Fencing

[Ashlyn]

Give fencing to warriors to level the playing field for the non-giant warriors. The trade off's being the boost to hit and dam scaling from int and being forced to wear light armor. Allow fencing to toggle between defensive and offensive style by manually using feint to prevent someone from just dual-wielding you into oblivion. You would see fights where disarm is actually used instead of hobble, bash, bash, bash.

[Stiehl26]

This is a very well thought out and needed option. Balances offensive prowess with loss of heavy armor and rids the trivialization of low strength high intelligence warriors.

[Dogran]

Warriors already have so much, I don't like this. The idea of a class that has fourth attack having fencing doesn't do it for me.

[Ashlyn]

It’s fair, balanced and has a HARD counter. Gives any race other than giant, slith and dwarf viability.

[deioped]

I would love to see a fire giant fencer.

[Xenyar]

Minotaur is a great warrior. Treant has best stats in game right beside OP jotun, but still carry a tough vuln. I still think they are very playable. I think the other races can be successful too. What races do you think is the worst options for a warrior?

[Ashlyn]

Funny how the races you mentioned are large size. Don't see drow, elf, halfling, avian, gnome, jagar, human, dwarf, or duergar tearing up the top 5.

[Xenyar]

Large size has their perks, that's for sure. Strength, bash, etc.. But, don't discount high dex dirt kick and trip. Also, there is a much larger variety of non-oversized weapons. Meaning you have access to a much larger pool of double grip-ables. The only problem I see with elf/drow warrior is that dumb material weakness change. With terrible con, and being hit by weakness weapons, trying to regen will be a pain in the butt.

[BlackWidow]

In response to Xenyar's question about worst races for warrior...

The worst option for a warrior has been drow for quite some time due to their stat block and questionably useful favoured weapons (a gnome may have mediocre choices but they have 100% lore so that staff bonus is actually significant). Halfling used to be worse before they could grab disarmed weapons/shields from their opponents (and are still not great). Half-elf is far worse than it used to be as you no longer have boundless mastery triggering off of stuff outside of combat (I saw Airelyn get a random bit of healing from that triggering on the fast healing skill once).

Avian also seems lackluster. Dive charge sounds cool but you don't often get to fight flying opponents who are susceptible to it (which is the time it is especially useful since you'll also be able to charge them while flying and stay flying).

Still, if I try naming a number of successful warriors from my time off the top of my head, only one human warrior makes the list that I can recall. Two half-elf warriors but they were before the nerf to boundless mastery. Maybe one gnome warrior depending on whether you count Tipplwise as successful (which is questionable given that he eventually became an outcast). Stone giants and dwarves both seem to have at least three examples each that I can name.

As for the OP's idea... Fencing does feel like a bit much to be added to the warrior's toolkit. While warriors did struggle a patch or two ago, I feel they are in a decent place at the moment.

[deioped]

How about specs for warriors as well?

We can have dex types, str types and con types.

Like the dex spec gets fencing but no double grip, etc.

[Kornhole]

OMFG YAY, lets SPEC ANOTHER CLASS!!!!!

[lionSpyre]

I think speccing is great but also a very slippery slope. I can think of legitimate specs for virtually every class that don’t currently have one. Granted, I would love to see them all implemented. But where to start?

Monk: strength vs dex (although monks can already spec with tattoos)
Warrior: strength vs dex (I don’t think con is needed here)
Thief: gadgets (utility) vs assassin (combat)
Necromancer: summons vs afflictions
Bard: entertainer (support) vs sword dancer (combat)
Illusionist: never played one 😝
Ranger: strength vs dex

And sort of stumped on Healer and Shaman - but I think since they lean into religion by default the most, which god they follow sort of specs them.

To my knowledge, everything else i haven’t mentioned has some level of speccing

[Ashlyn]

Its not about spec, its about making some of the more interesting races viable for warrior. Mostly the dex ones. Slith and Giants are the most viable. Elves having high dex and autosneak doesn't begin to offset high strength and wielding oversized in one hand plus physical resist.

[lionSpyre]

Ah okay, I see the distinction here.

I could see there being some minor modifications. For instance, I could see a dex-based warrior trading fencing for barrage, since it doesn't really make sense that a physically weak race could number the arm of a giant by banging on their shield.

Additionally, you could make warrior's favored weapon feature scale with INT rather than the lore skill. You could tune the numbers to help balance out the difference between a fire giant and an elf.

[lionSpyre]

Although the two of those changes combined could make elf warriors completely broken overnight lol

[deioped]

I don't know why kornhole seems to hate speccing so much when we have so many classes with specs, some with more and some with less:
-Paladins (I guess this is where the hate comes from)
-Druids (Circles)
-Dark knights (Ethos)
-Shadows (Ninjutsu)
-Invokers (Element affinity)
-Berserkers (Ancestry)
-Monks (Tattoos)

We don't have to go Paladin where elves get basically a whole new class of their own but instead do like berserkers.