[3.5]Fighter Fix?

[Fixer]

I have been giving some thoughts to Fighters lately. I don't think they get enough lovin'. I am thinking about the following changes and want to put it forward to everyone and see what you think about it.

Fighters, at class level 3, gain the Feat Training ability (see below).
At level 5, they gain the Weapon Focus Mastery ability (see below).
At level 7, they gain the Weapon Specialization Mastery ability (see below).
At level 9, their Feat Training ability improves and they gain the Hustle ability (see below).
At level 11, they would gain the Weapon Aptitude ability identical to Warblades.
At level 13, they gain the Feat Efficiency ability (see below).
At level 16, their Feat Training ability improves (see below).
At level 17, they gain the Feat Mastery ability (see below).
At level 19 they may use their Fortitude save in the place of their Reflex or Will save when attempting to avoid damage or resist mind-affecting effects.

Feat Training (Ex): At level 3, select a particular attribute. Your ability score, for meeting the prerequisites of feats, is considered four higher than it actually is. When you reach levels 9 the attribute selected at level 3 has its effective score increased by two and the fighter selects a new attribute and may consider that attribute increased by four. At level 15 both attributes selected at previous levels have their effective score increased by two and you select a third attribute to increase by four. These increases are not actual increases but only effective increases for the purposes of meeting the prerequisites of feats.

Weapon Focus Mastery (Ex): The bonus granted by all your Weapon Focus feat(s) is increased to half your class level (instead of +1). When the Fighter reaches class level 9, they are considered to have Greater Weapon Focus for the purposes of meeting prerequisites. At level 17, they are considered to have Epic Weapon Focus for the purpose of meeting prerequisites.

Weapon Specialization Mastery (Ex): The bonus to damage granted by all your Weapon Specialization feat(s) is increased to a bonus equal to your class level (instead of +2). When the Fighter reaches class level 13, they are considered to have Greater Weapon Specializations for the purposes of meeting prerequisites. At level 19, they are considered to have Epic Weapon Specialization for the purpose of meeting prerequisites.

Hustle (Ex): Fighter may take a move action as a swift action if they make no other movement in the round.

Feat Efficiency (Ex): When you use a feat that allows you to use your Base Attack Bonus towards another purpose (Power Attack, Combat Expertise, etc) you retain half the BAB you would apply towards that feat. This does not allow you to use more than your normal full BAB towards that feat.

Feat Mastery (Ex): When you use a feat that allows you to use your Base Attack Bonus towards another purpose (Power Attack, Expertise, etc) you retain all the BAB you would apply towards this feat. This does not allow you to use more than your normal full BAB towards that feat. You may only apply this ability towards one feat in any given round.

Opinions?

[Occasional Sage]

Sexy. I like that your fix doesn't change the basic flavor of the fighter: non-nonsense, customizable, and at its core stripped down to the basics. There are lots of more effective melee base classes than the standard fighter, but they tend to add fluff that a fighter just... shouldn't have. This one simply makes the fighter better at what it should be doing.

Thumbs up! This is a fighter I wouldn't be ashamed to play.

[Pramxnim]

Well... just be careful of a Fighter who uses a Lance, mounted on a Warhorse charges (he has Spirited Charge)...

3d8 + [9 (1.5*str) + 20 (WS) + 20 (GWS) + 40 (Power Attack)] x3 = 289 damage.

Add in a Valorous Lance and you increase the damage multiplier by 1, adding 1d8+89 = 93 damage.

On a crit, add in a further 2d8 + 178 damage.

Mind you, this is employing only a bit of optimization (but charger builds are not uncommon) and mounted combat is not optimal, but still...

With Leap Attack and no mounted combat, we get...

2d6 + 9 + 20 (WS) + 20 (GWS) + 60 (Power Attack) = 2d6 + 109

WS specialty applies to all WS feats. They stack with each other...

I'd say with Leap Attack and always Power Attacking for full, a Fighter will be able to dish out respectable damage without resorting to too much cheese. I would suggest to change the 17th level ability to something else though. As he is, the fighter might be dealing with too much attack bonus. Let's do a quick calculation:

20 BAB + 6 Str + 10 (WF) + Enhancement bonus (likely to be +5) + Circumstance bonus (i.e. Charging)

+41 attack bonus (and it won't go down with Power Attack). That's a tad overkill most of the time. I understand that a Fighter is supposed to be really really good, but it would be a bit boring if he autohits everything. Keep Feat Efficiency, but I would suggest something else at lvl 17. Maybe something along the lines of an Epic Virtue from The Demented One's Epic Hero (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=102456) homebrew class.

This fix is still simple and elegant, and newbie friendly. Thumbs up!

[Melamoto]

This is a pretty sweet fix to an otherwise practically useless class

[Arcane_Snowman]

This is interesting but does still not adress some of the major fighter issues:
MAD: fighters still need 13 Dexterity for the Dodge and Combat Reflexes tree if they want anything from there (with splat books there are some pretty decent stuff)
13 Intelligence is still needed for Combat Expertise tree, which is likewise quite extensive and also needed for one of the fighter's best tricks (Improved Trip)
they still have an abysmally low Will save and no way of doing anything about it before level 19.

THEY STILL DON'T HAVE SPOT/LISTEN AS CLASS SKILLS!, I mean how the heck is the fighter going to be anything in the likes of a guard/watchman when he can't even see further than the bridge of his damn nose?

Your chart is also way off: Wizards have better things to do than throwing fireballs and damage around, Look at Color Spray (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/colorSpray.htm) and Sleep (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/Sleep.htm) to incapasitate and subsequently coup-de-grace opponents etc. By level 7 the Wizard will be capable of Turning into a Hydra (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/hydra.htm) if he really is inclined towards dealing damage: that would be a maximum of 7d10+28 damage on a full-round attack, 65 damage average against the fighter's supposed 20-34.

Rogues work a heck of a lot better with TWF, since you're using splat books I can't see why a rogue wouldn't be allowed to go for Weapon Finesse, Martial Maneuver, Martial Stance (Assassins Stance), Shadow Hand and Two Weapon Fighting. Two weapon fighting alone grants the rogue 1d6+1d6+1d6+1d6 damage at level one, which averages out to 14, above the fighter. By level 20 a Rogue will be able to deal: 12d6 worth of sneak attack with 6 attacks (discouting Haste) + Dex on every attack.

The problem never really been that fighters can't sword well, Leap Pouncers prove otherwise, but they don't have enough options when swording is not available. Which brings me to another point, why does the fighter have Spring Attack/Whirlwind attack, is he afraid of success or something, those feats are abominably sub par, you'd be better off with something from the Power Attack/Combat Expertise/Combat Reflex Tree, getting Shock Trooper/Combat Brute or Improved Trip and Combat Reflexes, Karmic Strike, Robilar's Gambit etc.

[Tensu]

...Weapon Focus Specialty... ...Weapon Specialization Specialty...

Surely you could have come up with better names then these. I mean, weapon specialization specialty? seriously? I can't see anyone saying that with a straight face.

[Draz74]

Surely you could have come up with better names then these. I mean, weapon specialization specialty? seriously? I can't see anyone saying that with a straight face.

Harsh. True, but harsh. Seriously, coming up with decent names can be the hardest part of serious homebrewing. Try it sometime, if you haven't.

@Fixer: These look fun and powerful, but I'll echo some other people that they don't really solve the Fighter's problems (bad saves at earlier levels, reliance on getting full attacks, etc.).

[Occasional Sage]

How about a feat chaining from Spring Attack that allows movement with a full attack, with a req of Fighter 10?

[Siosilvar]

How do the Greater & Epic versions of Weapon Focus/Specialization work with the new abilities?

[Fixer]

This is interesting but does still not adress some of the major fighter issues:
MAD: fighters still need 13 Dexterity for the Dodge and Combat Reflexes tree if they want anything from there (with splat books there are some pretty decent stuff)This one, at least, I thought of a solution for over the weekend. I have updated the chart above to display the changes.

THEY STILL DON'T HAVE SPOT/LISTEN AS CLASS SKILLS!, I mean how the heck is the fighter going to be anything in the likes of a guard/watchman when he can't even see further than the bridge of his damn nose?Fighters aren't guards. Fighters are killers. They hit other people with sticks until they fall down. If you want them on watch, give them an animal with good skills (that is what they do in real life).

How do the Greater & Epic versions of Weapon Focus/Specialization work with the new abilities?The fighter CAN still take them, but the benefit they would gain from them would be negligible compared to what regular Weapon Focus and regular Weapon Specialization would grant. Those feats might be useful to other classes but the fighter is simply more efficient in that aspect. I could add, at the various levels, where the fighter is considered to automatically possess those feats at certain levels, for the purposes of meeting prerequisites but I forget what books those are in.

Surely you could have come up with better names then these. I mean, weapon specialization specialty? seriously? I can't see anyone saying that with a straight face.Give me better names and I will use them. I am not good with thinking up good names. Be constructive as opposed to criticizing if you want any further responses.

These look fun and powerful, but I'll echo some other people that they don't really solve the Fighter's problems (bad saves at earlier levels, reliance on getting full attacks, etc.).The saves problem can be solved by magic items (resistances, mind blank, etc) at least as much as these problems can be solved by anything. The build example I gave was actually IMMUNE to mind control at level 3. They can still be targetted, but they cannot be controlled due to the Planar Ward. Magic Items (i.e. cloaks of resistance) can help with the saves issue until level 19.

The reliance on full attacks... ok, I will grant you that one. I think adding an ability that allows the fighter to make a move action as a swift action will help a great deal. Let me think on where to add it. Obviously not before level 6, as the fighter can't get iterative attacks before then.

[Fixer]

2d6 + 9 + 20 (WS) + 20 (GWS) + 60 (Power Attack) = 2d6 + 109

WS specialty applies to all WS feats. They stack with each other...No it doesn't. The ability specifies Weapon Specialization. Greater Weapon Specialization does only what the feat says and its bonus is not increased by this Fighter ability.


I'd say with Leap Attack and always Power Attacking for full, a Fighter will be able to dish out respectable damage without resorting to too much cheese. I would suggest to change the 17th level ability to something else though. As he is, the fighter might be dealing with too much attack bonus. Let's do a quick calculation:

20 BAB + 6 Str + 10 (WF) + Enhancement bonus (likely to be +5) + Circumstance bonus (i.e. Charging)

+41 attack bonus (and it won't go down with Power Attack). That's a tad overkill most of the time. I understand that a Fighter is supposed to be really really good, but it would be a bit boring if he autohits everything. Keep Feat Efficiency, but I would suggest something else at lvl 17. Maybe something along the lines of an Epic Virtue from The Demented One's Epic Hero (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=102456) homebrew class.

This fix is still simple and elegant, and newbie friendly. Thumbs up!+41 attack bonus may seem like overkill, but I wanted it made certain that the Fighter does what the fighter does best better than anyone else: Hitting bad things with sticks to make them fall down. Dragons, at highest levels, have ACs that are that high WITHOUT boosts from magic items or spells (both of which dragons have access to).

Compared to what Clerics and Wizards are doing at level 17, Feat Mastery is borderline equivalent in terms of power, but completely lacking compared in versatility. That ability lets a fighter do well what a fighter is supposed to do best: hit things until they fall down.

[RandomFellow]

The only issue with this that I see is...

Rogues get completely shafted without alot of tweaking / splat books.

At level 20, they do half damage when flanking the target.

I have the feeling you'll need a 'Rogue Fix' for any game close to Core-only that includes this 'Fighter Fix'.

It is one thing to say 'Hey Rogue, your not going to be equal to a Fighter in terms of combat power.' it is quite another to say 'Hey Rogue, it takes two of you and proper positioning for you to have the combat power of a Fighter.'

My two cents would be:
Give Rogues a way to get to at least 75% (with Sneak Attacks) of the Fighter's damage. Otherwise, they'd feel like cripples in combat.

Yes, they are great skill monkeys for the Core-only crowd. But let us be honest, in terms of time spent 'skill monkeying' and time spent 'in combat':

You will be spending more (real world) time fighting battles.

[Fixer]

The only issue with this that I see is...

Rogues get completely shafted without alot of tweaking / splat books.

At level 20, they do half damage when flanking the target.

I have the feeling you'll need a 'Rogue Fix' for any game close to Core-only that includes this 'Fighter Fix'.

It is one thing to say 'Hey Rogue, your not going to be equal to a Fighter in terms of combat power.' it is quite another to say 'Hey Rogue, it takes two of you and proper positioning for you to have the combat power of a Fighter.'

My two cents would be:
Give Rogues a way to get to at least 75% (with Sneak Attacks) of the Fighter's damage. Otherwise, they'd feel like cripples in combat.

Yes, they are great skill monkeys for the Core-only crowd. But let us be honest, in terms of time spent 'skill monkeying' and time spent 'in combat':

You will be spending more (real world) time fighting battles.
I have serious issues with rogues being played as combat-types. Rogues are the type of character who (should) believe that if you have to fight, you have already screwed up somewhere. Rogues, as skill-monkeys, are just fine. If they want to be more combat-oriented, they need to take a combat-oriented class or prestige class. Rogues, as skill monkeys using Core and Splat, are just fine as they are.

To give an excellent example of something that happened this weekend to me. I was playing a warblade and a buddy of mine was playing a rogue. We had a disagreement about a course of action so we agree to spar (in a darkened warehouse filled with stacks of boxes) to see who gets to decide. The rogue uses bluff to gain a hide roll (I had no ranks in Spot) and he hides. My warblade readied an action for when he attacked to counterattack.

He never attacked. He quietly snuck out of the building, went to do what he wanted to do, then came back and gave in and we did what I wanted to do. THAT is how a rogue is supposed to be played: Smart.

[Mr.Moron]

I'm not so sure this works as a fix. Certainly, it does expand improve their ability to cause hit point damage with attack actions. However, I don't really think the problem with the fighter (and melee classes in general) is staggering deficiency in that department.

It solves the full-attack issue at least, through hustle. Which is nice. However it feels like a somewhat inelegant solution, that doesn't fit well thematically.

[RandomFellow]

.. Rogues are the type of character who (should) believe that if you have to fight, you have already screwed up somewhere. ...

The problem with that logic is...it is a matter of personal play style.

[Fixer]

I'm not so sure this works as a fix. Certainly, it does expand improve their ability to cause hit point damage with attack actions. However, I don't really think the problem with the fighter (and melee classes in general) is staggering deficiency in that department.

It solves the full-attack issue at least, through hustle. Which is nice. However it feels like a somewhat inelegant solution, that doesn't fit well thematically.Ok, your statement does nothing to say specifically what problems this particular fighter has. What was your point?

The problem with that logic is...it is a matter of personal play style.Please explain. Rogues are given light armor, mediocre BAB, massive skill bonuses for stealth and social interactions, and little along the way of combat abilities. How do you see rogues as combat oriented?

[Baron Corm]

I see Sneak Attack as a rogue's main feature, not their skills. Any class can get skills. Maybe not as many skills at the same time, but they can be gotten. Intelligence is not class-specific either (related to the example you gave where the rogue outsmarted you).

Skills are a big part of a rogue, yes, but being the highest-damage non-magic class ("glass cannons", if you will) is a big part of them too, and higher in my opinion. I'm not asking that you share this opinion, just that you see that it's an option. If you were to implement this fighter fix, I would at least double a rogue's sneak attack damage.

Rogues aren't the only ones you're making obsolete, though. Think about the paladins. Their Smite Evil is nothing if you implement this fix. And barbarians? Their Rage doesn't compare.

[Fixer]

I see Sneak Attack as a rogue's main feature, not their skills. Any class can get skills. Maybe not as many skills at the same time, but they can be gotten. Intelligence is not class-specific either (related to the example you gave where the rogue outsmarted you).

Skills are a big part of a rogue, yes, but being the highest-damage meleers is a big part of them too, and higher in my opinion. I'm not asking that you share opinion, just that you see that it's an option. If you were to implement this fighter fix, I would at least double a rogue's sneak attack damage.

Rogues aren't the only ones you're making obsolete, though. Think about the paladins. Their Smite Evil is nothing if you implement this fix. And barbarians? Their Rage doesn't compare.One class at a time. All the classes need a bar to go to, and given that druids and wizards are considered the top bar, I am setting the Fighter to match them. What I want to know is: does this Fighter class (not necessarily the build I made) hold his own with a wizard or druid of equal level, provided both sides are unaware of the specifics of the other.

[Baron Corm]

What books/spells are you allowing? Assuming pretty good optimization and minimal cheese:

Orb of Acid: 15d6 + 7.5d6 (Empower) + 15d6 (Twin) + 15d6 (Admixture) + 15d6 (Repeat) = 67.5d6 = 236.25 Average Damage

Quickened Orb of Acid: Same - Twin = 52.5d6 = 183.75 Average Damage

236.25 + 183.75 = 420 Average Damage per Round

Disintegrate: 40d6 + 20d6 (Empower) + 40d6 (Twin) + 40d6 (Repeat) = 140d6 = 490 Average Damage

Quickened Disintegrate: Same - Twin = 100d6 = 350 Average Damage

490 + 350 = 840 Average Damage per Round

Fighter Full Attack: 2d6 (Greatsword) + 20 (Strength) + 60 (Leap Attacked Power Attack) + 20 (Weapon Specialization) + 9d6 (Items) + 1 (Weapon Enhancement Bonus) = 108 + 9d6 = 139.5 x 5 = 697.5 Average Damage per Round

Rogue Weapon One: 1d8 (Rapier) + 5 (Strength) + 10d6 (Sneak Attack) + 9d6 (Items) + 1 (Weapon Enhancement Bonus) + 20 (Craven) = 97 x 4 = 388 Average Damage

Rogue Weapon Two: 1d4 (Dagger) + 2 (Strength) + 10d6 (Sneak Attack) + 9d6 (Items) + 1 (Weapon Enhancement Bonus) + 20 (Craven) = 82 x 3 = 276 Average Damage

388 + 276 = 664 Average Damage per Round

Items were assumed to be +9 worth of damage on the weapon, plus some random things from other items, feats, class-dipping, whatever. Strength bonuses were generous to account for these as well.

The arcane caster will be much weaker than the fighter at lower levels, damage-wise, and will slowly rise to his level. It is much easier for the caster to get his damage off, however he is limited in spells per day, and with disintegrate, by saving throws. A fighter's ability to deal 697.5 damage instead of 139.5 depends on circumstance. In addition, the caster will generally have an easier time of hitting their target, although with your Weapon Focus and Power Attack upgrades this may have changed. The rogue has an extremely low chance of hitting compared to the other two, so that should be kept in mind while looking at him. Hopefully something in this post helped.

[Fixer]

What books/spells are you allowing? Assuming pretty good optimization and minimal cheese:

Orb of Acid: 15d6 + 7.5d6 (Empower) + 15d6 (Twin) + 15d6 (Admixture) + 15d6 (Repeat) = 67.5d6 = 236.25 Average Damage

Quickened Orb of Acid: Same - Twin = 52.5d6 = 183.75 Average Damage

236.25 + 183.75 = 420 Average Damage per Round

Disintegrate: 40d6 + 20d6 (Empower) + 40d6 (Twin) + 40d6 (Repeat) = 140d6 = 490 Average Damage

Quickened Disintegrate: Same - Twin = 100d6 = 350 Average Damage

490 + 350 = 840 Average Damage per Round
How the hell is your mage casting 17th or 20th level spells? You can't use more than one metamagic rod on a given spell at a time.

[RandomFellow]

Ok, your statement does nothing to say specifically what problems this particular fighter has. What was your point?
Please explain. Rogues are given light armor, mediocre BAB, massive skill bonuses for stealth and social interactions, and little along the way of combat abilities. How do you see rogues as combat oriented?

I never said they were 'combat oriented'. I said they would feel like cripples in combat when they are doing half the damage of Fighters. They should be dealing 3/4s of what a Fighter can dish out.

They don't have the survivability of a Fighter. They don't have the damage of the Fighter.

That is fine. Being essentially a 'half fighter' in terms of damage in combat, is not.



I have the feeling you'll need a 'Rogue Fix' for any game close to Core-only that includes this 'Fighter Fix'.
...

Give Rogues a way to get to at least 75% (with Sneak Attacks) of the Fighter's damage. Otherwise, they'd feel like cripples in combat.
...

[Halna LeGavilk]

I'm not the OP, but the thread title talks about fighter fixes, not rogue fixes. Maybe I missed it, but this thread is about Fighters. It is not about his campaign or world, but his fix. His sharing of his fix. The Rogue issue is moot, because, if his party is okay with this, then it doesn't matter. You don't have to use this fix; he doesn't have to fix the rogues. Your 'combat rogue' is just as much a player style as his 'sneaking rogues' are.

EDIT: Man, that really just wandered. I cannot talk today.

[Fixer]

I never said they were 'combat oriented'. I said they would feel like cripples in combat when they are doing half the damage of Fighters. They should be dealing 3/4s of what a Fighter can dish out.

They don't have the survivability of a Fighter. They don't have the damage of the Fighter.

That is fine. Being essentially a 'half fighter' in terms of damage in combat, is not.Any rogue-fix I'd be making would focus more on their skills than their combat abilities. Disabling attackers, turning attacks back on their attacker or diverting them towards other targets, combat acrobatics to avoid attacks/set up for SA, fast-use of skills, HiPS and using their sneak attack against things normally immune as CLASS features (instead of relying on magic items or prestige classes), probably some other things I can't think of at the moment. Their damage would not be comparable with a Fighter, but their ability to avoid taking damage would be far superior to that of a Fighter.

Now, if I took upon myself fixing the swashbuckler, THAT would be a combat-oriented rogue-type.

EDIT: Now that I have thought about it, after I am satisfied that the Fighter fix is decent, I will work on a Monk-fix. The Monk is far more in need of fixing than the Rogue.

[Baron Corm]

How the hell is your mage casting 17th or 20th level spells? You can't use more than one metamagic rod on a given spell at a time.

No offense, but if you don't know this, I think you should investigate 3e optimization a little more before you start making fixes.

Metamagic School Focus (-1 total), Easy Metmagic (-1 total), Arcane Thesis (-1 per metamagic), incantatrix class ability (-1 total). Not sure which of these I applied, or if I added another one. The cheese crops up when you use Arcane Thesis with +0 level metamagics, but I didn't do any of that. There's also the Sudden metamagic feats that I didn't put in, because they are only once per day, but a mage's burst damage could be even higher.

[RandomFellow]

I'm not the OP, but the thread title talks about fighter fixes, not rogue fixes. Maybe I missed it, but this thread is about Fighters. It is not about his campaign or world, but his fix. His sharing of his fix. The Rogue issue is moot, because, if his party is okay with this, then it doesn't matter. You don't have to use this fix; he doesn't have to fix the rogues. Your 'combat rogue' is just as much a player style as his 'sneaking rogues' are.

EDIT: Man, that really just wandered. I cannot talk today.

o0

You completely missed the point. But hey, it looks like he still is too.

I'll just stay out of this from now on.

[cherez]

I love Feat Training and Hustle; they both do work around the major weaknesses of the Fighter, but I'm not so sure about all the abilities to pump up attack and damage. It seems at high levels fighters will smash all the other melee classes. Your fighter seems to get what amounts to a stronger Smite Evil with every attack and with +17 AC; an AC only fighters will be likely to hit. I've played in campaigns that tried similar fixes, and the end result was other characters pretty much giving up on AC protecting them from fighters and focusing on concealment instead.

I think you should try to better explain what it is you feel is wrong with fighters, because I really don't think attack rolls are the problem.

[Fixer]

No offense, but if you don't know this, I think you should investigate 3e optimization a little more before you start making fixes.

Metamagic School Focus (-1 total), Easy Metmagic (-1 total), Arcane Thesis (-1 per metamagic), incantatrix class ability (-1 total). Not sure which of these I applied, or if I added another one. The cheese crops up when you use Arcane Thesis with +0 level metamagics, but I didn't do any of that. There's also the Sudden metamagic feats that I didn't put in, because they are only once per day, but a mage's burst damage could be even higher.If you could be a little more elitist or condescending I am sure people will listen to you more. After all, everyone loves to hear they should do more research about a subject that the topic has nothing to do with. Especially when, IN THE VERY FIRST POST, the topic creator says they know there are better ways of causing more damage as a wizard.

This was for straight class comparison, so incantatrix shouldn't even be in there. Easy Metamagic comes from a Dragon magazine, which are not often allowed. The other two are fine, and apply to only one school of magic or one particular spell. Should the Fighter do his homework and know what the wizard specializes in, he can compensate for the damage he's expecting. Wizards aren't the only smart people.

I love Feat Training and Hustle; they both do work around the major weaknesses of the Fighter, but I'm not so sure about all the abilities to pump up attack and damage. It seems at high levels fighters will smash all the other melee classes. Your fighter seems to get what amounts to a stronger Smite Evil with every attack and with +17 AC; an AC only fighters will be likely to hit. I've played in campaigns that tried similar fixes, and the end result was other characters pretty much giving up on AC protecting them from fighters and focusing on concealment instead.

I think you should try to better explain what it is you feel is wrong with fighters, because I really don't think attack rolls are the problem.What I see 'wrong' with Fighters is that their damage output goes up insignificantly by level. Even if they use PA to increase their damage output, they do so at the cost of attack ability (or, with a feat, AC which makes them glass cannons). Even if they were to have comparable damage output to the normal glass cannons (wizards) they still have the crappy saves, but wizards have the crappy HP so that sort of evens out in the end.

To be clear: the other melee classes are also underpowered, which is why they'd need rewrites too. This is to change the Fighter to be up to the top bar with wizards.

This fix removes the glass cannon effect from fighters (they can now PA for full if they wish and have a decent chance to score a hit), provides a bit more versatility (changing weapon focus/weapon specialization feats, etc), and can allow them to tank well (with Improved Combat Expertise). Wizards can do all these things with spells. A fighter, with this fix, can do them with feats instead.

The wizard can still do many things fighters cannot, even with feats, while a fighter can still take care of himself in an anti-magic field, where a wizard is largely screwed. Each is now more balanced and versatile without either overwhelming the other. At epic levels, AC goes up drastically, and the Fighter's BAB will not keep up, hence the Weapon Focus helping make up the difference.

[aje8]

Um this class fix doesn't work all that well.

The central problem is HP damage becomes obsolete at the high levels. I don't care how much damage you can do, It's called Flesh to Stone.

Somewhere in the lv.10-15 range, HP damage as a whole becomes terrible as enemies have huge hps and their own Save or Dies as SLAs ect. Hp damage just sucks.

Additionally, bear in mind that no matter how good your class is at hitting things with sticks you won't really stack up well with a Wizard.

Why? Because obsoleteing troops is better than damaging them. Glitterdust will effectivley kill everything it hits at the early levels. Solid Fog will take an enemy entirley out of combat for it's duration. Tentacles will win enounters single-handedly.

All this, AND the Wizard still teleports, Sees invisible guys, buffs the party, opens locks, is the party face, shapes stone, and generally does everything you can imagine.

[Fixer]

The central problem is HP damage becomes obsolete at the high levels. I don't care how much damage you can do, It's called Flesh to Stone.
Do explain. I fail to see how Flesh to Stone stops HP damage.

[Serpentine]

Glitterdust will effectivley kill everything it hits at the early levels....what? :smallconfused:


Glitterdust
Conjuration (Creation)
Level: Brd 2, Sor/Wiz 2
Components: V, S, M
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Range: Medium (100 ft. + 10 ft./level)
Area: Creatures and objects within 10-ft.-radius spread
Duration: 1 round/level
Saving Throw: Will negates (blinding only)
Spell Resistance: No

A cloud of golden particles covers everyone and everything in the area, causing creatures to become blinded and visibly outlining invisible things for the duration of the spell. All within the area are covered by the dust, which cannot be removed and continues to sparkle until it fades.

Any creature covered by the dust takes a -40 penalty on Hide checks.

Material Component
Ground mica.

Blinded
The character cannot see. He takes a -2 penalty to Armor Class, loses his Dexterity bonus to AC (if any), moves at half speed, and takes a -4 penalty on Search checks and on most Strength- and Dexterity-based skill checks. All checks and activities that rely on vision (such as reading and Spot checks) automatically fail. All opponents are considered to have total concealment (50% miss chance) to the blinded character. Characters who remain blinded for a long time grow accustomed to these drawbacks and can overcome some of them.

Since when has being blinded for a few rounds and covered in shiny dust been a death sentence? :smallconfused: Anyway, you're not exactly being helpful, there. You're basically saying, "Wizards always own no matter what you do, so don't bother trying to even even things out the tiniest bit because it will do no good! No, don't try! It's a waste of time! DON'T DO IT! YOU'RE ONLY HURTING YOURSELF!"
...
I may have gotten a little carried away, there.

[MeklorIlavator]

Do explain. I fail to see how Flesh to Stone stops HP damage.
His point is that at later levels especially save-or-dies/sucks (or no-save, just dies/sucks) become much better, to the point they they're often more reliable than doing damage.




...what? :smallconfused:



Since when has being blinded for a few rounds and covered in shiny dust been a death sentence? :smallconfused:

Being blinded means that all your attacks suffer a 50% miss chance, and miss chances are the best form of attack prevention, so that's already a big buff. Also, you lose your dex bonus to AC, which means sneak-attacks galore, and take and additional penalty to AC. Oh, and you don't know where anyone is, so you have to attack random squares or use listen checks, which can be very unreliable. Their not dead yet, but neither are people who fail the save vs. sleep, and both are alot easier afterwards.

With proper tactics, a party can pretty much kill any level-appropriate challenge that's been blinded.



Anyway, you're not exactly being helpful, there. You're basically saying, "Wizards always own no matter what you do, so don't bother trying to even even things out the tiniest bit because it will do no good! No, don't try! It's a waste of time! DON'T DO IT! YOU'RE ONLY HURTING YOURSELF!"
...
I may have gotten a little carried away, there.
Yeah, I think you did get carried away. I mean, Godforbid anyone tells someone that their fix doesn't address the primary problems of a class. I mean, why should anyone ever give constructive criticism. How inconsiderate.
...
I guess I got carried away as well.

[Baron Corm]

If you could be a little more elitist or condescending I am sure people will listen to you more. After all, everyone loves to hear they should do more research about a subject that the topic has nothing to do with. Especially when, IN THE VERY FIRST POST, the topic creator says they know there are better ways of causing more damage as a wizard.

I was referring to the fact that you seemed to want to start making "fixes" for all of the classes, in your edit about monks, when this has been done thousands of times already on this very board, and if you didn't have knowledge of metamagic reducers or previous class revamps then you probably should do some research. The "no offense" in my comment was there to imply that no offense was meant by what I said. However I retract that and all of the other words I've wasted on trying to help you.

[Fixer]

Just to point out that all your help was to be condescending and demonstrate how things won't work, instead of offering suggestions on how to repair it.

Perhaps, however, you are correct that it is not possible to 'fix' any of the classes in 3.5, because the system itself is rife with design flaws that counteract the process of repair. If that is the case, a new RPG would be needed.

I suppose I can spend my time on that instead.

[Cieyrin]

Alright, for one, Flying Poo, I'm almost certain that Arcane Thesis got nerfed so it doesn't work like that any more, lowering Metamagic level cost by 1 TOTAL level, not by feat. And another thing, no one can be expected to read every thread in both this forum and other major forums about every fix to every base class. It's an impossible task that no one should be expected to be able to do before they decide to homebrew whatever. Also, there's no need to flame. There's nothing constructive from bitching at each other and being elitist just b/c you think can make the ultimate character to take on all challengers. We're trying to improve the fix, not just say that some homebrewer's work is a useless heap of drek that should have stayed out of the light of day. Read your goddamn forum rules and be considerate of others, jeeze. >=(

And finally, this thread is supposed to be a thread about enhancing the fighter, not optimizing every and all classes. While Fighters can't be expected to be the ultimate damage dealers (clearly the purview of Wizards and other arcane blaster types), Fighters shouldn't be left out in the cold. Now, from my point of view, Fighters are characters that keep their more squishy companions off the front lines and able to do burst damage with impunity. Nothing is more useless than a grappled and pinned wizard (Grapple Monk, anybody?). Upping their damage is good headway for keeping the Big Bad Guy off your buddies but I think that Fighters also need ways to absorb or negate damage, whether this be AC uppage, save bonuses to common Fighter disablers (fear effects and enchantments) or some good old-fashioned DR. If you take a look at the Pathfinder Beta (which is still a free download for the entire book, btb =3), they do a number of these things and could be some inspiration for you to do similar things to make your fighter a better meat shield/tank, like they should be.

Them's my 2 coppers. Take as you will.

[Fixer]

Now, from my point of view, Fighters are characters that keep their more squishy companions off the front lines and able to do burst damage with impunity. Nothing is more useless than a grappled and pinned wizard (Grapple Monk, anybody?). Upping their damage is good headway for keeping the Big Bad Guy off your buddies but I think that Fighters also need ways to absorb or negate damage, whether this be AC uppage, save bonuses to common Fighter disablers (fear effects and enchantments) or some good old-fashioned DR. If you take a look at the Pathfinder Beta (which is still a free download for the entire book, btb =3), they do a number of these things and could be some inspiration for you to do similar things to make your fighter a better meat shield/tank, like they should be.

Them's my 2 coppers. Take as you will.Well, all the problems Fighters face that you describe can be handled by magic items (DR, save bonuses, prevention of Fighter disablers) or even some feats (Shape Soulmeld - Planar Ward prevents mental control or possession and is one of my staples on low-wis warriors and is always available as a general feat, no matter what level). I took a look at Pathfinder and it was ok, but it moved the Fighter away from feats and more towards weapon & armor specialization, which are also available as feats. I believe giving Fighter class abilities that grant DR or prevent disabling unbalances Fighter too much in his favor. At least with magic items an opponent could try to remove them. If an NPC Fighter BBEG was fighting your party, would you want that NPC to have these as class abilities?

I am interested in hearing your arguments to the contrary. The DR thing I am still a bit open-minded about. Maybe allowing a 2nd level ability granting a Fighter DR/- equal to ½ their class level, to a maximum of the armor value they are wearing (or ¼ their class level if unarmored) [round all fractions down].

[Xvos]

To be honest, while this looks OK there have been better fighter fixes already done on this board, IMHO. Trawling through a few old posts I found one I have used in my own campaign Soldier (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=48316). OK its an old old post and the OP says its not a fighter fix, but it is really if you want to use it as one.

There are a couple of others from around the same time as that post that are pretty good too. Now I'm not saying theres anything wrong with your doing your own stuff I'm just suggesting having alook at a couple of the others who have done the smae thing and incorporating any of the ideas you like from thsoe into your design may make it smoother.

I rather like Hustle, Feat Efficiency and Feat Mastery, though I would suggest changing the wording slightly on the latter two, though I don't know what to change it to ATM.

[Mr.Moron]

I'll attempt to clarify the statement I made earlier, as apparently it wasn't very useful.

-The Fighter's problem is not an inability to deal hit point damage with attack rolls. They can already do this and already do it with a fair degree of proficiency.

-The issue all traditional melee suffer, and the fighter by extension of being traditional melee is this: Hit point damage with via attack roll, is not a large enough ability set. Having just 1 mechanic is too limiting, especially when that mechanic is a mediocre one (as attack roll for hit point damage is).

-This fix only goes towards pushing the fighter closer to the top of the table in the traditional melee role. However, that doesn't matter in the big picture. Being better (or even the best) in such a fundamentally lackluster field is kind of pointless.

-While the system isn't completely borked (assuming you "Play Nice" with the things that have the potential to bend the game .. polymorph etc..), the class can't be fixed by staying a 1 trick pony.

-It's fine if fighter's are "guys who hit things until dead" (though I might say that exact definition is too narrow). But "hitting things" has to be represented by more mechanics than just making an attack roll vs normal ac to do hit point damage.


-Ideally an Improved Fighter would be able to knock enemies across the room by hitting them with their maul, or leave them with a gaping sword-wound that hinders their ability to move/attack. Maybe the fighter can even lop off limbs with an axe, totally removing the targets ability to attack/hold items/cast spells with that arm. Unless they're a troll or have access to a regenerate spell.

Maybe some, or all of these attacks target saves instead of ac "The attack is so wild, it can't be avoided, however the target may make a saving throw....".

Really, hitting your things with your weapon is fine. Only being able to do hit point damage with an attack roll is NOT. (Being able to sometimes, maybe trip your opponent if they're not bigger than you and don't have four legs just isn't enough variety either).


Fighters and melee in general, need to be able to bring more to the table, not just more of the same. This fix is all just more of the same (hit & damage bonuses).

On a totally off-topic note:



Nothing is more useless than a grappled and pinned wizard (Grapple Monk, anybody?).


Grapple is a non-issue for casters
All wizards using spell compendium are effectively immune to grapple. All wizards using only core are effectively immune to grapple once they get 4th level spells. This is due to the fact they can simply teleport of out of the grapple with a silenced teleporation (it has no components, and so can be used so long as the wizard can think).

If other sources are included, spells like Heart of Water can get around grapples in other ways.

Also a monk is a terrible class to grapple with. They get no special bonuses and 3/4ths BaB, and will have more attributes drawn away from strength from than other melee-ers.

This all ignores the fact that a caster (above about 5th level) who winds up in a grapple has probably done something incredibly stupid.

[Fixer]

Yeah, for what a fighter is designed for (entry level players, simple tactics, and hurting things until they stop moving) I figured this was fair.

However, I have become more firmly concluded that the problem is the oversimplicity of the combat system itself more than the characters. Thus, I have started spending my efforts towards a new system.

I appreciate everyone's input, and hope that someone takes an opportunity to play this new Fighter and see if they like it. I take my leave now.

[Draz74]

Thus, I have started spending my efforts towards a new system.

Welcome to the club. It's a lonely life, constantly between a rock and a hard place with perfectionism and overcomplication. And you take a lot of criticism. But hopefully one of us will create The Perfect System one of these days. :smallwink:

[Baron Corm]

Cieryin: I was not trying to be elitist or "expect" that he knew that there were other fixes out there. I was helpfully pointing them out to him to let him look at them. It's not an impossible task, there is a search function. I was not hostile at all either so stop directing hostility at me. Your entire first paragraph was a hypocritical flame. The two of you are being very defensive because I said that I did not like his idea. I'm sorry that you feel I'm attacking you but I was trying to be constructive. And I'm still not holding hard feelings because I understand what it feels like when someone says they don't like something you have created. So let's just drop it.

[aje8]

Yeah, for what a fighter is designed for (entry level players, simple tactics, and hurting things until they stop moving) I figured this was fair.

However, I have become more firmly concluded that the problem is the oversimplicity of the combat system itself more than the characters. Thus, I have started spending my efforts towards a new system.

I appreciate everyone's input, and hope that someone takes an opportunity to play this new Fighter and see if they like it. I take my leave now.

My point exactly. I was in no way trying to be rude I was trying to show two things:
1. The system is broken. The class is weak but the system puts it from weak to abbsymal

2. No class should use Wizard as a benchmark. It's like using the IQ of ensiten as an average, it's unreasonable. You have to weaken wizards way down before you can make anyone equal to them.

So yeah, fix the system, then make wizards more on par with say Dread Necro or Tome of Battle Classes and THEN you can worry about buffing fighters. Though quite honestly those first 2 might do it.

Once again, I apoligize for being condesending and/or ambiguous before.

[lesser_minion]

I'm with you on the idea that the combat system itself needs improving, and I agree that the problem with having a class that is the absolute best in combat/hitting stuff is that the game system makes 'combat/hitting stuff' worthless.

So I'm probably in the club as well.

[Fixer]

Just a quick update.

I modified the 17th level ability to only apply to a single feat in any given round. That should balance it out a bit (not that I thought it was overpowered to begin with but that appeared to be the general consensus).