Quote Originally Posted by Tanarii View Post
As someone that enjoyed 4e, I can tell you one of the biggest losses in 5e was how awesome 4e Martials were. And it was a big loss as early as 4e Essentials, which was when Mearls, who had just been promoted to lead designer and already was planning for 5e/"back to old school" revisions, took away refreshing resources from 4e fighters and rogues to make them "I attack" classes again.

They definitely did not feel like casters. They felt something like battlemasters, except not as hamstrung in terms of very limited special maneuvers or feeling like something tacked on and always the same kind of resource and lacking any at-will maneuvers. They felt skilled and built-in.

But a large chunk of that was 4e also had far more battle mat / tactical focus, and martials were very good at manipulating that.
IMO,
1. Battlemasters ought to be able to change maneuvers after a long rest (like spell preparation) IMO (if they want to).
2. Battlemaster as the core of a fighter seems to me a good idea, but they wanted a 'beginner friendly' class (subclass Champion does that fine) so BM is a more advanced play style. I have a friend who still needs to be reminded to use his maneuvers; I simply ask, as DM "using a maneuver or not?" as he declares his actions. At some point, I won't need to, but he's new to BM (not to D&D, his default is dwarf paladin) and hasn't got an intuitive feel for BM yet.