5E Mission Impossible?!

Seramus

Adventurer
Because the design balance point doesn't change regardless if many DMs ignore it.
It was a foolish choice of balance point since almost nobody has eight encounters a day (even including skill challenges). It certainly happens sometimes, but you can sit and watch any FLGS table, any youtube D&D stream, or study the natural pacing of any official module... and a full eight encounters is rare as hell.

But I completely agree with you that 13th Age uses a great system, and have started using it myself.
 

Zardnaar

Hero
Generally back ground and go Dex based with a tertiary starving something like charisma.

Fighters get a bonus feat/ASI level 6 compared to every other class so you could use it in more skills or whatever without giving up to much in the way of combat use. You can still have 20 Dex level 8 and a feat.
 

Oofta

Title? I don't need no stinkin' title.
It was a foolish choice of balance point since almost nobody has eight encounters a day (even including skill challenges).
I'll have to tell my group that, they'll be quite relieved. Use the alternate rest rules to make a short rest overnight and a long rest is a week or more if you aren't doing dungeon crawls. If you are doing dungeon crawls, don't allow long rests in dangerous areas. Don't assume you'll have a long rest after a session. Done.

It's easy to overcome in a home game; admittedly not so much so in an AL game. But those (in my experience) tend to be combat heavy so it kind of balances out.
 

Oofta

Title? I don't need no stinkin' title.
Feats are fundamental to the functioning of the Fighter class. If you don't use feats your fighters are broken.
Not everyone does sharp shooter crossbow expertise builds or whatever feat heavy build you're thinking of. Those that do focus on combat feats do so because they enjoy optimizing the combat side of things. If you want to contribute more out of combat there are several backgrounds and feats that will help.
 

Oofta

Title? I don't need no stinkin' title.
This isn’t a thing.
Some people really want it to be an issue. This is what, the third thread on this arguing the exact same thing? That in spite of the fact that fighters are the most commonly build class on DndBeyond that they're somehow fundamentally broken because they aren't spellcasters or rogues.

Because the answer is simple. There's not a problem. Anyone can build a PC with a lot of out of combat flexibility if they want to do so. A lot of people don't care. In my games, the non-casters contribute just as much as the casters because they contribute to RP and party decisions. Most games don't have things like fly or teleport because either the caster is out of spells or they simply aren't high enough level.
 

Leatherhead

Possibly a Idiot.
Or the secret is just accept that they wont be as useful and just play with what you got?
I'm going to let everyone into a secret that often gets overlooked in white-room balance discussions: Something doesn't have to be as useful as the best, it only has to be useful enough to be a viable and reliable option.

Is expertise in the Stealth skill as good as Greater Invisibility? Heck no.
Is it useful enough to not warrant spending a spell slot in the vast majority of situations? Heck yes.
 

DM Dave1

Adventurer
I agree feats can make a Fighter more well-rounded - especially when one is not wedded to just taking combat feats.

Backgrounds also can play an important role in helping Fighter have some rules-obvious contribution to the exploration pillar (e.g. Archaeologist, Fisher, or Outlander among others) or the social pillar (e.g. Anthropologist, Sailor, or Smuggler). Even the tried-and-true optimizer’s choice of Soldier has some social pillar significance.

Beyond that, a DM should be cognizant of spotlight time and engage the Fighter in the non-combat pillars, too. So what if they aren’t the best at smooth talking or foraging, the party Fighter can still contribute meaningfully with some creativity on the player’s part and and engaging scenario set up by an inclusive DM.
 
So if that's the case, fix the root cause. Unfortunately that will likely take a fairly comprehensive change of the numbers.
So, 6-8 encounters/2-3 short rest/day is obviously a ratio of encounters to uses of abilities.
For sort rest abilities, its 2 encounters per short-test ability. So, converting short rest to encounter is simple halving.
For dailies, I suppose, split the difference: divide by 7. So anything less than 4/day, you don't have, 4-10/day becomes 1/encounter.

So the wizard would get his first slot at 3rd, a second at 7th, and top out at 3/encounter at 15th - at others the level of a slot might increase.
 
Last edited:

Blue

Orcus on a bad hair day
So, 6-8 encounters/2-3 short rest/day is obviously a ratio of encounters to uses of abilities.
For sort rest abilities, its 2 encounters per short-test ability. So, converting short rest to encounter is simple halving.
For dailies, I suppose, split the difference: divide by 7. So anything less than 4/day, you don't have, 4-10/day becomes 1/encounter.

So the wizard would get his first slot at 3rd, a second at 7th, and top out at 3/encounter at 15th - at others the level of a slot might increase.
Lots of ways to do it. A bit earlier I mentioned 13th Age, which divorces the narrative of sleeping from recovery management. They have at-will, per encounter, and per full heal-up. A full heal-up happens after 4 encounters, though if they are particularly tough a DM can knock it down to three. It doesn't matter if those 4 encounters happen in a single day, a single morning, or during a three week expedition through the tundra.

Players can take a full heal-up earlier, but at the expense of a campaign set-back, a currency used in just a couple of cases where the players want to overrule the system. So maybe the murderer strikes again, or another peasant is infected with lycanthropy, or the cultists complete the first stage of their fiendish ritual.

Actually, I like how 13th Age does casters within the system, it's something 6E might want to steal. All spells can be upcast (yes, it was out before 5e, but I think Wheel of Time RPG way back when first had that idea). As you gain levels you slowly gain slots but your slots migrate upwards. So a 2nd level character has 6 first level slots, but at 3rd level they have 3 first level and 4 slots of the next level. At 5th level you have 1/4/4. And 8th level you have 0/0/3/8. (It's only a 10 level system, so it only have 5 levels of spells instead of 9.) This means that spells are cast at viable levels, but the number of slots only slowly increase.

Also, the spells you learn are not only Vancian. Or rather, each spell is at-will, per-encounter, or per full-heal up. So you can take one of your highest level slots for a "cantrip" if it's an at-will spell and do lots of regular damage, while someone else has an amazing daily in that slot, or a great per-encounter.
 

Vitor Bastos

Explorer
Just to clarify, Im not trying to diminish the melee classes. Matter of fact, most times I played as melee. I'm just trying to raise some questions and see what you guys have to say about it based on your gameplay experience.
 

cmad1977

Adventurer
IME: having had high level feat-using melee classes and high level non fear using melee classes at my tables I’ve found them to be just as useful as any of the classes.
 
Not everyone does sharp shooter crossbow expertise builds or whatever feat heavy build you're thinking of. Those that do focus on combat feats do so because they enjoy optimizing the combat side of things. If you want to contribute more out of combat there are several backgrounds and feats that will help.
Actually I was thinking that you can also use the fighter's additional feats to develop their out of combat abilities. That flexibility is an important feature of the class.

The point is, without feats the fighter is disadvantaged both in combat and out of combat.
 
If true, the Fighter class should have appeared as an option in the Feats section.
It wouldn't be D&D if the fighter wasn't a core class.

IMO the "Optional" should be removed from the feats section.

Otherwise yes, if you play a "no feats" game you will need to buff fighters.
 

Advertisement

Top