What does the fighter need...

[awayfarer]

...if anything at all? I've been debating this with a member of my upcoming Eberron campaign and while it seems we agree that the fighter could use a nudge, I don't think we agree on why, what the nudge should be or how powerful it should be.

Personally, I'm of the opinion that the fighter is something like tofu; people take a few chunks (levels) of it and expect it to soak up the flavor in the rest of their character. In other words, it's bland all by itself. This is not only a problem with the non-existant flavor of the class but also in their inability to do anything other than fight.

In a nutshell, here's what I would add to the fighter.
1: Extra skills (Although not necessarily skill points)
2: Something to fill up the odd-numbered levels (Similar to the wotc dead levels bit)
3: An ability or abilities that give them a slight bump in combat ability. Preferably something that scales with level.
4: An ability that is all their own. (This could be the job of any of the previous three)


The player (and myself actually) has the Tome of Battle and is convinced that the fighters problem is that it's weak. He's suggested that it needs to be brought on par with the Warblade and wants to give the fighter a maneuver/stance progression. Frankly, I feel that if we're just going to do that, one may as well just leave the fighter alone and go play a ToB class. Furthermore, I don't think it's a good idea to keep bumping up other classes to be on par with whatever the "next big thing" is. I also don't want to turn a non-ToB class into one because I know not all of my players have the book.

I've looked at that Warblade and while it seems pretty damn strong on paper, I wan't to see it in play before I start nerfing anything. Now, while I have made the comparison, I'd prefer that this thread not degenerate into how broken the Tome of Battle or Warblade are. For our purposes here I'd just like to know what folks would do to give the fighter a bump, if anything.


Edit: Crap, I meant to have the poll allow for multiple choices. I guess this will be what people think it needs most.

 

[delericho]

I'm generally of a mind that several classes could do with being a bit more customisable, probably by adapting the talent trees idea from d20 Modern. This mostly applies to the Rogue, Ranger and Paladin, though.

As regards the Fighter, I think it's mostly fine as-is, but could do with adding more high-end feats to the top of those feat chains. In that regard, PHB2 was a long-overdue step in the right direction.

One thing I would quite like to see is an option to trade out some of those bonus feats for more skill points (so, drop the feat at 2/6/10/14/18 for 4 skill points/level and some more class skills, or something like that), and the ability to trade out the heavy armour proficiencies for some more mobility-based bonuses (this works better if you adapt class-based defense bonuses to the game).

I also think all characters now need more feats across the board - any given group now likely has hundreds of feats that they will never use, which is rather wasteful IMO.

 

[FalcWP]

Honestly? Something that's useful outside of combat, which will probably end up being "More skills and skill points".

A fighter hits things. When there is nothing to hit, the fighter is boring. He will occasionally climb, jump, or swim. He may, in the most unlikely of scenarios, intimidate someone. Of course, if he wants to do all of those reasonably well, he needs to be a human with a 12 intelligence, or a non-human with a 14 intelligence.

Personally, I think that's the reason that fighters are used solely to get the bonus feats - unless your game involves running from one combat to the next, the fighter is going to run in to a lot of places where he sits back and does nothing. It isn't fun for a lot of people. Most everyone else can do something outside of combat, whether its scouting, or casting spells, or interacting with NPCs (more than "I'll crush your skull" which is not as effective as it sounds at, say, a state dinner). The fighter can't.

 

[Ourph]

...if anything at all? I've been debating this with a member of my upcoming Eberron campaign and while it seems we agree that the fighter could use a nudge, I don't think we agree on why, what the nudge should be or how powerful it should be.

Fighters should get the Leadership feat for free at 10th level and gain a +1 bonus to their Leadership score at 11th, 13th, 17th and 19th level. IMO.

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

There should be an "other" option.

I suppose I could vote for a "minor combat boost". I just can't help looking at the barbarian rage benefits (bonuses to hit and damage and bonuses to saves vs mental effects) and then look at what the fighter gets: +4 damage.

I wonder why people complain that fighters can't deal with invisible flying mages and no one complains that barbarians are similarly screwed. (Well, okay, they do get better Will saves.)

Fighters should get the Leadership feat for free at 10th level and gain a +1 bonus to their Leadership score at 11th, 13th, 17th and 19th level. IMO.

I don't like this idea. This is bad for GMs (who wants to clutter combat with all these extra NPCs) and lots of fighters just don't have leadership qualities. That's a bit like giving TWF to rangers who don't want it.

 

[Pielorinho]

What about combining all those physical skills into just two skills: athletics (strength) and athletics (dexterity)? Leave tumble out of this equation because it's so fantastic by itself, but combine swim, climb, and jump into one skill and balance, escape artist, and ride (maybe) into another.

Consider other changes as well, especially ones based on Spycraft. Make grappling and bull-rushing an opposed athletics (strength) check. Make tripping an opposed athletics (dexterity) check. Make both checks replace an attack, not be a standard action. This gives the fighter something to do in combat besides beat on people.

I've been playing a level 8 ranger/rogue recently. What makes the character really fun is the improved trip and improved disarm feats: she's got stuff to do in a fight beyond hit and hurt. More stuff like that as defaults for fighters would be good, IMO. Currently, performing a special maneuver without having the requisite feat is a bad idea most of the time. I think that makes combat unnecessarily repetitive for fighters.

Daniel

 

[drothgery]

Voted for 'some sort of boost to combat ability' because almost everyone could use more skill points (certainly all 2 skill point/level classes, and most if not all 4 skill point/level classes), unless you implemented Iron Heroes style skill groups or a simplified skill list instead. And if everyone gets more skills, that wouldn't help power up the fighter at higher levels. Manuevers and stances are for the ToB guys, though; Fighters need something else (the PHB2 feats are a good start).

 

[Kae'Yoss]

A weapon.

 

[Ourph]

I don't like this idea. This is bad for GMs (who wants to clutter combat with all these extra NPCs) and lots of fighters just don't have leadership qualities. That's a bit like giving TWF to rangers who don't want it.

For the GM, it's no different than the player choosing to take the feat on his own at 6th level or later.

For Fighters who don't have leadership qualities, that's what the additional boosts to their Leadership score are for. The point would be to return the Fighter class to its archetypical roots as a combat hero and leader of men (Hannibal, Alexander, Odysseus, etc.) instead of leaving it as a generic class for hitting things. Players who didn't want the Leadership abilities could easily transfer to a PrC or multiclass to Barbarian or some other class after 9th level if they chose.

 

[DragonLancer]

IMO the fighter class is fine as is, providing that only core base classes are used. Those introduced in other books are too good (and specilised) compared to the base core.