I was thinking a little on the fighter-like professions I have for Ygg. As I stated elsewhere, my intent is to make everything interesting, no filler material.

The magic is certainly developed with this in mind, but what about the fighters?

We initially I envisioned two basic types of pure fighters: one who'd fight bare handed or nearly, kind of a martial artist and the other one sword (weapon) swinging and with armour.

The martial artist in fantasy in general gets a fairly poor treatment. Maybe they get a range of moves or some special abilities and that's it. They all look like bleached shaolin monk clones or similar. Not a few games limit their allowed weapons to staff only.

Boring boring boring.

And what about the fighter. He's usually what you get when you remove the special abilities of a character class and lets it use a sword. How interesting is that?

I don't know if supplements like Fighter's Handbook really improves things. It definately makes combat more complex and gives variants, but I don't see us GAINING anything in the process. The fighters are still the same.

Where can we really turn to for some INTERESTING fighters? Well, I'd say boardgames mostly. Especially those from companies like Games Workshop who make money from creating varied looking units.

Look at Warhammer. You have many different units all having their special abilities. They tend to be colourful and specialized. How can we translate that into a game without creating a million different character classes? A good question.

My initial take on this was to simply create a lot of special abilites for the fighters (armed and unarmed) to take. Fighters could learn Heroic Leap or Mighty Blow (stolen from Warhammer) or maybe Heroic Tackle or the Focus Blow of the unarmed martial artists.

Special martial feats. This seems to work to a point, but in the end becomes little more than decoration in the end unless created through some kind of guiding principle.

The common approach when creating "new and more interesting" fighters tend to be to make combat more specialized and complex to give the players using the fighters more to do during fighting. However, does not this create an imbalance in play? Players using fighters want to fight, because that's the only time they can really play out their characters? Other players may prefer other situations because those situations are where THEIR characters can play out their distinctive abilities.

If we look at the magician archetype, it's fairly clear. You have this guy who might be at least partially covered by magical sigils tatooed over his body. He may have an arm cut off and a few minor demonic taints visible like glowing eyes and claw-like nails. He'll probably also carry some weapon of protection, which may or may not be infested by some demonic spirit.

No matter where this guy goes he positively GLOWS magician.

But what about the fighter? Unless he picks up a weapon and actually STARTS TO FIGHT we're not gonna know he's a fighter unless we do some real thinking and gives him stuff to show for it.

What would usually tip people off?

Well, special weapons especially a lot of them would work. As would armour, especially if there is possiblity to get really distinctive armour and a reason to get them.
Maybe scars and battle wounds.

What about W40K? All the marines run around in very distinctive armour. In addition the type of armour depends on rank, so again this is something which stresses the importance of distinctive armour. They are also very specially trained indiduals and that would show off even if they weren't wearing them. They have very distinctive weapons and there are also several classes of them from the basic troopers to the people with specialized weapons.

There are different types of marines, like Blood Angels and so on. Each with their distinctive armour painting and symbols. They are also famous for different things, giving even more external significance to these choices.

In Warhammer FRPG we have specialized fighter professions among elves and dwarves like Trollslayers and Wardancers. These are very narrow professions which definatly have a very special impact on the character choosing them.

Anyway, this is hinting at a solution.

The first important thing is to make it visual. Armour and weapons seem like obvious choices.

To be continued.

Don't forget the lack of armor. There are few warriors more distinctive than a naked Pict covered in blue tattoos with lyme spiked hair screaming an unintelligible battle cry.

And fighting styles means more than special moves. Go for flavor, flavor described well enough that players can describe how their fighter is fighting differently from the next guy even if the rolls aren't any different.

I don't know if you have any FLGS where you are, but if you can get your hands on them, I'd HIGHLY recommend flipping through the dozens of Osprey military books on historical soldiers. These usually include several full color, highly detailed illustrations (ideal for minis painters) as well as details on the equipment and fighting styles of the soldier. Alot of the medieval books are illustrated by the incomparable Angus McBride.

Be distinctive but don't be afraid to draw from sources a heck of alot more believable than the often silly Warhammer universe. The Spartan Sacred Band, Saxon Shield Walls, Huscarls...these are the stuff of interesting warriors...not carrying 8 foot long oversided swords that must wiegh close to 30 pounds. IMO, OC.

Well, I'd suggest looking at Earthdawn, but I know you hate it. It does give 'fighters' some special abilities though.

Unfortunatly, I don't think there is any way you can have special fighters without making combat more complicated. Basicly, fighters fight, and unless they can do things while fighting that other can't, the only thing that really distinguishes them is that they are better at it. Unfortunatly, adding special abilities makes combat more complicated.

One could possibly make combat very dependent on skill. Thus, a fighter is the only one effective against certian types of opponents.
For instance a person in, say full plate mail would be almost invulnerably vs anyone who is not trained fighter. Against a fighter, they are just well armored. Other examples are possible.
Basicly, fighters get this bonus, BECAUSE they are fighters. Another possiblity is fighter could be given more latitude in describing their actions, and hence more effects.
Non-fighter:" I hit him."
Fighter:"I fend off his axe with my sword while I pick up a chair with my left and bash his unprotected left side."
A non-fighter would have penalties to this, while a fighter would not. When a fighter fights, it's cooler.

The down side is a group is toast if the fighter goes down.
This adds complexity, but the bonuses are static accross combat and can be easily figured out at the begining of combat.


One could also have 'fighter only' enhancements to performance along the general concept of cyberware in cyberpunk games. Maybe tatoo's or something.
Shadowrun is a good example here, as it has both 'magic' and cyber that are basicly equivilent.
Again, the goal is static bonuses, to avoid complicating combat.


One could also divide fighters by type of combat. Say mounted, ranged and melee.

A lot of what you're saying I already thought of ;)

I'm having dwarven and elven rune arts to create mystically protecting tattoos for warriors wanting to run around sans armour.

I'm trying to draw my influence from everything from picts and vikings to chinese pugalists.

I think my point is mainly that no matter how cool and full of flavour we make combat for the fighters, they're gonna look desperately 1 dimensional unless the fighter also has something to contribute outside of combat.

However, rpg creators often find it convenient to ignore that part. That's why we usually have very boring fighters.

With magic, people usually feel free to bring their preferences into the system, but combat? Combat is usually striving to be objective and equal. Since the fighter usually is intimately connected to the combat system he suffers from being reduced to a 1 dimensional character with little more than a few bonuses to the the attack and damage roll.

Anyway. Elsewhere I stated I intended of treating every character class as basically fighters.

What sets the pure fighters apart from the mystics or the magicians (who should be more properly viewed as fighter/mystics and fighter/mages) is their dedication to specialized methods of fighting.

The fighter is not a fighter/fighter, but something more. Beyond the basic ways of fighting, he is finding his own way of life through his training. Obviously this should be different from being "just a soldier".

Damion mentions Earthdawn, and to be honest, it's not too far from what I want to achieve. However, although the ED warriors are fine in theory, in principle their special moves and such are reduced to little more than bonuses to hit and to damage in the end.

What happens again is that the uniqueness of the pure fighters are reduced to events in combat.

And that is the very thing I find to be wrong. The pure fighter... the weapon master or the martial artist or whatever should have characteristics which permeates his/her behaviour and which isn't limited to combat situations.

I guess the idea has to be that the skills the warrior picks up should not only be useful in combat but in other situations as well.

Maybe there is a spiritual element to it in some way or the other. The discipline training the body itself, or some esoteric teachings. No matter what they should yield very real abilities to use outside of combat.

Anyone familiar with the comic Slaine? Slaine is the ultimate Celtic warrior (incidentally modelled after Cuchulainn) being able to channel the earth power in his "Warp Spasms" where his whole body get's grotesquely disfigured and gains incredible strength. Even without it he's an awesomely skilled warrior. In addition he's the perfect worshipper of the Great Goddess which is partly why he is so good at channeling the earth power.

So religious beliefs and abilites kind of go hand in hand for Slaine. This is ultimately what makes him a hero rather than a faceless fighter. He is driven by something, something which also is partly responsible for him being a fighter.

To put it more clearly. Being a warrior should mean more than just being able to fight well. This goes against the prevalent image of the fighter in RPGs, but I think that's a good thing.

Consider makeing the features of your fighters...whether moves or out of combat elements work the same way as your magic works. After all what is a special move but a spell cast with the magic of physical training.

Valamir wrote: Consider makeing the features of your fighters...whether moves or out of combat elements work the same way as your magic works. After all what is a special move but a spell cast with the magic of physical training.

It would be if you let go of some of the aspects that are giving you the most trouble ;-)

Get something into playable format...it'll be much easier to give you suggestions if we can actually play the game and see what works and what doesn't.

Until then its all speculation...dangerously circular and ultimately futile speculation.

If that sounds harsh its because I've been there. I have about a zillion game designs that never got finished because I spent too much time speculating and not enough time playing them. Trust me. Put together a playable version, post it, and people here will give it a whirl for you. Until then...in all honesty...its vaporware...and I've got many many megabytes of that of my own.

What really distinguishes fighters, in the real world, is the possession of military power. They are embedded in a power heirarchy, have a place and duties in that heirarchy. But this aspect is almost totally absent from RPG's, barring the nominal instant-castle-just-add-XP in D&D.

Valamir, you're right. I'm getting myself trapped in circles as my postings here reveal. However they do serve some purpose. One is to reveal their futility (if I just sit and think about it, it's not as obvious when I've exhausted my possibility), another is I do get some ideas which might be usable at a later stage.

Other than that I solidify things that only were concepts and hopefully I write my analysis generic enough for people to maybe learn some from my mistake. It also shows my current status of the project. And maybe some people think of things I haven't thought of myself and mail that.

Lastly, because I've written and posted this, I'm much less likely to go back to the same problem and try to solve it again, which might happen if I just think about it for myself.

As for contracycles remark, I think it's very true. An able swordsman (or whatever) is a like having a tank or something. It's an important power factor. Look at Sanjuro for an example of effects when that fighter is not part of the heirarchy enters a place where a deadlock has occured. However this effect, of course, would be valid for all player characters as all of them are able to upset an established balance of power.

As for a playable game, I'm still putting in and pulling out stuff. I don't know how many times I redesigned it. You're right I should give it a rest. Especially know when I have such inspiration for world related stuff.

On the topic of simply making fighters more interesting:

A soldier is not a 2D fighter. Every soldier is trained in at least the rudiments of first-aid, general and military courtesy, land navigation, and any and all labor fields related to his job. If your soldier is a pikeman, he is undoubtedly knowledgeable in maintaining whatever arms and armor he uses. Likewise, he is trained in history (though specifically focusing on military history) and heraldry (knowing the colors and standards of friend and foe, specifically). These are a whole slew of non-combat skills the soldier will know.
However, unless the entire PC party are going to be soldiers, I don't think soldier is a good idea. Ex-Soldier is probably much better, and opens up more doors. Military Courtesy could be the basis for diplomacy, and the leadership training the soldier could have is useful in many different ways. Mind you, I'm specifically speaking of the trained soldier, not peasants impressed into a lord's military and given a spear or pike.

Historically and in the stories, even the famed warriors were rarely "just fighters". Beowulf was a lord among his people, for example. D&D has taken a concept and narrowed it down so exclusively that it's unreal. No one lives to be a combat machine, despite the trend in RPGs. Even Street Samurai's have to pay rent, buy groceries and feed the cat. Think about where the "fighter" came from, why they fight, and how they learned, and that ought to be enough to give plenty of side-lines outside of combat.

Unfortunately, no matter the work you put into it, the players and GMs are going to want to have to do it too, or else, for that group, your work is worthless. And for those who already DO put alot of work and side-line info into their fighters, they aren't going to need your efforts. Your target audience should be for those who would like to, but just don't know how. All you really need, in that case, is a starting ground. A few unique types of fighters, and NO generic ones. No one should be able to say "I just want to be a fighter."

(Note: Star Wars D20 does a good job with this, because unless I just missed it, there is no "fighter" class. Soldier comes the closest, but it already implies military background, and as such, is not your generic "fighter".)

Well Lance, I definately agree with you. The fighter has become the standard and as such devoid of any real characteristics. The soldier, as you point out, is not really the pure fighter of D&D style games. D&D style fighter is a soldier or whatever with all the flavour taken out in comparison their generic Thief, Cleric and Wizard classes look full of interesting detail. Fighter is the default when you don't know how to model a certain character.

While most other games did not stick to the latter, they DID make use of the "soldier with all flavour taken out" approach.

I'm trying to eliminate the problem by
1) make every character class able to fight well
2) make the would-be "fighter"-class full of flavour just as any other character class.

Or in other words, you have to pick sides. "Fighter" was the neutral choice in AD&D. It didn't say anything really. Mage or Thief or Cleric, all of them were specialized things. Fighter was what pretty much everyone could be by default.

Ok. I think I pretty much know where to go. Now I just have to write it down in a usable form.