D&D 5E And Lo, the Fighter Did Get a Shtick of his Own... COMBAT SUPERIORITY!

[GX.Sigma]

while this addresses my concern about the fighter lacking any real choices to make during combat, it does absolutely nothing about my concern that the fighter lacks any class specific mechanics or benefits that are in any way useful in non-combat situations.

Mike said on Twitter that the fighter mechanic can give fighters some options for out-of-combat utility. No idea how, since it's called "Combat Superiority," but there you go.

I think a good reason not to give a second theme was that the game is supposed to work also without using themes and feats. If a class had more themes/feats than the others, then not using them would mean that some classes would lose more than others.

I totally get that; I would have argued for a system where you could choose an extra theme or some other benefit. Upon reflection though, CS actually seems better:

The combat superiority system drains some of the elements we had originally intended for the maneuver and theme system...For example, a fighter might have a combat superiority option that allows for two-weapon fighting that is better than the version offered by a feat.

So it gives me what I wanted, which is a way for fighters to express their unique variety of fighteryness, while still giving them the theme slot for things that aren't necessarily fightery.

What's interesting is how this will affect the various combat maneuver systems and the themes. And what happens when you take the dual-wielding ComSup and the dual-wielding theme? Pure awesome, I imagine.

Also, the talk of increasing CS die pools with increasing numbers of options, along with the previous explanation of the Fighter's multiple attacks that could be swapped with maneuvers, really paints the picture of the high level fighter as a deadly badass who dashes around the battlefield performing devastating combos of attacks, knockdowns, disarms, etc... Really sexy stuff.

 

[Black Knight Irios]

I like the idea, ranging from simple extra damage dice (even just adding the static average of all dice as someone suggested - even more simple) to complex 'maneuvers'. This sounds entertaining to play. I hope we see some of those options in the next Playtest Rules.

Boosting or dice pools are used in many games. I think it's a fine game mechanic. I just don't know why it needs to be unique to the fighter... Why couldn't a wizard use his dice pool to boost the damage of his magic missile or the defensive benefit of his shield spell, or the area of his fireball? Why couldn't the Cleric use it to boost the amount of healing, the bonus of his shield of faith, or increase the targets of his turn undead?

I don't think they have managed to find the answer to their initial question of "What makes the fighter unique compared to other classes?" In 4e, the identity of the weaponmaster is pretty clear, they are a martial defender class. They use melee weapons, have some innate toughness, and they have abilities that help defend their allies and make it difficult for enemies to ignore them. 5e currently has no schtic for the fighter, he is just a dude with a weapon, armor, and hit points. There is nothing more to it. And this new mechanic is just a mechanic. It is not a unifying/defining identity for the class. Are they implying a rogue can't be a swashbuckler and strike back with an immediate action? A paladin can't intercept an enemy's attack with his shield to protect an ally? A ranger can't master two weapon fighting beyond what a feat provides? Nothing the article says holds up to scrutiny.

Before throwing random game mechanics around, I wish they would define (in words rather than mechanics) what they think the fighter should be good at. Swinging a weapon, and being tough, is clearly not a sufficient answer based on their poll results.

I agree they didn't define the fighter's role. But with this info I can imagine a fighter as the 'master of weapon combat' changing his fighting style as he sees fit. And that is fine for me.

Regarding the question of random mechanics for random classes. You could probably ask that about many mechanics. Everyone should be able to do more damage if they 'surprise' their opponent. Everyone should be able to unleash really powerful attacks on a daily basis. Oh wait, that gets us nowhere.

Mike said on Twitter that the fighter mechanic can give fighters some options for out-of-combat utility. No idea how, since it's called "Combat Superiority," but there you go.

Fighters define everything as combat. Remember 300: Fighter using diplomacy: "This is Sparta!"

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

It could indeed make the Fighter more interesting and unique in combat. Now we need something for out-of-combat...

 

[Minigiant]

I wonder if Combat Superiority could used in the other pillars. Adding Combat Superiority dice results to your intimidate check in social situation. Or adding Combat Superiority dice to climbing or jumping rolls by employing your weapon as a tool. I doubt you could get more that a few situations without getting silly.

Perhaps a fighter could use their CS as their minimum skill roll while in combat much like skill mastery. A fighter is the most used to battle so they are least distracted by combat and maybe even more focused with the clanking of weapons around.

The fighter makes a trained check while in combat or doing something related to combat and uses Combat Superiority dice result as his minimum roll for his d20. The 5th level fighter performs a leap over a gap to slay an orc on the other side. He rolls a 1d20 and 2d6 and uses the higher result.

 

[pemerton]

[M]ore options from round to round. . .

In a manner similar to backgrounds and themes, the fighter class presents a set of combat superiority options in prebuilt packages, such as archer or duelist. You’ll also have the option to pick and choose abilities to build your own fighting style. In the current design, you gain two options at 1st level and one option each at 3rd, 7th, and 9th level.

the talk of increasing CS die pools with increasing numbers of options, along with the previous explanation of the Fighter's multiple attacks that could be swapped with maneuvers, really paints the picture of the high level fighter as a deadly badass who dashes around the battlefield performing devastating combos of attacks, knockdowns, disarms, etc... Really sexy stuff.

Hmm . . . choosing two options at 1st level, then more options at subsequent levels, which allow the fighter to dash around the battlefield performing devastating combos . . . I feel like I've seen this game before!

 

[Frostmarrow]

Traditionally fighters lose all patented moves quickly. I'd be happy to see fighters keeping a monopoly on this schtick. It sounds real fun!

 

[Chris_Nightwing]

I don't think they have managed to find the answer to their initial question of "What makes the fighter unique compared to other classes?" In 4e, the identity of the weaponmaster is pretty clear, they are a martial defender class. They use melee weapons, have some innate toughness, and they have abilities that help defend their allies and make it difficult for enemies to ignore them. 5e currently has no schtic for the fighter, he is just a dude with a weapon, armor, and hit points. There is nothing more to it. And this new mechanic is just a mechanic. It is not a unifying/defining identity for the class. Are they implying a rogue can't be a swashbuckler and strike back with an immediate action? A paladin can't intercept an enemy's attack with his shield to protect an ally? A ranger can't master two weapon fighting beyond what a feat provides? Nothing the article says holds up to scrutiny.

Emphasis mine - er, isn't that what all defenders do? Basically?

Personally, I think that unique mechanics for different classes is interesting and enjoyable at the table. In the old-school sense, only thieves got skills, only fighters got multiple attacks, only wizards got proper spells, only clerics got turn undead. Yes, it was clumsy, because there wasn't enough uniting them besides, but this system looks hopeful. I'm sure other classes will get mechanics that allow the archetypes you mention, but it might not be with the same mechanic, or perhaps it will be, but the default use of dice for a Paladin might be healing, for instance, and the Rogue might trade off sneak attack dice for benefits.

 

[Iosue]

We don't know that CS will be the out-of-combat fighter mechanic; Mearls' tweet was a little ambiguous on that.

But, if we run with the idea, it seems rather interesting -- perhaps even overpowered. The math would have to be looked at to make sure the fighter doesn't overshadow, say, the thief. But imagine being able to either use 1 CS-die roll, or perhaps spending a die to get advantage. So, the obvious is a bonus to Intimidate, but could also apply to, say, negotiation/diplomacy, or bluffing, or their training in reading opponents used in Insight. Or, the fighter tuning into their well-trained combat senses to get a bonus to perception. Or calling on their training to help them throw off the effects of poison.

What's intriguing to me about this idea is that you can go virtually skill-less in the game, like OD&D or B/X, and yet the fighter would have a mechanic he can turn to, to interact with the non-combat pillars. Casters will have spells, and thieves will have schemes or some basic thieving skills, and then the fighter has his combat superiority dice, representing his intensive physical and mental training.

 

[Connorsrpg]

Was that comment really needed?

I know the player of one of the fighters in our playtest wished he had a few more options. I think this will please him.

I certainly like the idea of swapping out the damage as opposed to going through a list of powers. Hopefully the styles stay on theme so that it is easy to choose and once again doesn't get to to big a list for mid combat decisions.

 

[Someone]

Hmm . . . choosing two options at 1st level, then more options at subsequent levels, which allow the fighter to dash around the battlefield performing devastating combos . . . I feel like I've seen this game before!

Which game? Is Exalted? You're talking about Exalted, aren't you?!?

More seriously they only have to divide those maneuvers into Gritty (level 1+: Trip, extra damage), Heroic (level 6+: attack everyone around you, grapple ogres), Bigger than life (level 11+: attack everyone in a room, rip someone's heart out and show it to him, shoot a handful of arrows at once), Mythic (level 16+: punch giants 30 feet away, jump castle walls, use a giant rock as an improvised weapon) and Anime Episode on Acid (level 18+: cleave mountains, use a gargantuan dragon as an improvised weapon) and give the DM authority on what maneuvers can the player choose from.