D&D 5E [Poll] How Satisfied Are You With the Fighter Class?

[Sacrosanct]

Yesterday was the Druid, today is the Fighter.

Once a year or so, I think it would be interesting to get a pulse on the satisfaction of the various classes. The game's been out for a few years now, and that's plenty of time to get a good experience on how each plays out.

For the purpose of this poll, I am keeping the answers to a minimum intentionally. When you have too many options, it's harder to really evaluate the results. And for the purposes of this, a general feeling is more than adequate.

Long term goal: Have a survey of each class, then compiled results to be easily referenced for future discussions that may want said information.

Previous rolling results (which are changing as more votes come in. On the final tally, they will be broken down by each category rather than general scores here):

Barbarian: 91% sat, 4% unsat
Bard: 84% sat, 11% unsat
Cleric: 84% sat, 8% unsat
Druid: 83% sat, 14% unsat

 

[Sacrosanct]

I understand I very well may be an outlier, but I love the fighter as written. I think it gives options and maneuvers for those that want it (BM), hybrid caster for those that want it (EK), and a basic core fighter for those that want it (Champion). I understand that even if one of those subclasses might not appeal to me, they do for others, and the ones that do appeal to me are there for me to play. Not every subclass has to appeal to me personally because other gamers have other preferences.

I also love how they granted the 2 extra feats above and beyond any other class, because instead of having a hard baked non combat ability that you had to have (because it would be hard baked into the class), they are allowing me the option to choose what I want to do with those two extra feats, which can be out of combat stuff that I want, or any other combat enhancement that I want.

More choice to customize is better, IMO.

 

[steeldragons]

Given the amount flack the fighter has taken, for any number of perceived "shorts," I am forced to conclude that it is perfectly well designed and implemented, as is.

More options are great. Sure. Options can be (and have been) added to any/all classes in a wide number of ways: new subclasses being the most obvious (and called for).

But, as written, there's nothing "wrong" with the Fighter class...even if certain playstyles would say/demand they "need moar" of this or that.

 

[Sacrosanct]

Given the amount flack the fighter has taken, for any number of perceived "shorts," I am forced to conclude that it is perfectly well designed and implemented, as is.

More options are great. Sure. Options can be (and have been) added to any/all classes in a wide number of ways: new subclasses being the most obvious (and called for).

But, as written, there's nothing "wrong" with the Fighter class...even if certain playstyles would say/demand they "need moar" of this or that.

Even most of the responses in our weekly "Make the fighter better" threads are just minor tweaks. So it seems for the most part, people are cool with the fighter. I admit I am very interested to see how this poll ends up. It seems to be one of the most polarizing classes right behind ranger.

 

[steeldragons]

I would have very much preferred if they had been a bit more symmetrical across the board and expanded on NON-magic/add-spellcasting-for- power class options.

Frex: Barbarians, Rangers, Fighters and Rogues could/should have ALL been given 5 subclasses (with non-magic using defaults)...with only one or two of them offering the 1/3rd caster spells-added-on option. Even if 2 subclasses of each involved magical abilities or spellcasting, that would still have tripled the non-spellcasting options within the game.

By the same token, the clerics and wizards (and their respective class offshoots) should have been pared DOWN to 5 subclasses each. Yes, in the case of clerics, particularly, this would have meant having to organize the archetypes in some way that was NOT "deity specific domains" and I can't say, off the top of my head, what that would be. But I'm sure it's possible.

Wizards could have just been knocked down, for initial release, to the most [traditionally] popular subclasses. I would say, it should/could easily have been: 1) generalist [default] mage, 2) illusionist (who doubles as "enchanter" with some conjuration thrown in), 3) necromancer (who doubles as "conjurer" w/ some evocation thrown in), 4) evoker (with some transmuting thrown in), varying degrees of abjurations and divinations sprinkled throughout any/all subclasses, and to give the flip side of a fighter with some minor magic - 5) a bladecaster/spellsword/weapon-using mage with some light armor and weapon skills.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

Class overall is fine.

I'm fine with the Eldritch Knight. I would tweak the Battlemaster's 15th level ability to make it recharge after five minutes, instead of when you roll initiative, but the subclass is basically okay.

Champion needs some work. Currently, its niche is unfortunately subclass-for-people-who-can't-do-probability-math: its iconic ability is Improved Critical, and yet Improved Critical is basically a ribbon in terms of its actual effect.

 

[Rod Staffwand]

I voted dissatisfied with major tweaks needed, but that's basically my thought on most of the 5e classes so fighters aren't outliers in that regard. Also, about half of my 5e play has been with Basic with the lackluster champion and no feats being the only available options.

Major problems are:
1. Lack of skills/expertise. As a mundane, fighters solve problems outside of combat with the skill system. More skills or even expertise goes a long way to make them more versatile. They shouldn't be competitive with the rogue, but should be able to contribute in a couple of areas. Even a third skill proficiency would help.
2. Fighting styles. These are bland and lame. I especially detest archery (which makes ranged too attractive, especially in conjunction with feats) and great-weapon fighting (with its damage re-rolls that just eat up resolution time to no good purpose). This is the first class feature a reader gets to and it screams, 'This class is dull, move along!'.
3. Second Wind. This is a good ability (finally, self-healing for the fighter!), but I abhor short rests (which I've removed from the game). I changed it to 'Fighting Spirit': Gain thp = level whenever initiative is rolled and it works pretty well.
4. Action Surge. Fantastic ability but based on short rests. Once again I made it once per combat (or 10 minutes out of combat), making it available much more often. This works in the context of Basic (with fighter as the only warrior class), w/o feats or multiclassing. It'd be unbalanced otherwise.
5. Extra Attack. Becomes 'Extra Action'. You get two actions in a round. This can be two attacks, a dash+attack, an attack+help, etc. Gives a lot more versatility to the fighter in combat and gets players away from the attackattackattack mindset. Again, I haven't tried this in a 5e game with all classes, feats, multiclassing and such but I think it'd probably be unbalanced.
6. Indomitable. Improved to automatic success. Usage rates remain the same.

'Champion' - My Basic version. Given that the basic fighter chassis has been upgraded, this needed less work. However:
1. Improved Critical. Improves faster: 19+ at 3rd, 18+ at 5th, 17+ at 9th, 16+ at 13th, 15+ at 17th. You can forgo extra damage and perform a special maneuver (trip, knockback, etc.). You also automatically kill/knockout/disable enemies of a certain CR (starting at CR1/4 for 3rd and going to CR3 at 17th) in lieu of rolling damage.
2. Remarkable Athlete. Stacks with proficiency. You also gain the BM's Know Your Enemy feature.
3. Survivor. Unchanged.

The Battle Master is better, but I hate the short rest recharges. The maneuvers also needed better scaling into epic tier and there should be advancement maneuvers to learn.

I've seen Eldtritch Knight once or twice at cons, but I haven't picked apart and cannot comment on its viability. My 5B gish class is basically a paladin with fewer class features and arcane casting.

 

[hawkeyefan]

Very satisfied with the Fighter, overall.

And I have to say that I absolutely LOVE the Champion Fighter and I wish people would leave it alone. There's something to be said for its simplicity and straightforwardness. Any proposed changes to the subclass should instead be made a separate subclass. I don't want any conplexity added to the Champion.

Battle Master is cool for people who want some options in melee. And Eldritch Knight fills a prominent role of the caster/warrior without the need to multiclass. Perhaps a little redundant in 5E given how many subclasses are kind of hybrid options, but it's well designed and I like it.

 

[Mercule]

Pretty solid, over all. I think there's room for tinkering with it, but I like to tinker. I haven't seen a Champion in play, but keep hearing that they're a bit weak.

 

[Sacrosanct]

This is the first poll we've had someone vote "very dissatisfied". I'd be curious to hear from those who voted that way as to why they think the class is completely broken. I admit the cynical bit of me is thinking sour grapes, but I fully admit that's just an assumption.