A (very slightly) modified fighter

[Clay_More]

Good job Gez, have to admit. A simple fix that gives to the fighter what all other classes already posses, some uniqueness. I dont mind that the Fighter can learn Sneak Attack and other skills that might be related to other classes indirectly, since it is a way of turning the Fighter into the versatile class that its PhB description suggests. Just glad that you stayed clear of giving it spellcasting abilities

Might also deter some of the munchkinisation of fighters picking a few levels in other classes to gain special abilities. The fighter should be allowed to branch a little into the fields of other melee classes, including the rogue, since these classes have other fields than melee that they specialise in as well.

 

[Trainz]

I REALLY like the concept. Très intéressant. Now, if only my DM would like it too...

O.K., here are my suggestions:

As someone else said, the levels he gains the bonus tricks, I wouldn't give him a bonus feat also, I would make him choose (like someone else already suggested). This way, it would still be balanced.

Allow me to give my two cents on each trick:

Close-Quarters Ranged Combat: Really cool, if somewhat strong. It is already a feat in the Epic Level Handbook, so I would give it a prereq. of at least +11 BAB.

Flurry of Strikes: Quite good. Once again, would give it a prereq. BAB +11 though (a fighter doesn't really mind a -2 penalty, like the monk does).

Graceful Combat: I like it as is.

Great Sunder: I don't think someone would take it at +1d6... I would give a straight +4 bonus.

Heavy Weapon: This I really don't like. I would leave that out IMC.

Ranged Disarm: Perfect as is.

Show Off: Oh this is VERY sweet. So many times a fighter player says "I wirl my weapon around to impress the guard" and there's no game mechanic to illustrate this. VERY sweet.

Sneak Attack: I like too. If a rogue is so good at finding the sweet spot in his adversaries, why would the ultimate D&D combatant (the fighter) be denied this ability ? Quite cool.

Stunning Blow: Nice, but I wouldn't put Wis as the modifier. For the monk, it's Wis because his combat techniques are a matter of mind and discipline, but stunning for a fighter should be a matter of brute power. Hence, I would give Str for this fighter ability.

Surprising Strike: I don't see a problem with it, but it's not as sweet as most of the others. Probably won't ever be picked.

Throw Weapon: See above. Furthermore, while a cool move, a fighter throwing his main weapon at an enemy in the middle of a fight is probably gonna go "Duh" on his next action.

Trip Attack: Since it's pretty much covered by Improved Trip, I wouldn't put that here.

Twin Weapon: This is not cool, it's awesome. Beware the munchkinisation of the drow-elf phenomenon. I would give it a very steep prereq., probably BAB +15.

Uncanny Blows: Quite good.

Weapon Defense: Since it's a shield bonus, is it stackable with greater two-weapon defense ? It's also a shield bonus (and almost only dodge bonuses are stackable).

Weapon Mastery: I would ask Greater Weapon Specialisation as a prereq. and just say:"add +2 to the damage of a greater specialized weapon", because of Epic Weapon Specialisation (ELH).

Weapon Parry: Hmmmm... this I'm really not sure about... does this means that a fighter with 4 attacks can use ONE of those 4 attacks to parry ? Many critters out there only have one attack (or two, but often that second attack misses). I have no idea what the power level of this ability might be, but I fear a retributive strike from the game mechanics hitting the DM square in the cojones if he allows this in his campaign.

Overall, no matter what modifications are made to these, I still like the concept MUCH better than the standard 3.5 fighter. Une très bonne initiative selon moi, mon ami !

 

[Gez]

In the progression table, I'd suggest changing "Bonus Feat, Stunt" to "Stunt" or "Stunt or Bonus Feat".

Good idea, clearer wording was needed.

Regarding GWSpecialization, I thought that was the point that was being made - the Weapon Mastery duplicates it, and doesn't require GWFocus. Therefore it seems a bit unbalanced.

The thing was that I simply forgot GWS' existence. I'm not much used with all of 3.5 changes, and GWS's introduction is one. So I didn't have GWS in mind when I written that.

This seems very good but also is a lot to take in. How, for instance, does Flurry of Strikes work with two-weapon fighting? Does it only apply to the main weapon, or to the off-hand weapon as well? (It could be used with a two-handed weapon. That's pretty scary!)

One extra attack at top bonus, at the price of a -2 penalty. For a TWF-er, I'd allow said extra attack to be made with either main weapon or off-hand weapon, but not both.

I'm not sure that I like the idea of Heavy Weapon or giving fighters Sneak Attack, but that's just my personal taste.

Heavy Weapon was inspired by the AU Warmain. Sneak Attack, I just like allowing people to take it. (One combat path for my rangers gives +1d6 sneak attack instead of feats, for example.) It's a powerful ability, so players are happy; but it's use is totally under the control of the DM, who may use constructs, undead, oozes, plants, people in fortified armors, giants, or merely camouflage to negate it.

Only one real balance concern: none of these are over-powerful, but a few are significantly better than others. You might attach a "minimum level" to a few of them.

A possibility.

Good job Gez, have to admit. A simple fix that gives to the fighter what all other classes already posses, some uniqueness. I dont mind that the Fighter can learn Sneak Attack and other skills that might be related to other classes indirectly, since it is a way of turning the Fighter into the versatile class that its PhB description suggests. Just glad that you stayed clear of giving it spellcasting abilities

With my modified magic system, they could, but assuredly not with their fighter class' abilities.

Might also deter some of the munchkinisation of fighters picking a few levels in other classes to gain special abilities.

Yep, that's the aim.

The fighter should be allowed to branch a little into the fields of other melee classes, including the rogue, since these classes have other fields than melee that they specialise in as well.

Agreed.

I REALLY like the concept. Très intéressant. Now, if only my DM would like it too...

O.K., here are my suggestions:

As someone else said, the levels he gains the bonus tricks, I wouldn't give him a bonus feat also, I would make him choose (like someone else already suggested). This way, it would still be balanced.

I've colored in red a bit of text that was there since day one but too often overlooked. Poor little bit of text.

Great Sunder: I don't think someone would take it at +1d6... I would give a straight +4 bonus.

This one was straight from the Complete Warrior's EWM. A straight +4 bonus is prettier, IMO, though. I think I'll adopt it.

Heavy Weapon: This I really don't like. I would leave that out IMC.

As said, it comes from the AU warmain. It's also close of Monkey Grip. But now that I think about it, it's quite anime-ish. I may drop it.

Stunning Blow: Nice, but I wouldn't put Wis as the modifier. For the monk, it's Wis because his combat techniques are a matter of mind and discipline, but stunning for a fighter should be a matter of brute power. Hence, I would give Str for this fighter ability.

I copied the Stunning Fist feat, except with specialized weapons rather than fists. Wisdom was thus there for consistency. That, and maybe the save DC would be too high if keyed to Str.

Trip Attack: Since it's pretty much covered by Improved Trip, I wouldn't put that here.

This one is also from the Complete Warrior's EWM.

Twin Weapon: This is not cool, it's awesome. Beware the munchkinisation of the drow-elf phenomenon. I would give it a very steep prereq., probably BAB +15.

Catering to the drizzt fanbase is a good marketing ploy... Oops, I forgot I don't sell this alt.fighter.

Weapon Mastery: I would ask Greater Weapon Specialisation as a prereq. and just say:"add +2 to the damage of a greater specialized weapon", because of Epic Weapon Specialisation (ELH).

Yep, I'll think about it and try to word it better.

Weapon Parry: Hmmmm... this I'm really not sure about... does this means that a fighter with 4 attacks can use ONE of those 4 attacks to parry ?

If I'm not mistaken, readying an action is a standard action, and you can only ready another standard action, a move action, or a free action. In no way, shape, or form, does readying an action allows to make a full attack.

So, this stunt forces you to forgo all your attacks. It's an alternative mechanism for expertise, except against only one opponent.

 

[Trainz]

O.K. Gez, now, with all the feedback we gave you, can you repost in this thread the modified new fighter ? Just to have all the proper stats in one nice post.

J'aime vraiment cela, je crois que ton idée est tout simplement géniale !

 

[3rdedreichcommander]

Very nicely done....but if you make any adjustments due to suggestion please e-mail me a copy of the nrew rules so I can print and tape it over the current fighter page in the PHB.
If the board doesn't allow you to mail me....my e-mail is
EnsignVradzi1781(at)aol(dot)com

 

[DonAdam]

Twin weapon wielding is only a problem in conjunction with the Heavy Weapon/Warmain power. Otherwise, it raises average damage by about 1 per hit compared to using two light weapons, and if the character has invested the feats in it I think he's suffered enough penalties through 8th level.

 

[Trainz]

Twin weapon wielding is only a problem in conjunction with the Heavy Weapon/Warmain power. Otherwise, it raises average damage by about 1 per hit compared to using two light weapons, and if the character has invested the feats in it I think he's suffered enough penalties through 8th level.

Oh, I don't have a problem with the power, but more with the style. I agree with Gez when he says it is too anime-ish.

Like Final Fantasy 7... did you see the size of that sword ? ? !

 

[Gez]

Anyway, it's now in the recycle bin. Removed.

 

[AeroDm]

Very excellent work. I ignored this thread for some time thinking it was yet another variant... but I am very glad I dipped in. I've tried to mimic this concept several times, but this is by far the best I've seen.

One question- why can't weapon defense stack with two-weapon defense? I don't really see any problems with that, especially since CW introduced improved/greater two-weapon defense. If someone really wanted to drop in 3 feats and a Stunt, I have no problem giving them the +4 AC that comes with it.

 

[Gez]

It was mainly meant for two-handed weapons, or for single handed weapons with a free hand.