The Essentials Fighter

[mkill]

Would someone give me the short answer to the following question, please? What is the reasoning behind the argument that the Knight is more complicated than the PH1 Fighter? (I've seen people suggest that it is.) I'd appreciate a clear and concise answer, if possible.

There really is none. There are three main reasons the PHB fighter is complicated:

1. You need to fiddle around with tokens or some other way to remember which monster you marked and which you didn't. You also need to remark every round.

2. There is a very subtle but significant difference between combat superiority and combat challenge, which is only apparent once you fully understood the difference between opportunity action and immediate action, shift and move etc. In my eyes the difference is complicated enough that a significant number of groups out there misunderstood these rules. I know I did.

3. You have your at-will attack powers, but despite the "at-will" moniker you can't use them in a number of common situations, which are charge, opportunity attack, combat challenge attack and attacks granted by Warlords.

Now, it looks like the Knight will have none of these issues. The Knight might get fiddly with the stances, but only a playtest will tell.

 

[DracoSuave]

The knight must pre determine stances before he attacks, requiring him to anticipate battlefield conditions.

If the battlefield is changing meaningfully in the time between taking a minor action and a standard action on the same turn... the knight has a lot more complex problems on his hands than which stance to choose.

Sure, it affects OAs, and such that occur off his turn, but in practice, the most complex decision is what stance to have for -that- turn.

That decision isn't -that- complex:

If your stance is more appropriate, you stay in it.
If your stance is less appropriate, you change to your other stance.
If it doesn't mattter, you stay in it.


It's less like a complex game and cat and mouse, but more like a version of the runepriest's Rune Mastery where you don't need to bother to tell other people what their bonus is, or even care what they do.

 

[Stalker0]

There really is none. There are three main reasons the PHB fighter is complicated:

1. You need to fiddle around with tokens or some other way to remember which monster you marked and which you didn't. You also need to remark every round.

2. There is a very subtle but significant difference between combat superiority and combat challenge, which is only apparent once you fully understood the difference between opportunity action and immediate action, shift and move etc. In my eyes the difference is complicated enough that a significant number of groups out there misunderstood these rules. I know I did.

3. You have your at-will attack powers, but despite the "at-will" moniker you can't use them in a number of common situations, which are charge, opportunity attack, combat challenge attack and attacks granted by Warlords.

Now, it looks like the Knight will have none of these issues. The Knight might get fiddly with the stances, but only a playtest will tell.

A good summary. I will also throw another vote on number 2 up there. Even to this day I have to check myself on teh difference between combat challenge and superiority. The difference is unintuitive, and I think for the most part unnecessary.

 

[Neonchameleon]

Combat Challenge: The fighter can sometimes make opportunities out of very little.
Combat Superiority: Where anyone would be given a free opportunity, the fighter is better.

 

[Jeremy Ackerman-Yost]

I'll take a shot at this, although I disagree with some conclusions.

The knight must pre determine stances before he attacks, requiring him to anticipate battlefield conditions.
The knight is constantly deciding after the fact whether to apply extra damage and what not.

I happen to feel that the knight is at least equal in complexity in play, it is a good fit for new players because it is simpler to roll up a PC.

This is more or less how I felt. Simpler to create, simple to run if you don't care if you're effective. Possibly less simple than a Fighter if you actually want to be good. IMO, of course. We'll see how the actual running of it bears out over time.

To attack with a Fighter, you make one decision, albeit from many options. Some, like myself, think this is very much a feature, but others consider it a bug. To attack with a Knight, you make at least 3 decisions, possibly more than that at higher level, with fewer options per decision point. Some people think this is a feature, whereas others, like myself, think it's a bug.

Most likely it's simply going to be a feature for some and a bug for others, but this seems to be a fundamental divide in how they think about gameplay. The people on one side of it are speaking Greek and the people on the other side are speaking Klingon. They can't actually communicate in any way other than to irritate each other.

I hadn't thought much about the combat challenge and superiority issue, but then I never had trouble with that. On this axis, the Knight is definitely simpler, on reflection. But again, is that a bug or a feature?

And am I speaking Greek, Klingon, or actual English? I may never know.

 

[Remathilis]

And am I speaking Greek, Klingon, or actual English? I may never know.

It doesn't matter; the TARDIS translates it all into standard British English anyway...

 

[mkill]

To attack with a Fighter, you make one decision, albeit from many options. To attack with a Knight, you make at least 3 decisions, possibly more than that at higher level, with fewer options per decision point.

Can you please explain which decision points you are referring to?

 

[Jeremy Ackerman-Yost]

Can you please explain which decision points you are referring to?

Now that I think about it, the functional difference is only one extra decision.

"Do I need to change my aura?" is functionally equivalent to choosing a power.
And the only actual new decision is "Is this a good time to apply Power Strike?"

Presumably, to scale in power as it levels, you'll get either additional uses of Power Strike or additional powers that supplement the MBA. Depending on how those operate, they may introduce additional decision points, like with the Thief's Backstab power.

 

[Klaus]

Now that I think about it, the functional difference is only one extra decision.

"Do I need to change my aura?" is functionally equivalent to choosing a power.
And the only actual new decision is "Is this a good time to apply Power Strike?"

Presumably, to scale in power as it levels, you'll get either additional uses of Power Strike or additional powers that supplement the MBA. Depending on how those operate, they may introduce additional decision points, like with the Thief's Backstab power.

Which aura do I use = which at-will attack do I use.
I hit! Do I use Power Attack = which encounter power do I use?
N/A = Do I keep this mark or mark someone else?
N/A = Is this an opportunity attack or an immediate interrupt attack?

From what I see, two fewer decision points.

 

[Jeremy Ackerman-Yost]

Which aura do I use = which at-will attack do I use.
I hit! Do I use Power Attack = which encounter power do I use?

But, that was one decision before, not two decisions in the same turn.

N/A = Do I keep this mark or mark someone else?
N/A = Is this an opportunity attack or an immediate interrupt attack?

I keep forgetting about the alleged problem there. Conceded again, though that's really an entirely separate decision space. In that space, the Knight is definitely simpler.