The Warrior (Variant Fighter)

It looks... okay now, I suppose. The class has more flexibility in terms of weapon group focus (use any axe, not just a battleaxe), but much less in terms of choosing feats.

If a path has what you want, the class could be worthwhile. Otherwise, it's still weak.

Assuming a character takes a 1/2/1/1 path (Axes, for example) they get 5 feats over 10 levels, plus Weapon Group Focus. If they take maces & clubs, they get 4 (generally weak) feats and average hit points as a barbarian (Bbn10 averages 70, maces & clubs warrior10 averages 71).
 

log in or register to remove this ad

First off, I like this. I think it adds some flavor and makes a bit more sense than the standard fighter. I like the weapon groups, and the group focus, paths, etc.

That being said, I see no advantage of taking this class over the std fighter. If I would use this variant, I would remove the regular fighter and it would be a decision based on flavor.

Most of the paths give 5 feats, plus the group focus, plus proficiencies. Another advantage is that the proficiencies can give exotic weapons for 'free'. And of course the focus feat applies to more than one weapon.

But... most fighters pick a main weapon, and the group focus, while making sense and being cool flavor, offers no real advantage in play. (Especially since they are so similar, there is no real benefit to switching weapons within a group.) I would say group focus is maybe 10% better than regular focus from a crunchy perspective.
And... If you don't want to use an exotic weapon, those 'feats' don't help you either.

So for the most part, you get 6 feats as awarrior, and 6 feats as a fighter. Except the warrior is locked into what and when those feats occur. (there may be some advantage in not needing to meet prereq's, but not sure how much of an advantage that really is.)

And Li brings upa a very good point. By 4th level, a human fighter has access to 5 feat slots. But if they want to work on heavy blades, they have to ignore PA until 4th level.
Now, the flip side, is they could use their 'other' feats for the blades, and take the path of the bow. But that ruins the flavor, as it makes their second choice the path choice.

I would probably switch group focus and the 1st path. Or make 5 path steps for the 5 feats, and move the 1st one closer.

Balance: Now, I have asserted that the warrior is close in balance, but has no advantages. Everything the warrior can do, the fighter can do. (Unless you want to use exotic weapons) This can be balanced by improving saving throws, or adding skills and points, or giving some other feat/class skills. I like the class and concept, it just needs to have some benefit.

.
 

I love the idea of this class, though the class name Warrior is taken, and Weapon Specialist is also taken =/. No suggestions here, I'm bad with names.

There's nothing in here that would make splashing into the class wothwhile. Monks get saves, Rogues get Sneak Attack, Fighters get feats, but all you get here is proficiency? Maybe you should give him martial weapon proficiency (less book keeping) and move up group weapon focus.

10 levels? I think that there should be some more spacing to increase it to a full-fledged 20 level core class; maybe throw in group Weapon Specialization and Greater WF and Specialization.

As for the paths, my only qualm is giving Greater TWF when they don't even have a third natural attack (double weapon tree).

Since some of the paths grant multiple feats, perhaps you'd want to make it something like 3rd level, and every three levels thereafter to spread it out a little thinner? This does give the mace/club tree a more streamlined approach (about 1hp/level) while keeping in tune with the other trees.

If you're willing to wait about a month, maybe my group can playtest this idea for a low-magic warrior style campaign. I love the idea and it's really newbie friendly.
 

Oops, didn't think about the exotic weapons. Maybe your idea is a little better in that aspect. I still hate book-keeping, though.

Add "you gain proficiency with all weapons in Group Weapon Focus" and I'll be happy :).

Looking at the feats, Core's right. Maybe give them two feats every time they hit a path?
 

What about developing "special attacks" for particular weapon paths? Perhaps something similar to spells in a certain way. For instance, one attack method could allow the warrior to attack in a "Circle", "Semi-circle", "Line" or "Cone" under very special circumstances. Do you think that this could work? Limiting this to special circumstances would, by far, be the toughest bit, but I think it could be done.

Let me throw out two examples of a "Special Attack" for Heavy Blades (these would only work for Heavy Blades in the given examples, but judge them as feats for now):

Head Wind
When the warrior threatens at least one opponent and has a clear path to a second, he can perform a special attack action to move after the attack and attack a second target.
Prerequisites: Base Attack Bonus +6, Dodge, Mobility, Spring Attack.
Benefit: You must threaten at least one opponent you intend to attack and must have a clear path to a second opponent you intend to attack that can be reached with a single move action. You must have a clear path toward both opponents, and nothing can hinder your movement (such as difficult terrain or obstacles). If you don’t have line of sight to the second opponent at the start of your turn, you can’t perform a Head Wind. You cannot perform a Head Wind if you are fatigued or exhausted.

Here’s what it means to have a clear path. First, you must move to the closest space from which you can attack the opponent. (If this space is occupied or otherwise blocked, you can’t charge.) Second, if any line from your starting space to the ending space passes through a square that blocks movement, slows movement, or contains a creature (even an ally), you don’t have a clear path. (Helpless creatures don’t prevent a clear path.)

You can’t take a 5-foot step in the same round as a Head Wind.

Attacking on a Head Wind: As a full-round action, you attack one opponent and then moving in a straight line to attack another. You make a normal attack against the first opponent he threatens using normal modifiers for the attack, and then takes move in a straight line towards your second opponent up to your base speed. This movement provokes attacks of opportunity normally. Finally, if the second opponent is within reach, you make a second attack at a -5 penalty against the second opponent.



No Moment
The warrior can attack multiple opponents during movement as a special action.
Prerequisites: Base Attack Bonus +16, Power Attack, Cleave, Great Cleave, Dodge, Mobility, Spring Attack.
Benefit: You can perform multiple attacks and move in a straight line at the same time. You must move at least 10 feet before making the first attack. You must move through a clear path, and nothing can hinder your movement (such as difficult terrain or obstacles). You cannot perform a No Moment if you are fatigued or exhausted.

Here’s what it means to have a clear path. First, you must move to the closest space from which you can attack the opponent. (If this space is occupied or otherwise blocked, you can’t charge.) Second, if any line from your starting space to the ending space passes through a square that blocks movement, slows movement, or contains a creature (even an ally), you don’t have a clear path. (Helpless creatures don’t prevent a clear path.)

You can’t take a 5-foot step in the same round as a No Moment.

Attacking on a No Moment: As a full-round action, you can move your base speed in a straight line through a clear path and attack opponents you threaten during your movement. This movement provokes attacks of opportunity normally. You suffer a -4 penalty to AC until the start of your next turn.

You must move at least 10 feet before the first attack, and you can never attack a single opponent more than one time. Each time you attack an opponent, you resolve that attack normally before continuing your movement or attacking a different opponent. If an attack drops an opponent, your attack bonus remains the same for your following attacks. If an attack fails to drop an opponent, you suffer a -5 penalty to all attacks that follow. If this penalty reaches -20, you cannot make additional attacks as part of your No Moment.
 
Last edited:

Now I'm up to level 10 with this revised version. I've broken down and borrowed content from the WotC splatbooks to fully detail everything. It at least "looks good" to me up to level 10.
 

Thoughts

I like your concept, Creamsteak. In my opinion, it is marginally (and a small margin at that!) more poweful than a fighter, as it is better in two ways and weaker in one.

It's better in that you get more feats.
It's better in that you can change which weapon is favored. This is a very big deal in a magic sparse world where if one finds a magic weapon, one really wants to be able to use it, and a fighter that specialized in, say, a Falchion would almost prefer his mundane Falchion to a magical quarterstaff.

It's weaker in that the feats are restricted. This just about balances evenly the greater number of feats, IMO.

That having been said, as regards your special attack ideas: Play SaGa Frontier? Much?

Seriously though, they're good. I had myself been brewing on a concept of a feat enabling someone wielding a spiked chain could make multiple attacks during a ride-by attack (it's got the reach, FCOL).
 

longhairmathgeek said:
That having been said, as regards your special attack ideas: Play SaGa Frontier? Much?
It's just one of those video games that happened during what I guess would be my CRPG golden days. I will probably always remember games like Final Fantasy Tactics, Saga Frontier, Vagrant Story, and Valkyrie Profile more fondly than I remember any of the new games. Each has also influenced my take on game design for dnd related stuff a lot... FFT gave me an overarching system ideal, Saga gave me "visual combat" ideas, Vagrant makes me think of weapons and altering weapons in a different way, and Valkyrie makes me think of story and characters in a different way. They are definitely not my only influences, but I'd say that I remember them pretty fondly.
 

Interesting...

I'm afraid I can't give any constructive comments at the moment, I'll look at it more indepth later...

Out of curiosity, CS, what is this for? You mentioned that you can only use the OGL/SRD... is this for LEW?
 

GnomeWorks said:
Interesting...

I'm afraid I can't give any constructive comments at the moment, I'll look at it more indepth later...

Out of curiosity, CS, what is this for? You mentioned that you can only use the OGL/SRD... is this for LEW?
Nope. I'm working my mind around a few things. Notably my FFD20 conversion stopped again (have you seen the latest thread, the one where I used a chart to show how I planned to associate the classes?), because I'm still not sure how to handle the core 6. Warrior, Thief, Monk, Red Mage, White Mage, and Black Mage. Red Mage I nailed (I think), but I havn't converted it to a digital form. Black Mage and White Mage are going to require some additional retooling to work properly, as they are completely re-invented sorcerers. Thief, Monk, and Warrior I can't come up with an excuse to change them from Rogue, Monk, and Fighter. I'm toying with methods of adapting the classes to fit a more archetypical role as the above demonstrates.

I'm trying to make the core bits more suited to specific FF style archetypes (in the Warrior's case you have Dragoons, Berserkers, Knights and such as different types of core "Warrior").

I'm also sorta waiting on your blue mage to get fleshed together as I'll be using it for the Base of my Blue Mage construction.

Here is the link to the FF discussion. Check my very last attachment in the thread to see my illustration. http://www.enworld.org/forums/showthread.php?t=78030
 

Remove ads

Top