Feat Points

[Celebrim]

Not if you give the player a choice of abilities. That's the whole reason I went with varying paths. The monk, for example, has five different fighting styles, and several abilities in each. No two monks will be the same.

I'm aware of your monk. And sure, I vastly prefer 'choice of abilities' over a single linear set of class abilities that every member of X base class gets. And there are times when the class ability is such that its not really feat equivalent and really has to be tied to a particular class or a particular class level and you have no choice but create an array of class abilities (domains for clerics or 'holy warriors' as BotR converts Paladins to something that actually resembles a base class). However, most of the time a mundane class ability (by that I don't mean 'non-exciting', but rather that its a product of ordinary skill) is in fact feat equivalent and its far better to transform the base class (or at least that element of it) into bonus feats from a class feat list.

And my version can't because...?

You've forced them to take one of your four required feat trees. I must walk the way of the bear, cat, wolverine, or gorgon. I can mix and match, but I can't go, "You know, I want to move as quickly as I can down an archer feat tree. I'd rather get a couple of archer feats at this time than learn cat or gorgon style or whatever." What this will lead you to doing eventually is creating large number of fighting styles to fit every different fighter concept. How is that better than a large number of feats?

They still get their normal bonus feats at every other level; all I did was add combat styles and bonus weapon feats. I don't get your complaint about reduced flexibility, though - they're gaining power and customization.

They are gaining power, and I've always argued that the fighter should gain power. But to claim that they are gaining customization is to compare apples and oranges. Your class gets more 'stuff' I grant you, and part of having more stuff is you make more choices. However, the original base class was fully customizable. It had no required class abilities at all. You didn't have to take 'weapon feats' (although most did). You weren't forced to take a particular style. You didn't have to pick a schtik from the approved schtik list (except to the extent that choosing between 600 or so feats is limiting). So while you get more stuff, you've gone from 100% custimizable to something like 80% custimizable and I don't see any real reason why you'd do that except that for some reason you think having a 'class ability' is inherently cooler than having feats - even if they are the same ability!

For example: in 3.5, I can make a fast fighter/duelist by choosing Dodge, Mobility, etc., putting him in light armor, and giving him a rapier. Whoopee - I could do the same thing with a rogue, AND gain stuff like sneak attack.

Yeah, well in 3.5 your fighter can get dodge, mobility ect. by like 2nd level (by which point a human fighter has like 5 feats), where as the rogue might not have the same list of feats until like 9th level (by which time the fighter has picked up even more feats). Getting fighting skills equivalent to a 9th level character at 2nd level is a pretty big difference. And when you get up to 9th level your 9th level fighter has a higher BAB and by 9th level 18 more hit points. So yeah, naturally the rogue gets some stuff to compensate.

In PP, the same fighter can choose Cat Style, gain some weapon feats with that rapier, and become a master fencer/acrobat. Tell me how that's not better.

It's the same freaking thing just with more 'stuff'. Are you trying to convince me that 3.X fighters are weak compared to 3.X rogues?* Are you trying to convince me that if you wanted to build a combatant the rogue outshown the fighter? At who's table? You haven't improved anything at all with respect to the choice between fighters and rogues! And if, you've just dumped an addtional 13 feat equivalent abilities into the fighter and done nothing to the rogue, then you've probably created a new problem with the rogue.

Let's say you made Cat Style a feat tree and we both built master fencer/acrobats, one using a fighter and one using a rogue. Are you telling me that the rogue would manage to get nearly as skilled of a fencer as the fighter was? By 20th level, the rogue would still be hard pressed to take the whole cat style spending every general feat. Meanwhile the fighter can get the whole cat style plus like 14 other feats (using your power level), plus an additional 40 hitpoints, plus an inherent +5 bonus to hit. Obviously the rogue gets something to compensate (sneak attack, skill points, evasion, etc.), but get real.

You could reduce just about any class ability to a feat. What's your point?

That's my point. Any class ability that can be reduced to a feat should be reduced to a feat.

What I see you saying is that its inherently cooler if you have class abilities and no other class can take them at all. I don't agree. I believe that a class is just a schtick and that all that is needed for coolness is to do that schtick better than any other class. If in theory some other class can learn part of the 'cat style', it's nothing from me because they can never be as cool or as masterful in their fighting style as the fighter.

You apparently didn't read it well enough, then, because I see it as "do more cool stuff in melee combat, besides hit things." That's what fighters are lacking.

No, it's not. Besides which, if that's your goal, you flunked it. Of the six abilities of the bear style, only 1 involves doing cool stuff besides hit things, and 3 of the six simply directly increase damage. Of the six abilities of the cat style, none of them involve doing cool stuff besides hitting things and 5 of the 6 are literally about hitting things. And some of them are ridiculous in there, "Need to hit things better/harder." desparation, as if that solves anything. ("I can make 5, no 6, no 9, no 52 attacks per round!")* Of the six abilities of the gorgon style, only two let him do cool things in combat besides hitting things and even this 'defensive style' is majority hitting things better.

So, yeah, I read it. You've got some interesting ideas about having fighters occasionally inflict conditions when they hit things that I'll definately think about, but as a list of 'doing cool stuff in melee combat besides hitting things' its definately lacking.

And again, the real problem with a fighter isn't there ability to do cool stuff besides hitting things. The real problem with a fighter is inability to deal with obstacles and dealing with magic.

Umm... fighters fight. That's their schtick. They hit things. Sure, they could use a little variety in that archetype, but when you get right down to it, that's what they do. You should be able to define every single class (even PrCs) in a short sentence. Hell, base classes could probably be defined in five words or less. If you can't, you did something wrong.

This is the reason your defensiveness is so ironic. We basically agree on the goals. Let's refresh:

1) "You could reduce just about any class ability to a feat."
2) "Umm... fighters fight. That's their schtick."
3) "You should be able to define every single class (even PrCs) in a short sentence."

*That 52 attacks per round I mention discussing the cat style is not an exagerration, nor is it even close to an upper limit. And here I was critical of my combat combat 'reforms' because they tended to resolve fairly slowing and with lots of dice throwing.
**Apparantly so, since the PP fighter gains between 10 and 14 new feat equivalent abilities compared to 3.X, but the PP rogue actually appears to have gotten weaker.

 

[Kerrick]

I forked the fighter discussion to a new thread, so we can quit hijacking this one.

Getting back to the original point: I'm attaching the system I made. It works on a decimal system, where a balanced feat = 1.00. If you want to convert it to yours, just multiply everything by 10. The spreadsheet is Open Office format; I can convert it to Excel if you prefer (I'm just running short on time right now). It has some of the Project Phoenix feats rated in it.

The reason I gave up, is that feats are really too "small" to rate accurately - they have too little mechanical information, unlike classes or monsters. Add to that, they vary widely in their application. Combat feats are easy to rate; utility feats like Run or Track are not. Take it for what you will, and good luck.