PDA

View Full Version : D&D 5e/Next I'm Out



Derpaligtr
2018-08-11, 10:31 PM
I'm out.

Don't want to deal with this site anymore :smallsigh:

GalacticAxekick
2018-08-12, 02:33 AM
What I look for in a game is the opportunity to solve problems in creative ways. This is why I enjoy the interaction/exploration pillars of the game, and why I only enjoy combat as a spellcaster. I love martial characters thematically, but the lack of options they offer make them close to unplayable without a lenient DM or homebrew.

I'm not sure why others hate the champion, but this is why I do. Every feature it gets, from 3rd level to 18th, improves existing options but doesn't give me any new tools. I don't think your homebrew addresses this at all, and so while it might improve the champion for others, I can only speak for myself and say it doesn't help at all.

Lalliman
2018-08-12, 03:34 AM
The champion is always going to be a simple and straight-forward class, because it's made for the people who want that. Changing it to have more tactical depth is pointless because A) you're just creating a different subclass under the same name, and B) you're doing a disservice to the few people who would've actually chosen the champion in the first place.

With that in mind, I like the changes to Remarkable Athlete and Superior Critical, because they make the champion more worthwhile without changing what it is. I do think the second benefit of Superior Weapon Proficiency might have to apply to saves, otherwise it will rarely come up. (NPCs are not expected to use the grapple and shove actions, since they rarely have Athletics proficiency. If a player gets grappled or shoved, it's likely by way of a saving throw.)

I don't like the new benefit of Improved Critical - it's too specific. The champion isn't a tanking subclass, it's not even necessarily a melee subclass. What if you're an archer? It's weird to give a benefit that isn't useful to like 25% of champions.

GalacticAxekick
2018-08-12, 04:29 AM
I'm aware that the current Champion is meant to be straight-forward and that some players enjoy that. But Derpaligtr specifically said they were aiming to make something for people who all-caps HATE the current Champion.

I don't think preserving the reasons for that hate is getting anywhere towards that goal, even if it's making the Champion more appealing to the camp who can already stomach it.

Derpaligtr
2018-08-12, 07:21 AM
What I look for in a game is the opportunity to solve problems in creative ways. This is why I enjoy the interaction/exploration pillars of the game, and why I only enjoy combat as a spellcaster. I love martial characters thematically, but the lack of options they offer make them close to unplayable without a lenient DM or homebrew.

I'm not sure why others hate the champion, but this is why I do. Every feature it gets, from 3rd level to 18th, improves existing options but doesn't give me any new tools. I don't think your homebrew addresses this at all, and so while it might improve the champion for others, I can only speak for myself and say it doesn't help at all.

The champion is strictly a combat sub-class meant for people who don't want to think all that much about their options. Taking it away from that defeats the prurpose of playing the champion. Also, while I'm not a fan of it, many people do like it. I wouldn't want to change this sub-class in such a way that it gets away from that. This is my happy medium.

The champion doesn't change the fighter, the champion makes the fighter more fighter-ish. Each class tends to have a sub-class that just makes it more of that class (some do it better than others!). It just so happens that the fighter itself is rather bland. To fix the combat issue you have with the fighter you need to either add stuff that isn't fighter (magic), add stuff that imitates magic like battlemaster maneuvers (which all have the same issue of not getting better), or change the base fighter. Not going that deep on this one.

Since your issue is with martial rules, I wouldn't expect you to like a champion subclass... Or many other subclasses that was based off the initial designs of 5e (except maybe some rogue subclasses... Rogue subclasses can get interesting).


The champion is always going to be a simple and straight-forward class, because it's made for the people who want that. Changing it to have more tactical depth is pointless because A) you're just creating a different subclass under the same name, and B) you're doing a disservice to the few people who would've actually chosen the champion in the first place.

With that in mind, I like the changes to Remarkable Athlete and Superior Critical, because they make the champion more worthwhile without changing what it is. I do think the second benefit of Superior Weapon Proficiency might have to apply to saves, otherwise it will rarely come up. (NPCs are not expected to use the grapple and shove actions, since they rarely have Athletics proficiency. If a player gets grappled or shoved, it's likely by way of a saving throw.)

I don't like the new benefit of Improved Critical - it's too specific. The champion isn't a tanking subclass, it's not even necessarily a melee subclass. What if you're an archer? It's weird to give a benefit that isn't useful to like 25% of champions.

The tactical depth that is added here... Doesn't actually change how someone will play the champion. The stickiness change is a passive change. You will only use it if you would already be using you OA. You can't force a creature to provoke. However, with this feature, you will end up protecting others when you do use it.

Also, for new players, it gives them a way to focus on a single enemy if they wish. That enemy gets to be their training dummy or that enemy isn't doing much else. However, the DM doesn't have to specifically hand them monsters that will stick near them. The player gets to decide to do this, if they want. It puts everything in the players hands... Without the player really needing to think about it.

I think changing it to saves or checks against being grappled or shoved would work nicely!

See, you say the champion isn't a tanking subclass and sure, it doesn't have to be, but dang do people play it as if it was. The stickiness doesn't stop you from not playing as a tank, it's just a passive option to help you play as a tank if you want.

Only one feature is actually not compatitble with a ranged character, the OA feature of IWP, but then again you won't/shouldn't often be in a position to make opportunity attacks or else you're in trouble. Not all features need to apply to all play styles. Monks don't get abilities that work around Step of the Wind after all.

If you're an archer and have a rapier or dagger, being caught in melee allows you to punish that creature more effectively than running and shooting. Don't try to shoot the creature, drop the bow and stab the creature in the face. Probably going to surprise the creature, especially when it tries to get away from face stabbings, and it can't run away. Let it get away the next turn if you wamt to go back to being ranged for the rest of yhe battle.



I'm aware that the current Champion is meant to be straight-forward and that some players enjoy that. But Derpaligtr specifically said they were aiming to make something for people who all-caps HATE the current Champion.

I don't think preserving the reasons for that hate is getting anywhere towards that goal, even if it's making the Champion more appealing to the camp who can already stomach it.

If I/we don't preserve the champion's intent, we may as well tell people to play another class. Which defeats the purpose of all this.

The idea is to take the concept and make it workable.

====

Changed the wording in IWP to allow a player the option of not stoping a creature when they hit with a Opportunity Attack. Feel free to ignore the stickiness.

Changed SWP to be advantage on checks and saves against being grappled or shoved.

GalacticAxekick
2018-08-12, 02:27 PM
I have no issue with 5e's martial rules. I prefer martial classes' action economy (unlimited actions of moderate power) over spellcaster's resource economy (limited actions of tremendous power).

My issue with martial characters—particularly the Champion—is that the only action of moderate power is "Attack". The Dash, Disengage, Hide, Ready and Search actions are usually terrible, and they never see any improvement Even out of the three attacks possible with the Attack action—weapon attack, grapple and shove—only weapon attacks are usually worth using.


So yeah, the Champion is meant to be a simple and unspecialized fighter. But it fails at that. It's cripplingly overspecialized. It throws away every one of the Fighter's options besides making weapon attacks.

Why not let a Champion's grapple restrain the target? Or grapple oversized creatures?
Why not let a Champion's shove throw the target 20 feet. Or shove oversized creatures?
Why not let a Champion's Disengage and Dodge affect everyone around them?
Why not let a Champion make one melee attack as a bonus action after Dashing?
Why not let a Champion make one ranged attack as a bonus action after Searching?
Why not let a Champion ready all of its Extra Attacks? The ready action only allows one.
Etc.

This isn't adding much complexity to the game. It's making the existing, neglected options worthwhile. It's making the Champion a better Fighter, rather than 1/8th of a Fighter.

Derpaligtr
2018-08-12, 03:09 PM
I have no issue with 5e's martial rules. I prefer martial classes' action economy (unlimited actions of moderate power) over spellcaster's resource economy (limited actions of tremendous power).

My issue with martial characters—particularly the Champion—is that the only action of moderate power is "Attack". The Dash, Disengage, Hide, Ready and Search actions are usually terrible, and they never see any improvement Even out of the three attacks possible with the Attack action—weapon attack, grapple and shove—only weapon attacks are usually worth using.


So yeah, the Champion is meant to be a simple and unspecialized fighter. But it fails at that. It's cripplingly overspecialized. It throws away every one of the Fighter's options besides making weapon attacks.

Why not let a Champion's grapple restrain the target? Or grapple oversized creatures?
Why not let a Champion's shove throw the target 20 feet. Or shove oversized creatures?
Why not let a Champion's Disengage and Dodge affect everyone around them?
Why not let a Champion make one melee attack as a bonus action after Dashing?
Why not let a Champion make one ranged attack as a bonus action after Searching?
Why not let a Champion ready all of its Extra Attacks? The ready action only allows one.
Etc.

This isn't adding much complexity to the game. It's making the existing, neglected options worthwhile. It's making the Champion a better Fighter, rather than 1/8th of a Fighter.

All of your options are adding a lot of unnecessary stuff to the champion. The champion isn't about that. I'm not a fan of the PHB champion, but to keep with its ideology, you can't go adding a ton of features or options that run counter to the basic "move and hit" scenario.

Keeping with the spirit of the champion can keep people who love the champion on board with any changes (I know a couple in real life and there are people on line that love it too).

You can make a simple subclass that expands the fighter's options... But it isn't the 5e Champion and it wouldn't fall under the 5e Champion ideology.

If I was remaking the battlemaster, the things i would do to fix the champion would be applied there as that subclass has a lot of issues and can be simplified and stay tactical... Which isn't what the champion is meant to be.

Actually, give me a bit and I'll work on that.

GalacticAxekick
2018-08-12, 04:17 PM
All of your options are adding a lot of unnecessary stuff to the champion. The champion isn't about that. I'm not a fan of the PHB champion, but to keep with its ideology, you can't go adding a ton of features or options that run counter to the basic "move and hit" scenario.This stuff is unecessary for someone whose only intention is to run and hit. But again, I thought you were trying to make a champion for people who hate champions: people who want to do more than run and hit.

If you don't want the champion to do anything besides run and hit, how will you attract it's haters? Are there people I don't know about who hate it for some other reason?


Keeping with the spirit of the champion can keep people who love the champion on board with any changes (I know a couple in real life and there are people on line that love it too).

You can make a simple subclass that expands the fighter's options... But it isn't the 5e Champion and it wouldn't fall under the 5e Champion ideology.People who love the original champion can continue to play it, even if you introduce a variant. I don't see why the original should constrain the variant if they can coexist and target different audiences.

Derpaligtr
2018-08-12, 04:46 PM
This stuff is unecessary for someone whose only intention is to run and hit. But again, I thought you were trying to make a champion for people who hate champions: people who want to do more than run and hit.

If you don't want the champion to do anything besides run and hit, how will you attract it's haters? Are there people I don't know about who hate it for some other reason?

People who love the original champion can continue to play it, even if you introduce a variant. I don't see why the original should constrain the variant if they can coexist and target different audiences.

Yes, making a champion for people who hate champions, but within the design concepts of the champion. Otherwise, just go play a different class.

Stickiness. That one ability with a simple class and no feat investment is huge. The 4e Fighter was praised for this exact feature. People would pick the fighter over any other class because it had a great class feature that distinguished it from everyone else.

People who like the original champion can play the original. Homebrew isn't always welcomed. However, there are many people who don't like it and many people who are on the fence. The original champion isn't designed well compared to other classes and options, but it does do what it was meant to do (simple, move n hit)... It just does many things poorly (remarkable athlete doesn't really make you remarkable).

GalacticAxekick
2018-08-12, 04:54 PM
I understand that you're trying to stay within the design concepts of the Champion. But I don't understand what you're trying to fix, and for whom.

I'm honestly asking, are there people who dislike the Champion for reasons besides the limited options? Are there people who dislike the Champion because Remarkable Athlete is unremarkable, or because it isn't sticky enough, or because it isn't resistant to being shoved and grappled?

I'm struggling to wrap my head around an attempt to fix the Champion without a statement of what's wrong with it.

Derpaligtr
2018-08-12, 05:02 PM
Some slight tweaks that the champion will have in an upcoming game. Well, one of the champions in an upcoming game... Gonna get weird.

A thread on here got me and a few friends talking about how to, in a simple way, make the Champion fun for certain people in our group to play... This is my submission to the group. Basically we are all going to be running different champions and see if the people who HATE the current champion can stomach a similarly designed subclass.

http://homebrewery.naturalcrit.com/share/BJ-1MsgpS7

This makes the champion sticky (you still only get one reaction!), an actual remarkable athlete (original wasn't well thought out), and gives the champion a defensive boost later in the game (especially against lower CR creatures).

Oh, yeah, the 3rd level feature is based off Combat Superiority. It's a shame this wasn't part of the base Fighter or the Champion to begin with. The closest thing to this is 'Goading Attack', which is a bit magical for some friends of mine.


I understand that you're trying to stay within the design concepts of the Champion. But I don't understand what you're trying to fix, and for whom.

I'm honestly asking, are there people who dislike the Champion for reasons besides the limited options? Are there people who dislike the Champion because Remarkable Athlete is unremarkable, or because it isn't sticky enough, or because it isn't resistant to being shoved and grappled?

I'm struggling to wrap my head around an attempt to fix the Champion without a statement of what's wrong with it.

Here, I'll bold my initial post.

GalacticAxekick
2018-08-12, 05:12 PM
I've read and reread your initial post. Saying "I'm updating this subclass for people in my group, who dislike the original" doesn't give a clear idea what problems they have with the original, let alone how effectively your changes fix them. It's impossible for me to comment on your work without knowing the goal.

Do the people in your group (who I presume to hate the original champion) hate it because of its unremarkable athleticism, lack of stickiness, and vulnerability to being shoved and grappled?

Derpaligtr
2018-08-12, 05:38 PM
The Battle Champion: My hybrid of the Champion and Battle Master Fighter Archetypes

http://homebrewery.naturalcrit.com/share/rkZu0Vz0S7

===

The things that people don't like about the champion in our groups is the same thing most people don't like about it and pretty much everything I tweaked.

We are still using the basic concept of the champion, simple play, but can we make that concept work for the people who hate the original champion. We will find out soonish.

GalacticAxekick
2018-08-12, 06:13 PM
The things that people don't like about the champion in our groups is the same thing most people don't like about it and pretty much everything I tweaked.The things that most people don't like about the Champion are the diminishing returns of (http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?468964-GUIDE-The-Art-of-War-A-Fighter-Guide) a second fighting style (http://rpgbot.net/dnd5/characters/classes/fighter/) and the lack (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?415302-What-makes-the-Champion-archetype-underpowered) of options (https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/99711/how-can-i-make-my-champion-fighter-more-interesting) in combat (https://www.reddit.com/r/DnD/comments/7h6vw0/5e_champion_powerful_crit_lord_or_training_wheels/), but neither of those are things you tweaked.

I'm not telling you to solve these issues, of course. I'm asking you to specific about what issues your group wants you to solve. If it's the athleticism, stickiness and wrestling then great! You did it! But if not, I need more information.

Composer99
2018-08-12, 08:47 PM
The variant in the original post is certainly an upgrade on the regular champion, as far as it goes.

However, the 3rd-level revised feature is just not impressive, being strictly weaker than Sentinel. To be frank, given how many ASIs fighters get, unless you're playing a game without feats, if you want to play a defender-type fighter it would be better to get Sentinel and play a different subclass. It also seems to me that most class and subclass features try not to step on the toes of feats too much (and vice-versa), so I'm not enthused about a feature that does.

It's also not really appropriate to compare 5e fighters, who get 1 reaction per round, which they have to choose to use for opportunity attacks plus anything else they might be able to do, to 4e fighters, who get 1 immediate action per round and get 1 opportunity attack per turn. There's no comparison with respect to stickiness.

Here's what I might suggest as alternatives:
- The ability to re-roll an attack roll, say, once per short or long rest (this is nice, but might not fit the theme of a subclass that doesn't have usage limits or resource pools to fiddle with)
- Give your second fighting style at 3rd level, so it will actually be meaningful in most campaigns, instead of 10th level (I don't see this being overpowered, since you will have picked up the fighting style you most want at 1st level already - you're either going to go for versatility or for the Defence style here.)


Dunno whether I'll look at the version with more options.

Derpaligtr
2018-08-13, 08:47 AM
The variant in the original post is certainly an upgrade on the regular champion, as far as it goes.

However, the 3rd-level revised feature is just not impressive, being strictly weaker than Sentinel. To be frank, given how many ASIs fighters get, unless you're playing a game without feats, if you want to play a defender-type fighter it would be better to get Sentinel and play a different subclass. It also seems to me that most class and subclass features try not to step on the toes of feats too much (and vice-versa), so I'm not enthused about a feature that does.

It's also not really appropriate to compare 5e fighters, who get 1 reaction per round, which they have to choose to use for opportunity attacks plus anything else they might be able to do, to 4e fighters, who get 1 immediate action per round and get 1 opportunity attack per turn. There's no comparison with respect to stickiness.

Here's what I might suggest as alternatives:
- The ability to re-roll an attack roll, say, once per short or long rest (this is nice, but might not fit the theme of a subclass that doesn't have usage limits or resource pools to fiddle with)
- Give your second fighting style at 3rd level, so it will actually be meaningful in most campaigns, instead of 10th level (I don't see this being overpowered, since you will have picked up the fighting style you most want at 1st level already - you're either going to go for versatility or for the Defence style here.)


Dunno whether I'll look at the version with more options.

It doesn't need to equal to be better than sentinel. That wasn't the plan. I'm ok with a feat being better than a partial class feature.

Feats are optional and they shouldn't be required to play a pretty basic archetype of the fighter that was immensely popular in the previous edition.

It's less of a direct comparison and more of a translation to the new system. Within the new system, the potential stickiness of this champion (it's no longer forced) goes a long way within the context of the 5e game. Especially when you don't need to spend feat on it. The champion is supposed to be a simple class and running ASI only is as simple as you get.

Yeah... Rerolling abilities and adding more short rest/long rest mechanics goes against the concepts of the Champion. They are about simplicity (to a fault). Adding new mechanics means you may as well play another class/subclass, sadly. The goal of this is to use the champion ideology and try to make something someone in my group can stomach playing.

I'm not a fan of giving extra fighting styles out. I left it in here (and in my battle champion) only because it's kind of the champion's thing and for simplicity sake. The problem I have with extra fighting styles is that if I already chose my fighting style, built my character around it, there will be very few times I actually will switch up my style unless I specifically made the character to be a switch hitter... But yeah, waiting 10 levels to do that is silly. I actually think the fighter should have all styles available to them at pretty much anytime, like, allow them to switch as a bonus action. But that goes a bit too far for many people.