D&D 5E The Fighter Extra Feat Fallacy

[hawkeyefan]

The versatility of ASIs is very limited. You distribute each one at the level you get it and can't change it thereafter. Level-up-only versatility is not very versatile, at all. Contrast that with the versatility of preparing a different set of spells after each long rest, or the versatility of a single slot that you decide how to use at the moment you cast.

This is beside the point. I am not claiming that ASIs are an incredibly versatile character trait compared to all other character traits. I said that the Fighter has versatility because he has more Feats/ASIs at his disposal. That’s quite a different point.

 

[Hussar]

It's the most popular class in the game. It was the most popular in the WOTC surveys, and it's the most popular from the 528 data a year later.

Given it is the most popular, for whatever reason that might be, that means it really does not need an "official" fix of any kind. WOTC accomplished their goal with the class - an overwhelming majority like it, and not only like it but seem to like it more than any other class.
/snip

I agree that fighters have polled as the most popular class. Heck, I mentioned that in this thread that fighter is by far the most popular class in my group.

For 3 levels.

To me, fighter has become the dip class. You take a couple of levels in fighter to bump up your DPS and maybe snag some proficiencies. That's about it. So, with that in mind, I created a poll:

http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?592445-Poll-for-PC-s-with-4-or-more-levels-in-a-class

My prediction here is that fighters will at best be middle of the pack instead of the most popular class by a large margin. We'll see after a week or two of polling.

 

[Imaro]

It was turned in that direction as a red herring: suggest that the only reason for criticizing of the Fighter's design /must/ be with the end goal of convincing WotC to redesign the Fighter soon, and since WotC has no plans to redesign the Fighter soon, that discussing the Fighter's design absolutely is pointless.

But "get WotC to redesign the Fighter soon" was never the goal of this thread.

That's besides the point, no one was forced to engage in this particular part of the discussion, it could have easily been ignored or brought back on topic by other posters, but if you choose to engage this tangent it shouldn't be with disingenuous reconstruction of what a poster is stating.

 

[Imaro]

I agree that fighters have polled as the most popular class. Heck, I mentioned that in this thread that fighter is by far the most popular class in my group.

For 3 levels.

To me, fighter has become the dip class. You take a couple of levels in fighter to bump up your DPS and maybe snag some proficiencies. That's about it. So, with that in mind, I created a poll:

http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?592445-Poll-for-PC-s-with-4-or-more-levels-in-a-class

My prediction here is that fighters will at best be middle of the pack instead of the most popular class by a large margin. We'll see after a week or two of polling.

I'm curious why only your current or last PC? 5e has been out for a couple of years so shouldn't you be looking to see how many people have played straight fighters over that time period as opposed to just the current or last PC they played?

EDIT: For example we just started a new game where the player who played a straight BM in our previous campaign is now playing a cleric... according to your poll he couldn't put fighter but instead would have to put cleric... even though he's played a straight fighter to a higher level than he has the current cleric...

EDIT 2: I asked this in your poll thread as well...

 

[Imaro]

Oh, heavens no! The most persistent virulent and universal-seeming of criticisms can come from a tiny minority, it's more a measure of determination than numbers..

Outside of this forum I don't see much determination on getting the fighter revised... so again I have to ask how are you coming to the conclusion there's "a lot" of criticism?

There's always room for improvement...

There's also always room for diminishing returns...

An official non-supernatural class in addition to an unchanged fighter would be nice, though...

I'd have no problem with this... heck we're pretty much there with the Barbarian & monk. In fact why don't these two classes fit the bill?

... But, yeah, not the thread for it. This one's more just refuting the reflexive apologists...

Ok, let's see....

Well Tony's brought up 4th edition in a thread about 5e, so...

It must be derogatory name time for those that don't share my opinion on the subject we're discussing, well at least it isn't the boring and trite proclamation of haters... but hey the thread may still have enough life to get there. Keep keeping it classy Tony.

 

[Mistwell]

I agree that fighters have polled as the most popular class. Heck, I mentioned that in this thread that fighter is by far the most popular class in my group.

For 3 levels.

To me, fighter has become the dip class. You take a couple of levels in fighter to bump up your DPS and maybe snag some proficiencies. That's about it. So, with that in mind, I created a poll:

http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?592445-Poll-for-PC-s-with-4-or-more-levels-in-a-class

My prediction here is that fighters will at best be middle of the pack instead of the most popular class by a large margin. We'll see after a week or two of polling.

Could be.

 

[Sacrosanct]

My prediction here is that fighters will at best be middle of the pack instead of the most popular class by a large margin. We'll see after a week or two of polling.

I'll bet you a donut it's not. Even with the wording of the poll being very limited and setting up the fighter for failure. For example, since you're only asking for the current PC, that limits the number of fighter responses because there are a lot of other classes people play. And then from that already limited number, you're asking how many take 4 or more levels of fighter.

If you wanted a more accurate response, you should have asked, "For all of your PCs that have a fighter as part of their class, how many have the fighter levels result in the majority of the class levels?"

 

[smbakeresq]

To some of the other ideas presented here I do think instead of or in conjunction with Fighters should get some fighter exclusive “feats” or powers as they level up that are small but flavorful. Half-feats might be a better name. They should situational but effective.

The other classes get something interesting and flavorful as they go up, fighters sort of get left behind. These could be things related to skills, weapons, shield and armor usage (say removing an armor movement penalty) different effects with weapons like disarm with flail or ignoring an opponents shield with same.


Sent from my iPhone using EN World

 

[Alexemplar]

That's besides the point, no one was forced to engage in this particular part of the discussion, it could have easily been ignored or brought back on topic by other posters, but if you choose to engage this tangent it shouldn't be with disingenuous reconstruction of what a poster is stating.

I wasn't referring to you in this instance. The inciting comments were…

[sblock]

It's the most popular class in the game. It was the most popular in the WOTC surveys, and it's the most popular from the 528 data a year later.

Given it is the most popular, for whatever reason that might be, that means it really does not need an "official" fix of any kind. WOTC accomplished their goal with the class - an overwhelming majority like it, and not only like it but seem to like it more than any other class.

Which means it's literally last on the priority list of "official fixes".

So if you have issues with the fighter, and it's perfectly fair to have issues with the fighter, then it will have to come through a house rule. You will never, ever, ever persuade enough people to make enough fuss to get WOTC to make a change in their most popular class. That's reality. The rest is just counting angels that can dance on the head of a pin.

So just work on a house rule that works for you. What more is there to do on the topic beyond that? You're not going to persuade many people you're right, and you're not going to accomplish anything meaningful if you do persuade a few people, so what exactly is the point of belaboring this point further? Particularly given people are now to the point they're just repeating the same points over and over again using slightly different words, I cannot imagine there is much sport or fun left in it anyway.

[/sblock]

I don’t think what I said is a disingenuous reconstruction of the above. In regards to getting back on track, I’ll have more to offer on the Fighter alternatives/simple caster front when my current project is done.

 

[Imaro]

I wasn't referring to you in this instance. The inciting comments were…

[sblock]

[/sblock]

I don’t think what I said is a disingenuous reconstruction of the above. In regards to getting back on track, I’ll have more to offer on the Fighter alternatives/simple caster front when my current project is done.

I was speaking to the fact that twice (once with Mistwell and once with myself), Tony tried to reconstruct the argument, after choosing to engage with this tangent, to something else and then argue against that reconstructed argument as opposed to the original point. I don't think you were being disingenuous in your comments but I do feel if a poster does choose to engage in a tangent, it should be done honestly.