For Champion, I suggest a small change to superior critical. As written, you score a critical hit on a 19 starting at 3rd level. Instead, I suggest the following: "when you make an attack and roll a 19, treat it as a 20." It seems like semantics, but it's actually a big deal when you consider magic items that have effects which only occur on a roll of 20 - of which there are quite a few.
Great job recognizing what didn't need fixing. The indomitable change was really smart from a mechanics standpoint, and will give a serious boost to both the power and the flavour of playing a fighter.
I guess im asking the wrong place but does anyone know a trick to log back into an instagram account?? I was stupid lost the login password. I would love any help you can give me!
@Trace Sonny i really appreciate your reply. I got to the site on google and im in the hacking process atm. I see it takes a while so I will get back to you later when my account password hopefully is recovered.
I love seeing your take on how you would balance 5th edition classes! I have one suggestion about the fighting styles though: Your improved great weapon fighting is not balanced with improved dueling fighting style. A long sword with dueling style will do 8.5 base damage on average, where improved great weapon fight style with a greatsword will do 9.333 base damage and a greataxe will do only 7.625 base damage. Since the dueling fighting style affords the use of a shield, the great weapon fighting style really should feel the most offensive out of all the options. My suggestion is to instead do the following: "When you roll a 1 or 2 on a damage die for an attack you make with a melee weapon that you are wielding with two hands, you can reroll the die and must use the new roll. Additionally you can add an additional 1/2 times your strength modifier (rounded down) to damage rolls with melee weapons that you are wielding with two hands." So this would make the "base" damage of a greatsword 10.333 and that of a greataxe 9.333 (only factoring in the additional +2 damage a 4 or 5 strength modifier would give you).
I've never played in a game or run one that didn't allow shoving/grappling as opportunity attacks. I know it's not actually allowed by raw, but it seems like too basic an ability to be gated behind a class feature.
It's the sort of ability that, if allowed in a game, would strongly favor monsters. In a balanced campaign (not one where every combat is against a single, strong monster), the fights against crowds become close to impossible with all the monsters being able to hold you as a reaction.
Your Fighter table still shows the proficiency bonus at level 5 being a +2. Admittedly, I was surprised that you chose to do the fighter next, as its a pretty powerful class. And while I like some of the changes you made here, I think you got a bit change happy, and made changes that were not needed, or in at least one case, way to powerful. While I think Second Wind could use some buffing, I think you scale Second Wind too quickly. The book's version, at level 5, provides more healing on average than a 1st level cure wounds. At an average of 10 hit points regained, that's between 20% and 25% of a 5th level fighter's maximum HP (assuming standard array with the 14 put into constitution). I would recommend changing it to 2d10 + fighter level, at 8th or 9th, and 3d10+ fighter level at 17th or 18th level. I really, really like your resolute feature at level 8. Its name is the only issue I have with it. Hitting someone with your weapon is not being resolute in your dodging. :-P Not certain of what I think of reactionary. It's a really powerful ability. (Unless the target has long hair or similar, grabbing and holding onto someone who is trying to run away without having to move much yourself is actually quite difficult or nearly impossible.) From a straight game play perspective, I'd honestly prefer a somewhat toned down ability, such as an attempt to trip them and knock them prone, or otherwise limit their movement without negating it entirely. It also steps on the toes of Sentinel more than a little, giving all fighters default the primary reason people take the feat. I also have mixed feelings about your improved combat styles. (As a side note, as they are currently worded, these abilities stack with the original fighting styles. You should note that these replace the older ability.)
Fighters are already a pain to hit without further increasing their AC. I'd rather see some other defensive bonus here, such as a boost to saving throws or some sort of damage reduction. I have no complaints to make about dueling, other than it's lack of creativity. But, as I'm not coming up with anything interesting... Your changes to protection seems to me to be broken. You might as well word it like this: "Attacks made by enemies you can see have disadvantage against allied creatures within 5' of you, provided you are wielding a shield (and not unconscious)." Edit: I hope I don't sound unappreciative. Your class variant videos are a highlight of my Friday mornings.
@@TreantmonksTemple Couldn't we get a fluff piece so we could use the Temple of the Treantmonk as an archfey, oath of the ancient, etc I know we could homebrew our own, but getting something with the official seal of approval would be great 😊
I houserule that opp attacks can shove grapple and prone. Doesn’t make sense to me that it’s worded so that an action is required to initiate those attacks. I argue that it helps balance ranged and melee (dex vs strength).
Agreed. Barbarians, STR fighters and maybe STR clerics are the only ones who could reliably do it, so why not reward them? People at my LFGS have started playing DEX Barbarians over STR because there just aren't enough rewards for playing a STR character.
You add to that mix his variant rule to give the off hand attack without using a bonus action and 2wf giving up to a +3 to damage and now your cooking.
For Weapon Master; honestly it seems just a tad too powerful, it's good, but just a little too good. Perhaps have it that when they crit, any following attacks are made with advantage. It would show them like, taking advantage of the enemy from reeling because of a powerful blow
Improved War Magic is actually dangerously powerful now - If you use your action to cast a cantrip such as Booming Blade, you'd get the extra attack that comes as part of the action, in addition to your bonus action attack. I feel like it would benefit from being specified as "when you use your action to cast a spell *of first level or higher..*"
> Once you get to levels 8, 9, 10 you start to notice the difference between fighters and spellcasters Same as it ever was Same as it ever was Same as it ever was Look where our Gygax was Melee isn't holding up Gary isn't after us Same as it ever was Same as it ever was Same as it ever was Same as it ever was Same as it ever was Same as it ever was Letting the fighters go by Same as it ever was And here Mordenkainen comes Here comes that Robilar
You listed champion twice in The description. Fighters seem very gear dependent mid to late level. Scimitar of Speed is a personal favorite (up to nine attacks in a burst for 1d6+2+modifier for each hit at late levels while still using a shield and Dueling? Yes please.) as well as +1-3 armor/shields. Eldritch Knight suffers from there not being enough 'Weapon Strike' spells in my opinion. Though they do get the 'bonus action to cast or attack'. Though magic debuffing is nothing to sneeze at though you're pretty much locked into sword and spells and the Fighter has great versatility. Champion vanilla is boring in my opinion. It's good for beginner players, though it feels like a 'beginner trap'. Battlemaster, personal favorite, is amazing at physical debuffs. Also they're a Samurai in all but name and without having a lord. Lack of ranged maneuvers is a pain, I'll freely admit. I will admit though that I find it odd that most of the maneuvers are something you'd think all Fighters should be able to do since as a Fighter you've 'studied the art of war' as opposed to Barbarians 'who are war', sort of like the Wizard/sorcerer thing. Iunno, maybe give Fighters a 'bonus feat' of Martial adept? A minute is a bit long, considering that there's no guarantee you'll ever get to use it depending on gm and campaign. Personally, I'd put it as a once per creature as a bonus action... but that's me.
@treantmonk regarding Eldritch Knight The one thing each commenter has not delved into while talking about Eldritch Knight is the war magic lvl 7 and eldritch strike lvl 10. Both are mid level powers that are extremely important for the EK. But what spells are best to capitalize on it. Example. WM. What cantrip is worth using with it? Besides Bb, Gfb. Ray of frost target one who is moving then run to target 2 and attack once? ES. Disadvantage on next turn save spell. What about hold person or blind. Lvl 2. Cripple the big enemy for your allies. Would really like to see thoughts on how to use spells with lvl 7 lvl 10
I like everything you've done. But I'd love to see fighters gain more utility with regards to there physical bodies. I think utility is the area that fighters lag behind in. Damage is fine in most cases. But they don't bring much problem solving to the table. Remarkable athlete is a good example that should be a base feature I think. Just as an example.
I think it's fine that the class isn't that big on utility, their natural athleticism makes them good in exploration and climbers. It's all about roles. They're masters of combat excelling in dealing damage, surviving hits and protecting their allies. If every class was equally balanced on each pillar it would make class choice less important and characters less distinctive.
@@lukecarroll4052 I just don't think casters pay as high a price. They deal good damage and offer amazing utility. Especially in tiers 3 and 4. Fighters should be beyond excellent at climbing and jumping and grappling at those tiers. Is my point.
@@unchartedexemain advantage of a fighter vs casters is the fighter can sustain their performance for a much longer time, they get most of their stuff from short rests, casters start to run dry after a few encounters and have reduced versatility and performance in combat as the day goes on due to reduced options and their higher level spells start running out of slots. Around levels 7,8,9,10 etc. The fighter starts to fall behind a little bit but they wind up coming back by level 11 onwards when they get a third attack,have two extra feats and Archetype features start getting good again.
@@sharkforce8147 great point about the lower level fighters handily replacing a higher level one. The ability 2 concentrate on 2 spells and the way the action economy works might favor the 2 clerics, but the fighter brings no second thoughts
@@sharkforce8147 A level 1 spell (Jump) can make any wizard "out-physical" a level 20 Barbarian with 24 strength and double proficiency in Athletics (1 level of Rogue for the Expertise feat)
Great video: It’s nice to see you give the fighters some tlc. (I do think sweeping attack is a bit overpowered now. It does what the player wants it to do, but it seems like an effect that should come from the more brutish flavored line of class features than the tactical master repertoire. I might have the second attack made at disadvantage, or at least be sure to give other similar features from other feats/class features a commensurate boost.
As usual i agree with all your tweaks/changes! With the UA Class Feature Variants currently in playtest and heavily hinted at as going into a next published product from WoTC, after the testing phase fighting styles got a lot of love. Hmm what a time to be a player!!
With the addition of your changes to feats, I would like to make a suggestion. Instead of Fighters getting an Extra feat at 6th and 14th, instead allow them to either use their ASI to increase their abilities by 3 instead of 2 (insinuating that fighters are just better with their training) or they get 1 additional option when choosing your Variant feats (so instead of 3 options they would get 4 options) or if they have half feat variant they could get a +1 to an ability and still get to choose two options. This would give them 15 Ability score improvements (vs the 14 they would have with the other 2 extra feats) and instead they should get something effective and helpful at 6 and 14. This solidify the concept of a fighter that they get the same things that other classes get (extra attack, ASI's ) but they are not equal, that the fighter with regards to these things are superior. Here are my suggestions for levels that I took away the ASI Wounding Strikes At 6th level, Once per turn, when the fighter hits with an attack, choose one target of that attack. The target must makes a Strength or Dexterity saving throw, Fighter's choice, which is done so with disadvantage if the attack that triggered this ability was a critical hit (both the initial and subsequent turn(s)), vs your Save DC of 8 + attack ability modifier + Proficiency bonus or gain the Crippling condition. At the end of the affected creature's turn, the creature makes a Constitution saving throw. On a failed save, the target take damage equal to 1d6 + your proficiency bonus and the condition ends. On a successful save, the Crippling condition ends (no damage).The Fighter can use wounding strikes a number of times per long rest equal to your proficiency bonus. Like all other conditions, the target may be affected by the same condition only once at a time. Damage for this ability increases to 2d6 + proficiency bonus at 10th level and 3d6+ proficiency bonus at 14th level. --Crippling Condition: Creatures with the Crippling condition make attacks with disadvantage and have their speed reduced by 10 ft.. Improved Wounding Strikes. At 14th level, the fighter's Wounding strikes ability no longer ends the Crippling condition on a failed saving throw, and a creature that succeeds still take half damage instead of no damage. The Fighter now gets wounding strikes a number of times equal to your proficiency bonus per a short or long rest instead of just on a long rest. ______________ These changes are to make fighters a little more effective at mid/upper tiers of play. I original had attacks and ability checks at disadvantage but felt that might have been too strong (essentially the poison condition + reduced movement) and nothing is resistant/immune to this feature RAW (I would argue a DM could make undead and construct immune, as they don't have functioning organ to wound... or any other creature where it doesn't make sense like Oozes and Gelatinous Cubes. ) These changes also make the number of ASI slightly stronger for the original progression before at levels 6 and 14 (3 at 6th instead of 4 and 9 at 14th instead of 10) so adding a minor ability at these levels seems okay On a tangent note I would remove the Extra feat Rogues get at lvl 10 and just give them Extra attack feature and the first option of Wounding strikes or something worded similarly (Obviously would need to have it scale at different levels, maybe even upping the damage portion of the Rogues version...like d8's or d10... or maybe the damage just equal's a roll of their sneak attack damage if the constitution save fails {success still no damage}). again fighter version better for those conditions/battlefield control.
Your Trip Attack variant doesn't slow your enemy down by much. Standing requires half your movement, and if your movement is slowed by 10 feet, that actually reduces the cost of standing (half of 30 is 15, vs half of 20 is 10). The end result is -5 ft. movement rather than -10 ft. I'd much rather see this variant state that while you are still within reach of the target you knocked prone with this ability, standing costs the target 10 additional feet of movement. That means a standard human can stand and move 5 ft. before dashing.
Any plans to Update your Variant Fighter listed on your GM binder with the updated Fighting styles from Tasha's? And their "Improved Fighting Styles" feature. Curious how you would improve things like Intersection (which is awesome at low levels, not great at higher levels, maybe add fighter level to the damage reduced? but still takes your reaction?, unlike your change to protection) and things like Blind Fighting (just 15-20 feet of Blindsight?) Thrown weapon seems ez (same as Dueling) and Unarmed Strikes could full unarmed damage + Proficiency bonus to damage against grappled targets? or maybe 1d6/1d8 versatile becomes 1d8/1d10 versatile?
@@BlackTempleGaurdian You take the Attack action (as opposed to Dodge/Help/Hide), meaning Grapples, Shoves, missed attacks are all ok. You essentially just use a bonus action so your ally can use their reaction to attack with your Superiority bonus. 1 Superiority Die + Bonus action is all you're really paying here.
@@BlackTempleGaurdian According to the GMbinder document he posted, you're misunderstanding: "When you *take the Attack action* on your turn, you can use a *bonus action* to direct one of your companions to strike. When you do so, choose a friendly creature who can see or hear you and *expend one superiority die* . That creature *can immediately use its reaction* to make one weapon attack, *adding the superiority die to the attack’s damage roll* ." Imagine this: lv5 GWF Fighter and a lv5 bow-wielding Ranger are fighting two thugs, a fat one with a maul and a thin one with a heavy crossbow. The Fighter engages the fat one and for his action he takes the Attack action, simultaneously shouting to his companion to shoot the thin thug that is about to take flanking shots at them. The Fighter makes his 2 attacks against the fat thug and expends his Bonus action along with a superiority die and the Ranger expends his Reaction to shoot the thin thug. The Attack action is a condition to the ability, you don't lose any of the attacks.
@@BlackTempleGaurdian I'm not going to read through *all* of them... I did Ctrl+F it at your prompt though, and the only other comment about it is from TM himself, the pinned one, where he explicitly states what I've been trying to tell you here. I'm not sure where your misunderstanding comes from. You'd said that it's better now because it no longer costs an attack and he confirmed that it is indeed so. What are you seeing that I am not?
@@Banejbt You're the one misunderstanding here. It says that in the document, but Treantmonk said in the video that he didn't adjust that ability from the Player's Handbook version. OP is pointing out that it is, in fact, different from the PH.
the problem i see with fighters is lack of mechanical options i would like to use my sword to deal bludgeoning and piercing damage, trip oponents parry them, counter faint and some more as basic things martial characters can do and the fighter excels at they are the fighter after all and that means aka weapons based martial artist not to mention not being able to use dex for melee, end strength for ranged or stances like high guard, low guard, ect
Just finished the video. I LOVE the Reactionary ability. I was disappointed when I first found out that I couldn't do that in the base game. I had to take Sentinel to compensate. Battle Maneuvers - I think Parry doesn't scale well. I would make it deflect sup. die + dex or half the incoming damage, whichever is higher. Question about Sweeping Attack - when you say "same attack" is the intent to use the same attack roll + modifier as the original attack? That makes sense in terms of flavour, and also makes it easier to decide when to carry forward that momentum and spend the sup. die. Can't wait to hear your take on the Class Variants! If Xanather ushered in a 5.1, then class variants make it seem like a new era of d&d 5.2.
The intent of sweeping attack is that you make a separate attack roll. I'll need to clean up the language. Yeah, with the class variants, there's stuff I like, other stuff I don't - so I hope it sees some changes before becoming official.
I'd house ruled that you can shove and grapple with an opportunity attack already, it's common sense to me. I'd never been a fan of the battle maneuvers, I prefer the approach of DCCRPG, where the players come with their own moves. I find superiority dice are inspired/stolen from DCC mighty deeds.
My level 11 Fighter was killed by an eldritch abomination awhile ago, and had his soul captured by it upon failing its DC 25 (!) Charisma save. I would have liked to have your Indomitable modification in that game...
Awesome! I was thinking of making the Indomitable save more in line with the Artificer's reaction to add INT bonus to save. That one even applies to others! This one kind of punishes Resilient users, but it's nice to have anyway.
Well yes and no. Taking Resilient is still great because then there are less failed rolls you have toconsider rerolling, thus making the times you fail rarer and this ability better overall. It isn't quite as strong as it was, but it still is quite comparable
I don't think fighters need a buff, I made a wizard subclass once, and in order to have something to compare it to I compared it to eldritch knight and I realized the fighters damage output is consistently insane.
Here are my (somewhat verbose) thoughts: 3:45 Meve? Nice :) Resolute - Does this work with Rogue's Cunning Action? Indomitable - Honestly, this alone boosts the fighter quite a bit, especially at higher levels. I can easily imagine a high level enemy spellcaster casting Maze on the pesky Fighter that keeps testing his Concentration. Before, there would be pretty much no way out for the Fighter as Int is probably their dump stat, but with this, at least they'd have a decent chance of success. Reactionary - I really like this one as I usually play grapplers whenever I play non-caster melee characters. But it gives pretty much nothing to ranged Fighters who, besides just not wanting to be in melee, tend to have poor Athletics. Not sure about that, from a design standpoint, though giving ranged reactionary attacks often tends to be either overpowered or obnoxious. IDK. Improved Combat Style - Damage styles seem a bit too strong IMO, because traditionally the most common magic items players find tend to be weapons and nearly all of them have damaging effects. I like the Protection though. After seeing Goading Attack from Battlemaster, I have to ask if you've thought about Protection giving Cover instead of disadvantage? Also, what about Champions taking Archery as their second improved style? I mean, I guess it's not that big of a deal. Weapon Master - Nice. I feel like Battlemasters profit the most from this. Battlemaster Disarming Attack - Nice touch. Currently all it does is pretty much just diminish potential Opportunity Attacks, as the opponent will just pick it up as part of their movement and continue on. This changes that. Evasive footwork - Not so sure about this one. It's really powerful early on. Though it does require a roll and you can always roll a 1. It's kind of like a less reliable Shield spell, but it doesn't require a reaction. Goading Attack - Imagine this: An Archery style Fighter finds themself within 5ft of a big fat baddie at the start of their turn, they take the Dodge action and backhand the enemy threatening them. They hit and use Goading attack and then proceed to bravely run away. Lol. If Resolute works with Cunning Action, they could even get a few more hits in from afar, potentially squeezing in a Pushing Attack just to further annoy the enemy. Lunging Attacks - Polearm Master + Sentinel... 15ft reach. You could theoretically duke it out with an Ancient Red Dragon, if you hit, it can't Multiattack you as Claws have a 10ft range. Though it can still roast you or smack you with its tail. Sweeping Attack - So basically Cleave? It's kinda fitting, it makes the Fighter like a janitor. Get it? Because he sweeps and cleans up the trash... Ahem. Trip Attack - Eh, still best with Sentinel. Changes I didn't mention are those I either I agree with and consider a good QoL improvement, or I had nothing witty to add. Conclusion: Resolute + Cunning Action???
Resolute - Technically it would, which wasn't the intent. I will need to reword it to "when you use your action to take the Dodge action" to close that loophole ICS - I hadn't thought of Protection giving cover tbh. Evasive Footwork: It's actually almost the same as the Sword Bard's defensive flourish Goading: Taking the dodge action afterwords is probably a good idea
Question: How would the newer Fighter Fighting Styles improve with the Improved Combat Style like Superior Technique, Thrown Weapon Fighting, Unarmed Fighting, etc.?
Now that you've probably had some time to play test these do you think there is any chance of seeing another series of revised 5e classes and maybe some of the other subclasses along with it?
Sweeping Attack: The intent is you make a new attack roll for the second target, I will clean up the language in the document to make that clear Commander's Strike: I make a mistake in the vid, I did boost Commander's Strike. It requires a bonus action rather than giving up an attack. Improved Combat Style: I have added wording, "The original fighting style is replaced by the improved one." just so it's clear they don't stack with the original. My version of the Fighter: The Treantmonk Variant For all the Treantmonk Variant content - go here: www.gmbinder.com/share/-LrZCguvN5bsrjsloVcY Access the document: www.gmbinder.com/share/-LtA_s7eBuEq-vgomP33 In this video, I also discuss : The Martial Archetypes, The Champion, the Eldritch Knight and the Battlemaster.
Can you make a video on the class feature variants UA? They tried to fix the same issues you are. Maybe you can rate the changes and compare them to your variants
While Resolute is good it's not very thematic, I'd replace it with Riposte "As an action you can use your action to parry an incoming attack, while wielding a melee weapon you declare the action on your turn and until the beginning of your next turn you subtract 1d10+fighter level+ Str or Dex mod (depending on weapon type) from the incoming damage of a melee attack, if you prevent all the incoming damage you may make a melee attack in response".
I think even if it worked on all incoming damage an action is too expensive for this, and it doesn't scale well. You're giving up two (or three or four) attacks, and in the best case scenario you're canceling out one hit and getting an attack in return, but only if they attack in melee, hit, and roll poorly enough on damage that you can completely cancel it out. Let's do some math. I'll look at a druid since that's what I'm most familiar with. Hopefully melee damage output is similar. For simplicity, I'll use the second highest available spell slot. When they're not summoning or polymorphing, an 8th level druid will be using Call Lightning. That's an average if 16.5 damage. A fighter with 20 in their primary stat is blocking 18.5, so that works more often than not. At 12th level, we're probably looking at an upcasted Ice Storm. That's 27.5 damage, and you can block 23.5, failing more often than not to get your attack. This gets even worse at 16th level, with firestorm dealing 38.5 damage and you absorbing 27.5.
It's funny that you that you said that the fighter doesn't have a capstone because I've always thought the 4th attack was the best capstone in the game.
My fix for the Fighter: Give them Expertise (at level 3) and replace the Champion with the Brute RIP Brute, I will miss you when they delete you from D&D beyond on the 15th.
twelfth level *Reactionary* ability needs some additional content, I think. It should read as follows: *Reactionary* Beginning at 12th level, when you use your reaction to make an opportunity attack against a creature you can see that moves out of your reach, you may choose to attempt a grapple or shove against that creature in place of the weapon attack. In addition, you automatically save vs the foolhardy innovations of your companions. You gain knowledge of deep, ancient lore that prevents you from succumbing to reckless innovations, foolhardy ideological thinking, and emotion-driven cant, whether issued by another PC or by an NPC.
I'm very much enjoying this series of videos. IMHO you should rename the Resolute feature. Maybe something along the lines of "Leaf on the Wind" I would have liked to have seen an additional combat style that allows an Archer to fire his bow in melee without disadvantage. It's ridiculous that a crossbow wielder has a Feat to enable this while a Bowman does not. And don't say just take the crossbow expert as a Bowman, you lose out on half the feats benefits unless you wield an actual crossbow. I see that you came at this issue from another angle with your improved combat style. But I think a Bowman should be given the option whether he wants to move or not and to not have that choice adversely affect his shot (Browncoat Nation 👍)
When you do your take on the variant class rules from UA, it would be awesome if you would also talk about how you would fit them into your class variants if you like them and would include them. assuming you weren't already planning on this.
I'm planning a quick follow-up vid to discuss what I would change with the variants if it was up to me. Not planning one for fitting them into my variants - I look at them more as an alternative to these variants than an addition - though you could pick a few features that would still work fine (changing out combat styles, skills, known spells off the top of my head - all fine)
@@TreantmonksTemple The campaign world I am building, before I saw those options I was including a spend gold and downtime (world will actually use downtime) to trade out styles, spells for classes with spontaneous casting, or cantrips. Groups change, and so many traps that I want players to be able to swap out stuff if they are not having fun. BTW love your work, glad you are willing to spend time and effort doing this for our community.
It looks like you changed Commander's Strike so that it does not require you to forego one of your attacks in addition to consuming the Bonus Action. That's a pretty huge change, but if I heard you correctly in the video you say you didn't change it at all. Am I missing an errata or something?
The problem with fighting style, both here and in the phb is that the four offensive ones (archery, dueling, great weapon fighting, and two weapon fighting) are too restrictive and also not balanced against each other (for example dueling is just better than great weapon fighting and two weapon fighting). I recommend collapsing these four all into one fighting style: offense, you gain a +2 bonus to weapon attacks.
Sweeping attack should at least cost a bonus action so its not just outright better than great weapon master or riposte, its also mildly confusing b/c it doesn't say outright to make an additional attack against another target but says something like damage a second target with the same attack. The champions additional fighting style, w/ regards to improving fighting style could be misconstrued to mean choose a 3rd fighting style and improve it. should probably read 'you may improve 2 fighting styles'. The fighters 4th attack I've always felt should have come online at 17th when all the casters are getting their 9th (and rogues get a big upgrade as well) so they can get some use out of it before the campaign ends at 20 (as if it might actually last that long). I like what you did to indomitable, I always thought it was weak if you didn't have resilient wisdom.
I've reworded Sweeping attack to address that. I did consider switching the 20th level ability to 17th, but I also wanted to keep it in line with the Monk variant I had already completed.
with the wizard series done and now the reviews of the UA variants, I was wondering, if you'll make a video on the artificer, especially as the second INT caster class?
Champion fighter seems so weak still, even at lvl 14 I'm not sure it has much of a leg-up on the other two subclasses on much. Crit range is nice, but being merely a DPR increases, I don't think it brings it up to the BM maneuvers DPR increase in most cases. BM maneuvers have secondary effects on top of that.
I know you feel that the school limitations are pretty much fine for Eldritch Knight, but do you think that allowing the player to choose the two schools would be too powerful?
I'm honestly pretty confused by your lack of champion changes and positive evaluation of it here. While I totally agree that it's nice to have a simple training-wheels class for new players or players who don't want to be bothered with too many mechanics. This should give it a little wiggle room to be weaker than average or what have you as the cost of doing business to be simple. That said, I was under the impression that they blew past their wiggle room and were weak to the point where it should be changed. Not like the monk or ranger or anything, but definitely something I would've expected you to change a lot more or at least not evaluate so positively. While I've admittedly never played as or even with a champion fighter, not only does the class read as weak to me, but you yourself rated it as the 5th, 4th, and 4th worst subclass in the entire game at levels 6-10, 11-16, and 17-20 respectively. If only based off that I had expected it to get at least a little more love. What was your reasoning behind this or why has your opinion changed?
It's true creatures immune to frighten aren't affected by menacing, but that's not all that many creatures. In the MM, about 10% are immune to frightened, and it's not one of those cases where more powerful creatures are significantly more likely to be immune either.
@@TreantmonksTemple Ah, I missed it. Thank you for pointing me to it. With these changes I now really like your version of the fighter, fantastic work!
Just as a note, my 20th level great weapon master and Polearm master Eldritch Knight fighter makes his first attack normal and hits. I now make all my weapon attacks with -5 but I have advantage which means it’s on average the same. I take my action surge. I get a free 10 extra Damage now on every other attack I hit with for the next 9 attacks I make. This is crazy strong. Even further anytime I roll a 1 or 2 I automatically get a 8increasingly my average from 3-8 from 1-8 with 3 sides of the die giving me an 8. I’m now unstoppable, I WIN D&D. Obviously I’m kidding but you’ve made it so I can easily pump out 200+ damage in a turn as a fighter in a turn two times every short rest due Fo action surge. I can also have hast and make a bonus action attack due to Polearm master. So I have 10 attacks a round.
unchartedexe yes. The Wizard can’t deal 200 Average damage with his 1 ninth level spell a day. I can do it twice per short rest. So YES I do. I can now take a dragon to almost half health in one turn.
Treantmonk's Temple It’s your build, I just wonder if you’re making it very heavy handed in the fighters favor where they outpace all other damage from other classes. I do think it’s cool, but I think it would make more sense if you said once per long rest, you may give yourself advantage on all attacks you take in a turn, over every turn you can give yourself advantage after you hit once.
@@keeganmbg6999 "The Wizard can’t deal 200 Average damage with his 1 ninth level spell a day." That's technically true, I mean a Wizard casting Meteor Swarm can only expect about 140. Then again, Meteor Swarm covers 256 squares, so you can theoretically hit an army for over 35,000 points of damage in a round. Single Target damage isn't the wizard's specialty though - that's the fighter's specialty.
Some average roll math you might find interesting about your GWF (Or not. I might be late) D4 averages to 3.625 D6 averages to 4.66666666667 D8 averages to 5.65625 D10 averages to 6.64 D12 averages to 7.625
It also makes the greatsword even more consistent and bumps the minimum to 6 (but you're probably rolling at least 8). here's the damage spread before modifiers Damage (%) 6 (3%) 7 (6%) 8 (19%) 9 (22%) 10 (31%) 11 (17%) 12 (3%)
TreantMonk? More like MidasMonk; everything you touch turns to gold! Yet another great variant from you :) I can't wait to hear your thoughts on the new UA Playtest material. Honestly, if they were to just use your variants, the new UA material, add in fixed artificer and mystic classes, and make some more minor QOL tweaks--calling it DnD 5.5 at the end of 2020 I'd be thrilled. Give this to us for Christmas, Wizards!
With level 20 Weapon Master - is the intent to give the Fighter advantage on that turn only, or for all their future turns too? In terms of flavour, do you envision this ability to work with improvised weapons? That's a super niche scenario, but I'm curious.
I have to disagree with Eldritch Knight being fine. 1st level spells are fine, 3rd level spells are fine, but at 2nd level being mostly limited to Abjuration and Evocation gives a teerrrrriible list of spells for your level. Most evocations are too weak to make a difference, and the only Abjuration is Arcane Lock. I do tend to make 1 small change - I usually open up Transmutation spells for them too. It seems like the spell school Fighters would MOST want to learn, and its always seemed bizarre Eldritch Knights would choose to ignore it.
That's fair - not a lot of decent options. Darkness I guess? Warding Wind maybe sometimes? Yeah, now that you mention it - level 2 spells are pretty yuck.
Cleave got shuffled into great weapon master, and your cleaving attack does almost the same thing. How does it intetqct with GWM? EK doesn't feel good to play. 1-4 GFB, 5-6 normal attacks, 7+ cantrip into BA second attack. I was hoping you would do something about that. I will once again reference the Eldrich Arcana on GMBinder.
@@TreantmonksTemple your rendition of the battlemasters cleaving attack. Derp, its called "Sweeping attack" My bad. It does almost the same thing that GWM does - 3.5 cleave. Kill something - another attack roll.
@@texteel When you reduce a creature to 0 HP with a melee weapon, you could technically to both as long as you have the superiority die and bonus action available.
It looks like you went through some iterations and didn't update your class chart, because the capstone is still named "Charger" on it instead of Weapon Master.
24:00 Id personally make it a bonus action. Know your enemy can only be used out of combat. This way it can be used in combat to gauge how weak an opponent is.
The level 20 Weapon Master is a great cap stone for Battlemasters, Champions, Eldrich Knights ... however you have stolen and nerfed the Samurai subclass uniqueness. I think you need to re-think this cap-stone. Otherwise your changes are very good.
I would probably also add the Brute extra damage starting at 3rd level and have it scale at the same rate as in the subclass, and Improved Critical at 6th-8th level or something. Needless to say I don’t think the Brute or Champion class should exist. Paladins, Rangers, and Rogues all deal more damage than the fighter. Giving the fighter the brute damage dice would go a ways towards greater parity between the classes, and having it scale the way it does and when it does prevents it from stepping on the toes of hex or hunters mark while also preventing players from simply taking one level in the class to gain access to an extra 1d4.
Champion Remarkable Athlete is pretty unremarkable. I'd add expertise in Athletics, otherwise raging Barbarians, Bards and rogues can all be a lot more remarkable at Athletics, grappling, shoving etc.
For Champion, I suggest a small change to superior critical. As written, you score a critical hit on a 19 starting at 3rd level. Instead, I suggest the following: "when you make an attack and roll a 19, treat it as a 20." It seems like semantics, but it's actually a big deal when you consider magic items that have effects which only occur on a roll of 20 - of which there are quite a few.
Vorpal blade is pleased
Great job recognizing what didn't need fixing.
The indomitable change was really smart from a mechanics standpoint, and will give a serious boost to both the power and the flavour of playing a fighter.
Thank you, honestly the tendency is to look at features, "so how can I change that?"
I guess im asking the wrong place but does anyone know a trick to log back into an instagram account??
I was stupid lost the login password. I would love any help you can give me!
@Trace Sonny i really appreciate your reply. I got to the site on google and im in the hacking process atm.
I see it takes a while so I will get back to you later when my account password hopefully is recovered.
@Trace Sonny It did the trick and I now got access to my account again. I'm so happy:D
Thank you so much, you saved my ass :D
@Hugo Cristiano You are welcome xD
I love seeing your take on how you would balance 5th edition classes!
I have one suggestion about the fighting styles though: Your improved great weapon fighting is not balanced with improved dueling fighting style. A long sword with dueling style will do 8.5 base damage on average, where improved great weapon fight style with a greatsword will do 9.333 base damage and a greataxe will do only 7.625 base damage. Since the dueling fighting style affords the use of a shield, the great weapon fighting style really should feel the most offensive out of all the options.
My suggestion is to instead do the following: "When you roll a 1 or 2 on a damage die for an attack you make with a melee weapon that you are wielding with two hands, you can reroll the die and must use the new roll. Additionally you can add an additional 1/2 times your strength modifier (rounded down) to damage rolls with melee weapons that you are wielding with two hands." So this would make the "base" damage of a greatsword 10.333 and that of a greataxe 9.333 (only factoring in the additional +2 damage a 4 or 5 strength modifier would give you).
The damage jump for GWF is in the feat GWM
@@AdeptPaladin IMO class balance shouldn't rely on feats
@@AdeptPaladin And what about games without feats?
@@sovelis7727 class balance shouldn't rely on feats, but it should account for them.
I've never played in a game or run one that didn't allow shoving/grappling as opportunity attacks. I know it's not actually allowed by raw, but it seems like too basic an ability to be gated behind a class feature.
It's the sort of ability that, if allowed in a game, would strongly favor monsters. In a balanced campaign (not one where every combat is against a single, strong monster), the fights against crowds become close to impossible with all the monsters being able to hold you as a reaction.
Improved fighting style is my favourite change I've seen among your stuff so far. Reaaallllly makes sense for the fighter.
Your Fighter table still shows the proficiency bonus at level 5 being a +2.
Admittedly, I was surprised that you chose to do the fighter next, as its a pretty powerful class. And while I like some of the changes you made here, I think you got a bit change happy, and made changes that were not needed, or in at least one case, way to powerful.
While I think Second Wind could use some buffing, I think you scale Second Wind too quickly. The book's version, at level 5, provides more healing on average than a 1st level cure wounds. At an average of 10 hit points regained, that's between 20% and 25% of a 5th level fighter's maximum HP (assuming standard array with the 14 put into constitution). I would recommend changing it to 2d10 + fighter level, at 8th or 9th, and 3d10+ fighter level at 17th or 18th level.
I really, really like your resolute feature at level 8. Its name is the only issue I have with it. Hitting someone with your weapon is not being resolute in your dodging. :-P
Not certain of what I think of reactionary. It's a really powerful ability. (Unless the target has long hair or similar, grabbing and holding onto someone who is trying to run away without having to move much yourself is actually quite difficult or nearly impossible.) From a straight game play perspective, I'd honestly prefer a somewhat toned down ability, such as an attempt to trip them and knock them prone, or otherwise limit their movement without negating it entirely. It also steps on the toes of Sentinel more than a little, giving all fighters default the primary reason people take the feat.
I also have mixed feelings about your improved combat styles. (As a side note, as they are currently worded, these abilities stack with the original fighting styles. You should note that these replace the older ability.)
Fighters are already a pain to hit without further increasing their AC. I'd rather see some other defensive bonus here, such as a boost to saving throws or some sort of damage reduction.
I have no complaints to make about dueling, other than it's lack of creativity. But, as I'm not coming up with anything interesting...
Your changes to protection seems to me to be broken. You might as well word it like this: "Attacks made by enemies you can see have disadvantage against allied creatures within 5' of you, provided you are wielding a shield (and not unconscious)."
Edit: I hope I don't sound unappreciative. Your class variant videos are a highlight of my Friday mornings.
Good catch on the wording of improved combat styles, I will add that the new style replaces the original. Thanks.
I really like that these are just adjustments and not whole reworks, honestly one of my biggest problems with a lot of homebrew stuff...
Pretty straightforward, for a straightforward class.
Looking forward to next week's post.👍
Playable treant so we can be a treant monk in 5e when? :p
Too powerful - sorry.
@@TreantmonksTemple Couldn't we get a fluff piece so we could use the Temple of the Treantmonk as an archfey, oath of the ancient, etc I know we could homebrew our own, but getting something with the official seal of approval would be great 😊
I've used the Tortle as a basis for an entling (young treant); basicly just removed the hide in shell ability and added shillealagh (w/ fist).
should also have the 4th attack coming at level 17 like with Eldritch blast, so the fighter gets some use out of it.
I houserule that opp attacks can shove grapple and prone. Doesn’t make sense to me that it’s worded so that an action is required to initiate those attacks. I argue that it helps balance ranged and melee (dex vs strength).
Agreed. Barbarians, STR fighters and maybe STR clerics are the only ones who could reliably do it, so why not reward them? People at my LFGS have started playing DEX Barbarians over STR because there just aren't enough rewards for playing a STR character.
I'd love to play this in a campaign. Especially a twf defensive champion with a +4 to AC.
And Half-orc with 2 rapiers and Piercer feat on top. So you have 5 attacks, almost 15% to crit on each hit and 4d8 dmg per crit ;-).
You add to that mix his variant rule to give the off hand attack without using a bonus action and 2wf giving up to a +3 to damage and now your cooking.
For Weapon Master; honestly it seems just a tad too powerful, it's good, but just a little too good. Perhaps have it that when they crit, any following attacks are made with advantage.
It would show them like, taking advantage of the enemy from reeling because of a powerful blow
Improved War Magic is actually dangerously powerful now - If you use your action to cast a cantrip such as Booming Blade, you'd get the extra attack that comes as part of the action, in addition to your bonus action attack. I feel like it would benefit from being specified as "when you use your action to cast a spell *of first level or higher..*"
Goading attack is already better than menacing attaxk because you don't have to worry about creatures being outright immune to it
> Once you get to levels 8, 9, 10 you start to notice the difference between fighters and spellcasters
Same as it ever was
Same as it ever was
Same as it ever was
Look where our Gygax was
Melee isn't holding up
Gary isn't after us
Same as it ever was
Same as it ever was
Same as it ever was
Same as it ever was
Same as it ever was
Same as it ever was
Letting the fighters go by
Same as it ever was
And here Mordenkainen comes
Here comes that Robilar
You may find yourself
Rolling a bunch of dice
You may find yourself
Living in another world
You may ask yourself
How did I get here?
@@TreantmonksTemple And you may say yourself
"OH DM, What have you done????"
@@Porphyrogenitus1 Once in a lifetime, Spells moving around the ground.
You listed champion twice in The description.
Fighters seem very gear dependent mid to late level. Scimitar of Speed is a personal favorite (up to nine attacks in a burst for 1d6+2+modifier for each hit at late levels while still using a shield and Dueling? Yes please.) as well as +1-3 armor/shields.
Eldritch Knight suffers from there not being enough 'Weapon Strike' spells in my opinion. Though they do get the 'bonus action to cast or attack'. Though magic debuffing is nothing to sneeze at though you're pretty much locked into sword and spells and the Fighter has great versatility.
Champion vanilla is boring in my opinion. It's good for beginner players, though it feels like a 'beginner trap'.
Battlemaster, personal favorite, is amazing at physical debuffs. Also they're a Samurai in all but name and without having a lord. Lack of ranged maneuvers is a pain, I'll freely admit. I will admit though that I find it odd that most of the maneuvers are something you'd think all Fighters should be able to do since as a Fighter you've 'studied the art of war' as opposed to Barbarians 'who are war', sort of like the Wizard/sorcerer thing. Iunno, maybe give Fighters a 'bonus feat' of Martial adept? A minute is a bit long, considering that there's no guarantee you'll ever get to use it depending on gm and campaign. Personally, I'd put it as a once per creature as a bonus action... but that's me.
@@sharkforce8147 really? Cool!
18:23 IMO you don't need to change goading attack. it was already really strong if not the strongest manouver for a ranged battlemaster
@treantmonk regarding Eldritch Knight The one thing each commenter has not delved into while talking about Eldritch Knight is the war magic lvl 7 and eldritch strike lvl 10. Both are mid level powers that are extremely important for the EK. But what spells are best to capitalize on it.
Example. WM. What cantrip is worth using with it? Besides Bb, Gfb. Ray of frost target one who is moving then run to target 2 and attack once? ES. Disadvantage on next turn save spell. What about hold person or blind. Lvl 2. Cripple the big enemy for your allies. Would really like to see thoughts on how to use spells with lvl 7 lvl 10
I like everything you've done. But I'd love to see fighters gain more utility with regards to there physical bodies.
I think utility is the area that fighters lag behind in. Damage is fine in most cases. But they don't bring much problem solving to the table.
Remarkable athlete is a good example that should be a base feature I think. Just as an example.
I think it's fine that the class isn't that big on utility, their natural athleticism makes them good in exploration and climbers.
It's all about roles. They're masters of combat excelling in dealing damage, surviving hits and protecting their allies.
If every class was equally balanced on each pillar it would make class choice less important and characters less distinctive.
@@lukecarroll4052 I just don't think casters pay as high a price. They deal good damage and offer amazing utility. Especially in tiers 3 and 4. Fighters should be beyond excellent at climbing and jumping and grappling at those tiers. Is my point.
@@unchartedexemain advantage of a fighter vs casters is the fighter can sustain their performance for a much longer time, they get most of their stuff from short rests, casters start to run dry after a few encounters and have reduced versatility and performance in combat as the day goes on due to reduced options and their higher level spells start running out of slots.
Around levels 7,8,9,10 etc. The fighter starts to fall behind a little bit but they wind up coming back by level 11 onwards when they get a third attack,have two extra feats and Archetype features start getting good again.
@@sharkforce8147 great point about the lower level fighters handily replacing a higher level one.
The ability 2 concentrate on 2 spells and the way the action economy works might favor the 2 clerics, but the fighter brings no second thoughts
@@sharkforce8147 A level 1 spell (Jump) can make any wizard "out-physical" a level 20 Barbarian with 24 strength and double proficiency in Athletics (1 level of Rogue for the Expertise feat)
Great video: It’s nice to see you give the fighters some tlc.
(I do think sweeping attack is a bit overpowered now. It does what the player wants it to do, but it seems like an effect that should come from the more brutish flavored line of class features than the tactical master repertoire. I might have the second attack made at disadvantage, or at least be sure to give other similar features from other feats/class features a commensurate boost.
(end paren)
As usual i agree with all your tweaks/changes! With the UA Class Feature Variants currently in playtest and heavily hinted at as going into a next published product from WoTC, after the testing phase fighting styles got a lot of love. Hmm what a time to be a player!!
With the addition of your changes to feats, I would like to make a suggestion. Instead of Fighters getting an Extra feat at 6th and 14th, instead allow them to either use their ASI to increase their abilities by 3 instead of 2 (insinuating that fighters are just better with their training) or they get 1 additional option when choosing your Variant feats (so instead of 3 options they would get 4 options) or if they have half feat variant they could get a +1 to an ability and still get to choose two options. This would give them 15 Ability score improvements (vs the 14 they would have with the other 2 extra feats) and instead they should get something effective and helpful at 6 and 14. This solidify the concept of a fighter that they get the same things that other classes get (extra attack, ASI's ) but they are not equal, that the fighter with regards to these things are superior. Here are my suggestions for levels that I took away the ASI
Wounding Strikes
At 6th level, Once per turn, when the fighter hits with an attack, choose one target of that attack. The target must makes a Strength or Dexterity saving throw, Fighter's choice, which is done so with disadvantage if the attack that triggered this ability was a critical hit (both the initial and subsequent turn(s)), vs your Save DC of 8 + attack ability modifier + Proficiency bonus or gain the Crippling condition. At the end of the affected creature's turn, the creature makes a Constitution saving throw. On a failed save, the target take damage equal to 1d6 + your proficiency bonus and the condition ends. On a successful save, the Crippling condition ends (no damage).The Fighter can use wounding strikes a number of times per long rest equal to your proficiency bonus. Like all other conditions, the target may be affected by the same condition only once at a time. Damage for this ability increases to 2d6 + proficiency bonus at 10th level and 3d6+ proficiency bonus at 14th level.
--Crippling Condition:
Creatures with the Crippling condition make attacks with disadvantage and have their speed reduced by 10 ft..
Improved Wounding Strikes.
At 14th level, the fighter's Wounding strikes ability no longer ends the Crippling condition on a failed saving throw, and a creature that succeeds still take half damage instead of no damage. The Fighter now gets wounding strikes a number of times equal to your proficiency bonus per a short or long rest instead of just on a long rest.
______________
These changes are to make fighters a little more effective at mid/upper tiers of play. I original had attacks and ability checks at disadvantage but felt that might have been too strong (essentially the poison condition + reduced movement) and nothing is resistant/immune to this feature RAW (I would argue a DM could make undead and construct immune, as they don't have functioning organ to wound... or any other creature where it doesn't make sense like Oozes and Gelatinous Cubes. )
These changes also make the number of ASI slightly stronger for the original progression before at levels 6 and 14 (3 at 6th instead of 4 and 9 at 14th instead of 10) so adding a minor ability at these levels seems okay
On a tangent note I would remove the Extra feat Rogues get at lvl 10 and just give them Extra attack feature and the first option of Wounding strikes or something worded similarly (Obviously would need to have it scale at different levels, maybe even upping the damage portion of the Rogues version...like d8's or d10... or maybe the damage just equal's a roll of their sneak attack damage if the constitution save fails {success still no damage}). again fighter version better for those conditions/battlefield control.
Your Trip Attack variant doesn't slow your enemy down by much. Standing requires half your movement, and if your movement is slowed by 10 feet, that actually reduces the cost of standing (half of 30 is 15, vs half of 20 is 10). The end result is -5 ft. movement rather than -10 ft. I'd much rather see this variant state that while you are still within reach of the target you knocked prone with this ability, standing costs the target 10 additional feet of movement. That means a standard human can stand and move 5 ft. before dashing.
Any plans to Update your Variant Fighter listed on your GM binder with the updated Fighting styles from Tasha's? And their "Improved Fighting Styles" feature. Curious how you would improve things like Intersection (which is awesome at low levels, not great at higher levels, maybe add fighter level to the damage reduced? but still takes your reaction?, unlike your change to protection) and things like Blind Fighting (just 15-20 feet of Blindsight?) Thrown weapon seems ez (same as Dueling) and Unarmed Strikes could full unarmed damage + Proficiency bonus to damage against grappled targets? or maybe 1d6/1d8 versatile becomes 1d8/1d10 versatile?
I'd note you did actually boost Commander's Strike: it used to also cost you an attack, making it silly expensive outside of big synergy plays.
My mistake, yes, it uses a bonus action now.
@@BlackTempleGaurdian You take the Attack action (as opposed to Dodge/Help/Hide), meaning Grapples, Shoves, missed attacks are all ok. You essentially just use a bonus action so your ally can use their reaction to attack with your Superiority bonus. 1 Superiority Die + Bonus action is all you're really paying here.
@@BlackTempleGaurdian According to the GMbinder document he posted, you're misunderstanding:
"When you *take the Attack action* on your turn, you can use a *bonus action* to direct one of your companions to strike. When you do so, choose a friendly creature who can see or hear you and *expend one superiority die* . That creature *can immediately use its reaction* to make one weapon attack, *adding the superiority die to the attack’s damage roll* ."
Imagine this: lv5 GWF Fighter and a lv5 bow-wielding Ranger are fighting two thugs, a fat one with a maul and a thin one with a heavy crossbow. The Fighter engages the fat one and for his action he takes the Attack action, simultaneously shouting to his companion to shoot the thin thug that is about to take flanking shots at them. The Fighter makes his 2 attacks against the fat thug and expends his Bonus action along with a superiority die and the Ranger expends his Reaction to shoot the thin thug.
The Attack action is a condition to the ability, you don't lose any of the attacks.
@@BlackTempleGaurdian I'm not going to read through *all* of them... I did Ctrl+F it at your prompt though, and the only other comment about it is from TM himself, the pinned one, where he explicitly states what I've been trying to tell you here.
I'm not sure where your misunderstanding comes from. You'd said that it's better now because it no longer costs an attack and he confirmed that it is indeed so. What are you seeing that I am not?
@@Banejbt You're the one misunderstanding here. It says that in the document, but Treantmonk said in the video that he didn't adjust that ability from the Player's Handbook version. OP is pointing out that it is, in fact, different from the PH.
I know DM'S that would not allow two weapon fighting and dual wielding to stack for AC.
the problem i see with fighters is lack of mechanical options
i would like to use my sword to deal bludgeoning and piercing damage,
trip oponents parry them, counter faint and some more as basic things martial characters can do and the fighter excels at
they are the fighter after all and that means aka
weapons based martial artist
not to mention not being able to use dex for melee, end strength for ranged
or stances like high guard, low guard, ect
Just finished the video. I LOVE the Reactionary ability. I was disappointed when I first found out that I couldn't do that in the base game. I had to take Sentinel to compensate.
Battle Maneuvers - I think Parry doesn't scale well. I would make it deflect sup. die + dex or half the incoming damage, whichever is higher.
Question about Sweeping Attack - when you say "same attack" is the intent to use the same attack roll + modifier as the original attack? That makes sense in terms of flavour, and also makes it easier to decide when to carry forward that momentum and spend the sup. die.
Can't wait to hear your take on the Class Variants! If Xanather ushered in a 5.1, then class variants make it seem like a new era of d&d 5.2.
The intent of sweeping attack is that you make a separate attack roll. I'll need to clean up the language. Yeah, with the class variants, there's stuff I like, other stuff I don't - so I hope it sees some changes before becoming official.
I'd house ruled that you can shove and grapple with an opportunity attack already, it's common sense to me. I'd never been a fan of the battle maneuvers, I prefer the approach of DCCRPG, where the players come with their own moves. I find superiority dice are inspired/stolen from DCC mighty deeds.
My level 11 Fighter was killed by an eldritch abomination awhile ago, and had his soul captured by it upon failing its DC 25 (!) Charisma save. I would have liked to have your Indomitable modification in that game...
Awesome!
I was thinking of making the Indomitable save more in line with the Artificer's reaction to add INT bonus to save. That one even applies to others! This one kind of punishes Resilient users, but it's nice to have anyway.
Well yes and no.
Taking Resilient is still great because then there are less failed rolls you have toconsider rerolling, thus making the times you fail rarer and this ability better overall.
It isn't quite as strong as it was, but it still is quite comparable
I would like to see a Scale Mail option for Dex based fighters.
I don't think fighters need a buff, I made a wizard subclass once, and in order to have something to compare it to I compared it to eldritch knight and I realized the fighters damage output is consistently insane.
Here are my (somewhat verbose) thoughts:
3:45 Meve? Nice :)
Resolute - Does this work with Rogue's Cunning Action?
Indomitable - Honestly, this alone boosts the fighter quite a bit, especially at higher levels. I can easily imagine a high level enemy spellcaster casting Maze on the pesky Fighter that keeps testing his Concentration. Before, there would be pretty much no way out for the Fighter as Int is probably their dump stat, but with this, at least they'd have a decent chance of success.
Reactionary - I really like this one as I usually play grapplers whenever I play non-caster melee characters. But it gives pretty much nothing to ranged Fighters who, besides just not wanting to be in melee, tend to have poor Athletics. Not sure about that, from a design standpoint, though giving ranged reactionary attacks often tends to be either overpowered or obnoxious. IDK.
Improved Combat Style - Damage styles seem a bit too strong IMO, because traditionally the most common magic items players find tend to be weapons and nearly all of them have damaging effects. I like the Protection though. After seeing Goading Attack from Battlemaster, I have to ask if you've thought about Protection giving Cover instead of disadvantage? Also, what about Champions taking Archery as their second improved style? I mean, I guess it's not that big of a deal.
Weapon Master - Nice. I feel like Battlemasters profit the most from this.
Battlemaster
Disarming Attack - Nice touch. Currently all it does is pretty much just diminish potential Opportunity Attacks, as the opponent will just pick it up as part of their movement and continue on. This changes that.
Evasive footwork - Not so sure about this one. It's really powerful early on. Though it does require a roll and you can always roll a 1. It's kind of like a less reliable Shield spell, but it doesn't require a reaction.
Goading Attack - Imagine this: An Archery style Fighter finds themself within 5ft of a big fat baddie at the start of their turn, they take the Dodge action and backhand the enemy threatening them. They hit and use Goading attack and then proceed to bravely run away. Lol. If Resolute works with Cunning Action, they could even get a few more hits in from afar, potentially squeezing in a Pushing Attack just to further annoy the enemy.
Lunging Attacks - Polearm Master + Sentinel... 15ft reach. You could theoretically duke it out with an Ancient Red Dragon, if you hit, it can't Multiattack you as Claws have a 10ft range. Though it can still roast you or smack you with its tail.
Sweeping Attack - So basically Cleave? It's kinda fitting, it makes the Fighter like a janitor. Get it? Because he sweeps and cleans up the trash... Ahem.
Trip Attack - Eh, still best with Sentinel.
Changes I didn't mention are those I either I agree with and consider a good QoL improvement, or I had nothing witty to add. Conclusion: Resolute + Cunning Action???
Resolute - Technically it would, which wasn't the intent. I will need to reword it to "when you use your action to take the Dodge action" to close that loophole
ICS - I hadn't thought of Protection giving cover tbh.
Evasive Footwork: It's actually almost the same as the Sword Bard's defensive flourish
Goading: Taking the dodge action afterwords is probably a good idea
@@sharkforce8147 You're right, I mixed them up. The "fix" remains the same though.
Question: How would the newer Fighter Fighting Styles improve with the Improved Combat Style like Superior Technique, Thrown Weapon Fighting, Unarmed Fighting, etc.?
Now that you've probably had some time to play test these do you think there is any chance of seeing another series of revised 5e classes and maybe some of the other subclasses along with it?
13:30 Weaker than two handed weapon perhaps but not weaker than one handed and shield, and you've now essentially given them the bonus of a shield.
Sweeping Attack: The intent is you make a new attack roll for the second target, I will clean up the language in the document to make that clear
Commander's Strike: I make a mistake in the vid, I did boost Commander's Strike. It requires a bonus action rather than giving up an attack.
Improved Combat Style: I have added wording, "The original fighting style is replaced by the improved one." just so it's clear they don't stack with the original.
My version of the Fighter: The Treantmonk Variant
For all the Treantmonk Variant content - go here:
www.gmbinder.com/share/-LrZCguvN5bsrjsloVcY
Access the document:
www.gmbinder.com/share/-LtA_s7eBuEq-vgomP33
In this video, I also discuss : The Martial Archetypes, The Champion, the Eldritch Knight and the Battlemaster.
the champion, the elritch night and the champion?
Can you make a video on the class feature variants UA?
They tried to fix the same issues you are. Maybe you can rate the changes and compare them to your variants
@@aldoushuxley5953 I know someone who didn't watch the video to the end ;)
@@TreantmonksTemple haha didn't even start yet, I'm currently at work "working".
But I know what I will watch when I get home :)
@@aldoushuxley5953 In that case, yes, I answer that question in the video.
While Resolute is good it's not very thematic, I'd replace it with Riposte "As an action you can use your action to parry an incoming attack, while wielding a melee weapon you declare the action on your turn and until the beginning of your next turn you subtract 1d10+fighter level+ Str or Dex mod (depending on weapon type) from the incoming damage of a melee attack, if you prevent all the incoming damage you may make a melee attack in response".
I think even if it worked on all incoming damage an action is too expensive for this, and it doesn't scale well. You're giving up two (or three or four) attacks, and in the best case scenario you're canceling out one hit and getting an attack in return, but only if they attack in melee, hit, and roll poorly enough on damage that you can completely cancel it out. Let's do some math. I'll look at a druid since that's what I'm most familiar with. Hopefully melee damage output is similar. For simplicity, I'll use the second highest available spell slot. When they're not summoning or polymorphing, an 8th level druid will be using Call Lightning. That's an average if 16.5 damage. A fighter with 20 in their primary stat is blocking 18.5, so that works more often than not. At 12th level, we're probably looking at an upcasted Ice Storm. That's 27.5 damage, and you can block 23.5, failing more often than not to get your attack. This gets even worse at 16th level, with firestorm dealing 38.5 damage and you absorbing 27.5.
It's funny that you that you said that the fighter doesn't have a capstone because I've always thought the 4th attack was the best capstone in the game.
My fix for the Fighter: Give them Expertise (at level 3) and replace the Champion with the Brute
RIP Brute, I will miss you when they delete you from D&D beyond on the 15th.
twelfth level *Reactionary* ability needs some additional content, I think.
It should read as follows:
*Reactionary*
Beginning at 12th level, when you use your reaction to make an opportunity attack against a creature you can see that moves out of your reach, you may choose to attempt a grapple or shove against that creature in place of the weapon attack. In addition, you automatically save vs the foolhardy innovations of your companions. You gain knowledge of deep, ancient lore that prevents you from succumbing to reckless innovations, foolhardy ideological thinking, and emotion-driven cant, whether issued by another PC or by an NPC.
Too powerful I'm afraid.
You have Resolute in the features description, but Unkillable on the class table.
Thank you! That one was a last minute replacement, I'll change the class table.
level 20 eldritch knight duel with a flame tongue and the spell shadow blade with the variant feat rules would actually be crazy lol
why keep remarkable athlete tho?
I'm very much enjoying this series of videos. IMHO you should rename the Resolute feature. Maybe something along the lines of "Leaf on the Wind"
I would have liked to have seen an additional combat style that allows an Archer to fire his bow in melee without disadvantage. It's ridiculous that a crossbow wielder has a Feat to enable this while a Bowman does not. And don't say just take the crossbow expert as a Bowman, you lose out on half the feats benefits unless you wield an actual crossbow. I see that you came at this issue from another angle with your improved combat style. But I think a Bowman should be given the option whether he wants to move or not and to not have that choice adversely affect his shot
(Browncoat Nation 👍)
Pretty sure Wash was not a fighter.
When you do your take on the variant class rules from UA, it would be awesome if you would also talk about how you would fit them into your class variants if you like them and would include them. assuming you weren't already planning on this.
I'm planning a quick follow-up vid to discuss what I would change with the variants if it was up to me. Not planning one for fitting them into my variants - I look at them more as an alternative to these variants than an addition - though you could pick a few features that would still work fine (changing out combat styles, skills, known spells off the top of my head - all fine)
@@TreantmonksTemple The campaign world I am building, before I saw those options I was including a spend gold and downtime (world will actually use downtime) to trade out styles, spells for classes with spontaneous casting, or cantrips. Groups change, and so many traps that I want players to be able to swap out stuff if they are not having fun. BTW love your work, glad you are willing to spend time and effort doing this for our community.
@@TreantmonksTemple dope, look forward to your thoughts.
It looks like you changed Commander's Strike so that it does not require you to forego one of your attacks in addition to consuming the Bonus Action. That's a pretty huge change, but if I heard you correctly in the video you say you didn't change it at all. Am I missing an errata or something?
The problem with fighting style, both here and in the phb is that the four offensive ones (archery, dueling, great weapon fighting, and two weapon fighting) are too restrictive and also not balanced against each other (for example dueling is just better than great weapon fighting and two weapon fighting). I recommend collapsing these four all into one fighting style: offense, you gain a +2 bonus to weapon attacks.
Weapon attacks or weapon damage?
@@kendrajade6688 weapon attacks
How do you think you would improve Superior Technique fighting style? Improve the d6 to d8s?
Sweeping attack should at least cost a bonus action so its not just outright better than great weapon master or riposte, its also mildly confusing b/c it doesn't say outright to make an additional attack against another target but says something like damage a second target with the same attack.
The champions additional fighting style, w/ regards to improving fighting style could be misconstrued to mean choose a 3rd fighting style and improve it. should probably read 'you may improve 2 fighting styles'.
The fighters 4th attack I've always felt should have come online at 17th when all the casters are getting their 9th (and rogues get a big upgrade as well) so they can get some use out of it before the campaign ends at 20 (as if it might actually last that long).
I like what you did to indomitable, I always thought it was weak if you didn't have resilient wisdom.
I've reworded Sweeping attack to address that. I did consider switching the 20th level ability to 17th, but I also wanted to keep it in line with the Monk variant I had already completed.
with the wizard series done and now the reviews of the UA variants, I was wondering, if you'll make a video on the artificer, especially as the second INT caster class?
Since the official Artificer comes out later this month, I will definitely be taking a look at that time
Champion fighter seems so weak still, even at lvl 14 I'm not sure it has much of a leg-up on the other two subclasses on much. Crit range is nice, but being merely a DPR increases, I don't think it brings it up to the BM maneuvers DPR increase in most cases. BM maneuvers have secondary effects on top of that.
I know you feel that the school limitations are pretty much fine for Eldritch Knight, but do you think that allowing the player to choose the two schools would be too powerful?
So one thing I would like to see is the return of feats to the mainstream of characters like in pathfinder or 3.5
I'm honestly pretty confused by your lack of champion changes and positive evaluation of it here. While I totally agree that it's nice to have a simple training-wheels class for new players or players who don't want to be bothered with too many mechanics. This should give it a little wiggle room to be weaker than average or what have you as the cost of doing business to be simple. That said, I was under the impression that they blew past their wiggle room and were weak to the point where it should be changed. Not like the monk or ranger or anything, but definitely something I would've expected you to change a lot more or at least not evaluate so positively.
While I've admittedly never played as or even with a champion fighter, not only does the class read as weak to me, but you yourself rated it as the 5th, 4th, and 4th worst subclass in the entire game at levels 6-10, 11-16, and 17-20 respectively. If only based off that I had expected it to get at least a little more love. What was your reasoning behind this or why has your opinion changed?
I thought the balance between menacing and goading was that creatures immune to frighten weren't effected by menacing?
It's true creatures immune to frighten aren't affected by menacing, but that's not all that many creatures. In the MM, about 10% are immune to frightened, and it's not one of those cases where more powerful creatures are significantly more likely to be immune either.
@@TreantmonksTemple ah, thanks for the clarification. I thought it was more prevalent.
you should probably clarify that the improved combat styles replaces the corresponding unimproved style
I have listed the changes in the pinned comment. That was one of them.
@@TreantmonksTemple Ah, I missed it. Thank you for pointing me to it. With these changes I now really like your version of the fighter, fantastic work!
Just as a note, my 20th level great weapon master and Polearm master Eldritch Knight fighter makes his first attack normal and hits. I now make all my weapon attacks with -5 but I have advantage which means it’s on average the same. I take my action surge. I get a free 10 extra Damage now on every other attack I hit with for the next 9 attacks I make. This is crazy strong. Even further anytime I roll a 1 or 2 I automatically get a 8increasingly my average from 3-8 from 1-8 with 3 sides of the die giving me an 8.
I’m now unstoppable, I WIN D&D.
Obviously I’m kidding but you’ve made it so I can easily pump out 200+ damage in a turn as a fighter in a turn two times every short rest due Fo action surge. I can also have hast and make a bonus action attack due to Polearm master. So I have 10 attacks a round.
This is intended to be very strong, particularly boosting action surge. Wizards already won D&D at level 17, at least you get there 3 levels later...
Of course. You are a level 20 character who SPECIALIZES in fighting. Did you think that 200 damage is too much?
unchartedexe yes. The Wizard can’t deal 200 Average damage with his 1 ninth level spell a day. I can do it twice per short rest. So YES I do. I can now take a dragon to almost half health in one turn.
Treantmonk's Temple It’s your build, I just wonder if you’re making it very heavy handed in the fighters favor where they outpace all other damage from other classes. I do think it’s cool, but I think it would make more sense if you said once per long rest, you may give yourself advantage on all attacks you take in a turn, over every turn you can give yourself advantage after you hit once.
@@keeganmbg6999 "The Wizard can’t deal 200 Average damage with his 1 ninth level spell a day." That's technically true, I mean a Wizard casting Meteor Swarm can only expect about 140. Then again, Meteor Swarm covers 256 squares, so you can theoretically hit an army for over 35,000 points of damage in a round. Single Target damage isn't the wizard's specialty though - that's the fighter's specialty.
Some average roll math you might find interesting about your GWF (Or not. I might be late)
D4 averages to 3.625
D6 averages to 4.66666666667
D8 averages to 5.65625
D10 averages to 6.64
D12 averages to 7.625
It also makes the greatsword even more consistent and bumps the minimum to 6 (but you're probably rolling at least 8). here's the damage spread before modifiers
Damage (%)
6 (3%)
7 (6%)
8 (19%)
9 (22%)
10 (31%)
11 (17%)
12 (3%)
TreantMonk? More like MidasMonk; everything you touch turns to gold! Yet another great variant from you :) I can't wait to hear your thoughts on the new UA Playtest material.
Honestly, if they were to just use your variants, the new UA material, add in fixed artificer and mystic classes, and make some more minor QOL tweaks--calling it DnD 5.5 at the end of 2020 I'd be thrilled. Give this to us for Christmas, Wizards!
With level 20 Weapon Master - is the intent to give the Fighter advantage on that turn only, or for all their future turns too?
In terms of flavour, do you envision this ability to work with improvised weapons? That's a super niche scenario, but I'm curious.
Every turn the first time you hit, subsequent attacks on that turn are made with advantage. Yes, it would work with any weapon.
@@TreantmonksTemple thank you!
Pick mobile feat, pick Evasive footwork, congrats you now have shield spells on short rest
Evasive footwork is intended to work similarly to defensive flourish of the swords bard.
I find the wording for your version of Lunging attack a bit confusing. How is it intended to work?
I have to disagree with Eldritch Knight being fine. 1st level spells are fine, 3rd level spells are fine, but at 2nd level being mostly limited to Abjuration and Evocation gives a teerrrrriible list of spells for your level. Most evocations are too weak to make a difference, and the only Abjuration is Arcane Lock. I do tend to make 1 small change - I usually open up Transmutation spells for them too. It seems like the spell school Fighters would MOST want to learn, and its always seemed bizarre Eldritch Knights would choose to ignore it.
That's fair - not a lot of decent options. Darkness I guess? Warding Wind maybe sometimes? Yeah, now that you mention it - level 2 spells are pretty yuck.
Cleave got shuffled into great weapon master, and your cleaving attack does almost the same thing. How does it intetqct with GWM?
EK doesn't feel good to play. 1-4 GFB, 5-6 normal attacks, 7+ cantrip into BA second attack. I was hoping you would do something about that. I will once again reference the Eldrich Arcana on GMBinder.
I need more specifics. Which ability are you referring to with "your cleaving attack"?
@@TreantmonksTemple your rendition of the battlemasters cleaving attack. Derp, its called "Sweeping attack" My bad.
It does almost the same thing that GWM does - 3.5 cleave. Kill something - another attack roll.
@@texteel When you reduce a creature to 0 HP with a melee weapon, you could technically to both as long as you have the superiority die and bonus action available.
It looks like you went through some iterations and didn't update your class chart, because the capstone is still named "Charger" on it instead of Weapon Master.
Whoops - yep, you're right, I did a few drafts. I'll correct that.
I would called it "battlefield control", reactionary can mean some... bad things
Greetings. I have tried to download the variant documents from gmbinder, but when i open them in pdf they look very wierd. Any tips? Thank you.
Are you using chrome? Firefox tends to provide weird results.
24:00 Id personally make it a bonus action. Know your enemy can only be used out of combat. This way it can be used in combat to gauge how weak an opponent is.
That would make less sense flavor-wise. Just do it before combat and keep track of how much damage you're doing.
The level 20 Weapon Master is a great cap stone for Battlemasters, Champions, Eldrich Knights ... however you have stolen and nerfed the Samurai subclass uniqueness. I think you need to re-think this cap-stone. Otherwise your changes are very good.
I'm really doing this with just PHB in mind, if/when I get to Xanathar's I'm sure a fix can be applied to the Samurai
What, what! Holla!
I would probably also add the Brute extra damage starting at 3rd level and have it scale at the same rate as in the subclass, and Improved Critical at 6th-8th level or something. Needless to say I don’t think the Brute or Champion class should exist.
Paladins, Rangers, and Rogues all deal more damage than the fighter. Giving the fighter the brute damage dice would go a ways towards greater parity between the classes, and having it scale the way it does and when it does prevents it from stepping on the toes of hex or hunters mark while also preventing players from simply taking one level in the class to gain access to an extra 1d4.
Champion Remarkable Athlete is pretty unremarkable. I'd add expertise in Athletics, otherwise raging Barbarians, Bards and rogues can all be a lot more remarkable at Athletics, grappling, shoving etc.