Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;1001557Oh, so it's shit like "I kill on you with my NINE DISAPPOINTED VIRGINS TESTICLE PUNCH!" sort of thing?

Basically.  Giving fighters magical abilities to make up for the fact that 3.5 casters have none of the limitations of TSR D&D.

Quote from: CRKrueger;1001561Basically.  Giving fighters magical abilities to make up for the fact that 3.5 casters have none of the limitations of TSR D&D.

So basically Asian Iron Heroes?

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;1001552Dragons?
Undead?
Gargoyles?
Magic swords?
Wizards?

I'm STILL not 100% sure what the hell you're talking about.  It seems to be related somehow to wire-fu, but I'm not sure that's all.

The issue, and it's a commonly attributed 3.x problem, is that in a lot of the later editions and variations, some of the mechanics are thrown for a loop.  From what I've seen, it actually started in AD&D, with hit points inflating relatively quickly, but unless you have magical spells, it comes to a point where the amount of 'health' the other side has out paces the amount of raw damage that be dished out.  It came to a point where certain magic systems/spells became mandatory to have, namely what most of us 'new schoolers' call the Save or Die (and by Die, we mean fight enders, like the Charm or Sleep spells.)

White Room Examples:

A 10th Level Fighter facing off with an appropriately challenging opponent at the required range, even with a magical weapon, will take several real hours to adjudicate and resolve, and there's no guarantee that the Fighter will live through it.

A 10th Level Wizard's only real roadblock is initiative.  Again, white room scenario in which this target is at the proper assumed distance.  One spell is usually enough to end a fight.

Now, in previous editions Magic Resistance was more effective than it was in 3.x, but some 'tactics' if you want to call it that, can bypass it completely.  But that's a case by case situation and it's the magic system that makes it possible, whereas the Fighter is commonly believed to have one option:  I hit it. It's a meme at this point, and has been repeated for decades (in fact, it's why the Fighter is considered the 'Baby's First Class' by a lot of players in the past 20+ years, it's mechanically simple and doesn't require any thought.  I get that your experience is different, but that's the outlier now.)

The issue is that outside of magical toys, almost all of the non-Fighter based characters had escalating damage options.  The Thief Backstab multiplier increased every some many levels, the Rogue gets an escalating Sneak Attack (which should more accurately named Anatomy Strike, but whatever), all the spells have increasing dice for damage, and still do half damage on a save, or bypass hit points directly, but some of those even have damage on a failed save as well.  I believe the older versions of Disintegrate had like a 10 dice roll if it was resisted.  But the Fighter, Barbarian, Paladin and Ranger's melee/physical combat options do not increase at the same rate, although in later editions the Barbarian's Rage does get boosted significantly.  The Fighter however, has no such access to mechanics, like Rage or the Paladin and Ranger's Spells, most of which are defensive or utilitarian in nature, admittedly.

The Book of Nine Swords for D&D 3.5, attempted to address this by making three new fighting classes and several more fighting 'styles' in the Monk's Wuxia sense.  But really, all it did was add extra mechanics for extra dice of damage.  The backlash against it was mostly from the Wizard/Magic Using Class players, who believed that by adding that series of systems it somehow managed to dilute the 'uniqueness' of the Wizard class.  It was rather amusing to watch.

And I'm OK with giving the Fighting Men an increasing damage capacity, simply because the more levels you gain the 'better' the character is supposed to be, and a Fighting Man's skill being relegated to simply being able to 'hit' better.  Here's the thing for me, I've taken some martial arts classes, tried to actually be a boxer (tried is the operative word) before my genetics gave out and I became the cripple I am today, and the more I trained, the better I got at knowing where to hit for maximum damage, how to twist the hips for more power, how to move my feet to get the most of any leverage I can produce.

AD&D's Fighter will do the exact same amount of damage on a hit with a longsword no matter what level they are.  This never computed for me.  The fact that later editions allow you to buff your stats to mitigate that is still a bit disingenuous to me.  The better you are, the more damage you should do.

Again, the idea was "Hell, every other class does, why not the Fighter Types?"

As always, your mileage may vary.

Thanks, that's a really, really excellent explanation of the whole thing, and matches what I've played of Pathfinder and other 3.0/3.5 derivatives.

Much appreciated.

My answer to the OP question then would be "I don't play versions with unrestricted magic users so it's not a problem."

As you said, mileage and all that.

I think the OP had multiple things involved in the question -- ToB and it's descendants as a way to address fighter balance in d20 games, and separately the wuxia-esque 'well outside realism' level of ability attributed to martial characters and whether it fits in D&D's 'feel.'

Quote from: Willie the Duck;1001691I think the OP had multiple things involved in the question -- ToB and it's descendants as a way to address fighter balance in d20 games, and separately the wuxia-esque 'well outside realism' level of ability attributed to martial characters and whether it fits in D&D's 'feel.'

Yeah, the two aren't really related except by circumstance. Fighters rock in old school D&D. You don't need spells to make fighters good, you just need to make fighters competent and tell the magic-user supremacist designers to fuck off.

Quote from: Christopher Brady;1001566A 10th Level Fighter facing off with an appropriately challenging opponent at the required range, even with a magical weapon, will take several real hours to adjudicate and resolve, and there's no guarantee that the Fighter will live through it.

Several real hours?  What are you talking about?

Quote from: CRKrueger;1001561Basically.  Giving fighters magical abilities to make up for the fact that 3.5 casters have none of the limitations of TSR D&D.

There's actually two perceived problems.

1) The sense that fighters were underpowered compared to the magic users.
2) The sense that fighters were boring and limited in their options compared to magic users.

Some people whinge about only one of the above while others whine about both.

Quote from: Christopher Brady;1001566In previous editions Magic Resistance was more effective than it was in 3.x, but some 'tactics' if you want to call it that, can bypass it completely.

What tactics?

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales;1001231Some sub-systems for martial characters in 3.x, like Tome of Battle, Path of War, Spheres of Might, etc give them wuxia and other superhuman capabilities. I do not know any comparable systems for other retroclones, pardon my ignorance. Considering that the fantasy world has magic, it does not break my suspension of disbelief for martial characters to develop such capabilities as a matter of course without explicitly being spell casters. Given the prevalence of such capabilities in real world mythology, legend, fairy tales, etc, I would be surprised if they did not. For whatever reason, a number of other people who I do not know hold the opposite view.

What is your opinion on martials having their own kind of martial magic, at least in high-magic settings where casters get really powerful?

It's called "Earthdawn", and I'm all for it;)!

You know what's fun?
Ditch spellcasters from 3.5, and replace them with psychics.
But keep the Tome of Battle classes.
Tome of Battle, Expanded Psionics Handbook (and Magic of Incarnum) actually makes for a pretty fun game.

Quote from: TJS;1001745There's actually two perceived problems.

1) The sense that fighters were underpowered compared to the magic users.
2) The sense that fighters were boring and limited in their options compared to magic users.

Some people whinge about only one of the above while others whine about both.

If 1 is a problem, it is much easier to fix with a steady damage bonus or something in order to help a fighter retain the simple feel they've always had. When I play a fighter in D&D, it often because I just want to play a tough guy who swings his sword at things and don't want the mechanical complexity that comes with wizards.

I think with 2, the problem they discovered is you fundamentally change the feel of the game when you make fighters mechanically similar to wizards and priests. And for people who always liked fighters, part of their attraction is their simplicity. the last thing I wanted for fighters in D&D was a bunch of bells and whistles.

And I am a fan of over-the-top fighting magic genres. I just think in D&D, it doesn't really fit as the default assumption for fighters. A lot of those more magical fighter options in 3E work great if you are running a wuxia campaign (I ran several with the 3E rules and found that stuff fit well for that kind of game). But I found my regular games were getting plagued with way too many character options by late 3E. And because all the books were pretty much written with players in mind rather than the GM, the culture of play really began to favor players having a huge say in what is allowable at the table.

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales;1001231Some sub-systems for martial characters in 3.x, like Tome of Battle, Path of War, Spheres of Might, etc give them wuxia and other superhuman capabilities. I do not know any comparable systems for other retroclones, pardon my ignorance. Considering that the fantasy world has magic, it does not break my suspension of disbelief for martial characters to develop such capabilities as a matter of course without explicitly being spell casters. Given the prevalence of such capabilities in real world mythology, legend, fairy tales, etc, I would be surprised if they did not. For whatever reason, a number of other people who I do not know hold the opposite view.

What is your opinion on martials having their own kind of martial magic, at least in high-magic settings where casters get really powerful?

An old GM I had in high school absolutely hated anything that smelled of asian martial arts in his western fantasy. I think it comes down to taste.

As a fan of Martial (ie. Fighter) classes, until 3.5's Tome of Battle it's always been the "simple" class. I actually like a lot more variety in what I can do with my turn and a lot of the Feats that accompanied the basic Fighter failed to do that with any sort of reliability, especially at later levels against bigger and more dangerous threats. The problem is when you force these classes into a role where that's the only way to play them, as was the case with 4th Edition. The 4E Fighter had exploits and features and Paragon Paths and etc. that made it not Simple and involved when many just want to use it to bash things, hence the Essential's Line and the Slayer/Knight classes (too little, too late though).

It also largely depends on how you incorporate it into the system. Like 3.5 and Path of War, they're accessories that can help facilitate a brand new setting with their integration OR they can be plugged into an on-going campaign/setting with little fuss. And because they're accessories, the need to buy/incorporate them, will vary greatly based on group. I know some, like myself, that really doesn't enjoy 3.PF without having The Path of War/Tome of Battle in their game and then there are some that outright refuse to look at it or incorporate it into their games. The other way is 4e's way, which didn't work out at all.

The issue I have is that the Fighter is always pegged as the "Simple" class. I can appreciate the history as to why this is so, but lots of people want more complexity from it. This is why I think 5e did a good job. They have multiple styles within the Fighter to facilitate one's desire without being grossly incompetent based on that decision. A Champion Fighter (getting better bonuses for Critical Hits and other generic 'always on' features) is just as effective as the Battle Master (using dice and powers and maneuvers) and both are balanced to the magic-y version Eldritch Knight with spells.

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;1001808If 1 is a problem, it is much easier to fix with a steady damage bonus or something in order to help a fighter retain the simple feel they've always had. When I play a fighter in D&D, it often because I just want to play a tough guy who swings his sword at things and don't want the mechanical complexity that comes with wizards.

I really liked Dungeon Crawl Classics mechanic of making their Critical Hits really effective and kinda awesome, also giving them better tables as they progressed. If I were to re-work/re-tool 3e I'd definitely look at that for inspiration. And while the complexity of the Fighter was simple, adding up all the modifiers for attacks and penalties for iterative attacks, and adding in things like feats and Damage Reduction....a Full-Round action attack could take minutes to calculate and record.  

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;1001808I think with 2, the problem they discovered is you fundamentally change the feel of the game when you make fighters mechanically similar to wizards and priests. And for people who always liked fighters, part of their attraction is their simplicity. the last thing I wanted for fighters in D&D was a bunch of bells and whistles.

Which begs the question, How do you balance high level spells in the game AND a Fighter without magical or otherwise extraordinary features? I mean, balance is extremely subjective but I think there's some agreement that 3e has almost none of it past a certain point. Personally I'd just lessen the impact these spells can achieve OR make it much harder to pull off. If we're going to make the Fighter a simple class, might as well ratchet up the complexity of those spellcasters .  

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;1001808And I am a fan of over-the-top fighting magic genres. I just think in D&D, it doesn't really fit as the default assumption for fighters. A lot of those more magical fighter options in 3E work great if you are running a wuxia campaign (I ran several with the 3E rules and found that stuff fit well for that kind of game). But I found my regular games were getting plagued with way too many character options by late 3E. And because all the books were pretty much written with players in mind rather than the GM, the culture of play really began to favor players having a huge say in what is allowable at the table.

Agreed. This is why when our long-running 3.5 campaign ends (currently at 16th level) I'm probably just going to run E6 from now on if they wanna play 3e.