D&D 5E Fixing the Champion

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[TwoSix]

Agreed. D&D is for everyone. But it would seem not everyone is for D&D...

I would agree with you, but I think we differ on our intended targets.

 

[TwoSix]

What? You don't mean 30-40 feats, because, uh, that would be a little unbalancing.

Do you want them to be a skillmonkey? Like the valor bard or the rogue? Wait, like the valor bard or the rogue?

No. Just 30-40 abilities, that aren't defined in the rules, aren't combat abilities, don't overlap with the other classes, and fit in perfectly with the fighter archetype.

I feel like this "hypothetical class" keeps coming back to the class that shall not be named?

(I have no opinion on that. Really. But just like the sorcerer threads, it always seems to come back to the same discussions. You either find what you like within the rules, you wait for them to publish something you like, or you homebrew something you like. That's how it's always been.)

Feat-like. Obviously (and I do mean obviously, as in I shouldn't have to point this out) each individual ability would be far less powerful than the feats currently in the rules, just as the core ability in the Actor feat is much less powerful than the core ability of Sentinel.

I don't particularly want a complex fighter to be a skill monkey. Although a complex rogue class with various skill tricks would also be interesting.

They obviously aren't defined in the rules, because we're discussing hypotheticals. And the bulk would be combat abilities, because this a complex fighter. And I'm sure there would be overlap with other classes, because every class overlaps each other. There aren't very many "one class only" spells in the PHB, if you look.

The class I'm picturing doesn't really have much of a support role, so it doesn't seem to overlap with the Class-who-must-not-be-Named you're speaking of. It's more about understanding the blind spots much of the community has in regard to pigeonholing complexity to narrative archetypes. There's nothing wrong with a D&D where casters know but a a few iconic magical abilities, and warriors learn a myriad of fighting techniques.

 

[Tony Vargas]

But a ruleset, by definition, cannot cater to every individualized preference.

Prior editions 'catered' to the preference for more interesting martial options. 5e is not so vastly and unalterably inferior in design to those prior editions that it couldn't do so as well. It's basic mission to be 'for everybody' (even if, according to Mike Mearls in L&L, merely "for everybody who ever loved D&D") requires it.

And that's fine. If you desire to play the most complex martial character ever, then more power to you!

More power, but no class options? Because there are none. There are 5 arguably-purely-martial sub-classes in the PH, they're all straightforward DPR types in combat.

I, on the other hand, will hit things. And, for what it's worth, I'm currently playing a monk (open hand). I hit stuff.

Open Hand Monk, Battlemaster, Barbarian, all hit stuff and hit it well with just a little resource management. Champion does so, by the numbers, slightly less & more randomly so, with even less resource managment. Clearly you have plenty of options in that regard. There was a poll here recently, what do you play when you just want to hit stuff. Barbarian and Battlemaster both got /more/ votes than Champion, and Monk & Paladin were also on the radar. (Valor Bard, at least, got very few votes.) Now, polls on here are as meaningless as Soviet-era economic statistics, but it's interesting just to think about what got put on that poll, as a candidate for 'just hit stuff.'

Clearly, the 'just hit stuff' camp has been lavishly serviced. And, it may well be that the OP had a point, and the Champion isn't quite competitive with those other comparatively simple options, including the Battlemaster.

Eldritch knight? Multiclass champion? Valor bard? Use a feat to get some spells?

Not what he meant by 'version of.' He meant a spellcaster as simple as the Champion. For those newbies who want to throw some magic around. The closest thing, right now, is probably an Elemental Monk ("you can't be Harry Potter, but you can be the Last Airbender!"), and it's not that close. Something like the Sorcerer build in Heroes of the Elemental Chaos would be an example. Pick an element, blast enemies with it, a couple of times between rests, toss a bigger blast.

Because you don't need to? Melee isn't spellcasting.

Now that's just circular. Just because D&D isn't currently giving melee types many options doesn't mean they don't need them. They /had/ them in prior editions (hundreds 'exploits' in 4e, dozens of feats in 3.x).

There's nothing wrong with a D&D where casters know but a a few iconic magical abilities, and warriors learn a myriad of fighting techniques.

Not only would there be nothing inherently 'wrong' with such a campaign, it'd be closer to most examples from genre. Most caster-types in genre, if they're protagonists, at all, don't actually display that great a range of magic.

 

[Mouseferatu]

Okay, so at the risk of further derailing...

What sorts of abilities would this hypothetical complex-fighter have? What would it do that's

1) Not already covered by BM maneuvers, and

2) Not already covered by the additional combat options in the DMG, and

3) Not skill-monkey-related, and

4) Not more appropriately modeled via the magic/spell system?

What are some examples of what you're actually looking for?

(This isn't meant to sound snide. I'm honestly curious.)

 

[I'm A Banana]

I meant more of a character with like one good cantrip, and then it would get class abilities that make it stronger, and some smaller side benefits. Closer to a 3.5 style warlock.

The closest to this is probably the Evoker (which is one of the reasons it's touted as the "default/basic wizard."), with maybe either kind of Sorcerer coming in close behind (I have three spells, I spam them all day, this is What I Do).

 

[ChrisCarlson]

I would agree with you, but I think we differ on our intended targets.

???

Sorry. That one must have gone over my head.

 

[Tony Vargas]

Okay, so at the risk of further derailing...

What sorts of abilities would this hypothetical complex-fighter have? What would it do that's1) Not already covered by BManeuvers, and2) Not already covered by the additional combat options in the DMG, and3) Not skill-monkey-related, and4) Not more appropriately modeled via the magic/spell system?

Everything the 3.5 and 4e fighters had, plus a fair bit of Bo9S, and various other martial experiments that have fallen by the wayside over the years. To start.

Seriously, as wide-open as 5e's philosophy is, the unexplored design space for any concept other than 'caster' is /vast/.


But, yes, this is getting pretty far off topic from just bringing the benighted Champion up to snuff, while leaving it the stand-out (no irony intended) simplest PC choice of 5e.

 

[Quartz]

You're right. Still would have been nice to get a spellcasting version of the Champion. Or a fighting class with a list of 30-40 ability to choose from. There's no reason NOT to do that, is there? I mean, any theoretical complex fighter would still be less complex than a wizard or cleric, and no one is complaining that fights are too complex because of them.

There's nothing stopping you creating additional manoeuvres for the Battlemaster.

 

[Lehrbuch]

The idea that the Champion is the 'simple fighter,' and the Battlemaster the 'complex fighter,' works only so long as you look at them next to eachother in isolation.

To be honest, the whole idea that the Champion is the "simple fighter" is starting to ring a bit hollow to me. It seems that most of those complaining about the Champion being underwhelming are finding it (either in play or just 'theoretically') too hard to play the subclass effectively. So, the supposed fix is to add or change bits to make it easier to play the subclass in accordance with some play-style.

This tells me that in fact the Champion is a complex subclass. If you really want to play a complex and challenging subclass, you should just figure out how to play the Champion well according to the RAW; rather than trying to make the class simpler to play effectively.