D&D (2024) Fighter (Playtest 7)

[Weiley31]

I like Mike Myler's Noble class for the 5E warlord.

 

[Mirrorrorrim]

I mean, it's the Pro Wrestler.

Agreed. We need to ignore the efforts to make the Brawler sound like a drunk, abusive uncle. We can then encourage a Pro Wrestler theme where they know how to use the environment no matter where they are. They can walk into an evil mastermind's throne room, willingly unarmed so they let their guard down, and still be confident and super effective if the mastermind sics their minions on him. It can allow for a very cinematic style. I like cinematics where the armored warrior punches effectively, amidst, or in place of, his normal weapon attacks.

Only the Monk would be comfortable at the Brawler's side, if both were unarmed. Paladins can smite with a punch in a pinch, but it's not as reliably dangerous if they are not specced into unarmed combat.

 

[Mirrorrorrim]

I would rather have a leader/warlord/banneret subclass in the core book rather than an unarmed subclass that encroaches on the Monk which desperately needs help and is already having its lunch t taken by the new drancer subclass in the Bard. A proper Warlord style subclass fills a niche that never really got filled in 5e since the Purple Dragon Knight is so ineffective, in a deprecated book and never got a rework in Tasha's or Xanathar's.

I think the Battlemaster is the subclass that has the "Leader" options. Bait and Switch, Commander's Strike, Commanding Presence, Maneuvering Attack, Distracting Strike, Rally, all of these are good Leadership and Team-assisting combat options. Add some leadership-themed feats in there, gain an edge with some masteries that can knock prone, etc. It's pretty good.

 

[Mirrorrorrim]

I'm glad Eldritch Knight's extra attacks have a future now, with the War Magic change. And they even let EK use arcane focuses, but... in a world where every bard and warlock can cast using their weapon, EK still cannot (unless it's a quarterstaff), but needs to engage in the ridiculous weapon juggling. And thus, sword+boarders cannot cast Shield while having a weapon out (unless they pay a feat tax in War Caster), and two-handers need to argue with their DMs about it only requiring two hands when attacking with the weapon...

Just something to note on the survey. How can you hit so close, yet be so far off.

An Eldritch Knight should be able to use their War Bond weapons as implements. That's totally going into my feedback. I'll allow it even if it's not in the book.

 

[Mirrorrorrim]

I'm glad Eldritch Knight's extra attacks have a future now, with the War Magic change. And they even let EK use arcane focuses, but... in a world where every bard and warlock can cast using their weapon, EK still cannot (unless it's a quarterstaff), but needs to engage in the ridiculous weapon juggling. And thus, sword+boarders cannot cast Shield while having a weapon out (unless they pay a feat tax in War Caster), and two-handers need to argue with their DMs about it only requiring two hands when attacking with the weapon...

Just something to note on the survey. How can you hit so close, yet be so far off.

The EK should also be able to War Bond a shield alongside 1 weapon if they wish.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

There has to be a name for the phenomenon of thinking that the broken stuff in the core book is balanced and that the less powerful splatbooks stuff is OP.

There really should be, because it is truly a classic phenomenon, dating back decades and clearly still operating in 5E.

The Mystic was the prime example - people absolutely went overboard about how "OP" it was, when it was slightly sub-par compared to a Full Caster (any Full Caster), just had a couple of obviously unintended or unconsidered rules interactions (it was an early design). It was literally like three specific nerfs away from being absolutely fine. As a thought experiment we might consider how people would react if they game didn't have Wizards in it, but WotC tried to introduce them in a UA. People would have lost their minds again - the only reason they don't re: Wizards etc. is as you point out, the completely inaccurate assumption that "corebook = balanced". We can see this with races too - the Elves and Mountain Dwarves have been, for most of the history of 5E, some of the most powerful races in it, whereas Humans and Dragonborn have been some of the weakest until both got revised/variants (fortunately race counts for little enough that it doesn't cause a major issue). You used to see it in games like Shadowrun and Cyberpunk too - often there was fairly wildly powerful cyberware/weapons/decks/programs/spells/etc. in the core books, and something would get introduced in a splatbook, and be seen as ridiculously OP, even though it's not even on par with the best stuff in the corebook.

It's totally fair to say a lot of splatbooks did introduce a ton of power creep, but people often fail to look at that in the larger context. Did it really matter 3.XE that X weapon or melee-oriented Feat Y is "OP" when Wizards/Druids/Clerics exist lol?

 

[NaturalZero]

There really should be, because it is truly a classic phenomenon, dating back decades and clearly still operating in 5E.

I'm about to claim this as the "Natural Zero Fallacy" unless someone has already.

The Natural Zero fallacy is the belief that content released on day 0 is automatically less powerful that content added after day 0.

 

[mellored]

I'm about to claim this as the "Natural Zero Fallacy" unless someone has already.

The Natural Zero fallacy is the belief that content released on day 0 is automatically less powerful that content added after day 0.

I would go with "Power Creep Fallacy".

 

[fluffybunbunkittens]

The Originalist Orison.

 

[Jefe Bergenstein]

Since 2nd Ed gish characters have been my favorite and in 2nd Ed there were lots of ways of playing them. Now ever though eldritch knight is better, warlocks (and bladesingers) are just so superior that I don't know how I can play an eldritch knight.

But at 20th level you get a 4th attack! (some dev, somewhere)