Occurred to me that some optional rules may not be in use and/Or not desirable to take a feat or fighting style just for one effect. Level would be the character level required to take the ability (in the case of multiclass or martial adept this isn't reliant on fighter level)
Hobbling Strike (7th Level)- when you hit with a weapon attack, you may spend a superiority die to initiate this effect. Add the superiority for to the damage of the attack. The target must make a CON save. If they fail, their speed is reduced to 0 and they cannot benefit from any bonuses to speed until the begining of your next turn.
Close Combat - use a bonus action and expend one superiority die. Until the beginning of your next turn, you do not take disadvantage on ranged attacks when in melee. Note this is not offsetting the disad so you would be eligible to get advantage as normal. If I understand RAW, you could not expend superiority dice on any of those attacks, so I think that balances the potential to affect a lot of attacks.
Power Attack (10th Level) - when you hit with a weapon attack, spend a bonus action to initiate this strike. You may then expend up to your remaining superiority dice and add them to the damage of the attack. Would be nice to have a Nuke option. And, you know, power attack needs to stay in the lore. :)
Penetrating Strike (7th Level) - when you hit with a weapon attack expend one superiority die and add it to the damage of the attack. In addition, the attack ignores the target's resistance to your weapon's damage type. A lot of classes get magic for purpose at 6th. Seems they expect fighter/Barbarian to have a magic weapon by then, but this would be nice too.
Mage strike - when a target within range of the melee weapon you are wielding casts a spell, you may expend a superiority dice and use your reaction to make an attack of opportunity against that target. Add the superiority die to the damage if the attack hits.
Disrupting Strike - when you hit with a weapon attack, expend a superiority die and add it to the damage of the attack. In addition, the target is at disadvantage on the concentration check, if any, caused by this attack.
Deadly Blow - when you reduce an opponent to 0 HP with a weapon attack you may expend a superiority die to use a bonus action to make a weapon attack against another target. If the attack hits, add the superiority die to the damage of the attack.
I don't like the level requirements. All of the official maneuvers are roughly on the same power level. If you need to add a level requirement, the maneuver is too strong. Ripping off feats also leaves a really bad taste in my mouth. Fighter already has the most ASIs in the game. Think of how players with only 5 of them would feel if a Fighter could get 80% of the benefit of one of their feats for a fraction of the cost, and still pick extra feats. Anyways, on to the specifics...
Hobbling Strike is good. All it needs is a provision that the effect ends if the target receives magical healing, for consistency with similar effects (like caltrops). It doesn't need a level requirement.
Close Combat is strictly worse than Evasive Footwork unless you can't move at all (a problem that can usually be solved with Pushing Attack.) Also seems too specific to ranged fighters, when most maneuvers are useful to any kind of fighter.
Power Attack is fine power-wise but should be specific to melee weapons and require Strength, similar to a Barbarian's Rage. I don't think it should use a bonus action or need a level requirement.
Penetrating Strike doesn't make sense. No amount of training would let you bypass magical or supernatural resistances. It also lets you bypass resistances to damage types that aren't bludgeoning/piercing/slashing.
Mage Strike rips off Mage Slayer, is too specific to spellcasting enemies but doesn't bring any unique benefits.
Disrupting Strike duplicates the best part of Mage Slayer. It should require using the die up front so there's risk of wasting it if you miss.
Deadly Blow is too redundant with Great Weapon Master (yet doesn't require melee weapons) and obsoletes Sweeping Attack.
Thank you for response. Sorry but your feedback is confusing as you consistntly contradict yourself. You take issue with getting inspiration from feats but then advise to expand an ability to be more like a feat. You mention that maneuvers shouldn't be limited to ranged saying they should be useful to all, and then comment an ability should be limited to Strength based melee fighters. On that note, not one single maneuver is specific to ranged, but several are specific to melee weapon attacks. So, maybe a few that focus on ranged aren't wrong?
I tried writing individual responses to each maneuver comment but they felt too argumentative. Again, thanks for taking the time to answer as it will help me address some overall concerns
On the overall issue of feats, I feel that some of the things require a focus on a feat a central to the build or role of your character. They are big enough that you really want to utilize all the benefits or it would be like taking a stat increase and putting pne of the points in a dump stat. Additionally, WoTC has said the feats have central focuses and then ancillary abilities or effects with a broader use. Right now if you want those ancillary abilities they are locked behind the primary focus of the feat. Sure you could still take it but it is comparable to taking a stat increase and moving two stats to odd numbers. Sure it may be useful at some point, but not so much. If I want a cleave effect enable by great weapon master but don't want to use a heavy melee weapon, I have to suck it up that the signature part of the feat is useless to my character. In practice, the only people "cleaving" are heavy weapon based concepts. Someone taking Mage Slayer is built around getting into melee with casters. Etc
I think it is not useless or minimizing to those feats to give some other option to do part if it as another limited ability. It gives people choices. I think that is important and valuable.
And if another player in a group is built around a feat like that, then, no you don't take an ability that undercuts them without discussing between players. Just like any other ability duplication between any class. That isn't a reason to deny the option.
Occurred to me that some optional rules may not be in use and/Or not desirable to take a feat or fighting style just for one effect. Level would be the character level required to take the ability (in the case of multiclass or martial adept this isn't reliant on fighter level)
Hobbling Strike (7th Level)- when you hit with a weapon attack, you may spend a superiority die to initiate this effect. Add the superiority for to the damage of the attack. The target must make a CON save. If they fail, their speed is reduced to 0 and they cannot benefit from any bonuses to speed until the begining of your next turn.
Close Combat - use a bonus action and expend one superiority die. Until the beginning of your next turn, you do not take disadvantage on ranged attacks when in melee. Note this is not offsetting the disad so you would be eligible to get advantage as normal. If I understand RAW, you could not expend superiority dice on any of those attacks, so I think that balances the potential to affect a lot of attacks.
Power Attack (10th Level) - when you hit with a weapon attack, spend a bonus action to initiate this strike. You may then expend up to your remaining superiority dice and add them to the damage of the attack. Would be nice to have a Nuke option. And, you know, power attack needs to stay in the lore. :)
Penetrating Strike (7th Level) - when you hit with a weapon attack expend one superiority die and add it to the damage of the attack. In addition, the attack ignores the target's resistance to your weapon's damage type. A lot of classes get magic for purpose at 6th. Seems they expect fighter/Barbarian to have a magic weapon by then, but this would be nice too.
Mage strike - when a target within range of the melee weapon you are wielding casts a spell, you may expend a superiority dice and use your reaction to make an attack of opportunity against that target. Add the superiority die to the damage if the attack hits.
Disrupting Strike - when you hit with a weapon attack, expend a superiority die and add it to the damage of the attack. In addition, the target is at disadvantage on the concentration check, if any, caused by this attack.
Deadly Blow - when you reduce an opponent to 0 HP with a weapon attack you may expend a superiority die to use a bonus action to make a weapon attack against another target. If the attack hits, add the superiority die to the damage of the attack.
Comments, feedback, suggestion?
I don't like the level requirements. All of the official maneuvers are roughly on the same power level. If you need to add a level requirement, the maneuver is too strong. Ripping off feats also leaves a really bad taste in my mouth. Fighter already has the most ASIs in the game. Think of how players with only 5 of them would feel if a Fighter could get 80% of the benefit of one of their feats for a fraction of the cost, and still pick extra feats. Anyways, on to the specifics...
Hobbling Strike is good. All it needs is a provision that the effect ends if the target receives magical healing, for consistency with similar effects (like caltrops). It doesn't need a level requirement.
Close Combat is strictly worse than Evasive Footwork unless you can't move at all (a problem that can usually be solved with Pushing Attack.) Also seems too specific to ranged fighters, when most maneuvers are useful to any kind of fighter.
Power Attack is fine power-wise but should be specific to melee weapons and require Strength, similar to a Barbarian's Rage. I don't think it should use a bonus action or need a level requirement.
Penetrating Strike doesn't make sense. No amount of training would let you bypass magical or supernatural resistances. It also lets you bypass resistances to damage types that aren't bludgeoning/piercing/slashing.
Mage Strike rips off Mage Slayer, is too specific to spellcasting enemies but doesn't bring any unique benefits.
Disrupting Strike duplicates the best part of Mage Slayer. It should require using the die up front so there's risk of wasting it if you miss.
Deadly Blow is too redundant with Great Weapon Master (yet doesn't require melee weapons) and obsoletes Sweeping Attack.
The Forum Infestation (TM)
Thank you for response. Sorry but your feedback is confusing as you consistntly contradict yourself. You take issue with getting inspiration from feats but then advise to expand an ability to be more like a feat. You mention that maneuvers shouldn't be limited to ranged saying they should be useful to all, and then comment an ability should be limited to Strength based melee fighters. On that note, not one single maneuver is specific to ranged, but several are specific to melee weapon attacks. So, maybe a few that focus on ranged aren't wrong?
I tried writing individual responses to each maneuver comment but they felt too argumentative. Again, thanks for taking the time to answer as it will help me address some overall concerns
On the overall issue of feats, I feel that some of the things require a focus on a feat a central to the build or role of your character. They are big enough that you really want to utilize all the benefits or it would be like taking a stat increase and putting pne of the points in a dump stat. Additionally, WoTC has said the feats have central focuses and then ancillary abilities or effects with a broader use. Right now if you want those ancillary abilities they are locked behind the primary focus of the feat. Sure you could still take it but it is comparable to taking a stat increase and moving two stats to odd numbers. Sure it may be useful at some point, but not so much. If I want a cleave effect enable by great weapon master but don't want to use a heavy melee weapon, I have to suck it up that the signature part of the feat is useless to my character. In practice, the only people "cleaving" are heavy weapon based concepts. Someone taking Mage Slayer is built around getting into melee with casters. Etc
I think it is not useless or minimizing to those feats to give some other option to do part if it as another limited ability. It gives people choices. I think that is important and valuable.
And if another player in a group is built around a feat like that, then, no you don't take an ability that undercuts them without discussing between players. Just like any other ability duplication between any class. That isn't a reason to deny the option.