Mustrum's Mythical Fighter Techniques

[Chris_Nightwing]

I described the levels of the fighter techniques at the level they become available - it happens not by accident to be 7 levels of techniques, though, since I understood that D&D Next will have 7 levels of spells, which would need to be spaced at about 1 per 3 levels.

There is no limitation on how many the Fighter can know, but he must research additional ones. I find it more interesting if techniques can/must be learned - it grants you basically plot hooks for free, since the player may want to acquire additional techniques and the DM can spend rumors of manuals, teachers or magic items providing such techniques.

Note that I worded Word on the Streets and other abilities so that you still have room for roleplaying - the DM can either grant you the information with no roll required within 1d4 hours, but he can also only provide you with the source of an information after this time and still require you to roleplay actually asking the source. The guarantee of the power is that you have the source of information and that you have advantage on all checks regarding acquiring the information.

Oh yes, of course you did - sensible setup then. Agree on the plot hooks for learning techniques, the same is true of spells and is an awesome personal quest.

I think my worry with Word on the Streets is, as an example, if a player says "I want to know who is in charge of $SECRET_ORGANISATION, so give me the info or tell me who has it" - which, as a DM, might blow up your carefully plotted intrigue adventure. Of course you can DM fiat say no, nobody knows, but then the player will be decidedly unhappy for learning that technique. I think things like this need a note to empower the DM to say no, or adjust what is gained from it - in this case I would try to reward use of the power to grant some advantage later in the adventure, but that may still leave rules lawyers unsatisfied.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

That's a lot of work! Good stuff.

I haven't GMed 4e psionics, but I gather it suffers a bit from "the high level expensive augments aren't sufficiently better hthan the low level cheap augments to justify themselves". How confident are you in your costings? (Word on the Street looked a bit pricey to me, for example.)

The story abilities are harder to measure, the combat ones I tried to build in automatic benefits that are worth the same as if you spend your tokens on a lower level effect. For example, the Death Mark abilities guarantee you - even if the enemy saves - that you get 3 extra damage dice worth of damage - which is about what you may get if you spend 3 stamina to take actions for attacks. (And of course, you get a death attack chance as well).

Rapid Shot gets you "only" two attacks instead for 3 instead of 3 attacks, but it grants you more spike damage than just Fighter's Surge, and that can be important. Also, it has a compensationary ability or extra reward if both attacks hit or both attacks miss. Flurry of Blows has a similar rationale (maybe it needs a bit more?)
Whirlwind Attack beats Rapid Shot or Fighter's Surge if you have more than 5 enemies on the battlefield.

Legendary Blow also delivers 3 damage dice for 5 stamina, and it removes one action from the enemy, the latter effect being worth at least one fighter surge.

The speed buffs are worth it generally if you actually need to move/jump that far. If not, you are better off with the lower ones, usually.

 

[Campbell]

Oh yes, of course you did - sensible setup then. Agree on the plot hooks for learning techniques, the same is true of spells and is an awesome personal quest.

I think my worry with Word on the Streets is, as an example, if a player says "I want to know who is in charge of $SECRET_ORGANISATION, so give me the info or tell me who has it" - which, as a DM, might blow up your carefully plotted intrigue adventure. Of course you can DM fiat say no, nobody knows, but then the player will be decidedly unhappy for learning that technique. I think things like this need a note to empower the DM to say no, or adjust what is gained from it - in this case I would try to reward use of the power to grant some advantage later in the adventure, but that may still leave rules lawyers unsatisfied.

Of course this isn't all that different from divination spells in player hands.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Oh yes, of course you did - sensible setup then. Agree on the plot hooks for learning techniques, the same is true of spells and is an awesome personal quest.

I think my worry with Word on the Streets is, as an example, if a player says "I want to know who is in charge of $SECRET_ORGANISATION, so give me the info or tell me who has it" - which, as a DM, might blow up your carefully plotted intrigue adventure. Of course you can DM fiat say no, nobody knows, but then the player will be decidedly unhappy for learning that technique. I think things like this need a note to empower the DM to say no, or adjust what is gained from it - in this case I would try to reward use of the power to grant some advantage later in the adventure, but that may still leave rules lawyers unsatisfied.

I adjusted the power a little bit to give some more leeway.

In that case, you don't give the information itself, but someone who knows that information for sure, with there being a way for the Fighter to reach it.

This would allow saying something like: "There is a former member of the organization that would definitely know. An old friend of him told you where to find him and gave you a small trinket that would suggest that you may not be hostile. The guy that knows is a few days outside the city, in a small village." The ability did already contain a remark that the player has advantage to also evade notice that he's asking the information - the important thing to remember for the DM is that it also implies that it's noticeable at all - so the Fighter can alert someone that doesn't want him to know. So the DM can basically think about counter-measures, but has to keep in mind that the Fighter has advantage on any checks related to that (of course, the a***hat DM would probably just not request any checks and give the NPCs automatic success in whatever interference he goes. I don't particularly worry about such DMs, though, they'd do so even without rules.)

Ultimately, this ability represents something like spells like Consult Mystic Sage or Legend Lore also provide - a way to access to information, but the information may need some work to correctly decipher. Except Fighters don't decipher scripts or solve puzzles, they walk around and ask people and maybe rough someone up along the way to find out whatever they want to find out. It's no accident that the ability also becomes available around the time such spells would first become available -and it has, IMO, more limitations than such spells usually have. And, as added benefit, the DM doesn't have to come up with riddles, he just has to come up with what someone that would find out what the Fighter is doing wouild do about it.

 

[Chris_Nightwing]

Of course this isn't all that different from divination spells in player hands.

Indeed, which is why when you look back at spell lists pre-4E, you see so many spells designed to stop divinations from working. That was an emergent property of allowing such powerful plot-bypassers, and I don't see why the same wouldn't happen here (oh, the leader of THAT organisation? He has a technique that means his underlings can never name him!).

 

[Kraydak]

Well, at the risk of being quite negative, it adds the problem of making fighter Vancian (seriously, Figther's Guidance: spend *stamina* just talking to someone at the start of the day?), without actually adding any real throughput. The latter is, of course, a matter of balancing and can be fixed. The former is a bigger problem.

I have an important question for Mustrum_Ridcully: did you ever play 1e (post UA)/2e to any significant level (say, party level of 7th+)?

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Well, at the risk of being quite negative, it adds the problem of making fighter Vancian (seriously, Figther's Guidance: spend *stamina* just talking to someone at the start of the day?), without actually adding any real throughput. The latter is, of course, a matter of balancing and can be fixed. The former is a bigger problem.

The Fighter's Guidance stamina expenditure happens not at the start of the day, but the very moment that you "lend" someone your stamina. You do not give them a reserve pool or something like that, you basicaly order them around or aid them in some way and that costs you your stamina.
I may have to clarify the wording for that. (Should I fire ZombieRoboNinja for not remarking that? ; ))

My goal is definitely not to remove the 15 minute adventuring day with these rules. My goal is (in that context, there are other goals) to ensure that if the 15 minute adventuring day happens, the Fighter doesn't fall back behind the Wizard in his contributions.

If you design mechanics or DM techniques that encourage something else than a 15 minute adventuring day for spellcasters, you can probably also apply these to the Fighter. (For example, if you allow milestone to give the wizard an ability to regain some spells, the Fighter can likewise regain stamina. If the party has only 12 hours to stop the sacrifice of the princess, then the fighter will have the same requirement as the wizard to manage his resources, etc.)

The other goal, of course, is to ensure that the Fighter can contribute impressive, powerful or usueful effects that can compete with the Wizard - without giving the Fighter actual spellcasting ability. The should be thematically appropriate for a "martial dude" - even if they at some point will appear anything but "mundane" and more like something out of a myth or legend (Beowulf being the typical extreme example, I think.)

I have an important question for Mustrum_Ridcully: did you ever play 1e (post UA)/2e to any significant level (say, party level of 7th+)?

No, I did not. My time with D&D started at 3E. But I've read some stuff on the boards about earlier editions, and so ideas like the ability to recruit allies definitely come from ideas of previous editions. (THough 3 E also had that with Leadership).

 

[Kraydak]

No, I did not. My time with D&D started at 3E. But I've read some stuff on the boards about earlier editions, and so ideas like the ability to recruit allies definitely come from ideas of previous editions. (THough 3 E also had that with Leadership).

I figured as much, but wanted to make sure. I know you firmly believe that it is impossible for non-Vancian and Vancian classes to co-exist in a more-or-less balanced state, but that is because you have limited experiences. It is hard for someone who hasn't actually played both 1/2e and 3e to understand how much of a balance impact many of the rules changes had between casters and non-casters, but in 1e, Fighters and Wizards coexisted acceptably well. Not perfect perhaps (some more out-of-combat utility for the Fighter would have gone a long way), but it worked.

Your profile suggests that you have a 3e game. Try a one/two shot in the same universe, with some significant changes:

Spell caster effectiveness changes:
a) Remove bonus spells from Wizards, cap bonus spell slots at 1/level for Clerics.
b) Take consumable item costs from Spell Level*Caster Level to Spell Level*(Minimum Caster Level*10+Caster Level-Minimum Caster Level)
c) Add something between 0.5*Level to 1*Level to all Saves. For NPCs, replaces Level with EL.. However, also subtract 2 from all Saves.

Generic effectiveness changes:
a) Monster offense drastically increased with the addition of STR to damage for monsters. Accordingly, add 50% to Fighter HP and healing received at level 5, increasing to 100% at level 10. Other classes (except Wizards) get a 50% boost at level 10.

Fighter/Melee changes:
a) Monster HP was dramatically inflated by the addition of CON to monster HP. Accordingly, multiply Fighter damage by 1.5 at level 5, 2 at level 10 and 3 at level 15.
b) Remove all pure caster melee self buffs (expect Tenser's, because hey, Tenser's).
c) Add +2 to Fighter to-hits and damage, just in general.
d) Remove iterative attacks from everyone but Fighters.

 

[FireLance]

I think my worry with Word on the Streets is, as an example, if a player says "I want to know who is in charge of $SECRET_ORGANISATION, so give me the info or tell me who has it" - which, as a DM, might blow up your carefully plotted intrigue adventure. Of course you can DM fiat say no, nobody knows, but then the player will be decidedly unhappy for learning that technique. I think things like this need a note to empower the DM to say no, or adjust what is gained from it - in this case I would try to reward use of the power to grant some advantage later in the adventure, but that may still leave rules lawyers unsatisfied.

Well, compare it with the Researcher feature of the Elf Wizard's Sage background in the playtest. It's not too different.

 

[Jack99]

I figured as much, but wanted to make sure. I know you firmly believe that it is impossible for non-Vancian and Vancian classes to co-exist in a more-or-less balanced state, but that is because you have limited experiences. It is hard for someone who hasn't actually played both 1/2e and 3e to understand how much of a balance impact many of the rules changes had between casters and non-casters, but in 1e, Fighters and Wizards coexisted acceptably well. Not perfect perhaps (some more out-of-combat utility for the Fighter would have gone a long way), but it worked.

Your profile suggests that you have a 3e game. Try a one/two shot in the same universe, with some significant changes:

Spell caster effectiveness changes:
a) Remove bonus spells from Wizards, cap bonus spell slots at 1/level for Clerics.
b) Take consumable item costs from Spell Level*Caster Level to Spell Level*(Minimum Caster Level*10+Caster Level-Minimum Caster Level)
c) Add something between 0.5*Level to 1*Level to all Saves. For NPCs, replaces Level with EL.. However, also subtract 2 from all Saves.

Generic effectiveness changes:
a) Monster offense drastically increased with the addition of STR to damage for monsters. Accordingly, add 50% to Fighter HP and healing received at level 5, increasing to 100% at level 10. Other classes (except Wizards) get a 50% boost at level 10.

Fighter/Melee changes:
a) Monster HP was dramatically inflated by the addition of CON to monster HP. Accordingly, multiply Fighter damage by 1.5 at level 5, 2 at level 10 and 3 at level 15.
b) Remove all pure caster melee self buffs (expect Tenser's, because hey, Tenser's).
c) Add +2 to Fighter to-hits and damage, just in general.
d) Remove iterative attacks from everyone but Fighters.

You forgot the most important thing if you want to mimic the older editions. Remove the concentration skill so that hit = lost spell.