|
Well said, KaeYoss.
I'm of the opinion that fighters should be able to utilize feats more effectively than others, as proposed in The Book of Experimental Might II. The feat "boosts" plus the bonuses that you get for choosing a feat as a fighter bonus feat made the class a lot more interesting, and also made sure to cement the idea that fighters are just plain better at fighting than everybody else.
EDIT: On a side note, I rarely ever get the first post on the second page ;)
1. There is nothing built into the Fighter's class that requires the Fighter to choose feats/skills that are easily usable outside of combat. Even if you increase the number of skill points available or feats available, a Fighter's player may still be inclined to put them into skills and feats that make a fighter a more powerful threat in combat. Unlike other classes, the fighter does not have any obvious class features which are desirable to have in combat and are also useful/desirable out of combat.
From a combat min-max perspective, I do not have any incentive to put any resources into skills and feats that are easily usable outside of combat. For virtually every other class, even if I min-max for combat, some of my class features I use in combat will also be easily usable outside of combat.
Quite to the contrary, not only is there nothing that requires the Fighter to choose feats/skills that are applicable outside of combat, there's practically NO WAY for a single-classed Fighter to acquire non-combat abilities without degrading the Fighter's raison d'etre. Adding skill ranks (feats are for Fighting) poses the least burden on changing the essence of a Fighter while still providing options for use in non-combat situations at the PLAYER'S discretion and/or taste. What's so god-awful about that?
|
If the vanilla metaphor is not for you, use bread. Nothing fancy, but you can eat it every day for decades, it's filling, and if done right, quite good! Keep your ciabatta-with-herbs-and-currants.
On a tangent, this metaphor amuses me after having read the story of Regdar being nicknamed Captain Whitebread by the 3rd edition design team.
I don't see the point of complaining about a single class when you can freely multiclass or take prestige & paragon classes. Its certainly possible to be a fighter crafter if you don't gimp intelligence and\or take some craft feats.
Fighters are efficient and a known quantity. If you don't like it take another class or multiclass. Don't try to change the fighter. Spread your feats into something not fighting based. Don't try to change the fighter. There just isn't a real barrier to mixing elements together in your class makeup.
Btw... I like that first level feat GeraintElberion. Name? Page?
Sigurd
|
|
I don't see the point of complaining about a single class when you can freely multiclass.
But it certainly has a point when there is a stigma in your group against multiclassing. When your DM calls you a munchkin for only taking two levels of fighter, or taking one level of a third class. Some people thought multiclassing penalties were a good idea after all.
|
I know blind adherence to game balance isn't good. You just end up with 4th Edition and if I was playing that I wouldn't be here. But something needs to be done, right? So what do we think? My best guess is that the Fighter needs special attacks which in one way or another mimic the effect that...
Others have some thoughtful insights above, but I wanted to say that it sounds like you've answered your own question. I think balance spoils the game. Fighters are cool because they just wade in and kill - that appeals to some people in the same way tossing fireballs or backstabbing - I mean sneak attacking - someone appeals to others.
That said, I like the fighter only bonuses that Monte added to the SRD feats in The Book of Experimental Might (like Hunterofthedusk mentions above)...makes killing even deadlier.
"He who controls the spice controls the galaxy."
If you can kill something you have power over it. Physical prowess is not just a combat related skill.
There is no requirement that you spend every thought on combat. That people do is mostly because that is what they really want to do.
Man up and play the character you like, by the rules. Don't worry about other people if everyone knows you're playing fair.
Have fun.
I don't want to see a Fighter "fix". I'd rather see a new class that makes people who don't like the Fighter happy.
I thought it would be worth adding that fighters can make really great social characters, despite usually dumping charisma & having only one social skill as a class skill. With the changes to how skills work, I was able to build a very useful social fighter- because if anyone has feats to spare, it's the fighter.
Stats (15 point buy): Str 18 (+2), Dex 12, Con 12, Int 12, Wis 9, Cha 10
Skills (5): Diplomacy, Intimidate, Linguistics, Perception, Use Magic Device
Feats (in order): Intimidating Prowess, Persuasive, Skill Focus (Use Magic Device)
By using his favored class ability to add 1 to his skills you end up with 5 very useful skills. Linguistics is amazing because it expands your languages spoken (I'm told it also helps you read things), but 20 ranks might be over-kill for some players. I recommend dipping into the muscle skills (acrobatics, swim, climb) to activate your class skill bonuses. When you're done with linguistics, just switch back to HP or start picking up Survival.
Best of all, Use Magic Device becomes very usable around level 11, when you *should* be taking the Skill Focus feat. Sure, you can pimp out all of your skills by taking things like Skill Focus (Diplomacy), Magical Aptitude, and Alertness, but I wanted to build a fighter that required only a minimal investment into her skills and rocked at them. Also, a level of rogue would do *wonders* for this build, but it sorta defeats the purpose.
Heh, we did have one of those Loopy, it just scarred you for life. :P
Exactly. At least it'd be easy to just ban the damned thing if it turns out to be a Frankenstein's Monster.
Heh, we did have one of those Loopy, it just scarred you for life. :P
For some of of that was not a fix. Made a nice manga/wuxia style game I guess but not a fix, not at all
heh true, but many of the powers were magical, but it looked neat for something wuixa or bleach-like really but not a fighter.
Oh the book had some good stuff, just not what I was wanting for a fighter, If I want spells and limited resources I have that a plenty
But for folks that liked it, cool, but some of use don't want the fighter to be something he is not.
Now new feats and alt ablitys to trade for weapon and armor training I can get behind however.
|
This has been interesting and way more popular than I imagined. Posters seem to fall in two categories.
1) Fighter is fine how it is, no matter that it can't match up to other classes. Most of these seem to people who simply value the RP space that Fighters occupy. Some seem to be, no offense intended, blind to the problem.
2) Those who think that changes are needed. These seem to fall into two more categories:
2a) Add some special in combat and out of combat abilities to the Fighters repertoire.
2b) Make a new class with new toys.
I'm fine with the RP reasoning to be in group 1. I can't understand those who don't think that there is a mechanical issue with the class. I've been reading through the DPR Olympics for a while, which someone upthread mentioned. The Fighter does make it up near the top but part of that is based on the rules of the Olympics. Clerics have a lot of buffs that have a duration of less than 10 minutes per level which is the threshold for that game. And they have a lot of spells per day so they can use those buffs.
|
|
Whats wrong with say: "At 4th level and every 4 levels thereafter, a fighter may exchange his bonus feat for a Fighter Maneuver." they might look something like this:
You spin beneath your enemy’s guard with a long, powerful cut,
and then sweep your leg through his an instant later to knock him
head over heels.
Once per encounter when using a weapon with which the Fighter was Weapon Focus as a full round action you deal normal weapon damage and you knock the target prone.
Thats basically an encounter power for lvl 1 Fighters in 4th Edition. It gives the Fighter an interesting ability in addition to hitting a guy. Other things could be added that also offer utility and mimic magical effects but are done entirely with a fighters weapon.
eh thats a feat sounds like to me. I do not want the fighter to have x/use powers. You have classes for that
|
|
eh thats a feat sounds like to me. I do not want the fighter to have x/use powers. You have classes for that
Well if its a feat it has to be Prerequisite: Fighter Lvl 4 like Weapon Specialization or other fighter only feats.
Either way, this is the kind of stuff I'm talking about. Stuff that adds to the fighters utility add allows him to do interesting things.
The Fighter, at its core, shouldn't have any innate magical per day abilities. The Fighter is balanced the way it is; it just doesn't meet the needs of some players or DMs. I would hate the the Fighter to be transmogrified into anything even resembling Tome of Battle.
Leave my Fighter alone. Make something else that fits your game better.
If that seems myopic to you, then you're a bit myopic yourself.
I am fine with fighter only feat, just leave em non magical.
Well YuenglingDragon, me thinks you've solved your own problem; how that pans out for the rest of the board who's to say. But, basically, why *not* cook up a handful of feats that let the fighter rock-out some fun moves? Run them by your GM, certainly not EVERY GM has to play canon/official rules, and as long as they're on par with similar feats/abilities for other classes at other levels, it works.
As to the feel for the discussion, I feel for the folks who think the fighter could fight better, and should fight better than the other classes. Makes sense to me.
But, it is a "fighter", its action is in its name. He fights. Hence, I don't get folks who want flashy toys for the fighter. I just want the classes to do what they do, and do it well. Paladins kill evil, they should kill evil better than anyone. Rangers hunt, they should hunt better than anyone. Fighters fight, and outside of the (narrow) areas where others are meant to shine, the fighter should simply fight better than anyone.
And, to wrap up my thoughts, a series of feats that react off magical gear seems not only sweet, but right in line with the base concept of a "fighter".
Fighters fight
That's So Rocky Balboa! And that's pretty much all he does too, and he is AWESOME!
The fighter has no problem the way he is, there are several martial classes that are worse (Barbarian I'm looking at you). And still nobody seems to have an issue with it.
Conan is a Barbarian/Fighter mostly and he doesn't need magical crap to kick everyone's ass, nor does Gimly, nor Azoun, nor Batman (he does a little) and all that. They do FIGHT and they rock even more because of it!
...nor Batman (he does a little)
Eh, Bat's is rogue, with a level or two in fighter or monk for some b$$##ing extra feats and a HP boost.
|
|
Conan is a Barbarian/Fighter mostly and he doesn't need magical crap to kick everyone's ass, nor does Gimly, nor Azoun, nor Batman (he does a little) and all that. They do FIGHT and they rock even more because of it!
Which is fine if you're not playing with too many levels. It's hard to play a warrior that doesn't need magic crap to kick ass in a game that requires you to have magic crap after a certain point in character progression.
Anyway, I won't waste any more of your time. Arguing about it won't get any of us anywhere.
Conan, went to high level and he still ran for his life from magic. His plan was to kill the wizard first as the magic was his death if the wizard got the spell off.
But the magic system was different then what pathfinder uses. But still Conan ran from wizards he only fought them if he had no other way to get away
They don't fight as good as the fighter mate. The thing is, I think that if u need something else than fighting Multiclass. There's a lot of possibilities there.
But what you think would be a nice "fix"? I'm all ears.
ya know they are gonna say something Bo9S like right?
can not say I like it. Seems to pigeon holed and always the same for the fighter to me. It has some nice items that would make ok feats or alt armor or weapon training but over all it's not what I want in a fighter
Personally, I've been thinking about borrowing an idea from WoW and giving the fighters 'battle stances' instead of the weapon training and armor mastery that they currently get. The stances would allow the fighter to have different 'modes' he could go into depending on the situation and the role that he wants to fill in the party.
There would be a standard 'combat stance' which would give attack, damage, and cmb bonuses equal to the current weapon training abilities. Another would be a 'defensive stance' which would give damage reduction and evasion as long as he's wearing armor or using a shield. Whenever he's in defensive stance, any opponent he hits or uses an intimidate check against would be forced to attack him for for a certain number of rounds, allowing him to 'tank'. Sure, tanking isn't something I think should be made nessissary in pathfinder, but I think the option should be there. One more stance would probably need to be added in for variety, but I haven't been able to think of something that wouldn't enter barbarian rage territory.
At least, that's the house rule that I've been thinking of adding in, but maybe I've just played too much Wow in the past XD
Really? That's a unique opinion of it from what I've seen so far. Interesting. I think I see where you are comings from, in that it does emphasize the 'fighter fights' idea.
I did however like the 6 skill points. I always at lest give them 4, but six like a ranger is nice, it always bugged the hell out of me a freaking barbarian getting more. I also liked the expanded skill list.
Other then that I didn't care for it. But that part is good. I may try 6 and see how that goes but I have used 4 skills and an expanded class skill list for about 8 years
Edit: The reason I did not like, was alot of the ablitys were just like feats, but per chosen for me and ones I could not change. Leading to the same build and less room to make the fighter I want. I also do not want a fighter having per/hour , day or what have you powers. He is not a caster and does not have rage
Yeah it's a bit unreal how 4/level and even a slightly expanded class skill list makes a difference . Also I would like to see his fighter at some point, he does have some interesting ideals.
Whenever he's in defensive stance, any opponent he hits or uses an intimidate check against would be forced to attack him for for a certain number of rounds, allowing him to 'tank'.
How would that work fluff-wise? Forcing someone to do actions has a very supernatural feeling to it, in the lines of Dominate. I'd say it would be better in that case to for example give him more AoO's, because then people wouldn't WANT to run past him.
|
|
I made my Google Group public, so you should be able to see it here. The initial feat swaps seem excessive, but let you build any fighter you want without useless armor/shield proficiencies.
Thanks, I don't care for alot of what he has done, but he has some nice things there
Whenever he's in defensive stance, any opponent he hits or uses an intimidate check against would be forced to attack him for for a certain number of rounds, allowing him to 'tank'.How would that work fluff-wise? Forcing someone to do actions has a very supernatural feeling to it, in the lines of Dominate. I'd say it would be better in that case to for example give him more AoO's, because then people wouldn't WANT to run past him.
You're right about that. I guess the idea is that the fighter would be 'taunting' opponents into attacking him, trying to distrat their attention from the rest of the party. The opponent would probably get to make a will save (or maybe sense motive, or some other check simmilar to a feint), and if another party member attacked the opponent while the 'taunt' was in effect, he would get to make another save with a bonus.
The AoO idea works too if you think forcing someone to change targets seems supernatural. Another possibility would be an attack penalty for attacking anyone other than the fighter.
For tanking, the knight had an ability I really liked. The ability to take attacks of opportunity against people who attack the person he is guarding. I know many GMs hate all the Person X must attack Person Y in 4e.
As for the current fighter, I like it. The only major change I would do is 4 skill points, though I would do that for all the 2 skill point classes. A slightly expanded skill list wouldn't be bad either, perhaps a choice of 3-4 different lists with a couple skills on them like:
streetwise: (sense motive, bluff, knowledge(local))
noble: (knowlege nobility, diplomacy)
Also, profession as class skill, mostly for profession(soldier)
I don't really think the fighter needs changing though.
For tanking, the knight had an ability I really liked. The ability to take attacks of opportunity against people who attack the person he is guarding. I know many GMs hate all the Person X must attack Person Y in 4e.
As for the current fighter, I like it. The only major change I would do is 4 skill points, though I would do that for all the 2 skill point classes. A slightly expanded skill list wouldn't be bad either, perhaps a choice of 3-4 different lists with a couple skills on them like:
streetwise: (sense motive, bluff, knowledge(local))
noble: (knowlege nobility, diplomacy)Also, profession as class skill, mostly for profession(soldier)
I don't really think the fighter needs changing though.
Yea, the more I think about it, the more I think just AoO would work better for 'tanking' purposes. Maybe combine that with a defense bonus for nearby party members so that he can provide some sort of defense against ranged attackers as well, making him into portable cover.
I agree that 2 skill points for the fighter is a bit low. Low skill points makes a class less interesting outside of combat, you have to give them something to do other than bashing heads in.
As for the current fighter, I like it. The only major change I would do is 4 skill points, though I would do that for all the 2 skill point classes. A slightly expanded skill list wouldn't be bad either, perhaps a choice of 3-4 different lists with a couple skills on them like:
streetwise: (sense motive, bluff, knowledge(local))
noble: (knowlege nobility, diplomacy)
A 'slightly expanded skill list' still pigeon holes a player's options for a class with very few non-combat options to begin with. Fighters come with only 10 class skills (placing it only ahead of the Sorcerer), and no non-combat class features. Adding a CHOICE of 2 additional class skills (as a class ability) lets the player determine his out-of-combat role in the group, instead of having to cobble from an already slim skill list (or, why shouldn't the Fighter have Diplomacy and Sense Motive as class skills if he wants to fulfill those roles?).
I'm against more combat options for Fighters. Pathfinder Fighters are damn good, uhhr, fighters.
Edit: Yeah, 4 or 6 skills per level would contribute greatly to out-of-combat roles, even above an expanded class skill list (but both together go hand-in-glove).
|
|
The thing is, I think that if u need something else than fighting Multiclass. There's a lot of possibilities there.
See people say this but multiclassing is wildly imperfect. It's great for a 1 or 2 level dip but not for mixing a pair of classes. There are some abilities that a multiclassing character doesn't need or will take so long to get really good that you'd rather just skip them entirely to get more of the stuff you want. Bloodlines are like this. My fighter could take Sorcerer levels to give him some spells to buff himself and whatnot but what Bloodline is useful for a Fighter? I sure don't need claws, I have a falchion. I'd like wings but I'll never get to 15th level in Sorcerer to get them. I'd rather just give up the entire feature to keep more interesting fighter stuff in a revised and expanded class in the APG or a brand new one that gets nice things.
A Man in Black put it well above, the Fighter has been defined as a less complete character than any other class. It might be the best of the martial classes at damage per round in general but it fails at out of combat stuff unless you put an undesirable amount of resources into it. At which point you might as well have just played a Barbarian.