D&D 5E Which 5e innovations do you like the most?

[triqui]

Technically, they had a couple of fighter-only feats, like Weapon Specialization.

but it did not give the fighter anything unique, just a bonus. Everybody can do damage, fighters do +2. In DDN, while fighters can use the expertise die to do damage (like rogues do with sneak attack), fighters can parry, which is unique to them, so far at least

Nod. There were only a couple of Fighter Bonus Feats that let you trade out BAB the way CS lets you trade out damage - though, sans feats, combat maneuvers often came at a penalty, anyway. CS is a nice system for what it does, but what it does is very much what the 3.5 fighter did. It's adapted to a new system, and, perhaps, that makes it a bit more consistent in how it does it, which is nice, but not, IMHO, really 'innovative.'

Imho, it is innovative in the same way Edison's light bubble or the iPad were innovative. They weren't the first try at it, but they were the first try that worked.

 

[Tony Vargas]

but it did not give the fighter anything unique, just a bonus. Everybody can do damage, fighters do +2.

That's how fighter have generally worked, yes. They are mundane weapon-users who get there abilities by training with weapons. Every adventurer trains with weapons.

In DDN, while fighters can use the expertise die to do damage (like rogues do with sneak attack), fighters can parry, which is unique to them, so far at least

And, we'll see how much of any such uniqueness they maintain. I'd be surprised if Paladins couldn't parry, for instance. More likely, IMHO, everyone will get some of the tricks in the Fighter's collective CS + Fighting Style portfolio, each other class just won't have as many to choose from, or might get them in more limited circumstances (like the rogue's SA damage), or might not have as many, in total. Again, very much like the bonus-feat fighter. The fighter had a few exclusive feats, some feats that were so hard to qualify for no-fighters would be unlikely to get them, and get them only at high level, and, of course, the fighter got more feats in total - but, ultimately, everything he could do was something other classes could do, too.

Imho, it is innovative in the same way Edison's light bubble or the iPad were innovative. They weren't the first try at it, but they were the first try that worked.

I see your point. The 3e fighter worked, though, in itself, including the few builds that worked like CS works (trading BAB out round-by-round rather than damage dice). In the context of the game as a whole, the 3e fighter couldn't remain relevant and had a lot of 'trap' options, so could be counted as not working. So far, CS seems to be a workable enough system, in itself. Whether it will work better than the bonus-feats of the 3e fighter in the broader context of the whole game (all classes, all levels, etc) remains to be seen.