Quote from: Libertad;575028@Mguy

What would be the best way to accomplish this?  Not just in 3rd Edition, but in other Editions in general?

I don't think a simple expansion of skills/non-weapon proficiencies/etc is enough, particularly if spellcasters can still do cool stuff both in and out of combat.

What about giving the Fighter (a versatile-sounding concept) something equivalent to themed "kits?"  Like a guerrilla soldier is good at stealth and deceiving the enemy, a mage hunter can lock down/negate magic, a legendary artisan can build awesome weapons/gadgets, etc.  It could be equivalent to Cleric domains or Wizard schools, where Fighters can take abilities from warrior archetypes which help both in and out of combat.

I'm aware that the Frank and K Tome Series Fighter can do a lot of the stuff I mentioned above, but it's 3rd Edition only and at a higher power level than many are comfortable with.

Domains and schools kind of like Rokagun or Lot5R that's a good start if 2e and before isn't tripping your trigger.

Yes please on themed magic users.  There is a reason why I think Mearls should steal anything possible from FC, DCC and others.  Just do it!

Quote from: Marleycat;575037Domains and schools kind of like Rokagun or Lot5R that's a good start if 2e and before isn't tripping your trigger.

Not familiar with Rokugan.  What did they do, exactly?

I actually think that OD&D/1st Edition had some neat and unique features for Fighters.  In OD&D, only Fighters could use magic swords, which had the potential to give all sorts of nifty abilities.  1st Edition Fighters got Exceptional Strength and could make multiple attacks against 1 or less Hit Die opponents.  These last two abilities are highly situational and won't make up for Linear Warrirors, Quadratic Wizards, but giving the Fighter unique abilities is a step in the right direction (and I don't consider 3rd Edition's Weapon Focus feat tree to be the right step).

Quote from: Libertad;575034I do like the idea in 3rd Edition of "themed" spellcasters, such as the Beguiler and Dread Necromancer.  Still versatile and cool to play, but limited in the sense that they couldn't go CoDzilla.

So what exactly do you think is a starting point for out-of-combat fighter stuff?  You mentioned a couple characters in media (Beserk, Battlehammer); what characters from media and myth should the D&D Fighter replicate?

Depends on the setting. In Berserk (my favorite Manga/Anime ever ever) things don't get off the ground a whole lot. At this point Guts has a magic suit of armor and a huge magic sword. With it he fights a bunch of demons. He has a mage on his team (and one in training) but all she can do is make barriers against demons (not people), astral project, keep him from going insane and can see/understand magic shit. Nothing overpowered. In One Piece everyone fights to some degree and in interesting (sometimes over the top) ways. The mundane characters can create mini storms, summon giant plants/fire, easily bust through walls, etc. So the setting sets what you can/n't expect from mundane characters.

DnD however has a wider range to cover. You literally have to go from average person tier (at level one) to fighting titans (at level 20). I'm not going to lie, I don't know how you can cover that kind of power difference in just 20 levels. The shit you fight in DnD is just too fantastic. While people concentrate a lot on wizards they do not concentrate on what the opposition can do. Demons, liches, dragons, etc all have powers like a wizard or sorcerer. They have all the reality shattering effects that wizards do and can fight as well as (and has more survivability than) a fighter on top of that. Casters keep up just fine becauase they don't have any restraints on what they can do. It has been well noted on this board people hate powering up fighters appropriately. So for those who want to shackle the fighter but keep them relevant you have to cut from the top. Otherwise... Well here's something someone wrote up at the Den within the last 24 hours:

Quote from: AndreiChekovI only recently got it to tome stuff. And discovering that the fighter was garbage was also recent. So I don't really understand how things become uneven at higher level, i just remember feeling useless as the party paladin.

Could you tell me what's bad about it at high levels please?

to which someone answere:

Quote from: maxusSure! Educate

Beginning past level 5, and certainly well in effect after level 10, a character's abilities have become more important than their raw numbers (to a degree).

At level 10, the Fighter...can stab things. At level 10, the Cleric can summon angels and demons and monsters, heal the sick, harm the wicked, travel to another dimension (plane shift), and they can even send someone to Hell while they're still alive (also plane shift). There's no amount of face-stabbing that comes close to the utility of that. AND the cleric can fight as well as the Fighter, thanks to Divine Power.

The problem also exists with the wizard--they get actual abilities and ways to affect the game world. Not numbers.

This isn't a problem with the casters though--it's a problem with the fighter. See, monsters also grow increasingly stronger and diverse in what they can do. Traditional fantasy says it should be possible to take a dragon in a one-on-one fight. That isn't going to happen in D&D, not with a Fighter or a Paladin. Everything in the game grows steadily more incredible and insane, but the melee fighters are expected to be realistic. By level 20, you should at least be pulling some serious God of War-type bullshit. But instead, a level 20 fighter doesn't get astoundingly strong. Sure, he can get stronger than a person here, but not Hercules or Roland strong. It's faintly possible that if he focused on Strength, he could get Beowulf-level strong. The fighters don't get inherently faster or more agile. All they get, is numbers.

By the same token, animals are pretty tame. Even a T-Rex is CR 8. D&D animals just don't get the stuff to be survivable or to contribute to the party as anything other than a transport, comic relief, or emergency rations.

Monks get goofy "inner mind" type stuff, Paladins and Rangers get spellcasting from the Gods, and Barbarians rage.

Since Fighters are about fighting and mastering certain weapon styles, perhaps they can gain stuff related to fighting styles.  At middle to high levels, when you're fighting giants and dragons and archmages, the Fighter can replicate certain magic spells and do superhuman actions.  A nimble Fighter can ignore negative effects of terrain, act hasted through an "adrenaline surge," and jump really high/glide.  An inspring figure can give morale bonuses like a Bard, negate mind-affecting spells on himself and others, and stave off damage and grant hit points "through second wind/fighting through the pain."  For things that Clerics can do (summon monsters, banish foes), a Fighter might get duplicate abilities ("the cavalry has arrived"/rescue attempt of minions like summoned monsters, staring down an opponent and getting him to surrender/relent like save-or-suck spells).

Quote from: Libertad;575048Not familiar with Rokugan.  What did they do, exactly?

I actually think that OD&D/1st Edition had some neat and unique features for Fighters.  In OD&D, only Fighters could use magic swords, which had the potential to give all sorts of nifty abilities.  1st Edition Fighters got Exceptional Strength and could make multiple attacks against 1 or less Hit Die opponents.  These last two abilities are highly situational and won't make up for Linear Warrirors, Quadratic Wizards, but giving the Fighter unique abilities is a step in the right direction (and I don't consider 3rd Edition's Weapon Focus feat tree to be the right step).

Mguy has suddenly gone sane which means I drank too much again.  Oh, you were asking about Rokagun? It's the 3x D20 version of LotFR hon. You know that game?

(Football season is nearly here so I am getting a bit "blonde"). I love my Seattle Seahawks and we have a quarterback! Watch out 49ers!!:)

Quote from: Libertad;574907Should the Fighter have an assortment of mechanical tricks he can use out of combat and not reliant on DM Fiat or multiclassing?  How broad should his skill base be?

My thoughts on the matter are "yes."  I see nothing wrong with a 3rd Edition/Pathfinder Fighter having access to Knowledge skills, social interaction skills, and more "sneaky" skills like Stealth and Disable Device.  I also think that giving more "versatile" and pseudo-magical abilities to Fighters useful in and out of combat can be good as well, such as having high ranks in Jump/Acrobatics granting you sort-of-but-not-quite-flight at middle-high levels, or a "mage hunter" getting Spell Resistance or the ability to detect/shrug off magical effects.

Yes, a versatility in skills is a good thing. I prefer to play Fighters whose abilities can be explained by mundane logic (the mythical Fighter archetype is okay for high-level games, but it's not a range of power I am interested in exploring), but who are competent, well-rounded individuals. Sometimes, skill-and-ability systems fence you in more than they give you extra options, because they can be read in a way that says "if you do not have it on your character sheet, you can't do that".

I prefer a game which has more fluid barriers between things you can do well, things you are handy with, and things you can't attempt. In classic D&D editions, I support Philotomy's take on skills:

QuoteWhen I allow Thieves, their class skills are treated as extraordinary capabilities. That is, anyone can hide, but a Thief can hide in shadows. Anyone can move quietly, but a Thief can move silently, without even making a sound. Anyone can climb, but a Thief can climb sheer walls.

Naturally, this was not a universal interpretation of O/AD&D. Many, maybe even the majority of people played it in a way that was less generous. In my own rules variant - a combination of a trimmed-down d20 system and old school ideas - I use a formal skill system, but give characters a very broad access to both skills and combat maneouvres (things that would be covered by 3e's feats), and a decent chance of success. And of course, there are yet other ways to accomplish the same goals. The concept of prestige classes as originally envisioned might have been a great tool to broaden character abilities (instead of leading into overspecialisation and CharOp). Ability checks may be another, supported by specialisation packages that give you background / flavour options. (This might make a great way to do it in 5e - actually, how does 5e do this stuff now?)

They are going with your last two suggestions and ability checks mostly.  It's almost like 2e but not quite because of "advantage" and dice expertise but it's very close. Dice expertise is very similar to DCC fighter/dwarf stuff and FC action dice in my opinion.  YMMV.

That's good to hear. I will have to take a look at the newest info out there, haven't been checking in a while.

Quote from: Melan;575079That's good to hear. I will have to take a look at the newest info out there, haven't been checking in a while.

Ben called it. This game is for me. I also said I am the excluded middle many times so take that as you will.  Honestly so far this game sounds awesome and it plays real easy.  For a casual player like myself it's pure heaven.  Not sure it would work for old hands. It's taking alot of FC's basic stuff with a twist. My question is can they continue with KISS?

Quote from: Marleycat;575057I love my Seattle Seahawks and we have a quarterback! Watch out 49ers!!:)

The Seahawks exist only to choke mid-season and then make every team it faces miserable since they cannot get into the playoffs.

The 49ers do not have to worry about the Seahawks.

Quote from: jeff37923;575101The Seahawks exist only to choke mid-season and then make every team it faces miserable since they cannot get into the playoffs.

The 49ers do not have to worry about the Seahawks.

I should put you on my IL for that offense. Lucky for you that I like you and Teddy.  Go Seahawks.

Quote from: Marleycat;575091Ben called it. This game is for me. I also said I am the excluded middle many times so take that as you will.  Honestly so far this game sounds awesome and it plays real easy.  For a casual player like myself it's pure heaven.  Not sure it would work for old hands. It's taking alot of FC's basic stuff with a twist. My question is can they continue with KISS?

Looking at what ENWorld has on skills, it seems decent enough. Freeing the game from the constraints of over-mechanisation and taking it back into a fuzzier space of rules+player ideas+character concept+negotiation is a move in the right direction - if, as you say, the mechanics that remain are easy, elegant and robust. Looks like Robert Schwalb is seeing the same issues with too tightly defined skills as I do:

Quote from: Robert SchwalbAlthough many see skills as empowering, offering customization options and character definition, in my experience, skills actually constricted game play so players tended to operate only within the bounds of the skills their characters possessed. If you tried to do something that wasn’t a skill, the DM might fall back on an ability check, which in both 3rd and 4th Edition wasn’t great since you didn’t get to add your skill/training bonus to your check result. Rather than improvise and come up with something unexpected, I found, in my own gaming experiences, players combed the skill lists on the character sheet to determine what they could and couldn’t do when presented with a challenge.

Quote from: Marleycat;575057(Football season is nearly here so I am getting a bit "blonde"). I love my Seattle Seahawks and we have a quarterback! Watch out 49ers!!:)

NFL cannot start soon enough!

as a brit i have to say NFL and NHL are probably the 2 sports(not counting psudo sports/entertainment like ufc and wrestling) i actually give a damn about so yeah the new season of nfl cant come early enough.