Post/Author/DateTime	Post
theotherdraxen 10-06-06, 04:59 PM	Would this help? I've seen that D&D purportedly most powerful class, the fighter, has actually been placed as one of underpowered classes. Balancing it causes problems: virtually anything a fighter can take anyone else can take. Enabling the fighter to take really powerful feats makes it too dangerous as a dipping class. So I thought about it, and I think I have an idea as to how the fighter can reclaim it's place at the top of the powerscale (er...maybe...). Oath of War [General?] By dedicating yourself to the absolute understanding and power of combat, you can learn abilities that others may not. Prerequisite: Fighter 1, no other class levels. Benefit: By taking the Oath of War, you may now gain access to feats unavailable those without it. However, you may not multi-class: you must progress from here on out as a fighter. Normal: Oath of War feats are unavailable to you. Note that lawfulness is not a prerequisite. Chaotic Fighters can 'take the oath' (for them it's more a lifestyle than an oath) by choice, and simply not deviate purely on personal preference. Maybe this should also give the Fighter a Very Good BAB (goes up to 25) or maybe a high Reflex Save? Or maybe they can now access the epic feat: BAB +1. Not really sure. If you think this is a bad idea, please don't flame my thread or set fire to my mailbox (again). Just let this thread die quietly. If you think it's a good idea, then please post any Oath of War feats that you would like to see.
not Yoda 10-06-06, 08:57 PM	Actually it's a different approach. I don't think pumping up fighters in that way will really help. Nerfing spellcasters unfortunately is the way to go.
Reversefigure4 10-06-06, 11:23 PM	Instead of making complicated pre-reqs and restrictions on multi-classing, why not just set the Oath of War feats to have pre-reqs like "Fighter Level 18th", and that sort of thing?
theotherdraxen 10-06-06, 11:40 PM	Eh, I think I get your point. Oh, well. It was worth a shot.
Kaligrad 10-06-06, 11:53 PM	Or you could instate class features, like with my fighter build!;)
OneWinged4ngel 10-07-06, 01:14 AM	Would this help? I've seen that D&D purportedly most powerful class, the fighter, has actually been placed as one of underpowered classes. Balancing it causes problems: virtually anything a fighter can take anyone else can take. Enabling the fighter to take really powerful feats makes it too dangerous as a dipping class. So I thought about it, and I think I have an idea as to how the fighter can reclaim it's place at the top of the powerscale (er...maybe...). Oath of War [General?] By dedicating yourself to the absolute understanding and power of combat, you can learn abilities that others may not. Prerequisite: Fighter 1, no other class levels. Benefit: By taking the Oath of War, you may now gain access to feats unavailable those without it. However, you may not multi-class: you must progress from here on out as a fighter. Normal: Oath of War feats are unavailable to you. Note that lawfulness is not a prerequisite. Chaotic Fighters can 'take the oath' (for them it's more a lifestyle than an oath) by choice, and simply not deviate purely on personal preference. Maybe this should also give the Fighter a Very Good BAB (goes up to 25) or maybe a high Reflex Save? Or maybe they can now access the epic feat: BAB +1. Not really sure. If you think this is a bad idea, please don't flame my thread or set fire to my mailbox (again). Just let this thread die quietly. If you think it's a good idea, then please post any Oath of War feats that you would like to see. This is basically the same as instituting exclusive class features you can choose from a variety of every other level... except you have to burn a feat to even start getting class abilities. Really, the whole thing is just kinda unnescessary and superfluous.
Thunder Dragonbane 10-07-06, 08:55 AM	Having the pre-reqs at 10th might be better than 1st. Yes the feat reads you may not multi class, but how many would actually do that?
Squirrelloid 10-07-06, 10:58 AM	Fighter has 2 problems: (1) it is substantially less powerful than casters at mid to high levels. (2) it cannot deal with level appropriate challenges at mid to high levels. (This criticism applies to all damage dealing classes except rogue, who in addition to dealing more damage than the fighter, also has other abilities to compensate). Nerfing casters only fixes one of those. Look up K's Races of War thread. That is a balanced fighter through 20 levels. The problem is that martial classes can really only contribute in combat, and they aren't even all that good at it. The casters gain new capabilities which dramatically reshape the battlefield and can take down powerful monsters in a round or two. The fighter has limited battlefield control that becomes less effective over time (monster str increases faster than fighter str, so tripping, grappling, etc... become unworkable against most monsters at high level). The fighter cannot deal meaningful damage under a wide variety of conditions at high level. (Meaningful damage at 20th level is on the order of 300-400 damage/round, consistently). Further, the underlying problem is that spellcasters are on an exponential power curve. An X+1 level spell is at least twice as good as a level X spell. Feats on the other hand are a linear increase in power at best, and because sufficiently long feat chains don't exist, fighters actually end up having to take feats which don't notably increase their power at all - thus their rate of power accumulation actually slows down at high levels when wizards and clerics are gaining power the fastest. Anyone who's taken calculus knows that exponential grows much faster than linear, and anyone who's played D+D knows the point of equality (where wizards become as useful as fighters early on) is approximately 3-7th level. Which means after that fighters are behind the curve, and they get twice as far behind every 2 levels thereafter.
Maraxus 10-08-06, 02:34 AM	Fighter has 2 problems: (1) it is substantially less powerful than casters at mid to high levels. (2) it cannot deal with level appropriate challenges at mid to high levels. (This criticism applies to all damage dealing classes except rogue, who in addition to dealing more damage than the fighter, also has other abilities to compensate). Nerfing casters only fixes one of those. Look up K's Races of War thread. That is a balanced fighter through 20 levels. The problem is that martial classes can really only contribute in combat, and they aren't even all that good at it. The casters gain new capabilities which dramatically reshape the battlefield and can take down powerful monsters in a round or two. The fighter has limited battlefield control that becomes less effective over time (monster str increases faster than fighter str, so tripping, grappling, etc... become unworkable against most monsters at high level). The fighter cannot deal meaningful damage under a wide variety of conditions at high level. (Meaningful damage at 20th level is on the order of 300-400 damage/round, consistently). Further, the underlying problem is that spellcasters are on an exponential power curve. An X+1 level spell is at least twice as good as a level X spell. Feats on the other hand are a linear increase in power at best, and because sufficiently long feat chains don't exist, fighters actually end up having to take feats which don't notably increase their power at all - thus their rate of power accumulation actually slows down at high levels when wizards and clerics are gaining power the fastest. Anyone who's taken calculus knows that exponential grows much faster than linear, and anyone who's played D+D knows the point of equality (where wizards become as useful as fighters early on) is approximately 3-7th level. Which means after that fighters are behind the curve, and they get twice as far behind every 2 levels thereafter. "Anyone, who has played D+D knows..." Please don't talk for everybody. What I know, is, that there are DMs out there somewhere, who seam to not have any control about the material, their players use and that most of the min/maxers seam to perfectly know the magic classes but totally suck at making (and playing) good fighters. Of cause I am one exception ( ;) and seriously I don't think I'm the only one) so what I know is, that in group vs. Monster fights, the martial guy is the backbone of the group all the way to level 10, where finally the others are starting to get their show-times, too. Sure, nothing can compeate with the brokeness of 9th level (mostly arcane) spells, but even at Level 16, I have seen a martial character (namely a monk!) shine. I admit however, that's more an exception. However, in any case, the statement that martial characters cannot deal with level appropriate challenges at mid to high level was mentioned often enough (by players that have seen them failing) and rejected by players that have seen them do just fine. That it does seam to work for some brings me to the conclusion, that it's a mistake of the players, not the class. You mention races of war. While I totally like the "diffrent races and their view on racial conflicts" part, I think the parts about "rebalancing" are simply broken. Those characters can easily, with almost no risk take on a challenge of their ECL on their own. Even (moderatly) prepared and fighting with all resources, this should have a big chance of death. There are some really good ideas, but the result is it not.
Squirrelloid 10-08-06, 11:31 AM	"Anyone, who has played D+D knows..." Please don't talk for everybody. What I know, is, that there are DMs out there somewhere, who seam to not have any control about the material, their players use and that most of the min/maxers seam to perfectly know the magic classes but totally suck at making (and playing) good fighters. Of cause I am one exception ( ;) and seriously I don't think I'm the only one) so what I know is, that in group vs. Monster fights, the martial guy is the backbone of the group all the way to level 10, where finally the others are starting to get their show-times, too. Ok, what level do wizard's start contributing equally with everyone else? Virtually everyone would say its somewhere in the 3-7 range, probably 5th. Now, how fast does a fighter's power increase? (Linear increase in # of feats, hp, BAB, etc... Looks linear to me). How fast does a Wizard's power increase? (exponential increase in spell power with spell level). So if we know when they're contributing approximately equally (lets say level 7 for argument's sake), and we know one is growing linearly and one is growing exponentially, which one is getting more powerful faster? In terms of power, is the linear power increase going to matter in 5 levels? 10? Do you understand how fast exponential power increase is?
Maraxus 10-08-06, 12:31 PM	As I said: While many players would say 3-7, it's not "virtually everybody" (this starts around 99% for me). Furthermore, as a mathematican, I can not agree with the statement, that spell power increases exponential. *starts excel* *checks it* Right, the best aproximation is x^n with x=Level and n=1.72. x*logn(x) with n=1.46 isn't that bad either. And you will know that x*log(x) or x^n with n less then 2 isn't that far away from x. Furthermore, the wealth per level (what is used by the fighter to emulate wizard abilities) is best aproximated by a*x^n with n>3.
Seerow 10-08-06, 12:36 PM	How did you come up with your value for N? If you're judging based on damage spells, that would say a lot. The things that make casters much more powerful aren't quantifiable, which is why it's so hard to show that casters -are- in fact stronger.
Maraxus 10-08-06, 12:55 PM	No, not the damage spells. That's hard to value. Like: Chain Lightning is 2 times as high as lightning bold, at only up to 1.5 times the damage - but how do you account for the highter save DC and the better area of effect? No, I simply took the spell level times the spell slots. One could also argue, that I have to factor another x in for the caster level. But on the other hand, one could argue for the fighter, that he is not really lineraty, too. Many of his feats benefit from a high BAB - almost all benefit from a high number of attacks. He get's more of these feats with levels and they get better throught more BAB and attacks, which points to an polinomial increase in power, too. The main problem is, that we are talking about a system with aproximatly infinit many variables, so any "mathematical proof" is nothing but a guestimation - Just how good the estimation in this is is the question, and how much I guess / leave out of my model.
Squirrelloid 10-08-06, 01:36 PM	No, not the damage spells. That's hard to value. Like: Chain Lightning is 2 times as high as lightning bold, at only up to 1.5 times the damage - but how do you account for the highter save DC and the better area of effect? No, I simply took the spell level times the spell slots. One could also argue, that I have to factor another x in for the caster level. But on the other hand, one could argue for the fighter, that he is not really lineraty, too. Many of his feats benefit from a high BAB - almost all benefit from a high number of attacks. He get's more of these feats with levels and they get better throught more BAB and attacks, which points to an polinomial increase in power, too. The main problem is, that we are talking about a system with aproximatly infinit many variables, so any "mathematical proof" is nothing but a guestimation - Just how good the estimation in this is is the question, and how much I guess / leave out of my model. There really aren't that many synergistic feats though. Gaining unrelated feats doesnt actually improve the fighter's power much. Especially when monster defenses against fighter tactics increase faster than their saving throws! (chance of a level 20 fighter grappling or tripping most CR20 monsters, even after optimizing for the tactic? Pretty small. Tripping is much better than grappling, but still he *needs* 4 attacks to have a chance 1 of them will actually trip the creature.) And a good level n spell is about twice as good as a good level n-1 spell. Sometimes the increase is astronomical - how do you compare timestop to any lower level spell and not just go: "Wow, this spell is arbitrarily better than anything lower level than it (and most spells of the same level)". PAO is probably ~10x better than polymorph, and Shapechange is even better yet. Caster level vs BAB: BAB compares to caster level in to hit vs SR penetration. Same deal, linear increase. BAB also gives extra attacks - less than linear increase because additional attacks are worse than the primary. (Fighters would still be underpowered if they were all at the same bonus, but at least extra attacks would be a linear increase scale). Wizards on the other hand use caster level to set duration, effect size, area or targets, etc... All of which are multiplicative improvements. (And spells synergize better than feats do, so the spell-feat comparison, even if you assume spell power increases linearly, has better multiplicative improvement from synergy, and we know spell power is not on a linear scale for anything but blast spells).
Mirikon 10-08-06, 01:46 PM	The only thing I would give to the fighter is more high end combat feats, and more tactical feats. While yes, anyone can take combat feats, generally only Fighters have the store of feats to follow feat chains more than one or two levels up the chain. Anyone can take Whirlwind Attack, but how many non-fighters have the feats open for Dodge, Mobility, Spring Attack, and Combat Expertise? Over the course of twenty levels, most characters get 7 feats (barring bonus feats for race or class). The Whirlwind attack chain takes five of those seven. Barbarians will do more damage while they rage, but they only have so many rages per day, and take more hits while raging. Rogues have the sneak attack, but what happens when they face undead? Paladins can only Smite Evil and Lay on Hands so many times before they are out of power. Rangers can't always fight their favored enemies. Fighters never get the high points of the other melee classes, but they don't get the low points, either. And they have the feats to be very versatile in combat as well. The reason people say the fighter sucks is because they look at raw damage, or lack of special abilities, and fail to see the possibilities of all those feats.
NineInchNall 10-08-06, 02:07 PM	How can it be said that Fighter power increases linearly when it mathematically is not the case? By way of simple counterexample, consider the case of the typical charge builds, where multipliers to damage enter at various points (Headlong Rush at 2nd, Leap Attack and Shock Trooper at 6th, Combat Brute at 9th, etc.). Adding in a valorous weapon when possible, the character's damage output on a charge [3*(PA*4+weapon+Str+misc)] increases along a curve too bent to be considered linear. Yes, it's only a single example, but it's all that's necessary to show that Fighter power does not have to scale in a linear fashion. As has been said many a time, Fighters can become holy terrors when polymorphed intelligently. I shudder to imagine a polymorphed charger -- "3k damage this round? Damn, I must be slipping."
Mirikon 10-08-06, 02:15 PM	Which brings up a point. D&D is not intended to be a solo game, like Everquest. It is intended to be a team game. Fighters help the casters by providing a line of defense, casters help the fighters with spells. Rogues help everyone with sneak attack and disarming traps. In the end, it is the synergy of a party as a whole that will determine how effective the team will be.
Seerow 10-08-06, 02:36 PM	How can it be said that Fighter power increases linearly when it mathematically is not the case? By way of simple counterexample, consider the case of the typical charge builds, where multipliers to damage enter at various points (Headlong Rush at 2nd, Leap Attack and Shock Trooper at 6th, Combat Brute at 9th, etc.). Adding in a valorous weapon when possible, the character's damage output on a charge [3*(PA*4+weapon+Str+misc)] increases along a curve too bent to be considered linear. Yes, it's only a single example, but it's all that's necessary to show that Fighter power does not have to scale in a linear fashion. As has been said many a time, Fighters can become holy terrors when polymorphed intelligently. I shudder to imagine a polymorphed charger -- "3k damage this round? Damn, I must be slipping." Everyone knows a charger can be wicked powerful. Any other build doesn't get anywhere near that kind of exponentiality.
Maraxus 10-08-06, 02:40 PM	@Squirrelloid: Don't forget fights vs. NPCs. A high level fighter (or even monk) getting a full attack against a wizard or especially sorcerer can mean a sudden death. Grapple, pin. Pin + damage every round. No, not every caster has a silent dimension door prepared (sure, every 13+ wizard with silent spell probably has one, but among the metamagic feats, silent spell usually comes after still, quick, maximised, spell penetration, -focus and item creation. Same for the mixture. Not all 20th level oppontns need to be 20th level Humans and Pit Fiends. 12th level Erinies are equally possible. - And don't think, a 20th level fighter has a problem grappling or tripping a pit fiend, if he focusses on that trick. It's just that he can perfectly grapple/trip a 20th level wizard even without focussing on this trick. So let's see the spells: And let's exclude 9th level spells. What do you mean with "times better" when you compare polymorph with polymorph any object? I'd say most of the time it's either polymorph or baleful polymorph - but that does not even have to say it's as good as both added, because it's either or, not both. Maybe it's more because it's a situation, where the other possibilities are suddenly extreamly useful - who knows, I don't think it's to far away from twice as valueable - and I have no idea, what I mean with this. And see other stuff: Damage spells are even less then proportional to the level. (Ice storm vs. Fireball?) Save effects: Level 2: Blindness, 3: Suggestion, 4: Confusion, 5: Feeblemind (and here you can basicly stop counting up), 6: Petrification, 7: Death, 8: ..., 9: Domination. Maybe I was struck by the second level but I can't see, where n+1 gets sooo much better then n. And I don't want to look at the buff spells. Shield & Mage Armor at level 1. Mirror Image, Blur at level 2. Displacement, Haste, Fly at level 3. And then? 4: Fire shield (I'd prefer Mirror image). Nothing at 5 and Transformation at Level 6, what has it's obvious drawbacks, too.
ninjarabbit 10-08-06, 04:00 PM	The problem with the fighter is that almost every other class out there does the fighter's job (tank/meatshield/somethingsimilar) as well or better than the fighter and even if you factor out the main spellcasting classes like durid, cleric, and wizard the other combat classes like barbarian, paladin, and even the ranger I think overall more effective at the tank role than the fighter.
krossbow 10-08-06, 04:24 PM	I for one think it would be best handled more by making spellcasters more balanced throughout (actually useful at levels 1-4, and not insane at levels 16-20), which would make the problem alot harder to notice. But I digress, we shouldn't focus on other classes being change here. One possibility is to make some feats that only fighters can take (in addition to weapon focus, imp. weapon spec., imp. weapon focus, ect.). Another thing would be to at high levels give them some DR based upon their armor (like DR 1/- light, DR 2/- med, and DR3/- heavy somewhere past 13th level, and have it upgrade to DR5/- at level 20). DR is a barbarian feature, but I don't think it would infringe too much; raging is their iconic feature, not DR, and fighters would benefit from the increased lastibility. Still, I'm not sure slapping DR on them would solve the problem.
Mousse 10-08-06, 05:36 PM	Its best explained as such: Damage is not the problem. A well built melee type can do damage comprable to a caster. Hell, they can do damage in excess at times. However, they cannot do the the other things casters can: instantly retreat half-way around the world, lock you in a cage of force for 40 hours at a time, kill you instantly, summon beasts from the alternate planes or even set up 10 levels of spell defenses and ignore you.
theotherdraxen 10-08-06, 08:59 PM	I for one think it would be best handled more by making spellcasters more balanced throughout (actually useful at levels 1-4, and not insane at levels 16-20), which would make the problem alot harder to notice. But I digress, we shouldn't focus on other classes being change here. One possibility is to make some feats that only fighters can take (in addition to weapon focus, imp. weapon spec., imp. weapon focus, ect.). Another thing would be to at high levels give them some DR based upon their armor (like DR 1/- light, DR 2/- med, and DR3/- heavy somewhere past 13th level, and have it upgrade to DR5/- at level 20). DR is a barbarian feature, but I don't think it would infringe too much; raging is their iconic feature, not DR, and fighters would benefit from the increased lastibility. Still, I'm not sure slapping DR on them would solve the problem. Weren't all these options offered in the PHII? I could have sworn that Weapon Supremacy requires 18th level fighter, and there was that Imroved Armor Use feat that grants DR... I think Wizards is fixing the Fighter up with their splat books. And I agree with the deal on spellcasters. Maybe one of the big reasons that Fighters come back underbalanced is that they are a class dependent on magic items. In a low-magic setting (which I hear a lot of people are trying) magic is king. In a high magic setting (isn't that what the game is balanced around? I don't really know), wizards are probably still too powerful at levels 16-20, but are weak 1-4, like you said. Anyway, just a big IMO...
Archangel62 10-09-06, 03:06 PM	I think that the actual use of a caster is being able to keep multiple balls in the air. The caster can damage, debuff, move, buff, and also wash the windows if they so desire. Yes, I realize that they can't do all of them but they have the option to. They can build themselves around the party and be incredibly good at what they choose. The issue with the fighter is this, the fighter can debuff after a fashion, denying actions or weaponry. But doing it is either feat intensive (tripping) easily dealt with cheaply (disarming/grappling) or impractical (sundering). Plenty of DMs ban things like the spiked chain and other exotic weapons because they find them cheesy or unrealistic or TOO GOOD. The fighter can get completely neutered with a single nerf, if the spiked chain no longer exists the tripper builds get tougher. Locked gauntlets can make disarming very difficult, same with armor spikes and grappling. And you can't disarm or sunder natural weaponry. The problem is that the fighter requires a lot of careful building. Casters can be harder to learn but are, overall, easier to build because they can be more easily customized and have more theoretical backups. I have no problem in the vein of the fighter being effective with a feat build, if they can build in and around their team they can be incredible. The issue is that the fighter tends to have to split feats melee and ranged, golf bag weapons and arrows, and has to be careful with feat selection as well as choosing gear. I actually think that the power of the fighter is synergy, not just feat synergy but synergy with other classes and synergy with teammates. And yes, the game is not a solo venture. The goal is not 'can the fighter beat the caster by himself' because the answer is probably no. The question should be if the fighter can properly contribute to the group throughout their career sans prestige classes and how much they take versus how much they give to the group.
rastlin_of_the_tomes 10-10-06, 12:12 PM	the war feat idea (getting back to the question of the thread) is an ok idea but the real thing is that fighters are being called underpowered by looking at them in the book alone, (at least that how it sounds on the boards.) and not the acid test. if you want damage then make a fighter that duals bast. swords and takes the weap. focus tree al the way for it. at level 18 this fighter with only 20 str and 19 dex (unchanged by spells!) can hit and will hit any target with AC 42 or lower for 7d10+the feat total+what ever the weapons add with their buffs. is that not a good amount to deal evey turn for your caster protecter that makes it so you dont have to memorize 5 stoneskins every day.:cool: