Combining Combat Challenge and Combat Superiority

[Stalker0]

So on the one hand you are increasing the fighter's stopping power by allowing his wisdom bonus on more types of attacks and allowing him to theoretically hold more guys down (as marking multiple guys is harder than one guy).

On the other hand, without marking people no longer suffer the -2 to attack rolls for hitting someone else.

Overall it seems like a solid change and definitely easier to keep track of. Chalk me up as another person who doesn't like marking as a mechanic.

 

[Naszir]

Here is a similar thought but without changing the Fighter Features as drasticly. Keep Combat Superiority as is. Change Combat Challenge to read like this:

Combat Harrier (I like the name Combat Harrier better than Combat Challenge)
Benefit: While any creature is adjacent to you and you are not flanked, they take a -2 penalty to attacks rolls for any attack that doesn’t include you as a target. In addition, whenever an enemy that is adjacent to you shifts or makes an attack that does not include you, you can declare a melee basic attack against that enemy as an immediate interrupt. (Note: You may only take one immediate action per round)

 

[eriktheguy]

The new design fits a bit better. Removing the mark works and makes things simpler. It doesn't work for other classes (or even for all fighter builds) so I would recommend making it an option (especially for players that have trouble remembering marks).
If you find the marking system troublesome, I would be interested in seeing an alternate system for defenders if one could be made simple enough.

 

[Saeviomagy]

If a foe ignores a fighters mark the foe is only going to take basic melee attack damage (if the fighter hits). How is that high-end striker level damage?

At-wills:
Take a melee ranger. He gets 2 attacks each round with one-handed weapons that do not apply strength bonus to damage, plus 1d6 (I'll avoid feats for now, but really, there's not that much in them).

Now compare with a fighter who gets his combat challenge each round. He gets 2 attacks each round which apply full bonus.

If anything, that fighter is coming out on top. Especially if he's wielding a 2-hander and not a shield/1hander combo.

If we add encounter and dailies into the mix, things get a lot more complicated, but the numbers don't change all that much (except with a select few powers on either side).

 

[Naszir]

The new design fits a bit better. Removing the mark works and makes things simpler. It doesn't work for other classes (or even for all fighter builds) so I would recommend making it an option (especially for players that have trouble remembering marks).
If you find the marking system troublesome, I would be interested in seeing an alternate system for defenders if one could be made simple enough.

I think by attempting this I am beginning to understand the marking system better and what the developers were trying to accomplish. Obviously its not that easy to just slap down something different without it having a cascading affect on other things in the game. Like you said what I put down doesn't work for other classes or even for all fighter builds.

For defenders it is all about making them sticky. Once a foe is in melee range it should be all about punishing them for either not paying attention to the defender (with both attack and movement actions). Yet, in 4e it seems like they didn't want multiple defenders to be able to go in and just stack penalties on foes so they came up with the marking system. It makes sense game wise even though some of us feel that it is a bit clunky.

 

[eriktheguy]

The reason behind the clunkiness is simply that 4e is a completely different philosophy than previous editions. 3rd edition was a major improvement upon 2nd but it was similar at the same time, many of the core mechanics were shared.

4e made some major fundamental alterations and I would say that the core system has changed more than with any previous edition. Attacks have been replaced by powers, the balance is insanely tight, and many effects now work off of keywords (mark, daze, quarry) rather than having to explain and define every power in the description.

The upside is that the developers have a lot more control over how the classes and powers work. The system is cleaner and much (MUCH) more newbie friendly. The drawback is a lack of experience. Wizards has never really published a game like 4e before, and as a result some of the new systems they came up with are pretty clunky. I imagine that 5e will be similarly a power based system with keywords, but probably a smoother implementation.

I'm also hoping that the game has a slightly better patching system than DDI, and that they use it to fix issues like we saw with stealth and expertise this edition.