What's the equivalent of Practiced Spellcaster for fighters?

[rgard]

At first I was thinking this is not necessary due to every class/prc getting some type of BAB.

Now I'm not so sure.

I think I could as a DM approve a new feat for fighters that added +1 for every BAB missed (say you have one level of druid and one level of rogue and you've missed +2 to your BAB) so a Fighter 4/Druid 1/Rogue 1, could catch up +2 on his/her BAB by taking the feat to a maximum of 4. I would also limit this to BAB and not iterative attacks. So if you are a fighter multiclass part way to your 3rd attack, you can't use this feat to get that third attack...you still have to get there on the fighter progression chart via your fighter levels.

EDIT: I'll write this up in feat format (and more clearly) later today if nobody else does it first.

Thanks,
Rich

 

[Li Shenron]

Powerful spells are way above attacks and BAB in worth.

Except that multiclass spellcasters are exactly giving up access to powerful spells that a single-class wiz or cle has at that level...

Caster level bonus can make the Fireball equal to the ones cast by the single-class wizard, but doesn't grant upper-level spells.

 

[Darklone]

I think I could as a DM approve a new feat for fighters that added +1 for every BAB missed (say you have one level of druid and one level of rogue and you've missed +2 to your BAB) so a Fighter 4/Druid 1/Rogue 1, could catch up +2 on his/her BAB by taking the feat to a maximum of 4. I would also limit this to BAB and not iterative attacks. So if you are a fighter multiclass part way to your 3rd attack, you can't use this feat to get that third attack...you still have to get there on the fighter progression chart via your fighter levels.

I think that's a bad idea. Eldritch Knight would love this

And screwing with the normal BAB (adding different classes together) is bad. What you desribe sounds like WF and MWM... IMHO there are enough feats that allow you to hit better.

 

[green slime]

Bad idea allround.

Multiclassed spellcasters need some method for them to keep their spellcasting abilities relevant (4th Ftr/ 6th Wiz case in point). Using a feat was an excellent way to maintain this. They do not, however need an additional method to keep their fighting abilities relevant: they always are.

 

[Nail]

Oh it is. But that is because practiced spellcaster is the problem. Feats are not supposed to make up for weak characters or a bad builds. Practiced spellcaster does this. It was meant to be a bone thrown to PCs who have casting potential lost to HD or other classes. To them it is fairly useful, unfortunately it also powers up monstrous spellcasters, notably dragons.

Practiced Spellcaster is a feat ALL players -- and I mean all of them -- should be up in arms about. Players should demand that it be stricken from the rule books. At least, they should, if they knew what was good for them.

Monsters have the most to gain from this feat, rather than PCs. Dragons are but one of many examples that show this feat to be a huge powerup for the Bad Guys(tm).

 

[szilard]

At first I was thinking this is not necessary due to every class/prc getting some type of BAB.

Now I'm not so sure.

I think I could as a DM approve a new feat for fighters that added +1 for every BAB missed (say you have one level of druid and one level of rogue and you've missed +2 to your BAB) so a Fighter 4/Druid 1/Rogue 1, could catch up +2 on his/her BAB by taking the feat to a maximum of 4. I would also limit this to BAB and not iterative attacks. So if you are a fighter multiclass part way to your 3rd attack, you can't use this feat to get that third attack...you still have to get there on the fighter progression chart via your fighter levels.

EDIT: I'll write this up in feat format (and more clearly) later today if nobody else does it first.

Thanks,
Rich

How about this, instead:

Practiced Warrior [General]

Prerequisites
Proficiency with martial weapons, base attack bonus +1, Weapon Focus.

Benefit
Your base attack bonus increases by one, but cannot exceed your hit dice.

Special
You can gain this feat multiple times. Its effects stack.

A fighter may select Practiced Warrior as one of his fighter bonus feats.

 

[calypso15]

How about this, instead:

Practiced Warrior [General]

Prerequisites
Proficiency with martial weapons, base attack bonus +1, Weapon Focus.

Benefit
Your base attack bonus increases by one, but cannot exceed your hit dice.

Special
You can gain this feat multiple times. Its effects stack.

A fighter may select Practiced Warrior as one of his fighter bonus feats.

I don't think I know a rogue or cleric alive that wouldn't take that at least once. Which, IMO, makes it too powerful.

Not to mention that, if you can take it, it's better than Weapon Focus. By quite a bit.

Calypso

 

[szilard]

I don't think I know a rogue or cleric alive that wouldn't take that at least once. Which, IMO, makes it too powerful.

Not to mention that, if you can take it, it's better than Weapon Focus. By quite a bit.

Calypso

I actually meant to make the prerequisite Weapon Specialization, rather than Weapon Focus... which would limit it to characters with levels in Fighter (or Warblade, Favored Soul, or a few other things, I guess).

-Stuart

 

[calypso15]

I actually meant to make the prerequisite Weapon Specialization, rather than Weapon Focus... which would limit it to characters with levels in Fighter (or Warblade, Favored Soul, or a few other things, I guess).

Ah. I think that makes it alright then. Useful for that Fighter who wants to dip a couple levels into arcanist or rogue for whatever reason.

Calypso

 

[Ridley's Cohort]

I don't think I know a rogue or cleric alive that wouldn't take that at least once. Which, IMO, makes it too powerful.

Not to mention that, if you can take it, it's better than Weapon Focus. By quite a bit.

Agreed.

The only major downside to FighterX/Cleric1, FighterX/Rogue1, etc. builds is that the full iterative attack lags the character that was built with a purer combat theme.

BAB already stacks. Saves superstack. IMHO the rules already favor multiclassing plenty.