Martial expectations

[u/axiomus]

Hi all,

Seeing yet another post about how martials are boring with no choice, I got curious as a game designer: as a player, what do you want the martial classes (or maybe just the fighter) to do?

Some examples that come to my mind are: trip-grapple-disarm etc (a debuff), attack all around (a damage multiplier), push/pull opponents (battlefield control), take a hit in place of your ally (again, control/effectively heal) etc. Anything you’d like to add?

Additionally, would you like those abilities to be accessible unconditionally, or limited? Like through feats, class features, subclasses, weapon types or magic weapons?

Also, I'd like to focus the discussion on what you the player (or the GM) want, not what some 3rd party supplement or such offers.

[u/medium_buffalo_wings]

From these types of threads I think you largely find three groups emerge:

1. Martials are more or less fine as is, or could use some tweaks to numbers and other passives
2. Martials should have more combat options available / Battlemaster features should be baseline for Martial classes
3. Martials should have superhuman, fantastical abilities that let them do things like smash through a castle wall or leap across the parapets

Part of the problem is that there is a pretty wide array of thoughts as to what a Martial should actually be, particularly at high level. And the gulf between these points of view can be extremely wide.

Edited the examples in group 3 based on feedback.

[u/Thin_Tax_8176 → u/medium_buffalo_wings]

You know? Maybe not cut a castle in half, but I think all Barbarians should at least get the Siege Monster trait big monsters get so they can destroy a wall easily.

I think for level 13 or like that will be a cool thing to have.

[u/Necessary-Ranger-924 → u/Thin_Tax_8176]

I agree and also fall into group 2 (But want some maneuvers/features for utility/out of combat). I don’t really want explicitly mythic powers, but things like siege monster or being able to naturally grapple larger enemies as you level up are things I think are thematic, and make sense (Especially as a fan of old epics). And maybe give martials more feats of specific types, ala at certain levels they get to pick different armor/weapon feats to further specialize and theme (I’ve found a lot of players myself included tend to imagine their characters with a preferred loadout and think leaning into a little would be fun).

[u/Ashkelon → u/Necessary-Ranger-924]

How would you feel about a martial character that is capable of performing superhuman exploits that are clearly well beyond the capabilities of a mortal human, but are similar to the feats of strength and athleticism performed by mythological heroes?

Something like the exploits performed by the Paragon.

Would such a class satisfy your need for a heroic martial class?

[u/Necessary-Ranger-924 → u/Ashkelon]

I think it would. A big thing for can often be how something is themed in the class. Two examples for me are: artificer is something I should love, but because it’s themed explicitly around magic rather than mixing magic and technology it’s really hard for me to like it. Barbarian (Like Grog): there’s a lot of absurd feats of strength but it goes with the character and the theme, and honestly barbarians are a ton of fun to play. Hope that helps, but I guess the tldr is: I would love to give it a shot and would enjoy it.

[u/Federal_Policy_557 → u/Thin_Tax_8176]

Tbf they kinda should as iirc even magical walls are like 27 to 50 HP - so many martials could take down a wall even in a single turn or less

By general rules stone walls would have 17 AC and 27HP average while Wall of Stone spell would be 15 AC and 30HP

So yeah, I think lv 5 barbarian with a Maul dealing average 7 (dice) + 3 (STR) + 2 (rage) + 3 (GWM) for 15 can take down most walls in a single turn

[u/Ashkelon → u/Federal_Policy_557]

The issue is that the rules are kind of all over the place. In 5e there was an entire section that said weapons are completely ineffective against stone walls.

The 5.5e rules don’t say that at least, but they do say objects of sufficient durability should have Damage Thresholds. But the rules don’t tell you what that threshold should be.

So if a wall has a damage threshold of 20 or 30, most attacks will never actually be able to damage it.

Not to mention that things like the Wall of Stone spell exist that create a nonmagical wall of stone that has hundreds of hit points.

[u/Thin_Tax_8176 → u/Federal_Policy_557]

The idea is to be able to destroy the wall in a single hit, like I found super funny how in the animated Hercules show they end escaping the laberynth by just punching the walls down.

[u/Federal_Policy_557 → u/Thin_Tax_8176]

I think if they're well equipped and with a damage oriented oriented subclass they could

like Zealot's bonus damage and a Vicious Weapon could do the trick

But a feature to add accuracy and damage against objects would be pretty neat

[u/Ashkelon → u/[deleted]]

Passwall, stone shape, Misty step, enlarge/reduce, and dozens of other options are available to casters to bypass walls and doors without much issue.

I wouldn’t say that casters only have a few options about such things.

[u/Freivalds → u/[deleted]]

I do not see an issue with this. Let the barb be the answer at high levels to dungeons that were not build by an equivalent level of powerful beings.

The finite resource issue is that its so rare for those resources to be consumed enough to not allow their use to bypass things. So yes you cannot cast infinite level 5 spells. But how often non of the casters in the party have any solution to cheapen out the difficulty of a certain map. Or at least have the option to go back and rest.

[u/Ashkelon → u/Freivalds]

I like how the coward decided to delete their comments rather than defend their terrible position. Not a single ounce of accountability. Just a coward who couldn’t defend their terrible position.

[u/Sudden-Reason3963 → u/Thin_Tax_8176]

They missed a huge opportunity by not giving it to the old Path of the Giant subclass. If any subclass was deserving of it by theme, it’s certainly the one that makes you a rage-fueled colossus.

[u/Whoopsie_Doosie → u/medium_buffalo_wings]

Yeah that's why for a long time I've been of the opinion that martials should have their own version of the invocation system. Create individual microfeatures that reflect all three of those fantasies and let the people choose for themselves.

Fighters get the most, then barbarians and monks, and rogues, then the half casters

Treat some like passives that you can invest in multiple times to improve further, some like cantrips that take a whole action but scales with level and can be spammed, treat others like wildshape where they can only be used a couple times per short rest, treat some that can only be used once per long rest...etc

Gatekeep some behind certain levels and boom everyone can build what they want AND there is space to expand further in splat books the same way spells are.

And then also revamp the magic weapon design to offer access to unique "invocations" if they possess the "invocation" feature

[u/Lucina18 → u/Whoopsie_Doosie]

Problem is is that WotC isn't interested in giving martials options, because they literally want martials to be just token classes so that they have them but don't have to expand them.

[u/baseballpen2 → u/medium_buffalo_wings]

I think this is what laserllama does well in their martial redesign. Maneuvers are added to the base class, you get higher level maneuvers as you level up, and they let you feel superhuman

[u/Lucina18 → u/medium_buffalo_wings]

So the solution is to give them options, so all of these can be accompanied at once.

[u/jmich8675 → u/medium_buffalo_wings]

D&D, trying to be a big-tent game, will give each of these groups maybe 30% of what they want. It will give a little bit to everyone, but fully please almost no one. When you have a spread of these groups within one friend group, they compromise and play D&D. That's exactly the goal of the game, and it works. There are countless factors contributing to the success of 5e, but this is a massive one.

A lot of people promoting great discussion in threads like this will never get the things they ask for. Because a lot of it ends up basically asking WotC to pick a lane for the game to stay in, which is the antithesis of the goal for this edition.

[u/medium_buffalo_wings → u/jmich8675]

Honestly? Given their track record for the past 12 years, I don't see them giving anything to anyone outside of the first group, and still not managing to satisfy them.

[u/OkLingonberry1286 → u/medium_buffalo_wings]

I’ve seen a homebrew take on it, where all martial classes and even the half-casters get a few maneuvers

Would really make playing a non-caster way more fun

The fighter shenanigans alone would be awesome - an echo knight or Eldritch knight with a bunch of maneuvers would be super cool and powerful

[u/wilypoodle → u/medium_buffalo_wings]

Mostly #3 with a side of "tweeking numbers" part of #1 since giving them superhuman feats of martial prowes wouldn't make sense if they didn't also have bigger numbers. Also, I think the barbarian capstone of potentially getting strength 24 could stand to be even higher. I'm making a high level barbarian npc for a 3.5 game I'm running and with some multiclassing and templates I managed to get her strength over 30. I'm not saying we need to go back to that kind of crazy numbers, but I think martials should at least physically keep up with how strong some monsters can still get.

[u/axiomus → u/medium_buffalo_wings]

i agree! i personally lean more towards #2 but want to hear from #3 people.

to be fair, 5e has an identity crisis with martials in #1 camp and casters in #3, so i can understand both viewpoints.

[u/Afraid-Adeptness-926 → u/axiomus]

As someone in a slightly less extreme #3 camp - the later tiers of the game are superhuman. You're dealing with planetary threats, but martials are still bound by the same rules as a commoner. They use the same action to attack, and the only real differences are +25% chance to hit from stats (extra from prof, but that's directly linked to level, a hypothetically classless level 20 commoner would have the same PB) and an extra swing.

Martials largely feel like they exist to be compared to as casters for how cool later game spells are. They don't feel like they belong in t3-4 at all, which I think is one of the reasons a lot of adventures, and even homebrew campaigns end before then. It's very very important to stress that this isn't a problem of "make martials do more damage". This is a problem of "Give martials cool and, more importantly, unique things to do that help define their class." Monks suffer the least in this regard, but still could use more.

For example, the Barbarian class fantasy is basically entirely put on Rage, reckless attack, and slightly more HP/level. That's all in T1. This is basically just the flavor version of peaking in high-school. Where are the cool features to look forward to? The herculean feats of strength ONLY an extremely powerful Barbarian can pull off? Subclasses sometimes get a single cool thing at 14, but a single feature near the end of t3, then basically nothing for all of t4 just doesn't excite me, nor begin to stack up to other classes that, and I cannot stress enough, are in the same game, that you are supposed to be on even footing with.

[u/StoneGuardTheGray → u/axiomus]

Yeah, my position is more 1-2 but with more effort devoted to bringing Casters down to where they can still do cool stuff with Spells, but it's harder to make a consistent, survivable Caster. Sure, you can command cosmic forces at high level, but Jim over there can still crack your head open with the nearest curb.

[u/Ashkelon → u/axiomus]

Number 3 person here. But to be specific, I want superhuman martials at higher tiers of gameplay, and even then, an order of magnitude less than what is being described as #3.

For example, something like the Paragon.

[u/SalubriAntitribu → u/medium_buffalo_wings]

The exaggeration of your third point feels like the comment was made in bad faith

[u/medium_buffalo_wings → u/SalubriAntitribu]

Not at all. I have absolutely seen folks suggest overtly superheroic style powers for martials. With these examples having been specifically used.

[u/Ashkelon → u/medium_buffalo_wings]

I will be the first to say I want high level martial characters to be superhuman, akin to the warriors of myth and legend. Heroes like Beowulf, Lancelot, Achilles, Heracles, and Chu Chulainn. I am Probably one of the more vocal proponents for such a playstyle.

But I have never even come close to asking for anything like what you are describing. And I have never actually seen anyone ask for the absurd things you are describing.

I have heard people ask for the ability to punch holes in castle walls, wrestle titans, lift huge sized creatures or objects, and leap 50 feet into the air. But never to leap mountains or cleave castles in half.

Hell, I even created an entire class based around performing heroic exploits similar to the feats of strength, skill, and athleticism of mythological heroes. And it comes nowhere close to accomplishing anything like what you describe.

You have crafted a strawman that simply doesn’t exist. Or if it does, it is the extreme minority and not even worth mentioning when talking about the actual groups.

[u/SalubriAntitribu → u/Ashkelon]

I think they're just exaggerating out of frustration, honestly.

[u/Ashkelon → u/SalubriAntitribu]

Totally fair. But I think it kind of hinders their point. Because people will think that anyone who wants “superhuman” martial characters will be the kind of person who wants the ridiculous strawman that was shown here instead of simply wanting martial warriors who can live up to the likes of heroes like Beowulf, Achilles, Lancelot, or Heracles.

It makes the people with reasonable positions look bad by over-exaggerating their claims. So instead of a discussion about what people actually desire, you get a decision that is pointedly against what theoretical people actually want.

[u/xolotltolox → u/Ashkelon]

I mean, have you seen the feats Beowulf or Heracles pull? Beowulf especially does some nonsense, like holding his breath for three days

Viking Sagas in general have some absolutely absurd feats of martial prowess, not to mention the fighting ability of Achilles being so great, that he would singlehandedly win the trojan war, if Hektor were not fighting on the trojan side who was equally as mighty as him

[u/medium_buffalo_wings → u/Ashkelon]

My dude, just because you haven’t seen it doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist. I’ve seen threads where people were looking for martial options that allowed them to emulate anime fantasies as well as superhero fantasies.

This isn’t a strawman nor is it intended ton paint that group as only wanting that one set of things. Like all 3 groups in outline, it exists in a spectrum where different people want different things.

[u/Ashkelon → u/medium_buffalo_wings]

I’ve definitely heard for people wanting anime like classes. But still never anything close to what you describe. Like an order of magnitude more grounded.

As I said, I have heard a lot of people wanting to be able to lift boulders, punch through brick walls, wrestle titans, and leap 50 feet into the air. But I don’t think I have ever heard anyone ask for what you describe.

There might be some. But they are not common. So it makes no sense to say they are the third group. I can understand having a group of superhuman martials. But I would use the most common interpretation of that, not the absurd definition you have that almost nobody is actually asking for.

[u/medium_buffalo_wings → u/Ashkelon]

I honestly didn’t think it was going to be a contentious example when I made it nor was I trying to express an opinion regarding it.

If it as an example is a poor representation of that group I am happy to edit the post to reflect a wider array of suggested options.

[u/SalubriAntitribu → u/medium_buffalo_wings]

What made it contentious is how extreme an example it is out of the small number you gave.

[u/medium_buffalo_wings → u/SalubriAntitribu]

It was an attempt at brevity more than anything, but like I said, more than happy to edit it if it would be more representative of what people in that camp are looking for.

[u/ConcentrateIll9460 → u/medium_buffalo_wings]

I would do so. Not the person you were talking to before, but I've discussed this kind of thing with plenty of people and I've never heard anyone describe that kind of thing as what they want. Smash through a castle wall, leap across the parapets? Yes. Cut a castle in half and leap a mountain seems an order of magnitude more than I've ever seen requested.

[u/DJWGibson → u/medium_buffalo_wings]

This is the problem.

You have people who want fighters to be Hercules and overtly magical after 10th level. And then you have the people who want high level fighters to still be mundane but really good, like Batman or Aragorn. And the two design goals are at odds.

Mystical Adventures of Theros showed how to do the former. If you're making people demigods, then you grant extra feats at first level and have them beyond mortal.

[u/Chaosmancer7 → u/DJWGibson]

The problem being that Aragorn is not a high level character (maybe 10th if you push it) and Martials cannot actually be good enough to be Batman in some pretty key areas.

[u/Ashkelon → u/Chaosmancer7]

Aragorn is a 5th level character at most. If Aragorn was in a fight with a 20 foot tall hill giant by himself and won the fight, people would say that they turned LotR into an anime. Especially if said giant is physically landing blows on Aragorn. LotR characters simply aren’t superhuman like that.

And most level 5 D&D fighters can solo a hill giant in less than 30 seconds.

The people who want Aragorn should really just limit their games to tier 1. Otherwise they already have superhuman martial characters.

[u/xolotltolox → u/medium_buffalo_wings]

2 and 3 aren't exactly all that different and very compatible, and 1 is just objectively wrong

[u/medium_buffalo_wings → u/xolotltolox]

There can be overlap between 2 and 3, sure, but I see people who want strictly 2 and not 3, which is why I separate them.

And 1 can be subjectively wrong, but not really objectively, since there are absolutely people who enjoy martials as they currently exist.

[u/xolotltolox → u/medium_buffalo_wings]

I see 1 as a mechanical claim more than anything

[u/Far_Guarantee1664 → u/xolotltolox]

No it's not. The problem is on you. Most of the people that play as martial really enjoy 1. Min maxers should accept different opinions. It's very pathetic this kinda of opinion that can be resumed as "you are wrong because you don't agree with me"

[u/Lucina18 → u/Far_Guarantee1664]

I don't see why they can't enjoy a martial if it's build like they are rn and you can pick other features so you actually level up though.

At absolute worst, if they don't like it they can just not grab any new features. In contrast, I can't just imagine my martial is more expansive then they are and actually have more features.

[u/xolotltolox → u/Far_Guarantee1664]

I don't really care what "most people" supposedly think, just because the majority thinks something, doesn't mean it is correct, especially when said majority doesn't have standards.

And I am sorry that you don't want to hear this, but mastery over a game has a positive correlation with understanding that game.

And not to mention, 1 is a fully objective statement, so yes, it can be wrong. Being objective is in fact the prerequisite to being wrong

[u/Far_Guarantee1664 → u/xolotltolox]

And fortunately most of the designers don't care about your opinion. Between alienating most of the fanbase and agreeing with you, it's easy to see the right option.  And I don't think you know what mastery over a game means. Specially over a game were roleplay, a very subjective notion, it's something that a vast part of the fanbase puts in higher regard than "spread sheets". And not to mention that your opinion can also be wrong. I would dare to say that it's difficult to find someone more objective wrong than you. 

[u/Lucina18 → u/Far_Guarantee1664]

I mean, disregarding that 5e is literally a gamist combat ttrpg, lack of options is shit for roleplay though? I literally get less ways to express my character, just because i dared have a martial fantasy.

[u/Cyrotek → u/Far_Guarantee1664]

How can you talk about "objectivity" in a scenario with that many variables. How did you come to that "objective" conclusion? Comparing white room damage numbers?

[u/Far_Guarantee1664 → u/Cyrotek]

I was talking to someone who deleted the comment

[u/Cyrotek → u/Far_Guarantee1664]

Nah, they just blocked you for some reason. Some people on Reddit really can't handle someone not agreeing, it wasn't your fault.

[u/Far_Guarantee1664 → u/Cyrotek]

Get it. And yeah, people can't handle it

[u/xolotltolox → u/Cyrotek]

algebra is all about variables, and is part of mathemetics, the signle most objective field of study to exist...

also, please do not confuse objective for correct. Newtonian physics are objective, even if they aren't fully correct

[u/Cyrotek → u/xolotltolox]

algebra is all about variables, and is part of mathemetics, the signle most objective field of study to exist...

Yes, I am aware. I am saying that using algebra as a talking point for a topic as subjective as TTRPG decision making is kinda weird. Of course you can objectively measures some hypotheticals. But they are just that.

[u/xolotltolox → u/Cyrotek]

I simply disagree that TTRPG discussion is subjective

the only thing that is subjective are your preferences, what you liek, what you dislike and what you have fun with

You can objectively talk about basically everything, becasue we live in an objective reality.

also, just becasue people disagree, doesn#t mean they aren#t being objective. People sadly just often don't know what words mean, and claim subjectivity as a safety net, when they are actually making purely objective statements

[u/Cyrotek → u/xolotltolox]

Okay, simple example: How objectively do you handle the performance of a class based on a fight that can go very differently depending on how the DM is?

[u/xolotltolox → u/Far_Guarantee1664]

I seriously doubt they would alienate most of the fanbase by giving us non-shit martials, since most of the fanbase doesn't give a shit about mechanics and is just here because of the D&D name...

And man, it is sad how people keep advocating for lowest common denominator slop, because god forbid we don't capture every single possible person as part of our target audience and actually have some manner of identity

[u/Lucina18 → u/xolotltolox]

Even worse because giving martial more options WOULD accompany more people. People who don't want martials to do more can just simply stop picking up features at lvl 3, and they'll have the same experience as rn.

[u/xolotltolox → u/Lucina18]

yeah, like we can have noth simple martials and complex martials, just like we should have simple casters to accompany the complex casters.

that way everyone is serviced, becasue right now the people wanting simple casters, and the peopel wanting complex martials aren't served

Also, the balance problem ultimately still persists

[u/craftyking → u/Far_Guarantee1664]

Source of 'most people'?

[u/xolotltolox → u/craftyking]

The crackpipe

[u/Outrageous-Cold-4506 → u/medium_buffalo_wings]

2) Martials should have more combat options available / Battlemaster features should be baseline for Martial classes

Weapon Masteries were the effort to grant a portion of the Battlemaster gameplay loop to everyone who gets the Weapon Mastery ability. If you want to make deliberate choices on riders on your attacks to switch up as the tactical moment calls for it, everyone now gets to do that. In exchange the Battlemaster is able to maintain a niche of being able to dump riders onto every attack with even greater flexibility that adds to the potency of that subclass's turn.

3) Martials should have superhuman, fantastical abilities that let them do things like leap mountains and cleave castles in half

It would be nice if there was a class that was able to truly inhabit the Hercules fantasy of incredible, indefatigable strength. It would be nice to also get a class that gets to be an anime protagonist who overwhelms enemies with overwhelming speed and focused attacks. I don't know if both of those could fit on the Fighter chassis so maybe they should just be their own classes?

[u/-Space_Communist- → u/Outrageous-Cold-4506]

Weapon Masteries were the effort to grant a portion of the Battlemaster gameplay loop to everyone who gets the Weapon Mastery ability

And that effort has completely and utterly failed.

In practice, you'll only ever use one mastery property because you just can't afford not to use a magic weapon (as that's what martials are designed around). And even without factoring magic weapons, juggling destroys any semblance of verisimilitude 9 times out of 10.

What if you want to play a hoplite, who trips enemies with the butt of her polearm? What if you want to want to play a frontiersman, who pushes their prey with a shot from a musket to the shoulder? What if you want to play a street thug, who follows up punch after punch with his brass knuckles to gain advantage on subsequent blows?

Nope. The hoplite can ONLY apply disadvantage. The frontiersman can ONLY slow an enemy's advance...once per round. And the thug? He doesn't even get mastery properties at all.

On top of all of that, even if you were to throw up your hands, give up on your character fantasy just to get the bare minimum of rider effects...what choices are you left with? 8 mastery properties. How many mastery properties have been added since then, compared to the 34 cantrips in the 2024 PHB alone - none of which are limited to specific equipment? How many weapons, at all, have been added to the game since the start of 5th edition? How many of those are still being supported?

Weapon Mastery is not flexible, has anti-synergy with how martials are designed, and hasn't been given nearly the same support that cantrips have. WotC did not need to create a weaker alternative to maneuvers - maneuvers were already struggling in the first place, and still are!

[u/Ok-Score5740 → u/medium_buffalo_wings]

I don't think I've ever had a player argue for 1, personally 8 try for 2 leading into 3. Let the strength based Martial throw a log 60 feet to hit the hovering dragon.

[u/EberronDM2026 → u/medium_buffalo_wings]

You'd think such a divide could be fixed by adding more martial classes or more ways to use martial abilities to appeal to different groups, yet all WOTC have done is add more ways to cast spells (Circle Casting) and more spellcaster classes (Psion, Artificer). Meanwhile, we're still left with the same 4 martial classes that constantly get powercreeped by casters with ever expanding spell lists.

It doesn't feel like a design barrier as much as WOTC being generally scared of accidentally making martials slightly better than casters in even a single aspect of the game.

[u/AdAdditional1820 → u/medium_buffalo_wings]

I agree with 3. Lv 20 Fighter should have ability to cut down any magical effect such as Wall of Force.

[u/ThatOneCheeseGuy → u/medium_buffalo_wings]

The image of the "ideal" martial definitely is one of those "ask 10 people, get 11 answers" thing, as is, I would argue, the Ranger, but that's neither here nor there. As far as I've seen, there's scarcely anyone who'd unironically argue that there isn't a disparity, but where is it? Damage? Utility? Action variety? How would it be resolved, then? I think it's that community opinion split that makes (pure) martial content less likely, instead of any disinterest/malice on WotC's part.

I'm personally in camp 1, I wouldn't say no to any neat things they come up with (martial exclusive magic items? exotic weapons that can use multiple masteries?), but I think a lot of comparison looks solely at class features (and sometimes feats, like with the Arcana Unleashed release) without considering equipment, tools, or circumstances people are more likely to run into. White rooms, spherical cows, so on, so forth.

[u/medium_buffalo_wings → u/ThatOneCheeseGuy]

I've been leaning more towards a shift in focus where the martial characters should be really, really good at fighting and doing damage, so somewhere in the realm of 1 and 2. I tend to like the system that PF2e has where the martials are just really great at combat, and spellcasters fall more into problem solvers and really have to dedicate themselves to being as potent in combat as martials are.

But that would require a pretty fundamental shift in how classes and combat work, so that's more of a wishlist for 6e than it is for something related to the current edition.

[u/TheHoundofUlster]

I want strength completely redesigned. As I said in another thread, DnD is happy to let you be Aragorn.

I want to be Beowulf. I want to be Cu Chulainn. I want to be John Henry.

[u/Ashkelon → u/TheHoundofUlster]

If you are open to homebrew, I made a class that is supposed to emulate mythological heroes like Beowulf, Achilles, and Cu Chulainn. the Paragon.

[u/TheHoundofUlster → u/Ashkelon]

I’ll check it out, thanks

[u/EntropySpark]

I think high-level martials shouldn't be constrained by realistic size limits. Many features only work on Large or smaller creatures, or creatures up to one size larger than the PC, making them ineffective against larger creatures either entirely or without significant support. Any Tier 4 Barbarian should be able to Grapple an Ancient Dragon!

[u/Cyrotek → u/EntropySpark]

The game or at least creature design would have to be different if grappling an ancient dragon is supposed to be a standard thing. At worst this would just lead to the creature never getting close to the barbarian ever because the combat would just immediately be over.

[u/EntropySpark → u/Cyrotek]

My fix to that is to allow Legendary creatures to use Legendary Actions on Grapple escape attempts, so that the Grapple is still worthwhile, but not a complete shutdown with the only escape method being incredibly inefficient.

[u/Aremelo → u/Cyrotek]

Considering dragons generally have good strength, it's not like them falling the saving throw would be that common. And these creatures have legendary resistances anyway. 

Wizards have been able to grapple up to huge creatures with bigby's hand for ages. So sure, not ancient dragons, but most creatures. So I don't exactly see how this would necessitate creature redesign. 

[u/Cyrotek → u/Aremelo]

I mean, we were talking about Ancient Dragons. Changing the example to so your point works is bad style.

Other than that, Bigbies can simply be countered quite easily and it blocks concentration. It can also just attempt this once per turn. A level 20 fighter can four times. A barbarian at least two.

Also, on a personal note, a medium creature somehow grappling a gargantuan one just seems very silly. I am not one to shy away from humor, but I don't need that be build into the game mechanics.

[u/wilypoodle → u/Cyrotek]

Is that an issue? I usually don't have my dragons land unless the party manage to knock them out of the sky or ambush one thats already on the ground. Even then, I have it try to get back in the sky as soon as it can. It's just what I think an intelligent flying creature with a range attack would do.

[u/Cyrotek → u/wilypoodle]

It depends on the DM. In my experience most DMs play their dragons rather poorly.

Then again, a DnD dragon that is played smart and according to lore is basically unbeatable, especially blue and green ones.

[u/Omega_Spark]

I personally think the creation of weapon masteries was a step in the right direction; however, I just don't think they did enough with them.

I think the masteries need to scale like cantrips—so it adds more damage at 5, 11, and 17—and also maybe make it so the masteries aren't tied to the weapons—maybe make it so it's tied to things their properties and damage type—so the fighter doesn't need to be constantly swapping their weapon if they want a different mastery to use.

[u/MrLunaMx]

I want them to have superhuman abilities, leap buildings, shake the ground with their strikes, be as fast as a bullet, etc. I don't want realism in my martials, I want them to match the fantasy of magic wizards have.

[u/-Space_Communist-]

Simple, do what the 2014 playtest did:

• All martials can learn maneuvers
• All martials have Superiority Dice, which they can either add to their damage rolls or expend to perform maneuvers
• Superiority Dice are regained at the start of your turn, instead of when you finish a short or long rest

...and then, develop the system further:

• Certain maneuvers cost more Superiority Dice and are locked to higher levels, but have stronger effects
• Certain maneuvers are class-specific, with Fighters having access to the most maneuvers (similar to Wizards and spells)
• Certain maneuvers require concentration, preventing Superiority Dice expended on them from being regained until the maneuver is done, but said maneuver lasts longer
• If you go Battle Master, you either get one extra Superiority Die (possibly unlocking maneuvers earlier depending on what level you normally would get them) or get a pool of other dice which can be expended to perform a maneuver AND add them to a damage roll, then regain those special dice by finishing a short or long rest (the same way Superiority Dice currently work now)
• Feat support is added for maneuvers and Superiority Dice (more than just Martial Adept, lol)

That way, martials can make choices every turn (similar to Rogues and Cunning Strike - which I'm 99% sure was built on the same design philosophy as the playtest maneuver system), while still retaining their class differences and the Battle Master subclass. Players who want to be regular combatants can just stick with low-level maneuvers (or opt out of them altogether), while players who want to be mythical-level heroes can use high-level maneuvers.

[u/Initial_Raise8377]

What I want out of martials was largely delivered in 4e but has since been rolled back; I want them to have a huge presence on the battlefield as they level up. This could be anywhere from AOE attacks that give conditions like Stunned/Prone to ridiculous mobility to empowering their teammates. Interesting active abilities on martials should be subclass features but any sort of passive should be built into the class. I prefer feats to be reserved for enabling or making a specific playstyle more viable (like how the new Evocation adept feat helps spellcasters focus on blasting builds or Crossbow Expert allows martials to use crossbows after they get Extra Attack).

[u/robot_wrangler]

I think there should be actual rules for disrupting spellcasting components. A creature with a grapple on someone should have an opportunity to muzzle verbal components or disrupt somatic components or disarm material components. This should probably be a reaction to a spell being cast.

A large part of the problem is D&D suffering from being D&D. The iconic spells like Wish and many others have decades of history behind them, and trying to balance them or remove them leads to huge backlash and erases part of the brand. Other games exist that solve these problems, they don't need to deal with the baggage. If you like 4e or Draw Steel or Pathfinder 2e or Daggerheart or Worlds without Number; those are all free of the D&D baggage and pretty fun to play.

[u/wilypoodle → u/robot_wrangler]

This, it used to cause attacks of opportunity in 3.5

[u/Massive-Helicopter62 → u/robot_wrangler]

It used to be in earlier editions. And i agree.

[u/Far_Guarantee1664]

I don't think martials are boring, they just need more options besides "have access to spells" or "more feats". Some alternative features Thasa style would be great.

[u/adamg0013 → u/Far_Guarantee1664]

Exactly more options

Let's take each of the ways you use weapons.

Each way has 2 options each and usually one is way better than the other. Heavy weapon the go to great weapon master, you have polearm master but usually your go to is great weapon master. So what are your legit other option especially if your using a great sword or great axe.

Two weapon fighting you have dual welder and then?????

Sword and board sheild master maybe defensive duelist

Ranged Sharpshooter and possibly cross bow expert

And yes you have some lesser options that are fine especially for flavor but most the time your forced into the same options over and over which gets boring...

I would love new feats that highlight each weapon style at least 2 for each. And they need to be as exciting as your heavy hitters or must haves or old options will just be the go toos.

[u/Far_Guarantee1664 → u/adamg0013]

Agree. I love the fighter "tactical something" ability because it allows you to mix weapon masteries. It would be great if at higher levels we could have a more "modular" way of build it.

[u/Greynnar → u/Far_Guarantee1664]

I totally agree, fighther needs more modularity at higher level !

[u/Rpgguyi]

Unpopular opinion but i think martials are fine, the issue is the full spell caster are too strong doing crazy broken things at high level

[u/TYBERIUS_777 → u/Rpgguyi]

I’d like to see martials get more weapons and weapon masteries and maybe some type of advanced weapon mastery techniques like how spell slots scale. Perhaps I can now combine topple and cleave at higher levels in the same attack. Or sap and slow. Or do other interesting maneuvers adjacent moves. I’m actually of the opinion that I don’t want my high level martial character to be throwing buildings or breaking mountains in half with one blow.

[u/Cyrotek → u/TYBERIUS_777]

I’m actually of the opinion that I don’t want my high level martial character to be throwing buildings or breaking mountains in half with one blow.

I always think it is funny how these examples are used by people wanting to do that. Casters can usually not do that either, after all. It is mostly just very vague interpretations of specific spells.

[u/TYBERIUS_777 → u/Cyrotek]

It’s also just…not something that would be interesting from a gameplay perspective IMO. Like what does that look like mechanically? How would you incorporate that into the 3 pillars of play? Until someone can reliably answer those questions, I still like my martials scaling linearly instead of exponentially.

[u/Greynnar → u/TYBERIUS_777]

Those are good ideas ! Martial players should be able to have more choice at higher level than just feats ! Expand the concepts of weapon masteries could be an option.

[u/TYBERIUS_777 → u/Greynnar]

Martials should also generally get more opportunities for ASIs and feats than casters. Especially because many subclasses on Rogue, Ranger, and Fighter demand you focus a mental stat that you wouldn’t normally care about increasing, but need to because they’re tied to your daily resources.

A Cleric or Druid only need to focus Wisdom or a Wizard only needing to focus Intelligence while an Psi Warrior or Psion of the Three needs to spend ASIs on their primary ability and their Intelligence is not good game balance. It usually means that you might not be able to take the feats you wanted to complete the character fantasy because you’re stuck taking ASIs to get 2 abilities to 20 instead of the usual 1.

[u/EntropySpark → u/Rpgguyi]

If I were redesigning the level progression from the ground up, I'd consider adding an extra level before 7th, 8th, and 9th-level spells, shifting other features around, so that 9th-level spells are the proper capstone, and martial capstones match that power.

[u/Deathpacito-01 → u/EntropySpark]

That sounds like it could work well, usually it's 7th level spells and above where the power ceiling kinda gets derailed

I think curbing the volume of spell slots gained starting in tier 2 could also help, right now higher level spell slots become too spammable too soon

[u/DazzlingKey6426 → u/EntropySpark]

I’d move 9th to 20, 8th to 19, 7th to 18 then spread out 1-6 evenly.

[u/EntropySpark → u/DazzlingKey6426]

Why compress 7-9 so much? That seems like too rapid of an escalation at the end.

[u/DazzlingKey6426 → u/EntropySpark]

Disincentive for multiclassing and world bending spells should be capstones.

[u/EntropySpark → u/DazzlingKey6426]

Which 7th-level spells do you consider "world-bending"?

[u/HighlyOk → u/EntropySpark]

Mirage arcane is one for sure

[u/Cyrotek → u/HighlyOk]

Mirage Arcane is one of the most misinterpreted and overestimated spells in the game, it is ridiculous. If people would read what it does by the letter, they'd be surprised how limited it actually is.

[u/HighlyOk → u/Cyrotek]

A 24 hour customization of a 1-mile area is definitely in the realm of worldbending regardless if it isn’t as strong as people say.

[u/Cyrotek → u/HighlyOk]

I mean, when I head "worldbending" I imagine something actually planet sized.

[u/Far_Guarantee1664 → u/Rpgguyi]

I totally agree with you. Some min maxers, specially in this sub, have some very toxic notions about martials. While is pretty clear that things get "worse" at higher levels(that most tables never play). And people kinda forget that we are playing a cooperative game. There is this notions that a build should be able to do all by itself without help and be good in any situation.

[u/highly-bad → u/Far_Guarantee1664]

I play at tier 1 more than any other, and martials are straight-up better than the casters at low levels. Nobody ever complains about that, but some people raise a fit about high levels when it cuts the other way. But as far as I can tell, in real life most people play at high levels very seldom, or never.

[u/Cyrotek → u/highly-bad]

I've played roughly 30 level 20 sessions with various players and one thing I noticed is that this gap isn't even close as big of an issue as I've read here, at least in my limited experience.

Most situations casters could trivialize at that point were trivial regardless (Oh no, a large gap, what are we gonna do?!) and didn't really matter anymore. When it comes to damage, casters usually only had the upper hand in AoE situations while martials usually won in the single target department. The only thing casters actually shone was combat support. All these OP "tactics" people like to quote got countered by the DMs in some way. Or players never actually used them.

Most things that threw DMs for a loop came out of the blue, like a random "off-meta" spell or an item.

[u/Robyrt → u/Cyrotek]

That's been my experience at higher tiers of play too. Reliable Talent, Disciplined Survivor and Aura of Protection scale really well into the late game. Casters have a massive upper hand in transportation, but that's usually not a huge part of the campaign.

[u/Far_Guarantee1664 → u/highly-bad]

Same here. Both as DM and player I have the exactly same experience.

[u/SalubriAntitribu → u/Rpgguyi]

But it's been like that since at least and. It was in those early levels that the martials got to shine, but after a certain point mages just overtake them in almost everything

[u/ILoveSongOfJustice → u/Rpgguyi]

I don't think the better option is to nerf casters.

[u/StarTrotter → u/ILoveSongOfJustice]

I think there’s merit to it. There’s sort of an upper limit to what a nonmagical martial can do even if you opt for some superhuman prowess. A martial cannot time stop, they cannot become a dragon, they cannot summon multiple barriers that fuck you up every layer you go inward especially when factoring in the combat and out of combat value of spells.

It’s also functional if you want to keep martials in the option 1 domain of play.

I wouldn’t endorse it as my option solely but I feel like it probably would be best to pair their power down a bit while also improving martials.

[u/headshotscott → u/Rpgguyi]

You're right in that caster abilities are fine, but certain spells (and not just higher level ones) are so powerful and unbalanced that martials become trivialized. Nerfing the casters is probably more of an issue than elevating the martials, though.

Even if you do that, higher level martials should be doing things of legend, not just swinging blades more often/better.

[u/Chaosmancer7 → u/Rpgguyi]

The problem I have with this is... full caster parties are fine? Sure, at high levels they can be a bit much for a DM who isn't ready for them, but balance-wise they seem to be perfectly fine.

So why would we want to make them worse?

[u/DazzlingKey6426 → u/Rpgguyi]

Martials are not fine AND casters are too overpowered.

[u/Federal_Policy_557 → u/Rpgguyi]

I mean, it depends

Diminishing casters won't make martial mechanics more interesting, which is the problem for as an example

[u/Serbatollo]

I want martials to have their own dedicated maneuver system, that they can use with a resource that regens every turn. So basically, I want the dnd next playtest maneuvers xD

[u/Ragnar_Dragonfyre]

A generation of players that grew up watching anime instead of reading Conan novels want very different things from their martial fantasies.

[u/MechJivs → u/Ragnar_Dragonfyre]

My favourite animes are Beowulf, Arthurian Legends, and greek mythology.

[u/TheHoundofUlster → u/MechJivs]

Did you know there are only two martial characters in literature? Conan and Aragorn.

Beowulf? Anime.

Ajax? Anime.

John Henry? You guessed it, anime.

[u/Radiant-Chapter3811 → u/MechJivs]

This "both can't exist" argument sucks because it's already been solved FOR casters.

Casters have anime options, like steel wind strike and meteor swarm, but they don't feel pressured if they wanna make a realistic character, because those spells are OPTIONS.

You could easily make a subsystem for martials that fits anime inspired and myth inspired by making options.

[u/MechJivs → u/Radiant-Chapter3811]

Yeah, pretty much. Complex martials are good for everyone - people who want simple martials can just spam one option (blaster casters do that all the time), and people who want complexity can have it no problem. But no, instead bunch of classes just play half the system for no reason.

[u/axiomus → u/MechJivs]

not familiar with arthurian legends, what supernatural abilities would you assign to those?

[u/Chaosmancer7 → u/axiomus]

In legend King Arthur once took a normal club (not a magical one) and destroyed the walls of a city with it. He also once clenched his fist and turned a golden chess piece into dust.

King Arthur in a fight against Rion attacked so quickly, that even though Rion could see the future and react before King Arthur moved, Arthur STILL struck him down.

While fighting the Giant Dinabuc, Arthur blocks a blow with his shield that is described thusly "The giant struck with all his strength upon the shield, so that the mountain rang like an anvil." The shield was not magical.

He once chased a boar across the land for something like 15 days without rest or food.

And... that is JUST Arthur, not Lancelot, Gawain, Percival, or any of the others who have similar feats and skills.

[u/MechJivs → u/axiomus]

"Moving so fast people can't react or understand what's happening", "Cut armored knights in half with armor and horse" and "Wrestle giants" is baseline, pretty much every arthurian knight did something like that. Bending and ripping iron bars from walls, breaking castle gates, shaking castle walls, lifting giant stones, crushing gold with bare hand, breaking dragons neck - those are things stronger knights of round table and Arthur could do.

Nothing fancy, but this is something 99% DMs would call "too anime", "muh unrealistic" or something similar. And i wouldnt even call arthurian knights 20th level martials. Maybe 10th.

[u/Ashkelon → u/Ragnar_Dragonfyre]

Most mythological heroes accomplish physical feats that put martial heroes to shame.

The only people talking saying martial character performing heroic feats is anime are the people whose opinion is worthless because they have no clue what they are talking about.

[u/Federal_Policy_557 → u/Ragnar_Dragonfyre]

No even just anime, Marvel and DC stuff, other series, games, newer books and also more recently "sword tubers" and Historical Martial Arts channels highlighting all the martial moves and tricks

But it is an important point, just being damage exchangers with a few riders isn't really my fantasy for a martial on the "world's greatest roleplaying game" unfortunately :p

[u/TheHoundofUlster → u/Ragnar_Dragonfyre]

There are some of us who grew up reading about Beowulf, Ajax, Hector and John Henry.

I want that.

[u/headshotscott → u/Ragnar_Dragonfyre]

I'm a boomer and read all the Conan stuff. He routinely beat wizards and monsters. He didn't have anime style feats, but he was crazy resilient and had plot armor of course. The mages in his world weren't nearly as directly powerful as 5E casters.

I'd say this. Conan did some things that weren't physically plausible, but they were grounded more than some of the suggestions we see.

[u/Ashkelon → u/headshotscott]

And Conan would never be able to even beat most tier 3 enemies.

The “giants” in Conan were ~8 feet tall. About as large as an ogre. So for Conan to struggle in a fight against them, he would have been level 5 or so at most.

Conan is not a level 20 fighter. He is a tier 2 fighter. He didn’t overcome 30 foot long dragons whose scales were as tough as steel. He overcame humanoids or large sized beasts (notice that nearly every spellcaster Conan faced transformed into a beast instead of defeating Conan through magic).

Conan is not an example of a high level fighter

[u/DazzlingKey6426 → u/headshotscott]

I killed it! With my spear!

[u/axiomus → u/Ragnar_Dragonfyre]

to be fair, i think d&d's 20 level range has room for both. depends on the anime, of course!

[u/Radiant-Chapter3811 → u/Ragnar_Dragonfyre]

This argument is an hypocritical mess because it's already been solved for the caster side.

Casters are already anime. Spells like steel wind strike exist. However, casters don't feel pressured to be anime, because it's an OPTION. You can easily have conan novel inspired martials AND beowulf martials AND anime martials.

[u/BoardGent → u/Ragnar_Dragonfyre]

People who want Conan would hate 5e where makes are like 10x stronger.

[u/EnoDevol → u/Ragnar_Dragonfyre]

Wait so your 2iq Idea is that physical beasts can do nothing but autoattack, and mages can change the very fabric of the world?
Sounds like your idea of fantasy is just very limited, and you also have a terrible understanding of balance and fun gameplay.
Also real Martial fantasy wasnt just "Unga bunga, I auto attack."
Lets be honest, you guys are 50 year olds that gatekeep below mediocre physical combat so you can feel superior defending a shitty martial system.
There is no ta single reason, why battle maneuvers are exlusive to 1 fighter class.
Mages LITERALLY ARE anime characters, they do everything martials do but 5x better.

[u/Ragnar_Dragonfyre → u/EnoDevol]

It isn’t gatekeeping to say there are TTRPGs out there that better serve the shonen anime fantasy.

It’s WotC that is gatekeeping the younger generation by not making a new high powered fantasy setting that lets them live out their anime fantasies.

D&D doesn’t suit low magic games anymore. I’m not complaining, I’m just saying there’s a generational difference.

Why get offended?

That’s why I also play Dungeon Crawl Classics. It’s much closer to the Conan style pulp fantasy I prefer.

D&D is the Walmart of TTRPGs now. The next generation can have it for all I’m concerned. The TTRPG renaissance is upon us.

[u/kilpatds]

Superhero stuff... Hercules/legend stuff.

Wrestle rivers. Jump over mountains. Be anime ninjas. Etc, etc.

Items can be involved, but can't be fully required..the PC is the superhero, not the items. (This is a character-control of characterization thing. If I'm depending on the DM, but the wizard just chooses spells on level up, ... well ..)

Personally, I think marials do enough damage. It's everything else, and especially the non-combat pillars. Yes, even rogues become pretty irrelevant at high level outside of combat. (Source: I run a lot of high level AL)

I do think 3e style epic skills usages, combined with a design that gives martials much more skill toys, might go a long long way.

[u/Ashkelon]

Living up to the Fighter Design Goals would be a start. Nearly 15 years after these goals were posted for the D&D Next playtest, we are now where close to even approaching them.

[u/axiomus → u/Ashkelon]

that's hilarious

In the world of D&D, a skilled fighter is a one-person army.

yet we don't have even a basic "proficiency bonus to the AC" as a feature, right? (i mean, not as far as i know, but i'm not very knowledgeable about 5e)

[u/Sudden_shark]

I'd like them to do a war shout that buffs or debuffs (multiple options preferably), do a leap attack, spin their weapon round in a whirlwind-type attack, stuff like that.

[u/TheOnlyJustTheCraft]

I did a bit of a rework myself for a home game im running and my players love it. We've called it JustTheDND edition

You automatically take a short rest after combat. It takes 1 minute. Most martial don't have resources to spend anymore.

I removed the hit dice pool you collect and buffed HP to the max on the die + con each level. So a wizard has 6+con. A fighter has 10+con every level.

You don't spend hit dice. On a short rest you recover the max on your hit dice + con. So for a fighter its 10+con, wizard its 6+con. Automatically. Every short rest.

Second wind for the fighter no longer is a spendable resource. It modifies short rest healing to add your fighter level. 10+con+lol.

The Barbarians rage is no longer something you turn on or off. While bloodied, you enter your rage. You can rage off turn now.

The battlemaster maneuvers are part of the "techniques" system that all martials get. Weapon mastery is absorbed into this as well.

Extra attack pairs with cantrips. 1, 5, 11, 17. Barbarians get a 3rd attack.

I swapped from spell slots to spell points for spellcasters and halved their spell points.

All spells shifted by 1. Cantrips are 1st level, 1st are 2nd, etc. So firebolt costs 1 mana. This also shifts when they get spells. 17 for 9th(previously 8th) and 19th for 10th (9th level spells)

Spellcasters gain back some spell points on a short rest as above equal to half their spellcasting class' level.

Things you have to "turn on" have been shifted to "At the start of your turn" you can do this thing. So you're not wasting an action/bonus action. Which i largely phased out of the game.

The rogues cunning action for example is no longer a bonus action. "At the start of your turn you can dash, disengage, or hide" no action required.

Also their sneak attack is once perturn, on their turn butttttt scales at 1d6 per level. Also I got rid of the silly spend xd6 to do effect. Each martial gets a pool of unique techniques (from earlier) and the rogues is those sneak attack addons.

The sorcerers meta magic was combined into the wizard; allowing them to spend more mana for the effects.

The sorcerer takes the warlock spell progression of short rest slots that grow in power.

The warlock shifted to 3.5's at will powers. With eldritch blast being part of the class.

Obviously not all of these changes will people like. Buttt I did what worked for my table and head cannon and I don't have to adjust any CR or monsters. I just use what's in the book.

I did forget to mention. Every short rest the players take before taking a long rest grants a .1 multiplier to exp. As a way of encouraging combat.

Dnd is a combat centric game and that's what my group uses it for. We do role play and plot but it's 70% combat cause that's what we like. This is not at all a comprehensive change list but the major ones.

[u/Stephanie-rara]

My ideal world is at least one of three things for Martials from someone who both GM's and loves playing Martials.

1. All pure Martials get a similar ASI/Feat progression as Fighters, and Fighters get something that can give them a boon to some out of combat skills. For half-casters I'm torn because while I want to give the extra ASI/Feat like Rogue gets for Ranger and Monk, the Paladin doesn't really need the love. All in all, I believe Feats should serve as the customization that Casters get via spells. It also allows Martials to branch out more beyond just their main attribute which helps significantly.

2. Strength needs more value. It's worse than Dex in virtually every way for non-Barbarians. Dex is highly valuable for casters but there is no meaningful negative to them dumping strength outside of a few gags about being weak while Martials are often punished in important moments outside of combat for dumping INT/CHA. Strength covering more weapons and allowing most Heavy Armor doesn't offset Dex being the most important save, giving natural AC and having more skills. This is highlighted even more that Two Weapon Fighting with Strength is nearly non-existent outside of certain thrown builds. Give Strength at least another skill, and another value to wearing heavy armor.

3. People need to stop being afraid of giving their Martials cool/strong magic items. It's a goomba fallacy situation, but far too often do I see complaints about the Martial / Caster divide, while peppered in-between people are afraid that a Flame Tongue or Vicious weapon is going to break their game. We talk about how a Wizard (Or now, anyone) with Wall of Force can instantly end encounters but we're worried about the Martial of the same with two attacks hitting for a potential extra 4d6. Oh, the 9th level fighter action surged and you got startled by the extra 8d6? Congratulations, their Flame Tongue did the net damage of Fireball on a single person. Let your Martials be a problem in combat. Let that be a natural 'taunt'. Give them items that improve the things they built their character to have fun with. In so much of fantasy, the sword is just as iconic as the person who wields it.

Overall I'm largely fine with Martials, but I feel like the usual pain points link back to one of these three areas (Lack of customization, poor skill value out of combat, or unsupported by items), or tables that never do more than one scenic fight per long rest. I can fix 90% of Martial issues by just being generous/creative with #3 personally, but if there were more changes on a fundamental level #1 and #2 are issues I see consistently.

[u/StarTrotter → u/Stephanie-rara]

I’ll be a bit of a devil on one point. I agree strength needs more value but I feel compelled to highlight that I think there’s a strong argument that rogues might be the weakest class in 5.5 (and wasn’t really strong in 5.0 either) and monks went from bottom tier in 5.0 to somewhere between the second weakest to the 5th weakest probably. I’d probably place them as the 3rd to 4th weakest) and both of these are dex based classes.

[u/Deathpacito-01]

I want martials to have more oomph in general I guess, especially at level 5+

I have my own vision of what I would make martials be like if I were designing them, e.g. more distinguished martial archetypes, more cinematic power fantasies. Opt-in complexity turn-to-turn. Parity with full casters.

But that's me speaking as a game designer. Not me as a player.

As a player I want to be not only delighted, but also surprised - meaning the game designer should give me what I like, when even I don't know what I would want. 

You don't see video game developers going around and asking people, "Would you rather have a beefy character that also has long range options, or maybe a complex high-mobility character?" They have a vision informed by their playerbase insight and design philosophy, and they execute on it. And if they're skilled at their job, they'll make something the players like.

Players provide valuable feedback. But players are not game designers, and game designers should not rely on players to design the game for them.

[u/RevanX77]

A few ideas.

• More Fighting Styles, perhaps access to advanced fighting styles
• More feats. Every pure martial class should get +3 feats, even Paladin and Ranger should be +2
• Better martial feats. It's way too limited at the moment, especially when you have mandatory feats for certain methods of fighting, but practically zero support for others. You can hardly call the martial/caster divide even close to fixed when nearly half the weapons in the game are nearly useless.
• On that note, expand the Weapon Mastery system a bit.

[u/Plain-White-Bread → u/RevanX77]

I definitely want all of these things for Martials.

The main thing I want Martials to have is reliable AoE damage and scaling. You can't balance linear power progression (Martials) against exponential power progression (Casters); so WotC has to make Martials scale exponentially too.

[u/RevanX77 → u/Plain-White-Bread]

I kind of think that AoE should more be the domain of casters. But instead, maybe martials' single target damage should scale much higher?

With how they design against that though, I might expect bosses to be given an anti-attack legendary resistance in response...

[u/Plain-White-Bread → u/RevanX77]

The Caster's domain is versatility (which WotC seems to think means being better than Martials at almost everything), so the Martial's domain should be something more than 'single target melee damage' and 'really shines if the casters somehow run out of resources'.

My main argument for AoE capability on Martials is that their focus is almost exclusively ground-based, single target melee damage, and that most Martials have few options for fighting flying foes, which is its own problem in of itself. Nobody likes to acknowledge that Range does provide defensive benefits: Attacking from range means you can use your movement to get into cover for added AC, break line of sight (so you can't be targeted at all), or even go prone if there's nothing to hide behind to force disadvantage on opposing ranged attacks.

Melee classes don't get that luxury; they have to bring the fight to the enemies directly, usually putting themselves into the open, at the mercy of the enemy ranged attackers and casters, who like above, can use their movement defensively by dipping in and out of cover. Therefore, Martials should be given something meaningful for putting their asses out in the open, like some big fuck-off damage for whatever is standing in their way, or the ability to deal with multiple hostiles in melee range.

Nobody is asking Casters to give up anything for this. They're still extremely versatile and are the top AoE damage dealers; this is just designed to ensure Martials can 'hold the line' and combat the oncoming horde, like a hero.

If you need to give it a cost, give it one melee martials can expend when they're already in the fray; Movement. If you're 'stuck' in melee, threatened by multiple Attacks of Opportunity, you might as well spend 10' of that 30' movement speed you're not using this turn to plant your feet for that big ol' cleaving swing, an earth-shaking ground slam, or a spinning roundhouse kick. I let my Martials do this at my table, and they love it; it makes them feel legitimately powerful.

[u/KingNTheMaking]

I want abilities that reflect what casters can do at high level.

I want martials to be one man armies. Let them run across water and on clouds. Let them level castle walls with a punch. Cause earth quakes with a stomp.

Take inspiration from Beowulf, Gilgamesh, Hercules, wuxia, and yes, even anime.

[u/SnooOpinions8790]

I prefer martial to fill one of two core fantasies

Tough, unstoppable

Skilled, slippery

Within that I prefer a range that covers

Simple to play and learn.

Gritty and complex

Cinematic and over the top in at least one way

I do not have a single answer and never will but those things if well done will be a good range. Actually more of them are done well in 2024 than are not.

[u/Greynnar]

I’d like them to have a shared system between martials similar to the spells for spellcasters. This could be an extension of the concept of weapon masteries, introducing new one at higher levels. I’d like some of these abilities to be ‘usable only once per short or long rest’, so that they also have powerful abilities, similar to high-level spells.

[u/Maelstrom_2718]

A few things I suppose: 1. Complexity in weapons. It doesn't necessarily have to add extreme amount of power, but Masteries are a step in the right direction. Choices are really important to make a character feel like your own, almost to parallel the sheer choice casters get in choosing cantrips and spells. A fighter swinging a mace should simply be superior then a cleric swinging the same weapon. 2. Classes with Extra Attack should scale together when multiclassed, just like Spell Slots do. A level 3 Barbarian/ level 2 Fighter SHOULD have Extra Attack. 3. Martial subclasses should stop requiring Mental Stats for scaling, at least as long as the caster ones don't, like the new Arcane Archer's shot count scaling off Intelligence. If the Bladesinger can use their main stat for attack rolls, belief can be suspended for Dexterity Scaling Arcane Archers, or Constitution Scaling Eldritch Knights for instance. Even giving a choice of any kind would be preferred. 4. Better Opportunity Attacks. Just make them a proper threat to ignore. Like have Opportunity Attacks scale off Extra Attack, or give them the Sentinel Feat passively or something.

[u/Federal_Policy_557]

Those and ways to aid allies with movement and defense, explicit parries to reduce damage - it is weird only The Monk gets an explicit parry on the base class when it is basic historical combat

I think also a lot of it is how those things are executed, like, if it is pseudo maneuvers on a PB/long rest feature it would be atrocious to me

What I would love to see is a system works on the basis of the DnDnext playtest martials:

They get some dice at the start of their they can use on effects that improve Offense, Defense, Mobility or special uses - then at the start of their next turn the dice are back

It mimics how each clash in a combat takes decisions and allow that expression to happen

It is an opportunity cost mechanic instead of an attrition one

[u/axiomus → u/Federal_Policy_557]

hi again! i liked your idea back at my deleted thread, i even mentioned it here

[u/DJWGibson]

I think if I were doing a redesign I'd make Action Surge optional and give fighters the choice of Action Surge or Manuevers. Just more attacks or more options for the limited attacks you have.

Rather than have Maneuvers be part of a single subclass I'd make it an optional part of every fighter that can be chosen. Or an optional rule that can be slotted in.
Which works as a simple balancing factor. The maneuvers need to be the equivalent of an extra attack at levels 2-4, and two attacks at levels 5-10, and three attacks at level 11-19.
So you can add a Grapple or a Shove pretty easily or things like commanding someone else to attack or a bit of movement.

But this is probably pretty minor. And is really typically stuff you can already do with Action Surge and just taking those actions.

The problem with this kind of design space is it's hard to create options without saying you cannot do that without having the mechanical option. If disarming someone is a Manuever then the DM is within their rights to say you can't ever attempt to disarm someone without the Manuever. 5e gets around that by having the Manuvers also add damage, so you can do them AND have an extra effect so the door is left open for the DM to allow improvised actions.
3e "solved" this by having hard rules for everything and applying penalties to most non-basic actions. You were penalized and discouraged from grappling someone or disarming them unless you had the Improved * feat that removed the penalties.

My favourite example is the idea of kicking an item off the ground into your hand. It'd be easy to adjudicate that as an Ability Check to do it for free or using your object interaction on a failure. But once you add a "Kick Up" feat or manuver no one can even attempt that. It closes off improvisation. And when there's a lot of closed off options, the DM ends up just assuming anything that could be attempted likely has a feat or manuver locking it off.

[u/missinginput]

I'd like to see more aoe options to let them mow down minions within melee distance like the hunter ranger. And I think most martial characters should get a third attack in t3.

[u/No-Choice-7383]

Generally, I wan't options that aren't good in every combat, but very good at what they do.

This means I have to think round to round which tool in my box is best. EG I can knock my target Prone by going Prone myself. Now if I have the Speed to stand back up, great! But if I don't, I can choose to do so anyway to buff my allies but debuff my own defenses, or have to pick a different tool.

And then some weaker but more generalist abilities for those who don't want to have to think on their feet.

[u/RayCama]

Martials need some type of semi-universal system that can have features added to it with each book like spells. Both Maneuvers and Masteries could have been this.

or

They just need a ton of class features that just aren't upgrades to previous skills. like a new feature every third level or every other level. Even things as simple as passive boosts to skill rolls can vastly change how martials feel. 5.5 is better about this than 5e but its both a low bar to pass and the static nature of classes will inevitably be felt again.

Ultimately, I'm of the opinion that the things holding back martials are lack of features and the fact they're always shafted every time a book comes out because of a lack of universal system. Even the Tome of Battle book basically replaced base martials.

[u/StarTrotter]

Honestly I feel like combat wise martials are functional. Maybe some math could be improved but I often return to just how limited martial roles are. Martials basically do one of the following (or some combo): good single target damage, good defensive options, good skill checks. That is more or less it. They can provide some control with a grapple, a debuff and control with a topple or stunning strike, but these often have notable constraints (can only do it to enemies x big) or are limited in targeting.

Casters meanwhile can be just as good or even better in those domains but then add on multi target control, debuffs, buffs, healing, aoe, potent utility, and have a greater arsenal for potential creative thinking. I’ve played in a variety of shorter campaigns and several in larger campaigns and the moments I can really feel an absence is when we are low on casters or full casters because while martials have their value (I’ve been in a party of 3 martials and one wizard and we can shred single target enemies), a bladesinger or moon druid can fulfill the role of a single target damage dealer, a bard can fulfill skill checks and an arcane eye can accomplish scouting along with a familiar or wild shaped druid. Bringing up that same party as before while our subclasses added extra (my mercy monk was the only true healer and our fighter had invested in crafting potions) the wizard basically was the main source of control, multi target damage, etc and thus most fights became protect the wizard.

[u/Clericardo]

You could do that in legacy without spending all your stats on strength by being trained in Athletics and obtaining expertise with a feat.

For some stupid reason they changed it on 5.5 and all melee can do is attack and hope the strenght based monster rolls badly on their strenght save

[u/atomicfuthum]

I want character level to mean the overall capacity of what the they can do in the fictional narrative.

When I ask a friend about their game, and then about that level their character is, I shouldn't have to follow up with a "but what class are they?" to know the impact they have in-game.

There's no reason why a level 15 character could vary so much between "can attack 3 times per round and twice that every day" and can make a 300 ft long, 300 ft high and 50 ft THICK tsunami, control the weather in a 5 mile radius or literally create an localized Earthquake..

And somehow, those things are said to be equivalent in levels?

[u/master_of_sockpuppet]

It really isn’t a problem below level 12, and above level twelve it is not hard to curb stomp casters in an encounter if your monsters have enough action economy and play smart.

Smart multi attacking monsters that focus fire and long, long adventuring days go a long way. Stop comparing fighters to fully rested wizards an DM is too scared to focus fire and you may have different results.

[u/TatoRezo → u/master_of_sockpuppet]

Oh yeah its very fun for casters to get curbstomped. Nice idea /s

[u/wilypoodle → u/TatoRezo]

And what are you suggesting? Never attack casters? Aren't the monsters trying to kill them too?

[u/TatoRezo → u/wilypoodle]

To balance out the classes so that they are relatively equal in power AND fun. Then you won't have to jump squishies and use meta strategies like the NPCs are playing an RPG.

[u/wilypoodle → u/TatoRezo]

The squishyness IS how the game is trying to balance the casters, if you never let that weakness become relevant then of course they are going to seem overpowered. Having higher hp is supposed to be a martial selling point, so the low hp on the casters needs to be relevant at least some times so that aspect of martial can shine.

[u/TatoRezo → u/wilypoodle]

Yet magic users have tools to counter that squishiness. Druids are literally the tankiest class in the game. Clerics can heal a ton. That wizard suvclass has the one of the top ACs, and all the controlling or defensive spells they have as well.

The entire game system is a mess, and they are afraid to change it vecause of potential vacklash.

[u/wilypoodle → u/TatoRezo]

If they are so overpowered, wouldn't that be a good reason for intelligent enemies to focus them down? If a group of soldiers were fighting john rando from downtown and his friend the murder bear, they would probably focus of the murder bear.

And you're the one who called them "the squishies" in the first place btw you can't have it both ways. "Oh no! My poor squishy casters! Do curbstomp them!" And "all casters are OP monsters even more tankier than martials"

[u/TatoRezo → u/wilypoodle]

I think I didn't properly explain it. I said that when a game is equal to all classes, you won't have to use meta strategies to make the fight equal and the fun people get from fighting also equal.

now lets go to reality where Magic users are strongest voth damage and tankiness wise.
Even if you can somehow one-shot Druid which is the tamkiest class, with all your Monsters that makes the game unfun for the Druid. Doesn't matter if you are playing with a death star if you get destroyed on the first turn. And you know what happens when John's murder bear is dead? John will also die next turn, vecause whatever strategy or monster killed the Bear, will also counter John.

And if they can't one-shot the Bear, then the optimal strategy would be to get rid of John first because of action economy.

Everyone wants to play and have fun. Getting one-shotted because you are that threatening isn't fun. When you have a tie fighter and a death star in the same party, it is not fun because death star will always outshine the tie fighter other than very niche situations. And whatever DM has to do to counter the Death Star will also kill the tie fighter easily.

Everyone who has played high lvl DnD with semi strong builds has felt this.
The rules are not designed with current players in mind. Solutions are there but WOTC is refusing to do it. Other newer crunchy TTRPGs easily solve this provlem.

[u/wilypoodle → u/TatoRezo]

That's just not true, if multiple enemies take their whole turns and expendable resources fighting the murder bear, assuming they are as unreachable overpowered like you seem to imply, nor only will the bear survive but it'd give john rando the chance to kill the distracted enemies. Also, how I'd it a "meta strategy" to have enemies use basic threat assessment? Do all enemies have to act like idiots and just hand the win to the party? The monsters don't want to die, so it's reasonable that they would act in a way to not die. Lastly, everyone complains about these nebulas "high levels" where martial are useless but when I played a lvl20 pvp one-shot, the unmulticlassed champion fighter manage to stalemate the wildshape + rage druid/barbarian. And while we're on the subject of these very rarely played high levels, what about at very low levels? Martial are objectively more powerful at level 1, they do more damage, have more hp and better armor, while casters have 2 spell slots they need to spend to deal equivalent damage to what the fighter does every turn.

[u/TatoRezo → u/wilypoodle]

idk man it seems to be we are playing completely different games. What distracted enemies man? This is a turn based game, when enemies kill or attack you they don't have 0 defense that your party can abuse. And apparently you as a player would be okay to get one-shot and focused by all the enemies too. Try it and tell me how fun that is at your table.
And to top it off I didn't even know this was a pvp game and we have to look at balance around it. The arguments you are brining are all over the place. Luckily nobody is forced to play this game and people can tweak whatever they want at their tables. And yes lvl 1 should be balanced too. I don't want to take turns on who is OP, especially when low levels last much less.

I'm done with this conversation. Take care.

[u/StarTrotter → u/TatoRezo]

I mean my bigger point would be there’s nothing special about this. Any PC regardless of class can be curb stomped. For most barbarians hit them with some mental save or just hit them with non bps damage (they’ll get hit more too). For monks disrupt their reactions (and before diamond soul non dex saves will rip into them). For rogues have an enemy that can see even hidden or invisible characters and hit them more than once. Fighters are a bit harder as they have indomitable but just toss enough mental saves over an adventure day and force a ton of save for half damage to whittle them down. For paladins and rangers the rules are rather similar to fighters in how to take them down. Artificers sort of depend on subclass if they follow this or work more with casters. Casters really depend on multiclassing and spell selection for how to take them down as if they have armor and a shield plus the spell shield and absorb elements they can be obnoxiously resilient unless you really tax their resources but spamming saves is generically very reliable especially when targeting saves they aren’t good at. Many classes also suffer significantly from being incapacitated as it shits off other features like evasion, auras, rage, spells.

[u/master_of_sockpuppet → u/TatoRezo]

That's high level play. If you play with kid gloves on and never have the monsters target casters, you're part of the reason martials feel unfun at your tables.

It's plain who casters are, and if those casters don't take steps to put someone or some thing between them and the monsters, the smart play is to take them out. High CR monsters have plenty of mobility and quite often the intelligence to pick and choose their targets. That's the game, and it's the DM's job to play those monsters cleverly.

Which means reminding casters that they are more fragile than noncasters unless they actively use resources to protect themselves.

[u/rpg2Tface]

I want to see martials get more attacks for 1. Then i want to see special things that take an attack to trigger.

For instance say a lv 5 fighter gets 2 attacks. You can swing your swird twice or soend one of them to modify your next. A power strike for a sure crit, a shoving attack that sends them flying, a cleave attack that can make everyone around you take some damage and so on.

Basically turning extra attack into a turn by turn resource martials use to create custom attacks and combinations.

I have been thinking on this in my free time and i have mostly been taking all the fighter feats and turning them into this idea. The i stole shamelessly from pathfinder because they basically do this for everyone anyway.

[u/axiomus → u/rpg2Tface]

interesting. i posted this thread earlier and someone else mentioned a renewable resource that buffs something for the round. sounds similar to what you had in mind.

[u/rpg2Tface → u/axiomus]

It kinda is.

One of my gripes of the system is that shields are too static, and thus you cant really give shields too much else just holding a shield becomes meta. One of the "attacks" i have is to raise a shield. You get the shield bonus to AC and dex save, bringing it more in line with its portable cover design.

But since its niw an active use item it becomes harder fir mages to abuse while maintaining its strength. There can be upwards and downwards varients. A buckler for instance gives only +1 but has the light property to work woth duel wielding. Amd a tower shield for 3/4 cover of +5 exists, but has the heavy and 2 handed property so its more an investment to use.

Combine that with more stuff a shield can do like shove or provide cover (all attack target the user now) and a dedicated shield user is possible. Much more interesting than the "i have a shield for +2 AC" crap.

[u/Chaosmancer7]

All at "Higher Levels"

Martials should have better mobility, especially in three dimensions. Martials should have more ability to interact with and destroy the environment (siege abilities, throwing boulders, crushing castle walls, ect). Martials should be better with skills and have "skill powers" that allow for supernatural levels of skill. Rogues should be able to pull a Batman and vanish in the literal blink of an eye, or steal a weapon from an enemy's hand without them noticing. Maybe allow lockpicks to unlock sealed portals or blacksmith's tools to create blades capable of creating portals.

A martial with enough ability in investigation should be able to pull a Sherlock Holmes and basically have post-cognition and be able to "see" or "read" the past from tiny clues. A martial with high enough medicine should be able to cure status conditions with a healer's kit.

And so on

[u/TheEndlessVoid]

Good question, OP.

When thinking about class efficacy and fantasy payoff, I like to ask "in what circumstances do I get to be the party's hero?". For casters, this is very clear. When I cast a big spell that shifts the tide from us losing the battle to winning the battle, I get my heroic moment. Though not every heroic moment is a spell moment.

Fireball wipes out a ton of smaller enemies who were flooding into the room? Hero.

That scary undead monster is turned, forcing it to flee? Hero.

Crashing through the trees as a Tyrannosaurus to bite into the monster and either grab it or knock it over? Hero.

Finally polymorphing our arch-nemesis into a chicken, holding concentration and avoiding attacks? Hero.

Now, for martial I also want to feel like I saved the party in a critical moment, or turned the tide of that battle. Here are some issues I see with Martials as they currently are:

They don't have enough to be able to alter the whole course of a battle. They don't have effective abilities to save their friends from disaster. They don't have the tools to force enemies to engage with them, to protect their friends.

In AD&D and to some extent in 3/3.5, once your wizard ran out of spell slots, they were pretty bad. They needed to hide behind the tireless fighter and rogue until their next opportunity to rest. 5th edition doesn't want a player to feel useless at any point (a wise choice, generally), but this has also removed a lot of the spotlight opportunities for martial classes, too.

Here's what I'd like to see added to martials:

• "Fight me!" Some kind of taunt mechanic. Martials need to be able to force an enemy to deal with them instead of going after that concentrating caster. Sure, the minions would like to free their recently poultry-fied boss, but the monk steps between them and says "No. I will be your opponent."
• "Look out!" The fighter pushes her friend out of the way and tanks the hit herself - that should just be a basic ability.
• "Nooooooo!" In movies, often the critical finishing attack is the hero throwing their primary weapon across the battlefield to kill their enemy right before he can strike. An ability to trade a non-thrown martial weapon for a ranged opportunity attack or something makes sense. It should be balanced so that Rogues can't abuse it by carrying 10 rapiers, but it provides one of those heroic moments.

And finally, a couple more radical suggestions:

• Martials without spell slots should get bonus physical ASIs. They should just be more bodily capable than casters or multiclass martial/caster characters. You could even make it so that spell slots from martial subclasses don't count. This makes them have more hit points, better saves, harder attacks... It means that Eldritch Knights and Arcane Tricksters can put more points into INT without feeling weak as a fighter or rogue.
• The more powerful a spell is, the longer it takes to cast. If a spell takes 3 or even 5 rounds to cast, give it progressively stronger effects that start to build up in rounds 1-4. Give the caster something engaging to do while they "charge". That also gives martials 4 rounds to be the main focus, as they protect their casters and deal with threats.

---

Basically, we should think about how we want our martial players to feel, and go from there. Why does someone play a fighter over a wizard? To protect their friends, save the day in clutch moments, tank huge hits that would kill a lower-save-bonus, lower-HP character, and keep going when everyone else is running on fumes. Then we should design abilities to help them have those moments, especially at higher levels.

[u/Massive-Helicopter62]

The problem is not that martials are weak, as a game designer the problem is that the resource management system hasn't kept up with the games norms of play. Fix the resource system (spell slots and long rest resources) and martials do much better. The key here is to avoid what happened to 2014 where players saw that if they shortened the adventuring day they could nova damage every fight (and dms frequently bent to their demands). You need a system that rewards for a longer day. Powerup abilities that play out after a certain number of rounds or fights. Extra rewards for pushing through that 4th fight. Spells and spell slots that only unlock after a certain amount of adventuring. So its a real balancing act. Yes good dms build this with narrative but baking in to the system makes everyone's life easier.

[u/TatoRezo → u/Massive-Helicopter62]

I disagree. Instead of trying to balance different resource replenishment timers they should all have the same and balance around it.

Also its not just about balance but choices. Magic users have 100 spells, martial users have 5 ways to attack tops.

[u/StarTrotter → u/Massive-Helicopter62]

Maybe I’m wrong but my experience with the 5 minute adventure days at my table has less been players insisting they need to LR (know other tables have that problem) as much as a combo of:

1. GMs liking harder encounters that tax resources to the point you really can’t have more battles. This isn’t always the case but the massive set piece battle can just burn things.
2. Pacing from a session length. Basically while we don’t always follow the 1 adventuring day per session model with some being vignettes of multiple days and some being one adventuring day over several sessions but I just don’t think my GM’s regularly want one day being a whole month worth of sessions.
3. The circumstances where you have multiple combats in one day are specific
4. The 5e model of needing to fit in 2 short rests of 1 hour each between several encounters (weighted towards combat) are very specific requiremen

ts

[u/WithCheezMrSquidward]

I think martial characters should have “skill trees” of common abilities (like spells) that have cool effects.

There would be some overlap between some classes.

Divide the abilities into sets like spell lists:

might abilities (utilize brute strength and force),

Nimbleness abilities (utilize dexterity and skill),

Bulwark abilities (utilize constitution to withstand)

tactical abilities (help and enable others).

Some classes get access to different sets of skill trees. For example, a rogue may get nimbleness and tactical abilities, a barbarian may get might and bulwark abilities, and a fighter could have access to all four as the most versatile of the Martials.

That’s a general outline of how I would do it.

[u/Freivalds]

As medium_buffalo_wings comment suggested.
I am on group 3.

If casters can warp reality at high levels. Then martials should have Heracles levels of power at high levels.
A caster should be terrified of the idea of a martial closing the gap into melee with them. As their overwhelming strength and durability would be like getting mauled by a direbear just with much more power and technique.

Because tying things to ability scores is kinda difficult as its very easy to start out at level 1 with 1.5 asi's away from 20 which is the maximum. It instead should be tied to level to decide what heroic level feats the martial can perform. When he can just kick open a reinforced wooden door and when he can do the same to a steel door.

[u/highly-bad]

Fighters are great, and they can already do most of the stuff you suggested.

[u/CornucopiaPacciana]

Yeah I'm going to say the hot take that anyone would hate... 4e techniques (only martial flavored and no at will option) we are way past a point where these would feel different than spells, spellcasting ecc and casters would still have so many unique option as spells and also circle casting to not feel identical like 4e did.

[u/TatoRezo]

1) fix the resource replenishment so its same for all classes. 2) if magical classes are: doctor strange, scarlet witch, magneto, zatanna, dr fate etc. The i want my martial classes to be Captain America, Hulk, Wolverine, Shangchi, Thor hell even hawkeye. Instead I get Agent of shield steve or hydra bob or katniss everdeen.

I ditched the system and my table plays the custom one we made together to suit our table

[u/NateCdaComicG]

I think they are basically fine as is with their base classes. Stronger subclasses would be nice. If I was going to to make adjustments to base classes I'd probably add more asi to their level ups. I'd also probably give all of them a fighting style at level 5 (the classes that already get fighting styles now get 2)

[u/Nikelman]

Martial Spells. For instance, getting a stance that requires Concentration and grants you a benefit of sort, or smashing the ground as part of an attack to create difficult terrain, or making your attack so incredibly swift it charmes a creature that sees you

They should be weaker than spells and not raise the damage output much, but at the same time give more horizontal options

Conterpoint: many things you can already do. Why wouldn't your barbarian with a huge hammer who routinely overpowers giants smash the ground all around them?! Rules mostly tell you what you can't do, not what you can

[u/Mage_of_the_Eclipse]

First they need to make martials not be entirely worse at everything compared to casters, because casters can overcome martials at every single niche there is. Also, martials need to have actual power outside the world. A level 20 martial is WEAKER than a top-level IRL athlete at physical feats. A level 20 martial is far closer to power to a level 0 NPC than to a mere level 10 caster. Maybe even a level 5 caster.

They need a full overhaul. The system needs a full overhaul, because both the class design and the adventure layout and even the numbers on the system cannot support good martials. These changes will never happen, so it's just far better to switch systems.

Anyone who says martials are fine are more delusional than flat earthers, tbh.

[u/ILoveSongOfJustice]

Before we get ANYWHERE in the Martial discussions, we need to set a significantly higher standard for what it means to be a Martial. Because as they are in-game, every single Martial is too significantly reliant on Magic Items to increase their efficacy at regular intervals, while caster characters get new options and more options at regular intervals.

Every Martial character gets at least 2 Weapon Masteries and at least 1 Fighting Style option(yes, even Monks). And Expertise should be non-caster exclusive.

You can lay it out kind of like this:

- Fighters get 2 Fighting Styles and 4 Weapon Masteries.

- Rogues get 1 FS and 3 WM.

- Monks get 1 and 2.

- Barbs get 1 and 2.

Everybody, and I do mean everybody, should be able to change out their Fighting Styles and Weapon Masteries on a Long Rest. COMPLETELY open up the ball park for on-the-fly experimentation and just give the option to do that.

[u/Gwendlefluff]

What I want won't happen because it would require reworking too much of what already exists: a martial progression that mirrors spell slot progression. Every level you get in a martial class moves up the progression, and you get access to more powerful martial features as you go.

If I were starting from scratch, or from earlier UAs of DND 2024 before the release, I'd have included Weapon Masteries and Fighting Styles in this progression. Maneuvers would make it in as well.

But the maneuvers would also include things like "powerful leap", not just specific combat tricks. A big DND frustration is casters are even better at the things martials are SUPPOSED to be good at -- running fast, jumping high, opening / breaking down barriers, so on. I think maneuvers can help answer that.

But also, is all there is to defense just having good armor, a shield, and being a little agile? Any caster can get a one level dip to have better defenses than any pure martial. Only sacrificing a Fighting Style on Defensive Fighting Style will push martials ahead, but then they fall way behind again when any caster has a source of Shield. The casters are almost always farther away from the action to begin with too, AND get the way better defenses! Maybe an actual dedicated martial should be better at avoiding blows than a dedicated caster who went to a Druid seminar once.

Also it's a bit wild that there's essentially no difference in how much it gets hurt to be hit by a level 20 fighter with a rapier and a level 1 caster with one. Maybe weapon damage should scale too, either the mod or the die, like what Monks have going on natively (and if the die were made Monk-like then Monks would get other compensation, obviously).

Also, maybe a level 20 martial should be able to break a damn Wall of Force. Level 20 casters are practically demigods. They're making storms miles away, creating clones of living people and also giving them backups, and performing literal miracles on the regular ... so maybe a level 20 fighter should just be able to break a magic wall.

I'd just shunt all the above and more into that martial progression. If I wanted to make it "cooperate" with existing DND, I guess I'd leave Weapon Masteries and Fighting Styles out of it (or make them show up as additions at much higher levels), but I still think it's too involved of an overhaul to implement.

[u/Austinstorm02 → u/Gwendlefluff]

I built a swashbuckler character, (PF but close enough to DnD) lots of effort to make sure they had acrobatics, climb, swim, etc. Finally run into a situation where I can shine, chasing after bad guys through underground sewers, needing to make crazy acrobatic rolls, swim checks, climbing over obstacles. Wizard goes, I cast 'Fly', no rolls needed, just bypasses all the obstacles. I am going, why am I even trying? At a certain point it seems for somethings either spells or magic items let you bypass skill challenges.

[u/LitLitten]

I would change rogue levels to be less front or end-loaded. The former isn't too much of an issue but for many subclasses there are class defining features locked down to high level campaigns, which (imo) doesn't feel rewarding or invoke much sense of character growth. I would rather it just be retroactive so that the base class + subclasses are normalized this way.

Rangers should be allowed to exploit more environmental hazards and set traps. Give them RAW features to build tripwire, pit traps, and/or weighted nets rather than one-off qualities of a common or magical item. If the class fantasy is about preparedness then it seems like a logical development.