Re-designing a fighter

[Venser]

Hello :)

When I say ''fighter is boring'' you all say ''tome of battle''. Sure, ToB fighter is amazing, but he is more anime like and that is why I hate him(he barely fits any of my campaigns).

So, I've been working on my P&P for 4 years now and I think it is time to focus a bit more on re-designing some core classes.

Now, a fighter is a troublesome class. Most people dislike it because his abilities are very limited. He has a few skills and most of the time he just swings his weapon. This forces player to multiclass or prestige after a certain level to be able to keep up with other classes.

While adding spells to fighter is not the best idea in the world and it can be achived by multiclassing, they are a great improvement to the class and they make it more fun to play.

Instead of adding spells to my fighter, I decided to give him a new ability codename tactics.

A tactic is a unique ability which a fighter gains at each odd level. Starting at 2nd level, a fighter can chose one out of many tactics listed in the book. Using these tactitcs is a standard action and they can be used con+3 times per day, although there will be a feat that will increase this number(example extra rage or extra wild shape).

Here is an example of a tactic which can be attained at a higher level.

Spellbreaker:
By spending one tactic usage and as a standard action, the fighter becomes more resistant to spells and spell-like abilities that target him and requier a fortitude and will save. A fighter gains +2 bonus on fortitude and will save rolls against spell until the end of the round. If a fighter suceeds on the save, a spell that with an effect fort/will(half) is completely negated and a fighter ignores all consequences that he would normaly gain with a succesful saving throw against that spell.

This is just one out of many examples. As you can see, the problem is that tactics take one standard action and usually last for the rest of the round, which makes a high dexterity score and improved initiative critical for a fighter. IMO it is not such a big deal and there will be other tactics which will have a longer duration.

The tactics are made to fit any type of fighter one would like to play. This example was made for a mage slaying fighter, but there are also numerous others for fighting with a two-handed weapon, crowd control, defense, buff and even ranged combat.

I hope you like it. Please, leave your comments.

[Eldest]

As written... It may not work right. Since a fighter uses his standard action to fight, or a full round action (which wouldn't let you take a standard action too) and the effects only last for that round, he can't attack with a tactic active on him.

[Venser]

Yes, I have taken that into consideration and I am currently fixing it.

Since these things are tactics, move action would make sense. Making them free action would just break the class.

[Eldan]

While the idea is not bad, I think I must play the Advocatus Diaboli here and ask: at this point, how is that different from a Warblade's maneuvers? They are extraordinary combat skills that are activated to improve your attacks. (I won't even get into the whole "too Anime" debate here). Why not use an existing, balanced system that does basically the same thing and is already written up for you?

[Veklim]

Many people (me included) have a problem with ToB, in that everyone has to completely re-learn the game once it's introduced, and with a group my size this becomes extremely tiresome and highly impractical. That said, I agree that this looks suspiciously like maneuvers with a different name and I still think it's the wrong way to fix a fighter.

Fighters don't need pseudo-spells or the like to do what they do, they're PHYSICAL characters, concerned with the world around them which they can see, hear and touch. Don't try and help them out by giving them stuff which DETRACTS from their basic ethos!

Fighters fight. The first thing a fighter fix should do is address the feat issue. Fighters get LOADS of feats, but most of them are wasted just trying to make a single favoured weapon usable. So....all fighters should gain the weapon focus/specialisation feat trees for one chosen weapon as standard. This means the bonus feats (which I'd have at 1st, 2nd, then every 3 levels thereafter) could be there to actually flesh out a unique combat role.

Secondly, there's the lack of anything else in the class apart from feats. Give the fighter a choice of maybe 2 or 3 skills to take as extra class skills, give them 4+int skills, and at 1st (and every 3 levels thereafter) give the fighter a combat skill trick to chose from.

Then you've got the last 3rd of the empty levels, and this is where you need to start brewing up individual and unique fighter-style abilities to be putting in. You'd probably be best served by having multiple paths to chose from, and gaining abilities on a set progression, but perhaps not. Only thing to remember is that fighters are an (Ex) ability class, not (Su) or (Sp).

[Eldan]

The warblade doesn't get any SU or SP abilities, he gets Ex abilities exlusively, most of which really are just "more damage and special effect", basically what you want here anyway. And they can pretty much all just be explained as, well, fighting. Hitting harder, hitting faster, hitting more recklessly, hitting more carefully. Disarming, tripping and bull-rushign while hitting.

The problem with making your tactical abilities move actions is this: if the fighter has to use his move action on making his attacks better, he can't use them to move up to the enemy. Which produces the same problem as a full attack now does: enemies can walk away from you, reducing you to a single attack every turn.

[Deepbluediver]

You should read my fighter fix (follow the link to my extended signature). I think it has a couple of ideas you might really like.

My 2 biggest inovations where a class feature that lets the fighter add more skills to his skill list (for versatility) and Battlecrys which are short-duration abilities that either buff your team, weaken the enemy, or have other effects (for power).

[Clawhound]

I've been actively working on this as well.

We can add magic to the fighter, but in a way that's more literary. For example, their weapons can be more like animal companions or familiars. There's the whole realm of intelligent weapons just waiting to be exploited.

There's also folklore and superstition. How many soldiers go into battle with lucky charms and such? A fighter doesn't need specific magic, but his accumulation of folklore could get him magical or extraordinary effects.

Here's an important one:

Larger Than Life (Ex) - Like the heroes of old, you're harder to push around than other mortals. At first level, for purposes of strength and grappling checks, your size is considered medium. (That's a little fix for small characters). At 6th level, this increases to Large, at 10th, huge, and at 14th colossal, and 18th gargantuan.

Grapple This (Ex) - There is one thing a dragon must never do. He must never grapple a hero or he will rue his fate. At 5th level, a Fighter may use any one-handed weapon in a grapple or when swallowed. At 10th level, a Fighter may use any 2-handed weapon in a grapple or when swallowed.

That fixes the scaling size issue and grappling, and does it in a way that sounds heroic. It also makes the fighter the ultimate in kicking down solid steel doors. Who needs lock picking?

Edit: Now you can have the fighter hop on the dragon's back, not get thrown off, and hack at the thing with his sword. I'm sure that these rules introduce breakage, of course. Everything introduces breakage.

[NeoSeraphi]

Larger Than Life (Ex) - Like the heroes of old, you're harder to push around than other mortals. At first level, for purposes of strength and grappling checks, your size is considered medium. (That's a little fix for small characters). At 6th level, this increases to Large, at 10th, huge, and at 14th colossal, and 18th gargantuan.


This needs work. It's very dip-worthy for Tiny creatures, and it punishes minotaur, ogre, and other Large-size fighters.

Here's a list of skills you should add to the fighter skill list: Appraise (I swear, no one deserves this skill more than a fighter), Balance, Diplomacy, Listen, Perform (Weapon Drill), and Spot. Then give them 4 skill points per level.

As for the dead levels, well, it depends on your perception of a fighter's flavor. The fighter class, as written, is extremely general. If you think he's just a normal trained soldier, give him some kind of endurance theme. If you think he's a tactical commander, you could take a look at some of the abilities of the marshal from the Miniatures Handbook. Etc.

[Ingus]

Someone already did it (http://dungeons.wikia.com/wiki/Races_of_War_%283.5e_Sourcebook%29/Warriors_with_Style#The_Failure_of_Feats). It is a good work, not completely satisfactory, but it is a good start. You can start from there if you want

[Greenish]

We can add magic to the fighter, but in a way that's more literary. For example, their weapons can be more like animal companions or familiars. There's the whole realm of intelligent weapons just waiting to be exploited.

There's also folklore and superstition. How many soldiers go into battle with lucky charms and such?Wouldn't those things just be magical items? :smallamused:

[Clawhound]

Wouldn't those things just be magical items? :smallamused:

If you look at the rules for intelligent weapons, sadly, they don't really work. All other intelligent cohorts are modeled as class features, so intelligent weapons would, according to common sense, belong to the same class of rules.

As for punishing big races, I don't care. They aren't played by many people. They can be barbarians or other classes and still get the benefits of being big. As levels go up, and opponents get even bigger, they'll need that size boost, too.

I admit that the boost for small races is dip worthy. Only melee types are likely to dip for that, and they are exactly the ones who need it.

We may as well state up front, we're trying to take a Tier 5 class to Tier 3. Rearranging the deck chairs won't get us anywhere.

As for flavor, there's lots of design space around sword and board. The class already supports it. We may as well run with it.

I'm a big fan of feat slots over feats. In addition, any feat that is designated as a "fighter feat" should have its ability prerequisites waived, with the caveat that these feats aren't "reliable" feats, so they can't be used as prerequisites for general feats or prestige classes.

I think that the Fighter should, by some mechanism, be able to use his strength bonus in charisma checks. Heroes are strong men, and strong men are looked up to, or feared, and diplomacy naturally sets them up for being kings. So they should have the intimidate, diplomacy, and sense motive cluster.

I think that Fighters could use a second good save, likely will.

I think that Fighters should have some immunity or mitigation to fear.

[Grod_The_Giant]

Here is an example of a tactic which can be attained at a higher level.

Spellbreaker:
By spending one tactic usage and as a standard action, the fighter becomes more resistant to spells and spell-like abilities that target him and requier a fortitude and will save. A fighter gains +2 bonus on fortitude and will save rolls against spell until the end of the round. If a fighter suceeds on the save, a spell that with an effect fort/will(half) is completely negated and a fighter ignores all consequences that he would normaly gain with a succesful saving throw against that spell.

OK, first the disclaimer: I can one-up the effects of the feat by playing a dwarf (+2 vs all spells and SLAs) Hexblade 3 (Mettle; does exactly what you wrote). Duplicating a low-level class feature for one round is not particularly impressive at higher levels.

Now, while it's difficult to evaluate the proposal without more examples, I find myself dubious. Stacking on passive bonuses is all well and good, but it's not fun. Even less so if you have to sacrifice a sizable portion of your turn (standard or move action) to get the bonus. If you do include active abilities (ie, "I hit him and daze him"), well... then you're going to start overlapping with maneuvers, and, as other people have said, you may as well go back to the ToB. (I don't want the thread to devolve into an argument about it, but I've had players use it, and it's not paticularly complicated or out of place in a campaign with wizards and monks running around, but it is extremely fun for the players).

I recently spent a lot of time working on a fighter fix myself, one that avoided any type of maneuver or tactic system or anything of that nature-- the warblade does that better. I had a lot of trouble making it tactically interesting to play.

I guess what I'm saying is... if you post the whole system, we can PEACH it more effectively. But from the very limited glimpse you're giving us, I see nothing to recommend it over the ToB besides bias.

(Oh, also, I swear that I've seen this idea floating around before)

[Ziegander]

I'm not going to tell you that your idea is bad or that you should be using Tome of Battle simply because I like it better. I'm going to try and help you out with your ability.

This Tactics ability should be something the Fighter gets at 1st level. I like that it follows the uses per day of Turn Undead. It's also a very simple "stamina" type mechanic, in that it is fueled by Constitution. The Fighter should get the Tactics ability at 1st level, and learn a Tactic at 1st level and every odd level thereafter.

Extra Tactics should be an available feat that, similarly to Extra Turning, grants four extra uses per day of Tactics. It should be able to be taken multiple times.

Using Tactics shouldn't require a blanket action type. Which is to say that the type of action required to use a given Tactic should be determined on a Tactic-by-Tactic basis. Some should be free or swift actions (ones that modify movement or attacks), some should be move actions (ones that are themselves movement or a move-equivalent action), some should be standard actions (ones that are themselves attacks or a standard-equivalent action), and some could even be immediate actions or full-round actions.

Some tactics, particularly ones that require a standard or full-round action, can and should have effects that last for more than 1 round. I'm thinking like one where the Fighter pours oil on his weapon and lights it on fire for a make-shift flaming property. That should require a standard action and last for a few rounds.

The Spellbreaker tactic you've given example of above is not an example of a high level tactic. That should seriously be a Tactic available to Fighters at 1st level, or at the highest 3rd level. It's also a good example of a Tactic that would work best as an immediate action. It gives 1 round of Mettle and a 1 round save boost that's weaker than the Dwarf's continuous racial bonus to saves vs all spells.

A high-level spelbreaker-type tactic should be just automatically ending an ongoing spell effect affecting the Fighter as a standard action. Maybe even allow him to end multiple ongoing spells with the same standard action, one per daily use of Tactics expended. I'd say something like this could be available anywhere between 11th level (when Greater Dispel Magic becomes available to casters) and 15th level.


HD: d10

{table=head]Level|BAB|Fort|Ref|Will|Special |
Tactics Known

1st|+1|+2|+2|+2|Bonus Feat, Tactics (Least)|
1

2nd|+2|+3|+3|+3|Bonus Feat|
1

3rd|+3|+3|+3|+3||
2

4th|+4|+4|+4|+4|Bonus Feat|
2

5th|+5|+4|+4|+4|Tactics (Improved)|
3

6th|+6/+1|+5|+5|+5|Bonus Feat|
3

7th|+7/+2|+5|+5|+5||
4

8th|+8/+3|+6|+6|+6|Bonus Feat|
4

9th|+9/+4|+6|+6|+6||
5

10th|+10/+5|+7|+7|+7|Bonus Feat|
5

11th|+11/+6/+1|+7|+7|+7|Tactics (Greater)|
6

12th|+12/+7/+2|+8|+8|+8|Bonus Feat|
6

13th|+13/+8/+3|+8|+8|+8||
7

14th|+14/+9/+4|+9|+9|+9|Bonus Feat|
7

15th|+15/+10/+5|+9|+9|+9||
8

16th|+16/+11/+6/+1|+10|+10|+10|Bonus Feat|
8

17th|+17/+12/+7/+2|+10|+10|+10|Tactics (Perfect)|
9

18th|+18/+13/+8/+3|+11|+11|+11|Bonus Feat|
9

19th|+19/+14/+9/+4|+11|+11|+11||
10

20th|+20/+15/+10/+5|+12|+12|+12|Bonus Feat|
10[/table]

Least Tactics

The DC of any saving throw allowed by a Fighter's tactic is 10 + 1/2 Fighter level + Fighter's Constitution modifier.

Least Pyrotechnics
Action: Standard
Saving Throw: Reflex negates

Using this tactic provokes attacks of opportunity as you retrieve a flask of oil from your person, pour its contents over an object or creature, and light the oil aflame. You must have a flask of oil and a way to start fires to use this tactic (flint and steel will do).

If you use this tactic on a creature it is allowed a reflex save to avoid the oil, but if that save fails the creature catches on fire (1d6 fire damage per round, full-round action to put flames out).

If you use this tactic on an object, that object catches fire for 5 rounds, unless the object is flammable in which case it burns until it is fully destroyed (or until the fire is put out, a full-round action to do). A creature is allowed a reflex save to negate this effect for an object they carry or wear.

If you use this tactic on a weapon, that weapon deals 1d6 extra fire damage with each successful hit, but also deals its wielder 1 fire damage per round, as long as it is on fire.

Least Poison Use
Action: Standard

This tactic provokes attacks of opportunity as you retrieve a does of contact or injury poison from your person and apply it to a weapon you wield. The applied poison remains active for 1 hour.

[Clawhound]

I think that simple is good. Bonuses on top of bonuses just gets confusing.

The tough part of fighter isn't 1st-10th level. The tough part is what to do about levels 10+. Up there, people want to do amazing things. Here's an example:

Fate Loves the Fearless (Ex) - You are fated to greatness. Starting at 10th, as an immediate action, ignore one effect per day from any source, increasing that up to two times per day at 13th, three per day at 16th, and four times per day at 19th.

That's brutally powerful, but at the high levels, you have spells going off like fireworks. Rushing up to certain death with confidence feels like a fighter, which is more in line with wizards who are warping space and time. Everyone likes saying "nya-nya, didn't touch me."

[Larkas]

We can add magic to the fighter, but in a way that's more literary. For example, their weapons can be more like animal companions or familiars. There's the whole realm of intelligent weapons just waiting to be exploited.

There's also folklore and superstition. How many soldiers go into battle with lucky charms and such? A fighter doesn't need specific magic, but his accumulation of folklore could get him magical or extraordinary effects.

Hmmmm, you could fold CW's Kensai into the Fighter and get something like that. I think it would be a nice boost to the Fighter's power level, but might warrant deeper thinking.

[Ashtagon]

One of the hidden advantages of the fighter class in 1e/2e was that, although it started out with lacklustre saves, it ended the game with the best saves of any class (better than "good" saves, in 3e terms). Unfortunately, 3e completely screwed over fighters on this aspect.

I let fighters re-roll a number of saves per day equal to his class level.

[Roderick_BR]

I'll just say this: "Tactics", "Art of War", "Auras", "Maneuvers". It's all the same thing. They are as "magical" as you want them to be. Seriously, how do you call magical the ability to jump farther than usual (maneuver sudden leap from TOB) or the ability to make two attacks at once? there's a 1st level maneuver that lets you do that at 1st character level, a few times a day, but you can also do that with Two Weapon Fighting (also at 1st level, and without uses limit) or with a Base Attack Bonues of +6 or more. Is that "adding spells to fighter"?

Seriously?

Now, if you don't like the mechanics, it's completely fine, your choise to not use it.
If you just don't like the flavor, change it. Or again, don't use it.
Don't want to learn a new mechanic? A lot of people learns all these new magic mechanics (incarnun, invocation, truenaming, totens) and others don't want to. Fine.

It just gets to me how people uses excuses, like "too anime", or "giving spells to fighters". You don't like, don't want to use, no one is forcing you, but these excuses just sound lame.

It's just as annoying as when you want a fighter fix and people say to "use ToB instead". or when you want a paladin build, and peopel say to "use a cleric instead".

</rant mode off>

Back to the topic, what exactly you want for your fighter? Limited uses/day of special moves (that sounds too much like Maneuvers)? I sugegst to search a popular fix with a mechanic called "art of war" that gives the fighter a (nomagical) special ability every other level. Sadly I don't remember the link or name now.

[Eldest]

First, I'd suggest that instead of having these effects be per day, I'd recomend per encounter. The tactics are going to be as central to the class as smite should be to the paladin, and the paladins smite sucks with a daily limit.
Second, another possible tactic:
Dirty Trick
Standard Action
Make a melée touch attack. If it hits, chose one of the following abilities and have the target make the apropriate save, at a +2 bonus.

The enemy must make a Fortitude save, or be Dazed for one round.
The enemy must make a Reflex save, or be Blinded for one round.
The enemy must make a Will save, or be Shaken for one round.