D&D 5E Hopes for the 5E Fighter

[TwinBahamut]

First off, I want to say that the following comes from the perspective of someone who has grown estranged from 4E and doesn't like Pathfinder. I started with 3E and grew dissatisfied with its many flaws, but neither of its replacements really suited me. I loved a lot of both the core ideas of 3E and many of the ideas implemented in its later books like the Tome of Battle, and the 5E announcement is giving me some hope that I might be able to play an improved version of that someday. So, to take advantage of this newfound spirit of inclusiveness, reconciliation, and player feedback WotC is promoting, I may as well offer my two cents.

To state it crudely, I hope 5E doesn't have a Fighter class. Or rather, I hope it doesn't repeat the mistakes of some older editions and try to create a single class that is somehow supposed to embody all the concepts of "a skilled warrior who fights without the aid of magic". All that does is create a generic, flavorless chimera of a class that inhibits the development of more interesting class concepts. I like seeing all kinds of different warrior variants. Heavily armored knights, archers, swordmasters who forego the use of armor, lightly armored cavaliers, etc. I hope 5E's rules leave room for all of these kinds of concepts and let different character types shine.

I also hope that 5E continues some of the good ideas from the Tome of Battle and 4E by letting such non-magical characters still perform impressive feats and use advanced combat techniques. Of course, the exact implementation could certainly be improved upon. For all kinds of reasons I'm not a fan of the extensive class-specific power lists that defined 4E. If nothing else, a broader separation between class features and powers would be nice, and creating class-independent fighting powers similar to 3E's arcane and divine spell lists could be really interesting.

I'd also like to see a broader range of magical warrior concepts be available in the game. This is one area where 4E's strict Power Source system failed, and even 3E was only partially successful. Similarly, it would be nice to see a variety of "not magical, but still supernatural" character concepts like the 3E Monk was or what the 4E Ki Power Source could have been (I'll admit it, WotC's announcement that the Monk was Psionic and the Ki Power Source was scrapped was the moment I realized 4E was drifting away from what I wanted it to be).

One final thing I would like to see is a good and simple set of rules for mounts and mounted combat that lets mounts serve an important role in the game. Older editions seem to have always marginalized such rules based on the idea that mounts don't belong in a dungeon, but if 5E really wants to let people play the way they want to play, it needs to move past that kind of thinking. 3E's Ride Skill system added a ton of extra die rolls and complexity for very little effect, and 4E's wasn't that much better. Some system where mounted characters had unique advantages and disadvantages (and maybe a dedicated Cavalier class) without significant complexity would be ideal.

Anyone else have some thoughts on the subject? Subjects? I think I rambled on a bit there...

 

[Ahnehnois]

I'd like to see something similar to Trailblazer's combat reactions; something that makes a martial character faster and better at high levels.

I want to see flexible and usable combat maneuvers like PF or TB.

I want to see a fighter class or classes that fully cover a wide variety of fighting styles. I'd rather see the default fighter (heavily armored melee character) return, with variant classes for lightly armored, fast fighters, archers, and others.

I want to see tougher, more realistic damage and fatigue mechanics that let the fighter shine.

I want to see a fighter class that starts simple and remains feasible for beginners, casual gamers, and others who don't like the complexity of selecting a bunch of things. I also want to see a class that lets people take complex options at higher levels if they really want to.

I don't want to see anything that gives even a whiff of the supernatural to the fighter (he can multiclass or learn rituals, but I don't want it built in(. I don't want to see any kind of per-day mechanics for the fighter (or anyone, but especially the fighter).

 

[Dice4Hire]

I want the 5E fighter to contribute at all levels, like they did in 4E, but not in 3.5.

I really do not think we need a fighter class exactly, unless somehow the world is 8% fighters with weapons and 20% everything esle.

 

[P1NBACK]

I want to see a Fighter who attracts followers and builds a stronghold at 9th Level.

 

[TwinBahamut]

I want to see a Fighter who attracts followers and builds a stronghold at 9th Level.

I'd rather not see that be a Fighter class feature, but it would certainly be nice for every character to get that option.

 

[P1NBACK]

I'd rather not see that be a Fighter class feature, but it would certainly be nice for every character to get that option.

Each class would have an equivalent world building function.

 

[Dragonblade]

I want an old school simplified damage dealing fighter as an option for those who like such things.

But for me, I prefer cinematic LotR moments like Legolas single-handedly taking out the Oliphants and its riders and then riding it down as it falls. And I want to be able to do that at Heroic Tier without having to make a series of difficult skill checks either.

I want powers and Tome of Battle style maneuvers to be an option for those like me who want more cinematic heroics. I'm cool with superhuman wuxia/anime style awesome-ness. Bring it on!

I'll pass on the death spiral and fatigue mechanics. No thanks on the "gritty" stuff. I get enough drudgery in real life. In the game, I want to be a BIG DAMN HERO!

 

[Stormonu]

I don't want to really see the fighter using supernatural wuxia-like moves. At the same time, they should still be able to hold their own and contribute to the group.

Give me a fighter who can fight like one of the 300 or Captain America, Robin Hood, William Wallace, Conan, King Arthur or the like. I don't want them to be like Neo and his gang (impressive yes, but not the default fighter).

Have the wizard screaming "Why...won't...you...die!" as he deflects, dodges or pushes through spells and keeps coming after his foe.

 

[The Human Target]

I'd rather not see that be a Fighter class feature, but it would certainly be nice for every character to get that option.

Every character has that option at every level in every game ever made.

No mechanics needed.

 

[Ahnehnois]

I don't want to really see the fighter using supernatural wuxia-like moves. At the same time, they should still be able to hold their own and contribute to the group.

Give me a fighter who can fight like one of the 300 or Captain America, Robin Hood, William Wallace, Conan, King Arthur or the like. I don't want them to be like Neo and his gang (impressive yes, but not the default fighter).

Have the wizard screaming "Why...won't...you...die!" as he deflects, dodges or pushes through spells and keeps coming after his foe.

XP is still off, but that's a good description of why you'd want to play a fighter.

 

[JRRNeiklot]

Fixing the fighter is simple, leave him as is and fix the magic system. 3e broke the fighter by making spells too easy to cast. Interrupting a wizard is insanely difficult. You have to ready a partial action to hit him when he begins casting. Even then, he gets a concentration check. This is again something Gary got right. In AD&D, the higher level the spell, the harder it is to get off. Meteor swarm takes nine segments to cast, which means it takes 2-3 rounds to cast. One hit from anything ruins it. You can't even use your dex bonus to dodge, or move at all. Now, I'm not saying 5e needs to go back to tracking segments, but some method of making spells harder to cast simply must be implemented, else the fighter will always be a torch bearer for the wizard. The other option is to give the fighter abilities that break immersion and end up being as magical as the wizard's spells. Then you don't have a fighter, you have a wizard with a sword. A method similar to WFRP could work. Not to mention being insanely fun.

 

[Hassassin]

Fixing the fighter is simple, leave him as is and fix the magic system.

As he is in 3e or as he is in 4e?

 

[JRRNeiklot]

I was using 3e as a base.

 

[Chris_Nightwing]

... and a new edition brings me crawling back to the boards

I think what I'm reading from many of the posts in this thread is that there is no default Fighter (or combat style). This is because you are fixated on specific class mechanics. You can separate fighting into 'like a fighter', 'like an archer', 'like a monk' and create a class for each.. or simply give every character (or every martial character) the options to develop their own combination of movement, armour, weapons and style.

When WotC talk about options, I hope this is what they plan.

 

[Ahnehnois]

But for me, I prefer cinematic LotR moments like Legolas single-handedly taking out the Oliphants and its riders and then riding it down as it falls. And I want to be able to do that at Heroic Tier without having to make a series of difficult skill checks either.

I want powers and Tome of Battle style maneuvers to be an option for those like me who want more cinematic heroics. I'm cool with superhuman wuxia/anime style awesome-ness. Bring it on!

This has to be one of the hardest things to read I've seen in the past few days. You want a character to be able to do something that caused theaters full of moviegoers worldwide to let out a collective groan? Without making any substantial character choices or spending any resources? Without any chance of failure? Before reaching 10th level in a game that runs at least 20?

Why have rules at all then?

I think that there's a role for that kind of stuff, but I think that's what epic levels and optional addons are for (if not, than what are epic levels for?). If you want to start a game epic and play wuxia that's fine with me, but I don't want the game restricted solely to that style. Frankly, if one of my players tried a stunt like that, his character would be dead before he hit the ground.

I'll pass on the death spiral and fatigue mechanics. No thanks on the "gritty" stuff. I get enough drudgery in real life. In the game, I want to be a BIG DAMN HERO!

If I were going to emulate something heroic and cinematic from LotR involving a fighter, I'd want to do Boromir's last stand and death scene. That was epic.

 

[Dragonblade]

This has to be one of the hardest things to read I've seen in the past few days. You want a character to be able to do something that caused theaters full of moviegoers worldwide to let out a collective groan? Without making any substantial character choices or spending any resources? Without any chance of failure? Before reaching 10th level in a game that runs at least 20?

In my theater everyone clapped and cheered.

Not without chance of failure or using resources. Just without having to make a number of difficult checks. The 7th level Rogue PC in my Pathfinder game can already do this so its not like being cinematically cool is some new concept for 5e.

I think that there's a role for that kind of stuff, but I think that's what epic levels and optional addons are for (if not, than what are epic levels for?). If you want to start a game epic and play wuxia that's fine with me, but I don't want the game restricted solely to that style. Frankly, if one of my players tried a stunt like that, his character would be dead before he hit the ground.

No. I like epic, but its so hard to get there for so many reasons. After playing D&D for 25 plus years, I'm tired of struggling through the "gritty" lower levels. When 4e allowed you to feel like a hero from level 1 it was a breath of fresh air.

I'm cool with optional 0 level rules, but I don't think they should be the default. Newbies to the game shouldn't have to struggle to be heroic, not when they can go play something like God of War 3 and are mowing through hordes of mooks right from the get go. Though I think that is another debate entirely.

 

[Hassassin]

No. I like epic, but its so hard to get there for so many reasons. After playing D&D for 25 plus years, I'm tired of struggling through the "gritty" lower levels. When 4e allowed you to feel like a hero from level 1 it was a breath of fresh air.

There are rules for starting at whatever level you want in 3e. What's the problem with that system?

 

[Dragonblade]

There are rules for starting at whatever level you want in 3e. What's the problem with that system?

First of all epic is broken in 3e. Second of all, like I mentioned before, campaigns always seem to start at level 1, and die by level 10. I'm one of the only DMs I know that has consistently DMed a group from level 1 to 20.

Over the years I have heard the same broken promises from so many DMs. "Just trust me, we'll start at level 1, but then you'll get to all the cool high level stuff soon enough."

But what happens? The game ends, the DM quits, or burns out, etc. I've realized the only way I'll ever be able to consistently play the PCs I want to play is for the game itself to break away from this notion that low level should be gritty and high level should be godly. I don't need to be godly, but I'm sick to death of being gritty. Cinematic heroics should come in heroic tier.

 

[Hassassin]

First of all epic is broken in 3e. Second of all, like I mentioned before, campaigns always seem to start at level 1, and die by level 10. I'm one of the only DMs I know that has consistently DMed a group from level 1 to 20.

Over the years I have heard the same broken promises from so many DMs. "Just trust me, we'll start at level 1, but then you'll get to all the cool high level stuff soon enough."

But what happens? The game ends, the DM quits, or burns out, etc. I've realized the only way I'll ever be able to consistently play the PCs I want to play is for the game itself to break away from this notion that low level should be gritty and high level should be godly. I don't need to be godly, but I'm sick to death of being gritty. Cinematic heroics should come in heroic tier.

And if "1st level" was more cinematic, but the "gritty levels" were in the core, what makes you think anything would change? Maybe you should just have chosen a game more carefully and/or insisted on higher starting level?

In any case, it seems clear there are players who want very different levels of power in their games, so it makes sense to me that the lower levels cater to one group and the higher levels to another.

 

[Dragonblade]

In any case, it seems clear there are players who want very different levels of power in their games, so it makes sense to me that the lower levels cater to one group and the higher levels to another.

The problem with levels is they imply that you must start at 1 and proceed up the chain. I don't like the idea that level should also determine play style.

Play style in terms of gritty vs. heroic should be a "dial" that is not predicated on level.

5e should have level 1 be anything from 1e style 4 hp wizards with a single spell to their name, to 4e style 30 HP heroes with multiple powers depending on how you set your dial for grittiness vs. cinematic play.