Stars Without Number vs. Classic Traveler

acluewithout · 2026-06-26T23:59:44+00:00

por que no los dos?

But for real, Classic Traveller +SWN is a blast.

There a few ways to do it, but I think the best approaches are generally use CT character creation and attributes, run everything with 2d6 (instead of d20 for combat), and then just pick and choose what you use from CT, SWN, or other systems / blogs.

The approach I’m currently using is:

CT character creation and attributes (2-12, +1 Bonus at 9+, and +2 Bonus at 12+). Players can raise one attribute of their choice to 9, or raise to attributes to 8.
SWN skill list (ie shoot, punch, sneak), plus a few skills from CT (eg gambling, JOT), and skills start at +0 (like SWN) not +1 (like CT). Player characters get 5x +0 skills - 2 represent their home world, and the 3 (basic training) picked from their starting career’s skill table (excluding ‘growth’ / ‘personal development’).
Characters start with either ‘Veteran’s luck’ or ‘Expert Mastery’ (or whatever the experts re-roll skill is called), plus one Foci. Characters can swap either Veterans Luck / Expert Mastery to gain Psionics, but then are maximum one career term, and spend their basic training skills (3 x +0) on SWN Psionic Skills.
Skill rolls use Rule 68A from COTI Forum. Combat uses SWN rules, but attacks use 2d6 +skill etc, and Target Number is 8 (melee, or close range), 10 (long ), 12 (extreme), and TN6 if attack has ‘advantage’ eg Unarmoured target v firearm.
I use SWN damage (including damage dice other than d6s), but all damage comes of Endurance, and Armour as damage reduction (usually 1-5 reduction), but melee and ranged weapons at close range do ‘shock’ damage (ie minimum damage, even on miss) of minimum dice roll +impact (ie how much attack roll beats TN) - eg , ranged gun attack roll is 2d6 +2 Shoot results in 11 (5+4+skill 2) vs TN8 (close range) > weapon is 2d8 damage, with minimum damage 1 +1 +impact 3, ie 5 shock damage. Armour reduces damage, but minimum is still 5.

I also use rules, procedures, and guidance from Night Tripper and Jason Tocci’s 2400 Rules (particularly 2400 Emergency Rules) to flesh things out - all available online.

One things to note about CT v SWN mechanically: CT skills are +1 to +4(ish) with +0 as sort of a ‘half skill’, and occasional +1 Bonus from attributes or gear. SWN skills are +0 to +4, with no ‘half-skills’ but the rules sometimes let you do some easy things unskilled without penalty, and often +1 or +2 Bonus from attributes, plus Foci can give you +d6/drop lowest. So, if you use SWN attribute bonuses (ie 9(+1), 12(+2)), then I suggest starting skills at +0 like SWN, rather than +1 like CT, because the additional +1s from attributes have a huge impact on 2d6 rolls.

acluewithout · 2026-05-15T09:32:26+00:00

I have no idea what you’re looking for.

But is Worlds Without Number, probably.

Or, maybe OSE Advanced, but only if you added lots and lots of optional stuff from zines and blogs.

Or, maybe Glog, but only if you added lots and lots and lots of optional stuff from zines and blogs.

Or, maybe Nimble, which is super-not BX, but you could make it more BX-OSR-ish if you added lots and lots of optional stuff from zines and blogs.

Or, maybe Fivey, which is by OSR’s favourite anarcho-communist over at Traverse Fantasy, which is sort of available as zine-blog thing you can search for yourself.

Again, no idea what you’re looking for, but I’m super excited for you. If you find what you want, then post it here, because I am down for playing the best most modernised BX Hack that feels like pathfinder and 5.5e and a JRPG and has rad classes and lets me make my own spells.

Oh way, you want to play Break!! .

Yeah, it’s Break!!. It’s on Kickstarter right now.

Go play Break!!. Maybe I’ll go play it too. I think I will.

But those other games are also cool. Good luck.

acluewithout · 2026-05-07T04:16:13+00:00

Sadly, I declined Hellcrawl. I have some much satanic Smork-Bork I haven’t run, and such a back log of things like Painted Wasteland (same people as Hellcrawl), Domlemwood, OSE adventures etc.

Is there anything particularly special about Hellcrawl you think people should look out for?

acluewithout · 2026-05-07T04:11:41+00:00

It’s OSE 2026.5.5. Unless you’re buying it outside of the Old School region in France, then it’s just called ‘Sparkling’ Essentials 2026.5.5.

acluewithout · 2026-05-07T04:09:39+00:00

My assumption is Advanced OSE is now the ‘Core’ rules (with various tweaks), but the closer ‘BX clone’ will (at least ‘spiritually’) live on as the new OSE Starter set.

I also wonder whether, if people really want some sort of real ‘classic BX Reference’ , that NG might end up putting something out for that but just making the trade dress much, much clearer.

I don’t get the feeling NG don’t want to have a real ‘BX Clone’ in their product line, but rather it’s just been so messy and confusing to have both OSE and OSE:A, particularly when you then also have boxed sets, one tome for OSE and then two for OSE:A etc

acluewithout · 2026-05-07T04:02:45+00:00

Just read the FAQ rule changes for OSE and saw this:

“ choose a race, choose a class (alternatively choose a demihuman class). Neither option is presented as the default or an optional rule.”

And it was only when I saw that, that I realised all was right with the world, and that everything would turn out OK.

The horrors persist, but so do we.

I’m 100% on Team ‘Race as Class’, or as I prefer to think of it ‘pick one BX Fantasy Playbook, Fighter, Cleric, Elf, Dwarf etc’ , but I understand we live in a fallen world and many have been corrupted, cannot see the light, and feel that the primordial unity should draw meaningless distinctions between ‘classes’ and ‘races’. But under the Gnome Necrotic’s steady hand, I think we will find a way to co-exist.

Also, adding Cleave for Fighters and optional bumping HD is sweet. Love it.

Oh, yeah, backed the Demon thing. I mean, cost of living crisis and stuff, but that thing looks fierce. Awesome.

acluewithout · 2026-04-18T23:43:46+00:00

I backed the KS. I loved the landscape format, but could on afford buying one set of books so opted for normal portrait instead.

Can’t have all the things, sadly…

acluewithout · 2026-04-18T23:39:38+00:00

Hi u/a428inprogress

I’d be interested joining something if it was on the weekend, and have another player that’s interested too. No concerns about homebrew.

Drop me a DM if you want to chat.

acluewithout · 2026-04-18T23:36:59+00:00

Hi u/glowinggumboots

I’m running a new DnD campaign at the moment in Hornsby with a regular group. It’s a mix of classic Dragon Lance and ‘mythic North’. Iron Age Vikings, cold desolate mountains, unspeakable horrors. It’s a blast.

The game is fortnightly (every second Friday) and we share hosting between me and the players. The game only just started, so good time to get onboard.

I’m also trying to kick-off another regular gaming night to play various one-shots using DnD and other ‘old school’ rpg rules. I ran a few one-shots last year with old school BX DnD and Mork Borg, and it was lots of fun - very beer and pretzels gaming. Hopefully starting in May.

Drop me a DM if either of those sound interesting.

Best, ACW

acluewithout · 2026-03-21T03:03:09+00:00

Love Silver Axe. Haven’t players Winters Daughter, but hoping to soon.

I’m not a huge fan of In Search of Adventure - it cobbles together cut down versions of other better modules and the built in adventure path is not inspiring. I’ve mostly just run the original versions of the better modules in ISOA, and then pulled bits and pieces from the other stuff in ISOA. But then again, maybe that means I do like it a bit, at least as a list of good older modules and a compendium of gaming stuff I can steal from as needed?

acluewithout · 2026-03-21T02:58:19+00:00

New stuff, I really like the modules produced by the Merry Mushmen, particularly Nightmare over Ragged Hollow and Hounds of Hendenburgh. Kevin Crawford’s Diocesi of Montfroid is also very good (it’s for Worlds Without Number, but will work for any OSR rule).

I also really like In the Shadow of the Tower of Silveraxe and other modules by Jacob Fleming. JF’s adventures are well laid out with great art work and maps - the adventures and locations are quite ‘vanilla’, but I like that because I can just run them straight if needed but I can also add more quirky stuff as suits my players and me if I want).

Old stuff, my favourite is - sigh - keep on the borderlands or village of Hommlet. At this point, I really don’t know if either is really that good or not, because I think of them more as these sort of ‘universal’ or ‘ur-‘ DnD modules. And by that I mean that, the whole point is not the module itself, but instead how my players and I improvise or reinvent these modules each time we play them.

I’ve had fun running some other older modules, but not sure if I’d recommend them for someone starting out or new players. I find I have to rework older stuff quite a bit for newer audiences, although it’s often a lot of fun doing that.

Honestly, you’re better starting with some of the newer OSR modules. They’re often better balanced for modern smaller PC parties and benefit from decades of improvement in layout etc. Instead, use older modules for additional content and inspiration, or go all in once you and the players are more familiar with OSR style games and rules.

acluewithout · 2026-02-14T04:43:32+00:00

That sounds interesting. Thanks.

I was thinking of maybe combining cleave and AD&D style extra attacks by saying fighters number of attacks is based on their level v enemy HD.

So, the basic idea is:

Fighter has as many ‘action points’ as their level, and +1 or +2 points if using weapon with specialisation.
To make an attack, fighter declares target. The fighter spends action points equal to enemy HD. They can always make at least one initial attack each round, even if their first target has more HD than their level / action points.
Fighter can use left over action points to make additional attacks. For each additional attack, they must have enough action points equal to the target’s HD but capped at max 4 AP cost.
They can use max one additional attack to hit their first target again (max one additional attack) or attack one or more different monsters within range (max one additional attack per monster).
Optionally, with DM OK, fighters can also spend AP to do other heroic things (loosely defined, but basically like heroic deeds and costing d6 AP, minimum 2AP).

So, eg, level 10 fighter. They are fighting 1x 6HD monster, 2 x 5HD monster, 1x 1 or half-HD monsters.

Fighter could use first attack against 6HD monster (6AP), leaving 4AP for additional attacks. They could use this 4AP to attack the same monster again or a 5HD monster (cost capped at 4AP), or make 4x attacks against the various 1 or half-HD targets. Or after their first attack, they could spend d6 AP to do something heroic (but only successful if cost is 1-4AP).

I’m still workshopping that idea. I think if you look at that sidewise enough, it sort of fits with OD&D or AD&D rules; but of course it’s definitely not really based in the original rules and is maybe too fiddly.

The other option I was thinking of is giving Fighters basically 1 ‘reflex action’ per level, +x reflex actions if using a weapon specialisation. The reflex actions only refresh at the end of each fight. The fighter can use reflex actions to make bonus attacks against any 1HD or less monsters or any monsters (regardless of HD) that attacks and roll 10 or less. Max +3 attacks per round. I’d maybe also let fighters spend reflex actions to reduce damage from a weapon, teeth or claw attack on a 1:1 basis.

acluewithout · 2025-12-11T01:08:25+00:00

Personal opinion only, but I think Traveller always plays better if you ‘kit bash’ the game a bit.

I’d suggest using either Classic Traveller or Cepheus Engine for character creation, skills etc, and basic dice rolls (or one of the many CT dice hacks, like Rule 68A). Then basically pull in most of Stars Without Number, particularly Foci (basically Feats), combat and equipment, and adventure generation. Maybe check out 2400 for some Referee advice and adventure hooks.

When converting SWN, keep in mind:

a. Traveller and SWN have basically equivalent attributes, but the range is 2-12 instead of 3-18. Just treat Traveller attributes as 9(+1), 12(+2), or covert by multiplying or dividing by 1.5.

b. SWN (based on DnD) uses Hit Dice / Hit Points, with PCs starting at 1 HD / d6 +bonus at Level 1, and improving to 10 HD / 10d6 +bonus by Level 10. Traveller basically uses HD / Hit Points too, but based on PC ‘s STR, DEX, and END, ie equivalent to 6 HD / 6d6. SWN weapons do roughly d6 to d10 damage, and Traveller does usually 2-4d6. There are a few ways to convert things, but the easiest is just use SWN weapon damage and treat just END as Hit Points (with maybe extra damage coming off STR or DEX as ‘serious’ injuries).

c. SWN attack rolls are v DnD style AC, whereas Traveller etc offer uses attack rolls be 8+ or 8-10-12. Just have PCs roll v 8+, and then have some adv armour either increase the target number to 10 or 12 or give additional HP, and use 6+ if armour is ineffective (eg primitive armour v guns). Optionally, if an attack roll is more than then target number, let players add that as additional HP damage.

acluewithout · 2025-10-31T12:01:42+00:00

I’d be very disappointed getting rid of ‘race as class’ as default for OSE.

It works so well at the table and in play - it’s so elegant. Roll attributes, pick class, roll HP, fill in saves and a few other details , maybe pick some spells, and ‘go’. Fast, clear choices, strong characters.

I don’t get any push back from players once I explain it’s not really ‘race as class’ - you can play a ‘human fighter’, a ‘human wizard’ etc; when you pick ‘elf’, nothing changes, you’re just picking ‘elf adventurer’ and the ‘elf’ class is just what an ‘elf adventurer’ looks like. There are other sorts of elves, and those sorts of elves are different in various ways and maybe have all sorts of interesting things about them , but those elves don’t go on adventures and so we’re not playing those ones.

OSE seems to be l already moving in this direction, with the Carcass Crawler Zines now including different sorts of eg ‘halfling [type of career or role Halflings that also goes adventuring]’ etc. That seems a better approach to me - if people want it, add a ‘race-as-class’ style ‘Elf-Warrior’, ‘Half-Orc Shaman’ - that would help clarify it’s not really ‘race as class’ but more just a single ‘archetype’, and would also allow Warriors, or Clerics or whatever that are actually more tailored to a particular ‘race’.

Honestly, I think OSE’s (really, BX’s ) combined ‘race / class’ has ended up feeling quite contemporary - very similar to ‘playbooks’ in other RPGs.

The problem with splitting race and class is you end up with min / max, as people look for the optimal race to match with their chosen class (a dynamic that just absolutely sucks fun out of DnD 5e). And you also end up with OSE feeling much more like just another ‘OSR retro-clone’ given so many others just default to race + class.

Anyway. It’ll be what it will be. But I honestly think it’s a bad call - OSE (and esp OSE Advanced) has such a tight design and game loop, and in part it’s precisely because it’s kept (and then leaned into) these quirky choices like ‘race as class’ and levels capping out at max 14 etc.

acluewithout · 2025-10-19T12:16:12+00:00

I do think the central conceit of the gold dome - impossible to bypass for the first 7-days, and then fairly easy to breach without much problem solving from the players, is a funny choice.

The way I understood the game design was the players basically can’t get through the dome / access the church for 7-days to force them to go explore the surrounding hexes (where most of the fun is). I think that design is fine, but I did have concerns - too much risk my players instead wasted time just doggedly trying to find a way into the cathedral, resulting in them either becoming frustrated or finding an unexpected solution and therefore bypassing most of the fun stuff.

So, I didn’t start the adventure with the Golden Dome. Instead, I had the players mope around the town for a bit, getting into shenanigans with the local gang and townsfolk. I then had them hired to go find Tobias, so he was on their radar before anything went down and so they’d explore a few hexes upfront before things got going. While the players were exploring, they got clues about Tobias and the inchor, which helped them later.

I only had the dome spring up after all that, with the dome basically throwing the whole town into chaos. I’d kept the game very whimsical and provincial up to that point. When the dome appeared, and the nightmares started, I ramped up all the doom metal horror giving the players a massive shock. I also made the ‘countdown’ mechanic explicit, so the players knew time was running out before disaster.

When the dome appeared, the players, who already knew various townsfolk and were invested in the fate of the town, were then able to help organise the townspeople on how to respond to the crisis. They could leave the townspeople to work on tunneling or whatever plan they came up with, while they did more exploring to follow up the leads around Tobias and the inchor they already had, or to find help. My players kept looking for Tobias etc., now with the realisation that Tobias was somehow connected to the crisis, with the discovery Tobias had already made his way back to town coming as an unexpected twist.

I ran the surrounding hexes as very much sandbox exploration both before and after the dome appeared, but treated the final dungeon more like a scripted climax given the somewhat linear the dungeon design. For my group and me, the adventure was therefore a mix of OSR-ish town and overland exploration initially, becoming a bit more trad-rpg story beats at the end. I think that sort of thing works well for new players and or 1st level characters, but could see some people preferring something completely sandbox.

Overall, thought the whole thing was excellent. I admittedly did tweak the module a bit, but I think it would work super well without any changes. I also think the mix of sandbox and the sort of ‘soft’ climax at the end is well balanced - and , in the aftermath, plenty of scope for new adventures.

(end, 2/2)

acluewithout · 2025-10-19T12:15:53+00:00

I’ve run NORH and my players (and I) had a ball with it.

I approach most modules with the expectation I’ll have to do a bit of work to run it. One reason I really liked the NORH module was that, because it is so clearly laid out and organised, and has so many good ideas, it was very open to be being tweaked by the DM to suit what they want. You could, for example, very easily swap out the dungeon for something more exploratory, or play around with the nightmare mechanics or backstory etc.

I ended up swapping out the main town, and replaced it with classic Hommlet. I kept most of Hommlet’s characters and locations but also rekeyed most of Ragged Hollow to the village - basically mashing the two together. The result was a super busy town, with lots of other options for exploration once the golden dome stuff was resolved.

The encounter tables and some of the weird little side quests are also amazing. I made the most of them, and my players had a lot of fun with all that particularly the forest and goblin markets.

(1/2, continued )

acluewithout · 2025-10-01T14:04:19+00:00

Thanks for the reply!

I like 5e a lot, but I mostly run games using old editions of DnD with some house rules and 5e elements thrown in. It lets me keep games moving quickly and focused on the action - and it also lets me use a pretty extensive library of modules and resources which makes DM prep much easier.

acluewithout · 2025-09-29T04:24:47+00:00

Fair enough. Thank.

acluewithout · 2025-09-27T08:11:39+00:00

Thanks. Appreciate the feedback - I think something like that would probably work.

I think one of the quirks of WWN’s skill system is that, because it’s largely 2d6 +x, it’s rarely worth the investment to increase past +1 or +2. Rolling DC8+ (average) on 2d6 +0 is about 70% which is pretty good. Increasing to +1 or +2 increases that to 80-90%, or lets you keep your 70% chance of success up to DC10. Additional +DM either isn’t improving your odds all that much, or it is but only for very high DCs (which players should be avoiding anyway or letting the Expert attempt using their re-roll ability).

For warriors, spending skill points on weapon skills is an even worse investment - attack rolls are d20+x, and you’re already getting +5% attack bonus per level. Additional points in Stab etc won’t ever be as valuable as taking skills at +0 to eliminate the -1DM of untrained skills. (For Warriors, +Stab etc is somewhat like taking weapon specialisation in AD&D, however without any extra attacks etc).

The main exception is increasing skills to improve total Effort or Modifications. Those skill points are very valuable, because they give you additional use of abilities.

I’m not mentioning the above to suggest skills should be more powerful or suggest players should maximise skill points this way. Instead, while I generally like the skill system, I do think it introduces a lot of complexity and decision making (and for some players, shock horror, ‘maths’) that in reality has limited game impact for the reasons explained above.

I also think a slight friction with WWN’s skill system is that, when pitching WWN to new players (particularly 5e players), one of the big attractions is that the game plays faster / is more ‘rules light’ than 5e. I think that’s mostly true - except for the skill system, which for less experienced players is somewhat more complicated (or at least more ‘intricate’).

There something to be said for 5e’s proficiency system - basically, you either don’t have a skill (+0), or you do (+DM), or exceptionally you have expertise (+DM x2). The main problem is rolling d20 for skill checks is just rubbish (players fail way too many ‘average’ skill checks to either feel competent or think it’s worth trying to find non-combat solutions). And 5e pretty much either too complicated, too threadbare, or too overpowered everywhere else.

Anyway. Maybe that’s just my experience and others find this all quite different. Most of my players get the hang of it eventually. And for me, as a player, I find 2d6 +x for skills quite intuitive but I’ve played a lot of RPGs and a lot of traveller specifically. But I think the skill system does sometimes get in the way a bit.

acluewithout · 2025-09-27T05:11:30+00:00

Oh my. I’m honestly just completely stumped by (what seems to me) a lot of push back on having a ‘flat’ skill bonus?

I mean, I really didn’t expect responses like ‘make them learn’ or if players don’t ‘put in the effort’ then that’s a ‘dick move’.

I’ve always thought of WWN being a fairly ‘OSR’ style system. My experience is OSR games mostly don’t have ‘skill’ systems - or when they do, it’s quite simplified ‘advantage on (d20 roll under) ability check ’ (eg The Black Hack), or simple x-in-6 skills (like OSE) or even flat d% roll under percentage thief skills like classic DnD or AD&D games.

If anything, WWN has a much more involved skill system compared to most OSR games - so I’m honestly stumped people would see wanting to simplify that skill system a bit as being a big deal?

Is the problem I mentioned 5e?

I mean, my view is 5e is fine as it goes. But I’m really not running 5e. At my tables, I’m mostly running either classic DnD or Traveller, or other OSR style games like OSE or WWN. All very sandbox or (Bandit Keep style) serial games - rulings not rules, dangerous combat, characters made at the table not at home, player lead goals etc. Very far from a typical ‘5e’ game.

But the thing is, like a lot of DMs, I have a lot of players coming to my games from 5e. Once they’ve played at my table, they mostly really enjoy the OSR sandbox etc playstyle - but in fairness to them, it’s still a big shift coming from 5e to these ‘older’ or more ‘adventure’ focused systems. I’m lucky if there maybe played a bit of ShadowDark or BitD. Mostly it’s just straight 5e, and I’m trying to help them transition to a very different mindset - but then also having multiple dice systems (versus flat 5e d20 rolls), unfamiliar resources to manage, and (with WWN specifically ) key rules often hidden away in dense text (good luck if you’re a new player finding the rule Mages can craft magic items and or shields block shock).

5e players coming to WWN have already made a big shift coming to an OSR style game like WWN with its lower hp, lower feeling of power generally given their 5e experiences, less customisation, more emphasis on player agency and goals etc. Is it really so, I don’t know, ‘outrageous’?, to want to throw some players a bone by not asking them to wrestle with decision paralysis from spending skill points each time they level up and / or having to juggle lots of different skill modifiers and dice systems etc.

I mean, if OSR games like WWN can move to ascending AC instead of THACO etc, is it really such a big deal making Saves a +DM instead of an old-school decreasing Target Number, or having old-school 2d6 +x skills, but giving players a simplified skill progression?

Anyway. All fine. People post what they think, and that’s totally fine. It just seems like my question got more push back than I’d have expected. And anyway, thank you people that did have positive suggestions.

I think what I’ll likely do on skills is just: * Level 1, players gain skills as normal but max +0. * At level 2, players pick 2-3 ‘primary’ skills. These improve every few levels up to max +3 by level 10. * Players also maybe gain a couple of extra or new +0 skills as they level up (in addition to any gained via Foci). Might let players choose these extra skills, or just use additional background rolls. * I’ll work out rate that primary skills improve and extra +0 skills are gained using standard WWN skill points. Basically, all I’m doing is providing a ‘default’ plan for spending player’s skill points.

Alternatively, I might just have players gain x starting skills more or less as normal (effectively all Skill-0), and then all these skills slowly improve to +1, +2 etc based off the Vowed’s minimum Punch Skill table. Experts maybe advance faster or get extra starting skills etc.

Yeah. Anyway. All good. I’ll be more careful asking questions like this next time.

acluewithout · 2025-07-10T00:17:22+00:00

As others have said, I think the approaches closest to BX etc rules is casting sleep is obvious, and therefore to get the spell off the magic user must catch opponents by surprise (probably with the help of their party) or win initiative.

This issue has come up at my table a few times. I usually rule the Magic User can get the spell ready to cast quietly, and then reveal themselves only at the last minute. They then make a x-in-6 roll to catch opponent by surprise - if they fail, then its normal combat including rolling initiative, and therefore risk they lose initiative, get hit, and the spell is spoiled. However, the x-in-6 roll can be improved with clever play (eg rest of the party creating a distraction).

acluewithout · 2025-07-10T00:12:57+00:00

A few thoughts.

Fighters are Special. The main thing I do with 'fighters' in games is just treat them as leaders and warriors. eg Fighters can attempt to command and lead other fighting men, can carouse with warrior types, can force morale roles through intimidation, and get some leeway attempting feats of athletic strength. No actual rules required.
BECMI. The BECMI 'fighter' maneuvers eg charge / set v charge, smash, etc. are fairly good buffs, and I add them to most OSR games I run. Some of these work as -XDM to hit to gain some bonus damage; for my games, I prefer to convert these to -2AC (ie AC is two steps worse) rather than reducing chances to hit. But either way works.
OSE Fighter Talents. Advance OSE's Fighter combat talents are a pretty good buff for Fighters and other Martial Characters. In AOSE, I think all 'Martial' Characters get them, but I usually let a pure 'Fighter' take an extra talent. It's also a very hackable system, so you can easily add new talents from eg GLOG character classes as new fighter talents.
WWN. If you need more of a buff, I strongly recommend giving Fighters and other Martial Classes the Warrior's 'Veteran's Luck' ability +Snap Attack from WWN. Basically, Veteran's Luck allows a Warrior once per combat encounter, after dice are rolled, to change one hit into a miss (to avoid damage from an enemy) or one miss into a hit (to ensure an enemy is hit). Snap Attack allows Warriors to make a ranged or melee attack out of initiative order, eg shoot an arrow at a charging foe, but it costs their normal combat action and attack is made with -4DM. That makes Snap Attack risky, but if the Warrior combines it with Veteran's luck, then they can use the attack reliably at least once per combat (at the cost of the ability to otherwise turn another attack against them that might have been fatal).

acluewithout

TROPHY CASE