>At the start of each day, similar to when spellcasters prepare spells, a Fighter may replace any and all bonus combat feats granted by the class in exchange for new ones. Feats for which you no longer meet the prerequisite cease to function.
Does this basically fix Fighter in a meaningful way?
Other urls found in this thread:
giantitp.com
twitter.com
No, because at level 5 it just means the fighter gets a couple of new ways to hit things, meanwhile the wizard gets to fucking FLY, TURN INVISIBLE, BREATHE UNDER WATER, REANIMATE CORPSES, SCRY OF PEOPLE FROM A DISTANCE, DOUBLE THEIR SPEED, SPEAK ANY LANGUAGE, and a ton of other things.
Here's a better idea. Stop playing DnD. For fucks sake, please give something else, ANYTHING else, a chance to dominate the market while this cancer dies.
...
>Does this basically fix Fighter in a meaningful way?
Not really, because it just makes it so the Fighter chooses how they'll be limited for that particular day and they'll still be limited to combat only while the mage is free to do practically everything else.
Geez, you idiot contrarians can't ever take a break.
OP basically baited for you, and you got hooked, line and sinker.
This post in particular is just pure cringe.
Veeky Forums is mostly bait and generals anyways.
Not really.
Feats are pretty lame compared to spells, being able to shuffle them around won't change that issue.
I fixed it.
Here's what you do. Any character that reaches six level gets a divine rank. People can use their feats to gain divine abilities. This way, fighters quickly gain things like flight and fireballs. Wizards might still be a little good, but spells are nothing compared to some salient divine abilities.
Make it Level 5 and we've got a deal.
Why not play 4e?
Here's some more stuff.
>use pathfinder skills
>barbarian and fighter are now one class(i.e. rage and fears in the same class)
>use ToB
>use the Vatican to psionics handbook
>remove feat taxes with giants and graveyards fixes
giantitp.com
>TFW you can't think of an actual counter-argument so you just start screaming BAIT!
DnDrones, I swear.
Level 5 is basically peak human.
Einstein works out as level 5, once you cross over to 6 it's superhuman time.
You would have to move feat progression around a bit, tho.
Try this
1 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
One extra feat, as well as a little reward for sticking it out til level 20
First post best post.
I think the intrinsecal problem is that adventurers should ALWAYS multiclass.
Having Fighter levels is great, but ONLY Fighter will limit you a lot if you're out adventuring. It's fine if you're in a military career, but kinda shit if you're out adventuring.
You mean World of Warcraft Edition?
No, because 4e is actually a good game.
Sure, if you count making everything even more videogamey and slowing the actual combat to a slower crawl than even 3.5, sure.
4e didn't "solve" the martial-caster problem anyway, it just made everyone into casters rather than trying to impose as sort of restrictions or reasonable limitations on casters.
Obvious bait is obvious, sage in all fields
Speaking as a person who's played 4e, nah.
It shares the bad gameplay with every other d&d edition and lacks the huge reservoir of contant that 3.5 had. Just play something else if you want something balanced.
Play 2e or 3e if you want to play d&d
You embarrass yourself.
Without an ability to impact the narrative, any sort of fighter cluge brings them up to the level of better “fighter” classes.
Some better fixes include letting a fighter dispel magic and counterspell, perform true feats of strength, and clearing rooms of weaker enemies for a fixed cost. None of those are even anime, they would be classic movie and epic story tropes. And nearly all of them would be decried as overpowered by most D&D fans.
>3aboos
>Knowing what a good game is like
Pick one and only one.
>Should always multiclass
>System has capstones
Does not compute, user. Multiclassing is pretty much a bone the designers throw at you. Base Classes have always been designed to be functional on their own and usually have thing to deter multiclassing and level-dipping, especially spellcasting classes
>4e
>good
Please, it's not even good as the best "game" in the series. GURPs, MM, Risus, Strike!, etc all are better games than 4e.
The clusterfuck of content is one of 3e's biggest problems. It ranges from "literally useless" to "Game = Broke".
Can someone explain this meme because I've played both and I find that 3e is more wow-edition than literally everything I've played.
>Please, it's not even good as the best "game" in the series.
You 3aboos crack me up.
Most of it is average and circumstantial. The good and useless stuff is just the stuff that slipped through the cracks.
D&D sucks and as such is better of being ported to a better game that knows what it's doing. 3.5 being the creative highlight of the series makes it the best choice for porting.
The focus on character building and itemization always made 3e feel more like Diablo 2 to me.
Gurps kicks the trash outta 4e, and GURPS is a walking meme at this point.
All d&d sucks and should only be used for the setting and ideas, if anything.
You are comparing taster poop to normal poop.
I posted this before some time ago, but this is how I handled it.
>Every few levels or so (I set it at 3) you get what I called a signature move
>The move itself can be anything you want, as long as it's described martial action
>This includes anything from targeted shots to defensive manuevers, or even just different methods of movement
>Once you declare a particular action as your signature move, you get bonuses to preforming it again
>Bonuses include anything from straight die roll bonuses to increased damage to demoraizing the enemy
>For example: Our fighter wanted to use his knife as a fulcrum to spin his entire body around in a sweeping greatsword strike, like the Abysswatchers.
>He chose that as his signature move
>Now, he gets bonuses to his rolls to do it again, and anyone he hits is either knocked down or thrown backwards.
>Another example: Our thief chose wall running as his.
>Given enough of a head start, he is able to run up a wall and leap off of it for a critical strike, hop from wall to wall, or run straight up and bound off the ceiling.
It doesn't fix the fighter vs caster thing, but it makes them way more engaging, and encourages players to roleplay a little harder.
The capstones are set so high that it's usually not a problem. Very rarely will a player get the chance to player a character all the way from 1 to 20 under normal game circunstancies.
Base Classes are functional, but limited. 5e multiclassing is pretty forgiving, and it's pretty useful to get some levels in a martial class as a spellcaster..
Everyone knows the best level dip is cleric.
For those tasty spells and dominion powers.
>Does this basically fix Fighter in a meaningful way?
Didn't work for the Brawler in Pathfinder
Best dip is Warlock, for the most powerful spammable projectile in the game, and short-rest spell slot. That half the good classes in the game are Charisma based is just icing on the cake.
Warlock is the best class for leadership servants.
Give people a huge ranged attack, even if they are level 1. You have them use the mass ranged combat rules in the PHB2 and annhilate things.
GURPS is just 3.PF if it was more focused on being a simulator than a card game.
There's differences
>balanced
>3d6 lower
>tons of content(much more than 3.X)
>really fun.
>Veeky Forums is mostly bait and generals anyways.
ftfy
>balanced
Let's not get ahead of ourselves chief. The power creep is just as bad in GURPS, it's just that it's a tad harder to nuke the planet by mid game since it doesn't have a dedicated community coming up with builds for it.
>3d6 lower
There are optional rules for using 3d6 and rules for having it be a roll under system instead.
>tons of content(much more than 3.X)
Arguable, especially since you're not going to use every supplement in the game.
>really fun.
Debatable
Eh gurps isn't built to be balanced.
It's not a stupid class based system where balance is important.
And it's fun.
yes but I find D&D fun, and as long as I have fun I don't care, so this argument is invalid.
>Eh gurps isn't built to be balanced.
Neither is 3.PF, yet we still get our weekly "le D&D was never good" threads talking about how to "fix" D&D.
Honestly, it's not even that people hate 3.PF because of its shitty balance, it's the fact that one set of classes can do everything while the other half can only do one thing, and even then, they aren't very good at it.
I mean, tell me, why would anyone play a Fighter in a campaign where combat isn't the main focus? For that matter, why would the designers make a class that doesn't favor INT and yet only gets 2 skill points per level?
Gurps is a different beast. In 3.pf classes are assumed to be of more or less equal power. Two creatures of the same CR are supposed to be able to beat each other 50% of the time. That really doesn't happen because the system has a bunch of nuance, but generally you want all your classes to be of equal power.
That didn't happen.
In gurps all choices are different and not necessarily "balanced". 4 points in social skills might be great in a CoC campaign, but not in a guns game.
Gurps has no reason to be balanced because abilities aren't "stronger" just different. You can be a 1000 point min maxed death machine but be completely useless in a ecchi campaign.
Different principles.
this really
the whole skillful intelligent rogue and brawny dumb fighter stuff really fucked over fighters having anything to do but hit people