Paizo Top Nav Branding
  • Hello, Guest! |
  • Sign In |
  • My Account |
  • Shopping Cart |
  • Help/FAQ
About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ
Varisian Wanderer

Aelryinth's page

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16. RPG Superstar 2013 Star Voter, 2014 Star Voter. Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber. 5,645 posts (5,708 including aliases). 1 review. No lists. No wishlists. 1 alias.

1 to 50 of 518 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Fighter Skill Points:

Brave and Skilled (replacing Bravery): Every time your Bravery bonus improves, you gain a new Fighter class skill of your choice, and additional skill points equal to your fighter class level.

---Which means your Fighter ends up with +5 Class skills of your choice, and 7 skill points per level, slowly acquiring them over levels from additional training...kinda like the real world. He'll end up with 1 more per level then a ranger, somewhere about 18th.

So you can start him out with 2 skill points at level 1, and watch him mature over time.

Makes him look forward to Bravery bonuses, too.


RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

3 people marked this as a favorite.

The paladin would be doing evil by killing an innocent.

The hostage takers are doing evil by killing the hostages.

Of the two options, which does not involve the paladin doing evil's work for it?

There's your choice. It is THEIR choice to kill the hostages, not his. It IS his choice to murder the innocent man.


RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

3 people marked this as a favorite.

There's been tons of side by side comparisons, Damian. It ain't the comparisons, its that each person reading them values the importance of different abilities differently.

Sorc lovers love the fact they can spam the most useful spell they have at the time they need it, without using a spellbook.
Wizards love the fact they can learn any spell and theoretically prepare perfectly for any scenario.

Sorcs love the fact they get tons of spell slots per day.
Wizards love the fact they get a higher tier of spells a level earlier, and conveniently ignore the fact the Sorc will probably still know more spells at one time then they will after the lowest levels.

Sorcs love the fact that Cha means they are the sexy casters.
Wizards love the fact that Int also means they get tons of skill points.

Sorcs love the extra powers from their bloodlines. They ooze flavor.
Wizards love the extra powers of their schools, ESPECIALLY the extra spell for specialists. They ooze powah!

Sorcs love the huge spell list because it means they can pick the best spells to know.
Wizards love the huge spell list because they can eventually learn them all, mwah ha ha ha ha ha!

Etc etc.


RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Magic Missile is also discriminated against.

If you have a method of doing extra damage with a spell (say, +Int to damage from a spell), magic missile only gets it on ONE missile, according to the dev team. Whereas if you're using an AoE, every single person in the area takes the extra damage.

I always rule that the bonus damage applies per target. So, if you're using a Banespell Magic missile that does +2d6 against orcs, each separate orc hit by a MM takes +2d6...exactly as if you had fireballed them. If you direct all the missiles against one orc, he also takes +2d6...exactly as if you had rayed him.

As for boosting up the power of magic missile, there's several viable 3.5 upgrades to the spell, but the best is simply using the FOrce Missile Mage PrC.


RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Kydeem de'Morcaine wrote:

I will 90% agree with what you say.

Some people will take your views and reasoning to say the ends justify any means. So I can do anything as long as it comes out generally better in the end. (I have actually seen a person justify selling an entire village into slavery so that they didn't blow their cover. All in the name of the greater good.) That I disagree with. I can not quite tell from what you wrote if you are in that group or not....

'For the Greater Good' is a LN/LE trap quote. Selling people into slavery is evil on its merits, doing it not to blow your cover doesn't make it less evil. Of course, if you do that for the purpose of conning the slavers out of their gold, and then ambushing the slaver train, killing them and taking the slaves, that's what we call sophisticated tactical planning!

The paladin is Heroic Lawful Good. Not Stupid Good or Lawful Stupid. He's going to be a hero, and if the law is wrong, he will sidestep the law. IF the law is RIGHT, agrees with his code, and gets in the way...that's where the Chaotics go right ahead anyways, and the paladin looks for another way. Maybe serving as a distraction for the Chaotics, who knows? maybe open confrontation and forcing an issue.

An example I like to use from my home campaign is the Champions of Valus. As LG has its paladins, CG has its Champions...who are less holy knights then good-hearted freebooters and gloryhounds. They'll blow into town, invite the local priests and paladins of the God of Justice out for drinks, and get them roaring drunk. The faithful of Harse let slip all the people who are getting away with doing dirt and preying on the locals and are protected by the system and the church can't do anything about it without breaking all sorts of laws and imperiling their hard-won standing in the community. The Valusar help the aggrieved and besotted Harsites home, and then over the course of the next week, all sorts of enthusiastic violent acts against these exploiters of the system take place. The law goes hounding after the criminal perpetrators of these acts and they get run out of town, while the Church of Harse shakes its head about such troublemakers as they exploit the chaos to dig up information and proof they need to dismantle the greater threat now that the Valusar have kicked down the doors and opened up the ugly mess for all to see, and the paladins have a field day.

It's considered a sacred tradition of both churches, and a major reason why Harsites are considered horrible drinkers.


RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

2 people marked this as a favorite.
BigNorseWolf wrote:
Aelryinth wrote:

You're trying to find a conflict where there is not one.

And you're trying to bolster your point by insulting me. Unless you have a mind reading machine, knock it off.

A paladin's 'code' is always a variation on the paladin's code, period. It's influenced by where he grew up, personal emphasis, and his god.

No, its not. A paladin cannot simply say that lying and using poison are not ok. They can use it to inform their decision making about conflicting elements of their code (a saranite paladin might err towards mercy and redemption and a paladin of ragathiel is going to lean heavily towards harsh justice)

Your disagreement seems to me a willful interpretation that I was attempting to state that a paladin could make up any code he wanted, which is Chaotic behavior.

I can't find any functional difference between that and what you said above.

Secondly, 'legitimate government' is a very dicey word for a paladin. A government that endorses slavery can be seen as only borderline legitimate to any paladin that believes in the freedeom and equality of man, and he's no more obligated to obey laws that interfere with his code then he is to obey other laws that endorse and support Evil behavior. Indeed, 'legitimizing' a government like that is tactcitly giving support to Evil.

Can you explain ANY difference between this and a chaotic good character that is not being chaotic stupid?

While it may not spark revolution, the paladin is not obligated to be Lawful Stupid and do whatever the government says. Lawful Stupid is NOT an obligation of the paladin!

And I am not advocating lawful stupid. I am advocating lawful damned- inconvenient-for-an-adventurer approach in the wrong situations.

A paladin cannot go full on John Brown. That is completely working outside the system. That does not in any way, shape, or form mean that they DON"T fight evil, slavery, or injustice- it means they need a way to fight...

Ah, and now you justify an attempt to get around insults with direct insults! Fitting, I see.

The paladin is not an administrator, he is not a bureaucracy. Furthermore, his paladin code may place a great deal of emphasis on the right of people to choose their own path in life, and forced slavery, by birth or imposition, is a vile evil that must be expunged.

In the name of his paladin's code, he can and will be compelled to act against them, The laws which support and justify them are on their face void and null, and the government which supports them is also in the wrong.

Does this mean the paladin leads a rebellion against the government? kills the watchman and the clerks and the tax collectors?

No, it means he takes action against those to which his code deems that he must. He does not try to tear the entire government down with fire and sword...unless, of course, the government itself resorts to fire and sword, in which case justice, not law, demands he take greater action.

You are attempting to enshrine 'slavery' into 'law' and so place it beyond the paladin's mores. You could do the same with 'lawful sacrifice to Asmodeus', 'freedom from laws of the common man' for nobles, 'the right of kings' to do whatever they want, 'rulership by wealth' and any of a number of different forms, that enshrine their own evils in law as a corrupted attempt to give them legitimacy.

The paladin looks beyond all that to his greater code, and deems what is wrong to be Wrong, to be corruption hiding behind words and decree, and may take action against them.

Being Lawful is not about blindly obeying laws, any laws, greater society or not. It is up to the paladin to decide which, if any, of the laws he deems legitimate and will respect, and which are cancers in the heart of society that must be expunged...sometimes with words, and sometimes with steel.

Slavery, as an evil against society that profits a few locals at the expense of many outsiders, is insidious and difficult to expunge, backed by the weight of greed and the power of tyranny over others, and oft times the best way to start dealing with such an organization is to shatter it, and then methodically pick up the pieces.

May that be breaking laws? Sure, laws the paladin doesn't consider legitimate. Does that mean breaking ALL the laws? By no means.

Trying to equate breaking corrupt laws with chaotic behavior is a trap and highly unfair to the paladin's code, which sits above such things in determining his behavior.


RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

2 people marked this as a favorite.
BigNorseWolf wrote:
Aelryinth wrote:
Remember that being lawful doesn' mean you have to be blindly obedient to whatever the local legal structure is.

While this is true in general, it is NOT true for a paladin (less that blindly part). Part of the paladins code is to respect legitimate authority: thats different than authority you agree with. While a paladin can (and should) favor good over law should they conflict, most paladins seem to completely ignore it "just this one time" so often their aligment should shoot past chaotic.

It means you have to abide by your own code

Hell. To. the. NO.

The entire point of lawful is having an external structure that you follow. If your own code is "i do what I think is right" you're chaotic good.

of discipline and respect local laws to the degree they do not conflict with your own.

How is that different from what chaotic good people do? Chaotic good andorans do not run around enslaving people just because the law said that they can't. The law says no slavery, they say no slavery, no conflict.

There are lots of Andoran Paladins who do not see slavery as legally valid and are perfectly entitled to do something about long as it doesn't involve full-on anarchy and stuff. But most Andorans consider slavers something rather lower then dirt, too.

And if their solution is to kick down the door and shoot the slaver (the most pathfindery or andoran option, triple points for using both together) you're degenerating into chaos.

You're trying to find a conflict where there is not one.

A paladin's 'code' is always a variation on the paladin's code, period. It's influenced by where he grew up, personal emphasis, and his god.

It's still His Code, and he likely shares a lot of it with lots of other paladins. Your disagreement seems to me a willful interpretation that I was attempting to state that a paladin could make up any code he wanted, which is Chaotic behavior.

Secondly, 'legitimate government' is a very dicey word for a paladin. A government that endorses slavery can be seen as only borderline legitimate to any paladin that believes in the freedeom and equality of man, and he's no more obligated to obey laws that interfere with his code then he is to obey other laws that endorse and support Evil behavior. Indeed, 'legitimizing' a government like that is tactcitly giving support to Evil. While it may not spark revolution, the paladin is not obligated to be Lawful Stupid and do whatever the government says. Lawful Stupid is NOT an obligation of the paladin!

Killing slavers is not chaotic, killing slavers is removing evil from society and doing Good work. Leading a revolution against the government is Chaotic.

Methinks you believe paladins should be Lawful Stupid, and it's coloring your views.

Saying Good people who believe in fighting for their beliefs can't fight for them is not very convincing.


RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.

non-lawfulness does mean rather undisciplined.

It does NOT, however, mean non-devoted or non-obsessive, which are very different things that can often be mistaken for discipline.

And Batman's alignment is whatever the writer of the day wants it to be. Batman of the TV show openly worked with the law. Batman of Miller is wanted by the police and is fairly brutal. Meh. Writers.


RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Lawful stupid would be trying to force the rest of the party to use merciful combat and avoid killing party in order to comply with the paladin's code.

Trying to save the lives of people and not be a murderhobo is an RPG choice, not Lawful Stupid.


RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Umbriere Moonwhisper wrote:
Aelryinth wrote:

Your example falls flat.

Stripping a wizard of his class features and exposing his weaknesses as having no viable combat ability without spells is BADWRONGFUN, but a flying wizard with wind walls up making him immune to missile fire from non-casters who he can bombard at will is PERFECTLY FINE, despite all the non-casters sitting around with their thumbs up their bums, being able to do nothing but sit and take it while the casters duke it out.

Yeah, no, not seeing it. If the party can pull this off, it's a win. There's definite risks to doing it, but it's a great tactic if it works.


though i see lots of theory craft examples where martial characters can't do a thing

i have never seen a legitimate play example where martial characters couldn't do anything in combat. whether ranged or melee, it may have been suboptimal but what i have seen more of is

encounters where the PC casters are out of spells and plinging a crossbow ineffectually for minimal damage because they used their last 3rd level spell giving the fighter flight to take on the flying enemy wizard

and before you say wind wall makes you immune to missile fire, it is useless against bullets, energy bows, and well, a lot less useful against slings.

enemy caster casts wind wall? time for the fighter to use that pepperbox musket he acquired off a dead rifleman like 2 months ago and held onto because it still bypasses wind wall when his bow isn't good enough.

fighters in my groups tend to hold onto a few excess looted weapons useful for fighting different foes in their golf bag, because we are lucky if we even reach level 10, and well, being it takes us a year to get to level 8, we loot every backup weapon we can that is useful in a corner case and tend to rarely sell things that are not of immediate benefit when they could be useful later

you never know when that masterwork longspear you looted off that dead pikeman you fought could be useful, with the help of a cheap arcane oil or...

You now have degenerated into theorycrafting.

I would venture that most games actually do NOT include firearms, for instance.

A caster throwing fly on the fighter means its a caster fight. He's dispelled the second he's twenty feet off the ground...its a caster fight.

Like the wizard who assumes the party can't automatically make use of AMF impossible, you're assuming a DM can't set the stage to make non-casters basically useless...and casters seem to think that's perfectly fine, them being able to do stuff while non-casters can't.

Which is the point I was trying to make. Trying to use a 'you must be prepared' argument is basically lapsing into Schroedinger's.


RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Marthkus, you are aware that, at the very least, all of the Valeros Builds at level 9 have him wearing dex boosters so that he can get the Dex necessary to use his ITWF feat, right?

And those are from official sources. You're just wrong here, sir.


RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.


JUSTIFY why the Rogue gets Buffs the Bard is giving HIMSELF, and that are NOT coming from the party. Because you are blatantly favoring the ROGue in your 'the rogue gets everything the bard does' buff suite.

Because none of us are believing your case. It has so many gaping holes we're flying dragons through it.


RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Peak damage if all attacks hit?


If you don't include the AC of the target, and the fact the bard does not have to use Deadly Aim or Rapid Shot, you're utterly wrong. The Rogue's low BAB is his biggest weakness. The bard being able to put up +5 to hit of bonuses will easily swing the fight and damage.

AC:24 Bard in melee: +2/+2 Heroism, +1/0 Haste, +2/+2 Inspire Courage, +2 Weapon (greater Magic weapon off another caster, to equal the free heroism or haste the rogue gets), Base +7, +2 th flanking, -2/+4 Power Attack, 0/+3 Arcane Strike +7 Dex = +21/+21/+16 to hit, for d6 + 13, avg 16.5.

Against an AC of 24, that's 90/90/65 or 245% damage, or 40.425, ignoring crits.
If we skip the Haste, that's 85/60 for 145%, or 23.925.

The Rogue: +7 BAB, Heroism +2, +1 Weapon, +7 Dex, +2 Flanking is at +17/+12, for 6d6+3, for avg 24, 70%/45% = 115% because he's going to miss and doesn't get as many attacks. Dmg is 27.60.

If he switches to Haste instead of heroism, his Th drops by 1, his dmg by 2, for +16/+16/+11, or 65/65/40 = 170% of 6d6+1 or 22, for 37.4. And that's assuming Sneak Attack on EVERY attack.

If he gets BOTH Spells as a freebie (which means unequal gear again), he's +18/+18/+13, which is 200% of 6d6+2, or 23, or 46 damage...the only scenario in which he beats the bard, and he loses if the bard crits, because the bard multiplies his whole bonus. (.15 crit chance x 170% chance of confirming x 16.5 is +4.25, or 45 damage, comfortably equal again). The rogue averages +1 damage on a crit.

The Rogue's TO HIT is killing him, and the only thing giving him a chance is his SA damage. It has always been this way. And this is the 'melee' example, where you thought he'd shine. His 'average damage' IF he gets a Sneak attack AND all the spell buffs the Bard gives himself is a whopping 2.5 points higher then the bard...and doesn't multiply on a crit, when both are using high crit weapons (rapiers).

The Rogue only outperforms the bard if someone casts Haste on him and the bard doesn't get it.

This gets worse with levels as Inspire Courage ramps up in effect, and the Rogue falls further behind in To hit. A Subtle Sword can save him for a while, but not forever.

Comparing the two classes without hit rate, as if 'every attack hits' is a trap and a fool's game. Unless you compare against AC and realize how glaring a problem the rogue's BAB and lack of TH is, you don't realize that all the damage dice in the world don't mean squat if you can't hit your enemy.

The rogue trying to be a sniper is going to suffer more problems if he uses Rapid Shot and/or Deadly Aim, as his miserable BAB goes into the floor and he can't hit squat. his Feint 1/rd (also not guaranteed to work, although highly likely!) means he gets 1 SA...if he hits.

With no flanking and no extra attack from Haste, he's +17 for a 70% hit chance of 23 damage, or 15 damage.

The bard, with Haste on himself, firing normally for d6+13, Deadly Aim and no Rapid Shot, is again at 21/21/16, or 245% of 16.5 damage, or 40 damage. Blows the rogue away. IF he uses Rapid Shot, he's at 19/19/19/14, which is 80/80/80/55, or 295% damage, so lets call it 48.

The Rogue is not even in the same league.

Without Haste (not wasting the buff round), the Bard is at 20/15, which is 85/60 or 145% of 16.5, which is 23, which still beats the Rogue's 15, because he HITS MORE OFTEN and doesn't need Sneak Attack damage to do the hurty-hurt.

So, seriously, where are you getting these awesome numbers for the Rogue? "IF we all dump our buffs on the Rogue, he rocks" is not a defense for the rogue, it is an acknowledgement that by himself he's really not useful.

Expecting that the Rogue is going to hit with all his attacks (meaning a 10th level Rogue is fighting AC 20 and less opponents) is likewise highly unrealistic.


RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Also note the Rogue has more gear...he has a complete other caster in the party providing buffs for him, OR an extra Wand he can UMD, that the Bard doesn't. The bard, oddly enough, gets neither of those benefits. He should be begging a Greater Magic Weapon off a caster if the Rogue gets free Heroism, to keep things fair.


RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Marthkus wrote:
Kudaku wrote:
*not FAQ or dev quote*
And no, a magic item does not let you take power attack.

Yes, it does. And it always has. Heck, there was at least one PrC that could be entered ONLY IF you had the appropriate magic item.

Where are you getting this erroneous opinon?


RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

2 people marked this as a favorite.


Remember the WBL is a guideline to 'help the DM'. It's there to determine both how powerful enemies are by loot, and how much stuff characters have to actually be 'balanced' characters of their level.

Characters with more or less WBL are more or less powerful then the baseline, and need to be treated accordingly.

It didn't matter as much in 1E, because melee characters were much more powerful there, and magic was much more biased to them. It was far easier to fit out a fighter with magic sword, shield and armor then it was for a wizard to get a Wand, for instance.

In PF, item creation rules say 'I create for me first, then you', which means spellcasters have just as much gear as martials, which is another huge power shift.

Since martials are LESS powerful, relatively, in PF, going sparse with gear HURTS them. Conversely, more WBL helps casters who can craft easily more then martials.

If you underequip martials, casters aren't affected as much. Their spells are much less reliant on gear, and they can even spend spells to replace what they don't have from gear.

Non-casters don't have the option, and suffer accordingly.

The 3.5 cleric was built upon this premise. Greater Magic Weapon, Greater Magic Vestment, Shield of Faith are all hour/level buffs that effectively give them magic gear for no cost. Add in Persistent Spell cheese and they needed remarkably little magic...and what magic they got was leveraged to be even stronger, as they didn't need to spend money on Enhancement bonuses or Rings of Protection.


RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Marthkus wrote:
GâtFromKI wrote:
Marthkus wrote:
He made a point that wasn't correct.

As well as your assumption that you can use wands "out of combat".

The BBEG isn't stupid, so he doesn't send his minion one after another: every opponent is attacking the party at the same time in some giant gangbang, if the PCs survive they're done for the month. It is how it works in actual game, discussing this is outside the scope of this thread.

That is in this kind of common situation that the rogue shine; at the 216th round, the bard has no more spell nor representations while the rogue continue to flank for a lot damages.

For this point, his old point still stands.

They can all (monk/fighter/rogue) run out of HP.

If you are talking about attrition gorilla warfare tactics, then yeah the rounds/day classes are going to run out of steam while both conservative fullcasters and monk/fighter/rogue classes will have more steam.

egggggg-seeept the Bard has intrinsic healing magic that scales with caster level...and as a spontaneous caster gets a bunch of them.

In a war of attrition, he'll definitely outlast the fighter and the rogue.


RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.

And each time you take it, it applies to a new spell. Since Paragon Surge only allows you to take it don't get a new spell. Now, if he actually took the feat and gained that spell permanently, I'd allow Paragon Surge to change to a different spell...and that spell only.

But letting him change the spell every time from the same feat. Nuh-uh. I consider that exactly analogous to popping up a Headband of Int on and off and changing the skill it applies to each time.


RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Link #2.


Please favorite the above and refer to these three posts if you see the question on 'how much casting power do wizards vs sorcs have?' comes up again. It frequently does on these boards.


RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Copied 1:

Here's the spell power ala 'power points' comparison between sorc, wizard and sorceror. I'm assuming the same casting stat at every level, ending in a 34 at 20th.

It doesn't end well for wizards...the amount of spell slots every sorceror gets are generally more then enough to compensate for being a level behind.
Laid out starkly like this in terms of raw power, it's easy to see why sorcs SHOULD be a level behind a wizard...they just have so much more then can do over the course of a day.

Spell Power
CLev 001 002 003 004 005 006 007 008 009 010 011 012 013 014 015 016 017 018 019 020
Sorc 004 005 006 015 018 032 037 058 065 092 101 130 145 179 192 237 252 314 331 361
Wizd 002 003 007 010 017 022 031 040 052 064 079 090 112 125 146 167 191 226 242 271
Spec 003 004 010 013 023 028 041 050 067 079 100 111 140 153 182 203 236 271 287 316
SinM 004 005 013 016 029 034 051 060 082 094 121 132 168 181 218 242 281 316 332 361

The Wizard has more spell levels/day then a Sorc at level 3…and that's it. They end up with 25% less spell levels/day then a sorcerer. Sheer number of spell slots means sorcs should be trying to blow spell slots frequently just to use them up...Quicken and swift spells are a sorc's friends.

The Specialist fares somewhat better. They are ahead at levels 3, 5, 7 and 9…but then the sheer amount of spells and bonus spells castable by sorcs is more then their +1/level can catch up to, and they fall behind, finishing about halfway between sorcs and wizards.

A Thassilonian Sin Magic Mage would finish with EXACTLY the same number of spell/day as a sorcerer, but would be ahead or tied for almost all levels. Probably a wee bit overdone, even lacking two or three schools.


RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Your example falls flat.

Stripping a wizard of his class features and exposing his weaknesses as having no viable combat ability without spells is BADWRONGFUN, but a flying wizard with wind walls up making him immune to missile fire from non-casters who he can bombard at will is PERFECTLY FINE, despite all the non-casters sitting around with their thumbs up their bums, being able to do nothing but sit and take it while the casters duke it out.

Yeah, no, not seeing it. If the party can pull this off, it's a win. There's definite risks to doing it, but it's a great tactic if it works.


RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Then you're not doing a class comparison, you're doing build comparisons, and this whole thing is largely meaningless, because you'll keep dragging in stat changes, magic item changes, race changes and archetype changes.

You're in effect trying to build an eclipse of Schroedinger's Bard vs Schroedinger's Rogue.

You wanted answers, I gave you answers on the last page. It was equal parts the bard's greater versatility to self and party, and that the rogue's stuff was given away to others who could perform the same tasks and do more stuff besides.

A starting Bard needs a Cha of 12 or 13 to be effective, he isn't reliant on it. Most of his spells are buff spells that don't need saves.

Make your Rogue and Bard. Identical stats. Give them the same jobs to perform. See how well each does with a default, basic, ignore race build (so that ANY race can use that build). Bard will win in almost all cases.


RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.

It's the overall package. What the Rogue brings personally and to the party simply do not compare to the Bard.

1) Skills: Bards end up better. This has been covered. Rogues are okay early.

2) Personal combat: Bardsong actually buffs personal to hit. This is incredibly important to a 3/4 BAB class. The Rogue is the only class that does NOT get something to buff his ability to hit. Even the Monk gets to flurry.
Add Haste and Heroism on top of this, and the Bard will soundly thrash the rogue in DOT. Add Arcane Strike for some cheap extra damage on top of this.
Oh, and Bard damage is not reliant on sneak attacking. It's all from class, not items.

3) Uniqueness. The unique things of the Rogue used to be finding traps, skills, and sneak attack. Other classes now get all of those things, and more besides.
Bards are basically unique in what they are. They are THE best 5th wheel class in PF, able to jump into any of the five roles if designed properly.

4) Healing. The bard can HEAL. This is incredibly nice from a personal and party stand point.

5) The bard has magic and can make magic items.

6) The bard can buff the party, either with class abilities or spells.

7) The bard makes a great party face with strong social skills, and doing so dovetails with his spellcasting. Buffing Cha buffs ONLY skills for a Rogue, he gets no other benefit.

8) Two good saves, including the very, very important will save, vs Reflex save good. Sure, they get evasion and uncanny dodge, but really, how important are either of those against fort save attacks and charm spells? In 1E where you could avoid the frequent fireballs, they were great. In PF, not so much.


RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Umbriere Moonwhisper wrote:
Ilja wrote:

Uhm... 1. You can use ranged weapons against the npw defenseless wizard and 2. You cant cast spells in the AM field, conjurations or not. Yoi can cast inst. Conjs. Into the field from outside though, so the AA and any other caster can stil bombard the victim.

Heck, a wizard in an AM field has so bad defenses even a monks shuriken aredangerous to them, to take on of the most melee focused classes.

but how are you getting access to the antimagic field weapon without a wizard's help?

if you can cast instant conjurations into the field from outside, you would be able to project them outward from the inside, no such thing as a one way forcefield.

Uh, What?


Uh, no.

Instant conjuration spells are being cited because AFTER they are cast, they are non-magical. Unfortunately, they do have to be cast first, and, for instance, they can be counterspelled, so they are CLEARLY magical while in the process of coming into effect.

While inside an AMF, a wizard can do squat for spellcasting, period.

And again, "My wizard will have minions in the way!" completely ignoring the fact that the rest of the party will be clearing those minions out of the way.

My wizard will put up Emergency Force Sphere!
My wizard will disintegrate it. Then the pouncing barbarian grabs you.
etc etc. Blanket statements NEVER WORK.

Regeneration is extraordinary.
DR /silver, iron, magic, and alignment are SUPERNATURAL. DR Adamantine, and blud/pierce/slash and x/- are Ex. The planetar loses his DR. Keeping its Regen is not going to help it once its dead, the barb tosses it outside the shell and someone coups it with a +5 Weapon.

And THEN you now want to customize the planetar to be evil. Yeah.

Take a look at the planar binding/calling rules. You can't compel an outsider to act against its beliefs under the summoning rules. You would literally have to dominate it, in which case its going to save each round against the spell...and if you're Evil, you can't even do that because of Aura of Menace (Prot/evil suppressing all compulsion/charms for the win!)
Blanket statements again, do not work.


RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I didn't make up the initial scenario, Anzyr. You did.

Your scenario is "This entire city is powerful enough to cloak it in an AMF, but is too stupid to think of the many ways to attack it from outside the field that don't involve spells, and furthermore doesn't have the collective gray matter to think up a solution to any of them."

On top of this is some completely self-serving interpretations of invisibility that no one here agrees with. You lost the argument when you starting having to resort to English-skewing to make a point that nobody is buying.

A city that can afford an AMF can also afford to planar bind air elementals, invisible stalkers and other creatures to guard its airspace, in addition to having mounted troops of its own, and ways for sentries to detect the invisible, ranging from bats to See Invisible areas excluded from the AMF.

There are SO MANY ways to shut down your piddling little mage who if he is very very lucky can barely get into position to do his damage with one spell, and has to cast another just to flee, and gets to do all his casting with nobody capable of sensing him, because, you know, the whole city is just that dumb.

It's a bad example, and like all blanket statements, yours that AMF is a trap and useless is untrue. The greatest fireball caster in the world can't do squat against an AMS, and once inside and the grappling starts, he's hosed. Certain spells are best used against certain targets, and AMS used against casters is definitely a good use if done correctly...especially if you have teammates who can cover for you.

Because, you know, all your examples assume wizards with helpers and minions and callings, and the attacker is a solo melee who has nothing. Which is HILARIOUS.


RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I'm going to shoot an arrow into the air. the fact it may come down in the middle of the army over there is irrelevant, I'll still stay invisible.

I think not.

Contingency doesn't work in an AMF, either. And the wording on Contingency in these examples is always miraculously exactly what is needed to avoid a threat instead of something realistic.

I find it highly amusing that an entire city covered in an AMF has a way to deal with airborne creatures dropping things on it, but a 5th level wizard can trump them all. Amazing how low level wizards rule the world.

And no, all wizards don't prepare conjuration direct damage spells. In fact, very few of them do, because direct damage is by and large less then useful, and especially at 5th level you don't cast it strongly enough to actually kill anything of equal CR. Tat warsteed hippogriff has 40 or so hit points, for example, and the rider is likely also 5th level. In the middle of trying to stay invisible, bombard a town with burning goo, you're going to take the time to shoot a direct damage spell at something it won't even slow down, and then you'll die.


And Schroedinger's wizard perfectly positioned to take care of an AMF also tends to be hilariously vulnerable when attacked by someone without it. "What do you mean, he still has buffs? You said-!" "Oh, I'll activate it in a minute. In the meantime..."

It's also widely ignored that a wizard has to pay a Called creature for its time and effort, but it's a no-no that a fighter can hire someone with class levels and the appropriate skills for a period of time and the same amount of money. No, no, can't use common sense and bring help along I paid the exact same amount of money that the mage did!


RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Anzyr wrote:

Let's go over this invisibility thing one more time. Again. With Feeling. And speaking in slow, short sentences.

You can drop the lava on buildings, even if you target said buildings with an attack roll. Objects are *explicitly* permitted to be attacked. Thus you can safely firebomb the town without dropping invisibility.

Do you understand the above point? If not explain why.

Next, as in point 3, provided your action indirectly leads to harm (ie. cutting ropes of a bridge/opening portcullis/remotely triggering traps) you will not break invisible. In my...

Let's try this in even shorter sentences.

You are making an area attack with molten lava against an inhabited city. You are aiming your attacks at buildings and structures with people, and you have no way of knowing whether or not you are going to miss them.

You are not triggering a trap. You are personally dropping bombs, which is no different then personally shooting a bow down at something. Your 'targeting structures' is a completely handwash attempt to sidestep the fact that what you are going to do is directly drop a gob of molten rock and kill someone when it crashes through the ceiling, and say it wasn't your action that did it, you were just aiming at the roof.

That's not going to fly. There's no 'separation of instance' in what your wizard is doing.

A 5th level wizard tossing that conjuration spell instantly becomes visible, might have to hit against a rider who can make a mounted check to totally avoid the attack, likely at +17 or higher (nobody in their right mind who flies an aerial mount has a low Ride skill), and you are using Direct Damage, fer gosh sakes. You don't really think 5d6 damage is going to stop anything, do you? Especially if rider or mount have evasion and can sub ride for the save (which is exactly how the rider is likely set up...he's an elite rider!)

as for tracking him, somehow you're managing to be attacking the city, the rider and stay invisible at 5th level, while all the multiple people below who want to kill their attacker and thought up this scenario years ago have suddenly been reduced to Int 3. Like their own spellcasters with Detect Invisibility, Dispel Magic, invis purge on a familiar granted a spell, blah blah blah.

Exactly how many wizards do you know who actually know conjuration damage spells? Multiples of them to deal with multiple people in AMF's? Boost them to the stratosphere so they actually do appreciable damage?

And the fact remains, when he reaches you, you're dead, because you just lost your con booster, false life, mage armor, and you're a squishy 4 hp/level wizard who he can likely Power Attack and kill in one round, especially with help from his mount. You're somehow assuming that he can't reach your mighty level 5 wizard, when he's equally convinced he can. He may require outside help, but that's what a party is for if they are trying to locate you.

Eesh. Get off your Schroedinger's Wizard. It just ain't that easy. And the fact remains that you're leaving scry droppings all over the place, and you're going to be tracked down and killed in short order...probably at home where you can't fly, the AMF expands to fill every place you can flee to, and the fighter there has more then enough HP to survive your snow ball.

I mean, seriously, resorting to conjuration direct damage as the be-all solution to a flight of mounted warriors coming in? Really?


RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Ashiel wrote:
Also, when Aelryinth asked what class features do Fighters have to help with their saving throws vs things like Dryads, who in the right mind can read that and then answer "Iron Will, and Cloak of Resistance" without being anything other than a troll of the lowest order?

To be fair, he wasn't 'of the lowest order', because he didn't mention a wayfinder with the right ioun stone...which wouldn't have worked because Dryads are Neutral. :)

So, troll of at least the middling order!


RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.

The fighter is actually better at ranged combat.

Why? Because ranged combat is extremely feat-intensive, and doesn't hit the fighter's main weakness, i.e. relying on full attacks. Archers always make full attacks. The ranger can rival him with FE at full, but round to round, against all foes, Archery is the #1 fighting style for a fighter.

Which doesn't address the fact that nobody is complaining about the fighter's ability to deal damage. It's everything else. People defending the fighter because he can hit things are steadfastly ignoring the fact that we're not talking about hitting things. Hitting things is FINE. Everything else, not so much.


RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

3 people marked this as a favorite.

The monk is probably complained about as much as the fighter, and is not a static class.

The rogue gets complained about because as far as Medium BAB combatants go, it is the absolute worst; skills are trumped by magic in nearly all situations; and its class abilities are given away to so many other classes. Add in lack of both save-or-die saves, and things get bad.

the fighter is complained about because it's a glass cannon. It can inflict damage. That's all it can do. it can't defend, it can't lead, it can't do out of combat stuff, it has little to no skills to back it. Complaints about fighters aren't complaints about inflicting damage...they are defense and utility complaints.

You are correct in that PF overvalues the ability of a static class. Unfortunately, as long as you have a burnable resource in hit points, everyone is a non-static class, the fighter and the rogue just don't get anything to make up for it.


RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

3 people marked this as a favorite.

To make a class comparison, you need to make a class comparison, not a race comparison, a 'who can spend WBL best on consumables ahead of time for an encounter' comparison, a 'general feats' comparison, a 'pick the spells ahead of time' comparison, an "I can assign stats on point buy better then you" comparison.

You need to break down what the class, and the class alone, can do. ANYTHING else, race, general feats and WBL, is something BOTH classes can do, and so is NOT a class comparison.

This is where class comparisons fall down...they continually move to things outside the class.

Bob Loblaw, bless his even temper, is the poster boy for this. He continually resorts to non-class comparisons to make his point on comparing classes.

Here's your class comparison questions for melees:
1) What's your BAB?
2) What's your hit die?
3)Do you have class features that increase damage?
4) Are they surge or constant? Are they limited in target or universal?
5) Do you have spells? (if yes, make note: Easier time making magic items)
5a) Do those spells include buffs? Offensive spells?
6) Do you have movement bonuses or modes of any kind? Are these cheaply subbed for?
7) Do you have stat dependency for your class features? (ex. Wisdom for casting ranger spells; stats for combat bonus feats)
8) Can you move and attack at full effectiveness?
9) Are you as effective at range as you are in melee?
10) Do you have a fighting partner?
11) Do you have non-casting combat enhancements?
12) Do your offensive abilities scale (increase by level) or are they flat bonuses?
13) Can you gain extra attacks/offensive power?
14) How does your offensive ability fare in anti-magic?

1) What good saves do you have?
2) Do you have any enhancements to saves you get from your class?
3) Can you cast defensive spells or use defensive powers?
4) How good are you at dealing with traps?
5) can you heal yourself?
6) can you remove status conditions from yourself?
7) How do you handle flanking/sneak attack conditions?
8) How do you handle flying foes?
9) Do you have any immunities? Resistances? SPell Resistance?
10) How good are you at defending against combat manuvers?
11) Do you have to trade off being good at offense and defense?
12) Do you have bonuses to AC from class that are not spells?
13) Any good news for Touch AC?
14) Do your defensive abilities that are numbers scale, or are they flat bonuses?
15) Do you have stat dependency for any of your class features?
16) How good are you at stealth?
17) Do you have useful defensive spells to cast that you would employ regularly?
18) How does your defensive ability fare in anti-magic?

1)How many skill points do you have?
2) How many class skills do you have?
3) Is it a 'good' class list? Specifically, does it handle Perception, a social skill aspect, and/or some combat usage (such as sense motive or Knowledge skills?)
4) Do you gain a bonus to any skills from class abilities?
5) Do you have any miscellaneous class features that would be called utility features?
6) Do you have spells that have a 'downtime' use? Utility usage when adventuring?
7) Do you gain bonuses from high statistics for non-standard purposes not covered elsewhere? (i.e. primarily bonus spells from stats)
8) Would you style yourself MAD or SAD as a class (i.e. requiring 16+ in 2+ stats to function normally, or 14+ in 4 or more stats)
9) How does your utility ability fare in anti-magic?

THIS is a melee class comparison. No general feats, no racial abilities, no WBL, no min-max on stat builds. It's a straight up class comparison, everything else gets added on afterwards, and what's good for one is good for the other.

And when you start looking at it this way, Fighters start coming up...poorly.

Note: If we're going to include primary casters, then you'd include things like prepared spells, spontaneous, surprise situations, size of spell list/spells known, etc.


RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

7 people marked this as a favorite.

Also, I would like to make mention that Bravery is NOT an underpowered mechanic...if you use it as a metric and enhancement device for other feats.

There are no other classes that get Bravery as a class feature. Thus, putting it as a pre-req makes a feat a fighter feat the same way Rage Powers are Barb only.

Secondly, Bravery scales early from +1 all the way to +5, and at a measured rate that is not prone to abuse.

Iron Will
You gain a +2 Bonus to WIll Saves.
Fighter: If you have bravery, this bonus increases by your Bravery bonus.

Improved Iron WIll
You may reroll a failed Will Save 1/day.
Fighter: If you have Bravery, you may reroll failed Will saves a number of times a day equal to your Bravery bonus.

Skill Focus (Intimidate)
You gain a +3 Bonus to your intimidate skill, improving to +6 at 10th level.
Fighter: If you have Bravery, this bonus increases by your Bravery ability, and you may use your Intimidate Skill as a save against all Fear effects.

Redefine Bravery not just as piddling bonus against fear, but as a measure of the Fighter's mental training and discipline when applied to feats.

You can do the same thing with Armor and Weapon Training.

Dash applies a +5 movement bonus for every level of Armor Training you have, eventually equaling and surpassing a barbarian.

Dodge turns your Armor Training bonus to Dex allowed to a straight Dodge bonus, freeing you from the tyranny of needing a 24 Dex to max out your class benefit.

Improved Initiative's bonus adds your Weapon Training bonus as you level, meaning your skill is as good as someone with a high Dex.

Sure, it's all only numbers, but it's NON-STAT numbers. It makes the fighters free of stats and all about levels and skill. The barbarian is the stat melee class.

Have a fighter's feats scale with Bravery, Weapon Training and Armor Training, and suddenly you'll see the appropriate level of flexibility and defensive power start to come to bear.

They'll still be vanilla, and their combat power won't generally increase by much, but it will be good numbers and in different areas.
You can do the same thing with Rogue Talents by improving them with Related skill Ranks.

The Rogue's biggest thing is his 8 skill points. SO have Talents level up if he has the skill ranks. Give excellent benefits for having ranks in 10+ skills, and the Rogue will be immensely cheerful as he exploits his Ranks for maximum benefit. It also rewards him for a high Int by giving him even more useful things, the same way spellcasters get something.

Note that Fighters and ROgues are the only classes that don't get 'extra stuff' for high stats. Every other class gets bonus points to a pool, or bonus spells, or enhanced smiting, or SOMETHING.

Not fighters or rogues. (the cavalier might not, either.)


RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.

As for Full attack:

The solution to a full attack is to make it a BONUS effect.

As it stands now, it is the Standard...damage is based on getting off a full attack action, and if you move you give up damage.

This doesn't work at low levels because you still only get 1 attack for most characters.

To rework it, you'd have to allow all attacks on move, and then if you full attack you get a bonus to hit, damage or AC for giving up your move.

Doing so would make monsters far more lethal, since all of them would always get their full attacks.

Having Vital Strike be an automatic benefit for giving up your Full Attack would make more sense. You'd just have to do it for the monsters, too, and replace those that spent feats on it. But once you turn it into a combat option, it opens up some doors.

One Striker (COmbat)
Req: Weapon Training 1, Weapon Focus
When performing the Vital Strike combat option, you include your bonuses from Weapon Training and Specialization on the single strike.
Additionally, you may perform a Vital Strike as a Full Attack action. If you do so, you gain a +2 to damage, to AC, or to a save of your Choice until the beginning of your next turn. This bonus increases by +1 for each iterative attack you give up to do this.

And there you have it.

The key with giving Fighters 'extra powers' is to make the powers they get (feats) better with fighters then with any other class. This is basically exactly what is done with Rage Powers...which are all feats, right?

4 Skill points and a feat rewrite would do wonders for a fighter, plus expansion of some of the combat options.

I personally would double all the feats a fighter grants, and assign them to a 'feat pool' of combat feats and 'training' feats...feats that enhance saves, skill points, or such like from a list. The Fighter then has the option to swap these feats in or out.

Then you can give him a feat that lets him add more feats to his pool! Since it doesn't give him any more active feats, it's just like having more rage rounds. You could also give him extra feats for high ability scores.


RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

3 people marked this as a favorite.
strayshift wrote:
As said previously I think the Two-Handed Weapon Fighter is excellent, not much, if anything, out-damages it in hand to hand combat.

And NOBODY is arguing the fighter falls down on DPR, so it's a moot point.

That's the whole problem here. Too many fighter lovers are saying his DPR is fine, and the rest of us are saying 'We know that, it's EVERYTHING ELSE that honks us off!'



RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.
LazarX wrote:
Aelryinth wrote:

Just a query, why are Rangers sucking at Combat manuvers when their FE bonus applies for CM, and Instant Enemy still allows them to pick their highest FE bonus? I'm thinking +4 to +10 on all CM bonuses is better then a Lore Warden of the same level?


Because maybe you don't have time to go fishing in your backpack for your wand to cast Instant Enemy when you're already in a grapple?

Uh, I said CM, not CMD. In other words, someone who has bonuses already on a specific CM form. Which assumes he's going to attack with it, right? I mean, anyone who uses CM has to have at least the Improved version so as not to provoke AoO.

By the logic you're using, Instant Enemy is a useless spell, because you can only use it when you're already being attacked by an enemy and thus would never cast it.

And who needs wands when you have Pearls of Power?


RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.

magic items are not part of the comparison package.

Otherwise, the Ranger gets to add in that +2 Enhancement that makes a magic weapon Bane to all his favored enemies...and then use Instant Enemy to shift the FE to whatever is needed.

Suddenly the Ranger is now +8/+8 +2d6 against his primary or any boss, and +4/+4 +4d6 against any other FE desired.

So, let's keep it to +2 Weapon Training and +2/+2 for blowing three feats, for an even +4. To one weapon, pick either Missile or Melee.

The ranger, of course, doesn't have to pick, he gets the bonus regardless.

Oh, and his FE bonuses start at 1st level. Have fun waiting until 4th for any damage bonus!


RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

2 people marked this as a favorite.
master_marshmallow wrote:
born_of_fire wrote:
LazarX wrote:
Squirrel_Dude wrote:
LazarX wrote:
Slaunyeh wrote:

Short answer: Nothing.

The Fighter doesn't do anything the Ranger can't do. He just does it better.

Let me see how fast your Ranger is running in Heavy armor and what your armor checks are like and come back to me again.
Before or after I buy mithral celestial plate armor?
While your Ranger is spending his extra dough on getting pixie armor, my Fighter will take that same gold for the extra costs of your fairy armor and spend it on items to improve his capabilities and open up other options.

The problem with that is it's not too difficult or prohibitively expensive for a ranger to buy armour that simulates a fighter's mobility in heavy armour. For a fighter to purchase items that simulate a ranger's class abilities, I believe it is a different story altogether.

Does an item exist that gives Hide in Plain Sight? What is its cost? How about the ability to ignore feat prerequisites? 4 levels of spells? An animal companion? 2 good saves instead of 1? The ability to track? More skill points? And prolly a bunch of other things that I have forgotten the ranger can do because I rarely play them. But you get my drift. What equipment can a fighter buy to simulate a ranger's class abilities and at what cost?

I know that one of the Variant Wayfinder abilities allows you to gain a favored enemy. Most of the time they tell you to max out UMD which means any wands or scrolls are useable. A scroll of Greater Invisibility pretty much surpasses hide in plain sight, and what other spells are you worried about missing out on? Using your Wayfinder and a wand of instant enemy you can actually get all the DPR that the ranger gets plus more from being a fighter.

UMD is and has always been a copout. Now you're paying money and spending actions to try and emulate what a Ranger gets for free. It has nothing to do with the fighter class. You're trying to spend gold to replace what you can't do. That's a dead end cost-wise.

And I find it hard to believe that a fighter is going to try and get a +2 FE instead of having the Wayfinder give him the protective effect to cover his Will save with prot/evil's effect.


RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.
SPCDRI wrote:

Fighter over the Ranger, 10th level

1/3 the skill points with an inferior skill list
No Favored Terrain
No Favored Enemy
Bonus Feats require pre-requisites
No innate casting ability
No Animal Companion
Doesn't get the Track package(Track, Endurance, Woodland Stride, Swift Tracker)
Poor Reflex Save without Evasion

3 Additional Feats
+1 or +2 with Weapon Training
Armor Training
Modest increase to Will Save against Fear effects


COns, expanded

NO ability to buff with class features for boss fights.
Combat BOnuses fall rapidly with secondary weapons.
Doesn't get bonus spells for having a high Wisdom.
Weapon Style feats are gained earlier then a fighter.
Heavy Armor prof and Armor Training nets out to a +1 AC bonus for 4 levels of class features.
No ability to heal himself or remove conditions.
Takes twice as many feats and skill points to make magic items.
Can't change his build (spells) to take advantage of downtime.
Has no th/damage bonuses at level 1-3.
Actually has to meet all level and stat pre-reqs for combat feats. The Ranger doesn't for his Weapon Style.
Including the Track package, gets no more Feats pre-10th then a Ranger.
Generally won't have the Dex to take advantage of Armor Training until extremely high levels.
Not only fewer skill points, but fewer Class Skills.

Don't have to worry about changing your're always the same. And it takes 4 levels to remove a mistake, so you don't need to worry about it.

Hit points.
Will save (but Rangers get spells for wis, too!)
Fort Save
Weapon Profs


RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Laif wrote:

To everyone that says that tere's no feat, feats doesn't scale well and things like that...

Weapon Specialization chain.
Weapon Training.
Archetypes that specialize in your weapon training.

Only the fighter has this awesome chain of feats that can make him one of the highest dpr.
Only the fighter has these 2 class skill/feats and they are awesome.
Make yourself an archer (someone pointed it before)

Human fighter:
(lvl1) Point Blank Shot
(Human) Precise Shot
(BF1) Deadlye Aim
(BF2) Rapid Shot
(lvl3) Weapon Focus (longbow)
(BF4) Weapon Specialization
(lvl5) Iron Will
(BF6) Manyshot/Clustered Shot
(lvl7) Clustered Shot/Manyshot
(BF8) Greater Weapon Focus
(lvl9) Improved Iron WIll/Improved Critical
(BF10) Improved Critical/Improved Iron Will
(lvl11) Improved Precise Shot
(BF12) Greater Weapon Specialization

You can have the same chain but with Power Attack and mele oriented feats, doesn't matter the weapon you choose, this weapon will be deadly.

PD: I stopped at 12th since it's when he obtains GWSpec.
let's make a little calculation:
Deadly Aim: -4atk/+8dmg
Manyshot: Extra atk
Rapidshot: Extra atk -2atk
Base atk +12/+7/+2
Modified: +8/+8/+8/+3/-2 1d8+12
+2atk/dmg from weapon training (lvl 5/9) (+3 in case of Weapon Master Arch.)
+10/+10/+10/+5/+0 1d8+14
And that is without Probably a +5dex bonus and +2-3 base str bonus.
If someone says that this needs to be lvl 12 to work, he is wrong.
He does well in all the levels, but when he hits that Weapon Spec Feats he goes up in his performance as a dpr.

Weapon Spec does not scale.

It consumes four feats.
I find it suspicious also that you used it for the one weapon that is best used by fighters, the very feat intensive route of archery (esp with Rapid Fire and MUltishot).

How about we actually, you know, DO MATH.

Weapon Spec affects only one weapon. Assuming its your primary Weapon Training, your maximum benefit FROM CLASS is +6/+8. With any other weapon in your primary, You are +4/+4. Any other weapon, your bonus rapidly falls off to nothing.

A Ranger can, with no feat expenditure, reach +10/+10 with any weapon, putting you to shame, and make any enemy desired his best favorite enemy. If he moves from missile to melee, he keeps his full bonus. At later levels, he can easily do this multiple times a day.

A Barbarian at level 20 gets +8 to his strength, which is either +4/+4 with every weapon, or +4/+6 with a 2h'er. Doesn't matter what he picks up, he can use it. And then Reckless offensive can increase that to +10 Strength or even higher. Yes, he's got more then enough Rage to last every fight.

The Paladin at the same level can issue a smite for, say, +8/+20. He can share that smite with the whole party. Against the rare foe that isn't evil, he can add +6 of variable bonuses to whatever weapon he is wielding, including Brilliant to completely deprive it of armor. He has an array of spells to auto-confirm crits, do additional damage.
Again, he can do this with any weapon he happens to wield...bow, sword, shield, lance.

Weapon Spec does not scale. It would scale if weapon focus was ONE FEAT that improved as you level. But, no. Each feat stands alone and is fixed and immovable. the numbers themselves have to change for a feat to scale.


RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.

The problem with posting 'solutions' is inevitably these get shot down or poo-poohed by many of the posters.

SideKick's reliance on a specific set of gear and feats for all fighters aside, he is correct on one point.

You CANNOT improve the fighter without redoing feats. It's just that simple.

As far as DPR and able to hack stuff goes, the fighter is fine.

But Fighter class features, the customizable stuff, are feats. Feats are equal to half a class feature. And the feats that other classes get, that build off THEIR class features, are often awesome (compare Rage Power feats to most combat feats!). You know feats are awesome when they do well as class features!

That, and many core fighter feats, like Robilar's Gambit, were taken away and given to the Barbarian as Rage Powers. The fighter, the martial tactician, doesn't even get Acrobatics as a Class skill so he's a natural at buying enough to get the Defensive Fighting bonus.

So, if you want to solve the Fighter problem (and the Rogue, too), you need to address several glaring problems.

1) The fighter has no magic, but is incredibly vulnerable to magic. That's just INSANE. He should be training hard to resist magic more then any class. At high levels, even RAGE is magical. He's the only non-magical martial, and he's the most vulnerable to magic.
Makes no sense. IN 1E, this was exemplified at the basic level by having the best saves over time. In 3.5, you at least had the Mage SLayer chain of feats.

2) He doesn't have spells to solve problems. That means he MUST rely on skills. Relying on gold is a cop-out. He should certainly have more skills then a barbarian. Barbarians are not scholars of war, they are survivors. They don't train endlessly, they rage.
In 1/2E, he had the most weapon proficiencies and above average non-weapon profs. There is NO paradigm for a functional intelligent fighter in 3.5+, until you get to the Warblade, who adds his Int bonus to a bunch of combat stuff. The Ranger became the skilled fighter.

3) There is no capacity for self-improvement for the fighter beyond what every class gets. Nothing like bonus spells, or rage rounds, or different options for the same power. Everything is fixed. There is NO versatility in the fighter, no adaptability.
IN 3.5, the Warblade could change his preferred weapon every morning, and the manuvers he could draw on fight by fight. With the right reserves, he could go from an offensive build to a defensive, from a greatsword specialist to a IUS wunderkind to a master Lancer.
And he could burn feats to buy more manuvers, which were each way stronger then almost any feat.

4) Feats don't scale with level. Feats are like spells, they should scale. All the best feats do scale. Even if they don't scale for other classes, they should scale for fighters.

5) Feats have incredibly high stat reqs. ITWF? Dex 19. You know, an INT of 19 lets you cast 9th level spells. Where exactly is the comparison basis here? Getting a second off hand attack takes a stat as high as that needed to cast a Meteor Swarm?
Hey, Fighters use feats, and can't even qualify for them.

6) Fighters have neither leadership nor recovery options...those are all delegated to other classes. Yet fighters have historically been leaders, and one of the tropes of all melee characters is their ability to recover quickly from injuries, and shrug off problems. Yet, the fighter cannot do such things.
Warblades had Iron Heart Surge, which could end pretty much any hostile magical effect. They also got access to limited healing later on. All of the PF full BAB classes have some form of healing or recovery options...EXCEPT the fighter.
Barbs can eventually inspire Rage in others. Paladins can help others smite, and buff them or heal them. Rangers can buff and heal. Fighters have no innate teamwork options that cannot be done just as easily by others. God forbid they be able to inspire like a bard!

7) There is no capacity for good training in the game. Training is what fighters do in their downtime, and rogues to a lesser extent. Casters cast spells, research magic, make magic toys. Rangers hunt, paladins pray, barbs live large, and fighters train.
Fighters should be able to train more and get more out of training then any other class (except maybe rogues). Nope.

If you want a Fighter fix, this is the stuff you have to address.

Note: DPR is not one of the options you need to address. See how it's not mentioned? It's everything else that is.


RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.
TheSideKick wrote:
Athaleon wrote:

Don't be obtuse. You said the fighter is fine, and I'm saying you're in denial if you really think that.

i do.

the only thing i want to see would be better anti caster fighter only feat choices. things that give the fighter an advantage against magic in later levels. fighter saves are fine, you might not be able to max focus your dps in order to achieve high enough saves, but you can achieve them non the less. a +22 ,and a reroll, on a 10 starting stat is more then enough.

to the point of the OP you can achieve this without needing to dip into anything.

The Fighter does not gain a +22 Will save.

The fighter gains a +6 from class features. That's it. Everything else you stated is non-fighter and requires an investment of general non-combat (and underpowered)feats, traits, race, and magic items, none of which have anything to do with being a Fighter.

As for Barbs doing d8+11 with the Bow, that's the same they'd be doing with any other one-handed weapon, so how are they suffering?

What you're trying to say is a 'fighters are fine' is a 'mandatory fighter tax', covering every single aspect other then being a fighter. Including that all fighters must now be dwarves.

It makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.


RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Without a trainer, meaning you're just kind of vaguely experimenting and covering ground others already have.

It's a hand-wave over reality. Just accept it and move on.


RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Spread effects won't bypass walls. And it's called a Force Sphere, not a dome, so it extends 360.

The fact remains that the wizard has spells that can help cover for his weaknesses on saves. Those are class features, independent of his general feats.

The fighter's only elective feats are combat feats, NONE of which help with saves. So, his class has no help for him at all.

Add to that the fact the fighter has MAD, and the wizard has SAD, and that doesn't help the mix much. The wizard also doesn't have the armor and weapon outlay a fighter does, which allows him to focus more on personal protection.

But the key thing is that the wizard has class features that help him cover his weaknesses and expand his strengths. The fighter has class features that do nothing for his weaknesses and only work with his current strengths. It's a completely different paradigm.

Yes, you can stick an ioun stone into a wayfinder and deal with MANY Will saves. But that means you've just forced a mandatory item purchase on a class, so you may as well make it a permanent ability. I'd prefer to have a good Will save over having to have a Wayfinder w Ioun Stone combination on all my fighters.


RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.

The argument that 'other classes should plug holes in the fighter's weaknesses' is another argument AGAINST THE FIGHTER.

There is little such argument against the barbarian and the paladin. It is a Fighter-specific weakness, because the fighter has no class defenses against magic to speak of.


RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Alexandros Satorum wrote:
Aelryinth wrote:

Armor Training is completely replaced by mithril early and celestial armor later.

Armor Mastery is basically replaced by mithral early, and since you're going to take mithral armor that stacks with a dex bonus over adamantine armor that doesn't stack with your class capstone, it's irrelevant at the higher level.

And Dwarves get Armor Mastery for FREE as a racial ability. 9th level class ability, at level 0. Yep.


You are confusing names but whatever.

A mithral breastplate is 5000 gp, more money than the +2 breastplate, the fighter have 10% more ac right there witht he same mobility. The same with full plates. And what if you find and uber adamatine full plate? The fighter get more use of it.

Dwarves do not get the dex thing, but if you do not care about it then take an archetypes that replace it, I do not see th eproblem here. The "core" only option is not enough for dwarves, but I think there are enough optiosn out there.

THe adamantine thing is really silly however.

You're confusing the references.

Armor Training is about the Dex bonus. Armor Mastery is about the speed.

Celestial Mail allows a +8 Dex bonus...26 Dex. Higher then almost any fighter is likely to get. Mithral Celestial Mail? 30 Dex? Why do you need Armor Training, again? If you don't have a 32+ Dex, Armor Training has NO BENEFIT for you.
Celestial Plate allows a +5 Dex bonus...a 20 Dex. And you can make Mithral Celestial Plate, allowing +7/24 Dex. Unless your fighter is going to get a higher Dex then 24, ARMOR TRAINING HAS NO VALUE FOR AC.

Armor Training is not a bonus to AC (unless you're a Viking Archetype). It's a removal of a penalty (not being able to use a high Dex bonus). If you don't have the penalty (i.e. you don't have a high Dex), Armor Training is worthless.

Point II: Mithral BP Allows a 20 Dex and full movement rate as if it were light armor. In effect, it gives you everything Armor Mastery I does. Yes, it costs the same as a BP +2. Again, 20 Dex vs 16. Your fighter WILL at some point be upgrading to mithral. Or, on the other foot, every other class gets the benefit of your Armor Mastery I by wearing a Mithral BP. Sure, they give up 1 pt of AC vs Heavy Armor. The barbarian with his 40 move thumbs his nose at you, anyways.

Mechanically, what happens is that you stick with a plain BP until your Dex hits 18. Then, you make the choice, do you spend 5k to go from BP+2 to BP +3, or 4k to go to Mithral? You get the same boost in AC, except the Mithral works for 20 Dex...and suddenly your movement rate goes up.
That movement rate is worth a LOT. And so people will generally pick Mithral first.

Adamantine Heavy Armor is the same as Armor +3, a point you stepped neatly around. You get DR 3/- which does not stack with your level 19 capstone, nor any PF feats, only a very specific archetype...and is less then a barbarian with invulnerable rager gets with HIS one class ability choice.

DR 3/- is much less valuable then the +2 Dex limit of mithral, in the long run. There is no synergy there in the short run or the long run, UNLESS the fighter has crappy Dex and can't max out his Armor Training dex limit, anyways.

Basically, Armor Mastery is about removing a penalty, not giving the fighter a bonus. SOrry, the fighter, like every other class, wants the bonus. He can only look at Longstrider and fast movement and wish for some extra gold to boost his move.

And WHY is this a 9th level benefit? It's a level 0 racial ability and a level 1 spell. bah!


RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.

or muy thai where you slam your body parts and get slammed by sticks for hours on end to toughen you up. Some even go so far as to sever nerves in their legs so they can hit harder and not feel the pain.

Or get tied to a rack and have coconuts dropped onto you from thirty feet in the air. So much of training is time, sweat and repetition, not bing! Inspiration.

But if magic can make you fly, I equally suppose it can make you incredibly tougher in a very short period of time, too.

We'll just call it 'Circumventing the training montage -Ex'.


RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

2 people marked this as a favorite.

IF you wanted to be serious about it, you'd divide what you get automatically by leveling and what you'd need training to improve.

For instance, for general characters, you don't get the bonus feat 1/2 levels without seeing a trainer.

You don't gain any additional class features or special powers.
Spellcasters wouldn't gain access to the next level of spells, but could improve their current ones as they wished. They shouldn't learn any new spells, either...if the fighters can't get feats, the casters shouldn't get spells.

Your BAB, Saves, and hit dice would all improve without a problem, as would caster level, pools of stuff you already can do (rage rounds, bardic music rounds, ki points, etc). So you'd be better, more experienced, and tougher...but you wouldn't have the KNOWLEDGE and extra tricks.

But all that would require work and realism. Not exactly great lures in a game.


RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Actually, the ninja thing is more akin to the monk spending ki points to heal themselves.


RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Imbicatus wrote:
I prefer to not play paladins whenever possible. There are too many ways for a miscommunication between you and the DM to make you fall. Cha is usually a dump stat for fighter anyway.

Cha is a dump stat for a fighter, UNLESS you have paladin levels.

If you have paladin levels, then Wis is the dump stat. It's fine, since you get the +3 Will Save from two levels of paladin, and your 14 Cha at +2 all saves off sets the -1 Wisdom, netting you at +4 Wis vs +3, and you saved the General feat.
No need to be snarky about everyone having all good saves. Just realize a few things.

Fighters are supposed to be the core martial. They are the only martial that doesn't get any effective save boosters from their CLASS. Rangers have two good saves, Paladins have 2 good+Cha+spells, Barbs have Raging Will + Superstitious.

Fighters can't even spend their combat feats on save boosters. They literally have no defensive abilities against spells or magic, which is INSANE for a non-magical class priding itself on martial excellence.


RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

5 people marked this as a favorite.

YOu can't spend a fighter's feats on Iron Will, it's not a combat feat.

You can spend any character's General feats on it, however, which means you're sacrificing a general feat to make up for the class you took.

Having to spend a trait, feat and your race choice to make up for your choice of class is generally a very bad indicator of balance.


1 to 50 of 518 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2014 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours: Monday–Friday, 10 AM–5 PM Pacific Time. View our privacy policy. Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc., and Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Online, PaizoCon, RPG Superstar, The Golem's Got It, Titanic Games, the Titanic logo, and the Planet Stories planet logo are trademarks of Paizo Inc. Dungeons & Dragons, Dragon, Dungeon, and Polyhedron are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and have been used by Paizo Inc. under license. Most product names are trademarks owned or used under license by the companies that publish those products; use of such names without mention of trademark status should not be construed as a challenge to such status.