Results 121 to 150 of 447
-
2017-01-01, 06:17 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Mar 2015
- Location
- Turkey/Izmir
- Gender
Re: Returning the Fighter to relevance.
Well I give you that. But half of the things you listed, is not the premise of fighter. Half of them is about being a warlord, commending armies, which I do not think exclusively should come from fighter. Commanding a small group/making others better, well that's something like a marshal (which also needs some buffs).
But I would agree that fighter is lacking his niche. He can do it (contributing martial combat), but not as the pinnacle of that aspect and can easily be overshadowed by other classes.
-
2017-01-01, 06:28 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Dec 2015
- Gender
Re: Returning the Fighter to relevance.
If you're giving a fighter stuff to do outside of battle and insist that it must be exclusively appropriate to one who focuses entirely on fighting, then you're going to have to give it skills which are pertinent to diplomacy, tactics, strategy, information gathering, history, battles, wars, and all the circumferential minutia (yeah, I said it) orbiting them.
With a broad enough repertoire of abilities that revolve around instigating and preventing violence, a "fighter" could be useful in just about any situation you could think of, not just when it comes to comparing AB to AC.
The player can choose to play such a character in a way that focuses more on hitting stuff, but at least give him access to the tools to be more of a competent warlord-type who can use his broad skillset outside of bashing skulls, if he wants.Last edited by MaxiDuRaritry; 2017-01-01 at 06:38 PM.
⚣ Tanuki in the Playground. ⚣
-
2017-01-01, 06:58 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jul 2009
- Location
- Michigan
- Gender
Re: Returning the Fighter to relevance.
I think we all have different ideas of what we want fighters to be, maybe we can find where we overlap and make options to include what other people find outside of the perview of what they want the fighter to be
-
2017-01-01, 07:37 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- May 2013
Re: Returning the Fighter to relevance.
Let me do a quick list of what I can remember in the thread immediately:
Make the Fighter lead armies. I don't like this one, because it goes against being a Fighter. A variant class, feat set or variant class that focuses on it seems good to me, but the base class should be personal power as the class itself.
Multiple feat sets. Kinda a game-y solution to combat flexibility options, and it does nothing to solve the out of combat problem.
Feats to give Fighters access to (Ex) versions of a bunch of Magic Weapon Enhancements, like Wounding and Defending. Good framework, but works best as Weapon Focus tied, because of class feature definition issues.
More skills. Not much of a solution, doesn't really give them anything for out-of-combat that Bards don't even need class feature use to do better in.
Give some lower tier class features, like the Kensai weapon thing or some Samurai things. The Martial class features are okay as options, but only direct fighting power should get class feature status. Magic, I don't like. Most of the wanted magic things have near-equivalents in Feat form anyway, why not make them into one or two feats to grab so all the Martial classes can enjoy? Fighter still has more feats to spare on it anyway.
Feats to make currently invalid combat methods work. I like it, I actually have had some ideas on it and there are some rather simple fixes. I've seen some things that make great bonuses to combat styles like TWF. One of my own ideas was to make TWF give multiplicative attacks. Thinking back, I think a BAB penalty to mitigate works best for that, because you are getting full attacks off both weapons, with the penalty removing iteratives that would go negative. Prevents massive attack spamming, which saves a lot of dice rolling. Of course, stuff based on Pommelling Style from PF can be made to reduce dice rolls in place of that potential damage reduction.
Feats to simply buy power in needed things. Personally, I like this best. It makes it so that a build that flatly needs something outside their class can grab it, and Fighter can always have changes to get all the strictly needed combat feats without needing to dip into the non-bonus feats. Fits the theme of Fighters trading their class-focused combat skills for extensions that aren't personal skill in combat I want so much.
Consolidate feats. Basically, replace the various feat chains with better, scaling versions to massively reduce the feat taxes. Works out well, overall, because it gets rid of a lot of issues for quite a few classes. And you can keep it away from the non-Martial classes by tying it all to Martial class things. I prefer BAB or class level, so that only somewhat focused Martial classes can properly use them.
-
2017-01-01, 07:46 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Dec 2015
- Gender
Re: Returning the Fighter to relevance.
Wrong. Allow the fighter to lead armies. Significant difference. The player doesn't want to lead armies or focus on Diplomacy to strike accords with the enemy force? He'll at least still have access to stuff like Sense Motive and Bluff, both of which are quite useful in and outside of a fight.
Definitely not all that it needs, but as is, the fighter is a complete joke. So the fighter can hit stuff over the head. The party's illiterate barbarian can do the same thing, and he is better educated than the fighter is.Last edited by MaxiDuRaritry; 2017-01-01 at 07:49 PM.
⚣ Tanuki in the Playground. ⚣
-
2017-01-01, 09:09 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jul 2009
- Location
- Michigan
- Gender
Re: Returning the Fighter to relevance.
Well-
Martial study a white raven or devoted spirit power for diplomacy or intimidate should cover these to a degree ,Convincing the commonfolk to conscript into an army? Leading men? Setting up war camps? Organizing supply lines?
Martial study for a shadow hand power can cover -Ambushing the opposite side?
Shadow, and a few others can do -Maneuverability before and during a fight
Iron heart maneuvers can do- counteract [magic] being used against you,
-
2017-01-01, 09:12 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Dec 2016
- Gender
Re: Returning the Fighter to relevance.
You missed incorporate meaningless combat feats into the class. For instance Feint is something a fighter should know, so why spend a feat on Improved Feint, just make it a class feature, other classes get it on the same grounds, It's something that class should just know.
Yes there is a big grey square as my avatar. I like it. It's endearing.
-
2017-01-01, 09:15 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Dec 2015
- Gender
Re: Returning the Fighter to relevance.
And where are you getting all the skill points to invest in these skills? 13 Int is the highest any fighter will want (and then only because of stupid requirements on prereq feats). Fighters are very MAD, and more INT means less Str, Dex, Con, Wis (for Will/Spot/Listen) and Cha (for Intimidate, if you're going to make use of one of the fighter's only social and utility skills).
Last edited by MaxiDuRaritry; 2017-01-01 at 09:16 PM.
⚣ Tanuki in the Playground. ⚣
-
2017-01-01, 09:59 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- May 2010
Re: Returning the Fighter to relevance.
Sigh.
As it stands, a Fighter can't competently do more than one, possibly two of the following with their pathetic skill-points:
Climb a cliffside
Stand watch
Administer first-aid
Navigate the wilderness
Swim
Get through an obstacle course
Swing from a chandelier
Maintain, repair or build their own gear
Ride a horse
Take care of a horse
Guess how tough their opponent is
Know what they're fighting
Not fall for a feint
Know the battlefield's terrain
Guess the enemy's tactics
Lead troops
Know the city they LIVE IN
Know politics
Be GOOD at politics
I'd expect any competent warrior-type to be able to manage AT LEAST half of those.
The 'lol, Fightars r dum' meme is a pernicious one, and I want to see it killed. But Fighters are no good at killing memes, either.Imagine if all real-world conversations were like internet D&D conversations...
Protip: DnD is an incredibly social game played by some of the most socially inept people on the planet - Lev
I read this somewhere and I stick to it: "I would rather play a bad system with my friends than a great system with nobody". - Trevlac
-
2017-01-01, 10:01 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Dec 2016
- Gender
-
2017-01-01, 10:01 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jul 2013
Re: Returning the Fighter to relevance.
Err, 14 Int is the highest a 3.5 point buy Fighter will want (because skill points are nice and 14 is the end of the 1:1 point buy).*
Your point is still valid. 2+2(14Int) is not much. Even Thugs(which lose a bonus feat) only get 4+2(14 Int).
*14 Int has been field tested & found desirable. There was no Int prerequisite involved.Last edited by OldTrees1; 2017-01-01 at 10:04 PM.
-
2017-01-01, 10:08 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Aug 2010
- Location
- Australia
- Gender
Re: Returning the Fighter to relevance.
Last edited by Milo v3; 2017-01-01 at 10:09 PM.
Spoiler: Old Avatar by Aruiushttp://i133.photobucket.com/albums/q56/Zeritho/Koboldbard.png
-
2017-01-01, 10:20 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jul 2013
Re: Returning the Fighter to relevance.
The hardest non scaling things on that list would be:
Capable of fighting while scaling a smooth canyon cliff face* (feels 9th ish)
Lead Troops (feels 6th ish)
Be GOOD at politics (feels 9th ish)
*Climb a cliff was ambiguous and different levels would have different difficulties expected.
So I would guess 9th level as a good rough estimate of a place to try it from. I would also recommend a 1st and 5th level snapshots since many of those accomplishments feel like they are either 1st or low level.Last edited by OldTrees1; 2017-01-01 at 10:23 PM.
-
2017-01-01, 10:23 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Oct 2011
- Gender
Re: Returning the Fighter to relevance.
No one enjoys having toys taken away, but nerfing a wizard to make fighter relevant can be effective. Consider this:
Originally Posted by Caster Resistance
The above pushes towards a much more cooperative form of play where every party needs both spell sources and spell sinks to be fully effective. Obviously, it makes challenges more difficult, but not so difficult that level appropriate parties cannot deal with it.Build help: Piercing Immunities | Skillfull full casters | Uptier base classes | Top 10 spells/level
PO: Core Fighter 20 > Pit Fiend | Whale Wrestler | Minimal Mailman | Wizard 1 > Fighter 1 | Team Mundane
TO: ExFighter | Eliminate spell defenses | All spells in no time | Planar Soldiers of Mystra | Best Nuke | Warmage vs. Favored Soul | Death Cults | E6 Circle Magic
-
2017-01-01, 10:27 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- May 2013
Re: Returning the Fighter to relevance.
I'm fine with options for the combat-related and basic-athetics stuff in there all being doable with the base Fighter overhaul version. My thinking is that the base Fighter should only do one thing by default: Fight. Anything else is opt-in, sacrificing insane personal combat power bit by bit to do so. The less connected to fighting something is, the more I want to see it as a general feat instead of a Fighter feat. Having a sizeable selection of Fighter feats for the army directing and countering stuff, feats to let any class meeting the requirements do politics stuff and ways to be competent at those things that aren't combat related under some variety of flexible skill system where the character has class skills separate from their classes specifically to deal with the issues of cross-skill ranks are all things I can accept. Yes, Fighters need more skill points, but only enough to cover all the direct combat use and travel skills. You can swap some things for other things, of course, but the design intent I want is to have enough skill points to fill in all the combat stuff, which can be traded off for non-combat stuff.
Also, you seem to mistake being a Fighter for being a general of an army. That is not the case, and should not be the case with the base class of Fighter. What you describe is much more Marshal than Fighter, because Marshals are built to be leading military groups. Fighters should trade off astronomical combat power when they are hitting for the non-personal fighting power. Being a warrior needs far, far fewer of those than half. A warrior is not necessarily a trained soldier or anything like a general. They can just be amazing at Fighting alone, no backup, no politics, just fighting on their own with little to no ability at anything else.Last edited by Morphic tide; 2017-01-01 at 10:29 PM.
-
2017-01-01, 10:31 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Aug 2010
- Location
- Australia
- Gender
Re: Returning the Fighter to relevance.
I'll do 1/5/10 rather than 1/5/9 just for numerical rhythem.
That makes "Personal" spells useless. My preferred change to wizard is to stop their spell list at 6th level (they still have spell slots above 6 though), since it weakens wizards when they are at their strongest while not nerfing them in the parts of the game where they are "fine".
According to PHP and PF's core rule book, being an overlord or someone who rouses the hearts of armies are perfectly valid fighter concepts. Fighters are allowed to be more than just "Durrrr I can stab things".Last edited by Milo v3; 2017-01-01 at 10:36 PM.
Spoiler: Old Avatar by Aruiushttp://i133.photobucket.com/albums/q56/Zeritho/Koboldbard.png
-
2017-01-01, 10:51 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- May 2013
Re: Returning the Fighter to relevance.
Allowed to I'm fine with, but that is under the condition that they are not part of core class features. Having support in the skill list, fine. Having bonus feats to help with it, allright. But nothing in the core class features that is not direct combat use. If it has a side use in those other things by design, okay. But it must assist in direct combat to be base class features. AFCs and Variant classes with support I'm also fine with, as long as the core, base Fighter has nothing that is entirely dead weight to a pure murder monster build. Nothing you can't simply not have in the base class that can't be used in direct damage dealing combat.
I'm fine with the option of an army leading Fighter build. I'm not fine with there being class features for that in the base class, no AFCs or feats involved.
-
2017-01-01, 11:05 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Aug 2010
- Location
- Australia
- Gender
Re: Returning the Fighter to relevance.
Then you are asking for a crappy fighter as the default fighter. Simple as that. (And to me your perspective of "Concepts described in the default fluff of the class shouldn't be able to be done without external stuff like variants" is rather strange. You shouldn't need to use variants to get the default fluff of the class).
Last edited by Milo v3; 2017-01-01 at 11:06 PM.
Spoiler: Old Avatar by Aruiushttp://i133.photobucket.com/albums/q56/Zeritho/Koboldbard.png
-
2017-01-01, 11:11 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Dec 2015
- Gender
Re: Returning the Fighter to relevance.
You know all it would take to give players the option of a competent warlord-type as part of the base class's features without shoving it onto anyone who doesn't want it? A.) More skill points, the ability to choose your skill list like an expert, and vastly better Int synergy to reduce MAD for those who prefer high Int to high Str or Dex (perhaps even exclusionary between the three). B.) The war lored ability I outlined earlier (useful in granting info on all sorts of things regarding both large-scale wars and small-scale skirmishes). And C.) The option to take feats like Leadership (even a scaled-down version) and Landlord as fighter bonus feats. That's it. And all of that is just as fantastically useful on a mounted knight as it is on a samurai as it is on a swashbuckler as it is on a HULK SMASH! brute.
As it stands, they're basically seriously incompetent town guards that are half-blind and half-deaf, and that's all they're good for. [edit] Actually, they're not even good for that. About the only thing they're well-designed for is dominate fodder.Last edited by MaxiDuRaritry; 2017-01-02 at 09:09 AM.
⚣ Tanuki in the Playground. ⚣
-
2017-01-01, 11:27 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Nov 2006
- Location
- Barstow, CA
Re: Returning the Fighter to relevance.
To all who've participated, thank you. I think I've got enough ideas to work out a home brew version that I can use at my table. I am keeping two diametrically opposed concepts in mind though, Fighter needs to be viable as a straight 20 level build as well as making sense in multi-class builds. As such I'm aiming to have the class able to excel at what the player wants it to by level 10 at the latest.
Few things are more disturbing to a dragon than to be attacked by a naked gnome slathered in BBQ sauce.
-
2017-01-01, 11:47 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jul 2013
-
2017-01-02, 01:32 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Oct 2015
- Location
- Ohio
- Gender
Re: Returning the Fighter to relevance.
I have to disagree. Here's the fluff text for Fighter:
The questing knight, the conquering overlord, the king’s champion, the elite foot soldier, the hardened mercenary, and the bandit king—all are fighters...Fighters who are not actively adventuring may be soldiers, guards, bodyguards, champions, or criminal enforcers.
Now if Marshal were a Fighter PrC, in core, that would be one thing. But it's a weird base class from a weird book. If you're going to keep putting Fighter in the core rulebook of every edition and not Marshal, then the Fighter needs to at least have the option of doing this very basic and intuitive thing that you would expect a Fighter to do.
-
2017-01-02, 01:37 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Nov 2013
Re: Returning the Fighter to relevance.
You can just give them every ACF that you can find for free at dead levels, normally you would have to turn in a feat.
So free dungeon crash, Thug acf, overpowering attack, resolute, counterattack, armor of god, and i might be missing a few more.
The fighter ACF are very powerful
I'm playing a two-handed fighter (lv 10 currently, no homebrew) and have no problem contributing to the party on the combat aspect. Out of combat just think outside of the box, you can do anything with being creative.Last edited by Ivogel; 2017-01-02 at 02:11 AM.
-
2017-01-02, 02:29 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jul 2009
- Location
- Michigan
- Gender
Re: Returning the Fighter to relevance.
I'm not saying they are good options for them, or that they can cover all of them at once, just that they have support for them in there class features.
It doesn't have to be crappy, but for it to not be crappy its ability to fight has to come like 90% from the class its self. Like at 20th level its level up feats got spent on skill focus perform, and 700k of his wealth got spent opening up a museum and he can still go toe to toe with the Tarrasqe type of thing.
-
2017-01-02, 03:06 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Aug 2010
- Location
- Australia
- Gender
Re: Returning the Fighter to relevance.
Spoiler: Old Avatar by Aruiushttp://i133.photobucket.com/albums/q56/Zeritho/Koboldbard.png
-
2017-01-02, 03:23 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jan 2014
- Location
- California
- Gender
Re: Returning the Fighter to relevance.
Combat isn't really a tiny portion of play. It's the biggest portion of all the portions.
Rhymes with "Protracted."
Handbooks: The Warlockopedia | The Warmagepedia (WIP) | Tier List (2019 Update)
Spreadsheets: Spellcasting classes | Deities | Useful items
Homebrew: Gestalt Theurge | Fighter and Monk fixes | Warlock stuff | Houserules and quick fixes
Original Fiction: The Wizard's Familiar
-
2017-01-02, 04:00 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Nov 2006
- Location
- Barstow, CA
Re: Returning the Fighter to relevance.
Oddly this is very table dependent. Each DM runs their game a little differently and what works at one table may or may not work at another. Down side is everyone tends to see things from their own perspective to the point they dismiss other's.
One goal I have is to allow the same chassis that can create Conan to create Inego Montoya and Robin hood along with the Prince John.Few things are more disturbing to a dragon than to be attacked by a naked gnome slathered in BBQ sauce.
-
2017-01-02, 04:29 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- May 2014
-
2017-01-02, 06:57 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Mar 2015
- Location
- Turkey/Izmir
- Gender
Re: Returning the Fighter to relevance.
Leading an army and being a martial combat master are 2 different things. I don't think it is a necessity for the tools that fighter should have access to. Neither social skills like bluff/diplomacy. I agree that fighter should be able judge his opponent, or do things like feint, but these abilities can easily be separated from social skills (bluff/sense motive).
Fighter chassis is a class that focuses solely on the martial combat mastery. If you want to tag other skills for your preference, well by all means do that. But the problem with fighter is not lacking these. It is the point he fails where he should excel , a.k.a. martial combat. He can do it, but as I said, he can easily be overshadowed by others. I consider it failure because the chassis forgoes almost any other ability to focus on that sole aspect, and that aspect is a large portion of the base game, especially for a design made for kick-the-door kinda approach.
As I said you might tag those abilities as a buff onto chassis if you like, though they are not a necessity for the martial-combat master.
-
2017-01-02, 08:58 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Dec 2013
- Gender
Re: Returning the Fighter to relevance.
Last edited by Keltest; 2017-01-02 at 08:59 AM.
“Evil is evil. Lesser, greater, middling, it's all the same. Proportions are negotiated, boundaries blurred. I'm not a pious hermit, I haven't done only good in my life. But if I'm to choose between one evil and another, then I prefer not to choose at all.”