The Essentials Fighter

[MrMyth]

I think you also need to keep in mind how a new player might approach this.

Someone playing a PHB fighter will often roll around and swing at people. Usually just saying, "I go up and attack!" Now, after that, I can ask, "What did you attack with" - and we need to pause and figure that out. Or, when an enemy shift away from them, I might have to ask, "Did you mark that guy last round?"

And so you end up with needing to either retroactively figure out what they could have done, or trying to preemptively make very clear what they are doing, which can disrupt the flow of combat.

With this... I mean, worst case, you can pretty much just assume they are always walking around with Defender Aura and Battle Wrath. They walk up to an enemy? Bam, he's in the aura, no questions needed. They swing, they hit, they deal damage.

When they hit, you can check if they want to Power Strike, and I think that is a lot easier since they can decide, as it lands, if they want to use it. Rather than, "That attack you just rolled - was it Reaping Strike, or Passing Attack, or Comeback Strike?"

The switching stances, really, is the trickiest part - and as long as they have one stance they like, they never really need to worry about doing so. More than that, I think it is a lot easier to keep in mind, "Here is something that happens every time I hit" and "Here is something I can use instead of a basic attack whenever I want to."

Is it as simple as an old-school fighter that just steps up and swings, steps up and swings? No, its not. But I think it is definitely simpler than a PHB fighter, and more than that, much more well-suited for the play style of a new or casual player.

 

[Saeviomagy]

But, they got rid of a little fiddliness in choice of attack and replaced it with a lot of remembering and fiddliness every time you have to attack.

That may be easier for some people, but it's going to be harder for others. And I think they're making it harder for the people they should be targeting: young gamers.

With something like a stance, the dm can just assume that you're using it whenever you say you attack someone. It's a pretty big gulf between telling someone that they have to say which attack they use each time they attack, and asking them which adjacent foe they'd like to apply their cleave damage to.

 

[Jeremy Ackerman-Yost]

With something like a stance, the dm can just assume that you're using it whenever you say you attack someone. It's a pretty big gulf between telling someone that they have to say which attack they use each time they attack, and asking them which adjacent foe they'd like to apply their cleave damage to.

So, at best, you're off-loading complexity from the player to the DM?

I'm not sure that's an improvement, either.

Also, see my edit above. Shuffling complexity around to tasks that human beings are actually quite bad at, overall, isn't usually a good thing. For example, we're better at choice than memory, IME and according to my data. We're also not real good at multiple modifiers. Ditching a system that emphasizes choice for one that emphasizes applying previously chosen modifiers may not be playing to our strengths, as a species.

 

[Saeviomagy]

So, at best, you're off-loading complexity from the player to the DM?

Typically the DM is the guy who's voted "most likely to learn the rules".

I'm not sure that's an improvement, either.

Also, see my edit above. Shuffling complexity around to tasks that human beings are actually quite bad at, overall, isn't usually a good thing. For example, we're better at choice than memory, IME and according to my data. We're also not real good at multiple modifiers. Ditching a system that emphasizes choice for one that emphasizes applying previously chosen modifiers may not be playing to our strengths, as a species.

I don't understand how you think that constancy isn't a thing that humans deal with effectively (and indeed often crave).

 

[the Jester]

It looks to me about as complex as remembering whether you're using your broad sword or your battle axe, and whether you have your cloak of displacement or your cloak of resistance on.

 

[Mark CMG]

So, at best, you're off-loading complexity from the player to the DM?

I'm not sure that's an improvement, either.

That player-side complexity will probably be available in later books. It'll be a handful of books in before anyone will really know what this revision portends.

 

[MrMyth]

You also may be making assumptions about how many conditional modifiers are in play, here. Right now, we have to remember that the attack does +2 damage, or hurts an adjacent enemy. And once the decision is made, it stays active - that is a lot easier to track than choosing from different powers.

I mean, no way to know for sure until we see things in action. But I've given my examples in my post above - those are genuine areas I've run into where younger players or newer players have had a hard time with choosing powers, and would not have an issue with the new system. Whatever hypothetical complications the Knight might add, I'm less concerned about those as compared to solving tangible complications I've truly seen in action.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

I must support MrMyth here:

if not so much easier, it makes combat way better:

"I attack the goblin/ I swing my sword at the Goblin" sounds much more like an RPG fighter than:

"I use reaping strike power at the Goblin"

It has everything to do with flavour...

 

[Klaus]

You also may be making assumptions about how many conditional modifiers are in play, here. Right now, we have to remember that the attack does +2 damage, or hurts an adjacent enemy. And once the decision is made, it stays active - that is a lot easier to track than choosing from different powers.

I mean, no way to know for sure until we see things in action. But I've given my examples in my post above - those are genuine areas I've run into where younger players or newer players have had a hard time with choosing powers, and would not have an issue with the new system. Whatever hypothetical complications the Knight might add, I'm less concerned about those as compared to solving tangible complications I've truly seen in action.

And when something is turned on, it stays on, for opportunity attacks, charging attacks, etc, etc.

 

[Truename]

It also looks like they got rid of the Combat Challenge / Combat Superiority distinction (to be replaced with Battle Guardian?). In my game, that always causes the most confusion.

"The monster shifts away." "No he doesn't! I attack him!" "No, he still gets away, it was a shift not a move and you haven't marked him." "???"

"The monster turns and runs." "Oh, darn, I already used my Immediate action." "No, this is a move, you get an opportunity attack." "Okay, I hit it with my axe. Does he stop moving or not?" "I don't remember, let me see your cards again?"