Alright already!!!

[Andur]

Once again I think the limits of predesigned FIRST level PC's get in the way of honest assessment.

Let's just make up a few "possible" at will powers for our Warhammer wielding Fighter:

1) ATK v Fort, X+Str Damage, Target is stunned until Fighters next turn

2) ATK v Ref, X+Str Damage, Target is slowed until Fighters next turn

3) ATK v Wil, X+Str Damage, Target is staggered until Fighters next turn

4) ATK v AC, X+Str Damage, Target suffers a -2 AC penalty until Fighters next turn

5) ATK v AC X+Str Damage + Y damage.

Now we'll say you get to pick two of those 5, heck take all 5, which one are you going to use EVERY round?

 

[lissilambe]

There's also this implication that if some group out there finds the various fighter options open from 3rd edition weren't used by them, they aren't used by anyone. My groups have always used terrain to affect combat, has always used odd and exciting encounter areas, and always enjoy pulling out the old options for combat such as Trip, Sunder, Grapple, etc. Not in every battle, perhaps, but regularly enough for me to see at least a couple of them in every session. And things that aren't in the book, too. So yeah, losing "trip" to an encounter power is disappointing in my mind.

Also, if "normal attacks" are rare...then they're not "normal attacks". At least...not to my mind. "Baseline" attacks, maybe...square zero attacks?

But yeah, I'm getting pretty tired of being told I'm not having fun with my edition of choice (and the clear implication from the 4e design team is that I'm not and I never even realized it), and I'm tired of being told that my players have no real options in combat because other groups don't use the options provided.

Take care
Don

 

[Remathilis]

Yes, but I think you miss the point:

Doing the same attack every round is boring.
If the fighter is going to use his at-will power over and over again every round, it's going to be boring.
The criticism is that if a fighter is just doing the same thing over and over again in every round, that's a bad thing. And if 4e suffers from this problem, it would be a bad thing.
I do think 4e is going to have enough options that people will at least be deciding between as many things as they were in 3e (Do I apply expertise? Power attack? Do I try to flank? Do I charged, or use my bow?), but the decisions will be different (Power X or Power Y?)
There's also a slight criticism that there should always be a place for a "normal attack," one that doesn't use any powers. 4e seems to have deliberately made the normal attack a pretty rare thing, so whatever happens with that, it's working as intended.
Once again: The sins of the previous edition don't excuse the sins of the next. If 4e does something to expand the fighter's options, it'll be doing a good thing.

However, there will be plenty of times a "basic attack" and a power are roughly the same thing: (cleave when there are no adjacent foes, for example) and basics seem mostly so you can't stack a at-will power with unique situations (charge+bull rush+tide of iron=flying foe). Also, there will be plenty of times you can't use your at-wills (neither at-will works if your using a bow to strike a flying foe). Lastly, we're not 100% sure what role feats will play into creating or augments combat situations.

And in the end of the day, at-wills are just basic-atks with a bit of flavor thrown on, I don't worry any more about a PC spamming Cleave than I would about one trying to get full-atks every round. Superior tactics and all...

 

[helium3]

Once again I think the limits of predesigned FIRST level PC's get in the way of honest assessment.

Let's just make up a few "possible" at will powers for our Warhammer wielding Fighter:

1) ATK v Fort, X+Str Damage, Target is stunned until Fighters next turn

2) ATK v Ref, X+Str Damage, Target is slowed until Fighters next turn

3) ATK v Wil, X+Str Damage, Target is staggered until Fighters next turn

4) ATK v AC, X+Str Damage, Target suffers a -2 AC penalty until Fighters next turn

5) ATK v AC X+Str Damage + Y damage.

Now we'll say you get to pick two of those 5, heck take all 5, which one are you going to use EVERY round?

I'm going to use whichever power my meta-game knowledge informs me I'll have the highest chance of hitting with.

"Oooh. An undead. They have low Fort defense."

 

[Mercule]

Also, the trip Exploit for fighters definitely needs to be called "Swift Kick to the Shin".

I really, really hope the DDI chargen tool has the ability to rename powers. Talk about great personalization/characterization potential.

 

[Cadfan]

I'm going to use whichever power my meta-game knowledge informs me I'll have the highest chance of hitting with.

1) That isn't necessarily metagame knowledge. If the dude you're fighting looks clumsy, try an attack against his reflexes. If he looks a bit dim, go for Will.

2) I'd default to the attack most likely to hit, but if my allies can exploit the rider effects my attacks create, that may be the better choice. See, eg, Tide of Iron pushing an enemy nearer to another enemy so that the wizard can blast them both at once.

 

[Storminator]

In theory, absolutely true, but in practice? Not so much.

Grapple (without placing two to three feats in Grapple) goes out the window when you are fighting Large or larger creatures, since they stack high strength (+8 minimum) and size bonus (for bull rush or grapple). If you are a fighter or barbarian, you are isolating yourself to a single enemy. Great for boss-type fights if it's just the PCs versus a medium-sized caster, but not when you are fighting mobs unless there are other guys that can stand up to the enemies.

Would you be willing to sunder that magic shield that the enemy has? If you kill him, you can take it for your own. Decisions, decisions..

When I played a high level fighter, I absolutely did all those things. Different things all the time. Grapple the wizard, sunder the holy symbol, power attack the rogue, expertise vs the giant, disarm the vorpal sword. Iterative attack when necessary, and cleave minions when possible.

That's kind of the point. A high level fighter has enough feats that he can be good at many different combat styles.

PS

 

[Andur]

So helium3, you'd use one of them vs. low Ref, another vs. low Forts, and yet another vs. low AC's? In otherwords you'd use NONE of them every round, but you'd use the "best" one each round depending on the situation?

Sounds about right IMHO.

 

[fafhrd]

Why is this discussion pretending that the fighter gets one at-will ability? This isn't true even at level 1. What's more, grapple(grab) and bullrush are still available irrespective of what powers you have. Strawman from moment start.

 

[Kwalish Kid]

To be fair, you could do a lot with the fighter.

With Trip, Disarm, Sunder, Bullrush and Grapple you had a lot of options even before we get to the Expertise, Power Attack, Fight Defensively series.

And then there was the Longsword & Spiked Buckler fighter that got to chose between Sword and Board, Two-handed, and TWF every round. And if you had Quickdraw, you could throw a dagger in any part of those attack sequences.

And none of this will be available in 4E?

Given Star Was Saga Edition, I'm inclined to believe that much of this will be available for every character. Accordingly, some characters might get powers that allow them to do one or more of these things better and some feats will allow a character to do these things better.