I am SURE this has been brought up before but I wanted to throw some ideas I have been thinking about to improve the fighter class and help the martial/caster divide.
I truly think that battle master subclass should be the base class for Fighter. All subclasses then would have maneuvers, extra tool proficiencies and the ability to measure their opponent. I don’t think it would be game breaking even at lower levels.
Other small ideas:
- every time you get an extra attack you can get an additional fighting style
- an “upcast” system that could elevate attacks. Yes a maneuver dice adds damage dice, but not at the scale of high level casters who upscale. Higher level fighters need a resource that spikes damage or secondary effects in maneuvers
Anyway, my thoughts. I haven’t play tested these yet but I want to soon. Just need to convince my players to take some time from our long campaign to try it
In one of their recent videos discussing 5.5, Crawford mentioned there were some ideas to make Battlemaster features part of the base fighter kit. Those plans, however, turned out to be incredibly unpopular with many players and the ideas were discarded. Why? A large segment of the player base likes fighter - they like how it is a simple class they can easily pick up and play effectively, without all the rigamarole of tracking additional information or tactically deciding when to use what ability. Wizards said their data indicated many players love fighter specifically because of is simple and linear, and they decided they were not going to take that away from those who want it. After all, you can always add more complexity through subclasses, giving those who want a more dynamic experience something to play with, but you cannot really remove base features.
What fighters really need isn’t much in the way of additional abilities (though the 5.5 weapon mastery system is certainly a nice boon). It isn’t more damage. It is Wizards and DMs to do a better job balancing encounters. Right now, the game is designed around a fictional view of an adventuring day—one where you do a half dozen or more combat encounters. In that kind of environment - or in an environment where monster HP is scaled up so you’re still having to deal the same amount of damage per day, even with only a handful of encounters - Fighters do come out relatively balanced. Spellcasters are flashy and big, but a fighter is the Energizer Bunny of classes—they continue to unleash solid damage output long, long after the spellcasters are down to cantrips.
I think the problem is that they satisfy the people that want a simple class to play at the expense of those of us who want an exciting fantasy fighter but for who battlemaster alone is too limiting (but if combined with another subclass would be awesome).
I'd suggest they could solve this by giving all base fighters a choice between two features at level 2:
(a) Some kind of passive buff that requires no management.
(b) Battemaster manuevers and dice
Then those that want simple linear can still have it, and those that want a richer fantasy fighter can also have it.
I don't think eliminating the Battle Master subclass is the best option. There are Fighter subclasses that clearly do not focus on the mastery of weaponry and techniques. Adding this in, I feel, won't satisfy all the players looking at this class. Instead we should examine how the class is being design from a beneficial perspective.
The class as access to the most ability score improvements. This means they can increase their ability scores at a staggering rate compared to the other classes, or have more access to Feats. So how can we build on that?
1) Make more Feats that primarily appeal to the Fighter class. This can increase the class' power but at the same time promote diversity in the development of characters. 2) Establish class features than can allow for some increased damage attacks. 3) From community stand point: Establish a demarcation between the class' effects and magical items. This is what I think is the biggest issue. The PHB defines weapon damage; so the only way to improve on that is with magical weapons or with features/Feats. How do we establish this baseline?
I do not want to focus on #3 that much. I think the first two items have more than enough room to discuss options. Examples would be a weapon expertise option or maybe the ability to take an attack with advantage after an alley does damage to a creature. Or once per Initiative the Fighter can do a "Specialize Attack" that does an average damage relevant to the character's level.
I don't think eliminating the Battle Master subclass is the best option. There are Fighter subclasses that clearly do not focus on the mastery of weaponry and techniques. Adding this in, I feel, won't satisfy all the players looking at this class. Instead we should examine how the class is being design from a beneficial perspective.
The class as access to the most ability score improvements. This means they can increase their ability scores at a staggering rate compared to the other classes, or have more access to Feats. So how can we build on that?
1) Make more Feats that primarily appeal to the Fighter class. This can increase the class' power but at the same time promote diversity in the development of characters. 2) Establish class features than can allow for some increased damage attacks. 3) From community stand point: Establish a demarcation between the calls effects and magical items. This is what I think is the biggest issue. The PHB defines weapon damage; so the only way to improve on that is with magical weapons or with features/Feats. How do we establish this baseline?
I do not want to focus on #3 that much. I think the first two items have more than enough room to discuss options. Examples would be a weapon expertise option or maybe the ability to take an attack with advantage after an alley does damage to a creature. Or once per Initiative the Fighter can do a "Specialize Attack" that does an average damage relevant to the character's level.
I like your #1 idea and would be interested if you have thought about any specifics.
I feel like *some* battlemaster manuevers are just "basic ways people fight with weapons" that all fighters should be able to do. That's why I'm more in the camp of giving those features to all. I think Battlemasters could still exist either with more or better superiority dice, and/or with some of the more esoteric maneuvers only available to them.
I'm not actually sure that I understand your #3 point.
I sort of miss earlier editions where everyone had to pick proficient weapons from a list. Fighters got MORE proficiencies, and had access to more choices too but they didn't just get handed "anything on the list". Most other classes were quite a bit more limited. I think this was better as fighters had a lot more martial versatility but still had to make some choices.
I didn't check the spell correct. I meant to type "class' effects vs magical items". The point I am trying to make is that the community doesn't have a firm baseline for a balance between how the (sub)class should grow more powerful vs. when character improvement tied to magical items. It is not an easy conversation, I acknowledge this, and I didn't want to go down this rabbit hole.
The real limiting factor for the Fighter is the Player's Handbook definition of the weapons. No matter what level the Fighter reaches, they only have access to a 1d8 long sword or 2d6 maul. So if the weapons are defined then how do we increase the production of the Fighter in combat? This question about the class will continue to persist because there is no established baseline: build it through class features/feats or the character acquires magical items. The debate is fine but as long as there isn't baseline then there is no way to arbitrate the "Giving away too many items" vs. "That is overpowering the class" arguments.
For changes to feats, a few items I would consider:
1) I would change the Martial Adept Feat so that if a Fighter takes it the Superiority Die is d8 and not a d6. I also would allow Fighters to take this feat more than once. This gives a player of the Fighter the option to learn more maneuvers but it allows for the Battle Master to have an identify. The reason I am against just giving all Fighter subclasses automatic access is because I don't think every Fighter build will benefit form these features. So it could be perceived as nonessential features but player. So I want to leave the option for the Fighter to learn them, but it is the option of the player.
2) I would change Fighting Initiate so that Fighter and Ranger can select this feat more than once. Similar to the reasoning above.
I like giving the characters more options in their build. It allows for more originality and uniqueness of a characters. I also feel it is important to give features to players they will use.
3) I am thinking about a feat that will benefit two weapon fighting. I feel Duel Wielder is more of a buff feat than helps with the player's offensive output. The player still gets no bonus on the BA attack. The use of weapons that lack the Light property doesn't really help the DEX warriors unless they want to use two rapiers. I don't want to change the feat; but I would like to create something that can stack with or stand on its own. I would propose a way to use the -5/+10 feature on one attack per turn. I like the -5/+10, but I think it needs to be tied into something with a cost.
4) I would like more feats that are based on the weapon damage type. Stuff like Crusher, Piecer, Slasher but maybe not always limited to one damage type. This is something to allow players who want to stack and build a particular style for combat. I think this might be something being addressed in the next generation of the game.
5) I am not sure if this a feats only improvement, but I would like to see tool proficiency and associated features have more a benefit. I can see a feat that allows you, provide you have access to a whetstone, you can condition a certain number of weapons during a rest that gives the weapon a bonus during the next Initiative roll. So the bonus doesn't carry between encounters unless you take a rest; but if you can condition a number of weapons equal to your INT modifier then with a +2 modifier you can have sword prep for one encounter and spear for another. I just like the idea of having more benefit in between encounters.
I can probably come up with more bad ideas; but this what I have for now.
Something I saw on a reddit thread definitely made me think. The question was why do fighters have all these different subsystems bolted on to give them flexibility and flavor? They keep trying to add new stuff to address a core issue - the class lacks a signature identity that others don't trample on. Instead of constantly adding, some unification and segregation from other classes is needed.
Current list: fighting style, maneuvers (for BM anyway), the extra ASI are often used for feats, and now adding weapon mastery...even the additions to second wind are becoming a little system in itself...
In addition, some of this stuff overlaps and is redundant which on the surface looks like more choice but actually is not.
The suggestion was why not give fighters a system that mirrors "eldritch invocations"? A set of features that are an amalgam of the stuff I listed above. It all gets redesigned and lumped into one long list of "fighting skills" (its hard to name because they keep coming up with new systems and naming them, lol). Just like invocations for warlocks, you get a certain number per level. I'd advocate that they shouldn't have a lot of prerequisites between them but a few is ok (some complicated tree is what to avoid IMO).
Personally I would make this strictly for fighters and in some cases even remove feats from the general list to populate this. Really lean into fighters are masters of combat, weapons and armor. Some of the things they can do can't be done by others. This would feel so much better than "fighters are special because they have proficiency in everything" (which is super lame). I also think maybe weapon mastery should only be for fighters and get added to this list. It might feel like actual class identity.
Some might say this is a drift back toward earlier editions. I'm not familiar with anything outside of 1e and 5e, but I'll say that my understanding of those editions in between is that they did this but made it overly complex and intertwined.
Combat is not where fighter needs help, it's everywhere else.
Give them something to do in social/exploration scenes other than sit there and pick their nose sharpen their sword. Give them a way to win over fellow soldiers at least as well as the foppy bard can. Give them a way to analyze arms and armor to gain information, or appeal to the king through their hard-earned reputation. Give them a reason not to completely tune out until the next initiative roll because there's literally nothing they can do that most classes can't do better.
It's not just social interaction. Its combat too, but in combat it isn't necessarily always a power gap (*) - its avoiding the "I attack three times and miss twice while standing there absorbing punishment for the party" feeling. You can only narrate around that so much when hp, ac are so abstract. How do you describe in interesting ways the attrition of 200hp on the fighter without being very repetitive?
It is exciting when your caster casts a new spell, even when that new spell is slightly less effective than the fireball you already knew. It is fun to figure out what to do in different circumstances and scenarios. For the most part, with fighters there isn't even a decision on what weapon or fighting tactics to use because the game pushed you to specialize as "the brutish big weapon guy", "the nimble dexy guy", "the sword and board", etc, etc. Heck I've had fun with one character just switching between a polearm and a sword/board depending on whether I wanted a little extra AC. Then I found a powerful magic polearm, and its hard to justify the switches (my DM is amenable to the weapon gaining the power to morph into different forms so I think this will come back). This would have been even more fun if I could switch fighting styles at the same time and feel like I'm good at whichever one was needed in the moment instead of "well at creation time I decided to be good at polearms, so polearm it is". (I avoided this by taking the defense fighting style but I shouldn't have to make that choice just once at creation).
I'm playing in a game based on the Arkadia setting as a "herculean" barbarian. The signature ability is bonus action grapple and the ability to still use your two handed weapon while you have someone grappled. I've had tremendous fun grappling monsters and dragging them away from party members and then smashing them with my hammer. It is a power boost but not a huge one but it is a gigantic FUN boost and little decisions about where to drag a grappled creature can have real impacts on the battle.
I think this is why people like Battlemaster so much - most of the maneuvers are not exactly combat defining but they are interesting enough to give you something to think about on offense. I think this is also why Echo Knight is fun, there is some interesting positioning and battlefield control going on. Just that little bit of extra positioning and movement makes the game a bit more fun.
But I also think the idea that a mighty martial character can only have one kind of these moves (and even Battlemaster has limits) is where it fails us. Give the fighter a giant pile of things they can do with their actions/reactions/bonus - they don't have to be better just interesting in different situations. I think this would also solve the refrain of people that want fighter to be boring (I want to mindlessly roll attacks and not think about stuff). Give those players access to some basic thing they can just spam and get extra damage from while more tactical players can be thoughtful about the weapon and tactics to use as the battle unfolds.
A lot of the power in fighter comes from hit points - these are basically passive things the player can't do much with other than watch go down and decide when to heal. You're not making interesting decisions, you're not doing anything but "taking the hit". Its super important for the group but it gets kind of boring. The game doesn't really support this core role being a lot of fun. The contribution itself even kind of becomes invisible if the player and DM don't work hard to narrate in interesting ways (which is itself challenging because the hp is so abstract - you can't narrate it as a miss because attack rolls hit/miss, but you also can't with a straight face describe someone taking 200hp of wounds).
If there was something active the fighter could do with their defenses I think that would help. Maybe some mechanic where they can expend hp actively to do something that stops the monster's attacks. The mechanical effect would be the same (fighter has less hp and is being worn down) but the agency would be so different. I'm not sure what the right mechanic is here but I am certain this problem of "passive role" is real.
(*) Yeah I know some higher level spells are just bonkers and fighters can't compete. At least for me, my advocacy of fighters isn't to try and close THAT gap. I don't give a shit if wizards can cast wish and fighters can't do anything equivalent. I care that in combat, where fighters should be at their best, that fighters have lots of interesting and meaningful things that other classes can't do. Right now it feels like too many of the interesting decisions happen at character build time rather in the moment.
I've been reading all of your post's. And while i do understand what you're all triying to say... I have my own opinion. And that opinion is... Just take ALL of the Battlemaster features and abilities and implement them into the class's base kit.
Now, hear me out, before all of you come after me and tell me that it would make the fighter to strong or complicated, I have heard MANY people say that the Battlemaster features should have been a part of the Fighter's base arsenal for a long time. And honestly? I agree with that statement.
You have no idea how many videos there are out there that call the Fighte a "Basic- B*tch" and have heard many arguments about how you should instead play a Barbarian or a Rogue if you want to go Martial. And unfortinately... There not exactly wrong. Aside from being able to attack 4-8 times per turn, without a subclass, that would be all you're doing.
Here's what i have in mind: In 2nd level, along with the other abilities we gain, we also gain Combat Superiority. At 5th level, we also gain Student of War. At 9th level, we gain Know Your Enemy. At 11th level, we gain Improved Combat Superiority. At 13th level, we gain Relentless. And at 17th level, we gain Ultimate Combat Superiority.
I understand that all of this makes the Fighter more complicated, but when other classes can gain resistance to all forms of physical damage and deal even more damage on a crit. Be able to hide, disengage and deal extra damage on the side. And, most importantly. Have access to magical abilities. All all you can do at base is attack more often? Yeah no, the Fighter needs this buff, simplisity be damned. Until they make these changes (or something similar) oficial to the class, i'm gonna homebrew my Fighters like this. This gives me more options outside of my subclass, and heck, to me, this makes it a good reason to multiclass. A Barbarian that can taunt or goad enemies to focus exclusively on him while he rages? A Rogue who is even better in social encounters and can basically be a leader from the shadows in battle. Or how about a Paladin with maneuvers?
Plus, with subclasses, you could also add maneuvers that are exclusive to that specific subclass, like: The Eldritch Knight could have elemental or magical maneuvers, the Psi Warrior could have maneuvers that expand on it's psyonic abilities, the Cavalier could have maneuvers that focus on focusing the attention on him, the Arcane Archer could have more ranged maneuvers... The possibilities are endless.
This is my piece on the matter. You can tell me what you think about it, either to agree, disagree, or put your own spin on things, go ahead. Just try and be respectfull.
I am SURE this has been brought up before but I wanted to throw some ideas I have been thinking about to improve the fighter class and help the martial/caster divide.
I truly think that battle master subclass should be the base class for Fighter. All subclasses then would have maneuvers, extra tool proficiencies and the ability to measure their opponent. I don’t think it would be game breaking even at lower levels.
Other small ideas:
- every time you get an extra attack you can get an additional fighting style
- an “upcast” system that could elevate attacks. Yes a maneuver dice adds damage dice, but not at the scale of high level casters who upscale. Higher level fighters need a resource that spikes damage or secondary effects in maneuvers
Anyway, my thoughts. I haven’t play tested these yet but I want to soon. Just need to convince my players to take some time from our long campaign to try it
In one of their recent videos discussing 5.5, Crawford mentioned there were some ideas to make Battlemaster features part of the base fighter kit. Those plans, however, turned out to be incredibly unpopular with many players and the ideas were discarded. Why? A large segment of the player base likes fighter - they like how it is a simple class they can easily pick up and play effectively, without all the rigamarole of tracking additional information or tactically deciding when to use what ability. Wizards said their data indicated many players love fighter specifically because of is simple and linear, and they decided they were not going to take that away from those who want it. After all, you can always add more complexity through subclasses, giving those who want a more dynamic experience something to play with, but you cannot really remove base features.
What fighters really need isn’t much in the way of additional abilities (though the 5.5 weapon mastery system is certainly a nice boon). It isn’t more damage. It is Wizards and DMs to do a better job balancing encounters. Right now, the game is designed around a fictional view of an adventuring day—one where you do a half dozen or more combat encounters. In that kind of environment - or in an environment where monster HP is scaled up so you’re still having to deal the same amount of damage per day, even with only a handful of encounters - Fighters do come out relatively balanced. Spellcasters are flashy and big, but a fighter is the Energizer Bunny of classes—they continue to unleash solid damage output long, long after the spellcasters are down to cantrips.
I dunno, rejiggering the Str based weapons to do a little more damage would certainly help.
I think the problem is that they satisfy the people that want a simple class to play at the expense of those of us who want an exciting fantasy fighter but for who battlemaster alone is too limiting (but if combined with another subclass would be awesome).
I'd suggest they could solve this by giving all base fighters a choice between two features at level 2:
(a) Some kind of passive buff that requires no management.
(b) Battemaster manuevers and dice
Then those that want simple linear can still have it, and those that want a richer fantasy fighter can also have it.
I don't think eliminating the Battle Master subclass is the best option. There are Fighter subclasses that clearly do not focus on the mastery of weaponry and techniques. Adding this in, I feel, won't satisfy all the players looking at this class. Instead we should examine how the class is being design from a beneficial perspective.
The class as access to the most ability score improvements. This means they can increase their ability scores at a staggering rate compared to the other classes, or have more access to Feats. So how can we build on that?
1) Make more Feats that primarily appeal to the Fighter class. This can increase the class' power but at the same time promote diversity in the development of characters.
2) Establish class features than can allow for some increased damage attacks.
3) From community stand point: Establish a demarcation between the class' effects and magical items. This is what I think is the biggest issue. The PHB defines weapon damage; so the only way to improve on that is with magical weapons or with features/Feats. How do we establish this baseline?
I do not want to focus on #3 that much. I think the first two items have more than enough room to discuss options. Examples would be a weapon expertise option or maybe the ability to take an attack with advantage after an alley does damage to a creature. Or once per Initiative the Fighter can do a "Specialize Attack" that does an average damage relevant to the character's level.
I like your #1 idea and would be interested if you have thought about any specifics.
I feel like *some* battlemaster manuevers are just "basic ways people fight with weapons" that all fighters should be able to do. That's why I'm more in the camp of giving those features to all. I think Battlemasters could still exist either with more or better superiority dice, and/or with some of the more esoteric maneuvers only available to them.
I'm not actually sure that I understand your #3 point.
I sort of miss earlier editions where everyone had to pick proficient weapons from a list. Fighters got MORE proficiencies, and had access to more choices too but they didn't just get handed "anything on the list". Most other classes were quite a bit more limited. I think this was better as fighters had a lot more martial versatility but still had to make some choices.
I didn't check the spell correct. I meant to type "class' effects vs magical items". The point I am trying to make is that the community doesn't have a firm baseline for a balance between how the (sub)class should grow more powerful vs. when character improvement tied to magical items. It is not an easy conversation, I acknowledge this, and I didn't want to go down this rabbit hole.
The real limiting factor for the Fighter is the Player's Handbook definition of the weapons. No matter what level the Fighter reaches, they only have access to a 1d8 long sword or 2d6 maul. So if the weapons are defined then how do we increase the production of the Fighter in combat? This question about the class will continue to persist because there is no established baseline: build it through class features/feats or the character acquires magical items. The debate is fine but as long as there isn't baseline then there is no way to arbitrate the "Giving away too many items" vs. "That is overpowering the class" arguments.
For changes to feats, a few items I would consider:
1) I would change the Martial Adept Feat so that if a Fighter takes it the Superiority Die is d8 and not a d6. I also would allow Fighters to take this feat more than once. This gives a player of the Fighter the option to learn more maneuvers but it allows for the Battle Master to have an identify. The reason I am against just giving all Fighter subclasses automatic access is because I don't think every Fighter build will benefit form these features. So it could be perceived as nonessential features but player. So I want to leave the option for the Fighter to learn them, but it is the option of the player.
2) I would change Fighting Initiate so that Fighter and Ranger can select this feat more than once. Similar to the reasoning above.
I like giving the characters more options in their build. It allows for more originality and uniqueness of a characters. I also feel it is important to give features to players they will use.
3) I am thinking about a feat that will benefit two weapon fighting. I feel Duel Wielder is more of a buff feat than helps with the player's offensive output. The player still gets no bonus on the BA attack. The use of weapons that lack the Light property doesn't really help the DEX warriors unless they want to use two rapiers. I don't want to change the feat; but I would like to create something that can stack with or stand on its own. I would propose a way to use the -5/+10 feature on one attack per turn. I like the -5/+10, but I think it needs to be tied into something with a cost.
4) I would like more feats that are based on the weapon damage type. Stuff like Crusher, Piecer, Slasher but maybe not always limited to one damage type. This is something to allow players who want to stack and build a particular style for combat. I think this might be something being addressed in the next generation of the game.
5) I am not sure if this a feats only improvement, but I would like to see tool proficiency and associated features have more a benefit. I can see a feat that allows you, provide you have access to a whetstone, you can condition a certain number of weapons during a rest that gives the weapon a bonus during the next Initiative roll. So the bonus doesn't carry between encounters unless you take a rest; but if you can condition a number of weapons equal to your INT modifier then with a +2 modifier you can have sword prep for one encounter and spear for another. I just like the idea of having more benefit in between encounters.
I can probably come up with more bad ideas; but this what I have for now.
Something I saw on a reddit thread definitely made me think. The question was why do fighters have all these different subsystems bolted on to give them flexibility and flavor? They keep trying to add new stuff to address a core issue - the class lacks a signature identity that others don't trample on. Instead of constantly adding, some unification and segregation from other classes is needed.
Current list: fighting style, maneuvers (for BM anyway), the extra ASI are often used for feats, and now adding weapon mastery...even the additions to second wind are becoming a little system in itself...
In addition, some of this stuff overlaps and is redundant which on the surface looks like more choice but actually is not.
The suggestion was why not give fighters a system that mirrors "eldritch invocations"? A set of features that are an amalgam of the stuff I listed above. It all gets redesigned and lumped into one long list of "fighting skills" (its hard to name because they keep coming up with new systems and naming them, lol). Just like invocations for warlocks, you get a certain number per level. I'd advocate that they shouldn't have a lot of prerequisites between them but a few is ok (some complicated tree is what to avoid IMO).
Personally I would make this strictly for fighters and in some cases even remove feats from the general list to populate this. Really lean into fighters are masters of combat, weapons and armor. Some of the things they can do can't be done by others. This would feel so much better than "fighters are special because they have proficiency in everything" (which is super lame). I also think maybe weapon mastery should only be for fighters and get added to this list. It might feel like actual class identity.
Some might say this is a drift back toward earlier editions. I'm not familiar with anything outside of 1e and 5e, but I'll say that my understanding of those editions in between is that they did this but made it overly complex and intertwined.
Combat is not where fighter needs help, it's everywhere else.
Give them something to do in social/exploration scenes other than sit there and
pick their nosesharpen their sword. Give them a way to win over fellow soldiers at least as well as the foppy bard can. Give them a way to analyze arms and armor to gain information, or appeal to the king through their hard-earned reputation. Give them a reason not to completely tune out until the next initiative roll because there's literally nothing they can do that most classes can't do better.My homebrew subclasses (full list here)
(Artificer) Swordmage | Glasswright | (Barbarian) Path of the Savage Embrace
(Bard) College of Dance | (Fighter) Warlord | Cannoneer
(Monk) Way of the Elements | (Ranger) Blade Dancer
(Rogue) DaggerMaster | Inquisitor | (Sorcerer) Riftwalker | Spellfist
(Warlock) The Swarm
It's not just social interaction. Its combat too, but in combat it isn't necessarily always a power gap (*) - its avoiding the "I attack three times and miss twice while standing there absorbing punishment for the party" feeling. You can only narrate around that so much when hp, ac are so abstract. How do you describe in interesting ways the attrition of 200hp on the fighter without being very repetitive?
It is exciting when your caster casts a new spell, even when that new spell is slightly less effective than the fireball you already knew. It is fun to figure out what to do in different circumstances and scenarios. For the most part, with fighters there isn't even a decision on what weapon or fighting tactics to use because the game pushed you to specialize as "the brutish big weapon guy", "the nimble dexy guy", "the sword and board", etc, etc. Heck I've had fun with one character just switching between a polearm and a sword/board depending on whether I wanted a little extra AC. Then I found a powerful magic polearm, and its hard to justify the switches (my DM is amenable to the weapon gaining the power to morph into different forms so I think this will come back). This would have been even more fun if I could switch fighting styles at the same time and feel like I'm good at whichever one was needed in the moment instead of "well at creation time I decided to be good at polearms, so polearm it is". (I avoided this by taking the defense fighting style but I shouldn't have to make that choice just once at creation).
I'm playing in a game based on the Arkadia setting as a "herculean" barbarian. The signature ability is bonus action grapple and the ability to still use your two handed weapon while you have someone grappled. I've had tremendous fun grappling monsters and dragging them away from party members and then smashing them with my hammer. It is a power boost but not a huge one but it is a gigantic FUN boost and little decisions about where to drag a grappled creature can have real impacts on the battle.
I think this is why people like Battlemaster so much - most of the maneuvers are not exactly combat defining but they are interesting enough to give you something to think about on offense. I think this is also why Echo Knight is fun, there is some interesting positioning and battlefield control going on. Just that little bit of extra positioning and movement makes the game a bit more fun.
But I also think the idea that a mighty martial character can only have one kind of these moves (and even Battlemaster has limits) is where it fails us. Give the fighter a giant pile of things they can do with their actions/reactions/bonus - they don't have to be better just interesting in different situations. I think this would also solve the refrain of people that want fighter to be boring (I want to mindlessly roll attacks and not think about stuff). Give those players access to some basic thing they can just spam and get extra damage from while more tactical players can be thoughtful about the weapon and tactics to use as the battle unfolds.
A lot of the power in fighter comes from hit points - these are basically passive things the player can't do much with other than watch go down and decide when to heal. You're not making interesting decisions, you're not doing anything but "taking the hit". Its super important for the group but it gets kind of boring. The game doesn't really support this core role being a lot of fun. The contribution itself even kind of becomes invisible if the player and DM don't work hard to narrate in interesting ways (which is itself challenging because the hp is so abstract - you can't narrate it as a miss because attack rolls hit/miss, but you also can't with a straight face describe someone taking 200hp of wounds).
If there was something active the fighter could do with their defenses I think that would help. Maybe some mechanic where they can expend hp actively to do something that stops the monster's attacks. The mechanical effect would be the same (fighter has less hp and is being worn down) but the agency would be so different. I'm not sure what the right mechanic is here but I am certain this problem of "passive role" is real.
(*) Yeah I know some higher level spells are just bonkers and fighters can't compete. At least for me, my advocacy of fighters isn't to try and close THAT gap. I don't give a shit if wizards can cast wish and fighters can't do anything equivalent. I care that in combat, where fighters should be at their best, that fighters have lots of interesting and meaningful things that other classes can't do. Right now it feels like too many of the interesting decisions happen at character build time rather in the moment.
I've been reading all of your post's. And while i do understand what you're all triying to say... I have my own opinion. And that opinion is... Just take ALL of the Battlemaster features and abilities and implement them into the class's base kit.
Now, hear me out, before all of you come after me and tell me that it would make the fighter to strong or complicated, I have heard MANY people say that the Battlemaster features should have been a part of the Fighter's base arsenal for a long time. And honestly? I agree with that statement.
You have no idea how many videos there are out there that call the Fighte a "Basic- B*tch" and have heard many arguments about how you should instead play a Barbarian or a Rogue if you want to go Martial. And unfortinately... There not exactly wrong. Aside from being able to attack 4-8 times per turn, without a subclass, that would be all you're doing.
Here's what i have in mind: In 2nd level, along with the other abilities we gain, we also gain Combat Superiority. At 5th level, we also gain Student of War. At 9th level, we gain Know Your Enemy. At 11th level, we gain Improved Combat Superiority. At 13th level, we gain Relentless. And at 17th level, we gain Ultimate Combat Superiority.
I understand that all of this makes the Fighter more complicated, but when other classes can gain resistance to all forms of physical damage and deal even more damage on a crit. Be able to hide, disengage and deal extra damage on the side. And, most importantly. Have access to magical abilities. All all you can do at base is attack more often? Yeah no, the Fighter needs this buff, simplisity be damned. Until they make these changes (or something similar) oficial to the class, i'm gonna homebrew my Fighters like this. This gives me more options outside of my subclass, and heck, to me, this makes it a good reason to multiclass. A Barbarian that can taunt or goad enemies to focus exclusively on him while he rages? A Rogue who is even better in social encounters and can basically be a leader from the shadows in battle. Or how about a Paladin with maneuvers?
Plus, with subclasses, you could also add maneuvers that are exclusive to that specific subclass, like: The Eldritch Knight could have elemental or magical maneuvers, the Psi Warrior could have maneuvers that expand on it's psyonic abilities, the Cavalier could have maneuvers that focus on focusing the attention on him, the Arcane Archer could have more ranged maneuvers... The possibilities are endless.
This is my piece on the matter. You can tell me what you think about it, either to agree, disagree, or put your own spin on things, go ahead. Just try and be respectfull.