Way to make fighter equal to psionic warrior/swordsage

[Nifft]

Eh, I have a bit of trouble putting Beguilers and especially Dread Necros in the same tier as Sorcerers, but that's just me, I guess. Can't really argue with the majority.

A default Beguiler probably isn't in the same league as a Sorcerer, but a high-op Beguiler can some of hit the same few tricks as a high-op Sorcerer, so ... yeah.

In terms of optimization ceiling, they seem congruent, and optimization ceiling seems to be what the tier list measures.

[Pleh]

A default Beguiler probably isn't in the same league as a Sorcerer, but a high-op Beguiler can some of hit the same few tricks as a high-op Sorcerer, so ... yeah.

In terms of optimization ceiling, they seem congruent, and optimization ceiling seems to be what the tier list measures.

Well, that's often how it's argued. Since the stated purpose of the tiers is to highlight risk of internal party disparity, combined with the push from character creation to hedge your bets with your character power level (leading to a trend towards the optimization ceiling), it's kind of natural for the ceiling to be the relevant focal point, though most tier lists do try to balance the danger of the ceiling against what actually tends to come out in average gameplay (is the ceiling a peak or a plateau?)

[Cosi]

Eh, I have a bit of trouble putting Beguilers and especially Dread Necros in the same tier as Sorcerers, but that's just me, I guess. Can't really argue with the majority.

Disagree, and fairly strongly.

In a low-op environment, a Beguiler or Dread Necromancer is simply better than a Sorcerer. A Beguiler will always know dominate person. A Dread Necromancer will always have animate dead. It may well be that those are worse picks than cloudkill or polymorph, but a low-op Sorcerer isn't always going to pick those spells.

In a mid-op environment, a Beguiler or Dread Necromancer's list is probably about as good as an equal level Sorcerer's. The Beguiler's spells are slightly less good, but she gets more of them, and she has some niche spells that will occasionally be amazing (rouse is not useful in every encounter, or even every campaign, but the ability to throw out a rouse when it is useful is something that a Sorcerer won't have).

In a high-op environment, a Beguiler or Dread Necromancer has options like Arcane Disciple, Prestige Domains (+ substitute domain), Runestaves, Knowstones, Bloodline Feats, and Apprentice to expand their list. Many of those options are available to the Sorcerer as well, but the best tricks (Rainbow Servant, Prestige Domains with substitute domain) are exclusive to the fixed list casters, and in general list expansion is better for them because their baseline lists have lots of less compelling spells.

The Dread Necromancer and particularly the Beguiler also have the ability to easily qualify for PrCs arcane casters usually can't get (the Beguiler's Rogue skills backdoor her into Unseen Seer for free, and from their Sneak Attack gets you all the Rogue theurge PrCs). That's not huge, but it also isn't nothing.

Now, per JaronK's criteria, we're supposed to ignore some parts of that, but his criteria are frankly stupid. If we are crediting the Wizard for his ability to buy scrolls of spells, scribe them into his spellbook, and then cast those spells, we have to do the same for the Beguiler buying Knowstones. If we are crediting the Factotum for her ability to take Font of Inspiration a bunch of times (as JaronK very explicitly does in his discussion of the class), we have to do the same for the Dread Necromancer taking Arcane Disciple. The argument for ignoring Rainbow Servant shenanigans is stronger, but you still get a pretty absurd power bump from any PrC that grants a prestige domain + substitute domain.

[Kelb_Panthera]

Because that has nothing to do with him being a fighter.

It has everything to do with him being a fighter. The -one- thing that the fighter class gives you is the ability to take more feats than any other class in the game. It dramatically changes the relative cost of picking a feat. Folks around here give this fact absolutely no consideration whatsoever.

Saying a monk can buy cross class ranks in umd and use wands and therefore the class is balanced because it has access to spells is technically true as well, but this has nothing to do with him being a monk. It's something any character of any class can do. This is why you saying "fighters can take martial study: QED they are just as powerful as swordsages" does not make sense, to set aside that you can only ever take it 3 times and that you will only be able to get access to weak maneuvers many levels late.

Monk features don't change the value of UMD or magic items. Artificers do though and they're quite properly acknowledged for that. In the same way, the fighter's feature changes the value of feats but he gets crapped on in spite of this.

No. You cannot.

Anything a fighter can do, a swordsage (or either of the other initiators) can do more easily, plus they have access to 9th level maneuvers (assuming a straight 20 in any of the classes) Have you ever played an initiator before? Even setting aside your personal distaste for them, they are factually much more powerful classes than fighters, occupying high tier 3 comfortably.

Really? When did the initiator classes get the ability to complete several long feat chains or use their character feats to branch significantly off of their main focus?

I don't have a distaste for martial adepts. I like them. I acknowledge that they have a higher op-floor and are more capable in the hands of a casual player than the fighter ever will have or be. They are -not-, however, absolutely more powerful. They're still just face-smashers and they don't do it any better than any other martial character closing on the limit of martial optimization. They're somewhat more complex in play than the average fighter but that doesn't have to be the case.

Also because like monk, there is never a reason to take more than 1, 2, or 6 levels of the class. "Straight fighters" are not very common in actual play because they don't actually do anything.

A fighter with three or four tactical feats, 3 maneuvers, and a couple stances doesn't do anything? That's where we're at?

If you're well-versed in optimization and want to willingly handicap yourself by building a straight fighter, sure, you can kind of be competent with a bare-bones shock trooper build, but you're not doing anything you couldn't do better with other classes.

What I'm trying to get across is that it's -not- a handicap. It's a different paradigm. A swordsage says, "Most of what you need to make me cool is right here in this book." A fighter says, "I look really simple and straight-foward but you're going to have to go dumpster-diving to get the most out of me." Shocktrooper and leap attack is 4 feats. That's more than half of an initiator's feats and less than a fourth of a fighter's. If you want to be generous, you could call it about a third of a warblade's but his bonus list is -really- limited.

The impetus behind most fighter fixes is so the class can be used out of the box by people who aren't familiar with or simply aren't interested in having to do a bunch of research to drag fighter kicking and screaming to the shores of basic competence.

If you want something "out-of-the-box" then you don't need to fix anything. Pick a different class or brew up something new. People screw with fighter because they've decided it -needs- fixing. I disagree.

binder is not a tob class. what are you talking about?

Tiers. The old JaronK list has swordsage at T3 and the only other class that's close to it in power and versatility in the T3 list is the binder. I -know- the swordsage being on that level is wrong unless you build the holy-begeezus out of it so I put forward the idea that it and binder being close is a poor reflection on the binder rather a positive reflection on the swordsage.

You'll also note that I haven't argued that the fighter isn't T5. If you select the bonus feats at random and take all of the ACF's that a fighter can, you're probably going to be bottomed out at a low T5 but if you build it with skill and direction, it tops out toward the top of T4. The swordsage starts and ends in T4 on a much narrower band unless you're -damn- good at optimizing and probably not even then before gear. It's always been my understanding that the tier listings were based on an arbitrary "average" level of optimization closer to the floor than the ceiling of most classes.

And a beguiler has very few options in combat with creatures who are immune to mind-affecting effects (one or two spells per spell-level).

This is hilariously off base. We can go over it in detail if you want but I don't think most people need convincing on this one. Take another, close look at the spell-list.

A dread necromancer isn't doing much out of combat aside from building up his hordes of undead.

Seriously? Even if that was strictly true (their list has several enchantments and illusions) the sheer variety of undead and their talents that are available makes this rather laughable as well.

A duskblade does pretty much the same thing an initiator can, except they can do those things a few times per day, not almost at-will.

Everything a swordsage can do, a duskblade can do better; substantially so. His out of combat options are a bit limited but less so than any initiator by a fair margin.

T3s are either very good generalists (bard, factotum, binder) or very good specialists in one thing who are able to contribute in other stuff (everyone else). T4s are either generalists who require focus on one thing to do their thing as well as T3s (the only thing a rogue is better than a factotum by default at is damage), or specialists who have a good chassis (barbarians are easier to build well than fighters, and a straight Barb 20 is a better decision than Fighter 20) and can't really contribute outside their specialty (what exactly does barbarian do other than being a beatstick and maybe picking up Survival/Intimidate?)

Yeah. Other than the underlined being something I disagree with this all looks right. ???

At the very worst, initiators are T3.5, but then half the third tier would be there too.

You said it yourself. A specialist that does very little outside their specialty is a T4. That's the martial adepts to a T. They're great face-wreckers. They have easily the highest op-floor of any face-wrecker specialist. They do absolutely frag-all outside of face-wrecking except for the swordsage being a passable scout. I'm not seeing the disconnect here.

To be fair, it's the most common reason to not have access to your own gear. If we're going to consider the distinction between innate abilities and gear anyone with coins can buy, incarceration is the go-to scenario to evaluate the subject in its natural habitat.

Naked in prison is not any class' natural habitat. Either a feature loses value for being easily replaced by gear or it doesn't. If it does, then mountain hammer is worth about 60gp outside of combat; unimpressive. If it doesn't, then monks are -way, way- better than they're given credit for being.

In either case, it's a low-level maneuver than -anyone- can pick up for a feat or 3k and -that- certainly seems to be something the community at large wants to devalue since the fighter's features can -also- be picked up by anyone for a feat or 10k. If you want to argue for martial adepts being useful out of combat, mountain hammer is certainly the single -weakest- argument you could make.

As I recall, WBL and equipment lists are meant to be universally SUGGESTIONS that are all subject to DM fiat. Your insistence that WBL be common RAW is sensible in very competive games (PVP or antagonist DM, where the rules have to be as consistent as possible) and in general theoretical analysis. But in most games, it only makes sense that the DM will have each shop in a town that makes certain wares available, and not always for exactly the listed price. Restrictions on adamantium gear is pretty sensible for most humanoid settlements. Even if you have the skilled tradesmen and social infrastructure needed to support an adamantium forge in a city, it's likely not in ready access to the general public and anything made from the material probably needs a special commission (which could mean waiting for more raw material to be shipped in).

You recall incorrectly. WBL is a -guideline- but it is not a suggestion. It was intended to be a major part of how PCs are balanced against NPCs and non-classed creatures. The sections describing the game-level economics (not to be confused with the economics of the gameworld itself) explicitly says that a DM -can- tweak what's available as a means of keeping the game under his control. The system assumes, plainly, that this will be used as needed rather than being the extremely common occurrence that it ended up being.

This is a non-trivial point that Kelb has been acknowledging, but maybe not taking seriously enough.

Favored Soul gets innate access to Flight, one of the hallmark powers in the game. That should be a good thing, right? Well, it's not bad, but it's kinda moot when it comes online at level 17, long after the game has been assuming you have some form of flight for about 10 or so levels.

"Fighter gets the maneuvers, too, just weaker and later."

In other words, they never get maneuvers at the level where they are the most relevant. Not a bad boost to slow the fighter's gradual drop from relevance in the game, but it doesn't really compare with having level-current maneuvers through all 20 levels.

This I can address with a single sentence: it's a good thing that maneuvers aren't the only non-class feature, non-gear way to get those things, innit.

To elaborate; flight is available by race and/ or feat (other than martial study/ stance), as are a whole host of other abilities. This is overvaluing of maneuvers is part of the problem I'm trying to address.

[Cosi]

It has everything to do with him being a fighter. The -one- thing that the fighter class gives you is the ability to take more feats than any other class in the game. It dramatically changes the relative cost of picking a feat. Folks around here give this fact absolutely no consideration whatsoever.

A Fighter feat is worth less than a 2nd level spell slot, because heroics is a 2nd level spell and it gives you whatever Fighter feat you happen to want that day (yeah, it's only 10 mins/level, but that usually covers the day's fighting). A Fighter gets exactly as many non-Fighter feats as anyone else.

Also, feats are ass and the feats that aren't ass are caster feats. Literally no one cares that you can get all the Weapon Specialization feats, or that you have Great Cleave. The feats people care about are things like Natural Spell, which do exactly nothing for a Fighter.

A fighter with three or four tactical feats, 3 maneuvers, and a couple stances doesn't do anything? That's where we're at?

Maybe you should enumerate those things and explain why people would care? What is this 10th level Fighter build (or just the actual feats) that you think is worth anyone's time? This should presumably not be hard if you've spent as much time on this as you're implying.

Naked in prison is not any class' natural habitat. Either a feature loses value for being easily replaced by gear or it doesn't. If it does, then mountain hammer is worth about 60gp outside of combat; unimpressive. If it doesn't, then monks are -way, way- better than they're given credit for being.

This is true. People have a strong tendency to try to evaluate classes in situations that do not actually matter, or do not matter as much as they think. In particular, PvP duels are a stupid evaluation metric because "something with PC classes" is like 1% of the opposition you are expected to be able to defeat.

[DMVerdandi]

Because doing so is the same as telling someone to play a warblade. Warblades are great, one of the best-designed classes in 3.5. I see no reason to make “warblade with more bonus feats and fewer other class features” when warblade exists.

And yet, the sorcerer exists when wizard is there. From the start.
The druid exists when the cleric is there, from the start.
Martial initiators are fantastic and as you said, one of the best designed classes [and last, which is important], and even from a home-brew standpoint, adding that into the regular base martial classes is an easy and effective way to give them some combat variety, so why not? It's easy to learn, easy to do, and for people who don't want magic, but do want something more than power attack>shock trooper, it can still be used in no magic zones.


Psychic warrior is good because it's just a fighter +psionics.
Bonus feats do not make a class. And the worst thing about it is you still have to be able to apply for the pre-requisites.

When I say fighter, I don’t mean “guy who can fight,” I mean “martial class whose primary class feature is bonus feats.” There are plenty of good classes that fight. I’ve got a whole folder full of interesting martial builds. But if someone says they want to play a fighter and not a warblade, I assume that they want to play something whose primary class feature is bonus feats, not maneuvers or spells.

Horrible assumption. I think the very point is someone wanting to play a fighter is someone who does want to live by the sword, but at the same time, I am sure they don't just want someone who cannot problem solve. They probably want someone who has a wide variety of methods of getting stronger, but is primarily a combat adept. And Feats as they are, are a MESSY representation of them.

Perhaps if every fighter feat scaled with your weapon master bonus, we'd be in business, but they don't, and slapping on a system that already exists is far easier than retooling the whole feat system to accommodate the desire. It's reinventing the wheel instead of just changing the tires.
Now, even if one would want to create a whole new list and set of schools for the base classes, It would be an easier undertaking than creating a whole new slew of feats, since the martial maneuver system is easier to write for than feats, which are EXTREMELY mundane, and difficult to balance.

Path of war is a great example. They made like 14 new disciplines, and just in the fact that the [Strike/Stance/Boost] style of organization is easier to write for and organize, it can be made rather well. There are hardly any prerequisites, and they are easier to track, and have more utility and balance since they all have a set standard of mechanics.

An example is one could easily make power attack into a martial maneuver. Make it a boost, and for every attack in that round you can reduce the amount of BAB for damage. Or a stance and have it work passively, or a strike. Maneuvers are simply the better mechanic. And the best part is it allows you to save those feats for something else.

The fighter bonus feat is a D&Dism, and really mechanically falls short of other types of resource management. All of the other resource management systems are better because they are in a way locked up into the class itself, and even if someone else can learn to do it, they can't do it as well.

So the question then is how to make feats effective as a class feature. The answer is to expand what feats can be taken (either by creating new feats, giving them more powerful versions of existing feats or expanding what feats they can take), and increase flexibility within the framework of feats that can be taken (such as by having floating feats a la the Chameleon as you suggested, or by adding class features that let you use those feats in different ways as I do in my games by giving an expanded weapon aptitude ability and a UMD-like ability that lets you imitate martial abilities as UMD lets you imitate spellcasting).

Or you could do the same thing, design maneuvers around certain styles that are more... Generic in flavor [Even though Iron heart, diamond mind, shadow hand, and white raven, and setting sun are essentially disciplines emulating classes with more depth and variety as is, and ARE actually pretty generic.]

If I want to play Bruce Wayne, I’ll play an artificer/warblade. In fact I have such a build already that can do a pretty great approximation of Batman. Again my issue with fixing the fighter by giving it maneuvers isn’t that I don’t like maneuvers, it’s that we already have three well designed classes that do maneuvers well. I’d prefer to largely preserve the fighter’s main class feature, or just not play a fighter at all.

Fighter's main class feature ISN'T a class feature, since everyone can do it without taking levels in fighter, or a special feat that gives them access. And there isn't anything that they necessarily get a bonus on for being a fighter. It would be like saying expert's main class feature is more skill points. It's literally the same type of thing. Sneak attack is a class feature. Rage is a class feature, Spells are a class feature. More feats is an extension of a resource that everyone already has. That is why everyone equates fighter to an NPC class, even though Adept is the sole one that actually has class features that can't be emulated by an NPC class.

On the bruce wayne thing, He SHOULD be able to be played as a fighter[INT Focused]. Lucius fox designs most of his weapons/tech, but he is a master martial artist, and detective. But combat is his focus. And if we are to say that warblade is a suitable representation of batman's fighting, then we can already determine that if you can perform a special type of attack, or take a stance that allows you to better defend or attack in the long term, or focus on a certain mindset that makes you more apt do do a certain function in the short term, without having any magic powers, that a system that organizes and categorizes those things is superior to one that does not is better.

If batman is better emulated as a warblade than a fighter in your words, than naturally, any "fighter" represented anywhere else that does have any martial arts[that is skilled fighting] training at all is better suited to be a warblade, because the system makes more sense. Batman isn't using any special whammy, he's just knows techniques, and feats are a worse mechanic at using techniques than maneuvers are.


Now, personally, I DO think it would be VERY cool to take artificer and give it maneuvers, and call it a fighter. Now the fighter's role is a crafter-tinkerer. Since chainmail, fighter's kind of schtick has been "weapon and armor guy", But as you kind of said before, the one with the weapons should be at least able to craft magical arms and armor. Even better if they are just quartermasters/combat engineers on the team.

Giving them infusions, and making them responsible for making sure everyone's gear is up to snuff, and having superlative knowledge of how to use them is tops.

Nothing would be more satisfying than having a rusty old blade and everyone being like "this crap", and then handing it off to your "quartermaster", and them being like "Gimme this... THIS IS HOW YOU USE IT" *Blade hums, takes on an infusion, and then dude cuts through something*.

I think that would make for a FAR more balanced party member than just the *I hit/feat* guy.

Taking on the artificer role as well would suddenly give them some out of combat application and use, as everyone has to go to the maester to repair or upgrade their gear, they can have a service to sell, and you can give them skills like appraise, craft, and diplomacy for haggling.

AND it takes the role of who makes magic items away from pure mages. And THAT is big. Perhaps give some sort of bonus for crafting WITH pure mages, using aid another, and all is right with the world.

Spoiler

Show

There's a bunch of problems with the idea of fighters as "generalists" or "supernormal guys/gals". First off, there's the concept and then there's the execution. Even if we like this particular idea, the fighter class doesn't do it anything remotely resembling justice.

The existence of other martial classes is of course an obstacle, like people have argued about to death. The fighter can't be too skilful, because that's the rogue's and ranger's job. It can't have overwhelming physical strength, because that's the barbarian's job. It can't have anything particularly special, in fact, because then it can't service many concepts that don't fall into the very specific niches of the other martial classes. Rogues have the same problems, only they carry all the concepts which are neither martial nor magical.

So the "generalist supernormal person" concept ends up as "nothing terribly special about it", which is a very bad thing in a class-based system about fantasy heroes. The main problem being that it doesn't scale very well. On low levels, being someone who doesn't have flashy tricks but is solid, reliable and well-trained works. But as you advance, there's no real way to make it scale up to the craziness that magic or even other non-magical classes allow. There's only so many ways you can stretch "reliable and competent", without becoming fantasy Batman... and that's a concept for which rogues and wizards are far better suited anyway.

Besides, sometimes people want something flashy that doesn't use spells or the very specific ways of being flashy that other classes utilize. So if we want fighters to accommodate that, they need a big pile of features. Since, after all, a keen-eyed archer who doesn't use spells or pets, a knight who doesn't use paladin oaths/powers or a canny duellist who isn't much for stealth all need to be covered by this one class. Most visions for fighter on high levels tend to focus on durability and resisting punishment or magic.

On the more mechanical side, feats are a very poor vessel for class features and customization. They're very rigid, since you only get a set number of them at strict intervals, and each needs to be worth as much as the next one, unless they have prerequisites. And in D&D's level system, prerequisites turn into long, cumbersome feat chains that make you wait half a campaign before you can realize your concept mechanically.

So the fighter class is basically doomed from the outset by a variety of factors, not even necessarily connected to it.

This 100%

[Arbane]

At the start of 3e feats were over valued. So the design of the 3e fighter centers around a system mechanic that was really cool and innovative (at the time, for D&D), but in the long run it turns out is only good for cranking out a one trick pony. You can make a really good one trick pony, but that's all.

Yup. One of the big problems with Feats is that they got used to wall off doing anything in combat more interesting than 'sword them in the hitpoints'.

And they're still way too weak. For some fun, try to think of any feats a Fighter can get that are anywhere near the power or versatility of the spells an equal-level Sorcerer Bard could have. (Aside from maybe Leadership.)

On the bruce wayne thing, He SHOULD be able to be played as a fighter[INT Focused]. Lucius fox designs most of his weapons/tech, but he is a master martial artist, and detective. But combat is his focus.

Oh, please, this is ridiculous.

Batman would work way better as a Ninja.

[Piggy Knowles]

I think you’re misunderstanding me.

I agree that a fighter is a poorly designed class with a lot of inherent limitations. But it’s also a piece of terminology that has some meaning in this context. A fighter in the context of 3.5 is a martial character whose primary class feature is getting lots of feats. That’s not a lot to go off of, but it’s what we’ve got.

If you want to homebrew another martial class to fit the “generic non-superpowered warrior who’s good at fighting” role, by all means do so (though again, warblade can already do this fairly well). Homebrew can be fun, and it can add a lot to the right campaign. But if this is about fixing the 3.5 fighter, I think the framework of “warrior that gets an excessive number of bonus feats” is the one to build off of (as flawed as that particular concept may be design-wise) because that’s what a fighter is in 3.5. By all means give it additional class features, give it ways to make those feats relevant, give it ways to do things with feats that no other class can do. But as soon as you take the focus away from “warrior that gets an excessive number of bonus feats,” I’d argue that you’re no longer talking about a fighter as that word means in 3.5. You’re talking about an entirely new class.

(Also I have no idea why you think Batman “should” be a fighter, and suspect there are a lot of ways you can reproduce his fighting style and detective skills with a variety of classes.)

[Troacctid]

Like I said, it's actually pretty easy to port in the 5e Fighter and get a solid fix while still preserving the class's core concept. Here, watch:

Level	Base Attack Bonus	Fort	Ref	Will	Special
1st	+1	2	0	0	Bonus Feat, Second Wind
2nd	+2	3	0	0	Action Surge (one use)
3rd	+3	3	1	1	Improved Critical
4th	+4	4	1	1	Ability Score Improvement
5th	+5	4	1	1	Extra Attack
6th	+6/+1	5	2	2	Ability Score Improvement
7th	+7/+2	5	2	2	Remarkable Athlete
8th	+8/+3	6	2	2	Ability Score Improvement
9th	+9/+4	6	3	3	Indomitable (1/day)
10th	+10/+5	7	3	3	Bonus Feat
11th	+11/+6/+1	7	3	3	Extra Attack (2)
12th	+12/+7/+2	8	4	4	Ability Score Improvement
13th	+13/+8/+3	8	4	4	Indomitable (2/day)
14th	+14/+9/+4	9	4	4	Ability Score Improvement
15th	+15/+10/+5	9	5	5	Superior Critical
16th	+16/+11/+6/+1	10	5	5	Ability Score Improvement
17th	+17/+12/+7/+2	10	5	5	Action Surge (two uses), Indomitable (3/day)
18th	+18/+13/+8/+3	11	6	6	Survivor
19th	+19/+14/+9/+4	11	6	6	Ability Score Improvement
20th	+20/+15/+10/+5	12	6	6	Extra Attack (3)

Hit die: d10
Skill points per level: 4 + Int
Class skills: Balance, Climb, Craft, Escape Artist, Handle Animal, Intimidate, Jump, Knowledge (History), Knowledge (Local), Knowledge (Nobility and Royalty), Listen, Profession, Ride, Sense Motive, Spot, Survival, Swim, Tumble

Weapon and Armor Proficiency
You are proficient with all simple and martial weapons and with all armor (heavy, medium, and light) and shields (including tower shields).

Bonus Feat
At 1st level, and again at 10th level, you get a bonus combat-oriented feat in addition to the feat that any 1st-level character gets and the bonus feat granted to a human character. These bonus feats must be drawn from the feats noted as fighter bonus feats. You must still meet all prerequisites for a bonus feat, including ability score and base attack bonus minimums.

Second Wind (Ex)
You have a limited well of stamina that you can draw on to protect yourself from harm. On your turn, you can use a swift action to regain hit points equal to 1d10 + your fighter level. Once you use this feature, you must spend at least 30 minutes resting before you can use it again.

Action Surge (Ex)
Starting at 2nd level, you can push yourself beyond your normal limits for a moment. On your turn, you can take one additional standard action on top of your regular actions.

Once you use this feature, you must rest for at least 30 minutes before you can use it again. Starting at 17th level, you can use it twice before resting this way, but only once on the same turn.

If your game uses the action point variant rule (see Eberron Campaign Setting), you can gain an extra use of this feature by spending 2 action points.

Improved Critical (Ex)
Starting at 3rd level, you gain the benefit of the Improved Critical feat for all attacks you make.

Ability Score Improvement (Ex)
When you reach 4th level, and again at 6th, 8th, 12th, 14th, 16th, and 19th level, you can increase one ability score of your choice by 2, or you can increase two ability scores of your choice by 1, or you can gain a bonus feat of your choice. The bonus feat can be any feat for which you meet the prerequisites.

Extra Attack (Ex)
Beginning at 5th level, you can make an additional attack at your highest attack bonus whenever you take the Attack or Full Attack action on your turn.

The number of additional attacks increases to two when you reach 11th level in this class and to three when you reach 20th level in this class.

Remarkable Athlete (Ex)
Starting at 7th level, when you make a Dexterity- or Strength-based skill check, you can use half your Fighter level (rounded up) in place of the number of ranks you have in the skill (even if that number is 0). For example, a 7th-level fighter would have the equivalent of 4 ranks in Balance, Climb, Disable Device, and so on (but only for the purpose of making skill checks). You can't take 10 on checks when you use remarkable athlete (to take 10 you have to use your actual ranks). If the skill doesn't allow untrained checks, you must have at least 1 actual rank to attempt the check.

You also gain a bonus on all Strength and Dexterity checks (including initiative checks, but not Strength- or Dexterity-based skill checks) equal to half your Fighter level, rounded up.

Indomitable
Beginning at 9th level, you no longer automatically fail saving throws on a natural 1. Additionally, once per day, you can reroll a saving throw that you fail. If you do so, you must use the new roll. You can do this twice per day starting at 13th level and three times per day starting at 17th level.

Superior Critical (Ex)
Starting at 15th level, your Improved Critical ability triples your critical threat range instead of doubling it.

Survivor (Ex)
At 18th level, you attain the pinnacle of resilience in battle. You gain fast healing equal to 5 + your Constitution modifier.

Spoiler: Alternate class feature: Cavalier Style

Show

This alternate class feature replaces improved critical, remarkable athlete, superior critical, survivor, and your 10th level bonus feat.

Class Skills
Starting at 3rd level, you add Diplomacy, Knowledge (nobility and royalty), Ride, and Sense Motive to your list of class skills for all classes. If you previously purchased ranks in these skills at the cross-class rate, you get additional ranks as if they had always been class skills for you.

Born to the Saddle
At 3rd level, you gain Skill Focus (Ride) as a bonus feat.

Unwavering Mark (Ex)
Starting at 3rd level, you can menace your foes, foiling their attacks and punishing them for harming others. When you hit a creature with a melee weapon attack, you can mark the creature until the end of your next turn or until the creature becomes marked this way by someone else, whichever comes first.

While it is within your reach, a creature marked by you suffers a -4 penalty attack rolls against anyone other than you. In addition, if a creature marked by you deals damage to anyone other than you, you can use a melee weapon to make a retaliatory strike against the marked creature as a swift action on your next turn. You get a +4 bonus on the attack and damage roll for this attack.

Regardless of the number of creature you mark, you can use retaliatory strike 3 times per day. For every 4 fighter levels beyond 3rd, you gain an additional daily use of the ability.

Warding Maneuver (Ex)
Starting at 7th level, you learn to fend off strikes directed at you, your mount, or other creatures nearby. As an immediate action, when you or a creature you can see within 5 feet of you is hit by a weapon attack, you can roll 1d8 and add the result to the target's AC against that attack. If the attack still hits, it deals only half damage.

You must be wielding a shield or a melee weapon in order to use this ability, and you can use it a number of times per day equal to your Constitution modifier.

Hold the Line (Ex)
Starting at 10th level, any opponent you threaten that takes any sort of movement, including a 5-foot step, provokes an attack of opportunity from you. Your foes provoke this attack before leaving the area you threaten. Your opponents also cannot use the withdraw action to treat the square they start in as no longer threatened by you, and if an opponent attempts to use the Tumble skill to avoid an attack of opportunity from you, the DC is increased by your fighter level.

Ferocious Charger (Ex)
At 15th level, when you hit an enemy with a melee attack at the end of a charge or from the back of a charging mount, that enemy must succeed on a Fortitude saving throw (DC 10 + half your fighter level + your Strength modifier) or fall prone.

Vigilant Defender (Ex)
Starting at 18th level, you respond to danger with extraordinary vigilance. You can make attacks of opportunity even while flat-footed, and the first attack of opportunity you make on each other creature's turn does not count towards your normal limit of attacks of opportunity for the round.

Spoiler: Alternate Class Feature: Eldritch Knight Style

Show

This alternate class feature replaces improved critical, remarkable athlete, superior critical, survivor, and your 10th level bonus feat.

Armored Mage (Ex)
You can cast your eldritch knight spells while wearing light armor and/or a light shield without suffering a chance of arcane spell failure. At 7th level, this benefit extends to medium armor. At 10th level, it extends to heavy shields. At 15th level, it extends to heavy armor and tower shields. Only spells you cast as an eldritch knight fighter gain this benefit; spells you cast from other classes are unaffected.

Bonus Proficiency (Ex)
Starting at 3rd level, you add Concentration and Spellcraft to your list of fighter class skills. If you previously purchased ranks in these skills at the cross-class rate, you get additional ranks as if they had always been class skills for you.

Spellcasting
When you reach 3rd level, you augment your martial prowess with the ability to cast arcane spells, which are drawn from a subset of the sorcerer/wizard spell list. You can cast any spell you know without preparing it ahead of time, just as a sorcerer can. To learn or cast an eldritch knight spell, you must have an Intelligence score of at least 10 + the spell's level. Bonus spells are based on Intelligence, and saving throws against these spells have a DC of 10 + spell level + your Intelligence modifier. Your caster level is equal to half your fighter level, rounded up.

Your selection of spells is limited. At 3rd level, you know three cantrips and three 1st-level spells. You learn an additional spell at 4th, 7th, 8th, 10th, 11th, 13th, 14th, 16th, 19th, and 20th level. You can learn any sorcerer/wizard spell up to the highest level you can cast from the schools of abjuration and evocation.

Upon gaining a level in fighter, you can choose to learn a new spell in place of one you already know. In effect, you "lose" the old spell in exchange for the new one. The new spell's level must be the same as that of the spell being exchanged. You can swap only a single spell this way each time you gain a level.

The table below shows the eldritch knight's spells per day.

Fighter Level	0th	1st	2nd	3rd	4th
3	2	1	-	-	-
4	3	2	-	-	-
5	3	2	-	-	-
6	3	2	-	-	-
7	3	3	1	-	-
8	3	3	1	-	-
9	3	3	1	-	-
10	3	3	2	-	-
11	3	3	2	-	-
12	3	3	2	-	-
13	4	3	2	1	-
14	4	3	2	1	-
15	4	3	2	1	-
16	4	3	2	2	-
17	4	3	2	2	-
18	4	3	2	2	-
19	4	3	2	2	1
20	4	3	2	2	1

Weapon Bond (Su)
At 3rd level, you learn a ritual that creates a magical bond between yourself and one weapon. You perform the ritual over the course of one hour. The weapon must be within your reach throughout the ritual, at the conclusion of which you touch the weapon and forge the bond.

Once you have bonded a weapon to yourself, opponents cannot disarm you of that weapon. If it is on the same plane of existence, you can summon that weapon as a swift action, causing it to teleport instantly to your hand.

You can have up to two bonded weapons, but can summon only one at a time with your swift action. If you attempt to bond with a third weapon, you must break the bond with one of the other two.

War Magic (Ex)
Beginning at 7th level, immediately after casting a spell, you may make a weapon attack as a swift action. At 18th level, this improves to two weapon attacks.

Eldritch Strike (Ex)
At 10th level, you learn how to make your weapon strikes undercut a creature's resistance to your spells. When you hit a creature with a weapon attack, that creature suffers a -4 penalty on its next saving throw against spells you cast before the end of your next turn.

Arcane Charge (Su)
At 15th level, you gain the ability to teleport up to 30 feet to an unoccupied space you can see when you use your action surge. You can teleport before or after the additional action. This is a conjuration (teleportation) effect.

Spoiler: Alternate Class Feature: Samurai Style

Show

This alternate class feature replaces improved critical, remarkable athlete, superior critical, survivor, and your 10th level bonus feat.

Bonus Proficiency (Ex)
Starting at 3rd level, you add Concentration, Diplomacy, Knowledge (history), and Sense Motive to your list of class skills for all classes. If you previously purchased ranks in Concentration at the cross-class rate, you get additional ranks as if they had always been class skills for you.

Fighting Spirit (Ex)
Starting at 3rd level, your intensity in battle can shield you and help you strike true. As a swift action, you can activate this ability to grant yourself 5 temporary hit points and a +5 bonus on weapon attack rolls. The temporary hit points last until depleted or until you activate this ability again, but the bonus to attack rolls lasts only until the end of your turn. This ability can be used three times per day.

Starting at 10th level, the temporary hit points granted by this ability are equal to your fighter level.

Elegant Courtier (Ex)
Starting at 7th level, your discipline and attention to detail allow you to excel in social situations. You gain Iron Will as a bonus feat, and you add your Wisdom bonus, if any, as a bonus to your Diplomacy checks.

Tireless Spirit (Ex)
Starting at 10th level, when you roll initiative and have no uses of fighting spirit remaining, you regain one use.

Rapid Strike (Ex)
Starting at 15th level, you learn how to trade accuracy for swift strikes. Whenever you take the Attack or Full Attack action, you may make an additional attack at your highest base attack bonus; however, you suffer a -2 penalty on all other attacks made that turn.

Strength Before Death (Ex)
Starting at 18th level, your fighting spirit can delay the grasp of death. Once per day, if you take damage that would reduce you to -1 hit points or less and you are not flat-footed, you can delay your death and immediately take an extra turn (no action required), interrupting the current turn. Your initiative remains unchanged. During this turn, you do not die as a result of having -10 hit points or less. At the end of the turn, roll a d10. Your hit point total becomes equal to 0 minus the result.

[DMVerdandi]

I think you’re misunderstanding me.

I agree that a fighter is a poorly designed class with a lot of inherent limitations. But it’s also a piece of terminology that has some meaning in this context. A fighter in the context of 3.5 is a martial character whose primary class feature is getting lots of feats. That’s not a lot to go off of, but it’s what we’ve got.

That may be the meta, but the fluff is that the fighter is the dude who can fight best because he has the most knowledge of combat maneuvers, but they also cite that the fighter is capable of taking on many roles, primarily adventurer.
Now the issue, is having that variety and ability to fit into a plethora of different roles requires SKILLS. Even just giving fighter factotum skills and points is a giant buff for them, But if you are saying someone can fill literally every role without having the capacity for filling every role, you are being dishonest.

Fighter is literally a dude who has rudimentary physical skills, and not even enough to cover THOSE, and 11 combat tricks, that do NOT scale by level, do NOT require the class itself, and do NOT give them any more actual variety than having any other skills.
The feats have no organization, rhyme or reason,and are generally mundane bonuses that hardly offer enough.

Take away metamagic feats, and spellcasters are probably more balanced and better overall.
Take away power attack [And all feats contengient on it], and they have lost nearly everything[ Worth taking].
Take away ALL feats from a martial initiator, and you still have someone functional in combat. And since they have more skill points, more functional out of combat as well.




[/QUOTE]
If you want to homebrew another martial class to fit the “generic non-superpowered warrior who’s good at fighting” role, by all means do so (though again, warblade can already do this fairly well). Homebrew can be fun, and it can add a lot to the right campaign. But if this is about fixing the 3.5 fighter, I think the framework of “warrior that gets an excessive number of bonus feats” is the one to build off of (as flawed as that particular concept may be design-wise) because that’s what a fighter is in 3.5. [/QUOTE]
A fix is homebrew/houserules. So any change you make to it is within the same realm. The scope might be different but the action is the same.
Fighter can be changed easily by slapping class features that other classes have on it, and can still work within the framework of fighter, if not preform MUCH better, because fighter has no features. It's just MOAR FEATS. But everyone fights and everyone gets feats so it's completely inert

Even adding feats every level doesn't stop feats from being tame and mundane. With 20 for example, you could all of the Improved combat feats, some lockdown stuff, and some charging stuff, but it's not twice as strong. Generally it just means you could possibly pick up the use of some other weapon too late in the game to matter.

So, yes you can re-tool the whole feat system, but unless you put an addendum at the bottom of every fighter feat that has a special thing to do for fighters (Like how augments work for psionics), everyone just gets better at using fighter feats, and fighter becomes less relevant still.

By all means give it additional class features, give it ways to make those feats relevant, give it ways to do things with feats that no other class can do. But as soon as you take the focus away from “warrior that gets an excessive number of bonus feats,” I’d argue that you’re no longer talking about a fighter as that word means in 3.5. You’re talking about an entirely new class.

(Also I have no idea why you think Batman “should” be a fighter, and suspect there are a lot of ways you can reproduce his fighting style and detective skills with a variety of classes.)

Anything that you add to the fighter is going to take away the focus of the feats, because the feats are underwhelming. Unless the additions are also dependent on feats, and thus somehow weaker than the feats themselves. We are definitely talking about a new class, but the question is how much you are willing to sacrifice to make the fighter a competitive choice worth taking for 20 levels. Because it is not. It's a dip.

Do you want to simply take from things that already exist and then roll them over into the fighter, or do you want to re-write 120+ feats just so the fighter can have enough individuality to stand on it's own?

If it really matters, I would without hesitation catabolize some other class to have my core choosable classes be worth it.


Its nothing to take Artificer, slap on fighter bonus feats, proficiencies and BAB, and say " This is the new fighter. He's a master crafter of magical weapons and armor, and master at using them".

It's nothing to take warblade, slap on fighter feats and call it a fighter.

Its nothing to take Factotum, slap on some bonus feats and say "this is a fighter. A fighter can be anyone, anywhere and anything,from a highwayman to a king, they are masters at combat maneuvers, use of intelligence in combat, and mundane skills"


And I promise you, they will be better for it, and still VERY much work within the theme of the game and of a dude who fights. Now they just have individualized stuff, be that inspiration, infusions, or maneuvers".

All of those are things the fighter could have or should have been a master at rather than everything interesting being relegated to everything BUT a fighter. Furthermore none of those things are so overwhelming that the fighter no longer becomes the dude that fights.

[Ignimortis]

This is hilariously off base. We can go over it in detail if you want but I don't think most people need convincing on this one. Take another, close look at the spell-list.

Alright. This piqued my curiosity, because I've DM'd for a beguiler at low levels (admittedly, with low game knowledge) and played one many years ago (admittedly, when I also had low game knowledge and thought that Power Attack was bad for fighters because you'd miss more often).

Level 1 non-mind-affecting spells: Comprehend Languages, Detect Secret Doors, Disguise Self, Expeditious Retreat, Mage Armor, Obscuring Mist, Silent Image, Undetectable Alignment.

I've crossed out those that would require really specific circumstances to be useful in combat. Mage Armor is for those two levels when you cannot afford a masterwork (mithril) chain shirt. Obscuring Mist and Exp. Retreat are good enough, I guess. Silent Image will take some creative use, but I can see what you mean.

Level 2 non-mind-affecting spells: Blinding Color Surge, Blur, Fog Cloud, Glitterdust, Invisibility, Minor Image, Mirror Image, Misdirection, See Invisibility, Silence, Spider Climb.

Much better around here, I'd say, but the only three offensive options (as the rest are defensive or counter-tricks to those defenses) are BCS, Fog Cloud and Glitterdust. But, well, Glitterdust is one of those win spells, so it's fine.

Level 3: And here's where all of this really comes to a halt, because Hold Person, Haste and Slow are already great, and there are 17 more quite good spells there. So...yeah, you're right. Guess the player should've stuck with Beguiler till at least level 5, and I shouldn't have trusted the 2012 me.

Seriously? Even if that was strictly true (their list has several enchantments and illusions) the sheer variety of undead and their talents that are available makes this rather laughable as well.

Now this is a claim I can at least substantiate.

• Level 1: mostly offensive magic, and generic Detect Magic+Undetectable Alignment. Makes sense, doesn't do much out of combat aside from being the "party's magic finder".
• Level 2: Gentle Repose is the only non-combat spell in here. It's good for hauling people back to town to get them raised (if that happens in your game and you can afford it).
• Level 3: again, a single spell - Speak with Dead. It's a good spell, but it's also the only non-undead, non-offensive in here.
• Level 4: Dispel Magic? Most people got that at 5, not 7. Again, offense and undead.
• Level 5: Greater DM, Magic Jar, Nightmare, Oath of Blood, Planar Binding (Lesser), Unhallow. Finally, some good stuff in here. GDM needs no introduction, and everything else is quite situational, but could be useful, I guess? Planar Binding is kinda bad without a Magic Circle, but I guess you can just summon fodder for necromancy then.
• Level 6: and we're back to slightly disappointing. Planar Binding and Geas. PB is good, although you still don't have a Magic Circle without external help, and Geas is...quite situational.
• Level 7: zero non-combat, non-undead spells. Just like that.
• Level 8: see level 7.
• Level 9: Imprison Soul. A non-direct combat case can be made for Plague of Undead (just send each pack to roam far enough and then release control, have fun being the new Dark Lord in town, although by this point you can probably do that without a 9th level slot).

So basically you either pick some VERY good spells with Advanced Learning (and with Necromancy limitations, those are not quite plentiful), or you're stuck doing your undead stuff and cackling evilly when the party actually needs an arcanist to do something better than say "well, I can send ahead a skeleton horde". And the undead servants available vary too much based on the campaign. If all you can get are the MM1 ones, and not even all of those...well, that's not exactly the DM's fault that his world doesn't have all the undead possible, I'd say. Of course, in a theoretical white-room scenario they're pretty good, but other fixed-list casters are way more setting-independent.

Everything a swordsage can do, a duskblade can do better; substantially so. His out of combat options are a bit limited but less so than any initiator by a fair margin.

Again, I'll have to disagree. Perhaps this is true for a warblade or a crusader, they're more limited in their options by their disciplines, but a swordsage outclasses a duskblade in non-combat versatility immensely.
Total list of a duskblade's non-combat options (and those have to be picked at 1 spell per level, the same as swordsage, except swordsages also get stances, which also do stuff):

• Level 0: cantrips. Duskblade advantage, I'd say, swordsages don't get those and their specific effects.
• Level 1 (1-4): Jump, Sw.Exp.Retreat, Rouse. Meanwhile, Wind Stride duplicates SER, Sudden Jump and Shadow Jaunt grant more movement options than Jump, and Rouse is extremely situational, but unmatched.
• Level 2 (5-8): Darkvision, Dimension Hop, Sw.Fly, Sw.Invisibility, See Invisibility, Spider Climb. Darkvision goes to Duskblades, Dimension Hop is HOPelessly outclassed by Shadow Jaunt and its' greater versions, Swift Fly is almost the same (60 feet of flight per cast? Usually teleportation does a better job with the same range). Swift Invisibility was Cloak of Deception back at Swordsage3, See Invisibility goes to Duskblades, Dance of the Spider duplicated Spider Climb.
• Level 3 (9-12): Duskblades get nothing. Maybe Dispelling Touch? Swordsages also get few things, but their teleport is a move action now, and they can walk over water or lava. Very situational, but better than nothing. Or a blindsense stance which invalidates concealment and invisibility, but only in close range, so also not exactly often useful out of combat. Still, +5 to Listen checks gotta count for something?
• Level 4 (13-20): Duskblades get Dimension Door and Dispel Magic. They're good. They're really good. But probably they were good when the real arcanist nabbed them back at level 5 and 7, too. Meanwhile, swordsages get...60ft teleport as a swift action, and a really bad version of flight which shouldn't be quite as relevant at level 15, especially with those silly limitations.

So, basically, it's a toss-up at higher levels, but a swordsage can use their tricks all day and IMO has a somewhat significant advantage at levels 1-4 and probably 5-8 too, just because they get a few more maneuvers known than a duskblade does spells.

Yeah. Other than the underlined being something I disagree with this all looks right. ???

Eh, a barbarian never runs out of good feat ideas even if you're playing PHB only (Extra Rage? Sure, why not, etc.) and a fighter has to dive sourcebooks to actually use his bonus fighter feats on something that improves his weapon of choice every time. That counts as "easier to build" for me, and, well, barbarians only have "dead-ish" levels with Trap Sense, while for fighters it's every other level they just get everything a Barb would get too (BAB, saves, skillpoints). Now, if you stack sub levels high, I can see how Zhent Dungeoncrasher Fighter could be an OK straight 20 build, but...I'm not really feeling it. Barb 20 isn't great, but it's also just an OK build. To be fair, I haven't seen either one played or anyone who said "I'm just gonna go 20 levels of Fighter/20 levels of Barb".

You said it yourself. A specialist that does very little outside their specialty is a T4. That's the martial adepts to a T. They're great face-wreckers. They have easily the highest op-floor of any face-wrecker specialist. They do absolutely frag-all outside of face-wrecking except for the swordsage being a passable scout. I'm not seeing the disconnect here.

All three can afford to be party faces, actually. Their skillpoints and class skills work towards that. Crusaders even have a secondary CHA focus. Granted, they're leagues behind a Bard or a Beguiler or a social Sorcerer, but they can do it pretty well without harming their combat capabilities. Swordsage is a passable scout, indeed. All three have some knowledge skills (no arcana or planes, but still), which often come in useful. They're primarily face-wreckers, yes, but they DO have some capability in non-combat situations.

[Arbane]

If you want to homebrew another martial class to fit the “generic non-superpowered warrior who’s good at fighting” role, by all means do so (though again, warblade can already do this fairly well).

I think the whole 'non-superpowered' part is a lot of the problem, since the Fighter will be working with characters who explicitly DO have superpowers from Level 1 on, against enemies who will often have superpowers. D&D puts Green Arrow on the same team as Superman, and expects him to be the front-liner.

[Pleh]

I think the whole 'non-superpowered' part is a lot of the problem, since the Fighter will be working with characters who explicitly DO have superpowers from Level 1 on, against enemies who will often have superpowers. D&D puts Green Arrow on the same team as Superman, and expects him to be the front-liner.

Or, less metaphorically, puts Hawkeye on the same team as Dr Strange and expects Hawkeye to be the front liner protecting Strange.

[Cosi]

I've crossed out those that would require really specific circumstances to be useful in combat. Mage Armor is for those two levels when you cannot afford a masterwork (mithril) chain shirt. Obscuring Mist and Exp. Retreat are good enough, I guess. Silent Image will take some creative use, but I can see what you mean.

silent image doesn't take creativity to use. Very basic uses like "illusion of a wall" are already all but guaranteed to cost your enemies an action until people start walking around with true seeing by default. Creativity just turns it from "solid" to MVP It's also an auto-win against mindless enemies, which comprise the majority of targets immune to your other tricks at low level. Also, it's a mistake to ignore niche spells on the Beguiler or Dread Necromancer lists, because those characters have access to all their spells all the time. whelm isn't always great, but it sometimes is, and a Beguiler is the only character who has it in those circumstances (at a reasonable level of optimization).

Level 1: mostly offensive magic, and generic Detect Magic+Undetectable Alignment. Makes sense, doesn't do much out of combat aside from being the "party's magic finder".

You also get Rebuke Undead. That's not always going to be useful, but it does make you very effective if you can find some pets.

Level 2: Gentle Repose is the only non-combat spell in here. It's good for hauling people back to town to get them raised (if that happens in your game and you can afford it).

It's worth noting that you get Advanced Learning here. That's not trivial.

Level 4: Dispel Magic? Most people got that at 5, not 7. Again, offense and undead.

Also death ward and animate dead. I mean, that does fall under "undead", but it's still a good deal of utility. Also, you do get an Advanced Learning if you stick with the class (or you get a Prestige Domain or something, which gives you a pile of utility).

Level 5: Greater DM, Magic Jar, Nightmare, Oath of Blood, Planar Binding (Lesser), Unhallow. Finally, some good stuff in here. GDM needs no introduction, and everything else is quite situational, but could be useful, I guess? Planar Binding is kinda bad without a Magic Circle, but I guess you can just summon fodder for necromancy then.

You're way underselling magic jar. That spell is insane. Also, it's not like getting magic circle is a challenge at all. You can just buy an Eternal Wand, or get domain access somehow.

Level 7: zero non-combat, non-undead spells. Just like that.

You've had another Advanced Learning here.

Level 8: see level 7.

create greater undead is a thing. But yes, a single classed Dread Necromancer relying only on his own class list is kind of unimpressive at high levels. But that's about as likely as a high level Wizard relying solely on levels. A high level Dread Necromancer is going to have options like Runestaves, Arcane Disciple, Prestige Domains, or something else.

[Ignimortis]

It's worth noting that you get Advanced Learning here. That's not trivial.
But yes, a single classed Dread Necromancer relying only on his own class list is kind of unimpressive at high levels. But that's about as likely as a high level Wizard relying solely on levels. A high level Dread Necromancer is going to have options like Runestaves, Arcane Disciple, Prestige Domains, or something else.

Well, I did note that Advanced Learning might change things a bit or even a lot, if you pick a good spell. And while I admit that Rainbow Servant-style with domain shuffling shenanigans might improve everything greatly, I'm not sure they should be considered a core part of the class. DNs are, in the end, more reliant on external resources which might or might not exist in the setting. If we're talking "all books, all content" style of game - then yes, absolutely, they can be very good. But it's a lot easier to deny a Runestave or an uncommon prestige class than it is scrolls or magic weapons in general, in my experience.

[Cosi]

Well, I did note that Advanced Learning might change things a bit or even a lot, if you pick a good spell. And while I admit that Rainbow Servant-style with domain shuffling shenanigans might improve everything greatly, I'm not sure they should be considered a core part of the class. DNs are, in the end, more reliant on external resources which might or might not exist in the setting. If we're talking "all books, all content" style of game - then yes, absolutely, they can be very good. But it's a lot easier to deny a Runestave or an uncommon prestige class than it is scrolls or magic weapons in general, in my experience.

I think if you're in an environment where it matters whether or not you can do planar binding shenanigans, it is unreasonable to expect that you will not be allowed Prestige Domains. And if it doesn't matter if you can do planar binding shenanigans, then the Dread Necromancer is at a totally reasonable power level.

[Kelb_Panthera]

Now this is a claim I can at least substantiate.

• Level 1: mostly offensive magic, and generic Detect Magic+Undetectable Alignment. Makes sense, doesn't do much out of combat aside from being the "party's magic finder".
• Level 2: Gentle Repose is the only non-combat spell in here. It's good for hauling people back to town to get them raised (if that happens in your game and you can afford it).
• Level 3: again, a single spell - Speak with Dead. It's a good spell, but it's also the only non-undead, non-offensive in here.
• Level 4: Dispel Magic? Most people got that at 5, not 7. Again, offense and undead.
• Level 5: Greater DM, Magic Jar, Nightmare, Oath of Blood, Planar Binding (Lesser), Unhallow. Finally, some good stuff in here. GDM needs no introduction, and everything else is quite situational, but could be useful, I guess? Planar Binding is kinda bad without a Magic Circle, but I guess you can just summon fodder for necromancy then.
• Level 6: and we're back to slightly disappointing. Planar Binding and Geas. PB is good, although you still don't have a Magic Circle without external help, and Geas is...quite situational.
• Level 7: zero non-combat, non-undead spells. Just like that.
• Level 8: see level 7.
• Level 9: Imprison Soul. A non-direct combat case can be made for Plague of Undead (just send each pack to roam far enough and then release control, have fun being the new Dark Lord in town, although by this point you can probably do that without a 9th level slot).

So basically you either pick some VERY good spells with Advanced Learning (and with Necromancy limitations, those are not quite plentiful), or you're stuck doing your undead stuff and cackling evilly when the party actually needs an arcanist to do something better than say "well, I can send ahead a skeleton horde". And the undead servants available vary too much based on the campaign. If all you can get are the MM1 ones, and not even all of those...well, that's not exactly the DM's fault that his world doesn't have all the undead possible, I'd say. Of course, in a theoretical white-room scenario they're pretty good, but other fixed-list casters are way more setting-independent.

Mother cyst goes a -long- way in that regard. As for non-core undead, dread necro's inclusion means that the bane wraith is available at the very least. Even in core, ghouls make fine scouts and kidnappers. Once you get into non-core undead and undead creation the options grow immensely. Spell-likes and other, unique special abilities abound. Core-only and near core-only just aren't much of the game anymore. People that prefer that kind of game have largely moved on to later editions.

Again, I'll have to disagree. Perhaps this is true for a warblade or a crusader, they're more limited in their options by their disciplines, but a swordsage outclasses a duskblade in non-combat versatility immensely.
Total list of a duskblade's non-combat options (and those have to be picked at 1 spell per level, the same as swordsage, except swordsages also get stances, which also do stuff):

• Level 0: cantrips. Duskblade advantage, I'd say, swordsages don't get those and their specific effects.
• Level 1 (1-4): Jump, Sw.Exp.Retreat, Rouse. Meanwhile, Wind Stride duplicates SER, Sudden Jump and Shadow Jaunt grant more movement options than Jump, and Rouse is extremely situational, but unmatched.
• Level 2 (5-8): Darkvision, Dimension Hop, Sw.Fly, Sw.Invisibility, See Invisibility, Spider Climb. Darkvision goes to Duskblades, Dimension Hop is HOPelessly outclassed by Shadow Jaunt and its' greater versions, Swift Fly is almost the same (60 feet of flight per cast? Usually teleportation does a better job with the same range). Swift Invisibility was Cloak of Deception back at Swordsage3, See Invisibility goes to Duskblades, Dance of the Spider duplicated Spider Climb.
• Level 3 (9-12): Duskblades get nothing. Maybe Dispelling Touch? Swordsages also get few things, but their teleport is a move action now, and they can walk over water or lava. Very situational, but better than nothing. Or a blindsense stance which invalidates concealment and invisibility, but only in close range, so also not exactly often useful out of combat. Still, +5 to Listen checks gotta count for something?
• Level 4 (13-20): Duskblades get Dimension Door and Dispel Magic. They're good. They're really good. But probably they were good when the real arcanist nabbed them back at level 5 and 7, too. Meanwhile, swordsages get...60ft teleport as a swift action, and a really bad version of flight which shouldn't be quite as relevant at level 15, especially with those silly limitations.

So, basically, it's a toss-up at higher levels, but a swordsage can use their tricks all day and IMO has a somewhat significant advantage at levels 1-4 and probably 5-8 too, just because they get a few more maneuvers known than a duskblade does spells.

Outside of an adventure that is an absolute gauntlet, the number of spells per day a duskblade gets is largely similar to the number of maneuvers that a swordage will use in the same day. They're also far better supported by a whole host of options that make spells and spellcasters more effective for which there is no parallel for martial adepts.

A swordsage gets roughly the same number of maneuvers known as a duskblade does spells (who gets more is up to the latter's int mod) but only has about half as many readied in the mid-to-late game.

Swift fly can be used to double move or even run for far more than 60 feet. Dispelling touch can be used with arcane channeling to simply smack away buffs so level 3 is hardly "nothing" even before you consider halt and regroup, effects that the swordsage simply can't mirror though a crusader can perform similar. Where are you getting walking on water/lava for the swordsage?

Anyway, the duskblade can hit just as hard or harder in battle before you look at gear or feats; scout far better with magically granted senses, stealth, and mobility; has access to better skills, if not as many; has more and better BFC and debuff options; and can even buff himself and his allies, which the swordsage can't do at all. All the swordsage really has on his side in this comparison is that he doesn't have to rest overnight to recharge.

Eh, a barbarian never runs out of good feat ideas even if you're playing PHB only (Extra Rage? Sure, why not, etc.) and a fighter has to dive sourcebooks to actually use his bonus fighter feats on something that improves his weapon of choice every time. That counts as "easier to build" for me, and, well, barbarians only have "dead-ish" levels with Trap Sense, while for fighters it's every other level they just get everything a Barb would get too (BAB, saves, skillpoints). Now, if you stack sub levels high, I can see how Zhent Dungeoncrasher Fighter could be an OK straight 20 build, but...I'm not really feeling it. Barb 20 isn't great, but it's also just an OK build. To be fair, I haven't seen either one played or anyone who said "I'm just gonna go 20 levels of Fighter/20 levels of Barb".

That's largely why Barb is considered T4 and fighter is T5 but being a tier higher doesn't make it automatically better. If you're dead-set on a charger and nothing else, sure, but that's hardly the only way to play a martial character. Even if you go that way, a fighter can be a little less of an RPG and do other things while the barb largely can't.

All three can afford to be party faces, actually. Their skillpoints and class skills work towards that. Crusaders even have a secondary CHA focus. Granted, they're leagues behind a Bard or a Beguiler or a social Sorcerer, but they can do it pretty well without harming their combat capabilities. Swordsage is a passable scout, indeed. All three have some knowledge skills (no arcana or planes, but still), which often come in useful. They're primarily face-wreckers, yes, but they DO have some capability in non-combat situations.

I don't think being as much of a party face as a Knight is terribly impressive or really doing the role particularly well; certainly not enough to justify being moved up a tier. Even a fighter can do as much with only a little effort.

[ngilop]

A really simple fix to give the Fighter something else to do than roll a d20 then a random polyhedral die for damage is to gestalt them with the Miniatures Handook's Marshal.


Reall the fighter just needs way to interect with the world (outside of skills) in more ways than just AC. They need way to affect fortitude, reflex, and will saves and be able to cause more status effects than just 'prone', 'grappled' ,and 'dead'.

They also need a way to utilize Swift and Immediate actions

Check out my NPC Warrior (hint: it literally just a upgraded PHB fighter) or my Third Fighter Fix

[Troacctid]

Or, less metaphorically, puts Hawkeye on the same team as Dr Strange and expects Hawkeye to be the front liner protecting Strange.

You're not supposed to put an archer on the front line either!

[Pleh]

I don't think being as much of a party face as a Knight is terribly impressive or really doing the role particularly well; certainly not enough to justify being moved up a tier. Even a fighter can do as much with only a little effort.

Knight at least has a reason to invest in their charisma: their special abilities key off it.

Fighters are going out of their way to even try.

Fighters do not get credit for being a good party "face" if commoners can do exactly the same things and do just as well. In fact, commoners can pump CHA and pay the cross class skill for diplomacy same as fighter and they have more reason to do so since they have no offensive capabilities to speak of.

You're not supposed to put an archer on the front line either!

I was replying to a suggestion that Green Arrow defends Superman. We were already in that territory.

[Lans]

You could keep the fighter focused on feats if you both up the amount he gets, and expands what he can use them on as he goes up levels, basically let him take any feat at levels above 10, and give him level/2 or 3 feats each new level.

[Red Fel]

You could keep the fighter focused on feats if you both up the amount he gets, and expands what he can use them on as he goes up levels, basically let him take any feat at levels above 10, and give him level/2 or 3 feats each new level.

Except, again, feats are not a class feature. They are not something the Fighter, and nobody else (or close to it), can do; they're a pool of character modifications to which basically everybody as access. Feats do not dramatically change the gameplay of the Fighter or his limited options; more feats won't do that, either.

Most feats aren't going to dramatically impact gameplay; they'll give the Fighter slightly bigger numbers. At best, a feat will give your Fighter some kind of SLA; yes, that would make him more versatile, but at that point you're just playing into the trope of "the way to fix a Fighter is to make him some kind of caster."

[Arbane]

Except, again, feats are not a class feature. They are not something the Fighter, and nobody else (or close to it), can do; they're a pool of character modifications to which basically everybody as access.

I remember reading at one point in 3.0's development, Feats WERE going to be Fighter-only. I wonder how much that would've changed the game? (Not much, unless they upped the power level of Feats significantly.)

[Eldariel]

Except, again, feats are not a class feature. They are not something the Fighter, and nobody else (or close to it), can do; they're a pool of character modifications to which basically everybody as access. Feats do not dramatically change the gameplay of the Fighter or his limited options; more feats won't do that, either.

Most feats aren't going to dramatically impact gameplay; they'll give the Fighter slightly bigger numbers. At best, a feat will give your Fighter some kind of SLA; yes, that would make him more versatile, but at that point you're just playing into the trope of "the way to fix a Fighter is to make him some kind of caster."

The big thing is, everyone gets X feats so they're obviously gonna pick the best ones. Thus, bonus feats are inevitably worse than the initial feats and the more you get, the worse each individual feat gets. If the system had a high number of high quality Fighter bonus feats that opened up new options and perhaps even required Fighter-level, it would be different, but as it stands you stand to get less from each level than the previous ones and compared to a class without bonus feats, you both have the same best feats (e.g. in Core, Improved Trip, Combat Reflexes, Power Attack and Spirited Charge, perhaps EWP: Spiked Chain) with the Fighter adding a bunch of lower quality feats with their bonus feats (Weapon Focus-line, Dodge, Mobility, Improved Sunder/Disarm/Bull Rush, etc.) since they have no other options left.

[razorback]

You could keep the fighter focused on feats if you both up the amount he gets, and expands what he can use them on as he goes up levels, basically let him take any feat at levels above 10, and give him level/2 or 3 feats each new level.

Or, make a change to feats along the lines of the way stunning fist works for monks.

Special: A monk may select Stunning Fist as a bonus feat at 1st level, even if she does not meet the prerequisites. A monk who selects this feat may attempt a stunning attack a number of times per day equal to her monk level, plus one more time per day for every four levels she has in classes other than monk.

I hate dodge and the fact that its a prequisite for so much, but rewrite it as - Special: a Fighter gets a +1 dodge bonus to Armor Class + 1/2 per Fighter level against attacks from all opponent. Note: A condition that makes you lose your Dexterity bonus to Armor Class (if any) also makes you lose dodge bonuses. Also, dodge bonuses (such as this one and a dwarf's racial bonus to dodge giants) stack with each other, unlike most other types of bonuses.
Make the feats better for fighters as Arbane mentioned, as these were intended for Fighters only. You wouldn't have to rewrite everything, just the ones the player was interested.
And not just for combat feats. Once you expand how many skills points a Fighter gets and expand the list, other feats like Persuasive would have Special: a Fighter gains a +2 bonus + 1/4 per level on all Bluff and Intimidate checks. Will it raise them a tier? Maybe... but probably not.
But it will give them some advantages in hitting better, not getting hit and things to do when they aren't hitting things.

[redwizard007]

Also depends on what you are doing in a party. If it's just small room raids, then yes...Fighter will hit things.
If you have to:
Sneak- Fighter will be too loud
Investigate- Fighter will get bored reading
Charm- Fighter will attempt to intimidate the person instead
Balance- Fighter will fall
Swim- They have this, but armor can't be very helpful
Do some other sort of thing in combat other than hit- won't

My nine year old is a better gamer than that. Play your character, not a one dimensional tool.

Have to balance, sneak, swim or climb? Watch the fighter take his armor off. I'd be willing to bet the skilled melee combatant has decent physical skills and will beat you to the other side of that anti-magic enhanced obstacle every time.

Charm? Why would a classic alpha male try to intimidate when he knows you've been trying to gain his approval since preschool? He'd just pat you on the shoulder and say "welcome to the team," and you'd be stealing him your sister's panties.

Want to mobilize the pesantry? Try taking your nose out of a spell book long enough to watch the crowd gather around a famous fighter as if he were a bard.

Want to actually be accepted by the population without casting Mass Charm? Try being one of them, oh wait. The fighter does that already, and there is no animosity when the spell wears off.

Have an enemy supprise you in combat? Don't worry, the fighter doesn't provoke attacks of opportunity every time he takes a breath, and isn't the insta kill that you are.

Need to carry dead casters to a random cleric after a near TPK? Luckily your fighter has the ability to do that, if he isn't holding a rival wizard at sword point to do it for him.


Are fighters a great class? Well, they weren't designed as one, but that doesn't mean that they can't be played as one.

[Pleh]

Are fighters a great class? Well, they weren't designed as one, but that doesn't mean that they can't be played as one.

Hang on, what you mean is they aren't a great CLASS, but it doesn't prevent them from being great CHARACTERS. The fact that you can enjoy the game with a bad class does not reduce how badly they do what they were meant to do.

[redwizard007]

Hang on, what you mean is they aren't a great CLASS, but it doesn't prevent them from being great CHARACTERS. The fact that you can enjoy the game with a bad class does not reduce how badly they do what they were meant to do.

I don't think they are bad at what they do. They soak up damage and whitle down a target's HP total. The alleged issue is that they don't do much else. While that argument has merit, it is not as severe a handicap as posters on these forums make it out to be.

[exelsisxax]

I don't think they are bad at what they do. They soak up damage and whitle down a target's HP total. The alleged issue is that they don't do much else. While that argument has merit, it is not as severe a handicap as posters on these forums make it out to be.

They're bad at both of those things! Druids have a secondary class feature that does that far better than fighters do, how is that good at their job?

[Nifft]

I don't think they are bad at what they do. They soak up damage and whitle down a target's HP total. The alleged issue is that they don't do much else. While that argument has merit, it is not as severe a handicap as posters on these forums make it out to be.

They only soak up damage if damage-dealers can be made to target Fighters preferentially.

At very low levels, a Fighter can use tactical positioning to encourage damage-dealers to target the Fighter simply by merit of occupying an appropriate square -- but that tactical capability doesn't persist for long, as damage-dealers start dealing area damage or get better mobility (e.g. flight, earthglide, teleportation).