No Hope for Scout and Monster Hunter Fighter and artificer wizard

[Yunru]

I don't see the problem with the Battlemaster. It's obviously a 1/3 subclass of something, much like the Eldritch Knight is a 1/3 caster. Now all we need is a 1/2 or full Superiority Dice class.

 

[Gadget]

I kind of thought the Scout had the makings of decent "Spelless Ranger" that many seem to clamor for over the years, but I can't recall the details and points made about a watered down battlemaster are well taken. I think they did paint themselves into a corner with the way they did the battlemaster and superiority dice. There was kind of a feel that there would be a lot more martial maneuvers in the future, maybe as a sop to 4e fans; but that hasn't really come about.

 

[BookBarbarian]

I think the ship has flown on subclasses besides Battlemaster getting superiority dice. WotC may have backed themselves in a corner this way, but I don't think it will change.

I also think they intended the Scout Rogue and Monster Slayer ranger to replace these two UA concepts. Which is a shame, because the Scout is my favorite fighter in 5e.

Adding the superiority dice to some skill checks made it so this fighter got some great out of combat utility. Adding them to AC while not in Heavy armor made it have a unique incentive to wear medium armor even on Strength based fighter.

It pretty much perfectly hit the nail on the head for being the fighter I like to play who smacks people with a non-finesse weapon, grapples, and tracks, doesn't wear plate, or cast spells. Without it I'm back to Barbarians or Strength based Rangers with spells refluffed as traps, tricks, and general wilderness know-how.

Edit: Also, I do think there is place for a Scout-Type and Monster Hunter-Type fighter in the game just not using superiority dice and under new names.

Like a Skirmisher, Outrider, Raider, Huntsman, Trapper, or Stalker fighter that gets non-superiority dice ways to boost Athletics, Nature, Perception, Stealth, and Survival checks, and some type of bonus while in non-heavy armor.

Or a Night Warrior that does the same thing with the Monster Hunter abilities.

 

[Pauln6]

The fighter 'scout' was not overpowered. One of my players chose it for his fighter subclass and if he wants to stick with it, I'm fine with that. I'll just modify the class features to match the official Rogue scout as appropriate.

 

[BookBarbarian]

The fighter 'scout' was not overpowered. One of my players chose it for his fighter subclass and if he wants to stick with it, I'm fine with that. I'll just modify the class features to match the official Rogue scout as appropriate.

I could only see the Fighter Scout being overpowered using the Revised ranger version of Natural Explorer instead of the PHB version. Otherwise it seems just fine.

 

[Olrox17]

If a player asked me permission to play one those subclasses, I'd say yes. It's non-official content made by the guys that make official content. It's fine.

 

[Bardbarian]

No, not really.

D&D has always been pretty clear that while you can build a light-fighter, scouting and scouting themes have almost always been the domain of the Ranger or the Rogue.

A Bounty Hunter doesn't need a class. It can be literally any sort of class, even Wizards can be Bounty Hunters, that's sort of why it was such a wide-spread profession because it was so "every-man". A Highwayman is probably better built as a Rogue/Fighter MC, and if you're about to say "Well I don't use the MC rules!" well then sorry bud, there's gonna be some concepts you miss out on, and D&D need not create a stock class to cover every MC concept under the sun. Aragorn has ALWAYS been a Ranger, you may not like that but he is literally the basis for the class, and a Forward Scout is probably better off built closer to a sniper anyway.

The fact of the matter is, concepts like the Scout were pretty heavily covered by the rules to begin with, you could build a very solid one with just the base PHB classes. We don't need a new class for only minor feature adjustments.

I really need to ask this because I just dont understand. What about Aragorn makes him not a fighter? Everything i can think of about that character is covered in the fighter class. Its bee a long time since i read the books but I just dont recall anything that screams ranger in the D&D sense. I know the was inspiration for the class but his actual actios are no different than any other fighter.

I am sure I am missing something and would appreciate an explanation.

 

[Olive]

I really need to ask this because I just dont understand. What about Aragorn makes him not a fighter? Everything i can think of about that character is covered in the fighter class. Its bee a long time since i read the books but I just dont recall anything that screams ranger in the D&D sense. I know the was inspiration for the class but his actual actios are no different than any other fighter.

I am sure I am missing something and would appreciate an explanation.

Magical healing is part of it? I think the short answer is that the original conception of the ranger was influenced, at least in part, by the portrayal of Aragorn in LotR and as the most famous character called a ranger he's been the archetype. Drizzt changed this a bit but he wasn't invented till sometime after the D&D ranger.

Here's many pages of discussion which I haven't read: http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?317388-What-s-an-quot-Aragorn-Style-quot-ranger

 

[Sunseeker]

I really need to ask this because I just dont understand. What about Aragorn makes him not a fighter? Everything i can think of about that character is covered in the fighter class. Its bee a long time since i read the books but I just dont recall anything that screams ranger in the D&D sense. I know the was inspiration for the class but his actual actios are no different than any other fighter.

I am sure I am missing something and would appreciate an explanation.

What makes him the Ranger is more the class was originally based largely on him.

 

[CapnZapp]

It's not an official message board!

Yes it is. This messageboard is officially a messageboard. It’s the official EN World messageboard.

I meant "public".

/The farter of Brains