Grrrrrr...I Have A Player Who Wants to Customize a Class....

[GandalfTheWhite]

So, I don't think I've seen any threads about this (or if there are, I haven't read them), but one of my players is getting ready to build a fighter. Instead of one of the existing Martial Archetypes, they're wanting to port over the features of the Tempest Cleric. Would anyone here let them do it? I honestly don't know what I'm gonna do. Do I let them do it?

[DracoKnight]

I might allow it. What's your reservation?

[GandalfTheWhite]

I might allow it. What's your reservation?

I just don't know how it will stack up power-wise against everything else.

[DracoKnight]

You can always playtest it. Or say no.

[Malifice]

I just don't know how it will stack up power-wise against everything else.

Any reason he cant just MC?

[GandalfTheWhite]

Or say no.

I'm highly inclined to say yes, though...This player is literally one of the best I've ever had. They never ask for anything - hell, whenever I try to give them a magic item, they give it to another party member. And now they've asked for something...should I give it to them?

And I mean no offense to you, DracoKnight, but I've seen your posts in the forum, and how lenient you are...I would feel more comfortable with another opinion.

[DracoKnight]

And I mean no offense to you, DracoKnight, but I've seen your posts in the forum, and how lenient you are...I would feel more comfortable with another opinion.

None taken.

[GandalfTheWhite]

Any reason he cant just MC?

There's no particular reason, other than they want to play a fighter who wields the power of the storm. They have wonderful backstory reasons to want this, and they're willing to give up the spell slots of the cleric and the crit range/maneuvers/spells of the fighter's MAs.

[GandalfTheWhite]

And it ports over fine, 5 features for 5 features...I don't have to create anything...Like I said, I just don't know how things will stack up power-wise.

[Giant2005]

It should be fine. Divine Strike might be a bit powerful on a Fighter, but not unreasonably so. Some of the abilities are kind of crappy without spellcasting to back them up, so their weakness should be more than enough to counter anything that you are frightened of being too powerful.
If you want to let him do it, then just let him do it - there isn't anything in there that will make you regret the decision.

[some guy]

A lot of the features of the tempest cleric don't work without spell slots or channel divinity. What are your plans for that? The spell progression of an Eldritch Knight and Channel Divinity 1/rest? What about the spells known? Just the domain spells?

I'd probably allow it with the specification that it could be altered between sessions if it would appear broken (in either direction), taking all parties in consideration.

[DracoKnight]

5 features for 5 features

Only if you count their Channel Divinity. You'll have to create one feature to replace this.

[Giant2005]

A lot of the features of the tempest cleric don't work without spell slots or channel divinity. What are your plans for that? The spell progression of an Eldritch Knight and Channel Divinity 1/rest? What about the spells known? Just the domain spells?

I'd probably allow it with the specification that it could be altered between sessions if it would appear broken (in either direction), taking all parties in consideration.

None of the abilities require Spell Slots, you would just have more ways of using them if you had Spells.
I sure wouldn't allow the change if it came with the Eldritch Knight's spellcasting too - then it would really be broken.

[GiantOctopodes]

Only if you could their Channel Divinity. You'll have to create one feature to replace this.

or just give them channel divinity without giving them turn undead.

[DragonLordIT]

I don't understand why he couldn't simply multiclass or be a cleric oriented to the melee fighting. :smallconfused::smallconfused:
It is not difficult to characterize I think. Someone who wield the power of the storm can't be simply a "warrior" cause he obviously wield magic/supernatural powers.

[GiantOctopodes]

I don't understand why he couldn't simply multiclass or be a cleric oriented to the melee fighting. :smallconfused::smallconfused:
It is not difficult to characterize I think. Someone who wield the power of the storm can't be simply a "warrior" cause he obviously wield magic/supernatural powers.

Emphasis mine. I don't personally subscribe to that line of thought because a) I don't think *any* character in D&D should be "simply a warrior", and b) I don't think it's fair to say that a class can't have nice things because it's not a spellcasting class.

I am currently playing a Rogue using the Way of Shadow subclass from the Monk. It's great times, it ports over nicely, and it lets me have abilities that would otherwise be out of reach, without having to be a "spellcaster" in the traditional sense, instead simply having abilities which obviously have a magical nature. If a Fighter can be an Eldritch Knight, and if a Monk can use the Way of the Elements, why could a Fighter not wield the power of the elements as a subclass? Sure, he *could* do the things you describe. But apparently that's not what he wants to do, so the question then becomes "is what he wants to do balanced", and imho the answer to that is yes.

[Requiemforlust]

I had a player wish to do something similar. Here's my solution (https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B66RprYE6_HHenZhTDRXNDV5bjg/view?usp=sharing). :)

[DracoKnight]

I had a player wish to do something similar. Here's my solution (https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B66RprYE6_HHenZhTDRXNDV5bjg/view?usp=sharing). :)

That's really neat. I'll have to play that at some point in the future :D

GandalfTheWhite, this might work...Just change the radiant damage to thunder or lightning damage.

[Gurka]

Here's what works best for me with custom anything:

Make sure the player knows ahead of time that it's subject to change later on, and if something that you don't initially see as too strong rears it's head later, you remove (or replace) that ability, or tweak it down a bit to bring him in line. Make sure the player knows any custom stuff us subject to retcon later on, and talk and work with the player if you need to change it.

The most important bit is for the player to have fun, and I know how tricky it can be to fit a cool concept you have in your head into one of the D&D classes. If this player does't make obvious meta-power grabs, and it sounds like (s)he doesn't, then I see no reason to curtail them unless/until it becomes a problem.

[Hawkstar]

Any reason he cant just MC?Multiclassing is awful, and often takes characters far off-concept because you end up with too much/commit too much for trying to poach just a small thing.


I'm highly inclined to say yes, though...This player is literally one of the best I've ever had. They never ask for anything - hell, whenever I try to give them a magic item, they give it to another party member. And now they've asked for something...should I give it to them?

And I mean no offense to you, DracoKnight, but I've seen your posts in the forum, and how lenient you are...I would feel more comfortable with another opinion.I say ask the group if they're comfortable with trying it, and let him give it a shot.


None of the abilities require Spell Slots, you would just have more ways of using them if you had Spells.
I sure wouldn't allow the change if it came with the Eldritch Knight's spellcasting too - then it would really be broken.

It shouldn't necessarily come with the EK's full spellcasting - just the spell slots (And spells known from the domain, up to the level of the EK's casting).

[GandalfTheWhite]

I think I will go with the template Requiemforlust has put forward. Can someone else double-check it for me?

[aceynn88]

I think I will go with the template Requiemforlust has put forward. Can someone else double-check it for me?

Seems perfectly fine to me. Most, if not all those mechanics are already in the game in one way or another. The only thing I would tweak is the Guardian Strike. As is, the fighter can push around a creature anytime he hits them. Not bad when you first get it, but once you get three attacks, being able to slap a monster around 3 different times could lead to some pretty silly stuff. Make that a once a round thing and you're good to go with this.

[Giant2005]

I think I will go with the template Requiemforlust has put forward. Can someone else double-check it for me?

It is better than just a straight transplant of abilities imo.
He took away the Channel Divinity and moved everything else forward a space in the Fighter's progression which is kind of necessary due to the Cleric's subclass abilities coming in a lot sooner than the Fighter subclass abilities. The ability he replaced it with and switched to the final position isn't overpowered for the level, yet it still useful.
His version is all Angelic and Radiant though - if you want the Lightning look from the Tempest Domain, you would essentially have to convert everything back.

[HoarsHalberd]

I think I will go with the template Requiemforlust has put forward. Can someone else double-check it for me?

Free flying at 15 might be a bit strong. And the level 18 ability is a bit of overkill, but doesn't synergise that well. Fair trade for channel divinity really.

2d8 damage a turn at level 14 may be a bit high though.

A battle master will have 18 d10s to do damage with a day at level 15. Average of 99 damage. Average of 2d8 = 9. 99/9=11. So he needs to hit with an attack 11 rounds a day to be doing more damage than a battlemaster at level 15 just from that feature. Both of them also give a useful amount of utility to the fighter.

Traits are: Thunder damage weapons that is immune to disarms and teleports to your hand. Thunder damage reaction option. +1-2d8 thunder damage 1/round. 10 foot knockback. Free flying. Free fear/intimidate as many times a day as you want.
vs
4-6 d8-d12s of damage per short rest. 3-9 maneuvers of varying strengths, and the ability to tell if someone is better or worse than you at something.

That's the comparison. You can take it as you like.

[Citan]

I'm highly inclined to say yes, though...This player is literally one of the best I've ever had. They never ask for anything - hell, whenever I try to give them a magic item, they give it to another party member. And now they've asked for something...should I give it to them?


There's no particular reason, other than they want to play a fighter who wields the power of the storm. They have wonderful backstory reasons to want this, and they're willing to give up the spell slots of the cleric and the crit range/maneuvers/spells of the fighter's MAs.

And it ports over fine, 5 features for 5 features...I don't have to create anything...
I think you just already gave yourself the two major selling points of authorizing him.
1) No extra work for you and...
2) More importantly, he asks not because of cheesing objective but because interesting and refined background concept which is always a behaviour to reward imo and...
3) Most importantly, your first post strongly hints that this player is a true teamplayer, always taking teamwork and global benefit/balance into account.

Meaning that you can just straight authorize it, maybe telling him beforehand that you may have to discuss a slight "tone-down" with him during the campaign if you feel he becomes so powerful that he overshadows other players.

From what you said, there will only a very slim chance that this situation actually arises, and even slighter chance that it would become a real problem 'cause player refusing some changes.

[Millface]

If anything Gandalf this will be less powerful than if he just went Battlemaster or Tempest Cleric.

The Cleric Domain abilities aren't that powerful on their own, they are balanced to be used in conjunction with the Cleric spell list, just like the fighter abilities are balanced around making use of a large number of feats and attacks/round.

A level 5 Tempest Cleric using a great weapon is going to be really, really good. Spirit Guardians + Spiritual Weapon + Heavy Armor + Reaction lightning damage = some fantastic DPR for that level.

A level 6 Battlemaster who then takes Tempest the rest of the way to 20 will also be really potent.

A fighter that just has reaction damage a few times/day and adds some lightning to his attacks is going to have less output than either of those builds. So, if he really wants it, hell yeah. I think he should have it.

[Shining Wrath]

Basic rule #1: work with your players.
Basic rule #2: no one character can be too awesome compared to the other characters.

I suggest taking Eldritch Knight and giving them a different spell selection that matches a Tempest Cleric. If that's not tempest-ish enough, trade out some fighter ASI / extra attacks for some Channel Divinity uses and features.

I'm AFB but there's a workable chassis for a spell-wielding fighter and you ought to be able to get there.

[Strill]

Free flying at 15 might be a bit strong. And the level 18 ability is a bit of overkill, but doesn't synergise that well. Fair trade for channel divinity really. Free flying is what tempest clerics and dragon sorcerers get. I don't see how it can be overpowered.


A battle master will have 18 d10s to do damage with a day at level 15. Average of 99 damage. Average of 2d8 = 9. 99/9=11. So he needs to hit with an attack 11 rounds a day to be doing more damage than a battlemaster at level 15 just from that feature. Both of them also give a useful amount of utility to the fighter.
Check your math again. Average of 2d8 = 9. With Great Weapon Fighting Style, the average is 10.5.


Traits are: Thunder damage weapons that is immune to disarms and teleports to your hand. Thunder damage reaction option. +1-2d8 thunder damage 1/round. 10 foot knockback. Free flying. Free fear/intimidate as many times a day as you want.
vs
4-6 d8-d12s of damage per short rest. 3-9 maneuvers of varying strengths, and the ability to tell if someone is better or worse than you at something.

That's the comparison. You can take it as you like.
The knockdown maneuvers make a huge difference that you haven't accounted for. Getting advantage on all subsequent attacks, and all your allies' attacks is a big deal.

[Millface]

lol there's a perfectly RAW race that flies from level 1. Throwing any idea of flying being overpowered right out the window there. WotC clearly doesn't think that it is.

[Shining Wrath]

lol there's a perfectly RAW race that flies from level 1. Throwing any idea of flying being overpowered right out the window there. WotC clearly doesn't think that it is.

The Aararocka is not RAW, and in fact is banned from Adventurer's League. It's in Unearthed Arcana, which is explicitly sandbox for WotC.

[Millface]

The Aararocka is not RAW, and in fact is banned from Adventurer's League. It's in Unearthed Arcana, which is explicitly sandbox for WotC.

It's in the Elemental Evil Player's Companion, is that technically still Unearthed Arcana? If so, that's my bad. I still don't think flight, especially at 15, is overpowered though.

[Demonic Spoon]

It's in the Elemental Evil Player's Companion, is that technically still Unearthed Arcana? If so, that's my bad. I still don't think flight, especially at 15, is overpowered though.

It's not unearthed arcana, so it's not playtest content. It isn't PHB (default) content, and the race comes with a giant asterisk advising the DM to think about whether he wants to allow aararocka in the game or not so it's hardly a fair reference point.

[Daishain]

It's not unearthed arcana, so it's not playtest content. It isn't PHB (default) content, and the race comes with a giant asterisk advising the DM to think about whether he wants to allow aararocka in the game or not so it's hardly a fair reference point.
For granting flight at level one, perhaps not. However, it does demonstrate that WOTC considers flight to not be inherently game breaking. I'd say that bringing up the Aarakocra in an argument to allow expanding the number of characters that have flight at L15 is somewhat valid.

[Giant2005]

It's not unearthed arcana, so it's not playtest content. It isn't PHB (default) content, and the race comes with a giant asterisk advising the DM to think about whether he wants to allow aararocka in the game or not so it's hardly a fair reference point.

My copy of the supplement doesn't contain that giant asterix.

[Millface]

For granting flight at level one, perhaps not. However, it does demonstrate that WOTC considers flight to not be inherently game breaking. I'd say that bringing up the Aarakocra in an argument to allow expanding the number of characters that have flight at L15 is somewhat valid.

BRB I need to print and frame this as the first time someone on GITP actually sees logic behind a post instead of arguing semantics. Thanks for seeing my point, instead of just arguing my incorrect use of the RAW tag.

Not that I don't appreciate my mistake being pointed out, I actually do.

For OP... I actually really like the EK idea. I say yes to my players more often than not, but if one of them comes to me with a concept and asks for a homebrew I first look for ways to fill out that concept that already exist in the game.


For this I would mention that there are a few really valid ways already provided to be a warrior who harnesses the power of storms. Maybe get a more in-depth reason for why it has to be Fighter with Tempest Domain instead of a Melee oriented Tempest Cleric or an EK that just takes lightning based spells. I understand your desire to say yes to such an awesome sounding player, but homebrew is something I avoid if I can. If he has valid reasons, though, I'd do it for him.

[Demonic Spoon]

For granting flight at level one, perhaps not. However, it does demonstrate that WOTC considers flight to not be inherently game breaking. I'd say that bringing up the Aarakocra in an argument to allow expanding the number of characters that have flight at L15 is somewhat valid.

I'd say that it shows that they don't think it is intrinsically game breaking, but that they view flight as powerful enough that it may be worth restricting until higher levels.

Not that I think flight at high levels is a problem (lots of people get it), but I don't think aarakocra is a good example.



My copy of the supplement doesn't contain that giant asterix.

The EE companion says:

Being able to fly at high speed starting at 1st level is exceptionally effective in certain circumstances and exceedingly dangerous in others. As a result, playing an aarakocra requires special consideration by your DM.

Also, more generally, at the top of the Races section, it says:

These new options are available when you make a character, provided that your DM allows them in your campaign.

[Yagyujubei]

It is better than just a straight transplant of abilities imo.
He took away the Channel Divinity and moved everything else forward a space in the Fighter's progression which is kind of necessary due to the Cleric's subclass abilities coming in a lot sooner than the Fighter subclass abilities. The ability he replaced it with and switched to the final position isn't overpowered for the level, yet it still useful.
His version is all Angelic and Radiant though - if you want the Lightning look from the Tempest Domain, you would essentially have to convert everything back.

this, while the homebrew is nice, it totally changes the theme of the character...if he was going for a Thor storm lord warrior thingy, then this doesnt really fit that bill...

you could just switch all radiant keywords to thunder/lightning though i guess.

[Millface]

I'd say that it shows that they don't think it is intrinsically game breaking, but that they view flight as powerful enough that it may be worth restricting until higher levels.

Not that I think flight at high levels is a problem (lots of people get it), but I don't think aarakocra is a good example.



The EE companion says:

Being able to fly at high speed starting at 1st level is exceptionally effective in certain circumstances and exceedingly dangerous in others. As a result, playing an aarakocra requires special consideration by your DM.

Also, more generally, at the top of the Races section, it says:

These new options are available when you make a character, provided that your DM allows them in your campaign.


As a DM to me special consideration just means that I have to be aware of the ability and be sure to plan accordingly. I see it as a note telling me that it's something I'm going to have to keep an eye on, and not to allow it if I'm not willing to do that.

Flying is great, falling sucks. If someone rolls up an Aarakocra my bad guys are going to do what they can to ground him, if that involves several D6s of falling damage at low level it could mean death session one. A well placed Hold Person goes from annoying to fatal when you're flying in combat at low level. Hell, a net is dangerous at first.

Consideration also means that if I want an obstacle to give the players some thought, and I have an Aarakocra in the group, to, you know, not make the obstacle a 100 ft. pit of spikes that can be flown over.

As far as the note about allowing them in the campaign... that's fair. Anything that comes after the core books the DM can rightfully decide not to use. That doesn't mean it isn't RAW. It's published by WotC, it's not in playtest, it is complete. They wouldn't have published it if they thought they'd be breaking games with it. Unlike Unearthed Arcana, which is sometimes obviously poorly tested material.

[1Forge]

Wait back on topic, Why did he need a cleric/fighter hybrid class? Multiclassing two or three levels wouldnt have been much different, or just taking paladin with some fluff changes, or maybe UA's favored soul? (heck a storm sorceror from UA might have worked) Or he could have taken a feat to swipe some abilities/spells. What backstory could he have that required him to create a hybrid class?:smallconfused:

Dont get me wrong i run a high-homebrew game, but I usually avoid class changes and find other ways to create a different class feel.

[Hawkstar]

Wait back on topic, Why did he need a cleric/fighter hybrid class? Multiclassing two or three levels wouldnt have been much different, or just taking paladin with some fluff changes (heck a storm sorceror from UA might have worked) Or he could have taken a feat to swipe some abilities. What backstory could he have that required him to create a hybrid class?:smallconfused:I find that, in actual play (Especially from level 1), multiclassing is a colossal headache, because it comes bundled with stuff you don't want, while putting off or locking out the stuff you're actually after... and, it cripples hitting performance benchmarks (ASIs, # of attacks, class features you care about, etc.)

Multiclassing may not look 'much different' on a level 20 piece of paper, but it's actually a huge, incredibly finnicky hassle to map out in play. Where are the jumping off points? At what level does he say "I'm gonna stop being a Fighter now, and be a Cleric". How many levels does he stay as that cleric?

[1Forge]

I find that, in actual play (Especially from level 1), multiclassing is a colossal headache, because it comes bundled with stuff you don't want, while putting off or locking out the stuff you're actually after... and, it cripples hitting performance benchmarks (ASIs, # of attacks, class features you care about, etc.)

Really? I have always multiclassed, I love the mechanic personally I often play a bard/paladin and i usually dont notice much strength drop. But in some multiclasses I can see your point, but then why didnt he just play a combat oriented cleric? or a fighter with some feats to steal cleric abilities? I mean i play X-paladin/fighter with the entertainer background so I could still be a bard, but without the magic, then tossed on the X-paladin because of backstory, it wasnt a homebrew class but it felt almost like playing one.

[Demonic Spoon]

For anyone who doesn't have a high degree of system mastery and loves mapping out character builds, multiclassing is janky and one of the best ways to create an unbalanced (likely underpowered) character. Not a problem if you know the system well and like to do it, but it's annoying for others. It's good that it's an option, but altering a base class to get the feel you want is the best option I can see.

A combat-oriented cleric is still a caster first and a warrior second. Creating new feats to steal the cleric abilities is doing almost the same thing OP is suggesting, you're just giving the abilities at level 4/8/12/etc instead of when they get normal subclass features. I don't see any advantage in that approach.


Also, doesn't that domain get bonus spells known, which are wasted on a fighter with no slots?

[mephnick]

I'd probably just tell the player to play a paladin and refluff all the spells and stuff as lightning/air powers.

Lightning Smite, etc.

But I like refluffing, so ymmv.

[DracoKnight]

The Aararocka is not RAW, and in fact is banned from Adventurer's League. It's in Unearthed Arcana, which is explicitly sandbox for WotC.

It's not in Unearthed Arcana. It's in the Elemental Evil book. Official rules. Yes, it's banned in AL, but it's still just as official as the Genasi, Goliath, and Svirfneblin.

[GandalfTheWhite]

What backstory could he have that required him to create a hybrid class?

He's playing an Aasimar who was raised in the Underdark by his mother a Half-Drow. His father, a Deva, is Barachiel (the angel of lightning and storms in the Christian mythos) a servant of Sashelas the elvish god of the sea. A war between the gods started brewing, and Barachiel was called back from his post in the Underdark to aid Sashelas. The player's mother raised him, told him about his heritage, and trained him in enough combat that he might be able to catch the eye of a mentor. The player does and eventually becomes a full-fledged fighter. And then he discovers that he wields some of his father's powers over the storm (kinda like Percy Jackson), and his bond is that he's searching for his long-lost father.

[DracoKnight]

He's playing an Aasimar who was raised in the Underdark by his mother a Half-Drow. His father, a Deva, is Barachiel (the angel of lightning and storms in the Christian mythos) a servant of Sashelas the elvish god of the sea. A war between the gods started brewing, and Barachiel was called back from his post in the Underdark to aid Sashelas. The player's mother raised him, told him about his heritage, and trained him in enough combat that he might be able to catch the eye of a mentor. The player does and eventually becomes a full-fledged fighter. And then he discovers that he wields some of his father's powers over the storm (kinda like Percy Jackson), and his bond is that he's searching for his long-lost father.

I like it. It has long term goals, it's a backstory that fits with a pre-level 1 character (there are people in my group that try to pass themselves off as the most badass assassin before level 1).

[DracoKnight]

I like it. It has long term goals, it's a backstory that fits with a pre-level 1 character (there are people in my group that try to pass themselves off as the most badass assassin before level 1).

I also like that they show that they trained to become that level 1 Fighter. I don't like it when players are just like:

Player: "I'm playing a fighter."
Me: "Why are you a fighter?"
Player: "Oh, I'm just a fighter."
Me: "Well, where did you get your training?"
Player: "I didn't, I'm just a fighter."
Me: *sigh* "Yes, but the things a fighter does still requires training."
Player: "Not really."

This is an actual conversation I've had with a player. I like it when a player has a backstory reason to play the class that they're playing. It leads to a deeper character, and I love deep characters that have a life of their own.

[Millface]

I like it. It has long term goals, it's a backstory that fits with a pre-level 1 character (there are people in my group that try to pass themselves off as the most badass assassin before level 1).

I definitely don't like it when players don't account for what level they start when doing a backstory. I jumped into a campaign that was @15 at the time, then I had some liberty with how influential I was in the past, but at level 1 you just started even sort of being what you are. This backstory certainly does sound like a level 1 character, and I like it.

I can see how none of the systems already in place really work for this. You either have to give him the Tempest domain or have him go EK and pick Thunder/Water/Lightning based spells only. I'd still probably do it that way, since you don't become EK until 3 he could play for a while before fully coming into his powers, you know?

[GandalfTheWhite]

I also like that they show that they trained to become that level 1 Fighter. I don't like it when players are just like:

Player: "I'm playing a fighter."
Me: "Why are you a fighter?"
Player: "Oh, I'm just a fighter."
Me: "Well, where did you get your training?"
Player: "I didn't, I'm just a fighter."
Me: *sigh* "Yes, but the things a fighter does still requires training."
Player: "Not really."

This is an actual conversation I've had with a player. I like it when a player has a backstory reason to play the class that they're playing. It leads to a deeper character, and I love deep characters that have a life of their own.

This would not be allowed at my table. You have to have a reason for what you're playing.

[Millface]

I also like that they show that they trained to become that level 1 Fighter. I don't like it when players are just like:

Player: "I'm playing a fighter."
Me: "Why are you a fighter?"
Player: "Oh, I'm just a fighter."
Me: "Well, where did you get your training?"
Player: "I didn't, I'm just a fighter."
Me: *sigh* "Yes, but the things a fighter does still requires training."
Player: "Not really."

This is an actual conversation I've had with a player. I like it when a player has a backstory reason to play the class that they're playing. It leads to a deeper character, and I love deep characters that have a life of their own.

I have the luxury of many viable players to choose from but I would honestly ask that player not to return. He wouldn't fit with my group. That's just a blatant refusal to give your character any thought at all.

[DracoKnight]

I have the luxury of many viable players to choose from but I would honestly ask that player not to return. He wouldn't fit with my group. That's just a blatant refusal to give your character any thought at all.

I have asked them to either put more thought into their character, or not return.

[Slipperychicken]

He's playing an Aasimar who was raised in the Underdark by his mother a Half-Drow. His father, a Deva, is Barachiel (the angel of lightning and storms in the Christian mythos) a servant of Sashelas the elvish god of the sea. A war between the gods started brewing, and Barachiel was called back from his post in the Underdark to aid Sashelas. The player's mother raised him, told him about his heritage, and trained him in enough combat that he might be able to catch the eye of a mentor. The player does and eventually becomes a full-fledged fighter. And then he discovers that he wields some of his father's powers over the storm (kinda like Percy Jackson), and his bond is that he's searching for his long-lost father.

I could see both paladin and cleric working with this fluff. Paladin would probably be casting thunderous smite a lot.

[BoardPep]

There's no particular reason, other than they want to play a fighter who wields the power of the storm. They have wonderful backstory reasons to want this, and they're willing to give up the spell slots of the cleric and the crit range/maneuvers/spells of the fighter's MAs.

Bolded the important part. If he doesn't even care about spell slots, give him whatever he wants. :D He clearly is just looking for fluff/theme.

If you're worried about balance, offer the other players something similar. Perhaps even giving all players in your game a "base" class with ALL features, and a secondary fluff, giving more fantastic kind of abilities that are all utility and flavor. I did a campaign like this once where everybody played a class and had an intelligent weapon that grew with them, giving them fluffly / flavorful powers. One could see twice as far and open a telepathic channel between the whole party. One could control his mist and grant the party the effects of his worn rings through the mist. One could control water/earth for fluffy/thematic effects. Usually slow, but with some effort could make walls and whatnot in combat. And one could breath fire on his sword to heat it up and use it to cook for the party (granting them interesting benefits based on what he cooked).

[GandalfTheWhite]

I could see both paladin and cleric working with this fluff. Paladin would probably be casting thunderous smite a lot.

The only problem with that is that the only god that the player has encountered in their backstory is Lolth. It would make no sense for them to make an Oath to her, and they most certainly wouldn't be a Cleric of her. Especially since they don't want to play a Trickery Cleric.

The way they're asking to do it makes sense for the character, and I'm okay with it. It doesn't look too OP.

[DracoKnight]

Bolded the important part. If he doesn't even care about spell slots, give him whatever he wants. :D He clearly is just looking for fluff/theme.

I agree. This player is willing to sacrifice the healing and the utility of the Cleric, and all the spell slots of a full caster. Let 'em take the Tempest domain abilities instead of a Martial Archetype. Give them something like what Requiemforlust did with the Divine Weapons, and you're golden.

It's actually kind of funny that you started this thread. I have a PC I'm working on for a campaign, and they have a somewhat similar backstory. I'm gonna ask my DM if I can use Requiemforlust's Templar. :D

[Scarab112]

I don't see any reason why it wouldn't work. Give him Wrath of the Storm and Destructive Wrath at 3rd level. That'll be about on par with the similar fighter features. Thunderbolt strike can be given at 7th, and Divine Strike at 10th, improving it again at 15. Then Stormborn at level 18.

It all should line up just fine. The main benefit is that at level 10 he'll be able to use Divine Strike and Thunderbolt strike to push things every turn with a fair bit of extra damage, with the ability to do it as a reaction a few times per day as well, though it won't be that drastic compared to the fighter's standard tools. He'll be very strong in open areas where he can push people off things and use his flight, but inside of dungeons he'll be rather weak compared to the other types of fighters.

Edit: Just re-read the features, Thunderbolt strike keys of of lightning damage, while Divine Strike deals Thunder. This means that the only way to get the push effect is from wrath of the storm, which is 5 times per day at best. Divine strike will just be an extra d8 damage each turn. With that in mind, it does seem a fair bit weaker than the other fighter classes, unless he can find a way to deal lightning damage more often.

[1Forge]

Well given the backstory your reasoning for playing the templar makes some sense, though couldnt his dad just have taught him about other dieties? (also paladins apparantly dont technically need to worship a god in this edition :/)

I'd have just re fluffed paladin but to every man his own I guess. The Templar set up actually looks kinda like a warden to me but i could just be crazy. Interesting homebrew though tell us how the class works.

[GandalfTheWhite]

Well given the backstory your reasoning for playing the templar makes some sense, though couldnt his dad just have taught him about other dieties?

Because she's never met her dad. She's going adventuring to find him. Otherwise I would say that she would probably play a Cleric. I'll use Requiemforlust's template, and just change the damage from radiant to lightning.

[Occasional Sage]

Whatever you and your player decide, please post your collective thoughts every few sessions. on-the-fly balancing seems like a universally-interesting topic!

At what level will this be starting?

[GandalfTheWhite]

Whatever you and your player decide, please post your collective thoughts every few sessions. on-the-fly balancing seems like a universally-interesting topic!

At what level will this be starting?

I'll update the forum every couple of sessions on how this plays :D

And we'll be starting at level 1. :)

[DracoKnight]

I'll update the forum every couple of sessions on how this plays :D

I'll post findings too. My new DMPC will use this for their class.

[Mjolnirbear]

I have the luxury of many viable players to choose from but I would honestly ask that player not to return. He wouldn't fit with my group. That's just a blatant refusal to give your character any thought at all.

A quote (or probably a paraphrase really) from a book in The Dresden Files series:

*upon being invited to a game in session*
"Well okay, but i want thews."
"Huh?"
"I want something big and strong and so i don't have to think too much".
"Do we have a barbarian sheet lying around somewhere?"

/end paraphrase

Some people just want the game part. They want to roll dice, beat **** up, and not have to think because they've been stressing all day and just want to relax their brain. It's a valid form of gaming, as valid as role-playing. Is it less fun to play that way? not for him. Role-play is not inherently superior to roll-play.

It *is* totally valid that he might not be a good fit if the whole party likes the role part of the game. But don't dismiss him outright. Refusal to think about his character, to him, is probably a bonus.

For said theoretical situation anyways :)

[Xetheral]

I like it. It has long term goals, it's a backstory that fits with a pre-level 1 character (there are people in my group that try to pass themselves off as the most badass assassin before level 1).

I find that almost every player at my tables prioritizes playing a badass (in some manner). Accordingly, I haven't started a campaign below level 5 in well over a decade. I find it works better (for me) to cater to the players' tastes than to try to fight their priorities (and illogical backstories).


I also like that they show that they trained to become that level 1 Fighter. I don't like it when players are just like:

Player: "I'm playing a fighter."
Me: "Why are you a fighter?"
Player: "Oh, I'm just a fighter."
Me: "Well, where did you get your training?"
Player: "I didn't, I'm just a fighter."
Me: *sigh* "Yes, but the things a fighter does still requires training."
Player: "Not really."

This is an actual conversation I've had with a player. I like it when a player has a backstory reason to play the class that they're playing. It leads to a deeper character, and I love deep characters that have a life of their own.

Honestly, I always assumed most characters were self-taught. Particularly if you're starting at level 1, formal training seems unlikely to me, although that will depend a lot on the assumptions of the campaign setting.

That being said, I certainly expect players to have a backstory, but I don't much care which class(es) they feel best model that backstory. It needs to make some sense, sure, but beyond that it doesn't bother me if I would have chosen a different build to model that particular character.

[Theodoxus]

Because she's never met her dad. She's going adventuring to find him. Otherwise I would say that she would probably play a Cleric. I'll use Requiemforlust's template, and just change the damage from radiant to lightning.

Huzzah! After reading your fuller explanation of the character background and concept, I was like 'um, the Templar is exactly that...' Angelic power (father) granted to fighter chassis (check) just needs slight modification from radiant to lightning - easy peasy.

I think I'll use the templar for an Angel of Death warrior BBEG - necrotic is so much more fun than radiant ;)

Honestly, Requiemforlust, that's a great template that's easily modified for every domain. Well done!

[HoarsHalberd]

Free flying is what tempest clerics and dragon sorcerers get. I don't see how it can be overpowered.


Check your math again. Average of 2d8 = 9. With Great Weapon Fighting Style, the average is 10.5.


The knockdown maneuvers make a huge difference that you haven't accounted for. Getting advantage on all subsequent attacks, and all your allies' attacks is a big deal.

Firstly: Clerics get it at 17. But yes, Dragon sorcerers get it at 14, so point made. However free flight isn't available to any other fighter archetype and could be optimised very powerfully for an archer build. Just because something isn't overpowered for one class doesn't make it automatically not over powered for all others. If monks traded out their level 11 features for the paladins +1d8 per hit it would be massively overpowered.

Secondly. This class isn't a 2h only class. It's a fighter with many fighting styles available. But assuming GWF is taken it makes the issue even larger. Average of 10.5 vs 18*6.3 means that it only takes 11 rounds of combat to out damage it now. If there are less than 11 rounds of combat a day where you are hitting, then it's a very non-combat focussed campaign.

Knockdown is a huge advantage, as is the ability to get a reaction attack when missed, or move your opponents. But is it right that the templar should do more damage most days, have more mobility in and out of combat and get a free AOE fear/charm as many times a day as they want? Is the effect of manoeuvres, which can be saved against, worth more than elemental damage weapons, free weapon return and immunity to disarms, and free knockbacks by such a degree to make up for the above benefits?


The only problem with that is that the only god that the player has encountered in their backstory is Lolth. It would make no sense for them to make an Oath to her, and they most certainly wouldn't be a Cleric of her. Especially since they don't want to play a Trickery Cleric.

The way they're asking to do it makes sense for the character, and I'm okay with it. It doesn't look too OP.

I don't disagree with the idea of a new character archetype, and agree with the idea of the templar (just needs a bit of toning down in my opinion.) But I would like to point out that 5e paladins aren't bound to any deity. They gain power from their conviction to their Oaths. (Probably from whatever good primeval forces were at work prior to the D&D gods who arose post Aboleth.)

[Daishain]

Honestly, I always assumed most characters were self-taught. Particularly if you're starting at level 1, formal training seems unlikely to me, although that will depend a lot on the assumptions of the campaign setting.

A level 1 fighter isn't some kid fresh in off the street with a rusty sword he barely knows how to hold. This is someone tougher than most, who probably has been in and won dozens of deadly fights already, and could probably beat the crap out of any single grunt rank soldier he encounters. Reset your expectations a bit. There's some room for self taught characters, but the majority of them will have needed formal training of some kind to get to where they are.

[Millface]

A level 1 fighter isn't some kid fresh in off the street with a rusty sword he barely knows how to hold. This is someone tougher than most, who probably has been in and won dozens of deadly fights already, and could probably beat the crap out of any single grunt rank soldier he encounters. Reset your expectations a bit. There's some room for self taught characters, but the majority of them will have needed formal training of some kind to get to where they are.

Yes! This is why 3e had NPC classes. Everyone who picks up a sword does not have d10 HP, save proficiencies, skill proficiencies, weapon proficiencies and a fighting style specialization. Being proficient in a weapon in and of itself implies that you know how to use it well, not just with educated guesswork.

If he is self taught that's pretty incredible and should make the backstory somehow.

Even classes like Warlock, that don't train to make a pact, have interesting histories to explore. How did you come into a pact? Why did you decide to sell your soul for power, what drove you to do this?

As far as Roll-Play I allow this to some extent but you have to work with me. You don't have to think up the most complicated backstory ever or even have a personality interesting enough for me to centralize the plot around you sometimes like I do for my other players... but you're gonna have to at least be imaginative enough to make something up about how you learned to fight.

"My mentor... uh... Oba-Won, who was a friend of my fathers, saw potential in me. He spent the last year training me to face the dangers near my village." Would be fine. Outright refusal and having the DM tell you that fighters need training and your response being "Not really" would grind my gears. I'm the DM for many reasons, one of which is my vast knowledge of the forgotten realms universe. Your players need to trust you for the game to really work. When I say "in this world fighters train to become fighters" the response is "Oh, I didn't realize that, ok!". "not really" implies that I don't know how my own world works, and that isn't going to fly. My players are free to change and effect the world, but if you're arguing with me about how it initially runs on day one that just reeks of "problem player", not "Roll-Player".

[Slipperychicken]

A level 1 fighter isn't some kid fresh in off the street with a rusty sword he barely knows how to hold. This is someone tougher than most, who probably has been in and won dozens of deadly fights already, and could probably beat the crap out of any single grunt rank soldier he encounters. Reset your expectations a bit. There's some room for self taught characters, but the majority of them will have needed formal training of some kind to get to where they are.

I don't know about "dozens of deadly fights", but a level 1 fighter is already quite far above a normal person. Remember that commoners have 4 hit points, AC 10, and no class features.

Really, level 1 fighters are a bit above the "guard" and "bandit" statblocks. That makes them pretty tough in context. It's hard to explain that kind of skill without some kind of instruction or relevant experience.

[Requiemforlust]

Honestly, Requiemforlust, that's a great template that's easily modified for every domain. Well done!

Thank you :D It's something my players do enjoy altering for all of the domains :)

[Requiemforlust]

Firstly: Clerics get it at 17. But yes, Dragon sorcerers get it at 14, so point made. However free flight isn't available to any other fighter archetype and could be optimised very powerfully for an archer build. Just because something isn't overpowered for one class doesn't make it automatically not over powered for all others. If monks traded out their level 11 features for the paladins +1d8 per hit it would be massively overpowered.

Secondly. This class isn't a 2h only class. It's a fighter with many fighting styles available. But assuming GWF is taken it makes the issue even larger. Average of 10.5 vs 18*6.3 means that it only takes 11 rounds of combat to out damage it now. If there are less than 11 rounds of combat a day where you are hitting, then it's a very non-combat focussed campaign.

Knockdown is a huge advantage, as is the ability to get a reaction attack when missed, or move your opponents. But is it right that the templar should do more damage most days, have more mobility in and out of combat and get a free AOE fear/charm as many times a day as they want? Is the effect of manoeuvres, which can be saved against, worth more than elemental damage weapons, free weapon return and immunity to disarms, and free knockbacks by such a degree to make up for the above benefits?



I don't disagree with the idea of a new character archetype, and agree with the idea of the templar (just needs a bit of toning down in my opinion.) But I would like to point out that 5e paladins aren't bound to any deity. They gain power from their conviction to their Oaths. (Probably from whatever good primeval forces were at work prior to the D&D gods who arose post Aboleth.)

I realize that this might look overpowered on paper, but I haven't run into any problems with it, and this was one of the first things I made when 5e came out. So I've been using it for almost a year now.

And their 7th level ability doesn't knock the enemy prone, just pushes them back. And their AOE fear/charm is per long rest. Please read it all the way through if you're going to criticize.

[Hawkstar]

I don't know about "dozens of deadly fights", but a level 1 fighter is already quite far above a normal person. Remember that commoners have 4 hit points, AC 10, and no class features.

Really, level 1 fighters are a bit above the "guard" and "bandit" statblocks. That makes them pretty tough in context. It's hard to explain that kind of skill without some kind of instruction or relevant experience.
It's called 'plot convenience." After all, a single backwater farmboy managed to blast his way through a heavily-fortified battlestation staffed with dozens of well-trained soldiers.

[DracoKnight]

a single backwater farmboy managed to blast his way through a heavily-fortified battlestation staffed with dozens of well-trained soldiers.

Not to be nitpicky, but I think it was more like hundreds. But he did have the help of a pirate, a walking carpet, 2 robots, and an old man who was fairly committable. :D

[Millface]

It's called 'plot convenience." After all, a single backwater farmboy managed to blast his way through a heavily-fortified battlestation staffed with dozens of well-trained soldiers.

In all fairness the author of that adventure can't write for sh!t.

Great universe, horrible writing. Awesome reference though!

Still, after all of that I'd put him at level 2, maybe. At most. He was level 1 by the time they got there due to his limited training before the climactic infiltration of what should have been an entirely un-infiltratable ship.

I agree that Dozens of Deadly fights is probably too many. You can be a level 1 fighter without having ever stepped out of a training ring, but you DID have to train. @10 HP and half a dozen proficiencies you're already far above the average Joe, even at level 1.

[Daishain]

It's called 'plot convenience." After all, a single backwater farmboy managed to blast his way through a heavily-fortified battlestation staffed with dozens of well-trained soldiers.
Aside from what others have said, the farmboy in question had that universe's equivalent of a strong sorcerous bloodline on top of a souped up version of the Halfling luck ability. He didn't need a great deal of training to be a force to reckon with. (as far as grunts were concerned at any rate)

That stated, the soldiers still underperformed. The writing could definitely have used work.



I agree that Dozens of Deadly fights is probably too many. You can be a level 1 fighter without having ever stepped out of a training ring, but you DID have to train. @10 HP and half a dozen proficiencies you're already far above the average Joe, even at level 1.The training needed to be a level one fighter without having participated in open combat would be extremely extensive, it is very difficult to substitute for actual combat experience.

I might have exaggerated on quantity, but I fully expect this kind of veteran to have seen bloody combat on more than one occasion.

[Hawkstar]

Aside from what others have said, the farmboy in question had that universe's equivalent of a strong sorcerous bloodline on top of a souped up version of the Halfling luck ability. He didn't need a great deal of training to be a force to reckon with. (as far as grunts were concerned at any rate)
What he had were the Director's attention and narrative focus, just like any PC in a roleplaying game.

Being selected by the great cheeto'd hand with the dice is enough to become a level 1 anyclass, even fighter.

NPC classes aren't so much "Unskilled everymen" as "Statblocks stripped of complicated **** DMs shouldn't have to deal with"

[Millface]

What he had were the Director's attention and narrative focus, just like any PC in a roleplaying game.

Being selected by the great cheeto'd hand with the dice is enough to become a level 1 anyclass, even fighter.

NPC classes aren't so much "Unskilled everymen" as "Statblocks stripped of complicated **** DMs shouldn't have to deal with"

But the average person is unskilled by comparison. There's nothing at all wrong with asking players where their characters came from. Especially if everyone else at your table has really deep stories and connections with their characters.

The cheeto'd hand with the dice says that he needs more than just to be chosen by the cheeto'd hand with the dice. How meta.

[Theodoxus]

I realize that this might look overpowered on paper, but I haven't run into any problems with it, and this was one of the first things I made when 5e came out. So I've been using it for almost a year now.

And their 7th level ability doesn't knock the enemy prone, just pushes them back. And their AOE fear/charm is per long rest. Please read it all the way through if you're going to criticize.

I did have a question regarding it - as I finally had a chance to review it completely (and while I don't want to derail the thread, I think it should be considered, since Gandalf stated he was going to use it).

Because Templar isn't a subclass of Fighter, but it's own class, have you stated it can't multiclass? Or do you have some way of balancing two Action Surges and Second Winds?

A fighter/templar build could be quite scary depending on how you rule the interaction of duplicated abilities.

In my games, it wouldn't matter much, as I'd rule Templar to be a subclass of Fighter - but I was wondering if you'd encountered this specific issue yet.

[Millface]

I did have a question regarding it - as I finally had a chance to review it completely (and while I don't want to derail the thread, I think it should be considered, since Gandalf stated he was going to use it).

Because Templar isn't a subclass of Fighter, but it's own class, have you stated it can't multiclass? Or do you have some way of balancing two Action Surges and Second Winds?

A fighter/templar build could be quite scary depending on how you rule the interaction of duplicated abilities.

In my games, it wouldn't matter much, as I'd rule Templar to be a subclass of Fighter - but I was wondering if you'd encountered this specific issue yet.

Another vote for making templar a subclass of fighter. My first rule for homebrewed classes is that they MUST be a subclass of an existing PHB class. It gives you a template you know is balanced for 70% of it and then you can homebrew the subclass abilities to taste, balancing them up against the base class's other subclass abilities.

[Seruvius]

The simplest solution may be to suggest the player uses a refluffed paladin. Use the divine smites as harnessing storms power. Maybe allow for a few changes in the spell list, or change in the damage type of the smite.

[Millface]

The simplest solution may be to suggest the player uses a refluffed paladin. Use the divine smites as harnessing storms power. Maybe allow for a few changes in the spell list, or change in the damage type of the smite.

This has been discussed. The paladin oaths don't make sense for the character. Granted you could call them something else, but that's a lot of refluff. He's gone with a homebrew class posted here earlier, I believe.

[GandalfTheWhite]

I did have a question regarding it - as I finally had a chance to review it completely (and while I don't want to derail the thread, I think it should be considered, since Gandalf stated he was going to use it).

Because Templar isn't a subclass of Fighter, but it's own class, have you stated it can't multiclass? Or do you have some way of balancing two Action Surges and Second Winds?

A fighter/templar build could be quite scary depending on how you rule the interaction of duplicated abilities.

In my games, it wouldn't matter much, as I'd rule Templar to be a subclass of Fighter - but I was wondering if you'd encountered this specific issue yet.

I have discussed this with Requiemforlust, and she said that it was intended to be a subclass of Fighter, she just got bored and typed it all out for the Templar. Submortimer converted it into the Storm Knight, and this is what I will be using for my player.

The particular player is not looking to multiclass, as a) they're not a fan of the MC system, and b) they don't feel it would make sense for their character to be anything other than the Storm Knight.

[ImperiousLeader]

So, I don't think I've seen any threads about this (or if there are, I haven't read them), but one of my players is getting ready to build a fighter. Instead of one of the existing Martial Archetypes, they're wanting to port over the features of the Tempest Cleric. Would anyone here let them do it? I honestly don't know what I'm gonna do. Do I let them do it?

I would. If we map the features to the same level as Fighter subclass features, they're all delayed. To be honest, I might offer a little bit more. Sure, Flight at will without concentration is awesome ... but at level 18, that's a long wait for it.

I might add a limited ability to cast the Tempest domain spells, when the weather or conditions favour it. IOW, in a rainstorm, the Fighter could cast Call Lightning. Maybe he might have to take thunder damage to be able to bottle it up and cast shatter or thunderwave. This, to me, adds to the flavour that he's harnessing the power of the storm, not summoning it up.

[Yagyujubei]

I have asked them to either put more thought into their character, or not return.

good for you man. don't put up with slackers who won't put any effort in.

[mephnick]

The paladin oaths don't make sense for the character. .

Oh, do people use these?

[Xetheral]

Honestly, I always assumed most characters were self-taught. Particularly if you're starting at level 1, formal training seems unlikely to me, although that will depend a lot on the assumptions of the campaign setting.

A level 1 fighter isn't some kid fresh in off the street with a rusty sword he barely knows how to hold. This is someone tougher than most, who probably has been in and won dozens of deadly fights already, and could probably beat the crap out of any single grunt rank soldier he encounters. Reset your expectations a bit. There's some room for self taught characters, but the majority of them will have needed formal training of some kind to get to where they are.

This will be highly campaign-setting dependent, but under the default rules wouldn't anyone who'd been through dozens of deadly fights have earned enough experience to gain multiple levels? Or, if you're using monster rules, be modeled as a high-hit-dice veteran soldier? Surviving dozens of deadly fights is an epic achievement in its own right, and would put one amongst a very small handful of elite veterans in most campaign settings I'm familiar worth.

As for beating up a soldier, I took a look at the numbers and was surprised to see that (controlling for stats and equipment) a 1st Level Fighter has roughly 8-to-1 odds vs the "guard" from the monster manual in a straight-up slugging match. While those are much better odds than I expected, a 1st Level Fighter still can't blithely engage a random soldier in a death match with any confidence of living through it. (If you want more details of the analysis, let me know.)


Yes! This is why 3e had NPC classes. Everyone who picks up a sword does not have d10 HP, save proficiencies, skill proficiencies, weapon proficiencies and a fighting style specialization. Being proficient in a weapon in and of itself implies that you know how to use it well, not just with educated guesswork.

If he is self taught that's pretty incredible and should make the backstory somehow.

I don't know... a common soldier with intrinsic talent could easily be a 1st level fighter, and common soldiers of the era (again, depending on campaign setting) usually got no training at all. Short of being squire to a knight or a professional guardsman, it's hard to imagine who in a medieval society would have access to training. Formal instruction seems to me to be the exception, rather than the rule.

The bar bouncer/street fighter/man-at-arms/tribal champion/village bully/pit fighter/gang enforcer backgrounds all would make formal training unlikely. Although I suppose with the longer-lived/more-disciplined races it's reasonable that perhaps even a majority of 1st level fighters could have received instruction from their parents.

[Daishain]

This will be highly campaign-setting dependent, but under the default rules wouldn't anyone who'd been through dozens of deadly fights have earned enough experience to gain multiple levels? Or, if you're using monster rules, be modeled as a high-hit-dice veteran soldier? Surviving dozens of deadly fights is an epic achievement in its own right, and would put one amongst a very small handful of elite veterans in most campaign settings I'm familiar worth.

As for beating up a soldier, I took a look at the numbers and was surprised to see that (controlling for stats and equipment) a 1st Level Fighter has roughly 8-to-1 odds vs the "guard" from the monster manual in a straight-up slugging match. While those are much better odds than I expected, a 1st Level Fighter still can't blithely engage a random soldier in a death match with any confidence of living through it. (If you want more details of the analysis, let me know.)

I was not using the term deadly as in the game's difficulty rating for fights, but rather to indicate that the combat was no practice bout. In fact none of my description was made in gamist terms. Try to avoid using outlandish concepts like XP as an excuse to ignore fluff. Its just a very crude means to for us to measure something that isn't measurable.

Nor was I advising that the fighter should go around picking such fights, I was just comparing relative skill level, which you confirmed, thanks for that.


I don't know... a common soldier with intrinsic talent could easily be a 1st level fighter, and common soldiers of the era (again, depending on campaign setting) usually got no training at all. Short of being squire to a knight or a professional guardsman, it's hard to imagine who in a medieval society would have access to training. Formal instruction seems to me to be the exception, rather than the rule.

The bar bouncer/street fighter/man-at-arms/tribal champion/village bully/pit fighter/gang enforcer backgrounds all would make formal training unlikely. Although I suppose with the longer-lived/more-disciplined races it's reasonable that perhaps even a majority of 1st level fighters could have received instruction from their parentsThere used to be a stat block for untrained common soldiers. Here's a hint, the Guard entry in the MM could tie them in pretzel knots.

[Xetheral]

I was not using the term deadly as in the game's difficulty rating for fights, but rather to indicate that the combat was no practice bout. In fact none of my description was made in gamist terms. Try to avoid using outlandish concepts like XP as an excuse to ignore fluff. Its just a very crude means to for us to measure something that isn't measurable.

I wasn't using the game term deadly either. In my opinion, anyone who has survived dozens of fights in which someone died is a mighty hero, and certainly not a 1st level character.

XP isn't necessarily just an out-of-game measurement. The concept also reflects the notion that in a D&D world the harder the circumstances one faces the more skill and power one accumulates, and at a much more favorable ratio than is possible in the real world. That's why frontier farmers who have to fight off wild animals might have double or triple the hit points of a city dweller. Similarly, a veteran of dozens of battles (on top of being extremely rare) is, practically by definition (both real-world and in-game), extremely experienced.


Nor was I advising that the fighter should go around picking such fights, I was just comparing relative skill level, which you confirmed, thanks for that.

Certainly. :) I'm happy to share my results when they don't match what I expected.


There used to be a stat block for untrained common soldiers. Here's a hint, the Guard entry in the MM could tie them in pretzel knots.

That stat block would model the average common soldier. That doesn't mean all common soldiers are modeled like that. An exceptionally talented levy with an instinctive understanding of weapons and fighting could very plausibly be a 1st level Fighter.

[GandalfTheWhite]

I just wanted to update the forum.

We started out at level 1, and we're currently level 12. The player is having an absolute blast, and she isn't overshadowing the other players. Across all of our gameplay so far, this port of the Cleric features to the Fighter has played rather well. It's on par with everyone else, and the numbers don't swing to far in either direction.

The character met her father at level 10, and that led to some interesting RP, and he blessed her (which was the in-world reason for her being able to pile lightning/thunder damage onto her weapon attacks). All-in-all, the Templar has been fun. Thank you Requiemforlust, my player's really enjoying it.

Submortimer, since you made the Storm Knight, one of my player's characters died, and they started playing that. Your version is incredibly well-balanced too. Thank you for your efforts to help me help my player capture their concept.

[Douche]

So, at level 8 he gets another 1d8 (from divine strike) to his 2 attacks. Now lets say he dual wields, that an extra 4d8 on top of his weapon damage. Then he action surges, so thats 8d8 in one turn, with another 8d8 if he's using long swords.

Sounds really cool and fun, but considering a superiority die only adds 1d8, and they're limited, I can see how it could throw off the balance. I do like the idea of a storm warrior though, reminds me of the Mountain King from Warcraft 3

[DracoKnight]

So, at level 8 he gets another 1d8 (from divine strike) to his 2 attacks. Now lets say he dual wields, that an extra 4d8 on top of his weapon damage. Then he action surges, so thats 8d8 in one turn, with another 8d8 if he's using long swords.

Sounds really cool and fun, but considering a superiority die only adds 1d8, and they're limited, I can see how it could throw off the balance. I do like the idea of a storm warrior though, reminds me of the Mountain King from Warcraft 3

I'm pretty sure the extra damage is only once a round.

[Douche]

I'm pretty sure the extra damage is only once a round.

Oh snap, just reread it... Guess I didn't see the "once on each of your turns", haha

[PoeticDwarf]

I don't understand why he couldn't simply multiclass or be a cleric oriented to the melee fighting. :smallconfused::smallconfused:
It is not difficult to characterize I think. Someone who wield the power of the storm can't be simply a "warrior" cause he obviously wield magic/supernatural powers.

I don't see why not

[djreynolds]

Basic rule #1: work with your players.
Basic rule #2: no one character can be too awesome compared to the other characters.

I suggest taking Eldritch Knight and giving them a different spell selection that matches a Tempest Cleric. If that's not tempest-ish enough, trade out some fighter ASI / extra attacks for some Channel Divinity uses and features.

I'm AFB but there's a workable chassis for a spell-wielding fighter and you ought to be able to get there.

Right. This is better. Shocking grasp is a cantrips and so is booming blade. Thunder clap cantrip, thunder wave is first level. I would rather you give him leeway with spell choices. Allow him to choose any spell he can cast as long as it is lightning or thunder based and he has the level to. Druid and tempest cleric has lots of cool spells he could grab. Give him thundering smite.

[WMO?]

... great deal of training to be a force to reckon with.

I saw this punniness go uncommented on and had to rectify the situation. Sorry to bump!

[Celcey]

Personally, I would let the player do it, but I might consider just homebrewing something instead. Porting features from a different class can work, but spellcaster to non caster can be a bit more tricky, because their abilities were meant to work with a spellcaster's spell progression. But you can always tweak it to make it more or less powerful as needed.


The Aararocka is not RAW, and in fact is banned from Adventurer's League. It's in Unearthed Arcana, which is explicitly sandbox for WotC.

I don't know about it being banned from Adventurer's League, or why it would be, but it's not UA. It's from the Elemental Evil supplement, which is fully 100% RAW.

[GandalfTheWhite]

Personally, I would let the player do it, but I might consider just homebrewing something instead. Porting features from a different class can work, but spellcaster to non caster can be a bit more tricky, because their abilities were meant to work with a spellcaster's spell progression. But you can always tweak it to make it more or less powerful as needed.



I don't know about it being banned from Adventurer's League, or why it would be, but it's not UA. It's from the Elemental Evil supplement, which is fully 100% RAW.

I did opt to let them do it, and they've been having the time of their lives. And actually, none of the Cleric's features have to do with spellcasting :smallbiggrin:

[Daishain]

I don't know about it being banned from Adventurer's League, or why it would be
AL has a habit of banning anything that isn't easy to control. Level one flight offers enough mobility options that it could upset some of the challenges presented by preset games where DMs have zilch wiggle room.

Frankly, I see no reason to care about what Adventurer's League does in cases like this. Their priorities are too far removed from the more traditional campaigns I run and play. Worry about their weird rulings if you're going to be playing with them, don't if you aren't.


I saw this punniness go uncommented on and had to rectify the situation. Sorry to bump!
I must have been off that day as I didn't see it either.

[Sigreid]

It sounds to me like they've got a cool character concept. I think what I'd recommend is to tell the player yes, on the condition that if it works out to be too unbalanced he will need to change to a standard subclass. I'd want to give it a go, but have agreement that if it's messing up the game the player is willing to change.