a possible fix for melee damage in 3.5

[theIrkin]

I was reading the 3.5 gripe list, and slogged through a bunch of complaints of melee damage being unable to keep up, and a few talking about HP bloat. Both are solid critiques that can be argued but rarely will anyone flat out deny that a fighter or non-charge-optimized barbarian is outpaced by a wizard or even a rogue on a good day. So, to incentivize those true blue mundane beat sticks, what if they got additional dice/multipliers to their base damage?

At level 10 a greatsword does 4d6 damage base instead of 2d6, a longsword does 2d8 instead of 1. Double it again at level 20.

Or at level whatever there is a flat multiplier of x2 to melee damage. x3 later.

It would have to be case by case for most classes, but have a fighter or ranger get extra dice/multipliers every 5 levels, barb's and monks every 6. wizards/clerics at maybe once at 15 or some such.

They already get more attacks and are probably going to hit twice as much as a caster would in melee, so their sword/bow damage is relevant again. A 20 fighter with a greatsword now does 8d6+2xStr at full attack bonus.

I'm not saying all damage should scale, just the base damage for any mundane weapon, whether ranged or melee.

What do you guys think?

[eggynack]

This doesn't seem like a thing that needs to be fixed. Melee attacks are already up there with the highest damage dealers in the game, and usually give you more than enough to one shot folks if you're optimized for it. Giving melee guys more damage just doesn't do much. If you want to give melee guys something worthwhile, give them options. Think something along the lines of ToB.

[theIrkin]

no, that's specifically why they need the fix. saying: if you want to do something worthwhile with your melee character, multi class into or just take ToB instead is not fixing the fighter. What that says to me is, why take a fighter or barb when you can just take a war blade or swordsage instead? because i want to be a straight fighter. high damage would help them immensely. everything stops fighting when it runs out of hp.

what builds as straight fighter/punching put out high damage? you can multiclass into scout, or find another class that adds bonus damage, but now you're not just a fighter anymore. a fighter becomes a one trick pony who, as he trips and grapples (maybe pounces?) just happens to sprinkle some damage on top of his maneuvers.

what i'm hoping to do is move fighter/barb/ranger/etc into the high tier 3, maybe even into tier 2 status, so he can hang with a wizard that isn't either gimped by it's player or hamstrung by the game the dm is playing.

[erikun]

The largest problem is that anything a melee character can do, a large creature can do better. Dealing x3 damage per attack may seem impressive until a gargantuan great wyrm dragon shows up and starts hitting with its eight-attack routine (each attack running off ~40 STR and dealing x3 damage).

I've considered just giving all iteratives the same base BAB as the first attack, but don't have a group to test the numbers with to see how badly that would mess everything up.

[theIrkin]

erikun, but what i'm suggesting (and i think i wasn't very clear in the OP) is that it become a class feature. a dragon doesn't get multiplied damage, but the fighter can now duke it out with a dragon. and full BAB iteratives would be interesting.

[sleepyphoenixx]

A fighter will never be T3 no matter how high you raise melee damage because they can be trivialized the same as now.
If you can get at the enemy and the enemy is vulnerable to melee damage fighters do just fine as is, given some optimization.
The problem is that it's too easy to shut a fighter down and that they are one trick ponies.

[SowZ]

See, giving them extra flat scaling damage won't free up their feats for other things. Now, they will just do the damage builds+Extra free damage. Interesting things to do in combat other than hit things won't really come from slapping on free damage to free up feat slots. Besides, your fix ends up screwing over archery.

No, TOB style class features and special attacks are the fix. No quick and easy fix exists. Also, I don't know what you mean by HP bloat. Hp scales far too slowly, if anything.

[eggynack]

no, that's specifically why they need the fix. saying: if you want to do something worthwhile with your melee character, multi class into or just take ToB instead is not fixing the fighter. What that says to me is, why take a fighter or barb when you can just take a war blade or swordsage instead? because i want to be a straight fighter. high damage would help them immensely. everything stops fighting when it runs out of hp.

what builds as straight fighter/punching put out high damage? you can multiclass into scout, or find another class that adds bonus damage, but now you're not just a fighter anymore. a fighter becomes a one trick pony who, as he trips and grapples (maybe pounces?) just happens to sprinkle some damage on top of his maneuvers.

what i'm hoping to do is move fighter/barb/ranger/etc into the high tier 3, maybe even into tier 2 status, so he can hang with a wizard that isn't either gimped by it's player or hamstrung by the game the dm is playing.
Let me make this perfectly clear. The fighter's attacks could do literally infinite damage, and he still wouldn't be in tier two. There's a chance he wouldn't even be in tier three. Straight mundane classes, not precision damage dealing classes, deal ridiculous amounts of damage. Think of a build with a barbarian dip that gives you pounce and whirling frenzy, and add on shock trooper, and you're just killing everything. ToB does not deal more damage than standard melee classes. ToB gives melee guys options. If you want to make melee guys better, you can't just staple on numbers and call it a day. They need options, versatility, and power beyond just hitting things. Your solution is not one, because the thing you think that melee damage fails at is the one thing it doesn't fail at. Damage alone is just never enough, especially when it's tied to something so easy to stop as running up to guys and stabbing them. At least a mailman has the benefit of delivering the mail in all weather.

[Devronq]

As it was already stated you can make a build with straight fighter or barb and still one shot everything. What will this damage increase do then ?

[Douglas]

Quantity of damage output is fundamentally not the Fighter class's biggest flaw. Lack of options, lack of versatility, and lack of many various non-damage abilities is what really keeps the Fighter lower than casters on the power scale.

[eggynack]

How about allowing the fighter to move further and still make a full attack? something like +5 ft at 6th, 11th, 16th level.
It's alright, I guess, but it's not something that hasn't been accounted for in the tier system. There's a whole list of ways to get free movement, and a good number of damage builds already make use of them. The obvious one is spirit lion totem barbarian, but there're other good options out there. It's still just not enough.

[SiuiS]

This doesn't seem like a thing that needs to be fixed. Melee attacks are already up there with the highest damage dealers in the game, and usually give you more than enough to one shot folks if you're optimized for it. Giving melee guys more damage just doesn't do much. If you want to give melee guys something worthwhile, give them options. Think something along the lines of ToB.

I think the unspoken, or rather, unarticulated, notion is that if a melee character does not need to optimize at all for damage, they can optimize for something else without losing out. The answer is "there isn't much else to optimize for besides damage", true, but pointing those out specifically and dealing with them (like "fighter can't do X" and figuring out how to solve that) is an easier route than just saying damage is insufficient. One needs to add why.


The largest problem is that anything a melee character can do, a large creature can do better. Dealing x3 damage per attack may seem impressive until a gargantuan great wyrm dragon shows up and starts hitting with its eight-attack routine (each attack running off ~40 STR and dealing x3 damage).

I've considered just giving all iteratives the same base BAB as the first attack, but don't have a group to test the numbers with to see how badly that would mess everything up.

I may be misreading you, but why is the dragon gettin x3 damage? It's not a melee character, so it doesn't get the melee character's boost. Or do you mean simply the size increases?

My preferred fix comes from wondering what distinguishes good fighters from bad ones outside of Roleplaying games, and the answer I got was defense of all things. A master swordsman isn't dealing out nuclear damage, he's untouchable when assailed by nine other men. He hits often, except when fighting other high-level fighter types. So I considered adding a "defense bonus" pool, of your level plus an attribute (your choice), which increases your AC, and your saves. You can reduce your AC/Save bonus and put those points into attack bonus for a single attack if you'd like.

But this led to a weird, theoretical system where all martial classes were based on giving the fighter class a feat which opened options and allowed semi-getalting with other classes. By the time I got the math in line to make it work at least as well as just multiclassing under the old system, it stopped being a 'quick fix' and got put on the back burner. Especially because Next is tryin to do about the same thing (or was!).

[erikun]

There's a couple of problems with this, namely that damage multipliers just aren't enough to make up the difference. Two-Handed weapon attacks can get up to 30-40 damage, and so multiplying that by x4 turns it into 120-160 damage. That sounds good, until you realize that CR 20 creatures have 400 HP and higher, and that even then, a spellcaster will still finish it off faster and easier.

And then there's the fact that ranged attacks are limited to, say, 15 damage. That makes shooting down the dragon with a bow feel pretty pointless, even with the damage multiplied to 60.

And then there's the fact that any damage boost to melee just makes ubercharing all the more attractive in comparison, because they'd need less feats to be killing everything.

And then there's the problem that multiclass characters become useless. Fighter/Wizard/Eldritch Knight? Well now not only is your spellcasting worse, but your melee skills are worse. This is nothing in comparison to needing to remain a straight-classed character to get the bonus, and all the lack of abilities that gives you.


That said, I'd recommend putting together a group and giving any rules tests a try out. You can put together a game on this same forum, and make sure that everyone is aware of the rules changes you have in mind. My top thoughts are to much make most special combat attacks (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/specialAttacks.htm) easier to use, along with the all-iterative-full-BAB, but my biggest concern is how these changes would affect giants and other creatures with a full attack.

[eggynack]

I think the unspoken, or rather, unarticulated, notion is that if a melee character does not need to optimize at all for damage, they can optimize for something else without losing out. The answer is "there isn't much else to optimize for besides damage", true, but pointing those out specifically and dealing with them (like "fighter can't do X" and figuring out how to solve that) is an easier route than just saying damage is insufficient. One needs to add why.

Eh, I guess. There's definitely an argument of potential and opportunity cost to be had here, but I think that the argument lacks merit. If a melee guy could gain sufficient options by refraining from dealing piles of damage, then melee guys would refrain from dealing piles of damage, pick up options, and be in a higher tier. Moreover, the cost of hitting high damage is pretty low, overall. I'm basically picking up power attack, improved bull rush, and shock trooper, and the barbarian dip for whirling frenzy and pounce is something I'd probably do anyway, because those abilities are sweet, and I like wolf totem. Improved bull rush even gives you extra options, so it barely counts, especially if you're using it for dungeon crasher or something.

So, this fix is basically 2.5 feats, because I'm probably not pushing any resources into damage after that. Past that point, I'm probably going after some versatility. My preference is runescarred berserker, but some people have mentioned champion of gwynharwyf, and that one seems cool as well. I might pick up a side specialization in intimidation, because barbarians are amazing at it, and there will definitely be at least a little tripping involved. This fix would get me maybe a single trick faster, and I don't think it's enough, especially when I can only get shock trooper at level six. As I noted, I could also just skip the shock trooper thing entirely, and get the extra trick that way. I probably wouldn't, but that's because most of these tricks are pretty limited. Well, except for runescarred berserker. That class actually does get you to tier three.

[theIrkin]

Sius put forward what i was trying to say better than i did. Specifically, my problem is that a mundane is one trick pony who has to optimize one avenue of affecting enemies in melee if he wants to affect high cr enemies (berserker pouncing whirlwind of doom, tripping lock-down, etc) and only the charger does significant enough damage to kill a big bad monster in 5 rounds or less. The goal that I would work towards by making mundane damage more powerful is to raise the optimization floor so that it isn't necessary to specialize as much, allowing a mundane to have 3 or 4 ways he can affect combat meaningfully at lvl 15+. They are still a mundane character with just a few out of combat skills to apply, but there less one dimension in the combat system. Combat (whether mundane or magical) is honestly 75% of DnD anyway.

Honestly, it's a half-formed idea, but thanks to everyone for the critiques on the core concept, keep it coming. I really would like to find a way to make mundanes more relevant without turning them into a pseudo-spellcaster (i.e. ToB; I love ToB but that's not the goal). The fighter, barb, and many of the means for building base classes using ACF's are meant to utilize all the weird maneuvers that are in the PHB for combat, but they rarely use more than one.

And I like the AC comment, but I would think full class level would take it too far. With +10 on full plate and shield, plus 5 or more in both natural armor and dodge items or class features, you're at a 50+ without a dex score.

[eggynack]

Sius put forward what i was trying to say better than i did. Specifically, my problem is that a mundane is one trick pony who has to optimize one avenue of affecting enemies in melee if he wants to affect high cr enemies (berserker pouncing whirlwind of doom, tripping lock-down, etc) and only the charger does significant enough damage to kill a big bad monster in 5 rounds or less. The goal that I would work towards by making mundane damage more powerful is to raise the optimization floor so that it isn't necessary to specialize as much, allowing a mundane to have 3 or 4 ways he can affect combat meaningfully at lvl 15+. They are still a mundane character with just a few out of combat skills to apply, but there less one dimension in the combat system. Combat (whether mundane or magical) is honestly 75% of DnD anyway.

A well built melee character can easily have three or four tricks that can affect combat meaningfully by level 15, or at least as meaningfully as melee can affect things. Let's start with the core of the build, which is barbarian 2/fighter 2. From barbarian 2, I'm picking up pounce, whirling frenzy, and improved trip. Just like that, I'm already a decent way through two separate character progressions. Let's make our hero human, because I can, and stick five feats on him. For tripping, the clear winner is knock down, and maybe combat reflexes. That's about all I'll do for tripping, because guisarmes are a fine replacement for spiked chains, especially if you're going after a bunch of stuff. After that, I'll get power attack and improved bull rush.

Now I'm one feat away from finishing my damage progression, so I'll start on intimidate with my fifth feat. For feat number five, I'll thus pick up imperious command, and I'll spend some skill points to get never outnumbered. After that, I'll continue on with fighter, and make it a zhentarim soldier for more intimidation. At level six, I add shock trooper and intimidating rage onto the build simultaneously, and finish my damage and intimidation progression, basically at the same time. I might want instantaneous and extra rage at some point, but I have 15 total levels, and that's plenty. Moreover, I can push back my progression by two feats, and get dungeon crasher as well. That's easily getting me three to four reasonable fighter tricks, and doing so far before level 15. It's not a perfect build, because I spent an incredibly small amount of time on it, but it works out alright for what it is.

[Yondu]

If damage is not the big issue, why do not add effects to the strike of the fighter like stunning, bleeding or hindering ( a little bit like the critical effect of the PF critical line) ? For always trying to strike the best spot, non only bashing heads or jumping around to charge...Yes we are close of the idea of the TOB but it add features to the fighter...for example, the fighter strike the flying creature at the joint of the wings in order to avoid see it run away or in the gullet of the dragon to avoid the big flamethrower...

For out of fight features, Fighters are survivalists, foragers, in time of war, they live on the land, in time of peace, they work in city guards or as bodyguards, so they can have social skills, survival skills (an idea linked to the NWP of AD&D)...

[Krazzman]

A good intention was had by pathfinder (giving him better weapon stuff and a will save enhancement) but the outcome is actually not that great.

One thing I would probably do is giving the fighter the Combat Form Feats for free as Class abilities on the corresponding levels, but slightly enhanced. Since there are 5 I would make the bonus +1 per feat. Basically the first one granting him +2 on willsaves +1 for every other combat form giving him a +6 will save bonus in the end. And maybe fixing Combat Strike.

Giving him some way to deal with ranged enemies from up close or close enemies with a ranged weapon would be another way. But simply put would need a few more good feats.

Damage isn't the problem. In low levels even a one handed light mace does enough damage to one-hit kill critters and bosses are still down rather quick.
The higher you get the more problems with accuracy rise if you focus on Powerattack.

[SiuiS]

Eh, I guess. There's definitely an argument of potential and opportunity cost to be had here, but I think that the argument lacks merit. If a melee guy could gain sufficient options by refraining from dealing piles of damage, then melee guys would refrain from dealing piles of damage, pick up options, and be in a higher tier.

That's the point. The idea is that if one wasn't so pressed for damage, they could do other things. The real problem is there aren't many other things to do – that is where the "fighter fix" lies.


Sius put forward what i was trying to say better than i did. Specifically, my problem is that a mundane is one trick pony who has to optimize one avenue of affecting enemies in melee if he wants to affect high cr enemies (berserker pouncing whirlwind of doom, tripping lock-down, etc) and only the charger does significant enough damage to kill a big bad monster in 5 rounds or less. The goal that I would work towards by making mundane damage more powerful is to raise the optimization floor so that it isn't necessary to specialize as much, allowing a mundane to have 3 or 4 ways he can affect combat meaningfully at lvl 15+.

You will definitely need to identify core issues an address those as well. While freeing up resources is a noble start, it's only half of one because you've got nowhere else to put those resources. How will you deal with fliers? Ghosts? Regeneration? Teleportation? Death spells? Get out of jail free cards (black tentacles, freedom o movement, etc.)?



And I like the AC comment, but I would think full class level would take it too far. With +10 on full plate and shield, plus 5 or more in both natural armor and dodge items or class features, you're at a 50+ without a dex score.

That's possible now; I think my best 2nd level AC without really trying was 34.

Consider though, that if you keep +20 AC, you're not adding that to attacks, damage or anything else.

Ideally, monk would be able to trade defense for skill boosts to certain skills, or to pump their stunning fist DC. Rangers could use it for tracking (maybe on a 4:1 ratio) and favored enemy to make the slow growth less painful. Paladins could redirect it to allies' saves against fear (or saves in general?) allies' AC, or put it towards their shield as a 1 round enhancement (+5 tower shield with +X*15 HP? Dragon breath is stopped completely by your wall!), etc. it would come with other devices, and hopefully be a meaningful choice, Defense versus some overt action.


A well built melee character can easily have three or four tricks that can affect combat meaningfully by level 15, or at least as meaningfully as melee can affect things. Let's start with the core of the build, which is barbarian 2/fighter 2. From barbarian 2, I'm picking up pounce, whirling frenzy, and improved trip. Just like that, I'm already a decent way through two separate character progressions. Let's make our hero human, because I can, and stick five feats on him. For tripping, the clear winner is knock down, and maybe combat reflexes. That's about all I'll do for tripping, because guisarmes are a fine replacement for spiked chains, especially if you're going after a bunch of stuff. After that, I'll get power attack and improved bull rush.

Now I'm one feat away from finishing my damage progression, so I'll start on intimidate with my fifth feat. For feat number five, I'll thus pick up imperious command, and I'll spend some skill points to get never outnumbered. After that, I'll continue on with fighter, and make it a zhentarim soldier for more intimidation. At level six, I add shock trooper and intimidating rage onto the build simultaneously, and finish my damage and intimidation progression, basically at the same time. I might want instantaneous and extra rage at some point, but I have 15 total levels, and that's plenty. Moreover, I can push back my progression by two feats, and get dungeon crasher as well. That's easily getting me three to four reasonable fighter tricks, and doing so far before level 15. It's not a perfect build, because I spent an incredibly small amount of time on it, but it works out alright for what it is.

Sure. How many books and sources did you have to trawl to get that? How much of that is system mastery versus actual ease of use? How useful are those tricks against A) a gargantuan dragon B) a Titan or storm giant C) a swarm of manticores 500' above ground?

More importantly, does that help the fighter/caster disparity at all?

I've made some fun stuff out of whirling frenzy lion totem barbarian and chaos monk because more attacks per round = more trips, grapples and such, but it only goes so far without magic or cheese.

[Komatik]

The thing eggy was trying to illustrate is that the options can be had along with good damage output, they just aren't that great.

[eggynack]

That's the point. The idea is that if one wasn't so pressed for damage, they could do other things. The real problem is there aren't many other things to do – that is where the "fighter fix" lies.
What? What things can this magnificent new fighter do? As I've mentioned before, no matter how fast you're doing things, you're still limited to the same list of stuff.



Sure. How many books and sources did you have to trawl to get that? How much of that is system mastery versus actual ease of use? How useful are those tricks against A) a gargantuan dragon B) a Titan or storm giant C) a swarm of manticores 500' above ground?

More importantly, does that help the fighter/caster disparity at all?

I've made some fun stuff out of whirling frenzy lion totem barbarian and chaos monk because more attacks per round = more trips, grapples and such, but it only goes so far without magic or cheese.
Yeah, these tricks don't help that much against any of that. That's the whole point. The OP's argument is that this will let you hit all of these amazing tricks, but it only lets you get maybe one trick faster, and one trick faster does not a tier three make. How does the build I constructed do against those things with this fix? How does a build you'd construct, with this fix taken into account, do against those encounters you've listed? The solution is adding options, which is what I've said all along. Piling on damage does next to nothing. The opportunity cost of adding damage to a build just isn't high enough to justify this being a fix at all. Also, only the intimidation stuff really requires that much book access and optimization understanding. The rest of it is mostly pretty easy. If I'm actually adding options to a melee build, I'm going runescarred berserker, and sticking spells on the whole thing. That PrC is frigging sweet. It's always seemed like a cop out in melee versus magic arguments.

[SiuiS]

The thing eggy was trying to illustrate is that the options can be had along with good damage output, they just aren't that great.

No one is disputing that, and in fact I think I said that in every post I've made so far.

What I am saying is that the idea to reduce system mastery required is still a valid one, even if it only one step amongst many to make things better. Eggynack said "we don't need to make the system easier, because I'm already a master" which is nice but wrong; his or my or your personal proficiency doesn't affect whether one should modify the optimization required for these things.

Making melee easier to do right is a good Idea. It's just not complete.


What? What things can this magnificent new fighter do? As I've mentioned before, no matter how fast you're doing things, you're still limited to the same list of stuff.


You're mistaking understanding the idea with the idea being my own argument. I've already answered this question, before you asked it in fact.

[eggynack]

You're mistaking understanding the idea with the idea being my own argument. I've already answered this question, before you asked it in fact.
Sure, but my point had nothing to do with optimization being a kind of fighter fix. That fighting fellow I posted is basically hitting tier four at best, even if the intimidation thing is kinda neat. I was just pointing out to the OP that specialization isn't quite the set of iron manacles they appear to be, and that you can hit most of the tricks in the game pretty fast if you know what you're doing. Thus, if you can hit all of the tricks quickly already, then letting them access those tricks even faster isn't going to help that much. In particular, I'm saying that you can largely remove this fix, give fighters like three extra feats, and you'll end up at around the same place. As long as you maintain the core pouncebarian aspect of the build, that's about as far as you need to go in the name of damage.

[SiuiS]

that you can hit most of the tricks in the game pretty fast if you know what you're doing.

If you know what you're doing is the relevant bit. It's the problem.


Thus, if you can hit all of the tricks quickly already, then letting them access those tricks even faster isn't going to help that much

Not faster; easier. Less effort. Totally different from more speed. This is a desirable goal in it's own right.

[eggynack]

If you know what you're doing is the relevant bit. It's the problem.

Not faster; easier. Less effort. Totally different from more speed. This is a desirable goal in it's own right.
I think you're missing the point a little. Assuming for a moment that you know how to optimize for damage, it doesn't matter how the rest of the build is optimized in either case. If you only take dodge and toughness, you get to start down that terrible path faster, and if you're taking combat reflexes and Robilar's gambit, you get those cool feats faster. You're getting access to whatever feat chains you're taking about 2.5 feats faster than you would otherwise. Assuming that you don't know how to optimize for damage, you likely won't gain any part of the other nifty options that fighters have access to, so they're still incredibly weak with this fix. There's really just no conceivable situation where this all adds up to fighters being good.

[Barsoom]

I was reading the 3.5 gripe list, and slogged through a bunch of complaints of melee damage being unable to keep up, and a few talking about HP bloat. Both are solid critiques that can be argued but rarely will anyone flat out deny that a fighter or non-charge-optimized barbarian is outpaced by a wizard or even a rogue on a good day. So, to incentivize those true blue mundane beat sticks, what if they got additional dice/multipliers to their base damage?

At level 10 a greatsword does 4d6 damage base instead of 2d6, a longsword does 2d8 instead of 1. Double it again at level 20.

Or at level whatever there is a flat multiplier of x2 to melee damage. x3 later.

It would have to be case by case for most classes, but have a fighter or ranger get extra dice/multipliers every 5 levels, barb's and monks every 6. wizards/clerics at maybe once at 15 or some such.

They already get more attacks and are probably going to hit twice as much as a caster would in melee, so their sword/bow damage is relevant again. A 20 fighter with a greatsword now does 8d6+2xStr at full attack bonus.

I'm not saying all damage should scale, just the base damage for any mundane weapon, whether ranged or melee.

What do you guys think?Interestingly enough, both 4E and 5E (aka D&D next) are doing this, although the technical details are a bit different from what you're saying.

It's an okay idea, but I don't think it'll have much effect, honestly. By level 10, a melee character is either (a) a martial adept initiating some maneuver that adds a heck of a lot more than +2d6 damage, or (b) an ubercharger power attacking for, again, you guessed it, a heck of a lot more than +2d6 damage.

[TrollCapAmerica]

If damage is not the big issue, why do not add effects to the strike of the fighter like stunning, bleeding or hindering ( a little bit like the critical effect of the PF critical line) ? For always trying to strike the best spot, non only bashing heads or jumping around to charge...Yes we are close of the idea of the TOB but it add features to the fighter...for example, the fighter strike the flying creature at the joint of the wings in order to avoid see it run away or in the gullet of the dragon to avoid the big flamethrower...

For out of fight features, Fighters are survivalists, foragers, in time of war, they live on the land, in time of peace, they work in city guards or as bodyguards, so they can have social skills, survival skills (an idea linked to the NWP of AD&D)...

I certainly wouldnt mind adding effects to attacks or more TOBish stuff just as long as it doesnt become like Hasbos D&D-like game

A better selection/number of skills would also be a great help to the Fighter and go a long way to helping him outside of sticking things with a sword

[Gigas Breaker]

I've got a fever and the only cure is more Tome of Battle.

[Epiphanis]

The 3.5 fighter doesn't really need fixing. It does what it was intended to do. It deals damage, survives stuff that others can't, draws fire from more vulnerable teammates, and generally provides a party with stamina and cost-efficiency to reduce the rate at which they must burn through expendables and dailies--and so such remain available when they are most needed, when you face the Final Boss after battling through eight waves of minions. All that talk about "tiers" is ultimately misleading.

It's true that most players don't care about that fighter's virtues, and that most DMs let them get away with not caring, but in that case there exist other alternatives, like Crusaders and Warblades and Duskblades, that are more to their tastes and needs.

[TrollCapAmerica]

The 3.5 fighter doesn't really need fixing. It does what it was intended to do. It deals damage, survives stuff that others can't, draws fire from more vulnerable teammates, and generally provides a party with stamina and cost-efficiency to reduce the rate at which they must burn through expendables and dailies--and so such remain available when they are most needed, when you face the Final Boss after battling through eight waves of minions. All that talk about "tiers" is ultimately misleading.

D&D is a game of challenges.Fighting monsters is one of them and even then the Fighter doesnt accomplish much.Outside of combat his high BAB still doesnt let him cross a giant ravine find where the villains have taken the princess or stop the Lich from flying away

[eggynack]

The 3.5 fighter doesn't really need fixing. It does what it was intended to do. It deals damage, survives stuff that others can't, draws fire from more vulnerable teammates, and generally provides a party with stamina and cost-efficiency to reduce the rate at which they must burn through expendables and dailies--and so such remain available when they are most needed, when you face the Final Boss after battling through eight waves of minions. All that talk about "tiers" is ultimately misleading.

It's true that most players don't care about that fighter's virtues, and that most DMs let them get away with not caring, but in that case there exist other alternatives, like Crusaders and Warblades and Duskblades, that are more to their tastes and needs.
It doesn't really do... most of those things. It doesn't survive things that others can't, because its defenses are kinda limited. You get AC, and you get some HP, but those aren't exactly the best sources of defense compared to stuff like miss chance. It doesn't really draw fire from more valuable teammates, because it has no mechanism to do so. Fighters don't actually have a lot of stamina and cost efficiency, because the price they pay for standing on the front lines is their blood. A caster has a surprisingly high endurance, given how far a single spell can carry you, and how many spells you get. Fighters can do damage with optimization, but it's not much of an innate thing. Moreover, damage is just a single avenue of attack, and one that it can only take by standing really close to an enemy. I know a fighter's virtues, and with ACF's they hit tier four, but the tier system is nowhere near misleading where they're concerned. This is all leaving aside the fact that druids are better on just about every relevant metric, and at lower ranges of build optimization too.

[Abaddona]

Not to mention Dragon Magazine stuff with things like Faerie Mysteries Initiate - if this feat is allowed then wizard can have rather easily more hp than fighter and if by coincidence he is a focused specialist in conjuration school then he has a potential to be greater tank than fighter.
Fighter definetely needs more skills and simply more options - maybe special options for using mundane exotic weapons (shooting net from a crossbow to immobilize flying monsters), using slippery oil as a swift/move action to deny his opponent a dexterity bonus. Ways to ignore miss chance on higher levels etc. Maybe even ability to modify his weapon so it will be a little better (mundane keen effect for example).