D&D 5E Fixing the fighter (I know...)

[FrogReaver]

Admittedly I am thinking about improving Expertise anyway so it would make iconic cool naughty word happen reliably and more influenced by 4e so.... hmmmm.

Arent people discussing ways to get fighters to have more diverse ability

Your the one that attacked my observation. Maybe don't do that if your not looking to actually discuss that topic?

 

[Garthanos]

Well, I decided to put my money where my mouth is and take a stab at writing a "Heracles" class. Results here:

The Paragon

Always having only half bonus on Strength based attacks (call it wild strength) but other benefits strongly strength based...taking the top off Strength growth the implications are interesting.

 

[Garthanos]

Your the one that attacked my observation. Maybe don't do that if your not looking to actually discuss that topic?

Whoa not an attack at all just thinking out loud and that character diversity is for me a genuine value and part of the premise of improving the fighter ie the over all topic of the thread. I do not like by default taking away in home brew response either (so mistake or not the impact seems low if people are taking rogue expertise == stealth anyway)

 

[FrogReaver]

Whoa not an attack at all just thinking out loud and that character diversity is for me a genuine value and part of the premise of improving the fighter ie the over all topic of the thread. I do not like by default taking away in home brew response either (so mistake or not the impact seems low if people are taking rogue expertise == stealth anyway)

It's interesting isn't it, that when someone says let's give this class expertise so rogues can't be better at their iconic class skills then the same complaint of taking away things from rogues gets made.

The bottom line - if skills get any fix at all - something about the current rogue is going to get taken away - either by giving his stuff to other classes - or limiting his stuff to traditional rogue skills.

 

[Phion]

Oh it is definitely character design flexibility - but it's at the expense of character playability for the other classes!

And you are strongly mistaken. If fighters got expertise it most likely would go into something other than athletics IMO.

Whereas Rogues nearly always put expertise in stealth - because stealth is actually a useful skill, whereas athletics is only particularly useful if you want to knock guys prone in combat - which usually isn't all that useful of a thing to do since it means you are not attacking!

I feel differently, I love putting expertise into athletics and will happily forsake one attack once I get the extra attack feature to knock a npc prone allowing other characters such as rogue to get advantage and therefore sneak attack. There's been a number of times the advantage has gave me a crit so it somewhat makes up for the lose of the attack; throw in a action surge for an extra 2 attacks with advantage and that has not been a joke. And then there is just the general fun of interacting with the physical world in a number of flashier ways which you may not otherwise attempt in fear of the skill check failure i.e. Once after I grappled a creature I moved half my speed with it through a door smashing it and entering the next area before finishing it off with a thrust of the blade through the side of its neck; the DM was loving it so he allowed the scenario in the first place and then he allowed me to make a intimidation against the creatures in next room. I get that some DM's are can be awkward with stuff like that but most I have played with are all for it.

 

[Garthanos]

current rogue is going to get taken away.

Getting less lime light maybe... taken away ... not exactly the same.

 

[FrogReaver]

I feel differently, I love putting expertise into athletics and will happily forsake one attack once I get the extra attack feature to knock a npc prone allowing other characters such as rogue to get advantage and therefore sneak attack. There's been a number of times the advantage has gave me a crit so it somewhat makes up for the lose of the attack; throw in a action surge for an extra 2 attacks with advantage and that has not been a joke. And then there is just the general fun of interacting with the physical world in a number of flashier ways which you may not otherwise attempt in fear of the skill check failure i.e. Once after I grappled a creature I moved half my speed with it through a door smashing it and entering the next area before finishing it off with a thrust of the blade through the side of its neck; the DM was loving it so he allowed the scenario in the first place and then he allowed me to make a intimidation against the creatures in next room. I get that some DM's are can be awkward with stuff like that but most I have played with are all for it.

I'm not sure how that disagrees with my assessment - MOST would not put it in athletics. You are one - certainly not most.

 

[FrogReaver]

Getting less lime light maybe... taken away ... not exactly the same.

That's their words and complaints about giving others expertise. You are giving my rogue toys to someone else. You are taking away my uniqueness. Etc Etc.

 

[Garthanos]

That's their words and complaints about giving others expertise. You are giving my rogue toys to someone else. You are taking away my uniqueness. Etc Etc.

I know... just not my words, To me the thief took away the fighting mans toys but that was poor design back then I think where it was way too easy to assume nobody could do this because the thief had horrible odds of doing it and there really wasn't any well defined ability for others to do it at all just DM improv at some tables.

Boohoo you stole it now it's now being returned. LOL

 

[TheCosmicKid]

Funny how apparently my "lies" and "unproductive argumentativeness" has resulted in prodding you to create a complete class that addresses all my criticisms.

I'd call that pretty darn productive, but, hey, apparently I'll just be told I'm lying again.

...unbelievable.

"Productive" would be you creating the class.