Talk:Fighter, Tome (3.5e Class)

From D&D Wiki

Jump to: navigation, search

Moving beyond the Fighter idea?[edit]

I like most of what I see here, the foiling, the combat actions, a lot of it works and fits. However, why is the fighter given Good reflex and will? The fighter doesn't have any abilities that would justify this. Look at all the other classes. A rogue gets evasion and gets good reflex as just one example. But mental strength and quick reflexes seems to be something that is separate from the whole "fighter" archetype. --T G Geko 09:36, 4 June 2009 (MDT)

I think that, mechanically, it gets the good saves because the fighter is going to be the person expected to get in the monster's face, so they'll be taking attacks of every kind much more often. But I can justify it with flavor by this being a class which is the result of intensive training--kinda like the monks. And if monks get a strenuous training regimen up in some monastery on some frozen mountain, there's no reason that Fighters can't get a strenuous training regimen down in some school; you could do intense exercise to build up the Fort, have them run gauntlets of minor traps to build up reflexes, and either have them routinely get blasted by minor enchantments--or whatever. Anyway, the Fighter CAN get the abilities to work those saves. If you're playing under Tome rules, you're using feats like this: Lightning Reflexes (DnD Feat), and Iron Will (DnD Feat). Also, it's dumb that Fighters are really weak to Fear effects and mental influences. This class, combined with the feats, is meant to cover several distinct archetypes--The Tank, the Ranger, the Fencer/Swashbuckler, and the Mounted Guy. That's why it has a large number of skill points and a large skill list. Anyway, yeah. It's got a reason for everything...And now I want to make a swashbuckling fencer dual-wielding rapiers, just to show...--Genowhirl 10:07, 4 June 2009 (MDT)
Well, with that logic every class should get good saves because that is just how they trained. And another thing, the tank, the skill, the ranger, et. al. are all separate archetypes, and thus should be separate classes. Oh, and why can they make magic weapons? I thought that the assumption was that you had to be able to cast the spell that you are infusing into the item?
How about instead, the fighter can make magic weapons with numeral [thing] only, IE, they can only make +2 weapons and the like; but not +2 flaming sword. Also, they can make weapons out of materials that break DR, like a silver weapon, or a good aligned weapon. No of these are specifically magical, and would still allow the fighter to make cool stuff. --T G Geko 13:50, 5 June 2009 (MDT)
Yeah, that argument was spur of the moment; if you really want, I'll ask Frank the justification for the all-good saves next time I see him. Anyway, Forge Lore already works how you suggest. Enhancement bonuses (+3 axe, +1 short sword, etc) *are* specifically magic. This fighter can make the enhancement bonuses like nobody's business, seeing as how their caster level equal to their ranks in Craft (maxes out at Level +3). But if they want the special abilities (flaming, shocking, etc), someone has to supply the spells for that end of it. If they paired up with the party caster, they could outfit the party in some seriously nice stuff. And they can also upgrade it (just pay the gap in the cost and put in the time, which is how Craft Magic Arms and Armor works), instead of the party just swapping out their stuff for "slightly more magical stuff" every couple of levels.--Genowhirl 09:21, 6 June 2009 (MDT)
Okay, here's his answer:
The Fighter is an inherently defensive character. Past the first few levels or so he is not putting out Rogue levels of damage nor is he dropping Save or Dies. He's dragging combat out longer, and that means being exposed to more enemy magic. If his saves aren't good, he just can't compete at any level.

Now this is not a new fact or a particularly insightful one. And it's something that every mundane character has to struggle with. And historically the way a warrior character deals with this particular need of the swordsman is by taking 5 classes in 12 levels. The way D&D classes add up, if you take a new class almost every other level, your saves are incredibly good - even if they are "bad." Remember that when a Cleric takes levels of Radiant Servant or Contemplative that they go from two good saves to only one - but that first level bonus for class hopping is so big that it actually takes about 6 levels for that "trade down" to go down to merely a net +1.

If you ask a warrior to single class, you pretty much need to give them a cannon equivalent of a Rogue or Wizard, or you need to give them all good saves. Indeed, a single classed character with all good saves still has weak saves to the point that it is their achilles heal at high levels.

Good saves aren't a crushing banner of power, their a bandaid on a gaping wound. And a paltry one at that. Every character who isn't participating through insta-gibs and doesn't have a list of classes as long as your arm needs all good saves.

How's that? --Genowhirl 11:00, 6 June 2009 (MDT)
Yea, the good saves make a lot of sense, the monk and fighter are very similar classes, flavor wise. I'm going to change the article to reflect the Forge Lore details you just mentioned.--T G Geko 11:34, 6 June 2009 (MDT)
It already does. Seriously, the enhancement bonus you can make is dependent on your caster level. And all it says is you can create magic weapons and armor as if you had a caster level equal to your ranks in Craft. The Fighter now has a Caster level for making weapons and armor, but he doesn't have spells he can use to get the weird properties. It doesn't say anything about him being able to make a flaming or freezing or a flaming freezing shocking sword, so he can't. So anyone who knows how magic item creation works goes, "Oh, hey, he can make +'s all he wants, but he can't make his sword a flaming sword." You seemed to have no known that (no reflection on you). You asked about it and the way you suggested it should work is, actually, how it already works. So I'll just change that back, because the wording doesn't need to be improved. --Genowhirl 11:47, 6 June 2009 (MDT)
In my opinion, a monk undergoes a training which leads to an incredibly mastery over mind and body - compare to the real world example of the shaolin monk. A fighter on the other hand is a good swordsman - but he has not that control over himself a monk has.
For dealing with fear I´d propose the solution of the pathfinder system: a "bravery"-feat which raises the saves against fear effects. (btw, right now your class is the standard fighter with better saves, more skill points and more feats - obviously overpowered) --XOR 13 September 2009
You think the standard fighter is somehow good? I'm not even going to quibble on the fact that your feat-counting is off. The Fighter is supposed to be a thinking warrior, one who uses extensive training and his wits to defeat foes that other Fighting Men handle by stabbing in the face. How exactly is he supposed to do that with just enough skill points to tie his shoes and one of the game's crappiest skill lists? Also, the saves: The Fighter's lot in life is to be taking the effects monsters and NPCs with class levels hand out; he doesn't get bonus damage or ways to hurry the fight up, so how else are you going to let a class which lends itself to front-line fighting take those effects. Besides, as I've spent a lot of time on this page explaining, this Fighter class covers several archetypes rather than just pigeonholing itself to a heavily-armored guy carrying a greatsword. Oh, and may I just say that burning an entire feat just to get a bonus on saves against is just plain dumb and indicative of the problems of the standard SRD and, by extension, Pathfinder feat system? --Genowhirl 08:40, 13 September 2009 (MDT)

Specific details[edit]

Is "Combat Focus" like the PH2 feat, the homebrew feat, or is it just something to describe this ability?

The class suggests that we get a limited number of swift actions. Is this true and where can I find more info about this?--T G Geko 13:50, 5 June 2009 (MDT)

It's just something to describe the ability, as far as I know. And, yeah, you get one swift action a round (The rules' from Magic Item Compendium where they talk about spells with swift actions). Casting a quickened spell, is for example, is a Swift Action instead of a Free Action, so you can cast a Quickened spell and also throw off a regular in a round. Also, if you use an immediate action on someone else's turn, you don't get your Swift action the next round, so if your wizard does something to use his immediate action (I can't imagine what it'd be offhand, honestly), he doesn't get to use his other Quickened Fireball next round. --Genowhirl 09:50, 6 June 2009 (MDT)


Power - 10/5 I give this class a 10 out of 5 because it has the abilities of three base classes rolled into one. Primary way of improving would be to tone down saves, skills, attacks, and abilities. -- 13:17, 28 January 2009 (MST)

Just because Fighters can't have nice things, eh? Now that I have the leisure to give an accounting...Look, everything on this class was reasoned out. This is meant to be class with which you can play various fighting styles and archetypes--fencing, skirmishing, tanking, mounted combat...Instead of gimping those various concepts and dragooning you into playing a heavily-armored clanker with a greatsword, this class tries to give you what you need to play a good deal of the warrior archetypes and fighting styles. Lemme preach on:
  • Fencing: fast, agile movement around the battlefield and finesse-y swordplay. That very much implies Tumble (for the moving around), and Bluff and Sense Motive (for the feinting and finessing). Once could also be a smooth-talking swashbuckler and take Diplomacy. Escape Artist would be good for this, too.
  • Scouting/Skirmishing: Hide, Move Silently, Spot, Listen. That's four of your skill points right there. If you take into account mobility skills (Balance, Climb, Jump, Swim, probably something else I forgot), that's another four skill points each level to keep those level-appropriate. Oh, and Survival.
  • Mounted combat: Ride, Handle Animal.
  • Other Skills: Well, let's see. Profession and Craft get a free pass because everyone gets them. Use Rope is, well, Use Rope. Intimidate gets a free pass, because fighters can be scary. The fighter archetype is supposed to get up in the face of monsters, too--and only an idiot would do it without knowing about them. Therefore, Knowledges are in order, because that's how you identify and know about monsters--which is because WotC often had no idea what the heck they were turning out (called, among other things, Skip Smokes Crack). Unfortunately, a lot of people think that WoTC's own policies and guidelines are the ultimate paragon in balance and that all written material should follow in WoTC's footsteps. This is not so. -- Genowhirl 19:07, 28 January 2009 (MST)
rating negated, the rater does not understand the base of the rating system. --Lord Dhazriel 13:33, 16 April 2009 (MDT)

Wording - 4/5 I give this class a 4 out of 5 because it was hilarious reading this over powered warmonger -- 13:17, 28 January 2009 (MST)

Rating Negated, the reason given is stupid. --Lord Dhazriel 13:33, 16 April 2009 (MDT)

Formatting - 0/5 I give this class a 0 out of 5 because the class is so blatantly over powered that it should not appear amongst respectable classes -- 13:17, 28 January 2009 (MST)

Wait, you gave this a 0/5 on formatting because you think the class is overpowered? Should you be judging it on, oh, I don't know, how neatly it's constructed, sectioned, labeled, and link? In rather marked contrast to your own approach to your ratings. --Genowhirl 19:18, 28 January 2009 (MST)
Rating negated, rater does not understand the base of the rating system, balance is rated in power not formatting.--Lord Dhazriel 13:33, 16 April 2009 (MDT)

Flavor - 0/5 I give this class a 0 out of 5 because it is a one man wrecking crew complete with the ability to make his own magical gear. Lose all the special abilities, skills, saves, and attacks. -- 13:17, 28 January 2009 (MST)

You're not seeing the flavor because you don't like the class. Shame upon thee and thy kin unto the seventh generation for letting pig-eyed prejudice blind thee so. Looking over the class for the first time, I rather quickly got the feeling that here was an extensively-trained, heroic improvisor who keeps his head in the heat of battle and uses a variety of tactical tricks to outmaneuver his enemies. Sure, the flavor text and ability names isn't quite up to the Celestial Beacon (DnD Prestige Class), but it's not bland. Also, it can't hyper-focus on one thing because this class is supposed to encompass multiple archetypes, Remember? Anyway, Monks get their three good saves because of their intensive training regimen, correct? If it can be taught in monasteries up on some frozen mountain, then it can be taught in an academy where you don't have to freeze your nadgers off. Stories, legends, and myths abound with warriors who made their own magic sword or armor, so Forge Lore is totally appropriate. Oh, and you think this is a one-man wrecking crew. How fascinating. Check out the Races of War (3.5e Sourcebook) versions of the Barbarian or Samurai if you want to see one-man wrecking crew. -- Genowhirl 19:07, 28 January 2009 (MST)
That's why its a variant, and I don't think you fully understand the rating system. And upon further review, its a Frank and K class. Why am I not surprised. Read everything Races of War-oriented then come back and understand the author's perspective. -- Jota 13:23, 28 January 2009 (MST)
This class owes its features to a couple of things. One, it was written on the assumption that a character of level X should be able to win about half the the time against challenges (various kinds and groups of monsters and traps and so on), of CR X. Two, the designers tend to write rules which accomplish their stated goals. The fighter is classically a tactical sort of warrior, using various tricks to exploit his enemy's weaknesses. The 3.5 SRD Fighter does not get that--he gets enough feats for him to hyperfocus in one or two tricks, but he gets nothing but feats. When Frank and Keith wrote this class, they included abilities to let the Fighter do that. Or, to put it another way, they gave melee classes (Fighter, Barbarian, Monk, Samurai), something nice. I realize that's against the religion of a lot of DnD players, because they somehow want their melee warriors to be 'realistic,' but the bald fact is that unless you want to rewrite the hundreds of monsters and spells in the game so they don't leave warriors in the dust, the warriors have to be tuned up to fit in with the rest of the world; I can easily come up with a reason for Fighters to have all good saves--the academies who put them through the intensive training programs make them undergo intense physical exercise for a good Fort save, run through through dreadful obstacle course to build up their reflexes, and leave piles of erotic elven poetry around to build up their willpower. In that way, they're rather like a Monk--a real Fighter has undergone rigorous training to tune up his body and mind to the best they can be.
I give your ratings and reasoning a .125/5, because you just assigned numbers based on your limited experience, without knowledge of what the writers were thinking when they put their sweat, blood, and tears to writing this, your wording is juvenile, your formatting is atrocious, and you haven't learned a few essential truths about Dungeons and Dragons 3.5--foremost among them, the principle Skip Smokes Crack. -- Genowhirl 14:00, 28 January 2009 (MST)
Rating Negated, the reason given is stupid. --Lord Dhazriel 13:33, 16 April 2009 (MDT)


Power - 5/5 I give this class a 5 out of 5 because this class, unlike other Frank & K classes, doesn't ever strike one as being overpowered. It gets a decent little bit unique abilities and even can make magic weapons without being a caster (Which is always something I thought was stupid, having to cast magic in order to make a cool weapon that is). Overall I must say, this is a very good class. → Rith (talk) 11:40, 16 April 2009 (MDT)

f I remember the magic item creation rules right (it's been a while since I've fooled with them), someone still has to supply the spells for the speshul abilities and qualities, but the Fighter is the business at caster level requirements and enhancement bonuses. Which is a nice touch; it gives a class a reason to really care about the Craft skill. --Genowhirl 14:22, 16 April 2009 (MDT)
I'm really wondering how this cannot come across as overpowered. Compared directly to the fighter class that it is based from, it has everything that class has, and also has extra special abilities added every other level, more skill points, and better saving throws. Since there is no earthly reason to use the SRD fighter if this Tome Fighter class is available, I would think that it counts as the very definition of overpowered. ( 12:26, 1 May 2009 (MDT))
You are wrong IP, the SRD Fighter suck. Look at the WotC Warblade (which is plain better) or some spellcasters, you see tghis fighter equal them roughly. Also, comparing a class to another class and saying the class is the absolute balance in power is probably the worst way to balance or judge something. --Lord Dhazriel 12:45, 1 May 2009 (MDT)
This class received this rating simply because it was made by Frank & K, and all of their classes are based off a paticular way of veiwing classes, and this way is based of the idea that a character of a paticular ECL should be able to win 50% of the time against a creature of a CR equal to their ECL, not that they should attempt to immitate WoTC classes. This rating was given with that philosophy in mind (Also, I've made a template that would specifically allow for a person veiwing these classes for the first time to be aware of this fact. Though, the caretakers of Frank & K's pages haven't been using it, and I'm thinking of adding it myself soon). → Rith (talk) 12:49, 1 May 2009 (MDT)

Wording - 4/5 I give this class a 5 out of 5 because, while all of the class features are easily understood and comprehensive, the strange BAB progression is never explained (I personally know it's from races of war, but others wouldn't, and so would look at it and say, "whuh?"). → Rith (talk) 11:40, 16 April 2009 (MDT)

Formatting - 2/5 I give this class a 2 out of 5 because massive portions of the preload are missing, and interwiki linking is lacking. (Also, I do not care if those portions that are missing were there in the beginning just to increase books page count, they're still missing). → Rith (talk) 11:40, 16 April 2009 (MDT)

Flavor - 5/5 I give this class a 4 out of 5 because, while most of the flavor related parts of the preload are missing, the flavor that is present is very interesting, unique, and needs to be added to the actual D&D fighter. → Rith (talk) 11:40, 16 April 2009 (MDT)

Changed rating since flavor is independant of the preload. → Rith (talk) 11:28, 17 April 2009 (MDT)


Power - 1/5 I give this class a 1 out of 5 because the class easily kill anything at its CR at any given level, and only get worse as it gains levels. Foil Action is easily the most broken ability I've ever seen, the bonus feats it gains access to are all homebrewed as well, each one so incredibly overpowered as to make Natural Spell seem tame. Then there the fact that it has high hp, full bab, tons of skill points...really, this class is a joke. -- 09:12, 13 December 2009 (MST)

My only question to you is: is this better than a wizard? -- Jota 11:21, 13 December 2009 (MST)
Yes. When you can kill a Balor in one round at level 16 100% of the time, you are better than the wizard.
I think you overestimate the significance of one challenge as far as its corresponds to the overall power of the class (or at the absolute very least you're vastly simplifying gauges of class power), but to each his own. A wizard can do the same thing (regarding the balor). Granted he needs to prep usually, but that's part of being a wizard. -- Jota 06:57, 14 December 2009 (MST)

Wording - 4/5 I give this class a 4 out of 5 because it's fine, really.

Formatting - 5/5 I give this class a 5 out of 5 because no problems here. -- 09:12, 13 December 2009 (MST)

Flavor - 4/5 I give this class a 4 out of 5 because I'm pretty neutral about this. Better than average no doubt though. -- 09:12, 13 December 2009 (MST)

I"m sorry but[edit]

How can you still choose to play a fighter over this? Correct me if im wrong.

Creating classes as discribed in the DM guide. Clearly states that if you are creating a class and it makes classes with the same purpose obsoleet... Its probebly overpowered. And if its the other way around it will probebly be underpowered.

Now you can discuss this to hell but what I see here is a fighter class who does not get the first level bonus feat. But instead gets a class ability, and an other class ability EACH other level...

Not only that. It gets the monks saves...

And if its not enough... this FIRST class ability you get is equal to getting ANY weapon proficiency feat.

I would recommend you kick out some bonus feats?-- 03:59, 14 December 2009 (MST)

You don't know Frank, do you? --Jay Freedman 13:30, 14 December 2009 (MST)
Yeah...Anyway, to understand: The two guys who wrote this class are... smart. I mean, they came up with a system and hold themselves to it. They're good at analysis, and pretty funny, too. Here's a piece of analysis/ranting from Frank to give you an idea. Some cursing, so if you're offended by that... --Genowhirl 20:56, 16 December 2009 (MST)
I agree with Genowhirl (at least, with what he seemed to insinuate). In the defense of F&K, this class was founded on the premise that no one in a properly balanced game would play an SRD Fighter anyway because, well, it's not that good. It really has nothing to offer besides a host of bonus feats, which when limited to SRD feats are very underbalanced. Optimization is key to making a fighter that can compete with other higher level characters, and those who cannot do this are pretty much doomed to a campaign of frustrating mediocrity. So, please, understand where they're coming from before you judge. - TG Cid 16:57, 19 December 2009 (MST)

Don't Hate[edit]

Hi, my name is Jay. Have you ever noticed a difference if usefulness between core classes? I have. From playtesting and building, to forum reading and discussion, it has become evident to me that not all classes are created equal. Indeed, some classes have been blessed by their creators with powers far beyond the limits of others. We, the humble homebrewers of the world, see this shift in power as a void with which to fill with amazing and wonderful creations of equality and balance.

It is important that I preface by saying that every class is judged based upon its maximum level of skillful optimization using core rules. With each class operating at it's maximum potential we can observe and quantify their interactions. Here are some of the calculations that came out of our years of research and development. Number 1: Fighter Class Characters do not grow in power exponentially. (The bonuses they receive at 20th level are equal to the bonuses they recieve at 1st.) Number 2: Wizard Class Characters do grow in power exponentially. (The bonuses they receive at 20th level are many times more powerful to the bonuses they recieve at 1st.)

It is from these scholarly observations that unique solutions have been created to balance this equation. Behold the Tome Fighter! A martial melee classification that possesses immense and exponential level of growth and power. Born for the express purpose to run efficiently at the highest levels of play, optimization, and challenge rating.

For those who do not still understand the vast and great importance this class is playing in shaping the battlefields of the future, I will attempt to communicate in a language which perhaps you can understand. When it comes to Rating this class: "Don't hate the player, hate the game."--Jay Freedman 13:05, 14 December 2009 (MST)

Yes, but the Tome Fighter, once optimized, makes playing the game pointless, since it makes every other class pointless. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talkcontribs) 11:56, 19 December 2009 (MST). Please sign your posts.
(I'm going to go easy on you. "wink") Numbers exist and Balance exists. However, numbers do not have to be balanced to be Balanced Numbers. Example: Fighter Bob has 100% more hit points then Wizard Joe. Does this make Fighter Bob better than Wizard Joe? Statistically, yes. But if Fighter Bob is statistically taking 100% more damage than Wizard Joe? Doesn't this make it a balanced trade, mechanically? Maybe... Frank and K seem to think so.
We learn in 4th Edition that their are roles in the party. Classes are first assigned a party role then built mechanically based upon that role. Roles are assigned as Defender, Striker, Controller, and Leader. Some classes get more Hp and Armor while some classes get more spells and healing ability. But they balance based on gameplay and role.
This Fighter, Tome would probably fall into the role of Defender. The Tank, the Front-Line, the Meat-Shield, etc. Now, what role do you play in the party? Hmmm? Are you a Damage Dealer? If so, then you should be doing more damage than this class. If your not, then you sucks. Are you a Status-condition-spell-thrower? If so, then you should be restricting and neutralizing opponents better that this class. If your not, then you sucks. (Sense a pattern here...)
In the opinion of Frank and K, the SRD Fighter couldn't fulfill his party role to the expectations of other classes or their players. This class does not make other classes pointless. You do. This class makes other classes proud to be in the party with them. --Jay Freedman 12:31, 19 December 2009 (MST)

Foil Action seems like it would effectively kill everything, every time, unless the DM works overtime to compensate, or the enemy has more actions per turn than the Fighter. They can just counter all of the enemies actions and nail them with their extra attacks. That's pretty much total dominance over any one or more enemies within 30-60ft. There's no way that's not broken, it's basically a class that can kill friggin Asmodean by itself. Oh you want to cast a spell? no. You want to hit me? no. You want to use your awesome magic rod? no. Oh, so now the RULER OF HELL wants to run away? haha, NO. It just doesn't work. I get what you guys are trying to do and I agree that the melee classes can't normally hold a candle to the spellcasters, but breaking the melee fighters just creates the opposite problem. And these guys are definitely broken. I mean, the Tome Barbarian? As soon as they get that Anti Magic Field ability going, spell casters are effectively useless against them, and they're running around at high speeds with a Disjunction affect and an extra 8d6 damage. Yeah, they couldn't beat the Fighter (I guess they'd stalemate, what with the equal actions per turn and all), but they'd beat just about any spell caster.

I appreciate the thoughts behind all of this, but forcing spell casters to optimize and take prestige classes just to keep up is just flipping the balance the other way, not fixing it. ---anonymous, I guess

I would say you're missing something here. The Tome classes eventually settled upon using monsters and level-appropriate challenges, not other classes, as the balance point. Have you seen the CR 15 monster list? At that level, the Barbarian would basically need some way to locally negate magic to survive playing like a Barbarian should (ie, going into Rage and hitting something). Even then, at high levels the Barbarian is expected to slay monsters bigger and stronger and with more hit point than he has; or at least contribute something to their defeat. Likewise, the Fighter gets action-denial out to a limited range, because by then, stuff really can throw down actions that can destroy the party; even then, it's not THAT incredibly mind-blowing. You think 30 or 60 feet is outrageous? Many, many effects have more range than that. A longbow has range increments of what, 100 feet? A Medium range spell is 100 + 10/caster level. A Long-range effect is 400 + 40/caster level, I believe. The critters they're fighting can just STAND BACK. Also, what's wrong with eventually being able to take on Asmodean? The CR system dictates that as you approach Asmodean's CR, you should have an increasing, however slight it may be to start with, chance of success to beat him, until you have a fifty-fifty chance of winning when you're Asmodean's own CR. But high level D&D (past level 15 or 16) is crazy-nuts anyway, and by then characters have enough resources available that a hypothetical build can be made to take down anything.
Sure, the Tome melee classes look nuts, but that's because we're all used to the SRD stuff. I'll let you in on a tip: The core element of a fantasy game is not the magic, but the fantastic. Magic is fantastic, but not all fantastic things are magic. Unfortunately, the writers of the D&D 3e didn't really consider that, which is why melee people scale really poorly against the monsters they are expected to do something against. As an example...A CR 3 encounter is a lion. I'd expect myself after sufficient training and practice and experience, to be able to be given a sword and some armor and be able to do something against a lion. At CR 8, I'm given a sword and armor and thrown out to do something against a T-rex. I'd need some fantastic strength, agility, or toughness to be able to take down a T-rex. And if I'm level 8, I'd be expected to do contribute to its downfall, if not stand a chance of killing it by myself.
As a final point, there is another way to look at this, which is what I use: I'd much rather have something too powerful to start with. Too powerful is much, much better than too weak. If something's too weak, you have to find ways of scaling it up and making it do the job it's supposed to do (like how SRD Paladins are supposed to be really great at fighting Evil and they are...for up to five swings of their weapon a day.), but if something's too strong, it's easier to tone down some numbers and drop an effect or two until the character is no longer turning the rest of the party into occasionally-useful people. Also, the rest of the players does not mind someone being reigned in to a level-appropriate level of power as much as they mind someone being given free upgrades for underperforming. --Genowhirl 07:12, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Fair enough idea if you're just focusing on monsters maybe (haven't play tested that idea yet), but I still disagree about action denial/foil action, because it's unlimited control over any one or more opponents within 30-60ft. When I say they can beat Asmodean, I mean they could do that at level 16 (and he was just an example of how they could beat any CR as long as the Fighter had more actions per turn). And they could, as long as they were within 60ft of him, he wouldn't be able to take any action; no magic, no summoning, no attacks, no nothing. He couldn't even run away with it as it's written now. That's horrendously broken, there isn't a spell out there that allows that kind of absolute dominance. I mean, most spells at least have saving throws or spell resistance or, well, something. This just works 100% of the time and denies the opponent the opportunity to do anything about it. I'm not going to pretend that SRD is even near perfect or that spell casters aren't broken, but unless you actively TRY to optimize them, they aren't going to dominate as much as this fighter does without even trying. Unless maybe they're a Druid, but that's another topic.

Yeah, that's something. Actually Asmodean could do a full attack, I believe. Might be able to run. Could use a clarification on the begin-before-it's-declared...Anyway, yeah, the Fighter does do what it's designed to do. The 30/60 feet can be negated by just not coming in that close. And I still maintain that I'd rather start with this and pare down, than the SRD Fighter and try to build that up. --Genowhirl 03:29, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

Might as well say it[edit]

This class, and their other melee classes (Monk, Barbarian, Samurai), were written with the intention of replacing the 'official' versions. And, to be honest, I'd trust Frank and Keith's judgment of overpowered and what works over that of most WotC writers. The D&D writers did an awesome job with 3e as a system, but there's too many holdovers and quirks and the like, and I think the biggest fundamental mistake they made with classes comes with their ideas of the fantasy genre, and is best described like this:

"The core element of fantasy is not magic, but “fantastic.” The core element of a fantasy roleplaying game is the progression of the fantastic. All characters (if classes and races are indeed balanced) should have an equal amount of fantastic for their level. If you don’t understand this fundamental lynchpin of fantasy design (balancing the fantastic) then you deserve to have people saying how crappy your product is. Magic is, by definition, fantastic, but not all fantastic things are magic."

That, right there. The SRD fighter is very, very un-fantastic. It gets no class features, just feats--and not even really interesting feats. At level five or six, the wizard is throwing around fireballs and lightning bolts and the cleric is summoning up all manner of extra planar creatures and...the Fighter is allowed to move a little before and after an attack, or take a swing at everyone around him. Really, that's not that fantastic. Oh, sure, he can get magic items and do cool stuff with that...but the magic gear was all explicitly made by a caster of some kind, and he'll never be able to do it himself (" n00b j00 got no spellz and no feat"). The official D&D writers are also really locked into pure combat features for classes. This Fighter does get something so simple, so obvious, I was truly impressed and still wish I'd thought of it: Pack Mule. A class feature to help with the transportation of gear.

So, yes, I have absolutely no problem with people writing material which overshadows what Ed and Mike and Andy wrote. If they ever admitted that the melee classes for 3.x were extremely lackluster compared to casters and monsters and spells (i.e., just about everything else in the game), I'd think more of them. As it stands now, their ideas are sufficiently good enough so that when they say something I listen to it and evaluate it with whatever means I have available. But saying 'the DMG says THIS' doesn't add any support to an argument or not. It's like saying a plant's green, a statement of fact which has no bearing on, to continue the example, if the plant is poisonous or not. --Genowhirl 22:55, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

In a game using only core content, when someone says ..."the DMG says THIS"... then yes, it not only supports the argument - it ends it. A lot of individuals put faith in a lot of non-core writers, and F&K have their share of an audience. But any gamer should always check with his/her DM first. Opinions aside.   Hooper   talk    contribs    email   04:55, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
" not only supports the argument - it ends it." Then, why bother using homebrew material at all? Why post any new classes? Why use anything non-WoTC, by your logic? I may not agree with every bit of F&K's work, but it's a damn sight less unbalanced than what WoTC put out. And isn't homebrew most of what this site is based on? -- Danzig 06:59, 26 January 2010 (UTC)


Allright, I'm prepared to discuss the above points, over the SRD's relevancy to homebrew and/or design, and I invite anyone who wishes to do so over (for or against) to my talk page here to hash it out. Green Dragon has asked the question "What is balance" and I am willing to offer up my talk page as a place to hash it out so there can be an exchange of ideas and some discussion about this before anyone poses any changes to the Ratings system, in the vein of "measure twice, cut once." I ask only this:

  • I don't care what happened last year the years before or who said what before. Address each other's points, but also recognize that there may be different basic assumptions about D&D and/or game design. If you have determined you have different assumptions/tastes about the game than someone else (how about everyone just say what they try for), agree to disagree but don't just assume the other person's a idiot or bad person of some kind because they don't share your. Just make sure your opinions and ideas have some sort of rational basis and validity to them.
  • Try to keep the snark down. If you think someone else is wrong on a point, lay out your reasons for thinking so with a minimum of disrespect, veiled or open. (Eesh, never thought that I, someone who is used to the acid test of the Gaming Den, would be asking people to play nice...)
  • It's not often than any idea is completely without merit. Look at what people say and see if there's anything you agree on or can relate to with before you say something's bad. Don't just reject something wholesale out of hand.
  • I may edit my articles, but that will be to clean up spelling and grammar in general, since I wasn't exceptionally alert when I wrote them. I will keep the ideas/points the same. Feel free to reply below them. Instead of just throwing everything together at the bottom of the page.

There. Let the debating begin. --Genowhirl 04:22, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

I'd just like to point out[edit]

You really can't say that a class is overpowered by comparing it to the SRD fighter. The SRD fighter is severely underpowered, so any class of a reasonable power level will be better than the fighter.

^^Amen to that. I always hated having dead levels as a fighter, when I played one. -- Danzig 03:59, 26 January 2010 (UTC)


I have read all the source books from Frank now. But still:Foil Action is unbalanced. Even in his frame work. Because once you get yourself close enough to use this there is nearly no dependency on the CR of your enemy... And you get it at level 9....

Possibilities to repare: One could use one or more of the following:

a) The fighter has to make some knowledge check to prove that he knows how to foil a special actions

b) Some Level based Check to do the action anyhow

c) Pulling the action through is possible but one recieves an automatical critical hit and has to make a CON save or still fail if one tries

Problem solver can get unbalanced... Just the same way cleric get unbalanced if too many people writes too many combat feats... and you can use them all... Since the DM has to check the feats anyhow he can at the same time check how many of the me allows. So this should be no real problem.

All of the other stuff seems to be quite OK. Forge Lore is a really a good idea. In flavor, in game mechanics and in explaining where all the magic weapons are coming from.

  • Why do people focus on Foil action? I mean, you can either stop them from moving or stop them from acting. Either way is handy, certainly, but it isn't sustainable. If you block their action, they can move away from you and you can't do it next round, very likely. If you block their movement, they're going to get their action. Foil action has a thirty-foot range starting at level 9. When plenty of things have a sixty-foot fly speed. After much of this, you finally get it upgraded!...To 60 feet. And then there's all those spells and effects with Medium and Long Range. Foil action is good at blocking one enemy if you're in the right spot. It can prevent some of the nasty player-killing powers from kicking in. But it's not an I-win button by any means, and you have to remember what it's up against. With those limitations on it (action economy, range, and the speed of monsters), it's not unbalanced by any means. --Genowhirl 20:27, 3 November 2010 (MDT)
    • The problem with this logic is that it assumes that all monsters are capable of identifying and judging what the fighter's range is and then staying beyond it. And that's a high level of cognitive thinking that many monsters won't possess. It forces the DM to play each monster as a strategist or be useless. No more big dumb monsters that charge in, unless they want to just be automatically nullified. Further, how would even a smart monster know that there was a 30-foot Aura of Uselessness surrounding the fighter? How would they acquire that knowledge, especially since the fluff makes it clear that the Tome Fighter is RARER than the old SRD fighter was? If they get hit with Foil Action at 15 feet away, how would they know that they could back up in order to be safe, and if they did, how would they know how far to move? It basically demands that the DM metagame and have the monsters act on knowledge they couldn't possibly have in order to stay even close to balanced. And that's a mark of bad design. 17:54, 28 March 2011 (MDT)
      • I appreciate that an IP has come into this discussion with a really well-thought out point. I agree with him, entirely. Foil Action could stand to be limited, in some way, by either passing a check, or having limited uses. Jwguy 23:17, 12 July 2011 (MDT)

The problem is that is absolute.. No restriction in uses per day no change for failure. No dependency on CR or on saves... It should be not that hard to understand that not everybody likes the idea of a level 9 fighter that foils the action of ancient dragons, demonlords and gods.. And the explantion that the can run away from him do not make it better in flavor really.. And there could be TWO level 9 fighters.. what a pitty then they can not even run away anymore..

In the construction of the creatures nobody thought that someone could neutralize movement an standard action. So many creature even at high CR can not do anything at all if you block them...

If you do not like my suggestions above what about you can foil the action of anything with CR<BAB +5 And can not foil the actions of anything with more CR... That does not make any aditional work. Works in most cases just as you are used to. But puts away most of the crasy stuff.


Power - 5/5 I give this class a 5 out of 5 because I've always been a person that loves being a fighter, swinging my blade, using tactics to beat my foes, only to end up with a bunch of feats, no skills and having to take a mass of multiple classes to make the character be able to do what I want him to do. No more of that now, the Tome Fighter fills all my needs, while making the damned wizard unable to stick his nose up at me. -- 21:05, 30 November 2010 (MST)

Wording - 5/5 I give this class a 5 out of 5 because it was crystal clear, no problems at all. -- 21:05, 30 November 2010 (MST)

Formatting - 5/5 I give this class a 5 out of 5 because all the links go were they need to and all the grammar and the like seem A-OKAY to me. . -- 21:05, 30 November 2010 (MST)

Flavor - 5/5 I give this class a 5 out of 5 because it really just brings in the whole feel of what the 'Fighter' is, the guy that fills an innumerable amount of roles depending on who he is be it tank, striker, archer, scout, swashbuckler, you name it. Bringing to mind how the party fighter should actually look; that guy in epic portraits leading the charge at the Colossal Red Dragon with the casters at the back providing cover fire and buffs while the fighter gets right up in the dragons face and eviscerates him, not just the casters turning the dragon to dust in 3.7 seconds. -- 21:05, 30 November 2010 (MST)

Is this "unbalance" concern needed?[edit]

Yes, this fighter is superior to the PH fighter in every way. That's the point. The PH fighter is objectively weak and cannot (without heavy optimization and multiclassing [in which case he's not really a "fighter" anymore]) contribute to level-appropriate encounters with his party as the campaign moves forward without the DM only sending weak enemies and/or giving the fighter multiple pity-artifacts like a +11 ghost touch vorpal greatsword of speed and brilliant energy (that can be switched on and off) and a +13 heavy fortification fullplate of permanent displacement, mirror image, fly, mind blank, freedom of movement and true seeing, with an armor check penalty of zero. At level 7. That the fighter might as well be an NPC-only class has been discussed to undeath and proven countless times (so don't bother arguing; google it if you need to see what has been said since about 2002).

And really, why would balance between the PH fighter even be a concern? This class is meant to replace the fighter with someone of roughly the same niche and archetype who can actually do his job. I believe this is also addressed in the opening paragraph, which makes me wonder if whoever put that up top bothered to read beyond the table, or any other Tome material for that matter (this guy is meant for a Tome game, not standard, so again worrying about balance to the PH fighter or other PH classes aside from the cleric-druid-wizard trifecta makes me scratch my head).

By the way, if we're going to worry about anyone being "unbalanced" with regards to the fighter of all things, we might as well slap this onto every homebrew class that does anything more than "I 5'-step and full attack", such as rogue-analogues and everyone with spellcasting. As an aside, read this. --ScryersEve 19:03, 14 September 2011 (MDT)

Well if no one has any counterpoints, I'll just remove the notice. --ScryersEve 02:12, 22 September 2011 (MDT)
There is a limit to Foil Action--30 feet. 60 feet if you're high enough level. Not to mention you can only do it once a round, with your immediate action (which cuts your swift action the next round). The Tome Fighter actually has things those swift and immediate actions are good for (and more than once), so Foil Action is only really worth it when something's about to use a PC-killer ability or spell. Also, you can either choose to stop them from moving, or stop them from casting/attacking (unless it's a full attack), but not both. It's a pretty darn handy tool, but not the end-all be-all. Oh, and it can be messed up by going against more than one opponent. And for that one opponent...well, the hard truth is if they're level appropriate and fighting a four-man D&D party, they will either A) Get brought down by wolfpack tactics anyway or B) They've got some PC-killing trick in hand. I saw something once where Frank said that's what Foil Action was for--it starts when the real "Screw You" spell-likes and spells and monster abilities are coming into play to turn D&D in Rocket Launcher Tag, and exists to prevent some of them because--and let's face it--there's not much you can do to defend against Solid Fog or Force Cage, aside from "Don't be in them" (and they're targetted, so that isn't going to happen), or "Stop them from being cast". And later on in the game, there isn't much to do to defend against Earthquake or Gate or Finger of Death or Acid Fog or Blade Barrier spam. It's hard, but it's the truth. Starting at level 9-10, D&D gets increasingly crazy, until it hits level 15+ and then becomes flat-out Crazy Town. The solution is to either A) Rewrite hundreds of page of monsters and spells or B) Let the melee types get an invite to play, too. Races of War, for better or worse, went with option B. --Genowhirl 09:58, 22 January 2012 (MST)
I realize that you may end up doing this alot, but I don't really need a reiteration of the ideology behind Races of War. I'm quite familiar with it and use the classes often. I placed the tag back up because no-one addressed the following comment, which was above:
The problem with this logic is that it assumes that all monsters are capable of identifying and judging what the fighter's range is and then staying beyond it. And that's a high level of cognitive thinking that many monsters won't possess. It forces the DM to play each monster as a strategist or be useless. No more big dumb monsters that charge in, unless they want to just be automatically nullified. Further, how would even a smart monster know that there was a 30-foot Aura of Uselessness surrounding the fighter? How would they acquire that knowledge, especially since the fluff makes it clear that the Tome Fighter is RARER than the old SRD fighter was? If they get hit with Foil Action at 15 feet away, how would they know that they could back up in order to be safe, and if they did, how would they know how far to move? It basically demands that the DM metagame and have the monsters act on knowledge they couldn't possibly have in order to stay even close to balanced. And that's a mark of bad design.
— 17:54, 28 March 2011 (MDT)
I believe this is a legitimate concern regarding the ability. One swift action or not, and even with once per turn, it can effectively render a monster unable to do anything at all, in some if not many case, simply because of the fact that while they can move, they may not always know to move out of range, or even know there is a range. Someone also brought up the concern regarding "What if" there were multiple Tome Fighters? A monster would be straight shafted, no matter what. Your argument about Wolfpack tactics occurring anyways may be valid, but in this situation, it can't even be considered that. Two characters can essentially just stab the immobile, unable creature until it dies, while the two Tome Fighters just do their bit to keep it locked.
Again, I sympathize in that I also enjoy a better portion of Frank and K's work, especially Races of War; That said, just because I like the work, doesn't mean I should be blind to some of the issues brought in the alteration, and write it off as just another new player complaining, ignorant of its purpose. Jwguy 13:17, 22 January 2012 (MST)
A 7th level wizard casts Solid Fog and locks down the opponent for four rounds, gives any creature within five feet concealment and any creature farther than that total concealment. Reduces all attack rolls, except ranged magic rolls, stops ranged attacks, again except magic. At 11th level the wizard throws down freezing fog which does all that, but also deals 1d6 damage/round on the wizards turn, forces a reflex save each round or fall prone, and an, admittedly trivial, balance check to even move. Yes these options are only usable a limited number of times per day but given the 4 encounter/day paradigm that’s hardly a problem, when that spell just ended combat. And all of that from medium range of course.
So I suppose what I’m saying is. If the fighter needs balance when one of its abilities lets them lock down one enemy within 30-60 feet at higher level. Why does the wizard not need balance for being able to lock down multiple enemies from 100+ feet away plus all manner of crazy effects at lower levels? Perhaps this doesn’t answer your question exactly, but it’s certainly valid. Because when someone else does basically the same thing but better and at a lower level, can an ability really be called unbalanced? Starless Knight 20:03, 3 May 2012 (MDT)
You seem to be missing the issue at hand: The ability isn't being criticized. I think it's reasonable for the Fighter to have a useful ability that represents the type of quick-thinking and resourcefulness they are supposed to be known for. I personally support Frank and K's belief that the base martial classes needed a boost to match the magical and skillful classes in order to be that much more fun. The problem, as has been stated a few times before your post, is that it is unlimited and much more powerful.
You may disagree, but consider the following before you cement that disagreement: For all of the examples you made, the Wizard has limitations of spells per day, even if you consider that they are a trivial limitation. Furthermore, none of those spell remove the ability to act in any manner, whatsoever. They can harm, and reduce the effectiveness of certain actions, and can be very useful, but they do not completely disable the target. The Tome Fighter, with this feature, can completely remove the ability of a creature to be effective by making a single touch attack (Ridiculously easy, in most situations; A CR20 Bronze Dragon has only 9 Touch AC); Two Tome Fighters? They can remove the ability to move and act, and the creature can't even try to do... anything. At least with fog, the Dragon could resort to magic, or attempt to flee until it dissipates, etc.. Not with Foil Action. As the IP said, this forces the DM to make monster act on knowledge they won't have, just to keep the game challenging, since there is an aura of uselessness that will hit them if they come anywhere near the Fighters. Sure, they could possibly fudge and roll lower than 8-10, sometimes a little higher, but if they're fighting CR20 creatures and rendering them useless turn after turn, can you really not see an issue with that?
I want the fighter to have this unique ability. I am sure the concerned IP did, as well. I would rather that there be some sort of limitation, though. A cooldown. A clause saying the target couldn't be hit by foil action twice in one round. A limit per day or encounter. Something that makes it so that the Fighter can't just mummify a creature before its even dead, regardless of CR or Level. A touch attack is simply far too easy in most cases to be the only limitation. Jwguy 05:20, 4 May 2012 (MDT)
I actually have a suggested fix for that being it is usable at most twice an encounter. Quite frankly if you are doing things like flicking sand and lobbing rocks people are going to anticipate and counter after they observe your actions a couple times. Think of the movie gladiator; the one guy kicks sand at the other to force him to block but he doesn't try it again because it wouldn't work. Tivanir 07:17, 4 May 2012 (MDT)
That'd be fine if it weren't for the nasty, nasty stuff that has their stuff at-will. Most high-up fiends have a couple of horrendous spell likes (like blasphmey) and pretty much all of them have Greater Teleport at-will. Dragons would be a bit more susceptible to it, I think. Now, honestly, I've never had a problem with Foil Action spam from players. I mean, it can get boring to do the same thing EVERY ROUND (which is what pushed us to Tome, I think)--but I know not everyone is lucky in that regard. So I propose the counter to Foil Action: Putting more than one enemy in a fight. Don't throw two dragons at folks if the party's CR indicates they should just have one. Just give said dragon a few minions. Or the Gelugon rocks up to the fight with a pair of Kytons in tow. Something to force things to keep moving. --Genowhirl 10:27, 4 May 2012 (MDT)
First, to Tivanir: That sounds like a plausible solution, but it feels like it goes a bit far. I don't think we should make the Fighter to not be able to use it but once in each encounter, some of which can last a long while, but just make it so that the effect can't be minigun'd at a creature until they die. Something like a (WIS + Tome Fighter Class level) uses per day, which gives them a good amount, makes sure that they have to have sensibility to use it, and still lets them throw a bunch out in a pinch, just not a bunch all the time. That may not be a perfect solution, either, though. We have a vast amount of options to address it, we just have to agree on it.
Second, to Genowhirl: But consider that even though said Fiend has Greater teleport, it doesn't mean jack if he's hit by Foil Action as he attempts to use it. I appreciate that Greater Teleport and other abilities are very powerful, surely, but if you have the ability to stop any action or move, which is essentially every possible option as an individual, are they really all the great? Dragons are not the only things susceptible to it. Anything is. As stated before, the only defense against being partially or completely petrified (Depending on PC Party Make-up) is Touch AC, which is usually abysmal at all levels, save for the occasional odd monster.
I also appreciate the concession regarding those of us who may not be as lucky as you are (Regarding the Players and repeated Foil Action spamming), but understand that the balance concern isn't a matter of effective DMing, nor should that be justification for clearing the feature of any concern. It is the feature that causes the issue, and while it is true that it can possibly be circumvented by introducing more creatures (Though not in all cases. If the group keeps the big guy locked, they can waste the obligatorily lower-leveled minions largely without worry, then proceed to the boss, with the same situation appearing as noted above), it doesn't necessarily solve the problem. We should try to find a way, within the class and the class features, that allows for creative and powerful uses of the skill, but also allows it some chance of failure or prevention above the seldom failed Touch roll, instead of curbing that with advice to DMs on how to deal with the feature. Jwguy (talk) 08:16, 9 May 2012 (MDT)
Maybe 1/2 Tome fighter level for the foil action (rounded up) would be slightly better. Being able to stop any enemy action for 20+ rounds seems a little excessive (if people aren't worried about taking damage even the clerics will add some combat ability making the thing die that much quicker) but that is just my take. And while multiple enemies would be useful to a point think of it like this: lets say you have two dragons and both are full round attacks, you negate one and the party fights the other unless the dragon runs out of your range then you switch dragons to negate the other full round attack. In short you can stop a full attack option by any creature while your party maintains nearly full dps is my concern, and even multiples don't necessarily make the party work any harder than non tome parties since you are locking one up. Tivanir (talk) 08:30, 9 May 2012 (MDT)
You know what a CR 20 bronze dragon can do? Fly hundreds of feet in a move action, deal massive damage in melee, and cast as a 13th level sorcerer. In a fight with a CR 20 bronze dragon foil action lets you choose how the dragon slaps you around but it hardly stop the dragon from slapping you around unless you really pump your movement speed AND can fly. And don't you even try to say a CR 20 bronze couldn't figure that out it has 22 intelligence.
As for creatures that couldn't figure it out, you know what most of them do, travel in packs. Generally packs of equally strong creatures. And in situations like that you're probably not going to use Foil Action unless you need to because there are honestly better things for a Tome fighter to do with his swift and immediate actions. So yeah, in single combat it makes team monster go cry in a corner, but how often does D&D ever come down to single combat. And let's not forget that a single monster of CR X is SUPPOSED to be pretty much a guaranteed win for a party of level X.
If, however, you really can't see foil action being acceptable without some other limiter besides tactical viability and and players not wanting spam the same thing over and over (that is why we're playing 3.5 and not 4e here), I could get behind a check using the creature's CR as the DC if and only if it doesn't make the fighter more MAD than they already are. What with being CON, Str, and Dex dependent at least, Int being a nice option now that they have more skill points and Magic items basing their DC off Cha you get fighters who could very well have to sink their basic item qualities into stat raising and nothing else because belts of magnificence are right out under tome rules. I suppose you could do it the other way round, require a save from the creature, but I don't know that some how doesn't really feel right to me. Starless Knight (talk) 19:40, 9 May 2012 (MDT)
Sure, a Dragon could do all those neat things, but not after getting hit with the Foil Action over and over. They could fly, sure, if the Fighter used the ability to stymie an action, but they'd be limited to only being able to charge in from outside of the range of the fighter, after escaping it and figuring it out; the only caveat that is relevant to them, and screw them if that Fighter and his friends have Tridents, Spears, and other weapons that deal extra damage against charges. What's better? There's nothing saying that that Dragon doesn't just get screwed again, filtered into the same loop of harming itself with single attack actions, since the Fighter can just use the feature again, next turn, and still full-round attack the creature. And the best part? It gets even more lopsided. You're still not considering the potential for abuse with two Tome Fighters. That Dragon is going to be forced to sit there and die from constant DPS, hoping that someone rolls a natural 1, since, considering that CR20 usually fights Lv20 or close characters... the Tome Fighter's touch attack would be at least 20, just from Base Attack Bonus, alone! Way to beat that 9 AC without trying, buddy. Way to beat almost all touch ACs without trying.
And regarding the ability to figure out the ability? How do they figure it out? It's not mentioned anywhere in the feature; there's no visible or otherwise detectable aura outlining the effective radius, the Tome Fighter is rarer than the original Fighter was, and the feature doesn't really even go into detail about what foil action is: It's just... anything that happens to seem like it might work. The creature doesn't observe this, it just happens, immediately, whenever he tries to move or act. Could be 30 feet. Could be 60 feet. Hell, it happened at 10 feet. Are you suggesting that the creature, intelligent and solo, should waste most or all of it's health in order to experiment with an enemy's or enemies' ability? I don't think that is a good point, at all. It doesn't change that the monster is pretty much raped before it figures Foil Action out, anyways, and the raping is the problem. Also, CR is equal to a single player level of the same value, meaning 50%. For a party of four at the same value, it means that there should be 25% resources consumed in defeating it. The Fighter essentially doesn't use any resources in this case. The only possible used up resources would be a Wizard or Sorcerer's Spell slots, completely put into DPS slots in order to blow the Dragon up without resistance.
Furthermore, again, you miss the point: It does not matter what think the player will or will not do. The fact is that it is entirely possible and I believe, highly likely. If you have a choice between being boring, and winning; ultimately, what do you choose? Winning. Sure, they might not try to at first (Hell, some even would), but if push comes to shove, you better believe any individual would pull out all of the stops. Sure, we have our exceptions: The one, sensible guy in a sea of power-players who feels that abusing the ability would only annoy his DM and friends... but when his friends' characters all die because he chose to (Wasn't restricted from doing so) not spam the ability, they're not going to be as happy. The possibilities for this feature to be abused exist: That is the problem. That is why it is being called "a mark of bad design". We can go back and forth all day regarding whether "They'll never do that! Pssh." and "It's not like players haven't already done things like that. That's part of what D&D is." all day, but the problem exists, and continues to exist, despite all the assurances that it will never come into play. It has. It will. It is completely unchecked, and no amount of love for Frank and K is obscuring that.
If you have a suitable suggestion for a limiter, then please note your preferred idea. I chose Wisdom because I thought it represented the type of action the fluff describes: A intuitive, quickly applied action that works against almost every character. He's not muscling a creature at a range with Strength, He's not showing them hand-tricks with Dexterity, He's not ripping off his shirt to expose his rock-hard abs with Constitution (Maybe with enemies of the opposite gender), He can't have the knowledge ahead of time, since some creatures are new to him, with Intelligence, and he's certainly not glibbly talking the enemy down, especially if some creature don't even speak, with Charisma. (Though, if you can think of a type of explanation for these to work in every situation, then I'm all for hearing it; We have to consider how this will fit in with the fluff) And while I don't think a saving throw against it is all that bad (Since, as Tivanir stated, the creature should probably be able to go "Wait a second..." after a while, and be able to counter the action... if it thinks, at all, bringing up more problems with affecting all creatures), it does seem to cause the creature to gain the advantage over the skill, considering saving throws at later levels, and we don't want that.
Maybe we could make the Intelligence + 1 or 1/2 Tome Fighter Level uses work if we required the Tome Fighter to study the creature for 1d3 or so rounds? He could then cement his knowledge with meditation or study after combat, within a certain number of days, to avoid having to do the check again? Jwguy (talk) 00:26, 10 May 2012 (MDT)
And with feats this gets even more out of control. --Green Dragon (talk) 00:34, 10 May 2012 (MDT)
Especially since this is suppose to work off of Frank & K feats. Those being much more useful than the normal and much more powerful on top of this ability. If it had a limited times per day it wouldn't be as bad but being able to stop any action is terrible. Also in the event of the CR20 bronze dragon if you decided to spring for your guy to have good hit points and even marginal spell resistence you can just stop his move. A single attack or a level 13 spell to a fighter is a joke and if he tries full round attack that is a wasted round. Demons same thing but in reverse since they can actually be quite dangerous with their spells, but you can keep double moving with boots of striding and springing to make sure he never gets away. My point is that there shouldn't be a face roll ability in DnD that will prevent the creature from acting. Besides the creatures that normally group up aren't dangerous enough one on one to prove a problem so instead of using it on the one he is facing he uses it on the one targeting the caster. Caster provides instant barbaque. Tivanir (talk) 07:06, 10 May 2012 (MDT)
You just said a 13th level sorcerer can't attack from farther than 60ft away. Just, I have lost faith in humanity, thanks for that. And no, I don't expect a six-hundred year old dragon to faff about trying to figure out the range of a fighter's foil action. I expect it to just know, because it's a super genius who's lived more than six hundred years in a world where all the fighters are tome fighters because this class was meant to replace fighters completely. This is not a supplemental thing, SRD fighters are assumed to not exist in the same setting as Tome fighters because SRD fighter's don't work past level five, and the tomes have a five level NPC class with full BAB already they don't need another. As for your assertion that an opponent just stop their attack mid stream for no reason that's just dumb.
"The Fighter may throw sand into a beholder's eye, bat aside a key spell component, or strike a weapon hand with a thrown object,"
Right there in the description, the fighter has to physically do something that negates the action so the creature can see that the thing is happening. It's not just some invisible force that stops you from acting there's a chain of cause and effect from the fighter doing something to stop the action, and the action stopping. As for a check to study the creature, well then we've got someone who makes a profession of fighting and doing nothing but fighting not knowing how to shield bash an ogre. And that just breaks verisimilitude.
And you mean like how most powerful demons get blasphemy and many of those have it at will? Seriously, at best it dazes you you, no movement or attacks at all no save and it only gets worse from there. AND it effects pretty much the entire party. So why isn't that a problem? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Starless Knight (talkcontribs) . Please sign your posts.
First I didn't say they didn't have 60 feet of range and insinuating people are idiots doesn't help much for seeing something resolved. I said that a 20th level fighter with all good saves (look at the class before you make a comment) against caster level 13 has what to fear exactly? seeing how he is probably looking between 15-20 on each save he will make them and nothing is going to instant kill him. at 13th caster level guess what the save for the 6th level spell he can use is 22 meaning that the average fighter set as this can basically ignore it. That being said unless he has already figured out he is a tome fighter prior to combat he will be within 60 feet since he is much more devastating in close combat. Then the tome fighter opens up with either denying him any action or the ability to move away, and locks him up next to him for the duration. THAT was my point for the entire comment I made not the idea he can't use things outside of 60 feet. Basically if he stays out of range, spells and ranged combat till dead or if he ever enters close combat he has to use both actions to attempt to leave. Two tome fighters he gets to sit there and cry while the party kills him for free, and two of any class should not be able to kill a CR appropriate creature with no expendables. Tivanir (talk) 08:46, 10 May 2012 (MDT)
Starless Knight, please remain civil in this discussion. Also, please don't copy everything on the page and re-paste it. I am not even sure what you were trying to do, there.
In regards to your assertions, you appear to be suffering tunnel vision. "The Fighter may throw sand into a beholder's eye, bat aside a key spell component, or strike a weapon hand with a thrown object" were examples, not a definitive list of things the Fighter can do; Or are you saying he can only throw sand into a beholder's eye, bat aside spell components, or strike a weapon hand with thrown objects? So, Dragons are immune? They're not beholders, don't use spell components, and they don't use weapons. Yes, all these things are physical, as you say, but what isn't physical? Just saying they have to do something physical isn't really limiting, at all, when that something could be nearly, and make sure to Read and Comprehend, my friend, anything. The Fluff just states that somehow, the Fighter uses an action that stops the action. No Line of Sight, No Save, No rule against stacking. It demonstrates that with the three examples, but in reality, where does that stop? Technically, never. And that Dragon, you say it should know that the Fighter can do that? Do what, exactly? Throw sand in his eyes? Sure. How about throwing a rock in them, or at his claws (Wait, how do you throw sand -or- rocks 60 feet? That's.. really difficult. This doesn't even have a range increment)? What about stabbing his funny bone? I think you get the point. Regardless of how old the dragon is, or how many adventures it has experienced, it cannot mentally think of everything ahead of time, and even if it could, you just proved the IPs point:
It basically demands that the DM metagame and have the monsters act on knowledge they couldn't possibly have in order to stay even close to balanced. And that's a mark of bad design.
Also, get a clue: I don't think, and never have said, that this is a supplemental piece in regards to having both the SRD Fighter and the Tome Fighter. The fluff for each, however, determine different things: SRD Fighters were something anyone could be, didn't really require innate talent or ability. Tome Fighters require both, and are therefore even rarer than their predecessor, making it much less likely that any monster has had contact with them (Entirely possible, but less likely, all the same. Even more so, given the crazy power of Foil Action, would they live to tell about it?).
And finally, are you attempting to say "Because that monster gets a really powerful ability, I should get the ultimate ability?". If so, that's hardly a justification for having this feature. Those demons and their blasphemy. I get it. That's some pretty rough stuff, but let's do a comparison: Assuming you're fighting something with that and you're likely of level when you should be fighting those, all you're getting is Dazed; I know, I know, pretty crazy stuff, but let's keep going. It has a fixed range of 40 feet, and I think it's plausible for some members of the party to not be within that range, since, you know, Wizards don't get along with melee. We'll skip that, for now, though. Even furthermore, it is vulnerable to Spell Resistance, and has two subtypes, Evil and Sonic, both of which are subjected to having ways to mitigate or otherwise disable them. Finally, even though Spell-like abilities are usually not subject to counterspelling, they can still be counterspelled by Dispel Magic, as stated here, which is a 3rd level spell and gives all spellcasters a chance to know it.
The other end of that argument is that Foil Action has none of these limitations, and just requires the player to designate a target, describe some action they're doing, and roll against Touch AC, and presto, a move or action has just be stopped in it's tracks. And you seem to think that the more attacks a creature has, as per your statement about the dragons, the more attacks they can do in a round; Untrue. By foiling the action, the standard or move action has been wasted, and they are not entitled to another action of the same type, that round. This effectively means no full-round actions, including retreating, if ever hit by the Foil Action feature.
Even you should be able to see it; There is a distinct difference in the power of the feature and the various spells and abilities you've referenced. It is not just a feature that levels the playing field; It has the potential to utterly demolish it. As Tivanir said, those neat magics are great and all, but they're 13th Caster level spells against a group of level 20 individuals, one of which just has to get within 60 feet to shut you down as far as actions go... and two? You'll never get away, in the first place. That's why it needs a limitation. The uses per day, or even encounter, wouldn't weaken the ability any, but allow it to be feasible and not indefinitely spammed. You think the studying Fighter isn't feasible? I think that a Fighter needs to have some idea of what he is fighting in order to know exactly what he can do to disable it, but fine, figure something else out. Just don't be blinded by fanboyism to the point of thinking nothing is wrong. Jwguy (talk) 10:37, 10 May 2012 (MDT)
Even worse, I just noticed that the Tome Fighter gets an extra Immediate action at 13th level due to Array of Stunts... One Tome Fighter can effectively completely shut down a monster until it is dead, then, making it all the more imperative that someone be done about that. Jwguy (talk) 13:04, 10 May 2012 (MDT)

Back to one indent

Sweet holy hell you are right. So effectively get a dragon into range and he never gets to leave or act. Yes I see balance written all over this class. Tivanir (talk) 13:18, 10 May 2012 (MDT)
As a side note he also gets another immediate action at 19th level. Tivanir (talk) 13:24, 10 May 2012 (MDT)
I can tell you that if the goal of a class is a critique of another class it fails. Why is this? Because it is not a real class, it is just trying to make a point. The way to make a point is not by saying "this other class sucks" but rather "this is this class and here is why it works well as a class". --Green Dragon (talk) 17:48, 10 May 2012 (MDT)
True we have managed to get off topic a bit and need to refocus. Based upon the basic number of rounds a class can expect to be in combat (average dps) I would be ok with the idea of base class plus dex modifier x2 for uses per day. Dex to me makes more sense though if others believe a different attribute would be more realistic I would be alright with that as well. The main point that was brought up is being able to lock someone down forever with nothing expended is a bit obscene. Absolute max for uses in my opinion should be no higher than twice your class level per day. Tivanir (talk) 18:18, 10 May 2012 (MDT)
I came up with a few ideas for how Foil Action could be reduced in power while still retaining its utility. The first is that the starting range is 10ft, and it improves to 20ft at level seventeen. Because really, how far can someone accurately throw a handful of sand? Secondly, touch attacks are meant to approximate the difficulty of touching a given target anywhere. That's why big dragons have such low touch ACs; the bigger they are, the more area their enemies have to poke them in. But the description of Foil Action involves the fighter hitting something specific, like an eye or a hand, so this should be subject to a called shot penalty. Ideally, the target's touch AC would get a +5 bonus against this attack roll. And if even these changes are not enough to balance the ability, the target could be allowed to oppose the attack roll with a reflex save (representing the beholder closing its eye, the spellcaster pulling his hand away, and so forth), meaning that the fighter would have to beat both the touch AC and the reflex save result in order to foil the action. --Atlas


Power - 0/5 I give this class a 0 out of 5 because It is way to powerful and doesn't follow the guidelines for making classes in the DM's Guide. -- 10:36, 25 June 2012 (MDT)

Wording - 4/5 I give this class a 4 out of 5 because there are some parts that dont make any sense. But then I do play 3.0 . -- 10:36, 25 June 2012 (MDT)

Formatting - 4/5 I give this class a 4 out of 5 because it is formatted in a way that is readable. -- 10:36, 25 June 2012 (MDT)

Flavor - 2/5 I give this class a 2 out of 5 because it is so powerful that it would be boring to play. -- 10:36, 25 June 2012 (MDT)

Home of user-generated,
homebrew pages!