New OOTS products from CafePress
New OOTS t-shirts, ornaments, mugs, bags, and more
Page 5 of 15 FirstFirst 1234567891011121314 ... LastLast
Results 121 to 150 of 447
  1. - Top - End - #121
    Dwarf in the Playground
     
    Hal0Badger's Avatar

    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    Turkey/Izmir
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Returning the Fighter to relevance.

    Quote Originally Posted by MaxiDuRaritry View Post
    It's not that the wizard can do it, too; it's that the fighter can't do it at all -- at least not using their class abilities. And this is elementary stuff that fighters should be trained in, but instead, it's a gaping hole in a protagonist warrior's repertoire.

    As a parallel, sure, wizard can do party-face stuff to a degree, but they're not that great at it; meanwhile, bards rock that stuff so hard that you'll basically prefer a bard every time over wizard when one is available, even though bards are "only" tier 3. After all, bards don't have to expend daily resources to do it, and they're far better at it, by default.
    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.

  2. - Top - End - #122
    Firbolg in the Playground
     
    MaxiDuRaritry's Avatar

    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Returning the Fighter to relevance.

    Quote Originally Posted by Hal0Badger View Post
    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.
    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.

  3. - Top - End - #123
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    NecromancerGirl

    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Michigan
    Gender
    Male

    Default 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

  4. - Top - End - #124
    Ogre in the Playground
    Join Date
    May 2013

    Default 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.

  5. - Top - End - #125
    Firbolg in the Playground
     
    MaxiDuRaritry's Avatar

    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Returning the Fighter to relevance.

    Quote Originally Posted by Morphic tide View Post
    Let me do a quick list of what I can remember in the thread immediately:

    Make the Fighter lead armies.
    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.

    Quote Originally Posted by Morphic tide View Post
    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.
    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.

  6. - Top - End - #126
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    NecromancerGirl

    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Michigan
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Returning the Fighter to relevance.

    Quote Originally Posted by MaxiDuRaritry View Post

    What about war? Tactics? Strategy? Knowledge of magic and how to deal with it, and counteract it being used against you, and use those who can use it for your own purposes? How to conduct sieges? Setting up war camps? Organizing supply lines? Ambushing the opposite side? Knowing enemy weaknesses? Maneuverability before and during a fight? Convincing the commonfolk to conscript into an army? Leading men? Knowing how to pinpoint weaknesses, both in your side and your enemies'?

    The fighter class can do NONE of these things.
    .
    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,

  7. - Top - End - #127
    Halfling in the Playground
     
    Ludic's Avatar

    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Returning the Fighter to relevance.

    Quote Originally Posted by Morphic tide View Post
    Snip.
    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.

  8. - Top - End - #128
    Firbolg in the Playground
     
    MaxiDuRaritry's Avatar

    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Returning the Fighter to relevance.

    Quote Originally Posted by Lans View Post
    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,
    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.

  9. - Top - End - #129
    Troll in the Playground
    Join Date
    May 2010

    Default Re: Returning the Fighter to relevance.

    Quote Originally Posted by Morphic tide View Post
    You want the Fighter to be great at stuff that isn't Fighting? Make a different class altogether for it. The Fighter is intended to be the greatest combat monster in the long term, after the Barbarian runs out of Rage, after the Monk runs out of Ki, after the casters run out of Magic, perhaps before those.

    (SNIP)
    Again, Fighter only does Fighting. That is what they are. That is all they are, and all they really should be, because they are Fighters. So any mobility options should be removing the importance of other mobility options that would otherwise counter the Fighter and make them go for multikills by basically outdoing the Monk at jumping between enemies.
    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
    Quote Originally Posted by Kelb_Panthera View Post
    That said, trolling is entirely counterproductive (yes, even when it's hilarious).

  10. - Top - End - #130
    Halfling in the Playground
     
    Ludic's Avatar

    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Returning the Fighter to relevance.

    Quote Originally Posted by Arbane View Post

    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.
    That would first require the fighter to be able to kill something.
    Yes there is a big grey square as my avatar. I like it. It's endearing.

  11. - Top - End - #131
    Titan in the Playground
     
    NecromancerGuy

    Join Date
    Jul 2013

    Default Re: Returning the Fighter to relevance.

    Quote Originally Posted by MaxiDuRaritry View Post
    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).
    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.

  12. - Top - End - #132
    Firbolg in the Playground
     
    Milo v3's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Australia
    Gender
    Intersex

    Default Re: Returning the Fighter to relevance.

    Quote Originally Posted by Arbane View Post
    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.
    Hmm.... I'm tempted to actually check how many of those a single fighter using my fix can cover. What level do you expect that stuff to all be done?
    Last edited by Milo v3; 2017-01-01 at 10:09 PM.
    Spoiler: Old Avatar by Aruius
    Show
    http://i133.photobucket.com/albums/q56/Zeritho/Koboldbard.png

  13. - Top - End - #133
    Titan in the Playground
     
    NecromancerGuy

    Join Date
    Jul 2013

    Default Re: Returning the Fighter to relevance.

    Quote Originally Posted by Milo v3 View Post
    Hmm.... I'm tempted to actually check how many of those a single fighter using my fix can cover. What level do you expect that stuff to all be done?
    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.

  14. - Top - End - #134
    Troll in the Playground
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Gender
    Male

    Default 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:

    Quote Originally Posted by Caster Resistance
    A spellcaster and monsters with spell-like abilities have a spell resistance of 15+caster level. Unlike other forms of spell resistance, caster resistance may not be voluntarily lowered. All spells from a caster are subject to that caster's resistance, even those which are otherwise not subject to spell resistance.
    This would dramatically alter the game in favor of fighters because a high level fighter, with his magical equipment and feat repertoire, becomes a relatively good buffing platform. Spellcasters could no longer be effective as fighters, since self-buffing strategies waste most spells and have high uncertainty in effect. Furthermore, although spellcasters can be magically healed, it is a more difficult process. In partial compensation, spellcasters at least resist enemy spells well. A spellcaster summoning monsters remains a powerful strategy, but since only non-SLA monsters can be easily buffed, summoned monsters generally cannot fight better than an appropriately leveled and outfitted fighter. Spellcasters have less ability to affect monsters at higher levels, because all of the SLA using ones have a high spell resistance. Mailman-style strategies at least remain effective with SR:No spells.

    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.

  15. - Top - End - #135
    Ogre in the Playground
    Join Date
    May 2013

    Default Re: Returning the Fighter to relevance.

    Quote Originally Posted by Arbane View Post
    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.
    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.

  16. - Top - End - #136
    Firbolg in the Playground
     
    Milo v3's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Australia
    Gender
    Intersex

    Default Re: Returning the Fighter to relevance.

    Quote Originally Posted by OldTrees1 View Post
    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.
    I'll do 1/5/10 rather than 1/5/9 just for numerical rhythem.

    Quote Originally Posted by Anthrowhale View Post
    No one enjoys having toys taken away, but nerfing a wizard to make fighter relevant can be effective. Consider this:

    This would dramatically alter the game in favor of fighters because a high level fighter, with his magical equipment and feat repertoire, becomes a relatively good buffing platform. Spellcasters could no longer be effective as fighters, since self-buffing strategies waste most spells and have high uncertainty in effect. Furthermore, although spellcasters can be magically healed, it is a more difficult process. In partial compensation, spellcasters at least resist enemy spells well. A spellcaster summoning monsters remains a powerful strategy, but since only non-SLA monsters can be easily buffed, summoned monsters generally cannot fight better than an appropriately leveled and outfitted fighter. Spellcasters have less ability to affect monsters at higher levels, because all of the SLA using ones have a high spell resistance. Mailman-style strategies at least remain effective with SR:No spells.

    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.
    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".

    Quote Originally Posted by Morphic tide View Post
    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.
    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 Aruius
    Show
    http://i133.photobucket.com/albums/q56/Zeritho/Koboldbard.png

  17. - Top - End - #137
    Ogre in the Playground
    Join Date
    May 2013

    Default Re: Returning the Fighter to relevance.

    Quote Originally Posted by Milo v3 View Post
    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".
    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.

  18. - Top - End - #138
    Firbolg in the Playground
     
    Milo v3's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Australia
    Gender
    Intersex

    Default Re: Returning the Fighter to relevance.

    Quote Originally Posted by Morphic tide View Post
    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.
    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 Aruius
    Show
    http://i133.photobucket.com/albums/q56/Zeritho/Koboldbard.png

  19. - Top - End - #139
    Firbolg in the Playground
     
    MaxiDuRaritry's Avatar

    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Returning the Fighter to relevance.

    Quote Originally Posted by Morphic tide View Post
    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.
    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.

  20. - Top - End - #140
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    John Longarrow's Avatar

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Barstow, CA

    Default 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.

  21. - Top - End - #141
    Titan in the Playground
     
    NecromancerGuy

    Join Date
    Jul 2013

    Default Re: Returning the Fighter to relevance.

    Quote Originally Posted by John Longarrow View Post
    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.
    Nice. Will you share it here when you have a final draft?

  22. - Top - End - #142
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    PirateWench

    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Location
    Ohio
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Returning the Fighter to relevance.

    Quote Originally Posted by Morphic tide View Post
    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.
    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.
    Just perusing that list, we've got several leader types: conquering overlord, bandit king, and even knights generally had their own private armies that they were expected to lead into battle. "Champion" implies some kind of inspirational figure rather than just someone of extreme violence; soldiers, mercenaries, and guards all belong to a military or paramilitary organization with rank based on merit. Good soldiers get promoted into commanders, good commanders get made into generals. It's a very natural, logical, and realistic transition for any militaristic character. The fact that there is no clean way to play that transition and have it reflected on your character sheet is a problem. Leading men into battle is not quite the same skill as fighting in it, but the two aren't uncorrelated. Focusing on one is not necessarily to the detriment of the other.

    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.
    Quote Originally Posted by Flickerdart View Post
    Alright, let's do this.
    So the necessary skillset for a modern Major-General is Knowledge (Nature), Knowledge (History), Profession (Mathematician), Profession (Siege Engineer), Perform (oratory), Perform (singing), Perform (whistling), Speak Language, and Ride, as well as a solid baseline Intelligence score
    PM me for any games in the Toledo area!

  23. - Top - End - #143
    Pixie in the Playground
     
    OrcBarbarianGirl

    Join Date
    Nov 2013

    Default 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.

  24. - Top - End - #144
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    NecromancerGirl

    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Michigan
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Returning the Fighter to relevance.

    Quote Originally Posted by MaxiDuRaritry View Post
    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).
    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.

    Quote Originally Posted by Milo v3 View Post
    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).
    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.

  25. - Top - End - #145
    Firbolg in the Playground
     
    Milo v3's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Australia
    Gender
    Intersex

    Default Re: Returning the Fighter to relevance.

    Quote Originally Posted by Lans View Post
    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.
    A class that only has options in combat is a class that can only interact with a tiny portion of play IMO. I see no reason some players should basically just leave the table just because there is no fight currently happening.
    Spoiler: Old Avatar by Aruius
    Show
    http://i133.photobucket.com/albums/q56/Zeritho/Koboldbard.png

  26. - Top - End - #146
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Troacctid's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    California
    Gender
    Female

    Default Re: Returning the Fighter to relevance.

    Combat isn't really a tiny portion of play. It's the biggest portion of all the portions.

  27. - Top - End - #147
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    John Longarrow's Avatar

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Barstow, CA

    Default Re: Returning the Fighter to relevance.

    Quote Originally Posted by Troacctid View Post
    Combat isn't really a tiny portion of play. It's the biggest portion of all the portions.
    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.

  28. - Top - End - #148
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    Goblin

    Join Date
    May 2014

    Default Re: Returning the Fighter to relevance.

    Quote Originally Posted by John Longarrow View Post
    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.
    This is profoundly true. Honestly, for the majority of tables I've played at "combat centric" might as well read "literally unplayable." I know it can color the way I look at character options pretty severely.

  29. - Top - End - #149
    Dwarf in the Playground
     
    Hal0Badger's Avatar

    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    Turkey/Izmir
    Gender
    Male

    Default 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.

  30. - Top - End - #150
    Titan in the Playground
     
    AssassinGuy

    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Returning the Fighter to relevance.

    Quote Originally Posted by John Longarrow View Post
    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.
    While this is true, I have to say, if you look at the minimal combat game and think "I need to be a fighter!" then you get what you deserve. More than any other class the fighter's job is apparent right in the class name.
    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.”

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •