D&D 5E Martials should just get free feats

[Micah Sweet]

I hope by reposing this we can get back to the topic... but I bet I will see 5-9 argueing about if the fighter needs a fix and 1 or 2 more suggesting that nothing we say matters to MAYBE 1 about the topic of the thread,,,

In all fairness, unless you're making homebrew suggestions, nothing we say here DOES matter. WotC is not going to make the changes suggested here. It would make the classes too different.

 

[Professor Murder]

My counter: Give Fighters more skills, both in terms of number and choices.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

nothing we say here DOES matter.

you are incorrect

not if one person says it hear and nowhere else... then you most likely have a point.

However if enough of us are vocal here, on facebook, on tic tok, on twitter at game stores and at cons... we get to shape the discusions.

listen to the last few videos and you will see that they "hear what we are talking abouut" so if I want a change or you want a change... we have to talk.

it also matters that If I convince even 1 poster here to go to the next playtest survey thinging similar to me that alone could move the needle.



if we tell timetravel stories about butterfly effects where 1 minor change snowballs, then right now right here ever choice we make can shape the future.

 

[Professor Murder]

To elaborate: The issue for me is that Fighter and Barbarians, and to a lesser extend Paladins, can often feel like they don't contribute as much out of combat. Rogues and Bards get skills (and spells for Bards) which allow them to help in the other pillars of play outside of combat.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

To elaborate: The issue for me is that Fighter and Barbarians, and to a lesser extend Paladins, can often feel like they don't contribute as much out of combat. Rogues and Bards get skills (and spells for Bards) which allow them to help in the other pillars of play outside of combat.

I think having a pool of martial exploits that work for those pillars is better, things that let you do things other then damage.

 

[Jefe Bergenstein]

One problem with Martials getting free feats adds complexity. The fighter was one of the worst classes to give beginners in 3e precisely because you had to pre-plan characters to navigate the various feat options that were out there. Building a stronger core fighter (and other martials) would, IMHO, go further than giving them more feats.

I'm tired of shackling a whole class for players who don't even want to learn the damn game. Moreover, where's my noob caster? My heal bot? Make 4 noob classes and release the fighter for people who enjoy tactics rather than designing it for a theoretical player who spaces out until someone tells them to roll to hit.

These white room goobers so overwhelmed by picking a feat you guys are so concerned about protecting don't actually exist in meaningful numbers! Moreover, just have a few pre-builds if that is such a massive concern. But damn near every noob I've seen wants to play a spellcaster anyways, particularly in 5E where your fighter is just some schlub town guard +1!

D&D has long cultivated this problem though. From Gary "Serious players will choose magic-users" Gygax, the game bred out anyone who actually wanted martial parity, so that the only people left playing D&D were comfortable with caster dominance.

I've added superior fighting styles, and let fighters pick an additional style every odd level (Barbs, Rogues and Monks get one every 4 levels), and it actually elevated them to being worthy of the term. It's a lot easier to get by with a 14 dex when you also have archery style on top of protection, dueling, etc. Adding in at-will martial maneuvers on par with weapon cantrips also helped make EK not the only fighter worth playing.

 

[Micah Sweet]

you are incorrect

not if one person says it hear and nowhere else... then you most likely have a point.

However if enough of us are vocal here, on facebook, on tic tok, on twitter at game stores and at cons... we get to shape the discusions.

listen to the last few videos and you will see that they "hear what we are talking abouut" so if I want a change or you want a change... we have to talk.

it also matters that If I convince even 1 poster here to go to the next playtest survey thinging similar to me that alone could move the needle.



if we tell timetravel stories about butterfly effects where 1 minor change snowballs, then right now right here ever choice we make can shape the future.

I suppose what I'm actually saying then is that the kind of changes you and I would like to see are far too sweeping to ever meet WotC's demands for public approval, in my view. You are much, much better off, both for your game and your peace of mind, if you turn to third party and homebrew for your fixing 5e needs.

Why would you need WotC to do it anyway? They're no better than any other content producer. Unless you play a lot of Adventuer's League (in which case you are in fact doomed) you can get your stuff from anywhere you want, from 3PP to other posters to your own imagination.

 

[FallenRX]

no it isn't

as long as all three are forced into only subclass of a single class we do not have what I suggested, 3 separate classes

correct, and if you go back to my example build I didn't take sharp shooter or GWM I took lucky and two feats that give misc abailities... so I totally see what you are trying, I just feel it isn't enouigh.

did you miss my example buildd?

I actually did, this thread has been going super fast.
Its honestly pretty cool.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I think having a pool of martial exploits that work for those pillars is better, things that let you do things other then damage.

As long as you don't pick them from the same pool as exploits that do do damage, that could work.

 

[FallenRX]

I'm tired of shackling a whole class for players who don't even want to learn the damn game. Moreover, where's my noob caster? My heal bot? Make 4 noob classes and release the fighter for people who enjoy tactics rather than designing it for a theoretical player who spaces out until someone tells them to roll to hit.

These white room goobers so overwhelmed by picking a feat you guys are so concerned about protecting don't actually exist in meaningful numbers! Moreover, just have a few pre-builds if that is such a massive concern. But damn near every noob I've seen wants to play a spellcaster anyways, particularly in 5E where your fighter is just some schlub town guard +1!

D&D has long cultivated this problem though. From Gary "Serious players will choose magic-users" Gygax, the game bred out anyone who actually wanted martial parity, so that the only people left playing D&D were comfortable with caster dominance.

I've added superior fighting styles, and let fighters pick an additional style every odd level (Barbs, Rogues and Monks get one every 4 levels), and it actually elevated them to being worthy of the term. It's a lot easier to get by with a 14 dex when you also have archery style on top of protection, dueling, etc. Adding in at-will martial maneuvers on par with weapon cantrips also helped make EK not the only fighter worth playing.

My problem with this argument always has been.

Wizards themselves found a great solution to this problem.
Just give them a Default option, where its entirely optional to swap out of, thats it, that's all that is needed genuinely, give them simple feats like Tough, or Savage attacker that they dont have to think too much about, its a good solution, that allows people to opt out of completely without removing it from the equation or making it not worth it like now