Talk:Grimoire Fighter (3.5e Alternate Class Feature)

Ratings
== Incomplete? ==

Not that I disagree with this, but it's kind of... underwhelming considering what you usually do for Grimoire classes... You totally remake them. This is just a single class feature. Maybe it's incomplete?--Soulblazer 87 16:39, October 17, 2010 (UTC)


 * Sometimes I totally remake them. At other times I think that other classes fulfill the same roll and just change one thing for the die-hards.
 * Misty asked me to make it after I mentioned that it would allow fighters to play in grimoire land without completely sucking too much. Originally I probably wasn't going to do it since my standard response is, "go play a warblade" to people who want to play fighters, but there it is. --Ghostwheel 22:30, October 17, 2010 (UTC)


 * Misty here. :P Yeah, this is pretty much designed to appease the diehards who insist that their Big Stupid Fighter matters after level 4 or so. Frankly, I don't think there's anything that needs to be added besides this, because as Ghosty said, go play a warblade already. MisterSinister 22:58, October 17, 2010 (UTC)


 * THE REAL MISTY HERE. :P. I asked him for it because I wanted to play a fighter who's awesome with weapons without the DBZ-esque style in ToB. And because I like feats. FEATS!


 * I would like to disagree with Ghost's warblade thing, but I won't as it is not of the time. In my opinion, the basic SRD classes fulifill most, if not all, stereotypes of fantasy combat. Unfortunately, they fail at it, sometimes epically so. In other words, I DO want to see an upgraded fighter, truly deserving the name, able to fight on par with just about any opponent using naught but training, weapons and sheer tenacity to do so. Which is why I dislike the Warblade and other ToB classes. Dunno about you, but I want a simple, stab-you-in-the-face guy, not a wizard-wannabe. Which was why I was, in part, confused and mayhaps disappointed by this. It's not a bad feature per se, if anything it's very good. But, it's like a first step, as if you didn't really bother with it, as much as wanted to get it done just to get it done. This is not an insult or anything like that. More like confusion at the fact you didn't re-work the entire class as you did with the others. Nothing more, nothing less (well, maybe more if it pushed me to write this thing after 12hours straight of Darksiders, but I digress).--Soulblazer 87 00:02, October 18, 2010 (UTC)


 * I could give you a bunch of reasons that the base classes suck and don't fulfill the breadth and length of concepts out there, and the only stereotypes that they might theoretically fill are the ones that D&D brought over from previous editions.
 * What you described fits almost exactly the warblade. It has stab-you-in-the-face abilities, and many of its maneuvers do what fighters do without having to waste feats on tons of prereqs (example: mithral tornado is whirlwind attack. adamantine hurricane is whirlwind attack x2). As MS said, this is for the die-hards who insist on playing a fighter. Can't do much about those--heck, if I changed the fighter considerably, they'd whine about that too. The class itself sucks, which is why I didn't rework it, nothing more, nothing less :-P I highly recommend playing a warblade focusing on iron heart maneuvers and picking up Heavy Armor Prof if you desperately want the heavy armor (or dip a single level into any class that gets it). --Ghostwheel 08:28, October 18, 2010 (UTC)