D&D 5E Fixing the Fighter: The Zouave

[5ekyu]

Yes, in 5e fighters characters can use their background to do stuff out of combat. It's a great feature of 5e, I'm very happy with it.

However, I find it strange that other characters can use their backgrounds and their classes to do stuff out of combat, but not the fighter. This is the crux of my argument.

edit: What I will do is create a Zouave subclass in a few days. It won't be super original and it will be "rough", but we'll see if it helps?

As many have said, extra feats means extra opportunities to take non-combat stuff. If you dont use feats, then that's extra ASI for extra bonuses to other skills.

I worked a half-elf samurai the other day. Two skill from half-elf, teo from fighter, two plus 2 tools from background. Elven accuracy at 4th.

At that point iirc with point buy had 8 str, 16 in dex 12 in con 14s in int wis and cha and a proficiencies that hit ecplore, social and other areas.

Had I really wanted to that 4th could be prodigy for another skill, tool and expertise then took the combat accuracy gain at 6th. But honestly with 8 proficiencies all backed by +2 or +3 stat, it did not seem needed and the accuracy with samurai seemed more potent at that point.

Iirc samurai, later on that Wis bonus will get added to social checks also, even better.

 

[Sacrosanct]

You could be forgiven for thinking that martial characters are the only ones who get backgrounds for the number of people who think fixing the lack of non combat agency is as simple as take/use a background. Once again who else can do that? Could the answer be again "everyone".

Also to answer another logical fallacy that keeps getting shovelled in high piles is that popular does not equal without issue.

no one thinks martial archetypes are the only ones to get backgrounds. No one has said because a class is popular, it’s without issue. Can you give citations for these?

speaking of, I’m still waiting for you to give citations on your earlier edition warring and insulting accusations earlier upthread about grognards being whiny liars who WoTC should ignore if they weren’t so weak.

or are you here to just insult people and make up arguments? If so, it would save me time from responding.

* if you’re referring to my comment, I said because it always comes up well in polls, it means the fighter isn’t necessarily broken, not that it’s perfect, and that any issues are subjective because they vary from person to person

 

[Sacrosanct]

Yes, in 5e fighters characters can use their background to do stuff out of combat. It's a great feature of 5e, I'm very happy with it.

However, I find it strange that other characters can use their backgrounds and their classes to do stuff out of combat, but not the fighter. This is the crux of my argument.

so can fighters as a class. They have two extra feats no one else gets. So the class, sans background, does have that option. If the fighter was designed to not have two extra feats, but instead had two hard baked in abilities that focused on out of combat functionality, no one could argue what you just said. It would be right there in black and white

instead WoTC gave us a choice on what to do, and I prefer choice over hard baked abilities when possible. Isn’t that what player agency is, and isn’t player agency a good thing?

I fully get how many people want more, and want it at earlier levels. It’s a legitimate preference. So I support your idea in the thread 100%, and like I said in my original reply, I’ll legitimately intrigued for a subclass.

but statements like “the fighter class can’t” aren’t accurate, and don’t help the discussion, because they can. You (general you) just choose not to use those options for whatever reason

 

[Undrave]

Fighters don't get extra feat.

They have class features hidden in the feat section that they have to share with everybody else.

Dual Wielder, Defensive Duelist, Heavy Weapon Master, Sharpshooter, Heavy Armor Master and Shield Master all feel like they could be 'Advanced' versions of the basic Fighting Styles (Two Weapon Fighting, Duelist, Heavy Weapon Fighting, Archery, Defense, and Protection respectively), while Sentinel feels like something all Fighter should get.

Inspirational Leader, Polearm Master and Mage Slayer could also be class features.

 

[Sacrosanct]

Fighters don't get extra feat.

They have class features hidden in the feat section that they have to share with everybody else.

Dual Wielder, Defensive Duelist, Heavy Weapon Master, Sharpshooter, Heavy Armor Master and Shield Master all feel like they could be 'Advanced' versions of the basic Fighting Styles (Two Weapon Fighting, Duelist, Heavy Weapon Fighting, Archery, Defense, and Protection respectively), while Sentinel feels like something all Fighter should get.

Inspirational Leader, Polearm Master and Mage Slayer could also be class features.

if you have pie, and other people could also have pie if they gave up something else (they have to give up a core ASI and you don’t), doesn’t mean you never had pie.

 

[Undrave]

if you have pie, and other people could also have pie if they gave up something else (they have to give up a core ASI and you don’t), doesn’t mean you never had pie.

Those feat were practically tailor made to synergies with the Fighter class features. Like they were ripped right out.

It is my belief they built the Fighter they way they did to appeal to 3e fans. They could go "LOOK! The Fighter has EXTRA FEATS! Just like in that game you won't stop playing, please love us again!" and keep the Fighter (what they assume to be) somewhat balanced with the other classes.

 

[5ekyu]

Fighters don't get extra feat.

They have class features hidden in the feat section that they have to share with everybody else.

Dual Wielder, Defensive Duelist, Heavy Weapon Master, Sharpshooter, Heavy Armor Master and Shield Master all feel like they could be 'Advanced' versions of the basic Fighting Styles (Two Weapon Fighting, Duelist, Heavy Weapon Fighting, Archery, Defense, and Protection respectively), while Sentinel feels like something all Fighter should get.

Inspirational Leader, Polearm Master and Mage Slayer could also be class features.

At this point, that just clearly doesnt make sense. Thisxseems yo now get round yo "but if I choose to not see this class feature as non-combat option".

 

[Undrave]

At this point, that just clearly doesnt make sense. Thisxseems yo now get round yo "but if I choose to not see this class feature as non-combat option".

Basically, it boils down to this: Other classes get handed non-combat class features, the Fighter has to trade his combat class features to do it.

 

[Oofta]

Those feat were practically tailor made to synergies with the Fighter class features. Like they were ripped right out.

It is my belief they built the Fighter they way they did to appeal to 3e fans. They could go "LOOK! The Fighter has EXTRA FEATS! Just like in that game you won't stop playing, please love us again!" and keep the Fighter (what they assume to be) somewhat balanced with the other classes.

I disagree. It gives the fighter (and other classes) a lot of flexibility without needing dozens of subclasses.

It, along with backgrounds, is one of the reasons I like 5E.

 

[Oofta]

Basically, it boils down to this: Other classes get handed non-combat class features, the Fighter has to trade his combat class features to do it.

Combat feats are not necessary to be a competent fighter. There are plenty of builds that don't need them.