Full-Feats Fighter? 3.5

[IdleMuse]

How broken/what tier would a Fighter who gained a Fighter Bonus Feat at every level, rather than just 1/2/4/etc. be? I don't think it would 'break the game', in so many words, but would it just start outclassing most of the melee base classes like Ranger? I'm talking in an optimised-campaign sense here, really.

[jokey665]

In our games we houseruled fighters to get a feat at each level. No problems so far; it actually got somebody to play a fighter for once, though.

[Glimbur]

How broken/what tier would a Fighter who gained a Fighter Bonus Feat at every level, rather than just 1/2/4/etc. be? I don't think it would 'break the game', in so many words, but would it just start outclassing most of the melee base classes like Ranger? I'm talking in an optimised-campaign sense here, really.

The problem with fighter isn't how many feats it gets. The issue is what you can do with [fighter] feats. With enough splat support the answer is "some things".

[Magikeeper]

I imagine it would prompt people to take as many as 4-5 levels of fighter for certain builds (assuming no multiclass penalties).

So, some kinds of PCs would love this (like AoO and archery builds, not so certain about the latter). I don't think it would be overpowering and pure fighter still wouldn't stack up to multiclassed prestige-class using PCs. It would reduce the desire to multiclass like crazy to get enough feats for such builds - which is a good thing. Although Martial Rogue and the like are pretty nifty dips if you can take the BAB hit.

[IdleMuse]

The problem with fighter isn't how many feats it gets. The issue is what you can do with [fighter] feats. With enough splat support the answer is "some things".

That's kinda the idea beind upping the number of feats; given the restrictions on fighter bonus feats, even with all-3.5-supplements support, I can't see how it could really create a problem, and, like mentioned above, it would hopefully enable some more sideways builds, like archers.

[Zeta Kai]

My money's still on a Warblade.

[Mongoose87]

My money's still on a Warblade.

That six-level Dungeoncrasher dip is looking pretty cool, though.

[Gnomo]

I am using the same fighter variant in my games, with the addition of having 4 + Int. mod. skill points per level, it works great.

I would say it takes the class to tier 4 if poorly build and to tier 3 if optimized.

I have also found that this makes the class less of a dip class than most people think, because players start to feel tempted by the bonus feats. I have 6 players at the moment, 2 of them have fighter levels now, a wizard gish with 5 fighter levels and a cleric with 4 fighter levels.

[DragoonWraith]

Both your Wizard and your Cleric are not optimizing at all. Nothing, and certainly not bonus feats and BAB, is worth 5 Wizard levels or 4 Cleric levels.

[Gnomo]

Both your Wizard and your Cleric are not optimizing at all. Nothing, and certainly not bonus feats and BAB, is worth 5 Wizard levels or 4 Cleric levels.
Your point being?

I said nothing about the other 4 characters, from which there are 2 quite optimized ones (a full caster cleric and a psion gish). In every party you will have different levels of optimization, I'm just saying that with this fighter fix the "not optimized" ones also do quite well (even in the presence of more optimized party members may I add).

On the other hand, your near sighted view on optimization is not what the OP wants to hear about, since he is asking about using this fighter fix, if you discard the use of it because of your way of playing, then you have little to contribute on this thread.

[lesser_minion]

Both your Wizard and your Cleric are not optimizing at all. Nothing, and certainly not bonus feats and BAB, is worth 5 Wizard levels or 4 Cleric levels.

Perhaps, but let's face it, a wizard who eschews five caster levels for extra base attack bonus is hardly useless. Just not likely to do too well in the Test of Spite.

[Zeta Kai]

That six-level Dungeoncrasher dip is looking pretty cool, though.

Yeah, but does 6 levels really count as a "dip"? That's a significant fraction of one's total character progression, not just a slight detour into the martial side of town, as it were.

And I agree that a full-feat fighter (hereinafter referred to as the FFF or the F3) with 4+Int skills is a much better class (that's not saying much) without being broken in the slightest.

[Roderick_BR]

I imagine it would prompt people to take as many as 4-5 levels of fighter for certain builds (assuming no multiclass penalties).

So, some kinds of PCs would love this (like AoO and archery builds, not so certain about the latter). I don't think it would be overpowering and pure fighter still wouldn't stack up to multiclassed prestige-class using PCs. It would reduce the desire to multiclass like crazy to get enough feats for such builds - which is a good thing. Although Martial Rogue and the like are pretty nifty dips if you can take the BAB hit.
This. People would only take even less level of fighters, since you get more feats for less levels. I'd suggest give him more general feats, but it would only make things worse.
There's plenty of good homebrew fighter classes around that rewards going full fighter with unique abilities instead of just more feats.

[DragoonWraith]

Your point being?

I'm talking in an optimised-campaign sense here, really.
You and IdleMuse are talking about two very different optimization levels, if he means optimized at all.

Lose enough caster levels, and even Wizards and Clerics can become weak. Four and five levels is looking like enough to get well on the road towards weakness.