the Jester
Legend
Yeah, my ideal complex fighter looks an awful lot like the 4e Essentials version, using stances.
-
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!
D&D 5E [+]What does your "complex fighter" look like?
- Thread starter Reynard
- Start date
cbwjm
Seb-wejem
The essentials fighters were great, I sometimes wonder if 4e would have had wider appeal if they had started 4e with the essential classes.
the Jester
Legend
I guarantee it. Remember all the cries of "all the classes are the same now" because of the AEDU system? Jeez.
theCourier
Adventurer
The problem is that the "fighter" is too generic and bland an archetype. Every character in D&D has the potential to be a combatant. Split the fighter into classes that people have shown interest in, imo. The Warlord, the Spellblade (or whatever name people want to give it), that kind of thing. Warlord, for example, could be a Combat + Social focused character while the Spellblade is Combat + Social/Exploration depending on what their spell list would be.
Composer99
Hero
To my mind, a "complex" fighter should...
(1) Have exploits that target saving throws
(2) Have exploits that impose conditions on targets in addition to grappled or prone
(3) Have options to choose from that are more potent as the fighter gains levels
(4) Have enough exploits that a fighter has about, say, a half-dozen options at any given time - or at any rate, enough options to feel like they have to weigh up their choices and make round-to-round decisions about what to do in a fight, but not so many that they feel overwhelmed. (Leave that for the wizards!)
(5) Have exploits be situationally useful on the whole rather than a "single best option" - so, for instance, if you're fighting a giant, you'll want to use exploits that are good against giants (ones that take advantage of their usually-poor Dexterity), and if you're fighting a lich, you'll want to use exploits that are good against liches (Mage Slayer as an "exploit" rather than a feat, say).
(6) Have these exploits grouped in thematic categories that I like to call martial disciplines and that would be about equivalent to the concept of spell schools.
(7) Have several features currently gated behind feats - Shield Master, Mage Slayer, Sentinel, that sort of thing - become exploits, more widely available.
(8) Have better access to exploits than everyone else, with some classes having better access to thematically appropriate sets of exploits.
By exploits, I mean discrete combat abilities.
A "complex" fighter should also have more out-of-combat functionality, compared to the PHB fighter. If nothing else, improved versions of Remarkable Athlete and Know Your Enemy should be core features.
One last thing about exploits: in my view, no two exploits should do exactly the same thing, although it's all right if some exploits might do very similar things if they approach them from different mechanical and narrative/thematic directions (like how a "multiattack" exploit might be different when it's "you swing your giant axe around a few times" versus "you unleash a flurry of jabs with your daggers").
I believe A5E does a pretty good job of meeting the above requirements; if I may toot my own horn, I feel pretty good about the homebrew combat exploit system I have been working on for some time in terms of doing the same.
Edit to add: I should like to add that in my view, the goal is to make the mechanics of the fighter match the theme of being a master of arms. The fighter should be able to do stuff with weapons that other martials either just can't do, or can't do to the same extent, where the PHB fighter (with the exception of the Battlemaster, which I would consider a starting point for the above) mostly just does the same thing with weapons as other martials do (i.e., weapon attacks against AC for damage), just more often - indeed, since most games end before 10th level, one hardly ever sees the fighter even get to do that much, the odd action surge notwithstanding.
(1) Have exploits that target saving throws
(2) Have exploits that impose conditions on targets in addition to grappled or prone
(3) Have options to choose from that are more potent as the fighter gains levels
(4) Have enough exploits that a fighter has about, say, a half-dozen options at any given time - or at any rate, enough options to feel like they have to weigh up their choices and make round-to-round decisions about what to do in a fight, but not so many that they feel overwhelmed. (Leave that for the wizards!)
(5) Have exploits be situationally useful on the whole rather than a "single best option" - so, for instance, if you're fighting a giant, you'll want to use exploits that are good against giants (ones that take advantage of their usually-poor Dexterity), and if you're fighting a lich, you'll want to use exploits that are good against liches (Mage Slayer as an "exploit" rather than a feat, say).
(6) Have these exploits grouped in thematic categories that I like to call martial disciplines and that would be about equivalent to the concept of spell schools.
(7) Have several features currently gated behind feats - Shield Master, Mage Slayer, Sentinel, that sort of thing - become exploits, more widely available.
(8) Have better access to exploits than everyone else, with some classes having better access to thematically appropriate sets of exploits.
By exploits, I mean discrete combat abilities.
A "complex" fighter should also have more out-of-combat functionality, compared to the PHB fighter. If nothing else, improved versions of Remarkable Athlete and Know Your Enemy should be core features.
One last thing about exploits: in my view, no two exploits should do exactly the same thing, although it's all right if some exploits might do very similar things if they approach them from different mechanical and narrative/thematic directions (like how a "multiattack" exploit might be different when it's "you swing your giant axe around a few times" versus "you unleash a flurry of jabs with your daggers").
I believe A5E does a pretty good job of meeting the above requirements; if I may toot my own horn, I feel pretty good about the homebrew combat exploit system I have been working on for some time in terms of doing the same.
Edit to add: I should like to add that in my view, the goal is to make the mechanics of the fighter match the theme of being a master of arms. The fighter should be able to do stuff with weapons that other martials either just can't do, or can't do to the same extent, where the PHB fighter (with the exception of the Battlemaster, which I would consider a starting point for the above) mostly just does the same thing with weapons as other martials do (i.e., weapon attacks against AC for damage), just more often - indeed, since most games end before 10th level, one hardly ever sees the fighter even get to do that much, the odd action surge notwithstanding.
Last edited:
EzekielRaiden
Follower of the Way
Well, it's hard to go wrong with just looking at what the 4e Fighter did...so let's do that.
I see Fighters as needing a core identity to start off. No need for restrictive, but it needs more. 4e said, "the Fighter is a stalwart warrior who is almost as good at dishing out pain as she is at taking it." Some vague notions of that exist in the current Fighter (Second Wind and the rather weak Indomitable), but they could be improved.
Reintroduce the marking mechanic. Leverage 13A-style range bands if needed to bridge the gap between TotM and grid.
Let the Fighter make as many OAs as their Proficiency Bonus. Minor feature, but great for punishing enemies.
Make maneuvers that you need higher level to access. Frankly, just run through the list of the best Fighter powers in 4e and implement as many as you can as maneuvers.
Perhaps add a resource like "Grit": gained from taking damage and failing saves perhaps, which then empowers their next Attack action.
Make weapon specialization matter more. That's a classic D&D mechanic and one that can be unique to Fighters. As part of that, bring back the more interesting weapon properties and design of 4e. This is an area where I honestly don't understand why WotC reinvented the wheel, 4e had really good and honestly really straightforward weapons.
On the non-combat side, give the Fighter ways to contribute to social/exploration challenges that are unique to them and thematically appropriate. Perhaps something like...whatever the thing Level Up did, the name escapes me, Knacks or something like that.
Give the Fighter another 1-2 free feats EARLY, like 3rd and 5th level, that have to actually be feats, they can't be ASIs (but can be "half" feats.) Make Feats a "complex Fighter only" mechanic in games where Feats are normally not allowed. (Imagine if that's how the default game worked! I would be pissed at the lack of flexibility overall, but at least you couldn't say that Fighters had no unique, interesting, and powerful mechanics.)
I see Fighters as needing a core identity to start off. No need for restrictive, but it needs more. 4e said, "the Fighter is a stalwart warrior who is almost as good at dishing out pain as she is at taking it." Some vague notions of that exist in the current Fighter (Second Wind and the rather weak Indomitable), but they could be improved.
Reintroduce the marking mechanic. Leverage 13A-style range bands if needed to bridge the gap between TotM and grid.
Let the Fighter make as many OAs as their Proficiency Bonus. Minor feature, but great for punishing enemies.
Make maneuvers that you need higher level to access. Frankly, just run through the list of the best Fighter powers in 4e and implement as many as you can as maneuvers.
Perhaps add a resource like "Grit": gained from taking damage and failing saves perhaps, which then empowers their next Attack action.
Make weapon specialization matter more. That's a classic D&D mechanic and one that can be unique to Fighters. As part of that, bring back the more interesting weapon properties and design of 4e. This is an area where I honestly don't understand why WotC reinvented the wheel, 4e had really good and honestly really straightforward weapons.
On the non-combat side, give the Fighter ways to contribute to social/exploration challenges that are unique to them and thematically appropriate. Perhaps something like...whatever the thing Level Up did, the name escapes me, Knacks or something like that.
Give the Fighter another 1-2 free feats EARLY, like 3rd and 5th level, that have to actually be feats, they can't be ASIs (but can be "half" feats.) Make Feats a "complex Fighter only" mechanic in games where Feats are normally not allowed. (Imagine if that's how the default game worked! I would be pissed at the lack of flexibility overall, but at least you couldn't say that Fighters had no unique, interesting, and powerful mechanics.)
Last edited:
Baldurs_Underdark
Hero
Firstly, I very much like the Battle master and Champion. Especially the Battle master with Sentinel as a feat really gets quite a lot of nice tricks that add a lot of value to combat. So, I am also happy if nothing changes.
Here's just some random ideas to join in the thread. Not sure these should be subclasses, or split up into some feats.
Here's just some random ideas to join in the thread. Not sure these should be subclasses, or split up into some feats.
- A real defensive specialist. Like a Shield Dwarf kinda build. Super tanky, really difficult to hit, maybe a penalty on movement, no great offense, which can always grant defensive bonuses to other PCs (e.g. cover, disadvantage or something similar). A real team player. Maybe with added siege bonuses too.
- A bonus on kicking in doors or opening chests. Rogues will always be the #1 choice for that job, but fighters and barbarians should both achieve the same effect as the Knock spell through pure violence.
DND_Reborn
The High Aldwin
Yep. It has no "direction" as I said in my first post upthread.
What does a Fighter do? Fight. Big deal, so does everyone else.
How does a Fighter do anything else? The same as everyone else.
There is really nothing that defines the class or gives it a role which differs from other martials. If no one else had Fighting Styles and they were expanded and improved, that (at least) would be something. But, that only tackles the combat pillar, and the other pillars need to be addressed as well.
FWIW, here is our rehashed styles from the Mod. You gain either an additional style or the next degree of a known style at 8th, 12th, and 16th levels:
CreamCloud0
One day, I hope to actually play DnD.
First of all i think fighter needs a rebrand to battlemaster or knight, while traditional the ‘fighter’ moniker doesn’t really convey the level of training they have, it just sounds crude and roughshod
Several layers of specialisations:
-stances-switch up on the fly in battle with different strengths, benefits and limitations, stuff like: reliable hits, reckless, evasive, counter, protector, draw aggro, magic resist, mobile, planted,
-fighting styles-as they are now basically, pick a favoured style, includes new options that work off stances and favoured weapon
-manoeuvres-as they are now, but just more of them, and inflict more status with them
-favoured weapon techniques-choose your favoured weapons, you get special bonus effects when using them, stuff like whips have 10ft reach instead of 5, knives crit on an 18-20, staffs can stun with a regular hit...
-battle commands- basically what the 4e battlemaster did, field commander stuff, ordering allies to attack off their turn, activating their healing surges, giving advantage/bonus to their attacks
De-facto military rank: scales with level, makes it easier to get an audience with and convince NPC officials of stuff, potentially requisition items and help for your cause
More tool and weapon proficiencies
‘Training course’ the fighter is able to temporarily train someone in a skill they are proficient in or be trained themselves to be proficient in a skill/task for 8/24 hours over the duration of a short/long rest
Bend bars, break crates, this was something from a previous edition gave bonuses to exert physical force on the world or something?
Field surveyor/battle planning/know thy foe: is able to give bonuses to the group if the fighter is able to spend time studying the battlefield/opponents before the battle
Several layers of specialisations:
-stances-switch up on the fly in battle with different strengths, benefits and limitations, stuff like: reliable hits, reckless, evasive, counter, protector, draw aggro, magic resist, mobile, planted,
-fighting styles-as they are now basically, pick a favoured style, includes new options that work off stances and favoured weapon
-manoeuvres-as they are now, but just more of them, and inflict more status with them
-favoured weapon techniques-choose your favoured weapons, you get special bonus effects when using them, stuff like whips have 10ft reach instead of 5, knives crit on an 18-20, staffs can stun with a regular hit...
-battle commands- basically what the 4e battlemaster did, field commander stuff, ordering allies to attack off their turn, activating their healing surges, giving advantage/bonus to their attacks
De-facto military rank: scales with level, makes it easier to get an audience with and convince NPC officials of stuff, potentially requisition items and help for your cause
More tool and weapon proficiencies
‘Training course’ the fighter is able to temporarily train someone in a skill they are proficient in or be trained themselves to be proficient in a skill/task for 8/24 hours over the duration of a short/long rest
Bend bars, break crates, this was something from a previous edition gave bonuses to exert physical force on the world or something?
Field surveyor/battle planning/know thy foe: is able to give bonuses to the group if the fighter is able to spend time studying the battlefield/opponents before the battle
Last edited:
Horwath
Legend
Fighter should have battlemaster mechanics built in.
Then add one more subclass as normal.
have more feats that have +1 ASI to any ability as Skill expert.
Better yet, make all feats half feats and give +1 floating ASI.
if Skilled feat would be; 2 skills and +1 ASI, I would say that more fighters would take the feat as they could raise their str/dex to 20 or closer to 20.
with 15+2 starting str/dex, you could then take 3 "flavor" feats and still get 20 at level 8 as fighter.
Then add one more subclass as normal.
have more feats that have +1 ASI to any ability as Skill expert.
Better yet, make all feats half feats and give +1 floating ASI.
if Skilled feat would be; 2 skills and +1 ASI, I would say that more fighters would take the feat as they could raise their str/dex to 20 or closer to 20.
with 15+2 starting str/dex, you could then take 3 "flavor" feats and still get 20 at level 8 as fighter.
Similar Threads
