Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="CapnZapp" data-source="post: 7140830" data-attributes="member: 12731">Do you know of any good effort to stratify or tier these manuevers. So that any given Battlemaster needs to pick some of the less good manuevers and not just the best ones over and over?There are lots of ways to do the design on this. Adding a level requirement might be the first solution that comes to mind, but that has the drawback that every low-level Battlemaster has now been nerfed, and that every high-level one will still pick the best ones.Making them depend on each other is probably a better solution. For instance, if we agree Precision Attack is one of the better ones, we say Precision Attack requires, say, Riposte Attack. This way you can't just pick the best ones but you can still pick at least one of the good ones.As an alternative, just strata them. For each tier III manuever, you need one tier II. For each tier II, you need one tier I. So you can get a single tier III maneuver already at level 3, provided your other choices are one from tier I and one from tier II. At level 10, you gain your sixth and seventh manuever, which allows you to have two tier III's. Or, we assign a cost to every Maneuver, and say you have a number of points equal to your level to spend, say. If one manuever costs 4 points while another costs just 1, you will have to decide which is the most fun: having lots of manuevers (and getting them already at the lowest levels) or holding off until you can pick your choice maneuver.Pointers to discussion threads or houserule documents appreciated. Thanks <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />The designers themselves have conceded it makes it very hard to create new Fighter subclasses when the Battlemaster can just pick the best maneuvers every time. I guess I have given up hope they'll ever act on this and issue official errata preventing this.</blockquote>

Verification