I attack...I attack...I attack...

Wizards have too many options.

Fighters have too few options.

We've heard that again and again haven't we? If there was a movie trailer for 4th Edition the words "FIGHTERS" "GET" "MORE" "OPTIONS" would have flown at the audience from the screen at high speed accompanied by some pounding THX bass.

Aaaand...it's true and it isn't. It's true that fighters have typically lacked options in combat outside of swinging their sword (or hammer or whatever) again and again. Of course, in 3.0 they got plenty of options like Tripping and Overrunning and BlahBlah...except the options sucked unless you feat-invested in them. Then guess what your options became? I trip...I trip...I trip...

Wow. Brilliant design there guys.

Fighters are supposed to be the masters of combat. Instead, they usually end up being masters of gimmicks. Shitty gimmicks. Gimmicks that have their novelty wear off very quickly.

See, when you're a wizard, you get lots of neat toys. Do you pick spell A or spell B? Well depends on the situation or which one is better or or or... So many 'ors'. Because they have options that are worth half a damn. Imagine an Illusionist whose only spell was "Illusion A". That's it. That's their spell. So what do you do as that Illusionist? You spam your one thing. Congrats, you're a wizard-as-designed-by-fighter-theory. Even specialists Wizards like Illusionists don't work that way though. Nope, they get lots of neat options too and trade a little versatility for a good amount of power.

What does the fighter get that invests in making himself good at tripping? Well...they don't suck at tripping. After all, if you DON'T invest the feats and such, you do suck at tripping. So the fighter has to invest just to make themselves not suck at something in combat. Wow. The Wizard? Nope, if they specialize they just get better at something they're already built to do.

Now at this point, this seems like a generic fighter bitchfest right? Well it ain't. I don't mind fighters. I don't mind their options. Their options just need to not suck out of the box. When designing a fighter, however, one also has to respect that they are designed to be a beginners class...or at least a class with simple, elegant design.

That is my goal as I work on fighters as my base-line class for the system overhaul I'm doing.

And what have I done? I've started looking at their options. As I am wont to do, I've done that by comparing it to something I'm familiar with...fighting games. Things like Street Fighter. You see, in Street Fighter, the elegant/simple/beginner character is Ryu. Ryu has basic attacks like everyone else. Press a button, punch a face (I attack...). He can also avoid attacking and block to defend himself. That's the same as what anyone else can do. He also has options. He can throw a fireball (control space), he can throw a rising uppercut (gamble risk/reward for damage) and he can move with a spinning kick across the screen (create pressure). When someone sees these things in action their purpose is immediately clear on, at the very least, a visceral level if not an obvious level.

In truth, Ryu is straightforward because he embodies and excels at the basic premises of the game of Street Fighter. Damage your opponent, control their space, keep them from controlling your space, create advantageous situations, punish disadvantageous situations. Fighters must be the same. They must reflect the combat system of D&D and excel at it...but they must do so in straight-forward, obvious ways.

Here is an example of my work thus far on simplifying combat.

"Push Back [Use: Standard/Full] - The character makes a Combat Maneuver roll against a target. If successful, the target is moved back 5 feet. If the Attack Roll exceeds the foes AC by 5 or more, the character may choose to push back the target 10 feet instead. If the target is pushed back and the character has not used their Move Action this round, they can make this maneuver a Full Round action and move into any of the squares vacated by the target of this attack."

Push Back is one of only a handful of maneuvers that will be available in combat (again, streamlining!) and is pretty straight-forward. Player rolls, compares value and gets a result. In this case, the poor orc is moved back. If the player rolls well enough, the orc is moved back even further. If the player chooses to do so (and has the Move action left) they can reposition themselves as well. Easy to understand. Easy to use. Useful.

Someone pressuring your wizard? Push them back. Need to use a foe to plug a hole like, for instance, a door? Push them back. Need to line someone up to double team them? Push them back. By making it easy to understand and perform it means that players will attempt it. It makes combat more dynamic as people have the option to do more than just stand toe-to-toe with enemies and slug it out as if they were standing static in a Final Fantasy game.


Now where does our friend the fighter come into play if everyone can attempt this?

"Bull Rush/Take-down - At level 2 a Fighter never misses an opportunity to hurt a foe! When a fighter successfully performs a Push Back or Trip maneuver against a target, the fighter also deals damage to the target equal to half their normal damage. For example, if the fighter normally does 1d8+2 damage, they would roll damage normally and then halve it against any opponent they successfully Push Back or Trip."

Now why is this better design? It keeps things simple. The player already knows how to do damage. They already know what a combat maneuver is. This incorporates nothing new. Rather, it marries two things the player is already familiar with doing. It isn't one of the insipid Improved-style feats that keep players from provoking attacks of opportunity (heave ho! they're gone!) or engaging in a tripping war (god how stupid...). No, it just takes an option that is already pretty good...and makes it better.

Furthermore, it is sound because it lets the fighter continue doing one of their primary jobs (deal damage!) while still contributing in a different way. Now, of course, the damage is in half...but that is what makes the option one that involves an actual choice! Do I Push this orc to position him better but do less damage? Or do I just hit him and hope to kill him? That choice is far more palatable to a fighter than simply saying "Do I move or do I hit?" because there is still a damage component. It creates interesting choices.

It is thematic. It is useful. It is interesting. It is simple.

Thoughts?