D&D 5E Fighters should be the social class

[CubicsRube]

It's not about stronger/weaker. It's about more/less appropriate. 5E by default doesn't do the sort of granularity that works well with this kind of thing nor let people have social skills that make sense (someone good at Persuasion is good at it in all circumstances, for example). DMs can apply Advantage/Disadvantage, of course, but it can seem like overkill, or just not quite right. I believe there is some sort of optional rule re: backgrounds that might help here though, but perhaps I'm thinking of a house rule.

I think driving it for me is that one of the things I always wanted to represent was the kind of different social strata in a game and how different characters may be better at working within those groups.

If you have someone born and raised on the street, they're more likely to have mannerisms, figures of speech etc that will make them more socially adept at talking with other unfortunates as opposed to people that were raised as aristocrats, or wealthy merchants etc.

Whether or not they have innate or developed social skills themselves personally, their lingo, body language, and general presentation should could for something I just don't know how to map that in the game.

 

[Weiley31]

I have been considering a house rule where a character who receives the same skill from two different sources can choose expertise in that skill instead of taking another one. It's not unreasonable for persuasion to be added to the fighter's skill list.

I, for some reason, REALLY like this House Rule. Like alot.

On the other hand, I'm not sure how that would work well with something that is a custom background. Unless ya just double down for the Expertise on purpose.

Regardless, I still love the idea.

 

[Weiley31]

Can I use my extra time to practice more fighting (instead of taking etiquette lessons or learning Celestial or whatever) and get a bonus feat instead?

I'll allow it. It'll be using downtime and gold for training, but I'll allow it.

 

[Tonguez]

Your idea is interesting. Whereas in old school D&D, fighters became nobles ruling over others, in your version the fighter has a "common touch" making it easier for them to make friends & influence people across all strata of society.

Regardless of what your answer is to the question "What is the fighter's identity?", I think the right place for the rules to answer that is predominantly in the subclass.

There are two reasons to place the weight of the fighter's identity in the subclass, as opposed to the heart of the class itself. First, it allows the class to be versatile and adapt to multiple ideas of what being a "fighter" means. Second, it places the additional features at 3rd level, thus avoiding further weighting the early levels when players are most likely to "dip" multiclass into fighter for Action Surge builds.

If you look at class design generally, you'll notice that the Fighter and the Rogue are alone in only having one feature at 2nd level. Every other class gets 2 or 3 things at 2nd level. Same goes for Fighter at 5th level as compared to the Barbarian, Paladin, and Ranger – Fighter only gets Extra Attack, the others all get other coolness on top of Extra Attack. These are "openings" for design additions to the class.

This comes down to personal views, but I think the more the rules can discourage "dip" multiclassing in general, and especially for the fighter class, the better. Because the fighter's identity has been eroded away over the editions, and its special features parceled out to other classes. Obviously, people who enjoyed 3e's approach to the fighter & multiclassing (and by extension PF's approach), and the latest UA "multiclassing lite" feats, would disagree with me here.

Nope I love 3ed and PF BUT agree with you entirely
(of course in my ideal design there would be only Fighter with the othermartial classes (Barb, Ranger, Paladin) being subclasses created via Feats and Skills )

 

[Weiley31]

My Half-Elf Battle Master has an 18 in STR and a 20 in CHA. The party is composed of an Ancestral Guardian Barbarian, an Assassin Rogue with a split personality, and a Druid. My PC is technically the "face" of the group. In hindsight I should made my CHA a 16 instead of my CON being a 16, but the 20 CHA came in handy with saving the Rogue from being killed by another player's PC(not part of the regular party/grouping) in a dispute.

 

[Asisreo]

I think driving it for me is that one of the things I always wanted to represent was the kind of different social strata in a game and how different characters may be better at working within those groups.

If you have someone born and raised on the street, they're more likely to have mannerisms, figures of speech etc that will make them more socially adept at talking with other unfortunates as opposed to people that were raised as aristocrats, or wealthy merchants etc.

Whether or not they have innate or developed social skills themselves personally, their lingo, body language, and general presentation should could for something I just don't know how to map that in the game.

Okay, so.

I know this may come across as a "no, duh" moment, but there's the backgrounds in the PHB. Many people forget about these since their features and traits are not of a mechanical nature.

But a way you can think of them are sub-subclasses that everyone has access to. Now, most care about the skills, but some provide exactly what you're looking for, socially.

For instance, a folk hero lives among the commoners and know them so well that they're willing to provide lodging and stuff. A soldier has a rank and can talk up the military corps. A criminal has their contacts and a charlatans can access friends in odd places from their second persona.

Again, there's no numbers alotted to them, but they may help with the feeling of having things given to your fighter to give them a place, socially.

It's less likely that anyone in a party will have overlapping backgrounds, too.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I, for some reason, REALLY like this House Rule. Like alot.

On the other hand, I'm not sure how that would work well with something that is a custom background. Unless ya just double down for the Expertise on purpose.

Regardless, I still love the idea.

Thanks! The idea seems to have some traction with my group at least.