PDA

View Full Version : [3.5] Fixing the fighter



jiriku
2009-09-11, 01:25 AM
It is often said on this forum that fighters cannot match spellcasters, chiefly because they have fewer options than casters, and don't have the luxury of choosing different powers each day as the Tier 1 classes do.

To narrow this "options gap" in my upcoming campaign, I am considering the following change, inspired by the warblade's Weapon Aptitude ability.


Your first level of fighter grants you Martial Aptitude, an extraordinary class ability which allows you to spend one hour drilling with your weapons to retrain your fighter bonus feats. You may change any or all of your feats gained as bonus feats from fighter levels, but you must comply with the retraining rules as normal. You may not use Martial Aptitude to retrain any of your other feats, such as racial feats or the feats gained by all characters at 1st level and every 3rd character level. All of your choices must remain legal, and you may not change a feat if it is a necessary prerequisite for a prestige class you have. The changes are permanent, but you can always change them again with another hour of training.

Opinions?

Edit: Adding new 3rd level class feature as a result of forum suggestions.


At third level, you gain Martial Focus, an extraordinary class ability which allows you to subtitute your fighter level+2 for your base attack bonus when qualifying for the fighter bonus feats granted by your fighter levels (for example, you can use a fighter level of 6 to meet the +8 base attack bonus requirement of Improved Critical). The feature only helps you when determining if you qualify for a feat. You must still use your normal base attack bonus for all calculations when using the feat (such as when determining the maximum penalty you can take when using the Power Attack Feat).

Eloel
2009-09-11, 01:30 AM
That still keeps them 'one trick pony', only different tricks every day.
The best way to use that would be getting a bunch of Martial Study and Martial Stance feats, and changing known maneuvers everyday, but seriously, why not ToB while at it?

Keld Denar
2009-09-11, 01:41 AM
Whats wrong with accepting warblade as a moderately reasonable "fix" for fighter? I mean, keep fighter around, in case people want to dip 1-2 levels for, but other than that, blah. Someone else has already done the work for you. Instead of trying to make a fighter more like a warblade, just...use...warblade?

Doc Roc
2009-09-11, 01:56 AM
I have some stuff you might like to see. It rolls out at 11:59 PM EST. We'll be testing it in the ToS.

Mystic Muse
2009-09-11, 01:59 AM
If you want to fix fighter without using TOB for some reason. (I for example am using fighter because my DM banned ToB since the other players generally play core classes like rogue) then I believe there are already several fighter fixes in the homebrew forum.

If you're not using TOB only because you don't have it that's not much of an excuse. there are other ways to get it besides buying it. For example, your local library. I know my library has ToB at it.Although this isn't always the case.

you can also take maneuvers from ToB and turn them into feats. There are a lot of things you can do for fighter but we have to know specifically what you want it to do. if you need to give it more options ToB is a good choice because it gives you a LOT of options. Is there a specific reason you don't want to use ToB?

jiriku
2009-09-11, 02:05 AM
Were I playing a fighter, I would play a warblade. As a DM, warblade levels are one of my favorite tools for advancing ogres, giants, and other nasty melee beasts.

This is for my players. Some of them are old-school players who started with 1st or 2nd edition, and even choosing feats seems new-fangled to them (THAC0 anyone?). Others are casual players who would play D&D on a Tuesday night with a borrowed PHB, then never think about D&D again until the next Tuesday night rolls around.

For both groups, I need a simple noob-friendly solution that forgives character-design mistakes and doesn't force the casual players to purchase and/or read a 160-page book if they don't want to. In that context, what do you think of this? How could I improve it?

PId6
2009-09-11, 02:06 AM
you can also take maneuvers from ToB and turn them into feats.
There is; it's called Martial Study.

Mystic Muse
2009-09-11, 02:11 AM
Were I playing a fighter, I would play a warblade. As a DM, warblade levels are one of my favorite tools for advancing ogres, giants, and other nasty melee beasts.

This is for my players. Some of them are old-school players who started with 1st or 2nd edition, and even choosing feats seems new-fangled to them (THAC0 anyone?). Others are casual players who would play D&D on a Tuesday night with a borrowed PHB, then never think about D&D again until the next Tuesday night rolls around.

For both groups, I need a simple noob-friendly solution that forgives character-design mistakes and doesn't force the casual players to purchase and/or read a 160-page book if they don't want to. In that context, what do you think of this? How could I improve it?



I honestly don't know how to improve it. The players might like playing warblades and you can give them the one feat free that allows them to change their readied maneuvers if they decide they don't like them. Also, until you're a high enough level only about 20 pages in TOB are usually relevant to your class anyway.

they can also be swordsages. they MIGHT like playing crusaders but I don't know.

it might not be too newbie friendly but neither are melee classes in PHB from what I've heard.

Swordguy
2009-09-11, 02:11 AM
Whats wrong with accepting warblade as a moderately reasonable "fix" for fighter? I mean, keep fighter around, in case people want to dip 1-2 levels for, but other than that, blah. Someone else has already done the work for you. Instead of trying to make a fighter more like a warblade, just...use...warblade?

{Scrubbed} The OP's pretty clearly asking for a "fix", not a "replacement".

How's this? Semantically speaking, the Warblade is...not...a...Fighter. That's more than enough reason for the occasional OCD person who wants to play a "fighter", and not a "warblade", and this hobby attracts MORE than its fair share of OCD types. To say nothing of the Warblade being completely un-newbie-friendly.


(To be fair, WotC probably should have just released the Warblade as an official errata for the Fighter, but done's done.)

jiriku
2009-09-11, 02:12 AM
There is; it's called Martial Study.

Slightly off-topic. Martial Study and Martial Stance PWN HARD. :smallbiggrin: I think 40% of my NPC designs use one of both of those feats now. The first time a monster pulls off a maneuver, it makes the players deathly afraid because they realize they now have no idea what the monster is capable of.

Doc Roc
2009-09-11, 02:13 AM
Making your first good ToB build really is NOT newbie friendly. It's basically the Gom Jabbar of D&D, up there with your first 17/9 Gish build

Fixer
2009-09-11, 07:08 AM
You can check out my Fighter Fix in my signature. It keeps the basics of the fighter (use feats, not a lot of class features) with some appropriate power upgrades.

kamikasei
2009-09-11, 07:21 AM
I suggest:

- either giving Fighters Pounce as a class feature at level 6, or just declaring that Full Attacks are a standard action (only for Fighters, or in general, whichever you prefer).
- removing/reducing either/both speed penalties and ACP for different classes of armour or by certain amounts. I think there are feats to do this already, probably in PHBII - just make them class features at the earliest levels they could be qualified for.

More speculatively:
- something to boost single-weapon damage, the way that the Diamond Mind and Iron Heart standard-action damage-boosters help out sword-and-boarders, would be nice, but I'm not sure what the best mechanic would be. You could go with something as blunt-force as saying that Fighters, and Fighters only, can make a single attack in place of a full attack which multiplies the damage by their number of attacks, or something like that (this is right off the top of my head and probably horribly ill-conceived).
- perhaps you could treat bonus fighter feats as if they were talent trees, and a fighter could have multiple ones for different weapons. So he could have both the shield-bashing, charging, and tripping "feat sets" available, and use each depending on what weapon he trained with that morning. Again, could be terrible design.


I see you're living up to your playground title.

The only title I see on Keld's post is "Troll in the Playground". Surely that can't be what you're referring to, here?

SparkMandriller
2009-09-11, 07:40 AM
Semantically speaking, the Warblade is...not...a...Fighter. That's more than enough reason for the occasional OCD person who wants to play a "fighter", and not a "warblade", and this hobby attracts MORE than its fair share of OCD types.

I dunno if the people who want to play a fighter just 'cause it's a fighter are really gonna want it fixed. They don't seem like the sorta people who'd care about power levels.

9mm
2009-09-11, 07:48 AM
Whats wrong with accepting warblade as a moderately reasonable "fix" for fighter? I mean, keep fighter around, in case people want to dip 1-2 levels for, but other than that, blah. Someone else has already done the work for you. Instead of trying to make a fighter more like a warblade, just...use...warblade?

1) there are somethings the Warblade can't do that a fighter can. (and vice versa)
2) If I wanted to play a Warblade, I'd play a Warblade.

Ravens_cry
2009-09-11, 08:03 AM
Please Stand by For a Test of the Emergency Rant System
Why should fighters be fixed? It is true they lack many options beyond 'Hit Stuff' and "Hit Stuff Harder'. But every game needs someone that can just be picked up played in a way that is satisfying for the new player. We were all newbies once, still am here, and the multitude of options of a magic user, even though they are 'best' can be intimidating. Besides, with teamwork from the magic users, the fighter can be still relevant as a beat stick, that is the whole idea behind the Batman wizard. Dungeons and Dragons is always a team effort.
If you want a more options for a fighter, look to the prestige classes, gish, or Tomb of Battle. I am not saying they should replace the fighter, but they should be there for when and if the player wants more. And frankly, the idea that a warrior with a large piece metal could do the same things as one who can KO the laws of physics in one round really suspends my belief.
It's even worse when the fighter-type can only do it so much per day. Magic coming from inner reserve of power, makes sense to me as much as magic does. The idea that you can only do that swirly bit with the sword that does exactly the same thing as magic, but isn't magic, only once per day? Yeah, excuse me, that makes my brain want leap out of my skull and take a fast train to Albuquerque, as it sure ain't gonna be needed any more.
Thank You, This Has Been a Broadcast of the Emergency Rant System

Nero24200
2009-09-11, 08:11 AM
Could we lay off the TOB? We have an 11 page thread dedicated to the non-TOB fans saying "Don't tell us to use TOB when we say we don't want".

For fighter advice, how it would fix it depends on what you define as being it's problem. If you think things like mobility are a problem, it won't do anything. In any case, a single ability isn't likely to fix (what I feel) are the fighter's core problems. Though it seems like a start at least.

kamikasei
2009-09-11, 08:13 AM
Why should fighters be fixed? It is true they lack many options beyond 'Hit Stuff' and "Hit Stuff Harder'. But every game needs someone that can just be picked up played in a way that is satisfying for the new player.

It's not just that fighters can only hit things. It's also that they have a hard time getting at things to hit them, have to stand still while doing their hitting, and depending on the rest of the group, in order to compete with other sources of damage (or the speed with which other kinds of attack can neutralize an enemy) have to overspecialize not just on "hitting things" but on "hitting things with one particular type of attack suitable to only one particular battlefield type and frustratingly easy to thwart".


The idea that you can only do that swirly bit with the sword that does exactly the same thing as magic, but isn't magic, only once per day?

What are you thinking of here?


Could we lay off the TOB? We have an 11 page thread dedicated to the non-TOB fans saying "Don't tell us to use TOB when we say we don't want".

On the other hand, the OP did not in fact say he didn't want ToB. He was asked why he wouldn't just use it, he answered, there was some discussion of how to use some elements from it via the Martial * feats. That's all. Let's not have "don't ever mention ToB unless presented with a formal request in triplicate to do so" become a reaction-meme.

Ravens_cry
2009-09-11, 08:31 AM
What are you thinking of here?

I don't want to turn this into a 4E flamewar, but that's how that edition feels like to me.

kamikasei
2009-09-11, 08:33 AM
I don't want to turn this into a 4E flamewar, but that's how that edition feels like to me.

Ah, I see. I thought you were voicing a misconception about ToB. Never mind, so.

Temet Nosce
2009-09-11, 08:41 AM
Personally? If I were going to change the Fighter my changes would look like this.

1. Feat at every level

2. Get multiple of what we'll call "fighting styles" (and I don't mean the ones from CW or whatever). Basically, at certain levels you'll get the ability to assign all your feats over again and can switch between which set of selected feats you're using as a standard action.

3. Have your Fighter level be added to any requirements for feats (I.E. if you were level 4 Fighter, and something needed an 8 BAB you'd qualify).

4. Access to Epic feats early (possibly with a limit on what you can take).

5. I might also add a capstone, but I'm drawing a blank on what.

Grumman
2009-09-11, 08:45 AM
Please Stand by For a Test of the Emergency Rant System
Why should fighters be fixed? It is true they lack many options beyond 'Hit Stuff' and "Hit Stuff Harder'. But every game needs someone that can just be picked up played in a way that is satisfying for the new player.
I disagree that the Fighter is that character. Primarily this is because, like the full arcane spellcasters, you have to pick every class feature for yourself. Until you know which feats are good and which are bad, that's a recipe for disaster.

If I had a new player wanting something easy to play, I'd point them at the Barbarian, not the Fighter.

Tehnar
2009-09-11, 08:46 AM
I think the point of fixing the Fighter is to make him stand out as a class separate from a Warblade (which frankly I think WotC intended to replace the fighter, a attitude I don't much like).

I think the first thing to realize is that the fighter is a very MAD class. Thus I suggest you allow your players to roll dice when they create characters. This will kill most of the MAD problems. With good rolls a MAD class becomes much more rewarding to play.

Next I would look at the fighters skills. Their skill list is very poor as is the number of skills they get per level.

I like the OPs Martial aptitude class feature. It further improves the fighters shtick, which are the bonus feats. I would like to hear how it works out in real play, because there is one problem I foresee. A character might use a lot of bonus fighter feats as a prerequisite to one thing or another, and thus be left with a very few feats to switch with Martial Aptitude.

Also you might want to look at various fighter fixes floating on the boards for inspiration. I have one of mine that has been playtested, so if you wish I can send you a PM with the details.

Temet Nosce
2009-09-11, 08:48 AM
I disagree that the Fighter is that character. Primarily this is because, like the full arcane spellcasters, you have to pick every class feature for yourself. Until you know which feats are good and which are bad, that's a recipe for disaster.

If I had a new player wanting something easy to play, I'd point them at the Barbarian, not the Fighter.

I'd agree with this, and in fact to expand... Fighter would be the next to last core class I'd suggest for a new player. Monk is the only one I'd be less likely to consider a good idea.

If they picked a spellcaster they might get bogged down, but it's unlikely they could make themselves totally ineffective. With a Fighter, odds are good that they will make themselves totally ineffective.

kamikasei
2009-09-11, 08:48 AM
I disagree that the Fighter is that character. Primarily this is because, like the full arcane spellcasters, you have to pick every class feature for yourself. Until you know which feats are good and which are bad, that's a recipe for disaster.

This is very, very true. One of the big problems with the fighter's design is that so many feats are traps, yet they're also permanent once chosen.

Dienekes
2009-09-11, 09:05 AM
1) more skills and improved skill list
2) either feat every level or some form of class feature
3) Fix feats to make a good portion come together or increase over fighter levels or simply stronger.
4) make feats/class features that can do other things than full attack. (An attack that ignores DR, an attack that weakens your opponent's attacks, an attack that pierces through magical barriers, an attack that stops a magic effect, ect.)
5) Standard attack does 2 attacks at 11 bab level.
6) Some way for Fighters to get feats earlier than others (Add 1/2 Fighter level to bab or +2 to all attributes, ect.) and/or the ability to switch a few feats every day.

Amiel
2009-09-11, 09:25 AM
Regarding feats; redesign the feats so they give variable returns depending on the class in play. The fighter will gain more of a benefit from combat/martial (fighter bonus) feats than another class. Ideally, these feats should improve or extend the fighter's existing abilities.
This benefit may involve a base numeric modifier, allow the fighter to target additional objects or creatures, or increase the duration of the feat.

Combine feats; merge Weapon Focus, Weapon Specialization into the one feat, Greater Weapon Focus, Greater Specialization into another and so on and so forth.

Instead of limiting Focus and Specialization to specific weapons, allow the fighter access to entire weapon groups.

jiriku
2009-09-11, 09:29 AM
These are great suggestions!

Fixer, I like how your fighter fixes are granted at odd-numbered levels. That smooths out the class progression and has a nice aesthetic - every even-numbered level gives you a bonus feat, and every odd-numbered level improves your bonus feats.

Kamakasei, I totally agree with you. Fighters need more options, more mobility, and the ability to hit and deal competitive damage without becoming overspecialized.

I like the suggestions provided on mobility. When people can move, they make more use of their environment, and combat becomes more fun. I'm considering making the full attack a standard action for all classes. Do you all think that would work, or could that damage game balance in a way I'm not seeing?

Yora
2009-09-11, 09:35 AM
Many people say they are unhappy with fighters only hitting stuff and not being able to meaningfully do anything else?
Giving them more skill points and more skills to pull of more acrobatic stunts, like jumping from a balcony and making a charge attack as they fall, is probably a start to make them appear more fun. (And I think appearance to be cool is more important than the bare numbers of an ability.)
Else, I can think of heavy lifting actions, like crashing doors, pushing heavy things over a ledge, or throwing people into chasms. (Moving a grappled opponent into a dangerous square does exactly that, you just have to fluff it right.)

When thinking about ways to make fighters more fun to play, I would start with listing things that would be cool for a fighter to do. And THEN look how it could be translated into rules.

I also use Weapon Groups and give fighter Weapon Focus, Specialization, Greater Focus, and Greater Specialization as a bonus feat at every odd level. Might help with making them Masters of all Weapons.

Amiel
2009-09-11, 09:38 AM
The fighter tends to have an over-reliance on feats. Thus the problem becomes, how one can install modifications into the mechanic that allows it to do what it does well yet still enable diversification so it can fulfill limitless archetypes.

The fighter is less specialised than all other classes; unlike other class fixes, the monk for example, the changes need to be broadly applicable and should not pigeon-hole the fighter unnecessarily.

Pharaoh's Fist
2009-09-11, 09:39 AM
The problem with getting feats as yoru class features is that there aren't enough good fighter feats...

Amiel
2009-09-11, 09:45 AM
You can 'fix' that to an extent by combining feats to give exponential return.


Fighter Class Skills

4 + Int modifier

The fighter's class skills (and the key ability for each skill) are Balance (Dex), Climb (Str), Craft (Int), Diplomacy (cha), Handle Animal (Cha), Hide (Dex), Intimidate (Cha), Jump (Str), Knowledge (any; tactics, war) (Int), Ride (Dex), Search (Int), Spot (Wis), Swim (Str), Tumble (Dex), Use Rope (Dex).

quick_comment
2009-09-11, 09:48 AM
It still doesnt matter.

You can give a fighter the following feat:

Ultimate Destruction
Requirements: Fighter 1
Effect: If you hit something, it dies.
Special: If you ever have levels in another base class, you lose the effects of this feat.

And they would still be unable to kill a caster.

Pharaoh's Fist
2009-09-11, 09:54 AM
More to the point, it doesn't add a new ability. fighters can already deal enough damage to kill things if optimized enough.

Yora
2009-09-11, 09:54 AM
And they would still be unable to kill a caster.

That's nonsense. Any character can kill any other character of the same level, if you make better use of tactics.
If you step in front of a wizard and challange him to a fight, and then wait until he has all his buffs up and is ready to cast his save or die spells, I'd say it's your own fault!

Temet Nosce
2009-09-11, 09:59 AM
That's nonsense. Any character can kill any other character of the same level, if you make better use of tactics.
If you step in front of a wizard and challange him to a fight, and then wait until he has all his buffs up and is ready to cast his save or die spells, I'd say it's your own fault!

Well, unless someone came up with a way to stop this by a Fighter and I missed it...

Persisted foresight, celerity, extended timestop, dimensional lock, force cage, maw of chaos.

Yora
2009-09-11, 10:02 AM
Persisted foresight, celerity, extended timestop, dimensional lock, force cage, maw of chaos.
Okay, in that case we're talking about different games, that just use the same rulebooks.

Sorry, my mistake. :smallwink:

Temet Nosce
2009-09-11, 10:03 AM
Okay, in that case we're talking about different games, that just use the same rulebooks.

Sorry, my mistake. :smallwink:

Heh, honestly that's pretty much the case between casters and non casters.

Amiel
2009-09-11, 10:04 AM
It still doesnt matter.

And they would still be unable to kill a caster.

Anything can defeat anything else if played tactically. If the fighter is charging while the arcanist is obviously casting a spell, the fighter epic fails due to stupidity.


More to the point, it doesn't add a new ability. fighters can already deal enough damage to kill things if optimized enough.

Given the fighter's generalist nature, do we need new abilities?
The fighter would, of course, always benefit from additives, be it increases to damage output, or AC et al.
The problem is that there is, mechanically, little reason to stay fighter aside from dipping into it for builds.


Well, unless someone came up with a way to stop this by a Fighter and I missed it...

Persisted foresight, celerity, extended timestop, dimensional lock, force cage, maw of chaos.

And if the wizard isn't prepared?

Grumman
2009-09-11, 10:06 AM
That's nonsense. Any character can kill any other character of the same level, if you make better use of tactics.
Wrong. At some point, they are simply going to be beyond your reach - possibly literally. No matter how good a tactician you are, you're not going to defeat the wizard that's playing orbital bombardment unless you can actually get to him.


If you step in front of a wizard and challange him to a fight, and then wait until he has all his buffs up-
Since this morning, thanks to Persistent Spell.


and is ready to cast his save or die spells-
Since six seconds before you arrived, thanks to scrying and Anticipate Teleportation.

Temet Nosce
2009-09-11, 10:08 AM
And if the wizard isn't prepared?

That's what the situation was based on. Foresight stops flatfooted, and celerity is an immediate action. Basically with that combination the Wizard has already won.

Now, if we're talking on an unoptimized level and the Fighter tries to kill the Wizard before he has the chance to do anything (say while asleep) it might work.

Even if a Fighter attacked a Wizard with no buffs up while awake though... Unless he could kill him while flatfooted the moment the Wizard can take immediate actions he's probably won.

Amiel
2009-09-11, 10:08 AM
You are short-changing the fighter. It has access to magic items.

Pharaoh's Fist
2009-09-11, 10:09 AM
Everyone has access to magic items.

Yora
2009-09-11, 10:09 AM
Heh, honestly that's pretty much the case between casters and non casters.
Well, it all starts with a 15th level spell slot, two non-core spells, one non-core feat, and the assumption that the wizard won't possibly miss any of these spells later that day.

Though that's actually also a type of D&D, it's something very different from "some custom feats and spells, and let's keep it below 16th level". :smallbiggrin:

Optimystik
2009-09-11, 10:10 AM
And if the wizard isn't prepared?

Abrupt Jaunt, Rope Trick, Contingency...

Amiel
2009-09-11, 10:12 AM
That's what the situation was based on. Foresight stops flatfooted, and celerity is an immediate action. Basically with that combination the Wizard has already won.

Now, if we're talking on an unoptimized level and the Fighter tries to kill the Wizard before he has the chance to do anything (say while asleep) it might work.

Even if a Fighter attacked a Wizard with no buffs up while awake though... Unless he could kill him while flatfooted the moment the Wizard can take immediate actions he's probably won.

That is if one assumes the wizard is preparing for a combat scenario. There is the distinct possibility that arcanists, especially those whose main focus is arcane research, extrapolation of formulae, magical theory et al, do not have your spells cast, prepared or even known.

Another likelihood is that the spells you mention are perhaps not as well known, arcanists do not know and cannot conceive of every spell in existence. There is the chance that such spells may not be available.

Pharaoh's Fist
2009-09-11, 10:15 AM
That is if one assumes the wizard is preparing for a combat scenario. There is the distinct possibility that arcanists, especially those whose main focus is arcane research, extrapolation of formulae, magical theory et al, do not have your spells cast, prepared or even known.

What do they have prepared? There's no guideline for what spells you prepare when you're researching something so...?

Temet Nosce
2009-09-11, 10:17 AM
That is if one assumes the wizard is preparing for a combat scenario. There is the distinct possibility that arcanists, especially those whose main focus is arcane research, extrapolation of formulae, magical theory et al, do not have your spells cast, prepared or even known.

Another likelihood is that the spells you mention are perhaps not as well known, arcanists do not know and cannot conceive of every spell in existence. There is the chance that such spells may not be available.

Sure, a PC Fighter attacking an NPC researcher might work. Probably wouldn't though, since I find it seriously unlikely that such a high level individual would have absolutely nothing prepared to deal with it (all he'd really need is a single spell prepared in case he got attacked).

However, barring assuming that the Wizard is completely wasting all his spells, the Fighter lost before he ever started.

Amiel
2009-09-11, 10:17 AM
Everyone has access to magic items.

This is a given; which is why most PCs in D&D resemble christmas trees.
However, with magic items, the previously short-changed fighter is not going to be defeated as easily as Grumman states.


Abrupt Jaunt, Rope Trick, Contingency...

But what if the wizard doesn't have those spells?


What do they have prepared? There's no guideline for what spells you prepare when you're researching something so...?

Generalist, utility spells. Perhaps the wizard may even have spell slots open, so after research, she can allocate the spells per day allotment.

Telonius
2009-09-11, 10:18 AM
Well, it all starts with a 15th level spell slot, two non-core spells, one non-core feat, and the assumption that the wizard won't possibly miss any of these spells later that day.

Though that's actually also a type of D&D, it's something very different from "some custom feats and spells, and let's keep it below 16th level". :smallbiggrin:

It starts a lot lower than that. Grease and Sleep are only level 1 spells. Fly and Wind Wall are 3rd.

Yora
2009-09-11, 10:19 AM
Usually when I see examples of how spellcasters can anhilate everything, it invloves lots of preperation, with knowing about everything that happens before preparing spells.
But when I create characters or NPCs, I give them spells to be best prepared for almost everything that could likely happen.
Making a very specific trap for one lone fighter is worth nothing, if you get attacked by two rogues with a sorcerer friend.

Yes, that's not the setup I made earlier, but I think a wizard wouldn't know that on that day, he would only fight one lone fighter.

I guess at some point (probabably level 30 or 40, or when in a game that uses 10+ splatbooks) it won't matter, because a wizard can do everything he wants at once, but that's what I'd call broken and what I can't understand why anyone would play it.
If people actually play in such games, their points might be valid for these games. But apparently very few groups play beyond 15th level or use more than a small handfull of splatbooks. So I don't think these very specific circumstances hold as a general statement.
But well, everyone can play the games he likes.

It starts a lot lower than that. Grease and Sleep are only level 1 spells. Fly and Wind Wall are 3rd.
True, but for that I could easily make up tactics to counter against it.

quick_comment
2009-09-11, 10:20 AM
Lets give all the advantages to the fighter. Every single one. The wizard is caught flatfooted and completely unprepared and unbuffed. The fighter kills him.

The wizard's clone then awakens and scys on the fighter. He teleports in, disjuncts the fighter's equipment and casts eternal torment followed by imprisonment. The fighter is now imprisoned and in everlasting agony.


(And a wizard without a clone is not roleplaying his 30 or higher intelligence, just to preempt that objection)

9mm
2009-09-11, 10:21 AM
That is if one assumes the wizard is preparing for a combat scenario. There is the distinct possibility that arcanists, especially those whose main focus is arcane research, extrapolation of formulae, magical theory et al, do not have your spells cast, prepared or even known.

Another likelihood is that the spells you mention are perhaps not as well known, arcanists do not know and cannot conceive of every spell in existence. There is the chance that such spells may not be available.

at which point your leaving whats in the book and into DM territory. Which while a valid aurgument, doesn't change that DMs are a YMMV variable and there for eliminated from the equation on this style of gaming logicial deduction.


If I were fixing the fighter this is what I'd do: better skill list, swift action boosts to X, and swift action to ready extra actions = every odd fighter level, with ways of increasing what actually can readied. (Yes Tide, I am stealing that idea.)

AmberVael
2009-09-11, 10:21 AM
The fighter tends to have an over-reliance on feats.

Now here's an understatement if I ever saw one. This is like saying "Wizards tend to cast spells." :smalltongue:


2. Get multiple of what we'll call "fighting styles" (and I don't mean the ones from CW or whatever). Basically, at certain levels you'll get the ability to assign all your feats over again and can switch between which set of selected feats you're using as a standard action.
I'm not sure I like your other suggestions, but this one looks like a winner to me. Keeps the basic mechanics, allows fighters to branch out. Only problem is that they might run out of feats (though they could have feat redundancy between their different sets).
Still, if you take the non core sources- and maybe some homebrew- to increase the number of available feats, this could work out very interestingly. I think I'd play that type of fighter, really.

Amiel
2009-09-11, 10:22 AM
Sure, a PC Fighter attacking an NPC researcher might work. Probably wouldn't though, since I find it seriously unlikely that such a high level individual would have absolutely nothing prepared to deal with it (all he'd really need is a single spell prepared in case he got attacked).

However, barring assuming that the Wizard is completely wasting all his spells, the Fighter lost before he ever started.

Although, this doesn't preclude a PC researcher from engaging in the same activities, albeit at a higher power level and CR, and thus preparedness. Of course, it will be unlikely for the PC researcher to be seriously unprepared, but the tedium of research does promote a kind of complacency on part of the arcanist.

The wizard could keep a few spell slots open for example, or may even have general utility spells prepared; and unlike the cleric cannot spontaneously convert those spells.

I disagree to the extent that the fighter will have lost before he started, but I agree that the fighter is not a good match for the wizard; being so disparately ill-equipped to deal with casters, magic items exclusive.

Morty
2009-09-11, 10:22 AM
Isn't this discussion kind of pointless? Fighters are too weak, that's a fact. They have to be stronger, or else they can't do their job properly and it might become a problem for some players. But no matter what you do, you can't rise the fighter to the wizard's level, because a twinked-out wizard is simply too strong. And if the wizard isn't twinked out, you don't have to. What's the problem here?
And anyway, I'm quite fond of Szatany's Ultimate Fighter (http://www.liquidmateria.info/wiki/Ultimate_Fighter). Note that he made new versions of all classes, so you can also use Ultimate Wizard to have a less gamebreaking wizard.

quick_comment
2009-09-11, 10:24 AM
On the non-prepared wizard.

Give me a list of all the spells a wizard would want for a day of crafting or selling items, whatever. We can then fill in the many slots you will have left over with contingency, celerity, foresight, etc.

Pharaoh's Fist
2009-09-11, 10:24 AM
The wizard could keep a few spell slots open for example, or may even have general utility spells prepared; and unlike the cleric cannot spontaneously convert those spells.

What are general utility spells?

quick_comment
2009-09-11, 10:26 AM
What are general utility spells?

Oh you know, things like spider climb and heightened mage hand.

Certainly not things like celerity and forcecage.

vrellum
2009-09-11, 10:28 AM
How about: Increase figters to 4 skill points per level. Add class skills of Profession, diplomacy, knowledge nobility, spot, and UMD(OK, kidding about UMD).

Then give them a the class features of a knight that makes the area they threaten difficult terrain (can't charge past them) and if movement triggers an AoO a successful hit that does damage stops the creature in the square it was in when the AoO was triggerded. Does not work if the creature is moving to attack the fighter.

The skill list could be fine tuned, but it gives them the opportunity to do a few things outside of combat. The second part makes them somewhat similar to the 4th ed fighter and actually gives them the ability to defend the mage, etc.

Pharaoh's Fist
2009-09-11, 10:30 AM
Oh you know, things like spider climb and heightened mage hand.

Certainly not things like celerity and forcecage.

The research wizard spends his time jazz-dancing up walls?

Temet Nosce
2009-09-11, 10:30 AM
I'm not sure I like your other suggestions, but this one looks like a winner to me. Keeps the basic mechanics, allows fighters to branch out. Only problem is that they might run out of feats (though they could have feat redundancy between their different sets).
Still, if you take the non core sources- and maybe some homebrew- to increase the number of available feats, this could work out very interestingly. I think I'd play that type of fighter, really.

I've been rolling the idea over in my head for a bit, however it fails to address a couple of other issues I had if used alone. The most major of which is simply that a serious feat intensive build isn't going to be functional until mid game at best in most cases (thus the rest of my suggestions). The most important pair other than that are the increased number of feats, and applying your fighter level to pre reqs (with these three, you can have a Fighter with multiple functional fighting styles by mid game).


Although, this doesn't preclude a PC researcher from engaging in the same activities, albeit at a higher power level and CR, and thus preparedness. Of course, it will be unlikely for the PC researcher to be seriously unprepared, but the tedium of research does promote a kind of complacency on part of the arcanist.

The wizard could keep a few spell slots open for example, or may even have general utility spells prepared; and unlike the cleric cannot spontaneously convert those spells.

I disagree to the extent that the fighter will have lost before he started, but I agree that the fighter is not a good match for the wizard; being so disparately ill-equipped to deal with casters, magic items exclusive.

As a PC I'd just basically assume they had at least a few spells prepared. It doesn't even so much matter what (A simple contingency would do the trick), just so long as they have something reasonable readied.

And yes, the Fighter simply isn't equipped with appropriate options for dealing with a caster. Winning requires not the Fighter being good, but the caster being bad.

Amiel
2009-09-11, 10:32 AM
at which point your leaving whats in the book and into DM territory. Which while a valid aurgument, doesn't change that DMs are a YMMV variable and there for eliminated from the equation on this style of gaming logicial deduction.

It can also be said that a player choosing the spells that the wizard opponent has is also entering DM territory as the DM has the final say; this is, of course, like you said the YMMV variable, but I think still needs to be considered.

Depending on the scenario, the game world, the power curve, the wizard may not know spells like foresight or celerity.


Now here's an understatement if I ever saw one. This is like saying "Wizards tend to cast spells." :smalltongue:

Well, some people would disagree, so it needs to be said :P


On the non-prepared wizard.

Give me a list of all the spells a wizard would want for a day of crafting or selling items, whatever. We can then fill in the many slots you will have left over with contingency, celerity, foresight, etc.

Although the wizard is still going to have to sleep for 8 hours (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicOverview/arcaneSpells.htm#preparingWizardSpells)to fill in those vacant spell slots.


What are general utility spells?


Oh you know, things like spider climb and heightened mage hand.

Certainly not things like celerity and forcecage.

Certainly not! We wouldn't want to totally ruin the fighter's existence; it's not his fault that he made a poor career choice. You fill in one spot the wrong way and they lump you in with the no-hopes.

Stuff like prestidigitation, detect magic, flare, light, arcane lock, locate object. Generally non-offensive, non-precognitive spells. YMMV.

Pharaoh's Fist
2009-09-11, 10:35 AM
Stuff like prestidigitation, detect magic, flare, light, arcane lock, locate object. Generally non-offensive, non-precognitive spells. YMMV.

Arcane lock doesn't seem useful, or likely to help in research more than Fireball.

Unless you're researching locking spells, in which case why have Locate Object?

You see what I'm saying here?

quick_comment
2009-09-11, 10:35 AM
Stuff like prestidigitation, detect magic, flare, light, arcane lock, locate object. Generally non-offensive, non-precognitive spells. YMMV.

And what would you say the wizard prepares when his daily contact other plane spells tell him to expect danger in the next week?

Telonius
2009-09-11, 10:35 AM
True, but for that I could easily make up tactics to counter against it.

If you can make up those tactics using only Fighter at about level 6 or so (the level at which Wizard gets two level 3 spells per day absent extra spells from high Int), I would love to see them. The only ranged attacks that can pass through Wind Wall are siege weaponry, giant-thrown boulders, and thrown weapons (at a 30% miss chance). Since the Wizard is flying, he's out of reach from the Fighter's melee attacks. As soon as he casts this combination, the Wizard has six rounds to do basically whatever he likes to the Fighter - Summon Monster, for instance, or even blasting away with Magic Missile.

Pharaoh's Fist
2009-09-11, 10:37 AM
Although the wizard is still going to have to sleep for 8 hoursto fill in those vacant spell slots.
Rope Trick
Tiny Hut
Luxurious Love Shack
Magnificient Mansion

And it's rest for 8 hours, not sleep.

Grumman
2009-09-11, 10:44 AM
Although the wizard is still going to have to sleep for 8 hours (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicOverview/arcaneSpells.htm#preparingWizardSpells)to fill in those vacant spell slots.
Sleep is for the weak!

Amiel
2009-09-11, 10:44 AM
As a PC I'd just basically assume they had at least a few spells prepared. It doesn't even so much matter what (A simple contingency would do the trick), just so long as they have something reasonable readied.

Yes, no intelligent researcher would leave himself totally bereft of spells, the degree of preparedness would change from one to the other. Paranoid wizards and those who are truly covered for any eventuality would likely max all available spell slots to ensure that no surprises surprise them.


And yes, the Fighter simply isn't equipped with appropriate options for dealing with a caster. Winning requires not the Fighter being good, but the caster being bad.
Poor, poor fighter. It's a lose-lose situation.


The research wizard spends his time jazz-dancing up walls?

Who needs spells when you can do the same with Up the Walls. Less hassle and less mess!
And fun times were had by all.


Arcane lock doesn't seem useful, or likely to help in research more than Fireball.

Unless you're researching locking spells, in which case why have Locate Object?

You see what I'm saying here?

You know how those rogues are, all sneaky and rogue-like. With your valuable components stored in those chests, who's to say that your experiment might not just blow up in your face, what with them being all selectively re-distributed away and all?


And what would you say the wizard prepares when his daily contact other plane spells tell him to expect danger in the next week?

He always needed those new pair of pants. They come in such striking colors too.
You need to be at least 9 level to prepare contact other plane, what if the arcanist is of lower level? Just saying.


Rope Trick
Tiny Hut
Luxurious Love Shack
Magnificient Mansion

And it's rest for 8 hours, not sleep.

That will certainly expedite the process, yes. And by sleep, I meant rest. You saw nothing untoward :p


Sleep is for the weak!

Have fun staying awake then; yes, do have fun with that


Oh, I'm not disagreeing with you all that the fighter wouldn't get his backside handed to him on a silver celerity empowered platter, in some instances though, it may not be as or so easy for the arcanist to defeat him.

Pharaoh's Fist
2009-09-11, 10:46 AM
Sleep is for the weak!

You should have included a link to the Ring of Sustainance.

vrellum
2009-09-11, 10:46 AM
Is the goal to make a fighter that is good at killing wizards? Or is the goal to make fighters that can make strong contributions to a party?

quick_comment
2009-09-11, 10:47 AM
You need to be at least 9 level to prepare contact other plane, what if the arcanist is of lower level? Just saying.


You use a scroll.

Pharaoh's Fist
2009-09-11, 10:47 AM
Sounds expensive.

jiriku
2009-09-11, 10:47 AM
WOW thread hijack!

OK, for the purpose of this thread only, let's assume that fighters don't have to worry about casters with highly-tailored spell loads because, as DM, I will refrain from delivering encounters that are nothing more than a one-finger salute to a player with a fighter. I'm a tough DM, but I grok that my job is to make sure everyone at the table has fun.

Guiding the discussion back to my question, does anyone have a comment on my idea to make full attacks a standard action?

Morty
2009-09-11, 10:50 AM
Guiding the discussion back to my question, does anyone have a comment on my idea to make full attacks a standard action?

It doesn't help the fighter as much as it makes melee combat much deadlier for everyone, including monsters without class levels.
I repeat my Ultimate Fighter suggestion.

Grumman
2009-09-11, 10:50 AM
You should have included a link to the Ring of Sustainance.
Bah! Even 75% less weakness is still 25% too much. Real powergamers get the need to sleep surgically removed, and replace it with magitech cybernetics that render them immune to stunning.

Telonius
2009-09-11, 10:51 AM
I'd be very wary of making it for everybody if your game includes Scouts.

AmberVael
2009-09-11, 10:53 AM
I've been rolling the idea over in my head for a bit, however it fails to address a couple of other issues I had if used alone. The most major of which is simply that a serious feat intensive build isn't going to be functional until mid game at best in most cases (thus the rest of my suggestions). The most important pair other than that are the increased number of feats, and applying your fighter level to pre reqs (with these three, you can have a Fighter with multiple functional fighting styles by mid game).

Well, fighters tend to perform relatively reliably at low levels too, so the feat build thing kicking in at mid levels really isn't so bad.

I'd find that the real problem is still a lack of effects which a character needs to survive (ability to reliably interact with invisible, flying creatures. Ability to deal with continued spell, spell-like, supernatural, and etc. effects.) Stuff like that. Granted, you can get some of this from magic items, but I hate magic item dependency...

Amiel
2009-09-11, 10:55 AM
Is the goal to make a fighter that is good at killing wizards? Or is the goal to make fighters that can make strong contributions to a party?

The latter, although the former helps.


You use a scroll.
Sounds expensive.
Word.



WOW thread hijack!

OK, for the purpose of this thread only, let's assume that fighters don't have to worry about casters with highly-tailored spell loads because, as DM, I will refrain from delivering encounters that are nothing more than a one-finger salute to a player with a fighter. I'm a tough DM, but I grok that my job is to make sure everyone at the table has fun.

Guiding the discussion back to my question, does anyone have a comment on my idea to make full attacks a standard action?

You could maybe have the fighters 'recuperate' expended actions and deliver the payload as a full attack.

Doc Roc
2009-09-11, 11:00 AM
Jiri, are you familiar with the tome series?

Temet Nosce
2009-09-11, 11:37 AM
Well, fighters tend to perform relatively reliably at low levels too, so the feat build thing kicking in at mid levels really isn't so bad.

I'd find that the real problem is still a lack of effects which a character needs to survive (ability to reliably interact with invisible, flying creatures. Ability to deal with continued spell, spell-like, supernatural, and etc. effects.) Stuff like that. Granted, you can get some of this from magic items, but I hate magic item dependency...

Reliably yes, but what I'm looking at is ideally that the Fighter should from a relatively low level begin to assemble multiple recognizable styles of fighting and build on them. As is, you will actually run out of feats before fully assembling some of the more feat intensive ones and by level 20 they simply aren't that competitive in many cases.

As for the Fighter lacking a built in way to deal with such things... I honestly don't know what to say. My best suggestion here is to examine feats which you normally would not have spares to take which might help the situation... Alternatively, we could look into a system whereby the Fighter is granted bonuses typically available to magic items as class features (I.E. assemble a possible list, then grant the Fighter the ability to pick off the list at certain levels).

Really though, I do need to do some actual playtesting on my idea. For all I've been thinking about it for a while, I haven't checked whether it would work out well in practice.

Friend Computer
2009-09-11, 11:54 AM
Guiding the discussion back to my question, does anyone have a comment on my idea to make full attacks a standard action?
Yup. I just wrote this up, in fact:


Fighters gain special abilities as they become more experienced. At levels 3, 6, 9, and 12, the fighter can select one of the abilities below.

Mobile combatant adapted from The force Unleashed Campaign Guide, page 24

When you end your movement adjacent to an opponent, you can spend a swift action to activate this ability. If the designated opponent moves or withdraws before the beginning of your next turn, you can choose to move with that opponent, up to a total distance equal to your current speed. Unless your opponent uses the withdraw action or makes a Tumble check to avoid attacks of opportunity, its movement provokes an attack of opportunity from you as normal. If your target moves farther than your speed, you must still end this movement closer to the target than you began.

Focussed Warrior adapted from The force Unleashed Campaign Guide, page 29

Your training makes you confident and disciplined in combat. When you successfully deal damage to an opponent in combat, you gain a +5 morale bonus to your Will save until the start of your next turn. You lose this bonus to your Will save if you are surprised or flat-footed for any reason.

Riposte adapted from KotOR Campaign Guide, page 25
You may make an attack of opportunity against an opponent who misses a melee attack against you when you are fighting defensively.

Whirlwind of Carnage original
If you have multiple attacks (from a double weapon, high Base Attack Bonus, etc.) you can make a full attack action as a standard action.

I like this because there is a limited number of abilities and they don't have any prerequisites, so the player doesn't have to plan heaps, and by the end of the chain will have all of them anyway, still with levels left to give to a PrC!

Maybe a progression of 3, 5, 7, 9 would be better for some people?

In any case, I think this is simple, and while I doubt it is perfect, I think the more experienced gamers here could work this into shape without too much effort.

jiriku
2009-09-11, 12:18 PM
I'm impressed again with the volume of really good ideas here. You guys rock!

Morty, thanks for the link to Ultimate Fighter. I see some good ideas I can mine there. I'll have to think about that for a while though. There's a lot in there.

Telonius, ack, you're right. I'd end up helping skirmish classes more than the fighter if I opened standard-action full attacks to everybody.

Tidesinger, I have read through Tome of Battle thoroughly. I have skimmed Tome of Magic slightly, and was disappointed with it. I don't know of any other Tome books.

Speaking more broadly, I recognize that as many feats as fighters get, they really don't have enough to develop multiple tactics. I am also revising weapon focus, weapon spec, TWF, TWD, and powerful charge so that as PCs level, they'll automatically gain the benefits of the improved and greater versions of these feats. This means that you don't have to continually invest more feats to keep your low-level feats current as you advance in level...leaving room for more cool melee tricks.

I'm really liking the feats that Friend proposed, as well as the idea that fighters might qualify for advanced combat feats at an earlier level, or finesse past the ability score prerequisites. A classic power-enhancing technique among casters is to grant access to specific spells at a lower than usual level. Why not give fighters the same goodies by giving them quick, easy access to juicy feats?


Edit: new feature added to the topic of the thread:


At third level, you gain Martial Focus, an extraordinary class ability which allows you to subtitute your fighter level+2 for your base attack bonus when qualifying for the fighter bonus feats granted by your fighter levels (for example, you can use a fighter level of 6 to meet the +8 base attack bonus requirement of Improved Critical). The feature only helps you when determining if you qualify for a feat. You must still use your normal base attack bonus for all calculations when using the feat (such as when determining the maximum penalty you can take when using the Power Attack Feat).