Specialist Fighters

[CleverNickName]

This comparison is somewhat flawed by the technology gap in the example.

...

Dunno, never run into it - not even in "Going into the Underdark and never coming back" campaigns.

Indeed. I think the analogy is intended to weigh the need to conserve ammunition against the ability to ignore it. For some, it isn't a big deal...for others, it ruins disbelief.

I don't do the "never coming back" adventures either. But I think that resources should always be a concern for the party, no matter how long they intend to be out of town.

 

[Black Knight Irios]

What did you think of the granted powers for Hammers, Axes, etc., that I posted previously? Like a hammer specialist being able to knock his opponents prone, or an axe specialist getting a shield bonus when fighting defensively? I think these abilities are closer to what I think of when I think "specialist." Not a generic +whatever bonus, or a "I can only do this once today" trick.

That idea is similar to what I had in mind. Spear/Polearm attacks can push, 2h swords auto cleave, Flails can trip and so on. I think that is the right way to go. And a fighter should not need to invest feats to gain those advantages.

 

[Tony Vargas]

I was talking about the Radiant Lance spell. MM is in a class all its own. It's more like a low-caliber handgun that never jams, never needs reloading, and doesn't even need to be aimed.

[MENTION=43019]keterys[/MENTION] is right when (s)he said that it is the first twelve rounds that count...most encounters are over in less than 10 rounds. But this is assuming that the fighter with the rifle gets to replenish its bullets for free after each encounter (or after resting, or whatever). Otherwise, the fighter with the rifle is going to be out of ammo before 10 a.m. but the mage with the handgun is still shooting.

That's an interesting point. The perk of the fighter is supposed to be that he's the energizer bunny, he may only do one thing, but he keeps going and going. But, the new caster at-wills are actually /more/ consistently available than the fighter's attacks. The fighter needs weapons. To be competitive at high levels, he needs magic weapons. To attack at range he needs ammunition. A fighter out of arrows isn't attacking at range anymore. A fighter deprived of weapons isn't attacking effectively anymore. The Cleric can keep zapping with his radiant lance and the wizard keep shockingly grasping no matter how long the day, and regardless of rust monsters, disarm/sunder, or even capture scenarios.

 

[keterys]

I'm all for attacks being slightly different depending on what weapon you're using (different/better crits, dealing with armor, knocking prone, whatever). I'd just also be okay if the fighter could choose to be a weapon master and get all of 'em.

As long as mathematically speaking the fighter can swing with an axe, or swing with a sword, and do roughly similar damage (delta small differences). Sure, whatever. It's just become very common for the differences to really be more like +3 attack, +5 damage and then it's kinda painful.

I'm playing a gunslinger in a pathfinder game at the moment, and I'm not sure I'll ever make a melee attack. My chance to hit is something like 7 worse and my damage half that. And that's only going to get worse as I level. By 5th, my melee damage will be less than a quarter of my gun damage.

Aside: I track ammo in that game, and I make all my own ammo... and it still hasn't really mattered, except in an abstract "some day" kinda way. I think I'll have used up something like 12 shots over the course of a single level. And I definitely don't envy the casters in that game who do have infinite casting of their ray of frost / acid splash spells.

 

[BobTheNob]

That idea is similar to what I had in mind. Spear/Polearm attacks can push, 2h swords auto cleave, Flails can trip and so on. I think that is the right way to go. And a fighter should not need to invest feats to gain those advantages.

Yes yes yes (and one more) yes.

By investing feats to gain advantage (i.e. specialization), you can fall into the old "by defining what you can do, you just end up defining what you cant do" trap. Seen it, many times. Have found it to be Frustrating.

If you go with something like this idea, we have a far more interesting approach. A fighter is automatically specialized in whatever he is holding. The power of this is limited by the fact you can only wield one (maybe 2) weapons at once, rather than limiting by a decision made last month.

It avoids the painful "I picked the wrong feat" trap and allows something far more cool : the fighter able to adapt during fight by integrating weapon choice into his lineup.

 

[JasonZZ]

My own suggestion is almost identical to BobTheNob's, above.

Specialization as in "I'm only at my best with this weapon here" is not good. The math ends up designed around it and you end up competent with that weapon and not with others.

Instead, I think "Weapon Specialization" should be a class feature that lets fighters (and only fighters) get some kind of advantage unique to any given weapon type they pick up. For example, maybe mace wielders get a bonus against opponents in heavy armor, or flails are especially good against shields, etc. Not sure how to balance this if "level dipping" works like it did in 3e. Maybe different tiers of advantage with level--the 1st level fighter gets the equivalent of cleave when using a greatsword. Slightly further up, that becomes great cleave. Still further, you get to move between cleaves. And maybe at the higher levels, you simply move and attack every opponent in your path.

 

[CleverNickName]

I'm all for attacks being slightly different depending on what weapon you're using (different/better crits, dealing with armor, knocking prone, whatever). I'd just also be okay if the fighter could choose to be a weapon master and get all of 'em.

If you go with something like this idea, we have a far more interesting approach. A fighter is automatically specialized in whatever he is holding. The power of this is limited by the fact you can only wield one (maybe 2) weapons at once, rather than limiting by a decision made last month.

Instead, I think "Weapon Specialization" should be a class feature that lets fighters (and only fighters) get some kind of advantage unique to any given weapon type they pick up.

While I don't disagree, this is not describe a "specialist." This would take a generalist class, and give it even more general toys.

Clerics, for example, do not gain every domain in their deity's portfolio. They have to pick two, and they can only prepare bonus spells from one of them per spell level. If they could get access to every domain in the game, they would blow the power balance scale out of whack with granted powers, and every cleric in the game would be identical.

Wizards do not get to specialize in every school of magic in the game, either. They pick only one, and that choice lets them skill bonuses and extra spells for that one school. If they got these bonuses for every school of magic, the way you suggest a fighter should get these bonuses for every weapon he picks up, then he isn't really a specialist at all...he is a textbook wizard with even more power balance issues, and every wizard in the realm would be identical.

I don't have a problem with fighters being able to do things with weapons that other characters cannot. Like you said, fighters can only use one, maybe two weapons at a time at most. I didn't think of that, and it is a very good point. I would support it in the new edition. But it does not address "specialization" of any sort...it is still a generalist approach to weapon use. At the end of the day, we are just giving more toys to the Fighter class. All fighters in the realm will be identical.

That's fine for some, I guess...it's been that way since the game was first published. I would just like options to make fighters more distinctive. I would like to find a way to make a fighter's choice of weapon matter more to the character, not just to the situation at hand.

 

[keterys]

I'd much rather that fighters chose distinctive weapon styles to be better at, rather than distinctive _weapons_.

Ie, more "Slayer" and "Guardian" and less "Chainer" and "MC Hammer".

 

[BobTheNob]

While I don't disagree, this is not describe a "specialist." This would take a generalist class, and give it even more general toys.

(snip)

... But it does not address "specialization" of any sort...it is still a generalist approach to weapon use. At the end of the day, we are just giving more toys to the Fighter class. All fighters in the realm will be identical.

(snip)

Your dead right in these points, but lets read the next post along

I'd much rather that fighters chose distinctive weapon styles to be better at, rather than distinctive _weapons_.

Ie, more "Slayer" and "Guardian" and less "Chainer" and "MC Hammer".

What a suggestion. Lets enable fighters to specialize (and hence avoid the "all fighters are the same" problem) and instead allow specialization in more "what I do" form rather than a more "what I use" form.

For the record, I would also want stances in this. Whit that said...

Now we are getting to a fighter that I would want to play. He has a focus/purpose and at the same time can change his approach during the fight and adapt by changing weapons and stances. Sure, Im a guardian by specialist, but if the need to grind the enemy down comes around I will switch to an aggressive stance, put away the sword and board and pull out the great axe. I wouldnt hit as hard as other specialist fighter types, buts Im not dead weight either.

 

[Black Knight Irios]

Clerics, for example, do not gain every domain in their deity's portfolio. They have to pick two, and they can only prepare bonus spells from one of them per spell level. If they could get access to every domain in the game, they would blow the power balance scale out of whack with granted powers, and every cleric in the game would be identical.

Wizards do not get to specialize in every school of magic in the game, either. They pick only one, and that choice lets them skill bonuses and extra spells for that one school. If they got these bonuses for every school of magic, the way you suggest a fighter should get these bonuses for every weapon he picks up, then he isn't really a specialist at all...he is a textbook wizard with even more power balance issues, and every wizard in the realm would be identical.

That is not the same as a fighter specialising in a weapon (2/3E) or a weapon group (4E).

A cleric can use any non-domain spell however he wishes and if the spell is not total crap he will be effective. Actually his domain spells are more like some added bonus (3E) whereas the fighter's spec. is an integral part of his class.

A specialized wizard is closer to a fighter's spec. than a cleric. In past editions he would have prohibited schools of magic but all others spells where still highly effective (No save, no SR or no attack roll or all of them).

The fighter on the other hand is totally bound to his weapon type/group because he has to spend a crapton of feats to be effective with the weapon in the first place. And due to this all other weapons(groups) are rather useless in comparison esp. in 4E where some power would loose their rider effects or would not work at all.

Please do not compare those things, their effects and implications are totally different.

I'd much rather that fighters chose distinctive weapon styles to be better at, rather than distinctive _weapons_.

Ie, more "Slayer" and "Guardian" and less "Chainer" and "MC Hammer".

What a suggestion. Lets enable fighters to specialize (and hence avoid the "all fighters are the same" problem) and instead allow specialization in more "what I do" form rather than a more "what I use" form.

For the record, I would also want stances in this. Whit that said...

Now we are getting to a fighter that I would want to play. He has a focus/purpose and at the same time can change his approach during the fight and adapt by changing weapons and stances. Sure, Im a guardian by specialist, but if the need to grind the enemy down comes around I will switch to an aggressive stance, put away the sword and board and pull out the great axe. I wouldnt hit as hard as other specialist fighter types, buts Im not dead weight either.

Guys, I do not know what to add.