D&D General When Was it Decided Fighters Should Suck at Everything but Combat?

[GMMichael]

But does that mean that more rules need to be devoted to the non-combat stuff, or just that combat needs less rules and everything else is fine at the level it is?

I think @Benjamin Olson was going for the former. I'm going with the latter, when "most of the mental load of planning or running a game relates to having balanced combats and combat stats familiar and at the ready, and then the actual combats are often on the sloggy side." When I'm writing up a game session, I don't want to be wasting time trying to figure out, for example, if the save DC on a monster's ability is too high for the PC party, depending on whether the bard or cleric are fully stocked on buff spells, what's included in the new set of powers in the ranger's recent level-up, and if the fighter . . . oh, who cares? The fighter is just a meat-shield.

Well the decision that everyone should be useful in a fight was a good decision. Just that they forgot to also make everyone useful outside of combat.

Useful is one thing. Comparable in hit points and/or damage output is another.

But, are you saying this move isn't useful outside of combat?

How does all these 'historical' examples and movie examples change when magic is added to the world? . . . Hard to argue these kinds of things.

Don't expect that to stop anyone.

 

[Basic Expert]

Fighters have absolutely been short-changed by the "big dumb meatshield" stereotype. I have had extreme reservations about the class in 3E, 4E, 5E and most of their competitors. It remains one of my favorite classes mainly because of it doesn't come loaded down with unwanted gimmicks. Make a hulking, battle-scarred gladiator or a courtly swashbuckler or a steely-eyed bowman or, sure, a big, dumb meatshield. Whatever you want. The enduring popularity of the fighter class, despite its flaws, bears this out.

However, that very nebulous nature of the fighter is its undoing in a design sense. It's much easier to load-up a class with fun bells and whistles if it comes with a much stronger identity. Ranger? Oh, should be good a fighting, tracking, hunting, exploration tasks, maybe healing and so on. Paladin?, should be good a fighting, looking good in shiny armor, smiting foes, healing, etc. Fighter?, uhh...should be good at fighting, I guess...

 

[TheSword]

Since 2024 launched, Fighters get to add their second wind to failed ability checks now. Gained at 2’d level, before subclass choices. Not to mention said subclasses giving all kinds of movement, extra skills etc. Feels there has been a concerted effort to correct this. They can now be excellent at many non combat things with +1d10 to a failed check several times per day. That’s without counting the many non-combat battlemaster maneuvers. That’s also pre-feat. Which they obviously get more of.

Yet another way 2024 is better than 2014.