| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Or, the thoughts that went into my rewrite.
Note: The Rewrite itself isn't posted here.
=================================
Fighter Design and Discussion
I’m going to go through my thoughts on how I’d try to build/rebuild the fighter class for 20 levels. My goal isn’t to get a more powerful combat machine, but to build a better narrative for the fighter and ‘round him out’, bringing him up to par with the other martial classes while retaining his own distinctive flavor.
Here’s some of the issues I’ll be attempting to deal with.
1) Retaining combat ability as a par, near constant, no ‘surge’ damage, but giving some flexibility on application.
2) The fighter’s ability should be based on level and skill, not ability scores. While high stats never hurt, a fighter with average ability scores should still be a dangerous combatant, much like you don’t need a 26 Int wizard to be dangerous.
3) The fighter is the Olympian and combat genius of the fighting classes. He takes mundane combat tricks and things and turns them into truly dangerous things. He is the SMART melee combatant, even if his Int is 10.
4) The fighter is and has always been centered around his weapon of choice, and to a lesser extent his armor.
5) The fighter should have some ability to lead and inspire others, if he chooses to develop it.
6) Fighters should not have or be reliant on magic in any form. Actually, they should be the most non-magical and magically resistant of all the classes. Every other class but the fighter has access to magic or magical abilities.
7) Fighters should be able to train and self-improve outside of their level gains, in the same way casters can learn more and new spells. Since they don’t have magic, when they do train, they should get more benefit out of training then someone with magic.
8) Feats are central to how fighters are. But feats are lousy class features, so if we’re going to use feats, we have to make feats awesome, and we're probably going to need more of them.
9) Fighters who are smart and educated should be rewarded. Furthermore, any mundane person living in a world of magic who cannot use magic will be as driven to find non-magical sources of strength. Fighters should have useful mundane skills that exceed that of spellcasters, because, well, they aren’t spellcasters, who just buff.
10) Fighters should be based on the existing chassis to a large extent so changes are minimized.
-------
With that, we start on the deconstruction of the Pathfinder Fighter.
At level 1: In my games, I presume there are things you get at you first character level that you get at no other time. This means that multi-classing actually costs you something, and your formative years are spent picking up these primary skills to shape your career.
At level 1, the fighter gets: Martial Weapons Proficiencies, light through heavy armor, shields, and tower shields as proficiencies. These are core level 1 skills, and those who take up the fighter at later levels get NONE of these, exactly as if they were prestige classing.
Saves: The fighter gets a good fort save, reflecting the fact he’s tough and in shape.
Unfortunately, this says NOTHING about the fact that superior combatants are also usually quite agile, with superb reflexes and tremendous mental focus and drive. For some reason, the ranger, who doesn’t even train to be more agile in armor, gets both a good reflex save and evasion against spells.
At levels 1,2, and every 2 levels thereafter, the fighter gets a bonus Combat feat; Unlike every other class that gets bonus feats, he has to meet the pre-reqs. Ostensibly, these 11 feats are the ‘spells’ of the fighter, but only by the biggest stretch of the imagination are they the equal of spellcaster levels. Furthermore, he has no ability to gain extra feats above and beyond, like casters get spells, nor does he have the flexibility to switch out feats with any timeliness, AND they must all be combat feats.
Ugh.
At level 2, he gets Bravery. This improves his save against fear by +1, and improves every 4 levels by +1.
---Much has been said about the uselessness of Bravery, how poorly it compares to a paladin’s immunity to fear, and the fact it’s worse than a good will save: the brave fighter gets intimidated more easily then the scrawny wizard.
----We’re going to use this as the basis of Mental Discipline, and turn Bravery into an engine of mental strength, discipline, perseverance. Fighters are like champion athletes, and their belief and desire to succeed will be embodied in this evenly scaling ability. The fact it maxes out at +5 is nice and convenient.
At level 3, he gets Armor Training/Mastery: I break this into two parts, because one part is move as if medium armor was lighter, an ability derided for how cheaply it is imitated; and the other is +1 To Dex limit and -1 to ACP in armor, which is derided for being a de facto Stat Requirement on a class feature.
---This is a +1 ability that improves every 4 levels, maxing out at +4 at level 15 at +4.
We’re going to use this bonus for everything to do with agility, balance and endurance…and harmonization with his armor.
At level 4, he gets Weapon Training/Mastery: A +1 th/dmg with a weapon group. This is also split in two parts, the bonus and the weapon groups. The bonus increases by +1 every 4 levels, to a maximum of +4 at 16th.
----We’re going to use this to represent hand/eye coordination and strength.
At level 7, he gets to suffer no speed penalties in Heavy Armor.
--We’re going to fold this in as a subset of the level 3, and if you already have the ability, give you a bonus feat (Endurance is appropriate).
At level 8, he gets another weapon group for Weapon Mastery, at -1 to the power of the Primary group.
---Adding another non-primary weapon group at -1 is fine. The Primary weapon group should indeed be primary.
At level 12, he gets a 3rd weapon group at -2.
--The shrinking bonus is inappropriate. We’ll be changing this to ‘another secondary weapon group’ and keeping the bonus at -1.
At level 16, he gets a 4th weapon group at -3.
---Ditto.
At level 19, he gets his first capstone, +5 DR whenever using armor or a shield.
---Huh. Let’s ignore the fact that +5 is where his armor training should be at, and focus on the fact that this DR stacks with no other DR…adamantine armor, armor spec, class abilities. Furthermore, he had to wait 19 levels to get it, which completely breaks the even scaling paradigm that's core to the Fighter.
At level 20, he gets awesome with one weapon, can’t be disarmed with it, and the crit number jumps by 1. Given that this is the scaling capstone of weapon mastery, this should apply to the whole group, not just one weapon, so we’ve broken the mold of the class for a capstone that arguably should be part of the weapon focus chain.
Feat retraining: Every 4 levels?!?
----Riiiight. Every level you can change one, at a minimum.
Notice something? Yeah. At levels 2, 5, 6, 9, 10, 11, 13, 14, 15, 17 and 18, the fighter doesn’t get anything. (remember, bonus feats are = to spellcasting, and shall be treated as separate class abilities!!!). Arguably, this could be EVERY LEVEL except 3,4,5 and 7, and the 2 capstones.
Trying to stick a paltry scaling bonus from a low level effect in there is an insult. Rage Powers, smiting, Favored Enemy and Terrain bonuses, all scale by level, each little +1 isn’t a whole Class Feature.
Furthermore, Armor Mastery 1 and 2 are woefully underpowered; the additional weapon groups are horrible, and the level 19 capstone, is, well, yeah.
Other Points:
FC: Fighters get an alternate FC ability, +2 to certain combat maneuver defenses based on Race.
----Yeah, no. We want vanilla, and choice. We’ll just make the human ‘pick your own’ the standard.
Training: The ability to ‘buy’ more hit points is awesome. If Fighters are the training and disciplined class, this should work better for them than it does for other classes.
===========================================
Themes I’m going to use
Archetypes: I believe Fighter archetypes, like most prestige classes, are largely unnecessary. This is particularly true in the case of the fighter, where archetypes become all about wielding a certain weapon, which is basically a modified weapon focus style feat chain. So, if I stub the toes of archetypes, it’s totally deliberate.
Feats: The Fighter is the Master of Feats, the Lord of Feats, and the Sage of Feats.
Master of Feats means basically that the fighter gets more feats than anyone. I am DEFINITELY going to step on the toes of rangers here. I really can’t believe that rangers get a fighting school, and fighters do not.
Lord of Feats means that Fighters get more out of feats than any other class. Feats are like spells to fighters…for fighters, all feats should scale. A normal person takes a feat, gets a benefit – the fighter takes a feat and relentlessly improves it as he levels. Feats are full blown class features to the Lord of Feats, and every one is useful.
Sage of Feats mean that the fighter learns feats more easily then anyone else. Fighters will ignore all pre-reqs for combat feats except BAB, and if it's a ranger Combat School feat, qualify at the same time as rangers do (who do you think is teaching rangers those feats?). It also means there will be much feat consolidation for fighters.
No Magic: Not having magical abilities is going to be intrinsic to the class, to the point where innately magical races are actually at somewhat of a disadvantage.
Schools: All Fighters should have Schools. If they are self-taught, then they are effectively starting a school. This ties Fighters into traditions, the development of Master and Student relationships in both directions. Picking a School will drive many class abilities. It will be the core of influencing the narrative.
Training: The fighter more than any other class is presumed to be undergoing continual self-improvement. Barbs rage, rangers stalk and cast, paladins pray and smite, and fighters engage in endless hours of training. The other classes can train, but training is what fighters DO.
This also opens up the avenue that Fighters are best at training others. While casters make better toys, Fighters make better people! Training will be how the fighter expands his versatility in ways other classes cannot, or better than other classes can.
Self-improvement: The fighter may start off worse than some classes, but will continually self-improve over time to rival or even surpass them. If you don’t have magic, you have no CHOICE but to do this.
This theme is intended to reflect the increasing power and utility of higher level magic spells, and the increase in caster levels.
Little defined by stats: I want the class to be skill and choice based, NOT reliant on multiple abilities. The idea is to minimize the amount of Stats a fighter needs to function effectively. Race should rarely be a factor. The class should stand on its own.
Choose your own fighter: You should be able to assemble the fighter you want from the pieces available. Archetypes that reserve specific powers to themselves should be unnecessary…make feats. Likewise, PrC alternate fighters should be unneeded…make a feat tree!
===========================
ANd now we are open to discussion.
What do you feel should be added to the above?
What do you disagree with, and why?
Keep in mind a central premise...the fighter should stand well ON HIS OWN. Being awesome because the casters can throw spells on you is not awesome at all.
I'd like to tweak the build some more, but I'd like to see some feedback before I do, just in case.
Keep in mind I also had to do a Feat re-write for this. I empathisize with Kirthfinder...rewriting feats is a big task!
==Aelryinth
I think if you want to fix feats, they should be fixed for everyone. It seems wasteful to do it for just one class. Fighters can get more of them and ignore prereqs like rangers do though, I'm fine with that.
I'd like to see military genius/leader played up as the new set of class features. Making the Fighter mesh with Warlord/Marshal archetypes. Granting actions, temporary hit points, etc. Or alternatively to being a secondary buffer, the Fighter could be a secondary debuffer, imposing penalties on enemies just for being in his battlezone. Or perhaps, both.
The ranger and barbarian are typically cast as lone wolves, but the Fighter should be an excellent squad mate/leader.
Here's the problem with updating feats for everyone.
Extra Rage Power.
Extra Smite.
Extra Rogue Talent.
Extra Mercy.
Favored Companion.
etc etc etc.
The Fighter's shtick is bonus combat feats.
Anyone can take bonus combat feats.
Several classes 'qualify as fighters' for the 2-3 feat lines that 'only fighters' can take.
The fighter needs to make every combat feat the equivalent of taking a rage power. It's the only way to keep parity for the class. Thus, you MUST have a feat re-write. Without it, the fighter is still gimped with half-strength class features.
That means to make a balanced Feat a) it has to be an excellent base power b) it has to scale just like a rage power does and c) it has to work for the fighter only, just like rage powers only work for those with rage powers.
To do that is simple: If you have Bravery +X and Armor Training X, then this feat does X.....
Which effectively makes it a fighters-only feat, because who keeps bravery and armor training in other classes? They're like the worst class features of the fighter.
=========
I put in a mechanic called 'Marshal Training', which is an aura mechanic with a very large area - 10'/level, that kicks in at 6th level (when the Fighter can take Leadership!). It provides a broad, small morale bonus to those who follow the Fighter's command against a set of foes. The bonus is doubled for those who are the Fighter's personal followers.
So he gets VERY good at leading his own personal students/guards/followers, he provides a bonus that is less then half the strength of the bard to others and limited to a specific set of foes at a time, but it is continuous. SO he doesn't step on the bard's toes as a morale buffer, but he's really good at leading large numbers of people.
The other stuff (temporary hit points, other buffs, enemy debuffs, action granting) is in the realm of specific feats if the fighter wants to develop his Marshal ability to become a leader of armies and the like...and its yet another reason the feats a fighter takes should be as strong as class features. A fighter with Marshal Training and the right Marshal feats should eliminate the need for Marshals as an archetype, right?
Squadmate: This is all about the teamwork feats.
A Fighter who takes Teamwork as a feat gains a number of Teamwork Feats equal to his Expertise Bonus (minimum 1). Thus, a scaling bonus.
At higher levels, a Fighter is considered to gain the Teamwork benefits when partnering with anyone within his Marshal Aura. At the next tier, anyone who he teams with also gains the benefit of the feat, and his followers gain the benefit of all his Teamwork feats with each other while within his Marshal Aura.
So when he says "Flank'em and kill'em," his followers oh-so-lethally can.
==+Aelrynth
Perhaps we have different expectations. I expect feats to be fixed for everyone, but I'm okay with Fighters getting something extra, ex. sharing Combat Reflexes with all nearby allies. Actually, I'm fond of the idea of the Fighter sharing some basic feats.
Alternatively, you could write new features for the fighter to choose from ala talents, and have one talent just grant you a feat, with no limit on the amount of times you can take it. So either dip into a pool of unique stuff like barbarians/magus/ninja do, or get the classic fighter stuff.
Side note: I don't keep Bravery/Armor Training because most archetypes trade it out, I'm sure the same will occur for others. That's why it may make sense to do Fighter Talents as a more effective way to make sure it's exclusive to the class.
Not a fan of making the Fighter bring a lot of mooks with him. Many tables ban leadership, and buffing NPCs better than PCs doesn't sound fun for anyone at the table. I don't think you have to worry about the Fighter stepping on the Bard's toes unless he starts casting Haste.
Oh, I called the improved feats 'Techniques', but they are all titled on/based on core feats.
Feat consolidation and feat leveling are part of the package. Synergy with other feats is, too. Combat Reflexes adds your Expertise bonus to the total AoO's you get. (Expertise is VERY useful in my re-write).
I agree that fighters don't want to tote around mooks. That being said, the fighter leading an army/founding a school/governing a nation/heading a mercenary band is a standard trope. Much of what Leadership entails can be relegated to non-adventuring action...which means a Fighter has something substantial to do outside of combat.
The casters make magic items. The Fighter makes awesome subordinates.
Why WOULDN'T Npc's specifically devoted to a fighter, trained by him in his school and style of combat, gain a better bonus then PC's?
More to the point, what does it matter? They are followers...low level guys who are never going to steer the initiative. But the bonus clearly says 'The army led by the fighter is going to be EXTREMELY dangerous.' PC's by their nature are going to resist being given orders...NPC's lap it up.
How much you want to include having followers in the game is a call with the GM. I liken it as no more disruptive then casters making magic items for half price.
Note to your Side Note: I use Bravery and Armor Training because no other class uses them...like, you know, extra Mercy, extra Rage Power, etc.
And I stated I'd be stepping all over Archetypes, which I don't believe in. Fighter Archetypes should be feat trees.
==Aelryinth
It kind of feels like you're re-inventing the Tome of Battle at some points, and at others it feels like you're just trying to create a base class based on leadership.
That just doesn't seem to feel like a fighter, but that's just me. We all have an idea of what a fighter is and what it could be.
I do like the idea of having combat feats do extra stuff for fighters. It's something I've been contemplating for a long time.
If the Fighter grants combat bonuses to mooks you don't actually expect him to bring on the adventure, what's the point?
If this bonus is meant to apply to an army at war, what does it actually mean? Wars aren't resolved by having each soldier roll to hit and damage (or rather, that would be a very tedious and lengthy method of resolution).
I don't understand your issue with Fighter archetypes, but that's your prerogative. Keeping a feature I don't need (ex. Armor Training on a Dex Fighter) then needing to spend feats on what I could've traded it out for in the first place? That's a nerf. If you call your special feats Techniques and make an Extra Technique, I think that would be good enough to keep it Fighter only.
I like the idea of Expertise modifying things but extra features are more appealing than additional scaling. I've never run out of AoOs when I had combat reflexes, getting 3 more isn't doing anything for me. But granting combat reflexes to my allies to allow them to strike the target while flat-footed due to my drilling? That's pretty cool.
I know you're just throwing out ideas here, and I know that the specifics of these new class features aren't worked out yet, but I want to specifically address Sage of Feats. I really hope this isn't a 1st level ability that lets a character ignore all combat feat prereqs except BAB. That seem out of control to me, and too easy to dip one level. If one was to make it a 1st level ability, I would allow the fighter to add his level to all ability scores for the purpose of qualifying for combat feats. In this way, even at 1st level the fighter with a 12 in an ability score qualifies for a bunch of other feats, but still needs a higher level to get better feats if he hasn't a high enough ability score. However, by 5th level, even the 10 dexterity fighter can pick up two-weapon fighting if he chooses.
Just a thought. I'm looking forward to seeing an actual write-up.
It kind of feels like you're re-inventing the Tome of Battle at some points, and at others it feels like you're just trying to create a base class based on leadership.
That just doesn't seem to feel like a fighter, but that's just me. We all have an idea of what a fighter is and what it could be.
I do like the idea of having combat feats do extra stuff for fighters. It's something I've been contemplating for a long time.
Leadership is a very minor part of what my re-write does.
Marshal training lets the fighter pick a foe, and then gain either +1 th/dmg or +1 ac/saves against that foe type as a morale bonus to all allies within 10'r/level. So, orcs, say. It doesn't stack with Favored Enemy or other morale bonuses.
So, if you're fighting a LOT of orcs, it's nice.
Leadership means the fighter actually has to sit down and form an organization to GET the followers. A government, a merc band, a school, whatever. There has to be some sort of base or foundation. If not, then he doesn't get followers, just a henchman.
If he does find himself in command of a large force, however, he's very effective. The morale bonus improves, applies to more foes (but never exceeds +2 or 2 foe types) and covers a wider area.
In a set battle setting, you'd reflect the bonus as a constant increase to morale, attack and defense for the whole force. Given two equal forces, the fighter will be the better commander and the force will reflect his leadership and battlefield acumen.
===
All of which is a Secondary function, and not Primary to the class. It's just there if you want to make use of it. If Leadership is a thing, the Fighter is the best of the commanders.
It's one of the four roles of the Fighter, and if he wants to build on it, he can get very good at it. If not, it doesn't hurt anything.
If you mean Tome of 9 Swords, no manuvers, no recharges, nothing like that to keep track of.
==Aelryinth
If the Fighter grants combat bonuses to mooks you don't actually expect him to bring on the adventure, what's the point?
===If there are crafting feats, but the DM doesn't allow you to craft, what's the point?
Exactly the same. If you are allowed, it's a good option to have.
If this bonus is meant to apply to an army at war, what does it actually mean? Wars aren't resolved by having each soldier roll to hit and damage (or rather, that would be a very tedious and lengthy method of resolution).
=========A broad and constant bonus to the entire fighting force, above and beyond charisma, to reflect inspiration, leadership, and superior discipline and training. The fighter understands the marshal and the soldier, he IS the marshal and the soldier.
I don't understand your issue with Fighter archetypes, but that's your prerogative. Keeping a feature I don't need (ex. Armor Training on a Dex Fighter) then needing to spend feats on what I could've traded it out for in the first place? That's a nerf. If you call your special feats Techniques and make an Extra Technique, I think that would be good enough to keep it Fighter only.
===I have the same issue with Archetypes that I do with many PrC's. They don't need to exist. You don't need to swap out this and that and reserve special abilities that all fighters should have access to just to some guy who uses a two handed weapon or likes to run around or specializes in the scimitar.
Those are feats. Make them Archetype feats you can only have one of and be done with it.
And Armor Training is actually MOST useful on a Dex fighter, who will have the Dex to actually take advantage of it. Armor Training on the Pathfinder fighter is absolutely worthless if you don't have the dex to take advantage of it.
And the armor training I use enhances your armor. It has nothing to do with Dex. Armor Training provides a virtual enhancement bonus to your armor, making it perform like stronger armor. It has nothing to do with Dex score. If you want high Dex armor, get Mithral Celestial and be happy like everyone else. The fighter should NOT be dependent on needing a massive Dex score to take advantage of his class abilities.
I like the idea of Expertise modifying things but extra features are more appealing than additional scaling. I've never run out of AoOs when I had combat reflexes, getting 3 more isn't doing anything for me. But granting combat reflexes to my allies to allow them to strike the target while flat-footed due to my drilling? That's pretty cool.
=========I use AoO's as a euphemism for 'extra actions' not just 'extra attacks.' So there's feats which allow you to burn AoO's for different things. Cleave lets you burn an AoO when you drop a foe to make another attack. You can burn an AoO to hit a foe you just dropped. Burn AoO's to take 5' steps that end in attacks and apply against next round's movements. Make a riposte. Parry other AoO's.
Having lots of AoO's is useful. If you've got a high Dex, that's great, enjoy it. But you can have a low Dex fighter that has a bunch of AoO's because he's just that bloody good, he doesn't have to be Mr Supersmooth or Spiderman the super-coordinated.
I call it freedom from the tyranny of high Stats.
Giving away actions to others is Teamwork stuff, and falls under Marshal type feats and actions. You can choose that path if you want to go down it. I don't see it as an ability every fighter should have, so it should be a Feat.
==Aelryinth
I know you're just throwing out ideas here, and I know that the specifics of these new class features aren't worked out yet, but I want to specifically address Sage of Feats. I really hope this isn't a 1st level ability that lets a character ignore all combat feat prereqs except BAB. That seem out of control to me, and too easy to dip one level. If one was to make it a 1st level ability, I would allow the fighter to add his level to all ability scores for the purpose of qualifying for combat feats. In this way, even at 1st level the fighter with a 12 in an ability score qualifies for a bunch of other feats, but still needs a higher level to get better feats if he hasn't a high enough ability score. However, by 5th level, even the 10 dexterity fighter can pick up two-weapon fighting if he chooses.
Just a thought. I'm looking forward to seeing an actual write-up.
Sage of Feats allows the fighter to ignore most pre-reqs for feats taken as Fighter bonus feats except BAB (and BAB is waived if it's a combat school ala the Ranger).
A 1 level dip won't get you too far.And most of the bonus combat feats it helps you get, if they are Techniques, are going to have Bravery, Armor, Weapon or Marshal Training reqs, which are not waived. Or, are sources of bonuses that are provided.
elsewise...it isn't going to get abused more then any other Fighter dip, but the Techniques aren't going to be of much use without fighter levels.
I don't worry about stat reqs at all. Freedom from Stat tyranny. The Fighter can use combat feats as easily as a Barb uses Rage powers. He doesn't need high stats any more then the Ranger does - learning feats easily is His Thing. No other class does it as easy. They get spells, magical powers, scaling abilities...the Fighter learns feats easily.
I completely do not see a problem with that.
==Aelryinth
Re: Mooks
I don't agree with the equivalency you see between crafting magic items and taking mooks into battle with you.
I'm not a fan of the Master Summoner because he adds clutter to combats, and I wouldn't welcome a Fighter taking his students on a field trip with the party for the same reason. And yet if I want to be a leader fighter, it sounds like it's a weak option unless you do have these mooks. I'd prefer to be an effective catalyst for the party, turning a group of ragtag heroes into a well-oiled fighting unit. The idea that the party won't want to take combat guidance from the Fighter seems silly to me, it's like rejecting magical aid from the Wizard or booing the Bard.
Re: Bonus to mooks in War
I'm not arguing that it doesn't make sense for the Fighter, I'm saying it's not clear what that means. These bonuses matter for small scale combats, but large scale combats aren't fought by those rules.
Re: Armor Training
Right, that's a good point that Dex Fighters can take good advantage of Armor Training. It's just that when I play a Dex Fighter, I don't want to wear heavy armor for stylistic reasons, even if the character can move in it as if it's light armor. I can see I wasn't clear on that.
It seems like you're remaking too much stuff to comment on without seeing the end product though, so I'm gonna stop here. I don't like the design behind feats as a major class feature, I don't think it's a meaningful niche. But that is what the Fighter is to a lot of people, so I'm sure a lot of people will like it.
I'm not saying take the mooks into a fight. They are complete mooks, 1/3 the level of the party at best...they aren't going to be helping in a standard combat.
But that ship? That crew? That's HIS ship and crew.
And it's not that PC's can't coordinate with the Fighter - you're taking it too far. It's that these are HIS followers, his students, his crew - they are TRAINED to take orders from him, and respond enthusiastically to doing so. It's a morale bonus, after all, and their hero/great leader just issued them an order - they jump!
So, no, you don't take a bunch of mooks who'd find monster summon II a challenge at level 10. But if you get into a situation where you need a bunch of mooks - the fighter has mooks!
Using them in your campaign is exactly like Crafting - if the DM doesn't want you to have followers, or you're not willing to set up a base, then it's a no go, just like if the DM says no crafting, you stick with magic shops.
But if you're going onto battlefields, crewing ships, starting a merchant/mercenary company, building an elite regiment, setting up a castle/fortification/new settlement/kingdom...the fighter is the one that draws in the mooks and leads them.
It's a way for fighters to have an effect on the Narrative, as Kirth puts it. Other classes work on their toys, Fighters can work on their people!
You do know that there's a Devoted Follower feat which thematically does the same thing for your NPC followers, right?
==Aelryinth
There's something called the Genius Guide to the Talented Fighter.
I'm sure you've read through it before, but it does exactly what you want it to. It makes fighter archetype abilities into feat-equivelant talents which can be taken above x level.
You get feats that allow you to gain a talent, talents that allow you to gain a feat, so on and so forth. You also gain a talent at -every- level, essentially doubling the amount of feats you are able to recieve.
Does nothing for the saves, though.
------------------
What I personally suggest to enhance the fighter's fighting to the level it should be as a warrior in a fantasy setting:
Make AoO's the fighter "resource" of sorts, which he can burn to not just do things other classes can, but things no one else can. Like reroll a save or take an extra 5ft step or use two AoOs to trigger one from your enemy immediately.
It makes sense for the fighter to have reactive and effective control of his personal threat zone and punish actions from his enemies that don't have "retreat" in their name.
It makes sense to have a fighter squeeze an attack in on his enemies as soon as they even think of raising their sword to attack, or shift their feet to move away.
This can also give a whole new dimension to fighter's... fighting. Give him a predefined role in a party, something the barbarian can't fulfill. And not to mention, a fight between two high-level fighters would be an absolutely baffling sight for other PCs. Two epitomes of combat prowess trading in over ten blows within seconds (One round) and the victor is decided as quickly as the fight had begun.
---------------------
Also, while the bard's class is quite literally made to inspire others, the fighter's isn't by default a leader.
It would make more sense to grant these leadership bonuses as an option, not as a core class ability.
Furthermore, you can 'train' to be a leader, but it's by default not going to get you as far as someone with the charisma to keep all these things working together. Making this particular bit a scaling passive bonus that isn't tied to ability mods at all seems thematically inaccurate to me.
Perhaps you could tie the morale bonus to charisma, and instead represent the fighter's tactical wisdom and strategical warfare training with a different effect? Something that reflected coordinated movement, efficiency and decisive maneuvers of the fighter's troop, rather than a straight numeric bonus.
Glosz posted his homebrew rules including combat techniques that grant bonus feats for the fighter.
A simple modification for fighters, which grants them much needed diversity.
http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2rk3o?house-rules#1
I empirically refuse to tie a class ability to a stat unless absolutely necessary. The leadership required of a someone in combat is completely different then social diplomacy, it operates on different paradigms, and it can be a learned skill.
The morale bonus I let the fighter grant is very limited. It applies against a maximum of 2 foe types at high levels, and a maximum of +2 (doubled for personal followers, letting them perform as if higher level).
It is completely overshadowed by the bard's ability to inspire, greater heroism, and even Favored Enemy. However, it is large area, and it is constant. So it is minor, but it exists. It's the fighter's method of buffing his companions.
A straight bonus is the easiest way to reflect what you are suggesting, Gulian. People are more careful of where they are, what they are doing, and do the right things at the right time. On a personal level, it would be about movement, positioning and teamwork. On a macro level, it's a morale bonus for either energetic offense or superior defense.
I use AoO's as one of the fighter's engines, trying to stay away from just generating more attacks with it. Increased movement options are the main thing I use, but there are indeed others.
The Primary Feats Fighters are built around are Power Attack (Str, martial power), Expertise (Int, learned skill), Iron Will (Wis, grit, determination, willpower), Combat Reflexes (Dex, Coordination and reactions), Toughness (Con, obdurate), and Leadership (Charisma, leader of men).
They are all really good feats in the re-write, and class abilities tie into all of them, as they should.
====
Making Fighter archetype abilities feats is exactly what they should be. Moreover, most of them should be folded into other feats so that they scale like Extra Rage Powers and Extra Smite does.
That's the problem with the Talented Guide. It's just adding more feats to an overcrowded universe. Since the fighter can't accumulate unlimited feats, it just leaves more feats begging that should be core to a specific skill (like, say, Improved Power Attack and stuff).
Admittedly, the Fighter doesn't really need bigger numbers as far as DPR, and I realize that. Trying to dance around that reality is...difficult.
==Aelryinth
I do like your thinking process and the way you deconstructed the fighter, I can't really say how much I agree or not with you until I see the finished product (I do like what I read though), however, it barely even matters, because, I can say -without a doubt- that a brainstorming session with you (regardless of what system, class, or game is it about) must be really productive, enjoyable and quite awesome.
I will surely check out your Fighter rewrite, keep the good work
The engines of the build are based on key feats and class features.
So armor training, weapon training and bravery are engines...they affect other feats and class abilities.
So are the primary feats. Expertise affects a lot of things (and note the bonus for Expertise and Power Attack is functionally the same). Combat Reflexes serves up AoO's that can be used to do things. Leadership gives the Fighter narrative power outside of combat, and in mass combat scenarios.
Yes, using AoO's as something you can spend as opposed to react to is a Good Thing. I think I had one thing that required you to burn 6 AoO's to do, but I don't have the sheet in front of me to refer to it. Heh.
=================================
I did the deconstruction to point out exactly what I figured was wrong with the fighter. That way, if anyone says things like 'the fighter is fine' I can point to the deconstruction and it explains my reasoning behind it all.
================================
I like what Glosz did there with his techniques. Basically, his Techniques are consolidated feat trees. I don't really understand the mechanic of how they worked, however. Did he just eliminate pre-reqs on them, or does taking one technique get you all the feats as long as you satisfied pre-reqs?
Paired up with more feats for the fighter, and it's okay. But I found that giving the fighter two bonus feats per level didn't actually overpower anything...even when they were buffed feats...there was just so much stuff the Fighter had to actually do!
==Aelryinth
curious how you "use AoO's as one of the fighter's engines" - like drawing or sheathing a weapon? kicking a door open? standing up from prone? other move/swift/free actions?
Making a feat re-write is time consuming and ornerous, but that's the gist of things going on. 'little things' that add more versatility and responsiveness, but not really more POWAH.
Effectively, AoO's become swift action and immediate action multipliers, to an extent, and help cut down on the number of feats someone needs. If you can Step Up and burn AoO's to take additional 5' steps, that basically shuts down the need for further parts of the tree, etc.
==Aelryinth
To my mind, the pseudoleadership is something that belongs to cavaliers. That's not to say that fighters shouldn't be able to take it, but it should be a feat. If the GM wants to ban it, he can ban it just like he can ban a caster from taking item creation feats. But there's no point in saddling the fighter with a gaggle of students that he can't use.
All the above has been about combat. What about the rest of the game? More skills? Better skills?
================================
I like what Glosz did there with his techniques. Basically, his Techniques are consolidated feat trees. I don't really understand the mechanic of how they worked, however. Did he just eliminate pre-reqs on them, or does taking one technique get you all the feats as long as you satisfied pre-reqs?
==Aelryinth
I co-designed the combat techniques with Glosz.
You select a combat technique in place of a normal feat.
For example: 1st level fighter selects Powerful Fighting Technique and Two-Handed Fighting Technique.
1st level: Power Attack, Shield of Swings
2nd level: Furious Focus, Cleave
Aelryinth it's good to see someone else has acknowledged the problems with the fighter class.
Me and Glosz believe the main problem (with the fighter) is a lack of diversity compared to other classes particularly the spell-casters. And combat techniques makes fighters a diverse class.
We have done major re-writes before and it led to the Game-Master being saddled with all this extra work. So combat techniques was designed to be easily implemented.
To my mind, the pseudoleadership is something that belongs to cavaliers. That's not to say that fighters shouldn't be able to take it, but it should be a feat. If the GM wants to ban it, he can ban it just like he can ban a caster from taking item creation feats. But there's no point in saddling the fighter with a gaggle of students that he can't use.
All the above has been about combat. What about the rest of the game? More skills? Better skills?
I'm currently playing in a campaign where the Leadership feat is only available to the fighter class.
My 2nd-level fighter character has 2 hirelings (historian/raven master and a warrior)who will become followers at the appropriate level.
This way you don't have a sudden explosion of followers, instead you have some battle companions who have a history, bond with your character (through friendship)and other player characters see why martial characters are dominating factors in society...they have a small army at their disposal.
House ruling that fighters get 4 skill points per level fixes the skill problem.
Kindly note that the cavalier is a sub-class of fighter, and has been in every iteration of the game.
A cavalier is a fighter with Archetype feats that swap out Armor Training for challenges and other things. There's no way I would restrict Leadership to cavaliers. Knights are often glory hounds and notoriously bad at being leaders...they aren't SOLDIERS.
Indeed, the historical precedent of arrogant, sons-of-nobles/the wealthy mounted knights riding down their own infantry who got in their way is well documented. Leadership?!?
======
Ah, so Glosz did the straight up 'gave more feats'.
What about non-combat feats? The fighter can never have too many combat feats, because of scaling, but his lack of ability to shine outside of combat is one of his biggest problems. Leadership solves some of that, but he really needs help with skills.
how did you approach that?
==Aelryinth
To my mind, the pseudoleadership is something that belongs to cavaliers. That's not to say that fighters shouldn't be able to take it, but it should be a feat. If the GM wants to ban it, he can ban it just like he can ban a caster from taking item creation feats. But there's no point in saddling the fighter with a gaggle of students that he can't use.
All the above has been about combat. What about the rest of the game? More skills? Better skills?
I'm currently playing in a campaign where the Leadership feat is only available to the fighter class.
My 2nd-level fighter character has 2 hirelings (historian/raven master and a warrior)who will become followers at the appropriate level.
This way you don't have a sudden explosion of followers, instead you have some battle companions who have a history, bond with your character (through friendship)and other player characters see why martial characters are dominating factors in society...they have a small army at their disposal.
House ruling that fighters get 4 skill points per level fixes the skill problem.
There's a feat in knights of the inner sea that allows you to take leadership at level 3, and you always get a warrior or expert. I snagged that as the basis for Leadership.
The fighter basically accumulates his henchman immediately, and gathers his leveled followers as he goes up in level as a 'support crew' that can travel with him. But the large number of students/supporters/adherents doesn't come to him unless he establishes a permanent base of operations of some kind for them to center around...which could be a travelling mercenary company, a fighting school, a fortification, or a ship.
In any case, only the henchman is supposed to be combat viable. The rest are there to get things done outside of combat. The fighter can also spend time and money to train them into PC instead of NPC classes, and slowly level them up, so they become elites among the general population...but they never get close to active PC levels (1/3 max).
==Aelryinth
Kindly note that the cavalier is a sub-class of fighter, and has been in every iteration of the game.
A cavalier is a fighter with Archetype feats that swap out Armor Training for challenges and other things. There's no way I would restrict Leadership to cavaliers. Knights are often glory hounds and notoriously bad at being leaders...they aren't SOLDIERS.
Indeed, the historical precedent of arrogant, sons-of-nobles/the wealthy mounted knights riding down their own infantry who got in their way is well documented. Leadership?!?
======
Ah, so Glosz did the straight up 'gave more feats'.What about non-combat feats? The fighter can never have too many combat feats, because of scaling, but his lack of ability to shine outside of combat is one of his biggest problems. Leadership solves some of that, but he really needs help with skills.
how did you approach that?
==Aelryinth
Because combat techniques (our house rule) gives martial characters so many bonus combat feats, there is ample opportunity for a martial character to invest in non-combat feats without compromising his or her combat ability.
So far in our campaign (we are 2nd level), combat techniques has created a larger gap between martial characters and martial capable characters like the cleric and druid, while giving martial characters more options in combat. A vast improvement to Pathfinder RAW.
Leadership (or even hirelings) gives fighters an abundance of skills. My 2nd level fighter has a hireling (expert 2) with Knowledge (history) +9 and Knowledge (nobility) +6.
I agree with you about the fighters lack of ability to shine outside of combat. For raw 'outside of combat' a fighter has no chance to compete with the freedom that spells such as Stone Shape and Teleport provide.
Although a fighter can build a watch tower and have one of his followers attend war council meetings in his place (while he is off adventuring), a wizard can't exactly send a Babau Demon (Summon Monster V spell) to a war council meeting expecting positive results.
I will have to check out this feat in 'Knights of the Inner Sea.'Sounds like something that could provide better structure in regards to the way we deal with the Leadership feat.
Thanks Aelryinth
http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/general-feats/squire
Squire feat. Basically gives you a noob, that graduates to a full henchie at later levels. I misremembered the warrior requirement. I think that's a different feat.
==Aelryinth
Re mooks…. the original 1E fighter could attack as many Mooks as he had levels (basically whirlwind attack) so things like goblins etc he could just mop em up.
Id like to see that return as a fighter bas class ability.
you could even call it Mook control.
By 1e mooks you mean 0-hd creatures? Those were pretty rare after a point.
By 1e mooks you mean 0-hd creatures? Those were pretty rare after a point.
I dont recall… I just remember the 1 attack per hit die thing.
I think it applied to kobolds and goblins and such
Less then 1 hit dice, actually.
And that's basically what the Great Cleave feat was for...if you dropped something, you could keep on swinging. Mooks die in one hit, so you could clear the area around yourself pretty easily. Unlike the 0 HD ability, it scaled...at high levels, you can easily take out level 3-5 NPC's with every swing, and just keep on trucking.
Combined with Robilar's Gambit to generate AoO's while you move, and you could leave a line of carnage through an army by provoking AoO's, getting one of your own, cleaving through to everything around you, and then continuing your move action forwards to provoke more AoO's and more Cleaves.
==Aelryinth
Less then 1 hit dice, actually.
And that's basically what the Great Cleave feat was for...if you dropped something, you could keep on swinging. Mooks die in one hit, so you could clear the area around yourself pretty easily. Unlike the 0 HD ability, it scaled...at high levels, you can easily take out level 3-5 NPC's with every swing, and just keep on trucking.
Combined with Robilar's Gambit to generate AoO's while you move, and you could leave a line of carnage through an army by provoking AoO's, getting one of your own, cleaving through to everything around you, and then continuing your move action forwards to provoke more AoO's and more Cleaves.
==Aelryinth
Where/what is Robilars Gambit?
I thought the same thing gets done by using the panther style feat chain.
But that was my point, great cleave is a feat chain.
That's something that fighters should just be able to do, like before.
by making specific things like feats and skills, the game limited characters that in earlier editions they could just DO (ride a pegasus, slaughter the helpless books etc) now you have to spend limited resources to specialize in it.
I think of all the classes, that has hurt the fighter the most.
Its not a Pathfinder feat. Its in a 3.5 book. Either Complete Warrior or Player's Handbook 2, maybe?
An idea just dawned upon me.
What if you use the samurai's Resolve (Ex) for fighters? Or at least make it an option?
It makes a great deal of sense for the iron-willed warrior.
Gulian,
that is the quick-n-dirty fix for the fighter, in addition to good will saves and 4 skill points per level and sharing in samurai's class skills.Aelryinth is searching for a more comprehensive fix.
You have rolled a natural 20 on your stating-the-obvious-with-a-smart-look skill, and please don't be upset by me saying so.
I've yet to see anyone suggest in sharing samurai abilities, first. Second, as a person who is well aware what Aelryinth is trying accomplish, I'm not suggesting that adding Resolve (Ex) to the fighter repertoire is going to fix every single problem about the class. I'm saying that it should be available as an option, because it may be thematically appropriate for certain character concepts based around the warrior, man-at-arms and soldier concepts, which are centric to the Fighter class.
I'm sorry, I got a bit annoyed just now. But not sorry enough to avoid posting my response.
Aye, I want a fighter that's more then a meat shield with a pointy stick.
I don't want him casting spells or using anything semi-magical, like ki pools, panache, rage, or whatever.
I want recovery options. Maybe not as good as spells, but something. usable on self only.
I want the ability to command, lead and contribute to the party buffs, not just soak them up. SOMETHING.
I want a degree of daily modularity against a known foe.
I want lots of combat options, moreso then 1000 damage a round. Sorry, Mythic, looking at you.
I want out of combat utility beyond smackdowns. When the casters are making magic items, what can the fighter do that's also a great use of his time?
I want good defenses, because intelligent fighters will accumulate good defenses. If I want dumb fighters, I'll take warriors, who only fight if they have to.
I want the fighter to be rewarded for being not magical. While others are practicing their magical skills, he's practicing being anti-magical for his own positive benefits.
--------------
So, yeah, comprehensive! If you want simplicity in your PC class, take a barbarian or something. The fighter should be every bit as impressive as the paladin, ranger or barbarian in or out of combat.
==Aelryinth
I like the overall idea. Some specific things that could be done to address some of the concerns without having to fix all the Combat Feats(*) would be having Combat Schools/Training like those of the Ranger (as stated above), and giving the Fighter 4 + IntMod Skill Points per Level (instead of 2 + IntMod). I would also recommend bumping the Fighter up to d12 Hit Dice. I also like the idea of making Class Features more a-la-carte to reduce the need for Archetypes, for all classes, not just the Fighter, but might as well start with the Fighter (actually too late -- Qinggong Monk already started this for Monk). Since the Feat progression starts to be not enough at higher levels, I would add the following:
At 10th Level (exact number subject to tweaking) and above, instead of getting bonus single Combat Feats at even Levels, they get Chains of 2 Feats, including 2 Feat subsets of longer Feat Chains. Feat Chains include Ranked Feats (ones that can be taken more than once to get stacking effects), Feats that have base, "Improved", and "Greater" versions (or sometimes just "Improved" and "Greater" versions), and "Style" Feats (Snake Style, etc.). If a Fighter takes a Feat Chain in this way that includes a Combat Feat that the Fighter already has, the duplicate Feat can be retrained to another Combat Feat without counting against the Fighter's normal limit on ability to swap Feats.
At 18th Level (exact number subject to tweaking) and above, the above ability improves to 3 Feat Chains, including 3 Feat subsets of longer Feat Chains.
(*) Some Combat Feat fixing is needed to make a-la-carte Fighter Class Features. For instance, replace the Phalanx Soldier's 3rd Level ability with a new Feat Phalanx Spear Training that lets you wield a Spear or Thrusting Piercing Polearm one-handed (regardless of whether you are wielding a Shield, which you would normally want to do, but which seems weird to make a requirement). This would normally require both high Str and Dex for potentially anyone to take it, but a Fighter who chose the Phalanx Soldier Combat School Feat chain (awarded starting at 3rd Level, or at 2nd Level if you want to replace Bravery with this, and qualifying for later compression as described above for Feat Chains) would get this Feat without needing to meet the prerequisites. Fighters should probably get Fighter Schools to correspond with Armor Training and Weapon Training and all the things that replace these in the various Archetypes; maybe make it if you want to replace Bravery (which is also scaling and often replaced in Archetypes, sometimes with something better).
|
if you ever got a look at me you would immediately realize that i do not look smart. that is, if you don't turn to stone first!
i am parked somewhere in between a quick-n-dirty fix and something of the magnitude preluded to here.
my only argument against using the Resolve mechanic is that what happens then if your players choose both a Resolved Fighter and a Samurai. it's better for compatibility if the fighter's new abilities are all original and still interact well with the other classes.
a similar argument could be made for Solo Tactics, for example. or Martial Maneuvers. or Combat Style. from a certain point of view these all 'belong' on the core fighter, not the inquisitor/brawler/ranger what-have-you.
that said, i definitely think Endurance at 3rd for the fighter is spot on...
The "fix" for fighters should have been the addition of grit, swashbucklers and gunslingers should have been archetypes.
Deeds should ave been more open and less specific and more of them to choose from
that would have fixed it, IMO
I want out of combat utility beyond smackdowns. When the casters are making magic items, what can the fighter do that's also a great use of his time?
I want good defenses, because intelligent fighters will accumulate good defenses. If I want dumb fighters, I'll take warriors, who only fight if they have to.
I want the fighter to be rewarded for being not magical. While others are practicing their magical skills, he's practicing being anti-magical for his own positive benefit.
I'd like to hear more about these parts
For the first one, the saef assumption is that the fighter is practicing. But if his training doesn't lend to adaptation, then its not great training.
Combat Expertise was supposed to be the feat for "intelligent" warriors. But we all know that beyond a prerequisite, thats where the need for Intelligence ends. I would also like to see some benefit for the clever, wise, or inspiring warriors beyond +1 or +2 to a few skills that someone else is still better at. But I feel that goinf down this path could lead to some very un-fightery features. Whever the soultion is, I hope it is effective, but short and sweet.
A fighter and his gear - both his blessing and curse. Whats your idea?
Ah, GEAR.
The fighter's current primary class feature is that he is better with his gear then anyone else.
he doesn't get a dodge bonus...he gets to use Dex in armor. he doesn't get a TH/DMG bonus...he gets better with specific weapons.
So, that's what I went with. The fighter gets more out of rote weapons and armor then any other class. He can make masterwork weapons and armor perform as if they were magical. He can Name a weapon and level it up without spending gold.
Expertise is indeed the feat of intelligent combat. THe fighter with expertise gets a lot more out of many feats. Expertise is the feat of the professional, savvy fighting man, NOT the fighter with a high Int score.
As I said above, freedom from the Tyranny of Stats.
Out of combat, the fighter's biggest thing is he's the best at Training, either himself or others.
The samurai as a class, just like the cavaliar, is just a subset of the fighter, and doesn't need to stand on its own. Archetype feats should be all that is required to build a samurai.
==Aelryinth
Ah, GEAR.
. He can Name a weapon and level it up without spending gold.
Expertise is indeed the feat of intelligent combat. THe fighter with expertise gets a lot more out of many feats. Expertise is the feat of the professional, savvy fighting man, NOT the fighter with a high Int score.
As I said above, freedom from the Tyranny of Stats.
Out of combat, the fighter's biggest thing is he's the best at Training, either himself or others.
The samurai as a class, just like the cavaliar, is just a subset of the fighter, and doesn't need to stand on its own. Archetype feats should be all that is required to build a samurai.
==Aelryinth
this stuff….
So, that's what I went with. The fighter gets more out of rote weapons and armor then any other class. He can make masterwork weapons and armor perform as if they were magical. He can Name a weapon and level it up without spending gold.
I wrote up a class that does this with special non-magical items I called heirlooms. I can imagine the fighter's version of this being some kind of non-magical "enhancement" bonus that can't be dispelled.
I used to play Earth Dawn for many years in the 90s. as such I missed 3.0 and didn't start playing 3.5 until it's waning years.
Earthdawn had the 'heirloom weapon thing' going on… you levels up with the weapon and it got more powerful as you did.
I used to play Earth Dawn for many years in the 90s. as such I missed 3.0 and didn't start playing 3.5 until it's waning years.
Earthdawn had the 'heirloom weapon thing' going on… you levels up with the weapon and it got more powerful as you did.
Reminds me of D&D 3.5's legacy weapons, detailed in the source book Legacy of Weapons.
Could be a format you could use if you are thinking about introducing it into your game.
Aelryinth, unfortunately I will have to disagree. The tyranny of stats is intelligent and effective game design.
It's an associated mechanic (a strength of the D&D 3.5/Pathfinder system), a fighter with low strength can't power attack and a fighter with low intelligence can't effectively trip their opponent.
Forces fighter characters into a theme, a set of related feats, authentic abilities for a specific type of character.
The only problem with the 'tyranny of stats' is that other classes don't follow the same rules.
There isn't any prerequisites to cast illusion or evocation spells.
Spells that automatically scale (and the rate that they scale) is also a major issue.
These issues affects fighter class rewrites. It's not just the issue of the design mechanics of the fighter class. Definitely not a problem that can be solved in isolation from the other classes.
I tried my hand at fixing the fighter, though what I ended up with still left me a little.. wanting.
The problem, I found, was that it boiled down to an issue with core mechanics; namely Feats and Skills.
The game has a lot of level-based assumptions, and the problem I've found is that Feats and Skills are mostly great at the lower levels, but then drop off quickly once higher level requirements kick in. Very few feats actually address high level content requirements, and that few that do are way higher level than when the problem is introduced or have obscene requirements.
Skills simply suffer from the "my bonus goes up, but I don't really get 'better' than I did at 8th level" issue, in that the functionality stagnates completely.
With feats, characters don't get any more feats per level than they did at core, but their selection of feats (if I remember right) has quintupled (something like 100 core, 500 overall with the additional books). A lot of these feats are introduced to address higher level game expectations, so many feel necessary, but you are stuck building up to them, tree upon tree, such that your range of abilities suffers.
Spells have similar expansions, but don't suffer nearly the same problems, because prepared casters can add in spells on a nap, and all casters can simply use scrolls, wands or other means (rings or pages of spell knowledge, etc). It's far more flexible.
.
My thoughts are to re-introduce the 3.5 splatbook mechanic of Skill Tricks to add in higher level based functionality for skills.
For Feats, I felt that consolidating feats into automatic functions (like making Power Attack a combat action, rather than a feat), and making feats primarily scaling in effect.
Yes, this would mean benefits for most classes. This is intentional. I want most classes to enjoy their feats and skills better.
However, to make the "Master of Feats" class (Fighter) and "Master of Skills" class (Rogue) still valid, I would change or add to their class features to make it so they can use Feats and Skills respectively in a method where their versatility more closely compares to how versatile spells are.
For example, the Fighter would be able to retrain his feats each day, and perhaps gain access to a few temporarily throughout the day (or leave trained options open to fill later with minimal training).
The rogue would do something similar with regards to skill tricks and bonus skills ranks, etc.
.
Regarding the Fighter's other class benefits, I feel that the base Fighter should gain bonuses regardless of what equipment he's using at a given moment. Basically give general benefits on all attacks, rather than super focused benefits. He might pick Axes weapon group, but gains a "cleave" like benefit from his axe training that he applies with any weapon. A focus more on training than specific weapon use.
"Super-focused" could be reserved for Archetypes or a scaling feat choice.
Aelryinth, unfortunately I will have to disagree. The tyranny of stats is intelligent and effective game design.
It's an associated mechanic (a strength of the D&D 3.5/Pathfinder system), a fighter with low strength can't power attack and a fighter with low intelligence can't effectively trip their opponent.
Forces fighter characters into a theme, a set of related feats, authentic abilities for a specific type of character.
The only problem with the 'tyranny of stats' is that other classes don't follow the same rules.
There isn't any prerequisites to cast illusion or evocation spells.
Spells that automatically scale (and the rate that they scale) is also a major issue.
These issues affects fighter class rewrites. It's not just the issue of the design mechanics of the fighter class. Definitely not a problem that can be solved in isolation from the other classes.
Tyranny of stats is also biased and highly unwelcome.
Power Attack is a non-stat requirement. Very, very few builds will NOT have the Str necessary to take it...and if you don't have it, you can take Piranha Attack, instead.
Stat requirements for spell casters are THEIR PRIMARY STAT. The idea of not being able to qualify for the spells you cast of a given level is laughable. They don't have stat requirements, and those feats they have to take that are dependent on their class either reference their 'primary casting stat' or use skill points or other feats.
But Blind fighting and improved blind fighting...19 Wis? What?
Improved TWF...19 Dex? What? For a standard, classic melee archetype?
The fighter, for some reason, needs 19's in non-primary stats to take effective and useful feats that are actually iconic. Casters do not have that problem.
And then Armor Training from Core. Ugh. I'm a level 10 Fighter wearing a suit of celestial plate. You know that I need a 22 Dex to get any benefit from my Armor Training? 24 to max it out? 28 to do so at level 15? But I started with a 13, and that's actually NOT POSSIBLE under the rules for a standard build?
I can totally see the Fighter not qualifying for non-combat stuff for feats. But it's been proven over and over again, you don't need massive stats if you train long enough and hard enough...it's a trope! The most current thing I can think of is Naruto vs Sasuke. Sasuke is a freaking genius who can master new stuff in no time, then alter and improve on it (as he did with the Chijiriki).
Naruto is an idiot who never gives up and keeps working on stuff until he gets it right. He even resorts to non-standard methods to succeed. He uses a hundred shadow clones to maximize his training time. And masters two of the hardest jutsus in the anime doing so.
That's the fighter to me. he keeps at it until he's done, and doesn't need a 19 Wis to learn how to fight blind. Do they think the only blind fighters are monks??
==Aelryinth