New fighter design felt useless

The latest revision of fighter is weaker than the previous version.  And the previous version seemed week in the first place. WTF?  Why make him worse. 

Previously: The martial 1d6 could be to used to sheild allies per round.  (or extra damage for other fighter options)
Now: Fighter get two d6 , per combat ??? What? This is nearly useless.


Six round fight:
Old: 1d6 x 6 = 21 points mitigated
vs
New: 2d6  = 7 points mitigated


Currently, this fighter mechanic might as well be scraped it so weak. Compared the Barbarian's Rage DR, Cleric's flexibility, or the Druid's everything. 


I would change this to 2d10, drop lowest, per round.
2d10, drop lowest  X 6 = 42.5 points mitigated.
Add a 1d10 every 5 levels.


At the table were 2 clerics, 1 barbarian, 1 fighter - It was noticable, that the fighter brought nothing important to the fight. I felt sorry for the guy playing him.



Compared to the spells that everyone on the boards are so afraid of - such as a 3rd lvl fire ball and the previous playtest version fighter 6d6 ... It is out of ratio for what kind of Dmg  per round to buget cor monsters to "challenge" characters of similar level.



the playtest a I've read had the fighter use all martial Dmg die son each hit for damage. 6d6 on every hit before factoring a magic weapon .... The monster hp would have to be quadrupled or the monster xp would have to be quartered .

too much Dmg per hit unless you want 
I dsagree. I think the fighter is much more fun to play now. Previously the fighters in our group were killing monsters way too easily, and were talking almost no damage at all, thanks to the overly powered MDDs. Even with only the single reaction per round used for Parry, using MDD + skill dice almost always changed a hit to a miss, and with the way dice roll, it wasn't unusual for other monsters to miss or just do little damage once the fighter's Parry reaction was gone.

Now with Xds, and their limitations, the fighters in our group are enjoying combat much more because there is some good challenge, compared to the overly easy cakewalke that previously made combat teeter on borderline boring.
The fighter does not mitigate damage this packet. 

His dice are either used to boost AC, or do damage (at level 1).

guides
List of no-action attacks.
Dynamic vs Static Bonuses
Phalanx tactics and builds
Crivens! A Pictsies Guide Good
Power
s to intentionally miss with
Mr. Cellophane: How to be unnoticed
Way's to fire around corners
Crits: what their really worth
Retroactive bonus vs Static bonus.
Runepriest handbook & discussion thread
Holy Symbols to hang around your neck
Ways to Gain or Downgrade Actions
List of bonuses to saving throws
The Ghost with the Most (revenant handbook)
my builds
F-111 Interdictor Long (200+ squares) distance ally teleporter. With some warlord stuff. Broken in a plot way, not a power way.

Thought Switch Higher level build that grants upto 14 attacks on turn 1. If your allies play along, it's broken.

Elven Critters Crit op with crit generation. 5 of these will end anything. Broken.

King Fisher Optimized net user.  Moderate.

Boominator Fun catch-22 booming blade build with either strong or completely broken damage depending on your reading.

Very Distracting Warlock Lot's of dazing and major penalties to hit. Overpowered.

Pocket Protector Pixie Stealth Knight. Maximizing the defender's aura by being in an ally's/enemy's square.

Yakuza NinjIntimiAdin: Perma-stealth Striker that offers a little protection for ally's, and can intimidate bloodied enemies. Very Strong.

Chargeburgler with cheese Ranged attacks at the end of a charge along with perma-stealth. Solid, could be overpowered if tweaked.

Void Defender Defends giving a penalty to hit anyone but him, then removing himself from play. Can get somewhat broken in epic.

Scry and Die Attacking from around corners, while staying hidden. Moderate to broken, depending on the situation.

Skimisher Fly in, attack, and fly away. Also prevents enemies from coming close. Moderate to Broken depending on the enemy, but shouldn't make the game un-fun, as the rest of your team is at risk, and you have enough weaknesses.

Indestructible Simply won't die, even if you sleep though combat.  One of THE most abusive character in 4e.

Sir Robin (Bravely Charge Away) He automatically slows and pushes an enemy (5 squares), while charging away. Hard to rate it's power level, since it's terrain dependent.

Death's Gatekeeper A fun twist on a healic, making your party "unkillable". Overpowered to Broken, but shouldn't actually make the game un-fun, just TPK proof.

Death's Gatekeeper mk2, (Stealth Edition) Make your party "unkillable", and you hidden, while doing solid damage. Stronger then the above, but also easier for a DM to shut down. Broken, until your DM get's enough of it.

Domination and Death Dominate everything then kill them quickly. Only works @ 30, but is broken multiple ways.

Battlemind Mc Prone-Daze Protecting your allies by keeping enemies away. Quite powerful.

The Retaliator Getting hit deals more damage to the enemy then you receive yourself, and you can take plenty of hits. Heavy item dependency, Broken.

Dead Kobold Transit Teleports 98 squares a turn, and can bring someone along for the ride. Not fully built, so i can't judge the power.

Psilent Guardian Protect your allies, while being invisible. Overpowered, possibly broken.

Rune of Vengance Do lot's of damage while boosting your teams. Strong to slightly overpowered.

Charedent BarrageA charging ardent. Fine in a normal team, overpowered if there are 2 together, and easily broken in teams of 5.

Super Knight A tough, sticky, high damage knight. Strong.

Super Duper Knight Basically the same as super knight with items, making it far more broken.

Mora, the unkillable avenger Solid damage, while being neigh indestuctable. Overpowered, but not broken.

Swordburst Maximus At-Will Close Burst 3 that slide and prones. Protects allies with off actions. Strong, possibly over powered with the right party.

I dsagree. I think the fighter is much more fun to play now. Previously the fighters in our group were killing monsters way too easily, and were talking almost no damage at all, thanks to the overly powered MDDs. Even with only the single reaction per round used for Parry, using MDD + skill dice almost always changed a hit to a miss, and with the way dice roll, it wasn't unusual for other monsters to miss or just do little damage once the fighter's Parry reaction was gone.

Now with Xds, and their limitations, the fighters in our group are enjoying combat much more because there is some good challenge, compared to the overly easy cakewalke that previously made combat teeter on borderline boring.



I agree.  When I first read the playtest package I was skeptical, but after DMing a group with a fighter in it, I liked what I saw.  The fighter player was making meaningful choices every round.

A Brave Knight of WTF - "Wielder of the Sword of Balance"

 

Rhenny's Blog:  http://community.wizards.com/user/1497701/blog

 

 

But BONUS FEATS!!! Those worked out SO WELL in previous editions and were not in any way meaningless filler to empty class design... /sarc
"Utinam barbari spatium proprium tuum invadant!"
And the previous version seemed week in the first place.



Seriously? I saw a level 3 Fighter in the last packet completely negate a critical hit with a parry. I saw a level 11 Fighter take a Dragon down from full health to single digit HP in a single turn. What Fighter were you playing?

But BONUS FEATS!!! Those worked out SO WELL in previous editions and were not in any way meaningless filler to empty class design... /sarc



Yeah, they did and were not. With bonus feats I can build a Fighter exactly the way I want instead of being railroaded onto one of three or so specific paths, and by making the maneuvers feats I can benefit from them as a Ranger, Paladin or Barbarian as well to a lesser extent.
Yeah, +1d6 AC is so much more meaningful than 1d6 DR. (Those are emphasis italics, not sarcasm italics.) Especially at higher levels, where +3.5 AC will easily save you from a 4d12+ damage attack, while DR 3.5 won't help much at all. I definitely like the system, I'm just not entirely sure I like the current number of expertise dice. Either start with more after a short rest, or have a better method for recovering them (perhaps when you kill a creature or score a critical hit).
Yeah, +1d6 AC is so much more meaningful than 1d6 DR. (Those are emphasis italics, not sarcasm italics.) Especially at higher levels, where +3.5 AC will easily save you from a 4d12+ damage attack, while DR 3.5 won't help much at all. I definitely like the system, I'm just not entirely sure I like the current number of expertise dice. Either start with more after a short rest, or have a better method for recovering them (perhaps when you kill a creature or score a critical hit).



I like the idea of recovering an XD when you fell an enemy, like an adrenaline rush.
Warlords and bards could also have abilities that restore allies expertise dice I guess.
Yeah, +1d6 AC is so much more meaningful than 1d6 DR. (Those are emphasis italics, not sarcasm italics.) Especially at higher levels, where +3.5 AC will easily save you from a 4d12+ damage attack, while DR 3.5 won't help much at all. I definitely like the system, I'm just not entirely sure I like the current number of expertise dice. Either start with more after a short rest, or have a better method for recovering them (perhaps when you kill a creature or score a critical hit).


Well basically systems with these mechanics are doomed to fail, at least with the people I know. After one evening where all those stupid buff dice came up showing a one everybody is frustrated enough to want to play an other game.

This is all nice and fancy if it is an optional mechanic. But I don't want to have this to be mandatory for an iconic core class (sword and board fighter)

Basically I don't want to play a character that has to use this mechanic and sword and board fighters are may favourite class.

Bottom line: D&D Next, the game that should have been designed to fit "all play styles" and combine all previous editions feel is totally not my game, while I enjoyed playing all previous editions.

We currently have a blast playing AD&D 2nd edition.

So next is worse for me than any of the other editions. Mission failed.

Ceterum censeo capsum rubeum esse delendam

I loved the Previous Fighter, yes he did too much damage, but he was more interesting than this one. This is just more book keeping, and the last thing a person playing a fighter wants is more bookkeeping. I have a realativly new player who had a lot of fun with the fighter last packet, it was simple to run, no book keeping, the bonus dice came back every turn (which I'm seeing most people didnt notice "You regain your spent martial damage dice at the start of each turn, whether it's your turn of someone elses turn." it wasn't on a per round basis).

Yes the fighter is just as effective as before, my new player is still taking things out with a Rapier and Scimitar just has handily as before, but now his dice just sit there unused because he doesn't wanna waste them. Everytime he's rolled one it's been a let down, either getting 1-2 damage on an attack that ended up killing the guy without it, or rolling a 1 or 2 on a glacing blow or dodge which ended up with his attack roll missing or him getting hit anyway.

Yes thats just bad luck, but when those dice have so little impact on a fight, why even bother being a Fighter, at lease if he were a Ranger he could do the same thing in combat but get some spells too, or some other passive benefits in combat from Favored Enemy.

The reason giving a class Bonus Feats as its main thing is boring is because "why play a fighter when I can just play something else and take the feats anyway" Sure you can use those extra feats to round out your combat options a little more, but most Fighters get their weapon and just wanna roll some dice, which is why the 4e fighter didn't feel very "fightery" too many options.
Try this class out.
community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/758...

Might be more your style
Last packet fighter damage was stupid OP. I like this version much better, there are meaningful choices to be made, but still lots of options to choose from.

One thing i would prefer - that the fighter gets all those attack/defence options over time- eg: pick one at 1st, then another at 2nd, 3rd etc - so you pick up all 9-10 by 10th.

Also, i think from 11th onward you should be able to use multiple expertise dice at once, not just one.
"Useless" or just not as powerful/interesting as you would like?  A lot of players are reporting that fighters are doing awesome damage, so I'm skeptical that the class is as bad as you say.

Hyperbole and exaggeration sound like whining and will probably get ignored by the devs.  If you want to provide useful feedback try using precise language.
"Therefore, you are the crapper, I'm merely the vessel through which you crap." -- akaddk
It's just that the class just feels boring and bland. It has tons of abilities that use tons of different mechanics for a miniscule gain.

Honestly, I would prefer a plain "I just attack every round" approach to that micro management of stuff that doesn't seem to be important to me.

The fighter uses too many different mechanics for his abilities:
- stuff can happen during his round
- stuff can happen when he is attacked
- stuff can happen when somebody else is attacked
- he rolls dice to add to damage rolls
- he rolls dice to add to his AC
...

this just feels messy and cumbersome.

Ceterum censeo capsum rubeum esse delendam


Bottom line: D&D Next, the game that should have been designed to fit "all play styles" and combine all previous editions feel is totally not my game, while I enjoyed playing all previous editions.



Maybe you should design the game that will make everybody on these forums happy...

/popcorn

"Therefore, you are the crapper, I'm merely the vessel through which you crap." -- akaddk
Yeah, +1d6 AC is so much more meaningful than 1d6 DR. (Those are emphasis italics, not sarcasm italics.) Especially at higher levels, where +3.5 AC will easily save you from a 4d12+ damage attack, while DR 3.5 won't help much at all. I definitely like the system, I'm just not entirely sure I like the current number of expertise dice. Either start with more after a short rest, or have a better method for recovering them (perhaps when you kill a creature or score a critical hit).



I like the idea of recovering an XD when you fell an enemy, like an adrenaline rush.



+1, but only if the fighter strikes the actual killing blow.  

WotC, are you paying attention?

"Therefore, you are the crapper, I'm merely the vessel through which you crap." -- akaddk


Maybe you should design the game that will make everybody on these forums happy...

/popcorn



I would definitely never try that one. Especially since most of the Ideas I liked where rejected by a lot of people here.

My problem currently is that I have the impression WotC listens far too much to what is going on here ;)


Ceterum censeo capsum rubeum esse delendam

Attack and AC boosts seems to break the bounded accuracy design philosophy. And the chance for a boost to work is very limited. Damage increase and decrease fit the design philosophy better. Each die can generate at least some outcome and they added up.
Yeah, +1d6 AC is so much more meaningful than 1d6 DR. (Those are emphasis italics, not sarcasm italics.) Especially at higher levels, where +3.5 AC will easily save you from a 4d12+ damage attack, while DR 3.5 won't help much at all. I definitely like the system, I'm just not entirely sure I like the current number of expertise dice. Either start with more after a short rest, or have a better method for recovering them (perhaps when you kill a creature or score a critical hit).



I like the idea of recovering an XD when you fell an enemy, like an adrenaline rush.



+1, but only if the fighter strikes the actual killing blow.  

WotC, are you paying attention?




Yes, I really like this idea. Though, I worry people will start "saving" monsters for the fighter. It kind of breaks immersion, what reason does the paladin to not kill the goblin now? Alternatively, what about when someone refuses to let the fighter get the kill he has been working on? Maybe the fighter gets another dice back whenever he lands a really good hit? X amount above the AC or X amount of damage?
It's just that the class just feels boring and bland. It has tons of abilities that use tons of different mechanics for a miniscule gain.

Honestly, I would prefer a plain "I just attack every round" approach to that micro management of stuff that doesn't seem to be important to me.

The fighter uses too many different mechanics for his abilities:
- stuff can happen during his round
- stuff can happen when he is attacked
- stuff can happen when somebody else is attacked
- he rolls dice to add to damage rolls
- he rolls dice to add to his AC
...

this just feels messy and cumbersome.


That's all the expertise die, isn't it?

The expertise die is one of those lets-make-the-fighter-interesting abilities that fails because, instead of expanding what the fighter can do, it chops up what the fighter can do into tiny little peices and says "pick 4 of these worthless fragments of one bland ability."


Expertise dice could simply add or subtract from /any/ die roll, and they'd be a not-imbalanced ability that would only take a sentence or two of rules to implement, and be vastly superior to their current form.

 

 

Oops, looks like this request tried to create an infinite loop. We do not allow such things here. We are a professional website!

Personally, I dislike the limited function of Expertise Dice.  I ended up not using any of them in Encounters last week.  Not to mention that you have to PICK ONE from each list of abilities, which are so situation and restrictive in terms of gear that it's silly.

At least give them all to the Fighter and let the player decide which applies at what time.  This isn't like a Video game where the hero goes to each weapon shop for upgrades, and finds that every store owner has a selection of personalized weapons JUST FOR HIM and his friends.

Versatility should be the name of the game for the Fighter.  The Wizard and Cleric can be, why not allow the Fighter too?  The Rogue gets more than enough skills to do so.
I did my first game a few nights ago. I'm a fighter. I've always been a fighter. Except that time I was a cleric and sucked and lost my gods favor and died. I will always be a fighter.


I like bonus feats, always have and always will. I've not played any earlier DDN fighters, only this latest. I had fun, more fun than 4e and at least as much fun as 3.5e. The expertise dice were good, though I agree we should at least be able to choose two of each. Simply because we're FIGHTERS. It's what we do. Sometimes the battle calls for differant tactics, differant types of fighting. But we're up to it, because fighting is what we do.


Perhaps add an extra level where we gain expertise die, but also make each exper die increase come with the option to instead reserve more abilities (similar to how skills work).



But at the end of the day, I had fun. That's all that matters. 
Having DM's several sessions of the recent and several previous packets, I've had my group's fighter say he's really enjoyed the current Expertise Dice system.

He happily admits the older MDD system was ridiculously OP, but still a lot of fun.  His one complaint though, was a lack of worthwhile options for the dice.

He's a 2 weapon fighter, but has used every single die for a parry, rather than increased damage (there are some other options in there, of course.)

During a discussion, he said that having the option to avoid an entire attack, grossly outweighs the benefits of adding a single die of damage to an attack.   My question, I suppose, is does anyone use the dice for damage?  Would allowing the die to add to the attack *roll*  be too broken?  The player would love to be using his dice for damage, as he's a greatsword wielder w/ feats for weapon damage, but he just can't justify using them on such paltry numbers, when a parry can avoid a 10-20 damage attack per dice. 
I have a party with 3 fighters and they often use the dice for damage. 

If it's about putting an enemy down so he doesn't get to attack at all then it's an obvious choice.

There currently seems to be a good amount of choice.

Given the options for damage on a miss at 4th, I don't think adding to hit would be a good design.  
During a discussion, he said that having the option to avoid an entire attack, grossly outweighs the benefits of adding a single die of damage to an attack.   My question, I suppose, is does anyone use the dice for damage?  Would allowing the die to add to the attack *roll*  be too broken?  The player would love to be using his dice for damage, as he's a greatsword wielder w/ feats for weapon damage, but he just can't justify using them on such paltry numbers, when a parry can avoid a 10-20 damage attack per dice. 



You can use it for +hit: it's one of the options at level 4 when the fighter gets "Unerring Attacker" and gets to pick one of the options.

What I think is silly is that each fighter only gets to pick ONE of the options.  If this were an online game and we could analyze specs I'm sure we'd see that 90% of the fighters pick the same options.  "Gee, should I boost my own damage, or have the option of boosting somebody else's?"
"Therefore, you are the crapper, I'm merely the vessel through which you crap." -- akaddk

During a discussion, he said that having the option to avoid an entire attack, grossly outweighs the benefits of adding a single die of damage to an attack.  



Well, basic statistics say these abilities are about on par (with parry being slightly better at level 5)

The main difference is if you are a person who remembers parrying that one hit that could have taken you down or the instances where you where so much hoping to parry that blow that hit you by 2 and rolled a 1.

Basic psychology says that usually humans experience failure more intensely than success (to help us learn our lessons)

Therefore, this mechanic is usually a bad one, since spending a limited resource for the experience to fail is usually not very rewarding.

However, since both options have a superficial chance of making any real difference in the battle at all, they are both pretty superfluous.

What I would do with expertise dice?

Pretty simple:

Either add die + Str Bonus to damage if you hit, or heal die + Con Hit Points at the beginning of your turn.

And then you can swap them for tactical stuff like pushing your foes around, make them drop to the floor or forcing them to attack you with their next attack.



Ceterum censeo capsum rubeum esse delendam

I'm not sure how to quote posts on here, so I'm not going to try

@Elfcrusher:  Huh, I must admit I hadn't seen that.  I am normally so good at knowing the rules, haha.  That's nice, and a good choice then.

I would still argue that adding 1 die of damage doesn't equate to negating entire attacks.  As you increase in levels, the chance of that 1 die actually being enough to drop a monster reduces drastically.  Yeah it's awesome at low levels when you know the monsters can only take one hit, maybe two if they're lucky, but the higher you go, the less you can gamble that your un-augmented hit would leave them on ~3-4 hp.

@Thomson:  You raise a good point, in that it would be good to always gain something from using the die.  Using the resource, then failing isn't always fun, but at the same time, that's the risk that comes with many rolls in the game.  Wizards blow high level spells only to roll badly and have the monster make its save.  The risk of failure sucks, but it also means that the roll and tension when you use that resource is increased.  It's not just a question of "when do I use this for a guaranteed effect", but "right, time to try and be awesome".
@Thomson:  You raise a good point, in that it would be good to always gain something from using the die.  Using the resource, then failing isn't always fun, but at the same time, that's the risk that comes with many rolls in the game.  Wizards blow high level spells only to roll badly and have the monster make its save.  The risk of failure sucks, but it also means that the roll and tension when you use that resource is increased.  It's not just a question of "when do I use this for a guaranteed effect", but "right, time to try and be awesome".



Well wizards have spells at their disposal that deal half damage if a safe is made. And arguably a wizard spell that deals half damage still may have a greater impact on the outcome of a battle than a fighter succeeding with his parry roll.

My main problem with the fighter abilities are that they are too much trouble for what they really do.

Ceterum censeo capsum rubeum esse delendam

Well, yes- I'll agree with that.

However I think I also have "something is better than nothing" syndrome, in which I love what they're doing with fighters, because it means they get to just hit stuff with weapons, but with some decisions and fun things to use.  What they've got isn't perfect, but I'm very happy it's here.  

It would be better if, as you've said, there were more tactical choices to use them for, or even just more choices.
Yeah, +1d6 AC is so much more meaningful than 1d6 DR. (Those are emphasis italics, not sarcasm italics.) Especially at higher levels, where +3.5 AC will easily save you from a 4d12+ damage attack, while DR 3.5 won't help much at all. I definitely like the system, I'm just not entirely sure I like the current number of expertise dice. Either start with more after a short rest, or have a better method for recovering them (perhaps when you kill a creature or score a critical hit).



I like the idea of recovering an XD when you fell an enemy, like an adrenaline rush.



I also like this.
Whilst I'll agree it's a pretty awesome concept, as has been previously mentioned, it can turn into the party "saving" monsters for the fighter to kill, which makes zero sense.  Not should it turn into things like the fighter getting pissed if the wizard finishes off 3 creatures with magic missiles.  There can be fun competition within the group, from a RP perspective, but getting into "kill stealing" territory is dangerous. 
Well, yes- I'll agree with that.

However I think I also have "something is better than nothing" syndrome, in which I love what they're doing with fighters, because it means they get to just hit stuff with weapons, but with some decisions and fun things to use.  What they've got isn't perfect, but I'm very happy it's here.  

It would be better if, as you've said, there were more tactical choices to use them for, or even just more choices.



Sounds they got more feedback like this. From www.wizards.com/dnd/Article.aspx?x=dnd/4... it seems they created a bare bones version with flat bonuses and without that cumbersome rules.

Ceterum censeo capsum rubeum esse delendam

I don't think it would even be that out of hand if the fighter recieved ALL of the options for each type given how situationally specific they are.  Also, I think allowing the fighter to use as many dice as he wants (up to his total of course) wouldn't be an issue since they don't get that many to start.  It might take a scaling down of how many they get at what levels, but maybe not even that.  That way, they can balance how much effect they feel they need with how much resources it uses up.  On top of that, why not let them blow an entire turn to regain all their dice?  With the increased usage, that recharge turn would come up more often making it more meaningful.  I think it would make the ability more useful and stay useful over time.
I don't think it would even be that out of hand if the fighter recieved ALL of the options for each type given how situationally specific they are.  Also, I think allowing the fighter to use as many dice as he wants (up to his total of course) wouldn't be an issue since they don't get that many to start.  It might take a scaling down of how many they get at what levels, but maybe not even that.  That way, they can balance how much effect they feel they need with how much resources it uses up.  On top of that, why not let them blow an entire turn to regain all their dice?  With the increased usage, that recharge turn would come up more often making it more meaningful.  I think it would make the ability more useful and stay useful over time.

I agree I with letting the fighter have access to all the styles. A fighter doesn't just train with sword and shield; their schtick is being the best with weapons and it doesn't seem like letting them switch between using exp dice with the two-handed weapon style and sword and shield would be a big deal/advantage. 

I also like the idea of potentially letting the fighter use more expertise dice and get them back faster, but I think it should cost HD to get them back faster -- this ties it to a daily mechanic/strategic choice representing how the extra effort is costing the fighter from her reserves (HD). So, get one back at no cost as per the current rules, or speed up recovery of exp dice by burning a HD. At higher levels,this effectively becomes less of a cost (because the fighter has so many more HD), representing higher skill but still having a cost. 

The more I think about it, I also like the idea of letting a martial healer be able to use some combination of temp hp (morale surge) and triggering HD (to get real HP healing from the same reservoir that could normally be used for non magical healing).

Just my two cents. 
 
I also like the idea of potentially letting the fighter use more expertise dice and get them back faster, but I think it should cost HD to get them back faster



That's a really good idea.  I dig that.

"Fighting" should just be a "free" trained skill for Fighters, allowing them to use their skill die as a reaction to augment their combat prowess.

Fighter class features would allow the use of the "fighting die" to cause effects. Like "Shield Slam" would let you blow your fighting die that round on a successful hit to impose disadvantage on the target's next attack, while "Deep Wounds" would let you roll the fighting die and add the result to damage. "Cleave" could be a feature that lets you damage creatures adjacent to your target for the result of the die roll. "Expert Strike" would let you blow the die in order to get advantage on an attack roll. Et cetera. 

Since you can already add Expertise Dice to damage rolls that benefit from Deadly Strike, we could retain that feature for the Fighter without worrying about balance. "Whirlwind" should work like it currently does - splitting the bonus dice from Deadly Strike into separate attacks. "Combat Expertise" as a feat would probably be highly-prized, allowing Fighters to use a reaction to spend their fighting die without curtailing their ability to make opportunity attacks. 

Basically, there should be flexibility and options baked into the Fighter class that isn't limited to a few times per fight.  By making it a use of the Fighter's reaction, you inherently limit its use. By removing the "per encounter" restriction, you free up the fighter to employ that feature every round. By making it your skill die, you tie the feature into other elements of the character, making it feel like it's really part of your fighter's style. 

If you have to fix it, it's broken.


The new fighter has been popular enough in my play tests. I admit that at level one, only having 2d6 dice and only 2 options (one offensive, one defensive) feels a little weak but, then again, all the classes are a bit weak at level one. By level 5 you have 3d6 and 3 options to draw on. So every combat you can draw on 3 special abilities. Yeah, bonus to damage or AC dosnt sound very exciting, but there are other more exciting options if you want. For instance, if you have a shield, take the slam ability which allows you to do an extra d6 and gives the enemy disatvantage on its next attack roll. Or if you are an archer, take Nimble so that you can boost your AC and then, if the attack misses, get a free 10 foot move to get out of melee range without provoking oppertunity attacks. Also, at level five, are you able to use wirlwhind to attack two targets, and then slam each of those targets if you hit them both? If so that is pretty cool. 


People here have suggested letting the die be added to a to hit roll but you can pick this up at level 4. Personally, I like how the fighter is distinguised from other clases by this mechanic that gives it sense of performing combat moves. The only thing I can think of is maybe tweaking how many dice the fighter has (maybe start off with 3d6 at level one?), and adding more options that reflect certain styles. There are already some to reflect sword and board or archer fighter, but some for two handed and dual wield style would be nice. A dual wield could be something like, spend a die to boost AC and if the attack misses, make a counter attack. Two weapon style could be to do d6 extra damage and push target back 10 feet or knock target prone, etc. 

I think its on the right track, just maybe needs to spice up the options a bit beyond bous damage/defense to include increased mobility/controlling effects. 



 
I'm building a fighter for the first time in Next, having played various fighter archetypes (the actual class or related class/PrC builds that fall into the "martial melee" type). I agree with a lot of the sentiment here in the thread: unless encounters are really short, the limited number of expertise dice, and random nature of the dice, makes them difficult to use. I don't want to "waste" one by using it when I don't need it, and definitely don't want to roll a 1.  I'd rather have a known +3, even that's a touch below average, than deal with variability almost all the time.

Having to pick the uses of my expertise dice at character creation is annoying. It means I have to decide: hmm, do I want to be able to parry melee attacks, hand out AC bonuses to my allies, or defend against ranged attacks? Decisions like that are so subjective to the character's current equipment loadout and the way the DM runs their games that they should be made at no coarser scale than a per-day "meditate and change focus" level. Ideally, you'd just have all the abilities; as mentioned above, it's not particularily overpowered and with two dice per encounter, I'm not going crazy anyway. There doesn't even seem to be rules for retraining (the way feats have), so... yeah. I'd better never decide to use something other than a shield.

I really miss the 4e Battlerager. Maybe he was OP, who knows, but that was a great way to introduce an interesting kind of "thinking person's fighter". With the final iteration of the temp HP system, you have to decide whether you want the easy hit with guaranteed tHP, or the high damage chancy hit that might not give you tHP. I managed my temp HP like a champ, and soaked a lot of damage without expending party resources. In a game where the central mechanic is resource depletion, the Battlerager temp-HP style fighter provides a nonstandard way to buffer that resource. 
Been reading this, and having only played a DDN fighter (@lvl 7) for this packet and had only minimal combat, here are my thoughts.

- The regenerate 1d6 on a successful kill is a superb idea.  It makes the concept more useful.

- Any group who "saves" kills for the fighter to kill everything is metagaming, and should be harshly punished by the DM for it.  Shame on those who willingly metagame.  Thank you for creating atrocities like 4E.

- Perhaps the expertise dice can be retooled to "use a number of expertise dice equal to the strength modifier" at a certain level (say, 11-13).  That should drastically influence a fight AND create utility to the concept.


--- Just my thoughts. 
Sign In to post comments