Rogue. Fighter, same thing really

[JonSetanta]

I propose to you... the sparse differences between Rogue class and Fighter class (RAW, not Tome)


From SRD
https://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/clas ... lasses.htm

Fighter

Some fighters prefer stealth and cunning over martial skill. This variant can also be combined with the thug variant.

Gain
Sneak attack (as rogue).

Lose
Bonus feats.

To start, Sneak Attack +1d6 is essentially = 1 Feat.
I'd rather have it scale with level or even do Precision damage based on the sum result of a Reflex or Stealth skill roll similar to the Diamond Mind maneuvers, but whatever. It is what it is.

Fighter basics: 1d10 HP each level (rounded median: 6), 2 SP, 1:1 BAB, Fort save

Rogue basics: 1d6 HP each level (rounded median: 4), 8 SP, 3:4 BAB, Ref save

So, extrapolated from these numbers, which are bull anyway since Rogues could virtually have only 1 HP between levels 1-20 and probably still survive given their combat-avoidance abilities:
• +1 HP per level is equal to the Improved Toughness feat, otherwise known as "The Real Toughness". Yes, this is a bad comparison since it only accounts for the first level of Fighter, as if they had 6 extra feats at level 1 and then NONE extra from 2-20.
• Rogues get more Chassis Basics than Fighters, due to the total between Fighter's 6 HP + only 2 Skill Points (8) vs. Rogue's 4 HP + 8 SP (12).
• Improving BAB 3/4 into 1/1 is most likely worth "One More Good Save Progression", unless I really should take all of these per-level values in sum rather than stating this is a feat, that is a feat, that is not a feat.

Anyway, averaged out, you get some kind of hybrid like d8 HD, 6 SP, and either 3/4 BAB and 2 good saves or 1/1 BAB and only 1 good saves. Pretty much... a Bard or Monk with Feats every level.

If Feats could grant caster levels and slots, you'd pretty much have the customizable hybrid of every class in 3e that Ever Was, Is, or Will be.

[angelfromanotherpin]

Welcome to like 18 years ago. One of the classic 'fighter fixes' on this board was just straight-up Fighter/Rogue gestalt as 'the Mundane' class.

There's a lot that's wrongheaded here, but I want to focus on this:

Rogues get more Chassis Basics than Fighters, due to the total between Fighter's 6 HP + only 2 Skill Points (8) vs. Rogue's 4 HP + 8 SP (12).

This broke me. Counting up hit points and skill points in a single total and comparing them as if it provides any useful information makes me despair of you.

[erik]

There's a lot that's wrongheaded here, but I want to focus on this:

Rogues get more Chassis Basics than Fighters, due to the total between Fighter's 6 HP + only 2 Skill Points (8) vs. Rogue's 4 HP + 8 SP (12).

This broke me. Counting up hit points and skill points in a single total and comparing them as if it provides any useful information makes me despair of you.

Tsk. I know right? Didn’t even factor in average starting age differences. Should add 10.5 for average age modifier to Fighter and 5 for Rogue. Which evens it a bit. Using the halfling standard of course.

I propose to you... the sparse differences between Rogue class and Fighter class (RAW, not Tome)

[The Adventurer's Almanac]

Here's a better idea: Rather than averaging both classes together, just slap 'em both in a blender and call it a day. Full BAB, d10 hit die, sneak attack, feats out the ass, good Fort/Ref saves, 6 skills per level, proficiency with all weapons, and all your fun rogue abilities.
I might consider playing that sometimes.

[Harshax]

Then just change the name ‘sneak attack’ to ‘precision strike’ keep the mechanics and remove the flavor.

Then players can just call it what they want.

Thief dudes will still call it sneak attack.
Knight dudes will call it precision strike.
Sniper dudes will call it headshots.

[JonSetanta]

Here's a better idea: Rather than averaging both classes together, just slap 'em both in a blender and call it a day. Full BAB, d10 hit die, sneak attack, feats out the ass, good Fort/Ref saves, 6 skills per level, proficiency with all weapons, and all your fun rogue abilities.
I might consider playing that sometimes.

I did consider that before making this thread but thought "nah some might consider it too much"

It just might be the most sensible option.

[erik]

Only change i would make from Almanac’s suggested gestalt-ish is give SA at 1,5,9,13,17 and bonus feats a 3,7,11,15,19.

[JonSetanta]

What about conditional Precision damage based on, i dunno, certain skill ranks?

[Harshax]

What about conditional Precision damage based on, i dunno, certain skill ranks?

Then you get dippers who take the Fighter class for precision damage and continue on as a Wizard who gets all the skill points.

Precision damage has to be based on class level. Otherwise, fighter is even more enticing to cherry pick and then exploit.

So, no. Unless you expand on your idea a bit more.

[JonSetanta]

I do know of the Iaijutsu-Skill Expert (NPC class) doing this, but it's pretty much a crappy Rogue.

[The Adventurer's Almanac]

Why do you want to scale Precision Damage on something that has nothing to do with the class you get it from? That's fine and you can do that, but it's something you should be able to answer.

[merxa]

In a 3.x system damage should scale along class or character level (usually class level to prevent abusive dipping), otherwise an enterprising player will find some way to break it. It also doesn't 'cost' the player anything when it scales by level -- they do not need to invest their choices be it feats, skill points, magic items.

and is no one else a little said that the den is having another fighter thread? and a 3.x fighter thread at that.

[The Adventurer's Almanac]

is no one else a little said that the den is having another fighter thread? and a 3.x fighter thread at that.

Time is a circle.

[Kaelik]

and is no one else a little said that the den is having another fighter thread? and a 3.x fighter thread at that.

I feel like this thread, just like every other thread Jon setana makes is just a desperate cry for help from someone trapped in a time loop in 2010 who can't read any part of the forum except the threads he creates and is prevented from speaking about the time loop.

[The Adventurer's Almanac]

He should make a thread about classes that can throw enemies into time loops, then. Time travel is always fun to argue about.

[deaddmwalking]

I'm pretty sure we already had that discussion. Or was that next week?

[erik]

[Harshax]

and is no one else a little said that the den is having another fighter thread? and a 3.x fighter thread at that.

I feel like this thread, just like every other thread Jon setana makes is just a desperate cry for help from someone trapped in a time loop in 2010 who can't read any part of the forum except the threads he creates and is prevented from speaking about the time loop.

He’s just top 20 radio from the last couple decades.

[JonSetanta]

He should make a thread about classes that can throw enemies into time loops, then. Time travel is always fun to argue about.

https://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/powe ... ession.htm

I feel like this thread, just like every other thread Jon setana makes is just a desperate cry for help from someone trapped in a time loop in 2010 who can't read any part of the forum except the threads he creates and is prevented from speaking about the time loop.

There are literally thousands of threads in TGD.
I've skimmed some on related topics, remember others that might have SOMETHING to do with whatever is being proposed, but conversations either degrade into shit flinging or halt at about 2-3 pages.

I mean, I could list every "Kaelik's X Class" you've posted in the last decade that has already been Tome'd or rehashed or discussed ad nauseam.

Sure, I could put EVERYTHING I WANT TO DISCUSS in one biiiig thread but do you really want a 30 page, multitopic thread? Or would that be bitched about as well?

Also, nice meme Erik. Flattered.

[Kaelik]

I mean, I could list every "Kaelik's X Class" you've posted in the last decade that has already been Tome'd or rehashed or discussed ad nauseam.

I wrote my classes because I felt they were an improvement of other version in existence. I was aware of the existence of the other ones when writing them and wrote different things.

You seem to be constantly rediscovering things. It might be fine to discover things for the first time, but it's weird to discover the things you are discovering about 3.5 which are extremely basic in the year 2021 since I'm pretty sure you've been here for a decade and the stuff you wrote 7 years ago was more advanced then what you are writing now?

Sure, I could put EVERYTHING I WANT TO DISCUSS in one biiiig thread but do you really want a 30 page, multitopic thread? Or would that be bitched about as well?

I don't have a problem with you posting in one or many threads. The forum is dead enough that it's probably even a good thing that you are posting things at all.

But it does seem really odd to have to have a conversation about what if Rogues and Fighters had good abilities in this particular forum where the main threads stickied are writing things with new abilities for fighters and rogues. I don't expect you to read every single thread, just like.... maybe the Tomes?

[Aryxbez]

is no one else a little said that the den is having another fighter thread? and a 3.x fighter thread at that.

Time is a circle.

I miss Fighter Threads, they were pretty valuable for bringing out illuminating discussion at the time. Build on your knowledge over time and all that.

[MGuy]

I have a few fighter threads he can visit in my sig if he wanted. Sneak out of the time loop there.

[JonSetanta]

You seem to be constantly rediscovering things. It might be fine to discover things for the first time, but it's weird to discover the things you are discovering about 3.5 which are extremely basic in the year 2021 since I'm pretty sure you've been here for a decade and the stuff you wrote 7 years ago was more advanced then what you are writing now?

Really? As far as I recall without glancing back, the most in-depth classes I've thought up were for Feybook (ugh) and that was pretty much the Nymph Sustainer, Fey Noble, and Sprite.

Granted, everyone here does have a good point about not rehashing Fighter and/or Rogue again and again, I have read the Tomes at least 5 times in entirety since the compilation was made, but I just don't like the Tome Fighter "role" from mid to high levels when there are PrCs in this forum that players would most likely love to switch over to after level 5.

Out of pretty much any Rogue variant anyone on TGD ever wrote, Koumei's Exploit-user outshines all of them.

And ultimately I should avoid waking up at 4-5am, reading the SRD as a measure of balance, and slap out whatever comes to mind.

Oh and correction on the "tenure", I read about Frank, K, and the Tome project in 2005 over on the WOTC site (they were blasting it briefly before mods deleted all such discussions) and it blew my mind, since about 90% of gamers I've met or wrote with about expectations of how D&D really plays out have been, well, "Great Cleave is overpowered" or "Let's make more Arcane spells that do entire class roles with a single spell slot". Followed the links to the other server, and I've been hooked ever since. There have been years when I was too busy working to even browse the internet but with the recent loss of my job due to pandemic I have months of time that could most likely be better spent making more monster classes or whatever.

I did make a Werewolf class, maybe too many stat boosts, but it pretty much does what the Monster Manual Dire Werewolf accomplished in 10 levels: viewtopic.php?f=6&t=57792

[JonSetanta]

I have a few fighter threads he can visit in my sig if he wanted. Sneak out of the time loop there.

Thanks, I think you mentioned those a few weeks ago and I did read them all.

[erik]

Also, nice meme Erik. Flattered.

Mission accomplished then.