Martial Power!!! (Give the martials something to do other than "attack again")

[Unoriginal]

IMO, there should just be more "useful options everyone can do in combat, but martials are better at those" options, like Grapple, Disarm or the like.

I know that technically that kind of things is already in the game under the "improvise an action" umbrella, but a lot of people (especially on RPG forums) only acknowledge the stuff that is explicitly stated (and even then, only in some interpretation of it).

For example, adding a rule that if you Grapple an enemy with an Attack action and you have the Extra Attack feature, you can use the grappled creature to hit another creature or an inanimate object within reach, dealing damage to both.


Also, the books should just be more explicit about how someone with 20 STR can break steel bare-handed and the like.

[sayaijin]

I don't want to completely derail the thread, so I can make a new one if need be, but what if martials got "martial-themed spells" at the same pace as casters? They don't have to be called spells, but classes get them at the same rate.

It's a lot of work to consider what a 1st (or 2nd, etc) level fighter spell should be, but this way there's more parity.

What if incredible feats of skill and strength were spells available to martials? All classes get full (or half, idk) caster slots, but the barbarian spell list is similar to, be slightly different from the fighter spell list, and different from the rogue spell list.

The ranger spells already do this to some extent. Pass without trace, cordon of arrows, conjure barrage, swift quiver - these aren't that magical, and are thematic for a ranger.

[Kuu Lightwing]

I don't like the idea of attaching martial abilities to the exact same mechanic as spells. Commonly cited strength of a martial is being able to use their abilities indefinitely, unlike spellcasters, so it would be nice to keep it.

Then there's the idea of "running out of sword" which can be immersion breaking to some. I would like to see some sort of stance or maybe combo mechanic if you want to limit the use of certain abilities - for example certain stances enable the use of certain abilities, and using abilities may switch your stance, for example.

[Ralanr]

I don't like the idea of attaching martial abilities to the exact same mechanic as spells. Commonly cited strength of a martial is being able to use their abilities indefinitely, unlike spellcasters, so it would be nice to keep it.

Then there's the idea of "running out of sword" which can be immersion breaking to some. I would like to see some sort of stance or maybe combo mechanic if you want to limit the use of certain abilities - for example certain stances enable the use of certain abilities, and using abilities may switch your stance, for example.

I like the idea of returning to the stance system the mystic had based on that. Since martial maneuvers are resources and the game is built around managing your resources. Giving fighters or any martial an unlimited resource to make them more useful in higher tiers would just be game breaking.

[Kuu Lightwing]

I like the idea of returning to the stance system the mystic had based on that. Since martial maneuvers are resources and the game is built around managing your resources. Giving fighters or any martial an unlimited resource to make them more useful in higher tiers would just be game breaking.

It depends on how it's balanced. I'm not convinced that the only way to balance special/unique abilities in 5e is to put them into nine tiers with same number of abilities available of each tier as there's spell slots of that level on a caster.

[Dienekes]

I like the idea of returning to the stance system the mystic had based on that. Since martial maneuvers are resources and the game is built around managing your resources. Giving fighters or any martial an unlimited resource to make them more useful in higher tiers would just be game breaking.

I’m uncertain if that’s true. Look at 3.5 and the ToB classes, they had essentially unlimited use of maneuvers and they balanced out rather well, when compared to casters and were quite a good deal weaker than some of them.

What matters is if the characters have some resource that drains along the adventure day that means they end their day roughly when the casters end theirs. And well, they already have that under the flag of hit points.

[BoutsofInsanity]

Read the spoiler section like Eeyore from Winnie the Pooh. In a sad defeated voice to convey the self depreciating humor of this post. The other stuff is normal.

Spoiler: BoutsofInsanity's favorite topic that no one agrees with him on.

Show

"Page 195 of the PHB, contests in combat. Top right corner. Use the grapple and shove rules to model attacks and behaviors taken in combat that aren't explicitly described in the book.

These could potentially be cool things like

• Pocket sand
• eye gouges
• leg attacks for movement slowing
• kidney punch for poisoned condition
• disrupting material, verbal, or somatic components
• Throat slams

The ability to do cool fighter things would only be bound by the limitations your specific table sets, your DM's ability to adjudicate rulings, and your imagination. I know it's not ideal. But the precedent is there by looking at both grapple/shove and the battle master subclass.

Anyway, martial characters need one of the following three things.

An expansion on what is allowed through opposed ability checks with examples to set a baseline. This could potentially give a lot more flexibility to the characters by allowing them to attack monsters in ways other classes couldn't.

or

The PHB/DMG needs a better guide for helping dungeon masters design "Adventuring Days" so that the resource expenditure conundrum that faces the party becomes an explicit part of the game design. Where the strategy becomes how best to leverage your renewable and finite resources effectively.

or

Reworking the magic item system to benefit the martial classes because it's part of their "Classical" identity. Most of this stuff would be more in Tier 3 or Tier 4 which would reward not multi-classing for some of these effects. They could be pretty powerful, but restricted by investing the class itself. Lastly, good game design would have an entire paragraph talking about "homebrewing" your own items and to be careful when handing out some special effects to magic users. Or something like that.

• Martial Characters can attune to more magic items
• Items have different effects if wielded by specific classes
• Class restricted items
• Feature specific items, action surge, rage, cunning action etc...

[Ralanr]

• Martial Characters can attune to more magic items
• Items have different effects if wielded by specific classes
• Class restricted items
• Feature specific items, action surge, rage, cunning action etc...

Emphasis mine. Would love to see something like this. Or at least more martial specific magic items (paladins and rangers I think are the only martial characters that get these).

Currently only the artificer can attune to more items though, so it's less likely we'd see this happen without rebuilding from the ground up. And that's unlikely to happen in 2024.

[Man_Over_Game]

I don't want the game to have some character types (mages) greatly improve in their ability to overcome engagement obstacles but other character types (knights) have no improvement in that area. Personally I would prefer if both had thematically appropriate level appropriate growth in those areas. Yes this does mean I expect a party of Fighters to be able to play the game from 1-20 against the same level of challenges that a mixed party or an all mages party can.

I like this idea, I just don't know if we're capable of delivering a thematic system that scales effectively in every area for each class.

For instance, Barbarians.

Rage is incredibly simple, the benefits of it are straightforward and only really relevant for combat, and there isn't really much else to play with besides Strength, Rage, and occasionally increased defenses or mobility. We could make Rage a lot cooler, but then you're still trying to build on a foundation that supports a player only getting to use his features and have fun while he has the Rage capacity to do so.

Barbarians don't really have any kind of theme beholden to them, like psionics or something, so how do we build on such a grey chassis in a way that feels like we're making the game more fun? There are only so many ideas we could make around a class identity of "Strong and Angry".

Sure, we could change Rage to be more interactive, but that seems like a lot of work for something that is supposed to be compatible with the core rules and existing subclasses. You're not just talking about an expansion, but a revision, as we won't be adding more content if we're too busy losing a bunch.

Not trying to be a debby-downer, but I think it'd be best to prioritize the hardest class or situation to work on. Once we can figure out how to make that playstyle more interactive, consistent and fun, I think it'll be easier to make the others follow suit.

[Unoriginal]

I don't want to completely derail the thread, so I can make a new one if need be, but what if martials got "martial-themed spells" at the same pace as casters?

Then they'd be indistinguishable from casters. I for one has no interest in going back to that.


We can have interesting mechanics without making all classes the same.

[LibraryOfAlex]

Rage is incredibly simple, the benefits of it are straightforward and only really relevant for combat, and there isn't really much else to play with besides Strength, Rage, and occasionally increased defenses or mobility. We could make Rage a lot cooler, but then you're still trying to build on a foundation that supports a player only getting to use his features and have fun while he has the Rage capacity to do so.

Honestly, lower levels for me would be absolutely perfect if Fighter and Barb got to use some abilities in non-combat scenarios. Let Barbarians rage for a minute out of combat (and maybe give more uses). If I have big strong-man, I want him to be able to rage and shove a boulder off the path. Let him rage and Climb up a tree to look out from the top.

Spellcasters can use their resources for combat, exploration, or social interaction. Let my barbarian rage and hold back a door from an angry young dragon trying to get in. Let him rage and flex his muscles to intimidate people, or use his rage to push through a crowd and grab a thief.

And I can do all of this - but, because rage requires you to hit things or take damage, only for 6 seconds. And I only have 2-3 rages, so if I do this stuff, I could just turn into 'worse fighter' in the next fight.

When I first saw how rage ends on no damage or attacks, I thought it was cool. But, in every 5e game i've played, the default option is 'attack again'. So a feature like this just disincentivizes being creative.

Up to high levels? Well, I don't really know. Let Barbarians shove over a bunch of small mobs at once? Let them grapple with a dragon, forcing the claw back? Let him put a lich into a submission hold so his allies can grab the phylactery? That stuff sounds really cool, but: shoving one person takes an attack, dragons are 2 size categories larger, and...well, you actually can put a lich in a submission hold, I think. I'm gonna do that.

Fighters are even harder cause they don't really have any non-combat features.

At least for other classes they have things. Rogues get expertise, reliable talent, blindsense, stroke of luck. Monks get slow fall, purity of body, tongue of sun and moon. Every other class has spellcasting.

Personally, I'm a fan of the 'martials become peak-human and even super-human' idea. Rogues can be so fast that its supremely difficult to track them in combat. Monks dodge almost everything thrown at them. Barbarians just walk through everything and lift hills. Rangers can make improbable shots. Fighters can cut arrows in half mid-flight. All of this is 'physically possible', just highly improbable.

Mechanically, though, I'm not sure how to make any 'probable' martial measure up to a spellcaster at high levels. Best I've managed in my games so far is magic items with really thematic powers that basically just cast certain spells or use certain maneuvers.

[t209]

Maybe I got it from battle brothers, but I do wish weapons should have properties other than simple ones.
3E had spear with charge defense and polearms have grapple function.

[Dr.Samurai]

But D&D is not that type of game of normal medieval heroes, not completely. It is (can be) at low level. At high level the design intent is to be fantastical.

This is a distinction that does not exist. Low levels are fantastical as well. And D&D is absolutely this kind of game. Case in point... fighters and barbarians don't suddenly gain the ability to fly or kill armies with a single swing of their sword or chop mountains in half. We know what D&D's roots are, and it isn't anime or comic books.

If you don't want that end the campaign before reaching that level or play another game system.

No, I'm good playing the game thanks. Perhaps others should search elsewhere for what they want instead? (See, not helpful.)

There are fantastical warrior ideas. The issue is getting D&D to embrace them. A warrior can block and take no damage from a dragon's breath, if he takes Shield Master feat. Make that a class feature and let the shield bonus add to all his DX saves for damage, not just single target. Let the warrior purposely jump down into a 30 ft pit and take no damage. Let the warrior do a called shot, represented by sneak attack renamed. Rogue could be subsumed into the warrior chassis. Then you can add rider effects like blindness or impaired vision for attacking the eye, reduce movement for attacking the leg, etc. The warrior can't swim in heavy armor, but he sure can hold his breath for a long time to walk along the river bottom that's 60 ft across to get to the other side.

I agree with all of this. We were in a hell wasp hive and I asked the DM if I could roll an Athletics check to drop down one of the 20ft tunnels without falling prone. He said I'd be giving myself the Slow Fall feature. I said well, I'm asking to roll, so I have a chance to fail. He said no. I thought to myself... my 20 strength barbarian, with proficiency in Athletics and advantage on the roll due to Rage, can't choose to drop down 20ft and land on his feet? This is beyond the pale for a heroic warrior?

I just don't agree that combat at higher levels of D&D becomes some sort of crazy battlefield where everyone has to be a character out of Bleach or Fate Stay Night to be relevant. Like, at all. We're in Descent into Avernus and I'm not worried that the inevitable showdown with a certain archduke is going to sideline my barbarian because everything is going to be moving too fast or 1000ft in the air or underwater or in the vacuum of space or the enemies are colossi from Shadow of the Colossus etc.

But it would be cool to be able to do more heroic things in combat.

[Ralanr]

This is a distinction that does not exist. Low levels are fantastical as well. And D&D is absolutely this kind of game. Case in point... fighters and barbarians don't suddenly gain the ability to fly or kill armies with a single swing of their sword or chop mountains in half. We know what D&D's roots are, and it isn't anime or comic books.

No, I'm good playing the game thanks. Perhaps others should search elsewhere for what they want instead? (See, not helpful.)

I agree with all of this. We were in a hell wasp hive and I asked the DM if I could roll an Athletics check to drop down one of the 20ft tunnels without falling prone. He said I'd be giving myself the Slow Fall feature. I said well, I'm asking to roll, so I have a chance to fail. He said no. I thought to myself... my 20 strength barbarian, with proficiency in Athletics and advantage on the roll due to Rage, can't choose to drop down 20ft and land on his feet? This is beyond the pale for a heroic warrior?

I just don't agree that combat at higher levels of D&D becomes some sort of crazy battlefield where everyone has to be a character out of Bleach or Fate Stay Night to be relevant. Like, at all. We're in Descent into Avernus and I'm not worried that the inevitable showdown with a certain archduke is going to sideline my barbarian because everything is going to be moving too fast or 1000ft in the air or underwater or in the vacuum of space or the enemies are colossi from Shadow of the Colossus etc.

But it would be cool to be able to do more heroic things in combat.

Agree with the heroic things in combat (or even out of combat) but Descent into Avernus goes up to levels 1-13. So while it is midway through tier 3, I'm not sure it's the best area to worry about when martial characters will get overshadowed.

Though I could be wrong. I've seen level 20 one shots where max level fighters did lots and lots of damage. I've never felt dealing damage was the problem for many martial classes. Rather, just things outside of that that make it the issue. Lack of utility, lack of abilities that can better alter the battlefield (some AoE would be nice), etc.

[Man_Over_Game]

Honestly, lower levels for me would be absolutely perfect if Fighter and Barb got to use some abilities in non-combat scenarios. Let Barbarians rage for a minute out of combat (and maybe give more uses). If I have big strong-man, I want him to be able to rage and shove a boulder off the path. Let him rage and Climb up a tree to look out from the top.

Spellcasters can use their resources for combat, exploration, or social interaction. Let my barbarian rage and hold back a door from an angry young dragon trying to get in. Let him rage and flex his muscles to intimidate people, or use his rage to push through a crowd and grab a thief.

And I can do all of this - but, because rage requires you to hit things or take damage, only for 6 seconds. And I only have 2-3 rages, so if I do this stuff, I could just turn into 'worse fighter' in the next fight.

When I first saw how rage ends on no damage or attacks, I thought it was cool. But, in every 5e game i've played, the default option is 'attack again'. So a feature like this just disincentivizes being creative.

Ooh, got an idea. A special "Wrath" Action that gives you all of the benefits of Rage until the end of your next turn. It takes your Action and you can follow it up with a Bonus Action that can be used to make an attack or an ability check.

From there, we can expand on combat options folks could use with Ability Checks, like throwing grappled enemies or boulders.

This would create an interesting combo system where you bounce between Rage and Out-of-Rage, managing your defenses while beating up your enemies in between Wrath turns, and then use Rage when you feel like you need the extra Action economy.

For Fighters, I've always liked the idea of allowing them to take both the Ready and Dodge Action with the same Action. It overall lowers their DPR and stickiness for defense and versatility, and helps mix up their options with Action Surge. Added uses for Ability Checks would help with this, too. It'd also help if Action Surge could assist with noncombat stuff, and personally I could see them getting something like that being added.

The trick isn't to make their offense stronger, but give them better subpar options. Martials don't need to be stronger, they just need options, and that's solved simply by buffing everything they aren't already doing. If players don't do the new stuff...well, that's why it's all backwards compatible, yah?

[paladinn]

This thread can make one wonder how on earth fighters survived back in the 0e days. No maneuvers, one attack. And yet fighters were arguably the foundation of everything, especially coming from Chainmail.

Honestly I can't look back at 4e with the kind of thrill that some do. Making martial characters (let's just say fighters) play like casters is not a solution. Fighters fight. They pick up a weapon and hit (or stab, or slice) something with it. We can dress it up all we want, add special effects, bolt-on different mechanics; but ultimately the fighter's purpose is just that. Yes it's simple compared to other classes, but it's supposed to be. The trick is always avoiding needless complexity while adding/allowing flexibility. So many of the proposed "solutions" crank up the complexity as well.

I haven't been a big fan of the battlemaster because I haven't cared for the bolt-on superiority dice mechanic. And while it does allow more flexibility, it also can tend to slow down combat. I have the same issue with the BECMI weapon mastery system. It has the potential to add a lot of variation; but all the various weapon "special effects" can seriously bog things down. I won't even go into the ToB or 4e fighter "powers."

As much as 5e has been good for its rendition of feats, I think incorporating some of the more combat-centered "micro" feats ala 3e could add a lot of variety with comparatively-little complexity. No one wants to go back to feat-trees and feat-taxes; but stand-alone feats/"tactics" could improve things for martials and help with the power gap with casters (which the spell/slot system already did, IMO).

Just thinking "out loud".. all classes get 4 ASI's, which they can swap for uber-feats. Fighters get 2 more of these. Maybe instead of one uber-feat, a player could pick 2-3 "tactics", things like cleave or power attack or such.

The problem with bringing this up is that Anything that gives a bonus to hit is automatically seen as "violating bounded accuracy!"; but I don't think it has to be. We don't need to overly-complicate things, or turn D&D into a wuxia game, to give some variety. Just my $.02.

[OldTrees1]

I like this idea, I just don't know if we're capable of delivering a thematic system that scales effectively in every area for each class.

For instance, Barbarians.

Rage is incredibly simple, the benefits of it are straightforward and only really relevant for combat, and there isn't really much else to play with besides Strength, Rage, and occasionally increased defenses or mobility. We could make Rage a lot cooler, but then you're still trying to build on a foundation that supports a player only getting to use his features and have fun while he has the Rage capacity to do so.

Barbarians don't really have any kind of theme beholden to them, like psionics or something, so how do we build on such a grey chassis in a way that feels like we're making the game more fun? There are only so many ideas we could make around a class identity of "Strong and Angry".

Totem Barbarian gets to see distant locations at 10th level (Commune with Nature).
Totem Barbarian gets flight at 14th level.
It sounds like the Nature theme from Barbarian might be more useful to our ends than the "Grr Angry" theme and Barbarian gets both.

Barbarian also gets the "Strength and Endurance" theme. If provided enough mechanical advantage they can achieve a lot. Could they smash handholds into walls? Could they dig a tunnel? Could they power a medieval aircraft? Could they swim underwater long enough with enough bags of air?

My ranking of easiest thematically to hardest:
Artificer (wow, easy mode thematically)
Paladin
Ranger
Rogue
Barbarian
Monk (plenty of thematic potential)
Fighter (Fighter is a bit generic, but any less generic version like Knight has increased thematic potential)

[Ralanr]

This thread can make one wonder how on earth fighters survived back in the 0e days. No maneuvers, one attack. And yet fighters were arguably the foundation of everything, especially coming from Chainmail.

Not to derail, but I think they sort of didn't? My knowledge of 0, first, and second edition are very limited mind you, but I kind of figured that the fighting man class didn't really do much but got followers as they leveled to keep up.

Though I think it says a lot that many of the big name NPCs that were created by Gary and his family/friends are all magic casters of some variety.

[Man_Over_Game]

The problem with bringing this up is that Anything that gives a bonus to hit is automatically seen as "violating bounded accuracy!"; but I don't think it has to be. We don't need to overly-complicate things, or turn D&D into a wuxia game, to give some variety. Just my $.02.

I really don't care about bounded accuracy - AC and ToHit scaling becomes less relevant as you level - my problem is that we can already do that. If I wanted to improve my accuracy, I can use a feat to pick up a fighting style, and I can sell my accuracy for damage by picking up a weapon feat.

My problem is that, between increasing or decreasing my accuracy, or adding more weapon attacks, there isn't really much else to do.


If the best we can come up with is something that's already been done, or could have been done, we aren't really adding any more game to the game. If those gameplay options were already enough, we wouldn't be looking for more.

It'd be "These features are weak", not "We need more features".

[Kuu Lightwing]

The problem with bringing this up is that Anything that gives a bonus to hit is automatically seen as "violating bounded accuracy!"; but I don't think it has to be. We don't need to overly-complicate things, or turn D&D into a wuxia game, to give some variety. Just my $.02.

Reminder that this game has a fighting style that gives flat +2 to all attacks with a ranged weapon. Surely if that's alright, then bounded accuracy isn't that fragile?

[Kuu Lightwing]

This thread can make one wonder how on earth fighters survived back in the 0e days. No maneuvers, one attack. And yet fighters were arguably the foundation of everything, especially coming from Chainmail.

Honestly I can't look back at 4e with the kind of thrill that some do. Making martial characters (let's just say fighters) play like casters is not a solution. Fighters fight. They pick up a weapon and hit (or stab, or slice) something with it. We can dress it up all we want, add special effects, bolt-on different mechanics; but ultimately the fighter's purpose is just that. Yes it's simple compared to other classes, but it's supposed to be. The trick is always avoiding needless complexity while adding/allowing flexibility. So many of the proposed "solutions" crank up the complexity as well.

I haven't been a big fan of the battlemaster because I haven't cared for the bolt-on superiority dice mechanic. And while it does allow more flexibility, it also can tend to slow down combat. I have the same issue with the BECMI weapon mastery system. It has the potential to add a lot of variation; but all the various weapon "special effects" can seriously bog things down. I won't even go into the ToB or 4e fighter "powers."

As much as 5e has been good for its rendition of feats, I think incorporating some of the more combat-centered "micro" feats ala 3e could add a lot of variety with comparatively-little complexity. No one wants to go back to feat-trees and feat-taxes; but stand-alone feats/"tactics" could improve things for martials and help with the power gap with casters (which the spell/slot system already did, IMO).

Just thinking "out loud".. all classes get 4 ASI's, which they can swap for uber-feats. Fighters get 2 more of these. Maybe instead of one uber-feat, a player could pick 2-3 "tactics", things like cleave or power attack or such.

The problem with bringing this up is that Anything that gives a bonus to hit is automatically seen as "violating bounded accuracy!"; but I don't think it has to be. We don't need to overly-complicate things, or turn D&D into a wuxia game, to give some variety. Just my $.02.

Also, "Fighters fight" is I guess a fair statement, but why should "Fighting" mean just "I attack this person with my sword..." and "I attack this person with a sword two more times"? Surely there may be more to fighting than "make attack roll" and "make damage roll".

Argument about maneuvers and such slowing down combat is incomplete. Yes, they do that, because they introduce more decisions to make, but when the discussion is about wanting more meaningful decisions/options, then you'd have to accept that it may slow combat down a bit. However all the same argument can be used against spellcasters, so we'll need arguments why it is acceptable for spellcasters to slow down combat, but not for martials.

Also what complexity is "needless" is very poorly defined and usually is entirely up to individual preferences.

[Man_Over_Game]

Also, "Fighters fight" is I guess a fair statement, but why should "Fighting" mean just "I attack this person with my sword..." and "I attack this person with a sword two more times"? Surely there may be more to fighting than "make attack roll" and "make damage roll".

Argument about maneuvers and such slowing down combat is incomplete. Yes, they do that, because they introduce more decisions to make, but when the discussion is about wanting more meaningful decisions/options, then you'd have to accept that it may slow combat down a bit. However all the same argument can be used against spellcasters, so we'll need arguments why it is acceptable for spellcasters to slow down combat, but not for martials.

Also what complexity is "needless" is very poorly defined and usually is entirely up to individual preferences.

I personally like the idea of simple Setup mechanics. You choose to do something in Turn 1 that sets you up to do something in Turn 2.

It comes with risk (you may take a subpar action on Turn 1 to chance a good outcome on Turn 2), it encourages teamwork (he's going for XYZ move next turn, so I'll prepare the stage for that), and both steps can be incredibly simple.

DnD has always had a habit of resolving effects too quickly, but the game becomes more interesting when you stagger out resolutions to effects a little bit. If an enemy or a player can react a bit more to what other players are doing, that's already adding a lot of strategy that we don't always have.

It could be as simple as "When you take the Dodge Action, enemies make contested ability checks against you with Disadvantage until the end of your next turn", perfect to set up a target to be Prone or Grappled next round.

[Psyren]

I like one of the unique benefits for Fighters that PF came up with - Combat Stamina, which in 5e could be a per-rest resource they can spend that lets them get more mileage out of feats than other classes can. If Fighter is intended to be the master of feats, i.e. more ASIs than anyone else, that could be one way for them to stand out that won't rely on every Fighter being a Battlemaster. You could even open the system up to other martial classes, but just give Fighters the most points or flexibility.

One way this could work would be to add a series of "if you spend X stamina when using this feat, it also does Y" and/or "so long as you have at least XX points of stamina remaining, this feat also does YY" to the existing ones. These could be used for increased damage, defense, mobility and utility. Some examples:

• Charger could let you spend some stamina to use your Extra Attack feature along with the bonus action attack you get after Dashing, giving you considerably more battlefield mobility in a spread encounter without sacrificing damage.
• Mage Slayer could have "For every point of stamina remaining in your pool, the range at which you get advantage on saving throws vs. all spells increases by 5ft, to a maximum of 30" making the fighter much more of a tank when up against casters.
• Shield Master could gain "if any adjacent allies also have to roll a dexterity saving throw for half damage, you can spend 1 stamina per ally to let them add your shield's AC bonus to their save. Each character you spend stamina for in this way will also take no damage on a successful save."

The issue in 5e of course is that feats are optional in this system, but I think most games that encourage Fighters allow them anyway.

[qube]

hmmm ... top of my head:

the Pendragon knight
(basically, a quick glance at the hexblade, un-magicing it)

1. Defensive warrior
2. Offensive warrior
3. Student of the art of war
4. ASI
5. extra attack
6. Student of the art of war
7. Master of war
8. ASI
9. Student of the art of war
10. Defensive master
11. Offensive master
12. ASI, Student of the art of war
13. Vortex of danger
14. warriors soul
15. warriors mind, Student of the art of war
16. ASI
17. warriors body,
18. ASI, Student of the art of war
19.
20. Action surge

1. Defensive warrior: just like defensive dualist for all weapons and such (a.k.a.: reaction: get prof. to AC), either for you or an adjacent target.

2. Offensive warrior: you're apt at attacking the weak spots of targets. You ignore resistance & immunity to nonmagical attacks and damage, and you crit at 19-20

3/6/9/... Student of the art of war you get to know 2 art forms; every 3 levels you get to know another art

• Educated: Pick 2 knowledge skills. you're proficient in them
• Aware: gain profciency in perception & investigation; or insight & handle animal.
• Defensive guard: bonus action (concentration): +1 AC
• Guard expertise: advantage in perception during nightly guard, require half as much sleep.
• sentinal feat
• mage slayer feat
• Agjile warrior: you get proficiency to dex saves
• Defending shield: you grant a alies adjacent to you a bonus equal to your prof-mod to dex & str saves
• [lvl 6+] blade dance: bonus action (concentration): enemies that start adjacent get STR-mod damage
• [lvl9+] Mobile stance: bonus action (concentration): speed +10 ft and expertise in athletics (climb & jump)
• [lvl 12+] personal guard. bonus action (concentration): pick 1 target. that person gets +1 AC, +1 AC if you're adjacent, and you can use a bonus action to dash toward that person
• [lvl 15+]exploit weakness, pick 1 creature type. as an action you can attempt a special melee attack ( Str vs Con save) to such creature. it deals your STR mod as damage (no resistance or immunty) and stuns the target for 1 round

7. Master of war: when you kill an enemy, gain temp hp equal to your proficiency bonus

10. Deffensive master: 1/short rest pick an enemy and an ally. As long as the ally or that enemy is adjacent, That enemy has an additional 50% miss chance on attacks against that ally, and that ally has adv. on save vs attacks from that enemy.

11. Offensive master: add your proficiency bonus to damage

13. Vortex of danger: you're able to reach at a moments notice, lunging unexpectably, and jumping to place where your enemy didn't expect you. Adjacent now is 'in 10ft' instead of 5ft. This increases your range, and improves abilities such as the personal guard study or the mage slayer feat. If an enemy moves, you can use your reaction to teleport 5 ft in it's path

14. warriors soul: 1 hour to mentally prepare. This creates a trigger (like contingiency), for a single attack. This attack can even trigger if you're sleeping or stunned.

15. warriors mind: as mind blank

17. warriors body: as forsight

20. Action surge: as action surge

[strangebloke]

Okay, what does everyone think of the following?

Dirty Tricks(3rd level Rogue)
You learn three maneuvers of your choice from the rogue's list. You can use only one maneuver per attack. Once you use a maneuver, you can't use it again until you use a different maneuver. You learn an additional maneuver of your choice at 7th, 11th, and 15th level. Each time you learn new maneuvers, you can also replace one maneuver you know with a different one.

You have one superiority die, which is a d8. A superiority die is expended when you use it. You can regain your superiority die as a bonus action. You gain an additional superiority dice at 7th, 11th, and 15th level.

Spoiler: example basic rogue list

Show

Bait and Switch
Brace
Disarming Attack
Distracting Strike
Evasive Footwork
Feinting Attack
Goading Attack
Grappling Strike
Lunging Attack
Maneuvering Attack
Menacing Attack
Parry
Precision Attack
Pushing Attack
Quick Toss
Riposte
Sweeping Attack
Trip Attack

Spoiler: justification

Show

The basic idea here is to play into how simple the rogue generally is with its resource economy. Because they effectively have infinite maneuvers they also don't have maneuvers that can be used on skill checks. I also removed a few options that didn't seem like "dirty tricks" to me, like rally and commander's strike. They also are required to switch up their maneuvers and use different ones occasionally, which creates a little combat minigame if you're trying to use riposte and brace to maximum efficiency.

Instinctive Fighting(3rd level Barbarian)

You learn four maneuvers of your choice from the barbarian's list. You can use only one maneuver per attack and you cannot use maneuvers while raging. You learn an additional maneuver of your choice at 9th, 13th, and 17th level. Each time you learn new maneuvers, you can also replace one maneuver you know with a different one.

You have a number of superiority die equal to your proficiency, which are d12s. A superiority die is expended when you use it. You regain one superiority die when you rage, or all of them when you complete a long rest. Starting at 9thlevel you regain all superiority dice after raging.

Spoiler: example basic barbarian list

Show

Ambush
Bait and Switch
Commander's Strike
Commanding Presence
Distracting Strike
Evasive Footwork
Feinting Attack
Goading Attack
Grappling Strike
Lunging Attack
Maneuvering Attack
Menacing Attack
Parry
Precision Attack
Pushing Attack
Quick Toss
Rally
Riposte
Sweeping Attack
Tactical Assessment
Trip Attack

Spoiler: justification

Show

The barbarian has a mostly-full list, although IMO stuff like ambush and commanding presence are clearly the best options. The Barbarian doesn't get many dice, but their dice are very powerful. Removed "brace" because it didn't feel on-brand to me. I expect most barbarians will grab OOC utility maneuvers here.

Further Development

• Unique manuevers for rogues and barbarians to represent "fighting dirty." (Blinding strike? Maybe convert smite/strike spells to maneuvers?)
• Higher level general maneuvers (steal from ToB here)
• a method for fighters and monks to use maneuvers. Currently I'm leaning toward them getting loads of maneuvers but having to pay ki to use them.

[Unoriginal]

Okay, what does everyone think of the following?

Dirty Tricks(3rd level Rogue)
[...]
You have one superiority die, which is a d8.

Instinctive Fighting(3rd level Barbarian)
[...]
You have a number of superiority die equal to your proficiency, which are d12s.

Personally I think that if you give more options, tying said options to a limited-ressource-dice thing is not the way to go.

Not all martials should be Battle Master-light. In fact, nearly all of them shouldn't be.

[Ralanr]

Interesting that you made it so barbarians can't use maneuvers when raging. Seems like they'd only use them when they ran out of rages.

[strangebloke]

Personally I think that if you give more options, tying said options to a limited-ressource-dice thing is not the way to go.

Not all martials should be Battle Master-light. In fact, nearly all of them shouldn't be.

Sure! Rogues are definitely the ones that I feel fit the least well with this sort of system. I could see a paradigm for rogues for example where they're just given loads of options to select from for cunning action including better options at higher level.

Overall they're simplistic in combat and good elsewhere, which makes them IMO one of the least 'problematic' martial classes, since the simplicity in combat can be a feature rather than a bug and the out-of-combat utility is where other martials (particularly barbarians) fall short.

Interesting that you made it so barbarians can't use maneuvers when raging. Seems like they'd only use them when they ran out of rages.

Well, they get access to the three Maneuvers that work out of combat, so they'll certainly be using ambush and commanding presence at least for some much-needed out of combat utility. And yeah, the idea is to give them something to do instead of raging, maybe even delay raging a turn so that they have something to refresh.

[Unoriginal]

Maybe class features that recharges when you spend a rage?

That way you're incentivized to use them before your rage too.

[paladinn]

Personally I think that if you give more options, tying said options to a limited-ressource-dice thing is not the way to go.

Not all martials should be Battle Master-light. In fact, nearly all of them shouldn't be.

This.

Also, barbarians getting maneuvers doesn't work in my mind. Maneuvers are things you do that require active thought. Rage is.. well.. not thinking.