So a Rogue and a Fighter have the exact same play style to you? Then how do you define different spells as different playstyles? One spell that deals damage is not significantly different from another spell that deals damage, one spell that takes away an enemy action is not significantly different from another spell that takes away an enemy action. Most spellcasters just stand still at the back and spam the same 2-3 spells over and over again, how does that make them more complex than a barbarian that moves around making 2-3 different types of attacks?
I've played a Moondruid - Wizard MC for 2 years now in a campaign and honestly playing her as a spellcaster is much much less interesting than wildshaping and playing her as a martial. As a spellcaster she does the following in every combat: (1) cast Conjure Animals (2) cast Magic Missile + command animals (3) cast a long-range healing spell. + command animals While standing behind cover.
While Wildshaping she does the following: (1) Grapple & drag enemies away from vulnerable allies (1.5) Shove enemies into persistent spell effects or into traps (1.75) Grapple/Shove flying enemies prone to knock them out of the sky (2) Attack (3) Move to create flanking for allies (4) Move to provoke AoO so allies can escape (5) Dash through enemies to get to their vulnerable back lines
I can agree that archers are the most boring characters in existence, but melee martial characters are so much fun that there are dozens of builds to allow people who like casters to also play as a melee martial when they want to.
As a Druid you could:
Summon allies
Hurl massively devastating spells at your enemies
Impose a myriad of various conditions on your enemies from blinded to unconscious
Cast spells to control the battlefield
And do lots of cool stuff outside of combat too
Ain’t nobody’s fault but yorn that all ya do is spam magic missile and cower.
And most of your list of what you do in melee is a rinse & repeat of:
Why are we even entertaining the notion of turning spellcasting into the same null-IQ single-button yaybo the fighter is?
Because there are players who like that level of complexity. I personally wouldn't find it interesting, but I know players who would.
So because yaybos that hate thinking exist, we need to pull the depth and engagement from existing spellcasting classes to suit the yaybos? Their total dominion over the Warrior group isn't enough?
An OA should mean potentially losing 1/3 of your total HP, if you are playing an actual challenging combat.
This is meaningful against a creature that (a) doesn't have reach (if it has reach, you can't negate its OA anyway), (b) doesn't have multiattack (multiattack doesn't apply to an OA, so OA damage winds up low), and (c) is useful to hit and run against in the first place (requires a creature that cannot reach any PC on its turn; fighters are generally durable enough that leaving it to someone else to tank the hit is an anti-tactic). This is not a zero set, but it's fairly small, and in practice is the same set as "just stand back while we pincushion it with arrows".
Glaive with reach give you a hit-and-run playstyle whereas glaive without reach means you're trapped in melee and taking hits. These are not the same.
First off the Glaive without reach can still hit-and-run, they just risk an OA. Big whoop. And the Glaive with reach can still just stand there. And either way you’re still just smacking something with a Glaive.
An OA should mean potentially losing 1/3 of your total HP, if you are playing an actual challenging combat. I mean if you don't care about losing 1/3 of your total HP or not then how do you care about combat at all? Cast Hypnotic Pattern to hypnotize 1/4 of the enemies? Big whoop. Who cares? they would only have done 10 damage anyway, Why did you bother wasting a 3rd level spell slot on that?
What the heck kinda game are you playing where a single attack could drop 1/3 of a Fighter’s HP?!? I hope to God you don’t run monsters with Multiattack or your players are absolutely boned. Round 1, the tank drops, round 2 the striker drops, round 3 the spellcasters run away because if a single hit will strip a fighter of 1/3 of their HP, then it’ll drop 3/3 of a Wizard’s HP.
Why are we even entertaining the notion of turning spellcasting into the same null-IQ single-button yaybo the fighter is?
Because there are players who like that level of complexity. I personally wouldn't find it interesting, but I know players who would.
So because yaybos that hate thinking exist, we need to pull the depth and engagement from existing spellcasting classes to suit the yaybos? Their total dominion over the Warrior group isn't enough?
Nononono, that’s what the blastlock is for, to give the simple people a simple caster option that fights like a fighter.
Ironically, I feel like I should argue that casters aren't actually more complex than martials. Here is how to play each full caster to be effective in any combat: Bard: Hide behind cover, cast Hypnotic Pattern round 1, then cast Dissonant Whispers against the most injured enemy that is adjacent to your allies and give out BI, if an ally is unconscious cast Vicious Mockery + Healing Word. Cleric: cast Spirit Guardians, move towards the densest group of enemies, cast/use Spiritual Weapon + use Toll the Dead, if an ally is unconscious substitution Healing Word for Spiritual Weapon. Wizard/Sorcerer: Hide behind cover, cast Hypnotic Pattern round 1, then cast Fireball if you can hit 3 enemies with it, otherwise cast upcast Magic Missile or Firebolt. If an ally is low health cast Polymorph on them. Warlock: cast Hex + Eldritch Blast + Agonizing Blast Druid: cast Conjure Animals, then cast Thorn Whip + Healing Word and command the animals.
Ironically, I feel like I should argue that casters aren't actually more complex than martials. Here is how to play each full caster to be effective in any combat: Bard: Hide behind cover, cast Hypnotic Pattern round 1, then cast Dissonant Whispers against the most injured enemy that is adjacent to your allies and give out BI, if an ally is unconscious cast Vicious Mockery + Healing Word. Cleric: cast Spirit Guardians, move towards the densest group of enemies, cast/use Spiritual Weapon + use Toll the Dead, if an ally is unconscious substitution Healing Word for Spiritual Weapon. Wizard/Sorcerer: Hide behind cover, cast Hypnotic Pattern round 1, then cast Fireball if you can hit 3 enemies with it, otherwise cast upcast Magic Missile or Firebolt. If an ally is low health cast Polymorph on them. Warlock: cast Hex + Eldritch Blast + Agonizing Blast Druid: cast Conjure Animals, then cast Thorn Whip + Healing Word and command the animals.
You do know that they can do more than that though, right? Whereas the fighters can’t.
Your shortcuts are godawful, Agile. Source: currently playing a seventeenth-level wizard, have never once cast Hypnotic Pattern, Fireball, or Magic Missile with her.
The fact that you cannot figure out what to do with spells doesn't mean other people can't. Just like how some people being unable to understand Superiority doesn't mean Superiority is terrible and anti-fun the way people keep holding it down as.
Your shortcuts are godawful, Agile. Source: currently playing a seventeenth-level wizard, have never once cast Hypnotic Pattern, Fireball, or Magic Missile with her.
The fact that you cannot figure out what to do with spells doesn't mean other people can't. Just like how some people being unable to understand Superiority doesn't mean Superiority is terrible and anti-fun the way people keep holding it down as.
gotta agree with this, while I love keeping magic missile on standby for en masse foes i dont wanna use higher level slots on, or are spread wider then my aoe's cuz my gm knows me, or acid arrow cuz its fun and nostalgic as the first 2nd lvl i ever took in 5e, you can do so much more with a 17th lvl wizard alone that you dont really....need to use the spells he proposed, or even can just do so much versatility wise its not funny, and thats not just with wizard, but with almost every full to half caster
Glaive with reach give you a hit-and-run playstyle whereas glaive without reach means you're trapped in melee and taking hits. These are not the same. And if you want a run down of Fighters, here are all the different things a level 8 Rune Knight did in my last arena combat: 1) Dash 2) Enlarge themselves 3) Deflect an enemy's attack 4) Summon fire chains to trap an enemy 5) Grappled a Dragon to hold it to the ground. 6) GWM maul attacks 7) non-GWM maul attacks 8) one-handed battleaxe attacks 9) Two-weapon fighting using Battle Axes 10) Attack of opportunity + Sentinel 11) Used Second Wind 12) Used Action Surge 13) Sentinel special reaction attack
Here are the number of different things the level 8 Creation Bard did: 1) Vicious Mockery 2) Healing Word 3) Hypnotic Pattern 4) Command 6) Dissonant Whispers 7) Create Dancing Item 8) Command Dancing Item to attack 9) Use Dancing Item to carry the Rune Knight
The Rune Knight used: two actions available to every character (one of which is part of the Attack action), their subclass feature, the two main class features, and the Attack action. And, fundamentally, everything other than the Attack action (and dashing) in this list is just bonuses to the Attack action.
The Creation bard used: a bard-only cantrip, a healing spell, an extremely powerful shutdown spell, two very bard-centric CC spells, and their subclass feature. Did they use no Bardic Inspiration? No Note of Potential? The main draw of being a bard, and specifically a creation bard?
Also, this is just in combat. The fighter (generic class, not your specific players, to clarify) also lacks a lot of options outside of combat too. The fighter gets fewer proficiencies than the bard, no expertise, no jack of all trades to assist in ability checks, no short rest group recovery options like song of rest, and, most importantly, none of the up to 22 spells bards can get, 6 of which can be from any spell list. Bards have a wide plethora of options available to them, on top of having more meaningful class features, AND spellcasting, with dozens of spell slots each day and hundreds of spells to choose from for a solution to every conceivable problem. The fighter gets their two class features once per rest each, their two subclass features a few times per rest each, and the Attack action with some spice.
But many (arguably most) players don't use 50 different spells in combat. I DM on a PbP server with 60 different players of different skill levels and experiences. I'm currently DMing an encounter with all spellcasters of different classes and levels: a druid, 2 wizards, 2 bards, a Ranger, a Warlock, an Artificer. We're on round 5, this is a list of every spell that's been cast: Shatter, Shatter, Shatter, Ice Storm, Ice Storm, Zephyr Strike, Zephyr Strike, Healing Word, Healing Word, Healing Word, Mass Cure Wounds, Cure Wounds, Faerie Fire, Call Lightning, Misty Step, Thunderwave, Silent Image, Firebolt, Sacred Flame, Sacred Flame, Shocking Grasp, Mind Sliver, Mind Sliver
vs here's the number of different versions of the Attacks: Longbow Longbow + Dread Ambusher Longbow + Sneak Attack + Favoured Foe Longbow + Sneak Attack Longbow + Sneak Attack + Zephyr Strike Longbow + Genie Wrath Rapier + Sneak Attack Glaive with reach Glaive without reach
That's 15 completely different and unique spells, versus a longbow, a rapier, and a glaive. Counting the six different longbow attacks with slightly different bonuses as fundamentally and interestingly different actions available to a character in the same level as Shatter, Silent Image and Mass Cure Wounds is never-before-seen levels of nitpicking, and claiming that using a glaive with and without reach is on that level is truly incredible.
Disengage Dash Readied action Unicorn Totem BI Protector Cannon Steady Aim Summon Pact Weapon Wails of the Grave
So even with my party that is predominantly spellcasters (though some MCs) there have been only 15 different spells cast vs 17 other types of actions taken.
Again, the same issue still presents itself. Disengage, Dash, and Ready are actions available to every character. Unicorn totem is druid, BI (bardic inspiration, I assume) is bard, protector cannon is artificer, steady aim and wails of the grave are rogue, and summon pact weapon is warlock. None of these features are available for fighters, which is what the discussion here is about. None of this proves without a shadow of a doubt that martials are fine and balanced. In fact most of this is just proving that spellcasters get spellcasting, as well as more class features and predominantly stronger subclasses than fighter, ON TOP OF being able to do all the same stuff fighters can do with their action except for Extra Attack - and thats ignoring the fact that every single spellcasting class except sorcerer has a RAW way of getting access to Extra Attack anyway.
The question remains: why don't fighters get to do cool stuff too? Why are all of the fighter features gatekept behind subclasses? Why must you choose between getting one cool thing and getting another cool thing, when casters get more class features as part of the base chassis AND all of the cool things with spellcasting AND access to the few cool things martials get too, on top of their subclasses?
The question remains: why don't fighters get to do cool stuff too? Why are all of the fighter features gatekept behind subclasses? Why must you choose between getting one cool thing and getting another cool thing, when casters get more class features as part of the base chassis AND all of the cool things with spellcasting AND access to the few cool things martials get too, on top of their subclasses?
The question only remains because you haven't been looking at any of the numerous answers to it when they have been provided for you. Fighter should remain a simple class because it is loved and well-liked for being that. Taking Fighter away from other people like me and numerous other people I've played with, merely to give yourself more options, is unacceptable. People love Fighter as is, let them have it.
And yes, there should be complex martial options. I 100% agree with you on that and explained ways to add complex martials into the game here. But there should be simple martials too, and I am honestly baffled as to why you see the need to make the most beloved simple martial complex when you can literally do that to any other martial class. And complexity in subclasses, feats, and other places like that is great, because it allows both new players to play and enjoy the same class with various degrees of complexity. However, large amounts of complexity in the base class for something does not allow for any of that.
Also, please note that Agilemind does not represent everyone in the "Simple Fighter Crowd". In fact, I disagree with much of what Agilemind is saying.
The question only remains because you haven't been looking at any of the numerous answers to it when they have been provided for you. Fighter should remain a simple class because it is loved and well-liked for being that. Taking Fighter away from other people like me and numerous other people I've played with, merely to give yourself more options, is unacceptable. People love Fighter as is, let them have it.
I personally just don't understand why we can't introduce complexity to the fighter without allowing for simple options? To accomodate for both camps? I've already suggested that very idea already, but I've not seen anyone seriously consider it. Here it is again:
But the main point of this whole discussion, at least what I can gather, is that "not every player has this problem" ignores the fact that many players have this problem, and "a holistic approach" has already been suggested. Making the barbarian the simple bonk bonk class is an option, though I personally think every class should have some level of complexity and decision making built into it from scratch; however, giving fighters maneuvers as a base part of the kit is already optional. If a newbie or particularly disinterested player who simply wants to bonk bonk desperately needs to play a fighter, they can just,,, not use the maneuvers. We can even introduce a newbie-pick option that just lets them add a superiority die of damage to one attack for free, with none of the rider effects. It allows the complexity and decision-making many fighters want to have available to them, while allowing for other fighters who want a simple stress-free bonk bonk life to keep that life - and this bit is important - without reducing their damage or capacity in combat. There should be an incentive to go for the complex options - the rider effects - but they shouldn't allow complex fighters to compeltely outshine the simple fighters, especially in terms of damage (what a lot of simple fighters are often after, big numbers) just because they wanted a simpler game.
This idea isn't even completely out of the blue: the OneD&D playtest has already done something very similar, with the ASI feat. Before, ASIs were core, and feats were an optional thing (like the battle master subclass) that you could take if you wanted to spice up your character. Now, because they realised how popular feats were, WotC decided to make feats the core feature (gave all fighters maneuvers) to allow for complex characters, and then introduced the ASI feat (the pure damage maneuver) for the people who don't want to mess with that level of complexity.
I feel like this just removes the issue of too much or too little complexity. We add complexity for those who want it, and allow for a panic button escape from it for those who don't.
Edit: I actually thought of another example of this specific kind of mechanic - metamagic. Metamagic now works somewhat similarly to how I wished maneuvers worked for the base fighter chassis. A selection of choices that you make during CharGen, and then another selection of choices from the choices you've already made when you attack/cast a spell. In fact, superiority dice would be even simpler than sorcery points, since there's only one use for superiority dice. And, if you want to play a sorcerer for the theme of sorcery, innate magic, overwhelming/near uncontrollable power, but you don't want to deal with the added customisation of metamagic, you can ignore it completely and just use the sorcery points for generating free spell slots. Instead, the current system for fighters is as if metamagic was gated behind a single sorcerer subclass that you have to play if you want to play a sorcerer for the vibes/theme and also just happen to want to spice your game up a little bit, and then when you post on a forum thread that metamagic should be a class feature because it makes for interesting customisation that the rest of the subclasses would benefit from theme-wise (while still allowing for a simple class panic button), people just tell you to go play wizard and stop trying to change their baby.
And yes, there should be complex martial options. I 100% agree with you on that and explained ways to add complex martials into the game here. But there should be simple martials too, and I am honestly baffled as to why you see the need to make the most beloved simple martial complex when you can literally do that to any other martial class. And complexity in subclasses, feats, and other places like that is great, because it allows both new players to play and enjoy the same class with various degrees of complexity. However, large amounts of complexity in the base class for something does not allow for any of that.
Right, but we aren't asking for large amounts of complexity. We're asking for literally any complexity at all. The fighter has absolutely nothing going for it. The base chassis gives exactly three features that have any real impact on the fighter's general gameplay: Fighting Style, Action Surge, and Extra Attack. Notice that only one of these has any level of decision-making (Fighting Style), and its a decision that sticks with you for literally the rest of the game and never improves. In contrast, a ranger gets a Favoured Enemy, Fighting Style, Extra Attack, Nature's Veil, Vanish, and Feral Senses (and I guess Foe Slayer) ON TOP OF being a half caster. Then they also get their subclass features.
This then adds onto the issue that, by theme and description, fighters aren't supposed to be the simple class. Fighters are supposed to have "an unparalleled mastery with weapons and armour, and a thorough knowledge of the skills of combat." Fighters in 5e don't have that. They can do very little more than any other martial class, and none of their features give them any sort of "mastery with weapons and armour" or "knowledge of the skills of combat." Even beyond the simple/complex debate, fighters should get more class features in general to allow for them to actually fulfill the fantasy of playing a master at arms. And if you really want to play a high level fighter, you can unironically play a 10th level Swords bard, pick up Swift Quiver with magical secrets, and then play a character with about the same level of combat ability as a fighter double its level while still having access to spellcasting and bardic inspiration.
I want to add complexity to fighters specifically because I believe it will fix both issues I have with the class: 1) it is extremely simple to play - which I recognise is a draw for some people! and have included mechanics to account for that desire! - but has absolutely no space to expend on complexity except for a single subclass; and 2) it doesn't live up to the fun and fantasy of playing someone who has unparalleled might with weapons. Playing a fighter is just playing a particularly tenacious commoner, while playing a spellcaster means bending the rules of reality and the laws of physics to your very whim literally every turn. I simply wish to play a heroic fighter who feels like a heroic fighter.
Glaive with reach give you a hit-and-run playstyle whereas glaive without reach means you're trapped in melee and taking hits. These are not the same.
First off the Glaive without reach can still hit-and-run, they just risk an OA. Big whoop. And the Glaive with reach can still just stand there. And either way you’re still just smacking something with a Glaive.
An OA should mean potentially losing 1/3 of your total HP, if you are playing an actual challenging combat.
I assume you mean you lose 1/3 of your total hps if an OA hits. If so I agree, but that is far less than 1/3rd in practice.
In any case if an AOO is 1/3 your total hit points then staying in melee range and taking multiattack would be 2/3rds or all of your hit points, which means you should still take the AO to get out of there.
I don't understand why you think you have to play one subclass. I guess I get why you don't want magic, but why can't you play a Cavalier or a Champion or a Samaurai?
Eldritch Knight is actually my favourite fighter subclass. However, what I have seen in this thread and others like it is an insistence that there is "already the Battle Master", so anyone who wants to play a fighter with any level of complexity already has their one subclass picked out for them. Of the others? Arcane Archer sucks, Banneret sucks, Cavalier is a good defender but doesn't have much complexity, Champion sucks, and Samurai is solid but extremely simple. Rune Knight and Echo Knight get kinda close to the level of complexity I want in a fighter but they both still end up being bonk bonk subclasses with a fun twist a couple times a day. None of the subclasses or playstyles in Barbarian and Monk come close to the in-the-moment interesting decision-making the Battle Master allows you to do.
What do you even mean by "sucks"? If you like the thematics of the class play it. ALL of those classes are viable in high level play, none of them are inherently too weak to contrinbute effectively.
IME Arcane Archer measures up to a battlemaster pretty darn well because their signature Arcane shot (grasping arrow) is substantially more powerful than any battlemaster maneuver and the combination of sharpshooter and curving shot is devastating even without arcane shot or maneuvers. .... and they can get battlemaster maneuvers on top of that through fighting style and feats .... which they have plenty of.
Echo knight has no limit to its manifest echo ability and Rune knights can throw out 2-5 Runes per short rest, so it is a lot more than a couple times a day for either of them, even at 3rd level.
IF you want battlemaster maneuvers play a battlemaster, if you want to play something else then play something else or if you ant both then play something else and take the fighting style and/or feat to get the battlemaster manevuers.
I don't see this lack of choice you claim exists, as a matter of fact the whole reason they put Superior Technique into the game was so that ANY fighter can get battlemaster maneuvers. It is there for the taking and it was put there specifically to address this supposed shortfall!
Martial Adept and Superior Technique are ironically only really useful for Battle Masters. They give one and two maneuvers respectively :o and one superiority die each :o so for the cost of your fighting style and a feat, you can do two cool things per short rest
Think about the math here - Two things per short rest is 6 times a day. That means you are using one maneuver out of every 3-4 turns in combat (3-4 turns in a fight on average, 2 fights in a short rest). It is more than that if you have fewer than average number of encounters (as most groups do).
Superior Technique is by far the most common fighting style I take on any fighter and I have not played a battlemaster in years. Even if I am playing an Arcane Archer I am trading archery for Superior technique at 8th level because by that time I have curving shot and rarely miss. At 12th level picking up a 2nd die and being able to make 4 sharpshooter attacks using quick toss when your first three on your action hit is pretty awesome. Menacing Attack is also good on an Arcane Archer and in terms of Nova this beats the battlemaster-archer as you can use both an Arcane Shot and a maneuver on the same hit.
I don't take martial adept that often as a fighter until high levels, although I do take it with Arcane Tricksters or multiclass Rogue spellcasters every time I play one because it lets me cast an offensive spell like tashas laughter or mind whip and make a sneak attack in the same turn using a bonus action with quick toss. Tasha's hideous laughter in the first turn of combat without losing a sneak attack is huge and I can do that in roughly half of the fights (usually actually more than that).
A Fighter with a longbow and Glaive starts with 4-5 weapons at 1st level so you will ALWAYS have more options than this. Assuming you don't lose any of those weapons you will have more options than this even if you never bother to buy or find another weapon.
Possiible combinations at 1st level include:
Longbow
Glaive
Crossbow
martial weapon
OR
Longbow
Glaive
Martial Weapon
Hand Axe
That is at 1st level with starting gear as you get more gold and more wepaons you will get more options.
A Fighter with a longbow and Glaive starts with 4-5 weapons at 1st level so you will ALWAYS have more options than this. Assuming you don't lose any of those weapons you will have more options than this even if you never bother to buy or find another weapon.
Possiible combinations at 1st level include:
Longbow
Glaive
Crossbow
martial weapon
OR
Longbow
Glaive
Martial Weapon
Hand Axe
That is at 1st level with starting gear as you get more gold and more wepaons you will get more options.
Those were the only two options actually taken by fighters out of the list provided in the relevant example. While you’re not wrong, what you say is irrelevant to the conversation.
Superior Technique is by far the most common fighting style I take on any fighter and I have not played a battlemaster in years.
Superior technique is competitive in tier 1; expected damage from Brace is around 8, which equals dueling fighting style at 4 hits per short rest, which isn't an unreasonable assumption in tier 1. It falls behind significantly in tier 2, though.
I do think that if the weapons themselves were more distinct and had more oomph to them, and maybe even have more utility uses outside of just hitting someone or something with them, this might be more of a non-issue.
So I guess if the weapons were more thought out, if the fighting styles were more fleshed out, and if the maneuvers were a thing built with every fighter subclass in mind and not just the Battle Master, the fighter would definitely be the quintessential master of combat it is made out to be.
I have long said that the weapons need to be adjusted. If it were up to me, anything finesse would stay like it is, as would all bows. The higher damage Strength only weapons would all creep up slightly so a Greatsword would do 4d4 damage, and a Greataxe would do 2d8 damage; Polearms would come in at 1d12, the Longsword would be 2d4/2d6, the Battleaxe and Warhammer would both be 1d10/1d12, and then the Arming Sword would get added slotting in at 1d10. Light and Heavy Crossbows would also bump up 1 die size each, and I’d add in a few other weapons like Staff Slings and specialized equipment like Mancatchers. I’d also add in a small shield and a large shield too to make those folks happy. That all would help, and it would help rebalance Str Vs Dex a bit too.
Superior Technique is by far the most common fighting style I take on any fighter and I have not played a battlemaster in years.
Superior technique is competitive in tier 1; expected damage from Brace is around 8, which equals dueling fighting style at 4 hits per short rest, which isn't an unreasonable assumption in tier 1. It falls behind significantly in tier 2, though.
I don't take brace and I agree it is not that powerful. I take menacing attack and quick toss both of which are relevant through tier 4 at least and it is not the extra damage that really matters.
A hit with menacing attack severely restricts mobility for a round. For example beat a purple worm in initiative and hit him and he can't move closer to the party for an entire round, so unless a party member is stupid enough to close with the worm it is a lost turn for the worm. If a party member is stupid enough to close with the worm then it still attacks him disadvantage. Canceling damage from a purple worm is an awesome 1-round debuff. If you are getting 3 attacks a turn, dueling is doing about 40 points extra damage between short rests if every attack hits (or probably 35 more realistically). At the levels you get 3 attacks, taking a turn away from a melee enemy once per short rest is better than 40 more damage per short rest I think. Even if you can't keep him from attacking making him roll attacks and skill checks at disadavantage for a round is probably worth about as much as 40 damage. Obviously it depends on the exact situation.
Quick Toss is an entire extra attack which can include a bonus from sneak attack or sharpshooter or any other damage rider (in addition the 1d6 you already get). It is also an attack you can take as a bonus action without taking an action to attack on your turn. It is very rare to find abilities that let you do this. Things like XBE, TWF, PAM and Martial Arts all require you to take the attack action to make a bonus action attack. Quick toss does not. As I mentioned this is a huge buff for caster Rogues, even if you only can do it 3 times a day. Taking the martial adept feat with quick toss is essentially action surge for a caster Rogue. Once you are at high level and sporting wands, a mace of terror, horn of Valhala etc this can be huge on any Rogue because he doesn't have to lose his sneak attack to use one of these items.
Superior Technique is by far the most common fighting style I take on any fighter and I have not played a battlemaster in years.
Superior technique is competitive in tier 1; expected damage from Brace is around 8, which equals dueling fighting style at 4 hits per short rest, which isn't an unreasonable assumption in tier 1. It falls behind significantly in tier 2, though.
I don't take brace and I agree it is not that powerful. I take menacing attack and quick toss both of which are relevant through tier 4 at least.
A hit with menacing attack severely restricts mobility for a round. For example beat a purple worm in initiative and hit him and he saves at -1 and can't move closer to the party for an entire turn, so unless a party member is stupid enough to close with the worm it is a lost turn for the worm. If a party member is stupid enough to close with the worm then it still attacks him disadvantage.
Quick Toss is an entire extra attack which can include a bonus from sneak attack or sharpshooter or any other damage rider. It is also an attack you can take as a bonus action without taking an action to attack on your turn. It is very, very rare to find abilities that let you make an attack as a bonus action without taking the attack action. Things like XBE, TWF, PAM and martial Arts are require you to take the attack action to make a bonus action attack. Quick toss does not. As I mentioned this is a huge buff for caster Rogues, even if you only can do it 3 times a day. Taking the martial adept feat with quick toss is essentially action surge for a caster Rogue.
The only weapon eligible for both Quick Toss and The damage bonus from Sharpshooter is the dart.
As a Druid you could:
Ain’t nobody’s fault but yorn that all ya do is spam magic missile and cower.
And most of your list of what you do in melee is a rinse & repeat of:
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
So because yaybos that hate thinking exist, we need to pull the depth and engagement from existing spellcasting classes to suit the yaybos? Their total dominion over the Warrior group isn't enough?
Please do not contact or message me.
This is meaningful against a creature that (a) doesn't have reach (if it has reach, you can't negate its OA anyway), (b) doesn't have multiattack (multiattack doesn't apply to an OA, so OA damage winds up low), and (c) is useful to hit and run against in the first place (requires a creature that cannot reach any PC on its turn; fighters are generally durable enough that leaving it to someone else to tank the hit is an anti-tactic). This is not a zero set, but it's fairly small, and in practice is the same set as "just stand back while we pincushion it with arrows".
What the heck kinda game are you playing where a single attack could drop 1/3 of a Fighter’s HP?!? I hope to God you don’t run monsters with Multiattack or your players are absolutely boned. Round 1, the tank drops, round 2 the striker drops, round 3 the spellcasters run away because if a single hit will strip a fighter of 1/3 of their HP, then it’ll drop 3/3 of a Wizard’s HP.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Nononono, that’s what the blastlock is for, to give the simple people a simple caster option that fights like a fighter.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Ironically, I feel like I should argue that casters aren't actually more complex than martials. Here is how to play each full caster to be effective in any combat:
Bard: Hide behind cover, cast Hypnotic Pattern round 1, then cast Dissonant Whispers against the most injured enemy that is adjacent to your allies and give out BI, if an ally is unconscious cast Vicious Mockery + Healing Word.
Cleric: cast Spirit Guardians, move towards the densest group of enemies, cast/use Spiritual Weapon + use Toll the Dead, if an ally is unconscious substitution Healing Word for Spiritual Weapon.
Wizard/Sorcerer: Hide behind cover, cast Hypnotic Pattern round 1, then cast Fireball if you can hit 3 enemies with it, otherwise cast upcast Magic Missile or Firebolt. If an ally is low health cast Polymorph on them.
Warlock: cast Hex + Eldritch Blast + Agonizing Blast
Druid: cast Conjure Animals, then cast Thorn Whip + Healing Word and command the animals.
You do know that they can do more than that though, right? Whereas the fighters can’t.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Your shortcuts are godawful, Agile. Source: currently playing a seventeenth-level wizard, have never once cast Hypnotic Pattern, Fireball, or Magic Missile with her.
The fact that you cannot figure out what to do with spells doesn't mean other people can't. Just like how some people being unable to understand Superiority doesn't mean Superiority is terrible and anti-fun the way people keep holding it down as.
Please do not contact or message me.
gotta agree with this, while I love keeping magic missile on standby for en masse foes i dont wanna use higher level slots on, or are spread wider then my aoe's cuz my gm knows me, or acid arrow cuz its fun and nostalgic as the first 2nd lvl i ever took in 5e, you can do so much more with a 17th lvl wizard alone that you dont really....need to use the spells he proposed, or even can just do so much versatility wise its not funny, and thats not just with wizard, but with almost every full to half caster
Lol. Lmao.
The Rune Knight used: two actions available to every character (one of which is part of the Attack action), their subclass feature, the two main class features, and the Attack action. And, fundamentally, everything other than the Attack action (and dashing) in this list is just bonuses to the Attack action.
The Creation bard used: a bard-only cantrip, a healing spell, an extremely powerful shutdown spell, two very bard-centric CC spells, and their subclass feature. Did they use no Bardic Inspiration? No Note of Potential? The main draw of being a bard, and specifically a creation bard?
Also, this is just in combat. The fighter (generic class, not your specific players, to clarify) also lacks a lot of options outside of combat too. The fighter gets fewer proficiencies than the bard, no expertise, no jack of all trades to assist in ability checks, no short rest group recovery options like song of rest, and, most importantly, none of the up to 22 spells bards can get, 6 of which can be from any spell list. Bards have a wide plethora of options available to them, on top of having more meaningful class features, AND spellcasting, with dozens of spell slots each day and hundreds of spells to choose from for a solution to every conceivable problem. The fighter gets their two class features once per rest each, their two subclass features a few times per rest each, and the Attack action with some spice.
That's 15 completely different and unique spells, versus a longbow, a rapier, and a glaive. Counting the six different longbow attacks with slightly different bonuses as fundamentally and interestingly different actions available to a character in the same level as Shatter, Silent Image and Mass Cure Wounds is never-before-seen levels of nitpicking, and claiming that using a glaive with and without reach is on that level is truly incredible.
Again, the same issue still presents itself. Disengage, Dash, and Ready are actions available to every character. Unicorn totem is druid, BI (bardic inspiration, I assume) is bard, protector cannon is artificer, steady aim and wails of the grave are rogue, and summon pact weapon is warlock. None of these features are available for fighters, which is what the discussion here is about. None of this proves without a shadow of a doubt that martials are fine and balanced. In fact most of this is just proving that spellcasters get spellcasting, as well as more class features and predominantly stronger subclasses than fighter, ON TOP OF being able to do all the same stuff fighters can do with their action except for Extra Attack - and thats ignoring the fact that every single spellcasting class except sorcerer has a RAW way of getting access to Extra Attack anyway.
The question remains: why don't fighters get to do cool stuff too? Why are all of the fighter features gatekept behind subclasses? Why must you choose between getting one cool thing and getting another cool thing, when casters get more class features as part of the base chassis AND all of the cool things with spellcasting AND access to the few cool things martials get too, on top of their subclasses?
The question only remains because you haven't been looking at any of the numerous answers to it when they have been provided for you. Fighter should remain a simple class because it is loved and well-liked for being that. Taking Fighter away from other people like me and numerous other people I've played with, merely to give yourself more options, is unacceptable. People love Fighter as is, let them have it.
And yes, there should be complex martial options. I 100% agree with you on that and explained ways to add complex martials into the game here. But there should be simple martials too, and I am honestly baffled as to why you see the need to make the most beloved simple martial complex when you can literally do that to any other martial class. And complexity in subclasses, feats, and other places like that is great, because it allows both new players to play and enjoy the same class with various degrees of complexity. However, large amounts of complexity in the base class for something does not allow for any of that.
Also, please note that Agilemind does not represent everyone in the "Simple Fighter Crowd". In fact, I disagree with much of what Agilemind is saying.
BoringBard's long and tedious posts somehow manage to enrapture audiences. How? Because he used Charm Person, the #1 bard spell!
He/him pronouns. Call me Bard. PROUD NERD!
Ever wanted to talk about your parties' worst mistakes? Do so HERE. What's your favorite class, why? Share & explain
HERE.I personally just don't understand why we can't introduce complexity to the fighter without allowing for simple options? To accomodate for both camps? I've already suggested that very idea already, but I've not seen anyone seriously consider it. Here it is again:
I feel like this just removes the issue of too much or too little complexity. We add complexity for those who want it, and allow for a panic button escape from it for those who don't.
Edit: I actually thought of another example of this specific kind of mechanic - metamagic. Metamagic now works somewhat similarly to how I wished maneuvers worked for the base fighter chassis. A selection of choices that you make during CharGen, and then another selection of choices from the choices you've already made when you attack/cast a spell. In fact, superiority dice would be even simpler than sorcery points, since there's only one use for superiority dice. And, if you want to play a sorcerer for the theme of sorcery, innate magic, overwhelming/near uncontrollable power, but you don't want to deal with the added customisation of metamagic, you can ignore it completely and just use the sorcery points for generating free spell slots. Instead, the current system for fighters is as if metamagic was gated behind a single sorcerer subclass that you have to play if you want to play a sorcerer for the vibes/theme and also just happen to want to spice your game up a little bit, and then when you post on a forum thread that metamagic should be a class feature because it makes for interesting customisation that the rest of the subclasses would benefit from theme-wise (while still allowing for a simple class panic button), people just tell you to go play wizard and stop trying to change their baby.
Right, but we aren't asking for large amounts of complexity. We're asking for literally any complexity at all. The fighter has absolutely nothing going for it. The base chassis gives exactly three features that have any real impact on the fighter's general gameplay: Fighting Style, Action Surge, and Extra Attack. Notice that only one of these has any level of decision-making (Fighting Style), and its a decision that sticks with you for literally the rest of the game and never improves. In contrast, a ranger gets a Favoured Enemy, Fighting Style, Extra Attack, Nature's Veil, Vanish, and Feral Senses (and I guess Foe Slayer) ON TOP OF being a half caster. Then they also get their subclass features.
This then adds onto the issue that, by theme and description, fighters aren't supposed to be the simple class. Fighters are supposed to have "an unparalleled mastery with weapons and armour, and a thorough knowledge of the skills of combat." Fighters in 5e don't have that. They can do very little more than any other martial class, and none of their features give them any sort of "mastery with weapons and armour" or "knowledge of the skills of combat." Even beyond the simple/complex debate, fighters should get more class features in general to allow for them to actually fulfill the fantasy of playing a master at arms. And if you really want to play a high level fighter, you can unironically play a 10th level Swords bard, pick up Swift Quiver with magical secrets, and then play a character with about the same level of combat ability as a fighter double its level while still having access to spellcasting and bardic inspiration.
I want to add complexity to fighters specifically because I believe it will fix both issues I have with the class: 1) it is extremely simple to play - which I recognise is a draw for some people! and have included mechanics to account for that desire! - but has absolutely no space to expend on complexity except for a single subclass; and 2) it doesn't live up to the fun and fantasy of playing someone who has unparalleled might with weapons. Playing a fighter is just playing a particularly tenacious commoner, while playing a spellcaster means bending the rules of reality and the laws of physics to your very whim literally every turn. I simply wish to play a heroic fighter who feels like a heroic fighter.
I assume you mean you lose 1/3 of your total hps if an OA hits. If so I agree, but that is far less than 1/3rd in practice.
In any case if an AOO is 1/3 your total hit points then staying in melee range and taking multiattack would be 2/3rds or all of your hit points, which means you should still take the AO to get out of there.
What do you even mean by "sucks"? If you like the thematics of the class play it. ALL of those classes are viable in high level play, none of them are inherently too weak to contrinbute effectively.
IME Arcane Archer measures up to a battlemaster pretty darn well because their signature Arcane shot (grasping arrow) is substantially more powerful than any battlemaster maneuver and the combination of sharpshooter and curving shot is devastating even without arcane shot or maneuvers. .... and they can get battlemaster maneuvers on top of that through fighting style and feats .... which they have plenty of.
Echo knight has no limit to its manifest echo ability and Rune knights can throw out 2-5 Runes per short rest, so it is a lot more than a couple times a day for either of them, even at 3rd level.
Think about the math here - Two things per short rest is 6 times a day. That means you are using one maneuver out of every 3-4 turns in combat (3-4 turns in a fight on average, 2 fights in a short rest). It is more than that if you have fewer than average number of encounters (as most groups do).
Superior Technique is by far the most common fighting style I take on any fighter and I have not played a battlemaster in years. Even if I am playing an Arcane Archer I am trading archery for Superior technique at 8th level because by that time I have curving shot and rarely miss. At 12th level picking up a 2nd die and being able to make 4 sharpshooter attacks using quick toss when your first three on your action hit is pretty awesome. Menacing Attack is also good on an Arcane Archer and in terms of Nova this beats the battlemaster-archer as you can use both an Arcane Shot and a maneuver on the same hit.
I don't take martial adept that often as a fighter until high levels, although I do take it with Arcane Tricksters or multiclass Rogue spellcasters every time I play one because it lets me cast an offensive spell like tashas laughter or mind whip and make a sneak attack in the same turn using a bonus action with quick toss. Tasha's hideous laughter in the first turn of combat without losing a sneak attack is huge and I can do that in roughly half of the fights (usually actually more than that).
A Fighter with a longbow and Glaive starts with 4-5 weapons at 1st level so you will ALWAYS have more options than this. Assuming you don't lose any of those weapons you will have more options than this even if you never bother to buy or find another weapon.
Possiible combinations at 1st level include:
Longbow
Glaive
Crossbow
martial weapon
OR
Longbow
Glaive
Martial Weapon
Hand Axe
That is at 1st level with starting gear as you get more gold and more wepaons you will get more options.
Those were the only two options actually taken by fighters out of the list provided in the relevant example. While you’re not wrong, what you say is irrelevant to the conversation.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Superior technique is competitive in tier 1; expected damage from Brace is around 8, which equals dueling fighting style at 4 hits per short rest, which isn't an unreasonable assumption in tier 1. It falls behind significantly in tier 2, though.
I have long said that the weapons need to be adjusted. If it were up to me, anything finesse would stay like it is, as would all bows. The higher damage Strength only weapons would all creep up slightly so a Greatsword would do 4d4 damage, and a Greataxe would do 2d8 damage; Polearms would come in at 1d12, the Longsword would be 2d4/2d6, the Battleaxe and Warhammer would both be 1d10/1d12, and then the Arming Sword would get added slotting in at 1d10. Light and Heavy Crossbows would also bump up 1 die size each, and I’d add in a few other weapons like Staff Slings and specialized equipment like Mancatchers. I’d also add in a small shield and a large shield too to make those folks happy. That all would help, and it would help rebalance Str Vs Dex a bit too.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
I don't take brace and I agree it is not that powerful. I take menacing attack and quick toss both of which are relevant through tier 4 at least and it is not the extra damage that really matters.
A hit with menacing attack severely restricts mobility for a round. For example beat a purple worm in initiative and hit him and he can't move closer to the party for an entire round, so unless a party member is stupid enough to close with the worm it is a lost turn for the worm. If a party member is stupid enough to close with the worm then it still attacks him disadvantage. Canceling damage from a purple worm is an awesome 1-round debuff. If you are getting 3 attacks a turn, dueling is doing about 40 points extra damage between short rests if every attack hits (or probably 35 more realistically). At the levels you get 3 attacks, taking a turn away from a melee enemy once per short rest is better than 40 more damage per short rest I think. Even if you can't keep him from attacking making him roll attacks and skill checks at disadavantage for a round is probably worth about as much as 40 damage. Obviously it depends on the exact situation.
Quick Toss is an entire extra attack which can include a bonus from sneak attack or sharpshooter or any other damage rider (in addition the 1d6 you already get). It is also an attack you can take as a bonus action without taking an action to attack on your turn. It is very rare to find abilities that let you do this. Things like XBE, TWF, PAM and Martial Arts all require you to take the attack action to make a bonus action attack. Quick toss does not. As I mentioned this is a huge buff for caster Rogues, even if you only can do it 3 times a day. Taking the martial adept feat with quick toss is essentially action surge for a caster Rogue. Once you are at high level and sporting wands, a mace of terror, horn of Valhala etc this can be huge on any Rogue because he doesn't have to lose his sneak attack to use one of these items.
The only weapon eligible for both Quick Toss and The damage bonus from Sharpshooter is the dart.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting