| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
team game.
I have also realized this. It's why I don't play fighters anymore when there are MANY other classes that can fill the martial roll of "do big damage on full attack and have high AC and fort saves". These classes also let the casters do other team helping things than just "buff the fighter". Or they could still buff me and I will only be more effective for it.
Sometimes teamwork means not dragging down the rest of the party when you know another class would fill your role better.
|
This is the Suggestions/ House Rules/ Homebrew forum. The Op posted a class based off the fighter and asked for feedback, not a debate on the power of fighters. This thread is heavily derailed and this kind of debate does not belong on this forum section.
Good point. Ahem, back to the original problem at hand.
This is the Suggestions/ House Rules/ Homebrew forum. The Op posted a class based off the fighter and asked for feedback, not a debate on the power of fighters. This thread is heavily derailed and this kind of debate does not belong on this forum section.Good point. Ahem, back to the original problem at hand.
idk.
Perhaps it would be easier just to reflavor the Aegis as mundane than it would be to re-write the fighter.
Thoughts? I'm thinking ki-based fighter that trains to enhance himself, kind-of like the martials in RWBY. Perhaps different stances and meditations allow him to do different things and that is how we justify the flexible suit modifications. For extra arm, just have it let the char wield a shield in one hand while fighting with a two handed weapon.
Perhaps fly is some sort of DBZ ki flight thing.
|
This is the Suggestions/ House Rules/ Homebrew forum. The Op posted a class based off the fighter and asked for feedback, not a debate on the power of fighters. This thread is heavily derailed and this kind of debate does not belong on this forum section.
This is a true statement.
I've posted some possible solutions for the Fighter on other threads, but there's a couple key things any fix should account for:
Quadratic growth: see also "scaling". The Fighter spends limited resources for set return. compare to literally every caster whose base abilities scale in power and effectiveness while they simultaneously unlock new and more powerful abilities. Weapon Focus for the Fighter is like a magic missile spell that never deals more than 1d4+1. Any fix needs to include adequate scaling.
Narrative power: There's a lot of ways to achieve this, my preferred solutions usually involve increased skill acquisition and improved skill facility. Doon't just give him more ranks in Intimidate or Handle Animal, give him whole new things he can do with it at levels 5, 10, 15, and 20 (or some other scale).
Closing the gap: The fix needs to be carefully targeted at the Fighter. The Fighter gets right around 25% less class resources than any other class, so fixes need to raise him up roughly 25% without raising other classes up by that same amount. This could be Fighter-specific feats, unique new class abilities, or other alternatives. I tend not to be a fan of raising the base power of feats in general, because even though yes, the Fighter could theoretically be brought up to par that way due to his more rapid acquisition, it results in total game power creep instead of focused problem resolution.
The big thing to remember is that the Fighter can already hit things standing still in front of him as hard as, or occasionally even harder than, any other class. He doesn't need bonuses to hit things, he needs bonuses and improvements to all the other stuff.
|
|
Perhaps it would be easier just to reflavor the Aegis as mundane than it would be to re-write the fighter.Thoughts? I'm thinking ki-based fighter that trains to enhance himself, kind-of like the martials in RWBY. Perhaps different stances and meditations allow him to do different things and that is how we justify the flexible suit modifications. For extra arm, just have it let the char wield a shield in one hand while fighting with a two handed weapon.
Perhaps fly is some sort of DBZ ki flight thing.
It actually wouldn't be terribly hard to take the Aegis apart and convert his customizations into martial techniques. There's also the Path of War classes that kind of already do that while occupying unique niches, like the party defending Warder or the party leading Warlord.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This is the Suggestions/ House Rules/ Homebrew forum. The Op posted a class based off the fighter and asked for feedback, not a debate on the power of fighters. This thread is heavily derailed and this kind of debate does not belong on this forum section.Good point. Ahem, back to the original problem at hand.idk.
Perhaps it would be easier just to reflavor the Aegis as mundane than it would be to re-write the fighter.
Thoughts? I'm thinking ki-based fighter that trains to enhance himself, kind-of like the martials in RWBY. Perhaps different stances and meditations allow him to do different things and that is how we justify the flexible suit modifications. For extra arm, just have it let the char wield a shield in one hand while fighting with a two handed weapon.
Perhaps fly is some sort of DBZ ki flight thing.
You can totally reflavor the fighter with the Aegis that way, but I prefer just using the Warlord and Warder from the other DSP project, Path of War. Between the two classes and their archetypes, you can get many variations of "fighter" with those two classes.
The Daevic from DSP's Akashic mysteries also fits with your refluffed ki-based fighter, and in my opinion is the best "mystical fighter" since it manages to blend magical effects with martial power without requiring any spells (magus) or size growth (aegis/synthesist summoner).
This is the Suggestions/ House Rules/ Homebrew forum. The Op posted a class based off the fighter and asked for feedback, not a debate on the power of fighters. This thread is heavily derailed and this kind of debate does not belong on this forum section.
I disagree, by nailing what the issues the Fighter has, we can then start with how to fix him.
Personally, like I said, the issue isn't so much the Fighter (although he does need some help) but rather the magic system, but if we can hammer down some of the things we can do to help the class, by pointing out flaws and mechanical issues, it's a great start.
The issue is that some people do not see these issues, simply because they've had them houseruled away, or don't play Fighters.
And for the record, this isn't the only place people complain about the lack of ability the class has. On at least three other forums deal with 3.x styled mechanics, the Fighter has been touted as the one needing the most help. So obviously there's an issue somewhere.
This is the Suggestions/ House Rules/ Homebrew forum. The Op posted a class based off the fighter and asked for feedback, not a debate on the power of fighters. This thread is heavily derailed and this kind of debate does not belong on this forum section.I disagree, by nailing what the issues the Fighter has, we can then start with how to fix him.
Personally, like I said, the issue isn't so much the Fighter (although he does need some help) but rather the magic system, but if we can hammer down some of the things we can do to help the class, by pointing out flaws and mechanical issues, it's a great start.
The issue is that some people do not see these issues, simply because they've had them houseruled away, or don't play Fighters.
And for the record, this isn't the only place people complain about the lack of ability the class has. On at least three other forums deal with 3.x styled mechanics, the Fighter has been touted as the one needing the most help. So obviously there's an issue somewhere.
I understand the why, I just think it doesn't belong on this thread when we have multiple threads (some of which with over 70 pages) that cover this argument in more depth. Someone serious about rewriting the whole magic/martial rule set would probably want to look over at least one of those threads, and start a thread with the stated goal of "time to rewrite X, what are your suggestions?"
I understand the why, I just think it doesn't belong on this thread when we have multiple threads (some of which with over 70 pages) that cover this argument in more depth. Someone serious about rewriting the whole magic/martial rule set would probably want to look over at least one of those threads, and start a thread with the stated goal of "time to rewrite X, what are your suggestions?"This is the Suggestions/ House Rules/ Homebrew forum. The Op posted a class based off the fighter and asked for feedback, not a debate on the power of fighters. This thread is heavily derailed and this kind of debate does not belong on this forum section.I disagree, by nailing what the issues the Fighter has, we can then start with how to fix him.
Personally, like I said, the issue isn't so much the Fighter (although he does need some help) but rather the magic system, but if we can hammer down some of the things we can do to help the class, by pointing out flaws and mechanical issues, it's a great start.
The issue is that some people do not see these issues, simply because they've had them houseruled away, or don't play Fighters.
And for the record, this isn't the only place people complain about the lack of ability the class has. On at least three other forums deal with 3.x styled mechanics, the Fighter has been touted as the one needing the most help. So obviously there's an issue somewhere.
The issue there is the same thing as what's happening here, you'd get a lot of 'But there's nothing WRONG with Magic, you're just doing it wrong.' like we're getting here. And let's face it having to peruse multiple threads at over a hundred posts, and trying to get the good stuff...
Let's face it it's like panning for gold in a sewer. You'll have to sift through a lot of brown stuff to get a single nugget.
I understand the why, I just think it doesn't belong on this thread when we have multiple threads (some of which with over 70 pages) that cover this argument in more depth. Someone serious about rewriting the whole magic/martial rule set would probably want to look over at least one of those threads, and start a thread with the stated goal of "time to rewrite X, what are your suggestions?"This is the Suggestions/ House Rules/ Homebrew forum. The Op posted a class based off the fighter and asked for feedback, not a debate on the power of fighters. This thread is heavily derailed and this kind of debate does not belong on this forum section.I disagree, by nailing what the issues the Fighter has, we can then start with how to fix him.
Personally, like I said, the issue isn't so much the Fighter (although he does need some help) but rather the magic system, but if we can hammer down some of the things we can do to help the class, by pointing out flaws and mechanical issues, it's a great start.
The issue is that some people do not see these issues, simply because they've had them houseruled away, or don't play Fighters.
And for the record, this isn't the only place people complain about the lack of ability the class has. On at least three other forums deal with 3.x styled mechanics, the Fighter has been touted as the one needing the most help. So obviously there's an issue somewhere.
The issue there is the same thing as what's happening here, you'd get a lot of 'But there's nothing WRONG with Magic, you're just doing it wrong.' like we're getting here. And let's face it having to peruse multiple threads at over a hundred posts, and trying to get the good stuff...
Let's face it it's like panning for gold in a sewer. You'll have to sift through a lot of brown stuff to get a single nugget.
An easy way to figure out what to fix in the magic system is to compare DSP psionics to the magic system and notice what is different.
I REALLY don't think magic is the issue. The only classes with serious problems are monk, rogue, fighter. And the monk is just barely on that list.
|
|
Monk isn't on the list at all once you bring in archetypes. The monk had plenty of abilities, just no synergy between them. With all the archetypes that let you carve away the parts that don't sync with what you want, there's a lot of very functional and effective ways you can go with the monk.
"Magic" is not the issue; it's the combination of no cost for scaling spells and non-scaling feats that plays one of the biggest roles in the divide, combined with the fact that the Fighter's chassis was built with notably fewer resources than the other class' (right around 25-35% less).
It's why psionics looks so much better by comparison; the casters have to pay to scale their spells and don't have as many shut-down/win button spells, and the "martial" classes actually have scaling and supernatural equivalent abilities at their disposal.
A few psionic classes also address WBL. The Soulknife and Aegis basically give you free gear, allowing the character the wiggle room in his WBL to purchase items that can shore up some weaknesses and/or provide mobility.
If I were to do it over again, a lot of static feats would receive some ability to scale. Power Attack, Skill Focus, and Toughness are all good examples of scaling feats. Stuff like Weapon Focus could have learned from its 4E counterpart, granting a few extra +1s along the way.
A few psionic classes also address WBL. The Soulknife and Aegis basically give you free gear, allowing the character the wiggle room in his WBL to purchase items that can shore up some weaknesses and/or provide mobility.
If I were to do it over again, a lot of static feats would receive some ability to scale. Power Attack, Skill Focus, and Toughness are all good examples of scaling feats. Stuff like Weapon Focus could have learned from its 4E counterpart, granting a few extra +1s along the way.
Actually, I'd also have made the Save Buff feats (Like Lightning Reflexes and the rest) scaling bonuses as well.
Also, one thing that drives me nuts about D&D, especially the 3.x derivatives is the singular focus into a weapon. Not a weapon type, but just one toy, like a Long Sword or a Great Axe. When in reality, most similar length swords are more or less used the same way.
The thing is, Pathfinder has done the wonderful thing of grouping up weapons into 'groups'. So for ME, I'm thinking of having the Weapon Focus family of feats work with those groups of weapons. So Weapon Focus (Heavy Blades) for example, as opposed to Weapon Focus (Longsword) and yes, it WOULD stack with the Fighter feature. Not to mention of doing the 4e thing and making the bonuses scale with level. Maybe even allowing for Damage die boosts ever 5-6 levels or something (Like at level 5 you do x2 damage with your weapons.) It's still no where near what the Wizard or Cleric can put out, but it'll allow for more 'heroic' play.
Here's the thing I want from a Fantasy game, I want the heroes to be able to take on up to 3 foes each. So a group of five heroes can handle 15 goons, like Hobgoblin troopers. Will they take damage and spend resources? OH YES! But this sort of combat should be the norm, in my opinion.
When you face a lieutenant level on the other hand, they should be a threat to the heroes one on one, so five lt. for five PCs. And Boss, well, that's where the five on one comes to play.
The first step in the process to 'fix' the fighter, is not to figure out what's broken, but to have a goal of what we'd like to see the fighter do.
The fighter is an artifact of the original D&D rules -- the ones way back in the days of there being all of four classes. The class was meant to represent any figure who attacked with a melee weapon. Since D&D is medieval fantasy, that meant there were a lot of people out there swinging swords, axes, maces, and fighting with all sorts of other implements of pain.
As has been pointed out by several other posters, the fighter did not scale well as the concept came along. And now, in the 3.Paizo ruleset, it's a subpar class. There are other classes which do what the fighter can do, better.
I think the answer doesn't lie in making the fighter do those specific things better. I think the answer lies in making the fighter do everything better -- just not as good as the specialized roles.
Okay, what does the fighter do? He fights. He learns to be good at fighting, because that's the class. But he should be good at all aspects of fighting, not just sword-and-board, damage-dealing or what have you. If the Aegis is the better defender, the Paladin is the better tank, and the Barbarian is the better striker, then the Fighter should be able to do all of those -- but his power comes in versatility. He should be able to switch between roles as needed, becoming what the party needs at the moment.
"But he can do that already!" No, he can't. The problem is the feat system, which encourages specialization, not generalization. The current rules on the fighter give him lots of these feats, which only encourages more specialization. The fighter picks an area to specialize in and only gets better at it -- until the power of feats stop scaling.
Feats are nowhere near as good as class abilities. The fighter should get the same amount of feats as the other classes (making 'dips' into fighter, for extra feats, useless). Instead he should get class abilities that make him a more effective warrior all around -- and as someone pointed out, these abilities should scale.
At low levels, the fighter shouldn't have to deal with weapon focus and specialization. Get rid of those, or alternatively, make weapon specialization a standard combat feat anyone can take (with the prerequisites of Weapon Focus with that weapon and a BAB of +4). The fighter, instead, gets additional attack and damage with any weapon he holds in his hands.
At midlevel, the fighter starts to show weakness from not having the hit points of the barbarian or the self-healing of the paladin. So let's give him a new mechanic: Damage Avoidance. As long as the fighter retains his Dex bonus, he is able to avoid damage entirely. It's like the barbar's DR, which effectively gives the fighter more hit points.
At the same time, the fighter starts losing versatility, because he just doesn't have the same kind of neat tricks all the other classes can do. He might have picked up some Improved Combat feats, like Improved Sunder, Improved Trip, etc., but taking those feats is breeding specialization, again. Instead I'd just give the fighter the ability to make those special attacks, not provoking -- but with an attack penalty, say, -4 to the roll.
At higher levels, the fighter really starts to suffer because he just can't scale like the other classes can. Well, okay, part of that is inherent in the genre -- the arcane classes took ten levels of being complete wusses so they can get to the point where they can just end combats at will. But there's the example above, of the fighter vs. the balron. Fighter steps up to the plate, balron teleports off, summons minions to swarm the fighter. Rinse and repeat. The fighter needs the ability to cut through that crap and get to the balron.
Personally I'd tie this to the skill system. If the fighter can pull out Intimidation and force the balron to come fight him through intimidation and taunts, then the fighter gains more power on the high-level battlefield. He is a commanding figure who the minions quake and shudder in fear at the thought of having to face him in combat, and as such they're useless to the balron -- the greater demon has no choice but to take on the fighter in combat.
But this is where I sort of fall apart, because I don't really have that much experience with the D20 game system at higher levels. Maybe someone else can come up with better ideas.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
So, what else is wrong with fighter? Can't do stuff out of combat? You're called "fighter." What do you want to DO out of combat? More skill points? Okay, how does that synch with every other non- or limited-magic class that relies on skill points? I mean, I love me some cross-class training but the supposedly skills-only rogue gets 8 base. Are we gonna bump her up to 12? The barbarian already gets 4 and that's one of his consolation prizes for being an ignorant and poorly-trained barbarian.
Apparently you haven't actually played Pathfinder. Barbarians are neither "ignorant" nor "poorly trained" and they're certainly not in need of a consolation prize. 4 + Int skill points is the bare minimum for every class in the game that doesn't have 9 level spell progression, with the sole exception of the Fighter. You know what a Fighter can't do competently on 2 skill points? Climb, jump and ride a freaking horse. That's 4 skill points right there.
The thing you're missing is that the Fighter is not balanced to the other classes. You don't need to bump someone else up because the Fighter was improved, you're just bringing him up to par with all the other non-caster classes. A single feat for the Fighter is weighted as heavily in his class design as the ranger or paladin's entire spellcasting.
|
|
Totally aside from that; the OP came in and asked to start a conversation about how to fix the Fighter. If you don't think the Fighter is broken and you're going to hold up your cross and try and ward off the forces of math and reason like the devil while deriding everyone who actually came in here looking to address the OP's request, you probably don't have business here. You're basically displaying the same level of ignorance and rudeness as a homeless man who walks into a college medical lecture and loudly interrupts the professor to inform the class that medicine is a lie and instead of learning how to heal others with medicine and science they should start treating pneumonia and cancer with prayer.
All righty then. Here's what most people seem to think the issues with the Fighters are:
Versatility: In both weapon options and knowledge, Fighters tend to lack width/breadth. Various feats trap Fighters into a single weapon option to be 'capable'. The skill list and amount of available skill points are also anaemic, forcing the Fighter into the 80's Nerds vs. Jocks mentality of anyone physically capable must be a moron.
Capability: Compared to classes that can heal, or has magic, The Fighter (and to a certain degree the Rogue) has a very limited shelf-life. For all of people claiming that Fighters can 'do it all day', the truth is they can't, and because Hit Points run out faster than with those who stay out of range, or can self-heal, they are often the first to fall.
(If there's more, please let me know and I'll add it to the list. Because I will not let a thread like this get shouted down yet again.)
So the question becomes: What can we do to bring those two options to the Fighter classes? Or at least closer to the other classes?
I am actually a big fan of what Master_Marshmallow did with the fighter, inspired by the brawler This
And I think another key issue about the fighter is that they are very easily disabled and lack archetype, feat, or class feature support to fix this Both the fighter and the cavalier have bad will and reflex saves with basically nothing to help them. It's so easy to make them go on "time out" with something like create pit, fear, hold person, or enchantment effects.
Fighter has the option to take Iron Will and Lightning Reflexes.
Barbarians, Paladins, and Rangers all have these options too, plus either in-class features or in-class options to improve their saves.
Bravery is not enough to protect fighters from fear, and honestly barely counts as a save ability as it is. Barbarians have an option to be immune to fear while raging. Paladins stop taking fear all together at the same level fighters gain bravery, and have an aura equivalent to a fighter's 14th level bravery.
I've posted my own views on how to fix the fighter, while defining the flavor of the class: Fighter = Student of the art of warfare
The education of the fighter can be via a master/disciple model, or formal elite training at an academy, or via membership in a secret society or warrior guild. This training includes the study of
- warfare history.
- terrain, battlefields.
- various powers, abilities and creatures which one might encounter on the battlefield, and how to properly defeat or employ them.
- methods of optimizing one's training of the mind and body.
These fields of study, and the concept, imply that the fighter is also a skill monkey of some sort. Following this approach resulted in the following additions to the existing Fighter class features.
- 4 skill ranks/level (instead of 2/level).
Add Knowledge (History) and Knowledge (Geography) as class skills.
- +1/2 Fighter level on all knowledge checks to identify an enemy and/or their abilities. These checks are always trained skill checks (can be over 10), even if the fighter has no ranks in the knowledge skill.
- Gain a Bonus Feat at levels 3, 6, 9, 12, 15 and 18. Select from among [Acrobatic, Alertness, Animal Affinity, Athletic, Deceitful, Endurance, Fleet, Iron Will, Lightning Reflexes, Magical Aptitude, Persuasive, Run, Self-Sufficient, Skill Focus, Stealthy], where this list can be extended by the APG, UC, UM and so forth.
This proposed change is meant to fix what I see as the most glaring issue of the fighter: Narrow usefulness.
As-is, the fighter is the only PC class whose abilities are only combat abilities, with pretty much nothing to contribute outside of direct combat. No stealth, no social skills, no crafting ... nothing. They are effectively a "battle commoner" who, like the NPC warrior class, is a commoner with mundane combat abilities tacked on.
In reading this thread, I have to agree that the fighter is also brutally lacking in self-sufficiency. I'm hoping that adding the "skill monkey" features can mitigate this, especially the added feats which can let a fighter use skills like Heal and Use Magic Device, at least more effectively than a commoner (the lowest-common-denominator class).
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
I made these fixes small because I didn't want to go overboard. I also think that the two class features - feats and skills, should be the hallmark of a mundane class like the fighter.
The bonus feats (every 3rd level) are selected so as to promote various flexible builds of fighter, keeping the "vanilla" aspect which some find appealing. They were also kept simple with the thought in mind that the feats themselves double as prerequisites for some more notable feats: Skill Focus, for example, can unlock Eldritch Heritage chain if you want to dabble in supernatural powers. Similarly, by level 6 a fighter could have Skill Focus - UMD and Magical Aptitude, providing +5 to UMD (and +2 spellcraft) before a rank is added. At 10 ranks that bonus jumps to +10. The same approach can be made to make the most of the Dazzling Display chain, with Skill Focus - Intimidate and Persuasive. Or a Feint specialist with Skill Focus - Bluff and Deceitful. Iron Will unlocks Improved Iron Will, Endurance unlocks Diehard, and so on and so on. There are many possibilities.
As a result, when comparing these additions to the base character class, they add up.
E6 (level 6): 12 skill ranks, +3 to knowledge checks for knowing enemy abilities, and 2 noncombat feats.
Level 12 (when Legend Lore applies): 24 ranks, +6 knowledge checks vs. abilities, 4 noncombat feats.
Level 20 (endgame): 40 ranks, +20 knowledge checks, 6 noncombat feats.
I'm confident that any optimizer worth his salt would take these additions and create a fighter who is both a capable combatant, and also a well-rounded, self-sufficient and useful party member.