Martial Surges

One of the criticisms I have heard about the current packet is that Expertise is perhaps too good.  That is, the Fighter is usually ranked as the best class.  Another critism I read is that those classes that use Expertise have fewer resources to deplete over the course of the day than the spellcasting classes.  The spellcasters have to track daily spells and hit points, while the Expertise classes only track hit points.  This means that the length of the adventuring day is still set by the Wizards and Cleric, who will often run out of spells before the Fighter runs out of hit points.  

A way to bring this into balance, would be to replace Expertise Dice with something I call (tentatively) Martial Surges.  These surges are meant to replicate surges of adrenaline in the middle of combat; letting you hit harder, run faster, dodge quicker, than you should normally be able to do.  In real life, as you perform over the top feats of athleticism, you become exhausted, limiting your ability to continue performing them.  In this system, as you perform these actions, you lose surges, simulating how doing these things exhaust your character.

To seperate this mechanic from spell casting, and to make it more realistic, you can gain these surges back.  Say one per ten minutes of rest. 

This still gives these classes more lasting power than the spell casting classes, but makes sure that they can't outshine them for the entire duration of a single encounter.  The Fighter, Rogue, and Monk have to judge when it is the best time to use one of these surges.

As for how many surges you would get, I'd say that may or may not be based on the class that gives them.  Though if the number were the same for all classes, it would make multiclassing between these classes easier.  Depending on how they wind up handling multiclassing, that is. 
That warm fuzzy feeling you get when you a forum thread you're subscribed to has a new comment.
One of the criticisms I have heard about the current packet is that Expertise is perhaps too good.  That is, the Fighter is usually ranked as the best class.



Which is as it should be. The fighter has one thing that he can do: fighting. Doesn't it stand to reason that he should therefore do it better than everybody else?

Another critism I read is that those classes that use Expertise have fewer resources to deplete over the course of the day than the spellcasting classes.  The spellcasters have to track daily spells and hit points, while the Expertise classes only track hit points.  This means that the length of the adventuring day is still set by the Wizards and Cleric, who will often run out of spells before the Fighter runs out of hit points.



And this is a problem because...?

A way to bring this into balance, would be to replace Expertise Dice with something I call (tentatively) Martial Surges.



Why does he need "balance"? Last time I checked, the PCs weren't competing with each other, so why do people always complain about player classes not being "balanced"? They do different things. Saying that they should be "balanced" in combat is like saying a Doctor and a Lawyer aren't balanced because the Lawyer doesn't know anything about the medical profession. Well, no, because that's not what he does.

As for the idea, I'm afraid I find the concept that you can expend more energy to temporarily become a better fighter than you normally are too hard to swallow. Martial artists learn a concept called "economy of energy", meaning they use as much energy as they need to. Using more does not make them fight better, because fighting - especially with weapons - involves more than just raw energy. It involves skill, reflexes and, to some extent, tactical awareness. You can't improve those factors by spending more energy.
Everything expressed in this post is my opinion, and should be taken as such. I can not declare myself to be the supreme authority on all matters...even though I am right!
Which is as it should be. The fighter has one thing that he can do: fighting. Doesn't it stand to reason that he should therefore do it better than everybody else?
------
I am sorry this makes not sence whatsoever, by that logic the fighter should be able to do everything the wizard can in combat, because what is useing a fireball but "fighting", in fact he should be able to do EVERTHING the rogue can and better too, he should be able to wear leather effectivly, backstab ect, and why stop there he should also get all the ranger features becuase a ranger fights and we cant have a non-fighter do fighting well.

the fighter is a heavy armor melee character, that is IT, if he was the only one who was supose to be good at fighting then why even have other classes?

they even said (and then ignored but still) that they want to balance the pilars separtly, meaning the ablity of a class to fight has no bearing on how well it does anything else.
Insulting someones grammar on a forum is like losing to someone in a drag race and saying they were cheating by having racing stripes. Not only do the two things not relate to each other (the logic behind the person's position, and their grammar) but you sound like an idiot for saying it (and you should, because its really stupid )
Seeing all this bickering about fighter/rogue/monk balancing just makes me dread the arrival of paladin/ranger/barbarian. Siiigh !!!
It isn't that the Fighter is the best melee combatant, its that the Fighter is currently the best class in the game. Period! The other classes aren't nearly as well received as the Fighter. If it isn't possible to make the other core classes as attractive as the Fighter, maybe its time for the Fighter to receive a slight nerf. Hence my idea of limiting the number of times you can use extra dice in one combat. You can get them back, but at least you aren't outperforming every other class all the time anymore. It isn't about achieving perfect balance between all the classes, it's about making sure there that no one class is significantly better than the others. Otherwise, why not just have everyone play Fighters? Especially since much of what used to be handled specifically by certain Classes in previous editions can now be handled by anyone with the correct choice of Background. And once multiclassing becomes available, I could see people taking just enough levels in the non-Fighter classes to get their most useful abilities, then go pure Fighter the rest of the time.
That warm fuzzy feeling you get when you a forum thread you're subscribed to has a new comment.


A way to bring this into balance, would be to replace Expertise Dice with something I call (tentatively) Martial Surges.



Why does he need "balance"? Last time I checked, the PCs weren't competing with each other, so why do people always complain about player classes not being "balanced"? They do different things. Saying that they should be "balanced" in combat is like saying a Doctor and a Lawyer aren't balanced because the Lawyer doesn't know anything about the medical profession. Well, no, because that's not what he does.




With the risk of starting this debate, yet again, I will tell you why they need "balance".

 Because being useless/third wheel/unneccessary/ect. is not fun. This is not about the rogue or the monk fighting at the exact same level as the fighter. This is not about making the rogue or monk better than the fighter. This is about making a player's most inmportant choice not be an iron chain that limits them to only being useful in 1 area of the game.

I really do not understand how this gets misunderstood in these forums so often. We do not want the fighter dealing (I'm making up numbers here) 45 points of damage a round while the rogue only gets 10. Did you choose the rouge to be a beast in combat? Probably not, you probably chose him to be a sneaky skill monkey and scout. Does this mean that when a fight starts he should have nothing exciting or useful to do? No. Should it be left entirely to the player's imagination and DM's whim for the rogue to fin something fun to do, while other classes have it hardcoded into them? I don't think so because that seems unfair to me.

So, to prevent me from ranting, I'll sum it up. I have yet to see a single person asking for perfect balance in combat. Just as I have not seen a single person asking for perfect balance in skill use. We do not want, to use a baseball analogy, a major league batter, a softball batter, and a kid as our choices. We want the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd string batters for a team. They can rank high to low, but we want them in the same ballpark.

P.S. I'm also bugged by the idea that a fighter is only good at fighting. Especially considering I've seen people claiming that those of us seeking a "balance" simply want a wargame instead of a roleplaying game. We are the ones who want something more on both sides, instead of regulating an entire class to being good only in one situation