At this point, why not?

[Lokishade]

I was thinking about Champion Fighter.

Specifically, the 7th level class feature: Remarkable Athelete. There had been many discussions about how this ability feels lackluster, like a poor man's Jack of All Trades that forces you to have subpar strength and dexterity skills to benefit from that specific, limited part. The bonus to initiative (and the once-in-a-blue-moon constitution skill check) was mostly deemed nice, though.

But seeing the blatant power creep in 5e over the course of the years, I was thinking: At this point, why not?

Why not just give the half-proficiency bonus on top of proficiency? I'll be bold and go beyond. Why not also give the bonus to these four skills on top of Expertise? It sure would put the "remarkable" back into Remarkable Athelete.

What do you think?

[UnintensifiedFa]

Honestly, I like this. The Champion is a simple subclass, and this doesn’t really interfere with simplicity. Considering expertise exists, this really doesn’t seem to bad, I’d just add a caveat that you can’t add the half proficiency to checks that have expertise, that might be a bit much.

[Rukelnikov]

I think its fine, expertise on all might be a bit much, but adding 1/2 prof to all Str/Dex checks sounds fine to me.

[OldTrees1]

A lot of this depends on how your group fixed 5E ability checks. Including how much progression you wanted (I want Expertise as default, so I am inclined to buff ability checks. Possibly more than your group wants).

It also depends on how much that extra jump distance can be used (increases from 18ft to 22ft at STR 18).


Also, have you asked the player that is considering Champion about what they want?

[Kane0]

Honestly i give remarkable athlete at level 3 alongside the crits, leaves room for something else at 7.

But yeah, prof and a half is fine, after all why shouldnt you?

[Jerrykhor]

Yes, why not. I'd probably give it Expertise or Advantage in Athletics at the very least. Its in the name. Also, you can get up from Prone using 5ft movement.

[clash]

Honestly I just give the athlete fear minus the ability score. Gives him some cool stuff to do that makes the champion feel like a better athlete

[Lokishade]

Honestly i give remarkable athlete at level 3 alongside the crits, leaves room for something else at 7.

But yeah, prof and a half is fine, after all why shouldnt you?

What do you replace the level 7 class feature with? You got me curious.

[Kane0]

Level 3: Improved Critical
You crit on a 19 or 20 and double all damage instead of just double dice.

Level 3: Remarkable Athlete
You add half your proficiency bonus (round up) to any Strength, Dexterity or Constitution check you make, including checks you are proficient in but not checks that you apply expertise to.

Level 7: Remarkable Might
You gain Expertise in one Strength or Dexterity based skill you are proficient in, or proficiency in one if you aren't proficient in any.
Additionally you add half your proficiency bonus to saving throws you are not already proficient in.

Throwing in the Athlete feat isn't a bad alternative either.

[MaxWilson]

I was thinking about Champion Fighter.

Specifically, the 7th level class feature: Remarkable Athelete. There had been many discussions about how this ability feels lackluster, like a poor man's Jack of All Trades that forces you to have subpar strength and dexterity skills to benefit from that specific, limited part. The bonus to initiative (and the once-in-a-blue-moon constitution skill check) was mostly deemed nice, though.

But seeing the blatant power creep in 5e over the course of the years, I was thinking: At this point, why not?

Why not just give the half-proficiency bonus on top of proficiency? I'll be bold and go beyond. Why not also give the bonus to these four skills on top of Expertise? It sure would put the "remarkable" back into Remarkable Athelete.

What do you think?

This is part of my standard houserules. The other thing I do is improve Champion's Improved Critical:


3.) Class tweaks:

For Champion:


Improved Critical: you crit on a 19-20. Furthermore, when you inflict a critical hit, roll damage once and then double the total damage (including any bonuses from Strength/magic weapons/etc.), instead of just rolling twice the normal number of dice.

Furthermore, Remarkable Athlete now stacks with proficiency. So a Str 18 Champion 9 with Athletics proficiency would have +4+4+2=+10 to Strength (Athletics) checks, not just +8.



Champion is still an unpopular choice so it's probably not overpowered. For me the main thing is that at least now Improved Critical isn't worse in practice than it looks on paper; now it's about as good as a new player probably thinks it is (about a 15-20% damage boost), so they aren't getting cheated by the system math (getting only an extra 2d6 5% of the time is downright awful, but getting an extra +5 to +15 on top of that 10% of the time isn't terrible).

I'd play a Conan-flavored Champion/Scout under this houserule and enjoy it, but I don't usually run solo games. Hmmm, maybe I should do one. You don't have to coordinate schedules...

[loki_ragnarock]

I was thinking about Champion Fighter.

Specifically, the 7th level class feature: Remarkable Athelete. There had been many discussions about how this ability feels lackluster, like a poor man's Jack of All Trades that forces you to have subpar strength and dexterity skills to benefit from that specific, limited part. The bonus to initiative (and the once-in-a-blue-moon constitution skill check) was mostly deemed nice, though.

But seeing the blatant power creep in 5e over the course of the years, I was thinking: At this point, why not?

Why not just give the half-proficiency bonus on top of proficiency? I'll be bold and go beyond. Why not also give the bonus to these four skills on top of Expertise? It sure would put the "remarkable" back into Remarkable Athelete.

What do you think?
So... okay, first I don't have a problem with it in the slightest.

But Remarkable Athlete doesn't stack because of the rules outlined on page 12 of the PHB about adding proficiency (whether halved or doubled or what have you) only once. You'd have to make a clause in Remarkable Athlete to say something like "this doesn't count as your proficiency modifier" or some such to satisfy the arcane workings of the system, but the result would be that it stacks with whatever.
And if it stacks with whatever that way:
1) It could stack with Bard's Jack of All Trades to effectively gain full proficiency in all STR/DEX/CON checks. By then you'd be a 9th level character searching for a gimmick, so I frankly don't see a problem with it.
2) It would no longer be a back door for applying the Rogue's Reliable Talent to all STR/DEX/CON checks. By then you'd have been a 18th level character in search of an impressive gimmick you could have achieved more impressively with bard's jack of all trades at level 13. A sad loss, but a real edge case among edge cases.

In short, I approve. Bounded accuracy was already borked by a bunch of Tasha's stuff, may as well lean in since the game is broken.

[Segev]

So... okay, first I don't have a problem with it in the slightest.

But Remarkable Athlete doesn't stack because of the rules outlined on page 12 of the PHB about adding proficiency (whether halved or doubled or what have you) only once.

If you want to avoid that, you could make it follow other precedent, and add dice. "You add a d6 to all Strength and Dexterity checks. This becomes a d8 at level 9, a d10 at level 13, and a d12 at level 17."

[ZRN]

If you want to avoid that, you could make it follow other precedent, and add dice. "You add a d6 to all Strength and Dexterity checks. This becomes a d8 at level 9, a d10 at level 13, and a d12 at level 17."

Yeah, I was about to say this. If I were rewriting the Champion, I'd probably do this at level 3 (including Con), then let you add the same die to str/dex/con saving throws at level 7 (sort of like the old Brute UA).

[KorvinStarmast]

Level 3: Improved Critical
You crit on a 19 or 20 and double all damage instead of just double dice.

Level 3: Remarkable Athlete
You add half your proficiency bonus (round up) to any Strength, Dexterity or Constitution check you make, including checks you are proficient in but not checks that you apply expertise to.

Level 7: Remarkable Might
You gain Expertise in one Strength or Dexterity based skill you are proficient in, or proficiency in one if you aren't proficient in any.
Additionally you add half your proficiency bonus to saving throws you are not already proficient in.

Throwing in the Athlete feat isn't a bad alternative either. Not sure if I'll ever play my Champion again, that campaign's dormant, but I'll toss this at the DM if we do start up again.

[Willie the Duck]

Fully support all these options, plus my suggestion which is that Champions could get Jack of All Trade if you instead wanted to focus on them being a little more all-around good. Worst thing I can say is that I don't foresee many instances where someone had decided against Champion but these small changes would make the difference.

[Segev]

I should add: I feel like "moar damage" on the level 3's crits is...not the right move. It's still not terribly exciting, which makes it FEEL less good, and it makes the damage too spikey, which is technically a little overpowered. Overpowered + not feeling exciting is the worst combination, in my opinion.

[MaxWilson]

I should add: I feel like "moar damage" on the level 3's crits is...not the right move. It's still not terribly exciting, which makes it FEEL less good, and it makes the damage too spikey, which is technically a little overpowered. Overpowered + not feeling exciting is the worst combination, in my opinion.

Note: the goal of doubling all crit damage for Champions is not exactly "moar damage." It's "making Improved Critical not be deceptively bad."

I strongly disagree about it being overpowered. It may not be exciting to you, but for someone who chose Champion in the first place, at least they'll get something exciting on every 19 or 20, just like they expected.

[Segev]

Note: the goal of doubling all crit damage for Champions is not exactly "moar damage." It's "making Improved Critical not be deceptively bad."

I strongly disagree about it being overpowered. It may not be exciting to you, but for someone who chose Champion in the first place, at least they'll get something exciting on every 19 or 20, just like they expected.

Doubling the number of dice rolled is "deceptively bad?" :smallconfused: Add in possibilities like half-orc or Piercer....

[stoutstien]

I should add: I feel like "moar damage" on the level 3's crits is...not the right move. It's still not terribly exciting, which makes it FEEL less good, and it makes the damage too spikey, which is technically a little overpowered. Overpowered + not feeling exciting is the worst combination, in my opinion.
Eh. The extended crit range isn't even that good for damage without any way for the champion fighter to add rider dice. It barely matches the fighting style they picked up at level one.

[MaxWilson]

Doubling the number of dice rolled is "deceptively bad?" :smallconfused: Add in possibilities like half-orc or Piercer....

Beginning when you choose this archetype at 3rd level, your weapon attacks score a critical hit on a roll of 19 or 20.

This is deceptively bad in a number of cases:


(1) People who are coming from a different game system where criticals double or triple all damage, or who for some other reason (like video games) expect a critical to be a big deal.

(2) People who aren't that great at math and think, "Oh, cool, so the Champion gives bonus damage on a 19 or 20" without realizing that it only gives you a bonus on a 19.


Throwing half-orc or a Piercer feat in on top of RAW Improved Critical is just throwing good money after bad.

On the other hand, letting Improved Critical double all damage instead of just damage dice fixes #1 by making critical hits function (for Champions) the way they are already expecting them to work, and fixes #2 by making Improved Critical do something for natural 20s as well as 19s. Getting 4d6+30 (44) damage 10% of the time with a GWM Champion wielding a greatsword is not overpowered, but it delivers on the experience which Improved Critical promised to the player originally: you will strike mighty blows, and sometimes you'll do more than 50 HP of damage in a single blow.

RAW Improved Critical, on the other hand, seems to promise this, but doesn't deliver.

[Segev]

Oh, it doesn't mean double the dice again to quadruple? That's not as bad as I thought it was.

Still, your dice doubling should be a significant boost in and of itself anyway. I just don't see this as being as bad as you say.

I'd be more inclined to move the "extra crit" number to 2 instead of 19, in order to make a probably-miss into an auto-hit, if I were concerned with making this cooler and more impactful.

[Kane0]

There was a thread about it, but basically fighter crits alone are not special. Theres no rider dice and youre usually talking rolling one extra die either or both of which could still be 1s.

[Cikomyr2]

Note: the goal of doubling all crit damage for Champions is not exactly "moar damage." It's "making Improved Critical not be deceptively bad."

I strongly disagree about it being overpowered. It may not be exciting to you, but for someone who chose Champion in the first place, at least they'll get something exciting on every 19 or 20, just like they expected.

How about you have a normal critical on a 19, and you actually double your damage on a 20?

Make having a Nat 20 feel better for a champion

[MaxWilson]

How about you have a normal critical on a 19, and you actually double your damage on a 20?

Make having a Nat 20 feel better for a champion

Meh. That adds complexity for no extra value that I can see. YMMV though and more power to you.

[Kane0]

How about you have a normal critical on a 19, and you actually double your damage on a 20?

Make having a Nat 20 feel better for a champion

Sounds like unnecessary complexity, is there a reason not to have all your crits be the same?

[Cikomyr2]

Sounds like unnecessary complexity, is there a reason not to have all your crits be the same?

Nah, I just like the idea of celebrating a nat 20 more than a nat 19

[Lokishade]

It was suggested in this thread to put Remarkable Athelete at level 3, along with improved crits. Hadn't thought of it, but I like the idea. It seems in line with what's come out of Xanathar's and Tasha's. And if it's going to be available so early on, then yes, I agree that adding 1/2 prof on top of possible expertises is excessive and prone to multiclass abuse.

Doing things this way leaves level 7 completely open. Looking at other Fighter class features, I noticed they mostly boil down to one of three things:
1. Improvement of preexisting class features
2. Watered down feats
3. Quality of life boons

I initially wanted to find something that wasn't a feat or a preexisting class feature, but then again, I was overthinking it. This is "Vanilla Fighter" we're talking about. So, inspired by the answers gathered on this thread and the Samurai class, I'm going with proficiency in Dex saves and the Athelete feat minus the stat boost.

If the Samurai gets one major save for free and face interactions quality of life, I feel like Champion Fighter could get a similar treatment.

[MaxWilson]

I initially wanted to find something that wasn't a feat or a preexisting class feature, but then again, I was overthinking it. This is "Vanilla Fighter" we're talking about. So, inspired by the answers gathered on this thread and the Samurai class, I'm going with proficiency in Dex saves and the Athelete feat minus the stat boost.

If you really want a dead-simple fighter for newbies, just make their subclass purely stat boosts:

Level 3: You get +2 to Strength (max 20).
Level 7: You get +2 to either Con or Dex (max 20).
Level 10: You get +2 to Strength (max 22).
Level 15: You get +2 to either Con or Dex (max 22).
Level 18: You get +2 to either Strength, Con, or Dex (max 22).

Optional: you can take forgo Action Surge and Second Wind in exchange for another stat boost.

[Sigreid]

What do you replace the level 7 class feature with? You got me curious.

How cool would it be if their level 7 feature were replaced with some kind of a leadership ability or something?

Really, they started in 3e with kneecapping the fighter by making them so they would most likely not invest in intelligence while also giving them the most limited skill points.

[Hytheter]

I don't get why there needs to be a dead simple fighter in the first place. Isn't that the barbarian?

[JNAProductions]

I don't get why there needs to be a dead simple fighter in the first place. Isn't that the barbarian?

Not even close, no.

[Segev]

If you're going to move the level 7 ability to level 3 (and I think thta's actually probably a good idea), and want a themed improvement to their existing features that continues the theme of getting a traditional fighter feat from 3e (improved critical) as subclass features, how about giving them a variant on Cleave?

"Once per turn, when you score a critical hit, you may make an additional attack with the same weapon on that turn."

[MaxWilson]

I don't get why there needs to be a dead simple fighter in the first place. Isn't that the barbarian?

Kind of. Rage is kind of finicky if you pay attention to its details (bonus action economy, ending conditions, etc.), and Reckless will get you killed if you use it carelessly, but yes, especially in Tier 1 a Barbarian who always Rages and then flails away with a weapon is approximately as simple as a Champion or Samurai who uses Action Surge at first opportunity (and Fighting Spirit if applicable) and saves Second Wind for after combat.

But the Fighter is more fundamental to D&D's heritage than the Barbarian is. It's been around longer, in more editions of D&D (including 5E's Basic Rules). Therefore it's more important for the product identity to have a Fighter that feels like a simple TSR Fighter than a Barbarian that feels like an simple TSR Fighter or Barbarian.

[KorvinStarmast]

But the Fighter is more fundamental to D&D's heritage than the Barbarian is. It's been around longer, in more editions of D&D (including 5E's Basic Rules). Therefore it's more important for the product identity to have a Fighter that feels like a simple TSR Fighter than a Barbarian that feels like an simple TSR Fighter or Barbarian. The core/baseline archetypes are: Wizard/Magic User(Evoker); Rogue/Thief(Thief); Cleric(Life); Fighter/Fighting Man(Champion).
I have a dream.
Play in a four person party from Tier 1 through Tier 4 with that exact line up. :smallsmile:

[MaxWilson]

The core/baseline archetypes are: Wizard/Magic User(Evoker); Rogue/Thief(Thief); Cleric(Life); Fighter/Fighting Man(Champion).
I have a dream.
Play in a four person party from Tier 1 through Tier 4 with that exact line up. :smallsmile:

Thief is a Johnny-come-lately, and IMO still doesn't fit very well into the game four decades later. I'll see your Evoker/Thief/Champion/Life Cleric and raise you two Cavaliers, an Evoker, and a Life Cleric instead.

I think the Thief could be a compelling addition to the team with the right additional game structures, but to quote Wikipedia: "These four fantasy gaming archetypes represent four major tactical roles in play: the Fighter offers direct combat strength and durability; the Thief offers cunning and stealth; the Cleric provides support in both combat and magic; and the Magic-User has a variety of magical powers."

The problem is that "cunning" isn't really restricted to Thieves at all (frankly it tends to belong more to wizards because they have more affordances to assemble in cunning combinations), and stealth isn't restricted to thieves nor is it a satisfying specialty on its own--you have to combine it with another capability to make it interesting. (Stealth + understanding = spy. Stealth + killing = assassin. Stealth + mechanical knowledge = saboteur.)

If Thieves somehow created a gameplay experience more like Blades in the Dark, e.g. allowing you to retcon preparations into existence ("that enemy patrol coming towards us? I already bribed them yesterday to ignore us"), I could see them as an essential class of sorts. But in 5E as written they're really just an alternate kind of Fighter.

[KorvinStarmast]

Thief is a Johnny-come-lately, and IMO still doesn't fit very well into the game four decades later. I'll see your Evoker/Thief/Champion/Life Cleric and raise you two Cavaliers, an Evoker, and a Life Cleric instead. I'll riposte with Evoker, Life Cleric, Champion, and Cavalier.

Thief showed up in Greyhawk supplement. By the second year I was playing that was more or less "core" in every group I played with.
Three brown books + Greyhawk.
The thief, as a class, was purpose built for (1) dungeon settings and (2) urban/town settings.

Also, for 5e I was referring to the Basic Rules which (allegedly, based on some of the rhetoric at release of 5e) was sufficient material to play from level 1 into Tier 4.

[MaxWilson]

Also, for 5e I was referring to the Basic Rules which (allegedly, based on some of the rhetoric at release of 5e) was sufficient material to play from level 1 into Tier 4.

Oh, I see. Yeah, that would be fun, although for the Champion's sake I hope feats would be allowed at least for his 6th and 14th level bonus ASIs.

[Eric Diaz]

Level 3: Improved Critical
You crit on a 19 or 20 and double all damage instead of just double dice.

Level 3: Remarkable Athlete
You add half your proficiency bonus (round up) to any Strength, Dexterity or Constitution check you make, including checks you are proficient in but not checks that you apply expertise to.

Level 7: Remarkable Might
You gain Expertise in one Strength or Dexterity based skill you are proficient in, or proficiency in one if you aren't proficient in any.
Additionally you add half your proficiency bonus to saving throws you are not already proficient in.

Throwing in the Athlete feat isn't a bad alternative either.


Yes, something like this would be perfect.

[MaxWilson]

Level 3: Improved Critical
You crit on a 19 or 20 and double all damage instead of just double dice.

Level 3: Remarkable Athlete
You add half your proficiency bonus (round up) to any Strength, Dexterity or Constitution check you make, including checks you are proficient in but not checks that you apply expertise to.

Level 7: Remarkable Might
You gain Expertise in one Strength or Dexterity based skill you are proficient in, or proficiency in one if you aren't proficient in any.
Additionally you add half your proficiency bonus to saving throws you are not already proficient in.

IMO the saving throw bonus shouldn't be part of Champion--it should be on the Fighter base class as a replacement for Indomitable. Each level of Indomitable, instead of granting a reroll, should just be another +1 to all saves. (So at level 9: +1 to saves, level 13: +2 to saves, level 17: +3 to saves.)

Otherwise, this looks fine, I would allow it even though it's a little bit stronger and more front-loaded than what I would prefer.

[Eric Diaz]

Here is my version:

At 3rd you get improved crit AND expertise in acrobatics or athletics, plus the jump thing from 7th.

At 7th you get remarkable athlete, but it also applies to saving throws and (maybe?) damage.

(Adding "one and a half" proficiency is mathematically sound/balanced, but not a thing that exists in the game, so this might be an alternative).

A small change, but it might be enough IMO. It hits the "exploration" pillar in both 3rd and 7th, and half proficiency is not really worth it at level 3 (I dislike +1 bonuses in general). In addition, champion gets better defense (grappling and STs) and offense (damage and grappling).

The +3 damage per attack sounds like a lot at higher levels but I think it is not enough to overshadow the battlemaster or other classes, and it doesn't interact with crits.

[luuma]

If we're all trading Champion fighter reworks, I might as well throw my hat into the ring. I don't think the subclass needs any sort of rework, but there's no harm having some loot prepped, to give it something neat if it feels bad.

Helm of Might
Wondrous item, Uncommon, requires attunement by a Champion Fighter

When you make an ability check or saving throw that uses Strength, Dexterity or Constitution, you can replace the result with your score in that attribute.

You have five uses of this feature, and you regain any expended uses when you finish a long rest.

[GeneralVryth]

The biggest problem with Improved Critical is it's unreliability (as it's unlikely to be a difference maker besides its bad average increase). So why not hit it from the other direction.

Finishing Blow:
You know how to hit when it matters most. When you make an attack roll you can change the result to a natural 20. If the attack kills the target you may use this ability again. Otherwise, it recharges after a short rest.

Combine that with making Remarkable Athlete stack with proficiency and Superior Critical add an extra set of weapon damage dice on a critical hit and you have a solid Champion.


The only thing I would be concerned about is multi-classing shenanigans for single super hits, which really isn't a new thing considering Elven Accuracy and Hexblade/Improved Critical are already a thing.

[MaxWilson]

The biggest problem with Improved Critical is it's unreliability (as it's unlikely to be a difference maker besides its bad average increase). So why not hit it from the other direction.

Finishing Blow:
You know how to hit when it matters most. When you make an attack roll you can change the result to a natural 20. If the attack kills the target you may use this ability again. Otherwise, it recharges after a short rest.

This makes Champion's optimal behavior extremely complicated to analyze, let alone play. You're incentivized to play very, very close attention to all the numbers in the game while picking up specific otherwise-mediocre feats like Piercer and abilities like Sneak Attack so you can use your Finishing Blow often. Guessing wrong and using a Finishing Blow on the "wrong" target and having them not die will feel like a punishment because you lose "your" special ability.

I feel like this is the wrong level of complexity for the Champion's target audience, let alone for the Basic Rules where the Champion is the only Fighter subclass.


The only thing I would be concerned about is multi-classing shenanigans for single super hits, which really isn't a new thing considering Elven Accuracy and Hexblade/Improved Critical are already a thing.

Except, this version is a lot more reliable if you pay the right complexity tax and know monster stats well enough. Paladin + warlock smiting might even become worthwhile if you can plan when to crit. Imagine a GWM Paladin 2/Bladelock 5/Champion 3/Whispers bard 10 who does 10d8+8d8+10d6 in autocrit smite damage on top of whatever the base attack is (say 4d6+5 with a greatsword) for 135 damage total, and then does another 10d8+4d6+5 (64) with another autocrit Divine Smite, and then a followup GWM bonus attack for 10d8+4d6+5 (64) with another autocrit. Or maybe you just do the one huge 135-point attack and call it good, and use your other attack and bonus action to Disarm somebody and award bardic inspiration to a buddy.

[GeneralVryth]

This makes Champion's optimal behavior extremely complicated to analyze, let alone play. You're incentivized to play very, very close attention to all the numbers in the game while picking up specific otherwise-mediocre feats like Piercer and abilities like Sneak Attack so you can use your Finishing Blow often. Guessing wrong and using a Finishing Blow on the "wrong" target and having them not die will feel like a punishment because you lose "your" special ability.

I feel like this is the wrong level of complexity for the Champion's target audience, let alone for the Basic Rules where the Champion is the only Fighter subclass.

Except, this version is a lot more reliable if you pay the right complexity tax and know monster stats well enough. Paladin + warlock smiting might even become worthwhile if you can plan when to crit. Imagine a GWM Paladin 2/Bladelock 5/Champion 3/Whispers bard 10 who does 10d8+8d8+10d6 in autocrit smite damage on top of whatever the base attack is (say 4d6+5 with a greatsword) for 135 damage total, and then does another 10d8+4d6+5 (64) with another autocrit Divine Smite, and then a followup GWM bonus attack for 10d8+4d6+5 (64) with another autocrit. Or maybe you just do the one huge 135-point attack and call it good, and use your other attack and bonus action to Disarm somebody and award bardic inspiration to a buddy.

I think you're right in theory land, but I actually think the idea would work well in play for the target audience. If you are not trying to be perfectly optimal, there is two short hand places to use it, one is against someone you just need to die right now, and if you get it back great. Otherwise it's a short rest recharge. The other straightforward use point is a bunch of weak targets, keep taking them out one attack a piece being a mook killer, which will feel nice and will be a kind of change of pace.

But you are completely right about what happens in the optimizer's hands... maybe it's just some bonus damage (like 2d6 or 3d6), usable once per short rest or if you kill the target on use. Then make the 15th level ability either an increase in the bonus damage or the auto crit ability.

The idea is to be simple, while giving something more than action surge as a way to be more dangerous on demand for the situation where you need something to die right now (which feels very in theme for the Champion).

[Sigreid]

Come to think of it, I think a fighter should be a skill monkey. Pretty much a rogue that swaps full armor and weapon proficiencies for the expertise that rogues get. I think that would make fighters very cool and give them the versatility they're lacking to branch out of hit things.

[MaxWilson]

Come to think of it, I think a fighter should be a skill monkey. Pretty much a rogue that swaps full armor and weapon proficiencies for the expertise that rogues get. I think that would make fighters very cool and give them the versatility they're lacking to branch out of hit things.

Expertise in archaeology and bullwhips?

[Lokishade]

I think the idea of a "finishing blow" class ability kind of already exists. It's the Battlemaster.

Superiority dice are basically on-command crits (that can crit, which is extra nice). They can be used whenever you like, letting you style them as finishing blows if that's what you want to role-play.

Transforming Indomitable into flat bonuses to all saves would make the Fighter hilariously broken when fighting alongside a Paladin. Imagine a Con save of +19. You could roll a nat 1 and still resist the DC of a level 20 Wizard with a +1 magic item.

"Vanilla Fighter" needs to be both simple in design and in use. That's why I went with Dex saves and Athelete. It's simple, thematic, and similar enough to the Samurai's 7th level ability to know it's not overpowered or out of place.

Expertise is kind of like the Rogue's domain (and not out of place for the Bard), but so are strength checks for the Fighter. Unfortunately, giving just one expertise is kinda lame for a level 7 ability when the Rogue got his fourth the level prior. Especially if it doesn't stack with Remarkable Athelete.

The increased crit range makes the iconic Fighter the best user of the equally iconic Vorpal Sword. I think that's what they were going for, design-wise, to give something special to critical hits.

[Kane0]

I build the ‘turn a hit into a crit’ thing into the core fighter, once per short rest same as second wind, action surge and indomitable (which I’ve also changed)

[Hytheter]

Transforming Indomitable into flat bonuses to all saves would make the Fighter hilariously broken when fighting alongside a Paladin. Imagine a Con save of +19. You could roll a nat 1 and still resist the DC of a level 20 Wizard with a +1 magic item.

Why is that a problem? When you've got three levels devoted to improving your saves, and are benefiting from a friend's class feature that improves your saves, and you're also supposed to be good at that save, you better be damn good at it! It requires level investment from you, level investment and stat investment from the paladin, and specific positioning - when all those factors align, I don't see an issue with just letting the fighter have a kickass con save.

[Gurgeh]

It also requires significant investment; Indomitable doesn't come online until 9th level, and doesn't hit its max until 17th. It's not something that everyone and their dog is going to be able to get as a side benefit when they dip for Action Surge.

[MaxWilson]

Transforming Indomitable into flat bonuses to all saves would make the Fighter hilariously broken when fighting alongside a Paladin. Imagine a Con save of +19. You could roll a nat 1 and still resist the DC of a level 20 Wizard with a +1 magic item.

But only if you can get +16 to Con saves from other sources, in which case the current Indomitable will already prevent keep you 99% safe. What's the difference? And the Wizard could just switch to a spell that doesn't give a save, like Wall of Force.

[2D8HP]

I don't get why there needs to be a dead simple fighter in the first place. Isn't that the barbarian?


I for one find higher level Barbarians to be overly complex, not higher level Champion Fighters.


The core/baseline archetypes are: Wizard/Magic User(Evoker); Rogue/Thief(Thief); Cleric(Life); Fighter/Fighting Man(Champion).
I have a dream.
Play in a four person party from Tier 1 through Tier 4 with that exact line up. :smallsmile:


Sounds fun!


I'll riposte with Evoker, Life Cleric, Champion, and Cavalier.

Thief showed up in Greyhawk supplement. By the second year I was playing that was more or less "core" in every group I played with.
Three brown books + Greyhawk.
The thief, as a class, was purpose built for (1) dungeon settings and (2) urban/town settings.

Also, for 5e I was referring to the Basic Rules which (allegedly, based on some of the rhetoric at release of 5e) was sufficient material to play from level 1 into Tier 4.


You indeed may, I have, though I wasn't asked to repeat that, or rather I was but with additional material which I wasn't interested in DMing.

There's a lot of game in just the free rules.

[Waazraath]

I was thinking about Champion Fighter.

Specifically, the 7th level class feature: Remarkable Athelete. There had been many discussions about how this ability feels lackluster, like a poor man's Jack of All Trades that forces you to have subpar strength and dexterity skills to benefit from that specific, limited part. The bonus to initiative (and the once-in-a-blue-moon constitution skill check) was mostly deemed nice, though.

But seeing the blatant power creep in 5e over the course of the years, I was thinking: At this point, why not?

Why not just give the half-proficiency bonus on top of proficiency? I'll be bold and go beyond. Why not also give the bonus to these four skills on top of Expertise? It sure would put the "remarkable" back into Remarkable Athelete.

What do you think?

Late to the party, but yeah, why not -though I'd earlier give 'em expertise in all these skills, than giving a half proficiency which stacks with expertise; at some point you need to stop the numbers getting higher to keep the system intact, and I wouldn't like a precedent where a subclass could add 2,.5 x proficiency modifier. Having said that, at this point, just give the champion a swiming and climbing speed as well, and other passives (to keep in style with the subclass and the simplicity theme) would work as well for me (as a sort of athletics plus).