D&D 5E Spellcasters and Balance in 5e: A Poll

[ECMO3]

The base of the fghter is a big dumb jock. Turning that into a sauve noble, a wise sensei, a genius bandit leader, or a terrifying commissar often results in something not satisfying to the player or the other member of the party.

Why?

I think this is only true for people with very limited imaginations and nothing in the rules drive you to a dumb jock. Nothing about the description of a fighter screams "dumb jock" to me and to be honest of all the pictures of fighters in the PHB, SCAG, XTE and TCE, the only one that actually looks like a dumb jock is the Rune knight.

Noble is a background that any class can take and there is no reason a fighter can't build himself into a bandit or a suave noble and play that very well. As a matter of fact both the Bandit Leader and the Knight in the MM are built on what is essentially a narrowed down fighter chassis and you can build either of those monsters with equivalent abilities using just fighter class features.

I also don't get what you mean by not satisfying for other members of the party. Can you provide an example?

 

[Sithlord]

This is how Marvel Heroic RP handles it - Doctor Strange et al have the Sorcery ability, which is rated from d6 to d12. The rulebook gives a general indication of what can be done at each level of ability.

It works pretty well, but does rely upon a structured resolution framework that 5e D&D tends to eschew.

Huh. My marvel handbook says doctor strange has unearthly (100) sorcery. U must have a misprint

 

[ECMO3]

Fighters at level 1 can't restore others' hit points in meaningful amounts during combat; nor can they confer bonus or enhances actions on others.

A warlord is not "self only".

They can restore their own hps at level 1 and they can prevent others from taking damage with the interception fighting style. They can confer bonuses or enhance the action of others through either the superior technique fighting style or the protection fighting style. They can get all these things at level 1.

While we are at it, you are also talking about level 1. A level 1 cleric can't turn undead, a level 1 Rogue can't use cunning action, a level 1 druid can't shapeshift. Does that mean we need a new classes that can do these things at 1st level?

 

[pemerton]

It can't be true both that INT and CHA mean something, and that they don't.

Likewise, it can't be true both that the impact of personality and intelligence on a situation are determined by CHA and INT checks, and that it's not.

Of course there's room for tweaks - eg it would make sense for Fighters and Barbarians to have a rule permitting them to make STR (Intimidation) checks - but these work best when they sit on top of the underlying framework.

 

[ECMO3]

It can't be true both that INT and CHA mean something, and that they don't.

Likewise, it can't be true both that the impact of personality and intelligence on a situation are determined by CHA and INT checks, and that it's not.

Of course there's room for tweaks - eg it would make sense for Fighters and Barbarians to have a rule permitting them to make STR (Intimidation) checks - but these work best when they sit on top of the underlying framework.

Both INT and Cha mean something I never said they didn't. There is no reason a fighter can't have a high intelligence or a high charisma or both. Also FWIW in point buy I never play a character with less than a 12 Charisma and rarely play a character with more than a 10 constitution (except barbarians). That includes fighters when I play them. I am playing a fighter (Arcane Archer) right now with starting stats of S8,D16,C10,I15,W12,Ch14

At level 4 she is going to boost intelligence to 16 with a half-feat.

Why because Charisma and Intelligence are important to what I wanted to do with that build and that class and subclass are better for it than any other I could play.

There is a rule permitting Fighters and Barbarians and any characters for that matter to make strength(intimidation) checks. It is a variant skill check and is covered in the PHB on page 175. It is rarely used in my games and does not make a lot of sense to me personally but the rules are there if you need it in your games. I do not understand why it should logically be limited to fighters and barbarians though.

 

[Undrave]

If a fighter wants to shine out of combat. Pay attention to the plot of an adventure. Know all the NPC’s by name. Learn what they all do and how they relate. You will be picking up clues that others making die rolls will completely miss.

Gee, thanks for the non-solution. Do you think we don't know that? What happens when the Wizard decide to also pay attention huh?

EVERYBODY can pay attention, EVERYBODY can be clever and EVERYBODY can be creative. IT. IS. NOT. A. SOLUTION. It's a basic state of the game!

I'm sorry if I come off aggressive but that argument's been foisted onto Fighters since at least 3rd edition. It was a non-solution back then and it is a non-solution now. It's basically telling a kid he doesn't need a toy if he can just 'play pretend', but you then give a super soaker to his cousin for HIS play pretend session.

Let's be honest though. There are a few of classes that don't feel like their class from a purely mechanical perspective at level 1. Paladins and Rangers being perhaps the worst offenders. Then there are also classes that feel like their class at level 1 but suck in comparison to most others (i'm looking at monks and sorcerers here).

Point I'm trying to make is that, a Warlord doesn't need a ton at level 1 to make it feel as warlordy as a paladin feels paladiny.

I'd say the Paladin is probably the worse of the bunch, because aside from the same armor proficiency as the Fighter they don't get any 'always on' ability. The Ranger is then the second worse because his always-on ability are pretty minor and get handwaved a lot. The fighter is probably third because, while a Fighting style and Armor prof at level 1 are always on and actually good, they're not particularly unique (the Ranger and Paladin get theirs at level 2). Barbarian is also very thin at level 1 but at least gets unarmored defense as a 'thing' that feels unique to them.

A Cleric can bust out Guidance and Sacred Flame all day at level 1 so that's pretty solid. Warlock get their Eldritch Blast so that's like... 80% of the class right there Rogue and Monk (despite the latter being lacklustre) come off pretty well at level 1.

Why do you say this? Lay on Hands and Detect Evil (sorry, Divine Sense) for the Paladin; Natural Explorer for the Ranger.

The analogue for the warlord might be an ability to bolster in some fashion - either hp restoration, action economy manipulation, or an appropriately balanced way of doing both.

We talked about 'always on' abilities that help establish a class' feel before. Paladin don't get any 'always on' abilities at level 1 aside from their armor proficiency (which they share with Fighter).

What is it that you want to do exactly? I keep getting vague references to "use intelligence, Charisma and Wisdom" in combat. What are you trying to build, I will help you get there and I am pretty sure I can build it using RAW.

You could always take a look at my own Warlord coughshamelesplugcough

Fighters can heal at level 1 and manipulate action economy at level 2 (or even level 1 with the right fighting style).

They can't heal allies or manipulate the action economy of allies.

 

[Sithlord]

Gee, thanks for the non-solution. Do you think we don't know that? What happens when the Wizard decide to also pay attention huh?

EVERYBODY can pay attention, EVERYBODY can be clever and EVERYBODY can be creative. IT. IS. NOT. A. SOLUTION. It's a basic state of the game!

I'm sorry if I come off aggressive but that argument's been foisted onto Fighters since at least 3rd edition. It was a non-solution back then and it is a non-solution now. It's basically telling a kid he doesn't need a toy if he can just 'play pretend', but you then give a super soaker to his cousin for HIS play pretend session.



I'd say the Paladin is probably the worse of the bunch, because aside from the same armor proficiency as the Fighter they don't get any 'always on' ability. The Ranger is then the second worse because his always-on ability are pretty minor and get handwaved a lot. The fighter is probably third because, while a Fighting style and Armor prof at level 1 are always on and actually good, they're not particularly unique (the Ranger and Paladin get theirs at level 2). Barbarian is also very thin at level 1 but at least gets unarmored defense as a 'thing' that feels unique to them.

A Cleric can bust out Guidance and Sacred Flame all day at level 1 so that's pretty solid. Warlock get their Eldritch Blast so that's like... 80% of the class right there Rogue and Monk (despite the latter being lacklustre) come off pretty well at level 1.


We talked about 'always on' abilities that help establish a class' feel before. Paladin don't get any 'always on' abilities at level 1 aside from their armor proficiency (which they share with Fighter).


You could always take a look at my own Warlord coughshamelesplugcough

They can't heal allies or manipulate the action economy of allies.

Yes. But many here are saying that the fighter has nothing to do outside combat and is just a wallflower. And that is a load of bull.

 

[Undrave]

a level 1 druid can't shapeshift. Does that mean we need a new classes that can do these things at 1st level?

Joking aside... I kinda want a class who's whole schtick is transformation though... probably not in plain ol' animals.

 

[Undrave]

Yes. But many here are saying that the fighter has nothing to do outside combat and is just a wallflower. And that is a load of bull.

Casters (and Rogues) gets super soakers. The Fighter gets finger guns.

 

[ECMO3]

A Cleric can bust out Guidance and Sacred Flame all day at level 1 so that's pretty solid. Warlock get their Eldritch Blast so that's like... 80% of the class right there Rogue and Monk (despite the latter being lacklustre) come off pretty well at level 1.

Paladins can bust out guidance and sacred flame all day long at level 2. Rangers can bust out guidance (but not sacred flame) all day long at level 2.

At level 1 Warlock Eldritch blast is not great damage at level 1, it does not get there until level 2 and invocations come online.

I play a LOT of Rogues. They are not great at level 1. They have sneak attack, they have two extra skills and they have expertise, that is not overwhelming (at least it does not feel overwheliming when the wizard casts sleep or the fighter heals himself mid battle). Level 2 is when Rogues really start to feel like Rogues to me.

Paladins feel like Paladins to me at level 1. A fighters "always on" combat abilities are superior to any others at level 1. This actually narrows as other classes gain levels. I know you are focused out of combat. Fighters can be great out of combat with the right choices, but they will never be optimized out of combat because the class is designed to be optimized in combat. If you want to be optimized out of combat I don't get why you would play a fighter.