Deadmanwalking's Fighter Fix


Homebrew and House Rules

1 to 50 of 151 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>
Liberty's Edge

6 people marked this as a favorite.

So... my House Rules include a Fighter Fix, which I feel is fun and useful, while maintaining archetype compatability. In many ways it's more like errata than a new Class, so I'm not gonna do a whole document. Here it is:

The Fighter Class:

The Fighter receives 4 + Intelligence modifier skill points per level. They receive Knowledge (Local), Perception, and Sense Motive as additional class skills as well as a Good Will Save. They do not possess the Bravery Class Feature, receiving the following features in exchange:

Spell Defense (Ex): At 2nd level, a Fighter receives a +2 bonus on all saves vs. spells or spell-like abilities.
Fearless (Ex): At 6th level, a Fighter is now immune to magical fear, and receives a +4 morale bonus to saves against non-magical fear.
Resilience (Ex): At 10th level, a Fighter can shake off the physical effects of certain attacks. If he makes a Fortitude saving throw against an attack that has a reduced effect on a successful save, he instead avoids the effect entirely.
Indomitable Will (Ex): At 14th level, a Fighter gains a +4 bonus on Will saves to resist enchantment spells. This bonus stacks with all other modifiers, and this feature is identical to the Barbarian Class Feature of the same name.
Combat Mastery (Ex): At 18th level, a Fighter is never considered an unaware combatant, can always act in the surprise round, and is never considered flat-footed (though he may still lose his Dex bonus to Armor Class). Additionally, he is considered to always roll a 20 on initiative checks.

Archetypes that replace Bravery, replace the Spell Defense Class Feature instead. If they replace it with a scaling bonus, instead of scaling they simply gain it at the full +5 bonus (or whatever other maximum the ability hits) at 2nd level. The Viking’s ‘Fearsome’ ability is an exception, only receiving its normal progression.

The Unbreakable Fighter simply doesn’t replace Spell Defenses, and gains Improved Resilience on Fortitude Saves at 13th, as Resilience stacks with Stalwart.

Lore Wardens replace all instances of Armor Training with their listed Maneuver Mastery progression. They replace Spell Defense with Expertise, Fearless with Know Thy Enemy (which they receive at 6th level), Resilience with Hair’s Breadth (which they receive at 10th), and Indomitable Will with Swift Lore.

The Two-Weapon Warrior does not receive Doublestrike, however his Twin Blades ability applies even when making a standard action attack with two weapons (and replaces both Weapon Training 1 and 2). Defensive Flurry still only applies on Full Attacks, though.

Other Relevant House Rules:

Two Weapon Fighting: Unlike other multiple attack effects, this Feat may be used even when attacking as a Standard Action, though Improved and Greater Two Weapon Fighting still require the full attack action.


Right off the bat I like it. I really appreciate that you've managed to improve it without making it incompatible with archetypes.

I'd consider adding Acrobatics (for lightly armored fighters) and Diplomacy (for officers and leaders) to the class list.

A pet peeve of mine is that fighters get weapon training (look how awesome I am with this huge list of weapons), but the iconic fighter-specific feats such as weapon specialization are all about focusing on one weapon. I'd consider adding Martial Mastery as a class feature, and a hell of a lot earlier than level 16.

Finally, I find the typical point buy distribution for fighters (high str/dex, decent con & wis, dump int & cha to the dregs) a little dull. The archetypical fighter charging a dragon just doesn't seem that wise to me. Adding a strong will save certainly helps, but it would be nice to provide a little something for fighters that invest in intelligence or charisma instead of wisdom.

How would you feel about something like this:

Quote:
A fighter can add his Intelligence or Charisma modifier to his will save (whichever is higher) in place of his Wisdom modifier.

coming online at level ~3?

Liberty's Edge

Kudaku wrote:
Right off the bat I like it. I really appreciate that you've managed to improve it without making it incompatible with archetypes.

Thanks, I tried hard. :)

Kudaku wrote:
I'd consider adding Acrobatics (for lightly armored fighters) and Diplomacy (for officers and leaders) to the class list.

I have no objection to modifying the Class list somewhat, but adding too many skills can be problematic. Other 4 Skill Point Classes have 10-13 almost universally, with only Gunslingers and Swashbucklers going over that (at 15 and 16 respectively). My revised list puts the Fighter at 13 precisely, so I'm leery of adding more. Also, see below.

Kudaku wrote:
A pet peeve of mine is that fighters get weapon training (look how awesome I am with this huge list of weapons), but the iconic fighter-specific feats such as weapon specialization are all about focusing on one weapon. I'd consider adding Martial Mastery as a class feature, and a hell of a lot earlier than level 16.

This is a very interesting idea, and one I'm now definitely considering adding. Though I'm not sure at what level...maybe level 4? That's not a very full level...or maybe 8th, so it's after he actually gets Weapon Training. Hmmm...yeah, I'm gonna add this, just let me think on how.

Kudaku wrote:

Finally, I find the typical point buy distribution for fighters (high str/dex, decent con & wis, dump int & cha to the dregs) a little dull. The archetypical fighter charging a dragon just doesn't seem that wise to me. Adding a strong will save certainly helps, but it would be nice to provide a little something for fighters that invest in intelligence or charisma instead of wisdom.

How would you feel about something like this:

Quote:
A fighter can add his Intelligence or Charisma modifier to his will save (whichever is higher) in place of his Wisdom modifier.
coming online at level ~3?

Well, first, I was hoping Good Will Save Progression would make this way less necessary. Wizards certainly don't feel the need to invest heavily in Wisdom, after all. Nor Bards. And Fighters actually do better than they do on Will Saves due to Spell Defense.

Second, this is running right into my general House Rules for everyone. Because I allow anyone who wants to use Charisma for Will Saves instead of Wisdom. As a side note, I also allow people to swap out up to two Class skills for other skills as well (which helps with the skill problem above, as well as helping make a Charisma heavy Fighter if you want).

Frankly, this problem just doesn't strike me as Fighter specific, it's true of all Classes to some degree. That said, if you wanted to add it 4th level seems about the right level of empty. That'd bump Martial Mastery to 8th, but like I said, I might do that anyway.

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.

You've replaced Bravery with a decent class feature, and then correctly added in other class features at every level bravery used to occupy.

Now, you need to add something at levels 5, 7, 8, 9, 11, 12, 13, 15, 16, and 17.

That is an excellent pseudo-capstone at 18th.
You probably want to change the 19th level one to average DR across all levels of armor training.
You might want to change the level 20 to apply equally to all weapons.

You have no recovery options.
You have no healing options.
You have no movement options.
You have no skill increases.
You have no out of combat utility/contribution other then increasing the skill points.
He's worse at using feats then most classes that get bonus feats.
He has no ability to buff his companions, lead on a battlefield, or acquire followers.

You did increase his saves and defenses to a degree. Defensively, its a much better fighter. Now you need to consider utility and versatility.

==Aelryinth

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

Deadmanwalking wrote:
[

You should post your generic house rules then, because they affect the build.

For instance, my house rules Include:

Armor and Weapon Proficiencies are gained only at level 1. At other levels, you must pay a feat to access them.

Weapon Proficiencies are limited; Non-martial classes are proficient only in a number of simple weapons equal to their starting skill points.
3/4 BAB classes with Martial Weapon prof are prof in all simple weapons and 2 martial weapons. If they have a restricted class-specific list (like a monk or rogue), they are instead proficient in 4 weapons off that list, and can purchase more with skill points.
Barbs and rangers are prof in all simple weapons and Martial Weapons equal to their starting skill points.
Fighters and Paladins are proficient in all martial and simple weapons.

If you have the proficiency, you can buy additional weapon proficiencies with a skill point.
Exotic Weapon Proficiency allows you to add one exotic weapon per skill point spent.
========================
Using Cha for Will saves is decent. If you go 4E, int/dex for Reflex, Str or COn for Fort and Wis/Cha for Wis were interchangeable and made sense.

==Aelryinth

Liberty's Edge

Aelryinth wrote:
You should post your generic house rules then, because they affect the build.

They're linked in the first post. I have a 10 page document of them, only 4 of which are other Classes. So...more than 5 pages of House Rules. Including all of them here seems rather distracting from the basic point of the thread (which should be port-able with minimal changes top games that don't use my House Rules).

More detailed response to the rest of your posts to follow.

Liberty's Edge

I have to say most of this looks pretty good, but the good will save and spell defense are probably a little too much. Fighter's aren't really the iconic schooled to defend themselves from magic class, however boosts to resist enchantment, and possibly a boost to ongoing saves might be more typical for the class. And he could use some more utility as well. Maybe something to make use of either Int or Wis, based around tactics or battle intuition? Or something else that doesn't need to be done in combat, because that's not really the problem with the Fighter right now, it's trying to fight something to do when the fighting stops, other than carrying everbody's stuff.

Liberty's Edge

Maybe a swift action ability to study an enemy and get an insight bonus equal to their Int or Wis bonus versus the next attack by the studied creature. I know it seems like everybody and their dog are getting study the enemy actions these days, but I can't really think of much that fits at the moment, especially any abilities that work out of combat, I chime back in if I do.

Liberty's Edge

Aelryinth wrote:
You've replaced Bravery with a decent class feature, and then correctly added in other class features at every level bravery used to occupy.

Yep, that was the plan. :)

Aelryinth wrote:
Now, you need to add something at levels 5, 7, 8, 9, 11, 12, 13, 15, 16, and 17.

Not inherently. Weapon Training and Armor Training up at 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 13, 15, and 17. That leaves 8, 12, and 16 only, and even at those levels they get a Feat...and a Feat's not nothing. Though I'm not averse to adding a little more at a few of those levels under the right circumstances.

Aelryinth wrote:

That is an excellent pseudo-capstone at 18th.

You probably want to change the 19th level one to average DR across all levels of armor training.
You might want to change the level 20 to apply equally to all weapons.

Eh. I'm okay with the capstones as they are, mostly. Adding one made me happy, but the existing ones are quite good enough already in many ways.

Aelryinth wrote:

You have no recovery options.

You have no healing options.

Neither do most Classes. Paladins are, in fact, the only Full BAB Class with any meaningful options in these regards. Okay, Rangers can use a Wand of CLW, but I don't consider that a very big advantage (sinc someone in the party can almost always do this).

Aelryinth wrote:
You have no movement options.

Neither do any non-casters (well, some people get a small movement boost). Unless you count Pounce, and I've actually added a Feat for that which is available to everyone (though with Mobility as a prerequisite, it's most useful for people with some Feats to burn).

Aelryinth wrote:
You have no skill increases.

Nope. Fighter isn't a skill Class and I wasn't really trying to turn it into one. I might yet add an ability or two to help them out with skills, but beyond putting them on par with other non-spell casters at 4+Int skill points, that's not precisely the primary design goal here.

Aelryinth wrote:
You have no out of combat utility/contribution other then increasing the skill points.

This is true, and again not especially atypical of existing Classes.

Aelryinth wrote:
He's worse at using feats then most classes that get bonus feats.

The mere fact that he gets a lot more of them actually does make up for something on this front. Also, Kudaku has convinced me that they need Martial Mastery as a Class Ability, which will in fact make many Feats notably better for them than anyone else.

Aelryinth wrote:
He has no ability to buff his companions, lead on a battlefield, or acquire followers.

Again, this is not something all Classes actually possess. Many spell casters do, but Barbarians, Slayers, that kind of Class? Not so much.

Aelryinth wrote:
You did increase his saves and defenses to a degree. Defensively, its a much better fighter. Now you need to consider utility and versatility.

I am considering utility and versatility to some degree. I added skill points, after all. Should I add more in that vein? Maybe, I'm certainly considering it. But Barbarians and Cavaliers don't have much more out-of combat utility than Fighters do in even this iteration...but Rangers definitely do. The question becomes whether they're closer to on par with the former or the latter in combat.

Aelryinth wrote:
Using Cha for Will saves is decent. If you go 4E, int/dex for Reflex, Str or COn for Fort and Wis/Cha for Wis were interchangeable and made sense.

Str and Int are useful enough without such an option in Pathfinder, IMO....while Cha is not. My making only Will Saves have a set of options for what stat to use is thus a game balance issue.

Liberty's Edge

Deighton Thrane wrote:
I have to say most of this looks pretty good, but the good will save and spell defense are probably a little too much. Fighter's aren't really the iconic schooled to defend themselves from magic class, however boosts to resist enchantment, and possibly a boost to ongoing saves might be more typical for the class.

Aren't they? I'd imagine learning how to fight would involve precisely that sort of thing in a world with magic. Also, it harkens back to their 1st and 2nd Ed. roots, where they had the best saves in the game, which I rather enjoy.

Deighton Thrane wrote:
And he could use some more utility as well. Maybe something to make use of either Int or Wis, based around tactics or battle intuition? Or something else that doesn't need to be done in combat, because that's not really the problem with the Fighter right now, it's trying to fight something to do when the fighting stops, other than carrying everbody's stuff.

I'm not against adding a bit more out-of-combat stuff or utility, but I'm still bouncing around on what exactly I can come up with that is both effective, balanced, and thematically appropriate.

Deighton Thrane wrote:
Maybe a swift action ability to study an enemy and get an insight bonus equal to their Int or Wis bonus versus the next attack by the studied creature. I know it seems like everybody and their dog are getting study the enemy actions these days, but I can't really think of much that fits at the moment, especially any abilities that work out of combat, I chime back in if I do.

Lore Wardens get this already, and are certainly an available option.

And yeah, I've been trying to think of thematically appropriate skill bonuses and/or out of combat abilities as well.

Liberty's Edge

Well, I have to say I've never read anything about the combat schools of Golarion that included study of magic or bringing in the sorcerer to train against magical effect. And aside from that, the monk has been the martial with the best saves for quite some time now, and even though I think the fighter needs a bit of a boost, there's no reason to step on other classes toes to do it. But if you like the high will save, I'll digress.

Also I was thinking of the student of war PrC when I thought of that, but I've never liked how they were tied to a successful knowledge check. For one, I don't think making the distinction between a zombie, a ghoul and a wight should make a big difference to how effective your attacks are. And second I hate how if you make a knowledge check versus an enemy, you can't know what a second enemy is, otherwise you lose your bonus versus your first enemy. I don't know if you're supposed to be willfully ignoring what other enemies look like or what in the meantime, but I just can't understand how you could have one skeleton come at you and know it's a skeleton, and not know the skeleton right behind it, who looks nearly identical, is also a skeleton.

Liberty's Edge

Deighton Thrane wrote:
Well, I have to say I've never read anything about the combat schools of Golarion that included study of magic or bringing in the sorcerer to train against magical effect. And aside from that, the monk has been the martial with the best saves for quite some time now, and even though I think the fighter needs a bit of a boost, there's no reason to step on other classes toes to do it. But if you like the high will save, I'll digress.

The high Will Save (along with Fearless and Indomitable Will) is to represent bravery and stubbornness more than anti-magic training. Spell Defense, meanwhile, can represent anti-magic training, but can just as easily represent being sorta inherently anti-magical, as only makes sense for the most 'mundane' class.

Deighton Thrane wrote:
Also I was thinking of the student of war PrC when I thought of that, but I've never liked how they were tied to a successful knowledge check. For one, I don't think making the distinction between a zombie, a ghoul and a wight should make a big difference to how effective your attacks are. And second I hate how if you make a knowledge check versus an enemy, you can't know what a second enemy is, otherwise you lose your bonus versus your first enemy. I don't know if you're supposed to be willfully ignoring what other enemies look like or what in the meantime, but I just can't understand how you could have one skeleton come at you and know it's a skeleton, and not know the skeleton right behind it, who looks nearly identical, is also a skeleton.

I can see where you're coming from, but the whole basic idea just doesn't sit well with me thematically on the core fighter anyway, so it's a bit off topic.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

These aren't the choices I'd personally make as a designer. I typically try to aim for changes that make a "meh" class more fun rather than simply better. In this case, you add a bunch of mostly passive defensive abilities against spells and such. Passive abilities are usually not all that fun. Still, I think the changes are pretty decent. It turns the fighter into a juggernaut.

However, I really dislike allowing two-weapon fighting as standard action. While I agree TWF deserves some love, I think getting an extra attack against the same target on a standard action is too much. When thinking about ways to help two-weapon fighting, I usually like the idea of Two-Weapon Fighting granting a standard action special attack that's not simply two-weapon fighting as a standard action. One version of Two-Weapon Fighting I homebrewed worked like this:

"While wielding two weapons, you can make a dual strike special attack as a standard action. When using dual strike, you make a single attack with your primary weapon at your full base attack bonus and add the damage dice of your off-hand weapon to the damage roll. The off-hand weapon's magical special abilities (such as flaming) apply to this attack. Special abilities already posssesed by the primary weapon do not stack."


Dot

Liberty's Edge

Cyrad wrote:
These aren't the choices I'd personally make as a designer. I typically try to aim for changes that make a "meh" class more fun rather than simply better. In this case, you add a bunch of mostly passive defensive abilities against spells and such. Passive abilities are usually not all that fun. Still, I think the changes are pretty decent. It turns the fighter into a juggernaut.

There's definitely an element of truth to this, but frankly, every time I hear people talk about what they actually like about Fighters and playing them, I hear about simplicity of play. People who want something complicated to play already have a myriad of options, if I'm gonna improve the Fighter, I'd like to do it in a way that will pretty unambiguously make current fans of the Class happy. So...I went with simplicity, and purely defensive abilities have the great virtue of being relatively simple both conceptually and in play.

I fully intend to follow the same policy with other additions to the class, too. Any utility I provide will either enhance a skill or three, or give a utility effect already common in the game. The Martial Mastery thing has the great virtue of being dead simple, too, which is one reason I quite like it.

Cyrad wrote:
However, I really dislike allowing two-weapon fighting as standard action. While I agree TWF deserves some love, I think getting an extra attack against the same target on a standard action is too much. When thinking about ways to help two-weapon fighting, I usually like the idea of Two-Weapon Fighting granting a standard action special attack that's not simply two-weapon fighting as a standard action.

TWF has a host of serious downsides (Dex-dependency unless you're an Unchained Rogue*, Ranger or Slayer, the cost in Feats, reduced damage with off-hand weapon, -2 to hit, etc.) and on top of that is useless aside from full-round actions. I don't feel that giving it a bit of a boost on standard actions is unwarranted. Especially when I'm already making Pounce available a bit more readily.

I mean, let's compare someone with, say, Str 22, BAB +10, Weapon Focus and Specialization, Weapon Training 2, Gloves of Dueling, TWF, Double Slice and a pair of Short Swords +2, vs. the guy with the same stats but a +3 Greatsword instead of the Sabres and Power Attack.

The Sabres have +21/+21 for 1d6+14 each, or 2d6+28. the Greatsword, meanwhile, is also +21 for 2d6+27..and cost at least one Feat less. If it's only one Feat less, he's doing a lot better at Full Attacks, and if the TWF guy has ITWF, that's two free feats the one-weapon guy has in exchange for +1 damage.

Now, as level rises, the TWF guy gets some advantage in damage, but the Feat difference continues to pile up, and the 1.5 Str to damage really helps a lot to keep pace.

So...as a baseline, it seems reasonable enough. It certainly makes some classes with a lot of static damage shine when TWF...but frankly, that's mostly gonna be Rogues and they need the help (even post-Unchained), and you could do the same anyway with TWF + Pounce if you're willing to make the investment.

Cyrad wrote:

One version of Two-Weapon Fighting I homebrewed worked like this:

"While wielding two weapons, you can make a dual strike special attack as a standard action. When using dual strike, you make a single attack with your primary weapon at your full base attack bonus and add the damage dice of your off-hand weapon to the damage roll. The off-hand weapon's magical special abilities (such as flaming) apply to this attack. Special abilities already posssesed by the primary weapon do not stack."

That's a valid way to go, but I feel that the price of TWF is high enough that the kind of advantage provided by two attacks is reasonable once you've made that investment.

*Unchained Rogues still need Dex for TWF, but that's hardly a downside for them.

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

Deadmanwalking wrote:
Answers.

1) I don't see why you didn't keep scaling it through on the other abilities.

2) No, they SCALE at those levels. Counting them as a class ability is like saying when your fireball goes from 5d6 to 6d6 it's a class ability, mark it down.
Like feats, STOP COUNTING SCALING AS A CLASS FEATURE. Argh! It frustrates me to no end when other classes get away with it, but Fighters can't have abilities that scale.

3) I'm not saying change the capstone. I'm saying that instead of adding 5/- DR out of nowhere at 19, put it into Armor Training.

4) Actually you are completely wrong here, even if you restrict to Core Martials.
Paladins have EXCELLENT recovery options, across the board.
Rangers can also spellcast Cure SPells, Goodberry, and use Wands.
Barbs even have Raging Vitality and boosts when getting healed as an option.

5)Again, you are WRONG here.
Paladins can choose a mount, and at later levels get spells that even allow them to fly.
Rangers can make their AC a mount, get Longstrider as a level 1 spell, and have beastform options via spells at later levels.
Barbs get Fast Movement, and options to grow wings, climb speeds and swim speeds if they like.
That's all 3 core martials. The Fighter has no options.

6)Again, you are wrong here.
The paladin doesn't have per se skill bonuses...but can cast spells that allow him to boost skill checks.
The Ranger has FE, FT, and spells that boost skill checks.
The Barb has Rage Powers he can choose to boost skill checks, the most obvious of which is Strength Surge.
Again, that's all 3 Core martials. The Fighter has nothing. This isn't about making him a skill class...it's about making him good at what Fighters are supposed to be able to do.

7)Again, you are wrong.
Paladins and Rangers, both as spellcasters, can engage in magical item construction.
The barb, admittedly, has only skill points to fall back on.

8) Getting a lot of feats that force you into MAD so you're worse at using them is more of a penalty then a plus. Feats that you don't qualify for effectively don't even exist as options, narrowing your choices down.
It's a double-edged sword. And there's no reason why Rangers get Combat Feats faster then Fighters do, AND ignore Pre-Reqs.
We won't get into how Paladin Mercies and Barb Rage Powers are just all around better then combat feats.

9)Again, you are wrong.
Ignoring spellcasting from Rangers and Paladins..
Paladins have their Auras that boost companions, anti-fear being the most iconic. However, they also have their Justice ability, which lets them give away a Smite...a hugely powerful ability for a group.
Rangers have their Guide ability, the choice to buff companions with their FE benefits against a foe, in lieu of an Animal Companion.
Barbs have the ability to GIVE AWAY RAGE, as an option.
Fighters have nothing.

10)Versatility and utility include most of the points above. It's not just a skill point thing. Utility includes things like leaving no tracks, sleeping in armor, skill bonuses in Favored Terrain, and being able to empathize with animals, as well as Detecting Evil and removing conditions as well as healing others. For barbs, it includes being able to boost their athletic ability to ridiculous levels.

Versatility includes the ability to change and adapt. For Barbs, this involves spending rage rounds on secondary powers. For paladins and rangers, this is mostly spellcasting. In the long term, it often means ease of retraining or adding additional abilities.

The fighter has none of any of the above.

11)Using Str for a Fort save does do one thing...it makes sure that your martial classes are indeed the toughest of the classes in at least one save. It's just as likely a Cleric is going to have this locked down instead.
Kindly note that the Fighter has no Charisma synergy at all, except for maybe Intimidation.

----------------------
I went over most of these points on the other thread, so they should be familiar to you.

Let me reiterate that the non-Core extra classes are not a concern of mine, and they exist in their own little niche. I'm simply concerned with bringing the Fighter up to the level of the other Core martials.

I listed out what the main classes get in that thread, and what the Fighter does NOT, in comparison.

YOu have the room to put in additional utility and versatility. This won't overpower the class with DPR. It makes the class fun to play doing something besides whack-a-goblin.

==Aelryinth


Aelryinth wrote:


5)Again, you are WRONG here.
Paladins can choose a mount, and at later levels get spells that even allow them to fly.
Rangers can make their AC a mount, get Longstrider as a level 1 spell, and have beastform options via spells at later levels.
Barbs get Fast Movement, and options to grow wings, climb speeds and swim speeds if they like.
That's all 3 core martials. The Fighter has no options.

I've seen this point made in a few places, and I think it overlooks the benefits of armor training. The class ability makes fighters arguably THE most mobile class in heavy armor. A level 7 fighter can wear adamantine full-plate and move their full base speed (lets leave dwarves and little guys out of it and assume that's 30' for this discussion).

Compare this to:

Ranger - Has to spend a feat to wear heavy. Has to get Mithril to avoid losing evasion. Still drops to base 20 move speed. At level 7 he can cast longstrider once or twice per day for 4 hours each, letting him match the fighter for about 8 out of 16 working hours. You can get a mount, but depending on your GM and campaign you may or may not be able to ride it all that much (see the numerous other threads about the perils of large mounts in dungeons).

Barbarian - Has to spend a feat to wear heavy. Has to get Mithril to avoid losing Fast Movement. Still drops his movement speed to 30 from 40. So once you can afford the mithral, it's a wash. The swim speed and climb speed are certainly nice options though.

Paladin - Gets a mount, and absolutely nothing to make it easier to ride. In full plate that -6 ACP on ride checks can be nasty to get around, especially for a class that needs to boost CHA as much as the Paladin. Then, just like the Ranger, there's the whole Dungeon-with-5-foot-hallways issue.

Plus, when you start getting into movement speed bonuses, the full move speed thing matters even more. Lets look at the move speeds of each class in the armor described above if the friendly party wizard casts haste.

Ranger - 60' total (doesn't stack with longstrider) -> 40' with heavy

Barbarian - 70' total -> 50' with heavy

Paladin - 60 total -> 40' with heavy

Fighter - 60' total -> 60' with heavy

There are ways to get around all of these, but I just think full move speed in heavy armor is often overlooked. It has benefits which some may value more highly than others, and that's the only point I'm trying to make here.


Aelryinth wrote:
YOu have the room to put in additional utility and versatility. This won't overpower the class with DPR. It makes the class fun to play doing something besides whack-a-goblin.

Unless you own the house he's GMing at and he has no where else to game if you kick him out, no he doesn't.

The whole point of the fighter class is to be uncomplicated. He's hit the minimum requirements for making the fighter work. It has 4+int skill points, a good will save, and bravery has been replaced with something that actually does something. Anything else is gravy and your demands for counterthematic buffing are just grousing. Those aren't the point of the fighter class for people who actually play fighters, which you obviously aren't.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

You may wish to more carefully re-read that bit you quoted Atarlost. Aerlynth wasn't making a mandate, he said

Quote:
You have the room to put in additional utility and versatility.

Whether or not one agrees it should be done, the room is there.

That being said... some of us who actually play fighters desperately CRAVE the sort of versatility Aelryinth is espousing. To be able to actually do shit other than swing a sword, to be badass heroes rather than an overpowered NPC class.

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

Atarlost wrote:
Aelryinth wrote:
YOu have the room to put in additional utility and versatility. This won't overpower the class with DPR. It makes the class fun to play doing something besides whack-a-goblin.

Unless you own the house he's GMing at and he has no where else to game if you kick him out, no he doesn't.

The whole point of the fighter class is to be uncomplicated. He's hit the minimum requirements for making the fighter work. It has 4+int skill points, a good will save, and bravery has been replaced with something that actually does something. Anything else is gravy and your demands for counterthematic buffing are just grousing. Those aren't the point of the fighter class for people who actually play fighters, which you obviously aren't.

And you are wrong.

Simple is the Warrior. You want simple, play him.

If you're going to be a PC, you should be able to stand shoulder to shoulder with other PC's.
That means either more abilities, or stronger, unmatched abilities.

The fighter has neither of these, so he not only isn't on theme, he isn't in the running.

If you think a will save, a change to bravery, and skill points were all the fix the fighter needed, we definitely aren't on the same page. You basically have to redo combat feats so they are equal to Rage Powers, for starters, and the fighter still has no recovery/healing, movement, or group bonuses.

In other words, every other class operates better alone, in groups, out-moves him, and benefits the group then does the fighter...the class that is all about, well, fighting.

Yep. We are DEFINITELY not on the same theme.

And the barb being the anti-caster class just makes me laugh. Why can't a professional fighter train himself to be ferociously anti-magical without giving up a third of his class features? It takes ONE Rage Power for a Barb, 2 if you count Witch Hunter, 3 for SPell Sunder. UGH.

Unfair, totally biased.

==Aelryinth

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

kyrt-ryder wrote:

You may wish to more carefully re-read that bit you quoted Atarlost. Aerlynth wasn't making a mandate, he said

Quote:
You have the room to put in additional utility and versatility.

Whether or not one agrees it should be done, the room is there.

That being said... some of us who actually play fighters desperately CRAVE the sort of versatility Aelryinth is espousing. To be able to actually do s**% other than swing a sword, to be badass heroes rather than an overpowered NPC class.

And being able to walk around without a two-legged healing drip backing you up. That would be nice, too.

==Aelryinth


If one really wants a simple martial PC class, the Fighter isn't it. As written the Fighter comes built in with fiddly bonuses to this weapon or that weapon, this save or that save, and the player has to sort his way through hundreds of published combat feats [and general feats on odd levels] to try to scrape together a character that performs well.

Try homebrewing a Juggernaut class, full BAB, full saves, 2 skill points per level, fast healing [perhaps 1 + 1/4 or 5 levels], one reroll per day per class level, a special 'flurry' type of Full Attack Action which grants all attacks at -2 to hit and a few specific abilities that come online at appropriate levels [including the ability to hit incorporeal opponents, the ability to move speed or half speed as a swift action and a few others.]

Don't try to pass the Fighter off as simple, because it's really not. New players screw up a Fighter build more often than just about any other class with the possible exception of Sorcerer.

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

DocShock wrote:
...

Or, you can be a dwarf and completely ignore everything you just posted.

Or, you can dip any class with heavy armor prof.

Or, you can note that Barb and Ranger have class abilities that dovetail with wearing medium armor, mithral bp is cheap and goes up to Dex 20, and Celestial Mail is also cheap and goes up to Dex 28. Wearing Medium armor is just a poor choice for both classes, because of class abilities (Ranger combat feats, esp).

heavy Armor prof, for almost all purposes, means +1 AC. Affording upgraded heavy armor is incredibly expensive. You basically have to choose between +3 armor and mithral, or +4 armor and adamantine!!

For lighter armors this is much cheaper, which mean they come online earlier.

So, yes, at 7th level, the Ranger is wearing lighter armor then you, and running around faster then you during the entire time you are fighting.
So is the barbarian.
And if you have a 16 Dex (unlikely at level 7 with standard point buy) you can actually take advantage of your own class ability to have +3 Dex bonus in your full plate. Congratulations. Otherwise, it's just sitting there unused.

==Aelryinth

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

kyrt-ryder wrote:

If one really wants a simple martial PC class, the Fighter isn't it. As written the Fighter comes built in with fiddly bonuses to this weapon or that weapon, this save or that save, and the player has to sort his way through hundreds of published combat feats [and general feats on odd levels] to try to scrape together a character that performs well.

Try homebrewing a Juggernaut class, full BAB, full saves, 2 skill points per level, fast healing [perhaps 1 + 1/4 or 5 levels], one reroll per day per class level, a special 'flurry' type of Full Attack Action which grants all attacks at -2 to hit and a few specific abilities that come online at appropriate levels [including the ability to hit incorporeal opponents, the ability to move speed or half speed as a swift action and a few others.]

Don't try to pass the Fighter off as simple, because it's really not. New players screw up a Fighter build more often than just about any other class with the possible exception of Sorcerer.

This is also true.

Combat feats in general are bad. Many of them are trap feats. Official retraining of mistakes is slow, and the fighter can't change anything readily.

That, and not getting any combat bonuses at level 1 is horrible for a martial class.

==Aelryinth


kyrt-ryder wrote:

If one really wants a simple martial PC class, the Fighter isn't it. As written the Fighter comes built in with fiddly bonuses to this weapon or that weapon, this save or that save, and the player has to sort his way through hundreds of published combat feats [and general feats on odd levels] to try to scrape together a character that performs well.

Try homebrewing a Juggernaut class, full BAB, full saves, 2 skill points per level, fast healing [perhaps 1 + 1/4 or 5 levels], one reroll per day per class level, a special 'flurry' type of Full Attack Action which grants all attacks at -2 to hit and a few specific abilities that come online at appropriate levels [including the ability to hit incorporeal opponents, the ability to move speed or half speed as a swift action and a few others.]

Don't try to pass the Fighter off as simple, because it's really not. New players screw up a Fighter build more often than just about any other class with the possible exception of Sorcerer.

You apparently can't tell the difference between table time and non-table time. Here's a hint: you can arrange to do non-table work when you're fully alert and can research decisions. Table time happens when it's scheduled and anything that delays the game is a problem.

A fighter may take thought to build, but he only tracks one thing: hitpoints. No per diem anything. No bonuses that only work against one kind of enemy. You put in some thought away from the table and you get a character that just works. Or would work if it had a better will save, which Deadmanwalking's proposal fixes. You can play a fighter with a after a stressful day at work or dealing with a toddler or having an allergy headache and not wreck the party dynamics. You won't drop favored enemy or misuse spell slots or forget how many rage rounds you've used. All you have to worry about are hitpoints and roleplaying. That's valuable.


Bravery only works against fear. [Deadmanwalking seems to have fixed this one.]

Weapon Training and Weapon Focus>Specialization>Greater Focus>Greater Specialization only work with limited groups of weapons.

Weapon Training then goes on to make it even worse, and you get multiple weapon training groups each with it's own damned bonus to track.

I agree there's value in only needing to worry about hitpoints. I just don't feel the fighter fully fills that role.


Aelryinth wrote:
That, and not getting any combat bonuses at level 1 is horrible for a martial class.

Back when I was running the PF Fighter mostly as-is my simplest change was adding an additional Weapon Training at level 1, granting a +1 DR/- with Armor Training that scales to the +5 in Armor Mastery [and explicitly noted it stacks with Adamantine armor, should the character choose to invest in that], changed Armor Training from increasing available dex-to-ac to granting dodge bonus, granted 5 skill points per level and a full Will Save.

Not a perfect fix, but it helped.

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Why keep track of feats, then? Why keep track of a bonus to hit rolls with specific weapon types?

Just play a warrior.

Eesh.

You can play a fighter as rot simple as you like. You can never rage on a barb, never smite on a paladin, never memorize a spell, never give away a guide bonus.

But you have the OPTIONS to do so.

That's for more valuable then NOT HAVING THE OPTION.

And the fighter, doesn't have the options.

==Aelryinth


Aelryinth wrote:


Or, you can be a dwarf and completely ignore everything you just posted.

Or, you can dip any class with heavy armor prof.

Or, you can note that Barb and Ranger have class abilities that dovetail with wearing medium armor, mithral bp is cheap and goes up to Dex 20, and Celestial Mail is also cheap and goes up to Dex 28. Wearing Medium armor is just a poor choice for both classes, because of class abilities (Ranger combat feats, esp).

heavy Armor prof, for almost all purposes, means +1 AC. Affording upgraded heavy armor is incredibly expensive. You basically have to choose between +3 armor and mithral, or +4 armor and adamantine!!

For lighter armors this is much cheaper, which mean they come online earlier.

So, yes, at 7th level, the Ranger is wearing lighter armor then you, and running around faster then you during the entire time you are fighting.
So is the barbarian.
And if you have a 16 Dex (unlikely at level 7 with standard point buy) you can actually take advantage of your own class ability to have +3 Dex bonus in your full plate. Congratulations. Otherwise, it's just sitting there unused.

==Aelryinth

The dwarf is certainly the exception to the rule in some respects, but a stone-plate ranger still loses evasion and his combat style feats, and the steel full-plate barb still loses fast movement. I wouldn't say it lets you ignore everything I said as you still need to burn the feat and pick up mithral gear. I'd just say a Dwarf has one fewer reason to play fighter than the other three medium races.

My only point was that a Fighter has an effective move speed boost when wearing medium or heavier armor (mithral-plate dwarf aside). In my personal opinion, this is an undervalued benefit.

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

No, he does not take a penalty.

That's not a speed boost. that's not taking a penalty.
He doesn't have the option to go faster, he has the option to move at normal speed.
Barb and ranger have the option to move faster. There's a big difference.

==Aelryinth

Liberty's Edge

Aelryinth wrote:
1) I don't see why you didn't keep scaling it through on the other abilities.

Huh? I'm not quite sure what you're asking here. I eliminated it entirely because it was a bad ability. I didn't eliminate other stuff, because those things aren't inherently bad abilities.

Aelryinth wrote:

2) No, they SCALE at those levels. Counting them as a class ability is like saying when your fireball goes from 5d6 to 6d6 it's a class ability, mark it down.

Like feats, STOP COUNTING SCALING AS A CLASS FEATURE. Argh! It frustrates me to no end when other classes get away with it, but Fighters can't have abilities that scale.

Uh...everyone who gets scaling abilities with actual numerical bonuses gets them listed and counted as class features. Sneak Attack, Favored Enemy, Studied Target, Inspire Courage...I could go on. Besides, Weapon Training actually gets new categories of weapon when it rises, that's certainly a Class Feature.

And bonus Feats most certainly are a Class Feature. If you want, you can argue that they're a bad class feature, but they're something the Class gets that people without that Class Feature do not.

The levels I see as open are 4, 8, 12, and 16. There's a bit of room for a utility ability at level 1, too.

Aelryinth wrote:
3) I'm not saying change the capstone. I'm saying that instead of adding 5/- DR out of nowhere at 19, put it into Armor Training.

Eh. DR is fiddly, and often comes in multiples of 5. I'm cool with it as-is.

Aelryinth wrote:

4) Actually you are completely wrong here, even if you restrict to Core Martials.

Paladins have EXCELLENT recovery options, across the board.
Rangers can also spellcast Cure SPells, Goodberry, and use Wands.
Barbs even have Raging Vitality and boosts when getting healed as an option.

I'm gonna assume you mean Raging Vigor. Raging Vigor is once per day healing of a trifling amount. It's not a good Rage Power at all, and not worth much in a discussion such as this.

Similarly, Goodberry and CLW are not meaningful amounts of healing in most ways by the time you get them. They save a little gp on wands, and allow an occasional save in combat if nobody else can manage it, and that's about it.

Aelryinth wrote:

5)Again, you are WRONG here.

Paladins can choose a mount, and at later levels get spells that even allow them to fly.
Rangers can make their AC a mount, get Longstrider as a level 1 spell, and have beastform options via spells at later levels.
Barbs get Fast Movement, and options to grow wings, climb speeds and swim speeds if they like.
That's all 3 core martials. The Fighter has no options.

Climb Speeds and Swim Speeds are only available to the Barbarian as of Unchained. Nor do I consider either especially valuable, as both are extremely niche in application, and can be acquired for very minimal amounts of gold if you really need them. Flying is a possibility, but one preclude by gaining Pounce (which is better). I'm letting Fighters grab Pounce as a Feat...so I consider that a wash.

As for Rangers and Paladins, that's almost entirely down to spells which I'm not sure is a valid basis for comparison.

Aelryinth wrote:

6)Again, you are wrong here.

The paladin doesn't have per se skill bonuses...but can cast spells that allow him to boost skill checks.
The Ranger has FE, FT, and spells that boost skill checks.
The Barb has Rage Powers he can choose to boost skill checks, the most obvious of which is Strength Surge.
Again, that's all 3 Core martials. The Fighter has nothing. This isn't about making him a skill class...it's about making him good at what Fighters are supposed to be able to do.

I never actually said otherwise. Indeed, I rather indicated I was planning on adding a bit to make them on par with Barbarians and Cavaliers and the like.

Aelryinth wrote:

7)Again, you are wrong.

Paladins and Rangers, both as spellcasters, can engage in magical item construction.
The barb, admittedly, has only skill points to fall back on.

And again, that's not actually any more helpful than a Fighter's 'always on' abilities, because they're the worst possible people to take those Feats. It's a theoretical advantage that almost never sees meaningful use in actual play.

Aelryinth wrote:

8) Getting a lot of feats that force you into MAD so you're worse at using them is more of a penalty then a plus. Feats that you don't qualify for effectively don't even exist as options, narrowing your choices down.

It's a double-edged sword. And there's no reason why Rangers get Combat Feats faster then Fighters do, AND ignore Pre-Reqs.
We won't get into how Paladin Mercies and Barb Rage Powers are just all around better then combat feats.

Sure, but there are plenty of Feat chains available to almost any Fighter with almost any build. Are they the best Feat chains ever in all cases? Maybe not, but they're better than nothing.

And again, what you're arguing is that they're a bad Class Feature and even if that's true, bad Class Features are, in fact, still Class Features. They don't cease to be so simply because you don't like them.

Aelryinth wrote:

9)Again, you are wrong.

Ignoring spellcasting from Rangers and Paladins..
Paladins have their Auras that boost companions, anti-fear being the most iconic. However, they also have their Justice ability, which lets them give away a Smite...a hugely powerful ability for a group.
Rangers have their Guide ability, the choice to buff companions with their FE benefits against a foe, in lieu of an Animal Companion.
Barbs have the ability to GIVE AWAY RAGE, as an option.
Fighters have nothing.

Barbarians do not, generally speaking, have the ability to give away Rage in a meaningful fashion. The others weren't on my list of Classes that can't buff, now were they? That was for a reason.

You need to be a little more careful about calling people wrong. You've called me wrong when I wasn't several times now, or assumed I meant things I didn't actually say. Please stop that.

Aelryinth wrote:

10)Versatility and utility include most of the points above. It's not just a skill point thing. Utility includes things like leaving no tracks, sleeping in armor, skill bonuses in Favored Terrain, and being able to empathize with animals, as well as Detecting Evil and removing conditions as well as healing others. For barbs, it includes being able to boost their athletic ability to ridiculous levels.

Versatility includes the ability to change and adapt. For Barbs, this involves spending rage rounds on secondary powers. For paladins and rangers, this is mostly spellcasting. In the long term, it often means ease of retraining or adding additional abilities.

The fighter has none of any of the above.

Barbarians have few if any abilities that involve spending Rage rounds per se. Nor are they very adaptable in terms of what powers they have. Paladins and Rangers, as prepared casters, obviously have a lot of out-of-combat versatility inasmuch as their spell list does.

I'm not against giving Fighters more versatility, but you really overstate the level of useful or meaningful versatility a lot of other Classes have.

Aelryinth wrote:

11)Using Str for a Fort save does do one thing...it makes sure that your martial classes are indeed the toughest of the classes in at least one save. It's just as likely a Cleric is going to have this locked down instead.

Kindly note that the Fighter has no Charisma synergy at all, except for maybe Intimidation.

I disagree. Str is solid as it is, it doesn't need to be a better stat. And many Clerics would still be as likely to be equal to Fighters in Fortitude even using Str for it.

And yeah, I know Fighter lacks Cha synergy. It lacks Wis synergy, too. Indeed, it leaves you rather free to decide what mental stats to focus on if any.

Aelryinth wrote:
I went over most of these points on the other thread, so they should be familiar to you.

They are. I disagreed with several of them then, too. :)

Aelryinth wrote:
Let me reiterate that the non-Core extra classes are not a concern of mine, and they exist in their own little niche. I'm simply concerned with bringing the Fighter up to the level of the other Core martials.

And yet you bring up Raging Vitality...a non-core Feat. I think you're one of extraordinarily few who cares about content from books other than the corebook, and yet not the classes introduced in those books. That...sorta makes your opinion very niche.

Aelryinth wrote:
I listed out what the main classes get in that thread, and what the Fighter does NOT, in comparison.

Yeah...and I still disagree in several ways. Mostly, I disagree with you about what the design goals of a particular Class Fix should be.

I am not trying to fix Caster/Martial disparity...that's outside the scope of this thread, and frankly, IMO, requires an almost complete overhaul of the game's function.

Aelryinth wrote:
YOu have the room to put in additional utility and versatility. This won't overpower the class with DPR. It makes the class fun to play doing something besides whack-a-goblin.

This I actually agree with. Do you have any particular suggestions? Everyone keeps saying 'utility and versatility' which is great, and I agree, but nobody's giving any ideas as to what utility and versatility are thematically appropriate to the Fighter and mechanically useful.

Liberty's Edge

kyrt-ryder wrote:
If one really wants a simple martial PC class, the Fighter isn't it. As written the Fighter comes built in with fiddly bonuses to this weapon or that weapon, this save or that save, and the player has to sort his way through hundreds of published combat feats [and general feats on odd levels] to try to scrape together a character that performs well.

Fighters aren't simple to build, but they're dead simple to play once built. Which is what I was referring to, for the record.

kyrt-ryder wrote:

You may wish to more carefully re-read that bit you quoted Atarlost. Aerlynth wasn't making a mandate, he said

Quote:
You have the room to put in additional utility and versatility.
Whether or not one agrees it should be done, the room is there.

It certainly is. As I noted previously, I definitely feel there's some additional room at 4th, 8th, 12th, and 16th level, plus maybe some at 1st for something utility or skill based.

kyrt-ryder wrote:
That being said... some of us who actually play fighters desperately CRAVE the sort of versatility Aelryinth is espousing. To be able to actually do s+%% other than swing a sword, to be badass heroes rather than an overpowered NPC class.

I'm well aware, and have no real objection to adding some such versatility. What precisely would you suggest? I'm very interested in ideas, hopefully ones with simple mechanics.

Liberty's Edge

Okay, so, here are my thoughts at the moment for additional abilities:

1st Level: The Fighter gains a bonus to one particular skill equal to 1/2 his level, this skill becomes a Class Skill (if it's already a class skill, he gets one Class skill of his choice). Possibly with some limitations on what skill (I'm thinking of banning Knowledge Skills, UMD, and Perception). Maybe they get a free skill unlock with this skill at some point (or even immediately). Flavored as whatever mundane skills their particular martial training emphasized. Maybe call it something to do with applying the lessons of war to peace time?

4th Level: Martial Mastery (as mentioned above). Any Weapon Specific Feats they possess apply to all weapons within that weapon group. Simple and expands their options and the usefulness of Feats without stepping on the toes of Ranger and Slayer (yes, Aelrynith, we know you don't care about that, but I do).

8th: Something versatility based and not damage-based. Dunno quite what, but definitely something useful and in-theme. Possibly something that actually applies in combat. Steal from 4E and 5E and throw in a 'Second Wind'ability, maybe?

12th: I'm really not sure. Maybe something else skill based? Or based on experience of some sort...maybe even a buffing effect of some sort based on a veteran's advice.

16th: Absolutely no clue. Possibly something, again, thematically based on being a hardened veteran. Not at all sure what, though.

So...anyone have any better ideas? The levels are definitely the ones where I'm giving them something, and I'm almost certainly giving something skill-based at level 1, and Martial Mastery at level 4, but beyond that some suggestions would be very helpful.

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

Deadman;

You made a blanket statement that the core martials had none of that stuff I listed above.

They DO have that stuff as options. The fighter doesn't have them as even options. Sure, it may be a poor choice...but it's a choice all the same. You are trying to argue they don't have those options, or that the options aren't very good.

But they DO have the options, and the fighter doesn't. That's the whole point of things. Just because it comes from spells or other sources is meaningless. That's like saying spellcasting doesn't count when comparing class features, which is...rather crazy.

Even the lesser healing of a Ranger means that they don't need a two legged IV holder following them around to give them HP back, nor do they need invest in UMD. They can support themselves, and even help others with healing.

It's not something a fighter can do. At all.

And wow, dissing the ability to make magic items. I have to say you are getting VERY crazy, putting down one of the best options in the whole game.

On scaling: Look, Dead, every time a caster goes up in level, the numeric value of many of his spells change. But you don't see +1 Caster level listed as a class feature every level. Yet an Ioun Stone to grant +1 Caster level is 30,000 gp. Compare that to +1 to hit!

Yet you make the argument that the fighter's should. And no, when the paladin's smite goes up in level, nothing is mentioned. It's noted when he gets MORE of them...and the paladin always gets something else when he gets more of them.
Because it's an auto scaling first level ability.

Ergo, Weapon Training Scales...never put it on the table again.
That means that at 8th...he gets a lesser weapon group. Wahoo. That's akin to getting an additional smite for the paladin, and is basically nothing at all.

The ability scales up slowly...which it is supposed to do by level. Class feature, right? It also expands laterally, slowly, which is not about power, its about versatility. Lateral expansion is not scaling and should never be counted as a full class feature...it just modifies the original one slightly.

Ergo, your levels 8,12 and 16 are free.

Armor Training is the same thing...its just a scaling class ability. The only way you can justify denoting it is if you give something extra at 11 and 15, like the movement breaks at 3 and 7, and even then its a stretch. So Armor Training should be expanding up for scale, and sideways for versatility.

Dissing my opinion because I refer to a splatbook rage power and don't care about the classes is basically nitpicking and an insult. If I referred to a non-core spell like Ant Haul, I doubt you'd bat an eye. So, your judgment of my opinion on the matter of non-core classes is noted and ignored as irrelevant to the topic at hand.

================
If you want suggestions, you first have to agree there's a problem, and the areas I noted in my first post are the problem areas. If you deny there's a problem, then adding anything is...very counterintuitive.

So, now that you're asking for recommendations, lay it out.

Everything I noted falls under versatility and utility - healing, movement, buffing self/others, out of combat usefulness.

You tell us where you think the fighter has weaknesses. You know that I believe he has problems in all those areas.

Once you admit where you also think he's weak, then work can be done.

==Aelryinth


Deadmanwalking wrote:

So... my House Rules include a Fighter Fix, which I feel is fun and useful, while maintaining archetype compatability. In many ways it's more like errata than a new Class, so I'm not gonna do a whole document. Here it is:

The Fighter Class:

The Fighter receives 4 + Intelligence modifier skill points per level. They receive Knowledge (Local), Perception, and Sense Motive as additional class skills as well as a Good Will Save. They do not possess the Bravery Class Feature, receiving the following features in exchange:

Spell Defense (Ex): At 2nd level, a Fighter receives a +2 bonus on all saves vs. spells or spell-like abilities.
Fearless (Ex): At 6th level, a Fighter is now immune to magical fear, and receives a +4 morale bonus to saves against non-magical fear.
Resilience (Ex): At 10th level, a Fighter can shake off the physical effects of certain attacks. If he makes a Fortitude saving throw against an attack that has a reduced effect on a successful save, he instead avoids the effect entirely.
Indomitable Will (Ex): At 14th level, a Fighter gains a +4 bonus on Will saves to resist enchantment spells. This bonus stacks with all other modifiers, and this feature is identical to the Barbarian Class Feature of the same name.
Combat Mastery (Ex): At 18th level, a Fighter is never considered an unaware combatant, can always act in the surprise round, and is never considered flat-footed (though he may still lose his Dex bonus to Armor Class). Additionally, he is considered to always roll a 20 on initiative checks.

Archetypes that replace Bravery, replace the Spell Defense Class Feature instead. If they replace it with a scaling bonus, instead of scaling they simply gain it at the full +5 bonus (or whatever other maximum the ability hits) at 2nd level. The Viking’s ‘Fearsome’ ability is an exception, only receiving its normal progression.

The Unbreakable Fighter simply doesn’t replace Spell Defenses, and gains Improved...

Interesting, I am currently playing a house ruled Fighter in my campaign. Using 3/4 BAB for saving throw progression (for all characters) with a +2 bonus for good saves. The saving throw system is the problem and the heavy feat tax for feat trees.

And consolidated feats, called techniques. For example 1 feat= Weapon Master Technique: Weapon Focus, Weapon Specialisation, Greater Weapon Focus, Greater Weapon Specialisation, and Penetrating Strike. Gaining 1 feat per level when appropriate.

D&D 3.5e has brainwashed us into thinking a bonus feat is a big deal, it's really not. I have been playing 1 1/2 years with these house rules and martial characters can do more and there is a stronger contrast between Fighters and their Cleric and Druid counterparts.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Morzadian wrote:
D&D 3.5e has brainwashed us into thinking a bonus feat is a big deal, it's really not.

Just to put this in perspective, I once spitballed [and posted onto these very boards] a 'quick fighter fix' which included [among better saves and skill points and slightly upgraded versions of Weapon Training and Armor Training] 2 bonus combat feats per fighter level.

He was a great deal more flexible and fun than a PF Fighter in my playtesting [and failed fewer saves and could actually do some skill stuff], but honestly not very much more powerful at all.

Liberty's Edge

Aelryinth wrote:

Deadman;

You made a blanket statement that the core martials had none of that stuff I listed above.

No, I didn't.

I made specific statements that many individual Classes lacked each of the things you stated individually. I gave specific examples of Classes that lacked such things (Slayer and Barbarian specifically lacking party-buffing, for instance). I never said anything about nobody having them. In fact, I never referred to 'the core martials' as a whole, at all.

But frankly, I'm just not gonna get into a detailed discussion with you on this point (or the other, primarily semantic, points you bring up in regards to 'what counts as a class feature'). It's off topic (since I have no problem adding some more utility to the Fighter), and it's pointless, since you ignore half of what I say (ie: anything that's based off non-corebook classes), and keep putting words in my mouth.

As for healing and magic item crafting:

It is extraordinarily advantageous to have both of these available in the party. It is not notably better to have them personally, than to be friends with the Witch who has them. Which is what I mean by a 'theoretical advantage'.

Yes, theoretically, the Ranger can grab Craft Wondrous Item rather than the Wizard, and be the go-top guy for combat healing rather than the Cleric...but if that's the case, he's either in a terribly set up party, or he's an idiot, since those Classes just do the job so much better. Which means that it's not a real advantage the vast majority of the time, since someone else is already doing it and doing a better job most of the time.

Aelryinth wrote:
If you want suggestions, you first have to agree there's a problem, and the areas I noted in my first post are the problem areas. If you deny there's a problem, then adding anything is...very counterintuitive.

This is because you keep applying your preconceptions to what I'm saying. I will attempt to clarify:

I don't actually disagree that the Fighter has weaknesses in the areas you suggest, what I disagree with you on is that the Fighter is remotely alone in this.

My posts disagreeing with you on the details of this are because you say "Oh, everyone but the fighter gets plenty of X, Y, and Z." My opinion is that some get X and Y, some get only Z, and some get all three but at a very low level of usefulness. In short, I'm disagreeing that other people all universally have those, not that Fighter doesn't.

All Classes have weaknesses. All of them. The Fighter has too many, and shoring up some of them is absolutely a worthwhile goal. What you advocate is (or at least seems to be) shoring up all of them. A lot. Simultaneously. And that's where I disagree with you. Profoundly.

In short, any one change you suggest for the Fighter to shore up a particular weakness? I might agree with you on. Giant screeds of "Oh, you need to stop thinking of A, B, and C as worth anything and add 15 new Class Features." Yeah...those are much less useful.

Aelryinth wrote:

So, now that you're asking for recommendations, lay it out.

Everything I noted falls under versatility and utility - healing, movement, buffing self/others, out of combat usefulness.

You tell us where you think the fighter has weaknesses. You know that I believe he has problems in all those areas.

Once you admit where you also think he's weak, then work can be done.

Could you possibly be specific? Particular, thematically in-synch, mechanics would be very nice rather than vague statements that everything needs to be better.

Liberty's Edge

Morzadian wrote:

Interesting, I am currently playing a house ruled Fighter in my campaign. Using 3/4 BAB for saving throw progression (for all characters) with a +2 bonus for good saves. The saving throw system is the problem and the heavy feat tax for feat trees.

And consolidated feats, called techniques. For example 1 feat= Weapon Master Technique: Weapon Focus, Weapon Specialisation, Greater Weapon Focus, Greater Weapon Specialisation, and Penetrating Strike. Gaining 1 feat per level when appropriate.

That's certainly one way to go about it, and sounds like a solid game design in many ways. However, it's a much bigger change to the basic way the game operates than I'm really interested in for this particular thread, or indeed my House Rules in general.

Personally, I like the basic way Pathfinder works and plays, and enjoy using published adventures. To keep this viable, I' aim for 'low impact' system modifications...those that while they might change a particular Class or Feat, don't impact the system itself in a profound way like this.

Morzadian wrote:
D&D 3.5e has brainwashed us into thinking a bonus feat is a big deal, it's really not. I have been playing 1 1/2 years with these house rules and martial characters can do more and there is a stronger contrast between Fighters and their Cleric and Druid counterparts.

Feats are nice. They're certainly not all-important, but even as-is, they're useful. I'm not really thinking of them as the Fighter's primary Class Feature, though. They're a nice secondary one, but that's all.

And I'm pretty sure I played less than 10 sessions of 3.5 pre-Pathfinder...so I doubt it meaningfully brainwashed me in any way. For the record. :)

kyrt-ryder wrote:

Just to put this in perspective, I once spitballed [and posted onto these very boards] a 'quick fighter fix' which included [among better saves and skill points and slightly upgraded versions of Weapon Training and Armor Training] 2 bonus combat feats per fighter level.

He was a great deal more flexible and fun than a PF Fighter in my playtesting [and failed fewer saves and could actually do some skill stuff], but honestly not very much more powerful at all.

This is probably true of most builds (a few that involve very specific synergies probably get a huge boost). I'm not that interested in adding more Feats to the Fighter, though.

Again, just for the record. :)


kyrt-ryder wrote:
Morzadian wrote:
D&D 3.5e has brainwashed us into thinking a bonus feat is a big deal, it's really not.

Just to put this in perspective, I once spitballed [and posted onto these very boards] a 'quick fighter fix' which included [among better saves and skill points and slightly upgraded versions of Weapon Training and Armor Training] 2 bonus combat feats per fighter level.

He was a great deal more flexible and fun than a PF Fighter in my playtesting [and failed fewer saves and could actually do some skill stuff], but honestly not very much more powerful at all.

Absolutely more fun, with the consolidated feat house rule I use, on average 3 bonus feats/level so similar to what you have used.

Nothing better, than power attacking with furious focus and vital strike, and great cleaving through your enemies in the dark with your blind-fighting skill, and sundering their weapons when you feel like it. Oh and defending yourself with shield of swings while dodging with mobility.

In our current campaign we have also got rid of iterative attack penalties. At least combat goes quick.


Deadmanwalking wrote:
Morzadian wrote:

Interesting, I am currently playing a house ruled Fighter in my campaign. Using 3/4 BAB for saving throw progression (for all characters) with a +2 bonus for good saves. The saving throw system is the problem and the heavy feat tax for feat trees.

And consolidated feats, called techniques. For example 1 feat= Weapon Master Technique: Weapon Focus, Weapon Specialisation, Greater Weapon Focus, Greater Weapon Specialisation, and Penetrating Strike. Gaining 1 feat per level when appropriate.

That's certainly one way to go about it, and sounds like a solid game design in many ways. However, it's a much bigger change to the basic way the game operates than I'm really interested in for this particular thread, or indeed my House Rules in general.

Personally, I like the basic way Pathfinder works and plays, and enjoy using published adventures. To keep this viable, I' aim for 'low impact' system modifications...those that while they might change a particular Class or Feat, don't impact the system itself in a profound way like this.

Morzadian wrote:
D&D 3.5e has brainwashed us into thinking a bonus feat is a big deal, it's really not. I have been playing 1 1/2 years with these house rules and martial characters can do more and there is a stronger contrast between Fighters and their Cleric and Druid counterparts.

Feats are nice. They're certainly not all-important, but even as-is, they're useful. I'm not really thinking of them as the Fighter's primary Class Feature, though. They're a nice secondary one, but that's all.

And I'm pretty sure I played less than 10 sessions of 3.5 pre-Pathfinder...so I doubt it meaningfully brainwashed me in any way. For the record. :)

kyrt-ryder wrote:
Just to put this in perspective, I once spitballed [and posted onto these very boards] a 'quick fighter fix' which included [among better saves and skill points and slightly upgraded versions of Weapon Training and Armor Training] 2 bonus combat feats per fighter level.
...

I have a question, have you played a long running campaign, like finished an AP with a few players playing martial characters. What is the average level you generally play?

Because level, and optimisation plays a huge part with ones goals for a fighter fix.

Liberty's Edge

Morzadian wrote:

I have a question, have you played a long running campaign, like finished an AP with a few players playing martial characters. What is the average level you generally play?

Because level, and optimisation plays a huge part with ones goals for a fighter fix.

I've played and run lots of Pathfinder. One game up to 15th level, and several up through the mid-levels (11th-12th). Most of my experience is probably in 4th to 12th level play or so, though I've certainly done both above and below that (and designed villains and fully-statted NPCs way above that upon occasion).

All my games have included martial characters of various sorts, though only the most recent (currently at level 7) includes someone with more than one level of Fighter (specifically, a single-classed Lore Warden).

As for the optimization level, it's middling to high, in games I've run anyway. I've had a well-made Color Spray Oracle of the Heavens, a rather optimized Illusionist God-Wizard (okay, he had only Con 10 for flavor reasons, but he was optimized other than that), and similar characters in those games, and even the less optimal tend to wind up at least serviceable, as I help players with chargen and am a pretty solid optimizer (I don't try to dictate their choices, but I do advise that they do the things they choose to do in a mechanically optimal way).

The current Fighter in my game is, as mentioned, a Lore Warden, and is both effective and fun. He uses only the Good Will Save and Extra Class Skills and Skill Points House Rules at the moment. Honestly, I'm not convinced he needs any more buffing at all, though a bit likely isn't gonna hurt.

But let's face it, Lore Warden is broken. I mean that in a technical sense, where it's flat-out superior to base Fighter. This series of House Rules were intended to give other Fighters something on par with Lore Warden's advantages, but running with a very different (and more appropriate to standard Fighters) theme. Which is why Lore Warden trades almost all of them away. I think I did a pretty good job of balancing that mechanically, too.

Now, looking at it, I'm pretty convinced that Lore Wardens Knowledge skills really help with giving them a real role in out of combat stuff (albeit at the price of several useful proficiencies), so I'm definitely cool with adding some additional utility to the base chassis to keep the Fighter from having nothing to do outside combat, and to widen his utility a bit in general, but I'm leery of messing up Lore Warden's balance point (which seems pretty solid all things considered).


Deadmanwalking wrote:
Morzadian wrote:

I have a question, have you played a long running campaign, like finished an AP with a few players playing martial characters. What is the average level you generally play?

Because level, and optimisation plays a huge part with ones goals for a fighter fix.

I've played and run lots of Pathfinder. One game up to 15th level, and several up through the mid-levels (11th-12th). Most of my experience is probably in 4th to 12th level play or so, though I've certainly done both above and below that (and designed villains and fully-statted NPCs way above that upon occasion).

All my games have included martial characters of various sorts, though only the most recent (currently at level 7) includes someone with more than one level of Fighter (specifically, a single-classed Lore Warden).

As for the optimization level, it's middling to high, in games I've run anyway. I've had a well-made Color Spray Oracle of the Heavens, a rather optimized Illusionist God-Wizard (okay, he had only Con 10 for flavor reasons, but he was optimized other than that), and similar characters in those games, and even the less optimal tend to wind up at least serviceable, as I help players with chargen and am a pretty solid optimizer (I don't try to dictate their choices, but I do advise that they do the things they choose to do in a mechanically optimal way).

The current Fighter in my game is, as mentioned, a Lore Warden, and is both effective and fun. He uses only the Good Will Save and Extra Class Skills and Skill Points House Rules at the moment. Honestly, I'm not convinced he needs any more buffing at all, though a bit likely isn't gonna hurt.

But let's face it, Lore Warden is broken. I mean that in a technical sense, where it's flat-out superior to base Fighter. This series of House Rules were intended to give other Fighters something on par with Lore Warden's advantages, but running with a very different (and more appropriate to standard Fighters) theme. Which is why Lore Warden trades almost...

I wouldn't consider Lore Warden to be broken in any sense. The class abilities are above average depends on what you after. Without house rules a Fighter (two handed archetype) with high strength will split open the head of a lore warden, time and time again.

Although just before the Lore Warden dies he would realise (through his knowledge skills) where the two-handed fighter was born, who trained him and which weapon smith crafted his sword.

People can play Pathfinder as they want, but in my opinion giving out personalised house rules to players 'you can have this, but you can't have that' is treading down a slippery slope. Creating rules that affect everyone equally across the board has always gone down better, in my experience anyway.

Martial characters were becoming rare to non existent in the campaigns I have played, until we introduced the fixes (like triple the number of feats). A lot depends on the type of players, but with spell-casters you don't need to optimise just cast a summon monster spell (the awesome Babau Demon comes to mind).

As long as you have diversity and the players are content then you don't really need to reinvent the Pathfinder game. Everyones experience is different.


Deadmanwalking wrote:
Morzadian wrote:
D&D 3.5e has brainwashed us into thinking a bonus feat is a big deal, it's really not. I have been playing 1 1/2 years with these house rules and martial characters can do more and there is a stronger contrast between Fighters and their Cleric and Druid counterparts.

Feats are nice. They're certainly not all-important, but even as-is, they're useful. I'm not really thinking of them as the Fighter's primary Class Feature, though. They're a nice secondary one, but that's all.

And I'm pretty sure I played less than 10 sessions of 3.5 pre-Pathfinder...so I doubt it meaningfully brainwashed me in any way. For the record. :)

kyrt-ryder wrote:
Just to put this in perspective, I once spitballed [and posted onto these very boards] a 'quick fighter fix' which included [among better saves and skill points and slightly upgraded versions of Weapon Training and Armor Training] 2 bonus combat feats per fighter level.

This is probably true of most builds (a few that involve very specific synergies probably get a huge boost). I'm not that interested in adding more Feats to the Fighter, though.

Again, just for the record. :)

Those few that involve very specific synergies often came online a few levels earlier [limited most by level-based restrictions than number of feats involved] but they weren't any stronger than they normally are. The Fighter just had an alternative tactic or two to fall back on.

That being said, I was responding directly to Morz [which was going a bit off-topic I suppose, you have my apologies DMW] and his comment of bonus feats having very little raw power impact on a character.

I wouldn't actually recommend that fix for most campaigns though. While its viability did go up a good deal, finding the right synergies among all the feats available is a massive research undertaking and it sucks a lot of time out of the player. [And if the player doesn't go into it with a theme he can end up with a huge clusterf%@* of options that doesn't really mesh together.]


In class design options come with costs. If you want to ditch options you don't intend to use for things you will use you come out ahead. If you do intend to use those options you play a ranger and stop being a jerk to people who value the design philosophy behind the fighter, which you seem to fail to grok about as thoroughly as it is possible to fail to grok something.


Atarlost wrote:
In class design options come with costs. If you want to ditch options you don't intend to use for things you will use you come out ahead. If you do intend to use those options you play a ranger and stop being a jerk to people who value the design philosophy behind the fighter, which you seem to fail to grok about as thoroughly as it is possible to fail to grok something.

Can you please be more specific to whom you are referring and exactly what you're saying about 'the design philosophy behind the fighter'?

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Having the option to make magic items is tremendously powerful regardless of who does it.

For a ranger or paladin, what it means is cost savings. Sure, the wizard can do it...but he's got his own stuff to make up, and the time suck that portends. Furthermore, what if there isn't a full caster like that in the party? Is he going to take ALL the Crafting feats, just for you, or just the ones that don't work out for others?

Realistically, most Wondrous items people use are easy to make, and the Ranger or Paladin can make them just fine. Ditto Arms and Armor, which no wizard should ever really take. He should be focusing on Wands, Rings, Staves, Scrolls and such stuff, in addition to wondrous item for himself.

The fact is, it's an option, and an option the Fighter simply doesn't have. And it's a really, really good option.

So, you want some OTHER options?

First, let him make magical items just by using a Craft skill. No need for the feats. Alternatively, let him straight out pay to elevate his weapons and/or armor ala the 3.5 OA Samaurai, by giving them a Name and making them grow. Half price weapons and armor for the class most dependent on them and most devoted to using them.

Have him respond well to healing.
Healing effects hitting him are always at his fighter level or the caster level, whatever is higher. So, he gets more out of CLW.
maybe he gets bonus healing equal to his Fort save. Or stamina Pool, when hit by a healing effect.
Have potions do double healing. That way, for the fighter, they are the same price as wands.
If you're using stamina rules, maybe he converts damage equal to his remaining stamina points (or Fort save) to non-lethal at the end of a fight. Maybe he heals additional HP = Stamina pool (or Fort Save) when the Heal skill is used on him.

For Movement, synergize Fleet with Armor Training. Multiply the bonus of Fleet by his armor training bonus. At level 11, he'll be as fast as a Fleet Barbarian. At level 15, horrors, he'll actually be faster then someone using a FIRST LEVEL ABILITY!

Let him spend stamina or martial something to give companions a Morale bonus to something as a form of group combat buff. It should be less then a bard, but possibly wider area. It should be SOMETHING.

Start bringing in anti-magical feats he can qualify for, things like Pierce Magical Concealment, and Pierce Magical Protection from 3.5. Casters LOATHED those two feats, and they dovetail sweetly with Vital Strike.

Make options worthy of being taken at the level they are at. That's going to involve feats. You can either have feats synergize with fighter class features, or consolidate feats, as many fighter builds do.

Like Morzadin, I put in Techniques to differentiate them from Combat feats. Martial Flexibility gets feats...specific, niche skills that are temporarily useful. Techniques are full-fledged class abilities that scale and are worth spending a class feature on.

I went with 2 Techniques every level, one for combat and one for Training. The fighter has the options for more defensive stuff and more skills-boosting stuff.

In particular, the Fighter's mastery of feats means he'd be the class most likely to grab Alertness, Skill Focus (perception) and blooded. What other classes do with skill point, the fighter would do with feats...except he can't DO that with combat feats.

Ergo, give him more feats that can only be used on that kind of stuff.

==Aelryinth

Liberty's Edge

Aelryinth wrote:

Having the option to make magic items is tremendously powerful regardless of who does it.

For a ranger or paladin, what it means is cost savings. Sure, the wizard can do it...but he's got his own stuff to make up, and the time suck that portends. Furthermore, what if there isn't a full caster like that in the party? Is he going to take ALL the Crafting feats, just for you, or just the ones that don't work out for others?

Realistically, most Wondrous items people use are easy to make, and the Ranger or Paladin can make them just fine. Ditto Arms and Armor, which no wizard should ever really take. He should be focusing on Wands, Rings, Staves, Scrolls and such stuff, in addition to wondrous item for himself.

The fact is, it's an option, and an option the Fighter simply doesn't have. And it's a really, really good option.

Eh.

IME, someone will usually take Craft Wondrous Item (they certainly have in most games I've seen), and occasionally Craft Magic Arms and Armor (yes, including Wizards, powering up weapon-using people is good for them, too, and saves more group money in the end). That right there gives enough of a boost and ability to customize that additional resources invested in Craft Feats are usually considered overkill (and in many games, though likely not mine, will result in the GM giving out less treasure to compensate). Yes, it's an advantage to be able to take such things, but not nearly as much of one as you're implying unless there's nobody with better than 4-level casting in the PC group.

It's one of those 'looks good on paper, less useful in reality' advantages.

Aelryinth wrote:
So, you want some OTHER options?

Yep!

Aelryinth wrote:
First, let him make magical items just by using a Craft skill. No need for the feats. Alternatively, let him straight out pay to elevate his weapons and/or armor ala the 3.5 OA Samaurai, by giving them a Name and making them grow. Half price weapons and armor for the class most dependent on them and most devoted to using them.

I'm using Skill Unlocks with their prerequisites reduced by 5 ranks, so this is already available as a Feat (at 10th level, admittedly). Heck, even in normal games it's available as two Feats. I don't think adding it as a baseline class ability is quite appropriate (well, beyond the idea of giving all Fighters a skill unlock of their choice, which I'm already considering).

Aelryinth wrote:

Have him respond well to healing.

Healing effects hitting him are always at his fighter level or the caster level, whatever is higher. So, he gets more out of CLW.
maybe he gets bonus healing equal to his Fort save. Or stamina Pool, when hit by a healing effect.
Have potions do double healing. That way, for the fighter, they are the same price as wands.

I actually like this idea quite a bit. If doing this, I'll probably steal Lesser Celestial Totem's mechanics (or something much like them)...this'd fit pretty well at 8th level, maybe combined with recovering more (probably double) from daily healing. Call it Quick Healer or something like that. Yeah, that sounds good.

Aelryinth wrote:
If you're using stamina rules, maybe he converts damage equal to his remaining stamina points (or Fort save) to non-lethal at the end of a fight. Maybe he heals additional HP = Stamina pool (or Fort Save) when the Heal skill is used on him.

I'm not. They're rather uninspiring to me.

Aelryinth wrote:
For Movement, synergize Fleet with Armor Training. Multiply the bonus of Fleet by his armor training bonus. At level 11, he'll be as fast as a Fleet Barbarian. At level 15, horrors, he'll actually be faster then someone using a FIRST LEVEL ABILITY!

A movement boost is possible. Though probably not at that level per se.

Aelryinth wrote:
Let him spend stamina or martial something to give companions a Morale bonus to something as a form of group combat buff. It should be less then a bard, but possibly wider area. It should be SOMETHING.

I'm not inherently against this idea, though I'm not sure I'd make it cost anything. Maybe at level 12...

Aelryinth wrote:
Start bringing in anti-magical feats he can qualify for, things like Pierce Magical Concealment, and Pierce Magical Protection from 3.5. Casters LOATHED those two feats, and they dovetail sweetly with Vital Strike.

I have no inherent objection to these sorts of things existing. I'll think about mechanics for them that I'd feel comfortable with...

Aelryinth wrote:

Make options worthy of being taken at the level they are at. That's going to involve feats. You can either have feats synergize with fighter class features, or consolidate feats, as many fighter builds do.

Like Morzadin, I put in Techniques to differentiate them from Combat feats. Martial Flexibility gets feats...specific, niche skills that are temporarily useful. Techniques are full-fledged class abilities that scale and are worth spending a class feature on.

I went with 2 Techniques every level, one for combat and one for Training. The fighter has the options for more defensive stuff and more skills-boosting stuff.

This seems unnecessary. Fighters already get more Feats than anyone else. No, that's not the hugest advantage ever but doubling (or more!) the number of Feats they acquire doesn't seem the right way to go about fixing things.

Aelryinth wrote:

In particular, the Fighter's mastery of feats means he'd be the class most likely to grab Alertness, Skill Focus (perception) and blooded. What other classes do with skill point, the fighter would do with feats...except he can't DO that with combat feats.

Ergo, give him more feats that can only be used on that kind of stuff.

Eh. I'm not sure how thematic and appropriate that is. Or, as discussed above, how necessary.


@deadmanwalking,

Yes, the Fighter get more feats than everyone else and with the release of the Unchained classes they are the weakest and certainly less diverse class in the whole Pathfinder game.

Imagine the Wizards class ability was the following: 6th level 6d6 Fireball spell, 8th level 7d6 Fireball spell, 10th level 8d6 fireball spell and that's it. Not too good, yet this what the Fighter has to put up with.

Making feats scale like how spells scale gives the Fighter some dignity. don't think of it as extra feats, think of them as scaling feats.

Aelyrinth brought up an important point about non-combat feats. The Fighter needs them the most but is shackled with taking combat feats just to keep up with everyone else. And that's why the Lore Warden is a popular choice- non-combat options.

Liberty's Edge

Morzadian wrote:

@deadmanwalking,

Yes, the Fighter get more feats than everyone else and with the release of the Unchained classes they are the weakest and certainly less diverse class in the whole Pathfinder game.

I don't dispute this...so I'm a little unclear on where you're going with it.

Morzadian wrote:
Imagine the Wizards class ability was the following: 6th level 6d6 Fireball spell, 8th level 7d6 Fireball spell, 10th level 8d6 fireball spell and that's it. Not too good, yet this what the Fighter has to put up with.

A lot of Classes have some Class Feature that is simply a scaling bonus (Rogues with Sneak Attack, Slayers with Sneak Attack and Studied Target, Rangers with Favored Enemy and Favored Terrain, heck even a Barbarian's Rage or Bard's Inspire Courage are pretty much just scaling bonuses). and are often the only feature gained at particular levels nonetheless (Rogues have 5 levels where all they get is Sneak Attack, Slayers have 6 where all they get is either Studied Target or Sneak Attack, Rangers have 3 where all they get is Favored Enemy or Terrain, etc.). Fighter gets 8 levels where such bonuses are all they get (which is higher than usual), but it's hardly a unique concept.

Now, the fact that this sort of feature is all Fighters get (except for Feats) is unfortunate, but it's not some sort of ringing condemnation of said features, it just means those features aren't all it should have.

Morzadian wrote:
Making feats scale like how spells scale gives the Fighter some dignity. don't think of it as extra feats, think of them as scaling feats.

I'm not inherently against scaling Feats (I've made Vital Strike scale in my games, for example), I'm just far from convinced that they're the solution to Fighter's problems. Fighters do fine at DPR in combat, they need help in other areas.

Morzadian wrote:
Aelyrinth brought up an important point about non-combat feats. The Fighter needs them the most but is shackled with taking combat feats just to keep up with everyone else. And that's why the Lore Warden is a popular choice- non-combat options.

I disagree. the Fighter is best situated of all Classes to take Feats like Skill Focus already. His Fighter Feats are sufficient for all but the most Feat intensive combat styles already, leaving him to do as he likes with the others.

Now, if he goes with a really Feat intensive combat style (like archery) this is less true, but even there, there's some possibilities.

Now, I don't disagree that non-combat options are needed, I just firmly feel that Feats aren't the right solution (not least because anyone can grab them, and do better than the Fighter due to better stat synergy in many cases).


Create a Fighter Level 5 with 3 times the amount of feats and you will be convinced that their DPR will be unchanged, but they will be able to do more: debuff with the Improved Sunder feat, they can be good at ranged attacks as well as melee attacks, can get past the Wizard's bodyguards with the Improved Overrun feat.

Giving them extra class skills does not give Fighters more options. As you put it the Fighter is not a skill class.

You just have to look at the fighter's non-feat class abilities, does armor and weapon training give the fighter new options? Nope.

D&D 3.75 otherwise known as Pathfinder is based around associated mechanics. Why do Fighters gain spell defences and Barbarians, Rangers and Paladins do not. I imagine they would all fight spell-casters and have the necessary training?

Making your Spell Defence house rule a disassociated mechanic. If all the martial classes had spell defence, then all the players would understand that warriors in this world are trained to fight magic-users.

1 to 50 of 151 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Homebrew and House Rules / Deadmanwalking's Fighter Fix All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.