New Fighter Feat - Fighter Reborn

[Jon_Dahl]

Fighter Reborn [General]

Prerequisites
Base attack bonus +18.

At higher levels, you find some of your older talents outdated. You train yourself to let go of a few of the useless skills and learn a couple of new ones.

Benefit
You remove three of your feats. These feats must be fighter feats.
After removing these feats, you must immediately take two fighter feats.

Special
A fighter may select Fighter Reborn as one of his fighter bonus feats.

[ngilop]

I like the idea behind this.

BUT

I feel its better put to use as a fighter ability

For my own fighter fix (not linking it sorry) I gave them the ability to exchange a certain number of fighter feats for others after an hour of meditation/training a day. I think I put that ability at 12th level or so.


18th is much, much to high a level to get a feat swaps. especially considering that feats fighters have access too are crap for the most part. And mostly the fact that it takes 4 feats to gain 2. see how the math is making the poor fighter worse?

[Jon_Dahl]

I understand your point of view, but I wish to stay loyal to the original fighter idea. The idea is that fighters get a lot of fighter feats, so when we give "nice stuff" to fighters, it should be in the form a fighter feats. It is a convention that fighters just get a bunch fighter feats and that's all. I'm not saying that it's a good idea, but it's working inside the system, not changing the system.

I see that swapping 4 feats to 2 feats sounds bad, but I think that in many cases it would be great. Especially if you have played the character from lower levels to higher ones. Many usual problems could be solved, such as investing feats to a certain weapon, and then abandoning that weapon completely.

[ngilop]

I understand your point of view, but I wish to stay loyal to the original fighter idea. The idea is that fighters get a lot of fighter feats, so when we give "nice stuff" to fighters, it should be in the form a fighter feats. It is a convention that fighters just get a bunch fighter feats and that's all. I'm not saying that it's a good idea, but it's working inside the system, not changing the system.

I see that swapping 4 feats to 2 feats sounds bad, but I think that in many cases it would be great. Especially if you have played the character from lower levels to higher ones. Many usual problems could be solved, such as investing feats to a certain weapon, and then abandoning that weapon completely.

I understand that you are trying to remain 'loyal' to the original fighter, but is forcing the fighter to lose a feat, and waste one to swap 2 other feats really doing the fighter 'justice'?

I enter the plea of no, it does not. You can just make it a feat so that way its only a 1 feat cost to swap X number of feats a day.


I would never, nor would most of who I know take this feat at all. you end up making the original fighter who's strength relies on his array of feats, weaker because you just lost them 2.

[AOKost]

Interesting, but I'd suggest that you still qualify for feats that require the feats you 'lost' but you just don't get the use of that ability anymore. Or maybe you've 'mastered' that feat, and can therefore still retain it's use while learning something new. You might implement a system where a certain ability or feat is used a certain number of times to become 'mastered' to qualify for this feat. I seem to remember something in real life martial arts that you don't start using 'muscle memory' when in combat until you've performed the same maneuver ~3,000 times. For game purposes, this may be a bit extreme, but it could also be that taking the feat is you doing those initial 3,000 times to be able to use it at will in combat, and 'Mastery' of it allows the character to use it at extra bonuses or some such while opening up a feat based on that feat.

[jqavins]

The basic idea seems questionable to me. How does one give up a feat? You've mastered, let's say, a given weapon so thoroughly that you do extra damage with it (Weapon Specialization.) How do you just forget that and get equally good at something else instead? I get the idea, and the crunch could work, but the fluff feels squirrelly. Maybe worth it anyhow.

I understand that you are trying to remain 'loyal' to the original fighter, but is forcing the fighter to lose a feat, and waste one to swap 2 other feats really doing the fighter 'justice'?

I enter the plea of no, it does not. You can just make it a feat so that way its only a 1 feat cost to swap X number of feats a day.

I would never, nor would most of who I know take this feat at all. you end up making the original fighter who's strength relies on his array of feats, weaker because you just lost them 2.

As far as "doing the fighter justice" goes, your last sentence covers that; there's no injustice since no one is compelled to take this. Though I agree that trading in three plus using a fourth to get two is too high a cost. I'd suggest only trading in two to get two, so there is a net cost of one feat (this one) to chance out two others.

Interesting, but I'd suggest that you still qualify for feats that require the feats you 'lost' but you just don't get the use of that ability anymore.

And this, but modified. I'd suggest that as long as you had all the prereqs for a feat when you took it you can retain that feat when you "trade in" a prereq. BUT, you can't take any new ones requiring the feat you no longer have. I'm not even sure about this even though I lean toward it. The feat trees are designed deliberately so that a certain number of slots are necessary to reach the top, so allowing the root to be removed once the top is reached doesn't feel right. But without that, trading in two could cut down whole trees so that getting two new is nowhere near enough compensation. Cutting out the root but keeping the top could be a big boost. But I guess a boost is what you're after, so this is probably a good part of it.

Or maybe you've 'mastered' that feat, and can therefore still retain it's use while learning something new. You might implement a system where a certain ability or feat is used a certain number of times to become 'mastered' to qualify for this feat. I seem to remember something in real life martial arts that you don't start using 'muscle memory' when in combat until you've performed the same maneuver ~3,000 times. For game purposes, this may be a bit extreme, but it could also be that taking the feat is you doing those initial 3,000 times to be able to use it at will in combat, and 'Mastery' of it allows the character to use it at extra bonuses or some such while opening up a feat based on that feat.

This I don't like, as it means gaining new feats without actually losing the old ones. Use a feat to get two new feats; one might as well just add another bonus feat to fighter's progression.

Also, I agree that 18th level is too late to start this if you're going to do it at all. One might use two new feats to go further up a tree that's already growing, but one also might want to start a whole new tree (take Focus for a new favorite weapon?) and at 18th there's no time left to grow that new tree.

Maybe the answer is just to give fighters a boost by giving more and better feats. Then they can get what they need at high level without any funky fluff or balancing of trades and the dead wood just isn't so important.

LEVEL	RAW	New
1	Bonus	Bonus
2	Bonus	Bonus
3
4	Bonus	Bonus
5
6	Bonus	Bonus
7
8	Bonus	Bonus
9
10	Bonus	Bonus
11		Bonus
12	Bonus
13		Bonus
14	Bonus	Bonus
15
16	Bonus	Bonus
17		Bonus
18	Bonus
19		Bonus
20	Bonus	Bonus

That's a net two extra feats, which is as many new ones as taking the "Fighter Reborn" once would allow while leaving everything else alone. Lots simpler this way.

[Jon_Dahl]

Yeah, the fluff makes no sense. I was thinking that the person taking the feat just has to create the fluff on the fly for his or her character.

[AOKost]

I really feel it'd be easier to just give fighters feats at every level as well as their standard feats... as long as they are fighter related, but there's so many that it verges on ridiculous...

[Deepbluediver]

I would rather just fix the feats (and mechanics if necessary) to make them not-useless at later levels. Sure it's more work but I feel like it gives a better overall result.

[ngilop]

its not just the flaff that makes no sense, to a lesser degree so does the mechanics.. How do you just randomly forgot a skill/talent you had to gain a new one? mechically you give up 4 feats to get 2.


why not just make a feat that allows you to swap out X-number of feats for others on a daily basis?

[JNAProductions]

The issue is, Fighters kinda suck. Adding a new feat won't fix that, and on the off-chance you add a feat so damn powerful it DOES fix them, guess what? Barbarians, and Monks, and Paladins, and hell, even Wizards can take it, probably.

[jqavins]

The issue is, Fighters kinda suck. Adding a new feat won't fix that, and on the off-chance you add a feat so damn powerful it DOES fix them, guess what? Barbarians, and Monks, and Paladins, and hell, even Wizards can take it, probably.

Not if it has a "Fighter level..." prereq.

[Ashtagon]

This feat is on a par with those in the Epic Level handbook.

It's not very good.