Fighter Subclass: The Bravura! (INT-based, tactical, non-magical)

[mellored]

Baked the 5' movement into "Legendary Moves" at level 3.

I think you were right about limiting the movement.
7 reactions, * 20' each = 140'. That's a rediculous distance to cover.

See if you like my movement pool idea. Seems to hit a nice middle ground.

Moved Double Team to the 10th level ability. (Not going to be a popular move, but I think it's better. Samurai doesn't get it until there, either. I think...)

That works.

Renamed Legendary Moves to Tactical Awareness

Better name.
Though I kind of liked "Poetry in Motion".

I'll go over the contingencies another time. But i'd still avoid rolling your own d20's on other people's turns.

 

[Guest 6801328]

I agree with the above.

Help+2 choices feels better than 1 choice.

Contingencies are a too niche.
Also, interrupting someone else's turn, rolling your own dice, resolving your own stats, and then resoloving the origional roll takes too much time and can add to confusion. It was something 4e ran into. I've seen people forget who's turn it was after a cascade of reactions and die rolls. So i would keep the reactions simple form a game flow perspective, avoiding any of your own d20's. I also retract my above idea for a contested shove for the same reason.

Yeah, I worry about that, too. On the other hand, imposing Disadvantage on saving throws is a big deal. But maybe imposing it on one target for a Dex save (which tends to be from area-of-effect spells) is ok. /thinkingcap

If you don't want the multi-armor-teir, and bonus movement is 1/round (probably a good idea), then I'd move it to level 3. It would feel wierd switching armor at level 7.
Hmm... maybe...
"While not in Heavy armor, you have a pool of extra movement equal to your Bravura! level (minimum 5') that you can use when you take a reaction. This movement can allow you to get into range to trigger the reaction. You regain this movement at the end of your turn." (wording might still need work).

Pool works mechanically, but leaves another resource to track.

Then you can move Crazy Plan to 7.

Indomitable comes in at 9. So maybe something with that at 10.

If you're going to keep with the action surge for reactions, I would add movement as well. Maybe move it to 10 (along with the indomitable thing) and leave 15 as just the bonus -> reaction.


Edit: Ninja'd.

It kind of makes sense to add movement to Action Surge, except that it starts to get messy again. Maybe this is where we add, "You can also move as part of the Action Surge, but any movement you use is deducted from your movement on your next turn."

 

[Guest 6801328]

Made these two changes to reduce rolls:

Rational Words: When an ally within 30’ fails a saving throw against an enchantment spell, as a reaction you may allow them to re-roll, although the second roll is made with Disadvantage.

Timely Shove: When a creature within 5’ is required to make a Dexterity saving throw, you may use your reaction to either grant Advantage or impose Disadvantage to the roll. If the creature succeeds at its saving throw it is Prone.

re: Indomitable. What if you when you use Indomitable, you can also allow one ally within 5' to re-roll?

Now we've got three things (bonus action, Action Surge, Indomitable) to squeeze into two slots.

I worry that this class is becoming insanely powerful. Super fun to play, though.

 

[Krachek]

I don't like the 'React now and pay later'.
I would prefer 'You hold your attack in order to evaluate the situation. For each attack you forgo, you accumulate an extra reaction in reserve.'
You can't accumulate more extra reaction than your intelligence modifier (min 1).
At level X, when you roll initiative you get an extra reaction.

 

[Guest 6801328]

I don't like the 'React now and pay later'.
I would prefer 'You hold your attack in order to evaluate the situation. For each attack you forgo, you accumulate an extra reaction in reserve.'

We discussed that earlier in the thread. You are describing a credit model, versus existing debit model There are a few differences:

1) Credit model is overall less powerful, because it moves your actions to a lower initiative count, rather than higher.
2) Penalty for guessing poorly is much more severe in credit model. In debit model the player cannot actually lose any actions, even if he spends them suboptimally. In the credit model the player might forego his attacks, and then have no reactions to take. (EDIT: unless you mean that you can hold the reserve round-to-round for the duration of the combat. That alleviates concern #2, but I find it a bit less elegant that keeping everything within a round.)
3) Credit model requires the player to accurately predict what will happen, which is vastly more complicated than anything any other class requires. Debit model is a simulation of the character predicting what will happen, but the demands on the player are much lower.

Credit model could be interesting and rewarding to play, but my sense is that it's too complex/penalizing for 5e.

You can't accumulate more extra reaction than your intelligence modifier (min 1).
At level X, when you roll initiative you get an extra reaction.

The first version was sort of like this. I waffle on bringing it back. I go back and forth on how MAD the class should be.

But combining the old version with the new is compelling: "You can trade attacks for reactions 1:1, but no more than your Int modifier (min 1)."

What do others think of that? Make this class Int-dependent?

 

[mellored]

Yeah, I worry about that, too. On the other hand, imposing Disadvantage on saving throws is a big deal. But maybe imposing it on one target for a Dex save (which tends to be from area-of-effect spells) is ok. /thinkingcap

You could always make it smaller. Say 1d4.

Reactionary (Prerequisite 13 Int)
"When a creature within 5' makes a Dexterity or Intelligence saving throw, you can use your reaction to roll a d4 and add or subtract the roll from the results. You can use this after the creature makes its roll, but before the DM resolve the save"

Share Bravado (Prerequisite 13 Cha)
"When a creature within 5' makes a Wisdom or Charisma saving throw, you can use your reaction to roll a d4 and add or subtract the roll from the results. You can use this after the creature makes its roll, but before the DM resolve the save"


I'm still kinda liking that 13 Prerequisite as both flavor and a soft penalty.

Pool works mechanically, but leaves another resource to track.

Maybe just slow the scaling? 5' at level 3, increasing to 10' at level 10. No OA's.
That brings your speed down to monk levels.

No OA's also prevents intrupting other players turns with your own die roll.

It kind of makes sense to add movement to Action Surge, except that it starts to get messy again. Maybe this is where we add, "You can also move as part of the Action Surge, but any movement you use is deducted from your movement on your next turn."

That sounds messy, and adds another resource to track.


Also, if you have movement-per-reaction, then just giving extra reactions gives movement. It was the once per round limit / movement pool that needed the boost.

 

[Guest 6801328]

You could always make it smaller. Say 1d4.

Reactionary (Prerequisite 13 Int)
"When a creature within 5' makes a Dexterity or Intelligence saving throw, you can use your reaction to roll a d4 and add or subtract the roll from the results. You can use this after the creature makes its roll, but before the DM resolve the save"

Share Bravado (Prerequisite 13 Cha)
"When a creature within 5' makes a Wisdom or Charisma saving throw, you can use your reaction to roll a d4 and add or subtract the roll from the results. You can use this after the creature makes its roll, but before the DM resolve the save"

This has the advantage (get it?) of offering some variety from Advantage/Disadvantage for everything.

Or it could be add your own modifier to the roll...

"Whenever a creature within 5' makes a saving throw, you can use your reaction to add or subtract your own ability modifier from that saving throw. Requires a 13 or higher in the relevant ability.* You can use this after the creature makes its roll, but before the DM resolves the save."

I can't think of non-magical fluff for Constitution saving throws, though. Exclude Con?

*(That's not just 1 higher than a default of 12...you don't want somebody with Int 3 getting to "add or subtract" -5 from saving throws.)

 

[mellored]

Now we've got three things (bonus action, Action Surge, Indomitable) to squeeze into two slots.

You could also not do anything with them.

I worry that this class is becoming insanely powerful. Super fun to play, though.

Fun should be the first goal.
Balance can be fixed later by adding/subtracting numbers.

What do others think of that? Make this class Int-dependent?

Currently, I'm liking the prerequisites as a soft touch.
Which could be bumped to 15 Int if needed.

 

[Guest 6801328]

If capping total reactions to Int modifier, should it be straight Int or Int + 1?

Minimum Int to get all reactions:

Level	Int	Int + 1
3	14	12
5	16	14
10	18	16
15	20	18
20	??	20

 

[Krachek]

We discussed that earlier in the thread. You are describing a credit model, versus existing debit model There are a few differences:

1) Credit model is overall less powerful, because it moves your actions to a lower initiative count, rather than higher.
2) Penalty for guessing poorly is much more severe in credit model. In debit model the player cannot actually lose any actions, even if he spends them suboptimally. In the credit model the player might forego his attacks, and then have no reactions to take. (EDIT: unless you mean that you can hold the reserve round-to-round for the duration of the combat. That alleviates concern #2, but I find it a bit less elegant that keeping everything within a round.)
3) Credit model requires the player to accurately predict what will happen, which is vastly more complicated than anything any other class requires. Debit model is a simulation of the character predicting what will happen, but the demands on the player are much lower.

Credit model could be interesting and rewarding to play, but my sense is that it's too complex/penalizing for 5e.



The first version was sort of like this. I waffle on bringing it back. I go back and forth on how MAD the class should be.

But combining the old version with the new is compelling: "You can trade attacks for reactions 1:1, but no more than your Int modifier (min 1)."

What do others think of that? Make this class Int-dependent?

Sorry I didn’t follow the whole process. But if it can help.

The credit mode is the standard in DnD. You have a credit of maneuver dice, ki or sorcery point and you spend your credit. I think it can make more fluid and intuitive play if you know what you can spend rather than speculate on a future cost.

And player wont be screw if he can spend most of its unused credit. Ex: As a reaction on your turn you can spend all extra reaction you have accumulate. Making one attack for each extra reaction you spend. That feature can bring back in the fight attack you forgo and make a little thrill burst. Used at the right time these in bank attacks can be very dangerous.

The bravura can fuel its extra reaction reserve by forgo attack, but you can evaluate the possibility that non-attack action like dodge, disengage, dash bring extra reactions in bank. You can also consider the use knowledge or other check to get information on its opponent as a source of extra reaction.