The C&C Fighter (Ultimate Thread)

C&C discussion. Fantasy roleplaying.
New products, general questions, the rules, laws, and the chaos.
User avatar
Frost
Beer Giant Jarl
Posts: 1324
Joined: Wed Nov 28, 2007 8:00 am
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Contact:

The C&C Fighter (Ultimate Thread)

Post by Frost »

Ok, so I just got the PH.... a first glance, the Fighter class seems a bit lackluster compared to the others. Am I missing something? Have I been playing 3.x too long.
[Edit (Fiffergrund) - Made into comprehensive thread and stickied. Add your fighter commentary and houserules here.]

serleran
Mogrl
Posts: 14094
Joined: Mon Oct 13, 2008 7:00 am

Post by serleran »

Yes. You'reused to feats every 2nd level that expand the combat "options." In C&C, these are ignored (or you can do what others do, and allow a SIEGE check for them)... but, the C&C fighter is the only class with level added as BtH (making them the best attacker) and also the main class (monks get this too) to have more than one attack / round. With the combination of Primes, one can have a large array of fighter types, from the siege master to the cavalryman, to the general... without the need to have feats and skills to do such. You simply roleplay it.

So, yeah... you're over-used to d20 (and no offense - many people have this psychosis hehe) where the mechanics told you what was allowed. C&C says "how can you do this? Up to you..." A completely different philosophy.

User avatar
bighara
Ulthal
Posts: 412
Joined: Fri May 12, 2006 7:00 am

Post by bighara »

There have been several threads about this over the last couple years. If you want to do soem searches, I'm sure you can read through those. The jist of it is the Fighter is the best at fighting. he's better at it than barbarians, rangers, paladins, and knights. And, as serleran points out, the SIEGE checks allow for a lot of flexibility in play.
“Style is the perfection of a point of view.”

Zebulon

Post by Zebulon »

You could simply give them Armor Specialization and improve Combat Dominance.
Armor Specialization: can sleep in armor, hindrances due to armor reduced by 1 pt, get +1 to AC at 6th level, and +2 to AC at 12th level when using armor.
Combat Dominance: not limited to d6 hd, applies to all 1HD creatures, and then at 12th level also appiles to 2HD creatures. That way, it's still a fighter, nothing really new or different, but he gets more edge.

Well just a 2 cents suggestion...
_________________
www.lythia.com: Free resources for Harn but also adaptable to any medieval setting.

Foxroe

Post by Foxroe »

I too felt that the Fighter was a bit lacking when I first read the description. Not so much any more. There are actually some extra abilities that Fighters have that I feel are hinted at later in the PHB.

The rules governing unarmed combat state that it is up to the CK if the BtH is applied to the attack roll. So, I give Fighters their full BtH for all unarmed attacks (grapple/pummel/overbear), but not necessarily for other classes (except maybe Monks).

Also, class level is not necessarily always added to SIEGE checks. However, during combat, I allow Fighters to add their level to all combat-related SIEGE checks, but not necessarily for other classes (unless the check falls under the scope of what the class is capable of).

-Fox

adaen
Red Cap
Posts: 299
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2007 8:00 am
Location: Bridgewater, NJ
Contact:

Post by adaen »

Zebulon wrote:
Combat Dominance: not limited to d6 hd, applies to all 1HD creatures, and then at 12th level also appiles to 2HD creatures.

This is how I handle CD.
_________________
~Adaen of Bridgewater, www.highadventuregames.com

User avatar
Aladar
Lore Drake
Posts: 1261
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 7:00 am
Location: Elgin, OK

Post by Aladar »

I actually allow the Fighter's Combat Dominance ability to work on any creature/NPC who is one quarter the fighter's level. So, an 8th level fighter could use his CD ability on any creature with one or two hit dice, at 12th level against creatures/NPCs with three hit dice, etc.

I think this gives the fighters that little extra push, without overpowering them.
_________________
Lord Aladar

Warden of the Welk Wood

Baron of the Castles & Crusades Society

The Poster formerly known as Alwyn

Senior Gamer - Member of the Senior RPG Tour

"NEMO ME IMPUNE LACESSIT - At least not in Yu Gi Oh"
http://www.cncsociety.org/
Lord Aladar
Warden of the Welk Wood
Baron of the Castles & Crusades Society
The Poster formerly known as Alwyn
Senior Gamer - Member of the Senior RPG Tour
"NEMO ME IMPUNE LACESSIT - At least not in Yu Gi Oh"

http://www.cncsociety.org/

serleran
Mogrl
Posts: 14094
Joined: Mon Oct 13, 2008 7:00 am

Post by serleran »

I always wonder about that, the people who increase the HD limit, on how it actually works: do the fighters deal a lot of damage so they can drop the guy in one hit, or do you allow "whittling" to occur? I mean, yes, there are times a 3 HD creature will have very low HP, but on average, they should have more than a fighter can deliver (without some serious boosts) so it just seems kind of weird to me. Is it more like "cleave" or more like a "it has to hit an unwounded creature?" If it is more like "cleave" it makes more sense, but why would it be limited?

adaen
Red Cap
Posts: 299
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2007 8:00 am
Location: Bridgewater, NJ
Contact:

Post by adaen »

I was speaking of not limiting it to d6-type hitdice.
_________________
~Adaen of Bridgewater, www.highadventuregames.com

User avatar
Aladar
Lore Drake
Posts: 1261
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 7:00 am
Location: Elgin, OK

Post by Aladar »

I have found that allowing its use for creatures one quarter the fighter's level just gives them more ability to take out the lesser HD creatures (cannon fodder) a little quicker, since they are able to strike them a few more times. I just felt the Combat Dominance ability should improve as the fighter grew in levels, not just limited to 1d6 HD creatures only.
_________________
Lord Aladar

Warden of the Welk Wood

Baron of the Castles & Crusades Society

The Poster formerly known as Alwyn

Senior Gamer - Member of the Senior RPG Tour

"NEMO ME IMPUNE LACESSIT - At least not in Yu Gi Oh"
http://www.cncsociety.org/
Lord Aladar
Warden of the Welk Wood
Baron of the Castles & Crusades Society
The Poster formerly known as Alwyn
Senior Gamer - Member of the Senior RPG Tour
"NEMO ME IMPUNE LACESSIT - At least not in Yu Gi Oh"

http://www.cncsociety.org/

User avatar
clavis123
Ulthal
Posts: 559
Joined: Wed Mar 05, 2008 8:00 am

Post by clavis123 »

I'm another CK that doesn't limit Combat Dominance to d6 or lower HD. A Fighter can use Combat Dominance against any creature with 1 HD of less, of any type.
Daniel James Hanley
Creator of Ghastly Affair, "The Gothic Game of Romantic Horror".
Player's Manual Now Available on DriveThruRPG and Amazon
Reader discretion is advised.

User avatar
bighara
Ulthal
Posts: 412
Joined: Fri May 12, 2006 7:00 am

Post by bighara »

clavis123 wrote:
I'm another CK that doesn't limit Combat Dominance to d6 or lower HD. A Fighter can use Combat Dominance against any creature with 1 HD of less, of any type.

I bumped it to 1d8 HD, just to include orcs, etc.
“Style is the perfection of a point of view.”

jamesmishler
Ulthal
Posts: 726
Joined: Tue May 30, 2006 7:00 am

Post by jamesmishler »

In addition to the above adjustments for Combat Dominance, you could also pump up Weapon Specialization so that it more resmbles the options present in 2E, the RC, and Mayfair Games' Blood & Steel set. Here are some suggestions:
Bonus Advancement: +1 bonus to hit and damage increases to +2 at 5th, +3 at 10th, +4 at 15th, and +5 at 20th.
Intimidate/Despair: Once per fight whenever a fighter inflicts maximum damage with his specialized weapon (or whenever he rolls a natural 20 or a critical, depending on your rules), all opponents who can see the attack must make a morale check (Charisma save, CL fighter level) or flee from combat.
Seize Initiative: Once per fight when the fighter is wielding his specialized weapon in melee against a weapon-wielding creature and said creature has initiative this round, the fighter may attempt to seize initiative. This is an opposed Dexterity check adding levels or hit dice; the fighter adds his specialization bonus (as does the target if he is also a fighter wielding his specialized weapon). If the fighter succeeds he may make his melee attack before the opponent gets his attack, and if said opponent dies from this attack, it does not get its attack.
_________________
James Mishler

Main Man, Adventure Games Publishing
[email protected]
http://adventuregamespublishing.blogspot.com/
http://jamesmishler.blogspot.com

User avatar
Fiffergrund
Lore Drake
Posts: 1118
Joined: Thu Mar 30, 2006 8:00 am
Location: Toronto, Ontario

Post by Fiffergrund »

TheFrost -

Most of the responses you've seen have covered the subject on a basic level. It might help to know some background...

Your question has been asked many times before. Though this is not your fault, lots of people have repeated themselves nearly every time the question is asked. The responses you might get, while some are undoubtedly helpful, may not be as helpful as you might expect.

During the design of C&C, the fighter was the subject of very spirited discussions. In the end, several principles apply:

1) The fighter should be the best at all-around fighting.

2) In the spirit of "rules-light", it's better to avoid multiple crunchy options. This makes it easier to change.

3) Roleplaying should be encouraged as a "customizer"

So, the C&C fighter, as-is, is the best all-around combatant. Certain classes, like the ranger, may have advantages in specific situations, but they also have drawbacks. The fighter has only advantages.

We did the math as well, by determining the average number of HPs damage per round compared to other classes. In most situations, by the book, the fighter is superior, or not far behind.

I'll agree the fighter as written is not flashy. Part of C&C's theme is to keep things simple so additions aren't difficult to make. As I already mentioned, part of C&C is maintaining a rules-light focus. Finally, C&C encourages roleplaying as a means of customization, rather than reliance on rules themselves to differentiate characters. All of these help to explain why the fighter isn't very glamorous, compared to other games. In C&C, fighters aren't supposed to be. They just get the job done.

Houserules abound for the fighter class - you've seen some already. I have some of my own. The important thing to realize is that the fighter is well-designed as-is. There's no need to add a houserule to make the fighter more viable, or to "fix" the class. Houserules are just to match the conception of the fighter as you want it to be.

I recommend the addition of houserules that promote the theme of the fighter being the ultimate combatant, without adding new powers or discrete abilities. My house rules encourage fighters to carry multiple weapons of different types, instead of automatically specializing, for example. If you want to make a change, consider breaking the mold without adding "powers." Adding new "abilities" tends to overlook the fact that the SIEGE engine can support just about anything if applied correctly.

I hope this helps. If you want more info, this is the place to ask!
_________________
Sir Fiffergrund, Lord Marshal of the Castle and Crusade Society.

He Who Hides Behind The Elephant's Back
Marshal Fiffergrund, Knight-Errant of the Castle and Crusade Society

User avatar
DangerDwarf
Maukling
Posts: 5284
Joined: Sat May 27, 2006 7:00 am
Location: East Texas

Post by DangerDwarf »

I must admit that I'm one who would prefer to be a ranger over a fighter due to the Combat Marauder ability and the sheer number of foes that it is useful against. That said however,I've got to say the fighter in no way is inferior.

In the C&C Dragonlance campaign that I ran up to around level 22, the fighter kicked ass. The only difference between her and a standard fighter (I ran a largely BTB campaign) was that she developed her 2 Weapon Fighting to a degree where she didn't suffer penalties any more and she also ended up earning the Knight's Inspire ability.

The fighter was instrumental in MANY of the fights. A stalwart hero who stood against the tide of the enemy unflinching.

adaen
Red Cap
Posts: 299
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2007 8:00 am
Location: Bridgewater, NJ
Contact:

Post by adaen »

You know, I can see C&C working really well with only the following classes:

Fighter

Wizard

Thief

Cleric

to be used as templates and using the examples in the other classes (i.e., abilities, balancing limitations, restrictions, etc.) as ideas for building the specific class you want. I'm hoping some of the info in the CKG will help with such an endeavor....I suppose I could figure it out myself, but it would be nice to see in the book.

Aob
_________________
~Adaen of Bridgewater, www.highadventuregames.com

serleran
Mogrl
Posts: 14094
Joined: Mon Oct 13, 2008 7:00 am

Post by serleran »

Technically, the fighter sets the standards the other classes are based upon, for determining XP needs, anyway.

Foxroe

Post by Foxroe »

adaen wrote:
You know, I can see C&C working really well with only the following classes:

Fighter

Wizard

Thief

Cleric

to be used as templates and using the examples in the other classes (i.e., abilities, balancing limitations, restrictions, etc.) as ideas for building the specific class you want. I'm hoping some of the info in the CKG will help with such an endeavor....I suppose I could figure it out myself, but it would be nice to see in the book.

Aob

Heck, you could just play it with Fighter, Cleric, Wizard (a la OD&D). SIEGE rules.
-Fox

User avatar
Frost
Beer Giant Jarl
Posts: 1324
Joined: Wed Nov 28, 2007 8:00 am
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Contact:

Post by Frost »

Folks, this has been very helpful, Fiffergrund's post in particular. I do plan to run C&C "as is" first to see how things play out. I figured there was a reason the fighter was designed the way he was.

Again, thanks.

Foxroe

Post by Foxroe »

My advice as well. I run C&C "out of the box" (no house rules) and we have great fun. It's just nice to know that somewhere down the line, if we get tired of anything we can just add some house rules to spice things up. Enjoy!
-Fox

User avatar
Aladar
Lore Drake
Posts: 1261
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 7:00 am
Location: Elgin, OK

Post by Aladar »

You know, I started tinkering with C&C adding a bunch of stuff from the old Rules Cyclopedia. Then a couple of weeks ago I came to realize I really didn't need all that extra stuff. I did add a few house rules, but basically C&C seems to run just fine as is, but it is nice to know that you can add new stuff with little effort.
_________________
Lord Aladar

Warden of the Welk Wood

Baron of the Castles & Crusades Society

The Poster formerly known as Alwyn

Senior Gamer - Member of the Senior RPG Tour

"NEMO ME IMPUNE LACESSIT - At least not in Yu Gi Oh"
http://www.cncsociety.org/
Lord Aladar
Warden of the Welk Wood
Baron of the Castles & Crusades Society
The Poster formerly known as Alwyn
Senior Gamer - Member of the Senior RPG Tour
"NEMO ME IMPUNE LACESSIT - At least not in Yu Gi Oh"

http://www.cncsociety.org/

User avatar
Aladar
Lore Drake
Posts: 1261
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 7:00 am
Location: Elgin, OK

Post by Aladar »

Oh, I forgot to mention that I am thinking of using Gary's CZ Options for secondary skills though.
_________________
Lord Aladar

Warden of the Welk Wood

Baron of the Castles & Crusades Society

The Poster formerly known as Alwyn

Senior Gamer - Member of the Senior RPG Tour

"NEMO ME IMPUNE LACESSIT - At least not in Yu Gi Oh"
http://www.cncsociety.org/
Lord Aladar
Warden of the Welk Wood
Baron of the Castles & Crusades Society
The Poster formerly known as Alwyn
Senior Gamer - Member of the Senior RPG Tour
"NEMO ME IMPUNE LACESSIT - At least not in Yu Gi Oh"

http://www.cncsociety.org/

User avatar
Keolander
Red Cap
Posts: 287
Joined: Wed Jul 12, 2006 7:00 am
Location: Tampa, Florida

Post by Keolander »

I like the Armour Specialization idea myself (I just saw that in Pathfinder yesterday when I downloaded a copy) as well as expanding Combat Dominance. Definitely gives the Fighter a little more oomph.
_________________
Lord Lamorek Steelguard, Baron of Calx Mons Montis - The Castles & Crusades Society
"Democracy, too, is a religion. It is the worship of jackals by jackasses." - H.L. Mencken
Μολὼν λάβε

Treebore
Mogrl
Posts: 20660
Joined: Mon May 01, 2006 7:00 am
Location: Arizona and St Louis

Post by Treebore »

Aladar wrote:
You know, I started tinkering with C&C adding a bunch of stuff from the old Rules Cyclopedia. Then a couple of weeks ago I came to realize I really didn't need all that extra stuff. I did add a few house rules, but basically C&C seems to run just fine as is, but it is nice to know that you can add new stuff with little effort.

When I first started playing C&C I figured I would be adding in tons of stuff from other editions of D&D, and even other games like GURPS, Paladium Fantasy, etc...

As I continued to run C&C and grew to understand the versatility of the SIEGE engine I realized that a lot of what I wanted added was already covered by the SIEGE engine.

If you, or a player can think of it, and you can decide on a CL for it, the SIEGE engine can do it.

Its just hard to see how true that is until you start understanding it. It being the SIEGE mechanic. Whoever came up with it really had a moment of "genius", its just too bad it was such a short lived moment.

For those of you who have my house rules, and I know a lot of you do, read it. A lot of it isn't so much new rules, but ways to determine CL's for a variety of actions.

The SIEGE checks for modifying spells, or "special attacks", etc... are already in the SIEGE engine. All my house rules do is give something of a codified system for determining the CL for those actions, and letting players know they can attempt such actions.

However, it is already in the SIEGE system. To a large extent your imagination really is the limit.
_________________
The Ruby Lord, Earl of the Society

Next Con I am attending: http://www.neoncon.com/

My House Rules: http://www.freeyabb.com/phpbb/viewtopic ... llordgames
Since its 20,000 I suggest "Captain Nemo" as his title. Beyond the obvious connection, he is one who sails on his own terms and ignores those he doesn't agree with...confident in his journey and goals.
Sounds obvious to me! -Gm Michael

Grand Knight Commander of the Society.

Ultack

Why play a fighter?

Post by Ultack »

Our group just started C&C to check it out. It was decided to start chars around lvl 4-6. As in many system I tried before, I like to start with a simple fighter.

I was really unhappy with the extensive list of abilities my fighter would have to work with, Combat Dominance, period. WoW. I get an extra attack on crapola of 1 HD, not even, of 1 HD of 1d6 or less even. Calm down I told myself, we are here to test this "better" system as my DM says.

Well I thought myself lucky when we effectively encounter some rats, I was to be able to use my ONLY skill against some mobs. A Cleric, a Ranger and a Fighter is all we had to work with that night. The Cleric could hit squat and the Ranger felt he wasn't doing his fair share of the killing so he suggested the possibility of a siege check to do a Sweep Attack on the rats.

OMFG I told myself. I have but a single skill as a lvl 5 fighter and with that SC it will be obsolete already. I was wrong. It was to be blown away completely because the Sweep would be able to attack anything there was in reach of the ranger. If you cant fight them, join them is what I told myself after telling everyone that this was ridiculous that this single SC could take the two abilities my fighter would ever have and throw them out of the window.

So the DM ruling on that Sweep Attack would be that you take a -2 on every SC for each target before rolling to hit. Here comes the punch ... based on DEX. So now I am really butt F......... Because as a good fighter that will be the meat shield of the group, my secondary is constitution since dexterity in a plate mail is useless anyway.

So now in mere minutes my whole fighter package as been render completely obsolete and any class with DEX as a primary, or anyone with DEX as a secondary can attack anything, not limited on level like me, that is within his/her reach. Just WOW! I tried to explain to the DM that Sweep maneuver isn't a DEX base skill but a STR one since you are trying to force your attack to go through any resistance you encountered with a target to get to the next target with enough force & velocity to inflict significant damage, not just go "tik" on your target (Sweeping Arc). To no avail, the ranger had no str but had dex so the SC on Sweep would now be DEX base.

And this is why I hate system where ignorance rules instead of having at least basics covered by rules.

User avatar
Buttmonkey
Greater Lore Drake
Posts: 2090
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2007 7:00 am

Re: Why play a fighter?

Post by Buttmonkey »

Ultack wrote:
Our group just started C&C to check it out. It was decided to start chars around lvl 4-6. As in many system I tried before, I like to start with a simple fighter.

I was really unhappy with the extensive list of abilities my fighter would have to work with, Combat Dominance, period. WoW. I get an extra attack on crapola of 1 HD, not even, of 1 HD of 1d6 or less even. Calm down I told myself, we are here to test this "better" system as my DM says.

Well I thought myself lucky when we effectively encounter some rats, I was to be able to use my ONLY skill against some mobs. A Cleric, a Ranger and a Fighter is all we had to work with that night. The Cleric could hit squat and the Ranger felt he wasn't doing his fair share of the killing so he suggested the possibility of a siege check to do a Sweep Attack on the rats.

OMFG I told myself. I have but a single skill as a lvl 5 fighter and with that SC it will be obsolete already. I was wrong. It was to be blown away completely because the Sweep would be able to attack anything there was in reach of the ranger. If you cant fight them, join them is what I told myself after telling everyone that this was ridiculous that this single SC could take the two abilities my fighter would ever have and throw them out of the window.

So the DM ruling on that Sweep Attack would be that you take a -2 on every SC for each target before rolling to hit. Here comes the punch ... based on DEX. So now I am really butt F......... Because as a good fighter that will be the meat shield of the group, my secondary is constitution since dexterity in a plate mail is useless anyway.

So now in mere minutes my whole fighter package as been render completely obsolete and any class with DEX as a primary, or anyone with DEX as a secondary can attack anything, not limited on level like me, that is within his/her reach. Just WOW! I tried to explain to the DM that Sweep maneuver isn't a DEX base skill but a STR one since you are trying to force your attack to go through any resistance you encountered with a target to get to the next target with enough force & velocity to inflict significant damage, not just go "tik" on your target (Sweeping Arc). To no avail, the ranger had no str but had dex so the SC on Sweep would now be DEX base.

And this is why I hate system where ignorance rules instead of having at least basics covered by rules.

Okay, a couple thoughts...

1. While the system's open-endedness allowed for your DM's ruling, I don't think it's fair to blame the system for an arguably bad ruling by the DM. There are plenty of guidelines in the PHB regarding application of the SIEGE engine that I think should have discouraged this ruling. For example,
PHB 3rd Printing, page 112 wrote:
In general, it is recommended that a Castle Keeper should disallow a character a chance of success in attempting a non-class ability.

Since the fighter and monk are the only classes that get multiple attacks and only the fighter has combat dominance, I personally would not have allowed the sweep attack by the ranger. And if I did, I certainly would not allow the ranger to attack more critters than the fighter's combat dominance would allow, since
PHB 3rd Printing, page 112 wrote:
It is important to note that the abilities of each class have the best results when used by only that class. A rogue can move silently, wiht an absolute absence of sound. A fighter, therefore, should only be able to move very quietly, even with a successful roll.

That said...

2. Was the ruling all that bad? The ranger took a significant penalty for attempting the action (-2 to SIEGE check for each additional monster). If he's trying to swipe at 4 rats, that would result in a -6 penalty (basically, if dex is prime and the CK rules it was a Dex check, he'd need at least an 18 to pull it off). I'm assuming the CK would have given your character an easier roll if your PC tried the same thing. Yes, I think it was a crappy ruling, but at least the CK tried to balance some things out with the penalty on the SIEGE check. Given the difficulty level faced by the ranger, I think claiming your combat dominance was "obsolete" is a little over the top.

3. I don't know what you mean about a good dex being pointless since your character was wearing plate mail.
tylermo wrote:Your efforts are greatly appreciated, Buttmonkey. Can't believe I said that with a straight face.

User avatar
ssfsx17
Unkbartig
Posts: 956
Joined: Sun Apr 08, 2007 7:00 am
Location: San Francisco Region

Re: Why play a fighter?

Post by ssfsx17 »

Ultack wrote:
And this is why I hate system where ignorance rules instead of having at least basics covered by rules.

This sounds more like your CK being biased against you than a problem with the system. You may want to ask your CK if you can "cleave" as a normal ability, or if you can perform a "whirlwind attack." After all, if the Ranger gets to ask for something, then you also ought to be able to ask for something. In fact, I'd see the situation as a success of the system - a player was rewarded for thinking of something to try out.

If your CK rejects all of your ideas because he simply hates you and/or hates fighters, there's nothing the system can do about it.
C&C/D&D-related writings, Cortex Classic material, and other scraps: https://sites.google.com/site/x17rpgstuff/home

Class-less D&D: https://github.com/ssfsx17/skill20

User avatar
gideon_thorne
Maukling
Posts: 6176
Joined: Thu Mar 30, 2006 8:00 am
Contact:

Re: Why play a fighter?

Post by gideon_thorne »

Well, in response to Ultack...

Combat dominance isn't the only 'skill' a fighter has. Nor are the class abilities listed in any class the only abilities they have. The group your playing with might take a longer look at the Siege engine check section.

A given character, including the fighter, has as many skills and abilities, not listed on the character description page, as the game master says they do.

Depending on Primes, and a bit of background on the character, fighters in my game can have a wide range of skills.

Wisdom Prime for example. This could represent trained instinct, where a fighter could roll a check to sense the position of adversaries all around him. If you want your 'sweep' attack, the challenge level of the task could be the # of opponents you want to hit.

It could operate thus. "Surrounding your brave warrior are a half dozen thuggish types who are quite evidently set on relieving your hero of his valuables, and perhaps his life as well. Now, years of training has honed your instincts (wis check prime) to where you can sense the most beneficial moment to strike. "

"Your successful check tells you that the figure at your 7 o clock threat position is the one you ought to strike at first. This due to some instinct that points this one out as the one most likely to be in control of the morale of the others. The strike would also be in an unexpected direction, since the target is not in front of you. And most expect a surrounded figure to attack the most visible target."

What would a successful check get here? Well. Lets say, for the sake of this discussion, that the 6 opponents represent a CL of 6 to be able to know how to apply a tactic to strike at all 6 with a sweeping attack. In this instance, a roll has not quite reached the number needed to hit all 6. Say you rolled enough to hit 4 instead of six.

What the check has given you is the ability to sweep your blade around and cause damage to 4 opponents.

All this done with a wisdom check that can remove the penalty from the fighter for a sweep attack.

A fighter with an Intelligence prime, in my opinion, is going to be highly knowledgeable in various combat related areas. One with a charisma prime will most likely be an effective leader of men, and can command morale in battle.

Its not a matter of whats written on a sheet, or spelled out in a book.
_________________
"We'll go out through the kitchen!" Tanis Half-Elven

Peter Bradley
"The accumulated filth of all their sex and murder will foam up about their waists and all the whores and politicians will look up and shout, 'Save us!' And I'll look down, and whisper 'No.' " ~Rorschach

Ultack

Re: Why play a fighter?

Post by Ultack »

Buttmonkey wrote:
Okay, a couple thoughts...

1. While the system's open-endedness allowed for your DM's ruling, I don't think it's fair to blame the system for an arguably bad ruling by the DM. There are plenty of guidelines in the PHB regarding application of the SIEGE engine that I think should have discouraged this ruling. For example,


Since the fighter and monk are the only classes that get multiple attacks and only the fighter has combat dominance, I personally would not have allowed the sweep attack by the ranger. And if I did, I certainly would not allow the ranger to attack more critters than the fighter's combat dominance would allow, since



That said...

2. Was the ruling all that bad? The ranger took a significant penalty for attempting the action (-2 to SIEGE check for each additional monster). If he's trying to swipe at 4 rats, that would result in a -6 penalty (basically, if dex is prime and the CK rules it was a Dex check, he'd need at least an 18 to pull it off). I'm assuming the CK would have given your character an easier roll if your PC tried the same thing. Yes, I think it was a crappy ruling, but at least the CK tried to balance some things out with the penalty on the SIEGE check. Given the difficulty level faced by the ranger, I think claiming your combat dominance was "obsolete" is a little over the top.

3. I don't know what you mean about a good dex being pointless since your character was wearing plate mail.

Sorry wasn't clear it seem, -2 on SC, period. But to be rolled before each attempt of hitting a target.

And the bad ruling as you said is exactly the reason why I dislike a system with no clear rule on basic stuff like that. Because one as just to be stuck with a DM that cant think his/her way through such situation and you get screwed.

When I said the only skills the fighter as, I were referring to a lvl 5 fighter.

Anyway it seem we will have to endure more of those situations because he is adamant on playing nothing else, for a long while. To let the DM decide on which stats a roll should be made is assuming he/she can make an educated judgment call. And that is the worst mistake an open ended system such as this can make. I played Champion for a long time, also open ended, but with the basics covered and that made the difference.

User avatar
Buttmonkey
Greater Lore Drake
Posts: 2090
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2007 7:00 am

Post by Buttmonkey »

I'm sorry you have a sucky CK. Before the next game session, you might try to calmly and politely point out the passages I quoted from the PHB and explain why you think his ruling is trashing your class ability. Again, I think the problem is the CK, not the rules, but I can see your point. The flip side is that if you have a great CK, the rules become a tool and not a limitation.
tylermo wrote:Your efforts are greatly appreciated, Buttmonkey. Can't believe I said that with a straight face.

Post Reply