Why do they hold back the cool toys until level 25-30?

[MartinHarper]

Race is generic. Skills will be ignored. ... I'm also counting the 4 standard feats, since a 3.x fighter is made of feats, whereas a 4e character's feats pretty much don't matter).

This is... dumb. Sorry, you can't just ignore race, skills, 4e feats, and 4e magic items, and pretend to be making a fair comparison. Especially when you take Power Attack and Quick Draw, which exist in 4e.

Here's another unfair comparison:
Take a fighter in 4e. He has X powers, Y items, Z feats, and so forth. I don't even care.
Take a fighter in 3e. He has nothing, because a fighter in 3e pretty much doesn't matter.

Our 3.5 fighter can do the following things ... trade accuracy for damage
...
"Making accurate attacks" is not an option; it's a function of character build.

You're contradicting yourself. Using Sure Strike vs a Basic Attack is precisely a choice about trading accuracy for damage. Sure Strike is more accurate. A Basic Attack does more damage.

[Username17]

Here's another unfair comparison:
Take a fighter in 4e. He has X powers, Y items, Z feats, and so forth. I don't even care.
Take a fighter in 3e. He has nothing, because a fighter in 3e pretty much doesn't matter.

But we're actually doing that. We aren't giving the 3e Fighter any of the figurines of wondrous power or quaal's feather tokens or bags of tricks that exist in 3rd edition on the grounds that that would be "unfair" since the Fighter himself isn't doing any of that shit. We're assuming that he has some kind of marginal equipment to keep him from falling off the RNG and nothing more.

Your complaints that we are unfairly gimping the 4e Fighter are laughable in the face of how totally we are holding back the 3rd edition character in this example. You want to rant about how the 4e Fighter has the ability to make a flaming explosion out of his fire sword once per day? Fine. The 3rd edition fighter has a god damned Bag of Tricks and he can summon wolverines to do his bidding - an ability which is by itself more interesting and game effecting than anything in 4th edition of any level.

-Username17

[MartinHarper]

We aren't giving the 3e Fighter any of the figurines of wondrous power or quaal's feather tokens or bags of tricks that exist in 3rd edition on the grounds that that would be "unfair" since the Fighter himself isn't doing any of that shit.

If you want to prove that the 3e fighter has more options than the 4e fighter, you'd be better off including all the things that both fighters can do, or only gimping the 3e fighter. Currently you're comparing a gimped 3e fighter with a gimped 4e fighter, and that proves nothing.

[ubernoob]

We aren't giving the 3e Fighter any of the figurines of wondrous power or quaal's feather tokens or bags of tricks that exist in 3rd edition on the grounds that that would be "unfair" since the Fighter himself isn't doing any of that shit.

If you want to prove that the 3e fighter has more options than the 4e fighter, you'd be better off including all the things that both fighters can do, or only gimping the 3e fighter. Currently you're comparing a gimped 3e fighter with a gimped 4e fighter, and that proves nothing.

Do tell us what "options" 4E skills, feats, and equipment bring.

[MartinHarper]

Do tell us what "options" 4E skills, feats, and equipment bring.

Race:
Human, +1 at-will power, and extra feats/etc (included below)

Feats:
Power Attack (trade attack mod for damage)
Quick Draw (switch between melee and ranged pretty much at will)
Warrior of the Wild (apply extra damage to a single target of your choice)
Powerful Charge (make charge more of an option)
Shield Push (shove people around with opportunity attacks)
One other.

Skills:
Intimidate & Heal are the obvious ones with in-combat options.
Athletics can do, depending on scenery.
Acrobatics from the multi-class feat provides stunting (jump over the defensive line to go for the boss).
One other.

Equipment:
For example, Terror Weapon gives an option to frighten an enemy and weaken their defenses, whereas Barkskin Armour gives an option to self-buff. The fighter will probably have 5-6 items, some of which will provide options, and some of which are always on.

Edit: improved parallel to Talisman's fighter re Acrobatics.

[The 13 Wise Buttlords]

When did the goal of D&D become "to play a Fighter" anyway? I've seen the argument - several times - that 4E is better because it makes playing a Fighter more interesting. Even if this were true - how the hell would this make 4E a better game?

If one or two of the classes are somewhat more interesting, and the rest are much less interesting - that's a step backward, not forward! And this is even ignoring the fact that nobody was forcing you to play a single-classed Fighter in 3E. A game where only half the options are interesting is still better than a game where none of them are.

What I want to know is when the Dumbass Melee Fighter was decided a viable archetype past level 5 or so.

No other series of speculative fiction seems to think so. Past that power level, DMFs get something that makes them, well, NOT DMFs. Even if it's something like being so strong that they can throw a building at you and you cannot dodge it.

Well, when we got on our knees and decided to suck on the rotten, AIDs-infected micropenis of the DMF in preparation for building this new edition the results are now obvious. I hope you shitmongers learned your lesson.

Fucking 4th Edition.

[ubernoob]

4E Power attack is fixed, so provides less options than 3.5 PA.
Quick draw is 300 gp in 3.5.
Warrior of the Wild is +1d6 1/encounter and skill focus. A joke.
Powerful Charge is 2 damage. A joke.
Shield push is 1 square. A joke in a world with only standard action attacks. A joke.

Skills: having or not having a skill is a 5 pt difference. Worthless.

Equipment: 3E has a gigantic advantage here and you know it.

[Talisman]

Race:
Human, +1 at-will power, and extra feats/etc (included below)

3.5 race: Human, +1 feat, more skills.

Feats:
Power Attack (trade attack mod for damage)
Quick Draw (switch between melee and ranged pretty much at will)
Warrior of the Wild (apply extra damage to a single target of your choice)
Powerful Charge (make charge more of an option)
Shield Push (shove people around with opportunity attacks)
One other.

Skills:
Intimidate & Heal are the obvious ones with in-combat options.
Athletics can do, depending on scenery.
Acrobatics from the multi-class feat provides stunting (jump over the defensive line to go for the boss).
One other.

3.5 skills:
Assume 4 maxed-out skills (2 base Sp's, +1 for human, +1 for Int 13)
Tumble (at half ranks, but still...that's +10 at 9th level, barring magic)
Climb (+16)
Jump (+16)
One other

Equipment:
For example, Terror Weapon gives an option to frighten an enemy and weaken their defenses, whereas Barkskin Armour gives an option to self-buff. The fighter will probably have 5-6 items, some of which will provide options, and some of which are always on.

I laugh at your puny terror weapon. Necklace of fireballs? Throwing, returning halberd? Bag of tricks (thanks Frank)? Robe of useful items? Et cetera.

I deliberately left these out because, at best, it's a wash (4e race vs. 3.x race, f'rinstance). More likely, it weighs the "options" scale even more in 3.x's direction.

[MartinHarper]

Power Attack is indeed less of an option than 3e. This makes it even weirder that someone would not include it when making a comparison. 4e is weak enough that you don't need to ignore its stuff to make 3e look good.

I'm copying Talisman in taking Quick Draw. Bitch at him.
Warrior of the Wild is another option. You can choose when to use it. And it's an option that you will use at some point during most encounters.
Powerful Charge is a feat that improves something all characters can do, just like Improved Trip in Talisman's build.

Shield Push: 1 square is sufficient to prevent a melee attack from happening, since Combat Challenge provides an immediate interrupt. That's good enough on its own, never mind that we have an entire thread on murder pinball.

Skills: the point is that the 4e fighter has more usable skills, and more skills that are usable in combat. That he gets +5 of a bonus from training and +4 from his level is entirely irrelevant. He still gets more combat options from his skills than a 3e fighter.

Equipment: I know that 3e has an advantage here. On the other hand, much of the WBL of a typical 3e fighter will be stuff like Talisman's +1 halberd and +4 strength belt that provide no combat options, just numerical bonuses.

He can also do the following with less chance of success (but it's still an option): break peoples weapons [sunder], help his buddies [aid another], feint, grapple, fight with two weapons.

Bluff is cross-class for this Fighter. He's got no relevant feats. He's got a -1 charisma modifier. Feint is a joke. And not the type of joke that does damage every encounter. Two weapon fighting is similarly a joke, never mind that both fighters can do it.

[MartinHarper]

So 3e Quick Draw is an option while 4e Quick Draw is a joke, and that makes sense to someone.

3.5 skills:
Assume 4 maxed-out skills (2 base Sp's, +1 for human, +1 for Int 13)
Tumble (at half ranks, but still...that's +10 at 9th level, barring magic)
Climb (+16)
Jump (+16)
One other

You'll need a house rule for the one other. Regardless, he can climb, jump, and tumble a bit. The 4e fighter can do all that, and more, with two of his five trained skills. How is that a wash?

I deliberately left these out because, at best, it's a wash (4e race vs. 3.x race, f'rinstance).

3e race gives +1 feat, +1 skill, while 4e race gives +1 feat, +1 skill, and +1 at-will power. How is that a wash?

I laugh at your puny terror weapon. Necklace of fireballs? Throwing, returning halberd? Bag of tricks (thanks Frank)? Robe of useful items? Et cetera.

Combat options, please, not robe of useful items. And try to take items that a fighter might actually take.

edit: I am struck by the irony of someone taking necklace of fireballs, which doesn't even recharge, while complaining that a 4e fighter has stuff that recharges once a day.

[Tydanosaurus]

Yeah, once the Fighter's 2/level skill points are being spent on Search and Disable Device, his ability to contribute out-of-combat steps way up.

Question: Can a core 3E fighter contribute out of combat?

Answer: Yes, easily. Take Intimidate and Craft. Or, max cross-ranks and buy a skill rod. Or, be a Rogue1/Fighterx, max cross-ranks (Diplomacy's handy), blow the Rogue points on a smattering of Knowledge, Gather Info, Tumble, and other stuff that might come in handy at low rank levels.

Remember, in 4E, you're noncombat skills either FAIL, or WIN, without much gray area. In 3E, you can simulate WIN by taking 20 on your low-rank skills.

In any event, if your fighter sucks out of combat, that's up to you.

[Tydanosaurus]

Well, that does potentially give him another five combat options, depending on which magic items he has.

Not really. Almost all Item powers are Dailys, and you get only one of those until the teens. You do get to choose which one of them you use, so I guess you could count that one action as five "choices."

I understand that you're trying to be even-handed, but :
* 4e races provide more options than 3e races.
* the 4e fighter is better at skills (including in combat) than the 3e fighter.
* 5 level-based feats for the 4e fighter are likely to provide more options than 3 level-based feats for the 3e fighter.

If you add those in, plus the actions that any 4e character can do, I think the average 4e fighter does substantially better than the optimised 3e fighter (and completely blows away a non-optimised fighter). For that matter, an 8th level sorcerer only knows 11 spells (disregarding cantrips), which is entirely comparable to our 4e human fighter.

Show your work.

It's odd you bring up the 3.5 Sorcerer, which couldn't be more Apple to the 4E Fighter's Orange. The Sorcerer specifically gives up variety to get to use it's few "actions" over and over again. It can use those 11 spells, at least 20 times. The 4E fighter has, what, 5 cool effects, and the equivalent of "I swing my sword. Again." If the 4E fighter could use a Daily power 4 times a day, I don't think there's be as much whining.

[Voss]

If the 4E fighter could use a Daily power 4 times a day, I don't think there's be as much whining.

Heres a thing. If 4e actually did something meaningful with encounter and daily powers [rather than straightjacket you with the once per <x> concept], it could have been a lot better.

If, for example, they set it up as:
you know 1 encounter and daily power per level, and you could use, oh, 5 encounter powers per encounter (or the expected # of rounds per combat -3)
and so many (say level/2 rounded up) daily powers per day, it would be a lot more interesting and a lot less stupid.

But that would have been more work, so they didn't.


And, former wizo guy... it isn't about the lack of rocket launcher tag. Its that 4e objectively sucks. Feel free to point out something that doesn't suck rather than whine that we're all negative and mean.

[mikal768]

And, former wizo guy... it isn't about the lack of rocket launcher tag. Its that 4e objectively sucks. Feel free to point out something that doesn't suck rather than whine that we're all negative and mean.

I will when everything I'm seeing which is negative doesn't essentially boil down to "I can't be as strong as I was in 3.x".

Until then... yeah, not seeing it.

[Talisman]

You'll need a house rule for the one other. Regardless, he can climb, jump, and tumble a bit. The 4e fighter can do all that, and more, with two of his five trained skills. How is that a wash?

First off, I don't need a houserule for "one other." The fighter gets one more maxed-out skill than I listed; I just didn't bother to specify it. Handle Animal, say, or Intimidate, or some damn thing.

And the 3.x fighter has a much higher level of flexibility in his skills. he could, instead of maxing out those 4 skills, end up with 8 skills at half ranks. Or 6 skills at 2/3 ranks. Or whatever.

He can also afford to put a few skill ranks in a skill (Craft, say) without shooting himself in the foot; this allows him yet another thing he can do without screwing his other schtick.

I deliberately left these out because, at best, it's a wash (4e race vs. 3.x race, f'rinstance).

3e race gives +1 feat, +1 skill, while 4e race gives +1 feat, +1 skill, and +1 at-will power. How is that a wash?

Because 4e feats suck, while 4e powers are roughly analagous to 3.x feats. At-will powers are also pretty lame.

4e feats =/= 3.x feats. 4 feats < 3.x feats (except the stupid ones like Toughness)

I laugh at your puny terror weapon. Necklace of fireballs? Throwing, returning halberd? Bag of tricks (thanks Frank)? Robe of useful items? Et cetera.

Combat options, please, not robe of useful items. And try to take items that a fighter might actually take.

edit: I am struck by the irony of someone taking necklace of fireballs, which doesn't even recharge, while complaining that a 4e fighter has stuff that recharges once a day.

Just because your fighter wouldn't take those items doesn't make them a bad choice. I was simply demonstrating that comparing a fully decked-out 4e fighter to a fully decked-out 3.x fighter can only make the 4e fighter look worse. 3.x magic items > 4e magic items

Do you really want a full list of the magic items a 3.x fighter could take to improve his combat options? Because I'm not rooting through all my books to compile it.

[Username17]

I will when everything I'm seeing which is negative doesn't essentially boil down to "I can't be as strong as I was in 3.x".

Until then... yeah, not seeing it.

Wait, you're complaining that the complaints in in a comparison between how many options a 3.5 character has vs. a 4th edition character are that the 3.5 character has more options. I'm totally fucking lost here. The claim that 4th edition characters had more options was a line one selling point. If people are complaining that the characters don't in fact have more options then yes, it's a big deal.

Yours is a typical 4th edition apologist position however:

• Make bold claim about 4th edition (ex.: dynamic new skill challenge system! Lots more character options! The Math works at all levels! Enhanced sweet spot! Whatever!)
• When anti-4th edition people come in with math and charts showing that the bold claim is false, or at the very least more true about 3rd edition than it is about 4th, boldly refute them, though of course without actually doing any math or backing up statements with anything.
• When anti-4th edition people point by fucking point refute all your bold statements with page citations, combinatorials, probability functions, and the personal blessings of the Buddha, accuse them of bullying tactics.

So please, put up or shut up. What 4th edition marketing myths are left?

-Username17

[Voss]

And, former wizo guy... it isn't about the lack of rocket launcher tag. Its that 4e objectively sucks. Feel free to point out something that doesn't suck rather than whine that we're all negative and mean.

I will when everything I'm seeing which is negative doesn't essentially boil down to "I can't be as strong as I was in 3.x".

Until then... yeah, not seeing it.

Wow, way to misread all the arguments. It isn't about strength. Its about having options. Its about being able to do something outside of combat. Its about taking an open game world and cutting it down with a plethora of limitations and flat statements that 'you can't do that'. Its about the game essentially not having a roleplaying aspect at all.

But hey, I'm not surprised you can't come up with anything good about 4e. I have yet to see any rational argument (using obscure material like numbers and facts) that successfully defends 4e. The closest I've seen is someone who claimed it was a pretty good beer n' pretzels tactical game, and if you make characters for a single night's scenario, play that completion and then do something different the next time you play, it can be pretty fun. Personally, I think there are more interesting table-top battle games you can play, but I can see his point- he's playing to the only dimension the system has, so it doesn't totally suck because he doesn't even care about the rest of it. And he actively admits he isn't doing any role-playing at all.

But for fuck's sake, at least edit your damn post and fix the fucking quote tags.

[Maxus]

I will when everything I'm seeing which is negative doesn't essentially boil down to "I can't be as strong as I was in 3.x".

Until then... yeah, not seeing it.

It's not the "Not as strong," thing, though options are somewhat related to power. And part of it is being able to do cool, interesting, and , yes, often lethal things is rather more interesting than just handing out different combinations of the same effects.

Not to mention, 3.x's versatility was--and is--much more interesting to most of us than 4e straightjacketing you into a few roles. For an example, I invite you to follow this link to see the Grapple Wizard: http://tgdmb.com/viewtopic.php?t=13119.

Yes. That's right. Someone on this board made a wizard build that can out-grapple near-anything. And it's not so much the power of the build, it's the hilarity. Nearly every time someone brings up playing the Grapple wizard, other people start suggesting that the character wear a Lucha Libre Mask of Intimidiation or similar silliness.

So, you can look at it two ways: You can either look at the power options bring a character, or you can look at the options themselves. Us? We're looking at the second one.

Edit:

But for fuck's sake, at least edit your damn post and fix the fucking quote tags.

Actually, Talisman screwed up his quote tags. He's got an extra quote-close at the end.

[Voss]

Ah. Thought I say some stray shit when I was quoting his. Well, whoever.

Tidy your thoughts, people.

[Talisman]

Fixed my tags

@MartinHarper: I never claimed that this build was string, or that the character was great at his various schticks. feint is a rather foolish option with no ranks and a -1 Cha (although I could dump those other SPs into it, for a +5...how many monsters have Sense Motive?).

What it has is a ton of options...which was the point of this exercise! I didn't call this; I just picked up the gauntlet, and the fact is that a 3.x fighter objectively has more combat options than a 4e fighter. The fact that said 3.x fighter has more staying power is just icing. Sure, TWF is a poor tactical choice if you're not tricked out for it, but the 3.x fighter can at least do it. Same with disarm, sunder, etc...no per-encounter powers, no minimum level: you just roll the damn dice. A 4e fighter, barring one or two specific powers, cannot even attempt to do these things.

------------------------------------------------------
Now, in the interests of fairness, I will say this about 4e:

~The classes do indeed appear to be (mostly) balanced against each other.
~I like the concept of the "per encounter" ability
~My game crew and I played a 4e one-shot. We had fun.

And that's...seriously, about all I can think of.

[RandomCasualty2]

So, our 3.5 fighter can do the following things: knock people prone (which is objectively better than immobilization or slow), trade accuracy for damage, trade accuracy for defense, disarm, push people around, shove past people, switch to ranged at the drop of a hat.

He can also do the following with less chance of success (but it's still an option): break peoples weapons [sunder], help his buddies [aid another], feint, grapple, fight with two weapons.

Now i know you're reaching when you have to include that last part.

Fighting with two weapons without TWF feats? lol. That just reeks of desperation. Come on man, at least the options i included for my 4E fighter were all realistic powers you may use sometime.

Also 4E gets aid another as well, but you're just never going to use it, because it sucks. An option that sucks ass isn't a real option.

Your character has 6 real options. He can inflict 1 status condition (prone), he can disarm people, he can trade around attack for damage and so forth, and he can push people (though that's all he can do with that action). And he has overrun.

That's not really much compared to the 4E guy who can pull opponents as well as push them. knock them prone, stun them, make whirlwind attacks and heal himself.

Immobilize and slow are mechanically similar, and both are less effective than knocking someone prone.

Similar, but not the same. Each can be useful in different circumstances. If you want to put the guy in a weaker position, prone is best. If you'd rather just stop him from getting to your buddies, I'd much rather go with immobilize or slow, since then he can't just stand up and decide to charge.

"Making accurate attacks" is not an option; it's a function of character build. Gaining regeneration and self-healing are the same thing. Slaying two minions at once can be accomplished with multiple attacks just as easily as with powers.

If you've got a power that gives a bonus to hit, then accurate attacks are an option. Regeneration and healing function a bit differently. Healing is all at once, and regeneration is over time. Also the 3.5 fighter probably can't kill two minions with his two attacks because he dioesn't really fight minions, he fights lower CR enemies, who still cna likely survive one of his attacks.

Note also that most of the 4e fighter's options are single-shot, at least until the next battle - and if you miss, you're screwed.

Actually many of the powers I chose were reliable. Meaning that they don't go away if you miss.

RC, if you prefer 4e, that's fine - play it and have fun. But you're not going to convince us that a 4e character has more options because that's demonstrably not true.

All I see from you is a bunch of handwaving "that's not an option, that's not an option" and what amounts to a complete act of desperation in pulling options out of your ass for the 3.5 figther.

Seriously, you showed just how ridiculous you are when you suggested that your 3.5 fighter could fight with two weapons without taking any TWF feats. I don't think I need to elaborate further. To get that, your hand must have been shoulder deep up your ass.

I mean just step back and think about that for a minute.

No TWF feat... and you think fighting with two weapons is an option.

With great logical points like that, how can I not accept that you're correct?

[Draco_Argentum]

RC, you're doing the same thing by discounting power attack as being objectively more options than the 4e version equivalents.

mikal, I assume you'll ignore this but power is important. Sure, this is a thread about options but the 4e defense is trying to claim weak options don't count. The two are linked since options that are just plain worse aren't really options.

[SphereOfFeetMan]

Now i know you're reaching when you have to include that last part.

Fighting with two weapons without TWF feats? lol. That just reeks of desperation. Come on man, at least the options i included for my 4E fighter were all realistic powers you may use sometime.
...
All I see from you is a bunch of handwaving "that's not an option, that's not an option" and what amounts to a complete act of desperation in pulling options out of your ass for the 3.5 figther.

Seriously, you showed just how ridiculous you are when you suggested that your 3.5 fighter could fight with two weapons without taking any TWF feats. I don't think I need to elaborate further. To get that, your hand must have been shoulder deep up your ass.

I mean just step back and think about that for a minute.

No TWF feat... and you think fighting with two weapons is an option.

With great logical points like that, how can I not accept that you're correct?

RC, you are so utterly and completely wrong it is sad. This tirade about Twf is the perfect example of your idiotic arguments.

Lets use an example of a level 5 3.x Fighter with a 14 dex. He has a ranged attack bonus of +7. He is twf with light thrown weapons, so he is at -4/-8 on his attacks. That means his total attack bonus is +3/-1. The average touch Ac for a Cr 5 monster is 10-11. That means that the Fighter has a ~70% to hit with his primary, and ~45% to hit with his off hand. One attack without twf would have ~85% hit with one weapon. Mathematically, there isn't much difference there. When you consider the extremes, the edge goes to Twf. At the extreme range, the single attack has one 5% chance to hit, while the Twf has two 5% chances to hit. At the other extreme, the single attack would have 95% chance to hit, while the Twf would have two 95% chances to hit.

And what can that 3.x Fighter throw as a light weapon ranged touch attack? He throws: Acid, Alchemist Fire, Holy Water, Thunderstones, and Tanglefoot bags. Everything but the Tanglefoot bag has splash damage or affects an area, so two attacks are superior to one attack.

In sum: The fact is a low-level Fighter in 3.x can sometimes fight with twf without the feats effectively (more effectively than one attack). The 3.x Fighter can: do damage in a splash area and set two enemies on fire (AF), Deafen two groups of creatures in a 10ft radius spread (Thunderstone), and glue two enemies to the floor (Tanglefoot bag).

In your own words the 4e Fighter can "That's not really much compared to the 4E guy who can pull opponents as well as push them. knock them prone, stun them, make whirlwind attacks and heal himself."

The most vehement accusation you made against the 3.x Fighter is the Twf example. The 3.x Twf thrown weapons example is arguably more interesting than everything a 4e Fighter can do. And we aren't even considering what the 3e Fighter can do using: any other inherent game abilities, any level abilities, or any class abilities whatsoever!

RC, you have lost every argument in this thread. Badly. I suggest that you remove your head from being "...shoulder deep up your ass."

[Tydanosaurus]

I will when everything I'm seeing which is negative doesn't essentially boil down to "I can't be as strong as I was in 3.x".

Until then... yeah, not seeing it.

No one's said word one about "strong." This entire thread is about "options," as in "how many cool things can I do." Those cool things can be pretty weak, if they're at least different. Frank pretty explicity says the 3.5 Fighter cheese is weak Velveeta.

[MartinHarper]

You can take 20 in 4e too. The example in the DMG is perception when looting the bodies. There's no change in that mechanic besides emphasis.
A fighter in 4e can fight with two weapons and with ranged weapons.

I don't need a houserule for "one other." The fighter gets one more maxed-out skill than I listed; I just didn't bother to specify it. Handle Animal, say, or Intimidate, or some damn thing.

Edit: my bad - forgot the lower cap on cross-class skills.

He can also afford to put a few skill ranks in a skill (Craft, say) without shooting himself in the foot.

The 4e fighter can put "I know how to build ships" in his back story, with rather better results. Not that Craft (shipbuilding) gives combat options in either system.

Do you really want a full list of the magic items a 3.x fighter could take to improve his combat options?

I'm more interested in the reality than the theoretical min/max exercise. 3e wins the theoretical exercise because it has vastly more flexibility in character creation and in magic item selection. But I'm more interested in the typical magic items that a 3.x fighter with the build you posted might actually have.

I could dump those other SPs into it, for a +5...how many monsters have Sense Motive?

The monsters get their BAB modifier on top of their wisdom bonus, and and it's still worthless without feats, because it takes too long. An option with a 0% success rate is not an option. The 4e fighter has a 0% success rate at pulling monkeys out of his backside, and that's not an option either.

A 4e fighter can feint too, and will probably succeed about half the time. Mind you, it's still mostly worthless, because it takes a standard action. But you might do it if you want to Stealth, I guess, given that 4e fighters can succeed at that too.

Those cool things can be pretty weak, if they're at least different.

To me, things stop being options when they're so weak, relatively, that you never use them, or nobody ever cares. Useless is almost never cool.