Fighters and the Kitchen Sink

A recent thread begged the question, "How do you see the fighter?"  In that thread I related my ideal vision of the fighter.



One of the things that stood out to me about my ideal vision for the fighter is that not only is a fighter the best at fighting with a great array of weapons, he/she is also the best at improvising weapons.  For me, no character is truly a fighter if she cannot improvise weapons better than anyone else.  This is something that I think is lacking in the existing fighter.  To remedy this, I suggest we give fighters the following feature.

Master of Improv.: When the fighter uses an improvised weapon, instead of using the stats for an improvised weapon, the fighter is able to treat the improvised weapon as the weapon that it most closely represents.  For example, a fighter can pick up a bent iron bar and use it as if it were a boomerang.  He can tie a dagger to the end of a broom, or simply sharpen the end of a wooden staff, and use it like a spear.

Thoguhts?

There are a great many problems that can be circumvented by players and DMs having a mature discussion about what the game is going to be like before they ever sit down together to play.

 

The answer really does lie in more options, not in confining and segregating certain options.

 

You really shouldn't speak for others.  You can't hear what someone else is saying when you try to put your words in their mouth.

 

Fencing & Swashbuckling as Armor.

D20 Modern Toon PC Race.

Mecha Pilot's Skill Challenge Emporium.

 

Save the breasts.

Definitely maybe.  I would like to see improved improvised weapons as an option, but as it currently stands, it's pretty low priority for the time being.
I'd love to see a way to make improvised weapons workable, but I definitely don't want to see them on par with normal weapons. If Fighter A has a longsword, and Fighter B has a longsword-shaped stick, then Fighter A should still be doing better than Fighter B.

Luckily, we already have a great method for winning with improvised weapons: Expertise Dice. As you gain levels, which weapon you use matters less and less. At level 10, with 3d10 Expertise Dice, you can deal 1d4+3d10 damage with a longsword-shaped stick, which isn't that far off from the 1d8+3d10 an actual longsword would get.

So we don't really need any special rules to model mastery or improvised attacks, since the Fighter's baseline ability already handles the problem.
I'd love to see a way to make improvised weapons workable, but I definitely don't want to see them on par with normal weapons. If Fighter A has a longsword, and Fighter B has a longsword-shaped stick, then Fighter A should still be doing better than Fighter B.

Luckily, we already have a great method for winning with improvised weapons: Expertise Dice. As you gain levels, which weapon you use matters less and less. At level 10, with 3d10 Expertise Dice, you can deal 1d4+3d10 damage with a longsword-shaped stick, which isn't that far off from the 1d8+3d10 an actual longsword would get.

So we don't really need any special rules to model mastery or improvised attacks, since the Fighter's baseline ability already handles the problem.


I don't think Fighter B should necessarily be worse than Fighter A, just different in a number of ways.

I for one would love a Fighter build based entirely on improvised weaponry.
If Fighter A has a longsword, and Fighter B has a longsword-shaped stick, then Fighter A should still be doing better than Fighter B.



Hey, now.  Miyamoto Musashi won plenty of duels with a bokken when against a sword.

If Fighter A has a longsword, and Fighter B has a longsword-shaped stick, then Fighter A should still be doing better than Fighter B.



Hey, now.  Miyamoto Musashi won plenty of duels with a bokken when against a sword.



And hell, those videos in the OP. I could have the best sword in the world and I'd turn and run if I saw that guy guarding a door I need to get by.
If Fighter A has a longsword, and Fighter B has a longsword-shaped stick, then Fighter A should still be doing better than Fighter B.



Hey, now.  Miyamoto Musashi won plenty of duels with a bokken when against a sword.



Even if untrue, the myth of it is part of the heroic nature of what martial classes should be capable of.

@JRutterbush: That's not strictly true because damage alone isn't the only measure of effectiveness.  Look at one of the examples I cited, hurling a bent iron rod like a boomerang.  How far can an improvised weapon be thrown?  How far can a boomerang be thrown?  Note that none of the improvised weapons have any range.  Also, you get no bonus for attacking with an improvised weapon.  So you can't measure it based solely on damage.

There are a great many problems that can be circumvented by players and DMs having a mature discussion about what the game is going to be like before they ever sit down together to play.

 

The answer really does lie in more options, not in confining and segregating certain options.

 

You really shouldn't speak for others.  You can't hear what someone else is saying when you try to put your words in their mouth.

 

Fencing & Swashbuckling as Armor.

D20 Modern Toon PC Race.

Mecha Pilot's Skill Challenge Emporium.

 

Save the breasts.

I've mentioned it in other threads, but I think weapon improv would be better as a monk "tradition" or whatever their subgroups are called. Even if it wasn't added officially, I might ask to house-rule improv weapons getting a bonus in addition/instead of unarmed attacks.

Example of what this would look like:
"Ha! Rock beats scissors!" "Darn it! Rock is overpowered! I'm not playing this again until the next edition is released!" "C'mon, just one more." "Oh, all right..." "Wait, what is that?" "Its 'Dynamite' from the expanded rules." "Just because you can afford to buy every supplement that comes out..." "Hey, it's completely balanced! You're just a bad DM for not accommodating it."
Show
RPGs are getting more popular, and whenever something gets more popular, it inevitably changes, usually becoming more palatable to the masses. Nintendo is the perfect example. In the old days their games coined the term "Nintendo hard" to extend play time, but they knew their fans were dedicated enough to play anyway. Now they mostly make stuff a five year old can master. That's not necessarily bad, though. Most of those old Nintendo games were infuriating. Likewise, a lot of old RPGs were too complex and irritating for the average person to really get into. Rules light systems are going to get more popular as more people enter the hobby, simply because the new people aren't bound by nostalgia, and would rather play something easy and fun than something that takes a huge amount of effort to learn.
I'd suggest going about it in this manner, even though it's unlikely to be in D&D Next:


  • Simplify all weapon types to be Small, Light/Finesse, Heavy/Martial [with separate categories for one-handed vs. two-handed, as well as melee vs. ranged]

  • Each class has its own weapon die for each size

  • Weapon proficiency bonus to attack rolls is thrown out the window


    • just adjust universal AC to the change


  • The things that would differentiate each weapon (Blunt damage, Slashing damage, Piercing damage, and a variety of other stuff that could complicate the game like weapon-based maneuvers or specializations) would be left in a module

  • Fighter gets probably the better (if not the best) damage dice for all weapon types

  • Fighter gets maneuvers that improve weapon attacks, improvised or no


That way, regardless if the Fighter is using a 10" steel pipe, a serrated combat dagger, or someone's head, he's consistently awesome.  Monks could have specialization in mobility and "mystic techniques" rather than straight up brawling (with or without armor), Rogues could work as well as a Fighter with Small and Light weapons but rely more on stealth and guile/diversions/deception (lower damage die for two-handed and Heavy weapons, perhaps with penalty to hit with two-handed heavy weapons), etc. etc. etc.
Show

You are Red/Blue!
Take The Magic Dual Colour Test - Beta today!
Created with Rum and Monkey's Personality Test Generator.

You are both rational and emotional. You value creation and discovery, and feel strongly about what you create. At best, you're innovative and intuitive. At worst, you're scattered and unpredictable.

D&D Home Page - What Monster Are You? - D&D Compendium

57047238 wrote:
If you're crossing the street and see a city bus barreling straight toward you with 'GIVE ME YOUR WALLET!' painted across its windshield, you probably won't be reaching for your wallet.
I Don't Always Play Strikers...But When I Do, I Prefer Vampire Stay Thirsty, My Friends
This is what I believe is the spirit of D&D 4E, and my deal breaker for D&D Next: equal opportunities, with distinct specializations, in areas where conflict happens the most often, without having to worry about heavy micromanagement or system mastery. What I hope to be my most useful contributions to the D&D Community: DM Idea: Collaborative Mapping, Classless 4E (homebrew system, that hopefully helps in D&D Next development), Gamma World 7E random character generator (by yours truly), and the Concept of Perfect Imbalance (for D&D Next and other TRPGs in development) Pre-3E D&D should be recognized for what they were: simulation wargames where people could tell stories with The Best Answer to "Why 4E?" Fun vs. Engaging
I've mentioned it in other threads, but I think weapon improv would be better as a monk "tradition" or whatever their subgroups are called. Even if it wasn't added officially, I might ask to house-rule improv weapons getting a bonus in addition/instead of unarmed attacks.

Example of what this would look like:


I had considered that it could make a good monk ability, but I don't think it's exclusive to their domain.  You might find a small handful of classes that deserve it, but the fighter definitely does.

There are a great many problems that can be circumvented by players and DMs having a mature discussion about what the game is going to be like before they ever sit down together to play.

 

The answer really does lie in more options, not in confining and segregating certain options.

 

You really shouldn't speak for others.  You can't hear what someone else is saying when you try to put your words in their mouth.

 

Fencing & Swashbuckling as Armor.

D20 Modern Toon PC Race.

Mecha Pilot's Skill Challenge Emporium.

 

Save the breasts.

I like the idea, a Master of Improvised weapons should be a option for fighters. I would go with something simpler though, granting a straight attack and damage bonus when using improvised weapons. Your suggestion is just going to create arguments over what type of weapon something would qualify as.

I would probably put this in as a specific feat that just mostly offsets the penalties for improvised weapons and as a specality that can even gain bonuses and advantage at higher levels through surprise and skill.

A cute option, but not something I'd see as fighter-defining.

 

 

Oops, looks like this request tried to create an infinite loop. We do not allow such things here. We are a professional website!

A cute option, but not something I'd see as fighter-defining.


Honest question:  Why not?
A cute option, but not something I'd see as fighter-defining.


Honest question:  Why not?


Because the ability to fight equally effectively with any object is a very rare and notable ability amongst the fighters we see in the media, so most people don't define all fighters by that ability. They define specific fighters by that ability, namely Jackie Chan and Miyamoto Musashi.

It's still a cute option.
I'd say it's a minor gimmick at best. Just like in certain video games, you could only beat so many monsters to death with their own limbs before the novelty wears off.
I'd say it's a minor gimmick at best. Just like in certain video games, you could only beat so many monsters to death with their own limbs before the novelty wears off.



That novelty lasts a hell of a long time for some of us.

I see the fighter as a martial artist, from any part of the world. Not just trained in swordplay or whatever, but they know all kinds of tricks to get the most out of their fighting. Instead of going on a long technical shpeel about things like meditation techniques and combination strikes designed to move people out of position, I will just say go check out a little Forgotten Realms character named Ryld Argith. Back before Drizzt hit epic, Ryld would have shat all over him. His whole "combat trance" was awesome.
I really love using improvised weapons and have done so in pretty much every system I've played in. They are fun, but should they be completely as effective as something that is made specifically to kill someone? Not usually. Sometimes you will get a sharp piece of metal or a heavy object thats just as good as a mace. But a chair just isnt as lethal as a sword in any stretch of the imagination.

That being said, Improvised Weapon fighter all the way!!! 
My two copper.
As ShinQuickMan says, it's a minor gimmick, which defines it as a feat. Here's another way of doing the improvised weapon deal.

Feat: Improvised Weapon Training
You gain weapon proficiency in improvised weapons.
Any object you wield that would deal 1d6 damage or less improves its damage by a die size. (This does not stack with any other effect that improves die size, such as racial weapon training.)

It's a very simple math bump that makes every random object functionally equivalent to a shortsword or a quarterstaff. It also provides a bit of extra damage to all low-damage weapons, which is in keeping with the intended effect. The proficiency bit is there to cover wizards and monks, who don't get that proficiency automatically.
If fighters are supposed to be better with any and every weapon, let's just do that.

Fighter Weapon Proficiency: Fighters are proficient with all weapons (including improvised weapons). Any weapon wielded by a fighter (including improvised) increases its damage die by one size.

I don't actually see this as a big issue in the current playtest. Except for some very weird wording in the Equipment document that others have noted, it looks like improvised weapons are just basic weapon with slightly lower damage than usual. In fact, it looks like a chair leg should already do exactly the same damage as a club (1d4).

I certainly don't think it's worth a class feature or a feat to increase that damage by a single die size (1d4 to 1d6 or whatever); is a level 10 fighter really going to care whether his two chair leg attacks with Deadly Strike deal 2d4+10+3d10 damage (average 31.5) or 2d6+10+3d10 (average 33.5)? 

I suggested in another thread that there could be more dynamic ways to improve improvised weapon use through maneuvers. Here's one I suggested:

Surprise Blow: The first time you use a new type of improvised weapon in an encounter, you can spend one or more expertise dice and add the highest to your attack roll. 

This would encourage some pretty wacky bar-fight scenes, as the fighter seeking to maintain his attack bonus would be grabbing a new chair leg, broken bottle, or jar of pickled eggs every round. (It also might be a bit too powerful, depending on whether there ends up being any other penalty to using improvised weapons.) 
I had considered that it could make a good monk ability, but I don't think it's exclusive to their domain.  You might find a small handful of classes that deserve it, but the fighter definitely does.



Well, I just noticed that Brock, your ideal "fighter" goes around in cloth armor or no armor, uses mostly unarmed and simple weapon (dagger) attacks, and does quite a lot of acrobatic jumping around. If you look up the clip The Only Weapon You'll Ever Need he actively insults "sword guys".

He really sounds more like a re-fluffed monk than a fighter.
"Ha! Rock beats scissors!" "Darn it! Rock is overpowered! I'm not playing this again until the next edition is released!" "C'mon, just one more." "Oh, all right..." "Wait, what is that?" "Its 'Dynamite' from the expanded rules." "Just because you can afford to buy every supplement that comes out..." "Hey, it's completely balanced! You're just a bad DM for not accommodating it."
Show
RPGs are getting more popular, and whenever something gets more popular, it inevitably changes, usually becoming more palatable to the masses. Nintendo is the perfect example. In the old days their games coined the term "Nintendo hard" to extend play time, but they knew their fans were dedicated enough to play anyway. Now they mostly make stuff a five year old can master. That's not necessarily bad, though. Most of those old Nintendo games were infuriating. Likewise, a lot of old RPGs were too complex and irritating for the average person to really get into. Rules light systems are going to get more popular as more people enter the hobby, simply because the new people aren't bound by nostalgia, and would rather play something easy and fun than something that takes a huge amount of effort to learn.
You've clearly never heard a 20th level fighter boast about how all he needs are his knives and his nuts. And then proceed to back it up by slaughtering a whole bunch of people.
How I see the Fighter:


A Level 1 Fighter vs a bunch of mooks. And yes, that's him at Level 1. You want to see him at high level, take a look at this thread, and check out the Post-Eclipse stuff. The anime only covered the first arc, and that's practically a prequel to the meat of the story.
You've clearly never heard a 20th level fighter boast about how all he needs are his knives and his nuts. And then proceed to back it up by slaughtering a whole bunch of people.


On one hand the Fighter has always been way too overarching in the realm of fighting -- I don't mind having warrior who goes for melee and ranged, but just about every martial class could be placed as "Fighter" if that were the case -- while on the other hand it wouldn't "feel" right if the Fighter couldn't really go for the bar brawler style of character.

Personally I'd say any full frontal class -- Barbarian, Paladin, Fighter, Ranger, Monk -- should all be able to go unarmed and do somewhat decently.  TheMonk would be the guy who specializes in a certain set of fighting styles, same with the Fighter who brings his own set of fighting styles, etc.  Each fighting style would bring with it various dynamics that allow you to retain the "feel" of the character, even if the ultra-basic mechanics would remain the same; for instance, perhaps all of them would use basic attacks, but the Fighter would use Expertise Dice, the Monk would use Combo Techniques, the Ranger would use Fighting Stances, the Barbarian would use Rages, and the Paladin would have Prayers, Exultations or Divine Intercessions.  Perhaps the Expertise Dice have limitations, the Combo Techniques require a successive use of various abilities, the Fighting Stances modify the basic attack directly, the Barbarian enhances the character (indirectly boosting basic attacks), and the Paladin might end up using spell-like prayers that could boost his attacks.  Maybe the Rogue could have Ambush Tactics that allow you to take advantage of surprise, distractions and deception (unlike his more straightforward bretheren).

That way, the weapon you have would not matter as much as the character you're playing.  So if you want to play as Mr. Rip-Off-Your-Heads-With-My-Fists Dan (Barbarian, Fighter or Paladin), or Mr. Silently-Break-Neck George (Rogue, Assassin, Monk), or any other character concept involving unarmed, all would be valid, with the differences mainly being how you go about fighting unarmed (something best left for the specific details of each class).
Show

You are Red/Blue!
Take The Magic Dual Colour Test - Beta today!
Created with Rum and Monkey's Personality Test Generator.

You are both rational and emotional. You value creation and discovery, and feel strongly about what you create. At best, you're innovative and intuitive. At worst, you're scattered and unpredictable.

D&D Home Page - What Monster Are You? - D&D Compendium

57047238 wrote:
If you're crossing the street and see a city bus barreling straight toward you with 'GIVE ME YOUR WALLET!' painted across its windshield, you probably won't be reaching for your wallet.
I Don't Always Play Strikers...But When I Do, I Prefer Vampire Stay Thirsty, My Friends
This is what I believe is the spirit of D&D 4E, and my deal breaker for D&D Next: equal opportunities, with distinct specializations, in areas where conflict happens the most often, without having to worry about heavy micromanagement or system mastery. What I hope to be my most useful contributions to the D&D Community: DM Idea: Collaborative Mapping, Classless 4E (homebrew system, that hopefully helps in D&D Next development), Gamma World 7E random character generator (by yours truly), and the Concept of Perfect Imbalance (for D&D Next and other TRPGs in development) Pre-3E D&D should be recognized for what they were: simulation wargames where people could tell stories with The Best Answer to "Why 4E?" Fun vs. Engaging
Knowing what goes on in the manga, is it wrong of me to say that the actual anime was a way better piece of storytelling? And yeah, Gatsu is an amazing representation of a classic fighter, tbh I'm kicking myself for not thinking of him sooner, as Berserk is my second favorite anime of all time, right behind Iria, and Record of Lodoss War is right behind Berserk in 3rd. Orson should be the representative for the barbarian.

@Chaosfang: Do you have a superpower to either a, read my mind, or b, get smarter with every post you make? You wouldn't believe how many people I have played with that have said the martial characters should all be able to do well, not necessarily based on their weapon, but on their class method, who they are. They have in fact specifically mentioned unarmed fighting and tavern brawls in those conversations.
If Fighter A has a longsword, and Fighter B has a longsword-shaped stick, then Fighter A should still be doing better than Fighter B.



Hey, now.  Miyamoto Musashi won plenty of duels with a bokken when against a sword.



Yes, but clearly he was a higher level than his enemy and that became more significant than the weapon he was using. Saying he was better than another guy using a bokken doesn't mean he wasn't less dangerous with the bokken than with a real sword.
Owner and Proprietor of the House of Trolls. God of ownership and possession.
IIRC, 4e's Dark Sun setting had a Fighter build that got a sort of Improved Improv, becoming proficient with improvised weapons and dealing more damage with them.
 Also, some of the current maneuvers are useful for improv. Snap Shot/Jab can be used to follow up an improvised action (i.e. pushing a boulder over, cutting a rope, etc.) with a low-damage attack. I, for one, am all for an option for Improved Improv. Maybe as part of a Drunken Master prestige class...
Knowing what goes on in the manga, is it wrong of me to say that the actual anime was a way better piece of storytelling? And yeah, Gatsu is an amazing representation of a classic fighter, tbh I'm kicking myself for not thinking of him sooner, as Berserk is my second favorite anime of all time, right behind Iria, and Record of Lodoss War is right behind Berserk in 3rd. Orson should be the representative for the barbarian.

@Chaosfang: Do you have a superpower to either a, read my mind, or b, get smarter with every post you make? You wouldn't believe how many people I have played with that have said the martial characters should all be able to do well, not necessarily based on their weapon, but on their class method, who they are. They have in fact specifically mentioned unarmed fighting and tavern brawls in those conversations.


Neither, I'm just drawing from my experiences and desires.  I actually play a Brawler Fighter (4E) as well as an unarmed Swordsage (3.5E, in this 2E/3E hybrid campaign), so that's basically two unarmed warrior concepts already -- one does skull-cracking straight up no mystical BS, another adds fire and shadow techniques to face-breaking like a pseudo-magus monk -- and frankly while I appreciated how 4E did the Dark Sun gladiator-type I-Can-Use-Any-Weapon sort of character mechanics, it's rather sad that just about every edition had to go through all that muck just to make A) unarmed warrior, and B) improv master, mechanically sound character concepts.

Which is why I prefer the Gamma World 7E and 13th Age routes of "pick your weapon, reflavor as you wish" over the "historically [in]accurate with multitude of rules" method often employed. 
Show

You are Red/Blue!
Take The Magic Dual Colour Test - Beta today!
Created with Rum and Monkey's Personality Test Generator.

You are both rational and emotional. You value creation and discovery, and feel strongly about what you create. At best, you're innovative and intuitive. At worst, you're scattered and unpredictable.

D&D Home Page - What Monster Are You? - D&D Compendium

57047238 wrote:
If you're crossing the street and see a city bus barreling straight toward you with 'GIVE ME YOUR WALLET!' painted across its windshield, you probably won't be reaching for your wallet.
I Don't Always Play Strikers...But When I Do, I Prefer Vampire Stay Thirsty, My Friends
This is what I believe is the spirit of D&D 4E, and my deal breaker for D&D Next: equal opportunities, with distinct specializations, in areas where conflict happens the most often, without having to worry about heavy micromanagement or system mastery. What I hope to be my most useful contributions to the D&D Community: DM Idea: Collaborative Mapping, Classless 4E (homebrew system, that hopefully helps in D&D Next development), Gamma World 7E random character generator (by yours truly), and the Concept of Perfect Imbalance (for D&D Next and other TRPGs in development) Pre-3E D&D should be recognized for what they were: simulation wargames where people could tell stories with The Best Answer to "Why 4E?" Fun vs. Engaging
Regarding giving fighters proficiency with improvised weapons: I believe fighters are already proficient with all weapons.  The main problem is, as I read the Improvised Weapon text (not the chart entry but the text), that the fighter who uses an improvised melee weapon doesn't get their strength bonus to the attack roll.  I'd also like to point out that none of the improvised weapons, not even the ranged one, has a listed or suggested range.

There are a great many problems that can be circumvented by players and DMs having a mature discussion about what the game is going to be like before they ever sit down together to play.

 

The answer really does lie in more options, not in confining and segregating certain options.

 

You really shouldn't speak for others.  You can't hear what someone else is saying when you try to put your words in their mouth.

 

Fencing & Swashbuckling as Armor.

D20 Modern Toon PC Race.

Mecha Pilot's Skill Challenge Emporium.

 

Save the breasts.

I had considered that it could make a good monk ability, but I don't think it's exclusive to their domain.  You might find a small handful of classes that deserve it, but the fighter definitely does.



Well, I just noticed that Brock, your ideal "fighter" goes around in cloth armor or no armor, uses mostly unarmed and simple weapon (dagger) attacks, and does quite a lot of acrobatic jumping around. If you look up the clip The Only Weapon You'll Ever Need he actively insults "sword guys".

He really sounds more like a re-fluffed monk than a fighter.


6 of 1, half-dozen of the other, really.  One could also easily say that Brock is a fighter with armor refluffed into dodging, and that his huge knife is more of a shortsword than a dagger.

There are a great many problems that can be circumvented by players and DMs having a mature discussion about what the game is going to be like before they ever sit down together to play.

 

The answer really does lie in more options, not in confining and segregating certain options.

 

You really shouldn't speak for others.  You can't hear what someone else is saying when you try to put your words in their mouth.

 

Fencing & Swashbuckling as Armor.

D20 Modern Toon PC Race.

Mecha Pilot's Skill Challenge Emporium.

 

Save the breasts.

The get expertise die and the largest martial wepon bonus. I don't know if they need more IMO.
I feel like, at a certain point, you just need to be excited when you manage something crazy, rather than having the game just do it for you. 
A few guidelines for using the internet: 1. Mentally add "In my opinion" to the end of basically anything someone else says. Of course it's their opinion, they don't need to let you know. You're pretty smart. 2. Assume everyone means everything in the best manner they could mean it. Save yourself some stress and give people the benefit of the doubt. We'll all be happier if we type less emoticons. 3. Don't try to read people's minds. Sometimes people mean exactly what they say. You probably don't know them any better than they know themselves. 4. Let grammar slide. If you understood what they meant, you're good. It's better for your health. 5. Breath. It's just a dumb game.
The get expertise die and the largest martial wepon bonus. I don't know if they need more IMO.
I feel like, at a certain point, you just need to be excited when you manage something crazy, rather than having the game just do it for you. 


Improvised weapon use doesn't really cover something crazy, at least not most of the time.  Most of the time it means nothing more than being able to deal regular damage in situations where you lack your usual weapons.  Also, this ability wouldn't necessarily make managing something crazy any easier.  At best, it allows you to hit more often with improvised weapons and do normal damage, and there's no guarantee that pulling off something crazy means an attack roll.  In many cases, it seems to just involve attribute/skill checks.

There are a great many problems that can be circumvented by players and DMs having a mature discussion about what the game is going to be like before they ever sit down together to play.

 

The answer really does lie in more options, not in confining and segregating certain options.

 

You really shouldn't speak for others.  You can't hear what someone else is saying when you try to put your words in their mouth.

 

Fencing & Swashbuckling as Armor.

D20 Modern Toon PC Race.

Mecha Pilot's Skill Challenge Emporium.

 

Save the breasts.

Mechanically, I think my idea fighter would be a dude who is great at combat, few out of combat focuses (maybe leading, intimidation, etc). He'd have a bunch of minor stances/moves he does all the time, then a point based "adrenaline" system that allows him to use special moves. Like, spend a point, next attack sunders a non-magical weapon, hits everyone next to you, does max damage, gives you another action...scaled by level and point cost, of course.

Fictionally...can I say Shepard from Mass Effect, with the Soldier class? You know, an extremely competent, hard to kill unit that has extreme flexibility in weapon choice, and abilities that further increase that. When not fighting, he's a leader of men, quick thinking and quick acting.

...Also, he gets a spaceship as a class feature.
I second the Shepherd comparison. That's a really good way to think about it. 

Also, spaceships should be a specialty  
My two copper.
I second the Shepherd comparison. That's a really good way to think about it. 

Also, spaceships should be a specialty  


I've been saying all along that the DDN system should be able to support a new version of D20 Modern/Future.

There are a great many problems that can be circumvented by players and DMs having a mature discussion about what the game is going to be like before they ever sit down together to play.

 

The answer really does lie in more options, not in confining and segregating certain options.

 

You really shouldn't speak for others.  You can't hear what someone else is saying when you try to put your words in their mouth.

 

Fencing & Swashbuckling as Armor.

D20 Modern Toon PC Race.

Mecha Pilot's Skill Challenge Emporium.

 

Save the breasts.

I second the Shepherd comparison. That's a really good way to think about it. 

Also, spaceships should be a specialty  


I've been saying all along that the DDN system should be able to support a new version of D20 Modern/Future.


That's a tough one. d20 modern functioned pretty differently than D&D did, and for good reason. Modern day classes would just be completely different than ones based in fantasy.

That aside, I have fond memories of cargo pants of holding, and CDs of bardic music. 
My two copper.
I second the Shepherd comparison. That's a really good way to think about it. 

Also, spaceships should be a specialty  



I'm buring through the Trilogy faster than I should during exam week. Regardless, one thing Boiware really got right was class balance, especially in ME2. Everybody does something cool, nobody is a auto-pick (anymore; I'm looking at you, Liara).
I second the Shepherd comparison. That's a really good way to think about it. 

Also, spaceships should be a specialty  



I'm buring through the Trilogy faster than I should during exam week. Regardless, one thing Boiware really got right was class balance, especially in ME2. Everybody does something cool, nobody is a auto-pick (anymore; I'm looking at you, Liara).


Adept, Liara, Kaiden/Wrex? Brooooken.
My two copper.
I second the Shepherd comparison. That's a really good way to think about it. 

Also, spaceships should be a specialty  



I'm buring through the Trilogy faster than I should during exam week. Regardless, one thing Boiware really got right was class balance, especially in ME2. Everybody does something cool, nobody is a auto-pick (anymore; I'm looking at you, Liara).


Adept, Liara, Kaiden/Wrex? Brooooken.


I had to go with Garrus as my third. He was just too much of a bro.
The get expertise die and the largest martial wepon bonus. I don't know if they need more IMO.
I feel like, at a certain point, you just need to be excited when you manage something crazy, rather than having the game just do it for you. 


Improvised weapon use doesn't really cover something crazy, at least not most of the time.  Most of the time it means nothing more than being able to deal regular damage in situations where you lack your usual weapons.  Also, this ability wouldn't necessarily make managing something crazy any easier.  At best, it allows you to hit more often with improvised weapons and do normal damage, and there's no guarantee that pulling off something crazy means an attack roll.  In many cases, it seems to just involve attribute/skill checks.


I just mean, it's more exciting to say, "I killed an orc with a broken chair 1d6 at a time, than to say, "I killed an orc with a chair, that my special fighter feats made to function basically like a warhammer"
A few guidelines for using the internet: 1. Mentally add "In my opinion" to the end of basically anything someone else says. Of course it's their opinion, they don't need to let you know. You're pretty smart. 2. Assume everyone means everything in the best manner they could mean it. Save yourself some stress and give people the benefit of the doubt. We'll all be happier if we type less emoticons. 3. Don't try to read people's minds. Sometimes people mean exactly what they say. You probably don't know them any better than they know themselves. 4. Let grammar slide. If you understood what they meant, you're good. It's better for your health. 5. Breath. It's just a dumb game.
The get expertise die and the largest martial wepon bonus. I don't know if they need more IMO.
I feel like, at a certain point, you just need to be excited when you manage something crazy, rather than having the game just do it for you. 


Improvised weapon use doesn't really cover something crazy, at least not most of the time.  Most of the time it means nothing more than being able to deal regular damage in situations where you lack your usual weapons.  Also, this ability wouldn't necessarily make managing something crazy any easier.  At best, it allows you to hit more often with improvised weapons and do normal damage, and there's no guarantee that pulling off something crazy means an attack roll.  In many cases, it seems to just involve attribute/skill checks.


I just mean, it's more exciting to say, "I killed an orc with a broken chair 1d6 at a time, than to say, "I killed an orc with a chair, that my special fighter feats made to function basically like a warhammer"


I have to really question that.  If I were making that boast, I'd be saying, "I killed an orc with a broken chair," not "I killed an orc with a broken chair 1d6 at a time."

Also, I believe a broken chair most closely resembles a club, and not a warhammer.  The improvised weapons that I would classify as a warhammer would be things like a sledgehammer (most blunt instruments, like ordinary hammers and iron sconces, make more sense as maces to me).

There are a great many problems that can be circumvented by players and DMs having a mature discussion about what the game is going to be like before they ever sit down together to play.

 

The answer really does lie in more options, not in confining and segregating certain options.

 

You really shouldn't speak for others.  You can't hear what someone else is saying when you try to put your words in their mouth.

 

Fencing & Swashbuckling as Armor.

D20 Modern Toon PC Race.

Mecha Pilot's Skill Challenge Emporium.

 

Save the breasts.

Sign In to post comments