5.5E Fighters if superiority dice was something all fighters get

I find the entire concept of the "basic Fighter", especially the laughable idea that they're for "new players", foolish at best, and actively disingenuous is more like it.

I've started quite a few new players in 4E and 5E, and how many them wanted to be a Fighter at all, let alone a "basic Fighter"? Let me tell you.

Exactly ZERO.

Not one. No-one has even been remotely interested in a playing a Fighter as their first character. The least-nerdy most basic/mainstream person I've played D&D with, who is definitely a non-nerd, and only played D&D a few times (though he swears he enjoyed it), picked a goddamn Swordmage in 4E. He didn't pick a Fighter.
Agreed. I'm thinking back on hundreds of characters I've seen over the last few years among a dozen groups, and I've seen exactly 3 fighters. And one of them was a 4e fighter, which broke the "simple fighter" mold anyway.
same...

You know who i find DOES play champion fighters... 30-40 year old players (who all brought beer to game... I don't know that matters but it is a thing) who played pre 4e and want 'simple fighters' or people who are level dipping for increased crit to go with extra attack and action surge (okay that is only 1 time... but he brings beer too...)
 

log in or register to remove this ad


same...

You know who i find DOES play champion fighters... 30-40 year old players (who all brought beer to game... I don't know that matters but it is a thing) who played pre 4e and want 'simple fighters' or people who are level dipping for increased crit to go with extra attack and action surge (okay that is only 1 time... but he brings beer too...)
To be fair the guy who always plays funky-ass Warlocks/Sorcerers (until 5E he always played Rogues, but he loved 4E's Rogue so much 5E's Rogue "broke him" and now he just plays Warlocks/Sorcerers) in my main group is 100% reliable as bringing beer and good beer at that.
 

Oofta

Legend
Same. We've got two Fighters in 5E, both very experienced players, one of them has complained that his character is "boring" a number of times. 4E we had one (but I played really only in one group in 4E), and he was Battlerage Vigor and totally out-of-control insane awesome.

Interestingly looking at the groups I've played 5E in Paladin is the most popular "melee" class by some margin. And most of those are not old-fashioned "holy" Paladins, but other kinds.

"Not for you or anyone you've played 5E with", you mean?

I mean, there is no subclass that no-one loves. No matter how bad or obscure or pointless. Someone loves it, and will play it by preference. Even Purple Dragon.

I'm not saying no-one likes it. I'm saying the logic that it's "for new players" or "training wheels" or indeed that it "needs to be in the PHB" is really faulty. Even you are an ultra-experienced veteran player, and you like it, not some new player. New players aren't into that kind of thing, in my experience. Especially younger ones. It's grogbait.

Well, my experience that the people who should be playing the base fighter are exactly the ones that levitate to the most complex classes. 😖 Personally I think any class can be boring if you fall into a repetitive pattern, we certainly see it with warlocks.

But that's not what this thread is about. Even if you "spiced up" the fighter class it wouldn't matter. We have plenty of alternative archetypes, so if people aren't playing it now they won't play it.
 

I dislike champion... and I dislike beastmaster... but GODs do I HATE wildmagic... all three from the PHB no less.
Beastmaster is weird for me. Conceptually, I like the idea, and in my experience, newer players (especially female ones, but not exclusively) like the idea, but I loathe the poorly-implemented and poorly-patched mechanics of it. Just let their pet hit things without some elaborate "action economy" for god's sakes. Make it have a pile of HP and sad damage and they'll love it and it won't be a problem.
 

Even if you "spiced up" the fighter class it wouldn't matter. We have plenty of alternative archetypes, so if people aren't playing it now they won't play it.
i promise you if tomorrow WotC put out a book with 4e style (or Bo9S style) warlord and fighter (names don't matter) I would see a HUGE uptick in martial non magic useing characters at my tables for however long we play this edition.
 

Beastmaster is weird for me. Conceptually, I like the idea, and in my experience, newer players (especially female ones, but not exclusively) like the idea, but I loathe the poorly-implemented and poorly-patched mechanics of it. Just let their pet hit things without some elaborate "action economy" for god's sakes. Make it have a pile of HP and sad damage and they'll love it and it won't be a problem.
let me rephrase... the reason I dislike/hate those subclasses is becuse they match concepts I want to play/run players with but have mechanics that make doing so too much of a chore.
 

Oofta

Legend
i promise you if tomorrow WotC put out a book with 4e style (or Bo9S style) warlord and fighter (names don't matter) I would see a HUGE uptick in martial non magic useing characters at my tables for however long we play this edition.
And ... I guarantee that it wouldn't affect my table. Experiences differ.

Now if we brought back avengers I might be interested. :)
 

Well, my experience that the people who should be playing the base fighter are exactly the ones that levitate to the most complex classes. 😖
But those people wouldn't be interested in playing D&D if you made them play that. Because they don't want vanilla. They want strawberry chocolate fudge.

And let's be real, very few 5E classes are significantly hard to play for a modern, moderately intelligent (like average) person. Maybe Wizards are a bit fiddly and odd? That's about it.
i promise you if tomorrow WotC put out a book with 4e style (or Bo9S style) warlord and fighter (names don't matter) I would see a HUGE uptick in martial non magic useing characters at my tables for however long we play this edition.
I have no doubt that we'd see fewer Paladins and Barbarians and more Fighters if they were distinctly 4E-style. Warlords, not so sure, I never actually saw one played for more than a couple of sessions in 4E.

That said 5E is also missing a properly-designed "Swordmage"-type class (and Booming Blade and Greenflame Blade are both sad, silly and confusing to newer players), and if that existed it would also draw a lot of players. Just like a guy who wears light armour, but is utterly deadly with a sword, and maybe doesn't cast spells, but has magic abilities - 4E had a bunch of classes like that, and people loved them.
 

TwoSix

Unserious gamer
i promise you if tomorrow WotC put out a book with 4e style (or Bo9S style) warlord and fighter (names don't matter) I would see a HUGE uptick in martial non magic useing characters at my tables for however long we play this edition.
Exactly this. There's no reason that their shouldn't be a warrior-type class with resource-gated exception-based abilities just like magical types get.
 

Now if we brought back avengers I might be interested. :)
Yeah thumbs up to this.

People in 4E LOVED that class. I've had people join 5E from 4E and they're really confused that it didn't make the transition and there's this weird Paladin pretending to be an avenger like bad cosplay ("we have avengers at home"). It combined like cool/badass magic without being a "spellcaster", and chopping people up with a 2h weapon whilst wearing light armour. It appealed to like a whole broad swathe of players from quite traditional types who had sort of "Severian with more magic" as their mental archetype, to people who quite clearly saw it as an "anime Fighter".
 

But those people wouldn't be interested in playing D&D if you made them play that. Because they don't want vanilla. They want strawberry chocolate fudge.
yeah... I would just stop TTRPGs if my only choice was fighters
I have no doubt that we'd see fewer Paladins and Barbarians and more Fighters if they were distinctly 4E-style. Warlords, not so sure, I never actually saw one played for more than a couple of sessions in 4E.

That said 5E is also missing a properly-designed "Swordmage"-type class
I still would do anything for a 4e fighter, a swordmage AND a Warlord
 

TwoSix

Unserious gamer
Yeah thumbs up to this.

People in 4E LOVED that class. I've had people join 5E from 4E and they're really confused that it didn't make the transition and there's this weird Paladin pretending to be an avenger like bad cosplay ("we have avengers at home"). It combined like cool/badass magic without being a "spellcaster", and chopping people up with a 2h weapon whilst wearing light armour. It appealed to like a whole broad swathe of players from quite traditional types who had sort of "Severian with more magic" as their mental archetype, to people who quite clearly saw it as an "anime Fighter".
Yea, avenger and warden are the two best 4e classes that they tried to shove into the "paladin" box and totally missed what made them badass.
 

Oofta

Legend
Yeah thumbs up to this.

People in 4E LOVED that class. I've had people join 5E from 4E and they're really confused that it didn't make the transition and there's this weird Paladin pretending to be an avenger like bad cosplay ("we have avengers at home"). It combined like cool/badass magic without being a "spellcaster", and chopping people up with a 2h weapon whilst wearing light armour. It appealed to like a whole broad swathe of players from quite traditional types who had sort of "Severian with more magic" as their mental archetype, to people who quite clearly saw it as an "anime Fighter".
Yeah, I'm playing a vengeance paladin right now. Fun for RP aspect reasons, but not the same.
 

Quickleaf

Legend
same...

You know who i find DOES play champion fighters... 30-40 year old players (who all brought beer to game... I don't know that matters but it is a thing) who played pre 4e and want 'simple fighters' or people who are level dipping for increased crit to go with extra attack and action surge (okay that is only 1 time... but he brings beer too...)
<< is 41, does not drink beer (more of a whiskey and red wine in moderation type of gentleman), played every edition since Basic D&D, disdains level dipping, and enjoys a "simple fighter."
 

<< is 41, does not drink beer (more of a whiskey and red wine in moderation type of gentleman), played every edition since Basic D&D, disdains level dipping, and enjoys a "simple fighter."
beer joke aside (I think it is just a funny coincidence) but you fit exactly... people who want 'simple fighters' are a subset of older players not newer (not that no new player will... but in general)
 

Minigiant

Legend
Supporter
You know who i find DOES play champion fighters... 30-40 year old players (who all brought beer to game... I don't know that matters but it is a thing) who played pre 4e and want 'simple fighters' or people who are level dipping for increased crit to go with extra attack and action surge (okay that is only 1 time... but he brings beer too...)

<< is 41, does not drink beer (more of a whiskey and red wine in moderation type of gentleman), played every edition since Basic D&D, disdains level dipping, and enjoys a "simple fighter."

beer joke aside (I think it is just a funny coincidence) but you fit exactly... people who want 'simple fighters' are a subset of older players not newer (not that no new player will... but in general)
I think the age is more 40+ for that good chunk of the simple fighter fans who aren't just playing it because they are too tipsy to run anything else. :p

The main factor of similarity of a lot of the simple fighter (and simple mage) lovers is having an experienced (and above average) DM/GM who have fairly and skillful adjudicate combat actions which match the expectations of the players in the group. Older groups. Long term groups. Veteran D&D groups. Friend, club, or hobby circles.
 

No dice, or consumable resources.

More situationally dependent abilities (e.g. Shove, or Rogue Sneak Attack), and risk/reward abilities (e.g. Barbarian's Reckless Attack).
 

DND_Reborn

Legend
Any other thoughts on such a approach?
Yes... see here:

 

Minigiant

Legend
Supporter
No dice, or consumable resources.

More situationally dependent abilities (e.g. Shove, or Rogue Sneak Attack), and risk/reward abilities (e.g. Barbarian's Reckless Attack).
The dice and consumables should have been a bonus to regular default actions.

  1. Crush: Target makes CON save or target is knocked prone. Roll superiority dice to deal weapon damage plus dice damage.
  2. Disarm: Target makes STR save or target is disarmed. Roll superiority dice to deal weapon damage plus dice damage.
  3. Distract: Target makes INT save or target is distracted (next attack has advantage). Roll superiority dice to deal weapon damage plus dice damage
  4. Envenom: Target makes CON save at disadvantage or target is poisoned. (Must have poisoned weapon) Roll superiority dice to deal weapon damage plus dice damage.
  5. Feint: Target makes WIS save or target falls for feint. Roll superiority dice to deal weapon damage plus dice damage.
  6. Hamstring: Target makes STR save or target's speed is halved until end of their next turn. Roll superiority dice to deal weapon damage plus dice damage.
  7. Goad: Target makes WIS save or target is marked. Roll superiority dice to deal weapon damage plus dice damage.
  8. Knock Down: Target makes STR save or target is knocked prone. Roll superiority dice to deal weapon damage plus dice damage.
  9. Menace: Target makes WIS save or target is frightening until end of your next turn. Roll superiority dice to deal weapon damage plus dice damage.
  10. Sand: Target makes DEX save or target is blinded until the end of their next turn. (Must have sand, mud, or dirt) Roll superiority dice to deal weapon damage plus dice damage.
  11. Trip: Target makes DEX save or target is knocked prone. Roll superiority dice to deal weapon damage plus dice damage.
 

Level Up!

An Advertisement

Advertisement4

Top