Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Imaro" data-source="post: 6665231" data-attributes="member: 48965">You do realize the battlemaster has numerous maneuvers that allow him to do many of the things the 3e fighter had to spend multiple feats on just to become proficient enough to have a decent chance of success in there usage.but majority of your feats are going to one, possibly 2 builds because you need to spend multiple feats in order to be decent at most of these builds... The 5e battlemaster is already a multi-target multi-attacker (since movement can now be split and he has maneuvers that protects him against OA's and allow him to damage nearby enemies), the battlemaster can exert battle field control through conditions, pushing & maneuvering maneuvers, the protection fighting style, sentinel feat, etc.  He increases his damage just by using Superiority dice but can also take Great Weapon Fighting style, Riposte maneuver and the SS and GWM feats, he can be a high accuracy fighter through Precision Strike and can be an archer by taking the archery style and maneuvers that work with ranged attacks... so yeah I'm not buying the more customizable argument with what you've presented above (at least not taking core vs. core... once splatbooks enter the picture it's a different story.) Could a core 3e fighter heal? Grant his allies attacks and/or maneuver them into and out of different positions? Reduce damage to himself?  These and more are all things a BM can do with maneuvers... And yet with the fighter I don't have to multi-class to get spells... Again...with the objective statements and nothing backing them up... I've listed only a fraction of what the BM can accomplish above and it's way beyond what everyone had by default in 3.5...  and your comparison of a multi-class fighter is flawed since we are comparing the customization of the fighter... not the fighter plus other classes.  So yeah... You haven't really shown anything once again... just stated your, IME, incorrect opinion as fact.  Put something up here to prove what you are stating and maybe I'll start to actually take your statements seriously but right now, just as in the other post you aren't backing your claims up with anything concrete.That's funny because a BM with Protection Style, Menacing Attack, Goading Attack, Trip Attack and/or Pushing Attack with the Sentinel Feat and the Polearm Master Feat makes one helluva defender... but yeah you keep waxing on about what can't be done with the fighter in 5e and I'll stick to actual facts.Yes and seeing as how most games don't go past 10th level... most of those feats were going towards building up the 1-2 things your build was centered around to an acceptable level that the BM is laready at with his scaling maneuvers... and he still gets feats.  Let's also not forget a BM can retrain his maneuvers... a fighter couldn't retrain feats...that strikes me as way more customizable. The question wasn't about optimal... it was about whether the feat was needed to be adept at dealing damage... it isn't.  Just as an easy example, a fighter who trips an opponent and allows his allies to get advantage (along with every other attack he has left) is probably outputting more damage than a fighter with GWM... In other words the feat isn't necessary for a fighter to be adept at dealing damage.All I'll say is you seem to have quite a few assumptions about how the game is/should be played... that don't really line up with what I've seen or what some/many posters are stating.  Or you could take some non-combat feats... unless of course the non-combat stuf just isn't that important to you... then I would expect you to just focus on what is.</blockquote>

Verification