Can the Fighter be Real and Equal to spellcasters?

[Set]

My question is, is it possible for Fighters to matain realism while still keeping up with spellcasters who can literally ignore the laws of physics?

Is it one or the other? Can the Fighter do both? If you have proof of this, please show me!

I think the Fighter could become a significantly more versatile and effective combatant without turning into some sort of quasi-mystical Bo9S class.

Some of the Feat options for other classes should be class abilities for Fighters, such as Power Attack. Any Fighter should be able to trade-off in that manner, and not just -Atk / + Dmg, but the reverse as well, and other trade-offs, like sacrificing Atk for AC (improved version of the 'Fighting Defensively' that anyone can do) or AC for Atk (similar to what happens during a charge, a form of 'reckless offense' or 'all out attack'). Quite a few 'Feats' seem to be the sorts of things every Fighter should know how to do (while other classes would indeed need special training to learn these stunts, or would be stuck using inferior options such as 'Fighting Defensively' or 'Charge').

Fighters (and Rogues) should also gain a series of combat tactical choices, from the already standard options of Disarm, Sunder and Trip, to some improved Condition-imposing attack options, such as a Laming Blow that hurts the leg and lames the target (similar to Caltrop effects), or a Bonk on the Noggin that can Daze or Stun a foe (depending on how well it hits), or a slashing attack meant to cause blood to flow in the targets eyes, imposing a Dazzled or Blinded condition temporarily (again, depending on how well it hits), or a Dirty Blow that sends a stainless steel Solleret into someone's codpiece and imposes a Sickened or Nauseated condition! All of these conditions are realistic conditions, not fancy stuff like, 'I spin around and my sword catches on fire, while the theme music for Wonder Woman plays in the background' or 'I throw this dagger and it ricochets and hits everyone within 30 ft.'

Action heroes in the movies, from Jackie Chan to John Rambo, never run out of interesting ways to mangle, cripple, stun or discombobulate their hapless foes, and they don't need magic or supernatural effects to do so. Allowing the Fighter to impose various Conditions and penalties, or even to apply Ability Damage with specific attacks, would be a fine way to make the Fighter more versatile, and better able to seriously affect larger monsters who will be more effectively hampered by a Blinded Condition than another 20 hp of damage.

4E also seems to be moving away from the multiple attacks scenario, which suggests that single hits that inflict extra dice of damage at higher levels will become more typical. If the 12th level Fighter is hitting once for 4d8+10 damage each round, it's going to involve a lot less die rolling, and make those single massive hits seem more impressive in a world where the wizard is doing 10d6.

There will be places where the spellcasters will always excell, such as inflicting damage to large groups of enemies, but the goal isn't for the Fighter to be able to equal the Wizard in *every* instance, merely for him to shine in his own areas, such as his own ability to absorb damage and his ability to inflict single-target damage.

 

[Brother MacLaren]

I think Forcecage wrecks the balance as well.

The spell allows for no mundane way to escape. It's essentially an Instakill. Because lasting 2 hours per level as it does by the time you cast it, it lasts over a day.

It's an instakill against a opponent of up to certain Large sizes with no means of teleporting, plane shifting, Dim Dooring, or Disintegrating. That's about it.
It's ineffective against most high-CR dragons, giants, and brute monsters (size), most other high-CR monsters (teleporting -- demons, devils, spellcasters), and even beholders (disintegrate).
How many MM monsters are there of CR 13+? How many can be held by Forcecage? Remember, the game isn't intended to be balanced for PvP.

I've never actually seen anybody use Forecage in a game, but I expect that a DM would rule based on the creature's actual size, rather than its square occupied. For example, a Huge dragon takes up a 15' square, but can reach its tail 10' behind the edge of its square and its bite 15' ahead of the square. I would expect that most DMs in actual play would rule that such a creature cannot be contained in a 20' Forcecage.

As you say, splats buff every class. One way to even up the imbalance somewhat (though it goes only partway) is to allow non-core options for fighters - Complete Warrior, PHB2, Bo9S - but not for wizards.

In my experience, balance was reached with the addition of CWar and CAdv, and very limited acceptance of things from CDiv and CArc (the warlock, for example, is fine to allow). I did not see much use of PHB2 or Bo9S, and still saw melee types do more damage against BBEGs than casters did.

 

[Brother MacLaren]

Fighters (and Rogues) should also gain a series of combat tactical choices, from the already standard options of Disarm, Sunder and Trip, to some improved Condition-imposing attack options, such as a Laming Blow that hurts the leg and lames the target (similar to Caltrop effects), or a Bonk on the Noggin that can Daze or Stun a foe (depending on how well it hits), or a slashing attack meant to cause blood to flow in the targets eyes, imposing a Dazzled or Blinded condition temporarily (again, depending on how well it hits), or a Dirty Blow that sends a stainless steel Solleret into someone's codpiece and imposes a Sickened or Nauseated condition!

These were included in the BECMI Weapon Mastery System. Certain weapons could delay (make foes lose initiative next round), stun (make them lose actions), strangle (the bola), hook (trip), disarm, skewer (trident), or deflect (an overpowered version of parry).

Tracking conditions does become something of an issue, especially with large numbers of foes who move around a bit. There have been times when I've forgotten that Orc Guard #2 was Cursed by the Hexblade three rounds earlier. I got better at it by going to a laptop and adjusting the stats for each monster each time a condition was imposed, but with short-duration effects (e.g. 1 round) it can be a real pain.

 

[FourthBear]

In my experience a fighter's damage generally IS good enough in actual games. I have seen casters struggle with SR to a greater degree than melee types struggle with DR. I have seen high-level foes usually make their saving throws.

I would agree with of those points. At high levels, the use of offensive spells was effectively nerfed by 1) Spell Resistance 2) High opponent saves and 3) various blanket opponent immunities to many "save or lose" effects. Since melee combat generally wasn't so constrained, it was a more reliable way to do damage (assuming the character had sufficient ability to get to his opponent). Non-combat magic was generally nerfed by hand-wavy use of unspecified magical wards and extraplanar effects to disrupt teleportation and similar magics.

Overall, I don't think that really the best solution, since it resulted in "fixing" arcane magic drastically increasing the number of wasted spells on the part of the spellcaster. Save or lose spells became so powerful that they *had* to fail regularly, or the opponents would drop like flies. You got situations like that of the two clerics fighting in Order of the Stick, where they simply toss death and paralysis magic back and forth at each for round after round until one finally rolls a 1.

 

[Engilbrand]

At low levels, when Wizards are still fairly weak, it makes sense that Fighters stay realistic. By the paragon tier, though, things should start getting goofy. The character I always come back to on this is Batman. For our reality, he's completely unrealistic. For his, though, intense training can create someone like him. He is near human perfection. Ridiculous jumps. Crazy fighting ability. He can take massive punishment and shrug it off. This should be paragon tier. By the time you hit epic tier, we should be talking about myths. In a world of magic, why wouldn't some of it rub off onto the major characters of the world and allow them to become even more powerful? This is where Beowulf and Hercules come in.
A first level Fighter should be able to jump a few feet, take some punishment and kill someone quickly. By 30th level, though, I have no problem with him being able to jump 60 ft, shatter rocks or jump from the tops of buildings. That's how high level characters can go toe to toe with spellcasters- their entire bodies have been reinforced and strengthened by the magic that they constantly come in contact with. The same thing happens for mages. Not only are they better at shaping reality the more they practice, but they can laugh off the mundane things because they've moved beyond that.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Aside from sheer utility and damage per round, I think there is also another goal for the 4E designers:
Doing the fighter thing should be interesting and diverse.

If the most optimum action for a Fighter is charge, attack, full attack, drop foe, cleave, charge, attack, full attack, even if he deals double the damage of a Wizard and does his thing all day, he can get boring. Giving powers to non-spellcasters means that they have to consider which power they use when.

The most entertaining high level Fighter I played concentrated on combat options like trip and disarm. I think the most common ability I used was trip (and Power Attack, naturally), thanks to various feats often in response to enemy attacks. That was pretty nice, but if I had even more options (with a chance to work), I think he might have been even more interesting...

 

[frankthedm]

The idea of giving powers to the fighter, rogue, ranger, and barbarian is not a bad one. I have no problem with a fighter slamming the ground with a hammer so hard it knocks everyone in a radius prone around him, or firing a volley of a half dozen arrows with a single shot, or even picking up the halfling rogue and serving up a fastball special against the BBEG who stands beyond a horde of minions. While extreme and perhaps unrealistic these are all physical acts, borne of supreme power, determination and skill, which are at the heart of a martial character.

What I don't want is for Fighters and other Martial characters to project visible crackling fire, electricity and windgusts without magic items that specifically generate those effects.

To me “a fighter slamming the ground with a hammer so hard it knocks everyone in a radius prone around him” without snapping or irretrievably burying the weapon requires just as much ‘magic’ as the ability to” project visible crackling fire, electricity and windgusts”.

Examples of other likely teleport spells and their limitations:

*A spell that allows you to stabilize a portal between two locales, often made into a magic item in the form of a ring of metal, standing stones, or even plantlife, thus making it a permanent doorway.

Always liked that one.

Also, enough of this "lowering softly to the ground" bull. If you get hit with a dispel magic that ends your fly spell, you plummet and take the falling damage.

Hell yes.

Personally, I think flight should be accomplished by either the spell growing you a set of wings or summoning a killable mount or other breakable flying object, like a carpet or a broom.

I say all of this to illustrate the point that magic in D&D is too easy, it has no costs, and the benefits it provides are far in excess of what they need to be. Teleport should let you cut down on travel time, Fly should help the wizard scale a cliff or scout above the trees, Invisibility should help you sneak by people. These spells should not, however, allow you to instantaneously appear in the guarded bedroom of the BBEG and stab him in the heart while floating invisibly in the air above him, nor should they invalidate a rogue or fighter's athletic ability to get past mundane obstacles like walls and pits. [Q/UOTE]well said.

The one exception I will extend is that perhaps the current power of D&D magic over level 10 should be moved up into Epic Play.

When you stretch 3E levels 3-14 over 1-30 in 4e, you kind of get that result.

 

[Imaro]

I don't think fighters and wizards will ever be equal, unless fighters go the route of Bo9S and wizards go the route of the 3.5 warlock. I think SW saga ed. is a good example of this. A maximized jedi will own a maxamized soldier in combat. His versatility is just better and he isn't dependant on equipment like the soldier is.

I think one thing that's being overlooked is...does the average or casual player (not the average enworld player/DM) really want this? I think having classes such as the Warblade, Swordsage and Crusader are great for those who want to invest the time in dealing with their fidly bits. But what about the player who really just wants a simple character to bash some monsters with, the type who might like the tactical elements of combat...but doesn't want to be bothered with selecting, optimizing and determining a bunch of fidly "powers" every encounter.

The Warlock and Sorcerer are both good options for those that want a simpler wizard while the Bo9S offers options for those who want a more detailed and complex fighter character. In my group, I've found that my purely casual players really don't want anything more complex than the Barbarian when they select a fighting class. That's why I feel the classes shouldn't be balanced, options for differing play prefrences...sure. But I get the impression that because certain people don't like the siimplicity of the fighter he should be changed into a warblade...but we already got a warblade for those who want it.

 

[Doug McCrae]

I think one thing that's being overlooked is...does the average or casual player (not the average enworld player/DM) really want this?

Look at the popularity of WoW. Most players are casual and yet every class has dozens and dozens of options. Warriors are no less complex than wizards. The trick is to introduce the complexity gradually over the course of play.

 

[JohnSnow]

JohnSNow:

The reason it's true is because there is no inherant law of balance.

If magic can exist, there is no rule stating it has to be balanced.

SOmethings hve inherant balance I am sure, but magic is really defined by the game system, writer, novel, movie, etc.

Due to that, it could be balanced, but there is no inherent reason why it should be or needs to be.

that's just my point.

Sanjay

Emphasis mine.

Yes there is. D&D is, first and foremost, a game. In a well-designed game, one choice should not prevail over all others, if you expect anyone to make a different choice.

As I said, Ars Magica assumes magic has precious few (no?) limitations, and that therefore everyone will want to play a wizard. It's balanced accordingly.

D&D, by contrast, assumes that every class is an equally valid play choice, and so the classes should be designed to make that true. And if that means magic needs to get real restrictions that it doesn't always have in fantasy fiction, then so be it.

Similarly, if you can't make fighters comparable to wizards (and still have wizards feel sufficiently "wizardy") without boosting the fighters up a bit, again, so be it.

Probably a combination of both is necessary to make the game work. And it looks to me like that's exactly what the designers are doing with Fourth Edition. They're restricting the wizards and amping up the fighters. And that will be good for supporting the kind of playstyle D&D is supposed to support. That's directly opposed to old Gygaxian style where you have an entire party of wizards and their hired help.

That's my point.