Assume Clerics and Druids are OK (the Shaman Fix)

[Olethros]

I propose the following thought exercise.

Assumptions
1) Clerics, Druids and Wizards are the most inherently powerfull core class.
2) Clerics, Druids and Wizards are balanced against each other.
3) Non-caster melee fighters are to one degree or another underpowered by comparison.
4) Clerics, Druids and Wizards are the intended power standard (i.e. they are not overpowered, the rest are underpowered)

Problem
Given these assumptions, how do we "fix" the other classes to put them back on par with the primary classes. What would have to be done to, say, a Fighter to make him comperable to a Cleric without giving the Fighter spells (though perhaps spell-like-abilities) or removing/changing spells from the cleric. (Note, this is just an example, feel free to coment on any of the traditionaly "underpowerd" classes)

[martyboy74]

Assumption 4 is wrong. If a character can solo creatures with a CR nearly twice their level, there's something wrong.

[NullAshton]

Don't arrange yourself where the wizard/cleric/druid can slam you with one area of effect spell and win?

[Olethros]

If a character can solo creatures with a CR nearly twice their level, there's something wrong.

Quite possibly, but the nature of this inquiry is not to test the assumptions, but to see what happens when we work within them.

[I_Got_This_Name]

Some more food for thought:
1) CR is based on something at full resources coming in, fighting, and disappearing never to be seen again (at least without refueling).

2) ECL is based on effectiveness as a PC, ability to overcome normally level-restricted obstacles (flight, and so on), and ability to contribute to a variety of types of encounter over the course of an adventure.

3) PC classes have CR = Character level, and therefore, assuming LA +0, CR = ECL. Therefore, they need to match eachother on both of those.

Rephrasing my point 1, CR is based on effectiveness when going nova. Since the CR of a level X human fighter = the CR of a level X human wizard = ditto psion, the fighter should be able to go nova just as well as the wizard or psion does.

However, over the course of the adventure, the Fighter must contribute just as much as the wizard. The wizard can also contribute in locks-'n'-traps situations via spells such as Knock, Dimension Door, Passwall, Disintegrate, Wall of Stone, and the like. The fighter has two skill points and a few movement skills that don't help anyone else as class skills, and the ability to bash open locks without burning the wizard's spells (serious locks will be too hard to bash easily, though). Therefore, in locks-'n'-traps situations, the fighter contributes nothing. The wizard also gets spells for negotiations (see: the entire school of Enchantment); the fighter has even less there than in locks-'n'-traps.

Since the fighter is only good in combat, and must contribute as much over the adventure as the wizard does (to balance ECL), the fighter must be better in combat than the wizard. To balance CR, however, a fighter going nova has to equal a wizard going nova.

Therefore, the only way to balance the fighter is to let them go nova more often, so that they contribute greatly in every fight, but have to fade in non-combat encounters. In fact, let's get rid of the idea of a fighter going nova; the fighter should be able to match the wizard going nova in every fight, since they can't help anywhere else.

Fortunately, I don't have to rewrite the fighter to match this, since it's already been done and widely called overpowered, here (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=9776630&postcount=4), about a fifth of the way down the post.

There's your fighter, brought up to the wizard's power level. It's not pretty, and it can do pretty much as I described.

[The Glyphstone]

Fighter going nova all the time = Tome of Battle classes. They do a lot towards equalizing the caster/non-casters, even if it is by just making a new type of caster"martial adepts".

[henebry]

Stupid question: is the "Tome of Battle" = "Book of Nine Swords"? I have the 9 swords book, and in small letters near the top of the cover it says "Tome of Battle". I see people refer to both titles on these boards, but I'm never sure if there is a ToB besides the Bo9S.

[Wolf53226]

ToB does in fact = Bo9S...the names get thrown around often, but are in fact interchangeable.

[Variable Arcana]

How about:

1) Make "Fighter level 6" a prereq to the Leadership Feat.
2) Better Prestige classes -- perhaps something that grants Lion's Charge around level 10 or 12, for example (5 level progression, req: Fighter 5 or 7, Leap Attack, grants a few other charge-related bumps and full BAB and bonus feat progression, caps with Lion's Charge)
3) Some anti-magic feat sequences or short prestige classes... (e.g. 5-level progression req: Fighter 10; grants SR:5xclass level, increase all spell saves by class level, caps with the power to sunder durable spell effects, like a forcecage or a spiritual weapon)
4) A better Two-weapon feat sequence
5) A better sword-and-board feat sequence (a shield-specialist should have an extremely good AC and be able to apply his shield bonus to Touch AC, for example).

Imagine a series of interchangeable five-level prestige classes that you'd take three of in any 20-level fighter build... -- and all of them allow full "bonus feat progression" as well as BAB progression. (Just like full caster progression -- keeping a Fighter's bonus feats is crucial to keeping his power level up.)