|
Posted this in the Chronicles forum, but that area doesn't seem to see much action so I'm reposing it here in the hopes of a response. :) Thanks!
--------------
Has there been any errata or clarification on this ability? As it is, I can't see why any fighter *wouldn't* take it.
Loss: Bonus feat at 1st level
Gain: A few bonus class skills, and 4+int mod skill points EVERY level.
That seems like a significant boost, all for one feat. The d20srd has a similar variant called the Thug, but they are restricted to light armor (I believe). Would adding the requirement of removing the Heavy Armor Prof and Tower Shield Prof work? The fighter can still wear medium armor then, but gets the nice extra skill points.
By itself...yeah. There's no reason not to take this.
Posted this in the Chronicles forum, but that area doesn't seem to see much action so I'm reposing it here in the hopes of a response. :) Thanks!
--------------
Has there been any errata or clarification on this ability? As it is, I can't see why any fighter *wouldn't* take it.
Loss: Bonus feat at 1st level
Gain: A few bonus class skills, and 4+int mod skill points EVERY level.That seems like a significant boost, all for one feat. The d20srd has a similar variant called the Thug, but they are restricted to light armor (I believe). Would adding the requirement of removing the Heavy Armor Prof and Tower Shield Prof work? The fighter can still wear medium armor then, but gets the nice extra skill points.
By itself...yeah. There's no reason not to take this.
I'd be willing to trade a feat for +2 skill points/level for any class. That's a feat for 40 skill points (more with the X4 at first) And it's not like fighter's don't have feats to spare(especially in pfrpg).
Then again, generally speaking,it seems quite a lot more weight is placed on combat feats over skill feats. But compared to skill focus +3 bonus or the group of +2/+2 feats, +40 seems a bit much.
Indago
The premise is that it's meant to be available for a Fighter who goes to a military academy of sorts...but even adding that as a requirement doesn't help much, as anyone can write that into their backgrounds.
Yeah, so the player spends an extra 3 seconds writing "graduated from A'xic'ont'in Acadamy for Academic Warfare" and gets an enormous amount of skill points. Maybe if it had a hefty INT requirement? That kinda impairs a fighter from its main attributes. Say INT 15 or 16. Then the fighters who really want to play the academic can, but not the fighter with the 8 INT.
Still think the bonus is too much.
There was a feat in Eberron, I think, called Education. Made all skills class skills and gave +1 skill point/level. We house ruled it out. Yeah, this one gives ALL skills as class skills vs some skills. But half the skill points.
I think it's a bit much. Then again, I wouldn't mind seeing the min skill points/level be bumped to 4 in pathfinder. So I might allow it, and maybe make a variation for clerics/sorcs,wizards...
Indago
It's a great alternate class feature, maybe a little cheap but the fighter doesn't have a lot of things to give up at first level.
Here is the class feature slightly altered to remove Golarian fluff:
Fighters who attend a martial college learn additional class skills and gain additional skill points. Taking this option replaces the bonus feat gained upon taking the first level of fighter.
Class Skills: A fighter trained at a famous war college or fighting school gains the following class skills (in addition to the normal fighter class skills): Diplomacy (Cha), Gather Information (Cha), Knowledge (architecture and engineering) (Int), Knowledge (geography) (Int), Knowledge (nobility and royalty) (Int), Sense Motive (Wis).
Skill Points at 1st Level: (4 + Int modifier) x 4.
Skill Points at Each Additional Level: 4 + Int modifier.
|
Fighters who attend a marital college learn additional class skills and gain additional skill points. Taking this option replaces the bonus feat gained upon taking the first level of fighter.
I like the idea that Fighters who constantly bicker with their wives learn more skills than those who don't. I guess all that time sleeping on the couch is beneficial for combattants, after all! ;)
Seriously though, thanks for putting up the class ability here. I just couldn't help myself...
I don't think it's unbalanced, personally. I'm generally inclined to give Fighters 4+INT class skills for free, so putting a little requirement makes me feel like I'm less generous.
|
The main reasons not to take it are role-playing ones which may not be applicable in all games. If you want to up the cost, you might also include the bonus feats at 6, 12 and 18th levels. If it costs them 4 feats, that might make the trade for an extra 40 skill points over the career more reasonable.
Yeah, so the player spends an extra 3 seconds writing "graduated from A'xic'ont'in Acadamy for Academic Warfare" and gets an enormous amount of skill points. Maybe if it had a hefty INT requirement? That kinda impairs a fighter from its main attributes. Say INT 15 or 16. Then the fighters who really want to play the academic can, but not the fighter with the 8 INT.
Well if you consider all the classes are balanced then this class feature swap is broken. If you figure the fighter is the red headed step child of classes then it's fine. I'm not going to debate it one way or the other beyond saying I think it's fine.
I would let a wizard or a sorcerer give up his familiar to get a similar skill boost. The thing with the fighter is... what does he have to give up?
I like the idea that Fighters who constantly bicker with their wives learn more skills than those who don't. I guess all that time sleeping on the couch is beneficial for combattants, after all! ;)
Fixed, thanks! I just scribed that in a hurry to replace non-OGL Golarian fluff.
Seriously though, thanks for putting up the class ability here. I just couldn't help myself...
I don't think it's unbalanced, personally. I'm generally inclined to give Fighters 4+INT class skills for free, so putting a little requirement makes me feel like I'm less generous.
Well this also gives additional class skills which is slightly better than what you house ruled. I am also inclined to give fighters some bonus skill points.
|
|
I've decided to give this as a bonus feature, without the loss of a feat.
It works out well.
It is true that the benefit for the cost is out of line, but I don't see any reason for the fighter to give up a feat for an ability he should probably have anyway (like the number and type of skills this grants him).
If you require the fighter to pay the feat, yes, his ability is more powerful than other things he could get for that feat, but again, it has little overall effect on balance or overall power.
Has there been any errata or clarification on this ability? As it is, I can't see why any fighter *wouldn't* take it.
If you're planning on playing a pure fighter for more than 4 levels (say), it would be worth it. But in my experience pure fighters are as rare as hen's teeth; people who are dipping into fighter for some feats would almost surely rather have the extra feat!
|
|
I would let a wizard or a sorcerer give up his familiar to get a similar skill boost. The thing with the fighter is... what does he have to give up?
The only other things that a Fighter could give up would be armor proficiency or his class level.
What I mean by this: A Fighter who takes this class feature is considered to be two levels lower than his actual level for the purpose of qualifying for feats such as Weapon Specialization, Greater Weapon Focus and Greater Weapon Specialization.
|
|
Regardless of how the Fighter class is as a whole, this class feature is broken. One feat for 40 skill points AND extra class skills is, as pointed out, broken. Saying the Fighter is underpowered and could use the help isn't a good justification. If that's the case, the base Fighter should be given these abilities and the 'substitution level' should be to exchange them back for a bonus feat.
Also, saying it's a 'roleplaying' theme is a bit much too. The point is, its a mechanic that has no restrictions (despite it's flavor text) other than to lose a bonus feat. Balancing it would require the loss of a bit more. A few extra bonus feats could work. My player suggested the loss of Heavy Armor Prof and Tower Shield prof (making them more medium armored Commanders into heavily armored Knights).
Thanks all for the suggestions so far.
It's a great alternate class feature, maybe a little cheap but the fighter doesn't have a lot of things to give up at first level.
Here is the class feature slightly altered to remove Golarian fluff:
Fighters who attend a martial college learn additional class skills and gain additional skill points. Taking this option replaces the bonus feat gained upon taking the first level of fighter.
Class Skills: A fighter trained at a famous war college or fighting school gains the following class skills (in addition to the normal fighter class skills): Diplomacy (Cha), Gather Information (Cha), Knowledge (architecture and engineering) (Int), Knowledge (geography) (Int), Knowledge (nobility and royalty) (Int), Sense Motive (Wis).
Skill Points at 1st Level: (4 + Int modifier) x 4.
Skill Points at Each Additional Level: 4 + Int modifier.
I like that write-up, but would add Knowledge (history) - assuming that the system has kept that particular skill (I'm no expert in Pathfinder) - to cover the study of historical battles and famous tacticians. (The Sun Tzus, Julius Caesars, and Napoleons of the setting.)
There might be an argument for adding Spellcraft too, as battlefield magic is important in most settings. For example, if your character sees that incoming "bead", he might recognise the Delayed Blast Fireball and react appropriately. Or order his archers to target that one particular enemy spellcaster which he has identified as being about to unleash some extremely unpleasant magic on the troops.
An alternative to Spellcraft being a class skill would be just to suggest that such a tactician character take some ranks in Spellcraft, despite it not being a class skill. (Personal house rule: non-class skills don't cost double, but they cannot be bought up to more ranks than the current cross-class skill maximum.)
That high INT requirement which Indago suggested would also be a good addition. While many people could have attended a martial school, not all of them would have benefited to the extent that they could take this particular feat. Only a dedicated tactician would put the points into INT instead of the usual fighter stats.
As for giving up things like armour proficiencies ... maybe the Heavy Armour Proficiency. I like to think of the Tower Shield as being a tactical option.
Just my two-cents' worth! :)
Regardless of how the Fighter class is as a whole, this class feature is broken. One feat for 40 skill points AND extra class skills is, as pointed out, broken. Saying the Fighter is underpowered and could use the help isn't a good justification. If that's the case, the base Fighter should be given these abilities and the 'substitution level' should be to exchange them back for a bonus feat.
You are entitled to your opinion. Looking at the rest of the substitutions I think it's reasonable.
Spontaneous Domain Casting (Su): A cleric who takes this ability only chooses one domain when selecting his first level of cleric. The cleric can swap prepared spells into domain spells from his chosen domain in addition to the normal spontaneous casting. The cleric can lose any spell that is not a prepared domain spell to cast any spell on his domain list of an equal or lower level.
Lose a domain but you can use spells from your other domain spontaneously? Very nice for the right domains.
Light of Purity (Su): Starting at 6th level, a paladin with this ability can emit a burst of blinding light once per week. This light acts like a daylight spell, save that it only lasts for 1 round per level of the paladin. In addition, any undead within 30 feet
of the paladin emitting this light takes 1d6 points of damage per round for every two levels the paladin has attained. A Fortitude save (DC
10 + 1/2 the paladin’s level + the paladin’s Cha modifier) halves this damage. A paladin may use the light of purity one additional time per week for every three additional levels he has attained, to a maximum of five times at 18th level. A paladin who takes this ability loses his ability to cure disease.
Drop the cure disease ability which is rarely used and gain the ability to cast daylight that burns undead where they stand? No-brainer. Personally, I think this is a better trade than the fighters feat/ skill points. Cure disease can easily be bought on a scroll for that once in a blue moon occasion you need it and you now have an ability you can use about 50% of the time.
Hidden Reserve (Su): Starting at 1st level, a sorcerer with this ability can call upon a hidden reserve of magical energy to cast additional spells. This reserve can be used to cast any spell the sorcerer could normally cast, but the sorcerer is fatigued after the spell is completed. If this spell is of the highest level that the sorcerer could normally cast, the sorcerer is exhausted instead. This ability cannot be used while fatigued or exhausted. It can be used a number of times per day equal to the sorcerer’s Charisma bonus. This ability replaces the summon familiar ability.
Again... almost a no-brainer. Well some people like familiars but most people would take the extra 4+ spells/ day in a heart beat and take the exhaustion/ fatigue.
Overall... sub levels are a mixed bag. I think in the greater scheme of things the fighter one is a great deal but not unreasonable. If anything the sorcerer gain is the best deal of the bunch since it gives additional uses of the characters most powerful spells.
|
|
It's not at all a broken class feature. I mean, seriously, look at what you're getting for your first fighter level if you take it:
+1 BAB
+2 Fort, +0 Ref, +0 Will
d10 HD
Simple and martial weapon prof.
Prof. in all armors and all shields (including tower shields)
4+Int class skills (or 4x that number if you're 1st level).
That's it. Total. That's everything. Why in the world would you take this class over a barbarian?
What I'm gathering from this is that substitution levels are OGL.
That's interesting. I did not know that.
From what I understand all crunch in Pathfinder material is OGL. Any references to Golarian or Fluff is Copyrighted. That is why I removed the fluff from the entries and rewrote then slightly.
I was actually seriously thinking about compiling a lot of the Pathfinder alternate rules so people could have them in one place for reference.
|
|
It's not at all a broken class feature. I mean, seriously, look at what you're getting for your first fighter level if you take it:
+1 BAB
+2 Fort, +0 Ref, +0 Will
d10 HD
Simple and martial weapon prof.
Prof. in all armors and all shields (including tower shields)
4+Int class skills (or 4x that number if you're 1st level).That's it. Total. That's everything. Why in the world would you take this class over a barbarian?
Because you're not losing the other 19 levels worth of bonus feats and abilities? Just a *single* feat in exchange for some bonus class skills and FORTY skill points? Sure, if you're playing a campaign from 1st level to 1st level, this might not be for you.
Totally balanced.
It's not at all a broken class feature. I mean, seriously, look at what you're getting for your first fighter level if you take it:
+1 BAB
+2 Fort, +0 Ref, +0 Will
d10 HD
Simple and martial weapon prof.
Prof. in all armors and all shields (including tower shields)
4+Int class skills (or 4x that number if you're 1st level).That's it. Total. That's everything. Why in the world would you take this class over a barbarian?
I see your point. But that's a problem with the class itself. Doesn't mean it's not broken in and of itself. Basically, is allowing any class to give up one feat for an extra 40+ skill points balanced? I'm not sure. It seems this is an attempt at a fix for the fighter(which it needs), but that doesn't make the substitution balanced. Like the OP says, "why WOULDN'T you take this as a fighter?" Hell, I'd take it as a cleric who only gets what, 7 feats thru 20 - as opposed to the 18 a fighter gets.
If you need to fix the fighter, fix the fighter(and I think pfrpg is doing a good job of re-balancing the classes against each other). Or as the one poster suggested, make this the class feature, and allow the player to swap it out for a feat if they want.
But like I said, I'm leaning towards making the min skill points/level 4 anyway.
Indago
edit: This is equivalent to 13 skill focus feats that have bonuses that stack. All for one feat. That's balanced?
Because you're not losing the other 19 levels worth of bonus feats and abilities? Just a *single* feat in exchange for some bonus class skills and FORTY skill points? Sure, if you're playing a campaign from 1st level to 1st level, this might not be for you.
Totally balanced.
What is 'Balanced'? Do you mean "This is an unequal trade"? In that case then I agree with you, trading a feat for this alternate class ability is not balanced. Do you mean "This class feature makes the balance of power between the fighter and the other classes in the game worse"? Then I have to disagree with you because clearly it does not, this actually brings the game closer to being balanced.
Is the Paladin swapping cure disease for daylight+burn undead a 'balanced swap? How about the sorcerer gaining 4+ extra spells per day versus a familiar?
Is this a sort of band-aid on a 'broken' class? Maybe. Do I care? No. Why is this such a big concern?
|
|
But that's a problem with the class itself. Doesn't mean it's not broken in and of itself. Basically, is allowing any class to give up one feat for an extra 40+ skill points balanced? I'm not sure. It seems this is an attempt at a fix for the fighter(which it needs), but that doesn't make the substitution balanced. Like the OP says, "why WOULDN'T you take this as a fighter?" Hell, I'd take it as a cleric who only gets what, 7 feats thru 20 - as opposed to the 18 a fighter gets.
Game mechanics do not exist in a vacuum. Nothing in this substitution feature will in any way shape or form negatively impact my game. It will not suddenly render fighters powerhouses, whether they were before or not. It does not make them an auto-take class. This is not broken.
Honestly, the only time I would consider taking this class feature is if I weren't starting a game at 1st level - because, as a 1st level character, this means I get nothing at all, and that is not appealing. As has been pointed out by the OP, this is just a version of the thug variant, and frankly, I've never seen anyone play a thug. Never.
You say you'd give up all your standard feats to get 4+Int skill points/level as a cleric? One: I highly doubt it. 2: Would you be willing to give up having any class abilities other than your weapon and armor proficiencies at first level for it, and never get them back? No spells at 1st level, -1 level for turning, -3 orisons and -1 1st level spell slot for your entire career? Because that's what the fighter would be giving up, as an equivalency.
You say you'd give up all your standard feats to get 4+Int skill points/level as a cleric? One: I highly doubt it. 2: Would you be willing to give up having any class abilities other than your weapon and armor proficiencies at first level for it, and never get them back? No spells at 1st level, -1 level for turning, -3 orisons and -1 1st level spell slot for your entire career? Because that's what the fighter would be giving up, as an equivalency.
I never said "all my standard feats". The fighter is giving up exactly ONE feat. I'd give up my starting feat as a cleric in a heartbeat! And the fighter isn't losing ALL of his class abilities. Just one feat at first level. He still gets another 10 bonus feats. I'm saying the trade out of one feat for 40+ skill points strikes me as a bit much. Not that the fighter does or does not need to be improved as a class. Not that it would be overly game breaking in most campaigns. Not that being that first level fighter with two extra skills and no super fancy extra combat feat is for everyone. But 1 feat for 40+ skill points and extra class skills is not balanced.
Indago
|
|
What is 'Balanced'? Do you mean "This is an unequal trade"? In that case then I agree with you, trading a feat for this alternate class ability is not balanced. Do you mean "This class feature makes the balance of power between the fighter and the other classes in the game worse"? Then I have to disagree with you because clearly it does not, this actually brings the game closer to being balanced.Is the Paladin swapping cure disease for daylight+burn undead a 'balanced swap? How about the sorcerer gaining 4+ extra spells per day versus a familiar?
Is this a sort of band-aid on a 'broken' class? Maybe. Do I care? No. Why is this such a big concern?
I haven't commented on the sorcerer or paladin one either because that wasn't the point of this thread. The point was to ask about the Fighter's variant, just that one variant, and to see if there had been errata for it or not.
And I mean the first definition with broken. How can you imply there's any other? When I see a 'class substitution level' I expect the give and take to keep the same power-level of the class, and only change a bit of the mechanics/theme. What this variant does is significantly increase the 'power' of the fighter. One bonus feat for 40 skill points and a few class skills.
Again, if you think this is a good way to 'fix' the fighter, then it should be part of the *base* fighter. Not a substitution level. Those levels should never raise or lower the power of the class, just alter it a little thematically. We can get into the paladin and the sorcerer or whatever later, I'm not saying those are balanced either.
You say you'd give up all your standard feats to get 4+Int skill points/level as a cleric? One: I highly doubt it. 2: Would you be willing to give up having any class abilities other than your weapon and armor proficiencies at first level for it, and never get them back? No spells at 1st level, -1 level for turning, -3 orisons and -1 1st level spell slot for your entire career? Because that's what the fighter would be giving up, as an equivalency.
...What? I never said I'd give up all my standard feats. I said that you need to give up ONE, ONNNNNE bonus feat to get this trade-off. Comparing it to a spellcasting class is ridiculous. You're implying that level of casting, turning, etc. is EQUAL to the fighter's normal bonus feat in the first place.
Why people are trying to take this beyond the Fighter is beyond me. I was asking one question.
Is it a FAIR tradeoff (balanced in that the power level stays the SAME, not that it 'fixes' the class) to give up ONE bonus feat in exchange for (over 20 levels) FORTY skill points and some bonus class skills.
If it ISN'T, then it isn't a balanced substitution level. Substitution levels should not be things that are an obvious take for 9/10 people (that 1/10th being someone who doesn't take it for thematic reasons). They should be something that is a pretty even give and take.
So if it isn't balanced, what can we add to the GIVE part? My suggestion was heavy armor prof. and tower shield prof. This keeps the 'theme' of a Fighter who went to a military school and studied his mind more than his body. If that was added into the requirements, do you think it would be balanced? If not, what would you suggest?
And please, again, this thread is about the Fighter sub level, not all of them. :) Thanks again for the comments so far.
|
|
But 1 feat for 40+ skill points and extra class skills is not balanced.
That's sophistry, pure and simple. Whether the trade-off is broken in a vacuum is entirely irrelevant, because the class is not broken after the trade, so there's no reason not to allow it. The OP suggested that fighters need to lose more in order to justify the trade-off. They clearly don't. The ability is not broken.
And similarly, arguing that the fighter is giving up "ONE feat" is also disingenuous. They are giving up 100% of their first level class features that aren't skills, saves, BAB or armor/weapon profs. They get nothing else. They become warriors, in essence. That is more than just a single feat. It's all they are.
|
|
That's sophistry, pure and simple. Whether the trade-off is broken in a vacuum is entirely irrelevant, because the class is not broken after the trade, so there's no reason not to allow it. The OP suggested that fighters need to lose more in order to justify the trade-off. They clearly don't. The ability is not broken.
Again, I am talking about the balance of the substitution level TRADE-OFF, not the balance of the Fighter class. The substitution levels should be equal trade-offs, and this one clearly isn't. I don't care how balanced you think the Fighter actually is. If it is to the point where it needs this to be balanced, then it should be added to the *base* fighter, not made an optional substitution level.
And similarly, arguing that the fighter is giving up "ONE feat" is also disingenuous. They are giving up 100% of their first level class features that aren't skills, saves, BAB or armor/weapon profs. They get nothing else. They become warriors, in essence. That is more than just a single feat. It's all they are.
That's a poor argument. The substitution level is like me saying "Give me $3 today, and I'll give you $1 for the next twenty days." Sure, that one day you're losing out, and if you only look at that one day, you're not getting much. But you're ignoring the fact that this bonus isn't just for first level. The *LOSS* is just for first level. The *GAIN* is for the rest of their career.
Again, I am talking about the balance of the substitution level TRADE-OFF, not the balance of the Fighter class. The substitution levels should be equal trade-offs, and this one clearly isn't. I don't care how balanced you think the Fighter actually is. If it is to the point where it needs this to be balanced, then it should be added to the *base* fighter, not made an optional substitution level.
How does this negatively affect the game?
|
|
Sigh. Again. I'm not talking about negative or positive effects on the game. My goal with this thread was simple.
Is this mechanical thing, this substitution level, is it balanced? Ignore everything else. Is it balanced in and of itself, and if not, how can it be?
I'm not even asking if the Fighter is balanced. I'm looking at the trade-off with this single substitution level.
One feat
FOR
2 extra skill points/level and some extra class skills
Now I'm looking to see what can be added to that one feat to make it a little more balanced, and keep the 'theme' of a less-warrior groomed but more tactics-groomed fighter.
That's all. That's the only reason I made this thread. If you think the Fighter is balanced with this, or that you think it makes the game happy and doesn't hurt anything, good for you. That doesn't help *me* balance this sub level that is obviously busted.
|
|
Ignore everything else.
Let me try to explain why Dennis and I are not going along with this tack.
As written, the substitution level is only going to be taken by someone who is a) planning to take at least 2 levels of fighter and b) willing to utterly forgo any class abilities whatsoever until he/she reaches that second level.
The ability is thus already several steps behind here.
Your angle - that the narrow "feat-for-skills" swap is too good - seems destined to try to weaken the ability even further, as evinced by your desire to strip heavy armor and tower shield proficiency from the class as well.
While you may succeed in winning the battle for balance here, you will inevitably utterly lose the war, because what comes out will be an entirely unplayable ability.
Thus, "ignore everything else" is a recipe for a class that will not be played, and therefore a worse game overall.
|
|
Would it help if I say that the Fighter I see this being used with is the PRPG one, and not the pure 3.5 one? I think that Fighter is significantly better.
Also, I don't think losing heavy armor and tower shields would break it.
So a fighter loses one feat and is stuck with medium armor and, at best, heavy shields. Whoopy. He still gets those nice bonus skill points, and a few extra class skills.
Of course, it isn't made for the person that is only going to take a level or two in Fighter. Nor do I think a 'class substitution level' *should* be balanced for someone who only wants the class as a dip. I think it should be balanced for the extreme, for someone who could take the full 20 levels.
That's all. That's the only reason I made this thread. If you think the Fighter is balanced with this, or that you think it makes the game happy and doesn't hurt anything, good for you. That doesn't help *me* balance this sub level that is obviously busted.
I think we have different definitions of "busted", that's all.
My idea of an ability that's "busted" or "broken" would be something that a certain level X character can do that is inappropriately powerful for level X. E.g. polymorphing into a ridiculously powerful monster at level 7 or getting free Wish spells at level 9.
At any given level, I don't see how a fighter with the given class ability is inappropriately powerful. It's a good trade-off if you're planning on playing a pure fighter, but it's not going to cause munchkins to give up their spellcasting characters in order to play pure fighters any time soon.
|
|
My point was that there's no reason *not* to take it. And when I see an 'optional' ability that no one in their right mind wouldn't want (unless they really want that extra feat), I think of it as busted. An optional thing like a class substitution level should, mechanically at least, be something that could go either way. In this case, sure, I don't think the "Fighter" as a whole would be broken if a player took this. My problem is that there's no player I know who *wouldn't* want it. When that happens, the ability should either be made part of the standard Fighter, or it should change.
This thread was for suggesting the latter.
My point was that there's no reason *not* to take it. And when I see an 'optional' ability that no one in their right mind wouldn't want (unless they really want that extra feat), I think of it as busted.
Let me put it another way. If a player is given a choice between two options, X and Y, and always chooses Y, that suggests one of two discrete possibilites:
- Option Y is overpowered
- Option X is underpowered
I'm suggesting that a fighter feat is an underpowered class feature for the fighter class. I just can't figure out a case where a fighter with 4 skill points per level is overpowered. YMMV, of course.
|
|
(unless they really want that extra feat)Anybody who doesn't "really want that extra feat" is not going to play a fighter. Seriously.
I would doubt that. Over their 20 levels, a 3.5 Fighter gets 18 feats. So they end up with 17/18. A PRPG Fighter gets 21 feats, so they end up with 20/21.
If it was a regular character, sure, 6/7 is a much bigger deal. But 17/18 or 20/21 is nothing compared to the 40 skill points you get out of it.
|
|
I just can't figure out a case where a fighter with 4 skill points per level is overpowered. YMMV, of course.
That's a whole 'nother discussion. I've seen the threads about why a Fighter is perfectly balanced with 4+int skill points. I've not been in that camp. I, and my players, are fine with the Fighter as it is. Granted, we're looking more at the PRPG fighter, so that may be skewing things.
The problem is also that Option Y, in your example, is the 'option'. Option X is the standard. If something is going to be overpowered, I would rather have it be the standard then the option. As soon as it becomes the option, that option becomes the standard.
IE: For you, I would suggest making Option Y (the extra skill points) be the new standard, and have the 'bonus feat' be the new sub level.
That doesn't work for me though. I'm fine with the Fighter as it is, and I see this 'option' as overpowered. All I want to figure out is a way to lower the power to make it balanced again, not to argue about whether or not the Fighter 'deserves' these skill points.
I don't think it's a fair trade for ANY of the core class features of the fighter for this class feature. Removing any single class feature other than the feat will seriously compromise the fighters viability as a class. About the only thing I can come up with to make this a 'more balanced' trade is making the fighter sacrifice a second or possibly third feat later in the game... perhaps at 8th level and 16th level.
This is like the beggar on the side of the road being offered to trade his last dollar for free meals for a week. It's an amazing deal and totally out of balance. You are asking us whether it's best to take his shoes or his shirt to make it a balanced deal.
His one feat is the fighters last dollar.
|
|
I don't think it's a fair trade for ANY of the core class features of the fighter for this class feature. Removing any single class feature other than the feat will seriously compromise the fighters viability as a class. About the only thing I can come up with to make this a 'more balanced' trade is making the fighter sacrifice a second or possibly third feat later in the game... perhaps at 8th level and 16th level.
You can't really take away higher-level class feats, though, since the player could just level the Fighter up to the level under that and then multiclass. Ex: You sacrifice 8th level feat, then the player levels up as Fighter until 7th and then multiclasses to Barbarian.
As I said previously, the only other class feature Fighters have is the ability to qualify for the Weapon Specialization tree. You could take that away as well as an appropriate penalty, if you wished.
I think this comparison only works if that same beggar is also getting another dollar every other day. Then giving up that one dollar for free meals for a week (or 20 days, to keep the comparison apt) isn't such a big deal.
You asked for suggestions about what would be a fair trade. I gave you a suggestion but instead of commenting on it you would prefer to bicker about my analogy?
|
Count me as in favor of this sub level. I believe 2 per level is not enough for any class. Also, it seems everyone is harping over 40 more skill points. You're not getting that. You're getting two per level, and if you're continuing all the way to level 20, you're more than likely going to put them in the same two skills to make sure they stay relevant to the DCs. This is an option to expand your choices, not your power. Some people will want the skills, others the feat.
|
|
I didn't blow them off, sorry I came across that way. The 8th and 16th level feats are a good idea, but as its been pointed out, it fails if the Fighter only goes to level 7. Granted, then he's only getting 14 bonus skill points, but I think that's still pretty good compared to a single feat.
As most class substitution levels do, the problem needs to be addressed within the level its taken, but also consider what happens if the class progresses.
Is the original trade off, one feat for extra skill points, fine if the Fighter only takes a single level? Certainly. Is it fine if the fighter takes 20 levels? No. Is it fine if the fighter takes 20 levels and loses two more feats? Yes. Is it fine if the fighter takes 7 levels to get 14 points and only lose one feat? Ehh...probably not.
I think narrowing it down at 1st level would be best. I don't think it's meant to be a sub level that someone would want if they only did a single level dip, I think it's meant to be something for a character focusing on Fighter levels.
You can't really take away higher-level class feats, though, since the player could just level the Fighter up to the level under that and then multiclass. Ex: You sacrifice 8th level feat, then the player levels up as Fighter until 7th and then multiclasses to Barbarian.
The benefits of the feat are spread over the life of the class, why shouldn't the cost be? I do like your suggestion of putting off the fighter specialization benefits but I think it's too expensive for the skill points.
|
|
You can't really take away higher-level class feats, though, since the player could just level the Fighter up to the level under that and then multiclass. Ex: You sacrifice 8th level feat, then the player levels up as Fighter until 7th and then multiclasses to Barbarian.The benefits of the feat are spread over the life of the class, why shouldn't the cost be? I do like your suggestion of putting off the fighter specialization benefits but I think it's too expensive for the skill points.
Maybe make the requirements higher?
Something like
"For purposes of any feat that requires a Fighter level, add +3 to the requirement."
|
|
Karui,
I think you have a good point.
Yes, the ability is 'a good trade'. Giving up 1 feat for up to 40 skill points is a very good offer, and very hard to refuse.
You think that the cost should be higher because it is such a good deal.
I believe that it should be a standard ability because any more cost on the ability will easily 'ruin' the fighter.
Having a more versatile fighter is good. A fighter who gets this ability without the expense of a feat is fine by me. It isn't mechanically broken.
Yes, the ability is getting a lot for one feat, but giving up anymore makes it too expensive. If you reverse it and nobody would make the change, it isn't a very good substitution level, either.
|
|
Thanks for the response. :)
I guess the thing I am trying to get across is that, yes, I agree. This is a fine ability to just *give* to the Fighter, without a trade. I can see why some think it's more than balanced, and they're entitled to it, especially if it's the 3.5 Fighter.
We'll be using the Pathfinder RPG Fighter in our games, and that one is a little bit better, to the point where I have one player wanting to do a pure Fighter. We think the class is fine now. This ability is a no-brainer though, and there's no reason said player wouldn't take it the way it is. Hence why I want to try to 'balance' it. :)