Quote Originally Posted by Just to Browse View Post
To me this still seems like it's going in the wrong direction. The logic seems to be:

  1. Martials should have something to do with concentration.
  2. What if martials had stances that use the concentration rules? That seems cool.
  3. Shoot, now we have to change the rules to fit that (stance concentration needs to be different from spell concentration)
  4. Shoot, we also have to work around the side effects in extant content (partial casters aren't benefiting as much, do we need to buff the ranger more elsewhere?)
  5. Shoot, a commonly-requested martial feature can only be included in a limited form now (using a variety of maneuvers within a round doesn't work well with stance-swapping)

In the hypothetical example, martial classes already need a list of brand new content (stances with their variable effects) written out, which is probably going to have to interface with class levels, and might require special rules & lists for e.g. differentiating rogue vs fighter vs ranger stances. That's 80-90% of the work still on the table.

If you're already doing all the hard work of writing this homebrew basically from scratch, piggybacking off Concentration is going to add more to your workload than it takes off.
That we will need rules for this is not a bug. It's the whole point feature because we're specifically adding something to martials so naturally we need rules to know how it works. The easiest is simply use the Concentration rules. Done. The problem is because generally martials get hit a lot by Law of Averages they will lose their Concentration by round 2 due to monsters having multiattack and lose the benefit of Concentration. Also, barbarians. Therefore something else is needed that is not dependent limited to taking damage. Call it Stance. Call it Focus. Whatever it is called it necessitates it is not Concentration.

The devil in the details is to what these rules are, but that these rules are needed to exist is not proof they shouldn't exist at all because of "complexity".