I would say, give the Fighter more options, BUT like they have been doing in the 1D&D UA with spell elections for Bards and Rangers, give the selections as a guide for those players who don’t want to make (or can’t because they are new) those decisions. So your little brother or sister can play with all the decisions made for them so they just have to roll dice.
Thank you Arithezoo and ThriKreenWarrior for giving some examples of what you're looking for, or ways to integrate maneuvers easier. I've been really struggling to understand what a more advanced fighter would look like, without being overly complicated. I threw out some ideas but they didn't seem to exactly fit what people were looking for, so I just keep guessing.
Personally, I'm totally fine with the Fighter as it stands. I enjoy them, even the Champion. Yes, some Champion abilities could use improvements. And I'm happy to get many more advanced subclass options. But I really do believe that there is a good place for a simple chasis. I'm still willing to look at different ideas though, and try to find some middle ground for everyone.
No one complains about the Rogue's simplicity. And they get just as few active options as a fighter. I would say the Sorcerer is the closest to a simple spellcaster. They only have a few spells known, metamagic can be used just to get more slots, and the default subclass basically just gives you some armor. There really isn't a simple priest class. Paladins are maybe the closest. Clerics have a lot of spells to look at every day and it's not super clear how they are meant to be played.
Fighters get a lot of options to make them as complex as you want, with a variety of subclasses, and extra ASIs. You can spend your large number of ASIs on just increasing ability scores if your want to keep it simple, or you can take a whole range of feats. I think that might be the direction to go for more options. Using ASIs and Metamagic as a guide. Both let you take the simple route, or the complicated one.
So I could see offering the base fighters some 'spell-like' abilities, if there is also a simple alternative. Like a short list of 3 Combat Master powers every few levels to pick from, where one option is always something like proficiency in a skill, or a new fighting style (which usually just add a flat bonus to a roll). And the other options can be more like battle master maneuvers.
I honestly think that the simplified "Sidekick" Classes are what those that don't want or can't understand anything more complex should be playing. Maybe WotC could add those into a chapter of the PHB for those that struggle with the extreme complexity of things like the Battle Master Maneuvers.
My stance is simple: everybody at the table should be allowed, encouraged, and empowered to make decisions, use their actions, and affect the course of the game. The Simple Fighter Crowd believes new players are too stupid to be so allowed, encouraged, and empowered and wish to use the fighter class as, effectively, an "observer" character for players who are not allowed to make decisions or affect the course of the game. A character, effectively, for people who are allowed to watch but not truly play.
To the extent such a class needs to exist at all (spoilers: it does not), the Sidekick classes in TC are the better choice. Rework them into "Foundation" classes and let Simple Fighter people play those, instead. Because yes, I am upset by the Rogue's over-simplicity - and I say this as someone for whom rogue was a favorite class for a while and who was deeply looking forward to the Better Rogue we didn't get in the Expert doc. I find sorcerers to be thematically interesting but mechanically shallow, and I've never seen a subclass that wasn't an anemic pack of more-or-less ribbon features specifically designed to be as meek, pointless, and useless as Wizards could make it without tipping people off to the idea that choice of subclass isn't supposed to matter.
Kam was right - you cannot play a "simple" class in a deep, engaging way. It simply does not have the tools. When your only possible action in the entire game of D&D is "I use The Attack Action to damage the enemy closest to me", you simply don't have any levers you can use to engage more deeply with the game. And no, "deciding who to hit" is not deep and engaging gameplay - any moron can look at a combat map and understand where they need to be and who they need to be hitting. If you truly, truly struggle with that basic a decision? The solve isn't to take away your options, it's for your fellow players to coach you through the process and help you learn. Something that the Simple Fighter Crowd seems viciously opposed to - TEACHING new players, rather than just handing them a stripped-down, bare-bones, optionless pile of suck and saying "here, this is easy! Now figure it out as you go because we're gonna be too busy playing D&D to bother helping you!"
A fighter is a master of war and athleticism, knowledgeable in both the history of warfare and its practical application in battle. They wield great weapons with a deadly skill that few can rival.
Beginning at level 1, a fighter can add their proficiency bonus to damage rolls.
Each time the fighter gains the Combat Mastery feature (at levels 1, 5, 10, 15, and 18,) choose one of the following benefits:
- Gain proficiency in a skill from the fighter's starting skill list.
- Gain an additional Fighting Style
- Gain 2 maneuvers from the battle master list and 1 superiority die
Some things to note here. I adjusted the fighter progression somewhat to account for the new method of getting the capstone at level 18 and a Boon at level 30. Other than the Combat Mastery Feature and that shift, everything else is already part of the fighter kit. They get a very large number of ASI/feats and more subclass features than almost anyone currently.
Would something like this satisfy people? Simple options with good benefits for those who want them, and maneuvers for those who want more? Assuming the subclasses are also improved across the board, of course.
A fighter is a master of war and athleticism, knowledgeable in both the history of warfare and its practical application in battle. They wield great weapons with a deadly skill that few can rival.
Beginning at level 1, a fighter can add their proficiency bonus to damage rolls.
Each time the fighter gains the Combat Mastery feature (at levels 1, 5, 10, 15, and 18,) choose one of the following benefits:
- Gain proficiency in a skill from the fighter's starting skill list.
- Gain an additional Fighting Style
- Gain 2 maneuvers from the battle master list and 1 superiority die
Some things to note here. I adjusted the fighter progression somewhat to account for the new method of getting the capstone at level 18 and a Boon at level 30. Other than the Combat Mastery Feature and that shift, everything else is already part of the fighter kit. They get a very large number of ASI/feats and more subclass features than almost anyone currently.
Would something like this satisfy people? Simple options with good benefits for those who want them, and maneuvers for those who want more? Assuming the subclasses are also improved across the board, of course.
Looking at this I might think that a super weak chassis like the current base fighter might be the best way to go with all martials, but with significantly, incredibly more powerful subclasses than casters. Battlemaster can get maneuvers for both utility and combat (and good utility not just "add a dice to skill check". Something comparable to spellcaster power) with better scaling (superiority die and maneuver power can increase exponentially). Eldritch Knight can be a 1/2 caster not 1/3 and maybe an arcane smite. Champion can just be the simple "fighter but more" option. Honestly though I think champion could just get replaced with Samurai because both are simple and people like samurai more. Keep the champion flavor but add samurai mechanics.
Hm. Not necessarily opposed to the idea of 'combat mastery', though offering a skill proficiency or a fighting style five separate times likely ends up as too much. Fighters would get drastically more proficiencies than even the most expert of Experts, or would run out of worthwhile fighting styles to take. Combat Mastery might need its own list of options like the old UA Deft Explorer did for rangers, with none of them repeatable except for taking more Superiority. Still, insofar as an option that allows for greater choice, depth, and engagement whilst allowing SFC folks to force new players to default to "I HIT IT W/MY HITTIN' STICK!", I've seen worse plans.
Yeah I figured a new player would start with a proficiency or fighting style the first few times the option came up, then try out maneuvers when they felt more comfortable with the game. An experienced player could keep it simple, or might start with maneuvers and use the other options to combine with specific builds in mind.
Fighters get more feats and subclass features than anyone. There is a lot of room for customization and creating very complex and interesting subclasses. The older ones especially need to be revisited (I'm looking at you Eldritch Knight).
The exact details of 'Combat Mastery' (or whatever you want to call it) could be anything. The basic premise was just to show how options might be presented that allowed everyone to build what they want. You can ease new people into rules, while letting the optimizers have tons of fun swapping around fighting styles and feats and maneuvers in different builds.
That is one of my primary complaints with this whole freaking issue, honestly.
SFC: "Why can't you just stick all the stupid complexification stuff into SUBCLASSES?! Then you can have it while all the sensible fun people who don't know things can ignore it!"
Yurei: "...because subclasses in R5e are super weak and ineffectual and don't really change the way a class plays, or give it meaningful options it didn't have before? And after releasing hundreds of weak and ineffectual subclasses I don't trust that Wizards is capable of writing good ones?"
SFC: "That's just, like...your opinion, man! Subclasses are great and awesome and super BECAUSE they don't change or impact anything, so no matter what a New Player picks they get to be a Simple Fighter! That's awesome, and you should just shut the f@#$ up and play a different game already you dumb ghost *****!"
Yurei: "And this is why I hate people. Huzzah."
I think subclasses in general should be overall much stronger to make them meaningful. Casters should have their subclasses at their current power level since spells are a massive boon to power budget but martials need much stronger and impactful ones. I'm honestly surprised that One D&D isn't putting more focus on subclasses, because they're the perfect way to give the "you have your cake and I eat my cake" type experience WOTC is going for As for the balance between subclasses, I think that the One surveys will mostly handle that with only a few bad apples left. In terms of subclass balance I think OneD&D is going to do something better for once than 5e.
I don't think anyone is saying those things, Yurei... but I'm sorry it feels that way.
Almost everyone is actively saying that the subclasses need major improvements. Even the 'simple' Champion does. 'Remarkable Athlete' is anything but remarkable. I've played champions though, and they are very fun. It's exciting to dominate the battle, stepping from one enemy to the next as you cut them all down. But even it could be improved while allowing for a 'basic' option to still exist.
All of the other subclasses need varying levels of updating. Even just giving Eldritch Knights access to all arcane spells would go a long way to helping them. Or scale the levels of the spells better with fewer slots. Battle Masters deserve more maneuvers and ways to use the dice. Arcane Archers need something like 'cantrips,' special shots they can do every round. Even if it's only getting to choose an element and minor effect that you always use. Make them actually feel magical. Psi-warriors are cool, but are way too limited in options for those who want this fantasy.
And we still need some mid-complexity options too. Rune Knights are a lot of fun, and work pretty well where they are. Some choices to be made, ways to buff your party, ways to alter how you interact with the battlefield by increasing your size. It's a good balance. Samurai (and the inferior Purple Dragon Knight) need more things to do with their Fighting Spirit, but are also a solid balance of choices and ease of use.
And I agree, Nano, I'm excited we have the chance to help build better subclasses with these surveys. I know I spent a lot of time on my comments there. I hope that the next UA is Warriors so we can see where they think they should be moving.
Stego, your Combat Mastery idea suffers from the same problem as the maneuvers: you pick your favorite upfront, and by the time you are picking your third at 10th level it is also your third favorite. Classes should get access to new and better features, not more from the initial list. Would you enjoy playing a wizard more or less if instead of getting higher level spells you just got more 1st level spells?
This is my desire for all classes: I want new, fun, unique features at higher levels. I don’t mind if some of those options are simply “Hit harder”; on the contrary, that is good design. Spellcasters have damaging spells at every level for this reason. But even something like the sorcerer doesn’t have to only take those. They can select their spells known from a huge list of options, including attack spells, utility, defensive, etc. Why can’t classes like the fighter and rogue (and yes, I also think the rogue needs more) get this?
Stego, your Combat Mastery idea suffers from the same problem as the maneuvers: you pick your favorite upfront, and by the time you are picking your third at 10th level it is also your third favorite. Classes should get access to new and better features, not more from the initial list. Would you enjoy playing a wizard more or less if instead of getting higher level spells you just got more 1st level spells?
This is my desire for all classes: I want new, fun, unique features at higher levels. I don’t mind if some of those options are simply “Hit harder”; on the contrary, that is good design. Spellcasters have damaging spells at every level for this reason. But even something like the sorcerer doesn’t have to only take those. They can select their spells known from a huge list of options, including attack spells, utility, defensive, etc. Why can’t classes like the fighter and rogue (and yes, I also think the rogue needs more) get this?
That's okay, it wasn't meant to be perfect, just show an example of how it could work. Some people want maneuvers for all fighters. Some don't. This option was showing how you could give everyone the choice. And add even more build flexibility on top of it.
If you want higher level maneuvers, that's something to fix with the maneuvers themselves. Make the battle master better. And the basic fighter will follow, if maneuvers are one of their options.
Heck, make advanced fighting styles too. Make styles that require you to have the basic version first as a prerequisite. Everyone can benefit from that as well, if they all have the option to take them.
I don't think that will work for the Simple Fighter Crowd, who've been notably ignoring the idea.
Here's a different take - put Superiority/maneuvers into the base fighter class. Then, in the PHB, have an official Alternate Class Feature that replaces Superiority with something simple for people who can't be assed to bring their brain to game night. That's more or less what you're suggesting anyways, save in the form of a more invocations-style Build-A-Bear manner. If Superiority is a base fighter feature, but that feature can be replaced with....I'unno, call it Combat Edge or something and have it be a series of fixed, boring, numerically powerful but mechanically useless static buffs a'la the gorram Champion? Then the Simple Fighter Crowd has their Simple Fighter they can use to sabotage new players with while the rest of us get a class actually worth playing, without needing an entirely brand new class they will neither make nore support for it.
I think what Yurei, kamchatmonk, and others are saying is that it isn't enough to boost the power level of Fighters. We are looking for the same level of complexity as a wizard or cleric. And the complexity should increase in a real way as you gain levels. Gaining access to higher level spells is far more interesting than getting an extra attack. And this is something that happens every other level for a wizard.
Why isn’t it enough though? Fighter is the one literal class that was set out as a relatively simple option for new players, adding loads of complexity to it for “funsies” only takes that option away from new players.
I honestly don't know why people think it is so hard to understand; every type of player, new and advanced, should have options available to them that they can play and enjoy. Both groups should have options like that, and by taking that option away from them, all you do is alienate and ostracize one of those groups. I get that some people vibe with super complicated, but others vibe with super simple too. And just as there are numerous class options to support the former of those two, there should be numerous class options to support the latter as well.
Fighter really is a great, relatively simple option for the people who want it. Sure, add more cool and complicated subclasses to it, but by adding Superiority, or other large amounts of complexity to the class with no options to avoid it, you take the "simple Fighter" option away from the people who love it, want it, or need it. D&D should be a game that is open and playable for everyone, putting as much complexity into the one class that has actively been set aside for new players stops it from being playable and enjoyable for large amounts of people.
Honestly, this may sound cringey and stupid, but taking away others options for the sake of expanding your own really just doesn't feel morally ok.
I honestly think that the simplified "Sidekick" Classes are what those that don't want or can't understand anything more complex should be playing. Maybe WotC could add those into a chapter of the PHB for those that struggle with the extreme complexity of things like the Battle Master Maneuvers.
Yes, lets make all the players who want simpler options spend $30+ on a supplementary book so that they can play as a massively under-powered "sidekick" in their own story.
If you truly, truly struggle with that basic a decision? The solve isn't to take away your options, it's for your fellow players to coach you through the process and help you learn. Something that the Simple Fighter Crowd seems viciously opposed to - TEACHING new players, rather than just handing them a stripped-down, bare-bones, optionless pile of suck and saying "here, this is easy! Now figure it out as you go because we're gonna be too busy playing D&D to bother helping you!"
Wow, you really seem to be missing the "Simple Fighter Crowd[s]" actual opinion: our whole literal point is not that you shouldn't not teach new players how to play the game, its that you should have a simpler option that doesn't involve immediately shoving a billion different complicated class mechanics down their throat. In short, its not that people shouldn't not have to learn the game, its that they should have an option that allows them to do so in a way they can understand, while giving them the option of taking a little bit more time than some other people might need to help them adjust to all the complicated mechanics and rules in D&D.
Stego: Advanced maneuvers and fighting styles is exactly the sort of thing I would like to see.
BoringBard: I explained why it isn't enough already, but I will do so again. Please note that it isn't, in any way, "for funsies", and claiming that is our only reason is both dismissive and disingenuous. I like complexity in the form of interesting and unique features, with new and better options at higher levels. And this is true regardless of whether I am playing a spellcaster or a martial character.
The idea that all new players should play a Fighter is silly. Why bring a new player into a fantasy game and then force them to play the least fantastic option available? And the idea that new players will want to play a Fighter over other options doesn't fit with my own experiences. I currently run a D&D program at my library. Over the past 3 years I have introduced the game to almost 20 new players. I let them choose between six classes (bard, cleric, druid, fighter, rogue, and wizard), and the only time anyone has played a fighter is when they didn't pick a class and so were given a pregenerated character that happened to be a fighter. To say that again: when I ask new players, kids who have never played D&D before, what class they want to play...none of them pick fighter. They want magic because magic is fun, unique, interesting, etc.
The same happened with my son's friends (age 12): druid, wizard, cleric, and bard.
Do some of the new players struggle with the intricacies of the spells? Sure. But they all have fun playing and none of them have asked to switch to something simpler. And all of them have somehow managed to learn the ins and outs of spellcasting after a few sessions. (Oops, I tried to avoid any snark but it slipped in.)
Don't misunderstand me: I am not saying the game shouldn't have simple options. There are definitely players who prefer that, and I would never say they don't matter. In fact, more should be done to allow for simple spellcasters (arcane, divine, and primal). And what I (and others) have been advocating for is to also ensure that martial classes can have the same amount of complexity (with increasing meaningful options at higher levels) that the casters have always enjoyed.
I think the Paladin makes a great template for this. You can play them without any thought at all, converting all spell slots into smites and just hitting stuff every round. Or you can carefully select spells for their utility and never smite.
There needs to be simple options. And complicated alternatives in the form of better subclasses. You can't just make a simple option more complicated without shutting someone out of it. Maybe some people come into DnD after watching 100 hours of Critical Role and they have it all figured out. But my niece sure didn't. She is very smart. She was still overwhelmed with choices that didn't have clear meanings to her yet. And, even though she was surrounded by loving family eager to teach her, she didn't have 100 hours to learn it before making a character on the one night every few months we get to see each other.
It's already a complicated game, even if this is one of the most streamlined editions yet. Some people are still kids. Some people have disabilities that make it harder to learn. Some people, as hard as it might be to believe, actually enjoy the 'simple' classes. Some people are bad at math. Some people don't have access to online tools or mentors. Some people bought the starter set and hope to learn it to play with their friends, and they shouldn't have to read 500 pages of advanced rules and watch hours of tip videos to do it.
I'm not going to gatekeep any of those people from playing the game.
So I offered some ideas of how you could keep simple classes, and still offer some choices for more advanced players. Choices that gave new people a fighting chance to actually learn the game. Choices that also provided even more options for every level of player. But it wasn't enough. I don't know what anyone wants, other than maneuvers for everyone. I even offered that, as an optional choice, not a requirement.
[Edit: thanks Arithezoo. I think advanced maneuvers and fighting styles are a great idea. My niece also wanted to be a spellcaater, and an Elf, for even more spells. I wish there was a simple spellcaster class too, with spells that functioned like basic abilities for those new players.]
I can't keep guessing what people want. Especially with so many responses just mocking different players by pretending like they are dumb or insane or cruel. If you think there is only one answer - complicating the classes for everyone - and see no other possible solutions, then I don't know what to say.
Stego: Advanced maneuvers and fighting styles is exactly the sort of thing I would like to see.
BoringBard: I explained why it isn't enough already, but I will do so again. Please note that it isn't, in any way, "for funsies", and claiming that is our only reason is both dismissive and disingenuous. I like complexity in the form of interesting and unique features, with new and better options at higher levels. And this is true regardless of whether I am playing a spellcaster or a martial character.
The idea that all new players should play a Fighter is silly. Why bring a new player into a fantasy game and then force them to play the least fantastic option available? And the idea that new players will want to play a Fighter over other options doesn't fit with my own experiences. I currently run a D&D program at my library. Over the past 3 years I have introduced the game to almost 20 new players. I let them choose between six classes (bard, cleric, druid, fighter, rogue, and wizard), and the only time anyone has played a fighter is when they didn't pick a class and so were given a pregenerated character that happened to be a fighter. To say that again: when I ask new players, kids who have never played D&D before, what class they want to play...none of them pick fighter. They want magic because magic is fun, unique, interesting, etc.
The same happened with my son's friends (age 12): druid, wizard, cleric, and bard.
Do some of the new players struggle with the intricacies of the spells? Sure. But they all have fun playing and none of them have asked to switch to something simpler. And all of them have somehow managed to learn the ins and outs of spellcasting after a few sessions. (Oops, I tried to avoid any snark but it slipped in.)
Don't misunderstand me: I am not saying the game shouldn't have simple options. There are definitely players who prefer that, and I would never say they don't matter. In fact, more should be done to allow for simple spellcasters (arcane, divine, and primal). And what I (and others) have been advocating for is to also ensure that martial classes can have the same amount of complexity (with increasing meaningful options at higher levels) that the casters have always enjoyed.
I think the Paladin makes a great template for this. You can play them without any thought at all, converting all spell slots into smites and just hitting stuff every round. Or you can carefully select spells for their utility and never smite.
I 100% see this point. I think it's good to teach some more complex options as they're getting used to things. Most people tend to say Battlemaster is complex but I've seen new players easily get the hang of it. A good design for classes is as said, like paladin. Paladin is just really a good basis on how all classes should be made... Complex choices of spells (what's even better is that tons of paladin spells were made exclusively for them adding unique identity) and abilities but an easy "go to" ability which is great for players who want that more simple experience. I plan on making a homebrew martial class with maneuvers which function like spells and spell slots and paladin is my go-to inspiration
Actually, you can play a "simple" class in a complex way. It's called subclasses, backgrounds, feats, and the ability to use your brain and think as opposed to just hitting what is right in front of you. If you make the base class super complicated, then anyone who plays that class will have to deal with all that complexity, regardless of what subclass they pick. Not only that, but you already have numerous options for "complexity and customization" available to you, you don't need to shunt everybody who likes those less into one subclass just to expand on what you already have.
It's called crutches. A subclass is four features. You can't cram versatility and variety into just four features, unless one of them is spellcasting.
Firstly, let me say that it is very hard to play a complex class simply if all the complicated mechanics are in the base class with no way to avoid them. If you are a Wizard just spamming Fireball, then not only will you lose all your 3rd level spell slots, but you will suffer mechanically because that's usually not optimal play. A simpler option doesn't necessarily mean a drastically less powerful option, and not only does it take lots of work to find simpler alternatives to complex options, but the system makes it so reusing the same spells over and over is inefficient at best.
Also, I explained this repeatedly in the other thread, but forcing everyone who wants to play a "simple" class to use Superiority is flat-out unfair. While you can limit the degree to which Superiority is complicated, you can only do it to a small extent. A more accurate statement for your original post would be that optional complexity (complexity that is in places such as subclasses, so you can choose to ignore or use it) allows for further customization and depth, while allowing simplicity for those who want it. That being said, saying complexity put into a base class can be ignored is simply not true.
Drop the words "optimal" and "inefficient" from your vocabulary, it's too complex for "new players". Fireball is simple and powerful. "New players" get to roll many dice, rolling dice is fun. No hit mechanic, no static bonuses and modifiers, just many dice. Many dice is fun.
To find simple alternatives, all a "new player" would have to do is look at the side of the page and read "Quick build" block. Though this requires an ability to read in the first place.
Hot take: new players don't need sidekick classes or something. Levels 1-3 are for them. They don't go any further. "New players" don't exist past level 5, because by then they stop being new.
A fighter is a master of war and athleticism, knowledgeable in both the history of warfare and its practical application in battle. They wield great weapons with a deadly skill that few can rival.
Beginning at level 1, a fighter can add their proficiency bonus to damage rolls.
Each time the fighter gains the Combat Mastery feature (at levels 1, 5, 10, 15, and 18,) choose one of the following benefits:
- Gain proficiency in a skill from the fighter's starting skill list.
- Gain an additional Fighting Style
- Gain 2 maneuvers from the battle master list and 1 superiority die
A rough draft, but actually a good one. Baseline feature offers complexity, but if you want, you may just stack passive options and do the basic bonk.
Though I still stand by the idea that basic class is barbarian, not fighter.
Think you might've mistaken me, Steg. I was actually suggesting that the "Alternate Class Feature" system Wizards invented as a random slap patch for Tasha's Cauldron could be used to help settle this issue. Put the good stuff in the base class where it's allowed to be impactful, then provide an alternative feature/set of features for those who simply can't with the primary feature. It's a riff on your idea of a mutable feature where people can pick stuff, but rather than having to be a pool of more-or-less independent features that can't build on each other and have to all be relatively mild because they can theoretically be chosen at any time, players can opt between a deeper, more engaging set of punchy, impactful mechanics or a set of less deep, less engaging, but ideally still (somehow) punchy mechanics. Combat Mastery could be a fixed track of moderate bonuses that's offered as a wholesale replacement for Combat Superiority for those who think Superiority is too complicated.
That said, Ari has a very good point. A lot of my anger comes from the fact that the people pushing my buttons are trying to keep the gates the other way. Do you like to make optimal decisions in your build and produce a really powerful character? Do you like to have a bunch of useful options built into your sheet, a lot of useful things you can do to help in any situation? Do you like to really think about your D&D game, try and play it more deeply and really press the limits of what your character can do? Well, too bad - the folks arguing so passionately for Simple Fighter hate it when you do any of those things and they'd prefer if you played a different game rather than do those things in D&D. They're all about sitting down, taking your pants off, grabbing a brewskie, and playing the slappest-ass game of slapass pizza-and-beer D&D you possibly can, and the fact that the current Fighter class, the Rogue class, the Barbarian class, the Sorcerer class, and even the oh-so-scary Wizard class are all built to support that style to the large exclusion of anyone else isn't enough.
The call is "all the other classes are already suuuuper complicated!" They're not. They're really not. And their continued call of "new players need this!" is hogwash, because Arithezoo is entirely right. My very first D&D character was a multiclass ranger/rogue. The one fighter in my table's first D&D game? A multiclass Eldritch Knight/wizard. There was both a paladin and a cleric as well, and for a little while there was a sorcerer whose background and spell selection set him up to be a thief rather than a classic blasty thing. None of us played the Simple Fighter, and yet somehow we all figured out how to play D&D. None of Ari's new kids - his literal new kids - played Simple Fighter, and yet they all figured out how to play D&D.
New players don't want to be "just, like...a dude. Nothing special or cool or interesting about him. Just, like...a guy" in their fantastical game of fantasy. They wanna be an awesome Gandalf wizard (or bard, or ranger, or sorcerer, or whatever version of "Gandalf was an [X], hear me out" we're playing this week). They want to be an awesome Aragorn-esque ranger. They want to be a creepy, mysterious warlock laden with Dark Dealings. They want to be a capital-P Paladin, Crusading For Righteous Justice. They want to be all that cool shit people tell fantasy stories about.
It's experienced players trying to be artsy-fartsy dinks, or trying to subvert expectations, or aiming for a specific breed of story, who default to "I wanna be just a regular guy with absolutely nothing special, cool, or interesting about him." Those are the ones that bust out the Champion fighter. Or, for that matter, the players trying to prove that Champion fighter "Isn't that bad guys, come on!" and build it for the meta reason of proving out the subclass to their fellows. But the people who're new to the game, don't know any of the meta community knowledge surrounding it, and are playing their first fantasy RPG story? They, typically, wanna try all that awesome stuff. And if they stumble for a little bit getting it right? Well hey - they still got to do awesome stuff in the interim, and they got there eventually.
If people want fighters to be For New Players? Then fighters should have awesome stuff they can do. Abilities that wow the audience, that make a new player on their first perusal of Chapter 2 of the PHB say "wow, that's super freaking cool! I wanna try that!" Right now, fighters have no such thing. There's nothing at all in the class that impresses people. New players who play fighter have generally been steered to fighter by a DM who doesn't trust the newbie and wants them on "The Easy Class" that, by happy just-so-coincidentally, cannot do much damage if the player bounces or goes off the rails. Which...well. SHouldn't have to say what I think of that.
So yeah. Fighters need something for the Wow Factor, something that makes people go "okay, that's awesome, I need to play a fighter some day and try that." Superiority could be that thing. Something else might serve better. Kam is also correct - it's very difficult to shove meaningful levels of versatility, variety, and depth into four whole features that are by design weaker and less impactful than the regular features of the base class, so the oft-touted "just make the SUBCLASSES complicated!" bit is out.
What's the solution? I don't know. I'm not a game designer, and fortunately Wizards is listening to none of us on this. The Simple Fighter Crowd and people who sincerely want fighters to be super cool and interesting to play each get precisely the same amount of input - filling out Satisfaction levels in a survey. Hopefully they find one, and hopefully it's better than anything we've tried so far. Because if they do to Fighter the same thing they did to poor Rogues in 1DD? Well...suppose we get to figure out how to make d8 Priest classes into frontline melee clowns, because Fighter just won't be playable at all.
I agree that Rogues got a bad shake in 1DnD. They're the only thing I said I was very dissatisfied with across the board. I left a lot of comments on their lack of active, meaningful features.
And I agree that many new players want to be something cooler than a fighter. Lots of people like the fighter. It's one of the most popular classes already, just the way it is. I think that it gets held up as the 'new player option' because it's one of the few actually simple classes. Not because new players necessarily want to be a fighter. But because it's the easiest class to grasp. If there were more of these, new players would gravitate to them too.
I wish WotC went that direction. I wish there was a simple option for ALL of the 4 class groups. I wish there was an arcane type that had a few powers like cantrips that just kept getting stronger. And a support type that had a few healing and buff abilities. No spell slots or massive spell lists to choose from at all. Just easy to master, competitive classes built like the Rune Knight. Then new players could make those kinds of characters too. Without being overwhelmed until they either buckle down and study the game for weeks, or give up. And those options should be presented as equals to the other classes, not a sidekick roll.
I've been DMing for a very long time, and all I have is my own personal stories of seeing players struggle. Players that aren't dumb, and shouldn't be kept from playing the game. It's absolutely vital to lower the bar for entry so everyone can enjoy this amazing game. You can then make the skill ceiling as high as you want.
I personally think that having some solid subclass options is great for raising the ceiling. Multiclassing works too. Or, as I suggested, having options that give a choice between complexity or ease. Thanks, kamchatmonk, for your feedback on those. It's appreciated.
I'm just finding it very hard to understand why a basic class is keeping anyone from playing more it advanced. There are so many options, even in the poor 'bland' fighter. You have tons of feats and subclasses to choose from. They just need to be a little better.
But.
I'm willing to accept that it's not enough for some people. I don't have to feel the same way to understand that there is a need to be filled. Maybe we are all correct, and we're just looking at the problem the wrong way. Maybe there needs to be a fourth Warrior class. The 'advanced' fighter. Call it the Warlord or whatever. I'm 100% cool with that too. Then we can stop trying to shoehorn working classes into roles they weren't meant for.
Let's have a super simple version of Priests, Experts, and Mages. And lets also add a complicated class to Warriors.
Fighters can keep their Champions and Rune Knights, etc. Fighters can be raw power and intuitive growth. Warlords can absorb the Battle Masters, Samurai, an so forth. Warlords can have complex options and nuanced ability interactions. That sounds awesome.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I would say, give the Fighter more options, BUT like they have been doing in the 1D&D UA with spell elections for Bards and Rangers, give the selections as a guide for those players who don’t want to make (or can’t because they are new) those decisions. So your little brother or sister can play with all the decisions made for them so they just have to roll dice.
EZD6 by DM Scotty
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/en/product/397599/EZD6-Core-Rulebook?
Thank you Arithezoo and ThriKreenWarrior for giving some examples of what you're looking for, or ways to integrate maneuvers easier. I've been really struggling to understand what a more advanced fighter would look like, without being overly complicated. I threw out some ideas but they didn't seem to exactly fit what people were looking for, so I just keep guessing.
Personally, I'm totally fine with the Fighter as it stands. I enjoy them, even the Champion. Yes, some Champion abilities could use improvements. And I'm happy to get many more advanced subclass options. But I really do believe that there is a good place for a simple chasis. I'm still willing to look at different ideas though, and try to find some middle ground for everyone.
No one complains about the Rogue's simplicity. And they get just as few active options as a fighter. I would say the Sorcerer is the closest to a simple spellcaster. They only have a few spells known, metamagic can be used just to get more slots, and the default subclass basically just gives you some armor. There really isn't a simple priest class. Paladins are maybe the closest. Clerics have a lot of spells to look at every day and it's not super clear how they are meant to be played.
Fighters get a lot of options to make them as complex as you want, with a variety of subclasses, and extra ASIs. You can spend your large number of ASIs on just increasing ability scores if your want to keep it simple, or you can take a whole range of feats. I think that might be the direction to go for more options. Using ASIs and Metamagic as a guide. Both let you take the simple route, or the complicated one.
So I could see offering the base fighters some 'spell-like' abilities, if there is also a simple alternative. Like a short list of 3 Combat Master powers every few levels to pick from, where one option is always something like proficiency in a skill, or a new fighting style (which usually just add a flat bonus to a roll). And the other options can be more like battle master maneuvers.
I honestly think that the simplified "Sidekick" Classes are what those that don't want or can't understand anything more complex should be playing. Maybe WotC could add those into a chapter of the PHB for those that struggle with the extreme complexity of things like the Battle Master Maneuvers.
She/Her College Student Player and Dungeon Master
Golaryn nailed it on the nose.
My stance is simple: everybody at the table should be allowed, encouraged, and empowered to make decisions, use their actions, and affect the course of the game. The Simple Fighter Crowd believes new players are too stupid to be so allowed, encouraged, and empowered and wish to use the fighter class as, effectively, an "observer" character for players who are not allowed to make decisions or affect the course of the game. A character, effectively, for people who are allowed to watch but not truly play.
To the extent such a class needs to exist at all (spoilers: it does not), the Sidekick classes in TC are the better choice. Rework them into "Foundation" classes and let Simple Fighter people play those, instead. Because yes, I am upset by the Rogue's over-simplicity - and I say this as someone for whom rogue was a favorite class for a while and who was deeply looking forward to the Better Rogue we didn't get in the Expert doc. I find sorcerers to be thematically interesting but mechanically shallow, and I've never seen a subclass that wasn't an anemic pack of more-or-less ribbon features specifically designed to be as meek, pointless, and useless as Wizards could make it without tipping people off to the idea that choice of subclass isn't supposed to matter.
Kam was right - you cannot play a "simple" class in a deep, engaging way. It simply does not have the tools. When your only possible action in the entire game of D&D is "I use The Attack Action to damage the enemy closest to me", you simply don't have any levers you can use to engage more deeply with the game. And no, "deciding who to hit" is not deep and engaging gameplay - any moron can look at a combat map and understand where they need to be and who they need to be hitting. If you truly, truly struggle with that basic a decision? The solve isn't to take away your options, it's for your fellow players to coach you through the process and help you learn. Something that the Simple Fighter Crowd seems viciously opposed to - TEACHING new players, rather than just handing them a stripped-down, bare-bones, optionless pile of suck and saying "here, this is easy! Now figure it out as you go because we're gonna be too busy playing D&D to bother helping you!"
Please do not contact or message me.
Here's an example of what it could look like:
Level. Feature.
1. Combat Mastery, Second Wind
2. Action Surge (Ă—1)
3. Subclass Feature
4. ASI/Feat
5. Extra Attack (Ă—1), Combat Mastery
6. ASI/Feat
7. Subclass Feature
8. ASI/Feat
9. Indomitable (x1)
10. Subclass Feature, Combat Mastery
11. Extra Attack (Ă—2)
12. ASI/Feat
13. Subclass Feature, Indomitable (x2)
14. ASI/Feat
15. Action Surge (Ă—2), Combat Mastery
16. ASI/Feat
17. Subclass Feature, Indomitable (x3)
18. Extra Attack (Ă—3), Combat Mastery
19. ASI/Feat
20. Epic Boon
Combat Mastery -
A fighter is a master of war and athleticism, knowledgeable in both the history of warfare and its practical application in battle. They wield great weapons with a deadly skill that few can rival.
Beginning at level 1, a fighter can add their proficiency bonus to damage rolls.
Each time the fighter gains the Combat Mastery feature (at levels 1, 5, 10, 15, and 18,) choose one of the following benefits:
- Gain proficiency in a skill from the fighter's starting skill list.
- Gain an additional Fighting Style
- Gain 2 maneuvers from the battle master list and 1 superiority die
Some things to note here. I adjusted the fighter progression somewhat to account for the new method of getting the capstone at level 18 and a Boon at level 30. Other than the Combat Mastery Feature and that shift, everything else is already part of the fighter kit. They get a very large number of ASI/feats and more subclass features than almost anyone currently.
Would something like this satisfy people? Simple options with good benefits for those who want them, and maneuvers for those who want more? Assuming the subclasses are also improved across the board, of course.
Looking at this I might think that a super weak chassis like the current base fighter might be the best way to go with all martials, but with significantly, incredibly more powerful subclasses than casters. Battlemaster can get maneuvers for both utility and combat (and good utility not just "add a dice to skill check". Something comparable to spellcaster power) with better scaling (superiority die and maneuver power can increase exponentially). Eldritch Knight can be a 1/2 caster not 1/3 and maybe an arcane smite. Champion can just be the simple "fighter but more" option. Honestly though I think champion could just get replaced with Samurai because both are simple and people like samurai more. Keep the champion flavor but add samurai mechanics.
Hm. Not necessarily opposed to the idea of 'combat mastery', though offering a skill proficiency or a fighting style five separate times likely ends up as too much. Fighters would get drastically more proficiencies than even the most expert of Experts, or would run out of worthwhile fighting styles to take. Combat Mastery might need its own list of options like the old UA Deft Explorer did for rangers, with none of them repeatable except for taking more Superiority. Still, insofar as an option that allows for greater choice, depth, and engagement whilst allowing SFC folks to force new players to default to "I HIT IT W/MY HITTIN' STICK!", I've seen worse plans.
Please do not contact or message me.
Yeah I figured a new player would start with a proficiency or fighting style the first few times the option came up, then try out maneuvers when they felt more comfortable with the game. An experienced player could keep it simple, or might start with maneuvers and use the other options to combine with specific builds in mind.
Fighters get more feats and subclass features than anyone. There is a lot of room for customization and creating very complex and interesting subclasses. The older ones especially need to be revisited (I'm looking at you Eldritch Knight).
The exact details of 'Combat Mastery' (or whatever you want to call it) could be anything. The basic premise was just to show how options might be presented that allowed everyone to build what they want. You can ease new people into rules, while letting the optimizers have tons of fun swapping around fighting styles and feats and maneuvers in different builds.
I think subclasses in general should be overall much stronger to make them meaningful. Casters should have their subclasses at their current power level since spells are a massive boon to power budget but martials need much stronger and impactful ones. I'm honestly surprised that One D&D isn't putting more focus on subclasses, because they're the perfect way to give the "you have your cake and I eat my cake" type experience WOTC is going for
As for the balance between subclasses, I think that the One surveys will mostly handle that with only a few bad apples left. In terms of subclass balance I think OneD&D is going to do something better for once than 5e.
I don't think anyone is saying those things, Yurei... but I'm sorry it feels that way.
Almost everyone is actively saying that the subclasses need major improvements. Even the 'simple' Champion does. 'Remarkable Athlete' is anything but remarkable. I've played champions though, and they are very fun. It's exciting to dominate the battle, stepping from one enemy to the next as you cut them all down. But even it could be improved while allowing for a 'basic' option to still exist.
All of the other subclasses need varying levels of updating. Even just giving Eldritch Knights access to all arcane spells would go a long way to helping them. Or scale the levels of the spells better with fewer slots. Battle Masters deserve more maneuvers and ways to use the dice. Arcane Archers need something like 'cantrips,' special shots they can do every round. Even if it's only getting to choose an element and minor effect that you always use. Make them actually feel magical. Psi-warriors are cool, but are way too limited in options for those who want this fantasy.
And we still need some mid-complexity options too. Rune Knights are a lot of fun, and work pretty well where they are. Some choices to be made, ways to buff your party, ways to alter how you interact with the battlefield by increasing your size. It's a good balance. Samurai (and the inferior Purple Dragon Knight) need more things to do with their Fighting Spirit, but are also a solid balance of choices and ease of use.
And I agree, Nano, I'm excited we have the chance to help build better subclasses with these surveys. I know I spent a lot of time on my comments there. I hope that the next UA is Warriors so we can see where they think they should be moving.
Stego, your Combat Mastery idea suffers from the same problem as the maneuvers: you pick your favorite upfront, and by the time you are picking your third at 10th level it is also your third favorite. Classes should get access to new and better features, not more from the initial list. Would you enjoy playing a wizard more or less if instead of getting higher level spells you just got more 1st level spells?
This is my desire for all classes: I want new, fun, unique features at higher levels. I don’t mind if some of those options are simply “Hit harder”; on the contrary, that is good design. Spellcasters have damaging spells at every level for this reason. But even something like the sorcerer doesn’t have to only take those. They can select their spells known from a huge list of options, including attack spells, utility, defensive, etc. Why can’t classes like the fighter and rogue (and yes, I also think the rogue needs more) get this?
That's okay, it wasn't meant to be perfect, just show an example of how it could work. Some people want maneuvers for all fighters. Some don't. This option was showing how you could give everyone the choice. And add even more build flexibility on top of it.
If you want higher level maneuvers, that's something to fix with the maneuvers themselves. Make the battle master better. And the basic fighter will follow, if maneuvers are one of their options.
Heck, make advanced fighting styles too. Make styles that require you to have the basic version first as a prerequisite. Everyone can benefit from that as well, if they all have the option to take them.
I don't think that will work for the Simple Fighter Crowd, who've been notably ignoring the idea.
Here's a different take - put Superiority/maneuvers into the base fighter class. Then, in the PHB, have an official Alternate Class Feature that replaces Superiority with something simple for people who can't be assed to bring their brain to game night. That's more or less what you're suggesting anyways, save in the form of a more invocations-style Build-A-Bear manner. If Superiority is a base fighter feature, but that feature can be replaced with....I'unno, call it Combat Edge or something and have it be a series of fixed, boring, numerically powerful but mechanically useless static buffs a'la the gorram Champion? Then the Simple Fighter Crowd has their Simple Fighter they can use to sabotage new players with while the rest of us get a class actually worth playing, without needing an entirely brand new class they will neither make nore support for it.
Please do not contact or message me.
Why isn’t it enough though? Fighter is the one literal class that was set out as a relatively simple option for new players, adding loads of complexity to it for “funsies” only takes that option away from new players.
I honestly don't know why people think it is so hard to understand; every type of player, new and advanced, should have options available to them that they can play and enjoy. Both groups should have options like that, and by taking that option away from them, all you do is alienate and ostracize one of those groups. I get that some people vibe with super complicated, but others vibe with super simple too. And just as there are numerous class options to support the former of those two, there should be numerous class options to support the latter as well.
Fighter really is a great, relatively simple option for the people who want it. Sure, add more cool and complicated subclasses to it, but by adding Superiority, or other large amounts of complexity to the class with no options to avoid it, you take the "simple Fighter" option away from the people who love it, want it, or need it. D&D should be a game that is open and playable for everyone, putting as much complexity into the one class that has actively been set aside for new players stops it from being playable and enjoyable for large amounts of people.
Honestly, this may sound cringey and stupid, but taking away others options for the sake of expanding your own really just doesn't feel morally ok.
Yes, lets make all the players who want simpler options spend $30+ on a supplementary book so that they can play as a massively under-powered "sidekick" in their own story.
Actually you can, but I guess you just don't find playing a Battle Master Fighter to be very deep and engaging.
Wow, you really seem to be missing the "Simple Fighter Crowd[s]" actual opinion: our whole literal point is not that you shouldn't not teach new players how to play the game, its that you should have a simpler option that doesn't involve immediately shoving a billion different complicated class mechanics down their throat. In short, its not that people shouldn't not have to learn the game, its that they should have an option that allows them to do so in a way they can understand, while giving them the option of taking a little bit more time than some other people might need to help them adjust to all the complicated mechanics and rules in D&D.
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.Stego: Advanced maneuvers and fighting styles is exactly the sort of thing I would like to see.
BoringBard: I explained why it isn't enough already, but I will do so again. Please note that it isn't, in any way, "for funsies", and claiming that is our only reason is both dismissive and disingenuous. I like complexity in the form of interesting and unique features, with new and better options at higher levels. And this is true regardless of whether I am playing a spellcaster or a martial character.
The idea that all new players should play a Fighter is silly. Why bring a new player into a fantasy game and then force them to play the least fantastic option available? And the idea that new players will want to play a Fighter over other options doesn't fit with my own experiences. I currently run a D&D program at my library. Over the past 3 years I have introduced the game to almost 20 new players. I let them choose between six classes (bard, cleric, druid, fighter, rogue, and wizard), and the only time anyone has played a fighter is when they didn't pick a class and so were given a pregenerated character that happened to be a fighter. To say that again: when I ask new players, kids who have never played D&D before, what class they want to play...none of them pick fighter. They want magic because magic is fun, unique, interesting, etc.
The same happened with my son's friends (age 12): druid, wizard, cleric, and bard.
Do some of the new players struggle with the intricacies of the spells? Sure. But they all have fun playing and none of them have asked to switch to something simpler. And all of them have somehow managed to learn the ins and outs of spellcasting after a few sessions. (Oops, I tried to avoid any snark but it slipped in.)
Don't misunderstand me: I am not saying the game shouldn't have simple options. There are definitely players who prefer that, and I would never say they don't matter. In fact, more should be done to allow for simple spellcasters (arcane, divine, and primal). And what I (and others) have been advocating for is to also ensure that martial classes can have the same amount of complexity (with increasing meaningful options at higher levels) that the casters have always enjoyed.
I think the Paladin makes a great template for this. You can play them without any thought at all, converting all spell slots into smites and just hitting stuff every round. Or you can carefully select spells for their utility and never smite.
Honestly I don't know what else to say, Yurei.
There needs to be simple options. And complicated alternatives in the form of better subclasses. You can't just make a simple option more complicated without shutting someone out of it. Maybe some people come into DnD after watching 100 hours of Critical Role and they have it all figured out. But my niece sure didn't. She is very smart. She was still overwhelmed with choices that didn't have clear meanings to her yet. And, even though she was surrounded by loving family eager to teach her, she didn't have 100 hours to learn it before making a character on the one night every few months we get to see each other.
It's already a complicated game, even if this is one of the most streamlined editions yet. Some people are still kids. Some people have disabilities that make it harder to learn. Some people, as hard as it might be to believe, actually enjoy the 'simple' classes. Some people are bad at math. Some people don't have access to online tools or mentors. Some people bought the starter set and hope to learn it to play with their friends, and they shouldn't have to read 500 pages of advanced rules and watch hours of tip videos to do it.
I'm not going to gatekeep any of those people from playing the game.
So I offered some ideas of how you could keep simple classes, and still offer some choices for more advanced players. Choices that gave new people a fighting chance to actually learn the game. Choices that also provided even more options for every level of player. But it wasn't enough. I don't know what anyone wants, other than maneuvers for everyone. I even offered that, as an optional choice, not a requirement.
[Edit: thanks Arithezoo. I think advanced maneuvers and fighting styles are a great idea. My niece also wanted to be a spellcaater, and an Elf, for even more spells. I wish there was a simple spellcaster class too, with spells that functioned like basic abilities for those new players.]
I can't keep guessing what people want. Especially with so many responses just mocking different players by pretending like they are dumb or insane or cruel. If you think there is only one answer - complicating the classes for everyone - and see no other possible solutions, then I don't know what to say.
At least I tried.
I 100% see this point. I think it's good to teach some more complex options as they're getting used to things.
Most people tend to say Battlemaster is complex but I've seen new players easily get the hang of it.
A good design for classes is as said, like paladin. Paladin is just really a good basis on how all classes should be made... Complex choices of spells (what's even better is that tons of paladin spells were made exclusively for them adding unique identity) and abilities but an easy "go to" ability which is great for players who want that more simple experience.
I plan on making a homebrew martial class with maneuvers which function like spells and spell slots and paladin is my go-to inspiration
It's called crutches. A subclass is four features. You can't cram versatility and variety into just four features, unless one of them is spellcasting.
Drop the words "optimal" and "inefficient" from your vocabulary, it's too complex for "new players". Fireball is simple and powerful. "New players" get to roll many dice, rolling dice is fun. No hit mechanic, no static bonuses and modifiers, just many dice. Many dice is fun.
To find simple alternatives, all a "new player" would have to do is look at the side of the page and read "Quick build" block. Though this requires an ability to read in the first place.
Hot take: new players don't need sidekick classes or something. Levels 1-3 are for them. They don't go any further. "New players" don't exist past level 5, because by then they stop being new.
A rough draft, but actually a good one. Baseline feature offers complexity, but if you want, you may just stack passive options and do the basic bonk.
Though I still stand by the idea that basic class is barbarian, not fighter.
Think you might've mistaken me, Steg. I was actually suggesting that the "Alternate Class Feature" system Wizards invented as a random slap patch for Tasha's Cauldron could be used to help settle this issue. Put the good stuff in the base class where it's allowed to be impactful, then provide an alternative feature/set of features for those who simply can't with the primary feature. It's a riff on your idea of a mutable feature where people can pick stuff, but rather than having to be a pool of more-or-less independent features that can't build on each other and have to all be relatively mild because they can theoretically be chosen at any time, players can opt between a deeper, more engaging set of punchy, impactful mechanics or a set of less deep, less engaging, but ideally still (somehow) punchy mechanics. Combat Mastery could be a fixed track of moderate bonuses that's offered as a wholesale replacement for Combat Superiority for those who think Superiority is too complicated.
That said, Ari has a very good point. A lot of my anger comes from the fact that the people pushing my buttons are trying to keep the gates the other way. Do you like to make optimal decisions in your build and produce a really powerful character? Do you like to have a bunch of useful options built into your sheet, a lot of useful things you can do to help in any situation? Do you like to really think about your D&D game, try and play it more deeply and really press the limits of what your character can do? Well, too bad - the folks arguing so passionately for Simple Fighter hate it when you do any of those things and they'd prefer if you played a different game rather than do those things in D&D. They're all about sitting down, taking your pants off, grabbing a brewskie, and playing the slappest-ass game of slapass pizza-and-beer D&D you possibly can, and the fact that the current Fighter class, the Rogue class, the Barbarian class, the Sorcerer class, and even the oh-so-scary Wizard class are all built to support that style to the large exclusion of anyone else isn't enough.
The call is "all the other classes are already suuuuper complicated!" They're not. They're really not. And their continued call of "new players need this!" is hogwash, because Arithezoo is entirely right. My very first D&D character was a multiclass ranger/rogue. The one fighter in my table's first D&D game? A multiclass Eldritch Knight/wizard. There was both a paladin and a cleric as well, and for a little while there was a sorcerer whose background and spell selection set him up to be a thief rather than a classic blasty thing. None of us played the Simple Fighter, and yet somehow we all figured out how to play D&D. None of Ari's new kids - his literal new kids - played Simple Fighter, and yet they all figured out how to play D&D.
New players don't want to be "just, like...a dude. Nothing special or cool or interesting about him. Just, like...a guy" in their fantastical game of fantasy. They wanna be an awesome Gandalf wizard (or bard, or ranger, or sorcerer, or whatever version of "Gandalf was an [X], hear me out" we're playing this week). They want to be an awesome Aragorn-esque ranger. They want to be a creepy, mysterious warlock laden with Dark Dealings. They want to be a capital-P Paladin, Crusading For Righteous Justice. They want to be all that cool shit people tell fantasy stories about.
It's experienced players trying to be artsy-fartsy dinks, or trying to subvert expectations, or aiming for a specific breed of story, who default to "I wanna be just a regular guy with absolutely nothing special, cool, or interesting about him." Those are the ones that bust out the Champion fighter. Or, for that matter, the players trying to prove that Champion fighter "Isn't that bad guys, come on!" and build it for the meta reason of proving out the subclass to their fellows. But the people who're new to the game, don't know any of the meta community knowledge surrounding it, and are playing their first fantasy RPG story? They, typically, wanna try all that awesome stuff. And if they stumble for a little bit getting it right? Well hey - they still got to do awesome stuff in the interim, and they got there eventually.
If people want fighters to be For New Players? Then fighters should have awesome stuff they can do. Abilities that wow the audience, that make a new player on their first perusal of Chapter 2 of the PHB say "wow, that's super freaking cool! I wanna try that!" Right now, fighters have no such thing. There's nothing at all in the class that impresses people. New players who play fighter have generally been steered to fighter by a DM who doesn't trust the newbie and wants them on "The Easy Class" that, by happy just-so-coincidentally, cannot do much damage if the player bounces or goes off the rails. Which...well. SHouldn't have to say what I think of that.
So yeah. Fighters need something for the Wow Factor, something that makes people go "okay, that's awesome, I need to play a fighter some day and try that." Superiority could be that thing. Something else might serve better. Kam is also correct - it's very difficult to shove meaningful levels of versatility, variety, and depth into four whole features that are by design weaker and less impactful than the regular features of the base class, so the oft-touted "just make the SUBCLASSES complicated!" bit is out.
What's the solution? I don't know. I'm not a game designer, and fortunately Wizards is listening to none of us on this. The Simple Fighter Crowd and people who sincerely want fighters to be super cool and interesting to play each get precisely the same amount of input - filling out Satisfaction levels in a survey. Hopefully they find one, and hopefully it's better than anything we've tried so far. Because if they do to Fighter the same thing they did to poor Rogues in 1DD? Well...suppose we get to figure out how to make d8 Priest classes into frontline melee clowns, because Fighter just won't be playable at all.
Please do not contact or message me.
I agree that Rogues got a bad shake in 1DnD. They're the only thing I said I was very dissatisfied with across the board. I left a lot of comments on their lack of active, meaningful features.
And I agree that many new players want to be something cooler than a fighter. Lots of people like the fighter. It's one of the most popular classes already, just the way it is. I think that it gets held up as the 'new player option' because it's one of the few actually simple classes. Not because new players necessarily want to be a fighter. But because it's the easiest class to grasp. If there were more of these, new players would gravitate to them too.
I wish WotC went that direction. I wish there was a simple option for ALL of the 4 class groups. I wish there was an arcane type that had a few powers like cantrips that just kept getting stronger. And a support type that had a few healing and buff abilities. No spell slots or massive spell lists to choose from at all. Just easy to master, competitive classes built like the Rune Knight. Then new players could make those kinds of characters too. Without being overwhelmed until they either buckle down and study the game for weeks, or give up. And those options should be presented as equals to the other classes, not a sidekick roll.
I've been DMing for a very long time, and all I have is my own personal stories of seeing players struggle. Players that aren't dumb, and shouldn't be kept from playing the game. It's absolutely vital to lower the bar for entry so everyone can enjoy this amazing game. You can then make the skill ceiling as high as you want.
I personally think that having some solid subclass options is great for raising the ceiling. Multiclassing works too. Or, as I suggested, having options that give a choice between complexity or ease. Thanks, kamchatmonk, for your feedback on those. It's appreciated.
I'm just finding it very hard to understand why a basic class is keeping anyone from playing more it advanced. There are so many options, even in the poor 'bland' fighter. You have tons of feats and subclasses to choose from. They just need to be a little better.
But.
I'm willing to accept that it's not enough for some people. I don't have to feel the same way to understand that there is a need to be filled. Maybe we are all correct, and we're just looking at the problem the wrong way. Maybe there needs to be a fourth Warrior class. The 'advanced' fighter. Call it the Warlord or whatever. I'm 100% cool with that too. Then we can stop trying to shoehorn working classes into roles they weren't meant for.
Let's have a super simple version of Priests, Experts, and Mages. And lets also add a complicated class to Warriors.
Fighters can keep their Champions and Rune Knights, etc. Fighters can be raw power and intuitive growth. Warlords can absorb the Battle Masters, Samurai, an so forth. Warlords can have complex options and nuanced ability interactions. That sounds awesome.