|
It would be nice to get a choice of progression options at fighter level 1st. Just as a ranger gets a choice of combat style, so too should the fighter.
Monte Cooke did something like this in his supp, BoXMII :
Fighting Domains
"Also called styles, schools, or foci, fighting domains allow characters to concentrate their efforts on one method of combat and gain additional benefits from this specialization. Each domain represents a different method of fighting. Some domains focus on offense, some on defense, and some on a combination of the two. But in any case, domains reward characters—particularly fighters—for focusing on just a few styles of combat."
|
While the new fighter is way cool, I think they still lag a little in way of damage output. While I don't know how well it would work, I was thinking maybe alter the Weapon Training ability to provide a +1 to hit, and a +1 to the damage die of a weapon (for example, a long sword would now do 2d8+mods in the hands of this fighter). While this does get up to 6d8 (with the longsword as an example) at max level, that's still less then a fireball, by dice alone, and not what a rogue is doing in a single hit with sneak. Yes, yes, there are many other factors here, attacks/turn, ability to always use it, would it scale up with crits (20th level fighter who's done all his work with great axes, and now has 6d12 for damage with a x4 crit...), and so on. Alternatively, it could just be a pool of dice, like sneak, that the fighter dishes out on cool factor. Potentially broken? What the fighter needs? What do people think?
|
Recently, I was involved in a discussion for creating the groundwork for the character class "roles" within the game.
I do not remember the name of the person who gave me an inspiration for fighting "types" or roles and I wish I could to give him/her credit. Nonetheless - I took that tidbit of inspiration and built upon it - and discussed the idea with my own players for an add-on for the fighter class - as I too feel that much of the fighters "class abilities" are lost in the feat progression etc. Great Cleave replaces Cleave. Greater Spec replace spec. etc etc.
The idea was to give players a choice of THREE fighter builds at first level (much like the ranger has two styles) and then gains benefits based on that style. (note my ideas were random musings - have not been playtested yet and not a final product - so the mechanics are not perfect by any stretch - but I feel is a start in the right direction)
The three are:
Juggernaut:
Just does damage to anything and everything; two handed or two weapon weilding (for those heavy armored dire flail or double bladed axes/swords etc). Weapon used gains additional damage that it can do. Begins to ignore hardness on objects. Does increased damage when charging. Bonuses to CMB for Overrun, Bullrush, Sunder attempts.
Defender:
Sword and board build - holds the front line - draws the aggro.
+1 / 4 levels to attack against a foe whom you attacked and hit but the opponent chooses to attack another person instead. And a bonus to damage equal to Fighter Level. This bonus continues until the creature makes a full attack action against the fighter.
Squares you threaten are treated as difficult terrain for the purpose of someone you're attacking, thus each square a person moves through of your threatened squares counts as 2 squares and provides a -2 to dex based movement. Finally you can always make 1 additional Attack of Opportunity against that one foe even if you've already made one that round.
As a move action you can apply your shield bonus to allies who are adjacent to you.
The Swashbuckler:
Two weapon or light weapon wielder, along with light armor - using quickness and light feet and his intelligence to save his life.
+1 AC / 4 levels of fighter - up to INT modifier when wearing light armor.
+1 Point of damage per 3 levels for attacks made after moving (like skirmish)
+1 CMB / 5 levels on manuevers involving Trip and/or Disarm.
Robert
|
|
Robert,
I like the idea of theme based fighters too...(what can i say, anything is better than the current solution we have in 3.5 :D). My question to you is...would you say the new fighter should not step on the toes of other classes that are similar? That list include, but is not limited to:
Paladin
Ranger
Barbarian
Monk
Swashbuckler (Complete Warrior)
Knight (PH 2)There might be more, but it's just a question. I think your defender and swashbuckler classes borrow from knight and swashbuckler classes quite liberally.
My point is - since Swash and Knight are not SRD - I'm hoping to create a system where splat books are no longer needed.
I wouldn't want to steal thunder from the other core classes however. Which is why i didn't include an archer theme. (leaving that to the ranger) or an unarmed theme (leaving that to the monk).
I have never been a fan of splat books, never used their classes - and the reason the splat books were created (aside from generating revenue) was to create or splat together two different existing ideas into one which inadvertantly made them more appealing to many players.
(Swashbuckler - fighter/rogue) Scout (Ranger/rogue), Knight (Fighter/paladin), Spellthief (Wizard/rogue) etc.
By making the fighter have multiple "themes" my design goal for my own homebrew game - which is what I'm using the above design themes for) I'm making the splat book choices obsolete and also a number of prestige classes a moot point. Thus keeping the game focused on the core bread and butter - the original classes of D&D. So I say step on the toes of the knight, swashbuckler etc as much as possible.
Robert
|
|
Although, I will say that you are probably correct that any changes to the fighter would probably end up stepping on the toes of the other classes. Unlike you, though, I hope we can keep off of those other classes as much as possible.
I like the concept of the fighter as a master of weapons and I do think that it will take some real creativity to make him different. Here's to hoping we can come to a compromise...cus I'm not the only one who bought the splat books! :)
Thanks for the feedback. I was just sharing what I'm doing for playtesting in my own campaign. As I intend to continue to ignore splat book classes and alternate classes, I was coming up with ways to make the fighter have more diverse appeal by adding these themes.
I admit it's not ideal in games that intend to keep these other classes.
Nonetheless, I still think that the fighter can benefit from the concept of these themes - even if the specifics are different.
I do whole-heartedly believe that the fighter is still a splash class as written.
It needs special themes and special combat manuevers that only a fighter can do, and get better at it as he advances.
Robert
|
|
Aside from the themes - I posted this on a thread of weapon training ideas in progress:
Here is what I posted there (sorry to those who already read that and see this as a re-post....
I just posted this in Locworks other thread - and just noticed it was for A-2 feedback. Thus I figure it won't be viewed often. I apologize to any who already read that and sees this as a repost...
Lokworks, These are nice ideas; simple and understandable (though the feat is a bit complex as other mentioned).
I really like the emphasis on making you better with your weapons manuevers like disarm.
Personally, instead of just number crunching and add up a lot of bonuses - (perhaps adding some is fine, however), I'd like to see fighters have "manuevers" of their own that they can perform.
The combat manuevers are general and universal. The combat feats will be fighter freebees, but everyong can take them I'm sure.
I think fighters need manuevers that THEY can do: (1/day, or 1/encounter; increasing as fighter level advances etc - however it needs to be doled out).
Examples: (but certainly not an exhaustive list).
A_When an opponent attacks your fighter misses, and the fighter then attacks and hits his opponent, the fighter is essentially forcing his indominable will upon his lesser opponent. The Fighter after hitting his opponent and doing damage can choose to push his target back with a successful CMB check into any adjacent square away from him. (Straight back, back-diagonally to left or to right). What this does is: 1) if the fighter has a reach weapon it sets up the target for an AoO. 2) the fighter can opt to take a 5'step back (if he is still alotted it) and thus make the opponent unable to make a full-attack action if/when it approaches him on the next round.
B_Cause the multiplier of his weapon to be increased by 1 for a critical. (chosen after the confirmed critical roll is determined).
C_Automatically confirm a critical without having to roll.
D_Double Damage on a charge
E_Full attack after a charge
F_A penalty applied to casters attemping to cast defensively.
G_Continue to gain an extra 5' steps between attacks (up to max movement). Say 1 extra at 5th level, another at 10th, etc.
One need only look at the myriad prestige classes in so many of the splat books for class feature ideas of what a fighter could/should be able to do with special manuevers. Thus eliminating the desire to want to go into any of those prestige classes or simply eliminate them altogether.
As for weapon training - I think that the bonus should be transferrable to different types on a day by day ability. Otherwise, you strangle the fighters abilities by the exact equipment he has. The other classes special abiliities dont restrict their function based on the weapon they're using (class restrictions nonwithstanding). But a ranger gets his two-weapon fighting whether fighting with mace, sickle, sword, or dagger. His point blank counts for crossbow, longbow, sling, or javelin. A barbarians rage powers work just as well with greatsword or a spiked chain.
I applaud the notion that a fighter that has always relied on a greatsword, stumbles upon a Frost GreatAxe in an earlier treasure hoard, and opts to use that today since they've just stumpled upon a red-wyrms domain and all his magmin, and salamander mooks.
Robert
|
|
Hey, here's an idea: Give the fighter a bonus to combat maneuver rolls that increases with his level.
Combat Mastery: At 1st level a fighter gains a +1 bonus on his combat maneuver rolls. At every third level, the fighter gains an additional +1 bonus to his combat maneuver rolls.
The bonus will be +7 by 18th level, an awesome advantage for players who actually remember how the combat maneuvers work.
The fighter may not deal as much damage on a single hit like the paladin or take as much punishment as the barbarian but he should certainly control his opponent and the flow of battle better.
This will put more focus on the fighter's "skill" and encourage fighter players to use trip, disarm, bull rush, feint, and overrun more often while the paladin uses smite and the barbarian uses rage.
I think this is part of the solution; not the only fix but a small part of it. Although starting at 1st level I feel is not appropriate, and elevating to +7 too much. I would reccommend like +4 or +5 as a ultimate max. Fighter class is already a major "splash" class that most people will only take 1 or 2 levels in - 4 if you need specialization, and 5 if you just happen to have a dex so good that you need that one more point of Max Dex for the armor.
Front-loading the class with even more benefits will only exacerbate that "splash" mentality.
Nonetheless, I feel a "fighter" bonus towards combat manuevers is a good step. I also feel that new cool manuevers that only a fighter can do should be incorporated with what they can do with their weapons. Perhaps searching some of the splat books for prestige class manuevers, or some of the feats that aren't going to be included in the 3.PF could become special fighter only manuevers (the one that allows a cleave attack on the owner after you sunder an item comes to mind - i think its called "Combat Brute". In fact those Tactical Feats, and Weapon Style Feats that are found in the Complete Warrior are excellent fodder for inspiring and coming up with "Fighter-only" manuevers.
Robert
|
|
Personally, instead of just number crunching and add up a lot of bonuses - (perhaps adding some is fine, however), I'd like to see fighters have "manuevers" of their own that they can perform.The combat manuevers are general and universal. The combat feats will be fighter freebees, but everyong can take them I'm sure.
I think fighters need manuevers that THEY can do: (1/day, or 1/encounter; increasing as fighter level advances etc - however it needs to be doled out).
Examples: (but certainly not an exhaustive list).
Another suggestion for fighter-manuever is additional movement in heavy armor.
Not to be given lightly - it should be something that a devoted fighter (not a splash level) should be rewarded with.
+5' at 8th level fighter and again at 16th. (or 9th and 18th, or 10th and 20th)
Robert
While the new fighter is way cool, I think they still lag a little in way of damage output. While I don't know how well it would work, I was thinking maybe alter the Weapon Training ability to provide a +1 to hit, and a +1 to the damage die of a weapon (for example, a long sword would now do 2d8+mods in the hands of this fighter). While this does get up to 6d8 (with the longsword as an example) at max level, that's still less then a fireball, by dice alone, and not what a rogue is doing in a single hit with sneak. Yes, yes, there are many other factors here, attacks/turn, ability to always use it, would it scale up with crits (20th level fighter who's done all his work with great axes, and now has 6d12 for damage with a x4 crit...), and so on. Alternatively, it could just be a pool of dice, like sneak, that the fighter dishes out on cool factor. Potentially broken? What the fighter needs? What do people think?
I'm not sure I agree with this. Unless I'm missing something, a fighter should have at least an equal or greater damage output per round than other classes. The exception to this would perhaps be the Barbarian.
In my games, my players tend to favor fighters. In a recent playtest we ran, the 8th level fighter was a greataxe weilding viking. Each time he hit, he rolled 1d12+11 for damage (+7 for STR (+5 normally, but x1.5 for two handed weapon), +2 for Greataxe Specialization, +1 for Weapon Training, +1 for magical weapon). With 2 attacks per round, that is an average of 34pts of damage. An 8th level wizards fireball would deal an average of 24pts (now there may be feats that can increase that but I can't think of one now). Now I'll concede that I like to run epic campaigns so this PC is very high on damage output. However, even an average fighter, I would expect to see an average of 26pts at this level(Bastard Sword +1, Weapon Training, Weapon Specialization, STR of 18, for a damage roll of 1d10+8).
Perhaps I am doing things differently than normal, but I would be against increasing the fighter's total damage output.
However, I like the idea of increasing their effectiveness with Combat Maneuvers. But to play Devils Advocate, can't an increase in effectiveness with Combat Maneuvers be achieved with a feat?
|
|
In my games, my players tend to favor fighters. In a recent playtest we ran, the 8th level fighter was a greataxe weilding viking. Each time he hit, he rolled 1d12+11 for damage (+7 for STR (+5 normally, but x1.5 for two handed weapon), +2 for Greataxe Specialization, +1 for Weapon Training, +1 for magical weapon). With 2 attacks per round, that is an average of 34pts of damage. An 8th level wizards fireball would deal an average of 24pts
How many people can be affected by that 24 pts of fireball damage at once? How often does the fireball miss?
However, I like the idea of increasing their effectiveness with Combat Maneuvers. But to play Devils Advocate, can't an increase in effectiveness with Combat Maneuvers be achieved with a feat?
While I don't agree with QuestMaster on the amount of bonus a fighter should get towards his CMB (as +7 is too high considering that the Improved Combat Manuever Feats only give a +2; being large only gives a +1 and being Huge only gives a +4.) I will say that I understand and agree with QM that just allowing this difference with a feat is not the answer when EVERYONE can take such a feat - thus other classes having a special "market" that cornered that they can do better is still not in the fighters corner. What we're saying is that pragmatically, a "Fighter" could potentially benefit from getting better at doing these manuevers because thats just what he does - combat. and thats his role, and his forte' and his arena; and thus his class features make him better at those things above all other classes.
Now - that being said, i still think a better answer is giving a fighter special manuevers that no one else can do - instead of just doing these manuevers better.
Having special manuevers that only fighters can learn would put them on par with all the cool special things that most of the other classes can do that no one else can.
Robert
One could indeed use a feat to increase combat maneuver effectiveness if one so chose.
The point here with the naturally increasing effectiveness is that fighters practice combat maneuvers more than the other fighting classes because they use combat maneuvers more often than the other base fighting classes. It's their bread and butter just as smites are for paladins and raging is for barbarians and favored enemy knowledge is for rangers. It's only natural that they should perform combat maneuvers more effectively without having to spend a feat. Even more effectively if they do so.
It gives a greater sense of class balance and class flavor for the fighter to be naturally better and naturally improving at combat maneuvers.
That is a great point, and I see the advantage of having the ability tied into the class rather than a feat. It is something fighters should excel at, and it would be nice if it scaled with PC levels. However, do CMs really come into play very often for you (or anyone else)?
My group has playtested (Alpha2) and while the Combat Maneuvers came up, it was only because it was forced on the group by monsters (darkmantles grappling for example). Maybe this will change over time as my players become more comfortable with the new mechanic (and less gun-shy of the old method). At the moment, I'm not sure if a CM bonus should be forced into the class, or that it would be a significant addition.
I also agree that using a feat may not be everyone's cup of tea. However, if the feat were restricted to just fighters (like Weapon Specialization) and if it scaled (like the new Toughness Feat), then it may not feel like a waste to burn a feat slot to take it.
How many people can be affected by that 24 pts of fireball damage at once? How often does the fireball miss?
Fireballs affect more than one person? They always hit?
Please forgive my sarcasm. I couldn't resist. My point was that a fighter should not be on the low end of the damage dealing spectrum. Obviously there are other factors that come into play.
|
|
How many people can be affected by that 24 pts of fireball damage at once? How often does the fireball miss?
Fireballs affect more than one person? They always hit?
Please forgive my sarcasm. I couldn't resist. My point was that a fighter should not be on the low end of the damage dealing spectrum. Obviously there are other factors that come into play.
Ah then I misunderstood the point you were originally making; I thought you were trying to indicate that fighters already do more damage at a given level than a wizard - by comparing his two melee attacks to a congruent leveled fireball.
I was merely retorting that it isnt that simple to compre when you consider that the firball could affect a dozen or more people - and no attack roll need - whereas the fighter in your example needs to hit with both attacks on ONE targe and NOT move more than 5' in order to be commensurate with that damage that the wizard did to multiple targets.
As for the use of the CMBs. I have noticed a bit of gunshyness, too, as many of us feel that the CMB base DC is a bit high. That being said - the manuevers associated with the CMB do have some really effective outcomes when used appropriately; and a bonus to a "fighter" for being a "fighter" to such fighting manuevers would go a long way in making the manuevers more apt to be used and beneficial, and go a long way to making the fighter be better at them than any other class.
Sure he can't smite evil, or rage, or cast spells, stun fist or flurr, or have any sneak attacks....but dammit he can bullrush and trip you like you wouldn't believe!
For the record, my idea for a redesigned Fighter class would be to allow "Fighter Talents" in lieu of taking a combat feat feat that level (like the Rogue has access to) and the talent trees provide special manuevers that only fighters can do (like the rogue talents have things only rogues can do). I remember the computer game Diablo and Diablo II had some cool talent tree ideas to build off of.
Robert
|
|
All Hail the “Fighter!”
The fighter; one of THE most iconic figures in fantasy fiction and role-playing games, standing head and shoulders above the rest of the field in their abilities, combat prowess, and martial knowledge. No other can hold a candle nor hope to ever be as good as the mighty and powerful fighter!
Fighter: Woah look at these cool new combat feats! I’m awesome!
Other Warriors: Yeah…? We can do those.
Fighter: I can take any of them I want.
Other Warriors: Yeah....we can do that.
Fighter: What? oh…well….I can have more of them! Look I get a feat every level now!
Other warriors: Ah……how many can you use at once?
Fighter: Huh? Oh…..uh……one?!?
Other Warriors: How’s that working out for ya?
Fighter: What?
Other Warriors: All those extra feats not being used…?
Fighter: Well…uh….I can now take Great Cleave at 4th level – Ha ha, you have to wait till 5th!
Other Warriors: Ah…..true….so congrats on that; you now have Great Cleave……What you planning to do with your Cleave feat then?
Fighter: Um…well….you see, I don’t really need it anymore……um……
Other Warriors: So you’re trading it in?
Fighter: No…I can’t do that.
Other Warriors: Well, then what good is it....?
Fighter: Well…you see…at first…..I guess I’m just going to cover it with a doily and put it on my mantle as a cool achievement….it looks neat on my resume character sheet thing….But I’m still better cuz I can take Greater Weapon Focus, and you can’t!
Other Warriors: Um…..after you take that, what are your plans for Weapon Focus?
Fighter: I’m going to.....well, I can……It’ll look really nice on the mantle next to Cleave…?
Other Warriors: Ah…..so…..thank goodness you get all these extra feats since so many of them are now useless…..
Fighter: Well I have bonuses to protect myself from fear.
Paladin: Really? Fear doesn’t even affect me – and I can give that little bonus of yours to everyone.
Fighter: Well, I’m strong.
Barbarian: Can you rage?
Fighter: No, but I have a good CON.
Barbarian: Can you rage?
Fighter: No, I don't need to I have a D10 Hit points!
Other Warriors:[B/] Uh....so do we....
[B]Barbarian: Well you guys do.....I don't.
Fighter: A'ha! Gotcha! What's you're little HD type, then?
Barbarian: 12
Fighter: Ha, right. What is it really?
Barbarian: Do I look like I'm joking?
Fighter: You have a D12, good CON, AND you rage?
Barbian: What's the matter, Cleave boy, Weapon Focus got your tongue?
Fighter: No, but I can wield two weapons….if I have a really good DEX of course.
Ranger: I have a 10 Dex….I can wield two weapons just fine……what’s your problem, amateur? I thought you were the fighter and was suppose to be better at all this stuff?
Fighter: Oh I am! I get a +1 BAB every level!
Other Warriors: Oh so were equal then.
Fighter: Well, that means that CMB goes up one every level – making me good at tripping and bullrushing!
Other Warriors: Hmmm…so it’s as high as ours, then? I thought you were suppose to be better at all this fighting stuff???
Fighter: I am! I can specialize in a weapon!
Paladin: That’s a start! What happens if you lose that weapon, if it breaks, or it isn’t ideal weapon to use against a particular foe?
Fighter: Um…..I guess I’m just as good as you then.
Paladin: Yeah, just as good, I suppose..how are your saving throws? I’m having trouble adding mine up.
Barbarian: You should try this rage thing – specialization, meh.
Ranger: Be easy on him boys...I'm sure he has lots of skills to help make up for it, right….?
Fighter: Well…you see….actually….um….you know what, screw you! I’m taking rogue levels!!!!
Raise you heads high, oh mighty “fighter” of the world. No more should you needlessly become an afterthought. No longer should you be the 2 level splash class for feats! No more shall you watch helplessly as your role as lead dog in combat gets replaced by cool class features, and equal footing ability with martial prowess. No more will you be a second choice for good old-fashioned combat power and maneuvers. Rise, my previously deprived sword-swinging, armor toting proverbial bad-asses, and show the world what you are truly capable of. Rise and strike fear into the hearts of other. Rise and boldly claim you’re a “FIGHTER” not a Fighter/Rogue/Barbarian or a Fighter/Paladin. Rise and be reckoned oh wicked warriors of woe – rise and fight! For we strive to provide you an overhaul worthy of your namesake.
Robert
I'd really like to see a monk in that discussion. Of course, he's not generally thought to be a fighter. He's only been doing fighting for the whole of his life :)
|
|
I'd really like to see a monk in that discussion. Of course, he's not generally thought to be a fighter. He's only been doing fighting for the whole of his life :)
Without sounding like I'm minimizing your concern - the monk does have a myriad of special features that no other class can duplicate or compete with. But I do believe there is a THINK TANK MONK thread.
Currently, I'm working on ideas for the fighter to give them a unique niche that also puts them in an elite status for certain features as well - just as every other class can corner such markets.
Robert
Robert,
Love your dialogue, man! You're right, though; the fighter lacks a "gimmick." Giving him combat maneuver bonuses would help. Personally, though, I'd prefer to see him get some pre-emptive strike abilities, which are what trained combat is all about. I'd like him to be able to move and attack and then move and attack again, and be able to "hold" some of those attacks and some of that movemement in reserve, in order to disrupt enemy movements/attacks/spellcasting even when it's not his turn. Instead of making adjacent squares "difficult terrain," he could physically get in the way, blocking enemy movement, as an immediate action, and maybe even get an attack in as well. Tactics would be in deciding how many attacks to take on his turn right away, and how many to save for use during his opponents' turns.
If this sort of ability were a fighter class feature, and improved with level, then the fighter would be unique, and could hold his own against wizards, sorcerers, and rogues.
Now that Combat Feats are out the window does anyone feel that gives a boost to the fighter? In other words: now that he's not restricted to one per round.
|
|
Now that Combat Feats are out the window does anyone feel that gives a boost to the fighter? In other words: now that he's not restricted to one per round.
It certainly makes it better....but it's still not UNIQUE to fighters.
All classes can take those feats and do just as much with them. Thats the point.
A fighter can never truly be better than anyone at any one thing - except when specific equipment.
Thats the focus here.
Robert
All Hail the “Fighter!”
The fighter; one of THE most iconic figures in fantasy fiction and role-playing games, standing head and shoulders above the rest of the field in their abilities, combat prowess, and martial knowledge. No other can hold a candle nor hope to ever be as good as the mighty and powerful fighter!Fighter: Woah look at these cool new combat feats! I’m awesome!
Other Warriors: Yeah…? We can do those.
Fighter: I can take any of them I want.
Other Warriors: Yeah....we can do that.
Fighter: What? oh…well….I can have more of them! Look I get a feat every level now!
Other warriors: Ah……how many can you use at once?
Fighter: Huh? Oh…..uh……one?!?
Other Warriors: How’s that working out for ya?
Fighter: What?
Other Warriors: All those extra feats not being used…?
Fighter: Well…uh….I can now take Great Cleave at 4th level – Ha ha, you have to wait till 5th!
Other Warriors: Ah…..true….so congrats on that; you now have Great Cleave……What you planning to do with your Cleave feat then?
Fighter: Um…well….you see, I don’t really need it anymore……um……
Other Warriors: So you’re trading it in?
Fighter: No…I can’t do that.
Other Warriors: Well, then what good is it....?
Fighter: Well…you see…at first…..I guess I’m just going to cover it with a doily and put it on my mantle as a cool achievement….it looks neat on my resume character sheet thing….But I’m still better cuz I can take Greater Weapon Focus, and you can’t!
Other Warriors: Um…..after you take that, what are your plans for Weapon Focus?
Fighter: I’m going to.....well, I can……It’ll look really nice on the mantle next to Cleave…?
Other Warriors: Ah…..so…..thank goodness you get all these extra feats since so many of them are now useless…..
Fighter: Well I have bonuses to protect myself from fear.
Paladin: Really? Fear doesn’t even affect me – and I can give that little...
This is hillarious Robert.
It seems there is a push for the fighter class to have it's own niche. I however, like this class remaining as generic and open-ended as possible. The reason being that you can customize the fighter to be any archetype you can imagine. This is obviously done through feats which is one of the prime features of the fighter class. In other words, the player has final say in finding his niche through feat selection.
The problem with giving the fighter it's own class abilities beyond that is that you begin to pigeon-hole the class into a singular archetype. Now if you can come up with class features that are broad enough to fit into any archetype, than that would be a good class feature. In my opinion, Jason B. is on the right track with his designs so far with weapon training, armor training and bravery... every fighter fights with some kind of weapon (even if it's just his fists), nearly every fighter uses armor, and I would bet that it is generally accepted that the fighter should be more stalwart than nearly every other class. I would even go so far as to say that the weapons training feature is sort of restrictive as well because it assumes that every fighter will train in more than one group of weapons. What of the fighter who only wants to train with one weapon? What of the fighter who wants to train with every concievable weapon? I would rather see the feature work for one weapon group and then give the option to gain more through a feat catering to fighters wanting more weapon groups.
I think that that's the hang-up from a designer standpoint on coming up with new features for the fighter class.
Now if you were to come up with the option of a list of class features for the fighter class, that could begin to be chosen from 1st level, then that would open the door to a lot of possibilities. But essentially, they work like feats... they just would be called something else. Then you could have a fighter with "Mettle," or one with "Weapon Aptitude," or both at a highter level. I've seen a lot of proposals, and thus far it just seems to me that most of them steer the class towards always being the same thing. All fighters can train for an hour in the morning with a specific weapon and use all thier relavant feats with it. I just don't see every fighter in the D&D world having that ability. This eventually would bring the design proccess toward somethign akin to fighter only feats.
Am I making any sense?
|
|
My redesigned focus for a new fighter was inspired by the redesigned ROGUE (which is the cat's meow for character classes right now - and everyone else is playing catch-up).
At even levels, where fighters use to have a bonus fighter feat, I have replaced that with a Fighter Talent - which (like a rogue) can opt to take a "Combat Feat" (or fighter feat whatever they're going to call them).
I feel that this keeps the diversity that some were concerned about - in replacing the bonus feats with arbitrary class features. This way if one doesn't want to follow the talents of a certain arch-type, they can choose feats instead as they see fit.
So far I have only done Talents for one ArchType fighter. Others will be "Juggernaut" (two-hander), Defender (sword and board), and "Tempest" (two weapon or double weapon).
1st Bonus feat
2nd, Bravery, Fighter Talent
3rd Bonus, Feat, Armor training
4th Fighter Talent, CMB +1
5th Weapon training, Knockback
6th Fighter Talent, Spell-Bane+1
7th Armor training,
8th Fighter Talent, CMB+2
9th Weapon training,
10th Fighter Talent, Spell-Bane+2
11th Armor training
12th Fighter Talent, CMB+3
13th Weapon training
14th Fighter Talent, Spell-Bane+3
15th Armor training
16th Fighter Talent CMB+4
17th Weapon training
18th Fighter Talent, Spell-Bane+4
19th Armor mastery
20th Fighter Talent weapon mastery CMB+5
CMB: At ever Four levels of fighter, the character gains a +1 to their CMB score for making and defending against these manuevers.
Knock-Back: At 5th level, if a creature misses a fighter with any and all of his attacks in a round, (not counting attacks of opportunity), and on the fighters next turn he hits that opponent with at least one melee attack, the fighter can force the creature back 5' if the fighter wants to. The fighter is showing his martial and combat prowess and forcing his indomitable skill upon his enemy. The knock-back attempt is resovled by the Fighter rolling a CMB check against the Targets DC. The fighter can choose NOT to force his opponent back if he doesn't want to. The fighter does not move with his target.
Spell-Bane: at 6th, 10th, 14th, and 18th leve of Fighter, the character causes spellcasters' DC to be increased by 1 for the purpose of Concentration checks. (Both Casting Defensively, and for the purpose of making concentration check after having been hit by the fighters attack).
TALENTS
Swashbuckler
+1 Dodge Bonus to AC when wearing Light or No armor
PREREQ: Dodge
Swashbuckler II
+1 Dodge Bonus to AC when wearing Light or No armor
PREREQ: Dodge, Swashbuckler Talent, Fighter Level 10
Swashbuckler III
+1 Dodge Bonus to AC when wearing Light or No armor
PREREQ: Dodge, Swashbuckler Talent, Swashbuckler II Talent, Fighter Level 18
Precise Strike
INT modifier applied as a bonus to damage to melee attacks made after the fighter moves at least 10’
PREREQ: Dodge, Mobility, Swashbuckler Talent, Fighter Level 6
Precise Strike II
INT modifier applied as a bonus to damage to all attacks made by the fighter, whether he moves that round or not.
PREREQ: Dodge, Mobility, Swashbuckler Talent, Fighter Level 12
Disarm Tactics
+1 to all Disarm Attempts, and to resist being disarmed
PREREQ: Improved Disarm, Swashbuckler Talent
Disarm Tactics II
+1 to all Disarm Attempts, and to resist being disarmed (Stacks with previous talents)
PREREQ: Improved Disarm, Swashbuckler Talent, Disarm Tactics Talent, Fighter Level 10
Disarm Tactics III
+1 to all Disarm Attempts, and to resist being disarmed (Stacks with previous talents)
PREREQ: Improved Disarm, Swashbuckler Talent, Disarm Tactics Talent, Disarm Tactics II Talent, Fighter Level 18
Disarm Specialist
After successfully disarming a target, the fighter can make an immediate attack against the disarmed foe. (Use the same BAB for the attack that you used for the disarm maneuver – in case the successful disarm came from one of your iterative attacks.)
PREREQ: Improved Disarm, Swashbuckler Talent, Fighter Level 10
Fencing Defense
When using Combat Expertise, you gain an additional +1 to your AC.
PREREQ: Combat Expert, Swashbuckler Talent
Fencing Defense II
When using Combat Expertise, you gain an additional +1 to your AC. (Stacks with previous talents)
PREREQ: Combat Expert, Swashbuckler Talent, Fencing Defense Talent, Fighter Level 12
Trip Tactics
+1 to all Trip Attempts, and to resist being Tripped.
PREREQ: Improved Trip, Swashbuckler Talent
Trip Tactics II
+1 to all Trip Attempts, and to resist being Tripped (Stacks with previous talents)
PREREQ: Improved Trip, Swashbuckler Talent, Trip Tactics Talent, Fighter Level 10
Trip Tactics III
+1 to all Trip Attempts, and to resist being Tripped (Stacks with previous talents)
PREREQ: Improved Trip, Swashbuckler Talent, Trip Tactics Talent, Trip Tactics II Talent, Fighter Level 18
|
|
This is hillarious Robert.
It seems there is a push for the fighter class to have it's own niche. I however, like this class remaining as generic and open-ended as possible. The reason being that you can customize the fighter to be any archetype you can imagine. This is obviously done through feats which is one of the prime features of the fighter class. In other words, the player has final say in finding his niche through feat selection.
The problem with giving the fighter it's own class abilities beyond that is that you begin to pigeon-hole the class into a singular archetype. Now if you can come up with class features that are broad enough to fit into any archetype, than that would be a good class feature.
See above post. Is this a start? Talents to fit an arch-type, but not arbitrary - feats if you prefer, to build your own....
Robert
I really like your talent trees, Robert. They'd be an awful lot of work to write up and playtest before the Beta is released, though.
See above post. Is this a start? Talents to fit an arch-type, but not arbitrary - feats if you prefer, to build your own....
Robert
I suggested something similar on the If there is one thing you would change about Alpha 3... thread. Although my suggestion was to have the fighter talents on every odd level and have them replace the first level bonus feat and the weapon and armor training/mastery. (I think I prefer warrior's training for the name, but that doesn't really matter)
See above post. Is this a start? Talents to fit an arch-type, but not arbitrary - feats if you prefer, to build your own....
Robert
Didn't think you would respond so fast! I edited my earlier post and added more... sorry, I'm a slow typer.
See above post. Is this a start? Talents to fit an arch-type, but not arbitrary - feats if you prefer, to build your own....
Robert
Yes. That is what I'm thinking. Again, the spell-bane thing isn't what I would call a generic feature and the knock-back ability doesn't do much if you wanted to be an archer. The CMB boost is ok, though it might be too much I think. I do like the fighter talents idea. Essentially, they are fighter only feats I would guess... am I correct? Also, If paizo introduced something akin to this, it would be nice to be able to instead of gaining a new fighter talent, have the option of gaining a feat instead.
|
|
Yes. That is what I'm thinking. Again, the spell-bane thing isn't what I would call a generic feature and the knock-back ability doesn't do much if you wanted to be an archer. The CMB boost is ok, though it might be too much I think. I do like the fighter talents idea. Essentially, they are fighter only feats I would guess... am I correct? Also, If paizo introduced something akin to this, it would be nice to be able to instead of gaining a new fighter talent, have the option of gaining a feat instead.See above post. Is this a start? Talents to fit an arch-type, but not arbitrary - feats if you prefer, to build your own....
Robert
One thing - you must not have noticed my comment that the talent trees work like the Rogues Talents (alpha rules) in that they're not "fighter only feats" they're talents. AND to address your last concern - I also stated that just like Rogue talents, the fighter DOES indeed have the option to choose a COMBAT FEAT in lieu of another talent.
I dont know what you mean about the "spell-bane" not being a generic feature. It wasn't meant as generic - it was meant as a fighter-only feature - essentially making fighters give spellcasters a little more difficulty in concentrating on their spells due to the fighters sheer combative force of will.
Robert
|
|
Robert I love this idea. After the PfRPG Rogue came out I started thinking along the same lines, but you are much further along than I am.
I would not worry about stepping on the toes of the Paladin, Ranger, splat book types much anyway. They are all essentially combinations of the core Core classes :) Fighter, Rogue, Wizard, Cleric. Nearly all otehr classes are combinations of or variants of those four.
One idea I have played with, and might be too overwhelming, is for a tank type. A great feat from Ultimate Feats called The Mountain Does Not Move. Expend a Wisdom point and make a Fort save DC= to damage dealt. With success you ignore or defelct the damage. Does not work on spells and such.
My variant idea on it as a fighter talent would be simply make a Fort save DC= damage dealt for half damage. No Wisdom points. You still take damage but in essence you turn some of the damage from armor or maneuvering or just toughing it out.
Play with it, and make suggestions. It might just be too much though.
|
|
This is very similar to the effect Wizards have had to deal with as well -- the redundancy of low-level spells as they gain in power. There are several other class abilities that succumb to the same "utility evolution" issue. ... I don't want to dismiss this as unimportant, but it has been a standard element of class design across the board, not just fighters.One of the things that I've always thought about fighters is "Yeah, they get more feats than anyone...but their feats that require other feats to use are reduce that number of feats". So, I think it takes 4 feats to get to the Weapon Specialization that gives you a +8 to hit. Well, great...I've got +8 to hit with a certain type of weapon...meanwhile, my only class ability of "greater number of feats" has been reduced by 3 because those other feats are useless now. Which is really weird because you have to have a certain level of fighter to qualify for those feats anyway.
Yeah but the lower level spells are still useful. Magic Missile still works. It may not be your first choice, but in a pinch you can pop some off and still contribute.
A fighter on the other hand has feats that are not useful anymore at all. It would more alike if the wizard lost access to the low level spells altogether.
I play a lvl 23 fighter and a lvl 14 cleric. As a cleric I still find I cast lower level spells quite often. The good buff spells are between 2nd and 5th levels. But as a lvl 23 fighter I do have a handful of feats that are completely obsolete because they are replaced by higher level feats.
And if Combat feats are going to be used as listed PfRPG ALpha, there will be even more feats that I won't be able to use.
not to minimize the problem with wizards, but that is insignificant when compared to the fighter.
|
|
This is very similar to the effect Wizards have had to deal with as well -- the redundancy of low-level spells as they gain in power. There are several other class abilities that succumb to the same "utility evolution" issue. ... I don't want to dismiss this as unimportant, but it has been a standard element of class design across the board, not just fighters.
There is a level of truth to this sentiment. Summon Monster 4 when you reach 7th level makes Summon Monster 1 nearly moot (except for sending mass of fodder down hallways to spring all the traps...)
BUT - a wizard can have a limitless number of spells in his book - and as soon as one becomes moot, he can swap it out.
Sorcerers had that problem in 3rd ed, but 3.5 made the allowance for swapping out lower level spells from their repertoire.
Fighters with their feats have no such luxury of swapping out. Once Great Cleave is taken, Cleave is moot and never again used. Once Greater Weapon Focus (or specialization) is taken their predecessors are moot and never again used.
What some have suggested (specifically with the weapon focus and specializations) that the feats scale for fighters in that they automatically increase in value for fighters so as to not require another feat to gain the ONLY class feature that a fighter had that no other class could do (specialize and greater focus)
I'm approaching the idea of bettering a fighter in another way - but i do see the logic in those ideas, too; and I certainly see the logic of the feats becoming moot.
Robert
|
|
Robert I love this idea. After the PfRPG Rogue came out I started thinking along the same lines, but you are much further along than I am.
Thanks for the support - I'm am almost finished with the juggernaut talents. I will post them when i am done.
I did a few changes with the swashbuckler talents - after playtesting them last night - I found a few issues, and I also added a few more class feature ideas for all builds.
I'll post all of that later
Robert
1st Bonus feat
2nd, Bravery, Fighter Talent
3rd Bonus, Feat, Armor training
4th Fighter Talent, CMB +1
5th Weapon training, Knockback
6th Fighter Talent, Spell-Bane+1
7th Armor training,
8th Fighter Talent, CMB+2
9th Weapon training,
10th Fighter Talent, Spell-Bane+2
11th Armor training
12th Fighter Talent, CMB+3
13th Weapon training
14th Fighter Talent, Spell-Bane+3
15th Armor training
16th Fighter Talent CMB+4
17th Weapon training
18th Fighter Talent, Spell-Bane+4
19th Armor mastery
20th Fighter Talent weapon mastery CMB+5
It would not be overpowering, IMO, to get rid of the level restrictions of most of the talents. If you really want to get a +3 bonus on dodge by 6th level you could go for it. Maybe advanced talents for the real cool tricks just like the rogue? Just my 2c's (€-cents, that is ;))
Robert I love this idea. After the PfRPG Rogue came out I started thinking along the same lines, but you are much further along than I am.
Thanks for the support - I'm am almost finished with the juggernaut talents. I will post them when i am done.
I did a few changes with the swashbuckler talents - after playtesting them last night - I found a few issues, and I also added a few more class feature ideas for all builds.
I'll post all of that later
Robert
I'm glad I'm not the only one who thought that the rogue talents were the cat's pajams (that's pajamas for all you squares out there :) )
Initially when I was going over the Combat Feats, I actually thought they were types of fighter-only maneuvers or exploits of some sort (like, if you use a two-handed sword, you can make a special charge or something once per day, with a certain bonus, etc which is successful with a CMB check DCXX. ...maybe that's a bit too 4e). What you have is a great idea! Just thought I would offer that conception...
I really like how you've created very broad bonuses that capture multiple fighting styles. In other words, they are not entirely weapon specific. Like the "swashbuckler" talents could easily be used by a knife fighter. Perhaps it might be useful to put certain weapon category restrictions on the talents though, like "when using a light weapon", else you might get a swashbuckling great sword wielding fighter. :)
|
|
I really like how you've created very broad bonuses that capture multiple fighting styles. In other words, they are not entirely weapon specific. Like the "swashbuckler" talents could easily be used by a knife fighter. Perhaps it might be useful to put certain weapon category restrictions on the talents though, like "when using a light weapon", else you might get a swashbuckling great sword wielding fighter. :)
HOLY SMOKE!
What was that feat called... Monkey Grip? to hold a two-handed weapon or a large weapon in one hand...
imagine a swashbuckling 2-weapon fighter with two great swords...
Ok I wanna make one just to make my GM's jaw drop and watch him crap his pants. And since we are still playing 3.5 in his games, I can take Tumble, and Improved trip and spam trips, and tumble around with my two great swords. Maybe play a dwarf too. Ok I know it is munchkin to do but it is still way cool.
Ok I have a project to do now. Some research on feats to make it happen... I'll get back to you guys in a few days on progress (and may ask for some advice on feats and such... or just give me some advice now to make it easier)
|
|
It would not be overpowering, IMO, to get rid of the level restrictions of most of the talents. If you really want to get a +3 bonus on dodge by 6th level you could go for it. Maybe advanced talents for the real cool tricks just like the rogue? Just my 2c's (€-cents, that is ;))
I completely disagree. The idea is to make the fighter ideal for taking many levels of it - not just the proverbial 6 level pitstop to get all the feats you want and go someplace else.
Robert