D&D General The Case For High INT Fighters in Dungeons and Dragons

True but...

You just said not to follow up bad ideas. The forced symmetry six saves is just one of the worst.
I'm not saying symmetry.

Just make STR, INT, and CHA saves common enough that you care about them


I believe in January, the percentage of spells saving throws was (rounded):

Strength 8%
Dexterity 30%
Constitution 24%
Intelligence 5%
Wisdom 26%
Charisma 7%

Strength intelligence and charisma should at least be at 11-12% so that they are target a little less than one eighth of the time each.

The good saves can share the other 5/8th equally
 

log in or register to remove this ad



Issue with the saves is how easy it is to force one. Strength might not have a large number of different things that cause a save, but one of the base attacks forces a STR save. INT saves don't have that luxury
 

Issue with the saves is how easy it is to force one. Strength might not have a large number of different things that cause a save, but one of the base attacks forces a STR save. INT saves don't have that luxury
INT saving throws currently are mostly psionics, psychic attacks, and mental traps.

5E didn't embrace psionics in 2014 because it was attempting to cater to all fans and excluded any form of controversial theme as core in settings.

2024 D&D is more receptive to psionics and mental attacks so they would have more default and core representation.
 

mr. welch is a real person. I had no idea and he just made a hell of a case for this.
Honestly, discuss

should there be a high int fighter and how/why?
Personally, this is a better case for a Warlord that actually uses Intelligence, rather than a Fighter that does.

A significant portion of the examples they refer to come across more as Warlords (Captains, Commanders, Tacticians, whatever you want to call them) than they do as Fighters. I've always understood the Fighter to be more commando-like, a versatile master-of-arms, which could have a space for a specific build ("subclass") that focuses on Intelligence. But I don't really see Int as being a key thing that Fighters of all stripes get lots of benefits from.

By comparison, Warlord (or insert preferred label here) very clearly has a space for even the first example listed in the video, the possibly-apocryphal Sun Tzu himself.
 

agreed.

The Warlord was one of my most favorite developments in 4e and the visceral response to it by other people just makes me scratch my head.

but it's also an effect of 5e where it's a magic exception system. it's openly hostile to non magical answers to problems.

the smart fighter should be a thing and if you don't want to do a warlord class per say, make it a subclass of the fighter that bolts on the tactical parts so you can give bonuses or give your own actions to other people (ex, your move goes to the rogue, your attack to the fighter, etc).
 

The Warlord was one of my most favorite developments in 4e and the visceral response to it by other people just makes me scratch my head.

but it's also an effect of 5e where it's a magic exception system. it's openly hostile to non magical answers to problems.
I bet if warlords lightly opened up the possibility of magical (not spells) effects, things would flow a lot more smoothly for people.

I.e.
While any intelligent beast can predict the trajectory of a rock flying though the air, and any intelligent humaniod can make and communicate dinner plans, the Tacticians take that to an whole new level. They are able to predict enemy an ally movements alike and devise stratagems that many call prescient. Fortunately for the rest of the world, too much analyzing will tire the warlord out.

How a Tacticians achives this remains a mystery even to themselves. Some say there is a divine spark leading them to a destiny, other say they can see the weave of fate or are imbued with divination magic, and others insist that it was just years of hard study and endless hours think of the best stratagems, honing their minds into a razor sharp edge.

Tacticians are nearly always draw to adventure, as mundane life becomes too predictable and boring. Having often played and beaten everyone they know in any strategy game, they often seek out the challenge of battles in order to stretch their abilities to the limits.

Good aligned Tacticians see themselves as protectors and guides. Using their abilities to increase the total amount of good in the world. Evil aligned Tacticians may even start wars if they can't find any to join, playing with lives as pieces on a game board just to alleviate their boredom. Though any good game player knows that even a pawn can be value if used correctly.
 


I bet if warlords lightly opened up the possibility of magical (not spells) effects, things would flow a lot more smoothly for people.
Unacceptable. The Warlord is non-magical. Period. There could be a magical subclass (IMO, there should be one!), but the class, or any further half-hearted (or more like half-@$$ed) "Warlord Fighter" nonsense, must not, cannot be inherently magical. This is non-negotiable.

Let me put it this way: Would you accept the Fighter being classified as inherently just a little bit magical? Just a smidgeon--that no matter what the Fighter is, it is necessarily magical in nature, what with having superhuman endurance and speed and etc., etc.?

If you would not accept the Fighter being inherently magical, then I see no reason why I should accept the Warlord being so either. And if you would, why do you think that an inherently-magical Fighter would be in any way a "smooth" thing to accept for D&D as a whole?
 

Remove ads

Top