Brohamsandy
2022-04-24, 11:02 AM
This will be controversial, but it is meant as a productive beginning for a much needed dialog and debate, so hear me and please contribute with opinions, suggests, why you agree disagree or qualify.
Please try to establish respectful commenting and accept that other people are allowed to disagree with you (and myself). Thanks!
Aegis Onslaught:
You are a formidable guardian, and possess the terrifying wrath of a determined defender. As a bonus action, you can focus yourself by entering either Lethal Warding stance of your choice, at which point you explode into a furious sweeping blur of fluid attack patterns, which you have honed for protecting yourself and others, and shape into a devastating shield of violence.
Your chosen stance lasts until the start of your next turn. While in any stance you receive both of the following benefits:
* You can make a number of opportunity attacks without using your reaction equal to half of your proficiency bonus, rounded up.
* You can use your Reaction to make a melee attack against a creature that moves more than 5 feet while within your reach.
Lethal Warding Stances:
1. Tunnel Fighter:
You excel at defending narrow passages, doorways, and other tight spaces:
* If you are inside a tunnel that is less then or equal to 20ft wide (tunnel determined by DM's discretion). You can make opportunity attacks without using your Reaction as long as you are facing and attacking in one direction of the tunnel. Choose the direction you would like to focus when you choose the Tunnel Fighter stance with your Bonus Action. The chosen direction stays until Tunnel Fighter ends at the start of your next turn. While using this ability, you cannot make attacks of opportunity outside of the direction without using a Reaction.
Swirling Sentinel:
If you are in an open area, defined as anything that is more than 20 feet wide, you can choose to enter a make opportunity attacks without using your Reaction on enemies that trigger them in your chosen direction, so long as the creature(s) fulfill ALL of the following criteria:
* If you are being approached from one direction in an open area by an enemy, you can focus your attention in that direction. Choose the direction you would like to focus when you use your bonus action and choose which Aegis Onslaught stance you will be using for this turn. You must choose the stance Swirling Sentinel stance when you activate Aegis Onslaught using your Bonus Action. The direction you choose to focus in while using the Swirling Sentinel stance cannot be changed and you must remain in the same occupied space to maintain it until Aegis Onslaught ends at the start of your next turn.
* If an enemy creature is within the 180° arc running perpendicular to the direction you previously declared, centered on you and facing your chosen direction, you can make opportunity attacks without using your Reaction on enemies within that arc that are also within reach.While using this ability, you cannot make attacks of opportunity outside of the arc, without using a Reaction.
* Entering Swirling Sentinel requires focus to maintain. Once you activate your bonus action and choose to adopt the Swirling Sentinel stance, your movement speed must remain at zero for the remainder of your turn, or your focus is broken and you exit Aegis Onslaught entirely, losing all of its benefits. .
*You may attack from this position in any direction for the remainder of your turn without breaking focus.
This style is meant to be dramatic and fun as well as useful. It is highly recommended to describe you stances and your motions:
Examples:
Something short and simple for a dexterous blademaster:
In alarm, you assume a lithe and fluid stance, whirling in a flurry, transforming in an instant from a slouching form into a deadly virtuoso, as your weapon(s) spring into twin blurring arcs of deadly blades.
Perhaps you are more solid and powerful, and also a bit more detailed with your descriptions:
As you walk down a poorly lit mineshaft, you turn a sharp corner, and lock eyes with the large group of goblins standing 30 feet down the passage. You adopt a timid ready stance, appearing weary and unassuming to swarming enemies, who see only a clunky dwarf in cumbersome heavy armor who is vulnerable to being overwhelmed as you eye them wearily and loudly grumble before crouching behind a shield that nearly dwarfs YOU-the squat lump of angry, dented metal who is still muttering behind it) you casually-and without hurry-begin whirling a massive war hammer slowly through the air above your head in languid circles, gritting your teeth and popping your neck lazily.
The goblins charge eagerly, and as the first set rush you the surprise on their faces remains frozen in place as you decimate them with your hammer, smashing into their slower comrades moments later, as they discover you’re actually a practiced and agile foe-with lightning fast reactions you display as you position yourself nimbly-using your deceptive agility to remain positioned on the balls of your feet, with your weapon delivering precise and efficient killing strokes, decimating the hapless goblins ranks as they stumble into the devastating reach of a shield guardian.
This is the end of my replacement idea for Tunnel Fighter Suggestion. I want to give credit to Reddit contributor Freddyx99 for his much older post that inspired this, but I am not permitted to post links so I apologize for not attaching one to that discussion thread.
What follows are my thoughts on a much bigger topic regarding non magic combat and things like tunnel fighter:
Tunnel fighter can be much more than a combat mechanic: for melee fighters, the roles and actions the tunnel fighting style represent are a fantastic opportunity to add some much-needed flavor and role-play dynamics to melee classes.It will significantly help your party to make combat more engaging.
Players, new and old alike, are highly encouraged to breathe life into the heroic battle scenes tunnel fighter is meant to empower. Once you paint a tunnel fighting scene and describe your actions, with even a bare amount of thought or effort, an image and a scene will begin to emerge, and you will find that with just a few descriptions, or an immersed visual, you and your fellow group members will have more exciting combat. As a play-tester of the original UA Tunnel Fighter who is currently using these guidelines and rules in my own play, I have found that encounters where I use tunnel fighter are almost always a new and exciting story, and using this fighting style has really deepened my character roles as a party member, and the combat descriptions have really impacted my storylines and character developments.
Tunnel fighter’s rules needed adjustments, without question. But, the idea is something missing to melee combat that is essential. Without it, melee combat loses flavor and appeal. Certain characters, those using reach weapons, those who want to take on a protector role, characters who want to engage more deeply than rolling for damage and number outputs and also thing weapon based fantasy combat is cool, need, want, and deserve what tunnel fighter represents. Before you say it’s a bad idea and it’s broken, I make an appeal to you, as someone who has read thousands of fantasy books myself, to reflect on a fantasy book or movie in which melee combat at one point inspired you.
I am in the middle of moving, and I have been packing up books this morning. As I did a fantasy section of my library, I started to write down the names of the authors every time I stumbled on to one where melee combat and non-magical heroism inspired me or deeper the plot and immersion of the novels or series.
This is just the authors of specific books inside the box that in a SINGLE large cardboard box of books with great combat depictions that I personally felt made non-magical combat what it should be. Even after I ruled out many other authors I won’t sully, the list here is impressive.
The point to all this is this: if, in a SINGLE box of fantasy books, the number of vivid melee combat scenes-and dynamic weapon wielding characters who are without magic-is THIS extensive, then what does THAT say about our current 5e subclasses, combat mechanics, and our general treatment of melee and non-magical classes as unworthy of dramatic abilities?
The general consensus I find and myself lament, is that while wizards crackle and sizzle and clerics are about as versatile as duct tape, and warlocks have broody patrons, druids the ability to transform, etc., melee based characters become tedious and boring. I’m currently playing an echo knight fighter myself, which is an improvement in flavor, and I still find out mechanics wanting.
Non-magical combat characters and fighting are vivid, immersive, and full of depth and great versatility in high fantasy: look no further than the brilliant character “Kvothe” in Patrick Rothfuss’, “The Kingkiller Chromicles”.
Players who share this communal love of fantasy come to D&D 5e inspired by countless worlds, worlds in which their heroes perform exciting battles, whose combat style lends to personality and role play and depth. A staggering ratio of our fantasy works contain nothing more dramatic than heroes wielding simple fighting swords, halberds (although more after quarterstaffs or spears) war-hammers, assassins with poisoned crossbows and sleek daggers, foresters with bows, or aggressive war axes.
Spells shouldn’t be the only aspect of our multiverse with versatility, or the acceptance of some less balanced features (looking at you, wizards <3).
I have extensive experience as a player, and as a DM. From that, I have this to say to those of you complaining about min-maxing or meta gaming or, heavens forbid, a build that is “OP” and there fore “broken”:
If, as a DM, you call for fear and subclass and skill bans, with very few exceptions, you should be ashamed. The first tunnel fighter needed modification, so there’s a great example of an exception to this statement, but even here, I am saddened and disappointed to hear most of you reject the concept of this fighting style. Personally, I believe the concept was poorly executed, but in dire need of being integrated with some modification. I understand if you’re AL or something, but I am a rules encyclopedia, and I’m the first to preach that as a DM, you are literally the god of a world for your characters. If you can’t scale, tailor, balance, or adapt for roleplay lay and combat to the abilities of one character, then you, a God, have been bested by a tiny mortal character. Stop blaming rules or classes, and accept that you need to improve your skills. This includes if someone wants to do some optimization or multi-class and outshines the rest of the party. Collaboration is great and so is the band of equal heroes sentiment as a player, but to this I counter with two extensive points:
1. Operating on assumption that everybody should be balanced fastidiously so they are equal is the antithesis of the Hero Epic that underpines Dungeons and Dragons. 5e is if anything painfully difficult to engineer unbalanced classes, but from an experience 5e perspective, yeah there are a bunch of well-known ways. Applaud those. Alter your encounters, change roleplay dynamics and add varied skill scenarios to engage different abilities like bards and rogues and a drunk barbarian dwarf. It is your job, despite whatever justification you have to the contrary, first and foremost to ensure your players each have the chance to be useful party members. Shape your world around them and adapt, for heavens sake.
2. We’ve established that it is a DM’s job to cater to player niches, and that it is your job to make encounters that scale to powerful characters, so let’s get back to my praise of people who build “OP” or “broken” builds. We’re playing a game where a main encompassing objective and theme is becoming an epic hero. You’re mad that some characters are way stronger than others? If everyone in a world is a super powerful champion of wizardly prowess of polearm master sword Lockett or what have you, then no one in that world can BE a hero. No one gets to shine. If you believe that NPCs count in theatre of the mind as people to accentuate a party’s heroic nature, then please reconsider. Look at NPC stats. Monsters alone who are deadly or dangerous may convey a dangerous world, but a lot of the exciting of a group role playing game is finding something we excel at. If one player optimizes an Echo knight with an ancestral barb, or after this goes pole-arm master, sentinel, AND tunnel fighter, then cool, let’s make sure that combat is more dynamic and engaging visually and mechanically and let that player be the strongest combatant. Upscale and interact with your encounters to make them harder until the party is challenged, even if one character is significantly better in combat. Then, add different flavors of encounters. All builds have weaknesses. Or discover how much you need to scale to engage and challenge each player. There are so many great monsters and creatures. Don’t underestimate encounters. I suggest when initially scaling and evaluating characters who are new or have improved, overestimate, but build in a feasible plot or reason to make sure not to TPK. This is not railroading, it’s thresholding and using a feint. They may succeed, if so, make a deadly encounter lucrative. Most importantly, allow differences in ability without naysaying the balance. Be flexible with players who aren’t happy with parts of their characters and allow changes. ENCOURAGE building a hero that feels like the destroyed of giants and strider of worlds, but if a character fills a different niche, that in no way means the strong concept must be nerfed or leave. If something mechanically just doesn’t add up with realism of the action, (ie the first tunnel fighter vs 100 tiny enemy creatures swarming), that’s another story. But, the bard may just not do well in fights. Give them great chances to utilize their unique spells and combat abilities, but also out of combat do more to give them room to shine. Look at life clerics. They fulfill a role that is essential to a party. Would you consider them equal combatants to wizards? Life clerics have FLAVOR, and ultimately that and a role are what matters.
We need to give melee fighters and non-magical heroes better flavor through better combat mechanics, more versatility, and most of all, we need to stop decrying them when they become really good and someone thinks they’re cool again.
I don’t know a lot of fantasy books where a wizard slays the dragon: he could, certainly, but our most epic heroes are given nearly inhuman non-magical abilities. There’s a reason the sword wielding knight slaying a dragon made it into folklore and fantasy instead. What I am trying to say, is that if you look at the extensive power variance in spells, and more importantly if you look at the length of the full spell lists and the variety of abilities they enable, is there really any reason to be upset that classes that are flavored primarily through how well they fight get a lot more, and yes even-gasp-unbalanced improvements?
Make fighting with melee combat and any non magical style more descriptive, more versatile and adaptive, and more dramatic. Stop fretting about the balance, because if you look and 5e, the bigger issue is we have turned melee combat into tedious rigamarole. Worse, we won’t even let it become more dramatic or give it flavor, because we’re more worried about this silly notion of balance.
Wizards have f$!%#%^# blazing balls of fire and pocket dimensions. Give fighter this version of tunnel fighter, and then, please, let’s all work on 100 more options, balance be damned. Fantasy needs it’s swords and spears, and the optimizing and min-max fixation of experience melee enthusiasts is a symptom of the disease that is our negligence to non magical classes. Stop trying to extinguish it. If you create a vast number of options to pick. Moves and style and feats, just a better and way more menu wild selection, and more intricate and responsive mechanics like these, you won’t see every melee fantasy enthusiast-those who were influenced often by many impressive melee fighting heroes of written epic fantasy that we should start to enable in our system by expanding it-run to polearm sentiental, etc. Like everyone else, they will be disperse among the buffet tables. Stop worrying about balanced melee for now. First let’s create a whole host of future headaches by varying moves and mechanical choices and what have you and whittle them down. Isn’t that exactly how our spell list evolved?
Please consider this tunnel fighter variant, but I wrote this really fast so feel free to edit typos, or suggest modified rules!
And again, there should never be a scenario possible long term with a DM that knows how to adjust in which a so called “broken” character is able to overwhelm your encounters in 5e, which if anything is too balanced. If it was a different addition I might say otherwise, but I think 5e could honestly use a little less balance and a ton more versatile non magical fighting options, skills, actions, and mechanics. Balance be damned!
if you have read any of these authors I enjoyed the many fantasy books that bring melee combat alive-many in our D&D multiverse. I could mention the Drizz’t saga by R.A. Salvatore, or the works of Robert Jordan, Frank Herbert, Brent Weeks, Brandon Sanderson, Patrick Rothfuss, Scott Lynch, Raymond Feist, Joe Abercrombie, J.R.R Tolkien, William Goldman, Terry Brooks, Robin Hobb.
Please try to establish respectful commenting and accept that other people are allowed to disagree with you (and myself). Thanks!
Aegis Onslaught:
You are a formidable guardian, and possess the terrifying wrath of a determined defender. As a bonus action, you can focus yourself by entering either Lethal Warding stance of your choice, at which point you explode into a furious sweeping blur of fluid attack patterns, which you have honed for protecting yourself and others, and shape into a devastating shield of violence.
Your chosen stance lasts until the start of your next turn. While in any stance you receive both of the following benefits:
* You can make a number of opportunity attacks without using your reaction equal to half of your proficiency bonus, rounded up.
* You can use your Reaction to make a melee attack against a creature that moves more than 5 feet while within your reach.
Lethal Warding Stances:
1. Tunnel Fighter:
You excel at defending narrow passages, doorways, and other tight spaces:
* If you are inside a tunnel that is less then or equal to 20ft wide (tunnel determined by DM's discretion). You can make opportunity attacks without using your Reaction as long as you are facing and attacking in one direction of the tunnel. Choose the direction you would like to focus when you choose the Tunnel Fighter stance with your Bonus Action. The chosen direction stays until Tunnel Fighter ends at the start of your next turn. While using this ability, you cannot make attacks of opportunity outside of the direction without using a Reaction.
Swirling Sentinel:
If you are in an open area, defined as anything that is more than 20 feet wide, you can choose to enter a make opportunity attacks without using your Reaction on enemies that trigger them in your chosen direction, so long as the creature(s) fulfill ALL of the following criteria:
* If you are being approached from one direction in an open area by an enemy, you can focus your attention in that direction. Choose the direction you would like to focus when you use your bonus action and choose which Aegis Onslaught stance you will be using for this turn. You must choose the stance Swirling Sentinel stance when you activate Aegis Onslaught using your Bonus Action. The direction you choose to focus in while using the Swirling Sentinel stance cannot be changed and you must remain in the same occupied space to maintain it until Aegis Onslaught ends at the start of your next turn.
* If an enemy creature is within the 180° arc running perpendicular to the direction you previously declared, centered on you and facing your chosen direction, you can make opportunity attacks without using your Reaction on enemies within that arc that are also within reach.While using this ability, you cannot make attacks of opportunity outside of the arc, without using a Reaction.
* Entering Swirling Sentinel requires focus to maintain. Once you activate your bonus action and choose to adopt the Swirling Sentinel stance, your movement speed must remain at zero for the remainder of your turn, or your focus is broken and you exit Aegis Onslaught entirely, losing all of its benefits. .
*You may attack from this position in any direction for the remainder of your turn without breaking focus.
This style is meant to be dramatic and fun as well as useful. It is highly recommended to describe you stances and your motions:
Examples:
Something short and simple for a dexterous blademaster:
In alarm, you assume a lithe and fluid stance, whirling in a flurry, transforming in an instant from a slouching form into a deadly virtuoso, as your weapon(s) spring into twin blurring arcs of deadly blades.
Perhaps you are more solid and powerful, and also a bit more detailed with your descriptions:
As you walk down a poorly lit mineshaft, you turn a sharp corner, and lock eyes with the large group of goblins standing 30 feet down the passage. You adopt a timid ready stance, appearing weary and unassuming to swarming enemies, who see only a clunky dwarf in cumbersome heavy armor who is vulnerable to being overwhelmed as you eye them wearily and loudly grumble before crouching behind a shield that nearly dwarfs YOU-the squat lump of angry, dented metal who is still muttering behind it) you casually-and without hurry-begin whirling a massive war hammer slowly through the air above your head in languid circles, gritting your teeth and popping your neck lazily.
The goblins charge eagerly, and as the first set rush you the surprise on their faces remains frozen in place as you decimate them with your hammer, smashing into their slower comrades moments later, as they discover you’re actually a practiced and agile foe-with lightning fast reactions you display as you position yourself nimbly-using your deceptive agility to remain positioned on the balls of your feet, with your weapon delivering precise and efficient killing strokes, decimating the hapless goblins ranks as they stumble into the devastating reach of a shield guardian.
This is the end of my replacement idea for Tunnel Fighter Suggestion. I want to give credit to Reddit contributor Freddyx99 for his much older post that inspired this, but I am not permitted to post links so I apologize for not attaching one to that discussion thread.
What follows are my thoughts on a much bigger topic regarding non magic combat and things like tunnel fighter:
Tunnel fighter can be much more than a combat mechanic: for melee fighters, the roles and actions the tunnel fighting style represent are a fantastic opportunity to add some much-needed flavor and role-play dynamics to melee classes.It will significantly help your party to make combat more engaging.
Players, new and old alike, are highly encouraged to breathe life into the heroic battle scenes tunnel fighter is meant to empower. Once you paint a tunnel fighting scene and describe your actions, with even a bare amount of thought or effort, an image and a scene will begin to emerge, and you will find that with just a few descriptions, or an immersed visual, you and your fellow group members will have more exciting combat. As a play-tester of the original UA Tunnel Fighter who is currently using these guidelines and rules in my own play, I have found that encounters where I use tunnel fighter are almost always a new and exciting story, and using this fighting style has really deepened my character roles as a party member, and the combat descriptions have really impacted my storylines and character developments.
Tunnel fighter’s rules needed adjustments, without question. But, the idea is something missing to melee combat that is essential. Without it, melee combat loses flavor and appeal. Certain characters, those using reach weapons, those who want to take on a protector role, characters who want to engage more deeply than rolling for damage and number outputs and also thing weapon based fantasy combat is cool, need, want, and deserve what tunnel fighter represents. Before you say it’s a bad idea and it’s broken, I make an appeal to you, as someone who has read thousands of fantasy books myself, to reflect on a fantasy book or movie in which melee combat at one point inspired you.
I am in the middle of moving, and I have been packing up books this morning. As I did a fantasy section of my library, I started to write down the names of the authors every time I stumbled on to one where melee combat and non-magical heroism inspired me or deeper the plot and immersion of the novels or series.
This is just the authors of specific books inside the box that in a SINGLE large cardboard box of books with great combat depictions that I personally felt made non-magical combat what it should be. Even after I ruled out many other authors I won’t sully, the list here is impressive.
The point to all this is this: if, in a SINGLE box of fantasy books, the number of vivid melee combat scenes-and dynamic weapon wielding characters who are without magic-is THIS extensive, then what does THAT say about our current 5e subclasses, combat mechanics, and our general treatment of melee and non-magical classes as unworthy of dramatic abilities?
The general consensus I find and myself lament, is that while wizards crackle and sizzle and clerics are about as versatile as duct tape, and warlocks have broody patrons, druids the ability to transform, etc., melee based characters become tedious and boring. I’m currently playing an echo knight fighter myself, which is an improvement in flavor, and I still find out mechanics wanting.
Non-magical combat characters and fighting are vivid, immersive, and full of depth and great versatility in high fantasy: look no further than the brilliant character “Kvothe” in Patrick Rothfuss’, “The Kingkiller Chromicles”.
Players who share this communal love of fantasy come to D&D 5e inspired by countless worlds, worlds in which their heroes perform exciting battles, whose combat style lends to personality and role play and depth. A staggering ratio of our fantasy works contain nothing more dramatic than heroes wielding simple fighting swords, halberds (although more after quarterstaffs or spears) war-hammers, assassins with poisoned crossbows and sleek daggers, foresters with bows, or aggressive war axes.
Spells shouldn’t be the only aspect of our multiverse with versatility, or the acceptance of some less balanced features (looking at you, wizards <3).
I have extensive experience as a player, and as a DM. From that, I have this to say to those of you complaining about min-maxing or meta gaming or, heavens forbid, a build that is “OP” and there fore “broken”:
If, as a DM, you call for fear and subclass and skill bans, with very few exceptions, you should be ashamed. The first tunnel fighter needed modification, so there’s a great example of an exception to this statement, but even here, I am saddened and disappointed to hear most of you reject the concept of this fighting style. Personally, I believe the concept was poorly executed, but in dire need of being integrated with some modification. I understand if you’re AL or something, but I am a rules encyclopedia, and I’m the first to preach that as a DM, you are literally the god of a world for your characters. If you can’t scale, tailor, balance, or adapt for roleplay lay and combat to the abilities of one character, then you, a God, have been bested by a tiny mortal character. Stop blaming rules or classes, and accept that you need to improve your skills. This includes if someone wants to do some optimization or multi-class and outshines the rest of the party. Collaboration is great and so is the band of equal heroes sentiment as a player, but to this I counter with two extensive points:
1. Operating on assumption that everybody should be balanced fastidiously so they are equal is the antithesis of the Hero Epic that underpines Dungeons and Dragons. 5e is if anything painfully difficult to engineer unbalanced classes, but from an experience 5e perspective, yeah there are a bunch of well-known ways. Applaud those. Alter your encounters, change roleplay dynamics and add varied skill scenarios to engage different abilities like bards and rogues and a drunk barbarian dwarf. It is your job, despite whatever justification you have to the contrary, first and foremost to ensure your players each have the chance to be useful party members. Shape your world around them and adapt, for heavens sake.
2. We’ve established that it is a DM’s job to cater to player niches, and that it is your job to make encounters that scale to powerful characters, so let’s get back to my praise of people who build “OP” or “broken” builds. We’re playing a game where a main encompassing objective and theme is becoming an epic hero. You’re mad that some characters are way stronger than others? If everyone in a world is a super powerful champion of wizardly prowess of polearm master sword Lockett or what have you, then no one in that world can BE a hero. No one gets to shine. If you believe that NPCs count in theatre of the mind as people to accentuate a party’s heroic nature, then please reconsider. Look at NPC stats. Monsters alone who are deadly or dangerous may convey a dangerous world, but a lot of the exciting of a group role playing game is finding something we excel at. If one player optimizes an Echo knight with an ancestral barb, or after this goes pole-arm master, sentinel, AND tunnel fighter, then cool, let’s make sure that combat is more dynamic and engaging visually and mechanically and let that player be the strongest combatant. Upscale and interact with your encounters to make them harder until the party is challenged, even if one character is significantly better in combat. Then, add different flavors of encounters. All builds have weaknesses. Or discover how much you need to scale to engage and challenge each player. There are so many great monsters and creatures. Don’t underestimate encounters. I suggest when initially scaling and evaluating characters who are new or have improved, overestimate, but build in a feasible plot or reason to make sure not to TPK. This is not railroading, it’s thresholding and using a feint. They may succeed, if so, make a deadly encounter lucrative. Most importantly, allow differences in ability without naysaying the balance. Be flexible with players who aren’t happy with parts of their characters and allow changes. ENCOURAGE building a hero that feels like the destroyed of giants and strider of worlds, but if a character fills a different niche, that in no way means the strong concept must be nerfed or leave. If something mechanically just doesn’t add up with realism of the action, (ie the first tunnel fighter vs 100 tiny enemy creatures swarming), that’s another story. But, the bard may just not do well in fights. Give them great chances to utilize their unique spells and combat abilities, but also out of combat do more to give them room to shine. Look at life clerics. They fulfill a role that is essential to a party. Would you consider them equal combatants to wizards? Life clerics have FLAVOR, and ultimately that and a role are what matters.
We need to give melee fighters and non-magical heroes better flavor through better combat mechanics, more versatility, and most of all, we need to stop decrying them when they become really good and someone thinks they’re cool again.
I don’t know a lot of fantasy books where a wizard slays the dragon: he could, certainly, but our most epic heroes are given nearly inhuman non-magical abilities. There’s a reason the sword wielding knight slaying a dragon made it into folklore and fantasy instead. What I am trying to say, is that if you look at the extensive power variance in spells, and more importantly if you look at the length of the full spell lists and the variety of abilities they enable, is there really any reason to be upset that classes that are flavored primarily through how well they fight get a lot more, and yes even-gasp-unbalanced improvements?
Make fighting with melee combat and any non magical style more descriptive, more versatile and adaptive, and more dramatic. Stop fretting about the balance, because if you look and 5e, the bigger issue is we have turned melee combat into tedious rigamarole. Worse, we won’t even let it become more dramatic or give it flavor, because we’re more worried about this silly notion of balance.
Wizards have f$!%#%^# blazing balls of fire and pocket dimensions. Give fighter this version of tunnel fighter, and then, please, let’s all work on 100 more options, balance be damned. Fantasy needs it’s swords and spears, and the optimizing and min-max fixation of experience melee enthusiasts is a symptom of the disease that is our negligence to non magical classes. Stop trying to extinguish it. If you create a vast number of options to pick. Moves and style and feats, just a better and way more menu wild selection, and more intricate and responsive mechanics like these, you won’t see every melee fantasy enthusiast-those who were influenced often by many impressive melee fighting heroes of written epic fantasy that we should start to enable in our system by expanding it-run to polearm sentiental, etc. Like everyone else, they will be disperse among the buffet tables. Stop worrying about balanced melee for now. First let’s create a whole host of future headaches by varying moves and mechanical choices and what have you and whittle them down. Isn’t that exactly how our spell list evolved?
Please consider this tunnel fighter variant, but I wrote this really fast so feel free to edit typos, or suggest modified rules!
And again, there should never be a scenario possible long term with a DM that knows how to adjust in which a so called “broken” character is able to overwhelm your encounters in 5e, which if anything is too balanced. If it was a different addition I might say otherwise, but I think 5e could honestly use a little less balance and a ton more versatile non magical fighting options, skills, actions, and mechanics. Balance be damned!
if you have read any of these authors I enjoyed the many fantasy books that bring melee combat alive-many in our D&D multiverse. I could mention the Drizz’t saga by R.A. Salvatore, or the works of Robert Jordan, Frank Herbert, Brent Weeks, Brandon Sanderson, Patrick Rothfuss, Scott Lynch, Raymond Feist, Joe Abercrombie, J.R.R Tolkien, William Goldman, Terry Brooks, Robin Hobb.