| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The biggest problem with the Fighter is that he's poorly envisioned and executed. A Fighter should not be about specialization, but about generalization. A Fighter should be about being versatile and deadly regardless of the circumstances he finds himself in and no matter what weapon he's armed with. Leave specialization to Rangers and Paladins.
So here's what I'd recommend for Fighters:
1. Ditch Weapon Training and give them a level-based damage bonus that works with any weapon. Fighters know that you have to use the right tool to get the job done. Just as a hammer makes a crappy screwdriver, a greatsword isn't always the appropriate weapon. A longspear is a much better weapon against a dragon and a shortsword is far more functional inside a building or tunnel. A warrior that spends all his effort on a single weapon is going to fall short when that weapon can't be used.
2. All of their saving throws should be good. The Fighter is a non-magical character in a magical world. They know what they're up against and they would have trained to overcome whatever strategies/abilities an enemy will throw at them. They may not have magic, but the're not idiots.
3. Reduce the number of bonus feats they get and give them access to special tactical abilities that allow them to counter their opponents' offensive and defensive strategies.
4. Give them 4 skill points as a base and at least Perception as a class skill. We can move past the trope that Fighters are big, dumb guys in armor that need others to think for them. That character should be an option, not a mandate.
I think for WF/WS it should really go by weapon groups (as for weapon training fighter feature). This is such an obvious thing. Won't affect balance that much but g@#+%!n does it make sense.
Honestly I feel like there is not much reason to have a fighter when you have the Cavalier, the Paladin, and the Barbarian around...
Going by weapon groups isn't a bad idea. I liked the idea Tome of Battle introduced better though. By spending an hour practicing with a weapon, you can get a feel for it and switch your Weapon Focus/Specialization feat to that weapon. If you know you're going after flying creatures that day, brush up with your bow, etc.
@ Wazat: Could you please move your feat chains on the wiki to their own page? For ease of use, I think this structure works best:
"Categories" page: contains descriptions of catergories
- Individual category pages: contain list of links to pages in that category with a brief summary of each
- Page for individual project: where your feat chains would go. I named mine "Pandora's workshop" to be identified by name in case others try a project similar to mine.
Thanks :)
we can either debate on all our ways to improve martial characters
or we can use either a new edition
or kirthfinder
I agree that it doesn't have to end up like 4th ed., but I don't think that limiting casters is the way to bridge the gap between martials and casters.
The dividing line between these class-types is reality. Martials are governed by reality, while casters could care less about its restrictions. So reality becomes this absolute paradigm that martials cannot overcome, despite the fact that they live in a world of magic. This even spills over into martials who can cast spells and is reflected in the spells available to them on their spell lists, which tend to be spells that only effect reality in minor ways.
It makes me wonder at the mindset of non-casters. How much denial of what happens in the world around them do they have to possess in order to pursue a career path that offers them so little? It reminds me of nega-psychics in Palladium's Beyond the Supernatural.
Why would a martial character choose to be so ill prepared for a significant portion of the dangers that the world presents? Why would martials with casting abilities avoid learning magic that would have a greater effect? If magic is the life-blood of the world, as many games settings propose, why are some characters so completely removed from it? I can see NPC classes being clueless about magic, but player classes?
colemcm:
Well, probably because they're not as intensely trained in magic as full casters are. An example in our world: Physics 101 and the basic calculus and trig classes in high school are immensely useful for someone wanting to build some cool architecture in their back yard, or tinker with robots, computers, video games, etc. But full specialization in a science background gives you whole orders of magnitude more knowledge and skill in whatever you apply those skills to accomplishing, which means you can do a lot more. I've taken some math courses (including linear algebra, fun for video games) and physics stuff, but I've not even begun to dabble in topology, quantum physics, etc. That's all well beyond me, even though I've had the general concept described to me many times and I get it from a layman's perspective.
Spellcasting is likewise not all-or-nothing. It takes a certain amount of study/practice/focus to delve deeper and deeper into what it has to offer.
The martials with casting ability (ranger, paladin, even bard) have such limited spell access because they're not dedicated to spellcasting the way the wizard, cleric or sorcerer are. The dedicated spellcasters gave up a lot to get where they are, while the martial-with-casting did a half-and-half job, enjoying benefits from both sides but no intensive specialization in either.
Pandora's:
Sure, I'll try doing that today. I'll just have to tinker around with the site to figure out how to set it up (I'm not remembering, but it should be simple). I'm guessing the structure will be:
Categories
--Combat Improvements
----Wazat's Feat Chains
(Edit: done. Silly me, it was trivial.)
Also, we need to strong-arm these other guys into contributing to the wiki and gathering everything up into one place so things don't get lost/buried.
I have a plan: You hold them, I'll hit them?
To use your analogy, what about the Fighter says they even have the magical equivalent of basic math skills? They are absolutely devoid of magical ability or knowledge.
Regarding martial casters, who is it that dictates how their efforts are directed? Aren't the orders of magnitude they can achieve represented by the fact that they'll never gain access to spells above level 4?
What if anyone who plays a martial class gets to gestalt into another one for free? That SEEMS like it might work.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Fighters don't need magical ability. They need supernatural ability. That sounds like splitting hairs, but a lot of people find it important fluff-wise. They don't want their character labeled "fighter" to rely on spells to get things done. They don't want to wave their hands and throw fireballs. They want to break down walls and jump buildings, preferably without an overtly magical source. Beowulf and the Hulk just need to be viable high-level concepts.
@Wazat: Hitting sounds therapeutic. I know Jess Door posted some stuff. Who else?
I agree with Pandora's, martials, specially high level martials should do/have supernatural/superhuman abilities, I still insist that the better approach I can imagine is something like ToB, when I picture a high level martial I picture something from DBZ, even just DB would work.
Supernatural effects are magical effects. That's why they can be countered with Dispel Magic and they don't operate in anti-magic fields.
I'm on the same page as you though. I'm not advocating spellcasting for martials. I am advocating magical (supernatural, if you will) effects that they intuitively gain access to as they progress; like a sorcerer, but martially oriented. I'm advocating that martials and casters should be measured on the same scale.
Bare minimum, Fighters should be able to reliably counter the effects of magical opponents. Sun Tzu would be turning over in his grave if he knew how pathetic the Fighter was. . . and was a role playing geek.
|
Supernatural effects are magical effects. That's why they can be countered with Dispel Magic and they don't operate in anti-magic fields.
I'm on the same page as you though. I'm not advocating spellcasting for martials. I am advocating magical (supernatural, if you will) effects that they intuitively gain access to as they progress; like a sorcerer, but martially oriented. I'm advocating that martials and casters should be measured on the same scale.
Bare minimum, Fighters should be able to reliably counter the effects of magical opponents. Sun Tzu would be turning over in his grave if he knew how pathetic the Fighter was. . . and was a role playing geek.
I'd make the abilities they gain Extraordiary, which avoids the whole Dispel Magic nonsense.
I'd make the abilities they gain Extraordiary, which avoids the whole Dispel Magic nonsense.
Tome of Battle also did this well. Effects like making your sword burst into flame as you swung it were supernatural, but most effects were extraordinary. It had a good intuitive divide. Nothing spell-like at all.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
or kirthfinderOr just keep playing Pathfinder. That's an option too.
Dang, TOZ, I feel so betrayed!
Fine, make me feel guilty for moving! ;P
|
** spoiler omitted **
While you're in this thread Kirth, I have a question. During a brief pawing through of your Kirthfinder stuff, I saw that the fighter was given a metric ton of shiny new combat things. Did you add anything along the out of combat/narrative lines?
While you're in this thread Kirth, I have a question. During a brief pawing through of your Kirthfinder stuff, I saw that the fighter was given a metric ton of shiny new combat things. Did you add anything along the out of combat/narrative lines?
While you're in this thread Kirth, I have a question. During a brief pawing through of your Kirthfinder stuff, I saw that the fighter was given a metric ton of shiny new combat things. Did you add anything along the out of combat/narrative lines?** spoiler omitted **
Hey, I'm a big fan of what you did with Kirthfinder. Is there a repository more up-to-date than TOZ's google site?
Not at present, sorry - and not really any plans for such. It's an idiosyncratic set of houserules, so I'm happy to email copies to people who honestly want to give it a go (stick a request on the main KF thread), but other than that, it's not intended for public dispersion.
|
Pandora's:
Sure, I'll try doing that today. I'll just have to tinker around with the site to figure out how to set it up (I'm not remembering, but it should be simple). I'm guessing the structure will be:
Categories
--Combat Improvements
----Wazat's Feat Chains
(Edit: done. Silly me, it was trivial.)Also, we need to strong-arm these other guys into contributing to the wiki and gathering everything up into one place so things don't get lost/buried.
I have a plan: You hold them, I'll hit them?
so, the link to the "Paizo Forum Thread" just goes to the messageboards. Any way to get added to the wiki home rule fun?
Yeah, that thread hasn't materialized yet. The wiki is a Google site, so it uses your Google account for the login. PM me your Gmail address and I'll add you.
After you compile all the feats from just the core rulebooks (Core, APG, UM, UC) you get upwards of 20 pages of feats. This gets bad as I'm trying to make a reference document that you can always see what is needed before or after a particular feat. Wazat's answer about a feat tree style similar to the ranger, answer's a question that I had. Why can a ranger do what a fighter can't. Take feats without prereqs.... and a 10th level ranger only has 2 less feats than a 10th level fighter. I'm using a scale for feat tree's (of which there are 14 valid trees when you look at the compiled list) that is almost like the weapon training or the rangers favored enemy. Letting fighters pick up one of the trees and beginning new ones as he goes along.