What does the fighter need...
- Thread starter awayfarer
- Start date
EyeontheMountain
First Post
Hussar said:I take it adding a bit of BAB wasn't a good idea?
I like the idea, but apparently you kicked a sacred cow.
William drake
First Post
green slime said:
Well, dont think I missed your point. Dead levels, to me sounds like you think without special gifts or abilities at these levels, the class is without meaning? Hence
ead Level? Also, the fact that it gets so many feats are the fighters options...a fighter is a fighter, his options are based on combat. Skills? Most players make their fighters highered hands, swordsmen...their skills are combat. As I've mentioned, if they want flavor, take skills outside of hide, move silent, tumble..and so on, but to that is to take away from what they want, which is the feat and combat effectiveness...they cant have both.
And, from what I've read, most people just want to add more combat based feats, or given skills in those deadlevles, to match what other players get. Well, you dont need to get them, if you chose them with the extra feats you already get as a fighter...and if all your giving the player is more combat things, then how are they becomeing anything more than just fighters?
Only one person has talked about giving them military history? I've mentioned music...or painting, as alot of warriors were artists when not in combat. Some where leaders, lords but they have no skills in law.
The options ive read are: blind fight, and other things which can be picked, and since they can be picked, I say, why just give it to them. THey have the option, let them choose.
I think that fighters get to pick everything they get, is what makes them unique. Unlike every druid or roge who gets all these standard things every few levels, making it easy to know what they can do on an average, a fighter picks and choses everything, therefor, unless the player chooses to take the generic feats and skill opitions, he can be different.
green slime
First Post
William drake said:Well, dont think I missed your point. Dead levels, to me sounds like you think without special gifts or abilities at these levels, the class is without meaning? Hence
Also, the fact that it gets so many feats are the fighters options...a fighter is a fighter, his options are based on combat. Skills? Most players make their fighters highered hands, swordsmen...their skills are combat. As I've mentioned, if they want flavor, take skills outside of hide, move silent, tumble..and so on, but to that is to take away from what they want, which is the feat and combat effectiveness...they cant have both.
And, from what I've read, most people just want to add more combat based feats, or given skills in those deadlevles, to match what other players get. Well, you dont need to get them, if you chose them with the extra feats you already get as a fighter...and if all your giving the player is more combat things, then how are they becomeing anything more than just fighters?
Only one person has talked about giving them military history? I've mentioned music...or painting, as alot of warriors were artists when not in combat. Some where leaders, lords but they have no skills in law.
The options ive read are: blind fight, and other things which can be picked, and since they can be picked, I say, why just give it to them. THey have the option, let them choose.
I think that fighters get to pick everything they get, is what makes them unique. Unlike every druid or roge who gets all these standard things every few levels, making it easy to know what they can do on an average, a fighter picks and choses everything, therefor, unless the player chooses to take the generic feats and skill opitions, he can be different.
35% of the time, a fighter gains nothing but +1 BAB, +2 skill points and +1d10 hp.
Compare to PrC's designed for fighters: most provide new toys every level.
Compare to Pure Spellcasters, which get new toys every level.
awayfarer
First Post
Hussar said:I take it adding a bit of BAB wasn't a good idea?
I wouldn't say it was a bad idea but I'd like to keep from monkeying with the mechanics too much. Adding in both of the weapon focus feats and weapon mastery nets a pretty good boost to hit; the only thing missing is the extra attack at an earlier level.
green slime
First Post
I'm against offering free Weapon Spec. feats, and so forth on the levels which they would otherwise become available, on the grounds that it does nothing to make that 5th level of Fighter class interesting. Nor the 7th, 11th, 13th, 17th or 19th.
Hussar
Legend
The problem with that is, that's so campaign specific. Why should a mercenary captain have any skills in law. Heck, most lords didn't have any skills in law from a historical perspective. They didn't need to. The law was whatever they wanted to do anyway. Look at Samurai. Kill a peasant? No problem. The laws were written to allow them to do pretty much anything they wanted to do.
Artistic abilities? Sure, but, again, that's very, very campaign specific. If a campaign doesn't feature a whole lot of sitting around and doing calligraphy, then art abilities are pretty much wasted.
Fighters fight. That's what they do. Anything you give to fighters should center around that fact.
green slime
First Post
Hussar said:
Agreed. Fighers are the feat hounds. Which is why I favour giving them more feats, in those blank level places, which allow them to select a focus for their fighter. Be it Cosmopolitan, or something else.
stonehill_troll
First Post
Fighters need nothing, if you believe the other classes are too powerful in comparison nerf them.
Raising/escalating the power of one class over another is a slippery slope that many game designers have found is difficult to get off.
Raising/escalating the power of one class over another is a slippery slope that many game designers have found is difficult to get off.
green slime
First Post
stonehill_troll said:
Easier said than done.
How would you nerf wizards for instance? There isn't much there to ween away, and would take far more effort and care.
Similar Threads
