Character Concepts you wished would work in D&D?

[Evaar]

Artemis Entreri

He uses a sword and a dagger. No reason to do that. If you have the Dual Wielder feat, use two longswords. If you don't, then you can't actually attack with both.

Also his sword is a longsword, so he's pumping Strength as well as Dexterity, because he only wears light armor.

[Morty]

I guess I mean that the next step seems to identify what an Intelligence-based Fighter that doesn't use magic would look like.

To me, that comes off as a Sherlock Holmes brawler, one that outsmarts you as he outmaneuvers you. An Inquisitive Rogue would fit the thematics nicely, especially once you turn it into a Thug. Or the Intelligence Monk, being wise over perceptive.

But you have something else in mind. It's not about a theme or a character concept, but a mechanic. It HAS to be Fighter, so it's the Fighter mechanics that matter.

My question is, how?

It's not about any particular class' mechanics. It's about how the interaction between attributes and classes encourages focusing on one pre-selected attribute. Maybe two.

Artemis Entreri

He uses a sword and a dagger. No reason to do that. If you have the Dual Wielder feat, use two longswords. If you don't, then you can't actually attack with both.

Also his sword is a longsword, so he's pumping Strength as well as Dexterity, because he only wears light armor.

His sword is described as a "sabre" in the novels, which is a type of weapon D&D has rarely if ever acknowledged. In 5E, you could take a rapier, describe it as a sabre and change the damage type to slashing on the off-chance it comes up. But it just goes to show that the equipment list is pretty paper-thin.

[JackPhoenix]

Artemis Entreri

He uses a sword and a dagger. No reason to do that. If you have the Dual Wielder feat, use two longswords. If you don't, then you can't actually attack with both.

Also his sword is a longsword, so he's pumping Strength as well as Dexterity, because he only wears light armor.

He's a rogue, so he needs a dagger (or another finesse weapon, but a dagger has an advantage of being throwable in a pinch) if he want Sneak Attack, assuming it's really a longsword. And longsword has better damage than dagger once the sneak attack has been made. Why longsword and not rapier, then? His (presumably) magic longsword is sufficiently better than any rapier he's found that it's not worth the switch. Also, the dagger definitely is magical, so the same principle may apply there.

[Evaar]

It's not about any particular class' mechanics. It's about how the interaction between attributes and classes encourages focusing on one pre-selected attribute. Maybe two.



His sword is described as a "sabre" in the novels, which is a type of weapon D&D has rarely if ever acknowledged. In 5E, you could take a rapier, describe it as a sabre and change the damage type to slashing on the off-chance it comes up. But it just goes to show that the equipment list is pretty paper-thin.

I haven't been keeping up, but according to the wikia I found he has a fancy new weapon called Charon's Claw which is a +4 keen smoking longsword. I actually went to look it up because I was pretty sure he used a longsword but wasn't 100%.

[Morty]

I haven't been keeping up, but according to the wikia I found he has a fancy new weapon called Charon's Claw which is a +4 keen smoking longsword. I actually went to look it up because I was pretty sure he used a longsword but wasn't 100%.

I'm going off the first Icewind Dale novels from ages ago, so my information might be out of date. Or maybe a longsword is just how his weapon is depicted by the rules.

[sithlordnergal]

Da Best Archer: Technically it wasn't disallowed by RAW until some changes were made specifically to disallow it, though it was never RAI

Basically you take Shaprshooter, Tavern Brawler, Heavy Weapon Master, and a Barbarian/Rogue split to smash people in the face with the Longbow for a -10 to hit/+20 damage. Technically, sneak attack still only requires that the "Attack must use a Finesse or a ranged weapon.", and I can't find anything saying that a weapon loses all of their properties if you use it as an improvised weapon...so you might, might, have a very shaky, not very convincing argument that you can smack someone upside the head with a longbow and still get sneak attack. But honestly, I doubt it would be worth the effort.

It is a hilarious build though, absolutely the dumbest thing you could think of.

[Man_Over_Game]

It's not about any particular class' mechanics. It's about how the interaction between attributes and classes encourages focusing on one pre-selected attribute. Maybe two.

I see.

I could see something like that be a slight modification of the Battlemaster. You get one more Superiority Die, but your Maneuver Save DC uses your Intelligence or Wisdom bonus instead of your Strength or Dexterity, and your Superiority Dice are one size smaller respectively for all levels (so they start as a d6 at level 3, ending as a d10 at level 18).

[Starbuck_II]

What I feel is missing:
1) A magical equivalent of Barbarian's rage. A lot of characters in fictions have those moments where they "enter into a trance" or "get possessed by a legendary spirit" where they get OP magical powers for some limited time. To be fair, that's already possible with a level 20 paladin, or some high level sorcerer, but that's kind of late...
2) Character classes defined by an artefact. In fiction, an absurd number of characters get their power from a magical sword / ring / whatever. The easiest way to include it would be to make a warlock patron for it. [In fact, I'm sure there are plenty of community-made warlock patron that do exactly that]
3) "Pokemon trainer". Well, not specifically with pokemon, but 5e doesn't have an equivalent of the 3.X animal companion stronger than its master.

Assimar Racials work, but that is a race rage not a class based rage.

So, like a Warlock rage?
Like a subclass like the Incendent:
Your patron is the very essence of magic itself.
Expanded Spell list:
1st: Magic Missile, Sleep
2nd: Scorching Ray, Mirror Image
3rd: Haste, Fireball
4th: Fire Shield, Banishment
5th: Circe of Power, Disintegrate,

Start at 1st:
Eldritch Awakening: You are able to bring forth great magical potential into your being. You can enter as a bonus action.
While Awakened, you gain many benefits:
-You gain advantage on Con checks and Con saving throws (this is to help concentration)
-You can ignore one energy type of resistance (not immunity) chose when activating Eldritch Awakening among the choices while the ability lasts: Fire, Cold, Lightning
-You gain a bonus to spell damage (including cantrips) while this lasts. This bonus start at +1 and increases by 1 every 4 levels.
This ability lasts 6 rounds, but ends early if you are knocked unconscious. It also ends if you haven't attacked a hostile creature since the end of your last turn.
This ability can be used 1 + 1/2 (minimum 1) your level in uses/day. This recharges with a long rest.

Starting at 6th: Magical bursting
While in Eldritch Awakening, Once/turn, reroll 1's and 2's on your spell (including cantrips) damage die once, taking the higher amount.

Starting at 10th: Determined Mind
You can't be charmed or Frightened while Eldritch Awakening is ongoing.

Starting at 14th: Relentless Way
If dropped to 0 hps, you can make a DC 10 Con saving throw. If you succeed, you drop to 1 hp instead.
If you are Eldritch Awakened, the DC drops by your Con Mod.
Each time you use this feature, after the first, the DC increases by 5. After a long rest, the DC resets to 0.

I liked the Warlord in 4e. One of its special abilities was just giving an ally an extra attack. So simple and straightforward, for 4th edition.

In general, 5th edition characters who make other 5th edition characters shine are either bards, or a caster who has cherry picked spells from their catalogue. The system could use more characters who share the spotlight. I mean, I like the Prism off DM's guild, but 3rd party homebrew still has a bad name from 3rd ed days.

Could also use a 3rd class that isn't flashy magicy supernatural woo woo, for those who play down to earth campaigns and want to get past 5th level. Warlord would fill that gap. As would a tinkerer who makes traps and tricks that aren't magic items.

So, like a 3.5 E Marshal converted to 5E?

[Evaar]

I'm going off the first Icewind Dale novels from ages ago, so my information might be out of date. Or maybe a longsword is just how his weapon is depicted by the rules.

But regardless of houseruling up a slashing damage rapier, my point was there's no good reason to use an offhand dagger. I mean I guess you could argue he just got a really good dagger, so he's acceptable the non-optimal offhand in order to get the magic effect. But you can't build a character so that rapier/dagger or longsword/shortsword is your optimal fighting style.

[Zetakya]

But regardless of houseruling up a slashing damage rapier, my point was there's no good reason to use an offhand dagger. I mean I guess you could argue he just got a really good dagger, so he's acceptable the non-optimal offhand in order to get the magic effect. But you can't build a character so that rapier/dagger or longsword/shortsword is your optimal fighting style.

I just mentioned this in passing over in the Hexblade thread, but you definitely can; you can only Sneak Attack once per turn, so you're better off using an offhand weapon for the Sneak Attack and a Higher Damage main hand, especially as a Fight/Rogue MC.

[JackPhoenix]

But regardless of houseruling up a slashing damage rapier, my point was there's no good reason to use an offhand dagger. I mean I guess you could argue he just got a really good dagger, so he's acceptable the non-optimal offhand in order to get the magic effect. But you can't build a character so that rapier/dagger or longsword/shortsword is your optimal fighting style.

You can't build a character with TWF as optimal fighting style, period. Everyone is better off with either ranged weapon, polearm or a shield, depends on what they aim for. But 'not optimal' doesn't mean it doesn't work.

[Tanarii]

But regardless of houseruling up a slashing damage rapier, my point was there's no good reason to use an offhand dagger. I mean I guess you could argue he just got a really good dagger, so he's acceptable the non-optimal offhand in order to get the magic effect. But you can't build a character so that rapier/dagger or longsword/shortsword is your optimal fighting style.

If it's a character based off the (just terrible) forgotten realms books, two points:

- those characters are supposed to be based off AD&D, but break the rules all the time. So technically they aren't a character concept that doesn't work. They're a flawed representation of the archetype that is the AD&D class.

- TWF rules were very different AD&D. And 3e. And 4e.

[Man_Over_Game]

I just mentioned this in passing over in the Hexblade thread, but you definitely can; you can only Sneak Attack once per turn, so you're better off using an offhand weapon for the Sneak Attack and a Higher Damage main hand, especially as a Fight/Rogue MC.

Both weapons have to be Light, or neither of them do (if you have the feat), in 5e.

That means two Shortswords or two Rapiers. You can do a Rapier and a Shortsword with the feat, but there's no reason you couldn't use two Rapiers then for +1 more damage.

Personally, if given the option, I like two Whips. The 1d4 doesn't matter when you have Sneak Attack.

[Morty]

But regardless of houseruling up a slashing damage rapier, my point was there's no good reason to use an offhand dagger. I mean I guess you could argue he just got a really good dagger, so he's acceptable the non-optimal offhand in order to get the magic effect. But you can't build a character so that rapier/dagger or longsword/shortsword is your optimal fighting style.

That is true, yes. I don't think there's any way to finagle it into being worthwhile in the rules as they are. Fighting with a sword and dagger was something actually done in real life, as opposed to fighting with two swords like Drizz't does - but the dagger in this situation was a defensive weapon, not an offensive one. Which Salvatore didn't know or disregarded when he wrote Entreri.

[Man_Over_Game]

That is true, yes. I don't think there's any way to finagle it into being worthwhile in the rules as they are. Fighting with a sword and dagger was something actually done in real life, as opposed to fighting with two swords like Drizz't does - but the dagger in this situation was a defensive weapon, not an offensive one. Which Salvatore didn't know or disregarded when he wrote Entreri.

Well, there's also the possibility that dual wielding would be effective in a world where ambidexterity is common, or the humanoids are more capable.

I'm not a big dual-wielding junky like a lot of people are, and I'm only vaguely familiar with Drizz't, but it's kind of odd to hold a fantasy world to the standards of a mundane one.

Unless the idea is "This world is identical to ours, except these specific exceptions", it'd be better to assume that everything is magical or uses its own types of physics until proven otherwise.

In Drizzt's world, dual wielding works. In ours, it doesn't work, because ours is different. We don't really question why rocks float in the Plane of Air, do we?

[Morty]

Well, there's also the possibility that dual wielding would be effective in a world where ambidexterity is common, or the humanoids are more capable.

I'm not a big dual-wielding junky like a lot of people are, and I'm only vaguely familiar with Drizz't, but it's kind of odd to hold a fantasy world to the standards of a mundane one.

Unless the idea is "This world is identical to ours, except these specific exceptions", it'd be better to assume that everything is magical or uses its own types of physics until proven otherwise.

In Drizzt's world, dual wielding works. In ours, it doesn't work, because ours is different. We don't really question why rocks float in the Plane of Air, do we?

I'm not suggesting that dual-wielding shouldn't work. I'm just making an observation about this particular kind of dual-wielding.

[AdAstra]

That is true, yes. I don't think there's any way to finagle it into being worthwhile in the rules as they are. Fighting with a sword and dagger was something actually done in real life, as opposed to fighting with two swords like Drizz't does - but the dagger in this situation was a defensive weapon, not an offensive one. Which Salvatore didn't know or disregarded when he wrote Entreri.

If you're a melee rogue, having a dagger (or multiple, nothing in the rules against that) in your off hand gives you the ability to make ranged attacks in a pinch without spending time switching weapons. If you prefer a rapier over shortswords it doesn't hurt your damage at all, and even if you do use TWF it's one damage lost, which is generally a decent trade. Theoretically rapier-wielders could also do this by holding a light crossbow or something in their off hand, then putting their rapier away when they want to make ranged attacks, but in addition to being way less cool, it prevents you from making opportunity attacks while you're using the crossbow.

[Nagog]

If I understand correctly, the summarized version of what you're saying is:

Cavalier doesn't deal enough area damage or denial, despite having a 10ft reach and several benefits to keeping enemies locked down within that area.
Conquest is too magical to be considered a valid choice, despite only being a 1/3 caster.

What kind of AoE Control are you imagining here? Some kind of bomb-thrower?

Cavalier is limited by number of attacks and keeping people within range, yes. I could see a Bugbear Cavilier, PAM, Sentinel, and Tunnel Fighter being decently effective as a crowd control, but nothing nearly as effective as the fire-and-forget capabilities of a MI Entangle or a ranger/druid with Spike Growth.
Aren't Paladins half casters? The only 1/3 casters I'm aware of is Eldritch Knight and Arcane Trickster. The difference is only a single level worth of spells, but the power scaling between 4th and 5th level spells is pretty huge. And the issue isn't necessarily "Magic", it's the slot system I'd like to move away from. Like how the Wild Magic Barbarian UA from a while back is still a martial class, despite having many magical effects associated with it.

A bomb thrower could be interesting. The Echo Knight is also pretty close, with having multiple copies of yourself to lock down more targets, but that's not really it's focus per say. I had an idea a while back for a fighter subclass that could use a bonus action to set up a 30 foot radius sphere around them, then with their attack action and subsequent turns they could teleport around that sphere and melee attack enemies from all over, and teleport to the next one between attacks. Later abilities could include halving movement speed of enemies hit, dealing all attacks against a single target and dividing the damage among all the hostiles in that area, stuff like that.

[ZenBear]

One that doesn't work in 5E is the 4E Swordmage. Lightly armored tank, uses magical wards to protect his allies.

Closest you get is Abjuration Wizard. Risky with the low HP, but you can make it easier in some ways. Ask your DM to let you use the Spell Points variant and you can spam Shield or Absorb Elements through every combat to mitigate damage and replenish your ward. I also like to build this as a Mountain Dwarf to get 14s in STR/DEX/CON/INT through point buy, medium armor and battleaxe/warhammer proficiency.

[RossN]

I'd like to be able to play a fighter who can be an effective swordsman without having to carry a shield and/or clanking around in full armour.

It's an aesthetic thing really. When I think of a skilled swordsman - at least one I'd like to play - I think of people like Zorro or Westley or basically every Hollywood pirate or samurai. I understand that the Swashbuckler does a lot of this and it is a fun subclass but I wish it was possible with the basic Fighter who is meant to invoke almost everyone who can hit well.

[Dr. Cliché]

I'd like to be able to play a fighter who can be an effective swordsman without having to carry a shield and/or clanking around in full armour.

It's an aesthetic thing really. When I think of a skilled swordsman - at least one I'd like to play - I think of people like Zorro or Westley or basically every Hollywood pirate or samurai. I understand that the Swashbuckler does a lot of this and it is a fun subclass but I wish it was possible with the basic Fighter who is meant to invoke almost everyone who can hit well.

I'm in the same boat, actually, though I'd extend it to other classes as well.

I wish there were more classes with stuff like the Monk or Barbarian natural armour. Or some other reward for not just using the heaviest armour available.

[Sorinth]

I'd like to be able to play a fighter who can be an effective swordsman without having to carry a shield and/or clanking around in full armour.

It's an aesthetic thing really. When I think of a skilled swordsman - at least one I'd like to play - I think of people like Zorro or Westley or basically every Hollywood pirate or samurai. I understand that the Swashbuckler does a lot of this and it is a fun subclass but I wish it was possible with the basic Fighter who is meant to invoke almost everyone who can hit well.

Isn't Zorro pretty much the inspiration they used for Swashbuckler?

Certainly a multiclass Fighter/Rogue should be able to create the character, but you could also go Barbarian since and fluff rage as actually just an intense focus similar to how athletes at times are just "in the zone".

Kensei Monk is also supposed to be that skilled swordsman.

But what is actually your problem with a straight Dex Fighter using a Rapier? It's not going to be the most optimized damage dealer, but you should be able to hold your own in games where min/maxing isn't the most important thing.

[RossN]

I'm in the same boat, actually, though I'd extend it to other classes as well.

I wish there were more classes with stuff like the Monk or Barbarian natural armour. Or some other reward for not just using the heaviest armour available.

Yep! :D

Isn't Zorro pretty much the inspiration they used for Swashbuckler?

Certainly a multiclass Fighter/Rogue should be able to create the character, but you could also go Barbarian since and fluff rage as actually just an intense focus similar to how athletes at times are just "in the zone".

Kensei Monk is also supposed to be that skilled swordsman.

But what is actually your problem with a straight Dex Fighter using a Rapier? It's not going to be the most optimized damage dealer, but you should be able to hold your own in games where min/maxing isn't the most important thing.

Barbarian and Kensei also have some pretty strong supernatural things going on though.

I'd be very happy to play straight Dex Fighter with a Rapier but by getting rid of a shield I'd be sacrificing significant protection for no in-game benefit.

[Waazraath]

I'd be very happy to play straight Dex Fighter with a Rapier but by getting rid of a shield I'd be sacrificing significant protection for no in-game benefit.

Why not go for two weapon fighting and pick the defensive duelist feat?

[Sorinth]

Yep! :D



Barbarian and Kensei also have some pretty strong supernatural things going on though.

I'd be very happy to play straight Dex Fighter with a Rapier but by getting rid of a shield I'd be sacrificing significant protection for no in-game benefit.

Most of the Monks supernatural stuff is fluff though.

Having a pool of resource points that you can use for Monk abilities is no different from the Batllemaster having a pool of resources he can spend on Maneuvers. So you can safely ignore/rename/refluff the whole Ki aspect.

At the later levels they do get a bit mystical, but most of it is also pretty minor and likely won't come up much if at all. For example Timeless Body is not likely to ever come up for a PC, as you aren't likely to get old and food and water is mostly hand-waived away anyways. Purity of Body is more likely to come up because of poison damage, but I don't see it taking away from any RP/game aspects, you simply took less damage, you note the number and move on. And finally Empty Body only comes online at 18th level so I'm not sure it matters much.

[ZenBear]

I'd be very happy to play straight Dex Fighter with a Rapier but by getting rid of a shield I'd be sacrificing significant protection for no in-game benefit.

Forgoing a shield or two-handed weapon provides a couple unique benefits. If you pump STR and/or get Expertise (Athletics) through feat or multiclass you can grapple foes with your free hand. You could also take some spellcasting levels (EK or multiclass) and not need Warcaster.

[WadeWay33]

A canceller-type build. It doesn’t really do damage, instead focusing on walls + other battlefield control to keep the martial away, and counterspelling. I think an Abjuration wizard with the right spells might work, but I’ve yet to see it in action.

[etrpgb]

I'm still disappointed there isn't some kind of knife thrower. It's cool in concept but there's no way to do it without a fair amount of house-ruling. Even then you'll be less effective than pretty much ANYBODY using a short bow.

Isn't this basically a Monk? Martial Arts + Dagger/Handaxe? With the bonus action you can also throw a Dagger/Handaxe as the Two-Weapon Fighting general rule. You'll probably need the Dual Wielder feat, though.

[Misterwhisper]

Isn't this basically a Monk? Martial Arts + Dagger/Handaxe? With the bonus action you can also throw a Dagger/Handaxe as the Two-Weapon Fighting general rule. You'll probably need the Dual Wielder feat, though.

The issue is throwing more than one, unless you have a friendly Artificer.

[etrpgb]

The issue is throwing more than one, unless you have a friendly Artificer.

I guess that's a problem.

Let's see if I got it right. One can draw a weapon freely, and draw another as Object Iteration.
So, our Monk (probably Kensai) explores the dungeons with two daggers in his hands. The initiative got rolled, the Monk uses the "Attack action", he can: throw the first dagger, throw the second dagger (as Bonus Action), draw two daggers (one for free, another as Object Iteration), and throw one thanks to Extra Attack. Now he has only one dagger in his hand, so the next turn he will be handicapped...

The problem is indeed there. I'd probably house-rule that Monks can draw weapons freely...