Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
The "more complex" fighter: What are you looking for?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Njall" data-source="post: 6806230" data-attributes="member: 54719"><p>For me? Tactical, effective <em>at-will</em> options. </p><p>Basically, cantrips for fighters. </p><p></p><p>As for why, tactical games generally revolve around making the best choice in a given situation and getting rewarded for it: right now, I don't feel that a class that's supposed to be all about combat gets enough <strong>good, effective</strong> options in combat.</p><p></p><p>As an example, being able to choose if you want to adopt an offensive approach or a defensive one strikes me as a very basic choice you should be able to make during each and every combat round.</p><p>As far as fighters go, on this front, they're vastly inferior to a bunch of other classes, mechanically: pretty much the only active, at-will defensive option for the supposedly "best-at-combat" class is, short of swiching to a one hander and a shield, dodging, which forces you to give up your attack action entirely. </p><p>Since combat in D&D is a matter of HP attrition, dodging is rarely a good idea, and generally one you only use as a last-ditch attempt to stay alive for a couple more rounds, as you're reducing your damage output to 0 while still taking damage yourself.</p><p>Every other "defensive option" the class gets is limited-use, and either situational ( like imposing disadvantage on attack rolls to an opponent who's not immune to fear ) or has terrible scaling ( "parry", for example, which is pretty worthless by the time you're high level ), and, generally, a bunch of other classes get better defensive options (uncanny dodge quickly outpaces parry, for example, and can be used all day long. Barbarians eventually halve all damage taken, even if I'd not really consider "rage" an "active" ability, all day long. High level wizards can spam shield, and so forth ).</p><p></p><p>And that's just an example.</p><p></p><p>Currently, (high level) fighters are all about damage: great if you're trying to build a glass cannon, less so if what you want is a flexible character that's good at reading the flow of combat and adapting; even the battlemaster's Superiority Dice mechanic is more strategic in nature than it is tactical, since it depends on the amounts of short rests your DM decides to hand out: try playing a battlemaster in a fast paced adventure where you can't really afford frequent short rests and you might quickly realize that you're pretty much stuck playing a weak Champion.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Basically, as far as I'm concerned, the Battlemaster doesn't live up to Mearls's promise that it would fulfill the "tactical warrior" role, and that would be able to choose "a different option every combat round" ( in Mearls's own words...unfortunately, I can't seem to reach the relevant L&L article on the website anymore. IIRC, it was the one about fighter maneuvers, dated January 2014 ): depending on the pacing of the campaign, it might end up being more of a "strategic warrior", which is another thing entirely.</p><p></p><p>I'm not sure this answers your question, but, especially in light of the fact that casters <strong>do</strong> get a bunch of varied, interesting <em>at-will</em> options, that's the main reason I dislike the way the 5e fighter is designed, at the moment.</p><p></p><p>TL;DR: to me, at the moment, the (high level) fighter is only really effective as a one-trick pony who doesn't have enough good options, aside from its spectacular burst damage, to justify giving up almost entirely the other two pillars around which the game is supposed to be built.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Njall, post: 6806230, member: 54719"] For me? Tactical, effective [I]at-will[/I] options. Basically, cantrips for fighters. As for why, tactical games generally revolve around making the best choice in a given situation and getting rewarded for it: right now, I don't feel that a class that's supposed to be all about combat gets enough [B]good, effective[/B] options in combat. As an example, being able to choose if you want to adopt an offensive approach or a defensive one strikes me as a very basic choice you should be able to make during each and every combat round. As far as fighters go, on this front, they're vastly inferior to a bunch of other classes, mechanically: pretty much the only active, at-will defensive option for the supposedly "best-at-combat" class is, short of swiching to a one hander and a shield, dodging, which forces you to give up your attack action entirely. Since combat in D&D is a matter of HP attrition, dodging is rarely a good idea, and generally one you only use as a last-ditch attempt to stay alive for a couple more rounds, as you're reducing your damage output to 0 while still taking damage yourself. Every other "defensive option" the class gets is limited-use, and either situational ( like imposing disadvantage on attack rolls to an opponent who's not immune to fear ) or has terrible scaling ( "parry", for example, which is pretty worthless by the time you're high level ), and, generally, a bunch of other classes get better defensive options (uncanny dodge quickly outpaces parry, for example, and can be used all day long. Barbarians eventually halve all damage taken, even if I'd not really consider "rage" an "active" ability, all day long. High level wizards can spam shield, and so forth ). And that's just an example. Currently, (high level) fighters are all about damage: great if you're trying to build a glass cannon, less so if what you want is a flexible character that's good at reading the flow of combat and adapting; even the battlemaster's Superiority Dice mechanic is more strategic in nature than it is tactical, since it depends on the amounts of short rests your DM decides to hand out: try playing a battlemaster in a fast paced adventure where you can't really afford frequent short rests and you might quickly realize that you're pretty much stuck playing a weak Champion. Basically, as far as I'm concerned, the Battlemaster doesn't live up to Mearls's promise that it would fulfill the "tactical warrior" role, and that would be able to choose "a different option every combat round" ( in Mearls's own words...unfortunately, I can't seem to reach the relevant L&L article on the website anymore. IIRC, it was the one about fighter maneuvers, dated January 2014 ): depending on the pacing of the campaign, it might end up being more of a "strategic warrior", which is another thing entirely. I'm not sure this answers your question, but, especially in light of the fact that casters [B]do[/B] get a bunch of varied, interesting [I]at-will[/I] options, that's the main reason I dislike the way the 5e fighter is designed, at the moment. TL;DR: to me, at the moment, the (high level) fighter is only really effective as a one-trick pony who doesn't have enough good options, aside from its spectacular burst damage, to justify giving up almost entirely the other two pillars around which the game is supposed to be built. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
The "more complex" fighter: What are you looking for?
Top