Why are fighters so unskilled?

[Duraska]

I wonder why Wizards of the Coast decided to only give fighters 2 skill points per level. Here we have a guy who has devoted his whole life to training himself for warfare and he's considered unskillful? I would think that a warrior wouldn't survive long without skills like survival, spot, ride, balance, listen and heal. Heck, even swim, climb, and knowledge (history) would be important to most fighters.

So they spend their whole lives working with their hands, but never develop more than 2 skill points per level?

Obviously it must be for balancing purposes, but would it really break the system too much to give fighters 4 skill points per level? After all, barbarians get that many and they don't even start out literate...

(Even adding skill focus (X) to the list of a fighter's choosable bonus feats would help).

What do you guys think?

[Quietus]

A lot of the skills you listed are already fighter skills, and the fighter isn't the outdoorsy type, so things like Survival wouldn't come into play. They focus on actual fighting, not the outside-of-combat aspects like finding food. I do think Heal should be a class skill, maybe, but certain things like Listen and the like? Nah.

The Fighter class skill list, while short, is relatively effective. But I do agree they should get more skill points.

[ReluctantDragon]

This has long been a pet peeve of mine. Why oh why did the Barbarian get 4 per level and the fighter get 2? Talk about strange. I agree wholeheartedly and in any campaign I've run where it comes up, I houserule fighters up to at least 4 to assist in cross-class skill buy.

But in the end, most of the time groups that I run don't consider it that much of a handicap. I'm lucky that way. So far.

[Swordguy]

No, you're right. I actually give EVERY class an additional 2 SPs, along with extra Knowledge Skills as class skills equal to thier INT modifier. It helps a lot.

Basically, WotC massively overvalued melee combat when balancing character classes.

[Lord Iames Osari]

Actually, I disagree, Quietus. Listen, Spot, etc. can be very useful in combat. Bluff and Sense Motive as well. Feinting, anyone?

[oriong]

Well first off I'd argue fighters are very 'skilled', they just don't have many skill points there is a difference between the two. A fighter is extremely skilled, his skills are just invested into...fighting (i.e. high hit points, BAB, lots of feats)

The main thing is that there simply isn't much reason for a fighter to be exceptionally full of skill points, he's got the worst class skill selection of anyone. This is mostly because there are almost no skills that directly relate to combat and most of the skills a fighter would reasonably develop he already has.

[Matthew]

It's just the way the Classes were set up 'for balance'. The Skill System doesn't make the best sense to begin with.

[Mike_G]

I really think Spot and Listen should be class skills for fighters and the NPC Warrior class, since they're the most likely to be guards, and sneaking up on some poor sap who has these both as cross-class is kinda unfair.

The fighter does get the shaft skill wise, especially since he's unlikely to get any INt bous, like one would expect the Wizard to. Why should the Wizard have more skills than the Fighter? Aprt from Knowledge skill, the Fighter actually has to go out and do a lot more stuff, and should have picked up a few things.

[Saph]

The way D&D 3.0 was designed was that Fighters were to be the Feat Class, but with almost no skills, whereas Rogues were to be the Skill Class, but with almost no feats (well, not enough, anyway).

That's the design reason, as far as I know anyway.

- Saph

[Wippit Guud]

Name me a classic 'fighter' anywhere that has a lot of skills?

[Duraska]

MacGyver? :)

[Bears With Lasers]

How about, oh, Conan?

The thing is, characters from books don't fall into line with D&D classes; you can always say they have Expert levels, a Rogue dip, etc.

Here's what it comes down to: more skill points make D&D more fun. Don't let people step on the skillmonkey's toes, but letting them do a few more things won't overpower anyone, as long as you don't add skills like Use Magic Device to their list and the points to fuel them. Even the skill-monkey benefits--it lets him, for example, "waste" points of Forgery, which he can then proceed to use (but which he wouldn't normally take, since you can use it in awesome ways, but it's never -necessary-).

[PnP Fan]

I'll put my two cents in favor of a skill pt bump (4 points total should do), and adding to the list of skills.
1. Survival: Medieval seiges (or modern day warfare for that matter) required camping and knowledge of how to survive in those circumstances. I think this is easily justified.
2. Spot/Listen: Almost every soldier/officer has to stand watch and guard a post at some point in their career. But for some reason our guards and bodyguards are blind as bats.
3. Bluff/Sense Motive: I can't see the average guard/soldier having much use for this, but your heroic Robin Hoods? Absolutely.
4. Your typical leaders of armies are, yep you guessed it, soldiers, so why don't Fighters have any of the leadership skills like Diplomacy? You can only get so far by Intimidating your troops, and you certainly don't keep people working for you through intimidation.

Fighters should not just be "sluggo" characters. There is a lot more to the tradition of the soldier than just killing things. Leadership and practical skills are as much a part of their jobs as jumping and climbing

[Duraska]

^^

I fully agree, but would also add heal to that list.

[talsine]

How about, oh, Conan?

quoted for truth.

Though if you built Conan in d20 he'd be, like, 6Bar/2Rog/10Fig by the later stories. Man i love Conan. Also in the same vein, Tarzan and John Carter, though Tarzan would obviously be a Ranger with a handful (maybe 2) levels of Barb and John Carter would be a Fighter with some Marshel levels.

Pet peive of mine, why isn't the Marshal a full BAB class? Lead from the rear my butt.

[Saph]

How about, oh, Conan?

His name is Conan the Barbarian, not Conan the Fighter. :P

Actually, if I'm remembering right, Conan was one of the main inspirations for the original D&D Barbarian class - rage, uncanny dodge, etc.

- Saph

[Fax Celestis]

It's just the way the Classes were set up 'for balance'. The Skill System doesn't make the best sense to begin with.

It's better than Nonweapon Proficiencies.

[Swordguy]

It's better than Nonweapon Proficiencies.

True, but just because something is better than something else doesn't mean it's the best option.

[the_tick_rules]

i guess cause their devoting their "time" to mastring weapinry and not practing jumping.

[Maxymiuk]

Name me a classic 'fighter' anywhere that has a lot of skills?

Sparhawk and Co. from David Edding's Elenium trilogy. They had all kinds of useful skills aside from being sword swingers.

Actually, they could be compared to paladins, but the argument still stands, since paladins don't get no skillpoint love either.

[talsine]

His name is Conan the Barbarian, not Conan the Fighter. :P

Actually, if I'm remembering right, Conan was one of the main inspirations for the original D&D Barbarian class - rage, uncanny dodge, etc.

- Saph

Only because he came from a barbarian culture, once he left he learned a lot, was a thief for a year or two and was even a profesional soldier/merc/pirate for a while.

[Fax Celestis]

True, but just because something is better than something else doesn't mean it's the best option.

You mean like democracy? It's a bad system, but it's better than a totalitarian regime. But that's off topic.

Still, the point is, it's an improvement.

[Behold_the_Void]

Sense Motive is a great skill for Fighters to have, especially guard types. They should be at least reasonably able to discern falsehoods.

"I'm totally a noble, I just forgot my invitation."

"Oh, OK, sounds reasonable. Go on in. I see no problem with you, especially since my spot skill isn't anywhere near high enough to note that concealed dagger with Vecna's seal on it."

[Matthew]

It's better than Nonweapon Proficiencies.

Who said it wasn't? Actually, though, by the time of Skills and Powers Character Points could be handed out independent of Levels and Non Weapon Proficiencies were beginning to strongly resemble 3.x Skills. I think I would take the Character Point system over the Skill Point system any day, with regard to Non Weapon Proficiencies and Skills.

[Draz74]

I'll put my two cents in favor of a skill pt bump (4 points total should do), and adding to the list of skills.
1. Survival: Medieval seiges (or modern day warfare for that matter) required camping and knowledge of how to survive in those circumstances. I think this is easily justified.
2. Spot/Listen: Almost every soldier/officer has to stand watch and guard a post at some point in their career. But for some reason our guards and bodyguards are blind as bats.
3. Bluff/Sense Motive: I can't see the average guard/soldier having much use for this, but your heroic Robin Hoods? Absolutely.
4. Your typical leaders of armies are, yep you guessed it, soldiers, so why don't Fighters have any of the leadership skills like Diplomacy? You can only get so far by Intimidating your troops, and you certainly don't keep people working for you through intimidation.


Cross-class, cross-class, cross-class. People seem to forget all the time (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0141.html) that cross-class skills are legal to take, and do actually work sometimes -- like, anytime you're not against someone who has the counterpart skill as a class skill.

Especially this part:
I can't see the average guard/soldier having much use for this, but your heroic Robin Hoods? Absolutely. That's like the definition of when a skill should be cross-class. (Otherwise I could argue that every skill should be a class skill for every class, because I could come up with an interesting character concept for every combination.)

I do agree it would make a lot more sense for Fighters to get more skill points, so they could have a lot more cross-class skills. But most of the skills discussed should remain cross-class for them, I think.

Spot and Listen? Yeah, just about every average soldier who sometimes does sentinel duty should have these maxxed. But fantasy generally has stealth be an effective tactic at getting you past sentinel-soldier types. In game, this is represented by a Level 3 Rogue being able to buy more ranks in Hide/Move Silently than a Level 3 Fighter can buy in Spot/Listen. The guards have these maxxed, but at cross-class rates.

Survival? Nah. If a typical fighter were an outdoorsy type, he'd be a Barbarian or Ranger. (I can imagine an outdoorsy character who's a Fighter, not one of the other two, sure, but he'd hardly be typical.) Oh, and camping isn't really using the Survival skill, unless you're the guy that goes out and hunts food for everyone else. PC parties camp all the time even if none of them have Survival.

Heal? Makes more sense than some, but treads on the Ranger's theme seriously. Not that Rangers ever get Heal, but that's because the skill is underpowered (and therefore Fighters wouldn't get it either even if they had more skills).

Bluff/Sense Motive? Depends if the "typical Figher" archtype is supposed to represent the type of warriors who Feint a lot. Maybe before the Swashbuckler class was invented, the Fighter should have had Bluff/Sense Motive (and Balance too, for that matter) on his skill list. But now, people usually just figure that type of warrior isn't a Fighter anymore.

Diplomacy? Well, for one thing, military generals aren't really likely to be pure Fighters -- levels in Aristocrat or Marshall are likely. Unless they're the gruff, hard-as-nails type of officer. Anyway, I think cross-class Diplomacy is sufficient to represent military leadership. (Military officers, even high-level, aren't usually silver-tongued. When they actually need to negotiate, they bring in an actual Diplomat to do the talking.)

Of course, with these strict interperetations, even the small skill list the Fighter has would get reduced. Climb, Handle Animal, and Jump are iffy -- I can't see why they particularly fit the typical Fighter archtype. But that would stink if the Fighter's pathetic list got even smaller.

It would be nice if more skills were actually about fighting. Like the Tactics skill or whatever it's called in Tome of Battle. That would make sense for a Fighter.

[Medieve]

You people are silly, its perfectly reasonable why some classes don't get that many skill-points relative to other classes. A skill's usefulness should never have a bearing on whether it is a class-skill. A classes' skill set should represent the environment and procedure that they are trained in. Skills (as well as feats) represent time and energy in training that skill. While sense motive would be useful to a guard (and a fighter with a lot of ranks in sense motive would probably be well suited as a guard) taking "sense motives" when you are training as a fighter isn't feasible. Its just not part of the curriculum. Skill sets are skills that are more easily accessible to your class are CLASS skills not whether they are useful.

[Shhalahr Windrider]

Bluff and Sense Motive as well. Feinting, anyone?
'Cept fighters get their BAB as a bonus to resist being feint (shooting down the need for Sense Motive), and they don't get much benefit out of feinting except against particularly high Dex opponents. Feinting was meant for rogues.


I really think Spot and Listen should be class skills for fighters and the NPC Warrior class, since they're the most likely to be guards, and sneaking up on some poor sap who has these both as cross-class is kinda unfair.
From a conceptual point, I also like Spot because it can represent an extension of a fighter's ability to keep an eye on his or her opponent, looking for weak spots and the perfect time to strike. Honestly, that bit of "Spotting" is probably represented in part by the full BAB, but if a fellow already knows how to look for anomalies in his opponent's fighting style, is it really that hard for him to transfer the skill to other areas of his life?

[Swordguy]

Meh, Spot and Listen should be class skills for everyone. They're the primary guides of how you interact with your enviornment, for pete's sake! Must we remember the example of commoners unable to hear a conversation at 10 feet?

[Matthew]

It does not work like that! Spot and Listen are only used when there is a chance that something may not be heard or seen straight away (i.e. not in the context of normal conversation or observation).

[WrathOfLife]

Eh? Why not just use Unearthed Arcana's Thug varriant? increased skill points, more skills, add the cost of a feat. You don't get Diplomacy, but a quick dip into human paragon and you can make it a permant class skill and pick up a feat. In the end you lose 1 bab and 1 feat (which can be made up for later), and gain 4 x int skill points and bluff and diplomacy as class skills.

It's how I plan on making my Swashbuckler (As I intensely dislike the actual class).

[clarkvalentine]

I really think Spot and Listen should be class skills for fighters and the NPC Warrior class, since they're the most likely to be guards, and sneaking up on some poor sap who has these both as cross-class is kinda unfair.

If a guy is a dedicated guard, maybe it's worth burning a feat slot on Skill Focus (spot) or Awareness.

Edit: A 1st level warrior NPC, human, Awareness and Power Attack, armed with a halberd. That's a formidable opponent for low-level adventurers right there.

But in general, I tend to agree - an extra +2 skill points for everyone is kind of nice, and doesn't unbalance things too much (although it does dilute the human's extra skill point a bit, so YMMV.)

[Mike_G]

Actually Awareness makes a decent 1st level warrior guard but the usefulness falls off very quickly, and burns a feat from a class without bonus feats. He'd be much better off with a combat feat. At 1st level, Weapon Focus is worth a lot, as is Point Blank Shot or Rapid Shot, if he has a bow.

Max ranks as cross class are 2 at first level. I doubt he's gonna have a huge Wisdom bonus, and that cost half his availible skill points, unless he's human or has an Int bonus. Add Awareness and he gets +2 to each.

If you give it as a class skill, he can get 4 ranks, which still eats half his points, all if he maxes both Spot and Listen, and leaves him zip for Ride, Jump, etc.

A 1st level Rogue should still have the advantage, because max ranks are the same, but he adds Dex bonus which is almost guaranteed to be higher than the Warrior's Wis bonus.

Above first level, the gulf widens rapidly.

Considering the average guard is going to be a Warrior, I can't see how they justify not givng the skills useful for, y'know, guarding.

[clarkvalentine]

Actually Awareness makes a decent 1st level warrior guard...
Considering the average guard is going to be a Warrior, I can't see how they justify not givng the skills useful for, y'know, guarding.

That's mainly what I was talking about - low level NPC guards.

[Fawsto]

I persoanly disagree with Bears... I think the skill that is missing to the fighters pool IS use magic device. With this single skill a fighter may fight for much longer AND buff himself! (Wand of Cure Moderate Wounds and Wand of Bull's Strenght).

Apart from that, all fighting classes should have Spot, Listen and Survival (the Ranger's skill, in my natural lenguage it may be diferent from the english name of the skill, dunno) in theyr skill list, and, at least, 4 skill points per lvl.

I may be wrong... This is just my opinion.

[Hario]

MacGyver? :) its been settled for a long time, MacGyver is not a fighter, nor does he fight that often he tries to think his way out of fighting, MacGyver is obviously an Artificer if any classes. Conan was a 'Barbarian/Fighter' and Rambo a 'Ranger/Fighter/Barbarian' If you want to see a homebrew skill system that balances the fighter and other classes, it still gives them 2 skill points per level but evens things out so they get skills just like the wizard but you won't see a wizard crossclassing to get ranks in climb but you would for say a fighter with good strength. ::insert shameless plug:: http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=10208

[Kahlan]

I don't think the number of skill points is such a big deal (since a lot of classes only allow 2 plus your Intelligence mod per level)... my beef is with the selection. It definitely focuses on the basic stuff that any simpleton can do - Climb, Swim, Jump - but the fact that Listen and Spot aren't on the list has been a constant annoyance for my fighters.

Albeit it has led to several amusing adventures. Who needs Spot and Listen when you can just blunder into traps and let that wicked Fortitude save do the rest? :smallwink:

Of course, if I had actually put those ranks into Climb instead of trying desperately to cross-class Listen... I wouldn't have fallen down that 230 foot shaft and hit the metal grate at the end...

But when it comes down to it, I'll take extra feats over extra skill points any day of the week. :smallbiggrin:

[clarkvalentine]

I guess the problem I have with giving spot/listen/survival/UMD/much else to fighters is that fighters aren't rangers, they aren't magical specialists,... they're fighters. They typically fight in an army with hundreds or thousands of their comrades. The army may have scouts and engineers and technicians, but those guys are rangers (or scouts or rogues) and experts (or artificiers or masters) and casters of various sorts. They're not necessarily skilled at outdoorsy stuff - they leave that to the rangers. They don't care about magic, it's possible they've never even seen it, in some settings.

Leave the fighters to the fighting.

But that's me.

[DeathQuaker]

Put me in the camp that agrees that Fighters should definitely have more class skills, and more skill points wouldn't hurt either.

Additional class skills I feel appropriate, based on the fact that many types of fighter builds would want to take these (not just a few specific concepts):

Heal: A soldier or merc who can't do basic first aid is in major trouble. Any fighter-type is likely to have access to and need of a healer's kit, and won't always be able to wait for the cleric to take care of him.

Listen/Spot: For reasons stated many times above--fighter's the default class for guards of all kinds (same for the Warrior NPC class). It seems ridiculous to have to pay double skill points for an ability many of this class would be capable of.

Profession: No reason why a fighter, who comes from all kinds of backgrounds and/or may also have crafting skills may also have some kind of profession--guard, guide, merchant, guildmember.

Survival: I disagree with the folks saying that's just for "outdoorsy" folks like Rangers. Yes, Rangers are the wilderness specialists (and that's why they have stuff like Track and Endurance for free, plus way more skill points), but there are lots of reasons many Fighters would have at least a basic understanding of survival outside city walls. Consider the setting first of all--lots of people in a pseudo-medieval fantasy are going to know how to hunt, or at least gather some edible morsels in the woods when food is scarce. Fighter-types in rural areas would likely be part of food-gathering expeditions. Fighters hired as caravan guards would need to know basic camping skills--how to start a fire, find a good place to set camp--as definitely would soldiers. The typical "peasant hero with a sword" is going to know how to deal with basic dangers of the wilderness surrounding his pastoral home. A Fighter isn't going to have the range of expertise that a Ranger would, but many fighter-types would know how to set camp and get food in the wilderness for a variety of reasons.

There are decent arguments for other skills, but I think these are the core ones. Other ones like Bluff or Tumble... that's more of a specific type of character that is likely to end up being better off a multiclassed rogue or what have you.

Now, why more skill points?

First, to accommodate the broader range of skills available in this scenario. Second, to make the fighter more able to specialize in supporting his trade. A fighter needs to keep his equipment in top condition without costing him a lot of money -- that's skill points in lots of Craft skills. Many fighters will want to at least know how to keep their mount from bolting in an ambush, even if they don't want to ride into combat -- that requires Ride. The reasons many fighter would have the skills listed above are already listed. And yes, also having some leeway to purchase cross class skills would be nice, so if you do want to build that mounted swordsman with a noble background, you can actually spare some skill points out of the ones you're saving for Ride and put them into Knowledge: Nobility instead.

[Dervag]

Only because he came from a barbarian culture, once he left he learned a lot, was a thief for a year or two and was even a profesional soldier/merc/pirate for a while.Barbarians can hold down jobs; there's nothing in the class description that prohibits it. Conan was definitely chaotic, and his preference for light armor suggests that he wasn't primarily a fighter.

[Arceliar]

I for one think every character should get a number of skills which are always treated as class skills equal to his or her intelligence modifier. Or something along those lines. At the very least it should be easier to increase the max ranks without a rogue/ranger dip. If a fighter wants to focus on sense motive or spot, even at the cost of 2 points per rank, he should be able to do so and be as good as a rogue who picks it up with his other 9-10 skills.

[Person_Man]

From a mechanical standpoint, its perfectly understandable that the game designers would want a few low Skill classes. This makes Skill Monkeys more valuable at what they do. If you want to give Fighters 4 Skill points per level and an expanded list, then Rogues should get 12 Skill points per level and every Skill on their list.

A better idea would be to simply give Fighters a bonus feat every level, instead of every other level after level 2. This way there are no dead levels. People might actually stick with Fighter longer so that they could pull off insane feat combos. And they'd have half a chance against high level casters.

Of course, this would make Rangers, Paladins, Barbarians, and Monks suck more. But those classes, while cool, are already on the shallow end of the power spectrum.

[Bears With Lasers]

"Free class skills equal to INT bonus" = "everyone picks up Use Magic Device".

[Shhalahr Windrider]

Survival: I disagree with the folks saying that's just for "outdoorsy" folks like Rangers. Yes, Rangers are the wilderness specialists (and that's why they have stuff like Track and Endurance for free, plus way more skill points), but there are lots of reasons many Fighters would have at least a basic understanding of survival outside city walls. Consider the setting first of all--lots of people in a pseudo-medieval fantasy are going to know how to hunt, or at least gather some edible morsels in the woods when food is scarce. Fighter-types in rural areas would likely be part of food-gathering expeditions. Fighters hired as caravan guards would need to know basic camping skills--how to start a fire, find a good place to set camp--as definitely would soldiers. The typical "peasant hero with a sword" is going to know how to deal with basic dangers of the wilderness surrounding his pastoral home. A Fighter isn't going to have the range of expertise that a Ranger would, but many fighter-types would know how to set camp and get food in the wilderness for a variety of reasons.
Meh. I think all those "survival basics" are represented well enough by untrained checks. The primary tasks for all that stuff are all DC 10-15, which I think are a fair enough representation.

[Raum]

A question to consider, if all skills were class skills for all classes how much would change? How often would you pick classes outside of the usual list? Would it help the game, hurt the game, or have no affect?

Frankly I think the fighter is one of the few classes who might commonly pick skills not on his standard list. A rogue won't, unless he has a very high Int he probably can't get all the skills he needs that are on his standard list. A wizard might at later levels once he's raised his Int, but his required knowledge, spellcraft, and concentration skills will take most of his points. Barbarians, bards, and clerics all have skills on the standard list they need to take.

Yet the fighter commonly spends points cross class even though he only gets 2+Int skills per level! Yes, I think the fighter's skill list is inadequate.

[Raistlin1040]

Yeah fighters should have more skills if they've devoted themselves to being fit. But that's real world mechanics. (Casts dispel catgirl) Sorry. I'm keeping our catgirl population in check.

[Norsesmithy]

"Free class skills equal to INT bonus" = "everyone picks up Use Magic Device".I am sorry Bears, but if you lived in a world with pervasive magic and didn't try to pick up UMD you are a GD retard.

I seen no problem with a fighter moving in on the wizard's or cleric's job, after all, they moved in on his.

[Deepblue706]

I think the primary problem with the Fighter's skill selection is related to the fact that the Fighter can be so many things. It is given no clear-cut definition, other than it being someone who uses a great deal of weapon training and discipline to take down foes.

A military commander should probably have ranks in Knowledge: History.

A bodyguard probably has a fair amount of ranks in Spot/Listen.

ect.

It would appear that as WotC creates more warrior-classes, they give us ways to "more appropriately" fill the roles of what the Fighter seems to fall short of, ie the Knight (But, I must admit I feel this class was poorly designed).

Having played GURPS, the D&D skill system only seems more trivial than it initially had, for me. While it makes sense that one who emphasizes in one field should be lacking in another, I not only agree that the Fighter should be more malleable in the way of skills, but all of the classes should have slightly more freedom, as well.

However, at the same time, restrictions would still have to remain in play. Off the top of my head, I consider an idea such as allowing a character an additional amount of class skills equal to their intelligence modifier (at first level) being not so bad. An actual analysis of how this effects game play might prove it not such a good idea, as this could grant INT-based characters a significant advantage over other players. But, I don't actually feel like investigating that right now - I'll just pose the idea and let someone else decide whether or not it works out in the end.

Perhaps, limitations could be imposed on some more exclusive skills, such as Forgery, Use Magic Device, ect. Also, perhaps to prevent characters from having too many class-skills, maybe these extra class-skills could be "traded" for, instead of simply added on?

Eh, whatever. I'd devote more thought to it if I didn't feel the entire system needed a huge overhaul in order to deem it reasonable, and had the free time to build my "own" D&D.

[Dan_Hemmens]

It's better than Nonweapon Proficiencies.

I'm not familiar with the way NWPs work, but I know people who are actually of the opinion that NWPs worked *better* than the D&D skill system.

[Orzel]

Fighters are all about combat. They specialize in combat and are the masters (in the base core classes) of complex combat actions. Most character backgrounds for fighters include a formal military school, a special combat academy, or mentoring under a combat master. Knowledge of many of the skill fighters don't have as class would not be taught heavily in these groups.

Spot/Listen: Detection skills are not important to combat specialists. Fighters are rarely put in a position where they need to see unexpected things from far away or often. You can say guard and patrols, but as a person who has stood guard for various chaotic activities; when people sneak past you, it's rarely your fault. Sneaky folk use distractions or avoid you all together. The classes with detection skills have them because they are in environments while stealth is all the time. Stealth is the key to wilderness survival and sneaky type need to counter other sneaky types and notice unwanted hurdles.

Heal: Fighter have medics for major healing.

Survival: Fighters should not be spending long periods in the wilderness without a guide. Just like everyone else. Fighter also won't be in the condition where they would be able to perfect the skill without becoming a barbarian, ranger, etc. Everyone knows some things are hard to learn without a long experience. A fight would most likely drop/not use half his class features if he had to live in the wild since half of them don't work well there.


If you go the education method, skills are equivalent to electives and optional courses. Rogue training is short and easy "This is the neck. Stab it. This is the chest. Stab it too." Combat and Magic training is long and repetitive. Fighter, Arcane masters, Paladins, and Clerics had 2+Int skill points because they have more required training and/or upkeep to master their skills. Other classes have less required work to do to learn. If Every class had 4+ Int skills, rogues would level up twice as fast due to near zero downtime training/researching/learning.

[silvermesh]

I am sorry Bears, but if you lived in a world with pervasive magic and didn't try to pick up UMD you are a GD retard.

I seen no problem with a fighter moving in on the wizard's or cleric's job, after all, they moved in on his.


I think the problem there is that there is a concernable difference between balancing classes and making them all exactly the same. sure, if the fighter and wizard have the same spell list, BAB progression, HPs progression, and saves they will balance... but then why are we even playing a class based game?

UMD is a very good skill, one that is highly specialized that very few classes get full access to. this makes those classes more flavorful, and is basically a class feature for those classes. letting everyone get it takes away from the rogue and bard, not the wizard and cleric.

even with the measly 2+int/level on my fighters I will usually try to cross-class UMD just because it's that good.

[Grendita]

This is Why I like some of the additions in the D20 Conan adaption. Such as Background skills. Every race has a list/choice of background skills that you get 2 ranks in during character creation. These are generally Survival/wilderness based skills for the more hardly races or diplomacatic skills for the more cosmopolitan races. This does in fact lead to more rounded characters.

As a matter of interest here are D20 stats for Conan (http://www.mongoosepublishing.com/pdf/kingconan.pdf), but in D&D I would lean towards a Barbarian/Fighter/Rogue. And I believe he may have inspired the first incarnation of the Barbarian class, but such has deviated since then.

[Telonius]

Iconic "skillful" fighters: Thorin Oakenshield & Co. Quite a few ranks in Survival, some in Perform (Harps of Gold), Spot, Craft (Weaponsmithing, Armorsmithing, etc.) They're obviously maxed out in Appraise, and probably close to it in Intimidate. Maybe some ranks in search. Though failing to find the secret door in the Misty Mountains pass might mitigate against that, it's possible its DC was higher than 20 (thus only Bilbo would have been able to find it).:smallbiggrin:

[Josh Inno]

One could ask the same question of clerics, and sorcerers. Any PC class represents a person who has devoted much of their life to a certain realm of training and/or experience.

Barbarians have more skill points than fighters, as has been said, for balance issues.

While at level 1, the Barbarian can likely out do the fighter, the fighter quickly becomes the superior combat choice for general battle, with the Barbarian being able to lay on quick spurts of power for the boss fight, spurts of power which ultimately threaten his life. With all the feats the fighter gets, a good fighter build can outdo a similar barbarian build in your standard 4 combat encounter module. To compensate, the barbarian has other talents. DR, the ability to run fast, and some out doorsy skills and the ability to purchase them with a few more skill points. Keep in mind the barbarian, if he wishes to be literate, must spend 2 of those extra skill points to become literate.

The fighter also has the option of many different styles and techniques in fighting, where as the Barbarian is limited to the generally potent "Thud Melle smash!"

[selfcritical]

How about, oh, Conan?
You mean Conan the Barbarian? If only we had a class for that archetype......


The thing is, characters from books don't fall into line with D&D classes; you can always say they have Expert levels, a Rogue dip, etc.

Here's what it comes down to: more skill points make D&D more fun. Don't let people step on the skillmonkey's toes, but letting them do a few more things won't overpower anyone, as long as you don't add skills like Use Magic Device to their list and the points to fuel them. Even the skill-monkey benefits--it lets him, for example, "waste" points of Forgery, which he can then proceed to use (but which he wouldn't normally take, since you can use it in awesome ways, but it's never -necessary-).

Agreed. This is a big reason why I find Iron heroes more fun. There's a lot more skill points running around in that game and a lot more applicable uses for each skill.

[SeeKay]

For all the people arguing that "Heal" should be a class skill for everyone, have any of you thought of dropping the DC of "First Aid" to 10? It's a skill that can be used untrained. Dropping it to 10 makes sure that anyone that "Takes 10" can pass the basics of holding a cloth over a bleeding cut.

[Fax Celestis]

I'm not familiar with the way NWPs work, but I know people who are actually of the opinion that NWPs worked *better* than the D&D skill system.

Who are these people? I can show them where the line for handing out brains is.

[Artanis]

I'm on the side that the skills being thrown around aren't really the sort of thing a Fighter would just "pick up", simply because the sorts of things that they could just "pick up" can be accomplished by taking 10.

--For Heal, look at what it actually does: save a mortally wounded character, provide long-term rehabilitation from wounds, fix an impaled foot, treat poison, and treat disease. All of those are a far cry from the "press the cloth to the bleeding place" that Joe Q. Stabbyguy is going to pick up in boot camp.

--For Survival, Fighters with 10+ Wisdom can already "forage for food if they need to" simply by taking 10. Even a Fighter with an abysmal WIS score can get to that point with just a couple ranks of Survival.

--For Listen, a totally untrained guard continuously taking 10 on Listen checks is going to have about a 50/50 chance of noticing somebody with no Move Silently ranks trying to get past him for every 15ft the would-be sneak moves. A guard who has specifically trained for it by taking just 2 ranks of Listen is going to have a nearly 90% chance of hearing that same sneak move 30ft. Even if the sneak has a +5 greater MS modifier than the guard has a Listen modifier (i.e. +3 listen vs. +8 MS), taking 10 still gives the guard about a 40% chance of hearing the sneak over the course of 30ft. Unless the setting gives everybody and their dog max ranks of Move Silently as a class skill, that isn't bad for a level 1 character.

--Spot is similar to listening in the take 10 department.


With Heal as it is now, your typical sword-swinger isn't going to have it as a class skill because there is no Heal check to put a bandage over a gash: the skill itself is all pretty serious stuff. Stuff that the concept of Medics was come up with to handle. Likewise with Survival, I see no reason why a Fighter would be learning to follow tracks or find their way through uncharted wilderness by default: that's why the military trains (or hires) scouts and such. Foraging? Sure, but any Fighter can do that untrained anyways without too much difficulty.

Profession, on the other hand, is something I think that Fighters should get. After all, "Thog smash things good!" is a pretty good resume for somebody looking for work as a mercenary or enforcer or such :smallwink:

[Matthew]

Who are these people? I can show them where the line for handing out brains is.

Me, for one. Not the original system, but the later (A)D&D 2.x Skills and Powers Character Point driven Non Weapon Proficiency System.

The Secondary Skills system might also, arguably, be considered better, since a Character just got whatever Non Weapon Proficiency the DM and PC agreed were appropriate.

[Mike_G]

I'm on the side that the skills being thrown around aren't really the sort of thing a Fighter would just "pick up", simply because the sorts of things that they could just "pick up" can be accomplished by taking 10.


--For Listen, a totally untrained guard continuously taking 10 on Listen checks is going to have about a 50/50 chance of noticing somebody with no Move Silently ranks trying to get past him for every 15ft the would-be sneak moves. A guard who has specifically trained for it by taking just 2 ranks of Listen is going to have a nearly 90% chance of hearing that same sneak move 30ft. Even if the sneak has a +5 greater MS modifier than the guard has a Listen modifier (i.e. +3 listen vs. +8 MS), taking 10 still gives the guard about a 40% chance of hearing the sneak over the course of 30ft. Unless the setting gives everybody and their dog max ranks of Move Silently as a class skill, that isn't bad for a level 1 character.

--Spot is similar to listening in the take 10 department.



But you can't take ten on opposed rolls. Or, if you can then the sneaker can take ten and if he has one more rank than you do, he can automatically beat you.

Taking ten involves carefully concentrating, as it can't be done while distracted, and no guard in the history of warfare has spent eight hours carefully concentrating on his surroundings. After ten miutes, he trying to shift his weight from foot to foot, shrug his cloak futher around him, find a place out of the wind, thinking about the last woman he had, figuring the minutes until his next leave and the next woman he'll have, resenting the rest of the company asleep in the nice warm barracks, and wishing he'd gone to college instead of listening to that damn recruiter.

That was always my experience.

I'd have a chance of noticing stuff, but I was never so concentrated as to be considered taking ten. Not for more than the first five minutes of walking post, anyway.

Seriously, try to just watch out your front window and really concentrate for an hour. Can't be done. That's your "totally untrained" Spot and Listen check. Skil ranks help you sort out stuff from background and make you bale to notice things even though your mind wanders.

[Fax Celestis]

Me, for one. Not the original system, but the later (A)D&D 2.x Skills and Powers Character Point driven Non Weapon Proficiency System.

The Secondary Skills system might also, arguably, be considered better, since a Character just got whatever Non Weapon Proficiency the DM and PC agreed were appropriate.

Secondary Skills was okay. I'm talking about the NWPs in the AD&D PHB.

[Artanis]

But you can't take ten on opposed rolls. Or, if you can then the sneaker can take ten and if he has one more rank than you do, he can automatically beat you.

Taking ten involves carefully concentrating, as it can't be done while distracted, and no guard in the history of warfare has spent eight hours carefully concentrating on his surroundings. After ten miutes, he trying to shift his weight from foot to foot, shrug his cloak futher around him, find a place out of the wind, thinking about the last woman he had, figuring the minutes until his next leave and the next woman he'll have, resenting the rest of the company asleep in the nice warm barracks, and wishing he'd gone to college instead of listening to that damn recruiter.

That was always my experience.

I'd have a chance of noticing stuff, but I was never so concentrated as to be considered taking ten. Not for more than the first five minutes of walking post, anyway.

Seriously, try to just watch out your front window and really concentrate for an hour. Can't be done. That's your "totally untrained" Spot and Listen check. Skil ranks help you sort out stuff from background and make you bale to notice things even though your mind wanders.
Fine then, roll to oppose the sneak rather than taking ten. It works out even better in the guard's favor since the average of a d20 roll is 10.5, and not 10.

If anything, you help prove my point. People are saying Fighters should get spot and listen because they might've "been trained to be guards"...but if even a "trained guard" won't spot somebody with no Move Silently ranks, why should being a level 1 Fighter mean that he "just picks up" the ability to (relatively) reliably detect a skilled Rogue who doesn't want to be found?

[Matthew]

Secondary Skills was okay. I'm talking about the NWPs in the AD&D PHB.

Don't forget the Character Point driven Non Weapon Proficiency System of Skills and Powers fame. Yeah, the Non Weapon Proficiency system in the 2.x (A)D&D PHB was just plain not very good (but was fortunately optional, unless you were playing in a tournament...).

[Fax Celestis]

Don't forget the Character Point driven Non Weapon Proficiency System of Skills and Powers fame. Yeah, the Non Weapon Proficiency system in the 2.x (A)D&D PHB was just plain not very good (but was fortunately optional, unless you were playing in a tournament...).

I quit playing D&D for a while, switching to Palladium, Chaosium Call of Cthulhu, and RuneQuest, and Skills and Powers came out during that period, so I never used it. All I really have to go on was the AD&D corebooks and a few of the AD&D Completes (Ranger, Fighter, and Bard, in particular).

[Mike_G]

Fine then, roll to oppose the sneak rather than taking ten. It works out even better in the guard's favor since the average of a d20 roll is 10.5, and not 10.

If anything, you help prove my point. People are saying Fighters should get spot and listen because they might've "been trained to be guards"...but if even a "trained guard" won't spot somebody with no Move Silently ranks, why should being a level 1 Fighter mean that he "just picks up" the ability to (relatively) reliably detect a skilled Rogue who doesn't want to be found?

I never said a trained guard couldn't spot somebody with no ranks. I said you can't just assume you're taking ten for eight hours.

Trained guards learn to notice changes in the background, to filter out the standard noise and position of objects and spot or hear the differences.

So, untrained, you can't take ten, If you roll a one, you're thinking about your girlfriend, or your buddy's girlfriend. If you roll a twenty, you just snapped back into focus after you caught yourself nodding off or thinking of you buddy's girlfriend, a tub of whipped cream and a stripper pole.

Trained, you have the ability to daydream about strippers, while separating the sound of a twig snapping underfoot from the bad porno electric guitar in you head. You have absorbed the noise of wind in the bushes, and notice alterations to it. Sudden silence often makes a trained guard more alert.

So, yeah, hours and hours of walking post have let me put ranks in Spot and Listen, so I do notice things, even when not concentrating, since you just can't do that for hours with no fixed object on which to concentrate.

[Matthew]

Heh, I quit playing D&D and cancelled my Dragon subscription at around the same time, just as the repackaged books were being released. I picked them up after 3.0 was released, but before I encountered it.

[SeeKay]

Why couldn't WotC taken the stand that DoJ's Hero system did on opposed rolls (limit them when possible)? Since I mostly DM these days, I've come to see something. When I bring in my characters, they are used for 1 fight, maybe 3-4 the most; when the players bring their characters, they are in every fight. So most of the skills people want to add to the class skills of a fighter (Listen, Spot, Bluff, Sense Motive) will HURT more than help in the long run. Yes, it would be nice to have a few more ranks of spot in your tanks, but my NPC's will have it as well. And nothing pisses off a rogue more than rolling a 20 on a hide/move silently and still failing the roll.

Seriously, look at the skills. The Fighter is mostly a damage sponge in the game. He takes some heavy blows and dishes them back. He is trained in combat, but his training is very linear. He's supposed to be a solid wall that the rest of the party forms around.

Sense Motive might be useful to counteract Bluff:Feints, but most of Sense Motive isn't about feints. A fighter isn't going to know the subtly of the body outside of combat. Save that for other classes. You might let a Figher use his Sense Motive ranks as full ranks against Feints, but as Cross Class vs everything else, but to straight out give all of Sense Motive to the Fighter would unbalance the classes.

Bluff is also a skill that is so much more than fighting. Like Sense Motive, I could see giving full ranks to Bluff:Feint but cross class ranks to other uses.

Listen is something that a Fighter uses alot when on guard duty, but it also has other uses outside of guarding. Same with Spot. Giving these to a Fighter will also throw game balance out of skew. Besides, while a Figher might be thrown on guard duty doesn't mean he'll be good at at. Look at most of our modern day "Guards". Most of the time they let stuff slip by with a little effort. Sure, they are trained to spot things, but they don't really pay that much attention. Do you honestly think just being a guard makes you better at guard skills? There is a reason why the saying "It takes a thief to catch a theif" started to be used and D&D captures that well.

Heal skill is one of the most under-used skills in the game. It is so much more than "First Aid". Heal:Long Term Care, Heal:Treat Poison and Heal:Treat Disease are well beyond what a combat class will see. It's so much better to drop the Heal:First Aid DC from 15 to 10 than give Heal skill to Fighers.

Profession is one I can't see not being a class skill for every class. So a figher can craft a sword, but not be able to sell it? Makes no sense to me.

Survival is something one would first think should be, but when you really look, it shouldn't. The Fighter is mostly a "city" class. They are the troops; they are the guards; they are the army. Surviving on their own isn't something that they would be too deeply trained in (that's more for the scouts who would be Rogues and Rangers). Fighters fight in large packs. They would be able to find a few game animals and fresh water (ie:Take 10), but not be able to find reliable long term shelter. They'd be lost quickly without their buddies to march behind and they have no clue how to prepare themselves for bad weather if they aren't equiped for it. Survival isn't something a Figher should be good at doing. That is something for the "loner" classes. The Figher is supposed to be in a group.

[Black Swan]

I think there's a pink elephant deliberately being ignored here. As it is, fighters suck. They need help in some major ways and in some lesser ways. The skills issue is one of the lesser ways.

In a way, I think the fighter suffers from something similar to what the cleric suffered from in 2nd Ed. In 2nd ed, the cleric was a healing battery. He couldn't fight, didn't have any real damage spells, all he really did well was heal and turn undead. That's boring. In 3rd ed, the fighter is a meat wall. Granted, he's always been a meat wall, but in 2nd ed he was also a meat blender. Maybe it's the DMs I've played with, but every time I've played a fighter in 3rd ed I've felt like I was just there to support the spellcaster. And by support the spellcaster I mean 'take hits for the spellcaster'. So effectively, you're a walking buffer zone. Not cool.

That's why the barbarian makes for a more interesting PC than the fighter, in my experience. Yeah, he doesn't get as many combat feats, but he has a lot of interesting traits and cool stuff. And unlike the fighter, his cool stuff scales up over time. You don't just stand there and soak up hits for the wizard, you go out and kill stuff. It's harder to do that as a fighter unless your DM loves mobs of small stuff or you play with unselfish casters. Which doesn't, at least in my experience, describe the majority of casters.

As for the earlier posts...
@Seekay: you oughtn't confuse 'security guard' and 'sentry'. 'Security guard' is a do-nothing job (I've been there, I know). This breeds complacency. A real security force which isn't just there for show is nothing like a bunch of security guards. A soldier on sentry duty ought to at least have a fighting chance. Likewise, the group's fighter ought to at least have a fighting chance of making his spot/listen rolls. Nothing's more frustrating than being the party's fighter and never, ever making your spot/listen roll.

[Beleriphon]

Actually Awareness makes a decent 1st level warrior guard but the usefulness falls off very quickly, and burns a feat from a class without bonus feats. He'd be much better off with a combat feat. At 1st level, Weapon Focus is worth a lot, as is Point Blank Shot or Rapid Shot, if he has a bow.


You're absolutely right, but then again I don't expect to see Tordek playing guard at the duke's castle. I do expect him to bashing the heads of goblins in while Lidda spots them.

[Mike_G]

You're absolutely right, but then again I don't expect to see Tordek playing guard at the duke's castle. I do expect him to bashing the heads of goblins in while Lidda spots them.

I do believe, however, that in his pre-advenmturing days, when he was learning how to wield that Dwarven Waraxe, he had to stand guard a few times.

Most Fighters would have formal combat training, whether they were soldiers or squires or just studied with a master. Learning the discipline to stand watch is a part of any military training.

I remember many nights pointlessly guarding the 3rd Battalion Chow Hall at Parris Island as a recruit. That's where I learned to tune out the normal background noise of bugs sucking your blood in the Carolina darkness from the footstep of a Drill Instructor hoping to catch a recruit napping.

[Beleriphon]

I
I remember many nights pointlessly guarding the 3rd Battalion Chow Hall at Parris Island as a recruit. That's where I learned to tune out the normal background noise of bugs sucking your blood in the Carolina darkness from the footstep of a Drill Instructor hoping to catch a recruit napping.

Fair enough, but at the same time would you really consider this to be ranks in the skill, a modest wisdom bonus, or your Drill Instructor not having any ranks in Move Silently? You may have picked up a few ranks in the skill, as a cross class, but its not something that I think you would specifically be dedicated to doing as part of your training. I don't imagine that the drill instructor ran you through exercises specifically to increase you're ability notice something.

Also, the taking 10 thing is for NPCs vs PC interaction. As the DM you can just assume the unskilled NPC got a 10 on his roll instead of rolling every single time.

[Artanis]

I think there's a pink elephant deliberately being ignored here. As it is, fighters suck. They need help in some major ways and in some lesser ways. The skills issue is one of the lesser ways.
Oh, I agree they could use all the help they can get.

One of my quirks is that I tend to argue against what looks like faulty logic, rather than a premise itself. So "Fighters should get Heal because they suck and need help" is perfectly fine by me because they DO suck and they DO need help. On the other hand, "Fighters should get Heal because every fighter should know how to patch up sixteen poisoned, infected sword wounds in the spleen just because they're fighters!" looks to me like BS (for the reasons I described a few posts back), so I speak out against that particular line of reasoning.


As for Spot and Listen, sure, give 'em to Fighters because they're useful skills and Fighters need the help. But people have made some good rebuttals to me on the "Spot and Listen are something that Fighters can do because they're Fighters" debate, so I'm going to back down on it until I can hear the two sides out some more :smallsmile:

[ArmorArmadillo]

One of the problems here is that people are citing examples like Robin Hood (who is more of a rogue anyway) or the military commander as the skillful fighter, but that doesn't go against the rules of the Fighter. A fighter can have good skill picks, it just involves investing in a good Int score.

Furthermore, a fighter with Cross-Class Spot/Listen can still invest in those skills and be good at it, he just won't be as good as the hypersensitive rogue (or able to spot the super-stealthy rogue.)

[Dan_Hemmens]

Who are these people? I can show them where the line for handing out brains is.

My understanding is that the argument runs something like:

NWPs were primarily designed to add character to PCs, they were there so you could play a jeweller, a blacksmith, or whatever, without compromising the effectiveness of your character. They were primarily flavour text.

The D&D skill system is an integrated part of the game, and as a result they tie the game much *more* to the dungeon-crawling system. Most of the skills are dungeon-based (I mean seriously: "Use Rope"?), and if you assume that the system applies to everybody else in the world, it becomes very hard to see how somebody can be good at their job without also being a kickass swordsman.

[Matthew]

An odd view considering that Rope Use was a Non Weapon Proficiency. I see what you are saying, but Non Weapon Proficiencies were a mix of Non Dungeon useful and Dungeon useful Skills.

[dead_but_dreaming]

Ok, I haven't fully read the thread, but it just struck me that perhaps every character should recieve one additional class skill at level 1 as an additional background-thingie? Sorry if anyone has suggested this allready.

[Matthew]

I don't really see why all Skills shouldn't be treated as Class Skills. Skill Points are the real limitation.

[Deepblue706]

I don't really see why D&D isn't GURPS.

[Mike_G]

Fair enough, but at the same time would you really consider this to be ranks in the skill, a modest wisdom bonus, or your Drill Instructor not having any ranks in Move Silently? You may have picked up a few ranks in the skill, as a cross class, but its not something that I think you would specifically be dedicated to doing as part of your training. I don't imagine that the drill instructor ran you through exercises specifically to increase you're ability notice something.


If I had a decent Wis bonus at 17 years old, I wouldn't have joined the Marines and requested Infantry.

All DI's have ranks in Moves Silently, plus the Eyes in the Back of Your Head feat, and spend all their skill points maxxing Intimidate.

We spent a lot of time standing guard. As much as we did on many things everyone would consider core fighter/warrior skills, and much more than we spent on the obstacle course, etc, which would be the Jump, Climb, ect that Fighters do get as a class skill. We posted guard in our own barracks every night and every time the platoon went to chow (pretty much any time we left the rifles in the squadbay without the platoon there) and rotated posting Battalion guard with the other training platoons in 3rd Battalion.

I can't see how we can spend more time on something than we did on unarmed combat and not consider it a "class skill."



Also, the taking 10 thing is for NPCs vs PC interaction. As the DM you can just assume the unskilled NPC got a 10 on his roll instead of rolling every single time.

Taking 10 doesn't really change teh dynamic, just assumes an average roll. I dislike taking ten on opposed rolls, because either participant can have a good or bad day, but that's jut me.

[Josh Inno]

*RaE* Fighters get loads of feats, which they can combine in fun, exciting, and powerful ways. They are superior in combat. And if you don't want to play a meat shield for the caster... then don't. If the caster wants a dedicated meat shield fighter he can take leadership and get a cohort. If I want to play a go gettum fighter, I'm gonna be a go getum fighter, and if the caster is being selfish or stupid, I'll point that out. It sounds to me like someone is confusing how he plays fighters with how all fighters are.

[Matthew]

I don't really see why D&D isn't GURPS.

Heh. It really wouldn't make much difference to alow Characters to purchase all skills as though they were Class Skills. The limitation for buying Non Class Skills / Proficiencies is for the most part harsher in 3.x than it was in previous editions.

[Viscount Einstrauss]

Just be human and take Able Learner. You have plenty of feats anyway, you can afford to drop one of your first three to gain access to every skill.

[Matthew]

Why not just give that Feat as a Free Bonus Feat to everyone?

[The Valiant Turtle]

I strongly agree with giving fighter's more class skills and more skill points. I like what Mike G has been elaborating on. Most soldiers of any form probably spend more time standing watch than they do training in combat or any of the fighters other class skills. This is probably just a matter of fatigue. You can't do physical training all day long, but you can spend an awful lot of time standing guard. Just how often does your average soldier jump anyway?

I actually think Fighters would be better at apot and listen than even Rangers. Wilderness skills are not really so much about spot and listen as they are about search and stealth. Surviving in the wilderness is more about finding things (search). Hunting would involve some stealth, but not much spot or listen.

Vietnam era guerilla warfare may have needed some spot and listen, but those guys would mostly be fighters anyway. I guess it depends on how you see the Ranger. I see him more as a naturalist than a guerilla warrior, although he is capable of being one if he needs to be, that would be more the Scouts role.

I'm not so sure about Heal and Survival, but I don't have anything against them as Fighter class skills.

Here's an interesting question to ponder: Which training is more intense and focused and leaves the least room for extracuricular activities, a Fighters or a Wizards?

My personal call: bump everyones skill points by 2 (except the Wizard) and all skills that can be used untrained are class skills for everyone.

I've also considered bumping the fighters will save up. You're typical fantasy fighter is actually usually the most strong willed person in a group. Wizards may be more focused and dedicated. But the Fighter (or certainly the Paladin) is usually the one who has a mission that they must accomplish and from which they will not be dissuaded. In the OOTS cast, I would certainly rank Roy as the most strong willed character.

[Orzel]

It seems that WoTC put the core base classes into 4 groups based on thier skil points per level. The 2+ Int skill point per level classes are the masters of their art. The 4+ Int classes are very good at their art but ignore key element to the class. The 6+Int classes ignore the art form enough that the can't perform major aspects of the class. The 8 SP class has little knowledge of combat or either magic style at all. The Rogue is the zero point on all scales.

The fighter is the master of weapons combat(has all the HP, BAB, Armor, Weapons, Fort save, and Feat). Barbarians have all the stats for combat plus some skill in the wild but lack the knowledge of the more complex aspects(some armor and feats). Rangers have the offense stats and knowledge for combat plus a ton of wilderness skill but lack the defense of combat in all it's features(A good amount of HP, Armor, and feats). Rogues lack the stats and knowledge of combat, both offense and defense (BAB, HP, Armor, Weapons, Feats, Fort save), but gain many skills.

The more you lose, the more skills you get.

Fgtr: HP, BAB, Armor, Weapons, Fort save, and Feats
Barb: HP, BAB, Armor, Weapons, Fort save
Rang: BAB, Weapons, Fort save, Feats
Monk: Fort save, Feats
Rog: None

Wiz: 1-9 spells
Bard: 1-6
Rogue: None

Cler: 1-9 spells, Heal based class feature
Druid: 1-9 spells
Bard: 1-6 spells
Paladin: 1-4 spells, Heal based class feature
Ranger: 1-4 spells
Rogue: None

[Deepblue706]

Heh. It really wouldn't make much difference to alow Characters to purchase all skills as though they were Class Skills. The limitation for buying Non Class Skills / Proficiencies is for the most part harsher in 3.x than it was in previous editions.

Agreed. I just felt like making a silly comment.

[Tor the Fallen]

Giving fighters more class skills isn't going to make up for their lackluster performance.

And as guys that probably lead the most 'sheltered' of lives, I don't see that it makes that much sense. Field surgeons take care of the healing for them, scouts take care of the scouting, diplomats and aristocrats take care of the talking and lying. They are there to deliver hurt when told to do so, and stop when told to do so.
At least, that's how I've always understood the fighter class.

What'd I like to see would be skill packages. Based on background, you get different class skills.

A fighter in the navy would get knowledge local, and lose handle animal. He's been a lot of places.
A paladin that acts as constable loses knowledge: nobility, and gains knowledge: local.
A fighter that serves as the company medic loses handle animal and gains heal.
Etc.

If someone has a good backstory, what's the harm in allowing them some near-useless class skill that they can spend their 2+int mod skills points on anyway?

[Beleriphon]

We spent a lot of time standing guard. As much as we did on many things everyone would consider core fighter/warrior skills, and much more than we spent on the obstacle course, etc, which would be the Jump, Climb, ect that Fighters do get as a class skill. We posted guard in our own barracks every night and every time the platoon went to chow (pretty much any time we left the rifles in the squadbay without the platoon there) and rotated posting Battalion guard with the other training platoons in 3rd Battalion.


Yeah, but did you ever receive any instructions in how to perform your guard duties beyond standing a certain place and making sure that nobody came in that wasn't supposed to?

At best I would wager that most characters that spend any significant period of time on guard duty would pick up ranks in spot and listen, as cross class skills. Those skills may be important parts of certain things that a Fighter may end up doing at some point, but they aren't part of what the core archetype is trying to represent. The Fighter is for putting the pointy of a sword into the other guy with exceptional skill.

The Fighter isn't a common guard, he's the master of weapons, combat. Or at least that would be the idea at any rate.

[Raum]

The Fighter isn't a common guard, he's the master of weapons, combat. Or at least that would be the idea at any rate.He's not a common guard at all, talk to your local security guard for that. Professional soldiers today are generally extremely good guards. Look at everything they guard...aircraft, vehicle parks, nuclear material, SCIFs, embassies...the list goes on.

In my experience, all military personnel receive some training in how to guard during basic. It's why they come up with so many worthless things to post guard on.

[Viscount Einstrauss]

New Fighter-

HD- d10
Skill points- 4
BAB- Fighter
Class Skills- All normal Fighter class skills, plus any four others.

Feat progression remains the same, with an important exception- the first feat is removed. In it's place, you pick an archetype.

Archetypes:
Brute- This character uses strength as normal. Fortitude is his good save. He obtains Power Attack and Cleave as free feats, even if he doesn't ordinarily qualify for them.
Graceful Hand- This character may use dexterity in place of his strength for melee attack rolls (exactly like Weapon Finesse, only he doesn't actually get the feat). Reflex is his good save. He obtains Dodge as a free feat, even if he doesn't ordinarily qualify for it.
Steel Body- This character may use constitution in place of his strength for melee attack rolls. Fortitude is his good save. At each level, his hit points are increased by an additional 2.
Clever Warrior- This character may use intelligence in place of his strength for melee attack rolls. Will is his good save. At each level, his skill points are increased by an additional 2, and he may choose three new class skills.
Indomitable Spirit- This character may use wisdom in place of his strength for melee attack rolls. All saves are good. This class may freely cross with monk and paladin.
Charming Knight- This character may use charisma in place of his strength for melee attack rolls. Reflex is his good save. This character may add his class level towards any charisma-based skill.

How's that?

[Stephen_E]

But you can't take ten on opposed rolls. Or, if you can then the sneaker can take ten and if he has one more rank than you do, he can automatically beat you.


The rules don't speciricly exclude Guards taking 10's and I've read punlished adventures that specifically had the guards taking 10's (and sometime 5's if they were supposed to be slack).

Generally the sneaker is considered to be capable of taking a 10 because it's a farly stressful situation. On the otherhand it is reasonable to take a 5 which gets around the 1/20 chance of screwing up for the really high level sneaker against the drone guard. Lets face it, the Master Thief shouldn't screwup on 1/20th of his move silently attempts.

Stephen

[Stephen_E]

I agree Fighters need more skill points. Especially when you take in the fact that with Str, Con and Dex all been Prime stats for them, Int is often a dump stat, unless they're going the trip route. Currently even if they ewant to, Fighters struggle to be competent at their class skill specalties.

To be honest I'm one of the "No one should get less than 4 skill points/level base" and have no objections to all classes getting +2 skill points. If you're concerned that this weakens the Human bonus, increase the Human bonus to +2 skill points (but if you do this I'd recommend also giving all the non-human races a 2nd favoured class to choose from. i.e. Elves can have either Wiz or Ranger as their favoured class)

Re: More class skills.
While I do like the idea of giving characters additional knowledge class skills = Int bonus (UMD isn't a knowledge skill) I don't think the lack of class skills is the problem here.

The problem is how cross-class skills are handled.
1) Reduce the cost of cross-class skills to 1, the same as class skills.
2) Class skills are only class skills if your current character class has them as class skills.

When combined with more skill points, it means characters can afford to but cross-class skills, but will never be as good as the person with class skills because of the limit of half the number of ranks. Point 2 is to stop people going "I took one level of Rogue, so now Move Silently is a class skiil, and I keep advancing it at max ranks now that it's cheap". Instead the Fighter with one level of Rogue can spend all his Rogue skills points on Move Silently, but in his next level as Fighter he can only spend skill points on Move Silently if he has less than (level+3)/2 ranks in it. The Fighter planing on becoming a leader can get ranks in diplomacy without having to dedicate half his skill points to it. The Wizard can afford to be a halfway decent rockclimber if he wants to. All adventurers can afford to have some ability at UMD (they adventurers for christsakes) but only the Rogue and Artificer will be reliably competent.

Stephen

[Harkone]

I agree with Draz74: cross-class skills are always available to Fighters. If Fighters were to have more skill points (say, 4 like the Barbarian), they would become radically unbalanced. The Fighter's strength is his/her bonus feats (on top of HD and +1 BAB/level), and anything more would strike me as too much. Note that many prestige classes and even base classes (ranger, barbarian, paladin) that keep the +1/level BAB lose either the d10 HD or the bonus feats in return for neat things like special abilities and more skill points.

[Gralamin]

I agree with Draz74: cross-class skills are always available to Fighters. If Fighters were to have more skill points (say, 4 like the Barbarian), they would become radically unbalanced. The Fighter's strength is his/her bonus feats (on top of HD and +1 BAB/level), and anything more would strike me as too much. Note that many prestige classes and even base classes (ranger, barbarian, paladin) that keep the +1/level BAB lose either the d10 HD or the bonus feats in return for neat things like special abilities and more skill points.

Fighters Unbalanced? Yeah right.
And in your example: barbarians gain a d12 HD, More skill points and special abilities, and you think that makes them worse off then fighters?

[Raum]

If Fighters were to have more skill points (say, 4 like the Barbarian), they would become radically unbalanced. This is one of the funnier statements I've seen on these boards! :) Pray tell, how would fighters be "radically" (or even slightly) unbalanced with two more skill points?

[Jack Mann]

If Fighters were to have more skill points (say, 4 like the Barbarian), they would become radically unbalanced.

You're right. Fighters would be terribly unbalanced, because they would still be far too weak. Giving them more skill points won't bring them up to par. All the bonus feats and skill points in the world won't help the fighter enough with his mobility and save deficiencies. It will let them have a small amount of utility, and is flavorful as well.

[saral]

Skill points aren't the problem. Fighters are supposed to be heavily armoured tanks, but their are too many ways to neautralise armour.

"Ranged houch attack!"

"save on anything except fort!"

Other classes have either good saves or decent dex. But even if a fighter had decent dex wearing plate would neutralise it

Suddenly the fighters only defenses have been neutralised.

And there is the major problem. In a high level campaign the fighter has lost all of his advantages unless he's a dwarven defender in a narrow corridor (in which case he only lost most of them)...

[rob]

I dislike the comments on 'what fighters are supposed to be.' Characters are made according to the character concept, not according to what people think the class is supposed to tell you to do.

Fighters subsume the concepts of - 1. Heavy horse cavalry. 2. Professional mercenary archer. 3. Heavy Infantry. 4. Gladiator. 5. Horse archer. 6. Marine infantry (viking)... The list goes on.

Primary reason I agree with the need for more skill points is that it's hard to make any of those builds convincingly without more of them. Name a horse archer without ranks in ride, survival, handle animal, first aid/heal, and craft (bowyer/fletcher). Name a veteran infantryman without ranks in listen, spot, survival, search, climb, craft (weapons), and hide. Maybe gladiators could get away with fewer skills, but...

Other alternative is to bump a few skill points and make cross-class skills 1 point per level (for all classes). Keep the cap; fighters don't have to be GOOD at all of those things, but they do need to know a lot of them. Save the class skills for things that MAKE the character (hide/move silently for rogues, perform for bards, concentration for wizards, survival for rangers, etc).

I like that solution for all characters, as it gives them a bit more freedom than the boilerplate character description, without having to venture into things like esoteric classes or prestige classes that may not be appropriate for the concept.

As for the balance issue, well, it's DMs and players responsibility to balance the characters to the campaign and each other. Who cares if they're balanced according to some abstract aesthetic appreciation of the DnD rules? If you have a fighter who gets taken out of every combat in the first round by a hold person spell, go for some counter (ring of freedom of action or something).

Soldiers learn a lot more than guard duty, but that's one example. In my experience, you learn a whole lot, cuz what if the people you need are dead? What if your field surgeon got killed? Oops, I think I'll die now.

Classic fantasy soldiers better know how to build houses, lay roads, design fortifications, cut down timber, pretty much rebuild a shield from the ground up, etc. And they BETTER know how to hide, for when their side gets stomped...

[Neek]

I prefer increasing the number of the skillpoints available to the characters; specifically, not allowing any class to have less than 4 + Int skill points per level for heroic classes.

Couple of things to help you if you don't like this idea:
Add the d20 Modern idea of backgrounds. Have the character take a background that provides a skill-base without removing any existing skill points. "What was he before he took up the sword? He was a carpenter." That would explain his "Profession (Carpenter)" skill. (And why isn't Profession a class skill for Fighters anyway?)

If it's about balance, think about it this way: What benefits PC classes also benefits NPCS. An increase of +2 skill points/class also increases EVERYONE's potential, not just the fighter's. You can also apply the DMG's rules on skill learning, forcing PCs to roleplay out their skillbase (i.e., giving justification--I made Scent (Wis) into a skill that requires the Scent feat, which is a race-based feat. A Gnome gains it, but it's ultimate effectiveness comes when he makes a Scent check. He must use his schnozz to gain skills.) Or force them to pay for it (The characters have down time at a village, and the fighter pays a little to the blacksmith to learn a bit of his trade)--this means that at level up, the players aren't pouring their hard earned skill points into things they have no base in (i.e., after a dungeon crawl where not a single spellcaster is fought, where not a single magical item is yet gleaned, and not a single spell is tossed--and my Spellcraft and Use Magical Device still goes up a few ranks!)

[Olethros]

Im comming late to this party, but I'd like to sholder in anyway.

I see the different Class Skill lists, as representing which skills a character will naturally recieve training in, experience with, inate improvment of, over the course of a lvl, with cross class skills those things that a character must go out of there way to improve, thus the increased cost and the lower skill cap.

I see the number of skill points a character gets as how likely it is that experience has taught him something about what is on the skill list.

So how about a new class/ prestige class, The Battle Tactician. It Gains skill points like a barbarian, fighter hit ponts and attack progression, with a bonus feet every 3 lvls instead of every other. Maby even something that provides an incease to ac based on inteligence.

[Beleriphon]

I dislike the comments on 'what fighters are supposed to be.' Characters are made according to the character concept, not according to what people think the class is supposed to tell you to do.


Fair enough but the fighter is a different archetypal character than the ranger, who is different than the paladin. All of them do the same basic thing, but in very different way. Fighters are not masters of skills, they fight stuff, presumably with a very high level of skill.



Fighters subsume the concepts of - 1. Heavy horse cavalry. 2. Professional mercenary archer. 3. Heavy Infantry. 4. Gladiator. 5. Horse archer. 6. Marine infantry (viking)... The list goes on.

Primary reason I agree with the need for more skill points is that it's hard to make any of those builds convincingly without more of them. Name a horse archer without ranks in ride, survival, handle animal, first aid/heal, and craft (bowyer/fletcher). Name a veteran infantryman without ranks in listen, spot, survival, search, climb, craft (weapons), and hide. Maybe gladiators could get away with fewer skills, but...


A horse archer can be done easily enough, Fighters get the feats for it and of skills you mention, except for heal and survival, are on the fighter's skill list, both are easy enough to pick up as cross class skills for their basic functions.

A veteran infantry soldier classically is a guy in a unit that stabs other guys with pikes. If you mean the PC sense of veteran then again cross-class skills make sense here. They would be something that you picked up was you went along.

The gladiator is even easier. If you go with just straight fighter he can pick up a few cross class ranks in bluff and you're set. From there its just a matter of picking the feats you want to represent the style of combat our erstwhile gladiator will use. Depending how you want him to behave he probably doesn't even need bluff.



Classic fantasy soldiers better know how to build houses, lay roads, design fortifications, cut down timber, pretty much rebuild a shield from the ground up, etc. And they BETTER know how to hide, for when their side gets stomped...

Fantasy soldiers, at least people who are primarily combatants, shouldn't know how to do these things, the common foot slogger doesn't know how to do these things in any army. Engineers are for the design aspect for soldiering, and virtually every army since the Greeks has had some form of engineers. Getting soldiers to work as cheap labour is easy, but just because I can chop down trees and build a fortification, that somebody else designed, means that I have any skill in the design portion.

Fighters are for fighting things, they have enough feats to let you do this however you want. The rules also make it easy enough to multiclass that you can level dip if the skills or other abilities that you want. There is nothing wrong with this approach, and in fact I encourage players to multiclass if they think that helps the character, or rounds them out more.

[Orzel]

Fighter ar too front loaded for a lot of "build" to make complete sense. I beleive that is the problem.

Look at the fighter's "class features":
Proficiency with all simple weapons
Proficiency with all martial weapons
Proficiency with all light armor
Proficiency with all medium armor
Proficiency with all heavy armor
Proficiency with all normal shields
Proficiency with all tower shields
Ton of other bonus feats

Fighters are built as heavy armor wearing guy with 2 martial weapons and a shield strapped to his body. They took away the Ranger's and Barbarian's medium and heavy armor because they "ain't 'posed to be be wearin it". Paladins gave up learning comples combat to "smite and heal dudes".

Fighters were made to move 20' and smash heads. Looking at junk and healing folk in the other guys' jobs.

Anyone who wants a non-simple heavy-armor slashing guy should remove two of the 8 free feats they get a level one for a bonus class skill.

[Olethros]

I find a lot of agreement with the sentiment that spot, survival, heal, listen are justified as cross class skills for fighters. From my point of view it is a matter of focus. All these skills are important in the course of campaigning, both in the D&D since and in the military since, but not as important to a dedicated battlefield killer as those skills represented by combat feats, large to hit bonuses and the like.

I think the fighter skill list is accurate, but fighters don’t get the skill points necessary to cross class many of those skills adequately.

Also, it makes sense to me that your average, built from a fighter, guard is not as proficient at keeping watch as a ranger may be. After all, from a fantasy story telling standpoint, the sneaky rouge is supposed to be able to slip past the mook guards on the front door easily, but know that if he is caught doom is almost certain. The way I see it that represents the fact that my 10th lvl rouge is easily beating the spot/listen check of the 10th lvl fighters, but if I do botch it, they will most likely own me in an open fight.

[Shhalahr Windrider]

The way I see it that represents the fact that my 10th lvl rouge is easily beating the spot/listen check of the 10th lvl fighters, but if I do botch it, they will most likely own me in an open fight.
Except that by 10th level, any rogue that's actually invested in sneaking is well past botching against anyone that hasn't invested in Spot or Listen as a class skill.

Example:

Silas, the 10th-level Halfling Sneakmaster:

Assuming Elite Array for ability scores, we have a Dex of 15 (start) + 2 (race) +1 (4th level) + 1 (8th level) + 4 (gloves of dexterity +4 or similar) == 23.

Being that he is a sneakmaster, he has invested in some equipment to help the job, including an elixir of sneaking, a darkweave outfit (from Eberron Campaign Setting), and silent shoes (from Arms and Equipment Guide).

In total that gives him

{table="head; width=350px"]Source|Hide|Move Silently
ranks|13|13
Dex mod|+6|+6
racial bonus|+0|+2
size bonus|+4|+0
competance bonus|+10|+10
circumstence bonus|+1|+1
Total:|+34|+32[/table]

Now, he's gonna go sneak past Joe Guard...

Joe is rather exceptional for a guard, being a 10th level fighter. People wonder why he's not the head constable. But Joe doesn't complain. Still, he has a tough time guarding things. He's got a 10 Wisdom (he spent all his high stats on physical skills). He's been resigned to be a guard since 4th level, and, as such has spent 16 of his 52 skill points (being a 12 Int human) on Spot and Listen for 4 ranks in each. He even went ahead and got himself the Alertness feat and some eyes of the eagle.

This results in...
{table="head; width=350px"]Source|Spot|Listen
ranks|4|4
Wis mod|+0|+0
Alertness|+2|+2
competence bonus|+5|+0
Total:|+11|+6[/table]

So Silas comes by, makes his Hide and Move Silently checks. Of all the rotten luck! Both rolls come up one! For a grand total of 35 Hide and 34 Move Silently.

Joe makes his Spot and Listen checks. Oh, frabjous day! They both come up natural 20! His results are 31 Spot and 26 Listen...



Joe failed.



Joe, who has a far greater investment in Spot and Listen than any "typical" fighter and was presented with the best series of rolls one could make while his opponent had the absolute worst, failed.

Even if Silas was missing a few of those bonuses, it would still be literally impossible for Joe to detect him if Silas just arranged for a Distraction. A proper distraction would give Joe a -5 penalty on his Spot and Listen checks and grant Silas even more breathing room.

It is impossible for Silas to "botch" a roll when sneaking past Joe or any other "typical" guard.

[Fax Celestis]

Don't H/MS have a synergy bonus too?

[Shhalahr Windrider]

Only insofar that you rarely use one without using the other.

[ArmorArmadillo]

It is impossible for Silas to "botch" a roll when sneaking past Joe or any other "typical" guard.

Yes, this is exactly as it should be. Rogues are supposed to be masters at sneaking, elite spies far better than anyone else is at spotting them, and sneaking past guards is one of the main things they're suppoed to do, it isn't a fair judgement on fighters to say that it doesn't make sense they can't spot super-sneaks. Especially at 10th level, when rogues are well beyond the basic limitations of the average thief and into the realm of high level commando stealth intrustion. The game is not built so fighters can spot sneaks.

As for Fighter Guard spot vs. Warrior, Expert, or 1st level Rogue, it becomes entirely possible to spot one on a good roll.

Class skills are meant to represent the people who are best at doing something, not necessarily the ones who need it most or who use it most often. Opposed checks represent who's better at what they do than the other person is at what he does, not necessarily who seems like they would make better use of the skill.

Furthermore, on the game balance issue, fighters tend to make really poor use of skills anyway. They have a few like ride, climb, and balance, but with armor they usually have high check penalties anwyay.

And it isn't skills that make fighters poor, (at least compared to a CoDzilla powerbuilds) it's the lack of powerful abilities to compare with spellcasting or massive sneak attack damage.

Current Skill Points:
Rogue: Hey I spotted something! I'll sneak attack it, you blast it wizard!

More Skill Points:
Fighter: Hey I spotted something! Rogue go sneak attack it, you blast it wizard!

[Shhalahr Windrider]

Yes, this is exactly as it should be. Rogues are supposed to be masters at sneaking, elite spies far better than anyone else is at spotting them, and sneaking past guards is one of the main things they're suppoed to do, it isn't a fair judgement on fighters to say that it doesn't make sense they can't spot super-sneaks. Especially at 10th level, when rogues are well beyond the basic limitations of the average thief and into the realm of high level commando stealth intrustion. The game is not built so fighters can spot sneaks.
Honestly, I mis-typed. I should have said "It is impossible for Silas to "botch" a roll when sneaking past Joe, or any "typical" guard, which will be in an even worse position." A "typical guard" is a Warrior a level or two lower than the PCs. A PC-classed guard is quite exceptional and meant to be a challenge, not something you can just pretend doesn't exist.

And, gee, I did make one comment to that extent earlier in the post. Guess I wasn't paying enough attention to what I as writing. :smalltongue:

[SpiderBrigade]

Going back the whole "marines stand guard for hours and hours" thing, I'm going to have to side with the camp that this doesn't mean they have lots of ranks in Spot and Listen. Yeah, sure, your drill instructor is going to come around and make sure you're paying attention, but is he going to sneak up on you? Do you do a lot of exercises where his goal is to get into the building without you noticing, and he dresses in black and tries to sneak in the window? THAT's the kind of training that would represent class-skill ranks, IMO.

Now, I'm not saying that someone doing a lot of guard duty might not HAVE some ranks in those skills (cross-class)...but it doesn't mean that all soldiers (warriors or fighters) should get these as class skills. Not in the D&D world, anyway. It might be plausible that modern military types might, though, since modern combat tends to be more about spotting an enemy who is trying to hide from you, and less about charging with swords.

Regarding Survival: again, not sold that your average fighter would have this skill. A professional soldier or mercenary, on the march for much of his life, might pick up some ranks, yes. But that's not your regular fighter. Even warriors are just as likely to be based in a city or village, and not have to forage in the wilderness.

I also agree with the school that points out that, in the rules, Heal checks are bigger deals than "Hank's wounded, put a bandage on there." It's more like that scene in Saving Private Ryan where the one guy gets shot and they're trying to keep him from bleeding out. Or curing a disease. First aid? Sure, a soldier would learn that. But Heal is much more in-depth medicine. He can still learn it - but it'd be cross-class.

[Neek]

There is a line to be crossed between our Fantasy PCs and reality. The game is intended to create a sense verisimilitude. How this is handled is entirely up to the DM--what a fighter should know (other than fighting) is dependent upon the campaign.

A Roman soldier before the 3rd century would be a farmer. A Greek hoplite would as well--well, at least own a farm with enough workers on it to produce food. These would be men high enough in social class to be able to afford their own armor and weapons. So his skills would be invested in things like Profession (Farmer), Profession (Shepherd)--and if the latter, high in spot (darn wolves).

A medieval soldier'd be a nobleman, who either earned his title during his lifetime or inherent it from his father. The lower class would produce food for this man, who were indebted for protecting them from whatever hell is out there. He would fancy himself with history and learning and languages, sometimes (especially if he weren't the French elite, say, during the 100 Year's War) learning battle tactics--so, Language (Latin), History (Ancient), History (Modern), Knowledge (Philosophy), Knowledge (Religion), and the off-chance Knowledge (Military tactics), not counting the Ride skill. Why'd he need to spot, or even listen? That's why he has his bumbling guards/dogs on his payroll.

Modern days it's much different. We have private armies. We have 5% of the population producing food for the other 95%. Our soldiers have much different backgrounds: computer programmers, auto mechanics, small-scale agrarians, artists and writers and the lot. Each of these men have a much greater background probably more diverged than their medieval and ancient predecessors.

Should a fighter receive more SP? Not unless you hope to develop them as characters more and give reason for that. This isn't anyone's call but the DMs, mind you--because a player might dump that into spot and listen and search and dungeon-crawling skills.

[Matthew]

I just think that since the Fighter is such a generic Class, there should be more ways to easily customise his non combat abilities. More Class Skills and Skill Points would make that possible.

[rob]

Mathew, I agree exactly.

Beleriphon, I think we agree on most of the stuff, just in different scope and extent. I have no problem with the fighter feat progression. I mentioned fighter for the archetypes I did because in order to build a convincing build of them, you pretty much would need the fighter's feat progression.



Fantasy soldiers, at least people who are primarily combatants, shouldn't know how to do these things, the common foot slogger doesn't know how to do these things in any army. Engineers are for the design aspect for soldiering, and virtually every army since the Greeks has had some form of engineers. Getting soldiers to work as cheap labour is easy, but just because I can chop down trees and build a fortification, that somebody else designed, means that I have any skill in the design portion.


This is kind of the crux of the argument everyone's been having - most people agree that fighters would have some context in which to learn most of the skills. They just disagree how much.

If I were a fantasy commander, I'd expect my joes to know how to fix their shields, because I don't want the entire army grinding to a halt after every major battle for the soldiers to take their shields to the forge or the carpetners, and I don't want to hire a shield-mechanic for every 12 soldiers. I'd expect them to be able to fix every piece of equipment that didn't require specialized equipment (like a forge), because I'd want them to be able to train on their stuff. I would expect a modicum of survival, escape, and evasion (survive and hide skills) training. And if I were a soldier, after about the 112th time I've been asked to build a road; chop down trees and hew them into spear-staffs, arrows, bowstaffs; or general stuff I'd be pretty dern good at it.

In game terms, I don't think the fighter class offers enough skill points for anyone to get a convincing number of ranks in these associated skills without a huge int bonus. Solution - cross class at 1 pt per rank, or offer more skill points, or both. Only other way to do it is multiclassing or dipping, which I have no problem with, but occasionally gets into some really stupid combinations or relies too much on esoteric classes.

[MeklorIlavator]

One point about Rome- after the reforms of Marius, the army stopped being landowners, so after that the idea of farmers turned soldiers pretty much evaporates. You see anyone out for booty go into the legions. Sure, some get farms after retirement, but thats after leaving the legion. And usually those farms didn't go well, so I would say that most wouldn't be that familiar with farming. Also, at that time large farms run by slaves became common, and pushed smaller farms run by non-slave labor out of business. So especially in later time, the soldiers wouldn't have had farmers in its midst.

About the standing guard thing, I don't really have first hand experience with this(not being in a army), but pretty much everyone has to stand guard at some time(not including officers above Sergeants) so I would think the soldiers would have ranks in spot/listen, and if 9/10 soldiers would have the ranks, maybe it just might be worthy of a class skill.

Also, soldiers would be trained to spot, because they need to identify signal banners in order to get instructions, and to recognize the enemy/areas of weakness, so I believe that it is reasonable for soldiers to get spot/listen as a class skill.

[Neek]

One point about Rome- after the reforms of Marius, the army stopped being landowners, so after that the idea of farmers turned soldiers pretty much evaporates. You see anyone out for booty go into the legions. Sure, some get farms after retirement, but thats after leaving the legion. And usually those farms didn't go well, so I would say that most wouldn't be that familiar with farming. Also, at that time large farms run by slaves became common, and pushed smaller farms run by non-slave labor out of business. So especially in later time, the soldiers wouldn't have had farmers in its midst.

A farm would have been the soldier's desire; it wasn't until the 2nd century (not 3rd, as my post had indicated--Marius instituted his reform in 107).

I agree with your statement about Spot being a class-skill. I'm just going to increase the number of skillpoints, personally.

[Jack Mann]

As has been said, the fighter is a very generic class. It has no strong, distinct flavor. This is one of the (vanishingly few) strengths of the class; that it has no baggage forcing it into any particular role. Look at the description in the PHB. It gives a plethora of possible choices. Some of these roles can be best replicated with more skill points. A guard needs spot and listen. A bodyguard can use sense motive. A king's champion might need some diplomacy.

And if you don't feel your particular fighter needs these skills? Don't put points into them. Really. If you don't put points into the skill, then you're no better off than someone for whom they're crossclass. Put your extra skill points somewhere like jump, or climb. Things that any fighter type might want to do well. Figure out what skills would fit his backstory.

If you don't think your fighter would be good at spotting and listening, then you don't need to put ranks in it. Having them as class skills doesn't change that. But it does give a much wider range of possibilities for NPCs and other people's characters.

[Matthew]

Even before Marius' so called reform (and its not always clear that he was actually responsible), non farmers were used in the legions, usually just to make up the numbers. It may well be that the Velites of the third cemtury were not farmers (depending on whether they are the poorest or youngest class of fighters).

[Raum]

Modern soldiers are taught to be observant for far more than just standing guard. They need to be capable of identifying soldiers, units, and vehicles as friend or foe very quickly. They need to watch for ambush. Spot the sniper...or tripwire. The list could go on, but let's look at professional (not conscript) medieval soldiers for parallels. Medieval soldiers also needed to recognize friends & enemies, spot and read tabards / shield devices, look for ambush, watch for traps...etc. Standing guard is a small part of why professional soldiers are taught to be observant.

Frankly, whomever decided Spot & Listen weren't fighter class skill probably didn't have any military experience.

[Shhalahr Windrider]

As has been said, the fighter is a very generic class. It has no strong, distinct flavor. This is one of the (vanishingly few) strengths of the class; that it has no baggage forcing it into any particular role. Look at the description in the PHB. It gives a plethora of possible choices. Some of these roles can be best replicated with more skill points. A guard needs spot and listen. A bodyguard can use sense motive. A king's champion might need some diplomacy.
All this is beginning to remind me of the variant fighters from Dragon #310 (http://paizo.com/dragon/products/issues/2003/310). Those who have access to it should check it out. It's got loads of variant starting proficiencies and class skills and "bonus feats"/class abilities to fill a lot of different fighter type archetypes.

[Aquillion]

Part of the problem is that, conceptually, barbarians are supposed to be the 'cunning warrior' types; they're always going to have more skill points than Fighters, 'cause they're supposed to be seen as almost part rogue.

...but, really, for people who think they need all those extra skills for highly specialized types of fighters like bodyguards or champions or military archers or whatever, I have two words for you: Prestige class. The basic classes are not intended to be all things for all people; if you think of your fighter as a skilled professional bodyguard and are upset that the fighter class doesn't reflect that, I'm sure that there's a prestige class out there for you somewhere.

[Fawsto]

At the end of the PhB's Chapter that tell you about how to make a character (or at MhB, dunno... Must search later) It is clear that a DM shoul encourage all classes to change their skills accordingly to the history of the character.

So, If you want to say that your Fighter was a Guard you can remove Ride and add spot... Things like that... The skills that a Fighter receive are for the straightforward fighting guy on the first line of attack in a huge battlefield.

I still think that a fighter should receive Spot, Listen and Survival as skills... But that was an alternative...

Btw.. Forget what I said about the Use Magic Device... by giving this to a fighter the wizards would become even more underpowered and useless in the intermediate lvls... Dunno if they stay overpower in the high levels... Must Check Later...

[Matthew]

Part of the problem is that, conceptually, barbarians are supposed to be the 'cunning warrior' types; they're always going to have more skill points than Fighters, 'cause they're supposed to be seen as almost part rogue.

...but, really, for people who think they need all those extra skills for highly specialized types of fighters like bodyguards or champions or military archers or whatever, I have two words for you: Prestige class. The basic classes are not intended to be all things for all people; if you think of your fighter as a skilled professional bodyguard and are upset that the fighter class doesn't reflect that, I'm sure that there's a prestige class out there for you somewhere.

What? Barbarians are 'cunning warriors', compared to Fighters? Prestige Classes? The Fighter Base Class is supposed to be generic and it should be capable of supporting various concepts, as the fluff suggests.

[ShadowYRM]

Well first off I'd argue fighters are very 'skilled', they just don't have many skill points there is a difference between the two. A fighter is extremely skilled, his skills are just invested into...fighting (i.e. high hit points, BAB, lots of feats)

The main thing is that there simply isn't much reason for a fighter to be exceptionally full of skill points, he's got the worst class skill selection of anyone. This is mostly because there are almost no skills that directly relate to combat and most of the skills a fighter would reasonably develop he already has.

Good points.

Also, I'd suggest that the Fighter Class is designed to be one of the most modular classes to combine with another build.

Improved feats in some of the latest books give the fighter a great chance to control the strategic battlefield.

Fighters are extremely useful in small to medium sized environments, controlling the enemy and limiting their movement while doling out damage.

There are also a ton of variation fighters, like the Ranger or Swashbuckler, who come out of the gate as a more skilled, finesse fighter.

Why not take a level of Ranger out of the gate, get a bow feat you'd probably have taken anyway, take the extra padding of skills, and then go Fighter from there?

The fighter is such a core building block of many builds, and even a core fighter can shine in a tactical control role.

[Duraska]

Good points.

Also, I'd suggest that the Fighter Class is designed to be one of the most modular classes to combine with another build.

Improved feats in some of the latest books give the fighter a great chance to control the strategic battlefield.

Fighters are extremely useful in small to medium sized environments, controlling the enemy and limiting their movement while doling out damage.

There are also a ton of variation fighters, like the Ranger or Swashbuckler, who come out of the gate as a more skilled, finesse fighter.

Why not take a level of Ranger out of the gate, get a bow feat you'd probably have taken anyway, take the extra padding of skills, and then go Fighter from there?

The fighter is such a core building block of many builds, and even a core fighter can shine in a tactical control role.

I guess this is what I dislike most about fighters. I personally dislike multiclassing (I feel that it exists only for munchkin reasons), so when I play a fighter, I stick with it (and therefore, sorely lack skill points).

Also, what benefit would you get out of taking one level of ranger? 6 skill points (24 at level 1)? Favored Enemy?

I think it's Wizards of the Coast's fault for blatently designing the fighter class as a stepping stone for multiclass advancement. Every other class get's hooks to keep you in it until level 20, but a fighter pretty much screams, "take four and go for a better class." :frown:

[SeeKay]

The main problem with fighters is that there are no great feats and even the good ones stop after a few levels. There needs to be an improvement to "Power Attack" with "Weapon Specialization" as a prereq. That's the problem with Fighters.

Giving all the skills everyone is asking for only makes it stand out more that the Fighter Feats suck. I don't own any of the extra books other than the core rules, so WotC might have added some, but the ones in the PHB are crud after 12th level and really aren't worth going for after 4th. Adding Spot, Heal, Listen, Survival and the other skills to the Fighter's list and giving more skills doesn't change this fact.

If there were a feat that doubled the damage from Power Attack open to fighters of level 8 (or 12-15), it would take away from the massive seperation of power high level Fighters experience from even other high level core classes. Heck, with the possible exception of a Paladin, the other classes leave the Fighter in the dust by 10th level. The only thing a Fighter has at that point is a high Armor AC and Fort Save when almost every monster has Reflex save breath attacks.

And it only gets worse from there. By level 20, a core class Fighter can't hold up against any other core class. The total feats (18, 19 for a human) doesn't give a great equalizer to the class abilities of the other classes. If you take Prestige Classes and mix them in, it only gets worse for the poor Under Power-Feated Fighter. That's the real problem with Fighers.

[Dnjscott]

I think FIghters are getting better, especially thanks to Player's Handbook 2 and Dungeonscape (the slamming, stuff-breaking FIghter is way cool). Of course, at the same time, the Warblade which out-fighters the Fighter, was introduced back in August, so two steps back for each forward.

Anyway, to get back to the original topic (hopefully this hasn't been mentioned yet) Dragon Magazine did Fighter Kits way back in the earliest days of 3.5. This let you have a Targetter Fighter that focused on Archery (and thus got spot), a Knight (with Diplomacy) a Bodyguard (with spot and sense motive) and a Survivalist (with Survival).

You still got 2 per, but at least you had a better selection.

It's Dragon 310 and you can (legally) download for like $5 here:

http://paizo.com/dragon/products/downloads

It's a really cool option for the poor ol' FIghter.

[Desaril]

It seems to me that since most skills can be used untrained, everyone has Spot, listen, sense motive, diplomacy, heal, etc and having skill points represents people who are really good at those things. Everyone else can take 10 (+ any levels and bonus) to accomplish an average task or roll d20 to attempt a harder task. The skill points characters get represent their unsusual ability in those areas.

Further, we come from a highly educated society where everyone has a wide variety of skills and knowledge, but medieval people had less education and training. People were able to do the basics for survival (take 10 on stuff) and 1-2 other things.

[Draz74]

I agree with Draz74: cross-class skills are always available to Fighters. If Fighters were to have more skill points (say, 4 like the Barbarian), they would become radically unbalanced. The Fighter's strength is his/her bonus feats (on top of HD and +1 BAB/level), and anything more would strike me as too much. Note that many prestige classes and even base classes (ranger, barbarian, paladin) that keep the +1/level BAB lose either the d10 HD or the bonus feats in return for neat things like special abilities and more skill points.


Hmmm, you don't agree with me almost at all. I want the Fighter to have more skill points (and it certainly wouldn't make him too powerful!). I just don't think he should gain Spot, Listen, Heal, Diplomacy, Sense Motive, etc., as class skills. (Though he should get Balance and Profession ...)

And some of the house rules to make cross-class skills better wouldn't be a bad idea. I just don't think a Fighter should be able to Spot/Listen/Heal as well as a Ranger, or Diplomacy/Sense Motive as well as a Rogue, etc., so I don't want those to be class skills for him.

[Viscount Einstrauss]

Fighter: Who are you?
Warblade: Me? I'm a warblade.
Fighter: What's that?
Warblade: Oh, I'm a lot like you. Just better in every single conceivable way.
Fighter: ...
Warblade: Yeah. Wanna cry about it?

[Duraska]

It seems to me that since most skills can be used untrained, everyone has Spot, listen, sense motive, diplomacy, heal, etc and having skill points represents people who are really good at those things. Everyone else can take 10 (+ any levels and bonus) to accomplish an average task or roll d20 to attempt a harder task. The skill points characters get represent their unsusual ability in those areas.

Further, we come from a highly educated society where everyone has a wide variety of skills and knowledge, but medieval people had less education and training. People were able to do the basics for survival (take 10 on stuff) and 1-2 other things.

This assumes that a world with magic would still function exactly like our world did during the middle ages. In a world where there are tons of gods (who prove their existence daily), and where magic can easily handle simple chores (like lighting streetlights, lifting objects (very useful for building houses/buildings), healing minor wounds, and providing comfort from extreme conditions (heat/cold), I don't think it's fair to say that people would be perfectly relatable to medieval peasants.

Sure, a lot of this depends on your campaign world, but I think it's fair to assume that (unless magic is so ultra rare that most people never see it and think it doesn't exist), the world would be more like the renaissance era (or early industrial era), with the social health conditions of near modern society. While people may not be as highly educated as they are today, I do believe that they would be far better educated than your typical serf.

Sorry, I guess this is a little off-topic; but I don't think the fighter's 2 measily skill points are supposed to reflect a poor education system.

[Bears With Lasers]

Fighter: Who are you?
Warblade: Me? I'm a warblade.
Fighter: What's that?
Warblade: Oh, I'm a lot like you. Just better in every single conceivable way. Also, I just did your mom.
Fighter: ...
Warblade: Yeah. Wanna cry about it?

Fixed it for you.

[PnP Fan]

A few brief comments:
1. I like the idea of cross class skills only costing 1 sp per rank, with the traditional limit in place.
2. Their seem to be enough arguments in favor of including spot/listen as fighter class skills, from people who have stood watch, that I feel fairly convinced those two skills should be added to the class skill list.
3. From personal experience, yes, marine corps drill instructors have amazing levels of move silent/hide, they do it in combat boots! ;-) And yes, they are training people to pay attention on watch, that's why there's always such a high price to pay (in push-ups, sit-ups, hop'n flops, etc. . .) when they catch you not paying attention. That's why they walk around the barracks at 2:00 am, to make sure that you are awake and paying attention, instead of sleeping. Believe me, they'd rather be sleeping too! ;-) If negative consequences (physical pain) for poor performance (not listening/looking for the DI when he storms your post) isn't at least a Pavlovian level of training/conditioning, then I don't know what is. (Could it be better training? sure, but generally we're talking about taking lvl 1 commoners and giving them a level of warrior/fighter, not making them 10th level radars :-) And I was only in the Navy Officer Candidate School, I can only imagine what they did to Marine Corps Infantry.
4. In reference to some of the other skills that are potentially useful, some of my buddies and I have come up with an option. Give Fighters the option to select two cross class skills as class skills, with the caveate that they have to represent some kind of profession (guard = spot/listen, etc. . ) every so often (say every 5 levels for this example), they can change these two skills to something else, to represent a career change. It's still a little half-baked at the moment, but I think it might help.

[Desaril]

@ Duraska

The point was to contrast the typical medieval commoner's knowledge to our own. We live in a world where we go to school for years and have access to lots of education and training, but even in a high-magic world, the people would have a more narrow skill base. Most people would not learn enough to represent skill use beyond "taking 10". Therefore, everyone can heal "some", survive "some", even move silently "some"; but if you put them in adverse conditions they can't do it and only a few "experts" can.

I think game balance between the combat classes and skill classes is the principal reason why fighters have less points, but it is also consistent with our vision of the genre.

[Jack Mann]

I think game balance between the combat classes and skill classes is the principal reason why fighters have less points, but it is also consistent with my vision of the genre.

Fixed. .

[Raum]

The point was to contrast the typical medieval commoner's knowledge to our own.There are NPC classes for "typical medieval commoners," PC fighters are definitely atypical.


We live in a world where we go to school for years and have access to lots of education and training, but even in a high-magic world, the people would have a more narrow skill base. Most people would not learn enough to represent skill use beyond "taking 10". Therefore, everyone can heal "some", survive "some", even move silently "some"; but if you put them in adverse conditions they can't do it and only a few "experts" can. Most journeymen were more skilled in their field. Version 3.x actually gimps common craftsmen more than it should (this is one area where proficiencies worked better).


I think game balance between the combat classes and skill classes is the principal reason why fighters have less points, but it is also consistent with our vision of the genre.As JackMann points out, that's not "our" vision. And, quite frankly, number of skill points has very little effect on class balance. The lists of skills accessible as class skills are more important.

[AdversusVeritas]

MacGyver is not a fighter, nor does he fight that often he tries to think his way out of fighting, MacGyver is obviously an Artificer if any classes.While I agree with the MacGyver=Artificer conclusion, I do have some beef with the notion that a fighter wouldn't try to think their way out of fighting. Grr, I've even been penalized experience points before by playing a fighter that thought fighting should be the last resort.

Honestly, casters (smart ones anyway) are frugal with their spells; no one expects casters to always think of magic as the primary means of solving their problems, so why should fighters be thought of that way. In most cases, it should be just the opposite. A good fight is supposed to take up, what, a quarter of your resources? For casters, that's spells and for fighters that's . . . hit points. If anyone should be reserved about getting into combat, it should be fighters. As they say, no one prays for peace more than a soldier.

[Thes Hunter]

As a dedicated fighter player, I have always wondered why intimidate is not a class skill.


Fighters are big bulky slabs of muscle, that only know how to cause hurt. I mean what's not intimidating about that?




However, I would disagree with making things like survival a class skill. Heal should also be cross class. Any fighter intelligent enough to understand the concepts behind first aid would get the extra skill points to cover the cross class nature of this.

But yes, I would also make the argument that spot and listen checks shouldn't be cross class, because part of being ready for battle is spotting danger. However, in their design, they balanced it towards fighters being the big dumb hulking lumps of meat versus the more skillful rangers and barbarians.

[Jack Mann]

Er, intimidate is a class skill for fighters.

[the_tick_rules]

i would think first aid would be a good choice for a class skill fighters, they teach every solider basic first aid skills. Just enough to keep a wounded solider alive until a medic arrives but still.

[Thes Hunter]

Er, intimidate is a class skill for fighters.

Did that happen in 3.5? Because I remember being very upset over that. :smallredface:


*lives in the land of 3.0, since she has a had this habit of only giving whoever owns the rights of D&D money for core books every few years, and not buying each and every version that comes out*


*still shakes her fist over 2nd Ed.*
*cuddles her 1st Ed*

[Artanis]

i would think first aid would be a good choice for a class skill fighters, they teach every solider basic first aid skills. Just enough to keep a wounded solider alive until a medic arrives but still.
As I said before, the Heal skill doesn't cover that sort of first aid. It covers stuff like curing the Plague and keeping somebody from dying due to thirteen stab wounds to the spleen. It's far beyond "push the bandage on the bleedy part".

[Orzel]

The only skills that make natural sense adding to fighters is the ones thugs get:
Bluff (a trained fighter should have enough body control to make a mean poker face)
Gather Information (fighters are constantly in bars ard talking to guards)
Knowledge (local)
and Sleight of Hand (fighter should have excellent finger control).

Every other skill comes with a major metagame change.... 'cept for Knowledge (history)

[Mike_G]

As I said before, the Heal skill doesn't cover that sort of first aid. It covers stuff like curing the Plague and keeping somebody from dying due to thirteen stab wounds to the spleen. It's far beyond "push the bandage on the bleedy part".

That's true. Stabilizing the dying, which is pretty much what Heal is, is fairly invasive stuff, like packing wounds, tying tourniquets and plunging hemostats into the patients body cavity to find and clamp severed arteries.

Long term care is treating disease, which is also pretty hard to do
untrained.

The abstract nature of wounds in D&D makes first aid kinda hard to simulate. You can't splint a broken ankle, since there's no way to get a broken ankle. Sure you can fall 200' for 20d6, but if you still have 1 hp left, you get up, dust yourself off, and walk away.

Stabilizing a dying comrade would be like the scene in Black Hawk Down where the medic tries to stop the wounded soldier bleeding out, actually digging down into him to find and clamp the artery.

I've used (in real life) a blood pressure cuff as a tourniquet on a guy who would have bled out otherwise. It worked to get him to the surgeon who could fix his issue. Just trying to bandage that wound wouldn't have done any good.

[Fax Celestis]

Did that happen in 3.5? Because I remember being very upset over that. :smallredface:


*lives in the land of 3.0, since she has a had this habit of only giving whoever owns the rights of D&D money for core books every few years, and not buying each and every version that comes out*


*still shakes her fist over 2nd Ed.*
*cuddles her 1st Ed*

You know, occasionally, change is a good thing. :smallwink:

[MeklorIlavator]

The only skills that make natural sense adding to fighters is the ones thugs get:
Bluff (a trained fighter should have enough body control to make a mean poker face)
Gather Information (fighters are constantly in bars ard talking to guards)
Knowledge (local)
and Sleight of Hand (fighter should have excellent finger control).

Every other skill comes with a major metagame change.... 'cept for Knowledge (history)
Because guards never have to catch the thieves, right?

[Titanium Dragon]

I think it is silly that fighters don't have listen/spot. They're the class most likely to be a guard, and guards are people who need those skills. It is utterly illogical that they don't have them.

I can't say fighters should be particularly skill-laden, but they should have logical class skills.

[Thes Hunter]

You know, occasionally, change is a good thing. :smallwink:

Hey I gave them amensity and got 3.0. :smallwink:


But I will buy the 4.0 books whenever they come out. Unless they suck. :smallbiggrin:

[Orzel]

If you don't use stealth or you don't live/work in the wild, you should NOT have spot or listen as a class skill.

Thieves don't sneak past guards. They avoid them, kill them, or walk pass them with a bluff/disguise. You still need cover or concealment to use stealth. If you are stand right at a door, people can't sneak past you to the door unless they are invisible/silienced.

[Jack Mann]

See, here's the thing. Even if you make more skills class skills for fighters, not every fighter is going to put ranks into those skills. Giving them more class skills does not change the flavor the fighter, insomuch as he has a flavor. It just lets the fighter fill more roles than he currently can, which is what the bloody class was for. If you don't want one that's skilled in spot and listen, put your ranks in jump and climb instead.

There is no solid fighter flavor, other than "guy who hits things hard." Giving him more options (and skill points) won't change that.

[Arbitrarity]

If you don't spend time outdoors, no spot or listen for you?


Commoner
Table: The Commoner NPC
Class Skills
The commoner’s class skills (and the key ability for each skill) are Climb (Str), Craft (Int), Handle Animal (Cha), Jump (Str), Listen (Wis), Profession (Wis), Ride (Dex), Spot (Wis), Swim (Str), and Use Rope (Dex).

Skill Points at 1st Level
(2 + Int modifier) × 4.

Skill Points at Each Additional Level
2 + Int modifier.

Class Features
The following is a class feature of the commoner NPC class.

Weapon and Armor Proficiency
The commoner is proficient with one simple weapon. He is not proficient with any other weapons, nor is he proficient with any type of armor or shields.




The fighter’s class skills (and the key ability for each skill) are Climb (Str), Craft (Int), Handle Animal (Cha), Intimidate (Cha), Jump (Str), Ride (Dex), and Swim (Str).

So yes. The commoner, has more class skills than the fighter.

Anyway, the fighter really doesn't need more skills, the balance issue is still one of manuverability, and a few other things.

[Shhalahr Windrider]

If you don't use stealth or you don't live/work in the wild, you should NOT have spot or listen as a class skill.
So city-dwelling ey painters and sculptors don't need an eye for detail?

Musicians don't need a trained ear?

[Duraska]

If you don't use stealth or you don't live/work in the wild, you should NOT have spot or listen as a class skill.


Technically speaking, don't we all live in the wild?

<--- takes a level in Philosopher and stares airily toward the horizon...

[Whamme]

I guess this is what I dislike most about fighters. I personally dislike multiclassing (I feel that it exists only for munchkin reasons), so when I play a fighter, I stick with it (and therefore, sorely lack skill points).

Also, what benefit would you get out of taking one level of ranger? 6 skill points (24 at level 1)? Favored Enemy?

I think it's Wizards of the Coast's fault for blatently designing the fighter class as a stepping stone for multiclass advancement. Every other class get's hooks to keep you in it until level 20, but a fighter pretty much screams, "take four and go for a better class." :frown:

The game designers /like/ multiclassing. The game was redesigned to try and make it easy and fun to multiclass.

[its_all_ogre]

i do not think fighters should have spot/listen as this steps on toes too much.
as stated guards are primarily to visually deter thieves, not spot them doing it. i think the class skills are fine as they are.
as for the good stealthy marines, wouldn't you see them as rangers more than fighters?
if you make MS/hide class skills they will only be stealthy if unarmoured.
spot/listen will only reduce the need for a rogue, you'll still need him for traps etc though.
if anything i think fighters need more class abilities beyond feats and better saves, reflex springs to mind. but then you could get lightning reflexes as a feat anyway, so it's kinda covered.
plus the phb 2 feats and stuff like shocktrooper really pays for a fighter, he can do stuff the barbarian can eventually achieve in combat several levels earlier.

[Orzel]

So city-dwelling ey painters and sculptors don't need an eye for detail?

Musicians don't need a trained ear?

Those are craft, perfrom, and perfession checks.

Spot and listen are for noticing things that are being hid from you and for understanding info from conversations outside of your normal sight and hearing range.

The main situations where things are hiding or being hid from you a lot is in the wilderness and high ranking offices.

[its_all_ogre]

also i always view the fighter as being a soldier, trained for rank and file.
if you want outdoors skills play a ranger.
the scouts for an army will be rangers/scouts anyway and those classes better reflect that

[Shhalahr Windrider]

also i always view the fighter as being a soldier, trained for rank and file.
That's the warrior.

The fighter is supposed to be the badass combat expert and artist. The fella that the rank and file soldiers only wish they could be.

[Desaril]

When i said "our" I was speaking to Duraska. Note the "@ Duraska" at the beginning of my reply. Even then I only meant the commonality expressed in our posts. We agreed on some points and on those points it is "our vision" of the genre.

A lot of people seem to think that because a skill would help a class, that class should have the skill. One purpose of the class skill vs cross-class skill is to highlight the differences between the classes.

The baseline or starting point for skill use is everyone can do most things fairly well. A character of any class can use most skills and take 10 or 20 for most actions meaning they can accomplish most tasks.

The next step is taking skill levels in a cross class skill. Characters of any class can spend a lot of time/effort (in game mechanics 2 skill points) to get better than the baseline. Anyone can do this and improve their chance to accomplish virtually any task (except class specific skills i.e. trapfinding).

The next step is taking levels in a class skill. Certain classes can develop certain skills to higher levels or several skill simultaneously (in game mechanics buy skills at the cheapest cost). This gives those classes both a mechanical benefit (hopefully acheiving game balance) and adds flavor (rogues will be presumed to be sneaky, rangers perceptive, and clerics knowledgeable about religion).

Under this framework, a guard (Fighter) can have a high Spot bonus, even better than a ranger' Spot or a rogue's Move Silently. But it will be rare. That (supposedly) balances the classes and creates the "feel" for the classes. Also, multi-classing enables characters to branch out and gain new skills.

The initial debate presumes that you are not "proficient" unless you have several skill ranks in a skill. It is probably more accurate to say that everyone is fairly proficient and those with skill ranks are better than average. Perhaps DCs have crept up to create a challenge for PCs with class skills, but DCs should probably be balanced against the skill points of cross-class users.

For example, a DM has a scene where the party (Level 4) has to sneak past a guard. The knows that the rogue can have 7 ranks in MS, a +3 from Dex, and the Stealthy feat (total +12). The rest of the party has no ranks in MS and maybe a +1 dex (total +1). He wants his guard to have a chance to catch the PCs, but what should he make his Listen bonus?

If he pushes the bonus high in order to have a chance to catch the rogue, he will almost certainly hear the others. If he puts it low, the rogue will likely sneak up on him if the rogue does it alone. I think the guard should be set at the level of the rest of the party. The whole reason the PC took the skills, feats, and stats was so that he can sneak past guards in his sleep (or while drunk and carrying a tambourine). But if the DM makes the guard perceptive enough to hear the rogue, the rest of the party is going to feel unproficient.

The truth is that both the rogue and the guard with a high listen are both exceptional, but if the DM does this repeatedly in several situations, it doesn't feel that way. They begin to think that in order to be "good" at something, you have to be as the best guy in the party.

Of course I realize that you have to make some challenges for the rogue, but most of the time, the rogue should be twice as good as sneaking as a fighter is at perceiving. It actually makes a more dramatic scene when the rogue is finally caught by a guard who has a few levels of Spot/Listen. And if the guard is also a rogue, the ensuing fight will be fair.

[Falconsflight]

The way I see it, Spot and Listen aren't. Hey, There's somebody standing in front of me! I can't see. Spot and listen is, "Hey look, there's a guy 500 yards away. he's coming this way." or "The people in the basement are talking about you" - said the guy on the top floor.

you know, EXCEPTIONAL uses of listen that no normal person can do.

But anyway, You know what would be great? Feats that do this. I mean, they get 50 billion feats, So they should have feats that give you extra skills and an extra skill point per level.

I.e.
Gaurd Duty
Fighter-oriented feat
You gain spot, sense motive, profession (gaurd) and ride. Your skill points per level increases by 2.
This can only be taken once.
Only one Fighter oriented feat per character.

See, That way you gain all the required skills for being a guard(Ride, becuase.. well cops on horses can catch and stop people faster. - assumption: Gaurds are cops as well as protectors)

Don't like that? Well give the fighters "Profession()" skill. Then allow them to apply that to anything they made need to that profession. For example, A Fighter that's a guard, you can use Profession(Gaurd) to see that guys knife, or sense if that man is on the level or not.