A Fighters skill points....

[Celtavian]

re

Which just shows that your methods are limited and flawed.

The Monk is dreadful.

While he has a lot of abilities, more abilities in fact than any character except the Druid, they don't mean anything.

The vast majority of the Monk's abilities are the ability to be almost as good without equipment as any other character can be with equipment. Since the game is supposed to be balanced with the assumption that characters in fact have that equipment - all of those abilities are essentially meaningless.

A Monk's unarmed abilities are sort of impressive, but he can't actually win a grapple because his BAB is as low as a Cleric. Furthermore, even at 20th level a Monk can't hurt an incorporeal enemy (ki strike makes the hands count as magical for the purpose of penetrating DR, but not for the purpose of sundering magical weapons or affecting incorporeal foes).

So despite all the wacky things you can do in only your pajamas - none of it actually matters because you still need a magic weapon anyway.

So what you've shown there is that your system is not evaluating things well - the Monk's abilities are numerous but anti-synnergistic. The Monk is a dreadful class. If your analysis didn't show that it's because you weren't acid testing it properly.

-Frank

Hmm. The Monk's hands do not allow them to strike incorporeal creatures? Why? Did they leave in the +1 or better weapon wording, I forgot to look.

 

[Norfleet]

Frank has some interesting ideas of what makes a balanced fighter. A bonus feat every level. Wow. Incidentally, that'd make it a great multiclass choice, too, since every level you take gets you modest skillpoints, good hitpoints, +1 BAB, and a FREE FEAT.

If you figure that feats have a point of diminishing return, a point at which you have so many of the damn things you don't have anything USEFUL to spend them on, even this impressive class will shortly fall by the wayside to something which gives you something you can actually use.

That aside, could somebody please pass the crack?

 

[Zerakon]

Interesting thread.

I agree that the fighter is poorly designed. Great for the low levels + horrible at high levels leads to an extreme multiclass incentive which is poor design. Weapon specialization/greater weapon focus/greater weapon specialization with their "fighter level X" seems merely a half-hearted attempt at a fix.

I almost wanted to say that the problem lies with broken prestige classes, but I think it is moreso that the fighter is a weak baseline. I don't have any splatbooks so my knowledge of all the prestige classes is severely limited, but I will say that when designing my own prestige classes, I feel handcuffed by the fighter's poor baseline.

I'm still debating exactly what my preferred fix would be, but here are some of my thoughts for building a better baseline fighter:

(1) If you think a fighter's skills are too weak and he could use a "non-combat schtick," give him:
4 skill points per level instead of 2 with a much better list of class skills (something on the scale of the rogue's list but with Ride included and drop some specialist stuff like Decipher Script, Use Magic Device, etc.) BUT with the drawback that the maximum rank the fighter can achieve is level+1 rather than the standard level+3.
This would allow the fighter to be somewhat of a minor jack-of-all-trades, truly master of none as he's always 2 ranks behind the best in the party at any particular skill (unless he takes a Skill Focus feat to catch up).

(2) If you think a high-level fighter needs something even more on the combat side, so that there is a reason for not veering off into the good BAB prestige classes and foregoing the high levels of fighter, perhaps something like:
At levels 3/7/11/15/19, the fighter gains cumulative +1 to his Swing Mastery (for lack of a better term). +N in Swing Mastery allows your extra attacks to be calculated as if your BAB was N higher.
This would mean that a fighter's BAB chart would effectively look like this:
Level Attacks
01 +1
02 +2
03 +3
04 +4
05 +5/+1
06 +6/+2
07 +7/+4
08 +8/+5
09 +9/+6/+1
10 +10/+7/+2
11 +11/+9/+4
12 +12/+10/+5
13 +13/+11/+6/+1
14 +14/+12/+7/+2
15 +15/+14/+9/+4
16 +16/+15/+10/+5
17 +17/+16/+11/+6 [/+1 if you want to allow a 5th attack]
18 +18/+17/+12/+7 [/+2 "]
19 +19/+19/+14/+9 [/+4 "]
20 +20/+20/+15/+10 [/+5 "]
Now, I don't know if this is too powerful, but it certainly would make one think about whether to pursue those prestige classes for their cool stuff or just sticking with the basic fighter and being simply the best at straight fighting. Also, with this rule, reaching fighter level 3 would be significant for multiclassing rather than the blank level it is now. A fighter3/cleric3 would get +5/+1 attacks rather than just +5.

-- Zerakon the Game Mage

edit: lining up columns

 

[reapersaurus]

Frank, you are way too polarizing and fervent in your exagerrated responses in this thread - it cuts into some good points you made.

I agree with some great statements made by others:
The fighter IS a poor baseline for a class - too weak, too uninteresting, not good for anything but combat, etc.

I loved Celtavian's post:

Everybody I know plays this game to simulate fantasy books and movies they have read, and occasionally historical archetypes as well. I don't think it would be a stretch to say the player base is comprised mostly of lovers of fantasy literature and films.

Why shouldn't the classes reflect the characters the player base reads about and desires to simulate in this game? Why shouldn't they be epic?

Giving the fighter more skill points and a more well-rounded skill selection makes the class more fun to play. I don't see how it would break the game.

Loved Shard O' Glase's:

On a game balance level the fighter doesn't come remotely close enough to owning combat to suck as bad as he does outside of a fight so he needs more skills.

And Lord Pendragon IS silly for arguing that a fighter should invest in skill feats to make up for a rules problem.

 

[FrankTrollman]

Hmm. The Monk's hands do not allow them to strike incorporeal creatures? Why? Did they leave in the +1 or better weapon wording, I forgot to look.

The same reason the Monk couldn't punch incorporeals in 3rd edition.

Incorporeal creatures are immune to nonmagical attack forms (they do not have Damage Reduction, they have immunity).
Monk Ki Strike only works for the purposes of bypassing Damage Reduction, not for any other purpose.

So yes, Monks can't punch wraiths any more than the Tarrasque can.

So a Monk needs a magical weapon in the same way that a Fighter does. So a Monk is just like any other warrior build except that they have Flurry Attack and a low BAB. Or we could use the Orc build above and have a full BAB and a Flurry Attack.

I agree that the fighter is poorly designed. Great for the low levels + horrible at high levels leads to an extreme multiclass incentive which is poor design.

And all the Prestige Classes in Sword and Fist are modelled on the Fighter.

You are supposed to get at least 1 feat equivalent for the first two levels and at most one feat equivalent for every level thereafter.

That's terrible design.

1> It makes people who multiclass better than people who don't.

2> It causes warriors (who stay in a class or three) to gain power slower at high level - a time when I'll remind you spellcasters are gaining power faster.

So the front loading makes people take 8 classes or more in 20 levels. The lack of back loading means that anyone who doesn't spends their high levels shuffling their feet while the Wizard does something awesome all the time.

----

There is a solution:

1> Make warrior classes good all the way through (that means keep giving Fighters and Barbarians good stuff after level 2, and Paladins and Rangers good stuff after level 5).

2> Make the Prestige Classes good all the way through.

3> Stop making more PRestige Classes, there are already too many by a factor of ten at least.

4>Fix saving throw and BAB progressions such that you don't end up with better saves as a multiclass character and allow non-warriors to multiclass without losing BAB every time.

---

On the last one, I suggest picking up 3/4 of a save for every level with a Good save and 1/2 of a save for every level with a Poor save, cummulative. That would end up with the highs at +15 at 20th level and the lows +10. That's a lot different from the current system where the High is +40 and the low is +0, and I think that's a good thing.

-Frank

 

[The_DarkAngel]

Zerkon, you make a intresting observation in regaurds to the "swing mastery thing" but, I do think its a little too much and a little too easy to require for multi-classes. Perhaps it would server better as something like this:

Masterful Multi-attack [General]
Choose one type of weapon, such as a long sword or a great axe. You are adept at attacking an opponent with a barrage of attacks.
Prerequisite: Proficiency with the weapon you choose, 8th level Fighter.
Benefit: Your Base Attack Bonus changes to the Following with your chosen weapon.
Level Base Attack Bonus
1st +1
2nd +2
3rd +3
4th +4
5th +5/+1
6th +6/+2
7th +7/+4
8th +8/+5
9th +9/+6/+1
10th +10/+7/+2
11th +11/+9/+4
12th +12/+10/+5
13th +13/+11/+6/+1
14th +14/+12/+7/+2
15th +15/+14/+9/+4
16th +16/+15/+10/+5
17th +17/+16/+11/+6 [+1 “Weapon Mastery Grand, Benefit”]
18th +18/+17/+12/+7 [+2 “Weapon Mastery Grand, Benefit”]
19th +19/+19/+14/+9 [+4 “Weapon Mastery Grand, Benefit”]
20th +20/+20/+15/+10 [+5 “Weapon Mastery Grand, Benefit”]
Note: Refer to the Weapon Mastery Grand feat for additional benefits.
A Fighter may select this feat as one of the fighter Bonus feats.
Special: This feat cannot be combined with the benefits gained with two-weapon fighting or shield weapon style. This feat does not restrict you from holding something in your off-hand including a shield however; do to the demanding prowess needed to attack with your primary weapon, its impossible to combine it with an off-weapon attack.
You can gain Masterful Multi-Attack several times. The effects do not stack. Each time you choose this feat it applies to a new type of weapon.

Grand Weapon Mastery is another Feat but its good point is that it makes the fighter have to work for it. For some reason I like that this isnt available till atleast 8th level, and its a Fighter only feat.

DA

 

[Zerakon]

That's terrible design.
...
There is a solution:

1> Make warrior classes good all the way through (that means keep giving Fighters and Barbarians good stuff after level 2, and Paladins and Rangers good stuff after level 5).

2> Make the Prestige Classes good all the way through.

3> Stop making more PRestige Classes, there are already too many by a factor of ten at least.

4>Fix saving throw and BAB progressions such that you don't end up with better saves as a multiclass character and allow non-warriors to multiclass without losing BAB every time.

Agreed with the exception of #3. If you fix #1, #2, and #4, then #3 shouldn't matter. Furthermore, just because companies crank out more prestige classes doesn't mean that the DM should allow them.

Thankfully, since I'm using all homebrewed Prc's, I can easily handle all of this. I'd probably be a bit frustrated if I was playing "by the books."

Btw, do you propose giving anything to single-classed rogues at upper levels, or do you think the only problem is with single-classed fighter-types?

 

[Magius del Cotto]

I feel I should probably jump in on this. Ever since coming to 3rd edition, and up until 3.5 came out, I've been playing a fighter. Personally, I just love customizing the class to my will (only PrCed once, for my AC god character), but I agree that the fighter has a horrendous skill list and poor skill progression. With the skill list, you can (with DM approval, of course) swap out some of the skills for others, but even with that, I find that, more often than not, I find I'm running out of skills faster than skill points (Int 14+, human). I also find that I'm swapping out at least 2-3 skills to build the character concept I want.
Just to clear things up before I go on, this isn't arguing that fighters have too many skill points, it's arguiing that fighters don't have enough skills. You want to play a knight errant? Sorry, no diplomacy. You want to play a witty swashbuckler? Sorry, no tumble. Bad implementation, IMO.
Some of you have said that feats are enough to vary the character. I disagree. While you can get a practically infinite set of characters from the Fighter as is, you can't get the character concepts you want, at least not from the fighter himself. And I just don't understand why Profession is a cross class skill for the fighter. It makes no sense!
At the least, I'd say add in Bluff, Diplomacy, and Proffession; maybe add in Gather Information, Survival, and a few others. Raise the skill points to 4/level (and this goes for sorcerors as well, maybe even up their HP, but that's for a different topic). This should bring the fighters closer to the level of other classes. Maybe add in an ability to go with the odd levels where they currently get nothing (maybe a skill boost, maybe something else, I dunno), then call it a day.
As it is, it's hard to play a fighter without making him a smith of some sort (craft skills), and when you have characters that start looking alike because they can't look any other way, then that's just bad design.
Um... I've rambled enough on this for now.
Magius out.

 

[FrankTrollman]

Btw, do you propose giving anything to single-classed rogues at upper levels, or do you think the only problem is with single-classed fighter-types?

Right now, the upper levels of Rogue are pretty sweet, excpet for a few that are mysteriously empty.

You start getting Rogue abilities, and Skill Mastery is crazy sweet.

The problem I generally see is that people don't like getting the middle levels of Rogue. That and the PrCs listed in Lute and Loot pretty much suck.

The first five levels give you a sneak attack and/or a cool ability every level. But level 6 gives you Trap Sense +2. Noone cares about Trap Sense +2.

So people want to PrC instead of taking level 6. But when they do, they end up not getting the later Rogue levels - and that really comes back to bite them when they don't have Skill Mastery: Disable Device.

I suggest that the Rogue abilities be moved around and down a bit so they get something nice every level.

Say a progression that looked like:

1 Sneak Attack +1d6, Trapfinding
2 Evasion
3 Sneak Attack +2d6, Trap Sense +1
4 Uncanny Dodge
5 Sneak Attack +3d6
6 Improved Uncanny Dodge
7 Sneak Attack +4d6, Trap Sense +2
8 Special Ability
9 Sneak Attack +5d6
10 Skill Bonus Feat, Trap Sense +3
11 Sneak Attack +6d6
12 Special Ability
13 Sneak Attack +7d6, Trap Sense +4
14 Skill Bonus feat
15 Sneak Attack +8d6
16 Special Ability
17 Sneak Attack +9d6, Trap Sense +5
18 Skill Bonus Feat
19 Sneak Attack +10d6
20 Special Ability

With Skill Bonus feats being just a bonus feat that can only be spent on one of those silly +2/+2 feats or Skill Focus.

Not much of a power-up, but moving things to the mid levels where they are needed.

That and the Rogue PrCs would get a lot more useful if people didn't lose BAB to get them.

-Frank

 

[Ridley's Cohort]

At the least, I'd say add in Bluff, Diplomacy, and Proffession; maybe add in Gather Information, Survival, and a few others. Raise the skill points to 4/level (and this goes for sorcerors as well, maybe even up their HP, but that's for a different topic). This should bring the fighters closer to the level of other classes. Maybe add in an ability to go with the odd levels where they currently get nothing (maybe a skill boost, maybe something else, I dunno), then call it a day.
As it is, it's hard to play a fighter without making him a smith of some sort (craft skills), and when you have characters that start looking alike because they can't look any other way, then that's just bad design.

I see where you are coming from, but I think your suggestions go too far. Different classes have their niche, and I do not see why a fighter should have any hope of attaining the excellence in social skills that a paladin, bard, or rogue can achieve.

In the context of D&D power scaling, a net skill of +5 is a raw journeyman, a skill of +10 that of a master, a skill of +15 or more would be in the legendary range.

Certainly a +5 or even +10 is well within reach of a fighter by spending skill points on cross class skills. I just think that fighter's mostly need more skill points to do this.