Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="FireLance" data-source="post: 6070061" data-attributes="member: 3424">You know, I could probably combine an AEDU-type fighter and a straightforward "just use basic attacks" type fighter under the same umbrella class. All you need is a class structure where the fighter gets a benefit once per level. You can even call them feats, if you want, as a nod to 3e.So what is a benefit? Potentially anything. A fighter could choose to gain a constant +2 to damage rolls, or to gain a maneuver that deals +6 damage, but is tiring, so he needs to take a short rest to regain it, or he could choose the ability to make a massive attack dealing +20 damage that he can only regain after an extended rest. Other benefits could allow the fighter to trip, push, blind, etc. his opponent. There could be multiple ways to gain the same effect - one benefit could be that the fighter can daze his opponent every time he scores a critical hit, while another could allow the fighter to daze an opponent he hit once per day. Now, some players and DMs might not like the latter ability as it is more metagame than the former, but it would be up to them to keep it (and other like it) out of their games. To make it simpler, perhaps the game could classify the feats/benefits into "constant", "luck" (triggered on good rolls), and "AEDU", etc. Alternatively, the game might give each maneuver a variety of trigger conditions, e.g. once per day, on a critical hit, must have successfully hit the target in the two previous rounds of combat, etc.I had hoped that 5e would be developed along those lines, since it was initially touted as a game that would allow characters in the style of different editions to play together at the same table. Get the balance between benefits right, and the simple fighter that sinks all of his benefits into constant attack, damage, and saving throw/defence bonuses, the luck-based fighter that can hinder his opponents in various ways if he rolls well, and the AEDU-style fighter with more control over when his encounter and daily powers come into play would all be viable characters, relatively well-balanced with each other, and whether or not one group or the other decides not to use any of them in play would be due to taste and not any mechanical failing on the part of the rules.Oh well.</blockquote>

Verification