Level Up (A5E) The Advanced Fighter

[DND_Reborn]

There are two things which change how good you are at the social pillar in 5e. Charisma score, and skills. So anyone who gets more of one of those is better at the social pillar than the average class. So, the Cha classes obviously qualify, but a rogue built a certain way will also qualify. Obviously spells can also allow you to interact on the social pillar, but usually only in limited ways. Except suggestion, that spell is bonkers.

Here's what I've said before: I can make a level 1 fighter with CHA 16 and +5 to all the CHA-based skills. Other than special features (bardic inspiration, expertise, spells, etc.) the fighter is as good as any other class in social (if you want them to be). And this fighter can still have a 16 STR or DEX and CON 14, with 10's everywhere else (so no dump stats).

In the same way, Fighters can be good at exploration, but due to features will never match other classes overall.

In short, Fighters can't be the "best" at social or exploration, but can be good certainly. But other than action surge really, other warrior classes can be just as good at Fighting as fighters, if not better.

So, it isn't that Fighters need things to make them better at social and exploration, those aren't their forte, then need things to make them the best at what they should be best at--fighting.

 

[Phoebasss]

So, it isn't that Fighters need things to make them better at social and exploration, those aren't their forte, then need things to make them the best at what they should be best at--fighting.

No matter what WotC is saying, 5E in particular and D&D in general is designed with the following "pillar weights" in mind:

Combat 75%
Explore 12,5%
Social 12,5%

I feel like this post does a good job explaining why I don't think we can safely push fighters into a place where they are much better than other classes at fighting. They should be good at fighting, but they can't be far ahead of everyone else, because combat is most of the game, and no one else should be hamstrung most of the time to give them a niche 1/8 of the time.

 

[DND_Reborn]

I feel like this post does a good job explaining why I don't think we can safely push fighters into a place where they are much better than other classes at fighting. They should be good at fighting, but they can't be far ahead of everyone else, because combat is most of the game, and no one else should be hamstrung most of the time to give them a niche 1/8 of the time.

Well, that don't have to be insanely better, of course, but something would be good.

 

[FrogReaver]

The fighter should be the king of damage and good at toughness.
Barbarians should be the king of toughness and good at damage.
Rouges should be the king of skills and good at damage
Rangers should be good at damage with strong nature themed utility (including magic)
Paladins should be good at damage with strong divine themed utility (including magic)
Monks should be great at martial control and good at damage.

That's how I would differentiate each classes capabilities.

 

[DND_Reborn]

That's how I would differentiate each classes capabilities.

Sounds about right to me.

 

[Garthanos]

Reactions
I liked the Legendary Actions idea but then wondered if it can be justified as exclusive to Fighters. Reactions feel "fairer", especially if simply tied to number of attacks, giving the Fighter a strong reason to have more. For every Extra Attack, you get an Extra Reaction. Reactions then become a currency for a range of martial classes' combat buffs such as the Riposte and Parry Maneuvers.

That is on my list...

D&D 5E - Why Not? A Variant Captain Fighter

Tandem Tactician Your presence in a scrap tends to elevate your comrades. You gain the following benefits: • You can use the Help action as a bonus action. • When you use the Help action to aid an ally in attacking a creature, increase the range of the Help action by 10 feet. Additionally, you...

www.enworld.org

I was thinking of limiting them to opportunity attacks but ....

Grit/Hit Dice
I also liked the mechanic of Grit Dice but wondered if there might be a viable way to link the resource to Hit Dice? Gives it a gritty fighter aesthetic. I feel that there is some consensus in these discussion in expanding Battle Master Maneuvers to give all fighters and perhaps other martial classes more interesting options in combat. If so, all fighters will have Superiority Dice and maybe the gritty fighter could use these instead of Grit Dice but also access their Hit Dice. Feels only right to then call that feature Maximum Effort...

Hmmm also similar to something I am looking at on that thread above I call it making an exertion.

 

[CapnZapp]

I feel like this post does a good job explaining why I don't think we can safely push fighters into a place where they are much better than other classes at fighting. They should be good at fighting, but they can't be far ahead of everyone else, because combat is most of the game, and no one else should be hamstrung most of the time to give them a niche 1/8 of the time.

Yes. The solution is - I'm afraid - to simply let Fighter be the character class that fights really well. Its abilities should be general-purpose (Action Surge is an excellent example) and not support any specific other pillar.

People wanting the Fighter to be more simply have to realize what they need is already there:

A fighter with stronger exploration pillar = a Ranger
A fighter with stronger social pillar = a Bard
A fighter with stronger connection to the gods = Paladin
A fighter with stronger connection to the spirits = Barbarian

Keep the Fighter pure. (Or "boring" depending on your perspective)

In the polls, the Fighter is one of the classes people want improved the most. But unlike the Beastmaster, Wild Mage or Four Elements Monk (say), I think Fighter is included by people that don't appreciate the Fighter for what it is and what it needs to be. While that Monk for instance really needs to be redesigned, I think the best solution to the Fighter is simply to tell the people that demand its transformation to play something else.

That doesn't mean I can't see more specialist Fighters (Warlord anyone?). Only that there's nothing wrong with the fighter itself. It just doesn't meet the expectations of people that for some reason want it to do the things we already have Rangers and Paladins for.

Generic classes (i.e. a Fighter you yourself can turn into a social adventurer or explorer) is bad for D&D. Any time you want a specific deal, you should be forced to pick a whole package (such as the way the Paladin comes with a whole slew of abilities, AND forces you to abide by its moral standards).

 

[TheSword]

Here's what I've said before: I can make a level 1 fighter with CHA 16 and +5 to all the CHA-based skills. Other than special features (bardic inspiration, expertise, spells, etc.) the fighter is as good as any other class in social (if you want them to be). And this fighter can still have a 16 STR or DEX and CON 14, with 10's everywhere else (so no dump stats).

In the same way, Fighters can be good at exploration, but due to features will never match other classes overall.

In short, Fighters can't be the "best" at social or exploration, but can be good certainly. But other than action surge really, other warrior classes can be just as good at Fighting as fighters, if not better.

So, it isn't that Fighters need things to make them better at social and exploration, those aren't their forte, then need things to make them the best at what they should be best at--fighting.

Action surge, excellent AC, full martial weapon choices, additional feats/ASI, crits on 19-20, additional fighting styles... all make the champion the great in combat.

The fighter’s additional attacks are being woefully undervalued. Additional attacks are force multipliers they take evening else a fighter can do and makes it 100%, 50% then 33% better. Sure other classes get this but with the exception of the Paladin and ranger extra attacks aren’t really helping these classes because A lot of the time they want to be casting spells not attacking.

I’ll make two additional comments here. Trying to make the fighter ‘the best’ is a fools errand, doomed to fail. You cannot design a class to match the weird combinations people can come up with like Sorcadin. Neither should you try.

Secondly, we really ain’t talking about the fighter as a class, we’re taking about the subclasses. Some of which have spells too. If you want a social and/or exploring fighter design a subclass for it. Problem solved.

Almost everything I’ve seen in this thread so far has been power increases. The fighter is already very popular and powerful. This isn’t just because it’s simple.

 

[DND_Reborn]

The fighter’s additional attacks are being woefully undervalued.

I think this is mostly because many games never get to the point where fighters get a 3rd (or even 4th!) attack.

I agree that fighters are pretty good as is. I like the class personally, but I would still like to see something "combat" oriented to really set them "above and beyond" the other warriors in the combat pillar.

Quick thought: What if Fighters could make a weapon attack each round once they have Extra Attack, even if they didn't take the Attack action? If they take the attack action, they get their normal 2-4 attacks.

 

[CapnZapp]

dbl post