Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Xeviat-DM 06-17-05, 04:44 AM	I guess irreconcilable differences caused the original thread to die, so I am reincarnating it in hopes of bringing back the old posters and drawing in new posters. First, the premise: The fighter is broken. Maybe you don't agree that the fighter isn't mechanically unbalanced, but it is safe to say that when compared to the barbarian, ranger, samurai, swashbuckler, and other variant warrior classes, the fighter is missing something. This is further exemplified by the existence of "technique classes", non prestigious-prestige classes which add to the fighter's fighting capability (dualist, master thrower, exotic weapon master, cavalier, and many others). We, on the last thread, started out with the hopes of adding something to the fighter to bring them up to par with the other core and recent base classes, and especially to make the fighter's special column look as developed as other class's. Abilities added would be generic enough to apply to any fighter, and would be chosen to remain within the fighter description's parameters. This fighter is not a new kind of fighter, not an alternate fighter to reside side by side with the PHB fighter, but a replacement for the PHB fighter that is appropriate, fun, and balanced. To start things off, I will post what we agreed upon in the last threads as the fighter's largest problems. I personally do not agree with all of them, and did not use all of them in the thought process that created my fighter re-write which I will post at the end of this post, but I will post them non-the-less in the spirit of good collaboration. Current Fighter Problems Weakness compared to other warriors: Compared to the Barbarian, the Fighter's damage and survivability are way behind. Compared to the Ranger, the Fighter is a worse archer. Lack of unique specials: While most intelligent players grin at the fighter's 11 bonus feats, many feel like the class is missing something. This feeling is largely superficial, but it still exists. Many players pass up the fighter for Barbarian, Ranger or Paladin if their character fits the broad molds (two-handed weapon user, archer or two-weapon fighter, or mounted combatant), or take as few fighter levels as possible before jumping ship to one of the many PrCs offered. Unique abilities would both give players a reason to play the fighter, and also to give abilities the fighter would have to give up if they took a PrC. Poor skills: The fighter has both the worse skill points in the game and the worse skill list in the game. Many fighter archetypes are skillful people, and the fighter class doesn't allow this. The lack of skills makes the fighter's only ability fighting; coupled with the apparent weakness of the class, this means the fighter's only ability is overshadowed by the ability of other classes. Weakness to magic: Of all the classes, the fighter is quite possibly the easiest to effect by magic. The other non-casters get some ability to protect them against magical effects, but the fighter is left without. This is especially painful when compared to the fighter of 2nd edition, who was very difficult to effect with magic at higher levels. Lack of high level feats: When the wizard picks up meteor swarm, gaining the ability to destroy small towns almost effortlessly, the fighter gains another feat, and because they have probably rounded out their fighting style, this feat is probably one available to 1st level characters. This is unacceptable, quite possibly the largest problem the current fighter faces. More feats should be created in the 12+ BAB range, like Improved Precise Shot, that will add strength and options to high level fighters. Similarly, feats with many prerequisites drawn from many feat chains, such as Whirlwind Attack, should be designed to give strength to generalist fighters to counterbalance the added power offered to specialists. If I've missed any from the previous thread, please let me know. ---------------- I have brought my newest fighter re-write for your approval/criticism. I took all of the above ideas into account, except the skill issue (I chose to ignore the perceived skill problem because I believe the more skills oriented fighters of the many genres are either very intelligent fighters or fighter/rogues. In my games, I offer many methods to add class skills to skill lists, and recently the Heroes of Battle book also offered a new method to increase class skills.). I decided that the fighter should be a weapon master. The vast majority of characters in literature, games, and movies who fit the mold of the fighter (and not barbarian, ranger, paladin, or the npc warrior) are known for their fighting style and the weapon they use, and the vast majority stick to that weapon/style above all others (even though many of them are quite proficient in other styles). This is partially the way the game is designed, rewarding specialization. Coupled with adding additional high level feats to the game and fighter bonus feat list, I believe my fighter solves all of the problems the current fighter faces. It is definitely not balanced against the current fighter, but that is because I believe the current fighter is unbalanced. FIGHTER The truest warrior, fighters are those who've learned the best methods to deal with their foes through force of arms. Where a barbarian uses brute force, a paladin uses the strength of their convictions, and a rogue uses deception and speed, the fighter relies upon their training to defeat their enemies. No class is as well trained as the fighter, represented by the many feats they gain through their advancement. A fighter can become any warrior from a devoted specialist to a ready generalist, a fencer or an archer, a mounted knight or a grounded juggernought. The one thing that all fighters share is their dedication to their fighting style, even if that fighting style is dedication to all styles. Skills: Same as PHB Fighter. Skill Points: Same as PHB Fighter. HD: Same as PHB Fighter. Proficiencies: Same as PHB Fighter. Bonus Feat: List same as PHB Fighter's, though additional feats will be added as they are created or approved from non-core books (up to DM discretion). Weapon Focus: The fighter gains Weapon Focus as a bonus feat that can be applied to any weapon the fighter has proficiency in. Mettle (Ex): At 2nd level an higher, a fighter can resist magical and unusual attacks with great willpower or fortitude. If they make a successful Will or Fortitude save against an attack that normally would have a lesser effect on a successful save (such as any spell with a saving throw entry of Will half or Fortitude partial), they instead completely negate the effect. An unconscious or sleeping fighter does not gain the benefit of mettle. Weapon Specialization: The fighter gains the weapon specialization feat as a bonus feat at this level, and it must be applied to a weapon the fighter already has weapon focus in. Weapon Mastery (Ex): At 8th level, the fighter can apply Weapon Mastery to one weapon they have the weapon specialization feat for. Weapon Mastery grants the fighter the ability to make one additional attack at their highest attack bonus when making a full attack action. Improved Mettle (Ex): At 10th level, a fighter's mettle ability improves. they still take no effect on a successful Will or Fortitude saving throw against attacks that allow a partial effect, but henceforth they only take the partial effect on a failed save. An unconscious or sleeping fighter does not gain the benefit of improved mettle. Greater Weapon Focus: At 12th level, the fighter gains the Greater Weapon Focus feat, and it must be applied to a weapon the fighter already has weapon focus in. Greater Weapon Specialization: At 16th level, the fighter gains the Greater Weapon Specialization feat, and it must be applied to a weapon the fighter already has greater weapon focus and weapon specialization in. Grand Weapon Mastery: At 20th level, the fighter perfects their mastery of their weapon. Weapon Mastery may be applied to one weapon they have the greater weapon specialization feat for. Grand Weapon Mastery grants the fighter the ability to make one extra attack at their highest attack bonus when making a standard action attack. Fighter Level BAB Fort Ref Will Special 1st +1 +2 +0 +0 Bonus Feat, Weapon Focus 2nd +2 +3 +0 +0 Mettle 3rd +3 +3 +1 +1 Bonus Feat 4th +4 +4 +1 +1 Weapon Specialization 5th +5 +4 +1 +1 Bonus Feat 6th +6 +5 +2 +2 7th +7 +5 +2 +2 Bonus Feat 8th +8 +6 +2 +2 Weapon Mastery 9th +9 +6 +3 +3 Bonus Feat 10th +10 +7 +3 +3 Improved Mettle 11th +11 +7 +3 +3 Bonus Feat 12th +12 +8 +4 +4 Greater Weapon Focus 13th +13 +8 +4 +4 Bonus Feat 14th +14 +9 +4 +4 15th +15 +9 +5 +5 Bonus Feat 16th +16 +10 +5 +5 Greater Weapon Specialization 17th +17 +10 +5 +5 Bonus Feat 18th +18 +11 +6 +6 19th +19 +11 +6 +6 Bonus Feat 20th +20 +12 +6 +6 Grand Weapon Mastery I made my decisions for this rewrite based on the idea that the fighter is a specialist in their chosen style. I do want to offer some kind of trade in ability for the weapon feats, possibly a method of giving up weapon mastery in a single weapon in order to gain weapon focus in all weapons, and grand weapon mastery could be given up to gain weapon specialization in all weapons; I'm unsure and open for suggestions. Also, the 2nd edition fighter had great resistance to magic due to the way their saves scaled, so since the rogue gains evasion, I figured the fighter was due to gain mettle. What do you think?
Nykidemus 06-17-05, 05:11 AM	Holy sweet mother of God. I agree that the fighter is a little on the low side of the power chain, particularly at higher levels, but to give them Improved Evasion for Fort and Will saves? Two attacks as a standard action? Yikes. I mean, I can see where this would be very in line for what a fighter should be, and I applaud your build for it's rounded unspecialized view, but when you use the old measureing stick of "Would everyone play this instead of the alternatives?"... I sure as hell would. You've made this fellow a more appealing choice even than the oft-reviled druid and cleric. Asside from the lack of spellcasting there is no class I've ever seen more powerful and versitile as this one. If that's what you were going for, bravo, and if not... well... maby you should go back to the drawing board.
Xeviat-DM 06-17-05, 05:39 AM	Re-read Mettle and Improved Mettle: It does not apply to all Fort and Will saves. It only applies to those with Will half, Will partial, fort half, and fort partial saving throw entries. If a spell has a will save, and does nothing on a failed save, then Mettle and improved Mettle will not apply to it. I originally considered adding -2 to hit penalties to the weapon masteries, perhaps I should return them?
Nyferto 06-17-05, 07:31 AM	Complete and utter crap. Weakness compared to other warriors: Compared to the Barbarian, the Fighter's damage and survivability are way behind. Compared to the Ranger, the Fighter is a worse archer. Except the Fighter isn't an Archer, and no - he isn't worse - he's more versatile. Suvivability? Don't take damage then, complete crap. Lack of unique specials: While most intelligent players grin at the fighter's 11 bonus feats, many feel like the class is missing something. This feeling is largely superficial, but it still exists. Many players pass up the fighter for Barbarian, Ranger or Paladin if their character fits the broad molds (two-handed weapon user, archer or two-weapon fighter, or mounted combatant), or take as few fighter levels as possible before jumping ship to one of the many PrCs offered. Unique abilities would both give players a reason to play the fighter, and also to give abilities the fighter would have to give up if they took a PrC. So stupid players should be catered for? Most players? Crap again. Unique abilities? **** off, having 11 bonus feats is a unique ability. Poor skills: The fighter has both the worse skill points in the game and the worse skill list in the game. Many fighter archetypes are skillful people, and the fighter class doesn't allow this. The lack of skills makes the fighter's only ability fighting; coupled with the apparent weakness of the class, this means the fighter's only ability is overshadowed by the ability of other classes. Who cares? Go cross class into skills and you'll be fine, multiclass and you'll pick up the non-fighter abilities you'll need. Many Fighter Archtypes? Name one. Weakness to magic: Of all the classes, the fighter is quite possibly the easiest to effect by magic. The other non-casters get some ability to protect them against magical effects, but the fighter is left without. This is especially painful when compared to the fighter of 2nd edition, who was very difficult to effect with magic at higher levels. Crap again, with the right set-up, you won't care - just like everyone else. Fighters were easy to effect with magic - it's called Direct Damage, the difference is they made other classes look stupid and they were limited in how they could counter attack. Frankly i'd rather kick that type of useless Tank out of the game. Lack of high level feats: When the wizard picks up meteor swarm, gaining the ability to destroy small towns almost effortlessly, the fighter gains another feat, and because they have probably rounded out their fighting style, this feat is probably one available to 1st level characters. This is unacceptable, quite possibly the largest problem the current fighter faces. More feats should be created in the 12+ BAB range, like Improved Precise Shot, that will add strength and options to high level fighters. Similarly, feats with many prerequisites drawn from many feat chains, such as Whirlwind Attack, should be designed to give strength to generalist fighters to counterbalance the added power offered to specialists. Crap again, I don't need meteor swarm to destroy a small village, I just great cleave my way through it. Then I do it again to the next town, all day long. I don't need to be 19th level to do that either, I can do it by 6th. Either way, this doesn't mean Fighter feats are underpowered, it just means Wizards have a few shots that are stupidly overpowered given what they could do to a world. I decided that the fighter should be a weapon master. The vast majority of characters in literature, games, and movies who fit the mold of the fighter (and not barbarian, ranger, paladin, or the npc warrior) are known for their fighting style and the weapon they use, and the vast majority stick to that weapon/style above all others (even though many of them are quite proficient in other styles). This is partially the way the game is designed, rewarding specialization. No they bloody well aint. They're known for being able to kickass with everything they pick up and for their array of tactical maneuvers that give them the edge. The useless idiot who focuses on one style and one weapon just cripples his effectivness and probably is an NPC warrior. Who the hell said weapon masters were Fighters? Maybe they're actually the Barbarians and Rangers of the world who are too limited to do anything else because they don't get a bunch of bonus feats. Maybe they weren't actually Fighters because they weren't actually good enough to be considered one. Just slackers who got lucky because they never actually fought a proper fighter before.
not Yoda 06-17-05, 07:54 AM	Xeviat-DM have you considered a gradual reduction of armor check penalties and increase of max dex bonus? If a player wants to run around without armor they can take Duelist. Nyferto if you are looking for bard go somewhere else.
Thelon Fairblade 06-17-05, 08:03 AM	Nyferto, your responses are disappointing, but I can understand you've been on the 30+ pages of the other thread, so you're probably done being civilized. Xeviat-DM, I like your conceptual Fighter. I am concerned about two things. First, now a multiclasser gets 2 feats for a mere 1-level dip (bonus feat + weapon focus). Second, for only a 2-level dip, he gets Mettle too. Wiz 18 / Fighter 2 was a nice combo before, but now those Wizards - without losing their max spells - also get Mettle to apply on their Will saves!
hammer_man_Dan 06-17-05, 10:00 AM	originally posted by Nyferto Crap again, I don't need meteor swarm to destroy a small village, I just great cleave my way through it. Then I do it again to the next town, all day long. I don't need to be 19th level to do that either, I can do it by 6th. dude you are so wrong, on another note show some respect this guy has put alot of time trying to fix something many percieve to be broken, and whats more is he's deigned to share it with us. originally posted byNyferto No they bloody well aint. They're known for being able to kickass with everything they pick up and for their array of tactical maneuvers that give them the edge. The useless idiot who focuses on one style and one weapon just cripples his effectivness and probably is an NPC warrior. dude I totally agree with this, and I really dont care about fighters becoming tougher I just like playing fighters their just so much fun to play. fighters have to be smart to win, their not just your plain hack and slash and bash char, if you play smart you can make your fighter outshine a barbarian.
Nyferto 06-17-05, 11:27 AM	And I've been sitting around for longer, telling people why they're wrong for ages now. No point putting time into fixing something you never understood properly in the first place. Deciding to do things and claiming it's a collaboration is an unfunny joke. I mean seriously, this fix is based on a bunch of injected ideals and no sense of reality. I could show you a ton of Fighter variants. Yes, I apologise for my overstated frustration, but this Fighter nonsense should really stop.
Clawhound 06-17-05, 01:21 PM	I am VERY worried about the additional attacks that a fighter would get. Think VERY carefully about this. Second, focus more oomph into the HIGHER levels of fighter. What's there that I want? The best bang still comes from levels 1-4. That has not changed with this draft. A fighter remains just as uninspired at high levels. The class still offers nothing unique. What does being a level 11-20 fighter get you that other classed can't get? Why should I stick with fighter? What amazing abilities do I gain?
Nephlite 06-17-05, 01:51 PM	Current Fighter Problems Weakness compared to other warriors: Compared to the Barbarian, the Fighter's damage and survivability are way behind. Compared to the Ranger, the Fighter is a worse archer. Lack of unique specials: While most intelligent players grin at the fighter's 11 bonus feats, many feel like the class is missing something. This feeling is largely superficial, but it still exists. Many players pass up the fighter for Barbarian, Ranger or Paladin if their character fits the broad molds (two-handed weapon user, archer or two-weapon fighter, or mounted combatant), or take as few fighter levels as possible before jumping ship to one of the many PrCs offered. Unique abilities would both give players a reason to play the fighter, and also to give abilities the fighter would have to give up if they took a PrC. Poor skills: The fighter has both the worse skill points in the game and the worse skill list in the game. Many fighter archetypes are skillful people, and the fighter class doesn't allow this. The lack of skills makes the fighter's only ability fighting; coupled with the apparent weakness of the class, this means the fighter's only ability is overshadowed by the ability of other classes. Weakness to magic: Of all the classes, the fighter is quite possibly the easiest to effect by magic. The other non-casters get some ability to protect them against magical effects, but the fighter is left without. This is especially painful when compared to the fighter of 2nd edition, who was very difficult to effect with magic at higher levels. Lack of high level feats: When the wizard picks up meteor swarm, gaining the ability to destroy small towns almost effortlessly, the fighter gains another feat, and because they have probably rounded out their fighting style, this feat is probably one available to 1st level characters. This is unacceptable, quite possibly the largest problem the current fighter faces. More feats should be created in the 12+ BAB range, like Improved Precise Shot, that will add strength and options to high level fighters. Similarly, feats with many prerequisites drawn from many feat chains, such as Whirlwind Attack, should be designed to give strength to generalist fighters to counterbalance the added power offered to specialists. All true, but doing everything would overpower Fighter. FIGHTER The truest warrior, fighters are those who've learned the best methods to deal with their foes through force of arms. Where a barbarian uses brute force, a paladin uses the strength of their convictions, and a rogue uses deception and speed, the fighter relies upon their training to defeat their enemies. No class is as well trained as the fighter, represented by the many feats they gain through their advancement. A fighter can become any warrior from a devoted specialist to a ready generalist, a fencer or an archer, a mounted knight or a grounded juggernought. The one thing that all fighters share is their dedication to their fighting style, even if that fighting style is dedication to all styles. Skills: Same as PHB Fighter. Skill Points: Same as PHB Fighter. HD: Same as PHB Fighter. Proficiencies: Same as PHB Fighter. Bonus Feat: List same as PHB Fighter's, though additional feats will be added as they are created or approved from non-core books (up to DM discretion). Weapon Focus: The fighter gains Weapon Focus as a bonus feat that can be applied to any weapon the fighter has proficiency in. Mettle (Ex): At 2nd level an higher, a fighter can resist magical and unusual attacks with great willpower or fortitude. If they make a successful Will or Fortitude save against an attack that normally would have a lesser effect on a successful save (such as any spell with a saving throw entry of Will half or Fortitude partial), they instead completely negate the effect. An unconscious or sleeping fighter does not gain the benefit of mettle. Weapon Specialization: The fighter gains the weapon specialization feat as a bonus feat at this level, and it must be applied to a weapon the fighter already has weapon focus in. Weapon Mastery (Ex): At 8th level, the fighter can apply Weapon Mastery to one weapon they have the weapon specialization feat for. Weapon Mastery grants the fighter the ability to make one additional attack at their highest attack bonus when making a full attack action. Improved Mettle (Ex): At 10th level, a fighter's mettle ability improves. they still take no effect on a successful Will or Fortitude saving throw against attacks that allow a partial effect, but henceforth they only take the partial effect on a failed save. An unconscious or sleeping fighter does not gain the benefit of improved mettle. Greater Weapon Focus: At 12th level, the fighter gains the Greater Weapon Focus feat, and it must be applied to a weapon the fighter already has weapon focus in. Greater Weapon Specialization: At 16th level, the fighter gains the Greater Weapon Specialization feat, and it must be applied to a weapon the fighter already has greater weapon focus and weapon specialization in. Grand Weapon Mastery: At 20th level, the fighter perfects their mastery of their weapon. Weapon Mastery may be applied to one weapon they have the greater weapon specialization feat for. Grand Weapon Mastery grants the fighter the ability to make one extra attack at their highest attack bonus when making a standard action attack. Fighter Level BAB Fort Ref Will Special 1st +1 +2 +0 +0 Bonus Feat, Weapon Focus 2nd +2 +3 +0 +0 Mettle 3rd +3 +3 +1 +1 Bonus Feat 4th +4 +4 +1 +1 Weapon Specialization 5th +5 +4 +1 +1 Bonus Feat 6th +6 +5 +2 +2 7th +7 +5 +2 +2 Bonus Feat 8th +8 +6 +2 +2 Weapon Mastery 9th +9 +6 +3 +3 Bonus Feat 10th +10 +7 +3 +3 Improved Mettle 11th +11 +7 +3 +3 Bonus Feat 12th +12 +8 +4 +4 Greater Weapon Focus 13th +13 +8 +4 +4 Bonus Feat 14th +14 +9 +4 +4 15th +15 +9 +5 +5 Bonus Feat 16th +16 +10 +5 +5 Greater Weapon Specialization 17th +17 +10 +5 +5 Bonus Feat 18th +18 +11 +6 +6 19th +19 +11 +6 +6 Bonus Feat 20th +20 +12 +6 +6 Grand Weapon Mastery I made my decisions for this rewrite based on the idea that the fighter is a specialist in their chosen style. I do want to offer some kind of trade in ability for the weapon feats, possibly a method of giving up weapon mastery in a single weapon in order to gain weapon focus in all weapons, and grand weapon mastery could be given up to gain weapon specialization in all weapons; I'm unsure and open for suggestions. Also, the 2nd edition fighter had great resistance to magic due to the way their saves scaled, so since the rogue gains evasion, I figured the fighter was due to gain mettle. What do you think? Get rid of weapon Mastery's they are too strong for this Fighter. That is all I guess. Removing weapon Mastery (and all things like Greater Mastery) would make this class balanced.
Tony Vargas 06-17-05, 08:18 PM	First, the premise: The fighter is broken. Maybe you don't agree that the fighter isn't mechanically unbalanced, but it is safe to say that when compared to the barbarian, ranger, samurai, swashbuckler, and other variant warrior classes, the fighter is missing something. Missing something? Sure: brokenness. The fighter is so not broken. It's a simple, elegant class design - quite possibly the least broken class in the game. I understand the arguments that the fighter is 'weak' at higher levels, compared to some other classes, in some situations, in some campaigns - and I understand the impulse to liven up it's austere special abilities column... ...but it's not broken. We, on the last thread, started out with the hopes of adding something to the fighter to bring them up to par with the other core and recent base classes, and especially to make the fighter's special column look as developed as other class's. Abilities added would be generic enough to apply to any fighter, and would be chosen to remain within the fighter description's parameters. Again, I understand the impulse, but, while I didn't stick around for the whole thing, all of the additions I saw floated failed to live up to either the 'generic' or 'in parameters' (or both). A lot of them also overshot the mark, and would've made the fighter overpowered compared to other warrior types. This fighter is not a new kind of fighter, not an alternate fighter to reside side by side with the PHB fighter, but a replacement for the PHB fighter that is appropriate, fun, and balanced. I have to say that an alternative fighter might be a better way to go. If you're obviating an existing (even popular - the fighter, though it has it's vocal detractors, is still a class that sees a lot of play) class, the chances are you're not balanced. Weakness compared to other warriors: Compared to the Barbarian, the Fighter's damage and survivability are way behind. Compared to a /raging/ barbarian, the fighter's damage is a bit behind - 'survivability' is different (a raging barb will have more hps, the fighter more AC). Compared to the Ranger, the Fighter is a worse archer. :banghead: Lack of unique specials: Fair enough. Poor skills: The fighter has both the worse skill points in the game and the worse skill list in the game. Yeah, but he's all about fighting, and multiclasses easily with more skill-intensive classes. Weakness to magic: Of all the classes, the fighter is quite possibly the easiest to effect by magic. Nod. And this was a substantial deviation from the past for 3E. The 1&2E fighter had excellent saves at high level, so, even though he couldn't match the spellcasters' high-level antics, he could at least stand up to them. Lack of high level feats: Ih. If you're /not/ a fighter, Whirlwind Attack /is/ a high-level feat. So fighters can pick up high level feats at mid level, that makes them suck? I decided that the fighter should be a weapon master. Well, there goes the 'keep it generic' idea. This is partially the way the game is designed, rewarding specialization.The game does not 'reward' specialization. It compensates specialists for thier lack outside thier speciality, with greater efficacy within thier speciality. That's not a reward, it's a trade-off. I made my decisions for this rewrite based on the idea that the fighter is a specialist in their chosen style. I do want to offer some kind of trade in ability for the weapon feats You could simply leave the weapon feats as feats, and give the fighter more bonus feats, possibly in a pattern that avoids 'dead levels.' (for instance, every level that you /don't/ get a feat for leveling) Also, the 2nd edition fighter had great resistance to magic due to the way their saves scaled, so since the rogue gains evasion, I figured the fighter was due to gain mettle.Not a bad idea, but it still doesn't address the poor will save very well. Not that many WILL save powers are for partial effects, and the fighter's still likely to fail. Frankly, with no supernatural abilities to dish out, there's no strong balance reason for the fighter not to stand up to such abilities well - he's at least as good a candidate for all-good saves as the Monk, in that sense. Though, since the problem with fighters-vs-casters is most prevelent at higher levels, a progression that kicks in later (like a scaling bonus to WILL and REF saves starting in the double-digits, and bridging most of the poor-good save gap by 20th).
Rialto 06-18-05, 02:58 AM	Quote: Compared to the Ranger, the Fighter is a worse archer. :banghead: I believe he is refering to the Spot being on the Ranger's class list, thus helping him, hmmm "spot" the enemies earlier and reacting earlier. As for the main weakness of the Fighter, the Will save there are various way to boost that up (Homebrew/House rule feats, for instance). Poor skills, I agree but most DM's would add a skill or two to that list, or if you want to make better skill list go ahead. The main reason for such threads IMHO comes from the lack of a 20th level Fighter-only Uber feat and the conception of the non-scaleability and lack of synnergy of feats; I agree feats are not as powerful as class abilities and very few synergize well ;) No doubt about it. However, I do not believe granting Fighter an additional attack via feats, abilities or better BAB progression is wise. Fighter's main focus should be battle and as such what should be his domain of expertise. So if you want to "fix" the Fighter aim for better and expanded Combat Styles, combat control feats, etc.
Xeviat-DM 06-18-05, 02:54 PM	Nyferto, please do not get adversarial. I do not want people bringing in attitudes like yours ruining my thread. First off, I posted my version as a SUGGESTION, I did not say that my version was the final culmination of fifteen pages of debate. Secondly, if I remember correctly, you never offered one thing to help the debate, you only tried to stear it into a direction which you never implied. Please, don't contribute to my thread if you aren't going to contribute. Except the Fighter isn't an Archer, and no - he isn't worse - he's more versatile. Suvivability? Don't take damage then, complete crap. The fighter isn't an archer? The fighter can be an archer. How many archery feats are there in the PHB? Who's the class who can take them all? Fighter and Ranger (only the fighter can afford to get mounted archery and shot on the run though, I'll give him that much). So stupid players should be catered for? Most players? Crap again. You sound a might bit elitist. Who cares? Go cross class into skills and you'll be fine, multiclass and you'll pick up the non-fighter abilities you'll need. Many Fighter Archtypes? Name one. Any swashbuckler and leader type fighter. They do not have the neccessary athletic skills (balance mainly) or diplomatic skills (bluff, diplomacy, sense motive) to properly simulate certain character types. The KNIGHT or samurai is another character archetype that cannot be simulated by the Fighter class well enough, due to a lack of skill points; I chose to not address this with mine because I think the Knight should be a different class, but not everyone thinks the same way as I do, thus the fighter's lack of skill versatility is an issue. Also, the guard archetype, if only for your character's backstory, is also tough to do with a fighter. Lacking spot, search, sense motive, and listen, the fighter can't be an adiquate guard. Crap again, with the right set-up, you won't care - just like everyone else. Fighters were easy to effect with magic - it's called Direct Damage, the difference is they made other classes look stupid and they were limited in how they could counter attack. Frankly i'd rather kick that type of useless Tank out of the game. Really? Wow, you're so convincing. The fighter is perfect just as they are, because with the right set-up, I won't care ... What is this right set up? You haven't made any suggestions! Crap again, I don't need meteor swarm to destroy a small village, I just great cleave my way through it. Then I do it again to the next town, all day long. I don't need to be 19th level to do that either, I can do it by 6th. Sure, that's why the world is ruled by 6th level fighters, right? Either way, this doesn't mean Fighter feats are underpowered, it just means Wizards have a few shots that are stupidly overpowered given what they could do to a world. Maybe, but what is easier to do to the game, destroy the wizard archetype in order to balance it and limit them to 3rd level spells tops, or increase the power of the high level fighter? Maybe you'd be okay with there being no wizards since theyre so overpowered, I don't know. You're pretty lax on presenting ideas other than "I'm right and you're wrong, but I'm so right that I wont tell you what I know because you're wrong and you wouldn't understand." No they bloody well aint. They're known for being able to kickass with everything they pick up and for their array of tactical maneuvers that give them the edge. The useless idiot who focuses on one style and one weapon just cripples his effectivness and probably is an NPC warrior. Alright, this one will be fun. Name me some fighters from movies, literature, and video games. Only suggest characters who do not fit into the "Knight in Shinning Armor" mold (Paladins), the "Warrior Who Uses His Anger" mold (Barbarian), the "Stealthy Commando" mold (Ranger), or obviously solid rogue or monk molds. Then, tell me what these characters are known for, what their weapon of choice is, and I'm pretty sure that the vast majority of them are known as being skilled with a certain weapon. Sure, fighters can pick up anything and fight well with it, that's represented by their BAB and their proficiency with all non-exotic weapons. Who the hell said weapon masters were Fighters? Maybe they're actually the Barbarians and Rangers of the world who are too limited to do anything else because they don't get a bunch of bonus feats. Maybe they weren't actually Fighters because they weren't actually good enough to be considered one. Just slackers who got lucky because they never actually fought a proper fighter before. Sure, what ever. Go somewhere else. And I've been sitting around for longer, telling people why they're wrong for ages now. You know what, this is the first intelligent thing you've said. That's all you do. Deciding to do things and claiming it's a collaboration is an unfunny joke. See my first point of this post; this is my suggestion, not the end all be all of fighter varients. I mean seriously, this fix is based on a bunch of injected ideals and no sense of reality. I could show you a ton of Fighter variants. This varient meets all of the criteria that I think a fighter should meet. I only took away one bonus feat and offered a slightly limited use damage increasing ability, just like every other non-casting class has their own limited damage increasing ability (rage, smite evil, increased unarmed damage, sneak attack, favored enemy). Compared to your varient, which you could show me but you choose not to because I'm too stupid to understand ... oh that's right, you didn't post one. Thanks for contributing. Yes, I apologise for my overstated frustration, but this Fighter nonsense should really stop. Then why don't you try one last post to enlighten us stupid players how the fighter is suposed to be played? Why don't you come and play all of our fighters for us, since we dont know how to play the game. Thanks for the appology, you should try one without a kicker next time. not Yoda, yes I have, but I don't think that is part of the fighter archetype's realm of expertise. I feel that that's something for the fighter/rogues, who function great as commando scout types (basically non-magical rangers). I've seen other fighter varients that use the idea well, it just wasn't something that I thought was important enough to all fighters. I think it would be very appropriate as a feat though. Thelon Fairblade, I did consider what would happen when characters could take two levels of rogue and fighter to get more save coverage, but truth be told I didn't consider the wizard. But, for non-elves, non-humans, non-dwarves, doing such would destroy a character because of the experience penalty system for multiclassing. I do think that it may be fair to have mettle apply only to fortitude saves, give it a different name perhaps, but I don't think there are as many fortitude half or fortitude partial spells as there are reflex half spells, but I could be wrong. As for the first level dip, you're right, they do get a bit for the first level. Barbarians get fast movement and rage and more skill points, paladins get detect evil and smite evil, rangers get favored enemy and track ... the other warriors get more than the fighter does at first level, I was just trying to even the playing field. hammer_man_Dan, the current fighter is playable, sure, which is why I did my best to not destroy what the fighter was. My largest worry is that with the PrC system in place, I have never seen a fighter taken to 15th level like I've seen every other character. If I don't allow PrCs in a game, I rarely see anything past Fighter 2 or 4. I've built high level fighters just for the heck of it, and I know how great all of those feats are, but as a player and DM, I feel that fighters are outshined by the other warriors in so many areas that the fighter isn't mechanically worth playing when the other classes and PrCs are options. Clawhound, at first I simply considered doing focus, specialization, improved focus, improved specialization, greater focus, greater specialization, but that seems uninspired. Then I considered having mastery and grand mastery add to the fighter's critical hit capability, but not all fighters care for critical hits (mechanically, only high threat range or high threat multiplier weapons benefit from crits, and some fighters are undead slayers and wouldn't care about criticals). Extra attacks were concieved when I remembered that the old fighter was the only character to gain 5 attacks. I do think that adding -2 penalties would help balance the abilities, though.
~Black Knight~ 06-18-05, 03:22 PM	To solve the lack of skills problem, why not allow all the skill boosting feats (alertness, stealthy, etc) to add those skills to your class list. If you want to create a guard, just take alertness at first level, and then you can pump all the skill points you want into listen and spot.
d_nychus 06-18-05, 03:26 PM	Xeviat_DM: I can tell you one thing from personal experience about your fighter, because my original revamp of the fighter shared a few characteristics with yours, namely gaining Weapon Focus at 1st level along with a bonus feat. It makes for very annoying level dipping. Every non-caster (and possibly even the rare caster, too) is going try to take one level of fighter simply for the bonus feat and Weapon Focus. In effect, it makes your revamp of the fighter the new 3.0 ranger (which you may remember was often level-dipped for the Track and Two-weapon Fighting). It was just too good to non-fighters to take one level of fighter and continue on with their normal class in my games, especially if XP penalties could be avoided via favored classes and the like. My solution was to keep the 1st level with just the bonus feat alone, and offer Improved Weapon Focus, which either gave a +1 to existing Weapon Focus bonus or effectively provided Weapon Focus if the character did not have the feat, at 3rd level. One suggestion from my own revamp I would like to make is to tie the mastery abilities to Weapon Focus. In otherwords, X Mastery lets you do Y, if you are wielding a weapon with which you have Weapon Focus. Not something needed for your version, but something that might make the class builds a little more interesting.
20102000 06-18-05, 03:56 PM	I'd agree with most of the premise. Although I don't think the fighter is broken or underpowered at low levels. And at higher levels they can match other classes, but you seem to have to force the class down certain builds, or mini/max it somewhat. I don't think the weakness with regard to magic is a problem. All classes should have weaknesses. Don't forget most characters die because of hit points than any other reason. And fighters d10 gives them a big advantage that way. I would also add the fighters equipment dependancy. Do you think perseus would of refused the sword from Hermes, because he had greater weapon specialization in battle axe? As to your suggested fix, too much, too powerful. Have you seen the warrior varient from UA. Thats a fighter , but you get to move the saves around, and choose the class skills. Which deals with the save and skill issues. I also think you should approach the problem from a role-playing point of view as well. What is the fighter? You've got rogues, rangers and swashbucklers. Which covers the light weight move and fight style. The fighter should be the heavier armoured option. Should the fighter be a specialist or be more versatile? If you we're a soldier , whether it was a roman legionare , an english longbow man, or a crusader knight. You should be able to create those types of character from the fighter class a lone. Legionares would be proficient in armour and shields, javelins, and swords. But not in all weapons and bows, as even a 1st level fighter would be. Longbow men didn't wear heavy armour or use anyting bigger than a buckler. so why would they be profiecient in armour? A knight would be proficient in most martial weapons and armours. But i'd expect a typical knight to have a lot more feats than a 1st level fighter. So would an apprentice knight be proficient in all those weapons and armour? I have a lot of questions but few answers. The only suggested solution I have is fighting style feats to replace weapon specialization/focus feats. You get the same bonuses, however rather than applying to one weapon , they apply when fighting a certain way. The styles would be for medium sized creatures) Medium weapon and shield. Medium/light and light weapon. Range weapon. Two handed reach weapon. Mounted weapon. Single medium weapon.
Mystyc 06-18-05, 04:01 PM	I do agree that the Fighter is bland in comparison to other classes, just like the Sorcerer is. Both are quite customizable through selection of certain feats or spells, but their tables just look so... meh. Here are a pair of adjustments that (if applied to the base fighter, not the OP's variant) could make the class a bit more interesting, although either also works on its own: 1) Background. Similar to a psion's commitment to a particular discipline, or a wizard's specialization, each fighter selects a background at first level. Each background adds three skills to that fighter's class skill list, and the fighter also gains a special ability. For example: Acrobatics: Balance, Move Silently, Tumble; The fighter gets a +4 competence bonus to Tumble checks to move without provoking attacks of opportunity. Adventuring: Knowledge (dungeoneering), Search, Use Rope; The fighter gains trapfinding (see the rogue class ability). Deception: Bluff, Disguise, Forgery; The fighter gets a +4 competence bonus to Bluff checks to feint in combat. Intelligence: Decipher Script, Gather Information, Knowledge (local); The fighter learns two additional bonus languages. Magic: Knowledge (arcana), Spellcraft, Use Magic Device; The fighter gains mettle (see the hexblade class ability). Politics: Diplomacy, Knowledge (nobility and royalty), Speak Language; NPCs are one category more favorable in their reactions to the fighter. Security: Listen, Sense Motive, Spot; The fighter gains still mind (see the monk class ability). Wilderness: Hide, Knowledge (nature), Survival; The fighter gains trackless step (see the druid class ability). 2) Mastery. At 5th level, the fighter may select one weapon feat he or she possesses that applies to a single weapon (ie: Weapon Focus or Improved Critical, etc.). This feat now applies to every weapon the fighter is proficient in, including unarmed strike. The fighter may select another feat to master at 10th, 15th and 20th levels. Using these variants would both specialize and generalize the fighter. The extra abilities are the only thing that would encourage dipping -- you'd need 5 levels to get Mastery, and the skill points are better accessed by some other class. The ability could be pushed back to, say, third level to prevent this. Of course, they also don't really address the desire for more interesting things at higher levels. I like the "additional attacks" flavor of Weapon Mastery -- perhaps add that as a special feat that requires X levels of fighter, like Weapon Specialization. Anything that scales from class level, like a Monk's stunning fist, would work as well.
Xeviat-DM 06-18-05, 11:20 PM	Missing something? Sure: brokenness. The fighter is so not broken. It's a simple, elegant class design - quite possibly the least broken class in the game. It's simple, elegant, and when one compares an archer-fighter to an archer-ranger, one can see just how weak the fighter can be. I did the comparison in the other thread, you saw it, and the ranger came out 5 feats and spells ahead of the fighter. Yes, a number of the ranger specials that I counted as feats count a little less because they are fairly limited, but they all are used by the ranger, none are floating around not getting used like mounted combat is in a dungeon (or other options). I understand the arguments that the fighter is 'weak' at higher levels, compared to some other classes, in some situations, in some campaigns - and I understand the impulse to liven up it's austere special abilities column... ...but it's not broken. Maybe I shouldn't have used the word broken, but the fact that, when PrCs are allowed, I have not seen one fighter taken above the level it takes to enter it. Cavalier, Dualist, Master Thrower, and many other PrCs are taken over the fighter, showing that the fighter is missing something post 8th level (the level most PrCs allow one to jump ship). This problem can be largely aleviated by creating more high level feats, often ones which mimic PrCs in order to disband them, but it is also a part of player perception in the fighter class, having so many options and nothing to spend them on. Again, I understand the impulse, but, while I didn't stick around for the whole thing, all of the additions I saw floated failed to live up to either the 'generic' or 'in parameters' (or both). A lot of them also overshot the mark, and would've made the fighter overpowered compared to other warrior types. I would understand if you told me that my suggested fix was overpowered, it very well could be and I am willing to tweek it in order to rebalance it, but what is out of parameter or non-generic about my fighter fix? The weapon mastery abilities fit into 90% of all fighter builds, and for those that don't I propose offering an alternative ability, or a PrC for "masters of all weapons" to take in order to give them good skill with all weapons (focus and specialization), but not the mastery abilities. I have to say that an alternative fighter might be a better way to go. If you're obviating an existing (even popular - the fighter, though it has it's vocal detractors, is still a class that sees a lot of play) class, the chances are you're not balanced. My fighter has everything the fighter has and then some, because I feel the fighter is missing something. 90% of all fighter builds call for weapon focus at some time, thus my progression does not sacrifice any of that. An old fighter will be largely the same as one built with mine; maybe one feat behind half of the time. Compared to a /raging/ barbarian, the fighter's damage is a bit behind - 'survivability' is different (a raging barb will have more hps, the fighter more AC). Barbarians always have more HP than fighters with the same Con. DR and better rage saves also add to survivability. And at mid levels, where the fighter problem starts, in standard campaigns, the barbarian can rage in all battles where it is necessary; the fighter has to spend their class abilities on feats that don't even level the playing field when damage is considered. At 1st level the barbarian is gaining +2 to hit and +3 to damage with their weapon (as long as it's two handed), while the fighter is getting +1 to hit and +2 to damage for two feats at level 4; at 12th level the barbarian is getting +3 to hit and +4 to damage, and the fighter is getting +2 to hit and +4 to damage for 4 feats. It's worse when the barbarian gets mighty rage and has +4 to hit and +6 to damage, compared to the fighter's +2/+4 for 4 feats. :banghead: 6th level ranger vs. 6th level fighter Ranger has 3 character feats, track, endurance, rapid shot, and many shot. Fighter has 3 character feats, and 4 fighter feats. Ranger selects Point Blank Shot, Precise Shot, and Weapon Focus (longbow) with their character feats. Fighter selects Point Blank Shot, Precise Shot, and Weapon Focus (longbow) with their character feats, and selects Rapid Shot, Many Shot, and Weapon Specialization with their fighter feats, and has one feat left over. The Ranger has Track, Endurance, and Favored Enemy +2 and Favored Enemy +4, vs. the fighter's Weapon Specialization and one other feat. It's safe to say tht the fight'ers weapon specialization, granting +2 to damage with all longbow attacks, is comparable to favored enemy +2 and favored enemy +4, which work against two creature types with any attacks made, not just the longbow. What are we left with: Fighter vs. Ranger Feat Track average +7 hp +54 skill points - 2 1st level spells per day - Endurance - Animal Companion - Wild Empathy - +3 Reflex save So I guess fighter's aren't meant to be archers eh? Yeah, but he's all about fighting, and multiclasses easily with more skill-intensive classes. Which is why I didn't consider it important enough to deal with with my fix. I think skillful fighters should have high intelligence (similarly, I once played a skillful paladin on a 25 point buy, had to suffer the other scores to get the skills I wanted). Ih. If you're /not/ a fighter, Whirlwind Attack /is/ a high-level feat. So fighters can pick up high level feats at mid level, that makes them suck? You're right, Whirlwind Attack is a 12th level feat for most people, but a fighter can pick it up at 6th. But Whirlwind is one of the only feats that does such, everything else is pretty even. Fighters can pick up +4 BAB feats (cleave, spring attack) two levels before anyone else, and I value that as a fighter strength. But this advantage goes away post 8-12th level, when the fighter runs out of options and is forced to "round out" their combat styles by picking feats that don't fit, unless their character was designed to be round from the beginning. Well, there goes the 'keep it generic' idea. Same as I said to Nyferto, name some fighter examples from movies, games, and stories. I spent a lot of time on this, and I came to realize that the vast majority of fighters have a specialized weapon that they are known for. The game does not 'reward' specialization. It compensates specialists for thier lack outside thier speciality, with greater efficacy within thier speciality. That's not a reward, it's a trade-off. Different way of saying the same thing; generalists do not get the compensation that specialists get, nor does their generalization reward them in the long run. The best example is a fighter who wants to be a power attacker like the barbarian, a mounted combatant like the Paladin, and an archer like the ranger; the idea is sound, if the fighter can do combat as well as each of them, that will be balanced against their special abilities. At 8th level, each of those characters have 4 feats, and will be assumed to take weapon focus (I really think the ranger's combat style feats should be removed, it would allow the fighter to be a better feat master; I'd have half as many complaints if such was done). At 9th, the fighter has 9 feats, allowing him to match all non weapon focus feats the others have taken. But each character will out damage the fighter in certain conditions, so he doesn't even match them. You could simply leave the weapon feats as feats, and give the fighter more bonus feats, possibly in a pattern that avoids 'dead levels.' (for instance, every level that you /don't/ get a feat for leveling) Quite sound, and probably would work well. I still think fighters should get something that no one else gets to allow players to percieve there being a reason for staying fighter through 20th level. Sure, you're suggesting adding 3 extra feats, which amounts to 7 feats between 11 and 20th levels, but when there's a 10 level PrC that grants 1 or 2 abilities at each level, that fighter is still weak. Don't say that PrCs have requirements, since most PrCs have requirements that are things the character would have taken anyway, so they only serve to set a level admition. Not a bad idea, but it still doesn't address the poor will save very well. Not that many WILL save powers are for partial effects, and the fighter's still likely to fail. Frankly, with no supernatural abilities to dish out, there's no strong balance reason for the fighter not to stand up to such abilities well - he's at least as good a candidate for all-good saves as the Monk, in that sense. Though, since the problem with fighters-vs-casters is most prevelent at higher levels, a progression that kicks in later (like a scaling bonus to WILL and REF saves starting in the double-digits, and bridging most of the poor-good save gap by 20th). Maybe. I could see an arguement for giving the fighter all high saves; they don't have any active magic of their own, but they learn to fight all foes and thus develope their defenses. Someone mentioned the warrior, which is the fighter with choice of high save and choice of skills (but has a lower HD and less starting proficiencies should be pointed out), and a part of me (25%) wouldn't mind switching over to a totally feat based system. In a feat based system, I would make an Evasion-like ability for all three saves, and have each one be a feat that requires Lighting Reflexes, Iron Will, or Great Fortitude. But Mettle is more appropriate for the fighter than Evasion; Perhaps your "feat every level" idea coupled with all high saves could solve most problems. I still think the fighter should get something unique instead of "feat every level", and since weapon specialization is fighter only I think it should simply be part of the fighter's progression. My two favorite suggestions for fighter fixes (that aren't mine) are add a special ability progression (9, 13, 17), but I haven't seen a suitable list of specials suggested for such a fix. Rialto, when the first version of this thred was still being contributed to, we started with the idea of simply creating more high level feats, but arguements made it so we couldn't even set down a base structure to organize our thoughts. I've suggested many high level feats, mainly based on expanding the three primary combat feat chains (Combat Expertise, Dodge, and Power Attack), but I still stand by my point that compared to a 10 level PrC, fighter levels 11-20 are weak. ~Black Knight~ I have done exactly that in my game (skill focus and the alertness-type feats add the skills to all your class skill lists), but such a suggestion is beyond a "fighter fix", and is in the realm of a small change to the whole system. I personally think that an alternate proficiency system and such a skill system would go a long way to fixing the fighter, but such are changes to the whole class system. d_nychus, I understand that perfectly, but I also see that the first level of every other non-casting class offers more than the first fighter level. Sure, versatilty and choice count for something. I also think that the favored class system should keep most players from cherry picking one fighter level. If you've seen such done in play, then you're more experienced than I because I haven't attempted implimenting a fighter variant yet. 20102000, yours was another idea that came up on the last thread. Rather than giving weapon specialization as fighter abilities, we would grant style abilities at certain levels (1, 5, 10, 15, and 20 most likely). But we were not able to narrow down all of the styles (our most concice list seemed to be 8 styles with several substyles for each), nor were we able to come up with suitable abilties for each. Sure, simple damage, attack, to hit, and critical hit increases would probably work best; as many fighters are known for their style as being known for their weapon. Mystyc, you're right, the fighter's problem is similar to the sorcerer's problem; a good player can work around it, but it's still there. A good player can break the system with a single build, usually using 10 different PrCs and other things, but the game should be designed to the common player. Your background suggestion is nice, it would work great in a d20 modern like campaign where all players select an occupation or background for their character in addition to their class. I think it would seem odd that only the fighter is different depending on their background, and would like to see a similar system used for all classes.
Mystyc 06-19-05, 01:57 AM	6th level ranger vs. 6th level fighter Ranger has 3 character feats, track, endurance, rapid shot, and many shot. Fighter has 3 character feats, and 4 fighter feats. Ranger selects Point Blank Shot, Precise Shot, and Weapon Focus (longbow) with their character feats. Fighter selects Point Blank Shot, Precise Shot, and Weapon Focus (longbow) with their character feats, and selects Rapid Shot, Many Shot, and Weapon Specialization with their fighter feats, and has one feat left over. The Ranger has Track, Endurance, and Favored Enemy +2 and Favored Enemy +4, vs. the fighter's Weapon Specialization and one other feat. It's safe to say tht the fight'ers weapon specialization, granting +2 to damage with all longbow attacks, is comparable to favored enemy +2 and favored enemy +4, which work against two creature types with any attacks made, not just the longbow. What are we left with: Fighter vs. Ranger Feat Track average +7 hp +36 skill points (corrected) - 2 1st level spells per day - Endurance - Animal Companion - Wild Empathy - +3 Reflex save So I guess fighter's aren't meant to be archers eh? To be perfectly fair, the fighter is a better archer than the ranger. The ranger only outdamages the fighter against his +4 enemy, and the fighter outdamages him on everything he's not favored in. One of those groups is much larger than the other. Make that last feat Shot on the Run, and the fighter even has a tactic the ranger doesn't. At 8th level, the fighter can also get Greater Weapon Focus, widening the gap. The problem is that the ranger does all this other stuff. That's always the problem: the fighter fights, and he fights marginally better than everyone else, but that's about it. I'm not sure if that can be changed without making him something other than the "Fighter." Even just improving the fighter in combat runs into its own problems, because at some point, everybody fights. If you let the fighter do something in combat, you have to ask why other combat-oriented classes can't do it too. Combat is so universal that any modifications to it are almost required to be general feats, so giving the fighter more feats is just about the only way to improve him. Eventually other classes will get that ability too, because they also have to fight. Longer feat trees aren't even that helpful, because even if they are more than a non-bonused character could get (seven feats), the character only needs enough levels of fighter to make sure he/she can finish it. Unless you want to make a tree that is eighteen feats long, there's not really a reason to max out the fighter; at some point, you're good enough at combat, and there's an entire other half of the game to get good at. At the end of the day, the fighter doesn't really have any abilities to call his own, because he doesn't have any exclusive territory. As such, other classes will dip for what they need, then return to their own places. I'm sort of stuck for ways to fundamentally alter this.
Rialto 06-19-05, 02:41 AM	Rialto, when the first version of this thred was still being contributed to, we started with the idea of simply creating more high level feats, but arguements made it so we couldn't even set down a base structure to organize our thoughts. I've suggested many high level feats, mainly based on expanding the three primary combat feat chains (Combat Expertise, Dodge, and Power Attack), but I still stand by my point that compared to a 10 level PrC, fighter levels 11-20 are weak. Xeviat, if you feel the Fighter lacks something between lvls 11-20 that's where you should add more abilities/feat-options, etc. - and not before because you would just be strengthening Ftr-multiclassed builds without solving the problem. Of course, the Ftr levels at these point /11-20/ are "weaker" in some sense than a 10th lvl Full Bab PrC - it is part of what PrC stands for: you gain more power in exchange for your base class/classes abilities (and that's not even true for spellcasting PrC), and since the Ftr only looses some feats that are not worthed anyway /no good high level feats/ he only gains from this.
Xeviat-DM 06-19-05, 03:56 AM	To be perfectly fair, the fighter is a better archer than the ranger. The ranger only outdamages the fighter against his +4 enemy, and the fighter outdamages him on everything he's not favored in. One of those groups is much larger than the other. Make that last feat Shot on the Run, and the fighter even has a tactic the ranger doesn't. At 8th level, the fighter can also get Greater Weapon Focus, widening the gap. Fighter needs dodge and mobility before they can select shot on the run. Careful there. The problem is that the ranger does all this other stuff. That's always the problem: the fighter fights, and he fights marginally better than everyone else, but that's about it. I'm not sure if that can be changed without making him something other than the "Fighter." The problem is that the fighter doesn't fight marginally better than the other warriors in their field. A fighter should be able to be as good as the others in their field if he generalizes, or better than them if he focuses. They have better skills and other abilities; the fighter only fights. Even just improving the fighter in combat runs into its own problems, because at some point, everybody fights. If you let the fighter do something in combat, you have to ask why other combat-oriented classes can't do it too. Combat is so universal that any modifications to it are almost required to be general feats, so giving the fighter more feats is just about the only way to improve him. Eventually other classes will get that ability too, because they also have to fight. Hense the need for fighter specific abilities as part of their class progression, instead of class specific feats that make one question why other classes can't pick them up. Longer feat trees aren't even that helpful, because even if they are more than a non-bonused character could get (seven feats), the character only needs enough levels of fighter to make sure he/she can finish it. Unless you want to make a tree that is eighteen feats long, there's not really a reason to max out the fighter; at some point, you're good enough at combat, and there's an entire other half of the game to get good at. Maybe, but the idea is to also create improved versions of some of the long feats, and what I call "cross chain feats" (like whirlwind attack) that require feats from multiple feat chains. The fighter still needs something unique to give players a reason to not jump ship. At the end of the day, the fighter doesn't really have any abilities to call his own, because he doesn't have any exclusive territory. As such, other classes will dip for what they need, then return to their own places. I'm sort of stuck for ways to fundamentally alter this. See, I knew you understood the point I was trying to get across. High level feats are needed by all non-casters, but only the fighter can really afford to exploit them. But I do feel the fighter needs something unique.
20102000 06-19-05, 05:27 AM	See, I knew you understood the point I was trying to get across. High level feats are needed by all non-casters, but only the fighter can really afford to exploit them. But I do feel the fighter needs something unique. An Idea I have seen on other boards is for feat synergy. For fighters you could add extra feats which you get free if you have certain combinations of feats, and usually feats at the ends of feat chains. As to unique abilities. How about something like the monks Ki strike. Or the ability to get ranged AOO. Someone mentioned the warrior, which is the fighter with choice of high save and choice of skills (but has a lower HD and less starting proficiencies should be pointed out) The warrior has the same HD as fighters, and you only lose tower shields and heavy armour proficiency. I don't see many characters wearing heavy armour. the fighter is missing something. I do agree. However I don't agree with you choices with what what to add. So as a compromise . Why not add options or choices, which include your choices.
Jarred Garrison 06-19-05, 11:16 AM	I personally think that boosting Will saves to good, instead of Mettle, would be enough to adress the Fighter´s weakness to magic. After all, they need a lot of discipline and training to become fighters, so that makes sense. Then, some Feat Synergy to represent the various styles can be a good idea. For example, if you have power attack and point-blank shot, you get ranged power attack for free (or something like that, maybe using higher-level feats for it, and only being granted it at a certain Fighter level). Then, with a couple tweaks more, the Fighter should be ok. One of the strengths of the Fighter is precisely the ability to PrC easily, and without losing much. Now, the problem is, you are pretty much forced to do so at high levels to keep up with the other classes in terms of power. The fighter is not broken, only underpowered, as far as straight 20 level Fighters go.
Creeg 06-19-05, 06:14 PM	Alright, this one will be fun. Name me some fighters from movies, literature, and video games. Only suggest characters who do not fit into the "Knight in Shinning Armor" mold (Paladins), the "Warrior Who Uses His Anger" mold (Barbarian), the "Stealthy Commando" mold (Ranger), or obviously solid rogue or monk molds. Then, tell me what these characters are known for, what their weapon of choice is, and I'm pretty sure that the vast majority of them are known as being skilled with a certain weapon. Sure, fighters can pick up anything and fight well with it, that's represented by their BAB and their proficiency with all non-exotic weapons. Boy that's simple.. any Gladiator or Soldier. Lets look more into history though. Fighters are Soldiers, people trained to fight. Does any army train it's soldiers how to use only one weapon? No, they don't. Soldiers were taught to use sword, dagger, axes, sling, javelin, and often bows in addition to shields and armor. Basically any weapon they might see on a battle field. Sure they might have mainly used swords but that was often for more tactical reasons. A good soldier could have picked up any "proper" weapon and used it with skill. Proper being anything meant to be a weapon. A gladiator would learn to fight with anything he picked up from a rock to a Glaive. Most Character in Fiction, don't fit into classes as they are in D&D. They don't fit any mold of a class in D&D close but not completely. You can only take such things from D&D books. The real world isn't full of classes, nor are most Fantasy settings. Tolken's world fits closley (almost perfectly with things like fighter and ranger) but that is about it. That argument just doesn't work. That is YOUR view, but perhaps not the D&D designers. Any character from a D&D book or game is likely to fit perfectly into any class/ multi-class.
Xeviat-DM 06-19-05, 06:36 PM	Creeg, first off, D&D is ment to model fiction, not history. Second, the fighter does know how to use all of those weapons, that's why they have proficiency in all non-exotic weapons. Thirdly, regulars in the millitary are warriors, not fighters; read miniatures handbook and heros of battle if you don't believe me. Fighters are special units in the millitary, often commanders or at the very least part of special forces. Again, the fighter knows how to use practically all weapons, but they still have a prefered weapon. I've already considered these arguements into my version. As for feat synergy, I'd rather see such done with cross chain feats. I made a ranged power attack feat, for example, that requires Power Attack, Point Blank Shot, and Far Shot, which allows one to use power attack with thrown weapons and also increases a weapon's range when one uses power attack. I realize I'm coming off as unreasonable and unmoving, but hardly anyone has suggested a build that can correct the fighter's problems.
Mystyc 06-19-05, 08:14 PM	I realize I'm coming off as unreasonable and unmoving, but hardly anyone has suggested a build that can correct the fighter's problems. The problem is that there may not be a way to do this without fundamentally altering the class. Every other class has abilities that scale with level, or more spells to be learned, but fighters get feats. As soon as you don't need any more feats, you're done with the fighter class. You could conceivably add some scaling ability to the class, but it pretty much has to be combat related, and then I would question why it couldn't just be another feat. The best thing I could imagine is some way to make the excess feats useful to the fighter in a way that they aren't useful to other classes. As such, here is a possibility that would let the fighter do something with his plethora of bonus feats (I've trimmed this down from when I first posted it in order to better emphasize the important bits): Fighter Level BAB Fort Ref Will Special 1st +1 +2 +0 +0 Bonus Feat 2nd +2 +3 +0 +0 Fighting Mastery 1 3rd +3 +3 +1 +1 Bonus Feat 4th +4 +4 +1 +1 5th +5 +4 +1 +1 Bonus Feat 6th +6 +5 +2 +2 Greater Weapon Focus 7th +7 +5 +2 +2 Bonus Feat 8th +8 +6 +2 +2 Fighting Mastery 2 9th +9 +6 +3 +3 Bonus Feat 10th +10 +7 +3 +3 11th +11 +7 +3 +3 Bonus Feat 12th +12 +8 +4 +4 Greater Weapon Specialization 13th +13 +8 +4 +4 Bonus Feat 14th +14 +9 +4 +4 Fighting Mastery 3 15th +15 +9 +5 +5 Bonus Feat 16th +16 +10 +5 +5 17th +17 +10 +5 +5 Bonus Feat 18th +18 +11 +6 +6 Greater Improved Critical 19th +19 +11 +6 +6 Bonus Feat 20th +20 +12 +6 +6 Fighting Mastery 4 Fighting Mastery (Ex): At 2nd level, a fighter improves his abilities in all forms of unorthodoxed combat. Whenever the fighter is assessed penalties to his to-hit roll due to his technique, the penalty is decreased by 1. Examples of such penalties are non-proficiency penalties, two-weapon fighting penalties, or the penalty assessed from using the feat Monkey Grip. For every six levels above 2, the penalties decrease by an additional 1, to a minimum of -0. Greater Weapon Focus: A fighter of 6th level or above may select redundant instances of the Weapon Focus feat. These feats now stack with each other. For example, a fighter with two instances of Weapon Focus (greataxe) would get a total of +2 to his attack rolls with a greataxe, in addition to his other bonuses. (This ability replaces and overrides the Greater Weapon Focus feat as written in the PHB.) Greater Weapon Specialization: A fighter of 12th level or above may select redundant instances of the Weapon Specialization feat. These feats now stack with each other. For example, a fighter with two instances of Weapon Specialization (greataxe) would get a total of +4 to his damage rolls with a greataxe, in addition to his other bonuses. (This ability replaces and overrides the Greater Weapon Specialization feat as written in the PHB.) Greater Improved Critical: A fighter of 18th level or above may select redundant instances of the Improved Critical feat. These feats now stack with each other. For example, a fighter with two instances of Improved Critical (greataxe) would threaten a critical hit on a roll of 18, 19 or 20 when wielding a greataxe. This Greater Feat setup lets the fighter take weapon-specific feats to a further extreme, and eliminates the possibility of "dead feats" at the end of the class. If you want an iconic weapon, you're all clear. I'm not sure if it's abusive -- if you totally sell out to Focus, you can have as many as 11 instances of Focus for one weapon, but is that any worse than what high level casters do? The Fighting Mastery plugs a couple extra holes in the list, and seems like something a fighter could make good use of without begging to be a feat unto itself. (I had some Charge abilities in there before, but those should really be feats.) By 20th level, you can at least do two-weapon fighting with a one-handed weapon and not suffer any penalty, and I'm sure there are more interesting things than that available.
The Wasp 06-19-05, 11:12 PM	Man, take a two week vacation and the old thread dies. Addressing the key weak points of the fighter, as listed by Xeviat-DM: 1. Weakness compared to other warriors: Compared to the Barbarian, the Fighter's damage and survivability are way behind. As TVargas mentioned, this is only when the Barbarian is raging. Unfortunately, at higher levels this is just about all the time. The limitations on the combat styles of the paladin and ranger mean that even if they have more "feats" than the fighter, the fighter still gets his chances to shine compared to them. And of course PrC's are a whole nother issue. At any rate, I would modify this complaint to weakness compared to barbarians and PrCs, past level 10. 2. Lack of unique specials: While most intelligent players grin at the fighter's 11 bonus feats, many feel like the class is missing something. This feeling is largely superficial, but it still exists. Many players pass up the fighter for Barbarian, Ranger or Paladin if their character fits the broad molds (two-handed weapon user, archer or two-weapon fighter, or mounted combatant), or take as few fighter levels as possible before jumping ship to one of the many PrCs offered. Unique abilities would both give players a reason to play the fighter, and also to give abilities the fighter would have to give up if they took a PrC. The fighter is meant to be a generic class. If you give it unique combat abilities that aren't generically applicable, you no longer have a fighter class. as was mentioned above, its hard to give a plausible reason that a fighter could have a special combat manuever, but not a paladin. its ok to make it harder for the paladin to get, though. 3. Poor skills: The fighter has both the worse skill points in the game and the worse skill list in the game. Many fighter archetypes are skillful people, and the fighter class doesn't allow this. The lack of skills makes the fighter's only ability fighting; coupled with the apparent weakness of the class, this means the fighter's only ability is overshadowed by the ability of other classes. The fighter has poor skills, but he is a fighter after all - 2 sp per level seems right. A few more class skills wouldn't hurt, though. 4. Weakness to magic: Of all the classes, the fighter is quite possibly the easiest to effect by magic. The other non-casters get some ability to protect them against magical effects, but the fighter is left without. This is especially painful when compared to the fighter of 2nd edition, who was very difficult to effect with magic at higher levels. I agree on the problem. The solution escapes me, although I still like the diea of a feat that boosts your saves when you fight defensively (or with expertise) 5. Lack of high level feats: When the wizard picks up meteor swarm, gaining the ability to destroy small towns almost effortlessly, the fighter gains another feat, and because they have probably rounded out their fighting style, this feat is probably one available to 1st level characters. This is unacceptable, quite possibly the largest problem the current fighter faces. More feats should be created in the 12+ BAB range, like Improved Precise Shot, that will add strength and options to high level fighters. Similarly, feats with many prerequisites drawn from many feat chains, such as Whirlwind Attack, should be designed to give strength to generalist fighters to counterbalance the added power offered to specialists. This is the main problem, right here. It has the same solution as number 1 - better high level feats, both for specialists and generalists. In order to maintain suitable versatility, increase the number of bonus feats so that, as Vargas suggested you get them on every level not divisible by three. This leads me to a few important conclusions: 1: don't mess with low level fighter 2: add feats, not special abilities. one of the key features of the fighter is its genericness. mandatory special abilities take away from this. 3: feat chains: in order to make the higher level feats of greatest benefit to the fighter, they should require prerequisites of 4 or five feats. Preferably, these feats would not be the most powerful synergystic combination for the other martial classes. They should be available to other classes, but at the price of multiclassing as a fighter, or giving up feats that synergize well with their class abilities.
Xeviat-DM 06-20-05, 01:23 AM	Wasp, I do think your solution is the easiest, but also requires quite a bit more work. To make your system work, one must disolve many, if not most, non-casting PrCs and make many of their abilities into feats. I still think two or three generic abilities for the fighter would look nice on the character special list to show players that there is something for fighters other than feats. I've never understood why you, Wasp, don't think that automatically granting weapon specialization, and like feats, for the fighter doesn't fit. Having it as a fighter only feat doesn't really make sense, there is no listed explanation for why only the fighter can develop this trick. If it were opened to everyone else, that would hurt the fighter because every other class has a damage boosting ability. Every fighter hits opponents with things, be it their fists, a rock, or a sword/axe/arrow, so boosting their damage capability with their primary weapon, which most fighters have a choice weapon, seems like a logical choice. I will stay that I don't like the idea of disrupting their feat every even level set up; I like that set up, it flows nicely with making feats require BABs with multiples of four to ensure that the fighter gains them before other classes. I do think that adressing the lack of mid-high level feats would go a long way to fixing the fighter's problems, if and only if a large number of PrCs are taken out of the equasion. I consider the fact that the fighter can jump ship into a PrC without considering what they loose to be the largest flaw with the fighter. And welcome back.
Mystyc 06-20-05, 01:44 AM	Just pointing out that I've adjusted the suggestions in post #26, for those jumping to the new posts at the end of the thread. Sort of a personal bump, if you will. I'm sure I'm biased, but I think it may hit some of these issues very close to the head, and it's much easier to read than when I had ten different abilities (several of which didn't belong) on there. :twocents:
Maraxus 06-20-05, 03:46 AM	Mystyc: (Edit: Ups, that was someone else...) Hm, your fighter is definitly better, if you think the fighter is underpowered. I don't think so. Fighting Mastery: Does it also apply to penalties from power attack / expertise? Greater Stuff: Hm, this could be a posible solution for the weak high levels, I should calculate this through. However, I think, it is dangerous. But I really like your backrounds above (In place of the first level feat). Only Meetle may be to good. To go back to the first post: Current Fighter Problems Weakness compared to other warriors: Compared to the Barbarian, the Fighter's damage and survivability are way behind. Compared to the Ranger, the Fighter is a worse archer. Lack of unique specials: While most intelligent players grin at the fighter's 11 bonus feats, many feel like the class is missing something. This feeling is largely superficial, but it still exists. Many players pass up the fighter for Barbarian, Ranger or Paladin if their character fits the broad molds (two-handed weapon user, archer or two-weapon fighter, or mounted combatant), or take as few fighter levels as possible before jumping ship to one of the many PrCs offered. Unique abilities would both give players a reason to play the fighter, and also to give abilities the fighter would have to give up if they took a PrC. Poor skills: The fighter has both the worse skill points in the game and the worse skill list in the game. Many fighter archetypes are skillful people, and the fighter class doesn't allow this. The lack of skills makes the fighter's only ability fighting; coupled with the apparent weakness of the class, this means the fighter's only ability is overshadowed by the ability of other classes. Weakness to magic: Of all the classes, the fighter is quite possibly the easiest to effect by magic. The other non-casters get some ability to protect them against magical effects, but the fighter is left without. This is especially painful when compared to the fighter of 2nd edition, who was very difficult to effect with magic at higher levels. Lack of high level feats: When the wizard picks up meteor swarm, gaining the ability to destroy small towns almost effortlessly, the fighter gains another feat, and because they have probably rounded out their fighting style, this feat is probably one available to 1st level characters. This is unacceptable, quite possibly the largest problem the current fighter faces. More feats should be created in the 12+ BAB range, like Improved Precise Shot, that will add strength and options to high level fighters. Similarly, feats with many prerequisites drawn from many feat chains, such as Whirlwind Attack, should be designed to give strength to generalist fighters to counterbalance the added power offered to specialists. 1. No, you can't say it that generalized (of cause you can, but it is wrong) 2. What? Fighters are the most unique characters. Think of barb, ranger, monk, paladin. Every character of this class has the exact same abilities. But a fighter, who chooses x out of y feats should be quite diffrent from most other fighters. And with the right selection of feat, you are really unique. 3. Right. I like Mystyc's idea about backrounds for this. 4. Yes, in 3.x they wanted to make it that way: Wizard beats fighter, fighter beats rogue, rogue beats wizard. So I have no problem with this. 5. Another right point. Shadowfoot has a great selection of feats (somewhere here on the boards ;)) There are also some good high level feats. Another thing are the weapon style feats from complete warrior (that should be treated as examples, who weapon style feats could look like). I agree, that somewhere around level 10, the fighter does no longer increase in power and get's bad. But before, he is in fact one of the best choises, what should be mentioned, too.
Nyferto 06-20-05, 07:24 AM	Now try comparing a Fighting Fighter to a Fighting Ranger. Then you see that the Ranger does jack all in combat asside from Combat. Take it up a few levels and the Archery Fighter can branch out into other fields, generally becoming a better fighter than a Ranger ever could. Considering that's what you're bringing them along for - where's the cause for complaint?
20102000 06-20-05, 12:56 PM	Boy that's simple.. any Gladiator or Soldier. Lets look more into history though. Fighters are Soldiers, people trained to fight. Does any army train it's soldiers how to use only one weapon? No, they don't. Actualy , thats not true. Medieval troops frequently only knew how to fight with one or two weapons, but could use other weapons similar to the ones they knew.Knights and gladiators would know more weapons, but they had more training. D&D is ment to model fiction, not history. And fiction models history. So you should really draw from both sources. if you feel the Fighter lacks something between lvls 11-20 that's where you should add more abilities/feat-options, etc. - and not before because you would just be strengthening Ftr-multiclassed builds without solving the problem. I think one of the easy solutions is to give fighters a bonus feat at every level past 11th. 4. Weakness to magic: Of all the classes, the fighter is quite possibly the easiest to effect by magic. The other non-casters get some ability to protect them against magical effects, but the fighter is left without. This is especially painful when compared to the fighter of 2nd edition, who was very difficult to effect with magic at higher levels. I'm not convinced Mettle is the best answer. Although having though about it somemore. I am coming around to the idea. Other alternatives could be a general boost to all saves. Some sort of feat , similar to combat experiste, where you could convert bab, to save bonuses, perhaps?
Tony Vargas 06-20-05, 01:10 PM	It's simple, elegant, and when one compares an archer-fighter to an archer-ranger, one can see just how weak the fighter can be. I did the comparison in the other thread, you saw it, and the ranger came out 5 feats and spells ahead of the fighter.Your comparison must have been deeply flawed. The comparisons I've done and seen make it pretty obvious. Even core, there are quite a few archery feats, more than the 10 an archer-ranger can accumulate over 20 levels. The fighter get's more (even all) of them and gets them sooner. Sure, the ranger has a few tricks up his sleeve that synergize a bit with archery (like being a good scout via hide/sneak & spot listen, like the rogue). That doesn't make him a better archer, though. Maybe I shouldn't have used the word broken, Maybe the word you were looking for was 'underpowered?' There's not exactly general agreement on that, either. Simple Vote: is the fighter underpowered, yes or no? (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=403921) but the fact that, when PrCs are allowed, I have not seen one fighter taken above the level it takes to enter it.Meaningless. PrCs are an optional rule, they are /meant/ to attract players away from core classes, on the theory that the DM will only include specific PrCs that he want's players to choose, as a means of enhancing the campaign. This problem can be largely aleviated by creating more high level feats, often ones which mimic PrCs in order to disband them That 'problem' can be completely aleviated by not including PrCs. I would understand if you told me that my suggested fix was overpowered OK: your suggested fix is overpowered. but what is out of parameter or non-generic about my fighter fix? The weapon mastery abilities fit into 90% of all fighter builds, and for those that don't I propose offering an alternative ability I honestly don't think that they do. Weapon Specialization does get taken a lot, because it is an ability unique to the fighter, but, I really don't think it's that central to that many fighter concepts. In the absence of the mechanic, you could still create great archers or great fencers, or whatever, by choosing feats that work best with the weapon or style of combat in question. Barbarians always have more HP than fighters with the same Con. Sure, 1 more per level, on average. But they don't always have the same Con. For instance, a half-orc barbarian is unlikely to have as much CON as a dwarven fighter. Barbarians are channelled into lighter armor, and away from using shields, so, to maintain some sort of AC (and to get significant use out of Uncanny Dodge), they need higher DEX, as well as STR and CON. Depending on the 'build,' a fighter may really only need STR and CON... 6th level ranger vs. 6th level fighter Ranger has 3 character feats, track, endurance, rapid shot, and many shot.5 feats that can actually have something to do with archery. Fighter has 3 character feats, and 4 fighter feats. 7 feats that can actually have something to do with archery. End of story. But this advantage goes away post 8-12th level, when the fighter runs out of options and is forced to "round out" their combat styles by picking feats that don't fit, unless their character was designed to be round from the beginning.It's not a case of an advantage going away. The fighter's advantage is choice - accellarated progression like that is just one way of using that choice. I spent a lot of time on this, and I came to realize that the vast majority of fighters have a specialized weapon that they are known for. Go back an think about it some more: is it really a /weapon/, or a style. Robin Hood (though more ranger or rogue) was a great archer, and used a longbow - but would he really have been less an archer with a composite bow? I'd seriously consider looking at styles, rather than specific weapons, for a source of possible unique abilities... Different way of saying the same thing; generalists do not get the compensation that specialists get, nor does their generalization reward them in the long run. No, it's not the same thing. You're trying to state it as if specialization is 'rewarded' - getting something over and above the value of what generalists have. That's not the case. The overall utility of a generalist or specialist build is similar. It's a trade-off, not a matter of the system favoring the specialist. The best example is a fighter who wants to be a power attacker like the barbarian, a mounted combatant like the Paladin, and an archer like the ranger; the idea is sound, if the fighter can do combat as well as each of them, that will be balanced against their special abilities. The idea is sound, but the criteria isn't. A specialist /is/ supposed to out-perform within his speciality - that's the compensation he recieves, afterall. A fighter should be able to seriously out-perform an archer-ranger as a power attacker, a barbarian as mounted combatant, and a paladin as an archer. That shows the power of the generalist 'build.' Head-to-head in thier specialities, the fighter should be edged out against the others - though, in some cases where the other character isn't really all that specialized (the ranger is a lot less combat-focused than the fighter, for instance, in spite of being focused on a narrow aspect of combat), that may not be the case. Quite sound, and probably would work well. I still think fighters should get something that no one else gets to allow players to percieve there being a reason for staying fighter through 20th level. Sure. We've been through this leading up to 3.5, actually. That's why we have GWS. As long as it's a balanced ability, adding another (or a few, with more variety than Weapon Specialization) fighter-only feat at high level - preferably 20th, just to silence the whining once and for all - would be fine. Of course, it wouldn't really silence the whining. Those who can't see the value of being able to choose your class abilities would still see any such feat as the 'only' thing a fighter-20 has, assume that every fighter 'must' take it, and judge it wanting compared to casting Wish... :rolleyes: Don't say that PrCs have requirements, since most PrCs have requirements that are things the character would have taken anyway, so they only serve to set a level admition. Actually, most really desireable PrCs have at least a few requirements that the player would only take to enter the PrC. But, what I really have to say about PrCs is that each PrC is included in a campaign only because the DM want's it to be. They are meaningless as a gauge of class balance. Maybe. I could see an arguement for giving the fighter all high saves; they don't have any active magic of their own, but they learn to fight all foes and thus develope their defenses. Nod. The only hang-up is that the fighter is pretty potent at low level, as it is, and straight +2's vs all saves at first, when DCs are likely around 13, might well be too much... a part of me (25%) wouldn't mind switching over to a totally feat based system. In a feat based system, I would make an Evasion-like ability for all three saves, and have each one be a feat that requires Lighting Reflexes, Iron Will, or Great Fortitude. Not a bad idea. Of course, if you mean the whole game as a feat-based system, that's unlikely. Class-based abilities are too ingrained in D&D tradition. Classes like the fighter, that allow a great deal of player choice, are about as close as we can come to a skill/point/build-based system... I still think the fighter should get something unique instead of "feat every level", Of course, the fighter's ability to choose so much of it's class ability is unique, but, like I said, I understand the impulse. Balanced feats with 'X' fighter levels as a preq are the best way to add such 'uniqueness.' and since weapon specialization is fighter only I think it should simply be part of the fighter's progression. Definitely not. There's just no need to limit the fighter that way. Specialization as a feat is a de-facto class ability for those who are obsessed with class-unique abilities, and, the option to take another bonus feat, instead, is there for anyone else. There's just no need to make it obligatory.
Tony Vargas 06-20-05, 01:15 PM	I think one of the easy solutions is to give fighters a bonus feat at every level past 11th. Part of the problem is that high-level bonus feats are seen as inadequate. Having more of them wouldn't help that perception much. I'm not convinced Mettle is the best answer. Other alternatives could be a general boost to all saves. Some sort of feat , similar to combat experiste, where you could convert bab, to save bonuses, perhaps? I don't know about converting BAB to save bonuses, but, Xaviat's idea about save-enhancing feats that take the current ones (Iron Will, et al) could be a place to start. If the feats in question also had double-digit fighter levels as a preq, then that could both give high-level fighters 'something to do with thier feats' and address thier vulnerability to certain saves.
-Defiler of Souls- 06-20-05, 01:45 PM	I guess irreconcilable differences caused the original thread to die, so I am reincarnating it in hopes of bringing back the old posters and drawing in new posters. First, the premise: The fighter is broken. Maybe you don't agree that the fighter isn't mechanically unbalanced, but it is safe to say that when compared to the barbarian, ranger, samurai, swashbuckler, and other variant warrior classes, the fighter is missing something. This is further exemplified by the existence of "technique classes", non prestigious-prestige classes which add to the fighter's fighting capability (dualist, master thrower, exotic weapon master, cavalier, and many others). We, on the last thread, started out with the hopes of adding something to the fighter to bring them up to par with the other core and recent base classes, and especially to make the fighter's special column look as developed as other class's. Abilities added would be generic enough to apply to any fighter, and would be chosen to remain within the fighter description's parameters. This fighter is not a new kind of fighter, not an alternate fighter to reside side by side with the PHB fighter, but a replacement for the PHB fighter that is appropriate, fun, and balanced. To start things off, I will post what we agreed upon in the last threads as the fighter's largest problems. I personally do not agree with all of them, and did not use all of them in the thought process that created my fighter re-write which I will post at the end of this post, but I will post them non-the-less in the spirit of good collaboration. Current Fighter Problems Weakness compared to other warriors: Compared to the Barbarian, the Fighter's damage and survivability are way behind. Compared to the Ranger, the Fighter is a worse archer. if you haven't notice, every warrior class pales in comparision to the barbarian...and the fighter should be a worse archer then the ranger, as a good archer is one of the few things a ranger can do well Lack of unique specials: While most intelligent players grin at the fighter's 11 bonus feats, many feel like the class is missing something. This feeling is largely superficial, but it still exists. Many players pass up the fighter for Barbarian, Ranger or Paladin if their character fits the broad molds (two-handed weapon user, archer or two-weapon fighter, or mounted combatant), or take as few fighter levels as possible before jumping ship to one of the many PrCs offered. Unique abilities would both give players a reason to play the fighter, and also to give abilities the fighter would have to give up if they took a PrC. /shruge, IMHO wizards has published so many feats at this point, the fighter can have abilities just as "fun" or "useful" as any other class, the weapon style and tactical feats specificly fill this gap Poor skills: The fighter has both the worse skill points in the game and the worse skill list in the game. Many fighter archetypes are skillful people, and the fighter class doesn't allow this. The lack of skills makes the fighter's only ability fighting; coupled with the apparent weakness of the class, this means the fighter's only ability is overshadowed by the ability of other classes. this i do agree is a problem, personally i can say that a well played fighter is deffinately on par with paladins/rangers in combat, but the fighter's skill set/skill points are abyssmal. Personally i think a fighter should be able to "stand guard" and thus should have spot and or listen on his class skills Weakness to magic: Of all the classes, the fighter is quite possibly the easiest to effect by magic. The other non-casters get some ability to protect them against magical effects, but the fighter is left without. This is especially painful when compared to the fighter of 2nd edition, who was very difficult to effect with magic at higher levels. not true at all, remember your feats are your abilities as a fighter: unlike other classes you can really afford to take all those save/protection feats others can't, the fighter does not need anything beyond what he has to protect him from magic also, which protection from magic does ranger recieve? if your talking about a second high save, notice rangers lost thier d10 hp for that, as for evasion if you haven't noticed, every class with a high ref save gets evasion. Lack of high level feats: When the wizard picks up meteor swarm, gaining the ability to destroy small towns almost effortlessly, the fighter gains another feat, and because they have probably rounded out their fighting style, this feat is probably one available to 1st level characters. This is unacceptable, quite possibly the largest problem the current fighter faces. More feats should be created in the 12+ BAB range, like Improved Precise Shot, that will add strength and options to high level fighters. Similarly, feats with many prerequisites drawn from many feat chains, such as Whirlwind Attack, should be designed to give strength to generalist fighters to counterbalance the added power offered to specialists. this may be true, but there are a few such feat chains that should not be extended, namely weapon focus/specialization If I've missed any from the previous thread, please let me know. ---------------- I have brought my newest fighter re-write for your approval/criticism. I took all of the above ideas into account, except the skill issue (I chose to ignore the perceived skill problem because I believe the more skills oriented fighters of the many genres are either very intelligent fighters or fighter/rogues. In my games, I offer many methods to add class skills to skill lists, and recently the Heroes of Battle book also offered a new method to increase class skills.). I decided that the fighter should be a weapon master. The vast majority of characters in literature, games, and movies who fit the mold of the fighter (and not barbarian, ranger, paladin, or the npc warrior) are known for their fighting style and the weapon they use, and the vast majority stick to that weapon/style above all others (even though many of them are quite proficient in other styles). This is partially the way the game is designed, rewarding specialization. Coupled with adding additional high level feats to the game and fighter bonus feat list, I believe my fighter solves all of the problems the current fighter faces. It is definitely not balanced against the current fighter, but that is because I believe the current fighter is unbalanced. FIGHTER The truest warrior, fighters are those who've learned the best methods to deal with their foes through force of arms. Where a barbarian uses brute force, a paladin uses the strength of their convictions, and a rogue uses deception and speed, the fighter relies upon their training to defeat their enemies. No class is as well trained as the fighter, represented by the many feats they gain through their advancement. A fighter can become any warrior from a devoted specialist to a ready generalist, a fencer or an archer, a mounted knight or a grounded juggernought. The one thing that all fighters share is their dedication to their fighting style, even if that fighting style is dedication to all styles. Skills: Same as PHB Fighter. Skill Points: Same as PHB Fighter. you kidding? skills are the one thing thats underpar about the fighter and you didn't change them? HD: Same as PHB Fighter. Proficiencies: Same as PHB Fighter. Bonus Feat: List same as PHB Fighter's, though additional feats will be added as they are created or approved from non-core books (up to DM discretion). even if you do want to make the fighetr stronger, theres no way its fair to take away 1 chosen feat, add 5 bonus feats, and then add more abilities Weapon Focus: The fighter gains Weapon Focus as a bonus feat that can be applied to any weapon the fighter has proficiency in. giving 2 feats in 1 level is a bad idea, its too powerful, and encourages dipping Mettle (Ex): At 2nd level an higher, a fighter can resist magical and unusual attacks with great willpower or fortitude. If they make a successful Will or Fortitude save against an attack that normally would have a lesser effect on a successful save (such as any spell with a saving throw entry of Will half or Fortitude partial), they instead completely negate the effect. An unconscious or sleeping fighter does not gain the benefit of mettle. Weapon Specialization: The fighter gains the weapon specialization feat as a bonus feat at this level, and it must be applied to a weapon the fighter already has weapon focus in. even if you want to give increased protection from magic, this is not the way to do it...you took the what is widely regarded as the hexblade's best ability and gave it to the fighter at a lower level....this is just stealing the hexblade's thunder, if your dead set on increasing resistance to magic, use a different abilit Weapon Mastery (Ex): At 8th level, the fighter can apply Weapon Mastery to one weapon they have the weapon specialization feat for. Weapon Mastery grants the fighter the ability to make one additional attack at their highest attack bonus when making a full attack action. as a rule of thumb abilities like this are broken unless they meet 1 of 3 prerequisites: 1). the extra attack doesn't stack with haste 2). all attacks suffer a -2 penalty and the character has medium BaB or less or 3). all attacks suffer a -2 penalty and the character is restricted in weapon type the ability is usable in(aka not 2 handed weapons allowed to be used with the ability) Improved Mettle (Ex): At 10th level, a fighter's mettle ability improves. they still take no effect on a successful Will or Fortitude saving throw against attacks that allow a partial effect, but henceforth they only take the partial effect on a failed save. An unconscious or sleeping fighter does not gain the benefit of improved mettle. same response I gave to mettle Greater Weapon Focus: At 12th level, the fighter gains the Greater Weapon Focus feat, and it must be applied to a weapon the fighter already has weapon focus in. Greater Weapon Specialization: At 16th level, the fighter gains the Greater Weapon Specialization feat, and it must be applied to a weapon the fighter already has greater weapon focus and weapon specialization in. Grand Weapon Mastery: At 20th level, the fighter perfects their mastery of their weapon. Weapon Mastery may be applied to one weapon they have the greater weapon specialization feat for. Grand Weapon Mastery grants the fighter the ability to make one extra attack at their highest attack bonus when making a standard action attack. Too powerful if you allow to be used with 2 handed weapons Fighter Level BAB Fort Ref Will Special 1st +1 +2 +0 +0 Bonus Feat, Weapon Focus 2nd +2 +3 +0 +0 Mettle 3rd +3 +3 +1 +1 Bonus Feat 4th +4 +4 +1 +1 Weapon Specialization 5th +5 +4 +1 +1 Bonus Feat 6th +6 +5 +2 +2 7th +7 +5 +2 +2 Bonus Feat 8th +8 +6 +2 +2 Weapon Mastery 9th +9 +6 +3 +3 Bonus Feat 10th +10 +7 +3 +3 Improved Mettle 11th +11 +7 +3 +3 Bonus Feat 12th +12 +8 +4 +4 Greater Weapon Focus 13th +13 +8 +4 +4 Bonus Feat 14th +14 +9 +4 +4 15th +15 +9 +5 +5 Bonus Feat 16th +16 +10 +5 +5 Greater Weapon Specialization 17th +17 +10 +5 +5 Bonus Feat 18th +18 +11 +6 +6 19th +19 +11 +6 +6 Bonus Feat 20th +20 +12 +6 +6 Grand Weapon Mastery I made my decisions for this rewrite based on the idea that the fighter is a specialist in their chosen style. I do want to offer some kind of trade in ability for the weapon feats, possibly a method of giving up weapon mastery in a single weapon in order to gain weapon focus in all weapons, and grand weapon mastery could be given up to gain weapon specialization in all weapons; I'm unsure and open for suggestions. Also, the 2nd edition fighter had great resistance to magic due to the way their saves scaled, so since the rogue gains evasion, I figured the fighter was due to gain mettle. What do you think? you gave 14 feats, fulll BaB, the Hexblade's best abilities, d10 hp, and 2 very very unconventional overpowered abilities....This class is overpowered, but i don't see why I would have expected anything else, everyone who creates a fighter "fix" horribly breaks the class. It's nothing new, and i guesse it makes sense as thier argument is based on the concept that a perfectly combat viable class is weak...I do believe the fighter skills need some work. I would even agree to d12 hp and the addition of some "armor mastery" feats to be added to tyhe list of potential bonus feats, but the changes most people propose are insane. Lets put it this way: last campaign we had a cleric, a fighter, a ranger, a paladin, and a rogue in the party. starting around level 8 and continuing all the way through level 20 when the campaign ended the fighter had both the highest dps and the greatest survivibility, the point being there is nothing wrong with the fighter's combat prowess.
Rialto 06-20-05, 02:25 PM	and the fighter should be a worse archer then the ranger, as a good archer is one of the few things a ranger can do well The only advantage Ranger has against FTR as archer is having Spot as class skill also, which protection from magic does ranger recieve? if your talking about a second high save, notice rangers lost thier d10 hp for that, as for evasion if you haven't noticed, every class with a high ref save gets evasion. Well Bards seem to be out ;) Ranger gets spells. you kidding? skills are the one thing thats underpar about the fighter and you didn't change them? What skills should be added in your opinion? giving 2 feats in 1 level is a bad idea, its too powerful, and encourages dipping Fighter levels 1, 6, 12 and 18 do that already. you gave 14 feats, full BaB, the Hexblade's best abilities, d10 hp, and 2 very very unconventional overpowered abilities....This class is overpowered, but i don't see why I would have expected anything else, everyone who creates a fighter "fix" horribly breaks the class. It's nothing new, and i guesse it makes sense as thier argument is based on the concept that a perfectly combat viable class is weak... That's why he started the thread to ask for opinions I do believe the fighter skills need some work. I would even agree to d12 hp and the addition of some "armor mastery" feats to be added to the list of potential bonus feats, but the changes most people propose are insane. Nyferto has done something like this; perhaps it will suit your tastes better. Lets put it this way: last campaign we had a cleric, a fighter, a ranger, a paladin, and a rogue in the party. starting around level 8 and continuing all the way through level 20 when the campaign ended the fighter had both the highest dps and the greatest survivibility, the point being there is nothing wrong with the fighter's combat prowess. Is survivability a measure of combat prowess?
Tony Vargas 06-20-05, 02:51 PM	I don't want to /just/ be an obstructionist, here, so here's a stab at making the fighter a bit more desireable, but, hopefully, not overpowered: Add the following to the fighter's anemic special abilities column: L 5 Veteran +1 L 7 Feat Synergy +1 L11 Veteran +2 L13 Feat Synergy +2 L17 Veteran +3 L19 Feat Synergy +3 Veteran: Experienced fighters have survived many battles, and thier reactions and resolve are hieghtened in battle. Starting at level 5 the fighter gains a +1 bonus to Initiative, and a +1 bonus to his WILL and REF saves when he is not flat-footed or unaware. If he also has Combat Reflexes or Uncanny Dodge, the WILL & REF save bonus is retained even when flat-footed or unaware. The save bonus does not aply when the fighter is not in combat, and the event forcing the save does not constitute the begining of combat (for instance, a comparatively benign sugestion cast by a sorcereress at the dinner table, or a REF save to avoid a trap out of combat). This bonus increases to +2 at 11th level, and again, to +3 at 17th. Feat Synergy: Each fighter developes and refines his own personal style - as represented by his feats - as he advances in level. At 7th level, the fighter chosses two feats from the fighter bonus-feat list, which he already has (these can be feats taken with fighter bonus feats, or otherwise acquired). When he uses both of these feats in combat, the fighter gains a +1 synergy bonus that he can choose to aply to attack bonus, weapon damage, or armor class. At 13th level, the fighter choses two more feats, and, again, when using both of these feats, gains a similar +1 synergy bonus. However, when he uses any three feats of the four he's chosen so far, the synergy bonus is increased to +2. At 17th, the fighter chooses a two more feats, for a total of 6. Again, using both of these two new feats grants a +1 synergy bonus, but using any three of the six grants a +2, and using any 4 of the 6 grants a +3. The fighter cannot choose a feat that is a prerequiste of another feat in his synergy list, unless that feat can be used sepparately. For instance, dodge can be used without using spiring attack, and vice-versa, but weapon specialization and focus are always used together - 'Dodge & Spring Attack' would be valid choices for Feat Synergy, while 'Weapon Focus & Weapon Specialization' would not (conversely, Improved Critical: Greatsword, and Weapon Specialization: Greatsword, though always used togther, are not prerequistes of eachother, so would be valid). Of course, this /is/ a power-up of the fighter, but, 2/3rds of the benefits are defered to to the double-digit levels where the fighter can be percieved as weak, all are gained on what are currently 'dead levels' for the fighter, and, in any case, the bonuses are not excessively high.
-Defiler of Souls- 06-20-05, 02:58 PM	The only advantage Ranger has against FTR as archer is having Spot as class skill I'll give you that Well Bards seem to be out ;) Ranger gets spells. once again your right :D What skills should be added in your opinion? spot and or listen(a fighter should be able to "stand watch" or "guard" something well, largely becauyse in my mind fighters are your standard guards and body guards), heal(i'd think there would be many fighetrs who are apt at first aid) also since fighters come in almost every variety i'd think skill "packets" would make sense, for example you choose a specific archtype of fighter and gain skills accordingly(for example mercenary migh gain gather information to find work, and diplomacy to negotiate his contract, or a more swashbucklerish rogue may gain sleight of hand and balance) Granted a packet system would be difficult to balance and would take time to develope but it could be interesting also this increase # of skills may neccessitate 4+int skill points /level instead of 2 Fighter levels 1, 6, 12 and 18 do that already. not nearly as much as a grab 1 level get 1d10 hpp +1 BaB and 2 feats free would do....any barbarian, ranger, or paladin would have no reason to not take 1 level of fighter That's why he started the thread to ask for opinions very valid point Nyferto has done something like this; perhaps it will suit your tastes better. /shrug maybe i'll check his out sometime, but the simple fact is i'm not in this thread looking for something I can play, the one reason i see myself as impartial is I'm a DM and thus have ntohing to really gain from a class becoming overpowered, to a DM overall balance is far more important then having a powerful class to play so in short, i'm not here looking for a fighter to play, i'm here to review the balance of this particular fighter variant Is survivability a measure of combat prowess? in the same paragraph i also mentioned damage output
Xeviat-DM 06-21-05, 12:50 AM	There are two reasons I look to weapon specialization rather than style specialization: in my games I use weapon groups, and I see styles to be greatly associated with weapons of similar types. Now, I will say that if we were to open weapon specialization and other feats to all characters, and give the fighter a style specialization sort of ability in there somewhere, we might be getting somewhere. But defining all of the styles is difficult. Here is my quickest stab at it: Unarmed Light Weapon/Shield Finesse (empty offhand) One-handed Weapon/Shield TWFing (equal sized weapons or double weapon) TWFing (One-handed/Light) Two Handed Weapon, non-reach Two Handed Weapon, reach Ranged, thrown Ranged, projectile As for weapon groups, here's the martials I use Thrusting Swords (rapier) Broad Swords (shortsword, longsword, bastard sword 2-H, great sword) Sabres (scimitar, falchion, kukri) Axes (handaxe, throwing axe, battle axe, war axe 2-H, great axe) Hammers and Picks (warhammer, throwing hammer, light pick, heavy pick, scythe) Chains (light flail, heavy flail) Bows (shortbow, comp. shortbow, longbow, comp. longbow) Polearms (lance, guisarm, trident, glaive, ransuire) As for longbow vs. comp. longbow, I believe the PHB 3.5 treats them as the same weapon. The reason I think that each weapon group is tied to it's style is because each weapon group is used differently than others. I have a hard time with the rapier/shortsword issue; part of me wants to treat them both as thrusting swords but I also think the rapier might be an exotic weapon due to the fact that it and it's counterparts are used quite unlike other weapons (most similar to sabres though I guess). Axes and hammers and picks are all used somewhat similarly, but they can be separate. If my weapon mastery ability is too powerful with two-handed weapons, I might suggest creating unique weapon mastery abilities for each weapon group. Also, the reason I put mettle there was not to devaluate the hexblade, which is less core than PrCs, so I never took it into consideration. I gave mettle at 2nd because the rogue and monk gain evasion at second. Perhaps it would fit in the standard fighter better at 3rd, but I like continuity. I also think that mettle is as powerful as evasion, except for the fact that mettle will get you out of a large number of instant kill spells (though these hurt the fighter more than anyone else, since the rogue has as many hp without con as a spell will damage, so they need evasion to survive). I just assumed that rogue vs. fighter was a natural counterpart. :shrug:
Creeg 06-21-05, 02:31 AM	Actualy , thats not true. Medieval troops frequently only knew how to fight with one or two weapons, but could use other weapons similar to the ones they knew.Knights and gladiators would know more weapons, but they had more training. Medieval European troops I assume you mean? The vast majority would hve been conscripts so I'll give you that. Personally I tend to look more toward Roman, Greek, and particulary Spartan soldiers. Looking at what would be "regulars" not conscripts. Spartan soldiers carried their swords, slings, and "spears" that we would consider javelins. Yes again they have prefered weapons. I won't argue that, but again it was for tactical purposes. A short thrusting sword allowed for tighter ranks and the protection of a true shield wall. However they were also just as trained and regularly drilled in slashing their sword to keep them familar with different styles and weapons. Yes, I know the bulk of an army would be the warrior class, but the fighter is the upgrade from them. One who can outshine the warrior in all ways. not just one. True a fighter is not proficient in all weapons only ones he would commonly see. Exotic weapons are just that Exotic. Sorry I can't offer you any help but I really think the only thing a fighter needs is spot, listen and heal added to his skill list. As has been pointed out they should be able to stand guard, and I think they would learn quickly how to tend wounds they would see all too often. I haven't just added them myself, I simply use a characters background and look to see if it would hold up to it. I have held off Heal untill later levels and informed a player, "You've seen enough wounds, watched them cared for and had to struggle through taking care of them yourself long enough that you've formed a basic understanding of tending the wounded, Heal is now a class skill for you" Out of what I've seen here though I like Tony's the best.
-Defiler of Souls- 06-21-05, 01:32 PM	There are two reasons I look to weapon specialization rather than style specialization: in my games I use weapon groups, and I see styles to be greatly associated with weapons of similar types. Now, I will say that if we were to open weapon specialization and other feats to all characters, and give the fighter a style specialization sort of ability in there somewhere, we might be getting somewhere. But defining all of the styles is difficult. Here is my quickest stab at it: Unarmed Light Weapon/Shield Finesse (empty offhand) One-handed Weapon/Shield TWFing (equal sized weapons or double weapon) TWFing (One-handed/Light) Two Handed Weapon, non-reach Two Handed Weapon, reach Ranged, thrown Ranged, projectile As for weapon groups, here's the martials I use Thrusting Swords (rapier) Broad Swords (shortsword, longsword, bastard sword 2-H, great sword) Sabres (scimitar, falchion, kukri) Axes (handaxe, throwing axe, battle axe, war axe 2-H, great axe) Hammers and Picks (warhammer, throwing hammer, light pick, heavy pick, scythe) Chains (light flail, heavy flail) Bows (shortbow, comp. shortbow, longbow, comp. longbow) Polearms (lance, guisarm, trident, glaive, ransuire) As for longbow vs. comp. longbow, I believe the PHB 3.5 treats them as the same weapon. The reason I think that each weapon group is tied to it's style is because each weapon group is used differently than others. I have a hard time with the rapier/shortsword issue; part of me wants to treat them both as thrusting swords but I also think the rapier might be an exotic weapon due to the fact that it and it's counterparts are used quite unlike other weapons (most similar to sabres though I guess). Axes and hammers and picks are all used somewhat similarly, but they can be separate. If my weapon mastery ability is too powerful with two-handed weapons, I might suggest creating unique weapon mastery abilities for each weapon group. i like that idea Also, the reason I put mettle there was not to devaluate the hexblade, which is less core than PrCs, so I never took it into consideration. I gave mettle at 2nd because the rogue and monk gain evasion at second. Perhaps it would fit in the standard fighter better at 3rd, but I like continuity. I also think that mettle is as powerful as evasion, except for the fact that mettle will get you out of a large number of instant kill spells (though these hurt the fighter more than anyone else, since the rogue has as many hp without con as a spell will damage, so they need evasion to survive). I just assumed that rogue vs. fighter was a natural counterpart. :shrug: how? one is a skill oriented character with d6 hp and medium BaB, the other is an armored tank who is based around straightforward combat if your willing to drop the fighter's hp to d6 and BaB to medium then by all means, use the rogue as a standard of comparison, but in it's current form a better comparison would be paladin or ranger anyway that aside, one thing is for certain: even if you give mettle, theres no way in hell fighetr should get "improved mettle", it's so overpowered it's sickening and heres why: improved evasion is only fair because the difference between a failed and succeeded reflex save is only half the spell effect, so your only automaticly evading half the spell effect; Will and Fort saves however do vertually nothing on a succeeded save, and thus your practicly spell immune to them with improved mettle....not to mention evasion applys to 1 savee, mettle applys to 2 the only reason normal mettle is balanced is because very very few fort/will saves have secondary effects....so while i frown on the use of mettle because it overshadows the Hexblade, I see Improved mettle as breaking the fighter beyond repair. only reason i didn't go off on it before is quite frankly i missed the ability when reviewing the class.
Tony Vargas 06-21-05, 01:44 PM	Out of what I've seen here though I like Tony's the best. Thanks. :) Sorry I can't offer you any help but I really think the only thing a fighter needs is spot, listen and heal added to his skill list. As has been pointed out they should be able to stand guard, and I think they would learn quickly how to tend wounds they would see all too often. I've been in some long discussions about just how apropriate it might be to give fighters spot and listen, but, rather than get into that, just think about it this way: Spot is one of the more useful skills in the game. Characters that have Spot on thier list tend to max it out. Listen is also up there. There's just no comparison to the existing skills on the fighter list, if you give fighters Spot and Listen, they'll tend to get maxxed at the expense of others. Rangers, Rogues and the like will probably not be pleased to have thier turf 'poached' like that, and it'll also lead to fighters losing some differentiation. Heal, OTOH, is not so desireable a skill that it couldn't be added to the fighter list without distorting every fighter character out there... I've been thinking about how to address fighter skills. I know there's some dissatisfaction on a few fronts. Obviously, the fighter has few skill points and no particularly desireable skills on his list. That does fit the fighter's focus on combat. Still, there are some skills that might be apropriate for at least some fighters, and which wouldn't imbalance or distort the fighter. And, there are a number of skills that have important aplications in combat (Tumble, Bluff, Sense Motive, Spot/Listen, etc), and lack of those skills in-class can make some concepts more difficult to do with a pure fighter... I think leaving the skill points alone is important if you want to retain balance with the fighter. It's a combat-focused class, and skills have myriand non-combat aplications. Likewise, the fighter's list shouldn't include the most desireable skills. The list could still be expanded, though. Adding the following skills to the fighter list would probably make sense, and wouldn't distort fighters' skill choices much: Heal (dealing with battlefield injury), Knowledge:Nobility (knights & heraldry, political allieances), Knowledge:Engineering (seigecraft), Knowledge:History (wars, tactics et al), Knowledge:Local (lay of the land, local unrest, etc), Perform (orator for officers, poetry or song for knights, etc, 'gladiator' could be a perform skill), Profession (bodygaurd, mercenary, or whatever you do when you're not fighting). The other issue is skills that have direct bearing on the fighter's speciality (combat and warfare), but are mainly non-combat. Sense Motive, for instance, is used to spot Feints, and Bluff to make them, yet the bulk of the uses for those skills are non-combat. It doesn't make sense for a fighter to be a master con-artist, but it does make sense for one with Improved Feint to be good at Feinting. One possibility (which I've aproached in various ways before), is to allow fighters to perform better with skills, in thier combat aplications. A fairly simple mechanic for this would be to double cross-class ranks from fighter levels a fighter has invested in a skill, when he uses that skill in a combat aplication. So, a fighter who has 2.5 ranks in Tumble (5 cross-class skill points), would have 5 ranks of Tumble when using the skill to evade an AoO, but 2 ranks (it rounds down), when using to for non-combat purposes. A pure-class fighter 'master fencer' might have 7 ranks each in Bluff and Sense Motive (max cross-class for his level), but 14 ranks in each when making and spotting feints - his skill is developed in combat, and most effective there, but he's still better-able to 'read' and decieve people out of combat, as well. Spot & Listen do have a combat aplication, in that they determine awareness at the begining of combat, and can be used to find invisible enemies. The latter is fairly straightforward, but the former would require some clarification. I'd say that Spot & Listen to determine awareness is a 'combat aplication' only if the fighter is willing to immediately innitiate hostilities vs whatever he spots or hears. This would represent a veteran fighter, attuned to danger, and accustomed to reacting decisively and violently - the kind of character that hears movement and responds with an arrow, not a closer look. In effect, when he makes a spot/listen and only succeeds because of his doubled ranks for 'combat,' he's seen or heard /something/ that he believes may be a threat, but, unlike a regular successful roll, doesn't get to know exactly what it is. Another possibility with Spot, Listen, and Sense Motive is to eliminate them as skills entirely. It makes sense that a seasoned adventurer would be harder to trick or sneak up on, so just oppose Hide, Sneak, and Bluff (et al), with a level check, instead of a skill. This is already how Intimidate works, for instance - there's no 'Bravado Skill' to oppose intimidate, just a level check. You'd keep all the same stat, feat, racial, etc modifiers to Spot, Listen & Sense Motive, it's just that they'd become mechanics based on level, rather than skills you have to spend ranks on...
Tony Vargas 06-21-05, 01:48 PM	the only reason normal mettle is balanced is because very very few fort/will saves have secondary effects....Will and Fort saves however do vertually nothing on a succeeded save, and thus your practicly spell immune to them with improved mettle.... I thought that Improved Mettle still only aplied to WILL & FORT: 'partial' saves, it's just that you were saving for no or partial effect, instead of no or full effect, as with Mettle. Fort/WILL saves normally for no effect would always be no/full, regardless of mettle, right? It also seems to me that Mettle would be a bit much for fighters, in terms of FORT saves (a fighter has enough hit points and high enough physical stats that he should be able to handle the effects of a successful FORT:partial save to some extent), but, at the same time, wouldn't do much to help with WILL saves (which the fighter's just as likely to fail). Improved Mettle, obviously, would help with WILL:partial saves, but are there very many of those?
20102000 06-21-05, 02:38 PM	Ok, here's my suggested fix. BAB and saves as normal. Style mastery (see below) ability at 5th, 10th and 15th level. Mettle and improved Mettle added to the fighter bonus feat list. Style Mastery ability. Choose one of the following fighting styles. Finesse (empty offhand) One-handed Weapon/Shield TWFing Two Handed Weapon, non-reach Two Handed Weapon, reach Ranged, thrown Ranged, projectile When fighting using this style you gain +1 to hit and +1 damage. When recieving the ability for a 2nd and 3rd time. A fighter may choose another style, or pick the same style and stack the bonuses. Style mastery bonuses don't stack with weapon focus/specialization bonuses.
Roxlimn 06-21-05, 03:26 PM	*shrug* I did present the system I was currently using, and I'm unfortunately too busy to help out with another system when I'm also trying to convert Psionic into a general Magic scheme while making up an article on the Lhazaars. It's just too much for me to post analytical commentary on what was increasingly a hostile thread. For those that weren't there, I proposed a combination of feat rules and synergy to create a continuing niche for the Fighter. This is the rule change: Fighter Feat: A Fighter Feat is a special category of feat that must be taken with a Fighter bonus feat. Feat slots from other classes and character feats cannot be used to take these feats, even if the PC in question is a pure Fighter. An example of a save feat chain: Iron Will Lightning Reflexes Quick of Mind and Body Quick of Mind and Body is a Fighter Feat that has Iron Will and Lightining Reflexes as prerequisites. It gives a +3 unnamed bonus to Will saves and Ref saves. I posted other feats that also boosted Fighter defense in other ways. For example, the Shield Cover Fighter Feat for Shield Fighters allows Fighters to use their Large and Tower Shields as effective Cover against magical effects that involve Ref saves, essentially giving them a +2 to such saves, in addition to other effects. On Whirlwind Attack: Seriously. This feat is a 6th level ability. It's a 6th level ability because it's been balanced so that 6th level Fighters who gain it don't break the game. While it's true that other classes can only gain them at higher levels, it does not invalidate the fact that it's been balanced as a 6th level ability. As you go higher in levels, the Fighter gets more 6th level or lower choices on his class menu, but not more powerful abilities. Thus, whereas a Wizard gains Wish where he used to gain Fireball, the Fighter still gets to choose between Weapon Focus: rock and Weapon Focus: scissors, just because he's already chosen everything else there is to choose in his chosen concept. Xeviat DM: If you must insist on Weapon Specialization, why not simply accept my suggestion of detailing a synregy between Weapon Specialization and Fighter levels, allowing Fighters to gain more damage from one feat as they take more Fighter levels? This avoids having to make a progression.
Xeviat-DM 06-23-05, 03:15 AM	Xeviat DM: If you must insist on Weapon Specialization, why not simply accept my suggestion of detailing a synregy between Weapon Specialization and Fighter levels, allowing Fighters to gain more damage from one feat as they take more Fighter levels? This avoids having to make a progression. I find the very notion of X class only feats, except when they utilize a class ability, to be strange in a system where feats have noticable prerequisites (ability score requirements, skill requirements, feat requirements). Also, feat synergy and class/feat synergy seems like a nice idea, but I would need to see a system designed utilizing all of the PHB feats to be able to speak on it since it is still a hypothetical issue. I'm not sure that if Weapon Focus and Weapon Specialization were opened to everyone, but the fighter got a scaling bonus, would work; every fighter would end up taking it, thus it might as well be part of the class structure. As for Improved Mettle, yes, it would still only work for Fort half, Fort partial, Will half, and Will partial effects. Maybe in the nature of fairness, mettle and improved mettle should be changed to only affect fortitude half and fortitude partial spells?
Maraxus 06-23-05, 04:40 AM	The problem I see with improved meetle is, that a spell that sais something like "Kills the victim, 3d6 damage on a succesful fort. save insteat." is supposed to be better than "Kills the victim, fortitude negates."
20102000 06-23-05, 07:09 AM	Rather than using Mettle and Improved Mettle. Why not give the fighter arcane resistance bonuses. +2 vs spells&spell like effects.
-Defiler of Souls- 06-23-05, 01:32 PM	Maybe in the nature of fairness, mettle and improved mettle should be changed to only affect fortitude half and fortitude partial spells? thats not the problem, it's the partial effect things that are a problem, it's not fair that your able to without even saving avoid like 80% of the spell effect. The reason Imp evasion is fair is because when you fail, you still take half of the effect, however with improved mettle the effect is changed from death to 5d6 damage(so your without even saving negating far more then half of the spell/ability's potency) I would suggest you either take out improved Mettle altogether(no other warrior type class has access to an improved evasion like ability and theres a reason thats true), or make it so mettle/imp mettle only applys to fortitude/will half saves(so the effects of mettle will be exactly like evasion only dealing with damage that asuccessful save halves). but seriously, you say that fighters have less magical protection then other warriors, what does barbarian have? the +2 on will saves while raging? a simple iron will feat gives you a permanent +3 bonus. What about the ranger? true he has evasion, but he doesn't get that until level 9 and he never gets imp evasion and the paladin? They need to stretch between so many stats important to them that they aren't likely to get a bonus out of this bigger then +3 or +4, and feats could give a fighter +3 on all saves fighters do have defense against magic, jsust as much as the other warrior(maybe alittle less then paladin), the people playing the fighters are just too caught up buying offensive feats to consider taking save feats, and then after ignoring such feats they complain that they are less resistant to magic...the point is even if the fighters are a little less resistant to magic, it isn't nearly bad enough to implement something like improved mettle.....mettle maybe but not improved mettle.
Tony Vargas 06-23-05, 01:46 PM	I find the very notion of X class only feats, except when they utilize a class ability, to be strange in a system where feats have noticable prerequisites There's really no meaningful difference between a feat that takes a preq that only one class has (Natural Spell) and one that explicitly makes a class & level a preq (Weapon Specialization). Both are, in effect, class abilities that 'cost' a feat, or, in the case of the fighter bonus feats, class abilities that can be 'traded in' for a feat. I'm not sure that if Weapon Focus and Weapon Specialization were opened to everyone, but the fighter got a scaling bonus, would work; every fighter would end up taking it, thus it might as well be part of the class structure. A scaling bonus like that might be a bit much, but, while it might eventually tempt every fighter, not every fighter would take it as early as possible and experience the full progression - some would choose to build up feats early on, and only take the scaling feat when it's scaled into something juicy... Maybe in the nature of fairness, mettle and improved mettle should be changed to only affect fortitude half and fortitude partial spells?That would rather defeat the purpose of addressing the fighter's vulnerability to magic. As for Improved Mettle, yes, it would still only work for Fort half, Fort partial, Will half, and Will partial effects.The problem I see with improved meetle is, that a spell that sais something like "Kills the victim, 3d6 damage on a succesful fort. save insteat." is supposed to be better than "Kills the victim, fortitude negates." That's a point. I suppose you could just go with 'half' not 'partial?' OTOH, the same is true of Evasion, and, while the former spell, above might be presumed to be better than the latter, a spell that's generally better than another isn't always better vs /all/ potential targets....
Tony Vargas 06-23-05, 02:03 PM	but seriously, you say that fighters have less magical protection then other warriors, what does barbarian have? the +2 on will saves while raging? a simple iron will feat gives you a permanent +3 bonus. The rage bonus to WILL saves goes up to +4, but it's a morale bonus, and other fairly common effects give morale bonuses. The Iron WILL feat only gives a +2, but it's unnamed, and always on. I'd call that comparable. What about the ranger? true he has evasion, but he doesn't get that until level 9 and he never gets imp evasionHe also has good REF saves, is dependent on light armor, which demands a high DEX, which further boosts that save, and is likely to have a WIS bonus to WILL saves, as he has spells that require an above-10 WIS to cast (ultimately, he'll want a 14). Compared to a fighter taking save-boosting feats, the Ranger's WILL save will be comparable, and his REF save much better (but, with DEX & WIS priorities competing with STR and CON, and fewer combat feats, and a d8 HD, he won't have the offensive punch or the hps of the fighter). and the paladin? They need to stretch between so many stats important to them that they aren't likely to get a bonus out of this bigger then +3 or +4, and feats could give a fighter +3 on all saves. Again, the feats would only give a +2. The pally is also more likely to have a WIS bonus for the same reason as the ranger, on top of the Divine Favor CHA bonus. Of course, that means he's likely to have a lower STR than the fighter, as well as fewer combat feats, making him a less potent warrior (smite evil and the like help make up that ground some of the time) - but, he's almost certainly going to be better-defended against magic, or any other effect that forces a save. So, yes, the fighter is, at best, comparable to the barb and ranger as far as resisting magic is concerned, and certainly behind the paladin. However, the paladin and ranger are also casting magic, themselves, and the barb has extraordinary abilities the fighter lacks. Without any kind of supernatural/extraordinary/limitted-use abilities to throw around, the fighter depends on a consistent performance over time to make his contribution - a failed save that takes him out of the fight really hurts, since he doesn't have the opportunity to throw out a high-level spell, smite, or Rage or FEB-enhanced full attack and make his contirbution to the battle all at once, before failing that save. A well-played fighter can get around that - by taking the save-boosting feats, favoring defensive items, and getting propper support from the party's casters - so it's not the damning proof of underpoweredness that it's made out to be. But, it wouldn't break the fighter to make that kind of play less critical at higher levels, either.
-Defiler of Souls- 06-23-05, 02:38 PM	He also has good REF saves, is dependent on light armor, which demands a high DEX, which further boosts that save, and is likely to have a WIS bonus to WILL saves, as he has spells that require an above-10 WIS to cast (ultimately, he'll want a 14). Compared to a fighter taking save-boosting feats, the Ranger's WILL save will be comparable, and his REF save much better (but, with DEX & WIS priorities competing with STR and CON, and fewer combat feats, and a d8 HD, he won't have the offensive punch or the hps of the fighter). being dependent on light armor IS NOT some sort of benefit that should be counterbalanced....its a restriction. If he wanted to a fighetr could also be a light armor user, so don't use a restriction as a reason the class is better at resisting magic then fighter, when the player could just as easily do the same thing wit hhis fighter, also keep in mind having a high dex is likely to effect your other stats(if you using point buy you have less points if you using rolls, you just used a high roll which can nolonger be used for say strength) once again for the wis, you seem to imply that because they cast spells thier decent wisdom score just pops out of nowhere for them, they have to assign points or assign a decent score there at character creation, and theres nothing keeping the fighter from doing the same and getting the same will save bonus So, yes, the fighter is, at best, comparable to the barb and ranger as far as resisting magic is concerned, and certainly behind the paladin. However, the paladin and ranger are also casting magic, themselves, and the barb has extraordinary abilities the fighter lacks. if you've ever played a ranger/paladin you'd know thier magic has very little value in combat, and it is 99% of the time not worth giving up thier attacks, so I hardly think the spells of the paladin/ranger should be a determining factor for balance, they aren't really used all that often. also why are you bringing this up now, i don't see how the ability to cast weak spells which are usually not used improves you dfense against magic. You may be talking about resist energy, and if you are you should realize that by the time they can cast spells temporary resistance 10to 1 element isn't all that useful(and much of the time you may not know what kind of energy if any is coming up, and this spell is hardly worth casting in combat(thus giving up a full attack)) Without any kind of supernatural/extraordinary/limitted-use abilities to throw around, the fighter depends on a consistent performance over time to make his contribution - a failed save that takes him out of the fight really hurts, since he doesn't have the opportunity to throw out a high-level spell, smite, or Rage or FEB-enhanced full attack and make his contirbution to the battle all at once, before failing that save. and remember that much of the time the ranger will be even worse off in such situations as they only get to fight thier favored enemy ever so often....when they aren't they become fighters without weaponspecialization/ all the extra feats....but thats beside the point for a mere 25k gold you can buy a cloak of resistance, thats +5 on all saves and 25k isn't very expensive, true anyone can get this but it help alot finally keep in mind that both the barbarian and ranger are only really good at 2 saves, where the fighter has the potential to be good at all three(if you take the three feats and put down 25k gold thats +7 to all stats, without anything to be said of ability bonuses/base saves A well-played fighter can get around that - by taking the save-boosting feats, favoring defensive items, and getting propper support from the party's casters - so it's not the damning proof of underpoweredness that it's made out to be. But, it wouldn't break the fighter to make that kind of play less critical at higher levels, either. only item you really need is the cloak of resistance, and as the many feats the fighter gets are it's equivilent of class abilitys, if you want the equivilent of other classes' defensive class abilitys you should need to take defensive feats Finally the point is I don't mind Mettle being given to the class(and mettle is a pretty powerful ability) but in it's current form Improved mettle is beyond overpowered **************************************** ************** ANd btw Xeviat-DM, IMHO, all that is really neccassary to make the class balanced right now is the removal of mettleand change weapon mastery(maybe make it only apply to 1 handed weapons, and 2 handed weapons instead get to add 2x strength to damage instead of 1.5x strength) granted after that the class would still be on the strong side(due to the 14 feats and 3 good abilties is 20 levels, not to mention 22 feats at level 1), but the biggest problems in balance are probably the two I mentioned.
Tony Vargas 06-23-05, 04:12 PM	being dependent on light armor IS NOT some sort of benefit that should be counterbalanced....its a restriction. don't use a restriction as a reason the class is better at resisting magic then fighter. Certainly, one that encourages emphasizing DEX over STR (you can use ranged attacks or Weapon Finesse to make up the loss of AB from STR), which has the side effect of having a higher stat-bonus to your REF save, and lot of spells call for REF saves. Certainly, a fighter could choose DEX over STR (some feat-intensive builds work well with that choice), and he'd have a higher bonus to his REF save - but it's still a poor save to start out with, the Ranger's is still going to be better. once again for the wis, you seem to imply that because they cast spells thier decent wisdom score just pops out of nowhere for them, they have to assign points or assign a decent score there at character creation, I'm certainly not implying free stat points, in fact I thought I tried to point out that those points are likely (relative to a fighter), to come out of stats that have a direct bearing on combat, like STR or CON. So, even while a ranger or pally might have better saves than the fighter, they won't be as tough combatants as him. and theres nothing keeping the fighter from doing the same and getting the same will save bonus Nothing, but it's a poorer choice for him, since that's all he gets out of it, while a ranger or pally gets to access his spells. if you've ever played a ranger/paladin you'd know thier magic has very little value in combat, Possibly true of the ranger, certainly not so for the pally, though. also why are you bringing this up now, i don't see how the ability to cast weak spells which are usually not used improves you dfense against magic. It doesn't, much, and what it does directly can also be done with relatively minor magic items. But, it does require that WIS, which has the side effect of boosting your WILL save a bit. finally keep in mind that both the barbarian and ranger are only really good at 2 saves, where the fighter has the potential to be good at all three(if you take the three feats and put down 25k gold thats +7 to all stats, without anything to be said of ability bonuses/base saves Well, the difference would be the +2 from feats, since the fighter has those to burn. Like I said, that's certianly comparable to the barbarian's rage bonus, and more generally aplicable. Doesn't compare quite so well the ranger's REF save, though. and as the many feats the fighter gets are it's equivilent of class abilitys, if you want the equivilent of other classes' defensive class abilitys you should need to take defensive feats Sure, and the fighter can, to an extent. In fact the ability to make that choice is a definite plus of the class. But, there really aren't all that many defensive feats - the save boosting feats give you a +2, and that's about it. The difference between a good and a poor save starts at +2 and goes to +6.
Xeviat-DM 06-23-05, 04:42 PM	Tony, Natural Spell builds off an ability that the Druid and only the druid has; wild shape. What part of Weapon Specialization says that only the fighter can take it? The only way I can explain it is that only the fighter is so singlemindedly focused on combat to develop such specialized skill in a single weapon. Defiler, using my weapon groups, could you suggest Mastery abilities for each weapon group? That could end up making things interesting; the only problem is many of the groups have a two-handed weapon amongst them. But a great axe is used differently than a great sword, a scythe, or a falchion. One quick question to those of you who disagree with the fighter gaining weapon specialization and other similar feats as part of their level progression: What is your reason for disagreeing with this? Would you be more likely to agree if there was a variable progression, similar to ranger favored enemy bonus (each time you gain the ability, you get one rank in one, and can increase another you have by one rank). That way a "weapon master" could have one weapon with grand mastery, and focus in 4 or so other weapons, while a more generalist could have weapon specialization in 4 or so weapons and focus in one other. And even though most games don't use weapon groups, it may be appropriate to at least take my weapon groups and apply them to the fighters specialization feats. For those who disagree with the way I've handled weapon mastery, could you suggest ways to make it better/more appropriate/more balanced? I'm considering the following progression: Fighter Level BAB Fort Ref Will Special 1st +1 +2 +0 +0 Bonus Feat 2nd +2 +3 +0 +0 Bonus Feat 3rd +3 +3 +1 +1 4th +4 +4 +1 +1 Bonus Feat 5th +5 +4 +1 +1 6th +6 +5 +2 +2 Bonus Feat 7th +7 +5 +2 +2 8th +8 +6 +2 +2 Bonus Feat 9th +9 +6 +3 +3 10th +10 +7 +3 +3 Bonus Feat 11th +11 +7 +3 +3 Special Ability 12th +12 +8 +4 +4 Bonus Feat 13th +13 +8 +4 +4 14th +14 +9 +4 +4 Bonus Feat 15th +15 +9 +5 +5 Special Ability 16th +16 +10 +5 +5 Bonus Feat 17th +17 +10 +5 +5 18th +18 +11 +6 +6 Bonus Feat 19th +19 +11 +6 +6 Special Ability 20th +20 +12 +6 +6 Bonus Feat Not sure exactly what the specials would be; one would be Mettle, all that is really needed are 8 or so abilities, at the very least one for each of the major combat styles, and 4 or so abilities that could be useful to all styles. Weapon Specialization, Mastery, Greater Focus, Greater Specialization, and Greater Mastery would be feats at 4, 8, 12, 16, and 20 for only the fighter, and Mastery and Greater Mastery will be redesigned to be different depending on what weapon group the weapon belongs to. Evasion might even be in there as a special that requires lightning reflexes.
Tony Vargas 06-23-05, 04:50 PM	Tony, Natural Spell builds off an ability that the Druid and only the druid has; wild shape. What part of Weapon Specialization says that only the fighter can take it? 'Cause it has fighter levels as a preq - why does any class get it's class features? Natural Spell does take a Druid class ability as a preq, but it's not like other classes can't change shape through spells, it's just as arbitrary to choose Wildshape (rather than 'ability to assume an alternate form' or whatever) as a preq, as to choose a class & level. The only way I can explain it is that only the fighter is so singlemindedly focused on combat to develop such specialized skill in a single weapon. Or because the fighter got weapon specialization in the olden days.... One quick question to those of you who disagree with the fighter gaining weapon specialization and other similar feats as part of their level progression: What is your reason for disagreeing with this? Loss of flexibility and customizeability. When the fighter gets bonus feats, and can use those on feats other classes can't, he has a de-facto class ability (the fighter-only feats) that he can trade in for some alternate ability (any other feat accessible with fighter bonus feats). When every fighter gains the same ability at the same level, that's lost.
Roxlimn 06-23-05, 04:50 PM	Xeviat-DM: I find the very notion of X class only feats, except when they utilize a class ability, to be strange in a system where feats have noticable prerequisites (ability score requirements, skill requirements, feat requirements). Also, feat synergy and class/feat synergy seems like a nice idea, but I would need to see a system designed utilizing all of the PHB feats to be able to speak on it since it is still a hypothetical issue. I'm not sure that if Weapon Focus and Weapon Specialization were opened to everyone, but the fighter got a scaling bonus, would work; every fighter would end up taking it, thus it might as well be part of the class structure. Tony Vargas already voiced my opinions on this. Conceptually speaking, I see no difference between the change I made and things like Psionic feats, Metamagic feats, Divine Feats, Wild Feats, Sneak Attack Feats, Rage Feats, and Favored Enemy Feats. Indeed, in the expanded Complete set, the only class not to have a class of feats a cut more powerful than usual specific to him is the Fighter, suppposedly the master of feats! I don't see most of the PHB feats themselves naturally having synergy, since they are open to most classes. Synergy will occur at the higher tier of feat design - new feat trees for the 8th level or higher Fighter. Finally, given that I've distilled a lot of nonFighter PrC abilities into feats, scaling Weapon Specialization is by no means a given. There are definitely powerful combos Fighters will want to amass, and the spare feats can go into nonFighter specific branches or generic feats for prereqs for more powerful trees.
-Defiler of Souls- 06-23-05, 04:51 PM	Tony, from your responses I think we may misunderstand eachother: I do agree that the fighter is probably due for a little bit of an increase in magic resistance, howevber the point I am argueing is that Improved Mettle is going way too far..... What you said about the fighter having no real limited use abilities does make sense to me. I can undersatnd how their lack of frontloadability can make in neccassary for them to be consistant. So i would suggest that instead of mettle/improved mettle just give Slippery Mind, heres why: the two types of spells that can usually "stop" the fighter altogether are spells involving fort saves and will saves.... Fighters already have a good fort save and don't need anything else in that department Slippery Mind would increase the fighter's chance of a successful will save greatly.
-Defiler of Souls- 06-23-05, 04:55 PM	Xeviat-DM: Tony Vargas already voiced my opinions on this. Conceptually speaking, I see no difference between the change I made and things like Psionic feats, Metamagic feats, Divine Feats, Wild Feats, Sneak Attack Feats, Rage Feats, and Favored Enemy Feats. Indeed, in the expanded Complete set, the only class not to have a class of feats a cut more powerful than usual specific to him is the Fighter, suppposedly the master of feats! I don't see most of the PHB feats themselves naturally having synergy, since they are open to most classes. Synergy will occur at the higher tier of feat design - new feat trees for the 8th level or higher Fighter. Finally, given that I've distilled a lot of nonFighter PrC abilities into feats, scaling Weapon Specialization is by no means a given. There are definitely powerful combos Fighters will want to amass, and the spare feats can go into nonFighter specific branches or generic feats for prereqs for more powerful trees. while the idea of fighter only feats seems like a very good idea, I have found that the feats people make are invariably overpowered, I understand the fighter feats would need to be alittle stronger then other feats, but people don't seem to have a concept of that little difference and make really really overpowered feats.
Xeviat-DM 06-23-05, 06:28 PM	If fighter only feats are more powerful than normal feats, then won't they be "necessary" abilities in order for fighters to keep themselves as powerful as other fighters? Tony, I've never suggested removing any of the fighter's bonus feats, well maybe one if the progression needs it to prevent too many abilities on a single level. Every fighter uses weapons, even if those weapons are their fists or claws, so giving every fighter the ability (rather than the choice) to specialize, and possibly master, a weapon or a number of weapons, I don't see how there's any fighter who would refuse that. I understand that there are some fighters who would like to focus on multiple weapons, and an option should be made for them. I'm only pressuring so much because I'd like to know why so many people think that automatic weapon specialization is an unfitting idea for the fighter. I've heard a few people saying that it may be too powerful, but it's the question of "is it appropriate" that confuses me.
Tony Vargas 06-23-05, 06:39 PM	Tony, from your responses I think we may misunderstand eachother: I do agree that the fighter is probably due for a little bit of an increase in magic resistance, howevber the point I am argueing is that Improved Mettle is going way too far..... I agree about improved mettle. I was actually getting overly pedantic there, I was just pointing out that, yes, the other warrior types are /likely/ to have some better saves than the fighter, but for reasons - like shifting stat points into WIS or DEX or CHA - that are going to weaken the character relative to the fighter in other areas. It only really becomes a problem at higher levels, and even then, it's not so much the fighter being underpowered as it being a little stilted. What you said about the fighter having no real limited use abilities does make sense to me. I can undersatnd how their lack of frontloadability can make in neccassary for them to be consistant. The campaign also makes a big difference. It's easy for the DM and Players to get into a quick-kill arms race, with the players focusing thier tactics on destroying the enemy quickly (starting buffed, leading with thier most powerful attacks, etc), and the DM rising to the bait and just trying to, similarly, inflict as much hurt as possible on the party in the round or two his monsters have before they're vaporized. So i would suggest that instead of mettle/improved mettle just give Slippery Mind: Aside from the name, I don't see anything too wrong with that... ;)
Tony Vargas 06-23-05, 06:52 PM	If fighter only feats are more powerful than normal feats, then won't they be "necessary" abilities in order for fighters to keep themselves as powerful as other fighters? Probably. The current fighter-only feat (Specialization) certainly isn't overpowered or a 'must have,' but still good enough to be worthwhile for concepts that call for being really good at one weapon, or stacking up non-STR damage bonuses (TWF or Rapid-Shot archery). Tony, I've never suggested removing any of the fighter's bonus feats, well maybe one if the progression needs it to prevent too many abilities on a single level. Every fighter uses weapons, so giving every fighter the ability (rather than the choice) to specialize, I don't see how there's any fighter who would refuse that. It's not so much a matter of giving up feats for a fixxed ability progression - though, to retain balance, that would make some sense. It's just that each fighter becomes more like every other fighter, when you just hand them all weapon specialization. I understand that there are some fighters who would like to focus on multiple weapons, and an option should be made for them. Not focusing on specific weapons at all - focusing on tactics (tripping whether with a heavy flail, guisarme, spiked chain or unarmed), or suiting the weapon to the situation/enemy, are also valid ways to aproach a fighter. For a fighter who doesn't want to focus on a weapon, simply taking another feat is already a fine option. There are lots of feats out there, and weapon specialization isn't so good as to be a 'must have.' If you want it to be easier for a fighter to afford weapon specialization, or have more feats like it (fighter-only feats that help a fighter stack up to a raging barbarian of Favored-enemy-slaughtering ranger or smiting paladin) you could create those feats, and give the fighter more bonus feats to play with. I'm only pressuring so much because I'd like to know why so many people think that automatic weapon specialization is an unfitting idea for the fighter. I've heard a few people saying that it may be too powerful, but it's the question of "is it appropriate" that confuses me. It might be too powerful, in the sense that you're just tacking it on to a class that's already fine in terms of combat ability, or it might not make much difference. I mean, if you just gave the fighter WF,S, and the greater versions at 1,4,8,&12th, he wouldn't be hitting any harder than a regular fighter who chose those feats, so wouldn't really be overpowered in terms of offensive punch. But, he would have one weapon that he always does better with, and at that point, the only thing that makes sense is to use that weapon as much as possible - so you better make sure that most-to-all of your feats are useable with that weapon... so all fighter builds start revolving around one weapon.
Fortebraccio 06-25-05, 07:17 AM	Some ideas... (originally posted in the wrong thread) High Level WS feats Superior Weapon Focus Prerequisites: Fighter 16, WF, GS, GWF, GWS Benefit: You can now take 10 in attack rolls with the selected weapon Superior Weapon Specialization Prerequisites: Fighter 20, WF, WS, GWF, GWS, SWF Benefit: You deal maximum base damage with the selected weapon. In case of critical hits, only the base damage is maximized. (1d12 x3 becomes 12 + 2d12) High Level Save-boosting feats Superior Fortitude/Reflexes/Will Prerequisites: BAB +8, GF/LR/IW Benefit: +4 bonus to Fort/Ref/Will saves, stacks with previous feats.
Roxlimn 06-25-05, 08:10 AM	-Deflier of Souls- while the idea of fighter only feats seems like a very good idea, I have found that the feats people make are invariably overpowered, I understand the fighter feats would need to be alittle stronger then other feats, but people don't seem to have a concept of that little difference and make really really overpowered feats. To be quite explicit about it, Fighter only Feats need to be as powerful as level-appropriate class abilities other classes get, and no more. Of course, these do tend to be quite a ways more powerful than your run-of-the-mill feat. For example, Whirlwind Attack is an OK major class ability at 6th level, especially in combination with its prerequisites. However, compared to the other capabilities a typical 12th level Ranger or Barbarian gets, it's not really that great. In general, the concept of the Fighter-only Feat is a rare one, and I'm the only one I know who has developed it into several specific feat lines. If you've perused my proposed feat lines, can you propose which ones are "overpowered?" Xeviat-DM If fighter only feats are more powerful than normal feats, then won't they be "necessary" abilities in order for fighters to keep themselves as powerful as other fighters? In a manner of speaking, yes. No more than PrCs currently appear to be de rigeur for many, many Fighter concepts. Still, Fighter will still have character feats to dispose of, and they can only really dispose of these by taking normal feats. Also, Fighter Bonus Feats in themselves are advantageous in that they can allow you to access coordinated effects faster, so that use won't fade even if a few specialized lines are expanded with Fighter Feat lines. Every fighter uses weapons, even if those weapons are their fists or claws, so giving every fighter the ability (rather than the choice) to specialize, and possibly master, a weapon or a number of weapons, I don't see how there's any fighter who would refuse that. I understand that there are some fighters who would like to focus on multiple weapons, and an option should be made for them. Generally speaking, I would like to make specialized weapon-abilities obtainable through sacrifice of what could be powerful generic use abilities, not the other way around. For example, you could make options that allow Fighters to generally apply the Weapon Mastery abilities to many weapons, but that would mean that they would be top level skill in all the weapons they possess, and that "normal" option Fighters would simply be less capable than they are, not more focused and therefore better in their chosen weapon. Alternatively, you can present an option in which Fighters can opt not to take the Weapon Mastery class-abilities in exchange for more blank feats, but why bother with starting out Weapon Mastery in that case? Might as well start out with blank feats and present Weapon Mastery as optional feats.
pvrhye 06-25-05, 08:41 AM	People leave fighter because they run out of feats they want. There are alot of PrC abilities that would make good feat chains.
aelryinth 06-25-05, 07:08 PM	If core feats scaled with Fighter levels, people wouldn't leave Fighter because they'd have a reason to stay...to eke out that last fighter bonus. And I'm a fan of Weapon Spec as a class feature, not some place to dump feats. Even other classes that get Weapon Spec access get it as a class feature (Psy Warrior, Divine Champ, Templar, Etc). It makes a Fighter the master of the Weapons he focuses in...he still has to burn feats to take advantage of it, but also frees up many feats to pursue feat trees he otherwise wouldn't be able to. ==Aelryinth
hammer_man_Dan 06-25-05, 10:15 PM	I have no idea if someone posted this before in this thread, if so I deeply regret my unentended plaigiarism :). Combating casters is a problem for fighters with low will, I have what I think to be a solution: (insert cool name here) when taking a full attack action the fighter can take a penalty on his bab ( no more than half his class lvl) and boost his will/reflex. at lvl 10 give fighters the ability to use weapon focus with all weapons they are proficient with. same with Weapon spec, greater weapon focus, greater weapon spec. Originally posted by Mystic I do agree that the Fighter is bland in comparison to other classes, just like the Sorcerer is. Both are quite customizable through selection of certain feats or spells, but their tables just look so... meh. Here are a pair of adjustments that (if applied to the base fighter, not the OP's variant) could make the class a bit more interesting, although either also works on its own: 1) Background. Similar to a psion's commitment to a particular discipline, or a wizard's specialization, each fighter selects a background at first level. Each background adds three skills to that fighter's class skill list, and the fighter also gains a special ability. For example: Acrobatics: Balance, Move Silently, Tumble; The fighter gets a +4 competence bonus to Tumble checks to move without provoking attacks of opportunity. Adventuring: Knowledge (dungeoneering), Search, Use Rope; The fighter gains trapfinding (see the rogue class ability). Deception: Bluff, Disguise, Forgery; The fighter gets a +4 competence bonus to Bluff checks to feint in combat. Intelligence: Decipher Script, Gather Information, Knowledge (local); The fighter learns two additional bonus languages. Magic: Knowledge (arcana), Spellcraft, Use Magic Device; The fighter gains mettle (see the hexblade class ability). Politics: Diplomacy, Knowledge (nobility and royalty), Speak Language; NPCs are one category more favorable in their reactions to the fighter. Security: Listen, Sense Motive, Spot; The fighter gains still mind (see the monk class ability). Wilderness: Hide, Knowledge (nature), Survival; The fighter gains trackless step (see the druid class ability). 2) Mastery. At 5th level, the fighter may select one weapon feat he or she possesses that applies to a single weapon (ie: Weapon Focus or Improved Critical, etc.). This feat now applies to every weapon the fighter is proficient in, including unarmed strike. The fighter may select another feat to master at 10th, 15th and 20th levels. Using these variants would both specialize and generalize the fighter. The extra abilities are the only thing that would encourage dipping -- you'd need 5 levels to get Mastery, and the skill points are better accessed by some other class. The ability could be pushed back to, say, third level to prevent this. Of course, they also don't really address the desire for more interesting things at higher levels. I like the "additional attacks" flavor of Weapon Mastery -- perhaps add that as a special feat that requires X levels of fighter, like Weapon Specialization. Anything that scales from class level, like a Monk's stunning fist, would work as well. I must admit this idea has me wildy excited about fighters again, granted that this would be quit a bit of work but well worth it in the end. I like it.
Xeviat-DM 06-26-05, 03:14 AM	Some ideas... (originally posted in the wrong thread) High Level WS feats Superior Weapon Focus Prerequisites: Fighter 16, WF, GS, GWF, GWS Benefit: You can now take 10 in attack rolls with the selected weapon Superior Weapon Specialization Prerequisites: Fighter 20, WF, WS, GWF, GWS, SWF Benefit: You deal maximum base damage with the selected weapon. In case of critical hits, only the base damage is maximized. (1d12 x3 becomes 12 + 2d12). Aside from the fact that it destroys critical hits, this is one of the most revolutionary, but appropriately balanced, idea for new weapon focus feats. I think that might be a good Weapon mastery, and the other could work as a good Grand Mastery; maybe. On a longsword, that's an extra 3.5 damage; on a greatsword it's an extra 5 ... and for giants it just gets crazy.
Creeg 06-26-05, 03:54 AM	Thanks. :) One possibility (which I've aproached in various ways before), is to allow fighters to perform better with skills, in thier combat aplications. A fairly simple mechanic for this would be to double cross-class ranks from fighter levels a fighter has invested in a skill, when he uses that skill in a combat aplication. So, a fighter who has 2.5 ranks in Tumble (5 cross-class skill points), would have 5 ranks of Tumble when using the skill to evade an AoO, but 2 ranks (it rounds down), when using to for non-combat purposes. A pure-class fighter 'master fencer' might have 7 ranks each in Bluff and Sense Motive (max cross-class for his level), but 14 ranks in each when making and spotting feints - his skill is developed in combat, and most effective there, but he's still better-able to 'read' and decieve people out of combat, as well. Spot & Listen do have a combat aplication, in that they determine awareness at the begining of combat, and can be used to find invisible enemies. The latter is fairly straightforward, but the former would require some clarification. I'd say that Spot & Listen to determine awareness is a 'combat aplication' only if the fighter is willing to immediately innitiate hostilities vs whatever he spots or hears. This would represent a veteran fighter, attuned to danger, and accustomed to reacting decisively and violently - the kind of character that hears movement and responds with an arrow, not a closer look. In effect, when he makes a spot/listen and only succeeds because of his doubled ranks for 'combat,' he's seen or heard /something/ that he believes may be a threat, but, unlike a regular successful roll, doesn't get to know exactly what it is. Another possibility with Spot, Listen, and Sense Motive is to eliminate them as skills entirely. It makes sense that a seasoned adventurer would be harder to trick or sneak up on, so just oppose Hide, Sneak, and Bluff (et al), with a level check, instead of a skill. This is already how Intimidate works, for instance - there's no 'Bravado Skill' to oppose intimidate, just a level check. You'd keep all the same stat, feat, racial, etc modifiers to Spot, Listen & Sense Motive, it's just that they'd become mechanics based on level, rather than skills you have to spend ranks on... You are welcome. Interesting idea if a bit difficult to work out at times. Another simple idea to the whole spot/listen thing is to give a fighter a bonus against being surprised. Constant battle and danger has given them an extra edge keeping them ever alert to danger type thing. Heck you could even throw in, at higher levels, an intitive bonus as it would be they are alwasy ready for danger. not talking much of a bonus there (to Intitive) like a +2 or +4.
Roxlimn 06-26-05, 05:48 AM	Xeviat-DM: The take 10 thing, I'm not so sure about. It takes one of the most exciting things about combat and makes automatic. I'm not sure I like that. As for the maximum damage thing, I've already posted it in the previous thread under the "Sword Adept" feat.
Fortebraccio 06-26-05, 06:31 AM	Roxlimm: It should be a "safety" option, much like the one Rogues get with their skills. By taking 10 you are forfeiting any chance of scoring a critical hit, and 10 may just be not good enough to hit (that's especially true with iterative attacks) anyway. :)
Rialto 06-26-05, 10:54 AM	High Level WS feats Superior Weapon Focus Prerequisites: Fighter 16, WF, GS, GWF, GWS Benefit: You can now take 10 in attack rolls with the selected weapon Fortebraccio,this completely negates critical misses (the downside: critical hits are also negated). One question though, from the wording of it, I could not figure does the 10 apply to all attack rolls with the selected weapon for that round? I.e. can the Ftr take 10 on his first attack then proceed rolling normally for the rest; what about AoO and Cleave attacks? Superior Weapon Specialization Prerequisites: Fighter 20, WF, WS, GWF, GWS, SWF Benefit: You deal maximum base damage with the selected weapon. In case of critical hits, only the base damage is maximized. (1d12 x3 becomes 12 + 2d12) Sounds good ;) High Level Save-boosting feats Superior Fortitude/Reflexes/Will Prerequisites: BAB 8+, GF/LR/IW Benefit: +4 bonus to Fort/Ref/Will saves, stacks with previous feats. I am not sure about these. That's like +8 will save at level 8 (+2 base +2IW +4SW), when the base will save of a Wiz is +6 at the same level???
Roxlimn 06-26-05, 11:24 AM	Fortebraccio: Well, I'm certainly not criticizing it in terms of power. Extremely powerful it is not. I'm more concerned with the conceptual basis of it. I don't see making attack rolls "take 10-able" a good thing.
Fortebraccio 06-26-05, 08:05 PM	Rialto: About SWF (Weapon Master in X-DM's progression, btw thanks for the appreciation :) ), negating critical misses it's the point of this proposed feat. Whenever you "take 10" you are basically sacrificing any chance of dealing critical damage to reliably score a hit against an approachable AC. It is intended to be an option applicable separately to each and any attack roll made with the selected weapon, including special attacks like tripping, disarming and sundering attempts, maybe with the exception of charge attacks (after all, charges are reckless). About save-boosting feats, you are comparing a Level 8 Fighter who has spent 2 feats in order to improve his will save bonus to a Level 8 Wizard who hasn't spent any. The +8 prerequisite should be changed to +9 anyway, since they cannot be taken as bonus feats. Roximm: The conceptual basis of "take 10" is to reproduce the Rogue ability to act reliably under pressure, reflecting the Fighter's cold efficiency in battle with the weapons he masters. It's indeed an unique benefit that should set high level Fighters apart from other warriors and monsters, stressing their superior technical insight...I think it's nice mostly for flavour reasons, and it adds a bit of complexity in their combat options ("take 10" can be used to evaluate an opponent's defense, or to reliably dispatch a crippled enemy when it's critical to do so before he gets to act, for example)
Rialto 06-27-05, 03:36 AM	Fortebraccio,first on the SWF: It is a great idea but I see one potential problem. Critical hit is not always possible (against undead, constructs, etc.) while "critical miss" is always "ON" so to speak. So in some cases there is nothing to lose from devoiding yourself from possible critical hits i.e. there is no trade-off. About save-boosting feats, you are comparing a Level 8 Fighter who has spent 2 feats in order to improve his will save bonus to a Level 8 Wizard who hasn't spent any. The +8 prerequisite should be changed to +9 anyway, since they cannot be taken as bonus feats. Then the comparison gets even worse: Ftr (or any full BAB class) 9 lvl: Will save = +9 (without applying Wis mod; Base +3; IW +2; SW +4;) Wizard (or any non full BAB caster class) 9lvl: Will save = +8 (without applying the Wis mod; Base +6; IW +2; not enough BAB for SW :( ) That is Fighter can get a better Will save than a spellcaster of equal level :cool:
Tony Vargas 06-27-05, 02:50 PM	Interesting idea if a bit difficult to work out at times. It'd only be a little troublesome when multiclassing (you'd have to note how many ranks are cross-class from fighter levels). One nice thing about it is that it's a broad solution - any skill that turns out, later, to have a combat aplication is covered. Another simple idea to the whole spot/listen thing is to give a fighter a bonus against being surprised. Constant battle and danger has given them an extra edge keeping them ever alert to danger type thing. Uncanny Dodge as a feat could represent that pretty well. (taking Combat Reflexes as a preq, and, if it being a 'class feature' is an issue, you could make it a fighter-only fighter-bonus feat)