First, looking at the class and you can instantly see that the Fighter is the “feats guy.” What does that mean? In Core, that means he gets a lot more feats then anyone else. The problem here is that now feats both do and don’t equal class abilities by any measure, especially in core. They don't scale well, there aren't enough of them to measure up to a PrC, and the choices available don't really allow the Fighter to do the one thing he should--be able to both specialize in a fighting skill and have versatility to back him up.
The Core Fighter is designed with the belief that he can specialize in combat and use his feats to support/cover his weaknesses. This is a strange belief because the game rewards the specialist, not the generalist, and yet a Fighter can't specialize enough. He literally doesn’t get enough class abilities to do what he needs to do to protect against a specialist.
==============
”Fixing” the Fighter
First improve the base chassis of the class (Hd, Skills, skill points, proficiencies, saves). The introduction of the Warblade is just that. The flavor text of the Warblade is almost a mirror of the flavor text of the Fighter in the PHB2 (read them one after another). These are the characters who practice, practice, practice, and love to FIGHT.
But the core chassis of the Warblade blows the Fighter out of the water. The Warblade also gets scaling class abilities based on Intelligence. No feat investment and free scaling is NICE. Then, to top it off, they get 18 feat equivalents (maneuvers and stances), completely demolishing any hint of balance sans the Fighter. And they have four bonus feats on top of it all. That’s something like 28 feat equivalents in 20 levels, before all is said and done. And people wonder why the Fighter is lagging.
So, lets look at what the Warblade REALLY does.[
1) Core class is great. Skill points, Hit Dice, Skills, saves, proficiencies. Everything a Fighter should have.
Sole weakness: No heavy armor/Tower Shields, no missile weapons. Take the HD down to D10 and those 3 items are paid for. Or you could make a Fighter bonus feat that gave you all three. That would lift the value of the profs. I strongly believe that the core armor/weapon profs should be more valuable--and stronger--and people should pay more for them for that value.
2) Intrinsic class abilities that scale with level, based off Int. This doesn't introduce MAD but it lets people be rewarded for playing a smart fighter. With magic, even a 12 Int can hit 22 at level 20, for a nice +6 bonus, scaling up from +1 at 1st level (+6 item, +4 Inherent).
3) Swapping feats: The Warblade calls these manuvers. As you level, you gain access to clearly stronger feats. Also, you can even 'swap out' pre-req feats, for stronger feats!
In other words, this is like needing WF and WS to qualify for GWF (let's assume it's +2 and overrides Weapon Focus). Then, simply swap WF out for GWS, and swap out WS for Melee Weapon Mastery. It's exactly the same mechanic. You get rid of the lower power feat, replace it with something better, and suddenly you are leveraging feats. With retraining rules from UA, you can do this every level. By the Martial classes, you can do it once every four levels, basically allowing you an additional 5 feats! (Yes, that now gives the Warblade 33 Feat Equivalents!). In short, you get rid of the crap low-level stuff that doesn't scale for the stuff you should have as a masterful warrior of your level.
4) Feats that scale properly: The Warblade calls these maneuvers. Clearly, there are maneuvers that are based on level (Diamond Mind concentration check ones come to mind, as they improve with ranks), others that improve with BAB (because you hit more often), and others that simply grant more added effects. The Nightmare blade sequence, which is really how the spec/focus tree should be arranged, but I digress. At level 17, the Warblade is guaranteed a strike that can do +100 damage, if he wants it. Or 2d6 Con damage. That's a 9th level effect. It's a feat worthy of a 17th level character. So, the Warblade has both feats that scale and feats that are worth the level they are taken at. It has some that are both!
5) Versatility: The Warblade knows more maneuvers then he can use at any one time. That's fine, the class is set up not to need them all the time. But with just a little bit of time, he can adjust what he has on hand for any specific encounter. Does he need more boosts and counters? Swap out the mega strikes. Hack down the big thing? Strikes are back in. Tricks and traps? Save boosters. Social situation? General purpose.
He can even adjust his entire weapon tree on a virtual WHIM. The Fighter, the master of using weapons can't. So, for a social situation, the Warblade can be death with daggers or his empty hands. The Fighter is stuck with the Greatsword mastery sitting out by the guards. The Warblade can then become a master of the longspear for fighting in a mass battle with allies, shift to a rapier for a formal duel, or pick up the Greatsword to strut his stuff as an adventurer, or grab that lance and couch it behind the shield for some charging fun (if he grabs some Ride ranks), and then swap out for morningstars for beating on ranks of skeletons. That is one useful set of skills that comes from ONE ability. It exactly parallels the ability of spellcasters to change their spells to deal with specific situations. It doesn't have the raw power or versatility of spells...but then, they don't have to lose their spellbooks, either.
6) Exclusivity: This is both a 'flavor' issue and a generic issue.; it is something one class has that no one else does. The Warblade shares with Swordsage and Crusader full Initiator level. Ergo, anyone can learn Maneuvers, they just won't be good because they aren't a Martial class. (The Fighter over in the corner, and the Barbarian, both look at one another in confusion. They must be chopped beef!)
Thus, high level maneuvers become exclusive. The Barbarian has his Rage and Class DR. The Fighter has nothing class exclusive. The closest analog is feats that can be taken only by Fighters--which is a feat function. Of course, the Warblade has a class ability that overrides this feat exclusiveness.
7) Capstone. Something that makes the class worth taking for 20 levels. For the Warblade, this is the striking ability of having 2 stances in play at once. That’s tremendously useful. 2 High-level stances is like having 2 7th level spells in effect. Fighters have nothing available as a Capstone. In essence, the only reason to take it for 20 levels as a class is to become an Epic Fighter. Woo hoo.
Warblades actually have 3 different capstones. They can take a level of Fighter, and a Fighter bonus feat, at level 20, and if they took the tree, get Weapon Supremacy, the Fighter 'virtual' capstone! Or, they can take a Fighter level, get Martial Study as the bonus feat, and take, oh, a 9th level strike, like, say, the Stone Dragon one! OR, they can take their Warblade ability, and get the double stance. Decisions, decisions.
So, here we are. Fighter against Warblade. 11 Feats against 33 and a superior Core chassis. How do we redress this?
1) Redo that core chassis.
2) Give Fighters versatility. They have versatility in build, but not in play. And their build versatility is dwarfed by their number of feats they could potentially learn. Warblades have fewer maneuvers but can choose more of them, and have bonus feats on top of it!
3) Have feats that scale by level and are worth the level they are taken at.
4) Intrinsic and scaling class abilities. The Warblade gets more then just maneuvers. Why can't the Fighter get more then just feats?
5) Feat swapping. Out with the crap, in with the shiny.
6) Exclusivity. Somehow, somewhere, give them something no one else can do.
7) A capstone. One that rocks HARD. One that makes people want to sit up and play a pure fighter. And not some dross feat that some Warblade can count his level-2 towards getting, either.
8) No Dead Levels. This simple fact borks a Fighter hard. First, it somehow evaluates the ‘value’ of a feat to the abilities of two levels of other classes, which is insane. It makes comparing class/level benefits impossible and lopsided. There’s a feat to increase DR by one, or give a rage use a day, but if a Fighter takes it, suddenly it has to be equal to two feats to equal what other classes get? Because he is a Fighter, he only gets a feat every other level when other classes get one every level.
Then it then becomes very, very easy to compare the Fighter to a PrC. If the Fighter got a feat every level he could take on any martial, full BAB PrC out there, and compare level benefits 1:1. A great number of PrCs could be thrown out and replaced by custom Feat trees that have you take the specialized feats in order. If they were balanced for the PrC, they will be balanced if taken as Fighter Feats.
Now, brave game designer, exactly how are we to do this?
A) Master of Many Feats: Fighter, more feats/feat-equivalents then anyone. (Warblade with 33 does this much better).
B) Master of Feats: Fighter levels mean you use feats better then someone else who has those feats, of the same level. (Initiator levels, anyone?)
C) Master of Applied Feats: The Fighter can change his feats so as to be able to deal with almost any situation. (Known vs. readied maneuvers, weapon feat swapping)
D) Master of Feats Beyond Feats; The Fighter can complete Feat trees that no one else can finish, because that's what Fighters do. (Initiator level mechanic - non-martial classes basically cannot get level 9 Maneuvers). Maybe even two of them!
E) Master of Feats of War: The Fighter can perform all the classic roles of a master of all the martial arts: Mass Combat, Personal Combat, Tactical Combat, Strategy, Command, Leadership. You are a student of all the arts of battle. You can fight anything and anyone, on any scale. And wars in the courts are as lethal as wars on the field...you have to be able to fight there, too. The potential to be these things must be built into the class. (A function of Martial Schools and core chassis).
F) Master of Feats of Style: Build the Fighter to be the warrior you want. Swashbuckler? Pirate? Gladiator? Soldier? Knight? These are simply different Fighter builds. Building these styles is a function of having the feats available to do so. (A lesser function of the Schools and weapon choices, skill reqs for maneuvers.)
The Warblade does all these things well, and, in different ways, so does the Swordsage and the Crusader. Furthermore, the Warblade is plenty generic, with no constraints to a specific weapon or style. The power comes from the maneuvers, not the weapon or style, and style is now a choice of roleplaying that is seamlessly integrated.
Can we do with feats what was done with Maneuvers? Well, why not? A Maneuver and making the key skill for its school a class skill equals one feat . They capped it at 3 maximum, because by definition, a maneuver is considered less then a feat. Even a Stance merely equals a feat! Consider the strangeness of feats: If Initiator level were not a factor, a Fighter could spend one feat to take the capstone Strike of the Stone Dragon school, AND gain Balance as a class skill. An IL17th level ability, for one feat. And then we have Toughness, also a feat, but no ‘exclusive’ IL rank req.
Do we need Schools? No. We need equivalent Feat Trees. What is a Martial School from the perspective of the Fighter, but a whole collection of feat trees, with amazingly easy pre-reqs (no need for stats, just prior feats/maneuvers and some skill ranks)?
Do we need PrCs for Fighters? No. Just assign class abilities to equal feats and create a feat tree. Problem solved. If you have a Fighter feat for every level, this is almost ridiculously easy. If people decry balance, laugh and point at the equivalents.
Do we need Schools? No. We need equivalent Feat Trees. What is a Martial School from the perspective of the Fighter, but a whole collection of feat trees, with amazingly easy pre-reqs (no need for stats, just prior feats/maneuvers and some skill ranks)?
Do we need PrCs for Fighters? No. Just assign class abilities to equal feats and create a feat tree. Problem solved. If you have a Fighter feat for every level, this is almost ridiculously easy. If people decry balance, laugh and point at the equivalents.
I wholeheartedly agree with you in general. And, moreover, I think the feats in the Player's Handbook II went a great deal of a long way to add some more oomph to the fighter to make him start to make a come back. But it is, after all, only a comeback.
One thing your article did provide is how much more different the Tome of Nine Swords is from core D&D. And, personally, I think that's a shame. The designers saw a problem ("Fighters are lagging because Spellcasters are so much more powerful") and fixed it in - in my opinion - entirely the wrong way ("Let's create a new class that's totally like the Fighter, except better.") It's called overcompensation people.
What we really needed weren't three new classes with a brand new system to learn. What we really needed were better Feats, more Feat trees, and more importantly, feat trees that could probably accomplish the same thing as Stances and Maneuvers. There was absolutely no reason to come up with a brand new system (other than the obvious - WoTC is a business, and they need to make money; which I respect.) The current system was fine, they're just not taking advantage of it. More feats for Fighters!
, total , freakin , bravo I've almost nothing to add, just the fighter is weak enough to add semi-gestalt to it without upsetting balance at all. At level 3, and each odd level up, add in the gestalt level stuff directly onto the F 20 chassis. So, rogue 9 gets evasion, skills, +5d6 sneak and wizard 9 gets slightly hinky-er spell casting than Pally or Ranger, etc.
The best ones I know are made by Otto
And Seerow
I’ve taken a look at how the Fighter compares to the Warblade, and will also do some elementary fixes about the crucial edge of the Fighter (specifically, his mastery of weapons for damage by level).
Here, in the current game, is how the Fighter actually scales.
1) Commoner: The unfighting Fighter. This is your basic pathetic human, who can’t do much of anything other then spend his 3 skill points on staying alive. Note, however, that this pathetic human has a better skill list then a Fighter, including both Spot and Listen for some reason.
2) The Warrior: While the book likes to portray the Warrior as the NPC fighting class, this is ridiculous. The Warrior is not a ‘career soldier, mercenary’ or other such type. He’s a commoner who knows how to fight.
The Warrior is effectively a Commoner with an additional skill or two, a Good BAB, stronger fort save, and some familiarity with weapons and armor. In other words, he’s Militia, voluntary fighting types, OR the commoners of barbaric tribes, where day to day fighting might be a part of life. A family with a strong history of assembling when the Lord demands levies is probably warriors. Most barbaric commoners who live in rough country (subject to raids, monster attacks, etc) are probably warriors.
This is not a class of professional, full time combat types. They might fill Police roles, since Police are considered inherently less combat focused then Military, but the only place they belong in a military is as levies. Their skill list should be everything a commoner gets, + those in the Warrior list.
3) Fighters: While the flavor text for the PHB II says otherwise, the setup of the Fighter and its fizzling ability to scale well basically makes it a low level threat. The Fighter is a 4 level Dire Threat. At low levels those bonus feats kill, and make for awesome soldiers and full time professionals who take pride in their combat ability. However, these guys are not adventurers. They do one thing, they do it well, and they suck anyplace outside a combat situation. Effectively, Fighters are Warriors making a career out of combat, as opposed to going home to other duties or having split duties.
Their skill list should include all the Warrior Skills, + Profession (soldier), Knowledge (history and nobility) and probably the Ride skill. Their additional ability with heavy armor and tower shields points to a full time, seasoned combatant whose abilities nonetheless start to peter out quickly. They can very quickly make work of less talented combatants at low level in their niche specialties, however. As subjects of constant training, they should also have more skill points to do their core jobs better, namely being good soldiers.
The core Fighter as presented makes a lousy knight, a poor commander, a clumsy duelist or unarmed combatant, an inept buffoon in social situations, and an unfit champion. Even his weapon specializing abilities tend to fall away to other classes, especially PrC’s.
4) The Warblade: These guys actually have formal schools, and abilities that scale from low to high level, ending in superhuman abilities that plainly extend beyond the mundane. The Fighter can learn on the street. Warblades actually need a master, and obsess over martial secrets, martial lore, and have a broad range of class abilities enabling them to master any of the various facets of warfare that they care to. Their flexibility and power dwarfs that of the Fighter, and anything the Fighter can learn. So can the Warblade and the Warblade can often learn a better version of it.
These guys are actually an adventuring class, perfectly at home in the field, dungeon, or court as they prefer. They really have no purpose in life other then to be great heroes and try to grab for the ultimate styles and forms and fight foes that make lesser mortals flee in terror…and they can do it.
Rangers, Paladins and Barbarians fall into the category of specialized Fighters with extra abilities to make them more functional. The Barbarian is the general Super Human…stronger, faster, tougher, the survivor and the overwhelming fury. The Ranger is effectively Special Forces and has spells, to boot! The Paladin is the blessed weapon of the LG gods, riding out to confront evil, direly powerful at his specialty, subpar at combat outside it, but also highly at home in the courts. The Knight is the civilized anti-barbarian, who gains his power from dueling individually with champions as opposed to general slaughter against anyone.
Other Gish builds basically just build on Full BAB and a mix of skills, saves and the like, then add spells into the mix, and everyone knows that spells scale much better then feats do, as do most class abilities.
A Fighter betrays his presentation in the PHB2, because he isn't all the things it says he is. The Warblade almost lifts the same text word for word and IS all those things.
So, if you want to change the Fighter, you have to change what exactly his place in the scheme of things he is. As it is now, he is a dire low level threat, because bonus feats, heavy armor, shields and weapons rock at lower levels with good HP and BAB to back them up.
At higher level, the seriousness of the threat falls off as the survivability and capability of spellcasters pick up. By the end game, the Fighter is exactly as useful as the primary spellcasters and the Gish choose to make him, and not much more. His class abilities are dwarfed by the importance of his gear, whereas for most classes, it is the other way around.
===Aelryinth
In my above post, I noted how a Warblade happily out-does a Fighter because he has 33 Feat Equivalents. One of the common ways to fix a Fighter is to introduce more feats. Another way of doing this is giving ‘feat-equivalents’ of core abilities to the Fighter as class abilities.
The only thing resembling a ‘class ability’ of the Fighter is the Weapon Focus/Spec/Supremacy Tree. These feats specifically have Fighter reqs. Unfortunately, there are still classes that can take them, and taking the whole tree burns up 6 or 7 of the Fighter’s 11 Bonus feats--hardly a good trade off. Here are the alternate methods towards fixing this problem.
==============================
Weapon Focus, the Scaling Feat
1) Remove Fighter level reqs from the Weapon Focus/Spec feat, replace with BAB. If another class wants to take them, bully for them.
2) Weapon Focus is now rewritten as follows:
Weapon Focus
You focus your weapons training on one weapon to master it more then others.
Prereq: +1 BAB
Benefit: You gain a +1 TH with the selected weapon.
Special: If this feat is taken as a Fighter Bonus feat, you gain the additional benefits:
Fighter level 4 – You gain +2 Dmg with the selected weapon. This counts as Weapon Specialization.
Fighter level 6 – Your TH bonus rises to +2. This counts as Greater Weapon Focus.
Fighter level 8 – Your threat range with the weapon you have Focus in is doubled, as per Improved Critical.
Fighter level 10 – You gain an additional TH/Dmg bonus of +2/+2 for all weapons dealing the type of damage your weapon does. This stacks with other bonuses from this feat. This counts as Weapon Mastery of the appropriate category.
Fighter level 12 – Your base dmg bonus for your Focused Weapon rises to +4, for a total base of +2/+4 with your weapon. This counts as Greater Weapon Specialization.
Fighter level 18 – You gain the benefits of Weapon Supremacy with your Weapon. If you have Weapon focus in more then one weapon, chose only one weapon to have Supremacy in.
Thus, you now have one feat that scales with Fighter levels. This simultaneously gives the Fighter a ‘class ability’ and it replicates the ability of the Warblade to ‘swap out’ less useful feats for greater ones, minimizing the costs.
Tweaks: Note that the wording of the feat does not allow Warblades to use the expanded value of the feat. Warblades count as Fighters for taking feats, not gaining additional benefits from them. In short, their class ability largely becomes moot.
Change the spacing on the levels. For instance, Weapon Supremacy is the capstone at Fighter/18 because there’s a feat there. With scaling, Supremacy should be properly moved back to level 17, where it becomes a sort of ‘capstone’ feat.
Inserting level changes to fix dead levels, you could then have the benefits accrue at levels 3,7,9,11,13 and 17.
At level 5, grant Quick Draw with the specialized weapon.
At level 15, you could Insert Power Critical - +4 to confirm Critical Threats.
At level 19, you could insert another feat equivalent (no weapon specific/general ones spring to mind atm). A possibility is all abilities of the tree apply to all weapons you have Melee Weapon Mastery in, except for Weapon Supremacy…truly a great reward for 19 levels of Fighter!
Mechanic: This gives the Fighter a scaling and increasing ability to deal damage with the weapons he practices with most. All other classes have damage dealing abilities that are not dependent on weapon type.
It also removes the increasing need to deal damage from the Fighter’s expenditure of bonus feats, effectively freeing up 7-8 feats to help the Fighter with versatility.
===================
Master of Weapons
This approach is designed to make a Fighter truly good with a limited number of weapons, at the cost of others. It somewhat mirrors the way a Warblade has no missile weapon proficiencies. It is biased towards Martial weapons. Those weapons proven to be the absolute best over time. Exotic Weapons by their nature lack simplicity and elegance.
Weapon Master
You master some weapons to the exclusion of all others
Pre-Req: +1 BAB
Benefit: Double all bonuses you get from weapons as you take the Weapon Focus/Spec Tree (not including Weapon Supremacy). This feat counts as Weapon Focus in all other ways (i.e. +1 TH with a single weapon, etc).
If you have Weapon Master in any weapon, you take a –2 TH with any weapon you do not have Weapon Focus/Master in.
If you have Greater Weapon Focus, you take a –4 TH with any weapon you do not have Weapon Focus/Master in.
--
Mechanics: Forces the character to burn feats on the Spec Tree, but now Specializing really means you are specializing…your ability with other weapons suffers, but you are truly the Lord of the Sword, the Master of the Mace, etc. Abso-smurfly no one can deny you that. The cost of taking all the spec feats means it is highly unlikely another class will rise to rival your ability in your chosen weapon. This is the feat for the guy obsessed with becoming the best swords guy in the land.
===========
Weapon Sympathy
You train weapons in tandem, and learn their secrets together.
Pre-Req: (Master of Weapons), Two Weapon Fighting
If you are capable of simultaneously wielding two weapons that you have Weapon Focus in, the benefits of the Weapon Focus/Spec/Mastery chain (not including Supremacy) applies to both.
Specifically, this refers to a light and medium weapon. You can take feats to allow the wielding of larger weapons to expand the utility of this feat. This weapon can be taken multiple times, as long as the weapon combination is satisfied. (For instance, you could take Sword up the Spec tree, Sympathy in the Dagger, then Sympathy in the Short Spear since it can be wielded with the Dagger, or perhaps a Morningstar instead).
Mechanics: You only have to take this feat once, and any weapon combination you could take allows you to only need to spend feats on the Spec Tree Once, saving feats. Note that this feat will not help with Missile Weapons, but could be used in conjunction with Thrown weapons (if you have the Thrown Weapon Mastery feat). This is a somewhat more feat intensive version of the Warblade ability to change weapons for the Spec tree…but it allows more then one weapon at a time to take advantage of the tree.
============================
Weapon Versatility
With minor practice, your adaptability with weapons comes forth.
Pre-Req: Weapon Focus (any), +3 BAB
Benefits: With an hour of practice, you can switch your melee weapon spec tree to apply to any melee weapon you are proficient with. This does not apply to Weapon Supremacy. You lose the benefits of Weapon Supremacy until you regain the spec tree for the weapon it is tied to.
Note that Melee Weapon Mastery is tied to a melee damage type, not a weapon.
Mechanics: This is the Warblade ability. If you only want to have access to one Spec weapon at a time, but change it around as needed, this is the feat.
It can be expanded by removing the ‘Melee’ weapon language and making it any weapon, thus allowing a Fighter to become a good Archer if needed (and is actually reasonable if you consider a Fighter’s weapon training broader and deeper then a Warblade).
========================
Master of Weapon Styles
This approach focuses on the various approaches to combat, and focuses on mastering defeating/maximizing certain styles as opposed to specific weapons.
There are several styles of combat. The feat in parentheses is the fundamental feat associated with the style.
Two Handed Weapon (Power Attack)
Two Weapon Fighting (Two Weapon Fighting)
Weapon and Shield (Tower or Heavy Shield Proficiency)
Unarmed Combat (Superior Unarmed Strike)
Thrown weapons (Quick Draw)
Polearms/Reach Weapons (Short Haft)
Missile weapons (Precise shot)
Natural Weapons (Improved Unarmed Strike) – Slams, claws, bites, etc.
Exotic Weapons (Expertise)
One Handed Weapon (Dodge)
Master of Styles I
You know how to overcome the various weapon styles of others.
Pre-req: Fighter/4, Weapon Focus in a martial Weapon
Benefit: You gain a +2 TH and +2 AC benefit against anyone employing a fighting style whose fundamentals you are familiar with (see above feats).
Mechanics: Note, the bonuses for two people with the same feat and styles cancels out. It also encourages the taking of a broad range of feats to gain maximum benefit from the feat…and is a nice secondary benefit for choosing to take more diverse feats!
Master of Styles II – Mastery of Weapon Type
You maximize the usage of your chosen weapon.
Pre-Req: Melee Weapon Mastery (any/all), Greater Weapon Focus in a manufactured Weapon, Versatile Unarmed Strike
Benefit: You are able to extend the type of damage your Focused weapon does to one extra type at a time (for instance, a slashing sword becomes S/P or S/B). You may change this combination of damages as an immediate action on your turn.
If your opponent does not have the Weapon Mastery for the extra type of damage, that Weapon Mastery type stacks with the primary Weapon Mastery you have for purposes of dealing damage. You may set this feat to reactively counteract another Style Master’s bonuses.
If you have Combat Reflexes, any opponent attacking you with a Natural Weapon without benefit of Reach on you provokes an AoO.
Mechanics: Turns all weapons into Claw attacks (all damage types available) and encourages taking multiple Melee Weapon Masteries for the stacking benefit.
This effect burns several higher level feats, but is a very viable way to diversify a Fighter as an alternative to shooting up the spec tree…or for feats to take in the meantime.
Master of Styles III – Mastery of Weapon Style
You are a true master in using your preferred Weapon’s Style.
Req: Master of Styles I; Weapon Specialization; appropriate Style feat; BAB +8
Benefit: When wielding a weapon in your Preferred Weapon’s Style, you gain a +2 TH/Dmg.
This feat counts as Melee Weapon Mastery for all Pre-Reqs. Its benefits do not stack with Melee Weapon Mastery.
Mastery of Styles IV – Master of Weapon Group
You wield weapons similar to your preferred one with ease and skill.
Req: Weapon Spec, BAB +8
Benefit: Another Melee Weapon Mastery variant, this one is instead tied to Weapon Groups (Axe weapons, large swords, polearms, light blades, monk weapons, etc). It should be considered the same as Melee Weapon Mastery, and not stack.
==============================
Master of Many Feats
This simple build is just assigning the Fighter a feat every level, and then comparing the abilities available to various classes at certain levels as feat equivalents.
Now that straight comparison is available, you should have little problem picking up a broad range of needed talents as long as associated pre-reqs are available. In other words, the Fighter becomes the ultimate master of martial skills, because he can master the martial skills of all other classes.
This will also eliminate the need for many martial PrCs. Simply institute the appropriate abilities/penalties at the required levels, and you are good to go.
===========================================
Bringing It All Together
All of these ideas can be combined to allow a Fighter maximum versatility.
Weapon Focus as a scaling feat saves the Fighter 6 feats, perhaps 8!
Weapon Master truly emphasizes the Fighter as the master of ONE weapon, using the Spec Tree.
Weapon Sympathy lets the Fighter train multiple weapons together, if you don’t want to allow Weapon Focus for all weapons.
Weapon Versatility allows the Fighter to customize his weapon for an encounter.
Mastery of Styles rewards a Fighter for having a broader range of combat knowledge then any other character can possibly develop...in other words, leveraging multiple feats into something of value beyond their own language.
Mastery of Weapon Style/Weapon Group provides alternatives for Weapon Mastery.
Mastery of Weapon Style II allows one weapon that the character has focused on to have more exceptional benefits at lower level, at a feat cost only the Fighter can typically afford, building on Melee Weapon Mastery, and with its effectiveness against Natural Weapons (including UA) firmly sets Weapons down as the way to go.
Many Feats is mainly an observation that if the Fighter had a feat every level, sooo many PrCs and balance questions would just resolve themselves and could be disposed of for a return to newer, stranger feat trees.
Comments welcome!
==Aelryinth
Once more, good article.
A lot of people are disappointed with Fighters because, well, so many things are NOT possible with the classic Fighter build. Can you really make a devoted archer? Duelist? Commander? Proud knight? Pirate captain? Fighters have a broad area of possibility because of their feats, but their Core levels tend to make things difficult. So, let’s look at some negotiations.
Core Chassis
D10 Hit Dice is actually good. D12 is okay if you want to focus on just an in your face, tough, ‘tank’ build, but really, there is nothing wrong with d10.
BAB: Has the best, but this is undervalued. Unlike in, say, 1E, the Fighter doesn’t get to build on this with more attacks and sooner then anyone else…there’s no ‘edge’ in his BAB and attack progression that every other martial class doesn’t share (a loss to the fighter)
Saves: Fort good. Basically, this means the Fighter stays in prime physical shape. There’s no nimbleness on the feet from long hours of sparring, no great willpower from thousands of hours of physical discipline.
Skills: Fighters should have 4/level. Everyone knows it…barbarians get 4, and they don’t even TRY to learn stuff. The Fighter is a civilized combatant, and should have combat oriented fallback skills. The skill set of a Warblade and/or a commoner in addition to the fighter would make perfect sense…and then nobody would whine about skills.
There are a couple skills that could be swapped out. Ride is very situational, and could be swapped out for something more relevant (knowledge (monsters), anyone?). Knowledge (Nobility and History) could be swapped out, and the ‘warfare’ aspect of History subsumed into Martial Lore, where it belongs. Martial Lore should definitely be on the Fighter list, no questions.
Proficiencies
Simply because the Fighter gets so many basic proficiencies that he shares with other classes devalues them tremendously.
Light Armor Proficiency (Free) – Commoners get this proficiency. Masterwork Light Armor basically has no penalties for wearing it.
Medium Armor Proficiency –Every other martial class gets this. The existence of Mithral says this is the only Armor Prof you will ever need.
Heavy Armor Proficiency – Warriors get this. So do Clerics. Arguably, with TWO other proficiencies required to gain this, this should be a good/important feat.
Unfortunately, it is hamstrung by the simple fact that Mithral Full Plate is considered medium Armor, and that Heavy Armor isn’t really any better then lighter types over the long run. In essence, this is a non-existent feat…the ONLY reason to get it is if you are never going to get past 8th level and be able to afford mithral armor, OR you simply MUST pay even MORE money to get Adamantine, and get penalized even more by having slow movement. We don’t need movement at higher levels, do we?
Shield Proficiency – Common. Value dubious. Worth is great…shields are very useful. But it's very easy to grab this as part of a package elsewhere, so the value of it is next to nil.
Tower Shield Proficiency – While rare as a proficiency, the value of this is dubious. Most people just don't use Tower Shields. It's more for line soldiers and pikemen then for adventurers.
Simple Weapons Proficiency, Group – Wizards get this. No value.
Martial melee weapons proficiency, group – Better then rogues and monks…but every other melee class gets this. Some races get Familiarity with weapons not on the list, or can even dispose of it with racial profs, notably Elves. Value dubious because if you take it away, anyone can grab a level in a dozen other classes to get it all back. Proficiency in a single weapon is thus very much NOT worth blowing a feat on.
Martial Missile Weapons Proficiency, group.- the only martial classes that don’t get this are the Martial Adepts…who can, of course, either use Racial Profs or grab another class to pick it up. Blowing a feat for one missile weapon is, of course, a laugh and not worth spending a feat.
One bonus feat – Really, the only unique thing about the Fighter is being able to choose a unique level 1 benefit. Unfortunately, level 1 Fighter feats are noticeably rather weak, and don’t measure up to, say, Regional feats. If they were, they’d only encourage even more ‘dipping’, instead of sticking with the class. The lack of Fighters being able to build up a single feat over time only makes this worse, and for people to turn elsewhere for real character development. The fact you can make a Class Choice and effectively choose a feat, too, also renders the value of this ambiguous.
Buuuut….we’re trying to develop something other then the core Fighter.
As presented, the Fighter is basically a Heavy Footman, or Heavy Mounted Warrior. He can wear heavy armor, pick up nice weapons, use the best weapons out there, is sturdy and can line up shield to shield next to his fellows. He makes a nice soldier. I, however, want a swashbuckler.
Here is where we learn the true value of a feat. Swashbucklers are basically ‘light’ Fighters…little to no armor, agile, witty, sophisticated. They are not grinding toughs in plate and shield swinging flails.
Rule 0: An Intelligence or Wisdom based bonus to AC is there to replace a level of armor. Maybe two, if it scales by level.
Rule 0.1: One good save is freely exchangeable for another Good Save. Thus, if you want a Fighter with a Good Reflex Save, there shouldn't be any problems subbing for it. Now, if you want a character with an EXTRA good save, that's basically worth a feat, and you should give up something for it.
So! If you want to make a light Fighter, you can swap out Heavy Armor Proficiency to give them an Intelligence bonus to AC in no armor. If you swap out Medium Armor, you can give them an Int or Wis bonus to AC when in light or no armor (as a swordsage). The AC bonus is replacing the heavier armor. If their AC bonus from a second stat increases over levels (like a monk’s), you can give them the same by giving up shield proficiency and disallowing shield usage.
Shields: If you lose Heavy Armor Proficiency you should lose Tower Shield Proficiency. A scaling bonus to AC should also disallow Shield proficiency/usage…the bonus essentially is replacing the Shield.
Fast Movement: Want to be able to run fast like a barbarian? Give up Heavy Armor and Tower Shields, and take Fast Movement. If there are cries of ‘cheese’, point at the barbarian and mithral armor and say ‘then fix that, too.’ The Fighter is being PENALIZED because he has worthless armor proficiency.
So, to build a Swashbuckler with a Fighter, lose the Heavy and Medium Armor proficiencies to gain an Int/Dodge bonus to AC in light or no armor. I'll give up my Tower Shield proficiency for, oh, Lightning Reflexes (that's about equal), and my Shield proficiency for Fast Movement. I now have a nimble, agile sword fighter. I'll give up my martial Missile Weapons to have automatic Weapon Finesse. Adding Bluff to my skill list should be almost free after all this.
If I want to get Heavy Armor at a later date, however, I'm going to be severely constrained if it's only available with Knightly training, or by taking Clerical oaths, and not just by grabbing levels in synergistic classes or PrCs.
Other Observations:
Armor Proficiency should mean something. A barbarian shouldn’t be able to slap on Mithral Full Plate and enjoy the same AC as the Fighter who is actually proficient in the stuff.
As written, no Armor prof only doubles Armor Check penalties. A more suitable penalty would be –2 to AC and no Dex to AC while being worn, in addition to the Armor Check penalties. Furthermore, Mithral wouldn’t obviate the need for a proficiency. To wear Mithral Full Plate, you’d have to know how to wear Full Plate, period.
Secondly, Heavy Armor should be a very restricted thing, handed out sparsely. Getting used to hauling around 40 lbs of armor does not happen overnight, let alone 60 lbs and more.
I propose that Heavy Armor proficiency be allowed in any class only at the First Character Level. After that, it requires blowing a feat on. Furthermore, the list of classes that grant it at First level should be very, very short…probably the Knight alone. I could see the Fighter and the Warrior picking it up at level 2 or 3 automatically as a class benefit. I could also see a Cleric with the War domain picking it up instead of Weapon Focus.
What this does is not only encourage a one or two level ‘dip’, it gets the player thinking about the long-term advantages of sticking with a Fighter, since now he’s already multi-classing to start out things. If we start introducing other Feat Fixes, Fighter starts looking more and more viable.
===Aelryinth
I agree with what you have to say. However there are fighter fixes already.
The best ones I know are made by Otto
And Seerow
Nobody is going to agree on a proper Fighter fix. I've seen dozens. I've made up two or three. Seerow and Otto have put a lot of time and effort into theirs, and I applaud them for it, but it's not for me.
A lot of fighter fixes deal with two things I'm uncomfortable with - choosing a 'combat mastery' or 'subclass', wherein you decide "I'm a Swashbuckler" and thence you get channeled into these feats here; and/or introducing a new 'fighter only' mechanic, so the Fighter has a unique shtick.
The problem is, the Fighter has a unique shtick. It's called lots and lots of feats. He doesn't need to be channeled down a path. He can pick the feats and do it himself. They are the same thing. So, the problems lie less with the class mechanics then with the sum of his class abilities, the feats themselves.
Consider: The Fighter is the only class that really has a MAD based off Class abilities. Seriously! Expertise: 13 Int. Power Attack: 13 str. Combat Reflexes: 13 Dex ITWF: 17 dex! There are feats with Wis reqs and Cha reqs and Con reqs and whatnot reqs. What other class has to put up with this just to use their class abilities?
The Fighter is the master of Feats. Being able to ignore the reqs for Fighter bonus feats is no different then a Monk being able to ignore the reqs for Unarmed Feats, or for a Valenar Revenant Blade being able to ignore the reqs for HIS bonus feats, or the Ranger not needing the reqs for HIS class ability fighting style. They have the reqs by adhering to their class.
The Fighter should get the same consideration, don't you think?
So, Fighters should either obviate or be able to ignore stat reqs for Fighter feats. Or, to use the Martial Adept guideline, sub in Skill Ranks for them, which are far more adaptable to being met. Look at the Diamond Mind, the very personification of the intelligent, mentally focused fighting school...>concentration is a skill based off of CON. You can have a 12 Int, be a Diamond Mind, and not even qualify for a feat as basic as Expertise but you can learn Pearl of Black Doubt and how to take two Full Attacks in one round, and stick your little finger through an Adamantine block with Nightmare Blade.
Hell, if you use the Martial Adepts as a guide, and I'd seriously consider it, you should only need the low level feats until you gain the higher level ones and then you should be able to swap them out for something better!
The Fighter should be written along the lines of a Martial Adept, and given that additional versatility. A Fighter is more hampered with his bonus feats then any other class. It's time to do away with that.
And if you do away with the silly stat reqs, you make gaining feats = getting PrCs, which don't require stat reqs. And a PrC is nothing more then a collection of class abilities, or feat equivalents.
===Aelryinth
C) Master of Applied Feats: The Fighter can change his feats so as to be able to deal with almost any situation. (Known vs. readied maneuvers, weapon feat swapping)
When I read this, it immediately made me think of Iron Heroes, a D20 game. One of the classes in IH is the Man-at-Arms, who gets "wild card" feats as a class feature.
From IH (this is OGC): "You can pick a feat to fill the “wild card” slot as a standard action. You retain this feat for the rest of the day. After you rest for eight hours, the wild card slot resets to empty..."
I think that if you changed all of the fighter's bonus feats to wild card feats (except maybe the first one to avoid too many single-level dips), it would be a simple fix that would address some of your concerns. The fighter might not be the out-and-out master of battle that the warblade is, but they would be the masters of versatility.
Chris
Nobody is going to agree on a proper Fighter fix. I've seen dozens. I've made up two or three. Seerow and Otto have put a lot of time and effort into theirs, and I applaud them for it, but it's not for me.
A lot of fighter fixes deal with two things I'm uncomfortable with - choosing a 'combat mastery' or 'subclass', wherein you decide "I'm a Swashbuckler" and thence you get channeled into these feats here; and/or introducing a new 'fighter only' mechanic, so the Fighter has a unique shtick.
I find it highly ironic that you first say my fix isn't for you, then bring up the single reason why I feel my fix is the best out there.
My fix gives the Fighter a bonus WITHOUT forcing him down a path of specialization, or anything of the sort. On the contrary, the abilities given make him ultimate GENERALIST. Making the Fighter powerful without forcing him into any specific niche is honestly the number one thing about my fix that I'm proud of.
The Chameleon gets a broad level of this power; they can grab any feat. The Revenant Blade gets this ability from a restricted list. The Fighter should have access to the whole of the Fighter bonus feat list to grab stuff if the tactical situation changes enough to demand it.
Building a focused Dragonslayer or undead slayer is a fine goal. Then he sucks doing anything else. He can't even really attempt at being good at any other role, because his feats are so locked in and he can't change or compensate them without massive retraining rules.
Again, this is Build Versatility vs Play Versatility. Spells provide play versatility AND Build versatility. Select your spells, then select the ones you want to use. Maneuvers do the same thing. You have a pool and you select the ones you want to use.
On top of all this is the belief that very specific feats are too powerful to allow. For instance, a feat that allows you to Disrupt Undead with a swing. It's very specific, and it's useless against anything but undead, but it makes you too powerful to fight undead, so it's nerfed as a feat.
Look at all the feats needed to be a great Dragonslayer. Holy Jeez. There's like 8 of them. No room to become much else.
========================
Fighters suffer another unfair effect - they are the only class constrained by reality. Really, think about it. Barbarian/20? THE HULK! Smashing through stone walls, leaping mighty chasms, lifting great weights. Yeah, you got a 'superhero' to look at.
Wizards? We've got tons of fiction about uber wizards doing crazy stuff.
Rogues? Hey, they are the skill guys. They can go anywhere, do anything, ninjas and super stealthy assassins are all over the place.
Fighters? They just sort of...well...fight things. Whackamole. Oh, they can pick up great armor, great swords, great, blah blah, but it's the GEAR which is great, not the person using it. He's just the person chosen to use the weapon and make great use of it. If you think about a Fighter, try to keep these things in mind.
Level 8 is OLYMPIAN level. Ignore 'fantastic' history. It's entirely likely that no person on our planet every exceeded level 10, and the best of the best fighting types never got much past level 8. Level 10 is so ungodly skilled as to be almost unbelievable in the 'real' world. Therefore, after level 10, the fighter should be capable of things (feats) that, simply put, can't be replicated in the real world.
These feats should be the equal of what 5th level and higher spells can accomplish. Should a fighter be able to teleport? No, but he should be able to stop himself from being teleported. Launch fireballs? Maybe not, but resist a fireball? Sure. Pick up a stock sword and use it to slice through adamantine? Sure. Launch a spear and drive it through a dozen foes? Yeah. Destroy plate armor with a blow, or cleave the Hide of a Wyrm, get thrown a hundred yards through the air by King Kong and live, avoid the blades of a dozen demons with a stupefying agile dance of martial mastery? Yeah, the Fighter should be able to do that.
Any Feat the fighter takes past level 8 should start looking like something impossible. The Fighter is Just That Good. It's not something you ever expect to happen in reality. It's just something he can do because he's better then anything and anyone in the real world can ever be.
Don't limit the Fighter by reality, which means don't limit the power of Fighter bonus feats by reality. Feats need to scale, depending on what level you take them, and they need to build over time. A Fighter taking Dodge should get more out of it then a peon taking it. A f/20 taking Dodge against a Foe should be one hard to hit mofo, and not just because some wizard bothered to make up some armor and enchant it for him out of the goodness of his heart. A Fighter who takes a feat at level 18 should get a feat that is the equal of a 9th level spell slot. It should be powerful, versatile, and useful.
Versatility of Play is a hallmark of play at higher levels. The greatest thing about being a spellcaster isthe ability to recustomize your character every day. The ability to get spells that are actually worthy of the level they are taken is the other. Spells that scale by level are another great thing.
All are hallmarks that Fighters lack. When you make a Fighter build, think seriously about those problems. Fighters are great at low levels. They a level 4 Dire Threat. At level 10, they are useful. At level 20, they are unsatisfying, and as useful as the spellcasters want to make them.
When you make a Fighter, look seriously at the higher levels, and consider what it would take to get you to play it to level 20. The Capstone is only one aspect of play.
And remember that the problems with the Fighter don't start or end with just the Fighter. His feats are the 'unseen liability' of the Fighter, because without worthwhile class abilities to choose from (i.e. appropriate feats) the Fighter has only his core chassis. And his Core chassis is just a Warrior.
===Aelryinth
An intelligent dwarf fighter with Mobility, Combat Expertise, and Improved Trip has probably got more hit points (I figure most Warblade users think "Why have CON when I can have STR instead and do more damage?" Of course, ignore this if you're playing a silly game where you have 18s in everything...) of much greater use to a party when it comes to the whole TEAMWORK thing, than some burly Warblade that charges into battle and smacks things around. The crazy-lotta bonus feats also give the fighter some breathing room for feats that most feat-starved individuals can't afford: Iron Will and Lightning Reflexes, for example.
I find it highly ironic that you first say my fix isn't for you, then bring up the single reason why I feel my fix is the best out there.
My fix gives the Fighter a bonus WITHOUT forcing him down a path of specialization, or anything of the sort. On the contrary, the abilities given make him ultimate GENERALIST. Making the Fighter powerful without forcing him into any specific niche is honestly the number one thing about my fix that I'm proud of.
I started to work on a fix after reading this thread, then I remembered that I had read Seerow's fix. It was awesome. A few minor changes, but I REALLY like the concept of separate feat trees.
Fantastic job, Seerow.
This article doesn't take into account that while the Warblade is better at dealing damage, it doesn't necessarily benefit the party in the "tank" role as well as a fighter can.
An intelligent dwarf fighter with Mobility, Combat Expertise, and Improved Trip has probably got more hit points (I figure most Warblade users think "Why have CON when I can have STR instead and do more damage?" Of course, ignore this if you're playing a silly game where you have 18s in everything...) of much greater use to a party when it comes to the whole TEAMWORK thing, than some burly Warblade that charges into battle and smacks things around. The crazy-lotta bonus feats also give the fighter some breathing room for feats that most feat-starved individuals can't afford: Iron Will and Lightning Reflexes, for example.
No, it doesn't. Iron Will and Lightning Reflexes are not Fighter feats--they are general feats.
You can easily make a Warblade a tank. The Stone Dragon is all about being a tank. You just have to take the maneuvers to do it. The AC dif is non-existent. Remember versatility of build AND play, above? The Warblade does indeed have both. Furthermore, I'll point out that though the base Warblade doesn't get heavy armor, none of his abilities are penalized by wearing it if he does dip into, say, Crusader to pick up the prof, or grab one level of Fighter.
Furthermore, the save boosting feats of the Diamond Mind, and the condition-erasing benefits of Iron Heart Surge, are unbeatable. You sub Concentration checks for saves. Base +23 Will save before mods at level 20, anyone?
The int based bonus to Reflex saves the Warblade gets will quickly dominate any save bonus that Lightning Reflexes could grant, and it's a class ability.
So, please don't comment on situational circumstances until you can argue convincingly about them. The Warblade CAN be a tank build; it just doesn't have the Glamour of a Stormguard Warrior unleashing a Double Attack Raging Mongoose Girrallon Flesh Ripping Windmill or something.
===Aelryinth
This article doesn't take into account that while the Warblade is better at dealing damage, it doesn't necessarily benefit the party in the "tank" role as well as a fighter can.
An intelligent dwarf fighter with Mobility, Combat Expertise, and Improved Trip has probably got more hit points (I figure most Warblade users think "Why have CON when I can have STR instead and do more damage?" Of course, ignore this if you're playing a silly game where you have 18s in everything...) of much greater use to a party when it comes to the whole TEAMWORK thing, than some burly Warblade that charges into battle and smacks things around. The crazy-lotta bonus feats also give the fighter some breathing room for feats that most feat-starved individuals can't afford: Iron Will and Lightning Reflexes, for example.
Your example doesn't make much sense. Arbitrarily saying that a Dwarven fighter who has a decent INT to take the Expertise Feat tree will have better hit points because he has a high CON while a Warblade won't take a good CON because he'd rather boost STR is a bit ridiculous.
Both classes need good STR. Your fighter won't trip very well with a low STR. Plus, a Warblade has a better HD so he'll have more HPs with the same CON bonus anyway.
As far as teamwork goes, a Warblade is likely better suited to help the party out more in combat due to the flexibility of his maneuvers. The fighter either has to use his feats to become a one trick pony (Charge build, battlefield control build, TWF build etc...) or he'll try to become a generalist by spreading his feats out and become mediocre at everything.
I agree with you that a fighter might want to save a Feat for Lightening reflexes since he has a lousy reflex save, but Warblade already has a class ability that is better than Lightening reflexes and he doesn't have to spend a feat to get it since he gets to add his INT bonus to reflex saves. By mid levels, he'll likely have a much better reflex save than a fighter with the Lightening Reflexes feat.
These feats should be the equal of what 5th level and higher spells can accomplish. Should a fighter be able to teleport? No, but he should be able to stop himself from being teleported. Launch fireballs? Maybe not, but resist a fireball? Sure. Pick up a stock sword and use it to slice through adamantine? Sure. Launch a spear and drive it through a dozen foes? Yeah. Destroy plate armor with a blow, or cleave the Hide of a Wyrm, get thrown a hundred yards through the air by King Kong and live, avoid the blades of a dozen demons with a stupefying agile dance of martial mastery? Yeah, the Fighter should be able to do that.
===Aelryinth
He can already do those. Cleave, lighting reflexes, iron will, toughness, sunder, chink into the armor, you name it.
Also, the next time you go around all day long with a tower shield, longsword and heavy plate equipped, plus plenty of equipment, all without any real trouble, give me a call, right?
Just read the threads that asked if Meleé Weapon Mastery stacks with Weapon Focus and Weapon Specialisation for your chosen weapon. Many people said "WTF? +3 to hit and +4 to damage for a fighter?! Totally overpowered! Not in my game". Or another thread I read today where someone asked if you could gain Insightful Strike (like a Swashbuckler) through a feat. There were some reasonable feat proposals with thought out prerequisites (that hindered easy access to the feat for wizards and the like), but there were again many people that said it would be very overpowered to give Int to damage for a fighting class.
I just do not see why such things would totally screw your game balance. Wee a minor to hit and damage bonus at level 8 that costs 3 (read THREE) feats, very scary! Yet nobody complains about the dozens (maybe less, but you get my point) of feats for casters in every new book that are a) often very strong and b) are designed to synergize the heck out of each other and do pretty amazing things (Metamagic Feats! Quickened, empowered and maximised spells? Ok sure, no problem! But a fighter getting a really big bonus to damage with a cool and unique feat at level 15 or so? No way, overpowered and stuff!)
Anyway, good and easy to understand comparison of the Fighter and Warblade classes, that will hopefully catch the eye of my DM.
You went over, in detail, how the Warblade and Fighter have essentially the same fluff around them, and how the Fighter fails to live up to it while the Warblade does. How the Warblade is what the Fighter should be.
The Warblade chassis is, as you have mentioned, spectacularly done. We've got a clear focus on melee combat, some versatility, good scaling, a slight taste of MAD, at least some usefulness outside of battle, and so on. It's a great example of how classes should be made -- none of this "My Wizard throws everything into INT commences burninating the countryside" nonsense. The Fighter's, conversely, is miserable. It allows for (and because of its inherent genericness, actively encourages) a huge amount of overlap with other classes. And it's dull. And it scales miserably. And it's a pud anytime it isn't swinging that greatsword around. I enjoy vanilla ice cream and plain yogurt, but the Fighter is too bland even for me to stomach.
And yet both classes go towards more or less the same ends. What does this mean?
What it means is that the Fighter has been fixed. It's just called the Warblade. If you absolutely must have a class called "The Fighter" in D&D -- a desire which is as absolutely beyond my comprehension as the need to have Vancian casting in D&D -- buy Tome of Battle and slap some whiteout everywhere the word "Warblade" appears. Problem solved. To say "Ooh, the Warblade is cool, let's make a Fighter that's like that" is to admit to being redundant solely because you want a class with a different name.
Your comparison is excellent, particularly in how the Warblade's ability to change his weapon-specific feats depicts him as a true master of war. Where the logic breaks down is when you make the leap to "The Warblade is good, how should we change the Fighter to be like him?" Why do we absolutely, positively, desperately need a "Fighter?" Frankly, I'm not convinced we do. The Fighter has long been a sloppy piece of class design, and a solution (as well as a few other pretty solid solutions -- my hat's off to Otto and Seerow) has been presented. Is the name so problematic?
What suggestions do you have for the people that see the fighter as fair and balanced as is and the Warblade as grossly overpowered? (please no "wake up!" or "get real" responses)
I would ask them to first explain their game to me to understand if their design is causing this view. Also, the way that players use the classes and the DMs understanding of the classes as well as the mechanics of maneuvers. I also ask the people in question to explain why they would find the fighter balanced and the warblade overpowered. What are their baselines, how many books are allowed, are they using third party material...?
I cannot answer for aelryinth, but I can tell you why I want a Fighter class. I want a Fighter because I like the idea of being able to customize my fighting character exactly the way I want. The Warblade class is fine but it pulls you in the direction of a highly intelligent combatant that uses quasi magical martial arts maneuvers and (correct me if I misread it) cannot use or is not very good with ranged weapons (bows, crossbows). What if I want to become a legendary archer in my game? Can I do it with the Warblade? I don’t think so. Ok, I could take the Ranger with Ranged Weapon Style, but will he be able to be a truly legendary archer? Do I want to have spells or a smelly Animal Companion? I hope you care to understand my point.
Now for the problem:
This customisation works fine till level 5-8 and then you start running out of feats that are powerful enough for your level. That’s the breaking point of the low-on-skill-points standard Fighter, until here it was fun to just bash things around without doing anything spectacular. But now every other class get more and more truly special and flashy things, while you as a Fighter think "Shiny! What do I get?" and your DM says "Here, you get just another feat from the same list you could choose from at first level."
The start for a solution for this problem is built in to the Fighter class already and its called Fighter Feats. Feats that are for Fighters and for Fighters only, just as arcane spells are for arcane casters only. There should be dozens and dozens of specialized Fighter Feats for any fighting style in every new D&D book (just like they provide casters with new spells in EVERY darn new book!). These feats would be very powerful (depending on the level) and give the Fighter something unique to choose from. A Ranger/Archer player should look on the Fighter Feat list and say "Wow look at this Archery Feat! Awesome! Too bad only a Fighter level 12 can take it..."
But all this should have started years ago. You just cannot quickly make up for the lack of love the Fighter got since his career as a D&D class started. Over the years arcane and divine casters got hundreds of spells and mighty Meta Magic feats, that improved their versatility and made them more powerful and unique. A Fighter just got normal feats that are balanced so that every fighting class can take them and that are NOT very powerful. That’s why fixing the Fighter is not easy business.
But some players, like myself, still are Fighters at heart that don’t want the Fighter to be deleted and replaced by another "pre-written" class. We would love to see the Fighter rise beyond their current "underpowered" and "underskilled" status.
Feats don't DO that. Feats, well, they tend to suck. You know, I was just looking through Complete Scoundrel. There's a trick there requiring 12 ranks in spot that allows you to make a Spot Check against an opponent's AC to make your next attack a touch attack.
Huh. Guess they forgot to realize that this ability already exists as a feat. A woefully underpowered feat, because the classes with the greatest martial ability who are most likely to FIND a weak spot (Fighters) don't have Spot as a class skill and so can't make use of it. Uh, but a Ranger could. Really, really could against a Favored Enemy.
And it's this constant underwhelming introduction of new feats (look, a TRICK does what a feat does! Ooooo, yay feats!) which makes maneuvers stand out more and more. Maneuvers are fair, balanced, and intrinsically one maneuver = a feat. It's right there as part of martial study. Actually, they are worth LESS then a feat, because you get a skill as a permanent class skill, too.
I'm not sure a Fighter Fix can actually be done, in all fairness, without really fixing the feats the fighter takes so they scale like maneuvers do. Until then, we can only adapt what we see into what our own unique flavor of the Fighter is.
===Aelryinth
Just a thought but with every book that comes out there are new classes that are 'more powerful' than the base classes.
I understand WoTC needing to make money of course, as said above... But why not work on a fix that nerfs the warblade?
What it means is that the Fighter has been fixed. It's just called the Warblade. If you absolutely must have a class called "The Fighter" in D&D -- a desire which is as absolutely beyond my comprehension as the need to have Vancian casting in D&D -- buy Tome of Battle and slap some whiteout everywhere the word "Warblade" appears. Problem solved. To say "Ooh, the Warblade is cool, let's make a Fighter that's like that" is to admit to being redundant solely because you want a class with a different name.
Ok, well, what about people that don't like the maneuver system? I like many of the Warblade's class abilities (except weapon aptitude which I despise) but I find that overall the maneuver system doesn't agree with me.
I've been reading this thread with great interest though I’ll admit having glossed over some posts ;) But indeed, as Pyke_Moonshadow pointed out, why is it not so that the fighter is alright and the Warblade is simply too much?
Just a thought but with every book that comes out there are new classes that are 'more powerful' than the base classes.
I understand WoTC needing to make money of course, as said above... But why not work on a fix that nerfs the warblade?
The Warblade didn't break the Fighter. PrCs broke the Fighter.
A standard ten level melee class is designed to have an ability every level. Why? Because, in the words of one designer, "You are waiting for the benefits, and sacrificing other things to get into the Class. You should therefore gain something every level to make up for it."
So you have an ability EVERY level of a PrC. You get an ability every OTHER level of a fighter. And if you DARE to try to balance the abilities of a PrC as FEATS (you know, the class abilities for a Fighter) people scream at you that these are far too imbalanced.
On top of this, instead of building feat trees that give you the specialization you want, people build PrCs that give them. Why? Because then you get the equivalent of TEN bonus feats (at the least); you get the justification for abilities much more powerful then a feat; and you can wrap it all up in fluffy history as a neat package with a backhistory.
The Warblade didn't break the Fighter. What the Warblade did is give a Fighting class a REAL reason to take it all the way to level 20, in the way no other Fighting Class ever really has.
The only PrCs currently made for the class of Warblade deal exclusively with more TWF goodness, and introducing a sort of 'ranged combat' Warblade dealing with thrown weapons. There's also one that goes a bit deeper into the 'tanking' power of the Stone Dragon. Ruby Vindicator Knights are probably overpowered and broken with their ability to turn Turn attempts into swift actions, but otherwise just build on a cleric/crusader mix. Regardless, you are perfectly capable of taking ALL the ToB classes to level 20 and NOT feeling like a gimp or underpowered.
A Fighter at that level is so reliant on his gear, because his feats just don't scale well, that his class abilities become outshined by his gear. As many people have noted, a Warrior with the same gear as a Fighter/20 is almost as capable of handling challenges as the Fighter is!
Magical items don't define a Warblade that way. They've got enough stuff of their own that isn't reliant on magic to stand out and be defined by what they are, not what they own.
====================
Smiling Bandit, you are being highly critical of the Warblade sans archery. Obviously the Warblade is a melee class, and isn't going to spec archery.
I return the question to you. If all the Fighter can actually be good at is archery, why isn't he called the Archer?
Why doesn't he have Spot, needed to SEE the stuff he is shooting, as a class skill?
Why does he only get 11 special abilities for his class, when other classes get 20 or more?
Why is he proficient with martial melee weapons, if he's just good at archery?
Archers are snipers, which mean concealment and hiding. Why can't he do that, too, if need be?
Archers don't wear heavy armor, why is he proficient with it?
Etc etc. Think of both sides of that argument before you bring it up.
======================
Leo, that's not much of a contribution. If you really think those feats are the equal of a 5th level spell effect, then tell me why a Fighter can get them at level one and two, because they are obviously broken if that is so.
==============================
Pyke, the maneuver system is, to put it bluntly, a rewrite of the feat system.
Think of all the feats that are out there. Hundreds of them, literally. Rewriting all of them would be next to impossible. It was far, far easier to just write a new system of scaling 'feats', with more liberal rules and better scaling effects.
Consider how maneuvers work.
Let's take the Diamond blade series that lets you sub a Conc check for damage. Level 2, I think? At level 5, you can access a better version that does double the Conc check. At level 8, triple.
First of all, this thing scales. Your Damage is based off skill ranks and bonuses, all of which increase by level. If all you got is the first strike, at level 3 you've got a strike that does 1d20 +~9 dmg or so. But it works with any weapon. For instance, you'll probably be able to sunder an average club with a blade of grass in your hand.
The fighter gets weapon focus and weapon spec...+1/+2 in one weapon.
The Maneuver goes UP in power. At level 20, you are doing 1d20 +23 + bonuses (Conc skill bonus, + Con Score). let's ignore the bonuses, except for COn, likely to be about 22, so you are doing 39 dmg with your little finger.
Your Weapon spec/focus is still +1/+2. It didn't scale at all.
NOW, we bump up the maneuver one, to the 2x Concentration one. You have now DOUBLED your damage. But Wait! this is clearly better then the low level effect...why do we need it...it's clearly an upgrade!
We don't. We swap out our first feat and 'upgrade' to the second feat.
Now, not only do we not waste one of our precious maneuvers to upscale the feat, we can take another feat in it's place! To 'upgrade' his damage, the Fighter must BLOW TWO MORE FEATS, of his precious 11, and what does he get?
Another +1/+2.
The Warblade can pull this stunt yet again, for TRIPLE the Concentration check. With minimal bonuses, his strike is now going to be doing 100+ dmg, every time he uses it. And it uses the SAME feat slot he took at level 3.
The fighter has to blow TWO more feats to get Melee Weapon Master and Supremacy. Both provide fixed bonuses.
The Diamond Nightmare blade will continue to scale with levels, Skill bonus items, a higher Con score, and so on. The Weapon Spec Tree is forever fixed.
This pattern is repeated, just off the top of my head, with the x2,3,4 dmg sequence of strikes in Iron heart, and the Mountain Hammer series of strikes in Stone Dragon, and the +additional attacks series in Tiger Claw. ONE feat/maneuver slot, scaling into the most powerful attack in the game. ONE maneuver slot, the equal of taking SIX Fighter feats.
And it's not overpowered. It's the equivalent of a low level spell at low level, and the equal of a high level spell at high level. It's balanced, it scales, and its useful at all levels of play.
=====
Diamond Mind also gives us the save boosting maneuvers, sub your Concentration check for a save.
This is awesome, because Fighters, once proud recipients of the best saves in the Old Game, now are horribly vulnerable to Will Saves, or "Save or Dies", or, yet worse "Save or Kill Your Friends."
This is a horrible and deficient situation. Any Fighter knows that he is horribly vulnerable to being taken out of a fight with simple magic, or turned against his comrades, and the best he can do about it is blow a general, personal feat on Iron Will. His class does NOTHING for him to help him with this glaring gap in his defenses.
The Warblade can choose to remove this vulnerability from the arena of a sucky fixed boost to a scaling defense. The defense isn't perfect...he can't use it every round...but it's solid and effective and it scales against the threat levels of his opponents. His class takes care of it...just like clerics and mages can use spells to cover their ass, and the rogue can choose Slippery Mind to cover his, to some extent.
The Fighter has absolutely no recovery options. This wasn't so bad in the Old Game, where no class had the melee combat options that the Fighter did...the Fighter ruled melee. However, that's not the case now. Rogues can do great damage in melee, and there's even a Full BAB class with SA progression. Clerics went from being healers and second tier fighters to having immense personal combat ability if they chose to do so. Mages found the power of Polymorph and personal buffs made them more powerful then all of a Fighter's skills, and then they could remove themselves from a dangerous situation to recover. Druids with buffed animal companions and Wildshape could totally overshadow a Fighter in combat.
In short, the roles broke down. All of the other classes can now do the Fighter's job...because his abilities don't scale to keep his ability to wreak havoc in personal combat commensurate with his role in the party.
The fact of the matter is this: the Fighter, and the Barbarian, should be the Kings of Melee. They should be so good at melee that even with the most uber of buffage, the best that other classes can do is come close to their ability for a very short period of time...and if they are buffed, they should be so far beyond the emulation of mere magic as to laugh at it.
This was the old situation. You just couldn't insert a c/20 into a situation where you needed a f/20. Less staying power, couldn't fight as well, too vulnerable to this and that...the Fighter's role was unassailable.
Now, the Fighter's Role is sublimated into other classes. The Fighter is now not merely replaceable, he is EASILY replaceable.
A Warblade is not by any stretch of the imagination EASILY replaceable. He can do Too Much Stuff. He has recovery options, even limited HEALING options...he can do immense amounts of damage that a buffmeister just can't emulate...and should not BE able to emulate.
The class has flavor, it's customizable to a great extent, and you can't just swap in another cleric and replace it. It's just too good at what it does well. The goal is to get the Fighter to that same level. You will NOT be able to do that, without revising the Feat system.
If every feat on the Fighter's list scaled evenly and appropriately by level, AND you popped up his skills to at least match a Barbarian, you probably would not have to do ANYTHING to change the Fighter. That Weapon Focus you took at level 1 is Weapon supremacy at 18. Great, one feat down, ten more to go. Keep picking. Cleave is now Supreme Cleave at high level. Awesome. Keep going. Expertise goes to unlimited BAB AND offers an AC bonus based on level. SURE, that's three. You get eight more. Combat Reflexes starts including the Uncanny Dodge tree and keeps upping the number of AoO's you get. YES, that works. Keep going.
The introduction of more and more and more feats is a Cognition Trap. You can't compare feats to spells. The Cleric gets every damn spell on his list. The wizard, with enough gold, can learn every single spell in the game and tailor himself to any situation. The sorcerer can make wands and staves to use them all, too.
Feats are fixed. You only get THIS MANY. Introduce 20 new feats. So what? I only get 11. That has not changed. I am STILL capped. And to be effective I still have to generalize and take the best average feats, the ones that stand heads and shoulders above the rest.
As one of the other posters pointed out, new feats don't expand your selection...they shrink it. Because you still are going to take only the best feats, and those feats become part of EVERY build.
So, to sum up: The Fighter fix will not be complete without a Feat fix. All the feats need to be thrown out, and the attitudes that 'this feat is too powerful' with them. Feats need to be rewritten with an eye to balance and improvement, just like maneuvers, and just like spells, so that the class that is the Master of Feats, the Fighter, has class abilities that scale just like EVERY OTHER CLASS DOES.
Until then, no Fighter fix is really going to work. It's just that simple.
===Aelryinth
Some people (maybe a great many) saw this power gap and cried out that melee should be able to "compete" with casters. So they made the tome of battle. Yay, now melee types had "spells" that they could use. While I like the concept it doesn't do justice to many archetypes. I cannot see your career soldier as a warblade. Maybe some special forces type, maybe. If I want to play a legionnaire similar to a roman centurion I will play a fighter. He doesn't have any quasi mystical abilities he is just a solid warrior that can best men on equal footing.
I guess that could just be my hang-up. I just find the warblade to be over the top a bit as far as melee goes and that its clear infringement on the fighter rankles me.
Sorry it seems the wording of my post was not very good, I did not want to criticise the Warblade or the Fighter. Quite the opposite! What I was criticising was MerlintheTuna’s statement that the Fighter has been or should be replaced by the Warblade.
What it means is that the Fighter has been fixed. It's just called the Warblade. If you absolutely must have a class called "The Fighter" in D&D -- a desire which is as absolutely beyond my comprehension as the need to have Vancian casting in D&D --
buy Tome of Battle and slap some whiteout everywhere the word "Warblade" appears. Problem solved.
Of course I know that the Warblade is a melee focused class, but MerlintheTuna said it should replace the Fighter and I just wanted to show that this would not be a good idea. That’s why I picked the example of an archer. I did not say the Fighter can only be good as an archer, it was just an example for a specialisation that should show why a Warblade is not a Fighter. I did not want to bash the Warblade, but rather MerlintheTuna’s statement.
Why doesn't he have Spot, needed to SEE the stuff he is shooting, as a class skill?
Why does he only get 11 special abilities for his class, when other classes get 20 or more?
Why is he proficient with martial melee weapons, if he's just good at archery?
Archers are snipers, which mean concealment and hiding. Why can't he do that, too, if need be?
Archers don't wear heavy armor, why is he proficient with it?
Don’t tell me, I said earlier that all the changes you suggested are really good. In fact unlike other Fighter Fixes there is no single point that is not to my liking. That’s why I choose an archer as example, with your variant Fighter you could easily swap out martial weapon proficiency for just proficiency with martial ranged weapons and swap medium and heavy armour for more skill points and better class skills. I really like that!
You can not do that with a Warblade, which is fine, because the Warblade is something different and I wanted to make that clear, as a response to MerlintheTuna’s statement. You see I did not intend to criticise the Warblade or your views on why or how the Fighter should be fixed.
etc etc. Think of both sides of that argument before you bring it up.
That’s what I intended, my apologies if that has been misunderstood due to my unclear phrasing (English is a foreign language to me, seems like I need more routine in writing answers.) I hope I could clear things a little bit up. Keep on writing; it is a very interesting thread!
Since Fighter is the only class that can reasonably get 2+ feats a level consistently, Fighter will have near exclusive access. Certain PRCs if timed properly can get it too. Rogues don't get it unless they interrupt their normal rogue level progression to time it with their 10+ high level abilities, in which case they're sacrificing some unique Rogue tricks to get these Exceptional Feats.
I don't have any exceptional feats in mind, but as a frame of reference, the power of an exceptional feat should be worth significantly more than just 2 feats. It should also be an ability that scales with you, much like a spell. A fighter traveling from 1-20 can get Exceptional Feats at levels 1, 6, 12, 18.
So, to sum up: The Fighter fix will not be complete without a Feat fix. All the feats need to be thrown out, and the attitudes that 'this feat is too powerful' with them. Feats need to be rewritten with an eye to balance and improvement, just like maneuvers, and just like spells, so that the class that is the Master of Feats, the Fighter, has class abilities that scale just like EVERY OTHER CLASS DOES.
Until then, no Fighter fix is really going to work. It's just that simple.
===Aelryinth
I agree with 99% of what you're advocating Aelryinth. Fix the feats, and only tweak the fighter slightly. To prevent other characters (non-fighters) from taking these better feats, make them fighter only. There's precedent here, just look at Weapon Specialization.
So, I suggest a two-step fix that involves no amendments to the fighter class, only a single house-rule and a single new feat.
1. Houserule:
All feats in all splatbooks that are eligible as "fighter bonus feats" are now "fighter ONLY feats".
Ok, before the other people panic that they can't take Elusive Target for their rogue, don't worry; you can always dip into fighter. All the "fighter bonus feats" from the core books are still available to other classes. THIS IS WHAT GIVES THE FIGHTER A POWER BOOST RELATIVE TO OTHER MARTIAL CLASSES.
2. Make a new fighter bonus (fighter only) feat:
Martial Generalist
Prerequisite: Fighter level 4, this feat may only be taken as a Fighter Bonus Feat.
Benefit: The fighter can as a standard action can gain any single fighter bonus / fighter only feat for which he meets the prerequisites. The gained feat temporarily replaces the fighter's Martial Generalist feat. The fighter may lose his temporary feat and regain Martial Generalist after 8 hours of rest.
Special: This feat may be taken multiple times. Each time, it allows the fighter to gain an additional fighter bonus / fighter only feat for which he meets the prerequisites. Feats gained in this manner do not qualify as prerequisites for Prestige classes or for other feats, though they do count as prerequisites for purposes of temporary feats gained through replacing Martial Generalist.
A FEAT LIKE MARTIAL GENERALIST IS WHAT GIVES THE FIGHTER PLAY FLEXIBILITY IN ADDITION TO DESIGN FLEXIBILITY. I would expect that these two changes would manifest mostly in one of three ways:
1. A mid level fighter could choose to take Martial Generalist a number of times. However, since Martial Generalist does not act as a prereq for a PrC, then this character would have a harder time qualifying for a lot of PrCs, and is thus encouraged to stay a fighter.
2. A mid level fighter could choose other fighter bonus feats, with maybe only one or two instances of Flexible Fighting, and still use his actual fighter bonus feats to qualify for PrCs at the sacrifice of flexibility of play.
3. A mid level character could take a four level "dip" as a fighter to get one single instance of Martial Generalist. I feel that four levels is a significant investment, and a four level dip wouldn't be that common; the level four requirement would discourage the practice of dipping to get this one obviously powerful feat, though one / two level dips would still allow fighter only feats from splatbooks for characters who really need them for their builds.
Now, if you want feats that scale for the fighter, just make 'em up yourself. Or declare that every martial maneuver/stance is actually available as a feat, rather than a class ability. The DM can make a single sneak attack die a fighter feat if he/she wants. Make a feat that scales with fighter levels. Really, adding feats to the game is as easy as making new spells or magic items. With more fighter-only feats and Martial Generalist, you've addressed the biggest problems the fighter faces: power and flexibility; but you don't have to make any ink amendments to your PHB.
It would also add special abilities at higher levels; you'd automatically gain the benefit of Improved Critical at 8th, Supremacy at 18th, and probably some middle capability at 13th. Maybe even some minor trick at 3rd (like a +2 bonus to resist Disarm and Sunder attempts) Why? Because linear bonus progressions don't keep up with class ability progressions, which get increasingly powerful at higher levels. With these traits added on, the "feat" would keep up.
- Gain a Feat every level AND either have 4+Int Mod skill points/level or 1d12 for Hit Points.
- 4+Int Mod skill points/level and 1d12 Hit Points and upgrade all Saves to "Good" and add one Feat.
I don't see any reason why a Barbarian should have more skill points than a Fighter. So, it seems that there is wide agreement that a Fighter should/could get a Feat at every level without becoming too powerful, and the class "chassis" could be beefed up too.
What he needs is class abilities that are on par with what other classes get. If he got one of those every level that he doesn't gain a bonus feat, that would probably do the trick. I'd give him the Weapon Aptitude which the Warblade has at 1st level. At 3rd level he might gain a +2 bonus to opposed checks made as part of standard attack options (disarm, trip, grapple, bull rush). Maybe at 5th level he treats armor as being one category lighter for encumbrance purposes (so full plate only slows him/skill penalizes him as much as medium armor does).
Etc.
It's called "weapon versatility 1-9." There are nine dead levels and these fit in those spots. Weapon versatility adds a new weapon he is already proficient with to a "pool" of weapons. Weapons in this pool gain the benefits of any feat that applies to a single weapon.
It's that simple. Imagine killing an orc with a longsword, throwing your longsword at his friend 10 feet away, and then grabbing the dead orc's battle axe on the ground and WAILING with it. The benefits the same for both weapons! I hated being a fighter the first time and turning down a new weapon because I was not focused with it. 20 long levels with the same old weapon. erg...
Doctor Strange is clearly more powerful then Captain America. Equally clearly, he can't do Cap's job. If the spellcasters had their roles clearly defined, and that meant occasionally popping off a mountaintop, I wouldn't much mind.
It's when they can brush the melee boy aside and do his job better then he can that I set aside my 'respect for the mundane' and start getting Darwinian. If a Fighter can't beat a mage, then one way or another, he's going to join him. And that Kung Fu fun of the Nine Schools is exactly that sort of thing that would evolve, otherwise the fighting man is, to put it bluntly, extinct in any fantasy setting.
=================
Bandit: Sorry if I came off stiffly, I see a lot of "Fighters are great because they are the only ones who can do this incredibly uberspecialized form of combat, so they don't need any changes!" type of posts, and that's what you were coming across as. Apologies.
=======================
Evilgenius: Yeah, I'd do something like this. Wild Card feats, Mearls called them. Chameleon feat, that class gave it. Ancestral heritage feat, Revenant Blades do.
Me, I'd just call it a Heroic Bonus feat. This is a distinct reference to the spell that allows a wizard to grab any Fighter feat he wants. Any person who has problems with the power of the feat I'd just refer to the spell that duplicates my class abilities, and tell them to think long and hard about not allowing me to duplicate the power of a third level spell that duplicates my own class abilities.
I'd move it to fifth level...a 'dead level', to really make taking it stick. I'd pop the feat in at level 5,10,15, and 20.
And I wouldn't say ANY feat. That would be, well, too much. Instead, I'd introduce the same kind of mechanic that Wizards get. I'd make a 'pool' of feats, equal initially to 3+ Int bonus, and then I'd let a Fighter 'buy' feats to expand his pool, just like a wizard getting new spells.
His second Heroic Feat could be the second feat in a chain, or any of his first pool. He'd get another 3 + Int for pool two, and then another set for pool3, and another for pool4.
Would there be book keeping? Yeah. You could just use 'any Fighter bonus feat' and it would simplify things, but with a pool, you allow some level of customization...the character chooses the optional feats based on availability of training, and can even build multiple 'optional feat chains' and the like. As a DM and/or player, you could choose simplicity or some customizing. It's like a Wizard picking the spells for his books.
Fighter-only feats won't solve the problem unless they are extremely able to scale. The Weapon Spec Tree is precedent, but it's a joke. The whole tree should be ONE feat. And that's what such feats would have to be, to encourage others to take Ftr/20 and be proud of it.
===Aelryinth
When I read novels, I am fully into the tales of wizards being battled by warriors and... those warriors just can't keep up! It's... normal. It's quite a feat to slay a wizard who has prepared for battle! Of course, they're only books...
So, like I said before, I disagree with a warblade being able to gain powers equal to a disintegrate, because he has scaling powers and his damage output just keeps getting better! The fighter is the weapon master. He's the one can wield that supermagic sword, put on that supermagic armor and be a terror on the battlefield, also because he hits 3 to 4 times a round!
Of course, give a wand of fireballs to a wizard and there you go... blasting everything that moves. The fighter keeps his abilities under any circumstances though. His fighting abilities aren't used up like spells.
To conclude, I'd say that the spirit (of older editions) of the fighter has been kept and has been broken with things like a warblade.
ps: Excellent points of view, aelryinth ;)
While that example does not hold true at all levels and builds (Girallon Flesh Rend with Time Stands Still Two weapon builds are, notably, insane) it is true in many cases.
I love both classes. (The fighter just needs an average save and 4 skill points -- Think Arcana Unearthed's Warmain). They're both great concepts to roleplay, and a talented player will enjoy playing either class.
So, to sum up: The Fighter fix will not be complete without a Feat fix. All the feats need to be thrown out, and the attitudes that 'this feat is too powerful' with them. Feats need to be rewritten with an eye to balance and improvement, just like maneuvers, and just like spells, so that the class that is the Master of Feats, the Fighter, has class abilities that scale just like EVERY OTHER CLASS DOES.
What do you think of the idea of fighter feats scaling with the number of fighter feats you possess? This has been done for the draconic feats in Complete Arcane, Races of the Dragon and Dragon Magic, for example, where the benefit you get from a feat depends on the number of related feats you have.
For example, what if Weapon Focus granted a +1 bonus to hit plus an additional +1 for every six fighter feats? A fighter who devoted all of his feat slots to fighter feats could get a +4 bonus with his attack rolls once he has 18 fighter feats (18th level for a human, 20th level for a non-human). There would also no longer be a need for Greater Weapon Focus.
Similarly, what if Weapon Specialization granted a +2 bonus to damage, +1 for every three fighter feats?
Improved Initiative could grant a +4 bonus, +1 for every four fighter feats. Improved Bull Rush, Improved Sunder, Improved Disarm, Improved Trip and Improved Grapple could provide a similar bonus to their checks.
Toughness could grant a 3 extra hit points, +1 for every fighter feat.
Dodge could grant a +1 bonus to AC, +1 for every six fighter feats.
Mobility could increase AC against AOOs by +4, +1 for every four fighter feats.
Spring Attack could incorporate its advanced versions from PHB2 by granting an additional target to ignore AOOs from and an additional iterative attack for every nine fighter feats.
Some fighter feats may be more difficult to fit into this framework, but how does this sound conceptually?
I've been reading this thread with great interest though I’ll admit having glossed over some posts ;) But indeed, as Pyke_Moonshadow pointed out, why is it not so that the fighter is alright and the Warblade is simply too much?
Just a thought but with every book that comes out there are new classes that are 'more powerful' than the base classes.
I understand WoTC needing to make money of course, as said above... But why not work on a fix that nerfs the warblade?
Because the warblade isn't broken, the fighter is. The warblade performs roughly as he should compared to the CR system, the fighter severely under performs. Also, with every book there are not classes that are more powerful than the base classes, Cleric and Druid have been and still are the best with Wizards right up there.
With more fighter-only feats and Martial Generalist, you've addressed the biggest problems the fighter faces: power and flexibility; but you don't have to make any ink amendments to your PHB.
The problem with this is that your "fix" doesn't fix anything. It has already been shown that giving the fighter all the feats in the world won't solve some of his fundamental problems. Also, limiting fighter bonus feats to only fighters hardcore nerfs every other non caster class, and it doesn't even make sense.
Sorry Mr. high level monk, I know you are pretty much focused around Stunning Fist but Freezing the Lifeblood is a fighter only feat, and you can't take it. Sorry Mr. barbarian but you just aren't skilled enough to take improved toughness, you just aren't tough enough unless you dip into fighter."
See what I mean?
Now, we've all moaned and groaned over what the Fighter lost in the transition to 3e. The transition probably nerfed the Fighter more then any other class, even as it helped the Rogue and Cleric to no end.
But have you ever really thought of what the Fighter lost? It starts really adding up.
1) Exclusive 18% Str bonus. Only the fighting classes could get them. While this made everyone go hunting for Gauntlets of Ogre Power and made Girdles of Giant Strength the bomb, it also mean that in campaigns where this stuff wasn't handed out, Fighters had a built in damage advantage over other classes.
2) Current Low End Str stats. You know, in the old system it took a 17 Str to get +1 on your TH/DMG, meaning it required a huge investment into Str to be melee effective. Since you couldn't make GoOP willy nilly, Fighters were way out ahead of other classes who simply couldn't afford to invest that much in a good Str score. While I LIKE being able to get moderate bonuses, the shift away from extreme ability scores actually hurt the Fighter, since it allows other classes to more easily emulate the key Fighter function of hitting often and hard.
3) Fighter exclusive Con benefits. I'm specifically looking at Con scores here. Every non-Fighting class maxed out at +2 HP per die. Which meant your melees simply had more hit points then any other class, period...and the difference was huge if you could boost your Con. Tack that onto a bigger hit die, and bigger per level bonus, and the Melee classes always retained Hit point superiority.
With the current artificial means to boost your HP via Con bonuses to the moon, the huge HP edge the melee classes had is gone as well. It's actually easier for a Caster to boost his Con to high levels, because often its their second most important stat, and they've the means and focus to do so. Six points of Con erases all hit point advantage between a Wizard and a Fighter.
4) Dex limits on Armor AC. This heavily devalues the Fighter, who places a premium on physical ability scores. Other classes favor other stats, either because of skills or key ability scores (Paladins go for Cha, Clerics for Wis, etc). This makes it harder for Fighter types to have the highest AC of the party, also once a key province of the Fighter. The Fighter was typically the only party member who built high Dex into a heavy armor build...the other classes had a hard time doing so (except maybe Paladins).
5) Saves. Fighters went from having the best all around saves (the worst at low levels, the best at higher levels), to simply having a good Fort save. Their ability to withstand the magic of the enemy went right in the hole.
6) Unlimited topside ability scores. This really hurt the Fighter because the easiest ability scores to acquire huge numbers on are the physical ones, via various monster forms and/or size buffs. As has been pointed out many times, Polymorph completely erases a Fighter's advantage of investing heavy into Str, Con and Dex when he was built. In many cases, the forms and buffs are completely beyond what the Fighter can achieve on his own, at least until exceedingly high level.
This also makes the Fighter ability to deal damage consistently over a long period of time less and less important. With high ability scores on monsters comes massive ability to damage and massive ability to take or avoid damage. Emphasis turns from the ability to grind away to the ability to go nova and take out the enemy before he can take out you...it's a race to the finish line. A strongly built fighter in 1E could actually deal out damage fairly comparable to a strongly built fighter today...but the foes have so many more hit points now, the ability to routinely do 100 hit points a round in damage doesn't have the same effect when your foes can take two and three times as much damage as before. Just giving monsters Con bonuses was a blow to the Fighter just as heavy as it was to Fireball flingers...and then the fact that those Con bonuses can get really, really high only makes it worse.
And when that monster can take you out in one or two rounds of melee, taking a chunk of his hit points becomes less important then being able to take them all by some other means.
Temporary bonuses to Str, Con and Dex help every class far more then temporary bonuses to Int, Wis and Cha. As the class most reliant on the first three, they effectively replace much of a Fighter's build power.
7) Easily customizable/attainable gear. While this benefits the Fighter, it actually benefits the casting classes the most. Instead of having to rely on their spells for defense, which by necessity puts more limits on those spells being available for offense, a caster can swiftly customize items to cover those holes and 'save' himself spells. A Fighter with Double Spec was a nasty, nasty character, irrespective of his weapons' uber magic...his gear was nice, but it didn't make or break the character. Nowadays, the gear must be great, or the Fighter is just a shadow of himself. You didn't look at a 1E Fighter to see if he owned a morningstar +3...you first looked to see what he was specced in. It made the difference.
8) Clerics being able to sponcast heals : It should be pretty obvious, but if a cleric actually had to memorize healing spells, he would not be able to afford all the uber buffage that now allows him to sub for a Fighter. I'm not saying this is a good or bad thing...I'm simply pointing it out. Clerics were very frugal on offensive casting in the older game, because those healing spells could make or break the party. Sponcasting healing spells basically opens up the whole Cleric spell list, and removes the 'bandaid-only' shtick that in many ways counter-balanced the powers of a priest.
9) Exclusivity of multiple attacks. Only the true melee classes got multiple attacks, and Weapon Specialization gave you an additional 1/2 rds. Sure, mages could use Tensers...and be a really sucky fighter type. But melee attacks were the province of melee guys. It didn't matter how buffed your cleric was...he still got only 1 at/rd, even if he hit every time.
It's worth pointing out that even in 1E, characters who were F/MU (and lower level because of it) were still viable at higher levels of play, because the additional attacks, hit points and TH ability of their Fighter levels were really, really helpful towards making up for their lesser casting ability.
10) Multiple forms of additional damage. Hey, double weapon spec was +3/+3...and there were very, very few ways to stick additional damage on anything. That +3/+3 was HUGE, because no other class could call up a buff like that. Now, +5 weapons are routine, you can access all types of energy dmg, insight bonuses, huge str buffs, etc etc. The bonuses to damage a Fighter gets from class skills are trivial.
11) Considerably better BAB progression then other classes.
Not only did the melee classes get more attacks, but their ability to hit the enemy was much, much better. Clerics advanced at +2/3 levels. Rogues were at +1/2, and wizards were +1/3. This is now +3/4 and +1/2...a significant upgrade. While necessary in the current environment to some extent, it erodes yet more of the Fighter's usefulness, as he clearly isn't at the top of the heap as firmly as he used to be.
12) unlimited spell learning ability: This is a subtle one, and applies mostly to mages. Getting a 19 Int was the holy grail of wizards, because it meant you could learn an unlimited number of spells. It was also very hard to do (the 1E Elminister had an 18 Int). There is no such limit nowadays...you can learn what you afford to learn.
It applies to Clerics in that a great number of the additional spells in earlier editions were setting or deity specific, so all clerics didn't have access to them. This is starting to come back with some of the Faerunian feats/spell combos, but by and large, clerics can grab spells off a huge list...as can druids.
13) The unlimbering of wildshaping/polypmorph. Ever look at the old Druid? did you know he had to CHOOSE the mammal, bird or reptile form he could change into, and never choose another one? Yes, that's right...he had only THREE animal forms, total, could take on each one once a day, and that was it until he was a hierophant. Wow, did Wildshape come a long ways. The class ability alone is probably as good as a Fighter's BAB and Hit dice, to say nothing of the versatility it lends the druid. And we won't get into Natural Spell.
14) Variable XP by level. This is a hot point of debate, but it's all fairly one to bring up. In the current edition, the classes are theoretically balanced so that each can level up with the same xp and be about the same. In earlier editions, the thought was that the most powerful classes had to pay more xp to level up, and the least powerful classes 'evened out' their power by being higher level then their compatriots. When that Wizard hit the heady heights of level 18 and called himself an Archmage, his Fighter companion just hit 23, and their Thief hit 24, as did the cleric. This was also played around with by having different things the classes could get xp for (wizards got insane amounts of xp by recovering spells and spellbooks, for instance). The power of a wizards spells even in earlier editions was enough that such level discrepancy was not only not out of place, it actually was balanced to a great extent.
(Please, no arguments about this. It's just a different system where xp=power. In the current game, they tried to do the same thing, but squished f/23 into f/18...it amounts to the same thing in principle, but in balance it's actually harder to do).
15) The ability to target weak saves. While it introduces a nice tactical side to spellcasters, this utterly hosed Fighters...because they used to have NO weak saves, and now they clearly do. In addition, one of their weak saves is basically 'save or die', the Will save, which they are vulnerable to even at very low levels. Save or die Fort saves don't pop up til higher levels.
So, let us all moan and groan in unison as we comprehend how far the mighty Fighter has fallen. I don't remember my earlier edition Fighters being overshadowed by casters ever...casters had their place in AoE's and bringing the occasional big spell into play. I'm reminded of a Devastated Empradweomered Nystul's Radiant Arch (cold) taking out a Wyrm Red Dragon in one casting back then, but the Fighters were the ones who had to bring it and take it.
Mages were interesting, but Fighters were fun. I don't have as much fun with Fighters anymore, because the Casters can do what they can do. That used to not be the case. :P
===Aelryinth
One thing to note is that the Warblade is less consistent than a Fghter. Sure, he has some truly awesome abilities, but the coolest (and most spell-like) ones are strikes, which almost universally require standard actions. A properly equipped and feated fighter (perhaps one taking a weapon style from CW) would wipe the floor with a Warblade any day since he'd be making 8 attacks and lets say, 3 trip attempts (High sword, low Axe-- which BTW grant extra attacks if successful) for the warblade's one really cool 4X damage (with concentration check DC of enemy's AC) strike.
While that example does not hold true at all levels and builds (Girallon Flesh Rend with Time Stands Still Two weapon builds are, notably, insane) it is true in many cases.
I love both classes. (The fighter just needs an average save and 4 skill points -- Think Arcana Unearthed's Warmain). They're both great concepts to roleplay, and a talented player will enjoy playing either class.
I'll have to point out this is a common fallacy of Fighter builds. The whole Trip/Disarm shtick doesn't work in normal play unless you never fight monsters. The bonuses monsters get from size, str, or simply using naturally attacks completely obviate this fighting style.
Also, there isn’t anything preventing a Warblade from taking that combo feat and using it in tandem with his maneuvers. Remember, it all goes off the same time. The Warblade will actually be far, far more resistant then the Fighter to being tripped or disarmed in turn because of his class benefits.
At high level play, the ability to nova is more important then the ability to grind. While the Fighter can do well against other medium size martial opponents with the right build, he just fails against monstrous opponents and spellcasters...something that the Warblade does not.
===Aelryinth
I'd also note the inclusion of Concentration checks for casting under duress (rather than an instant fizzle), and the removal of the old "casting time=spell level" thing. Spellcasting used to be risky, and casters used to be fragile, but neither of these things really hold true any more.
@FireLance: This thread uses the same sort of approach you're suggesting. Because of the poor scale-ability of many feats, it requires a full rewrite of all the existing feats, as well as a bunch of new ones... which is OK, but a bit drastic for my liking.
Anyway, here's an idea for feat progression that just came to me, very much a WIP:
Advanced training: Your experience allows you to further hone your prowess with the techniques you have mastered in the past. Once every X levels, you may choose to gain any one (possibly two or three at later levels) bonus Fighter feat for which you currently possess all of the usual prerequisites. This cannot be a feat that does not have any other Fighter feats listed in its prerequisites.
What do you think?
I like the idea of scaling feats, but the problem is getting them all to scale evenly, especially when some feat streams are longer than others. It's also hard to justify a higher level Fighter spontaneously gaining equal access to multiple techniques that another Fighter may have gained gradually over the entire course of his career, and having both of them equally good at them.
"Advanced training" or something like it would mean a Fighter could advance Cleave to Great Cleave, or Weapon Focus to Weapon Spec, etc., but this would represent his dedication to a discipline that he has already trained in, rather than just because he's "better" at higher levels.
What do you think of the idea of fighter feats scaling with the number of fighter feats you possess? This has been done for the draconic feats in Complete Arcane, Races of the Dragon and Dragon Magic, for example, where the benefit you get from a feat depends on the number of related feats you have.
For example, what if Weapon Focus granted a +1 bonus to hit plus an additional +1 for every six fighter feats? A fighter who devoted all of his feat slots to fighter feats could get a +4 bonus with his attack rolls once he has 18 fighter feats (18th level for a human, 20th level for a non-human). There would also no longer be a need for Greater Weapon Focus.
Similarly, what if Weapon Specialization granted a +2 bonus to damage, +1 for every three fighter feats?
Improved Initiative could grant a +4 bonus, +1 for every four fighter feats. Improved Bull Rush, Improved Sunder, Improved Disarm, Improved Trip and Improved Grapple could provide a similar bonus to their checks.
Toughness could grant a 3 extra hit points, +1 for every fighter feat.
Dodge could grant a +1 bonus to AC, +1 for every six fighter feats.
Mobility could increase AC against AOOs by +4, +1 for every four fighter feats.
Spring Attack could incorporate its advanced versions from PHB2 by granting an additional target to ignore AOOs from and an additional iterative attack for every nine fighter feats.
Some fighter feats may be more difficult to fit into this framework, but how does this sound conceptually?
The concept is proven to work, since it effectively is level dependent and scales. For instance, the Combat Focus feats upgrade with three or more of them. I've seen iterations where you straight scale by level; scale by number of iterative attacks; scale by number of XXX feats. Any of them could be usable.
The challenge then is to rewrite the Core Fighter feats to scale and make them worth being a class ability. And everyone will have their own idea of a good scale and what is not. So be prepared to tinker with any scale someone comes up with to satisfy your urges.
I personally like scaling with number of weapon feats on the Spec tree...a Fighter's skill and confidence goes up with his proven ability to fight better. Among other things, I'd tack this number on to his Initiator level for picking feats, and sub for any School's # of maneuvers, too!
But that's just me. I really, strongly like the idea of a Fighter's class abilities overshadowing his gear. It would make the Fighter more complex, but hey, that is probably what is needed.
===Aelryinth
Casters need a nerf, not melee-ers a boost.
1) Mithral armor still requires the proficiency feat for whatever kind of armor it originally was. (Ex. Mithral full plate still requires heavy armor proficiency.)
2) Characters who do not possess the appropriate armor proficiency while wearing armor receive an additional -2 armor check penalty, have a 10% increased arcane spell failure chance, and have the max dex of the armor reduced by 2 (this can bring the max dex of some armors to less than 0).
3) The martial weapon proficiency feat grants you proficiency in 5 martial weapons. Classes that gain proficiency in all martial weapons instead gain this feat twice. If you have this feat three times you are instead proficient in all martial weapons. Fighters gain this feat three times at first level.
3) At first level you may choose to trade in proficiencies for various abilities. Giving up tower shield or shield proficiency gives you one bonus point each. Giving up light, medium, and heavy armor proficiency give you one bonus point each. Giving up martial weapon proficiency once gives you one bonus point. You may give up any number of proficiencies but may only give them up at your first character level.
For one bonus point you may choose any of the following abilities (any feats are bonus feats):
* Improved Initiative
* Lightning Reflexes
* Toughness
* Weapon Finesse (you do not need to meet the normal prerequisites to take this feat)
* Improved Unarmed strike
* Skill Focus
* Blind Fight
* Point Blank Shot
* Rapid Reload
* Quick Draw
* Skill points and skill list as either druid, swashbuckler, monk, or warblade
For two bonus points you may choose from these abilities:
* Power Attack
* Dodge
* Combat Reflexes
* Weapon Focus
* Combat Expertise
* Exotic Weapon Proficiency
* Two Weapon Fighting
* Mounted Combat
* Uncanny Defense: You may add your Int mod as a dodge bonus to armor class as long as you wear light or no armor and are unencumbered.
For three bonus points you may choose from one of these abilities:
* Monk like AC bonus: you add your wisdom bonus to AC just like a monk. This bonus scales just like a monks as well, based on your level in whatever class you gained this ability in. All the same restrictions apply to you that apply to a monk
* Skill points and list like a ranger, bard, ninja, or swordsage.
* Fast Movement: as a barbarian
* Increased Hit Die: increases the hit die of this class one step
Again, what I am noticing is that while fighters could use a bit of a boost to be "brought up" to the baseline of power/balance it seems that more of the fault lies with heavily abusable spells that some casters have. This just redoubles my belief that I need to nerf some spells in my homebrew.
Casters need a nerf, not melee-ers a boost.
I would argue that both are needed.
The problem with Melee (non ToB) right now is that there are only a select few viable builds:
2-handed Power attack Op
Spiked chain Battlefield control
2 Weapon Sneak attack (only if you're a rogue)
Everything else is underpowered and weak. Sword/shield is obsolete. Mounted Combat is bunk due to lack of versatility. AC whoring is pointless when spells autohit you or target your touch/flatfooted AC. What this limits you to is choice of weaponry and focus. It also causes any melee class that isn't capable of focusing properly on one of the above 3 options, to fall behind. Additionally, the ability to keep up with damage and utility as a specialized variant of any of those means that you fall behind in every other area.
Spellcasters on the otherhand have everything handed to them on a silver platter. Do you have spells? Then you have battlefield control, you have damage, you have utility.
Every supplement that gets released contains more spells than feats and thus the gulf between melee combat and spellcasting grows. Of course there are always the Gish builds that are better at damage than power attack ops.
The proposed fix being in the ToB is a good one. It effectively changes melee classes into casters. Assuming Wizards decides to release supplemental Maneuvers much like how they release new Spells with every supplement, then Melee classes can catch up.
What is needed at this point to balance Warblade and Fighter is to just scrap Fighter as it is, and remodel it in the fashion of the ToB classes. Give Fighter Initiator levels, and give it access to EVERY school out there. Allow it a larger list of maneuvers learned, and fewer maneuvers readied. That's what a fighter should be after all, raw potential. Fighter should be to Warblade, as Wizard is to Sorcerer.
Also, add an Archery school. The school selection and combinations should give as much variety as there was for traditional fighter builds.
Again, what I am noticing is that while fighters could use a bit of a boost to be "brought up" to the baseline of power/balance it seems that more of the fault lies with heavily abusable spells that some casters have. This just redoubles my belief that I need to nerf some spells in my homebrew.
Casters need a nerf, not melee-ers a boost.
Certain spells need to not exist in their present form, but spellcasting has its own problems as well. Melee-ers definitely need a boost, the feats of this game, and the class features of the fighters are not good enough.
On a different note: Good analysis of the Warblade vs. the Fighter, very interesting stuff, and well put. The various fixes for the Fighter that you proposed, I didn’t really read, ‘cos I feel it´s a lost cause already, so I can’t comment on it.
I'll have to point out this is a common fallacy of Fighter builds. The whole Trip/Disarm shtick doesn't work in normal play unless you never fight monsters. The bonuses monsters get from size, str, or simply using naturally attacks completely obviate this fighting style.
Also, there isn’t anything preventing a Warblade from taking that combo feat and using it in tandem with his maneuvers. Remember, it all goes off the same time. The Warblade will actually be far, far more resistant then the Fighter to being tripped or disarmed in turn because of his class benefits.
At high level play, the ability to nova is more important then the ability to grind. While the Fighter can do well against other medium size martial opponents with the right build, he just fails against monstrous opponents and spellcasters...something that the Warblade does not.
===Aelryinth
I will have to disagree. The fighter is still getting 8 attacks off, most of which will hit if he's maxed his strength and weapons. The trip attempts are just extras, and very very likely that one would work since all he needs is to roll considerably higher than his given foe. Let’s say Mr. fighter is fighting a Balor (in a space where his 30-40 ft wingspan prevents flight). Balor has a total mod against trip of +16 (+12 strength +4 size). Fighter has a total mod of +16 (+12 for strength [18+5+6+5=34 strength=+12 mod] and +4 for improved trip). He has an even chance of tripping the Balor on any of his three attempts and thereby netting an additional attack. High Sword- Low Axe makes the trip attempts free, and his damage from the 8 attacks will already make him the equal or better of the warblade.
Against casters, a combo such as this would be even more brutal (since the caster would not be able to get a spell off the next round [fighter gets Attack of Opportunity used for another trip if caster tries to get up, gets another attack of opportunity when caster tries to cast spell which will have no difficulty breaking concentration]. All this fighter needs is his good buddy the cleric to bust off a quickened spell resistance on him and he'd make mincemeat of just about any caster-type foe.
But, I will agree that such a tactics works less well on a foe that isn't vaguely humanoid and human sized (like our Balor). Let’s run this again with a larger foe within the CR range. Let’s see, a Solar... it'd work with about the same odds as the Balor. Tarrasque... impossible. Titan? About a 1/3 chance each attempt [if fighter chugs potion of enlarge person], and he does get 3 attempts. I'm finding nothing else within his appropriate CR, so I'll stop there. Other than the Tarrasque and Dragons, he's got a pretty decent chance of his bonus tactic paying off.
As for the warblade pursuing this same combo-- He could, assuming he was willing to spend all 8 Feats he ever received as a 20th level human on it. Let’s face it, weapon styles are impractical for anyone besides a fighter.
Again, what I am noticing is that while fighters could use a bit of a boost to be "brought up" to the baseline of power/balance it seems that more of the fault lies with heavily abusable spells that some casters have. This just redoubles my belief that I need to nerf some spells in my homebrew.
Casters need a nerf, not melee-ers a boost.
It's true that the caster vs. combatant divide is the biggest source of imbalance. I'm all for nerfing casters. Maybe by giving Initiative penalties on casting based on the spell's level and increasing the difficulty of Concentration checks for high level spells... definitely addressing and nerfing some of the more abusable spells.
But the fact remains that the Fighter, specifically, is widely recognised as weak even compared with other melee classes - especially the ones in the Tome of Battle - in all but the first few levels. We're talking about giving the Fighter abilities that scale, in the same way that a Barbarian or Warblade's do.
@aelryinth: A very insightful thread. You've raised some very good points, particularly about the changes across the editions, including some that hadn't even occurred to me.
I'd also note the inclusion of Concentration checks for casting under duress (rather than an instant fizzle), and the removal of the old "casting time=spell level" thing. Spellcasting used to be risky, and casters used to be fragile, but neither of these things really hold true any more.
@FireLance: This thread uses the same sort of approach you're suggesting. Because of the poor scale-ability of many feats, it requires a full rewrite of all the existing feats, as well as a bunch of new ones... which is OK, but a bit drastic for my liking.
Anyway, here's an idea for feat progression that just came to me, very much a WIP:
What do you think?
I like the idea of scaling feats, but the problem is getting them all to scale evenly, especially when some feat streams are longer than others. It's also hard to justify a higher level Fighter spontaneously gaining equal access to multiple techniques that another Fighter may have gained gradually over the entire course of his career, and having both of them equally good at them.
"Advanced training" or something like it would mean a Fighter could advance Cleave to Great Cleave, or Weapon Focus to Weapon Spec, etc., but this would represent his dedication to a discipline that he has already trained in, rather than just because he's "better" at higher levels.
I'm not slamming you, but what you have here is a logical fallacy, and how people unconsciously favor spellcasters over Melee builds.
You say that because a Fighter picks up Cleave, and it's got a F/5 = Great Cleave and f/10 = Supreme Cleave, that if he picks it up at level 12 he shouldn't be as good with it as a Fighter who grabbed Cleave at level 2.
Now, substitute the words "fireball" or "magic missile" in there for "cleave", and "Mage" for "Fighter".
My mage never cast a magic missile until level 12, yet he's every bit as good as the mage who picked it up at level one. Ditto the fireball...at level 13, he took it for the first time, and is every bit as good as the mage who torched his first wattle and daub hut at level 5.
A spell is equal to a feat (Extra Spell, right?), and the mage is allowed to take more powerful spells as he levels higher, right? So, why can't the Fighter?
To wit, the Fighter doesn't get the benefits of a higher 'caster level' or 'initiator level'. Feats that scaled with Fighter levels would address the problem.
Why should a Fighter gain Supreme Cleave when he takes the feat? Because he's a Fighter/12. He's better then any fighting man who has ever existed on our humdrum little world. He can do things that we know aren't really possible...and do them routinely. He's just that damn good to understand all the little intricacies of Cleaving...just like the Mage is capable of understanding that he gets 5 magic missiles and 10d6 out of the Fireballs when he learns them.
It's part of his Fighter levels. He's just that awesome.
===Aelryinth
Again, what I am noticing is that while fighters could use a bit of a boost to be "brought up" to the baseline of power/balance it seems that more of the fault lies with heavily abusable spells that some casters have. This just redoubles my belief that I need to nerf some spells in my homebrew.
Casters need a nerf, not melee-ers a boost.
Yeah, some spells are a bit much, but the problem here is that melee classes consistently under-perform. The barbarian, Ranger, and Paladin at least have uses outside of combat and will generally perform more within the set CR rating, the fighter does not.
More importantly, the fighter itself is a class that does not live up to its design concept simply because the mechanics of the system are too deeply at odds with the fighter’s general concept.
1] Fighters are considered martial adepts, and thus their initiator level equals their class level.
2] +1 Maneuver Known/Readied every odd level (1, 3, 5, 7, etc.) (i.e., no dead levels)
3] +1 Stance every 4th level (1, 4, 8, 12, etc.)
4] Access to all nine disciplines, since the Fighter is the generalist.
5] Recover maneuvers as a swift action, like the Warblade.
Feel free to shoot holes through this, since I have no books with me and I am sure there are many flaws in the idea. I'm getting back to work before my boss notices. ;)
Just off the top of my head here, but how's this?
1] Fighters are considered martial adepts, and thus their initiator level equals their class level.
2] +1 Maneuver Known/Readied every odd level (1, 3, 5, 7, etc.) (i.e., no dead levels)
3] +1 Stance every 4th level (1, 4, 8, 12, etc.)
4] Access to all nine disciplines, since the Fighter is the generalist.
5] Recover maneuvers as a swift action, like the Warblade.
Feel free to shoot holes through this, since I have no books with me and I am sure there are many flaws in the idea. I'm getting back to work before my boss notices. ;)
First off, this guy would be in many ways better than the warblade from his maneuvers readied alone. He'd be powerful, but he'd be overpowering the Tome of Battle classes and we don't want more power inflation, we want to make the fighter competitive, not dominating. If you want to give the fighter full initiator level, that’s great. If you want to give him maneuvers and stances, that’s cool too, but at least make him balanced.
If you want him to keep his insane number of feats, reduce the number of maneuvers so that he gets his first known and readied at 3rd level, second at 7th level, next at 11th, 15th, and 19th. Then, give him stances at 5th, 9th, 13th, and 17th. This eliminates his dead levels, gives him the ability to master a single school or use both his stances and maneuvers granted to gain mastery level abilities in two schools. He could, of course, use his feats to gain significant access to a 3rd school or to speed his mastery of his other schools.
Give him access to every school except perhaps shadow hand-- I don't want him stepping on the Rogue's toes (note the only class that currently gives shadow hand, setting sun, and desert wind access is a 3/4 attack progression class). Add on a better skill list and 4+ int mod skills and an average will save and you'll have a class to be reckoned with, that also has cool features, great options, and a LOT of versatility.
What I found was quite possibly the most reasoned criticism I've seen of the Fighter, while refuting the Warblade/Bo9S "overpowered" statement I keep seeing. Very well done, the idea that the Fighter's problems stem not so much from a failure in power (though that's true), but a failure in implementation of concept.
Again, the analysis was well thought out and well stated, good job.
(sblocked for brevity)ShowI'm not slamming you, but what you have here is a logical fallacy, and how people unconsciously favor spellcasters over Melee builds.
You say that because a Fighter picks up Cleave, and it's got a F/5 = Great Cleave and f/10 = Supreme Cleave, that if he picks it up at level 12 he shouldn't be as good with it as a Fighter who grabbed Cleave at level 2.
Now, substitute the words "fireball" or "magic missile" in there for "cleave", and "Mage" for "Fighter".
My mage never cast a magic missile until level 12, yet he's every bit as good as the mage who picked it up at level one. Ditto the fireball...at level 13, he took it for the first time, and is every bit as good as the mage who torched his first wattle and daub hut at level 5.
A spell is equal to a feat (Extra Spell, right?), and the mage is allowed to take more powerful spells as he levels higher, right? So, why can't the Fighter?
To wit, the Fighter doesn't get the benefits of a higher 'caster level' or 'initiator level'. Feats that scaled with Fighter levels would address the problem.
Why should a Fighter gain Supreme Cleave when he takes the feat? Because he's a Fighter/12. He's better then any fighting man who has ever existed on our humdrum little world. He can do things that we know aren't really possible...and do them routinely. He's just that damn good to understand all the little intricacies of Cleaving...just like the Mage is capable of understanding that he gets 5 magic missiles and 10d6 out of the Fireballs when he learns them.
It's part of his Fighter levels. He's just that awesome.
===Aelryinth
As a counterbalance, an "easy" fix to some of the problem, you could change the text of fighter bonus feats to the following:
At 1st level, a fighter gets a bonus combat-oriented feat in addition to the feat that any 1st-level character gets and the bonus feat granted to a human character. The fighter gains an additional bonus feat at 2nd level and every two fighter levels thereafter (4th, 6th, 8th, 10th, 12th, 14th, 16th, 18th, and 20th). These bonus feats must be drawn from the feats noted as fighter bonus feats. A fighter must meet only the following requirements for the listed feats: base attack bonus and required feats.
These bonus feats are in addition to the feat that a character of any class gets from advancing levels. A fighter is not limited to the list of fighter bonus feats when choosing these feats.
It's quick and dirty, but does allow the fighter to not worry about stat requirements - problematic for a 1 level dip, that's a given.
You could also make Weapon Focus scale only for the fighter (+1 for every 5 levels). Personally, I have Weapon Specialization increase the base damage die by one step. (i.e., scimitar does 1d8, great sword/axe deals 2d8). Same rough bonus as Weapon Specialization, but much, much more useful.
In addition to increasing skills to 4/level, why not add a level 5, 7, 9 ability called Adaptable Learning? It adds 2 skills to the fighters skill list of his choosing. Six extra skills justifies the skill point increase, eh?
Just off the top of my head here, but how's this?
1] Fighters are considered martial adepts, and thus their initiator level equals their class level.
2] +1 Maneuver Known/Readied every odd level (1, 3, 5, 7, etc.) (i.e., no dead levels)
3] +1 Stance every 4th level (1, 4, 8, 12, etc.)
4] Access to all nine disciplines, since the Fighter is the generalist.
5] Recover maneuvers as a swift action, like the Warblade.
Feel free to shoot holes through this, since I have no books with me and I am sure there are many flaws in the idea. I'm getting back to work before my boss notices. ;)
The all 9 disciplines part is just a tad dangerous, IMO. I like the maneuver system though and am thinking that maybe we could adapt it into something like 'advanced tactical options' that a fighter could use.
I save the TOB stuff for my mystical warriors of certain fighting orders, not my career soldiers, hired muscle and loyal guard captains. Sure, you could flavor work it in and try to make it less blade magicky but the underlying essence of it would still be there.
Should feats scale? That is a good question. I think maybe a few tactical feats should but not just any old feat. I also feel that they should scale by fighter level not just by character level. Do I mind spending several feats to get to WS? Nope. But I find that the tactical feats and the weapon style feats could use a bit more for the investment. While fighters should have access to specialized scaling feats I don't think feats should scale as a whole. In my opinion feats are about synergy, not just take one and run with a boost just for going up a level.
I will have to disagree. The fighter is still getting 8 attacks off, most of which will hit if he's maxed his strength and weapons. The trip attempts are just extras, and very very likely that one would work since all he needs is to roll considerably higher than his given foe. Let’s say Mr. fighter is fighting a Balor (in a space where his 30-40 ft wingspan prevents flight). Balor has a total mod against trip of +16 (+12 strength +4 size). Fighter has a total mod of +16 (+12 for strength [18+5+6+5=34 strength=+12 mod] and +4 for improved trip). He has an even chance of tripping the Balor on any of his three attempts and thereby netting an additional attack. High Sword- Low Axe makes the trip attempts free, and his damage from the 8 attacks will already make him the equal or better of the warblade.
Against casters, a combo such as this would be even more brutal (since the caster would not be able to get a spell off the next round [fighter gets Attack of Opportunity used for another trip if caster tries to get up, gets another attack of opportunity when caster tries to cast spell which will have no difficulty breaking concentration]. All this fighter needs is his good buddy the cleric to bust off a quickened spell resistance on him and he'd make mincemeat of just about any caster-type foe.
But, I will agree that such a tactics works less well on a foe that isn't vaguely humanoid and human sized (like our Balor). Let’s run this again with a larger foe within the CR range. Let’s see, a Solar... it'd work with about the same odds as the Balor. Tarrasque... impossible. Titan? About a 1/3 chance each attempt [if fighter chugs potion of enlarge person], and he does get 3 attempts. I'm finding nothing else within his appropriate CR, so I'll stop there. Other than the Tarrasque and Dragons, he's got a pretty decent chance of his bonus tactic paying off.
As for the warblade pursuing this same combo-- He could, assuming he was willing to spend all 8 Feats he ever received as a 20th level human on it. Let’s face it, weapon styles are impractical for anyone besides a fighter.
Again, you are doing the Trip Fallacy.
You are somehow assuming all combat takes place at level 20. You are picking a monster that is a CR 20, but are playing him stupidly. It is also noteworthy that the Balor works best as a ranged combatant, not a melee combatant. You can't confine a balor unless you can shut down his ability to teleport. You are vastly overstating his ability to hit with all his attacks. Generally, iteratives 3 and 4 are lucky to hit at all in any combat against an intelligent foe.
This Fighter simply won't be great at tripping until mid levels, and will be blowing huge amounts of feats on his TWF tree just to try and remain competitive. You are hand waving away the balor's reach, whip and fire aura, his ability to teleport, to Unholy Word, and to fly.
An intelligently run balor is not going to fight the fighter's fight. So you are a TWFricasse machine...so what? Look at a balor's stats, and tell me how much of an idiot he is. If he wants to get churned into meat, he'll stand in front of you. More likely he'll just disarm your axe from range and leave you without half your offense while you are stunned from the Unholy Word.
Do not post such examples without analyzing both sides of the situation please. That's extremist defending of a position. Look at the whole picture. The best of spiked chain builds regularly fail to perform at high levels because they are instantly recognizable or can't pull off a trip, and a blender machine TWF build has to invest a tremendous amount of feats for damage that is ultimately par in the best situations, and subpar in almost all others.
Please acknowledge the research that has gone on before, and the analysis that exists therefrom, instead of handwaving in a perfect situation for a perfect fighter build. It does not do credit to the arguments presented.
===Aelryinth
Actually, it shouldn't be such a big deal; just know how to handle them. I think the fighter is the least "fully-used" class, anyway, only being used, along with other fighter/barbarian types, as mere "meat-shields." I’m not saying that the occasional meat-shield never saved the life of some over-zealous or "cowering-in-the-corner magic-user every now and then. Most times, fighters are cross-classed or gestalted simply for the strength, melee ability, HP and feat access. What say you?
Fighters are an extremely solid 1-5th level class, because at low levels, good weapons, hit points and armor are really all you need to shine if you can hit the foe.
Fighters then promptly leave the class for others. Why? Because their feats don't scale. Now their starting kit and chassis simply is not enough to justify what they are doing and where they are going, and the dead levels really, really start to hurt their overall power.
PrCs should be stricken from the game and replaced with feat trees. It's that simple. There is no purpose for them other then to dilute the importance of the Core Classes. The same 'feel' and 'backhistory' can be applied to learning feats as to taking levels in this amalgamation of a class which grants triple the class abilities of a Fighter, and gives up nothing to it.
Going into other core classes is fine, if you think it fits a build. But there should be great rewards for sticking with a Core Class all the way. Supreme Rage. Ninth level spells. Rogue special abilities.
Fighter...gee, he gets the same feat list he had at level 1.
========================
Aerunation: The class abilities they presented are a good start, and should be plowed into the odd levels. Perhaps they should even stack. Replacing the feats was a joke. They effectively restricted the options of the Fighter even more then before.
===Aelryinth
==========
Ryanroyce:
Actually, I don't mind Fighters not being martial adepts, however, I do believe they should be able to gain bonus Initiator levels as they wish. For that matter, so should Barbarians.
For instance, give Fighters a bonus initiator level for every step along the Weapon Spec tree they are. This can ultimately give them any maneuver.
If they take Martial Study, Weapon tree feats count as Pre-Reqs, and they can access the whole School for maneuvers. Thus, Fighters won't have many maneuvers...but they can pick the ones they want.
Martial stances is a subject that ties into class abilities. Using this as an extension of Combat Focus falls more into my line of thinking, but the stances as Buffs you can choose among is a very nice idea.
I don't see access to 9 Disciplines as key. The swordsage is really more a generalist then the Fighter, as reflected by his BAB. The Fighter being allowed to pick his schools is more to my liking, using his feats.
Maneuver recovery is not a key point for me for a Fighter build. If the Fighter can pick what he wants to execute, being able to get it off only 1/fight is fine...his feats should be able to grab him Adaptive style, or something.
As an aside, I'd probably give Barbarians a boost to their Initiator Level = Rages/day. So they could end up with an IL of 15, or more if they took Extra Rage. I'd also up it a level with every Tiger Claw maneuver they took...but that's just me, and Your Mileage May Vary.
==Aelryinth
-Invested into Power Attack, Combat Expertise instead of actual BAB points.
-Used as bonuses to Trip, Disarm, Bull Rush or Intimidate rolls.
-Used as an insight bonus to any one saving Throw.
-Used as a haste bonus to a character's Speed.
The Reserve could be refreshed through some mechanism similar to ToB maneuvers, to be a lasting factor in combat, and could even be increased through feats. I'm not sure this by itself helps the fighter catch up with other classes, but I think it can scale nicely (As you could theoretically always be power-attacking at at least +5 for later levels, if you feel safe enough to do so), needs some planning (when to hold the bonus back for saves? When to use it for damage or AC? When to sprint across the battlefield to hit the enemy commander?) Thoughts?
Advanced Feat: On every x levels, a fighter may swap a feat for an advanced feat in that feat chain, i.e. lose Weapon Focus for Greater Focus. This is similar to Sorcerers and spell swap, doesn't drastically alter the rules, and one just needs a notation for the Advanced feat.
Then add skill points or initiator levels to fill in the remaining gap.
I've long toyed with the idea of adding a flexible class feature to the Fighter, something I usually call "Strategic Reserve". Basically, the fighter gets 1 point to his Reserve at level 2, another at level 4, and then again at level 8, 12, 16 and 20. These points can be used, over the course of each encounter, for the following purposes:
-Invested into Power Attack, Combat Expertise instead of actual BAB points.
-Used as bonuses to Trip, Disarm, Bull Rush or Intimidate rolls.
-Used as an insight bonus to any one saving Throw.
-Used as a haste bonus to a character's Speed.
The Reserve could be refreshed through some mechanism similar to ToB maneuvers, to be a lasting factor in combat, and could even be increased through feats. I'm not sure this by itself helps the fighter catch up with other classes, but I think it can scale nicely (As you could theoretically always be power-attacking at at least +5 for later levels, if you feel safe enough to do so), needs some planning (when to hold the bonus back for saves? When to use it for damage or AC? When to sprint across the battlefield to hit the enemy commander?) Thoughts?
That's actually a very workable idea. Action points flow much along the same lines. The key problem with 'points' is 'how many can I spend?' and 'Do I hoard them for defense?' and 'How do they regenerate/accumulate?' Action points provide substantial benefits, but you only get so many a level, and are pretty limited on what you do. They do scale in power by level (the dice rolled get bigger.)
The new 'inspiration points' of the Factotum do this, and you get so many per encounter. As you level up, the stuff you pull off gets more varied and stronger without using up feats. Class ability.
The Tactical Option you want is going to be less important if they are capable of being used defensively. A Smart player will build his character good offensively and hoard the points for defense, where the Fighter is poor (i.e. to survive a deathblow, or to make a failed save).
If you are capable of using multiple points a roll, you will end up with Nova situations, where the Fighter charges the BBG, blows his wad of points, and takes him out in one combo. It then becomes all or nothing.
I believe one of the Fighter builds handing around had a floating pool of points or focus or something the Fighter could change from round to round. The key is balancing what the Fighter can do with it to avoid the Hoarding and Nova aspects of it. I would suggest playing with Action Points. Regardless of class, they'll give you an excellent idea of what your characters would do with a 'pool' of bonuses, and you can tweak it from there.
===Aelryinth
aelryinth Please let me have your children. Please. Your analysis is so spot on it hurts. It simply hurts. Especially since I brought up the feat problem before 3.5e. Where was your awesomeness then? I could have used you against Andy Collins to actually fix the fighter.
As a counterbalance, an "easy" fix to some of the problem, you could change the text of fighter bonus feats to the following:
At 1st level, a fighter gets a bonus combat-oriented feat in addition to the feat that any 1st-level character gets and the bonus feat granted to a human character. The fighter gains an additional bonus feat at 2nd level and every two fighter levels thereafter (4th, 6th, 8th, 10th, 12th, 14th, 16th, 18th, and 20th). These bonus feats must be drawn from the feats noted as fighter bonus feats. A fighter must meet only the following requirements for the listed feats: base attack bonus and required feats.
These bonus feats are in addition to the feat that a character of any class gets from advancing levels. A fighter is not limited to the list of fighter bonus feats when choosing these feats.
It's quick and dirty, but does allow the fighter to not worry about stat requirements - problematic for a 1 level dip, that's a given.
You could also make Weapon Focus scale only for the fighter (+1 for every 5 levels). Personally, I have Weapon Specialization increase the base damage die by one step. (i.e., scimitar does 1d8, great sword/axe deals 2d8). Same rough bonus as Weapon Specialization, but much, much more useful.
In addition to increasing skills to 4/level, why not add a level 5, 7, 9 ability called Adaptable Learning? It adds 2 skills to the fighters skill list of his choosing. Six extra skills justifies the skill point increase, eh?
Removing stat reqs or reducing them is one thing the Fighter should have as The Master of Feats. Either use Str only, reduce the required stat by x/Fighter level, or eliminating them all outright are proposals.
Your Weapon Focus fix there is simple and workable...and that last +1 TH is just one more thing to shoot for at F/20. Conceivably, it would eliminate GWF, Epic Weapon Focus, and it scales nicely. Saves precious feats and gives a good advantage. Just make sure you justify the math; do full fighter levels round up or round down? If rounded up, you just capstoned at F/16 instead of F/20, unless you are heading into Epic, of course.
Your Spec fix there benefits big weapons far more then little ones, since single die weapons increase on average 1 pt, while big weapons increase 2. I'd probably leave the +2 bonus just for equality sake, but it's not imbalanced. It's essentially a built in Oversized Weapon. One Feat = another, as it were.
Adaptable learning smacks to me too much of extra skills...that's more the rogue thing. Remember, the Fighter is first and foremost about Combat, not skills. His skills should be directed at combat applications, and his class abilities directed there too...not at more skills.
However, adding skills to his list as part of other feats is a great idea. This comes down to the Master of Feats and Mastery of Feats shtick, and the fact you really do have to rewrite what feats can do.
For instance, if the Fighter takes an Affinity Feat (Any +2/+2 skill feat is an Affinity feat for me, i.e. Alertness = Spot/Listen Affinity) for one of his precious Fighter Bonus Feats (they aren't on the last, but I digress), why not add the two skills that are buffed to his skill list? Obviously, he's doing it for some combat application. Even if you don't rewrite the skill list, feats like Alertness and Acrobatic will suddenly get a LOT of attention from Fighters.... Tumble, Listen, Spot and Balance all added to the Skill List, with a +2 bonus to each! And then, if the bonus SCALED...mmmm....
Is it overpowered? Certainly not. Martial Study grants you a FULL MANUVER + CLASS SKILL. The maneuver is the key thing, but you have to have the class skill to perform many of them.
Well, why can't the Fighter get the same bloody benefit out of an Affinity feat? Feats should be equal, FIGHTER BONUS feats should be equal to class abilities AND they should scale like class abilities.
=========================
For all you deep thinkers considering Fighter fixes, here's a thought:
How about a Feat being more powerful if it is chosen as a Fighter Bonus Feat? That way, you actually don't have to add a zillion feats to a Fighter build because those extra feats will be built into the Feats that he takes.
If you want, like me, to cry about 'dead levels', then the solution is simple--the scaling effects of Fighter Bonus feats kick in at uneven levels, just as the new spells for spellcasters and new maneuvers for Martial Adepts do. This would, of course, require you to rewrite a lot of feats, but that needs to be done anyways to balance the class, so I think it would be pretty workable.
One of the very key things about Fighters that make people leave them is those dead levels. If every dead level now makes them better and better, you again start turning heads and making them consider sticking with the class.
Am I the only one out there that finds maneuvers kinda hokey? The concept is neat, I find them to be ki-like powers for weapon users. Do I want my shining knight of the realm using them though? Heck no. I want him to be a solid warrior of traditional means.
I save the TOB stuff for my mystical warriors of certain fighting orders, not my career soldiers, hired muscle and loyal guard captains. Sure, you could flavor work it in and try to make it less blade magicky but the underlying essence of it would still be there.
Should feats scale? That is a good question. I think maybe a few tactical feats should but not just any old feat. I also feel that they should scale by fighter level not just by character level. Do I mind spending several feats to get to WS? Nope. But I find that the tactical feats and the weapon style feats could use a bit more for the investment. While fighters should have access to specialized scaling feats I don't think feats should scale as a whole. In my opinion feats are about synergy, not just take one and run with a boost just for going up a level.
I agree. Not any old feat should scale. BUT Feats should be worth the level they are taken at. Thus, any feat that is only takeable at level 12 should be worth a 12th level character's ability.
AND, any Feat taken as a Fighter Bonus Feat should DEFINITELY scale. It's a Fighter's class ability, and it should scale like any other class ability.
==Aelryinth
One other area that we've failed to dwell upon much is the Fighter's reliance upon his gear.
Fighters, and to some extent barbarians, are very gear reliant because they lack recovery and defense options. While the routine of going up the ladder from +1 to +10 on armor weapons, shields, rings, amulets, and cloaks or whatnot is pretty easy to understand, the fact is these numeric increases do nothing more then keep pace with the BASE STATS of the monsters you fight. They do nothing to keep pace with the increase in special abilities, flexibility of spells and spell like powers, and what not.
The only thing a Fighter has to defend himself against such things is his gear. Spellcasters, of course, rely upon their spells for such things, both for offense and defense.
There's a thread bouncing around, where multiple comments are directed at Roy from Order of the Stick where the Fighter is Good because by DM fiat he gets an Artifact Sword at level 3 that unleashes some new special ability as he goes up in level. What's even funnier is that this actually is how a lot of 'legendary' fighters are. They are good fighters, but they are legends because they used the Sword Excalibur, or some such thing. You look at that and go, yeah, Excalibur won that fight, not the mook using it. If I had me a sword like that...
Well, you know you can get a sword like that, right? Ancestral Weapon. Roy even quoted the name of the feat. Damn thing scales by level. Admittedly, its overpowered for good Ol' Roy unless he somehow just hit level 12 (his Ancestral Greatsword is now a +5 Undead Bane or something). The Whole Kensai class is built around this concept of scaling an effect by level and possibly not including it in your wealth by level, and for some people, even stacking effects.
Yes, that's right. One feat/class ability, and suddenly you've got an extra 200k to play with on the long road to level 20. Wowza, eh? Now, I'm not advocating that you do this. Effectively, Ancestral Weapon is a very limited Create Magic Arms or Armor for a Fighter.
Ah, wait, did I just say that? A very limited feat for a Fighter? To make/use one of the core things for his build, his weapons, his armor? And what have I been discussing all along? The Fighter should be Master of Feats and have Mastery of Feats?
How about we just turn this feat on its head and make it something no good melee character would willingly do without. Now, anyone can get Ancestral Weapon and elevate the weapon by levels with the proper sacrifice of xp. But, how about we tweak it so that if you have no spellcasting ability, or magical, supernatural skills, it doesn't count towards your gold limit? And to further restrict it, require some smithing skills to advance the weapon along if you do this, and base the free benefits on your BAB? And, if you can do this for Weapons and Armor and Shield you free up a lot of gold to shore up a Fighter's defenses.
From a story standpoint, it's a lot more reasonable way of saying why there's so many magic weapons out around there, when no wizard, the ones most likely to make them, would bother to spend much time on it when they've got stuff to empower themselves or other spellcasters to make. Empowering endless armies of Fighters? Better to make them reliant on Greater Magic weapon spells and potions.
Well, if a Fighter doesn't need a spellcaster to make better weapons, especially the simpler ones, that neatly explains the profusion of lesser magical weapons all over the place. The spellcasters didn't make them magical...the Fighters did.
=================
What I'm saying is, seriously consider pulling a 'Roy'. Let the Fighters improve their base arms and armor with xp, but not with gold, and let them pour their gold elsewhere. This should be especially good if they take Weapon Focus in a weapon. They want their weapon to be special. Sure, they might stumble across the Axe of King Tharbromm if you want them too, and carry it into battle against the Ogre Hordes. Or maybe they'll just make their own weapon a legend.
Let's see how it might work...
==============================
My Very Own Roytoy (Ancestral Weapon/Armor, Personal Arms and Armor, etc.)
Requirements: Weapon Focus or Shield Spec or Armor Spec, 6+ ranks in Profession (weapon or armorsmith).
Alternatively, allow the Character to 'spend' one skill point to 'bond' to a weapon/armor/shield.
You may not have more then one Roytoy for a specific use, unless they are a matched set. For instance, you cannot have a Roytoy sword and mace, unless you are wielding the Lance and Orb of the Sun as a TWF, of course! This generally limits you to a melee weapon, a missile weapon, a suit of armor, and a shield.
Flavor: You call forth the spirit /invoke the Favor of your ancestors/entreat the blessing of beast whose tooth adorns it/consecrate it to the gods/bathe it in the blood of the innocent/ask the will of Fate to empower it/enslave screaming souls of the damned to/whims of chance infuses/drop it into the local spellpool accidentally/swear upon the spirits of your slain kin/dedicate the item to your unwavering cause/etc to a single weapon, suit of armor, or shield. This item is tied to you and grows as you do. It must be of masterwork quality, even if it doesn't LOOK like masterwork. Thematically, it might even become masterwork just going thru any of the steps above.
Crunch: As you level up, this Roytoy grows with you.
The abilities you can awaken in your sword/suit/shield are strictly limited. To awaken a new ability, you must have a BAB equal to three times the overall enchantment of the Roysword, OR you must have feats devoted to it equal to the new enchantment level (WF= +1, Wspec= +2, GWf=3, GWS=4, Melee Weapon Mastery = 5, etc).
You may do the following:
Increase the Enhancement bonus by +1. This Enhancement bonus only applies when the Roytoy is in your hands, or the hands of someone you give distinct permission to. The Weapon does not shed light unless it has a Legacy, and the Legacy is active. +5 is still the maximum.
Weapon: Add the Keen/Impact/Piercing Quality.
Add Exactly ONE (and no more) Legacy feature. This is the 'defining' trick of the sword, letting everyone know 'I've got something special.' A Legacy ability is no more then +1. Sample Legacy abilities are Ghost Touch (lay their spirits to rest!), Flaming (Burn all trolls!), Bane (your most hated foe!), Good (+1d6 vs them Evil bastiches!), or some such thing. The Legacy feature should be thematic, flavored, and directly reflect the foes it was used against and the needs of the wielder at those times. A Legacy power cannot be activated before the sword is at least +4 overall (i.e. Greater Specced, or at level 15).
Armor/Shield: Add Comfort or Lesser Fortification.
Add one Legacy feature, as above. The bonus may also be no more then +1.
To bring out a Legacy feature, the Roytoy MUST be Named, and named APPROPRIATELY, reflecting the importance that the wielder has placed in it. A sword named "Fred" will never manifest a Legacy, nor will "My Plate Mail". If the item is referred to in such terms, feel free to lose the Legacy. If the character doesn't feel it is important, then it simply isn't there. "Heart of Iron", "Fyrgin's Shell", and "The Golden Wall" are all good names. You want your enemies to know that when you come forth bearing Scalebane, the Yuan-Ti had better be damn well afraid of you and the sword that slew the Abomination Korsss-kirl!
These benefits cost the Warrior who wields them the appropriate amount of xp to bring out, and may or may not require a ceremony or investiture rite depending on exactly how the DM wants things to play in his campaign. They do NOT count towards his GP limit of wealth/level.
If your Roytoy is broken or sundered, it can be reforged with a DC check of 20+Bonus x2. If it was disenchanted, it will regain its powers over a period of days equal to the amount of the Caster level check - your level. The weapon is considered to have a caster level of your level for all effects/saves. It has no magical ability outside of your hands unless you wish it to.
If you die, you have the option of having your Legacy item/Roytoy retain its powers. It will retain its Enhancement bonus for any who pick up and wield it, but the Legacy bonus may have any extra conditions on it you wish (my descendents, Knights of the Golden Flame, worshippers of Kord, etc.)
Magic may be used to bring the bonus of the Roytoy up to a total of +10. Such bonuses cost money appropriate to the level of the existing enchantment. However, the gold for early magical treatment is 'bumped' to later levels if you further increase the Roytoy yourself. So, if you use Magic to add Shocking to your +3 sword, you pay the gold for a +1 increase. If you then Roytoy it up by +1, and then wish to add Bane (Evil Outsiders), you have to pay ALL of the difference between a +4 and +5 weapon, adding in what you paid for the Shocking effect, or you lose the Shocking (it must not have been strong enough to last on your Roytoy). (i.e. in the end, you are going to pay for the Last +3 of enhancements, 'buying early' isn't going to save you any money). You may pay the xp costs for magically upgrading the Roytoy yourself, which makes Wizards much more likely to agree to do it for you for mere gold.
If you want to add in extremely powerful magical effects, you are of course free to enchant your Roytoy in the standard manner as you see fit.
A Roytoy cannot be salvaged for magical Essence until after you die permanently and invest it. The permanent departure of the spirit is needed to 'cement' the magical power into place.
Reforging: You may Reforge your Roytoy to add certain material benefits to it. You must possess skill ranks = 4 + 2x the bonus of the weapon to do so in the appropriate Craft to direct the Reforging, although you don't actually need to do the work yourself. The DC for the work is 20+ 2x the bonus of the weapon.
You may reforge a weapon or armor as some other material (technically an alloy, but hey, it's YOUR Roytoy!) or to add adornments/flashing/STYLE, BABY/mechanical improvements or tricks. Reforging takes the standard amount of time for the base item, but you have a +10 bonus on your checks when working on your own Roytoy.
If your Roytoy is permanently destroyed, you may (in a fit of tears no doubt) make another weapon personally to replace it. DC is the same as above, time required is as for a mastercraft item of the same thing. You gain a +10 bonus on your Crafting check as you slave away to replace your cherished item.
=========================
Any thoughts on the above?
==Aelryinth
NRT: You should have a look at my Fighter fix. It's got a scaling ability that lets you ignore feat prereqs as you advance in levels, and an ability to choose a couple of additional class skills at 1st level. Even if you don't like the rest of what I did with the class, have a look at those bits.[/plug]
I've been looking into scaling feats recently, allowing a Fighter to get more out of his feats as he progresses in level. Using Aelryinth's proposal for the Weapon Focus stream as the starting point, I've tried a similar approach with the other streams, starting from the first feat in each stream. If anyone's interested, I can post what I've got so far.
I agree. Not any old feat should scale. BUT Feats should be worth the level they are taken at. Thus, any feat that is only takeable at level 12 should be worth a 12th level character's ability.
AND, any Feat taken as a Fighter Bonus Feat should DEFINITELY scale. It's a Fighter's class ability, and it should scale like any other class ability.
==Aelryinth
I agree with both things you said. As for the second part, about fighter bonus feats, if they scale then they should be available to ONLY fighters or they should scale for ONLY fighters.
There's been a lot said about Fighters actually having MAD because of Feat Regs. Well, there's a flip side to that argument. The feats you take dovetail to the stats you have, and say something about your Fighter. For Instance:
Strength: Power Attack/Cleave Tree*, Efficient use of Strength, Grappling, Bull Rushing, Larger Weapons, big, Brutal, Charge-Prone, Heavy Armor.
Intelligence: Expertise* tree, precision damage, tactical fighter, non-provoking of AoOs, special attacks, extreme skill, Canny/Dodge bonus to AC, light armor, defensive fighting, arcane magic/power, psionic magic/power
Dexterity: Weapon Finesse, light weapons/Archery/ranged attacks, lighter armor, Combat Reflexes* tree, Evasion, Initiative, Good Reflex Save, multiple attacks/limbs, speed, Dodge bonuses.
Wisdom: Uncanny Dodge* tree, Alertness tree*, awareness/senses, Willpower/Good Will Save, Mental Fortitude, Wis to AC (Insight), Alternative Stat, spiritual enlightenment, Divine magic/power
Constitution: Endurance/Toughness tree*, Hit points, Fortitude Save, Good Armor, Natural Armor/physical abilities, Fitness, health, poison/immunity, disease resistance/immunity, Exercise, Repetition, fatigue/exhaustion resistance, life force, defiance of magic/psionic power, tanking.
Charisma: Aid Another/Flanking Tree*, Leadership feat, Belief in self, Save Boosting, smiting, Luck, Deception, Alternate Stat, Spontaneous magic/power, performing, charms
=======================
This is kind of the premise the revamped psion and psychic warrior are built off of. The psychic warrior bases all his powers on his strength. The psion's base is intelligence, with subsets for the different powers.
There's nothing that says a Fighter can't be built the same way. For instance, a blanket rule that a Fighter taking a bonus feat that has a stat req has that req reduced by one for every feat in the tree caters to chosen stats, scales over time by direction of the player, and helps the lower stat fighter as much as the higher stat one.
==============================
Redefining Level One Characters
Without a doubt, the worst levels of Fighter are the first and the second.
Why? Because they give the entire class away.
10 HP.
Medium Armor Prof
Heavy Armor Prof
Martial Weapons Prof (!!)
Shield Prof
Tower Shield Prof
Bonus Fighter Feat
Good Fort Save
+1 BAB
Then, d10 HP
+1 BAB
Bonus Fighter feat
+1 Fort
If you want to give value to the Fighter you have to start evaluating first level class abilities very, very differently.
For instance, tell me WHY you get all them bonus skill points at level One. Easy. It represents years and years of learning the ins and outs of your trade, ergo, your first level class. Well, tell me exactly WHAT all those first level feats of the Fighter represent? Uh huh. the EXACT SAME THING.
It is time to feed dippers and nonmartial classes their teeth, and put some bite into those first two levels. You don't want Fighters to have more skill points. That's fine. Then at least give some value to their starting feats.
Rule ONE: All characters have simple weapons and light armor proficiency. A commoner or expert gets this. Do I have a problem with mages having this? No. Once you introduce mithral, it's a moot point, anyways.
Rule ONE-A: Mithral armor doesn't get around Proficiency restrictions. Non-proficiency penalties mean loss of all Dex mods, Doubled Armor Penalties, and doubled Arcane Spell Failure base (before any reductions). Moreover, spell failure applies to divine spells if you aren't proficient, either! (No druids waltzing around in Dragonhide full plate without proficiency, sorry).
Rule TWO: No class grants any Weapon Proficiency, Medium or Heavy Armor Proficiency except at Character Level One.
Justify: Seriously, what do you think Fighters do with all their time, since they have no skill points? You bury your nose in a book or apprentice to some skill-heavy master and practice skills. They spend months/days/years practicing with all kinds of weapons, in all kinds of armor, using all kinds of shields and tactics. It's the exact same thing, but from a different angle.
But you get a hefty bonus for those years once in your life. Melee classes get no recognition of the time and effort involved in their training whatsoever. Yes, in one level of casting sleep spells on goblins, that wizard over there miraculously became proficient in dozens of weapons and learned how to troop around in heavy armor without complaining about it.
If you want to learn a weapon, take a look in the mirror. How long is it going to take you to learn how to use a sword properly, swing a flail without bashing yourself in the ear, spin a staff, fight with a knife, or wrestle effectively? If you want to learn those things, you actually go out and learn them one by one. In other words, you actual do blow a feat on them. You don't go to a fencing school to learn martial weapons; you go there to learn fencing with fencing weapons. Unless you have a really eclectic instructor, you'll probably never pick up a staff, spear, or mace, or chain weapon. Taking a semester of Fencing 101 doesn't make you a level 1 Fighter or even a warrior. It makes you proficient in fencing weapons, i.e. it removes a penalty. This is not recognized under the current system.
So, what happens with dippers? They have to make a HARD choice. Martial weapons, Armor Profs, Shield Profs, or all them juicy low level skill points?
But what about someone who does take Fighter later? Even I'm not so cruel as to suggest blowing an entire feat on Martial Weapon Proficiency (rapier). Happily, the answer is found in the centerpiece of the Fighter class, the Weapon Spec tree. To wit, if you take Weapon Focus as a Fighter feat, you are considered proficient in the weapon if it is considered a martial weapon.
This is exactly equal to the power of the War Domain (auto prof in the deity's weapon with WF to boot. We wouldn't think of choosing a deity for a specific weapon, would we?). This also nicely folds in the bastard sword, dwarven waraxe, urgosh and other martial/exotic weapon mixes...no need to blow an Exotic Weapon slot on marginal bonuses. leave exotic weapons for exotic weapons. You can now take katanas and bastard swords to full effect by taking Weapon Focus in them, as they are martial weapons.
Now, this clearly favors races or classes that get auto prof in certain weapons (Elves, I'm looking at you.) My view? So what? It's so marginal a benefit, and what it does is forces dippers into elven stereotypes (they have to use a longsword, bow, spear or rapier, heh!). I'll be satisfied with that.
Rule THREE: Any PrC that grants Martial Weapons Prof, any/all Armor Profs, and Shield prof now REQUIRES THEM.
Yes, that's right. If you want to get into Uber Martial PrC, you'd best have the right foundation under you. You just don't get to pick up five Feats for free with one level of ANY class except at first level. Down with PrC Munchkinness! Those PrCs don't take some half ass fencer; you need those abilities BEFORE you enter, you don't get them handed to you. Seriously, why would you possibly think anyone could get into Duelist without the right weapon profs, or Dwarven Defender without heavy armor prof? They aren't going to teach you that. You need to know it already!
Never noticed how PrCs gave away all those extra feats now, did you? Well, now you do. A PrC is about class abilities. It should have no bonus feats on entry. It's just another thing that takes away from Martial classes. A PrC is nothing more then an alternate set of class abilities, and should be evaluated exactly as such--a modified Feats tree with flavor is all it is.
Other Classes:
Someone who gets into Wizard past level one loses Scribe Scroll. Really, did you practice copying pages and pages from your master's books to elsewhere while taking your training in Wizardry? No?
And exactly how many spells do you think you're going to have as a Wizard, with no time to copy them and being unable to do it yourself? That's right, when you go from rogue 1 to Wizard 1, you start with Read magic. That's it. Oh, and don't forget to buy your starter spellbook, pay all the copying costs for the spells your friends will give you, etc. And no, you don't get a free familiar, either. See, there are benefits to starting as a wizard, too.
Sorcerer: HAH, joke's on you. Except for not having a familiar, you lose nothing by taking sorcerer at a later time. It’s spontaneous magic. You don't have to learn anything, you just have to emote! Start up costs alone mean there should be tons more sorcerers around then wizards.
Cleric: Sorry, no armor proficiencies for you past level one. There's a reason why Fighters become warrior-priests, and rogues become monk-priests or temple-priests, after all.
Monk: As a nod to the 'retirement' aspect and Lawful alignment req of the monk class, you acquire proficiency in monk weapons at the rate of one weapon per monk level. Typically, your first weapon is going to be Improved Unarmed Strike (that's right, your bonus feat is now One Monk Weapon OR IUS). But someone who grew up in a monastery swinging around kamas is going to be better at this odd selection of weapons then some rogue shaving his head to hide out from the knives in the dark, or just looking for some additional training.
Monk B: Monk has a Lawful requirement. It's assumed that tremendous discipline is required to maintain the fighting trim and power of a monk, particularly the scaling effects. If you lose the Lawful alignment, you lose all scaling effects of being a monk. Personally, I'd make you lose the untyped Wisdom bonus to AC, too. Find a Monk's Belt if you want it back.
Druid: No new Armor/Shield Profs, no animal companion at first level (you just became a druid, when did you have time to find it?), no new weapon profs. Not that any smart person who wants Druid levels doesn't start from level one, anyway.
Ranger: No new armor, weapon, or shield profs. OW. On top of losing the skill points, best take this at level one, aye? No starting animal companion either, in case you were wondering. A DM might defer Tracking until second level, but its so core to the class and so rarely used he could leave it in.
Rogue: No new armor or weapon profs. But hey, if you are playing a rogue, its for the skill points, or the SA, and likely you won't even notice.
Bard: As Rogue.
Barbarian: No new Armor, Shield or Weapon Profs. You may have got some special training to bring out that Rage, but so what? It doesn't sub for months and years of being raised as a savage warrior.
Secondly, you lose the movement bonus. Really! That's a product of a savage lifestyle, and more vitality and pure physical ability, not just 'special training' which any mook can take. It's the big bonus for being a Barbarian/1. You don't want to start as an illiterate savage? Weigh the cost of your skill points on Read/Write against the movement.
Yeah. You start as a Fighter, you get Heavy Armor/Tower Shield. Start as a Barb, get Fast movement. Decisions, decisions.
Barb B: You become Lawful, you lose all Raging ability. Also note, while Raging, you can't Concentrate (use any ability requiring a Concentration check, and I'd extend that to Autohypnosis), expertise/defensive fighting/total defense, or any feats/skills that rely on the same.
Paladin: Goodie, you are being called to serve. You haven't been divinely granted the ability to know how to swing a Flail. No new armor/weapon/shield profs. Paladins who get called late in life should be unique and building on the skills of their prior professions.
Of course, if you want to give the Paladin some teeth because of that LG alignment restriction, maybe you do get all them armor and weapon profs as long as you stay true to the paladin code! That would be a true sign of the paladin...a commoner/3 gets Called and shows up at the fight in full plate toting a Greatsword, and knows how to use it. Mmmm. Go pally! Might want to make it a class ability...Divine Martial ability, and simply remove the Proficiencies from the base class. Then again, it would be a nod to the people who believe the paladin should be a PrC if only those people who'd been Fighters actually become a Knight in Shining Armor. A ranger would become a Knight in Shining Wolfskin, or something.
Other classes:
Generally speaking: No new armor/weapon/shield profs. No starting with any spells if an arcane prepared caster, except Read Magic, and pay for your spellbook. No bonus feats that have anything to do with time spent in the class...like the Scribe scroll for Wizards. Maybe you want to give it to them after a level or three or maybe not.
The easiest classes should be the ones with the fewest class benefits, and the least amount of front-loading. Most classes front-load with excess weapon/armor/shield profs, having a massive skill point total or skill list, or a prized bonus feat or ability or something. Wizards front load compared to sorcs. Taking sorc later should be lots easier then taking wizardry.
Thoughts, analysis, critique? Go ahead and dissect it for does and don'ts and balance issues. Remember, you can balance the Fighter in two ways...bring it up to the level of other classes, or make what he actually has so valuable that he's intrinsically worth what they are. Proper valuation of starting feats to equal them in value to skills and bonus feats is a superb starting point.
===Aelryinth
This is where a lot of fixes get into contention with people; they don't all see Fixes the same way. Fighters should be able to be built to work with just about any stat. Here's an example, using a Door to be chopped through.
Strength Fighter: CHOP CHOP CHOP CHOP -crash-
Int Fighter: "Hmmm." chop chop chop -Crash-
Wis Fighter: "I See." CHOP -Crash-
Dex Fighter: "Hah!" chopchopchopchopchopchopchopchopchopchop -crash-
Con Fighter: "hrn." ChopChopChopChopChopChop -crash-
Charisma Fighter: "Woohoo!" chopochchopcophcophchopchcopoochchopcochcopocpohcchopcopchophcohphcop -Crash-
=================
A Strength fighter fights by application of power. His strength is his speed, it is his charm, it is his skill. His blade hits because to him, it's as light as a willow wand is to you. He learns ways to bring his strength to bear fast and instinctively, powering through problems.
An Intelligent fighter relies on his weapons and his precision. He is in the right place at the right time, puts his sword where it should go, dissects defenses, plays mind games with his enemy. He maximizes leverage, figures out all the angles, and makes the best attack for the best approach, weighing all the odds. Of all the Fighters, the most precise. He considers the pros and cons of every lesson, and fits everything, no matter how minor, into his fighting style.
A Dexterity fighter is all about speed. He's always ahead of his opponent, beating him to the defense and the offense. He dances through lessons with grace, speed, and innate control, executing patterns with instinctive control and flair. Two weapons just add to the fun and complexity of the issue. Strength is a crutch...first to strike and last to strike is the rule, and if you hit more then anyone, that is the way to go. Every new lesson is a new pattern to master until it becomes effortless and faster then anyone else can hope to execute.
A Wisdom fighter is about awareness. Instinctive assessment of a foe, finding the weakest spots, acting without thought, knowing the moment without analysis, 'going with the flow'. Wisdom fighters take the best approach without really understanding why, forgoing analysis for action, and being practical and efficient instead of fancy or over analytical. Lessons are absorbed and used as they are needed, or discarded if not. Wisdom fighters fight with fluid efficiency, bringing grace, power, precision, speed and confident execution together as the situation demands.
A Charisma fighter is about willpower and self-belief. You simply will not lose. The force of your personality carries you through a fight, radiating an impossible confidence and surety that every action you are making is the best and proper one. Your lessons show you that you can overcome anything, and every motion or skill in your repertoire just gets the enemy defeated faster. People follow you because you radiate purpose, and your purpose becomes theirs. Your fighting skill is naturally intimidating, more overwhelming, with an innate flair and enthusiasm that tells your foes they simply are not your equal, and it only gets better when others are there to watch you win.
A Constitution fighter is all about endurance. (Lee of Naruto is a great Con fighter). You outlast your foe. You out practice your foe. An intellect fighter learns and dissects a pattern by observing it once. You learn by observing it a hundred times. A Wise fighter takes the best, loses the rest. You do the same after being thrashed in a score of bouts and feeling the pain.
A Strength fighter powers through an obstacle. You keep hammering on it until it falls, regardless of how long it takes.
A Dex fighter naturally flows through the most complex forms with blinding speed. You grind away with a thousand repetitions until your body can do the same. A Charisma fighter believes he can overcome anything. You simply keep going until the belief of your enemy shatters, and you claim victory in the end.
My personal view of the Fighter class tends to be a naturally Con/Int one. I look at all the feats of the Fighter, and I see someone who has to be smart. If he's not a genius, then he practices and practices and practices, more then any other class (including the vaunted Warblade) to get to where he needs to be. He may or may not be really strong, but strength is a tool of his skill, whereas for a Barbarian, strength is the focus of his skill. A Barbarian is Str/Con and all about the raw, brutal power. Wis and instinctively knowing what to do is more about then figuring things out.
Most archetypes of the Fighter can be broken down by these approaches.
Ranger: Dex/Con/Wis. All about agility, toughness, and awareness. Both 'normal' fighting styles are Dex based, class abilities on Con or Wis.
Paladin: Cha/Str. Divine abilities powered by Cha sub for other combat abilities for this class.
Archer: Dex/Con/Int. An Archer's power is in his bow, and being precise and being able to draw a bow a hundred times is more important then brute strength. For this reason, I'm very much in favor of caps on Strength bows.
Classic Swashbuckler: Dex/Cha all the way. Flair and speed, grace and dazzle.
Duellist: Dex/Int. A master fencer's mind is a tool more dangerous then his rapier. Always in the right place at the right time.
Knight: Charisma/Str/Con. The Knight knows he can overcome anyone and anything, and his entire existence is the one on one duel where he will triumph. His force of will dominates all that he is.
Soldier: Con/Str. Built to endure, strong enough to accomplish anything.
Master: Int/Con/Str. Smart enough to pick his battles, has the tools to win them.
Pirate King: Charisma/Dex. A swashbuckler where doing it with flair and command is more important then pure speed.
Marshal: Charisma/Int. Able to lead the horde to war, and do it the right way.
Champion of a Cause: Cha/Str. All eyes on him, sure that he can win the day, and strong enough to do it.
Tank: Str/Con. Stands up to anything, lays it low, and keeps on going.
Martial Artist: Typically a Dex/Str build...able to dish it out, but less able to take it.
Martial Arts Master: Typically Wis/Con/Dex. Skill replaces Speed, practice made perfect. Internal power makes up for external deficiencies.
Focused Slayer: Charisma/Wis: Able to slay his foe, and nothing is going to stop him from doing so. Overwhelmingly confident in his ability and sure of himself in his specialty.
Given that these are all strong stereotypes, the Fighter has to be able to accommodate them.
The Warblade is a Str/Int fighter build...it's generally assumed you are going to raise Str, but are rewarded for being intelligent.
The Swordsage is a Wis/Dex build...it's assumed your damage is coming from your techniques, and you are rewarded for being agile and evasive.
The Crusader is a Con/Str/Cha build...you are rewarded most for pure toughness and indomitability. Your ability to Take It and keep going is phenomenal, Strength and Charisma provide your offensive edge and leadership to inspire others with your example.
==========
So, when you make your Fighter build, you have to take into account not only how you see what a "Fighter" is, but how to accommodate the different stat emphasis for the builds. Trying to accommodate them all typically does not work unless you rework feats to accommodate them or have class abilities that will accept multiple Stat inputs to power them up in level.
Really, is there any reason a Cha based Fighter build should be less effective then an Int Based one? Or Wis based one? It's Reason against Confidence against Instinct...they all work perfectly well together and can be used to justify the same bonuses.
Another Orientation
Saves are another way to orient your Fighter, and provide an easy means to customize him without simply ordering him to get another good save. The Warblade has a Good Fort Save, with Int bonus to Reflex saves. So, if you can eventually get a +6 Int bonus (22), you actually have two strong saves. You can get such a bonus with a +5 Inherent modifier, and a +6 Int booster, if you want.
Well, since you can build a Fighter a zillion ways, why not do the same with his saves? At level one, A Fighter can pick his good Save, and then pick the secondary stat that buffs his other 'good' save.
Fort: This signifies a Str/Con fighter build. Typically Int for the Reflex save boost, Cha for a Will boost.
Reflex: This signifies a Dex/Int fighter build. Boost Fort Will with Cha, typically the latter.
Will: This signifies a Wis/Cha fighter build. Buff Fort with Cha or Reflex with Int.
This could, as the Warblade does, replace the need for two good saves, and allow the character the choice of his Good save in building his Fighter. The vast majority of Fighter builds will be Dex or Str centered. The Knight is actually a severe departure from the archetypical Fighter stat base, although no less viable, because much of its class abilities center around Cha and Wis.
If you actually give a Fighter two good saves, this shouldn't be a class ability, of course. But it does make a good alternative. Imagine if a Fighter had the Warblade array of Int-based abilties (which he probably should), but instead of Int, he could choose Con, Cha or Int to power them.
===Aelryinth
How about this for scaling Fighter feats...
Advanced Feat: On every x levels, a fighter may swap a feat for an advanced feat in that feat chain, i.e. lose Weapon Focus for Greater Focus. This is similar to Sorcerers and spell swap, doesn't drastically alter the rules, and one just needs a notation for the Advanced feat.
Then add skill points or initiator levels to fill in the remaining gap.
This is effectively a feat rewrite, and would work fine. You'd just need something to fill all the dead levels. The Martial Adept classes get this every other level, so its a very powerful benefit, eventually allowing a first level maneuver to 'improve' all the way to level 8.
===Aelryinth
1. You lose the mundane, non-magical flavour of the class.
2. With a big bad magic weapon, you lose the versatility that the fighter SHOULD have. You end up with another specialized, pigeon-holed character.
The solution to this could be adding fighter feats that replicate enhancements. Already there is a precedent here: A sword of mighty cleaving requires the Cleave feat to work, and grants you essentially a weaker version of Great Cleave (it's limited to one additional cleave attack per round).
Mighty Cleaving < Great Cleave
Keen = Improved Critical
Distance = Far Shot (for thrown weapons)
Seeking > Precise Shot
Seeking < Precise Shot + Improved Precise Shot
Thus, +1 weapon enhancement = 1 feat (with a few exceptions) So, create a feat to replicate a weapon enhancement. Something like:
[INDENT]
Master of Arms
Prerequisite: Fighter level 5, must be taken as a Fighter Bonus Feat.
Benefit:
For every Fighter Bonus Feat other than Master of Arms that the character possesses, any weapon, shield or armor he holds may have a +1 enhancement bonus. This enhancement bonus may not be used to apply for special enhancements such as flaming or ghost touch as this is not a supernatural or magical ability; It is simply the fighter's incredible ability with his arms and armor. The fighter may re-assign these enhancement bonuses as a free action once per round at the start of his turn.
Special:
The Fighter must divide the enhancement bonus amongst the weapons and armor he currently wields / wears. Also, the fighter may not increase the enhancement bonus of any piece of equipment beyond the number of non-Master of Arms fighter bonus Feats.
Example:
A 12th level Fighter (with 6 fighter bonus feats OTHER than Master of Arms) with a longsword, shield and a chain shirt could choose to increase the enhancement of his longsword by +3, his shield by +1 and his armor by +2. If he were to pick up a very powerful +5 longsword, he could only increase it's enhancement by a further +1 (to +6) as he has 6 fighter bonus feats besides Master of Arms. [/INDENT]
Bingo, your fighter is a lot less reliant on magic gear and doohickeys, but the cap prevents ridiculous enhancements if he already HAS magic gear.
I'm going to reiterate this point because of Pyke Moonshadow. Pyke finds the maneuver system inappropriate for knights in shining armor. Why? Because the flavor is rather Oriental. To put a finer face on it, its' European D&D vs Oriental D&D.
I suggest a broader view. Classical 1E basically went up to about 10th level and capstoned. Mages grew, but Fighters gained nothing new except an additional attack and more magical gear. Yet their exclusivity and awesomeness was enough to allow them to prosper with just their core chassis.
Oriental stuff and the 'comic' media is suffused with demons, martial arts, gods, spirits, whereas Euro-centric views tend to push that stuff into the realms of superheroism or 'true fantasy'. Western views is that one man with a sword or axe can overcome anything if he is strong enough. Or maybe has the grace of god with him, without resorting to all the mystic mumbo-jumbo that adheres to it. Think Conan with his oriental Shaman along for the ride; The Mummy with the Western Explorer and the Arabian mystical guardian and evil sorcerer bad guy; Indiana Jones’ Western two fistedness against Indian heart grabber.
Well, I'm here to tell you that D&D is magical at all levels, and unless you can realize that anything about 10th level IS superhuman and crazily magical, you aren't looking at the game right. In game terms, I don't believe anyone alive on our planet has ever really gotten past 10th level. 10th is the limit of humanity. The BEST archer who ever lived. The BEST warriors. The GREATEST artists and thinkers. Differences in stats, skills, and feats are all that separated them.
D&D goes past level 10. Every f/11 is a superhuman being, faster, tougher, stronger, leaner and meaner then anything our planet has ever seen. He can survive things routinely that would make us normal mortals balk in shock, kill things that would send us fleeing in terror routinely, accomplish deeds that lesser men will simply and utterly find impossible.
Look at some of the maneuvers presented there. Iron heart has a level 8 maneuver that is basically Whirlwind, but you get two attacks. You can only use it every other round. It's basically Whirlwind on 'roids. Strikes that do a lot of damage. So what? You don't believe a Knight can pull off a Finishing Blow on a demon? Why? Let me clarify again.
The Maneuver System is nothing more then a rewrite of the Feat System.
First, maneuvers get their balance vs Feats because they are not 'on' all the time. Adamantine Hurricane is usable only once every other round by a warblade. Improved Whirlwind is usable again and again. Moment of Perfect Mind provides a hefty Will save boost for a warblade. At best every other round, if he chooses to recover. If not, or if hit by more then one Will save, he's really out of luck.
Secondly, Maneuvers SCALE. They are appropriate for the level you get them at.
Thirdly, Maneuvers are Feat Efficient. Consider the Nightmare blade sequence. Add a die, double dmg, triple dmg, quadruple dmg at level 8, starts at level 1.
Do you realize that you can swap out the Maneuvers for level 1 at level 15, effectively 'learning' all the feats in between, and get the end result of them? This is exactly analogous to learning "Cleave" at level 1, it automatically upgrading to "Great Cleave" at level 5, then "Supreme Cleave" at level 9. Or, you could just take Supreme Cleave at 9 and get all the benefits of the first two, without ever having learned them. Exact, same, result.
Strike of Perfect Clarity is the Ultimate result of added Weapon Damage that starts at level 1. At level 17 you can take it without ever having known a single Iron Heart Strike. It's the exact same thing as a Fighter at 17 deciding to pick up Weapon Supremacy, and getting all the benefits of all the previous feats, without ever having had even weapon focus before. The exact same thing.
So, Feats scaling should not bug you. Additional damage and effects from maneuvers should not disturb you in the slightest. They don't need to have the flash and flair of wuxia films or Naruto chakra jitsus or Bleach Reiatsu forms or Dragonball Z chi-balls. But realize that the magic of the West can be as brutal or more so then all the flair and flash of the Orient.
Orientals have a great fascination with the concept of the European armored knight. They find the armor and weapons and mounts as beautiful and fascinating as we find samurai armor, and they empathize deeply with knightly codes of honor and valor. However, they like ascribing mythical feats to their heroes, and we like to place such things firmly in the realm of mythology and superheroics.
Well, you are playing in mythology, and after 10th, you Are Not Human. You are a Giant Walking The Earth, and I don't care if your name is Pious Luther the Gallant or Zhen-Szi Tu, Sage of Ten Thousand Lotus Blooming Six Dragon Style. You ARE magic. Fighters at 10th+ are superhuman combat machines, and giving them their due in a world filled with magic isn't about giving them showy moves and too much muscle flexing. It's about making them brutal, lethal and effective at their roles.
That's why the Styles are so different. Some obviously magical, some that don't really look magical at all. A Diamond Mind/Iron Heart warrior can advance all the way to level 20 and never look like Goku or Naruto...but +100 dmg on a strike can still make a demon dead in an instant, the Moment tree can defy any magic hurled his way, and attacks faster then the eye can follow are the bread and butter of high level fighters of ANY story. He can surge and break the magic bonds that hold him, recover faster then any normal person from seemingly crippling injuries, and hurl himself into the teeth of awesome things without a moment of hesitation.
You don't have to be a demigod to do that, but you have to be as effective as a demigod. Happily, the world is magic, the characters get over 10th, and they become demigods. So, let’s give our fighter Demigod his due, eh?
===Aelryinth
Again, you are making the Trip Fallacy. You are somehow assuming all combat takes place at level 20. You are picking a monster that is a CR 20, but are playing him stupidly. It is also noteworthy that the balor works best as a ranged combatant, not a melee combatant. You can't confine a balor unless you can shut down his ability to teleport. You are vastly overstating his ability to hit with all his attacks. Generally, iteratives 3 and 4 are lucky to hit at all in any combat against an intelligent foe.
Target Ac 35
Highest attack of 20th level fighter 43+1d20 (20 BAB +12 STR +5 Weap enhancement +4 focus, melee specialization, greater focus +1 competence +1 haste)
Full attack +41/41/39/36/34/31/29/26
Even his last attack only needs a roll of 9 to hit, I believe you are vastly understating his chance of hitting. Also, note that blasphemy is only of limited use at best against a 20th level fighter (it dazes for 1 round, but the cleric should have already quickened a spell resistance on him anyways).
Let's break down the Fighter by levels, so as to clear up any misconceptions you might have in building one.
Level 1-5
Optimizers will call this level 4 at best, and usually two...but levels 1-5, or 1-6, are effectively Pre-PrC levels, 'foundation levels'. You are preparing and training your character to specialize in a career for which later fighter levels simply cannot do for you. The only reason you have Fighter levels is for the extra feats you need to be effective...the Weapons/armor/Shield stuff is nice, but you can get them anywhere, especially the PrC you are going into.
These are the levels the Fighter shines at, because his mundane gear and feats aren't really outshone by anyone or anything, he can pull all his weight, and he's fighting stuff that is solidly inside his ability to handle. He's focusing on being good at one thing, his bonuses give him a definite edge, and he's setting up the techniques he's going to use for the rest of his career.
In real world terms, he's a prize fighter preparing for the heavyweight championship of the world.
Levels 6-10
The second attack gives the Fighter teeth, but now the weaknesses of the class become more apparent. He lacks motility. Spells start preying on his bad saves. His opponents scaled suddenly in size and strength, and special moves are no longer as effective. Instead of becoming 'enhanced' by the skills and powers of allied spellcasters, he becomes 'dependent' on them, effectively limiting their options if he wants to contribute (a situation, by the way, that preys on spellcasters just like it once forced priests to always carry cure spells).
Two levels here are just dead levels. His feat choices for fighting monsters of this level are quite weak relative to what they can do to him in return. At this time, the Fighter is seriously considering a PrC, because he will get far more abilities, far more potent abilities, and they will synergize better then the mere three feats he picks up.
In real world terms, he is the finest human combatant to have ever lived. He is fast and powerful and strong, but in a magical realm, his mundane powers and abilities just aren't cutting it.
Levels 11-15
Three dead levels here make this a torturous climb. The Fighter gets virtually no new tricks for his arsenal, but his opponents are scaling the sizes from Large to Huge against his tricks, mages end up with 8th level spells in plethora. The number of magical effects arrayed against him is fantastic...he has nowhere near the gold needed to defend against them all AND to perform the combat function that he is supposed to. PrCs are a necessity to keep pace with the escalating challenges and to hold their own place without increasing reliance (and perhaps resentment both ways) on spellcasters.
In real world terms, this is a magical being of tremendous power, who simply has no way to unleash his true might. He has not been given the tools to do so. Three attacks a round now make him a death machine, but his foes are so tough it might not really matter. He lacks motility, the ability to nova, the ability to recover, and the ability to overcome. We can't truly picture what a character of this level is capable of in real life...but this isn't real life, it's a magical world, and in it, he's just not capable of doing enough.
Levels 16+
At level 18, the Fighter gets a capstone ability...if he devoted half his class features and more to accomplishing it. He gets three feats total, few of which are of broad use, and his only recourse for his defenses and motility problems are to sink ever more money into his gear, because he has none himself. He's seriously thinking of calling up the gods and doing a PrC Optimizer board retraining of all his experiences, so he can at least get a couple of good Capstone abilities and cover at least some of the gaping holes in his ability to defend himself, let alone others. He watches the spellcasters tossing around 9th level spells, able to pull off all the jobs that once were his with relative ease, and wonders why he stayed a fighting man. they are looking at mastering magic and achieving immortality...he's looking at getting old, weak, and dying a not-so glorious death.
In mundane terms, this guy is utterly superhuman. He can power attack and kill the best fencers alive with a teaspoon, or drive a toothpick thru a brick wall.
But in the rules of the game, he just sucks. He has nine levels where he learned NOTHING new. His Will save haunts him with virtually every opponent he faces. Opponents facing him ignore him, avoid him, trample him, overrun him, or bullrush him with impunity to get to the people they really want to reach...the spellcasters who are now dominating every combat with their synergistic spell combinations. He gets to focus on lesser threats while they take the glory and the power. It's increasingly apparent that he is not a threat unless his opponent is truly stupid AND small enough for him to handle AND has no magical ability of its own...a true rarity at this level of superheroic action.
In other words, up until Level 5, the Fighter has Edge.
UP until 10th, the Fighter has Endurance.
At level 15, the Fighter gets to enjoy Forbearance on the part of the casters.
At level 20, the Fighter gets to enjoy almost irrelevance. he can look to his Epic feats and more superheroic action...then compare such things to Epic Spellcasting and level 10= metamagicked spells, AND wonder where all his Epic gear is going to come from.
=====
Buffing the Fighter to take on an enemy is a powerful tactic and very useful. HAVING to buff the Fighter so he can take on an enemy is a drag on the party and limits the options of your spellcasters.
A high level Fighter walking into a room on our world could terrify the greatest soldiers alive with a glance. Walking into a room with threats suitable to his ability will likely earn him a dismissive glance, unless he's been the recipient of some truly overdone gear and/or spell buffs.
In which case, as ever, it's the sword that won the fight, not the mook wielding it. I'd rather have the fighter win the fight.
===Aelryinth
Just off the top of my head here, but how's this?
1] Fighters are considered martial adepts, and thus their initiator level equals their class level.
2] +1 Maneuver Known/Readied every odd level (1, 3, 5, 7, etc.) (i.e., no dead levels)
3] +1 Stance every 4th level (1, 4, 8, 12, etc.)
4] Access to all nine disciplines, since the Fighter is the generalist.
5] Recover maneuvers as a swift action, like the Warblade.
Feel free to shoot holes through this, since I have no books with me and I am sure there are many flaws in the idea. I'm getting back to work before my boss notices. ;)
Hmm. I'd come up with a new maneuver recovery mechanic. Something good and practical, but also unique. Also, I'd change it to "The Fighter has access to any 4 of the 9 disciplines, chosen at character creation". Still flexible, but not as oppressively powerful.
The fighter there makes sense. However, he's a Fighter; the logistical, strategic master who's able to control the field and be where he needs to be when he needs to be. Oh, he also gets Forge Lore at lvl 7. You can craft magical equipment with a Caster level equal to your ranks in the Craft skill (note: craft is one skill, no subsets, it's less stupid that way).
It's a fighter that treads on no one else’s toes, but no one else can do what he does; especially their abilities to temporarily figure out how to perform any feat, be able to remain ice-cold when the Balors come to roost and, here's the kicker, they have something that would let them 'deal' with having to tank a Balor and all of it's awesomeness.
Because, we really need to be frank with ourselves. The core fighter wasn't designed for play beyond 5th level; so he needs to be changed in such a way that he occupies his own specialized niche.
The link to Races of War is in my sig, Keith and Frank Trollman posted in the Classes section a couple of months ago now.
I disagree with the notion of letting fighters pseudo-craft magic arms and armor. Two problems with it:
1. You lose the mundane, non-magical flavour of the class.
2. With a big bad magic weapon, you lose the versatility that the fighter SHOULD have. You end up with another specialized, pigeon-holed character.
The solution to this could be adding fighter feats that replicate enhancements. Already there is a precedent here: A sword of mighty cleaving requires the Cleave feat to work, and grants you essentially a weaker version of Great Cleave (it's limited to one additional cleave attack per round).
Mighty Cleaving < Great Cleave
Keen = Improved Critical
Distance = Far Shot (for thrown weapons)
Seeking > Precise Shot
Seeking < Precise Shot + Improved Precise Shot
Thus, +1 weapon enhancement = 1 feat (with a few exceptions) So, create a feat to replicate a weapon enhancement. Something like:
[INDENT]
Master of Arms
Prerequisite: Fighter level 5, must be taken as a Fighter Bonus Feat.
Benefit:
For every Fighter Bonus Feat other than Master of Arms that the character possesses, any weapon, shield or armor he holds may have a +1 enhancement bonus. This enhancement bonus may not be used to apply for special enhancements such as flaming or ghost touch as this is not a supernatural or magical ability; It is simply the fighter's incredible ability with his arms and armor. The fighter may re-assign these enhancement bonuses as a free action once per round at the start of his turn.
Special:
The Fighter must divide the enhancement bonus amongst the weapons and armor he currently wields / wears. Also, the fighter may not increase the enhancement bonus of any piece of equipment beyond the number of non-Master of Arms fighter bonus Feats.
Example:
A 12th level Fighter (with 6 fighter bonus feats OTHER than Master of Arms) with a longsword, shield and a chain shirt could choose to increase the enhancement of his longsword by +3, his shield by +1 and his armor by +2. If he were to pick up a very powerful +5 longsword, he could only increase it's enhancement by a further +1 (to +6) as he has 6 fighter bonus feats besides Master of Arms. [/INDENT]
Bingo, your fighter is a lot less reliant on magic gear and doohickeys, but the cap prevents ridiculous enhancements if he already HAS magic gear.
Well, the abilities I chose are the least magical ones of the class...enhancement, keen, fortify and comfort. In fact, outwardly they aren't apparent at all.
Secondly, just like your ability, the weapon or armor is only good in his hands if he wants it to be.
The Legacy abilities are the only things that can become magically apparent...and there's nothing wrong with just houseruling it out.
We did the same thing, we just used different approaches. Compare mine to yours and we end up at pretty much the same area.
Also, it frees up gold for the Fighter's defenses. Remember, he lives in a magical world, he should EXPECT to have magical gear. A Fighter is NOT a non-magical being...past level 10, he's a Magical Creature capable of impossible things. Do NOT forget that. He doesn't have a 'non magic' nature....he has a 'not tossing spells around blatantly' magical nature.
===Aelryinth
Target Ac 35
Highest attack of 20th level fighter 43+1d20 (20 BAB +12 STR +5 Weap enhancement +4 focus, melee specialization, greater focus +1 competence +1 haste)
Full attack +41/41/39/36/34/31/29/26
Even his last attack only needs a roll of 9 to hit, I believe you are vastly understating his chance of hitting. Also, note that blasphemy is only of limited use at best against a 20th level fighter (it dazes for 1 round, but the cleric should have already quickened a spell resistance on him anyways).
Unholy Aura? Armor? Protective devices/rings? Starting the combat 60' away by summoning another balor? You once again ignoring all the stuff the balor can do?
And suddenly you are changing the scenario by introducing a cleric? Why doesn't the Cleric just Gate in a solar and ignore you? Why can't you resist the balor yourself? What if he spams the Unholy Word and just stands next to you and roasts you alive? What if the instant you trip him he just teleports away and telekinesis' your precious weapon over yonder? It's not like you can stop his spell like ability.
Please, drop this. It just isn't going to work. If I was running that balor against a single fighter, I'd take you apart. The only way you would win is with specific gear to take him out, not by being a generalist.
===Aelryinth
Aelryinth>You really, really need to read the Races of War supplement.
The fighter there makes sense. However, he's a Fighter; the logistical, strategic master who's able to control the field and be where he needs to be when he needs to be. Oh, he also gets Forge Lore at lvl 7. You can craft magical equipment with a Caster level equal to your ranks in the Craft skill (note: craft is one skill, no subsets, it's less stupid that way).
It's a fighter that treads on no one else’s toes, but no one else can do what he does; especially their abilities to temporarily figure out how to perform any feat, be able to remain ice-cold when the Balors come to roost and, here's the kicker, they have something that would let them 'deal' with having to tank a Balor and all of it's awesomeness.
Because, we really need to be frank with ourselves. The core fighter wasn't designed for play beyond 5th level; so he needs to be changed in such a way that he occupies his own specialized niche.
The link to Races of War is in my sig, Keith and Frank Trollman posted in the Classes section a couple of months ago now.
As I noted in my letter back to you, I read it a long, long time ago. Like a lot of people, I just don't like the feel of his build, or the way you basically have to redesign every single campaign world to cater to the design flaws of D&D. I also don't like the 'foil' mechanic much.
That's why I don't post a real build, I post ideas for them. The Fighter is a different vision for every person reading this, and I really think it should be revised for every different campaign so it fits them.
But I don't play in K's world, and while it's a very good read pointing out all kinds of problems with the Rules As Written, it doesn't mean I'm going to grab his build any faster then the excellent work both Szatany and Seerow have done on their Fighters.
===Aelryinth
That's the main difference between the western and oriental fantasy. In the western fantasy the heroes search for allies to help them. Did Frodo and the fellowship decide they would face Sauron in a test of power? NO. They hid, crawled, made alliances, barricaded themselves in the biggest fortress, scrambled everywhere and anywhere for allies, and finally made a completely suicide attack just so Frodo could sneak by and destroy the ring. No special powers or super humans needed, thank you very much.
Because a hero in the western mythology isn't someone who fights well, it's someone who inspires others to fight well. King Arthur had his knights. Ulysses had his soldiers. Aragorn had his fellowship. Never underestimate the power of the common people.
And that's the fighter. He's the warrior that stands in the front line no matter what, thus inspiring his team members to stay in the fray. It's not his job to find trouble, or even to solve them. His purpose is to make sure the others can achieve theirs. He needs no superhuman powers.
Apparently, your vision of western fantasy is a lot different than mine. Two of the so called best classes are Druid (which, ironically, has 9 dead levels as well) and cleric. What do they have in common? They both get their amazing powers from other sources. What is a druid without nature's blessing? What is a cleric that fails to follow his ideal/god? They're common people. Their power comes from their faith in others, not themselves.
First off, no spellcasting class has dead levels...EVER. Every level is an increase in the volume of spells the character can pour out. That's not a dead level. Spells are as good, if not better than class features.
That's the main difference between the western and oriental fantasy. In the western fantasy the heroes search for allies to help them. Did Frodo and the fellowship decide they would face Sauron in a test of power? NO. They hid, crawled, made alliances, barricaded themselves in the biggest fortress, scrambled everywhere and anywhere for allies, and finally made a completely suicide attack just so Frodo could sneak by and destroy the ring. No special powers or super humans needed, thank you very much.
I fail to see how this has anything to do with the topic of the thread. Your argument would be better placed in a "fighter vs wizard" thread, and even then your argument is incorrect.
A wizard Gish build can easily accomplish what a fighter does and then a whole lot more.
Because a hero in the western mythology isn't someone who fights well, it's someone who inspires others to fight well. King Arthur had his knights. Ulysses had his soldiers. Aragorn had his fellowship. Never underestimate the power of the common people.
And that's the fighter. He's the warrior that stands in the front line no matter what, thus inspiring his team members to stay in the fray. It's not his job to find trouble, or even to solve them. His purpose is to make sure the others can achieve theirs. He needs no superhuman powers.
That's a really great philosophy, now if only the game mechanics worked like that. The irony is that a Rogue or Bard fits the bill of "diplomacy master", "Inspiring leader" better. In fact, nothing about the fighter class has anything to do with "diplomacy" or "inspiration." Sure you can go charisma heavy and take Leadership at level 6...but so can everyone else.
I really don't see where your point is going. It really just looks like a Straw Man that's attempting to get a flame.
Apparently, your vision of western fantasy is a lot different than mine. Two of the so called best classes are Druid (which, ironically, has 9 dead levels as well) and cleric. What do they have in common? They both get their amazing powers from other sources. What is a druid without nature's blessing? What is a cleric that fails to follow his ideal/god? They're common people. Their power comes from their faith in others, not themselves.
That's the main difference between the western and oriental fantasy. In the western fantasy the heroes search for allies to help them. Did Frodo and the fellowship decide they would face Sauron in a test of power? NO. They hid, crawled, made alliances, barricaded themselves in the biggest fortress, scrambled everywhere and anywhere for allies, and finally made a completely suicide attack just so Frodo could sneak by and destroy the ring. No special powers or super humans needed, thank you very much.
Because a hero in the western mythology isn't someone who fights well, it's someone who inspires others to fight well. King Arthur had his knights. Ulysses had his soldiers. Aragorn had his fellowship. Never underestimate the power of the common people.
And that's the fighter. He's the warrior that stands in the front line no matter what, thus inspiring his team members to stay in the fray. It's not his job to find trouble, or even to solve them. His purpose is to make sure the others can achieve theirs. He needs no superhuman powers.
We seem to be reading different western fantasy. The Knights of the Round Table fought all sorts of monstrous foes. The heroes of Greek mythology fought and defeated most of the classic monsters upon which D@D is based. One human fighter (well, maybe he was a barbarian!) defeated Grendel, who was 'invincible' to lesser warriors, and defeated that one's immortal mother, albeit at cost of his own life, with precious little magic to aid him. Jack the Giant Killer and Sir George stand side by side. Conan and John Carter of Mars and Solomon Kane all predate Tolkien, Fafhrd and the Mouser are as much about Fighting as Knavery.
Westerners can fight and battle monstrous enemies in our own mythology. But all the flashy abilities and magical things were on the side of the enemy, because obviously magic was derived from primitive and evil powers, because humans had no such abilities.
Well, this is a magical world we play in, so obviously humans have some magic...and fighters should have some too. It doesn't have to have flash, it has to have effect.
And I take some umbrage at your description of the fighter in your second to last paragraph. It relegates him entirely to a supporting role, where others can be the hero. Traditionally, it is quite the other way around. The fighter is the hero, and the sage, wise man, trickster and so forth are there for support. It is the Fighter who does things, and the others who are along to help, because they are simply not capable of dealing with threats the way the fighter is.
The Fighter doesn't need to have flash, but he must have EFFECT. And as it stands, he doesn't really have either. Being superhuman doesn't mean spitting fire. Being able to survive a 100' fall is superhuman...and a f/10 can do it, get up and walk away. Being able to drive your little finger into a rock (Power Attack for 11!~) is superhuman. Being able to hit someone three times with one hand faster then a trained martial artist can with two is superhuman. Being able to pick up a bow and hit a target 1000' feet away more easily then most people can one 60' away (BAB + Far Shot+ GWS) is superhuman.
Superhuman doesn't mean flash, flare and glitter. But it means having EFFECT. And the effects the Fighter is capable of are, well, mediocre in a game with open magic and truly monstrous foes.
===Aelryinth
And that's the fighter. He's the warrior that stands in the front line no matter what, thus inspiring his team members to stay in the fray. It's not his job to find trouble, or even to solve them. His purpose is to make sure the others can achieve theirs. He needs no superhuman powers.
So he's the Marshall? Y'know, with Diplomacy and command auras? ;)
I disagree completely, and think (as Aelryth stated) that you are cherry-picking your western mythological heroes. You mention Arthur? What about his right-hand man, Lancelot, who by all accounts was an indestructible killing machine? What about Percival, who could simply ignore evil sorceries because he was pure of heart?
You mention Ulysses? Are you forgetting the end of his story, where he performs an inhuman feat of archery and single-handedly (almost) defeats a small army? What about Achilles, the hallmark of the Greek warrior-hero? What about Theseus, Bellerophon, Hercules? All fighters who defeated monstrous beasts that no other could.
You mention Aragorn? Wasn't he one of the three who were unscathed after the battle of Pelennor fields, because "no man could withstand them, or indeed face them in the moment of their wrath" or some such? What about Bard the Bowman, who slew a dragon with a single arrow? What about Gil-Galad and Elendil, who went head to head with Sauron himself?
Western myths, even the ones you cited, are filled with heroic warriors fighting impossible odds, battling against supernatural foes...and winning. The fighter should be able to do no less.
Actually, I don't believe Beowulf was killed by Grendel's mother, although she did strike at him whilst he was down with her dagger; to quote directly from the text:
"Then the leader of the Geats, Ecgtheow's son,
would have died far under the wide earth
had not his corslet, his mighty chain-mail,
guarded him, and had not holy God
granted him victory; the wise Lord,
Ruler of the Heavens, settled the issue
easily after the hero had scrambled to his feet.
Then Beowulf saw among weapons an invincible sword
wrought by the giants, massive and double-edged,
the joy of many warriors; that sword was matchless,
well-tempered and adorned, forged in a finer age,
only it was so huge that no man but Beowulf
could hope to handle it in the quick of combat.
Ferocious in battle, the defender of the Scyldings
grasped the ringed hilt, swung the ornamented sword
despairing of his life - he struck such a savage blow
that the sharp blade slashed through her neck,
smashed the vertebrae; it severed her head
from the fated body; she fell at his feet.
The giant's blade allowed Beowulf to slay Grendel's mother. He was actually killed - and in true D&D fashion, I might add - by the Dragon.
Of course, Beowulf was unquestionably hardcore - as fighters go, the man who threatened to strangle a dragon with is bare hands ("I would not wield a sword against the dragon if I could grasp this hideous being with my hands (and thus make good my boast), as once I grasped the monster Grendel;") clearly deserves a measure of respect.
Let's face it guys, Beowulf was the stuff D&D games should be made of.
The Dungeonomicon Monk and the Races of War Barbarian and Knight were absorbed by my group in literally the time it took to read the class. So, 10 minutes from start to character creation using new mechanics for the class.
The Ultimate Fighter or Ultimate Barbarian present not one but several different classes for each of the base classes. That may be good for one player willing to pore over it.
For a player who's a bit weaker with the rules or implications of what a new class can present they might not understand how to assemble a character that achieves a certain goal; like shove stuff down your pants while in combat, or... be really quick at opening up people's necks or being the juggernaut! Which is a bad precept for changing a gaming group's opinion and trying out new material. If any and all new material is more than a few pages for a new class, then no one except a few rabid people will look at it. I guess, keep it simple.
Also, discuss why something was done. If people don't see the intent of design in a new class or class replacement, they tend to get uneasy about looking or using it. The introduction/discussion of a class should be as much mechanical as flavourful. Creative players can always come up with more flavour given a few scant seeds, but poor mechanics hidden by a veil of rich flavour always leaves players hungering for something they don’t' realize they hunger for.
I dunno, aelryinth. The reason that I don't like a lot of the other presented classes is that I have to read tons and tons of different options and dozens of new feats. I want the game to be more efficient and remove useless feats. I don't want another 30 feats; I want say... 10, or 20 that completely replace all the drek that currently excess. Plus, I want material that I can introduce to any of the people in my gaming group.
The Dungeonomicon Monk and the Races of War Barbarian and Knight were absorbed by my group in literally the time it took to read the class. So, 10 minutes from start to character creation using new mechanics for the class.
The Ultimate Fighter or Ultimate Barbarian present not one but several different classes for each of the base classes. That may be good for one player willing to pore over it.
For a player who's a bit weaker with the rules or implications of what a new class can present they might not understand how to assemble a character that achieves a certain goal; like shove stuff down your pants while in combat, or... be really quick at opening up people's necks or being the juggernaut! Which is a bad precept for changing a gaming group's opinion and trying out new material. If any and all new material is more than a few pages for a new class, then no one except a few rabid people will look at it. I guess, keep it simple.
Also, discuss why something was done. If people don't see the intent of design in a new class or class replacement, they tend to get uneasy about looking or using it. The introduction/discussion of a class should be as much mechanical as flavourful. Creative players can always come up with more flavour given a few scant seeds, but poor mechanics hidden by a veil of rich flavour always leaves players hungering for something they don’t' realize they hunger for.
I am inclined to agree with you. Much of what we like about the Fighter is the simplicity of presentation. Look, 11 feats, wow! We understand the class at a glance, and then it's a question of just finding the feats. The problem, I'm coming more and more to realize, is the feat system.
If you look at the Warblade, his class abilities alone add up to about the same feat equivalents as a Fighter. The makers of the ToB realized that the Feat system was dragging them down, I think.
Think about it. Is there really a feat that is the equal of a class ability you gain at the same level? If there are, there are very few of them. You can see they've been trying to address the lack of power of feats by substitution levels, letting the Fighter swap out his feats for certain abilities...and some of those abilities are actually quite good, used properly.
Moreover, you can directly say, Overpowering Attack is worth a Fighter bonus feat, in the eyes of the designers, because that's what you lose to get it.
However, you look at the new wall bashing ability in Dungeonscape, and you go a bit goggle-eyed. The damage potential of the ability to bull rush somebody into a wall dwarfs any feat out there, especially at level 6 when it hits 8d6+3xStr. You have to actually DO it, of course, but still...
And the designers know they made feats too weak. One of the Skill tricks imitates one of the attack to Touch Attack feats. Look at the new feats for Epic Warlocks. Now THOSE are Epic Feats!
I stand by my statement that a great deal of PrCs simply should not exist. They should exist as specific feat trees. It would remove all the problems with front loading PrCs, it would start to revalue the starting profs of the Fighter, and it would make glaringly obvious just how powerful feats should be. There is NO excuse for the proliferation of PrCs with an ability stronger then a feat at every given level. None.
The Nine Swords got completely around this by throwing out the feat system entirely, and bringing in the Nine Schools. Take a serious look at them, and do you realize what you have? Yes, a feat system customized for melee toons. They didn't have to worry about how this feat matched up with this feat. They didn't have to worry about 'reality' and comparable BAB between fighting classes. The Nine swords pretty much encompass all the traditional melee play styles.
Shadow Hand = Sneaky Fighter.
Sun = Gentle/Mystical/Wise Fighter
Desert Wind = Wuxia flash/bang fighter.
Devoted Spirit = Religious/inspired/Charismatic Fighter.
Iron Heart = Pure fighting fighter.
Stone Dragon = Tank/Strong big Weapon Fighter
White Raven = Champion/Leader Fighter
Diamond Mind = Intelligent/duellist Fighter
Tiger claw = Savage/TWF fighter.
Take a look at some of the stances, which basically amount to at will buffs. One grants you reach on your turn...level 9. Find a feat that can do something that awesome. Another at the same level grants you blindsense 30'...as opposed to, say, Improved Blindfighting, which takes TWO feats and has an insane Wis req AND just reduces your miss chance. Or the stance that turns 5' steps into AoO opportunities.
These are the kinds of things that high level fighters should simply be able to DO. But the history of feats is pathetic, and melee feats especially. SKR said that making a feat with a BAB higher then +8 was hard, because a +8 meant you were an incredibly skilled warrior. Furthermore, putting 'fighter level X' onto a feat sounded incredibly cheesy, because it IS hard to justify why you'd need fighter levels for a feat.
Requiring levels in a class is just bad pre-reqs for ANYTHING. Requiring an ability you can only get from a class X is GOOD feat design...but, you see, the Fighter HAS no class abilities, except his Fighter levels.
The more and more I look at it, the more I realize the Fighter really doesn't need too much change to it. What really needs an overhaul is what Fighter Feats can actually DO.
Like the maneuver system, the Fighter Bonus Feat needs to be an entirely new mechanic. It needs to be STRONG. You only get 11 of them, so they have to be worth taking. This plethora of feats allowing you to do simple little things...they need to be folded into tactical feats for the fighter.
It's becoming increasingly obvious that the Fighter cannot survive inside the current limitations of the Feat system, anymore then the designers of the ToB wanted to stat up every School as a new feat tree...it would draw far, far too many unhealthy comparisons. Why, for instance, get Improved Blindfighting when you can Hear the Air at the same level? It's easier to get, easier to qualify for, and it's BETTER.
=================
If you are going to attempt a serious Fighter Fix, these things need to be addressed:
1) The value of the Fighter's starting armor and weapon Proficiencies needs to be set equal to the starting skill point mechanic of other classes. This is a Class Foundation problem, and a weak point most people just don't point out specifically. When your core chassis of feats can be acquired almost anywhere, your class starts out devalued.
2) Front loading of many classes needs to be cleaned up, making dipping a hard choice instead of a good tactic. In other words, there should be a bonus for being first level in a class, other then skill points.
3) Fighters need more skill points and a better list, specifically including spot and listen, some capability to learn about mass combat, and some way to assess enemies/monsters. The idea that any person with some brains who goes around bashing monsters isn't soon going to be an expert on bashing monsters is ludicrous. this is a chassis problem, and an image problem. Barbarians are the dumb tanks...fighters are about skill, and should be able to use their heads. Being somewhat useful outside of combat is a must.
and Lastly,
4) Fighter Bonus Feats need to be in a class of their own, equal to or surpassing the power of a special ability for any class. They need to scale, they need to be viable at all levels, and they need to mean something. Fighters can never equal another class if the value of their special abilities is not the same as any other class, and specifically any other PrC.
Here's a simple example:
Martial Study (Fighter)
You've undertaken an exhaustive study of the tricks and techniques involved in the Martial School, and gleaned the best of them for yourself.
You may pick one Martial School, and learn one maneuver from it. The Skill associated with that school becomes a Class skill for you.
Your Initiator level is considered to be half your Fighter level + your number of Martial Feats. If you have ranks in Martial Lore, you may add your synergy bonus to your Initiator level (Maximum Level = Fighter Class level)
YOu may take Martial study a maximum of three times. Every time you take it, you may select a new school, and learn a maneuver from that school. You may also select and add a maneuver from any previous school you have Studied, and you may swap out a maneuver you learned previously in that school for a new one in that school.
You may substitute half your number of Fighter Bonus Feats for the number of Pre-req manuvers for any school.
Is this better then plain ol Martial study anyone can take? You betcha. Why? Because this is a FIGHTER FEAT. It's part of their class abilities, and it blows away a feat any squib off the street could take. Fighter Bonus Feats now have intrinsic value in and of themselves...they can substitute for maneuvers!
There's far, far too much invested in the 'you must invest a feat to improve this feat!' mechanic. ToB utterly ignores this rule. You don't need to learn nightmare Blade EVER to suddenly learn Diamond Nightmare Blade...which is the exact same thing as all the previous Nightmare blades stacking on one another. Like Learning Weapon Supremacy and picking up ALL the feats before it in one swoop...that's another thing ToB handily ignores.
Fighter Bonus Feats need to be like that. It doesn't matter when you take them, and it doesn't matter if they scale...they need to be awesome and useful for whatever level you are at. Swapping maneuvers in for others you've outgrown is an auto-scaling effect. Generic pre-reqs effectively allow you to take multiple maneuvers at once, going right to the top end of the scale.
Feats that add new tricks, new AoO opportunities, and stuff like that should be purchasable...either with time, xp, gold, skill points, or by expanding existing feats. Fighter bonus feats can be interlinked for greater synergy and to play off one another.
But no Fighter fix will be complete without fixing feats and the Fighter Bonus Feat pool.
===Aelryinth
Pyke Moonshadow: What works well in a movie or novel, does not necessarily work well in a game, where presumably part of the fun is that all the players feel equally useful and powerful, whether competitive or cooperative. What I find particularly frustrating about your stance is that some of your posts seem to indicate that you admit the warblade (and the martial maneuver system in general) is in fact more mechanically sound and balanced than the original fighter, but that you're still opposed to it because of silly flavor considerations, that it's "too Oriental" for you.
However, flavor is utterly irrelevant, because it can be changed instantly and far more easily than mechanics. Don't like the name "Stone Dragon school?" Change it to "heavy arms training." Don't like the name "Wolf Fang Strike?" Change it to "dual blow."
Even the very concept of martial arts and special techniques is not unique to Eastern cultures; the West has produced pankrit, glima, savate, capoeira, boxing, etc., to say nothing of the countless fencing and swordplay traditions. Really, the only major differences between East and West on this matter seem to be that certain Asian cultures were more prone to give specific maneuvers elaborate names - an identical overhand slash might be called "Thundering Mountain" in an Asian style, but merely designated as "overhand strike 2b" in a European one - and that Eastern traditions were more stubbornly preserved in the face of modern warfare (which more or less obsoletes hand-to-hand combat), surviving long enough to now be (overly) glorified by the media.
And while we're on the sub-topic of Tolkien as the catalyst of modern Western fantasy, keep in mind that even he wasn't totally ethnocentric; the presence of Oliphant-riding foreign mercenaries in Return of the King indicates that even Middle Earth has Asian-esque cultures present.
Pyke Moonshadow: What works well in a movie or novel, does not necessarily work well in a game, where presumably part of the fun is that all the players feel equally useful and powerful, whether competitive or cooperative. What I find particularly frustrating about your stance is that some of your posts seem to indicate that you admit the warblade (and the martial maneuver system in general) is in fact more mechanically sound and balanced than the original fighter, but that you're still opposed to it because of silly flavor considerations, that it's "too Oriental" for you.
While I did admit that at levels 15+ the fighter could use a slight boost, and I do mean slight, I never said I found the warblade to be mechanically sound. If I did then I misspoke. I find the warblade to be too mechanically good. Anything that basically keeps you from playing another class is either too good (warblade) or too bad (samurai). The warblade basically subsumes the fighter and I don't like that.
I have no major issue with the flavor, I understand that it can be changed. My issue was the manner of the "fix" for melee-ers. Giving them abilities that resemble spells mechanically, regardless of the designation given to them, rankles me.
Another Commentary
Any thoughts on the above?
==Aelryinth
Yeah...
Wow. Who do you work for? Maybe WotC is hiring....
Just for the record, in a low or no magic campaign (an option now thanks to the classes presented in the TOB) that these classes would be great.
One of the more interesting things that was done with the Martial Classes was importing the 'swap and improve' mechanic from the sorcerer. As I noted above, this is one of the great 'unseen class features' of both the Warblade, and the sorceror.
For the sorcerer, it's a necessity, being able to swap out one spell for another. Effectively, it gives you two new spells for the price of one, because when do you swap out spells? When you have access to a better one, of course.
Thus, Dispel Magic gets swapped out when you have access to Greater Dispel Magic, and in comes Fly. The mechanic is the same, just a bit roundabout in how you get to it.
The mechanic would work for feats, but would get protests. Suddenly being able to 'swap in' Whirlwind Attack, without having to go thru the feat tree to get there, would send feat purists howling...especially if you got all the benefits of the lower level feat. Greater Dispel Magic gets all the benefits of Dispel Magic when you swap it in, and no one protests...the Shadow Magic line goes up in power and effectiveness, and no one protests...but feats? No way!
As an intellectual exercise I was applying the mechanic to Rangers (this is a little off tangent, so bear with me).
Favored Enemies are one of the sticking points of Rangers. You either make a campaign based around a specific type of enemy or two, or rangers are unable to bring their strongest combat bonuses to bear.
Also, there are a ton of cool (and powerful, even!) Favored Enemy feats, that don't get taken simply because they are so situational. Who wants Favored Enemy Power Attack, when you never know if you are going to be fighting FE's? What about Favored Dodge, and you never get the hefty AC bonus from the ONE FE you can choose to use it against?
Well, look at what the Manuver system would do for Favored enemies.
1) Let's assume Favored Enemy Progression as normal. 1, +1/5 levels, and a +2 kicker to any current FE. Thus, you can have one really hefty bonus that might seldom apply, or a bunch of so so bonuses that will actually get used.
2) Let's introduce swapping! Woot!
Anytime a Ranger would gain access to a new Favored Enemy, he may also choose to swap out one of his old Favored Enemies for a new one. He may also choose to reallocate his Favored Enemy bonuses among the choices available to him, with a minimum of +2 per Favored Enemy.
o0o0 look at that, a little bit of swapping, a lot of flexibility...retraining without all the gnashing of teeth.
3) Now let's introduce some stacking. You know, like Abyssal Inheritor feats. But only for Favored Enemy Feats.
Feat Type (Favored Enemy): A ranger who takes a Favored Enemy feat has two additional bonuses for taking such a feat.
He may immediately designate an additional Favored enemy type, with the standard +2 bonus. This also triggers his class ability to reallocate permanent bonuses and swap Favored Enemies in and out.
If the Favored Enemy feat is Enemy Specific (Example: favored Dodge, FE bonus= AC bonus against that type), then the Ranger may spend one hour practicing and reviewing his knowledge and shift the Favored Enemy that the Feat applies to.
These benefits are in addition to the benefits of the feat itself. You must have Ranger levels for these benefits to apply, and they apply only to Favored Enemies on the Ranger list.
MMM, now maybe Favored Enemy feats will become a usable Ranger mechanic.
Now, let's make Adaptive Style a Ranger feat!
Adaptive favored Enemy (FE feat)
You are capable of rapidly shifting the focus of your Favored Enemies.
Pre-req: Two favored Enemies.
Bonus: At the beginning of every day, you may reallocate the bonuses of your Favored Enemies among those you have chosen. You may not exceed the maximum possible bonus for your level, nor may you lower a bonus below +2. These changes are permanent until you change them again.
Baneful Enemy (FE feat)
This is one Favored Enemy that is going to stay with you forever.
Pre-Req: one favored enemy, level 1 only.
Bonus: The Favored Enemy you choose with this feat has wired itself into your soul, by trauma, upbringing, focus, or simply fanatical emphasis. Simply put, you will never forget the lessons you have learned about this enemy.
Your Favored Enemy bonus for this FE only starts at +4, and has a minimum of +4. This feat may not be retrained, nor the bonus taken below +4, or the FE swapped out. Your normal maximum for this Favored enemy is raised by +2.
This nicely sums up the "Orcs killed my family!" to the "Dragon-hunting is the family specialty" type quite nicely. It also represents a 'super skill focus' for Rangers over Experts, since the bonus against, say, Animals, is more then an Expert could possibly gain, thus cementing the place of the lifeling ranger/hunter as THE best hunter around at low levels. Rangers with this feat would very properly be known as 'beast slayers', 'dragon slayers', 'the Orcslayer', 'Giantbane' and the like.
--------------------------
Take a look at all the new feats out there that reward dual classing. Notice something weird?
Yeah, they Really, really benefit the Fighter. What class in their right mind is going to blow seven feats on working up the Fighter Weapon Tree chain because they count as Fighter levels?? Why, none. But the Fighter gets all of THEIR class abilities that apply with the feat. o0o0o...that's actually a pretty substantial Fighter feat. You can get like +8d6 or something sneak attack damage from it...for one feat! All you have to do is not be a Fighter for a bit.
Well, if this is a Fighter Bonus feat, then it should be even better, and more broadly applicable.
Martial Synergy (Fighter Feat)
You take the tricks and combat skills of other classes and subsume them into your fighting style.
Pre-Req: At least three levels in the applicable listed classes (this feat applies to up to as many other classes as your Int bonus, with a minimum of 1); Two other Fighter Bonus feats.
Bonus: Your fighter levels count as levels in the other class for certain of the classes benefits.
Rogue (Sneak Attack), barbarian (Rage uses), swashbuckler (Grace and Reflex saves), or Scout (Skirmish Damage and AC from movement). Others may be added at the DM's discretion.
You want a multi-talented Fighter, here's a multi-talented Fighter! I'll just be a F/15 Rogue/3 and at level 19 up my Sneak Attack Damage to +10d6 (which is what the normal feat allows), or maybe I'll be a f/4 Rogue/3 Barb/3 with 4d6 SA and two uses of Rage.
Mmmm, good stuff! Note that those 'other classes' don't count as Fighter levels for upping fighter bonus feats...you are taking their tricks, you aren't improving your own. The Fighter level to qualify for feats is something we need to seriously move away from, anyways. Let's count Fighter Bonus Feats, instead.
===Aelryinth
However, you're missing something. WotC doesn't do that! WotC won't change anything in the core books until a new edition comes out. The biggest things they've done is affect wildshape and polymorph. And even despite all of that, they haven't removed polymorph from the game!
So, you have to take what you can get. ToB is a collection of ideas, as is every supplement, as is the Core Books. Use what you're given that will make your game more fun, and don't waste time lamenting how they haven't done it right, because there's a lot of things that they haven't done right ;)
With substitution levels, we can do all sorts of things to the fighter, without deviating to the norm, to help even him out. Here are some of the things we can do:
1.) Improve core chassis: There's already a precedent for substitution levels with varying hit die, skills, etc., from the norm. Now we can give the tough fighter a few d12s, or te duelist some more skill points to work with.
2.) Fighter's only: The Warblade's special ability only applies to feats. Features gained through substitution levels will always be fighter exclusive.
3.) By pass empty levels: If the fighter needs a free boost, whose to say that these levels can't replace an odd level number? Plus, substitution levels with almost no net decrease in power have already appeared. Elven Universalist wizard, anyone?
4.)Trade in useless feats: As mentioned earlier, not every fighter is going to benefit from Heavy Armor Proficiency. A 1st. level substitution can easily allow us to trade in that feat for something more appropriate.
The great thing about it, is that we can create a small set of substitution levels to accommodate any fighter build.
I see some of you are making comments that you don't like ToB, because it attempts to fix the fighter problems. You say that WotC should instead fix the fighter class. Well, you're right! WotC should correct the root of the problem rather than make patches.
However, you're missing something. WotC doesn't do that! WotC won't change anything in the core books until a new edition comes out. The biggest things they've done is affect wildshape and polymorph. And even despite all of that, they haven't removed polymorph from the game!
So, you have to take what you can get. ToB is a collection of ideas, as is every supplement, as is the Core Books. Use what you're given that will make your game more fun, and don't waste time lamenting how they haven't done it right, because there's a lot of things that they haven't done right ;)
I didn't start the thread on the premise of invalidating the ToB or commenting on WoTC. I actually believe the ToB, and some of the newer feats that have come out that are class specific, are showing us all that WoTC realizes that the Feat mechanic is very, very skewed, mechanically uneven, and quite discriminatory.
Hence the ToB, which works because it completely chucks the feat mechanic for a much easier to understand and empathize system that clearly solves the problems of relevant power, stacking and scaling that the overdone Feat system, bloated with little tricks and underpowered niche specialties, simply could not.
I've made multiple attempts to look at the Fighter in the new vein presented here, for people who don't want to use a non-core book...but do believe there's real problems with the Fighter. Very few people are going to agree on a Fighter fix. Well, coming with ideas, approaches and the like are all different ways to get people thinking about the problem and solving it 'on their own'.
I personally think the steps I put down above are the most vital:
1) Re-evaluate the importance of the level 1 class and its core chassis.
2) Re-evaluate the front-loading of Core and PrC classes.
3) Definitely redress the Fighter's core chassis.
4) Remove the Fighter Bonus Feats from feats any old schmuck can take with a General feat and make them feats that only Fighters can take. Fighter Bonus Feat should mean as much or more then Maneuver. This will probably mean a new list of feats...so what? The Feat system is overdone and bloated, and there's an entire book of new feats called Maneuvers to provide great guidelines, and page after page of things called PrCs with Class abilities to also take.
====Aelryinth
While I did admit that at levels 15+ the fighter could use a slight boost, and I do mean slight, I never said I found the warblade to be mechanically sound. If I did then I misspoke.
And/or I misread, or read too much into it.
I find the warblade to be too mechanically good. Anything that basically keeps you from playing another class is either too good (warblade) or too bad (samurai). The warblade basically subsumes the fighter and I don't like that.
But what if the fighter deserves to be subsumed or replaced, or rather, should have been, but wasn't due to the time and/or intellectual restraints of the time? Considering how the barbarian, bard, monk, and ranger all received changes (upgrades mostly) from 3.0 to 3.5 but the fighter didn't (despite needing it more badly), would it be fair to say that the original fighter class should be relegated to purely 3.0 status, and that warblade is in fact the 3.5 re-write of the fighter?
I have no major issue with the flavor, I understand that it can be changed. My issue was the manner of the "fix" for melee-ers. Giving them abilities that resemble spells mechanically, regardless of the designation given to them, rankles me.
D&D and most D20 games in general, by virtue of the way the system was designed, are heavily skewed in favor of limited use, high intensity abilities (such as spells), as opposed to (theoretically) "unlimited" use, low intensity abilities (such as feats). Barring heavy DM favoritism or a radical re-write of how feats and magic function in general (i.e. the speculative "4th edition"), I don't think it's possible for a class to be as effective as it should be, unless it has at least some "abilities that resemble spells mechanically."
While not technically a spell, barbarian rage operates along similar principles in that it's also a limited use, high intensity ability; judicious application of it is the reason that barbarians tend to out-perform fighters in melee. Likewise, rangers get the edge on fighters in ranged combat, because even though fighters can take more feats (unlimited use, low intensity), rangers have access to archery-boosting spells (limited use, high intensity), which despite having a limited duration, are typically several times more powerful than what a feat or even several feats would allow (again, this might just mean that the feat system in general requires drastic change).
Anyway, until such a time (a 4th edition?) that the game system actually makes unlimited use, low intensity as valid an option as limited use, high intensity, I would suggest that you accept the warblade (and martial adepts in general) at least as a temporary stopgap measure; the "lesser of two evils" if you will. It's no one person's fault; D&D 3.x was written too imperfectly, to the point where the fighter had to be replaced by something like the warblade.
D&D and most D20 games in general, by virtue of the way the system was designed, are heavily skewed in favor of limited use, high intensity abilities (such as spells), as opposed to (theoretically) "unlimited" use, low intensity abilities (such as feats). Barring heavy DM favoritism or a radical re-write of how feats and magic function in general (i.e. the speculative "4th edition"), I don't think it's possible for a class to be as effective as it should be, unless it has at least some "abilities that resemble spells mechanically."
I think this is largely true, but, what about a Rogue? Her sneak attack ability doesn't resemble any spell. Like a good number of Fighter feats, SA is limited not by uses per day, but by the limited set of situations it can be used in.
We can look at feats in much the same way. Many feats, particularly those outside of the core PHB set (tactical feats being a good example), give a Fighter benefits only in very specific situations. It's a different kind of limiting factor, but it can balance out if you can get it right. The trouble is that there are no feats that can even come close to high level spells.
@Warric: I raised the same issue a while back. Aelryinth's response is here: http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=11493170&postcount=58
Actually, I was wondering what everyone's thoughts were on the "combat styles" idea, as seen in Seerow's Fighter? Even in the absence of any other changes, mightn't this give the higher level Fighter much-needed flexibility and an ability to specialise within each of his styles?
And/or I misread, or read too much into it.
But what if the fighter deserves to be subsumed or replaced, or rather, should have been, but wasn't due to the time and/or intellectual restraints of the time? Considering how the barbarian, bard, monk, and ranger all received changes (upgrades mostly) from 3.0 to 3.5 but the fighter didn't (despite needing it more badly), would it be fair to say that the original fighter class should be relegated to purely 3.0 status, and that warblade is in fact the 3.5 re-write of the fighter?
D&D and most D20 games in general, by virtue of the way the system was designed, are heavily skewed in favor of limited use, high intensity abilities (such as spells), as opposed to (theoretically) "unlimited" use, low intensity abilities (such as feats). Barring heavy DM favoritism or a radical re-write of how feats and magic function in general (i.e. the speculative "4th edition"), I don't think it's possible for a class to be as effective as it should be, unless it has at least some "abilities that resemble spells mechanically."
While not technically a spell, barbarian rage operates along similar principles in that it's also a limited use, high intensity ability; judicious application of it is the reason that barbarians tend to out-perform fighters in melee. Likewise, rangers get the edge on fighters in ranged combat, because even though fighters can take more feats (unlimited use, low intensity), rangers have access to archery-boosting spells (limited use, high intensity), which despite having a limited duration, are typically several times more powerful than what a feat or even several feats would allow (again, this might just mean that the feat system in general requires drastic change).
Anyway, until such a time (a 4th edition?) that the game system actually makes unlimited use, low intensity as valid an option as limited use, high intensity, I would suggest that you accept the warblade (and martial adepts in general) at least as a temporary stopgap measure; the "lesser of two evils" if you will. It's no one person's fault; D&D 3.x was written too imperfectly, to the point where the fighter had to be replaced by something like the warblade.
If a class is designed to be replaced, it should be designed not to be a 'core class'. I.e. it shouldn't have 20 levels, it should focus on low level power, and it shouldn't have a capstone...it should have a transition ability.
The Fighter was not designed as a 'temporary class'. It turned into one because of a simple 'elective rule'....melee PrCs. With PrCs to compare to, any notion of the Fighter as a specialist is laughable...PrCs specialize just as well or better. The Fighter 'became' the transition class.
Most PrCs simply should not exist. Their abilities should be feat trees and/or Fighter Sub levels.
Nice observation on the odd levels. It's worth noting that almost all classes gain regular power-ups at odd levels...especially the spell casters, but Initiator levels for the Martial Classes are based on the Odd levels, too.
Sub levels for Fighter are always based on Even levels because the fighter bonus feat is there. I propose that all fighter sub levels be at odd levels...which would mean Fighters actually get something every level.
====Aelryinth
While I did admit that at levels 15+ the fighter could use a slight boost, and I do mean slight, I never said I found the warblade to be mechanically sound. If I did then I misspoke. I find the warblade to be too mechanically good. Anything that basically keeps you from playing another class is either too good (warblade) or too bad (samurai). The warblade basically subsumes the fighter and I don't like that.
I'm having a very difficult time understanding your rationale. I think I understand what you are saying, I just don't understand why you find it acceptable or should be the rule. You have indicated you prefer that wizards should move mountains and be more powerful than fighters because that is how you interpret fantasy stories.
Even if I were to agree this is my impression of fantasy literature, why on earth would I want to play a game and accept a gimped role vis-à-vis everyone else? When I play Chess, I do not remove one of my bishops. When I play basketball, I do not place a restriction that I cannot take 3 point shots whereas my opponents/teammates can. I suppose there are folks out there who are not very competitive and would not mind knowingly play a gimped class/role but I am sure most forced into such a role would resent it even if they "accepted" it on the outside.
You have also indicated you dislike the warblade because it overshadows the fighter into obsolescence. With the Warblade around, of course nobody will play the fighter because the warblade is too good.
Hmm...
1) Does this not parallel your thinking regarding wizards and fighters? I mean, you have no problem with spellcasters "subsuming" fighters because they should be better than melee-ers. Now all of a sudden it is a problem?
2) How are you so sure the fighter is the correct standard to which other melee classes should be measured and not the warblade? Because it came first? If anything, it being first would strongly suggest it should *not* be the standard as after 3 1/2 years of experience its flaws have beckoned some sort of fix. Because it is called "fighter"? Seriously, what makes it so venerated that infringing upon its sacred place become heresy?
3) How are you so sure the warblade is too good? I remain thoroughly unconvinced. It is flashy, fun, and allows for more *options* than the dull and flavorless fighter, but its dependence on standard actions means missing out on full attack options (quite noticeable when one is hasted) and charging barbarians still out-damage them strike for strike.
It is easy to be mesmerized by flash, so while I am disappointed with the assertions the ToB are overpowered - most of them little more than knee-jerk reactions - I suppose I can begrudgingly accept the fact DMs will pointlessly ban it.
I do *not* understand why it is acceptable to compel someone to play a gimped class [fighters] vis-à-vis everyone else [wizards] simply because it conforms with a opinion regarding fantasy literature.
A 20th level wizard without any magic items=still scary.
A 20th level Rogue without magic items=still sneaky.
etc.
But a 20th level fighter? Sure, he'd clean up in a bar fight, but he'd likely lose a brawl with a well equipped 5th level fighter, and almost guaranteed to lose against any spellcaster.
And I take some umbrage at your description of the fighter in your second to last paragraph. It relegates him entirely to a supporting role, where others can be the hero. Traditionally, it is quite the other way around. The fighter is the hero, and the sage, wise man, trickster and so forth are there for support. It is the Fighter who does things, and the others who are along to help, because they are simply not capable of dealing with threats the way the fighter is.
===Aelryinth
Random thought - how about the addition of an ability for the fighter that makes it much more worthwhile for others to buff him? Say, around levels 7-10, he gains an ability that doubles the +'s and durations of all buffs cast on him, doubles his flanking bonus, etc... And then another class ability around 18-20 that triples them? This way, while a cleric _can_ buff himself up into some sort of uber-fighter, it's actually more useful for him to cast all of those spells on his fighter friend instead... Everyone benefits from having a fighter in the party because he's capable of turning their support into something extraordinary, in a way they couldn't by themselves.
Obviously, it wouldn't solve everything - but it'd certainly make people glad to have a fighter or two in the party with them, and make him more of a central person in those big fights that you'd _expect_ people to look towards the fighter as the hero of.
Random thought - how about the addition of an ability for the fighter that makes it much more worthwhile for others to buff him? Say, around levels 7-10, he gains an ability that doubles the +'s and durations of all buffs cast on him, doubles his flanking bonus, etc... And then another class ability around 18-20 that triples them? This way, while a cleric _can_ buff himself up into some sort of uber-fighter, it's actually more useful for him to cast all of those spells on his fighter friend instead... Everyone benefits from having a fighter in the party because he's capable of turning their support into something extraordinary, in a way they couldn't by themselves.
Obviously, it wouldn't solve everything - but it'd certainly make people glad to have a fighter or two in the party with them, and make him more of a central person in those big fights that you'd _expect_ people to look towards the fighter as the hero of.
I allude to this principle in one of my earlier posts. The crux of the problem is the abilities the Fighter is based on (Str, Con, Dex) are the easiest to emulate/replace/enhance. Between Polymorphing, Shapechanging, Enlarging, Templating, and Buff Spells, the abilities of the Fighter can get very, very quickly overshadowed. The ability of certain spells to enhance BAB to that of a melee class, and to cast spells that grant benefits the Fighter cannot emulate, only make the discrepancy worse.
Enhancing the power of buff spells cast on you still means the caster has to choose to cast on you, and now you have a new balance issue...perhaps you are TOO strong?
Look at Part TWO of the Lunchtime D@D battle, where Mike Mearls use the old Against the Giants against a 3E party. The deadliest fighter? A buffed up Animal Companion, with an AC so high it was unhittable. Probably Animal Growthed, Bite of the Werebear'd, Barkskinned, Venomfire'd, and Avatar of Nature'd, or somesuch combo.
So, here the problem is the spells themselves, and what they make possible.
While this would be a unique solution, what it in essence is pointing back to is the nature of buff spells and what they make possible to replace the fighter.
===Aelryinth
Random thought - how about the addition of an ability for the fighter that makes it much more worthwhile for others to buff him? Say, around levels 7-10, he gains an ability that doubles the +'s and durations of all buffs cast on him, doubles his flanking bonus, etc... And then another class ability around 18-20 that triples them? This way, while a cleric _can_ buff himself up into some sort of uber-fighter, it's actually more useful for him to cast all of those spells on his fighter friend instead... Everyone benefits from having a fighter in the party because he's capable of turning their support into something extraordinary, in a way they couldn't by themselves.
Obviously, it wouldn't solve everything - but it'd certainly make people glad to have a fighter or two in the party with them, and make him more of a central person in those big fights that you'd _expect_ people to look towards the fighter as the hero of.
Dude, that is the most ridiculous ruling I have EVER SEEN!!
Just kidding it's just the opposite! TOTALLY AWESOME! Perhaps by extending it to all BAB full classes, (or you gain the benefit after achieving a certain BAB) Heck, have it be fortitude based, because it take a fortitude high enough to handle the increased magical energy? Just a great idea. No it doesn't fix everything, but it’s a very simple efficient patch.
Generally, anything involving multiplication just isn't going to work out right.
The core of the situation is clear. The Fighter chassis isn't valuable enough to start with. Following that, the bonus feats are not providing enough kick to help the fighter keep up with other high level classes, nor any prestige class (barring maybe Vigilante).
Here is the Fighter I'm using in my campaign. Just starting so no real testing yet, but I'll soon see the results. Several of the abilities were based of on Lotus Cranes rebalanced classes
With that said, here goes:
The fighter only gets one class exclusive feature; the very few fighter only feats Weapon Specialization, Greater Weapon Focus, and Greater Weapon Specialization. What if we eliminated these three feats altogether. Instead, when a Fighter chooses Weapon Focus as one of his feats, two things happen: 1. it gradually gets better as he rises in level, 2. it applies to all weapons of a given type (slashing, piercing, bludgeoning, ranged).
For example:
Level 1: Fighter takes Weapon Focus (slashing) +1 to hit with all slashing weapons
Level 4: +1 to hit, +2 damage
Level 8: +2 to hit, +2 damage
Level 12: +2 to hit, +4 damage
note: the progression should not stop here, but continue so...
Level 16: +3 to hit, +4 damage
Level 20: +3 to hit, +6 damage
With the expense of one feat, the fighter has gained weapon versatility. Also, where it took 4 feats to get the most out of one particular weapon, now it takes 4 feats to get the most out of nearly all weapons. Maybe that's too good...what do you think? It automatically changes certain feats like Improved Critical.
Next, It is frustrating rising in level and getting only hit points and +1 BAB; a dead level as I've seen it posted here...
Level 5 gains endurance as a bonus feat.
Level 7 gains Combat Focus +1
Level 11 Combat Focus +2
Level 15 Combat Focus +3
Level 19 Combat Focus +4
I derived "Combat Focus" from the PHB II from the section on Combat Form Feats. This is what it would do...
At the start of an encounter, on his turn the fighter's combat sense kicks in (call it what you want... adrenaline, sheer will power, clear mindedness...). For the duration of the encounter, the fighter gains a +1 dodge bonus to AC and a +1 on Will saves. This bonus increases every four levels (+2 at 11th, +3 at 15th, +4 at 19th).
Also the fighter gains 4 skill points per level and has the following additional class skills: Spot, Listen, Use Rope.
I derived these skill changes based on what I've seen in this thread. Plus, I like how it plays in the classic party setup:
Cleric 2 ranks/lvl
Wizard 2 ranks/lvl
Fighter 4 ranks/lvl
Rogue 8 ranks/lvl
It allows the fighter the opportunity to become a secondary lookout for the rogue.
So what do you think?
After reading through this very long thread, I have been inspired to come up with my own version of what a fighter progression should look like. I must admit that my knowledge of the supplementary books is limited and I've not read the Warblade (our group only uses the core rule books plus the PHB II). But if I’m not mistaken, from what I've read here it seems that less books to draw from helps the fighter's cause by limiting the vast number of PrCs, available spells and so on. I also tried use as a frame of reference the fighter's role in a "Classic Party" build, i.e. Fighter, Cleric, Rogue, Wizard.
With that said, here goes:
So what do you think?
I would add Balance to the skills, as I feel Balance/footwork is core to the image of the Fighter. Balance is to the Fighter on foot as Ride is to the Fighter on Horseback.
You have numerous dead levels still...3,9,13 and 17. I suggest moving your weapon focus upgrades to odd levels, or add a few of the simpler bonus feats.
You could, instead of giving the AC and Will bonus, just give bonus Combat focus feats at the levels, that way it won't look as much like you are rubbing off a Barbarian. However, it is a simple mechanic, and if it works to you, it is certainly not overpowered.
BTW, I’ve always believed Wizards should have bonus skill points to put into Knowledge skills. Giving a class noted for its scholarship crappy skill points just because smart people take the class is just plain stupid in my mind.
===Aelryinth
So, you pick up, say Weapon Finesse; it’s as good at level 16 as it was at lvl 1; since it gives you more stuff based on your BaB; same with Great Fortitude, Iron Will, Mage Slayer, Sniper or all the rest of them. With a total of 17 feats you can easily explore ranged, martial and perhaps something specialist like killing mages or being really hard to kill with certain types of effects.
While I am not opposed to scaling feats I am opposed to power-driven madness. A feat available since level 1 scaling from a +1 bonus to a +5 bonus seems ok. One allowing multiple abilities based on a single feat choice? Um, no.
In short, feats should be ranked level 1-9 just like everything else, with a whole bunch of generic feats (skill focus/affinity, the save feats, etc) as '0 level' things.
AND, AND, AND, you have to actually give value and weight to Armor and weapon profs. That would mean rewriting how PrCs are thought of.
A PrC should never be a mandatory thing to advance a concept. If you want to specialize with a PrC, it must be a give and take. Of all classes, it is the Fighter who gives up the least to PrC in favor of a concept, but contributes the most ahead of time (with the Sorcerer contributing little but also benefiting a lot).
===Aelryinth
BenTGaidin, that sounds like a good idea, until you realize just how powerful that would be. A 20th level wizard cast Bull' Strength on the Fighter. Now the Fighter has +12 Strength for the next hour and half. Worse, at this level it can be made persistent. A +12 Str bonus for three days is just wrong.
I don't have a group at present, so I can't exactly test out the idea. But while it's certainly a large number added on there, I'm not so certain that it'd be completely unreasonable for high level fighters. Really, what do they get out of it? Another +6 to hit and to damage, (or +12 to damage, if they dump the extra into Power Attack) which means they deal that much more damage while fighting, making them very dangerous to get near... Say another 24 damage a round or so, depending on how many of their iterative attacks hit, and how the power attack goes. Assuming they drop the rest of that series of spells on him (and why wouldn't they?) he also has +6 to his AC, another 120 HP (which _is_ nice, probably nearly doubling his total), +6 to his saves and skill checks. That’s a nice set of benefits, but they don't seem all that game-breaking for a 20th level character who still has to walk up to his enemies and hit them with a heavy, pointed chunk of metal.
After all, isn't one of the main complaints about high level fighters is that everyone else takes care of the fights, because the enemies are too dangerous to go toe-to-toe with, or simply have too many hitpoints to handle that way? The fighter still will have trouble closing with the enemy, but at least now they've got a good reason to fear him as well. (And he's still vulnerable to being dispelled, too.) Sure, it makes him a god to commoners, able to wrestle giants to the ground with one hand tied behind his back, but a 20th level character should be fairly powerful.
Well, at least the `concept` of getting level-appropriate abilities has emerged. Why not just use Races of War feats with a plain-Jane core fighter? Feats that scale based on BaB or Skill Ranks allow a pile of options.
So, you pick up, say Weapon Finesse; it’s as good at level 16 as it was at lvl 1; since it gives you more stuff based on your BaB; same with Great Fortitude, Iron Will, Mage Slayer, Sniper or all the rest of them. With a total of 17 feats you can easily explore ranged, martial and perhaps something specialist like killing mages or being really hard to kill with certain types of effects.
A feat rewrite is probably at the heart of what is needed to make the Fighter come alive. Everyone has their favorites in style and application. If Races of War works for you, go for it! It's probably true that if Fighter Bonus Feats were set up correctly, the Fighter probably wouldn't need much more adjusting then his skills but to do so, you'd basically have to triple the power/versatility of the feats he takes and really, really focus on the level appropriate powers of feats.
===Aelryinth
The problem comes when he doesn't get a full attack, or can't pull off a 'special combo'...i.e. an ubercharge, use his megatinked trip build with Enlarge Person and spiked chain, etc. Suddenly, his weaknesses come fully into play. Horrible defenses for a tank. He can't MAKE creatures attack him instead of his friends. He has no recovery options and is highly vulnerable to save or dies. His ability to enhance damage comes at huge cost to his class abilities (his feats). Battlefield control against monstrous opponents at later levels tends to be on the range of difficult to impossible. The money needed to be spent on uber gear also needs to be spent on stuff that allows him to reach an enemy and withstand their special attacks. Lastly, his standard attacks tend to be underpowered versus his full attacks, or trying to grab a Pounce effect for a charge.
On pure damage, the Fighter does okay with the Weapon Spec tree...but it costs So Many Feats. It's all the other stuff which poses the problem. If you look at my comparison to the Warblade, some of the glaring weaknesses stand out:
The Warblade's Int-based class abilities reward tactical thinking with extremely effective defenses and attacks as the Warblade levels.
The Warblade has access to maneuvers which provide tremendous defensive ability, specifically the Diamond mind Concentration save boosters AND Iron Heart Surge.
The Warblade has access to recovery options and self-healing without forced reliance on a cleric to restore his only commodity he can use up...his hit points.
A Warblade's maneuvers are extremely, even extraordinarily effective, BECAUSE they are standard actions, not Full Attacks. A Standard action allows movement and more tactical usage. People who play against effective monsters at high levels will tell you that getting a full attack on a monster is either very unlikely OR letting one get taken on you is suicide.
Lastly, Warblades are never bound by their choices. Retraining is built right into the class, and a Warblade at low levels can have an entirely different focus at high levels, in many, many ways. Fighters are locked into their feats.
The skill point and out of combat stuff is, of course, classic and protested, and quite unfair, as is the undervaluing of a Fighter's weapon and armor proficiencies. Thus, the solution to the Fighter is not merely giving him more TH/DMG stuff. That's the Frenzied Berserker route.
==Aelryinth
Lastly, Warblades are never bound by their choices. Retraining is built right into the class, and a Warblade at low levels can have an entirely different focus at high levels, in many, many ways. Fighters are locked into their feats.
==Aelryinth
That is the number one problem I have with Warblades. I believe you have to stick by your choices. That is why I don't use the rebuilding/retraining rules.
That is the number one problem I have with Warblades. I believe you have to stick by your choices. That is why I don't use the rebuilding/retraining rules.
Sorcerers don't have to stick with their spells anymore...retraining is built in. Prepared casters have never had to worry about fixed choices...it's built in. Fighters have a variable build, but no way to change things if suddenly their circumstances change. No way to turn a useless feat into a usable one, or upgrade something crappy for something decent.
It's not something spellcasters ever get penalized for. Penalizing a melee character for it is just pouring acid on their wounds.
===Aelryinth
That is the number one problem I have with Warblades. I believe you have to stick by your choices. That is why I don't use the rebuilding/retraining rules.
So, you believe that, if you're doing something wrong or ineffectively, you should continue doing things that way, because that's how you first decided to approach the situation? No successful person operates like that. In any endeavor, you make mistakes. You try something, and it doesn't work out the way you thought it would. You learn from that, and don't do it again.
As an example, a long time ago, I was a fairly talented martial artist within a specific style. However, when I gained more experience in more situations, I discovered that my style was designed with certain assumptions in mind, and that those assumptions didn't adequately reflect a combat situation. Therefore, I restructured my entire way of fighting. I couldn't fight the way I used to if I tried, because I've retrained myself to fight in this other way, and it's much more effective.
It's not a moral issue. Sticking with poor decisions because you've already made them doesn't make them good decisions. It makes you stubborn and foolish. Also, if your life and others depends on your ability, it makes you selfish, and probably dead.
And that's why maneuvers better reflect a fighter's training than non-retainable feats.
Maneuvers:
- Spring Attack/Ride-by Attack/ Shot on the Run
- Deflect Arrows
- Snatch Arrows (as a higher level version of Deflect Arrows)
- Ride-By Attack
- Cleave (going up to Great Cleave)
- Whirlwind Attack
Stances:
- the obvious- Dwarven Defender's Defensive Stance
Other things I think might be better as maneuvers are the Improved Trip/Disarm etc. The normal trip and disarm would still be normal attack options, but the improved forms would be maneuvers.
This could be controversial, but as a player who prefers playing melee characters, I find I never use trip, disarm, sunder etc because there are too many drawbacks and I'm very unlikely to actually do it, and if I wanted to become competent at it then I'd have to spend 2 feats to get it.
While this would weaken the characters who do have it since it could no longer be used every round, it would mean it was easier to use these since they only require one maneuver rather than 2 feats, and if you find you no longer use tripping (say if you start fighting a lot of four legged monsters) then you can just focus on other maneuvers (swapping out the Trip maneuver).
Doing this sort of thing is basically impossible at the moment- there are too many feats and class abilities to look at, let alone put in sensible schools and balance. Also, this would basically require a couple of new schools, and a general way of getting back maneuvers- it would no longer be possible to have just the one use per encounter since this would nerf those who do use such tactics a huge amount.
Concerning Fighters though, I'm currently running a game where there is one Fighter 4 and one Barbarian 1 / Fighter 2 / Warblade 1. I currently think the multiclassed character is a lot more powerful than the straight fighter, but I don't want to retrospectively change the Fighter class too much in order to get them equal, and the multiclassed player would then just start taking more levels in Fighter.
What I'm currently about to try though, is to have the Fighter have full Initiator level, remove the max of 3 maneuvers restriction, and give it a maneuver from any school at 3rd, a stance at 5th, another maneuver at 7th, stance at 9th and so on, alternating the maneuver and stance at each odd level. This immediately removes the dead levels, and gives the straight fighter another option in combat. This doesn't change the balance a huge amount, but importantly gives the straight fighter more options, and lets him have more fun.
This allows a Fighter to basically focus on one school, like focusing on one weapon, or give them a wide variety of low level options.
About the retraining rules, I agree that retraining some things, especially levels, seems crazy, but some things such as skills I can agree with. I view it as either forgetting some things, or focusing on others to an extent that they no longer as proficient in other areas (moving points from one skill to another). Something as drastic as Weapon Aptitude though I completely disagree with, which is why I'm never going to try using that class ability or letting one of my players use it.
By implementing the requirements of having feats in Armor proficiency and not allowing things like Scribe Scroll to be taken after 1st level, you cut down on the dip into Prestige class abuse as well.
Similarly, the front loading of feats that make up many of the classes encourage dipping not for role-playing reasons but simply for power-considerations.
What I find weird is that WOTC understood that with regard to skill points but somehow missed the boat on 1st level abilities/feats? WTH is up with that?
That is the number one problem I have with Warblades. I believe you have to stick by your choices. That is why I don't use the rebuilding/retraining rules.
I'm not sure this is fair to the fighters though. What it does is that it actually makes the fighter a non-newbie choice as a new player isn't going to realize that Monkey Grip is a sub-optimal choice etc. Compare this with the divine caster and the sorcerer who are wrong only once a day (and if given 15 minutes, have the right choice with a slot open).
Sure, if the wizard takes Weapon Focus:Axe as a feat we would scratch our heads, but our class ability isn't hampered permanently. Hell, you could NOT take any useful feat for a druid INCLUDING Natural Spell and a Druid 20 would still be a force to be reckoned with since his class abilities are JUST THAT GOOD.
A fighter's class ability is feats though and picking a wrong choice at level X will slow your development. In fact, pick all "bad" feats and your 15th level fighter becomes MUCH< MUCH weaker. Only the sorcerer is this new user unfriendly of the base classes IMO.
For intelligence, you could build up an extra bonus that lasts for 5 turns + your int mod, after fighting defensively for 4 rounds -1 per int mod. This bonus would be equal to 1/3 your BAB. Charisma would be like an aura of fear, due to the way your enemies would interpret how confident you are. Basically Fighter Level + Cha Bonus.
Wisdom would be like a deflection bonus or something. Strength would be like a power attack that takes place once every 10-str bonus rounds, and functions like whirlwind attack. You would pick two of these special qualities. Also, maybe you could substitute an ability in for strength for damage.
Strength represents shearing through stuff, dexterity finding weak sports in armor, intelligence timing an attack, constitution hitting repeatedly, doing bruised throughout armor. Etc.
That is the number one problem I have with Warblades. I believe you have to stick by your choices. That is why I don't use the rebuilding/retraining rules.
If the universe stayed in one place I'd probably agree with you. But whilst wizards and clerics don't agree not to use the new spells that come in, I don't see why meleers should be bound to be limited by the options that were available to them at earlier times.
Not that Warblade retraining actually has anything to do with "sticking to your choices" in the first place. It's actually a major limitation on the class in that, unlike say wizards or clerics, half of their access to new high level abilities comes only at the cost of somehow "forgetting" how to use lower level ones.
I'm sure given the option Warblades would be quite happy to have to "stick with their choices" and just get a new highest level maneuver every level instead!
That is the number one problem I have with Warblades. I believe you have to stick by your choices. That is why I don't use the rebuilding/retraining rules.
They are then the only class that does. Barbarians have no choices. Rangers can actually choose a different fighting style if they want. Wizards choose a bad spell? They acquire a different one. Sorcerers choose a bad spell? Swap it out as a level mechanic...its part of the class. UA doesn't come into it. Psions get psionic reformation, of all things. Get to do it in one fell swoop.
The fighter has no ability to select the changing conditions of the campaign. Planning ahead is, in real life, not possible...you need skills that adapt to the needs of the now, not what you think they are going to be. In a real campaign, a 20 level build should be almost impossible, because you don't know what is going to be needed over those 20 levels.
A campaign that veers from a low level escort mission to battlefield fun to deepearth delving to extraplanar exploration encompasses a LOT of different situations, and feats used to make the best of things for the current problem become useless or outweighed later.
===Aelryinth
That is the number one problem I have with Warblades. I believe you have to stick by your choices. That is why I don't use the rebuilding/retraining rules.
Well, see that's not really fair. The wizard can 'retrain' daily with different spells. The same is true with the cleric and druid. This is especially true with the cleric and druid as they know all their spells. They never have to stick with their choices for more than a day. The sorcerer is even allowed to switch out some of his old spells for new ones at the same levels as a warblade (unless you don't allow that as well which would also be unfair). The only way this would be fair if you only allowed wizards, clerics and druids to prepare their spells once when they level. After that they would simply have to rest and/or meditate to regain the same spells in the same slots.
More ways to look at a Fighter
Redefining Level One Characters
Without a doubt, the worst levels of Fighter are the first and the second.
Why? Because they give the entire class away.
10 HP.
Medium Armor Prof
Heavy Armor Prof
Martial Weapons Prof (!!)
Shield Prof
Tower Shield Prof
Bonus Fighter Feat
Good Fort Save
+1 BAB
Then, d10 HP
+1 BAB
Bonus Fighter feat
+1 Fort
If you want to give value to the Fighter you have to start evaluating first level class abilities very, very differently.
For instance, tell me WHY you get all them bonus skill points at level One. Easy. It represents years and years of learning the ins and outs of your trade, ergo, your first level class. Well, tell me exactly WHAT all those first level feats of the Fighter represent? Uh huh. the EXACT SAME THING.
It is time to feed dippers and nonmartial classes their teeth, and put some bite into those first two levels. You don't want Fighters to have more skill points. That's fine. Then at least give some value to their starting feats.
Rule ONE: All characters have simple weapons and light armor proficiency. A commoner or expert gets this. Do I have a problem with mages having this? No. Once you introduce mithral, it's a moot point, anyways.
Rule ONE-A: Mithral armor doesn't get around Proficiency restrictions. Non-proficiency penalties mean loss of all Dex mods, Doubled Armor Penalties, and doubled Arcane Spell Failure base (before any reductions). Moreover, spell failure applies to divine spells if you aren't proficient, either! (No druids waltzing around in Dragonhide full plate without proficiency, sorry).
Rule TWO: No class grants any Weapon Proficiency, Medium or Heavy Armor Proficiency except at Character Level One.
Justify: Seriously, what do you think Fighters do with all their time, since they have no skill points? You bury your nose in a book or apprentice to some skill-heavy master and practice skills. They spend months/days/years practicing with all kinds of weapons, in all kinds of armor, using all kinds of shields and tactics. It's the exact same thing, but from a different angle.
But you get a hefty bonus for those years once in your life. Melee classes get no recognition of the time and effort involved in their training whatsoever. Yes, in one level of casting sleep spells on goblins, that wizard over there miraculously became proficient in dozens of weapons and learned how to troop around in heavy armor without complaining about it.
If you want to learn a weapon, take a look in the mirror. How long is it going to take you to learn how to use a sword properly, swing a flail without bashing yourself in the ear, spin a staff, fight with a knife, or wrestle effectively? If you want to learn those things, you actually go out and learn them one by one. In other words, you actual do blow a feat on them. You don't go to a fencing school to learn martial weapons; you go there to learn fencing with fencing weapons. Unless you have a really eclectic instructor, you'll probably never pick up a staff, spear, or mace, or chain weapon. Taking a semester of Fencing 101 doesn't make you a level 1 Fighter or even a warrior. It makes you proficient in fencing weapons, i.e. it removes a penalty. This is not recognized under the current system.
So, what happens with dippers? They have to make a HARD choice. Martial weapons, Armor Profs, Shield Profs, or all them juicy low level skill points?
But what about someone who does take Fighter later? Even I'm not so cruel as to suggest blowing an entire feat on Martial Weapon Proficiency (rapier). Happily, the answer is found in the centerpiece of the Fighter class, the Weapon Spec tree. To wit, if you take Weapon Focus as a Fighter feat, you are considered proficient in the weapon if it is considered a martial weapon.
This is exactly equal to the power of the War Domain (auto prof in the deity's weapon with WF to boot. We wouldn't think of choosing a deity for a specific weapon, would we?). This also nicely folds in the bastard sword, dwarven waraxe, urgosh and other martial/exotic weapon mixes...no need to blow an Exotic Weapon slot on marginal bonuses. leave exotic weapons for exotic weapons. You can now take katanas and bastard swords to full effect by taking Weapon Focus in them, as they are martial weapons.
Now, this clearly favors races or classes that get auto prof in certain weapons (Elves, I'm looking at you.) My view? So what? It's so marginal a benefit, and what it does is forces dippers into elven stereotypes (they have to use a longsword, bow, spear or rapier, heh!). I'll be satisfied with that.
Rule THREE: Any PrC that grants Martial Weapons Prof, any/all Armor Profs, and Shield prof now REQUIRES THEM.
Yes, that's right. If you want to get into Uber Martial PrC, you'd best have the right foundation under you. You just don't get to pick up five Feats for free with one level of ANY class except at first level. Down with PrC Munchkinness! Those PrCs don't take some half ass fencer; you need those abilities BEFORE you enter, you don't get them handed to you. Seriously, why would you possibly think anyone could get into Duelist without the right weapon profs, or Dwarven Defender without heavy armor prof? They aren't going to teach you that. You need to know it already!
Never noticed how PrCs gave away all those extra feats now, did you? Well, now you do. A PrC is about class abilities. It should have no bonus feats on entry. It's just another thing that takes away from Martial classes. A PrC is nothing more then an alternate set of class abilities, and should be evaluated exactly as such--a modified Feats tree with flavor is all it is.
===Aelryinth
Got about halfway through the entire thread and I wanted to point this out before I pass out from exhaustion (dang, you guys write longer posts than I do, and that's saying something).
Spycraft had an interesting mechanic for handling the multiclass dipping that D&D still abuses. It used a Core Class Ability that essentially said that if a character selects this class at his 1st character level, he gets an additional ability that isn't available if he later multiclasses into this class. It also repeated this tactic for the first prestige class you enter, allowing a second Core Class Ability for that PrC. Not to say that Spycraft discouraged multiclassing or heavily gimped characters that did so; it just gave you a bonus for your first choices. A similar mechanic can be used here, but moving back from "handy bonus" to "good thing you were here at the start of class".
However, something that I think should be used is the "X Progression" mechanic for class abilities. For example, a character levels up in a class that offers "Evasion X". If the character did not have an Evasion ability from earlier in his career, he only gains Evasion. However, if he has Evasion already, he now gains Improved Evasion.
In this situation, a character from a non-melee class that decides to multiclass into a melee class would gain an "Armor Improvement X" class ability. Assuming he starts with Light Armor Proficiency from his previous class, he now gains Medium AP. If he enters another class with the same 1st class level ability, he would finally gain Heavy AP. However, the 1st character level Fighter gains AIX both as a 1st class level ability and as a CCA, so he starts the game already at Heavy AP, plus (tower) shields.
The stuff above is just open examples, not necessarily exactly what I would apply to your current Fighter class build. I'm a rulebook hound, so I tend to glean good ideas from a good number of sources. In addition to Spycraft above, take a look at D20 Modern/Future (especially the base classes talent trees) and Arcana Unearthed/Evolved (especially the Champion class, with its in-class variants).
I look forward to finishing this thread to find out where it's ended up, and I'll try to bring in my ideas to help out, but it'll have to wait until tomorrow. Work to do, and not enough energy and time to do this and that both.
That is the number one problem I have with Warblades. I believe you have to stick by your choices. That is why I don't use the rebuilding/retraining rules.
But why should a "Warrior type" be stuck with his choices and no other class is? Sorcerers, swap out. Wizards can buy, steal, new spell. Druid/Clerics know everything on their list everyday? Rouges typically don't have to choose, they get enough points to actually have all skills. So why should warriors be stuck with that limit? Given that why would anyone play one at all?
Do we need PrCs for Fighters? No. Just assign class abilities to equal feats and create a feat tree. Problem solved. If you have a Fighter feat for every level, this is almost ridiculously easy. If people decry balance, laugh and point at the equivalents.
Amen! I "LOL" hard in the face of staunch defenders of the "balanced fighter" as it is.
We do indeed need full bonus feats, and PrC-like abilities made into feat chains. Some famous ones include Hide In Plain Sight, Skirmish/Sneak Attack and related attacks, massive damage bonuses, more hit points (perhaps an Improved Toughness type feat but cumulative), maybe more stat bonuses, and most definitely some spell duplication effects especially combat self-buffs, movement, and detection. The more the better.
And for scalability, base everything off of Base Attack. If we can make this into the equivalent of an Initiator Level, that's most the issue of self-advancing abilities there, right? OK so other classes like Barbarian and Ranger might tap into these feat chains but the Fighter will be able to MASTER it. Like add BAB to melee or ranged damage... BAB to AC as Dodge... BAB as spell resistance... so many avenues to explore there.
Being able to be a master of every weapon with a few hours practice makes no sense to me at all. If my fighter works his way up to weapon supremacy and then the warblade also does (albeit 2 levels later) and then can change it to any weapon he wants that seems wholly unbalanced and really very lame. Saying that the fighter should be able to as well is not an option. A master swordsman, even though he knows the basics of axe use, should not be able to be just as proficient with a days practice.
But, what I’m going to try to do is look at the fighter from the perspective of a 'mirror image' of the Warblade. For maneuvers, I'm going to be using feats. Since feats don't have a recovery mechanic, this is fine. You'll find it impressive what feats can do once you treat them like maneuvers. You'll also see that adding some class abilities to a fighter isn't overpowered at all.
=============
Base Campaign Premises:
Level One: Like extra skill points, all proficiencies gained at first level of a class are not gained by multiclassing. For example, you cannot multiclass into Fighter and pick up all his weapon and armor proficiencies. Such things are the core of the martial classes.
This immediately makes the Core shtick of the Fighter worthwhile.
Premise Two: PrCs that formerly granted weapon and armor proficiences now require them for entry, much like spellcasting classes.
This means you can't dip a PrC to pick up a proficiency, and 'get around' the first level dip loss of base classes. It also means that if you want to get into a martial PrC, you'd best be starting as a martial oriented class.
Premise Three: Martial PrCs should be almost non-existent. If they can't be expressed as part of an existing martial class by use of feats or maneuvers, or substitution levels, then they are likely unbalanced. Most PrCs should represent a 'mix' not possible with core classes, such as a Gish or Gosh build (Fighter/arcane, fighter/divine). A Commando build should take a strong look at Ranger and modifying class abilities thereof.
Note that as soon as you take away 'free' proficiencies and 'starting' saves, all PrCs basically just become substitution levels.
Premise Four: "Starting Saves" is completely optional, and the DM should be encouraged to just change the save progression to fast or slow. This will preclude dipping classes for hefty save bonuses (yes, you get the equivalent of three save feats with ONE level of monk! woo hoo!)
Premise Five: Mithral armor does not allow you to forgo being proficient in an armor. If a character does not have proficiency in an armor type, he cannot apply his Dex mod to AC while in it, and adds the base AC bonus as an additional penalty to all spellcasting checks.
Premise Six: The only classes starting with Heavy Armor Proficiency are the Fighter, the Warrior, and the Paladin (and the Knight, if you use him). The cleric may take Heavy Weapon Prof as the granted power of the Protection or War domains instead of the normal power.
=====
Fighter, base Chassis
D10: We're going to stick with the D10 hit dice because a Fighter can become an archer, swashbuckler, or ranged attacker, none of which fit the 'tank' image. they also train in missile weapons, which the Warblade does not, and the barbarian rarely uses.
Armor Proficiencies: Heavy Armor + Tower Shield. HOWEVER...
The Fighter may, at level one, opt out of his armor proficiencies to play a light fighter.
He may opt out of Medium/Heavy Armor to gain an INt or Wis bonus to his AC. This is considered to be the same as Monk's Wis bonus to AC. It applies in Light or no armor.
He may opt out of Medium+Prof +Shields to gain a scaling AC bonus as per the monk. His Int/Wis bonus to AC applies only when in no armor.
Note: Because he must give up his Armor feats, this is subject to the LEvel ONe proficiency rules above. In effect, you can't gain any of these alternate AC benefits after level one as a Fighter. Go be a monk. It's what retired fighters do!
He may opt out of Heavy Armor/Tower Shields to gain Fast Movement as a Barbarian.
He may opt out of Shields to gain Weapon Finesse.
All such costs must be paid independently. Just because you gave up all armor profs+Shields doesn't mean you get Fast Movement. It must be paid for by itself.
Weapon Proficiencies: All Martial and simple melee/missile weapons. The Fighter may give up Martial Weapons to pick up Improved Unarmed Strike if he wishes.
Special: A weapon that is a martial weapon is granted full Familiarity if taken as a Weapon Focus at first level (Waraxe and Bastard sword for specific examples).
Skills: The Fighter is a master of combat in all forms, and this includes all the skills necessary to perform all the skills of combat, much like the Warblade.
A Fighter's Class List consists of the Athletic series of Climb, Jump; Ride OR Balance; and Swim; Intimidation as the 'order giver'; Spot and Listen for Guard duties; Handle Animal for working with warbeasts; Craft/Profession for miscellaneous work; and Martial Lore for background of fighting skills of all styles and combat/lore of war.
Martial Lore: Expanded Role: Martial Lore now serves the function as the 'mass combat/strategy role', as well as serving the relatively minor role of identifying Maneuvers. History is a much broader field, Martial Lore focuses explicitly on battles, strategy, tactics and logistics of warfare, in addition to fairly intricate knowledge of personal combat and champions of the past.
Alignments: Fighters can be of any alignment. However, their tactical nature tends to lean them towards Lawful alignments. Many Fighters come from backgrounds as military officers, champions-at-arms, and mercenaries, and Lawful backgrounds tend to be better at working in teams and taking and giving orders. This also tends to put them in rivalries with their more ostentatious, glory-seeking counterparts, the Warblades.
Skill Points per level: 4, exactly the same as a Warblade or Barbarian. Fighters, because of their alignment tendencies, are actually inclined to be more bookish then either of their counterparts, and so learn more as an outgrowth of their mastery of fighting feats.
Saves: Good Fortitude save. Some class features will enhance his other saves, and he might use feats to boost them further.
======
Okay, the fun stuff, Class abilities and features.
Step One: Class Features
1) Weapon Aptitude, Weapon Confidence, (Feat Mastery)
2) Uncanny Dodge (like his martial peers)
3) Combat Focus
4) Battle Options
5) Bonus Combat Feat
6) Improved Uncanny Dodge
7) Battle Maneuvers
8)
9) Bonus Combat Feat
10)
11) Battle Defender
12)
13) BOnus Combat Feat
14)
15) Battle Opportunist
16)
17) Bonus Combat Feat
18)
19)
20) Fighting Mastery
Shtick: The Fighter is differentiated from his peers by 3 things: His reliance on weapons, his desire for a full Attack, and his skill.
1) Weapon Aptitude: Like the Warblade, the Fighter excels in all manner of weapons, and he picks the right one for the fight he's about to get into. He can apply any weapon specific feat he has to any other weapon he is proficient in with an hour of practice. This Aptitude lasts until the following morning, when it resets to his initial, 'favored' weapon. Many fighters take Improved Unarmed Strike as their favored weapon, and simply apply the lessons to whatever weapon of the day strikes them.
This ability works only for melee weapons OR missile weapons...you cannot swap melee and missile focus/specs.
Note that the Weapon Focus/Spec tree does not include Weapon Supremacy (which by definition must remain singular) nor Weapon Mastery (which includes multiple weapons). Effectively, it includes Weapon Focus/Spec, and the Greater, Superior and Epic versions of the same.
2) Weapon Confidence: With a weapon in hand, a Fighter knows he can take on the world. A Fighter adds his weapon's enhancement bonus as a Resistance bonus on all saves as long as it is in hand. If he has Focus in the weapon, he adds that bonus on as well. (Another reason why many Fighters take Improved UA...they always are armed then!)
(This does nothing more then save him some coin, as he won't have to buy a Cloak...and gives him a slight kicker as a reward for taking the Spec tree).
1) Feat Mastery: This is the counterpart to a Warblade's Recovery Mechanic, and sets a bar for the Fighter. Choose one interpretation.
Choose Spot (Wis), Martial Lore (Int) or Intimidation (Cha).
a) Subtract the synergy bonus for the Skill you've chosen from any ability requirements of a Fighter bonus feat you are going to take with your class abilities. Any feats that add a bonus to your Skill count as virtual ranks towards the synergy bonus (+2 at 5 ranks, +1/5 ranks thereafter)
OR
b) Subtract the ability score modifier for the Skill you've chosen from any ability score requirements for a Fighter bonus feat you've taken (i.e. you are choosing to apply Confidence (cha), Cunning (wis) or Brilliance (int) to your fighting feats). Your skill ranks must equal your BAB for this bonus to apply.
If your Fighter class is not your highest level class, you lose Feat Mastery as a result of falling from the path of the Fighter. This may cause you to lose eligibility for some feats.
(I suggest the DMs and players agree on one system and stick with it. The skill version has a practical limit of +6 at level 20 (23 ranks, +2 skill affinity), the stat version will probably max out at +6 or +7, but could go much higher in Epic. I recommend the Skill Ranks as best.)
---This now allows you to build a Fighter based on Int, Wis or Cha, in addition to Str or Dex!
2 and 6) Uncanny Dodge and Improved Uncanny Dodge. Because, like, any pure martial class should have these. They are merely feat-equivalents.
3) Combat Focus: As per the feat, for the most part. I would change the bonus to +1 Will save, +1 for every Focus feat (including this one). This allows a reward for every Focus feat, instead of plateauing at 3. It also launches the Fighter into the Focus tree and the goodness that can bring as a mental-oriented Fighter combat machine.
4 and 10) Battle options: Whenever the Fighter undertakes an alternate battle form (Aid Another, Defensive Fighting, Full Defense, Reckless Assault, Flanking) the bonus from the action is increased by 1/2 his Synergy Bonus (or Stat bonus) from his Feat Mastery to reflect his mastery of alternatives and tactics.
(This really, really reduces the need for silly Improved Flanking, Improved Aid Another, etc. feats).
5, 9,13,17) Bonus Combat feat: The Fighter may select a bonus Combat Feat from among any feat with the Martial, Focus, or Tactical descriptor. This feat is considered always available. He must meet the prerequisites, but may apply his Feat Mastery as normal.
7) Battle Maneuvers: Nobody does the standard array of combat tricks like the Fighter. He may apply his Feat Mastery bonus to any use of Trip, Overrun, Disarm, Bull Rush, Grapple, etc. that he is involved in (for or against).
Superior to the Warblade ability because, well, these tricks work best off Fighter feats, and he should be better at them then a Warblade.
11) Battle Defender: The Fighter adds his Feat Mastery bonus to his AC for all AoO's taken against him. Optionally, he may substitute his Mobility bonus, if any.
(Harder to find any openings on Fighters for these sneaky things)
15) Battle Opportunist: The Fighter may strike any creature once a round that he threatens which has been struck by an ally in combat. He adds his Feat Mastery to his TH/DMG rolls for this strike. This does not count as an AoO, and may be used against multiple creatures, but no more then once per creature per round.
(This generates AoO's, while the Warblade equivalent makes all AoO's far stronger).
20) Fighting Mastery: The Fighter may take a Full Attack as a standard action.
(Capstone!)
Okay, there we have a Fighter comparable to the class abilities of the Warblade! Doesn't he rock? Isn't he awesome?
Oh, wait, we haven't handed out the equivalents of maneuvers yet! Well, that's pretty easy, too.
Fighter bonus Feats Known/Feats readied
1) 3/1
2) 4/2
3) 5/2
4) 6/3
5) 7/3
6) 8/4
7) 9/4
8) 10/5
9) 11/5
10) 12/6
11) 13/6
12) 14/7
13) 15/7
14) 16/8
15) 17/8
16) 18/9
17) 19/9
18) 20/10
19) 21/10
20) 22/11
Fighter Bonus Feats Known: The Fighter may choose these feats among any of the various feats that may be used as Fighter bonus feats. These represent a broad storehouse of many special skills he has picked up over time and can draw upon if need be.
Special: Any Fighter level substitution option that basically replaces a Feat is takeable at the appropriate level or later as a Feat Known. The Attack series in the PHB II is an example of this.
Special: Any class ability that is plainly an 'improved' version of a feat is takeable at the minimum level by BAB applicable for the PrC or class it was taken at. Examples are Improved and Supreme Power Attack, Superior Mobility, and the Improved Spirited Charge attack of the Frenzied Berserker, Duellist, and Cavalier respectively. Simply calculate the minimum BAB at which the ability may be achieved to find the level at which the Fighter might learn it. If the PrC has feat pre-reqs, the Fighter must either have those Pre-Reqs, or substitute 'Two Fighter Feats Readied' for each feat he does not know.
Fighter Bonus Feats Readied: These are the feats the Fighter has 'on hand' and ready to use. Many feats a Fighter may choose to learn are hardly applicable in many situations, and Fighters bring the right tool to do the job.
Special Limitation: If the Fighter picks a feat with limited uses/day, said feat must be readied at the beginning of the day, and may not be swapped out until the following day.
Really Special Limitation: If a Fighter PrCs and the PrC requires Bonus Fighter feats to enter, then those Feats must remain Readied at all times or he loses access to all the special abilities of the PrC.
Changing Readied feats: A Fighter may set his entire repertoire of readied feats at dawn (or a like full rest period), without penalty. (It is strongly recommended to have an 'automatic' set of feats, either by DM fiat or player design). If he needs to change his feats in the course of a given day, he may change a single feat with five minutes of meditation and exercise, two more feats with fifteen minutes, and any/all of them with another hour (cumulative).
Design: This falls squarely into the maneuver design/use category. This allows a Fighter to grab, say, Mounted Combat or its chain, then swap it out if he's going into a dungeon for, say, Wall Smasher.
Martial Feats: As far as a Fighter is considered, Manuvers are just feats. A Fighter's Initiator level is considered to be his Fighter Bonus Feats Readied + his Feat Mastery + his number of Martial feats (but never higher then his level).
A Fighter has no recovery mechanic. He must either take Adaptive Style or dip another class to get a recovery mechanic. All Martial maneuvers he takes as Feats Known are considered to use the Fighter mechanic, even if he has access to another class recovery mechanism.
A Fighter who takes Martial Study as a Feat Known may thereafter take maneuvers from that school as Known Feats without restriction, provided he meets IL levels. For pre-reqs, count his number of Martial feats/maneuvers...Fighters tend to ignore the differences between schools, as Maneuvers are just fancy feats, and aren't restricted to knowing maneuvers of any one school. It all counts.
A Fighter is, however, restricted to three actual Martial Study feats, i.e. he may never access more then 3 Martial Schools. If he wants more...take Warblade!
Additional Feat!
Expanded Combat Knowledge (General Feat)
YOu are a true student of combat
Req: Martial Lore (5 ranks), Fighter 1
Benefit: You gain a number of new Fighter Feats Known equal to your Synergy Bonus from Martial Lore. (If your bonus increases, you gain additional feats).
These feats must come off the basic Fighter list in the PHB, and have a BAB/level requirement no higher then the synergy bonus.
(For picking up all those useful low level feats that start up chains).
Wow, you might be thinking. This Fighter is Rocking now...lots of feats, he can swap in and out, so I can actually build a Dragonslayer who doesn't have to BE a dragonslayer all the time...
Oh, but we aren't done yet. Did you forget something?
Right. Swapping! Another core of the martial classes!
Martial training: At level 4, and every 2 levels thereafter, the Fighter may swap out a Feat Known for another Feat he is eligible for. This new Feat must be an Improved, Superior, Greater or otherwise advanced form of a Feat he already knows (likely the one he is swapping out).
The Fighter may ignore any feat requirements in this chain of improvement (i.e. he can jump from Weapon Focus to GWF without taking Weapon spec, as long as he is the appropriate level). He is considered to be proficient in all feats in the Improving Chain for purposes of the Pre-Reqs for other feats and use (i.e. GWF = +2/+2 with a weapon, satisfies weapon spec for any other feat).
He may not swap Martial feats/maneuvers in and out, because Martial maneuvers are never 'improved' (even if they mechanically are). Thus, if you take Emerald Nightmare Blade, you can't 'swap up' to Sapphire. Pick your Maneuvers wisely, or be a Martial Adept, not a Fighter!
Examples of Improving feat Chains are:
The Weapon Focus tree, up through GW Spec, then Epic Foc/Spec. Note Superior spec is available only as a Feat Known off a class ability from weapon Master, and isn't in a chain and should probably be just Greater)
Cleave, Great Cleave, Supreme Cleave.
Expertise, Superior Expertise
Combat Reflexes, Improved, Superior, Epic
Improved Unarmed Strike, Superior, Versatile.
TwF, Imp TWF, Greater TWF, Supreme TWF, EPic TWF
Flurry of Blows=>Highest form Flurry of Blows
Spring attack=> the various multiple attack Spring attack forms.
Toughness, Improved Toughness.
The Dragonslayer chain of feats (where the intent is killing dragons, and getting better at it).
Note: You must have at least the starter feat in the chain to swap up!
Feats that add new, different, evolved or other abilities are not considered Improved Feats, and may not be swapped in this way. An example is the Endurance/Diehard feat chain...each feat clearly has a unique ability associated with it, even if they all involve being tough.
In the event of a class ability, like the Cavalier advancement of Spirited Charge, simply note the level at which the new improvement is effective at.
Whoa! I can hear you all saying it. Yet go back on the Martial classes and this is EXACTLY what they get to do. Remember the 33 feat equivalents? This is why! And they aren't restricted to Improved anythings...they can take it from whatever school they want to!
But I'm not done yet! OMG, I can hear you, yes. You forget the one other thing they get. That's right...STANCES. A permanent selection of electable buffs to choose from.
Martial Stances
The Fighter gains access to a number of Martial Stances equal to his Feat Mastery-1 (to a minimum of 1, count only permanent Mastery). If his Feat mastery improves via permanent raising of skills/stats, he gains access to additional stances. Use Two Fighter Bonus Feats Readied in place of any Maneuvers required, as needed. Note that the Fighter must have Martial Study in a School to select a Stance from it.
There! Using Skill ranks, he'd have four stances at level 20. The problem, of course, is that he'd wait til level 20 and grab the highest level stances he could from multiple schools...of course, then he'd suck not having stances available to him for 20 levels, and frankly, I'd want Hear the Air as soon as I could get it.
If you have workaround for Stances, other then simply granting Martial Stance at levels 1,6,11, and 16, I'd be happy to hear it.
And that, my friends, is what the Fighter looks like done the Warblade way. Looks sweet, doesn't it? Next up...Barbarians! Who said Rage couldn't be used like maneuvers?
====Aelryinth
All I can say is that if someone showed me a book with a feat called Weapon Goodness that read: Every morning choose one weapon, for the rest of that day you gain a +1 to hit with the chosen weapon. I would say that had to be some wonky 3rd party feat
Being able to be a master of every weapon with a few hours practice makes no sense to me at all. If my fighter works his way up to weapon supremacy and then the warblade also does (albeit 2 levels later) and then can change it to any weapon he wants that seems wholly unbalanced and really very lame. Saying that the fighter should be able to as well is not an option. A master swordsman, even though he knows the basics of axe use, should not be able to be just as proficient with a days practice.
WHOA! A few hours of practice??? Try years of fundamental training!
You are looking at Weapon Focus as I'm good with this Weapon. Weapon Focus in combination with Weapon Aptitude has SYNERGY...you've now changed the definition to "I'm good with all weapons, but I normally prefer this weapon here." That's all it means.
As for Weapon Supremacy, it won't qualify for Aptitude because it requires Melee weapon mastery, and Melee Weapon Mastery is unaffected by Aptitude. Since you can't alter one of the pre-reqs, I'd personally rule you couldn't alter Supremacy.
Also, you are in effect burning three feats (Up through GWFocus), to effectively get the equivalent of one feat (Melee Weapon mastery).
Also, I'd like to point out Melee Weapon Mastery has the same pre reqs as GWF...Weapon Spec...and is available at the same level...BAB+8. Which would your Fighter rather take first?
The 'suck now so I can be uber at level 18 with one toy' approach just does not fly with me, and cries out for waste of a feat.
===Aelryinth
Having played tome of battle characters, including a warblade, I can safely say that if you want to kill all the monsters in the game, in one or two rounds, the warblade is the way to do it. Warblades are devastating in melee combat, and as long as you can get the monster to come within melee range, there is no need for clerics or wizards what so ever.
A human fighter gets 19 feats all told, a warblade gets 11, plus all the maneuvers you could want, and stances that convey amazing abilities.
Mostly there are no saving throws against those maneuvers either: want to simply inflict 100 extra points of damage, use the strike of perfect clarity. They only thing they left out were strikes to open locks and disarm traps, perhaps they will fix that in future supplements. You eliminate the need for a cleric, of course, because with the right stance and maneuver, you can heal yourself.
Of course, the warblade would benefit from maneuvers that turned undead, played music with his singing blade, and summoned companions to benefit from all the plus fives he can hand out to his allies.
But that is asking for so much. After all, what would be the point of playing D&D if my friends didn't have anything to do because my warblade is accomplishing all the goals and all the tasks of the party, with the occasional assist from the peanut gallery.
And socially, as a warblade, well you are the courtier, counselor, and all around good guy that everyone loves. And you are not limited to one weapon, you can kill with the splinter of wood you broke off from the table. Once WotC sorts out they need a stance to eliminate the non-proficient penalties, and the improvised weapon penalties, the warblade will be fixed and perfect.
Now if only we could make the fighter just like a warblade, we could do it all in core D&D campaigns just like we can in ToB campaigns. Of course my warblade died. Killed by a guy on a horse with a bow, who never got within a 100 feet of him. If only there was a deflect arrows maneuver. Then I could SOLO every adventure. Here's hoping they fix all the problems with the warblade class.
As for Weapon Supremacy, it won't qualify for Aptitude because it requires Melee weapon mastery, and Melee Weapon Mastery is unaffected by Aptitude. Since you can't alter one of the pre-reqs, I'd personally rule you couldn't alter Supremacy.
===Aelryinth
Ok, you have me there, so that means the warblade can have supremacy with all melee weapons of one type (slashing, piercing or bludgeoning).
Well, since the book has come out I have had a chance to play all 3 intiatior classes. While the maneuvers seem to be balanced well enough I still think the warblade is a bit too ability heavy. I pared down a version for my homebrew (removing that annoying weapon aptitude ability) and it has been working fine. For my campaigns fighter only feats will stay fighter only and the warblade will have to be a thing of legend.
Building a straw man to vilify a class is a poor argument, and should never have been submitted to this board. If you want to denounce the warblade, please do so in a logical manner.
===Aelryinth
Shtick: Rage! Physical buffs, endurance, toughness, motility.
Assumptions: As with the Fighter, above.
Base Chassis: Mostly unchanged. I might add Move Silently, just because the class has Listen, and it would be good to have the opposite skill as it is a hunting skill. Also, Ride or Balance should be optional.
Class abilities
Explanations: True Rage: Like a warblade, a barbarian should be able to bring his best weapon, his rage, into every single encounter he has. However, this is a nice combat buff, and should remain pretty exclusive to the barbarian.
Thus, we change the definition of Rage!
True Rage: If a Barbarian’s level in his class is greater then all his combined levels of other classes, he has True Rage in his heart. Once per encounter, he may unleash his Rage for the appropriate benefits. The duration of this Rage is equal to his (modified) Constitution bonus. He may extend his Rage duration with feats, or by using bonus Rage rounds.
If his Barbarian levels are not sufficient, he has lost True Rage, and is limited in his rage usage to the default limits of his class as shown in the PHB and below. He may regain True Rage by gaining more Barbarian levels.
Rage Alternatives: Whirling Frenzy; Wrath (can take all the actions normally forbidden to by Rage (requiring concentration, expertise, etc), nor do they suffer an AC penalty. However, the bonus from Wrath is reduced by one step (i.e. it starts at +2/+2) and it can be taken by lawful barbarians. Wrath is often taken by military barbarians who learn this rage alternative as a special combat state.)
Initiator Level: A Barbarian adds his bonus to Str from Rage (+4 to +8) to his Initiator level when qualifying for manuvers from the Tiger Claw class. This may not exceed his barbarian class level.
1. Fast movement; Barbarian Cunning; illiteracy; Rage (1)
2. Uncanny Dodge
3. Trap Sense, +1/3 levels (round down)
4. Rage (2)
5. Bonus Rage Feat
6. Improved Uncanny Dodge
7. Damage Reduction (1/-)
8. Rage (3), Rage Asunder
9. Bonus Rage Feat
10. DR (2/-), Raging Assault
11. Greater Rage, Tireless Rage
12. Rage (4), Endless Rage
13. DR 3/-, Bonus Rage Feat
14. Indomitable Will
15. Glorious Rage
16. DR 4/-, Rage (5)
17. Bonus Rage Feat
18. Sundering Rage
19. DR 5/-
20. Mighty Rage, Rage (6)
Fast Movement: As standard for barbarians.
Barbarian Cunning/Illiteracy: While barbarians are unlettered, they are also naturally very curious and inquisitive. A barbarian may, at 1st level, pick 4 skills and never have to pay cross class prices for them, although he is still limited to cross class ranks. This benefit is not gained at any level other then 1st level.
Rage: If a barbarian does not have True Rage, he may elect to rage this number of times per day. He also gains a number of extra rounds of rage/day equal to his barbarian levels (summarized below).
Uncanny Dodge/Improved: Kicked back improved one level to standardize it vs. the other classes.
Trap Sense: This scaling bonus is a bonus to Reflex saves on Traps.
Bonus Rage Feat: At 5,9,13, and 17, the barbarian gets a bonus feat with the Rage descriptor. If he is a Shifter, he may instead substitute a Shifter feat.
Damage Reduction: As standard for the class. The DM may wish to allow it to stack with the DR gained from wearing adamantine armor, or having Armor Spec.
Rage Asunder: If the barbarian Sunders a magical object, he may spend a Rage Round to either gain xp = that required to make the object, or to heal an amount of dmg = 2x the price of the object in 1000’s of gp (i.e. a 10K item = 20 pts of healing). The influx of magical power is rewarding but disorienting.
Raging Assault: A Barbarian with True Rage may make a full attack at the end of a charge while in a Rage.
Greater and Mighty Rage: As the normal upgrades.
Tireless Rage: This was moved down to level 11 as a reward for sticking with a True Rager! There are PrC’s which give immune to ALL fatigue/exhaustion effects by level 15..waiting until level 17 to not become winded is, well, dumb.
Endless Rage: At this level, the Barbarian may elect to choose his Endless Rage variant. He may choose to become a Berserker (as the PHB II effect), or to gain Frenzy (as per the Frenzied Berserker).
A Lawful barbarian with Wrath may not choose either; however, he can spend a daily use of Rages/day to bring his rage up to the normal limit for his level-10. Once taken, this choice may not be altered.
It is possible to stack normal Rage and Frenzy effects. It is not possible to stack normal Rage and Berserk effects. The DR from being Berserk does stack with class DR.
If the character is a Berserker (PHB2 variant), he instead gains either access to Rages/day at this level, allowing him to rage when at full HP totals; or he may elect to Frenzy.
Indomitable Will: To make things simple, this +4 applies to all hostile Will saves while raging (note that going into/out of Frenzy is NOT a hostile save).
Glorious Rage: While Raging, a barbarian’s attacks are all considered chaotic. If he has Wrath and is lawful, such attacks are considered Lawful instead. If he is Exalted, his attacks are also considered Good. If he is Vile, his attacks are also considered Evil.
Sundering Rage: The barbarian’s weapon attacks are always considered as Adamantine while Raging for purposes of sundering unattended objects or avoiding DR.
Mechanics: With a starting Con of 16, a barbarian is guaranteed 5 rounds of Rage in every encounter. He may spend his Bonus rounds of Rage to extend that duration if need be, or get feats to stretch it out. He also doesn’t need to worry about being exhausted after coming out of range at mid levels, instead of at level 17. Indomitable Will receives a slight upgrade to all Will saves, bringing him to a Strong Will Save while raging.
Extra Rounds of Rage/Day
1. 1 (extend rage) (rage of iron)
2. 2
3. 3
4. 4
5. 5 (rage of freedom)
6. 6
7. 7
8. 8
9. 9 (rage of blood)
10. 10
11. 11
12. 12
13. 13 (rage of fury)
14. 14
15. 15
16. 16
17. 17 (rage of death)
18. 18
19. 19
20. 20
Bonus Rage Rounds/Day: This number is the amount of extra rounds of rage a barbarian can sustain per day, above and beyond that normally allotted to by encounters and his Constitution score.
A barbarian can expend these bonus rounds, or the rounds of his normal rage, to generate significant effects. If expending rage rounds brings the rounds he can rage to 0, he immediately drops out of rage with all normal effects. He may still only Rage once per encounter. If he is in a Berserk state, he may only expend Bonus Rage rounds to generate effects.
Using up Rage rounds is a free action that can be taken whenever a barbarian could initiate a Rage.
Extend Rage: The basic use of bonus rounds is to make a Rage last longer. Each use of a Rage round extends a Rage by 1 round.
Rage of Iron: The barbarian may expend 1 round of rage to gain DR equal to his stat bonus to his DR/- (i.e. DR +2 to +4/-) for the duration of his current Rage.
Rage of Freedom: A barbarian may expend 3 rounds of rage to immediately end a single spell effect upon himself, or to end a physical state (as Per Iron Heart Surge).
Rage of Blood: The barbarian may expend 5 rounds of rage to become immediately aware of the location of any viable targets for his Rage within 30’, as if possessing blindsight, for the duration of his rage.
Rage of Fury: The barbarian may expend 7 rounds of his rage to not trigger any AoO’s for the remaining duration of his Rage. He may still take AoO’s as normal.
Rage of Death: The barbarian may expend 9 rounds of his rage. During this Rage, he confirms all criticals, ignores all DR, and can critical hit creatures that normally cannot be critted due to anatomy, all due to the disruptive force and power of his attacks.
Mechanic: Allows a barbarian stance-like effects, at the cost of the length of his Rage. By taking feats that raise Rage duration, or raising Con, becomes capable of paying for lower level stances with base Rage duration, leaving the bonus slots for the major effects.
This mechanic also emphasizes the importance of Con for a barbarian.
So...how do the Tome of Battlesque Fighter and Barbarian look?
===Aelryinth
The thing about Warblade and the entire TOB is I have yet to see a DM ( myself included) allow said classes once they had read the books and the class. Most DMs I know regard the book as the most broken book that wizards has put out (right up there with psionics). Therefore, I think that the fighter is ok as is and that the warblade is the one with the problems in balance. I really so not see much problem with any other classes as is, so long as, as a dm, you use your noggin to disallow any shenanigans. Weapon Supremacy is damn good and should be limited to the fighter and that’s the way it should be.
I'd let someone play a warblade in the game that I run; the problem is that most people won't since it's not an easy class to play well. Just something that I've noticed. I'd seriously play a straight AoO-based fighter over most ToB classes.
Learning curves and all that.
Then again, most people won't play a Races of War Fighter in my group since while it's a very capable class, it's very hard to use to it's fullest since it's not about dealing tons of damage. It's a class centered entirely around strategy and creative thinking to solve strategic problems; things that many people aren't that good at or don't think that a a 'fighter' is capable of. Heck, sometimes I see situations that a fighter could have used their training to circumvent, but only after the fact and analyzing what could have gone differently.
I've built a RoW fighter character (as an exercise and to compare it to the Core fighter; both came out pretty good overall though, the RoW fighter was very much in the spirit of 2nd Ed fighters, while the Straight Fighter was an AoO-monster able to control an area 70 feet across and get AoOs for stuff that wouldn't normally provoke AoOs); but I generally play a melee character to play a simple (or simpler at least) character. So I'll probably not play that guy.
I have heard of the Races of War brought up before on this thread and others but I had never taken a look at it. So, I did. I wouldn't touch those rules. Egads.
Well, it depends on who you play with. If you've got one person who likes to read the rule books and likes to play some of the balanced classes that bring a sufficient amount of power (both combat and non-combat related) to a group like a: Ranger, Rogue, Cleric, Druid or Wizard. Well, such a player will tend to make other people (and their characters) look less than heroic.
The main reason I advocate using RoW is this:
The person who is a gaming group's weakest player should have a character that's just as good as the group's strongest player and should only have to spend a short amount of time to do so.
When the Fighter, Monk and Barbarian are able to bring to the group as much "combat problem solving"; "wuxia action stunting" and "big melee damage" in a noticable way that the Wizard brings "being magical batman" to the group; well, then you've got players that will be happier.
You really have to be a heartless monster to deny the guy who likes to play a fighter or barbarian the opportunity to be just as useful as the wizard player's character; that or you play with emotionless androids who aren't stung every time the wizard uses their spells to solve a problem, since the "hitting it with a stick" solution that the Core Barbarian has is not good versus certain monsters.
On the other hand, I tend to use a mix of CRs; very few 1 or more CR's lower than the party (10% of all fights); about 1/3 are CR's the PC's level or easy encounters; the remainder are encounters that will kill PCs if they don't work as a team (CR = PC's average lvl +1 to +4; +5 is guaranteed PC deaths in my experience).
If the group I played with wanted me to run a core melee-classes only game, that would be okay. I'd have to remove almost every monsters spells, SLAs and tone down their Su's a pile and do other stuff, like tell them they get max HP per level or have them fight plain goblins as high as level 5 and not bring out the bugbears or ogres until level 6 and hill giants would have to wait until level 8 or 9; which is okay, but would bore me.
While I am not opposed to scaling feats I am opposed to power-driven madness. A feat available since level 1 scaling from a +1 bonus to a +5 bonus seems ok. One allowing multiple abilities based on a single feat choice? Um, no.
Except for one problem. The core fighter, in taking fighter levels loses on up to 4 (or more) 1/day abilities per level; that can end fights immediately.
Seriously, the players could all play wizards, clerics, rangers, druids and rogues and hire mercenary warrior NPCs to do the "keeping of monsters back" job.
My 2nd Ed group used to do that while I was running my own as well as the half of the parties fighters; while the wizards did their thing, the assasin would sneak around killing people and the Samurai would control the other half of the fighters and the group's pack of wardogs. We used wardogs to surround and harrass a target, with NPC fighters to set up a spearwall or help the two main tanks deal extra damage/absorb hits.
Heck, D&D turned into that as far back as 1st Ed. Gary Gygax and Co. would have their actual casters or high level fighters (example "Robilar" played by Robert Kuntz, probably the only 'named' fighter from the early games that we still have kicking around today as an NPC) actually earn names. Everyone else was a mook that they paid.
It was a thought provoking and interesting analysis, and an impressive tribute to the warblade. The stances and maneuvers of a warblade are typically much more powerful than even the spells of clerics and wizards, (assuming you don't fudge on foci and spell component requirements-you know you do).
Foci are reusable. Most components require a component pouch, a free hand, and a voice. And really, all that is required to stop a warblade is 1500 gold worth of Ruby dust (forcecage) followed by any number of cheap spells at your leisure. He can't save against them all. Then you simply sell his equipment to get more ruby dust. So no, maneuvers are not more powerful than spells.
Having played tome of battle characters, including a warblade, I can safely say that if you want to kill all the monsters in the game, in one or two rounds, the warblade is the way to do it. Warblades are devastating in melee combat, and as long as you can get the monster to come within melee range, there is no need for clerics or wizards what so ever.
Many monsters cast spells that can obliterate the warblade. I couldn't imagine going without a wizard and cleric. But if it works for you, that’s cool.
A human fighter gets 19 feats all told, a warblade gets 11, plus all the maneuvers you could want, and stances that convey amazing abilities.
Yup. The warblade is much better than the fighter. So is everybody else.
Mostly there are no saving throws against those maneuvers either: want to simply inflict 100 extra points of damage, use the strike of perfect clarity. They only thing they left out were strikes to open locks and disarm traps, perhaps they will fix that in future supplements. You eliminate the need for a cleric, of course, because with the right stance and maneuver, you can heal yourself.
Well, first of all, warriors should do substantial damage even with a standard action especially at 17th level. Even so, I'm not sure I'd bother with the strike of perfect clarity but maybe that's just me. And they can open locks like any warrior- they smash them.
Clerics are always useful, and for more than just healing. I don't really like most of the supernatural maneuvers however so I'll leave it at that.
Of course, the warblade would benefit from maneuvers that turned undead, played music with his singing blade, and summoned companions to benefit from all the plus fives he can hand out to his allies.
I like the idea of a sublime bard actually. I'm not so fond of the idea of replacing all classes with martial adepts however.
But that is asking for so much. After all, what would be the point of playing D&D if my friends didn't have anything to do because my warblade is accomplishing all the goals and all the tasks of the party, with the occasional assist from the peanut gallery.
Yeah and the warblade shouldn't have supernatural maneuvers anyway.
And socially, as a warblade, well you are the courtier, counselor, and all around good guy that everyone loves.
Sure, if you put ranks in diplomacy. The same if you're a rogue, bard, or any other class that has access to diplomacy.
And you are not limited to one weapon, you can kill with the splinter of wood you broke off from the table. Once WotC sorts out they need a stance to eliminate the non-proficient penalties, and the improvised weapon penalties, the warblade will be fixed and perfect.
Who would take that stance? It doesn't seem worth it to me.
Now if only we could make the fighter just like a warblade, we could do it all in core D&D campaigns just like we can in ToB campaigns. Of course my warblade died. Killed by a guy on a horse with a bow, who never got within a 100 feet of him. If only there was a deflect arrows maneuver. Then I could SOLO every adventure. Here's hoping they fix all the problems with the warblade class.
Range is a real issue with the warblade. If you really want to solo, go crusader. And a deflect arrows maneuver would probably only work against a single arrow (as a counter, you could only use it once per round.) Perhaps a stance might work I guess. Or a boost if you were anticipating a barrage of arrows.
More ways to look at a Fighter
There's been a lot said about Fighters actually having MAD because of Feat Regs. Well, there's a flip side to that argument. The feats you take dovetail to the stats you have, and say something about your Fighter. For Instance:
Strength: Power Attack/Cleave Tree*, Efficient use of Strength, Grappling, Bull Rushing, Larger Weapons, big, Brutal, Charge-Prone, Heavy Armor.
Intelligence: Expertise* tree, precision damage, tactical fighter, non-provoking of AoOs, special attacks, extreme skill, Canny/Dodge bonus to AC, light armor, defensive fighting, arcane magic/power, psionic magic/power
Dexterity: Weapon Finesse, light weapons/Archery/ranged attacks, lighter armor, Combat Reflexes* tree, Evasion, Initiative, Good Reflex Save, multiple attacks/limbs, speed, Dodge bonuses.
Wisdom: Uncanny Dodge* tree, Alertness tree*, awareness/senses, Willpower/Good Will Save, Mental Fortitude, Wis to AC (Insight), Alternative Stat, spiritual enlightenment, Divine magic/power
Constitution: Endurance/Toughness tree*, Hit points, Fortitude Save, Good Armor, Natural Armor/physical abilities, Fitness, health, poison/immunity, disease resistance/immunity, Exercise, Repetition, fatigue/exhaustion resistance, life force, defiance of magic/psionic power, tanking.
Charisma: Aid Another/Flanking Tree*, Leadership feat, Belief in self, Save Boosting, smiting, Luck, Deception, Alternate Stat, Spontaneous magic/power, performing, charms
=======================
This is kind of the premise the revamped psion and psychic warrior are built off of. The psychic warrior bases all his powers on his strength. The psion's base is intelligence, with subsets for the different powers.
There's nothing that says a Fighter can't be built the same way. For instance, a blanket rule that a Fighter taking a bonus feat that has a stat req has that req reduced by one for every feat in the tree caters to chosen stats, scales over time by direction of the player, and helps the lower stat fighter as much as the higher stat one.
==============================
Redefining Level One Characters
Without a doubt, the worst levels of Fighter are the first and the second.
Why? Because they give the entire class away.
10 HP.
Medium Armor Prof
Heavy Armor Prof
Martial Weapons Prof (!!)
Shield Prof
Tower Shield Prof
Bonus Fighter Feat
Good Fort Save
+1 BAB
Then, d10 HP
+1 BAB
Bonus Fighter feat
+1 Fort
If you want to give value to the Fighter you have to start evaluating first level class abilities very, very differently.
For instance, tell me WHY you get all them bonus skill points at level One. Easy. It represents years and years of learning the ins and outs of your trade, ergo, your first level class. Well, tell me exactly WHAT all those first level feats of the Fighter represent? Uh huh. the EXACT SAME THING.
It is time to feed dippers and nonmartial classes their teeth, and put some bite into those first two levels. You don't want Fighters to have more skill points. That's fine. Then at least give some value to their starting feats.
Rule ONE: All characters have simple weapons and light armor proficiency. A commoner or expert gets this. Do I have a problem with mages having this? No. Once you introduce mithral, it's a moot point, anyways.
Rule ONE-A: Mithral armor doesn't get around Proficiency restrictions. Non-proficiency penalties mean loss of all Dex mods, Doubled Armor Penalties, and doubled Arcane Spell Failure base (before any reductions). Moreover, spell failure applies to divine spells if you aren't proficient, either! (No druids waltzing around in Dragonhide full plate without proficiency, sorry).
Rule TWO: No class grants any Weapon Proficiency, Medium or Heavy Armor Proficiency except at Character Level One.
Justify: Seriously, what do you think Fighters do with all their time, since they have no skill points? You bury your nose in a book or apprentice to some skill-heavy master and practice skills. They spend months/days/years practicing with all kinds of weapons, in all kinds of armor, using all kinds of shields and tactics. It's the exact same thing, but from a different angle.
But you get a hefty bonus for those years once in your life. Melee classes get no recognition of the time and effort involved in their training whatsoever. Yes, in one level of casting sleep spells on goblins, that wizard over there miraculously became proficient in dozens of weapons and learned how to troop around in heavy armor without complaining about it.
If you want to learn a weapon, take a look in the mirror. How long is it going to take you to learn how to use a sword properly, swing a flail without bashing yourself in the ear, spin a staff, fight with a knife, or wrestle effectively? If you want to learn those things, you actually go out and learn them one by one. In other words, you actual do blow a feat on them. You don't go to a fencing school to learn martial weapons; you go there to learn fencing with fencing weapons. Unless you have a really eclectic instructor, you'll probably never pick up a staff, spear, or mace, or chain weapon. Taking a semester of Fencing 101 doesn't make you a level 1 Fighter or even a warrior. It makes you proficient in fencing weapons, i.e. it removes a penalty. This is not recognized under the current system.
So, what happens with dippers? They have to make a HARD choice. Martial weapons, Armor Profs, Shield Profs, or all them juicy low level skill points?
But what about someone who does take Fighter later? Even I'm not so cruel as to suggest blowing an entire feat on Martial Weapon Proficiency (rapier). Happily, the answer is found in the centerpiece of the Fighter class, the Weapon Spec tree. To wit, if you take Weapon Focus as a Fighter feat, you are considered proficient in the weapon if it is considered a martial weapon.
This is exactly equal to the power of the War Domain (auto prof in the deity's weapon with WF to boot. We wouldn't think of choosing a deity for a specific weapon, would we?). This also nicely folds in the bastard sword, dwarven waraxe, urgosh and other martial/exotic weapon mixes...no need to blow an Exotic Weapon slot on marginal bonuses. leave exotic weapons for exotic weapons. You can now take katanas and bastard swords to full effect by taking Weapon Focus in them, as they are martial weapons.
Now, this clearly favors races or classes that get auto prof in certain weapons (Elves, I'm looking at you.) My view? So what? It's so marginal a benefit, and what it does is forces dippers into elven stereotypes (they have to use a longsword, bow, spear or rapier, heh!). I'll be satisfied with that.
Rule THREE: Any PrC that grants Martial Weapons Prof, any/all Armor Profs, and Shield prof now REQUIRES THEM.
Yes, that's right. If you want to get into Uber Martial PrC, you'd best have the right foundation under you. You just don't get to pick up five Feats for free with one level of ANY class except at first level. Down with PrC Munchkinness! Those PrCs don't take some half ass fencer; you need those abilities BEFORE you enter, you don't get them handed to you. Seriously, why would you possibly think anyone could get into Duelist without the right weapon profs, or Dwarven Defender without heavy armor prof? They aren't going to teach you that. You need to know it already!
Never noticed how PrCs gave away all those extra feats now, did you? Well, now you do. A PrC is about class abilities. It should have no bonus feats on entry. It's just another thing that takes away from Martial classes. A PrC is nothing more then an alternate set of class abilities, and should be evaluated exactly as such--a modified Feats tree with flavor is all it is.
Other Classes:
Someone who gets into Wizard past level one loses Scribe Scroll. Really, did you practice copying pages and pages from your master's books to elsewhere while taking your training in Wizardry? No?
And exactly how many spells do you think you're going to have as a Wizard, with no time to copy them and being unable to do it yourself? That's right, when you go from rogue 1 to Wizard 1, you start with Read magic. That's it. Oh, and don't forget to buy your starter spellbook, pay all the copying costs for the spells your friends will give you, etc. And no, you don't get a free familiar, either. See, there are benefits to starting as a wizard, too.
Sorcerer: HAH, joke's on you. Except for not having a familiar, you lose nothing by taking sorcerer at a later time. It’s spontaneous magic. You don't have to learn anything, you just have to emote! Start up costs alone mean there should be tons more sorcerers around then wizards.
Cleric: Sorry, no armor proficiencies for you past level one. There's a reason why Fighters become warrior-priests, and rogues become monk-priests or temple-priests, after all.
Monk: As a nod to the 'retirement' aspect and Lawful alignment req of the monk class, you acquire proficiency in monk weapons at the rate of one weapon per monk level. Typically, your first weapon is going to be Improved Unarmed Strike (that's right, your bonus feat is now One Monk Weapon OR IUS). But someone who grew up in a monastery swinging around kamas is going to be better at this odd selection of weapons then some rogue shaving his head to hide out from the knives in the dark, or just looking for some additional training.
Monk B: Monk has a Lawful requirement. It's assumed that tremendous discipline is required to maintain the fighting trim and power of a monk, particularly the scaling effects. If you lose the Lawful alignment, you lose all scaling effects of being a monk. Personally, I'd make you lose the untyped Wisdom bonus to AC, too. Find a Monk's Belt if you want it back.
Druid: No new Armor/Shield Profs, no animal companion at first level (you just became a druid, when did you have time to find it?), no new weapon profs. Not that any smart person who wants Druid levels doesn't start from level one, anyway.
Ranger: No new armor, weapon, or shield profs. OW. On top of losing the skill points, best take this at level one, aye? No starting animal companion either, in case you were wondering. A DM might defer Tracking until second level, but its so core to the class and so rarely used he could leave it in.
Rogue: No new armor or weapon profs. But hey, if you are playing a rogue, its for the skill points, or the SA, and likely you won't even notice.
Bard: As Rogue.
Barbarian: No new Armor, Shield or Weapon Profs. You may have got some special training to bring out that Rage, but so what? It doesn't sub for months and years of being raised as a savage warrior.
Secondly, you lose the movement bonus. Really! That's a product of a savage lifestyle, and more vitality and pure physical ability, not just 'special training' which any mook can take. It's the big bonus for being a Barbarian/1. You don't want to start as an illiterate savage? Weigh the cost of your skill points on Read/Write against the movement.
Yeah. You start as a Fighter, you get Heavy Armor/Tower Shield. Start as a Barb, get Fast movement. Decisions, decisions.
Barb B: You become Lawful, you lose all Raging ability. Also note, while Raging, you can't Concentrate (use any ability requiring a Concentration check, and I'd extend that to Autohypnosis), expertise/defensive fighting/total defense, or any feats/skills that rely on the same.
Paladin: Goodie, you are being called to serve. You haven't been divinely granted the ability to know how to swing a Flail. No new armor/weapon/shield profs. Paladins who get called late in life should be unique and building on the skills of their prior professions.
Of course, if you want to give the Paladin some teeth because of that LG alignment restriction, maybe you do get all them armor and weapon profs as long as you stay true to the paladin code! That would be a true sign of the paladin...a commoner/3 gets Called and shows up at the fight in full plate toting a Greatsword, and knows how to use it. Mmmm. Go pally! Might want to make it a class ability...Divine Martial ability, and simply remove the Proficiencies from the base class. Then again, it would be a nod to the people who believe the paladin should be a PrC if only those people who'd been Fighters actually become a Knight in Shining Armor. A ranger would become a Knight in Shining Wolfskin, or something.
Other classes:
Generally speaking: No new armor/weapon/shield profs. No starting with any spells if an arcane prepared caster, except Read Magic, and pay for your spellbook. No bonus feats that have anything to do with time spent in the class...like the Scribe scroll for Wizards. Maybe you want to give it to them after a level or three or maybe not.
The easiest classes should be the ones with the fewest class benefits, and the least amount of front-loading. Most classes front-load with excess weapon/armor/shield profs, having a massive skill point total or skill list, or a prized bonus feat or ability or something. Wizards front load compared to sorcs. Taking sorc later should be lots easier then taking wizardry.
Thoughts, analysis, critique? Go ahead and dissect it for does and don'ts and balance issues. Remember, you can balance the Fighter in two ways...bring it up to the level of other classes, or make what he actually has so valuable that he's intrinsically worth what they are. Proper valuation of starting feats to equal them in value to skills and bonus feats is a superb starting point.
===Aelryinth
I like this restriction. It would make a lot of sense and forces the players to think how they should level up.
But I believe if you multtclass into a fighter those penalties should be a little softer.
x class/fighter 1: bonus feat
x class/fighter 2: gain martial proficiency
x class/fighter 3: heavy armor proficiency
x class/fighter 4: shield proficiency
x class/fighter 5: tower shield proficiency
As a fighter you should have them, especially if you invest 5 levels of your character into the fighter.
I do not like your tweak/fix on the fighter though. Yes, it may be that the fighter becomes the representation of how a wizard wants him to become with all the magic enhanced equipment, but it is also part of what make a fighter a fighter.
He is the guy with all the shiny weapon and armor running around shouting 'look at my awesome weapon, it is 1337'.
With that new restriction in it I believe it will sort out all those problems, where a player will only take 1 level in a core class just to gain the proficiency/level 1 benefits.
Also as a wizard: He should 'know' all level 0 spells and have the level 1 spells available to a level 1 wizard. That doesn't mean he can cast them without his spellbook to aid him in preparing them. Means he actually has to get himself to write up his spellbook or buy the scrolls/copy them from a friend to have them available for memorization, unless he takes the feat for not needing the spellbook to cast his spells.
To make the game more fun by "balancing" the fighter by restricting proficiencies, you're going to make it less fun for other people who rely on those armor proficiency rules. So overall, you're not making everyone happy. A fighter fix should be as simple as possible, so that the core information is as untouched as possible. Your goal should be to make the fighter BETTER, not make EVERYONE ELSE WORSE.
If I was going to make a change to the fighter in my game, it would be just one. A really cool ability that solves half of a fighters problems.
Way of the Blade
The fighter is distinct from other classes because in a world of magic, he trusts his instinct and his blade to defeat any foe. After he has mastered the basics of defeating ordinary foes, the fighter begins to train himself to dodge the fearsome magical attacks that threaten to defeat him. As the fighter adventures and defeats more foes, their ability to make magic slide off them like water off a ducks back makes them heroes worthy of legend.
From seventh level onwards, the fighter has learnt the extraordinary ability to dodge magical effects. She gains spell resistance equal to twice her fighter class levels. This is an ability that is under the control of the fighter - they can suppress it to receive the effects of beneficial magic, while leaving it active against their enemies.
Example: Trogdor is a seventh level fighter, so gains SR 14. Once he has reached eighth level, this improves to SR 16. If Trogdor chooses to join a prestige class, he will learn new class features, but he will only continue to increase his resistance to magic if he stays a pure fighter (he retains whatever spell resistance he has earned, however). By fighter level 17, Trogdor has stayed the course of a true believer in martial combat in a world of magic, and has attained a very powerful SR 34.
If I was going to make a second change, it would be 4 skill points per level and add spot, listen, balance to the fighters skill set to improve their role play value a little.
This patch keeps absolutely everything in core untouched, but gives the fighter a way to compete in a world that becomes increasingly hostile to him as he gains levels. Although other PCs may be able to do more damage, enemies will start having to take the fighter into account when planning on destroying the party. Sure, feats aren't that great at higher levels, but if the tank is highly resistant to magic, he has more chances to make enemies play his game.
The Barbarian actually seems to have more in common with the Factotum, but the power of the scaling Rages at higher level are Stance-level rewards for sticking with the class. It also kicks out the Frenzied Berserker and even lets you play and justify a Lawful Barbarian as someone who received training in Rage.
Are they overpowerful? No. Seerow's fighter fix does largely the same thing by swapping between feat trees. My builds a little more flexible in which feats can be switched, and far more forgiving of advancing up feat trees and getting the 'lesser' feats below them.
In short, I gave the Fighter versatility; scaling feats; class abilities that scaled with level; a reason to have a decent score in the mental stat of his choosing; and of course, a lot more feats to play with. I also gave him a unique shtick that no other class can really hone in on...clearly, he has so many feats, and is good at so many feats, AND so many basic fighting maneuvers, no one is really going to intrude on this.
But, you'd have to play it and see. he is still going to need gear and all the fun stuff people like to complain about to compare with mages. Only now, you can take the whole Mage Slayer Chain and the ultimate cost is One Feat--not THREE. You can take the Weapon Spec Tree and it occupies one feat out of 20, not 6 or 7 of them.
So every one of those 22 feats you have at level 20 is a viable something you can bring into play...just like a well-designed mage or warblade. I think that's pretty cool, and you get some class abilities that no one else really has...and finally, a really useful capstone.
===Aelryinth
However, I do have a suggestion, mostly inspired by 8-Bit Theatre, a comic from which many strange ideas come: consider the supernatural application of a high-level warrior's abilities.
Sure, mages and priests can bend reality or get someone else to do it for them, but for a fantasy warrior nothing comes easy; they must struggle and work to accomplish everything they do.
That said, a high level warrior (15+) could create pseudo-magical effects such as temporary superspeed, phenomenal strength, agility, perception, energy manipulation, elemental enhancements to attacks, all that good Gish stuff, through feats alone.
Compared to high level casters of any kind it won't come close to full caster capabilities, but it will be within range of possible Fighter abilities and since the Warblade proves that one can indeed create a cone of fire or become invisible (albeit temporarily) I think the Fighter and other PHB classes must have a chance to Accomplish the Demigodly. Gate, Wish, and more might even be possible, by calling favors from warrior patron deities, as part of their class ability repertoires.
Think of it as a different means to an end, since so many other classes in D&D resculpt reality through prayer, song, reading, being beautiful, 'expressing bloodline', and so on, why not through good ol' training and martial prowess?
Attack the friggin air hard enough, and the shockwave carries onward. Strike the ground to cause earthquakes. Move so fast that time slows down for a moment. All as reliable feats, as consistent as the sun. That should be the high level Fighter ideal.
Citations to support my proposal:
Cuchulain. Became a one-eyed giant deathgod (not of Babylon) when raging, literally. Cuz that was just what he did, no spells, no enhancements, no items, just Cuchulain.
Goku. He trained hard. Vegeta trained harder. They fly with Chi. They resist energy with Chi. They punch through stone with Chi. They blow stuff up with Chi. The end.
What do I think? I think you have something brewing here, Aelryinth. A maneuver-based Barbarian vs. a versatile yet powerful Fighter option set. I can't decide which I like more.
However, I do have a suggestion, mostly inspired by 8-Bit Theatre, a comic from which many strange ideas come: consider the supernatural application of a high-level warrior's abilities.
Sure, mages and priests can bend reality or get someone else to do it for them, but for a fantasy warrior nothing comes easy; they must struggle and work to accomplish everything they do.
That said, a high level warrior (15+) could create pseudo-magical effects such as temporary superspeed, phenomenal strength, agility, perception, energy manipulation, elemental enhancements to attacks, all that good Gish stuff, through feats alone.
Compared to high level casters of any kind it won't come close to full caster capabilities, but it will be within range of possible Fighter abilities and since the Warblade proves that one can indeed create a cone of fire or become invisible (albeit temporarily) I think the Fighter and other PHB classes must have a chance to Accomplish the Demigodly. Gate, Wish, and more might even be possible, by calling favors from warrior patron deities, as part of their class ability repertoires.
Think of it as a different means to an end, since so many other classes in D&D resculpt reality through prayer, song, reading, being beautiful, 'expressing bloodline', and so on, why not through good ol' training and martial prowess?
Attack the friggin air hard enough, and the shockwave carries onward. Strike the ground to cause earthquakes. Move so fast that time slows down for a moment. All as reliable feats, as consistent as the sun. That should be the high level Fighter ideal.
Citations to support my proposal:
Cuchulain. Became a one-eyed giant deathgod (not of Babylon) when raging, literally. Cuz that was just what he did, no spells, no enhancements, no items, just Cuchulain.
Goku. He trained hard. Vegeta trained harder. They fly with Chi. They resist energy with Chi. They punch through stone with Chi. They blow stuff up with Chi. The end.
Goku and Vegeta and Dragonball really take the power level up a notch or five above D@D. After all, Goku as a kid is powerful enough to blow up the moon!
The celtic idea of a 'warp-spasm' level of being a berserker is best exemplified by Slaine the Berserker in modern fiction. Yeah, he can do some pretty nasty stuff once he's berserk, but then berserkers were always pretty terrifying compared to normal warriors. It's just that you can't make a berserker clearly overwhelming to a fighter of the same level.
The best comparisons I've actually seen for high level fighters is the Drenai series. You've clearly got mystical fighters in their, but you've also got assassins of superhuman skill, fighters clearly levels and levels above other fighters, subtle and overt magic, and the like....but very, very little of the magic ends up coming from THINGS...it's all from the user.
While much of a fighter's power can be cited as coming from his gear...the fact of the matter is if you give the ancient sword of legends to the wizard, he's holding a sharp stick of metal he can't do a damn thing with.
In D&D, you give it to the wizard, he takes the proper spells, or maybe PrCs into a gish, and he's far better a wielder of the sword then the no-magic Fighter is.
Spellcasters, by and large, are not stuck using a huge portion of their per-level gold just to keep pace with their offensive ability...a high level cleric can easily substitute buff spells for 250k gold worth of magic items (Greater Magic Weapon/Vestment, Shield of Faith, etc) with very little problem, which means he can shore up his defenses to a fantastically better degree then any Fighter. The sword of legend would definitely work better in his hands with the right buffs.
To make a martial character stand out, he has to be unsubstitutable. You can't just grab Str/Size/BAB buffs and do his job. Yet, that is exactly what the rules allow.
Hence why I'm against relying on gear to even up things. Gear is another weakness of the Fighter, not a strength. Unless you consider his weapons and armor 'free' to a great extent, he's building up his core just to keep pace, while spellcasters just go around his core defenses to strike at his vulnerabilities - specific saves, touch ac, no saves, etc. And he doesn't have the cash to cover all these weak points, despite the fact he should be the least vulnerable to them.
===Aelryinth
However, many of you would say these feats make Fighter a "support baseclass," and in all honesty, the current incarnation of these feats lends itself to that. I speak specifically of Daring Warrior and Martial Stalker; right idea but wrong direction.
Daring Warrior- Allows Fighter & Swashbuckler levels to stack for the sake of determining Grace bonus, Dodge bonus, & Feats.
PROBLEM: Class features of Swashbuckler make it more advantageous to take a mere 4 levels of Fighter and the rest as Swashbuckler, as you gain more Swashbuckler class features this way while continuing to benefit from an influx of Fighter bonus feats.
Martial Stalker- Allows Fighter & Ninja levels to stack for the sake of determining Ki pool, AC bonus, & Feats.
PROBLEM: Same as with Swashbuckler.
SOLUTION: Make more Feats like this that do not allow levels to stack for the sake of Feats, but grant more of the Class Skills from the other class associated with the feat.
An example could be something as such:
Martial Thief- Allows Fighter & Rogue levels to stack for the sake of determining Trap Sense, Sneak Attack, & Rogue Special Abilities (Homebrew Example)
In this way, Fighter would be the preferable class (assuming you want a combat-oriented character) as you'd get a little bonus to your utility in the form of Trap Sense, a large boost to tactical damage with Sneak Attack dice, and access to Abilities not normally available to a Fighter - Crippling Strike, Defensive Roll, Improved Evasion, Opportunist, Skill Mastery, Slippery Mind; any combination of 4 of these. (OR alternately, an additional 4 feats as per description of Rogue Special Abilities.)
-Geregald
One takes Sztany's build with its very commendable "career paths", and kicks it up a notch or two. As I thought about it, there are so many more potential career paths for a fighter, and there are times I'd like to have knights, swashbucklers, et. al. who don't have all the fancy features from the new books but are just exceptional warriors who make a decent go of it with what they've got. So why not make it possible to "roll your own"?
ff6shadow's Before:
Skill Points at 1st Level: (4 + Int modifier) x 4.
Skill Points at Each Additional Level: 4 + Int modifier.
Class Skills
The fighter’s class skills (and the key ability for each skill) are Climb (Str), Craft (Int), Handle Animal (Cha), -Heal (Wis), Intimidate (Cha), Jump (Str), Knowledge (+geography, tactics and war) (Int, Wis), Listen (Wis), Profession (Wis), Ride (Dex), Sense Motive (Wis), Spot (Wis), and Swim (Str).
After:
Skill Points at 1st Level: (4 + Int modifier) x 4.
Skill Points at Each Additional Level: 4 + Int modifier.
Fighter Core Class Skills
The fighter's class skills (and the key ability for each skill) are Craft (Int), Handle Animal (Cha), Intimidate (Cha OR Str), Jump (Str), Knowledge (tactics and war) (Wis), Profession (Wis), Spot (Wis).
Fighter Individual Add-on Class Skills - pick 4:
Balance (Dex) Climb (Str), Diplomacy (Cha), Heal (Wis), Knowledge (geography, local, nobility & royalty) (Int), Listen (Wis), Sense Motive (Wis), Ride (Dex), Survival (Wis), Swim (Str), Tumble (Dex), Use Rope (Dex).
Note the changes, including this crucial addition: Intimidate is Cha OR Strength based. Because you know, the bug ugly brute over there may not have lots of social skills, but that isn't what he relies on to intimidate you. I'd be happy to take the WotC staff to a biker bar or two and have the concept illustrated for them, if this explanation is too complicated.
With respect to the "pick 4" option, this gives full flexibility when creating your fighter, without really intruding into others' territory. It also avoids a lot of stupid situations, like the local constabulary, sailors/marines, mercenaries, et. al. lacking critical skills for their jobs. Here's an illustration of what I mean, and how it works. As you can see, there are still real choices for a PC to make here - and the fighter's so-so Int score means further choices will be in order as they decide how they want to allocate skill points and where they want to be above-average.
Some Suggested Fighter Types & Individual Skill Choices
Police: Diplomacy, Knowledge local, Listen, Sense Motive
Bounty Hunter: Listen, Sense Motive, Survival, Use Rope
Bodyguard: Heal, Knowledge nobility, Listen, Sense Motive
Sentinel: Listen, Sense Motive, Knowledge - local, nobility
Knight: Diplomacy, Knowledge - geography, nobility, Ride
Mercenary: Knowledge geography, Listen, Survival, +1
Trained Thug: Knowledge local, Listen, Use rope +1
Musketeer: Climb, Knowledge nobility, Tumble, Use rope
Sailor: Climb, Swim, Use rope, +1
Wilderness Warrior: Climb, Swim, Survival, Use rope
OK... that's change #1, and it's the biggie. The second is one I'm wrestling with, and it involves the suggestion someone made that the weapon specialization progression should be simpler and more powerful. In that model, it looks more or less like this:
Weapon Focus: +1 to hit/damage
Weapon Specialization: +2 to hit/damage
Greater Weapon Focus: +3 to hit/damage
Greater Weapon Specialization: +4 to hit/damage
Weapon Mastery: +6 to hit/damage
The fighter's extra feats give them a real edge here, and with this progression the bonuses become more meaningful and worth a feat.
With these additions, and ff6shadow's plus-ups like Height of Battle and Mastery of Battle, the fighter should be able to hold her own with minimal adjustment. Remaining combat bonus disadvantages are now more than compensated for in improved protection, plus incredible timeliness that puts them over the edge in those critical moments (Height of Battle) and helps offset her save issues, plus Mastery of Battle abilities that give fighters a definite edge over all others (Ambidexterity, Swift Strikes, Ranged Weapon Mastery, etc.).
Feedback and thoughts encouraged, and welcome. And of course, thanks to fighter class O Sensei aelryinth for pointing me at a few options for the class and encouraging me to think about it and come up with my own adaptation.
Thus, ninjas and swashies gain almost nothing for taking Fighter levels unless they want to dip it for Spec.
Fighters, on the other hand, profit nicely by essentially blowing one feat and picking up an escalating slew of class benefits...which is pretty much exactly what their bonus feats should do.
===Aelryinth
If anybody's read draconic or fiendish feats you'll probably recognise this
FIGHTER BONUS FEATS : EVERY FIGHTER BONUS FEAT WITH NUMERICAL VARIABLES, INCREASES OR DECREASES [as applicable] BY 1 FOR EACH 2 FIGHTER BONUS FEATS OTHER THAN THE FEAT IN QUESTION YOU POSSESS [RETROACTIVE]
Examples:At fighter level 20 with 10 bonus fighter feats other than the one in question
Point blank shot - +6 to ranged attacks and damage
Dodge - +6 to ac vs one person
mobility - +9 to ac vs aoo's
Improved initiative - +9 to initiative
Weapon specialisation+greater WS - +14 damage
Two weapon fighting - penalty reduces by 7/11 effectively nullifying the penalty
greater TWF - Third attack with off-hand weapon at -5 penalty
Note that the mechanic might need some refinement
Just my 2 cents :D
I've looked around at a number of alternative fighter builds. There's something to recommend quite a few of them, but for minimal disruption of the core mechanic and minimal need to buy additional materials, ff6shadow's build stands as my favorite. "Height of Battle" almost makes the class worth taking all by itself - consider the effect of that instant reality shift for just-missed rolls, hits or damage you just gotta have, etc. It's huge. I'd make 2 changes to it.
One takes Sztany's build with its very commendable "career paths", and kicks it up a notch or two. As I thought about it, there are so many more potential career paths for a fighter, and there are times I'd like to have knights, swashbucklers, et. al. who don't have all the fancy features from the new books but are just exceptional warriors who make a decent go of it with what they've got. So why not make it possible to "roll your own"?
ff6shadow's Before:
Skill Points at 1st Level: (4 + Int modifier) x 4.
Skill Points at Each Additional Level: 4 + Int modifier.
Class Skills
The fighter’s class skills (and the key ability for each skill) are Climb (Str), Craft (Int), Handle Animal (Cha), -Heal (Wis), Intimidate (Cha), Jump (Str), Knowledge (+geography, tactics and war) (Int, Wis), Listen (Wis), Profession (Wis), Ride (Dex), Sense Motive (Wis), Spot (Wis), and Swim (Str).
After:
Skill Points at 1st Level: (4 + Int modifier) x 4.
Skill Points at Each Additional Level: 4 + Int modifier.
Fighter Core Class Skills
The fighter's class skills (and the key ability for each skill) are Craft (Int), Handle Animal (Cha), Intimidate (Cha OR Str), Jump (Str), Knowledge (tactics and war) (Wis), Profession (Wis), Spot (Wis).
Fighter Individual Add-on Class Skills - pick 4:
Balance (Dex) Climb (Str), Diplomacy (Cha), Heal (Wis), Knowledge (geography, local, nobility & royalty) (Int), Listen (Wis), Sense Motive (Wis), Ride (Dex), Survival (Wis), Swim (Str), Tumble (Dex), Use Rope (Dex).
Note the changes, including this crucial addition: Intimidate is Cha OR Strength based. Because you know, the bug ugly brute over there may not have lots of social skills, but that isn't what he relies on to intimidate you. I'd be happy to take the WotC staff to a biker bar or two and have the concept illustrated for them, if this explanation is too complicated.
With respect to the "pick 4" option, this gives full flexibility when creating your fighter, without really intruding into others' territory. It also avoids a lot of stupid situations, like the local constabulary, sailors/marines, mercenaries, et. al. lacking critical skills for their jobs. Here's an illustration of what I mean, and how it works. As you can see, there are still real choices for a PC to make here - and the fighter's so-so Int score means further choices will be in order as they decide how they want to allocate skill points and where they want to be above-average.
Some Suggested Fighter Types & Individual Skill Choices
Police: Diplomacy, Knowledge local, Listen, Sense Motive
Bounty Hunter: Listen, Sense Motive, Survival, Use Rope
Bodyguard: Heal, Knowledge nobility, Listen, Sense Motive
Sentinel: Listen, Sense Motive, Knowledge - local, nobility
Knight: Diplomacy, Knowledge - geography, nobility, Ride
Mercenary: Knowledge geography, Listen, Survival, +1
Trained Thug: Knowledge local, Listen, Use rope +1
Musketeer: Climb, Knowledge nobility, Tumble, Use rope
Sailor: Climb, Swim, Use rope, +1
Wilderness Warrior: Climb, Swim, Survival, Use rope
OK... that's change #1, and it's the biggie. The second is one I'm wrestling with, and it involves the suggestion someone made that the weapon specialization progression should be simpler and more powerful. In that model, it looks more or less like this:
Weapon Focus: +1 to hit/damage
Weapon Specialization: +2 to hit/damage
Greater Weapon Focus: +3 to hit/damage
Greater Weapon Specialization: +4 to hit/damage
Weapon Mastery: +6 to hit/damage
The fighter's extra feats give them a real edge here, and with this progression the bonuses become more meaningful and worth a feat.
With these additions, and ff6shadow's plus-ups like Height of Battle and Mastery of Battle, the fighter should be able to hold her own with minimal adjustment. Remaining combat bonus disadvantages are now more than compensated for in improved protection, plus incredible timeliness that puts them over the edge in those critical moments (Height of Battle) and helps offset her save issues, plus Mastery of Battle abilities that give fighters a definite edge over all others (Ambidexterity, Swift Strikes, Ranged Weapon Mastery, etc.).
Feedback and thoughts encouraged, and welcome. And of course, thanks to fighter class O Sensei aelryinth for pointing me at a few options for the class and encouraging me to think about it and come up with my own adaptation.
If you play this class through a campaign, please return and comment to us on two things -- The Balance issue (overpowered, underpowered, just right?) and the Fun issue (independent of the Balance issue...we are talking fun for everyone, not for someone playing an overpowered class).
===Aelryinth
* Making Intimidate Str or Cha based seems to have strong fun value - it gets used more, gets more skill point player focus, and seems to add a very useful 'toughness' flavor to fighters (and opposing thug fighters) that scouts, rangers, and paladins don't have. It also helps barbarians, of course, as it should, but barbarians aren't for everyone. It's hard to realize what a staple of fantasy is missing, until you add this in and PCs start using it.
* The individual skill choices value is already very apparent on the DM side, as I am now able to build NPCs with skill sets appropriate to their roles. It has also added more depth to fighter PC background, which is a + for fun but not overpowering near as I can see. On my end, the cops are now less easy to trick (sense motive), a background as a sailor translates into useful NPC skills for a side adventure without having to introduce a thief (and also becomes an attractive background hook for PCs that can move the party into sea-based adventures later), there are swashbucklers out there who can play the role reasonably well without me having to buy a book, etc.
OFF-TOPIC ASIDE: ultimately, I believe the skills set is almost as broken as the feats. Eventually, I think it has to move to a system where there is a limited set of universal skills, which anyone can take, plus a system of add-ons that might factor in such items as race, background, and class. The lack of that core universal set, for skills that are very clearly universal, is a big minus right now. I also think it's ridiculous to have elven wizards running around who have spend over 100 years in the forest, but don't have survival as a skill, but that's another whole thread.
* The major power issue thus far, such as it is, is the skill point comparison with clerics and mages (wizard/sorcerer).
Clerics are already so powerful in D&D that they don't really require compensation. Mages are powerful, and their intelligence largely offsets the skill gap. Both classes could also arguably be justified as low given the demands of their core class advancement on their time and concentration. But I still hate the 2 poiint "solution."
I'm looking for options to offset the mage gap, and give clerics their proper due as religion experts (as opposed to now, where mages and bards are), without overbalancing. I may move to a system that gives clerics 1 point per level to spend on knowledge areas within their purview (religion/planes or any other directly related to deity's foci), and mages 1-2 points point per level to spend on any knowledge, concentration, or spellcraft.
One thing that nobody has said, is maybe the fighter is good. When I am playing a non-fighter I can never figure out what feat to take, but when I am a fighter I never have enough. I have seen some great fighter builds. Karmic strike with a big crit window. Good stuff. And that particular fighter was a great archer. The feats are not really great until you can get lots of them. The advantage of the F is that he can put feat combinations together faster than anyone. Using a reach weapon with short haft, combat reflexes, and karmic strike is cool, but most characters would be too high level to really enjoy themselves. I have played a warblade and the abilities are really good, but they are not as awe inspiring as people are making them out to be. And another thing to consider is that maybe the F is not really a 20 lvl class. It may be a general class that you can use to round out a character. Not sexy, but necessary for the system. I have seen a ton of characters that have F somewhere in that class line, but few that went all the way
That whole line of reasoning is one reason why this post exists.
1) As the Fighter stands now, he IS very generalist. So General, you can stick him right above the warrior in the scheme of things and tuck him in and notice how utterly he fits Generic.
2) But generic is FINE if it still means power, versatility, and/or flavor. Even better if it completely obviates the need for tons of other classes/PrC's...just build them with the core Fighter.
3) As it stands, the Fighter is not a 20 level class, it is a dip class. It's a stepping stone to a PrC. That's not how it should work. A PrC should be a difficult choice to make for leaving Fighter, not an automatic one.
If you are going to make dip classes, then all starter classes should be dip classes (like d20 Modern is). But if a Class is going to be a 20 level class, then it should be utterly worth taking for 20 levels, and leaving should be quite the decision.
=========
War Winner:
Adding numeric bonuses to feats would require some fine-tuning and realignment of some feats (for one thing, it completely gets rid of the need for the spec tree).
Routine increase in the bonuses given by Fighter feats is a suggested fix that would go a long way towards giving Fighters a boost, even if the flavor isn't spectactular. It's the Master of Feats shtick...the Fighter should get more out of his feats then anyone else.
If you really like the idea, post it in more detail, along with the feats it would affect. You might want to restrict yourself to Core. I myself have often advocated an increase in the benefit a Fighter gets from his feats, but I usually based it on his iteratives. Basing it on his Fighter Bonus feats makes excellent sense, however.
===Aelryinth
I've looked around at a number of alternative fighter builds. There's something to recommend quite a few of them, but for minimal disruption of the core mechanic and minimal need to buy additional materials, ff6shadow's build stands as my favorite. "Height of Battle" almost makes the class worth taking all by itself - consider the effect of that instant reality shift for just-missed rolls, hits or damage you just gotta have, etc. It's huge. I'd make 2 changes to it.
One takes Sztany's build with its very commendable "career paths", and kicks it up a notch or two. As I thought about it, there are so many more potential career paths for a fighter, and there are times I'd like to have knights, swashbucklers, et. al. who don't have all the fancy features from the new books but are just exceptional warriors who make a decent go of it with what they've got. So why not make it possible to "roll your own"?
ff6shadow's Before:
Skill Points at 1st Level: (4 + Int modifier) x 4.
Skill Points at Each Additional Level: 4 + Int modifier.
Class Skills
The fighter’s class skills (and the key ability for each skill) are Climb (Str), Craft (Int), Handle Animal (Cha), -Heal (Wis), Intimidate (Cha), Jump (Str), Knowledge (+geography, tactics and war) (Int, Wis), Listen (Wis), Profession (Wis), Ride (Dex), Sense Motive (Wis), Spot (Wis), and Swim (Str).
After:
Skill Points at 1st Level: (4 + Int modifier) x 4.
Skill Points at Each Additional Level: 4 + Int modifier.
Fighter Core Class Skills
The fighter's class skills (and the key ability for each skill) are Craft (Int), Handle Animal (Cha), Intimidate (Cha OR Str), Jump (Str), Knowledge (tactics and war) (Wis), Profession (Wis), Spot (Wis).
Fighter Individual Add-on Class Skills - pick 4:
Balance (Dex) Climb (Str), Diplomacy (Cha), Heal (Wis), Knowledge (geography, local, nobility & royalty) (Int), Listen (Wis), Sense Motive (Wis), Ride (Dex), Survival (Wis), Swim (Str), Tumble (Dex), Use Rope (Dex).
Note the changes, including this crucial addition: Intimidate is Cha OR Strength based. Because you know, the bug ugly brute over there may not have lots of social skills, but that isn't what he relies on to intimidate you. I'd be happy to take the WotC staff to a biker bar or two and have the concept illustrated for them, if this explanation is too complicated.
With respect to the "pick 4" option, this gives full flexibility when creating your fighter, without really intruding into others' territory. It also avoids a lot of stupid situations, like the local constabulary, sailors/marines, mercenaries, et. al. lacking critical skills for their jobs. Here's an illustration of what I mean, and how it works. As you can see, there are still real choices for a PC to make here - and the fighter's so-so Int score means further choices will be in order as they decide how they want to allocate skill points and where they want to be above-average.
Some Suggested Fighter Types & Individual Skill Choices
Police: Diplomacy, Knowledge local, Listen, Sense Motive
Bounty Hunter: Listen, Sense Motive, Survival, Use Rope
Bodyguard: Heal, Knowledge nobility, Listen, Sense Motive
Sentinel: Listen, Sense Motive, Knowledge - local, nobility
Knight: Diplomacy, Knowledge - geography, nobility, Ride
Mercenary: Knowledge geography, Listen, Survival, +1
Trained Thug: Knowledge local, Listen, Use rope +1
Musketeer: Climb, Knowledge nobility, Tumble, Use rope
Sailor: Climb, Swim, Use rope, +1
Wilderness Warrior: Climb, Swim, Survival, Use rope
OK... that's change #1, and it's the biggie. The second is one I'm wrestling with, and it involves the suggestion someone made that the weapon specialization progression should be simpler and more powerful. In that model, it looks more or less like this:
Weapon Focus: +1 to hit/damage
Weapon Specialization: +2 to hit/damage
Greater Weapon Focus: +3 to hit/damage
Greater Weapon Specialization: +4 to hit/damage
Weapon Mastery: +6 to hit/damage
The fighter's extra feats give them a real edge here, and with this progression the bonuses become more meaningful and worth a feat.
With these additions, and ff6shadow's plus-ups like Height of Battle and Mastery of Battle, the fighter should be able to hold her own with minimal adjustment. Remaining combat bonus disadvantages are now more than compensated for in improved protection, plus incredible timeliness that puts them over the edge in those critical moments (Height of Battle) and helps offset her save issues, plus Mastery of Battle abilities that give fighters a definite edge over all others (Ambidexterity, Swift Strikes, Ranged Weapon Mastery, etc.).
Feedback and thoughts encouraged, and welcome. And of course, thanks to fighter class O Sensei aelryinth for pointing me at a few options for the class and encouraging me to think about it and come up with my own adaptation.
Don't really mind the career paths and choosing your own skills but the bonus to hit on the weapon focuses really seems like a bit much. Bonuses to hit are far better than bonuses to damage, even when limited to a single weapon.
Consider all of the following at 20th level.
The Weapon Focus line, including Weapon Focus, Weapon Specialization, Melee/Ranged Weapon Mastery, Greater Weapon Focus, and Greater Weapon Specialization grant a total of +4 to hit and +6 to damage for a required 12 levels of Fighter. Adding Weapon Supremacy, which is a very nice feat, but I feel that it isn't strong enough for a capstone fighter feat, grants severalnice abilities (Avoiding copyright issues here) the most valuable of which is full attacking with any weapon in a grapple at no penalty. This increases Figher level requirment to 18. For future comparison, Weapon Suprmeacy is left out. I'm trying to stick to offensive comparisons
Rage grants an end total of +8 Strength, netting a guaranteed +4 to hit and +4 to damage, +6 if using a two-handed weapon. This requires 20 levels of Barbarian. As a class ability, Rage is more powerful than feats, represented by its granting of 60 HP, +4 on Will saves, +2 on Fortitude Saves, and a few other mild abilities (+4 on Grapple, +4 to break objects). In return, you suffer a -2 AC. I'll also be ignoring these benefits and this penalty.
One thing that nobody has said, is maybe the fighter is good. When I am playing a non-fighter I can never figure out what feat to take, but when I am a fighter I never have enough. I have seen some great fighter builds. Karmic strike with a big crit window. Good stuff. And that particular fighter was a great archer. The feats are not really great until you can get lots of them. The advantage of the F is that he can put feat combinations together faster than anyone. Using a reach weapon with short haft, combat reflexes, and karmic strike is cool, but most characters would be too high level to really enjoy themselves. I have played a warblade and the abilities are really good, but they are not as awe inspiring as people are making them out to be. And another thing to consider is that maybe the F is not really a 20 lvl class. It may be a general class that you can use to round out a character. Not sexy, but necessary for the system. I have seen a ton of characters that have F somewhere in that class line, but few that went all the way
Yeah, but even a badly built Wizard is pretty good. With the fighter you have only a few builds that work and others are pretty bad. Also the Wizard is good in core and the Fighter is not.
One thing to note is that the Warblade is less consistent than a Fghter. Sure, he has some truly awesome abilities, but the coolest (and most spell-like) ones are strikes, which almost universally require standard actions. A properly equipped and feated fighter (perhaps one taking a weapon style from CW) would wipe the floor with a Warblade any day since he'd be making 8 attacks and lets say, 3 trip attempts (High sword, low Axe-- which BTW grant extra attacks if successful) for the warblade's one really cool 4X damage (with concentration check DC of enemy's AC) strike.
I still feel that it isn't enough to make the fighter equal with a warblade. If the said warblade decided to use a specific maneuver - Time stands still - with boots of haste, he can easily make far more trip attempts, attacks, or grapple attempts than a regular fighter. If he goes TWF with GTWF, he gets a total of 15 ****ing attacks! Add rage of the mongoose and Animeblade gets 19 attacks per round, 4 of them at his highest BAB! To make it worse, he can recover said feat as a swift action.
As if things couldn't get worse, our good "Uberblade" gets stances that make him resistant to the likes of criticals, and gives him +10 to all grapple, trip, disarm w/e checks. He can use the fighter weapon focus tree on any weapon as long as he spends an hour "exercising." The fact that he can substitute his concentration check for fortitude/will/reflex save makes him able to pretty much automatically resist MANY of the wizards "vaunted" battle field control spellls. Throw in a d12 and why would anyone play a fighter again?
The Warblade is strong, sexy, and smart. He simply outclasses the fighter, and can stand easily toe to toe with a wizard.
EARLY REPORTS:
* Making Intimidate Str or Cha based seems to have strong fun value - it gets used more, gets more skill point player focus, and seems to add a very useful 'toughness' flavor to fighters (and opposing thug fighters) that scouts, rangers, and paladins don't have. It also helps barbarians, of course, as it should, but barbarians aren't for everyone. It's hard to realize what a staple of fantasy is missing, until you add this in and PCs start using it.
* The individual skill choices value is already very apparent on the DM side, as I am now able to build NPCs with skill sets appropriate to their roles. It has also added more depth to fighter PC background, which is a + for fun but not overpowering near as I can see. On my end, the cops are now less easy to trick (sense motive), a background as a sailor translates into useful NPC skills for a side adventure without having to introduce a thief (and also becomes an attractive background hook for PCs that can move the party into sea-based adventures later), there are swashbucklers out there who can play the role reasonably well without me having to buy a book, etc.
OFF-TOPIC ASIDE: ultimately, I believe the skills set is almost as broken as the feats. Eventually, I think it has to move to a system where there is a limited set of universal skills, which anyone can take, plus a system of add-ons that might factor in such items as race, background, and class. The lack of that core universal set, for skills that are very clearly universal, is a big minus right now. I also think it's ridiculous to have elven wizards running around who have spend over 100 years in the forest, but don't have survival as a skill, but that's another whole thread.
* The major power issue thus far, such as it is, is the skill point comparison with clerics and mages (wizard/sorcerer).
Clerics are already so powerful in D&D that they don't really require compensation. Mages are powerful, and their intelligence largely offsets the skill gap. Both classes could also arguably be justified as low given the demands of their core class advancement on their time and concentration. But I still hate the 2 poiint "solution."
I'm looking for options to offset the mage gap, and give clerics their proper due as religion experts (as opposed to now, where mages and bards are), without overbalancing. I may move to a system that gives clerics 1 point per level to spend on knowledge areas within their purview (religion/planes or any other directly related to deity's foci), and mages 1-2 points point per level to spend on any knowledge, concentration, or spellcraft.
Excellent. since you are not commenting on the upgrades to spec, I'm assuming you left the total amount of bonuses alone.
As for the Knowledge points, that's fairly easy to solve. Either pick a skill for the domains the cleric takes so they can take points in it, or simply give them bonus skill points they can apply towards certain skills. For instance, giving them 2 extra skill points that can only be spent on Knowledge - Religion, The Planes, or Diplomacy would go a long way towards building what you feel is a standard cleric for, say, Pelor. Change that to Religion, Planes or Intimidation, and Hextor comes to mind. Change to Intimidation, Bluff, and Craft (Trapmaking), and you are looking at Erythnul.
And so forth.
Mages can never have too many knowledge skills. Give them an extra two points a level they can only dump in knowledge skills, and they might even have enough left over to take some cross class stuff. Remember, while they have nice Ints, the big Int raises are LATE in the game...and are not retroactive. It's entirely conceivable that an Archmage could raise his Int 6 points from 17-20...but that doesn't give him an extra 51 skill points for all his early levels, it gives him NINE.
If you simply let wizards apply their Int raise skill points retroactively to knowledge skills, then you don't need to make any other changes.
===Aelryinth
If the group I played with wanted me to run a core melee-classes only game, that would be okay. I'd have to remove almost every monsters spells, SLAs and tone down their Su's a pile and do other stuff, like tell them they get max HP per level or have them fight plain goblins as high as level 5 and not bring out the bugbears or ogres until level 6 and hill giants would have to wait until level 8 or 9; which is okay, but would bore me.
I've built a PHB dwarf fighter 3 that has a 61% chance of beating the ogre in the monster manual (CR 3) in a straight duel. If you allow him his +4 AC vs. giants, his chances increase to 93%. Str 18, con 16, dex 13+, int 13+, cha any. Average HP. Weapon focus, dodge, combat expertise, toughness (shooting for dwarven defender), MW waraxe, full plate, heavy shield. That's it! Ran 10,000 simulated battles on my computer. That means an ogre should be an appropriate challenge for a party of 4 decently made level 3 fighters. "Level 6"... honestly.
I've also made a core fighter of a level equal to a fire giant's CR, and he utterly annihilated the fire giant. Again, that's w/o the +4 AC he's supposed to get against giants. That was before I learned a couple new optimization tricks that I know now.
source code for simulated battles
Runs in any browser (copy and paste into an .html file). Remove the //'s before the "message" commands to show the individual battles.
"Oskar1" is a dwarven fighter 3.
Runs in any browser (copy and paste into an .html file). Remove the //'s before the "message" commands to show the individual battles.
"Oskar1" is a dwarven fighter 3.
Also the Wizard is good in core and the Fighter is not.
I disagree with this.
The fighter only benefits marginally (a conditional free attack here, a +1 bonus there) from additional feats to choose from,
By contrast a cleric gets spell phylactery, draconic polymorph, rainbow, create magic tatoo, a druid gets: creeping cold, nature's favor, miasma, owl's insight, greater/superior resistance, nature's avatar, and a wizard gets [element] orbs, lion's charge, dragonskin, ghostform, prismatic eye, Simbul's spell sequencer, maw of chaos).
Don't really mind the career paths and choosing your own skills but the bonus to hit on the weapon focuses really seems like a bit much. Bonuses to hit are far better than bonuses to damage, even when limited to a single weapon.
Consider all of the following at 20th level.
The Weapon Focus line, including Weapon Focus, Weapon Specialization, Melee/Ranged Weapon Mastery, Greater Weapon Focus, and Greater Weapon Specialization grant a total of +4 to hit and +6 to damage for a required 12 levels of Fighter. Adding Weapon Supremacy, which is a very nice feat, but I feel that it isn't strong enough for a capstone fighter feat, grants several nice abilities (Avoiding copyright issues here) the most valuable of which is full attacking with any weapon in a grapple at no penalty. This increases Fighter level requirement to 18. For future comparison, Weapon Supremacy is left out. I'm trying to stick to offensive comparisons.
Rage grants an end total of +8 Strength, netting a guaranteed +4 to hit and +4 to damage, +6 if using a two-handed weapon. This requires 20 levels of Barbarian. As a class ability, Rage is more powerful than feats, represented by its granting of 60 HP, +4 on Will saves, +2 on Fortitude Saves, and a few other mild abilities (+4 on Grapple, +4 to break objects). In return, you suffer a -2 AC. I'll also be ignoring these benefits and this penalty.
I disagree with this.
The fighter only benefits marginally (a conditional free attack here, a +1 bonus there) from additional feats to choose from,
By contrast a cleric gets spell phylactery, draconic polymorph, rainbow, create magic tattoo, a druid gets: creeping cold, nature's favor, miasma, owl's insight, greater/superior resistance, nature's avatar, and a wizard gets [element] orbs, lion's charge, dragonskin, ghostform, prismatic eye, Simbul's spell sequencer, maw of chaos).
As time permits, I am working on a new Regdar thread to address this issue, but to briefly put forward my thesis....
The game is based on rounds, as such there is an upper limit to power - you ALWAYS need at least ONE round to kill / incapacitate / etc. an enemy in this game. An easy argument can be made that spellcasters are already at or close to this one round upper limit in core, whereas a fighter is far below that. With splatbooks, and their increased feats / spells / items / PrCs etc. a caster certainly has more OPTIONS as to how to end the encounter in one round, but they are still held to that one round minimum. A fighter on the other hand, with the new feats etc. in splatbooks, can now get closer to that one round minimum.
Splatbooks benefit caster options, whereas they increase melee power.
Me.
I also agree that focus is more limited than rage. I was pointing out to katman though, upping the bonuses on Weapon Focus isn't necessary. It simply adds more redundant hit and damage bonuses onto something that already performs adequately.
If given the choice between playing a straight fighter or a straight barbarian, I choose the barbarian. He has options that don't relate to killing other things that play naturally into his abilities. Most fighter feats, and his limited skill choices press him into the 'I kill stuff' roll.
My comparison was solely to explain that increasing the potency of the Weapon Focus line wasn't necessary.
Now two questions: How would you work scaling feats for characters with racial HD and level adjustment? It kind of hurts say... a half-dragon that has started as a fighter and never multiclassed that scaling feats based off of BAB or fighter levels/fighter bonus feats just won't be as powerful as a straight human fighter. Maybe that's just the cost of racial HD and LA, but can you come up with any solutions?
Second Question: How would you design a mini-feat tree that would give a fighter half of mettle? I was thinking of 2 or three feats around level 7-14 (this is a pretty rough estimation) that ends up giving the fighter mettle for his fortitude saves. I think it keeps the flavor of the fighter only having good Fortitude saves but prevents opponents from finding spells that could take him out of a fight or severely weaken him even on a failed save. (An example would be the strength damage done by moon bolt from Spell compendium, my memory is telling me its a fort save though I could be wrong, but the principle holds).
And finally, thank you for starting this thread.
The only disagreement I have is with the feat swapping feature you proposed. It seems strange that a fighter could willingly "forget" his feats, even if he was learning a new one in return. Needless to say I don't think much of any retraining-style rules in general, but that's just me. I do like the scaling feats, as well as the concept that effective fighters can be focused any ability score.
As time permits, I am working on a new Regdar thread to address this issue, but to briefly put forward my thesis....
The game is based on rounds, as such there is an upper limit to power - you ALWAYS need at least ONE round to kill / incapacitate / etc. an enemy in this game. An easy argument can be made that spellcasters are already at or close to this one round upper limit in core, whereas a fighter is far below that. With splatbooks, and their increased feats / spells / items / PrCs etc. a caster certainly has more OPTIONS as to how to end the encounter in one round, but they are still held to that one round minimum. A fighter on the other hand, with the new feats etc. in splatbooks, can now get closer to that one round minimum.
Splatbooks benefit caster options, whereas they increase melee power.
Me.
A couple of things. First and foremost a caster can incapacitate many creatures in a single round. In this way he can bypass this limit. Heck, he can gate in creatures that can incapacitate many creatures in a round.
Also, more options means more power. Clerics and Druids get all those extra spells for free and Wizards can eventually scribe as many spells as they want, though the DM and/or funds can limit this I suppose.
Selecting a feat is a much larger commitment than a spell. You're a caster and going dragon hunting? Prepare some serious dragon-killing spells. Facing a demon tomorrow? Swap out your dragon-killing spells for demon-killing spells.
You don't have these same options as a melee character (or as a sorcerer but that's another discussion) unless your DM is very liberal with retraining. Facing a dragon? Well, if you are leveling up and you think you'll be facing a lot of dragons, than take that dragon killer feat. Facing a demon tomorrow? Umm, buy some demon-killing equipment and lament your feat selection. Uber-strong monsters and/or giants thwart trippers. Sunder builds are thwarted by natural attacks. Charger builds are actually pretty good but get a little repetitive. Also, they can be thwarted by circumstance. Almost any build can be effective in the right situation. The more options you have in game- not just when you level up, the more situations your character will be able to handle and the more powerful your character will be.
First off, my compliments Aerlynth, an exemplary job.
Now two questions: How would you work scaling feats for characters with racial HD and level adjustment? It kind of hurts say... a half-dragon that has started as a fighter and never multiclassed that scaling feats based off of BAB or fighter levels/fighter bonus feats just won't be as powerful as a straight human fighter. Maybe that's just the cost of racial HD and LA, but can you come up with any solutions?
Second Question: How would you design a mini-feat tree that would give a fighter half of mettle? I was thinking of 2 or three feats around level 7-14 (this is a pretty rough estimation) that ends up giving the fighter mettle for his fortitude saves. I think it keeps the flavor of the fighter only having good Fortitude saves but prevents opponents from finding spells that could take him out of a fight or severely weaken him even on a failed save. (An example would be the strength damage done by moon bolt from Spell compendium, my memory is telling me its a fort save though I could be wrong, but the principle holds).
And finally, thank you for starting this thread.
Thanks for the compliment!
Well, the whole racial HD thing for me is a loaded issue. Taking a race is simply taking a class with front load benefits, from a game design standpoint.
From a realism standpoint, you have to realize that someone who does NOT have all the natural advantages of racial Hit Dice is going to rely considerably more on class skills then someone who does...they have no choice in the matter. Sure, the 18 Int Ogre might want to use his spells all the time...but the fact of the matter is an average Ogre is as strong as a higher level fighter, can smack a human without getting smacked back, and isn't even humanoid, granting him resistance/immunity to some lower level spells.
I consider a lot of racial classing to be munchkinism...you want all these special advantages, and you want them NOW instead of waiting and paying gold for the equivalent benefits (which probably isn't possibly, or is way too overpriced).
I actually like the HD penalty thing. It discourages people from shopping for the best benefit and focus on the class they want to play, not the creatures whose stats are so uber that they are more then worth their +LA (Mineral Warrior is one of these...Half-Ogre might be, too).
I'm afraid my attitude on the racial attitude is that if the special abilities of X that you want are so important, suck up the relevant penalties and stick to it.
I do know that many abilities that a race gets are easily replaced at higher levels. My reply is...so? It's at low level where most racial abilities prove the most powerful. Look at warforged. Remember that everyone potentially starts a character at level 1-3. Warforged RULE in that level range. No exhaustion, no food/water/air, inbuilt armor and DR, fortification, etc.
by level 10, those abilities are kind of 'meh'. The Half-Ogre with reach at 3rd is a massively strong, dangerous melee machine...at level 10, the human can be walking around with permanent Enlarge, and suddenly he's not so uber.
Realize that taking odd races means you want something because you are taking them. You can't expect to have your cake and eat it, too...you don't get everything at 16th level a Human Fighter has when you play an Ogre too, but he doesn't naturally have reach, +8 str, +4 Con, +4 NAt Ac and the Giant type, either. You don't want the racial Hit dice...you just want all the 'kewl' stuff. Well, if you could have both, why would anyone bother to play a human?
Suck up the penalties with the bonuses, and really think about why you want to play that Ogre. And then look at the human next to the Ogre and figure out why someone would want to stick with being human.
====
Mettle is a woefully underpowered feat. I would simply give it straight off as a feat. In almost all circumstances it is less useful then evasion, simply because there are relatively few Fort/Will saves that actually have secondary effects...it's either save or be hosed. Go on, look at all the spells.
Remember, Mettle only helps if you MAKE the save. If you make the save against a Charm/Death Spell/Poison, you've already avoided the next effect. There are relatively few effects, compared to evastion, that Mettle does anything to.
Now, if Mettle was like IMPROVED Evasion, that might be something different. Halving the effect of a save-or-dead, or delaying it a round or two, would be a great benefit, or taking less effect from poisons, even when a save is failed, would be an excellent, awesome benefit.
There's no need for a Feat Tree for Mettle. Just make up a feat you can take around 6th level, with a Good Fort Requirement (=5 or so), and either a +4 Will save or Iron will, and a decent Con (13).
I'd actually direct you to Steady Concentration from the PHB II as a much better feat against Save or Dies for melees. It lets you use your Con mod instead of Wis for Will saves, and you no longer fail Fort saves on a 1. That's far more valuable then Mettle.
In all honesty, Mettle should be available at level 2 or 3 to a Fighter, for all that it is actually going to be relevant in any game. It SOUNDS cool...but it actually DOES almost nothing.
====Aelryinth
The problem with changing something that is in everyone's book already is that suddenly the changer must provide a full print-out of the new class for everyone, and everyone must know it and must show proper interest in it. In our game we used to have revisions of many spells and feats for balance but discarded most of those because people prefer to read a book over a web page or print-out.
We also have a small fighter buff that mainly illustrates how simple a fix should be: "Fighters get tumble as a class skill", it's simple and spread by word of mouth, you don't need a print-out to remember it or see what it does - and if a player considers a fighter and doesn't know another player just tells it.
The same would be true for a "fighters get a feat every level", also quite simple. But I just don't see these scalable feats or the enormous fighter overhauls making it to a game, not my game at least.
I mostly read this thread to see if a nice and simple fighter buff came up, but no.
The problem with changing something that is in everyone's book already is that suddenly the changer must provide a full print-out of the new class for everyone, and everyone must know it and must show proper interest in it. In our game we used to have revisions of many spells and feats for balance but discarded most of those because people prefer to read a book over a web page or print-out.
We also have a small fighter buff that mainly illustrates how simple a fix should be: "Fighters get tumble as a class skill", it's simple and spread by word of mouth, you don't need a print-out to remember it or see what it does - and if a player considers a fighter and doesn't know another player just tells it.
The same would be true for a "fighters get a feat every level", also quite simple. But I just don't see these scalable feats or the enormous fighter overhauls making it to a game, not my game at least.
All very good points. I could see the same happening with either of my 2 groups.
The feat every level is a nice fix, but doesn't fix the problem with the feat system itself, which is horrendously underpowered choicewise.
Instead of a BAB increase, I'd suggest Fighter levels giving Iteratives at 4 levels instead of 5 as a possible fix, potentially a very powerful one. This would lead to iterative attacks at levels 5, 9, 13 and 17....all otherwise dead levels. If you make this last attack only possible with Fighter levels, it becomes a very strong incentive, indeed!
Lastly, the Stance mechanic as a way of calling on buffs would be a great system to invoke, again at 'dead' levels.
But, we shall see.
By the way, did everyone get a look at the way they described the Fight scene for the new Star Wars Saga rules? I'm not sure if any of you caught it, but NOBODY got multiple attacks routinely...including high level Luke and Boba Fett. Luke only got it with Flurry of Blows...which sounded like a feat.
Sound like a nice makeover for 4E, which Enworld hinted at possibly coming out at this year's Gen Con? (Hence the end of Dungeon and Dragon in sympathy?) We could find many of the Fighter problems addressed with a whole new edition.
===Aelryinth
Other then the overhaul of the base chassis? Hmm.
The feat every level is a nice fix, but doesn't fix the problem with the feat system itself, which is horrendously underpowered choicewise.
Instead of a BAB increase, I'd suggest Fighter levels giving Iteratives at 4 levels instead of 5 as a possible fix, potentially a very powerful one. This would lead to iterative attacks at levels 5, 9, 13 and 17....all otherwise dead levels. If you make this last attack only possible with Fighter levels, it becomes a very strong incentive, indeed!
Lastly, the Stance mechanic as a way of calling on buffs would be a great system to invoke, again at 'dead' levels.
===Aelryinth
Then there is a problem with the system itself. However, the system can't be fixed because people would rather have underpowered fighters then having to implement an overhaul.
And, the one feat per level thing is still good. All factors considered it's the best I think.
Balance-wise it might not do all that is neccessary, I'm not sure myself (there are a lot of nice feats out there) but I trust you to be right on that. However, all those feats make the fighter very interesting for people that have seen a lot of fun feats they would like to combine in one build. That one build might not be as good as a warblade but for that player it's much more fun.
Also, it doesn't change the flavor of the fighter.
I would suggest that all suggested fighter fixes are one line max and do not require explanation as to how it works or what it means, no tables, no illustrations. A short proposed fix, followed by an explanation why that would fix it. - That way, I might get a decent fighter fix for my game out of this topic :P - and seriously, that is what this topic should do: give a simple fix people can use.
1. A feat every level. Would enable fighters to branch out and not focus on one aspect.
2. All good saves followed with evasion and mettle. This would help the fighter be virtually immune to special effects and the only reliable way to defeat him would be hand to hand combat.
I came up with a kind of point system that fighters can use to purchase mastery levels in their feats. They would get more points at odd-numbered levels to help with the dead level problem; specifically, 1 point at even-numbered levels, and 2 points at odd-numbered levels.
The ability to gain mastery levels starts at level 3, to forgo any additional incentive for the 2-level fighter dip.
Most of the feat masteries in Iron Heroes grant abilities and bonuses that are identical to feats that exist in regular D&D, feats like Weapon Focus, Mounted Combat, and Two-Weapon Fighting. By allowing feat mastery to grant these feats, it frees up room for a fighter to not have to spend his feats to fill long feat trees and start new feat trees.
Of course this will require a lot of work, particularly on sorting out which mastery abilities need to be revised for balance reasons (i.e. Weapon Finesse) or are simply unnecessary (i.e. Manyshot).
If I knew how to create those boxed-graph-table things, I'd be able to better illustrate my idea. :P
The fighter's problem is a lack of versatility...of having anything other to do then a full attack.
1) Fighters don't have anything to use swift/immediate actions on. ToB classes have boosts and counters.
2) fighters tend to suck with standard actions. IT's worth noting that ToB classes don't really out damage a fighter with full attack actions, because they run out of strikes and have to refresh. But ToB classes are all over a fighter when it comes to standard actions...most of their strikes require standard actions, not full attacks, meaning they do the damage of a full attacking fighter...but can still move.
3) The many int-based class abilities of Warblades give great encouragement to using special abilities...and make them more effective at it. Fighters have feats to do this...feats which are fixed in effect.
4) A fighter can be built basically one way, maybe two, to approach combat. A Warblade can radically change their approach to combat with different maneuvers or stances.
5) All the ToB classes have far better defensive options then a Fighter.
So, there's really no such thing as a simple fix. There's blanket fixes, but they don't undercut the real weaknesses of the class.
===Aelryinth
Remember that pure damage output isn't really the fighter's problem.
The fighter's problem is a lack of versatility...of having anything other to do then a full attack.
1) Fighters don't have anything to use swift/immediate actions on. ToB classes have boosts and counters.
Neither did anyone else until they came up with them. The Fighter just needs feats that are used in a swift/immediate nature. Obviously they would have to have limited uses though (and not per encounter-man I hate per encounter)
2) fighters tend to suck with standard actions. It's worth noting that ToB classes don't really out damage a fighter with full attack actions, because they run out of strikes and have to refresh. But ToB classes are all over a fighter when it comes to standard actions...most of their strikes require standard actions, not full attacks, meaning they do the damage of a full attacking fighter...but can still move.
I will agree for the most part with you here. ToB classes are vastly more powerful in terms of standard actions. I don't see a ready way to fix that, it is more the combat system than anything.
3) The many int-based class abilities of Warblades give great encouragement to using special abilities...and make them more effective at it. Fighters have feats to do this...feats which are fixed in effect.
I do like the int-based abilities of the warblade, I just wish that they were on a better class. Many could be easily duplicated with feats thus allow other classes to benefit from being a tactical combatant.
4) A fighter can be built basically one way, maybe two, to approach combat. A Warblade can radically change their approach to combat with different maneuvers or stances.
I am not sure what you mean by a fighter can be built in one or two ways.
5) All the ToB classes have far better defensive options then a Fighter.
With counters? of course they do. Again, if there were feats designed along a similar line then fighter's could be uber too.
So, there's really no such thing as a simple fix. There's blanket fixes, but they don't undercut the real weaknesses of the class.
===Aelryinth
The biggest weakness of the class is that they don't get the love. Rather than make a book filled with awesome combat options for the existing melee classes they wrote a whole new set of rules for all new classes. I think the game designers had the wrong focus but the right ideas.
There is no reason to not get into a prestige class or multiclass out of the fighter class.
I have no problem whatsoever with this fact.
The individual player adds the flavor to his character. A Fighter PC can act like a paladin/samurai/swashbuckler and viseversa. There is no reason that a Warblade needs to be played differently flavorwise as a fighter. If the ranged proficiency is a problem for you ask the dm to add it and maybe give up something small.
With the current and future classes (base and prestige) you can make any character that you want with most any ability within the scope of the game. These characters can also behave and act like anything you want them to be. Hell give a wizard heavy armor proficiency and have him act like a fighter. Is it powerful...hell no, and is just an extreme example.
I find this whole discussion over redoing the fighter incredibly pointless. Take it for 4 levels and then get the abilities that you want. There should be nothing stopping you from working out prestige/base classes with a competent DM.
----
I see no reason for the Warblade/Crusader to not take the place of a fighter in most campaigns...flavor wise they can be the exact same...add ranged proficiency and play what you want. Most every maneuver from the Warblade list can be explained by a mundane (non-magical) (and non-flying monkey kung-fu) description.
If you want a "Core" class fighter so bad wait for 4.0.
Looking at the Ranger with 8 DEX and no requirement to retain either archery or Two-Weapon Fighting at level 11(19 Dex anyone), when elsewhere it's specifically stated that if you don't qualify for the Feat you don't get it's benefits. Double-Standard if ever there was one.
The entire Feat system needs an overhaul for balance. This was sort of done with the maneuver system, where you get scaling, replaceable feat-equivalents.
Fighters also need something useful to stuff into their dead levels. Those empty levels just glare holes at people who actually want to advance their characters.
When I say build a fighter to approach combat, I mean a Fighter will be built to one, maybe two of the common themes...tank, mounted warrior, archer, uber tripper, or the like. At higher levels, by changing the maneuvers accessible, a warblade or swordsage can have a totally different look to an opponent. Heck, just changing the weapon used can do the same thing.
I will also note that one thing that the Magical Item Compendium does is introduce a LOT of items that work for fighters and require swift/immediate actions to use. Once again, WoTC using magic items to cover the holes in the Fighter's build,as since Fighters have NOTHING to use their actions on, these items become extremely usable to them.
===Aelryinth
The True Weakness of the Class is the "Human Limits" approach he is forced to take, those "Dead Levels" wouldn't be any where near as such if he were capable of getting "Fast Healing" or any other "Epic Feat" on any level after 10.
Looking at the Ranger with 8 DEX and no requirement to retain either archery or Two-Weapon Fighting at level 11(19 Dex anyone), when elsewhere it's specifically stated that if you don't qualify for the Feat you don't get it's benefits. Double-Standard if ever there was one.
That's actually one of the things I touch on in my original post...Fighters actually have a fairly severe form of invisible Multi Ability Dependency.
Assuming an Elite Array of 15, 14 13 12 10, 8, A fighter is not going to be able to meet all of the requirements for the Trees of Expertise, Power Attack, combat reflexes, and Blind Fighting, to say nothing of keeping his Con high. going TWF for a build, or for Improved Blind Fighting, has almost insane requirements for anyone, let alone a Fighter.
Really, how many standard builds actually have a Fighter capable of using Expertise? The Standard array for a Fighter usually ends up with 15 str, 14 con, 13 Dex, 12 Wis, 10 Int and 8 Cha. (It's how Regdar is built). He can't even take Expertise, which should be a central feat of the whole class!
heh.
===Aelryinth
The martial adept rules I think really are like an evolution of the fighter, so I'm not sure there is a need, really, to improve the class. For one thing, most roleplaying groups possess at least one player who can't reckon with anything as complex as a rogue or wizard, let alone a warblade. And in a traditional high level D&D game, doesn't a fighter still get to factor prominently in each game? He might be bland, but he still tanks, still hits and deals damage most every turn, and augmented by magical items, can still do tricky things.
A fighter also improves with subsequent books or at least new builds present themselves. Martial adepts are not likely to see as much support.
In a fourth edition or alternate PHB, I wholeheartedly support fighting of all warrior-types to represent the maneuver mechanics (better balanced), but spells and low-level casters need more tinkering, in my opinion.
- PigFiend
Looking at the Ranger with 8 DEX and no requirement to retain either archery or Two-Weapon Fighting at level 11(19 Dex anyone), when elsewhere it's specifically stated that if you don't qualify for the Feat you don't get it's benefits. Double-Standard if ever there was one.
Rangers don't actually get those feats. They are "treated as having" them. Their Combat Style class feature simulates certain feats without actually being those feats. The primary benefit being that they can ignore prerequisites. Combat Style is an (Ex) ability and as such represents an extraordinary skill that bends or breaks the normal rules of nature.
+ 
= DragonCookie Thats for you Aelryinth.
This is one of the most comprehensive and thought out threads. It is not that fighters suck(9 dead levels obviously don't help) but the feat system does. You also brought up 2 relevant points no one else has, the saves and the old XP system. 3.5 Fighter is unplayable for anything besides a dip as is. Between this thread and the Races of War there are very valid reasons and fixes. Pyke obviously HATES a fighter and thinks he is well suited as a meat shield ONLY. That is very foul to me. I just got back into D&D a couple months ago and it Disgusts me what has happened to the fighter. Feats are all built around a level 3 ability(forgot where I read that but it was in the articles section) so a 16 level fighter get a level 3 class ability.
*Tips head in your direction*
Respect
Nathan
Pyke obviously HATES a fighter and thinks he is well suited as a meat shield ONLY. That is very foul to me. I just got back into D&D a couple months ago and it Disgusts me what has happened to the fighter. Feats are all built around a level 3 ability(forgot where I read that but it was in the articles section) so a 16 level fighter get a level 3 class ability.
Respect
Nathan
I hate the fighter? I really have no clue where you get that from. I play fighters fairly frequently, if I play a melee class it is a fighter. I have never had a problem with their functionality or their playability. I do see some room for expansion of feats in general though and that is why I partake in this thread.
Maybe I didn't come across very well before. Let me come out and state my opinion very clearly.
1. The fighter works fine as is but could use a little bit of flash (i.e. swift and immediate actions in the forms of feats). I do not believe fighter's need an overhaul.
2. The Tome of Battle is a good book but it in no real way helps the existing meleers out. Rather than print a book that "fixes" the problem with melee not measuring up to casting they just printed out 3 new classes and a new system to support those classes.
Next, a disclaimer: it is 9 AM, I read all 7 pages of this thread tonight, and have yet to sleep, so if I am treading on something someone else put forth, sorry.
Anyway, some ideas for scaling fighter feats have been put forth, but there has been much debate over the complexity of the change, what scales, etc...? Why not just say that every feat that has the text, "this feat may be taken as one of your fighter bonus feats," that has a solid, numeric effect (+X) that is not already building upon a lesser feat, gains an additional +1 for every other 3 feats you have with that same text? Yes, this means that feats would scale (marginally) for other melee classes a little bit, but for really raw power, the Fighter still reigns supreme.
A human fighter gets 19 feats. If he takes WF, WS, GWF, GWS, MWM, Improved Initiative, Power Attack, Cleave, Great Cleave, Dodge, Mobility, Spring Attack, Bounding Assault, Rapid Blitz, Heavy Armor Optimization, GHAO, Armor Specialization, Shield Specialization, Shield Ward, (all fighter bonus feats), each of the feats that confers a numeric bonus would gain an additional +6 to that bonus. So, your level 20 fighter, ends up with +10 to hit (+1 WF, +1 GWF, +2 MWM, +6 for 18 other feats aside from WF), +12 damage, +10 initiative, +7 Dodge AC vs. 1 opponent, +10 dodge vs. AoO, +8 armor bonus to AC, +7 shield bonus to AC (and touch AC). Sure, a bunch of the feats don't do anything else, but most of them were pretty good or scaled to begin with (Power Attack, Great Cleave, Spring Attack and its two iterations)
That seems like a pretty sweet deal, without being absolutely insane (maybe a little on the AC, but not the rest). A player could throw in Point Blank Shot for a further bonus on attack and damage w/in 30 ft. with ranged weapons in place of a couple feats. Now, the fighter's class abilities at least match, and in some cases outshine, his equipment, and this seems a pretty easy fix to the core issue as you have pointed out: the feat system. They still don't have a real capstone, but do have the potential for some significant power growth. The above feat selection, with some changes, would likely make me consider taking fighter all the way, or certainly past level 5 or 6.
Comparatively, a barbarian, for example, would only get a further +2 out of any feats he'd have taken (assuming he took only fighter-style feats, which is a stretch anyway), and given that most of the feats he'd take don't give a numeric bonus anyway, it'd be a very small increase. Besides it just might make Weapon Focus not suck so completely for all the non-fighters who take it as well, which is a distinct upside.
The only adjustment, might be taking some feats off of the fighter list, but that's a real maybe. A further shift, though not entirely necessary, would be grouping the remaining feats into categories that stack similarly: skill boosts, and I don't know what else. Perhaps giving non-numeric feats some scaling as well? Power Attack-->Supreme PA? But that seems unnecessary.
Oh, and obviously the change in class skills and skill points for the fighter. No idea how WotC managed to print a PC class with a worse skill selection than a commoner! Someone had too much pr0n up on their desktop during editing I think.
As a slight aside, I don't see why WotC has apparently had so much trouble coming up with good, strong fighter feats, when it has already shown that it can come up with solid, scaling feats in Divine Feats. Tale Divine Might (a favorite for my paladins): at low levels, you likely get +2-3 damage on your attack in a round 5-6 times each day. But they worded it just right, the bonus applies to all your attacks in the round, so it scales in multiple ways as you level up: more uses as your Cha increases, more damage as your Cha increases, and as you gain more attacks, whatever damage you do increases naturally anyway.
Many, though not all, of the divine feats work this way...I don't see why they seem to have so much trouble with feats that don't require an expendable resource as a payment. Heck, if power were an issue, they'd likely not have done Divine Metamagic (plus the oversight that is THE NIGHTSTICK!! )
I propose this, because while I do like the Warblade (which I read fully only after reading your arguments here...thanks for that by the way), and I do like the new fighter progression you presented, I'm not too keen on the whole maneuvers things (but that may just be because I haven't tried it...definitely my next character, DM permitting!).
Aelryinth has done a magnificent job of analyzing the deficiencies with both the fighter and the feat system as a whole, and, although Aelryinth and many others have posted solutions to this both here and elsewhere, I feel that a fairly simple solution is workable as follows.
Every feat that grants a fixed numeric bonus (ie. Weapon Focus [+1]) that has the text, "A fighter may select THIS FEAT as one of his or her fighter bonus feats," gains this additional text: "The bonus granted by THIS FEAT increases by +1 for every 3 other feats with the "A fighter may select THIS FEAT as one of his or her fighter bonus feats" text he or she has taken. For example, if a player has taken Weapon Focus, Dodge, Mobility, and Spring Attack, the bonus from Weapon Focus and Dodge both increase to +2.
While this does allow non-fighters to gain greater benefit from some feats, only a fighter can really gain a significant benefit from this change. Sure, there are a lot of feats that do not directly benefit from this, but most either scale well already (Power Attack), or remain fairly useful even at higher levels (Spring Attack), while all such feats gain a little bit of added value by helping other feats.
Built even reasonably well, a fighter can end up with the highest attack bonus, ranged attack damage, or AC in the game, and that after only a quick glance.
One further alteration I would make would be to add a few feats that seem necessary to the list of fighter bonus feats, beginning with Great Fortitude, Iron Will and Lightning Reflexes, among others.
The only real issue I can see coming up (and that doesn't seem too significant) is testing whether multiple feats that grant bonuses of the same function should all increase. If a human fighter takes fighter bonus feats for all 19 of his feats, should Weapon Focus, Melee Weapon Mastery, and Greater Weapon Focus each grant a further +6 to attack, for a total of +22? At first blush it seems excessive, but does it end up unbalanced compared to other classes? On that, I really don't know. If the verdict is 'yes', then I'd think that only the first feat in a chain that grants a bonus to a specific action or stat would gain the additional +1/3 feats. So, Weapon Focus would end up granting +7 to hit, while the other 2 feats would not increase in power, but would still be contributing to other feats' growth. In the case of feats that do not grant a bonus for the same thing, this wouldn't hold true, such as with Dodge and Mobility. Both would gain the +1/3 feats since they function differently.
Thoughts? Comments?
This marks my third attempt at posting a response on this thread, and so I'm going to keep this simpler and more to the point than my 2 previous attempts.
Aelryinth has done a magnificent job of analyzing the deficiencies with both the fighter and the feat system as a whole, and, although Aelryinth and many others have posted solutions to this both here and elsewhere, I feel that a fairly simple solution is workable as follows.
Every feat that grants a fixed numeric bonus (ie. Weapon Focus [+1]) that has the text, "A fighter may select THIS FEAT as one of his or her fighter bonus feats," gains this additional text: "The bonus granted by THIS FEAT increases by +1 for every 3 other feats with the "A fighter may select THIS FEAT as one of his or her fighter bonus feats" text he or she has taken. For example, if a player has taken Weapon Focus, Dodge, Mobility, and Spring Attack, the bonus from Weapon Focus and Dodge both increase to +2.
While this does allow non-fighters to gain greater benefit from some feats, only a fighter can really gain a significant benefit from this change. Sure, there are a lot of feats that do not directly benefit from this, but most either scale well already (Power Attack), or remain fairly useful even at higher levels (Spring Attack), while all such feats gain a little bit of added value by helping other feats.
Built even reasonably well, a fighter can end up with the highest attack bonus, ranged attack damage, or AC in the game, and that after only a quick glance.
One further alteration I would make would be to add a few feats that seem necessary to the list of fighter bonus feats, beginning with Great Fortitude, Iron Will and Lightning Reflexes, among others.
The only real issue I can see coming up (and that doesn't seem too significant) is testing whether multiple feats that grant bonuses of the same function should all increase. If a human fighter takes fighter bonus feats for all 19 of his feats, should Weapon Focus, Melee Weapon Mastery, and Greater Weapon Focus each grant a further +6 to attack, for a total of +22? At first blush it seems excessive, but does it end up unbalanced compared to other classes? On that, I really don't know. If the verdict is 'yes', then I'd think that only the first feat in a chain that grants a bonus to a specific action or stat would gain the additional +1/3 feats. So, Weapon Focus would end up granting +7 to hit, while the other 2 feats would not increase in power, but would still be contributing to other feats' growth. In the case of feats that do not grant a bonus for the same thing, this wouldn't hold true, such as with Dodge and Mobility. Both would gain the +1/3 feats since they function differently.
Thoughts? Comments?
I'll comment on this first.
Remember, the Fighter's problem isn't raw damage output, and this is really a more damage output problem then anything. With +7/+8 on combat rolls, the Fighter will definitely outshine any other melee character, and that includes barbarians, whose uber combat buff is only temporary!
So, stay away from pure dmg potential. The Fighter's main weaknesses are versatility, adaptability, MAD, poor defenses, and feat conservation. These are where you have to focus the attention on a Fighter re-write.
Gaining a scaling bonus on feats other then TH/DMg actually makes these scaling, which would be advisable. Basing this on Fighter Bonus Feats makes great sense, as it allows non-Fighter classes to choose between enhancing melee ability or some other effect, and gives some hope and lift to barbarians who take the feats. It also provides a very nice return for staying in a fighter class, as extra class abilities are not more feats, and so the feats won't scale.
On the other hand, this is tricky to balance with PrC's, and the elusive worthwhile capstone of the Fighter (oh, I can only look forwards to another +1? Hmm, time to PrC out...) still isn't really existing.
==Aelryinth
Rangers don't actually get those feats. They are "treated as having" them. Their Combat Style class feature simulates certain feats without actually being those feats. The primary benefit being that they can ignore prerequisites. Combat Style is an (Ex) ability and as such represents an extraordinary skill that bends or breaks the normal rules of nature.
"Treated as Having Them" is the same as saying they have them without the standard drawbacks, while they can't wear Heavy Armor do you think that'll stop them from wearing Mithral Full Plate?
Combat Style? yeah, right, Extraordinary Skill, i must have missed that in the Fighter description since that's the level of skill Fighter's are supposed to have.
Rangers don't actually get those feats. They are "treated as having" them. Their Combat Style class feature simulates certain feats without actually being those feats. The primary benefit being that they can ignore prerequisites. Combat Style is an (Ex) ability and as such represents an extraordinary skill that bends or breaks the normal rules of nature.
So you are telling me that someone who has a focus outside of Fighting (Spell Casting, Animal Companion, Tracking) should truly outshine a Fighter of the same DEX score in the Fighting department, right?
Anyways, as for breaking the normal rules of nature you are forgetting one little fact, the Fighter is putting ALL his Practice + Training in the area of Melee and/or Ranged Combat so why should this "Loser Tree-Hugger" suddenly come along and outshine said Fighter in his chosen field?
I'll comment on this first.
Remember, the Fighter's problem isn't raw damage output, and this is really a more damage output problem then anything. With +7/+8 on combat rolls, the Fighter will definitely outshine any other melee character, and that includes barbarians, whose uber combat buff is only temporary!
So, stay away from pure dmg potential. The Fighter's main weaknesses are versatility, adaptability, MAD, poor defenses, and feat conservation. These are where you have to focus the attention on a Fighter re-write.
Gaining a scaling bonus on feats other then TH/DMg actually makes these scaling, which would be advisable. Basing this on Fighter Bonus Feats makes great sense, as it allows non-Fighter classes to choose between enhancing melee ability or some other effect, and gives some hope and lift to barbarians who take the feats. It also provides a very nice return for staying in a fighter class, as extra class abilities are not more feats, and so the feats won't scale.
On the other hand, this is tricky to balance with PrC's, and the elusive worthwhile capstone of the Fighter (oh, I can only look forwards to another +1? Hmm, time to PrC out...) still isn't really existing.
==Aelryinth
Hmm...well, for one, the barbarian's rage should probably be a bit more impressive as it stands anyway, since there are spells that grant similar bonuses, making the rage that must less impressive (Righteous Might?).
And as has been stated, Weapon Focus and its ilk are pretty mediocre as far as feats go as levels rise.
Would simply removing the WF chain from those that gain benefits be a decent adjustment? As it stands, after testing, I eliminated GWF, GWS and X Weapon Mastery, since allowing them all to stack was excessive. Without that possibility though, this doesn't represent a huge boost above what was previously possible: the whole chain results in +4/+6, while a human fighter 20 with all fighter feats (2 of which being WF and WS), would end up, as you point out, around 3 points higher. Could disallow the chain to scale, but I
As for the PrC issue, it becomes a choice between an additional +1 to several feats, or PrC powers. Dipping into a PrC would likely not cut back too much, but a full 10 levels would probably result in a loss of +2 or +3 across many feats. Fighter becomes a slightly better dip than it was before, but it does gain increased pull this way.
The aspect I like about this, vs. some other changes I've seen people make, are that it doesn't constrain the fighter to a specific build or type. It simply encourages him to continuing doing what he'd already be doing most of the time.
Improved Base Attack
Your intensive training and devotion to one weapon allows you to improved the swiftness of your blows in combat
Prerequisite: Fighter level 3rd, Weapon Focus (any)
Benefit: Your base attack bonus increases by +1 for your chosen weapon. If your base attack bonus is high enough to grant an extra attack, then you gain the extra attack, but only with your chosen weapon.
Special: You may gain this feat multiple times. Its effects do not stack, each time you choose this feat you must choose a different weapon for which you have the Weapon Focus feat. A fighter may select this feat as one of his bonus feats.
Improved Extra Attacks
Your basic combat skill with a given weapon eclipses even the most devoted of other warrior classes.
Prerequisite: Fighter level 6th, Improved Base Attack
Benefit: You reduce the penalties for all extra attacks made with your base attack bonus by 2 when wielding your chosen weapon. For example, a 6th-level fighter with this feat would have a base attack of +7/+4 instead of +7/+2 (including the benefits of the Improved Base Attack feat).
Special: If you gain more extra attacks, the benefits apply to these as well. You may gain this feat multiple times. Its effects do not stack, each time you choose this feat you must choose a different weapon for which you have the Weapon Focus feat. A fighter may select this feat as one of his bonus feats.
Weapon Legend
You have become unto a god with your chosen weapon.
Prerequisite: Fighter level 20th, Improved Extra Attack
Benefit: You may make one extra attack as part of your full attack action when using your chosen weapon. This extra attack is made at your highest base attack bonus. In addition, any spells or effects that grant an extra attack stack with the benefits of this feat.
Special: You may gain this feat multiple times. Its effects do not stack, each time you choose this feat you must choose a different weapon for which you have the Weapon Focus feat. A fighter may select this feat as one of his bonus feats.
remember, the ranger is a Full BAB class,meaning he's a fighting class...a warrior first, and a skill monkey second. Aragorn is the classic ranger, and you don't think of him as a martial wimp, do you?
Two Weapon Fighting is the preferred style of many rangers who enjoy melee combat because it goes well with the fact they have to wear light armor, so they tend to have a higher Dex. Note that they don't HAVE to...but the style is so ingrained into the class that they have a superior method of teaching it that doesn't rely on the natural nimbleness of students.
Fighters can wield two weapons in full plate armor, something no ranger can do. They probably consider it really impressive...which it is.
Now, I don't like the MAD that Fighters are subjected to, but such things are a control mechanism, making sure not everyone can grab all the 'sweet stuff'. On the other hand, the reqs for some feats are totally insane (esp the Blind Fighter tree) and really need revision.
We won't go into the undervaluing of heavy armor prof and stuff, I've been over that several times.
===Aelryinth
Hmm...well, for one, the barbarian's rage should probably be a bit more impressive as it stands anyway, since there are spells that grant similar bonuses, making the rage that much less impressive (Righteous Might?).
And as has been stated, Weapon Focus and its ilk are pretty mediocre as far as feats go as levels rise.
Would simply removing the WF chain from those that gain benefits be a decent adjustment? As it stands, after testing, I eliminated GWF, GWS and X Weapon Mastery, since allowing them all to stack was excessive. Without that possibility though, this doesn't represent a huge boost above what was previously possible: the whole chain results in +4/+6, while a human fighter 20 with all fighter feats (2 of which being WF and WS), would end up, as you point out, around 3 points higher. Could disallow the chain to scale, but I
As for the PrC issue, it becomes a choice between an additional +1 to several feats, or PrC powers. Dipping into a PrC would likely not cut back too much, but a full 10 levels would probably result in a loss of +2 or +3 across many feats. Fighter becomes a slightly better dip than it was before, but it does gain increased pull this way.
The aspect I like about this, vs. some other changes I've seen people make, are that it doesn't constrain the fighter to a specific build or type. It simply encourages him to continuing doing what he'd already be doing most of the time.
If you allow WF and WS to scale, then definitely eliminate the feats that also add on to those bonuses. Also, you should look at the maximum benefit of those feats as a guideline to what your Cap is, and the combat benefit of the Rage likewise. So +7/+8 is over the top. You want to end up about where the Chain is now...you just don't want to force the fighter to spend Six feats to get there.
Slowly scaling feats that stay useful in and of themselves as the Fighter levels are better then having to stack feats on one after another to remain viable.
As has been noted, the biggest problem with the flavor of the Fighter is the feat system. Fix the feat system so that it synergizes with the Fighter, instead of lump sum adds to it, and we've got a rocking class!
===Aelryinth
Absolute Steel: for the 10' movement speed bonus. Very nice.
uncanny dodge (level 2), improved uncanny dodge (level 6). In a full combat class no less. Covers a weakness to rogues. May be extremely useful or mostly useless, depending on campaign.
OTOH the barb gets all of these.
As for medium armor, that means a -1 to -3 penalty to AC (usually -2 to -3, unless you roll 4 high stats). And mithral full plate is so expensive it's stupid compared to magic medium armor. On average, assuming your opponent's AB is 10 lower than your AC, that means you take 10% to 30% more damage. But you also get ~10-15% more HP from the d12 hit die (depending on your con).
Firstly I want to congratulate Aelryinth on some very well thought out observations and suggestions. I’ve disagreed strongly with you on some other threads but I find myself wholeheartedly agreeing with most of your comments here.
Secondly, I thought I’d contribute by offering some of my own suggested “fixes” (although I freely confess some ideas sprang from others’ suggestions). Before I’ll point out that I prefer to “tweak” the class rather than overhaul it or whole sections of the rules. Naturally that will produce a different “solution” to more detailed ideas.
Insufficient skill points and a restrictive class skills list seem to be high on the list of class deficiencies. I suggest the following as a fix:
Versatile Training:
Fighters receive 4 skill points per level and may choose two bonus Class skills. This should fix their lack of skill points and a solid skills foundation for most Fighter archetypes. Eagle-eyed hunter (sans-animal companion and spells), take Spot & Survival. Noble knight, take Diplomacy & Knowledge (Nobility). Etc, etc.
Dead levels and a scalable class feature. The problem has been well presented elsewhere in this thread so I’ll simply offer my suggestion:
Fighter's Focus
Upon gaining their 3rd class level, and every 2 class levels thereafter, Fighters receive a cumulative +1 Circumstance bonus which may be applied to Armor Class (with the same restrictions as Dodge bonuses), Attack Rolls, Skill Checks, Saving Throws, or opposed checks for Battle Manoeuvres (such as Trip, Overrun, Disarm, Bullrush, Grapple, etc). This bonus may be activated as an Immediate Action once per round per two class levels and lasts for one round per use. This bonus may also be split (between AC and Saving Throws for instance) each time it is used. Applying his focus to defence means a high level Fighter can be harder to hit than a low level character with the same equipment, applying it to battle maneuvers means the Fighter will be more effective at them than other classes, and so on. [thanks to BrazilRascal for the main inspiration]
Deficient feat system. As Aelryinth points out we should ideally discard the whole feat system, but since I’m looking for “quick fixes” how about we just get more out of them for Fighters? My suggestions:
Feats Mastery:
Focus, combat experience and training supplement the Fighter’s natural talents allowing them to learn some feats that others cannot. Attribute score pre-requisites for “Bonus Fighter Feats” are reduced by one per three Fighter class levels gained. So while most characters require Dexterity 15 to leave Two Weapon Fighting, a 9th level Fighter only requires Dexterity 12, and so on. Through Feats Mastery, Fighters can access more feats than other classes with less MAD restrictions.
Weapon Mastery:
When a Fighter focuses on a weapon type he gains far greater benefit than other classes. The Weapon Focus feat grants a Fighter +1 to hit and damage with the chosen feat and this bonus increases by +1 per four class levels. Largely inspired by Katman’s suggestion, and many others’ comments to the effect that the “weapon specialization” is a laughable as a balancing class feature, this fix eliminates the need for Weapon Specialization/GWF/GWS while still giving Fighters the benefits of those feats. It also turns Weapon Focus into a scalable feat that effectively allows them to “specialize” in a wider selection of weapons. At the RAW cost of GWS for one weapon you get slightly better benefits across four weapon types IF you want to allocate your feats that way.
Feat Lock also seems to be a problem. Don’t like the fact wizards can change their spell selection (etc, etc) but Fighters are always stuck with the same feats? Try this:
Martial Versatility
Once per day per 5 class levels, for up to one minute per class level, a Fighter may take a Move action to temporarily replace one of their Bonus Feats for up to one round per class level with any other “Bonus Fighter Feat” they satisfy the prerequisites for. At 7th level and every 2 levels thereafter the Fighter may substitute another “Bonus Fighter Feat” including ones that that they only qualify for through other substitute feats. [Caveat - this may be too powerful combined with Weapon Mastery so Weapon Focus should probably be barred from feats that can be substituted]
Hopefully someone finds something there they can use. Anyway, thats my suggestions. I think they combine to preserve the "flavor" of the Fighter while making them a bit more competitive.
All I can say is that if someone showed me a book with a feat called Weapon Goodness that read: Every morning choose one weapon, for the rest of that day you gain a +1 to hit with the chosen weapon. I would say that had to be some wonky 3rd party feat
Being able to be a master of every weapon with a few hours practice makes no sense to me at all. If my fighter works his way up to weapon supremacy and then the warblade also does (albeit 2 levels later) and then can change it to any weapon he wants that seems wholly unbalanced and really very lame. Saying that the fighter should be able to as well is not an option. A master swordsman, even though he knows the basics of axe use, should not be able to be just as proficient with a days practice.
Honestly, no. The idea that every weapon in the world is a completely unique skill set that takes years of practice to master is a stupid D&D-ism. In real life, *knowing how to fight* is its own skill set, and once you know how to fight, knowing how to fight using different tools is a far less strenuous endeavor.
Off the top of my head, as simple fix might be this:
Improved Base Attack
Your intensive training and devotion to one weapon allows you to improved the swiftness of your blows in combat
Prerequisite: Fighter level 3rd, Weapon Focus (any)
Benefit: Your base attack bonus increases by +1 for your chosen weapon. If your base attack bonus is high enough to grant an extra attack, then you gain the extra attack, but only with your chosen weapon.
Special: You may gain this feat multiple times. Its effects do not stack, each time you choose this feat you must choose a different weapon for which you have the Weapon Focus feat. A fighter may select this feat as one of his bonus feats.
Improved Extra Attacks
Your basic combat skill with a given weapon eclipses even the most devoted of other warrior classes.
Prerequisite: Fighter level 6th, Improved Base Attack
Benefit: You reduce the penalties for all extra attacks made with your base attack bonus by 2 when wielding your chosen weapon. For example, a 6th-level fighter with this feat would have a base attack of +7/+4 instead of +7/+2 (including the benefits of the Improved Base Attack feat).
Special: If you gain more extra attacks, the benefits apply to these as well. You may gain this feat multiple times. Its effects do not stack, each time you choose this feat you must choose a different weapon for which you have the Weapon Focus feat. A fighter may select this feat as one of his bonus feats.
Weapon Legend
You have become unto a god with your chosen weapon.
Prerequisite: Fighter level 20th, Improved Extra Attack
Benefit: You may make one extra attack as part of your full attack action when using your chosen weapon. This extra attack is made at your highest base attack bonus. In addition, any spells or effects that grant an extra attack stack with the benefits of this feat.
Special: You may gain this feat multiple times. Its effects do not stack, each time you choose this feat you must choose a different weapon for which you have the Weapon Focus feat. A fighter may select this feat as one of his bonus feats.
Improved Base attack should be folded into Greater Weapon Spec, OR into Melee Weapon Mastery. It might even apply as a stand alone feat, but regardless, the minimum fighter level should be 5 to discourage dipping. This is a slight power up...it lets you get more iteratives faster, possibly up to 4 levels faster (with GWF, WF and MWM), which is really going to overshadow the attack options of other classes. Your job isn't to overshadow the barbarian, really. Your job is actually to be able to do the expected damage AND other things. Something really hard to do with a Fighter build.
Improved Iteratives unfortunately dwells on the full attack mechanic, which is one of the weak points of the fighter class. Damage output isn't a problem...feat conservation to get that dmg is. This could well replace all or part of the spec tree, since increasing your ability to land iteratives makes your average DOT go up very healthily, however.
Weapon Legend should be folded into Weapon Supremacy as a capstone, or could be substituted far more easily by a Flurry of Blows alternative (which is available to Monks at level 1!!!)
--
I'm not picking on these alternatives, but I must reiterate...pure damage output is not the problem of the Fighter class. The number of feats, lack of defenses, and poorer versatility are.
My personal favorite for a capstone is allowing the Fighter to perform a full attack as a standard action. This basically subsumes the Pounce mechanic, works with Spring Attack, vastly increases mobility options in a fight, but it doesn't really increase his damage output on a number basis. It's also one HELL of a reward for sticking it out to F/20.
====Aelryinth
The flaw in this 'pump up the basic fighter' reasoning is that the benchmark is the specialty class at the height of it's number-crunching ability, and not the fighter at any given level of experience.
The real problem with adding more and more abilities, more and more combinations, and more and more options, is that game play slows and benchmarks become difficult to determine. In practice, how many GMs have every strange book that their more specialized players' go and pick up? Can we all recite every prestige class combination? I challenge even Wizard's staff and game testers to provide a numerical analysis of every combination they've created through unchecked market-driven publication.
Tome of Battle never should have been published, and the classes therein are the most laughably overpowered and game-breaking rule sets I've seen on paper since we were graced with the warlock.
For a better take on the game, take a look at what they've done with Saga Edition.
What's the problem with the feat system?
The feat system for Fighters, as it currently stands, is much too grainy to be of use in either limiting level-appropriate acquisition, or in giving him versatile and flavorful bits of powers. I could, and have, devolved various powerful warrior PrCs into collections of 5 feats for Fighters to take, but they invariably became a collection of various powers that don't really have a central theme.
One feat, for instance, could give Pounce, and +2 Ref, and a couple skill points. It makes sense from an overall build standpoint and you could restrict it to level all you like, but what would we call it?
Alternatively, you could design a feat system much like FFX's power acquisition system that's a bit like a board game. You could give Fighters 1 feat per level, give them lots of feats to choose from, and then interlink and interconnect them as desired.
In fact, the current slew of over a hundred feats already kind of does that.
There's only one problem. The main draw of Fighters is that they're supposed to be simple and relatively hassle-free to play, and sludging through a gazillion interconnecting feat trees is NOT something I could get even a Wizard player to do.
Even if I somehow could, the 1 feat/level Fighter ends up having upwards of 12 or 14 special note abilities by mid levels only - hardly "simple."
The solution is NOT in feats. Feats are great for single character-defining minor or major talents, but not for defining a plethora of tactical choices a Fighter ought to be able to call in battle.
Yes, this conclusion ALSO includes the "scaling" bit that's figured so prominently in Frank's version of the Fighter. The problem with most scaling feats is that they don't usually make the Fighter more versatile - only more powerful where he already is, and as aelryinth asserts, that wasn't really the core of his problem to begin with.
Should we mess with his Full Attack Routine?
No. I actually rather like the SAGA development where you only get one attack. At some point a -X AB attack isn't really going to be all that useful, and all that adds is a mostly pointless die roll to the combat. As well, it forces the Fighter to seek the Full Attack, and I really don't want him to stay put unless he's going to do something spectacular. NO, a -15 AB extra attack isn't spectacular.
The approach needs to be multipronged. More powerful feats are still needed, of course, but "versatility" mechanics are necessary in between.
First off, Fighters get Good Will saves. They used to have the best saves in the game in 2e save Paladins, and I don't see why that had to change. They weren't less willful then. They shouldn't be now. The OA Samurai is a great precedent for this change.
It's a fairly simple change, and removes one of the Fighter's key vulnerabilities.
Secondly, Fighters get full Initiator Level. He's going to be a Fighting Class, too, so I don't see why he should be gimped in that respect.
Third, Fighters can ignore attribute prerequisites when selecting their class Bonus Feats. That takes care of MAD.
Finally, Fighters get a Maneuvers List and Progression. I'd say Diamond Mind, Tiger Claw, Stone Dragon only. One Maneuver Known at level 3, then every odd level. Auto-refresh and random granting like Crusader. At 5th level, 2(1), 7th level 3(1), 9th level 4(2), 11th level 5(2) and so on.
We have ToB material, I think we should use it. I've seen a midlevel Warblade sheet and it's nothing like a spellcaster's. For one thing, he only ever needs to track 4 or so Maneuvers because that's all he ever has Readied. One defense, one boost, 2 Strikes. It's actually much easier than making a competent Fighter, because all the strikes are more or less okay to take.
Choices aren't terribly diverse either. Given the Discipline spread, a Warblade has about half the choices at each Maneuver Level as a Cleric. About as much as a Paladin's spell list, I would estimate, and that's pretty short. The full Feat list is actually longer.
This Fighter yields a slightly more resistant, potentially better armored "Warblade" with an emphasis on feats rather than Maneuvers.
This is another proposed alt fighter. It focuses on using the feat system to its fullest effect. Instead of using auto-scaling feats, I just give them straight to the fighter independently of his normal bonus feats, and fighters also get bonus tactical feats. The feats are drawn almost entirely from the PHB, Complete Warrior, Complete Adventurer, and PHB II.
But this isn't just a "lot-o-feats" fix; this alt.fighter revolves around Fighting Styles. Fighting Styles are pre-built groups of feats. The fighter can use one of these feats a round. The fighter can have multiple fighting styles, but only one primary style.
But let's get to the meat of this post.
First, some assumptions and definitions:
Show
Base Campaign Premises
Premise One
Like extra skill points, all proficiencies gained at first level of a class are not gained by multi-classing. For example, you cannot multi-class into Fighter and pick up all his weapon and armor proficiencies.
Likewise, all saves have either a good (+1/2) or poor (+1/3) save progression (round down in both cases). At first character level, all classes gain an additional +2 bonus in their good saves. This benefit is not available at later levels. However, characters that gain a new class and switch from a poor save progression to a good save progression gain a +1 bonus in those saves at the first level of the new class.
Premise Two
PrCs that formerly granted weapon and armor proficiencies now require them for entry, much like spell casting classes.
Premise Three
All characters are automatically proficient in all simple melee weapons, plus any additional weapons described in their class entry.
Premise Four
Characters taking Martial Weapon proficiency gain proficiency with all weapons of a single damage type. Characters choosing the Weapon Focus feat are automatically proficient with their (single) chosen weapon, and this includes exotic weapons as well. For bookkeeping purposes, treat Weapon Focus as if it granted the Weapon Proficiency (single weapon) feat needed as a bonus feat, including Exotic Weapon Proficiency.
Premise Five
Mithril armor (and armor made from other similar materials) does not allow you to forgo being proficient in an armor. If a character does not have proficiency in an armor type, he cannot apply his Dexterity modifier to AC while in it, and adds the base AC bonus as an additional penalty to all spell casting checks.
Premise Six
The only classes starting with Heavy Armor Proficiency are the Fighter, the Warrior, the Knight, and the Paladin. The cleric may take Heavy Armor Proficiency as the granted power of the Protection or War domains instead of the normal power.
Definitions
Combat Feat - is any feat that a fighter can take as his bonus feat.
Typed Feat - is any feat that has a type other than "General", e.g. Metamagic feats, Divine feats, Item Creation feats, Combat feats, etc.
Class Feat - is a feat that has a class feature has one of its prerequisites.
Character Feat - is any feat that is NOT a typed or class feat.
Natural Ability Modifier - The ability modifier of the character's base ability score, the ability score increases applied as part of gaining a new level, and inherent bonuses to the ability score. If this modifier is positive, it is known as a Natural Ability Bonus. If the modifier is negative, it is known as a Natural Ability Penalty.
Base Campaign Premises
Premise One
Like extra skill points, all proficiencies gained at first level of a class are not gained by multi-classing. For example, you cannot multi-class into Fighter and pick up all his weapon and armor proficiencies.
Likewise, all saves have either a good (+1/2) or poor (+1/3) save progression (round down in both cases). At first character level, all classes gain an additional +2 bonus in their good saves. This benefit is not available at later levels. However, characters that gain a new class and switch from a poor save progression to a good save progression gain a +1 bonus in those saves at the first level of the new class.
Premise Two
PrCs that formerly granted weapon and armor proficiencies now require them for entry, much like spell casting classes.
Premise Three
All characters are automatically proficient in all simple melee weapons, plus any additional weapons described in their class entry.
Premise Four
Characters taking Martial Weapon proficiency gain proficiency with all weapons of a single damage type. Characters choosing the Weapon Focus feat are automatically proficient with their (single) chosen weapon, and this includes exotic weapons as well. For bookkeeping purposes, treat Weapon Focus as if it granted the Weapon Proficiency (single weapon) feat needed as a bonus feat, including Exotic Weapon Proficiency.
Premise Five
Mithril armor (and armor made from other similar materials) does not allow you to forgo being proficient in an armor. If a character does not have proficiency in an armor type, he cannot apply his Dexterity modifier to AC while in it, and adds the base AC bonus as an additional penalty to all spell casting checks.
Premise Six
The only classes starting with Heavy Armor Proficiency are the Fighter, the Warrior, the Knight, and the Paladin. The cleric may take Heavy Armor Proficiency as the granted power of the Protection or War domains instead of the normal power.
Definitions
Combat Feat - is any feat that a fighter can take as his bonus feat.
Typed Feat - is any feat that has a type other than "General", e.g. Metamagic feats, Divine feats, Item Creation feats, Combat feats, etc.
Class Feat - is a feat that has a class feature has one of its prerequisites.
Character Feat - is any feat that is NOT a typed or class feat.
Natural Ability Modifier - The ability modifier of the character's base ability score, the ability score increases applied as part of gaining a new level, and inherent bonuses to the ability score. If this modifier is positive, it is known as a Natural Ability Bonus. If the modifier is negative, it is known as a Natural Ability Penalty.
Fighters can wield two weapons in full plate armor, something no ranger can do. They probably consider it really impressive...which it is.
They CAN...but is it worthwhile? In order to progress well along the TWF tree, a fighter needs a 17-19 Dex. If he's in heavy armor, he loses one of the benefits of that Dex (bonus to AC). Considering he probably has a +4 or 5 Dex bonus to AC anyway, does he lose a lot by wearing light armor instead of heavy? It increases his mobility and decreases his check penalty, while not losing him much (if any) in the AC department.
So you're down to a fighter wearing light armor just like the ranger...or losing some of the benefits his investment in the prerequisite ability score. Hosed either way.
To whomever said that mithril full plate was crazy expensive...dude, it's 9000 gp. At high levels, when you have several hundred thousand, do you think you're going to miss that 9K? Somebody help me out, I don't have my DMG on me for the wealth-by-level guide...at what level does 9K become pocket change? In the meantime, OK, you wear breastplate instead of full plate...it's not the end of the world.
I also must confess I enjoy the fact that you also took up the banner of the Campaign Premise. The Fighter gets so much better if other classes simply cannot steal his starting profs.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Reed, I of course agree that a Fighter taking the TWF tree and wearing full plate is kind of silly. It enforces MAD as much as anything...it's actually a feat tree that should stop at "Improved TWF: You now gain as many iterative attacks with your off hand as you do with your main hand" and be done. The lower bonuses of additional attacks basically render the higher level feats not worth the sacrifice, for the most part. And again, that level of Dex is often very painful for a classic fighter build to reach.
+++++++++++++++++++++
Roxlimm: Adding in extra maneuvers could potentially increase a Fighter's power or versatility...it's a sticky balancing situation. You can build a Warblade more flexibly then a fighter because his strikes are his big dmg, not his str mod and spec tree.
Shafting the Fighter with a half initiator level when Bo9S came out is a real sore point for me...for all of us who love the Fighter. Likewise, seeing the Warblade get all these great save boosters was a kick in the teeth...along with the way he could swap in new maneuvers to 'upgrade' all the time. For free! Why couldn't the fighter do that with his feat tree?? Likewise, they finally fixed the skill list and points...and everyone knows, just KNOWS that they did all this because, well, the Fighter sucked to play (not that it sucked in melee, mind you...it just wasn't as FUN as some other classes).
I think most of us noticed a long time ago that you could SCRAP a huge number of the melee classes out there, and replace them with a) fighter feats or b) fighter substitution levels.
This gets especially relevant when these idiotic PrC's give everything a Fighter does and more in ten levels. It's blatantly unfair, as if they are thumbing their nose at Fighter builds.
=============================
I'd like to issue something of a challenge here. Take your favorite Melee PrC (any PrC with full BAB and a d8+ hit die) and render it as:
a) Fighter feats (this should be entertaining...make sure they are minimal level appropriate!)
b) Fighter Sub levels (this should be even funnier)
Remember to include PrC reqs for those first feats, if you take that route...and if the skill list is expanded, or more skill points added, or two good saves are there...add them in and justify them! (if the save changes to good Reflex, just leave it as fort or use Grace for a reflex save bonus)
When you start adding 'cool' PrC's to a Fighter chassis, you really, really start seeing how the fighter gets shafted, and just how powerful PrC's are.
I would find it especially funny for a PrC that grants spellcasting levels almost every level, especially if it isn't required to be a spellcaster to enter.
===============
And, if none of you WANT to do this, I think you can all share a chuckle with me and agree that most, if not all, PrC's shouldn't exist in the game, and the fighter's role should have been expanded to include what they can do.
We need fewer classes, not more of them.
===Aelryinth
Tome of Battle never should have been published, and the classes therein are the most laughably overpowered and game-breaking rule sets I've seen on paper since we were graced with the warlock.
Have you read the PHB? Natural Spell, Gate, Polymorph Any Object, Mord's Disjunction... No, no, the Warlock is overpowered.
The Martial Adepts are significantly stronger than the Fighter and significantly weaker than casters. That puts them somewhere in the middle, wouldn't it?
[color=navy]Sword Adept [Fighter][/color]
You have dedicated yourself to the mastery of the sword.
Prerequisites: Combat Reflexes, Weapon Focus (any sword), Whirlwind Attack, Intimidate 4 ranks, base attack bonus +6
Benefits: After scoring a hit with the sword in which you have the Weapon Focus feat, you can choose to deal maximum normal weapon damage instead of rolling dice for base weapon damage. Additional dice damage, such as for sneak attack or weapon special abilities, such as flaming, must still be determined normally. You may use this ability up to twice a day, but never in conjunction with a critical hit.
If you score a critical hit, you may choose to increase the critical multiplier by 1 before rolling damage. You may use this ability once a day.
Finally, this feat grants you a +2 to Reflex saves.
Sword Master [Fighter]
You are considered a master in the use of your chosen weapon.
Prerequisites: Sword Adept, base attack bonus +8
Benefits: You gain a +1 to your attack rolls when attacking with your chosen weapon (the weapon you have chosen with your Weapon Focus feat). In addition you may use the damage maximization ability of the Sword Adept feat an additional 2x per day (for a total of 4x/day). You may also choose to increase your critical multiplier on a critical hit an additional one time per day (for a total of twice per day).
Secret of Speed [Fighter]
You have learned the secret of using speed to augment your sword mastery.
Prerequisites: Sword Master
Benefits: You may add your Wisdom modifier to your Dexterity modifier when determining the number of attacks of opportunity you can make in one round. In addition you may use the damage maximization ability of the Sword Adept feat an additional 2x per day (for a total of 6x/day). You may also choose to increase your critical multiplier on a critical hit an additional one time per day (for a total of 3x per day).
Ki Critical [Fighter]
You have attained near perfection of your ki through the use of your chosen weapon.
Prerequisites: Secret of Speed
Benefits: You may double your weapon’s threat range as if you had the Improved Critical feat. If you already have the Improved Critical feat, you may add an additional +2 to your weapon’s final threat range, instead (after doubling with the Improved Critical feat). . In addition you may use the damage maximization ability of the Sword Adept feat an additional 2x per day (for a total of 8x/day). You may also choose to increase your critical multiplier on a critical hit an additional one time per day (for a total of 4x per day).
Finally, this feat grants you a +2 to Will saves.
Kensai [Fighter]
You have achieved perfection in the art of wielding your chosen weapon.
Prerequisites: Ki Critical
Benefits: You may make a Whirlwind attack as a standard action rather than as a full round action. . In addition you may use the damage maximization ability of the Sword Adept feat an additional 2x per day (for a total of 10x/day). You may also choose to increase your critical multiplier on a critical hit an additional one time per day (for a total of 5x per day).
I made this up shortly after acquiring Sword and Fist (wow, long time ago!) and reasoning that these new PrCs weren't really all that divergent from what Fighter players wanted, and that they oughtn't be PrCs.
Some people, on reviewing these feats, told me point blank that they were too powerful. Too "monty-haul," even after my stipulation that [Fighter] feats can only be taken with Fighter class feature bonus feats. Those comments were easily swept away when I pointed out that these "feats" did nothing that the PrCs didn't do, and that these PrCs aren't normally considered "broken" in any way, shape, or form. If you compare even PHB2 feats to these, you'll notice that these feats each give a more diverse spread of benefits, and they're also often more brutely powerful.
Personally, I think that the Warblade is an excellent replacement concept for the Fighter, except that it doesn't do everything we expect Fighters to do, and most of that is artificial - so as not to blatantly step on the Fighter's toes, no doubt.
The more I think about it, actually, the less I think that Maneuvers alone are a good salve for the Fighter. Stances should be a Fighter thing to do, especially since Stances are more like what Fighters (the concept) seem to gravitate to: unlimited passive bonuses, that is.
This is why I think that it's pointless to mess around with the Fighter as a starting chassis, when the Warblade Martial Adept chassis is just so much better in every way that counts. Better in power balance, better in concept, better in versatility.
Attack Bonus as Skill:
There's another way to increase the Fighter's versatility. Just as Skill modifiers can do a plethora of activities related to the broad category they cover (Diplomacy and Knowledge for instance), it ought to also follow that Fighters should be able to do more with their Attack Bonus (essentially, a "class skill" for the Fighter related to combat) than just hit things. The Feint changes already hint at something of this development, and of course, you could Grapple and Disarm with your AB.
IMO, you should be able to do a lot of really special things that relate to killing enemies with AB. For instance, if Sneak Attack is related to precision, shouldn't you be able to exchange AB directly for extra damage dice on vulnerable enemies? Essentially, you're trying to hit some part that's especially vulnerable and thus more well protected, like the heart. The bad part is that you're more likely to miss it and just do an insignificant glancing blow. The good part is if you hit, you're going to do something pretty devastating.
Guardian Lurker, that's an extremely impressive body of work for a fighter rework. Two thumbs up! I hope you or someone plays it out and sees how it works.
I also must confess I enjoy the fact that you also took up the banner of the Campaign Premise. The Fighter gets so much better if other classes simply cannot steal his starting profs.
Thank you. I'm thinking of actually using it my next campaign; but that might be years from now, sadly. (I've got a campaign that's just started, that's all.) So hopefully, it can get vetted before then. As for the premises, all I can claim is that I can recognize a good idea when I see it.
I'd like to issue something of a challenge here. Take your favorite Melee PrC (any PrC with full BAB and a d8+ hit die) and render it as:
a) Fighter feats (this should be entertaining...make sure they are minimal level appropriate!)
b) Fighter Sub levels (this should be even funnier)
Remember to include PrC reqs for those first feats, if you take that route...and if the skill list is expanded, or more skill points added, or two good saves are there...add them in and justify them! (if the save changes to good Reflex, just leave it as fort or use Grace for a reflex save bonus)
When you start adding 'cool' PrC's to a Fighter chassis, you really, really start seeing how the fighter gets shafted, and just how powerful PrC's are.
I would find it especially funny for a PrC that grants spellcasting levels almost every level, especially if it isn't required to be a spellcaster to enter.
I'm all for this, but we should probably move it out of Redgar's.
And the warlock...powerful? Well, I suppose if you fight armies all the time and want to do nothing but cast low powered invocations all day, it's powerful. But any melee can technically fight all day, as long as they can get healed. And they can't bring the power like a real spellcaster can.
That's kind of a trolling, absolutist statement, and we're trying to look at both the good and the bad here
So, keep it mild and instructive, not scorching, please?===Aelryinth
I have to ask, given the options that now exist, is it even worthwhile to bother "fixing" the fighter? If it takes all the extra feats and their books, and the PHB2 and ToB initiator levels to make a fighter worthwhile, why not just take the warblade and move on?
Do I need everyone's nebulous concept of what the fighter should be focused on to make a fix that not everyone is going to agree on when there's probably already something out there for me if I'm not suck on 'guy who can fight = fighter?'
Kaphrem, I have to say that's just not true. Warblades' offensive power is definitely not anything beyond that of a fighter...it just has more versatility and defenses (particularly in damage off standard actions).
I'd say you're greatly mistaken there. The warblade has the same BAB, full initiator levels, counts as a fighter of their level -4 for 'fighter only' feats, multiple class abilities, twice as many skill points, larger HD and has 4 bonus feats to boot. In fact short of sub levels and I think 1 feat there's basically nothing a fighter is going to pick up or that warblade won't also. There's a lot more a warblade will do a fighter won't.
What makes you think that fighter is going to do more damage than the warblade? I'm not seeing anything that really supports that.
And the warlock...powerful? Well, I suppose if you fight armies all the time and want to do nothing but cast low powered invocations all day, it's powerful. But any melee can technically fight all day, as long as they can get healed. And they can't bring the power like a real spellcaster can.
While a warlock may lack the game breaking spells, they are a very powerful class. Invisibility at will, Wall of Force at Will, Dispel Magic at will, Dimension Door at will, Baleful Polymorph at will, Eldrtich Glaive... those aren't low powered invocations. That's up to 5th level spells at will all day every day. Different, but not certainly not weak. I don't see bards being put down for only having 6th level spells.
Further, the Warblade doesn't really do heavily armored concepts justice, and is noticeably lacking in the ranged combat and mounted combat arenas. A sizeable feat pool combined with a bit of Maneuver progression, is the way to go for the Fighter, methinks.
Anyway, I read this whole post over during the course of the last week, so I'm going to offer my ideas! My whole premise is this: Fighters can bend, break, and occasionally shatter the game's combat rules with their superior combat prowess.
Show
The Fighter
HD: d10
Class Skills: Climb, Craft, Diplomacy, Handle Animal, Intimidate, Jump, Knowledge(Geography), Knowledge(History), Knowledge(Nobility and Royalty), Listen, Ride, Spot, Swim, Use Rope
Skill points at 1st level: (4 + Int Mod) x 4
Skill points at each additional level: (4 + Int)
Ok, I'm no good at tables. Take the fighter table in the PHB. At every odd level beyond the first(3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 13, 15, 17, and 19) add in the phrase "Feat Trick."
1st level - Fighter's Discipline: Whenever the character gains a bonus feat from the fighter class, his ability scores count as 4 higher for the purposes of determining which feats he qualifies for. (It only works for qualifying for fighter bonus feats, so cherry-picking does no good). At level 6, your ability scores count as 6 higher, and at level 12, your ability scores count as 8 higher. I had to mention this idea. I know someone else posted it first, but it's a darn good idea!
Feat Tricks: There are 3 levels of tricks for each feat: Expert(E), Specialist(S), and Master(M). In order to take the next level, you must have at least one before it. I.E. You cannot take a Master feat trick unless you have a Specialist trick for that same feat...which naturally needs an Expert trick before it can be taken. A fighter can begin taking expert feat tricks at 3rd level. He gains a feat tricks every odd numbered level afterwards.
A fighter can start to take Expert(E) feat tricks at 3rd level, Specialist(S) feat tricks at 9th level, and Master(M) feat tricks at 15th level. When he advances his knowledge of a feat's trick, he gains the new feat trick in addition to the ones he already knows.
Here are a couple examples:
Combat Expertise(E): You gain damage reduction X/- whenever you use combat expertise, where X is equal to the penalty you take to your attack using CE. The damage reduction cannot exceed 5.
Combat Expertise(S): Combat expertise now gives an amount equal to the penalty you take on attacks as a circumstance bonus on all of your saving throws.
Combat Expertise(M): You may take up to a -10 penalty using combat expertise. Your damage reduction gained while using combat expertise is now equal to twice the penalty taken. You may use combat expertise once per round as an immediate action. If you do so, it lasts until the end of your next turn instead of the beginning of it.
Cleave(E): As a standard action, you can attack two foes adjacent to each other with one swing at a -4 penalty. Make one attack roll against both opponents' armor class, and determine for each if it hits. Additionally, there is no limit to the number of creatures you can cleave(bye bye great cleave!).
Cleave(S): You may make a 5-foot step as part of a cleave attempt. You may do this once per round. Also, your cleave attacks can strike two foes with the same swing. Roll once and determine for each if the attack roll hits. If you strike two foes, both of them must fall in order to continue cleave attempts.
Cleave(M): You have mastered capitalizing on the death of your fallen foes. If you have yet to cleave this round, you may sacrifice your next cleave attempt, and instead make a full attack action against a single opponent within reach. You cannot make any more cleave attempts if that opponent falls. You may take your 5-foot step from Cleave(S) before you make your attacks.
Heavy Armor Proficiency(E): You are only encumbered by 50% of your armor's weight. You do not suffer any movement penalty for wearing heavy armor. It still counts as heavy armor for all other intents and purposes, like monk abilities and ranger combat styles.
Heavy Armor Proficiency(S): Armor check penalties are halved. You gain DR 2/- while wearing heavy armor. The max dex bonus of the armor is increased by 1.
Heavy Armor Proficiency(M): You gain DR 5/- while wearing heavy armor. The max dex bonus of the armor is increased by 3. Also, you maximize the advantage your heavy armor affords you. You gain a +4 bonus on bull rush and trip attempts, as well as a +4 bonus to avoid being tripped or bull rushed.
HD: d10
Class Skills: Climb, Craft, Diplomacy, Handle Animal, Intimidate, Jump, Knowledge(Geography), Knowledge(History), Knowledge(Nobility and Royalty), Listen, Ride, Spot, Swim, Use Rope
Skill points at 1st level: (4 + Int Mod) x 4
Skill points at each additional level: (4 + Int)
Ok, I'm no good at tables. Take the fighter table in the PHB. At every odd level beyond the first(3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 13, 15, 17, and 19) add in the phrase "Feat Trick."
1st level - Fighter's Discipline: Whenever the character gains a bonus feat from the fighter class, his ability scores count as 4 higher for the purposes of determining which feats he qualifies for. (It only works for qualifying for fighter bonus feats, so cherry-picking does no good). At level 6, your ability scores count as 6 higher, and at level 12, your ability scores count as 8 higher. I had to mention this idea. I know someone else posted it first, but it's a darn good idea!
Feat Tricks: There are 3 levels of tricks for each feat: Expert(E), Specialist(S), and Master(M). In order to take the next level, you must have at least one before it. I.E. You cannot take a Master feat trick unless you have a Specialist trick for that same feat...which naturally needs an Expert trick before it can be taken. A fighter can begin taking expert feat tricks at 3rd level. He gains a feat tricks every odd numbered level afterwards.
A fighter can start to take Expert(E) feat tricks at 3rd level, Specialist(S) feat tricks at 9th level, and Master(M) feat tricks at 15th level. When he advances his knowledge of a feat's trick, he gains the new feat trick in addition to the ones he already knows.
Here are a couple examples:
Combat Expertise(E): You gain damage reduction X/- whenever you use combat expertise, where X is equal to the penalty you take to your attack using CE. The damage reduction cannot exceed 5.
Combat Expertise(S): Combat expertise now gives an amount equal to the penalty you take on attacks as a circumstance bonus on all of your saving throws.
Combat Expertise(M): You may take up to a -10 penalty using combat expertise. Your damage reduction gained while using combat expertise is now equal to twice the penalty taken. You may use combat expertise once per round as an immediate action. If you do so, it lasts until the end of your next turn instead of the beginning of it.
Cleave(E): As a standard action, you can attack two foes adjacent to each other with one swing at a -4 penalty. Make one attack roll against both opponents' armor class, and determine for each if it hits. Additionally, there is no limit to the number of creatures you can cleave(bye bye great cleave!).
Cleave(S): You may make a 5-foot step as part of a cleave attempt. You may do this once per round. Also, your cleave attacks can strike two foes with the same swing. Roll once and determine for each if the attack roll hits. If you strike two foes, both of them must fall in order to continue cleave attempts.
Cleave(M): You have mastered capitalizing on the death of your fallen foes. If you have yet to cleave this round, you may sacrifice your next cleave attempt, and instead make a full attack action against a single opponent within reach. You cannot make any more cleave attempts if that opponent falls. You may take your 5-foot step from Cleave(S) before you make your attacks.
Heavy Armor Proficiency(E): You are only encumbered by 50% of your armor's weight. You do not suffer any movement penalty for wearing heavy armor. It still counts as heavy armor for all other intents and purposes, like monk abilities and ranger combat styles.
Heavy Armor Proficiency(S): Armor check penalties are halved. You gain DR 2/- while wearing heavy armor. The max dex bonus of the armor is increased by 1.
Heavy Armor Proficiency(M): You gain DR 5/- while wearing heavy armor. The max dex bonus of the armor is increased by 3. Also, you maximize the advantage your heavy armor affords you. You gain a +4 bonus on bull rush and trip attempts, as well as a +4 bonus to avoid being tripped or bull rushed.
And yeah, the Warblade definitely can't fill a whole bunch of niches, but that's because it wasn't made to. It still does what it was designed to do very well.
===Aelryinth
I'd say you're greatly mistaken there. The warblade has the same BAB, full initiator levels, counts as a fighter of their level -4 for 'fighter only' feats, multiple class abilities, twice as many skill points, larger HD and has 4 bonus feats to boot. In fact short of sub levels and I think 1 feat there's basically nothing a fighter is going to pick up or that warblade won't also. There's a lot more a warblade will do a fighter won't.
What makes you think that fighter is going to do more damage than the warblade? I'm not seeing anything that really supports that.
One reason is this, while the warblade might deal more damage on a single attack than the fighter the maneuvers are standard actions, so that means that the fighter can make full attack actions which does mean more damage. Equally valid is that the feat selection that is fighter only is really rather slim and generally not that worthwhile for it (weapon focus and specialization are pretty good but the greater versions and the like really aren't very good at all).
While a warlock may lack the game breaking spells, they are a very powerful class. Invisibility at will, Wall of Force at Will, Dispel Magic at will, Dimension Door at will, Baleful Polymorph at will, Eldritch Glaive... those aren't low powered invocations. That's up to 5th level spells at will all day every day. Different, but not certainly not weak. I don't see bards being put down for only having 6th level spells.
Yes, and the baleful polymorph and wall of force aren't available till level 15+ and their selection is rather limited. To say nothing of the fact that wall of force for the warlock injures them if it is damaged. Also, bards have a relatively versatile list and can take prestige classes to get 9th level spells. All I am saying is that it isn't as if the warlock is superhuman, it's a fun class but I wouldn't call it incredibly powerful or overpowered.
One reason is this, while the warblade might deal more damage on a single attack than the fighter the maneuvers are standard actions, so that means that the fighter can make full attack actions which does mean more damage. Equally valid is that the feat selection that is fighter only is really rather slim and generally not that worthwhile for it (weapon focus and specialization are pretty good but the greater versions and the like really aren't very good at all).
Have you looked at the maneuvers? A full attack isn't more damage than a lot of them. Double weapon damage (2 attacks as a standard action), quadruple it (4 attacks at highest BAB effectively s a standard action), take 2 full attack actions, +100 damage, add 2-4 attacks to a standard or full attack, Drop a foe and give all your allies a free attack for a move action. As for them all being standard actions, you're sorely mistaken there.
Yes, and the baleful polymorph and wall of force aren't available till level 15+ and their selection is rather limited. To say nothing of the fact that wall of force for the warlock injures them if it is damaged. Also, bards have a relatively versatile list and can take prestige classes to get 9th level spells. All I am saying is that it isn't as if the warlock is superhuman, it's a fun class but I wouldn't call it incredibly powerful or overpowered.
Ok that's 2 of the 6 I listed that are late (for a good reason since they're at will). As for Wall of Force, how many things can actually take one down? It's immune to all damage and isn't effected by dispel magic. You have basically 4 options to get rid of it: Disintegrate (6th level spell), Disjunction (9th level spell) a specific magic item, and an artifact. And if they do get rid of it, how much damage do you take? d10.
Ooooh! Scary d10 damage when you're 15+ level! Would you rather the wall got disintegrated and deal d10 damage to you, or you got disintegrated for 40d6 damage?
Of course at 2nd level the warlock is in a permanent darkness spell that he can see through with no problems. At 6th level you're invisible at will. At 8th level you can Flee the Scene at will. At 10th you can dispel magic at will and damage with it. Want one of those first rather than invisibility? Fine pick anyone of the three, any one of them is available at 6th level. Want Eldritch Glaive? It's available at 2nd.
I would suspect if you don't think Dispelling, Invisibility and Dimension Dooring at will aren't powerful when you can get all 3 by 10th level, yeah, you're not going to get why the warlock is a very powerful class.
But the key thing is this: The fighter isn't bad because it is inferior at tanking to the warblade. It is bad because it is inferior at tanking to the cleric and druid. Or one of those crazy four attacks 9th level spell builds they have on the optimization boards (they're actually a few points past that I believe). I hear quickened true strike goes pretty good with power attack.
Bill, don't be absolutist and repeat things that have not been proven. Indeed, it's been shown over and over again that druids and clerics largely suck at the melee/tanker roles over a melee. It takes tremendous resource waste to just equal the role of a melee tank...and if those same resources were spent on the melee, he'd be utterly impossible to stop.
The idea that a melee role can be performed by a cleric or druid is not the same as the idea that it can be done better...it can't, and too many people are making that error. The kind of havoc a decently designed melee build can wreak out is not easy for a spellcaster to emulate, especially when they could be doing far more productive things.
As for quickened True Strikes, that's true, and that's why melees can now buy Gauntlets of True Strike. It's also rather true that Elusive Target gives quite the laugh to someone using this tactic, and only fighters are likely to have the spare feats to grab this tactical feat, and really annoy power-attackers.
Oh, and True Strike is a divination spell. It actually doesn't work against someone with a Mind Blank or similar effect up!
===Aelryinth
My personal favorite for a capstone is allowing the Fighter to perform a full attack as a standard action. This basically subsumes the Pounce mechanic, works with Spring Attack, vastly increases mobility options in a fight, but it doesn't really increase his damage output on a number basis. It's also one HELL of a reward for sticking it out to F/20.
====Aelryinth
Wow. Yes, that would be a big carrot to dangle in front of any player. Maybe too big, when compared to anyone else's damage potential in most high level situations, where full attacks are hard to come by?
You could do this via feats, though. Just as there's a Manyshot feat, what if someone who had taken Weapon Specialization (2 feats to get under official system) becomes eligible for:
Attack Flurry. You can make an extra melee attack with your main weapon as part of a standard action. The second attack is taken at a -5 penalty.
Improved Attack Flurry. Requires Attack Flurry, and Improved weapon focus. Allows a third melee attack with your main weapon as part of a standard action, with the 2 attacks taken at -5/-10.
Non-fighters can gain this ability, but it's 5 feats and would largely define the character. Only someone who had been a fighter for many levels would be able to do this routinely and still have other neat combat options. And at high levels, the addition of that extra attack = real damage and effectiveness bonuses.
NOW add the "full attack as standard action" capstone at 20th level, and it's not such a huge chasm from what would otherwise be possible. You could just wait and get this, of course, but the ability to perform 2 and 3 attacks regularly in standard action situations is probably useful enough that people take the feats anyway.
Thoughts?
Wow. Yes, that would be a big carrot to dangle in front of any player. Maybe too big, when compared to anyone else's damage potential in most high level situations, where full attacks are hard to come by?
You could do this via feats, though. Just as there's a Manyshot feat, what if someone who had taken Weapon Specialization (2 feats to get under official system) becomes eligible for:
Attack Flurry. You can make an extra melee attack with your main weapon as part of a standard action. The second attack is taken at a -5 penalty.
Improved Attack Flurry. Requires Attack Flurry, and Improved weapon focus. Allows a third melee attack with your main weapon as part of a standard action, with the 2 attacks taken at -5/-10.
Non-fighters can gain this ability, but it's 5 feats and would largely define the character. Only someone who had been a fighter for many levels would be able to do this routinely and still have other neat combat options. And at high levels, the addition of that extra attack = real damage and effectiveness bonuses.
NOW add the "full attack as standard action" capstone at 20th level, and it's not such a huge chasm from what would otherwise be possible. You could just wait and get this, of course, but the ability to perform 2 and 3 attacks regularly in standard action situations is probably useful enough that people take the feats anyway.
Thoughts?
That already exists as part of Slashing Flurry and similar feats...the problem is that it burns feats.
Despite having all his feats, the Fighter never has enough. Ergo, this really needs to be a capstone ability. Flurry also brings with it the shade of monk abilities adding extra attacks to the full attack action.If you are going to have a full attack action, letting a Fighter/20 do it as a SA is actually analogous to how many of the Warblade's level 9 maneuvers work (Strike of Perfect Clarity, +100 dmg, SA). Ergo, it's not unbalancing...it's level 20! And people can already move and Full Attack with Pounce by this level...as a Standard Action, this is almost underpowered, but it would make for a more dynamic game, and get the Fighter out of his 'stand and slog full attacks' routine.
A Scaling benefit, if you wanted to put it in, is basically the equivalent of a Pounce (Pounce auto scales, as it were.) It would be somewhat better, and so nice for a Fighter. I'm thinking that if a Barb can get Pounce at level 1, a Fighter getting Full Attack as an SA at level 6 or 12 or ANYWHEN wouldn't be unbalanced...but at level 20 it still makes a nice reward. You will NEVER be able to ignore a fighter's dmg potential with this ability.
==Aelryinth
One thing became very clear very fast: the existing system sucks. Both characters, who were not previously overpowered and fit well into adventuring parties without dominating, were weakened. The revised build offered some changes and improvements... but my conclusion is that it still falls slightly short.
I'm going to follow this up with a very concrete example, built first as a Fighter and then as a Scout class, to illustrate. I tweaked a few things to generate the same effects the character's previous gear had (+1 mithril chain shirt instead of elfin chainmail, for instance, Sword of Quickness uses 3ED mechanics instead of "automatically strikes first and give the wielder an extra attack per round"), and I removed a couple of campaign events based abilities that would have muddied the comparison. Overall conclusions, however, are:
* ff6shadow's Mastery of Battle needs more flexibility and/or an earlier start to be effective.
Right now, it only really starts at 10th level and many campaigns don't play much in the 10th-20th range. Worse, it's usually 15th level before the combo abilities are all that useful, and the fighter needs serious help by level 10. For example: Ranged Weapon Mastery requires 15th level, should be more like 10th. Ditto the Swift strikes/ Ambidexterity combo for two-fisted fighters. The simplest fix is to make Mastery of Battle: Mastery of War (+1 to all attacks) one of the MoB options you can choose at 5th level, instead of THE designated option. Or, make Mastery of War a bonus at some other level, and slot in a "choose your MoB ability" at level 5.
* Mastery of Battle has one ability that's head and shoulders above the others: Mastery of Survival.
You don't notice it so much at lower levels. But In exchange for picking Survival as 1 of your 4 optional fighter skills, or having it via a previous class, our 10th level fighter Jenis Kelamin gets +1 to all saves and +10 hit points (would be +15 at 15th level, +20 at 20th). No other ability in the set comes close. Since most savvy players are apt to take it first or second, this means we're looking at level 20 for any interesting combo abilities. Way, way too late.
I kind of like Mastery of Survival, as it really helps different fighter styles in even up with the tank style, step ahead of options like Scout or Ranger with a notable hit point boost, and step even with the Barbarian. But its presence does exacerbate the inherent design flaw in MoB, absent a fix to the MoB mechanic.
* The "4 points/level and 4 additional class skills from this list" concept worked better than I thought at higher levels.
Fighters come away with decently rounded skill sets but still face hard selection choices, and the choices they do make often leave them with impressive scores in the key skills they do choose. That was really gratifying, and you'll see it in the 10th level build below.
I'll add that she was scything down foes with her twin short swords before a certain famous moriquendi was a gleam in Bob Salvatore's eye. Here's Jenis built as what she was originally - a fighter - using my ff6shadow build modified by my skills changes...
Jenis Kelamin, 10th wood elf Fighter CR 10
CG Medium female humanoid
Height: 5'1" Weight: 95 lbs. Eyes/Hair: Green/Strawberry blonde Born: 428 CY
Init +14/+4
Senses: Low light vision; Listen +3, Search +1, Spot +14
Interaction: Bluff +3, Diplomacy +3, Handle animal +5, Sense motive +1
Languages: Elvish, Common, Draconic, Suloise
AC 21, touch 16, flat-footed 17 (Armor +5, Dex +4, Deflection +2)
HP 75 (10d10+16); DR fire/10
Immune Sleep
Fort +11, Ref +9, Will +8
Resist Enchantment magics @+2 Weakness -
Speed 30 ft. (6 squares)
Tactical: Craft traps +8, Hide +9*, Move silently +4, Balance +19, Climb +1, Jump +8, Tumble +19.
BASE ATK: +11/+6; Grp +11
STNDRD ATK: 4 Short sword attacks (AT +18/+13//+16/+11 | DG d6+6/ d8+6// d6+3/ d6+3 | CR 17-20 x2)
FULL ATTACK WEAPONS OPTIONS:
- +3 Short sword (AT +18/+13 | DG d6+6 | CR 17-20 x2); and
- +1 Short sword of Quickness (AT +16 | DG d6+3 | CR 17-20 x2, +10 Initiative, off-hand attack can be part of standard action or AOO) or
- +1 Whip (AT +15/+10 | DG d3+2 NL | CR 20 x2 | racial weapon, can make trip attacks)
- +1 Composite Shortbow (AT +15 | DG d6+1 | CR 20 x3) and 20 arrows
Atk Options: Swift strikes
Special Actions: Height of Battle +5, 2/day
Combat Gear: +1 mithril elfin chain shirt (MDB 6, ACk 0), +2 Ring of greater protection (protection + resistance), Ring of fire resistance 10, Gloves of missile snaring.
Abilities: Str 13, Dex 18, Con 14, Int 14, Wis 12, Cha 16
(Were S 13, D 17, C 13, I 14, W 12, Ch 16)
Worships: Kelanen, Prince of Swords
Hooks: A blur of motion begins...
SQ: Elven traits, incl. detection of secret doors.
Feats (normal rules): Combat reflexes, Dodge, Evasion, Spring attack, Improved critical: SS, Two-weapon fighting, Weapon Finesse, Greater Weapon focus(2): SS, Weapon specialization: SS. Mastery of Battle: Mastery of War (+1 AT), Swift strikes.
Feats (With weapon Spec as 1 feat + progression): Close quarters fighting*+, Combat expertise+, Combat reflexes, Dodge, Mobility, Spring attack, Two-weapon fighting, Weapon Finesse, Weapon Specialization: swords (+2/+2), Improved critical: swords. Mastery of Battle: Mastery of War (+1 AT), Swift strikes.
Skills [24+54 = 78] Craft - traps (Int) +8, Handle Animal (Cha) +5, Intimidate (Cha OR Str) +7, Jump (Str) +8, Knowledge - tactics and war (Wis) +14, Spot (Wis) +14. Plus 4 selected: Balance (Dex) +19, Tumble (Dex) +19, Survival (Wis) +9, Swim (Str) +4. Also Listen +3, Knowledge - nature +4.
Other Possessions Cloak of Elvenkind, Traveler's clothing, Boots of levitation, Potions: Water breathing, Remove poison. Asstd. Survival supplies and adventurer's gear.
Ability Explanations
Close Quarters Fighting = Feat. Gain an AOO when someone tries to grapple you if not already grappled or flat-footed, even if the attacker has the improved grab ability. Damage dealt applies as a bonus to the ensuing grapple check.
Height of Battle (Ex): Once per day a fighter of 3rd level or higher can draw on his unmatched combat experience for a burst of inspired effort that lesser warriors simply cannot match. As an immediate action, he can gain a bonus on all attack and damage rolls, or a bonus to Armor class and all saving throws (this ability can be used even after an attack or save has already been rolled, possible negating harm that would have otherwise affected the fighter). This bonus is equal to 1/2 his fighter class level and lasts 1 round.
At 9th level, and at every six levels there after, the fighter may use height of battle one additional time per day. He cannot use height of battle more than once per encounter, however.
Swift Strikes. Mastery of Battle option. Prerequisite: BAB +6, Dex 15.
When making an attack as a standard action, you may make one extra attack at a -5 penalty. If you fighting with two weapons, you may also make an attack with your off-hand weapon.
N.B. Jenis' sword already gives her this ability. I ruled that it stacked with the sword, to give Jenis a cuisinart-worthy 4 Short sword attacks as a standard action. Reasoning? Twofold. One, it was from natural skill which is a different source. Two, it makes the comparison with the scout build much clearer, because the sword doesn't blur a key extra ability distinction.
With weapon Spec as 1 feat + progression. Under this system, a warrior class (or in some games, a fighter only) takes Weapon Specialization as one feat. As the warrior becomes eligible for more advanced versions like Greater Weapon Focus et al, the abilities are gained automatically. As you can see above, this gives Jenis some important additional options - options that make a difference in the comparison to come. Items with a "+" sign represent additional feats in her repertoire because this option was taken.
Jenis Kelamin, 10th wood elf Scout CR 10
CG Medium female humanoid
Height: 5'1" Weight: 95 lbs. Eyes/Hair: Green/Strawberry blonde Born: 428 CY
Init +14/+4; Senses Low light vision; Listen +13, Search +1, Spot +13
Interaction: Bluff +3, Diplomacy +3, Handle animal +3, Sense motive +1
Languages: Elvish, Common, Draconic, Suloise
AC 21, touch 16, flat-footed 17 (Armor +5, Dex +4, Deflection +2, Uncanny dodge)
HP 75 (10d10+16); DR Fire/10, Evasion
Immune Sleep
Fort +11, Ref +9, Will +8
Resist Enchantment magics @+2 Weakness -
Speed 45 ft. (9 squares)
Tactical: Hide +23*, Move silently +14, Balance +11, Climb +3/+5, Jump +8, Tumble +17.
BASE ATK: +11/+6; Grp +10
STNDRD ATK: 2 Short swords (AT +15/+13 | DG d6+4/ d6+1 | CR 17-20 x2)
FULL ATK WEAPOM OPTIONS:
- +3 Short sword (AT +15/+10 | DG d8+4 | CR 17-20 x2); and
- +1 Short sword of Quickness (AT +13 | DG d6+1 | CR 17-20 x2, +10 Initiative, off-hand attack can be part of standard action), or
- +1 Whip (AT +15/+10 | DG d3+2 NL | CR 20 x2 | racial weapon, can make trip attacks)
- +1 Composite Shortbow (AT +15 | DG d6+1 | CR 20 x3) and 20 arrows
Atk Options: Skirmish (+3d6, +2 AC)
Special Actions:, Camouflage (hide in any natural surroundings), Flawless stride (no movement penalties), Trackless step.
Combat Gear: +1 mithril elfin chain shirt (MDB 6, ACk 0), +2 Ring of greater protection (protection
+ resistance), Ring of fire resistance 10, Gloves of missile snaring.
Abilities Str 13, Dex 18, Con 14, Int 14, Wis 12, Cha 16
Worships Ehlonna
Hooks: (A blur of motion begins...)
SQ: Elven traits, incl. detection of secret doors.
Feats: Dodge, Evasion, Spring Attack, Improved critical: SS, Two-weapon fighting, Weapon finesse.
(Key scout vs. fighter combat changes: Speed ups mobility by 50%, Skirmish increases damage by almost 3x. In payment, lose +3 AT/+2 DMG (weapon specialization, Mastery of War +1 AT), 2 attacks from a standard attack, and combat reflexes' multiple attacks of opportunity.
Using standard weapon specialization rules, we're still on nearly even ground as a combatant. One could argue for a pure combat advantage to either build, and that's still wrong because the scout has all kinds of tactical abilities like hide skills et al, not to mention uncanny dodge, evasion [a biggie], trackless step, camouflage, and +26 skill points. It shouldn't match a two-weapon fighter 1 on 1 in combat.
Use of weapon specialization as just 1 feat with progression buffs the fighter build with close-quarters fighting to prevent grapples, and combat expertise which can give Jenis a +3 AC boost at equal AT to the scout build, offsetting the scout's +2 skirmish bonus to AC. Still too slight an edge in combat?)
Skills [32+72 = 104] Balance (dex) +11, Climb (str) +3/+5 rope, Craft - traps (int) +7, Hide (dex) +17, Jump (str) +8, Listen (wis) +13, Move silently (Dex) +14, Spot (Wis) +13, Swim (Str) +4, Tumble (dex) +17, Use rope (dex) +9, Survival (wis) +14/ +14 lost / +12 swift tracker; Knowledge (int): Geography +7, Nature +9. Escape artist +5/+7 rope.
(Key scout vs. fighter changes: No knowledge (tactics & war), no intimidate, no handle animal, balance goes sharply down, trapmaking goes down, slight losses in spot, tumble. In exchange, major boosts to hide, move silently, listen, survival, knowledge - nature/geography, some climb improvement, and the addition of escape artist thanks to 1 cross-class point. I was surprised to find that the scout had less of a skills advantage than expected - the builds were different, and the scout has more of a tactical skills edge thanks to stealth, but each is unique and playable.)
Other Possessions: Cloak of elvenkind; Boots of levitation; Potions: Water breathing, Remove poison. Traveler's clothing, Asstd. Survival supplies and adventurer's gear.
Final thoughts: The need for more Mastery of Battle Flexibility shines through here, and it seems clear that fighters need to be able to treat weapon specialization as 1 slot with progression.
If 5th level allowed for selection of any MoB ability, Jenis the Fighter could take Mastery of Survival to boost all saves by 1 and rise to 85 hit points. Or, she could take Ambidexterity and drop her two-weapon penalties to -0/-0. Either would restore the fighter build's combat edge over the scout to a clear advantage, esp. when combined with occasional but sometimes very useful options like combat reflexes (great for whizzing though cultist underpriests).
That, plus the extra feats like combat reflexes and CQF, would round her out as a Fighter PC could stand beside the v3.5 10th level cleric, 10th level mage, 10th level rogue, or even Prestige class PCs. Someone confident in her ability to play a vital role, face the tough foes, and do things no other PC in the party can do. Someone that will have the other party members doing their thing, but also waiting with anticipation as she steps in to give some 'badass' opponent a very nasty surprise.
That's our girl the way I remember her. The way she ought to be - without having to change what she was.
Also, most people take Melee Weapon Mastery as part of the Spec Tree, because it is required for Supremacy. Since you are level 10, that would make your Spec bonuses +4/+4! IMproved Critical is usually not considered part of the Tree, although it certainly could be.
Lastly, a Short Sword of Quickness in the current rules would probably be equal to a blade of Warning or Eager. In the old system, it allowed a first strike, not additional attacks...additional attacks were the sole provinces of Swords of Speed. I'd simply give a +5 bonus to Initiative, which is very substantial and equal to an Eager weapon, and the ability to make AoO while flat-footed.
Again, thanks for the post and analysis.
===Aelryinth
-Mastery of Battle needs more flexibility and/or an earlier start to be effective-
I noticed at the end of you posts that you thought Mastery of Battle: Mastery of War was required to be your first choice, so I'll hit it first because its far more important. This is incorrect. You can choose any of the abilities at fifth level. But your still right that Ranged Weapon Mastery still applies to late. I'd probably remove the Mastery of War requirement, making it available at 10th level.
-Mastery of Battle has one ability that's head and shoulders above the others: Mastery of Survival-
In my original design, Mastery of Survival was originally just a +1 bonus to saves. Shortly before posting it here, I noticed a trend in players. Most will go with the best offense is the best defense. Few players choose to place more than a cursory effort at defense unless they are obviously getting hurt to much and too often. So I added the HP as an incentive to actually invest in defense.
-The "4 points/level and 4 additional class skills from this list" concept worked better than I thought at higher levels.-
Yeah, the skill points really do help even with tough choices. It helps even more with some of the feats I made available to my players in my current campaign. I'll post them at the end of the post.
-Build Comparison-
Very nice comparison. Also, I agree with the Sword Stacking with the Swift Strikes so the weapon doesn't negate the comparison. But I have a problem. I think you miscalculated the attack bonuses for the Scout.
You posted
+3 Short sword (AT +15/+10 | DG d8+4 | CR 17-20 x2); and
The BAB for a 10th level Scout is +7, +4 bonus for Weapon Finesse, +3 for weapon, only totalling up to +14, before two-weapon fighting penalties. Giving what you're build, I'll run the weapons myself real quick, just stating the swords. I'm assuming that you meant Weapon Focus to include Greater Focus and Specialization and that your Weapon Specialization mentioned is intended to be Melee Weapon Mastery. Finally, I'm assuming that the Sword of Quickness doesn't apply the attack penalty, and affects only the offhand weapon for an extra attack.
Fighter - BAB +10, Dex Mod +4, Feats Bonuses - +4 att/ +4 dmg
Standard Action (Max Attacks)
Short Sword +3 - +19/+14 (1d6+8) - Avg. Dmg - 11.5
Short Sword +1 - +17/+12 (1d6+6) - Avg. Dmg - 9.5
Full Attack
Short Sword +3 - +19/+14 (1d6+8) - Avg. Dmg - 11.5
Short Sword +1 - +17/+12 (1d6+6) - Avg. Dmg - 9.5
Scout - BAB +7, Dex Mod +4, Feat Bonuses - None
Standard Action
Short Sword +3 - +14/+9 (1d6+4) (Skirmish +3d6) - Avg. Dmg - 18
Short Sword +1 - +12/+12 (1d6+2) (Skirmish +3d6) - Avg. Dmg - 16
Full Attack - (Note:Cannot make DC 40 to Tumble 10ft as a 5ft step.)
Short Sword +3 - +12/+7 (1d6+4) - Avg. Dmg -7.5
Short Sword +1 - +10/+5 (1d6+2) - Avg. Dmg - 5.5
The fighters is actually +5 for accuracy and +4 for damage, essentially making his full attack as a standard action. This is devastatingly powerful. The scout gains an average of 10.5 damage during his standard action. This assumes he is moving, which is obvious. He gains roughly a 150% damage boost for a 25% reduction in accuracy.
Of course, the Fighter has a far easier time surviving a drawn out fight, or a fighter against a high AC opponent. Looks fairly close to me.
A note aside, the fighter gets absolutely vicious by 15, when he can take True Power Attack, and the Power Attack feat. The scout has gained +4 to hit and +3.5 to damage. He may also have a Improved Two Weapon Fighting. The fighter has gained +5 to hit and can now power attack his excess accuracy away for bonus damage, despite wielding light weaponry. This is applicable for my group which prefers play between 5th and 15th. Just pointing out the eventual synergy.
In closing, I'll post those feats I mentioned earlier.
Versatile Learner
Prerequisite: None
Benefit: Choose any two skiills. These skills are always considered class skills for you.
Special: You may choose this feat multiple times, choosing different skills each time.
Open Minded
Prerequisite: None
Benefit: You gain 5 + 1/HD skill points. Whenever you gain another HD, you gain 1 additional skill point.
These are intended to enable truly oddball characters. It is currently in use in my campaign for a Barbarian (chieftain who was tutored in Knowledge (Nobility and Royalty) and Diplomacy by a diplomatic envoy from a nearby kingdom.) and a Cleric who grew up as a street thief (Sleight of Hand and Open Lock) but joined the clergy before developing the greater skills of a rogue (Trapfinding, Stealth, lots of skills). He still maintains his abilities. It allows those character to make a trade of in feats, to gain full access to skills that enhance their character concepts as well as extra skill points to fill these skills in.
Also, I appreciate you running that test to see how things went. Still working on it myself. Dealing with a Dual Wielder and an unarmed specialist. Dual wielder went for the Ambidexterity and the Brawler took the bonus feat. You didn't mention though, did the boosted will save help at all?
Jenis the 10th level Fighter has:
Fort +11, Ref +9, Will +6
Jenis the 10th level Scout has:
Fort +11, Ref +13, Will +6
Chalk up one more advantage for the Scout option, which the fighter build must overcome with combat capabilities just to pull even.
See below for my thoughts re: aelryinth & ff6shadow's well-considered comments. Overall, I think I can now conclude that the ff6shadow build + katman skills system makes the fighter a fully competitive choice vs. other classes, without needing to tweak feat rules for things like Weapon Specialization. ff6shadow, take a bow.
MORE CORRECTIONS:
Looking over Jenis, I really wish it was possible to edit your own posts at any time. There are 1-2 other things deserving of minor edits, like Tumbling and Balance coming down to +17 for the Fighter build due to max. ranks rules of level+3+4 Dex, and 4 points to put elsewhere. The end result is:
Craft - traps (Int) +8, Handle Animal (Cha) +5, Intimidate (Cha OR Str) +9, Jump (Str) +8, Knowledge - tactics and war (Wis) +14, Spot (Wis) +14. Plus 4 selected: Balance (Dex) +17, Tumble (Dex) +17, Survival (Wis) +10, Swim (Str) +5. Also Listen +3 (elf + wisdom), Search +3 (elf + wisdom), Knowledge - nature +4 (Survival synergy + Int).
RE: Scout attack bonus. I didn't have the book, so relied on a source that appears to be incorrect. Folks, please use ff6shadow's figures. Thanks for the correction, it was and is material to the analysis.
ISSUES:
RE: Mastery of Battle. Many thanks for the clarifications. Glad my analysis contributed to a Ranged Weapon Mastery change, too.
RE: Mastery of Survival. ff6shadow is probably right that the HPS bonuses are necessary to make players take it. And under my skill system, a pure fighter has to burn one of their 4 optional skill slots on survival, without getting tracking, in order to make use of it. So to me, it's fair to have this be more powerful because the pure fighter gave up more to get it. If your PC Fighter does have the Survival skill, however, you're really doing the character a disservice if Mastery of Survival isn't your #1 or #2 MoB selection.
ff6shadow, you asked re: will saves. I'd say the +1 won't be turned down, and adds useful "toughness flavor," but your instincts were spot on - an extra 5% margin doesn't help enough to work without the HPS, even with other saves getting a similar +1 boost.
If I understand 3ED correctly, 1st level Wizard with 17 int. casts Charm Person on 10th fighter with no protective item or wisdom or feat bonuses. DC is 14 (10 + 1 lvl + 3 int). 10th Fighter has +3 Will saves, so needs to roll 11 to save (wow, what a switch from 1ED/2ED, and what a power boost for wizards in civilized areas!). MoB/MoS makes it 10, so the vulnerability isn't attenuated very much; realistically, (s)he is still a sucker for enchantments.
Jenis is lucky enough to have protection items, and as an elf she gets extra relief on that front, so it's not as much of a concern. She would need to roll a 6 or better. Of course, in 2ED, the charm spell would simply have failed because she's an elf.
RE: Future MoB synergies. Good point re: True Power Attack. That makes for a very useful ability at higher levels, and does give dex-based fighters a real kick. It also ensures that they can keep up at 10+ level, when the spellcasters are moving into really high gear and their power-attack warclass brethren have lots of extra points to spend.
If you want a city-slicker who never took survival, 15th level means Ambidexterity, Swift strikes, and True power attack. All of the sudden, you can see that ff6shadow's Mastery of Battle means you can build great Swashbucklers up to high levels, without leaving the fighter class.
Ding! Another thing we really wanted just proved that it works.
The fighters is actually +5 for accuracy and +4 for damage, essentially making his full attack as a standard action. This is devastatingly powerful.
Not really. I've done some work on other character conversions, and could redo Jenis as a strength-based human build instead of Dex.-based elf in order to illustrate. But my conclusion? I think you'll find that the high-strength fighters with Power attack, big weapons, et. al. rack up the huge damage very reliably and can go to full attack to boost that. Jenis relies on lower-damage weapons because of the two-handed fighting requirements, using repeated strikes whose effectiveness declines over time, and gets no boost from full attack. This makes her more fearsome against weaker hps. creatures and spellcasters, and less fearsome against high AC creatures. In the end, it all balances out.
As for balance with other character classes, the Scout build has Evasion, Uncanny dodge to frustrate rogues, much better reflex saves, more skill points and tactical skills to spend them on, Skirmish damage, and Better movement. As a Ranger, Jenis would have a capable animal companion, Evasion, better attacks than the scout, Improved two-weapon fighting, more skill points and tactical skills to spend them on, much better reflex saves than the fighter, a couple minor spells, and either 3 favored enemies or serious bonuses vs. fewer sets. So yeah, the fighter should have a real edge in straight combat. And she does.
RE: Improved critical vs. Melee Weapon Mastery... I am using only basic rules feats etc. in the builds, for best comparison purposes. Would be interesting to do a statistical comparison of +4/+4 (instead of +2/+2 for improved weapon focus + specialization), vs. taking Improved critical and upping threat range from 10% - 20%. I can never remember if a critical doubles bonuses as well without looking it up; if not, then clearly Melee Weapon Mastery is the choice. If bonuses do double, then the possibility of True Power Attack here makes Improved critical the more interesting choice.
RE: the specific short sword Jenis carries. Can't remember which adventure it's from, but it was not a treasure table item and did grant both automatic initiative and an extra attack per round in 2ED. As you might guess, Jenis was the absolute bane of enemy mages, and not a lot of fun for evil clerics either. "Quickness" may have mislabeled the sword, but given its former abilities the conversion stands as is. Let's give it a new name to take that issue off the table, like "+1 Quicksilver Shortsword" or something. I tried to set the builds so its influence zeros out for comparison purposes anyway.
RE: katman skills system synergies with ff6shadow new feats. In a way, my skills system partly replaces the need for that in that you can create those kinds of interesting characters without penalizing them on feats.
But the feats do add something, and stack nicely with my skills system to add variety to the fighter class if a PC is willing to forego combat feats. I like them.
While this is primarily a mechanics thread, it's my opinion that mechanics and roleplaying are made to compliment each other, not detriment. So I'd like to address one scary issue I see tossed around everywhere:
The fighter's fine, you can roleplay being a master of combat.
This argument walks painfully hand in hand with the mentioned "fighter gets outfought by druids/clerics" one. As Aelryinth said, I can agree that it's not really true. The core of the issue, for me (and correct me if I'm wrong), is that on the other hand, the fighter gets outfought by appropriate CR monsters.
We have all heard about them. They are massive in core, lessened with outside core and somewhat compensated for with all books allowed; Balor will just teleport around you, at high levels you can't trip anything, 1Hander+Shield = SUCK, nothing except big 2hander power attack scales (which scales brokenly), TWF = SUCK, you're not a threat, Unarmed = SUCK, no mobility, weak mind, Balor will just teleport around you - wait I already said that. You get the point. And while I am a big fan of Bob Loblaw's Understanding fighter thread in classes forum too, all of these things are frequently thrown at fighter and have to be acknowledged.
So let us return to The fighter's fine, you can roleplay being a master of combat. Aelryinth's description was a huge hit here. Master of weapons. You can excel in various combat styles, fight in a rank in the morning and in a duel in the evening, hold an inspiring victory speech after it, and all of that. YES! A FIGHTER SHOULD BE ALL OF THAT!
Be good with many weapons and very strong with several or etc. I believe that one can't just roleplay it without some backup. Combat expertise means something, mastery of weapons means something. If monsters are hitting you on every hit because there are no feats to improve your AC or fighter can't take them, then you aren't a "deft, quick-witted duelist who relies on avoiding attacks". Likewise, someone might say that being proficient with a guisarme is in itself a mastery of two-file rank fighting, but when you hit your allies instead of charging enemies or just scratch them, it will be hard to style yourself a "master at arms". And I don't think this has anything to do with Stormwind Fallacy either. I'd appreciate everyone's thoughts on roleplaying of the said issue though, if you feel like it.
Once again, great job on the thread and keep it up; I sure hope that 4E picked up some pointers from it. Take another round of cookies now
Bill, don't be absolutist and repeat things that have not been proven. Indeed, it's been shown over and over again that druids and clerics largely suck at the melee/tanker roles over a melee. It takes tremendous resource waste to just equal the role of a melee tank...and if those same resources were spent on the melee, he'd be utterly impossible to stop.
Unfortunately, all the best buffs are personal range only.
The idea that a melee role can be performed by a cleric or druid is not the same as the idea that it can be done better...it can't, and too many people are making that error. The kind of havoc a decently designed melee build can wreak out is not easy for a spellcaster to emulate, especially when they could be doing far more productive things.
Spellcasters don't have to try, though. Meleers do. When spellcasters try they get more insane then fighters. What kind of melee builds are you thinking of here?
Of course they could be doing more productive things with their resources. However, you just admitted that a spellcaster maximising their abilities is more productive then a fighter maximising their abilities.
As for quickened True Strikes, that's true, and that's why melees can now buy Gauntlets of True Strike. It's also rather true that Elusive Target gives quite the laugh to someone using this tactic, and only fighters are likely to have the spare feats to grab this tactical feat, and really annoy power-attackers.
Sorry you have to spend money on something I get for free.
Oh, and True Strike is a divination spell. It actually doesn't work against someone with a Mind Blank or similar effect up!
I wonder who can make a mind blank effect. Is it meleers or spellcaster? I'm not sure....
Oh, and warlocks aren't broken.
Unfortunately, all the best buffs are personal range only.
Spellcasters don't have to try, though. Meleers do. When spellcasters try they get more insane then fighters. What kind of melee builds are you thinking of here?
Of course they could be doing more productive things with their resources. However, you just admitted that a spellcaster maximising their abilities is more productive then a fighter maximising their abilities.
Sorry you have to spend money on something I get for free.
I wonder who can make a mind blank effect. Is it meleers or spellcaster? I'm not sure....
Oh, and warlocks aren't broken.
Bill, please don't be sensationalistic and absolutist like this. This is Regdar's, not the Char Opt boards. Put some logic behind what you are saying, not rampant emotion.
For instance, as soon as you put 'all' into your first statement, the Druid started laughing at you. His best buffs work perfectly fine on others, and his best ones on his Animal Companions. Polymorph Any Object into some uber form is effectively as good as Shapechange for giving someone a 'template' for a specific job.
Spellcasters do have to try at their job, because they only get so many spells a day, and have to balance what they can do against what is expected of them AND what they must accomplish. They have to do a job of pre-planning every day, while a Melee plans on what he is doing over his career. Spellcasters DO have to try...they just have to agonize over spell choices daily, while a Melee typically makes his decision once and then goes on (or retrains later).
You then take my comment on spellcasters completely out of context. Let's add math to it. A spellcaster performing a melee's job at 30-80% effectiveness is far better off leaving the melee to do his job and focusing on doing spellcaster jobs instead. I think that conveys the message better. In effect, a spellcaster should be a spellcaster, not a poor man's melee.
The statement about spells and being 'free' I can, of course, turn around on it's head. I'm sorry you have to blow cast spells on something that I can simply pay gold for and never have to worry about again. It's something spellcasters don't ever think about, but it IS possible to actually buy an entire casting suite of 'key spells' and 'do the spellcaster's job' for him. Sure, it's not as cost effective as actually having a spellcaster around, but it can be done. Heck, the Artificer is built on the very concept!
As for your last statement, that's pure opinion, absolutist, and you don't have any facts backing it up, and moreover, it's totally irrelevant to the thread as presented.
Could you please leave off the sensationalism/complaints about balance, and stick to good, solid logic and straight reason. Let the emotions run high on another board. We try to be scholarly here. Or, at least, I do.
===Aelryinth
They are actually starting to balance feats and use them to replace class abilities.
Yes, indeedy.
Look at the three 4E feats they've given us.
Toughness is basically Toughness AND Improved toughness rolled into one. So not only is it good at level 1, it scales all the way to 20.
NOOOOO, you can't have Uncanny Dodge as a feat!
Well, guess what. Yes, you can now. And to really add insult to injury, they stuck in Alertness on top of it.
Feats are actually worthwhile!
The last one was for spellcasters, but it was normally found only in the Archmage class at level 12+, and he had to sack a spell slot to get it...he can now exclude specific squares from the areas of spells he casts.
The designers are actually fixing feats!
What this tells me is that they finally woke up and realized that every fighter feat should be the equal of a class ability...or more. I'm willing to bet that if you start looking at the 4e feats and applied them to the 3E fighter, the fighter would suddenly look like a VERY nice class to play.
Uncanny Dodge + Alertness for ONE feat. Chortle, chortle. Toughness a great choice at ALL levels.
I just wish it had come in 3.5, and not in 4E.
===Aelryinth
So that they are, in fact, SUPERIOR to Class abilities, as they should have been all along, I've been motivated to rework the Spec Tree as something more in line with 4E feats.
To wit, 4E feats are generally equal to at least two 3.5 feats, OR a higher level class ability, AND they tend to scale much better or be more inclusive.
All the feats below are to be considered Fighter Bonus Feats.
Weapon Focus
Your initial training with a weapon has paid off.
Req: BAB+1
Benefits: Choose a single weapon or weapon like attack form (rays and missile weapons are acceptable).
You gain +1 TH with that weapon.
You gain Quick Draw with the weapon if it is a melee weapon. If it is a crossbow, you gain Rapid Reload.
Special: You may choose this feat multiple times, for a different weapon each time.
Weapon Specialist
You are now a master of your weapons.
Req: Ftr/4, Weapon Focus.
Benefits: You gain a +2 to damage with all weapons that you have Weapon Focus with. With an hour of training per day, you may switch your Weapon Spec tree weapons from one weapon to another, as you prefer. If you do not specify a weapon you are practicing with, the tree defaults to the first weapon you took Weapon Focus with.
Greater Weapon Focus
Your weapon Skills start to really shine through.
Req: F/8, Weapon Specialist.
You gain a further +1 TH with all weapons you have Focus in. You also gain the Improved Critical ability for those weapons. If you have the Improved Critical feat, or the weapon is Keen, you instead gain a +4 bonus to confirm all critical hits.
Improved Critical
You can deliver incredibly lethal blows with surpassing ease.
Req: +8 BAB
Benefit: The threat range for all weapons you wield is doubled. This benefit does not stack with Keen, or other abilities that increase a threat range, unless specifically stated otherwise. IF the weapon is Keen, then you instead gain a +4 bonus to confirm all critical hits with the weapon (replaces Power Critical)
Greater Weapon Specialist
Your mastery of weaponry borders on the inhuman.
Req: F/12, Greater Weapon Focus
You gain an additional +1 TH and +2 to damage with any weapon that you wield.
If you wield a weapon in which you have Weapon Focus, then you may make devastating strikes with it. A number of times per day equal to your BAB-10/2 (i,.e at BAB 12, 14, 16, etc) you may declare maximum damage on any successful attack, bypassing the die roll for damage. This does not affect any critical hits (roll damage normally) or extra dice of dmg (for example, SA damage).
Weapon Mastery - Unchanged.
Weapon Supremacy - Unchanged, except make it a Fighter Bonus feat, and specifically unalterable with Weapon Specialist or Aptitude feats.
There! That puts the fighter's weapon feats right in line with class abilities for the level they are gained at. Also, it redefines the Fighter as a Weapon Specialist and not just specialized in a Weapon (we leave that for Weapon Supremacy). Improved Critical becomes worthwhile to take for non-Fighters (and now stacks with Keen in its own way), becomes automatic for Fighters using Focused Weapons. We get Quick Draw in our primary weapons, we get to cause max damage like the weapon master, and the higher level weapon specialist increases his damage with ALL weapons, not just one.
=========================================================
Now THESE are some feats decent for the level they are taken, and worth spending feats on. This is how they should have looked all along. I'm of the opinion that if what we see as 4E feats were given to us now for 3.5, many of the fighter problems would simply go away, as would the need for many PrC's. A PrC would be redefined as a melee class where you get half a feat per level!
Feats worth the taking! You can fix the fighter without having to get all wishywashy on him!==Aelryinth
I've been reading this thread with great interest though I’ll admit having glossed over some posts ;) But indeed, as Pyke_Moonshadow pointed out, why is it not so that the fighter is alright and the Warblade is simply too much?
Just a thought but with every book that comes out there are new classes that are 'more powerful' than the base classes.
I understand WoTC needing to make money of course, as said above... But why not work on a fix that nerfs the warblade?
Because the warblade isn't as powerful as a core druid with natural spell, using only core spells, core feats, and core animals to shift into.
In melee.
The warblade - and swordsage and crusader - give people the ability to make characters with martial concepts that are closer to the power level of spellcasters. They aren't unbalanced because even a core-only game has stuff more powerful than them.
3e/3.5 is hampered by old sacred cows of D&D. One of those is, "Warriors do the same thing every round. Mages do something different every round." That's something Core was just... stuck with, in the current version. However, 4e is killing any D&D sacred cows that hamper the play experience.
The Fighter is dead. Long live the Fighter.
1) Melees should have more skill points.
2) Armor profs are overpriced and undervalued.
3) Melees have very little to contribute if limited to standard actions.
4) melee have very little to do with using the new swift/immediate actions.
5) Melees need to make a way to differentiate themselves from casters in what they can/cannot do. As it stands, a caster can easily duplicate numbers, because that's all most melees contribute to melee...more numbers.
6) They needed a system that discriminated against casters. enter Initiator Level.
7) Feats need to be powerful and scale with level, and should be able to be upgraded just the way spellcasters can pick better versions of the spells they know. Ergo, we'll invent a whole new type of feat called 'maneuvers' with different pre-reqs, rather then fixing the old system, and do away with all the sacred cows people have over the feat system - "must be less powerful then class abilities", "Don't scale", "Anybody can use them", "Can't untrain them or upgrade", "Don't need to be appropriately powerful to the level taken", etc etc.
Then we'll invent some new classes. We'll make a paladin wannabe that ignores alignment restrictions, so everyone can smite and heal. We'll make a rogue/warrior type with tons of flexibility, if not power. And then we'll put in a plain jane dmg dealer, but give it access to the best schools to make up for less flexibility.
Instead of calling these classes 'revised paladin', 'revised monk', and 'revised fighter', we'll give them entirely new names. For the warblade, we'll lift the fighter language right out of the PHB2 and hope no one notices that they are basically identical.
Then we'll see how people like them, and if they do, pat ourselves on the back and use the concept in 4e. And if we do stuff wrong, well, it's another learning experience.
===Aelryinth
Fighter can also match the ToB classes if built well... it's just BORING!
(Same reason I don't play clerics. Yes, clerics are godlike in their power compared to anything else but a druid of their level, but it doesn't matter because they're boring. Fighter is worse!)
And the warblade, swordsage, and crusader take the in-game roles of the fighter, monk, and paladin. The crusader not having alignment restrictions is a good thing - it's a step toward eliminating alignment as a mechanical concept (4e finishes that task, finally) - something virtually every other game system has already done.
Monk and Fighter remain viable dip-classes, but with the ToB out, they're nothing more than that.
3) Fighter exclusive Con benefits. I'm specifically looking at Con scores here. Every non-Fighting class maxed out at +2 HP per die. Which meant your melees simply had more hit points then any other class, period...and the difference was huge if you could boost your Con. Tack that onto a bigger hit die, and bigger per level bonus, and the Melee classes always retained Hit point superiority.
With the current artificial means to boost your HP via Con bonuses to the moon, the huge HP edge the melee classes had is gone as well. It's actually easier for a Caster to boost his Con to high levels, because often its their second most important stat, and they've the means and focus to do so. Six points of Con erases all hit point advantage between a Wizard and a Fighter.
I think the massive impact of this change is often under-rated.
Before, a CON 16 Wizard had the best possible hit point progression (1d4+2 -- so the hit die always gave more hit points than the CON Score).
In 3.0, it is common to see a wizard have CON 14 to start, +4 (inherent), +6 (item) and maybe +2 for race for a 26 con (+8 hit points per level). The difference between a wizard and a fighter with same CON is much less:
Fighter (26 CON) = 13.5 hit points/level
Wizard (26 CON) = 10.5 hit points/level
Cleric (26 CON) = 12.5 hit points/level
In 1E (with 18 CON -- a more likely 1E number):
Fighter (18 CON) = 9.5 hit points/level
Wizard (18 CON) = 4.5 hit points/level
Cleric (18 CON) = 6.5 hit points/level
This comparative advantage was lowest at CON 16 but even there the fighter clearly outpaced the Wizard.
Also, CON only added hit points for some many levels and then stopped. Today, the Mage or Cleric could end up with more hit points than a fighter due to crafting or polymorph leading to a really serious blow to the fighter's ability to survive.
I agree with the concept that the fighter scales poorly. I also agree that most feats for the fighter are poor in that they also do not scale. In my current game we have gotten around this somewhat, it seems to work, but maybe I could have everyones opinion. Here is what we do:
First off the fighter bonus feats stay the same. Second, the alternative class features for the fighter from PHBII are now standard features of the fighter class, and they stack, and they dont cost you your bonus feats. So at 16th level, a single attack as a full round action means double damage, +6 Dodge bonus, plus a counter attack at double damage. Third at 3rd level every fighter gets either short haft or shield specialization, his choice. Fourth, at 5th and then 9th level, every fighter gets armor mastery from the knight class. At 13th level everyfighter gets armor specialization for all armor he is proficient in.
I think that these fit what a fighter is well. A fighter lives in his armor, so he should be better in it than everyone else, thus armor mastery and specialization. The alternative class features seem to me exactly what every fighter would know, and as for the short haft or shield specialization, well by this time everyone has decided if he is a two hander or a shield user, plus it seems to me if you were training to be a fighter in the mythical world you would have made your choice by then. It also gets the polearms in play. If you want to do both, then the extra training is replicated by burning a feat later to have both.
Having added these in, we are playing the fighter again. They have worked well so far, and the group has had plenty if use for the 11 fighter bonus feats, although it seems everyone takes iron will or lightening reflexes or both. But it has helped.
All respones are welcome.
Took a longer look at the Warblade and counted out his feat-equivalents again.
+13 'Class Abilities'. Of these, 4 are bonus feats from a limited list, 5 are int-based and so scale by level, and the other 4 are combat skills.
+4, Stances Known.
+13, Manuvers known (7 readied). These are, in effect, 'open wildcard feats.' In other words, he doesn't have all 7 at one time, but that's fine. He can choose the ones best for the situation with a bit of pre-planning. It gives him great encounter flexibility.
+9. Starting at level 4, the Warblade can upgrade his feats, swapping out an old and getting a new. This is the equivalent of going from Cleave to Great Cleave with the same feat slot, or going up the spec tree and not spending additional feat slots. You can even skip intermediate steps if you so desire. He can do this every other level until level 20.
+1, automatically gets a manuver refresh mechanic.
+1 gets full class IL (and thus early access to stronger manuvers, and exclusive to the stronger ones).
+1 for lack of MAD with manuvers. Remember, once you have a manuver, you need never worry about having the pre-reqs to use it. Fighters always need to worry about qualifying for feats, and need to have a good stat array to do so. Manuvers are based on skill points at worst, not stats, and so free of this mechanic, and once you get them, you never have to worry about 'losing' the ability to use them, ever.
So, 43 Feat-Equivalents.
People like to say that Warblade 'fixed the fighter.' Well, I have to tell you, people, that if my Fighter gained 43 feats as class abilities over 20 levels (not touching general feats, mind you!), I'd likely call that a 'good fix', as well. And that's not even counting the base chassis.
===Aelryinth
There are multiple ways to look at the Fighter, and shoehorning him into a combat style breaks the very generic likeability of the class. Many so called “fixes” do this, while others try to adhere to the general flexibility of the class and simply add some new mechanics or class abilities. Well, if you seriously, want to 'fix' the Fighter, I outline the kinds of steps you need to take below.
First, looking at the class and you can instantly see that the Fighter is the “feats guy.” What does that mean? In Core, that means he gets a lot more feats then anyone else. The problem here is that now feats both do and don’t equal class abilities by any measure, especially in core. They don't scale well, there aren't enough of them to measure up to a PrC, and the choices available don't really allow the Fighter to do the one thing he should--be able to both specialize in a fighting skill and have versatility to back him up.
The Core Fighter is designed with the belief that he can specialize in combat and use his feats to support/cover his weaknesses. This is a strange belief because the game rewards the specialist, not the generalist, and yet a Fighter can't specialize enough. He literally doesn’t get enough class abilities to do what he needs to do to protect against a specialist.
==============
”Fixing” the Fighter
First improve the base chassis of the class (Hd, Skills, skill points, proficiencies, saves). The introduction of the Warblade is just that. The flavor text of the Warblade is almost a mirror of the flavor text of the Fighter in the PHB2 (read them one after another). These are the characters who practice, practice, practice, and love to FIGHT.
But the core chassis of the Warblade blows the Fighter out of the water. The Warblade also gets scaling class abilities based on Intelligence. No feat investment and free scaling is NICE. Then, to top it off, they get 18 feat equivalents (maneuvers and stances), completely demolishing any hint of balance sans the Fighter. And they have four bonus feats on top of it all. That’s something like 28 feat equivalents in 20 levels, before all is said and done. And people wonder why the Fighter is lagging.
So, lets look at what the Warblade REALLY does.[
1) Core class is great. Skill points, Hit Dice, Skills, saves, proficiencies. Everything a Fighter should have.
Sole weakness: No heavy armor/Tower Shields, no missile weapons. Take the HD down to D10 and those 3 items are paid for. Or you could make a Fighter bonus feat that gave you all three. That would lift the value of the profs. I strongly believe that the core armor/weapon profs should be more valuable--and stronger--and people should pay more for them for that value.
2) Intrinsic class abilities that scale with level, based off Int. This doesn't introduce MAD but it lets people be rewarded for playing a smart fighter. With magic, even a 12 Int can hit 22 at level 20, for a nice +6 bonus, scaling up from +1 at 1st level (+6 item, +4 Inherent).
3) Swapping feats: The Warblade calls these manuvers. As you level, you gain access to clearly stronger feats. Also, you can even 'swap out' pre-req feats, for stronger feats!
In other words, this is like needing WF and WS to qualify for GWF (let's assume it's +2 and overrides Weapon Focus). Then, simply swap WF out for GWS, and swap out WS for Melee Weapon Mastery. It's exactly the same mechanic. You get rid of the lower power feat, replace it with something better, and suddenly you are leveraging feats. With retraining rules from UA, you can do this every level. By the Martial classes, you can do it once every four levels, basically allowing you an additional 5 feats! (Yes, that now gives the Warblade 33 Feat Equivalents!). In short, you get rid of the crap low-level stuff that doesn't scale for the stuff you should have as a masterful warrior of your level.
4) Feats that scale properly: The Warblade calls these maneuvers. Clearly, there are maneuvers that are based on level (Diamond Mind concentration check ones come to mind, as they improve with ranks), others that improve with BAB (because you hit more often), and others that simply grant more added effects. The Nightmare blade sequence, which is really how the spec/focus tree should be arranged, but I digress. At level 17, the Warblade is guaranteed a strike that can do +100 damage, if he wants it. Or 2d6 Con damage. That's a 9th level effect. It's a feat worthy of a 17th level character. So, the Warblade has both feats that scale and feats that are worth the level they are taken at. It has some that are both!
5) Versatility: The Warblade knows more maneuvers then he can use at any one time. That's fine, the class is set up not to need them all the time. But with just a little bit of time, he can adjust what he has on hand for any specific encounter. Does he need more boosts and counters? Swap out the mega strikes. Hack down the big thing? Strikes are back in. Tricks and traps? Save boosters. Social situation? General purpose.
He can even adjust his entire weapon tree on a virtual WHIM. The Fighter, the master of using weapons can't. So, for a social situation, the Warblade can be death with daggers or his empty hands. The Fighter is stuck with the Greatsword mastery sitting out by the guards. The Warblade can then become a master of the longspear for fighting in a mass battle with allies, shift to a rapier for a formal duel, or pick up the Greatsword to strut his stuff as an adventurer, or grab that lance and couch it behind the shield for some charging fun (if he grabs some Ride ranks), and then swap out for morningstars for beating on ranks of skeletons. That is one useful set of skills that comes from ONE ability. It exactly parallels the ability of spellcasters to change their spells to deal with specific situations. It doesn't have the raw power or versatility of spells...but then, they don't have to lose their spellbooks, either.
6) Exclusivity: This is both a 'flavor' issue and a generic issue.; it is something one class has that no one else does. The Warblade shares with Swordsage and Crusader full Initiator level. Ergo, anyone can learn Maneuvers, they just won't be good because they aren't a Martial class. (The Fighter over in the corner, and the Barbarian, both look at one another in confusion. They must be chopped beef!)
Thus, high level maneuvers become exclusive. The Barbarian has his Rage and Class DR. The Fighter has nothing class exclusive. The closest analog is feats that can be taken only by Fighters--which is a feat function. Of course, the Warblade has a class ability that overrides this feat exclusiveness.
7) Capstone. Something that makes the class worth taking for 20 levels. For the Warblade, this is the striking ability of having 2 stances in play at once. That’s tremendously useful. 2 High-level stances is like having 2 7th level spells in effect. Fighters have nothing available as a Capstone. In essence, the only reason to take it for 20 levels as a class is to become an Epic Fighter. Woo hoo.
Warblades actually have 3 different capstones. They can take a level of Fighter, and a Fighter bonus feat, at level 20, and if they took the tree, get Weapon Supremacy, the Fighter 'virtual' capstone! Or, they can take a Fighter level, get Martial Study as the bonus feat, and take, oh, a 9th level strike, like, say, the Stone Dragon one! OR, they can take their Warblade ability, and get the double stance. Decisions, decisions.
So, here we are. Fighter against Warblade. 11 Feats against 33 and a superior Core chassis. How do we redress this?
1) Redo that core chassis.
2) Give Fighters versatility. They have versatility in build, but not in play. And their build versatility is dwarfed by their number of feats they could potentially learn. Warblades have fewer maneuvers but can choose more of them, and have bonus feats on top of it!
3) Have feats that scale by level and are worth the level they are taken at.
4) Intrinsic and scaling class abilities. The Warblade gets more then just maneuvers. Why can't the Fighter get more then just feats?
5) Feat swapping. Out with the crap, in with the shiny.
6) Exclusivity. Somehow, somewhere, give them something no one else can do.
7) A capstone. One that rocks HARD. One that makes people want to sit up and play a pure fighter. And not some dross feat that some Warblade can count his level-2 towards getting, either.
8) No Dead Levels. This simple fact borks a Fighter hard. First, it somehow evaluates the ‘value’ of a feat to the abilities of two levels of other classes, which is insane. It makes comparing class/level benefits impossible and lopsided. There’s a feat to increase DR by one, or give a rage use a day, but if a Fighter takes it, suddenly it has to be equal to two feats to equal what other classes get? Because he is a Fighter, he only gets a feat every other level when other classes get one every level.
Then it then becomes very, very easy to compare the Fighter to a PrC. If the Fighter got a feat every level he could take on any martial, full BAB PrC out there, and compare level benefits 1:1. A great number of PrCs could be thrown out and replaced by custom Feat trees that have you take the specialized feats in order. If they were balanced for the PrC, they will be balanced if taken as Fighter Feats.
Now, brave game designer, exactly how are we to do this?
A) Master of Many Feats: Fighter, more feats/feat-equivalents then anyone. (Warblade with 33 does this much better).
B) Master of Feats: Fighter levels mean you use feats better then someone else who has those feats, of the same level. (Initiator levels, anyone?)
C) Master of Applied Feats: The Fighter can change his feats so as to be able to deal with almost any situation. (Known vs. readied maneuvers, weapon feat swapping)
D) Master of Feats Beyond Feats; The Fighter can complete Feat trees that no one else can finish, because that's what Fighters do. (Initiator level mechanic - non-martial classes basically cannot get level 9 Maneuvers). Maybe even two of them!
E) Master of Feats of War: The Fighter can perform all the classic roles of a master of all the martial arts: Mass Combat, Personal Combat, Tactical Combat, Strategy, Command, Leadership. You are a student of all the arts of battle. You can fight anything and anyone, on any scale. And wars in the courts are as lethal as wars on the field...you have to be able to fight there, too. The potential to be these things must be built into the class. (A function of Martial Schools and core chassis).
F) Master of Feats of Style: Build the Fighter to be the warrior you want. Swashbuckler? Pirate? Gladiator? Soldier? Knight? These are simply different Fighter builds. Building these styles is a function of having the feats available to do so. (A lesser function of the Schools and weapon choices, skill reqs for maneuvers.)
The Warblade does all these things well, and, in different ways, so does the Swordsage and the Crusader. Furthermore, the Warblade is plenty generic, with no constraints to a specific weapon or style. The power comes from the maneuvers, not the weapon or style, and style is now a choice of roleplaying that is seamlessly integrated.
Can we do with feats what was done with Maneuvers? Well, why not? A Maneuver and making the key skill for its school a class skill equals one feat . They capped it at 3 maximum, because by definition, a maneuver is considered less then a feat. Even a Stance merely equals a feat! Consider the strangeness of feats: If Initiator level were not a factor, a Fighter could spend one feat to take the capstone Strike of the Stone Dragon school, AND gain Balance as a class skill. An IL17th level ability, for one feat. And then we have Toughness, also a feat, but no ‘exclusive’ IL rank req.
Do we need Schools? No. We need equivalent Feat Trees. What is a Martial School from the perspective of the Fighter, but a whole collection of feat trees, with amazingly easy pre-reqs (no need for stats, just prior feats/maneuvers and some skill ranks)?
Do we need PrCs for Fighters? No. Just assign class abilities to equal feats and create a feat tree. Problem solved. If you have a Fighter feat for every level, this is almost ridiculously easy. If people decry balance, laugh and point at the equivalents.
Ok. But where's the expected fix now?
Weapon Focus [Fighter]
Prerequisite(s): Weapon proficiency
Each time you take Weapon Focus, choose a weapon, such as longbow, longspear, longsword, or spiked chain. When using your chosen weapon type, you get +1 on all accuracy rolls with that weapon. For every 4 points of base attack bonus, you get an additional +1 on all accuracy rolls with this weapon.
You gain no benefit for taking Weapon Focus for a weapon more than once.
Weapon Specialization[Fighter]
Prerequisite(s): Weapon Focus (chosen weapon), Fighter level 4
Each time you take Weapon Specialization, pick a weapon for which you have Weapon Focus. Each time you hit, you deal an extra 1 point of damage + 1 damage for each 4 points of base attack bonus you posess.
You gain no benefit for taking Weapon Specialization for a weapon more than once.
Another quick and easy fix to the Spec/Focus tree Really, a Fighter should never have to take more then one or two feats to upgrade a weapon. Paizo actually added in a generic bonus every level just to equalize out the damage over levels and return the fighter to the top of the melee combatant heap.
It all works.
As for 'expected fix', Fighter Fixes are all over the place. There's 260 posts here, and I can guarantee you that people have different levels of expectations for just Melee, and for Fighters in general.
These fixes also evolve over time, as new ideas come out, and new focus is made on the problems of the classes. some people poo0poo the idea of taking Stances...I think it's a WONDERFUL idea, and I raid them freely. Others deride just giving numeric bonuses...but bonuses are what the game is based on. The more advanced thinkers look at what Melees have lost in comparison to other classes, and how it has to be rectified...making fighters good at the 'melee' role doesn't mean squat if the melee role itself sucks.
But that's another Regdar Thread.
===Aelryinth