A Simple and Effective Idea for the Fighter

[Stormonu]

@Stormonu , I think that objections to the "do some damage on a miss" mechanics have somewhat closed off a fertile area to explore--namely, a fighter buidling up tokens or other options as they miss--not to do small damage now, but to cash in later.

I see it this way. If the fighter is on a streak of luck and hitting every round, then he is bringing down the hurt. So he'll be pretty happy with his simple attacks. However, if he starts missing all the time--bad luck, tough monster to hit, environmental conditions, etc.--then the player gets frustrated. He doesn't have an option to change the situation up. (The big exception is DM-adjudicated stunts the fighter may try, which will obviously vary wildly frrom game to game.)

Tokens gained on a miss means that a frustrated fighter is getting ready to take it out on some poor monster. The longer the drought, the more spectacular the payoff.

As much as I despise the reaper attack, I could get behind this - even if it was the fighter cashing in those tokens for a "close call" attack that essentially does what the reaper attack does. Somehow it just seems more fun. I guess sometimes its the presentation.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

The current Fighter is really good at fighting, but is he "fun" when fighting? Or rather, let's say is he "interesting" when fighting?
Default Behavior: Attack every Round. That's what you can do best already.
Reaper Ability: Attack every round, really, do that, it's a good idea.
Fighter Surge Ability: Attack twice a round once or twice per day!
Cleave: Please attack every round to get extra attacks!
Herreman's Initiative Bonus: Attack early and better!
In short, the Fighter is: Attack early, attack often.

I think that is ultimately boring. Only Fighter Surge actually brings some resource management into it, but it always boils down to "attack" every round, and there is no variation. Maybe that's enough for a "Core" Fighter without any expansions or modules for most players? It's certainly not enough for me.

I think a special ability would need to be phrased in a way that implies a choice and is not just simply better than the default option - but situational better it can be.

Fighter's Parry
When an enemies attack misses you, you can make a counter attack as a reaction. You lose your next action.
Tactical Considerations: You may want to use this when your enemy is more mobile than you are, or you need to get rid of an enemy now because he's blocking your path or something like that.

Fighter's Gamble I
Once per turn when you miss with an attack, you can allow the missed target to make an attack against you. If the enemy makes that attack, you can immediately make a second attack against it. You have disadvantage for the attack if the enemy hits you.
Tactical Considerations: You use this when your enemy is weak in making attacks, or you can just afford taking some more damage in the hope that your next attack will take him down, and not risk one of your allies.

Fighter's Gamble II
When you hit with an attack, you can immediately make a second attack at disadvantage. Your lose your next turns action.
Tactical Considerations: Alternative take on the first Gamble, with the same basic idea - you risk something in the hope of dispatching an enemy more quickly. Maybe you have reason to believe you won't make it another round anyway, or one of your allies won't...

Exerting Assault
Spend one hit dice (or take 1d10 damage if not using hit dice) to gain advantage on your attack and deal +1d10 damage on a hit. You must take a short rest before you can use this ability again.
Tactical Consideration: It's basically an "encounter" and a "daily" power in one that allows you to deal more damage and hit better, but at a cost. So you'll probably not use it all the time, but when you have trouble dealing with a foe, this may be something to use.

 

[Ahnehnois]

I think it's a good idea to add to the fighter, not replacing anything like Ahnehnois suggests.

My point is not that simply replacing one ability would create a 100% balanced fighter. There may be plenty of room to change other things to that effect, as needed. My point was only that this mechanic was better written and more appropriate than surge that was presented in the playtest fighter, and seems a logical substitution.

 

[Mallus]

As I understand it, Lamentations of the Flame Princess takes this sort of approach, but focusing on active rather than passive combat ability: only fighters get a per-level bonus to hit, which means that as levels go up, and other classes improve their various magical and other abilities, only fighters get better at actually fighting.

I've read that, too. It's an interesting approach, but I would use it. My understanding of gamer psychology, assembled over years of careless study, is that everyone wants to do something in a fight, which at some point means attacking a foe with a form of pointed stick.

Non-fighters who can't hit or do meaningful amounts of damage are a problem.

Which is why my solution specifically involved increasing the fighters' defense rather than offense. Allow them to charge in/place themselves in danger/do something risky and exciting without neutering the other classes ability to score the big knockout blow occasionally (when they're out of spells and clever tricks).

I find it be an good compromise. In an odd way, by boosting the fighters passive defenses out-of-scale with other classes, you enable a more active character.

 

[The Little Raven]

My point was only that this mechanic was better written and more appropriate than surge that was presented in the playtest fighter, and seems a logical substitution.

Logical substitution? I don't see it. They serve entirely different purposes and have dramatically different contributions in combat. Removing Action Surge for this Initiative Advantage would make the fighter even weaker (and less interesting) than it is now.

One grants an additional action, allowing you to do a number of things (increase damage output, alter positioning, drink a potion, etc). The other gives you an effective +3 on initiative checks. One is not an effective substitute for the other.