Way to make fighter equal to psionic warrior/swordsage

[solooize]

Simply look for ideas to make a fighter equal to a swordsage or psionic warrior..

1. Double the money
2. Pet
3. Astral construct armor

Any other ideas?

[Mordaedil]

Can't you just roll up a psychic warrior or swordsage and just theme it however you want to make it the same as a fighter?

Balancing classes this way is a bit of a futile effort and it is so easy to misstep and cause gripes or jealousy in a group.

[Venger]

Simply look for ideas to make a fighter equal to a swordsage or psionic warrior..

1. Double the money
2. Pet
3. Astral construct armor

Any other ideas?
1. Fighters need so much gear to be even on-task, much less relevant, that this will not meaningfully address your shortcomings
2. An animal companion alone is stronger than a fighter, so this will make you more powerful as far as contribution to the party's efforts goes, but it won't make your character better at life
3. combination of 1 and 2


Can't you just roll up a psychic warrior or swordsage and just theme it however you want to make it the same as a fighter?

This is the correct answer.

Fighters aren't a real class. They're the absence of a class with some crappy feats. Anything you do to give them extra goodies is really just building a new class from the ground up. You're better off just picking a well-designed class to start with.

[Hyperversum]

Fighters aren't a real class. They're the absence of a class with some crappy feats. Anything you do to give them extra goodies is really just building a new class from the ground up. You're better off just picking a well-designed class to start with.

Basically this. Start by using the PF Figther, at least it does get something more than feats.

After that, ask yourself why you need to see written "Figther" on the sheet rather than "Warblade".
After writing that warblade, just play the warblade as you would have played the Figther. Maybe make it a d10 and give him back his heavy armor.

Easy peasy.

[JyP]

Simply look for ideas to make a fighter equal to a swordsage or psionic warrior..

1. Double the money
2. Pet
3. Astral construct armor

Any other ideas?
main concept of the fighter is to be proficient with all weapons and armors, and being able to do more and more martial tricks at-will. Swordsage & psychic warrior have limited tricks per encouter/per day, but which scale well in power over levels, unlike the figher - feats do not provide enough dakka.

To boost up fighter feats, some ideas :
- for all feats which require Nth fighter level : divide the level requisite by 2, or get rid of the level requisite altogether
- double numerical effects of martial feats for fighters : Focus is +2, specialization is +4 damage...
- Extend the feat chains: weapon focus > specialization > greater focus > greater specialization > 3rd Focus > 3rd Spec > 4th Focus > 4th Spec...

this is untested by the way - but which aspects of fighter class are you interested in ? the versatility ? the feats ? other ?

[torrasque666]

- double numerical effects of martial feats for fighters : Focus is +2, specialization is +4 damage...

Maybe instead of just doubling the numbers, make these scale. Like Focus is +1 and +1 per 4 fighter levels, Spec is +2 and +2 per 4 fighter levels etc. Maybe every other fighter level, or key it to the number of [combat] feats the fighter has.

[Ellrin]

The main problem with the fighter in my mind isn't even how poor he performs in his typically assigned role (beatstick), it's his total lack of versatility. Since 3.5 has covered almost every possible fighter specialization with its own base class, except maybe sellsword, I'd say the best thing you could do for a fighter is give the class more of its own identity--instead of just the guy with a pointy stick and armor and all the feats, turn the fighter into a veteran mercenary, and give him the tools on top of that needed to succeed in that kind of life. PF's fighter is a good start, but still signifcantly lower tier than a half caster like the psychic warrior or an initiator like the swordsage. On top of that, give him more, stronger options for combat maneuvers--he can make an damaging attack at the same time as tripping, for instance, and/or can combine maneuvers. Give him more skills per level and class skills--he should be capable of surviving when cut off from others--and more uses for combat-related skills like Intimidate. Give him scaling attack and/or damage bonuses that apply to his combat maneuvers; let him target opponents usually immune to certain combat maneuvers; let him change out a certain number of feats at the start of each combat, since he's the feat guy, so he can be capable in multiple spheres of combat. Give him an (Ex) knack for bypassing magic meant to keep him out, resisting magic targeting him, and/or activating magic items. Give him all good saves--it makes sense for the gruff, battle-scarred veteran of a thousand fights to be tough, quick, and strong-willed.

These are all just off the cuff ideas, mind you, and even all of them together isn't going to make a fighter native 3rd-tier, but I feel like there's something that could be done with expanding non-martial-intiating combat maneuvers and combat skills to give a mundane class more versatility while increasing their beatstick potential. They should scale with level, so you can't just get it with a dip, and should probably be class-locked, so magicky-types can't just absorb the changes and still be better at it than everyone else could hope to be.

[Kayblis]

The best I can tell you is: play a Warblade.

Warblade is what the Fighter was supposed to be. He's a master of armed combat that can apply his intelligence to his combat style, use his Weapon Focus/Spec/etc feats with any weapon by training with them for an hour, and can use many tricks in combat only he can have, in the shape of maneuvers and stances. He's the actual Fighter you see in stories, just like an Unarmed Swordsage is better at Monking than the Monk.

[DMVerdandi]

Simply look for ideas to make a fighter equal to a swordsage or psionic warrior..

1. Double the money
(HOW. WHY. HOW DOES THIS STAY CONSISTENT? DM FIAT?)

2. Pet
(Really makes it more of a "tamer" than a fighter)

3. Astral construct armor
(An Aegis?)
Any other ideas?

My opinion on it is this. Fighter should be the modular class, not unlike the wizard is to spell casting. The one with the most breadth and depth. They tried but the point of the matter is most feats suck, you don't get enough. Most weapon choices are trash, fighter gets no skill points etc.


Now, PF fighter is pretty much perfect with martial master/myrmidon, but if I were to try and emulate that into 3.5, I would make it like so:

1. 6+ Skill points, Regular fighter feats + all TOB skills

2. Maneuver Recovery as warblade, maneuvers prepared as warblade, 3 maneuvers known at level 1, + 1 maneuver every 2 levels, and can learn maneuvers by using a martial script and spending [20 exp * maneuver level]. Access to all disciplines as class disciplines.

3. 1 Rolling feat at level 1, 4,7,11,14 etc. Changing the feat requires 1 day per feat.


THAT is how I would do fighter. Granted, I would take warblade out due to overlap.

[Red Fel]

Simply look for ideas to make a fighter equal to a swordsage or psionic warrior..

1. Double the money
2. Pet
3. Astral construct armor

Any other ideas?

As others have pointed out, you've basically acknowledged your problem in the question.

What is a Fighter? A miserable little pile of feats. That's it, that's all Fighters get - BAB, a Fort save, and bonus feats. Virtually any other class with a decent BAB progression can do what the Fighter does, but better, because feats are not as valuable as spells or similar abilities. The "spells > everything" rule remains in full effect.

What is a PsyWar? A Fighter with actual class features. You lose out on some BAB and some feats. You gain a PP reserve and a spell list. Spells that do things, more than just boosting your numbers - like sensing enemies, or tactical teleportation, or gaining Pounce. Real, useful, versatile abilities.

What is a Swordsage Warblade? (Fixed that for you.) A Monk Fighter with actual class features. You lose out on some bonus feats, and that's all you lose. You gain actual class abilities, including the incredibly versatile Weapon Aptitude that's basically like getting multiple feats for the cost of one, along with martial maneuvers, which are basically spells. And those maneuvers are from some incredibly useful schools, granting - once again - real, versatile abilities.

So how do you make a Fighter equal to a Warblade or PsyWar? Simple. Roll him as a Warblade or PsyWar. Feats won't make up the difference. Money and gear won't make up the difference. And having an Animal Companion doesn't actually make your Fighter stronger - it just proves how utterly fungible he is, given that a moderately-trained bear can do the same or better. What makes a difference - what makes the Warblade or PsyWar better - is that they have actual class features, real abilities beyond just adding +2 to certain rolls, that give them more utility.

I mean, at the end of the day, they're all ultimately only good as beatsticks. But Warblades and PsyWars are better beatsticks, is the point. Because spells > everything.

[daremetoidareyo]

If you take the fighter chassis and apply and initiator progression similar to a Bards spell progression, you should have something closer to tier 3 for a fighter. Also, four skill points per level.

[Pleh]

1. 6+ Skill points, Regular fighter feats + all TOB skills

Small point here: having more points doesn't help much if we don't have a place to spend them.

So if by TOB skills, you mean adding class skills that those classes get, sure (adding diplomacy and tumble is a huge step to making fighters more versatile). If you mean "add Martial Lore," it's not that helpful.

As to the comment about fighters just being "tamers" that's actually a neat idea. One of the most effective methods to beatstick is mounted combat, so you can double as BFC through kiting enemies. Tack on some kind of verbal/social skill to force enemies to will save or aggro to you (similar to Knight class feature) and the fighter is starting to evolve past a guy with a stick. He now has mastery of animal and humanoid psychology, combat tactics, and we should really add wilderness survival since extended marches through rough terrain should be par for the course for a fighter.

Heck, let's just tristalt the barbarian, knight, and ranger and call it a day.

[Karl Aegis]

To be the equal of a spellcaster you must become a spellcaster.

[Andor13]

Not all classes are equal.

At this stage of the evolution of the game trying to make Fighter decent is only a pile of feats away from making the Warrior decent.

At the start of 3e feats were over valued. So the design of the 3e fighter centers around a system mechanic that was really cool and innovative (at the time, for D&D), but in the long run it turns out is only good for cranking out a one trick pony. You can make a really good one trick pony, but that's all.

I would advise just mentally shifting the Fighter over to the NPC class slush pile as the Warrior Mk. 2, rolling a warblade and moving on.

[Aetis]

We play with ToB banned, and never had a problem with the fighter class not being able to keep up with other classes. ToB classes tended to overshadow all other classes at our table.

Looking at the other responses, my experience seems to be rather unique. I am curious what you guys are doing different at your tables.

[DMVerdandi]

We play with ToB banned, and never had a problem with the fighter class not being able to keep up with other classes. ToB classes tended to overshadow all other classes at our table.

Looking at the other responses, my experience seems to be rather unique. I am curious what you guys are doing different at your tables.

Generally when this is happening, one has a pro-active DM. Not just one who sets up the environment, setting, and NPC's, but generally one that doles out plenty dosh or rules lightly in favor of a lot of things.


There is a fine line between trying to kill the party, and then using the same tools as them to create a challenge. With either one, the fighter can only accel at one thing really, and that is creating a single gimmick in combat. Tripping and archery being the two fantastic ones.

Secondly, if this is a straight fighter, and this fighter ISN'T an archery specialist, then things like charging aren't going to really be as good as they could be. Full attack requires a full round action, so lots of "tactical movement" if you will isn't really encouraged.


Also depends on what you are doing in a party. If it's just small room raids, then yes...Fighter will hit things.
If you have to:
Sneak- Fighter will be too loud
Investigate- Fighter will get bored reading
Charm- Fighter will attempt to intimidate the person instead
Balance- Fighter will fall
Swim- They have this, but armor can't be very helpful
Do some other sort of thing in combat other than hit- won't

Fighters are like ordering two buns and lettuce. Where is the meat?

[Karl Aegis]

We play with ToB banned, and never had a problem with the fighter class not being able to keep up with other classes. ToB classes tended to overshadow all other classes at our table.

Looking at the other responses, my experience seems to be rather unique. I am curious what you guys are doing different at your tables.

You have to realize that the classes are both unequal yet still a lot more balanced than popular opinion would have you believe.

[Aetis]

Meat is the combat, presumably.

I think I misspoke, since even at my table no one actually builds a pure fighter. People just uses them as dips to get feats.

I guess what I mean to ask is the disparity between casters and melee, but I think that is outside the scope of this thread.

[Lans]

Try tristalting with expert and 1 non tob martial class. So paladin, barbarian, swashbuckler etc

[Nifft]

The way to make a Fighter able to play with the big kids is to change the Fighter class so it has features which allow it to play with the big kids.



I guess what I mean to ask is the disparity between casters and melee, but I think that is outside the scope of this thread.

Casters get class features which allow them to avoid melee, or to render melee irrelevant.

Melee-ers don't get class features to avoid casters, nor to render them irrelevant.

[DMVerdandi]

Meat is the combat, presumably.

I think I misspoke, since even at my table no one actually builds a pure fighter. People just uses them as dips to get feats.

I guess what I mean to ask is the disparity between casters and melee, but I think that is outside the scope of this thread.

That makes a lot more sense; To answer, the point is about degrees of action. Think of fighter as 3d. He can move up, down,left, right, back, forward through time/space. His primary attribute in life is learning certain knacks which are quite mundane called fighter bonus feats. These are things that normal people could probably learn, and to his peak, he only learns like 11.

Just as a real world example, some martial arts literally have hundreds of different moves for different situations and such. our guy learns 11. And he can't get better or worse. He is for all intended purposes "normal". Even if he becomes "Supernormal" later.



Casters instead get to act on higher planes. They get to interact with the rules themselves, and without much negative backlash. So they have a larger breadth of problem solving capabilities, especially when realizing how unskilled the martial characters are.
Does that make casters bad? Absolutely not. They are just the queen/vizier piece on the board. That piece can still be taken, but it's just way more powerful than a pawn.

Logically speaking, there should be no cosmic "fairness" that makes someone who is magical equal to someone who does not. However the game designers throw in stuff like differences in hit dice, and other mild deterrents, even though we know there should have been an exercise spell at level 1.

But yeah...Magic is better than not-magic, essentially.

[Pleh]

Casters get class features which allow them to avoid melee, or to render melee irrelevant.

Melee-ers don't get class features to avoid casters, nor to render them irrelevant.

An amped up Mageslayer system could fix that. The feat by itself is rather underwhelming. Occult slayer isn't quite good enough to bother with.

[Nifft]

An amped up Mageslayer system could fix that. The feat by itself is rather underwhelming. Occult slayer isn't quite good enough to bother with.

vigorous_nodding.gif

I really wanted to like Occult Slayer, but when I used one in play it just wasn't all that.

[Aetis]

I've started a new thread to avoid hijacking this one.

[Tvtyrant]

We play with ToB banned, and never had a problem with the fighter class not being able to keep up with other classes. ToB classes tended to overshadow all other classes at our table.

Looking at the other responses, my experience seems to be rather unique. I am curious what you guys are doing different at your tables.

This sounds like a classic low floor optimization group. ToB has a very high floor, but a moderate optimization ceiling. Casters outside of Cleric and Druid have a very low floor, and a very high ceiling.

[The Shadowmind]

Lets steal somethings from pathfinder, and add some normal buffs as well.

Skills: Upgrade to 6 a level, and add spot, listen, gain the benefits of the Thug variant, without losing the 1st level bonus feat.
Abilities:
1. Let's steal the Martial Flexibility (Ex) ability of the Pathfinder's Brawler. (https://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/hybrid-classes/brawler/#TOC-Maneuver-Training-Ex-), just replace combat with fighter feat, or heck let them pick combat feats as well.

Then give it the benefits of the Myrmidon archetype (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/core-classes/fighter/archetypes/dreamscarred-press-fighter-archetypes/myrmidon-fighter-archetype) without having actually trade away the feats. Using ToB disiciple instead of the ones listed if you are keeping to 3.5

That give the fighter some in-combat utility.

[Kelb_Panthera]

Simply look for ideas to make a fighter equal to a swordsage or psionic warrior..

1. Double the money
2. Pet
3. Astral construct armor

Any other ideas?

:sigh:

While I hate the fighter hate in this thread, I can't deny that the fighter simply isn't the equal of a psywar. Given that Psywar is a caster, this is to be expected and there's nothing much for it.

Swordsage is entirely another matter. It only has a few tricks, outside of being a desert wind specialist, that don't amount to "hit it again but different," and then some defensive features if you pick those. A fighter focused around tactical feats that picks up some crown of the white raven type items is every bit his equal.

The capability of the ToB classes is hilariously overblown. The crusader and warblade are certainly not better than T4 at most and the swordsage -might- be toward the top of T4. "I can hit it 15 different ways!" just does not a T3 make.

[Troacctid]

If you're making major changes, you could try backporting the 4e or 5e version of the class. It wouldn't be very hard.

[Dr_Dinosaur]

Three strong “Fixed Fighter” ideas:

1. Warblade with Fighter Bonus Feats tacked on (in place of the Warblade’s existing bonus feats)
2. Combine Fighter, Marshal, and Knight. Still probably T2, but no ToB if you don’t like that and at least it gets skills and Cha synergy.
3. Use PF Fighter (or Vigilante if you want more of a social warrior). While Vigilante tries to push you into derailing the game to play Batman, keep in mind you can totally use all your combat abilities in your “Social Identity” if you don’t care abour hiding who you are.

[Ignimortis]

:sigh:

While I hate the fighter hate in this thread, I can't deny that the fighter simply isn't the equal of a psywar. Given that Psywar is a caster, this is to be expected and there's nothing much for it.

Swordsage is entirely another matter. It only has a few tricks, outside of being a desert wind specialist, that don't amount to "hit it again but different," and then some defensive features if you pick those. A fighter focused around tactical feats that picks up some crown of the white raven type items is every bit his equal.

The capability of the ToB classes is hilariously overblown. The crusader and warblade are certainly not better than T4 at most and the swordsage -might- be toward the top of T4. "I can hit it 15 different ways!" just does not a T3 make.

T4 is the default barbarian - you hit hard and are hard to take down, basic competence level for a melee combatant. Warblade and Crusader are much more than that - they have healing, crowd control, active defenses, various effects such as blindsense and non-move action movement, etc. Swordsages get invisibility, short-range teleportation, stat damage, concealment, extra movement modes (climb, fly). And they have good class skills as well, so the barbarian just doesn't have the same range of capabilities. That's why ToB classes are usually considered low-mid T3.

[Lans]

Also if a class can cover combat while dipping into other resources less, then they can use those resources to get versatility, like the warmage or dread necro with arcane disciple. The Crusader and Warblade have a bit more flex to grab the fiend/fey heritage feats

[Bohandas]

let the fighter take epic feats early as fighter bonus feats

[The Viscount]

Swordsage is entirely another matter. It only has a few tricks, outside of being a desert wind specialist, that don't amount to "hit it again but different," and then some defensive features if you pick those. A fighter focused around tactical feats that picks up some crown of the white raven type items is every bit his equal.

The capability of the ToB classes is hilariously overblown. The crusader and warblade are certainly not better than T4 at most and the swordsage -might- be toward the top of T4. "I can hit it 15 different ways!" just does not a T3 make.

As mentioned before, crusader has access to bottomless healing, and both it and warblade can mess with the action economy via white raven. Devoted spirit may usually involve strikes, but many of the important white raven maneuvers are not strikes.

Swordsage can fly and teleport. Fighter cannot fly or teleport. I'm referring to the higher level maneuvers since fighter could use their feats to learn lower level maneuvers.

People may get enthusiastic about initiators and look down on fighters, but its disingenuous to say all initiators do is hit things, especially swordsage.

[Malimar]

I houserule fighters to have a feat every level instead of every other level. This doesn't really help, but it does mean there's slightly less deadness on your way to Dungeoncrasher or whatever.

The real way to fix fighters is probably to just give them a maneuver progression. Of course, if you take that too far, you're just making another Warblade, which isn't a helpful solution. (I proposed (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?529141-Tacking-Initiating-Progression-Onto-Low-Tier-Classes) a maneuvers-for-every-low-tier-class thing awhile back, but got no attention, oh well.)

[Nifft]

People may get enthusiastic about initiators and look down on fighters, but its disingenuous to say all initiators do is hit things, especially swordsage.

Very true.

In addition to what you've said, there's a level 2 Stone Dragon maneuver which allows the initiator to ignore Hardness (and DR) for one strike.

As a utility power, this means the initiator can say, "Oh, there's an adamantine portcullis in front of us? I break it with my fist." It's without exaggeration a get-out-of-jail-free card, since jails are typically made in a way that relies on specific objects existing, and those object relying on their Hardness to remain existent in the face of angry prisoners.

(As an aside: this is obviously why you see those hanging-from-the-wrists prisons in movies. If you suspend an initiator off the ground, he can't use Stone Dragon maneuvers.)

[Kelb_Panthera]

As mentioned before, crusader has access to bottomless healing, and both it and warblade can mess with the action economy via white raven. Devoted spirit may usually involve strikes, but many of the important white raven maneuvers are not strikes.

Literally all of that is available to the fighter as well through the martial study/stance feats. No maneuver below 6th level is off limits to the fighter, though he gets access a touch later and to a lesser extent.

Beyond that, bottomless healing is available through the combat focus line, specifically combat vigor, although only for the fighter himself.


Swordsage can fly and teleport. Fighter cannot fly or teleport. I'm referring to the higher level maneuvers since fighter could use their feats to learn lower level maneuvers.

Anyone can for a feat and not just martial study; shape soulmeld also offers these things with much the same limitations as all but the highest level initiators -unless- you want to sink another feat. Guess what's the one thing fighters have way more of than anybody.


People may get enthusiastic about initiators and look down on fighters, but its disingenuous to say all initiators do is hit things, especially swordsage.

I didn't say it's all they do, I said it's most of what they do, which is true. I'll happily conceded that they're much more self-contained and require less book diving than basically every other melee class, including the fighter, but they're nothing particularly special as far as melee in general goes if you actually have the knowledge to match them. I went with tactical feat focusing for the much vaunted "variety" that they have but the simple fact is that there's almost nothing an initiator can do that a fighter can't if you build it right and that includes quite literally everything that is a 5th level or lower maneuver before you even get to gear.

On the gear front: items that grant maneuvers are much, much cheaper than items that grant feats, on the whole.


Very true.

In addition to what you've said, there's a level 2 Stone Dragon maneuver which allows the initiator to ignore Hardness (and DR) for one strike.

As a utility power, this means the initiator can say, "Oh, there's an adamantine portcullis in front of us? I break it with my fist." It's without exaggeration a get-out-of-jail-free card, since jails are typically made in a way that relies on specific objects existing, and those object relying on their Hardness to remain existent in the face of angry prisoners.

The monk gets crapped on -a lot- for the fact that most of his class features are available for purchase relatively easily and you give me a maneuver that's largely matched by owning an adamantine shuriken as an example of why initiators are good? The higher level mountain hammers at least come with substantial bonus damage and you want to tell me that the one that a 6th level fighter can pick up with his bonus feat invalidates him.

This is the kind of fighter hate/ initiator special-pleading I was sighing over. :smallsigh:


(As an aside: this is obviously why you see those hanging-from-the-wrists prisons in movies. If you suspend an initiator off the ground, he can't use Stone Dragon maneuvers.)

That, on the other hand, is pretty amusing. Kudos. :smallamused:

[Nifft]

The monk gets crapped on -a lot- for the fact that most of his class features are available for purchase relatively easily and you give me a maneuver that's largely matched by owning an adamantine shuriken as an example of why initiators are good? "Largely matched"? Don't make bad jokes.

You have to ask your DM nicely to allow you to buy the appropriate gear, and then you need to keep it somewhere safe when they confiscate all your belongings. Where in specific did you stick that shuriken to sneak it into prison? Was that comfortable for you?

But that's kinda the whole point. You have to ask for gear to compensate for your lack of ability. The initiator -- much like the spellcaster -- doesn't need to ask for those abilities. The initiator just gets them, and can ask for gear to get more abilities.

[Kelb_Panthera]

"Largely matched"? Don't make bad jokes.

You have to ask your DM nicely to allow you to buy the appropriate gear, and then you need to keep it somewhere safe when they confiscate all your belongings. Where in specific did you stick that shuriken to sneak it into prison? Was that comfortable for you?

But that's kinda the whole point. You have to ask for gear to compensate for your lack of ability. The initiator -- much like the spellcaster -- doesn't need to ask for those abilities. The initiator just gets them, and can ask for gear to get more abilities.

A) Niche situation (imprisonment) is niche. That's the situation where the bloody monk shines brightest since all his abilities (that get crapped on for being easily replaceable) are innate.

B) Needing to make special requests for gear is a (very unfortunately common) houserule. By default, you're supposed to be able to buy just about anything that's inside a town's gp limit and an adamantine shuriken is chump change before you even hit mid levels. This and WBL being a thing are part of the default rules. You shouldn't throw them out anymore than you should throw out martial study's 3 per character rule.

C) Repeat: mountain hammer is available to the fighter through his class feature too. This is the furthest thing from a uniquely initiator class feature.

[Goaty14]

I houserule fighters to have a feat every level instead of every other level. This doesn't really help, but it does mean there's slightly less deadness on your way to Dungeoncrasher or whatever.

The real way to fix fighters is probably to just give them a maneuver progression. Of course, if you take that too far, you're just making another Warblade, which isn't a helpful solution. (I proposed (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?529141-Tacking-Initiating-Progression-Onto-Low-Tier-Classes) a maneuvers-for-every-low-tier-class thing awhile back, but got no attention, oh well.)

As a side note: Once I saw a guy house rule that a fighters got +5/4 BaB, to +25 at level 20. I might suggest, for your initiating progression, to offer the Falling Star (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?10707-Maneuvers-Falling-Star-Discipline) discipline for ranged rangers.

@Initiating Fighter discussion: It may seem obscure, but Martial Study can only be taken three times. The fighter doesn't get a recharge mechanic (ok well, he does, but listed in term of encounter).

[Kelb_Panthera]

@Initiating Fighter discussion: It may seem obscure, but Martial Study can only be taken three times. The fighter doesn't get a recharge mechanic (ok well, he does, but listed in term of encounter).

I know. Mentioned it myself in my last post.

As for recharge, the swordsage recharge is only marginally better than not having one at all. If maneuvers are all you have, getting them back during a given encounter can matter sometimes but if they're supplemental to whatever else you've got going on it's not such a big deal. In a nutshell; swordsage has so many maneuvers that recharging isn't important while fighter gets so few that it isn't.

[Bohandas]

Adding more skill points, and making use magic device a class skill would help

[Andor13]

Literally all of that is available to the fighter as well through the martial study/stance feats. No maneuver below 6th level is off limits to the fighter, though he gets access a touch later and to a lesser extent.

Beyond that, bottomless healing is available through the combat focus line, specifically combat vigor, although only for the fighter himself.

It's not much of a defense of Fighters vs initiators to say "Fighters can initiate too, with their feats." It's true, but kind of misses the point that the whole idea of initiators classes was to say "Why don't we try giving martials nice things too?"And the Fighter is why that was said.

I mean to say a fighter doesn't suck because he can spend his one class feature to weakly mimic multi-classing is ignoring the fact that he'd be better off actually multi-classing. Is spending a feat to learn a soul meld actually a better choice than taking a dip in Incarnate or Totemist and learning dozens? Is that 1 point of BAB really that valuable?

[Kelb_Panthera]

It's not much of a defense of Fighters vs initiators to say "Fighters can initiate too, with their feats." It's true, but kind of misses the point that the whole idea of initiators classes was to say "Why don't we try giving martials nice things too?"And the Fighter is why that was said.

I disagree with the premise of your statement. They did say "lets try something new with non-casters" but I don't believe for a moment that they did so "because fighters et al suck."

It's a -different- approach to melee but when you actually look at the numbers it's not at all obvious that it's strictly superior. The time was taken to make the majority of the options in the book available to every class through both feats and a number of magic items as well. The idea that they were supposed to be exclusive to initiators and that initiators were intended to replace anything is missing the point, IMO.


I mean to say a fighter doesn't suck because he can spend his one class feature to weakly mimic multi-classing is ignoring the fact that he'd be better off actually multi-classing. Is spending a feat to learn a soul meld actually a better choice than taking a dip in Incarnate or Totemist and learning dozens? Is that 1 point of BAB really that valuable?

Multiclassing benefits literally every class. You can't reasonably bring it into a discussion comparing class X to class Y. If the goal is to show that a fighter can match a swordsage, why wouldn't you use what is available either uniquely or to both classes to do so? While a fighter doesn't have unique access to these options (he gets precious little in that regard) they cost him comparatively much, much less in terms of build resources.

The point is, you can build a straight fighter that is the equal of a straight swordsage. The op-ceiling for both classes, sans multiclassing, is surprisingly similar.

_______________________________

One of the phenomena I've noticed in this forum is a tendency to crap on the fighter more than is warranted, in part because his options are almost entirely non-unique and because his capacity to combine more of these non-unique options into a single character goes under appreciated, IMO.

I don't deny that the class takes more optimization chops to fully realize than basically any other non-caster and that, even fully realized, he's behind partial casters like the paladin and ranger in both basic and absolute power, much less any real caster of basically any stripe. What I vehemently deny is that the fighter is irrecoverable dreck that is in desperate need of fixing just because it -does- take more effort to put all the pieces together into something really spectacular.

Less vociferously, I also deny that ToB is the end-all, be-all solution to making a martial character. It's a fun, useful supplement that I do, in fact, enjoy using as often as not. The classes contained within, while great fun, simply are not the equal of most of T3 if any at all. Frankly, the only one that looks close on the original list is binder and that strikes me more as a misplacing of binder than a justification for putting the initiators on that level. They just don't do much of anything outside of combat without -really- squinting at their options.

[Venger]

Multiclassing benefits literally every class. You can't reasonably bring it into a discussion comparing class X to class Y. If the goal is to show that a fighter can match a swordsage, why wouldn't you use what is available either uniquely or to both classes to do so? While a fighter doesn't have unique access to these options (he gets precious little in that regard) they cost him comparatively much, much less in terms of build resources.
Because that has nothing to do with him being a fighter.

Saying a monk can buy cross class ranks in umd and use wands and therefore the class is balanced because it has access to spells is technically true as well, but this has nothing to do with him being a monk. It's something any character of any class can do. This is why you saying "fighters can take martial study: QED they are just as powerful as swordsages" does not make sense, to set aside that you can only ever take it 3 times and that you will only be able to get access to weak maneuvers many levels late.



The point is, you can build a straight fighter that is the equal of a straight swordsage. The op-ceiling for both classes, sans multiclassing, is surprisingly similar.
No. You cannot.

Anything a fighter can do, a swordsage (or either of the other initiators) can do more easily, plus they have access to 9th level maneuvers (assuming a straight 20 in any of the classes) Have you ever played an initiator before? Even setting aside your personal distaste for them, they are factually much more powerful classes than fighters, occupying high tier 3 comfortably.



One of the phenomena I've noticed in this forum is a tendency to crap on the fighter more than is warranted, in part because his options are almost entirely non-unique and because his capacity to combine more of these non-unique options into a single character goes under appreciated, IMO.
Also because like monk, there is never a reason to take more than 1, 2, or 6 levels of the class. "Straight fighters" are not very common in actual play because they don't actually do anything.


I don't deny that the class takes more optimization chops to fully realize than basically any other non-caster and that, even fully realized, he's behind partial casters like the paladin and ranger in both basic and absolute power, much less any real caster of basically any stripe. What I vehemently deny is that the fighter is irrecoverable dreck that is in desperate need of fixing just because it -does- take more effort to put all the pieces together into something really spectacular.
If you're well-versed in optimization and want to willingly handicap yourself by building a straight fighter, sure, you can kind of be competent with a bare-bones shock trooper build, but you're not doing anything you couldn't do better with other classes. The impetus behind most fighter fixes is so the class can be used out of the box by people who aren't familiar with or simply aren't interested in having to do a bunch of research to drag fighter kicking and screaming to the shores of basic competence.


Less vociferously, I also deny that ToB is the end-all, be-all solution to making a martial character. It's a fun, useful supplement that I do, in fact, enjoy using as often as not. The classes contained within, while great fun, simply are not the equal of most of T3 if any at all. Frankly, the only one that looks close on the original list is binder and that strikes me more as a misplacing of binder than a justification for putting the initiators on that level. They just don't do much of anything outside of combat without -really- squinting at their options.
binder is not a tob class. what are you talking about?

[Ignimortis]

Less vociferously, I also deny that ToB is the end-all, be-all solution to making a martial character. It's a fun, useful supplement that I do, in fact, enjoy using as often as not. The classes contained within, while great fun, simply are not the equal of most of T3 if any at all. Frankly, the only one that looks close on the original list is binder and that strikes me more as a misplacing of binder than a justification for putting the initiators on that level. They just don't do much of anything outside of combat without -really- squinting at their options.

And a beguiler has very few options in combat with creatures who are immune to mind-affecting effects (one or two spells per spell-level). A dread necromancer isn't doing much out of combat aside from building up his hordes of undead. A duskblade does pretty much the same thing an initiator can, except they can do those things a few times per day, not almost at-will.

T3s are either very good generalists (bard, factotum, binder) or very good specialists in one thing who are able to contribute in other stuff (everyone else). T4s are either generalists who require focus on one thing to do their thing as well as T3s (the only thing a rogue is better than a factotum by default at is damage), or specialists who have a good chassis (barbarians are easier to build well than fighters, and a straight Barb 20 is a better decision than Fighter 20) and can't really contribute outside their specialty (what exactly does barbarian do other than being a beatstick and maybe picking up Survival/Intimidate?)

At the very worst, initiators are T3.5, but then half the third tier would be there too.

[Troacctid]

Psychic Rogue, Psychic Warrior, Lurk, Duskblade, and Wildshape Ranger are all T3 and I think they're all worse than martial adepts, or if not, then close enough that you can argue it. Incarnate, Totemist, and Binder are also low T3 (maybe high T4 depending on where your line is) and are worse than martial adepts as well. Warlocks and Dragonfire Adepts are T3 and I think you'd have a hard time arguing that they're significantly better than martial adepts, if they're even better at all. Barbarians, Rogues, and Paladins are T4 and I have a pretty hard time putting martial adepts on the same level as them.


And a beguiler has very few options in combat with creatures who are immune to mind-affecting effects (one or two spells per spell-level). A dread necromancer isn't doing much out of combat aside from building up his hordes of undead.
Both of those classes are T2, so they're not exactly great comparisons.

[Pleh]

... to set aside that you can only ever take it 3 times and that you will only be able to get access to weak maneuvers many levels late.

This is a non-trivial point that Kelb has been acknowledging, but maybe not taking seriously enough.

Favored Soul gets innate access to Flight, one of the hallmark powers in the game. That should be a good thing, right? Well, it's not bad, but it's kinda moot when it comes online at level 17, long after the game has been assuming you have some form of flight for about 10 or so levels.

"Fighter gets the maneuvers, too, just weaker and later."

In other words, they never get maneuvers at the level where they are the most relevant. Not a bad boost to slow the fighter's gradual drop from relevance in the game, but it doesn't really compare with having level-current maneuvers through all 20 levels.

[Venger]

This is a non-trivial point that Kelb has been acknowledging, but maybe not taking seriously enough.

Favored Soul gets innate access to Flight, one of the hallmark powers in the game. That should be a good thing, right? Well, it's not bad, but it's kinda moot when it comes online at level 17, long after the game has been assuming you have some form of flight for about 10 or so levels.

"Fighter gets the maneuvers, too, just weaker and later."

In other words, they never get maneuvers at the level where they are the most relevant. Not a bad boost to slow the fighter's gradual drop from relevance in the game, but it doesn't really compare with having level-current maneuvers through all 20 levels.

Right. In no event is a fighter equal to a full initiator.

[Piggy Knowles]

I actually like the fighter, and think it generally gets a bad rap. The idea is simple and straightforward, and as much as I love ToB and the like, you can’t “fix” the fighter by turning it into an initiator.

So, making the fighter relevant without changing what makes it a fighter. Is it possible? In the last couple of games I’ve run, this is what I’ve done:

1. Given fighters the ability to take a certain selection of [Epic] feats instead of regular feats from level 12 on without needing to meet level/skill/ability score pre-reqs.

2. Given fighters the warblade’s weapon aptitude ability, plus the ability to eventually use it as a swift action.

3. Given fighters a “weapon master” ability that lets them use a modified level check to do things such as quickly sheathe weapons, wield exotic weapons, and even emulate race, class or alignment as per UMD with magic weapons.

4. Given fighters the Craft Magic Arms and Armor feat for free and the ability to use their weapon master check (see #3) to emulate spells when crafting weapons and armor.

Basically the idea was to keep fighters mostly feeling like fighters: the basic mechanics of gaining a feat every other level remain unchanged. At the same time, legendary feats at level 12+ give them something unique to do with that feature, without changing that core mechanic. They also make up for a lack of magic to some degree, giving unique abilities, fast healing, damage reduction (and the ability to penetrate same) and more.


Armor Skin, Blinding Speed, Combat Archery, Damage Reduction, Devastating Critical, Dire Charge, Distant Shot, Epic Endurance, Epic Fortitude, Epic Prowess, Epic Reflexes, Epic Toughness, Epic Weapon Focus, Epic Weapon Specialization, Epic Will, Fast Healing, Great Constitution, Great Dexterity, Great Strength, Improved Combat Reflexes, Improved Manyshot, Improved Whirlwind Attack, Instant Reload, Legendary Climber, Legendary Leaper, Legendary Rider, Legendary Wrestler, Overwhelming Critical, Penetrate Damage Reduction, Spellcasting Harrier, Storm of Throws, Superior Initiative, Swarm of Arrows, Two-Weapon Rend, Uncanny Accuracy

The weapon master level check and weapon aptitude abilities were added mostly so that fighters can use those feats in a variety of ways, instead of being locked into a single fighting style forever.

(The magic weapon/armor crafting was originally just something else to do with the weapon master checks, but it ended up being a really cool feature in practice, letting equipment-heavy builds like archers remain self sufficient and giving fighters a relevant out of combat niche in games with downtime.)

It’s still less versatile than an initiator or psychic warrior, but it’s something better than “play a warblade” at least.

[Ignimortis]

Both of those classes are T2, so they're not exactly great comparisons.

They are? Since when? I might've missed something, so this is a serious question and not a sarcastic one, but as far as I recall, in JaronK's tierlist fixed list casters were usually T3 (apart from Warmage which got T4'd and Healer which got T5'd).

[Andor13]

It’s still less versatile than an initiator or psychic warrior, but it’s something better than “play a warblade” at least.

I like what you're doing, but I feel it misses the point. The trouble with the fighter isn't that you can't make him effective in combat, or even as or more effective than a warblade, it's that that is all you can do with him.

3e has the explicit design assumption that there are 3 pillars to the game, combat, exploration, and social. The fighter can, if well built, and properly equipped, fully pull his weight in combat, but brings nothing to the table, at all, in the other pillars that a Commoner can't do just as well. Between low skill points and lack of class features this is more true of the fighter than it is of perhaps any other class in the game.

The tier list is often misread as being about power, but if you read the criteria it's actually about versatility. A fighter doesn't have any. You could, I suppose, argue that his bonus feats allow his to spend his base feats on branching out to pick up other useful abilities, but again, you can do exactly nothing this way that you couldn't do with levels of commoner.

[Pleh]

A) Niche situation (imprisonment) is niche. That's the situation where the bloody monk shines brightest since all his abilities (that get crapped on for being easily replaceable) are innate.

To be fair, it's the most common reason to not have access to your own gear. If we're going to consider the distinction between innate abilities and gear anyone with coins can buy, incarceration is the go-to scenario to evaluate the subject in its natural habitat.


B) Needing to make special requests for gear is a (very unfortunately common) houserule. By default, you're supposed to be able to buy just about anything that's inside a town's gp limit and an adamantine shuriken is chump change before you even hit mid levels. This and WBL being a thing are part of the default rules. You shouldn't throw them out anymore than you should throw out martial study's 3 per character rule.

As I recall, WBL and equipment lists are meant to be universally SUGGESTIONS that are all subject to DM fiat. Your insistence that WBL be common RAW is sensible in very competive games (PVP or antagonist DM, where the rules have to be as consistent as possible) and in general theoretical analysis. But in most games, it only makes sense that the DM will have each shop in a town that makes certain wares available, and not always for exactly the listed price. Restrictions on adamantium gear is pretty sensible for most humanoid settlements. Even if you have the skilled tradesmen and social infrastructure needed to support an adamantium forge in a city, it's likely not in ready access to the general public and anything made from the material probably needs a special commission (which could mean waiting for more raw material to be shipped in).

[Eldariel]

let the fighter take epic feats early as fighter bonus feats

Sadly most of the epic warrior feats are nothing to write home about. Exceptional and Infinite Deflection are cool as immunity to all touch attacks but that's about it. Rest of the stuff replicates low level stuff (Dire Charge has nothing on Barbarian 1, Combat Archery is just OoTBI 2 or a 1st level spell, most of those abilities just add numbers where stuff like Knowledge Devotion, Law Devotion or such would add more, Blinding Speed replicates a 3rd level spell or a 12k item, etc.) or just isn't all that impressive. However, the fundamental idea is sound: make truly epic Fighter-feats that come around level 10 latest, and let a level 10 Fighter feel like a level 10 Fighter instead of a stage prop in a Wizard 10's play (replicatable with a single spell, of which the Wizard can have any number).

[Bohandas]

Ok, I just stumbled across this alternate version of the Fighter in my archived copy on the old Races of War thread from the old WotC forum

Hit Die: d10
Class Skills: The Fighter's class skills (and the key ability for each skill) are Balance (Dex), Bluff
(Cha), Climb (Str), Craft (Int), Diplomacy (Cha), Escape Artist (Dex), Handle Animal (Cha), Intimidate
(Cha), Jump (Str), Knowledge (all skills individually) (Int), Listen (Wis), Move Silently (Dex),
Profession (Wis), Ride (Dex), Sense Motive (Wis), Spot (Wis), Survival (Wis), Swim (Str), Tumble
(Dex), and Use Rope (Dex).
Skills/Level: 6 + Intelligence Bonus
BAB: Good (1/1), Saves: Fort: Good; Reflex: Good; Will: Good
Level, Benefit
1 Weapons Training, Combat Focus
2 Bonus Feat
3 Problem Solver, Pack Mule
4 Bonus Feat
5 Logistics Mastery, Active Assault
6 Bonus Feat
7 Forge Lore, Improved Delay
8 Bonus Feat
9 Foil Action
10 Bonus Feat
11 Lunging Attacks
12 Bonus Feat
13 Array of Stunts
14 Bonus Feat
15 Greater Combat Focus
16 Bonus Feat
17 Improved Foil Action
18 Bonus Feat
19 Intense Focus, Supreme Combat Focus
20 Bonus Feat
All of the following are Class Features of the Fighter class:
Weapon and Armor Proficiency: Fighters are proficient with all simple and Martial Weapons.
Fighters are proficient with Light, Medium, and Heavy Armor and with Shields and Great Shields.
Weapons Training (Ex): Fighters train obsessively with armor and weapons of all kinds, and using a
new weapon is easy and fun. By practicing with a weapon he is not proficient with for a day, a Fighter
may permanently gain proficiency with that weapon by succeeding at an Intelligence check DC 10 (you
may not take 10 on this check).
Combat Focus (Ex): A Fighter is at his best when the chips are down and everything is going to
Baator in a handbasket. When the world is on fire, a Fighter keeps his head better than anyone. If the
Fighter is in a situation that is stressful and/or dangerous enough that he would normally be unable to
"take 10" on skill checks, he may spend a Swift Action to gain Combat Focus. A Fighter may end his
Combat Focus at any time to reroll any die roll he makes, and if not used it ends on its own after a
number of rounds equal to his Base Attack Bonus.
Problem Solver (Ex): A Fighter of 3rd level can draw upon his intense and diverse training to
respond to almost any situation. As a Swift action, he may choose any [Combat] feat he meets the
prerequisites for and use it for a number of rounds equal to his base attack bonus. This ability may be
used once per hour.
Pack Mule (Ex): Fighters are used to long journeys with a heavy pack and the use of a wide variety
of weaponry and equipment. A 3rd level Fighter suffers no penalties for carrying a medium load, and
may retrieve stored items from his person without provoking an attack of opportunity.
Logistics Mastery (Ex): Fighters are excellent and efficient logisticians. When a Fighter reaches 5th
level, he gains a bonus to his Command Rating equal to one third his Fighter Level.
Active Assault (Ex): A 5th level Fighter can flawlessly place himself where he is most needed in
combat. He may take a 5 foot step as an immediate action. This is in addition to any other movement
he takes during his turn, even another 5 foot step.
Forge Lore: A 7th level Fighter can produce magical weapons and equipment as if he had a Caster
Level equal to his ranks in Craft.
Improved Delay (Ex): A Fighter of 7th level may delay his action in one round without
compromising his Initiative in the next round. In addition, a Fighter may interrupt another action with
his delayed action like it was a readied action (though he does not have to announce his intentions
before hand).
Foil Action (Ex): A 9th level Fighter may attempt to monkeywrench any action an opponent is
taking. The Fighter may throw sand into a beholder's eye, bat aside a key spell component, or strike a
weapon hand with a thrown object, but the result is the same: the opponent's action is wasted, and
any spell slots, limited ability uses, or the like used to power it are expended. A Fighter must be within
30 feet of his opponent to use this ability, and must hit with a touch attack or ranged touch attack.
Using Foil Action is an Immediate action. A Fighter may not wait until an action is partially completed
before deciding to attempt to foil the action, but must instead attempt to foil an action as it is
declared. Note that this means that a Fighter may not foil a Full Attack (because it is not declared until
after it has already begun), nor may he foil a move or charge action that began out of range.
At 17th level, Foil Action may be used at up to 60 feet.
Lunging Attacks (Ex): The battlefield is an extremely dangerous place, and 11th level Fighters are
expected to hold off Elder Elementals, Hezrous, and Hamatulas. Fighters of this level may add 5 feet to
the reach of any of their weapons.
Array of Stunts (Ex): A 13th level Fighter may take one extra Immediate Action between his turns
without sacrificing a Swift action during his next turn.
Greater Combat Focus (Ex): At 15th level, a Fighter may voluntarily expend his Combat Focus as a
non-action to suppress any status effect or ongoing spell effect on himself for his Base Attack Bonus in
rounds.
Intense Focus (Ex): A 19th level Fighter may take an extra Swift Action each round (in addition to
the extra Immediate Action he can take from Array of Stunts).
Supreme Combat Focus (Ex): A 19th level Fighter may expend his Combat Focus as a non-action to
take 20 on any die roll. He must elect to use Supreme Combat Focus before rolling the die.

[DMVerdandi]

I actually like the fighter, and think it generally gets a bad rap. The idea is simple and straightforward, and as much as I love ToB and the like, you can’t “fix” the fighter by turning it into an initiator.
And why not? Can you not fix a ranger or bard by expanding their spell lists [the answer is yes].
In fact, even thought this is out of edition, the pathfinder fighter is LEAGUES ahead with it's myrmidon, lore master and martial master archetypes working at once.
Moving further, the 4e fighter is perhaps one of the best iterations the fighter has ever had, and TOB was essentially the prototype for the powers of 4e as a whole.

Many have correctly hit the nail on the head with realizing the 3x fighter's main issue is twofold:
1. It has no identity/niche
2. It can't handle adventuring, and becomes a liability in all but the most combat focused campaigns.


So, making the fighter relevant without changing what makes it a fighter. Is it possible? In the last couple of games I’ve run, this is what I’ve done:

1. Given fighters the ability to take a certain selection of [Epic] feats instead of regular feats from level 12 on without needing to meet level/skill/ability score pre-reqs.
It still has the issues of being feat based (Most have to build on each other cumulatively/all but the best feats are rather weak)


2. Given fighters the warblade’s weapon aptitude ability, plus the ability to eventually use it as a swift action.
Not bad, but what couldn't be achieved with this by giving the fighter the chameleon's bonus feat[x every 2 levels]


3. Given fighters a “weapon master” ability that lets them use a modified level check to do things such as quickly sheathe weapons, wield exotic weapons, and even emulate race, class or alignment as per UMD with magic weapons.
Again, rolling bonus feat. The weapon emulation thing is pretty cool, but this could simply be a "wield anything" Class ability.


4. Given fighters the Craft Magic Arms and Armor feat for free and the ability to use their weapon master check (see #3) to emulate spells when crafting weapons and armor.
This is cool, but part of me would just want that to be available to everyone, unless fighter is going to end up thematically, not dissimilar to the Artificer.
Even though it would be AWESOME to kind of...gestalt them into one class, but that would wreck the "everyman" image that the fighter is supposed to have. Realistically, a better everyman should be able to do everything.




Basically the idea was to keep fighters mostly feeling like fighters: the basic mechanics of gaining a feat every other level remain unchanged. At the same time, legendary feats at level 12+ give them something unique to do with that feature, without changing that core mechanic. They also make up for a lack of magic to some degree, giving unique abilities, fast healing, damage reduction (and the ability to penetrate same) and more.


Armor Skin, Blinding Speed, Combat Archery, Damage Reduction, Devastating Critical, Dire Charge, Distant Shot, Epic Endurance, Epic Fortitude, Epic Prowess, Epic Reflexes, Epic Toughness, Epic Weapon Focus, Epic Weapon Specialization, Epic Will, Fast Healing, Great Constitution, Great Dexterity, Great Strength, Improved Combat Reflexes, Improved Manyshot, Improved Whirlwind Attack, Instant Reload, Legendary Climber, Legendary Leaper, Legendary Rider, Legendary Wrestler, Overwhelming Critical, Penetrate Damage Reduction, Spellcasting Harrier, Storm of Throws, Superior Initiative, Swarm of Arrows, Two-Weapon Rend, Uncanny Accuracy

The weapon master level check and weapon aptitude abilities were added mostly so that fighters can use those feats in a variety of ways, instead of being locked into a single fighting style forever.

(The magic weapon/armor crafting was originally just something else to do with the weapon master checks, but it ended up being a really cool feature in practice, letting equipment-heavy builds like archers remain self sufficient and giving fighters a relevant out of combat niche in games with downtime.)

It’s still less versatile than an initiator or psychic warrior, but it’s something better than “play a warblade” at least.
I understand being attached to the certain narrative charm of the supernormal dude that doesn't have to rely on the at first observation more complex power frameworks, but feats are really the least useful of them all, just in their requirements and limitations. They are great for customizing what is already there, but no so much for if nothing is there.
Fighter has nothing that others can't necessarily do without taking a single level in fighter except like...weapon specialization.


I do like your fixes, some of them, but they miss a lot of what makes fighter NOT the king of the hill.
Building a good fighter is like building a fast car out of a junker. It doesn't have breaks, the wheels are about to fall off, and the gas tank has holes in it.
Sure you can put a couple of turbochargers on it, but if you just want to drive it around town, it's going to REALLY rattle.

Another part of the flaw, is too much of it's potential was taken away with splitting up roles with barbarian and rogue. Those should be subtypes if anything, and one thing that a warblade did was consolidate really good styles of fighting in an organized fashion.
It still has the flaws of the skill-monkey being disjointed from it's purview.

If anything, fighter being the generalist-specialist fluff wise, SHOULD have been a skill monkey. They should have been as I have said, the wizard of fighting and of adventuring. Knowing 11 mundane techniques and that alone does not reflect that at all.


An even simpler fighter fix is taking factotum, adding fighter weapon proficiencies and BAB, and swapping out it's casting tricks (If you really want a no magic fighter), and putting those bonus feats where they get their spells.


Warrior is warrior. A basic dude who can pick up weapons and fight.
Fighter should be genius level technician,IMO. A bruce wayne type.

[Troacctid]

They are? Since when? I might've missed something, so this is a serious question and not a sarcastic one, but as far as I recall, in JaronK's tierlist fixed list casters were usually T3 (apart from Warmage which got T4'd and Healer which got T5'd).
JaronK also wrote his tier list like ten years ago without even looking at the Beguiler's spell list. The more recent rankings have it and Dread Necromancer in the same tier as Sorcerer (which usually ends up in T2). Example (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?515845-Retiering-the-Classes-Home-Base).

[Piggy Knowles]

I like what you're doing, but I feel it misses the point. The trouble with the fighter isn't that you can't make him effective in combat, or even as or more effective than a warblade, it's that that is all you can do with him.

3e has the explicit design assumption that there are 3 pillars to the game, combat, exploration, and social. The fighter can, if well built, and properly equipped, fully pull his weight in combat, but brings nothing to the table, at all, in the other pillars that a Commoner can't do just as well. Between low skill points and lack of class features this is more true of the fighter than it is of perhaps any other class in the game.



Yes, I understand how the tier list works, thank you. It’s worth noting that all of these criticisms similarly could be levied toward the warblade, whose out of combat functionality is largely confined to mountain hammer and having a pair of extra skill points and a slightly expanded skill list. (This isn’t intended as a criticism of the warblade, by the way - I love the class and its class features are inherently strong enough to easily branch out using feats, multiclassing and said skills.) Considering that the CoV expansion gives Skill Focus (Intimidate) and extends Intimidate’s effects to 24 hours for fighters, they aren’t as far behind in the social arena as it would seem.

My own houseruled fighter adds on to the intimidate focus that post-CoV fighters already get with some appraisal and crafting features (appraising and identifying magic weapons/armor are two of the weapon master abilities).


And why not? Can you not fix a ranger or bard by expanding their spell lists [the answer is yes].

Because doing so is the same as telling someone to play a warblade. Warblades are great, one of the best-designed classes in 3.5. I see no reason to make “warblade with more bonus feats and fewer other class features” when warblade exists.

When I say fighter, I don’t mean “guy who can fight,” I mean “martial class whose primary class feature is bonus feats.” There are plenty of good classes that fight. I’ve got a whole folder full of interesting martial builds. But if someone says they want to play a fighter and not a warblade, I assume that they want to play something whose primary class feature is bonus feats, not maneuvers or spells.

So the question then is how to make feats effective as a class feature. The answer is to expand what feats can be taken (either by creating new feats, giving them more powerful versions of existing feats or expanding what feats they can take), and increase flexibility within the framework of feats that can be taken (such as by having floating feats a la the Chameleon as you suggested, or by adding class features that let you use those feats in different ways as I do in my games by giving an expanded weapon aptitude ability and a UMD-like ability that lets you imitate martial abilities as UMD lets you imitate spellcasting).




Warrior is warrior. A basic dude who can pick up weapons and fight.
Fighter should be genius level technician,IMO. A bruce wayne type.

If I want to play Bruce Wayne, I’ll play an artificer/warblade. In fact I have such a build already that can do a pretty great approximation of Batman. Again my issue with fixing the fighter by giving it maneuvers isn’t that I don’t like maneuvers, it’s that we already have three well designed classes that do maneuvers well. I’d prefer to largely preserve the fighter’s main class feature, or just not play a fighter at all.

[Morty]

There's a bunch of problems with the idea of fighters as "generalists" or "supernormal guys/gals". First off, there's the concept and then there's the execution. Even if we like this particular idea, the fighter class doesn't do it anything remotely resembling justice.

The existence of other martial classes is of course an obstacle, like people have argued about to death. The fighter can't be too skilful, because that's the rogue's and ranger's job. It can't have overwhelming physical strength, because that's the barbarian's job. It can't have anything particularly special, in fact, because then it can't service many concepts that don't fall into the very specific niches of the other martial classes. Rogues have the same problems, only they carry all the concepts which are neither martial nor magical.

So the "generalist supernormal person" concept ends up as "nothing terribly special about it", which is a very bad thing in a class-based system about fantasy heroes. The main problem being that it doesn't scale very well. On low levels, being someone who doesn't have flashy tricks but is solid, reliable and well-trained works. But as you advance, there's no real way to make it scale up to the craziness that magic or even other non-magical classes allow. There's only so many ways you can stretch "reliable and competent", without becoming fantasy Batman... and that's a concept for which rogues and wizards are far better suited anyway.

Besides, sometimes people want something flashy that doesn't use spells or the very specific ways of being flashy that other classes utilize. So if we want fighters to accommodate that, they need a big pile of features. Since, after all, a keen-eyed archer who doesn't use spells or pets, a knight who doesn't use paladin oaths/powers or a canny duellist who isn't much for stealth all need to be covered by this one class. Most visions for fighter on high levels tend to focus on durability and resisting punishment or magic.

On the more mechanical side, feats are a very poor vessel for class features and customization. They're very rigid, since you only get a set number of them at strict intervals, and each needs to be worth as much as the next one, unless they have prerequisites. And in D&D's level system, prerequisites turn into long, cumbersome feat chains that make you wait half a campaign before you can realize your concept mechanically.

So the fighter class is basically doomed from the outset by a variety of factors, not even necessarily connected to it.

[The Shadowmind]

Okay, try this fix(shoving a bunch of archetypes on the fighter, ignoring where they would give up the same thing twice.

Dilettante Fighter
Skills Ranks per level: 4+2.

1: Bonus Feat, Scholastic, Grit (Ex), Deeds, Psionic.
2: Bonus Feat, Essence Pool.
3: Tactician (Ex), Free Fighting Style (Ex), Essential Armaments
4: Bonus Feat, Broad Knowledge.
5: Martial Flexibility Inspiring Speech (Ex), Steel Bond:
6: Bonus Feat
7: Know Thy Enemy (Ex)
8: Bonus Feat
9: Improved Essence Capacity, Combat Focus (Su), Inspire Greatness (Ex)
10: Bonus Feat
11: Greater Tactician (Ex)
12: Bonus Feat
13: Double Imbue
14: Bonus Feat
15: Swift Lore (Ex), Inspire Heroics (Ex)
16: Bonus Feat
17: Master Tactician (Ex)
18: Bonus Feat
19:
20: Bonus Feat


Skills added to the base fighter:
Diplomacy (Cha), Knowledge (geography) (Int), Knowledge (nobility) (Int), Linguistics (Int), and Sense Motive (Wis), Spot/Listen, Perception.
Scholastic (Ex) [Lore Warden]
Lore wardens gain 2 additional skill ranks each level. These ranks must be spent on Intelligence-based skills. All Intelligence-based skills are class skills for lore wardens.

Bonus Feat(Ex), A fighter with no knowledge of the world at large is just a fool with a sword, the Dilettante laughs at the simple minded, and shows how far studied of the world he truly is.

At 1,2 and every 2 levels after, the Dilettante may select a Combat/fighter, Psionic, or Akashic/Incarnum Feat, including Shape Soulmeld/Shape Veil. The Dilettante may select a Psionic or Akashic/Incarnum include instead whenever he would gain a combat/fighter feat. The Dilettante treats his fighter level as his meldshaper /veilweaver level.



Initiation progression from the chart (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/path-of-war/classes/abilities-for-other-classes/).
The Dilettante, selects three disciples at first level, and they become the disciplines they have access to. The Dilettante recovers manuves as a Myrmidon, and his initiator modifier is Intelligence. If the Dilettante does not have the discipline key skill as a class skill, they become a class skill.

The Dilettante gains the Grit and Deeds class feature as the Myrmidon (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/core-classes/fighter/archetypes/dreamscarred-press-fighter-archetypes/myrmidon-fighter-archetype)

Psionic
At first level the Dilettante gains Wild Talent, and Unlock Talent (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/psionics-unleashed/feats/unlocked-talent/) as bonus feats. The Dilettante may only select Powers with a range of Person, or Touch with Unlock talent gained this way. If the Dilettante already has either feat, they may select any other feat they meet the prerequisites for.


Essence Pool [2nd]
At 2nd level, the akashic warrior gains an essence pool equal to ½ his class level.

Free Fighting Style (Ex) [3rd] As the Free-Style Fighter Archetype

Broad Knowledge. [4th]
The while the Dilettante is not as well trained any one school as other initators, they are skilled in a large variety of tactics. When the Dilettante gains a new maneuver they may instead select a manuever one one level or lower below their maximum maneuver know from a disciple they don't have access to and instead learn that maneuver.


Martial Flexibility (Ex). 5th level

At 5th level, the martial master can use a move action to gain the benefit of a combat feat he doesn’t possess. This effect lasts for 1 minute. The martial master must otherwise meet all the feat’s prerequisites. He can use this ability a number of times per day equal to 3 + 1/2 his fighter level.

The martial master can use this ability again before the duration expires in order to replace the previous combat feat with another choice. If a combat feat has a daily use limitation (such as Stunning Fist), any uses of that combat feat while using this ability count toward that feat’s daily limit. At later levels, when he gains multiple feats through this ability, the martial master can use those feats to meet the prerequisites of other feats he gains with this ability. Doing so means he cannot replace a feat currently fulfilling another’s prerequisite without also replacing those feats that require it. Each individual feat selected counts toward his daily uses of this ability.

At 9th level, a martial master can use this ability to gain the benefit of two combat feats at the same time. He can select one feat as a swift action or two feats as a move action. At 14th level, a martial master can use this ability to gain the benefit of three combat feats at the same time. He can select one feat as a free action, two feats as a swift action, or three feats as a move action. At 17th level, a martial master can use this ability to gain the benefit of one combat feat as an immediate action or three combat feats as a swift action. At 20th level, a martial master can use this ability to gain the benefit of any number of combat feats as a swift action.


Improved Essence Capacity [9th] [Akashic Warrior]
At 9th level, the Akashic Warrior increases the maximum essence capacity of all class abilities, feats, and veils by one.
Essential Armaments: ^
Steel Bond: ^


Combat Focus (Su)
A psionic fighter Dilettante of 9th level does not provoke attacks of opportunity when gaining psionic focus.

Double Imbue [Psionic Figther] (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/psionics-unleashed/psionic-options/fighter/psionic-fighter/)[13th]

These abilities as the Seasoned Commander Archetype (https://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/core-classes/fighter/archetypes/paizo-fighter-archetypes/seasoned-commander-fighter-archetype/)
Tactician (Ex)
Inspiring Speech (Ex)
Inspire Greatness (Ex)
Greater Tactician (Ex)
Inspire Heroics (Ex)
Master Tactician (Ex)

[Ignimortis]

JaronK also wrote his tier list like ten years ago without even looking at the Beguiler's spell list. The more recent rankings have it and Dread Necromancer in the same tier as Sorcerer (which usually ends up in T2). Example (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?515845-Retiering-the-Classes-Home-Base).

Eh, I have a bit of trouble putting Beguilers and especially Dread Necros in the same tier as Sorcerers, but that's just me, I guess. Can't really argue with the majority.

[Nifft]

Eh, I have a bit of trouble putting Beguilers and especially Dread Necros in the same tier as Sorcerers, but that's just me, I guess. Can't really argue with the majority.

A default Beguiler probably isn't in the same league as a Sorcerer, but a high-op Beguiler can some of hit the same few tricks as a high-op Sorcerer, so ... yeah.

In terms of optimization ceiling, they seem congruent, and optimization ceiling seems to be what the tier list measures.

[Pleh]

A default Beguiler probably isn't in the same league as a Sorcerer, but a high-op Beguiler can some of hit the same few tricks as a high-op Sorcerer, so ... yeah.

In terms of optimization ceiling, they seem congruent, and optimization ceiling seems to be what the tier list measures.

Well, that's often how it's argued. Since the stated purpose of the tiers is to highlight risk of internal party disparity, combined with the push from character creation to hedge your bets with your character power level (leading to a trend towards the optimization ceiling), it's kind of natural for the ceiling to be the relevant focal point, though most tier lists do try to balance the danger of the ceiling against what actually tends to come out in average gameplay (is the ceiling a peak or a plateau?)

[Cosi]

Eh, I have a bit of trouble putting Beguilers and especially Dread Necros in the same tier as Sorcerers, but that's just me, I guess. Can't really argue with the majority.

Disagree, and fairly strongly.

In a low-op environment, a Beguiler or Dread Necromancer is simply better than a Sorcerer. A Beguiler will always know dominate person. A Dread Necromancer will always have animate dead. It may well be that those are worse picks than cloudkill or polymorph, but a low-op Sorcerer isn't always going to pick those spells.

In a mid-op environment, a Beguiler or Dread Necromancer's list is probably about as good as an equal level Sorcerer's. The Beguiler's spells are slightly less good, but she gets more of them, and she has some niche spells that will occasionally be amazing (rouse is not useful in every encounter, or even every campaign, but the ability to throw out a rouse when it is useful is something that a Sorcerer won't have).

In a high-op environment, a Beguiler or Dread Necromancer has options like Arcane Disciple, Prestige Domains (+ substitute domain), Runestaves, Knowstones, Bloodline Feats, and Apprentice to expand their list. Many of those options are available to the Sorcerer as well, but the best tricks (Rainbow Servant, Prestige Domains with substitute domain) are exclusive to the fixed list casters, and in general list expansion is better for them because their baseline lists have lots of less compelling spells.

The Dread Necromancer and particularly the Beguiler also have the ability to easily qualify for PrCs arcane casters usually can't get (the Beguiler's Rogue skills backdoor her into Unseen Seer for free, and from their Sneak Attack gets you all the Rogue theurge PrCs). That's not huge, but it also isn't nothing.

Now, per JaronK's criteria, we're supposed to ignore some parts of that, but his criteria are frankly stupid. If we are crediting the Wizard for his ability to buy scrolls of spells, scribe them into his spellbook, and then cast those spells, we have to do the same for the Beguiler buying Knowstones. If we are crediting the Factotum for her ability to take Font of Inspiration a bunch of times (as JaronK very explicitly does in his discussion of the class), we have to do the same for the Dread Necromancer taking Arcane Disciple. The argument for ignoring Rainbow Servant shenanigans is stronger, but you still get a pretty absurd power bump from any PrC that grants a prestige domain + substitute domain.

[Kelb_Panthera]

Because that has nothing to do with him being a fighter.

It has everything to do with him being a fighter. The -one- thing that the fighter class gives you is the ability to take more feats than any other class in the game. It dramatically changes the relative cost of picking a feat. Folks around here give this fact absolutely no consideration whatsoever.


Saying a monk can buy cross class ranks in umd and use wands and therefore the class is balanced because it has access to spells is technically true as well, but this has nothing to do with him being a monk. It's something any character of any class can do. This is why you saying "fighters can take martial study: QED they are just as powerful as swordsages" does not make sense, to set aside that you can only ever take it 3 times and that you will only be able to get access to weak maneuvers many levels late.

Monk features don't change the value of UMD or magic items. Artificers do though and they're quite properly acknowledged for that. In the same way, the fighter's feature changes the value of feats but he gets crapped on in spite of this.



No. You cannot.

Anything a fighter can do, a swordsage (or either of the other initiators) can do more easily, plus they have access to 9th level maneuvers (assuming a straight 20 in any of the classes) Have you ever played an initiator before? Even setting aside your personal distaste for them, they are factually much more powerful classes than fighters, occupying high tier 3 comfortably.

Really? When did the initiator classes get the ability to complete several long feat chains or use their character feats to branch significantly off of their main focus?

I don't have a distaste for martial adepts. I like them. I acknowledge that they have a higher op-floor and are more capable in the hands of a casual player than the fighter ever will have or be. They are -not-, however, absolutely more powerful. They're still just face-smashers and they don't do it any better than any other martial character closing on the limit of martial optimization. They're somewhat more complex in play than the average fighter but that doesn't have to be the case.


Also because like monk, there is never a reason to take more than 1, 2, or 6 levels of the class. "Straight fighters" are not very common in actual play because they don't actually do anything.

A fighter with three or four tactical feats, 3 maneuvers, and a couple stances doesn't do anything? That's where we're at?


If you're well-versed in optimization and want to willingly handicap yourself by building a straight fighter, sure, you can kind of be competent with a bare-bones shock trooper build, but you're not doing anything you couldn't do better with other classes.

What I'm trying to get across is that it's -not- a handicap. It's a different paradigm. A swordsage says, "Most of what you need to make me cool is right here in this book." A fighter says, "I look really simple and straight-foward but you're going to have to go dumpster-diving to get the most out of me." Shocktrooper and leap attack is 4 feats. That's more than half of an initiator's feats and less than a fourth of a fighter's. If you want to be generous, you could call it about a third of a warblade's but his bonus list is -really- limited.


The impetus behind most fighter fixes is so the class can be used out of the box by people who aren't familiar with or simply aren't interested in having to do a bunch of research to drag fighter kicking and screaming to the shores of basic competence.

If you want something "out-of-the-box" then you don't need to fix anything. Pick a different class or brew up something new. People screw with fighter because they've decided it -needs- fixing. I disagree.


binder is not a tob class. what are you talking about?

Tiers. The old JaronK list has swordsage at T3 and the only other class that's close to it in power and versatility in the T3 list is the binder. I -know- the swordsage being on that level is wrong unless you build the holy-begeezus out of it so I put forward the idea that it and binder being close is a poor reflection on the binder rather a positive reflection on the swordsage.

You'll also note that I haven't argued that the fighter isn't T5. If you select the bonus feats at random and take all of the ACF's that a fighter can, you're probably going to be bottomed out at a low T5 but if you build it with skill and direction, it tops out toward the top of T4. The swordsage starts and ends in T4 on a much narrower band unless you're -damn- good at optimizing and probably not even then before gear. It's always been my understanding that the tier listings were based on an arbitrary "average" level of optimization closer to the floor than the ceiling of most classes.


And a beguiler has very few options in combat with creatures who are immune to mind-affecting effects (one or two spells per spell-level).

This is hilariously off base. We can go over it in detail if you want but I don't think most people need convincing on this one. Take another, close look at the spell-list.


A dread necromancer isn't doing much out of combat aside from building up his hordes of undead.

Seriously? Even if that was strictly true (their list has several enchantments and illusions) the sheer variety of undead and their talents that are available makes this rather laughable as well.


A duskblade does pretty much the same thing an initiator can, except they can do those things a few times per day, not almost at-will.

Everything a swordsage can do, a duskblade can do better; substantially so. His out of combat options are a bit limited but less so than any initiator by a fair margin.


T3s are either very good generalists (bard, factotum, binder) or very good specialists in one thing who are able to contribute in other stuff (everyone else). T4s are either generalists who require focus on one thing to do their thing as well as T3s (the only thing a rogue is better than a factotum by default at is damage), or specialists who have a good chassis (barbarians are easier to build well than fighters, and a straight Barb 20 is a better decision than Fighter 20) and can't really contribute outside their specialty (what exactly does barbarian do other than being a beatstick and maybe picking up Survival/Intimidate?)

Yeah. Other than the underlined being something I disagree with this all looks right. ???


At the very worst, initiators are T3.5, but then half the third tier would be there too.

You said it yourself. A specialist that does very little outside their specialty is a T4. That's the martial adepts to a T. They're great face-wreckers. They have easily the highest op-floor of any face-wrecker specialist. They do absolutely frag-all outside of face-wrecking except for the swordsage being a passable scout. I'm not seeing the disconnect here.


To be fair, it's the most common reason to not have access to your own gear. If we're going to consider the distinction between innate abilities and gear anyone with coins can buy, incarceration is the go-to scenario to evaluate the subject in its natural habitat.

Naked in prison is not any class' natural habitat. Either a feature loses value for being easily replaced by gear or it doesn't. If it does, then mountain hammer is worth about 60gp outside of combat; unimpressive. If it doesn't, then monks are -way, way- better than they're given credit for being.

In either case, it's a low-level maneuver than -anyone- can pick up for a feat or 3k and -that- certainly seems to be something the community at large wants to devalue since the fighter's features can -also- be picked up by anyone for a feat or 10k. If you want to argue for martial adepts being useful out of combat, mountain hammer is certainly the single -weakest- argument you could make.


As I recall, WBL and equipment lists are meant to be universally SUGGESTIONS that are all subject to DM fiat. Your insistence that WBL be common RAW is sensible in very competive games (PVP or antagonist DM, where the rules have to be as consistent as possible) and in general theoretical analysis. But in most games, it only makes sense that the DM will have each shop in a town that makes certain wares available, and not always for exactly the listed price. Restrictions on adamantium gear is pretty sensible for most humanoid settlements. Even if you have the skilled tradesmen and social infrastructure needed to support an adamantium forge in a city, it's likely not in ready access to the general public and anything made from the material probably needs a special commission (which could mean waiting for more raw material to be shipped in).

You recall incorrectly. WBL is a -guideline- but it is not a suggestion. It was intended to be a major part of how PCs are balanced against NPCs and non-classed creatures. The sections describing the game-level economics (not to be confused with the economics of the gameworld itself) explicitly says that a DM -can- tweak what's available as a means of keeping the game under his control. The system assumes, plainly, that this will be used as needed rather than being the extremely common occurrence that it ended up being.



This is a non-trivial point that Kelb has been acknowledging, but maybe not taking seriously enough.

Favored Soul gets innate access to Flight, one of the hallmark powers in the game. That should be a good thing, right? Well, it's not bad, but it's kinda moot when it comes online at level 17, long after the game has been assuming you have some form of flight for about 10 or so levels.

"Fighter gets the maneuvers, too, just weaker and later."

In other words, they never get maneuvers at the level where they are the most relevant. Not a bad boost to slow the fighter's gradual drop from relevance in the game, but it doesn't really compare with having level-current maneuvers through all 20 levels.

This I can address with a single sentence: it's a good thing that maneuvers aren't the only non-class feature, non-gear way to get those things, innit.

To elaborate; flight is available by race and/ or feat (other than martial study/ stance), as are a whole host of other abilities. This is overvaluing of maneuvers is part of the problem I'm trying to address.

[Cosi]

It has everything to do with him being a fighter. The -one- thing that the fighter class gives you is the ability to take more feats than any other class in the game. It dramatically changes the relative cost of picking a feat. Folks around here give this fact absolutely no consideration whatsoever.

A Fighter feat is worth less than a 2nd level spell slot, because heroics is a 2nd level spell and it gives you whatever Fighter feat you happen to want that day (yeah, it's only 10 mins/level, but that usually covers the day's fighting). A Fighter gets exactly as many non-Fighter feats as anyone else.

Also, feats are ass and the feats that aren't ass are caster feats. Literally no one cares that you can get all the Weapon Specialization feats, or that you have Great Cleave. The feats people care about are things like Natural Spell, which do exactly nothing for a Fighter.


A fighter with three or four tactical feats, 3 maneuvers, and a couple stances doesn't do anything? That's where we're at?

Maybe you should enumerate those things and explain why people would care? What is this 10th level Fighter build (or just the actual feats) that you think is worth anyone's time? This should presumably not be hard if you've spent as much time on this as you're implying.


Naked in prison is not any class' natural habitat. Either a feature loses value for being easily replaced by gear or it doesn't. If it does, then mountain hammer is worth about 60gp outside of combat; unimpressive. If it doesn't, then monks are -way, way- better than they're given credit for being.

This is true. People have a strong tendency to try to evaluate classes in situations that do not actually matter, or do not matter as much as they think. In particular, PvP duels are a stupid evaluation metric because "something with PC classes" is like 1% of the opposition you are expected to be able to defeat.

[DMVerdandi]

Because doing so is the same as telling someone to play a warblade. Warblades are great, one of the best-designed classes in 3.5. I see no reason to make “warblade with more bonus feats and fewer other class features” when warblade exists.
And yet, the sorcerer exists when wizard is there. From the start.
The druid exists when the cleric is there, from the start.
Martial initiators are fantastic and as you said, one of the best designed classes [and last, which is important], and even from a home-brew standpoint, adding that into the regular base martial classes is an easy and effective way to give them some combat variety, so why not? It's easy to learn, easy to do, and for people who don't want magic, but do want something more than power attack>shock trooper, it can still be used in no magic zones.


Psychic warrior is good because it's just a fighter +psionics.
Bonus feats do not make a class. And the worst thing about it is you still have to be able to apply for the pre-requisites.


When I say fighter, I don’t mean “guy who can fight,” I mean “martial class whose primary class feature is bonus feats.” There are plenty of good classes that fight. I’ve got a whole folder full of interesting martial builds. But if someone says they want to play a fighter and not a warblade, I assume that they want to play something whose primary class feature is bonus feats, not maneuvers or spells.
Horrible assumption. I think the very point is someone wanting to play a fighter is someone who does want to live by the sword, but at the same time, I am sure they don't just want someone who cannot problem solve. They probably want someone who has a wide variety of methods of getting stronger, but is primarily a combat adept. And Feats as they are, are a MESSY representation of them.

Perhaps if every fighter feat scaled with your weapon master bonus, we'd be in business, but they don't, and slapping on a system that already exists is far easier than retooling the whole feat system to accommodate the desire. It's reinventing the wheel instead of just changing the tires.
Now, even if one would want to create a whole new list and set of schools for the base classes, It would be an easier undertaking than creating a whole new slew of feats, since the martial maneuver system is easier to write for than feats, which are EXTREMELY mundane, and difficult to balance.

Path of war is a great example. They made like 14 new disciplines, and just in the fact that the [Strike/Stance/Boost] style of organization is easier to write for and organize, it can be made rather well. There are hardly any prerequisites, and they are easier to track, and have more utility and balance since they all have a set standard of mechanics.

An example is one could easily make power attack into a martial maneuver. Make it a boost, and for every attack in that round you can reduce the amount of BAB for damage. Or a stance and have it work passively, or a strike. Maneuvers are simply the better mechanic. And the best part is it allows you to save those feats for something else.

The fighter bonus feat is a D&Dism, and really mechanically falls short of other types of resource management. All of the other resource management systems are better because they are in a way locked up into the class itself, and even if someone else can learn to do it, they can't do it as well.




So the question then is how to make feats effective as a class feature. The answer is to expand what feats can be taken (either by creating new feats, giving them more powerful versions of existing feats or expanding what feats they can take), and increase flexibility within the framework of feats that can be taken (such as by having floating feats a la the Chameleon as you suggested, or by adding class features that let you use those feats in different ways as I do in my games by giving an expanded weapon aptitude ability and a UMD-like ability that lets you imitate martial abilities as UMD lets you imitate spellcasting).
Or you could do the same thing, design maneuvers around certain styles that are more... Generic in flavor [Even though Iron heart, diamond mind, shadow hand, and white raven, and setting sun are essentially disciplines emulating classes with more depth and variety as is, and ARE actually pretty generic.]



If I want to play Bruce Wayne, I’ll play an artificer/warblade. In fact I have such a build already that can do a pretty great approximation of Batman. Again my issue with fixing the fighter by giving it maneuvers isn’t that I don’t like maneuvers, it’s that we already have three well designed classes that do maneuvers well. I’d prefer to largely preserve the fighter’s main class feature, or just not play a fighter at all.
Fighter's main class feature ISN'T a class feature, since everyone can do it without taking levels in fighter, or a special feat that gives them access. And there isn't anything that they necessarily get a bonus on for being a fighter. It would be like saying expert's main class feature is more skill points. It's literally the same type of thing. Sneak attack is a class feature. Rage is a class feature, Spells are a class feature. More feats is an extension of a resource that everyone already has. That is why everyone equates fighter to an NPC class, even though Adept is the sole one that actually has class features that can't be emulated by an NPC class.

On the bruce wayne thing, He SHOULD be able to be played as a fighter. Lucius fox designs most of his weapons/tech, but he is a master martial artist, and detective. But combat is his focus. And if we are to say that warblade is a suitable representation of batman's fighting, then we can already determine that if you can perform a special type of attack, or take a stance that allows you to better defend or attack in the long term, or focus on a certain mindset that makes you more apt do do a certain function in the short term, without having any magic powers, that a system that organizes and categorizes those things is superior to one that does not is better.

If batman is better emulated as a warblade than a fighter in your words, than naturally, any "fighter" represented anywhere else that does have any martial arts[that is skilled fighting] training at all is better suited to be a warblade, because the system makes more sense. Batman isn't using any special whammy, he's just knows techniques, and feats are a worse mechanic at using techniques than maneuvers are.


Now, personally, I DO think it would be VERY cool to take artificer and give it maneuvers, and call it a fighter. Now the fighter's role is a crafter-tinkerer. Since chainmail, fighter's kind of schtick has been "weapon and armor guy", But as you kind of said before, the one with the weapons should be at least able to craft magical arms and armor. Even better if they are just quartermasters/combat engineers on the team.

Giving them infusions, and making them responsible for making sure everyone's gear is up to snuff, and having superlative knowledge of how to use them is tops.

Nothing would be more satisfying than having a rusty old blade and everyone being like "this crap", and then handing it off to your "quartermaster", and them being like "Gimme this... THIS IS HOW YOU USE IT" *Blade hums, takes on an infusion, and then dude cuts through something*.

I think that would make for a FAR more balanced party member than just the *I hit/feat* guy.

Taking on the artificer role as well would suddenly give them some out of combat application and use, as everyone has to go to the maester to repair or upgrade their gear, they can have a service to sell, and you can give them skills like appraise, craft, and diplomacy for haggling.

AND it takes the role of who makes magic items away from pure mages. And THAT is big. Perhaps give some sort of bonus for crafting WITH pure mages, using aid another, and all is right with the world.





There's a bunch of problems with the idea of fighters as "generalists" or "supernormal guys/gals". First off, there's the concept and then there's the execution. Even if we like this particular idea, the fighter class doesn't do it anything remotely resembling justice.

The existence of other martial classes is of course an obstacle, like people have argued about to death. The fighter can't be too skilful, because that's the rogue's and ranger's job. It can't have overwhelming physical strength, because that's the barbarian's job. It can't have [I]anything particularly special, in fact, because then it can't service many concepts that don't fall into the very specific niches of the other martial classes. Rogues have the same problems, only they carry all the concepts which are neither martial nor magical.

So the "generalist supernormal person" concept ends up as "nothing terribly special about it", which is a very bad thing in a class-based system about fantasy heroes. The main problem being that it doesn't scale very well. On low levels, being someone who doesn't have flashy tricks but is solid, reliable and well-trained works. But as you advance, there's no real way to make it scale up to the craziness that magic or even other non-magical classes allow. There's only so many ways you can stretch "reliable and competent", without becoming fantasy Batman... and that's a concept for which rogues and wizards are far better suited anyway.

Besides, sometimes people want something flashy that doesn't use spells or the very specific ways of being flashy that other classes utilize. So if we want fighters to accommodate that, they need a big pile of features. Since, after all, a keen-eyed archer who doesn't use spells or pets, a knight who doesn't use paladin oaths/powers or a canny duellist who isn't much for stealth all need to be covered by this one class. Most visions for fighter on high levels tend to focus on durability and resisting punishment or magic.

On the more mechanical side, feats are a very poor vessel for class features and customization. They're very rigid, since you only get a set number of them at strict intervals, and each needs to be worth as much as the next one, unless they have prerequisites. And in D&D's level system, prerequisites turn into long, cumbersome feat chains that make you wait half a campaign before you can realize your concept mechanically.

So the fighter class is basically doomed from the outset by a variety of factors, not even necessarily connected to it.

This 100%

[Arbane]

At the start of 3e feats were over valued. So the design of the 3e fighter centers around a system mechanic that was really cool and innovative (at the time, for D&D), but in the long run it turns out is only good for cranking out a one trick pony. You can make a really good one trick pony, but that's all.


Yup. One of the big problems with Feats is that they got used to wall off doing anything in combat more interesting than 'sword them in the hitpoints'.

And they're still way too weak. For some fun, try to think of any feats a Fighter can get that are anywhere near the power or versatility of the spells an equal-level Sorcerer Bard could have. (Aside from maybe Leadership.)



On the bruce wayne thing, He SHOULD be able to be played as a fighter[INT Focused]. Lucius fox designs most of his weapons/tech, but he is a master martial artist, and detective. But combat is his focus.

Oh, please, this is ridiculous.

Batman would work way better as a Ninja. :smallbiggrin:

[Piggy Knowles]

I think you’re misunderstanding me.

I agree that a fighter is a poorly designed class with a lot of inherent limitations. But it’s also a piece of terminology that has some meaning in this context. A fighter in the context of 3.5 is a martial character whose primary class feature is getting lots of feats. That’s not a lot to go off of, but it’s what we’ve got.

If you want to homebrew another martial class to fit the “generic non-superpowered warrior who’s good at fighting” role, by all means do so (though again, warblade can already do this fairly well). Homebrew can be fun, and it can add a lot to the right campaign. But if this is about fixing the 3.5 fighter, I think the framework of “warrior that gets an excessive number of bonus feats” is the one to build off of (as flawed as that particular concept may be design-wise) because that’s what a fighter is in 3.5. By all means give it additional class features, give it ways to make those feats relevant, give it ways to do things with feats that no other class can do. But as soon as you take the focus away from “warrior that gets an excessive number of bonus feats,” I’d argue that you’re no longer talking about a fighter as that word means in 3.5. You’re talking about an entirely new class.

(Also I have no idea why you think Batman “should” be a fighter, and suspect there are a lot of ways you can reproduce his fighting style and detective skills with a variety of classes.)

[Troacctid]

Like I said, it's actually pretty easy to port in the 5e Fighter and get a solid fix while still preserving the class's core concept. Here, watch:



Level
Base Attack Bonus
Fort
Ref
Will
Special


1st
+1
2
0
0
Bonus Feat, Second Wind


2nd
+2
3
0
0
Action Surge (one use)


3rd
+3
3
1
1
Improved Critical


4th
+4
4
1
1
Ability Score Improvement


5th
+5
4
1
1
Extra Attack


6th
+6/+1
5
2
2
Ability Score Improvement


7th
+7/+2
5
2
2
Remarkable Athlete


8th
+8/+3
6
2
2
Ability Score Improvement


9th
+9/+4
6
3
3
Indomitable (1/day)


10th
+10/+5
7
3
3
Bonus Feat


11th
+11/+6/+1
7
3
3
Extra Attack (2)


12th
+12/+7/+2
8
4
4
Ability Score Improvement


13th
+13/+8/+3
8
4
4
Indomitable (2/day)


14th
+14/+9/+4
9
4
4
Ability Score Improvement


15th
+15/+10/+5
9
5
5
Superior Critical


16th
+16/+11/+6/+1
10
5
5
Ability Score Improvement


17th
+17/+12/+7/+2
10
5
5
Action Surge (two uses), Indomitable (3/day)


18th
+18/+13/+8/+3
11
6
6
Survivor


19th
+19/+14/+9/+4
11
6
6
Ability Score Improvement


20th
+20/+15/+10/+5
12
6
6
Extra Attack (3)



Hit die: d10
Skill points per level: 4 + Int
Class skills: Balance, Climb, Craft, Escape Artist, Handle Animal, Intimidate, Jump, Knowledge (History), Knowledge (Local), Knowledge (Nobility and Royalty), Listen, Profession, Ride, Sense Motive, Spot, Survival, Swim, Tumble

Weapon and Armor Proficiency
You are proficient with all simple and martial weapons and with all armor (heavy, medium, and light) and shields (including tower shields).

Bonus Feat
At 1st level, and again at 10th level, you get a bonus combat-oriented feat in addition to the feat that any 1st-level character gets and the bonus feat granted to a human character. These bonus feats must be drawn from the feats noted as fighter bonus feats. You must still meet all prerequisites for a bonus feat, including ability score and base attack bonus minimums.

Second Wind (Ex)
You have a limited well of stamina that you can draw on to protect yourself from harm. On your turn, you can use a swift action to regain hit points equal to 1d10 + your fighter level. Once you use this feature, you must spend at least 30 minutes resting before you can use it again.

Action Surge (Ex)
Starting at 2nd level, you can push yourself beyond your normal limits for a moment. On your turn, you can take one additional standard action on top of your regular actions.

Once you use this feature, you must rest for at least 30 minutes before you can use it again. Starting at 17th level, you can use it twice before resting this way, but only once on the same turn.

If your game uses the action point variant rule (see Eberron Campaign Setting), you can gain an extra use of this feature by spending 2 action points.

Improved Critical (Ex)
Starting at 3rd level, you gain the benefit of the Improved Critical feat for all attacks you make.

Ability Score Improvement (Ex)
When you reach 4th level, and again at 6th, 8th, 12th, 14th, 16th, and 19th level, you can increase one ability score of your choice by 2, or you can increase two ability scores of your choice by 1, or you can gain a bonus feat of your choice. The bonus feat can be any feat for which you meet the prerequisites.

Extra Attack (Ex)
Beginning at 5th level, you can make an additional attack at your highest attack bonus whenever you take the Attack or Full Attack action on your turn.

The number of additional attacks increases to two when you reach 11th level in this class and to three when you reach 20th level in this class.

Remarkable Athlete (Ex)
Starting at 7th level, when you make a Dexterity- or Strength-based skill check, you can use half your Fighter level (rounded up) in place of the number of ranks you have in the skill (even if that number is 0). For example, a 7th-level fighter would have the equivalent of 4 ranks in Balance, Climb, Disable Device, and so on (but only for the purpose of making skill checks). You can't take 10 on checks when you use remarkable athlete (to take 10 you have to use your actual ranks). If the skill doesn't allow untrained checks, you must have at least 1 actual rank to attempt the check.

You also gain a bonus on all Strength and Dexterity checks (including initiative checks, but not Strength- or Dexterity-based skill checks) equal to half your Fighter level, rounded up.

Indomitable
Beginning at 9th level, you no longer automatically fail saving throws on a natural 1. Additionally, once per day, you can reroll a saving throw that you fail. If you do so, you must use the new roll. You can do this twice per day starting at 13th level and three times per day starting at 17th level.

Superior Critical (Ex)
Starting at 15th level, your Improved Critical ability triples your critical threat range instead of doubling it.

Survivor (Ex)
At 18th level, you attain the pinnacle of resilience in battle. You gain fast healing equal to 5 + your Constitution modifier.

This alternate class feature replaces improved critical, remarkable athlete, superior critical, survivor, and your 10th level bonus feat.

Class Skills
Starting at 3rd level, you add Diplomacy, Knowledge (nobility and royalty), Ride, and Sense Motive to your list of class skills for all classes. If you previously purchased ranks in these skills at the cross-class rate, you get additional ranks as if they had always been class skills for you.

Born to the Saddle
At 3rd level, you gain Skill Focus (Ride) as a bonus feat.

Unwavering Mark (Ex)
Starting at 3rd level, you can menace your foes, foiling their attacks and punishing them for harming others. When you hit a creature with a melee weapon attack, you can mark the creature until the end of your next turn or until the creature becomes marked this way by someone else, whichever comes first.

While it is within your reach, a creature marked by you suffers a -4 penalty attack rolls against anyone other than you. In addition, if a creature marked by you deals damage to anyone other than you, you can use a melee weapon to make a retaliatory strike against the marked creature as a swift action on your next turn. You get a +4 bonus on the attack and damage roll for this attack.

Regardless of the number of creature you mark, you can use retaliatory strike 3 times per day. For every 4 fighter levels beyond 3rd, you gain an additional daily use of the ability.

Warding Maneuver (Ex)
Starting at 7th level, you learn to fend off strikes directed at you, your mount, or other creatures nearby. As an immediate action, when you or a creature you can see within 5 feet of you is hit by a weapon attack, you can roll 1d8 and add the result to the target's AC against that attack. If the attack still hits, it deals only half damage.

You must be wielding a shield or a melee weapon in order to use this ability, and you can use it a number of times per day equal to your Constitution modifier.

Hold the Line (Ex)
Starting at 10th level, any opponent you threaten that takes any sort of movement, including a 5-foot step, provokes an attack of opportunity from you. Your foes provoke this attack before leaving the area you threaten. Your opponents also cannot use the withdraw action to treat the square they start in as no longer threatened by you, and if an opponent attempts to use the Tumble skill to avoid an attack of opportunity from you, the DC is increased by your fighter level.

Ferocious Charger (Ex)
At 15th level, when you hit an enemy with a melee attack at the end of a charge or from the back of a charging mount, that enemy must succeed on a Fortitude saving throw (DC 10 + half your fighter level + your Strength modifier) or fall prone.

Vigilant Defender (Ex)
Starting at 18th level, you respond to danger with extraordinary vigilance. You can make attacks of opportunity even while flat-footed, and the first attack of opportunity you make on each other creature's turn does not count towards your normal limit of attacks of opportunity for the round.
This alternate class feature replaces improved critical, remarkable athlete, superior critical, survivor, and your 10th level bonus feat.

Armored Mage (Ex)
You can cast your eldritch knight spells while wearing light armor and/or a light shield without suffering a chance of arcane spell failure. At 7th level, this benefit extends to medium armor. At 10th level, it extends to heavy shields. At 15th level, it extends to heavy armor and tower shields. Only spells you cast as an eldritch knight fighter gain this benefit; spells you cast from other classes are unaffected.

Bonus Proficiency (Ex)
Starting at 3rd level, you add Concentration and Spellcraft to your list of fighter class skills. If you previously purchased ranks in these skills at the cross-class rate, you get additional ranks as if they had always been class skills for you.

Spellcasting
When you reach 3rd level, you augment your martial prowess with the ability to cast arcane spells, which are drawn from a subset of the sorcerer/wizard spell list. You can cast any spell you know without preparing it ahead of time, just as a sorcerer can. To learn or cast an eldritch knight spell, you must have an Intelligence score of at least 10 + the spell's level. Bonus spells are based on Intelligence, and saving throws against these spells have a DC of 10 + spell level + your Intelligence modifier. Your caster level is equal to half your fighter level, rounded up.

Your selection of spells is limited. At 3rd level, you know three cantrips and three 1st-level spells. You learn an additional spell at 4th, 7th, 8th, 10th, 11th, 13th, 14th, 16th, 19th, and 20th level. You can learn any sorcerer/wizard spell up to the highest level you can cast from the schools of abjuration and evocation.

Upon gaining a level in fighter, you can choose to learn a new spell in place of one you already know. In effect, you "lose" the old spell in exchange for the new one. The new spell's level must be the same as that of the spell being exchanged. You can swap only a single spell this way each time you gain a level.

The table below shows the eldritch knight's spells per day.



Fighter Level
0th
1st
2nd
3rd
4th


3
2
1
-
-
-


4
3
2
-
-
-


5
3
2
-
-
-


6
3
2
-
-
-


7
3
3
1
-
-


8
3
3
1
-
-


9
3
3
1
-
-


10
3
3
2
-
-


11
3
3
2
-
-


12
3
3
2
-
-


13
4
3
2
1
-


14
4
3
2
1
-


15
4
3
2
1
-


16
4
3
2
2
-


17
4
3
2
2
-


18
4
3
2
2
-


19
4
3
2
2
1


20
4
3
2
2
1



Weapon Bond (Su)
At 3rd level, you learn a ritual that creates a magical bond between yourself and one weapon. You perform the ritual over the course of one hour. The weapon must be within your reach throughout the ritual, at the conclusion of which you touch the weapon and forge the bond.

Once you have bonded a weapon to yourself, opponents cannot disarm you of that weapon. If it is on the same plane of existence, you can summon that weapon as a swift action, causing it to teleport instantly to your hand.

You can have up to two bonded weapons, but can summon only one at a time with your swift action. If you attempt to bond with a third weapon, you must break the bond with one of the other two.

War Magic (Ex)
Beginning at 7th level, immediately after casting a spell, you may make a weapon attack as a swift action. At 18th level, this improves to two weapon attacks.

Eldritch Strike (Ex)
At 10th level, you learn how to make your weapon strikes undercut a creature's resistance to your spells. When you hit a creature with a weapon attack, that creature suffers a -4 penalty on its next saving throw against spells you cast before the end of your next turn.

Arcane Charge (Su)
At 15th level, you gain the ability to teleport up to 30 feet to an unoccupied space you can see when you use your action surge. You can teleport before or after the additional action. This is a conjuration (teleportation) effect.
This alternate class feature replaces improved critical, remarkable athlete, superior critical, survivor, and your 10th level bonus feat.

Bonus Proficiency (Ex)
Starting at 3rd level, you add Concentration, Diplomacy, Knowledge (history), and Sense Motive to your list of class skills for all classes. If you previously purchased ranks in Concentration at the cross-class rate, you get additional ranks as if they had always been class skills for you.

Fighting Spirit (Ex)
Starting at 3rd level, your intensity in battle can shield you and help you strike true. As a swift action, you can activate this ability to grant yourself 5 temporary hit points and a +5 bonus on weapon attack rolls. The temporary hit points last until depleted or until you activate this ability again, but the bonus to attack rolls lasts only until the end of your turn. This ability can be used three times per day.

Starting at 10th level, the temporary hit points granted by this ability are equal to your fighter level.

Elegant Courtier (Ex)
Starting at 7th level, your discipline and attention to detail allow you to excel in social situations. You gain Iron Will as a bonus feat, and you add your Wisdom bonus, if any, as a bonus to your Diplomacy checks.

Tireless Spirit (Ex)
Starting at 10th level, when you roll initiative and have no uses of fighting spirit remaining, you regain one use.

Rapid Strike (Ex)
Starting at 15th level, you learn how to trade accuracy for swift strikes. Whenever you take the Attack or Full Attack action, you may make an additional attack at your highest base attack bonus; however, you suffer a -2 penalty on all other attacks made that turn.

Strength Before Death (Ex)
Starting at 18th level, your fighting spirit can delay the grasp of death. Once per day, if you take damage that would reduce you to -1 hit points or less and you are not flat-footed, you can delay your death and immediately take an extra turn (no action required), interrupting the current turn. Your initiative remains unchanged. During this turn, you do not die as a result of having -10 hit points or less. At the end of the turn, roll a d10. Your hit point total becomes equal to 0 minus the result.

[DMVerdandi]

I think you’re misunderstanding me.

I agree that a fighter is a poorly designed class with a lot of inherent limitations. But it’s also a piece of terminology that has some meaning in this context. A fighter in the context of 3.5 is a martial character whose primary class feature is getting lots of feats. That’s not a lot to go off of, but it’s what we’ve got.

That may be the meta, but the fluff is that the fighter is the dude who can fight best because he has the most knowledge of combat maneuvers, but they also cite that the fighter is capable of taking on many roles, primarily adventurer.
Now the issue, is having that variety and ability to fit into a plethora of different roles requires SKILLS. Even just giving fighter factotum skills and points is a giant buff for them, But if you are saying someone can fill literally every role without having the capacity for filling every role, you are being dishonest.

Fighter is literally a dude who has rudimentary physical skills, and not even enough to cover THOSE, and 11 combat tricks, that do NOT scale by level, do NOT require the class itself, and do NOT give them any more actual variety than having any other skills.
The feats have no organization, rhyme or reason,and are generally mundane bonuses that hardly offer enough.

Take away metamagic feats, and spellcasters are probably more balanced and better overall.
Take away power attack [And all feats contengient on it], and they have lost nearly everything[ Worth taking].
Take away ALL feats from a martial initiator, and you still have someone functional in combat. And since they have more skill points, more functional out of combat as well.




[/QUOTE]
If you want to homebrew another martial class to fit the “generic non-superpowered warrior who’s good at fighting” role, by all means do so (though again, warblade can already do this fairly well). Homebrew can be fun, and it can add a lot to the right campaign. But if this is about fixing the 3.5 fighter, I think the framework of “warrior that gets an excessive number of bonus feats” is the one to build off of (as flawed as that particular concept may be design-wise) because that’s what a fighter is in 3.5. [/QUOTE]
A fix is homebrew/houserules. So any change you make to it is within the same realm. The scope might be different but the action is the same.
Fighter can be changed easily by slapping class features that other classes have on it, and can still work within the framework of fighter, if not preform MUCH better, because fighter has no features. It's just MOAR FEATS. But everyone fights and everyone gets feats so it's completely inert

Even adding feats every level doesn't stop feats from being tame and mundane. With 20 for example, you could all of the Improved combat feats, some lockdown stuff, and some charging stuff, but it's not twice as strong. Generally it just means you could possibly pick up the use of some other weapon too late in the game to matter.

So, yes you can re-tool the whole feat system, but unless you put an addendum at the bottom of every fighter feat that has a special thing to do for fighters (Like how augments work for psionics), everyone just gets better at using fighter feats, and fighter becomes less relevant still.




By all means give it additional class features, give it ways to make those feats relevant, give it ways to do things with feats that no other class can do. But as soon as you take the focus away from “warrior that gets an excessive number of bonus feats,” I’d argue that you’re no longer talking about a fighter as that word means in 3.5. You’re talking about an entirely new class.

(Also I have no idea why you think Batman “should” be a fighter, and suspect there are a lot of ways you can reproduce his fighting style and detective skills with a variety of classes.)
Anything that you add to the fighter is going to take away the focus of the feats, because the feats are underwhelming. Unless the additions are also dependent on feats, and thus somehow weaker than the feats themselves. We are definitely talking about a new class, but the question is how much you are willing to sacrifice to make the fighter a competitive choice worth taking for 20 levels. Because it is not. It's a dip.

Do you want to simply take from things that already exist and then roll them over into the fighter, or do you want to re-write 120+ feats just so the fighter can have enough individuality to stand on it's own?

If it really matters, I would without hesitation catabolize some other class to have my core choosable classes be worth it.


Its nothing to take Artificer, slap on fighter bonus feats, proficiencies and BAB, and say " This is the new fighter. He's a master crafter of magical weapons and armor, and master at using them".

It's nothing to take warblade, slap on fighter feats and call it a fighter.

Its nothing to take Factotum, slap on some bonus feats and say "this is a fighter. A fighter can be anyone, anywhere and anything,from a highwayman to a king, they are masters at combat maneuvers, use of intelligence in combat, and mundane skills"


And I promise you, they will be better for it, and still VERY much work within the theme of the game and of a dude who fights. Now they just have individualized stuff, be that inspiration, infusions, or maneuvers".

All of those are things the fighter could have or should have been a master at rather than everything interesting being relegated to everything BUT a fighter. Furthermore none of those things are so overwhelming that the fighter no longer becomes the dude that fights.

[Ignimortis]

This is hilariously off base. We can go over it in detail if you want but I don't think most people need convincing on this one. Take another, close look at the spell-list.

Alright. This piqued my curiosity, because I've DM'd for a beguiler at low levels (admittedly, with low game knowledge) and played one many years ago (admittedly, when I also had low game knowledge and thought that Power Attack was bad for fighters because you'd miss more often).

Level 1 non-mind-affecting spells: Comprehend Languages, Detect Secret Doors, Disguise Self, Expeditious Retreat, Mage Armor, Obscuring Mist, Silent Image, Undetectable Alignment.

I've crossed out those that would require really specific circumstances to be useful in combat. Mage Armor is for those two levels when you cannot afford a masterwork (mithril) chain shirt. Obscuring Mist and Exp. Retreat are good enough, I guess. Silent Image will take some creative use, but I can see what you mean.

Level 2 non-mind-affecting spells: Blinding Color Surge, Blur, Fog Cloud, Glitterdust, Invisibility, Minor Image, Mirror Image, Misdirection, See Invisibility, Silence, Spider Climb.

Much better around here, I'd say, but the only three offensive options (as the rest are defensive or counter-tricks to those defenses) are BCS, Fog Cloud and Glitterdust. But, well, Glitterdust is one of those win spells, so it's fine.

Level 3: And here's where all of this really comes to a halt, because Hold Person, Haste and Slow are already great, and there are 17 more quite good spells there. So...yeah, you're right. Guess the player should've stuck with Beguiler till at least level 5, and I shouldn't have trusted the 2012 me.



Seriously? Even if that was strictly true (their list has several enchantments and illusions) the sheer variety of undead and their talents that are available makes this rather laughable as well.


Now this is a claim I can at least substantiate.

Level 1: mostly offensive magic, and generic Detect Magic+Undetectable Alignment. Makes sense, doesn't do much out of combat aside from being the "party's magic finder".
Level 2: Gentle Repose is the only non-combat spell in here. It's good for hauling people back to town to get them raised (if that happens in your game and you can afford it).
Level 3: again, a single spell - Speak with Dead. It's a good spell, but it's also the only non-undead, non-offensive in here.
Level 4: Dispel Magic? Most people got that at 5, not 7. Again, offense and undead.
Level 5: Greater DM, Magic Jar, Nightmare, Oath of Blood, Planar Binding (Lesser), Unhallow. Finally, some good stuff in here. GDM needs no introduction, and everything else is quite situational, but could be useful, I guess? Planar Binding is kinda bad without a Magic Circle, but I guess you can just summon fodder for necromancy then.
Level 6: and we're back to slightly disappointing. Planar Binding and Geas. PB is good, although you still don't have a Magic Circle without external help, and Geas is...quite situational.
Level 7: zero non-combat, non-undead spells. Just like that.
Level 8: see level 7.
Level 9: Imprison Soul. A non-direct combat case can be made for Plague of Undead (just send each pack to roam far enough and then release control, have fun being the new Dark Lord in town, although by this point you can probably do that without a 9th level slot).

So basically you either pick some VERY good spells with Advanced Learning (and with Necromancy limitations, those are not quite plentiful), or you're stuck doing your undead stuff and cackling evilly when the party actually needs an arcanist to do something better than say "well, I can send ahead a skeleton horde". And the undead servants available vary too much based on the campaign. If all you can get are the MM1 ones, and not even all of those...well, that's not exactly the DM's fault that his world doesn't have all the undead possible, I'd say. Of course, in a theoretical white-room scenario they're pretty good, but other fixed-list casters are way more setting-independent.



Everything a swordsage can do, a duskblade can do better; substantially so. His out of combat options are a bit limited but less so than any initiator by a fair margin.


Again, I'll have to disagree. Perhaps this is true for a warblade or a crusader, they're more limited in their options by their disciplines, but a swordsage outclasses a duskblade in non-combat versatility immensely.
Total list of a duskblade's non-combat options (and those have to be picked at 1 spell per level, the same as swordsage, except swordsages also get stances, which also do stuff):

Level 0: cantrips. Duskblade advantage, I'd say, swordsages don't get those and their specific effects.
Level 1 (1-4): Jump, Sw.Exp.Retreat, Rouse. Meanwhile, Wind Stride duplicates SER, Sudden Jump and Shadow Jaunt grant more movement options than Jump, and Rouse is extremely situational, but unmatched.
Level 2 (5-8): Darkvision, Dimension Hop, Sw.Fly, Sw.Invisibility, See Invisibility, Spider Climb. Darkvision goes to Duskblades, Dimension Hop is HOPelessly outclassed by Shadow Jaunt and its' greater versions, Swift Fly is almost the same (60 feet of flight per cast? Usually teleportation does a better job with the same range). Swift Invisibility was Cloak of Deception back at Swordsage3, See Invisibility goes to Duskblades, Dance of the Spider duplicated Spider Climb.
Level 3 (9-12): Duskblades get nothing. Maybe Dispelling Touch? Swordsages also get few things, but their teleport is a move action now, and they can walk over water or lava. Very situational, but better than nothing. Or a blindsense stance which invalidates concealment and invisibility, but only in close range, so also not exactly often useful out of combat. Still, +5 to Listen checks gotta count for something?
Level 4 (13-20): Duskblades get Dimension Door and Dispel Magic. They're good. They're really good. But probably they were good when the real arcanist nabbed them back at level 5 and 7, too. Meanwhile, swordsages get...60ft teleport as a swift action, and a really bad version of flight which shouldn't be quite as relevant at level 15, especially with those silly limitations.

So, basically, it's a toss-up at higher levels, but a swordsage can use their tricks all day and IMO has a somewhat significant advantage at levels 1-4 and probably 5-8 too, just because they get a few more maneuvers known than a duskblade does spells.



Yeah. Other than the underlined being something I disagree with this all looks right. ???


Eh, a barbarian never runs out of good feat ideas even if you're playing PHB only (Extra Rage? Sure, why not, etc.) and a fighter has to dive sourcebooks to actually use his bonus fighter feats on something that improves his weapon of choice every time. That counts as "easier to build" for me, and, well, barbarians only have "dead-ish" levels with Trap Sense, while for fighters it's every other level they just get everything a Barb would get too (BAB, saves, skillpoints). Now, if you stack sub levels high, I can see how Zhent Dungeoncrasher Fighter could be an OK straight 20 build, but...I'm not really feeling it. Barb 20 isn't great, but it's also just an OK build. To be fair, I haven't seen either one played or anyone who said "I'm just gonna go 20 levels of Fighter/20 levels of Barb".



You said it yourself. A specialist that does very little outside their specialty is a T4. That's the martial adepts to a T. They're great face-wreckers. They have easily the highest op-floor of any face-wrecker specialist. They do absolutely frag-all outside of face-wrecking except for the swordsage being a passable scout. I'm not seeing the disconnect here.

All three can afford to be party faces, actually. Their skillpoints and class skills work towards that. Crusaders even have a secondary CHA focus. Granted, they're leagues behind a Bard or a Beguiler or a social Sorcerer, but they can do it pretty well without harming their combat capabilities. Swordsage is a passable scout, indeed. All three have some knowledge skills (no arcana or planes, but still), which often come in useful. They're primarily face-wreckers, yes, but they DO have some capability in non-combat situations.

[Arbane]

If you want to homebrew another martial class to fit the “generic non-superpowered warrior who’s good at fighting” role, by all means do so (though again, warblade can already do this fairly well).


I think the whole 'non-superpowered' part is a lot of the problem, since the Fighter will be working with characters who explicitly DO have superpowers from Level 1 on, against enemies who will often have superpowers. D&D puts Green Arrow on the same team as Superman, and expects him to be the front-liner.

[Pleh]

I think the whole 'non-superpowered' part is a lot of the problem, since the Fighter will be working with characters who explicitly DO have superpowers from Level 1 on, against enemies who will often have superpowers. D&D puts Green Arrow on the same team as Superman, and expects him to be the front-liner.

Or, less metaphorically, puts Hawkeye on the same team as Dr Strange and expects Hawkeye to be the front liner protecting Strange.

[Cosi]

I've crossed out those that would require really specific circumstances to be useful in combat. Mage Armor is for those two levels when you cannot afford a masterwork (mithril) chain shirt. Obscuring Mist and Exp. Retreat are good enough, I guess. Silent Image will take some creative use, but I can see what you mean.

silent image doesn't take creativity to use. Very basic uses like "illusion of a wall" are already all but guaranteed to cost your enemies an action until people start walking around with true seeing by default. Creativity just turns it from "solid" to MVP It's also an auto-win against mindless enemies, which comprise the majority of targets immune to your other tricks at low level. Also, it's a mistake to ignore niche spells on the Beguiler or Dread Necromancer lists, because those characters have access to all their spells all the time. whelm isn't always great, but it sometimes is, and a Beguiler is the only character who has it in those circumstances (at a reasonable level of optimization).


Level 1: mostly offensive magic, and generic Detect Magic+Undetectable Alignment. Makes sense, doesn't do much out of combat aside from being the "party's magic finder".

You also get Rebuke Undead. That's not always going to be useful, but it does make you very effective if you can find some pets.


Level 2: Gentle Repose is the only non-combat spell in here. It's good for hauling people back to town to get them raised (if that happens in your game and you can afford it).

It's worth noting that you get Advanced Learning here. That's not trivial.


Level 4: Dispel Magic? Most people got that at 5, not 7. Again, offense and undead.

Also death ward and animate dead. I mean, that does fall under "undead", but it's still a good deal of utility. Also, you do get an Advanced Learning if you stick with the class (or you get a Prestige Domain or something, which gives you a pile of utility).


Level 5: Greater DM, Magic Jar, Nightmare, Oath of Blood, Planar Binding (Lesser), Unhallow. Finally, some good stuff in here. GDM needs no introduction, and everything else is quite situational, but could be useful, I guess? Planar Binding is kinda bad without a Magic Circle, but I guess you can just summon fodder for necromancy then.

You're way underselling magic jar. That spell is insane. Also, it's not like getting magic circle is a challenge at all. You can just buy an Eternal Wand, or get domain access somehow.


Level 7: zero non-combat, non-undead spells. Just like that.

You've had another Advanced Learning here.


Level 8: see level 7.

create greater undead is a thing. But yes, a single classed Dread Necromancer relying only on his own class list is kind of unimpressive at high levels. But that's about as likely as a high level Wizard relying solely on levels. A high level Dread Necromancer is going to have options like Runestaves, Arcane Disciple, Prestige Domains, or something else.

[Ignimortis]

It's worth noting that you get Advanced Learning here. That's not trivial.
But yes, a single classed Dread Necromancer relying only on his own class list is kind of unimpressive at high levels. But that's about as likely as a high level Wizard relying solely on levels. A high level Dread Necromancer is going to have options like Runestaves, Arcane Disciple, Prestige Domains, or something else.

Well, I did note that Advanced Learning might change things a bit or even a lot, if you pick a good spell. And while I admit that Rainbow Servant-style with domain shuffling shenanigans might improve everything greatly, I'm not sure they should be considered a core part of the class. DNs are, in the end, more reliant on external resources which might or might not exist in the setting. If we're talking "all books, all content" style of game - then yes, absolutely, they can be very good. But it's a lot easier to deny a Runestave or an uncommon prestige class than it is scrolls or magic weapons in general, in my experience.

[Cosi]

Well, I did note that Advanced Learning might change things a bit or even a lot, if you pick a good spell. And while I admit that Rainbow Servant-style with domain shuffling shenanigans might improve everything greatly, I'm not sure they should be considered a core part of the class. DNs are, in the end, more reliant on external resources which might or might not exist in the setting. If we're talking "all books, all content" style of game - then yes, absolutely, they can be very good. But it's a lot easier to deny a Runestave or an uncommon prestige class than it is scrolls or magic weapons in general, in my experience.

I think if you're in an environment where it matters whether or not you can do planar binding shenanigans, it is unreasonable to expect that you will not be allowed Prestige Domains. And if it doesn't matter if you can do planar binding shenanigans, then the Dread Necromancer is at a totally reasonable power level.

[Kelb_Panthera]

Now this is a claim I can at least substantiate.

Level 1: mostly offensive magic, and generic Detect Magic+Undetectable Alignment. Makes sense, doesn't do much out of combat aside from being the "party's magic finder".
Level 2: Gentle Repose is the only non-combat spell in here. It's good for hauling people back to town to get them raised (if that happens in your game and you can afford it).
Level 3: again, a single spell - Speak with Dead. It's a good spell, but it's also the only non-undead, non-offensive in here.
Level 4: Dispel Magic? Most people got that at 5, not 7. Again, offense and undead.
Level 5: Greater DM, Magic Jar, Nightmare, Oath of Blood, Planar Binding (Lesser), Unhallow. Finally, some good stuff in here. GDM needs no introduction, and everything else is quite situational, but could be useful, I guess? Planar Binding is kinda bad without a Magic Circle, but I guess you can just summon fodder for necromancy then.
Level 6: and we're back to slightly disappointing. Planar Binding and Geas. PB is good, although you still don't have a Magic Circle without external help, and Geas is...quite situational.
Level 7: zero non-combat, non-undead spells. Just like that.
Level 8: see level 7.
Level 9: Imprison Soul. A non-direct combat case can be made for Plague of Undead (just send each pack to roam far enough and then release control, have fun being the new Dark Lord in town, although by this point you can probably do that without a 9th level slot).

So basically you either pick some VERY good spells with Advanced Learning (and with Necromancy limitations, those are not quite plentiful), or you're stuck doing your undead stuff and cackling evilly when the party actually needs an arcanist to do something better than say "well, I can send ahead a skeleton horde". And the undead servants available vary too much based on the campaign. If all you can get are the MM1 ones, and not even all of those...well, that's not exactly the DM's fault that his world doesn't have all the undead possible, I'd say. Of course, in a theoretical white-room scenario they're pretty good, but other fixed-list casters are way more setting-independent.

Mother cyst goes a -long- way in that regard. As for non-core undead, dread necro's inclusion means that the bane wraith is available at the very least. Even in core, ghouls make fine scouts and kidnappers. Once you get into non-core undead and undead creation the options grow immensely. Spell-likes and other, unique special abilities abound. Core-only and near core-only just aren't much of the game anymore. People that prefer that kind of game have largely moved on to later editions.


Again, I'll have to disagree. Perhaps this is true for a warblade or a crusader, they're more limited in their options by their disciplines, but a swordsage outclasses a duskblade in non-combat versatility immensely.
Total list of a duskblade's non-combat options (and those have to be picked at 1 spell per level, the same as swordsage, except swordsages also get stances, which also do stuff):

Level 0: cantrips. Duskblade advantage, I'd say, swordsages don't get those and their specific effects.
Level 1 (1-4): Jump, Sw.Exp.Retreat, Rouse. Meanwhile, Wind Stride duplicates SER, Sudden Jump and Shadow Jaunt grant more movement options than Jump, and Rouse is extremely situational, but unmatched.
Level 2 (5-8): Darkvision, Dimension Hop, Sw.Fly, Sw.Invisibility, See Invisibility, Spider Climb. Darkvision goes to Duskblades, Dimension Hop is HOPelessly outclassed by Shadow Jaunt and its' greater versions, Swift Fly is almost the same (60 feet of flight per cast? Usually teleportation does a better job with the same range). Swift Invisibility was Cloak of Deception back at Swordsage3, See Invisibility goes to Duskblades, Dance of the Spider duplicated Spider Climb.
Level 3 (9-12): Duskblades get nothing. Maybe Dispelling Touch? Swordsages also get few things, but their teleport is a move action now, and they can walk over water or lava. Very situational, but better than nothing. Or a blindsense stance which invalidates concealment and invisibility, but only in close range, so also not exactly often useful out of combat. Still, +5 to Listen checks gotta count for something?
Level 4 (13-20): Duskblades get Dimension Door and Dispel Magic. They're good. They're really good. But probably they were good when the real arcanist nabbed them back at level 5 and 7, too. Meanwhile, swordsages get...60ft teleport as a swift action, and a really bad version of flight which shouldn't be quite as relevant at level 15, especially with those silly limitations.

So, basically, it's a toss-up at higher levels, but a swordsage can use their tricks all day and IMO has a somewhat significant advantage at levels 1-4 and probably 5-8 too, just because they get a few more maneuvers known than a duskblade does spells.

Outside of an adventure that is an absolute gauntlet, the number of spells per day a duskblade gets is largely similar to the number of maneuvers that a swordage will use in the same day. They're also far better supported by a whole host of options that make spells and spellcasters more effective for which there is no parallel for martial adepts.

A swordsage gets roughly the same number of maneuvers known as a duskblade does spells (who gets more is up to the latter's int mod) but only has about half as many readied in the mid-to-late game.

Swift fly can be used to double move or even run for far more than 60 feet. Dispelling touch can be used with arcane channeling to simply smack away buffs so level 3 is hardly "nothing" even before you consider halt and regroup, effects that the swordsage simply can't mirror though a crusader can perform similar. Where are you getting walking on water/lava for the swordsage?

Anyway, the duskblade can hit just as hard or harder in battle before you look at gear or feats; scout far better with magically granted senses, stealth, and mobility; has access to better skills, if not as many; has more and better BFC and debuff options; and can even buff himself and his allies, which the swordsage can't do at all. All the swordsage really has on his side in this comparison is that he doesn't have to rest overnight to recharge.


Eh, a barbarian never runs out of good feat ideas even if you're playing PHB only (Extra Rage? Sure, why not, etc.) and a fighter has to dive sourcebooks to actually use his bonus fighter feats on something that improves his weapon of choice every time. That counts as "easier to build" for me, and, well, barbarians only have "dead-ish" levels with Trap Sense, while for fighters it's every other level they just get everything a Barb would get too (BAB, saves, skillpoints). Now, if you stack sub levels high, I can see how Zhent Dungeoncrasher Fighter could be an OK straight 20 build, but...I'm not really feeling it. Barb 20 isn't great, but it's also just an OK build. To be fair, I haven't seen either one played or anyone who said "I'm just gonna go 20 levels of Fighter/20 levels of Barb".

That's largely why Barb is considered T4 and fighter is T5 but being a tier higher doesn't make it automatically better. If you're dead-set on a charger and nothing else, sure, but that's hardly the only way to play a martial character. Even if you go that way, a fighter can be a little less of an RPG and do other things while the barb largely can't.



All three can afford to be party faces, actually. Their skillpoints and class skills work towards that. Crusaders even have a secondary CHA focus. Granted, they're leagues behind a Bard or a Beguiler or a social Sorcerer, but they can do it pretty well without harming their combat capabilities. Swordsage is a passable scout, indeed. All three have some knowledge skills (no arcana or planes, but still), which often come in useful. They're primarily face-wreckers, yes, but they DO have some capability in non-combat situations.

I don't think being as much of a party face as a Knight is terribly impressive or really doing the role particularly well; certainly not enough to justify being moved up a tier. Even a fighter can do as much with only a little effort.

[ngilop]

A really simple fix to give the Fighter something else to do than roll a d20 then a random polyhedral die for damage is to gestalt them with the Miniatures Handook's Marshal.


Reall the fighter just needs way to interect with the world (outside of skills) in more ways than just AC. They need way to affect fortitude, reflex, and will saves and be able to cause more status effects than just 'prone', 'grappled' ,and 'dead'.

They also need a way to utilize Swift and Immediate actions

Check out my NPC Warrior (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?317055-NPC-classes-for-my-campaign-world) (hint: it literally just a upgraded PHB fighter) or my Third Fighter (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?424466-My-Third-Fighter-fix-trying-something-new) Fix

[Troacctid]

Or, less metaphorically, puts Hawkeye on the same team as Dr Strange and expects Hawkeye to be the front liner protecting Strange.
You're not supposed to put an archer on the front line either!

[Pleh]

I don't think being as much of a party face as a Knight is terribly impressive or really doing the role particularly well; certainly not enough to justify being moved up a tier. Even a fighter can do as much with only a little effort.

Knight at least has a reason to invest in their charisma: their special abilities key off it.

Fighters are going out of their way to even try.

Fighters do not get credit for being a good party "face" if commoners can do exactly the same things and do just as well. In fact, commoners can pump CHA and pay the cross class skill for diplomacy same as fighter and they have more reason to do so since they have no offensive capabilities to speak of.


You're not supposed to put an archer on the front line either!

I was replying to a suggestion that Green Arrow defends Superman. We were already in that territory.

[Lans]

You could keep the fighter focused on feats if you both up the amount he gets, and expands what he can use them on as he goes up levels, basically let him take any feat at levels above 10, and give him level/2 or 3 feats each new level.

[Red Fel]

You could keep the fighter focused on feats if you both up the amount he gets, and expands what he can use them on as he goes up levels, basically let him take any feat at levels above 10, and give him level/2 or 3 feats each new level.

Except, again, feats are not a class feature. They are not something the Fighter, and nobody else (or close to it), can do; they're a pool of character modifications to which basically everybody as access. Feats do not dramatically change the gameplay of the Fighter or his limited options; more feats won't do that, either.

Most feats aren't going to dramatically impact gameplay; they'll give the Fighter slightly bigger numbers. At best, a feat will give your Fighter some kind of SLA; yes, that would make him more versatile, but at that point you're just playing into the trope of "the way to fix a Fighter is to make him some kind of caster."

[Arbane]

Except, again, feats are not a class feature. They are not something the Fighter, and nobody else (or close to it), can do; they're a pool of character modifications to which basically everybody as access.

I remember reading at one point in 3.0's development, Feats WERE going to be Fighter-only. I wonder how much that would've changed the game? (Not much, unless they upped the power level of Feats significantly.)

[Eldariel]

Except, again, feats are not a class feature. They are not something the Fighter, and nobody else (or close to it), can do; they're a pool of character modifications to which basically everybody as access. Feats do not dramatically change the gameplay of the Fighter or his limited options; more feats won't do that, either.

Most feats aren't going to dramatically impact gameplay; they'll give the Fighter slightly bigger numbers. At best, a feat will give your Fighter some kind of SLA; yes, that would make him more versatile, but at that point you're just playing into the trope of "the way to fix a Fighter is to make him some kind of caster."

The big thing is, everyone gets X feats so they're obviously gonna pick the best ones. Thus, bonus feats are inevitably worse than the initial feats and the more you get, the worse each individual feat gets. If the system had a high number of high quality Fighter bonus feats that opened up new options and perhaps even required Fighter-level, it would be different, but as it stands you stand to get less from each level than the previous ones and compared to a class without bonus feats, you both have the same best feats (e.g. in Core, Improved Trip, Combat Reflexes, Power Attack and Spirited Charge, perhaps EWP: Spiked Chain) with the Fighter adding a bunch of lower quality feats with their bonus feats (Weapon Focus-line, Dodge, Mobility, Improved Sunder/Disarm/Bull Rush, etc.) since they have no other options left.

[razorback]

You could keep the fighter focused on feats if you both up the amount he gets, and expands what he can use them on as he goes up levels, basically let him take any feat at levels above 10, and give him level/2 or 3 feats each new level.

Or, make a change to feats along the lines of the way stunning fist works for monks.

Special: A monk may select Stunning Fist as a bonus feat at 1st level, even if she does not meet the prerequisites. A monk who selects this feat may attempt a stunning attack a number of times per day equal to her monk level, plus one more time per day for every four levels she has in classes other than monk.
I hate dodge and the fact that its a prequisite for so much, but rewrite it as - Special: a Fighter gets a +1 dodge bonus to Armor Class + 1/2 per Fighter level against attacks from all opponent. Note: A condition that makes you lose your Dexterity bonus to Armor Class (if any) also makes you lose dodge bonuses. Also, dodge bonuses (such as this one and a dwarf's racial bonus to dodge giants) stack with each other, unlike most other types of bonuses.
Make the feats better for fighters as Arbane mentioned, as these were intended for Fighters only. You wouldn't have to rewrite everything, just the ones the player was interested.
And not just for combat feats. Once you expand how many skills points a Fighter gets and expand the list, other feats like Persuasive would have Special: a Fighter gains a +2 bonus + 1/4 per level on all Bluff and Intimidate checks. Will it raise them a tier? Maybe... but probably not.
But it will give them some advantages in hitting better, not getting hit and things to do when they aren't hitting things.

[redwizard007]

Also depends on what you are doing in a party. If it's just small room raids, then yes...Fighter will hit things.
If you have to:
Sneak- Fighter will be too loud
Investigate- Fighter will get bored reading
Charm- Fighter will attempt to intimidate the person instead
Balance- Fighter will fall
Swim- They have this, but armor can't be very helpful
Do some other sort of thing in combat other than hit- won't


My nine year old is a better gamer than that. Play your character, not a one dimensional tool.

Have to balance, sneak, swim or climb? Watch the fighter take his armor off. I'd be willing to bet the skilled melee combatant has decent physical skills and will beat you to the other side of that anti-magic enhanced obstacle every time.

Charm? Why would a classic alpha male try to intimidate when he knows you've been trying to gain his approval since preschool? He'd just pat you on the shoulder and say "welcome to the team," and you'd be stealing him your sister's panties.

Want to mobilize the pesantry? Try taking your nose out of a spell book long enough to watch the crowd gather around a famous fighter as if he were a bard.

Want to actually be accepted by the population without casting Mass Charm? Try being one of them, oh wait. The fighter does that already, and there is no animosity when the spell wears off.

Have an enemy supprise you in combat? Don't worry, the fighter doesn't provoke attacks of opportunity every time he takes a breath, and isn't the insta kill that you are.

Need to carry dead casters to a random cleric after a near TPK? Luckily your fighter has the ability to do that, if he isn't holding a rival wizard at sword point to do it for him.


Are fighters a great class? Well, they weren't designed as one, but that doesn't mean that they can't be played as one.

[Pleh]

Are fighters a great class? Well, they weren't designed as one, but that doesn't mean that they can't be played as one.

Hang on, what you mean is they aren't a great CLASS, but it doesn't prevent them from being great CHARACTERS. The fact that you can enjoy the game with a bad class does not reduce how badly they do what they were meant to do.

[redwizard007]

Hang on, what you mean is they aren't a great CLASS, but it doesn't prevent them from being great CHARACTERS. The fact that you can enjoy the game with a bad class does not reduce how badly they do what they were meant to do.

I don't think they are bad at what they do. They soak up damage and whitle down a target's HP total. The alleged issue is that they don't do much else. While that argument has merit, it is not as severe a handicap as posters on these forums make it out to be.

[exelsisxax]

I don't think they are bad at what they do. They soak up damage and whitle down a target's HP total. The alleged issue is that they don't do much else. While that argument has merit, it is not as severe a handicap as posters on these forums make it out to be.

They're bad at both of those things! Druids have a secondary class feature that does that far better than fighters do, how is that good at their job?

[Nifft]

I don't think they are bad at what they do. They soak up damage and whitle down a target's HP total. The alleged issue is that they don't do much else. While that argument has merit, it is not as severe a handicap as posters on these forums make it out to be.

They only soak up damage if damage-dealers can be made to target Fighters preferentially.

At very low levels, a Fighter can use tactical positioning to encourage damage-dealers to target the Fighter simply by merit of occupying an appropriate square -- but that tactical capability doesn't persist for long, as damage-dealers start dealing area damage or get better mobility (e.g. flight, earthglide, teleportation).

[Venger]

My nine year old is a better gamer than that. Play your character, not a one dimensional tool.

Have to balance, sneak, swim or climb? Watch the fighter take his armor off. I'd be willing to bet the skilled melee combatant has decent physical skills and will beat you to the other side of that anti-magic enhanced obstacle every time.
So now instead of an armored character who doesn't do anything, you're an unarmored character who doesn't do anything. Awesome.

If that obstacle course involves anything but climb, jump, and swim (which you can totally afford to put ranks in with your 2 skill points and nonreliance on int) then no, no he won't.


Want to mobilize the pesantry? Try taking your nose out of a spell book long enough to watch the crowd gather around a famous fighter as if he were a bard.
And they would do that... why?


Want to actually be accepted by the population without casting Mass Charm? Try being one of them, oh wait. The fighter does that already, and there is no animosity when the spell wears off.
Because magic users aren't people or something. There's no animosity when a charm spell wears off either. You are confusing it with the intimidate skill.



Have an enemy supprise you in combat? Don't worry, the fighter doesn't provoke attacks of opportunity every time he takes a breath, and isn't the insta kill that you are.
Yeah, fighters never lose init due to their ability to cast nerveskitter, and never has to move out of threatened squares while being unable to tumble. Having hit points is all that matters in survivability and it's lucky fighter natively has access to important immunities unlike those dumb ol' t1 casters.


Need to carry dead casters to a random cleric after a near TPK? Luckily your fighter has the ability to do that, if he isn't holding a rival wizard at sword point to do it for him.
Because mules, tenser's floating discs, and bags of holding don't exist. Holding a rival wizard at swordpoint implies the fighter poses some kind of threat. He doesn't. Ever.


Are fighters a great class? Well, they weren't designed as one, but that doesn't mean that they can't be played as one.

you're allowed to like fighters, but it doesn't make them mechanically competent like your nonexamples imply

[Bucky]

For some fun, try to think of any feats a Fighter can get that are anywhere near the power or versatility of the spells an equal-level Sorcerer Bard could have. (Aside from maybe Leadership.)


Power aside, if you want a Fighter to have versatility from feats that's comparable to a caster, they basically need to have a library of feats that they can select from on the fly that's comparably broad to a Sorcerer's spells known. An ability like Pathfinder brawler's Martial Flexibility gets you there.


A brawler can take a move action to gain the benefit of a combat feat she doesn’t possess. This effect lasts for 1 minute. The brawler must meet all the feat’s prerequisites. She may use this ability a number of times per day equal to 3 + 1/2 her brawler level (minimum 1).

Of course, the versatility also needs to scale. Thus, you also need something like this:

At 10th level, a brawler can use this ability to gain the benefit of three combat feats at the same time.

[Arbane]

redwizard007: No amount of Good Roleplaying(tm) will keep the dice from saying LOLNOPE.


Power aside, if you want a Fighter to have versatility from feats that's comparable to a caster, they basically need to have a library of feats that they can select from on the fly that's comparably broad to a Sorcerer's spells known. An ability like Pathfinder brawler's Martial Flexibility gets you there.


Having played a Warsighted Oracle in PF, I can attest that Martial Flexibility is indeed a very fun ability.

[Dr_Dinosaur]

Now, personally, I DO think it would be VERY cool to take artificer and give it maneuvers, and call it a fighter. Now the fighter's role is a crafter-tinkerer. Since chainmail, fighter's kind of schtick has been "weapon and armor guy", But as you kind of said before, the one with the weapons should be at least able to craft magical arms and armor. Even better if they are just quartermasters/combat engineers on the team.

Giving them infusions, and making them responsible for making sure everyone's gear is up to snuff, and having superlative knowledge of how to use them is tops.

Nothing would be more satisfying than having a rusty old blade and everyone being like "this crap", and then handing it off to your "quartermaster", and them being like "Gimme this... THIS IS HOW YOU USE IT" *Blade hums, takes on an infusion, and then dude cuts through something*.

I think that would make for a FAR more balanced party member than just the *I hit/feat* guy.

Taking on the artificer role as well would suddenly give them some out of combat application and use, as everyone has to go to the maester to repair or upgrade their gear, they can have a service to sell, and you can give them skills like appraise, craft, and diplomacy for haggling.

AND it takes the role of who makes magic items away from pure mages. And THAT is big. Perhaps give some sort of bonus for crafting WITH pure mages, using aid another, and all is right with the world.

Check out the Blacksmith class from Spheres of Might. Seems right up your alley

[Lans]

Except, again, feats are not a class feature. They are not something the Fighter, and nobody else (or close to it), can do; they're a pool of character modifications to which basically everybody as access. Feats do not dramatically change the gameplay of the Fighter or his limited options; more feats won't do that, either.
I disagree, feats very much do change the game play, expecially when looking at feats like shock trooper, elusive target, karmic strike, imperious command and the various sub systems.

Why do i care if somebody else can do something I can do, if they don't do it as well, and there are a half dozen other things that I can do that they can't?

When you have dozens of extra feats you can dramatically change your game play, especially when your exploring options that would other wise be scantly touched like the luck, heritage, bindng, or the like.


Most feats aren't going to dramatically impact gameplay; they'll give the Fighter slightly bigger numbers. At best, a feat will give your Fighter some kind of SLA; yes, that would make him more versatile, but at that point you're just playing into the trope of "the way to fix a Fighter is to make him some kind of caster."

Or I am keeping him a mundane everyday character for the setting that he lives in. He is stuck with options that any dirt farmer or warrior could do some, but not all of. He is the everyman, the less special one.


Or, make a change to feats along the lines of the way stunning fist works for monks.

I hate dodge and the fact that its a prequisite for so much, but rewrite it as - Special: a Fighter gets a +1 dodge bonus to Armor Class + 1/2 per Fighter level against attacks from all opponent. Note: A condition that makes you lose your Dexterity bonus to Armor Class (if any) also makes you lose dodge bonuses. Also, dodge bonuses (such as this one and a dwarf's racial bonus to dodge giants) stack with each other, unlike most other types of bonuses.
Make the feats better for fighters as Arbane mentioned, as these were intended for Fighters only. You wouldn't have to rewrite everything, just the ones the player was interested.
And not just for combat feats. Once you expand how many skills points a Fighter gets and expand the list, other feats like Persuasive would have Special: a Fighter gains a +2 bonus + 1/4 per level on all Bluff and Intimidate checks. Will it raise them a tier? Maybe... but probably not.
But it will give them some advantages in hitting better, not getting hit and things to do when they aren't hitting things.
That sounds like a horrible idea that would lead to the fighter just being off the RNG in a narrow swath of circumstances as opposed to actually increasing his options.




The big thing is, everyone gets X feats so they're obviously gonna pick the best ones. Thus, bonus feats are inevitably worse than the initial feats and the more you get, the worse each individual feat gets. If the system had a high number of high quality Fighter bonus feats that opened up new options and perhaps even required Fighter-level, it would be different, but as it stands you stand to get less from each level than the previous ones and compared to a class without bonus feats, you both have the same best feats (e.g. in Core, Improved Trip, Combat Reflexes, Power Attack and Spirited Charge, perhaps EWP: Spiked Chain) with the Fighter adding a bunch of lower quality feats with their bonus feats (Weapon Focus-line, Dodge, Mobility, Improved Sunder/Disarm/Bull Rush, etc.) since they have no other options left.


There is a high number of good fighter bonus, and my alteration lets them take any feat from level 10 on wards, and that could easily be lowered if level 10 is too high.

Even in core you mentioned 8 feats, and there is sill the manyshot line and improved initiative in core. Once you leave core your options explode. Even if you do manage to take all the best ones, when you're getting 7 feats in a level you can afford to take feats that are situational, fringe or even just ok.

[Eldariel]

There is a high number of good fighter bonus, and my alteration lets them take any feat from level 10 on wards, and that could easily be lowered if level 10 is too high.

Even in core you mentioned 8 feats, and there is sill the manyshot line and improved initiative in core. Once you leave core your options explode. Even if you do manage to take all the best ones, when you're getting 7 feats in a level you can afford to take feats that are situational, fringe or even just ok.

While that may be true, they are broadly all usable to the same end and they don't actually increase your power meaningfully. You'll be okay at more things but you need other things like class features and stats to back it up anyways and if you have two ways to do the same thing (say, Sunder & Disarm or mounted charge and manyshot), you actually aren't gaining any meaningful advantage in terms of power. Versatility is a big thing if it allows you to defeat different challenges; all the bonus feat chains Fighter gains largely contribute to the same kinds of challenges which is the problem in the first place. Well, two, which I already covered with the build I just listed; AoO/Trip and charge. That's about all you'll want. And you can always dip two levels in a feat bonus class while taking 18 in a real class if you want to.

[Lans]

While that may be true, they are broadly all usable to the same end and they don't actually increase your power meaningfully. You'll be okay at more things but you need other things like class features and stats to back it up anyways I disagree the class features of the low tier 3 classes and lower really don't add up to much more than a couple of feat chains.


and if you have two ways to do the same thing (say, Sunder & Disarm or mounted charge and manyshot), you actually aren't gaining any meaningful advantage in terms of power. Versatility is a big thing if it allows you to defeat different challenges; all the bonus feat chains Fighter gains largely contribute to the same kinds of challenges which is the problem in the first place. My fix let the fighter take any feat from level 10 onwards, and before that manyshot can be used against opponents that are flying, up hill or in the rear ranks. Then there are things like the combat focus line that make you more durable, and gives blind sense.


Well, two, which I already covered with the build I just listed; AoO/Trip and charge. That's about all you'll want. And you can always dip two levels in a feat bonus class while taking 18 in a real class if you want to.
Why don't you want to be able to effectively use a bow/other ranged weapon?

If all your doing is charging and AoO your going to need more than a couple bonus feats, your going to want shock trooper, leap attack, knockdown, close quarters fighting, karmic strike, elusive target. Thats another 9 feats right there just to do 2 things, when going into ranged use is at the very least a legitimate option.

As are the other feats you might want to take, like the devotion feats and the like.

I'm not going to say that taking 20 levels of this is the best choice, but I will say that its close enough to be looked at for a tier 3 campaign, and way better than non pounce barbarian

[Eldariel]

I disagree the class features of the low tier 3 classes and lower really don't add up to much more than a couple of feat chains.

While it's true that you get martial maneuvers, you get them at ½ initiator level and without a recovery mechanic and a max of 3. As such, well, it's not really on the same power level as the real thing. Same with Incarnum, Binding & al.


My fix let the fighter take any feat from level 10 onwards, and before that manyshot can be used against opponents that are flying, up hill or in the rear ranks. Then there are things like the combat focus line that make you more durable, and gives blind sense.

Manyshot has a range limit of 30' making it very inconvenient vs. flying, uphill or rear of the rank enemies. It's frankly little more than a glorified reach melee attack (10' more than an Enlarged PC with a reach weapon). But yes, feats give a lot of nice boons but generally you want class features to build on them with rather than taking them as the point itself. To be a good archer you need very good Dex and Str and preferably primary Dex-focus; thus a Fighter dabbling in archery is probably still gonna be pretty bad at it unless he's an Archer first and melee second, or has magical Christmas land stats. Throwing is a bit better but takes special classes (Master Thrower, Hulking Hurler) to truly shine - archery is better out of the box with Rapid Shot.


Why don't you want to be able to effectively use a bow/other ranged weapon?

Generally all you need to efficiently use those is Rapid Shot - that is to say, Ranger 2. Rest comes from bow enhancements. And most of bow power comes from stats and enhancements in general; Woodland Archer is the key exception but that begins to take a lot of build resources to really make good (we're talking ways to get extra attacks and preferably extra attack actions too here).


If all your doing is charging and AoO your going to need more than a couple bonus feats, your going to want shock trooper, leap attack, knockdown, close quarters fighting, karmic strike, elusive target. Thats another 9 feats right there just to do 2 things, when going into ranged use is at the very least a legitimate option.

You don't need Knock-Down, Karmic Strike, Close-Quarters Fighting or Elusive Target really. Karmic Strike is for melee strike trading but if your plan is to trip and outreach, you'll very rarely be within enemy reach aside from Gargantuan or Large+ humanoid enemies with reach weapons. Close-Quarters Fighting is completely redundant once Freedom of Movement enters the picture and even before then, trivially cheap items like Chronocharm of the Horizon Walker or Anklets of Translocation make the combat maneuver threat minimal; and it's just a subset of one threat type in the first place (one against which reach AoO tripping build is already extremely well prepared with the basic gameplan I might add). Elusive Target is really good but for hit trading - not your primary plan. And it takes some supplementation to truly shine anyways. Those are all very good examples of nice-to-have second tier feats that add something cute but not really necessary for a basic build. And something like Elusive Target is an excellent example of the diminishing returns; you have to take 3 feats to get one good ability. Even for a Fighter getting feats every level that's very taxing; 3 levels for negating Power Attack and the passive overreach ability. You should only take it if you're taking Dodge and Mobility as prerequisites anyways or if you're building for an environment with only melee duels and things of that nature (say, a Warrior Arena); it's very good for 1v1ing strong melee types but that's about it.


As are the other feats you might want to take, like the devotion feats and the like.

Devotions are good but you're limited to one unless you're a Cleric and dipping Cleric is strictly superior to taking them as feats since it gives you Turn Undead to recoup them. I wouldn't want to pick them up as feats unless I were forced to single-class for some reason.


I'm not going to say that taking 20 levels of this is the best choice, but I will say that its close enough to be looked at for a tier 3 campaign, and way better than non pounce barbarian

I dunno, non-Pounce Barbarian with Street Fighter, Whirling Frenzy, Wolf Totem, Trapkiller and company is actually pretty good. Other spirit totems are pretty good too. You negate prerequisites for Improved Trip and get extra attacks on a full attack and can charge non-linearly and eventually multicharge while ignoring many charge limitations and even some minor extra crit range. It's pretty nice overall and you have out-of-combat options in 4 skill points and Trapkiller and the obvious Greater Frenzy options. It's not optimal but not a bad 20 level class; I'd definitely at least strongly consider it over any Fighter.

[Lans]

And something like Elusive Target is an excellent example of the diminishing returns; you have to take 3 feats to get one good ability. Even for a Fighter getting feats every level that's very taxing; 3 levels for negating Power Attack and the passive overreach ability.

My fix was to add multiple feats per level, giving more as it went on, it could grab all of Elusive target at level 4 or 6. This was to help mitigate the diminishing returns, let a class play with the feat subsystem, and hopefully let it give more as it leveled up. I'll go over your other points after work.



While it's true that you get martial maneuvers, you get them at ½ initiator level and without a recovery mechanic and a max of 3. As such, well, it's not really on the same power level as the real thing. Same with Incarnum, Binding & al.
While you maybe restricted to lower level maneuvers the difference is not as big as with spells, and basic feats can make the difference in a lot of situations. Take Time Stand Stills for example, it doubles the warblades attacks, essentially doubling his damage. My Fighter can replicate that effect if it can up its damage and accuracy by enough it will have the same effect. Now, there are a few manuevers that are harder to replicate like the Inferno Blast, but I don't think theres all that many.

As for incarnum, my fighter can make the 2 points of essentia difference with a couple of feats, or even just having a better base attack bonus. The Chakra binds are a different matter as I don't know the higher level binds to well, but I did use a qualifier in my statement. Im also not sure on the binder pacts.



Manyshot has a range limit of 30' making it very inconvenient vs. flying, uphill or rear of the rank enemies. It's frankly little more than a glorified reach melee attack (10' more than an Enlarged PC with a reach weapon). But yes, feats give a lot of nice boons but generally you want class features to build on them with rather than taking them as the point itself. To be a good archer you need very good Dex and Str and preferably primary Dex-focus; thus a Fighter dabbling in archery is probably still gonna be pretty bad at it unless he's an Archer first and melee second, or has magical Christmas land stats. Throwing is a bit better but takes special classes (Master Thrower, Hulking Hurler) to truly shine - archery is better out of the box with Rapid Shot.
Point about many shot, I don't think rapid shot would be good enough by itself, and a subpar dex can be mitigted by feats, and throwing boomerangs is worthwile with boomerang daze and richochet.


Generally all you need to efficiently use those is Rapid Shot - that is to say, Ranger 2. Rest comes from bow enhancements. And most of bow power comes from stats and enhancements in general; Woodland Archer is the key exception but that begins to take a lot of build resources to really make good (we're talking ways to get extra attacks and preferably extra attack actions too here).







Devotions are good but you're limited to one unless you're a Cleric and dipping Cleric is strictly superior to taking them as feats since it gives you Turn Undead to recoup them. I wouldn't want to pick them up as feats unless I were forced to single-class for some reason.

Actually you're limited to two, and if your a cleric you can take 3. I'm not concerning myself with high tier classes


I dunno, non-Pounce Barbarian with Street Fighter, Whirling Frenzy, Wolf Totem, Trapkiller and company is actually pretty good. Other spirit totems are pretty good too. You negate prerequisites for Improved Trip and get extra attacks on a full attack and can charge non-linearly and eventually multicharge while ignoring many charge limitations and even some minor extra crit range. It's pretty nice overall and you have out-of-combat options in 4 skill points and Trapkiller and the obvious Greater Frenzy options. It's not optimal but not a bad 20 level class; I'd definitely at least strongly consider it over any Fighter.
You do understand that I gave the fighter either 60 or 100 additional feats, so he could afford to take Open Minded like 23 times, and pick up trap finding if skills and traps were issues for out of combat options

[Thirdtwin]

Open Minded is a fighter bonus feat? And gives fighters a better skill list?

[Venger]

Open Minded is a fighter bonus feat? And gives fighters a better skill list?

open-minded is neither a fighter feat nor does it improve one's skill list. when taken, you get 5 skill points to spend immediately. that's all it does.

[Thirdtwin]

open-minded is neither a fighter feat nor does it improve one's skill list. when taken, you get 5 skill points to spend immediately. that's all it does.

So even with 100 extra fighter bonus feats, a fighter could still only take Open Minded 7 times base (8 if you're human, and more if you do other stuff obviously). And, is there a fighter bonus feat for trapfinding somewhere that I missed?

[Lans]

Open Minded is a fighter bonus feat? And gives fighters a better skill list?

Just to repost the start of this tangent


You could keep the fighter focused on feats if you both up the amount he gets, and expands what he can use them on as he goes up levels, basically let him take any feat at levels above 10, and give him level/2 or 3 feats each new level.

So, basically yes it is for this tangent of the discussion. As for skill list, he could can throw feats at solving that.

[Karl Aegis]

So even with 100 extra fighter bonus feats, a fighter could still only take Open Minded 7 times base (8 if you're human, and more if you do other stuff obviously). And, is there a fighter bonus feat for trapfinding somewhere that I missed?

It's a pair of feats from Magic of Incarnum which the fighter can totally take because it has enough feats to spare some.

[Venger]

So even with 100 extra fighter bonus feats, a fighter could still only take Open Minded 7 times base (8 if you're human, and more if you do other stuff obviously). And, is there a fighter bonus feat for trapfinding somewhere that I missed?
No, you didn't miss anything. No such fighter bonus feat exists.


It's a pair of feats from Magic of Incarnum which the fighter can totally take because it has enough feats to spare some.

Making it the equivalent of the incarnate in addition to being the equivalent of the swordsage

[Alent]

I seem to have missed something. That whole thing about giving Fighter the same feat 23 times to give him the equivalent of 7+int skill points per level instead of just giving the class 8+int skills per level to begin with- that was a joke to demonstrate how feats aren't a substitute for class features, right? :smallconfused:

[Cosi]

It's a pair of feats from Magic of Incarnum which the fighter can totally take because it has enough feats to spare some.

The idea that the Fighter has feats to spare only really makes sense if you believe that people are sinking lots of their feats into Fighter Bonus Feats. I do not think this is the case.

[Lans]

I seem to have missed something. That whole thing about giving Fighter the same feat 23 times to give him the equivalent of 7+int skill points per level instead of just giving the class 8+int skills per level to begin with- that was a joke to demonstrate how feats aren't a substitute for class features, right? :smallconfused:

A lot of it was to make the fighter scale with level semi exponentially, and letting them explore the feat subsystem.
I think realistically this is a much, but if a fighter wound up getting a feat for every spell known for a caster, that would be reasonable. The other had to do with enough feats not equaling class features or at least getting into a toss up ranged.The open minded thing was in response to the barbarians better skill points.


The idea that the Fighter has feats to spare only really makes sense if you believe that people are sinking lots of their feats into Fighter Bonus Feats. I do not think this is the case.

If the argument is about my fighter fix, this is less true as my fighter fix lets the fighter take any feat from level 10 on wards and gives the fighter a lot more bonus feats as he levels up.

In general I think a few fighter feats get taken, a lot of people take improved initiative, melee people take the shock trooper+ leap attack. In general I would say people take 2 fighter bonus feats on average

[Bucky]

A lot of the reason people don't take so many fighter bonus feats is that the good ones tend to be later in the feat chains. But a lot of these are simply on par with other subsystems' feats - not worth spending half their feats slots to get at the levels where they're most useful. Spring Attack is very nice, it does what a martial feat should do, but it's not worth getting Dodge for, and it's not worth getting Mobility for if you have an ability like Spring Attack that avoids AoOs.

As a separate issue, feat chains typically don't scale well for deep feats. Yes, improved trip is way better than combat expertise. But in order for the fighter class to work as written, deep chains like {Weapon Focus -> Greater Weapon Focus and Weapons Specialization -> Greater Weapon Specialization} need to start close to other feats in power level and then get exponentially stronger, not have the late feats do the same thing as the early feats.

[Cosi]

If the argument is about my fighter fix, this is less true as my fighter fix lets the fighter take any feat from level 10 on wards and gives the fighter a lot more bonus feats as he levels up.

Sure. It still seems bad though. There just aren't feats on par with finger of death out there for the taking.

[Nifft]

Sure. It still seems bad though. There just aren't feats on par with finger of death out there for the taking.

You can get slay living from a bonus feat, but not a Fighter bonus feat.

[Karl Aegis]

The idea that the Fighter has feats to spare only really makes sense if you believe that people are sinking lots of their feats into Fighter Bonus Feats. I do not think this is the case.

What does this even mean? Are your Fighters not getting bonus feats?

[Cosi]

What does this even mean? Are your Fighters not getting bonus feats?

If your comment was in fact in reference to the proposal that the Fighter get totally unrestricted bonus feats after a certain point, nothing. That avoids the issue.

In reference to the RAW Fighter, the idea that he has "free feats" is misleading. He gets a resource he can spend on a specific kind of feat -- Fighter Bonus Feats -- so he doesn't have to use his level up feats on that kind of feat. But that only results in him getting "free feats" to the degree that he otherwise would have spent feats on Fighter Bonus Feats.

To make an analogy, giving you a $10 coupon to Burger King isn't the same thing as giving you $10. It's not nothing, but its worth less than $10 by some amount dependent on how likely you are to go to Burger King.

[Venger]

You can get slay living from a bonus feat, but not a Fighter bonus feat.

greater aberrant dragonmark is a general feat which isn't in any other category. how do you get it as a bonus feat? to say nothing of the fact that it's the third in a chain, so you can't get it from one feat.

[Cosi]

greater aberrant dragonmark is a general feat which isn't in any other category. how do you get it as a bonus feat? to say nothing of the fact that it's the third in a chain, so you can't get it from one feat.

Some people are talking about a proposal where the Fighter gets unrestricted bonus feats. Though technically the post he was replying to was just talking about feats, not Fighter bonus feats.

[Venger]

Some people are talking about a proposal where the Fighter gets unrestricted bonus feats. Though technically the post he was replying to was just talking about feats, not Fighter bonus feats.

Are they making up new feats, or just giving fighters access to extant feats? If the latter, then you need to sink 3 feats into the aberrant dragonmark line for slay living 1/day, keyed off the fighter's totally awesome charisma score.

[Cosi]

Are they making up new feats, or just giving fighters access to extant feats? If the latter, then you need to sink 3 feats into the aberrant dragonmark line for slay living 1/day, keyed off the fighter's totally awesome charisma score.

I was not claiming it was a good idea, or that doing so would be mechanically effective. Just that under the proposal in question, you could in fact get slay living from feats.

[SirNibbles]

Fighters get prepared Arcane spellcasting (Int to DC/max spell level, Con to Bonus spells per day) with progression equal to a Paladin's (CL = 1/2 Fighter Level).

https://i.imgur.com/jsLSOjw.png

Fighter's Study: Choose one of the following bonuses at 3rd, 6th, 9th, and 12th levels.
-Your BAB is treated as being 3 higher than normal for the purpose of meeting any feat or prerequisites and 1 higher than normal for the purpose of meeting Prestige Class prerequisites.
-All of your ability scores are treated as being 2 higher than normal for the purpose of meeting any feat prerequisites.
-All of your skills are treated as being 4 higher than normal for the purpose of meeting any feat prerequisites and 2 higher than normal for the purpose of meeting Prestige Class prerequisites.
-You count as up to one size smaller or larger than you actually are for the purpose of meeting feat prerequisites.
-Any feat that grants you a bonus to weapon attack or damage grants an additional +1, plus an extra 1 for every 5 fighter levels you have.
-You count as any creature of the same type and subtype as you for the purpose of meeting feat requirements.
-Your count as being of within one step of your actual alignment for the purpose of meeting feat and Prestige Class requirements.

You cannot select the same ability more than once.

Combat Healing (Ex): At 7th level, a Fighter gains the ability to heal his wounds an amount equal to the result of a Heal check. He can use this ability a number of times per encounter equal to his Constitution modifier. Using this ability requires a standard action.

Skill points: 4 + Int skill points per level
Class skills: Add Balance, Diplomacy, Heal, and Use Magic Device to the Fighter's class skills

[Venger]

Fighters get prepared Arcane spellcasting (Int to DC/max spell level, Con to Bonus spells per day) with progression equal to a Paladin's (CL = 1/2 Fighter Level).

https://i.imgur.com/jsLSOjw.png

Fighter's Study: Choose one of the following bonuses at 6th, 9th, and 12th levels.
-Your BAB is treated as being 3 higher than normal for the purpose of meeting any feat prerequisites.
-All of your ability scores are treated as being 2 higher than normal for the purpose of meeting any feat prerequisites.
-All of your skills are treated as being 4 higher than normal for the purpose of meeting any feat prerequisites.

Combat Healing (Ex): At 7th level, a Fighter gains the ability to heal his wounds an amount equal to the result of a Heal check. He can use this ability a number of times per encounter equal to his Constitution modifier. Using this ability requires a standard action.

Skill points: 4 + Int skill points per level
Class skills: Add Balance, Diplomacy, Heal, and Use Magic Device to the Fighter's class skills

What list does he pull spells from?

Can you pick a fighter's study ability more than once, or do you have to work your way through all three of them?

[Red Fel]

greater aberrant dragonmark is a general feat which isn't in any other category. how do you get it as a bonus feat? to say nothing of the fact that it's the third in a chain, so you can't get it from one feat.

And again, it comes back to the point that if your way to make a Fighter better is to give him spells or powers, you're not really making a Fighter better - you're making a gish, a PsiWar or ToB class. Which is where you could just as easily start.

[Cosi]

And again, it comes back to the point that if your way to make a Fighter better is to give him spells or powers, you're not really making a Fighter better - you're making a gish, a PsiWar or ToB class. Which is where you could just as easily start.

If the Fighter is defined as not having special abilities, I'm not sure how you go about making him good. If "give the class abilities on par with shadow jaunt or awaken or finger of death" makes it fundamentally not a Fighter, I don't see how you can make something that is both competitive at high levels and a Fighter.

For what it's worth, I agree with this assessment and think the solution is to realize that "Fighter" is simply not a high level concept. When you can fight an army of angels, "dude with a sword" doesn't really cut it anymore as a concept.

[Venger]

And again, it comes back to the point that if your way to make a Fighter better is to give him spells or powers, you're not really making a Fighter better - you're making a gish, a PsiWar or ToB class. Which is where you could just as easily start.

I know that. Nifft was the one proposing fighters being fixed by sinking 3 feats into a 1/day slay living ability keyed off their cha, not me.

[Dr_Dinosaur]

If the Fighter is defined as not having special abilities, I'm not sure how you go about making him good. If "give the class abilities on par with shadow jaunt or awaken or finger of death" makes it fundamentally not a Fighter, I don't see how you can make something that is both competitive at high levels and a Fighter.

For what it's worth, I agree with this assessment and think the solution is to realize that "Fighter" is simply not a high level concept. When you can fight an army of angels, "dude with a sword" doesn't really cut it anymore as a concept.

Yeah, defenders keep saying things like “the Fighter is one of the peasants! He’s the everyman!” and all that means is he’s an NPC that becomes irrelevant as soon as the real fights start unless you jump through hoops to keep him around for a couple of levels before becoming irrelevant.

[emeraldstreak]

Yeah, defenders keep saying things like “the Fighter is one of the peasants! He’s the everyman!” and all that means is he’s an NPC that becomes irrelevant as soon as the real fights start unless you jump through hoops to keep him around for a couple of levels before becoming irrelevant.

Not irrelevant, though. As far as the system is concerned, any party of 4 that curbstomps level-appropriate encounters is relevant. Since four properly-optimized Fighters can do that, Fighter is good enough for DnD 3.5, even if very, very subpar to other classes.

[SirNibbles]

What list does he pull spells from?

Can you pick a fighter's study ability more than once, or do you have to work your way through all three of them?

1. I don't know. It'd probably be a custom-made fighter spell list or the Fighter would be able to pick a number of schools or spells from the Sorcerer/Wizard spell list.

2. You can only pick an ability once. Ideally there'd be more than 3 abilities but that's all I could come up with at the time.

Some more possible options:
-Count as up to one size smaller or larger for meeting feat prerequisites.
-Any feat that grants a bonus to weapon attack or damage grants an additional +1. At 9th level this becomes +2, and at 12th level it becomes +3. For example, Weapon Focus would give +4 to a 12th level Fighter instead of +1. (It's still trash, but if you have a ton of small +1 or +2 feats becoming +4 or +5, it could potentially not suck).
-Count as any creature of the same type and subtype as you for the purpose of meeting feat requirements

[Cosi]

Not irrelevant, though. As far as the system is concerned, any party of 4 that curbstomps level-appropriate encounters is relevant. Since four properly-optimized Fighters can do that, Fighter is good enough for DnD 3.5, even if very, very subpar to other classes.

Yes, if you don't constrain optimization, Fighters can win combat encounters. So can Commoners and Monks. Reasonable people do not understand this as those classes being relevant or good. If you want to get good data out of a test, that test shouldn't be expected to pass under all conditions. To get a real answer about the value of the Fighter, you need to run something like a SGT where he is expected to sometimes lose and not to be optimized to the limit of the system.

Of course, all this totally ignores the Fighter's absolute inability to match the utility of spells.

[emeraldstreak]

Yes, if you don't constrain optimization, Fighters can win combat encounters. So can Commoners and Monks. Reasonable people do not understand this as those classes being relevant or good. If you want to get good data out of a test, that test shouldn't be expected to pass under all conditions. To get a real answer about the value of the Fighter, you need to run something like a SGT where he is expected to sometimes lose and not to be optimized to the limit of the system.

And you must be one of them "reasonable people", then?

[darkdragoon]

The fighter bonus feat list is largely prerequisite filler. Adding more slots is not 1:1. Many don't have synergy with each other. Others are simple parallelism, +1 attack for sporks and rubber chicken.

For the "I need this one thing for a bit" UMDing a wand of Heroics is probably much better. For moderately better skills Thug is passable. Heck for just plain hit point damage you'll probably get more out of Dungeoncrasher than most tree bloat.

[Nifft]

You can get slay living from a bonus feat, but not a Fighter bonus feat.


greater aberrant dragonmark is a general feat which isn't in any other category. how do you get it as a bonus feat? You take enough levels in Child of Khyber, duh.

Taking levels in Fighter won't get you things this nice.


I know that. Nifft was the one proposing fighters being fixed by sinking 3 feats into a 1/day slay living ability keyed off their cha, not me.

Actually NOPE, nobody named Nifft is making that argument.

Nifft is making the point that bonus feats can grant nice things, and this example is specifically about non-Fighters, since the prestige class Child of Khyber is entirely different from the base class Fighter.

The More You Know!


Yeah, defenders keep saying things like “the Fighter is one of the peasants! He’s the everyman!” and all that means is he’s an NPC that becomes irrelevant as soon as the real fights start unless you jump through hoops to keep him around for a couple of levels before becoming irrelevant.

I like how FATE and TriStat (Buffy) handle "everyman" PCs: the character gets fewer nice things, but in trade the player gets more narrative control.

Overall the intention was that every player felt (roughly) equal in terms of protagonist status -- every player had significant control over the outcome of the challenges, some of which was related to character powers, some of which was not.

[Lans]

If the Fighter is defined as not having special abilities, I'm not sure how you go about making him good. If "give the class abilities on par with shadow jaunt or awaken or finger of death" makes it fundamentally not a Fighter, I don't see how you can make something that is both competitive at high levels and a Fighter.

For what it's worth, I agree with this assessment and think the solution is to realize that "Fighter" is simply not a high level concept. When you can fight an army of angels, "dude with a sword" doesn't really cut it anymore as a concept.


And again, it comes back to the point that if your way to make a Fighter better is to give him spells or powers, you're not really making a Fighter better - you're making a gish, a PsiWar or ToB class. Which is where you could just as easily start.


It depends on how we define special abilities, if any dirt farmer can get slay living or teleporting 1/day by spending 3 feats, the fighter getting that ability really isn't special. Not that finger of death is super special, its basically the same as pumping the enemy full of arrows. Shadow jaunt is a second level manuever and could be grabbed with a feat. Awaken is something I have never even thought about using.



Sure. It still seems bad though. There just aren't feats on par with finger of death out there for the taking.
That depends on how much you value finger of death, expecially when its a limited number of times per day, and only 1/round. Also, if the bar is low tier 3, finger of death is less of an issue. I'm not sure on any class that has access to it that isn't at least high tier 3. Does warmage have access to it?Maybe Binder or Shadowcaster?

Other class features are easier to compare, sneak attack is 35 damage, So craven+assassins stance+8 other points of damage. Basically 6ish feats.

rage is +2/3/2/2/2/-2to hit, damage, fortitude save, will save, 'temporary' hp level and ac. Also basically 6ish feats.

Are they making up new feats, or just giving fighters access to extant feats? If the latter, then you need to sink 3 feats into the aberrant dragonmark line for slay living 1/day, keyed off the fighter's totally awesome charisma score.

Sinking 3 feats into something for my fightert fix is like a half of level worth of feats on average.

[Cosi]

Shadow jaunt is a second level manuever and could be grabbed with a feat. Awaken is something I have never even thought about using.

I mean shadow walk -- the one that actually takes you to the Plane of Shadow. awaken is pretty useful utility, it's just that because most classes don't do anything outside combat, non-combat options end up undervalued.

[Dr_Dinosaur]

Not irrelevant, though. As far as the system is concerned, any party of 4 that curbstomps level-appropriate encounters is relevant. Since four properly-optimized Fighters can do that, Fighter is good enough for DnD 3.5, even if very, very subpar to other classes.

How do four fighters beat a balor? Because I seem to recall an entire thread a while back that proved fighters couldn’t beat a balor without enlisting a real class

[Lans]

I mean shadow walk -- the one that actually takes you to the Plane of Shadow. awaken is pretty useful utility, it's just that because most classes don't do anything outside combat, non-combat options end up undervalued.

Well this thread is in the low tier 3, so the only class that has shadow walk is shadowcaster, so being excellent in combat kind of makes up for the lack of utility.


How do four fighters beat a balor? Because I seem to recall an entire thread a while back that proved fighters couldn’t beat a balor without enlisting a real class

That thread had 1 core only fighter and the result was one side saying he could and the other side saying he could n't. Presumably 4 non core fighters do a little better.

[Troacctid]

If the Fighter is defined as not having special abilities, I'm not sure how you go about making him good. If "give the class abilities on par with shadow jaunt or awaken or finger of death" makes it fundamentally not a Fighter, I don't see how you can make something that is both competitive at high levels and a Fighter.
Other editions have done it just fine. In 5e, Fighter is very good in its niche and remains relevant through all 20 levels; in 4e, Fighter is actually just one of the strongest classes in the game. Just because the 3e version is atrociously designed doesn't mean the core concept is unworkable.

[Arbane]

And again, it comes back to the point that if your way to make a Fighter better is to give him spells or powers, you're not really making a Fighter better - you're making a gish, a PsiWar or ToB class. Which is where you could just as easily start.

Unfortunately, while "beat the HP out of things" is an ability that remains useful at all levels, every class can do it (albeit not as well), and it starts looking pretty boring compared to things like 'stop time', 'create pocket universe', or 'ask god a few questions'.


Yeah, defenders keep saying things like “the Fighter is one of the peasants! He’s the everyman!” and all that means is he’s an NPC that becomes irrelevant as soon as the real fights start unless you jump through hoops to keep him around for a couple of levels before becoming irrelevant.

Yep. I've quoted this guy's rant before because it does a pretty good job of summing up the problem, even if i'm not sure about his solutions:



It's phrased in all kinds of different ways. Fighters shouldn't be too "anime". Or maybe Fighters should be more Conanesque. Or whatever. But it's actually really common that people think of a "Fighter" and they think of some fictional character who is like 4th level. Mad Martigan from Willow, Conan from Conan, Gimli from LotR, or whatever. That's their concept of a Fighter, and they don't want their character to do anything that character does not do.

Where this gets problematic is when it bumps right next to their next demand, that the party is hitting 5th level and they still want to be limited to a benchmark that is essentially 4th level. And while at that point you can in fact keep things kind of hobbling along with the same character with bigger numbers, after a few levels of that it becomes untenable. When the player is asking for their character to be archetypically identical to a 4th level concept and asking to be mechanically balanced with 9th level casters, you're up **** Creek.

That was the horrible revelation that was caused by the Tome Fighter. The harsh reality is that Mad Martigan is a 4th level character and the people who hold up Mad Martigan as the example are seriously not saying that they want higher level abilities that happen to be skinned as guts and luck, they are literally saying that they want to be quintessentially 4th level characters while being balanced with 9th level characters. It's an actually and actively contradictory thought pattern and there is no solution.

Contrariwise, the Tome Monk get accepted with hardly a blip. Some people quibble about it being overpowered. Some people even helpfully informed us that it was more powerful than a Core Monk. But people didn't tell us that any of it was out of theme. Because the Monk theme is one which can in fact continue growing until it's Goku. Similarly, "Wizard" is a character concept that just keeps growing forever. Your summoner summons electric rat, and then he summons a storm crow, and then he's summoning a thunder dragon. No one bats an eye at this ****.

But Fighter players seriously do get annoyed and even offended when their character can beat up an elephant with their bare hands. Also they get annoyed and offended when they notice that the other characters are more powerful than they are. It really is cognitive dissonance, and the solution is to force people to abandon the Fighter concept after a few levels. Mandatory PrCs is the only way to get people to accept their own character having level appropriate abilities at high level.


If the Fighter is defined as not having special abilities, I'm not sure how you go about making him good. If "give the class abilities on par with shadow jaunt or awaken or finger of death" makes it fundamentally not a Fighter, I don't see how you can make something that is both competitive at high levels and a Fighter.


It's utterly bizarre that people are using Finger of Death as an example of something Fighters Cannot Do, because I can think of something historically accurate with a very similar effect to that spell: STABBING PEOPLE.

[Pleh]

Unfortunately, while "beat the HP out of things" is an ability that remains useful at all levels, every class can do it (albeit not as well), and it starts looking pretty boring compared to things like 'stop time', 'create pocket universe', or 'ask god a few questions'.

Furthermore, some classes do it better just by adding magic (gish) or without having to do any of their own stabbing (druids can let their animal companions do the fighter's whole shtick while they hang back and cast spells, if they want).


It's utterly bizarre that people are using Finger of Death as an example of something Fighters Cannot Do, because I can think of something historically accurate with a very similar effect to that spell: STABBING PEOPLE.

Well, sort of. I don't recall what kind of weapon deals 3d6 damage (with a bonus that scales with level, rather than with ability modifier), but stabbing people doesn't trigger save or die without massive damage, which a weapon dealing 3d6 could never manage without damage multipliers.

So the spell get to apply SoD every time it's used, while our hypothetical 3d6 weapon (is it an oversized weapon?) probably only gets it about 5% of the time.

[Ignimortis]

while our hypothetical 3d6 weapon (is it an oversized weapon?) probably only gets it about 5% of the time.

It's either a large greatsword or a fullblade for 3.5. Either way, it's way too anime for fighters, because that's like a Buster Sword or a Dragonslayer.

[Cosi]

Other editions have done it just fine. In 5e, Fighter is very good in its niche and remains relevant through all 20 levels; in 4e, Fighter is actually just one of the strongest classes in the game. Just because the 3e version is atrociously designed doesn't mean the core concept is unworkable.

4e has no abilities that aren't hit point damage. 5e doesn't scale past the power range of a 10th level 3e character. Neither of those games make the Fighter good in situations where he wasn't, they just exclude those situations. Unless you think a 4e or 5e character is competitive with a high level 3e caster?


It's utterly bizarre that people are using Finger of Death as an example of something Fighters Cannot Do, because I can think of something historically accurate with a very similar effect to that spell: STABBING PEOPLE.

Well, I did originally give that as an example on the limits of what you can get from a feat, not the power level of the Fighter as a whole. But yes, Fighters are more competent in combat.

[Pleh]

4e has no abilities that aren't hit point damage. 5e doesn't scale past the power range of a 10th level 3e character. Neither of those games make the Fighter good in situations where he wasn't, they just exclude those situations. Unless you think a 4e or 5e character is competitive with a high level 3e caster?

To be fair, in a thread about fighter fixes involving power disparity, nerfing the casters is a valid option, even if it isn't the most eloquent.

[Morty]

The 4e Fighter differs from the 3e/5e Fighter in one crucial aspect. It has a job beyond "generic weapon monkey". It's a Martial Defender and gets abilities accordingly. It's still plagued by many of the problems inherent in D&D's treatment of martial characters, that alone makes for a lot of difference.

[darkdragoon]

And the alternative has throwing rocks (IT WAS A BIG ROCK! as Killer Croc would say) and 5 DR as 16+ BAB worthy abilities.

[Cosi]

To be fair, in a thread about fighter fixes involving power disparity, nerfing the casters is a valid option, even if it isn't the most eloquent.

I think "nerf casters" is not a Fighter fix. It's a caster fix, and while you can argue that it might be necessary (and I don't entirely disagree, even if I have much less of a problem than many posters here), I don't think anything that doesn't change the Fighter can be said to be fixing it.

[Troacctid]

4e has no abilities that aren't hit point damage. 5e doesn't scale past the power range of a 10th level 3e character. Neither of those games make the Fighter good in situations where he wasn't, they just exclude those situations. Unless you think a 4e or 5e character is competitive with a high level 3e caster?
I'm pretty sure 4e Fighter has non-combat abilities. And both of them are more than competitive with casters in their respective editions. They would easily compete with ToB classes in this edition.

[Pleh]

I think "nerf casters" is not a Fighter fix. It's a caster fix, and while you can argue that it might be necessary (and I don't entirely disagree, even if I have much less of a problem than many posters here), I don't think anything that doesn't change the Fighter can be said to be fixing it.

Name of the thread is, "make the fighter equal." Fixing on either side of the equation is a valid answer. Not meaning to suggest it a preferable solution, merely equally satisfies the objective.

Fixing casters through gentleman's agreement is actually the most common solution to fighter problems

[Morty]

"Buff fighters" and "nerf casters" are two short phrases that reflect the actual problem, which is reconciling different, sometimes entirely incompatible, ideas, levels of play, assumptions and genre conventions that different classes and parts of rules use.

[Arbane]

Well, sort of. I don't recall what kind of weapon deals 3d6 damage (with a bonus that scales with level, rather than with ability modifier), but stabbing people doesn't trigger save or die without massive damage, which a weapon dealing 3d6 could never manage without damage multipliers.

So the spell get to apply SoD every time it's used, while our hypothetical 3d6 weapon (is it an oversized weapon?) probably only gets it about 5% of the time.

Let me try rephrasing this: In real life, stabbing people can kill them instantly. In D&D, the Fighter has to hack their way through a protective layer of Hit Points first. Spells generally ignore hit point totals, and have (at most) one saving throw to avoid instant-loss because Magic.
So high-level fighters should have Save-or-Die attacks.

Here's another idea I rather liked:

But even if you do want realism, there's a really easy solution to that: magic is unrealistic, so it shouldn't work on high-level fighters. They can shrug off any spell, and maybe magic even stops working near them if they want it to. That would seriously tip the balance to the other side, and I'm only arguing for it in order to shove the realism argument down the throats of the spellcasters.
:smallbiggrin: I don't RECOMMEND it, but I LIKE it.

[Nifft]

Here's another idea I rather liked:

But even if you do want realism, there's a really easy solution to that: magic is unrealistic, so it shouldn't work on high-level fighters. They can shrug off any spell, and maybe magic even stops working near them if they want it to. That would seriously tip the balance to the other side, and I'm only arguing for it in order to shove the realism argument down the throats of the spellcasters.


:smallbiggrin: I don't RECOMMEND it, but I LIKE it.

Interestingly, in 1e the Fighter had the best saving throw progression.

Magic worked against a fighting-man less often than it did against a dress-wearing elf.

Sorry, V. :vaarsuvius:

[Arbane]

Interestingly, in 1e the Fighter had the best saving throw progression.

Magic worked against a fighting-man less often than it did against a dress-wearing elf.

Sorry, V. :vaarsuvius:

Yep. Not sure why Fighters got such lousy saves in 3rd ed.

I vaguely remember an old RPG called DragonQuest, which assumed most PCs would know some sort of magic (and it had quite a few types). But it had a rule hidden away in a subclause that a character who didn't have any magic abilities got a hefty bonus on their magic-resistance rolls. Something like that might make a good ability for fighters.

[torrasque666]

Yep. Not sure why Fighters got such lousy saves in 3rd ed.

I vaguely remember an old RPG called DragonQuest, which assumed most PCs would know some sort of magic (and it had quite a few types). But it had a rule hidden away in a subclause that a character who didn't have any magic abilities got a hefty bonus on their magic-resistance rolls. Something like that might make a good ability for fighters.
Maybe a scaling "magic miss chance" where magic just might not effect them if they don't want it. Similar to how SR can be lowered if the creature so chooses, this ability can be temporarily negated to allow their allies to buff them. Like a 5% chance per level (I realize that this hits 100% at 20th but lets be real, if he's survived until that point he deserves to be able to just say No to magic.) that would apply towards all forms of magic. Spells, SLAs, Supernatural Abilities. Not that his presences would negate magic, so he doesn't cancel an illusion just by walking into it, but that it simply ignores him. If the caster fails on their d100 to effect him, the Fighter would see that room that looks grand and opulent is actually a decrepit cave with the skeletons of previous adventurers lining the walls. His companions wouldn't necessarily see through it though. The fireball that nukes him and his party? The flames don't seem to harm him while the rogue is roasting in his leathers.

No matter what, a fighter has a 5% chance to wiff on his main shtick. Part of his abilities should be forcing that 5% onto the foot of those who normally don't have to deal with it. And before anyone mentions "but then casters would just prepare self buffs and long-term spells instead of instantaneous, combat ones" to which I say that a chance to be ignored by magic is a chance to be ignored by all magic. The summoned monster? Phases right through him. The called one too, since it was transported to the plane by magic. Divination? Might not be detected. A simulacrum/ice assassin? Ignored.

That should be the fighters shtick. He doesn't get fancy powers because he is so​ mundane that he negates the supernatural in its entirety.

[Cosi]

"Make the Fighter immune to magic" is a bad plan. It's boring in combat, and it doesn't fix the Fighter's lack of out of combat abilities. A combat paradigm where high level characters don't use their abilities because their enemies are immune to them is uninteresting. Being immune to finger of death doesn't make you any more able to infiltrate an extraplanar fortress.

[Venger]

"Make the Fighter immune to magic" is a bad plan. It's boring in combat, and it doesn't fix the Fighter's lack of out of combat abilities. A combat paradigm where high level characters don't use their abilities because their enemies are immune to them is uninteresting. Being immune to finger of death doesn't make you any more able to infiltrate an extraplanar fortress.

Or in-combat options for that matter. There's a reason people aren't clamoring over themselves to play forsakers and witch slayers.

[Eldariel]

Maybe a scaling "magic miss chance" where magic just might not effect them if they don't want it. Similar to how SR can be lowered if the creature so chooses, this ability can be temporarily negated to allow their allies to buff them. Like a 5% chance per level (I realize that this hits 100% at 20th but lets be real, if he's survived until that point he deserves to be able to just say No to magic.) that would apply towards all forms of magic. Spells, SLAs, Supernatural Abilities. Not that his presences would negate magic, so he doesn't cancel an illusion just by walking into it, but that it simply ignores him. If the caster fails on their d100 to effect him, the Fighter would see that room that looks grand and opulent is actually a decrepit cave with the skeletons of previous adventurers lining the walls. His companions wouldn't necessarily see through it though. The fireball that nukes him and his party? The flames don't seem to harm him while the rogue is roasting in his leathers.

No matter what, a fighter has a 5% chance to wiff on his main shtick. Part of his abilities should be forcing that 5% onto the foot of those who normally don't have to deal with it. And before anyone mentions "but then casters would just prepare self buffs and long-term spells instead of instantaneous, combat ones" to which I say that a chance to be ignored by magic is a chance to be ignored by all magic. The summoned monster? Phases right through him. The called one too, since it was transported to the plane by magic. Divination? Might not be detected. A simulacrum/ice assassin? Ignored.

That should be the fighters shtick. He doesn't get fancy powers because he is so​ mundane that he negates the supernatural in its entirety.

Making a character immune to non-magical results of magic would cause all sorts of problems. Say, the world was afflicted by a magical cataclysm long ago; does the Fighter have a 5% chance of walking in a reality where said cataclysm didn't occur? Or someone time travelling and killing someone in the past - would the Fighter just end up in a different timeline? In general, I don't think it's feasible for a Fighter to ignore things which explicitly are non-magical. Summons are fine but called monsters? That's like saying if an outsider Plane Shifts or Teleports once it suddenly can't influence the Fighter. Which opens up all sorts of questions not to mention being a bookkeeping nightmare.

But yeah, the mundane - tech counterforce angle has been the subject of many a game and story (Arcanum of course comes up first in my mind), often in steampunkish fashion. Magic doesn't work in places where tech is strong and the corollary. This would require altering some of the basic parameters of D&D though, and ultimately it still wouldn't give Fighter much in terms of versatility, just resilience.


Don't get me wrong, I fully agree that a level 20 Fighter should be nigh' immune to magic. In AD&D 2e Player's Editions that was an option (but it required giving up your Stronghold which blew) - you could get like 90% magic resistance which means that before getting hit by Lower Resistance a bunch of times, all magic no matter the caster level simply fails 90% of the time. And said Fighter also had godlike saves (god, fix those 3.5 saves first if you wanna change something). Warriors being unmovable, untouchable juggernauts is a fine angle to play up - it doesn't produce balance but it gives them a niche. 5% would be way too little though; level 20 should look at 100% Magic Immunity and before then you should have scaling Spell Resistance of sorts (and anti-SR effects would need to be nerfed).

I like the approach overall combined with others. This is also why I advocate double HP from Con for warriors, so they actually have some durability to speak of, and AC based on BAB and good saves. That's the basics; get the chassis right and they actually aren't completely hopeless and dependent on magic. Add to that mette-like abilities and some active magic dodge/reflection and extra actions and mobility over the 20' and the ability to control an area and you have a Fighter that at least does what it advertises. Then just a stronghold and it's good to look.

[Morty]

Slapping magic immunity on fighters is a quick patch-job at best. So is arbitrarily granting them a stronghold with followers whether they like it or not. If we want to fix the deep incongruity with D&D's classes and levels, we need to move forwards, not backwards.

[Ignimortis]

My personal fix for this consists of the following:
1) Pure Fighter is an NPC class, when you need mooks that are slightly more elite than trash-tier warriors. They get fighter bonus feats every level, because why not.
2) PCs can take Warblade if they don't mind the "unique hero" status, or gestalt fighter with rogue, paladin, marshal or scout. This gives them either some more utility and actual "army leader" capabilities, or good skills and skillpoints plus great damage.

To be fair, the second option probably would soft-break things if the optimization level ever went above low, since an ubercharger with scout goodies would be quite good. Not as good as an intelligently-played wizard, but still really good.

[Lans]

Name of the thread is, "make the fighter equal." Fixing on either side of the equation is a valid answer. Not meaning to suggest it a preferable solution, merely equally satisfies the objective.

Fixing casters through gentleman's agreement is actually the most common solution to fighter problems

The other part of the thread is equal to psionic warrior/swordsage, so critisisms that a fighter can't do planar traval seem a little out of placed.


Interestingly, in 1e the Fighter had the best saving throw progression.

Magic worked against a fighting-man less often than it did against a dress-wearing elf.

:

Didn't he start out with the worse saves? Maybe they looked at where he was at level 1 and went twith that.

[Arbane]

Didn't he start out with the worse saves? Maybe they looked at where he was at level 1 and went twith that.

Let me bust out my old 1st ed DMG:

Level 1 Fighter has saves of 14, 15, 16, 17, 17. (Low is better, since you're trying to roll this number or higher.)
Level 1 Magic User has saves of 14, 13, 11, 15, 12.
So yeah, Fighters have bad saves at level 1. Sheesh.
Level 8 Fighter has saves of 10, 11, 12, 12, 13.
Level 8 M-U has saves of 13, 11, 9, 13, 10.
M-U's still better than the Fighter at some things.
Level 16 Fighter: 4, 5, 6, 4, 7
Level 16 M-U: 10, 7, 5, 9, 6. At last the Fighter has pulled ahead somewhat!
(16 is several levels HIGHER than the suggested level to go to the Abyss and kill Lolth.)

So, it looks to me like AD&D Fighters' saves have been overstated, they only start becoming notably better at AD&D's version of Epic Levels.

That said, Fighters in 3.X STILL need better saves.

[Karl Aegis]

Psychic Warriors can travel the planes, fly, transform and teleport. They can get extra actions and heal themselves if they want to. They're good like that.

[DMVerdandi]

I think that having some sort of anti magic just for the merit of being a "fighter" without changing the fighter's role and class features outside of it is silly and flawed.

Am I cool with a TOB style boost/counter/stance that lol-nopes a single spell(Or rather grants SR or a bonus to will saves)? Sure, why not, Heck yes. But the resource management of TOB is really good, and has a structure that is modular, consistent and doesn't require too much buy in, but at the same time should it just be something that every fighter is pre-made with just by virtue of being the sword wielder? Nein.


Nothing about fighter screams "and he has a permanent anti magic field", and it's kind of a retroactive statement that is conscious of magic in the first place. And why would the fighter who in 3.5's role is the mundane technique guy, be any better at it than any other class that doesn't natively have magic.



Now, again, I think the role and mechanics of the fighter SHOULD be changed, and at face value, Warblade IS a proper replacement for it, but as far as making it better, that isn't the alley I would go down.




One full revision of the mechanics that I have always thought was a good idea, was having a 7th ability score. If you make something like a "Soul", ability score, or whatever you want to name it to represent one's paranormal power, you can completely dump it if you want to be mundane, or you can put ranks into it if you want to use some sort of supernatural stat.
Make "soul", the primary casting stat for every caster, and then have their secondary stat be the normal one, and they get bonus spells and such from THAT.

So Wizard for example must have Soul/INT score =17 to cast level 7 spells, and gets bonus spells from INT, and so on for all the other classes.

And then you can have Spell resistance be a skill, and then you can buy the skill, and have a non-magical character take ranks, with each rank Giving SR + Ability score bonus.


Now it's something everyone can learn, and it's logical, and concrete.




But just making it a random fighter class feature is a terrible design idea.