I'll put this out in front so you know what you'd be getting into, it would involve rewriting the Non-spellcasters to give them abilities that work similar to how some of the abilities in Incarnum worked. Assuming you haven't run away screaming (especially from the Azuren Sorcerer of doom), this is what I'm thinking:
You get a pool of points that you can use to improve things that your class is good at each round. For instance X level Fighter has 3 of these points. She can spend them to get bonuses for things fighters are good at like hitting, taking hits, and dealing damage. Lets say she decides to spend one to get +2 to hit, one to gain +2 to AC, and one to deal an extra 1d4 points of damage. Next round she spends them to gain +4 to hit and +1d4 to damage.
A Rogue might get things like increasing the Threat Range of a weapon by 1, bonuses to CMD, or performing skill checks in combat. These are just arbitrary suggestions for abilities. It's even possible that you could do something like a Barbarian spending one to enter/maintain Rage and spend additional points to activate various powers she has.
I figured I'd throw this out as I'm looking at some massive reworks for a game setting (including making Bards a PrCl and replacing it with the Adventurer class). This is one idea I had and I wanted to get feedback. I'm also thinking of making Paladins (Champions, to make them not LG dependent in the setting) and Rangers non-spellcasting.
The problem is that you might get into a maelstrom, as after doing that you might want to consider making non-fighting classes a bit sexier, by giving them combat abilities. ;)
I am teasing of course, but you get the point.
Yeah really, Seoni gets to wander around in her full jugginess, and Seltyiel is nice and shonen, but the fighters just aren't as hot. Sure, Amiri's rocking the abs but couldn't we get some assless chaps on Valeros? I mean, come on.
|
Ignoring Seldriss and Ernest Mueller's teasing (though those images of Seoni and Valeros are...distracting), one of the reasons non-spelling classes are attractive ala "sexy" is that they're simple to run. Sometimes one doesn't want the pain and pleasure of going through several dates to finally get a nightcap. Sometimes just wants that special someone at the door with nothing on but a naughty smile and enough Redbull(tm) to go all night long.
I think if you did this, you'd have to do it for all the classes. A full BAB class that gets all its class features AND rotating bonus to attacks, damage, AC, etc., is going to be unbalanced against a spellchucker that can't also boost its CL, Save DCs, Spellcraft checks, Concentration checks, etc. etc.
I think it would be a lot of work to balance this out and then make combats longer because it would introduce more choices.
Probably the easiest way to do this would be to make the abilities work as Swift actions, so the PCs only have to decide one kind of boost per round. Kind of like the Beta Dodge feat, which used to require a swift action to get the +1 Dodge bonus to AC.
Maybe make the Character Talents, and give them out at levels 2, 6, 10, 14, and 18....the non-class "dead" levels (no feats or ability score increases). Maybe even base them on race instead of class?
Ignoring Seldriss and Ernest Mueller's teasing (though those images of Seoni and Valeros are...distracting), one of the reasons non-spelling classes are attractive ala "sexy" is that they're simple to run. Sometimes one doesn't want the pain and pleasure of going through several dates to finally get a nightcap. Sometimes just wants that special someone at the door with nothing on but a naughty smile and enough Redbull(tm) to go all night long.
Keep in mind I'm writing this with a setting in mind, not rewriting all of Pathfinder. I do want to address some of the common complaints that I have heard along the way but I'm looking at making a lot of changes.
For instance, one idea I had to make combat a bit quicker was to do away with the progressive attacks. Instead I'm going to use feats that allow you to make additional attacks as Move and Swift Actions att your full bonus. The requirements are based off of your attack bonus and Fighters will get them as part of their class. This is one of the reasons why I'm looking at alternate systems to make classes look attractive so players don't feel that they are loosing a lot. That's why I'm wondering if people would think a system like this would work.
Maybe make the Character Talents, and give them out at levels 2, 6, 10, 14, and 18....the non-class "dead" levels (no feats or ability score increases). Maybe even base them on race instead of class?
I think my comment above should cover most of your concerns.
I'm already planning on using those character levels for actual racial progression. When 4th Ed came out all the hype suggested to me that your race would level up with your class. I was against it at first but when 4th Ed came out I found that I was really disappointed that their hype was really just a couple of feats. I've been looking to add something like a race level since then.
|
|
I'm already planning on using those character levels for actual racial progression. When 4th Ed came out all the hype suggested to me that your race would level up with your class. I was against it at first but when 4th Ed came out I found that I was really disappointed that their hype was really just a couple of feats. I've been looking to add something like a race level since then.
The Raptoran, for all that I hated it for not being the Aarokocra, had a pretty neat thing going on with the 'fly at 5 HD' thing. I'm all for the idea of racial bonuses that accrue with levels, but I might want to avoid introducing yet another mechanic and sort of steal the Pathfinder Trait mechanic for that.
Each race would get specific Racial Traits that are designed for fighters learning appropriate styles or 'stunts' taught by their race (such as the use of a certain elven weapon, or a special bonus against giants, or whatever), and similarly, Traits for races of other classes could be introduced as well (such as traits that involve divine casting, or rogue-ish talents, or arcane ability), with the caveat that only certain classes get these Trait options as they level up. Clerics and Wizards would get their standard two Traits at character generation (one perhaps assumed to be spoken for as a Campaign trait) and having to take the Additional Traits feat if they want to pick up a special 'Elven Patient Spellcasting' Trait or 'Dwarven Faith in Stone' trait, while a Fighter or Rogue would gain access to additional Traits at certain levels, say, 2nd, 6th, 10th, 14th and 18th.
(Since the Pathfinder Fighter and Rogue don't have any 'dead levels,' I looked at the chart on page 30, and picked levels where the character doesn't gain a new Feat or Ability Increase.)
Rangers and Paladins have spells. Barbarians and Monks have points (rage and ki). Paladins have their lay on hands/turning resource.
Bards have bardic music and spells.
Pretty much only the Fighter and Rogue are missing any kind of resource management, and the Rogue has a ton of skillpoints to keep himself busy.
So really, what this discussion is about is Fighters getting a mechanic to make them more entertaining, since pretty much every other combat class already has a resource mechanic that "makes them sexy".
.
There are two camps on the Fighter issue (going by past threads).
There's the "Fighters are the class for the new player or those that want simple gameplay", and while I agree that they are simple to run while in-game, they are one of the most complex for pre-planned building since feats are (mostly) forever choices.
Then there's the "Fighter should get nice things" camp, who want the Fighter class to be capable of handling himself against high level content without needing handouts or gobs of magical equipment.
I'm getting the impression you want something in between. A resource for the Fighter to use so that he gets a little sexier in combat, but nothing way out there, like flying under his own power (crouching tiger style).
The Raptoran, for all that I hated it for not being the Aarokocra
I need to go way off topic before I go to bed but: they also suck because they are Hawkman from Buck Rodgers. Sorry, but my hatred of Raptorians knows no bounds so I couldn't resist. Goodnight!
|
|
For instance, one idea I had to make combat a bit quicker was to do away with the progressive attacks. Instead I'm going to use feats that allow you to make additional attacks as Move and Swift Actions att your full bonus. The requirements are based off of your attack bonus and Fighters will get them as part of their class. This is one of the reasons why I'm looking at alternate systems to make classes look attractive so players don't feel that they are loosing a lot. That's why I'm wondering if people would think a system like this would work.
Trailblazer by Bad Axe Games does away with iterative attacks per class. Also, here's a link to the TB fighter and the system's combat reaction feature:
One major addition to the game is the readjustment and realignment of attacks of opportunity under the larger heading of combat reactions. Characters start with 1 reaction and gain an additional combat reaction at 6th, 11th, and 16th level—the levels at which they previously gained new iterative attacks.
Fighters gain a big boost in their effectiveness simply as a function of getting more combat reactions.
There are four main ways to spend your combat reactions.
* Dodge: You can spend a combat reaction to dodge a single attack, adding ½ your BAB to your AC.
* Block: You can spend a combat reaction to block an attack, gaining DR equal to ½ your BAB, plus your shield bonus.
* Aid Another: If you and and ally are both in melee combat against the same opponent, you can spend a combat reaction to give an ally a +2 bonus to one attack roll, or a +2 bonus to his AC against one attack. (Note that there’s no attendant “vs. AC 10” roll required—just announce that you’d like to use the reaction, and the bonus is yours.)
* Make an attack of opportunity: We’ve made it much easier to move around the battlefield, greatly simplifying the number of conditions which trigger attacks of opportunity. Moving into or within threatened squares no longer provokes an attack of opportunity, but moving out of a threatened area will. On those occasions, the fighter’s punishing strike ability helps him “hold the line.”
Your point system sounds similar.
|
|
You get a pool of points that you can use to improve things that your class is good at each round. For instance X level Fighter has 3 of these points. She can spend them to get bonuses for things fighters are good at like hitting, taking hits, and dealing damage. Lets say she decides to spend one to get +2 to hit, one to gain +2 to AC, and one to deal an extra 1d4 points of damage. Next round she spends them to gain +4 to hit and +1d4 to damage.A Rogue might get things like increasing the Threat Range of a weapon by 1, bonuses to CMD, or performing skill checks in combat. These are just arbitrary suggestions for abilities. It's even possible that you could do something like a Barbarian spending one to enter/maintain Rage and spend additional points to activate various powers she has.
Another option is to give non-spelling classes a pool of "feat" points which allows them to use feats they currently don't possess. This is based off Action Points option per Unearthed Arcana:
Emulate Feat
At the beginning of a character’s turn, he may spend 1 action point as a free action to gain the benefit of a feat he doesn’t have. He must meet the prerequisites of the feat. He gains the benefit until the beginning of his next turn.
|
|
The Raptoran, for all that I hated it for not being the AarokocraI need to go way off topic before I go to bed but: they also suck because they are Hawkman from Buck Rodgers. Sorry, but my hatred of Raptorians knows no bounds so I couldn't resist. Goodnight!
If they were Hawkmen from Buck Rogers, all bombastic and vaguely Thanagarian, I would have liked them better! At a certain point, dorky goes back around and becomes cool again. (I think it has to do with my senility setting in...)
Check out the War Domain 8th level power.
look at book of 9 swords was there basic train of thought. Fighters seem kind of dull what can we do to spice them up, and thus was born many melee fighters with " combat " abilities could be used sort of like spells. I do so love book of 9 swords, and thought about using that as a basis and creating a series of maneuvers for fighters and rogues, or ripping some from book to create one for base fighter/rogue.
The problem with doing something like this is no one will offer any real help or input; they'll refer you right back to the system or they'll just sit there and nitpick why nothing should be changed under any circumstances. You'll be deluged by backwards justifications built to explain away the sacred cows as reasoning against any sort of change.
Would a fighter with some abilities to put them on par with spell-casters be cool? Of course it would, but it's near impossible to get anyone to admit that. People are happy with balancing a fighter on the back of the GM's choice of magic items while they complain about how fighters are too reliant on the GM's choice of magic items. They complain about how a character should develop how a player wants them to while they want the GM to have full discretion over how a character develops.
Ok, let's take Barbarian as an example for this system as it has the closest systemto what I'm looking at. You start off with one point that you can use to activate Rage or a rage power (I'd seperate the rage powers that didn't really stand out from Rage, like all the movement powers). Rage would last as long as you spend that point to maintain your rage. I might put in something like becoming staggered when you come out Rage to give a little more bite for when you have to come out of rage or some sort of limiter, like you can only stay in rage for 1 round + Con bonus. You can also spend that point to get scent or a climb speed.
As you go up you get more points to activate/maintian powers each round. Now this won't change much for the Barbarian but it already is geared towards this idea. Apply it to a class like Ranger and you can end up with something completely differnt.
What if Favored Enemy told you what Monsters you could affect with some of your special abilities? For instance your attacks might count as silver, give you the Bane effect, etc. This is just an example of what could be done and it also represents my desire to move Ranger away from what it is to a monster hunter.
The problem with doing something like this is no one will offer any real help or input; they'll refer you right back to the system or they'll just sit there and nitpick why nothing should be changed under any circumstances. You'll be deluged by backwards justifications built to explain away the sacred cows as reasoning against any sort of change.
Would a fighter with some abilities to put them on par with spell-casters be cool? Of course it would, but it's near impossible to get anyone to admit that. People are happy with balancing a fighter on the back of the GM's choice of magic items while they complain about how fighters are too reliant on the GM's choice of magic items. They complain about how a character should develop how a player wants them to while they want the GM to have full discretion over how a character develops.
Since the fighter is designed around getting lots and lots of feats, maybe what we should do to make the fighter cool at high levels is design high level feats that are as cool as 9th level spells.
The critical feats are kind of like this; some require a BAB of 17+, which is also when wizards and clerics and druids get their 9th level spells.
@Skaorn: I've actually statted up several races with a 20-level progression of "stuff" they get as they level. Nothing uber-crazy, but things that emphasize racial choice and make it lasting and relevant for the career of the character. I'm trying to figure out a way to organize it and put it out somehow, but it's good to know someone at least is a fan of the idea. :-)
@the OP: I'm in the process of attempting to rebalance/adjust some of those classes to my taste a bit more right now. I've some ideas for the fighter class - nothing "magic" like what you suggest, but the idea was to give them "abilities" that only they can pick up - each one is something unique and not usable in any other class. To increase their appeal and utility, they also build/grow in effect with higher Fighter levels taken. One final effect of them is to be used in a sort of "kit building" sense to make the Fighter base-class into the "go to source" to create any kind of concept you'd like to play that is a "fighting man" of any kind. Swashbuckler? Take the lightly armored options to make 'em more viable! Stuff like that. So ... they're like Feats and then some, really. They are also very limited (only 7 in the course of the whole 20 levels of the Fighter's career) with a LARGE selection (I'm up to around 25 or so of these things).
The point is to make them into even *more* "fighter-y" than they were before, but also open up new windows and avenues of scaling power and utility to the class WITHOUT relying solely upon Feats (which are generally fairly weak by comparison to these abilities).
|
|
My thoughts for the Fighter in specific back in Alpha were to add some combination of the following;
1) A flat damage bonus, equal to half class level (+1 at 1st, +2 at 3rd, up to +10 at 19th). This would apply to melee weapon attacks, ranged weapon attacks or even unarmed attacks, if the Fighter had Improved Unarmed Attack.
2) Some sort of bonus to Armor Class.
Option 1 would be some sort of flat defense bonus, similar to what is used by the Wheel of Time RPG.
Option 2 would be a form of 'armor optimization' that gives a Fighter (and only a Fighter) a +1 AC bonus when using a shield, another +1 AC bonus when wearing light armor, a +2 AC bonus when wearing medium armor or a +3 AC bonus when wearing heavy armor, as the Fighter's specialized training simply allows him to 'get more out of the armor' than another wearer. In this latter case, the bonuses would only show up at 1st, 3rd, 5th and 7th levels, respectively, so that a Paladin couldn't dip 1 level of Fighter to get a +4 AC when wearing fullplate and bearing a shield.
3) The ability to swap out attack bonus (from their BAB), damage bonus (from number one, above) and / or AC bonus (from number 2, above) simialr to the effects of Power Attack or Combat Expertise, but without requiring the Fighter to take either of those Feats. The feats would remain in the game, for Paladins, Barbarians, Rogues, etc. to take, but Fighters would be treated as automatically having them for the purposes of jockeying around the BAB, damage bonus and / or AC bonuses they get from their Fighter levels (and for the purposes of qualifying for Feats that require them as prerequisites).
So a 5th level Fighter would have BAB +5, a Damage Bonus of +3 and a potential +3 to his Armor Class (if wearing heavy armor), and could reduce any of those numbers to add to any of the others, although no bonus could more than double. This hypothetical Fighter could negate all +3 of his AC bonus to add +3 to his Damage Bonus for the round, or to add +3 to his Attack Bonus, depending on the situation. These adjustments would not be 'stackable' with the Combat Expertise / Power Attack adjustments, and those Feats would be worked up similar to the Pathfinder Power Attack, so that a Barbarian, Paladin, etc. taking Power Attack would have *less* flexibility in moving his numbers around than a Fighter.
4) Fighters would have 4 skill points / level. (So would Clerics, Wizards, etc. 4 would be the new 2.)
5) Fighter, to my ear, is as lame as a name as 'Magic-User.' I'd change the name to Soldier or Warrior (and, in the latter case, the name of the NPC class to 'Fighting-Man' or something). Sometimes it's not how you feel, but how you *look.*
6) Fighters would have the *option* of trading in some of their starting armor / shield proficiencies, for use in games where that sort of thing isn't going to come into play (desert settings, swashbuckling builds, etc.). Giving up heavy armor proficiency and tower shields grants a permanant +1 dodge bonus to AC. Giving up medium armor proficiency and heavy shields grants a total +2 dodge bonus to AC. Giving up proficiency with light armor and light shields grants a total +4 dodge bonus to AC. These bonuses only apply when you are not wearing armor of the prohibited kind, so that if you gain proficiency from another class (or later purchase it through a Feat), you do not gain these dodge bonuses in armor beyond the rated level. These dodge bonuses to AC can be used for the swap-outs mentioned in option 3.
7) In lieu of an iterative attack, a Fighter will have the option to put all of his force into one attack. The base damage of the weapon is multiplied by the number of iterative attacks he would have been eligible for, and he adds his bonuses afterwards normally. So an 11th level Fighter with a greatsword that normally inflicts 2d6+9 damage with hits at +11/+6/+1 BAB, can take a single swing at +11 that does 6d6+9. The idea predates the Vital Strike feat, and becomes a base class ability (although the Feat can still exist for Paladins, Barbarians, etc. to use).
So, your basic 'Soldier' would end up with more skills, the ability to perform a sort of Combat Expertise / Power Attack shuffle on the fly, a bonus to damage that will only increase as he goes up in level, and a better AC than a similarly armored Paladin, Ranger, Barbarian or Cleric, as well as having the Vital Strike feat as a class ability.
It doesn't give the fighter the ability to fly, or hack through walls of force, or anything that just flat-out doesn't fit what a highly-trained soldier should be able to do, which, in the words of one poster at the time, made it 'worthless,' but, IMO, succeeded at making the fighter more 'fighter-y' and better able to perform in that specific niche, with more options, more flexibility and better able to deal with things like damage reduction, high AC foes, etc.