|
Just as barbarians have Rage Points, wouldn't it be mechanically consistent and make fighters more "versatile" if they had 'Adrenalin Points' that they can use to activate class abilities? For example:
- Bonus to your Initiative (+4?)
- Temporary Hit Points (2 HP/LVL?) for 1 round
- +2 to attacks for one round
- An extra attack or move-equivalent action
- If you charge you can double (or, with 2-H weapons, triple) your STR bonus to damage
- A bonus to your Fort Save (+4) for one round
- +2 to your STR, DEX or CON for one round
These are just quick ideas, but I think it would make fighter a more interesting character to play without making him too "defenderish" ;)
|
|
I think the reason this is never going to be done is twofold:
1) You can simply flavor rage as adrenaline.
2) It would make the Fighter too mechanically similar to the Barbarian.
I think that would kind of be the point -- make all "martial" classes function mechanically in a similar fashion. Why would only the Barbarian's class abilities function with points? Now it seems like a mechanical "anomaly" to me -- wizards, clerics, bards et al. all have spell slots, fighter has "static" abilities, paladins have some variety through their auras but not much, and only the rogue has some real choice over what they can tactically do (and even those abilities are still "static").
|
|
I think that would kind of be the point -- make all "martial" classes function mechanically in a similar fashion. Why would only the Barbarian's class abilities function with points? Now it seems like a mechanical "anomaly" to me -- wizards, clerics, bards et al. all have spell slots, fighter has "static" abilities, paladins have some variety through their auras but not much, and only the rogue has some real choice over what they can tactically do (and even those abilities are still "static").Ah, so you are opting for some sort of mechanical unity to non-spellcasting classes? How far do you take the concept then? Do all non-spellcasters have points per day systems?
Why don't I just appeal to thematics here? What is the thematic difference between getting a +2 boost to Str, Dex, and Con through your combat fired adrenaline and getting a +4 boost to Str and Con through rage? Is there really any difference? By extension then, what makes the Fighter and the Barbarian different enough to be a separate class?
Well, in fact, I kind of feel that Barbarians should not even be a class, because to me it's a cultural implication ("He is an uneducated and smelly barbarian, but we two are civilized men!"). So I wouldn't really mind if Barbarians were just Fighters with access to Rage Feats. Yet I don't "hate" them and it's not a major issue for me anyway.
As for what would be the difference between the Fighter and the Barbarian (and their powers/abilities) -- I think it's pretty clear that Fighters are more "sophisticated" and versatile in melee, while Barbarians (who might lack finesse) are more "savage" and "aggressive". There is a difference -- the Barbarian couldn't boost his AC or DEX like the fighter could, for example, and neither could he get extra attacks. Yet the Barbarian would definitely have higher STR and CON (usually) and probably deal more damage than a "sword-and-board"-type of fighter.
The abilities I listed are just quick examples, not a "finalized" concept.
I will have to say that RAGE POINTS give the barbarian even more fun toys while the Fighter still get Maxo-Blando abilities. I mean the barbarian didnt need more toys, the Fighter does.
I would like to see the fighter having a different MINIGAME to be playing in combat. but it still need something more to bring a bit of tactics to the warroir class thats supposed to be the "smart warrior" or at lest the tactical warror. WTF are they deciding on their round? to attack once at a +6 or attack at a +4 and add +2 to damage? yippee thanks for making my turn a no brainer ( oh by the way, the druid still gets to do two or three thing a round)
|
Truth be said the Rage points uses mechanics "similar" to Pools from Iron Heroes, and seems to be well received. I really like the idea of Pools and think it is the finest mechanic yet for activating super natural abilities. I'd like to see all of the classes get Pools of some kind.
And yes, the Fighter needs some more flavor love. I'd like to see the fighter also get some trees to follow, like the sorcerer did, and like d20 Modern used. There are 3 common kinds of fighters that could be treed: DPR (Damage per Round) with strength and damage being the emphasis, Finesse with accuracy and maneuvers being the emphasis, and Tank with Con and staying power being the emphasis.
Fighter has always been my favorite class and it has always needed the most love.
Remember the stated design goals of backwards compatibility and less labor in converting your stock of adventures, please.
I posted this back in Alpha Release 1. I hope they had an influence on the Rage points, but who knows.
I've personally already gone back through my own custom rules and renamed the generic-sounding "Fighter Pool" to Adrenalin Surge.
Ok, I fear I have to sit on the opposition's side from now on.
I was in doubt about rage points, and with smite/faith and now adrenaline points at proposal, there is not much left to give ALL non casters something like that, and we are on the way to 4th Edition.
I strongly recoment the use of per round/encounter(scene)/day abilities,
because they FEEL more of D&D than pointpools.
Pointpools are just a step towards MMORPGs and really would like to see this not happen.
I understand your feeling; if I could figure out a better way to do the "pool feats" than using points I would have done so. Tracking uses per day is for spellcasters, not melee monsters. But "once per encounter" is even MORE like 4E in a way I don't want to go. 3E is firmly a "per day" allotment or "unlimited uses" for just about everything. Only Warlock is a "per encounter" class.
Unfortunately, fighters have some real limitations that make the class seem barren past 8th level in the unaltered rules. After 8th level, you basically just start picking up a new feat chain, instead of any of the feat chains continuing to getting better. Optimizers can put together some hard-hitting builds, but casual players would be better off using wizards who can play around with spell selection and still have a lot of room to be effective (You shouldn't have to be a hard-core character optimizer to build a hefty high level fighter, but that's what it takes - and the more suppplements, the better your chance of doing so :( ) Another big problem is the fighter's feats have been hamstrung - not one is even as powerful as a 1st level spell. At the same time, if you start giving fighters feats that are powerful as spells (even ones of lower-than-optimal-level), you have to put some kind of limit on them to keep them from getting out of hand.
It's a tough balancing act.
I don't get where all this "Per encounter=4E" rubbish comes from. Even before Tome of Battle there were per encounter mechanisms. Neraph Charge from Manual of the Planes was a per encounter thing. And lest anyone forget Tome of Battle IS 3.5. Then there's the Factotum, and to some extent even the Binder from Tome of Magic.
I do like the idea of floating bonuses that a Fighter can choose to apply each round though. That's not a bad idea and is different enough from Rage points that I could get behind it.
ToB, ToM and Factotum were "4E previews" in my opinion - and at least ToB was by the designers own admission. They represented the designer's shift from "per day" abilities to "per encounter" abilities. It's not that they are bad or taboo, but "per encounter" has a very different balance - and feel - than from "per day", and "per encounter" are very hard to balance against per day powers. Warlock is always getting slammed for being the "energizer bunny" of the arcane classes, even though most people claim he's underpowered at higher levels. I won't, for example, allow the factotum in my class because of the "per encounter" inspiration points make it too good (in my opinion).
But WHO CARES?!
If it's a good mechanic and not TOTALLY different to existing 3.5, THEN USE IT!
Too bad we don't have signatures here. If we had, I could put "Fighters should be simple" in there and just point towards it whenever someone wants to give fighters spells.
|
|
Ok, I fear I have to sit on the opposition's side from now on.
I was in doubt about rage points, and with smite/faith and now adrenaline points at proposal, there is not much left to give ALL non casters something like that, and we are on the way to 4th Edition.I strongly recoment the use of per round/encounter(scene)/day abilities,
because they FEEL more of D&D than pointpools.
Pointpools are just a step towards MMORPGs and really would like to see this not happen.
I understand your concern, but I think we'd still be very far from 4E if these abilities were not designed as "superpowers" or Bo9S "martial spells". And as noted before, PSPs in 3E worked just like this, so it's nothing radically new or MMORPG-ish, in my opinion.
The biggest concern I have about the powers in 4E is that neither the flavour nor the mechanical data seems to indicate how the power works in the story ("Uh, so I use this 'Assault of the Black Oliphant' and I shift you two squares as I charge and I can also shift the rogue and then I inflict 3d10 points of damage if I hit? Come again?"). Not to mention that some of them are outright magical in nature. Temporary HPs or the ability to boost your AC for one round, for example, would be far from Healing Surges or Martial "Exploits". ;)
Now, given that the Barbarian seems a lot more versatile in PF than the fighter, I feel that the fighter's melee abilities are inferior in comparison. In fact, Barbarian seems to outclass fighter at every turn -- for example, he can boost his AC if needed (half the class level, to boot), add his class level to damage, has higher DR than fighter and has higher Hit Points as well. So the fighter has a bit higher AC when wearing armor and gets a static damage bonus with certain weapons -- I don't see that measuring up to the new and improved Barbarian.
Like you, I wouldn't want to see fighters flinging spells or using their "Ki" to "power up" their sword with plusses and whatnot (the latter is fine for Paladins, though). And in any case I'm talking about smaller bonuses that the Barbarian gets -- maybe +2 to AC or Fort Save, or maybe +2d6 to damage rolls for one round. The fighter already has bonuses from his class abilities, so I don't think he needed as many powers as the Barbarian. I think this system would make the fighter as tactically enjoyable to play as the barbarian without being an overkill.
|
|
I definitely agree. In the combat points thread, I suggest a per round ability instead of a daily point pool. Specifically, fighters get a floating bonus that can be reassigned each round. That mechanic would closely match the existing armor and weapon training fighter abilities, but with tactical options like those of a point pool. (And it FEELS very D&D, because it works very much like Combat Expertise and Power Attack.)I strongly recoment the use of per round/encounter(scene)/day abilities,
because they FEEL more of D&D than pointpools.
Oh Meepo, you're *sooo* 4E fanboi! ;P (just kidding...)
I think that "floating bonus" you get to assign to your combat abilities every round in combat would be a good idea -- I like it, although I don't like it as much as the point pool, though ;) The only concern I have is that whenever there's a hint of danger, I could see players trying to abuse this ability by triggering their "combat mode" -- e.g. by attacking an innocent bystander or ally just to get the bonuses. So the definition of "functions only in combat" is a bit tricky and I could see it becoming problematic with some "powergamers" I know.
I like the idea of more abilities for Fighters, but adrenaline seems too Barbariany to me. In my opinion they should get "Tactical Abilities" mostly based on a new skill Knowledge (tactics), which would have other uses as well. The Fighter would have to succeed on a skill check to use the abilities which might include stances, various techniques, ect.
LordZack, that's actually quite an intriguing idea, though it sort of breaks the backwards compatibility rule. Definitely something to consider for a future "Fighter-type" class though.
Yeah that's is true, because it relies on the Knowledge (tactics) skill. The general idea no more disrupts backwards compatibility than any of the other modifications to base classes in Pathfinder. Maybe make it be based on Base Attack Bonus rather than a whole new skill.
Edit: actually what might be good is just to give the Fighter unique Combat Maneuvers.
I'll just say it now, giving the fighter adrenaline points is sooo World of Warcraft. :P
*heh* and feats were so Diablo II ;)
|
|
I think that "floating bonus" you get to assign to your combat abilities every round in combat would be a good idea -- I like it, although I don't like it as much as the point pool, though ;) The only concern I have is that whenever there's a hint of danger, I could see players trying to abuse this ability by triggering their "combat mode" -- e.g. by attacking an innocent bystander or ally just to get the bonuses. So the definition of "functions only in combat" is a bit tricky and I could see it becoming problematic with some "powergamers" I know.It doesn't have to function only in combat. If a fighter wants to assign his floating bonus to AC when walking around in a dungeon, I say go for it. The floating bonus is just replacing the fixed armor and weapon training bonuses anyway, and those bonuses are active even outside of combat.
I'm not sure it should necessarily replace them, because at the moment a barbarian clearly outclasses a fighter in melee (as long as he has Rage Points left, anyway ;).
|
|
Here are the barbarian abilities that I'd like to see being "cut" from the Rage Powers (and maybe even the fighter "stealing" some of them from him?):
* Powerful Blow (makes sense for the barbarian, too, but I'd still argue that it should be part of the fighter's repertoire as well)
* Rolling Dodge (A very powerful defensive ability which at higher levels makes the fighter look quite pathetic in his armor. Maybe this would work best as one of the advanced rogue talents?)
* Surprise Accuracy (So you can add your barbarian level to your attack roll and make the fighter *really* look like a novice in combat? Uh... which of them was supposed to be the raging berserker and which the guy who should be more "accurate" with his attacks?)
* Unexpected Strike (Again, seems more like a fighter's talent that belonging to the guy who is raging...)
* Renewed Vigor (Certainly a barbarian power, but one which should be EX instead of SU, and I could very well imagine the fighter being able to do this, too)
* Elemental Rage (If any of the classes should get the benefits of this power, IMO it's definitely the *ranger*)
All in all I don't like how many barbarian Rage powers seems to be supernatural in origin -- especially as most of them would work as Extraordinary abilities as well.
Thoughts? Do you think some of those barbarian abilities should be given to the fighter?
Part of the problem is: What makes the fighter unique? What is he does that none of the other classes can do?
It isn't his BAB, number of attacks, weapon selection, saves and hit points - Barbarians, Paladins and Rangers all share that, and Barbarian beats him in the hit point department.
It isn't the fighter's armor - both the paladin and cleric can both match him in that department, and they get proper spells to boot.
Right at the moment, the fighter's schtick is has the most feats. He's the most customizable of 3.5, but his "powers" only go up to around 8th level (Greater Weapon Focus and Specialization are such a slap in the face they aren't worth counting), yet no single ability is even as powerful as a 1st level spell (Really, it's like his class ability is "unlimited cantrips all day long"), and he has to share them with anyone else who decides to get up on the battlefield.
I wish 3.0/3.5 had the foresight to limit the feats that have a BAB to be "fighter-only" feats; there would have been at least a reason for many builds to include up to 8 levels of fighter, but that would have been an overall weak solution in the first place.
The fighter needs something he can call his own. For the rogue, it's sneak attack. The monk has the unarmed attack all but cornered. Druid has wildshape, Barbarian has rage, the Wizard & Sorcerer his spells and the cleric his own spell list. Even the bard has his bardic music. Everybody gets to steal from the fighter's "abilities" (i.e., list of feats) leaving him somewhat in the cold. He doesn't only need access to only feats that benefit him, he needs some class features that aren't doled out to even his brother classes, the Paladin, Barbarian and Ranger.
ToB definitely has the germ of an idea that will work, but the wrong "flavor" (at least for me). If we could somehow strip stances & maneuvers of their Asiatic "Kung Fu Style Move" tone, I think it would be far more palatable.
|
How about giving the fighter the ability to spend his feats on improving his existing feats? So you could spend two feats on Dodge to get a +2 bonus to AC. Obviously you'd have to have a limit on how often you could do this to prevent someone stacking all their feats into Dodge and being nigh unhittable, or having +30 on Sunder attempts.
Or Fighters could use multiple Combat feats in one round (say 1/iterative attack).
Or Fighters can move and still make full attacks but drop the lowest attack.
Or give Fighters 'open' feats every five levels that can be changed each day. So if a 6th level fighter wishes he had Improved Sunder because he is really getting sick of the bad guy's uber-weapon but it isn't something he'd normally do, he spends his open feat to get it. Next day, he uses it to get Two Weapon Fighting after his shield is lost.
Just some suggestions on keeping the Fighter broadly as he is, just more useful at higher levels.
|
|
How about giving the fighter the ability to spend his feats on improving his existing feats? So you could spend two feats on Dodge to get a +2 bonus to AC. Obviously you'd have to have a limit on how often you could do this to prevent someone stacking all their feats into Dodge and being nigh unhittable, or having +30 on Sunder attempts.
Or Fighters could use multiple Combat feats in one round (say 1/iterative attack).
Or Fighters can move and still make full attacks but drop the lowest attack.
Or give Fighters 'open' feats every five levels that can be changed each day. So if a 6th level fighter wishes he had Improved Sunder because he is really getting sick of the bad guy's uber-weapon but it isn't something he'd normally do, he spends his open feat to get it. Next day, he uses it to get Two Weapon Fighting after his shield is lost.
Just some suggestions on keeping the Fighter broadly as he is, just more useful at higher levels.
I think it wouldn't be far-fetched to give the fighter an ability to "emulate" any Combat Feat that he "qualifies" for but doesn't have. But that would have to limited in some way...