The Fighter is the workhorse of D&D classes - the class itself is fairly simple (though a bit more than in 2014 because of the various Weapon Mastery-related features) but it's consistently one of the most powerful martial classes because it just does what it does so well.
Where the Fighter gets a lot more of its distinctiveness is its subclasses, where you can suddenly become an arcane battle-mage, a clever tactician, or have psychic powers.
Fighters have gotten a fair number of additional subclasses over the years. We'll be looking at the Arcane Archer, the Cavalier, the Samurai, the Echo Knight, and the Rune Knight. (And not the Purple Dragon Knight, which was, bafflingly, reprinted in Heroes of Faerun and remains terrible.)
Arcane Archer: No
Conceptually cool, but here's the thing: if you want a Fighter with some kind of magic ability, just play an Eldritch Knight, which also works with a ranged build (probably not as well, but it does work). If you're drawn to the subclass because you like having cool things you can do to add on to your existing weapon attacks, play a Battle Master. This subclass is just a much more limited option between the two.
Cavalier: Yes
I don't love the "focus" on mounted combat, as that's a really limited thing in a lot of campaigns, but the actual mechanical focus on this subclass is being the "tank Fighter," which is an archetype that makes a lot of sense for the Fighter class. I think another coat of polish on this and a real emphasis on being the knightly protector would be a great option (and honestly more "core fantasy" than the Psi Warrior.)
Samurai: No
Setting aside that WotC is working very hard to move away from anything that could be considered culturally appropriative (I'm not here to get into that full discussion, but I think going too far in the "no cultural appropriation" side of things risks failing to include non-Western archetypes, which is equally if not arguably less inclusive, but that's not what I'm here to talk about) I also think that the Samurai's mechanics were only tangentially related to the fantasy - a fantasy that, perhaps, any Fighter (and even Paladin) could probably fulfill. I don't really know what, specifically, you could do to make a Fighter feel more like a Samurai, but I also think they're just not going to anyway.
Echo Knight: No
This is almost a non-issue, because Echo Knights are a very specifically-Exandrian idea. I really like Echo Knights conceptually, but given that they appeared in a collaboration project, it might not even be theirs by rights to reprint. Anyway, the subclass is plenty powerful as it stands.
Rune Knight: No
This is probably the one I could most easily be talked into giving another pass, but I think the truth is that it's already quite good as it is. We have a Rune Knight in my Wildemount game, and he's really effective (the Cloud Rune makes DMs regret rolling crits, for example). This one's in the Not-Broke, Don't-Fix camp.
And there you have it. I guess I'm a bit more conservative on this one, but I do think there's a lot of design space that you could explore that they haven't really, yet. That said, one of the challenges with Fighter subclass design is that the Battle Master and Eldritch Knight are so good that it's hard to come up with something that truly feels like it can't be covered by one or the other. The Echo Knight and Rune Knight both feel like they do things that the aforementioned can't really do, and I think a really solid revision to the Cavalier could accomplish that as well.
No comments:
Post a Comment