Class skills for Fighters
- Thread starter warhookdm
- Start date
I seem to have struck a nerve! 
I see some of the points made so far, and agree with some of them. Move silently probably would be a bit outside the basic concept of the fighter. However, in answer to the points about spot - why doesn't it make sense for a person trained for COMBAT, to also be trained in spotting potential ambushes? Every basic grunt in the army is taught the basics of what to look for in this regard. In the same vein, any basic grunt learns field first aid in basic training; some of the better/best soldiers get damn good at it, too. (Without going to extra schools, etc.)
Also, as any veteran can tell you, knowledge (of history or tactics or war) is one of the most important skills a PROFESSIONAL warrior can have. And the Fighter is really a professional. That is the main reason I understand why they don't have Profession as a class skill; their class IS their profession, and it takes a lot of time to stay current with all those weapons, techniques, etc.
I agree that many of the other classes would need to get their skill points bumped as well; I believe I even mentioned that in the first post.
My primary beef with the skills and points as is is that Fighters (the backbone of any party) are way too easy for any moderately competant rogue to take down as they currently stand. No matter how smart you play a Ftr6, a Rog4 (Avg Hp=25) can take him with few problems - the Ftr6 can't spot him, and will end up being sneak attacked when he blindly wanders in to the Rogues ambush. Then the Rogue will tumble out of harms way (no Opp attack), and do it again. Or he will successfully feint, and do it again. So the Ftr6 (Avg Hp=49.5; assumes +2 Con bonus) will end up taking something like 3d6 or so hp damage every round or 2, while the Ftr might dole out d8+3 every other round or so. Granted the fighter COULD drop the rogue in 2 rounds, but only if he is able to close... not likely!
As for cross-classing with Fighters, Wizards, Sorcerers, and the like - you can't do it effectively with so few skill points. An average fighter will end up with 3 or 4 skill points per level; the player isn't going to spend those points on cross-class skills.
On the subject of Multi-classing to get what I'm after: Multi-classing works great - below about 10th level. After that, straight-class NPC's have a huge advantage. Take it from the DM who almost TPK'd a party of 9 experienced players with 2 straight class NPC's 1 level stronger than the party average level.
Most of the PC's were multi-classed.
I see some of the points made so far, and agree with some of them. Move silently probably would be a bit outside the basic concept of the fighter. However, in answer to the points about spot - why doesn't it make sense for a person trained for COMBAT, to also be trained in spotting potential ambushes? Every basic grunt in the army is taught the basics of what to look for in this regard. In the same vein, any basic grunt learns field first aid in basic training; some of the better/best soldiers get damn good at it, too. (Without going to extra schools, etc.)
Also, as any veteran can tell you, knowledge (of history or tactics or war) is one of the most important skills a PROFESSIONAL warrior can have. And the Fighter is really a professional. That is the main reason I understand why they don't have Profession as a class skill; their class IS their profession, and it takes a lot of time to stay current with all those weapons, techniques, etc.
I agree that many of the other classes would need to get their skill points bumped as well; I believe I even mentioned that in the first post.
My primary beef with the skills and points as is is that Fighters (the backbone of any party) are way too easy for any moderately competant rogue to take down as they currently stand. No matter how smart you play a Ftr6, a Rog4 (Avg Hp=25) can take him with few problems - the Ftr6 can't spot him, and will end up being sneak attacked when he blindly wanders in to the Rogues ambush. Then the Rogue will tumble out of harms way (no Opp attack), and do it again. Or he will successfully feint, and do it again. So the Ftr6 (Avg Hp=49.5; assumes +2 Con bonus) will end up taking something like 3d6 or so hp damage every round or 2, while the Ftr might dole out d8+3 every other round or so. Granted the fighter COULD drop the rogue in 2 rounds, but only if he is able to close... not likely!
As for cross-classing with Fighters, Wizards, Sorcerers, and the like - you can't do it effectively with so few skill points. An average fighter will end up with 3 or 4 skill points per level; the player isn't going to spend those points on cross-class skills.
On the subject of Multi-classing to get what I'm after: Multi-classing works great - below about 10th level. After that, straight-class NPC's have a huge advantage. Take it from the DM who almost TPK'd a party of 9 experienced players with 2 straight class NPC's 1 level stronger than the party average level.
Most of the PC's were multi-classed.
warhookdm said:
Knowledge (war) isn't a specialisation in the core rules, nor is Profession (fighter).
1. The fighter should ready an attack against a rogue who wants to tumble around. This also works against Spring Attack.
2. Feinting works once every other round, and leaves the rogue vulnerable to a full attack in return.
3. A 6th level fighter gets two attacks per round with a full attack, and most likely will hit. A rogue who stays in close combat against a melee monster is most likely going to die, barring extraordinary circumstances.
4. A 6th level fighter who does d8+3 points? Ha. Try 2d6+9. Similarly, said fighter could easily have an AC of 20+, which won't be trivial for the rogue to blow through.
5. At higher levels, armour of fortification negates sneak attacks completely.
I can see the reasoning behind wanting to give fighters more skill points so they're useful in non-combat situations, but that's something completely different.
NoOneofConsequence
First Post
warhookdm said:I seem to have struck a nerve!
I see some of the points made so far, and agree with some of them. Move silently probably would be a bit outside the basic concept of the fighter. However, in answer to the points about spot - why doesn't it make sense for a person trained for COMBAT, to also be trained in spotting potential ambushes? Every basic grunt in the army is taught the basics of what to look for in this regard.
Maybe in a modern army, where all combat is essentially skirmish based - everyone's got a versatile missile weapon as their primary piece of equipment. Fighters from the pre-modern era mostly expect to close with their enemy in open combat, not get shot at from behind trees by an enemy using autofire weapons. There's a reason why armies marched in tight groups in previous eras.
]
Again, a modern circumstance which does not parallel the pre-modern experience.
I think we agree on this point.
This situation is the reason why most parties have a rogue walking point, not a fighter. Your point man is the guy with the sharpest eyes, not your tank. Even in modern warfare, you don't send tanks when you can send scouts first.
This proves the point - the scout is more multi role than the single class fighter (tank). The wider the role(s), the less likely you are to be first class in any one role.
Endur
First Post
No more skills/points for fighters
I probably woudn't give any more skill points or skills for the fighter class.
If they want to play a skillful fighter, that's what Barbarians and Rangers are for (more skills, 4 points per level).
Fighters are the best at using weapons, because that's what they focus on.
They get Ride as a class skill, and that's really the only class skill they need. Anything else can be bought at cross-class. Yes, the character won't be the best in the world at moving silently, but this is a Fighter, not a Ninja.
Tom
I probably woudn't give any more skill points or skills for the fighter class.
If they want to play a skillful fighter, that's what Barbarians and Rangers are for (more skills, 4 points per level).
Fighters are the best at using weapons, because that's what they focus on.
They get Ride as a class skill, and that's really the only class skill they need. Anything else can be bought at cross-class. Yes, the character won't be the best in the world at moving silently, but this is a Fighter, not a Ninja.
Tom
handforged
First Post
This is a slightly different solution than you have proposed, but I decided to introduce skill packs in my campaign so that fighters could differ in their skill selection.
Guard: Climb (Str), Craft (Int), Handle Animal (Cha), Sense Motive (Wis), Spot (Wis), and Swim (Str)
Sailor: Balance (Dex), Climb (Str), Profession(sailor) (Wis), Rope Use (Dex), and Swim (Str)
Soldier: Climb (Str), Craft (Int), Handle Animal (Cha), Jump (Str), Ride (Dex), and Swim (Str)
Thug: Bluff (Cha), Climb (Str), Craft (Int), Intimidate (Cha), Jump (Str), and Swim (Str)
Woodsman: Climb (Str), Craft (Int), Handle Animal (Cha), Intuit Direction (Wis), Swim (Str), and Wilderness Lore (Wis)
The Fighter still gets the same number of skill points per level, but now has many more choices. Once you pick which skill pack you are stuck with it.
~hf
Guard: Climb (Str), Craft (Int), Handle Animal (Cha), Sense Motive (Wis), Spot (Wis), and Swim (Str)
Sailor: Balance (Dex), Climb (Str), Profession(sailor) (Wis), Rope Use (Dex), and Swim (Str)
Soldier: Climb (Str), Craft (Int), Handle Animal (Cha), Jump (Str), Ride (Dex), and Swim (Str)
Thug: Bluff (Cha), Climb (Str), Craft (Int), Intimidate (Cha), Jump (Str), and Swim (Str)
Woodsman: Climb (Str), Craft (Int), Handle Animal (Cha), Intuit Direction (Wis), Swim (Str), and Wilderness Lore (Wis)
The Fighter still gets the same number of skill points per level, but now has many more choices. Once you pick which skill pack you are stuck with it.
~hf
Victim
First Post
Drawmack said:
Mobility only helps against AoO provoked by movement. It's almost useless.
All classes should probably get more skill points. I think a base of 4 skill points for existing 2 point classes, with 8 for the bard and ranger, 6 for the monk and druid and barbarian, and 12 for the rogue would work better.
LostSoul
Adventurer
Fighters learn how to fight. That's why they get weapon & armour feats, bonus feats, good attack bonus, and d10 hit points.
They don't learn much of anything else. That's why they only get 2 skill points and a crappy class skill list.
That's what a Fighter is. The "fluff text" that many people give to a Fighter ("They should be able to spot!" "They're professional soldiers! They should know more about their job!" "They should be able to live off the land!") isn't part of the class. It's your own bias showing through about what you think the class should be.
If you want a Fighter who can Sneak, Spot, Heal, etc. - take a level or two of a class that lets you. Ranger and Rogue are good choices.
They don't learn much of anything else. That's why they only get 2 skill points and a crappy class skill list.
That's what a Fighter is. The "fluff text" that many people give to a Fighter ("They should be able to spot!" "They're professional soldiers! They should know more about their job!" "They should be able to live off the land!") isn't part of the class. It's your own bias showing through about what you think the class should be.
If you want a Fighter who can Sneak, Spot, Heal, etc. - take a level or two of a class that lets you. Ranger and Rogue are good choices.
drnuncheon
Explorer
Victim said:
Only if you never move. I can't count the times it's managed to save my characters, set up favorable tactical situations more quickly, etc.
J
WOW!!
My computer wouldn't post for a few days, or I would have posted this sooner.
After multiple re-reads of theses posts, I think that Spot & Listen should still be class skills, along with some sort of knowledge skill (and, yes I know the ones I posted earlier aren't in the PHB).
I understand why they don't get "Profession" - their class IS their profession. A profession indicates continual study and dedication - Fighters apply this to their class, not a separate area.
Also, with regard to the comparison to Ranger & Barbarian: yes, Fighters get a cubic butt-load of feats. Rangers & Barbarians get a butt-load of Feat-Like abilities (Special bonuses, Rage, etc.), AND more skill points to boot. The question is, why would anyone take Fighter?
Finally, my main beef is, I think, actually with the Rogue Class.
If ever there was an unbalanced class, baby, this is it. They can't be hit most of the time by the most effective Arcane spells (Evasion), at high levels they can deal potentially far greater damage (Sneak Attack), and played with moderate Intelligence, they can deal that damage without being hit themselves. AGHHHHHHH! (DM downed by 5d6 sneak critical....)
My computer wouldn't post for a few days, or I would have posted this sooner.
After multiple re-reads of theses posts, I think that Spot & Listen should still be class skills, along with some sort of knowledge skill (and, yes I know the ones I posted earlier aren't in the PHB).
I understand why they don't get "Profession" - their class IS their profession. A profession indicates continual study and dedication - Fighters apply this to their class, not a separate area.
Also, with regard to the comparison to Ranger & Barbarian: yes, Fighters get a cubic butt-load of feats. Rangers & Barbarians get a butt-load of Feat-Like abilities (Special bonuses, Rage, etc.), AND more skill points to boot. The question is, why would anyone take Fighter?
Finally, my main beef is, I think, actually with the Rogue Class.
If ever there was an unbalanced class, baby, this is it. They can't be hit most of the time by the most effective Arcane spells (Evasion), at high levels they can deal potentially far greater damage (Sneak Attack), and played with moderate Intelligence, they can deal that damage without being hit themselves. AGHHHHHHH! (DM downed by 5d6 sneak critical....)
