What is wrong with Eldritch Knight?Glances at Eldritch Knight And be usable? Hard. Very, very hard.
I'm still bucking for a full-on fighter/magic-user class myself.
Pathfinder did this with ACF's, or Alternate Class Features, they predated 5e, and IMO I think they were adapted into 5e for its class archetypes. Its interesting how games can evolve with some competition. I think they work well either way.What if they opened up design space to let subclass features replace class features? Give up your action surge for beast companion, give up second wind for some kind of maneuver your beast could learn to protect allies or take down a weakened opponent. I think it sounds neat.
So each oath is a subclass and also core class features to replace some parts of the fighter hmmmmI think that it could be done if there were some structural changes to allow for Subclasses that could, optionally, have a greater impact on play style. But throw some primal magic at a fighter, give them some skill expertise in survival and stealth, and let them pick a quarry when you roll initiative and give a bonus die of damage against their quarry? Well hell, that’s pretty ranger-y to me.
Paladin may be trickier, but could be pulled off with multiple subclasses. I think a divine half-caster with some supportive abilities would hit most of the beats.
I think it might be possible but I also think tricky is it's name-o. Many but not all of the archetypes/subclasses are really just pre-planned multi-classing by a different name. (4e had some themes which if you used the power swapping a lot will feel like the same / but it was a choice in effect replacing a core class power/feature with one from your theme. 5e does have a pretty flexible multiclassing already but isnt careful of making a level X ability the same potency as another level X ability.Now that I think about it, bump up eldritch knight to half caster arcane progression, then have ranger as half caster primal and Paladin as half caster divine… I like how that ends up looking.
I thought of allowing one to cancel a critical hit by sacrificing the shield (usually a shields straps are what is broken and damaged severely enough it will need repaired) and if the shield is magical it may resist sundering with a saving throw based on their users str ....Some I use are:
*Shields shall be sundered- You get the usual -1 to your AC with a shield. However, any time you take damage, you can opt instead to say your shield absorbed the force of the blow. The shield is shattered and must be discarded, but you don't take any damage from that hit. It's quick, it's easy, and it's valuable.
I think the shifts in paradigm you are using is different enough to make analysis harder... avoiding level dipping I think is important and not assuming people are ok with removing the multiclassingI went ahead and made a mock up of the idea for folding the ranger into the fighter as a subclass, although it uses a different paradigm than current subclasses. Mostly a thought experiment, my commute to work this morning was full of ideas.
Design Goal: Strixhaven is… a bit of a mess, I agree. And I’m not overly interested in the “magical school” flavor that was its main selling point. But man oh man did I love the concept of subclasses that could be used with any, or just multiple, classes. The implementation failed hard in UA, th...docs.google.com
This is proof that mundane ability to snark at stuff can derail complex situations/plans. DMs can make enemies act unoptimally / give them penalties if a PC makes a good crack!Mod Note:
Just a gentle reminder: this is a (+) thread, so let’s keep focused on positives and please minimize the snark.
|Level||XP Required||Level Title||HP||THAC0||Save||Special Abilities||Chainmail Combat|
|1st||0||Veteran||8||19||14||Set Spear Maneuver||1 Man +1|
|2nd||2,000||Warrior||12||19||14||Lance Charge Maneuver||2 Men +1|
|3rd||4,000||Swordsman||16||18||13||Improved Parry Maneuver||3 Men or Hero −1|
|4th||8,000||Hero||20||17||13||Heroic Fray||4 Men or Hero|
|5th||16,000||Swashbuckler||24||17||12||Improved Disarm Maneuver||5 Men or Hero +1|
|6th||32,000||Gladiator||28||16||11||Smash Maneuver||6 Men or Hero +1|
|7th||64,000||Champion||32||15||11||Multiple Attacks (3 / 2 rounds)||7 Men or Superhero −1|
|8th||125,000||Superhero||36||14||10||Sweep Attack||8 Men or Superhero|
|9th||250,000||Lord*||40||13||10||Detect Invisible within 30'||9 Men or Superhero +1|
|10th||500,000||Overlord||44||12||9||Frightful Presence||10 Men or Superhero +1|
I posted that OSR blog article when I found it a little ways back, and the more I think about it the more I like it. I think I might replace mighty deeds with it just because it’s so got dang elegant.Not strictly relevant to 5e perhaps, but here's how I run OD&D fighters these days:
Level XP Required Level Title HP THAC0 Save Special Abilities Chainmail Combat 1st 0 Veteran 8 19 14 Set Spear Maneuver 1 Man +1 2nd 2,000 Warrior 12 19 14 Lance Charge Maneuver 2 Men +1 3rd 4,000 Swordsman 16 18 13 Improved Parry Maneuver 3 Men or Hero −1 4th 8,000 Hero 20 17 13 Heroic Fray 4 Men or Hero 5th 16,000 Swashbuckler 24 17 12 Improved Disarm Maneuver 5 Men or Hero +1 6th 32,000 Gladiator 28 16 11 Smash Maneuver 6 Men or Hero +1 7th 64,000 Champion 32 15 11 Multiple Attacks (3 / 2 rounds) 7 Men or Superhero −1 8th 125,000 Superhero 36 14 10 Sweep Attack 8 Men or Superhero 9th 250,000 Lord* 40 13 10 Detect Invisible within 30' 9 Men or Superhero +1 10th 500,000 Overlord 44 12 9 Frightful Presence 10 Men or Superhero +1
* Lordship permits the fighter to build a castle, raise an army, clear a fiefdom, and attract a taxable peasantry.
(And it's worth noting that every special ability or combat maneuver that I've spread out over ten levels is something that old-school fighters already have in some form or another; it's just that they're normally concentrated at levels 1 and 7–9.)
I don't use DCC "Mighty Deeds of Arms"; but I do use the OSR blogsphere's "super simple combat maneuvers" method (because it's extremely simple, naturally self-regulating, and it's usable by all classes, but since it's based on the normal attack and damage mechanics, fighters are always going to be better at it). Though I do call them stunts to distinguish them from the defined maneuvers that fighters get at various experience levels.
A healthy spread of defined maneuvers that are either fighter-exclusive or that fighters are just plain better at, plus the aforementioned system of freeform stunts that fighters are also just plain better at, goes a long way to keeping things more interesting in combat than just "I hit, roll damage." And as for out-of-combat, when the wizards are throwing around cool spells… that old melody always comes backs to warm the cockles of my cold, dead heart: castle, army, fiefdom, peasants, that scream from Zep's "Immigrant Song"!
I agree that it is elegant, but IMO, you'd probably need to change more for it to work with the fighter. The problem with the fighter is that they don't typically do a heck of a lot of damage with any individual hit.I posted that OSR blog article when I found it a little ways back, and the more I think about it the more I like it. I think I might replace mighty deeds with it just because it’s so got dang elegant.