|
I'm against more combat options for Fighters. Pathfinder Fighters are damn good, uhhr, fighters.
Only in situations where they are allowed to be.
Let me give you an example. My game yesterday featured a big bad with DR, fast healing and flight. Bear in mind that the party was 3 level 2's and a level 1. The big bad either could not fly very fast or the DM made her not fly very fast to give us a chance but we got a few hits in before she was too high to reach without a DC 40 jump test. However, with her fast healing and DR those hits were erased. She spammed fear effects and channeled negative energy and we were in trouble. Now maybe a Fighter would have had a composite bow to make a few attacks but without feats in it his damage would also probably be erased by her DR and fast healing. If it were not for the casting ability of my Summoner who was able to enlarge the Druid who then made a reasonable jump test and grappled her, we'd have been screwed.
This kind of stuff happens and the Fighter needs items to be able to match the abilities other classes have just for existing.
At which point you might as well have just played a Barbarian.
And be half as good as the Fighter in combat. It's a good option, u get nice stuff, but you won't excell in what u proposed to do, which was to fight.
|
|
Actually, I think that the Fighter needs more out-of-combat and in-combat utility. More skills and a somewhat expanded list mostly deals with the first part. Feats can help boost some skills further.
I'm also concerned about in-combat versatility, doing the kinds of things other classes do by adding "martial powers," things that mimic the special things that others do while keeping the focus on the smashy smashy.
I'm not actually looking to fix the fighter myself. I'm not making and home brew or anything. I'm just using the space as a sounding board for everyone to chime in with because when the APg comes out I hope it shows a bit of love to second and third tier classes that could use it.
Well, I would like to see some stuff too, like feats for specific weapons and weapon styles and such. I think some diferent maneuvers as feats would be nice too.
But I wouldn't like anything too flashy.
GRIFFIN KILLER (Combat)
You are expert at shooting flying opponents in a place where you are able to bring them crashing to earth.
Prerequisites:Point Blank Shot, Far Shot, Base Attack Bonus +6
Benefits:As a full-round action, you can fire a single arrow or other missile weapon at your highest attack bonus at a flying opponent. If you hit, you do only the unmodified damage of your bow. Your opponent's wings or flying spells are temporarily disrupted, and they fall to the ground, although they are able to slow themselves enough to not take any damage from the fall. The opponent remains unable to fly for a number of rounds equal to 1/2 your level. If you score a critical hit with your shot, in place of double damage, your opponent remains unable to fly for a number of rounds equal to your level.
Thoughts?
Cool, but only if the opponent has wings I would use that. Otherwise it's magical in nature.
Commoners can RP, too, yet I notice a shortage of commoner enthusiasts and defenders. I would suspect that it's because people like playing heroic characters who can do fantastic things, rather than taking a night off from their boring life to play a boring person.
Hacking dragons to bits and battling hordes of ogres are often considered pretty fantastic. And I have never noticed a problem with people not being able to roleplay in a situation just because their character does not have a specific skill, feat or ability to roll against to resolve the situation. Most people I play with do most of their roleplaying without rolling dice at all. We call it the difference between "roleplaying" and "rollplaying."
If somebody is only able to enjoy a gaming session while their character is actually rolling dice, then there's a chance the problem is not with the class design.
Every class is made to fight. Only one class can do nothing but fight.
There's nothing in the core rules that says fighter characters can't talk, yell, laugh, joke, drink or do any of the millions of other things that make up roleplaying. And I've yet to see a class (in Pathfinder or any other game) with the "roleplay" skill, ability, feat or talent.
I'm against more combat options for Fighters. Pathfinder Fighters are damn good, uhhr, fighters.Only in situations where they are allowed to be.
Let me give you an example. My game yesterday featured a big bad with DR, fast healing and flight. Bear in mind that the party was 3 level 2's and a level 1. The big bad either could not fly very fast or the DM made her not fly very fast to give us a chance but we got a few hits in before she was too high to reach without a DC 40 jump test. However, with her fast healing and DR those hits were erased. She spammed fear effects and channeled negative energy and we were in trouble. Now maybe a Fighter would have had a composite bow to make a few attacks but without feats in it his damage would also probably be erased by her DR and fast healing. If it were not for the casting ability of my Summoner who was able to enlarge the Druid who then made a reasonable jump test and grappled her, we'd have been screwed.
This kind of stuff happens and the Fighter needs items to be able to match the abilities other classes have just for existing.
If she can hit you with channel energy, she is still within thrown weapons range. You get your str bonus to thrown weapons, if you haven't bought a composite bow yet. If your fighter's str and weapon damage can't get through its DR, you have bigger problems and should probably retreat and bide your time. Flight is hard to deal with for anyone at lvl 2. DC 40 tests are superhuman, in this case jumping 20 feet in the air.
This example fails to convince me that the fighter needs anything else.
Actually, I think that the Fighter needs more out-of-combat and in-combat utility. More skills and a somewhat expanded list mostly deals with the first part. Feats can help boost some skills further.
I'm also concerned about in-combat versatility, doing the kinds of things other classes do by adding "martial powers," things that mimic the special things that others do while keeping the focus on the smashy smashy.
And see, when I hear solutions like this, I see a game with a party of 4 different classes, all making the exact same rolls for the exact same effects:
Fighter: "I'll do my MARTIAL BLAST for 6d6 area effect with a DC 15 Save!"
Wizard: "I'll do my FIREBALL for 6d6 area effect with a DC 15 Save!"
Rogue: "I'll do my HAIL OF DAGGERS for 6d6 area effect with a DC 15 Save!"
Cleric: "I'll do my DIVINE LIGHT for 6d6 area effect with a DC 15 Save!"
Characters are supposed to be able to do different things and have different capabilities. If there were no situations where a class were useless (or much less useful), then why would there ever be any other classes? This sounds like the path to tabletop World of Warcraft (and I mean the computer game, not the RPG, which I've never actually seen).
|
|
Wait...
Your plan is for me to throw my greatsword with the range increment penalty and the penalty for throwing a greatsword and reliably hit AC 19? That's not a real plan. That's saying "well, I can't do anything else because I'm no good at this situation or situations like it where the versatility of a spellcaster exceeds my brute strength." Even a composite bow would not be doing significant damage when the opponent has such great defensive abilities.
I would be shocked if every person on this thread could not identify a situation where their fighter or one in their group either in combat or out of it was nearly useless or even a liability.
Ok,I want to reiterate that there are reasons not related to the mechanics of this game to play a Fighter. I have no negative anything for people who play one because they want to. I'm one of those people. But casting adds dimension to a character and allows him to do cool stuff. That's why anyone you ask to rank the classes puts casters at the top.
What I'm looking for here are ideas for how a Fighter can be brought up to par with some of the casting classes. A fighter can do good amounts of damage and have a high AC but with buffs a Cleric will do the same thing better and have better saves doing it. An Oracle with the Battle focus will probably do likewise. This is what I'm talking about. No class in the game should be better at hitting dudes with heavy stuff than the fighter. Right now there are several. Am I the only person who thinks that is wrong?
The one thing that shot up flags here was that sounds like their thinking when they gave 4E fighters "powers" that made 0 sense, and felt like you were watching anime. Feats are the fighters "powers" in a sense. Anything that reeks of spell-like abilities or powers don't fit
|
|
The one thing that shot up flags here was that sounds like their thinking when they gave 4E fighters "powers" that made 0 sense, and felt like you were watching anime. Feats are the fighters "powers" in a sense. Anything that reeks of spell-like abilities or powers don't fit
I'm not talking about magic. While Pathfinder does need a better gish class than what is currently available, I'm talking about plausible weapon based attacks that merely mimic the kinds of buffs and debuffs available to casting classes. This was the example I showed earlier:
"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 has Weapon Focus, as a full round action you deal normal weapon damage and you knock the target prone.
Crack the egg is another 4th Edition power that has a daily use. It deals double or triple weapon damage and debuffs the targets AC. Again, a totally worthwhile thing for a fighter to want to do in replace of a feat. It is essentially a combination of Vital Strike and Sunder but would habve a times per day usage or maybe once for every four levels, that kind of thing.
Just out of curiosity, what kind of opponent can fly, have DR, Fast Healing, AC 19, and "spam" fears and still be level-appropriate for a group of level 1 and 2 PCs? o.O Not doubting it, just a little boggled that your DM tossed that at you so early.
I don't have a lot of details for you not being the DM. She couldn't exactly spam fears though it seemed like it at the time. She had one that affected all of us when we started the fight and I believe two more. If our level 2 Cleric wasn't the clever bastard he is and prepared Remove Fear the Druid would have been out the door like me and the AniCom. The first Cause Fear sent the Cleric, who had just enlarged himself running. Another sent the other Cleric running. But a mass fear effect and 2 directed ones is plenty I think for a party of four people.
She wasn't technically a super hard encounter. She starts on the ground and flies slowly. She had very little direct damage other than channeling negative energy. Technically, we had enough healing to survive every channel she had and then just wait for her to come down and fight us so we may have been able to do that. Or she might have just stayed up at the ceiling and waited for reinforcements (if there were any).
The one thing that shot up flags here was that sounds like their thinking when they gave 4E fighters "powers" that made 0 sense, and felt like you were watching anime. Feats are the fighters "powers" in a sense. Anything that reeks of spell-like abilities or powers don't fitI'm not talking about magic. While Pathfinder does need a better gish class than what is currently available, I'm talking about plausible weapon based attacks that merely mimic the kinds of buffs and debuffs available to casting classes. This was the example I showed earlier:
"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 has Weapon Focus, as a full round action you deal normal weapon damage and you knock the target prone.Crack the egg is another 4th Edition power that has a daily use. It deals double or triple weapon damage and debuffs the targets AC. Again, a totally worthwhile thing for a fighter to want to do in replace of a feat. It is essentially a combination of Vital Strike and Sunder but would habve a times per day usage or maybe once for every four levels, that kind of thing.
How is this significantly different than greater trip, other than not needing an extra attack roll, using a full round action instead of an attack action, and being limitted in number of uses?
Okay, in that case, what kind of non-magical ability do you suggest to counteract flying?
In basics, bulid a better net. While it is a little more complex with just the core game, it is not far fetched at all to create a item that both entangles and provides a controlling line that a fighter could use to drag down a flying foe. No feats need, just a new piece of mundane gear.
If one had a GM that alowed a bit of creativity and the target was in thowing range, lead with a tangle foot bag, then chuck a grappling hook(attached to rope) to hook them. Start reeling the target in.
A fighter is typically strong. Both in and out of combat the key is finding ways to use that 'strenght'.
|
|
How is this significantly different than greater trip, other than not needing an extra attack roll, using a full round action instead of an attack action, and being limitted in number of uses?
I'm not sure we're looking at the same feat...
Greater Trip makes the falling down enemy provoke an AoO and gives a bonus to the roll. While that does mean that you can attack the target of your trip it uses your only AoO for the round. Greater Trip also requires two feats before it, one of which (Combat Expertise) is generally not available to most Fighters because of the Int requirement.
Sure, but I could also think of some other situation for all the classes.
Please name one as common as the enemy being able to move in a way the Fighter can't match. An Antimagic Field is the only one I can think of. However, that gimps the caster of the field as well, whereas teleportation and flying buff the caster of the spell.
How is this significantly different than greater trip, other than not needing an extra attack roll, using a full round action instead of an attack action, and being limitted in number of uses?I'm not sure we're looking at the same feat...
Greater Trip makes the falling down enemy provoke an AoO and gives a bonus to the roll. While that does mean that you can attack the target of your trip it uses your only AoO for the round. Greater Trip also requires two feats before it, one of which (Combat Expertise) is generally not available to most Fighters because of the Int requirement.
Sure, but I could also think of some other situation for all the classes.Please name one as common as the enemy being able to move in a way the Fighter can't match. An Antimagic Field is the only one I can think of. However, that gimps the caster of the field as well, whereas teleportation and flying buff the caster of the spell.
Just because you don't like a package doesn't mean it doesn't already exist.
Edit: to your second point, I consistently see casters unable to do anything and sitting on their thumbs because they have the wrong spells.
|
Please name one as common as the enemy being able to move in a way the Fighter can't match.
Who is to say a spellcaster always has the proper ranged spell for such a situation as a flying enemy? What if he only had Shocking Grasp or Burning Hands? Or what if the flying creature is immune to his fireball?
Please name one as common as the enemy being able to move in a way the Fighter can't match. An Antimagic Field is the only one I can think of. However, that gimps the caster of the field as well, whereas teleportation and flying buff the caster of the spell.
How common something is is largely dependent on the dungeon master. However, compared to for example a 2nd-level wizard, I'd prefer a fighter if:
The party got separatedThere was more than three fights that day
The enemy was a mage with blasting spells (blasting isn't good in most cases - but against a mage, the 2d4+2 of a 3rd level wizard's magic missile can be really dangerous.
The enemy was a level-appropriate flyer.
Actually, a 2nd-level wizard might not be that much better of against a level-appropriate flying enemy than a fighter is. Say that it's the second fight of the day. The best offensive choice I can see for a wizard would be a sleep spell, and he'd probably just have a single of those unless it's the first fight of the day. If that fails, he'd have to resort to cantrips, his crossbow, or a school ability dealing 1d6+1 damage with a range of 30 feet.
Meanwhile, even a melee-focused fighter would probably be able to make a longbow attack with a reach of a few hundred feet dealing 1d8 damage (the same as the Acid Dart but with greater range and crit). A level-appropriate flying creature might be an Imp for example, and sure, it has DR 5/silver, meaning that the fighter might have a hard time hurting it after using his few silver arrows - but it has Acid and Cold resistance 10 and is IMMUNE to fire.
No, at 2nd level I'd rather be a fighter in most combat situations. It's quite the reverse of high level problems - at low levels, a mage generally isn't good without a supporting fighter. At high levels, a fighter generally isn't good without a supporting mage.
I doubt we see any substantive changes to the Fighter at all. There will probably be several Fighter-friendly feats in the offing, as feats are easy to add on-the-fly without changing anything previously presented. But this is a thread for expressing preferences, and that tends to produce myriad responses rather than gainful concurrence.
Eh we have got into the "My fighter needs spells...just lets call it something else" yet again.
Folks if ya want to play a caster then play a damned caster. The fighter does not need a mass overhaul, every single class is not the best in every single area.
A flying BBEG is a pain for the whole group. I have yet to see a single party were wizards fly at will or the rogue or any class except maybe the druid. OP just how did the rogue deal with this high DR, flying foe? How did the wizard, cleric, barbarian, bard, druid monk or anybody deal with it? What could any other class in your group do you could not?
If I were you I would buy a bow.
for example, Conan is strong-willed, a leader of men, and sneaky as hell.
Yeap, that's why Conan is a multiclassed Character, funny ain't it?
I doubt we see any substantive changes to the Fighter at all. There will probably be several Fighter-friendly feats in the offing, as feats are easy to add on-the-fly without changing anything previously presented. But this is a thread for expressing preferences, and that tends to produce myriad responses rather than gainful concurrence.
I think we'll see some nice new feats and maybe some alt ablitys to replace armor and weapon training.
|
HOW do you completely redo the fighter to be better and yet remain non-magical?
Actually, I would suggest this. I don't think it counts as 'like Bo9S'.
|
I think I stated this somewhere else, but even thou I personally like fighters, it is true that they can be lacking in the options department.
Whenever I´ve played a fighter I always tent to do the whole leader strategist thing, however It always seemed odd that that archetype was not supported by the class.
All I would really wish in the APG are alternatives instead of Armor Training and Weapon Training. Things like Battlefield Training, Commanding Training and such that will allow the fighter to fulfill the archetypes that mechaniclaly it doesn´t unless fighting ability is heavily sacrificed. And even then it will not be as good as other classes, and a wizard being a better battle planer or a Bard being a better general just doesn´t sit well with me.
Once again, we've had a few suggestions from people -- more skill points per level, the example feat I gave, etc. -- yet we don't hear anything except the mantra "fighters suck, they should be fixed, fighters suck, they should be fixed." Or "fighters should be just as versatile as magic users, but we don't want that wuxia crap, they need mundane effects that equal wish, time stop, and fireball while still being totally plausible."
Since nobody on that 'side' of the thread seems to be interested in discussing the fixes people have offered, or offering fixes of their own, but just repeating the same generalized complaints over and over, I'm bowing out of this one except as a passive observer, until and unless I see some substantive, constructive discussion going on.
I will say, though, that if the fighter is really as useless as some of you make him out to be, I think the best fix in your home games is to remove all flying creatures and all flying spells from the game, and to probably consider eliminating all classes except fighter, rogue, ranger, and barbarian. You'd probably enjoy that quite a bit more -- and I'm not being snarky here, I'm stating what appears to be fact to me.
In short, if you don't like magic, don't use it.
We did that in one game, probably the best game we ever had.
The game limited clerics and wizards to second level spells. Basically there were 6 wizard kings that ruled. They made sure no one could threaten them by creating a barrier to the gods that limited clerics to 2nd level spells or less. As well they had some artifact that allow them to detect magical energies from arcane casters casting higher than 2nd level spells. Once detected they were eliminated.
So the group was made up of 1 fighter, 1 rogues, and 2 rangers. As well there was a NPC cleric for healing but limited to 2nd level spells and npc bard that kept their magic hidden, pretended to be a rogue.
Just to throw my 2 cp in..
In also think fighter is the least versatile and thus, unfortunatly, also the least interesting to play. What I would like to see for the fighter are not more skills, or social options or anything that expands his role. Instead, I think the bloodline-idea from the sorcerer or domain powers from the cleric would be perfect for our beloved underappreciated fighter!
'Bloodline'-surrogates would be more like roles the fighter can take, like; Bodyguard, Wizardslayer, Adept of Steel, Godslayer, Samurai, God-favored, Arcane-infused, Inquisitor. I'm just making these up now, some might be more fitting than others. The point is, these 'bloodlines' could give additional powers, like the sorcerer, which are not combat oriented. This would probably make the fighter a little bit stonger in the eye's of some, but it will not make it stronger in it's favored role; as a front-line fighter.
Some detailed examples I can think of now;
-The inquisitor 'role'-line would add same gather informationesque abilities as well as more uses for the intimidate skill. At higher levels the fighter would be able to reproduce the effect of a Zone of Truth, or similar magic.
-The bodyguard would gain abilities that would prevent enemies from landing blows on allies, or negating those attacks completely at higher levels. Or maybe the ability to mimic some Abjuration spell effects.
-The Godslayer would gain spell resitance, but only to divine magic. At higher levels it might gain an ability to channel all channelled energy types (from clerics) to himself, automaticly turning it in the healing kind if negative energy was channelled. Or maybe something like the barbarian's Superstition-power. Or absorbing divine or scrying spells, or gaining some scrying or other divination spells himself (to seek out the cults).
-The Samurai could gain some spell like abilities, but only those that would effect himself, like; Jump, Expeditious Retreat, Spider Climb, Invisibility.
These examples should not be seem to literal, they just serve to be examples.
Some of you would (and I believe: correctly) say that this does nothing to adress the problem of fighter being one trick ponies or being 'boring' out of combat. However, it would make the fighter a much more _fun_ class to play! Think about it, why do people play RPG's? To identify themself with a well-defined avatar of their idealistic/opposite selfs. No-one sees himself as just a 'generic' fighter (generic equals boring). That is also why barbarians are more fun to play than fighter, they have a strong personality. The fighter has NO personality.
A secondary role would give that personality, and at the same time improve the secondary abilities of the fighter (or not! if the character truly wants to be a perfect engine of destruction!)
Edited: I should add that I'm aware all these possibilities could by some be considered the same as taking prestige classes. I resent this; prestige classes just make the fighter from one one-trick-pony into another. This should be avoided.
I think I stated this somewhere else, but even thou I personally like fighters, it is true that they can be lacking in the options department.
Whenever I´ve played a fighter I always tent to do the whole leader strategist thing, however It always seemed odd that that archetype was not supported by the class.
All I would really wish in the APG are alternatives instead of Armor Training and Weapon Training. Things like Battlefield Training, Commanding Training and such that will allow the fighter to fulfill the archetypes that mechaniclaly it doesn´t unless fighting ability is heavily sacrificed. And even then it will not be as good as other classes, and a wizard being a better battle planer or a Bard being a better general just doesn´t sit well with me.
I agree with you on most things u said... but how is the Wizard a better battle planer than a fighter?
, they have a strong personality. The fighter has NO personality.
Sorry mate, Personality has NOTHING to do with class.
And I think most abilities you put there are magical in nature. Teh bodyguard one is pretty cool however.
Seems like what people want is a Multiclassed fighter OR a fighter with a race that gives spell like abilities to me.
Just to throw my 2 cp in..
'Bloodline'-surrogates would be more like roles the fighter can take, like; Bodyguard, Wizardslayer, Adept of Steel, Godslayer, Samurai, God-favored, Arcane-infused, Inquisitor. I'm just making these up now, some might be more fitting than others. The point is, these 'bloodlines' could give additional powers, like the sorcerer, which are not combat oriented. This would probably make the fighter a little bit stonger in the eye's of some, but it will not make it stronger in it's favored role; as a front-line fighter.
That's 2 cp's well-spent! Bravo!
Cool, but only if the opponent has wings I would use that. Otherwise it's magical in nature.GRIFFIN KILLER (Combat)
You are expert at shooting flying opponents in a place where you are able to bring them crashing to earth.
Prerequisites:Point Blank Shot, Far Shot, Base Attack Bonus +6
Benefits:As a full-round action, you can fire a single arrow or other missile weapon at your highest attack bonus at a flying opponent. If you hit, you do only the unmodified damage of your bow. Your opponent's wings or flying spells are temporarily disrupted, and they fall to the ground, although they are able to slow themselves enough to not take any damage from the fall. The opponent remains unable to fly for a number of rounds equal to 1/2 your level. If you score a critical hit with your shot, in place of double damage, your opponent remains unable to fly for a number of rounds equal to your level.
Thoughts?
Yes, I agree. Kind of hard to think of a mundane way to disrupt magical flying, though --
although I'd like to. Maybe an arrow with a cord attached to it so you can tow them down like a balloon? ;)
There is that, which is why I pointed out the tangle foot bag/laso possibilty. I remember a few combats I've run against my players in the past the put a flying foe just out normal melée reach. Most of the time there where plenty of backup ranged weapons. Although in one case the part didn't and feel back to leaping (aid another jump checks) and trying to grapple... but I digress.
To the feat, all that takes us a thematic change and an understanding of the falling ruled. Instead of directly discribing it as an arrow or other ranged weapon negataiting the mechanics of flight, you cause that the target to stall (because the projectile got in the way, fouled a wing, and so on in nonspesifics). This forces a fly check, with a penalty assigned based on the attack roll. Design the feat mechanics to keep up with an average flying creatures average roll for the level.
To give a target your looking at a base 15 (force a mommentary hover) + DC increase based on attack roll. Like aid another or other 'aim for square' attacks base AC for the move is 10 (then add distance).
Perhaps even expand the mechacinc and have the DC penalty apply to all manuvers taken that turn if the feat is used as a readied action.
There, you have mundaine if a little Exraordinary (at higher levels) option for bringing down fly creatures (if mommentarly).
"Hurgoth the fighet gets mad and throws a chair at floating wizard nocking him out of control for momment and to the ground."
It's why I was't happy to see that Trip didn't apply to flying creatures.
|
|
Interesting -- thank you. I'm pretty favorably impressed by it. It probably doesn't go far enough to satisfy some, but it's an interesting take and almost prompts me to try to do for the fighter types what Tejon did for the fighter/mage with his Iron Mage.
You're welcome. I just wanted to make sure you realized that there have been other options put forth.
Actual playtesting of the Tome Fighter has suggested it is TOO good of a fighter, but that is the puzzle of game design I guess. Always too much or too little.
Frerezar- Use (quote="Forum Name")(/quote). Obviously replace the () with []. The reply link automatically does it for the one post, but large posts get cut off.
|
|
Bog's ideas are great and I think a fitting replacement for the Training class features. And his point about fighters being somewhat boring are right on target, too. That's why I had thought to replace some bonus feats with special "moves" which would debuff or buff without being overtly magical. I think the game would benefit from the fighter not being a PC that does nothing but full attack or get into position to full attack (I realize that's overly simplistic but you get the idea).
As to multiclassing, it's not that easy to do as I said earlier. A fighter has to give up two feats, a swift action, and pay mucho gp for mithril armor to be able to cast arcane spells in decent armor while minimizing failure chance. I hardly see a purpose to multiclassing the Fighter into Cleric (aside from a quick dip) since you might as well just play a Cleric at that point.
Which makes me wonder -- is the problem that the fighter IS too generic, after all?
Do we actually need more fighter-type classes, splitting out archetypes from the fighter to make more barbarians, so to speak? Would we have all these problems with the fighter if there were no fighter, but instead, the archer, the footman, the blowpipe warrior, the knight, and so on?
Bean, I prefer generic classes as a rule. The thing I hate the most about the Monk is that its too specific. You should be able to pick a path like Bloodlines or Arcane Bond where you're a monk or a brawler. But that's another thread. I think that the idea of a few "Bloodlines" for the Fighter is a great way to improve the class. A version with more skills, and versions for a few other specialties. One that replaced Armor and Weapon Training with reducing spell failure chance and eventually allowing arcane casters to use armor without penalty would be great for people that want to multiclass into Wizard, Sorcerer, etc.
---------
I see tempers rising here and there and I hope we can keep this civil. If you think Fighters are perfect the way they are then that's great, I'm happy for you. But this probably isn't the thread for you since the rest of us, I think, are interested in tossing around some ideas on alternate class features and feats for the APG that would benefit this much loved class. There is a 100% chance that the dev's won't be considering what's said here it it devolves into a flame war (or even a water balloon fight).