Giving the fighter some love

[Nazhkandrias]

I don't really need to see the need for Fighters to be "given any love". They're the only class without ANY distinct class features - by definition, that isn't too great. At least half-caster classes like Hexblades and other warriors like Barbarians have special abilities at their disposal. Fighter is usually only a class taken for a quick feat or two, or to qualify for a good PrC. A pure 20th level Dwarven Fighter isn't much to look at compared to other characters, but a 10th level Dwarven Fighter and 10th level Dwarven Defender has its place on the battlefield. Maybe you could encourage use of Fighter as an auxillary class (its only real purpose, I believe) by eliminating multiclassing penalties for being a Fighter, or something like that.

If you really need to show some love, just toss in a class feature or two, like ability boosts (Str and Con would make sense), a few extra feats, and maybe more skill points or something along those lines.

Come to think of it, a smartly played Fighter with an excellent selection of feats, combined with a good player with a LOT of sourcebooks can be pretty powerful. The Spiked Chain Trip/Disarm/AoO/Reach build Fighter, while cheesy, is a force to be reckoned with. Combine that with Monkey Grip for an oversized Spiked Chain, and that's some serious power we're talking about.

 

[PhantomNarrator]

I don't really need to see the need for Fighters to be "given any love". They're the only class without ANY distinct class features - by definition, that isn't too great. At least half-caster classes like Hexblades and other warriors like Barbarians have special abilities at their disposal. Fighter is usually only a class taken for a quick feat or two, or to qualify for a good PrC. A pure 20th level Dwarven Fighter isn't much to look at compared to other characters, but a 10th level Dwarven Fighter and 10th level Dwarven Defender has its place on the battlefield. Maybe you could encourage use of Fighter as an auxillary class (its only real purpose, I believe) by eliminating multiclassing penalties for being a Fighter, or something like that.

If you really need to show some love, just toss in a class feature or two, like ability boosts (Str and Con would make sense), a few extra feats, and maybe more skill points or something along those lines.

I take your point Nazhkandrias, but I disagree with you regarding the use of the Fighter as an auxillary class. To me, the Fighter has always been central to D&D and the fantasy genre. They should be made more viable through 20th level.

Does it make sense to take prestige classes in most cases? Yes, I would say so - they're designed to be slightly more beneficial than the core classes. Yet there is still plenty of incentive to play Rogues, Wizards, Druids and Clerics well into high levels. I wanted to give something to the fighters that would encourage them to stick with the class without unbalancing them. The exploding die house rule would only be available to single class fighters, period, to reflect their singular dedication to combat.

Come to think of it, a smartly played Fighter with an excellent selection of feats, combined with a good player with a LOT of sourcebooks can be pretty powerful. The Spiked Chain Trip/Disarm/AoO/Reach build Fighter, while cheesy, is a force to be reckoned with. Combine that with Monkey Grip for an oversized Spiked Chain, and that's some serious power we're talking about.

Well I don't consider them exactly helpless, and the PHB II, OA and UA certainly help, but I do not allow the spiked-chain uber-cheese in my game, nor the other silly weapons like the orc double-axe or the two-bladed sword. Even Monkey Grip is kind of cheesy, although I do allow it. To my mind, what the fighter really needs is something to encourage sticking with the class past 12th level. I like some of the suggestions in the fighter threads I've read, but what I really wanted was something that would reward people who stuck with the class. Giving single-class fighters the benefit of exploding damage would seem to be a balanced way of doing that, but I'll grant that it needs to be playtested. What works well in Hackmaster might not translate so well to D&D 3.5.

 

[Nifft]

I take your point Nazhkandrias, but I disagree with you regarding the use of the Fighter as an auxillary class. To me, the Fighter has always been central to D&D and the fantasy genre. They should be made more viable through 20th level.

Remember that in previous editions, nothing was viable through 20th level.

Also remember that "3.0e Fighter" is an artifact of 3.0e, not the same as the "Fighting Man" from OD&D or the "2e Fighter" from 2e.

There are some full-BAB classes which are totally viable from levels 1-20, it's just that Fighter isn't one of them.

Cheers, -- N

 

[Nazhkandrias]

I take your point Nazhkandrias, but I disagree with you regarding the use of the Fighter as an auxillary class. To me, the Fighter has always been central to D&D and the fantasy genre. They should be made more viable through 20th level.

What I mean is that Fighters as they are now are only good as an auxillary class. I think that they could be more, since they represent a different way of fighting than other full BAB classes like Barbarian and Ranger, but you'd need to do some serious tweaking to make them a viable play to 20 class. In fact, you'd change them so much that they'd hardly be Fighters anymore! I really think that Ability Boosts would give some incentive to play Fighters, like at level 10 and every 5 levels after that, you might get to pick a stat (Str, Dex, or Con) that gets a +2 bonus. I'd play a Fighter to 20 if I could start out with 18 Str in point buy and raise it to 29 Str with ability boosts every 4 levels, and class feature ability boosts. Or maybe introduce equipment, like advanced versions of Greatswords and Full Plate or the like, that require a minimum Fighter level to use with proficiency. Better yet, give the Fighter an ability that makes use of their number of class levels, something like a boost to damage or attack or something like that, with a variable numeric effect that grows with their class levels. You know, sort of like the Paladin's Smite Evil.

 

[AnonymousOne]

There are some full-BAB classes which are totally viable from levels 1-20, it's just that Fighter isn't one of them.

Which were you thinking? Duskblade? Barb?

 

[notjer]

Just mention to your fighters that they shoulden't try to spoil the game with maximum damage abuse in best rule lawyer style.

A pixie with that ability could make a infinity damage roll with a pixie sword.

1d1 = 1 reroll, 1d1 = 1 reroll etc.

You will always have a minimum of 1 damage I read somewhere in PHB or DMG.

 

[Arkhandus]

Have you looked at Nyaricus' "What Do You Do For....Fighters?" thread? Several people put their fighter houserules in that thread (the incomplete earlier version of my Aurelian fighter is there too).

(Edit: Here's Nyaricus' thread.)

I'd humbly suggest you take a look at my Aurelian houserules for the Fighter, or my Rhunarian houserules for it. The latter is pretty fair for normal D&D, the former is for games with all the classes being a little more powerful (as I beefed up the fighter a lot in Aurelia to be comparable with others).

The Aurelian Fighter has a handful of custom feats available to it that work towards that, but I don't use the 3.5 feats so they're not listed (frex, I have a feat for them called Grandmaster available only at 14th-level plus in Fighter, gives +2 to attack and damage with the weapon, among other things). Both my versions of the Fighter have several bonus feats listed that aren't in the core rules, though; they come from 3.0 supplements like Oriental Adventures or Sword & Fist.

Links to my Aurelia and Rhunaria stuff are in my signature. The Rhunarian fighter houserules are in the Houserules and Miscellany section of my Rhunaria page, near the bottom of the page. The Aurelian fighter is near the bottom of my Aurelia thread on EN World, as I just recently posted my final version of it.

Even if you don't like the totality of my additions or other folks' fighter revisions, adopting a few bits piecemeal could be useful.

 

[Nifft]

Which were you thinking? Duskblade? Barb?

Barbarian
Ranger (archery style)
Paladin
Warblade
Duskblade
Crusader

That's just IMHO.

Cheers, -- N