My opinion is that player should be able to decide on target archetype (or build) and than customize it through feats.
So, while the core class abilities of the fighter should make him him more durable and stronger over levels, its the customization angle which should provide a selling point to customers, er, players.
In order to reign in feat suggestion, I would advise to produce a quick list of archetypes suitable for Fighter class, and verify that such fighters are doable.
Example fighter character archetypes:
1. Armored Juggernaut - monstrosity with high defenses and high offenses. Particularly effective against groups.
2. Skirmisher - highly mobile skirmisher with good protection against ranged attacks and attacks. Particularly effective against single opponents.
3. Commander - officer leading armies. Often mounted. Decent offense, defense, diplomatic skills, decent mobility. Particularly effective with morale boosting abilities.
4. Protector - typical MMORPG tank character, i.e. fighter type with high defense, high hitpoint reservoir, ability to withstand SoD. Particularly effective at stopping opponent advance (Attacks of opportunity, Trip, Bash and so on).
5. Sheriff - self-sufficient fighter. Jack of all weapons and master techniques, able to self-heal, decent in all fighter areas.Also, there are special aspect of fighter which should be important part of possible character development - these are not archetypes per se, rather aspects to be added to basic archetypes as per player wishes:
1. Arcane - fighter capable of shrugging off magic attacks.
2. Siege - fighter capable of operating siege machines.
3. Mounted - warhorse rider. Knows how to protect his mount from high level offense.There are various ways to implement this, one could for example design talent trees (a fighter chooses a few talent trees and bonus feats are added automatically at certain character levels):
- Arcane Protector, Siege Skirmisher or Mounted SheriffAnother thing is do define feat pools and assign...
Man, I love to hear that there is more to "Fighters" than just Protectors (as you put them) Protecting party members is a useful skill, but it is not the only concept for the battle trained warriors. In most 3.5 games my Fighters feel like crash test dummies. I get into the wreck,get mangled, so some yuppie punk doesnt bruise his shin in an accident. at least crash test dummies are mindless and dont care that they fill a crummy role.
IF your going to deal some damage your going to take some hits, I hope
back to the point, I like your archetypes and fully support building the Fighter class to fulfill these concepts
The take home message here is that we cannot playtest the fighter before the Feats chapter is up for review.
When the feat chapter comes out, we will almost certainly have to revisit the fighter.
I'm perfectly happy banishing Feat pre-reqs at my table— and I agree completely with Squirreloid's assessment that each feat needs to be centralized. No chains— just universal pre-reqs.
Would anyone care to defend the concept of feat chains as they stand? I feel they trap for new players (my biggest gripe), they take us a huge amount of space through redundancy, they require a lot of reading to grasp the nuances. If you replace them with requirements that everyone has in some capacity (BAB, Ability Scores, Caster Level), the feats stay balanced (and reverse compatible) but you avoid the negatives.
I guess we're gonna have to take this up in a few weeks when feats come up for review. However, I'll stress that I don't think any meaningful playtest of the fighter can happen until we looks at feats.
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games
|
[quote"Jason Nelson"]
I agree in principle here. I might spread it out slighly more like so:1st feat - basic application
2nd feat - scaling improvement
3rd feat - icing on the cakeIn fact, it might be better to call these feats 1, 2A, and 2B, because you could take one without the other.
In the case of TWF, this would basically be:
1st feat - Ambidexterity (in the 3.0 sense) and TWF - you can use a weapon equally well with either hand, and you can do basic TWF. I might even add TW Defense as a basic feature.
2nd feat - All BAB-scaled increases to attack (ITWF, GTWF, Supreme TWF, Extra-Gnarly-Mega-TWF, whatever) and defense (ITWD, etc.)
3rd feat - TW Rend, TW Pounce, Double Slice, and whatever other TWF doo-dads are out there that I'm too lazy to go look up
Look, the diff between 2 feats and 3 is not huge, but adds comparative value to the fighter vs. other martial classes, in that they are best able to do the big stacks and more of them.
See here is where I completely disagree. Unless I pick it before 6th level, your first feat will aways seem too little too late. The point is any feat should make you feel good about taking it no matter what level you take it. I don't mind one building on another other as long as the first one is always good no matter what.
This "well I'll take this so I can get that" has got to go. There are no spells which are prerequisites for other spells are there? In the real world where most players don't get past 10th level, using up 3 feats to finally do their main shtick well is cruel.
My final point is that fighters are supposed to my multi-faceted jack of all trade warriors, this means that they should be freaking cool at manythings not just sort of cool at many or really good at one and not even worth mentioning in the rest.
I too made a charge monkey once and while if is charge hit it could often take something nearly down, once he couldn't charge he might as have not even been there. I don't want to play a fighter like that again.
...
I suppose the market research supports you, that most campaigns end by 10th. My experience would seem to be unusual, in that most campaigns go to high teens or even early 20s. Maybe that colors my view of looking at the whole 20+ level span. If the presumptive typical character doesn't go past 10th, then maybe the way WotC build the basic suite of SRD fighter feats made sense. You didn't need to worry about what kind of feat ability a high-level fighter would want because high-level fighters effectively don't exist. Which is bleah but I suppose makes sense.
Also, perhaps I've played in campaigns where, because of regional feats, racial feats, and that kind of stuff, people have more feats than is typical, especially stacked at lower levels, so 3 feats vs. 2 doesn't seem too much.
For that matter, I still like the basic principle that:
1 feat gives you basic training and skill in a technique
2 feats makes you an expert in a technique
3 feats makes you a master of a technique
The absolute limit on any kind of feat group (I hesitate to even call it a chain or tree because it's one root with two branches) should be 3.
Three is the number, and the number shall be three. The number shall not be four, nor shall it be two, save that it then go on to three. Five is right out. Nine, like my uber-charging cohort, is beyond the pale.
A 6th level paladin or barbarian or rogue, for instance, who wanted to focus on combat could be a master of one technique (say mounted combat, or THF, or archery).
A 6th level fighter could be a master of one style AND an expert in two more (say, mounted combat and THF and archery).
Now, I'm not married to the concept, and I don't disagree with the notion that, if feats ARE a fighter's class abilities, then each one of them should do something cool. I think your basic training (first feat) SHOULD be something cool. But, I also don't mind rewarding specialization, and making [level/BAB scaling] and [special tricks that are not necessarily directly scaled] into two separate feats. It gives the fighter another leg up on other martial characters in their greater ability to do more scaled stuff.
Now, that means that those other classes need more differentiation so that they aren't just trying to do the fighter's same thing only worse. That comes with customization of those classes, not with making them good at the same thing the fighter is already good at.
So simplifying the fighter... instead of giving him tons and tons of feats many that do little or just build up to other feats how about lowering the number of feats he gets but making each individual feat scale and eventually be more powerful.
For example have Weapon Focus at 1st level auto upgrade at BAB +4 to Weap Spec, then grtr WF, then grtr WS at the appropriate levels. So it's one feat that is equivalent to 4 and it's no more powerful than if you took the 4 feats separately.
Since you have now freed up 3 feats remove some of the fighter bonus feats from the game, perhaps switch it to 1/ 4 levels. The fighter would have fewer feats but more power and more options overall. You could still have other feats require the core feat but they would be more like shrubs than trees.
You want a player that is good at TWF then you need exactly one feat. He could take additional feats at higher level but the core TWF feat would be good throughout the game.
Feats like Weapon Focus should limit their benefits for non-martial classes, or delay them.
The downside is that this is not entirely backwards compatible :( Overall though it makes creating characters much easier.
While I like the idea of Weapon Focus upgrading (and Weapon Specialisation etc.), I don't think that wholesale feat conflation is a good idea. For instance, while I'm happy for TWF/ITWF/GTWF to all be one feat, I wouldn't throw in TW Defence, especially if that also scaled up to +3 at the same rate as TWF.
While I like the idea of Weapon Focus upgrading (and Weapon Specialisation etc.), I don't think that wholesale feat conflation is a good idea. For instance, while I'm happy for TWF/ITWF/GTWF to all be one feat, I wouldn't throw in TW Defence, especially if that also scaled up to +3 at the same rate as TWF.
Well my thinking is that rather than polluting the feat pool with dead/ lame feats we should have fewer feats that are individually more powerful. It is not arbitrary 'conflation' because we would remove the fighter bonus feats from the game. To compensate for the power gain of individual feats.
The other thing I would like to see is some way for fighters to be more than just "Big Man in Tin Suit poke things with pointy stick". The fighter needs some more flexibility if he is ever going to be relevant in the game. Barbarians have seen an increase in flexibility, rangers and paladins have always been a bit more flexible, the fighter needs to be able to branch out into doing more than just dishing out melee/ ranged damage. I'm not sure how we can do that though.
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games
|
So simplifying the fighter... instead of giving him tons and tons of feats many that do little or just build up to other feats how about lowering the number of feats he gets but making each individual feat scale and eventually be more powerful. So the fighter takes Weapon Focus at 1st level at BAB +4 it auto upgrades to Weap Spec, then grtr WF, then grtr WS. So it's one feat that is equivalent to 4 and it's no more powerful than if you took the 4 feats separately. Then remove some of the fighter bonus feats from the game, perhaps switch it to 1/ 4 levels. The fighter would have fewer feats but more power and more options overall. You could still have other feats require the core feat but they would be more like shrubs than trees.
You want a player that is good at TWF then you need exactly one feat. He could take additional feats at higher level but the core TWF feat would be good throughout the game.
Feats like Weapon Focus should limit their benefits for non-martial classes, or delay them.
The downside is that this is not entirely backwards compatible :( Overall though it makes creating characters much easier.
You don't even have to reduce the number of feats.
What you are enabling is increasing variety without directly increasing the power of any one of them.
Instead of spending 9 feats to super-optimize one tactic, and then having to use that same tactic over and over and over again because your other options are so weak by comparison, you can actually have a versatile combatant who can do different things and respond to different situations with different tactics AND BE GOOD AT EACH OF THEM.
We accept that a high-level cleric can both raise the dead and kill with a spell and be good at both. That they can both create a wall of whirling blades of force and also call up their deity on the phone and ask them questions, and be good at both. That they can both call down strikes and storms of holy fire and create an all-day Happy Meal that makes you immune to fear and poison and does a bunch of other stuff, and be good at both. That they can super-charge themselves to be uber-warriors and travel the planes and be good at both. That they can smite the undead and heal their comrades and be good at both.
And there is a laundry list of effects I didn't even mention.
If we accept in the game that some characters are allowed to be good at a great variety of things, why do we insist that fighters should have to invest most or all of their class abilities (extra feats) just to be good at ONE?
So that's a long diatribe, but in sum I'd say:
1. Yes, make feats better in toto.
2. Yes, make fighters better able to use feats that already exist (scaling Weapon Focus and Wpn Spec have been mentioned before, by me and others)
3. No, DON'T reduce the number of feats a fighter gets.
4. MAYBE make every feat self-contained. I have some other ideas here, noted above, but I could come around to "every feat is its own feat" as a concept.
One of my essential rules of good DMing: "It's not a crime for the PCs to be good at something."
You don't even have to reduce the number of feats.
What you are enabling is increasing variety without directly increasing the power of any one of them.
I'll buy that... One of my gripes about feats is that players are often confused about why to take one. New players just don't get that power attack is great. My only issue is that by 12th level or so every fighter is good at everything fighting wise. While this is not terrible, it sort of takes the variety out of the class.
It also opens up the opportunity to add feats like this (Stolen from the Psionics section of the SRD)
Stand Still [General]
You can prevent foes from fleeing or closing.
Prerequisite Str 13.
Benefit: When a foe’s movement out of a square you threaten grants you an attack of opportunity, you can give up that attack and instead attempt to stop your foe in his tracks. Make your attack of opportunity normally. If you hit your foe, he must succeed on a Reflex save against a DC of 10 + your damage roll (the opponent does not actually take damage), or immediately halt as if he had used up his move actions for the round.Since you use the Stand Still feat in place of your attack of opportunity, you can do so only a number of times per round equal to the number of times per round you could make an attack of opportunity (normally just one).
Normal Attacks of opportunity cannot halt your foes in their tracks.
Combine this with a reach weapon and Combat Reflexes and suddenly fighters can control movement over large parts of the battlefield. Other feats that give the fighter/ martial character control over melee would be great.
1. Yes, make feats better in toto.
2. Yes, make fighters better able to use feats that already exist (scaling Weapon Focus and Wpn Spec have been mentioned before, by me and others)
3. No, DON'T reduce the number of feats a fighter gets.
4. MAYBE make every feat self-contained. I have some other ideas here, noted above, but I could come around to "every feat is its own feat" as a concept.
One of my essential rules of good DMing: "It's not a crime for the PCs to be good at something."
I second: To each feat it's own Mechanic.
In my world, where feats are never pre-reqs for other feats, I still have proficiency, attack bonus, caster level, ability score, class ability, skill ranks to work with. This means I have to deal with certain feats that are just "stages of magnitude," such as Spell Focus and Greater Spell Focus; Weapon Focus and Greater Weapon Focus.
Pathfinder Beta's Dodge feat sets an interesting precedent. Why not make Weapon Focus turn into Greater Weapon Focus at Base attack 10? If all feats that are stages of magnitude were folded into single feats, the whole conundrum gets a lot easier. You can even go the route of Dodge and require some kind of optional investment (10 ranks in Acrobatics) to get the second stage of the feat.
Some more examples:
Arcane Armor Training becomes arcane armor Mastery at BaB +8 or so.
Wind Stance Becomes Lightning Stance at base attack 11.
The important thing is to get rid of the purely conceptual links, like Dodge to Mobility. Sure, they "feel similar" but it should be strictly limited to stages of magnitude, and there is no such link there. For example, if my first-level character concept is an elven sniper, the obvious feat choice is Far Shot. And it's not imbalanced in the least... but I have to take Point Blank Shot First? Why?
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games
|
Stand Still [General]I've mentioned that before, and there's another feat I first saw in the Dragonstar player book titled Pressing Attack which allow you to take an immediate five foot step when someone five foot steps outside of the area you threaten to move so you are threatening them again.
I believe there is an Eberron feat called "Pursue" or "Pursuit" that also lets you make an immediate 5' step when someone 5' steps away from you. It makes you spend an action point to use it, which is a little silly to me. You already spent ONE resource on the ability (the feat slot); seems like a double-tax.
Stand Still would be a good feat, esp. combined with Hold the Line.
Actually, the two effects do appear as a combined feat called "Large and in Charge" (one of the great feat names ever) in the Draconomicon.
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
You spend your whole career fighting, and in the twilight you suddenly are unaffected by blows from more-mortal-men. Just doesn't sit right.
You know, we could make it one of a couple options, and have it be around DR 20/something obscure, like Mistletoe or Being hit in the Ankle (requires a sunder attempt?).
Very cool. So, if I'm one of these two thousand orcs with greatswords, I'm going to start peeling this guy out of his armor. Sunder attempts on the armor, and when it falls, there goes the damage reduction. (Keeps rust monsters kind of a threat, too.)
Now all we have to deal with is a pissed-off 19th Level Fighter.
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games
|
You spend your whole career fighting, and in the twilight you suddenly are unaffected by blows from more-mortal-men. Just doesn't sit right.You know, we could make it one of a couple options, and have it be around DR 20/something obscure, like Mistletoe or Being hit in the Ankle (requires a sunder attempt?).Very cool. So, if I'm one of these two thousand orcs with greatswords, I'm going to start peeling this guy out of his armor. Sunder attempts on the armor, and when it falls, there goes the damage reduction. (Keeps rust monsters kind of a threat, too.)
Now all we have to deal with is a pissed-off 19th Level Fighter.
I've been puzzled by all the references to sundering armor, since the rules specifically state that you CAN'T sunder armor. Shield, yes. Armor, no. (PH p. 158.)
But then I looked in the PF Beta and I don't see that specific prohibition (PF Beta p. 151).
Interesting. I wonder if that was intentional or if it was an oversight.
Of course, it's probably a moot point, since while the fighter has DR 15/-, the armor he's wearing (presumably +5 at 19th level) has hardness of 20, so they have even less chance of cutting through that without adamantine greatswords...
|
|
You spend your whole career fighting, and in the twilight you suddenly are unaffected by blows from more-mortal-men. Just doesn't sit right.You know, we could make it one of a couple options, and have it be around DR 20/something obscure, like Mistletoe or Being hit in the Ankle (requires a sunder attempt?).Very cool. So, if I'm one of these two thousand orcs with greatswords, I'm going to start peeling this guy out of his armor. Sunder attempts on the armor, and when it falls, there goes the damage reduction. (Keeps rust monsters kind of a threat, too.)
Now all we have to deal with is a pissed-off 19th Level Fighter.
I've been puzzled by all the references to sundering armor, since the rules specifically state that you CAN'T sunder armor. Shield, yes. Armor, no. (PH p. 158.)
But then I looked in the PF Beta and I don't see that specific prohibition (PF Beta p. 151).
Interesting. I wonder if that was intentional or if it was an oversight.
Of course, it's probably a moot point, since while the fighter has DR 15/-, the armor he's wearing (presumably +5 at 19th level) has hardness of 20, so they have even less chance of cutting through that without adamantine greatswords...
You can indeed sunder armor in PRPG. There are specific rules for armor gaining the broken condition.
Of course, any respectable armor wielder would have a special material to increase hardness.
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games
|
Spending an action point for that is sad. Large and In Charge sounds like a decent feat effects wise, although I doubt the prerequisites are fair. The Dragonstar one does have the advantage of being OGL though.
I believe there is an Eberron feat called "Pursue" or "Pursuit" that also lets you make an immediate 5' step when someone 5' steps away from you. It makes you spend an action point to use it, which is a little silly to me. You already spent ONE resource on the ability (the feat slot); seems like a double-tax.Stand Still would be a good feat, esp. combined with Hold the Line.
Actually, the two effects do appear as a combined feat called "Large and in Charge" (one of the great feat names ever) in the Draconomicon.
Oh, the prereqs are fair. Quite simple really.
The first prereq is that you be Large.
And the second?
You gotta be In Charge! Oh yeahhhh!!!
(honestly, you just need size Large and 10'+ reach)
Effect is you take AoO, you inflict damage, AND you make an opposed STR check (+4/size difference) with a +1 bonus/5 hp damage. Win and you boot them back into the square they just left and their movement is DONE. Done baby!!!
Sorry, just getting excited... :)
Oh, the prereqs are fair. Quite simple really.
The first prereq is that you be Large.
And the second?
You gotta be In Charge! Oh yeahhhh!!!
(honestly, you just need size Large and 10'+ reach)
Effect is you take AoO, you inflict damage, AND you make an opposed STR check (+4/size difference) with a +1 bonus/5 hp damage. Win and you boot them back into the square they just left and their movement is DONE. Done baby!!!
Nice... problem is most PCs aren't size large ;)
|
Example fighter character archetypes:
1. Armored Juggernaut - monstrosity with high defenses and high offenses. Particularly effective against groups.
2. Skirmisher - highly mobile skirmisher with good protection against ranged attacks and attacks. Particularly effective against single opponents.
3. Commander - officer leading armies. Often mounted. Decent offense, defense, diplomatic skills, decent mobility. Particularly effective with morale boosting abilities.
4. Protector - typical MMORPG tank character, i.e. fighter type with high defense, high hitpoint reservoir, ability to withstand SoD. Particularly effective at stopping opponent advance (Attacks of opportunity, Trip, Bash and so on).
5. Sheriff - self-sufficient fighter. Jack of all weapons and master techniques, able to self-heal, decent in all fighter areas.Also, there are special aspect of fighter which should be important part of possible character development - these are not archetypes per se, rather aspects to be added to basic archetypes as per player wishes:
1. Arcane - fighter capable of shrugging off magic attacks.
2. Siege - fighter capable of operating siege machines.
3. Mounted - warhorse rider. Knows how to protect his mount from high level offense.
I love this.
Why dont we give the Fighter one of these abilities
*catching ones breath- a number of times per day equal to CON bonus +1, a Fighter can take a standard action (which does not provoke) to heal a number of hitpoint equal to twice his level+ his CON score
*Fighter Specialization- as long as a Fighter remains single class, he can chose one weapon. He is +1 to hit, +2 to damage, a may make a additional attack as a full round action with a -3 to all attacks. (this is to have a fighter like he was in 2nd ed...he was cool then) at any point a level of another class in taken, this become a regular weapon focus feat.
*Morning training- after resting, the Fighter may reassign any one feat at first level after 30 minutes of practice. The Feat stays fixed until he reassigns it (as per gaining it), he gains the ability to do this for two feats at 10th level and three at 20th
I say this because i just built a fighter who had around 16 feats and when all was said and done, he was just OK. (when you have to waste a to not draw attacks of opportunity for punching a guy, they go fast)
Feats are not the only answer to making the Fighter exciting, their image is to damaged for that to work (P.S. my Fighter build is the first Fighter my group has even though about using. Im not even sure Im excited about it)