I'd like to discuss ways to make fighters awesome.
Point 1. Is easily achieved. Getting +4 to hit and damage as part of.your class means you don't have to try hard to get your kill on.
Now point 1.-In my opinion a Well built fighter should be able to Kill an equal CR opponent in 2 rounds.
Usually simply high Str+weapon training+ gtr weapon fcs/spec and duelist gloves add enough pluses WITHOUT ALLIED BUFFS to get the job done. Run the math on any level appropriate foe. DPR avereages don't lie.
2. For those not allowed the orc bloodline. Play a race that has lowlight or darkvision.
Now to me fighters are not the basic, easy to play class everyone makes them out to be.
But this problem is actually why I prefer Dwarf fighters. Dwarves get get +5 to all saves vs magic for the cost on a feat and a trait. (Steel soul and glory of old) A big bonus on a fighter.
Alternatively Half Elves are wonderful Vs Will saves. Iron Will + Duel Minded+Elven Immunities and a +1 Will trait means a Half-Elven fighter can start with +5on all Will Saves and +7 Vs mind effecting enchantments and compulsions.
As for the whole 2 weapon vs 2handed vs Archery thing. Well that doesn't matter.
Feel free to post any questions on specific builds and I'll try to assist. TWF is my specialty but I'm not a bad hand at optimising
what do you think of unbreakable?
Ha ha str ranger (or perhaps that should be str fighter), I agree with a lot of what you say. The fighter is one of my old favourites, I prefer the beta fighter personally. There is so much you can do, but it isn't always about killing tough opponents in two rounds. No, I almost jumped into a game and brought in a horse archer fighter. The dm had said, we will be fighting giants, and that was all good and supposedly scary, but the great benefit of the fighter, is if you know what you are facing, you can build a fighter to slay the main beast (the ranger also does well if there is a single main enemy type). If I made a bow cav fighter, and could keep my distance and dodge thrown rocks, killing giants would just be a matter of time and ensuring I had enough arrows and movement space.
Fighters are sometimes mocked as simple and basic, but there is a lot to learn playing a fighter, and I've always felt pretty smug beating down more complex types or spellcasters with a humble fighter or fighter barb.
Unbreakable is ok. But it really does suffer in the DPR department. Certainly is harder to put down but I'd only use it for a Dwarf with the +5 to saves. Such a build would rarely, If ever be stopped by a failed save. But I'd probably focus on 2 handed with feats like Standstill and Pindown to make me harder to ignore.
I could not find this warrior of the old trait you mention, the only one I coul find is this
Warrior of Old (Elf)
Benefit: You gain a +2 trait bonus on Initiative checks.
3.5 Loyalist wrote:
I use STR Ranger as a Tag because a 18 Str, 14Dex Ranger TWF has to be my favorite build.But it won't beat a fighter in a fair match.
I think bad fighters are easy. Too many people only focus on the to hit and parade builds that have massive weaknesses. Building a Good Fighter, one that has high DPR and doesn't get dominated daily is hard.
GLORY of Old
A greatsword fighter is just terrible without their sword, at range before they have put feats into bow, at range if they don't have their bow, and sometimes in a grapple against something really good at grappling. High speed scouts, barbs or monks skirmishing them to death can also work well. Their saves are also not so great unless fort is made exceptional via feats, and what about the rest?
Mmmm, anything can be beaten.
I am not co-operating with the enemy two-hander orcs. Fighters are on the other side as well.
The game is indeed competitive, for some moreso than others. In the nature of envious and greedy humans and all that. Players are often competing and rating themselves in comparison to the others, hence the fixation on damage, to hit, special abilities, spells, etc etc.
Or as one player said to another:
Competitive player: what is the dex of your ninja, my rogue's is 18.
The ninja (who did not have a 10 dex) then proceeded to be a total badass, and put the rogue with higher scores to envious shame.
3.5 Loyalist wrote:
Ahhh, but a well built fighter doesn't suck in your scenario.Assume I built A greatsword Dwarf with powerattack, +5 to all saves via the aforememtiomed glory of old/steel soul combo. Let's run with level 2.
Save vs spells- +5 racial says his save Is likely just as high or better than a barb's fort and equal to a clerics will.
Grapple? Ok so no greatsword, but a well built fighter ALWAYS wears a Cestus and is still a full bab, high str char. No worse off than any other melee class. Slight edge to a Barbarian.
Bow? again FULL bab! At later levels? Well your second weapon group should be bows. So weapon training +3 and gloves is still +5 to hit AND damage with 4 attacks per round. Not shabby at all. Not ideal, but hardly sucks. Deadly aim is just 1 feat.
This is actually a good scenario. People should build fighters that specialise at one thing, but doing that doesn't mean.you suck at everything else.
Take my first example LORE WARDEN.
With a bow? 2nd weapon group so ANY FOUND BOW
In a grapple? 3rd weapon group (close)
So for 8 feats you are crazy good with a greatsword and only very good at range or any grapple weapon.
Add steel soul to the dwarf combo and that +5 racial took care of giving you GOOD saves.
Now the naysayers will say a Pally can have all that?
One failed Will save later....
No.worse off than a ranger failing. Took imp Iron will and.has +5 racial, +2 feat and maybe wis mod.
How many rangers bother with imp iron will?
Never said they were infallible. I said if well built you can specialize in a style and not have glaring weaknesses. +7 to will before adding class saves and gear is not weak.
Fighters are awesome because you can be truly scary at your thing.
I just put foreward only 1 example of a build that was earth shattering with a weapon of choice. Good at range. Freakish at all manuveres (Lore Warden's get +8 to CM's which stacks with to hit) and had good defences.
One failed Will save later....
everyone is suceptible to fail a save (maybe with the eceptions of monk and paladins)
Sigh!I'll knock one up today. But I hope this isn't gonna get into a 'oh, but this can beat your fighter', thing.
You can do that with ANY class.
I will however, put up a level 10 WELL ROUNDED, BALANCED and EFFECTIVE build for the sake of demonstration.
1- Weapon Focus: Dwarven Waraxe
There ya go.
That's all cool and well, but some of us want our Fighters awesome right out of the box (Core Rulebook) and not having to dumpster-dive all the splatbooks + an archetype from a campaign setting specific sourcebook.
You know, like full casters or Rangers or Paladins, who work perfectly with just the CRB.
Full casters are always great, But paladins and rangers have some of their more powerful option outsise the CRB; oath of vengance,instant enemy etc.I think fighters work just well with the CRB.
That was a bit rude.
What was rude?
STR Ranger wrote:
This, so much this. A successful fighter needs so much more, and people only parade their damage potential like it was something special or somehow made for a real character.
That being said, I commend you STR Ranger! You really have a great head for Fighters. Good job sir. I particularly like your lore warden build. A minor nitpick is that Blur is a 2nd level spell, not 1st (unless it's on a spell list I'm not aware of). Not a huge difference (a 3 minute blur at-will is 10,800 gp, which is reasonable), but I'm anal about that stuff. :P
Define: awesome. What do you want the class to do? I can build a decent fighter that can do things in and out of combat with acceptable saving throws. I'm sure others can do it as well.
I aim to please.I would like the base fighter to have more stuff. But I think I've shown they can be good.
One just has to understand the limitations on a class whose role is 'I do damage
STR Ranger wrote:
The only thing that concerns me is the "hack fix" nature of the Fighter. The Fighter in your examples basically relies on a lot of non-core material like Eldritch Heritage and specific race/class/feat combos. Paladins by their nature kind of pimp Eldritch Heritage, and Rangers get similar benefits to Lore Warden with a buff-round (Lore Warden 7th should get +2 to hit and damage for 1 standard action, whereas Ranger can do similar or scarier things with the same 1 standard action buff round).
Since I don't feel that Fighters do enough damage to make up for the other tricks martials have; can you play around with the Fighter and impress me, sir? You've displayed a wonderful example of shoring up some of the Fighter's defenses. Can you make them look really appealing as an adventurer (I say adventurer because adventuring requires a lot of things)?
1- Power Attack, Point-blank Shot, Precise Shot
It's a pretty straight-forward build, using an archetype and focusing on ranged attacks. Leaping Attack(ex) gives you the Weapon Training benefits of ANY weapon you use if you move at least 5 feet, giving you a lot of versatility.
It's an archetype that doesn't give up armor training 1 and 2, which a lot of the more 'gimmicky' archetypes will throw out of the window.
Of course, the real bread-winner is Rapid Attack(ex), allowing you to give up your first highest BAB attack to make a full attack in a movement. This allows a ranged attacker to start behind total cover, move into view, make several ranged attacks, and then move back to total cover all in one turn.
So long as your opponents have no line of sight or line of effect to you, the need for saving throws is drastically reduced.
Also you can you rapid shot with rapid attack in my view to only give up one attack and still move and fire. Although if you still wanted weapon training and to go with something like celestial armor you could use something like the dawnflower dervish for the switch hitter build.
If you read it carefully, the Rapid Attack doesn't specify your *first* attack as the attack that you give up, just the highest BAB attack. In which case, the extra attack from Rapid shot would be considered your first, and you declare that attack as the one to fire two arrows via Many Shot. So, by 11, you're making 3 attacks with 4 arrows during a rapid attack.
Yeah that is what I thought as well you get one shot two arrows with manyshot for two arrows then two iteratives.
You have made a fighter that does big damage and gets to full attack all the time.It's good but your will save blows.
Same build as Half Elf with dual minded and a +1 will trait would be +5 better on will saves and +7 vs enchantment.
Other than that it's pretty good.
I would like to point out to the original builder that many of your adjustments to the class for builds are NOT about the class. They are about races.
Half-orcs get a bloodline Str boost. Dwarves are res to magic. Half-elves have good will saves.
None of that has anything to do with the class of the fighter. Indeed, all those benefits can work as well or better for other classes.
Saying 'my fighter is awesome because my Dwarf has +5 to magic saves' makes no sense...the dwarven barbarian gets the same benefit.
Bringing up Lore Wardens to make the fighter awesome effectively is pigeonholing an archetype. 'Lore Warden fighters are awesome' is not 'fighters are awesome'.
I like fighters, but it's arguments like these that get me tired. A correct way to do things is simply to put down 'These are good Fighter builds to play' and go from there.
But there's nothing you've posted that says 'Fighters are awesome'. I'm seeing more 'Dwarves, Half-orcs, and Half-elves are awesome.'
STR Ranger wrote:
Pretty solid advice, all things considered. It would definitely help in those levels before 11. Afterwards, I'll be hiding behind solid objects, all of the time.
While the above may indeed be true, you have to consider all aspects of a character when making it effective at what it does.
If you look at the fighter as a class, there are elements to consider:
Consider first what a fighter can potentially do:
1. They reliably deal damage.
Consider what a fighter can't do (or can't do well):
When considering what a fighter can potentially do, consider all of the archetypes in comparison to the vanilla option. Most of the archetypes of a fighter will pigeon-hole most of the 'tried-and-true' features of a fighter for gimmicky abilities. This usually makes a fighter even narrower in scope than it already is. Exceptions to this case would be the Lore Warden or Mobile Fighter. There may be others, but I haven't delved too deep.
If you want your fighter to be awesome, they not only have to strengthen what they do, but minimize what they can't deal with. If you're not going to consider the fact that they have poor will saves into your build, your fighter is going to be a poor example for making the case that a fighter is indeed awesome.
Other examples of making your fighter NOT awesome is minimizing their BAB benefits. If you're going to sink-hole a ton of feats for TWF as a regular fighter, prepare to be disappointed when you find your opponents don't sit there for your full-attacks.
Indeed, moving beyond 5-feet as a fighter is the quickest way to make a fighter much less effective. Either removing the need to move more than 5 feet or skirting around this limitation is key.
How about fighter (including archetypes) are awesome?
I won't submit a build for EVERY archetype to back up my statement.
I am saying that Fighters are AWESOME at what they do.
@Ashiel. Play around with the class? To make it interesting?
IF you're asking for a 'fix' I believe Paizo has a wonderful oppourtunity to give fighters nice things via style feats. So far style feats are for monks but some could be made with fighters inmind.
Barbarians get 1 less rage power then fighters get feats. Some rage powers are WAY better than feats.
If you simply mean a fighter build that does something good out of combat. Well, for example my Lore Warden build could Dump Weapon Spl and Greater Weapon Spl. He'd still get +12 to hit and +10 damage. Sub in Master Craftsman and Craft Magic Arms and Armor and you add magic crafter dude to your role. This is pretty powerful considering how rare those +5 Menacing, Speed Weapons are. It garuntees the group can get thier custom stuff and saves the fighter TONS of cash which he can spend on other stuff.
Hmm, true that. You make very good points Aelryinth. I go to ponder.
Fighters are awesome because everyone else has to do things to be on par with them. They use spells to up their to hit and damage, They use spells to add to movement, They use spells that act as feats, and use more spells because they don't have the HP to take two hits.
I have fun playing a fighter because he has so much room for badassness. He doesn't cower in the back/middle like the wizard, he doesn't fear death because he sees it everyday in the mirror. He doesn't get weaker through out the day, he is strong and tough, and when fighting equal cr mobs is not getting hit much. When a worthy challenge appears I enjoy getting hit instead of the weaker party members. I enjoy the rush of pride as we defeat the our toughest foes, guided by my constant strength and skill.
I enjoy playing a fighter because my build is just one feat power attack, I have 19 or 20 more to build a character with. Feats that show my talents or feats that I learned through sweat and blood from my mistakes.
I love my fighter because he isn't babied by a god like a paladin, he isnt sworn to a lord like a cavalier, and he enjoys the company of people more than animals like the ranger. He is free and owns his own destiny.
He could choose to study art science or lore, he could try to become the best swordsman in the world, or he could enjoy looking for the best ingredients for his food/beer/exotic habits. He lives in the world and not at the end of a rope trick.
The fighter is awesome.
other class comments :
I play a wizard in carrion crown and enjoy cowering in the back and being ignored when I warn the party not to open doors or approach something until I am certain it is safe, and then they regret it. I enjoy being above the pary literally (also). The one thing I dislike about the wizard is GMs always pass saves they roll, no matter what version of dnd or who is GMing, or what the monster is.
I also enjoy the other classes I have played over they years, inquisitor, psion, samurai, rogue, monk, ect.
If you want to ask if the fighter class in general is good, then perhaps we should look at the most common features of a fighter across all archetypes?
As far as I know, all fighter archetypes have a full BAB progression and combat bonus feats. The vast majority of them have proficiencies in all simple and martial weapons, all forms of armor, and all shields, and most have some form of passive bonus to attack and damage rolls with a particular weapon group.
Based solely on this, I'd say fighters are horrible. But that's hardly the end-all-be-all of what makes a fighter.
But fighter archtypes are fighter options just like feats. Making a great fighter using a fighter archtype is still making a great fighter.
Everyone has to choose race so I'm not sure why this is a problem. If you can choose a race to help take care of some of the weaknesses of the class then what's the problem?
Archetypes are not like feats. If they were, you could just grab and go from every single archetype and build the fighter you should be able to build.
You'd get the improved power attack of the 2h fighter and the saves of the unbreakable. You'd get the mobility of the dervish and the crit power of the weapon master. you'd be able to pick your capstones at 19 and 20 instead of having to plan 20 levels ahead of time for them.
So, no, archtypes are not feats. They should be.
Oh, and STR Ranger, Reckless Abandon was called Robilar's Gambit in 3.5. It was a feat long before it was a barbarian power. It was considered essential for any serious fighter build...any melee build, really.
I'm not sure if Ghost Touch was ever a melee ability. It might be in Heroes of Horror or Lords of Darkness or whatever the undead book is.
Most classes stand on their own. As strange as it is, I could make an orcish wizard, a dwarf rogue, or a goblin bard and still make them viable and awesome. Most races add icing to a cake, not add the missing ingredients to let you bake the cake in the first place.
A Fighter that does what it's designed to do is the 1E Fighter who existed to Fight. He did so better than pretty much every class, and also had the best saving throws in the game next to the Paladin (Paladin had Fighter saves +2, more or less). In that game, being a Dwarf meant your already formidable defenses were even more draconic in nature. In 3.x/PF, it means you might have a half-decent chance (but even then you're only looking at +8 instead of +6).
I was initially impressed with the bloodline bit, but then found you needed a standard action to activate your Will-save bonus, and it only lasts 1 round. Which means that it's very questionable in usefulness. If it were usable as an immediate action, then I'd be all over it, but it's too situational to really put faith in at this point.
Fighters have two things. Raw hitting/damaging and fair to good AC. Virtually all their combat options are based around either one or the other. Now if they were more akin to their 1E counterparts, I don't think people would complain as much (by comparison, Fighters were actually very awesome in 1E when placed next to other classes).
The problem is that the game has evolved -- greatly -- but Fighters have devolved. They can no longer move + attack effectively. Their saves went from being the best in the game to being barely better than a commoner. Their weapon specialization capability is a pale imitation of its former glory (creatures had way less HP and their specialization provided both bonus damage and extra attacks per round).
If you wanted to see a 3.x/PF version of a classical Fighter, it would look more like this.
Proficiencies: Fighters are proficient in all simple and martial weapons, light, medium, and heavy armor, and all shields (including Tower Shields). At 1st, 4th, 8th, 12th, 16th, and 20th a Fighter gets proficiency in an exotic weapon of his choice.
Weapon Specialization (Ex): At 1st, 3rd, 5th, and every odd level thereafter, a Fighter may specialize in a weapon of his choice. Specializing in a weapon provides a +1 bonus to hit and +2 bonus to damage. A Fighter may select the same weapon to specialize in multiple times, providing further bonuses to hit and damage. Sufficiently high specialization increases the threat range of the weapon. Upon specializing further in a weapon, the Fighter also learns to make extra attacks with the weapon each round. This extra attack is made in addition to any other attacks and at the Fighter's highest base attack bonus. A Fighter does not have to take a full-attack action to get the extra attacks (an attack action is sufficient). Sufficiently high specialization increases the threat range of the weapon. These threat range modifications are applied after other effects that improve threat range (such as the Improved Critical feat or keen weapon enhancement). The benefits of weapon specialization are as follows below:
1 Specialization: +1 hit, +2 damage
Combat Style Mastery: At 2nd, 4th, 8th, 12th, 16th and 20th level, a Fighter gains a bonus combat feat chosen from any of the style sets below. A Fighter needn't qualify for these feats:
Weapon and Shield
Uncanny Defense (Ex): Fighters are able to shrug off far more than most due to their hearty and resilient nature. Beginning at 5th level, a Fighter gains a bonus to all saving throws equal to 1/2 his Constitution modifier (minimum +1), and gains bonus hit points equal to 1/2 his Constitution modifier per fighter level (so a 20th level Fighter with a +8 Constitution modifier has 80 bonus hit points).
That would put it in the direction of its 1E counterpart in comparison to the current edition. But only as a starting point. Still it lacks options, but it's more reminiscent of the traits they got back in the day (more HP/level than others due to Con, more attacks that even Rangers & Paladins, and stellar saving throws).
Fighters get NO magic. Like it or not, magic equates to options in 3.x/PF. Options equate to power. It's like Xykon notes. Sometimes power comes in the form of 9th level spells, and sometimes it comes in a +8 Perception. Power depends on the situation.
Urgh, more and higher numbers is not the answer guys. It means you don't escape the numbers tread-mill and the need to power-game just to keep up.
Fighters don't need all good saves, why are you getting rid of some weaknesses? Do you want chars to have all good numbers and no weaknesses? Then you get more sameyness and more of the classes blurring into one-another.
I'm not saying everyone should do exactly what I have done, but here are some ideas. I've gone back to early 3.5 and built my games up from there. Course you could do it for core, but most importantly, keep the numbers simple for players and their enemies. Restrain the giant dr, ac and hp in monsters and opponents, give them strengths and weaknesses, and ensure they always have at least something for the players to exploit. Then you will find, that a low save can often get you by with some problems only if you are countered (and you should have a weakness), a decent save will do pretty well because the DCs aren't skyrocketing. Keep the ability scores away from the ridiculous numbers (oh another routine 20 or 30, yay?) and you will find that the classes don't need much changing to keep up and contribute.
Pathfinder has had some real valid criticism due to its crunchiness. We can minimise that and step off the stack more abilities, higher saves, higher dcs, higher everything tread-mill.
Thank you for your time reading this.
3.5 Loyalist wrote:
My point wasn't exactly about bigger numbers. I was demonstrating the kind of pros that the pre-3.x/PF Fighter had going for it, only in ways that people more familiar with PF would understand better (and I noted that it needs actual class features/options because more numbers doesn't equate to good).
Ironically, said Fighter in my example still is loaded with weaknesses. Not being a caster of any sort is a damn big one. No casting = no options in 3.x/PF. The above Fighter still would have to rely on magic items almost 100% to function at high levels. The only thing he has going for him is the improved specialization and saving throws that aren't sucky and more like the old Fighter's saving throws (as in, really good more or less naturally).
Higher numbers makes using Combat Expertise along with Power Attack a viable option. You can be on the offensive and defensive at the same time. Higher numbers also help if you need to deal with high CMDs when you are using a maneuver.
What I would like to see though, instead of higher numbers, is the ability to deal with certain things without having to spend feats on it. For example, the monk can bypass some types of damage reduction starting at a relatively early level (the fighter can't do that until level 12 when he can take Penetrating Strike and it's limited to only 5 points). If the fighter was able to be able to bypass DR/material by dividing his Base Attack by 3 and consulting the table from Overcoming Damage Reduction:
DR Type...................Weapon Enhancement Bonus Equivalent
So starting at level 9, they can bypass cold iron/silver. At level 12, adamantine, and at level 15 they can bypass alignment-based. You could also allow them to bypass epic at level 18. The paladin can already do this so it's not a problem. I would add one at level 6: They can bypass DR/Magic without needing a magic item.
This would go a long way to improving them and giving them a unique ability that grows with them. They still wouldn't be able to bypass DR/- but that's ok. They can still just deal a lot of damage.
I would also like to see them be able to choose any two from the following skills to make them class skills: Acrobatics, Bluff, Diplomacy, Escape Artist, Heal, Knowledge (any), Perception, and Stealth. Then give them 2 more points per level.
I don't want complex changes to the class. The changes should be simple and have a consistent progression.
By the gods, it needs a way to get a decent mount that doesn't require the Leadership feat.
I think the class works fine for what it does. I can make a very effective fighter that does fine in and out of combat. I can do it with as few or as many books are allowed. I can make a certain fighter that enhances his race and I can make one that is enhanced by his race. That doesn't mean that I think it's perfect though.
I agree wholeheartedly with this. In fact taht are the only changes I would do to the fighter class ,well, maybe the posibility of some bonus to the will save but that is all.