Even if a fighter specializes in daggers and hand-crossbows he's still going to see useable light blades and crossbows come up very regularly.Ranger: Sucks to be you! No awesome greatswords around here! You are gimped forever!
Fighter: Well, shoot. I mean, if you give me an aldori duelling sword, a bastard sword, a chakram, an elven curve blade, a falcata, a falchion, a flambard, a greatsword, a katana, a longsword, a scimitar, a scythe, or another such weapon, I am only missing out on my weapon focus/weapon specialization feats. But still, I am utterly gimped when denied a greatsword!
There's a feat for that...
|
There's a feat for that...Even if a fighter specializes in daggers and hand-crossbows he's still going to see useable light blades and crossbows come up very regularly.Ranger: Sucks to be you! No awesome greatswords around here! You are gimped forever!
Fighter: Well, shoot. I mean, if you give me an aldori duelling sword, a bastard sword, a chakram, an elven curve blade, a falcata, a falchion, a flambard, a greatsword, a katana, a longsword, a scimitar, a scythe, or another such weapon, I am only missing out on my weapon focus/weapon specialization feats. But still, I am utterly gimped when denied a greatsword!
I'm pretty sure that was sarcasm, since all of those weapons would work for a fighter with the Heavy Blade Weapon Training group.
There's a feat to make WF and WS trees work with multiple weapons.
There's a feat to make WF and WS trees work with multiple weapons.
It's a pretty cool Feat.
Too bad it's Human only and requires level 16.
This is the kind of thing that makes you go "Why? Why do the devs hate the Fighter?" because there ARE things that mitigate or eliminate his weaknesses and broaden his focus, but they're so ridiculously limited and restricted to high levels that they often don't matter.
I mean, level 16 is like the end of a campaign in many cases.
There's a feat to make WF and WS trees work with multiple weapons.It's a pretty cool Feat.
Too bad it's Human only and requires level 16.
This is the kind of thing that makes you go "Why? Why do the devs hate the Fighter?" because there ARE things that mitigate or eliminate his weaknesses and broaden his focus, but they're so ridiculously limited and restricted to high levels that they often don't matter.
I mean, level 16 is like the end of a campaign in many cases.
I noticed that when I started getting on these forums. It's rather upsetting because level 20 is very fun. My group will usually start at later levels if we don't think a campaign will take us to level 20. But that's because we have a loving GM who makes us custom encounters and campaigns.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Well, with Martial Versatility, you can take the feat twice early on (level 4 and 6), once for Weapon Focus, and once for Weapon Specialization, and then at level 16 re-train one of them out for Martial Mastery. Then, for most of the fighter's career he is able to at least not worry about Weapon Focus or Weapon Specialization going away when forced to use a different weapon in the weapon group.
Also, Martial Mastery kind of is a powerful feat, as it applies to all weapon-specific combat feats, from any number of weapon groups. So, with a cost of 2 feats, you can ensure that any weapon-specific feat applies to an entire weapon group, which is pretty sweet. Level 16 seems a reasonable time to be granted such a potentially powerful feat.
Personally, I think the human restriction should be removed, and that maybe Martial Mastery should come automatically for fighters, perhaps bundled with Weapon Training. So, when you get Weapon Training, you get the standard +1 Atk/Dmg, and can start applying weapon-specific feats to all weapons in the group. It would help further establish the fighter's role as kind of a versatile master of martial combat.
I don't think rangers can replace the fighter in an all encompassing fashion...I do however think that fighters are the class whose roles can "almost" always be circumvented by another martial class. niche protection isn't much when your niche is "while others can overkill an enemy, I can overkill them MORE!" They need more unique-ness to make them matter. Heck when I stat out npc martials that need pc class levels, I can usually get by with requiring a small fighter dip at most, if at all. We need to figure out what sets the fighter apart other than dpr. I admit scaling feats would lend them a proper versatility role so I would start there.
Personally, I think the human restriction should be removed, and that maybe Martial Mastery should come automatically for fighters, perhaps bundled with Weapon Training.
At level one in tome of battle a warblade could retrain any weapon specific feat to a different weapon. Not even limited to groups of weapons. Every morning during an hour of practice. Probably wouldn't be a bad idea to open it to other classes too.
That said, I don't place a high value on retraining. Not nearly as high as the books place it. If someone thinks it would be more fun to be x I say go for it. The idea that the same value as a level one class feature built to ensure that the player always had a weapon on hand they could use is worth a racial specific feat with prerequisites at 16th level is sort of... insane.
I don't think rangers can replace the fighter in an all encompassing fashion...I do however think that fighters are the class whose roles can "almost" always be circumvented by another martial class. niche protection isn't much when your niche is "while others can overkill an enemy, I can overkill them MORE!" They need more unique-ness to make them matter. Heck when I stat out npc martials that need pc class levels, I can usually get by with requiring a small fighter dip at most, if at all. We need to figure out what sets the fighter apart other than dpr. I admit scaling feats would lend them a proper versatility role so I would start there.
Agreed. The biggest thing I've seen fighters "Own" is in the archetypes and their sometimes odd methods of fighting that other classes have difficulty emulating(that I know of). Problem is some of them are interesting but hardly effective and some of the other one's just don't happen until too late. Such as the mobile fighter's ability to make a full round attack as a standard action. He doesn't get it till level 19. The phalanx fighter can get evasion and improved evasion while using a tower shield but doesn't get that till level 20. I'd personally like to see more fighters like the Thunderstriker, the Cad, and the Brawler. The Two Handed Fighter and the Two-Weapon Warrior are very good classes that take their concepts and maximize them but they're just as simple as their names suggest, which is a turn off to some people. And of course as always the fighter could do with a couple more skill points and a better will save. I mean I imagine all of my fighters being as determined as the Unbreakable fighter but that's rarely how it pans out with his often low will.
I think the one weapon type fighter should totally be a thing. Most fighters in lore are good at using 1 particular kind of weapon to great effect.
My only issue is that this is almost Required for fighters to have an edge on all the other classes wanting to fill their role do to lack of valid feats options (most feats suck, like cornugon smash; Oooh free intimidate check to give the enemy a -2, with enough feats they are flat footed too. People thinking that feat is good highlights my problem with feats. Most suck. The weapon focus tree is good and effective in comparison)
It's more than just a +2 to hit and +4 to damage. Weapon specific feats double the crit range and allow the fighter to ignore 10 points of DR, which at higher levels means doing 10 points more of damage per hit.
I think the one weapon type fighter should totally be a thing. Most fighters in lore are good at using 1 particular kind of weapon to great effect.
My only issue is that this is almost Required for fighters to have an edge on all the other classes wanting to fill their role do to lack of valid feats options (most feats suck, like cornugon smash; Oooh free intimidate check to give the enemy a -2, with enough feats they are flat footed too. People thinking that feat is good highlights my problem with feats. Most suck. The weapon focus tree is good and effective in comparison)
It's more than just a +2 to hit and +4 to damage. Weapon specific feats double the crit range and allow the fighter to ignore 10 points of DR, which at higher levels means doing 10 points more of damage per hit.
Agreed. The Weapon Focus, Specialization, Penetrating, Critical Focus, and Improved Critical are necessary to most fighter builds. The rest of the feats in existence except for a select few can be pretty meh. The fighter could probably benefit from an even larger selection of Fighter only feats. Of course then it would be just like rouge talents, ninja tricks, rage powers, and blah blah blah, but you know what as much as I love the fighter that's really what the fighter needs. Something special.
I don't think the fighter needs something special. Better feats would help everyone and the fighter would gain twice the benefit. Feats chains should go die. I don't have spell chains for my casters.
For example, Rage powers shouldn't be hands-down better than most feats. That's ridiculous.
There are like 3-4 fighter builds that I can make with solid feats and feat chains. They all have weapon focus though...
I don't think the fighter needs something special. Better feats would help everyone and the fighter would gain twice the benefit. Feats chains should go die. I don't have spell chains for my casters.
Yesterday I was reviewing the 5th edition playtest. They have a few examples of feats. I'll talk just about one:
Alertness:
+5 to intiative checks
Can't be surprised.
Rolls 2d20 take better with perception
If all feats were like that, then Fighters would be quite nice.
Some feats are like that though. To get your moneys worth as a fighter, you have to find them and take them.
Alertness:
+5 to intiative checks
Can't be surprised.
Rolls 2d20 take better with perception
WOW! I think I need to look at 5e.
Alertness:
+5 to intiative checks
Can't be surprised.
Rolls 2d20 take better with perceptionIf all feats were like that, then Fighters would be quite nice.
Do want! That's a sexy feat. Show me what persuasive looks like!
Some feats are like that though. To get your moneys worth as a fighter, you have to find them and take them.
I remember doing that in 3.5 and pathfinder all the time. I swear, I could get a black marker and blot out half of the book if I went through and got rid of everything deemed subpar or useless. Always a few shinies though. More helpful to casters because spellbloat is something you can always get a bonus from, but you only have so many feats.
Some feats are like that though. To get your moneys worth as a fighter, you have to find them and take them.
Some feats are decent, but they are all a bit lackluster. It's always like if the devs "fear" to give too much in a feat. For example, Improved Initative is considered a good feat in pathfinder. Compare it to the above alertness...
.....I want feats like that.....
No Improved Initiative is not a good feat for fighters. Wizards like it, and Sorcerers like it because it comes free with a bloodline.
And reason I said the fighter needs something special is because I keep seeing the constant argument of "Yeah but every other class can do that." But I guess if feats were as good as rage powers and the like then the ability to have more than everyone else would actually shine for once.
No Improved Initiative is not a good feat for fighters. Wizards like it, and Sorcerers like it because it comes free with a bloodline.
Yeah I rarely want to waste the feat on improved initiative. The only characters I've ever had with initiative bonuses came from class abilities or racial traits like Fire in the Blood. Quite frankly I build my fighters to be able to survive a round. Plus sometimes it's nice to just let the enemy run up and hit me once so I can smear him with a full round attack right off the bat.
And reason I said the fighter needs something special is because I keep seeing the constant argument of "Yeah but every other class can do that." But I guess if feats were as good as rage powers and the like then the ability to have more than everyone else would actually shine for once.
Exactly.
Barbars tend to not even take feats aside from power attack. They just take extra rage power over and over again.
Even if you made feats tons better, barbars might still do that to work up their totem chains.
No Improved Initiative is not a good feat for fighters. Wizards like it, and Sorcerers like it because it comes free with a bloodline.Yeah I rarely want to waste the feat on improved initiative. The only characters I've ever had with initiative bonuses came from class abilities or racial traits like Fire in the Blood. Quite frankly I build my fighters to be able to survive a round. Plus sometimes it's nice to just let the enemy run up and hit me once so I can smear him with a full round attack right off the bat.
To fighters, improved initative isn't a good feat. The whole point of casters taking it, is to go before the fighters, so they can either buff the fighters, or weaken the oposition with a spell. If the fighter charges before the wizard can cast his AOE, then it's counterproductive.
Also, fighters prefer to be charged than charge, except for mounted lancers. Being charged mean you do a full attack instead of a single attack.
However, many other characters like Imp Initative, like rogues and all kind of ranged characters (including archer fighters too). For all of them, compare Imp Initiative, with 5th edition Alertness. It's simply a league above it.
Consider for a moment that you build ALL the feats like that. Let's say "Greater fortitude" gives you "+2 to Fortitude. You suffer no efect in spells that give partial effects with fortitude saves if you make the save. You roll hit points twice and take better when you level up". Hey, suddenly taking one extra feat every other level isn't that bad, is it?
The problem with fighter bonus feats, is that most feats are crap anyway. Having twice the crap don't make you nicer. Make feats really worthwile, and suddenly the fighter goes up a lot in the Char ranking.
No Improved Initiative is not a good feat for fighters. Wizards like it, and Sorcerers like it because it comes free with a bloodline.Yeah I rarely want to waste the feat on improved initiative. The only characters I've ever had with initiative bonuses came from class abilities or racial traits like Fire in the Blood. Quite frankly I build my fighters to be able to survive a round. Plus sometimes it's nice to just let the enemy run up and hit me once so I can smear him with a full round attack right off the bat.To fighters, improved initative isn't a good feat. The whole point of casters taking it, is to go before the fighters, so they can either buff the fighters, or weaken the oposition with a spell. If the fighter charges before the wizard can cast his AOE, then it's counterproductive.
Also, fighters prefer to be charged than charge, except for mounted lancers. Being charged mean you do a full attack instead of a single attack.
However, many other characters like Imp Initative, like rogues and all kind of ranged characters (including archer fighters too). For all of them, compare Imp Initiative, with 5th edition Alertness. It's simply a league above it.
Consider for a moment that you build ALL the feats like that. Let's say "Greater fortitude" gives you "+2 to Fortitude. You suffer no efect in spells that give partial effects with fortitude saves if you make the save. You roll hit points twice and take better when you level up". Hey, suddenly taking one extra feat every other level isn't that bad, is it?
The problem with fighter bonus feats, is that most feats are crap anyway. Having twice the crap don't make you nicer. Make feats really worthwile, and suddenly the fighter goes up a lot in the Char ranking.
Alright. So I guess we've agreed a way to make fighters better while making the game better in general is *drumroll* better feats.
Yep.
I like the game the way it is, but better feats would only improve it.
Add a few specially good "fighter only" feats, and yes, we are in right way
Add a few specially good "fighter only" feats, and yes, we are in right way
Why not give fighter his own class features while your at it?
Add a few specially good "fighter only" feats, and yes, we are in right wayWhy not give fighter his own class features while your at it?
I'm afraid we're going in a circle now.
I had a fighter in one of my games, played by some one who usually played a more magical magical character. Before every battle he asked the victims the same question: "Is this a glaive, flail, bow, or fist fight?"
I had a fighter in one of my games, played by some one who usually played a more magical magical character. Before every battle he asked the victims the same question: "Is this a glaive, flail, bow, or fist fight?"
I like this guy.
A fighters are absolutely lovely for multiclassing.
the difference between a Nodachi build and a Greatsword build is very minor. Nodachi builds depend on Crits, but Greatswords are more common, more consistent, and benefits more from buffs that alter size.
the difference between a Nodachi build and a Greatsword build is very minor. Nodachi builds depend on Crits, but Greatswords are more common, more consistent, and benefits more from buffs that alter size.
I think I have to dispute that last part. The nodachi benefits just as much, if not more, than a greatsword from size increases. Two size category increases (like an enlarge person alongside lead blades/an impact weapon) will put a greatsword up to 4d6 (average damage 14) while the nodachi goes up to 3d8 (average damage 13.5). Thanks to the way weapon size categories work, the nodachi's damage dice only lag very slightly behind the greatsword as size category goes up, and the damage dice gap can actually get narrower than at base size.
That's not to mention that as damage goes up, so does the effectiveness of crit range/modifier.
the difference between a Nodachi build and a Greatsword build is very minor. Nodachi builds depend on Crits, but Greatswords are more common, more consistent, and benefits more from buffs that alter size.I disagree, Nodachi is superior its just 2 to 3 dmg less but Crits WAY more often so like my fighter who's 12th level that's +28dmg x2. and criting 15 to 20
at first, the difference is 1.5 points
but the nodachi is restricted by the following conditions
it is assumed to be a rare weapon that isn't guaranteed in every setting
because of the above, and because it comes from a special setting specific chart, a DM can deny you a chance to buy it
unlike Kikko, which can be renamed Brigandine without much issue, a Nodachi doesn't have many well known western equivalents.
few DMs allow eastern weaponry and many avoid eastern armor because they tend to be nippophobes