The Fault in our Fighters

[lorddrake]

Since my google-fu has let me down I decided to bow down to the Forum's knowledge. I'm working on a piece of homebrew, and for that I need a list of thing a Fighter lack (such as lack of flight, ways to deal with traps - other than one's face, and so on). This list can comprise of things one can cover with magic items or not.

What I gathered from memory:

Flight
Trapfinding
Trap deactivation
Nondetection
Freedom of Movement

[Triskavanski]

Skill Points

[OldTrees1]

Well fighters lack many things, but I think what you are asking for is what do they lack that they ought not to lack.

Fighters are warriors as such they need:
To be able to engage their opponents
To be able to survive their opponents
To be able to defeat their opponents

If there is a Lich using ghostform to incorporeally move though its floating tower above a lake of lava in the plane of fire,

Then the Fighter needs to be able to get to the plane of fire, get to the tower floating above the lava lake, reach the lich as it ghosts through walls, and finally be able to engage incorporeal undead.
Then the Fighter needs to be able to survive the spells, traps, and minions the lich will unleash upon the Fighter.
Then the Fighter needs to be able to destroy, incapacitate, persuade, or otherwise render the lich no longer a problem.



Fighters are more than just warriors as such they need:
The ability to participate in non combat encounters

This area is largely agreed upon in broad strokes but details are fiercely debated.

[ngilop]

I did a big fighter fix (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showsinglepost.php?p=16560510&postcount=1)a couple years ago. and am going to link you the first post in that because a lot of links are in that post than answers you questions I heartedly recommend looking at zeigander's design philosophy for fighters.

[Pluto!]

They target one defense (AC/HP) with one attack type (damage).

You can add a rider effect or two to their attacks, and maybe give the ability to hit one more defense with Intimidation or something, but they have one dimension in combat, compared to casters, who at minimum target four defenses (Fort/Ref/Will/touch) with a variety of effects.

And then there's that little part of the game that's not spent in combat...

[Telonius]

A few things come to mind.

- Ways to force enemies to direct fire towards them. There are a bare handful of ways to "draw aggro" in D&D.
- Ways to play to their archetype out-of-combat. Someone who's supposed to be a soldier (or a guard, or a weapon specialist, or whatever) should have a way of doing the things a soldier should be able to do, without multiclassing to Ranger (or Rogue, or whatever). More skill points and a better skill list would be a great start to this, but it could include other abilities as well.
- Ways to overcome, negate, deflect, reverse, or ignore spells directed at them.

[LudicSavant]

It's not so much that Fighters need to have the same exact tools Wizards do. It's that they need to have an answer to tools utilized by the other side, and it's that the system has a tendency to screw over fighters at every turn for no good reason.

A few areas of design space to explore if you want a good fighter fix...

- Counterplay: One of the major things that are lacking in a lot of "beatstick vs magician" equations are considerations of counterplay. In The Legend of Zelda, Link can seriously just hit back magic orbs with his sword. In D&D there are examples of mundane counterplay too (like divinations being blocked by lead), but all too often this design space is completely overlooked. Many spells require no accuracy whatsoever (a fireball will hit its mark 1000 feet away with no deviation whatsoever, making the mage a better marksman than a master siege engineer doing all kinds of calculations), and bypass any mundane defenses or resist any mundane offenses without a second thought. A Wall of Force simply cannot be overpowered. No interaction! A Ray cannot be deflected or even blocked by a shield (unless you take some special feat that allows you to use shields for touch AC or something). Flight tends to be incredibly stable and messing with a guy's balance or something generally won't make them plummet to the ground. Teleportation leaves no opportunity for pursuers (unlike, say, if it left a portal behind you could jump through, for instance). Magical auras don't raise the hairs on the back of the Barbarian's neck in recognizable ways and veteran Fighters don't get Spellcraft and can't recognize spells being cast against them (I feel that saying Fighters shouldn't have something like the Spellcraft skill is like saying generals shouldn't be able to recognize siege equipment just because they can't build or operate them themselves).

Unlike a wide variety of fantasy and games, spells in D&D in general don't telegraph or provide rational expectations for what your enemy's wider capabilities are (for instance, if you see a Fighter with a greatsword or one with a spiked chain, you probably have some idea of their combat style before they even do anything). It's not just magic either, it's things like "you can't critical hit a monster of X type." Go back to things like the Legend of Zelda. Constructs, undead, and even oozes (such as the Water Temple boss) often have weak points that can be exploited. And yet the system in general just tends to categorically say "nope, you can't interact with this" to martial characters or "nope, you don't need to interact with this" to spellcasters without giving it a second thought. Even things as basic as, say, attacks of opportunity to interrupt spells are easily handwaved with a flat, easy Concentration check for casting defensively.

Over and over again, the default rule for Fighters is "you can't interact with that" and the default rule for Wizards is "you don't need to interact with that."

I think some would be surprised how much of the gap between fighters and spellcasters could be closed if you just kept the game design concept of counterplay in mind when designing the magic system in the first place. However, this is something I rarely see fully explored because counterplay isn't really part of the lexicon in our homebrew community (although it is in professional videogame design communities).

- Speed, accuracy, etc: Wizards are crazy athletic. I already mentioned that they can land a Fireball at siege ranges with no deviation... compare that to a mundane throwing a flask 20 feet away and taking penalties and rolling on deviation tables! By contrast, Wizards don't need to roll to hit many of their spells at all, they just automagically go exactly where they want them.

You think the folks in Avatar: The Last Airbender are dextrous casters? Please. Even a level 1 wizard can move 30 feet, enunciate so clearly that he won't mess up delicate verbal components, perform a variety of complex and precise somatic gestures, draw items out of his material component pouch and do MacGuyvery things with them, and do this all while maintaining evasive action well enough that they don't provoke attacks of opportunity or, indeed, hinder their ability to defend themselves at all.

By mid-high levels, wizards do so much in 6 seconds that Rita Mordio (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_bK4XKS7gL0) is jealous. No joke. We're talking things like Spell, Swift Spell, Immediate Spell, Familiar-Share Spell, move action, directing certain effects as free actions, and evasive maneuvers in the same round, and that's before we're optimizing. Or even considering minions.

Meanwhile, a Fighter has to fight tooth and nail for every inch he gets in the action economy. A level 16 fighter, by default, can't swing their sword effectively as many times in 6 seconds as a medieval re-enactment player. Yeah, an attack roll isn't supposed to be literally "that's how many times you swing," it's an abstraction that assumes some swordplay is involved, but still, it illustrates the point. Every action the Fighter takes is taxed by the action economy.

Also, wizards probably have a higher move speed than the Fighter does. Okay, so you're a mundane. You have to pay for everything you get. Want to carry stuff? Well, it costs weight. Encumbrance is a total pain in the butt if you're a light-armor type mundane. If you have 10 strength, light for you is 33 lbs or less. Even if you have 14 strength, it's 58lbs.

A Chain Shirt, a shortbow, a longsword, a quiver of 20 arrows, a steel shield, an empty backpack, a waterskin, and a tanglefoot bag is 60 pounds. And that's... that's barely anything. So much for moving 30 feet per round. You have to spend money on reducing weight or start tossing things, making yourself less versatile.

Of course, if you're in medium or heavy armor, you're already down to moving 20 feet and having skill penalties and all that.

On the other hand, Wizards don't face this problem. They use Mage Armor (or, by the time they do wear armor, it's mithral twilight etc etc and barely weighs a thing). Wands are some of the lightest things with listed weight in the game, weighing less than or equal to one ounce ("No more than one ounce"). Material components weigh absolutely nothing (even though you carry around tons of objects just for a day's worth of spellcasting), and don't take any action to draw (unlike anything the fighter might want to draw). At every turn, it's like they said "Weight? Actions? Oh, you're a wizard, don't worry about it." It doesn't even matter that you dumped Strength, you're still moving your 30 feet!

- Concept: So, there's often a big divide between what we're told Fighters and Fighter-types can do and what they actually do. Here's an example:
http://archive.wizards.com/dnd/images/cw_ag/75436.jpg

Awesome, right? But... that picture is from Complete Warrior, and it's supposed to be a picture of what the "Divine Resistance" feat does. And that's totally not what it does.

In fact, we get an awful lot of pictures of things like warriors using shields to block dragon breath (and shielding people behind them from the cone!) but the mechanics don't let us do that! Why?

Fighters can't even block lasers with shields unless they take a special feat. Why? Heck, why can't they straight up deflect and redirect a ray with a shield like we see a lot of fantasy fighters in media do?

I see occasional arguments on fighter threads about how Fighters will never catch up to mages unless they throw Kamehameha waves or something, followed by people arguing about whether that would still even be a Fighter, but... no, that's not even it. There's tons of design space to explore that fits the idea we're presented with already of what Fighters should be that simply isn't tapped.

Heck, a Kamehameha wave wouldn't even add much to the fighter's conceptual space to explore. What is that? It's just a ranged attack! Fighters already have ranged attacks, we can just make them better.

- Itemization: In D&D 3.5e itemization grossly favors mages for all kinds of reasons that you can just... not have in your system. Or add factors that make it swing more towards Fighters like saying that, for instance, higher physical stats make you resist the "toxicity" of magic more and so you can stand to wear more magic armor. Or have magic weapon effects that have their effectiveness multiplied by the martial skill of the wielder (e.g. the magic hammer doesn't just cast earthquake, it creates an earthshaking impact that scales dramatically based off of your martial prowess which can scale UP to being a catastrophic earthquake). Or any of a million other solutions.

But none of these happen in 3.5e. In 3.5e you need to pay through the nose to just keep a single sword up to damage standards, while wizards are out there increasing their versatility with cheap scrolls, or buying caster level boosters that just apply to everything they do.

This means that Fighters have less interesting items, and less versatility to switch out their options. You can say "Hmmm, this situation looks like it calls for a ranseur" and then say "hmmm, this situation looks like it calls for a greatsword," you can't afford to have a variety of different weapon styles! You can't afford the feats, you can't afford the items, you just can't afford it. You're locked into doing things one way.

- Specialization: In D&D 3.5e the Fighter has to invest much of their advancement resources into just keeping ONE trick's numbers advancing in a numerically relevant way (like "tripping"). You also generally have to have only ONE weapon (and thus weapon style), because your +5 magic sword takes up so much of your wealth (this goes back to itemization problems, above). Meanwhile, spellcasters tend to have the numbers advance in a numerically relevant way mostly automatically, while players invest in entirely new tricks which have level-appropriate numbers the second you pick them up. Make sure that your mundanes aren't just advancing upwards, but outwards, too.

- Complexity: Some of you might be going "wait, what? I thought Wizards were supposed to be more complex." And, well, they are, sort of. But the problem with the Fighter's complexity is that he has to work really hard to make a new option relevant, none of his stuff is plug'n'play. If a Wizard picks up Stinking Cloud tomorrow, it will do Stinking Cloud's job in a level-appropriate way. If the Fighter wants to learn to trip well, he has to plan his build ahead of time, and combine a variety of different mechanics in order to make him trip in a level-appropriate way.

- Out-of-level advancement: A wizard can learn new spells in their spellbook. A Cleric or druid can straight up just wake up tomorrow and know a completely new set of spells from a sourcebook they just picked up. The mundanes? They generally have to wait until they level up to pick up a new skill. What's that? You want your linguist Rogue with 10 ranks in Speak Language to learn the language of the people of the country you're off to adventure in? No deal, buckaroo, you get that XP to level up and learn a new language after the adventure is over, and you're never visiting that country again! Meanwhile, the mage just copies Comprehend Languages into their spellbook.

- Synergy and teamwork: A lot of games make Fighters a much better target for the mage's buff actions than the mage themselves, one way or another. In D&D 3.5e, many of the strongest buffs are self-only and might actually make the casters a better fighter than the Fighter.

Even if the Fighter isn't the best on his own, one could explore the potential for synergistic abilities such that a Fighter and a Wizard are better than two Wizards.

- React! D&D fighters are pretty terrible at playing basketball defense. They can't get in the way of things. This is one of the reasons that Fighters tend to work out better in D&D-based video-games than in the actual game: You can't just run around them when everyone is moving at the same time. Other factors that make fighters more relevant in those contexts is the lack of open-ended creative spells (like Silent Image) and range limits (you simply can't have fights where people are 1000 feet away from each other where a wizard can lay down spells with equal ease to firing away at 30 feet).

Actually, D&D fighters tend to be bad at tanking in general because they are often rather lackluster at projecting threat or locking down threats (e.g. being something that enemies are strongly pressured to deal with before they can get any thing else done, like hitting the back row squishy). Being a well-designed tank doesn't just mean being a durable target with a bunch of hp. If the hp bag can be ignored, it will be by any decently intelligent foe. Multiplayer competitive games with team tank roles such as League of Legends or Guild Wars often provide many good examples of how to make tanks really work. Games that are just PvE can often be lazier and have worse examples since the designers don't have to assume sentient actors on both sides ("aggro" or "taunt" mechanics. Ew)

- New Tools vs Augmented Tools: One thing that D&D 3.5e does is... how should I put this... that spells tend to add fundamentally new tools whereas mundane talents tend to simply augment existing tools. Evasion is "you dodge, but better." You aren't gaining some entirely new flavor of action there. Fireball is "you can do something entirely flavorfully different from anything you could do before: You can throw a ball of fire." Now that's all well and good, but one thing a designer should keep in mind is that the augmented tool is as good or worse than the mechanics description (since it follows the limitations of your existing flavor, like "you're still just dodging things"), whereas the new tool is often as good or better than the raw mechanics description (since the flavor might have implications beyond "the Fireball does X damage"). What I mean by that is that DMs are likely to make rulings expanding your capabilities about creative ways you can use Fireball to accomplish some utility besides simply dealing XD6 damage (such as providing a heat source for something, say, or evaporating a liquid or melting ice or whatever), whereas they are likely to make rulings limiting your capabilities about how things like Evasion work (such as "well, this is a 5x5 room, there's no SPACE to dodge the Fireball, so I'm going to rule that you take damage"). As a result you should probably make "augmenting abilities" a bit stronger by default than "entirely new" abilities to compensate for this oft-overlooked principle.

- Skills and utility: In 3.5e they seem to have decided to split up martials into "guy who is good at fighting" (Fighter) and "guy who is good at utility" (Rogue). But of course the Rogue is still expected to fight, he just fights differently. But the Fighter's utility just got forgotten. Just as the Rogue is good at fighting (just differently than the Fighter), the Fighter should be good at utility (just differently than the Rogue). Give the Fighter out of combat skills. It could be any number of things. Navigation, perception (mastery of perception to an uncanny level is a classic warrior trope. There's also things like being able to learn an enemy's skills just by seeing their stance), knowledge (including stuff like the Spellcraft skill: an expert in war should be good at knowing their enemy), sense motive (and otherwise "sizing up" or "reading" foes), diplomacy, leadership, intimidation, athletics, crafting, acrobatics, balance, mobility, survival, tracking... all kinds of options. I mean seriously, if you look at the martial heroes in popular fantasy, the high level fighter guys tend to clearly have tons of skills. Make your Fighter just as much of a skill monkey as the Rogue, just with different specializations.

[Triskavanski]

Nods.

That there is the reason I like that Pathfinder came up with Martial Versatility. Cause it allowed a fighter to have a solid 'tree' he could build up with his normal feats, but as the situation demanded, he could spontaneously grow branches on it so it could go where he wanted to go.

The Weapon Master book does do quite a bit imo to really help out fighters and close the gap, especially by bringing stuff down from epic/mythic and placing it in the hands of mid-level fighters, such as deflecting arrows, boulders and rays.

IMO to really help fighters and other martial out, we need more feats like Weapon and Equipment trick type feats. Ones where you accomplish a certain goal and you unlock more of the feat

Primarily I'd use this with things like Two-Weapon Fighting, where once you have the requirements for them, you'd get Improved and greater two-weapon fighting, easing up a little of the feat burden.

Other feats would be like Weapon Focus where as you go up in BAB you get more weapons that are affected by weapon focus, letting you have a larger number of them to be affected by feats, without having to use up a larger number of feats. Only seems fair to me, as Wizards would only need to take Spell focus once to affect something like 30-50 spells at once.

[Amphetryon]

Perception skills, and Sense Motive skills.

[Blackhawk748]

Primarily I'd use this with things like Two-Weapon Fighting, where once you have the requirements for them, you'd get Improved and greater two-weapon fighting, easing up a little of the feat burden.

Other feats would be like Weapon Focus where as you go up in BAB you get more weapons that are affected by weapon focus, letting you have a larger number of them to be affected by feats, without having to use up a larger number of feats. Only seems fair to me, as Wizards would only need to take Spell focus once to affect something like 30-50 spells at once.

Grod did this in Giants and Graveyards. Its a solid rules change.

I am all for this. Let Fighters actually have a freakin use for that stupid feat chain.

[Grod_The_Giant]

Grod did this in Giants and Graveyards. Its a solid rules change.
<nods> I basically handed out big clumps of feats when you hit a certain BAB. Mostly stupid prerequisites and "must have this feat to enter" stuff like Improved Unarmed Strike, but I also had stuff like Improved TWF and Weapon Specialization on the list if you took the base feat.

The fighter, basically, needs a niche. It's not that hard to come up with T3 abilities once you know what they're SUPPOSED to do, but "man who fights" really isn't an identity.

It's also worth noting that they don't have to do everything. If they could, they'd by T1. As long as they're good at their schtick, and their schtick is wide enough to apply in many situations, you're good to go.

[PraxisVetli]

Is it possible to do what the Divine Resistance illustration suggest?
Shield your allies from AoEs?

[LudicSavant]

Is it possible to do what the Divine Resistance illustration suggest?
Shield your allies from AoEs?

Yes. Just not as a Fighter-sort using a shield with non-homebrew, as far as I know. Mages, on the other hand, can do reactive line of effect blockers pretty easily. Because of course they can.

If it is possible for Fighter-sorts using shields through some obscure source, you probably have to pay through the nose for it because that's just how our Fighters roll.

[TheCrowing1432]

Things missing from Fighters:

Actual Class Features.

[Florian]

Well, that depends on whether things will escalate in later levels or not.

A fighter has one job to do: Engage the enemy and focus their actions on himself, all the while dishing out punishment.
He does not have to kill it, be the toughest, deal the most damage or the killing blow, he just has to be the center of enemy attention.

Problems usually crop up if both goals can't be teached, the player wants to reach another level or metagaming, on this case pure tactical decisions w/o character POV starts to show up.

[Darrin]

One of the biggest things Fighters are missing:

Things to do with swift actions.

Most every other class has options that can leverage the action economy. If you're going to add something to fighters, then I'd start with giving them some class features that use swift actions. Start small, like an extra 5' step, build up to an extra move or standard attack. Also, it's somewhat galling that Barbs can get Pounce from level 1, but Fighters can't get this at all.

[ExLibrisMortis]

The whole fighter class doesn't really need to exist. It's too broad, and has too little to design class features around. If you absolutely want to have a 'fighter', you should build something like the UA generic fighter, with access to whole libraries of abilities, including rogue, monk, ranger, barbarian, fighter (Dragon #310, DotUD, Dungeonscape), knight, samurai (CW) and scout abilities, feat chains, maneuvers and stances, minor spellcasting and manifesting, auras, weapon stunts, tactical and weapon style feats and fighting styles, psychic focus and combat focus... but don't let me get lost in listing stuff.

You could design a class around synergy bonuses for otherwise incompatible abilities, and granting bonus 'synergy' feats. E.g. Flurry of Blows, Spring Attack, and Anvil of Thunder do not work together, and in any case Anvil of Thunder has five prerequisite feats, plus five feats to make Spring Attack usable. However, if you could combine these things, it'd be pretty damn cool ("I jump forward and attack four times with my axe and my hammer. The siege-troll is dazed for four rounds*, and I jump back safely behind the gate, out of reach of their archers"). It'd be like the monk fighting styles, but err, usable.


*Yes, I'm aware the feat doesn't allow stacking.

[PraxisVetli]

Things missing from Fighters:

Actual Class Features.
I laughed
Really, really hard

Yes. Just not as a Fighter-sort using a shield with non-homebrew, as far as I know. Mages, on the other hand, can do reactive line of effect blockers pretty easily. Because of course they can.

If it is possible for Fighter-sorts using shields through some obscure source, you probably have to pay through the nose for it because that's just how our Fighters roll.

damn.
Could that be an enchantment on a shield?
How would ya'll run that?

[Blackhawk748]

Something like this:

Divine Bulwark

When you have a shield equipped and are within the area of a Cone or Line attack, make a Reflex save. The save DC is equal to the triggering attacks DC. If the attack does not allow a save the save is DC 10+half the users HD+Con. If you succeed on the Reflex save you stop he effect from continuing past you. For a Line attack this just means that the Line stops in your square, For a Cone you block you block everything in a Cone originating in your square and continuing behind you. This Cone extends to the max range of the Triggering attack's Cone. You also gain a +2 Shield Bonus to Reflex Saves while you have a Shield Equipped.

Example: Tordek is 15 feet away from a White Dragon when it uses its 30ft Cone Breath Attack. If he succeeds on his Reflex save he nullifies the Breath Weapon in a Cone behind him up till the end of the Cone, in this case 15ft.

Note that the Reflex save to activate Divine Bulwark is taken in addition to any saves normally allowed.


If someone who is better at writing rules wants to clean that up, go nuts, but i think the intent is clear.

[ExLibrisMortis]

There is an epic enhancement that allows you to deflect/reflect ranged attacks, Reflex DC 20 + spell level/weapon enhancement, price: +8 bonus. There's another that grants Spell Turning on any spell that targets you, price: +10 bonus. There is a third enhancement that allows you to deflect any number of times per round, price: +6 bonus.

Ergo, the person in that picture is carrying a 6.25m gp shield. Except that it still doesn't do anything versus dragon breath.

New theory: wings of cover in a wand chamber inside the shield.

[LudicSavant]

Could that be an enchantment on a shield?

It could, but that would just make the Itemization problems stacked against the Fighter-sorts even worse. I definitely would not implement it that way.

[Blackhawk748]

There is an epic enhancement that allows you to deflect/reflect ranged attacks, Reflex DC 20 + spell level/weapon enhancement, price: +8 bonus. There's another that grants Spell Turning on any spell that targets you, price: +10 bonus. There is a third enhancement that allows you to deflect any number of times per round, price: +6 bonus.

Ergo, the person in that picture is carrying a 6.25m gp shield. Except that it still doesn't do anything versus dragon breath.

New theory: wings of cover in a wand chamber inside the shield.

Or you know,we could make them reasonably priced, seriously, those are overkill expensive.

[LudicSavant]

Okay, so people seem to like the Concept point. But there's a lot more to be said about that. The shields thing? That's the tip of the iceberg. Not a little global warming iceberg either. We're talking ice age in the paraelemental plane of ice icebergs. It's ice all the way down.

For all that I see people getting into arguments about the Fighter-sorts not being able to do exactly what the Wizard can do, I only rarely see it brought up that the Fighter-sorts can't do what fantasy knights can do (both in 3.5e and in later editions, too).

I honestly think that part of the fault with Fighters is a failure of the imagination. To that end, I think it might be good to gather some examples of things that fantasy fighter-sorts can do, but that D&D fighters have a lot of trouble with. With pictures and video clips and such, because the shield example had a picture. So, to that end, here's a couple to start off:

1) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0MPVU2HLu88 (mundane archers should have so much more going for them. Grappling hooks, move while shooting fast, trick shots, mobility, a bag of special tools, keepaway, control, all kinds of things)
2) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4uIEKEqQl0Y (Proper grappling and fisticuffs, esp. vs big creatures)
3) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BEG-ly9tQGk, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2zGnxeSbb3g (Shoot fast)
4) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Rz2ivHHCug (Quick weapon style mastery, item identification by feel)
5) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FsTWE5yZOOA (Overcoming a weapon's curse)
6) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fdOcOtPqcIs (Improvise weapons properly. Also, pretty much anything in Monty Oum's videos besides straight up throwing energy blasts should be doable by Fighters. I mean, mages far outperform anything his mages ever do)
7) Jump Good. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uwbqr2UjeSg, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uGW1m6DZYKA
8) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Md_iIs2ATWQ (Extreme perception / danger senses / sense killing intent. Not necessarily the skywalking, though Jump Good should probably be a thing)
9) Speaking of Jump Good... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uwbqr2UjeSg, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uGW1m6DZYKA
10) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Ub83PeWYAE
11) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Me0zP9vuvg
12) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xm7u4TGao_U (9-11: Mass combat proficiency, reactive movement, quick use of secondary weapons like flasks and such)
13) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oV4AlLYHe7w (Feats of strength!)
14) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pYW2GmHB5xs#t=25 (Move fast, versatile styles and Bloodborne-like transforming weapons)
15) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ofj1CNfJPtI (Speed! Worthwhile utility tools that scale with mundane skill! Wounding!)
16) Also, let's not forget about emphasizing what mundane skills can do. Expanding concept for mundane utility and skills is important too. So, for example, here's some quick change artists: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kdnXvfPCxjI
17) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AVZB_I-WQdw (Freakin' Dragoons, air combos)
18) http://www.veoh.com/watch/v16897969shBZ8MkC?h1=Battles--Soul+Eater%3A+Sid+vs+Mifune (setting up traps on the fly, special mobility options, moving while fighting, danger sense letting one deflect ranged sneak attacks)

In almost everything: Fighters are much more agile and rapid with their attacks than in D&D. Even if they have ginormous weapons. Also hitting people with those attacks does a lot more than merely damage them, it exerts all kinds of pressure. For instance:
19) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wI1eSloW2AM (Transitions smoothly from one maneuver to another, knocks enemies around all over the place)
20) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5NCVtSNbfr8
21) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mSzUPJZxBXw
22) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CR_F20NtwQM
23) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZiEX2OL5o-M (Nobody bloody stays still while fighting. Also, improvise with the environment! Also, again fighter-sorts in media are often good at perception and can fight blind)
24) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RWB2mHWJaOM


D&D fighters move like snails. Even in ToB they tend to be kinda slow.

I've got a lot more things in mind... just can't find clips immediately...

[ExLibrisMortis]

Or you know,we could make them reasonably priced, seriously, those are overkill expensive.
Yes, they are. Even without the random x10 epic price multiplier, it's 625k gold.

To put that in perspective: a continous item of shapechange or greater metamorphosis at CL 20 costs 2000 * 9 * 20 = 360.000 gp. The latter allows you to take fun 40 HD shapes like the young adult force dragon, or the sirrush (42/40/44/35/38/28 ability scores, SR 39, +20 natural armour, blindsight 300 ft.).

Of course, that item runs into the pre-epic price cap of 200.000 gp, except that Ancestral Relic allows an item of up to 380.000 gp at level 20. Now you know what to get your fighter this christmas!

[Blackhawk748]

Yes, they are. Even without the random x10 epic price multiplier, it's 625k gold.

To put that in perspective: a continous item of shapechange or greater metamorphosis at CL 20 costs 2000 * 9 * 20 = 360.000 gp. The latter allows you to take fun 40 HD shapes like the young adult force dragon, or the sirrush (42/40/44/35/38/28 ability scores, SR 39, +20 natural armour, blindsight 300 ft.).

Of course, that item runs into the pre-epic price cap of 200.000 gp, except that Ancestral Relic allows an item of up to 380.000 gp at level 20. Now you know what to get your fighter this christmas!

SO. VERY. OVERPRICED!!! id say cut all of them in half at least

[LudicSavant]

Why can't archers do things like, say, take careful aim for a round to land a max-range hit that automatically crits? I mean, heck, Cleric archers can do it, and they don't even need a feat or anything. Why can't mundane ranged characters?

Why can't they thread an arrow through a hundred heads like Leraje? Why can't they ricochet sling bullets like Revolver Ocelot? Why can't they fire volleys while running? Why can't they zip from vantage to vantage with a grappling hook and still have time to fire? Why can't they set booby traps on the fly? Why can't they do so much damage with a single arrow it pierces a dragon's heart and fells it? Why can't they ground flying creatures with a flaming arrow like in Dragon's Dogma? Why can't they put an arrow in your knee to make you into a Skyrim would-be-hero, or at least ruin your movement ability for a while? Why don't they have unarmed melee skills like Legolas or Kai or anyone? Why don't they have keepaway dashes? Why don't they catch arrows, string them, and fire them back? Why don't they have an arsenal of nonmagical trick arrows? Why can't they stake a vampire at range? Why can't they tie up a monster with a web of ropes while running around them and firing? Why can't I bind someone with a thrown bolas (or make a flier plummet and die)? Why can't they harpoon an enemy and tell them to Get Over Here? Why can't I hit an construct, undead, or ooze in its vitals like Link in the Legend of Zelda? Why do I have to take Quick Draw to start throwing stuff, let alone throwing it well? Why don't they have all of these things at the same time and then some?

I mean, I can do this kind of stuff with gishes. But mundanes apparently aren't allowed to have nice mundane things.

[stanprollyright]

PF treats its Fighters a lot better than 3.5, and it's actually possible to make a Fighter into the badass they're supposed to be, albeit with some work. Weapon Training is minor, but it's a nice buff with your favored weapon group - very Fighter. Armor Training is great - you're the only guy moving full speed in heavy armor. Good reflex saves (finally). There are some really nice archetypes as well - as often mentioned, Martial Master, Lore Warden, and Tactician are all great. Lore Warden and Martial Master stack, so even without going into Path of War, you can have 4+ skill points per level, bonuses to CMB and CMD for all maneuvers, and can grab situational combat feats on the fly. With Tactician you can be that "leader of men" you're supposed to eventually become. There's even the Automatic Bonus Progression (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/gamemastering/other-rules/automatic-bonus-progression) from PF Unchained, which benefits martial characters more than casters and makes them less item-dependent. The new Dirty Trick Maneuver is pretty nice for Fighters too. If you do use PoW, you can make a Tier 3 Myrmidon/Martial Master/Lore Warden Fighter with martial maneuvers, 6+ skills, floating feats, and ungodly high modifiers on every trip or grapple or dirty trick you attempt.

Here's the problem: that requires using several splatbooks, an alternate rule, and 3rd party sources. It takes a hell of a lot of optimization to get a Fighter to exactly where he should be to begin with. There's also the issue having to give up armor proficiencies, the only class features you've got, and several of your bonus feats to take those archetypes.

In the interest of making Fighters more like fictional heroes, I would advocate letting them take Lore Warden and Martial Master without giving up Weapon and Armor Training or armor proficiency, a few extra class skills like Perception, Sense Motive, and Diplomacy, removing the Lore Warden limitations on which skills they can use their skill ranks on, and then getting some Tactician abilities after 10th level. If you're worried about balance, get rid of 50% of the Fighter's bonus feats (it's not like they'll need them with the Martial Master floating feats). Add a few simple house rules, like Automatic Bonus Progression, and allowing shields to apply to Touch AC and (maybe) Reflex saves. With these small changes, you'd have Fighters that are adaptable to tactical situations and useful outside of combat while still being the best at their chosen combat style, less dependent on items while still wanting to save up for Boots of Flying or whatever, Sword and Board becomes a viable combat style, and at higher levels they can transition into leaders and generals without multiclassing.

[LudicSavant]

Armor Training is great - you're the only guy moving full speed in heavy armor.

Only? Moving at full speed in heavy armor for 1 hour/level is a level 1 spell. And that's just for base speed... if you want to move fast, you boost your speed, and you boost it a lot.

[stanprollyright]

Only? Moving at full speed in heavy armor for 1 hour/level is a level 1 spell. And that's just for base speed... if you want to move fast, you boost your speed, and you boost it a lot.

None of the casters save Paladins have heavy armor prof in PF. And they have a mount anyway.