| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
First thing, the fighter doesn't need any improvement in realation to his fighting ability, I know that.
What he needs is improving his ability in other areas.
Basic idea:
Give him 4 skill points per level. Particularly I believe that 4 per level should be the minimun for all heroc classes, with more skillful classes getting six (ranger, bard) and the rogue, as skill master should have eight.
Add perception to his skill list. Remove Knowledge Dungeoneering and Knowledge Engineering.
Give him the folowing ability:
Fighting Knowledge(Ex): At firsth level the fighter chooses two Knowledge skills and another skill not on the fighters list. This skills become class skills for the Fighter.
Maybe add a suggestion list of possible skill combinations you can take depending on background, to help lazy GMs and indecisive players, like:
Soldier: Engineering and Dungeoneering; Acrobatics or Heal
Aristocrat: Nobility and Religion or History; Appraise or Diplomacy
Streetraised: Local and Nature; Stealth or Sleight of Hand
More involved idea:
Another idea would be giving him a couple of new class abilities.
My suggestion would be at level 4 and then 12 the fighter can choose from a small pool of abilities. A list with 8 to 12 abilities would be enough. This abilities would have to meet two critria:
One: be useful out of battle but not so much during it. Fighter are already great damage dealers they don't need help in that area. Using Intimidate instead of Diplomacy to gather information is a good examle, it rewards charismatic fighter and those that spend a feat or two to improve intimidate. Giving a bonus to Intimidate, on the other hand, would just make Demoralize builds more abusable.
Two: Have a Fighter flavor. Rogue Talents have many similarities to this idea, so it would be best to keep the fighter abilities as something unique. The sweet spot for the flavor of those abilities would be too brutish and jock type for rogues, too disciplined for barbarians and too ruthless for paladins.
My first name for this wouldbe Diversified Training but I think there's an ability with that name already. Not sure.
So, what do you guys think?
|
It would be a slight combat buff, but what about letting a fighter use sense motive to get a bonus on initiative counts? Being in as many battles as a fighter gives you a 'danger sense' that just gets you moving faster.
Before combat, you have the option to roll Sense Motive to see the motion of things. If you clear 15, +1 to initiative, and +1 for every 5 after that; just in case combat goes down, you were ready for it. I say 'option' because it's possible that being battle ready at all times might give a diplomacy penalty of some sort. Any thoughts?
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I am so sad...I had written out a very long post, and then hit the backspace key while my cursor was not in the text box, and firefox took me away from the page, losing all my text...
*groans*
Here' my quick'n'dirty suggestion:
BATTLE READY: +Level to initiative. In surprise rounds, if oterwise unable to act, roll initiative at -20; if it's a positive value, you can act in the surprise round, but you are flat-footed until you do. In the 1. normal round of combat, use normal unpenalized initiate.
MOBILE COMBAT: As a standard action, make a full attack. If you think it's OP, restrict out BAB, attack-granting class features and bonus feats from other classes.
All good saves, better skills. Also needs:
*Being able to deal with the occasional level-appropriate flying opponent, even if not archery focused, from level 5 on, maybe level 7. Needs no appreciable limit on daily use no later than 11th level. As a class ability.
Level 20 capstone: As a full-round action, kill 1 creature within your melee range. This is a no-save(ex) non-[death]effect.
Here are my considerations. They are driven by where I think a Fighter's training SHOULD be able to contribute in a meaningful way, but currently does not. Many of these have issues with them, so any suggestions on improvements are welcome.
### Issue 1 - no significant advantage when ambushing. ###
Description: Cinematic-style sneak attacks. Functions similar to SA... sort of.
Mechanics: Acquired at Fighter level 6. Usable once per minute. When attacking flat-footed foes who are denied their dexterity bonus to AC, your weapon damage is increased as determined by arbitrary DM assignment of target importance...
- Low (expendable extras) - The attack delivers a coup de grace effect
- Medium (tough foes, but not story-breaking) - add 1d6 damage per Fighter Level
- High (arch enemies, bosses) - add 1 damage per Fighter Level
Description: Cinematic-style surprise appearance, used to demoralize enemies before crushing them.
Mechanics: Acquired at Fighter level 6. Usable once per minute. Used against flat-footed foes who are denied their dexterity bonus to AC. As a standard action, you can demoralize foes with a competence bonus of +1 per Fighter level. The results depend on the arbitrary DM assignment of target importance...
- Low (expendable extras) - The target is dazed for 1 round and shaken for 2 rounds.
- Medium (tough foes, but not story-breaking) - The target is staggered and shaken for 1 round
- High (arch enemies, bosses) - The target is shaken for 1 round.
### Issue 2 - no significant insight or perception. ###
Description: When certain conditions arise, and an active perception check or sense motive check could apply, the Fighter automatically makes an intuition check. The result substitutes for both perception and sense motive, but instead of providing normal information, a successful check gives the character a vague feeling that something is amiss. This usually prompts the use of active perception or sense motive checks, or using other sensory abilities or spells. This ability works only against attempts at surprise attacks or sneaky tactics.
Mechanics: Roll 1d20 plus CHA and WIS bonuses, plus 1/2 class level.
Description: In training, the Fighter not only learns how to use weapons and armor, but also about the sorts of enemies he'll meet on the field of battle, their tactics, abilities, and how to tear victory from their corpses.
Mechanics: Add +1 competence bonus to knowledge checks to determine a creature's or class's abilities. The creature must be one from the same region of the Fighter's training. By spending a move action, can check again, adding a self-stacking +1 for a specific creature or class. The maximum bonus is the Fighter's level. The bonus lasts until the either creature or the Fighter ceases combat (such as by being defeated or escaping).
### Issue 3 - no significant social prowess ###
Description: Having the guts and training to build a career on violence gives a certain authenticity to your threats.
Mechanics: Full round action to add +1/2 Class level on an Intimidate check
### Issue 4 - a mid-level Fighter, unarmed, might still be powerless against a housecat thanks to AoOs ###
Description: As an experienced combatant, your battle instincts are honed to the point where your mind and body are a weapon.
Mechanics: At level 8, get Improved Unarmed Strike as a bonus feat. If you already have this feat, select any other feat which has Improved Unarmed Strike as a prerequisite. You must qualify for this feat normally.
### Issue 5 - no significant contribution to party empowerment during downtime, nor friendly NPCs in wartime ###
Description: Training and experience has culminated in advanced training and battle preparation methods.
Mechanics: Starting at level 6 the Master of the Craft feats become available, as normal or fighter bonus feats (see below). These function similar to Crafting Feats, but do different things.
-=# Master of the Craft Feats #=-
The following are available to the Fighter. Note that there are others (Trapper, Herbalist, Craft Fetish, Inspirer, Spiritual Leader, Modify Spell) which are not available to the Fighter.
Benefit: Can spend long hours teaching combat drills to participants, temporarily giving combat prowess to those who take the time to practice the drills. The money needs to be spent on props, targets and other training gear for the drills, and possibly to pay or feed the participants. The cost is 1 gp per participant per day. There must be at least 2 participants, not including the Drillmaster
Each day of drills provides the participants temporary XP, used to purchase temporary levels in the same class as the Drillmaster. These levels provide only Base Attack, effective levels (for feat qualification), combat feats and teamwork feats which the Drillmaster has, and in the order that the Drillmaster chooses (which may or may not be the same as the Drillmaster's own character build). The Base Attack Bonus does not stack with that of the participants. All participants learn these in the same order. The amount of temporary XP provided per day is equal to 1d20 + Charisma Bonus, multiplied by the Drillmaster's Base Attack Bonus, and then subtract the number of participants. The maximum temporary XP is half of the amount that the Drillmaster has.
The drill must be performed by at least 2 participants, who must remain in the same formation as they were in the drill (depending on their role). To begin the drill, all participants must synchronize their initiative, likely by using the delay action. The bonuses and additional feats provided by the drill only work among those participants, and only if used within 1 day per level of the Drillmaster.
Benefit: Can spend long hours overseeing the creation of fortifications. This modifies terrain to create biased cover, hazards and difficult terrain for invaders, and other advantages for defenders. Each fortification has a cost, many which require exactly 1/3rd to be spent on materials, depending on the terrain. The rest of the costs must be covered by labor. The cost of a given fortification is reduced by the quality of design, and the speed of the fortification is improved by quality of management.
The design is determined by a check against the DC of the fortification (below). Use either a Knowledge Engineering Check, or 1d20 + INT bonus + Base Attack. Roll both and take the better result. For every 5 that you exceed the DC, reduce the total cost by 5%.
Construction of the fortification is determined by workforce. Each worker adds their Strength scores and Fortitude save bonus (+4 if they have Endurance), and this is the amount of silver pieces they can contribute to fortification per 8 hour work day. This can be increased by +2 if they have masterwork tools (shovels, masonry tools, etc.), -2 if they have poor quality or improvised tools, -4 if they have no tools. Further, each participant also can add the Fortifier's Charisma bonus.
[Fortification] :: [Design DC] :: [Cost per applied 5'cube] :: [Materials]
(Nice little work project here)
Benefit: Can spend long hours training participants, giving temporary physical enhancements.
(functions like Drillmaster, but adds to STR, DEX and/or CON, Fort saves, Reflex saves, and also HD worth of temporary HP. Lasts days, depending on Trainer level; CHA or INT enhances rate of improvement)
Benefit: Can spend long hours among a population, gathering volunteers for an army, church, or training program.
(Make CHA checks based on character level to recruit. Can alternately make diplomacy checks. Result dictates how many participants you get per day. Percent of the population in a region is capped by the applicable requirements - eg infants and invalids can't join armies. Costs money to compensate families or as per 3.5 Gather Info, but this may be covered by the institution)
|
I am so sad...I had written out a very long post, and then hit the backspace key while my cursor was not in the text box, and firefox took me away from the page, losing all my text...
*groans*
For a person that posts such stupendous amounts of text, you might want to take a look at the Lazarus plugin for Firefox.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I am so sad...I had written out a very long post, and then hit the backspace key while my cursor was not in the text box, and firefox took me away from the page, losing all my text...
*groans*
Well the condensed version is that the Fighter has multiple problems. Increasing their class skill list, and their skill points, is a good start for general purposes. However, the biggest problem is that skills are not enough to save the Fighter. The rogue has proved that more skills doesn't necessarily mean more usefulness, as it is frequently trumped by the Ranger or Bard in virtually every field.
A big reason is because exceptional abilities such as magic either mimics or trumps skills. More so, they give options. Virtually every ranger or paladin variant that removes their spells (like in 3.5) generally drastically weakened them in terms of options. The Fighter's problem is that he lacks options, and I believe that extends to in-combat as well.
I commented in the other thread that Fighters generally need a lot of custom items or a menagerie of spellcasting cohorts to fix his problems at higher levels. It's because combat scenarios are just too dynamic at higher levels. There is so much that can be brought to bear as levels rise. You're looking at stacks of crowd control (CC), status ailments (daze-locking a Fighter isn't difficult these days), movement problems (even if the Fighter can fly, swim, climb, or whatever, you still have to deal with reducing your combat effectiveness by about 75% because of your inability to full-attack), and simply that they have no defenses against so many attacks without custom magic items.
This combined with their lack of out of combat utility, is where I feel they are really getting hosed. Fighters don't really even fight well. They can get big numbers, but big numbers don't account for much in a game where the GM plays enemies to their potential. That extra +5 to hit and damage is really sexy, but does you no good at all when you're too busy being stuck to the floor, dominated, level drained to death, blinded, dazed, or just dealing with being unable to get around obstacles (be the obstacles creatures or objects).
I think the only way to really save the Fighter is to take a cue from the Tome of Battle. Give the Fighter some abilities they can choose as they gain levels, which allow them to do special things. Barbarians get Rage Powers, Rogues get talents, so Fighters should get some love as well. Something that doesn't require enormous feat chains for completely mundane stuff.
I think a system that allows for Stances, Techniques, and Talents would help the Fighter out. Stances of course could provide passive benefits based on a given fighting style, while Techniques would be more active, or function like feats that are keyed to certain actions the Fighter can already take. Talents would be selectable class features which improved the Fighter's out of combat utility, such as providing benefits to skills, or passive situational benefits.
A few example ideas...
========================================================================
FIGHTER STANCES
Footwork Stance (Ex): While in this stance, you treat difficult terrain as normal terrain for up to half of your movement speed (if you have a 30 ft. speed, you may ignore up to 15 ft. of difficult terrain). You may also take a 5 ft. step while on difficult terrain. At 6th level, you may take a 10 ft. step (treat as a 5 ft. step, except you may move up to 10 ft.) when not on difficult terrain. At 11th level, you may take a 10 ft. step even through difficult terrain.
Acrobatic Stance (Ex): While in this stance, you may take 10 on Acrobatics checks even while distracted. At 6th level, you may stand up from prone as an immediate action that doesn't provoke attacks of opportunity. At 11th level, you may ignore any penalties to Acrobatics for moving at your full speed.
Warden Stance (Ex): While in this stance, enemies are not treated as threatening any spaces that you threaten when determining if they can make attacks of opportunity. At 6th level, spaces you threaten are considered difficult terrain for your enemies. At 11th level, enemies within your threatened space cannot make attacks of opportunity against anyone except you.
Avoidance Stance (Ex): While in this stance, you gain a dodge bonus equal to 1 + 1/4th your level to your Armor Class and Reflex saving throws, but you reduce your movement speed by half. At 6th level, you are treated as having Evasion while in this stance. At 11th level, you are treated as having Improved Evasion in this stance.
Heightened Awareness Stance (Ex): While in this stance, you gain the scent ability. At 6th level, you gain blindsense 30 ft. At 11th level, you gain blindsight 30 ft.
Unbreakable Stance (Ex): While in this stance, when afflicted with certain status conditions, the condition does not begin affecting you until 1 round after it would have. You may prevent the condition if you become immune to it before it affects you (such as becoming immune to fear). The conditions affected by this ability are: Bleed, Confused, Dazed, Fatigued, Nauseated, Shaken, Sickened, Staggered. At 6th level, add the following conditions: Blinded, Cowering, Exhausted, Frightened, Panicked, Paralyzed, Stunned, and Unconscious. At 11th level, add the following conditions: Dead, Petrified. If you would gain the Dead condition due to hit point damage, being healed before the condition is applied prevents the condition as if you weren't killed.
FIGHTER TECHNIQUES
Relentless Charge (Ex): When using the Charge action, you may move through difficult terrain (you still take movement penalties for the terrain as appropriate). At 6th level, you may change direction once during your charge, allowing you to charge at an angle. At 11th level, when you declare a charge, you are treated as if under the effects of freedom of movement until the end of your turn.
Devastating Strike (Ex): As a standard action, make a single melee attack with a weapon or unarmed attack against a target within range. If the attack succeeds, the target takes damage normally and must succeed on a Fortitude save (DC 10 + 1/2 your level + your Strength modifier) or be afflicted with one of the following status conditions, chosen by you, for 1 round: Deafened, Fatigued, Shaken, or Sickened. At 6th level, add the following conditions to the list: Confused, or Blinded. At 11th level, add the following conditions to the list: Dazed.
Rending Strike (Ex): As a standard action, make a single melee attack with a weapon or unarmed attack against a target you threaten. If the attack succeeds, the target takes bleed damage equal to your base weapon damage (a medium unarmed strike would deal 1d3 bleed damage while a medium greatsword would deal 2d6 bleed damage). At 6th level, you double the amount of bleed damage suffered (2d6 becomes 4d6). At 11th level, you triple the amount of bleed damage suffered. (2d6 becomes 6d6). Bleed effects that deal damage do not stack, only the worst applies. When determining which is worst, choose the one with the highest average damage.
========================================================================
Next post will include some more ideas...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
For a person that posts such stupendous amounts of text, you might want to take a look at the Lazarus plugin for Firefox.I am so sad...I had written out a very long post, and then hit the backspace key while my cursor was not in the text box, and firefox took me away from the page, losing all my text...
*groans*
I think I love you. ^.^
Thanks for telling me about this. XD
I am so sad...I had written out a very long post, and then hit the backspace key while my cursor was not in the text box, and firefox took me away from the page, losing all my text...
*groans*
Ashiel if you are using firefox then get the Lazareus add-on. Even if the the browser crashed you can recover lost text.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Ashiel, my problem with the fighter isn't even so much utility, it's that the fighter feels boring when compared with anything else I've played. Your suggestions give a lot of new stuff to do, and stuff is fun. It's the reason why the gunslinger seems so cool: grit and grit abilities give new options and just new things to do other than "I hit the guy with my sword".
I think Ashiel's suggestions make the fighter not feel like a fighter. I'd rather fix the problem where it really comes from: the magic item list and, the spell list, and the ill considered metamagics like dazing spell.
That's fair, but I'd like to pose a question:
What makes a Fighter feel like a Fighter? The Fighter as-is is not unlike the NPC warrior class in terms of how it actually plays. In fact, it is only an NPC warrior class but with bigger numbers.
Does a class have to not have any class features that let you make choices during the game to "feel like a fighter"? If that is the case, then I feel that the Fighter is a lost cause. The suggestion to change magic items, spell lists, and metamagics, is impractical from a design standpoint, and it still doesn't actually fix the problem.
I already noted that one of the Fighter's problems is their over-reliance on custom magic items to be able to remain playable at higher levels. Changing magic items doesn't help this.
Fighters lack options. Changing spell lists doesn't help this.
Fighters have a lot of inherent weaknesses and lack of options that far exceed other classes. Changing metamagics doesn't help this, as the problem manifests when dealing with core monsters too.
But I feel that your argument that the Fighter feeling like a Fighter is a fair one. So, again, "What feels like a Fighter"?
I can try to answer that from my perspective:
I think a Fighter feels like a Fighter when...
Ashiel, my problem with the fighter isn't even so much utility, it's that the fighter feels boring when compared with anything else I've played. Your suggestions give a lot of new stuff to do, and stuff is fun. It's the reason why the gunslinger seems so cool: grit and grit abilities give new options and just new things to do other than "I hit the guy with my sword".
Pretty much this. There is factually little difference between playing Fighter 20 and NPC-Warrior 20, other than the Fighter is just stronger due to more feats and weapon training. Their actual options and play style is about the same.
EDIT: I'm also not sure just throwing more bonus feats at them is the solution. A lot of the bonus feats that you suggested, or made up for the Fighter, are in essence along the same idea of giving the Fighter class features like the Tome of Battle that let them do different things (in fact, the ability to move and attack with 2 weapons is actually a 1st level maneuver from the Tome of Battle).
I feel like at some point doing it all as feats makes it a bit clunky. :\
Next post will include some more ideas...
Another thing that basically caused "Warblade" to become Fighter when the Tome of Battle came out is because the Tome of Battle design paradigm allowed for you to make a variety of warriors who relied on martial skill and could have entirely different focuses in combat, while remaining effective.
For example:
You have a combat style that heavily focused on dual-wielding and mobility (named tiger-something).
You had a combat style that was heavily focused on more traditional and direct combat (named iron heart).
You had a leadership style that focused heavily on teamwork and cooperation with allies (named white raven).
You had a style that focused on brute strength and steady endurance (called stone dragon, if I recall correctly).
You had a style that focused on steady focus, mental resolve, and clean decisive strikes (called diamond mind).
You could select from all of these basic combat principles to build your "Fighter" (aka "Warblade"). Almost by default, the design principles in the Tome of Battle fix the Fighter's most consistent flaws. It was entirely possible to be a good sword & board fighter immediately, because many of your attacks allowed you to do them more like Vital Strike (take a standard action to deal decent damage, sometimes with a kicker effect).
Meanwhile the class itself (not counting the build your own combat style type abilities) had 4 + Int modifier skills, some skills like Diplomacy and Sense Motive and Knowledges, rewarded Intelligence (the Warblade class could apply Intelligence to Initiative checks, and I think later could apply it to their flat-footed AC or Reflex saves), the ability to apply feats like Weapon Focus to different weapons, and so on and so forth.
As for actually being in play, it feels like a Fighter. Your primary mode of operation is hitting stuff and making attack rolls. Just sometimes, you are might be choosing to do it in a different way, and resolve it as a standard-action attack that does something special (similar to how PF Fighters try to make use of Vital Strike). Sometimes you might include skill checks with those special attacks (for example, there is one martial maneuver that allowed you to make a Jump check during a charge against a larger foe to deal bonus damage, as you literally crashed down on them with your attack, which was very cool, thematic, and worth it, when fighting stuff like dragons, purple worms, and other big bads).
If you look at what literally every other class has that makes it viable, it is options outside of just some feats and the basic class features. Bonus feats have just proven to not be an ideal way to make a class special, or work, since 3E came out. The Fighter has had these problems for a long time. They're still not fixed yet. I feel the reason they're not fixed yet, is because people are still holding on to the basic model that has been around since 3.0 and still doesn't work well (it worked better in 3.0 because there were no limits on which feats worked together, and stuff like keen and improved critical stacked, and weapon size rules were kinder to Fighters, etc; but all that stuff got nerfed in 3.5).
Anyway, I digress for a bit. More examples of mechanical ideas to keep Fighters viable with different syles
========================================================================
FIGHTER STUFF
Style and Activity
Shield Bastion (Ex): When wielding a shield, you are treated as having the Deflect Arrows feat even if you don't meet the prerequisites. At 6th level, you apply your Shield's AC bonus against touch attacks. At 11th level, you may act as if under the effects of spell turning as an immediate action. The effect lasts for 1 round, and never results in either target being sent through a planar rift (roll again for a different result). Once you have used your spell reflect option, you must wait 5 rounds before doing so again.
Substance and Passive
Athlete (Ex): When you select this talent, choose one skill: Acrobatics, Climb, Jump, or Swim. You gain a bonus on checks with the chosen skill equal to one half your level (minimum +1). You may select this talent multiple times. Its effects do not stack. Each time you select a new skill.
Rational Fighting (Ex): You gain an insight bonus on Will saving throws equal to your Intelligence bonus (minimum +1). At 6th level, you may add your Intelligence bonus to rolls to confirm critical hits. At 11th level, you may add your Intelligence bonus to your flat-footed armor class.
========================================================================
But again, I think the best way to "fix" the Fighter is to allow them to build their own combat style through a series of: Stances, Techniques, and Passive abilities, which aren't directly connected to their standard class-chassis.
I've never considered direct combat to be a Fighter's weakness, even in the mid level or high level game... so long as the build had some level of planning.
One other curse is that the Fighter rocks when buffed and geared, and people complain about the need for buffs and gear. Consequently we see fixes where the gear and buffs aren't needed, and then when we add the gear and buffs you often end up with unstoppable juggernauts able to solo PL+ encounters.
The funny part bout these combat fixes is that we still end up with one-trick ponies who can only fight, can't talk well, can't sneak, can't contribute out of combat, and end up having moments of forced BS contributions, boredom, pr0n-surfing during game time, and so on until the next fight.
Summary: focusing on combat ignores the rest of the game, and this is the biggest problem with the Fighter. Ergo, fix utility first.
I've never considered direct combat to be a Fighter's weakness, even in the mid level or high level game... so long as the build had some level of planning.
It takes a lot of system mastery, and without custom magic items, I've never seen a Fighter that can hold up to even Monster Manual/Bestiary enemies.
One other curse is that the Fighter rocks when buffed and geared, and people complain about the need for buffs and gear. Consequently we see fixes where the gear and buffs aren't needed, and then when we add the gear and buffs you often end up with unstoppable juggernauts able to solo PL+ encounters.
I see this as the biggest failing with the PF remix of the Fighter. They just tried to give the Fighter bigger numbers. Ok, so weapon specialization wasn't enough? Ok! Let's give him a +5/+5 to hit and damage that stacks with Weapon Specialization and Greater Specialization, so we can hit +7/+9, and then give him some gloves that give him another +2/+2, bringing him to +9/+11! Yeah, numbers fix stuff!
Except it doesn't. The Fighter still suffers from the huge issues of mobility at higher levels (fly is not an issue at high levels, but being able to move and deal decent damage, deal with teleporting enemies, or deal with larger enemies with reach is an issue). They still lack skill points, they still lack class skills. They still lack abilities that can be used in and outside of combat.
Look at the barbarian. The barbarian has rage powers that can be used inside and outside of combat. Some of them are utility based. A lot of them are defensive, and protect them against a wider variety of problems. For example, a raging barbarian is harder for a vampire to dominate. Some barbarians can heal themselves. They get passive bonuses against traps (not major, but it at least is a defense), they get uncanny dodge, which helps with getting ambushed. They can get resistances and immunities while raging, etc.
I'd rather not just add more flat bonuses to the Fighter. It doesn't help stuff. It's like back in 3.5 when someone posted this crazy monster on the GitP forums, which had stat bonuses in the five-digit range, and stupidly large amounts of damage and such. After looking at it for a moment, I realized a 17th level wizard could destroy it in direct combat, and a 6th level cleric could have defeated them in a less direct method, because for all the big numbers, it had no way of actually dealing with stuff adventurers run into all the time.
The funny part bout these combat fixes is that we still end up with one-trick ponies who can only fight, can't talk well, can't sneak, can't contribute out of combat, and end up having moments of forced BS contributions, boredom, pr0n-surfing during game time, and so on until the next fight.
Agreed here again. That's why I think that we should look at options that are reminiscent of the warblade mechanics, or strait up lifted from the warblade in some cases, because they were useful both inside and outside of combat. Closer to being like Barbarians in terms of skill points and such, having Diplomacy and Sense Motive as class skills, etc.
I don't want to raise the ceiling, just widen the room. Giving them more that they can do in combat, other than just bigger numbers, is a start for fixing their combat shtick, because combat in D&D is more than just big numbers.
All the more reason I propose a stance/technique/other system. Stances could allow for specific focuses that you can swap between. Techniques could include combat options that were active, passive, or semi-passive, and other options filling the gaps, to make them better at out of combat stuff, which you could pick and choose.
Summary: focusing on combat ignores the rest of the game, and this is the biggest problem with the Fighter. Ergo, fix utility first.
I can agree with this. While I do believe the Fighter has issues in combat, its out of combat is nigh non-existent. I feel like a big contributor to this issue is the fact the Fighter has no niche. Barbarians have the big tough weapons guy shtick. Rangers have the generalist/woodsman shtick. Paladins are holy warriors. Etc.
Can we all, together, figure out what the Fighter's out of combat shtick is? In previous editions, it was a leadership role. Fighters got followers and cohorts just for being awesome Fighters. I think they could even get keeps and such. I'm not really big on giving out land and castles and junk as mechanical benefits, but making focusing on their leadership might be a way to improve their out of combat capabilities. Giving them the option to get an NPC warrior cohort or something wouldn't overpower them either. *ponders*
The fact that the Fighter has the largest list of proficiencies, advanced training (feats) and class abilities which amplify proficiencies further... it all points to the Fighter being the "technology" warrior; the guy who comes from a background of advanced civilization and resources. What does this imply most? Word come to mind like Military, Urban. I can see secretive warrior guilds who hoard rare combat techniques and train in dark basements. I can see special combat training in the military, creating elite war machines. These would eventually lead to some mercs emerging from masters of war and combat, who teach others the secrets of their academy or guild.
In thinking this, I look at my offering above, and also yours. We're two of a kind in some ways, for this topic anyway.
I don't agree the fighter is the NPC warrior with bigger numbers either. Feats aren't just numbers, they're the only form of in combat versatility non-casters get and fighters get about twice as many of them as warriors. A fighter can put together two greater maneuvers at level 7. Nobody else can do so before level 9, and the warrior would use all his feats doing so unless human. That's not just numbers.
Still just numbers. Number of feats. More HD allows warriors to do the same thing. Ironically, this shows up exceptionally easily from the GM's side of things when adding class levels to bestiary creatures, where you can drop lots of warrior HD onto enemies for a low CR boost.
Having two greater maneuvers at level 7 is possibly, but is it really that great? Combat Maneuvers are do-able by most anyone. There's not a huge difference between greater and lesser versions except a +2 and a kicker, and tons of enemies are invulnerable to at least one or two combat maneuvers. Plus, it seems like they are just giving that stuff away to spellcasters these days. Q.Q
The feats Fighters do have that are just for Fighters or are regularly useful, are generally damage based effects, or come too late and have no options to upgrade them. NPC warriors even match the fighter in proficiencies (having the same proficiencies, including tower shield proficiency).
Even then, feats provide very little in terms of defenses against bad things. The greater saving throw boosting feats were kind of nice, but aren't really enough. Fighters really just have no ways to realistically deal with a huge variety of enemies in the game, be they humanoid NPCs or monsters, and god forbid if the GM actually custom builds the NPCs to be stronger than the average version of those monsters.
It just worries me, y'know? Fighters have been having problems for years. More than a decade actually. I've been watching Fighters kind of suck it up for more than a decade, and it's only recently that I realized it's because of the design paradigm behind Fighters. Everyone got hung on the idea that Fighters are just a warrior with bonus feats. Pathfinder tried to spice them up, but it did so by just giving them bigger numbers, which fixed nothing, but made them at least compete with their rivals in terms of damage without relying on a truckload of poorly balanced 3.5 splatbook feats.
I think I'd like to see something more akin to...
Level 1: Bonus Feat || +1 Stance || +2 Techniques ||
Level 2: Class Feature || — || — ||
Level 3: Class Feature || — || +1 Technique ||
Level 4: Bonus Feat || +1 Stance || — ||
Level 5: Class Feature || — || +1 Technique ||
Level 6: Class Feature || — || — ||
Level 7: Bonus Feat || +1 Stance || +1 Technique ||
"Class Feature" might include stuff like Armor Training, Uncanny Dodge, Combat Style (like rangers), and might include some new stuff like...
Weapon Synergy (Ex): You may apply any feat that requires you to select a weapon (such as Weapon Focus) to any other weapon that shares a Fighter weapon group with it (so if you have Weapon Focus (longsword) you may apply it to all weapons in the Heavy Blade category, such as bastard swords and greatswords).
Hmmm, actually, this is interesting enough that I think I'm going to write up a prototype and link it up here for you guys to look at.
I have to agree with the sentiments Malignor and Ashiel have expressed. The Fighter class is often pointed out as having little to no presence in out of combat affairs. With its low skill points and focus on attributes that don't apply to most social or problem solving skills, it can often seem like a fish out of water when the fighting stops.
This, coupled with the fact that there are many spells that trivialize or downright mock the few skills a Fighter can take (such as Spider Climb, Jump, Fabricate, etc) and it can be easy to see why some might feel the Fighter's weakness is out of combat options.
I particularly like Ashiel's suggestions to add new class features in the form of Stances, Techniques and Talents. I've seen quite a few houserules for the Fighter class, and I always delve into any of them that add such features.
Spellcasters are powerful for many reasons, but ultimately, because they have options. Pathfinder did a great job adding more options to many other classes, such as Barbarians through Rage Powers, Rogues through Rogue Talents, and even very recently Monks through the Qinggong monk archetype and Ki Powers. These features add diverse options to the classes, sometimes with a focus on combat, other times with a focus on skills or out of combat applications.
Adding simply more numbers to the Fighter is one way to improve the class, but I feel until the Fighter gains features like the classes above, they will continue to be less attractive once the last badguy is eating dirt.
By dropping the number of bonus feats you're actually making the fighter less flexible. There were almost enough feats with just the CRB, but even then shield bash builds had nothing to spare. Now it's worse. Those class features you want to add more of? I can almost guarantee I'll find them less interesting than the ability to viably perform combat maneuvers.
Those techniques might as well be fighter only feats.
And the stances go against the Fighter's theme of being consistent.
Define what you mean by consistent. If you mean by not running out, then I don't see a problem here. If you mean by always active, always, then perhaps there would be a disconnect, in the sense that you could shift your stance to something else (such as going from an offensive stance to a defensive stance).
As for the progression above, it was purely as an example. Though I don't see why giving them less feats would suddenly bar them from being good at combat maneuvers, before even being aware of what they would be replaced with. :o
Also, I had mentioned the possibility of giving them weapon styles, like how rangers get weapon styles, which would effectively allow you to pick certain themed feat progressions and early access to certain feats (for example, rangers aren't even as combat-focused in theme as Fighters are, but rangers can ignore prerequisites for their 5 bonus feats, which sets them up really pretty for mastering hard to master combat styles).
But I'm all for group efforts here, so let's talk about this a bit. :)
Let's say, hypothetically, that my writeup would contain no less bonus feats. Is there anything that jumps out at you that would help the Fighter with dealing with situations within combat that he cannot currently? Currently, Fighters have harsh mobility issues if they are melee, barring the very specific Mobile Fighter archtype, with the only method of trying to recoup the loss being Vital Strike feats, which cannot be comboed with feats like Spring Attack; which generally means moving -> attack -> receive full-attack in return.
Or, if the bonus feats, were lowered in number, what would YOU say would be adequate replacement?
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
The alternate fighter class from the Pathfinder Chronicles: Campaign Setting (3.5) =
Class Abilities: Numerous martial academies around the Inner Sea region teach weapon skill, tactics, diplomacy, and other tools useful for war. Fighters who attend these schools may choose to take additional class skills. Taking this option replaces the bonus feat gained upon taking the
first level of fighter.
Class Skills: A fighter trained at a famous war college or fighting school gains the following class skills (in addition to the normal fighter class skills): Diplomacy (Cha), Knowledge (architecture and engineering) (Int), Knowledge (geography) (Int), Knowledge (nobility and royalty) (Int), Sense Motive (Wis).
Skill Points at 1st Level: (4 + Int modifier) x 4.
Skill Points at Each Additional Level: 4 + Int modifier.
Gather Information was rolled into Diplomacy, so one less skill. Knowledge (engineering) was already added to the list of fighter skills. Just add the remaining and call it a day.
The alternate fighter class from the Pathfinder Chronicles: Campaign Setting (3.5) =
Class Abilities: Numerous martial academies around the Inner Sea region teach weapon skill, tactics, diplomacy, and other tools useful for war. Fighters who attend these schools may choose to take additional class skills. Taking this option replaces the bonus feat gained upon taking the
first level of fighter.Class Skills: A fighter trained at a famous war college or fighting school gains the following class skills (in addition to the normal fighter class skills): Diplomacy (Cha), Knowledge (architecture and engineering) (Int), Knowledge (geography) (Int), Knowledge (nobility and royalty) (Int), Sense Motive (Wis).
Skill Points at 1st Level: (4 + Int modifier) x 4.
Skill Points at Each Additional Level: 4 + Int modifier.Gather Information was rolled into Diplomacy, so one less skill. Knowledge (engineering) was already added to the list of fighter skills. Just add the remaining and call it a day.
That hardly addresses their problems in combat at levels in excess of 8th-12th.
EDIT: It also doesn't address Mergy's concern that Fighters basically just whack stuff with sticks. :P
Make a fighter only feat that lets fighters deflect spells back at their casters with a successful attack roll if the spells area of effect includes the fighter. Make a feat that lets characters use tower shields to block line of effect. Make a feat similar to toughness that gives an additional skill point per level.
I think that would pretty much cover the classes major weaknesses.
|
|
Well there's the option to make them more interesting in combat, such as giving them free combat manoeuvres, or letting them immediate action intercept attacks.
Actually, being able to move as an immediate action x times/day would solve a few mobility issues and would be interesting. I know the whole fighter has to be able to do the same things all the time all day is a major sacred cow, but maybe it's time to get rid of that. You can only get really cool powerful stuff if you're limited somehow in its use.
*I'm not trying to turn this into 4E.
My DM once mentioned allowing fighters to prepare feats like a wizard prepares spells. It would give him flexibility and not force characters to play one trick ponies that become largely useless if their schtick is countered.
"Today we fight flying monsters? I'd better not try tripping them, maybe I should focus on grappling them or smashing their faces in."
Never really got farther along to designing anything but thought you guys could use some food for thought.
I just wanna jump out on a limb here and say that I don't think the Fighter class is worth changing the entire game around just for its sake. I'd rather scrap the class completely, rather than have to change everything about the game I love, from magic items to feats to spells, just to make a class that is too limited in scope and use fit in. EDIT: The fighter needs to be able to stand on its own. I don't mean deal with everything alone, but be able to stand up and succeed on its own merits.
I mean, barbarians, paladins, rangers...they work. Fighter doesn't. We're not tearing up the system and rebuilding it around those classes. Why is this?
I think that here there are two problems in the same discussion. I'm sorry if I'm not clear, but english is not my native language.
First, I see a problem. The 2 skill point classes. I think that at least classes should have 4 skill points / level, but only if the GM can handle this. In most game a small group of skills is used. GM should find a use for all skills (even professions) so having 4 points/level got sense.
Now I'm trying this for fighters: they add level/2 on check to know something about war (history, siege weapons, troops, etc.), on heal check to identify wounds (knife, fighting technic), profession soldier, etc.
A lot can be done with traits and good use of background (I permit some change on class skills).
Second, the biggest of all. You are what you have, more than what you know.
Casters can reach broken DC with magic items. All character can have insane bonus on ST. All the game is too much gear dependant. This is a problem, because this bring the game to the hack and slash flavour (Diablo) and away from the real RPG. Is a sort of required doping of character. I don't like this anymore.
At high level skills are not important (why climb, jump, when ALL can fly?).
You are the best weaponsmith of the world? Better if you can enchant your weapons, or it will be useless, and you need a lot of time to create one. A simple spells ruin all this.
In my game spells that render useless a skill didn't exists. Nothing is more frustrating and against roleplay. Maybe this stuff should be used as a plot device, but for regular play I erase or change it (for example, pass without tracks give +1/level to DC to track).
Every group of npc need some magic gear, thus inflating magic items, for value and for roleplay.
Now I'm playing PF with normal rules on magic items. My group has less money and gear than they should have, and still a lot of roleplay is wasted. From the next campaign we will use a "non rule". More focused on character and their skills, magic items will be very rare and strange. I think that we don't need a rule, every item should be created by or with GM and should ADD something to roleplay. Not the +2 flaming sword (more damage, again? wow...) but something fantastic.
Better sword will be made by weaponsmith, not by wizards...
Regard to spells, it's simple. I modify some, delete some else. Every spell is apart from rule. If is good designed, no problem. Invisibility and great invis? Good spells. Mind blank? Very bad one. Feeblemind? Bad. Excruciating deformation? Good. Gm and players would be able to recognize that.
In this way a warrior can protect is mind, taking feats, traits, maybe multiclassing, because all game is not fixed at exaggerated levels. Caster should not need broken spells because they would not be oneshotted, etc.
Gah, you guys are going wild. Smaller steps people, one problem at a time.
Also, let's try to fix the class not the system. If we start changing feats, spells, how magic itens work, giving every martial class a bunch of abilities, the game expectations on magic items, buffs and how they affect CR, monters abilities and encounters, then we might as well admit we're not playing pathfinder anymore.
First, the fighter doesn't need any more combat power. He is already the best at fighting. Sure, big numbers, but that is what combat is about. He still needs improvements in a lot of areas, but not in that. Mobility problems... Well, he has the same mobility problems as any other melee class. Everyone has problems if they can't full attack. No reason to single him out. A fix for this would be giving him pounce as a possible ability, but I'll get to that.
Second, the fighter needs more versatility and uniqueness. I agree with that. But stances and techniques are the wrong way to go. Some tables may consider the Warblade the improved Fighter, but most consider the whole book too eastern, too anime. The idea is solid if you're making a eastern class (it's what the monk should get) but it's not the Fighter. A better idea might be to pull a page from Kirths 'Kirthfinder' and instead of Armor and Weapon training you get abilities. You could just buy Weapon and Armor training and get your big numbers but you could also get abilities that give you new options in combat, improve your weapon style, increase mobility or defenses and you even can mix and match. You get unique abilities and, like rage powers and rogue talents, they are a steady thing. It also kills a pet peeve of mine, absorbing the abilities of many fighter archetypes that really have no reason to exist. A fighter with the right build should be an archer, archetypes should be something more unique.
Third, and the reason we started this whole thing, off combat utility. Mergy and Malignor gave some ideas, tough Malignor is trying more to change the system, and Thomas LeBlanc just wants to give him more skills and skill points. And noone commented on my ideas. Its sad being ignored like that...
Gah, you guys are going wild. Smaller steps people, one problem at a time.
Also, let's try to fix the class not the system. If we start changing feats, spells, how magic itens work, giving every martial class a bunch of abilities, the game expectations on magic items, buffs and how they affect CR, monters abilities and encounters, then we might as well admit we're not playing pathfinder anymore.
Agreed.
First, the fighter doesn't need any more combat power. He is already the best at fighting. Sure, big numbers, but that is what combat is about. He still needs improvements in a lot of areas, but not in that.
I have to disagree with this in a huge way. He is most definitely not the best at Fighting. Fighting entails a lot more than just having bigger X/Ys than your peers. If this was a Facebook game where a number generator simulates battles by comparing your levels vs your targets levels and then touting out a winner, then the Fighter would definitely be looking good. But fighting in Pathfinder is far, far more dynamic than that. The ability to adapt to situations is far greater in terms of general combat effectiveness than the assumption that you will win if your opponents happily engage you in a raw slugfest.
Which was one of the reasons I wanted to diversify the Fighter both in and out of combat. For example, if you look at the stances I gave as an example, you will notice that while most give obvious combat applications without trying to give the class more hit and damage, most if not all of them have out of combat applications as well, allowing you better capability at exploration, dealing with traps, etc.
The techniques were an example of how someone could do something that was more meaningful than hit point damage, while also not locking the fighter into a 5ft space, and have tactical benefits (landing bleed damage on a spellcaster means that they need to stop the bleed or deal with having to make Concentration checks due to gushing blood everywhere), and lets the fighter to hinder foes that can easily kite him (for example, landing a single shot to cause bleed would allow the Fighter to cause a teleporting demon to have to stop its antics to stop the bleeding, or continue taking damage).
Mobility problems... Well, he has the same mobility problems as any other melee class. Everyone has problems if they can't full attack. No reason to single him out. A fix for this would be giving him pounce as a possible ability, but I'll get to that.
Pounce is just a crutch to an existing problem. Charging doesn't fix your mobility problems, it just exemplifies it. Look how easy it is to stop a charge. Difficult terrain, obstacles, movement impairment, or just not having a strait-line to your foe, etc.
Either the ability to move (even to a lesser extent such as being able to move up to 1/4 or 1/2 your movement and still full-attack, or have alternative ways to contribute or strategies that don't rely on full-attacks. In pre-3E, you could move and get all your attacks in.
Second, the fighter needs more versatility and uniqueness. I agree with that. But stances and techniques are the wrong way to go. Some tables may consider the Warblade the improved Fighter, but most consider the whole book too eastern, too anime. The idea is solid if you're making a eastern class (it's what the monk should get) but it's not the Fighter.
I have to call this out as just being stupid. Even if stances and techniques are not the desired path, it shouldn't be because some fool found Tome of Battle to be too "wuxia" or something. Especially since stances and combat techniques exist worldwide. European traditions of martial skill, including documents detailing stances and techniques to use in different situations, are widespread. For example, with a longsword (which is actually a greatsword or bastard sword in reality), there are techniques for grabbing the bottom of the blade to shorten the length of your weapon for close-quarters combat, and wielding your weapon as a whole (including disemboweling, stabbing, pummeling, and even striking with the hand-guard) which is represented by the Tome of Battle "wolverine stance", which allows you to continue to fight with a 2 handed weapon while being grappled by some big-nasty.
Stances and techniques are a staple of any martial discipline that includes forms. There are western stances which are offensive, defensive, used for fighting multiple opponents or being surrounded, and so forth. In the same way, there are techniques for getting the most out of your weapon, countering attacks, mixing unarmed strikes or secondary weapons with your primary weapon (such as connecting with your foe's weapon, moving up while your sword is locked with theirs, and punching them in the face with your gauntlet).
Calling it "too anime" is just ignorant, and makes me roll my eyes in disgust everytime I hear it. Do people really assume that western traditions were just two people slapping each other in the face with axes and swords until their thick-skulls caved in?
From Wikipedia: Earlier period arts include the use of the longsword, arming sword, falchion, dagger, shield, spear, poleaxe, halberd, and many other weapons, together with unarmed combat and wrestling. Later arts may teach fighting with the rapier, smallsword, backsword, quarterstaff, pike, or bayonet. See Historical European Martial Arts for more information.
This video from Modern Marvels is also perhaps worth watching, which mentions a little bit of this concept.
And noone commented on my ideas. Its sad being ignored like that...
Actually I said I liked your suggestion for skill-packages. The ideas of giving the fighter more unique abilities which could be useful both in and out of combat, which could be selected to build around a theme, without overly stepping on the barbarian, paladin, or rogue?
Well, I already responded to that... :P
Third, and the reason we started this whole thing, off combat utility. Mergy and Malignor gave some ideas, tough Malignor is trying more to change the system
That's partly true, which may be one reason why my offering has remained sadly untouched (the other being that there's so much there; too big?).
I've always been a fan of cinematic style gaming - turn a game into a movie, or comic book, or some other media where character importance matters. Some of the ideas I put forth include some of this approach, but I find that they are self-contained; no overarching change to the system is required.
Abilities which would do well to be isolated to the Fighter are: Hardcore, Brawler, and creating the listed Master of The Craft as Fighter-only feats.
@Ashiel:
I know that. The greeks actually had a hand to hand combat system, AKA a martial art, way back in the classical era, one of the first martial arts ever. I'm Brazilian, we've got two martial arts invented under our flag. Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu is considered the best style in ground fighting. I know martial doesn't mean eastern.
Still, Fighter =/= Martial Artist in the gaming subconscience. Sad, but true. In the gaming community, martial artist means unarmed strikes, ki, no armor, meditation, kung fu, wuxia, stances and techinques.
And the role of martial artist, with all that implies, is already taken by the monk.
Now, I know you didn't skip the rest of my ost, so you saw I did post an alternative. Allowing the fighter to mod his fighting style from an ample list of abilities going from mobility to defenses to battle abilities and even simple numeric bonuses. More freedom of choice, maybe not as much as changing stances would grant, but it keeps closer to the fighter.
Sorry, I can't find your comment on the skills idea. You sure it isn't in the post that the forum ate? Or maybe I'm just being dumb and overlooking them, dunno.
@Mergy:
The ideas are good. But they just seem to be ideas for another system.I look at them and it takes me a moment to remember we're still talking about the same game. I like many of the basic ideas but as they are they don't quite fit the game.
Particularly I like the idea of Student of Battle. A bonus to identify enemies is cool and flavorful, but it's small enough that it doesn't thread on the Rangers toes.
Hardcore is good, but for the skill abilities list I'm doing, I'm going to divide it in two. Bravery will add its bonus to Intimidate, to make Bravery more relevant and I will include iton the list of abilities. Hardcore will be the name of another ability that improvesthe use of Intimidation.
I don't like Brawler. It's a bonus feat, but you're forced to take this or that feat. Good for a thematic archetype but for the main generic fighter it would seem forced.
Fortifier... I like the idea of a fighter that knows there will be a battle here and can make difficult terrain, cover and traps and generally put the terrain to his favor, but as is, it takes to long to make anything and it would need a list of different fortification one can do. It would only be useful in rare campaigns where the players are at a full scale war, or have a base that gets frequently attacked.
Drillmaster and Trainer... If you can use them onother PCs they are overpower. If you can't, they aren't much usefull. Again, outside of war campaigns they don't seem to usefull.
Recruiter is just not usefull. If you need people devoted to your cause get Leadership. If you just need people to do something, take 20 on a Diplomacy test. I don't see much real use for it.
@Malignor: (<--I fixy for you)
The ideas are good. But they just seem to be ideas for another system.I look at them and it takes me a moment to remember we're still talking about the same game. I like many of the basic ideas but as they are they don't quite fit the game.
Particularly I like the idea of Student of Battle. A bonus to identify enemies is cool and flavorful, but it's small enough that it doesn't thread on the Rangers toes.
Hardcore is good, but for the skill abilities list I'm doing, I'm going to divide it in two. Bravery will add its bonus to Intimidate, to make Bravery more relevant and I will include iton the list of abilities. Hardcore will be the name of another ability that improvesthe use of Intimidation.
I don't like Brawler. It's a bonus feat, but you're forced to take this or that feat. Good for a thematic archetype but for the main generic fighter it would...
Allow me to sell some of these ideas to you then.
Hardcore - based around the idea that a professional soldier tends to be rather successful at intimidating folks, especially if they're experienced (ie. survived incredible odds and killed alot of people). Considering Fighters are above the "rank and file" (Warrior NPCs), they are akin to spec ops or elite specialists... so they're like Rambo. I'm pretty sure Rambo would be pretty intimidating, whether he trained (ie spent ranks) in intimidation tactics or not, don't you? He'd have all the scars, the lean warrior's frame, the calloused hands of a warrior, and the kind of dead, haunted stare that has seen a hundred atrocities of bloodshed and suffering. I've met one of those guys, and if they don't like you, just looking at them makes you wanna shrivel up and vanish.
Brawler - You know that conversation about martial arts? Yeah. I find it ludicrous that any martial class who has gone beyond E6 (and are now in "superhumansville") can't use his fists to effectively fight a preschooler armed with a knife. So yes, it's forced. But it's forced to preserve the reputation of martial characters; disarmed (such as by being stunned), why would an experienced slayer-of-beasts be suddenly powerless? It hurts my suspension of disbelief too much.
Fortification - What I had was some smaller fortifications, using materials of the environment, could be made in a matter of hours. For example, a 20' long moat in a swamp, or a rampart of loose stone in a city ruin, or a 15' long trench with a 5' dirt rampart in a field. They could be created whlie camp is set up, creating a defensible camp in enemy territory.
For the grander stuff (stone-enforced clay bunkers, 60' long spikey barricades, half a mile of camouflaged pits, etc), you'd need a team working for long hours. But again, if the wizard needs to craft, now you can too. I guess you could even make engineering rolls for places you've visited, and design fortifications ahead of time for when you get back; selling your services as a military adviser.
The ideas here were stolen from stuff I read, about the Vietnam war, and what soldiers did as they held a piece of land - every day, they'd be adding more and more to the place, creating line after line of fortified defensible positions, all using just shovels and the materials of the environment.
Trainer/Drillmaster - are they OP? A caster can spend shorter amounts of time to make, for example, a Wand of Enlarge Person (375gp and 1 day's work). This gives 50 instances where an ally gains reach, higher damage, and increased carrying capacity for 1 minute (outlasting most combats). Compare that to a combat Drill, which is logistically harder to pull off, and takes longer to do. I don't see this as being nearly as OP as crafting magic items. Especially since it also requires undivided participation.
Recruiter - this is designed to synergize with the other MotC feats, so you can recruit people to build fortifications, or participate in combat drills. Together, these feats turn a village of dirt farmers into an effective war camp.
@Ashiel:
I know that. The greeks actually had a hand to hand combat system, AKA a martial art, way back in the classical era, one of the first martial arts ever. I'm Brazilian, we've got two martial arts invented under our flag. Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu is considered the best style in ground fighting. I know martial doesn't mean eastern.
Still, Fighter =/= Martial Artist in the gaming subconscience. Sad, but true. In the gaming community, martial artist means unarmed strikes, ki, no armor, meditation, kung fu, wuxia, stances and techinques.
And the role of martial artist, with all that implies, is already taken by the monk.
Now, I know you didn't skip the rest of my ost, so you saw I did post an alternative. Allowing the fighter to mod his fighting style from an ample list of abilities going from mobility to defenses to battle abilities and even simple numeric bonuses. More freedom of choice, maybe not as much as changing stances would grant, but it keeps closer to the fighter.
Sorry, I can't find your comment on the skills idea. You sure it isn't in the post that the forum ate? Or maybe I'm just being dumb and overlooking them, dunno.@Mergy:
The ideas are good. But they just seem to be ideas for another system.I look at them and it takes me a moment to remember we're still talking about the same game. I like many of the basic ideas but as they are they don't quite fit the game.
Particularly I like the idea of Student of Battle. A bonus to identify enemies is cool and flavorful, but it's small enough that it doesn't thread on the Rangers toes.
Hardcore is good, but for the skill abilities list I'm doing, I'm going to divide it in two. Bravery will add its bonus to Intimidate, to make Bravery more relevant and I will include iton the list of abilities. Hardcore will be the name of another ability that improvesthe use of Intimidation.
I don't like Brawler. It's a bonus feat, but you're forced to take this or that feat. Good for a thematic archetype but for the main generic fighter it would...
exactly brazilian ju jitsu is a japanese style brought in brazil by an irish family :)
Btw, I think that we should mark the difference between a simple fighter and a real "FIGHTER", someone who is also a philosopher, a strategist.
@Ashiel:
I know that. The greeks actually had a hand to hand combat system, AKA a martial art, way back in the classical era, one of the first martial arts ever. I'm Brazilian, we've got two martial arts invented under our flag. Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu is considered the best style in ground fighting. I know martial doesn't mean eastern.
Still, Fighter =/= Martial Artist in the gaming subconscience. Sad, but true. In the gaming community, martial artist means unarmed strikes, ki, no armor, meditation, kung fu, wuxia, stances and techinques.
And the role of martial artist, with all that implies, is already taken by the monk.
Now, I know you didn't skip the rest of my ost, so you saw I did post an alternative. Allowing the fighter to mod his fighting style from an ample list of abilities going from mobility to defenses to battle abilities and even simple numeric bonuses. More freedom of choice, maybe not as much as changing stances would grant, but it keeps closer to the fighter.
Well, I think it might be a good idea to begin re-educating the gaming consciousness. There are plenty of gaming enthusiasts who would like to see more love for traditional western martial arts techniques as well as eastern martial arts techniques, and the Fighter should be able to do both. The Fighter, as a class, should be just as capable of creating a powerful Roman legionnaire as it is a Japense samurai warrior, or a powerful Gladiator, or a skilled English Longbowman; and they should have skills and abilities which help them to remain viable in ways that simple +X/+Y hit and damage bonuses do not. :O
The reason I proposed a system for stances and techniques is pretty simple, and it's grounded very heavily in this sentence you used right here:
Second, the fighter needs more versatility and uniqueness.
Currently there is little to nothing that's really unique to the Fighter (this is especially true since Paizo seems to love giving away their unique stuff to other classes in splatbooks). All Fighters are is bonus combat feats and some +X/+Y modifiers. Little else. There is in fact almost nothing that makes Fighter feel much different from any other class that swings swords or shoots bows, other than just having bigger numbers. There's a very big reason that people just equate Fighter to an upgraded Warrior NPC class; and that's because it plays like one.
Someone else also commented that something too refined for rage, too hardcore for paladins, and more specialized than rangers would be good as Fighter abilities. Vart the Fire Man says:
Spellcasters are powerful for many reasons, but ultimately, because they have options. Pathfinder did a great job adding more options to many other classes, such as Barbarians through Rage Powers, Rogues through Rogue Talents, and even very recently Monks through the Qinggong monk archetype and Ki Powers. These features add diverse options to the classes, sometimes with a focus on combat, other times with a focus on skills or out of combat applications.
And he's right. Pathfinder not only improved these classes with a wider breadth of options, but there is a definite difference in the game-play aspect of playing a Barbarian or a Monk or a Ranger or a Paladin, whereas a Fighter just plays like everything else minus class features that make them fun and interesting to play. As Mergy pointed out, Fighters are really boring right now.
Now let me step away from the ideas of Stances and Techniques for a moment (I'll be back to them in a bit, don't you worry :P)...
Now with a clear idea that the Fighter needs a mechanic that is more unique to it, while being appropriately mundane at low levels, while offering the player the ability to build Fighters who are diverse, technical, and capable of adapting to situations, without loading them down with a whole bunch of abilities and seeming random; how do we achieve this?
Design Goals
The biggest problem I see is that it is not practical, without some way to shift your focus around. If we give the Fighter a ton of abilities and let them have them all at once, 24/7, rain or shine, then the Fighter becomes overpowered because he has a legitimate answer to everything in every situation. If we made it so you have to hyper specialize to get the benefits of these things, then we would end up back in the same boat we're in, with a class that is relatively boring to play and also only suitable for dealing with their ideal scenario.
And of course, now I'll come back to stances and stuff...
Which is why I suggested stances. If you look at the examples of stances that I presented, most have in and out of combat uses. One stance helps you with keeping your footing, and improves your acrobatics skills. Such a stance would be ideal for someone who is in an adventuring environment. Meanwhile, another stance gave the benefits of Evasion as you gain levels, which makes it a good defensive stance while in combat, but also makes it ideal for dealing with quite a few traps. Another stance improves your resiliency to all kinds of things, making it ideal for combat and for general adventuring. Yet another gives awareness based benefits, for the keen fighter who notices small details (scent, blindsense, and eventually blind-sight).
Having the option to switch between two or more focuses, while being clearly in control of them, is reminiscent of martial skill in general. Martial skill has a lot of emphasis on footwork, balance, reading movements, and develops sensory skills that are applicable in other areas of life. You likely cannot make use of all of these things at once however. For example, how do you maximize your offense while holding your weapon close to quickly parry incoming attacks, or maintain a strong center of balance while focusing on something completely different?
It seems logical, and within flavor of a character who succeeds due to simple hard training.
As for techniques, the idea behind techniques is very simple. Things to do outside of your normal attack routine. Situational things. For example, the one that inflicts bleed damage is to deal with a particular type of issue. Not all would need to be combat related either. A technique based on athleticism or leadership could be an option. Techniques for different styles of fighting would also be appropriate (such as things for sword & board, archery, dual-wielding, 2 handed weapons, emphasis on certain combat maneuvers, or debilitating enemies). Techniques offer a way to give the Fighter options both inside and out of combat, without breaking the central concepts of the Fighter itself (which is, at least to me, someone who is exceptional because of pure martial skill).
People are going to hate me for this one but the Warriors from World of Warcraft are excellent examples of Fighters in an RPG that work. Their options do not extend to just hitting stuff with swords until it stops moving. They have things that improve their movement; spur their allies with warcries; fill their foes with fear; inflict status ailments on their foes (such as dazing them); have methods of shaking off bad things like certain spells; and can debilitate their foes (a warrior in WoW can attack you so that the injury makes it difficult to move effectively for a short time, making it hard to escape them, or they can stun you, or disarm you, or interrupt your spell by silencing you, and so on and so forth). At high levels, they get some strong area of effect options as well.
Now, I'm not suggesting that we turn tabletop RPGs into MMOs or World of Warcraft; but by golly they took enough from tabletop RPGs that we should be able to take a little back! That little, in my opinion, should be the idea that Fighters have options.
Applying the benefits of martial training outside of combat is nothing new I might add. The moment a Barbarian gets Uncanny Dodge, they effectively gain Spider Sense. Uncanny Dodge allows the Barbarian to walk around using a Total Defense (+4 dodge bonus to AC), which effectively rocks socks against lots of traps and a number of natural hazards that work like traps (and stacks with trap-sense).
Ultimately, this is why I believe that a system that incorporates options to shift between focuses on the fly, and use special class features that don't involve relying on full-attacks or just the same old hit + damage routine, is a good idea.
However, I'm open to hear ideas as to how else you are going to get a Fighter who can contribute in different scenarios, with different options, without hyperspecialization, but allowing for specialization and customization, that has the opportunity to answer problems, but without having the answer to all problems, while keeping the answer within his capability of achieving, without some sort of system that is at least similar to this sort of concept.
Sorry, I can't find your comment on the skills idea. You sure it isn't in the post that the forum ate? Or maybe I'm just being dumb and overlooking them, dunno.
Hm, now that you mention it, I think my commentary was indeed in the post that was eaten. Wow, I curse my lack of Perception. My bad my friend, my bad. I meant to say, that I really like the idea of giving Fighters skill-packages, where you choose a group of class skills based on a theme. In fact, that would likely be a good option for a lot of classes, and would fit especially well for a Fighter who literally lacks any sort of default theme or skill set.
Ooooo fortification goldmine.
LINK
Ironically, it's more applicable in PF than you might think... breath weapons, wizards as artillery, etc.
Though I can see more emphasis on melee combat fortifications, such as ramparts, barricades and murder holes.
Brazilian jiu-jitsu was also invented after the historical period the game resembles. So, I believe, were all modern western martial arts except the surviving renaissance fencing forms.
Which historical period the game resembles is that? The pre-dark ages, the age of gunpowder? Or was it the age that we had giant fire-breathing lizards, dinosaurs, and space monsters?
They don't use stances. The differences in guards are too small to take an action to switch between.
Why is that, exactly? A wizard can break the fabric of space/time in 3 seconds flat, but changing from a stance that emphasizes physical defense and avoidance to one that emphasizes quickness of foot is too much?
The rediscovered medieval stuff uses a lot of combat maneuvers, but still no stances.
Martial Arts =/= Stances.
I call utter bullcrap on this one, my friend. Virtually all fighting styles have stances. Your stance is the root of your ability to fight. Your stance influences how you avoid strikes, how you make strikes, and your balance. Look at fencers, and their stance. Look at people who dual wield and how their stance changes. Look at boxers versus wing chun practitioners. Whether you call them stances or forms, all fighting styles, regardless of origin, have different methods in which one is prepared for combat.
Fencing, for example, emphasizes quick footwork, balance, and finesse.
En garde position.
The en garde position is the basic stance of fencing. You stand somewhat sideways from your opponent; this gives him the smallest target to attack. Your feet should be about shoulder-width apart, your front foot pointed straight out, your back foot pointed sideways.
Your dominant arm — the one that’s going to grasp the sword — is held loosely in front of you, bent just a bit, and you hold your other arm (the “off hand”) behind you at shoulder height, with your elbow out like a chicken wing, or in the traditional position of curved up behind your head. This position grew from the practice of using a cape draped over this arm, but most importantly, it’s used for balance. Remember during your bouts to use your off hand for balance throughout all your movements.
And techniques are just redundant. We have a mechanic for combat techniques. It's called the combat maneuver system. Most of the techniques seen in stuff like the Talhoffer manuals are already in the game. I see a lot of trip, some disarm, and some bull rush. Western Medieval Martial Arts are best represented by the existing combat maneuver feats.
I'm skeptical of that. Firstly, the combat maneuver system leaves a lot to be desired, and if the extent of combat options begins and ends at combat maneuvers, then it is time to give up now. We've already lost this. The fighter is doomed.
Western Renaissance Martial Arts are best represented by just attacking. They're pretty boring in comparison. Modern stuff may be different, but it's also outside of the games thematic time period.
You mean the time when dragons flew around, and people wore full plate, and wielded swords mate out of space metal. Riiiight. If this is the case, then the fighter is doomed. If he is allowed to do nothing other than make the same boring attacks that an untrained smelly ogre makes, and the barbarian's tantrums mean having more versatility in combat, then the Fighter may as well roll over and die.
Honestly, I think if Ashiel's ideas where put in place as class features inherent with what the fighter already has and mixed with OP's ideas for skills then I think the fighter ends up being a lot better off. As far as the idea of stances and what not being too based in certain settings I honestly think that could be a benefit in that having techniques and stances tied to specific fighting themes like fencing or samurai styles could add thematic/story effects to fighters that I feel they sorely lack.
And there's only one position used for fencing.
That's so wrong...I don't even know where to start. Let me just keep it brief, since I have other things to say. Besides the fact that most countries which practiced fencing each had their own individual styles, each style has, at the LEAST, its own offensive and defensive stances. Even in today's competitive fencing there are differing styles depending on whether it's traditional or sabre fencing, and whether you're dueling offensively or defensively.
But enough of that.
Text incoming in 3...2...1...
So, I think Ashiel makes an interesting point here. If we were to improve the fighter, we need to mechanically widen it, rather than heighten it. Increase the number of options, rather than the amount of power the class has. He also makes a good point in that the first place to go when figuring out just how to improve the fighter...is to define the fighter.
So what is a Fighter? Well, barbarians are wild warriors, monks are spiritual warriors, paladins are holy warriors, rangers are nature warriors, rogues are stealth-based, cavaliers are tactical, noble warriors, magi are arcane warriors and gunslingers are, well...gunslingers. The only option left that I see is that of the trained warrior—the soldier, the mercenary, the bodyguard. That is the fighter.
Now, knowing that, we need to figure out what it means in the context of the class. How does the fact that the class is a “trained” warrior affect the way it functions? Well, first of all, I think it suggests that the class is trained in the “art” of combat. He knows battle and he knows weapons. But he's more than just a footman pointing a longspear in the right direction. Like the soldiers of today, he learns stealth and survival training, as well as heavy endurance training in addition to his combat skills.
But how do we portray this? First, I think Ashiel has the right idea with stances and techniques. Using stances as all-around boost forms, I envision that they grant both combat and out-of-combat abilities, like one that might grant stealth bonuses and a minor sneak attack ability, or another that grants an acrobatics effect along with evasion or a dodge bonus to AC. You could even roll Bravery into the mix, creating a stance that maybe boosts your mental resistance. Even weapon/armor training could be transformed into stances, if you like.
When it comes to techniques, specifically, I've got a couple ideas. First of all, I think they should be prepared, similar to spells. Also like spells, I think a fighter should use some kind of Combat Manual to record his known techniques. This gives him a huge amount of versatility, which is something that the basic fighter really misses out on. Mechanically, I also think that techniques should be able to affect things both in and out of combat. Make a good amount of them special attacks/parries/etc. But also include techniques that grant special skill uses, like the ability to leap tall buildings in a single bound, or run faster than a speeding bullet (obvious exaggerations, but you get the idea). I'm not sure on how uses per day should be utilized, but I'm a big fan of the fighter retaining his “all day long” status, and allowing these techniques to be used at will.
Finally, I'm completely on-board with giving the fighter 4 skill points, as well as expanding its skill list. It's supposed to be a trained soldier, after all. Part of that training includes skills. It's not just about combat.
And that's what I've got. I would be fully willing to write a mock-up for this class, but it might take a while to come up with the appropriate amount of techniques and stances.
...Catch Phrase,
-Chris
|
Some advice/gibberish
Have the plot arc end at lvl 9, only allow spells to do exactly what is written. I cannot vouch for past lvl 9, you might be able to go higher.
Follow learning and copying spells into spell books correctly. And avoid situations of only 3 combats. More smaller fights, preferably ambushes, or unexpected encounters. Have people flee and prepare the next encounter. Social encounters, even fighters can do them.
Have the threat of a larger combat so the wizard holds back.
Don't play a dumb fighter.
@Malignor:
My bad, sorry. :)
I get the concept of Brawler and the way you built is good. And I'll use that concept, but for the system I'm building I already have an ability that gives a bonues to Intimidate. I'm thinking of using the name 'Hardcore' to another ability that improves Intimidate.
Brawler is problematic. If it forces you to spend your feat like that, it will anger the players i.e. "who are you to tell me what feat I should take". The closest thing you have on the rules are the bonus feats of the monk and the fighting styles of the ranger, both of which give you entire lists of feats to choose and are thematical. If it's an extra feat, besides whatever you already get, then it would be less problematic... except for the whole fact that you are simply giving an extra feat for nothing. Maybe it's just me, but I don't want to give a free feat. Fighter already have enough feats, monks could abuse this and the other martialclasses don't need it. And I don't see the need, if the character never trained to fight unarmed, why should he be good at it? And even without being good at it, a high level character unarmed will defeat a low level character that is armed by sheer dint of BAB and HP. Unlike what Ashiel believes big numbers are a major part of combat.
Fortifier, drillmaster, trainer and recruiter are all great for war campaigns. And that is it. Your base and your followers just don't matter in most types of campaigns.
Drillmaster, used on the party, is too complicated (virtual class levels?), lasts too long (several days?), paradoxically too short (all that gold for only a couple days? If the bad guy doesn't attack soon the gold will have been wasted) and is not very effective if used on other PCs (The BAB will be smaller then what they already have unless they are low BAB and have less levels than the fighter, the extra feats will be useless to casters and will make martials outshine the fighter). Trainer is an unfinished note.
@Ashiel:
I'm gonna be honest. I already use Stances and Techniques for my Martial Artist class (built mostly by Kuma, but I helped and I use it). That is why I want something different for the Fighter.