the lack of symmetry when the reasoning for why things are the way they are can apply to other aspects of the game.

That would be interesting. I would be completely open to that idea.

 

[CreamCloud0]

There should be a simple caster as well where the player can just make up magic on the fly.

The core pillar behind these issues is the lack of symmetry when the reasoning for why things are the way they are can apply to other aspects of the game.

The issue with that I feel, is that it’s magnitudes easier to justify doing basically anything if you’ve using magic rather compared to the pure basic capabilities of the ‘human’ body (quotes because of fantasy species) and when using magic basically all your checks get consolidated into arcarna because there’s a magical alternative method of doing basically everything it’s so versatile, but martials have all their skills spread across multiple stats