D&D 5E The "more complex" fighter: What are you looking for?

[Jester David]

I would like to see a fighter class whose resource management operates on a round-by-round level (a bit like the token systems in "Iron Heroes," a cool little d20 game which Mike Mearls may perhaps recall). Each round, you accumulate a resource; you spend that resource to do your stuff. So you can get a small advantage every round, or hold off a few rounds and then blow out the enemy.

That'd be fun. Tricky to balance though. I'd be unsure how much of a benefit to make something gained each round. That would take serious play testing.

I think it would get more traction, as well. Everyone knows rogues need a "something" for combat, and acrobatic combat tricks or prepared "surprises" seem right in the rogue's wheelhouse.

That'd be fun to design. More's the pity the Battle Master isn't covered by the OGL.

 

[TwoSix]

That'd be fun to design. More's the pity the Battle Master isn't covered by the OGL.

True, but warlocks are.

 

[JohnLynch]

You've said this before, but I'm looking for specifics. What specifically do they do that you can't do in 5E?

I admit I don't know every power in Bo9S. But flipping through it, a whole lot of them seem to be combinations of things you can already do in 5E. Blinding, granting allies bonuses to attack, pushing/pulling/moving, disarming... You can already do all of that.

The biggest problem in using a 5e fighter as the basis for a tactical fighter is that they can do all those things, X times per day. Once they run out of X times they are stuck with nothing but melee basic attacks or ranged basic attacks until they rest. It gets worse with the more attacks you get because now you're making even more boring* melee basic/ranged attacks. If I want a fighter that more closely resembles the fighters of 4e than I want to be making 1 melee basic attack each round at the most regardless of what level I am, and making up the difference with burst attacks. Just like the casters get to do. I'd also, ideally, want at-will attacks that sacrifice some damage presented in a basic attack (not all damage, but some) in favor of a nice status effect or terrain control. Just like casters get to do.

I don't need to get spells (already got that with the 5e PHB for every single class in the game except maybe barbarians!), nor do I want spells that are disguised as martial abilities. What I would like though, is to be able to make a tactical choice every single turn, even if I have run out of daily or short rest abilities.

One way I've gotten around this without having to rewrite the entire fighter class, was to create a feat that gave characters a free battlemaster maneuver and allowed them to use any maneuver by forgoing the damage on an attack. You can find the feat over in EN5ider's Heroes of the Blade. It's a pretty neat trick, but it only comes online at 4th level (1st for humans).

Those combat maneuvers ought not to be limited to one class, but something that anyone can do, and the fighter, by dint of having the most combat training (expressed probably as the highest attack bonus) is the best at accomplishing.

The problem with multiple attacks each round is that the fighter has a choice: be effective or do something interesting. That something interesting, by the way, is often at the price of facing a contest (where opposed rolls are made) possibly after a successful attack roll has been made to initiate the contest. But wouldn't it be great if fighters could do interesting things and be effective at the same time? Definitely seems like that should be the fighter's forte. And doesn't stop everyone else from doing interesting things either.

* I don't actually mind the AD&D 1e/2e fighter or the 3e/Pathfinder fighter or the 5e fighter. I can have fun with all of them. But this post is being made with my 4th edition hat on (and yes, I can also have fun with 4e fighters as well ).

^ That I'm aware of at least.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

I'll be honest--I don't specifically know what it is that I'm looking for, with the "more complex" Fighter type. Particularly with the relatively extensive list of caveats about what I'm allowed to reference. It's a little like Justice Potter's response to someone expecting him to precisely define "hardcore pornography": "I shall not today attempt further to define the kinds of material I understand to be embraced within that shorthand description, and perhaps I could never succeed in intelligibly doing so. But I know it when I see it, and the motion picture involved in this case is not that."

So: I don't necessarily believe I need to lay out precise figures or characteristics. But I can distinguish where it appears (which I have been requested not to speak of), and where it does not appear, namely the 5e Fighter. The Battlemaster has an idea of it, but it's not quite there, much like a film which happens to depict sex between two people has an idea of "hardcore pornography" but isn't quite there (and thus cannot be prohibited on merit of that alone.)

However, I think I can speak about what things help keep me engaged with a character when I'm playing it. I have no problem whatsoever being engaged in the story, so I will speak no further of it--that has never been a concern on any character I've played, ever. However, I frequently find that being thrown into a situation with "no tools"--that is, *zero* well-defined mechanical elements to hook into--that what results is frustration, sometimes severe enough to make me want to walk away from the table (metaphorically, since I've only played online). Perhaps it is a quirk of my thinking processes compared to most people; perhaps it is purely a game-style difference or force of habit; I don't know. But when I have tried to find improvisational or so-called "creative" solutions to things, even in games where that is encouraged (like Dungeon World), I have almost without fail encountered at least one of the following:

- Excessively high difficulty level, such that the task is essentially guaranteed to fail from the outset.
- The DM does not properly understand probability, specifically iterated probability, yet forces the situation to be "you must never fail in any of an indefinite string of rolls." This means that, while the task may be easily accomplished in the short term, it is guaranteed to fail in the long term.
- The potential benefits of the improvisation are highly circumscribed, while the penalties for failure are extensive, thereby making it a risk not worth the reward. (I admit, here, that I am almost surely more risk-averse than the average player, but even risk-takers I've known have slowly learned that "the house always wins.")

As a sort of corollary/combination of the above three things, there is a fourth thing: playing as a class without access to well-defined resources, I have almost never seen a situation where I am able to achieve more than the most meager effects of classes that do have well-defined resources, even at fantastically high level relative to those meager effects. Yet, at the same time, success often hinges upon being able to achieve large-scale, dramatic, or long-lasting effects.

I am 100% on board with the idea that a class called "Fighter" (or "Warrior" or "Knight" or whatever else) should be at its best when fighting--when using the skills of arms and armor--or when performing feats of physical prowess. But my experience has been that DMs are a skeptical, "conservative" lot when it comes to areas of personal prowess (physical or mental) and things one can do in combat. Such conservative skepticism is reserved almost exclusively for those characters who lack access to magic (I would normally say "classes," but magic is as much a function of subclass as class), while characters who do have access to magic are treated to near-zero skepticism about the applications of their abilities--even ones not actually indicated by the abilities in question. (And yes, I've seen this happen even with an otherwise-excellent DM in Dungeon World too, not just D&D, though I was fortunate enough to be the magic-user in that instance.)

There's also a second problem, not directly related to the first but which still matters for me. Simply put: I get bored in "mechanical" situations, such as combat, if I have very few distinct tools to employ or choices to make. And when I get bored, my mind wanders; I lose track of what's happening in the combat, which slows everything down for everyone; and I try to "fill up" that empty cognitive space with some other thing, which may or may not end up helping. My experience of more..."choice-and-option rich" gameplay (which I cannot explain further, per the OP's request) has shown this doesn't happen all the time, though--games that give me "enough" choice (which I know is purely subjective) don't have that problem. But, at the same time, I really don't actually care that much for either the fluff OR mechanics of most casting classes (ironically, I am probably most strongly *like* a Wizard IRL, but I find the Wizard archetype tedious in D&D). I further tend to like playing physically strong, contemplative characters, often those associated with some kind of martial tradition (Paladins especially, but also Fighters, Warlords/Captains, and Monks). So what am I to do, when my only option for "choice-rich" characters is spellcasting, which I find tedious, and when my only option for "martial tradition" characters without spellcasting is not at all sufficiently "choice-rich"?

I don't think it's at all weird to enjoy a breadth and subtlety of choices, while at the same time not liking spells (the specific mechanical implementation) or spell-casters (whether mechanically or thematically). Yet for someone with such preferences, the Battlemaster is the closest you get, and it feels like a token effort.

So that's what I find wrong with the situation, and why I'd like to see it changed--to include an option for me that I find interesting and engaging, without mucking around with things I find tedious or which have flavor I don't care for. But I'm no game designer, so I don't know what it would be to do that, or how one would go about it, any more than I know how to fix a collision-detection bug in a video game. Yet I know I want this change and would almost certainly recognize something that did it, just as I know I want collision detection to work in a video game and knowing that a particular action shows successful or failed collision.

 

[Imaro]

You know one of the things I never/rarely see mentioned when discussing the breadth of options for the fighter is using equipment creatively... The player who had a fighter character (Battlemaster) in my last campaign used (on top of the BM maneuvers, regular combat options and options in the DMG)... equipment to supplement his combat options and increase his breadth (different damage types) and effectiveness... does no one else do this?

So let's take a look at the options available to a mid level BM fighter (8th level)...

BM Maneuvers5 maneuvers (5 superiority dice)
Commander's Strike: Grant ally an attack
Disarming Attack: (Debuff) chance to disarm foe (possibly unnecessary if DMG options are in effect)
Distracting Strike: (Buff) Advantage on next attack against foe
Evasive Footwork: (Buff) Increase AC during movement
Feinting Attack: (Buff) Self buff for advantage
Goading Attack: (Debuff) Disadv on attacks with targets other than you
Lunging Attack: Increase reach by 5ft
Maneuvering Attack: Tactical movement of allies
Menacing Attack: Inflict fear condition
Parry: (Heal) Negate damage
Precision Attack: (Buff) Increase bonus to hit
Pushing Attack: Push target 15ft
Rally(Heal); Grant temp hp's to allies
Riposte: Extra attack on a miss by opponent
Sweeping Attack: Damage to extra foe
Trip Attack: Inflict Prone condition

PHB OPTIONS All available
Basic Attack (melee or ranged)
Dash
Disengage
Dodge
Help
Grapple
Shove (Bullrush)
Shove (Trip)

EQUIPMENT OPTIONS All available
Acid: A vial of acid that can be used in melee or at range and does 2d6 acid damage.
Alchemist Fire: ranged weapon that does 1d4 damage every round and forces the target to use an action to try and extinguish it. (Combine this with oil for an extra 5 pnts of damage per round).
Ball Bearings: Covers 10ft square and forces any creature moving in the area to make DC 10 Dex save or fall prone
Caltrops: Covers a 5ft area that forces any creature entering the area to move at half speed or succeed on DC 15 Dex save or stop moving and take 1 pnt of damage. Speed permanently reduced by 10ft until healed of at least 1 point of damage...
Holy Water: 2d6 radiant damage to fiends and undead
Poison, Basic: +1d4 poison damage on attack for up to 1 minute.

NOTE: This is actually how I would prefer a more "complex" fighter to be done... through equipment that gives him more options inside and outside of combat.

DMG OPTIONS All Available
Climb Onto Bigger Creature
Disarm
Flank
Mark
Overrun
Shove (Aside)
Tumble

So 5 maneuvers + 8 PHB combat options + 6 equipment options + 7 DMG options... 26 options to choose from

This list doesn't include feats but I'm seeing a multitude of options for the fighter (and I may have missed some)... so I have to ask... are these just not the options people want? If so, again like the OP asked... what are you looking for specifically? If not is there another issue? Do people not use the generic combat options open to fighters? If so why not? Or is there some other issue?

 

[Al2O3]

When I want a different fighter I'm looking for:
1. More out of combat options, things that can easily and consistently be used in social situations and exploration that are not just regular skill checks.
2. Things that modify the standard attack (or possibly just opportunity attacks) each round. E.g. choosing between more damage, more AC or giving advantage to allies. I would still do the attacks I want to do during combat, but they would be better and I would have a choice to make from turn to turn. "More damage" would probably be the bread and butter, but when surrounded it could be worth it to use a bonus action to improve the AC instead.

Most actions available in combat either run out potentially too fast (BM manoeuvres), don't really help as much as more damage because combat is over fast (dodge, help, grapple, shove etc) or cost too much (equipment).

Also, the things that are just as open to paladins are not really useful for comparison of "what the Fighter can do".

So the BM risks running out of dice too fast, the rest of the examples are not selling points for the fighter.

The main reason I won't just play a banneret/Purple Dragon Knight and be happy is the magic weapon dependency to get around resistances. Give me a fighter with +60 ft darkvison and a way to count attacks as magical for overcoming resistance and I just might play a human fighter from the start.

 

[Miladoon]

My most complex fighter right now is a life cleric/wild mage.

 

[Jester David]

Things that modify the standard attack (or possibly just opportunity attacks) each round. E.g. choosing between more damage, more AC or giving advantage to allies. I would still do the attacks I want to do during combat, but they would be better and I would have a choice to make from turn to turn. "More damage" would probably be the bread and butter, but when surrounded it could be worth it to use a bonus action to improve the AC instead.

That already exists.
Action Surge gives you an extra action. Most of the time it is used to attack, but it could equally be used to use the Help or Dodge actions.

 

[Salamandyr]

The problem with multiple attacks each round is that the fighter has a choice: be effective or do something interesting. That something interesting, by the way, is often at the price of facing a contest (where opposed rolls are made) possibly after a successful attack roll has been made to initiate the contest. But wouldn't it be great if fighters could do interesting things and be effective at the same time? Definitely seems like that should be the fighter's forte. And doesn't stop everyone else from doing interesting things either.

* I don't actually mind the AD&D 1e/2e fighter or the 3e/Pathfinder fighter or the 5e fighter. I can have fun with all of them. But this post is being made with my 4th edition hat on (and yes, I can also have fun with 4e fighters as well ).

^ That I'm aware of at least.

At least in 5e, that contest often comes in place of the attack roll. Personally, I don't use contests. I have my players roll against a static DC based on 10 plus the monsters bonus. I do that because I think contests are mathematically the same as making the player roll with disadvantage. But that's an aside.

Yes, you're absolutely right, shoving, disarming, and grappling often come at the expense of doing damage (unless you're a battlemaster doing maneuvers), which in 75% of the cases is the more useful action. Could those maneuvers have been set up to allow, say, some damage as well as a status effect? Absolutely. I think that would be an improvement.

 

[Al2O3]

That already exists.
Action Surge gives you an extra action. Most of the time it is used to attack, but it could equally be used to use the Help or Dodge actions.

No, action surge is not an option for each turn. It is even further from what I am looking for than the BM features. Rather, I want something that also affects the attacks etc made with action surge.