Break the Fighter Feat Fix [Archive] - Wizards Community

Break the Fighter Feat Fix [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
HippoMaster
12-11-06, 11:14 PM There is a very large thread in the Classes forum, and it seems to be the "answer" to the supposed problem with fighters. However, with so much change, I'm sure there's something new broken.

I haven't been able to find anything truly broken, except perhaps the ease of which one can get 60+ AC. If you can find something broken, post it so he can fix it.

http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=743929
X-Codes
12-11-06, 11:52 PM Aside from making just about every single defining class ability available to every single class, this doesn't seem very outrageous.

Seriously, theres little point in making non-spellcasters now, since spellcasters also get all the cool benefits of this stuff.

For example, a Human Wizard can do one of about 5 different things to get Hide as a class skill at level 1, and then pick up Calculated Kill at first level. Then, as he levels up, he gets Remorseless, Slice, Mutilate, and Crippling Strike. Once there, each ranged spell cast by the invisible wizard (lets start with Ray of Exhaustion) deals 5 extra damage, cuts their move speeds by 5', deals 2 points of Strength damage, and inflicts a -2 penalty on Fortitude and Reflex saves. He can just keep playing with the hapless victim like this until he decides to throw out a Finger of Death or something and finish off the guy with an already annihilated Fortitude Save.

These feats are still feats that everyone can take. The Fighter still sucks, because he still doesn't have any good tricks of his own.
HippoMaster
12-12-06, 01:45 AM I believe the Murder feats might not be meant for fighters, but rogues. And how could those feats be any better for a wizard than Spell Focus or the metamagic, especially since the spells they affect only account for a very small fraction of the mage's arsenal?

I see your point, though...

Any other ways this could be abused?
tsuyoshikentsu
12-12-06, 02:32 AM *Sigh*

Pack Mule [Power]
Benefit: Treat your strength as 1 point higher for every power feat you have when determining your carrying capacity.

If you don't immediately see what's wrong with this, you haven't been on this board long enough.
ressurrector
12-12-06, 02:39 AM *Sigh*Benefit: Treat your strength as 1 point higher for every power feat you have when determining your carrying capacity.If you don't immediately see what's wrong with this, you haven't been on this board long enough.
*convulses*
The hurlers...they come for thee!
X-Codes
12-12-06, 04:04 AM *Sigh*

If you don't immediately see what's wrong with this, you haven't been on this board long enough.
:eek: :rofl:

I didn't go down that far, I stopped at the murder feats which suck in their own way by stealing damn near every cool thing the Assassin, Rogue, and Ninja classes can do, as well as being a huge ripoff of WoW.

Still, this isn't just boosting fighters, and the fighters aren't getting that big of a boost beyond that of other characters.

Are Fighters good? Sure. Why not. Afterall, now they can do everything everyone else can do, just like everyone else can do everything the Fighter can do. Theres no reason to even pick a class, really. Just roll some dice.
Talen Lee
12-12-06, 04:20 AM The problem is, this is a very good idea being handled by retards. This area of design space, of intereferential feats, is so rarely touched by WotC.

Fixing the fighter is not done by making the Wizard better, nor is it done by making the cleric worse. I just wish that people would stop proposing alternate classes and prestige options for Fighters when the way to increase options for fighters are *right there*.
X-Codes
12-12-06, 04:33 AM The problem is, this is a very good idea being handled by retards. This area of design space, of intereferential feats, is so rarely touched by WotC.

Fixing the fighter is not done by making the Wizard better, nor is it done by making the cleric worse. I just wish that people would stop proposing alternate classes and prestige options for Fighters when the way to increase options for fighters are *right there*.
Indeed... Now if Fighters had some cooler Fighter-Exclusive feats than Weapon Supremacy, THATS a decent way to "balance" the class.

Of course, if a pure Warblade/Fighter ends his career with a Fighter level, he can take Weapon Supremacy... So I guess it's not so Fighter-Exclusive afterall...
neceros
12-12-06, 04:46 AM Since when does the Fighter need to be fixed? Who levels in straight fighter anyway?
jedrious
12-12-06, 04:54 AM Since when does the Fighter need to be fixed? Who levels in straight fighter anyway?

which is why it needs fixing
GaffeR
12-12-06, 04:55 AM Since when does the Fighter need to be fixed? Who levels in straight fighter anyway?
No one, and that bugs some people - hence the plethora of Fighter "fixes" on the Classes board. They all mean well, but I think DnD 3.5 was designed such that some things are just better than others (look at Toughness, for example).
WombleHunter
12-12-06, 08:13 AM Of course, if a pure Warblade/Fighter ends his career with a Fighter level, he can take Weapon Supremacy... So I guess it's not so Fighter-Exclusive afterall...

Huh? Weapon Supremacy isn't a Fighter Bonus Feat, if that's what you mean.
X-Codes
12-12-06, 08:24 AM Huh? Weapon Supremacy isn't a Fighter Bonus Feat, if that's what you mean.
Hmm... you're right... I guess that does make it pretty Fighter exclusive... until Epic...

Since it required Fighter Level 18+ I assumed that it was a fighter bonus feat like all the other feats requiring Fighter levels.
WombleHunter
12-12-06, 08:35 AM Yeah, it sucks.
Talen Lee
12-12-06, 08:41 AM Yes, and this is true, but only for feats and class selection. Having whole classes that only exist for four levels is bad design (such as the Survivor). The Fighter is terribly designed because it gives you no incentive to be a fighter. Everyone else can do your job better and do other stuff as well. The solution is pretty obvious, but nobody's willing to do it.

I mean, I've tried, but hey, there are only so many hours in a day to test new feats.
Midnight_v
12-12-06, 08:56 AM You know Ironically enough, the people most qualified or rather who would probbably do the best job at "fixing" the fighter are the people here on the Char-ops boards who have little interest in doing so.
Why because those people trying to fix the fighter deal in "what ifs" and we deal in "what is". I mean I think there is a similar but slightly different rubric being used between those two boards.

Here's a fighter fix though:
How about Leaving the fighter as it is except allowing him to choose one school from the tome of battle and gaining all the manuevers from that one school as he reaches the appropriate intiator levels levels.
He can still take martial study 3 times to learn from other schools and has an initator level equal to his fighter level -2.
No recovery method.
That and give him x4 skill points for goodness sakes and sense motive. Fighter learn to read feints. Part of fighting.
Talen Lee
12-12-06, 09:40 AM When I needed something tested to determine its brokenness, I ran it past the guys here. I don't do it very often, because I think it's quite rude, though. I did mean to run the Big fighter feat list past the board though. Should do that sometime... if people think two years between requests isn't too much.
WombleHunter
12-12-06, 09:42 AM That and give him x4 skill points for goodness sakes and sense motive. Fighter learn to read feints. Part of fighting.

...which is why a Feint is opposed by a Sense Motive + BAB. :P
Midnight_v
12-12-06, 09:53 AM Not the point... ;)

Point is they should get a few better skills over all. Sense motive is a good one so they can do something other than intimidate and a spot or listen. You know what basically they should get the warblade skill set is what it boils down to. Knowledge (any 1 knowledge) wouldn't exactly break the game either... Hell I don't think they even get Profession.
Silliness. They just need to update the fighter is all. I'm sure they could have just written fighter at the top instead of warblade and people would still complain but give the fighter a little something in the realm of the supernatural and he's at least playing the same game.

Course thats a talk for another time...:P
mkill
12-12-06, 10:36 AM Ok, here's my take on the matter...

The fighter works as intended by design. You can be a decent fighter if you combine the right feats. You can be a better fighter if you combine the right Prestige classes.

Now, let's assume it was the other way around... who would buy all the shiny books with the prestige classes? Would that be in WotCs interest?

And now, even more heretic...

Is that wrong?

What's bad about base classes that are just that... plain simple straight base classes. Everybody who levels straight in fighter *knows* that what he gets is a plain straight simple base class. If powerful+shiny is what you want, don't do fighter. Nobody is forced to play a straight fighter, if he thinks the class is bland or powerless.

Every player with a 20th level straight fighter whining about their character
a) obviously forgot how his char ruled until lvl 10
b) probably just kept straight fighter to secure whining rights

/rant off

On topic: I've been contributing in the said fighter thread, mainly to brush up the design. I agree with X-Codes that the authors greatly underestimate how much their fix boosts non-fighters. It gets even funnier when you stat a dragon or other high-HD monster with the stuff... the power spiral turns for everybody when you up the general feats, not just fighters.
Aratex
12-12-06, 10:45 AM Ok, here's my take on the matter...

There are so many things right about this post, I don't know where to begin.
Kamikaze Chicken
12-12-06, 10:51 AM What if they made some PrC's with feat requirements only highe rl vl fighters could have?

or perhaps simply making fighter lvl x a requirement for a PrC?

Why not have more feats that are fighter only?

There are tons of questions, and tons of fixes, but I don;t have time to think through em all. id rather playw ith what I have and enjoy it for what it is then try to fix it so others can play it.

/rant end

I think that including properly balanced fighter only feats beyond the existing ones would help the problem. Talen Lee, id gladly help look at any feats youve got going, i can't promise my input is worth anything though

KAMIKAZE! :chicken:
amalcon
12-12-06, 11:13 AM The Backstab feat + the Avalanche of Blows maneuver from ToB = automatic kill of anything. Just walk up to it, use AoB, and automatically hit until it dies. This should only cause the attack to be an automatic threat if it does hit -- Fighters are pretty good at hitting stuff to begin with, and it's bad enough with a scythe even that way.

Battle Cool is amazing in itself -- several skills are useful in combat, and combat is the predominant reason you can't take 10 with them. That makes it basically skill mastery with those skills for a feat...with no prerequisites. Concentration, anyone? (Please, please give that a BAB requirement or something!)

The new Diehard is not especially powerful, but would it not be simpler for it to just give you 2 HP per Vitality feat, in addition to the negative-HP effect? That would do the exact same thing, but be less confusing.

The Battlefield Superiority should specifically say what it does when combined with the TWF tree.
Sabo
12-12-06, 12:12 PM Since when does the Fighter need to be fixed? Who levels in straight fighter anyway?

With my current character that is what I am doing. I am already chewing my lip and wondering what the hell I was thinking in the first. So now I am thinking of bailing the pure fighter idea and multiclass or just engineer a character death.
Sabo
12-12-06, 12:56 PM Well the following probably will not be well received though here is my two cents.

The fighter needs some kind of crowning ability, what that crowning ability should of been I have no idea.

My other grip is that damn dire charge feat in the ELH, what is so darn epic about it, certainly not the feat prerequisite for it? Following suit with ToB dire charge could of easily been a Fighter 9+ fighter only feat. Heck I would of been content with it being Fighter 12+ or fighter 14+ only feat. (perhaps I talk to my DM about this as a house rule)

Yeah sure PHBII helped out the fighter, though still not for all 20 levels worth of fighter.

/whining end

Well guess I going to have to sit back and play my current fighter and keep aiming it towards all twenty levels of all fighter and see what I ca make of and how bad it really is.
ressurrector
12-12-06, 02:40 PM If you look at pretty much every single class (aside from paladin) they get some sort of capstone ability (and even paladins get a level-dependant mount).
Fighters don't, hence suckage.
Rogues have speciaal options, monks get better damage, speed, and other goodies.
Wizards get spells (and PrCs won't take this away for multiclassing)
Clerics/Druids get the above, and more.
Even barbarians get better raging and uncanny dodges.

Fighters get feats, and one of the primary tenents of feats is that they are supposedly within a certain power level of eachother.
Since what other classes get is so much better than feats, fighters get the short end of the stick.

I'm all for good fighter only feats, however to truly balance the fighter, we should allow some mechanic for the fighter to still get at least some of his goodies while multiclassing, like casters do.

As a sidenote, why isn't anyone going on and on about fixing the paladin? Let's face it, they're worse off than fighters except for their special mount, which has a limited usage per day...
Hanniball
12-12-06, 02:53 PM Why does a class need to altered to make it "viable" for all 20 levels? What's wrong with multi-classing? If the DM houserules that you cannot multi-class, then talk about a possible fighter fix; otherwise, there's no point.
FeceMan
12-12-06, 02:57 PM *Sigh*

If you don't immediately see what's wrong with this, you haven't been on this board long enough.
Don't you just love the smell of hack 'n' slashers in the morning?
Sabo
12-12-06, 03:04 PM Why does a class need to altered to make it "viable" for all 20 levels? What's wrong with multi-classing? If the DM houserules that you cannot multi-class, then talk about a possible fighter fix; otherwise, there's no point.

There is nothing at all wrong with multi-classing, though it would be nice to be able to remain pure and have some decent pay-off.

Other than that with past fighter type characters I have always multi-classed into better and greater things.
Ancillary
12-12-06, 03:08 PM Ive toyed with the idea of having a fighter get his bonus feats at even levels but +1 to hit at all odd levels. Then the fighter would be able to consistantly hit things better than any other class. I am not sure that would be enough, but getting +10 to hit on all your attacks is not something to complain about as even a niineteenth level character.
Nanshork
12-12-06, 03:11 PM As a sidenote, why isn't anyone going on and on about fixing the paladin? Let's face it, they're worse off than fighters except for their special mount, which has a limited usage per day...

Search the boards, already had a thread about that.
jedrious
12-12-06, 04:43 PM Search the boards, already had a thread about that.

"a" thread try several dozen
Timlagor
12-13-06, 10:21 PM Ive toyed with the idea of having a fighter get his bonus feats at even levels but +1 to hit at all odd levels. Then the fighter would be able to consistantly hit things better than any other class. I am not sure that would be enough, but getting +10 to hit on all your attacks is not something to complain about as even a niineteenth level character.

If you make those +1s to BAB then you're definitelyonto something.
Ancillary
12-13-06, 10:48 PM It would be kind of cool if they were to BAB. If a fighter started getting iteratives at 4th level, That would be pretty cool. Is it enough to keep up with a ToB character though?

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
HippoMaster 12-11-06, 11:14 PM	There is a very large thread in the Classes forum, and it seems to be the "answer" to the supposed problem with fighters. However, with so much change, I'm sure there's something new broken. I haven't been able to find anything truly broken, except perhaps the ease of which one can get 60+ AC. If you can find something broken, post it so he can fix it. http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=743929
X-Codes 12-11-06, 11:52 PM	Aside from making just about every single defining class ability available to every single class, this doesn't seem very outrageous. Seriously, theres little point in making non-spellcasters now, since spellcasters also get all the cool benefits of this stuff. For example, a Human Wizard can do one of about 5 different things to get Hide as a class skill at level 1, and then pick up Calculated Kill at first level. Then, as he levels up, he gets Remorseless, Slice, Mutilate, and Crippling Strike. Once there, each ranged spell cast by the invisible wizard (lets start with Ray of Exhaustion) deals 5 extra damage, cuts their move speeds by 5', deals 2 points of Strength damage, and inflicts a -2 penalty on Fortitude and Reflex saves. He can just keep playing with the hapless victim like this until he decides to throw out a Finger of Death or something and finish off the guy with an already annihilated Fortitude Save. These feats are still feats that everyone can take. The Fighter still sucks, because he still doesn't have any good tricks of his own.
HippoMaster 12-12-06, 01:45 AM	I believe the Murder feats might not be meant for fighters, but rogues. And how could those feats be any better for a wizard than Spell Focus or the metamagic, especially since the spells they affect only account for a very small fraction of the mage's arsenal? I see your point, though... Any other ways this could be abused?
tsuyoshikentsu 12-12-06, 02:32 AM	Sigh Pack Mule [Power] Benefit: Treat your strength as 1 point higher for every power feat you have when determining your carrying capacity. If you don't immediately see what's wrong with this, you haven't been on this board long enough.
ressurrector 12-12-06, 02:39 AM	SighBenefit: Treat your strength as 1 point higher for every power feat you have when determining your carrying capacity.If you don't immediately see what's wrong with this, you haven't been on this board long enough. convulses The hurlers...they come for thee!
X-Codes 12-12-06, 04:04 AM	Sigh If you don't immediately see what's wrong with this, you haven't been on this board long enough. :eek: :rofl: I didn't go down that far, I stopped at the murder feats which suck in their own way by stealing damn near every cool thing the Assassin, Rogue, and Ninja classes can do, as well as being a huge ripoff of WoW. Still, this isn't just boosting fighters, and the fighters aren't getting that big of a boost beyond that of other characters. Are Fighters good? Sure. Why not. Afterall, now they can do everything everyone else can do, just like everyone else can do everything the Fighter can do. Theres no reason to even pick a class, really. Just roll some dice.
Talen Lee 12-12-06, 04:20 AM	The problem is, this is a very good idea being handled by retards. This area of design space, of intereferential feats, is so rarely touched by WotC. Fixing the fighter is not done by making the Wizard better, nor is it done by making the cleric worse. I just wish that people would stop proposing alternate classes and prestige options for Fighters when the way to increase options for fighters are right there.
X-Codes 12-12-06, 04:33 AM	The problem is, this is a very good idea being handled by retards. This area of design space, of intereferential feats, is so rarely touched by WotC. Fixing the fighter is not done by making the Wizard better, nor is it done by making the cleric worse. I just wish that people would stop proposing alternate classes and prestige options for Fighters when the way to increase options for fighters are right there. Indeed... Now if Fighters had some cooler Fighter-Exclusive feats than Weapon Supremacy, THATS a decent way to "balance" the class. Of course, if a pure Warblade/Fighter ends his career with a Fighter level, he can take Weapon Supremacy... So I guess it's not so Fighter-Exclusive afterall...
neceros 12-12-06, 04:46 AM	Since when does the Fighter need to be fixed? Who levels in straight fighter anyway?
jedrious 12-12-06, 04:54 AM	Since when does the Fighter need to be fixed? Who levels in straight fighter anyway? which is why it needs fixing
GaffeR 12-12-06, 04:55 AM	Since when does the Fighter need to be fixed? Who levels in straight fighter anyway? No one, and that bugs some people - hence the plethora of Fighter "fixes" on the Classes board. They all mean well, but I think DnD 3.5 was designed such that some things are just better than others (look at Toughness, for example).
WombleHunter 12-12-06, 08:13 AM	Of course, if a pure Warblade/Fighter ends his career with a Fighter level, he can take Weapon Supremacy... So I guess it's not so Fighter-Exclusive afterall... Huh? Weapon Supremacy isn't a Fighter Bonus Feat, if that's what you mean.
X-Codes 12-12-06, 08:24 AM	Huh? Weapon Supremacy isn't a Fighter Bonus Feat, if that's what you mean. Hmm... you're right... I guess that does make it pretty Fighter exclusive... until Epic... Since it required Fighter Level 18+ I assumed that it was a fighter bonus feat like all the other feats requiring Fighter levels.
WombleHunter 12-12-06, 08:35 AM	Yeah, it sucks.
Talen Lee 12-12-06, 08:41 AM	Yes, and this is true, but only for feats and class selection. Having whole classes that only exist for four levels is bad design (such as the Survivor). The Fighter is terribly designed because it gives you no incentive to be a fighter. Everyone else can do your job better and do other stuff as well. The solution is pretty obvious, but nobody's willing to do it. I mean, I've tried, but hey, there are only so many hours in a day to test new feats.
Midnight_v 12-12-06, 08:56 AM	You know Ironically enough, the people most qualified or rather who would probbably do the best job at "fixing" the fighter are the people here on the Char-ops boards who have little interest in doing so. Why because those people trying to fix the fighter deal in "what ifs" and we deal in "what is". I mean I think there is a similar but slightly different rubric being used between those two boards. Here's a fighter fix though: How about Leaving the fighter as it is except allowing him to choose one school from the tome of battle and gaining all the manuevers from that one school as he reaches the appropriate intiator levels levels. He can still take martial study 3 times to learn from other schools and has an initator level equal to his fighter level -2. No recovery method. That and give him x4 skill points for goodness sakes and sense motive. Fighter learn to read feints. Part of fighting.
Talen Lee 12-12-06, 09:40 AM	When I needed something tested to determine its brokenness, I ran it past the guys here. I don't do it very often, because I think it's quite rude, though. I did mean to run the Big fighter feat list past the board though. Should do that sometime... if people think two years between requests isn't too much.
WombleHunter 12-12-06, 09:42 AM	That and give him x4 skill points for goodness sakes and sense motive. Fighter learn to read feints. Part of fighting. ...which is why a Feint is opposed by a Sense Motive + BAB. :P
Midnight_v 12-12-06, 09:53 AM	Not the point... ;) Point is they should get a few better skills over all. Sense motive is a good one so they can do something other than intimidate and a spot or listen. You know what basically they should get the warblade skill set is what it boils down to. Knowledge (any 1 knowledge) wouldn't exactly break the game either... Hell I don't think they even get Profession. Silliness. They just need to update the fighter is all. I'm sure they could have just written fighter at the top instead of warblade and people would still complain but give the fighter a little something in the realm of the supernatural and he's at least playing the same game. Course thats a talk for another time...:P
mkill 12-12-06, 10:36 AM	Ok, here's my take on the matter... The fighter works as intended by design. You can be a decent fighter if you combine the right feats. You can be a better fighter if you combine the right Prestige classes. Now, let's assume it was the other way around... who would buy all the shiny books with the prestige classes? Would that be in WotCs interest? And now, even more heretic... Is that wrong? What's bad about base classes that are just that... plain simple straight base classes. Everybody who levels straight in fighter knows that what he gets is a plain straight simple base class. If powerful+shiny is what you want, don't do fighter. Nobody is forced to play a straight fighter, if he thinks the class is bland or powerless. Every player with a 20th level straight fighter whining about their character a) obviously forgot how his char ruled until lvl 10 b) probably just kept straight fighter to secure whining rights /rant off On topic: I've been contributing in the said fighter thread, mainly to brush up the design. I agree with X-Codes that the authors greatly underestimate how much their fix boosts non-fighters. It gets even funnier when you stat a dragon or other high-HD monster with the stuff... the power spiral turns for everybody when you up the general feats, not just fighters.
Aratex 12-12-06, 10:45 AM	Ok, here's my take on the matter... There are so many things right about this post, I don't know where to begin.
Kamikaze Chicken 12-12-06, 10:51 AM	What if they made some PrC's with feat requirements only highe rl vl fighters could have? or perhaps simply making fighter lvl x a requirement for a PrC? Why not have more feats that are fighter only? There are tons of questions, and tons of fixes, but I don;t have time to think through em all. id rather playw ith what I have and enjoy it for what it is then try to fix it so others can play it. /rant end I think that including properly balanced fighter only feats beyond the existing ones would help the problem. Talen Lee, id gladly help look at any feats youve got going, i can't promise my input is worth anything though KAMIKAZE! :chicken:
amalcon 12-12-06, 11:13 AM	The Backstab feat + the Avalanche of Blows maneuver from ToB = automatic kill of anything. Just walk up to it, use AoB, and automatically hit until it dies. This should only cause the attack to be an automatic threat if it does hit -- Fighters are pretty good at hitting stuff to begin with, and it's bad enough with a scythe even that way. Battle Cool is amazing in itself -- several skills are useful in combat, and combat is the predominant reason you can't take 10 with them. That makes it basically skill mastery with those skills for a feat...with no prerequisites. Concentration, anyone? (Please, please give that a BAB requirement or something!) The new Diehard is not especially powerful, but would it not be simpler for it to just give you 2 HP per Vitality feat, in addition to the negative-HP effect? That would do the exact same thing, but be less confusing. The Battlefield Superiority should specifically say what it does when combined with the TWF tree.
Sabo 12-12-06, 12:12 PM	Since when does the Fighter need to be fixed? Who levels in straight fighter anyway? With my current character that is what I am doing. I am already chewing my lip and wondering what the hell I was thinking in the first. So now I am thinking of bailing the pure fighter idea and multiclass or just engineer a character death.
Sabo 12-12-06, 12:56 PM	Well the following probably will not be well received though here is my two cents. The fighter needs some kind of crowning ability, what that crowning ability should of been I have no idea. My other grip is that damn dire charge feat in the ELH, what is so darn epic about it, certainly not the feat prerequisite for it? Following suit with ToB dire charge could of easily been a Fighter 9+ fighter only feat. Heck I would of been content with it being Fighter 12+ or fighter 14+ only feat. (perhaps I talk to my DM about this as a house rule) Yeah sure PHBII helped out the fighter, though still not for all 20 levels worth of fighter. /whining end Well guess I going to have to sit back and play my current fighter and keep aiming it towards all twenty levels of all fighter and see what I ca make of and how bad it really is.
ressurrector 12-12-06, 02:40 PM	If you look at pretty much every single class (aside from paladin) they get some sort of capstone ability (and even paladins get a level-dependant mount). Fighters don't, hence suckage. Rogues have speciaal options, monks get better damage, speed, and other goodies. Wizards get spells (and PrCs won't take this away for multiclassing) Clerics/Druids get the above, and more. Even barbarians get better raging and uncanny dodges. Fighters get feats, and one of the primary tenents of feats is that they are supposedly within a certain power level of eachother. Since what other classes get is so much better than feats, fighters get the short end of the stick. I'm all for good fighter only feats, however to truly balance the fighter, we should allow some mechanic for the fighter to still get at least some of his goodies while multiclassing, like casters do. As a sidenote, why isn't anyone going on and on about fixing the paladin? Let's face it, they're worse off than fighters except for their special mount, which has a limited usage per day...
Hanniball 12-12-06, 02:53 PM	Why does a class need to altered to make it "viable" for all 20 levels? What's wrong with multi-classing? If the DM houserules that you cannot multi-class, then talk about a possible fighter fix; otherwise, there's no point.
FeceMan 12-12-06, 02:57 PM	Sigh If you don't immediately see what's wrong with this, you haven't been on this board long enough. Don't you just love the smell of hack 'n' slashers in the morning?
Sabo 12-12-06, 03:04 PM	Why does a class need to altered to make it "viable" for all 20 levels? What's wrong with multi-classing? If the DM houserules that you cannot multi-class, then talk about a possible fighter fix; otherwise, there's no point. There is nothing at all wrong with multi-classing, though it would be nice to be able to remain pure and have some decent pay-off. Other than that with past fighter type characters I have always multi-classed into better and greater things.
Ancillary 12-12-06, 03:08 PM	Ive toyed with the idea of having a fighter get his bonus feats at even levels but +1 to hit at all odd levels. Then the fighter would be able to consistantly hit things better than any other class. I am not sure that would be enough, but getting +10 to hit on all your attacks is not something to complain about as even a niineteenth level character.
Nanshork 12-12-06, 03:11 PM	As a sidenote, why isn't anyone going on and on about fixing the paladin? Let's face it, they're worse off than fighters except for their special mount, which has a limited usage per day... Search the boards, already had a thread about that.
jedrious 12-12-06, 04:43 PM	Search the boards, already had a thread about that. "a" thread try several dozen
Timlagor 12-13-06, 10:21 PM	Ive toyed with the idea of having a fighter get his bonus feats at even levels but +1 to hit at all odd levels. Then the fighter would be able to consistantly hit things better than any other class. I am not sure that would be enough, but getting +10 to hit on all your attacks is not something to complain about as even a niineteenth level character. If you make those +1s to BAB then you're definitelyonto something.
Ancillary 12-13-06, 10:48 PM	It would be kind of cool if they were to BAB. If a fighter started getting iteratives at 4th level, That would be pretty cool. Is it enough to keep up with a ToB character though?