PDA

View Full Version : Pumping up the Fighter



shuntsu
2007-05-10, 09:59 AM
So everyone seems to be of the opinion that the Fighter is drastically underpowered. But instead of nerfing casters (which is seems like we do all the time), how about we pump up the Fighter?

There's 10 levels of empty space to play with, what can we add?

Fighting Styles, Tactical Feats, Temporary HP, better saves? What would you add to improve the Fighter?

Indon
2007-05-10, 10:14 AM
Well, really, there's nothing wrong with the fighter; they're pretty good at what they do, being hitting things, and with their prolific feats they can do a couple other things, too (like trip a zillion people with a spiked chain, etc).

Fighters just aren't very versatile, and the one thing they can do (combat), pretty much any other D&D class can also do (Man, we need someone to swim. Druid, can you shapeshift? Now we need someone to fly. Wizard, Go! Dang, now we need someone to look pretty. Half-elf bard, do your thing. Well, now we need to fight. Okay, let's all do this!).

But, if I wanted to buff the fighter, I would:

-Increase their skills per level and give them more class skills. Tumble strikes me as one good possibility, I'm pretty sure they don't have it. Even without more class skills, that opens up the door for skill tricks (or whatever they're called).

-Improve fighter feats in general. The weapon Focus/Specialization line is _four feats_, for what, +2 to hit and +2 to damage? Fighters have a lot of feats, but not so much that they should squander them on things like that. Sure, non-fighters can take a lot of these feats as well, but not as many of them, giving a fighter the edge (and other meleers a boost which probably wouldn't get out of hand).

Lòkki Gallansbayne
2007-05-10, 10:24 AM
Aye, the problem with Fighters is there's very little if anything they can do that no-one else can except take a gajillion feats. And the few Fighter-unique abilities that I know of (Weapon Specialisation, etc.) really aren't that great in the grand scheme of things.

Still, I won't get into the whole rebuild the fighter thing as I ain't the most knowledgeable or experienced D&Der about, not to mention it's been done to death so many times. I do, however, agree that their skill list is completely braindead. For a start, they get fewer skill points per level than the Barbarian, the steretypically big and dumb class. What's up with that? Secondly, where the hell are Spot, Listen and Tumble? The first two would be extremely appropriate for a guard/defender type fighter and Tumble's actually, y'know, vaguely useful in combat on occasion (not so much if you're not moving around, though - depends on your build and strategy), compared to virtually the entire Fighter skill list except Ride and Intimidate.

Falrin
2007-05-10, 10:25 AM
http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=30692

This is one from Bears with Lasers.

It gets the Fighter right up there with the casters.

Now you only need a fix for all other non-casters.

Good luck.

the_tick_rules
2007-05-10, 10:29 AM
it's an long struggle, but we'll get there.

lord_khaine
2007-05-10, 10:30 AM
if i was to fix the fighter i would just make a Warblade instead, and call it a day.

Viscount Einstrauss
2007-05-10, 10:42 AM
I'm with Khaine. But that's only if you have/like the Tome of Battle. Personally, I'll always use it. But it's good to have some homebrewed fixes to the non-casters for those who can't obtain or don't like ToB.

Lord Iames Osari
2007-05-10, 10:48 AM
Here's my pumped-up version of the fighter. (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=39416&page=2#41)

Deepblue706
2007-05-10, 11:55 AM
I believe fighters need a lot more stuff for defense. They should get a great amount of ability to resist being tripped, disarmed, and grappled without necessarily having such great ability to dish it out first. I also think they should be able to take more hits, in general (or have more ways to boost AC).

Also, they should be skilled in delivering blows that people actually harmed by, instead of just causing a loss in HP (As in, inflicting fatigued or a sickened status through some attacks). But then, I think all fighting-types should have more in that department...

I don't think Fighters should be able to slay Wizards without having to work for it, but I don't think Wizards should totally pwn Fighters, either. I mean, I'm pretty sure Fighters get less skill points than a class like Barbarian because of how much emphasis they put into combat training. They should actually, say, know how subvert a lot of damage simply because of how skilled they should be. And, I think it's reasonable that they pick up, at least, some minor ways to combat more magically-inclined foes, such as a Wizard, since D&D is so often high-magic and Wizards are surely going to be encountered. I don't think they should exactly be able to parry fireballs with a sword, or anything like that, but perhaps in battle they should be granted a WILL save bonus as the Barbarian had through rage, only perhaps through different means, such as a battle focus or calm.

Also, there should be abilities that allow a Fighter to assess his foes as he fights them, and implement what he knows about their specific strengths and weaknesses to his own ability to battle them. Yeah, Fighters have good BAB and HP and all that - but if Fighting is all they do, then Fighting is something they should be better at.

Feats should be the icing on the cake, not what makes them what they are, especially when everyone else gets them (if only fewer). If a Wizard can pick up something like Combat Expertise without having a level in a martial class, why can't a Fighter learn a Cantrip without having a level in a caster class?
Wizards aren't the only ones who can learn Cantrips, but, there are certainly classes that cannot. The only thing unique to a Fighter is a plus sign here and there to attack and damage. Would Wizards be thought of as cool if instead of getting bonus spells and higher DCs on spells for having a high INT, they got a +2 damage to their fireball spells, or something?

bosssmiley
2007-05-10, 12:21 PM
"Tome of Battle: Book of Nine Swords" - the classes in there are basically the D&D 3.6 fighter, paladin, monk and barb. Oh, and ranger too if you squint at swordsage a bit (Desert Wind, Tiger Claw, etc.).

Or, if the above doesn't float your boat, one of the many homebrew fighter fixes on the GITP, WOTC or DiceFreaks boards.

Person_Man
2007-05-10, 12:24 PM
1) The Dungeoncrasher ability from Dungeonscape gives the Fighter a huge damage output when combined with the right feats. So it's well worth taking at least 6 levels of Fighter. For example:


Flaming Homer, the Bowling Ball of Doom

Goliath

Overwhelming Attack Monk 2/Fighter 6/Psychic Warrior 2/Pyrokineticist 1/Warmind 5/Full BAB class 4

Feats: Improved Unarmed Strike, Power Attack, Improved Bull Rush, Combat Reflexes, Combat Expertise, Improved Trip, Knock-Down, Cleave, Knockback, Leap Attack, Shock Trooper, Hold the Line.

Other Feats for Consideration: Mage Slayer, Battle Jump, Robilar's Gambit.

Books: SRD, Complete Warrior, Races of Stone (Knockback), Unapproachable East (Battle Jump), PHBII (Robilar's Gambit), Dungeonscape (Dungeon Crasher ability).

Before combat, use the Expansion power on yourself to increase your reach.

Charge 10 feet into your enemy. Make a touch attack with your fire lash as a two-handed weapon (as it explicitly says you can in the FAQ). Transfer your full BAB to Leap Attack. Make sure that your initial enemy is close to you when you attack him if possible, as you want to keep your enemies in your threatened area each time you knock him back.

If you hit (you probably will) and deal more then 10 or more points of damage (you will) you get a free Trip attempt (from Knock-Down).

If your enemy is standing next to anyone, each attack also applies to them (Warmind Sweeping Strike). You will also get a free Trip attempt against him and a follow up attack (Improved Trip), which will also apply to someone standing next to him, until pretty much everyone in your threatened area has been hit multiple times and is prone.

Regardless of whether or not the Trip attempts succeed, you get a free Bull Rush attempt (Knockback, which requires that you be a Goliath, Half Giant, or Large creature) on each attack, applying your damage and Leap Attack bonus to the opposed Str check.

This should allow you to push your enemy several spaces backwards. For each space you move your enemy backwards, you may also shift him one hex to the left or the right (Shock Trooper). If this pushes your enemy into the same hex as another enemy, you get a free Trip Attempt on each of them (Shock Trooper again - though if one of the enemies is already Prone from a successful Trip, you can't Trip him again).

Again, each successful Trip gets a free follow up attack, and each successful melee attack gets a free Bull Rush, which can start another Trip. And every melee attack can also apply to someone standing next to your enemy using Sweeping Strike.

Plus, if you kill someone (you will) you get a Cleave attack, which will also apply to whoever is standing next to them, and start the Attack+Trip+Attack+Bull Rush+Trip+Attack... combo, again.

And, at any time you can Bull Rush an enemy into a wall or other inanimate object, and use the Dungeon Crasher ability to deal an extra 8d6 + (3 x Str mod) damage. This is really easy to pull off, since with Shock Trooper and your uber Bull Rush modifier, you should be able to fling enemies pretty far.

If you're feeling really saucy, use Psionic Lion's Charge for a full attack.

If someone charges you (they pretty much have to in order reach you) you get a free AoO from Hold the Line, resolved immediately before the charge attack, in addition to the normal AoO you'd get for them moving through your threatened area.

2) Check out the Tome of Battle. A Warblade is essentially a fixed Fighter, substituting maneuvers for feats.

Morty
2007-05-10, 12:24 PM
Nnnope. You can't make a ranger with ToB. Nor can you make a fighter without altering the flavor.
Fixing fighter isn't hard, there are numerous fixes on this board and WoTC board. BWL's is one of them, one guy have made fixes for fighters, rangers and paladins, but I can't find them now.

Roderick_BR
2007-05-10, 01:00 PM
As was said, fighters are good at one thing, and everyone can do what he does, or better. The huge amount of feats is good, but at higher levels you don't have many good real good feats to get (Player's 2 has some good high level stuff), and even then, some low level feats (like weapon focus) turns out to be too weak for a feat.
Check the Homebrew section. Lots of options. One option I'm attempting to do is using the Tome of Battle with the feats from Player's 2, making the warblader's maneuver lists available for fighters, and some maneuvers available to others meelers.

ShneekeyTheLost
2007-05-10, 01:23 PM
Nnnope. You can't make a ranger with ToB. Nor can you make a fighter without altering the flavor.
Fixing fighter isn't hard, there are numerous fixes on this board and WoTC board. BWL's is one of them, one guy have made fixes for fighters, rangers and paladins, but I can't find them now.

Actually, Warblade makes a darn good fix for a Fighter. It does just about everything you want a Fighter to do, with the continued advancement of power curve required to keep up with the Joneses, and has nearly exactly the same flavor as a Fighter ('I am a complete warrior, I have honed and trained my martial skills, I have tactical and strategic capability, and I'm impressive while I'm doing it'). In fact, it lives up to Fighter's original concept WAY better than Fighter does.

Crusader... I'd have to change a few things before I call it the complete replacement of Paladin. Mostly the whole random maneuvers accessable thing.

Swordsage... everything Monk wishes it could be, but isn't. Seriously. Drop the light armor proficency and Discipline Focus to give them Monk Unarmed Damage progression, Flurry progression, and Ki Strike (magic and adamantine only) at appropriate levels. It's Monk 2.0.

Rangers don't need to be fixed. Although, a simple fix would be remove spellcasting and give them a bonus feat at every level they would start a new spell level (four total bonus feats) and allow Favored Terrain rather than requiring specific Favored Enemies. However, this does give me an idea...

Viscount Einstrauss
2007-05-10, 01:30 PM
I'm still hoping for a ranged sequel to ToB. Then the ranger could truly be replaced (and the arcane archer archer prestige class could finally be fully realized!) and, after replacing all of the caster classes with ToM, we have a viably balanced D&D at last.

Morty
2007-05-10, 01:32 PM
Actually, Warblade makes a darn good fix for a Fighter. It does just about everything you want a Fighter to do, with the continued advancement of power curve required to keep up with the Joneses, and has nearly exactly the same flavor as a Fighter ('I am a complete warrior, I have honed and trained my martial skills, I have tactical and strategic capability, and I'm impressive while I'm doing it'). In fact, it lives up to Fighter's original concept WAY better than Fighter does.

Crusader... I'd have to change a few things before I call it the complete replacement of Paladin. Mostly the whole random maneuvers accessable thing.

Swordsage... everything Monk wishes it could be, but isn't. Seriously. Drop the light armor proficency and Discipline Focus to give them Monk Unarmed Damage progression, Flurry progression, and Ki Strike (magic and adamantine only) at appropriate levels. It's Monk 2.0.

Rangers don't need to be fixed. Although, a simple fix would be remove spellcasting and give them a bonus feat at every level they would start a new spell level (four total bonus feats) and allow Favored Terrain rather than requiring specific Favored Enemies. However, this does give me an idea...

Well, if you drop this whole "dedicated martial adept" thing so that class is usable by common mercaneries, slodiers, adventurers etc. it may be true. Though I'd still rather see good ole' fighter but this time with any class features.
Can't argue with Paladin/Crusader and Monk/Swordsage. Those classes are indeed easily replacable. Maybe Crusader doesn't replace Paladin ideally, but Swordsage is Monk-But-Better.
Probably the worst thing in ToB is lack of any archery stuff. Though "Book of Nine Swords and One Bow" wouldn't sound so cool.

Talya
2007-05-10, 01:39 PM
http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=30692

This is one from Bears with Lasers.

It gets the Fighter right up there with the casters.


Most of BWL's Art of War list is good, but it gets too powerful at upper levels.

Soul of Battle (Su) must be limited to once per encounter.
Spell-Parrying Steel (Su) needs to be at half BAB, with no competence bonus for cold iron.
Willful Resistance (Ex) needs to be limited to once per encounter.

All the above, in their original state, make a fighter pretty much immune to magic unless limited somehow. While it's all well and good to buff the fighter, they should never be MORE powerful than an equivalently levelled wizard, and situations where they could match them should be rare.

Viscount Einstrauss
2007-05-10, 01:39 PM
Remove the basic flavor found in ToB's martial maneuvers, replace them with a more Euro-centric theme, remove the handful of wonky maneuvers, and voila! The warblades feel like fighters. Maybe make each martial school the specialty of a particular nation or culture, or perhaps an ideal way of fighting (stone dragon used by well-trained knights, tiger claw a mish-mash used by untrained mercenaries, diamond mind used by guards taught in magic-heavy cities, etc.). Anyone have European name suggestions for the Warblade-accessible martial schools?

They are-
Diamond Mind
Iron Heart (might keep this one)
Stone Dragon (might keep this one too)
Tiger Claw
White Raven

Catch
2007-05-10, 01:40 PM
Tome of Battle. It's everything Fighters want to be, but can't be with just Core.

Morty
2007-05-10, 01:49 PM
Remove the basic flavor found in ToB's martial maneuvers, replace them with a more Euro-centric theme, remove the handful of wonky maneuvers, and voila! The warblades feel like fighters. Maybe make each martial school the specialty of a particular nation or culture, or perhaps an ideal way of fighting (stone dragon used by well-trained knights, tiger claw a mish-mash used by untrained mercenaries, diamond mind used by guards taught in magic-heavy cities, etc.). Anyone have European name suggestions for the Warblade-accessible martial schools?

They are-
Diamond Mind
Iron Heart (might keep this one)
Stone Dragon (might keep this one too)
Tiger Claw
White Raven

Maybe I'm old-school, but I consider Iron Heart and Stone Dragon a bit too "oriental", either. At least not something that mercenary or city guard would use.
I think that you could go with naming everything "Tactics of X". White Raven would be "Tactics of Group Fighting", for example.

Matthew
2007-05-10, 02:02 PM
War Blade is a good alternate, but it isn't a Fighter replacement. No Heavy Armour Proficiency, no Ranged Weapon Proficiency, no Ride Skill (amongst others). The Fighter is fine up until about Level 6, after which things start to go wrong comparatively.
The real problem, though, is the Feat System. the necessity of creating poweful Sub Feats in TOB demonstrates that. It's been a dead end for D&D and Skill Points are the same trap.
Up the power of Non Spell Casters, lower the power of Spell Casters, it's all a matter of preference and both solutions have been tried and met with some success. I think balancing the Classes against CR is more important than balancing them against one another at this point...

Fourth Tempter
2007-05-10, 02:02 PM
Most of BWL's Art of War list is good, but it gets too powerful at upper levels.

Soul of Battle (Su) must be limited to once per encounter.
Immunity to critical hits, death effects, and negative levels is already something equipment could provide. Not failing saving throws on a 1 could be restricted, I suppose, but I hardly see the point.


Spell-Parrying Steel (Su) needs to be at half BAB, with no competence bonus for cold iron.
I do not see why--caster level plus casting ability modifier is the traditional spellcaster replacement for Attack Bonus (observe Telekinesis, or spells such as Whirling Blade). The fact that it is an immediate action, and as such can be performed once per round, ought to suffice.


Willful Resistance (Ex) needs to be limited to once per encounter.
Willful Resistance needs to be changed, I agree; I seem to recall Bears With lasers making a post about that--I believe his idea was that it would also consume the next move action. That would give it a big opportunity cost.


All the above, in their original state, make a fighter pretty much immune to magic unless limited somehow. While it's all well and good to buff the fighter, they should never be MORE powerful than an equivalently levelled wizard, and situations where they could match them should be rare.
I do not think they do. There are still quite a number of things spellcasters can do, even if the fighter has devoted a significant amount of his Arts to preventing them.
Furthermore, spellcasters are uncommon enemies. "Fighter versus wizard" is not a situation that is particularily relevant when it comes to balancing classes meant to encounter monsters. Spell-Parrying Steel would be useful much less often than, say, Seize the Initiative, or Overcome Limitation: Size Difference, or Overcome Difficulty: Weakness.

Talya
2007-05-10, 02:18 PM
I do not see why--caster level plus casting ability modifier is the traditional spellcaster replacement for Attack Bonus (observe Telekinesis, or spells such as Whirling Blade). The fact that it is an immediate action, and as such can be performed once per round, ought to suffice.


The caster can only fire one touch attack per round. But you're right, I was reading spell level, not spell's caster level. That makes a huge difference. Against the CL, it works okay.

Dausuul
2007-05-10, 02:47 PM
*waits for the inevitable "Fighters are just fine, if you're having problems with fighters not keeping up it's because your DM sucks" post*

Diggorian
2007-05-10, 02:56 PM
I prefer Bear's fighter myself.

They and Warblades coexist in my world. Fighters learn mostly hands on like Sorcerors while Warblades are formally trained like Wizards

Matthew
2007-05-10, 05:07 PM
*waits for the inevitable "Fighters are just fine, if you're having problems with fighters not keeping up it's because your DM sucks" post*
Nah, it's because you're playing higher than 5th Level.... (depending)

Aotrs Commander
2007-05-10, 05:28 PM
My personal 'fix' was to give fighters a bonus feat at 3rd level and every odd level thereafter (not a bonus Fighter feat, a bonus whatever-the-heck-you-like-feat). In addition, I expanded the utility of some feats if you had levels of Fighter. (The specifics are here (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?p=11535571), if anyone's interested).

I have not playtested this yet in-game, but I've been converting Dragon Mountain to 3.5 for a group of 14th+ characters, so it's been getting a heavy work-out, given the large numbers of Fighter Kobolds in that adventure! At the most uninspired level, it gives you another set of tricks or ramps up the Fighter's passive defences. I've thought of several really clever things you could do with it (unarmed combatant, maybe with additional psionic umph, full-on adept with lots of Martial Study to name two examples).



Several people have mentioned ranged schools; I would just like to suggest Tempest Stormwind's superlative Falling Star (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=771597) style (currently in development).

Also, the Martial Compendium (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=804856) thread has lots of links (including some cross-board) to various Sublime Way gubbins for those of you wanting to upgrade/replace any martial classes.

Indon
2007-05-10, 05:44 PM
They are-
Diamond Mind
Iron Heart (might keep this one)
Stone Dragon (might keep this one too)
Tiger Claw
White Raven

Hmm... One thing I'd do would be to genericize them somewhat.

Adamant School
Iron School
Bastion School

Can't think of anything even halfway decent offhand for Tiger Claw or White Raven.

Snooder
2007-05-10, 06:02 PM
My personal 'fix' was to give fighters a bonus feat at 3rd level and every odd level thereafter

Problem with simply adding more feats is that the fighter already has enough feats, it's just that feats suck. Really, ToB and the whole maneuver system is the best melee combatant fix I've seen. Just slap heavy armor proficiency on the warblade and turn his hit die to d10 and there you go.


Remove the basic flavor found in ToB's martial maneuvers, replace them with a more Euro-centric theme, remove the handful of wonky maneuvers, and voila! The warblades feel like fighters. Maybe make each martial school the specialty of a particular nation or culture, or perhaps an ideal way of fighting (stone dragon used by well-trained knights, tiger claw a mish-mash used by untrained mercenaries, diamond mind used by guards taught in magic-heavy cities, etc.). Anyone have European name suggestions for the Warblade-accessible martial schools?

They are-
Diamond Mind
Iron Heart (might keep this one)
Stone Dragon (might keep this one too)
Tiger Claw
White Raven

Just rename everything in German. That'll make it sound European. :smallbiggrin:
Diamond Mind - Diamant-Verstand
Iron Heart - Eisen-Herz
Stone Dragon - Steindrache
Tiger Claw - Tiger-Greifer
White Raven - Weißes Raven
(courtesy of babelfish)

Or you could simply call the schools by the sword style they most resemble:
Diamond Mind - Epee
Iron Heart - Saber
Stone Dragon - Zwiehander
Tiger Claw - Florentine
White Raven - Sword and Board

Aotrs Commander
2007-05-11, 06:04 PM
Problem with simply adding more feats is that the fighter already has enough feats, it's just that feats suck. Really, ToB and the whole maneuver system is the best melee combatant fix I've seen. Just slap heavy armor proficiency on the warblade and turn his hit die to d10 and there you go.

That's why I upgraded the feat capability as well as just adding more of them. For example, Iron Will, if you have at least 1 level of Fighter, doesn't grant you +2 to Will saves, but changes your Will save progression to Good or Martial Study which allows Fighter to take it 3+Fighter level times or letting Improved Crit stack with Keen.

That and the fact I am also using Warblades (indeed, it was ToB that finally made me realise that Fighters sucked so bad). It's not a complete fix, no, but it means Fighters become extremely flexible in terms of Feats, meaning there is a reason to take levels in the class. More or less, you can have all the Fighter 'class' feats and still have some spare to burn on other related feats, or do somethign different altogether.

And Fighters (especially with 9 extra feats) make damn good archers, which Warblades don't. The thought of what the Fighter/Ranger/Deepwood Sniper will do with a couple of extra feats in the aforementioned game fills me with deep fear.

Emperor Tippy
2007-05-11, 06:18 PM
Lets see. In my RL games the warrior NPC class is replaced with the PHB fighter and ToB is allowed. BWL's fighter variant is allowed as well.

Don't pump up the fighter just dump the PHB one and use a complete replacement to fit the archetype. ToB does an excellent job of this and so does BWL's fix.

Caelestion
2007-05-11, 06:38 PM
Well, the Warrior is supposed to suck. It's an NPC class after all.

Emperor Tippy
2007-05-11, 06:51 PM
Yeah. But it sucks hard. And fighter sucks almost as hard. The fighter base class is what the warrior NPC class should be.

Matthew
2007-05-11, 08:51 PM
It's level dependent. Up until about Level 5 there's nothing particularly sucky about Fighters. It's higher levels where they start to have problems. There's not much difference between a Fighter 1 and a Warrior 1.

Viscount Einstrauss
2007-05-11, 08:54 PM
Sure there is, there's a huge difference between a Fighter 1 and a Warrior 1. See, one is highly expendable for plot purposes and likely won't even have a name while the other goes outside with a pointy stick and stabs goblins, kobolds, and rats for a few days.

Matthew
2007-05-12, 06:26 AM
Heh, sounds pretty similar... Which one is which?

Morty
2007-05-12, 08:24 AM
The one bad thing about using BWL fix is that fighter fixed this way is better than other meleers on higher levels. You can replace Paladin with Fax Celestis' paladin, but I haven't seen a Ranger or Barbarian fix.
For me, fighters don't suck, but you can't really make a class using bonus feats. After 10 levels or so, fighter just plain run out of feats to take, and he doesn't get any new abilities.

Theodoxus
2007-05-12, 11:13 AM
I don't understand the premise of the question. Everything I've read about why fighters suck vs everyother class tends to come down on 'well, the fighter just has to sit there while the wizard flys up and annihilates the flying monster.' or 'The druid can just shapechange into a dragon and eat the heads of the orcs.' or 'The Cleric casts a bunch of persistant metamagic buffs and wades into combat, hitting as well as the fighter'. Well, the answer to each of those is - 'The fighter joins the wizard in the air, using his (one of many different magic items that allow him to fly) and beats the flying monsters into submission.' or 'The fighter laughs as the druid slowly takes the heads off the orcs, because it doesn't get iterative attacks with natural weaponry - and then wades in doing a lot more damage and racking up a greater kill ratio.' or 'The fighter sits back and watches as the cleric does suboptimal damage with his heavy mace and shield because the poor little monkey spent all his feats on getting groovy persistant metamagic rather than optimal combat feats, like Power Attack and Cleave. The fighter then wades into combat and again, gets a bigger kill ratio.'

These boards depress me sometimes, that people don't see the wonder anymore. I really wonder why a lot of you play the GAME. It isn't to make the best, meanest, toughest character thats gonna wtfpwn the rest of the party. Certainly there are times when a character does something dumb and you're jonsing to lay the smack down on their head, but that's rare. This isn't PvP - player parties aren't made up of some Midgard Trolls and Dwarves fighting against an Hibernian Elf and her Celtic mate, trying to figure out the best way to kill the enemy player while minimizing the amount of damage you take.

(Oh sorry, I should have said 'Horde Tauren and Undead vs Alliance Humans and Night Elves')

The D&D Fighter Class obviously has some followers, else no one would play it in games. It obviously has something going for it, else no one would play it in games. If any other class could truly compensate for everything a fighter can do, then no one would play it. That obviously isn't true. Its sad that the inevitably power creep has taken aim at the fighter; warblade, knight, swordsage - all 'better' classes than fighter... in some aspect. What keeps people coming back to playing fighter? Concentrate on those aspects, and boost the limitations if you must - but their-in lies the answer.

Fourth Tempter
2007-05-12, 01:27 PM
Unfortunately, Theodoxus, while items that convey flying do help, they do not do enough. For a melee combatant, a sixty-foot fly speed is utterly inadequate when faced with something that has a two-hundred-foot speed, or can teleport itself whenever it so desires. In addition, even when the warrior can catch his elusive enemy, he is reduced to striking a single blow, rather than four or five.

Meanwhile, the wizard has no need of a full-round action, as he may cast two devastating spells with one swift and one standard action, using his move action to close sixty feet with flight. Furthermore, his spells can be cast at range--at high levels, from sixty feet away to many hundreds, depending upon the spell.

Similarily, while perhaps the cleric can not catch the soaring dragon, he is capable of doing other things--offensive and defensive spellcasting. He can fling a Dimensional Anchor at the teleporting demon and proceed to Heal a wounded comrade; the warrior does not have that option.

The Druid could do that, but he does not have to--Wild Shape allows him to take a form with a large move speed and the Pounce ability, and charge through the air to deliver a devastating full attack.


Your other objections are rather poorly though-out. The cleric is certain to have Power Attack and cleave, and the sheer power persisted spells such as Righteous Might and Greater Visage of the Deity convey dwarfs the benefits of the Fighter's feats, allowing the cleric to kill more enemies more quickly. Similarily, the druid can turn into a form which has far more natural attacks than the warrior receives iterative ones--at any level (and to rub salt in the warrior's wounds, these attacks are all at -5, or -2 with Multiattack, not at -5/-10/-15). Consider the simple, core Wild Shape form of the Dire Tiger: on a charge, it receives two claw attacks, a bite... and two rake attacks, plus an additional attack from haste. Shapechanging into a dragon would lead to significantly more attacks.


Also, you seem to feel for some incomrpehensible reason that understanding of the game's imbalances somehow signifies that one does not play the game in good faith. Please justify this if you're going to state it. Comprehension of, say, the matters described above do not make me someone who wants to wtfpwn the rest of the party, as it was crudely put.

de-trick
2007-05-12, 02:39 PM
wat i truely think is that the fighter should have fighting styles
eg-finesse style -would give u tumble wepon fenesse and cats grace as special ability
power style -weapon focus power attack bulls strenght specail ability
defence style would give armor specailization decresse fighting defencily get extra ac bonus



extra...

Indon
2007-05-12, 04:31 PM
I don't understand the premise of the question. Everything I've read about why fighters suck vs everyother class tends to come down on 'well, the fighter just has to sit there while the wizard flys up and annihilates the flying monster.' or 'The druid can just shapechange into a dragon and eat the heads of the orcs.' or 'The Cleric casts a bunch of persistant metamagic buffs and wades into combat, hitting as well as the fighter'. Well, the answer to each of those is - 'The fighter joins the wizard in the air, using his (one of many different magic items that allow him to fly) and beats the flying monsters into submission.' or 'The fighter laughs as the druid slowly takes the heads off the orcs, because it doesn't get iterative attacks with natural weaponry - and then wades in doing a lot more damage and racking up a greater kill ratio.' or 'The fighter sits back and watches as the cleric does suboptimal damage with his heavy mace and shield because the poor little monkey spent all his feats on getting groovy persistant metamagic rather than optimal combat feats, like Power Attack and Cleave. The fighter then wades into combat and again, gets a bigger kill ratio.'


Yes, fighters can often contribute in encounters, even at higher levels, provided you aren't running a campaign in which everything flies at 200 feet a round, or something like that.

Often, though, where a Fighter would make use of a tactical decision to circumvent any given weakness ("Rather than let the Dragon fly around, I'll engage it in a place where flight is difficult and face him there!") often another party member can just solve the problem without needing to be creative ("Oh, it's flying. I laser beam it.").

Even still, the major power of Fighters is their feats, not their cleverness or their magic items. And many feats simply suck.

PlatinumJester
2007-05-12, 04:45 PM
Give him/her a Fullblade 2d8, crit:19 - 20 x 2 (exotic two handed weapon)
Get improved critical, weapon focus, weapon spec and there greater forms
Give him/her lightening reflexes and Iron Will.
Make him/her gain a few levels of exotic weapon master (complete warrior) and take fllurry of blows and one that allows you to do x2 str bonus with two handed weapon.
High Wisdom and Dexterity for Will, reflexes, AC and Initiative.
As soon as possible get a mithral breastplate and vorpal weapon.
Improved Initiative is quite helpful.
Make him/her a Dwarf or a Human.

Fourth Tempter
2007-05-12, 05:02 PM
Yes, fighters can often contribute in encounters, even at higher levels, provided you aren't running a campaign in which everything flies at 200 feet a round, or something like that.
If you examine the movement capabilities of high-CR monsters, I think you will find that a very significant majority of them outclass fighters when it comes to mobility. Additionally, the Fighter has plenty of weaknesses on top of his unfortunately lack of mobility.


Often, though, where a Fighter would make use of a tactical decision to circumvent any given weakness ("Rather than let the Dragon fly around, I'll engage it in a place where flight is difficult and face him there!") often another party member can just solve the problem without needing to be creative ("Oh, it's flying. I laser beam it.").
That's fairly problematic, because, of course, a dragon flying around and strafing the fighter with its breath weapon until the spellcasters disable it is (lamentably) the best-case scenario for the Fighter, as trading full attacks with a dragon is a sure way to die very quickly.

Hazkali
2007-05-12, 05:07 PM
Can I plug my not-quite-a-fighter-fix-but-almost the Mercenary? Just see my sig.
It's not got the range of options BWL's fix has, but is focussed around making melee combatants good in a range of situations by madatorially giving them an equivalent for Weapon focus and Weapons specialisation with a number of weapons, and cool bonuses when they use these weapons. It also doesn't use any supernatural abilities, it's all Ex, just as a fighter should be. :smallwink:

Piccamo
2007-05-12, 05:55 PM
The one bad thing about using BWL fix is that fighter fixed this way is better than other meleers on higher levels. You can replace Paladin with Fax Celestis' paladin, but I haven't seen a Ranger or Barbarian fix.
For me, fighters don't suck, but you can't really make a class using bonus feats. After 10 levels or so, fighter just plain run out of feats to take, and he doesn't get any new abilities.

I haven't seen a Barbarian fix. I think most people feel they are ok for the most part. Here is a good Ranger Fix:
Ranger of the Sublime Way (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=738077) by RadicalTaoist

Here is a good Marshall Fix:
Marshall of the Sublime Way (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=752414) by Tempest Stormwind

Jack Mann
2007-05-12, 06:45 PM
I've heard some people have success by giving the ranger the druid's animal companion progression.

Theodoxus
2007-05-12, 08:25 PM
Also, you seem to feel for some incomrpehensible reason that understanding of the game's imbalances somehow signifies that one does not play the game in good faith. Please justify this if you're going to state it. Comprehension of, say, the matters described above do not make me someone who wants to wtfpwn the rest of the party, as it was crudely put.

Really? What I was meaning, was basically I have a different observation of high level fighters. Maybe its because the games I've participated in weren't 'Great, we're 17th level now, lets go kick some planar ass!' They were more 'The king is being targeted for assassination by a rival nation, there's an orc warband marching south and the Thayan Ambassador has been missing for a week. Go figure out whats happening.' Which lead to a lot of intrique and fighting massive armies and less about being useless in melee because the spellflingers are nuking at range.

Also, what I was meaning - particularly about the 'wtfpwn the rest of the party' is - if, in your games, you are facing things that only the party wizard can handle - 1) who cares, 2) if the fighter is crying about the fact that the wizard is killing everything so he has nothing to do, the DM needs to make it more fun for the fighter, or loose him as a player, 3) D&D isn't a PvP game, and the fact that the wizard can wipe the floor with the fighter leads us right back to #1 - who cares.

In life we all make choices. I'm not sitting at my desk at home bemoaning the fact that I didn't go to school to become a lawyer or a doctor or a tech specialist and bringing home a gazillion dollars a year. Likewise, someone who chooses to make a fighter shouldn't bemoan his choice either because his friend who sits next to him during gaming sessions choose to be a druid and can tear his face off when he turns into a Dire Tiger. Is fighter, by RAW suboptimal? sure. He doesn't get nifty abilities that teleport him at will and allow him to run 300' a round and still make full attacks, or even make one attack for 150 points of damage. Waaa.

All I'm saying is it shouldn't matter. And that to those it does matter, beyond an exercise like BWL did (and probably a lot of others - hell, even the Wizards, and their ToB) should pick a different class or live with their choice - they won't be facing the party cleric in a duel to the death, so... you guessed it - who cares.

Fourth Tempter
2007-05-12, 08:35 PM
Who cares? Well, I would imagine that a lot of people who enjoy playing fighters do. Let's say you are protecting the king from assassination. The rogue, cleric, and wizard can all contribute heavily... the Fighter can not. The fighter is no good at anything except direct combat, and it turns out that he's fairly shoddy at that (his speciality) as well!

I'm not certain I understand your reasoning. Do you truly think that class balance is unimportant? If so, why bother examining class features for power at all? The Fighter and a new class that receives a bonus one million to hit, damage, saves, and AC are both equally viable, because, after all, who cares if the new class is so much better, or that the poor Fighter is no good at all?

Combat is part of D&D--the largest part, by the game's design. The Fighter is the class focused most on combat, since it is essentially incapable of doing anything else at all.
Do you really not see why someone playing such a class might feel a tad miffed by the fact that he can not significantly influence the course of high-level combat?

de-trick
2007-05-12, 10:11 PM
i see where every1s coming from about how the wizard can fly and attack the dragon sure fore that 1-2 rounds the wizard is doing good but wat happens when the dragon attacks the wizard and with a d4 of hitpoints a level the wizards should get a magor wound over half for sure maybe died
or if the clerics fighting upfront he is pretty much the same as u but with a couple of spells but after the duration is done he wont hit the barn side also he has mainly simple weapons so a heavy mace or spear doing a 1s8 ur up there hitin the enemy like a pro takin a couple hits but ur doin mager damage 1d8- 2d6

de-trick
2007-05-12, 10:13 PM
also if ur complaining about fighters sucking dont play a fighter play the class that u say is doing everything or multiclass into it ever heard of multiclassing before

Jack Mann
2007-05-12, 10:33 PM
Please use proper English. It makes things much easier for everyone. It's not difficult. Manitoba nowhere near Quebec, so you have some passing familiarity with the language. Try using the Google Toolbar, which has a spellcheck function added in.

Now, for your actual points, it's much harder for the dragon to hit the wizard than it is for the dragon to hit the fighter. The wizard has many more ways (contingency, prismatic sphere, etc.) to make himself extremely difficult to touch. The fighter has very few ways to effectively shore up his weaknesses.

As for why we complain about this, some of us would like to play fighters. It irks us that the rules effectively punishes us for our choice of class, much as it does for monks.

Nowadays, we at least have the Tome of Battle classes to fall back on, but some of us would like to see a straight fighter class that remains viable into the high levels. And before Tome of Battle came out, we lacked a good, dedicated melee class. The best melee came from clerics and druids, classes that were meant as secondary combatants, but overshadowed the "primaries."

The question isn't, "why should we play melee if it sucks," the question is why should melee suck when we want to play it?

Fourth Tempter
2007-05-12, 10:54 PM
i see where every1s coming from about how the wizard can fly and attack the dragon sure fore that 1-2 rounds the wizard is doing good but wat happens when the dragon attacks the wizard and with a d4 of hitpoints a level the wizards should get a magor wound over half for sure maybe died
or if the clerics fighting upfront he is pretty much the same as u but with a couple of spells but after the duration is done he wont hit the barn side also he has mainly simple weapons so a heavy mace or spear doing a 1s8 ur up there hitin the enemy like a pro takin a couple hits but ur doin mager damage 1d8- 2d6

I... I am honestly at a loss as to how to reply to this. Should I attempt to communicate in my usual manner? Should I attempt to puzzle out this odd foreign language of yours and do my best to speak to you in it? Perhaps to make matters easier, you could translate your reply into English; after all, I have no ranks in Decipher Script. No one ever does.

Emperor Tippy
2007-05-12, 11:30 PM
i see where every1s coming from about how the wizard can fly and attack the dragon sure fore that 1-2 rounds the wizard is doing good but wat happens when the dragon attacks the wizard and with a d4 of hitpoints a level the wizards should get a magor wound over half for sure maybe died
or if the clerics fighting upfront he is pretty much the same as u but with a couple of spells but after the duration is done he wont hit the barn side also he has mainly simple weapons so a heavy mace or spear doing a 1s8 ur up there hitin the enemy like a pro takin a couple hits but ur doin mager damage 1d8- 2d6

I see where everyone is coming from, about how the wizard can fly and attack the dragon. Sure, for 1-2 rounds the wizard is doing great but what happens when the dragon attacks the wizard? With a d4 for hitpoints per level the wizard should lose a major amount of HP, most likely over 50% of his health and maybe even enough to kill him.

Or, if the cleric is fighting up front he is pretty much the same as the fighter, but with a couple of spells. After the spells duration runs out he won't hit the broad side of a barn though. The Cleric is also confined to mainly simple weapons, such as a heavy mace or spear, which do 1d8 of damage per hit. The fighter is up there hitting the enemy liek a pro, sure he takes a coupel of hits, but he is doing major damage - 1d8- 2d6.

-----------------------------

Translated for your convenience Fourth.

/I have had Comprehend Languages and Tounges made permanent.

Theodoxus
2007-05-12, 11:35 PM
I agree de-trick. Besides which, why do people refuse to read everything I write. I make an argument, someone counters, I clarify, but don't include my original argument, and then the reply is 'what about "x"' which is exactly what I had said the first time around.

I think the next time I GM, I'm just have one giant ass anti-magic field. Then all the wizards can whine about being ineffective during specific situations.

De-trick is spot on with what happens when the CoDzillas of the world run out of spells or are dispelled or enter the AMF. Then they're running back to the lowly fighter who's sitting in a bar, drinking with his buddies thanking the good lords that CoDzilla has saved the day again.

I get why you'd want to bump up the fighters ability. It sucks to be the guy with a bayonet when the enemy is coming at you with m16s and jet fighters.

But magic is the same as technology. There's a reason that horse cavalry units, long lines of pikemen and hoplites all disappeared off the face of the battlefield. And that's just our history. In a system where magic replaces technology, I highly doubt armed warfare would ever have evolved.

Mr Man, King of Smackdownia wants to take over Jo-Bob, King of Steamrollerfied's lands. Mr Man summons his trusty court wizard who teleports into Steamrollerfied, magic missiles Jo-Bob and declares the nation under Mr Man's domain. Why go through the problem of making an army when one guy can do it for you?

Magic is to an F-14 Tomcat as a sword is to... that's right, it wouldn't exist.

Melee is obsolete in terms of damage potential and ability when compared to what magic can do. It's been that way since the days of the Red Box. There is nothing - NOTHING - that can be done in game, houseruled, or muckied up that will change that, and keep the flavor of 'Ug, me big fighter with bigger sword, me kill lots'. There's nothing in ToB or BWL's fighter that corrects the problems outlayed by anyone here - neither provides fighters with the ability to fly and teleport onto a flying elemental and survive in their environment natively. Neither makes the fighter self buffing, increasing his physical stats and offering as many natural attacks as he wants. Magic trumps melee - everytime, everyplace. If you don't want it to be so, play an historical game, or play an uber low magic campaign like LOTR.

Or, simply play the game as written, with the understanding that fighters are pisspoor magic dependant monkeys.

Jack Mann
2007-05-12, 11:37 PM
Well, some of us take skills for flavor, thank you.

...Plus, I needed decipher script of a prestige class. It still counts, dammit!

Anyway, I forgot to address the point about the cleric. At high levels, the cleric's spells will rarely run out by the time battle is over. The cleric is also not only as good as the fighter, but much better. His buffs are just that good. As for the weapons, the cleric can take the war domain and become proficient in a decent weapon, or even suck it up and take a feat.

I'm sorry, but the fighter just isn't as good as you think he is, de-trick.

Fourth Tempter
2007-05-13, 12:11 AM
I see where everyone is coming from, about how the wizard can fly and attack the dragon. Sure, for 1-2 rounds the wizard is doing great but what happens when the dragon attacks the wizard? With a d4 for hitpoints per level the wizard should lose a major amount of HP, most likely over 50% of his health and maybe even enough to kill him.
First of all, for the entirety of the moderate levels, flight keeps the wizard almost entirely safe from the majority of enemies. At high levels, the wizard's mobility consists of not only flight but the Phantom Steed spell and teleportation.
What does happen when the dragon attacks the wizard? A cunning wizard has ensured that it can not (consider, for example, an Irresistible Dance spell followed by a Rod-quickened Teleport or Dimension Door out of the dragon's range. Even if it can, it can not make a full attack; the wizard can easily survive one or two blows, if not six, assuming the dragon even lands its attack (the wizard can defend himself with spells that give a miss chance. Greater Invisibility and Greater Blink in combination mean that three out of four attacks will simply fail outright). Wizards are, despite their hit dice, significantly more survivable than fighters, as they are infinitely more capable of dealing with their weaknesses.
And not only that--many spells have a very long range, not necessitating close proximity to the dragon. Crushing Hand, for example, can be cast from three hundred feet away! And after casting, the wizard can have his Phantom Steed take a double move, putting him two hundred and eighty more feet away. Medium- and Long-range spells will keep the wizard quite safe, thank you... not that he needs to avoid such proximity; he simply needs to be out of range for a full attacks.


Or, if the cleric is fighting up front he is pretty much the same as the fighter, but with a couple of spells. After the spells duration runs out he won't hit the broad side of a barn though. The Cleric is also confined to mainly simple weapons, such as a heavy mace or spear, which do 1d8 of damage per hit. The fighter is up there hitting the enemy liek a pro, sure he takes a coupel of hits, but he is doing major damage - 1d8- 2d6.
I'm sorry, but that's a poor argument: fights do not, typically, last very long. Even seven rounds is almost always longer than a fight's duration. And not only that: the cleric under the effects of Divine Power, Divine Favor, and the lovely Righteous Might (this is quite doable in one round plus the next's swift action, four times a day, at higher levels) is doing more damage than the Fighter. The War domain grants him access to a greatsword if he wants it, but a weapon's damage is almost insignificant compared to enchantments and a high Strength score. The difference between a heavy mace's 1d8 and a greataxe's 1d12, for example, is merely two points of damage. Beyond the first level, this is entirely negligible. The cleric's spells will not run out in the middle of a fight, and he can throw them up very, very quickly. An Antimagic Field would be a weakness, but an antimagic field likely means death for a Fighter, as well (whose Armor Class and offense suddenly plummet, pitting him against better-armored, stronger, deadlier enemies).


Translated for your convenience Fourth.

/I have had Comprehend Languages and Tounges made permanent.
Thank you; I could read that painlessly (unlike, to spell things out quite clearly, the original post).




I agree de-trick. Besides which, why do people refuse to read everything I write. I make an argument, someone counters, I clarify, but don't include my original argument, and then the reply is 'what about "x"' which is exactly what I had said the first time around.
As a matter of fact, that in no way resembles what has occurred here.


I think the next time I GM, I'm just have one giant ass anti-magic field. Then all the wizards can whine about being ineffective during specific situations.
In normal campaigns, Antimagic Fields occur in 0.1 to one percent of the encounters, let us say. In a magicless campaign, of course spellcasters would be ineffective. This is absolutely unrelated to, well, more or less anything.


De-trick is spot on with what happens when the CoDzillas of the world run out of spells or are dispelled or enter the AMF. Then they're running back to the lowly fighter who's sitting in a bar, drinking with his buddies thanking the good lords that CoDzilla has saved the day again.
It takes many encounters for a cleric to run out of spells. The Druid is even better off--his Wild Shape lasts for hours and hours! Dispelling a cleric is difficult (an equal-level caster has even odds for each given spell), besides which, anyone capable of doing so is a spellcaster in their own right! Facing a spellcaster, the cleric (with Wisdom as a prime ability score and a good Will save progression, as well as magical counters to offensive spells. A spellcaster may be able to dispel the cleric, but if he were up against a Fighter, he could inflict vastly less pleasant conditions than "dispelled"--such as "insane", perhaps, or "dead".


I get why you'd want to bump up the fighters ability. It sucks to be the guy with a bayonet when the enemy is coming at you with m16s and jet fighters.

But magic is the same as technology. There's a reason that horse cavalry units, long lines of pikemen and hoplites all disappeared off the face of the battlefield. And that's just our history. In a system where magic replaces technology, I highly doubt armed warfare would ever have evolved.
I am sorry, but that is simply not the case. There are many systems in which magic does not render armed combat obsolete. In fact, Arcana Evolved is a D&D variant system which (while the setting does not particularily please me) comes very close to striking a good balance between spellcasters and sword-swingers.
The Fighter is not meant to be obsolete. It is only poor game design that makes him so.



Melee is obsolete in terms of damage potential and ability when compared to what magic can do. It's been that way since the days of the Red Box. There is nothing - NOTHING - that can be done in game, houseruled, or muckied up that will change that, and keep the flavor of 'Ug, me big fighter with bigger sword, me kill lots'. There's nothing in ToB or BWL's fighter that corrects the problems outlayed by anyone here - neither provides fighters with the ability to fly and teleport onto a flying elemental and survive in their environment natively. Neither makes the fighter self buffing, increasing his physical stats and offering as many natural attacks as he wants. Magic trumps melee - everytime, everyplace. If you don't want it to be so, play an historical game, or play an uber low magic campaign like LOTR.
Are you so sure? Tome of Battle has stances which allow walking on air. It has maneuvers that teleport. More importantly, it has maneuvers which require a standard action to initiate--Martial Adepts are vastly less reliant on full attacks than the Fighter! There are maneuvers and stances that increase significantly mobility, to boot, and the Tome of Battle classes have far fewer gaping achilles' heels than the Fighter. A Martial Adept has a far easier time being useful in the endgame than the Fighter.
As for Bears With Laser's "fix" of the Fighter, I would say it does a very good job of preserving the fighter's flavor... while, like the Tome of Battle, increasing its mobility and decreasing its reliance on full attacks, while shoring up its defenses. It does less for mobility, since that would require some breaking with the flavor, but it helps significantly.


Or, simply play the game as written, with the understanding that fighters are pisspoor magic dependant monkeys.
It simply does not have to be this way. There are numerous games, including Arcana Evolved (which is, essentially, Modified Dungeons & Dragons), that show this is the case.
Even if it did, the gap does not have to be so large. The Fighter is simply a poorly-designed class, even if you compare it with classes other than the top-tier spellcasters (such as the druid and the wizard).

de-trick
2007-05-13, 12:21 AM
so wat if i cant spell worth a **** who the hell cares like omg he spelled this word wrong wat are u a ditonary or something

de-trick
2007-05-13, 12:27 AM
ps if u want magic there are lots of magic items u could buy

Theodoxus
2007-05-13, 12:27 AM
Are you so sure? Tome of Battle has stances which allow walking on air. It has maneuvers that teleport. More importantly, it has maneuvers which require a standard action to initiate--Martial Adepts are vastly less reliant on full attacks than the Fighter! There are maneuvers and stances that increase significantly mobility, to boot, and the Tome of Battle classes have far fewer gaping achilles' heels than the Fighter. A Martial Adept has a far easier time being useful in the endgame than the Fighter.
As for Bears With Laser's "fix" of the Fighter, I would say it does a very good job of preserving the fighter's flavor... while, like the Tome of Battle, increasing its mobility and decreasing its reliance on full attacks, while shoring up its defenses. It does less for mobility, since that would require some breaking with the flavor, but it helps significantly.


It simply does not have to be this way. There are numerous games, including Arcana Evolved (which is, essentially, Modified Dungeons & Dragons), that show this is the case.
Even if it did, the gap does not have to be so large. The Fighter is simply a poorly-designed class, even if you compare it with classes other than the top-tier spellcasters (such as the druid and the wizard).

ToB, by your definition turns a Fighter - which, while highly implausible, could at least be shown to work with RL physics - into a pseudo-gish with 'magic like abilities.' That completely destroys the flavor of what the fighter is supposed to represent. BWL's remake grants the fighter a crap ton of resistances and ability to go toe to toe with a mage without sacrificing flavor, but doesn't help with the rest - flight or massive damage.

I never read Arcana Evolved, and don't have the resources to grab books as often as I'd like, but without examples, I don't understand how a fighter will ever beat a mage, unless AE only utilizes Blasters. Damage vs damage is easy to balance. Damage vs utility isn't - and thats where magic will always win, if its allowed.

I'm sorry - I stick by my stance that magic replaces technology. To put it another way, would you play a knife fighter in a Modern d20 game when pistols were available? Would you play a Jedi if lightsabers didn't reflect blaster bolts, and the Force didn't grant much beyond some awareness of your surroundings? Again, why pick up a sword and go adventuring when you can just as easily pick up a spellbook or holy symbol and be more useful?

Jack Mann
2007-05-13, 12:27 AM
It's your choice, de-trick. But these forums do have certain standards of spelling and grammar. As well, I don't think anyone's likely to take you seriously if you continue typing like that. If you enjoy being a joke, then by all means continue. If you want to be treated as an intelligent adult, I suggest you learn to type like one.

Emperor Tippy
2007-05-13, 12:34 AM
so wat if i cant spell worth a **** who the hell cares like omg he spelled this word wrong wat are u a ditonary or something

So what if I can't spell worth a damn, who the hell cares? "OMG he spelled this word wrong", what are you? A dictionary or something?


ps if u want magic there are lots of magic items u could buy

P.S. if you want magic there are lots of magic items that you could buy.

-----------------

No, I am not a dictionary and neither is anyone else. In fact my spelling generally sucks and I happen to be dyslexic. Both of those are reasons that I use spell check. Firefox 2 comes with it built in.

And if you can't be bothered to make your posts somewhat readable most people on this forum wont take you seriously and will silently mock you. We expect you to attempt to follow the forum rules, which are linked to in the box at the top of every page.

I'll quote a couple of them for your conveinence


Typing Incoherently
This is a written medium and people have to read what you write. Chat speak, l33t speak and anything that has to be “translated” falls into this area. You may have something incredible to say, but it won’t be read if you use “m8” and “pwn3d” as every other word in a post. The occasional typo or confusion regarding spelling is understood and expected, but at least take a moment to read over a message before you post it.

Double Posting
Posting twice in a row is generally frowned upon. If you are responding to multiple points, please use quotes and other post formatting to clarify this. Please use the Edit option to modify information in a post instead of immediately making a new one. If you do accidentally double post, you can delete the extra post under the Edit option.

------
Now you do realize that every GP a fighter spends on items to become equal to a wizard is a GP that the wizard spends to pull farther ahead.

Wizards need less items than fighters do to be effective.

Fourth Tempter
2007-05-13, 12:39 AM
so wat if i cant spell worth a **** who the hell cares like omg he spelled this word wrong wat are u a ditonary or something

Perhaps you do not understand: the point of writing is to communicate. You are communicating very, VERY poorly--reading your initial post in this thread required far more effort than it should have and was quite irritating.

Not only that, but writing is a habit. The more you write in such an improper way, the more used to it you will become. The more you write properly, the easier it will get--it takes no effort on my part to capitalize and punctuate and spell properly; indeed, it would be far more difficult to type the way you do. This means that you are making matters worse for yourself--school assignments will be "like omg he spelled this word wrong", and the teacher will have "a ditonary[sic] or something", or perhaps simply know how to spell on his own. Every time you type the way you do, you are making it more difficult to complete every written assignment you will ever receive properly by strengthening a bad habit.

Finally, roleplaying, here on the internet, is essentially cooperative writing. If you write the way you do, roleplaying with you would be the equivalent of telling a story with someone who speaks half in English and half in Velociraptorese.


*sniff* Good day, sirrah.

de-trick
2007-05-13, 01:18 AM
ok ok with me not spelling right i thought we were talking about fighters not my spelling ability here and to be honest im 14 im 4 years to be an adult so i have time to get better at spellin

Fourth Tempter
2007-05-13, 01:22 AM
You're already showing some effort, and I thank you for that. Capitalization is the next step; surely hitting the Shift key occasionally isn't so terribly difficult?

We are trying to talk about Fighters. My point, my good lad, is that the way you type makes it difficult to do so. And yes, you'll improve eventually if you try--but you may as well start now, no? It really does become very easy after a while.

Koga
2007-05-13, 01:54 AM
Step one: Bonus feat every level.

Step two: Permit any feat from the [General] list rather then specific fighter-bonus feats.

Step three: Hit die d12.

Step four: ????

Step five: Profit!

Fourth Tempter
2007-05-13, 01:58 AM
That would be a very limited help. The fighter can already access more or less all the feats he needs--in fact, he should already have taken his best feats by level ten or twelve.

Dhavaer
2007-05-13, 02:15 AM
Prestige Fighter (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=41107). If you use this as anything but a dip class, you're doing it wrong.