Post/Author/DateTime	Post
boozerker 08-02-07, 08:13 PM	So many fighter variations have been posted to fix the class. I don't visit the Classes area much, however it seems that for years and practically every day, a new class fix springs up. Yet has anyone seen one here which fixes the known (or most complained about) issues, in a *simple* way (and presenting that in a brief intuitive layout, rather than a sprawling mountain of terms and options )? Curious to see which fix gets the vote, if any. Had such been posted by now, it's unlikely that fixes would still keep popping up ;)
JadeSpider9643 08-03-07, 12:05 AM	oh people will always keep posting their own personal "fixes" for the fighter. but they never catch on for one extremely simple reason. The fighter is not broken. He doesn't need fixing, he does what he's supposed to do just fine. He specializes in armed combat better than any other class. The problem (if there is one) would be that armed combat is typically weaker than high level spellcasting. If a fighter seems to be ineffective then there's most likly another reason. Mabye an inept DM that keeps the party well behind their wealth/level guidelines but pushes their encounter CRs well ahead of their level. Mabye it's an inept player that just takes a different weapon focus for every fighter feat. And most "fixes" I've seen on these boards, arn't actual improvements. They mostly just make things more complicated and try to twist the fighter to benefit their own situation or to favor their own personal play style.
pale_enchantress 08-03-07, 02:11 AM	I usually just leave it alone since there are so many other options. Some classes may dip into fighter for a few feats, I see nothing wrong with that really. Other then that I use the fighter as a no-fuss way to create a basic NPC mook. If the someone wants to play a tank and sees druid as their best option whats wrong about that?
IdleAltruism 08-03-07, 02:26 AM	The fighter does his job just fine. He can play in a 20th level game(really the only gap is around the 15-20) before and after that a fighter do great and start to excel the farther you go on either end. The lower levels fighters excel and when you get into epic they start to shine the higher you go. So basically its a trade off, spellcasters don't do so well for the first 5-8 levels then start picking up the pace and then hit that sweet spot at lvl 15-18. So your fighter might not be the awesome killing machine a wizard is for a few levels, so what neither was he for half the game. In an average game the fighter does just fine, they do well at their job and are probably the simplest core class(probably any class core or not).
Nexis 08-03-07, 04:17 AM	People, the OP asked for fighter fixes that have been on the boards, not for you to preach about things you’re wrong about. And before I list a few Id like to point out that In an average game the fighter does just fine, they do well at their job and are probably the simplest core class(probably any class core or not). Is so wrong that I was stunned while reading it. Even one of the best pure fighter builds I've seen in awhile, Here (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=883706) is awfully complicated because you need to find the feats that really matter by pouring over multiple books and sources. Taking toughness over and over won’t cut it. As for alternative builds... Powerful, interesting, and certainly controversial, Frank and K's Fighter, found here (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=9776630&postcount=4), is one of the largest fixes I’ve ever seen. It’s definitely on the high sides of power levels. Otto the bugbear has his own, which is basically a toned down Frank and K fighter. Found here (http://dsenchuk.googlepages.com/fighter) Seerow has a good one that was made with a bit more community involvement. It incorporates some of the Frank and K work and some ToB things. It can be found here (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=728493) Finally, another good one is here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warblade_%28Dungeons_%26_Dragons%29) (JK :P) Those are my favorites. :D
Frogmantis 08-03-07, 04:42 AM	I've found the fighter to be a fine class, and with the PH II, you've got some interested new fighter-only feats that make for a tougher higher level character. if anything, adding complicated new level progression or brand new tweaks won't fix the fighter (I agree with the previous posters).
Leress 08-03-07, 04:51 AM	I second the Frank and K version... it is still simple like the original fighter but adds more meat to the class.
OneWinged4ngel 08-03-07, 05:00 AM	Let's get this out of the way: At least 9 in 10 of the Fighter fixes on these boards are garbage. No, seriously. Most of them aren't even new. You see post after post of some guy wanting feedback for his "new" fighter fix consisting of something like "get a feat every level" or "2/3 feat progression" or "gain a +1 bonus to some arbitrary combat-related thing every few levels" or "gain better than full BAB." They've been done a hundred times each. What many of these have in common is a lack of a sense of what they're even trying to do! So many of these people just think "Well, I think the Fighter is weak, so I'll do something totally random to make him more powerful." That's not how you fix problems with a class's design. You need to target the problems and work on them. Half these people don't even seem clear on what they're trying to fix, and it's just plain frustrating. Remember folks, any good designer should be able to answer the question "why did you make this decision?" and answer it well. Anyways, a few that actually might be worth looking at are Seerow's Masterwork Fighter (which focuses on giving the Fighter versatility and dynamic play through the use of multiple feat trees seperated into switchable styles, and a sort of warrior's focus ability), Frank and K's Fighter (has a lot of good concepts, but is incompatible with a lot of standard D&D material and is intended to be balanced against a well-played straight-classed Transmuter wizard... which can be a bit tough for many people's tastes), and Otto the Bugbear's Figther (it's really K/Frank's Fighter, but beaten half to death with a nerfbat). Might also want to look at Szatany's Ultimate Fighter. However, though it is not included under the purview of the topic's title, there is another Fighter Fix that deserves an honorable mention, created by WotC's Mike Mearls (and the rest of the ToB team). Be sure to check out the Warblade. It's the fix I use :)
Nexis 08-03-07, 08:19 AM	I wholeheartedly agree with Onewinged4ngel, so much so that our posts are nearly identical (even the Warblade joke at the end!) :P. Id also like to point out that Frank has stated that he balanced the Fighter off of the monsters, not other classes, which he found irrelevant for contributing to a party. Source is here (http://bb.bbboy.net/thegamingden-viewthread?forum=1&thread=981).
High Octane 08-03-07, 10:17 AM	Let's get this out of the way: At least 9 in 10 of the Fighter fixes on these boards are garbage. No, seriously. Most of them aren't even new. You see post after post of some guy wanting feedback for his "new" fighter fix consisting of something like "get a feat every level" or "2/3 feat progression" or "gain a +1 bonus to some arbitrary combat-related thing every few levels" or "gain better than full BAB." They've been done a hundred times each. What many of these have in common is a lack of a sense of what they're even trying to do! So many of these people just think "Well, I think the Fighter is weak, so I'll do something totally random to make him more powerful." That's not how you fix problems with a class's design. You need to target the problems and work on them. Half these people don't even seem clear on what they're trying to fix, and it's just plain frustrating. Remember folks, any good designer should be able to answer the question "why did you make this decision?" and answer it well. Anyways, a few that actually might be worth looking at are Seerow's Masterwork Fighter (which focuses on giving the Fighter versatility and dynamic play through the use of multiple feat trees seperated into switchable styles, and a sort of warrior's focus ability), Frank and K's Fighter (has a lot of good concepts, but is incompatible with a lot of standard D&D material and is intended to be balanced against a well-played straight-classed Transmuter wizard... which can be a bit tough for many people's tastes), and Otto the Bugbear's Figther (it's really K/Frank's Fighter, but beaten half to death with a nerfbat). However, though it is not included under the purview of the topic's title, there is another Fighter Fix that deserves an honorable mention, created by WotC's Mike Mearls (and the rest of the ToB team). Be sure to check out the Warblade. It's the fix I use :) Apparantly we diverge on the term "fix." When someone asks me to fix his computer, I would replace bad parts, clean up the software side (checking for viruses and spyware) and if that wasn't enough to accomplish the task, upgrade their memory or video card or some such. I expect that if someone asked you to fix their computer, you would build them a new one. Which would be a concrete difference between your rebalanced paladin and my recent attempt at a rebalanced fighter. With my rebalance, I actually tried to change as little as possible, trying to fill in the blanks and give the straight fighter more versatility in a few places, and advantages that were unique to the class. With your rebalance, you changed nearly every aspect of the paladin, adding a whole slew of different options and new abilities. The end result was a class with much more thought and complexity than even the original designers of the class had done. (By the way, your rebalance was very intricate, and I applaude the effort and skill put into it. I think the rebalanced would be a lot more enjoyable to someone who is really into their paladin character and willing to put the time and effort into it. I would not recommend it for NPCs, mooks, cohorts, etc that you would want to flesh out quickly) Basically my attempt was to create Fighter v1.1 and your paladin is Paladin version 2.0. A lot of people do not want to change the fighter class though, at least not a lot. The problem they have is that the fighter is lacking in unique abilities and they have a hard time figuring out how to keep their fighters on the same level as other classes who get increasingly good abilities as levels go up. The fighter has just always seemed to lose reason to be taken after a certain amount of levels. With so many feats, fighters end up having a hard time finding a fighter bonus feat that they qualify for that will bring them any decent benefit. For this reason, fighters are often a dipped class or what I call a springboard class, a class whose only purpose is to be used until they can qualify for a prestige class. With some system mastery and a healthy application of splat books, yes the fighter can use all his feats effectively, but not everyone has access to those kinds of resources nor the skill and system mastery to take advantage of it. Going core only you end up going down one entire tree in less than 5 levels easy, leading you to have to invest in another tree which you probably will not use too often.
Lord_Zeb 08-03-07, 12:21 PM	As I see it, I agee with that the Fighter is actually able to fend for themselves quite well, and able to be vital parts of any party if built and played well even if they go for Pure Fighter. But, they do need a little boost at higher levels, have a tendency to run away/get controlled due to low Will save, and have a deplorable number of class skills. Not to mention that the Dead levels make them not that fun to level in after 2nd level. Most Fighter fixes adds loads of special abilities, boosting power by themes that they think is the way the Fighter should be, when the Fighter's theme is: He learns to fight efficiently. Without resorting to strange tactics, but through straight-forward techniques and heavy armor. And may learn to do this in a multitude of ways, according to each and every Fighter's own style. Any Special Abilities will enforce the creator's style, what he thinks a Fighter should be, upon them. And, with the abundance of feats available in Splat-books, it is growingly increasingly hard of seeing what one want, while every bad choice is something that is hard to undo. Some more bonus feats may be what is needed... but adding straight Bonus Fighter Feat will mainly let the Munchkins further specialize their Fighters, still making them boring one-trick-ponies. I took these things in considerations when I made my own Fighter fix, which I naturally feel is superior to anyone elses;), and which others so far only thought good things of. (Check link in sig, if you are interested.)
nonsi 08-03-07, 12:53 PM	As I see it, I agee with that the Fighter is actually able to fend for themselves quite well, and able to be vital parts of any party if built and played well even if they go for Pure Fighter. But, they do need a little boost at higher levels, have a tendency to run away/get controlled due to low Will save, and have a deplorable number of class skills. Not to mention that the Dead levels make them not that fun to level in after 2nd level. Most Fighter fixes adds loads of special abilities, boosting power by themes that they think is the way the Fighter should be, when the Fighter's theme is: He learns to fight efficiently. Without resorting to strange tactics, but through straight-forward techniques and heavy armor. And may learn to do this in a multitude of ways, according to each and every Fighter's own style. Any Special Abilities will enforce the creator's style, what he thinks a Fighter should be, upon them. And, with the abundance of feats available in Splat-books, it is growingly increasingly hard of seeing what one want, while every bad choice is something that is hard to undo. Some more bonus feats may be what is needed... but adding straight Bonus Fighter Feat will mainly let the Munchkins further specialize their Fighters, still making them boring one-trick-ponies. I took these things in considerations when I made my own Fighter fix, which I naturally feel is superior to anyone elses;), and which others so far only thought good things of. (Check link in sig, if you are interested.) I recognize 3 problems with your build. 1. As far as I can tell, it does nothing to promote the Tank role. 2. It's still skill starved. 3. You could allow "Combat Form" instead of "Tactical" - they offer a huge advantage.
OneWinged4ngel 08-03-07, 01:31 PM	Apparantly we diverge on the term "fix." Yeah... I like to actually fix things. As I recall, your fix just threw in spell resistance, added an ability vaguely reminiscent of the lame "Dead Levels" article's "physical prowess," and gave a bunch of tiny +1s to random things. It doesn't really change much, but it moves numbers around! :rolleyes: When someone asks me to fix his computer, I would replace bad parts, clean up the software side (checking for viruses and spyware) and if that wasn't enough to accomplish the task, upgrade their memory or video card or some such. That sounds exactly like what I did with the Paladin. I expect that if someone asked you to fix their computer, you would build them a new one. Why would you expect that? The Rebalanced Paladin stems completely out of the design of the original paladin. In fact, it is a contrast to yours, where you throw in a completely random thing like spell resistance. Which would be a concrete difference between your rebalanced paladin and my recent attempt at a rebalanced fighter. Mine's actually a tune up, yours is just throwing random parts in there and some that don't even make sense there. With my rebalance, I actually tried to change as little as possible, trying to fill in the blanks and give the straight fighter more versatility in a few places, and advantages that were unique to the class. What advantages did you give him that were unique to the class? A bonus to physical skill checks? Nope, not unique. Spell resistance? Nope... not unique... and definitely doesn't seem in line with the existing fighter flavor. More versatility? Eh, how's that? Getting +1 to level checks to avoid being demoralized? With your rebalance, you changed nearly every aspect of the paladin, adding a whole slew of different options and new abilities. A whole slew of new options, sure, but every supplement ever has done that. It doesn't actually change much of anything about the paladin... merely expands on the paladin's original abilities. Unlike yours, where you're adding completely new abilities. Your argument seems a bit hypocritical here. You're adding completely new abilities, while I'm tuning up the old ones, and you tell me that I'm the one making completely new material. :rolleyes: The end result was a class with much more thought and complexity than even the original designers of the class had done. More thought than the original designers sounds like a complement to me. But complexity? You'll have to explain this one to me. It doesn't seem complex at all in play, especially compared to many other *core!* classes. I would not recommend it for NPCs, mooks, cohorts, etc that you would want to flesh out quickly) I actually find it much easier to flesh out NPCs quickly with the new version, because with the old version you had to hunt down PrCs to give them abilities past level 5. A lot of people do not want to change the fighter class though Well, if you don't want to change it, then you probably shouldn't do a fix. ____ Pray tell, what's so much more complex about the Rebalanced Paladin? It's pretty much just as simple as the original. There are *two*, count 'em, *two* little added levels of complexity, and they're both extremely simple. 1 is switchable auras instead of just one (Aura of Courage), and two is giving Lay on Hands some additional functionality. The specializations don't add complexity... paladins had various replacement options for the mount before I ever made my fix. Smite isn't any more complex. It's just different. (are you honestly telling me you have a much harder time understanding /encounter instead of /day?) Spells are still spells, and work the exact same way they used to. They just work better. All the extra options are purely optional, and as such add no more complexity than any supplement that includes a few feats for the paladin. The new lay on hands and switchable auras are the simplest things in the world. Seriously, what is complex about using it? As far as I can tell, it's still one of the simpler classes out there. And as far as building something utterly new? 90% of the work I did was just expanding and tweaking things the paladin already has. Switchable auras are the result of extending the paladin's ability progression past level 5, and Aura of Courage had set a precedent. Lay on Hands was just an expanded version of Lay on Hands that actually worked for something other than nova-ing undead or occasionally stabilizing an ally without a heal check. Smite / encounter reduced the nova aspect of the paladin further. I set out with the exact things I wanted to fix, and I gave them a major tune up on pretty much *every* design aspect. I didn't build a new computer (indeed, one of the main goals we stuck to was to keep it in line with the old paladin), and I can build NPCs with the rebalanced paladin even more quickly than I can with the core one, because you don't have to search through splats to give them abilities past level 5 to make them halfway level appropriate to interact with the PCs. For the Fighter, though, I really would prefer a new computer. Because the warblade is a danged nice computer. Seriously though, enlighten me as to how my fix is so complex, because simplicity of design matters to me, and if the problem exists then I'll fix it. Last I checked, people didn't think getting things like "+1/day use of a class ability" over a progression instead of just once a day was amazingly difficult to swallow, though. Your fix, on the other hand, is a bunch of tiny little +1s thrown in random little places that don't really change much about the Fighter (indeed, it seems like it would do little to help fix them at all) and completely unjustified spell resistance thrown in just for "huh?" value.
Lord_Zeb 08-03-07, 02:36 PM	I recognize 3 problems with your build. 1. As far as I can tell, it does nothing to promote the Tank role. 2. It's still skill starved. 3. You could allow "Combat Form" instead of "Tactical" - they offer a huge advantage. Thank you for your input, which I have responded to in a more suitable place: http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=13294000&postcount=30
JadeSpider9643 08-03-07, 02:52 PM	The most reasonable fighter "fix" I've seen, made the simple change of giving fighters bonus fighter feats at every level starting at lvl 10, instead of every other level.
CrazyOzzy 08-03-07, 03:00 PM	Ultimate Fighter : http://www.liquidmateria.info/wiki/Ultimate_Fighter I love it, I think it's fantastic, near perfect.
Lord_Zeb 08-03-07, 03:19 PM	The most reasonable fighter "fix" I've seen, made the simple change of giving fighters bonus fighter feats at every level starting at lvl 10, instead of every other level. Why not start earlier than lvl 10? 4 Dead levels before then... Otherwise, my Fighter Fix is similar. What do you think of that one? (Link) (http://boards1.wizards.com/leaving.php?destination=http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php%3Ft%3D890412)
RobbyPants 08-03-07, 03:24 PM	Otto the bugbear has his own, which is basically a toned down Frank and K fighter. Found here (http://dsenchuk.googlepages.com/fighter) I have my own (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=845103) based on Otto_the_bugbear's version. I modified it a bit, and added in something similar to the Combat Focus feats from the PHB II. I'm playtesting it in a campaign I'm running now.
Endarrion 08-03-07, 03:45 PM	I figured everyone would just start posting their own fighter fixes (I've even got one, and I even thought it was an ORIGINAL idea to fix the fighter. Ha!) and arguing about what makes the fighter "teh br0k3n." Glad to see I wasn't disappointed ;) My problem with the fighter is 3-fold: 1. Class Abilities and the Inability to Obtain Said Abilities: Bonus Feats. That's it. This is the only class that can be completely replicated with bonus feats, because that is the extent of its abilities. The rogue has sneak attack, trapfinding, uncanny dodge, bonus abilities starting at 10th level... The fighter? Some extra feats. LAME. And besides that, a fighter has to have several bonus range scores (13+) to be able to be anything more than a one trick pony. Also lame. 2. Skill Points: This is a HUGE problem with the current fighter in the PHB. If it actually had some respectable and original/unique class abilities, it wouldn't be such a problem. But even then, some extra options outside of combat, or even IN combat (sense motive anyone?) would be nice. 3. Lack of Originality: This was touched on in number one. It is seriously a souped up version of the warrior. How does that make it any better than another NPC class? I'm sorry, but 11 feats a class does not make. There you have it. I'd say anything that poses a fix to all three of those problems is at least worth a closer look. And now for a little pet peeve of mine: Weapon Aptitude/Retraining. Why? Sure it SOUNDS good at first but, really, who would use such an ability? "Hey guys, lemme spend an hour retraining with this weapon so I can be mediocre with it instead of bad." Wha...? Most melee, heck, most classes in GENERAL, stick to one melee and one ranged weapon. I suppose there's arguments for this ability, but I really see no point. Like I said: good flavor, poor execution (and this pops up in A LOT of builds). ...all done now.
Lord_Zeb 08-03-07, 04:29 PM	1. Bonus feats gives choice of what one wants the Fighter to be. Special abilities removes that choice, even if one do them in "trees". Want Ranged? Two-hander? One-hander? Brute force? Light Weapons? Fancy manuvers? Tactics? Learn what you want, and if you got the aptitude for it. (If you are stupid, you can't learn the fancy stuff. If you are clumsy, you cannot learn to dodge. Not much to think of really, is it? And, due to the huge numbers of feats available, no class can replicate it. A core rule Fighter got 11 feats available by their class alone, and can add an additional 7 feats from their regular feats. (With my fix, that's 11+9+7=27.) So, compare 18 feats against some other character's 7 feats, with maybe a few bonus feats from their classes, and you will see that it is hard to truly replicate a Fighter. And if Feats is not what you want, play some other class.;) 2. Fighters Fight. If they want to learn something else, they better Multiclass. And, they do have a few options open, such as Intimidate. Sense Motive is something to consider though... But it is tied a bit to Rogues and lipreading ability... and why would a Fighter be good att telling if someone is a lier or not? But, do agree that there are a bit little Skill points out there over all, which I do adress in the third part of my Class Re-balancing posts. 3. Lack of originality? Well, then it is you that is lacking in originality;) , since every Fighter can be different, while for instance every Barbarian is basically alike. The Fighter fights the way you choose him to become. The Barbarian ... rages. Of course the Barb can learn how to fight in some styles, for instance getting Two Weapon Combat feat tree if he wants to, but the Fighter can do that AND learn one or two additional styles. (And with my fix learn a multitude of different things to do in combat... basically becoming the Combat Tactician instead of the One-trick Pony.) So, have looked at your issues, and only thing I would change regarding my re-balancing thoughts... would possibly be Sense Motive. But you got to make a better case before I do add that to my fix.:P Also, do not like the Warblade Weapon Aptitude myself. Good enough that they can get Weapon Specialization, but... changing it? Why would anyone even be able to do that?
JadeSpider9643 08-03-07, 04:47 PM	1. Bonus feats gives choice of what one wants the Fighter to be. Special abilities removes that choice, even if one do them in "trees". Want Ranged? Two-hander? One-hander? Brute force? Light Weapons? Fancy manuvers? Tactics? Learn what you want, and if you got the aptitude for it. (If you are stupid, you can't learn the fancy stuff. If you are clumsy, you cannot learn to dodge. Not much to think of really, is it? And, due to the huge numbers of feats available, no class can replicate it. A core rule Fighter got 11 feats available by their class alone, and can add an additional 7 feats from their regular feats. (With my fix, that's 11+9+7=27.) So, compare 18 feats against some other character's 7 feats, with maybe a few bonus feats from their classes, and you will see that it is hard to truly replicate a Fighter. And if Feats is not what you want, play some other class.;) 2. Fighters Fight. If they want to learn something else, they better Multiclass. And, they do have a few options open, such as Intimidate. Sense Motive is something to consider though... But it is tied a bit to Rogues and lipreading ability... and why would a Fighter be good att telling if someone is a lier or not? But, do agree that there are a bit little Skill points out there over all, which I do adress in the third part of my Class Re-balancing posts. 3. Lack of originality? Well, then it is you that is lacking in originality;) , since every Fighter can be different, while for instance every Barbarian is basically alike. The Fighter fights the way you choose him to become. The Barbarian ... rages. Of course the Barb can learn how to fight in some styles, for instance getting Two Weapon Combat feat tree if he wants to, but the Fighter can do that AND learn one or two additional styles. (And with my fix learn a multitude of different things to do in combat... basically becoming the Combat Tactician instead of the One-trick Pony.) So, have looked at your issues, and only thing I would change regarding my re-balancing thoughts... would possibly be Sense Motive. But you got to make a better case before I do add that to my fix.:P Also, do not like the Warblade Weapon Aptitude myself. Good enough that they can get Weapon Specialization, but... changing it? Why would anyone even be able to do that? Agreed. the fighter is what it is, and it does it just fine. If you want something else from the fighter, suggest you try a different class. :cheer: :clap: :ayyyy!: :tiphat: :fight!: :thumbsup:
nonsi 08-03-07, 06:33 PM	I figured everyone would just start posting their own fighter fixes (I've even got one, and I even thought it was an ORIGINAL idea to fix the fighter. Ha!) and arguing about what makes the fighter "teh br0k3n." Glad to see I wasn't disappointed ;) My problem with the fighter is 3-fold: 1. Class Abilities and the Inability to Obtain Said Abilities: Bonus Feats. That's it. This is the only class that can be completely replicated with bonus feats, because that is the extent of its abilities. The rogue has sneak attack, trapfinding, uncanny dodge, bonus abilities starting at 10th level... The fighter? Some extra feats. LAME. And besides that, a fighter has to have several bonus range scores (13+) to be able to be anything more than a one trick pony. Also lame. 2. Skill Points: This is a HUGE problem with the current fighter in the PHB. If it actually had some respectable and original/unique class abilities, it wouldn't be such a problem. But even then, some extra options outside of combat, or even IN combat (sense motive anyone?) would be nice. 3. Lack of Originality: This was touched on in number one. It is seriously a souped up version of the warrior. How does that make it any better than another NPC class? I'm sorry, but 11 feats a class does not make. There you have it. I'd say anything that poses a fix to all three of those problems is at least worth a closer look. And now for a little pet peeve of mine: Weapon Aptitude/Retraining. Why? Sure it SOUNDS good at first but, really, who would use such an ability? "Hey guys, lemme spend an hour retraining with this weapon so I can be mediocre with it instead of bad." Wha...? Most melee, heck, most classes in GENERAL, stick to one melee and one ranged weapon. I suppose there's arguments for this ability, but I really see no point. Like I said: good flavor, poor execution (and this pops up in A LOT of builds). ...all done now. I couldn't agree more. Maybe you'll find this one useful: http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=898146 Bottoms Up :pint: