Often when someone goes on about making fighters supernatural on these boards, someone else will rebuke with the idea that fighters should be bound by the laws of the world AKA they should be realistic. But are they really?
I've seen iconic examples of Wizards, Assassins, Rogues, Bards, Barbarians, and Paladins in stories and myths, but I don't think I've ever seen one of a straight fighter. I don't know of any fighting character that wasn't either charismatic, stealthy, or a barbarian.
In real life, what I know of both historical and modern armies is that they are actually trained in many non-combat skills as well. Making them closer to rangers than just fighters. Is there anyone in real life who is only skilled in the use of a single type of weapon?
Recently, I've seen many threads that want to combine rogues and fighters for mechanical reasons, but maybe they should be combined for flavor reasons, maybe call them mercenaries.
In it's place, the Ninja should be left (magic wielding assassin is probably what the rogue should have been).
Or perhaps I'm just missing something?
The fighters are not realistic. No one person can take on an entire army, but in the game they can. A level 10 fighter can take on a lot of CR 3 fighters or warriors. He can also kill an entire village alone. Fighters are good with the other weapons, based on BAB alone. That high level fighter can kill a village with a club, even if he put no feats into it.
You can't really compare media to the game. The characters in the movies are not limited to a point buy. The game characters are also not the single focus of a story, and are not assumed to be on auto-victory mode like movies are.
You can make a charismatic fighter, but you have to drop something somewhere else. Even in most games barbarian dont use charisma so the fighter argument could apply to him also.
It can even apply to rogues. If the rogue is trying to balance skills, and fighting he may put points into the social skills, but he won't be charismatic himself.
Good fighters can do that in real life Wraithstrike, though they tend to use tricks, traps, and shenanigans instead of just a weapon. Naturally there are some exceptions to this.
I think that most soldiers/fighty-types, are a mix of fighter and ranger. Pretty much all of them taking Iron Will at 3rd level, or simply getting it at that level.
Caramon Majere is about as straight fighter as they come. Not especially charismatic or smart either, but a great fighter.
Jaime Lannister, Loras Tyrell, Bronn, Sandor and Gregor Clegane all from A Game of Thrones.
|
Also, wouldn't Riddick be a pretty iconic fighter? They fight with skill regardless of whether they're using a true weapon or a tea cup.
This line takes the cake for me (source: wikipedia): Riddick is well trained with any kind of weapon that he can get his hands on.
Yes, I know most martial characters are like that, but it's something that the fighter is iconic for: Picking up any number of weapons and still being damned good. He seems to favor knives and knife-like weapons (implying weapon training: light blades).
Miyamoto Musashi was a real fighter, and quite fantastic.
He dedicated himself to learn war, and wrote books on it.
Mandorallen from the Belgariad Series
Morley Dotes and Suaucerhead Tharp from Garret PI by glen cook
Boromir and Faramir from the Lord of the Rings
And if you are concerned with fighters as presented in dnd/pathfinder, well your best portrayals in media are Hawkeye and Green Arror, because once you get passed level 8 or so you get past playing lord of the rings and are now playing superheroes.
And both Hawkeye and Green Arrow dont have additional special skills besides being particularly agile, being awesome archers and having cool bows and arrows (archer fighter's to a t if you ask me).
Fighter: Maximus
Not a Fighter: Commodus
You can make a charismatic fighter, but you have to drop something somewhere else. Even in most games barbarian dont use charisma so the fighter argument could apply to him also.
It can even apply to rogues. If the rogue is trying to balance skills, and fighting he may put points into the social skills, but he won't be charismatic himself.
And that's my problem. If a fighter isn't a charismatic and leading armies, being knight-like (Cavalier, Samurai, Paladin) or Barbaric running through a battle-field, shouldn't that character at least have scouting, sneaking, and infiltration skills?
Rogues are also a problem for me because they generally fall into two categories: The charismatic type (who bluff and lie and cheat and steal and in fiction sometimes have magical devices) and the killing type who use any advantage and flank and well, kill stuff. Both are stealthy, but they are two very different flavors.
I guess my problem is that I feel that the second type should be good at fighting and that fighters should also be able to infiltrate. Like marines or something...
Most of the iconic 'fighters' that are being brought up are:
a) intelligent and charismatic (leading others)
or
b) dextrous and mobile (infiltrating stuff)
and if not (the one's I don't recognize probably) I have a sneaking suspicion it's because they were influenced by the game instead of the game being influenced by them.
I don't know, I'd just like to see more support for either of those or maybe both.
I really think you are being overly nitpicky.
Having a good charisma doesnt make you not a fighter. Or are we saying there are no wizards because gandalf was a good leader?
And having a good dexterity doesnt make you not a fighter, hawkeye/green arrow ARE archer fighters. They dont have extensive skills outside of combat, and yes they are ok infiltrators but they arent like batman or anything, they are just pretty good at it, which pathfinder fighters can be by taking stealth ranks.
So if the "iconic fighter" can't have good intelligence, charisma, or dexterity, what does that leave? The big, dumb, but one with the universe "Hulk Smash!" types? (A Hulk Dalai Lama? Though they may be more monkish then fighterish. I guess the iconic fighter can just be strong and tough then.)
Every one of the examples given in this thread (well, the ones I know at least) I have no problem putting as a straight fighter.
Also, I suggest any of King Arthurs knights. I can't recall any of them using any of the iconic paladin powers. I would put them all as fighters. (Again, at least the ones I can remember. Though some of them did have some sort of magical power - like Gawains strength changing during the day). And many of the Greek heros, unless you feel demigods can't be fighters. But not all of them were demigods anyway.
Iconic fighters abound in mythology:
Achilles, Heracles, Perseus, all those guys that basically just quested and killed things...
Of course the three mentioned have some kind of divine bloodline according to Greek Myth.
A realistic real-world Fighter - William Wallace and the aforementioned Miamoto Musashi.
I'm not saying that the iconic fighter shouldn't be intelligent or dextrous; I'm saying that in play with the fighter class, I don't feel like I'm getting that. :/ I'm saying it's unrealistic for fighters to lack skills.
I'm saying it's weird for a fighter to not be charismatic and intelligent or dextrous and mobile. While pathfinder rules are closer than 3.5 in that aspect, I think the class still needs more work to feel like the iconics being mentioned. Why is it that fighters need to be so specialized? They should be skilled in multiple weapons, right?
I'm not trying to be nitpicky, but isn't it weird when iconics are considered non-optimal?
Isn't it weird when a fantasy hero is less capable than a marine in the real world?
Iconic fighters abound in mythology:
Achilles, Heracles, Perseus, all those guys that basically just quested and killed things...
Of course the three mentioned have some kind of divine bloodline according to Greek Myth.
A realistic real-world Fighter - William Wallace and the aforementioned Miamoto Musashi.
Right but dnd/pathfinder doesnt stay within human limitations for long. by 8th level you are super heroes, by 20th level you are demigods. It makes perfect sense for 'fighters' to be divine in nature like heracles because pathfinder characters go well beyond human limitations relatively early in the game cycle.
So if the "iconic fighter" can't have good intelligence, charisma, or dexterity, what does that leave? The big, dumb, but one with the universe "Hulk Smash!" types? (A Hulk Dalai Lama? Though they may be more monkish then fighterish. I guess the iconic fighter can just be strong and tough then.)
Every one of the examples given in this thread (well, the ones I know at least) I have no problem putting as a straight fighter.
Also, I suggest any of King Arthurs knights. I can't recall any of them using any of the iconic paladin powers. I would put them all as fighters. (Again, at least the ones I can remember. Though some of them did have some sort of magical power - like Gawains strength changing during the day). And many of the Greek heros, unless you feel demigods can't be fighters. But not all of them were demigods anyway.
Who said they can't? I think that the fighter's scope is too limiting, being the "I hit things" guy is simply too narrow. They should have other abilities as well, like they get one or two class features from other classes (with which you can build rune soldiers, special operatives, engineers, commanders, combat medics, and the like), a wider selection of skills, more skill points, or simply a bit more flexibility as a class.
The fighters of myth, legends, comics, etc. all of them have something else they were really good at, besides killing people.
I would like to see fighters as fantastic (in the same way Earthdawn makes warriors fantastic) I think it becomes easier to 'give high level fighters "nice things" comparable to casters spell options at high levels if they are approached as fantastic (superheroish to use Kolokotrani's analogy)
But then again I would rather cav, fighter, rogue, ranger, paladin, barbarian, monk, etc all be one base class where each level you buy options from the various iconic abilities, saves, and skill points of each class call it martial class. some abilities would have alignment or bab restrictions
But then again this would better allow me to make Samurai Jack ;)
And then do the same for casters. buy spell lists domains companions/familiars bonded objects etc.
Perhaps make some like bard, inquisitor, magus (maybe) a set of prestige classes requiring some combination of martial and caster.
Good fighters can do that in real life Wraithstrike, though they tend to use tricks, traps, and shenanigans instead of just a weapon. Naturally there are some exceptions to this.
I think that most soldiers/fighty-types, are a mix of fighter and ranger. Pretty much all of them taking Iron Will at 3rd level, or simply getting it at that level.
They can do what exactly? If you mean take on an army, I was specifically talking about taking on an army in a straight* fight which can't be done in real life.
*on a battlefield without shenanigans such as poisoning the water supply and so on.
Right but dnd/pathfinder doesnt stay within human limitations for long. by 8th level you are super heroes, by 20th level you are demigods. It makes perfect sense for 'fighters' to be divine in nature like heracles because pathfinder characters go well beyond human limitations relatively early in the game cycle.Iconic fighters abound in mythology:
Achilles, Heracles, Perseus, all those guys that basically just quested and killed things...
Of course the three mentioned have some kind of divine bloodline according to Greek Myth.
A realistic real-world Fighter - William Wallace and the aforementioned Miamoto Musashi.
Low-tier superheroes anyway. You don't see anyone as the equal of even Iron Man in all of this, even at 20th level, much less someone more powerful.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Good fighters can do that in real life Wraithstrike, though they tend to use tricks, traps, and shenanigans instead of just a weapon. Naturally there are some exceptions to this.
I think that most soldiers/fighty-types, are a mix of fighter and ranger. Pretty much all of them taking Iron Will at 3rd level, or simply getting it at that level.
They can do what exactly? If you mean take on an army, I was specifically talking about taking on an army in a straight* fight which can't be done in real life.
*on a battlefield without shenanigans such as poisoning the water supply and so on.
Proper use of equipment, one man can fight entire armies by themselves, look at most of the Medal of Honor recipients, several of them defeated armies by themselves, in combat, and a few of them even lived to tell the tale.....no matter how ridiculous it was.
And that's my problem. If a fighter isn't a charismatic and leading armies, being knight-like (Cavalier, Samurai, Paladin) or Barbaric running through a battle-field, shouldn't that character at least have scouting, sneaking, and infiltration skills?
I do think fighters should have more than 2 skill points, but so should anyone. I don't think only being good at fighting makes them less heroic. The big brute bad guy that is in movies is still deadly even if all he can is kill people.
Rogues are also a problem for me because they generally fall into two categories: The charismatic type (who bluff and lie and cheat and steal and in fiction sometimes have magical devices) and the killing type who use any advantage and flank and well, kill stuff. Both are stealthy, but they are two very different flavors.I guess my problem is that I feel that the second type should be good at fighting and that fighters should also be able to infiltrate. Like marines or something...
Most of the iconic 'fighters' that are being brought up are:
a) intelligent and charismatic (leading others)
or
b) dextrous and mobile (infiltrating stuff)
and if not (the one's I don't recognize probably) I have a sneaking suspicion it's because they were influenced by the game instead of the game being influenced by them.I don't know, I'd just like to see more support for either of those or maybe both.
The game is based on team play and assumes different things are covered by different people so characters kind of have to be roped off(held to certain limitations) from stepping into other people's toes. People in movies may be on their own, and they don't have "rules" they have to follow so that is another reason why you can't expect the same thing from a movie as you can for a game.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm not saying that the iconic fighter shouldn't be intelligent or dextrous; I'm saying that in play with the fighter class, I don't feel like I'm getting that. :/ I'm saying it's unrealistic for fighters to lack skills.
I'm saying it's weird for a fighter to not be charismatic and intelligent or dextrous and mobile. While pathfinder rules are closer than 3.5 in that aspect, I think the class still needs more work to feel like the iconics being mentioned. Why is it that fighters need to be so specialized? They should be skilled in multiple weapons, right?
Right but you keep saying things that are untrue. Fighters in pathfinder ARE these things, they just arent these things ENOUGH for your tastes. You are reaching at an extreme which isnt actually present in the game in order to make your point, and thus are being shot down. Fighters can be mobile (heck there is a mobile fighter archtype), fighters can be intelligent (they get lots of benefit from things like combat expertise with all those extra feats for combat manuevers), they can be dextrous (archer fighter anyone? or aformentioned mobile fighter archetype). The can and ARE good at using multiple weapons. They are best at using a single type or group of weapons but they advance in the use of many types of weapons (remember weapon training expands to other weapon groups as you level up, and there is the general bonuses of bab and more feats)And they can be skilled(if not as skilled as other classes), it just requires investment from the person creating the character. Or they can be the guy in heavy armor that is just good with swords.
I'm not trying to be nitpicky, but isn't it weird when iconics are considered non-optimal?
No, its not, optimization at its most extreme is always out of the realm of iconics because it is often a very silly combination of things since you are focusing on numbers over concept. Iconic characters from literature were made without concern for a game rule system so they get whatever seems cool. In a game system we have to make choices, which means leaving out some of the cool if you want to be 'good'
Isn't it weird when a fantasy hero is less capable than a marine in the real world?
I know of no real life marine that would face down 50 other real life soldiers of any kind and not seek the fastest route out of there because victory is possible.. A mid level fighter can do that.
Fighters can be good at lots of things like special forces because you can do just about anything with feats (which fighters get). You can take skill focus stealth and be sneaky, or leadership and be a good leader, there are billions of feats, fighters can be good at all sorts of things. But if you are saying they should be good at all sorts of things AND be the best at fighting, I am not sure that is a good idea, everyone should have their moment in the sun, and if you dont have to make choices, a class isnt balanced.
|
|
Low-tier superheroes anyway. You don't see anyone as the equal of even Iron Man in all of this, even at 20th level, much less someone more powerful.Right but dnd/pathfinder doesnt stay within human limitations for long. by 8th level you are super heroes, by 20th level you are demigods. It makes perfect sense for 'fighters' to be divine in nature like heracles because pathfinder characters go well beyond human limitations relatively early in the game cycle.Iconic fighters abound in mythology:
Achilles, Heracles, Perseus, all those guys that basically just quested and killed things...
Of course the three mentioned have some kind of divine bloodline according to Greek Myth.
A realistic real-world Fighter - William Wallace and the aforementioned Miamoto Musashi.
Iron Man is just a 20th level fighter with Craft (Armor), Master Craftsman (Armor) and Craft Magic Arms and Armor. He has weapon training (lasers) +4, weapon training (guns) +3 and weapon mastery (lasers), along with Deadly Aim, Point Blank Shot, Precise Shot and Improved Precise Shot (this last one might be a feat built into the armor using his crafting). Not to mention the armor mastery abilities.
Basically, Iron Man is a fighter who invested in crafting.
Low-tier superheroes anyway. You don't see anyone as the equal of even Iron Man in all of this, even at 20th level, much less someone more powerful.Right but dnd/pathfinder doesnt stay within human limitations for long. by 8th level you are super heroes, by 20th level you are demigods. It makes perfect sense for 'fighters' to be divine in nature like heracles because pathfinder characters go well beyond human limitations relatively early in the game cycle.Iconic fighters abound in mythology:
Achilles, Heracles, Perseus, all those guys that basically just quested and killed things...
Of course the three mentioned have some kind of divine bloodline according to Greek Myth.
A realistic real-world Fighter - William Wallace and the aforementioned Miamoto Musashi.
I would like to direct you to mr 20th level evoker...everything ironman can do he can do better.
I think it would be important to distinguish here between a "fighter" and a "memorable character". Fighters that lead armies or rage through a battlefield are memorable, probably because of the traits that were mentioned (charisma, stealthiness, raw fury etc.) But these characteristics are what make them noteworthy, and that's why these characteristics are highlighted. There were probably other warriors that were just as adept at combat, but were probably nondescript. Everyone knows Leonidas led the 300, and Many people might remember his 10 or so closest soldiers (Dilios, etc), but who knows the names of the other 290 spartans? Yet everyone would probably agree, they were excellent warriors.
Who said they can't? I think that the fighter's scope is too limiting, being the "I hit things" guy is simply too narrow. They should have other abilities as well, like they get one or two class features from other classes (with which you can build rune soldiers, special operatives, engineers, commanders, combat medics, and the like), a wider selection of skills, more skill points, or simply a bit more flexibility as a class.
The fighters of myth, legends, comics, etc. all of them have something else they were really good at, besides killing people.
I misinterpreted what was being said.
Yes a fighter can pull off the "intelligent and charismatic leader" type as well as the "dexterous and mobile" type. The skills and feats are there. Unlike 3.5, Pathfinder doesn't actively discourage you from putting ranks into skills that aren't class skills for you.
Edit: And more iconic fighters. I would place most of the ones from the 13th Warrior movie as fighters. And bonus points for not having any magical abilities at all.
Low-tier superheroes anyway. You don't see anyone as the equal of even Iron Man in all of this, even at 20th level, much less someone more powerful.Right but dnd/pathfinder doesnt stay within human limitations for long. by 8th level you are super heroes, by 20th level you are demigods. It makes perfect sense for 'fighters' to be divine in nature like heracles because pathfinder characters go well beyond human limitations relatively early in the game cycle.Iconic fighters abound in mythology:
Achilles, Heracles, Perseus, all those guys that basically just quested and killed things...
Of course the three mentioned have some kind of divine bloodline according to Greek Myth.
A realistic real-world Fighter - William Wallace and the aforementioned Miamoto Musashi.
Iron Man is just a 20th level fighter with Craft (Armor), Master Craftsman (Armor) and Craft Magic Arms and Armor. He has weapon training (lasers) +4, weapon training (guns) +3 and weapon mastery (lasers), along with Deadly Aim, Point Blank Shot, Precise Shot and Improved Precise Shot (this last one might be a feat built into the armor using his crafting). Not to mention the armor mastery abilities.
Basically, Iron Man is a fighter who invested in crafting.
Except he's actually a squishy mage type. Tony Stark is an engineering genius, but he also has diplomacy, a high charisma, high perception, high acrobatics, a good appraise, a very good bluff (seriously, playing poker against him sucks, just ask Ben Grimm), a phenomenal disable device, a pretty good escape artist (from all the times he's been kidnapped), a ridiculous fly skill, can be intensely intimidating, he has a fair knowledge (history), very high sense motive, and some degree of stealth.
His intelligence modifier can only give so many skill points and he's well past the limit.
Take him out of the suit and he's the technological equivalent of a wizard, he only has a handful of competitors in that department, and he can do things that are basically magic. He's also bloody squishy. While he can do that stuff in the suit, he tends to not need it for obvious reasons.
@Kolokotroni: No, he wishes he could do what Tony can do, there is nothing in Pathfinder that lets you fly at mach, much less the mach 2+ the Iron Man suit is capable of.
@Kolokotroni: No, he wishes he could do what Tony can do, there is nothing in Pathfinder that lets you fly at mach, much less the mach 2+ the Iron Man suit is capable of.
Assuming you can use the run action while flying (like you could in 3.5), you just need to find a way to get a fly speed of 3300 feet/round. You only travel at Mach 2 as a full-round action, though.
And why fly at Mach 2 when you can just teleport around instantly? An at will, command activated item of teleport only costs 81,000gp, and sens the user as far as 900 miles in under 6 seconds. If used each round for an hour. that is 540,000 miles covered as opposed to Mach 2s 1500 mph. Beat that Tony Stark (the wizard using an item to do this is perfectly acceptable, as Tony also requires an item to fly that fast as well.) If you only allow 25% of your starting wealth to be spent on a single item like the game suggests, even a 15th level character can afford that.
Boost that to an item that allows a quickened teleport, that increases the cost to 275,400gp. But that also increases the distance travelled to 1,700 miles per round (or 1,020,000 miles per hour). Again, limiting the character to no more then 25% of his wealth on a single item, a 20th level character can afford this. A 19th comes close. As a bonus, since it is quickened and so a swift action, the wizard can still fight while teleporting.
Edit: And I knew I forgot something. Make that item a construct with the Construct Armor modification, and the wizard becomes Iron Man while wearing it (except better). As a bonus, the armor can act on its own when not worn.
Tony Stark has nothing on a high level wizard.
@Kolokotroni: No, he wishes he could do what Tony can do, there is nothing in Pathfinder that lets you fly at mach, much less the mach 2+ the Iron Man suit is capable of.Assuming you can use the run action while flying (like you could in 3.5), you just need to find a way to get a fly speed of 3300 feet/round. You only travel at Mach 2 as a full-round action, though.
And why fly at Mach 2 when you can just teleport around instantly? An at will, command activated item of teleport only costs 81,000gp, and sens the user as far as 900 miles in under 6 seconds. If used each round for an hour. that is 540,000 miles covered as opposed to Mach 2s 1500 mph. Beat that Tony Stark (the wizard using an item to do this is perfectly acceptable, as Tony also requires an item to fly that fast as well.) If you only allow 25% of your starting wealth to be spent on a single item like the game suggests, even a 15th level character can afford that.
Boost that to an item that allows a quickened teleport, that increases the cost to 275,400gp. But that also increases the distance travelled to 1,700 miles per round (or 1,020,000 miles per hour). Again, limiting the character to no more then 25% of his wealth on a single item, a 20th level character can afford this. A 19th comes close. As a bonus, since it is quickened and so a swift action, the wizard can still fight while teleporting.
Tony Stark has nothing on a high level wizard.
3300 feet/round, each round is 6 seconds, so 550feet/second= 375mph or ~0.48 mach. There's an important point in flying that fast: you can't always teleport and sometimes you don't want to, like when looking for trouble or if teleporting will cause a massive explosion because reality is a wreck. Also, the fly spell doesn't let you use the run action with it, for some reason. Mach 2 is also a pretty conservative number, merely based on the movie.
Tony can and has built machines that let him teleport to the far side of the galaxy or other dimensions entirely, it wasn't a big deal. Basically a 9th level spell he built in his basement because he needed to get somewhere, which basically makes it a spell-trigger item, which is something you can't do as a noncaster.
|
|
@Kolokotroni: No, he wishes he could do what Tony can do, there is nothing in Pathfinder that lets you fly at mach, much less the mach 2+ the Iron Man suit is capable of.Assuming you can use the run action while flying (like you could in 3.5), you just need to find a way to get a fly speed of 3300 feet/round. You only travel at Mach 2 as a full-round action, though.
And why fly at Mach 2 when you can just teleport around instantly? An at will, command activated item of teleport only costs 81,000gp, and sens the user as far as 900 miles in under 6 seconds. If used each round for an hour. that is 540,000 miles covered as opposed to Mach 2s 1500 mph. Beat that Tony Stark (the wizard using an item to do this is perfectly acceptable, as Tony also requires an item to fly that fast as well.) If you only allow 25% of your starting wealth to be spent on a single item like the game suggests, even a 15th level character can afford that.
Boost that to an item that allows a quickened teleport, that increases the cost to 275,400gp. But that also increases the distance travelled to 1,700 miles per round (or 1,020,000 miles per hour). Again, limiting the character to no more then 25% of his wealth on a single item, a 20th level character can afford this. A 19th comes close. As a bonus, since it is quickened and so a swift action, the wizard can still fight while teleporting.
Tony Stark has nothing on a high level wizard.
3300 feet/round, each round is 6 seconds, so 550feet/second= 375mph or ~0.48 mach. There's an important point in flying that fast: you can't always teleport and sometimes you don't want to, like when looking for trouble or if teleporting will cause a massive explosion because reality is a wreck. Also, the fly spell doesn't let you use the run action with it, for some reason. Mach 2 is also a pretty conservative number, merely based on the movie.
Tony can and has built machines that let him teleport to the far side of the galaxy or other dimensions entirely,...
Wait, so now he's a Fighter/Wizard/Eldritch Knight? (Only way I can think of to be both competent in physical combat and get 9th level spells).
(For the person who commented on skills): Yes, tony has lots of skills, he's probably got like 20-24 int. That (plus being human) gives you a LOT of skills, no matter what your class is. Plus, at 20th level you don't need to have everything maxed to be amazing at it. You can half-rank things and still be one of the most competent people on the planet.
Either way, once he's in his suit and fighting, his fighting habits are that of a fighter, not a wizard. I don't see him standing there throwing death at a bad guy without his suit, he relies on it.
I have trouble seeing him as being anything more than a high-int high-level fighter with the right feats and skills. Sure, to represent the exact types of things he could do via technology in Pathfinder you'd need a wizard, but he *was not a wizard*. He was just really smart and knew how to build things. He cannot cast teleport. He must make an object that does so. This, to me, removes the need for any casting class levels and adds the need for a "craft quasi-magical". In fact, I'm pretty sure Craft Wondrous allows you to make things that act like spells, as long as they aren't spell trigger/activation (use command word instead "Jarvis, teleport me!").
3300 feet/round, each round is 6 seconds, so 550feet/second= 375mph or ~0.48 mach. There's an important point in flying that fast: you can't always teleport and sometimes you don't want to, like when looking for trouble or if teleporting will cause a massive explosion because reality is a wreck. Also, the fly spell doesn't let you use the run action with it, for some reason. Mach 2 is also a pretty conservative number, merely based on the movie.
Tony can and has built machines that let him teleport to the far side of the galaxy or other dimensions entirely, it wasn't a big deal. Basically a 9th level spell he built in his basement because he needed to get somewhere, which basically makes it a spell-trigger item, which is something you can't do as a noncaster.
I did preface that with "If you can use the rune action while flying". That multiples the speed per round by 4. If you can't, then you need a fly speed of 13,200 feet. It only takes a standard action (or a swift action for the greater version), and teleporting never causes "massive explosions because reality is a wreck". Well, maybe in Tony Starks universe it does. And the running while flying wasn't a function of the fly spell. All fly speeds, mundane or magic, could take the run action in 3.5. But I haven't found that in Pathfinder.
Teleporting to other dimensions? Plane Shift does that, a 5th or 7th level spell, and doable as early as 9th level (15th level if wizard). Alternate dimensions are even mentioned in the spell.
Far side of the galaxy is harder, but 2 plane shifts can do it (one to another plane, one back to the material). Or you use Greater Teleport (a 7th level spell), which has no distance limit.
And while you do have to be a spellcaster to make the magic items, they can still be used by anyone who knows the command words. I still don't see anything Tony Stark can do that a 15th level or higher wizard can do better.
Taking on 50 lv. 1 warriors at tenth level is not so much an accomplishment when every other tenth level character can do that.
My point is that characters that are good at fighting should not have to give anything up to have their side skills. Soldiers in real life can sneak. Soldiers should be intelligent; The army which Achilles was part that infiltrated Troy by hiding in a giant wooden horse and slew their enemies in the night.
Commanders and Generals are intelligent, knowing strategy, and charismatic, leading their troops. Soldiers have skills being able to survive, taking cover when needed, infiltrating the enemies camps, and learning to take advantage of their situations.
Being memorable is important for a PC, otherwise they might as well be an NPC with NPC classes. I don't think I've ever heard of a player wanting to be the guy in the bright red uniform standing in rank shooting a musket when the commander says fire. Even the standard infantryman has more skills than the fighter though; able to light fires, obtain food, dig trenches, and fix their weapons.
Saying that those abilities are "roped off" for balance reasons is annoying. I didn't say the fighters needed to pick pocket or cast spells (which is why I said keep the Ninja); but they should be able to sneak around, for logical reasons, unless they are the armor wearing commander type. Balance is subjective anyway and every other class but fighter has stolen the rogue's abilities. Wizards can do anything with the right scroll. Scouts and Thugs should be able to fight better, and the soldiers should have more skills and be more capable of sneaking.
Take the iconics:
Pathfinder is a closer to what I look for in a fighter, but the skills are unrealistically limiting. Feats would make up for it... if there weren't so many feat trees. A fighter should be a master with multiple weapons. A fighter should not be gimped by some unrealistic penalty to speed by armor in the first place. The fighter has an ability to make armor more realistic. We don't have wizards that are only good at one spell.
I guess it's kind of depressing to have real life be more fantastic than their fantasy counterpart. Especially if you compare the environments they live in...
|
Yeah, the Fighters should be totally realistic. I believe that having more than one attack per round is really stretching the bounds of realism - I can imagine a mighty Wizard casting several spells within 6 seconds due to the wrought of his craft, but several sword swings? Shenanigans, I say.
And then there's this powergaming cheescake of 3.5 Tome of Weaboo Fightan Magic. A blatant assault on my cherished ideal of a mundane medieval Fighter, I say! What madness has this anime computer gaming unleashed upon us, truly.
;-)
|
|
I shall remind those who actually have this view (in contrast to my jesting friend) that combat rounds in the old days were a whole minute, which would mean one spell every minute, while the Fighter should be getting one swing every 6 seconds ^_^Yeah, the Fighters should be totally realistic. I believe that having more than one attack per round is really stretching the bounds of realism - I can imagine a mighty Wizard casting several spells within 6 seconds due to the wrought of his craft, but several sword swings? Shenanigans, I say.
And then there's this powergaming cheescake of 3.5 Tome of Weaboo Fightan Magic. A blatant assault on my cherished ideal of a mundane medieval Fighter, I say! What madness has this anime computer gaming unleashed upon us, truly.
;-)
On a more serious note: every time somebody shouts "realism" in a game where a level 10 character can fall 200ft. and walk away without as much as saying "awww" while another character can create demiplanes out of thin air, God kills a puppy.
Think of the puppies.
|
I shall remind those who actually have this view (in contrast to my jesting friend) that combat rounds in the old days were a whole minute, which would mean one spell every minute, while the Fighter should be getting one swing every 6 seconds ^_^Yeah, the Fighters should be totally realistic. I believe that having more than one attack per round is really stretching the bounds of realism - I can imagine a mighty Wizard casting several spells within 6 seconds due to the wrought of his craft, but several sword swings? Shenanigans, I say.
And then there's this powergaming cheescake of 3.5 Tome of Weaboo Fightan Magic. A blatant assault on my cherished ideal of a mundane medieval Fighter, I say! What madness has this anime computer gaming unleashed upon us, truly.
;-)
When you were high enough level to do so. Some spells took longer than a minute to cast and you had to keep casting it, doing nothing else until it went off.
Low-tier superheroes anyway. You don't see anyone as the equal of even Iron Man in all of this, even at 20th level, much less someone more powerful.And some of us see that as a problem. In my opinion the non-magical capabilities of Thor (the super hero) line up with what a high level non-epic fighter should be capable of.
Thor is a deity's son. He is basically supernatural himself. I dont have an issue with it, but that was one strike against ToB.
edit:I know ToB was not magical except for the swordsage.
I did preface that with "If you can use the rune action while flying". That multiples the speed per round by 4. If you can't, then you need a fly speed of 13,200 feet. It only takes a standard action (or a swift action for the greater version), and teleporting never causes "massive explosions because reality is a wreck". Well, maybe in Tony Starks universe it does. And the running while flying wasn't a function of the fly spell. All fly speeds, mundane or magic, could take the run action in 3.5. But I haven't found that in Pathfinder.
Teleporting to other dimensions? Plane Shift does that, a 5th or 7th level spell, and doable as early as 9th level (15th level if wizard). Alternate dimensions are even mentioned in the spell.
Far side of the galaxy is harder, but 2 plane shifts can do it (one to another plane, one back to the material). Or you use Greater Teleport (a 7th level spell), which has no distance limit.
And while you do have to be a spellcaster to make the magic items, they can still be used by anyone who knows the command words. I still don't see anything Tony Stark can do that a 15th level or higher wizard can do better.
I was letting you know that you can't, using the spell. Teleporting did cause massive explosions in one of the games I ran, so it does sometimes. That's the Marvel setting, do you live under a rock or something? Teleporting to another dimension, sure, but it's highly inaccurate, his device can get you there without incident.
Or you could just use the 9th level spell designed to teleport you to other planets.
Really? How about doing all of that, while not being shut down by an anti-magic field. How about making fort and reflex saves, taking hits, while being able to hit back just as hard or (more often than not) harder.
@Stabbitydoom:No, because he still isn't actually using magic. That's not that many, even including favored class it's 10 points/level, simply not enough to mimic what he has.
Tony's standard fighting style is a mix, he blasts the enemies until they get close, then he starts punching and kicking, because not only is he a genius engineer, but he's also a skilled fighter. He uses status effects as well, but mostly "blinded", "deafened", or "dead". Occasionally he might go with "paralyzed" or "entangled", but not often.
The biggest problem is his inventions act like magic, but his inventions are everything, a suit of armor, a bunch of weapons, a vehicle, a device that does what the plot needs it to do, goggles, helmets, etc. You cannot mimic that in Pathfinder, in the suit he's tougher than any fighter could ever hope to be, but his inventions mimic a wizard, while not being magical. He has all of the craft feats, without being a spellcaster (yes he's made rings, wands, and staves on at least one occasion each) which is not supported in this system.
I shall remind those who actually have this view (in contrast to my jesting friend) that combat rounds in the old days were a whole minute, which would mean one spell every minute, while the Fighter should be getting one swing every 6 seconds ^_^Yeah, the Fighters should be totally realistic. I believe that having more than one attack per round is really stretching the bounds of realism - I can imagine a mighty Wizard casting several spells within 6 seconds due to the wrought of his craft, but several sword swings? Shenanigans, I say.
And then there's this powergaming cheescake of 3.5 Tome of Weaboo Fightan Magic. A blatant assault on my cherished ideal of a mundane medieval Fighter, I say! What madness has this anime computer gaming unleashed upon us, truly.
;-)
On a more serious note: every time somebody shouts "realism" in a game where a level 10 character can fall 200ft. and walk away without as much as saying "awww" while another character can create demiplanes out of thin air, God kills a puppy.
Think of the puppies.
My point is that of the people who cry for realism, they seem pretty ignorant of some pretty unrealistic limitations being set. Why do fighters only get two skill points? Why does armor slow down a person by so much? Why are bullets armor piercing? Why is using a bow as easy as using a sword? (Incidentally, this is why archers are so freaking amazing)
In terms of balance, why must a fighter spend an entire career on a single weapon, while wizards can be great and still be broad?
Why are fighters dealing with wizards and dragons and monsters so specialized, while in real life 'fighters' have multiple skills? Comparing Fighters to Rogues is not fair because they also get the short-end of the stick. Compare them to the Magical classes...
Often when someone goes on about making fighters supernatural on these boards, someone else will rebuke with the idea that fighters should be bound by the laws of the world AKA they should be realistic. But are they really?
I've seen iconic examples of Wizards, Assassins, Rogues, Bards, Barbarians, and Paladins in stories and myths, but I don't think I've ever seen one of a straight fighter. I don't know of any fighting character that wasn't either charismatic, stealthy, or a barbarian.
Why are bullets armor piercing? Why is using a bow as easy as using a sword? (Incidentally, this is why archers are so freaking amazing)
In terms of balance, why must a fighter spend an entire career on a single weapon, while wizards can be great and still be broad?
Why are fighters dealing with wizards and dragons and monsters so freaking specialized, while in real life 'fighters' have multiple skills?
Comparing Fighters to Rogues is not fair because they also get the short-end of the stick. Compare them to the Magical classes...
I can answer the point behind the gun being armor piercing: because they basically were, at least the advanced ones are/were, The Mythbusters had an episode where they tested out paper armor, which stood up just as well as metal armor, while being lighter, but bulkier, and more ridiculous looking. Even against a gun, right until it they used a revolver on it, that went clean through it.
I can also answer the fighter-wizard disparity question:Monte Cook built 3.x to reward system mastery, in that he made sure that the best option was always a caster with full progression. This was most evident in 3.0, when buff spells would last for hours.
Pathfinder tried resolving that balance, while maintaining some basics, and they did a rather lackluster job of it. As much as I love Pathfinder, the casters are simply better at just about everything, but pretty much only if their player builds them like that, which I think that makes them a jerk.
Fighter: Maximus
Not a Fighter: Commodus
Brilliant. Also illustrates the difference between a fighter and a not-fighter; the not-fighter relies on poison and still gets butchered like a pig.
Tony can and has built machines that let him teleport to the far side of the galaxy or other dimensions entirely, it wasn't a big deal. Basically a 9th level spell he built in his basement because he needed to get somewhere, which basically makes it a spell-trigger item, which is something you can't do as a noncaster.
Eh? Can't non-casters make magic items now? ... one quick fact-check later and, yes, indeed, you can! Master Craftsman (the feat) allows you to make magic items without being a caster! And here I thought when they called him a "rogue" they were just being facetious!
No but seriously, Tony's brilliant, but he's not a caster. He's a rogue with an uber-dex and a suit that does all his fighting for him Every time he's caught out of the suit its either his quick reflexes or quick mind (and tongue) that has gotten him out of trouble. There ARE casters in the comic-verse. Tony ain't one of 'em, despite how awesome he is. And he's been taken to task by magic users before.
Speaking of, however, if you really want to go beyond Pathfinder's ability to imitate: Mr. Fantastic. He basically owns everything (even Tony) forever. And he's not even very cool!
Thing is, as with all things, attempting to say "we can't duplicate X, so this isn't great" won't really work. What PF, or any other system, at best, could do, is say "here's our closest approximation". PF is supposed to be evocative, and it does that pretty well. It doesn't do it perfectly, however. That's something most all of us could admit. And: if it doesn't work for you, change it. PF needed to be balanced around the presumption that it did. But citing CORE RAW as the only reason that things won't work doesn't fly at your home table.
That said, if you're saying that it doesn't work in Golarion... you'd again be right! And it's not supposed to. Golarion is built out of Pathfinder (and originally 3.5 before it). It handles what it handles. That's why we have multiple gaming systems in the first place.
And, yes. Once we've left sixth level, we've surpassed mortal human capabilities, and once we've left 11th level (lichdom, you know) we've surpassed Lord of the Rings* stuff, and once' we've gotten into 20th level, we're roughly around most mythological* abilities.
So PF does what it does rather well: simulate things decently from 1st to 16th, with a passing nod to the super-powers beyond, and a brief flyby at mach 2 of the levels beyond 20th. And I love me some levels beyond 20th.
* If you want to get technical, the Lord of the Rings Valinar are more closely like 20th-30th levels with the Overgod (is his name Illuvatar? I don't recall now) being the only creature with levels beyond that. For most mythology, the gods are actually epic characters, ranging from 21 to 60 (roughly, on average), though a few probably surpass the several-hundred mark.