PHB-2 ... early list of contents nearly 2 weeks early.

[dbb]

It gave you strength based on caster level, and back them a 22 strength was insanely good.

Not ... exactly. Enlarge gave you strength based on your newly enlarged size, which in turn was based on your caster level and the target's original height. (Yes, this meant Enlarge was really much better for humans than it was for dwarves.)

So if you grew to 12' tall, you were effectively an ogre, and if you grew to 18' tall, you were effectively a giant. Having giant strength in AD&D was actually really good, at least as good as anything non-wizard ever got in AD&D -- you were looking at somewhere from +2 to +4 more to hit over your un-enlarged Strength, and an extra +4-+8 damage (depending on exactly what kind of giant you were equivalent to).

But being 18' tall sucked pretty badly in an era when most adventures took place in dungeons where the corridors were 10' squares. So -- while Enlarge was in fact pretty boss when you could use it at high level -- you couldn't use it much by the time you got to that point. That's why I say it wasn't as good as it is now -- not because the benefits were numerically inferior (in relative terms they were hugely superior -- it was much harder to pick up +6 to damage in AD&D than in 3E), but because it was harder to use effectively.

--d.

[User3]

Here is some more PHB II material.

The 6th level ability is alright for a defensive fighter who is already at the top of the AC curve(monsters only hit him on an X, so with this they only hit him on a 20). The 12th is somewhat better than readying an attack...which is not actually saying much, but its something. The 16th level ability is actually not bad if you consider that you can massively Power Attack or even charge on the back of a mount.

Overall, I'm not too impressed.

[User3]

1146773362[/unixtime]]The 16th level ability is actually not bad if you consider that you can massively Power Attack or even charge on the back of a mount.

You can't charge because the attack requires a full-round action.

It would be useful for AoO specialists, but slogging through 16 levels of fighter to get there would be depressing.

[Username17]

Elusive Atack is shit. It's just a feat (+2 AC while Full Attacking), except that it has a stiff prereq (must take 6 levels of Fighter) and a harsh disadvantage (no iterative attacks). If someone wrote that feat up without the Fighter level prereqs, it would get laughed out of the room. Why are we supposed to jizz ourselves over it when it's written as a class feature that costs a feat to get?

Counterattack is actually excellent, but only because the current writeup doesn't say "once per round". If it can only be used once per round, it blows. And I'm pretty sure the intention is for it to be a feat that has huge prereqs and sucks ass.

Overpowering Attack doesn't matter, because noone is ever going to play a single classed Fighter past level 15. The very idea is absurd.

All in all, the Fighter Options are just some mediocre feats with class level prereqs. More dumbasses think that f you write enough feats like Weapon Specialization, eventually the Fighter will be good. That's dumb.

-Username17

[Hey_I_Can_Chan]

Elusive Atack is shit. It's just a feat (+2 AC while Full Attacking), except that it has a stiff prereq (must take 6 levels of Fighter) and a harsh disadvantage (no iterative attacks). If someone wrote that feat up without the Fighter level prereqs, it would get laughed out of the room. Why are we supposed to jizz ourselves over it when it's written as a class feature that costs a feat to get?

…But, if I'm reading it right, one doesn't have to stay a fighter after getting the class feature to reap the benefits of the higher level abilities. A dodge bonus of +6 ain't bad. Yeah, 6 levels of fighter is, but, hey…

[Username17]

1146781216[/unixtime]]

…But, if I'm reading it right, one doesn't have to stay a fighter after getting the class feature to reap the benefits of the higher level abilities. A dodge bonus of +6 ain't bad. Yeah, 6 levels of fighter is, but, hey…

You aren't reading that right. It's a class feature that costs a feat, not a feat. That means that when it says "level" it means "class level of Fighter". So it corresponds to a +2 AC bonus per iterative attack you give up - but since it's based on class level rather than BAB, a multiclassed character gets boned.

It's not even as good as Combat Expertise, and it doesn't lead to anything, If it was a feat with no prereqs at all, people wouldn't take it.

Consider this feat:

Full Combat Expertise:
Prerequisite: BAB +6 or higher
Benefit: When taking a full attack action, you may voluntarily forfeit all of your iterative attacks and gain a +2 Dodge bonus to your AC until the beginning of your next turn for each attack forfeited in this manner. This feat counts as Combat Expertise for prerequisites of other feats.

Would you take that feat instead of Combat Expertise? Would you take that feat in addition to Combat Expertise?

Think about that really hard, and then remember that the feat I just wrote up is better than Elusive Attack in literally every way. It's technically a full attack (so it can be used with TWF or haste), it scales to your BAB rather than your Fighter level, it can be combined with Pounce if for some reason you care, and it can be used by characters with a low intelligence to qualify for Improved Trip (albeit at an obscenely high level). It's completely superior in every way, and it still wouldn't make the cut in any build I've ever seen.

Elusive Attack is unmitigated crap, I am actually offended that someone would publish that.

-Username17

[RandomCasualty]

It isn't a bad feat for a metamagic rod quickened true strike /power attack meleers, that's about it. You're basically getting +6 AC for almost nothing.

Also note that the level dependent factor of the feat is not based on your BaB, but rather on your character level. Making it kind of nice for mixed class fighter mage types and possibly a spellsword.

Though it's still by no means a great feat, mostly because of the 6 levels of fighter required, which just makes it more or less suck.

[Username17]

I seriously don't know what you are talking about. It's a class feature that you get instead of a feat, not a feat. It requires 11 levels of Fighter to get a +4 AC bonus, and 16 levels of Fighter to get a +6 bonus. Really, it's just a shitty waste of time.

--

And that's my problem with this writeup. It's just a lame feat. But because it's a "class feature" it gets extra looking over and justification that a feat never would. It's unsalvagable bullshit, and the fact that it gets a special write-up as a class feature gets it special attention that it does not warrant.

Being a class feature makes it worse and causes people to waste more time analyzing it. By writing it up as a class option for Fighter they've caused an immense amount of damage to the D&D community. Uncountable numbers of players are going to actually use this "feature". And there's no fvcking point.

With one stroke of the pen, they've made people playing fighters have worse characters.

-Username17

[Book]

I agree, Elusive Target is horrible. About the last thing a 16th level Fighter needs is an improvement to AC ... which is something he is already sufficiently good at providing himself. As a Ftr-16, you already suck at nearly everything else except for BAB, AC and some lukewarm feat enhancements.

So since you have an assload of meaningful weaknesses to address at that level, why would you want to foolishly pile on even more unneccessary bonuses to AC?

Seriously, whenever I see people unfortunate enough to play high level Fighters, I *NEVER* see them have problems with AC or HP.

[Count Arioch the 28th]

My brother played a fighter to level 15, and he had severe AC problems.

Of course, that's because he thought for whatever reason a dwarf wouldn't want enhanced equipment, and was sitting on several hundred thousand gold, plus the gear he had back at level 7.

[RandomCasualty]

1146801156[/unixtime]]
With one stroke of the pen, they've made people playing fighters have worse characters.

I wouldn't quite go that far. Nobody has to take it. But I do agree with you that it's dumb to make it a class feature, when it is just a feat that has "fighter 6+" as a prereq. Mechanically the only difference is that a rogue can't take it with one of his bonus feats, but who really cares anyway?

I reallyhope they let this new idea of fighter class features pretty much die with the PHB2.

[User3]

1146805961[/unixtime]]I agree, Elusive Target is horrible. About the last thing a 16th level Fighter needs is an improvement to AC ... which is something he is already sufficiently good at providing himself. As a Ftr-16, you already suck at nearly everything else except for BAB, AC and some lukewarm feat enhancements.

So since you have an assload of meaningful weaknesses to address at that level, why would you want to foolishly pile on even more unneccessary bonuses to AC?

Seriously, whenever I see people unfortunate enough to play high level Fighters, I *NEVER* see them have problems with AC or HP.

Elusive Target is amazing. Elusive attack is the shitty one.

[fbmf]

Spammers really love this thread, so I'm locking it.
[/TGFBS]