How do you like your martial characters?

[Mattachine]

The main issue, though, is that some people are only interested in 5th level D&D or 9th level D&D-- a perfectly valid matter of preference-- and the D&D rules have just never been designed to linger at a given power level.

So true, so true.

Many folks arranged their BECMI, AD&D, and 2e games to feel like they were lingering at a level, by limiting magic items and available spells.

 

[Sunseeker]

I found the slayer to be the best piece of design to come out of 4e. Simple, potent, distinct, playable. I know alot of people disagree on this, but the slayer was bang on for what I was looking for in a fighter.

If the finally composed fighter (including themes and background) reached this level of complexity I wouldnt complain. Any more than this I might grumble...

I would say that the level of complexity a fighter possesses should be determined by the player through their choice of themes, backgrounds, race, feats and other things. A finesse-fighter might dual-wield rapiers and incorporate a lot of acrobatics(maneuvers), a brute-fighter might be little more than an armored barbarian. These kinds of decisions should be in the player's hands.

I would say that the Slayer is a good median for the fighter. I definitely believe an even simpler version should exist for those who prefer it.

 

[Salamandyr]

I want mechanics that reflect that my character is a highly skilled, professional bad-ass who can take on almost any challenge with nerve and sharp steel.

How the mechanics* accomplish that is irrelevant to me.

*one important caveat. I don't care for class based mechanics. I prefer the mechanics of the game to be universal, and your class determines your competency at particular aspects of the game.

 

[BobTheNob]

No, just no. This isn't some special hate as it applies to Martial characters, but I really, really hate the entire AEDU structure-- it feels artificial and contrived, and I just can't get over it.

I was a 4e junky for a while. By the time we finished playing I was tired of AEDU. It wasnt too bad for the wizard (to be honest, I thought the Mage from essentials was pretty good) or the cleric, but for martial classes? Oh please no never again.

 

[Neonchameleon]

I have only one rule that must be followed.

Martial classes must appear to have at least as much care, attention, and polish lavished on them as wizards. Creating a new spell is cheap (and probably shouldn't be done at all nine times out of ten). And far, far fewer fictional heroes were wizards than warriors.

The "how" almost doesn't matter to me. The "whether" does. And the whether should not simply involve slapping on a +1 here and a +2 there - or being equally lazy and just handing out feats.

And there should be a wide range of martial options.

 

[Chalice]

How do I like them? NOT overpowered or overshadowed by spellcasters, is how.

I like Fighters (and the like) to have abilities that are unique to them. Many of them. Plus, of course, they should be miles ahead of everyone else, when it comes to "basic combat", whatever that might mean in the system in question (power, resilience, endurance, efficiency, skill, knowledge, etc., etc.)

They should also become increasingly - literally! - superhuman as levels go up, as per AD&D (just done more interestingly, with the above taken into account, thanks). But then, that part should apply - as per AD&D - to PCs and NPCs of every class.

As for AEDU, I'm not a fan. And in particular, I don't think it works well for non-spellcasters of any kind. But if 5e uses that, I'll have a look. Perhaps it will convince me to "upgrade", where 4e failed to.

 

[Herschel]

I'd really like to see something similar to the 4E psionics system for martial and most other classes.

Imagine if a character picked up 3 auto-scaling at-will powers, and these at-will powers could be boosted to Encounter or Daily level with an application of energy. This energy could have an encounter reserve AND a daily reserve, allowing them to restore a certain amount each encounter, but also letting them pull off some extra crazy stuff a limited number of times per day. Modify that with smaller utility abilities like stances or special movement modes, and make sure that at least 3 such at-wills per class are dirt-simple to use. A more advanced module could give you multiple ways to scale a power in case you wanted a Crippling Trip Attack as well as a Stunning Trip Attack.

I've thought abou this too. It's really a rather simple system, not unlike the Essentials stance/rider system but slightly more robust and interesting.

Low Strike: Level 1 At-Will
You strike at the knees of your opponent, hindering it or even knocking it prone.
Attack vs. AC
1[W] + STR and target is slowed on its next turn.

Exploit Power 1: Expend 1 Exploit Point
Target is also knocked prone

Exploit Power 2: Expend 2 Exploit Points, As above but attack is against all adjacent enemies.

 

[Agamon]

The power I'd prefer my fighter have is his player's power of imagination to pull off cool maneuvers, and then give the DM the power to adjucate a ruling for him to pull it off, rather than either of them having to consult their sheet or the book to see what it is they can do. At least at the core of the game.

 

[Agamon]

So true, so true.

Many folks arranged their BECMI, AD&D, and 2e games to feel like they were lingering at a level, by limiting magic items and available spells.

Did that in 3e, too, actually.

 

[Herschel]

There are a lot of problems with that though.

1. It requires new players to have experience/ideas they may not already.
2. The DM's job becomes a lot more adjudicxation for small stuff.
3. It also requires advanced DMing skills even in a new player game.
4. It also requires players and DMs to be on teh same page as to what their characters can do. It's bad for teh game if a group gets together and there are new gamers involved and said palyer keeps trying things and the DM keeps saying "no". That's bad design.