Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="ECMO3" data-source="post: 9475070" data-attributes="member: 7030563">Things that do not tie them to specific weapons.  Strength ASIs, Defensive Duelist, Sentinel are three off the top of my head if you want to lead into martial combat.Sure if you want those.  I think a Fighter with those is going to be happier in play than a GWM-PAM-SENTINEL Fighter.I have seen a Fighter with Chef and I have played a Fighter with Skill Expert, both using 2014 rules, I don't know that I have ever seen a Fighter with Skulker.  But as for the other two, both he and I had a lot fun, more fun than the GWM-PAM fighters generally have.Keep in mind the fiction around the fighter is a person who is expert with weapons, not with one or two weapons.They are the progression if you want to pigeonhole yourself and have less fun at the table.I play a ton of 5E and I have never played a fighter with the GWM feat as a player.  This includes Fighters who started with a 20 Strength at level 1 and did not even have to worry about staying on the strength ladder.The game is full of choices and this is one of them (well 3 of them) and the people who make those choices commonly have less fun with the class IME.No, the rules don't need that kind of bloat IMO.  As others noted many tables are not finding masteries to be more fun, it is unlikely even more complication to how fighters attack would improve things.</blockquote>