Fighter Ability Boost at 6th

Post/Author/DateTimePost
#1

UnknownMourner

Sep 05, 2014 22:31:45

I just wanted to see if this was a typo. I know it is in two places (the chart and the ability description) so it is probably not.

 

I'm sure it's supposed to be a free feat, but they had to do it that way since feats are optional.

 

 

#2

JRutterbush

Sep 05, 2014 23:36:39

Fighters and Rogues both get more Ability Score Increases than other classes. This is because the other classes get more specific abilities, and because the Fighter and Rogue are supposed to be the more adaptable or versatile classes, as well as the classes that are best at improvised actions. It's not supposed to be a free feat, it's supposed to be an extra Ability Score increase. That was intentional.

#3

2Chlorobutanal

Sep 05, 2014 23:49:38

It basically functions as the "bonus feats" that fighters got in past editions, I think.  As the OP put it, feats are optional, so it's extra ability boosts instead of a feat - although anyone using feats could then translate this into a bonus feat.

#4

UnknownMourner

Sep 07, 2014 18:29:48

Rogues do?

#5

2Chlorobutanal

Sep 07, 2014 18:34:06

A "normal" character typically gets increases at 4, 8, 12, 16, 19.

 

Rogues get one additional increase at level 10.

 

Fighters get two, at 6 and 14.

#6

Illithidbix

Sep 08, 2014 11:30:55

Yep. Pretty sure it's working as intended.

 

Note, nowhere in 5E rules does it say "You get Ability Score Improvements at levels 4, 8, 12, 16 and 19", merely that all classes in the PHB do (with fighters and rogues getting more)

 

In theory they could release a class in the future which didn't follow that pattern in exchange for other snackies. I'd be a little surprised if they did though.

 

It also means that if you multiclass then you delay getting Ability Score Improvements.

e.g. A multiclassed Fighter 3/Wizard 3 has a Character level of 6 but doesn't have any Ability Score Improvements. hasn't got any, whilst a Fighter 6/Wizard 4 would have 3.

- Again I'm pretty certain this is an intentional limitation of multiclassing.

#7

Sword_of_Spirit

Sep 08, 2014 16:03:11

Working as intended.