PDA

View Full Version : Fighter Class Feature: Omnicompetence



Lapak
2010-05-13, 11:27 AM
This idea has probably been suggested before, but I thought I'd throw it out and see what people thought about it. A quote in another fighter-fix-related thread (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=151826) got me thinking:


I very much disagree that different classes should only be good at a specific subset of weapons. In 2e, a fighter could pick any weapon he wanted and be amazing with it, even the daggers/darts/shuriken/short swords/whatever that are stereotypically rogue weapons, and I don't ever recall anyone saying "thieves are good with [weapon], so you shouldn't use it!" The existence of swashbucklers, ninjas, rogues, and such doesn't mean a finesse fighter is out of the question, it means there are many ways to focus on one weapon; if a rogue can sneak attack with a greatsword, a fighter should be able to specialize in a dagger.PairO'Dice is right. This IS something that the fighter lost in the shift to a build-specific set of skills that 3rd edition introduced. Fighters get feats as their class feature, which has the double problem that a given fighter is only really powerful along one or two specializations AND that any other class can invest a portion of their feats to become nearly as skillful in any one chain of feats, or cherry-pick the most relevant, and they get actual class features on top of that. Fighters, among their other problems, don't get anything special to them alone and lost their overall competence in the bargain. Most of the fighter fixes also involve them specializing in one way or another.

So, to address this, I propose an very simple alternate class structure based around being adaptable kind of warrior that D&D's source material had. Conan could kill you with a dagger, an axe, a sword, a bow, a lance, on foot, mounted, as the leader of an army, as a thief alone, while hanging from a cliff, or while sailing on the sea. Aragorn was deadly with a bow or a blade, Fafhrd killed with knives and clubs and his bare hands, and so on. So:


Martial Omni-Competence
At every level where the core Fighter gets bonus feats, the Fighter gains access to ALL feats that are on the Fighter bonus feat list that she currently qualifies for. For feats with a minimum BAB requirement, calculate her BAB using only her levels in the Fighter class. You do not gain access to any feats which you do not have the prerequisite feats for prior to gaining this level in Fighter. (For example, the first level in Fighter will give you Point Blank Shot if you do not already have it, but will not give you Precise Shot unless you already had Point Blank Shot through some other source.)

So the fighter can pick up and be focused (and/or specialized in, depending on fighter level) any weapon he comes across. Including exotic weapons. A 4th-level fighter could Shoot on the Run with an Orc Shotput if he has the Dex for it, then deflect an arrow fired at him as he closes the range before delivering an Improved Disarm while unarmed to steal his enemy's spiked chain away and start wreaking havoc with Spring-Attack Improved Tripping. Every reach-weapon fighter can automatically threaten his immediate area with unarmed attacks without having to buy armor spikes or invest one of a limited number of feats to do it.

This proposal does not fix any number of problems the core fighter, but it alleviates a relatively broad spectrum of them that result from being tied to a specific build and gives the fighter a degree of adaptability that no other melee class has while still tying that the to basic idea of the core fighter (feat-based class feature.) It does not fix (for example) equipment dependence for mobility. It does give the core fighter increased options as splatbooks are added in a similar fashion to casters getting their spell lists expanded, and campaigns which use alternate rules that include usefully-scaling feats (or more powerful homebrew high-level standalone feats) can integrate this without too much trouble. I don't think this is an end-all, be-all fix for the class, but it does give the fighter something useful and flavor-relevant - certainly it makes 'Fighter' and 'NPC Warrior' two very different things. Other martial classes can still get subsets of a Fighter's power and add their own class powers to amplify it, but that's okay: they can't switch styles on the fly the way the Fighter can.

I do see some problems. For example, the way the feat chains are laid out makes a couple of dip levels in Fighter extremely appealing. I'm not sure how to address this, and would welcome suggestions. I'm also trying to remember if there are fighter feats outside Core that can be taken more than once in the way Weapon Specialization can - if Shape Soulmeld was a fighter feat, say, that would be kind of a problem. (I know it's not; I'm just trying to clarify the kind of feat I'm worried about.) The biggest hole, obviously, is the sparse number of high-level feats available in Core - the Fighter in this will have gained 95% of what he's going to get by around level 12.

Suggestions? Opinions? (Hopefully not links to other threads where this has been discussed to exhaustion, but if they exist let me know?)

Milskidasith
2010-05-13, 11:53 AM
This idea has probably been suggested before, but I thought I'd throw it out and see what people thought about it. A quote in another fighter-fix-related thread (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=151826) got me thinking:

PairO'Dice is right. This IS something that the fighter lost in the shift to a build-specific set of skills that 3rd edition introduced. Fighters get feats as their class feature, which has the double problem that a given fighter is only really powerful along one or two specializations AND that any other class can invest a portion of their feats to become nearly as skillful in any one chain of feats, or cherry-pick the most relevant, and they get actual class features on top of that. Fighters, among their other problems, don't get anything special to them alone and lost their overall competence in the bargain. Most of the fighter fixes also involve them specializing in one way or another.

So, to address this, I propose an very simple alternate class structure based around being adaptable kind of warrior that D&D's source material had. Conan could kill you with a dagger, an axe, a sword, a bow, a lance, on foot, mounted, as the leader of an army, as a thief alone, while hanging from a cliff, or while sailing on the sea. Aragorn was deadly with a bow or a blade, Fafhrd killed with knives and clubs and his bare hands, and so on. So:



So the fighter can pick up and be focused (and/or specialized in, depending on fighter level) any weapon he comes across. Including exotic weapons. A 4th-level fighter could Shoot on the Run with an Orc Shotput if he has the Dex for it, then deflect an arrow fired at him as he closes the range before delivering an Improved Disarm while unarmed to steal his enemy's spiked chain away and start wreaking havoc with Spring-Attack Improved Tripping. Every reach-weapon fighter can automatically threaten his immediate area with unarmed attacks without having to buy armor spikes or invest one of a limited number of feats to do it.

This proposal does not fix any number of problems the core fighter, but it alleviates a relatively broad spectrum of them that result from being tied to a specific build and gives the fighter a degree of adaptability that no other melee class has while still tying that the to basic idea of the core fighter (feat-based class feature.) It does not fix (for example) equipment dependence for mobility. It does give the core fighter increased options as splatbooks are added in a similar fashion to casters getting their spell lists expanded, and campaigns which use alternate rules that include usefully-scaling feats (or more powerful homebrew high-level standalone feats) can integrate this without too much trouble. I don't think this is an end-all, be-all fix for the class, but it does give the fighter something useful and flavor-relevant - certainly it makes 'Fighter' and 'NPC Warrior' two very different things. Other martial classes can still get subsets of a Fighter's power and add their own class powers to amplify it, but that's okay: they can't switch styles on the fly the way the Fighter can.

I do see some problems. For example, the way the feat chains are laid out makes a couple of dip levels in Fighter extremely appealing. I'm not sure how to address this, and would welcome suggestions. I'm also trying to remember if there are fighter feats outside Core that can be taken more than once in the way Weapon Specialization can - if Shape Soulmeld was a fighter feat, say, that would be kind of a problem. (I know it's not; I'm just trying to clarify the kind of feat I'm worried about.) The biggest hole, obviously, is the sparse number of high-level feats available in Core - the Fighter in this will have gained 95% of what he's going to get by around level 12.

Suggestions? Opinions? (Hopefully not links to other threads where this has been discussed to exhaustion, but if they exist let me know?)

All feats?

Do you realize how many sourcebooks there are, and how generic this makes the fighter? Every fighter will be exactly the same because they now have an absurd number of feats, and a one level dip in fighter gets you about HOLYOMGWTFBBQ feats.

Lapak
2010-05-13, 12:01 PM
All feats?

Do you realize how many sourcebooks there are, and how generic this makes the fighter? Every fighter will be exactly the same because they now have an absurd number of feats, and a one level dip in fighter gets you about HOLYOMGWTFBBQ feats.Well, yes, that's kind of the point. Not every fighter will be exactly alike, however: some will use their non-fighter feats to advance up feat chains faster, those without the required INT or DEX or whatever will be lacking other feats. But your point is well taken - I'm not clear myself on exactly how many feats fall under the classification of 'may be taken as a fighter bonus feat.'

(Quoting my entire post to give a two-line response may have been overkill, though. :smallwink:)

Milskidasith
2010-05-13, 12:06 PM
Well, yes, that's kind of the point. Not every fighter will be exactly alike, however: some will use their non-fighter feats to advance up feat chains faster, those without the required INT or DEX or whatever will be lacking other feats. But your point is well taken - I'm not clear myself on exactly how many feats fall under the classification of 'may be taken as a fighter bonus feat.'

(Quoting my entire post to give a two-line response may have been overkill, though. :smallwink:)

The point is, this is not a good way to go about things. If the point is to move the fighter up a tier... well, OK, it might bring him from 5 to 4 just because he now has a variety of ways to hit stuff really hard, but it doesn't make him useful relative to casters. If it's to give the fighter more variety, it hardly does so, because now every fighter can chain trip, ubercharge, disarm, sunder, shoot stuff, lightning mace stuff, and has a variety of passive bonuses. All fighter bonus feats *also* means there are about a hundred sourcebooks to go through and a ton of issues of dragon magazine that will all give you at least one or two feats.

As for may be taken as a fighter bonus feat: It's every feat with the [Fighter] tag. Also, epic fighter feats, too, though you have to be epic level before you get those.

Lapak
2010-05-13, 12:20 PM
The point is, this is not a good way to go about things. If the point is to move the fighter up a tier... well, OK, it might bring him from 5 to 4 just because he now has a variety of ways to hit stuff really hard, but it doesn't make him useful relative to casters. If it's to give the fighter more variety, it hardly does so, because now every fighter can chain trip, ubercharge, disarm, sunder, shoot stuff, lightning mace stuff, and has a variety of passive bonuses. All fighter bonus feats *also* means there are about a hundred sourcebooks to go through and a ton of issues of dragon magazine that will all give you at least one or two feats.No one is required to do that, or make use of any feats other than those readily available to them. That's like claiming that every cleric is obligated to buy every sourcebook that adds a spell to their class list. And the point is not to increase the fighter's tier as such, or be a cureall for their problems: it's to address the problems of:

- fighters no longer being able to pursue a variety of strategies effectively
and
- every other class being able to emulate any given fighter by investing their feats that way

by making the pure-fighter build different in a mechanically straightforward way.


As for may be taken as a fighter bonus feat: It's every feat with the [Fighter] tag. Also, epic fighter feats, too, though you have to be epic level before you get those.No, I understand that; what I don't have a clear fix on is how many such feats are added by the average group's array of sources. 10? 40? 100?

Frozen_Feet
2010-05-13, 12:40 PM
All Fighters wouldn't be alike, if only for the reason that many feats have skill or ability requirements, and there's a lot of leeway with those. Someone who doesn't invest in dexterity still won't become an archer and so on. If there's something I worry about, it's the sheer amount of new abilities gained at every other level. This feature would likely make putting down all proper modifiers very hard.

Frog Dragon
2010-05-13, 12:43 PM
Too much bookkeeping, too much stuff and it cuts into the customization. It also makes it incredibly easy to create really stupid combos. You get them as a part of the package.

Milskidasith
2010-05-13, 02:09 PM
No one is required to do that, or make use of any feats other than those readily available to them. That's like claiming that every cleric is obligated to buy every sourcebook that adds a spell to their class list.

The big difference here is that feats are passive. You can work perfectly well with just core spells, and even if you added in spells, you don't *need* to use non-core spells. But if X, Y, Z, and ampersand sourcebooks are allowed, then the fighter is only hindering himself by only using Y and ampersand, and if the DM happens to own X and Z and assume the fighter is adding in the passive bonuses from his feats, it could cause problems.


And the point is not to increase the fighter's tier as such, or be a cureall for their problems: it's to address the problems of:

- fighters no longer being able to pursue a variety of strategies effectively
and
- every other class being able to emulate any given fighter by investing their feats that way


Fighters having only one scthick is a reason they are T5 and not T4. You can't claim that the design intent is to remove the sole reason keeping them from being T4 while also saying you don't want them to move up a tier. If you want the fighters to stay at T5, then why are you doing this, and if you want them to be more powerful, you have to admit this is an intent to move them up a tier.


by making the pure-fighter build different in a mechanically straightforward way.

By making the pure fighter build the same as what would currently be three or four fighters? I don't see how this solves the "fighter has no class features" problem; any class can *still* emulate what the fighter does with feat choices, and can do *everything* this fighter can do if the chaos shuffle is allowed (it shouldn't be, but still).


No, I understand that; what I don't have a clear fix on is how many such feats are added by the average group's array of sources. 10? 40? 100?

At level one, you get:

Blind Fight
Combat Reflexes
Every Exotic Weapon proficiency
Improved Initiative
Improved Shield Bash
Improved Unarmed Strike
Mounted Combat (for one rank in ride; that's trivial enough every fighter should have it, unless ride isn't a class skill for some reason)
Point Blank Shot
Quick Draw
Rapid Reload (All crossbow types, excluding exotic ones [are there any?])
Weapon Finesse
Weapon Focus (all nonexotic)

At level 2 you get:

Rapid Reload and Weapon Focus for nonexotic weapons.
Mounted Archery
Ride-by Attack
Trample (I think; wiki I'm using links to the special ability)
Far Shot
Precise Shot

At level 4 you get:

Power critical with all weapons
Weapon specialization with all weapons
Spirited Charge
Sharp-shooting

At level 8 you get:

Improved Crit for all weapons
Greater Weapon Focus for all weapons

Level 12:

GWS for all weapons.

With 13 int, you also get:

Combat Expertise (level 1)
Improved Disarm (level 2)
Improved Feint (level 2)
Improved Trip (level 2)
Whirlwind attack (level 6, needs 13 dex)

With 13 Dex, you also get:

Dodge (level 1)
Mobility (level 2)
Shot on the run (level 4)
Spring attack (level 4)
Whirlwind attack (level 6, needs 13 int)
Deflect Arrows (level 2)
Improved Grapple (level 2)
Rapid Shot (level 2)

With 15 Dex, you also get:

TWF (level 1)
Snatch Arrows (level 4)
TWD (level 2)

With 17 dex, you also get:

Manyshot (level 6)
Greater Manyshot (level 8)
ITWF (level 6)

19 Dex, you also get:

Improved Precise Shot (level 12)
GTWF (level 12)

With 13 Str, you also get:

Power Attack (level 1)
Cleave (level 2)
Improved Bull Rush (level 2)
Improved Overrun (level 2)
Improved Sunder (level 2)
Great Cleave (level 4)

With 25 str and large size, you can grab Awesome Blow. Not a likely one to get.

With 13 wis and 13 dex, you get:

Stunning Fist (level 8)

EDIT: List fully done. Excluding duplicates of the "pick one weapon" feats, you get around 50 feats if you somehow have all of the stats high enough for everything, or around 30 if you are only high in two stats, with dex being the stat most feats are linked to, but it's a pretty great ability score when you can pick up weapon finesse for your dual weilding while also being an effective charger and chain tripping with chains. If you just skip out on int and wis, you have around 40 feats.


All Fighters wouldn't be alike, if only for the reason that many feats have skill or ability requirements, and there's a lot of leeway with those. Someone who doesn't invest in dexterity still won't become an archer and so on. If there's something I worry about, it's the sheer amount of new abilities gained at every other level. This feature would likely make putting down all proper modifiers very hard.

While there are some things you lose (especially for dex, but you get weapon finesse, so yeah) you get a massive amount of feats with just a 13 in a non constitution non charisma ability score, and you *want* to have those for most normal fighter builds anyway.

Even a str 13 con maxed cha maxed int 13 fighter is still, with this, an effective chain tripper, sunderer, charger, grappler, overrunner, disarmer, etc. because of the fact that you have all the feats you need at level 4 without flaws or spending other feats. Once you throw in stuff like X stat to damage feats and other sourcebooks things get insane, but even a basic fighter can be a mounted charger for as little as one skill point and 13 in strength, by level 6, with a bit of extra damage and a few more crits and the ability to great cleave everything in the area after he smashes things with his lance.

All fighters have the best fighting stuff or the best archery stuff along with a bunch of otherwise useless, but now great, small passive boosts and a decent amount of archery stuff for the fighters and fighting stuff for the archers, *and* you get to spend your other feats on... well, who knows what. PrC requirement things, toughness?

Oh, and then there is the fun of warblades, where a warblade 18/fighter 2 would get nearly all the feats I just listed while still having maneuvers.

Lapak
2010-05-13, 02:31 PM
Hm. That certainly makes Fighter levels 1 and 2 a wee bit overloaded compared to every other level. While that could be dealt with, it would no longer be as straightforward an adjustment as "you get them as soon as you qualify for them." I wasn't aware that so very many feats are only one slot down on a feat chain - to make this work would require reorganizing the entire feat-tree layout to spread these out a bit, which is more overhauling of the system as a whole than I had hoped for. Oh well. That is, after all, why I threw this out: to see what problems there were with the idea.

EDIT: The edited end of your response is exactly what I was TRYING to accomplish, however: give every fighter the entire array of feat-related options and bonuses rather than making them focus on one or two tricks, and let them use their feats on NON-weapon-oriented options. I still think that's a good thing to shoot for, but it's not as simple as I'd hoped.

Milskidasith
2010-05-13, 02:46 PM
Hm. That certainly makes Fighter levels 1 and 2 a wee bit overloaded compared to every other level. While that could be dealt with, it would no longer be as straightforward an adjustment as "you get them as soon as you qualify for them." I wasn't aware that so very many feats are only one slot down on a feat chain - to make this work would require reorganizing the entire feat-tree layout to spread these out a bit, which is more overhauling of the system as a whole than I had hoped for. Oh well. That is, after all, why I threw this out: to see what problems there were with the idea.

EDIT: The edited end of your response is exactly what I was TRYING to accomplish, however: give every fighter the entire array of feat-related options and bonuses rather than making them focus on one or two tricks, and let them use their feats on NON-weapon-oriented options. I still think that's a good thing to shoot for, but it's not as simple as I'd hoped.

Shooting for that is not a good idea. It really isn't. When every fighter is just as good at fighting things, then it doesn't matter if X fighter has improved toughness while the other one has run and the third one has skill focus: (craft walrus tusk lawn gnomes); they'll all fight exactly the same, and that's what stats are for in D&D 99% of the time.

As for reworking the feat trees: That won't work either. For one thing, many feats are already only tenuously related to the feats required to use them, and making it so that chains are strict simply weakens every class but the fighter just so the fighter... gets spread out more while still having the same power at around level 10? That would be just as bad for entirely different reasons, because now you've left fighters with no variety *and* other classes have to turmoil with a much higher feat tax on certain feats.

Lapak
2010-05-13, 02:54 PM
Shooting for that is not a good idea. It really isn't. When every fighter is just as good at fighting things, then it doesn't matter if X fighter has improved toughness while the other one has run and the third one has skill focus: (craft walrus tusk lawn gnomes); they'll all fight exactly the same, and that's what stats are for in D&D 99% of the time.Well, no, for two reasons.

Any given fighter has all of those options available, but not all of them can be used at the same time and not all of them will be used when they are most appropriate. It shifts the differentiation of fighters from build construction to player skill in using those options during combat. If you build a chain-tripper, you go into fights looking for ways to trip and delay foes and then beat them up; if you COULD trip like crazy, but you could also charge in with a Power Attack or attempt to sunder their weapons or leap into the middle of a bunch of lackeys to Cleave them the choice of what the fighter actually chooses to do becomes important, and recognizing the right tool for the job means the player has something meaningful to do.


As for reworking the feat trees: That won't work either. For one thing, many feats are already only tenuously related to the feats required to use them, and making it so that chains are strict simply weakens every class but the fighter just so the fighter... gets spread out more while still having the same power at around level 10? That would be just as bad for entirely different reasons, because now you've left fighters with no variety *and* other classes have to turmoil with a much higher feat tax on certain feats.Other classes, to be frank, have enough going for them already, and few enough feats to spare that the level they actually get those feats at probably won't change to begin with.

Milskidasith
2010-05-13, 03:57 PM
Well, no, for two reasons.

Any given fighter has all of those options available, but not all of them can be used at the same time and not all of them will be used when they are most appropriate. It shifts the differentiation of fighters from build construction to player skill in using those options during combat. If you build a chain-tripper, you go into fights looking for ways to trip and delay foes and then beat them up; if you COULD trip like crazy, but you could also charge in with a Power Attack or attempt to sunder their weapons or leap into the middle of a bunch of lackeys to Cleave them the choice of what the fighter actually chooses to do becomes important, and recognizing the right tool for the job means the player has something meaningful to do.

You have completely ignored my point. The point wasn't that fighters would always do the same thing. The point is that every fighter is mechanically *capable* of doing the same thing. And you have pretty much confirmed that. That is the problem; yes, a tactical genius will do better than a moron, but that doesn't change the fact that both of their fighters would be, when played by one or the other, near exactly the same.


Other classes, to be frank, have enough going for them already, and few enough feats to spare that the level they actually get those feats at probably won't change to begin with.

This is completely wrong. Maybe casters can afford spending extra feats at the moment and also have a lot going for them without feats, but making good feats require more feats hurts every other noncaster class in the game.

Lapak
2010-05-13, 04:16 PM
You have completely ignored my point. The point wasn't that fighters would always do the same thing. The point is that every fighter is mechanically *capable* of doing the same thing. And you have pretty much confirmed that. That is the problem; yes, a tactical genius will do better than a moron, but that doesn't change the fact that both of their fighters would be, when played by one or the other, near exactly the same.I wasn't trying to ignore your point, I was trying to address it. I just don't see it as a bad thing. Any two fighters that are built to achieve a particular goal - two trippers, two shock-trooper-pouncers, or whatever - are already very similar, but locked into a one-or-two-trick routine. This would indeed make all fighters similar mechanically, but it would open up a lot more options for playing all fighters at the same time. I respect that you don't think that's a good goal to shoot for, but I don't agree with you.

Aside from that, it's already largely true of non-fighter non-spellcaster classes to begin with. Many pure-class paladins look like many others; many pure-class scouts look like many others. Builds involving multiple base classes or PrCs will look different, but that's still true with this change to the fighter.


This is completely wrong. Maybe casters can afford spending extra feats at the moment and also have a lot going for them without feats, but making good feats require more feats hurts every other noncaster class in the game.Possibly true, but if I was going to rearrange the feat tree (which I'm not - you convinced several posts ago, and I said, that this entire idea was not viable because I was not going to do this) it might be something that can be worked around by changing the pre-reqs in ways that don't involve adding pre-req feats, but adding more minimum BAB or skill rank requirements to push them into later levels.

Milskidasith
2010-05-13, 04:29 PM
I wasn't trying to ignore your point, I was trying to address it. I just don't see it as a bad thing. Any two fighters that are built to achieve a particular goal - two trippers, two shock-trooper-pouncers, or whatever - are already very similar, but locked into a one-or-two-trick routine. This would indeed make all fighters similar mechanically, but it would open up a lot more options for playing all fighters at the same time. I respect that you don't think that's a good goal to shoot for, but I don't agree with you.

Yes, two fighters built the same are going to be the same. That is reasonable. The problem with this is that two fighters who are built entirely differently are still going to be 95% the same, with the only specializations existing in the extremely high X stat required feats and the occasional use of martial study. That is a bad thing. By doing this, you make *less* viable builds, because many builds are pointless when you get the feats for free anyway. You get a ton less build variety in fighters and you can only do what you already do.


Aside from that, it's already largely true of non-fighter non-spellcaster classes to begin with. Many pure-class paladins look like many others; many pure-class scouts look like many others. Builds involving multiple base classes or PrCs will look different, but that's still true with this change to the fighter.

Actually, not really. Paladins can be trippers, chargers, casters, PrC out as gishes, etc. They have more variety than the base fighter, in fact. Scouts are possible to look similar in function, but that's only because high mobility hit and run stuff is their niche to begin with.


Possibly true, but if I was going to rearrange the feat tree (which I'm not - you convinced several posts ago, and I said, that this entire idea was not viable because I was not going to do this) it might be something that can be worked around by changing the pre-reqs in ways that don't involve adding pre-req feats, but adding more minimum BAB or skill rank requirements to push them into later levels.

Don't put words in my mouth. I have said, from the start, the entire thing is not viable *at all*. If you don't rearrange the feat tree, you can dip two levels in fighter to get nearly everything (pretty much everything if you are a warblade, and if you take four levels as a warblade, you *do* get everything besides GTWF, but even non fighter classes get tons of feats), and if you do rearrange the tree, the problems of making classes that need feats hurt for them more is a lot stronger.

As for more BAB or skill rank requirements: Same problem. It makes it harder for non fighters to get feat trees when they need to be level 15 to get the last feat, and so they can't play at low levels by using flaws to get feats, and in fact, since fighters have terrible skill points, because they could very well qualify for *less* feats, which makes the idea of more variety in fighters laughable.

In short: If you want to give fighters variety, give them actual class features, or look at good homebrews for varied martial types such as the War-Marked and other Penny Dreadful remakes. This idea is not, cannot, and will not ever be feasible, and I with that, I'm out of this topic. If you want to try it, fine, but it's not going to be balanced and it's going to take far more work than it is worth just to get it into a "not broken, not ruining other classes, still leaving variety in fighters" state, let alone actually improving the games balance.

Oslecamo
2010-05-13, 05:30 PM
Yes, two fighters built the same are going to be the same. That is reasonable. The problem with this is that two fighters who are built entirely differently are still going to be 95% the same, with the only specializations existing in the extremely high X stat required feats and the occasional use of martial study. That is a bad thing. By doing this, you make *less* viable builds, because many builds are pointless when you get the feats for free anyway. You get a ton less build variety in fighters and you can only do what you already do.


Well, last time I checked, the druid's class features don't offer you any permanent choice at all. The only diferences will be on the feats they take. But tecnically they all have the same spells and animal companions and wildshape options.

Also why do you say the builds become less viable? What builds become pointless when you get the feats anyway exactly? If they were good enough to use before, they're still good enough now.

So the fighter becomes more like the wizard/druid in the point that he can pretend he's specialized in something, but in pratise he can quickly change to any other combat style.

It's like comparing a favored soul to a cleric. Nobody says that the cleric sucks because he gets all cleric spells at once while the favored soul is stuck with two per level.

Milskidasith
2010-05-13, 05:39 PM
Well, last time I checked, the druid's class features don't offer you any permanent choice at all. The only diferences will be on the feats they take. But tecnically they all have the same spells and animal companions and wildshape options.

Also why do you say the builds become less viable? What builds become pointless when you get the feats anyway exactly? If they were good enough to use before, they're still good enough now.

So the fighter becomes more like the wizard/druid in the point that he can pretend he's specialized in something, but in pratise he can quickly change to any other combat style.

It's like comparing a favored soul to a cleric. Nobody says that the cleric sucks because he gets all cleric spells at once while the favored soul is stuck with two per level.

I have never once stated the fighter becomes weaker. I just claim that there are less viable builds because... there are. You're stuck with "Fighter with all fighter feats except this stat" and "Fighter with all fighter feats except that stat" and that's about it. Druids, wizards, clerics, etc. all get to take a myriad of different feats even single classed which make them much different, and spell selection can be changed up, while since feats are generally passive, every fighter has exactly the same benefits, and since they all have quick draw, they can take advantage of all their feats. There are less viable builds because, to use your example, if the fighters were sorcerers, they would automatically know all spells and get the class features of all PrCs they qualified for.

There's a difference between there being a smaller number of viable builds and the class in general being less viable. It makes the fighter more viable, certainly, but it limits his ability to do much besides switch to a new class, while at the same time in order to keep it from being so front loaded other classes are going to get shafted in their feat chains, and it *still* doesn't give the fighter the variety of any caster class, so I really don't see how the "fix" is in any way useful. Instead of giving him all the feats he can already use and be underwhelming with, giving him features that allow him to be competitive while still allowing a variety of choices instead of just "You get everything" would be a much better way to improve the class.

See: War-marked.

As for pretending to be specialized in something, no. The fighter has all the possible feats relevant to every possible specialty, so he's not "pretending" to be anything. Again, imagine if all wizards could cast any spell they wanted at any and had all the feats and class features to buff them up, and that's essentially what this advocates, except with fighters. Sure, the wizards might use different tactics, but in practice all the builds are nearly identical.

PairO'Dice Lost
2010-05-13, 08:34 PM
While giving the fighter every single [Fighter] feat isn't really a good idea, the base idea of "let the fighter have ridiculously easy access to feats" isn't actually a bad one. Giving the fighter more feats more easily doesn't really fix anything, but it makes it a bit more interesting to play one.

One idea off the top of my head is to let the fighter replace all of his class bonus feats all at once with a minute of practice. A fighter picks up a lance? Give him 10 rounds and he can pick up the Power Attack/Mounted Combat/Shock Trooper/etc. line of feats. A fighter picks up a longbow? Give him 10 rounds and he can pick up the Point Blank Shot/Precise Shot/Rapid Shot/etc. chain.

dyslexicfaser
2010-05-13, 09:41 PM
Or maybe, each round he may exchange one feat for another as a free/swift action? So within 10 rounds he has the Shock Trooper line instead of Spring Attack, but it's more like he's learning how to do it on the fly.

PairO'Dice Lost
2010-05-13, 10:08 PM
Or maybe, each round he may exchange one feat for another as a free/swift action? So within 10 rounds he has the Shock Trooper line instead of Spring Attack, but it's more like he's learning how to do it on the fly.

Could work, but he might run into problems with prerequisites (like needing to switch Weapon Focus, Weapon Spec, and Greater Weapon Focus but losing GWF if he swaps either of the first two). You could simply not require him to meet all the prerequisites at every step, but that opens a bigger can o' worms.

Milskidasith
2010-05-13, 10:14 PM
Could work, but he might run into problems with prerequisites (like needing to switch Weapon Focus, Weapon Spec, and Greater Weapon Focus but losing GWF if he swaps either of the first two). You could simply not require him to meet all the prerequisites at every step, but that opens a bigger can o' worms.

Or just require that he swaps his newest feat first, then moves on to older ones in succession (ignoring feats added).

Or just swap every encounter, which has been proposed dozens of times and still works well enough.

PairO'Dice Lost
2010-05-13, 10:17 PM
Or just require that he swaps his newest feat first, then moves on to older ones in succession (ignoring feats added).

Or just swap every encounter, which has been proposed dozens of times and still works well enough.

One minute, every encounter, works out to the same thing. I haven't seen it proposed here before, but I'm not surprised, as it's not all that revolutionary.

Milskidasith
2010-05-13, 10:30 PM
One minute, every encounter, works out to the same thing. I haven't seen it proposed here before, but I'm not surprised, as it's not all that revolutionary.

I think I've seen it here... three times, IIRC, that I'm sure of. Two within the past few weeks, and I *think* it was one of the features of Oslecamo's fighter redux.

PairO'Dice Lost
2010-05-13, 10:32 PM
I think I've seen it here... three times, IIRC, that I'm sure of. Two within the past few weeks, and I *think* it was one of the features of Oslecamo's fighter redux.

Hadn't noticed that, but then I just skim most fighter fixes these days.

Milskidasith
2010-05-13, 10:36 PM
Hadn't noticed that, but then I just skim most fighter fixes these days.

I tend to hop randomly from homebrew to homebrew, although I've stopped posting on a lot of the one shot caster PrCs that give flavorful but not incredibly useful benefits in exchange for way too many caster levels; there are just too many of them.

Fighter fixes are fast becoming part of the "way too many, not going to change" category. :smallannoyed:

The Mentalist
2010-05-13, 10:39 PM
I think that a big problem with implementing this, other than repeating what those above me have already said is the always entertaining Dark Chaos shuffle, I'd lose a CL for 50-60 some odd bonus feats just from weapon focus.

Milskidasith
2010-05-13, 10:56 PM
I think that a big problem with implementing this, other than repeating what those above me have already said is the always entertaining Dark Chaos shuffle, I'd lose a CL for 50-60 some odd bonus feats just from weapon focus.

In most cases I tend to believe in the ToS ruleset when judging homebrew, so the chaos shuffle for a ton (hundreds, really) of extra feats is not something I consider, balance wise.

Melayl
2010-05-14, 10:36 PM
I don't see the problem you're seeing, Milskidasith.


While giving the fighter every single [Fighter] feat isn't really a good idea, the base idea of "let the fighter have ridiculously easy access to feats" isn't actually a bad one. Giving the fighter more feats more easily doesn't really fix anything, but it makes it a bit more interesting to play one.

One idea off the top of my head is to let the fighter replace all of his class bonus feats all at once with a minute of practice. A fighter picks up a lance? Give him 10 rounds and he can pick up the Power Attack/Mounted Combat/Shock Trooper/etc. line of feats. A fighter picks up a longbow? Give him 10 rounds and he can pick up the Point Blank Shot/Precise Shot/Rapid Shot/etc. chain.


Quote:
Originally Posted by PairO'Dice Lost
Could work, but he might run into problems with prerequisites (like needing to switch Weapon Focus, Weapon Spec, and Greater Weapon Focus but losing GWF if he swaps either of the first two). You could simply not require him to meet all the prerequisites at every step, but that opens a bigger can o' worms.

Or just require that he swaps his newest feat first, then moves on to older ones in succession (ignoring feats added).

Or just swap every encounter, which has been proposed dozens of times and still works well enough.
Also, how are these any different, in practice, from the OP's suggestion?

Fizban
2010-05-14, 11:52 PM
Looking at the PHB list, I don't see what the problem is. Most of those feats give flat bonuses that are flat sneered at whenever they show up in a prestige class since they're so obviously not worth it and you can only use one at a time. While the int/dex/str differentiations actually make quite a bit of difference. Looking at each of them you think "yeah, a smart/fast/strong fighter should be able to do all of /whichever things at once, and now he can.

I might have them delay a bit to first level and every third level instead (or every "third after" so it's not at the same time as normal feats), so it's not quite as front loaded, and limit it to the PHB and PHBII. That'll give you the rest of the specialization lines and some other nifty things fighters should just be able to do. If you're really that worried about it you can increase the prerequisites on those gained in the pile, but I don't see why: an actual 25 point build that puts 13's in three stats will be dumping hard or won't have anything stellar to specialize with.

I agree that fighters will still be pretty different based on their gear and stats, as well as the non-fighter feats and feats not on the main list (as I suggested restricting) that they take, and the fact that any fighter can use almost any fighting tequnique is the whole point. That's why they're called fighters. Any feat that copies a class feature is absolute weaksauce compared to the class feature. One level of incarnate binds any soulmeld you want, you get more than one, and you can change it every day, but the shape soulmeld feat gives you one set soulmeld that you can't change. One level of binder lets you bind any 1st level vestige and change it every day, but the bind vestige feat only gives you a short list of vestiges with restricted powers. You can't even duplicate spellcasting with feats, at most gaining a couple cantrips and one crappy 1st level spell for your feat. So why can anyone duplicate 2 whole levels worth of fighter after 2nd with a single feat?

The best way to implement this would be to get all the fighter feats together in a list by prerequisites and look at them side by side. Start with the PHB and PHBII, then make sure you've got a core fighter line that everyone gets, and fill out the specializations with feats from other books till they're all about even. Bam. Now they've got the same buffet that all those other classes have at every level, but instead of preparing or readying their stuff they switch weapons and stat boosters.

PairO'Dice Lost
2010-05-15, 12:39 AM
Also, how are these any different, in practice, from the OP's suggestion?

There's a big different between having every single fighter feat "on" all the time and being able to switch them out at a certain interval. First, you don't have to keep track of every feat in existence and the numerical bonuses granted by them; it's a lot simpler to have a smaller number of feats, just like going through every book and giving your wizard every single buff spell would take way too much effort.

Second, there's an action cost involved in switching them out. If I can switch feats out in 1 round, do I spend a full-round action swapping feats to use a ranged weapon more effectively, or do I see if I can charge in and deal damage now? If I can only switch every encounter, what style do I pick for this one? Like preparing spells, it adds an element of strategy that would otherwise be lacking.