D&D 5E So what's exactly wrong with the fighter?

[Sacrosanct]

Ok, I gotta ask. If your biggest complaint is that you want a fighter with a ton more spell-like abilities (as long as you don't call them spells), why are you playing a champion? That sublcass was designed specifically for the player who doesn't want to deal with resource management as a fighter.

Because I gotta say, at this point what I'm seeing is a whole lotta:

"The class sucks because it can't do X, Y or Z"
"Yeah it can, here's how, by extra feats, use this subclass, refer to the DMG to alter it if you want, etc etc etc. You're just choosing not to use any of that."

And almost all of it comes down to your choices as a player choosing not to use the tools or options in front of you. It would be insane for me to decide to go with a barebones car, and then complain how it doesn't have all the bells and whistles I wanted when I was given the choice to pick a car that had all that stuff.

 

[Enkhidu]

So, after reading the whole thread, I'm seeing that what this boils down to is that most of the complaints about the 5e fighter are that its not the 4e fighter.

Is that correct?

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

You could probably do all those by giving up Action Surge and/or some of the high-level Extra Attacks and getting some other sauce (make a shield bash! your horse/ally/lackey can attack!)

But I think this might be a tough sell - Action Surge and the Extra Attacks are already probably some of the sexiest stuff in 5e, especially from a damage and flexibility perspective.

It's not complex, but I imagine in a lot of folks' minds, that's a plus, not a minus.

You could use extra attacks as the currency. AD&D called shots traded THAC0 penalties for effects like crippling because fighters had the best THAC0. In 5E, fighters have the most attacks so you could trade those in, which is already how grappling and disarming work: fighters are good at disarming because they have more attacks than anyone else. You could create a "Crack the Shell" analogue that costs two attacks, does normal damage on a hit, and gives everyone advantage to hit them next turn. Fighters would be the best at it due to having more attacks. Any maneuvers which cost three or more attacks would be the exclusive province of fighters.

 

[Ashkelon]

So, after reading the whole thread, I'm seeing that what this boils down to is that most of the complaints about the 5e fighter are that its not the 4e fighter.

Is that correct?

If that is what you got from this thread, I seriously doubt you have read any of it...

 

[Enkhidu]

If that is what you got from this thread, I seriously doubt you have read any of it...

Doubt away!

Earlier, you said

I really enjoyed my warblade in 3e, my fighter in 4e, my fighter in 13th Age, and my non-magical warriors in Savage Worlds.

Three of those things are mechanically connected (the warblade was the testbed for 4e design, and 13th age is at least in part a paeon to 4e), and those seem to be your benchmark for what is fun about fighters. For you those expressions of "fighter" didn't need fixing (and please let me know if that's incorrect - from context that seemed pretty clear).

 

[Ashkelon]

Doubt away!

Earlier, you said



Three of those things are mechanically connected (the warblade was the testbed for 4e design, and 13th age is at least in part a paeon to 4e), and those seem to be your benchmark for what is fun about fighters. For you those expressions of "fighter" didn't need fixing (and please let me know if that's incorrect - from context that seemed pretty clear).

The warblade is nothing like the 4e fighter though. They are about as similar as the 5e fighter is to the 5e wizard. They had radically different mechanics. The 4e fighter was all about battlefield control and AEDU. The warblade was designed based around a list of constantly refreshing. maneuvers. These classes had radically different playstyles and compatabilities.

The 13th Age fighter is also completely different. It doesn't have AEDU powers at all. Instead it has maneuvers that are entirely dependent upon the result of your attack roll.

The savage worlds character is nothing like any of the others and doesn't have powers at all, instead relying on the systems built in stunts and tricks.

Furthermore, many of the complaints about the 5e fighter could also be levied against the 4e fighter. For all the interesting mechanics it brought to combat, the 4e fighter was still wildly inferior outside of combat. It also does a very poor job of modeling the "mythic" heroes that 2e describes as fighters such as Beowulf, CuCuchlain, Hercules, and Gilgamesh. In fact, only in 3e were you able to see fighters who could perform superhuman (but not supernatural) feats of athletics such as swimming up a waterfall, jumping a 50 foot chasm, or lifting a 50,000 lb Boulder.

So if you had actually read the complaints or knew what you were talking about (which obviously you don't) you would see that I don't want a rehash of any particular editions fighter at all. I want a martial warrior with a diversity of options and capabilities, both in and out of combat. That is it. I don't want a 4e fighter anymore than I want a 2e fighter. I want something different. I want a 5e martial warrior that is mechanically interesting and complex without relying on spell slots.

But...nice try.

 

[Manbearcat]

left out "not" in the first sentence...it's rather key!

Furthermore, many of the complaints about the 5e fighter could also be levied against the 4e fighter. For all the interesting mechanics it brought to combat, the 4e fighter was still wildly inferior outside of combat. It also does a very poor job of modeling the "mythic" heroes that 2e describes as fighters such as Beowulf, CuCuchlain, Hercules, and Gilgamesh. In fact, only in 3e were you able to see fighters who could perform superhuman (but not supernatural) feats of athletics such as swimming up a waterfall, jumping a 50 foot chasm, or lifting a 50,000 lb Boulder.

Accepting that there is really no reason for the 4e Fighter (and all classes) to not have 4 Trained Skills instead of 3 Trained Skills, just a couple things right quick on this that are absolutely of paramount importance when trying to compare a 4e Fighter PC's noncombat acumen to 5e:

1) 4e is governed by noncombat conflict resolution mechanics where 5e is governed by its task resolution (where it isn't governed by fiat via spellcasting/feature). The Skill Challenge is THE utter game-changer for the paradigm of noncombat acumen across PCs. The ability to express your PC's protagonism is as much a product of 4e's noncombat resolution framework, its play procedures, and its math as it is the PC build mechanics.

Noncombat tropes are no longer dominated/governed by spell loadout and win button nuclear options via those spells. This paradigm-shift alone pushes noncombat action resolution toward parity more than anything else.

2) The primary Group Checks are Athletics, Endurance, Stealth, Perception. Half of those are anchored by the Fighter's efficacy with Perception typically being a skill the fighter is more than functional at. Group Checks made their way to 5e so this is also a part of the 5e Fighter's noncombat portfolio that is also given short shrift. However, Group Checks in 4e also interface with (1) above.

3) Extra-class resources (Race, Background, Theme at the Heroic Tier alone will typically grant a + 2 to 5 different Skills) broaden or focus proficiency. Investment in a multi-class feat (granting a Trained Skill +) is SOP (as it is always worth it), JoAT entrance isn't much (the entrance grants + 1 to a large number of skills and the + 2 to all UT Skills is a huge bonus...possibly the most popular feat in my game), and Skill Powers are fantastic (especially stuff like Mighty Sprint with combat application, [ii] stunting application, and [iii] Skill Challenge application).

4) The Stunting/Terrain Power, Hazard, Challenging Terrain, and Trap systems play deeply into Athletics and Endurance as either Skill Activators or Countermeasures.

5) Paragon Paths and Epic Destinies (especially) do most of the load-bearing for the mythic (Beowulf, Hercules, et al) archetype. Also see (1) above as Epic Tier SCs should be framing Fighters into those sorts of conflicts where they are opposed by adversity that requires (hence allows) them to perform those mythical feats of strength and mettle that you mention.

 

[Manbearcat]

I think removing Sharpshooter/Great Weapon Fighter from the game would be good. I think allowing Fighters to use the Mark, Healing Surge (and maybe as a bonus action 1/combat), Cleaving Through Creatures rule (on creatures of a certain level lower than them a la AD&D 1e and 2e) would be a good start.

in the terms of cool, thematic noncombat stuff, looking through various Heroic Fantasy TTRPGs I have, I think this sort of stuff would be nifty:

* The spirits of your weapons' wielders or those slain by them give you flashes of insight into various situations and can be proactively consulted (at whatever scheduling).

* The God/spirit of Death sponsors you without any pact or (explicit) commitment from you (merely due to the fact that you move so many units in the life:death game), giving you powers of prognostication regarding life/death or those who are marked for it (at whatever scheduling).

* Your legend becomes a thing of power unto itself, bulwarking and moralizing you and your allies (in the way that the greatest athletes raise their game and that of their allies in the most crucial moments) when the stakes are high (auto-20 at whatever scheduling).

* Powerful agents (divine, demonic, primal, primordial, fey et al) are available at your beckon. The tech of Backgrounds (eg Charlatan's Acquaintances and Criminal Contacts can be leveraged here and just scaled up).

* Of course there are the options of powerful followers that have actual mechanical impact (eg Heralds for Social Skills, Huntsmen for Wilderness Explorations, Medics or Men At Arms for combat).

* Then there is the truly epic tier Heroic Fantasy stuff like Legendary Sovereign (you're destined to rule), Demigod (within you lies the latent bloodline of a god), Draconic Incarnation (you are an ancient dragon reborn in mortal flesh) etc. All of that could appear around level 17.


I think what would most help is a legitimate conflict resolution system (see above post).

 

[EzekielRaiden]

I think removing Sharpshooter/Great Weapon Fighter from the game would be good. I think allowing Fighters to use the Mark, Healing Surge (and maybe as a bonus action 1/combat), Cleaving Through Creatures rule (on creatures of a certain level lower than them a la AD&D 1e and 2e) would be a good start.

in the terms of cool, thematic noncombat stuff, looking through various Heroic Fantasy TTRPGs I have, I think this sort of stuff would be nifty:

* The spirits of your weapons' wielders or those slain by them give you flashes of insight into various situations and can be proactively consulted (at whatever scheduling).

* The God/spirit of Death sponsors you without any pact or (explicit) commitment from you (merely due to the fact that you move so many units in the life:death game), giving you powers of prognostication regarding life/death or those who are marked for it (at whatever scheduling).

* Your legend becomes a thing of power unto itself, bulwarking and moralizing you and your allies (in the way that the greatest athletes raise their game and that of their allies in the most crucial moments) when the stakes are high (auto-20 at whatever scheduling).

* Powerful agents (divine, demonic, primal, primordial, fey et al) are available at your beckon. The tech of Backgrounds (eg Charlatan's Acquaintances and Criminal Contacts can be leveraged here and just scaled up).

* Of course there are the options of powerful followers that have actual mechanical impact (eg Heralds for Social Skills, Huntsmen for Wilderness Explorations, Medics or Men At Arms for combat).

* Then there is the truly epic tier Heroic Fantasy stuff like Legendary Sovereign (you're destined to rule), Demigod (within you lies the latent bloodline of a god), Draconic Incarnation (you are an ancient dragon reborn in mortal flesh) etc. All of that could appear around level 17.


I think what would most help is a legitimate conflict resolution system (see above post).

Sooooooomebody's been playing some Dungeon World! Not that I can blame you. And there are far worse places to go for finding out-of-combat Fighter features. As I mentioned in someone else's "Warlording the Fighter" thread, there's a Dungeon World...uh...supplement? Third-party product. Called "Grim World." Has a "Battlemaster" class with some thematically appropriate features for a more "intellectual" Fighter type--history, reading others' motivations, education, etc.

 

[tyrlaan]

Y'know what, [MENTION=48965]Imaro[/MENTION] has the right idea here. It's pretty obvious that the OP isn't interested in actually getting opinions, but, rather simply wanted an echo chamber where everyone parrots back his own ideas.

The question was asked - what's wrong with the fighter. The question was answered - people want a more complex fighter option. End of conversation.

This is also self evident by the simple fact that [MENTION=6776548]Corpsetaker[/MENTION] has yet to really answer any of the questions I've asked in this thread.

I agree with you and Imaro; nothing more to see here.