PDA

View Full Version : [3.5e] A player insists on making a fighter... (opinions)



Uin
2008-08-27, 07:15 AM
I'm in the process of planning a 3.5e Eberron game and an interesting situation appears to be developing. I posted the character generation guidelines for any players that wanted to join which look like (quoted):

Races available - PHB + Eberron Races (Changelings, Kalashter, Shifter, Warforged).
Classes available - PHB + Eberron (Artificer) + Tome of Battle + Other stuff you run by me and have the kit for (Spellthieves, Bucklers of Swash, Warlocks...)*
Equipment - 3/4 Max starting gold eg. Barbarian 150gp, any 1 item can be made masterwork free of charge.
Abilities - 32 point buy, its like 4d6 drop lowest without the insanity (example 10 12 12 14 14 16).
*I don't have the completes myself but certainly know whats in them.

Now the first person to reply said they'd make a fighter and I know the player, he will want to use mostly PHB stuff. This might pose a problem if the rest of the party make an Artificer, Wizard, Cleric, and a Warblade. We're only planning just now, but what do you do if you have a player that insists on making something a bit suboptimal when you've opened the gates to allow everyone to make great characters?

Neon Knight
2008-08-27, 07:19 AM
Let him do it. Who knows, your other players might not optimize their characters and everything will be alright. He might be sub-optimal and honestly not care, in which case its a non-issue.

You should probably tell him about your concerns and make sure he's fine with whatever state of affairs come about.

Although encouraging him to look beyond the PHB for material couldn't hurt. I mean "encourage" as politely suggest, and don't be too insistent.

Dhavaer
2008-08-27, 07:19 AM
What kind of Fighter? They can do okay as archers or uberchargers, but a two-weapon fighter will go poorly after the first few levels.

CASTLEMIKE
2008-08-27, 07:19 AM
What level? Only a single wizard - 11 in Sharn.

Saph
2008-08-27, 07:50 AM
If you're starting at level 1, a PHB Fighter is actually a pretty good class. In this case, don't worry about it. He can multiclass out after 2 levels if he's worried about optimisation, and he'll do fine.

Single-class Fighters only start to look underpowered after level 4, and even then multiclassing into something like Warblade solves most of the problems.

Finally, it might be the case that the player just isn't interested in rules mastery and character power. In which case, you should just let him be. Not everyone wants to spend hours tweaking their character's numbers. If the more optimise-happy players are nice, they'll steer him towards good choices and stop him from being useless.

- Saph

Uin
2008-08-27, 08:06 AM
Thanks for your replies. It will be a level 1 start, so I suppose it won't matter in the short term.* When he sees the Artificer piloting his airship while firing twined empowered acidic death from above he may branch out a little. I do allow a bit of retraining at certain points in a characters life so hopefully he'll take up the offer.


* I'd still rather play the warblade, haha. Which is more interesting.
Fighter - I hit it
Warblade - I enter X Stance and hit it with one of my A to C Maneuvers... or hit it.

xPANCAKEx
2008-08-27, 08:24 AM
Maybe he takes joy in playing a meatshield?

Don't select it entirely on whos got the most asskicking characters of the bunch (unless you're planning an OTT hack n zap campaign), but also consider the enthusiasm they bring to the group. Enthusiasm is what keeps PBP alive. Someone can have a great set of stats, but if they don't seem that bothered about the game/the fluff of the character they will get bored every time they're not killing something

BizzaroStormy
2008-08-27, 08:49 AM
Don't be talkin bad bout mah fighters. Before ToB, they were a very versatile non-caster class due primarily to their excess of feats. If you're worried about him becoming underpowered, let him become one of these (http://http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=4798077&posted=1#post4798077) once he hits 6th level.

WickerNipple
2008-08-27, 08:53 AM
If I were a player starting a new game and my GM's response was LOLWUT?! to me choosing a fighter... I would probably find a different game.

Person_Man
2008-08-27, 09:18 AM
Halfling Fighter X

Feats: Mounted Combat, Ride by Attack, Spirited Charge, Combat Reflexes, Power Attack, Leadership.

1st level: You get Mounted Combat and Ride by Attack. Buy a riding dog (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/dogRiding.htm), or just buy cheap untrained dogs and use Handle Animal (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/skills/handleAnimal.htm) to train them yourself to act as mounts, fight, track, guard, etc. (Takes three weeks per dog, but a reasonable DM will allow you to have a small pack as pets that you've trained yourself before adventuring). You should learn the Handle Animal rules, because at low levels there's nothing stopping you from using your dogs (or whatever) to fight alongside you. (At higher level, the threat of Fireballs and other area of effect spells make them pointless).

Use a lance from the back of your mount. When you charge you deal double damage, and your Ride by Attack and the fact that a lance is a reach weapon will allow you to keep your distance from enemies and get an AoO most rounds. Use it two handed if you want more damage. Pull out your tower shield (fighters get it as a bonus feat, check their "Weapon and Armor Proficiency" listing in the SRD) if you need high AC or concealment from an ambush.

2nd level: You get Spirited Charge and a nice damage output bump.

3rd level: Pick up Combat Reflexes. Now you can make AoO when flat footed, and you'll get more of them.

4th level: You get Power Attack. Now you should always be using your lance two handed, and have an animated shield if necessary. You deal 3(d6 + [Str*1.5] + 8 + magic), or around 50 damage on a charge, enough to kill any ECL appropriate enemy, and enough for a massive damage check against those it doesn't kill.

5th level: Dead level. I suggest you give the player the Zhentarim Soldier (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/we/20060327a) add on, which fixes this. The 9th level power ability to Demoralize as a Swift Action can be ridiculously useful with the right combo. But its not necessary if you want to be strictly core only for whatever reason.

6th level: You now qualify for Leadership. Give the him something very cool with special powers and movement, like a Blink Dog or Dragon or whatnot.

There you go. A fun and playable core only Fighter build.

Sstoopidtallkid
2008-08-27, 09:20 AM
Why Halfling instead of Gnome?

Yakk
2008-08-27, 09:29 AM
Why Halfling instead of Gnome?

Gnomes are monsters. Rawr.

Person_Man
2008-08-27, 09:29 AM
Why Halfling instead of Gnome?

Halflings get a bonus to Saves, which I prefer over the Gnomes racial abilities. You could use any small race without LA though.

only1doug
2008-08-27, 09:38 AM
Kobold fighter could actually be quite fun (the kobold fighter racial class buys off some of the disadvantages of Kobold starting stats, at the cost of armour proficiencies and specifying the feat choices)

Telonius
2008-08-27, 09:41 AM
If he really wants to tough it out and stay Fighter his whole career, make it worthwhile for him. I'd suggest a few homebrew fixes.

Make the Fighter feats scale. Dodge improves by +1 every five fighter levels, Improved Bull Rush improves to +4 every few levels, Weapon Focus and Specialization upgrade automatically, Cleave upgrades to Greater Cleave at Ftr 10. Fill in as needed. By requiring several levels of fighter to gain the bonuses, it discourages one-level dipping.

You might also want to check out Szatany's Ultimate Fighter (http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=690116) class, as well as some of his other ultimate melee classes on the same page.

Saph
2008-08-27, 09:46 AM
My favoured fix for fighters is just to give them a feat at level 3 and every odd-numbered level thereafter.

It's not as balanced or detailed as the homebrew fixes, but it's fast and easy and if you use books like PHB II and Complete Warrior, it's very easy to find enough good feats.

- Saph

Eldariel
2008-08-27, 10:32 AM
You could offer him the Dungeoncrasher-variant (Dungeonscape). It's a very reasonable way of dealing damage, slamming people to walls (and various obstacles) is fun and it's flavourful to boot. Also, it adds an extra tool to the fighter repertoire, so he's less likely to get bored. Just make sure he's got Power Attack and he should be fine. Then give him a few Tactical Feats (Shock Trooper and Combat Brute work fine, although Elusive Target is nothing to scoff at either), perhaps Combat Reflexes and Improved Trip, Knockback if you feel like making him a bit stronger, the Zhentarim Fighter (right here (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/we/20060327a)) substitution levels along with Cityscape Web Enhancement (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/we/20070228a)-substitution to replace Handle Animal and Ride with Gather Information and Tumble.

He'll make a fine talker with Bluff, Intimidate, Diplomacy and Gather Information and Tumble is an actually useful physical skill. Then Complete Champion ACF to replace an even-leveled feat with Resolute (Immediate Action: Lose half BAB, add to Will-saves) and PHBII ACF "Overpowering Attack" to replace the 16th feat with an ability that greatly enhances any AoOs he takes. Then just toss in Mage Slayer and maybe Pierce Magical Protection and he's set for a solid, versatile Fighter-build that should keep him doing ok and contributing throughout the whole tree while being good at multiple things (out of the normal trees, he can attack, Trip, Bull Rush, Sunder, Charge and deal AoOs all very decently - he can also either raise his AC or damage at the expense of his attack bonus depending on what suits him best, and he's a nimble fasttalker out of combat). Oh yeah, and he's very savvy in a dungeon, having great saves against traps and the like and being an expert at smashing things with Dungeoncrasher and Power Attack combined for Massive Damage. Toss in Robilar's Gambit while at it. Obviously he fights with a two-handed weapon such as Glaive or Guisarme with Armor Spikes to attack adjacent opponents (or a quick Monk-dip for Unarmed Damage and few more feats), or Spiked Chain to cover it all. While you probably can't fit 'em in, allowing him to take Weapon Supremacy at 18 would also be sweet. Melee Weapon Mastery too, possibly, but again, the feats are running short.


EDIT: I tossed together a build here:

1, H, F. Power Attack, Combat Expertise, Improved Trip
2F. Dungeoncrasher
3. Improved Bull Rush
4F. Combat Reflexes
5. Improved Sunder
6, F. Shock Trooper, Dungeoncrasher
8F. Resolute
9. Combat Brute
10F. Martial Study: Foehammer
12, F. Robilar's Gambit, Martial Stance: Thicket of Blades
14F. Mage Slayer
15. Pierce Magical Protection
16F. Overpowering Attack
18, F.
20F.

Three feats are open. Those could be the Combat Form-chain (Combat Focus, Combat Stability and Combat Vigor, probably - Combat Strike is a good finisher too) given 13 Wis (asking a lot though - this one already wants high Str, high Con, some Dex, 13 Int, and probably Charisma for facing), one could try to fit Weapon Focus-chain (with Weapon Supremacy coming at 18, it's 5 feats total, so need to open up 2, such as taking out Mage Slayer or Overpowering Attack - 6th for Melee Weapon Mastery would be nice too), Exotic Weapon Proficiency: Spiked Chain, Deft Opportunist (better AoOs), Leap Attack (better charges), Knockback (mean combo with Dungeoncrasher), Imperious Command (great combo with Zhentarim Soldier sublevels) or some such.

There's Dodge>Mobility>Elusive Target for defenses, Brutal Strike for Power Attack, Brutal Throw>Power Throw for excellent Str-based ranged combat capabilities, Defensive Sweep for more AoOs, Stand Still for better control-abilities against creatures of any size, Blind-Fight>Pierce Magical Concealment to ignore spell-based nonsense, Sidestep to dodge full attacks, Close-Quarters Fighting to avoid big bad grapplers, Shield Specialization>Shield Ward to make your Animated Shield kick ass, Improved Buckler Defense to utilize a Buckler while fighting two-handed, Improved Unarmed Strike>Superior Unarmed Strike to threaten adjacent (add Two-Weapon Fighting line to TWF with unarmed strikes and two-handed, add Snap Kick for an extra unarmed strike and Improved Grapple to...well, Grapple), Improved Initiative to act first, Quick Draw to switch weapons fast (and to avoid the need to walk armed and for iteratives on thrown attacks) and Improved Toughness to take extra hits (HP is your primary defense against evocation and other melee, as well as misc.).


This guy can, among others, crash people to walls, trip people, get AoOs and trip people, break stuff (lots of stuff - wielded and unattended) charge people, hit people really hard (and keep hitting them really hard for the rest of the turn), hit back if hit, fight defensively, fight offensively, move people around, breach peoples' magic, scour the dungeons and talk.

EDIT#2: Source list:
Dungeoncrasher (Alternative Class Feature): Dungeonscape
Shock Trooper (Tactical Feat): Complete Warrior
Resolute (ACF): Complete Champion
Combat Brute (Tactical): Complete Warrior
Martial Study/Martial Stance (Feat): Tome of Battle
Mage Slayer/Pierce Magical Protections (Feat): Complete Arcane
Overpowering Attack (ACF): Player's Handbook II
Robilar's Gambit (Feat): Player's Handbook II
Combat Focus-chain (Feat): Player's Handbook II
Weapon Supremacy/Melee Weapon Mastery (Feats): Player's Handbook II
Deft Opportunist (Feat): Complete Adventurer
Leap Attack (Feat): Complete Adventurer
Knockback (Feat): Races of Stone (requires large size or Goliath, so probably template or Enlarge Person to activate when needed)
Imperious Command (Feat): Drow of the Underdark (a friggin' sweet way to make Intimidating worth the effort - requires Charisma 15 though, so not without a very high pointbuy or rolls)
Brutal Strike (Feat): Player's Handbook II
Brutal Throw/Power Throw (Feats): Complete Adventurer
Defensive Sweep (Feat): Player's Handbook II
Elusive Target (Tactical): Complete Warrior
Stand Still (Feat): Expanded Psionics Handbook/SRD (http://www.d20srd.com)
Shield Specialization/Shield Ward (Feats): Player's Handbook II
Improved Buckler Defense (Feat): Complete Warrior
Superior Unarmed Strike/Snap Kick (Feats): Tome of Battle
Improved Toughness (Feat): Complete Warrior

Tsotha-lanti
2008-08-27, 10:38 AM
Why Halfling instead of Gnome?

Because gnomes suck, but halflings get sick bonuses to everything, especially ranged combat.


Power is, in practice, less of a concern than variety, and you can get plenty of that with tactical feats. (Which also give you a good bit of power, obviously. Elusive Target, for instance, is too good to pass up.) Unless the other players are playing casters to the hilt (bothering with divinations, prep time, etc.), the fighter's player is unlikely to feel seriously outclassed.

CASTLEMIKE
2008-08-27, 10:39 AM
F-4 is pretty easy for the next few games. Maybe he will take a level of Warblade -1 at fifth level when he has a IL-3 and dip it a few more times between non martial adept PRCs as his IL increases for a few maneuvers with Rapid Recovery. Something like:

F-4, WB-1 (Il-3), X-2, WB+1 (Il-5), X-2, WB+1(Il-7)

If he went Dragon Mark Heir for a House like Orien he could be Teleporting at L8 instead of Warblading.

The Artificer can help him get better magic items.

You could give him a Least Dragon Mark for his race which would give him a DM resource to help drive the game especially with a Favored in House Feat.

Pyroconstruct
2008-08-27, 10:43 AM
The fastest solution is honestly, if it becomes a problem, to just start throwing overpowered magic items his way. It's pretty much the standard fix to one party member being underpowered compared to others.

Diamondeye
2008-08-27, 10:45 AM
Let him do it, and worry about problems if they start to arise. Message-board theorizing doesn't mean problems will necessarily occur.

Leon
2008-08-27, 10:46 AM
Let him, the class is a decent one with a good number of options.
Too much these days is bogged down in optimization worries.

Zeta Kai
2008-08-27, 10:49 AM
We're only planning just now, but what do you do if you have a player that insists on making something a bit suboptimal when you've opened the gates to allow everyone to make great characters?

Please keep in mind that a great build does not equal a great character, & "a bit suboptimal" does not automatically mean "completely useless in combat".

Darrin
2008-08-27, 11:35 AM
Why Halfling instead of Gnome?

A small-sized halfling rides a medium-sized mount. Medium sized mounts can easily be taken into any dungeon/scenario designed for medium characters.

Large mounts create problems in dungeons where they have to squeeze, can't fit through certain doors, or run into traps designed for only medium-sized characters.

As far as halfling vs. gnome... personal preference, I guess. Me, I prefer grippli.

Emperor Tippy
2008-08-27, 11:41 AM
If I were a player starting a new game and my GM's response was LOLWUT?! to me choosing a fighter... I would probably find a different game.

And as a DM my response would be "That's great, good luck and have fun in your new game. I don't allow my PC's to play NPC's."

I'm sorry but a Warblade makes a functional fighter, the fighter class doesn't (unless the player really knows what they are doing).

Chronos
2008-08-27, 11:48 AM
Abilities - 32 point buy, its like 4d6 drop lowest without the insanity (example 10 12 12 14 14 16).Just a nitpick, but 4d6 drop lowest is roughly equivalent to 25 point buy, not 32. Which should not stop you from using 32 if you want your characters to be a bit more powerful than normal; just be aware of it.



I'm sorry but a Warblade makes a functional fighter, the fighter class doesn't (unless the player really knows what they are doing).No, a warblade makes a functional warblade. The two classes work completely differently, and some folks prefer the way the fighter works.

Frosty
2008-08-27, 01:37 PM
And as a DM my response would be "That's great, good luck and have fun in your new game. I don't allow my PC's to play NPC's."

I'm sorry but a Warblade makes a functional fighter, the fighter class doesn't (unless the player really knows what they are doing).

Would you allow Fighter 2-level dips? I like those with my Warblade sometimes to get a better Stance progression.

Uin
2008-08-27, 01:39 PM
One of the reasons I would like my players to be at least non-crap is so that I don't accidently kill them, I don't think obviously pulling your punches makes a game feel exciting.
Let him do it, and worry about problems if they start to arise. Message-board theorizing doesn't mean problems will necessarily occur.This is true but I thought it an interesting point that would generate some chat.
LOLWUT?!To be honest, I'm quite an offhand guy and am likely to just spurt that out without thinking. But within any particular character concept I don't see why you wouldn't try to be the best you can be.

ocato
2008-08-27, 02:14 PM
"Fighter is a useless class" is pretty much an internet meme at this point. If you ask me, it has very little value to a real game being played because the strength and weakness of any character is dependent on so much more than his place on an arbitrary power scale based on abstract internet hypothesis relative to a type of Wizard I've never seen played up to its supposed potential. I've seen fighters and Monks completely wtfpwnzilla with BBQ sauce (and all that rot) people playing 'batman' wizards and I've seen Evokers massacre dragons almost single-handedly. Everything that the people around here claim is stupid and useless has been successfully and skillfully played a hundred times and is perfectly valid if that is what you want to play.

While the OP seems more interested in making sure his player is having fun and not being over-shadowed (a reasonable concern, and one that makes you a good DM), it seems a few people here (and on these boards in general) want to tell this poor guy and people like him that his choice is not valid because it doesn't subscribe to their version of what D&D is. For example, I really like to play a Bard, and I get the same crap from some people. "No, you need to roll a Beguiler or something else, I'm not going to baby-pants your character to the same power level as the rest of the party." Then, by the end of the session my bard is throwing his sonic-weapon'd whirling blade'd long sword through a dragon and its rider's respective faces because when Batman got squashed the DM started acting like the other 4 party members were L1 commoners.

I apologize for the rant but this is a sore subject for me. Telling people their character choices aren't good enough and trying to force them into something else is bad DMing, bad manners, and generally being an optimization snob. People played melee classes before ToB and played D&D before the logic ninja guide and did just fine. And now they'll damn sure play just fine by ignoring them, if that's what they so choose.

If your player wants to play a fighter, I say let him. If your other players want to bend the rules or abuse poor wording to become unto gods, maybe you should be focusing more on making sure their characters fit the power level of the game instead of expecting the same from Fighter McGee. Again, I apologize if my tone came off a little accusatory or impolite, this is just a subject of some frustration for me.

Eldariel
2008-08-27, 02:31 PM
If your player wants to play a fighter, I say let him. If your other players want to bend the rules or abuse poor wording to become unto gods, maybe you should be focusing more on making sure their characters fit the power level of the game instead of expecting the same from Fighter McGee. Again, I apologize if my tone came off a little accusatory or impolite, this is just a subject of some frustration for me.

Sigh, the problem is comparative power. An Artificer, a Wizard and a Cleric played well are all going to make the Fighter look bad come midlevels (and seems like the campaign is planned to last that long). Since the Fighter is a new player, the worst thing he could do is to pretend "there's no issue." The important part isn't the absolute powerlevel of the characters, it's the comparative powerlevels of the characters in the party.

If they're close to each other, you can challenge all the characters at once - if the powerlevels are all over the charts, you basically have to split up the party and challenge them one by one to give them all challenges they can shine versus. This isn't a problem levels 1-5 though - a Fighter keeps up just fine even if it isn't the best build ever. However, the campaign does appear to go on after that and the Fighter should get help. Yes, people did play Wizards and Fighters before ToB and before Being Batman. That hasn't changed - the problems weren't something people online came up with. It's all written right in the Player's Handbook for anyone who feels like really reading through the spell lists.

There were plenty of groups before the net where people realized that "Man, they really gave melee the short ends of the stick!" Heck, the first time I played 3.5 and our party reached level 13, my Fighter was only contributing thanks to 3x the normal wealth while the Cleric and the Wizard were kicking ass without any equipment whatsoever (and played poorly to boot). It isn't some internet discovery, internet simply brought it to the knowledge of the more casual players. Likewise, internet also brought the solutions within everyone's grasp, so instead of saying "Lalalalalaa, not listening!" one could just use one of those solutions and enjoy the game with players playing their characters just to the level they wish to and having all characters do something useful. Sure, if your whole group enjoys the game playing Evoker/Thief/Warrior/Healbot vs. featless Dragons, go ahead, play the game and enjoy! Nobody tells you not to! Just have understanding for people who play differently. And if someone specifically asks for help regarding class imbalance, please don't tell them "The problem doesn't exist!" They know the problem exists. They just want help solving it.

ocato
2008-08-27, 02:40 PM
I didn't say the problem doesn't exist, I think it exists to the degree that the players make it exist and to the extent that the DM lets it exist. I believe that the first thing a DM should do is go through a spell list and start picking stuff out. We can all agree there are spells that just don't need to be used. I also think that if the players are making a serious attempt at playing as a team, not a bunch of mavericks trying to out do each other, that each player can contribute evenly.

Stupendous_Man
2008-08-27, 02:41 PM
I didn't say the problem doesn't exist, I think it exists to the degree that the players make it exist and to the extent that the DM lets it exist. I believe that the first thing a DM should do is go through a spell list and start picking stuff out. We can all agree there are spells that just don't need to be used. I also think that if the players are making a serious attempt at playing as a team, not a bunch of mavericks trying to out do each other, that each player can contribute evenly.

Earth!
Wind!
Water!
Fire!
Heart!

Sstoopidtallkid
2008-08-27, 02:48 PM
Earth!
Wind!
Water!
Fire!
Heart!The problem in a nutshell. Imagine if the OP was running a supers game, and so far has Batman, Green Lantern, and Superman. Then a player asks to play Aquaman. What should he do?

ocato
2008-08-27, 03:19 PM
Throw some aquatic situations at the party instead of just detective work or smashing?

Sstoopidtallkid
2008-08-27, 03:21 PM
Throw some aquatic situations at the party instead of just detective work or smashing?Remember the old JL show? That's what happened, and it was ****, because they had to do that each week just so he wouldn't suck, and it got stupid.

snoopy13a
2008-08-27, 03:30 PM
The problem in a nutshell. Imagine if the OP was running a supers game, and so far has Batman, Green Lantern, and Superman. Then a player asks to play Aquaman. What should he do?

But the fighter would be Robin not Aquaman and certainly Batman and Robin can be played together :smalltongue: .

Rayzin
2008-08-27, 03:31 PM
Dont use ToB and use the feats in Fighter Feat Chains (http://www.giantitp.com/articles/tAIsESE3xc7MFFjrPPQ.html).Also the suggestion to make feats for fighters stronger is good too.

All the fighters i've DMed whine about getting whupped after level 4!

Ecalsneerg
2008-08-27, 03:32 PM
That's not fair. Robin goes on to become Nightwing. Aquaman stays Aquaman.

chiasaur11
2008-08-27, 03:35 PM
That's not fair. Robin goes on to become Nightwing. Aquaman stays Aquaman.

He could try playing Namor.
IMPERIUS REX!

Da Beast
2008-08-27, 03:37 PM
I'd say let him play the fighter. If it becomes a problem later on, give him the option of retraining.

snoopy13a
2008-08-27, 03:49 PM
. But within any particular character concept I don't see why you wouldn't try to be the best you can be.

Probably because optimization isn't the goal for everyone. Some people would rather play sword and board fighters or blaster wizards. Anyway, optimization is a zero-sum game, if you have an optimized character then the encounters can be more difficult. If you have an unoptimized character then the encounters can be easier.

Obviously, the problem occurs when you have an unoptimized character among a group of optimized ones (or vice-versa) which is your potential fear. However, if the fighter isn't bothered by it, then it isn't really an issue. Worst case scenario is that he dies and has to make a new character, right?

mabriss lethe
2008-08-27, 03:52 PM
Tell the player your concerns. Let him play it his way, though. He might just surprise you. Don't hold back just because of him though. If he shuffles off this mortal coil hand him a note that reads something along these lines:

"I'm giving you an opportunity to 'reincarnate" your character on the spot, same race, experience level, ability scores, etc. If you take me up on this, all I ask is that you choose a slightly more powerful melee class this time, Here are my suggestions.

Class A, with such and such, B with whatnot, or C with widgets 1-3. [trying your best to offer suggestions that grant a comparable style of play]"

If he takes you up on your offer let the scenario go something like this:

You saw Swordnboard McHacksalot get swarmed under by that mob of rabid goblins. As they pull back, all that remains are bloody tatters of flesh and a few scraps of metal. [Slam your DMG on the table as loudly as you can] You hear a thundering crash and your eyes are seared by a flash of light. When you manage to blink the motes from your eyes, you see a great hand reaching down from some unknowable Somewhere, lifting McHacksalots body in the air, his limbs dangling like some morbid marionette.

YOU HAVE FOUGHT WELL comes a booming disembodied voice BUT YOUR ETERNAL REWARDS WILL HAVE TO WAIT. YOUR DESTINY REMAINS UNFINISHED. BE REBORN!

The earth shakes and spears of light lance into his crumpled chest, searing your vision once more. You hear a muffled thud, the sound a body might make upon hitting the ground. There's an unmistakable gasp and as your vision clears you see the unbelievable. Mchacksalot is there before you, alive and unharmed.

Oslecamo
2008-08-27, 04:03 PM
Let him play the fighter.

Seriously, unless you plan to TPK the party and throw them the ultimate batman wzard of doom, a powergamer fighter will be able to rape anything you throw at him.

Remember, fighters can take maneuvers with their feats.

I would be more worried with an artificer trying to dominate the game.

Anyway, you know, there are people out there who like pure fighters. We even have our own handbooks and like to show those anoying casters they'll need more than a paragraph of cheese to take us down.

Frosty
2008-08-27, 04:10 PM
Probably because optimization isn't the goal for everyone. Some people would rather play sword and board fighters or blaster wizards. Anyway, optimization is a zero-sum game, if you have an optimized character then the encounters can be more difficult. If you have an unoptimized character then the encounters can be easier.

Sword and Board you say? Hey guess what? That works with Tome of battle a *lot* better than it does with the fighter. Warblades, Crusaders, and Swordsages don't acutally *need* Power Attack like almost every other effing melee character to do decent damage. Their strike damage isn't affected by one-handed two-handed, and the power level scales. Brilliant!

snoopy13a
2008-08-27, 04:17 PM
Sword and Board you say? Hey guess what? That works with Tome of battle a *lot* better than it does with the fighter. Warblades, Crusaders, and Swordsages don't acutally *need* Power Attack like almost every other effing melee character to do decent damage. Their strike damage isn't affected by one-handed two-handed, and the power level scales. Brilliant!

And you take a throw-away example out of context. The whole point is that optimization doesn't mean anything as encounter difficulty is variable. It may make your character more powerful but the DM is going to raise the stakes on his/her end so your optimization doesn't really give any benefit in the long run. The only issue can arise when some players are optimized and others aren't.

Frosty
2008-08-27, 04:23 PM
I'm already operating under the assumption that there's a power difference. That's what we're trying to fix. We're bringing the fighter up to Competence levels, not Uber levels.

AslanCross
2008-08-27, 04:26 PM
I'm of the "if he wants to, let him" crowd, but make sure you let him know why you're concerned. If he doesn't mind everyone doing flashier stuff than he does, then let him.

Oslecamo
2008-08-27, 04:39 PM
I'm already operating under the assumption that there's a power difference. That's what we're trying to fix. We're bringing the fighter up to Competence levels, not Uber levels.

You know, the wizard may end specializing in evocation and the artificer spending all his resources brewing potions.

"Competence" is a very broad word. The fighter can kill enemies of his CR singlehandedly. With an artificer and cleric backing him up he can rock the heavens.

Lappy9000
2008-08-27, 05:03 PM
I'm already operating under the assumption that there's a power difference. That's what we're trying to fix. We're bringing the fighter up to Competence levels, not Uber levels.

Looks to me like you're just ragging on the fighter class and not really fixing anything. Just saying...

To the OP, let the man (or woman, it wasn't specified) play a fighter. Some people like playing sub-optimal players. It can be called role-playing in some circles. That little thing called "fun" isn't always optimization for everyone.

Sorry if that sounded a little venemous, it wasn't intended. Besides what's a party of glass-cannons without a meatshield? :smallbiggrin:

Jayabalard
2008-08-27, 05:21 PM
But within any particular character concept I don't see why you wouldn't try to be the best you can be.Because that sometimes doesn't match the concept; for me, that sometimes is always, since my concept is never "be as badass an adventurer as I can be"

Frosty
2008-08-27, 05:49 PM
Looks to me like you're just ragging on the fighter class and not really fixing anything. Just saying...

To the OP, let the man (or woman, it wasn't specified) play a fighter. Some people like playing sub-optimal players. It can be called role-playing in some circles. That little thing called "fun" isn't always optimization for everyone.

Sorry if that sounded a little venemous, it wasn't intended. Besides what's a party of glass-cannons without a meatshield? :smallbiggrin:

I *am* ragging on the fighter class. It deserves to be ragged on in anything beyond levels 1 through 4. Unless someone builds that fighter intelligently (and the player is a newbie, remember that), he will be very frustrated.

Can unoptimized fighters built by newbies even solo CR-appropriate encounters?

MartinHarper
2008-08-27, 05:51 PM
Because that sometimes doesn't match the concept; for me, that sometimes is always, since my concept is never "be as badass an adventurer as I can be"

I achieve that by not starting at max level.

RagnaroksChosen
2008-08-27, 06:24 PM
I *am* ragging on the fighter class. It deserves to be ragged on in anything beyond levels 1 through 4. Unless someone builds that fighter intelligently (and the player is a newbie, remember that), he will be very frustrated.

Can unoptimized fighters built by newbies even solo CR-appropriate encounters?

I don't know frosty, I think they can still hold there own up till 7ish once wizards and clerics get there 4th level spells i think it gets thrown off Even there 3rd levels spells will be powerfull, a fighter can take some of it i think.


also ocato... heh meme's what are we on 4chan now?

MammonAzrael
2008-08-27, 06:40 PM
I'm of the opinion that you should let him play what he wants. Talk to him before hand and make sure that he knows that the Fighter class isn't on the same power level as the other classes that will be played.

If you keep playing and he's enjoying everything, great! If you get the feeling that he's being left out more and more, or is becoming bored, you can take him aside and talk about ways to fix this (from retraining, to starting a new character).

Otherwise just let the guy enjoy his feats! :smallsmile: (of course, also make sure he knows that most feats in the PHB aren't any good, and try to point out good, but simple ones he'd like)

Lappy9000
2008-08-27, 06:43 PM
I *am* ragging on the fighter class. It deserves to be ragged on in anything beyond levels 1 through 4. Unless someone builds that fighter intelligently (and the player is a newbie, remember that), he will be very frustrated.

Can unoptimized fighters built by newbies even solo CR-appropriate encounters?

Last time I checked, D&D wasn't a solo game, so does it really matter?

But we're getting off-topic. So I'm heading back to the homebrew forum where we attempt to fix things instead of just saying "they're bad" and never letting go of that fact.

Frosty
2008-08-27, 06:50 PM
I don't know frosty, I think they can still hold there own up till 7ish once wizards and clerics get there 4th level spells i think it gets thrown off Even there 3rd levels spells will be powerfull, a fighter can take some of it i think.


also ocato... heh meme's what are we on 4chan now?

Melee characters in general are still in play until level 9 or so I think, but the Fighter Class itself just doesn't offer anything to me beyond level 4 unless we're using the Dungeoncrasher variant, in which case, take 6 levels of Fighter. There's just something better and safer...something that's not so *easy* for the newbie to screw up on.

OneFamiliarFace
2008-08-27, 10:41 PM
As an avid fighter player (because I am a DM and need some character simplicity to rest my tired bones), I say let him charge ahead. Just make sure he doesn't take any super-suboptimal stuff (like I. Overrun), and he will most likely be fine with hitting things with his sword. Make sure to make a few combats with big beefy what-nots who don't move so fast, or have magic protection of some kind (golems = good).

When I play my fighters, I'm happy to just roar around, hit things with my sword/mace/axe/3 hammers, and then roleplay my awesomeness outside of combat. I just said, "Magic doesn't count," and ended up specifically building myself to beat magic NPCs because they were cheating. The only times playing a fighter really sucks to me are

1) When the druid's animal companion outshines me.
2) When the DM always gives the cleric time to buff and never uses dispel magic.

Other than that, Swordnboard McHacknslash can hold his own, as long as he is happy with knowing that the reason that Archery Bowsalot and Batman Alakadabra can do so much is because he is taking all the damage by looking so dang impressive.

So essentially, he has to PLAY UP his non-magicy-ness, and kind of look down on the fancy whirlybird doodads of the warblade, because, really...at the end of the day, hitting something in the head with a sword is hitting something in the head with a sword. (Suggest he take Iron Will for this, and then possibly one of the cool PHB will save feats.)

Justin_Bacon
2008-08-27, 11:41 PM
Now the first person to reply said they'd make a fighter and I know the player, he will want to use mostly PHB stuff. This might pose a problem if the rest of the party make an Artificer, Wizard, Cleric, and a Warblade. We're only planning just now, but what do you do if you have a player that insists on making something a bit suboptimal when you've opened the gates to allow everyone to make great characters?

Let them.

Look, 3rd Edition encoded some baseline assumptions about PC power levels so that they could also include some baseline guidelines about what challenges would be appropriate for those PCs. But there's no need for treat that baseline like holy writ. If the party ends up being a little less effective because their meat shield is sub-optimal, it's no big deal. Throw them easier challenges.

Plus, niche protection is pretty robust in 3rd Edition, so the guy will probably be able to have plenty of fun even if his character ends up being sub-optimal compared to the others.

There are two ways in which you could run into problems:

(1) Somebody else has a better character in the same niche. I'm going through this in my current campaign: There are two fighters. One is a barbarian/fighter and has been playing slightly longer so they're a level higher. The other is a straight fighter and the player has been frustrated because her character is basically, "Just like the other guy, only one level lower and he can't rage." In order to solve this problem, I'm letting her re-design her character from the ground up (and tying this to the in-game development of the character receiving training through a knightly order).

(2) The campaign doesn't service his niche. This would actually be a problem regardless of the optimization of the character, but that a lot of people complain about online (frequently without realizing the actual root of the problem they're complaining about). Basically, fighters are designed to contribute when a group fights 4+ battles per day. If you don't do that at least some of the time, the fighter's niche is completely screwed and the CoDzillas and Batman Wizards will manifest themselves.


The problem in a nutshell. Imagine if the OP was running a supers game, and so far has Batman, Green Lantern, and Superman. Then a player asks to play Aquaman. What should he do?

Either ask the guy playing Aquaman to change characters or make sure that there's a fair amount of undersea action taking place during the campaign.


I believe that the first thing a DM should do is go through a spell list and start picking stuff out. We can all agree there are spells that just don't need to be used.

I think gimping the other characters is pretty much the worst thing you could do.

WickerNipple
2008-08-28, 12:13 AM
I *am* ragging on the fighter class. It deserves to be ragged on in anything beyond levels 1 through 4. Unless someone builds that fighter intelligently (and the player is a newbie, remember that), he will be very frustrated.

What would be more frustrating to a noob: a) being told your idea sucks and being thrown a dozen splatbooks and then being told to do better or b) letting them realize it themselves 8 levels down the line?

The noob's not going to feel like they've wasted 8 levels - they've been playing a game. The question of whether their time was wasted or not is going to be whether they've been having fun. And when they do wise up, helping them retrain a character or killing it off to make a new one is easy as can be.

And only half of the given players out there will even mind being outclassed so long as they're participating and having fun. And that's the GM's job anyway.

"Bad noob no fighter!" is about as anti-fun as it gets ~ and fun is really all that should matter to someone just starting the game.

Is there more to the game? Absolutely. Are fighters pretty impressively sucky? Yes. Is there a joy in the optimization process? Hell yeah ---> But throwing that down someone's throat isn't going to make them enjoy the game more.



Can unoptimized fighters built by newbies even solo CR-appropriate encounters?

Yes, a mediocre 4th level fighter can solo a CR appropriate encounter.

Frosty
2008-08-28, 12:18 AM
At 4th level, yes. At 13th level...probably not so much.

I'm more for the "The DM helps the newbie with his build a bit" like how I'm trying to help one of my players build a Justiciar that doesn't suck.

Truly and honestly, a newbie should be taken through an easy solo campaign to get used to things, but if one had to be thrown into a medium to high level campaign that I run, I'll make damned sure the Fighter doesn't pick the Toughness feat 5 times, for example.

CASTLEMIKE
2008-08-28, 12:32 AM
Truly and honestly, a newbie should be taken through an easy solo campaign to get used to things, but if one had to be thrown into a medium to high level campaign that I run, I'll make damned sure the Fighter doesn't pick the Toughness feat 5 times, for example.

At least one Craft Skill Focus right? :smallsmile:

OneFamiliarFace
2008-08-28, 12:41 AM
At least one Craft Skill Focus right? :smallsmile:

Hey, if you're going to do it, do it right.

BobVosh
2008-08-28, 12:42 AM
Make a pathfinder fighter. Same basics as fighter, but a few more buffs. Also the feat progression echos what one guy said, where you get feats every odd level from leveling (instead of every 3).

ocato
2008-08-28, 01:02 AM
Taking away alter self and polymorph and whatnot isn't exactly gimping a sorcerer/wizard, so much as reigning it in. Granted, that's just my 2c.

turkishproverb
2008-08-28, 01:06 AM
The problem in a nutshell. Imagine if the OP was running a supers game, and so far has Batman, Green Lantern, and Superman. Then a player asks to play Aquaman. What should he do?

Read the peter David Aquaman. TO use TV Tropes he took a level in badass (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TookALevelInBadass)

although more than anything they made use of his powers rather than using him as a joke.

Super strength, durability, endurance, powerful jumping, limited telepathy based on similarities to marine brains, etc.

Colmarr
2008-08-28, 01:53 AM
4th level: You get Power Attack. Now you should always be using your lance two handed, and have an animated shield if necessary. You deal 3(d6 + [Str*1.5] + 8 + magic), or around 50 damage on a charge, enough to kill any ECL appropriate enemy, and enough for a massive damage check against those it doesn't kill.

My bolding. Is this even possible following WBL limits?

Oslecamo
2008-08-28, 05:27 AM
At 4th level, yes. At 13th level...probably not so much.

I'm more for the "The DM helps the newbie with his build a bit" like how I'm trying to help one of my players build a Justiciar that doesn't suck.

Truly and honestly, a newbie should be taken through an easy solo campaign to get used to things, but if one had to be thrown into a medium to high level campaign that I run, I'll make damned sure the Fighter doesn't pick the Toughness feat 5 times, for example.

With all due respect to the DM, it's an online campaign. They're starting lv1. It will be some months untill they reach lv4, and years before they reach lv13. More than enough time for the newbie to become a decent character builder.

Uin
2008-08-28, 07:51 AM
With all due respect to the DM, it's an online campaign. They're starting lv1. It will be some months untill they reach lv4, and years before they reach lv13. More than enough time for the newbie to become a decent character builder.

Actually, its a round-the-table number, I'm part of a gamer community in Edinburgh and we use it message boards to organise games. Apologies, I can see where the confusion came from. You're right that it will be slow however, we'll be testing Eberron on our Saturday meet-up (maybe ever other week so other people can run games) and hopefully be playing weekly once I move into a bigger place.

Telonius
2008-08-28, 08:17 AM
Read the peter David Aquaman. TO use TV Tropes he took a level in badass (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TookALevelInBadass)

although more than anything they made use of his powers rather than using him as a joke.

Super strength, durability, endurance, powerful jumping, limited telepathy based on similarities to marine brains, etc.

I think that has more to do with Peter David having about ten levels of badass. But yeah. :smallbiggrin:

busterswd
2008-08-28, 08:33 AM
Figure out why he wants to roll a fighter. If he wants a simple class to get used to and not have to worry about as he learns the ins and outs of DnD, you have a couple options:

Option 1: The Evolving Magic Weapon
Craft some lore maybe, around a legendary weapon (that happens to be of the fighter's proficiency type) that has some reason to grow as you progress through the story. Perhaps it's the avatar of a minor god whose power is locked by the mooks you send at them, maybe it's a symbiotic sword that grows as its user matures and changes form based on his nature, maybe it's a magic resonance sword that increases in power as his companions gain power, or perhaps you can make sidequests throughout for the party to visit certain waypoints that he can pray/kill something at to increase its kickass level. In short, give him something cool to play with that will let him keep pace with the casters.

It's a way to give him early power increases if he finds he's lagging in speed, and under your direct supervision to boot. This will go smoothest if he's the only newbie/non-metagamer in the group. Talk with the other members and make sure it's OK with them. The main reason for this is helping him get his feet wet before you throw character customization at him, without discouraging him from playing future games.

Option 2: Hard Love
Basically let him do what he wants. As the challenges grow and the party gets stronger, let him find out the hard way that Fighter-ing isn't what it's cracked up to be. If he's fine with it still and soldiers on through your campagin, great. If not, give him the option to either optimize his fighter feats with your guidance (you find a legendary wandering swordsman who retrains him) or kill him off and reincarnate him.

This'll work better if the rest of the group will be annoyed that you're going out of your way to pamper the fighter, and is better in the long term if you know slogging along as a fighter isn't going to turn him off to DnD.



Either way, express your concerns in the beginning. Don't use phrases like "underpowered" or "not viable" or "useless", just explain that the fighter is a deceptively more difficult class to use than others and if it's his first try at DnD, you'd be more than happy to either walk him through an easier character or help him customize his character. If he wants to stick to it without help, fine; either let him learn the hard way or give him a boost. Some people will just by their nature steamroll through "boring" character customization until they have a better idea of what things do.

only1doug
2008-08-28, 09:07 AM
Figure out why he wants to roll a fighter. If he wants a simple class to get used to and not have to worry about as he learns the ins and outs of DnD, you have a couple options:

Option 1: The Evolving Magic Weapon
Craft some lore maybe, around a legendary weapon (that happens to be of the fighter's proficiency type) that has some reason to grow as you progress through the story. Perhaps it's the avatar of a minor god whose power is locked by the mooks you send at them, maybe it's a symbiotic sword that grows as its user matures and changes form based on his nature, maybe it's a magic resonance sword that increases in power as his companions gain power, or perhaps you can make sidequests throughout for the party to visit certain waypoints that he can pray/kill something at to increase its kickass level. In short, give him something cool to play with that will let him keep pace with the casters.

It's a way to give him early power increases if he finds he's lagging in speed, and under your direct supervision to boot. This will go smoothest if he's the only newbie/non-metagamer in the group. Talk with the other members and make sure it's OK with them. The main reason for this is helping him get his feet wet before you throw character customization at him, without discouraging him from playing future games.
<snip>

Two Words:Item Familiar (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/magic/itemFamiliars.htm)
Give him the item Familiar Feat for his weapon and ignore the XP costs to him of improving the weapon. Make it a family heirloom and (as GM) you can have it made of a special material as well, say cold iron or silver.

Person_Man
2008-08-28, 10:03 AM
For those who are worried that the Fighter is too weak, stop worrying.

I already sketched out (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=4798252&postcount=10) levels 1-6 of a potent core only Fighter. In particular, the Leadership feat can carry any player throughout the entirety of any ECL, because having a potent mount/pet/follower to tag team can give you a huge advantage (you just have to ban it for the other more powerful players).

Here are some other ways to help a strait Fighter:

Mounted Combat + Ride by Attack + Spirited Charge: Mobility, defense, attack. And its core.

Mercantile Background (Player's Guide to Faerun):Gives the player a 25%ish gp advantage when you sell things. Or even better...

Ancestral Weapon (Book of Exalted Deeds): Lets you sacrifice gp or magic items to improve one weapon. This bypasses the need to ever sell any magic items, thus increasing the player's wealth by roughly 50%.

Headlong Rush (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/ex/20030301a): Double damage when you charge. Use a reach weapon to avoid the AoO, or don't and start a Karmic Strike or Robilar's Gambit combo.

Robilar's Gambit + Combat Reflexes: Every time an enemy swings at you, you get a free hit. Throw on Karmic Strike for even more attacks. Or...

Reach Weapon + Standstill + Combat Reflexes: Easy way to stop most enemies from approaching you.

Zhentarim Soldier (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/we/20060327a) + Imperious Command (Drow of the Underdark): Now you can make one enemy per turn Cower (ie, helpless, ie, Coup de Grace) as a Swift Action. With the Never Outnumbered Skill Trick (Complete Scoundrel) it effects everyone within 10 feet.

Net + Farshot (core) or Lasso (Book of Exhalted Deeds): Either of these exotic weapons are touch attacks that debuff and limit the movement of enemies.

Use Magic Device, Use Psionic Device: At high levels, anyone can use these Skills effectively, even if its cross class.

That took me five minutes to write, two additional minutes to find the links in my bookmarks, and that was off the top of my head. Fighters benefit from codex creep just as much as any other class. I fully admit that they'll never be as potent as a full caster. We all get that. But almost any class is playable with the right build, even if everyone else in the party is optimized as well.

Frosty
2008-08-28, 10:07 AM
Not everyone wants to be an orc though. But if you're charging, Leap Attack should already do enough damage.

Eldariel
2008-08-28, 10:23 AM
For those who are worried that the Fighter is too weak, stop worrying.

I already sketched out (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=4798252&postcount=10) levels 1-6 of a potent core only Fighter. In particular, the Leadership feat can carry any player throughout the entirety of any ECL, because having a potent mount/pet/follower to tag team can give you a huge advantage (you just have to ban it for the other more powerful players).

Here are some other ways to help a strait Fighter:

Mounted Combat + Ride by Attack + Spirited Charge: Mobility, defense, attack. And its core.

Mercantile Background (Player's Guide to Faerun):Gives the player a 25%ish gp advantage when you sell things. Or even better...

Ancestral Weapon (Book of Exalted Deeds): Lets you sacrifice gp or magic items to improve one weapon. This bypasses the need to ever sell any magic items, thus increasing the player's wealth by roughly 50%.

Headlong Rush (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/ex/20030301a): Double damage when you charge. Use a reach weapon to avoid the AoO, or don't and start a Karmic Strike or Robilar's Gambit combo.

Robilar's Gambit + Combat Reflexes: Every time an enemy swings at you, you get a free hit. Throw on Karmic Strike for even more attacks. Or...

Reach Weapon + Standstill + Combat Reflexes: Easy way to stop most enemies from approaching you.

Zhentarim Soldier (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/we/20060327a) + Imperious Command (Drow of the Underdark): Now you can make one enemy per turn Cower (ie, helpless, ie, Coup de Grace) as a Swift Action. With the Never Outnumbered Skill Trick (Complete Scoundrel) it effects everyone within 10 feet.

Net + Farshot (core) or Lasso (Book of Exhalted Deeds): Either of these exotic weapons are touch attacks that debuff and limit the movement of enemies.

Use Magic Device, Use Psionic Device: At high levels, anyone can use these Skills effectively, even if its cross class.

That took me five minutes to write, two additional minutes to find the links in my bookmarks, and that was off the top of my head. Fighters benefit from codex creep just as much as any other class. I fully admit that they'll never be as potent as a full caster. We all get that. But almost any class is playable with the right build, even if everyone else in the party is optimized as well.

And the build I posted in the first page incorporates a dozen things and lists a dime dozen more. And the build is versatile, quite competent at multiple thing and versatile enough to be enjoyable to play. And competent socially too.

turkishproverb
2008-08-28, 01:40 PM
I think that has more to do with Peter David having about ten levels of badass. But yeah. :smallbiggrin:

Sigged.

Seriously though, a fighter won't be THAT suboptimal unless someone else builds an UBER close combat person or we have a powergamer building a 6+ 1st level spell man.

DeathQuaker
2008-08-29, 06:59 AM
At the risk of sounding like a jerk, I gotta say, if I said "I got a cool idea for a mostly-core fighter" -- or, in fact, an idea for ANY character that I liked and wasn't asking much of the GM (i.e., asking to use books he isn't) -- and the GM said something along the lines of , "But... but... (according to message board logic), that isn't OPTIMAL enough..." then I'd be out of that game like a bat out of hell and never seek to play an RPG with that GM--as a player or GM--ever.

Mind, I think I build decent characters. Optimized? No. Effective in a typical D&D campaign--which as far as I know, are pretty typical--run by my friends? Absolutely.

And if one of MY players came to me and said, "I want to play a mostly-core fighter," I'd kiss them all over and declare myself their slave for making my life easy for once, instead of asking for x prestige class or broken feat in a book I don't have. If the other PCs seemed obviously more powerful than the fighter, I'd make sure the fighter player knew about it, and if need be, if designing challenges for the party was a problem, maybe give him a better weapon or something (and I would make sure the other players knew why I was doing that).

After all, Lina Inverse can destroy the world with a spell, but she still needs Gourry Gabriev (Sword of Light or no) to help her out. ...

... What do you mean you haven't heard of Lina Inverse??? Dragon SLAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAVE!!!!!!!!!!

Epinephrine
2008-08-29, 09:29 AM
Fighter really doesn't seem that bad to me - it was, before all the books came out, but with feats better than those in the PHB you can do pretty well. The skill points are silly though - a fighter should get 4+Int, just like a warblade or crusader. That's less than the ranger, who is more of a skill monkey, but enough to let one flesh it out a bit. The 2 extra skill points don't break him, but add some flavour - and the new ToB classes all have at least 4 skill points per level anyway.

Tactical feats, weapon style feats and so on actually allow a character to have some fun.

I honestly think one weakness of the D&D system is the armour system - it's punishing to heavy armours in particular, especially as the point-buy (or equivalently, the lucky rolls) go up.
One advantage a warrior should have is the ability to use heavy armours, but they provide nearly no benefit: They are expensive, slow you down, have huge penalties to skills, and if your ability scores are high enough, provide no real benefits - the armour bonus + max dex bonus is roughly the same whether you look at Heavy Plate (+0, +9), or chain shirts (+4, +4). So essentially, you gain very little for the added ability to wear heavy armour - you take penalties on tons of skills, your movement, and end up with basically the same AC, if you have dex bonuses (and most fighters will pick up dex bonuses through gear eventually anyway).

Making matters worse, they introduce mithril. Mithril makes heavy armours medium (and lighter), so that others can wear them (all those classes limited to medium armour, for example), and the cost is very low. This does preclude getting the armour made of adamantine, so there is a cost, but it negates the heavy armour penalty, reduces the penalty to skills, and boosts the Dex bonus by 2! That's essentially two free AC for characters with decent stats. There goes the fighter's advantage of having access to heavy armour.

The animated shield is a nother huge blow to fighters - they can use any shield, but of course they give up the damage of a two handed weapon to do so. Many classes can't even use shields, so this is a clear benefit - extra AC - but the floating tower shields eliminate this, and allow even an unarmoured mage to have a floating barricade, with no proficiency or penalty attached.

I suspect one improvement would be to make the benefits of heavy armour bigger, and to alter mithril to remove the penalties associated with the armour (Heavy armour counts as medium in terms of penalties, and what feats/abilities one can use) but still requires the proficiency with the type of armour (i.e. A barbarian wants mithril plate. It still counts as medium for purposes of his speed, and his abilities - he can use his increased speed, which only works in no, light, or medium armour - but he has to invest a feat in Heavy armour proficiency, as it's still a type of heavy armour). I'd consider removing the DX bonus that mithril provides as well, or alternatively providing a full-weight armour option that provides +2 AC for heavy armours (+1 AC to medium, no bonus to light).

Heavy armours should probably offer a bit more of a benefit to AC as well, it's silly that the total AC and Dex bonus of some light armours are higher than the total for heavy armours - if players can expect to have a +3 or more dex bonus to AC at later levels, it's silly to take any armour that doesn't allow at least a +3 Dex bonus. Trading Dex bonuses off for AC should happen at a better ratio, so that going to the heavy armour provides tangible benefits.

Currently it's hard to see why anyone would choose to wear a heavy suit of armour with any decent point buy - they're likely to have at least a small Dex bonus, and are likely to pick up more Dex bonus during their careers. You don't gain AC really for picking a heavy armour, and in fact you are likely to lose it. The system doesn't make sense.

Brauron
2008-08-29, 09:37 AM
At the risk of sounding like a jerk, I gotta say, if I said "I got a cool idea for a mostly-core fighter" -- or, in fact, an idea for ANY character that I liked and wasn't asking much of the GM (i.e., asking to use books he isn't) -- and the GM said something along the lines of , "But... but... (according to message board logic), that isn't OPTIMAL enough..." then I'd be out of that game like a bat out of hell and never seek to play an RPG with that GM--as a player or GM--ever.

I agree with this wholeheartedly -- in fact, I *have* left games when I felt I was being punished for playing an allegedly "sub-optimal" character that I enjoyed playing, or pressured to build characters a certain way. Dungeons and Dragons is GAME. It is supposed to be FUN. If it ceases to be fun, why bothered with it any more? If I wanted to put in the mathematical effort I've seen other players go through to generate the most optimal build possible, I'll go fill out tax forms.

crimson77
2008-08-29, 01:20 PM
Let him play a fighter. If you notice that he is falling behind (which he will start to at some point), then give him some magical equipment to balance him out like the rest of the party.

Just my two cp

Aneantir
2008-08-29, 01:37 PM
Let him play the fighter. I really don't see what the big deal is. Fighters are crazy good right now, with the heaps of additional feats in splatbooks and all. He will be fine, as long as he isn't specifically undermining his own abilities.

Skaven
2008-08-29, 02:00 PM
Thought about offering him a more non-standard race to patch the weakness of an inherent fighter?

A Minotaur or Centaur might help, as the strength bonus is a wonderful combination to use with a two hander and power attack. (might have to ditch/but off the LA though)

Ifni
2008-08-29, 02:35 PM
The animated shield is a nother huge blow to fighters - they can use any shield, but of course they give up the damage of a two handed weapon to do so. Many classes can't even use shields, so this is a clear benefit - extra AC - but the floating tower shields eliminate this, and allow even an unarmoured mage to have a floating barricade, with no proficiency or penalty attached.

Just a note: the nonproficiency penalty and ASF still apply when using an animated shield, it's treated just as if you were wielding it for those purposes (p.218, DMG). It's basically just like a normal shield except you have both hands free: it makes two-handed-weapon and two-weapon fighting types better compared to sword-and-board, but it's not "no-ASF AC for mages" (that would be the mithral buckler).

I don't have much else to add, other people have made good suggestions. Combat Reflexes + reach weapon is a decent Core-only combo at the baby levels - most enemies are Medium and focus on melee attacks, and you can get a lot of free attacks as they come in (last time I played a L1 barbarian with this combo she killed three bad guys in the surprise round while surprised - the GM started throwing ranged-combat-focused bad guys at us after that). I would be fairly liberal with letting your fighter player retrain his feats, as it's far too easy to build a really weak fighter if you pick the wrong options.

chiasaur11
2008-08-29, 03:50 PM
I think that has more to do with Peter David having about ten levels of badass. But yeah. :smallbiggrin:

He and Jewel Staite once, according to TVTropes, had an entire comic convention flip off Nathan Fillian.

Good stunt.

Epinephrine
2008-08-29, 03:50 PM
Just a note: the nonproficiency penalty and ASF still apply when using an animated shield, it's treated just as if you were wielding it for those purposes (p.218, DMG)

Ah, my mistake.

Gavin Sage
2008-08-29, 04:25 PM
If you are worried about a Fighter being too sub-optimal does then I have to ask whether the rest of the party is a bunch of powergaming minmaxers built to eat TPK encounters for breakfast? Heck even if no one is playing CoDzilla or other melee blasting frakkers then even at high levels the Fighter can be the meat shield soaking up damage. You have to be very deep into power gaming territory before a newbie is unhappy with a Fighter I think, because they don't care about "I hit things with my sword" being boring yet.

And if its dragging the party down, uber magic items compensate.

Lycar
2008-08-29, 05:39 PM
Making matters worse, they introduce mithril. Mithril makes heavy armours medium (and lighter), so that others can wear them (all those classes limited to medium armour, for example), and the cost is very low.

Woah there! If you let your players get away with THAT interpretation of the rules it's no wonder you feel the fighter gets the short stick:

Ahem: "Most mothral armours are one category lighter then normal for purpose of movement and other limitations (for example, whether a barbarian can use her fast movement ability while wearing the armour or not)."

Soo... this should mean that mithral armour isn't as encumbering as is steel or adamntine armour. But i dare say it was NEVER INTENDED that a heavy armour all of a sudden no longer requires the adequate proficiency.

Damn straight, the ability to wear heavy armour is a hallmark of the fighting classes. It behooves any DM well not to allow anyone to bypass the lack of training with some cheap trick like that!

About the barbarian: The Players Handbook makes it clear that the barbarian gets slowed down by medium armour but still gets his speed bonus. Making his medium armour mithril would allow him to move at full speed + bonus.

If he takes the feat and wears mithral full plate for example, he is slowed as if wearing a medium armour but gets to add the speed bonus.

He still has to learn how to wear heavy armour first though!

It's really the same thing as with the animated shield. Non-proficincy still gets punished.

Lycar

Sstoopidtallkid
2008-08-29, 06:25 PM
@ Lycar: Not so much.
Most mithral armors are one category lighter than normal for purposes of movement and other limitations. Heavy armors are treated as medium, and medium armors are treated as light, but light armors are still treated as light

Lycar
2008-08-30, 07:19 AM
@ Lycar: Not so much.

As i said: If you allow your players to use this to disregard proficiency penalties it's your own damn fault.

Lycar

Epinephrine
2008-08-30, 07:35 AM
Even if one were to decide that proficiency were required, there is scarcely any advantage to wearing a heavy armour, because the Dex+armour bonus of a heavy armour isn't significantly different from those for non-heavy armours. Many people play with fairly heroic stats, and dex items are popular since they can provide an AC bonus, a reflex save bonus, bonuses to skills and to missile weapon attacks. The heaviest of armours only provides a +10/+0 set of bonuses (mountain plate, requiring a feat to use...), full plate is +8/+1 for a total of +9, standard medium armours have a total of +8 (+5/+3, +4/+4), which is about the same as the chain shirt (+4/+4) or leather (+2/+6).

So realistically, you get +1 AC for having heavy armour proficiency compared to having light armour proficiency, provided stats are somewhat heroic and magic items are in play - as little as a 14 dex with a +4 dex item grant a light armour wearer (chain shirt) with one less AC than a similar character wearing full plate. +1 AC doesn't seem like a huge bonus, and a total of a +4 bonus to dex by later levels isn't absurd for a melee class - getting that AC does require some points in Dexterity, diverting some wealth away, but investing a bit in dex to get lighter armours functioning at the same AC provides many other bonuses too - better speed, less of a penalty on skills, better reflex saves, skill checks, missile combat. There's almost no reason to wear heavy armours, making it a questionable benefit for warriors.

Frosty
2008-08-30, 11:23 AM
What they need to do is actually make heavy armor BETTER.

Sstoopidtallkid
2008-08-30, 02:12 PM
As i said: If you allow your players to use this to disregard proficiency penalties it's your own damn fault. Yes, it's my own fault for obeying the rules. Don't go Oberoni on this.

Also, put your signature in your signature, that sort of thing is just annoying.

Stupendous_Man
2008-08-30, 02:14 PM
Also, put your signature in your signature, that sort of thing is just annoying.

heh, indeed!

Lycar
2008-08-30, 07:24 PM
What they need to do is actually make heavy armor BETTER.

Indeed. Now Unearthed Arcana offers an optional rule where armours offer damage resistance. While this certainly is a step into a direction to rewarding the use of heavy armour, a DR 3/- doesn't really cut it.

Now while a DR 1/3/5 diversion between light/medium/heavy armours would appear to make heavy armour too good at lower levels, consider that even DR 5/- is but a drop in the bucket for higher levels.

Of course, if one would take a bit more effort to assign different vakues of DR to different sets of armour, one would get a bit more variety. This would probably still make a chain shirt the best available light armour. Unless one argues that the chain shirt only covers the torso and about half of the arms, and therefore only has a DR 1/-, as opposed to, say, studded leather that gets Dr 2/- on account of covering most of the body.

As for medium armours, one could give scale armour a higher DR then a breastplate, making the same argument.

As for heavy armours, well, maybe even consider giving a full suit of plate armour a DR of up to 6/- to make it worthwhile.

And about 'obeying the rules' ... there is a slight difference between interpreting ambigious rules in a way that benefits only yourself as opposed to interpreting them in a way that makes actual sense.

There is a certain kind of player who lives for the first kind of rules interpretation. We all know who those are.

Personally i prefer to give the poor, abused full BAB classes at least something for their heavy armour proficiency, even if it is more symbolic then anything else.

Besides, unless i'm mistaken, the OP's problem was making it worth the while of one of his players to be a fighter, when one of the other players is a warblade.

Guess what? Warblades don't get heavy armour proficiency. It makes sense since their skill selection makes mobile fighting styles feasilble for them and heavy armours are slowing them down too much.

So the fighter could have this slight perk of being able to use heavy armours without spending a feat to learn how to wear them. Or *gasp* taking a single level dip into a class that gets said armour proficiency.
Like, for example, fighters. Or clerics. Or...

Is it really too much to ask to not take this minor benefit away from the fighter by making the choice of material an armour is made from negate the need to actually be trained in it's use?

For some people this is too much to ask for, obviously. Because we all know that fighters are the suxxor and can't have anything nice. :smallmad:

And about the much-abused Oberoni fallacy: You missed the point of the thread. This is about how one could go about fixing the brokeness of the fighter, not about if or how broken he is. Interpreting the rules in a way that gives the fighter a slight edge is a way to ease the burden of the fighter. Nothing more, nothing less.

Has it ever occured to you that players who insist on milking every bit of unclear rulings for their own maximum benefit are actually part of the problem?

Lycar

BobVosh
2008-08-31, 06:39 AM
Why not divide them as 1/2/3. Then the dr "levels up" with enchancement bonus. Multiply half the enhancement with the dr. Mw won't have it, +1 through +3 the same, +4 is 2/4/6, +6 3/6/9