Unearthed Arcana 4/4/16

[DracoKnight]

Hey, so I didn't see any posts on this yet, so here's this month's Unearthed Arcana (http://dnd.wizards.com/sites/default/files/media/upload/articles/UA%20Gothic%20Characters.pdf)! :smallbiggrin:

I'm a pretty big fan of the Inquisitor Rogue :smallsmile:

[orcafromthesky]

Hey, so I didn't see any posts on this yet, so here's this month's Unearthed Arcana (http://dnd.wizards.com/sites/default/files/media/upload/articles/UA%20Gothic%20Characters.pdf)! :smallbiggrin:

I'm a pretty big fan of the Inquisitor Rogue :smallsmile:

I agree, the Inquisitor Rogue looks pretty fun. A rogue that relies on Wisdom. Neat.

The Revenant Subrace is...powerful. I get that Relentless Nature kind of leashes the decisions that you can make, but jeez -- regeneration, free resurrection, plus crazy bonuses to stats. The Human Revenant gets a total of +7 to stats: +2 to 2, and +1 to the rest. Wow.

[Foxhound438]

revenant subraces seems pretty neat. Only problem would be that it kind of trivializes death. Maybe i'd use it if someone died like 3 fights before the final encounter and the party had no means of resurrection.

[eastmabl]

revenant subraces seems pretty neat. Only problem would be that it kind of trivializes death. Maybe i'd use it if someone died like 3 fights before the final encounter and the party had no means of resurrection.

And revivify/raise dead/resurrection don't trivialize death?

[Nicrosil]

Inquisitor Rouge looks really good! I do have a question about Insightful Fighting though.

When it says "This benefit lasts for 1 minute or until you successfully use Insightful Fighting against a different target," does that mean that it "wears off" after a successful strike, like a paladin's smite spell, or is that up to 10 rounds of sneak attack as long as you wail on the same target? If the latter, then Inquisitor rouges might be the best nova damage dealers.

Monster Hunter fighter feels kind of bland though. Protection from good and evil and giving casters disadvantage on concentration saves is pretty neat though. But with each fighter archetype, I'm becoming more and more convinced to try to fold Champion and combat supreriority into the main class...

[RickAllison]

Inquisitor Rouge looks really good! I do have a question about Insightful Fighting though.

When it says "This benefit lasts for 1 minute or until you successfully use Insightful Fighting against a different target," does that mean that it "wears off" after a successful strike, like a paladin's smite spell, or is that up to 10 rounds of sneak attack as long as you wail on the same target? If the latter, then Inquisitor rouges might be the best nova damage dealers.

Monster Hunter fighter feels kind of bland though. Protection from good and evil and giving casters disadvantage on concentration saves is pretty neat though. But with each fighter archetype, I'm becoming more and more convinced to try to fold Champion and combat supreriority into the main class...

I think it's meant to be something like Hex, where you can set it up but you can't have more than one target at a time. Otherwise, one could mark several enemies for when the first dies.

[Fishybugs]

I agree, the Inquisitor Rogue looks pretty fun. A rogue that relies on Wisdom. Neat.

The Revenant Subrace is...powerful. I get that Relentless Nature kind of leashes the decisions that you can make, but jeez -- regeneration, free resurrection, plus crazy bonuses to stats. The Human Revenant gets a total of +7 to stats: +2 to 2, and +1 to the rest. Wow.

The way I read it was that you use the +1 to two instead of the +1 to all. That's why they said for variant human you lose the feat and skill, so they are the same. The way it is worded is that you "modify the Human's Ability Score Increase".

[thepsyker]

The Human Revenant gets a total of +7 to stats: +2 to 2, and +1 to the rest. Wow.

No it doesn't, re-read the description of Human Revenant. You "modify the human’s Ability Score Increase trait to the following," which is a complicated way of saying you replace the existing Human Ability Score Increase with a +1 to two Abilities of your choice, which adding the Revenant's Ability Score Increase means +1 Con and +1 to two Abilities of your choice. With the variant human you also drop the free skill and feat.

Edit: For my own question, I am AWFB right now, but am I reading/remembering it right that Reliable Talent(I think that is the name) would supplant Ear for Deceptive when it is gained at 11th level? Not necessarily a bad thing the other 3rd level abilities are nice and getting a weaker/more specific version of RT for your first 10 levels is still pretty good, but just wondering. Also how would it pair with the Observant feat?

[GraakosGraakos]

The Monster Hunter fighter would be more flavorful if it had some kind of Advantage mechanic. I think the the Inquisitor and the Monster Hunter should be combined in some way into one subclass, either Rogue or Fighter. Both are fine balance wise, I think. Holy smokes the Revenant is powerful.

[Nicrosil]

I think it's meant to be something like Hex, where you can set it up but you can't have more than one target at a time. Otherwise, one could mark several enemies for when the first dies.

Ah, ok, that makes sense. Now, time for some number crunching.

A third level Inquisitor rouge with 18 Dex and a rapier, striking an opponent marked with Insightful Fighting, will deal (4.5 (rapier average damage) + 4 (Dex modifier) + 7 (2d6 sneak attack average damage))*10 (duration of Insightful Fighting) = 155 damage over ten rounds. Now, that's assuming that every attack hits, mind you.

A third level fighter with 18 Str and a great sword, using Action Surge in her first turn will deal (7 (greats word average damage) + 4 (Str bonus)) * 11 (Action Surge on the first turn and fighting for 10 rounds) = 121 damage over 10 rounds*.

That's less damage on average, but this is all theoretical. In my experience, with multiple party members all flinging spells or swinging swords, combat doesn't last long enough for a ~20 damage difference to be noticed.

*I'm not factoring in GWF or GWM, which an optimized fighter is likely to have, because I'm bad at math :P

[Oramac]

When it says "This benefit lasts for 1 minute or until you successfully use Insightful Fighting against a different target," does that mean that it "wears off" after a successful strike, like a paladin's smite spell, or is that up to 10 rounds of sneak attack as long as you wail on the same target? If the latter, then Inquisitor rouges might be the best nova damage dealers.

The way I read it, you get the bonus against that target for 1 minute, regardless of anything else happening. So you get the benefit for basically a whole combat, but only against that target.

It kinda feels like a damage version of Vow of Enmity actually.

[KorvinStarmast]

http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?483645-April-Unearthed-Arcana-Gothic-Heroes

There was one a bit ago, but it's a topic of much interest.

[orcafromthesky]

The way I read it was that you use the +1 to two instead of the +1 to all. That's why they said for variant human you lose the feat and skill, so they are the same. The way it is worded is that you "modify the Human's Ability Score Increase".

Oh I see! So they actually have less of an ability score increase than their non-undead versions. Huh.

My question, then, would be this: if a variant human character dies, and then comes back as a revenant, do they lose their first-level feat and skill proficiency?

[Fishybugs]

Oh I see! So they actually have less of an ability score increase than their non-undead versions. Huh.

My question, then, would be this: if a variant human character dies, and then comes back as a revenant, do they lose their first-level feat and skill proficiency?

Yes. (That's the second sentence of my post you quoted.)

[EvilAnagram]

First reaction:
Oh crap. Now I have add a new race to my guides.

Second reaction:
Woohoo! It's just a race template! No changes!

Third reaction:
Oh crap. Now I have to add another archetype to a guide.

The new options are pretty cool, though.

[Linker2k]

At first i thougt that the Monster Hunter was a little OP combat related and it's also getting a kind of "Jack of All Trades" little cousing thing for example a human variant has 5 skills and it will have now 7. But it removes things from the manuevers of the BM so i think in the end it's like a Champion & BM love bastard child.

The new rogue archetype it's like a Sherlock Holmes type so it's kinda cool.

What i really liked it's the Revenant. And how it can be used to revive characters that are killed during the adventures. From what i have the following question.

Tell me how would you use this Revenant to bring your characters back (DM justification, narrative, etc)?

I'm already thinking of ideas but it would be nice to hear from other DMs

[GlenSmash!]

Revenant looks very powerful. It could be fun in Curse of Strahd, which I'm about to start DMing.

Monster hunter looks ok. It looks very simalr to the Cavalier and scout from a previous UA, so i'm not too excited about.

Inquisitive Rogue just became my new favorite rogue.

[Alerad]

The Revenant seems kind of strong when applied to a race which already has sub-races:

Dwarf: +3 Constitution, +1 to two ability scores (possibly +4 Constitution)
Elf, Halfling: +2 Dexterity, +1 Constitution, +1 to two ability scores (possibly +3 Dexterity)
Gnome: +2 Intelligence, +1 Constitution, +1 to two ability scores (possibly +3 Intelligence)
Half-Elf: +2 Charisma, +1 Constitution, +1 to two ability scores, +1 to two ability scores (possibly +2 Cha +2 to two other, or +4 Charisma +1 to to other AND +1 Constitution)

It clearly says it replaces the sub-race and only provides explicit description for races without a sub-race.

Am I missing something?

[smcmike]

The Revenant seems kind of strong when applied to a race which already has sub-races:

Dwarf: +3 Constitution, +1 to two ability scores (possibly +4 Constitution)
Elf, Halfling: +2 Dexterity, +1 Constitution, +1 to two ability scores (possibly +3 Dexterity)
Gnome: +2 Intelligence, +1 Constitution, +1 to two ability scores (possibly +3 Intelligence)
Half-Elf: +2 Charisma, +1 Constitution, +1 to two ability scores, +1 to two ability scores (possibly +2 Cha +2 to two other, or +4 Charisma +1 to to other AND +1 Constitution)

It clearly says it replaces the sub-race and only provides explicit description for races without a sub-race.

Am I missing something?

Yes. For races with subraces, you just remove the subraces features and apply the revenent. - so +1 con. I don't know where you are getting +1 to two ability scores - that was just for humans.

[Tanarii]

Doesn't Reliable Talent invalidate the Inquisitive's Ear for Deceit at level 10?

[RickAllison]

Doesn't Reliable Talent invalidate the Inquisitive's Ear for Deceit at level 10?

Yes. Kind of cements the idea of this archetype as better for dipping...

[GWJ_DanyBoy]

Doesn't Reliable Talent invalidate the Inquisitive's Ear for Deceit at level 10?

Nearly. There is one edge case, as EfD applies even if you aren't proficient in the skill, whereas RT requires proficiency.

Also, minor correction: Reliable Talent is at level 11.

[JackPhoenix]

What i really liked it's the Revenant. And how it can be used to revive characters that are killed during the adventures. From what i have the following question.

Tell me how would you use this Revenant to bring your characters back (DM justification, narrative, etc)?

I'm already thinking of ideas but it would be nice to hear from other DMs

I can see two approaches: either the character turns into revenant with sheer force of will to finish some important quest/get revenge on their killer, or some greater power revives them for their own purposes. The second option has potentionally longer "lifespan", because the entity may keep giving you new orders, in the first, you'll die when you finish your business...any unlike Eugene Greenhilt, you can't change your mind and just continue living, you'll have to do your best to do it.


The Revenant seems kind of strong when applied to a race which already has sub-races:

Dwarf: +3 Constitution, +1 to two ability scores (possibly +4 Constitution)
Elf, Halfling: +2 Dexterity, +1 Constitution, +1 to two ability scores (possibly +3 Dexterity)
Gnome: +2 Intelligence, +1 Constitution, +1 to two ability scores (possibly +3 Intelligence)
Half-Elf: +2 Charisma, +1 Constitution, +1 to two ability scores, +1 to two ability scores (possibly +2 Cha +2 to two other, or +4 Charisma +1 to to other AND +1 Constitution)

It clearly says it replaces the sub-race and only provides explicit description for races without a sub-race.

Am I missing something?

Yes. The revenant is only available for human, dragonborn and tiefling.

[pwykersotz]

Yes. The revenant is only available for human, dragonborn and tiefling.

This isn't true. The UA says:

The revenant subrace can be applied to any race that has a subrace, and replaces that race's existing subrace options. Alternatively, you can apply this new subrace to a race without subrace options using the modification options provided below.

[Fishybugs]

Yes. The revenant is only available for human, dragonborn and tiefling.

No, it's available for any race which has a sub-class. Additionally, it is available for the human, dragonborn, and tiefling.

EDIT: Ninja'd

[DracoKnight]

Yes. The revenant is only available for human, dragonborn and tiefling.

No, it can replace the subrace option for any race. They were just showing how to graft it onto those three races.

[Tanarii]

Yes. Kind of cements the idea of this archetype as better for dipping...good point. I invariably think in terms of single class, not multiclass.


Nearly. There is one edge case, as EfD applies even if you aren't proficient in the skill, whereas RT requires proficiency.

Also, minor correction: Reliable Talent is at level 11.Good call, and good catch. Thanks on both.

[smcmike]

It's a shame they didn't include more revenent races. Revenent Warforged seems fun - like the iron giant, reassembling from bits and pieces, programmed to complete some ancient task.

[MadBear]

The Monster Hunter seems weirdly named to me. It's abilities to give disadvantage to enemies, make Wis/Int/Char saves, and to detect liars seems more like a "Witch Hunter" to me then a monster hunter.

In fact this fighter doesn' t get much in the way of hunting monsters other then the max superiority die damage.

[burninatortrog]

The "monster" in "monster hunter" refers to gothic horror monstors like vampires and werewolves.

[Professor Gnoll]

Is there a reason the Monster Hunter wasn't a Ranger subclass? I mean, come on. You've got a whole class themed around the targeting of specific types of creatures, and you just graft it onto the standard warrior...?

[JoeJ]

Is there a reason the Monster Hunter wasn't a Ranger subclass? I mean, come on. You've got a whole class themed around the targeting of specific types of creatures, and you just graft it onto the standard warrior...?

Maybe because gothic horror works better if the party has no spell casters? If you are going to allow casters, though, I agree this fits better as a ranger subclass.

[Professor Gnoll]

Maybe because gothic horror works better if the party has no spell casters? If you are going to allow casters, though, I agree this fits better as a ranger subclass.They also could have just made it a spell-less Ranger option.

[HoarsHalberd]

The Revenant seems kind of strong when applied to a race which already has sub-races:

Dwarf: +3 Constitution, +1 to two ability scores (possibly +4 Constitution)
Elf, Halfling: +2 Dexterity, +1 Constitution, +1 to two ability scores (possibly +3 Dexterity)
Gnome: +2 Intelligence, +1 Constitution, +1 to two ability scores (possibly +3 Intelligence)
Half-Elf: +2 Charisma, +1 Constitution, +1 to two ability scores, +1 to two ability scores (possibly +2 Cha +2 to two other, or +4 Charisma +1 to to other AND +1 Constitution)

It clearly says it replaces the sub-race and only provides explicit description for races without a sub-race.

Am I missing something?

Yes, you are missing something. +1 Con is all the subrace gives in the way of ability improvements. The other modifications are solely for specific races.

[Oramac]

The Monster Hunter seems weirdly named to me. It's abilities to give disadvantage to enemies, make Wis/Int/Char saves, and to detect liars seems more like a "Witch Hunter" to me then a monster hunter.

Probably because Critical Roll already made a Witch Hunter class and put it on the DMsG site. It's not "official" but it's pretty close since it was used in the whole D&Diesel game with Vin Diesel and all that.

Personally, as much as I love the Battlemaster concept, I'm getting a little tired of seeing Superiority Dice show up. I agree the Monster Hunter should have been a spell-less Ranger.

[DireSickFish]

All the hate for the ranger class (deserved or not) it a big reason not to make it a ranger subclass. Stopping development for the Ranger until they can figure out something people like and is distinct for a base is a good idea.

[R.Shackleford]

All the hate for the ranger class (deserved or not) it a big reason not to make it a ranger subclass. Stopping development for the Ranger until they can figure out something people like and is distinct for a base is a good idea.

CoughRanger=FighterSubclassCough


:p

[Fishybugs]

All the hate for the ranger class (deserved or not) it a big reason not to make it a ranger subclass. Stopping development for the Ranger until they can figure out something people like and is distinct for a base is a good idea.

Actually, all the hate for the ranger class is the best reason to release material for it.

[JoeJ]

Actually, all the hate for the ranger class is the best reason to release material for it.

Yeah, except that if they're planning to revamp it entirely, trying to be compatible with stuff being released now would lock them into directions they might not want to go.

[Alejandro]

The Inquisitive has a strong Sherlock flavor, in terms of mentally calculating and planning out actions for optimum punishment. :)

[2D8HP]

CoughRanger=FighterSubclassCough


:p
This x infinity!
Replace the "Eldrich Knight" with the Ranger.
The "Battlemaster" with the Paladin.
And get rid of these damn 10 siders and bring back 20 siders that go from 0-9 twice!

[R.Shackleford]

This x infinity!
Replace the "Eldrich Knight" with the Ranger.
The "Battlemaster" with the Paladin.
And get rid of these damn 10 siders and bring back 20 siders that go from 0-9 twice!

If you fix the champion then this could, mostly, work.

Ranger (Divine Fighter), Eldritch Knight (Arcane Fighter), Champion (Martial Fighter). Use Paladin casting rules/ Spells per day for the Ranger or Eldritch Knight.

Recreate the champion with one feature being Bonus Action = maneuver (perhaps related to fighting style).

I saw a homebrew where the champion could stay with the crit boost or could just decide to crit on a hit. Something like that would be awesome.

You could keep the 1-20 but things like indomitable would need fixed (con to all saves much like the Paladin would work or allow the reroll to be a con save).

[EvilAnagram]

Gitp is always good for many and varied ways to fix things that don't need fixing.

[R.Shackleford]

Gitp is always good for many and varied ways to fix things that don't need fixing.

And fixing things that need fixing, even when others are wearing rose colored glasses.

[EvilAnagram]

And fixing things that need fixing, even when others are wearing rose colored glasses.

The fact that you don't like something doesn't mean it needs fixing.

[NewDM]

At first i thougt that the Monster Hunter was a little OP combat related and it's also getting a kind of "Jack of All Trades" little cousing thing for example a human variant has 5 skills and it will have now 7. But it removes things from the manuevers of the BM so i think in the end it's like a Champion & BM love bastard child.

The new rogue archetype it's like a Sherlock Holmes type so it's kinda cool.

What i really liked it's the Revenant. And how it can be used to revive characters that are killed during the adventures. From what i have the following question.

Tell me how would you use this Revenant to bring your characters back (DM justification, narrative, etc)?

I'm already thinking of ideas but it would be nice to hear from other DMs

I personally would implement a kind of system where there are special 'bonfires' that characters can rest at and 'attune' their souls to. Once that happens they come back from dying at these locations.

I'd also implement a system where they lose all XP gained since last level. They have one chance to get it back and thats by finding where they died and focusing on it as an action. If they die again they lose any xp that they did not earn since their last death and a new spot would need to be focused on to get back any remaining xp.

Of course since death isn't really a penalty anymore I'd change the world up to where money is worthless and you pay for everything with xp.

Then to give an in game name to xp, we'd just call it souls or embers or something. The cool thing is I'd add a magic item that when used gives them a semblance of life until the next time they die.

Yep, totally original.


CoughRanger=FighterSubclassCough


:p

Yeah, its sad when you can make a better ranger by going half and half fighter/druid or fighter/druid/paladin or just going fighter with a woodsman background.

[R.Shackleford]

The fact that you don't like something doesn't mean it needs fixing.

The fact that you like something doesn't mean it doesn't.

When I first started playing 3.5 I really liked the Monk and didn't want to admit that it was poorly designed. However I took a step back and looked at the system and how other classes were made and then, putting my attachment aside, I realized that yes it really did need to be fixed.

The Fighter isn't as bad as the 3.5 monk, as it can do one thing quite well. But in a game where doing one thing quite well is causing you to be lacking... You need to be fixed. Also when you have class features like Indomitable that look good at first but end up be terrible in practice... You need to fix that.

[EvilAnagram]

Fighters can all deal damage extremely well. That's true.

But that's not all they can do. The Battle Master can exercise battlefield control, the Purple Dragon Knight can heal and act as the party face, the Champion has skill support, and they all have extra feats that can allow them to specialize in a number of things.

If someone feels like the Fighter can only do one thing, then they haven't actually looked at the options available to them.

[JoeJ]

Fighters can all deal damage extremely well. That's true.

But that's not all they can do. The Battle Master can exercise battlefield control, the Purple Dragon Knight can heal and act as the party face, the Champion has skill support, and they all have extra feats that can allow them to specialize in a number of things.

If a someone feels like the Fighter can only do one thing, then they haven't actually looked at the options available to them.

Absolutely. Of all the classes, fighters have the most ability to grab things that are not specifically class features. Three of the four archetypes are about as SAD as anything in D&D gets, yet they have the most ASIs to either grab feats or boost ability scores that are not directly related to stabbing things.

[MBControl]

There is a player in my play group that has been playing a revenant for a few months now. It was something we pieced together based on some homebrew builds online. Our final template was almost exactly the same.

We added two other features, more for flavour than anything. First he has an unknown time limit. Meaning I rolled a random amount of time that he had to avenge the wrongs done against him. He was given a vague window of time, but he is pretty unclear when he could blink out of existence forever. The second ability he has, is the ability to phase through solid objects, though this is a very difficult task, that generally requires the help of inspiration or Aid. He also has limited attempts at this action per day. This led to a funny situation where he phased inside a locked vault, but then couldn't get out for days.

[pwykersotz]

There is a player in my play group that has been playing a revenant for a few months now. It was something we pieced together based on some homebrew builds online. Our final template was almost exactly the same.

We added two other features, more for flavour than anything. First he has an unknown time limit. Meaning I rolled a random amount of time that he had to avenge the wrongs done against him. He was given a vague window of time, but he is pretty unclear when he could blink out of existence forever. The second ability he has, is the ability to phase through solid objects, though this is a very difficult task, that generally requires the help of inspiration or Aid. He also has limited attempts at this action per day. This led to a funny situation where he phased inside a locked vault, but then couldn't get out for days.

It took me a moment to realize someone got back on topic!

The unknown time limit idea is really cool. I'd be tempted to implement it as well. :smallsmile:

[Mith]

My idea for a Revanant is that they are sent back by Hextor (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?451475-My-pantheon-s-take-on-Hextor) to complete a task. So if I have the players in the end game, and they die, then the player can choose to become a Revenant if this conflict is on the scale of divine interest.

[R.Shackleford]

Fighters can all deal damage extremely well. That's true.

But that's not all they can do. The Battle Master can exercise battlefield control, the Purple Dragon Knight can heal and act as the party face, the Champion has skill support, and they all have extra feats that can allow them to specialize in a number of things.

If someone feels like the Fighter can only do one thing, then they haven't actually looked at the options available to them.

The purple dragon knight has a lot of potential but falls flat. Much like how this UA article does.

The Fighter isn't even the best at using maneuvers. Barbarians, Rogues, and Bards do as good or blow the Fighter out of the water. Advantage and Expertise laughs in the face of the fighter.

The Fighter can do one thing well, everything else it falls short compared to everyone else. Not in a "kinda keep up way" but in the difference between a major league pitcher versus a pony league pitcher.


Absolutely. Of all the classes, fighters have the most ability to grab things that are not specifically class features. Three of the four archetypes are about as SAD as anything in D&D gets, yet they have the most ASIs to either grab feats or boost ability scores that are not directly related to stabbing things.

Wrong. Barbarians, Rogue, and Bards are better at grabbing things. All can have high AC or other defenses.

The best grabber is an armored strength based rogue. Variant human does it straight from 1st level. Now that we have rogues that can sneak attack when they get an enemy alone... The thing won't live long.

I too want the Fighter to be awesome, however I'm not going to pretend that the class keeps up. Barbarian and Rogue are bad too, well after level 6-8, but even they make the Fighter look pathetic.

Also, waiting till level 12 or 20 to be awesome is also a horrid class design. Most games don't get past about level 8.

But I'm done with this topic on this thread. You all can wear your rose colored glasses if you like but I'm not drinking to cool aid just because the Fighter can out damage other classes (which in itself is a useless metric).

[2D8HP]

Absolutely. Of all the classes, fighters have the most ability to grab things that are not specifically class features. Three of the four archetypes are about as SAD as anything in D&D gets, yet they have the most ASIs to either grab feats or boost ability scores that are not directly related to stabbing things.


The Fighter can do one thing well, everything else it falls short. You all can wear your rose colored glasses if you like but I'm not drinking to cool aid just because the Fighter can out damage other classes (which in itself is a useless metric).

Strange as it may sound, I actually quite like how simple/limited the "Champion" is. After too many years of buying RPG rules I find that now whIle I can still remember most of Holmes basic, some of 1e AD&D, and some of 1e COC, most other rules/system's I forget soon after I close the books. The "Champion" allows me to still play an effective class in the current edition, without having to keep re-reading the rules at the table (if you live long enough expect it to happen to you as well. Memories from decades ago remain clear, but last week? Not so much).

[JoeJ]

Wrong. Barbarians, Rogue, and Bards are better at grabbing things. All can have high AC or other defenses.

The best grabber is an armored strength based rogue. Variant human does it straight from 1st level. Now that we have rogues that can sneak attack when they get an enemy alone... The thing won't live long.

Grabbing things that are not class abilities. As in, spells through Magic Initiate and/or Ritual Caster, or extra skills and languages. Proficiencies that aren't tied to their most important ability score. A fighter has to spend fewer resources to become an expert in Arcana than a wizard does to become a top athlete. That's the kind of grabbing I was talking about.

[NewDM]

Grabbing things that are not class abilities. As in, spells through Magic Initiate and/or Ritual Caster, or extra skills and languages. Proficiencies that aren't tied to their most important ability score. A fighter has to spend fewer resources to become an expert in Arcana than a wizard does to become a top athlete. That's the kind of grabbing I was talking about.

Actually they pay the same, its just that the fighter has one more ASI/Feat to do it with. The main problems is there are only 2 really useful feats for a fighter to grab. After that they are trying to max their strength and after 2 more ASIs/Feats they've done that. The remaining ASIs/Feats are either used to shore up weak saves or to grab near useless things like a 1st level spell you can cast once per day and a cantrip that deals less damage and has less chance to hit than your weapon attacks.

Fighter is officially a dip class to get weapon and armor proficiencies, action surge, and second wind.

[JoeJ]

Actually they pay the same, its just that the fighter has one more ASI/Feat to do it with. The main problems is there are only 2 really useful feats for a fighter to grab. After that they are trying to max their strength and after 2 more ASIs/Feats they've done that. The remaining ASIs/Feats are either used to shore up weak saves or to grab near useless things like a 1st level spell you can cast once per day and a cantrip that deals less damage and has less chance to hit than your weapon attacks.

Fighter is officially a dip class to get weapon and armor proficiencies, action surge, and second wind.

The combination of being SAD and having more ASIs means that the opportunity cost for the fighter is lower than for any other class to gain abilities that are not specific to their class. That includes, but isn't limited to, spells.

And if you think spells are that useless, then fighter should be the highest tier.


Fighter is officially a dip class to get weapon and armor proficiencies, action surge, and second wind.

I don't recall seeing that in the books. Can you give a page reference for that, seeing as how it's official?

[pwykersotz]

Actually they pay the same, its just that the fighter has one more ASI/Feat to do it with. The main problems is there are only 2 really useful feats for a fighter to grab. After that they are trying to max their strength and after 2 more ASIs/Feats they've done that. The remaining ASIs/Feats are either used to shore up weak saves or to grab near useless things like a 1st level spell you can cast once per day and a cantrip that deals less damage and has less chance to hit than your weapon attacks.

Fighter is officially a dip class to get weapon and armor proficiencies, action surge, and second wind.

Your reduction of the Fighter and use of loaded terms like "near useless" is pretty telling that you play a game pretty far distant than many other posters here. I can't relate to your statement at all.

[EvilAnagram]

The purple dragon knight has a lot of potential but falls flat. Much like how this UA article does.

The Fighter isn't even the best at using maneuvers. Barbarians, Rogues, and Bards do as good or blow the Fighter out of the water. Advantage and Expertise laughs in the face of the fighter.

The Fighter can do one thing well, everything else it falls short compared to everyone else. Not in a "kinda keep up way" but in the difference between a major league pitcher versus a pony league pitcher.

The Fighter is the best at single-target damage. It is also pretty good at other things. That's the difference. Nothing else can claim to be the best at taking down the biggest threats in the game. The Fighter can. It can also be reasonably good at just about everything else, but if it were amazing at those things (while also being the best at dealing with the top threats) it would be totally broken. It's the major league pitcher because it's the best at that one job. You're asking why the pitcher doesn't bat.

And yeah, it's the best at using maneuvers. It has the most maneuver dice, the biggest maneuver dice, and the most opportunities to use maneuver dice each turn.

[JoeJ]

Does anybody else remember the Masque of the Red Death campaign setting for 2e? These subclasses made me remember playing that.

[NewDM]

The combination of being SAD and having more ASIs means that the opportunity cost for the fighter is lower than for any other class to gain abilities that are not specific to their class. That includes, but isn't limited to, spells.

And if you think spells are that useless, then fighter should be the highest tier.

I think a single 1st level spell slot is marginally useful at high level in one out of 8 combats a day. The cantrips and any saving throw will be sub-optimal because the fighter won't have raised the spell casting stat to 18 or 20 like the Wizard has. Yeah, grabbing a feat like that is pretty much useless for a fighter.

The opportunity cost doesn't matter after the fighter maxes out strength and gets their 2 feats (usually two of GWM, PAM, SENT, etc...etc... since they don't stack its less useful to get more).


The Fighter is the best at single-target damage. It is also pretty good at other things. That's the difference. Nothing else can claim to be the best at taking down the biggest threats in the game. The Fighter can. It can also be reasonably good at just about everything else, but if it were amazing at those things (while also being the best at dealing with the top threats) it would be totally broken. It's the major league pitcher because it's the best at that one job. You're asking why the pitcher doesn't bat.

And yeah, it's the best at using maneuvers. It has the most maneuver dice, the biggest maneuver dice, and the most opportunities to use maneuver dice each turn.

The fighter isn't 'best' at single target damage. This has been proven over and over. (usually with the discussion devolving into grabbing multiple classes and questionable interaction of feats, which means you aren't comparing fighters anymore.).

The Barbarian deals as much if not more due to GWM and Reckless attack.

A Blade Singer with the War Caster and Mobile feats using Booming Blade and Flaming Sphere can bounce from enemy to enemy without opportunity attacks dealing as much if not more than the Fighter (the enemy either takes Flaming Sphere damage or the movement damage from Booming Blade). When they can't do that they can damage 2 enemies using Green-Flame Blade. Or they can choose to cast another of their many spells. With spells like shield and mirror image and a decent Dexterity and Studded Leather (which is a smart move for rapier wielding Blade Singers) their chance of getting hit are so marginal that they are better protected than Plate Mail.

War Clerics and Paladins can be built to deal as much if not more damage than fighters.

I'm saying all this from experience. The fighter deals damage and is a survivable class, but they are not unique nor are they the best at what they do. They clearly fall into tier 4 territory.


Your reduction of the Fighter and use of loaded terms like "near useless" is pretty telling that you play a game pretty far distant than many other posters here. I can't relate to your statement at all.

So you speak for 'most posters here' now? I must have missed that poll or survey.

[pwykersotz]

So you speak for 'most posters here' now? I must have missed that poll or survey.

many != most

Though that could be inferred, I suppose. No, it's just that I read these boards quite a lot and I don't see many sharing your view on those points.

Oh, and I just remembered, I didn't respond when you posted, but well done on getting that response from Crawford on whether DC's scale or not.

[NewDM]

many != most

Though that could be inferred, I suppose. No, it's just that I read these boards quite a lot and I don't see many sharing your view on those points.

Oh, and I just remembered, I didn't respond when you posted, but well done on getting that response from Crawford on whether DC's scale or not.

Yeah, my friend had to send it several times but finally got an answer.

[DeAnno]

The Barbarian deals as much if not more due to GWM and Reckless attack.

A Blade Singer with the War Caster and Mobile feats using Booming Blade and Flaming Sphere can bounce from enemy to enemy without opportunity attacks dealing as much if not more than the Fighter (the enemy either takes Flaming Sphere damage or the movement damage from Booming Blade). When they can't do that they can damage 2 enemies using Green-Flame Blade. Or they can choose to cast another of their many spells. With spells like shield and mirror image and a decent Dexterity and Studded Leather (which is a smart move for rapier wielding Blade Singers) their chance of getting hit are so marginal that they are better protected than Plate Mail.

War Clerics and Paladins can be built to deal as much if not more damage than fighters.

I'm saying all this from experience. The fighter deals damage and is a survivable class, but they are not unique nor are they the best at what they do. They clearly fall into tier 4 territory.

To me the Fighter seems to shine more at Ranged Damage than Melee. There it is mainly competing with Ranger (which does very similar things) and Warlock/Sorc mashups. In particular Fighters with an archetype that lets them add Superiority Dice to attack rolls profit from the efficient interaction that has with Sharpshooter, and their extra ASIs mean it's not a struggle to obtain both Sharpshooter and Crossbow Expert quickly.

[EvilAnagram]

The fighter isn't 'best' at single target damage. This has been proven over and over. (usually with the discussion devolving into grabbing multiple classes and questionable interaction of feats, which means you aren't comparing fighters anymore.).

The Barbarian deals as much if not more due to GWM and Reckless attack.
A fighter can deal more damage with GWM. You roll just as many dice with four attacks as you do with two advantage attacks, but you can hit more than twice with four attacks.


A Blade Singer with the War Caster and Mobile feats using Booming Blade and Flaming Sphere can bounce from enemy to enemy without opportunity attacks dealing as much if not more than the Fighter (the enemy either takes Flaming Sphere damage or the movement damage from Booming Blade). When they can't do that they can damage 2 enemies using Green-Flame Blade. Or they can choose to cast another of their many spells. With spells like shield and mirror image and a decent Dexterity and Studded Leather (which is a smart move for rapier wielding Blade Singers) their chance of getting hit are so marginal that they are better protected than Plate Mail.
A Fighter can hit something eight times and kill it.


War Clerics and Paladins can be built to deal as much if not more damage than fighters.
Both are fun. Neither can deal as much damage as consistently as a Fighter can.

[NewDM]

A fighter can deal more damage with GWM. You roll just as many dice with four attacks as you do with two advantage attacks, but you can hit more than twice with four attacks.


A Fighter can hit something eight times and kill it.


Both are fun. Neither can deal as much damage as consistently as a Fighter can.

Math time:
Fighter 4 attacks with GWM with 1d12 damage weapon rerolling 1's and 2's only increase DPR by about 0.33. Most attacks have about a 65% hit chance at any given level assuming a decent ability score.

Average damage 1d12(weapon)+5(str)+0.33(reroll 1's and 2's)+10(GWM) = 21.83
Average crit damage 1d12(weapon) + 1d12(weapon)+5(str)+0.66(r1's,2's)+10(GWM)=28.66
Hit chance 35% (-5, -5% for crit) * 21.83 = 7.6405
Crit chance 5% * 28.66 = 1.433

Average DPR per hit = 1.433 + 7.6405 = 9.0735
x4 = 36.294

Barbarian 2 attacks with Reckless attack and GWM with 1d12 damage weapon and rage damage (+4), brutal critical adds 1 more weapon dice to criticals. by level 20 a Barbarians Strength score is 24(+7). Advantage from reckless attack and GWM -5 cancel each other out (there's a whole thread on it somewhere where they mathematically prove this).

Average damage 1d12(weapon)+7(str)+10(GWM)+4(rage) = 27.5
Average crit damage 1d12(weapon)+1d12(weapon)+1d12(weapon)+7(str)+10(G WM)+4(rage) = 40.5
Hit chance 60% (-5 and advantage cancel, -5% for crit) * 27.5 = 16.5
Crit chance 5% * 40.5 = 2.025
Average DPR per hit = 2.025 + 16.5 = 18.525
x2 = 37.05

Barbarian beats Fighter by 0.756

A Fighters nova is 8 attacks or 72.588 DPR. A paladin novas and hits the hundreds. A paladin has enough spell slots to use a smite spell or attack several times per encounter by 20th level. I'm not going to do that analysis now, I'll leave that to someone else.

[DeAnno]

There are some issues with your analysis, but the most pressing is that when a Fighter novas he will either use Superiority dice to make more sure he hits if he rolls something that looks like a miss, or he will have Haste on to give advantage on all attacks.

EDIT: Nevermind, I misremembered the effects of haste. But I meant to imply he was an EK that cast it on himself.

[NewDM]

There are some issues with your analysis, but the most pressing is that when a Fighter novas he will either use Superiority dice to make more sure he hits if he rolls something that looks like a miss, or he will have Haste on to give advantage on all attacks.

The fighter doesn't have haste because the casters decided to give it to the barbarian for higher DPR.

Feel free to redo the analysis with the few superiority dice they get added in over the 245 combat rounds in the expected day (6-8 encounters with 5 rounds each average). You can even include the 2 short rests that the game expects. Who knows you might raise it enough to beat the barbarian by a tiny margin.

The truth is they are about even and other feats benefit the Barbarian more than the fighter because their DPR is stable.

[HoarsHalberd]

Math time:
Firstly, you discounted the higher crit chance of reckless attack. Secondly you undervalued the Barbarian's brutal critical by two die. Thirdly you misrepresented the difference in hit chance. (0.35+0.25+0.1)=0.7 Thirdly. The reckless attack/GWM cancelling thing is on average and cannot be applied to cases where there is a difference in base hit chance. (Barbarians +13 to hit vs the +11 for the fighter.)

Now lets try doing math time with an optimised build and do it logically.

So, Barbarian, PAM and GWM.

If the fighter was hitting on a 0.35 in your example. The barbarian hits on a 0.45

0.35(4(5.5+5+0.75+10)+(2.5+0.5+5+10))+0.05(4(11+5+ 1.5+10)+(5+5+1+10)) = 42.6

(1-(1-0.4)^2)(2(5.5+7+10)+(2.5+7+10+4))+(0.0975)(2(5.5+5 .5+5.5+5.5+5.5+7+10+4)+(2.5+2.5+2.5+2.5+2.5+7+10+4 ))=56.56

The difference here in DPR is almost 14. So you were undermining your own point.

Also. You misunderstand the value of GWF. for a d12 it adds an average of 0.83 per d12 rolled. http://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/47172/how-much-damage-does-great-weapon-fighting-add-on-average


There are some issues with your analysis, but the most pressing is that when a Fighter novas he will either use Superiority dice to make more sure he hits if he rolls something that looks like a miss, or he will have Haste on to give advantage on all attacks.

He also missed the case where the barbarian frenzies for an extra 50% of the damage from what he calculated. And he low balled the barbarian. Significantly. Also haste doesn't give advantage. It gives 1 extra attack.


AND finally. 6*5 is 30. 6*8 is 40. the 245 is nonsense. It's a 30-40 round day.

[NewDM]

Firstly, you discounted the higher crit chance of reckless attack. Secondly you undervalued the Barbarian's brutal critical by two die. Thirdly you misrepresented the difference in hit chance. (0.35+0.25+0.1)=0.7 Thirdly. The reckless attack/GWM cancelling thing is on average and cannot be applied to cases where there is a difference in base hit chance. (Barbarians +13 to hit vs the +11 for the fighter.)

Now lets try doing math time with an optimised build and do it logically.

So, Barbarian, PAM and GWM.

If the fighter was hitting on a 0.35 in your example. The barbarian hits on a 0.45

0.35(4(5.5+5+0.75+10)+(2.5+0.5+5+10))+0.05(4(11+5+ 1.5+10)+(5+5+1+10)) = 42.6

(1-(1-0.4)^2)(2(5.5+7+10)+(2.5+7+10+4))+(0.0975)(2(5.5+5 .5+5.5+5.5+5.5+7+10+4)+(2.5+2.5+2.5+2.5+2.5+7+10+4 ))=56.56

The difference here in DPR is almost 14. So you were undermining your own point.

Also. You misunderstand the value of GWF. for a d12 it adds an average of 0.83 per d12 rolled. http://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/47172/how-much-damage-does-great-weapon-fighting-add-on-average



He also missed the case where the barbarian frenzies for an extra 50% of the damage from what he calculated. And he low balled the barbarian. Significantly. Also haste doesn't give advantage. It gives 1 extra attack.


AND finally. 6*5 is 30. 6*8 is 40. the 245 is nonsense. It's a 30-40 round day.

Its past my bedtime here. I shouldn't do math proofs while tired, but if we give PAM to the Barbarian we have to give it to the Fighter too.

However my point is clear. Barbarians deal more damage than fighters by a significant mark when using GWM. Barbarian was getting advantage from reckless attack on every attack. Frenzy can only be used once per day before the exhaustion cost gets ridiculous. Divided by 35 rounds in a day it amounts to almost nothing. Getting hit more was counteracted by being a bear totem barbarian for 1/2 damage from everything.

[HoarsHalberd]

Its past my bedtime here. I shouldn't do math proofs while tired, but if we give PAM to the Barbarian we have to give it to the Fighter too.

However my point is clear. Barbarians deal more damage than fighters by a significant mark when using GWM. Barbarian was getting advantage from reckless attack on every attack. Frenzy can only be used once per day before the exhaustion cost gets ridiculous. Divided by 35 rounds in a day it amounts to almost nothing. Getting hit more was counteracted by being a bear totem barbarian for 1/2 damage from everything.

I'd recommend going to bed soon man. I already did add PAM to the fighter. :-P
And the frenzy stuff was talking to the guy who was complaining about the lack of subclass abilities.

[JoeJ]

I think a single 1st level spell slot is marginally useful at high level in one out of 8 combats a day. The cantrips and any saving throw will be sub-optimal because the fighter won't have raised the spell casting stat to 18 or 20 like the Wizard has. Yeah, grabbing a feat like that is pretty much useless for a fighter.

Combat? You think a fighter would choose Magic Initiate for combat? Nah, man, they'd pick it to grab Mending, or Guidance, or Mage Hand, or Message, or whatever other utility cantrip nobody else in the party has. Getting a 1st level spell on top of that is just gravy. (Although delicious gravy.) Or they'd take Magic Ritualist to get spells like Alarm, or Find Familiar, or Tensor's Floating Disk, or Unseen Servant, or Speak with Animals. Again, whatever the party doesn't already have access to.

It's not about using a feat to try and compete with another class, it's using a feat to fill gaps in the group's capabilities.

[NewDM]

Combat? You think a fighter would choose Magic Initiate for combat? Nah, man, they'd pick it to grab Mending, or Guidance, or Mage Hand, or Message, or whatever other utility cantrip nobody else in the party has. Getting a 1st level spell on top of that is just gravy. (Although delicious gravy.) Or they'd take Magic Ritualist to get spells like Alarm, or Find Familiar, or Tensor's Floating Disk, or Unseen Servant, or Speak with Animals. Again, whatever the party doesn't already have access to.

It's not about using a feat to try and compete with another class, it's using a feat to fill gaps in the group's capabilities.

You do realize you are saying the fighter is better than spell casters because he can choose to become a spell caster right?

[JoeJ]

You do realize you are saying the fighter is better than spell casters because he can choose to become a spell caster right?

Which is correct. A fighter is better at filling in some of the gaps left by the other the players' choices without sacrificing their own strengths.

But not just spellcasting, because they can also pick other feats or boost ability scores that aren't directly related to stabbing things.

[NewDM]

Which is correct. A fighter is better at filling in some of the gaps left by the other the players' choices without sacrificing their own strengths.

But not just spellcasting, because they can also pick other feats or boost ability scores that aren't directly related to stabbing things.

Yes, but in doing so they are worse than a character dedicated to those things, even if that character is split among several things.

Like a Rogue is best at skills, but can keep up with about 90% of a fighters damage. The Fighter on the other hand can keep up with about 70% of the Rogue's skills and ability scores through feats. So the Rogue is the better choice.

This is the essential problem not only does the fighter not have its own thing (Barbarians and Paladins do it too, most classes can do 80%-90% of the fighters damage, some more than 100%), but it doesn't do other classes things well enough to compete.

[Regitnui]

Take the "fighter sucks" argument to its own thread. You've clearly gone off topic here.

Personally, I see nothing wrong with the fighter. It's entire purpose is in the name; it fights. As for the new subclass, I agree the fluff of "monster hunter" applies much better to a ranger-type character.

And what 3.5 aficionado started applying tiers to 5e? Didn't we agree that they don't apply here beyond "this is what I like"?

[JoeJ]

Take the "fighter sucks" argument to its own thread. You've clearly gone off topic here.

Personally, I see nothing wrong with the fighter. It's entire purpose is in the name; it fights. As for the new subclass, I agree the fluff of "monster hunter" applies much better to a ranger-type character.

And what 3.5 aficionado started applying tiers to 5e? Didn't we agree that they don't apply here beyond "this is what I like"?

Fluff wise it does fit with ranger, but the lack of spellcasting fits the gothic horror genre better. This would work great in a setting where only monsters have supernatural (or would that be preternatural?) powers.

[JackPhoenix]

Does anybody else remember the Masque of the Red Death campaign setting for 2e? These subclasses made me remember playing that.

I remember 3e version. It was basically Ravenloft, except on 17-18 century Earth.