Unearthed Arcana Unearthed Arcana Fighter: Samurai, Sharpshooter, Arcane Archer & Knight

I'm getting, like, unhealthy amounts of mad, clicking on that broken link.

 

[RSIxidor]

Arcane Archer
- Arcane Arrow with Arcane Shots is good
-- Bursting Arrow and Piercing arrow seem to be the winners to me
-- The other Arcane Shots options are all interesting and mostly useful
- Archer's Lore - It kind of feels like they didn't know what else to give them so... skills!
- Conjure Arrows is quite boring unless in specific sorts of campaigns
- Ever-Ready Arrow is nice to have, fits alongside the similar Battlemaster feature but allows for more uses
- Deadly Arrow is nice to have

Knight
- Born to the Saddle is nice to have
- Implacable Mark ... ugh ... as much I was loved 4th edition fighters and would like to see a similar option here, this is so wordy. If they can improve the wording, then I'll welcome this feature. I'd almost rather it be granting the Sentinel feat outright but a later feature gets in the way a bit.
- Noble Cavalry - see my note on Archer's Lore above
- Hold the Line is a nice expansion of one portion of the Sentinel feat. I rather like this feature. It doesn't completely get in the way of Sentinel, though.
- Rapid Strike is okay. Would be much better if it didn't use your bonus action and instead was limited to one extra a turn. If you don't have solid uses for your bonus action by level 15 then what are you doing with your life?
- Defender's Blade... I would have rather seen this earlier. At this point, it does make you very good at defending against a horde but so will Tunnel Fighter and Sentinel, and you can get that a lot sooner (assuming your DM allows all playtest material and not just some).

Samurai
- Fighting spirit is solid. Where's their second 3rd level feature?
- Elegant Courier is a good social feature
- Unbreakable Will is quite welcome
- Rapid Strike again... this would be good if it could work with Fighting Spirit better (you'll be able to receive the benefits on the attacks of the next turn). Again, shouldn't require a bonus action and should be limited to once a turn.
- Strength Before Death could potentially be amazing. Fighting Spirt could potentially save you from death, as could a number of other things.

Sharpshooter
- Don't like that it has the same name as a feat.
- Steady Aim is great. I wish they could change the Sharpshooter and Heavy Weapon Master feats to a similar style (our group already does this)
- Careful Eyes - I can honestly say I've never played with a DM that actually enforces the Search action. In combat, we pretty much use our passives or we get prompted for a perception roll in some cases.
- Close-Quarters Shooting is nice
- Rapid Strike again... please once a turn no bonus action...
- Snap Shot - Underdark Ranger gets this at level 3...

My main problem with Rapid Strike is likely how late it comes. If it was an earlier feature, I probably wouldn't mind it as a bonus action.

 

[RSIxidor]

After reading the UA I liked the Arcane Archer. When I finished reading I realized that the Arcane Archer write up is incomplete. The Arcane Archer should have a 10th level feature.

What should the 10th level feature for Arcane Archer be? I thought maybe it should be a third Magic Arrow.

They get an extra Arcane Shot option. Compared to most of the other fighter archetypes, this is fine for level 10, if a little underwhelming.

 

[jbOKgamer]

They get an extra Arcane Shot option. Compared to most of the other fighter archetypes, this is fine for level 10, if a little underwhelming.

Actually that is just part of the Arcane Archer 3rd level ability. The Arcane Archer should have another archetype feature for 10th level. I was reading through all post and was wondering if anyone else noticed the absence of the feature.

 

[Bitbrain]

EDIT
Forget what I said. My brain woke up enough for me to realize that the Arcane Archer is intended for those who want to play as Green Arrow.

 

[Sacrosanct]

Color me mind-boggled.

Why on earth not?
.

Because the concepts are directly opposed. It would be like having an atheist cleric. Look at what a samurai is. Order, structure, honor, unwavering loyalty, aristocratic, etiquette. Many things a barbarian or assassin are the opposite of. I'm not talking background limitations here (as implied by an earlier poster), but class dipping. I also said "under most circumstances" because there might be something that happened in game that would convince me to permit it (like the aforementioned Shogun Assassin). But on the surface, as a general rule, I probably wouldn't allow two directly opposed character types to be multiclassed. I know some people don't care about the role-playing aspect of multiclassing and only look at classes as packets of mechanics to be swapped around and I don't care about that. But on the flip side, understand that there are a lot of people who DO care about the fluff and how it impacts their game. So if someone wants to do something like that, there better be a good in game reason for it.

 

[dave2008]

Rapid Strike
This is, confusing, to say the least. Instead of Advantage, you can get a Bonus Action attack. I think it's supposed to simply negate advantage on one attack out of the three you will be doing at this level. But what happens if you have two sources of advantage on the same attack?

Advantage does not stack. You don't have multiple instances of advantage, you either have it or you don't. You forgo advantage and can make an attack as a bonus action. The RAI is clear, but I agree the RAW could be clarified.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Because the concepts are directly opposed. It would be like having an atheist cleric. Look at what a samurai is. Order, structure, honor, unwavering loyalty, aristocratic, etiquette. Many things a barbarian or assassin are the opposite of. I'm not talking background limitations here (as implied by an earlier poster), but class dipping. I also said "under most circumstances" because there might be something that happened in game that would convince me to permit it (like the aforementioned Shogun Assassin). But on the surface, as a general rule, I probably wouldn't allow two directly opposed character types to be multiclassed. I know some people don't care about the role-playing aspect of multiclassing and only look at classes as packets of mechanics to be swapped around and I don't care about that. But on the flip side, understand that there are a lot of people who DO care about the fluff and how it impacts their game. So if someone wants to do something like that, there better be a good in game reason for it.

Your game, you do you.

I just don't see how a samurai/rogue isn't a perfect Ronin, for instance. Or a Samurai/Barbarian a more beefy rage-y Ronin. Or any number of other things.

I mean, why not just let players make the character they want, instead of God-gming all over their fun?

 

[Sacrosanct]

Your game, you do you.

I just don't see how a samurai/rogue isn't a perfect Ronin, for instance. Or a Samurai/Barbarian a more beefy rage-y Ronin. Or any number of other things.

Bolded for emphasis. Try to think outside your own world and you just might. Like I said in that post that you quoted (and obviously ignored), several people think the fluff of the game is important on how characters grow and progress

I mean, why not just let players make the character they want, instead of God-gming all over their fun?

Keep your badwrongfun accusations to yourself. Not allowing every player to do whatever they want, especially when it's contradictory to the game world, is not "God-gming all over their fun." You can take that entitled attitude and burn it. I don't think I'm being all that unreasonable to tell a player who has spent their entire profession so far being a raging barbarian with no self control over their anger issues suddenly becoming a class that's built around etiquette, always following orders, and self control. Not without a dang good reason for it in game at any rate.

 

[Jer]

I don't think I'm being all that unreasonable to tell a player who has spent their entire profession so far being a raging barbarian with no self control over their anger issues suddenly becoming a class that's built around etiquette, always following orders, and self control. Not without a dang good reason for it in game at any rate.

Honestly you just described Wolverine's character arc under Chris Claremont in the 80s, so there is story precedent

What about the other way? The Samurai who's spent his entire life bound by honor and orders and self control who finally snaps and has all of that built up barely suppressed rage rise up to where they become a vicious monster on the battlefield, forgetting about their training and just raging their way through battle.

(Personally I think pretty much any multiclass can have a story that justifies it. Like you I would require a player who wants to play their weird multiclass to bring me a story explaining why their character has the choices that they've made, but I make all of my players do that anyway for their characters even if they single class. And my group enjoys coming up with weird reasons for the feats they've chosen or whatever so it's no big at my table.)

 

[Dorian_Grey]

These are interesting but my gut flip is that the arcane archer should have been in the ranger. Just a feeling.

Anyway, what I was hoping for I didn't end up seeing: following up on the superiority dice and running with it. Sharpshooter would be the closest thing I'd use and even that leaves me feeling underwhelmed. Further, what about fighters using thrown weapons or slings - i.e. class 2nd Edition halflings? They don't have a real place in these classes, and it's mildly disappointing. Classic historical example in David vs Goliath too.