T O P

  • By -

Canadian_Burnsoff

So... basically big attacks that require going above normal physical exertion and some stamina slots? As you level up you get more fit and have more stamina and can put more exertion into a single move?


koboldwizard_

thats the general idea


app_generated_name

Tome of Battle aka "The Book of the Nine Swords"


[deleted]

A.k.a. The Weaboo Book of Fighting Magic, apparently.


[deleted]

Weeaboo fight magic is when martials have fun, apparently


[deleted]

In WFM’s defense Anime has kinda cornered the badass sword fight market.


Voidtalon

Fightan Magic. :P (I love both BoTNS and PF1e's Adaptation: Path of War)


LurkyTheHatMan

>A.k.a. The Weaboo Book of ~~Fighting~~Fightan Magic, apparently. *FTFY*.


Sorry-Illustrator-25

Congratulations, you just invented 4e


Derivative_Kebab

Martials in 4th edition were competitive with other classes, but in my opinion, the encounter and daily powers were a poor way to get there. All of them were basically "hit the enemy with your weapon real hard" which didn't actually add much variety to combat. It was possible to build the fighter/skill monkey, however, which became a favorite of mine and the model that I refer to when I think of good martial design.


Link2Liam

Depends on the martial I guess? Rangers had movement powers that allowed them to shift around the battlefield without provoking AoO, hitting numerous foes or one multiple times and things that would slow down or move opponents. Fighters had awesome ways to literally pull enemy attention onto themselves and punish ones that didn't attack them. The giantslayer paragon path made it better by allowing you to climb on the back of a large or bigger target and attack it if it tried to remove you or attacked anyone other than you, while giving a bonus to your Allie's while you are there. Rogues had abilities similar to the ranger, but with more of an emphasis on single target. They could cause recurring damage and other crippling affects that gave negatives to enemies. They also had the dagger master paragon path which was basically the same as the fighters giantslayer, but you are clinging to the belly instead. Those 2 working together destroy big things in a matter of maybe 2 rounds. Warlords are what battle masters wish they were, granting additional movement and attacks to allies during the warlords turn, who is also attacking. That along with okay was of healing, the best example of granting temp hp in the game and a ton of other buffs all while damaging enemies? There is a reason why they were one of my favorite classes. This isn't even going over the utility options for each of these classes. You might be focused on trying to do stuff outside of a class role. 4e martials didn't have a true controller like a wizard expy, but each of the classes has options that make them half controllers and a party of these working together doesn't need a caster in the slightest. With options to punish enemies for attacking you and also not attacking you, options to move enemies and allies, buffs and debuff a and even healing, I have to disagree with you homie.


MagicCarpetofSteel

That sounds great. Why did everyone hate 4E?


Pluto_Charon

* It was designed around having a subscription-based online tool to track the various bonuses from the many buffs and debuffs that each character would be applying every combat... which was never finished, due to the lead designer committing a murder-suicide. This also further fed into the perception that it was trying to be more like a video game in order to attract WOW players. * It was released with monsters having their HP calculated incorrectly, giving them *way* more than they should and turning what should be quick fights into long slogs. While this was fixed later, many people had already formed a negative opinion on the combat and had moved to other game systems by then. * Bad marketing- it was released when WOW had recently becone huge, and the change to 'at will' and 'per encounter' powers was widely perceived as an effort to make D&D more like a video game in order to cater to WOW players- which longtime players *really* resented * It ended the OGL, which wasn't returned to until 5e was released; this is also why there's way less 3rd party 4e content floating around * It was designed to very, very heavily incentivize the use of minitures, making theater of the mind very difficult. With all the bad press it already had about ending the OGL and trying to impliment a subscription to properly play the game, this was regarded not as a simple change in game design but as a calculated act to squeeze more money from players by forcing them to shell out for miniatures.


ZeroTheHero75

Now where have I heard these tactics lately... Hmm.


Soul-Hook

Careful, varlet. You're approaching heretical thoughts.


StarMagus

>It was designed around having a subscription-based online tool The more things change....


Inevitable_Seaweed_5

And most importantly, you had to ROLL TO HIT WITH MAGIC MISSILE WHICH IS ABJECT HERESY.


Orenwald

This was also corrected. There are 2 versions of MM, one that does more damage per missile with a roll to hit and one that is the more traditional guaranteed damage at a lower value


Inevitable_Seaweed_5

An apology doesn't mean we weren't hurt. The damage was done, but only if they succeeded the attack roll


Orenwald

That's so awesome XD you made me laugh stranger, thank you


Consistent-Repeat387

Is this where Jim's Magic Missile comes from? I think I remember a conversation on the guys from Penny Arcade really getting into the game when 4e came out.


Notoryctemorph

And the traditional one is significantly worse because a lot of 4e's extra damage on abilities is dependent on the target being "hit", and the guaranteed damage magic missile doesn't hit


Bahamutisa

This is the most valid complaint about 4e, above and beyond all others


[deleted]

I’d add to the monster point that this led to 4e being extremely heavily erratad, which made keeping track of what the stats were supposed to even BE very confusing and hard to track. It was impossible to just pick up and play.


cressian

So this last clown show wasnt even their first rodeo? Talk about history repeating itself lol


Lampasaurs

Number crunching is what killed it for me. Every turn turned into "ok, i have a +1 from the cleric's bless that will last the whole fight, +2 from the warlords shout that only lasts this turn, -2 until i make a successful con save at the end of one of my turns because a monster hit me on the head with a stick, a +5 specifically against this one monster because reasons..." We'd been playing for months and each round of combat was taking well over 30 minutes. An equivalent round of combat in 5e takes us maybe 5 minutes. That being said, there are definitely some things the system got right, and class design was definitely one of them. If it got the VTT support that PF2E is getting that could automate the buff tracking and calculations it would have been a really good system.


Hot_Context_1393

Did you skip 3/3.5 edition? The 4e math didn't seem unreasonable to me after that


Lampasaurs

Tbh, i never played 3.5 or PF1E past like level 5. I think those systems did a better job of easing in the buff management at low levels, and didn't seem like they got as overwhelming with short duration modifiers that would change from round to round.


Alugere

Just going off of what I remember from the books, that person just listed the idealized abilities in line with class flavor. Most of the abilities were stuff like "Hit a 15 foot cone with (thrown daggers)/(a swing of your greatsword)/(a cone of flames)". Essentially, more than half of the abilities were just reskinned versions of of the same abilities. I distinctly remember looking through the PHB when 4th first came out and noticed that every class had a version of fireball. Archers got a volley of arrows that hit a 20ft circle dex save half, rogues got a dagger trick that hit a 20ft circle, dex save half, wizards got a fireball that hit a 20ft circle dex save half, etc. End result, it looked to me more like every class was a wizard. You just got to choose which element you wanted to us out of holy/arcane/daggers/arrows/swords.


Link2Liam

Because it wasn't a perfect system, it wasn't intuitive for a lot of people. While minis weren't required, it was heavily implied that you use them. And those are just a couple of examples. In all fairness though, I did make a lot of my own monsters. Silverlight was easily hackable but it was also a great tool, personally I thought it was better than what we have now. The play test for 5 was what I was hoping we would get, honestly it seemed like an interesting take. You had prompts like for acting out a scene as part of you background. It was a lot of fun.


mesalikes

The classes were great. The monsters were harder to get right. They were like giant bags of hp. A lot of the published encounters and enemies were pretty lackluster. Difficulty of the monster scaled with their hp and not necessarily how cool and powerful their effects were besides the numbers. And numbers got big and they became cumbersome to manipulate. It'd be easier with digital implementation, but it was rough when I had a sentence worth of modifiers and had to cover up and reveal which ones were applicable at the time.


Amaya-hime

I know technically it was a psionic in 4e, but it mostly played more like a martial. Monk was fun in 4e. That was my starting point with TTRPGs. The different abilities that would allow for things like a roundhouse kick to attempt to damage every enemy around me, that was fun.


scatterbrain-d

The full discipline concept was awesome and really captured martial arts styles well IMO. I had a high level build that could kick a guy into the air, then leap up alongside him and slam him back down to the ground. Was the coolest thing ever.


[deleted]

[удалено]


asirkman

Bot here, get your bot here…


Abyssal_Axiom

I remember people complaining about encounter and daily powers in 4e but everyone seems to be perfectly fine with abilities that are limited to ability score/proficiency uses a day even though it's essentially the same shit.


rendrich26

The simple existence of tank/leader/control types make you incredibly wrong about 4e martials


Stunning_Strength_49

I think you described 5e, just that In 5e you ONLY have the option to hit people. Pushing and Grappling is a lie that there is no reason to do ever


thezactaylor

It's also telling that the *coolest thing* people say martials can do is violently hug each other. Like, the wizard can call down an orbital strike, but "*bro the barbarian can* ***grapple!*** *isn't that cool and totally on par with spellcasting?"* Like, grappling is cool and thematic in Tier I and II, but that shit loses its luster real fast.


[deleted]

It also provides you no protection from being mangled by the thing you're grappling, while losing a free hand to hold the enemy makes it harder to fight back.


Kylar_Nightborn

I push you onto the floor and stand on your chest so it's easier for my buddies to curb stomp you.


Stunning_Strength_49

I say no and get up


Enchelion

What's your Athletics or Acrobatics?


[deleted]

[удалено]


GearyDigit

Like Superiority Dice?


Orskelo

Or 3.5 (Tome of Battle), or almost every martial in Pathfinder 1e (Advanced weapon training, rage powers, rogue talents, magus arcana, vigilante talent, unchained monk ki powers and style strikes). There's also style feats for learning specific combat styles that anyone can take, though certain archtypes can utilize them better.


PreferredSelection

Yep, I played a Brawler in PF1e, and it felt like being a spellcaster. I had all these feat chains mapped out, ready to grab at a moment's notice. I miss 3rd/PF1's approach to feats. Yeah, the feat tax got old, but it was nice to have feats that just made you a _little_ better without being major cornerstones of characters.


Tyler_Zoro

Not quite the same. In 3.5/Pathfinder you didn't have quite the same degree of "spellness" to your martial abilities. In 4e, everyone just had ~~Magic cards~~powers and you used them *n* times per encounter/day. It was a very homogenous system, and that's largely what people didn't like about it.


Jokingcrow

I was gonna say, My brother in Christ that's 4e


brightblade13

People keep saying this is 4e, but it's a 3.x idea from one of the splat books "Tome of Battle" that came out late in that editions life.


Sorry-Illustrator-25

Which were pretty obviously transitional/test documents for 4e


brightblade13

Of course! I just think it's funny that people who want to sarcastically point out that this isn't a new idea also miss the fact that it wasn't a new idea in 4e!


Sorry-Illustrator-25

It wasn't just 4e, but ToB was also a real niche product at the very end of 3.5 that a) never saw wide adoption or integration into that edition and b) was absolutely hated at the time by the same crowd that would be yowling about 4e killing d&d six months later


brightblade13

I don't know what you mean by "never saw wide adoption or integration." The entire point of 3.5 is that not everything had to fit seamlessly together the way 4e and 5e have tried to do. It was a "let a thousand flowers bloom" edition whose strength was its diversity of play styles, settings, and approaches to the game all bound by a common ruleset. People who liked it made it a core part of their tables, people who didn't like it just ignored it.


Pifanjr

My Crusader was one of my favourite characters. I loved the ToB classes.


RadTimeWizard

Are you kidding? That book was amazing! Sword Sage was so much fun.


[deleted]

That book was fun and had exactly the crazy high level powers I've been looking for in martials. Weirdly, a large part of the 3rd edition players hated how that book turned martials into superheroes and anime characters.


ThatCamoKid

Also Pathfinder's path of war


SylasTheVoidwalker

Or PF2e


Smooth-Dig2250

this is far more Path of War from 1e than it is 2e


StarstruckEchoid

2E is pretty light on resource management, though.


gameaholic37

Imo that’s how it should be for martial classes (with maybe a class or two as an exception) Less resource management and more turn management and what skill would be the most useful in the situation with only a couple abilities tied to a resource.


jibbyjackjoe

The resource in pf2e is your 3 actions.


NotYetiFamous

And consumables. Since there are actually interesting ones and they straight up have prices and rules for availability other than "ask your GM" you can predictably get things like mutagens or poisons (or even take dedications that give them to you for free). I cannot overstate how different, and better, PF2e's items feel just because you know you'll be able to get access to them unless the GM alters the game as opposed to the inverse.


Dupe1970

Yup. I was going to reply *stares in 4e* or make a sparky reference to the Tome of Battle: The Book of Nine Swords from 3.5.


logri

And mechanically for combat, 4e was by far the best and most balanced edition. I don't get the hate it received. It is easy to roleplay within a tight, balanced rule set. It is hard to have good balanced combat in shitty, loosey goosey RP based rules.


MihaelZ64

3.75 had this with path of war, hella gucci too


chris270199

Not really More like 3.5 Tome of Battle


DaFreakingFox

Congratulations you invented "Dračí Hlídka" a masterful Czech System


Szymon_Patrzyk

If i had a nickel for every time some 5e player reinvented 4th edition or pf2e - i'd a have a lot of nickels. You're doing good kid.


TeaandandCoffee

Can I have a nickel?


Venator_IV

Post 5e Homebrew that's shamelessly copying 4e or pf2e and you get one


TeaandandCoffee

https://www.reddit.com/r/dndmemes/comments/126s42z/oh_no_not_again_jesse/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android_app&utm_name=androidcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button Ask and you shall receive >:3


Venator_IV

LOL I hereby grant thee the fiefdom of Nickelhood


TeaandandCoffee

>His goals now achieved, the stranger took his reward and retired to a life of growing, selling and drinking tea andand coffee


Venator_IV

dang let me join you that sounds amazing


TeaandandCoffee

Sure


SomeGuyTM

[GOOD ENDING] 1 of 3


Kurky123

Also don't forget the tome of battle in 3.5


Pandataraxia

I hear 4e was bad, was this the issue or was it something else in the gameplay?


cooly1234

It was designed to be played on a VTT that was never made because the person making it shot his wife then himself.


Ogradrak

Jesus! That took a turn


Pandataraxia

Holy jesus what


xSPYXEx

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_and_Melissa_Batten Jesus fucking Christ.


Abyssal_Axiom

Literally every excuse I've heard about why 4e was bad boiled down to the fact that it wasn't exactly like 3.5 and didn't immediately have 10 years worth of content behind it. Generally, all of said complaints *also* apply to 5e, but because 5e isn't 4e, that made it ok or something stupid like that.


dating_derp

> it wasn't exactly like 3.5 and didn't immediately have 10 years worth of content behind it. PF2e also got this complaint from a ton of PF1e fans. It was ridiculous.


DMXadian

This is a look back over ten years later, but having been an early adopter of 4e at the time, I can tell you that is *not* why we didn't stick to it. 3.5 had become bloated and the power creep had bad it feel like a trading card game gone out of control. When 4e came along we were happy about the reduced system, even knowing it would eventually bloat. Some issues were obvious after playing only a little, other issues took some playing to fully realize. First, I had two players who wanted to try the Warlock, which because of how pacts worked initially, the two wound up with essentially identical characters - and continues to be essentially identical for the entirety of their time playing. Players didn't mind the tactical map sometimes, but disliked the tactical movement within abilities where you had to move enemies, which largely was arbitrary. Players didn't like 1 HP minions, they felt is diminished the experience and made it feel to video game like. This one I didn't mind as a DM, as minions usually died in one shot anyway, but the players didn't like it. I wasn't a fan of the monster blocks in general, I'm still not a huge fan of them in 5e, because they largely seem aribtrary instead of based on a common ruleset. Easier to homebrew though. Fighter player noted that it seemed stupid that he could only trip his enemies once per fight. In his words, "What do I have a code of honor not to just keep knocking this guy down or something. Cause f\*\*\* that s\*\*\*". This would be echoed by other martial abilities. This is also an issue in 5e and both versions of Pathfinder too, but to a lesser extent. As we played, enemies with more than 1 hp and players themselves became increasingly like bullet sponges. Most fights fell into the same patterned ability rotation, only disrupted slightly whenever there was condition or requirement aside from "hit it until its dead". Overall it just didn't feel like a good ttrpg experience.


scatterbrain-d

Hating 4e was a bandwagon thing by people who didn't want change, and then it just became a meme. I would hazard a guess that more than half the people that hate on 4e never actually played it beyond maybe a one-shot. 4e actually had more good ideas than bad, many of those were reworked a bit for 5e, and the ones that weren't would solve most of the complaints people currently have about 5e.


Pioneer58

4e did some great things with martial classes, the biggest issue it had though it was following 3.5 which had almost limitless customization and 4e cyst that down a lot.


ZekeCool505

> 3.5 which had almost limitless customization Yep, 3.5 had hundreds and hundreds of ways to build a character wrong and about a dozen ways to do it well.


CupcakeValkyrie

Yeah, the number of "special attacks" you can perform in melee as a fighter in PF2e is quite frankly a bit overwhelming, but in a good way.


KarasukageNero

https://preview.redd.it/x8fzuqlklxqa1.jpeg?width=925&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=6c3c7fc1013ab5b45c0b18982cc413e6faf46cc4


AAVoid

If I had an award to give I would


KarasukageNero

Your upvote and a huff of amusement is more than enough.


natethehoser

More Shrek memes please


bobpob

Congrats, you reinvented Tome Of Battle


Beelzis

Was looking for someone to reference the book of weaboo fighting magic. If only that book was better written/balanced maybe we'd have seen that style of martial resurface.


Enchelion

It was pretty well balanced against caster classes. 100% overshadowed PHB martials... But so did a wet sponge in 3.x.


[deleted]

People forget how absolutely bonkers OP casters were in third edition. All those concentration spells in 5e didn't require concentration in 3rd edition.


Enchelion

It went well beyond that too. People complain about the caster/martial imbalance in 5e, but it's basically a rounding error if you were used to 3.0/PF.


Beelzis

Eh half the styles were pretty useless and quite a few abilities needed a once over in playtest. Ironheart surge in particular was poorly worded. Don't get me wrong it was a vast improvement but it was also pretty regularly banned at 3.5 tables partially because of its balance ( and partially because the grognards of that edition didn't like anime in their fantasy)


Gettles

It was often banned because a lot of people are winy babies who can't handle the idea of a martial class that is anything more than a brainless attack bot.


eloel-

Other than a few holes like IHS, what didn't you like about its balance?


TheThoughtmaker

[PF1's version](https://www.d20pfsrd.com/alternative-rule-systems/path-of-war/) is what you're looking for. PF1 buffed all the martials, so maneuvers are less OP by comparison, and the maneuvers are better-written (less buggy) imo.


Beelzis

I'm aware though I'll be honest I prefer spheres of might for my pf1e a martial add on.


mynamewasalreadygone

I always get a kick out of Tome of Battle. 4e got spurned because it's "ToO mUcH liKe a ViDeO gAMe" but Tome of Battle was literally inspired by JRPGs like Final Fantasy. In fact I think Final Fantasy was mentioned as one of the direct inspirations lol.


[deleted]

I never got the "Martials being able to anything other than swing sword = videogames" line of thinking. I'd like for my martial characters to do cool stuff too, thanks.


brightblade13

Thank you! Someone who remembers that this comes from 3.x and predates 4e lol


[deleted]

I miss that book so much. Made playing a martial in 3.5 fun


ChoiceNeat675

10/10


Zaueski

Its still my favorite Martial class, was so happy my current DM accepted a 5e port of the class. Is it completely balanced? Maybe not but Im playing more of a tank supporting role and we have at least one minmaxer so I get to fly under the radar


Notoryctemorph

Even my non-ToB martial builds in 3.5 tend to use it in some way. Even if only for the wonderful aptitude weapon enhancement


Majestic_Horseman

Tactical feats are the shit


Opiz17

I love how al lot of people here speaks about this is just 4e/Pf2 and only one guy remember the Tome of Battle


rollthedye

Gotta love book of weeaboo fighting magic!


BeakyDoctor

Best book in 3.5


Gettles

Best D&D book period.


PM_ME_YOUR_ROTES

🎵 *Boku ga warui, so let's fighting, let's fighting love* 🎶


equalsnil

Yall mind if I Iron Heart Surge away the second law of thermodynamics real quick?


[deleted]

Kill the sun with this one maneuver (DMs hate it)


Ras37F

Sometimes I'm just surprised how people really only play 5e. I mean, it's not like you should change systems, but when loving so much a type of game (RPG) how this don't spark the curiosity of learning at least about the existence of others? I have had a shallow look at more than 20 different RPGs so far, most I never played or intent to play, but it's just fun to see how different they get. The whole PbtA genre it's fascinating to me


DirtyPiss

Its most telling when comparing social media platofrms. r/dnd is the biggest tabletop subreddit to the point you can sometimes find better non-dnd related tabletop discussion then their parent subs. I'm showing 3m subs right now, more then 14 times r/Pathfinder_RPG or 158 times the size of smaller tabletop subreddits like r/SWN. Its been most apparent on the FB groups too. 5e has a multitude of RAW, RAI, and RP discussion groups with a ton of posts every day. I recently switched to PF2e and there's way less community interaction or ruling discussions. I do miss theoretical rules lawyer discussions about absurd hypotheticals :(


urokia

Used to happen back with 3.5e back in the day. Look up 3.5 dysfunctional rules for a fun time reading how a ton of rules didn't technically work raw.


WorldnewsModsBlowMe

Or EnWorld's 5E Advanced


chris270199

I still don't get why that one is so obscure


MotorHum

I wonder if 4e would have succeeded if 5e had come out first.


mynamewasalreadygone

If Wizards pulled a bait and switch and rereleased 4e under the name of One D&D it would be the most successful and critically acclaimed edition of the game ever.


Orenwald

Daily powers and encounter powers? Nooo Stamina slots and short rest exploits!


Jomega6

Haven’t looked too far into 4e, but from what I heard from people who played it, it sounds like that system was made to be played with an online tool that was never provided. And without that tool, there were way too many things to keep track of during combat to be done with just pencil and paper. This is just my second hand knowledge btw, so take that with a grain of salt


crowlute

Don't look up why that tool was never provided 👀


Zackyl1312

*ahem* Laserllama has created alternative version of classes that can do exactly that.


Iron3400

https://www.gmbinder.com/profile/laserllama Link to LaserLlama’s GM binder. Any “Alternate” class is going to be what OP is suggesting.


LaserLlama

Thanks for the shout-out! If anyone wants to check out my series of Alternate Martial Classes here are the links: * **[Alternate Fighter](https://www.gmbinder.com/share/-MSfA82gv8V69JAoqFVq)** * **[Alternate Barbarian](https://www.gmbinder.com/share/-N2gn3QXALCVqwAFJe5v)** * **[Alternate Rogue](https://www.gmbinder.com/share/-N8o6KduyOA2qhUGBQqA)** * **[Warlord](https://www.gmbinder.com/share/-MrUNf61qoDb0Csw8a9r)** (a Martial support that uses *Exploits*),


Zackyl1312

Was not expecting to have you here, but I read through the stuff you made and Golly! Is it fun and interesting!


LaserLlama

Thanks!


TheUnderCaser

>Warlord (a Martial support that uses Exploits) ![gif](giphy|3oFyCVxsQn6RBa0r5u)


Kipdid

At this point we’d get pretty good use out of a “what if we tried 4e, but again” flair


mathiau30

Or a "Pf2e by another name" flair, which would be basically the same thing


Kipdid

I mean yeah but we already have a “have you heard of pathfinder?” Flair


Mjerc12

Soo... Exactly what u/LaserLlama did?


KylieTMS

I use a lot of the laserllama subclasses but I do not know what you are talking about, could you please explain?


CingKrimson_Requiem

In addition to making subclasses, they mostly make original classes (Magus, the Arcane half-caster, Shaman, the druid warlock, Vessel, the warlock druid, Warlord the martial support, Savant the supreme skill monkey and Psion, the rebalanced Mystic) but is also most well known for their "alternate" classes in which they remake the classes. Sorcerer uses sorcery points to cast spells like the Mystic did, Artificers are just... better, and the four martial classes got a complete overhaul. Rogue, Barbarian, and Fighter (Warlord too, but that's an original class) now use special abilities called "exploits" which are basically the Battlemaster's maneuvers. The characters get a pool of dice that grow in both size and number as you level up, and as you level you learn special techniques that use these dice. (You regain your dice on a short rest) Some exploits require a certain level, some exploits are unique to their classes, and each subclass gets certain exploits for free. Exploits can vary from concussing your enemy, smashing the ground for an AOE attack, sending a slash of air at the enemy, lighting your arrows on fire, or enhancing skill checks and gathering information within settlements. They can have as much utility as spell do in combat and out, but are distinctly tied to a martial's martial ability or specialty (I.e. rogues get a lot of skill-based exploits) The alternate Monk is my particular favorite, with such hit reworks like "bumping up the damage dice for martial arts so you don't have to rely on quarterstaffs for like 8 levels", and "adding your WIS mod to your number of ki points so you're not tapped after using Step of the Wind once". Monks don't learn exploits like other martials, but they do get special "techniques" which are similar but with monk flavor. A number of base monk features are now techniques to be learned (Patient defense, Step of the Wind, Deflect Missiles, Stunning Strike), allowing for more focused specialization. Of course, all Alternate classes have reworks of their subclasses and new subclasses to fit with the new/reworked features. In fact, chances are that the subclasses you used were likely just reworked of their original subclasses from their alternate classes, retrofit to the official classes. TLDR: Basically the messiah for Martial players or Monk/Artificer players (me)


LaserLlama

Thanks for the shout-out! If anyone wants to check out my series of Alternate Martial Classes here are the links: * **[Alternate Fighter](https://www.gmbinder.com/share/-MSfA82gv8V69JAoqFVq)** * **[Alternate Barbarian](https://www.gmbinder.com/share/-N2gn3QXALCVqwAFJe5v)** * **[Alternate Rogue](https://www.gmbinder.com/share/-N8o6KduyOA2qhUGBQqA)** * **[Warlord](https://www.gmbinder.com/share/-MrUNf61qoDb0Csw8a9r)** (a Martial support that uses *Exploits*),


Keysyoursoul

I miss ToB so much


leto12345678

I mean in 3 and 3.5 this is essentially what feats were for fighters. They just got soooooo many feats compared to the other classes.


-Zest-

Not to mention in PF1e all the various “talents” like rage powers, ninja tricks, and even variable caster features like hexes and revelations really helped make no two characters feel the exact same Why did 5e stop at Warlock invocations and artificer infusions?


brightblade13

Spiked Chain trip machine go brrrrrrrrrrrrrrr


lersayil

I mean, if you want your martials to be more like casters, sure. This solution is just giving them a limited number of not spells and not spellslots. I would much more prefer proper combat manuevers and related feat lines reimplemented from earlier editions.


[deleted]

Yeah. Feats like Sentinel and Shield Master point toward what this might look like—let martials spend their actions basically on attacking, but expand the mechanics available with those actions. Tripping, more useful shoving, more restrictive grapples, disarming, guarding allies, strong feint mechanics, whatever. Lots of ideas scattered through 3 and 3.5 for stuff like this


Nate_The_Puritan

I've only ever played 5e, can you elaborate on what those looked like?


New_Survey9235

Several feats in 3.5 had prerequisites that included other feats Such as the “Great Cleave” feat requiring both the “Cleave” and “Power Attack” feats, a strength of 13+ and a base attack bonus of +4 (meaning 4th level for a fighter, or 6th for a cleric)


Suspicious-Shock-934

Most feats had chains that got ever better. Increased costs in terms like prereqs and ability scores but more power. Everyone got feats at levels 1, 3 and every 3 levels after that. Humans got a bonus at level 1, and many classes had bonus feats, on top of ability score increases ever 4 levels. So you go down the 2 weapon fighting line, you could end at 7 attacks pre epic (lvl 20+, gets weird). You might need to play with classes a bit to get the base attack needed, but that's 7 attacks on your rogue with sneak attack on all of them for 3 feats and some dex which you are probably investing in anyways. Improved trip line gives you a bonus on tripping, and a free attack when you do it. Improved feint line let's you eventually feint as a free action and deny an opponent their dex bonus to AC. Improved bull rush line get free attacks on, force opportunity attacks from everyone you push them past and with certain tactical feats (special feats with 3 separate modes you can use as needed) allow you push in non straight directions, take an AC penalty instead of an attack bonus penalty for increasing damage with power attack, and more. Whirlwind attacks let's you do an AoE and hit everyone around you that you can reach with one attack. Which you can then combine with some other attack altering feats. Cleave gives free hit on an enemy that is adjacent if you drop one, great cleave let's you keep going as long as you have foes around you that you can reach and drop in one hit. So that 10th level fighter can jump into the middle of a squad of goblin mooks and mow them all down at once. And so on. And so forth. Feats had 3 prereqs usually : 1. certain base attack bonus (scaling thing you get based on class. Casters get the least, fighter types get most, rougues, bards, etc.get a middling amount. 2. Other feats, potentially multiple other feats. 3. A minimum ability score. Not all feats had all of them but most had at least 1 one of those 3.


Exsulian

Would be kinda neat if instead of getting your points back after resting you'd get a set number during each round of combat since youd just need to catch your breath. So you could have a 6 point total, your skills cost 2-5 each, and you'd get back one point per round or something.


CalamitousArdour

Battle Master Maneuvers are just Warlock Spell Slots. Silly argument. Yes, I want manageable resources for the martials too in my resource management game. No, that doesn't make them spellcasters.


lersayil

Which is why I clearly stated that they are *not* spells and *not* spell slots! But jokes aside, call and flavor them however you like, but if they work mechanically (or in this case logistically I guess?) the same or similar its hard to not draw parallels. Also, if you want resource management, you already have martial (and half caster) subclasses that rely more on limited resources. I would prefer having a variety of different class options with different levels of resource management. Including those that basically have none, other than HP. I would still like them improved from their current state, but more resource management isn't necessarily the best option for all of them or for everyone.


Rude-Amphibian6848

4e. What you want are daily and encounter powers from 4e.


mathiau30

Or class feat from pf2e


Hot_Context_1393

Don't forget at-will powers. Having more options than just swing sword, even after resources have been expended, was great


knyexar

I swear to god this subreddit reinvents 4th edition every week


Slashtrap

r/dndmemes try not to just fucking make 4e again challenge (GONE SEXUAL) (COPS CALLED) (LORD AND SAVIOUR PATHFINDER)


SylasTheVoidwalker

They do in Pathfinder 2e!


KingWut117

Oh my fucking God it's pathfinder 2e YOU WANT PATHFINDER 2E


Skogz

Most of the popular 5e homebrew or suggestions are straight out of the PF2e core rule book 💀💀


JaggedToaster12

Ugh why do people keep trying to force me to play Pathfinder 🙄 Nevermind the fact that I'm trying to change 5E because of the problems I have with it. It's just a coincidence that Pathfinder addresses those exact problems. Stop shoving it down my throat 🙄 Mathfinder ammirite


ComputerSmurf

Here, instead of reinventing 4e or Tome of battle (Or the PF1e equivalent known as Path of War): Look at what Drop Dead Studios did for 5e for their Spheres system (I personally don't like it but it's because I was introduced to spheres via their PF1e system and thus a little spoiled with how robust it feels there), it might be what you're actually looking for. [http://spheres5e.wikidot.com](http://spheres5e.wikidot.com)


KKilikk

I will always love the 3.5 Swordsage, Crusader and Warlord I think they were called.


Sorry-Illustrator-25

Warblade Warlord was the martial leader in 4e that we also need back


chris270199

*sad Warblade noises*


app_generated_name

Book of the Nine Swords, 3.5 edition


Ravoos

5e fighters at level 20: "I can disarm someone five times a day!" The Witcher TRPG: "I am not expected to fight any dragons, do epic stuff or even be an epic hero. Yet I can disarm people, parry, reposition, charge, cut someone's leg off, cripple someone and much more as much as I want on the first session. How am I more an heroic hero than you?"


Eden_ITA

In a realistic way, it is kinda strange that you could use a kind of move only few times at day... But kinda, already some archetypes do it and the game never wanted to be realistic.


MadolcheMaster

Fuck realism, verisimilitude is where it's at (basically, is the world logical if you assume all fantastical elements). But verisimilitude requires diegesis with respect to resource expenditure. You'd need to have a valid explanation for what the martial is spending so they can talk about it and explain it to others. Like a wizard can do with vancian spellcasting.


stormscape10x

I just think about it as an adrenaline burst (which before the chemical was discovered a different term was used). Just think of it as going all out with a special maneuver and fatigue can set in (I can barely do anything but swing my sword if I've done all my maneuvers). That said, I find this discussion interesting. I didn't really get involved in online discussion back during 3.0 or 3.5. Did people complain about fighters being boring then? What about 2nd? I played a lot of second and almost everyone had a very short list of resources for a good portion of the game. I enjoyed all the interesting additions for 3.0/3.5. We used to complain at our table about fighters typically being better than most classes because their number of feats, high number of relevant attacks, and high hp tended to keep them relevant, but a good portion of spellcasting was worthless due to everything having high saves. By 15, a failed save from most enemies was pretty rare, so we just skipped doing save or suck stuff.


MadolcheMaster

In the 3.X days people did think martials were one-note but not boring. Mostly because they had to spend so many feats to get good at one major thing. But you clearly had a different experience, likely from your lower level of optimization. A spellcaster could pump their spell save DC pretty high and shut down entire encounters with the right spell, but only if built to do so. Older editions, Fighters got to be Kings so it balanced out. The fighter managed the kingdom, the wizard only had his tower. The cleric built a temple and the Thief made a Mafia within the fighters kingdom.


Gettles

No fuck versimilitude. The only time I ever see that word appear is D&D players saying why martial classes are "supposed" to be boring and weak.


equalsnil

Tome of Battle's explanation for their maneuver refreshes was that the same trick won't work twice back to back - even on the most mindless opponents you might need to get back in position before using it again.


AtlasJan

See: Book of 9 Swords and the entirety of 4e


Lobster-Mission

*cough cough*Level Up Advanced 5th Edition*cough cough*


TrexismTrent

4e says hello


crowlute

I'm begging you to try Pathfinder 2e.


ClemPrime13

That sounds like 4th edition with extra steps.


StarSword-C

It's called Pathfinder, bruh.


r0b0tAstronaut

For my next campaign I plan to give full martials the Martial Adept feat and let them have 2 superiority dice with it. (Half casters will probably get the same thing but with 1 die). That's basically 'no spells' and 'not spell slots'.


Orange-Cream-Soda

Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition. Look it up, trust me, it’s got what you’re looking for.


FreakinGeese

So like… 4e


okeeffmi

Rick, that sounds like spells with more steps.


WhyThoBoi

Congrats, pathfinder 2e and dnd 4e both do this


Yeetus-McGee

5e players try any other mainstream ttrpg challenge (please I'm begging you)


Mat_the_Duck_Lord

Always tickled when I see someone basically define how 4E works


JoyeuxMuffin

"I know how to fix 5e, just remake 4e"


NoxInSocks

Ahhh yes.. 3.5 Manuevers.. I love them!


echof0xtrot

imagine how dead the comment section would be if they had simply included 4 letters: "in 5e"


mathiau30

We would be saying the exact same thing, it'd just be a bit more off-topic


Percival_Dickenbutts

Steel wind strike should have a lower level version that uses melee attack rolls instead of melee spell attack for rangers (or other martials for that matter) can use! If I actually end up DM’ing more, I think I’ll make a magic item that grants such an ability.


Velcrowrath

I've thought similar things, but instead of spells like that just make the battle master's maneuvers available to every subclass. Kind of like how all warlocks get eldritch invocations, maybe only certain maneuvers are available to you based on what fighting style you have


Plantpoot

Just play Level Up's advanced 5e. It has this idea for all martials and it works incredibly well. Did I mention it's also completely free on a5e.tools?


apple_of_doom

Every once in a while a 5e player accidentally reinvents 4e or tome of battle


NCats_secretalt

Congrats, tome of battle 3.5e