|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
I think people tend to overvalue acrobatics to be honest. Its very hard to maintain a competitive edge when you use acrobatics in combat due to the way CMD works, and every other use of acrobatics requires far less focus and investment. If you fully focus on dexterity and take skill focus acrobatics, your character still can't just run around the battlefield.
I was also under the impression that you could not invest in flight without some means of actually flying, which makes the flight skill really more about tracking the flight spell most of the time. There are instances where this isn't true, but I feel as though that is a corner case at best.
I think I will wait and see how unchained looks before coming to any concrete decision one way or another.
If unchained can modify the core game mechanics enough to bring the linear scale of the martial classes closer to those of the quadratic casters, then I will be fairly satisfied. If not, then we may have to have this discussion again.
I always felt that the weapon group system was the opposite of what I wanted in a fighter. The fighter class has no versatility out of combat, and I think that it makes sense that the class can basically pick up a sharp stick off the ground and ruin your day. If I were to change the fighter class, it would be to remove weapon training and add class features that modify feats in a way that no other class could emulate.
While technically true(as long as the t-Rex doesn't use attacks from bab gained through barb levels), this seems like a very niche concern at best.
Okay, so looking through the first level spells for inspiration, I came across swallow your fear which, while not granting the exact bonuses I would apply, gives insight as to how powerful a class feature of this level should be.
With that in mind, here is my offering.
Bravery(Ex): Starting at the 2nd level, a fighter becomes a bulwark against which fear falters. When the fighter is subject to hit point damage or must make a save against a fear or compulsion effect, he gains a +1 morale bonus to will saves and a bonus to healing effects equal to his class level for rounds equal to half his class level. This morale bonus stacks to a maximum of +5, and each stacking effect refreshes the number of rounds the effect lasts.
So basically this gives the class a kind of momentum as rounds of combat play out, making the fighter stronger in more protracted battles. The second benefit is that bravery is now something that takes up a second level class feature and that is it, which really opens up the design space.
I think that if we are being honest about the opportunity cost associated with feats versus spells, we can say that feats should have a relative effect similar to one line of spells. What I mean is that a feat should accomplish one thing, and that thing should improve as your character does. Its the only way to make a class with ten class features compete with a class that has 60 or so.
An example might be something like blindfight working as it does now up to BAB 6 and then granting blindsense and then tremorsense at BAB 11 and then finally something akin to blindsight at bab 16.
All that said, I think effects like blindsight should grant large bonuses to spotting stealthed characters as apposed to hard countering the ability altogether. Regardless, I think you get the idea.
If you want to balance casters, then restrict their access to spells of wildly different sorts. If a wizard has to choose a field to specialize in, and has three barred schools, then I think you would find their power becomes much more reasonable.*
Still cosmic in their area of specialization, but not the omni-tool they currently are.
*example off the top of my head
Because if you want to play a spellcaster, then you have to accept that progression in your class choice will occur infrequently as compared to the other players.
In essence, the whole reason they got rid of these sort of balancing mechanics is because of the dynamic it creates in the real world, not the consequences within the game itself.
While it may rebalance the game some, this is probably the most un-fun way of doing it possible.
Right, but I would point out that your "roleplay-centric" game simply benefits more from keeping the spell, because at least it will see use more than once a year... or four.
Sure, that could work, but I would offer your player the option to retrain the ability for nothing because Rudy2's suggestion is hugely situational(like on the verge of never going to see this happen, and if said opportunity does arise, the player with the ability doesn't even remember they have it any more).... Though that may be what you want?
Just keep in mind that the effect in question is supernatural in nature. The bard is not, in fact, just making stuff up. He/she has to consume performance rounds, which are inherently magical in nature to manifest this ability.
Another thing to note is that the house rule you employed is essentially the bog standard bluff skill in action, albeit with a circumstance bonus, which offers no mechanical benefit to the player so invested whatsoever.
christos gurd wrote:
Instead of substituting an attack, id rather have them get early access to the critical feats and have vital strike count as a critical hit for the purposes of it. it lends itself to something more than just higher damage. or you could bypass the critical feats and just let them inflict many of the conditions from the antipaladin's cruelties.
+1 I think that would lend itself to an awesome debuffing fighter style instead of the usual DPR rat race.
If the fighter should be batman, then I would say that your going to have to throw some GM fiat powers onto their chassis so beating the superman equivalent makes some sort of sense.
Yes. Basically, a high level fighter will be running around with a whole series of bonuses without suffering any penalties whatsoever. They would then be the king of feats.