Kind of in a love-hate relationship with the battlemaster in that it's mechanically really cool and probably my go-to choice for most Fighters, but also feels like a missed opportunity for what could have been a much more fundamental part of the game. To some extent, I dislike that I have to choose between Battlemaster and other archetypes because it sort of feels like that should just be what Fighters do.
Battlemaster is something I have sentimental feelings about. It was my very first character that I've ever played DnD with, and I ended up doing a whole home campaign with that character to completion. And, yeah, it was mechanically strong with GWM + Precision Attack+action surge for awesome nova moments. So no matter what, I'll always have it near and dear to my heart.
However, Eldritch Knight is extremely good with all the flavor of being magical. In AL, I was able to make use of spellcasting with scrolls, scribing with arcana proficiency, and itemization so it meant I was able to enjoy EK from a power-gamey perspective. I did not deal as much damage as a BM due to lack of precision attack, but I did end up being overall with more utility and defense. It felt great to have an attack coming at me with a 23 to hit, and being able to say "Nope, I can't shield and you can't touch me," where my battlemaster would have just sighed and reduced the HP on his character sheet.
I'm liking the Battle Master for the versatility. Eldritch Knight also has much appeal, again because you get versatility and utility. Some of the other subclasses (cough squirm, Arcane Archer) feel like a lost oppurtunity. Also think fighter should get dedicated feat slots - maybe all classes should.
Currently playing a Warforged battle master. He has a retractable cup holder, ponders existence beyond war, and likes to cook.
Kind of in a love-hate relationship with the battlemaster in that it's mechanically really cool and probably my go-to choice for most Fighters, but also feels like a missed opportunity for what could have been a much more fundamental part of the game. To some extent, I dislike that I have to choose between Battlemaster and other archetypes because it sort of feels like that should just be what Fighters do.
Yeah the "Battlemaster" problem is real....It's one of the things I would have done with fighter in 5e. Give all fighters maneuvers and the subclasses let you use them indifferent ways.
Warlord could have come from this as you could have had a subclass with the ability to pick up a ton of them and allow you to use a reaction to add them to an ally's hit instead of yours.
Giving away everything that makes a Battlemaster special seems like a poor idea to me. In a game with a highly abstract combat system, specific maneuvers only further confuses people about the number of swings that happens when you make an attack. It is *not* just one swing. Each attack, every single one, is multiple attempts to do harm, while trying to avoid being harmed. You might make 12 swings, all of them hitting, and do no damage at all, since hit points are as abstract as any other thing. One hit point remaining means you are effectively unharmed.
You lunge, you parry, you do so multiple times, and all of that goes on while you move around trying to harm your enemy. You make one roll. You hit, you roll damage, you go on from there.
I like Battlemasters. I have one of my own. I like the semi-magical maneuvers as a limited resource. I have to make tactical decisions, and that's wonderful.
Giving away everything that makes a Battlemaster special seems like a poor idea to me. In a game with a highly abstract combat system, specific maneuvers only further confuses people about the number of swings that happens when you make an attack. It is *not* just one swing. Each attack, every single one, is multiple attempts to do harm, while trying to avoid being harmed. You might make 12 swings, all of them hitting, and do no damage at all, since hit points are as abstract as any other thing. One hit point remaining means you are effectively unharmed.
You lunge, you parry, you do so multiple times, and all of that goes on while you move around trying to harm your enemy. You make one roll. You hit, you roll damage, you go on from there.
I like Battlemasters. I have one of my own. I like the semi-magical maneuvers as a limited resource. I have to make tactical decisions, and that's wonderful.
It would be the opposite...you would have battlemaster feels on ALL the fighters.
You could still have a fighter who had more maneuvers than the others in subclass that focused on getting more of them rather than augmenting them.
I would have Battlemaster feels on all the Fighters, you are correct. Then none of them would be special. I might as well play a Hexblade. Those are a type of fighter, just a different kind. I wonder if the DM will allow me to use Precision Strike with Eldritch Blast? I could use a little +8 to hit at 120 feet...
I would have Battlemaster feels on all the Fighters, you are correct. Then none of them would be special. I might as well play a Hexblade. Those are a type of fighter, just a different kind. I wonder if the DM will allow me to use Precision Strike with Eldritch Blast? I could use a little +8 to hit at 120 feet...
Precision Strike is best combo'd with GWM or SharpShooter. DPR kings are Crossbow Expert + Sharpshooter Battlemasters
Yeah the "Battlemaster" problem is real....It's one of the things I would have done with fighter in 5e. Give all fighters maneuvers and the subclasses let you use them indifferent ways.
Warlord could have come from this as you could have had a subclass with the ability to pick up a ton of them and allow you to use a reaction to add them to an ally's hit instead of yours.
Opportunity lost though....maybe with 6e!
it's not that they should all have maneuvers. It's that certain maneuvers should have been either fighter wide. Or part of the combat in general instead of relegated to one subclass in a single class. Because they are things that realistically any martial person is doign but ALL fighters in particular are doing anyway. But it kills some of the flavor of that by making them only special if your a battlemaster.
And in fact in older editions some of these things were in fact more open to all through various means.
Seeing any word derived from the word "real" makes me cringe when discussing a fantasy game. Judging from the poll, the Battlemaster is the most popular subclass of all, and research Wizard of the Coast did suggests that Fighter is by far the most popular class in the game.
People seem perfectly happy with the Battlemaster as is. Every type of player appreciates it from the roleplaying type to the power gamers and everything in between. Older editions of the rules are not salient to the discussion. Why tinker with something in perfect working order? Give the poor Eldritch Knight some love. At .8% it's the least favorite one.
Seeing any word derived from the word "real" makes me cringe when discussing a fantasy game. Judging from the poll, the Battlemaster is the most popular subclass of all, and research Wizard of the Coast did suggests that Fighter is by far the most popular class in the game.
People seem perfectly happy with the Battlemaster as is. Every type of player appreciates it from the roleplaying type to the power gamers and everything in between. Older editions of the rules are not salient to the discussion. Why tinker with something in perfect working order? Give the poor Eldritch Knight some love. At .8% it's the least favorite one.
.8% on the least favorite poll, means that very few people think Eldritch Knight is the worst fighter subclass. Contrast that with the Purple Dragon subclass at 42.5%, so almost half of the people polled think it's the worst fighter subclass! The "least favorite" fighter is the one with the highest number, not a .8%. :)
Seeing any word derived from the word "real" makes me cringe when discussing a fantasy game. Judging from the poll, the Battlemaster is the most popular subclass of all, and research Wizard of the Coast did suggests that Fighter is by far the most popular class in the game.
People seem perfectly happy with the Battlemaster as is. Every type of player appreciates it from the roleplaying type to the power gamers and everything in between. Older editions of the rules are not salient to the discussion. Why tinker with something in perfect working order? Give the poor Eldritch Knight some love. At .8% it's the least favorite one.
.8% on the least favorite poll, means that very few people think Eldritch Knight is the worst fighter subclass. Contrast that with the Purple Dragon subclass at 42.5%, so almost half of the people polled think it's the worst fighter subclass! The "least favorite" fighter is the one with the highest number, not a .8%. :)
Least Favorite does not necessarily mean Worst. It just means the one they don't prefer to play. And that could be for lots of reasons. it's not a bad subclass. It's actually fairly strong. It's problem is that the flavor and some of it's indirect power comes from the Setting that it comes from. Which most people don't readily know, realize, or get to use in other settings. Partly because of all of the Subclasses it's one that needs some of the most work from DM's to really make full use of. Because it requires a DM to attach it to some in setting Group to give it it's full flavor and context. Which just doesn't happen much these days.
Eldritch knight focus is on the wrong kind of spells...limiting the spell selection hurts this class more than anything.....better off taking a few levels in Wizard to expand spell selection...
The great thing about Battlemaster is that not only about Precision Attack + GWM or SS. You have thousands of option that are both flavorful and powerful — and a huge force multiplier alongside your group.
A party full of melee heavy-hitters will always love a well placed Trip Attack.
Your Rogue will always love a Commander’s Strike (although I found it costly).
Your casters or ranged warriors will enjoy a lot a Quick Toss with a Net restraining an enemy.
People say Rune Knights make a good grappler, and I agree, but a Skill Expert Battlemaster with Grappling Strike can be even more effective.
Your entire group will appreciate Goading or Menacing Attack.
And there are Brace, Riposte, Lunging Attack, Disarming Attack and all the new skill-related maneuvers as well.
The great thing about Battlemaster is that not only about Precision Attack + GWM or SS. You have thousands of option that are both flavorful and powerful — and a huge force multiplier alongside your group.
A party full of melee heavy-hitters will always love a well placed Trip Attack.
Your Rogue will always love a Commander’s Strike (although I found it costly).
Your casters or ranged warriors will enjoy a lot a Quick Toss with a Net restraining an enemy.
People say Rune Knights make a good grappler, and I agree, but a Skill Expert Battlemaster with Grappling Strike can be even more effective.
Your entire group will appreciate Goading or Menacing Attack.
And there are Brace, Riposte, Lunging Attack, Disarming Attack and all the new skill-related maneuvers as well.
Battlemasters are more versatile than Wizards.
You had me until that last point but I agree with the rest!
Wizards can fly, shrink, see through an owl 100 ft away....they are incredibly versatile.
However I do think that Battlemasters are one of the most (if not THE most) versatile martial options.
The great thing about Battlemaster is that not only about Precision Attack + GWM or SS. You have thousands of option that are both flavorful and powerful — and a huge force multiplier alongside your group.
A party full of melee heavy-hitters will always love a well placed Trip Attack.
Your Rogue will always love a Commander’s Strike (although I found it costly).
Your casters or ranged warriors will enjoy a lot a Quick Toss with a Net restraining an enemy.
People say Rune Knights make a good grappler, and I agree, but a Skill Expert Battlemaster with Grappling Strike can be even more effective.
Your entire group will appreciate Goading or Menacing Attack.
And there are Brace, Riposte, Lunging Attack, Disarming Attack and all the new skill-related maneuvers as well.
Battlemasters are more versatile than Wizards.
I once tried making a character that was a human battlemaster that invested the majority of the ASIs into taking the Martial Adept feat and just pumping up the sheer number of maneuvers they know and superiority dice they have. It was pretty cool having 12 maneuvers and 9 superiority dice at level 8. Sadly, the character didn't get alot of play time before he died (not from a combat encounter, but from a magic item effect that was more-or-less beyond his control).
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Three-time Judge of the Competition of the Finest Brews!Come join us in making fun, unique homebrew and voting for your favorite entries!
I know it sounded provocative stating that Battlemasters are more versatile than Wizards, it was just to reinforce the point of how flexible they can get in problem-solving situation. But I agree nothing can stand in front of a Wizard in terms of utility, heheh.
Superior Technique and Martial Adept are great to Battlemasters, specially if you are not choosing the best ones Archery or Dueling.
One thing that I love as well is to refresh all Superiority Dies on short-rests. This gives incredible consistency. If you manage your resources well, you will always have something cool to do in every encounter.
I don't know if I'd say BM is all that versatile. At least, not all on one build. A DPR build has little value for finicky maneuvers that rely on saves, when they'd be better off using their dice on riposte, precision, and brace (for non PAM builds) for the sake of getting the most out of action economy.
Fact of the matter, you're limited to a small handful of maneuvers, and only have so few meaningful opportunities to use them. Sure, you could try and use trip attack all the time, but most monsters that make melee attacks have pretty good STR scores, and the same could be said for disarming strike and most melee opponents that use weapons. Menacing works nice, as not everything has a good WIS score, but also, plenty are immune too. But, you know when precision and riposte are useful? All the time.
Kind of in a love-hate relationship with the battlemaster in that it's mechanically really cool and probably my go-to choice for most Fighters, but also feels like a missed opportunity for what could have been a much more fundamental part of the game. To some extent, I dislike that I have to choose between Battlemaster and other archetypes because it sort of feels like that should just be what Fighters do.
Battlemaster is something I have sentimental feelings about. It was my very first character that I've ever played DnD with, and I ended up doing a whole home campaign with that character to completion. And, yeah, it was mechanically strong with GWM + Precision Attack+action surge for awesome nova moments. So no matter what, I'll always have it near and dear to my heart.
However, Eldritch Knight is extremely good with all the flavor of being magical. In AL, I was able to make use of spellcasting with scrolls, scribing with arcana proficiency, and itemization so it meant I was able to enjoy EK from a power-gamey perspective. I did not deal as much damage as a BM due to lack of precision attack, but I did end up being overall with more utility and defense. It felt great to have an attack coming at me with a 23 to hit, and being able to say "Nope, I can't shield and you can't touch me," where my battlemaster would have just sighed and reduced the HP on his character sheet.
I'm liking the Battle Master for the versatility. Eldritch Knight also has much appeal, again because you get versatility and utility. Some of the other subclasses (cough squirm, Arcane Archer) feel like a lost oppurtunity. Also think fighter should get dedicated feat slots - maybe all classes should.
Currently playing a Warforged battle master. He has a retractable cup holder, ponders existence beyond war, and likes to cook.
Have to agree with this.
Altrazin Aghanes - Wizard/Fighter
Varpulis Windhowl - Fighter
Skolson Demjon - Cleric/Fighter
Yeah the "Battlemaster" problem is real....It's one of the things I would have done with fighter in 5e. Give all fighters maneuvers and the subclasses let you use them indifferent ways.
Warlord could have come from this as you could have had a subclass with the ability to pick up a ton of them and allow you to use a reaction to add them to an ally's hit instead of yours.
Opportunity lost though....maybe with 6e!
Giving away everything that makes a Battlemaster special seems like a poor idea to me. In a game with a highly abstract combat system, specific maneuvers only further confuses people about the number of swings that happens when you make an attack. It is *not* just one swing. Each attack, every single one, is multiple attempts to do harm, while trying to avoid being harmed. You might make 12 swings, all of them hitting, and do no damage at all, since hit points are as abstract as any other thing. One hit point remaining means you are effectively unharmed.
You lunge, you parry, you do so multiple times, and all of that goes on while you move around trying to harm your enemy. You make one roll. You hit, you roll damage, you go on from there.
I like Battlemasters. I have one of my own. I like the semi-magical maneuvers as a limited resource. I have to make tactical decisions, and that's wonderful.
<Insert clever signature here>
It would be the opposite...you would have battlemaster feels on ALL the fighters.
You could still have a fighter who had more maneuvers than the others in subclass that focused on getting more of them rather than augmenting them.
I would have Battlemaster feels on all the Fighters, you are correct. Then none of them would be special. I might as well play a Hexblade. Those are a type of fighter, just a different kind. I wonder if the DM will allow me to use Precision Strike with Eldritch Blast? I could use a little +8 to hit at 120 feet...
<Insert clever signature here>
Precision Strike is best combo'd with GWM or SharpShooter. DPR kings are Crossbow Expert + Sharpshooter Battlemasters
it's not that they should all have maneuvers. It's that certain maneuvers should have been either fighter wide. Or part of the combat in general instead of relegated to one subclass in a single class. Because they are things that realistically any martial person is doign but ALL fighters in particular are doing anyway. But it kills some of the flavor of that by making them only special if your a battlemaster.
And in fact in older editions some of these things were in fact more open to all through various means.
Seeing any word derived from the word "real" makes me cringe when discussing a fantasy game. Judging from the poll, the Battlemaster is the most popular subclass of all, and research Wizard of the Coast did suggests that Fighter is by far the most popular class in the game.
People seem perfectly happy with the Battlemaster as is. Every type of player appreciates it from the roleplaying type to the power gamers and everything in between. Older editions of the rules are not salient to the discussion. Why tinker with something in perfect working order? Give the poor Eldritch Knight some love. At .8% it's the least favorite one.
<Insert clever signature here>
.8% on the least favorite poll, means that very few people think Eldritch Knight is the worst fighter subclass. Contrast that with the Purple Dragon subclass at 42.5%, so almost half of the people polled think it's the worst fighter subclass! The "least favorite" fighter is the one with the highest number, not a .8%. :)
Least Favorite does not necessarily mean Worst. It just means the one they don't prefer to play. And that could be for lots of reasons. it's not a bad subclass. It's actually fairly strong. It's problem is that the flavor and some of it's indirect power comes from the Setting that it comes from. Which most people don't readily know, realize, or get to use in other settings. Partly because of all of the Subclasses it's one that needs some of the most work from DM's to really make full use of. Because it requires a DM to attach it to some in setting Group to give it it's full flavor and context. Which just doesn't happen much these days.
Eldritch knight focus is on the wrong kind of spells...limiting the spell selection hurts this class more than anything.....better off taking a few levels in Wizard to expand spell selection...
The great thing about Battlemaster is that not only about Precision Attack + GWM or SS. You have thousands of option that are both flavorful and powerful — and a huge force multiplier alongside your group.
A party full of melee heavy-hitters will always love a well placed Trip Attack.
Your Rogue will always love a Commander’s Strike (although I found it costly).
Your casters or ranged warriors will enjoy a lot a Quick Toss with a Net restraining an enemy.
People say Rune Knights make a good grappler, and I agree, but a Skill Expert Battlemaster with Grappling Strike can be even more effective.
Your entire group will appreciate Goading or Menacing Attack.
And there are Brace, Riposte, Lunging Attack, Disarming Attack and all the new skill-related maneuvers as well.
Battlemasters are more versatile than Wizards.
You had me until that last point but I agree with the rest!
Wizards can fly, shrink, see through an owl 100 ft away....they are incredibly versatile.
However I do think that Battlemasters are one of the most (if not THE most) versatile martial options.
I once tried making a character that was a human battlemaster that invested the majority of the ASIs into taking the Martial Adept feat and just pumping up the sheer number of maneuvers they know and superiority dice they have. It was pretty cool having 12 maneuvers and 9 superiority dice at level 8. Sadly, the character didn't get alot of play time before he died (not from a combat encounter, but from a magic item effect that was more-or-less beyond his control).
Three-time Judge of the Competition of the Finest Brews! Come join us in making fun, unique homebrew and voting for your favorite entries!
I know it sounded provocative stating that Battlemasters are more versatile than Wizards, it was just to reinforce the point of how flexible they can get in problem-solving situation. But I agree nothing can stand in front of a Wizard in terms of utility, heheh.
Superior Technique and Martial Adept are great to Battlemasters, specially if you are not choosing the best ones Archery or Dueling.
One thing that I love as well is to refresh all Superiority Dies on short-rests. This gives incredible consistency. If you manage your resources well, you will always have something cool to do in every encounter.
I don't know if I'd say BM is all that versatile. At least, not all on one build. A DPR build has little value for finicky maneuvers that rely on saves, when they'd be better off using their dice on riposte, precision, and brace (for non PAM builds) for the sake of getting the most out of action economy.
Fact of the matter, you're limited to a small handful of maneuvers, and only have so few meaningful opportunities to use them. Sure, you could try and use trip attack all the time, but most monsters that make melee attacks have pretty good STR scores, and the same could be said for disarming strike and most melee opponents that use weapons. Menacing works nice, as not everything has a good WIS score, but also, plenty are immune too. But, you know when precision and riposte are useful? All the time.