Why do people complain about fighters having nothing to do out of fights when you should be a rogue if you want to be a...

That should be something the fighter should have retained: the ability to call upon an army or at least a party of warriors to aid him. They wouldn't even have to be great fighters, just good enough to follow orders and function as a logistics line or do things where three additional pairs of hands would be useful. Fighter should be the Ice Climbers of classes!

BASIC BITCH D&D FAG DETECTED

It's not hard to do things outside of fights as a fighter. The problem is, you are limited by your imagination. Fighters can easily be jacks of all trades.

Because D&D was never intended for narrative-heavy campaigns. It was all about dungeon-crawling and monster-slaying. It was only later, when people started wanting more out of their campaigns, that problems with classes having nothing to do outside of combat arose. The Fighter was never meant to represent anything more than a bit of armoured muscle.

If you want to avoid this problem, you should try a classless system, where everything comes down to what your character's stats are and what skills they have. Then you can make a character however you please, avoiding or embracing archetypes as you like. You can still make a combat monster if you want, but you could also make a character with a more varied skillset.

This could be an interesting thread, but then it turned out into "le d&d classes".

Fuck you all and classes too

The mechanics of the system don't support that.

But then, what's the point of playing a fighter then? Combat generally happens maybe once or twice in a four hour session so outside of those instances, are you just supposed to sit around with a thumb up your ass while the rest of the party gets to contribute to the campaign?

Yes they do. Your skills have uses in general adventuring and anything that can't be shoehorned into one of those could be rolled with basic stat modifiers.

Fighters don't get nearly enough skill points to get anywhere close to being "jacks of all trades."

I don't know about you, but the fighter in my last game was most useful person both inside (dealt the most damage and locked enemies down so no one else would get hurt) and outside (handled logistics, negotiations, lorekeeping, and first aid) of combat, but that might've been because everyone else was an idiot that could've done all those things better than the fighter if they'd only tried.

why do people complain about trap options when there are other options that aren't as big traps

I don't understand, you've answered your own question.

>skill points

Have you tried not playing 3e/Pathfinder?

In 5e DnD my fighter dwarf archaelogist had a bunch of skills too, just thanks to the skill proficiency stuff in the system. I dont think theres a problem with fighters not getting skills, but rather casters getting a lot of spells to handle anything.
Granted, in the game I'm in, theres usually about one or two encounters between rests.

Of course. I only reference 3.pf because OP's problem doesn't exist in other editions, or any halfway decent game for that matter.

What sort of fucking setting do you live in?
Even in a modern setting, a western ordinary grunt has a lot of skillpoint in what is Scribe skills. Many ranks in repair, and a lot of prophecies in weapons, vehicles and equipment.

Fantasy grunt would still a lot of skill ranks, and officers even more.
"I hit shit" doesn't work unless the system has a acrobatic and grappling system, that works properly.

It exists in 4e and even 5e.

It doesn't exist in 4e and it's mitigated heavily in 5e by proficiency system and backgrounds although the spell thing is still an issue a bit in 5e

Might be compensated by doing some talking, if GM's interpetation of talking isn't "a series of Persuasion checks"

Stop playing DnD, honestly. Its class/level system means that everyone is defined by their ability to kill, and progression means killing better.

If you want to play a good roleplaying game, just try anything but DnD and its derivatives, really.

>It doesn't exist in 4e

>3 trained skills
>dogshit class skill list

I always here about the gurps meme on here but haven't really looked into it. Id love to try out shadow run but have heard it's really heavy on book keeping, what's GURPS like?
(I haven't been playing tabletop very long, I've only ever played pathfinder now for about half a year with my current playgroup. So long enough to see some of the flaws with the rogue class and the Challenge rating system.)

Between themes, backgrounds and then the ability to take ritual caster or the martial equivalent (the name of which escapes me right now) it is a non issue

That's still a shitty base compared to other classes.

Yes but it doesn't relegate them to uselessness unlike another edition we all know

GURPS and Shadowrun are both good, but require an experienced GM to do properly. It's very easy for a rookie to get overwhelmed with all the shit they get thrown at them by those systems.

I would recommend something simpler, like Storyteller, specifically cWoD (Vampire the Masquerade, Mage the Ascension, Werewolf the Apocalypse, etc.). If you don't mind Star Wars, I think the FFG systems (Edge of the Empire, Age of Rebellion, and Force and Destiny) are some of the best games out there. But honestly, pretty much anything other than DnD and its derivatives is better than DnD and its derivatives.

Because they aren't good in combats either, specially compared to the classes you mentioned, Cleric in case.

>2 ranks per level
>Able to compete against casters who get the same or more plus spells that completely bypass skills
5/10

I play Anima, thank god that doesn't happen there.

GURPS is pretty brutal compared to D&D. Especially with a new GM. For all the shit it gets for its complexity it is not actually harder than D&D but it puts a lot of strain on GM.

If you have an experienced GM with ready setting for which he choose what rules he wanted to use and all the other stuff - it's really good.

For a new group it may be a little daunting to get into because your GM will need to put a lot of work into preparing a game.

On the other hand playing fighter there is satisfying. I still fondly remember the time when some corrupt guards tried to harass our group and my character, as a warning, kicked one them in the knee so hard it bent the other way.

Because people want to do the things that are trap options, and there's rarely a full replacement that's NOT a trap option.

There's no reason for trap options to even exist in a system unless the developers are retarded, the players are retarded, or it wants ivory tower design (which is just a combination of the previous two).

I don't want to sound like a cunt, but that post is meaningless for what we're discursing, it means nothing, it brings nothing. Roleplaying is a skill everybody can have and doesn't depend on the system, you can also have a smart wizard player doing the same while still being back up by the system. Fighters aren't back up by the system, Casters are, your Roleplaying Fighter is still at disadvantage. So even if we give you that and asing a point for it, your Fighter gets 1 point for being smart, 0 for mechanics, Wizard dude gets 1 point for being smart, 1 for mechanics, wizard wins.

All of this if we discourse the worst editions of D&D and clones of course.

1. There shouldnt be trap options in system that tells you all options as equally powerful
2. Very few people allow ToB or Psyonics so not always can pick non trap options for the character concepts you want to play

They also leveled faster in pre3rd D&D.

The followers got split off into a feat that anyone could take (and was based off CHA) and leveling speed was uniformized.

>If you want to have fun and be useful, you should play a different class
This is what your argument is. It gets even worse when you throw magic into the mix and you effectively get a split between those who can do everything well and those who can do one or two things decently.

I get that classes need to be (over)specialized to make the party construction viable, but rather than separating between mundane and magical we should give everyone a very specialized form of magic. Get rid of the "wizard" and split the various schools up between various classes. This is why I like the Dread Necromancer and Beguiler from 3.5e for example. Especially the latter, who's basically a rogue if rogues didn't suck outside of skill checks. They're still skillmonkeys first and foremost, but they can do something useful in almost every situation.

I've never liked this assumption, but it speaks of an assumption at how we play rpgs.
this guy gets it.

Instead of a fighter, you're playing a
>soldier
>mercenary
>gang enforcer
>veteran
>gladiator
>tactician
>thug
>treasure hunter
etc.

Use your imagination. That's what this game is all about. A player who is looking for "something to do" might need a scene or a hook to get their imagination going, and then you give them the opportunity to add something.

The fuck is "psyonics"?

I know about PSIonics, but what's that thing?

I mixed the name Psyche (from Psychic Warrior, a Psionic) and Psionic

sell me on anima
'Coz from this pic it doesn't look so inspiring

Oh, dont get me wrong, is crunchy, and a mess for new players, but if you like crunchy its fun. It only have 3 books for players (Core, Ki and Magic/Psychic powers). Is a point buy system with "classes", so martials can have magic, psychic powers or ki if you want to pay for it. It follows the rule that if everybody is overpowered nobody is.

^this

And they still can.

If your DM and group isn't shit.

No, you're limited by the mechanics and how much your GM allows. Meanwhile other classes with the mechanics on their side aren't as limited as you.

4/10, work harder next time.

>Why do people complain about fighters having nothing to do out of fights when you should be a rogue if you want to be a martial with great noncombat skills, or a cleric if you want to be a guy with a big weapon and armor but also noncombat magic?

Because, a lot of little whiny gamers don't want to stay in their own lane. They want a character that can do everything, and do it well. They want to be "special", by being a wizard who picks locks better than a pure rogue, they want to be a fighter who can tank against an army, but still move stealthy and heal and read scrolls to cast spells.

99.99% of the complaints about fighters, are made by little bitches who like to bitch. They're hung up on WOW and anime, and have no place in normal games.

Why do I have to sacrifice the ability to tumble or swim to get ranks in Profession (Guardsman)? You have to gimp yourself even harder than an Intelligence based skill system already does to make a character of any interest or even any sense.

the mechanics don't "limit" fighters any more than they do other classes.

It's a give/take.

Give extra HP, top armor, bigger feat selection
Take skill points and spells

I'm sorry you're retarded and have never played with a good dm.

>kimono, pantyhose, miniskirt
High tier taste, could do without the ears and tail though

You don't sacrifice anything.

You choose. Want Tumble, but don't have the skill points? Take it next level then. Skill points aren't unlimited.

Look at it like this..

>Why do rogues have to sacrifice taking 4 ranks in every knowledge skill, just so they can be stealthy and disarm traps?

Your argument makes exactly no sense.

don't reply to bait

>You have to gimp yourself even harder than an Intelligence based skill system already does to make a character of any interest or even any sense.
>make a character of any interest
>any interest

"I can't RP"......the post

Yet Casters don't even need to ""roleplay"" (mother may I is not roleplay) and do everything I do and better, odd right

Oh?

Casters can disarm better than a rogue?

They can have a favored enemy bonus better than a ranger?

They can wear plate mail, carry a shield, and swing a longsword better than a fighter?

Wow........Casters are very impressive.

Rogues have more than enough skill points that they can usually pull off both the standard rogue skills and have some leftover for flavoring or improving their character. Most classes end up with enough that they can at least fill their role comfortably. Wizards are sometimes better than Fighters are Climbing and Swimming, a Strength based skill, because Fighters may be taking something like a single skill point per level. I'm not saying Fighters should be jacks of all trades homie, they shouldn't just get 8 skill points to do whatever and impinge on other classes niches, but rather skills should be distributed in a more sensible way.

>Casters can disarm better than a rogue?
Yes, heat metal or grease just for example
>They can have a favored enemy bonus better than a ranger?
Actually yes too, and not like favored enemy is good, is useless as fuck +4 to damage? worthless, +4 perception? achievable through familiar or spells,
>They can wear plate mail, carry a shield, and swing a longsword better than a fighter?
Are you joking? you meant as those actual weapons? yes, cleric, duskblade, favoured soul, etc for example. You meant as the bonuses? yes, almost every caster ever for example.

We're discussing 3.PF, right? or did we change to another system? because if not, then you migh have a point

>He doesn't know there're spells that literally give you Smite and Favoured enemy for hours/level of a Paladin/Ranger of your caster level
user...I...

Casters can indeed buff themselves up to do maneuvers better than a rogue, partly because rogues have terrible CMB anyway, but hell the casters can outdo the fighter too if they want. They never want to though because maneuvers are 90% pointless

Who gives a fuck about favored enemy bonuses when HP damage is the worst way to beat monsters and casters can pull out bigger damage spells anyway if they want to feel gimped by being mere blasters?

They can have a higher AC and piles of defenses that fighter's can't even dream of. They can again buff themselves to be better combatants, or just summon in more monsters to do it for them.

And the thing is that if any given caster could do ONE of those sorts of things, it might not be so bad. But every one of them can do all that and more. That's what makes casters OP. It's fine if magic can do everything, but a single class shouldn't be able to do everything.

>Yes, heat metal or grease just for example

Yes, heat that wooden door up and then cast grease at it. That should totally not alert anyone from the smoke. (also, the mage is now down 2 spells), just to get by the first of many doors. Oh, I forget, that tg casterfags think wizards have unlimited spells.

>is useless as fuck +4 to damage
If a +4 bonus is worthless, then you have shit DM, and are playing some weird version of D&D. Or would you be willing to give every attacker on you, a +4 bonus , since it's worthless?

>We're discussing 3.PF, right?
I was discussing 3.5. But I hear it's basically the same as pf?

>cleric, duskblade, favoured soul
Those classes all cast grease and heat metal?

>or hours/level of a Paladin/Ranger of your caster level
Playing with too many sups, can lead to issues in your game user.

PF has an optional ruleset called Background Skills which goes a long way toward addressing the poor skill distribution problem and is pretty great for the 1 skill Fighter problem, but it's bloated down with a bunch of extra stuff and a partial skill revamp and probably needs GM tweaking to prevent abuse. You could easily end up with a bunch of barbarians who all happen to have a ton of skill in knowledge(nobility) for no reason in a political intrigue campaign, that sort of thing. I'd like to see more official attempts at improving skills.

>. But every one of them can do all that and more. That's what makes casters OP. It's fine if magic can do everything, but a single class shouldn't be able to do everything.

Oh, yes, the unlimited spells again........

Want wizards to stay in their own lane? Then make the classes stay in their own lane. It's not that difficult. I'm sorry your DM is shit.

>Is not that these classes are shit, is that your GM is shit for not limiting the rest of classes beyond what the system tells him
Oh you
Well, what else should have expected of a bait since post 1
Was enjoyable while it lasted

Next time use Disable Device not Disarm when refering to open doors, disable traps, etc, disarm is a combat maneuver in where you remove a weapon from your opponent's hand.

>Can casters do these?
>Yes to all
>W-well...d-doesn't matter because I don't allow it
Again, user, the system works in their favour, you're free to do whatever you like as a GM, but that doesn't mean the system isn't rigged, hope you can separate system from what you, as an individual, do.

>Next time use Disable Device not Disarm

Sorry, there's some bleed over from 2e into 3.5 on terminology.

How do you tell a tank to stay in its own lane when it takes up multiple lanes by default?

>Again, user, the system works in their favour, you're free to do whatever you like as a GM, but that doesn't mean the system isn't rigged,

Fighters have HP far in excess of wizards.
FIghters have better weapon selections, armor choices and a shit load of combat/general feats, above a wizard.

If the wizard spends all his spells, on utility functions (like opening locks), he's gonna be a shitty mage for the party when combat occurs.

>A Troll.....quick mage, blast it!
>Srry, no can do, outta spells, cause I wanted to be a better rogue than the rogue! lol....casters rock eh?

>Not using tank-sized lanes.

>scrolls
>wands

It is like you don't even caster.

>Fighters have HP far in excess of wizards.
Doesn't matter.
>FIghters have better weapon selections, armor choices and a shit load of combat/general feats, above a wizard.
Also doesn't matter.
>If the wizard spends all his spells, on utility functions (like opening locks), he's gonna be a shitty mage for the party when combat occurs.
No more useless as a Fighter with no HP though, which is more likely to happen before the wizard runs out of spells.

I understand, but you misleaded us into thinking other stuff and that's why we told you heat metal (that affects 1 extra target per 2 caster levels) and grease (that has an area) for disarming opponents.

Knock spell in a wand is regarded as the most useful way of opening doors, its pretty fucking cheap for what it does.
Then there's the feat from complete arcane that, as long as you have a summon monster prepared spell, you can summon at will 24/7 without spending slots a weak as fuck monster, you could use that to trigger traps for examples. There are other ways though.

Disable traps is a trap option though, the CDs are so high not every rogue might accomplish it, I know, I played one with every rank and a +3 from feat to Disable device and Spot and I was at best disabling 1/4 of them, and spotting 1/4 too.

Shit, I forgot.

To Veeky Forums, wizards have unlimited spells, and unlimited scrolls and wands.

My bad.

Unlimited? No, but past the first few levels wizards will be racking up enough spells that they're going to be hard pressed to run out even intentionally, not to mention scrolls, wands, staves and plenty of wondrous items that store/cast spells without using their own.

As for making the class/niche protection, that would be greatly aided by making the fighter and rogue actually powerful enough at their jobs that they can't be replaced with spells. Or maybe just cutting the casters down a bit. If the fighter can only ever be Conan, then the wizard should have to be specialized into enchantment to play at being Thulsa Doom, not freely running around with more magic than all the Greek gods combined.

Wizards get "scribe scroll" as a first level extra feat, why wouldn't they make more scrolls to offset their piddly spell slots? They can also make magic items as well as an extra feat, why wouldn't they make a wand for their more ubitquitious spells like grease, fly, or invisibility?

If you're going to be salty about being proven wrong then why did you even bring up the argument?

>you misleaded us into thinking other stuff
totally unintentional m8
>Knock spell in a wand
IF you DM has allowed you to find one, or you've spent the time/money/exp on making one. We don't play with a magic item shop on every corner.

>complete arcane
Holy shit that book led to more bullshit.....Toss it away, because it's disruptive and fucked up.

>Disable traps is a trap option though, the CDs are so high not every rogue might accomplish it
Yes, traps are difficult, and often dangerous. If adventuring was easy, women and children would do it.

Might sound odd, but I never ran out of spells as a Wizard, surely not before the martials wanted to sleep to recover HPs and other stuff. Must be because IM NOT A FUCKING BLASTER CASTER.

>Wizards get "scribe scroll" as a first level extra feat, why wouldn't they make more scrolls to offset their piddly spell slots?

>Knock
>First level wand or scroll creation

Oh...that's impressive.

Takes literally 8 hours and 250 gp to create a knock spell wand with 50 charges or 25 gp for a scroll of one use, user, is not impossible at all. If the fighter has money for full plates, shields, bows, arrows and greatswords I'm fucking sure I have money for scrolls and wands.

>Might sound odd, but I never ran out of spells as a Wizard

Of course you didn't. You opened all locks, disarmed all traps, and buffed yourself up to be a better tank than the fighter......all before lunch, and still had 902 spell slots left open.

>you've spent the time/money/exp on making one
Well it's quite easy to make one since the martials will likely need 8 hours to recover all their lost HP and all.
>Yes, traps are difficult, and often dangerous.
Even for the class whose whole purpose was disabling traps? It shouldn't be possible to replace an entire class's niche with a 10 ft. pole and a Barbarian.

>Takes literally 8 hours and 250 gp to create a knock spell wand

Fuck, sorry, I forgot that wizards on Veeky Forums have unlimited money and down time as well. My bad.

Okay, doesn't change the fact that the Fighters were asking for rest more often than I was.

I think two things can be done to improve fighters, either make them proficient in leadership and commanding, or make them proficient in smithing and enchantments.

Making them proficient in leadership represents the sort of front line commander that you might expect of a fighter. They have troops at their beck and call, and they make the rest of the team fight better. Sort of like a banneret or purple dragon knight, but without compromising the ability to fight.

Meanwhile, the fighter proficient in smithing and enchantments represents the lone champion type of fighter, who had magically enhanced his armor and weaponry to make up for his lack of skill with spellcraft. Flaming poisonous swords, nigh invulnerable armor, and very good skill with a blade ensure that this fighter can duke it out with a wizard despite the range disadvantage.

Yes, the magic of using wands, scrolls and winds of cover.

Yeah, I forgot that martialfags dumped INT as well. My bad.

If I don't have 250 gp for a wand, neither has the fighter for his armor and weapons.

>A trivial amount of money and time is the same as unlimited money and time

I don't even what.

>Fighter can buy 2000 GP in full plate, shield and greatsword
>I can't buy 250 GP in a wand
Your mind works in misterious ways

>Takes literally 8 hours and 250 gp to create a knock spell wand with 50 charges

Wut?

Why were the fighters injured?

I thought mages "broke reality" each round and slaughtered everything in their path?

You must be doing it wrong.

>It shouldn't be possible to replace an entire class's niche with a 10 ft. pole and a Barbarian.
Unless that niche is "beating people to death with a stick"

But user, wizards have EVERY spell they'd need in a wand/scroll.

That's not a trivial amount of time/money.

there have been a dozen spells mentioned here itt. And wizards are assumed to have wands of each.....always. Because "wizards"

>Why were the fighters injured?
Because they ran into melee to attack the enemy, took damage while dealing damage back, and every so often they ate a crit or two and lost a sizable chunk of their HP.