| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Seriously, take the 4 man party. You're a monster with a Charm attack and some brains.
Do you dominate the cleric? Great will save and wisdom. No.
Do you dominate the mage? Great will save and likely spells helping his saves. No.
Do you dominate the rogue? Weak will save, but might slippery mind it. But less effective in melee without a flanking partner, and certianly isn't going to catch his fellows flat footed.
Fighter? Oh, yeah. poor will save, and getting rid of him removes your best melee threat, and turns their offense into YOUR offense. Pick on fighter...it's the only reasonably target.
If that target is a Paladin? Feh. better off picking on the wizard or rogue.
If a ranger...well, yeah, except having FE undead, aberrations and evil outsiders isn't likely to hurt the party like a weapon specced fighter.the monsters vote for more fighters in the parties of people.
And without metagaming, how does the monster know who to target and why? Can you tell the difference between a cavalier and a mounted fighter and a paladin all of whom have holy symbols for their god? Can you tell the difference between the barbarian and the lore warden, both wearing just medium armor and wielding great swords? Can you tell the difference between the ranger archer and the rogue archer and the fighter archer if they are all equipped the same way?
This is a problem that I have with many of these discussions. It often requires a bit of metagaming on the GM's part. Since most combats seem to last only 1-3 rounds, to know who the fighter is and to target him, you would have to know by the end of the first round everything there is to know about the party.
|
Here's something for those who keep advocating that putting someting like Protection from evil on the fighter is a waste of economy.
When the BBEG casts dominate on the fighter, it fails. That wasted the BBEG's turn, cos you know, he casts a spell and it fails. Just like many casters in the party in fact.
The fighter though, he now rushes in and smacks the BBEG in the head with his big weapon, using his feats to compensate for lack of full attack and pulls out massive damage.
Now BBEG needs to cast defensively to try that trick again, but this time drop the buff with a dispel. But dispel strips spells from top level down, and...what PROT FROM EVIL IS FIRST LEVEL!!!! NO!!! I have to strip like 4 buffs from fighter dude to get to the one spell that makes his calss weaksauce.
OH CRAP!! The fighter is hitting me again....at full attack.
Oh, I seem to be dead.
Meanwhile, casty has just finishig summoning T rex who proceeds to feed on BBEG, and accidentally crushes the skeletons miniosn, COS HES A HUGE FRICKEN DINOSAUR!
That's pretty much how that scenario plays out in a real game, as opposed to theory craft.
Cheers
|
|
Here's something for those who keep advocating that putting someting like Protection from evil on the fighter is a waste of economy.
When the BBEG casts dominate on the fighter, it fails. That wasted the BBEG's turn, cos you know, he casts a spell and it fails. Just like many casters in the party in fact.
The fighter though, he now rushes in and smacks the BBEG in the head with his big weapon, using his feats to compensate for lack of full attack and pulls out massive damage.
Now BBEG needs to cast defensively to try that trick again, but this time drop the buff with a dispel. But dispel strips spells from top level down, and...what PROT FROM EVIL IS FIRST LEVEL!!!! NO!!! I have to strip like 4 buffs from fighter dude to get to the one spell that makes his calss weaksauce.
OH CRAP!! The fighter is hitting me again....at full attack.
Oh, I seem to be dead.
Meanwhile, casty has just finishig summoning T rex who proceeds to feed on BBEG, and accidentally crushes the skeletons miniosn, COS HES A HUGE FRICKEN DINOSAUR!
That's pretty much how that scenario plays out in a real game, as opposed to theory craft.
Cheers
BBEG's need quickened spells to be effective like quickened grease or quickened true strike +enervation. Along with a game plan like concealment or greater invis...
And what right does a DM have to tell me what choices my character can and cannot make in the process of playing the game? If that's the case, why don't we just go play a video game.
I highly recommend you go play video games then, because you obviously don't get it. The DM has EVERY right to tell you what choices you can/cannot make in the process of playing the game. It's his responsibility to make sure EVERYONE AT THE TABLE has fun, not just you. I guarantee you received plenty of eye rolls, groans, and hostility for each and every one of those characters. And, I hope most of them were evil aligned.
Reminder: You built a character with a certain alignment. If your DM pays attention to alignment, he should make you play to it. That involves telling you that certain decisions are outside of your chosen alignment. Repercussions of pursuing said choice or action involves forcibly shifting your alignment to correctly correspond to those actions.
Seriously, take the 4 man party. You're a monster with a Charm attack and some brains.
Do you dominate the cleric? Great will save and wisdom. No.
Do you dominate the mage? Great will save and likely spells helping his saves. No.
Do you dominate the rogue? Weak will save, but might slippery mind it. But less effective in melee without a flanking partner, and certianly isn't going to catch his fellows flat footed.
Fighter? Oh, yeah. poor will save, and getting rid of him removes your best melee threat, and turns their offense into YOUR offense. Pick on fighter...it's the only reasonably target.
If that target is a Paladin? Feh. better off picking on the wizard or rogue.
If a ranger...well, yeah, except having FE undead, aberrations and evil outsiders isn't likely to hurt the party like a weapon specced fighter.the monsters vote for more fighters in the parties of people.
And without metagaming, how does the monster know who to target and why? Can you tell the difference between a cavalier and a mounted fighter and a paladin all of whom have holy symbols for their god? Can you tell the difference between the barbarian and the lore warden, both wearing just medium armor and wielding great swords? Can you tell the difference between the ranger archer and the rogue archer and the fighter archer if they are all equipped the same way?
This is a problem that I have with many of these discussions. It often requires a bit of metagaming on the GM's part. Since most combats seem to last only 1-3 rounds, to know who the fighter is and to target him, you would have to know by the end of the first round everything there is to know about the party.
I did say monster with some brains.
It's a DC15 Sense Motive to find out the base stats of those you're facing.The cavalier, fighter, barb, etc all tend to dress and act differently, but in any case are the preferred targets of charm spells. YOu know this, stop trying to metagame around the preferred choice, Bob. Monster very seldom has to choose between fighter 1, 2 and 3, or fighter, cavalier and barb.
==Aelryinth
I hihgly doubtful that rangers would have higher Wisdom than fighters, and I do not see how a charging cavalir and a full attacking gunslinger would not be a threat as big as a fighter.
Rnagers and gunslingers have better reflex save though, but that was not the question because that was not your initial statement against fighters.
Rangers will, if just to get better perception. they need that 14 for level 4 spells. They are more likely to buff it then a fighter.
A fighter might want expertise, after all, and a Ranger can afford to turf intelligence because he has so many skill points.
A cavalier in a party dominated to turn against the party likely is not going to be able to charge them, on his horse, or otherwise, because he's right in the middle of them.
Gunslinger, also going to be in the m iddle of them, which means provoking AoO for trying to use a missile weapon in melee.
So, neither quite as good as the brute fighter.
14 in Wisdom is the typical for my fighters (even without dumping Cha). also fighters tend to pick Iron will early, so i really doubt that the ranger and the gunslinger would have a better save, and even if they have a highger save it would not be by much.
exactly why hte charging cavalier would be in the middle of his party?
and how knows about the ranger, maybe he instant enemy the wizard.
Because if he already charged the monster, it's either dead or not going to cast a spell in melee?
And 'attack your friends' doesn't mean 'stop and cast a spell, then attack your friends, especially so you can be AoO'd while casting.'==Aelryinth
And constant protection from evil against mental control is only 4500gp (wayfinder +Clear spindle: Protection from possession and mental control (as protection from evil).). You also never need to eat or drink.
None of which are class abilities of the fighter, thank you, and which can all be suppressed with targeted dispels, gotten around with suggestion (The wizard is an evil necromancer in disguise! Kill him before he turns on you! or "Your little box is cursed! Throw it away before it explodes!) and so forth.
We're talking fighter and class abilities, and not the stuff he buys so he can make a poor man's not quite as defensive paladin.
"I cast Prot/Evil on the Fighter" also means "I can't cast Prot/Evil on myself, I'm going to leech off the spellcaster who'd rather be fireballing the enemy." It also means you just wasted Prot/Evil if you're facing an encounter where nothing charms.
Again, not a facet of the fighter.
==Aelryinth
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I did say monster with some brains.
It's a DC15 Sense Motive to find out the base stats of those you're facing.
Where do you get this from? I don't see it under the Sense Motive skill anywhere. I also haven't seen too many creatures with high Sense Motive skills.
The cavalier, fighter, barb, etc all tend to dress and act differently, but in any case are the preferred targets of charm spells. YOu know this, stop trying to metagame around the preferred choice, Bob. Monster very seldom has to choose between fighter 1, 2 and 3, or fighter, cavalier and barb.
Do they really all dress and act differently? Is it a stretch to see characters that can all use heavy armor, use heavy armor? Is it a stretch to see someone have a holy symbol of their god even if they aren't a divine caster? At a glance, can you tell the difference between a mounted cavalier and fighter or even a multiclassed character? I doubt it. Neither one comes with a label.
Classes are mechanics that we, as players, use to build our characters. They aren't things used in the game world to describe oneself. No one introduces themselves as Sir Joust About, Paladin Level 8 and Fighter Level 3!. They just don't do it.
The intelligent enemy shouldn't be able to tell either. There are some things they can assume (these are the same things that players often expect):
1) Casters tend to have more will power and are harder to affect with mental attacks.
2) Holy warriors tend to have the conviction of their faith behind them, making them harder to affect with mental attacks.
3) Combatants in less armor are probably more mobile in some way and may be more reflexive.
4) Characters that wade into battle with heavy amounts of armor and large weapons tend to be very healthy and are hard to poison but their minds are often weaker than their allies.
5) The guy frothing at the mouth may have just raged
6) The one singing in the background is probably boosting his friends' confidences
There's more, but the point is that there are some assumptions I don't have a problem with. These aren't always true but there are generally safe bets. There are others, like definitively knowing exactly which class a character is, that is actually GM metagaming and it is one of the problems. To target the fighter over the cavalier is metagaming. To target the guy on foot with a greatsword who's standing next to the unarmored caster and the guy in chain mail with a shield and mace with a holy symbol of Iomedae instead of the one mounted with a lance because you want the one who can probably get more attacks, is not metagaming. That's a tactical move. Do you see the difference though?
Taliking about class abilities in vacumm is pointless. Fighters have weakness, they also have the means for overcome those weakness.And constant protection from evil against mental control is only 4500gp (wayfinder +Clear spindle: Protection from possession and mental control (as protection from evil).). You also never need to eat or drink.
None of which are class abilities of the fighter, thank you, and which can all be suppressed with targeted dispels, gotten around with suggestion (The wizard is an evil necromancer in disguise! Kill him before he turns on you! or "Your little box is cursed! Throw it away before it explodes!) and so forth.
We're talking fighter and class abilities, and not the stuff he buys so he can make a poor man's not quite as defensive paladin.
"I cast Prot/Evil on the Fighter" also means "I can't cast Prot/Evil on myself, I'm going to leech off the spellcaster who'd rather be fireballing the enemy." It also means you just wasted Prot/Evil if you're facing an encounter where nothing charms.
Again, not a facet of the fighter.
==Aelryinth
No. OTHER classes have the means to overcome their weakness, but that is true for any situation. If I'm playing a wizard, believe that I can take any class and make them better; often doing so to multiple classes in the same action. The catch is that some classes require more of my special sauce to overcome that strange aftertaste.
A Paladin helps me, the wizard, conserve my resources. If I don't have to cast protection from evil on the Fighter I can cast it on somebody else (now we have 2/4 members warded), or I could instead cast enlarge person to turn our melee into a big ol' meatshield that provides cover to the whole party, doubles his/her reach, and grants noticeable bonuses to damage (+2 Strength equates to +1 to +1.5 to damage, and the size increase ups the damage of weapons by about +1 to +3), which allows the character more potent combat presence and tactical superiority.
It doesn't help that Pathfinder nerfed the protection from spells, since now there is no way to ward against a neutral-aligned enchanter, and the mental-warding effect only functions vs the appropriate alignment (so while protection from evil is probably the safest bet it does diddly vs things like neutral-aligned fey or humanoids). Now if you want to be appropriately guarded you'd need to either cast 4 spells (for chaos, law, evil, and good) or get a custom magic item that permanently sustains all of those that costs more than 20,000 gp and doesn't block neutral-aligned dominates.
In short, it's easier to get more bang out of other martial classes than it is to shore up the Fighters ineptitude.
At level 4, with a human fighter I have six feat choices to make.
The odds of seeing anything past level 7 in the games I'm a part of is pretty remote. Magic items are few and far between.
I like the games I play in, there's nothing wrong with them.
I can accomplish builds with a Fighter that I would never see otherwise, due to the nature of my sessions.
My game sessions, my circumstances.
I am not talking about party members helping me. Potions of protection from eveil cost 50 gp, at mid-to hihger levels I should have my own means to fly even to detect and see invisible things. Iron will and cloaks of resistance help with he saves. All things than a fighter can have by their own.
It amuses me that people argue that Fighters are jumping into the fray while Paladins and Rangers are buffing, when they gotta drink potions that cost lots of gold pieces (seriously, a 1st level potion is 50 gp, a 2nd level potion is 300 gp, and a 3rd level potion is 750 gp). I mean, honestly having to quaff what is nearly a +1 cloak of resistance is not exactly what I'd call covering your butt.
Though frankly, fly is something I wouldn't be pushing until higher levels. Bows are your friend.
i really do not see how the wizard enters in the equation.
EDIT: When the pally buy the celestial fullplate to not be slow is all good but when the fighter buying his potions should not counts because items are not class features?
The catch is you're trying to mask with lots of consumables that anyone can use. That eats into your funds. Celestial plate is a relatively permanent item that you buy and you keep. Nobody is poking fun at fighters for having access to Gloves of Dueling for example.
But when the Fighter is arguing that the Paladin's immunity to Fear, Charms, and Compulsions isn't so awesome because you can choke down 4 50 gp * caster level potions and still have holes, it begins to look iffy. When the Ranger can say "I cast freedom of movement" and be immune to a plethora of CC abilities (including grappling) you can't say "I drink a potion of freedom of movement" (even if you could, it would cost 1,400 gp per drink, but 4th+ level potions are illegal in core).
It might be due to a lot of people arguing as a group, but from where I'm sitting it looks like Fighter Team A is saying "Fighters don't need X, Y, Z, they have a party!" and Fighter Team B is saying "Why are you talking about Paladins and Rangers being better with team support, we're talking about single classes only!", and then you have Not-Fighter Team that says "These bring more to a party by virtue of their class, have less reliance on teammates, sustain the party's total resources further, improve action economy, save the party gold on consumables, are more defensive and do adequate damage, all while having strong out of combat presence".
So perhaps we got our wires crossed.
It might be due to a lot of people arguing as a group, but from where I'm sitting it looks like Fighter Team A is saying "Fighters don't need X, Y, Z, they have a party!" and Fighter Team B is saying "Why are you talking about Paladins and Rangers being better with team support, we're talking about single classes only!", and then you have Not-Fighter Team that says "These bring more to a party by virtue of their class, have less reliance on teammates, sustain the party's total resources further, improve action economy, save the party gold on consumables, are more defensive and do adequate damage, all while having strong out of combat presence".
Exactly.
Oh, the wizard casts prot/evil on the fighter so he wont be charmed.
The paladin won't be charmed, so instead the wizard casts Enlarge Person. Which is better for the party?
Etc etc. Too many people arguing that the Fighter is okay because he can rely on non-Fighter things to cover for what Fighters lack, while totally discounting the fact that if he didn't have to cover for his weaknesses, he could use those things to make strength, instead of shore up weakness.
==Aelryinth
It might be due to a lot of people arguing as a group, but from where I'm sitting it looks like Fighter Team A is saying "Fighters don't need X, Y, Z, they have a party!" and Fighter Team B is saying "Why are you talking about Paladins and Rangers being better with team support, we're talking about single classes only!", and then you have Not-Fighter Team that says "These bring more to a class, have less reliance on teammates, sustain the party's total resources further, improve action economy, save the party gold on consumables, are more defensive and do adequate damage, all while having strong out of combat presence".
I'm saying that people are putting different emphasis on different things, assuming that their campaigns are just like everyone else's, and then assuming that these are givens. They aren't.
The paladin brings a certain set of tools to the table and the fighter brings a certain set of tools to the table. It's up to the player and the group to determine if those tools are valuable enough to continue using or if a different character is a better choice.
Since we are talking about fighters, there are archetypes that shore up some of the problems people see. Unbreakable, for example, deals with the mind control problem on its own. A 12 Intelligence can give a fighter 4 skills points per level (that's not heavy investment at all). Choosing the right race (which applies to any character) can do more to help as well.
Classes aren't the only defining characteristic of a character. There are still races, traits (in games that allow them), gear, feats, skills, etc. The fighter, just like any other class, needs to figure out what he wants to do and how to shore up his weaknesses. Any character that expects the rest of the party to always bail him out or always provide the extra oomph is probably being a drain. One that shores up his weaknesses but still expects some help from time to time is being part of a team. Just like the wizard would expect a restoration if hit with an enervation, the fighter should expect a heal if hit for enough damage. It's how friends and teammates work together.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Archetypes are not admissible because they don't cover the weakness of all fighters. We are using a broad brush here, Bob.
And saying a 12 Int gives them 4 skill points is ignoring the fact that it gives a Ranger 8. It's not a class benefit.
Yes, there's things FIghters can do to cover the holes. But they are things ANYONE can do, and so not part of BEING a Fighter. The Fighter does not have the class abilities he should. That's the crux of the argument. He should not be forced to spend general feats, abilities, stats, etc to cover holes that gape that large.
==+Aelryinth
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Exactly.
Oh, the wizard casts prot/evil on the fighter so he wont be charmed.
The paladin won't be charmed, so instead the wizard casts Enlarge Person. Which is better for the party?
Etc etc. Too many people arguing that the Fighter is okay because he can rely on non-Fighter things to cover for what Fighters lack, while totally discounting the fact that if he didn't have to cover for his weaknesses, he could use those things to make strength, instead of shore up weakness.
==Aelryinth
The paladin has to shore up his weaknesses as well. Last time I looked, he has 2 skill points too. He also doesn't have as many ways to consistently deal large amounts of damage in combat. He has a limited number of spells he's casting per day too. It doesn't matter if he isn't the one who is charmed. He can't protect everyone else from being charmed. His defenses only extend so far. He has limited resources, just like everyone else. He needs to shore up his weaknesses too.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Archetypes are not admissible because they don't cover the weakness of all fighters. We are using a broad brush here, Bob.
They aren't allowed because then it means that one argument is now wrong. It has nothing to do with what they cover. They are still fighters 100%.
And saying a 12 Int gives them 4 skill points is ignoring the fact that it gives a Ranger 8. It's not a class benefit.
I ignored nothing. I made a simple statement that the fighter doesn't have to do much to deal with the low skill points.
Yes, there's things FIghters can do to cover the holes. But they are things ANYONE can do, and so not part of BEING a Fighter. The Fighter does not have the class abilities he should. That's the crux of the argument. He should not be forced to spend general feats, abilities, stats, etc to cover holes that gape that large.
==+Aelryinth
Every class has to spend resources to deal with their weaknesses. Name one class that doesn't. Want more spells? You need money for magic items. Want more powerful spells? You need more money for magic items or to spend feats that may not be part of your class. Want more uses of a class ability? You need to use a feat that isn't part of your class. Want to be better at something? You need to spend a feat or use skills to get there.
Let me give you an example, wizards have the same number of skill points as fighters yet they are allowed to count their bonus skill points even though that isn't actually a class feature. Anyone can do it. It doesn't really matter if they are going to pump their Intelligence, they have the same number of skill points. So to improve that weakness, they have to shore it up. They do this buy pumping Intelligence. That serves several purposes, but it doesn't provide protection from anything on its own. It doesn't add to AC or saving throws. It allows the wizard to cast a few more spells, which may be used for defense but that means that he will have fewer spells available for offense or utility.
Every class has weaknesses and must shore them up somehow.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Wow characters shouldn't work on weaknesses...
It doesn't take an in combat action to protect your self. A fighter can also do it them selves. If you are going to ignore everything why keep posting? A low will save is not a death sentence and will not ruin your game, there is no guarante a target will fail a save and many fighters can get good saves. In fact realizing that is a weakness is the start to making an awesome character.
I would love it if fighters got better saves, it probably wouldn't break the game. While we are at it lets make all poor will saves good and frustrate casters - who already have a problem landing save spells.
Improving the fighter is a slippery slope, I think bravery could be all emotion spells and they could have 4 skills per level (maybe choose a theme and the extra 2 points must be spent in specific places) but the fighter as is can be a fun and balanced part of the party.
Using newer pathfinder options helps too, like traits and non CRB sources like the players guide and ultimate line.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Archetypes are not admissible because they don't cover the weakness of all fighters. We are using a broad brush here, Bob.
And saying a 12 Int gives them 4 skill points is ignoring the fact that it gives a Ranger 8. It's not a class benefit.
Yes, there's things FIghters can do to cover the holes. But they are things ANYONE can do, and so not part of BEING a Fighter. The Fighter does not have the class abilities he should. That's the crux of the argument. He should not be forced to spend general feats, abilities, stats, etc to cover holes that gape that large.
==+Aelryinth
A ranger built like a fighter will not be as good as a fighter built like a fighter. Just because a class has more of something doesn't mean it will try to improve that area or get the same value returned for doing do.
|
|
The fighter has one real weakness, and that's will save. Everything else comes down to how the player wants to build them and what role the player envisages for the fighter.
That one weakness can be overcome by a simple game mechanic, ie a spell, item or feat. Heck, build a dwarf fighter who tends to have inherent bonuses to saves vs magic and its even easier to close that gap.
The Paldin however has one glaring weakness. That's the alignment code of his/her god. This is not something with a mechanical fix. This is something that requires hard work from everyone else at the table to compensate for your characters flaw.
That sux, to be quite frank.
If your're all playing a group of lawful good or even just good aligned who will happily work within the Paladins code, then great. However, most casters, rogues and Barbarians don't tend to fall into this category because of thier alignments, general activities or the spells they like casting. In other words, Paladins don't fit most campaigns for the majority of people because their one flaw stops lots of people having fun.
The fighters one flaw gets worked around in about two seconds by a party.
Also, enlarge person is amazingly over rated and easily replaced with, say, tactical thinking. The biggest flaw of course is that you get hit easier when enlarged, which sucks up more healing resources. These cost more money or spell slots. Way to go with "boosting" the party.
Oh, and Aerlynth, you need to read the protection spells again mate. Protection from evil et all protect against mind control no matter what the source. The only parts that refer specifically to evil are physical attacks. (at least in my copy of the rule book)
Cheers
edit - From my PDF copy of the rule book (emphases are mine)
Second, the subject immediately receives another saving
throw (if one was allowed to begin with) against any spells or
effects that possess or exercise mental control over the creature
(including enchantment [charm] effects and enchantment
[compulsion] effects). This saving throw is made with a +2 morale
bonus, using the same DC as the original effect. If successful,
such effects are suppressed for the duration of this spell. The
effects resume when the duration of this spell expires. While
under the effects of this spell, the target is immune to any new
attempts to possess or exercise mental control over the target.
Wrath, you should quote the entirety of the text, not just the part that says what you want it to say.
Second, the subject immediately receives another saving throw (if one was allowed to begin with) against any spells or effects that possess or exercise mental control over the creature (including enchantment [charm] effects and enchantment [compulsion] effects, such as charm person, command, and dominate person). This saving throw is made with a +2 morale bonus, using the same DC as the original effect. If successful, such effects are suppressed for the duration of this spell. The effects resume when the duration of this spell expires. While under the effects of this spell, the target is immune to any new attempts to possess or exercise mental control over the target. This spell does not expel a controlling life force (such as a ghost or spellcaster using magic jar), but it does prevent them from controlling the target. This second effect only functions against spells and effects created by evil creatures or objects, subject to GM discretion.
|
|
Wrath, you should quote the entirety of the text, not just the part that says what you want it to say.
Second, the subject immediately receives another saving throw (if one was allowed to begin with) against any spells or effects that possess or exercise mental control over the creature (including enchantment [charm] effects and enchantment [compulsion] effects, such as charm person, command, and dominate person). This saving throw is made with a +2 morale bonus, using the same DC as the original effect. If successful, such effects are suppressed for the duration of this spell. The effects resume when the duration of this spell expires. While under the effects of this spell, the target is immune to any new attempts to possess or exercise mental control over the target. This spell does not expel a controlling life force (such as a ghost or spellcaster using magic jar), but it does prevent them from controlling the target. This second effect only functions against spells and effects created by evil creatures or objects, subject to GM discretion.
Thanks for the heads up, and appologies for the mistake. I did find the part that says its only agianst evil btw, now I really feal like a fool. <sigh> I suspect its due to my group just houseruling it at some stage and just playing it so long we assumed it was the rule. Again, embarrassing.
In fact, the whole tone of the last part of my post sounds very snarky. Appologies for that as well. I wasn't trying to be, but then sometimes the medium of the written word doesn't relay tone as well as I'd like (at least the way I wield the written word).
Cheers
Wrath, you should quote the entirety of the text, not just the part that says what you want it to say.
Second, the subject immediately receives another saving throw (if one was allowed to begin with) against any spells or effects that possess or exercise mental control over the creature (including enchantment [charm] effects and enchantment [compulsion] effects, such as charm person, command, and dominate person). This saving throw is made with a +2 morale bonus, using the same DC as the original effect. If successful, such effects are suppressed for the duration of this spell. The effects resume when the duration of this spell expires. While under the effects of this spell, the target is immune to any new attempts to possess or exercise mental control over the target. This spell does not expel a controlling life force (such as a ghost or spellcaster using magic jar), but it does prevent them from controlling the target. This second effect only functions against spells and effects created by evil creatures or objects, subject to GM discretion.Thanks for the heads up, and appologies for the mistake. I did find the part that says its only agianst evil btw, now I really feal like a fool. <sigh> I suspect its due to my group just houseruling it at some stage and just playing it so long we assumed it was the rule. Again, embarrassing.
In fact, the whole tone of the last part of my post sounds very snarky. Appologies for that as well. I wasn't trying to be, but then sometimes the medium of the written word doesn't relay tone as well as I'd like (at least the way I wield the written word).
Cheers
Actually, more likely your group didn't house rule it but didn't realize that it had been changed. In all of 3E and 3.5 the protection from line of spells blocked mental domination regardless of alignment source. Now they are specific, and there is no protection vs a Neutral-aligned caster. If you want to be an enchanter and mind-rape everything, be Neutral.
|
Actually, more likely your group didn't house rule it but didn't realize that it had been changed. In all of 3E and 3.5 the protection from line of spells blocked mental domination regardless of alignment source. Now they are specific, and there is no protection vs a Neutral-aligned caster. If you want to be an enchanter and mind-rape everything, be Neutral.
Of course, if your character wants to mind-rape everything, he's likely going to be Chaotic, at the very least.
Archetypes are not admissible because they don't cover the weakness of all fighters. We are using a broad brush here, Bob.They aren't allowed because then it means that one argument is now wrong. It has nothing to do with what they cover. They are still fighters 100%.
And saying a 12 Int gives them 4 skill points is ignoring the fact that it gives a Ranger 8. It's not a class benefit.I ignored nothing. I made a simple statement that the fighter doesn't have to do much to deal with the low skill points.
Yes, there's things FIghters can do to cover the holes. But they are things ANYONE can do, and so not part of BEING a Fighter. The Fighter does not have the class abilities he should. That's the crux of the argument. He should not be forced to spend general feats, abilities, stats, etc to cover holes that gape that large.
==+Aelryinth
Every class has to spend resources to deal with their weaknesses. Name one class that doesn't. Want more spells? You need money for magic items. Want more powerful spells? You need more money for magic items or to spend feats that may not be part of your class. Want more uses of a class ability? You need to use a feat that isn't part of your class. Want to be better at something? You need to spend a feat or use skills to get there.
Let me give you an example, wizards have the same number of skill points as fighters yet they are allowed to count their bonus skill points even though that isn't actually a class feature. Anyone can do it. It doesn't really matter if they are going to pump their Intelligence, they have the same number of skill points. So to improve that weakness, they have to shore it up. They do this buy pumping Intelligence. That serves several purposes, but it doesn't provide protection from anything on its own. It doesn't add to AC or saving throws. It allows the wizard to cast a few more spells, which may be used for defense but that means that he will have fewer spells available for...
Using an archetype means you're pigeonholing the fighter into a specific build. That hardly addresses all fighters. So, no, I'm not counting archetypes for fighters anymore then I do for paladins.
A fighter investing in a 12 Int is gimping other stats. The reason nobody complains about the wizard having low skill points is the exact same reason that nobody would complain about fighter skill points if they were tied to his Strength bonus...the wizard already has a high Int, it's going to get higher, and stat synergy kicks in. He doesn't have to invest in Int 'to boost skills'...he's going to invest in it for the same reason the fighter pumps str, and the skill points are a convenient side benefit. For the fighter, it provides absolutely NO other benefit. (No, don't bring up Expertise)
When the fighter's prime req pumps his skill points, nobody will care about his low skill points, either. So, the wizard argument isn't working. Be reasonable. Note that they expect a barb to tank Int, and for some reason decided he deserved 4 skill points. Exactly why is an unschooled barb entitled to more skill points then a highly trained fighter?
As for the paladins, they have magic weapon, weapon bond, and possibly GMW to give them more killing power in combat. These bonuses easily keep right up with fighter weapon training. This will generally mean they are only slightly behind the fighter at neutral combats, while absolutely rocking on the evil ones...and evil ones are more frequent, not less, as you level, esp the BBEG. And such abilities don't cost them any gold to quaff, either.
The paladin has weaknesses, sure. the problem is, the fighter has all of those weaknesses, too, and then a whole boatload more, without having any real advantages to go with them.
======
Enlarge is an offensive tactical spell. The fact you have a slightly lower AC is mitigated by the fact you do more damage, and you have reach...meaning it is considerably harder to reach you to do that damage. Reach alone is worth the spell.
If you don't like Enlarge, then Grease, Color Spray, or magic missile, whatever you like. Offense against the enemy instead of 'wasting a round buffing someone else', as it were. There's already complaints against the time delay of classes buffing themselves...relying on someone else to do it for you is a step in the worse direction.
Oh, and Instant Enemy might be a swift action, but 'attack your friends' again, doesn't mean spellcasting; the caster does not have access to your mind and know what spells you have available; and you are dominated, not charmed, and you know full what's happening to you and can't do anything about it. That hardly means you have to HELP the bad guy by making yourself more effective.
And human FE might be fairly common, but it won't work against a party of an elf, dwarf and halfling, now, would it? Again, less dangerous then a fighter. It's also not likely to be a ranger's highest FE, at least if they're a PC. Pretty niche, in other words.
===Aelryinth
Don't be ridiculous. There's diminishing returns on a second cleric in the party or a third wizard. Some of us will be playing Druids, Oracles, and maybe even Witches.You might be playing a fighter for his or her story?
Madness - but don't worry, there's a cure! I'll start by emailing you spreadsheets for DPR calculations and then we'll move on to optimal will saves by level once you've mastered that.
After all this is done you'll come to understand that both fighters and paladins are non-top tier classes and we'll all only wizards and clerics for the rest of our PF careers.
I'm on board so long as the Oracle is properly optimized and remembers to maximize UMD.
Actually, more likely your group didn't house rule it but didn't realize that it had been changed. In all of 3E and 3.5 the protection from line of spells blocked mental domination regardless of alignment source. Now they are specific, and there is no protection vs a Neutral-aligned caster. If you want to be an enchanter and mind-rape everything, be Neutral.Of course, if your character wants to mind-rape everything, he's likely going to be Chaotic, at the very least.
The statement was hyperbole. I meant that there is no defense against it, it works against everything regardless of alignment protections. The strongest spellcasters are Neutral.
Standard point buy is 15, not 20.
Standard point buy is 15, not 20.
After all of that "Of course everyone gets +5 to all stats for free the moment sixth-level spells become available!" business in the other thread, you're really going to take a stand against 20-point buy?
Standard point buy is 15, not 20.After all of that "Of course everyone gets +5 to all stats for free the moment sixth-level spells become available!" business in the other thread, you're really going to take a stand against 20-point buy?
Does that surprise you Roberta? Standard is standard. It's what the core rules declare standard, it's what I play in my home games, and it's pretty irrelevant as to whether inherent modifiers are available or not. All discussions I have concerning classes are based on standard and what is available within the rules.
I'm not taking a stand against anything. I'm just pointing out that putting out 20 PB builds might be useful for the heavily house-ruled Pathfinder society, and it might be useful if your group uses 20 PB, but the standard is 15 PB plain and simple.
Purchase: Each character receives a number of points to spend on increasing his basic attributes. In this method, all attributes start at a base of 10. A character can increase an individual score by spending some of his points. Likewise, he can gain more points to spend on other scores by decreasing one or more of his ability scores. No score can be reduced below 7 or raised above 18 using this method. See Table: Ability Score Costs for the costs of each score. After all the points are spent, apply any racial modifiers the character might have.
The number of points you have to spend using the purchase method depends on the type of campaign you are playing. The standard value for a character is 15 points. Average nonplayer characters (NPCs) are typically built using as few as 3 points.
Inherent modifiers are pretty irrelevant and are available within the rules regardless of your point buy. My tabletop group plays standard 15 PB, and despite what some people seem to think, it's actually very tame.
Standard point buy is 15, not 20.that depends of what you mean by standard.
But
Str 16
Dex 12
Con 14
Int 12
Wis 14
Cha 7
Well, you're not making use of Armor Training, that's for damn sure. You can't qualify for Dodge or Combat Expertise either, so forget feats like Dodge, Mobility, etc. Improved Trip/Disarm is out as well. You now have 3 skill points per level. Almost matching a Barbarian with 10 Int, or a Ranger with 6. Looks like fairly decent stats for a Paladin (swap Wisdom and Charisma I'd think, maybe swap Dex and Constitution sine the Charisma to Fort helps there and Lay on Hands gives way more HP than Con ever will).
We have 2 and a half sets of encounters already.
Ashiel's Crypt of the Mummy Lord
The Valley of God-Hates-Paladins
Terror in the Sodden Lands
Incidently, Im still hoping Ashiel might weigh in on Paladin vs. Sodden Lands. It'd be nice to round out the experiment.
Im wondering how a paladin fares when armor hindrance: (quicksand, water, climbing) comes in to play. And Smite is only good for one target, so after a Marsh giant, 4 harpies and a dozen devils, there are still things not getting smote.
Alternatively, pulling up random PFS scenarios may give some insight.
We have 2 and a half sets of encounters already.
Ashiel's Crypt of the Mummy Lord
The Valley of God-Hates-Paladins
Terror in the Sodden LandsIncidently, Im still hoping Ashiel might weigh in on Paladin vs. Sodden Lands. It'd be nice to round out the experiment.
Im wondering how a paladin fares when armor hindrance: (quicksand, water, climbing) comes in to play. And Smite is only good for one target, so after a Marsh giant, 4 harpies and a dozen devils, there are still things not getting smote.
Absolutely! I was meaning to get around to that but had company over the weekend, and kind of forgot about it. I'll see if I can't crunch some numbers on that tomorrow after putting up Christmas lights.
Nicos: Absolutely you can choose to ignore the spirit of the wizard's instructions and obey the letter. If you're a two weapon wielder, nothing says you have to attack with both weapons. You can hold one back to parry. The wizard is going to have to be quite explicit to force you to act out.
and, as Ashield pointed out, standard buy is 15 points, and you indeed gimped yourself grabbing for points. You even took Cha down to 7, instant proof of the desperate need for extra points to make your point. Having to gimp and minmax stats to cover a weakness is bad. It also explains the pure need and lack of stat synergy that fighters seem to have.
==Aelryinth