D&D 5E (2014) Giving Fighters nice things...

[jaelis]

Fighters get a lot of nice things now. You can give them more, but then other classes might get jealous

 

[Salamandyr]

I am considering the following changes to Fighters and would like to get some feedback:

Hit Die: D12
Extra Attack: 4th, 9th, 15th
Indomitable: Goes from a re-roll to an auto-success.

Champions: 5th level: Free Savage Attacker feat.
Champions: Remarkable Athelete: Add your entire proficiency to Str, Dex, and Con checks that do not already include it. Increase your vertical and horizontal jump by 1X Str Mod for standing and 2x STR Mod for running jumps.

Eldritch Knight: Choose any two schools.

Battle Master: At 7th level, you can expend an additional Superiority Die on a maneuver.

I am all for giving Fighters nice things. My preferred nice thing is opening up their flexibility rather than giving them more combat goodies...but on your choices, point by point.

Hit Die: D12

Not necessary, and steps on a Barbarian's toes.
Extra Attack: 4th, 9th, 15th

I like this idea, though I want to expand it a bit. The fighter's main schtick--the thing that supposedly sets him apart from everybody else, doesn't actually pull ahead of anyone until 11th level (and even then the other classes get an equivalent feature). Other than giving the 4th attack at 15th level, when it will actually do a bit of good for a player, this won't do much.

Indomitable: Goes from a re-roll to an auto-success.

Perfectly good idea, but I'd prefer to just get rid of the usage make it always on advantage on all saving throws.

Champions: 5th level: Free Savage Attacker feat.

Savage Attacker is a lame feat. How about increasing all weapon dice one step?

Champions: Remarkable Athelete: Add your entire proficiency to Str, Dex, and Con checks that do not already include it. Increase your vertical and horizontal jump by 1X Str Mod for standing and 2x STR Mod for running jumps.

No need for this (and steps on Barbarian's toes), but doesn't hurt anything. You should never, ever have ability checks that can't be modified by some proficiency anyway. It screws up the math.

Eldritch Knight: Choose any two schools.

Why not just remove the school limitation?

Battle Master: At 7th level, you can expend an additional Superiority Die on a maneuver.

Is there a rule you can only expend one superiority die? This doesn't actually help the Battlemaster much. It just runs them out of gas even quicker. More flexibility is needed, not less.

 

[aco175]

In my game I find the fighter to be able to hold his own with the other classes. The party is 9th level right now and the fighter has the highest AC and HP. He deals good damage, but half the time the thief deals more with the backstab. I could see adding increased damage, maybe increasing the weapon damage a step (d6 becomes d8) or giving criticals on 18-20 rather than 19-20 at some point. Maybe even giving action surge more times per rest and increase 2nd wind.

Overall I would give a small boost to check against the balancing with other classes and see if more is needed rather than granting a lot now and either needing to take some back or giving more to the rest of the classes to make it right.

 

[seebs]

I am pretty sure fighter is very close to Best Class already, why would you buff them?

 

[Springheel]

Wow, I'm surprised to see so much love for the fighter. D&D is supposed to be about three pillars, and it seems like the fighter is the one class that has absolutely nothing special for two of the three pillars. If you don't get into a lot of combats, what makes a fighter able to compete with other classes?

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

Wow, I'm surprised to see so much love for the fighter. D&D is supposed to be about three pillars, and it seems like the fighter is the one class that has absolutely nothing special for two of the three pillars. If you don't get into a lot of combats, what makes a fighter able to compete with other classes?

That's precisely the point people are making here. These changes only really help the Fighter in combat, where they are already superb. They don't help out where the fighter actually needs the help: in the other two pillars.

(Apart from the Remarkable Athlete change, but as was pointed out earlier, that is rather badly designed: negating a Champion's skill choices rather than enhancing them.)

 

[Salamandyr]

That's precisely the point people are making here. These changes only really help the Fighter in combat, where they are already superb. They don't help out where the fighter actually needs the help: in the other two pillars.

(Apart from the Remarkable Athlete change, but as was pointed out earlier, that is rather badly designed: negating a Champion's skill choices rather than enhancing them.)

I don't think the fighter is superb. Honestly I don't think they bring anything to the table that is not amply supplied by other classes. At best they are as good as other classes in combat, assuming really optimal ability usage.

But I do agree that the way to fix that is to give them breadth, rather than depth. Give em breadth in combat too; we need to make that "master of weapons" mean something.

One quick idea; give them all the weapon specializations-with the ruling that they can only have one active at a time. Suddenly you've got a fighter who has a reason for carrying and using more than one weapon.

Give the Battlemaster both the BM and Champion's 7th Level ribbons.. Take away the two school limitation from the Eldritch Knight (don't increase their spells known though).

The biggest problem with the fighter is that almost every interesting choice one makes with the class are made at character creation and then, never again. Look at ways to make the character use different tools for different problems, rather than hyperfocusing on using one tool for every problem.

 

[FrogReaver]

Wow, I'm surprised to see so much love for the fighter. D&D is supposed to be about three pillars, and it seems like the fighter is the one class that has absolutely nothing special for two of the three pillars. If you don't get into a lot of combats, what makes a fighter able to compete with other classes?

D&D without combats.... heresy!

I know you didn't say without any combats but I just wanted to point out that in a combat lite game D&D is probably not the best system...

 

[FrogReaver]

I am pretty sure fighter is very close to Best Class already, why would you buff them?

lol

 

[Sacrosanct]

D&D is designed around three pillars but not every class has to be equally designed to fit all of those pillars. That's a fallacy. We as players have the choice as to what classes we play and what ones we don't. Some classes are designed to do better in one pillar and maybe not as good in the other, that doesn't mean the entire game is off balance or bad. That's a feature, not a bug, because it gives us more choice to find a class that fits what we like.

Want a fighter who has a lot of exploration ability? Congrats, that's called a ranger. People are getting hung up on the name, and are getting caught up in an unrealistic expectation that every class needs to have the exact same functionality in every other pillar as every other class. IMO, at that point, what is the point in choosing a class? It's the same stuff but with the serial #s filed off and they feel the same. YMMV obviously. If the fighter doesn't give you what you want in another pillar, you have plenty of other classes that are designed to do that. No one says you have to play every class in the game.