Subclass, backgrounds, skills, feats, races and ability score distribution all have various levels of influence of the time of a campaign and the acceptance of the DM.
Why is the fighter fully designed around appeasing the few DM who demand the fighter be 10% Combat with no brainpower, skills, exploration power, and social power which could be overshadowed or outniched
They do have the opportunity to get these things though. I think 6 of 10 fighter subclasses bring an extra proficiency to the game and Rune Knight brings both an extra proficiency and advantage on multiple skills.
Fighters have those extra options, so they can take them. Feats like Ritual Caster, Skilled, and Magic Initiate for example are intended primarily for non-casters and they gave fighters an extra ASis to take that sort of stuff.
Would it be okay for the wizard only to have evocation spells and tell them to "take a subclass, skill prof, feat, race and ability score mod to do anything else"?
Wizard subclasses are weaker than figher subclasses and the rules do tell Wizards they have to take and prepare a specific spell if they want to do anything, then they need to both prepare it and spend a spell slot casting it.
Wizards can really do it all but A WIZARD can't do it all and a Wizard that takes spells to dominate for the social or exploration pillars is going to be pretty weak in combat.
There are some tables where Wizards are afforded the opportunity to get the number of spells required to "do it all" but in my experience that is the real 10% of DMs. Most campaigns do not afford time to add lots of spells to your spellbook.
I have played very high level powerful combat Wizards and I never played a single one that had all 3 pillars covered or that was the best in even two of the pillars. The Bladesingers in particular I have played are the most powerful melee combat builds I have done personally but they are burning high level slots on things like False Life, Song of Defense and Tasha's otherworldy Guise like it is going out of style. They have low Charisma and lowish Wisdom, and at the end of the day, they have below average utility out of combat. Not none, but not a lot. My high level fighters have all been MUCH better out of combat than my high level Bladesingers.
What essentially happened is that WOTC surveyed the community in 2013 and there were just enough Toms, Dicks, and Harrys who wanted the fighter to be 100% Combat, 0% anything else to nudge noncombat fightery things out of satisfaction threshold and ensure that dabbling in noncombat was weak as well. +2 to alchemist supplies does nothing vs the d20 afterall.
However when 5e released, Tom, Dick, and Harry went back to older editions or OSR. 5e had made concessions to people who don't even play 5e. And then 5e developped a Sunk Cost Fallacy once it became popular.
I don't agree with this interpretation and a lot of those asking for more balance don't either. I don't think a lot of people went back to OSR. I know I started playing D&D in 1980 and I did not go back to OSR.
At the end of the day the fighter in 5E is only 100% combat if the player builds it to be 100% combat.
As a whole the 5e community doesn't feel skilled as anything in play due to the unreliablity of the d20 unless
- You have Expertise at the check
- Your have Proficiency in the check and a primary or secondary score which matches the check
- You have magic that boost or overrides the check
- You have a class feature that boost or overrides the check
Most fighter subclasses offer extra skill proficiencies, at least one of the fighter subclasses gets expertise in a skill, another offers advantage on multiple skills and a third offers a 1d8 bonus on skill checks sever times a day that scales to a higher dice with level.
The skill expert feat also gives expertise while boosting an ability and a fighter has an extra ASI to devote to this if she wants.
If fighters did not have subclasses that offered this, or an extra ASI that offered these things that may be an argument, but those things are available to fighters who choose to take them. Som of those combos (example Rune Knight and skill expert) can be taken without compromising combat power at all.
As an example, take a Mountain Dwarf Rune Knight, Knight background at 8th level, who used his extra ASI for skill expert:
- Your abilities are 2 points higher than most race/class combos (1 point for mountain dwarf, 1 point for skill expert)
- You have proficiency in 9 tools and speak 4 languages.
- You have proficiency in 5 skills, expertise in 1 skill
- you roll with advantage on up to either 5 skills or alternatively 4 skills and all of your 9 tools
- you have 3 retainers that can do all sorts of things outside of combat, including "Help" on ability checks when they happen to be around.
If you like skills more than tools, you can make the same sort of build using a half-elf and have proficiency in 2 tools and 7 skills, while still being 2 points ahead of other race/class combos in terms of your ability scores.
Another third option I can forgo the expertise, lose 1 skill proficiency and use my extra feat for Lucky and get to reroll a failed check 3 times a day (often in this case rerolling a check I made originally with advantage) and I do this while still having better ability scores than most other players!
