Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 Vikingkingq Aug 19, 2014 15:20:51	Ok, so back on the old forums, I wrote a series of posts evaluating each iteration of the Fighter in the playtest. Now that the PHB is here, I thought I'd check in to see how things have improved (or not) from the last Playtest packet and to talk about where the Fighter could go from here.   And just to be clear off the bat, I actually want to give the devs kudos for making some improvements along the way and coming up with a pretty good Fighter, even if they didn't fulfill their potential. But the amount of potential that remains untapped is disappointing.   Fighting Styles   Well, Archery got better (+2 compared to +1), Defense is the same, Great Weapon got redone to deal with DAOM, Duelling gave sword and boarders some damage options, but Protection still has the same problem it's always had - the action economy. Imposing Disadvantage is good...but it prevents you from using any of the Maneuvers that use bonus actions, or making use of the Sentinel feat, etc. It's a problem that the tanking Fighting Style is actively not useful to tanks.   Second Wind Got improved quite a bit actually. 1d10 vs. 1d6 isn't a huge difference, but being able to use it as a Bonus Action is nice, and the change between HP and Temp HP is huge. It's a genuinely useful ability.  Other Changes Ability Improvements got nerfed a bit from 7 down to 6, but that should still let you get your primary to 20 and have room for a few feats. Defy Death was perhaps a bit too good, but in combination with the nerf to Indomitable (reroll a failed/daily is nowhere near as good as Advantage on all throws) the Fighter doesn't quite live up to the Design Goals.   Archetypes   For those who like Gishes, Eldritch Knight seems to be a viable option. Champion got a good deal weaker; Remarkable Athlete should really be a basic Fighter utility ability, and it's nowhere near as good as Devastating Critical's stun/hamstring/DoT were for what is a critfisher build.    And now for the thing I care the most about: the Battlemaster: Combat Superiority - it got a bit of a boost (9 versus 6 max maneuvers known, 6 versus 4 max dice), but got totally kneecapped by this simple addition: "You can use only one maneuver per attack." This completely eliminates any potential for experimenting with combinations and really diminishes the idea that Battlemaster = Maneuvers. It was bad enough that your dice only refresh on a short rest and most routes to replenishing them have been eliminated, but this has really thrown away most of the potential of the Maneuver system. As I've said in the past, you have the potential for enormous amounts of tactical and strategic depth here by allowing Battlemasters to choose between pumping multiple dice into powering up a maneuver vs. creating maneuver combinations. For crying out loud, when you look forwards to the Fighter's Handbook/Complete Fighter or PHBII, eliminate this rule and encourage depth of play.  Student of War/Know Your Enemy - some mildly useful utility abilities, but nothing worth writing home about when the purpose of the Sub-Class has been undermined like this. The Maneuvers:   I'll go Maneuver by Maneuver in a second, but up front, I really want to stress my disappointment that 1. you can't improve a Maneuver by putting multiple dice into it, as per the 12/17/12 playtest packet, 2. there's no room for combinations, both in the one-per-attack rule and within the text of the maneuvers, and most importantly 3. the maneuvers don't scale to end-game. At the same levels that Wizards are learning to Gate or True Polymorph or Time Stop and Druids turn into Elementals, a Fighter is learning to do the same kind of things they did back in level 3. This is a big problem; the Fighter should feel more impressive and powerful and fun as you level to promote people wanting to play and level up. But a Fighter really does start to plateau. The Devs really need to fix this when they get to FH/CF/PHBII/Epic.    On the positive side, I do think it's a good sign that the Battlemaster has no less than 16 maneuvers, way more than the 6 in the last playtest packet, and that the Maneuvers do have the basics of a Warlord's functionality in there with Commander's Strike, Distracting Strike, Maneuvering Attack, and Rally. Also, adding the damage on pretty much all Maneuvers gives the Battlemaster a bit of punch and avoids the effect vs. damage tradeoff.    On to the individual Maneuvers: Commander's Strike - the "weapon attack" really limits this one; a Warlordish Battlemaster can't really do much with spellcasters. But I'm glad it's there. Disarming Attack - the big question mark for me here is what the viability of the "interact with environment" free action is. As per the rules, it doesn't cost the enemy anything to pick up the weapon, but if you can kick the sword into another square or pick up your enemy's weapon, this might be a viable maneuver. Distracting Attack - this is really good; giving Advantage is huge for any party with Rogues, and the extra damage actually means you can help out your party. Evasive Footwork - not quite as useful in some regards as some earlier iterations (Tumble used to let you roll through an enemy's square; Spring Attack gave you some additional movement and blanket guarantees vs. OAs), but the extra AC is actually quite handy. Feinting Attack - the Fighter's main swashbuckling ability, but also really useful for Great Weapon Fighters who want to make sure that big attack lands.  Goading Attack - the Fighter's main taunt/marking ability, which potentially allows you to throw disadvantage onto 4-5 targets by the end-game. Way, way more useful than Protection, and it doesn't use up your bonus action, so you can actually use it in combination with tanking feats. Lunging Attack - still kind of weak; if it were up to me, I'd combine this with Precision Attack or maybe give that attack a larger crit range to give this maneuver more of a punch.  Maneuvering Attack - more basic Warlord functionality; the OA protection is nice too. Menacing Attack - I really like this one; arguably it's a lot stronger than some of the old Disadvantage granters and is arguably a better tanking/crowd control ability than some of the others. And it's one of the few "different" things a Fighter can do from just hitting people.  Parry - bringing back an old favorite, but I am wondering what the hell happened to Protect. Seems like a fairly modest ability, all told, so why not let the Fighter tank? Precision Attack - see Lunging Attack; on it's own, probably not as good as getting Advantage via Feinting Attack. Pushing Attack - a Maneuver I have great fondness for, but sadly it really needs to be usable with Trip to actually deny a Movement 30 creature proximity for a turn, and you can't do that any more. Noticeably weaker than the Monk equivalent. Rally - Warlord fans note: a Battlemaster can eventually heal for 1d12 + Cha 6 times per short rest.  Riposte - really kind of meh. Only works on a miss, uses up reaction. Needs something else to give it a bit more oomph. Sweeping Attack - not really as good as previous Cleave maneuvers. At least solved the re-rolling problem. Trip Attack - nothing fancy, but it's functional. Arguably better than Feinting Attack and Menacing Attack, but strictly for the Fighter and people next to the Fighter.  So what's missing here? In addition to the problems already addressed above, there's no Charging stuff as there was in previous packets (that's all been feat-gated); there's no Utility Maneuvers like Tumbling Dodge, Great Fortitude, Vault, Lighting Reflexes, Mighty Exertion, or Danger Sense; you can't Volley or Whirlwind to get a bit of AOE; you can't Hamstring people to kill their movement (that's feat-gated). So let me challenge the Devs: going forward, if you want the Battlemaster to really shine as the standout star of 5e, think bigger. If you want to put things like Whirlwind or Menacing Attack as higher-level Maneuvers, feel free as long as that inspires you to give the Fighter Maneuvers that give the same "wow" factor as an end-game spell.
#2 seti Aug 19, 2014 15:36:59	I don't have the PHB yet, but the battlemaster sounds pretty cool. Do they still get 4 attacks (8 with action surge) by level 20ish like the 'basic' fighter?   Also, I think (and have stated on other threads ad nauseam) the fighter, and probably all martial classes, do need that "wow factor" of most spells. Especially high level spells.   Part of that would be damage. Lots of it. Fighter types should get to roll a handful of dice at high level too. And have once a day maneuvers that never miss. Like herakles, or beowulf...You know, epic heroes. That's what I want, and I think that's what all fighter/melee/martial/non-caster fans want. Otherwise...We'd all play wizards or clerics.   PS: I wonder if the Paladin now has the 4e-style 'defender' moves? That's also missing from the 5e basic fighter. Oh well, I'll look at a PHB soon.
#3 GladiusLegis Aug 19, 2014 17:44:46	Vikingkingq wrote:
(Reply to #3) Vikingkingq	GladiusLegis wrote:
#5 Karnos Aug 19, 2014 18:33:19	Vikingkingq wrote:
#6 ClockworkNecktie Aug 19, 2014 19:04:29	You misstate the situation with Protection style a bit - it uses your reaction, but NOT your bonus action. So it interferes with Sentinel but not most maneuvers.   Also, only 1 maneuver per attack is so that you don't just dump 4d8 bonus damage on one attack at level 3, I'd guess.
#7 GladiusLegis Aug 19, 2014 19:11:38	Besides that, it just doesn't make sense visually to stack that many maneuvers on one attack. I can suspend my disbelief to a point, but that would be a little much.
(Reply to #6) Vikingkingq	ClockworkNecktie wrote:
(Reply to #7) Vikingkingq	GladiusLegis wrote:
#10 Vikingkingq Aug 19, 2014 19:19:57	By the by, I think this guy's design for a 5e swordblade isn't a half-bad interpretation of what a Battlemaster really could be. A bit too powerful in places, but these are the kinds of things that would be perfect for high-end Maneuvers.
(Reply to #5) Vikingkingq	Karnos wrote: