Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 6558570" data-attributes="member: 996">No problem.&nbsp; The Champion archetype never uses that mechanic, so there's always an alternative.&nbsp;While your DM might infer that, I'm fairly confident stating (from a position of no authority whatsoever) that 5e's /intent/ is for the DM to let you try whatever the heck you want.&nbsp; So your Champion could, on any given round that it seemed appropriate, try to trip someone, hit their weapons, grapple, bullrush, feint, trash-talk, bait, disembowel, or otherwise do something cool/effective/dramatic.&nbsp; The DM might say it doesn't work or call for a check that you're likely to fail, but that doesn't mean you can't do it, just that you failed.&nbsp;5e fighter /do/ eventually get a lot of attacks at &quot;Full BAB,&quot; so in a sense you don't really need to. &nbsp; 5e is very open and encouraging to DMs when it comes to introducing their own house rules.&nbsp; It offers no such encouragement when it comes to accepting proposed house rules from players who are hoping to make their characters better.&nbsp;The 5e fighter does get a choice of Style at first level, and of archetype at 3rd, and that does add to something like 15 or so more or less distinct sorts of fighters.&nbsp; Add a background, and, while it's not customized in as much detail, nor modeled with such confidence as in 3.5, you can get quite the range of concepts down in a general way.&nbsp;The latter, I'm afraid.&nbsp; If you keep looking at the Champion, squint just right, and feel out what your DM will let you get away with, you might find that you can get something like the same concept out of a 5e fighter as a 3.5, it's just less a matter of the build and more a matter of what happens in play.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Tony Vargas, post: 6558570, member: 996"] No problem. The Champion archetype never uses that mechanic, so there's always an alternative. While your DM might infer that, I'm fairly confident stating (from a position of no authority whatsoever) that 5e's /intent/ is for the DM to let you try whatever the heck you want. So your Champion could, on any given round that it seemed appropriate, try to trip someone, hit their weapons, grapple, bullrush, feint, trash-talk, bait, disembowel, or otherwise do something cool/effective/dramatic. The DM might say it doesn't work or call for a check that you're likely to fail, but that doesn't mean you can't do it, just that you failed. 5e fighter /do/ eventually get a lot of attacks at "Full BAB," so in a sense you don't really need to. 5e is very open and encouraging to DMs when it comes to introducing their own house rules. It offers no such encouragement when it comes to accepting proposed house rules from players who are hoping to make their characters better. The 5e fighter does get a choice of Style at first level, and of archetype at 3rd, and that does add to something like 15 or so more or less distinct sorts of fighters. Add a background, and, while it's not customized in as much detail, nor modeled with such confidence as in 3.5, you can get quite the range of concepts down in a general way. The latter, I'm afraid. If you keep looking at the Champion, squint just right, and feel out what your DM will let you get away with, you might find that you can get something like the same concept out of a 5e fighter as a 3.5, it's just less a matter of the build and more a matter of what happens in play. [/QUOTE]

Verification