[3.5] Fighters, Skills, and Armor

[Kerrin]

One game design thing that's been bugging me about fighters (in addition to the usual topics) is that according to their class-skill list fighters are supposed to be good at doing physical things (e.g. climbing, jumping, swimming, etc) yet these are all the same skills that take the most penalties from armor (something fighters are often known to wear a lot of).

This seems to gimp fighters in the skill area even more than they already are (due to few skill points to spend).

Any ideas why the fighter class-skill set / armor penalties were designed this way?

[AslanCross]

I see your point, but to begin with the Fighter isn't supposed to be necessarily good at those things either, considering his lack of skill points. The idea might be that the fighter COULD do those if he absolutely needed to, but he might have to strip his armor off if it was something as simple as swimming to the other side of a river.

The Ranger (or Barbarian), on the other hand, could swim in his lighter armor and be better at it due to his lighter armor and better skill point total.

[Runestar]

Common sense, I guess.

If you are wearing heavy and cumbersome fullplate, you aren't going to be swimming or climbing mountains much, however good your training.

[HunterOfJello]

You can always take off your armor, but this is just another item on the long list of problems with the Fighter.

[Havelock]

I have the habit of taking jabs at the guy in the group who likes making fighters.

Seriously, anything a fighter can do, a warblade can do better, pretty much.

[Thurbane]

Fighters can wear heavy/encumbering armor - nothing in their class description says they have to.

But FWIW, there are definitely some skills missing from the Fighter's list that should be there - Listen and Spot at the very least.