Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Current one, unchanged.

+4 AS and +5 DMG when moving 4 spaces or more.

+2 AS and +3 DMG on Player Phase, with additional +2 AS and +2 DMG when moving 4 spaces or more.

+1 AS and +1.5 DMG for each space moved up to 4 spaces.

Current one but AS bonus is converted to DR from the end of the Player Phase until the next one.

I don't know but I want to see the results.

[Solymr]

Fighter hero gives -whatever to nearby enemies and he gets (fighter's passive would be +10 Hit and Evade for himself when near 2+ enemies):
1 DMG and AS, +15 Hit and Evade near 2 enemies
1 DMG and AS, +17 Hit and Evade near 3 enemies
2 DMG and AS, +20 Hit and Evade near 4 enemies

Instead of fighter hero it would be Warrior and the numbers need some tweaking.
Also keep in mind that voting yes doesn't necessarily mean that they'll get this passive. It's just that they would get something other than (or in addition to) forest walk.

[birdy51]

Mrrmh. I'm still not sold yet, partially due to them getting evade. It doesn't quite play into anything, with considerations that Fighters are not a class a akin to Myrmidon where they are meant to be dodgy. However, a change of subject.

I've been considering trying my own version of Fire Emblem on the Forums, but the idea is still very much in the beginning stages. However, I have a concept drawn up in my head, as well as a few principle characters and plot fodder. Mainly, the biggest things what would separate it from other games going on would be in the introduction of Laguz. Ever since I started working on them, I've had a few ideas on how I would run them. It's just a matter of sitting down and fleshing them out now that I have taken notes of their stats.

They would play remarkably different than their human counterparts, and as such need specialized attention. When/if I ever create a final concept, I'll try to present them to you guys for review.

[darkpaladin109]

Mrrmh. I'm still not sold yet, partially due to them getting evade. It doesn't quite play into anything, with considerations that Fighters are not a class a akin to Myrmidon where they are meant to be dodgy. However, a change of subject.

I do agree with Birdy on the fact that it doesn't quite suit fighters, so if we will give them a new ability, I propose we change it to giving the fighter a minor boost to strength and defense instead of the  hit and evade boost, and maybe giving them something like a wekaer version of armoured, but without the weakness that knights and classes that normally get it have?

[birdy51]

I like that line of thought. The biggest problem with Fighters, is that they rapidly become glass cannon characters in melee form. When they become big burly men that can't take a hit, we have a problem. However, that doesn't help them as their defense is already naturally low. Very few things would actually be blocked by that passive.

I suppose the question I'm asking myself now is; how do we make them able to take a hit or two, but not nearly as well as a knight?

[Solymr]

Like I said, the current poll only says to give them a new special. We can flesh out the details later.

I do like that new thing though, even if it's going to be a little tough to balance.

[Blade Master Model 42]

My main concern is that the current fighter special is to... let them be ninjas for some reason? That makes no sense to me.

EDIT: Returning to the idea of reduced damage to Fighters as a special, how about -2 damage from all attacks if the fighter lands at least one hit during the player phase?

[Rolepgeek]

And it's any weirder that Fencers have the same thing? They're meant to be the axe-user group that isn't (just) about sheer force.

[birdy51]

Hrmm... Not quite effective enough for my taste.

How about this. 5 less damage to any attack made against the fighter when he has full health. After that, all hits, including doubles, deal full damage.

It's not overpoweringly strong, but it allows them to take a full hit without going down. Once they do get in the fight though, it's fair game, and they won't have that initial defensive bonus.

[Blade Master Model 42]

Fencers are on the entirely other end of the physical weapon spectrum. The whole thief branch is about alternative combat, and they use swords. It doesn't seem strange to me at all that the fencer gets sneaky ninja nonsense, not that I like it.

Plus it clashes heavily with their pre-established roles in the games. They're front line fighters.

Maybe a sort of defense variation of Quick Burn from FEA? First turn, physical damage is reduced by 3, next turn 2, third turn 1, then from Phase 4 until the end of the battle it's gone.

I'm just spitballin' here, work with me people. I don't really want to give them more hit (axes are too powerful to be getting that kind of boost), and damage boosts would kind of be pissing into a river. We don't want them out-tanking knights either, so if we do something defensive, it shouldn't be better than them.

[birdy51]

That could work.

[Shoruke]

I really don't mind at all that we have on-foot axe users with something to them other than "big guy with big weapon".
The Bandits and Pirates have that covered. The role of Fighters is when, working within the top tier of damage output, you're willing to sacrifice some of your raw damage for utility. Conceal does exactly that.
If you want a tanky axe-user, play a Bandit and stand on a hill.

Although... to reinforce the whole "roles of the different axe-users" thing, maybe we could give Bandits 1 more STR? Pirates have 9, Fighters and Bandits have 7... Maybe the roles would be clearer if Bandits had 8? Sure, it's one damage per shot, but still...

[Blade Master Model 42]

Bandits:

HP 24 STR 7 MAG 0 SKL 2 CON 11 AID 10
LUK 0 DEF 3 RES 0 SPD 3 MOV 5

Fighters:

HP 23 STR 7 MAG 0 SKL 3 CON 10 AID 9
LUK 2 DEF 3 RES 0 SPD 2 MOV 5

Pirates:

HP 22 STR 9 MAG 0 SKI 3 CON 9 AID 8
LUC 1 DEF 3 RES 0 SPD 3 MOV 5



If we reduce the lowest instance of a stat to zero, and reduce the stats of the other classes by the same amount, we see...

Bandits:

HP 2 STR 0 MAG 0 SKL 0 CON 2
LUK 0 DEF 0 RES 0 SPD 1

Fighters:

HP 1 STR 0 MAG 0 SKL 1 CON 1
LUK 2 DEF 0 RES 0 SPD 0

Pirates:

HP 0 STR 2 MAG 0 SKI 1 CON 0
LUC 1 DEF 0 RES 0 SPD 1

... Not much in terms of cohesive information. Except we learned that Fighters are the lucky class. And no one but me likes Luck.

Edit: In any case, if we give Bandits extra Strength, we'd have to take something away.

[Shoruke]

In any case, if we give Bandits extra Strength, we'd have to take something away.

Hit points. That's my vote.

Bandits get -1 (or maybe -2) HP and +1 STR, and then we call the First Class axe-users good.

(interesting to note that, while Pirates do the most damage, Bandits can use the biggest weapons more easily...)

[Haspen]

I always thought that Bandits were the purest in terms of HP and STR (while being clumsy), Fighters mixing attack power with accuracy, and Pirates being the most 'averageish' of the axe family...

[Solymr]

Actually pirates in the games were the most offensive axe users, while lacking much more in defense.
Here they get the biggest offensive stats while bandits get the most HP and CON and fighters the most skill... and luck.
If we move one HP to STR for bandits I suggest we move one LCK to SKL for fighters.