How would giving fighters "exclusive martial abilities that surpass the capabilities of other classes" prevent those other classes contributing in a meaningful fashion? Just because the Fighter is better at tripping, or manoeuvring through battle, or inflicting bleeding attacks, that doesn't prevent the other classes from using their abilities to contribute just as well as they can do so currently.
Because you could not build other classes that could be as effective in battle. The melee Wizard or Warlock is going to feel left out if the fighter is running around tripping people and maneuvering through battle.
IF you need that stuff on the fighter to make the fighter "fun" then just give it to everyone and then the fighter can do it and other classes can do it too if they want to.
You claimed that you "don't want them having extraordinary martial powers other classes don't get", but this seems to be based on an unfounded assumption that you are making that any ability that Fighters get exclusively will be overpowered.
No, not at all. It is not the fact that it is overpowered, it is the fact that it is unavailable. I just think other classes should be able to do that stuff too.
I would not mind giving more out of combat stuff for the fighter, like advantage on intelligence or wisdom checks about weapons or armor, but the combat stuff should be available to everyone.
Me for starters, but a lot of other players too.
If every member of an adventuring party is contributing an average of 28% towards the success of the team, but the fighter is only contributing 16%, then bring the fighter up to 25% contribution is going to weaken the contributions of the other members from 28% to 25%.
I don't think most players are calculating how much percentage they are contributing, and if we are going to use real numbers, they actually need to be real numbers, not some made up metrics with no statistical basis. If your hypothesis is based on a numerical contribution then you need to come up with the methodology to measure that contribution.
In any case, the cornerstone of my argument is another class should be able to contribute almost equal to a fighter if engaged in martial combat with weapons, without using any spells.
To turn this argument around on you - if a fighter is contributing X amount without using any spells, another character from another class built for melee should be fairly close to X while also using no spells.
I can't imagine any of the group being so selfish as to object to that however.
then why all the objections to giving these abilities to every single class?
I am playing a fighter in two different campaigns right now and I object to rules changes which mean other classes can't hope to melee nearly as effectively with weapons as my fighter. That is not selfish IMO.
I think demanding rules changes to give one class more power while not allowing any other class to get those powers is more selfish than simply boosting every class in a similar fashion.
This is my main problem with this - the people demanding these changes are also demanding that no other class gets them.
"I need to this to have fun with a fighter, but I don't want to let other classes do it" ..... If you need changes to make martial combat more fun, ok but just let everyone have it!
Smites let Paladins keep up with fighters for damage in general,
Sure, but the post was about the fighters "niche" and what is unique to the class.
and the base Fighter doesn't get to use any more fighting styles than the Paladins do either.
This is not true. The base fighter has 11 different fighting style options, including two that are unique to the fighter class (unarmed fighting, superior technique). The Paladin only gets get access to 6 of those fighting styles (and another spell casting style).
Further a fighter can change fighting styles 6 times over 20 levels, while a Paladin can only change 5 times.