|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
Well, uh, not quite?
The expectation is that at least one player can activate a CLW wand, and the party all chips in for it. Neither is everyone expected to cast spells. Being useful out of combat is expected though. Mundanes try to do that with skills generally, while casters do it with spells (unless they're int-based, in which case they have both).
But ye olde fighter-thief-cleric-wizard, where the fighter is the main guy in the front, with the cleric right behind him? Far from the norm now.
Given how it exists in PF, I think it'd be simpler to make it a Ranger archetype.
I like PF, but it's not the end all system for me. I also liked 4e, before they started doing Essentials. I like the new 5e stuff as well. I could play a sniper rogue and actually be a contributing party member thanks to my class features, not magic items or being babysat by a wizard. That's something 3.x/PF has never supported, and probably never will.
I think the Fighter is outdated as a concept. The class name isn't descriptive of a unique class. Everyone in the party is expected to fight now.
Perhaps it would be easier to create a vanilla archetype called "Fighter" for the Ranger. Trade out naturey themed stuff for bonus combat (style?) feats. Trade out spells for weapon training or armor training, maybe, or use one of the existing archetypes.
This helps limit the exponential scaling of casters. A high level wizard in 3.x can end encounters with his highest level spells, or just contribute on the level of everyone else with his low level spells. And as mentioned, cantrips do scale. The Warlock is all about blasting away with Eldritch Blast all day.
Dragon Style is the best after Pummeling.
Unfortunately as a monk you have to pick between good AC and high damage (Dex/Wis vs. Str/Wis), but you can get by if you have a friendly mage that preps Mage Armor (be sure to buy him a Pearl of Power I for his troubles, it only costs 1k).
I suggest going Harrow Warden if you skip Dragon Style, because Idiot Strike works on everything, unlike Stunning Fist.
Trip builds can do a lot of damage because you can stack a lot of follow-ups to a trip. Greater Trip, Vicious Stomp, Ki Diversity (Bone Crusher). All without losing the full attack (or handy when you have to move and attack).
I'd say Lucifer would cheat with Mass Charm Monster on the judges, but the bard would have a chance to countersong it (even though it's not a sonic/language-dependent spell).
I'm not familiar with homebrew superbeings such as the one you linked, but you could easily make one with ranks in Perform, as well as an item that offers a hefty competence bonus.
Precisely, there's diminishing returns for over-optimizing a skill. You could be spending those resources elsewhere.
Lord Fyre wrote:
Hey now, he'd only taken his first level in that PrC, and it looks like he got other features as well.
I love it, though I haven't used it yet.
Stunning Fist is good against humanoids that wield weapons/have low fort saves, like casters. That's a minority of monsters. Most of them have excellent fort saves, use natural weapons, and many are straight up immune to stuns.
Nothing is immune to Idiot Strike, and most creatures that fight in melee have weak will saves. It also helps to set up your casters for their big SoBS spells.
Taking a bonus and turning it into a penalty is not just reversing the RP cost. One could easily add penalties that are inconsequential.
-2 to Diplomacy doesn't matter when you aren't the party face, you'll never be rolling Diplomacy anyway. +2 Diplomacy matters more because it gives you something to build around (and even then, it's cheap).
No one is saying that. We're saying that you're stacking a lot of physical prowess (far beyond what current races have), and not counteracting it with meaningful penalties. Powerful Build alone is amazing. Multiple arms alone are amazing. A bonus feat alone is amazing. +2/+4/-2 stats alone are amazing. And these are all amazing in the same direction.
The two custom traits you create to bring them just under the monstrous category do not merit -3 and -4 IMO. I'd say -2 and -1 would be more accurate. Slow is worse than either of those two, and it's only -1.
Another thing to consider: Have you just made the ultimate warrior race? Is there any mechanical reason to pick another race for a martial?
Re: Bonus to mooks in War
Re: Armor Training
It seems like you're remaking too much stuff to comment on without seeing the end product though, so I'm gonna stop here. I don't like the design behind feats as a major class feature, I don't think it's a meaningful niche. But that is what the Fighter is to a lot of people, so I'm sure a lot of people will like it.
If the Fighter grants combat bonuses to mooks you don't actually expect him to bring on the adventure, what's the point?
If this bonus is meant to apply to an army at war, what does it actually mean? Wars aren't resolved by having each soldier roll to hit and damage (or rather, that would be a very tedious and lengthy method of resolution).
I don't understand your issue with Fighter archetypes, but that's your prerogative. Keeping a feature I don't need (ex. Armor Training on a Dex Fighter) then needing to spend feats on what I could've traded it out for in the first place? That's a nerf. If you call your special feats Techniques and make an Extra Technique, I think that would be good enough to keep it Fighter only.
I like the idea of Expertise modifying things but extra features are more appealing than additional scaling. I've never run out of AoOs when I had combat reflexes, getting 3 more isn't doing anything for me. But granting combat reflexes to my allies to allow them to strike the target while flat-footed due to my drilling? That's pretty cool.
Perhaps we have different expectations. I expect feats to be fixed for everyone, but I'm okay with Fighters getting something extra, ex. sharing Combat Reflexes with all nearby allies. Actually, I'm fond of the idea of the Fighter sharing some basic feats.
Alternatively, you could write new features for the fighter to choose from ala talents, and have one talent just grant you a feat, with no limit on the amount of times you can take it. So either dip into a pool of unique stuff like barbarians/magus/ninja do, or get the classic fighter stuff.
Side note: I don't keep Bravery/Armor Training because most archetypes trade it out, I'm sure the same will occur for others. That's why it may make sense to do Fighter Talents as a more effective way to make sure it's exclusive to the class.
Not a fan of making the Fighter bring a lot of mooks with him. Many tables ban leadership, and buffing NPCs better than PCs doesn't sound fun for anyone at the table. I don't think you have to worry about the Fighter stepping on the Bard's toes unless he starts casting Haste.
I think if you want to fix feats, they should be fixed for everyone. It seems wasteful to do it for just one class. Fighters can get more of them and ignore prereqs like rangers do though, I'm fine with that.
I'd like to see military genius/leader played up as the new set of class features. Making the Fighter mesh with Warlord/Marshal archetypes. Granting actions, temporary hit points, etc. Or alternatively to being a secondary buffer, the Fighter could be a secondary debuffer, imposing penalties on enemies just for being in his battlezone. Or perhaps, both.
The ranger and barbarian are typically cast as lone wolves, but the Fighter should be an excellent squad mate/leader.
Everyone knows predatory instincts demand you eat your kill on the spot, heedless of other threats.
And what do they say about you?
My favorite stats have always been Dex and Wisdom.
I usually prefer avoiding trouble, either by evading notice or not being in the place where trouble expects me to be. I likewise value self-awareness, recognizing competence where one has it, and incompetence where one needs to improve.
Once I thought it would be good to meet more nerds like me IRL, as opposed to online. I went to my university's game club on new member's night, and joined a one-shot game.
There were three new people (including myself), and three current members (including the DM). We get off to a standard start, getting a job in a tavern. 4 of us take the hook, but one of the members (who is playing the fighter) decides to stay back and seduce the barkeeper's wife. Okay. 4/5 of us are going on the adventure.
Combat begins, and the other current member is playing a druid. He wildshapes into a big cat, and once he slays his first opponent (out of a large group of enemies), he spends the rest of his turns eating his kill. So we're down to 3 contributing members. Meanwhile the Fighter is found out by the barkeeper, so he kills the tavern owner.
I decided that if that's what the club members thought was good RP, it wasn't where I wanted to be.
Durngrun Stonebreaker wrote:
Wildblooded is an archetype. Even if you allowed it, the Sylvan bloodline should be excluded as it replaces the bloodline power and the arcana. Eldritch Heritage only gives you the bloodline power.
That's similar to my take. I consider wildblooded variants legal choices, but Sylvan gives a bigger slice of pie than Eldritch Heritage is meant to provide, since it also replaces the arcana.
I love what they've done for the Rogue. I'm playing one at lvl5 right now, and was planning to take an opening shot with my bow, then close with the rapier. But I've been able to use Cunning Action to shoot, move, and hide all in the same turn, so long as the terrain allows it.
I like a lot of stuff, Advantage/Disadvantage, Concentration to prevent people from getting too crazy prepared for a fight with buffs, and so on. But I feel most of it works for 5e and would be very difficult to put into PF.
There are, and Intimidate to cause Shaken is one of the most basic ways.
Void Wizards are great at this, as is anyone with the Madness Domain. Alternatively, making them roll twice and take the worse result with something like Misfortune (Witch hex), Ill Omen (lvl 1 spell, best if cast by a familiar with a wand), or Idiot Strike (Harrow Warden archetype monk)