| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
This thread is based off the earlier thread about boosting fighters by giving them two more skill points.
I would like to propose something more radical, because I think this doesn't really address the fundamental problem with fighters, which is that they're not actually very good at, well, fighting. Rangers get a bunch more skill points, utility spells and free fighting style feats to avoid the problem of multiple attribute dependencies. Paladins get to rock saving throws and self-heal, giving them the survival potential of cockroaches after a nuclear holocaust, and of course barbarians,.... are barbarians.
So here's my proposed "fighter that doesn't suck" new archetype.
Not a Klutz (Ex) Fighters that don't suck are automatically treated as having ranks equal to their level in all Strength and Constitution-based skills. Furthermore, at level one, a fighter that doesn't suck can select two Dexterity-based skills and is automatically treated as having maximum ranks in those skills.
Fight Good (Ex) Fighters that don't suck automatically receive all combat feats for which they have fulfilled the prerequisites. As illustrative examples, a fighter that doesn't suck will automatically have the Power Attack feat if he has a strength of 13 or better, and at sixth level will automatically gain Bloody Assault.
I don't think this would be unbalancing. Such a fighter would still be limited by action economy --- for example, he would still be restricted to a single attack if he moved more than 5' barring an ability like Pounce. He would still be limited by his attributes (Two Weapon Fighting still requires Dex 15, and Greater TWF still requires Dex 19 and 11th level), and would also be limited by basic physics (I don't care how good your Climb skill is, you can't fly like Superman) and basic anatomy (you still only have two hands, so you can't wield eight swords at once like a Harryhausen statue of Kali).
Furthermore, this still doesn't give him spellcasting, rage powers, laying on hands, favored enemy bonuses, and so forth -- the other martial types still have their niches intact. And, of course, CODzilla still owns him straight up, even in a physical battle.
What it does do is let a fighter fight. He can pick up any weapon in the game and use it to good effect, and to be proficient with any physical tactic (such as combat maneuvers) he qualifies for. I think this moves the fighter from a classic tier 5 "waste of space" to a high tier 4 or low tier 3.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
you are aware that by giving every fighter all feats you basically make every fighter the same, sans archetype, right?
Nobody believes fighters should have all feats all the time. Nobody believes fighters should have more skill points then rogues.
Fighters need magic defenses.
Fighters need movement options.
Fighters need recovery and/or immunity options.
Fighters need MORe skill points, and some bonuses to go with class skills.
Fighters need some versatility in and out of combat. Martial Flexibility is a good one, letting them go dumpster diving for feats.
Fighters need to have a combat bonus at level 1.
If fighters have to burn feats to acquire these things, instead of class abilities, then fighters need a LOT more feats.
Note: Advanced Weapon Training effectively let fighters exchange 3 Weapon Trainings for AWT feats, which are demonstrably better then normal feats. Paizo is learning.
My own fighter remix gives fighters a Combat Technique and a Training Technique at ever level, in addition to class abilities at every level that are not mere scaling effects. It still isn't overpowered, but is a LOT more versatile.
==Aelryinth
It sucks because it's unplayable. The result is a massive list of coditional modifiers that stops combat as you check the game state against all the passive combat feats.
you are aware that by giving every fighter all feats you basically make every fighter the same, sans archetype, right?
Fighters are still limited in the feats they can apply by their equipment, by their skill choices, by their choices on weapons training and whatnot, and more importantly, by their attributes. You still need a high Dexterty to fight effectively with two weapons at the same time, a high Perception skill for the Blind-Fight tree, and you need a high Intelligence for the Combat Expertise skill tree.
Nobody believes fighters should have all feats all the time.
I do. That's why I proposed it. Because it gives fighters the ability automatically to do what they need to do -- fight -- and thus they have the feats they need to pick up the rest of their stuff.
Nobody believes fighters should have more skill points then rogues.
I don't think I gave that to them. They get Swim and Climb (Str-based) "for free," and two Dex-based skills "for free," plus the 2+Int they get automatically. That's 6+Int skills, of which two are locked into being highly marginal. Rogues get 8+Int. Even rangers get 6+Int and they don't need to pick skills that will be useless as soon as the wizard gets Levitate at third level.
Fighters need magic defenses.
Fighters need movement options.
Fighters need recovery and/or immunity options.
Fighters need MORe skill points, and some bonuses to go with class skills.
Fighters need some versatility in and out of combat. Martial Flexibility is a good one, letting them go dumpster diving for feats.
Fighters need to have a combat bonus at level 1.If fighters have to burn feats to acquire these things, instead of class abilities, then fighters need a LOT more feats.
Right. So I gave them "a LOT more feats."
Interesting and simple in application.
Would they still get the 2+Int+FCB/Human ranks per level to apply?
Yeah. That still puts them behind a rogue or a ranger, as I mentioned upthread, but it allows a fighter to actually take something useful.
I assume the "1 rank per level on all STR/Dex" would be a bonus, not an actual ranks?
Nope, actual ranks. The implication, of course, is that you aren't allowed to spend skill points on Swim, but also that you don't need to, because you get all the ranks you are permitted as part of the chassis. So take Disable Device instead, because that's cool and flavorful and fun.
The only thing from "player enjoyment" I could see (and this may sound strange), is some people enjoy the aspect of picking vs just getting things as automatic. So although it would be a restriction, some players might want to have to decide "daily" which feats to take. Kind of like a prepared caster having a full spellbook, but still having to pick which slots to fill. they might rather get 8skill ranks/lvl and enjoy the decisions involved with where to place them.
Well, you still get choices, in the same way that clerics have access to all of the spells in the list but can't use them all at the same time. A fighter-that-doesn't-suck, for example, could wield any exotic weapon in the game, but would probably choose which one to carry around. The advantage is that if somehow he gets into a position where he has to use an Klingon bat'leth, he can do it, because he's a fighter that doesn't suck.
And, yes, the skill list is deliberately restrictive to allow fighters not to suck at fighter-stuff but still preserve the skill monkey niche (such as it is). You can be not-a-klutz but still not necessarily the god of knowledge (like the Investigator would be).
It sucks because it's unplayable. The result is a massive list of coditional modifiers that stops combat as you check the game state against all the passive combat feats.
I don't think so -- although I'm willing to be persuaded otherwise. Any given fighter has her favorite kit-out and will know the conditional modifiers for that kit-out. The fact that she can attempt any combat maneuver without provoking attacks of opportunity doesn't mean that she will.
A bonus on constitution based skills seems like a pretty poor way to make fighters better...
Agreed, if that were all that were in the package. Especially since as of writing, there are no Con-based skills.
I don't really get the hate anyways. Every pathfinder character ever made the player is always saying "man I wish I had more feats." That's what the fighter offers.
The problem with the fighter is that the fighter is one of the few characters that gets less flexible as he gains levels. A first level fighter can use any weapon he can pick up with roughly equal proficiency, attempt any combat maneuver with the same level of confidence, and just generally be all-around badass.
A tenth level fighter needs to have his specific specialized weapon in order to do his specific thing (case in point, a "trip fighter") or he loses a substantial amount of his ability to be effective. So even the fighter is saying "man I wish I had more feats" because the feat trees chew up all of the bonus feats and then some. This makes the fighter one of the few classes with feats to spend on cool stuff instead of mandatory stuff.
Notice that this doesn't actually make the fighter that much harder hitting (if any). It does, however, make him a lot more flexible and open up a lot of new ways to hit hard and to be hard to hit. This is a good thing, in my view.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It sucks because it's unplayable. The result is a massive list of coditional modifiers that stops combat as you check the game state against all the passive combat feats.I don't think so -- although I'm willing to be persuaded otherwise. Any given fighter has her favorite kit-out and will know the conditional modifiers for that kit-out. The fact that she can attempt any combat maneuver without provoking attacks of opportunity doesn't mean that she will.
Pop Quiz: A halfling Fighter is flanking a human enemy with an allied human fighter. The Fighters are fifth level. The halfling moves and provokes. What is the halfling's conditional AC bonus if all ability scores are 14? Show your work.
Breaking the skill rank system and giving out even more free feats does very little to make the Fighter class more interesting and fun to play.
Giving automatic free feats is also a terrible way to address the awkward prerequisites that a handful of feats possess. It's not only game breaking (since you automatically get any new feat that gets released), but also it's an extremely backwards way of approaching the problem. It's like accidentally buying a shirt that's too big and then gaining 40 pounds so it'll fit. Sure, you solved the problem, but you created many bigger problems in the process when you could have just bought another shirt or had it tailored.
Pop Quiz: A halfling Fighter is flanking a human enemy with an allied human fighter. The Fighters are fifth level. The halfling moves and provokes. What is the halfling's conditional AC bonus if all ability scores are 14? Show your work.It sucks because it's unplayable. The result is a massive list of coditional modifiers that stops combat as you check the game state against all the passive combat feats.I don't think so -- although I'm willing to be persuaded otherwise. Any given fighter has her favorite kit-out and will know the conditional modifiers for that kit-out. The fact that she can attempt any combat maneuver without provoking attacks of opportunity doesn't mean that she will.
Dunno. Haven't played a halfling in ten years, so that's not my kit-out.
Well, Paizo definitely thinks that Swim is fighter-stuff (as is Climb):And, yes, the skill list is deliberately restrictive to allow fighters not to suck at fighter-stuff but still preserve the skill monkey niche (such as it is). You can be not-a-klutz but still not necessarily the god of knowledge (like the Investigator would be).I don't think swim, acrobatics, or fly are particularly fighter-stuff.
The fighter's class skills are Climb (Str), Craft (Int), Handle Animal (Cha), Intimidate (Cha), Knowledge (dungeoneering) (Int), Knowledge (engineering) (Int), Profession (Wis), Ride (Dex), Survival (Wis), and Swim (Str).
Ride, of course, is a Dexterity skill, so you can certainly put that on your list. That's three of the freebie skills f-t-d-s are given.
But most of the rest of the skills you mentioned are about soldiers, not about "fighters," and many of the skills are actually officer skills as well. If you want to be an army officer (or ex-officer), you can put your level-based skill points into appropriate skills, including non-class skills like Knowledge (nobility). But if you're a pit fighter recently escaped from the Chelish arena, you might instead use Stealth and Escape Artist.
Dunno. Haven't played a halfling in ten years, so that's not my kit-out.Pop Quiz: A halfling Fighter is flanking a human enemy with an allied human fighter. The Fighters are fifth level. The halfling moves and provokes. What is the halfling's conditional AC bonus if all ability scores are 14? Show your work.It sucks because it's unplayable. The result is a massive list of coditional modifiers that stops combat as you check the game state against all the passive combat feats.I don't think so -- although I'm willing to be persuaded otherwise. Any given fighter has her favorite kit-out and will know the conditional modifiers for that kit-out. The fact that she can attempt any combat maneuver without provoking attacks of opportunity doesn't mean that she will.
No, but you're the one claiming that this stuff is easy. So demonstrate that to us. Me, I know that the answer is at least +6 and could go as high as +20, and I have no idea which number is closest to correct.
Soldiers swimming is only a thing since metal armor stopped being worn. Since PF has metal armor swimming is a lost cause and there's no reason soldiers would be any more able to swim than cowherds. No matter how good they were before they became soldiers they'll sink like a stone if they fall in the water while wearing armor. Why would it be standard?
Medieval armors weren't nearly as cumbersome as D&D/Pathfinder and Holywood would lead you to believe. I've seen people not only swim, but even perform cartwheels while donning armor. Also, while underwater, metal is actually lighter than most fabrics, since it doesn't absorb water. You're better off swimming in a metal breastplate than in a thick sweater. Finally, not all Fighters wear heavy armor.
What armor did do is exhaust the wearer relatively quickly... And that's not because it's armor, but because it's heavy. And carrying a heavy load all the time, everywhere you go is exhausting. Even if the weight is well distributed.
Pathfinder ACP numbers are grossly exaggerated.
EDIT: Relevant video.
All that, said I don't think automatically giving Fighter every feat they qualify for is a good solution, mostly because of the reason pointed out by QuidEst and Manly-man Teapot.
It wouldn't simply slow down gameplay, it would completely stop it... Or force the player to ignore most of its abilities, which completely defeats the point.
It's a simple "solution" in theory, but it's just not viable in practice.
There are other ways... (shameless self-promotion).
If you want better feat versatility then drop some boys feats (or something else) and add in the brawler's Martial Versatility. It's not an all encompassing fix but it could achieve the feat goal.
As for skills and out of combat ability, this forum has 100 ideas, but few people agree on the best way to do it.
They aren't cumbersome to any significant degree when worn properly except helmets. What they are is heavy and dense and impossible to remove quickly enough to not drown.
The ACP numbers for metal armors are much too low for swim. They shouldn't even apply to any other skills.
Metal doesn't absorb water, so weight shouldn't be an issue. Armor should actually feel lighter underwater. Some kinds of armor do have layers of fabric in them, though... So that might be a problem. I don't know how much of that is compensated by buoyancy.
I'm not sure how much of a impediment armor would be for swimming, but I've literally seen people swim in plate armor. Not like professional divers or anything, but more than well enough to keep themselves afloat and cross a river.
you are aware that by giving every fighter all feats you basically make every fighter the same, sans archetype, right?
Nobody believes fighters should have all feats all the time. Nobody believes fighters should have more skill points then rogues.
Fighters need magic defenses.
Fighters need movement options.
Fighters need recovery and/or immunity options.
Fighters need MORe skill points, and some bonuses to go with class skills.
Fighters need some versatility in and out of combat. Martial Flexibility is a good one, letting them go dumpster diving for feats.
Fighters need to have a combat bonus at level 1.If fighters have to burn feats to acquire these things, instead of class abilities, then fighters need a LOT more feats.
Note: Advanced Weapon Training effectively let fighters exchange 3 Weapon Trainings for AWT feats, which are demonstrably better then normal feats. Paizo is learning.
My own fighter remix gives fighters a Combat Technique and a Training Technique at ever level, in addition to class abilities at every level that are not mere scaling effects. It still isn't overpowered, but is a LOT more versatile.
==Aelryinth
Aelryinth - another great post by you! Fair play, despite our differences over Mythic play ;) [Legendary Games' Mythic Heroes Handbook offers a host of potential and viable solutions ... what can I say? Love high level play.] Would you be willing to share the list of Combat Techniques & Training Techniques? Have a great weekend!
Buoyancy doesn't work like that. Steel is far denser than water and the water it displaces is trivial in comparison to its considerable weight. Weight that must be counteracted by motion if you want to swim rather than walk along the bottom.
Wet fabric does not have similar issues. The water in fabric has exactly the density of water making it neutrally buoyant. Which should be bloody obvious.
I'm not saying metal is not as dense as water... Only that it'd feel lighter underwater than on dry land, while water-absorbing fabric would be the opposite (although its buoyancy wouldn't be affected).
Water is denser than air, so if you can lift something on dry land, you can do it underwater... Maybe just not well enough to do it before you drown. Sometimes the occupancy doesn't help you enough to keep you from sinking, but it does help.
Pop Quiz: A halfling Fighter is flanking a human enemy with an allied human fighter. The Fighters are fifth level. The halfling moves and provokes. What is the halfling's conditional AC bonus if all ability scores are 14? Show your work.It sucks because it's unplayable. The result is a massive list of coditional modifiers that stops combat as you check the game state against all the passive combat feats.I don't think so -- although I'm willing to be persuaded otherwise. Any given fighter has her favorite kit-out and will know the conditional modifiers for that kit-out. The fact that she can attempt any combat maneuver without provoking attacks of opportunity doesn't mean that she will.
+4 from mobility
+1 from Circling Offense+5 Total.
(Favored Defense does not help because Dedicated Adversary does not count for prerequisites.)
My turn: Same halfling attempts to grapple a human. What bonus does he gain from feats.
Water is denser than air, so if you can lift something on dry land, you can do it underwater... Maybe just not well enough to do it before you drown. Sometimes the occupancy doesn't help you enough to keep you from sinking, but it does help.Dry land supports all of your weight. So does seabed or riverbed, but walking along the bottom is not swimming.
Armor might weigh very slightly less under water, but not enough less for you to fly in it by flapping your arms. Humans can swim because even a very lean human is near neutral buoyancy and most have positive buoyancy.
I never disputed any of that.
What I'm saying is that armor penalties should not exist... Most of it should be covered by encumbrance penalties. If you're strong enough that the armor's weight isn't an issue, why would the mere fact that it's armor suddenly make it a problem? I have literally seen people swim while donning armor.
Not to mention how unfair ACP is from a gameplay point-of-view. Most classes are given no real alternative to donning armor, but are still penalized for doing it.
|
Another fix the fighter thread. Fighters are fine. They have full BAB, they have a good fort save, they're simple to play, so make a great introduction to the game for new players or older players that just want a break from the over complex. Also, they don't typically rely on misinterpretation and intentional misrepresentation of rules to pull off dubious combinations as a rule. They can be good close and at range. And in many a campaign that I've run or played, they have contributed and held their own.
With the right archetype they have good will saves as well since you can add bravery to all will saves, not just fear.
Like every class they are a combination of class and equipment. Stop ignoring equipment to confine what they can do.
There biggest flaw is skills, they should have 4+ or 6+ And a wider range of class skills - a house rule we employ.
I play fighters quite often when I want to escape the complexity of the other classes. It's nice to play a character whose role is clearly defined.
If you wanted to improve them give them alternatives to bravery, weapon and armour training.
The biggest issue that magic needs to be reigned in, if magic was toned down, and/or classes maxed out at 6 level casters like the recent hybrids, that would go a long way to equalising the classes. They will never be equal though, and that's fine, it's what makes the classes in pathfinder feel distinct.
ACP is fine. You can't honestly think that someone performing in armor can perform exactly equally to someone who is in athletic gear. I don't care who you are, Mike Phelps in masterwork full plate is not swimming as well as Mike Phelps in a Speedo.
Derron, I'll see about getting the list up under my google drive. Give me a bit.
It's not complete, but the best thing about it is the very anti-magical nature of some of the feats.
Note I haven't revised them since the AWT feats or Ultimate Intrigue came out, and haven't seen the list of Ultimate Intrigue Bravery feats yet.
==Aelryinth
Simple =/= effective.
An no class that I know relies on misinterpretation and intentional misrepresentation of rules to be effective.
Fighters are no better than any other class at using their gear, nor do they earn any more gold... So citing equipment is pretty pointless.
Even if we remove all full casters from the game, Fighters would still be at the bottom of the barrel.
I do agree that magic should be reined in a bit, but even if that's done, martials, specially Fighters, would still need some buffs.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
on google drive, there are three documents:
The first is the fighter philosophy document, which analyzes the fighter, conveys what I think a fighter should do, and my mindset when creating one.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B6Q5kojmrb9JeVdZSkpBUXhVc3c/view?usp=shari ng
The one where I set up my fighter level by level, and then introduce a slew of techniques to use with him, is:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B6Q5kojmrb9JcURwRGVneHpQZzA/view?usp=shari ng
A new Rogue Variant is here:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B6Q5kojmrb9JTWNxMl9CM09fUWc/view?usp=shari ng
Wherein I return the Rogue to the very best of all skill monkeys, in ALL skills, and design a 'magic rogue' to replace the skill monkey function of the rogue, as well.
==Aelryinth
on google drive, there are three documents:
The first is the fighter philosophy document, which analyzes the fighter, conveys what I think a fighter should do, and my mindset when creating one.
Your proposed fixes do very little beyond just giving an insane amount of statistical buffs to the fighter and making him immune and resistant to a whole bunch of things. While I agree the fighter could use help in that department, this does not address what I perceive as the biggest problem with the fighter -- they're bland and uninteresting to play. Giving them free ability score bonuses and healing doesn't fix that.
Even your listed design goals don't address this issue.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
While I think fighters need some boosts, I reject several of the assertions of the OP.
Fighters are great at first level. They don't really start to fall behind until 6th level, and that is largely for reasons other then the ability to deal damage. Fighters are good at dealing HP damage at just about every level of the game, and don't really need a boost to damage. CoDzilla beats the fighter at versatility, not physical damage.
I recommend changes to the class that don't increase damage, but rather gives the fighter versatility, in and out of combat.
- 4 Skill points, and more class skills (heal, social skills, etc). You could add something that lets fighters use their BAB in place of ranks for something like 1 skill/ 5 fighter levels.
- Probably give the fighter good will save progression.
- At 5th level, and every 5 levels thereafter, fighters can swap out one fighter bonus feat for any other fighter bonus feat. This is done each day after the fighter rests. Evil Lincoln did an excellent detailed write up of something like thisd.
- Fighters (And perhaps any other full BAB class and race, including dragons!) can forgo additional attacks granted by high BAB, and instead take additional 5ft steps.
- Fighter bonus feats that allow the fighter to attack multiple targets, deal area damage, make touch attacks, target saves, etc.
- Feats that allow higher level fighters to create effects similar to lower level buff spells- false life, enlarge person, bears endurance, displacement, and maybe even dimension door.
Beyond that, you would need to create a whole new mechanic to allow fighters to really affect the narrative, like powerful skill unlocks, rituals, strongholds with followers, etc. That would be beyond the scope of fixing a single class, and could dramatically alter the game.
It doesn't? I'm pretty sure I've seen the term being used in Pathfinder books... And a quick search tells me it means the same as "dress, wear, enrobe, put on".
Is there something I'm not seeing here?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
On Cyrad's point about fighters being bland-
There are a couple of things I have seen: despite fighters usually being decked out in full plate mail, they rarely use combat maneuvers unless they are specifically built for it (and when they are, they just do that one thing over and over). Some of this seems to just be not wanting to get hit, even though they have the AC to deal with it. But a lot of this is because combat maneuvers are just so difficult to pull off against the opponents you really need it to work on.
As an example, I remember in one scenario we were getting beaten up by a cleric who was channeling, and I had a raging barbarian. I was like I'll steal his holy symbol. I'm a strong guy; I should be able to. I rolled pretty high and couldn't do it. It was way easier to just hit the guy. Your basic fighter would have never been able to, probably even with improved steal. It felt really anti climactic to have a cool way to solve a problem and then just not be able to. And I feel like a fighter should have been able to pull off that feat where a barbarian couldn't. And stealing the holy symbol would not have totally disabled the guy; he still hit really really hard with his sword.
The risk vs reward of combat maneuvers really needs to be examined. Your basic monk has the same problem; they should be the kings of wrestling and disarming and things, but in practice they rarely can. Maybe giving both something like martial flexibility from level 1 would be a good idea. And maybe adding dexterity to CMB, as well? But then I don't want to see every fighter using every other action to blind their opponent with dirty trick, you know? but there should be some way to encourage fighters to be looking for opportunities like this.
I kind of think combat expertise needs reworked to be a +2 to cmd/cmb for combat maneuvers and no AoO, and the greater versions of the combat maneuver feats reduced to the improved option. Take the AC aspect of combat expertise and roll it directly into dodge.
You are saying "he swims while putting on armor" instead of "he swims while wearing armor". You don the armor to put it on. After it is on, you are no longer donning it; the verb specifically means putting it on.It doesn't? I'm pretty sure I've seen that term being used in Pathfinder books... And a quick search tells me it means the same as "dress, wear, enrobe, put on".
Is there something I'm not seeing here?
Ah, I see... I thought it was interchangeable with "wearing". Thank you for the clarification.
|
Imp combat maneuvers need to give more than +2 to the skill, they also should allow you to do it on creatures that were initially immune to such or more difficult to perform it on.
Ex. Imp trip should be a +4 bonus to CMB/CMD, it should also allow you to trip a 4 legged creature and 1 that is a size category bigger than yourself with no penalty. I know that isn't what would happen in real life but this isn't real life. It is magic and fantasy, if you watch the 3rd Night at the Museum the Knight ( I think it is Lancelot) and he trips the skeletal dinosaur who is 1 size category larger and has 4 legs with no AoO.
edit: Knight tripping 4 legged dino and kicking his but in full plate with a long sword.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
On Cyrad's point about fighters being bland-
There are a couple of things I have seen: despite fighters usually being decked out in full plate mail, they rarely use combat maneuvers unless they are specifically built for it (and when they are, they just do that one thing over and over). Some of this seems to just be not wanting to get hit, even though they have the AC to deal with it. But a lot of this is because combat maneuvers are just so difficult to pull off against the opponents you really need it to work on.
As an example, I remember in one scenario we were getting beaten up by a cleric who was channeling, and I had a raging barbarian. I was like I'll steal his holy symbol. I'm a strong guy; I should be able to. I rolled pretty high and couldn't do it. It was way easier to just hit the guy. Your basic fighter would have never been able to, probably even with improved steal. It felt really anti climactic to have a cool way to solve a problem and then just not be able to. And I feel like a fighter should have been able to pull off that feat where a barbarian couldn't. And stealing the holy symbol would not have totally disabled the guy; he still hit really really hard with his sword.
The risk vs reward of combat maneuvers really needs to be examined. Your basic monk has the same problem; they should be the kings of wrestling and disarming and things, but in practice they rarely can. Maybe giving both something like martial flexibility from level 1 would be a good idea. And maybe adding dexterity to CMB, as well? But then I don't want to see every fighter using every other action to blind their opponent with dirty trick, you know? but there should be some way to encourage fighters to be looking for opportunities like this.
I agree that the restriction of combat maneuvers is a contributing factor to many martials feeling like they lack tactical options.
But consider this perspective to that notion. If we focus on just buffing the fighter's damage, defenses, and giving them extra ways to bypass enemy defenses, that results in making damage always the best solution to different situations. Buffing a fighter's ability to run up and stab something does not give them incentives to do something other than running up and stabbing something.
+5 Total.(Favored Defense does not help because Dedicated Adversary does not count for prerequisites.)
My turn: Same halfling attempts to grapple a human. What bonus does he gain from feats.
Missing Underfoot Combat for +2 and the combat trick for Mobility for another +1. I think that's it, but in a few levels the answer starts depending on what skill ranks the Halfling has.
I kind of think combat expertise needs reworked to be a +2 to cmd/cmb for combat maneuvers and no AoO, and the greater versions of the combat maneuver feats reduced to the improved option. Take the AC aspect of combat expertise and...On Cyrad's point about fighters being bland-
There are a couple of things I have seen: despite fighters usually being decked out in full plate mail, they rarely use combat maneuvers unless they are specifically built for it (and when they are, they just do that one thing over and over). Some of this seems to just be not wanting to get hit, even though they have the AC to deal with it. But a lot of this is because combat maneuvers are just so difficult to pull off against the opponents you really need it to work on.
As an example, I remember in one scenario we were getting beaten up by a cleric who was channeling, and I had a raging barbarian. I was like I'll steal his holy symbol. I'm a strong guy; I should be able to. I rolled pretty high and couldn't do it. It was way easier to just hit the guy. Your basic fighter would have never been able to, probably even with improved steal. It felt really anti climactic to have a cool way to solve a problem and then just not be able to. And I feel like a fighter should have been able to pull off that feat where a barbarian couldn't. And stealing the holy symbol would not have totally disabled the guy; he still hit really really hard with his sword.
The risk vs reward of combat maneuvers really needs to be examined. Your basic monk has the same problem; they should be the kings of wrestling and disarming and things, but in practice they rarely can. Maybe giving both something like martial flexibility from level 1 would be a good idea. And maybe adding dexterity to CMB, as well? But then I don't want to see every fighter using every other action to blind their opponent with dirty trick, you know? but there should be some way to encourage fighters to be looking for opportunities like this.
I ran Expertise Technique as dovetailing with a LOT of other feats (for Fighters).
Base was the standard AC bonus if you wanted to defend.If you were not defending, it gave the bonus on CMD at all times. It gave the bonus on CMB to one manuver per point of bonus, so as you leveled up you could pick first Feint, then Dirty Trick, then Bull Rush, then Trip...giving you the flexibility to pick as you go without spending more feats, AND providing an ever increasing bonus without more feat investment.
==Aelryinth