D&D 5E Why does 5E SUCK?

[Imaro]

But even then, most non combat feats in 5e don't actually do all that much for the fighter.

Really... Alertness, Dungeon Delver, Keen Mind, Lucky, Skilled... are all great feats for someone with feats to spare.

 

[Ashkelon]

But it's only Dex saves... nothing else. The fighter can reroll any save... In other words I don't think you can claim one is objectively better than the other.

I never said indomitable is worse that advantage on Dex saves all the time, merely that it is worse outside of combat. A 1 to 3 times per day reroll, that is arguably better off used in combat is worse than advantage against the most common type of trap all the time in terms of exploration.

Indomitable is great in combat, though, but we are talking about non combat capabilities.

 

[Imaro]

Why measure it in rounds? Outside of combat there is no need. Its not like you have to make a skill check every 6 seconds. Usually for non combat situations the game moves at the speed of plot. Also, even if those situations were measured in rounds, how would a single extra round matter outside of combat?

Why doesn't he have to make a check every six seconds? In other words each check represents succesfully moving the distance he can travel in one round...

Okay... speed of plot... that explains alot... For me speed of plot is only used when there is no consequences and/or risk to failure.

Woohoo, the fighter gets to the top of the cliff 6 seconds faster than anyone else (well, anyone who doesn't bother wasting a spell slot or have some other ability like flight). Disarming traps...as a Strength based fighter, really? Being chased is technically a combat situation.

Wohoo it also means he makes less checks which means he has less chance to fall... it also puts him in a position where he can actually help someone else having trouble climbing (by say throwing down a rope at the beginning of the next round to the weak wizards so he doesn't have to use a spell)... without wasting a resource.

Now Being chased (or outrunning something) is a combat situation... really I thought combat involved attack rolls??

So again, I will ask, where is the fighter more capable outside of combat than any other class. You keep avoiding answering the question?

No the question has been answered numerous times by numerous people... you just refuse to accept the answers that have been given to you... *shrug*

 

[Imaro]

I never said indomitable is worse that advantage on Dex saves all the time, merely that it is worse outside of combat. A 1 to 3 times per day reroll, that is arguably better off used in combat is worse than advantage against the most common type of trap all the time in terms of exploration.

Indomitable is great in combat, though, but we are talking about non combat capabilities.

And I disagree... it is better or worse in certain situations...

 

[Ashkelon]

Really... Alertness, Dungeon Delver, Keen Mind, Lucky, Skilled... are all great feats for someone with feats to spare.

Alertness doesn't have non combat applications. Surprise and initiative are related to combat only.

Dungeon delver is good against traps, but traps don't actually make up a very large portion of the exploration pillar. Besides, as a fighter, you probably don't have the intelligence and wisdom necessary to make that feat really shine.

Same scenario with keen mind. You don't generally have the necessary INT or Wisdom to make it worthwhile.

Skilled gives you more skill proficiency, but that doesn't put you above any other skilled character. Remember part of the problem is that the fighter doesn't do anything better than others outside of combat. A few extra skill proficiencies still puts the fighter behind the likes of the ranger, bard, rogue, etc.

Lucky is great, but more for its combat capability than outside of combat.

Those feats (except for Alert) are all rated rather poorly in most guides because they are only situationally useful and do not stand up to things like resilient, GWM, Polearm Master, Sharpshooter, Crossbow Expert, Heavy Armor Master, Mobility, Etc.

 

[Imaro]

Those feats (except for Alert) are all rated rather poorly in most guides because they are only situationally useful and do not stand up to things like resilient, GWM, Polearm Master, Sharpshooter, Crossbow Expert, Heavy Armor Master, Mobility, Etc.

LMAO!! Because the guides rate things for combat usefulness... You're asking specifically for non-combat stuff...

 

[Imaro]

Alertness doesn't have non combat applications. Surprise and initiative are related to combat only.

I'd say it could help you avoid combats... but ok, I'll concede Alert to you...

Dungeon delver is good against traps, but traps don't actually make up a very large portion of the exploration pillar. Besides, as a fighter, you probably don't have the intelligence and wisdom necessary to make that feat really shine.

I'm starting to feel like your exploration pillar is vastly different from my own (and possibly many other people's)...what exactly does the exploration pillar in D&D mostly consist of in your games?

As to the issues with Int and Wis... you only need one to be decent (not good) since the feat gives you advantage, which is essentially a +5 to the check...

Same scenario with keen mind. You don't generally have the necessary INT or Wisdom to make it worthwhile.

Again you only need to be decent...

Skilled gives you more skill proficiency, but that doesn't put you above any other skilled character. Remember part of the problem is that the fighter doesn't do anything better than others outside of combat. A few extra skill proficiencies still puts the fighter behind the likes of the ranger, bard, rogue, etc.

It in fact does put you above others in the realm of flexibility since everyone gets the same amount of proficiencies and class abilities are usually specific to one area or niche...

Lucky is great, but more for its combat capability than outside of combat.

Lucky works just as well in non-combat as it does in combat...

 

[Pickles III]

The fighter is deficient in non-combat pillar support. This is evident due to the fighter's...
1) Heavy reliance on tools available to all PCs - skills and feats
2) Extremely minimal specialized mechanics the class possesses that can be clearly used in non-combat scenarios
3) Best fighter-specific option is to pick up wizard spells, which is wizard-specific, not fighter-specific

Clearly the fighter can do things in non-combat scenarios. However the game as written doesn't provide much in the way of making the fighter feel distinct in these scenarios.

I broadly agree with the analysis but I am not sure it's so important

1) With bounded accuracy baseline effectiveness is not very polarised. Blagging the DM & rolling well will get you a long way. Everyone can contribute quite well in general non combat situations. This is less the case after level 10 when rogues take 10 on everything & expertise really kicks in but its most of most campaigns.

2) The fighter does not borrow Wizard's spells at worst he borrows Sorcerer ones. 5e uses spell mechanics to avoid proliferation of mechanisms - (see ranger & ignore monk ). Eldritch Knight need not be some sort of scholar of arcana instead he has superhuman powers he can draw on a limited number of times per day. If you want plot coupon out of combat stuff you use these powers. Maybe there could be EK only spells?

3) Someone has to have the least non combat support. Fighters are so strongly defined by the combat pillar that there is not much that is "fightery" outside that.
You have athletic prowess - given by the Champion, Skills in related area (Battle dude tool use) & supernatural physical feats (EK suitably fluffed).
While these do not exactly set the world alight & culd be more potent (except the last) I am not sure what would constitute a Fightery exploration/interaction pillar ability.

Please suggest some?

 

[Pickles III]

I'm starting to feel like your exploration pillar is vastly different from my own (and possibly many other people's)...what exactly does the exploration pillar in D&D mostly consist of in your games?

It's the boring bits between fights.


Seriously I asked months ago what the exploration pillar was as I am not sure there is much of it in games I play or run, probably as I don't think I enjoy it.

OTOH there is lot of stuff usually that is neither combat nor interaction eg planning a robbery, though calling it exploration is jarring.

Lucky works just as well in non-combat as it does in combat...

I think the issue is that the stakes in combat are usually higher, or at least more immediate & obvious.

Combat happens incrementally as HP are eroded. Non-combat tends to happen in discrete chunks & the consequences tend not to be so severe on a given die roll or it feels like the DM being unfair
Ie making one roll to see whether you live or die tends to feel a bit arbitrary outside combat but in combat making that one important save can feel like a key decision & the agency is important.

Hmm I don't think I am describing this theory very well but I think it's because combat is more structured & out of combat & out of constructs like 4e skill challenges the game can feel more like a negotiation with the DM where you do not want to blow concrete resources like rerolls.

Meh I agree Lucky is just good & I am going to take a non combat feat on my next fighter er character (all my PCs are humans these days so it will be L1)

 

[Tony Vargas]

Those feats (except for Alert) are all rated rather poorly in most guides because they are only situationally useful and do not stand up to things like resilient, GWM, Polearm Master, Sharpshooter, Crossbow Expert, Heavy Armor Master, Mobility, Etc.

Feats are little more relevant than backgrounds. Anyone can take a feat. The fighter gets one extra feat at typical levels of play, a second at high level. We're not talking a 3.5 fighter who ultimately gets 18 feats compared to everyone else getting 7, with the fighter claiming bonus feats up front at 1st & 2nd level.

And feats are an optional sub-system, anyway.

3) Someone has to have the least non combat support. Fighters are so strongly defined by the combat pillar that there is not much that is "fightery" outside that.

That's just an appeal to tradition (a perfectly valid appeal in in the context of 5e). What it says is that, yes, the fighter is starkly inferior out of combat, and that's as it "should be," not just because it's unfair, contrary to genre, and imbalanced - but because that's how it was for a long time.

OTOH, it doesn't seem like somone had to have the least in-combat support, because all classes seem well-able to contribute there, one way or another.

You have athletic prowess - given by the Champion, Skills in related area (Battle dude tool use) & supernatural physical feats (EK suitably fluffed).
While these do not exactly set the world alight & culd be more potent (except the last) I am not sure what would constitute a Fightery exploration/interaction pillar ability.

If you look at the fantasy archetypes that the fighter is called on to represent, rather than the name of the class, there's lots of non-combat stuff they should be capable of. The fighter (or 'fighting man') didn't get quite so pigeonholed at the outset. In Men & Magic (0D&D, 1st booklet), there were no skill rules at all, any character could do just about anything, solve a puzzle, find a trap, etc, etc. When the Thief was added, it's poor combat abilities and the 'Special' Abilities (skills) they paid for created a combat/non-combat divide among non-casters that has left them confined to the lower tiers ever since.

It's the boring bits between fights.

Seriously I asked months ago what the exploration pillar was as I am not sure there is much of it in games I play or run, probably as I don't think I enjoy it.

Exploration is the 'Dungeons' half of Dungeons & Dragons. In the classic game, it's arguably the primary thrust of the experience. You spent hours crawling through a dungeon and minutes fighting things in it.

Hmm I don't think I am describing this theory very well but I think it's because combat is more structured & out of combat the game can feel more like a negotiation with the DM where you do not want to blow concrete resources like rerolls.

That's true. Combat is structured in rounds, so everyone gets a turn. It has a concrete progress bar in the form of hps, that everyone can contribute to moving. It has a lot of options that can be interesting and dramatic, and every class can avail themselves of some of them. The other two pillars have received short shrift from the system in that regard. Challenges in exploration or interaction tend to focus on one character, tend to be pass/fail, and present few and situational options that only certain classes can really avail themselves of.