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

[bert1000]

The 5e Battlemaster's maneuvers, OTOH, are all essentially 3rd-level abilities, even if he doesn't get to pick some of them until high levels. Not only that, but the obvious thing to do is pick the best abilities, first, so those latter picks are much more marginal, making advancement less meaningful. .

This is my biggest problem with the 5e Fighter. If we had gated higher level maneuvers, I think we could have had a fighter that 'complex' types liked well enough.

I find the 5e Fighter really interesting because it seems to have adopted all the big design characteristics that people who hated the 4e Fighter didn't want:

1) martial healing (Second Wind = not just temporary hitpoints or something but actual regaining HP!)
2) abilities that aren't at-will (action surge, maneuvers, indomitable)
3) 'narrative control' (commanders strike)

But then executed on them very poorly.

I just don't get it.

 

[Hussar]

This is my biggest problem with the 5e Fighter. If we had gated higher level maneuvers, I think we could have had a fighter that 'complex' types liked well enough.

I find the 5e Fighter really interesting because it seems to have adopted all the big design characteristics that people who hated the 4e Fighter didn't want:

1) martial healing (Second Wind = not just temporary hitpoints or something but actual regaining HP!)
2) abilities that aren't at-will (action surge, maneuvers, indomitable)
3) 'narrative control' (commanders strike)

But then executed on them very poorly.

I just don't get it.

Heh, join the club.

And it's interesting that Monks do gain gated abilities at higher levels - spending more Ki points allows you to perform higher level maneuvers or cast higher level spells. Why can't we port the same structure into fighters, especially BM's which have a built in "ki" style structure right out of the chute.

 

[Minigiant]

This is my biggest problem with the 5e Fighter. If we had gated higher level maneuvers, I think we could have had a fighter that 'complex' types liked well enough.

I find the 5e Fighter really interesting because it seems to have adopted all the big design characteristics that people who hated the 4e Fighter didn't want:

1) martial healing (Second Wind = not just temporary hitpoints or something but actual regaining HP!)
2) abilities that aren't at-will (action surge, maneuvers, indomitable)
3) 'narrative control' (commanders strike)

But then executed on them very poorly.

I just don't get it.

This probably links to my only real gripe with the fighter.

PAGE SPACE

The wizard gets 9 subclasses and a bunch of spells in the back.

The fighter gets 3 subclass, no unique spells for EKs, a small list of maneuvers for the battlemaster, and a moderately sized list of weapons.

I knew the wizard would get more page space but come on. Couldn't the subclass text be smaller to fit more? Shrunk some art? Less full page art?

Could 2 more martial archetypes have fit? A second list of greater maneuvers? Something.

Just one more page?

Fighter
-Champion (simple crit fisher)
-Battlemaster (maneuver and greater maneuver user)
-Eldritch Knight (mage warrior)
-*New* Warrior (simple fighter with flat bonus damage and "Third Wind")
-*New* Duelist (maneuver user with benefits from high mental scores)
-*New* Godborn (stereotypical descendant of immortal or man of "good stock" with ability score bonuses)

Just need one or one and a half more pages.

Stinking book hogging wizards.

 

[Quajek]

Could 2 more martial archetypes have fit? A second list of greater maneuvers? Something.

Just one more page?

Fighter
-Champion (simple crit fisher)
-Battlemaster (maneuver and greater maneuver user)
-Eldritch Knight (mage warrior)
-*New* Warrior (simple fighter with flat bonus damage and "Third Wind")
-*New* Duelist (maneuver user with benefits from high mental scores)
-*New* Godborn (stereotypical descendant of immortal or man of "good stock" with ability score bonuses)

Just spitballing some ideas for new Fighter subclasses...

New: Godborn / or alternate name: Paragon: How about something like - "Gain an additional feat/ability score increase every other level (or every 3rd), and at level 10, you unlock stats going up to 21 instead of 20. And a number of times per day equal to your proficiency level, you can double your result on any attack, skill check, or save." This fits with the power of being born of a god, or the very best at what you do.

New: Gladiator: Get bonuses for being outnumbered. Finally create a viable "Net & Trident Fighting Style". If dropped to half HP, gains advantage on enemy who last hit him. If dropped to 0, instead drops to 1hp and auto-crits the next round, unless healed. If a Gladiator follows someone else's direction to spare or execute a helpless enemy, gains inspiration. Gain some sort of bonus for changing weapons mid-battle--Maybe every time you attack an enemy with a weapon you haven't used in that encounter, you gain advantage on the attack. Maybe Fame points or something that Gladiators can use to add to Social skills?

New: Brawler: Unarmed fighter with maneuvers that enable him to stand as a worthy combatant. It doesn't make sense that the only viable unarmed fighters are mystical Monks or magically-empowered Bards, Druids, Wizards... I want to see a guy who is a normal dude who is just an expert at ripping monsters apart with his bare hands / kicking people apart.

Give all Fighters Expertise on two out of Athletics, Acrobatics, Intimidation.

 

[Zaruthustran]

Amen to the Expertise. It bums me out that the best wrestler in the game is a bard.

 

[Corpsetaker]

This probably links to my only real gripe with the fighter.

PAGE SPACE

The wizard gets 9 subclasses and a bunch of spells in the back.

The fighter gets 3 subclass, no unique spells for EKs, a small list of maneuvers for the battlemaster, and a moderately sized list of weapons.

So what's stopping you from designing your own EK spell list and asking your DM if it would be allowed?

 

[Minigiant]

So what's stopping you from designing your own EK spell list and asking your DM if it would be allowed?

Nothing. A player has and the DM did. Luckily my table has talent for design and rarely makes broken additions anymore.

That doesn't absolve the design team for being extremely safe with some classes but give ground to others.

It is understandable that there are 9 subclasses for wizards. The 9 schools of wizardry are tradition and they would be attacked if they left any out (like they were in 4e). Same with cleric domains.

However they were less fear of fighter fans claiming the same. And fans of other classes. So we have this topic. Because they played safe and thought if would be fine.

There are many fighter subclasses which could have been printed in the PHB. Ones which are general enough to fill many archetypes. And there are fighting styles and weapons which could have inspired more to the class or offered more for the class. However they didn't make the book. They will appear eventually. The favoritism of "moving parts" remained.

I just question why not in the PHB or DMG. I felt there was a bit too much "have your DM do it" in the game or at least more than what was needed. Or at least, explain some of these concepts in the DMG or in articles.

 

[JWO]

New: Gladiator: Get bonuses for being outnumbered. Finally create a viable "Net & Trident Fighting Style". If dropped to half HP, gains advantage on enemy who last hit him. If dropped to 0, instead drops to 1hp and auto-crits the next round, unless healed. If a Gladiator follows someone else's direction to spare or execute a helpless enemy, gains inspiration. Gain some sort of bonus for changing weapons mid-battle--Maybe every time you attack an enemy with a weapon you haven't used in that encounter, you gain advantage on the attack. Maybe Fame points or something that Gladiators can use to add to Social skills?

That would be such a fun class to play!

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

It is understandable that there are 9 subclasses for wizards. The 9 schools of wizardry are tradition and they would be attacked if they left any out (like they were in 4e). Same with cleric domains.

Wait, there's 9 now? In AD&D there were only 8...

I wish cleric domains were more like AD&D specialty priests. Domains are kind of bland and samey.

 

[Quajek]

Wait, there's 9 now? In AD&D there were only 8...

I wish cleric domains were more like AD&D specialty priests. Domains are kind of bland and samey.

How did specialty priests work? I haven't played AD&D in almost 20 years.

I'm playing a Cleric right now for the first time ever, and my Tempest domain Cleric is wholly different from the other Life Domain Cleric in the party, and crazy fun to play.