Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 6665139" data-attributes="member: 996">The fighter does work OK as the simple DPR class it's traditionally been.  If it were just the Champion, that'd be fine.  It doesn't go far, but as far as it goes, it's fine.  But, the EK making the fighter into a caster class was unexpected, and the Battlemaster failing to make it meaningfully more/other than the traditional simple DPR alternative, disappointing.  The class could do more out of combat, which'd help a little, but, as the Battlemaster design illustrates, it's hard to add much of anything directly to that tough, high-DPR baseline without becoming problematic (more problematic, multi-attacking has always been problematic to begin with). Sadly, with a class as hard-focused on DPR as the 5e fighter, they generally are.    That's the biggest of the things 'wrong with the fighter' - it lacks the flexibility of the 3.5 fighter, and doesn't make a distinct enough contribution from the other non-magic-using sub-classes (also all DPR oriented in combat). Maxing DEX and taking Sharpshooter is an obvious alternative. To uniquely contribute you need to do something others can't, or do it better.  Supposedly, the fighter's extra ASI at 6th gives him a shot at 'doing better.'  In this case, though, it seems there was a diversity of high stats and proficiencies in the party, such that the fighter wasn't ever that competitive with them.  It's always possible, of course, that a fighter's 14th level ASI put to some tertiary stat that no one else invested in would give the fighter a +1 edge with those stat checks, it just didn't happen in that instance. 3/day is nothing to sneeze at.  It's the 1st-level wizard's claim to fame, for instance. Is that really much of a challenge for an 8th level party? I saw what you did there.  <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />If, for instance, Remarkable Athelete added whether you were proficient or not, instead of only non-proficient, it would be like Expertise, in that it'd make the Champion particularly good at certain tasks, even compared to someone with 'just' proficiency.  Not as good as someone with expertise, but the fact that it helps with untrained rolls, as well, would help make up for that.  Minor help, for the champion, only, but a very easy change to make. Under Bounded Accuracy, he wouldn't be.  The most sensible thing is for anyone who has a shot to make the check, if at all possible.  That maximizes the chance of at least one success.  It also trivializes any but a fairly dramatic superiority at that check, though.  So if one character has a +5 and everyone else has around a +3, the one with a +5 isn't exactly differentiated or 'shining' or spotlight-balanced by that small edge.  When you have a +17 and the next best has a +8 while everyone else is still around +3, then you're really standing out.</blockquote>

Verification