Effect of specializing with a weapon.

Steerpike · Post by **Steerpike** » Thu Jul 30, 2009 11:08 pm

For example, worshippers of the god Tyr automatically specialize with a spear at level one. Does that just mean they add it to the list of weapons in the PHB for that class, or does it confer some additional advantage?
_________________
"There are two kinds of people in the world: those with guns, and those who dig." - The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly

Lord Dynel · Post by **Lord Dynel** » Thu Jul 30, 2009 11:12 pm

I'm assuming that this is from OG&M? Since it's Tyr, I'd assume that it means that they repeat the fighter ability. But I'm not the authority - I'm just guessing.
_________________
LD's C&C creations - the witch, a half-ogre, skill and 0-level rules

Troll Lord wrote:
Lord D: you understand where I"m coming from.

Steerpike · Post by **Steerpike** » Thu Jul 30, 2009 11:21 pm

Ah...ok makes sense. That's the way I am going to interpret it.

Thanks!
_________________
"There are two kinds of people in the world: those with guns, and those who dig." - The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly

Treebore · Post by **Treebore** » Thu Jul 30, 2009 11:28 pm

I asked a very similar question in the Of Gods and Monsters product thread, yes, you are to use the definition of the most similar word.

So it is the same as the fighters specialization.
_________________
The Ruby Lord, Earl of the Society

Next Con I am attending: http://www.neoncon.com/

My House Rules: http://www.freeyabb.com/phpbb/viewtopic ... llordgames

Lord Dynel · Post by **Lord Dynel** » Fri Jul 31, 2009 6:31 pm

Treebore wrote:
I asked a very similar question in the Of Gods and Monsters product thread, yes, you are to use the definition of the most similar word.

So it is the same as the fighters specialization.

Glad to see I got one right!
_________________
LD's C&C creations - the witch, a half-ogre, skill and 0-level rules

Troll Lord wrote:
Lord D: you understand where I"m coming from.

Omote · Post by **Omote** » Fri Jul 31, 2009 9:26 pm

There's a lot to interpret in OG&M. Those gods sure are wiley.

~O
_________________
> Omote's Advanced C&C stuff <
Duke Omote Landwehr, Holy Order of the FPQ ~ Prince of the Castles & Crusades Society

Go0gleplex · Post by **Go0gleplex** » Fri Jul 31, 2009 10:52 pm

Wiley...or just so full of beans they're half baked constantly.
_________________
The obvious will always trip you up FAR more than the obscure.

Baron Grignak Hammerhand of the Pacifica Provinces-

High Warden of the Castles & Crusades Society

serleran · Post by **serleran** » Fri Jul 31, 2009 11:21 pm

Isn't it a +1 bonus to hit and damage, increasing again at level 7 and 12, or something like that? Have not played a C&C fighter yet...
_________________
If it matters, leave a message at the beep.
Serl's Corner

CharlieRock · Post by **CharlieRock** » Sat Aug 01, 2009 12:09 pm

Converting the spirit of this to a game using BECMI WM rules is simplicity. Allow worshippers in certain sects an increased % and discounted study rate on their deities favored stick.

_________________
The Rock says ...

Know your roll!

Treebore · Post by **Treebore** » Sat Aug 01, 2009 2:13 pm

serleran wrote:
Isn't it a +1 bonus to hit and damage, increasing again at level 7 and 12, or something like that? Have not played a C&C fighter yet...

Yes.
_________________
The Ruby Lord, Earl of the Society

Next Con I am attending: http://www.neoncon.com/

My House Rules: http://www.freeyabb.com/phpbb/viewtopic ... llordgames

Relaxo · Post by **Relaxo** » Sat Aug 01, 2009 2:32 pm

Kind of a thread drift, but I've been considering a houserule where fighters can add their specialization bonus to their initiative roll. it's just a tiny bump in power but if they strike first, the enemy may not.

I've also considered allowing a bow specialist to use Combat Dominance with their bow (RAW melee only)... perhaps restricted to short or med range, or targets near each other. I dunno.

Treebore · Post by **Treebore** » Sat Aug 01, 2009 4:14 pm

Relaxo wrote:
Kind of a thread drift, but I've been considering a houserule where fighters can add their specialization bonus to their initiative roll. it's just a tiny bump in power but if they strike first, the enemy may not.

I've also considered allowing a bow specialist to use Combat Dominance with their bow (RAW melee only)... perhaps restricted to short or med range, or targets near each other. I dunno.

I would say they are all very workable ideas. I amy also consider the Initiative bump, there is definitely a lot of reasons to justify such an effect.
_________________
The Ruby Lord, Earl of the Society

Next Con I am attending: http://www.neoncon.com/

My House Rules: http://www.freeyabb.com/phpbb/viewtopic ... llordgames

lobocastle · Post by **lobocastle** » Sat Aug 01, 2009 5:36 pm

[quote="Relaxo"]Kind of a thread drift, but I've been considering a houserule where fighters can add their specialization bonus to their initiative roll. it's just a tiny bump in power but if they strike first, the enemy may not.

I believe that this idea is great. It aids the fighter with a lower dex and provides one more good reason to play a fighter character.

Joe

Relaxo · Post by **Relaxo** » Sat Aug 01, 2009 6:52 pm

That's what I was thinking! I know "on average' the Fighter is a better, well, fighter, than the other classes, but even with combat dominance and extra attacks they seem wimpy next to a ranger's combat marauder (that even sounds cooler) adding his level to damage against a host of creature types.

Treebore · Post by **Treebore** » Sat Aug 01, 2009 7:35 pm

I don't get this "on average" sentiment about the fighter I keep seeing. I have played fighters, I have seen Slimy, Silva, and others play fighters of up to 10th level, I have seen Knights, Rangers, Paladins, and Bards played to similar and higher levels.

What I have consistently seen is the fighter always kicks butt. Always. Granted, the fighters always had good STR scores, but so did the Rangers, knights, bards, etc...

But with his high AC, super high BtH, and bonus to damage, the fighter kicks butt, hits way more often, for more damage, and gets hit far less, and even when he does he has a ton of HP's.

From what I have seen the fighter is totally kick butt.

Yeah, the Ranger does a lot of damage against goblinoids, giants, etc... The Knight is a machine of devastation on horse back, but the fighter always kicks butt, against everyone, in any environment.

In C&C I have finally come to like the fighter, and respect them on the battle field. Where ever that field may be.
_________________
The Ruby Lord, Earl of the Society

Next Con I am attending: http://www.neoncon.com/

My House Rules: http://www.freeyabb.com/phpbb/viewtopic ... llordgames

Relaxo · Post by **Relaxo** » Sat Aug 01, 2009 7:59 pm

Yeah, that's what I mean.

One of the trolls or Serleran or someone in The Fighter Thread said something to this effect, that no matter what, the fighter was designed to be the best combatant. They're the only class whose BtH = level, even the other warrior classes are behind a point, and w/ specialization, they're +2 at first level before adding STR bonus. (of course I realize you know this already)

Like you said, in earlier editions the fighter was the boring class that newbies played because all they did was run over to things and chop them up. In 3rd ed, their plethora of feats made them interesting, powerful and customizable, (but feats got a little nutty after a while... I suppose kits in 2e did too).

Anywho, the C&C fighter is sweet, but I like these tweaks, they're subtle but could be significant, and allowing the bow for Combat Dominance makes bow specialist an interesting choice. I rarely think missile weapons for fighters, not as their bread and butter weapon, at least. Sword, mace... if no weapon speed rules in play, whatever does d12 damage, like a maul, if memory serves.

serleran · Post by **serleran** » Sat Aug 01, 2009 8:48 pm

Well, not "no matter what" as that would be impossible, but it is true that the fighter was meant to be, over the course of the campaign, the best combatant -- the one who hit more often, hit less often, and so on and so forth. Rangers and knights are mighty in their province, but a fighter is more effective in more situations... and that should trump it all.

If I were to play a fighter, I would consider some nasty weapon, like the bearded axe -- 3d4 damage is not something to sneeze at, especially with the damage mods. Of course, you may need to rely (or in-game contract) on the Castle Keeper to allow a magical version to be obtained, but for levels 1-6, it would be lethal, and that tends to be where most of my games play.
_________________
If it matters, leave a message at the beep.
Serl's Corner

Treebore · Post by **Treebore** » Sat Aug 01, 2009 8:54 pm

Oh, I agree these tweaks are good ones to consider. Its just that I keep seeing suggestions that Fighters are some who weak in comparison to other classes.
_________________
The Ruby Lord, Earl of the Society

Next Con I am attending: http://www.neoncon.com/

My House Rules: http://www.freeyabb.com/phpbb/viewtopic ... llordgames

Post by **Breakdaddy** » Sun Aug 02, 2009 1:54 pm

I agree with you Tree. The two characters I have played when I wasn't running our C&C game were both "basic" fighters and they rocked. I quickly found that a dwarven fighter specialized in bearded axe even at level 1 is a friggin badass. I was doling out damage that was often making the difference between survival and death for our group. The times that Braghni, my Dwarf, was knocked out of the fight ended up as very trying times for the group since they counted on his damage output and strong AC to be our frontline bulwark. Of course this was in a group with only 5 PCs, two of whom were squishy lil' spellslingers.

Relaxo · Post by **Relaxo** » Sun Aug 02, 2009 6:45 pm

ok, I want to be clear I DON'T think fighters are weak if anyone thought I was saying that.

Maybe in 2nd ed they were a less attractive option, b/c ranger and paladin had the same THAC0 and the only "power" fighters had over the other warrior classes was exceptional strength and everyone I played with allowed anyone to use exceptional strength (or maybe that is how the rules are, i don't remember)

anyway, I've always thought the C&C fighter was great and better than the 2e fighter, without being too juiced up and muchkin-ish. It wasn't really true, but it sort of seemed like the 2e fighter had no "powers".

that said, I don't hte the 2e fighter was all that bad, just that the ranger was cooler, but maybe that's just the group think I absorbed from all my friends who were huge fans of Tolkein (Strider) and Salvatore (Drizzt).