5E Why Not? A Variant Captain Fighter

doctorbadwolf

Heretic of The Seventh Circle
Arguably adding a clause so maneuvers like Commanders Strike you can do it on the allies turn wouldnt have to be some separate mechanic action type.
Right. If you can take attacks off turn, as if part of the attack action, then you can use manuevers off turn. Elegant and effective.

Might need a special clause here and there for some subclasses that do stuff as an action, like the EK, but otherwise it should work great.
 

Garthanos

Arcadian Knight
Note that Straining should be bonus action really or actually something you can do alongside the action you are straining to do.
 
Last edited:

Garthanos

Arcadian Knight
Right. If you can take attacks off turn, as if part of the attack action, then you can use manuevers off turn. Elegant and effective.
Yes it would require that as a special clause. Perhaps doubling as a way to get fighters more reactions sort of if they are attacks
 

doctorbadwolf

Heretic of The Seventh Circle
Yes it would require that as a special clause. Perhaps doubling as a way to get fighters more reactions sort of if they are attacks
Idk, I think giving extra Reactions is more outside the 5e design paradigm. I’d go the other way, and give a single extra Reaction that cannot be used to make an attack, and make sure the fighter has a couple good reaction options that aren’t attacks, like defensive stuff, ally buffs, movement, etc.
 

Garthanos

Arcadian Knight
Idk, I think giving extra Reactions is more outside the 5e design paradigm. I’d go the other way, and give a single extra Reaction that cannot be used to make an attack, and make sure the fighter has a couple good reaction options that aren’t attacks, like defensive stuff, ally buffs, movement, etc.
I think its kind of silly that someone can attack move attack move attack move and only react to someone running past once....
 

Garthanos

Arcadian Knight
The fighter already does more than anyone else in a round.
And basically that unable to react really nerfs your ability to act as a defender which is why if you look at the sub class cavalier they basically relaxed it - I think that is a feature that could be reabsorbed into the fighter just as some of those PDK abilities might be absorbable
 
Idk, I think giving extra Reactions is more outside the 5e design paradigm.
May seem like a distinction without a difference, but I'd phrase it as taking a certain reaction, like an AoO, "without expending your reaction" once/extra attack you're entitled to - use your reaction for something else, it's gone, and you can't take anymore AoOs, even if you "have some left."
Would tend to keep the lid on things.
 

Garthanos

Arcadian Knight
May seem like a distinction without a difference, but I'd phrase it as taking a certain reaction, like an AoO, "without expending your reaction" once/extra attack you're entitled to - use your reaction for something else, it's gone, and you can't take anymore AoOs, even if you "have some left."
Would tend to keep the lid on things.
verbose one...
 

Garthanos

Arcadian Knight
And basically that unable to react really nerfs your ability to act as a defender which is why if you look at the sub class cavalier they basically relaxed it
I relooked again at it they got fairly complex about the marking and limiting this reactive attack but how often in practice you get attacks of opportunity is already a built in limit... enemies do not want to try and rush past when they see you cut deep on a surprising multiple ones who try. I think they actually were way more complex than needed in some sense all to enforce limits that shrug.
 
Last edited:

Garthanos

Arcadian Knight
Eventually they did this though.

Starting at 18th level, you respond to danger with extraordinary vigilance. In combat, you get a special reaction that you can take once on every creature's turn, except your turn. You can use this special reaction only to make an opportunity attack, and you can't use it on the same turn that you take your normal reaction.
 

Garthanos

Arcadian Knight
AFAIC, it's not about that, at all, because we're starting with Fighter. ;P
Well I am up with things like an Archetype Inspiring Lord
Any ally whom your grant temporary hit points to can additionally choose to spend HD up to half their total HD till they take a short rest. They can choose to use less and do it again later on any but the total they may spend till they take a short rest remains half. Maybe give extra healing in there. Let the healing part shine through by spending those attacks and durability etc to get more maneuvers and keep the party flush.
 

doctorbadwolf

Heretic of The Seventh Circle
And basically that unable to react really nerfs your ability to act as a defender which is why
Well, no, not really. The Cavalier mark works well, and would work even better if the fighter could take an attack right at the end of the attackers turn, and the damage bonus or whatever applied to the next attack you make against the target.
May seem like a distinction without a difference, but I'd phrase it as taking a certain reaction, like an AoO, "without expending your reaction" once/extra attack you're entitled to - use your reaction for something else, it's gone, and you can't take anymore AoOs, even if you "have some left."
Would tend to keep the lid on things.
That could work. I don’t think defending necessarily requires multiple reactions, but if we add any I’d definitely keep it to 1 extra, max.
 

Garthanos

Arcadian Knight
Well, no, not really. The Cavalier mark works well, and would work even better if the fighter could take an attack right at the end of the attackers turn, and the damage bonus or whatever applied to the next attack you make against the target.
Yes it does nerf it when enemies can swarm past you and take out your squishies you are barely even a door stop... which is why they piled things directly related into the subclass... designed to be a defender shrug.
 

doctorbadwolf

Heretic of The Seventh Circle
Yes it does nerf it when enemies can swarm past you and take out your squishies you are barely even a door stop... which is why they piled things directly related into the subclass... designed to be a defender shrug.
Nah. check it out.

Guardian Stance. Bonus action, x/day; enemies can’t move within your threatened area normally. Each foot of movement requires 4 ft of movement. As a reaction when an enemy moves within your threatened area, all enemies within the area must save or take X damage when they move while within your threatened area. When you use this reaction, the stance ends at the beginning of your next turn.
 

Garthanos

Arcadian Knight
Nah. check it out.

Guardian Stance. Bonus action, x/day; enemies can’t move within your threatened area normally. Each foot of movement requires 4 ft of movement. As a reaction when an enemy moves within your threatened area, all enemies within the area must save or take X damage when they move while within your threatened area. When you use this reaction, the stance ends at the beginning of your next turn.
It is possible to compose things which may enable some defenderisms, but look at what 5e provided, protection fighting style (use of which is effectively in conflict with opportunity attacks instead of adding to them and in conflict with the sentinel feat (Note how even sentinel in 5e is only going to slow 1 enemy.) and yes the cavalier which does explicitly make exceptions to override reaction limits is largely about extending reactions and opportunity attacks. 5e very much recognizes that the mechanism for defender tends to be reactions.

Arguably being a warlord is about letting allies do their thing more often and usually on the warlords turn now picture every warlord power with an ally must spend their reaction to take advantage of this its a royal nerf bat (you should not be monopolizing your allies actions you are spending you own not theirs)
 
Last edited:

Garthanos

Arcadian Knight
The fighter has more resources than we give it credit. Not just those extra attacks but also the great tankish defense. A bravura or barbarian or battlerager etc are playing off of trading in exactly that. They take extra risks to gain benefit. There was a particular noteworthy Warlord maneuver which supported the idea of taking risks to aid in inspiring an ally it makes more sense actually in the context of a well defended fighter than perhaps a less so 4e Warlord the original is called fearless rescue. The flavor of it is defender fighter but the effect was very warlord and bravura.
View attachment 118271
One thing of note this daily is effectively using potentially multiple instances of a meta-maneuver to enhance a single result. Gaining multiple superiority die applied immediately to the healing bonus.
And that one feels rather good....

if maneuvers are defined with benefits per superiority die or if one has more than X. The effect is again sort of what we were looking when one is talking about level gating..... or more like using a higher level slot in 5e.
 
Last edited:

Advertisement

Top