I played two games just as this was happening (along with a lot of other know-related hilarities). I think it was about 2002 or so. Definitely before 3.5, but firmly within 3.0.
Also, in this skill rework, perform would fall into competence, would have much broader categories, but I've no clue how to handle the whole sing=talk>anything that requires instruments as far as bards go. Better replacement skills, maybe? I don't know...
Have yet another version! Get it here. As announced, things have been proceeding very slowly, mostly due to NaNoWriMo.
I have been having fun lately not just with rebalancing and redesigning the feats, but also with envisioning various different character archetypes that might use them.
(sorry, I am talking nonsense, it is a Thursday, so that means that the long day at work was especially long)
Sorry, but these forums don't allow me to update the OP... I value your comments, but you should know that I have already addressed some of your concerns (quick study, improvise) in the more recent version, available here.
Any feat that gives +2 to 2 skills. It should be a single, generic feat, like skill focus, which can be taken multiple times and applies to the 2 skills chosen when the feat is taken. Don't get me wrong, I like the cute names of those feats, particularly the ones that help tie together two disparate skills, but they're a pretty big waste of space.
This and skill focus aren't combat feats, so I won't be going over them soon (if ever), but I do like the idea. Split focus is a good name for such a feat...
I don't think you need to reinvent the wheel. :) It's both important and specialised enough to need its own skill and if you make it an all-purpose military skill, then soldiers can take ranks in it as their Profession skill, tacticians (who need not be fighters) can take ranks in it and so on.
So far, I like either Warcraft (but it's a rather famous IP, so I'd rather avoid the association), Warfare or Battlecraft for the name of this skill.
If you go with your variant UMD idea, I'd stick to spell-trigger items like wands and staves, rather than spell-completion items such as scrolls. It makes sense that an animal handler could eventually make items of speak with animals etc., but it seems very odd that the non-scholarly types could bust out scrolls and potions, which are traditionally the domain of the learned classes.
I fear you may have misunderstood, I would not allow, say, an animal handler to craft a scroll of speak with animals without actually having the spell. That would be too much, and could break a lot of things. He could, however, make a handle animals check instead of a use magic device check in order to use a scroll of speak with animals, summon nature's ally, etc.HOWEVER, casters would need to use linguistics to make scrolls, thaumaturgy to infuse arcane spells into wands or arcane effects into items, ontology to do the same with divine effects, etc. The semi-magical crafting by non-magical classes would come in the form of craftsmanship (+# weapon enchantments replicated in the form of various materials, high quality workmanship to replicate, say, 'of dueling' properties, etc.), alchemy (transmuting materials, making them spontaneously burst into flame when in contact with blood, etc.), and heal (potions, oils, etc of cure X wounds, remove poison, remove disease, restoration, etc). An alchemist would get to replicate a use-activated fireball-like one-shot item without any magical talent, but he'll never be able to replicate stuff like detect thoughts, animate rope, magic mouth, etc. Basically, I want an expert blacksmith be able to craft a +1 Keen Flame Burst Scimitar without caster levels or hilariously extensive feat tax.
Hmm... True that about Evaluate... I'll have to think up a skill to encompass tactics, strategy, logistics, siege, etc.
You know, it'd be a lot more helpful, constructive, and respectful if you would comment on the work presented in the thread, and not just come in and shotgun up some unrelated ideas. Thanks.
I think the key to really 'fixing' fighters is to get everyone to figure out what the fighter does other than fight. Everyone seems to want something, but have no idea what they want.
I have a pretty clear definition of what I want the fighter to be and do. Some of it also expands to other martials as well. However, without thoroughly reworking the feats, item creation, spells, and skills, giving some basic useability buffs is the mandatory first step.
This is a wonderful idea! Maybe it should give out some sort of "debt" option, so that you can start at level 1 with an EWP, but other than that, nice!The BABness is not bad either, but it ends up automatically showering you with things even if you wouldn't want them, like it or not.
Funny thing about inherent bonuses: they don't stack with themselves, but the price increase is linear. Why is it so?
Regarding weapon proficiency:
To tell you the truth, I'm considering getting rid of Use Magic Device entirely, and fold the functions of that into certain other skills. Want to use a wand of cure light wounds, and you don't have that spell on your list? Give me a heal check. Wanna use any scroll, and you don't have the spell on your class list? Linguistics (maybe). That sort of thing.
Professions and performs are all included in the competence skills. It has a variable ability score attached, so jugglers use competence (juggling) (Dex), public speakers use competence (oratory) (Cha), playwrights use competence (literature) (Int), etc.
It's an interesting idea about the strategy and tactics skill. I might see it as yet another function of evaluate (as in, evaluate a tactical situation or plan out an enemy's likely response)... I'll have to think on that one yet.
Oh, wow! I made it! I actually made it through this entire thread! Go me!
(sorry for the necro)
So, yeah, I am in the process of making a fighter fix (discussion thread here). You folks might find it interesting. It gives the fighter an actual class feature (versatility, the ability to double up on fighter bonus feats, but only have half of them available at any moment) available from level 1, gives him a new strong save, 4+Int skill points, and as class skills he gets heal as default, and a choice of two more from a pool of pairs, with each skill appearing in at least two options. I also gave him an ability to power through some disabling conditions.
Now, to comment on some of the ideas recently mentioned...
* Changing skills to modifier amount per level: There are no Con skills. There are only a few Dex skills. There is a grand total of two Str skills. 4+int is a far more elegant solution to the problem.
I threw out appraise as a stand-alone skill; now, every skill that helps craft something or deal with something (alchemy, craftsmanship, heal, thaumaturgy, etc.) will have an appraise-like application to identify and price items related to it. Evaluate is for sense motive, roughly gauge the capabilities of an observed creature, etc. The name might be a bit misleading, I admit.
One additional skill I am trying to come up with now is something related to cutting gems, crafting jewelry, appraising the minute valuables, etc. A name like lapidary, fine crafts, or something along those lines. It is distinct from craftsmanship, construction, and alchemy. Any advice on that one? What other useful ability should I consider adding alongside my existing ones?
Thanks for those!
The Boz wrote:
And also, what other possible sources of inherent bonuses do you personally houserule as being available, and at what price?
...people are making arguments that because feats like Power Attack scale by level, other feat trees should scale by level as well...
That is not at all the argument people are making. It isn't "Hey, Power Attack is scaling, let's make other feats like that so that PA isn't OP", but rather "Feats are lolworthy and underpowered, let's make them scale! Power Attack is a good example." People are even talking about removing PA altogether (an idea I dislike), along with all other "trade X for Y" feats.
Also, no amount of feats could EVER overpower non-casters when compared to casters. Ever. A level 20 commoner with every single feat ever (except for spellcasting feats) and no ability to use spells or SLAs will be far, FAR below the power and utility of a magus, paladin, ranger, bard... The comparison becomes hilarious when you start to include wizard, druid, cleric, sorcerer, oracle, witch, etc...
I already gave my monk a ki power that allows him to pounce. It might be a bit too good, I'll have to do some more testing to see how it would work. I plan to do the same for rangers and paladins, and make the barbarian's Beast Totem pounce ability a stand-alone rage talent. However, the ranger, paladin, and barbarian "fixes" will be very limited in scope, likely included in a single thread, with just a single page of content each.
Meanwhile, I was thinking about expanding the fighter's training options with something along the lines of these two:
Offensive Support Training
Defensive Support Training
Should probably find a nice place to point out that training option effects only work while fighter is up and about, and not while he's helpless or something silly like that.
It technically is, but while you won't have feats require feats that don't exist anymore I am more concerned with feats in splatbooks and third party material that print material assuming that certain feats exist because they are in the core book.
Yes, I understood your concern. I won't expand the description of every single changed feat as "this counts as X", especially in the cases where I have folded one feat into a default ability (such as power attack/improved power attack). But I will probably add some sort of disclaimer in the opening description for GMs to use discretion and common sense in resolving requirement incompatibilities.
Mythic +10 Artifact Toaster wrote:
Just a thought but shouldn't elven battle training grant proficiency in the listed weapons if you received training with them?
No, that would make the feat way better than comparable ones (such as, you know, the proficiency feats). I even toyed with the idea of making proficiency with one of the listed weapons a prerequisite, but then rejected that idea due to being inelegant (do you get it for that weapon alone? or all weapons, even if not proficient? do you automatically get it later if you become proficient?).
I like the idea of splitting up/codifying Craft skills (I did that in Star Wars d20 by appropriating the TOR crew skills). I also like the name (and combination) of Cunning and Thaumaturgy.
Thanks!One thing I'm trying to do about crafting is to power it up a bit without resorting to magic. Things like more relevant material effects. When I find the time, I will expand upon this bit further.
Despite being a serious Elder Scrolls aficionado, I would break Jump out Acrobatics and add it to Athletics if you're going to merge in Escape Artist.
I... would not be against this idea.
I'd also suggest putting Sense Motive in with Bluff, so you can have a Cha/Wis skill that is used to oppose itself.
I really wouldn't like this. It would make the skill more important, and I'm not sure I like the self-countering property of something like that. Instead, I hope to make Evaluate more relevant and useful.
You have Craft (Potions) under Medicine, but you also have an Alchemy skill. You may also wish to put scribing scrolls under Linguistics.
Hey, this is an excellent idea!One more note about the Linguistics skill is the way I run it: with each rank you can either learn another language (starter language(s) and Int bonus languages are just this), or to improve upon a language you already, making it possible to fake accents, spot dialects, that sort of thing. This rapidly cuts down on the "I know every language ever" effect of later levels. I like how your idea could actually make scholars more scholarly, and less "I just do magic."
Weapons usable with weapon finesse gain a 'finesse' quality which allows anyone to use Dexterity to atack with them.
I like this, and will probably steal it.The result would be something like weapon finesse becoming a default option, with the finesse feat adding up to 1.0 dex to damage while using dexterity to attack in melee.
So far I like a lot of what I'm reading.
...I think that there should be a clause to make it count as 'X' feat for the purposes of prereqs.
That would be a REALLY painful and clunky way to implement something that really should be intuitive on its own right. I plan on being consistent with my own work, so you won't see feats require feats that no longer exist or are renamed, but any future updates should be intuitively solved on a case-by-case basis.
I like that Combat Expertise changes fighting defensively rather than be it's own thing. I still don't understand why that isn't how it worked in the first place.
That puzzled me greatly as well. I wanted to move a lot of those feat options into slightly inferior default options (power attack, for example), and then work on some rule/system consistency.
Made yet another version. This is now getting very close to the point at which I'd feel comfortable calling it Fighter 2.0 and being done with it.
The great feat rework that I've gotten myself into has been taking up most of my time so far. It has given me new insights into the state of the fighter, and where I want to take him. I now really like the second and third effects of the Quick Study ability as explained above, but I'll remove the BAB functionality of the first effect. This will tie in nicely with the feat consolidation and weapon group reforming (so that they work with weapon focus/specialization, etc).
Inspired by this and one other thread, I am thinking of using these groups in my own games:
I am saddened by the lack of comments so far.
Death Or Glory
Improved Power Attack
Ranged Power Attack
Finesse Power Attack
Update: Almost 20% done, just finished with the letter C (and all the feats that build off the feats that start with A, B and C).
Before I continue, I want to share a couple of feats with you guys, see if you like the direction I'm going, so that I can fix stuff before I go too far...
Charge of the Righteous
Improved Combat Maneuver
There, that's a neat enough sample...
I like the general idea, GeneticDrift. I was hoping to fold the Cad archetype into the Equipment Training option more thoroughly. Take once, you gain proficiency with improvized weapons and unarmed strikes, as well as the usual broken/repair bonuses. Take twice, get 19 crit range for improvized and unarmed, as well as the usual broken/repair bonuses. Take three times, gain x3 crit multi on improvized and unarmed, as well as the broken/repair bonuses. Something like that.
This would only bugger rogues and other mundane stealthies further.
My current thoughts are aimed at restructuring Quick Study to function like this:
Quick Study (Ex): A fighter's skill in combat is equal parts natural talent and endless hours of practice. At 4th level and thenafter, the fighter starts to develop greater and greater efficiency with marital studies.
Well, that's the idea bouncing around in my head right now. Still not happy enough with it to commit it to e-paper.
It also increases your ability scores by an equal amount. As far as I know, the most OP thing it enables you to do is to get a Vital Strike of a higher attack number earlier (getting it as early as level 4), but... that's just Vital Strike, so whatever.
This is perfect. Also very moddable without adding any archetypes, thanks to how the trainings work.
That is one of the overarching goals of my class fixes; to fold in all of the archetypes into optional class features that the character gets during progression.
The only thing I kinda sorta don't like is agressive charge, although I do get that that's the way PF works, so it is just needed to be able to get a full attack.
I am of the opinion that all of the five major frontline classes (barbarian, fighter, monk, ranger, paladin) should have some type of access to a charge>full attack ability. However, while I want this ability to be optional for most of these, I think that the fighter really should have it automatically.
I do feel like if, say, Vital Strike didn't suck it wouldn't be needed though. In general, after this, the only thing fighter needs is fixing feats that suck to make more builds available.
I like the skill focus feat autoscale thing, and if I ever get around to redoing some of the feats, I think that is direction they'll go. So weapon focus automatically becomes greater weapon focus at BAB +8, weapon specialization automatically becomes greater weapon specialization at BAB +12, etc. But there are only a few of these minor outliers, I do not think that most feats need a thorough rework.
EDIT: one more thing. I think the trainings should probably be forced to alternate. Something like "you can not select the same training twice in a row". I know it probably wouldn't be OP, but it feels a bit bad to me to be able to dump everything into the same training when the point here should be versatility. That's just an opinion though.
The thought has crossed my mind, but I ultimately decided against it. Grabbing a +9 attack and damage with a chosen weapon group (+18 at level 20) at the expense of all the other bonuses really should be an option, I think.
Ciaran Barnes wrote:
I love the imagery conjured up from the "preacher" fighter. Also the "spy" should have bluff instead of escape artist.
I was having so much fun thinking up those! Stuff like preacher, mercenary, and gambler are my favorites.Bluff and disguise is already a combination of the swindler... but you're right. Maybe I should rename the spy into infiltrator or something similar?
Maybe I should have made the wording more clear; it only works with fighter's bonus feats, not all feats or all bonus feats any of the other classes could get. So if you dip fighter for Versatility, you get just two feats. And what I really wanted is for the fighter to have an actual class feature right at 1st level.I did check out the vancian fighter, just like I did many of the other fighter fixes. I'm not sure I like the vancian feats on a fighter. Some other class? Sure, in order to compete with the many caster martials out there, I could see that being a thing, in some limited way... but changing feats by selecting ANY without having to learn them (like a wizard adds spells to his spell book)? Not sure I like it.
Walk It Off is a move action, Shake It Off is a teamwork feat that just increases saves when people stick together.I should also probably make it more clear that walk it off does NOT remove any other effects of the ability, just the condition. Not sure, what do you think?
That type of penalize and restore I don't particularly like. Especially because it's a somewhat minor effect, but still needs to be kept track of, and it could have some bad interactions with other feats.I have toyed with the idea of making the AC penalty be -2 + (-2) for each additional attack, so that would be -4 at level 6 and 2 attacks, -6 at level 11 and three attacks, and -8 at level 16 and four attacks... I decided against it, I think it would be too harsh, especially when compared with the monk version I already have (it's a 2pt ki power) or the ranger (full attack against favored enemy) or paladin (full attack with smite evil, but only until you miss) versions I'm planning on.
I definitely do not want to make vocation optional; especially if the option is between in and out of combat utility.
Sorry for not responding, had to finish up some stuff like college, get a job, etc.
Add class level to DC Poison Use!? As in, the whole thing? That would pretty much break the game. Most DCs are 10 + 1/2 class level + pertinent ability. That DC is somewhat difficult to beat for a weak save, but not difficult to beat with a strong save. 10 (or up to 26) + class level? Unbeatable. It'd break the game.
I don't like the idea of one feature overwriting another, so instead of flat immunity, a scaling resistance that adds goodies (swift and lasting poison talents) seems good to me. However, I am unhappy with the current wording on the ability, so I'll change it to be simpler and a tiny bit more powerful.
The alchemist is my next project, and he'll have something very neat and similar to the bombs to replace bombs and round up his kit somewhat. I didn't want to copy that mechanic onto the poisoner directly.
Thanks for the feedback! Let me respond to some of your points.
Categorizing things makes it easier to apply certain mechanics down the road; this will be important for the rest of the alchemy tweak, and is also apparent now, with the poisoner, and how he gets better with first simple stuff, and then more and more complicated compounds.
Ability penalty is cheaper than damage or drain, yes. Its DC is also lower, and it is quite problematic to have it disappear as soon as the poison is cured.
I like the extraction rules, I think I'll use them in some form. Milking snakes, for example, screams Unstable Crafting to me, either that, or obtaining a % of base cost towards some poison. The alchemy rules will later include things like working in bulk, batches, with help, stuff like that.
I like the slower poisons, so I whipped up a modification option right now to make it possible. Good idea, that!
And I want the Poisons category to be only about poison: harmful effects. I toyed with the idea to include antidotes as well, but rejected that; that (and slow working regenerating stuff) belongs to the Concoctions category, which I will expand upon later.