I posted this a while ago looking for input, but I updated it a bit and cleaned it up, fixed some mistakes. Was thinking I might get so different input since it's been a while, new faces and all.
Thing of note: this is supposed to be a general improvement to the fighter, and stack with most other archetypes, so it should seem better than the fighter, even slightly so. so that's the goal to raise the fighter's ability to do things in combat other than full attack.
Also, wonder if limiting it to melee(to regain vigor) is too restricting or since most abilities that require a use of vigor are for melee that it should be fine.
feel free to comment in the document itself.
The swashbuckler is effectively the iconic dexterous fighter. The class that the duelist wanted to be. The Active Fighter gains vigor points instead of bonus feats that work a lot like panache but keyed off Constituion instead of Charisma. I rather like the selection of deeds the active fighter gains and none seem, at first glance, to be more powerful than gaining the bonus feats. No whirlwind attack at 5th level for this fighter, but it has more than enough other tricks to make up for it.
Some suggestions:
1) The name seems a little bland and not very attractive. Consider revising it to something more... vigorous.
2) The parry ability is nice, but it would be even more awesome as an overpowering parry: on a successful parry, the fighter can choose to spend a vigor point to have the weapons deal damage to each other. Something to that effect.
3) ...
(continuing from a rude interruption)
3) Second wind. I really like this ability, though mechanically I would do it a bit differently. It does not sit well with me that a fighter can heal status effects. But suppressing/ignoring them is completely what a vigorous fighter would do. Perhaps once per day have the fighter suppress all negative effects for 1 round per vigor point spent.
4)Deathless Vigor: Obtained at later levels (15+?) which enhances Second Wind to ignore/suppress even more dire negative effects such as death.
5)The movement abilities are nice but I would consider replacing them with more hold-your-ground or prevent others movement abilities. The swashbuckler is more the agile moving fighter and as such I would expect these kind of abilities more on that type of fighter.
(as a side note on overpowering parry: This would work very well against natural attacks but less well against hard hitting critters like giants)
Just some thoughts.
well the movement thing is to allow them to support their team better by moving to where he needs to be, to be a better team player, which i don;t think a swashbuckler is as much as a fighter(stereotypically). I imagine this is to set up flanks or protect an ally from harm, as it was before, a fighter had little he could do to support his team, where good positioning is what a martial arm needs. which is why I added it.
also, I didn't add the counter attack to parry, because I felt that it should remain a staple of swashbuckler's with their improved dexterity.
Also, i forget what my inspiration at the time was, but the idea is the fighter turns conditions placed on him into resources he can use mechanically. so the end point or goal of the ability is to regain vigor, and since it's so late game anyway, there is little reason to limit what conditions can be effected.
also, cheat death i feel fills the goal of deathless vigor.
The movement thing was more a suggestion. 5ft moves are a very fighter thing to do IMNSHO. I question the 10 and 15 foot moves, though. But as I said.
At first, I thought that this fighter shouldn't have a parry at all... but then thinking about it I thought it would be nice to have a parry based on Strength rather than finesse. Hence the Overpowering parry suggestion. Its not really a counterattack since the fighter does not get another roll... and is much more situational so it doesn't really take away from the Parry and Riposte of the swashbuckler.
I still feel that conditions shouldn't be auto-healed but suppressed. It plays in to the fighter being so hardy and vigorous that he just continues going and going and going.
Same with the deathless vigor suggestion. Cheat death feels more like a rogue trick where as deathless vigor is again playing into the fighter that just keeps ticking.... until he doesn't. Also having abilities play off each other makes them easier to remember as well.
Again these are suggestions. Take 'em or leave 'em.
Here's what I came up with a little while ago. I think a lot of people are on the same page, mechanically, for fighter changes. Mine is a full class rewrite instead of an archetype, but I think it works. Fighter needs a lot to change, and all of the patches made me think that it'd just be better to leave the sinking ship and find a new one.
I did my build with the idea that I'd make it feel more versatile and less restrained than the Brawler, Gunslinger, and Swashbuckler: not better than them at their niche, but the ancestor that has simpler but more foundational abilities. I'll totally have a bias looking at things here :P
Losing bonus feats makes this a hard archetype to swallow. I'm not sure if the situational stuff would make a fighter want to give up what their schtick sort of is. These are more powerful than feats, but not so much so that anyone outside of a specific party support fighter would want to give up all of the extras that make fighter combat builds work. The exploding dice maneuvers deeds stands out to me as something that's a bit much. Skills are one thing, but exploding dice for combat purposes could get nutty.
One thing, if you want it to be an archetype instead of an overhaul, would be to tighten up thematically and mechanically on the abilities. Lose a few of them that are death attack deals and focus all of the abilities on defense or support. I'd say even lose a few abilities overall and give back bonus feats, use Weapon or Armor training if you need the fighter to lose something (which they really don't). Much of what you're going for here seems defensive, so for your homebrew you could tout different sets of these deed packages that are designed for different types of fighters.
I like how you tied things to the Bravery bonus. I'm a big fan of self-referential stuff like that, because it's usually pretty clean and efficient, and that's a big reason why 5th ed. is so streamlined. I'll also chime in and say that I think a way to make an overpowering parry ability would be to replace an attack with a maneuver like bull rush, reposition, and/or sunder. That way the swashbuckler keeps its thing, but this fighter feels like a sticky battlefield control specialist: you attack me, you could end up in the middle of my allies or with a broken sword. But! Just some thoughts. I like what you have here.
At first, I thought that this fighter shouldn't have a parry at all... but then thinking about it I thought it would be nice to have a parry based on Strength rather than finesse. Hence the Overpowering parry suggestion. Its not really a counterattack since the fighter does not get another roll... and is much more situational so it doesn't really take away from the Parry and Riposte of the swashbuckler.
oh, I didn't realize you meant they would deal damage to the weapons. I read damage to each other as the opponent and your self. maybe, i'm not sure. this opened me up to other rider effects on the parry though. maybe a combat maneuver that can be done in place of an attack can be used against the enemy, and i can rename is parry and opening or something.
The fighter isn't necessarily an ultra beef guy either, he's supposed to be a martial exemplar, which I took to be also slightly smarter on the battlefield than currently portrayed (even has 4 skills points + int mod per level), the abilities are also mostly unthemed so that they can play the Samurai as much as a Roman Hoplite, or even a roguish character who is more specialized in combat.
so i understand what your saying, but I think you're giving the fighter more of a theme than i had intended is all.
Losing bonus feats makes this a hard archetype to swallow. I'm not sure if the situational stuff would make a fighter want to give up what their schtick sort of is. These are more powerful than feats, but not so much so that anyone outside of a specific party support fighter would want to give up all of the extras that make fighter combat builds work. The exploding dice maneuvers deeds stands out to me as something that's a bit much. Skills are one thing, but exploding dice for combat purposes could get nutty.One thing, if you want it to be an archetype instead of an overhaul, would be to tighten up thematically and mechanically on the abilities. Lose a few of them that are death attack deals and focus all of the abilities on defense or support. I'd say even lose a few abilities overall and give back bonus feats, use Weapon or Armor training if you need the fighter to lose something (which they really don't). Much of what you're going for here seems defensive, so for your homebrew you could tout different sets of these deed packages that are designed for different types of fighters.
early game the fighter doesn't have enough options to help allies, late game they don't have options that would allow them to quickly defeat enemies. their damage will be high for sure, but still i felt by that time feats would allow them to help if they needed it, and by late game he needs to be better at surviving and killing things spectacularly.
I see your point on combat maneuver's but they fall off in usefulness as time goes on anyway. maybe a flat bonus would be more appropriate? I wanted the fighter to be able to trip dragons and giants late game if he wanted to, but i can understand that that means anything smaller can get crushed, which MAY be a bit overboard.
also I wouldn't say defensive, so much as reactive, I wanted the fighter to be able to react to things as they happen, allowing him to better support his team, and be where he needs to be.
with weapon training he REALLY has no issues with offense, he is probably hands down the best damage dealer(outside of peak niche encounters, such as paladins fighting evil outsiders), so i don't think offense is needed.
so i understand what your saying, but I think you're giving the fighter more of a theme than i had intended is all.
This got me thinking. Let's see if I can put this logic down.
Each person will have their own idea of what a fighter should be or do. Ask two different people and generally they will agree but on the details (like abilities) there will be differences. As an example, the one might want an agile disarming fighter while the other wants a stalwart powerhouse.
So how does this relate to base class creation? You want to give the player options to meet his expectations of a fighter. The current core fighter's choices are basically down to his chosen feats. These can be quite interesting but does not quite give the fighter his own identity since most other classes can take those same feats as well (although maybe a bit later).
So back to the class at hand: I think it needs more choices so that each player can create their flavor of fighter that is actually viable. (I actually have this same gripe with the swashbuckler and gunslinger classes but the multitude of archetypes does somewhat alleviate the problem.)
As for tripping giants and dragons, sure, if the fighter is specialized to trip he should be able to do it, but that does mean expending at least 2 additional feats to get there and gain +2 to trip from each of those feats.
well I only took out half the feats, the remaining focus should still come from those feats. That's why most of the abilities are pretty neutral actions that everyone could use.
also it's meant to work with most other fighter archetypes, allowing for even greater customizability.
So, I don't really know what you mean by more choices...
I agree with Bandw2 on the fact that a player should still be able to mold the fighter into the niche they want with half the feats, especially with vigor adding some things that would otherwise take one or more feats.
As for the tripping why don't you add something like: "A fighter with at least 1 vigor point may choose to ignore size differences for combat maneuvers he has a bonus in, from a feat, deed, spell or equipment." or something along those lines. This would effectively allow trip to stay effective as creatures turn huge or larger, but doesn't simply hike his bonus to the moon. And by forcing the fighter to have a bonus in the maneuver from a feat, deed, spell, or equipment; you force the fighter to specialize at least a little.
Also just a thought, but since you are cutting a fighter's feats in half you might want to figure out a way to overcome some feat taxes and tie it to deeds.
and does the fighter pick and choose deeds? or is he assumed to have it as soon as he is at the minimum lvl? if he has to pick and chose, at what levels?
As for the tripping why don't you add something like: "A fighter with at least 1 vigor point may choose to ignore size differences for combat maneuvers he has a bonus in, from a feat, deed, spell or equipment." or something along those lines. This would effectively allow trip to stay effective as creatures turn huge or larger, but doesn't simply hike his bonus to the moon. And by forcing the fighter to have a bonus in the maneuver from a feat, deed, spell, or equipment; you force the fighter to specialize at least a little.
hmm, this feels a bit too niche for me, nor would it be useful at first level. Maybe I should remove the exploding dice and mention that at 7th level this allows the Active fighter to count the enemy as her size for purposes related to that combat maneuver check.
Also just a thought, but since you are cutting a fighter's feats in half you might want to figure out a way to overcome some feat taxes and tie it to deeds.
Aren't the Fighter's feats still significantly more plentiful and more open than most other classes? Though I am interested in this, maybe I could replace the first ability with a weaker brawler feat swap ability.
and does the fighter pick and choose deeds? or is he assumed to have it as soon as he is at the minimum lvl? if he has to pick and chose, at what levels?
The Blue area under deed explains that they can take use any deed that they have the level for and vigor points to spend on.
Fighter spend Vigor points to accomplish deeds. Most deeds grant the Fighter a momentary bonus or effect, but some provide longer-lasting effects. Some deeds remain in effect while the Fighter has at least 1 panache point, but do not require expending panache to be maintained. A Fighter can only perform deeds of her level or lower. Unless otherwise noted, a deed can be performed multiple successive times, as long as the swashbuckler has or spends the required number of panache points to perform the deed.
The Blue area under deed explains that they can take use any deed that they have the level for and vigor points to spend on.
Fighter spend Vigor points to accomplish deeds. Most deeds grant the Fighter a momentary bonus or effect, but some provide longer-lasting effects. Some deeds remain in effect while the Fighter has at least 1 panache point, but do not require expending panache to be maintained. A Fighter can only perform deeds of her level or lower. Unless otherwise noted, a deed can be performed multiple successive times, as long as the swashbuckler has or spends the required number of panache points to perform the deed.
That's how I read it, but since it isn't instantly obvious i wanted to make sure it wasn't just an error of omission.
Aren't the Fighter's feats still significantly more plentiful and more open than most other classes? Though I am interested in this, maybe I could replace the first ability with a weaker brawler feat swap ability.
With half feats the fighter would gain the same amount of bonus feats as the monk, gunslinger, and swashbuckler. He gains his feats at the same rate as the ranger receives his combat training (which ignore feat taxes). and is closely matched to the bonus feats the wizard gets (every 5 lvl's). inquisitor can be thrown in here to, because of their teamwork feats class feature (every 3 lvl's).