joseph wrote:

Ghul wrote:

Indeed! I have an agreement with Johnathan Bingham to do 26 illustrations -- that is, all the class and subclass pictures. We are also talking about 26 additional full page pieces that will all be setting related, so 52 new illustrations in all! Del Teigeler is also going to do monster illustrations, and I've spoken with Glynn Seal about re-doing the Hyperborea map. Things are in motion! Thanks for asking.

This is great news! We're all looking forward to the hardcover!

I agree. While I love the old school feel of the boxed set, I want to see the next edition be a hardcover.

One thought re the 2nd printing...

I've always thought that, in AD&D, the Fighter class as being a bit 'short changed' (i.e. underpowered), especially when compared to the added abilities of figher sub-classes which make them so much more attractive to players.  As such, I'd be tempted to give the pure Figher a small combat boost - something unavailabe to other classes (including fighter sub-classes).  For example, a straight  +2 bonus to AC (and maybe a small damage bonus at higher level).

Just a thought...

R

Hi Blackadder,

Yes agreed, but only against mooks of 1HD or less - which (in my experience anyway) are enemies of increasing rarity as levels advance.  That is, in fairly quick time this ability becomes moot.  It would be good to see a really meaninful buff to make the pure Fighter a class to be reckoned with, especially when compared to figher sub-classes which are sooo much more attractive IMO.

Ynas Midgard wrote:

I have a house rule to allow this special ability to be useful more often: Fighters can make attacks against as many combined HD of creatures as they have levels. For instance, a 3rd level Fighter may attack three different 1 HD enemies, a single one with 3 HD, or one with 2 HD and one with 1 HD.

 
Nice! That's a neat house rule - just the sort of buff Fighters ought to have.

When one considers all the additional abilities of Rangers, Barbarians, Paladins etc that Fighers lack, I really think there needs to be meaningful stuff that Fighters can do that other classes cannot - and things which make the class attractive to players.

Rob

joseph wrote:

Castles and Crusades expanded the ability as well, maybe allowing it against  returns up to 4 HD? Anyway, don't forget that only Fighters in ASSH can get grand mastery with their weapons, have more mastery slots than sub-classes and advance faster.

 
Sure, but Weapon Grand Mastery only grants +2 attack and damage.  The Fighter class will in general advance one level ahead of the sub-classes.  The ability to (according to current rules) multi-attack 1 or 2HD creatures is of negligable utility at mid to high level.  Contrast these modest features against all the cool stuff that the sub-classes can do that Fighters cannot.  Basically, why would a player want to be a Figher, as opposed to a Ranger of a Barbarian? 

The fact that people are seemingly house-ruling already shows there is a need to address the shortcomings of the Figher; perhaps the 2nd printing might consider some optional rules...?

The main reason to play a fighter IMO is because you want to just be a fighter, without any of the baggage of the fighter sub-classes.

Doctor_Rob wrote:

The fact that people are seemingly house-ruling already shows there is a need to address the shortcomings of the Figher...

Perhaps.  Conversely, I could say that (judging from campaign journals, including my own) plenty of people seem to play fighters; therefore they must be perfectly fine as written.

Doctor_Rob wrote:

Hmmm, not convinced I'm afraid. A one level difference is hardly 'falling behind' IMO, and all that 'baggage' can readily be translated into 'handy abilities'...

I'm not trying to be contrary, and I'm certainly not trying to bust your chops, but the special abilities are definitely baggage IMO.  The fighter is the class for people who want to straight-up fight.  No armor restrictions.  No weapon restrictions.  Best overall combat abilities.  Nothing else to worry about, just get stuck in and fight.  It's true the fighter sub-classes all have special abilities (of varying utility), but they all come with what I'm again forced to call baggage: severe alignment and behavior restrictions (paladin), chance of attacking comrades while using special abilities (berserker), armor restricted while using special abilities (barbarian, berserker again, ranger, warlock), abilities that are not often useful (barbarian and ranger in "dungeon" campaigns, cataphract in most campaigns).  Meanwhile, the fighter just fights.  It's what he does.  It's why the fancy subclasses haven't and won't render him obsolete.  I'm a big believer in not fixing what isn't (IMO) broken.

All that said, why not submit your ideas to Jeff and see what he says?

Last edited by Blackadder23 (8/11/2015 6:18 pm)

Thanks everyone for your thoughts on this.   

I can see that folks generally don't seem to want to go along with a Fighter buff.  In my defence, I'm not suggesting adding a huge list of stuff, but for fairly modest boosts.  So far mentioned is a flat bonus to AC and the ability to multi-attack creatures of more than 2HD. 

I'm not overwhelmed by the list of stuff that Fighters can do as compared to their sub-classes, and the class risks being under-represented in games.  To summarise: the Figher XP progression will generally be one level advance on other sub-classes, and is a modest advantage at best.  Heroic fighting becomes irrelevant at mid to high level as PCs grow beyond 1 or 2 HD mooks.  Weapon Grand mastery is nice but not unique - the Berserker gets the +2 attack/damage from the get go. 

Looking simply at the list size, a quick glance shows the Figher has 4 advantageous abilities (this includes the XP advance, but not Weapon Mastery because this is shared across sub-classes), the Barbarian has 15 advantages, the Berserker has 12, the Cataphract has 6, the Paladin 11, and the Ranger 13 (I've not counted strongholds and similar in all this).

In sum, I think the figher looks unattractive when observed from this perspective.  The suggestion is for something modest - something to make the figher uniquely good at fighting (see suggestions above).

Anyway, I can see this is a view not generally shared; so be it, but I am yet to be convinced that the Figher is a 'go to' class for many players.

Last edited by Doctor_Rob (8/12/2015 2:04 am)

Even though I slightly adjusted how Heroic Fighting works as I explained above, one other thing to cinsider besides the "baggage" issue is the prerequisites.

With the good ol' 3d6 in order attribute determination, the eligibility for some classes is the following: Fighter 74%, Ranger and Cataphract 30%, Warlock 14%, Barbarian less than 2%, Berserker less than 1%.

4d6 drop the lowest in order changes these statistics the following way: Fighter almost 90%, Ranger and Cataphract 64%, Warlock 38%, Barbarian almost 12%, Berserker a bit more than 1%.

4d6 drop the lowest arrange to taste would be more complicated to calculate, but I may give it a shot later today, just because I've gotten curious myself...

EDIT: Oh, I definitely will do so. Not making promises, but the idea of a nice spreadsheet including such statistics (maybe an extra column for XP bonus statistics, as well) for each of the attribute determination methods in the corebook is just too good in my head.

Last edited by Ynas Midgard (8/12/2015 7:11 am)

I can't speak to the mathematical probabilities offhand, but I can offer a practical example.  I rolled 288 sets of stats for Waifs of the Boreas, 12 sets for each class including cryomancers and purloiners.  I used 4d6, drop lowest, and arranged as needed for the class.  Also, I used the 2-for-1 ability adjustment rule whenever needed to meet minimums for the class.  Following this procedure, I only had to discard and reroll 3 times (and those were all bards, who have minima in 5 out of 6 ability scores).  Based on this experience, I would say you can choose practically any class with a given set of rolls, provided the referee permits 4d6 drop lowest with arrange as needed, and also allows the 2-for-1 ability adjustment rule.  Of course, that raises the question of just how low you might have to push your INT, WIS, and CHA in order to qualify as a berserker... but maybe that's a feature, not a bug...