Boosting Fighters

[voska66]

I think the fighter would be more interesting with floating good save. Basically at 1st level you choose one save as you good save. That way you could have fighter with a Good Reflex save or Will Save but the others would be poor.

[cranewings]

FireberdGNOME wrote:

Thank you Greg. I appreciate the cool-headed thinking. However, I *am* trying to think of it from Crane's perspective. He wants to overhaul the game so much that he may as well start over in design. That was my point.

I basically have. E6 by itself if just the normal game with 2/3 of the material chopped off. Then, with what's left, I tweak it wherever I think something could be better, to me.

I love having all the material that was written for the game as stuff I can use but I don't like how it comes together naturally from raw, at all.

[cranewings]

Orc Bits wrote:

Kirth Gersen wrote:

Spells in my home game are very powerful -- but they're so hard to get off reliably in combat that martial characters end up doing all the heavy lifting.

That kind of game suits me and my players, but I'll be the first to acknowledge that it isn't for everyone.

Fair enough, but why would anyone actually play a spell-casting class in this system?

It depends on how you perceive casters. I think they are way too good, so if someone cut out a ton of stuff and made them only as good as the other classes, I'd be happy because I wouldn't feel like I was playing the game on easy mode.

If you think the game is fair already, and I can only guess people do from reading the opinions on here, then having the caster knocked down seems unfair.

[CunningMongoose]

The Hero point system can help. You give something to everyone, but fighters get the most since they can spend on the feats. When you get more rerolls and etc, you can get by with a weaker Will save.

The only thing I would change, is to give a Fighter more skills: a free rank in a profession or craft AND a free rank in a knowledge every level. You choose them at first level, and can't change them.

[Orc Bits]

Sphynx wrote:

Orc Bits wrote:

Kirth Gersen wrote:

Spells in my home game are very powerful -- but they're so hard to get off reliably in combat that martial characters end up doing all the heavy lifting.

That kind of game suits me and my players, but I'll be the first to acknowledge that it isn't for everyone.

Fair enough, but why would anyone actually play a spell-casting class in this system?

All the non-combat spells. ;)

See, this aspect of magic is much harder to plan for and balance than combat spells. I can usually balance combat for high power casters without punishing the rest of the party. On the other hand, to have a caster PC actively working to bypass story, RP, and puzzle sections with "spells" can be very frustrating.

[TriOmegaZero]

Orc Bits wrote:

Kirth Gersen wrote:

Spells in my home game are very powerful -- but they're so hard to get off reliably in combat that martial characters end up doing all the heavy lifting.

That kind of game suits me and my players, but I'll be the first to acknowledge that it isn't for everyone.

Fair enough, but why would anyone actually play a spell-casting class in this system?

I'm looking forward to have a chance at my dwarven eldritch knight again in one of Kirth's games. In the Curse of the Crimson Throne game I played him in, he relied on his waraxe almost exclusively in combat. The most he did spellwise was a Daze cantrip. He saved his slots for things like Featherfall and Grease, saving the gnome cleric from harm when he fell off the rooftops and stopping the guards from giving chase. Yeah, this isn't a straight spellcaster, but I think the changes will make it even more of a tactical thing, and I like tactics.

[KaeYoss]

Sgmendez wrote:

+100 to KaeYoss

Making me the Centurion.