). I think the majority of characters I would define as simply beasts would be fighters. So just trying to understand where all of this is coming from.
Jaenoic hit almost everything above. Forgive my editing (and giving a little more detail), if possible. I excluded the rogue sneak attacks because I don't believe a bit that this makes up for their loss of multiple dodge. I'm also not convinced it works better than backstab+circle from the responses I've gotten (albeit they are outdated now).Jaenoic wrote:Enhanced damage was removed.
Hitall was removed.
Dodge was changed.
AC no longer gives damage reduction.
Magical +'s were fixed.
Every other class has been worked on to become more powerful; spell casters (basically every class but rogues and fighters) got an enormous array of new spells
All classes use the same BAB progression. And to be correct, it is not a penalty, it is less of a bonus. As you increase in level, your attack bonus increases, this adds to your d20 roll to hit an opponent. By the time you have second attack, your attack bonus will be at least +5, and your second attack will be +0. By the time you can train third attack, your attack bonus will be at least +10 with your first attack, your second at least +5, and your third +0. This continues with each attack, adding one to each of them as you reach a certain level, and as you are allowed to train another attack, you get that attack at +0 to hit, until your last attack will have a +5 bonus at 50th level, always a progressive 5 points behind its preceding attack.Selveem wrote:Fighters specifically receive penalties on each attack after the first. I'm not so certain this is the case with any other classes because many of my other characters seem very unaffected. Couple that with the fact that they get the penalties without the bonuses that a Fighter would normally get as they progress in levels.
The buzz about multipliers/power increases/etc of magic spells has been dispelled in at least two threads now, word from the top, that it is not the case, and should not be used as fodder for how the fighters are so much weaker than the spellcasters. And the number of spells isn't really such a consideration when you consider that there are still no trainers for most of the damage spells above 6th level. At least not for a PvP consideration... the NPC casters lob them off quite nicely.Selveem wrote:Melee damage does less than its magical counterpart. Whether that was the case in the past is irrelevant now with the increase in damage and/or power of magic spells combined with the increase of spells available to casters.
While that may be how it works in D&D, you might want to have that suspicion confirmed. I don't have access to the code, but what I can tell you is that my fighter misses just as much as my wizard.Kregor wrote:Not only does this apply to ALL classes, but any classes with less attacks a round actually don't get as high an attack bonus.
I mean this with all possible respect intended when I have to disagree with the 'word from the top.' I've already proven that magic missile is hyped damage and I'm very certain beyond doubt that other spells do far more damage than in D&D. What something "should be" and what it "is" are completely different things. While I may not be able to see specific numbers, I -can- see percentages. I -can- tell you that spells do a lot more damage percentage-wise to physical damage. What I -can- tell you is that a wizard struck by a fighter wielding a bastard sword or greater would be pretty much minced meat. That's not the case in FK. I'll do actual testing on it later. ~8 hits with a bastard sword should drop a wizard, pretty much. I'm certain my wizard survives far more than that.Kregor wrote:The buzz about multipliers/power increases/etc of magic spells has been dispelled in at least two threads now, word from the top, that it is not the case, and should not be used as fodder for how the fighters are so much weaker than the spellcasters. And the number of spells isn't really such a consideration when you consider that there are still no trainers for most of the damage spells above 6th level. At least not for a PvP consideration... the NPC casters lob them off quite nicely.
This is definitely true for most classes. I'm not so sure about fighters, though. There's either one of two things happening here: fighters are being double penalized or progression in attack skills are worthless. Let me explain:Rawlys wrote:You never win. You can always improve.
If a warrior could knock down a wizard in less than two rounds (five attacks at maximum, right?), that would mean the fight would last, what, 2 RL seconds? If that?Selveem says...
What I -can- tell you is that a wizard struck by a fighter wielding a bastard sword or greater would be pretty much minced meat. That's not the case in FK. I'll do actual testing on it later. ~8 hits with a bastard sword should drop a wizard, pretty much. I'm certain my wizard survives far more than that.
), but I do know a few things. Ie. a fighter gets 1d10+(con) hp per level. Magic missiles do 1d4 per missile and a wizard can produce ten of them if they twin cast. Even by the book, that would mean an average of 20 hp damage, and off of a level 20 fighter with, say, 180 hp (average roll of 7 + 2 con bonus), that's around 11%. I'm not positive what a twinned MM *does* take off, but I'm pretty sure it's not 11%. I'm certain that's not the case in the MUD.Actually, I did do the math on this already (each missile does 1d4+1). If you read this post:Enig wrote:Ie. a fighter gets 1d10+(con) hp per level. Magic missiles do 1d4 per missile and a wizard can produce ten of them if they twin cast. Even by the book, that would mean an average of 20 hp damage, and off of a level 20 fighter with, say, 180 hp (average roll of 7 + 2 con bonus), that's around 11%. I'm not positive what a twinned MM *does* take off, but I'm pretty sure it's not 11%.
*I* can see the numbers, and therefore, I do, in fact, know what I'm talking about. I can see my to hit rolls on the testport, with a rogue, with a wizard, with a warrior, etc. I can see each iterative attack bonus dropping by 5 points in a round. I can see what my dice rolled, yes, it IS a 20 sided die. I can see the armor class of my opponent, it doesn't change or wack out, same number every time. I can see that I rolled <X>, my hit bonus is <Y>, and whether I beat an AC of <Z> or not. So you see, it was never a suspicion for me, I already knew the numbers. So I would kindly appreciate if my explanations of such weren't simply waved off as sophomoric ignorance.Selveem wrote:While that may be how it works in D&D, you might want to have that suspicion confirmed. I don't have access to the code, but what I can tell you is that my fighter misses just as much as my wizard.Kregor wrote:Not only does this apply to ALL classes, but any classes with less attacks a round actually don't get as high an attack bonus.
..in reference to seeing actual numbers. True, most players do not. Imms do and so do some players who are permitted to work with FK code. It comes down to trust. You either trust that we are being fair and doing what we identify as best for the game, or you don't trust us and believe that we are at best disinterested or at worst actively trying to ruin an entire class of character.Bear in mind I and the majority of players do not.
As for looking into the numbers, Kregor summed it up well enough. The attack numbers are working as designed and the design is in keeping with d20 rules where warrior classes have at least a +5 advantage over other classes, depending on skill level. As for looking into ways to improve the fighter class with wondrous feat trees and other positive things, to be perfectly honest, that may have to wait. The imms with the most ability and desire to affect change in that area were very put off by the ruination of the thread designed for just that purpose. Their efforts are now focused elsewhere, but still on subjects that have to do with bettering the game. There is no shortage of suggested improvements in any of the multitude of things that make up our mud. Just as every player has the inclinations of which PC in their account to play based on their own, specific motivations, imms have similar inclinations of what to work on within the make-up of the game. Our motivations change just like yours, and the motivation for looking into improving the fighter class is low at this time because of the way some things were handled on that earlier thread. If you are a newer player, or one who is returning to the game and coming a little late to this discussion, please take some time to read the other thread and you will, hopefully, see the reason for the current lack of motivation in this regard.I think what most of us are looking for is a simple post from an admin saying they will eventually look into this. That alone will make us happy
Lathander wrote:One, they are not broken - the numbers work and they have the advantage.
