D&D 5E The Fighter Problem

[Dausuul]

My players rarely choose to play a fighter. The class doesn’t appeal to them as it is disappointing to have their character roll poorly and watch as another player’s mage or rogue is scoring another hit on the enemy. My resolution is a home rule; the fighter (think about it) is a professional warrior, as a pro, gets one automatic success on a melee or ranged attack per turn. They still get to roll, and if a critical hit results can use the roll. Suddenly, the fighter is a true asset to the party and is a desirable choice for the player.

Speaking as a wizard player... yeah, sure, you could complain about missing with an attack. Or, you know, you could just attack again, like you get to do every single round. Twice. Or more.

Me, when I cast my Big Spell and the target makes its saving throw--or fails its saving throw and then goes, "Legendary Resistance, nyah nyah"--that's it. I don't get to pull out that spell again till the next long rest. Welcome to wizarding. I can get the option to maybe force a spell through, by playing a diviner, but even then I'm at the mercy of the dice (if both my Portent dice roll high, I can't force a failed save that day) and it still doesn't punch through Legendary Resistance.

I mean, your players don't like playing fighters, fine. I'm not all that fond of 'em myself. Wizard has been my class of choice since the first day I picked up the dice. But this is just a bizarre complaint.

 

[Satyrn]

I like playing fighters.

I'm pretty sure I'd grow bored of them if I automatically hit every round.

 

[Necrofumbler]

Read properly: He specifically said "that no other class gets". This means feats are not doing that because everybody can pick feats.

There is a huge differently between
"Having more feats than other classes, but in a list that everybody can choose from."
and
"I want unique abilities only my class can ever have".

I agree that the fighter lacks a HUGE amount of flavor and out-of-combat utility.

Renaming them Warriors, and giving them a few out of combat abilities related to "stategy", "tactics", "planning", "camping", etc., could prove interested. Basically, this is the guy who know how to war, both during a fight, and out of it.

A few examples:
- Giving the entire party a bonus on any forced march to pursue an enemy force (or escape from it).
- Establishing an efficient camp duty cycle, for various bonuses such as better Perception against enemies coming to attack the camp, work schedules, etc.,
- Maybe some overall morale bonus for the group when doing "coordinated attacks" together, under the leadership of the warrior.
- Bonuses when interacting with any military or mercenary force or patrol when they are not outright hostile enemies. Because the warrior knows how these guys really think much better than the other Pcs.

And so. Tons of ideas to add both flavor, and out-of-combat shining moments, to an otherwise extremely bland class.


Personnally, at low level the main power" of a fighter is mostly having a better AC than everybody else by a few points. Afterwards, this remains true only if the GM is generous with gold and heavy magical armor.


Heck, I weould ave preferred if all the classes were so front-loaded. Giving everybody unique abilities, nice. Giving everybody several not only unique but VERY powerful abilities in levels that, according to the rules, you go through in only a couple gaming sessions, that wasn't such a good idea IMHO.

 

[Necrofumbler]

Read properly: He specifically said "that no other class gets". This means feats are not doing that because everybody can pick feats.

There is a huge differently between
"Having more feats than other classes, but in a list that everybody can choose from."
and
"I want unique abilities only my class can ever have".

I agree that the fighter lacks a HUGE amount of flavor and out-of-combat utility.

Renaming them Warriors, and giving them a few out of combat abilities related to "stategy", "tactics", "planning", "camping", etc., could prove interested. Basically, this is the guy who know how to war, both during a fight, and out of it.

A few examples:
- Giving the entire party a bonus on any forced march to pursue an enemy force (or escape from it).
- Establishing an efficient camp duty cycle, for various bonuses such as better Perception against enemies coming to attack the camp, work schedules, etc.,
- Maybe some overall morale bonus for the group when doing "coordinated attacks" together, under the leadership of the warrior.
- Bonuses when interacting with any military or mercenary force or patrol when they are not outright hostile enemies. Because the warrior knows how these guys really think much better than the other Pcs.

And so. Tons of ideas to add both flavor, and out-of-combat shining moments, to an otherwise extremely bland class. Flavor, more utility, but not necessarily more complicated. "Simple" can be a huge attraction to a new player. Champion is that. But I've found out that if you just start at level 1, and then SLOWLY level up (instead of a super-fast rush to level 4 like the rules describe), new players can easily adjust to almost any class. You know, sufficient tome to become familiar not only with your pwn PC's new powers, but *also* those of your companions AND having also enough time to master making teaming-up combos of various tactics together, BEFORE gaining new cool powers, so that the team becomes like a well-oiled, well tuned engine? And not swamping everybody with tons of options that they end up never having the time to use anyway. Instead of this very centered on the self new era, where fast gratification of "getting and trying a bit some new trick and getting even more so, before someone immature just might start getting bored already?" rules the day.

But I digress.

Personally, at low level, the main "power" of a fighter is mostly having a better AC than everybody else by a couple points (which is still a huge bonus, thus explaining the popular fighter level dip). Afterwards, this gap remains true only if the GM is generous with gold and heavy magical armor.

Heck, I would ave preferred if all the classes were so front-loaded. Giving everybody unique abilities, nice. Giving everybody several not only unique but VERY powerful abilities in levels that, according to the rules, you go through in only a couple gaming sessions, that wasn't such a good idea IMHO.

IMHO, multi-classing should be about a character concept that REQUIRE both classes. But in practicality, it's become more about level-dipping to min-max a character. It makes everybody step upon the "unique coolness factor" of other PCs, too. This is when I GM for a big group (DM + 5 or 6 players) I simply forbid multi-classing. With a medium group (DM + 4 players) I insist on both classes being close to the same level. Wiz 6 / Fighter 5 is ok, not Wiz 11/ Fighter 1. Basically, only for PCs whose character concept screams for multiclassing. And with small groups (up to 3 players) I allow full multiclassing.