Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
What DO you DO for... Fighters?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="DarkKestral" data-source="post: 2970005" data-attributes="member: 40100"><p>Basically, the idea behind fighter's cunning is that they use their knowledge of opponent tactics to hide their real attack. They sacrifice their first attack, which becomes a 'cover' for the real attack that will strike at an opponent's weakspot, and therefore do a ton of damage should it hit. It plays off the idea that fighters over time learn how various people are likely to respond to various apparent threats and will start using that against them over time. It is essentially my attempt to give the D&D high-end fighter some of the advantages of the d20 Modern 10th level Soldier (the closest comparable d20 Modern base class/AdC/PrC to the D&D fighter), who can sacrifice an action point to auto-confirm crits. However, the Soldier has only +3/4 BAB, while the Fighter gets +1, and D&D 3.5 lacks action points, except in specific campaign settings, so I also felt it a good idea to limit it to the 2nd or later attack and put in a skill check requirement (though I'd also be willing to use Knowledge (tactics) here, as another choice) to prevent it from being an automatic thing that will always be used if a player has put a heavy investment into boosting the threat range of their weapons. (having doing crits half the time on an attack can be pretty brutal, especially if you can do so more than once a round)</p><p></p><p>I'd consider Tumble for a substitution class, or a variant base class, where they drop a couple of skills in return for Balance and Tumble (so that they essentially choose a lighter-armored route focusing on Dex or a heavier armor route focusing on Str or Con) because giving those skills means taking over several of the combat advantages of the lighter-armor classes, as far as I can tell, so giving them the skills plus better armor can be quite powerful, especially once the armor vs. spells starts kicking in to offset their generally low Dex scores. (+5 armor and a +5 shield would mean +10 touch AC!!!, rendering their touch ACs easily in the range of a monk's, though the monk gets some of his bonus for free, and would provide a VERY good incentive to go sword n' board mechanically) However, I'd have to playtest the new modified version before I could say for sure whether or not it would be appropriate.</p><p></p><p>Some of the other houseruled skills (Profession being one of them) are simply because I find the idea of fighters not being good at doing things other than simply thwack things less than intelligent, and wasn't at all related to improving combat ability, but just what I see as bad flaws about their class design. (I can see Barbarians not getting it in most campaign worlds, but considering that fighters are in some sense a catch-all class, it just seems counter-intuitive, and the same goes for spot/listen and wizards vs. fighters) </p><p></p><p>Were I to have knowledge (tactics), I'd basically allow PCs to use it to get hints about their enemies, once they have heard something about how the enemy fights, or for use in gaining bonuses vs. enemies in combat. Nothing major, perhaps on the order of a +1 or +2 to attack rolls or somesuch in combat, but enough to be worth some effort, especially as those bonuses couldn't be dispelled. I'd also be killing the separation of monster types as knowledge categories but compressing them into a catch-all 'monster lore' category, which would probably be mostly cross-class.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="DarkKestral, post: 2970005, member: 40100"] Basically, the idea behind fighter's cunning is that they use their knowledge of opponent tactics to hide their real attack. They sacrifice their first attack, which becomes a 'cover' for the real attack that will strike at an opponent's weakspot, and therefore do a ton of damage should it hit. It plays off the idea that fighters over time learn how various people are likely to respond to various apparent threats and will start using that against them over time. It is essentially my attempt to give the D&D high-end fighter some of the advantages of the d20 Modern 10th level Soldier (the closest comparable d20 Modern base class/AdC/PrC to the D&D fighter), who can sacrifice an action point to auto-confirm crits. However, the Soldier has only +3/4 BAB, while the Fighter gets +1, and D&D 3.5 lacks action points, except in specific campaign settings, so I also felt it a good idea to limit it to the 2nd or later attack and put in a skill check requirement (though I'd also be willing to use Knowledge (tactics) here, as another choice) to prevent it from being an automatic thing that will always be used if a player has put a heavy investment into boosting the threat range of their weapons. (having doing crits half the time on an attack can be pretty brutal, especially if you can do so more than once a round) I'd consider Tumble for a substitution class, or a variant base class, where they drop a couple of skills in return for Balance and Tumble (so that they essentially choose a lighter-armored route focusing on Dex or a heavier armor route focusing on Str or Con) because giving those skills means taking over several of the combat advantages of the lighter-armor classes, as far as I can tell, so giving them the skills plus better armor can be quite powerful, especially once the armor vs. spells starts kicking in to offset their generally low Dex scores. (+5 armor and a +5 shield would mean +10 touch AC!!!, rendering their touch ACs easily in the range of a monk's, though the monk gets some of his bonus for free, and would provide a VERY good incentive to go sword n' board mechanically) However, I'd have to playtest the new modified version before I could say for sure whether or not it would be appropriate. Some of the other houseruled skills (Profession being one of them) are simply because I find the idea of fighters not being good at doing things other than simply thwack things less than intelligent, and wasn't at all related to improving combat ability, but just what I see as bad flaws about their class design. (I can see Barbarians not getting it in most campaign worlds, but considering that fighters are in some sense a catch-all class, it just seems counter-intuitive, and the same goes for spot/listen and wizards vs. fighters) Were I to have knowledge (tactics), I'd basically allow PCs to use it to get hints about their enemies, once they have heard something about how the enemy fights, or for use in gaining bonuses vs. enemies in combat. Nothing major, perhaps on the order of a +1 or +2 to attack rolls or somesuch in combat, but enough to be worth some effort, especially as those bonuses couldn't be dispelled. I'd also be killing the separation of monster types as knowledge categories but compressing them into a catch-all 'monster lore' category, which would probably be mostly cross-class. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
What DO you DO for... Fighters?
Top