D&D 5E What Makes the Fighter Best at Fighing?

[EzekielRaiden]

The big point is that "best at fighting" is an ambiguous term that could apply to any class under the right lens. It's like asking what makes a^2 + b^2 = c^2 the most beautiful theorm or asking what makes Coyote the best trickster god. There's no actual answer, just a bunch of opinions that don't talk to each other much because they don't actually agree on what "best at fighting" means.


This seems really squishy. How do you know that for a fact? Do you know that this stated goal in an article (giving you the benefit of the doubt there) was also the goal for the final class? Do you know how the numbers were calculated? Were the pillars balanced against each other like that?

I mean, in the PHB, all classes seem to fire at least potentially, at least a bit, on all pillars. The Fighter we got clearly has benefits outside of combat, which makes them less combat-focused than a sorcerer or wizard with combat-only magic, forex. If we use that as a guideline, and presume the pillars are balanced in ratio against each other, then the fighter should suck more at combat than a blasty sorcerer.

How do you define "good at combat," and what classes are, by that definition, "good at combat?" Do they also get things that are not combat-related? Would that maybe indicate that there's not an explore/fight/talk ratio in the final class design goals?

*shrug* It may or may not be ambiguous. But, from where I'm standing, there is exactly one thing the Fighter can do which no one else can easily replicate: occasionally taking two standard Actions. So the best, most unique thing a Fighter can do is "more stuff everyone would or could do with an extra turn." While no one can do everything a Fighter could with that extra standard Action, almost everyone can do some of them. Meanwhile, Barbarians have eye-poppingly crazy tanking ability and can get some sick damage with careful Raging/Frenzying, and Paladins can pump out huge and consistent damage through a mixture of hit bonuses, bonus-action smiting spells, and Divine Smites (especially if reserved for crits), while keeping a couple 1st or 2nd level spells (once you get past the training-wheels levels) for after-the-fact healing and using Lay on Hands for spot-treatment during combat. And don't forget the ridiculousness of the save-boost aura and the juicy CD options (like Bless Weapon).

The Fighter has a degree of flexibility...and that's it. My experience with literally every D&D-alike ever has shown me that flexibility rarely wins over focus; doing many things okay, or even decently, is less useful than doing one thing very, very well, especially when it comes to combat. It's only when you can marry flexibility with great power (e.g. Batman Wizard) that the former is really worth its salt, mechanically.

I also have to say: the Fighter's "non-combat options" are laughable at best. Other than the alleged uses of Action Surge out of combat (which have, thus far, always sounded very contrived to me), you're talking about "Remarkable" Athlete (which is anything but remarkable), or a bloody artisan tool proficiency. The Eldritch Knight, of course, is a dirty cheater P) but even it only really gets a couple of cantrips and one first-level spell (since all the rest are school-limited and there's very little utility in Abju/Evoc levels 1-4). The Paladin list has some solid options that can be swapped out with a rest (EKs are fixed-spells-known like Bards), and all three of the PHB oaths give a little more as well.

 

[Bawylie]

I do.

 

[I'm A Banana]

I'd think it'd be a stretch for some classes.

I think you could even say that someone who just has a maxed Persuasion skill is "best at fighting" if you look at it through the lens of, say, resource optimization - the most efficient use of resources is to avoid every fight that it is possible to avoid, and a maxed Persuasion is there to help achieve that (Stealth would also be a real contender).

OTOH, the fighter's class features aren't all that ambiguous - you were still able to pick three, for instance.

Another way to look at this is which features are the least dispensable? How far would a fighter drop behind his rivals if he didn't have Second Wind? Action Surge? Extra Attack?

I think the most defining Fighter feature is Action Surge.

A defining feature would have to (1) come online early (ideally in the first 2 levels, but I could probably be persuaded that the first 3 or 4 are OK in some cases) while (2) remaining relevant even in the endgame (scaling is OK), (3) be independent of subclass or ability selection (a defining ability is not one that can be opted out of), (4) be used at least once per short rest (a defining ability is not one that can be only used once a day), and (5) be something no other class is really capable of (a defining ability is not one that someone else can do).

So, generally....

• Barbarian: Rage
• Bard: Bardic Inspiration
• Cleric: Channel Divinity
• Druid: Wildshape
• Fighter: Action Surge
• Monk: Ki points (specifically, Flurry of Blows, Patient Defense, and Step of the Wind); debatably, Unarmored Movement
• Paladin: Smite; debatably, Lay on Hands
• Ranger: Natural Explorer; debatably, Primeval Awareness (Favored Enemy arguably should be, but it's too variable and not big enough)
• Rogue: Cunning Action; debatably, Sneak Attack.
• Sorcerer: Font of Magic / Metamagic
• Warlock: Pact Magic / Invocations
• Wizard: Arcane Recovery

When comparing these, you get different pings of strength and utility on different pillars of play. A druid's wildshape, for instance, is most useful for the exploration pillar - the same place a Ranger's Natural Explorer pings. A cleric's Channel Divinity varies with the subclass, but it's hard to see much use for Smite outside of "killin' baddies." The defining abilities of primary spellcasters are smaller and less impactful than others - Bardic Inspiration is nice, but a d6 doesn't have nearly the force of an extra action or a smite.

A Fighter's Action Surge gets most of its mileage in Combat. You could use it outside of combat (in a chase or something), but combat is where the action economy tends to matter the most. Compared to similar action-economy-breaking abilities (Ki points, Cunning Action), it's more of a nova, and more flexible.

Without Second Wind, a fighter wouldn't suffer much (it's a bit of an emergency button anyway). Those high-level Extra Attacks and ASI's are nice, but not early enough to be defining or relevant for most of the class. Take them away and replace them and no one worries.

But if you take Action Surge from a fighter, you're looking at a significant bit of its identity and unique schtick being stolen.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

[MENTION=2067]I'm A Banana[/MENTION]
While I definitely think that was an analysis worth doing, I'm not sure it really captures the core of several classes--particularly the heaviest spellcasters. I mean, Arcane Recovery? *That's* the thing that makes a Wizard special and unique, standing out from others? No. It's the spells, and being able to learn the whole damn list if they work for it. Same for Cleric--Paladins also get Channel Divinity, you know, and in more-or-less comparable ways (but for Clerics, it's the Domain that matters--it's all about the subclass).

But I do think this highlights something, which Mearls had referenced but didn't give specific explanation of. That is, under this analysis, the core thing Fighters can do...is very light in flavor. Metamagic, Divine Smite, Ki, Rage, Wildshape...all of these things have a pretty strong, distinctive flavor to them. You can refluff them in various ways, sometimes, but you can't really get away from them having a particular "feel" to them.

In fact, I think we could divide this selection of classes up into three distinct groups. You have the Flavorful Core, where there's a key mechanic that underlies the class and supports its unique identity in a strong but more-or-less balanced way (Barb, Druid, Monk, Pally, Rogue, Sorcerer, Warlock). You have the Prime Casters, whose strength is not any particular feature, but rather their approach to the ultimate of class features, spellcasting (Bard, Cleric, Wizard). And then you have the...other classes. Fighters are certainly capable, but the flexibility of their core features (Action Surge, but also bonus ASIs and feats) is precisely what makes them lack a core identity, a clear flag that says "look at me, I'm a FIGHTER and I'm AWESOME."* And Rangers have plenty of flavor...they just don't have a potent core feature the way Fighters do.

Is it any wonder, then, that Ranger is the class that's gotten the most dissatisfied reviews? And that Fighter is so contentious, between those who love the "freedom" of no identifying feature, and those who feel like there's nothing "special" the Fighter can do?

*It should, but sadly does not, go without saying that some people think it's great that Fighters have nothing that clearly identifies them as Fighters, unlike pretty much every other class. I, personally, think this was a weakness--and it would seem Mearls does, too. Probably one of the few places he and I are of the same mind about much of anything, when it comes to game design!

 

[famousringo]

A little bit of a sideways answer but:

Their range of proficiencies, Fighting Styles, more ASI and similar class features make them the class who's features care the least about whether you're going for.

A STR based clank fighter, either shield based, two-handed weapon/polearm focused
or
DEX based lightly armoured fighter, either duel wielding, rapier and shield or archery based.

You can play a DEX focused Barbarian or Paladin, or a STR based Ranger, but arguably the class features don't fully work with you for these options.

Very much agree with this. Fighter supports any kind of combat style.

Just look at it from a multiclass perspective. There's no class out there that couldn't stand to benefit from a few levels of fighter, whether it's a barbarian looking for a bigger crit range, a rogue looking to pick up a fighting style and shield proficiency, or even a wizard who just wants a little more durability and the ability to cast two spells in a round.

Fighter can be made to work with anything.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

The fighter is great. Durable and useful and it gets good features from the beginning.
Second wind is a helpful ability allowing the fighter to work at full strength even if denied long rests for a while. It compares very well to lay on hands at level 1. The fighting style and very low stat dependancy helps too. You can easily afford a 16 in both your main stat and constitution. So overall, your first level is better than most other people's in regards to fighting. Action surge at second level will make sure you get an extra attack in when it counts. Even if you use it for the ovcasional dash action you will be able to make it count. A paladin has 2 smites per day. IF he gets a lucky crit he may outdamage the fighter. Otherwise not.
At level 3, assuming battlemaster which I deem to be the standard fighter you get useful abilities and extra damage. If you do short rests, your power will be high. Your AC is good. Your versality is good. And then ASI, Extra Attack, ASI and you are still at the top. Only if long rests are very frequent, the fighter loses some of its üower compared to other classes... but the the game is easy and you don't need to be that powerful. It is a DM problem however. If you make your fights too hard, spellcasters will fire all they have and start complaining about needing a long rest. If you have many easier fights, the fighter will show its power.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

You can play a DEX focused Barbarian or Paladin, or a STR based Ranger, but arguably the class features don't fully work with you for these options.

Somehow I missed this earlier. I can say that a Dex-focused Paladin works perfectly fine. You're committing yourself to a more purely defensive style, since you get minimal support for dual-wielding and Finesse weapons max out at d8. But you can get perfectly cromulent AC (Studded Leather gives AC 12+Dex, +2 for shield, +1 for Defensive style, means you're at 17 or 18 AC at first level vs. the 19 AC of Chain+Shield+Defensive, but with zero armor penalty), you do just as good of melee damage and can spot-switch to a bow if needed...and you aren't dependent on getting super-expensive/rare items (or DM generosity) to make your AC work for you. You'll top out slightly below the cap (12+5 = 17, vs. the 18 AC of plate), but both you and the Str-based Pally would want to max that stat--and you'll have excellent Initiative to boot. Admittedly, to keep your AC up you really do need those first few couple of feats put into Dex, and then your next couple in Cha unless you've got a compelling reason not go get that juicy +5 to saves...but as far as 5e characters go, there's nothing wrong with it I can see.

And as for class features, there's literally nothing the Paladin offers that doesn't depend on Cha or your melee weapon stat. Halflings, Tieflings, Half-elves, and Wood Elves all make solid Dex Paladins (Drow, actually, also make good ones but Sunlight Sensitivity is just too much penalty for a melee character). Half-elves in particular stand out, especially with their swappable options in SCAG.

 

[Uchawi]

I believe the best fighter is the one that can adapt, and to adapt in 5E you need spells. Maneuvers are presented as a poor substitute.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Eldritch knight is perfectly fine. Especially if long rests are more common. Creativity can replace some spells. The eldritch knight does not know enough spells to depend on them anyway.

 

[Iosue]

Somehow I missed this earlier. I can say that a Dex-focused Paladin works perfectly fine. You're committing yourself to a more purely defensive style, since you get minimal support for dual-wielding and Finesse weapons max out at d8. But you can get perfectly cromulent AC (Studded Leather gives AC 12+Dex, +2 for shield, +1 for Defensive style, means you're at 17 or 18 AC at first level vs. the 19 AC of Chain+Shield+Defensive, but with zero armor penalty), you do just as good of melee damage and can spot-switch to a bow if needed...and you aren't dependent on getting super-expensive/rare items (or DM generosity) to make your AC work for you. You'll top out slightly below the cap (12+5 = 17, vs. the 18 AC of plate), but both you and the Str-based Pally would want to max that stat--and you'll have excellent Initiative to boot. Admittedly, to keep your AC up you really do need those first few couple of feats put into Dex, and then your next couple in Cha unless you've got a compelling reason not go get that juicy +5 to saves...but as far as 5e characters go, there's nothing wrong with it I can see.

And as for class features, there's literally nothing the Paladin offers that doesn't depend on Cha or your melee weapon stat. Halflings, Tieflings, Half-elves, and Wood Elves all make solid Dex Paladins (Drow, actually, also make good ones but Sunlight Sensitivity is just too much penalty for a melee character). Half-elves in particular stand out, especially with their swappable options in SCAG.

Sure, there's nothing wrong with a DEX Paladin. One of the features of 5e is that you can have viable characters even if they are so-called "sub-optimal" variations. But look at how you're describing it. "Perfectly fine." "Perfectly cromulent." "Nothing wrong."

But the fighter excels whether he goes STR or DEX. He doesn't commit to a more purely defensive style if he goes DEX, because he has Two-Weapon Fighting or Archery as options. And with his extra ASIs he can max his DEX early and devote the rest to CON, or WIS, or whatever he wants, without worrying about CHA. Heck, he can max both STR and DEX if he so desires, for maximum damage in both melee and ranged, without sacrificing any defense, or other class abilities. That's Illithidbix's point. The game is set-up so if you go with STR, that's right in the fighter's wheelhouse. If you go with DEX, that's also right in the fighter's wheelhouse. Go with INT and you're still in the Eldritch Knight's wheelhouse. Heck, CON is in the fighter's wheelhouse. Max CON, Protection Fighting Style, plate and shield, and he's hardly ever going to go down. And that's not even including feats like Heavy Armor Master or Tough. It's only when you go with the WIS or CHA fighter that you have to resort to "perfectly fines" and "perfectly cromulents". Whatever ability score you want to focus on, the fighter's going to fight, and fight well.