Author Topic: What would it take to make the Fighter a Tier 3 class?  (Read 67757 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

veekie

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 9034
  • WARNING: Homing Miko
Re: What would it take to make the Fighter a Tier 3 class?
« Reply #160 on: April 28, 2011, 10:08:18 PM »
Thats better, at least it's a playable class. Sorta.

The mechanic makes more sense on top of the other posts in this thread though.
Amongst other things
-Grant Fighters damage reduction and energy resistances as they level.
-A Fighting Styles mechanic, you add fighting styles to the fighter and they improve those styles in the particular manner. The TWF one, I think, wouldn't go amiss at the levels they're granted, compared to manuevers of similar level and frequency. You'd be getting a lot more abilities than that after all, and the advanced styles you'd be getting later can do quite a few tricks.
-Automatically magical weapons and armor.
-Additional special abilities off a menu to allow you to do things like jump for miles, move faster(scales with level), smash dimensional portals into existence, negate immunities, parry/shatter magical effects. Or at lower levels just provide superior senses(blindsense is a good start for alertness related) and fancy footwork(immediate action 5ft steps).

By themselves, no one mechanic is going to do it without being as absurd as spellcasting.
The mind transcends the body.
It's also a little cold because of that.
Please get it a blanket.

I wish I could read your mind,
I can barely read mine.

"Skynet begins to learn at a geometric rate. It becomes self-aware at 2:14 a.m. Eastern time, August 29th. At 2:15, it begins rolling up characters."

[spoiler]
"Just what do you think the moon up in the sky is? Everyone sees that big, round shiny thing and thinks there must be something round up there, right? That's just silly. The truth is much more awesome than that. You can almost never see the real Moon, and its appearance is death to humans. You can only see the Moon when it's reflected in things. And the things it reflects in, like water or glass, can all be broken, right? Since the moon you see in the sky is just being reflected in the heavens, if you tear open the heavens it's easy to break it~"
-Ibuki Suika, on overkill

To sumbolaion diakoneto moi, basilisk ouranionon.
Epigenentheto, apoleia keraune hos timeis pteirei.
Hekatonkatis kai khiliakis astrapsato.
Khiliarkhou Astrape!
[/spoiler]

There is no higher price than 'free'.

"I won't die. I've been ordered not to die."

Saxony

  • Donkey Kong
  • ****
  • Posts: 742
  • My avatar is from the anime "Pani Poni Dash!".
Re: What would it take to make the Fighter a Tier 3 class?
« Reply #161 on: April 28, 2011, 10:24:43 PM »

@ Saxony;  While I appreciate this isn't to the taste of many of the people who have come from 1e and periodically launch into rants about the good old days when fighters were fighters and the DMs job was to screw you in the ass as much as possible while pretending to be fair, this is a co-operative roleplaying game.  If one guy is playing Lord Wizard, King of New Zealanders, and someone else is playing Bob The Shitty Soldier, then that is a problem.  Especially when it says on the box that Bob is supposed to be as good as Lord Wizard.  We already have a CLASS for Soldier Dude.  It's called WARRIOR.  And NPCS take it.  Because their job is to DIE IN DROVES.  PCS ARE NOT SUPPOSED TO DIE IN DROVES, SAXONY.  THEY ARE NOT SUPPOSED TO DIE IN DROVES.  The Goddamn Fighter is not supposed to be Soldier Dude.  He is supposed to be the frickin' Sword in Sword and frickin' SORCERY.  Wizards of the GODDAMN coast are not some all-goddamn-knowing amazing super duper game designers who do everything perfectly!

I completely and whole heartedly agree with you (Also, many chuckles, thank you for the chuckles). Fighters' terrible state makes us sad. But that sadness doesn't make the Fighter better than Soldier Dude.

Quote
We are not misin-fucking-terpreting their goddamn divine fucking will as regards the Fighter class!  THAT IS CRAP.
What in the Fighter class is anything like the Big Damn Hero Fantasy Combatant? Quote the reference material.

My point is Wizards of the Coast actually made the Fighter class good at Only Fighting Stuff. And as advertised, the Fighter does pretty well at Only Fighting Stuff. Their design failure was equating BMX Bandit picking up Improved Trip ON TOP OF Exotic Weapon Proficiency (BMX) AND EVEN Shock Trooper to 10th level Wizards, much less 6 more bonus feats for that UNCOMFORTABLY VERSATILE BMX TRICK MASTER equaling 20th level Wizards. Which makes us sad. Very, very sad.

Does that sadness make the Fighter class anything other than the class that fights stuff well? No. In fact, it does nothing to alter the PHB text into a class titled "Mythological Hero of Legend" with class abilties called "Does Things Other Than Fighting Well". Unless you're crying and you're so lucky your tears smear the ink and the ink dries into a more pleasing form.

Again, please quote the Dungeons and Dragons 3.5 Edition Player's Handbook when you make claims like "Fighters are more than Soldier Dudes". Maybe the Fighter class is just Soldier Dude and some other class is the Big Damn Hero Fantasy Combatant.
« Last Edit: April 28, 2011, 10:28:03 PM by Saxony »
If I say something about real world physics, and someone disagrees, assume I am right 90% of the time. This number goes up to 100% if I am late night posting - trust me, my star dust sibs.

veekie

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 9034
  • WARNING: Homing Miko
Re: What would it take to make the Fighter a Tier 3 class?
« Reply #162 on: April 28, 2011, 10:31:18 PM »
Quote
My point is Wizards of the Coast actually made the Fighter class good at Only Fighting Stuff. And as advertised, the Fighter does pretty well at Only Fighting Stuff.
They don't though. Fight well that is. They can hit hard with a 2H weapon but so can everyone else. Can't take hits.
The mind transcends the body.
It's also a little cold because of that.
Please get it a blanket.

I wish I could read your mind,
I can barely read mine.

"Skynet begins to learn at a geometric rate. It becomes self-aware at 2:14 a.m. Eastern time, August 29th. At 2:15, it begins rolling up characters."

[spoiler]
"Just what do you think the moon up in the sky is? Everyone sees that big, round shiny thing and thinks there must be something round up there, right? That's just silly. The truth is much more awesome than that. You can almost never see the real Moon, and its appearance is death to humans. You can only see the Moon when it's reflected in things. And the things it reflects in, like water or glass, can all be broken, right? Since the moon you see in the sky is just being reflected in the heavens, if you tear open the heavens it's easy to break it~"
-Ibuki Suika, on overkill

To sumbolaion diakoneto moi, basilisk ouranionon.
Epigenentheto, apoleia keraune hos timeis pteirei.
Hekatonkatis kai khiliakis astrapsato.
Khiliarkhou Astrape!
[/spoiler]

There is no higher price than 'free'.

"I won't die. I've been ordered not to die."

DrPhro

  • Ring-Tailed Lemur
  • **
  • Posts: 74
Re: What would it take to make the Fighter a Tier 3 class?
« Reply #163 on: April 28, 2011, 10:39:44 PM »
@sinfire
Yeah, I was going for something that was still based off of the fighter's "class features," but it looks like the fighter as we know it is nothing more than an accountant. So I'll defer to my original point that you can't build on something that isn't there. I'm perfectly fine with just making stuff up to make the fighter better (it seems that many have already started), but I was just waiting for a unanimous consensus that what it has right now isn't going to cut it. Giving the fighter better feats would still include some amount of creation. If the feats were out there I'm sure there wouldn't be as much complaint as I'm seeing.

lans

  • King Kong
  • ****
  • Posts: 886
    • Email
Re: What would it take to make the Fighter a Tier 3 class?
« Reply #164 on: April 28, 2011, 10:43:44 PM »
Iron heart Surge is a standard action to use.  Fighter just burned their turn (they don't have Swift action options) to get rid of whatever happened to them and the mage just throws it on again, most likely.  Only the second time, the Fighter can't remove it.

Wizards have methods to protect their spellbooks (for example, keeping it in an extradimensional space).  Fighters can't do the same.  If you're protecting it, you're not using it.

Belt of battle can give you extra actions. Also, do not forget AoO combined with anti-mage feats. Use move to get close.
Spellbooks need to have better ways to protect them since they are so much more fragile than that hardness 40 +10 equivalent adamantine spiked chain with 100+ hp. Provided you beat the fighter's attack. Again: not that likely.

- Giacomo
Wouldn't using WRT make more sense? Especially with floating feats being batted about makes the fighter an oddly good initiator.
Skill prodigy from Kingdoms of Kalamar

Saxony

  • Donkey Kong
  • ****
  • Posts: 742
  • My avatar is from the anime "Pani Poni Dash!".
Re: What would it take to make the Fighter a Tier 3 class?
« Reply #165 on: April 28, 2011, 10:47:05 PM »
Quote
My point is Wizards of the Coast actually made the Fighter class good at Only Fighting Stuff. And as advertised, the Fighter does pretty well at Only Fighting Stuff.
They don't though. Fight well that is. They can hit hard with a 2H weapon but so can everyone else. Can't take hits.
Many builds depend on a 2 level Fighter dip so they can Fight Well. The class might be 2 levels long, but it still helps you Fight Well.
If I say something about real world physics, and someone disagrees, assume I am right 90% of the time. This number goes up to 100% if I am late night posting - trust me, my star dust sibs.

veekie

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 9034
  • WARNING: Homing Miko
Re: What would it take to make the Fighter a Tier 3 class?
« Reply #166 on: April 28, 2011, 10:51:14 PM »
Well, granted, 2 feats are indeed not too bad at the first couple of levels.
The mind transcends the body.
It's also a little cold because of that.
Please get it a blanket.

I wish I could read your mind,
I can barely read mine.

"Skynet begins to learn at a geometric rate. It becomes self-aware at 2:14 a.m. Eastern time, August 29th. At 2:15, it begins rolling up characters."

[spoiler]
"Just what do you think the moon up in the sky is? Everyone sees that big, round shiny thing and thinks there must be something round up there, right? That's just silly. The truth is much more awesome than that. You can almost never see the real Moon, and its appearance is death to humans. You can only see the Moon when it's reflected in things. And the things it reflects in, like water or glass, can all be broken, right? Since the moon you see in the sky is just being reflected in the heavens, if you tear open the heavens it's easy to break it~"
-Ibuki Suika, on overkill

To sumbolaion diakoneto moi, basilisk ouranionon.
Epigenentheto, apoleia keraune hos timeis pteirei.
Hekatonkatis kai khiliakis astrapsato.
Khiliarkhou Astrape!
[/spoiler]

There is no higher price than 'free'.

"I won't die. I've been ordered not to die."

Bester

  • Barbary Macaque at the Rock of Gibraltar
  • ***
  • Posts: 187
    • Email
Re: What would it take to make the Fighter a Tier 3 class?
« Reply #167 on: April 28, 2011, 10:57:18 PM »
@sinfire
Yeah, I was going for something that was still based off of the fighter's "class features," but it looks like the fighter as we know it is nothing more than an accountant. So I'll defer to my original point that you can't build on something that isn't there. I'm perfectly fine with just making stuff up to make the fighter better (it seems that many have already started), but I was just waiting for a unanimous consensus that what it has right now isn't going to cut it. Giving the fighter better feats would still include some amount of creation. If the feats were out there I'm sure there wouldn't be as much complaint as I'm seeing.

If you make fighter only feats and make them really good, they become a must have.  A must have is a feat tax usually...like druid and natural spell.  Fighter only feats are better served being class features written into the class directly.  For instance, the ability to always move and full attack is desperately needed at level 6 and afterwards.  Travel devotion won't cut it due to being once or for 2 feats, twice a day.

If the feats were out there, you'd still hear the argument that fighters suck due to anybody being able to grab the feats.  Gishes are more badass than a fighter while using that class's feats.

I am in the crowd that what the fighter has right now, including Pathfinder's changes, isn't going to cut it in the slightest.  They are even a weak choice in a gestalt game, and that's saying alot.

Now, for a feat I'd love to see:  Combat Toughness(Combat):  You gain 2 HPs for every Combat feat you have, including feats taken after this one.  Because I love to know that even if I selected a sucky feat, I still got HPs for doing so.

veekie

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 9034
  • WARNING: Homing Miko
Re: What would it take to make the Fighter a Tier 3 class?
« Reply #168 on: April 28, 2011, 11:09:40 PM »
Quote
I am in the crowd that what the fighter has right now, including Pathfinder's changes, isn't going to cut it in the slightest.  They are even a weak choice in a gestalt game, and that's saying alot.
Well, theres like maybe two of them that're worthwhile at the level you get them at. Dazing Assault or something. The rest might have managed a T4.....if they were available 5 levels earlier across the board.
The mind transcends the body.
It's also a little cold because of that.
Please get it a blanket.

I wish I could read your mind,
I can barely read mine.

"Skynet begins to learn at a geometric rate. It becomes self-aware at 2:14 a.m. Eastern time, August 29th. At 2:15, it begins rolling up characters."

[spoiler]
"Just what do you think the moon up in the sky is? Everyone sees that big, round shiny thing and thinks there must be something round up there, right? That's just silly. The truth is much more awesome than that. You can almost never see the real Moon, and its appearance is death to humans. You can only see the Moon when it's reflected in things. And the things it reflects in, like water or glass, can all be broken, right? Since the moon you see in the sky is just being reflected in the heavens, if you tear open the heavens it's easy to break it~"
-Ibuki Suika, on overkill

To sumbolaion diakoneto moi, basilisk ouranionon.
Epigenentheto, apoleia keraune hos timeis pteirei.
Hekatonkatis kai khiliakis astrapsato.
Khiliarkhou Astrape!
[/spoiler]

There is no higher price than 'free'.

"I won't die. I've been ordered not to die."

CrimsonDeath

  • Curious George
  • ****
  • Posts: 316
    • Email
Re: What would it take to make the Fighter a Tier 3 class?
« Reply #169 on: April 28, 2011, 11:15:20 PM »
As opposed to Fighter-only feats, how about allowing Fighter levels to count double for BAB prerequisites?  One nice thing about a one-level Monk dip is the ability to get Stunning Fist before level 8.  What if a Fighter could get it at level 4?

When you need to make complex decisions AT the table, you have a problem. A well designed encounter is already multifaceted and generally pretty complex, if you need to decide what prereqs you're gonna change as you dock out half dozen feats and load a new set in, people are going to balk.
Unless (like the version I mentioned earlier) rather than swapping out half a dozen feats for any other half-dozen feats anywhere, you swap them out for a half-dozen specific other feats you already chose earlier as you were leveling up.

Bester

  • Barbary Macaque at the Rock of Gibraltar
  • ***
  • Posts: 187
    • Email
Re: What would it take to make the Fighter a Tier 3 class?
« Reply #170 on: April 28, 2011, 11:34:40 PM »
Unless (like the version I mentioned earlier) rather than swapping out half a dozen feats for any other half-dozen feats anywhere, you swap them out for a half-dozen specific other feats you already chose earlier as you were leveling up.

Swapping feats is fun, but not easily tracked, at least in the games I play in.  I like to cast heroics all the time to give people either combat reflexes or step up.  I have to constantly remind those players to use those abilities.  Then, when I dm and my character isn't there, they forget that they don't have those feats any more (they got used to it).

What if fighter was a one way door to all combat/fighter feats?  You enter the class at level 1 and as long as you are a fighter of the level you can normally get a fighter feat, you are considered to have the feat.  If you multiclass out, you cannot come back in and it just becomes vanilla fighter...in other words a two level dip.  This would probably make it a strong tier 4.  I'd still never play one in a million years in 3.5/PF.  I used to play fighters exclusively in 2nd edition with combat and tactics + fighter's handbook, back when weapon speed + katana + super focus was viable.

Rejakor

  • Donkey Kong
  • ****
  • Posts: 610
    • Email
Re: What would it take to make the Fighter a Tier 3 class?
« Reply #171 on: April 29, 2011, 07:13:27 AM »
Christ, I see that breaking people of the 'FIGHTING EQUALS BONUS FEATS' mindset would be the hardest part of making the fighter a tier 3 class.

What exactly, do bonus feats, have to do with fighting, at all, ever?  Please explain this to me.  And so help me god if you use the words 'good at fighting' or 'wizards of the coast designed it so that fighting = bonus feats'.

------------

The Fighter, as written, is used almost solely as a source of bonus feats.  It has exactly two class features, both of those from ACFs.  The 10th level fear-spam substitution, and dungeoncrashing.  It also has Hit And Run, but having used that, I don't think it even counts.  Dungeoncrashing is a good class feature.  It's interesting, and lends itself to a style of play.  Fear-spam isn't.  Hit And Run is just an attempt to make melee light weapon using viable.  You stack it with shadow blade and precision damage and then you kind of can do damage!  Yay!

Giving the Fighter MORE SHITTY FEATS does NOT MAKE THE FIGHTER A CLASS WORTH PLAYING, MUCH LESS T3.  It just upgrades you from 'glass cannon that does 200 hp damage', to 'glass cannon that does 300 hp damage'.  Maybe, if you give the fighter all feats ever, he could totally be a lightning macing Jack. B. Quick pouncing ubercharger!  And this makes him good at TRADING HITS WITH MONSTERS.  Maybe if you pulled shenanigans with a prestige class and defending weapons and combat expertise optimization you could make him have an unhittable AC!  Yay!  However... now you have an unhittable AC and you do damage.  That's alright, but it's strictly, STRICTLY, T4.  T3 is for people who actually have multiple options.  Immunities are the closest thing to an option that fits with the Fighter's fluff, that and being able to hit stuff.  At low levels, you can get away with only hitting AC.  At higher levels, you not only need to be able to fly and go ethereal to GET to your opponent, you need to be able to target will, and concentration checks, and fire resistance.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quote
What in the Fighter class is anything like the Big Damn Hero Fantasy Combatant? Quote the reference material.

Classes are for PLAYERS TO PLAY.  They should FULFILL THE ROLES THE PLAYERS EXPECT FROM THEM.  We are playing in a BIG DAMN FANTASY COMBAT GAME.  If the FIGHTER is someone who can't even FIGHT, much less BIG DAMN FANTASY FIGHT, then that's false fucking advertising.   People, looking at the list of classes in the front of the PHB, who want to play a Cool Sword Guy like, y'know, wait for it here, the Sword part of Swords and Sorcery, immediately go to the Fighter.  The ranger is Cool Nature Warrior, druid is Cool Secretive Mystic Forest Dude, Sorcerer and Wizard need a bit of explaining but both fill essentially the same role, Monk is Cool Kung Fu Guy, Barbarian is, well, y'know.  And they are being LIED TO.  If the Fighter is supposed to be Shitty Soldier Guy Who Can't Fight, then why is he called 'The Fighter'?  Why are people taking it for more than 2 levels?  If it's a 2 level dip, why write the rest of the class?  If all melee combatants weren't so feat starved (knock someone into someone else?  That'll be 5 feats.  Oh, mr spellcaster, you want spells to last all day?  2 feats.), no-one would ever bother dipping fighter, and when feat rogue came out, only the BAB requirements of prestige classes stop people dipping it instead of fighter EVERY DAMN TIME.

Your GODDAMN CLASS should do more than give you BAB AND FUCKING FEATS.  It should have a FLAVOUR, and unique abilities, and keep you on par with the rest of the party out of the box with ZERO OPTIMIZATION.

If you need dozens of feats and magic items from dozens of supplements including some of the most obscure things on the face of the planet (drow of the underdork) and some of the most often banned (psionics, ToB:Bo9S) in order to BE RELEVANT, and at which point you still literally aren't as good as a wizard right out of the box (picking colour spray instead of magic missile is something my YOUNGER BROTHER DID AT HIS FIRST GAME EVER.  Why?  BECAUSE HE CHOSE MAGIC MISSILE, THEN READ IT, THEN READ COLOUR SPRAY, AND THEN LITERALLY LAUGHED OUT LOUD AT HOW SHIT MAGIC MISSILE WAS.  GIACOMO IF YOU TRY TO SAY THAT BUYING AN IRON HEART SURGE VEST ISN'T OPTIMIZING AND PICKING COLOUR SPRAY INSTEAD OF MAGIC MISSILE IS OPTIMIZING I WILL RIP OUT YOUR SPLEEN AND DO HORRIBLE, HORRIBLE THINGS TO YOU WITH IT), then that class is a bad class, and needs to be rewritten.

So.

1.  The bonus feats fighter doesn't actually fulfill the role of 'fighter' in a Big Damn Fantasy Combat Game. (he can't fight well)

2.  The bonus feats fighter does not fulfill the archetypes he is supposed to be fulfilling.

3.  The bonus feats fighter is poorly designed and much, much weaker than many other classes in the PHB and even other Fighting Man style classes.

4.  The bonus feats fighter doesn't bring ANYTHING to the table other than vague customisability through a shitty medium (feats).

5.  The role that some have suggested the class was intended to play - shitty soldier - is supposed to be, according to the DMG, covered by the Warrior class, which makes a fuckton more sense as that is a class NOT INTENDED FOR PLAYERS.


--------------------------------------------------------

Fighter only feats is just a stupid idea.  why not just deduct that many bonus feats from the fighter and give them goddamn class features instead.  If you want to preserve it as a dipping class for extra feats, why not just add more feats to the goddamn game, since really, characters could get a bonus feat for each point of BAB and the game would simply become better, quickly, not worse.

Or hell, call this fighter something new, like 'The Facepalm Warrior' and then you can still have crappy shitty basic fighter for the people who REALLY REALLY MUST have their 2 feat dip.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

2e and the Good Ol' Days.

2e was a much less powerful game than 3.5.  3.5. is very much Big Damn Fantasy.  You can kill armies by about level 10 fairly consistently.  That's the power level.  Stuff that worked in 2e like making fighters get 2 extra attacks at base weapon damage, won't work here in 3.5.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quote
Thats better, at least it's a playable class. Sorta.

The mechanic makes more sense on top of the other posts in this thread though.
Amongst other things
-Grant Fighters damage reduction and energy resistances as they level.
-A Fighting Styles mechanic, you add fighting styles to the fighter and they improve those styles in the particular manner. The TWF one, I think, wouldn't go amiss at the levels they're granted, compared to manuevers of similar level and frequency. You'd be getting a lot more abilities than that after all, and the advanced styles you'd be getting later can do quite a few tricks.
-Automatically magical weapons and armor.
-Additional special abilities off a menu to allow you to do things like jump for miles, move faster(scales with level), smash dimensional portals into existence, negate immunities, parry/shatter magical effects. Or at lower levels just provide superior senses(blindsense is a good start for alertness related) and fancy footwork(immediate action 5ft steps).

Yeah, but you're still thinking too small.  You want a) a bunch of core class features of the Goddamn Fighter.  That's being immune to stuff, using hp to beat stuff down, and generic stuff like moving around for free and standing up for free and pulling people out of the way of fireballs.

Then you move onto specialized stuff.  I was thinking that could be covered under shit like thor's chariot etc.  The fighter has special magic items that are way better than regular magic items but have bullshit prereqs that mean only he can use them.  He gets to pick off a list.  So you could have a belt that lets you make a 5' step after each attack, or one that lets you take a 5' step when you're attacked, or both.  OR maybe the second one is better off as a class feature all Goddamn Fighters get to spend their immediate actions on.  But DR, ER, automatic magic weapons and later on things like one 5' step as an immediate action is not a good use of levels.

The goddamn fighter needs to be getting stuff that compares to dipping various base and prestige classes, and at the same time be able to compete, in different ways, with the wizard.  So you need to be getting 1 or 2 things per level that actually matter to you, like immunity to dazing, or thicket of blades, or burning tornado testicles, as well as flavour things like Tuck And Roll and whatnot.

Besides, DR and ER is more of a goddamn barbarian thing.

EDIT:  On second look, the abilities you are suggesting (mile-jumping, dimensional rifts etc) are actually in line with some things wizards and clerics can do, as long as you're planning on handing them out at 6-12th levels, not 15-20.

But while making a Fighter who can do crazy insane things out of eastern legends is a laudable goal, what I was kind of trying for was the 'Indomitable' part of a Goddamn Fighter.  There's nothing wrong with the 'does crazy impossible stuff like a wizard' Fighter, but I liked the idea that the Fighter would have personal small range combat power in that he couldn't be stopped and could turn people into mince, while having a few shiny things like a belt that fires celestials at people, and could make people around him like him but slightly less unstoppable, whereas the wizard can build giant dungeons with his mind and affect large areas etc etc... it also (bonus) has the side benefit of being T3, which is what this thread was asking for.  While you can make a 'makes rifts with his fists' fighter that is T3, you probably can't make a T1 immunity to everything fighter.  While you could make one that could stand up to wizards by just being that guy they can't imprison, stop, or kill who just relentlessly comes after them, that's at best T2.
« Last Edit: April 29, 2011, 07:22:58 AM by Rejakor »

JaronK

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 4039
Re: What would it take to make the Fighter a Tier 3 class?
« Reply #172 on: April 29, 2011, 07:23:36 AM »
Christ, I see that breaking people of the 'FIGHTING EQUALS BONUS FEATS' mindset would be the hardest part of making the fighter a tier 3 class.

What exactly, do bonus feats, have to do with fighting, at all, ever?  Please explain this to me.  And so help me god if you use the words 'good at fighting' or 'wizards of the coast designed it so that fighting = bonus feats'.

It's simple: if you just make another class who fights, but don't stick to what WotC already said is a "Fighter" then you're not remaking the Fighter and making it a T3 class.  You're just making a new class.  Well, if you wanted a T3 fighting class, the Warblade and Crusader already did it, so we can just go home.

The question is whether you can turn the Fighter, which is a class that currently just has feats but is discribed as a guard and military veteran and war leader, into a T3 class... and have it still be a "Fighter." 

That means you're going to have to end up with a class that fits in with the T3 classes, and yet people still look at it and say "yup, that's a Fighter" and not "interesting new class" as they did with the Warblade.  If you don't stick with the feats theme in some way, you're going to fail at this, even if you do make a neat new class.

Now, to be clear, this doesn't mean that feats are going to be the be all end all of the class.  As you say yourself, even with every feat ever he's still just going to be a T4 beatstick.  But they do have to be central enough to still fit in, and since it's an obvious direction to take, you might as well run with it, in addition to whatever other additions you'd like to make...which should probably still fit the fluff at the beginning of the Fighter section of the PHB.  Of course, being a "guard" is what low level Fighters do.  They should quickly switch over to being an elite soldier, and rapidly become the kind of soldier and war leader people write epic poems about.  I think Beowulf is about the right sort of concept to aim for.

JaronK

Rejakor

  • Donkey Kong
  • ****
  • Posts: 610
    • Email
Re: What would it take to make the Fighter a Tier 3 class?
« Reply #173 on: April 29, 2011, 09:36:00 AM »
'questing knight, conquering overlord, the king's champion, the elite foot soldier, the hardened mercenary, and the bandit king - all are fighters.'


'You can also use the Warrior class for soldiers (although perhaps not for commanders or career soldiers), guards, thugs, toughs, bullies, and even regular people who have learned to defend their homes with some ability'



The Fighter is NEVER supposed to be a guard.  At worst, he's a career or elite foot soldier.  So, when the King's Elite Phoenix Guards step in in full plate with magical force-pikes, THOSE ARE LOW LEVEL FIGHTERS.  When Jim the Guard clocks off shift, hangs up his battered chainmail, and heads down to the pub, THAT IS A LOW LEVEL WARRIOR.

A warblade is a t3 class that fights.  Does that mean that all t3 classes that fight are warblades?  How in gods' name is a warblade an invincible chunk of obdurium?  They're a good all around martial adept.  They have maneuvers that do stuff, and that is their schtick.  They (badly) fill the Warrior-Hero role because they are the closest WotC (or indeed, anyone) has come to making a class that fits that role.  And that is IT.

Here is what i'm thinking; Alright, a t3 fighter.  Well, let's look at the fighter fluff.  Oh, I see, they're going for a kind of 'warrior hero feel'.  Well, the class doesn't do that.  I guess that's why it's t5 and unplayable in t3 games.  Just like the adept and the warrior and the samurai.  So, how about we write a class that has a 'warrior hero' feel, and fills the preconditions of the Fighter in the fluff of the fighter in the PHB, but is playable?  Oh, and instead of just making it a wizard clone with maneuvers per level instead of spells, or gambits or victory schema or whatever, how about we give it some always-on abilities that synergize with melee feats and give the class a different flavour than the wizard or warblade or whatever?

Here is what everyone else is thinking;  WITHOUT BONUS FEATS IT'S NOT A FIGHTER.

That appears to be about the sum.  What plans there are revolve around making 'feats that are worthwhile' for the fighter to take and making them fighter only (because fuck those barbarians and rangers and duskblades and monks, amiright?), or giving the fighter mechanical bonuses to hit stuff, which is great, but doesn't actually make it a t3 character, which is, I thought, the entire point of this thread.

Also, did you read Beowulf?  He does shit that would be nigh impossible for any fighter proposed in this thread.  That guy is basically the epitome of what i'm talking about, shrugging off nigh EVERYTHING and coming through it to beat people to death with his bare hands.  I think the fighter should just be handed an army at level 8, by the way.  As a class feature.  And he should get the ability to basically raise an army from nothing in like a day at about level 12.

But yes.  My point is, this fighter is supposed to be t3.  There is nothing in the fluff that says we can't do this.  Just people's prejudices about fighters and bonus feats.  So why are we listening to people's goddamn stupid prejudices, again?

Rejakor

lans

  • King Kong
  • ****
  • Posts: 886
    • Email
Re: What would it take to make the Fighter a Tier 3 class?
« Reply #174 on: April 29, 2011, 10:16:51 AM »
Are you actually trying to make a tier 3 fighter? Or are you trying to make a fighter on par with a wizard?
Quote
Also, did you read Beowulf?  He does shit that would be nigh impossible for any fighter proposed in this thread.  That guy is basically the epitome of what i'm talking about, shrugging off nigh EVERYTHING and coming through it to beat people to death with his bare hands.


I would like to say that a necropoliton pugilist variant 1 can do that.

A fighter fix should be able to do everything that a fighter mk1 can do.

Feats might not be as good as class features, but they are pretty stack able. If you count some of the alternative magic systems, they are class features just with limitations  built in.
Skill prodigy from Kingdoms of Kalamar

veekie

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 9034
  • WARNING: Homing Miko
Re: What would it take to make the Fighter a Tier 3 class?
« Reply #175 on: April 29, 2011, 10:17:27 AM »
Quote
So why are we listening to people's goddamn stupid prejudices, again?
Probably because we want to have people use it other than yourself. Sure you make a great class. It'd never see play, no DM would let it work outside of this small circle.

Hence, T3 as the goal. T1 and T2 are screwed up in their own ways. Its not power. It's usability.
The mind transcends the body.
It's also a little cold because of that.
Please get it a blanket.

I wish I could read your mind,
I can barely read mine.

"Skynet begins to learn at a geometric rate. It becomes self-aware at 2:14 a.m. Eastern time, August 29th. At 2:15, it begins rolling up characters."

[spoiler]
"Just what do you think the moon up in the sky is? Everyone sees that big, round shiny thing and thinks there must be something round up there, right? That's just silly. The truth is much more awesome than that. You can almost never see the real Moon, and its appearance is death to humans. You can only see the Moon when it's reflected in things. And the things it reflects in, like water or glass, can all be broken, right? Since the moon you see in the sky is just being reflected in the heavens, if you tear open the heavens it's easy to break it~"
-Ibuki Suika, on overkill

To sumbolaion diakoneto moi, basilisk ouranionon.
Epigenentheto, apoleia keraune hos timeis pteirei.
Hekatonkatis kai khiliakis astrapsato.
Khiliarkhou Astrape!
[/spoiler]

There is no higher price than 'free'.

"I won't die. I've been ordered not to die."

Rejakor

  • Donkey Kong
  • ****
  • Posts: 610
    • Email
Re: What would it take to make the Fighter a Tier 3 class?
« Reply #176 on: April 29, 2011, 10:36:01 AM »
Veekie, please stop putting words in my mouth.

At what point have I advocated making a fighter class that is t2?  Or t1, even?


For reference, I had a player bring me BWL's fighter fix and he played that for 4 levels in a home game I ran.  People really DO WANT to find a fighter that works.  And there REALLY ARE dms out there who don't lolban anything other than the holy holy content from noobs of the coast.

Also, from what i've seen people are more likely to accept homebrew classes that are self-contained and relatively simple, rather than a whole slew of new feats or abilities with complex interactions.  As the GM I know if someone hands me 20 pages of reading and goes 'can I use this' and it's all non-standard checks and crap that interacts with other crap and whatnot, i'm generally going to go 'no' even if I go 'no, not until I read it', and i'm an optimizer and someone who understands dnd mechanics to a small extent.

But if they bring me a 'swordmage' or a sandwichmage or something and it's fairly simple or uses existing mechanics that I already know, I tend to just allow it.

Weak argument, but meh.  If we're going to put time and effort into designing a class, we should make one that's shit so that idiot GMs don't get up in arms about it while giving the wizard extra goodies because 'he only gets spells X times per day'?  Screw that.  Make something useful for the people who aren't idiots.

skydragonknight

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 3297
It always seems like the barrels around here have something in them.

Rejakor

  • Donkey Kong
  • ****
  • Posts: 610
    • Email
Re: What would it take to make the Fighter a Tier 3 class?
« Reply #178 on: April 29, 2011, 10:45:44 AM »
A FIGHTER IS NOT JUST ANYONE WHO USES MELEE WEAPONS.

Holy shit.

If you can't tell the difference between a tough as nails campaigner/warlord/blade bravo/sword and sandals warrior who has abilities related to that and the goddamn psychic warrior who uses psionic powers to smack people in the face, then you need your eyes/brain checked.

There is a CLEAR, THEMATIC, DIFFERENCE between Form Of Doom and Heroic Surge.  Between a guy who wanders around using counters and boosts and strikes in a strategic manner and a guy who is just personally IMMUNE to some stuff ALL THE TIME and who has a few consistent abilities he can do with swords to attack things other than AC.

Yes, they're all hitting things with swords and resisting dying, but mechanically and thematically, they're doing it in different ways.  And that is important.

Unbeliever

  • King Kong
  • ****
  • Posts: 766
Re: What would it take to make the Fighter a Tier 3 class?
« Reply #179 on: April 29, 2011, 11:43:35 AM »
I don't want to continue Rejakor's apoplectic rage, but this:

a tough as nails campaigner/warlord/blade bravo/sword and sandals warrior who has abilities related to that

does not necessarily equal

a guy who is just personally IMMUNE to some stuff ALL THE TIME and who has a few consistent abilities he can do with swords to attack things other than AC

nor does it necessarily exclude

a guy who wanders around using counters and boosts and strikes in a strategic manner

Now, if your point was that a "fighter" should not be relying on a TOB style or spell style resource, then I am in complete agreement.  I just think the vehement argument that fighter=Sparta is a bit much.

I'd probably put more emphasis on the ability to counter or respond to effects than blanket immunity.  A fighter is a master of arms to me, not just, or not necessarily a brute.  You can flavor it to taste.  Tentative suggestions, in no small degree inspired by the stuff Rejakor has posted, are listed below.  I like associating actions w/ them -- if even an idealized fighter is being challenged by some grabbling monster trying to strangle him and a sorcerer trying to charm him at the same time, he should be harder pressed than if just facing one at a time.  This gives the potential to be  overwhelmed.  I have no idea how I would structure such a class, overall, but these are things that I'd like to see in it.

Shake it Off:  swift action, maybe costs 5 HP, negate one ongoing effect/condition; essentially swift action Iron Heart Surge. 

Wise to Their Ways:  immediate action, till the end of your next turn anytime an opponent attempts a grapple, trip, bull rush, etc. against you, take an attack of opportunity.  If you hit, add your damage to your check to resist their maneuver.  A broader and more useful version of the Close Quarters Combat feat.

Battle-Hardened:  immediate action, costs some HP, gain +level or +half level to a saving throw.  I'd probably limit this one to X times per encounter b/c it could have the potential to be annoying.  Say 1/encounter for every 4 levels.

Supreme Fortitude:  you have the option to re-roll any Fortitude save.

Immunities:  every few levels get some immunities, to things like fear, fatigue, and so forth.  I think some immunities are appropriate and handy, but that they should not be the defining feature of the fighter class.