|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I believe combat casting should be a feat chain
If you want to cast spells with creatures in your face then its going to cost you a few feats.
You mean like Combat Casting and Uncanny Concentration? Which don't even give you that guarantee for your higher level stuff?
How about instead of making it so that wizards can do everything but have a 50/50 chance of shitting their pants instead of being useful, we make it so that wizards can't do everything but can do what's left reliably. That sounds like more fun to me.
|
A will be combat. Both the wizard and the fighter can do A. We don't care much about A at the moment. And both the wizard and the fighter can do B. But the fighter has no method for participating in C, D, and E. However the wizard does.
This should be the formula A(v), B(v), C(v), D(v), and E(v).
The fact that the wizard can do everything isn't the problem, the fact that:
-In some builds/spell combos he can do A better, that’s a problem.
-The fact that he can do skills/tricks (we'll call these B traits) better than the core class design to do them is the problem.
C, D and E are part of what magic is going to do in a game, independent of casters - with or without a wizard, so a fighter can participate if the game facilitates it.
Ex: Frothgar the fighter who needs to teleport to Castle Doom uses the Crystal Tooth from Chubix the Demonlord (taken off his body) the only item in the universe that can get him there. It doesn’t get circumvented by Wizards C, D or E abilities.
So the functionality of D isn't the issue via items, tools, etc - it's the risks associated with it. And the fact that the caster can duplicate the risks of the Crystal Tooth (item X) with no risk is bs, and brought us to where we are at today.
So yes in my scenario the fighter circumvents many of D ability risks and gets his cake (teleport via the Crystal) and he gets to eat it (goes to Castle Doom). The wizard does not get to circumvent point 1 (he can duplicate it If he also gets the crystal) and he gets the same experience as point 2 (Castle Doom), when he gets there. He just experiences it with different tools and abilities.
And no - C, D and E are not on another plane/separate game leaving the mundanes in the dust. C, D and E should be areas that casters can dip in on a limited basis with great risks, not dance and play in. They don't get to wander in these zones unchecked and play the game on another level - they dip as needed to move the story along and sometimes they should need to be rescued from it by the A and B experts.
Whereas fighters traverse and deal in A and B at great risk to their physical health, casters should do the same (but weaker at A, always) and they should traffic in C, D and E at great peril to mind and body without guarantee for success.
And C,D and E should not only accomplishable by X spell, this is piss-poor game design. You should be able to get down the same road with a mix of actions and abilities - once you start answering X problem with Y spell you have eliminated the need for most other classes. This should never have been a design consideration, lazy and stupid.
The issue with time stop isn't that the wizard can stop time, it’s the fact that he can do it as frequently as he makes a ham sandwich. If the ability use was high risk this would reduce the use of the ability – thus reducing it’s dominance.
Ex: Fritzbang the Wizard - "We can just teleport into Blackleafs castle and slay him in his bed thusly….but, there could be a problem..."
Goliat the Fighter - "Speak Wizard!"
Fritzbang the Wizard – "well, when we arrive it may make some noise.."
Goliat the Fighter - "..and?"
Fritzbang the Wizard – "we may also be disoriented for a time due to lack of familiarity and some of us may be melded in the walls of his chamber"
Goliat the Fighter –"let's just ride there and clear the walls, save your spell if there’s a chance of us getting captured and we need a quick escape'.
Friztbang returns to the back of the party...where he belongs.
Balancing things by giving other classes full access to C, D and E turns everyone into spell casters - this is a failure in game design. You'd basically be taking one aspect of the game (casting and spells) and let it decide how the rest of the game should be played and how all the classes need to bend to it. Fail.
Make the damn spells have limitations and then the casters become the limited and great risk guys who can do C, D and E. Also C, D and E should not be the "win" button options (see original Demilich). A spell should not be the only counter to the problem, and it should not be the most efficient.
Tl:DR version – A & B can be one type of experience where everyone plays (not at the same level), while C, D and E are dip areas a tremendous risk and only to facilitate A & B play, not a separate level of play.
|
|
Let's see if I can do this a bit more formally.
- Let y and z represent different arbitrary characters of equal CR (generally meaning equal level).
- Let A(x) represent a character's skill in combat in obvious, mundane methods (attack, combat maneuvers, etc).
- Let B(x) represent a character's skill in combat in non-obvious, supernatural or magical methods (buffing, healing, etc).
- Let C(x) represent a character's skill in low-tier non-combat (diplomacy, jumping, etc, but not levitation and other supernatural/magical stuff).
- Let D(x) represent a character's skill in mid-tier non-combat (levitation, flight, speaking with plants and animals, etc)
- Let E(x) represent a character's skill in high-tier non-combat (teleportation, plane shift, time stop, cloning, astral projections, ethereal jaunt, etc). Basically anything that redefines the rules of engagement when used.
- Let the functions A, B, C, D and E have a range of between 0 and 1. This is enforced by normalizing values (highest capability of that CR is 1, lowest without unnecessary sacrifice is 0).
- Let the function F(x) = A(x) + B(x) + C(x) + D(x) + 5 * E(x)
- Given the above points, the ideal balance is when F(y) == F(z), with A and/or B being the highest values, C and/or D the next highest and E being the lowest (much lower than A and/or B).
In other words, given two characters, the amount of total capability in the various areas should be approximately equal, with "game-changer" abilities given much more weight than any other abilities due to their ability to completely turn situations upside-down. However, no matter how good you are at swinging the sword, you will never be able to be considered balanced unless you also have some contribution elsewhere.
Using this scale you'll likely see casters start a hair lower than martials, but end up notably higher by around level 10. By level 20 the gap is insane, except possibly in the case of "thematic-spells-only" builds of the spontaneous casters. Fighters and Rogues get the lowest rating. Fighters due to their low B and non-existent C, D and E. Rogues due to their low A, barely extant C, and completely non-existent D and E. Casters, meanwhile, end up with very high B, C, D and E. Some also have good A, depending on build, and do so by pulling a tiny amount from each of the others.
PS: C, D and E obviously can include combat applications, but the primary applications are generally non-combat.
PPS: I pretty much pulled the scale out of my rear, so it'll obviously need tweaks.
The fact that the wizard can do everything isn't the problem, the fact that:
-In some builds/spell combos he can do A better, that’s a problem.
It is a problem. But a minor one. Because even if the casters are balanced in combat against the fighting men or even if the balance is tipped in the other direct it will not matter. As long as the caster can handle level appropriate combat challenges AND handle a number of level appropriate situations above the number that the fighter can, than the wizard is going to continue to piss in the fighters cheerios.
-The fact that he can do skills/tricks (we'll call these B traits) better than the core class design to do them is the problem.
No. "skills" are not aspect B. They are a mechanic that allow you to interact with various aspects of the game but are not themselves an aspect. Aspect A can be combat, aspect B can be social interaction, aspect C can be overland travel and navigation, and so on. But simply saying I have skills and feats and equipment changes nothing about the aspects of the game you are interacting with.
C, D and E are part of what magic is going to do in a game, independent of casters - with or without a wizard, so a fighter can participate if the game facilitates it.
If the game facilitates it by handing you items that perform the actions necessary to participate in those aspects of the game FOR you, than nothing is solved. Fighting men will continue to be inferior in a game that hand waves its shortcomings by handing weaker classes magical "Do stuff" cards. Sometimes its cool to require the crystal skull or whatever. But if the only way you can even participate in parts of the games is by getting mystical hand waving than your class is still inferior and still less likely to actually solve the problems you are expected to face than the class that can just DO IT.
"And no - C, D and E are not on another plane/separate game leaving the mundanes in the dust. C, D and E should be areas that casters can dip in on a limited basis with great risks, not dance and play in. They don't get to wander in these zones unchecked and play the game on another level - they dip as needed to move the story along and sometimes they should need to be rescued from it by the A and B experts."
You are correct. Aspects C, D, and E are not on another plane. But casters should be dancing in it. And so should fighting men. Because interacting with those elements would open those classes up and allow them to tell a wider number of stories than "I can kill people yo"
And C,D and E should not only accomplishable by X spell, this is piss-poor game design. You should be able to get down the same road with a mix of actions and abilities
Hand waving the disparity with magical items and mystic locations of power that solve problems for you is literally no different than having spells solve the problems for you. I am advocating upgrading the fighting men so they can solve problems too.
Also I have to laugh at your role playing vs rollplaying swipe.
What I am advocating is returning risk which in turn enhances stories and plots with traditional fantasy complications: wizard is lost in time, summoned creature got out of control, created golem is acting strange,etc. What you are advocating (current system) is limitless and flavorless casting, with no deviation or story value but retaining mechanical value. I am advocating roleplaying via risk and consideration, you are advocating spells that work in combat sim (aka MMO) style of balance which IMO, is crap. SorryThese are good role playing? All I'm hearing is the GM ten minutes into the session saying "Um, crap, you're lost in time. We need to break for a month so I can come up with a new setting for you to be lost in." Possibly followed a week later by "Time travel is too complicated to deal with in an interactive medium. That spell failure didn't happen like that. You're all {fine/dead} and we'll meet this weekend to {pick up where we left off/roll up new characters}."
And that's the only interesting example. Summon goes out of control people die or they don't. Blah. Golem acting strange people die or they don't. Blah. These are mechanical complications with as little contribution to the story as an enemy summon remaining under control. But that's not what 1st edition had anyways. It had "you lose your spell and consequently probably die because you have d4 hit dice and will lose any spell you attempt to cast" and "the one good spell that works by making the martials better also ages them to death."
Any interesting spell failure is going to require the GM to break up the game to revise his plans unless he has no planned plot and an excess of planned locations.
I think the actual result he is hinting at is not "Wizard is lost in time," but rather "Wizard is too scared to actually cast spell that might lose them in time, so they cast fireball instead, like they're supposed to."
And the thing is, I agree to some degree, but would much prefer if they just couldn't, by default, cast the spell that might lose them in time, and instead leave it to some kind of discovered ritual/plot device he can't reliably be used.
|
The fact that the wizard can do everything isn't the problem, the fact that:
-In some builds/spell combos he can do A better, that’s a problem.
It is a problem. But a minor one. Because even if the casters are balanced in combat against the fighting men or even if the balance is tipped in the other direct it will not matter. As long as the caster can handle level appropriate combat challenges AND handle a number of level appropriate situations above the number that the fighter can, than the wizard is going to continue to piss in the fighters cheerios.
-The fact that he can do skills/tricks (we'll call these B traits) better than the core class design to do them is the problem.No. "skills" are not aspect B. They are a mechanic that allow you to interact with various aspects of the game but are not themselves an aspect. Aspect A can be combat, aspect B can be social interaction, aspect C can be overland travel and navigation, and so on. But simply saying I have skills and feats and equipment changes nothing about the aspects of the game you are interacting with.
C, D and E are part of what magic is going to do in a game, independent of casters - with or without a wizard, so a fighter can participate if the game facilitates it.If the game facilitates it by handing you items that perform the actions necessary to participate in those aspects of the game FOR you, than nothing is solved. Fighting men will continue to be inferior in a game that hand waves its shortcomings by handing weaker classes magical "Do stuff" cards. Sometimes its cool to require the crystal skull or whatever. But if the only way you can even participate in parts of the games is by getting mystical hand waving than your class is still inferior and still less likely to actually solve the problems you are expected to face than the class that can just DO IT.
...
"And no - C, D and E are not on another
What is this about pissing in the fighter's cheerios?
Does the fighter step back and let the Wizard handle every encounter?
Does the Wizard walk up and take the fighter's sword and do a better job?
Both classes fill completely different roles so I'm not sure what the problem is. I have seen Wizards end combats and I have seen fighter's do the same
I've seen fighter's get their asses kicked and I've seen Wizards get the same. Nobody has to sit down while the Wizard steps up and does it all. If an encounter is beaten by a spell very quickly then it's on to the next one.
The way some of you describe these scenarios it seems like you have never actually been part of an on going campaign, sounds a lot like theory crafting.
The fighter's does his job just fine. If you want more than what a fighter is supposed to do then just play another class.
What is this about pissing in the fighter's cheerios?
Does the fighter step back and let the Wizard handle every encounter?
Does the Wizard walk up and take the fighter's sword and do a better job?
Both classes fill completely different roles so I'm not sure what the problem is. I have seen Wizards end combats and I have seen fighter's do the same
I've fighter's get their asses kicked and I've seen Wizards get the same. Nobody has to sit down while while the Wizard steps up and does it all. If an encounter is beaten by a spell very quickly then it's on to the next one.
The way some of you describe these scenarios it seems like you have never actually been part of an on going campaign, sounds a lot like theory crafting.
The fighter's does his job just fine. If you want more than what a fighter is supposed to do then just play another class.
Emphasis mine. Please go back and read the entirety of the conversation so you have an understanding of the points that are being made.
I believe combat casting should be a feat chain
If you want to cast spells with creatures in your face then its going to cost you a few feats.You mean like Combat Casting and Uncanny Concentration? Which don't even give you that guarantee for your higher level stuff?
How about instead of making it so that wizards can do everything but have a 50/50 chance of s+#%ting their pants instead of being useful, we make it so that wizards can't do everything but can do what's left reliably. That sounds like more fun to me.
Fiddling around with a spellcasting system right now that's similar to this one but with a few differences. Would probably work better for the custom caster/martial hybrid I made for my little brother but it might be interesting to see in action for a full caster.
Essentially, spells known become very limited, but below a certain point they become at will (a 20th level full caster can cast 1st/2nd level spells at will, but he only knows as many as a Sorcerer would, maybe a little less), and as you go up they become more difficult to cast.
That same 20th level caster can cast 1st/2nd level spells all day long, but can only cast any given 3rd/4th/5th level spell 3/day, and any given 6th/7th level spell 2/day, but here's where it changes: Running out of one of those spells Fatigues them for a few rounds (and so by the rules running out of another 6th/7th level spell would exhaust them), 8th level spells instantly Exhaust them for a few rounds, and casting a 9th level spell causes them to fall unconscious for a few rounds from the strain. I think at 20th level I'd probably bump it down to merely Exhaustion for 9th level spells though.
It'd work much like this at lower levels, with the highest level spell causing unconsciousness (or at least Exhaustion) and then going down the Fatigue line. Probably wouldn't implement that until 4th/5th level spells or above though.
Essentially spells start working a lot more like spell like abilities but with a few differences. I'll see how it works in play in a couple of weeks.
|
|
Emphasis mine. Please go back and read the entirety of the conversation so you have an understanding of the points that are being made.What is this about pissing in the fighter's cheerios?
Does the fighter step back and let the Wizard handle every encounter?
Does the Wizard walk up and take the fighter's sword and do a better job?
Both classes fill completely different roles so I'm not sure what the problem is. I have seen Wizards end combats and I have seen fighter's do the same
I've fighter's get their asses kicked and I've seen Wizards get the same. Nobody has to sit down while while the Wizard steps up and does it all. If an encounter is beaten by a spell very quickly then it's on to the next one.
The way some of you describe these scenarios it seems like you have never actually been part of an on going campaign, sounds a lot like theory crafting.
The fighter's does his job just fine. If you want more than what a fighter is supposed to do then just play another class.
No I understand what you are saying completely. You honestly sound like you would prefer 4th edition better because you seem to have a problem with the fighter needing magical gear to do his job. It seems you would rather have it built into the class.
What you seem to forget is the fact that the class is supposed to be built around magical swords and armor. That is what a fighter is and has always been. It is a person who is damn good at melee combat who enhances this with magical swords, armor and other trinkets.
Wizards control magic while fighter's do not. Fighter's are the guys who can do the extra ordinary in a world full of magic without commanding the forces of magic so they use items of magic.
What are you comparing when you talk about the fighter being inferior?
I don't go in much for all this "inferior/superior" talk. To me it's all about the story, and the story should have opportunities for all the party members to shine in one way or another.
The distinction should not be between "wizard" and "fighter" but between "casters" and "martial" characters.
It should be understood that there are some "casters" which have some dabbling into the "martial" realm, and there are some "martial" which have some dabbling into the "caster" realm.
But the delineation between the two does demonstrate some significant game mechanic realities. The most important of which is that casters can do things that martials can't, but the reverse is not true. Casters may not be as good at martial activities as martial characters are, but they can do them. And as several posters demonstrated in a separate thread, they can actually do the martial things much better than most people realize. But no matter how frantically a fighter waggles his fingers and sticks out his tongue, no blast of arcane power is going to destroy his opponent.
To some people this is a bug. To others it's a feature. I tend to be more on the "feature" side of the debate.
The best rationalization of how the martial character closes the gap with the casters is that martial characters can do their thing all day long and don't need to huddle in a corner for an hour every day to be able to do their job. They just do it. All day long.
In game management terms that means one way to demonstrate the value of a martial character is to bleed the casters dry and have the martial characters save the day with pure grit, sweat, toil and blood.
No I understand what you are saying completely. You honestly sound like you would prefer 4th edition better because you seem to have a problem with the fighter needing magical gear to do his job. It seems you would rather have it built into the class.
No, you clearly do not understand or you wouldn't have even used any of the examples you did. They don't pertain to me or my position.
And to be clear, 4e solves not a single one of the issues I'm talking about. It is a horrible game.
What you seem to forget is the fact that the class is supposed to be built around magical swords and armor. That is what a fighter is and has always been. It is a person who is damn good at melee combat who enhances this with magical swords, armor and other trinkets.
And that is why he sucks.
What are you comparing when you talk about the fighter being inferior?
Absolutely every single thing that cannot be resolved with a weapon.
in my experiences with Martially Oriented Divine Casters. whether cleric, oracle or inquisitor. i felt a lot of the same issues a martial character would feel.
my spell list was mostly buffs, as could be done with limited spells available but i felt as bad as any other aware martial. feeling like the mere clean up crew for Seth's arcanist in Weekly William's group. with the exception of a handful of martials once in a blue moon. Seth had a literal habit of playing arcane spellcasters and his current bard, devastates things with a combination of skills and arcane spellcasting. an int/cha focused caster bard who literally eliminates any source of challenge. it doesn't help that most of the foes we face are medium humanoids with bad will saves. a ranger with Favored Enemy (Human) would break the campaign.
a beatstick is still a beatstick, no matter what his/her sheet says. it doesn't matter whether the beatstick is a druid or oracle, fighter or ranger, paladin or magus, inquisitor or barbarian. a beatstick will do the same stuff every other beatstick does. beat stuff with his pointy stick. it matters not whether you gain the bonuses from spell or item. for example; a beatstick oracle, deprives themselves of the majority of the power derived from their full casting, to become a beatstick with a handful of buffs and a few minor heals.
|
|
I don't go in much for all this "inferior/superior" talk. To me it's all about the story, and the story should have opportunities for all the party members to shine in one way or another.
The distinction should not be between "wizard" and "fighter" but between "casters" and "martial" characters.
It should be understood that there are some "casters" which have some dabbling into the "martial" realm, and there are some "martial" which have some dabbling into the "caster" realm.
But the delineation between the two does demonstrate some significant game mechanic realities. The most important of which is that casters can do things that martials can't, but the reverse is not true. Casters may not be as good at martial activities as martial characters are, but they can do them. And as several posters demonstrated in a separate thread, they can actually do the martial things much better than most people realize. But no matter how frantically a fighter waggles his fingers and sticks out his tongue, no blast of arcane power is going to destroy his opponent.
To some people this is a bug. To others it's a feature. I tend to be more on the "feature" side of the debate.
The best rationalization of how the martial character closes the gap with the casters is that martial characters can do their thing all day long and don't need to huddle in a corner for an hour every day to be able to do their job. They just do it. All day long.
In game management terms that means one way to demonstrate the value of a martial character is to bleed the casters dry and have the martial characters save the day with pure grit, sweat, toil and blood.
I suppose this is where we'll have to agree to disagree, as I view this as a bug. There should be some things that the martial can do that the caster simply cannot.
I also view it as a bug that martials can do their stuff all day, however.
In general, I believe that as long as martial characters seem to be banned from doing things equally outlandish as what casters can do, there will be imbalance. We probably won't see balance until people stop yelling about a martial type surviving a 100ft fall when the caster just fell from several miles up safely using a 1st level spell. Somewhere along the lines, the martial character has to be able to do that which seems patently and obviously impossible, even if it's not considered "magical".
Right now, most martials only get one or two "impossible" things each (except barbarian, which gets a few). Rangers get hide in plain sight, barbarians can break spells with their bare hands, paladins can stand in the face of the god of fear himself without so much as a bead of sweat, etc. However, casters can do these things with relatively low-level spells (invisibility instead of hide in plain sight, dispel magic instead of eating magic, etc). Sure, these are limited usage, but it still doesn't feel fair to the martial types that their "ultimate" abilities are often emulated with no more than a 3rd level spell. Heck, you can outright *become* a paladin (to a certain extent) with a 7th level spell (Bestow Grace of the Champion).
I'm not saying I want to see fighters casting time stop, because that would be stupid, but seeing a fighter summon their blade to their hand? Sure, why not. How about sending out damaging waves of energy from the sheer power of their swing? I'm cool with that. How about breaking the ground, turning into difficult terrain? Definitely!
Even these, of course, are emulatable with relatively low-level spells, so you'd likely have to come up with even more outlandish things at very high levels, but hopefully that serves as an example of "mundane, but not" types of things I would prefer to see.
Want to be a beatstick?
even if you have a 3/4 B.A.B. character who uses spells to become a better beatstick, choosing spells that make you a better beatstick narrow down your options to near the level of a true beatstick. with the addition of multiple attribute dependency, less feats, and more expensive gear.
so remember that the caster beatstick, has reduced himself from a full caster, to become a beatstick. and will become just as boring. DCs will suffer, Metamagic will be fewer, and former dump stats will be no longer easily dumpable.
What you seem to forget is the fact that the class is supposed to be built around magical swords and armor. That is what a fighter is and has always been. It is a person who is damn good at melee combat who enhances this with magical swords, armor and other trinkets.And that is why he sucks.
Full caster are more powerful than martial at highger level but I just disagree wit the statement that martials or particurally fighter sucks.
I have been show in several places that you can build a fighter that can handle a wide variety of combat situation and CR equivalent encountest and at the same time have an aceptable range of out of combat usefullness.
Now, he can not teleport, but why have he?
wizard isn't the only full caster.
look at the opportunity costs for a cleric, inquisitor or oracle to replace a fighter. a divine caster who chooses to become a beatstick limits his options severely
look at the opportunity costs for a wizard to replace a rogue. a wizard who tries to become a skill monkey is also severely limiting his options every time he tries to become a substitute rogue.
there are reasons why non-casters can be appreciated.
the beatstick oracle can't immediately enter the fight like the fighter can
and the skill wizard won't be as decent a trapfinder or face as a rogue built for it. having to find ways to compensate for investing in crossclass skills.
|
|
Want to be a beatstick?
even if you have a 3/4 B.A.B. character who uses spells to become a better beatstick, choosing spells that make you a better beatstick narrow down your options to near the level of a true beatstick. with the addition of multiple attribute dependency, less feats, and more expensive gear.
so remember that the caster beatstick, has reduced himself from a full caster, to become a beatstick. and will become just as boring. DCs will suffer, Metamagic will be fewer, and former dump stats will be no longer easily dumpable.
Also, don't forget that it takes time to cast those spells during combat.
So while you are busy buffing up, the fighter is already engaged with the creature and/or has already dropped a creature and is on to the next.
|
|
No I understand what you are saying completely. You honestly sound like you would prefer 4th edition better because you seem to have a problem with the fighter needing magical gear to do his job. It seems you would rather have it built into the class.No, you clearly do not understand or you wouldn't have even used any of the examples you did. They don't pertain to me or my position.
And to be clear, 4e solves not a single one of the issues I'm talking about. It is a horrible game.
What you seem to forget is the fact that the class is supposed to be built around magical swords and armor. That is what a fighter is and has always been. It is a person who is damn good at melee combat who enhances this with magical swords, armor and other trinkets.And that is why he sucks.
Absolutely every single thing that cannot be resolved with a weapon.
What are you comparing when you talk about the fighter being inferior?
The fighter doesn't suck so I don't know why you keep saying it.
How about give us some real life game examples where the fighter has failed in his job?
Regards to your last remark: Then you obviously don't understand the class and what it represents. The fighter is the guy who solves problems with a melee or ranged weapon. Now you can create a multi tasking fighter in Pathfinder, Bob Loblaw and a few others have already demonstrated this.
The problem with these arguments is the fact that some of you want the fighter to be able to do everything. If there are traps that need disabling you call the rogue, you need some healing you call the cleric, you need to kill something big and nasty that has a lot of hit points you call the fighter, you need the party to fly and teleport then you call the Wizard. Everyone has their part to play in the party.
Want to be a beatstick?
even if you have a 3/4 B.A.B. character who uses spells to become a better beatstick, choosing spells that make you a better beatstick narrow down your options to near the level of a true beatstick. with the addition of multiple attribute dependency, less feats, and more expensive gear.
so remember that the caster beatstick, has reduced himself from a full caster, to become a beatstick. and will become just as boring. DCs will suffer, Metamagic will be fewer, and former dump stats will be no longer easily dumpable.
Also, don't forget that it takes time to cast those spells during combat.
So while you are busy buffing up, the fighter is already engaged with the creature and/or has already dropped a creature and is on to the next.
it takes time, except in circumstances where you are aware of approaching foes and have time to prepare, such as Skull and Shackles with shipboard combats. where it takes many rounds before ships engage at close enough range to board.
the ship to ship rules are intended to resolve the preboarding phase, but it is usually from what i have experienced "it's takes Ship X; Y rounds to get into boarding range, so you have Z rounds of free buffing." which applies to the enemy as well.
|
|
Want to be a beatstick?
even if you have a 3/4 B.A.B. character who uses spells to become a better beatstick, choosing spells that make you a better beatstick narrow down your options to near the level of a true beatstick. with the addition of multiple attribute dependency, less feats, and more expensive gear.
so remember that the caster beatstick, has reduced himself from a full caster, to become a beatstick. and will become just as boring. DCs will suffer, Metamagic will be fewer, and former dump stats will be no longer easily dumpable.
Also, don't forget that it takes time to cast those spells during combat.
So while you are busy buffing up, the fighter is already engaged with the creature and/or has already dropped a creature and is on to the next.
it takes time, except in circumstances where you are aware of approaching foes and have time to prepare, such as Skull and Shackles with shipboard combats. where it takes many rounds before ships engage at close enough range to board.
the ship to ship rules are intended to resolve the preboarding phase, but it is usually from what i have experienced "it's takes Ship X; Y rounds to get into boarding range, so you have Z rounds of free buffing." which applies to the enemy as well.
Agreed.
If you actually have time to buff then you will be grand but going back further for the prepared casters. Pre buffing isn't that great when you didn't prepare the right buff spells for that day.
Now if you've memorized the right spells and have plenty of time to prepare for the upcoming battle and you know whats coming then you will rock. A lot of what if's though.
Also, don't forget that it takes time to cast those spells during combat.
So while you are busy buffing up, the fighter is already engaged with the creature and/or has already dropped a creature and is on to the next.
it takes time, except in circumstances where you are aware of approaching foes and have time to prepare, such as Skull and Shackles with shipboard combats. where it takes many rounds before ships engage at close enough range to board.
the ship to ship rules are intended to resolve the preboarding phase, but it is usually from what i have experienced "it's takes Ship X; Y rounds to get into boarding range, so you have Z rounds of free buffing." which applies to the enemy as well.
Agreed.
If you actually have time to buff then you will be grand but going back further for the prepared casters. Pre buffing isn't that great when you didn't prepare the right buff spells for that day.
Now if you've memorized the right spells and have plenty of time to prepare for the upcoming battle and you know whats coming then you will rock. A lot of what if's though.
true, but it is also easy to aqcuire a list of Generally useful buffs, and any rounds the party spends prebuffing, are also rounds the enemy is entitled to prebuff. so it kind of balances out.
but in my S&S experience, Shipboard combat has pretty much been a contest of who can kill the enemy's enlarged, bulls strengthed, cat's graced, bears enduranced, hasted, greater magic weaponed, greater magic vestmented, death warded, barkskinned, shield of faithed, freedom of movemented, flying, lead bladed, reach polearm wielding beatstick first.
Regards to your last remark: Then you obviously don't understand the class and what it represents. The fighter is the guy who solves problems with a melee or ranged weapon. Now you can create a multi tasking fighter in Pathfinder, Bob Loblaw and a few others have already demonstrated this.
And that's stupid. Seriously. If you're the guy who solves problems with a melee or ranged weapon then you're just a guy whose role in the party can be replicated with another classes features or purchased with gold or obtained with leadership. The fact that your fighter Bill the Butcher did this one funny or interesting thing that one time as opposed to Carl the Kill becomes completely meaningless as long as there continues to remain a class that defines itself as "dude who kills shit."
The problem with these arguments is the fact that some of you want the fighter to be able to do everything. If there are traps that need disabling you call the rogue, you need some healing you call the cleric, you need to kill something big and nasty that has a lot of hit points you call the fighter, you need the party to fly and teleport then you call the Wizard. Everyone has their part to play in the party.
No one has said anything about the fighter being able to do everything. What I'm arguing is that as long as he continues to do only ONE thing than the class will continue to be out shined. And if you try to solve this issue by giving him a magical macguffin for everything he should be doing, then he will always be out shined.
In the general thing of thing I would rate the fighter as the lowest of the full BAB classes. Assuming we take out the base + accuracy + damage abilities that all the full HD classes have (smite evil, favored enemy, challenge and weapons training) and assume as a whole they are roughly equal. Then the fighter clearly loses on class features.
Looking at Class Features
Barbarian's get pounce, sunder spells, strength surge and superstition.
Gunslinger's target touch AC, have some nice tricks and decent reflex saves.
Paladin's get legendary saves, divine bonds and quick action healing (the most important one IMO) as well as four levels of casting.
Rangers get better saves, animal companions, four levels of casting, evasion, hide in plain sight, terrain bonuses and bonus feats (ones that let you skip pre-reqs).
Fighters get bravery (pretty minor), Armor Mastery (pretty decent bonus to AC) and access to some decent feats (point blank mastery, focus and specialization tree's.)Archery fighters can be quite good but as a whole I would prefer to play a gunslinger as ranged attacker due to the touch AC, high crit rates and most of all dex to damage.
We haven't been clear. But when I say fighter or fighting men I am talking about all of the full BAB martial classes. And when I say wizard or caster I mean all of the full casters. Though I agree with you and I would also rate the Fighter class is the lowest of the martial classes.
|
|
@WPharolin - Respectfully, you showed with the high level wizard you described that you are already hand waving the few risks and costs still part of the system.
At the end of the day, the Devs want all story options to be possible, and write spells to leave open possibilities. The problem is that some people interpret this possible as problem.
If you read the spell as open to greater expansion, you create disparity. If you hand wave failure as unlikely, you create disparity.
Would I like more chance in the system, maybe. Do I think if GMs used common sense about how pissed off inter planar beings and there friends would be about abuses it would solve some problems? Works for the GMs I've played with.
Which is part of the bemusement that come invariably from the same people who say that Wizards are overpowered and broken being the ones who broke them.
|
|
Absolutely every single thing that cannot be resolved with a weapon.
What are you comparing when you talk about the fighter being inferior?The fighter doesn't suck so I don't know why you keep saying it.
How about give us some real life game examples where the fighter has failed in his job?
Regards to your last remark: Then you obviously don't understand the class and what it represents. The fighter is the guy who solves problems with a melee or ranged weapon. Now you can create a multi tasking fighter in Pathfinder, Bob Loblaw and a few others have already demonstrated this.
The problem with these arguments is the fact that some of you want the fighter to be able to do everything. If there are traps that need disabling you call the rogue, you need some healing you call the cleric, you need to kill something big and nasty that has a lot of hit points you call the fighter, you need the party to fly and teleport then you call the Wizard. Everyone has their part to play in the party.
Wrong. Absolutely wrong. The fighter's job is to enable his player to have fun interacting with the game world, same as every other PC character class.
In any conflict where violence is socially unacceptable he fails in that job. In any conflict where violence is a losing proposition but skills can be used to avert combat he fails. Any time a character's best action in a scene that requires more than a couple quick skill checks is to stand there with his mouth shut and twiddle his thumbs he fails to do his job as a mechanism for player-GM interaction.
LOL!
I'm talking about what the class was designed for.
Fun has nothing to do with what we are talking about.
Now if you've memorized the right spells and have plenty of time to prepare for the upcoming battle and you know whats coming then you will rock. A lot of what if's though.
The highest level I ever played from 1st was 21st, back in 3.5. It was a long, tough campaign. We never went anywhere without our beatstick, and he was awesome, especially when we buffed him, and he used his own magic items to pound the crap out of things our best blaster could only singe.
Our rogue was like that, too. With any prep time, he got some buffs that made him quite the sneak attacker, and he saved us a lot of pain in the trap-filled, hostile places we sometimes went.
Maybe Elminster could run around by himself, but our party was always on a mission, and the casters played for the team, not just to save themselves if things went wrong.
At high level, it was a lot of bookkeeping, but we had party buffs up as needed, and the pace depended on party-wide spells, not just whatever uber-win-button the mage could cast.
I can't imagine a wizard trying to complete an adventure path on his own. Not gonna happen.
A lot of people here seem to be willfully missing the point.
Yes, Fighters CAN have lots of skill points, but they have to sacrifice what you call the purpose of the class (combat) to do so.
Fighters CAN do a lot of things, but that doesn't change the fact that they will never be as good at a lot of them as pretty much any other class, except combat.
|
|
A lot of people here seem to be willfully missing the point.
Yes, Fighters CAN have lots of skill points, but they have to sacrifice what you call the purpose of the class (combat) to do so.
Fighters CAN do a lot of things, but that doesn't change the fact that they will never be as good at a lot of them as pretty much any other class, except combat.
Fighters are so good at combat that they can sacrifice some combat potential and still be kicking ass and taking names.
It's apparent that the current Pathfinder fighter was not designed to be a skill monkey. If you have another class in the party who can use that skill better then you naturally let them handle it. The idea is to compare notes between characters to see what each other can and cannot do and let those who can the best do it while those who can't step back.
Common sense tells you to let the PC with the highest score attempt the job. The only thing you would need to worry about is if you were in a one man party and you need to fight, have loads and loads of skills, cast spells and heal.
a wizard technically can't Solo an AP. and even then, an AP is bound to include a wizard or few to teach your Cocky Apprentice a Lesson.
just because there exists a spell for every purpose doesn't mean you should use a spell for that purpose if a functional alternative stands before you.
got traps? the summoned monster might risk less damage to the party, but letting the Archaeologist or Urban Ranger do it instead saves you a spell slot. they can actually disable the trap without spell expenditure, and subtly. and not all traps deal damage, some of them inflict status ailments or serve as an alarm.
need to kill something? don't rely on the summoned creature, send the fighter guy instead. yeah, he may not be as expendable, but he sure as hell saved you a high level spell slot and an angry outsider.
need healing? allow the healbot cohort to take care of that. it saves wand charges.
what did we learn?
healbot cohorts are amazing.
Fighters are so good at combat that they can sacrifice some combat potential and still be kicking ass and taking names.It's apparent that the current Pathfinder fighter was not designed to be a skill monkey. If you have another class in the party who can use that skill better then you naturally let them handle it. The idea is to compare notes between characters to see what each other can and cannot do and let those who can the best do it while those who can't step back.
But even between other martials the Fighter falls behind in that regard. They don't have to sacrifice combat potential to be good at social interactions. Look at the Barbarian and especially the Ranger. They don't have to sacrifice anything to get twice and even thrice the Fighter's skill points, and they've still got full BaB and nifty as hell tricks to make up for them.
Common sense tells you to let the PC with the highest score attempt the job. The only thing you would need to worry about is if you were in a one man party and you need to fight, have loads and loads of skills, cast spells and heal.
But the thing is: The Fighter will almost never be that PC. He might have a good Climb, Swim, or Ride score, but due to his lack of skill points and very small list of class skills (seriously? Not even Perception?) he will very rarely have anything else beyond those.
That's the issue I have with the Fighter specifically. Martial classes in general aren't as crippled as many make them out to be, but the OP's point still holds true, they will almost always have more options. And more options makes them both more versatile (and thus better) and more interesting to play. I still wish all martial classes were on par with around the Inquisitor's level of versatility, but not necessarily to have spellcasting.
|
|
Fighters are so good at combat that they can sacrifice some combat potential and still be kicking ass and taking names.It's apparent that the current Pathfinder fighter was not designed to be a skill monkey. If you have another class in the party who can use that skill better then you naturally let them handle it. The idea is to compare notes between characters to see what each other can and cannot do and let those who can the best do it while those who can't step back.
But even between other martials the Fighter falls behind in that regard. They don't have to sacrifice combat potential to be good at social interactions. Look at the Barbarian and especially the Ranger. They don't have to sacrifice anything to get twice and even thrice the Fighter's skill points, and they've still got full BaB and nifty as hell tricks to make up for them.
Common sense tells you to let the PC with the highest score attempt the job. The only thing you would need to worry about is if you were in a one man party and you need to fight, have loads and loads of skills, cast spells and heal.But the thing is: The Fighter will almost never be that PC. He might have a good Climb, Swim, or Ride score, but due to his lack of skill points and very small list of class skills (seriously? Not even Perception?) he will very rarely have anything else beyond those.
That's the issue I have with the Fighter specifically. Martial classes in general aren't as crippled as many make them out to be, but the OP's point still holds true, they will almost always have more options. And more options makes them both more versatile (and thus better) and more interesting to play. I still wish all martial classes were on par with around the Inquisitor's level of versatility, but not necessarily to have spellcasting.
Then use some of those many many feats you get to make yourself a skillful fighter.
I don't see very many clerics using a lot of skills. Hell, it's better to ask the Wizard about knowledge religion.
@WPharolin - Respectfully, you showed with the high level wizard you described that you are already hand waving the few risks and costs still part of the system.
Respectfully, you haven't demonstrated that anything I did involved any hand waving what-so ever. You claimed earlier that I dismissed the fact that dominate monster could be dangerous while ignoring the fact that dominated ogre magi are not dangerous. You have claimed that getting them to do something outside of their nature would grant them an additional save while neglecting the fact that they are acting within their nature. They were scouts for a group of thugs who only cared about the money. Their loyalty lies in gold. They have been well fed, well taken care of, and well equipped. And they are still just scouts. That said...twice now the oni have made thier saves and once they have all gotten free because of an anti-magic field. That didn't matter because they are ogre magi. They aren't a threat. They are scouts.
So...no I've never hand waved anything.
At the end of the day, the Devs want...
I'm not paticularly interested in the dev's desires. Only their results. That isn't to say that a discussion of what ought to be isn't worth while. Most of my discussions are from a design stand point and ask that very question. But unless they participate in the conversation their wants are very much irrelevant.
If you read the spell as open to greater expansion, you create disparity. If you hand wave failure as unlikely, you create disparity.
Individual spells are not a part of my argument so I'm going to ignore that except to say I read spells literally and do not allow obfuscation of the rules in play.
I'm not hand waving failure as unlikely. There are a large number of challenges that are well... challenging. And that means not presupposing success for any casting class. The disparity comes from a lack of participation on the martial end. Because the goal in any game is to create classes that can handle the challenges the game presents. Fighters don't handle any of them except for combat.
Would I like more chance in the system, maybe. Do I think if GMs used common sense about how pissed off inter planar beings and there friends would be about abuses it would solve some problems? Works for the GMs I've played with.Which is part of the bemusement that come invariably from the same people who say that Wizards are overpowered and broken being the ones who broke them.
This doesn't really address the issue. Of course if you bind a planar creature against its will its gonna be pissed. I've had a bound creature not only hunt down the party member who bound it before but succeed in killing him. The spell has that as an inherent thing. That doesn't really address the issue of fighter non-participation.
Another thing I should address. Not once have I said that wizards are overpowered and broken. My stance is the opposite. Fighters are broken ( I hate that term actually) by being replicable with abilities, spells, items, and a feat and not contributing anything more meaningful than those things do and sometimes offering less.
the fighter isn't really too good at theatrical or tactical combat, it however is really good at getting high numbers in stabbing people in the face with one type of pointy stick and a few others to a lesser degree.
any time the fighter cannot full attack is a time the fighter's contribution drops drastically. i agree they need more versatility. and not at the expense of combat numbers.
even if a fighter isn't intended to be a skill monkey, at least give them 2 additional skill points per level and more options within the scope of combat besides stabbing foes in the face with a pointy stick.
maybe give fighters huge permanent bonuses to CMB (lore warden huge) for free and the ability to utilize manuevers on creatures that would be deemed otherwise impossible such as tripping legless creatures or special combat manuevers that only a fighter could perform.
Nicos, that is not a stock fighter. that is a human tactician built around archery, a forgiving fighting style that carries your weight for you. i'm also not impressed by that strength of 10 or constitution of 12. you even have 2 extremely powerful non core items, a human alternate racial trait and a masterwork tool carrying the weight for you.
what you have proven, is not that a fighter can have decent skills, but that a human archery focused tactician with a few powerful noncore items and a powerful alternate racial trait can have decent skills.
i want to see what happens when you take Race, Archetype and Magical Gear out of the Equation on a separate sidebar.
I think theres far too much effort being exerted making a class called 'fighter' be good at anything else but 'fighting'... And far too much energy trying to prove that once the fighting be done the fighter can be packed up into his pokeball and forgotten about until its fighting time again.
I hate to state the obvious but Its sort of the name of the class. If you don't gravitate to that then why would you play one. What is this. The disenfranchised fighter's union? And to argue that it cant dip into the roles of other players?
A fighter can be a party face. A fighter can unlock doors and unlock locks and and shoot bows... I mean really he's dipping into thief and ranger abilities there don't ya think? He can throw flaming bottles of alchohol so there's your mundane fireball. Between his ability to use poison and bombs he's kind of dipping into alchemists job... To argue that he should also be able to heal you by spitting on some twigs and berries and rubbing the mess in your wounds? That he should be able to make magical things? To be able to teleport by 'cleaving a rift in spacetime itself? Tame tigers with a wink and a nod? Shadowsoul is right. If you want a caster who fights a bit there are options for it. When you choose fighter you're saying "No. I dont want to do that."
Hulk cant separate your laundry into whites and colors. Hulk can't cast haste. Hulk cant teleport. Hulk smash. Sure he's not the only one that can smash but when the class is called 'fighter' you get two guesses which thing he's good at.
The argument seems to be that the fighter is a class where you're just a page full of numbers tied to a light switch. When there's fighting to do you flip the switch on and hulk go nuts. When the fight is over hulk flip switch and is now a worthless lump that shouldnt bother with interpersonal interactions, problem solving, guarding the door, fixing the wagon, baking a pie, sharpening the tools, carousing with the ladies, or any other thing at all that a game style called 'role playing' is supposed to entail.
If that's how you play them then you're right. Thats weak man.
What you seem to forget is the fact that the class is supposed to be built around magical swords and armor. That is what a fighter is and has always been. It is a person who is damn good at melee combat who enhances this with magical swords, armor and other trinkets.
You're talking about the Fighter using magic items, which is fine, but wizards can use the same items. They're equally good at using magic items (and the wizard can even make their own). So how is this advantage fighter?
You know, I kinda hate that Fighter have so few skill points and subpar saves, but I do agree that they can be rather skilled if they want.
Most of the limitations of Fighters apply to pretty much every full-BAB martial character in the game, but Fighters suffer the most.
If the game allowed for more in-combat mobility, skill were more powerful and feats were more about breaking limits than about bypassing artificial restrictions, Fighter could become pretty awesome by just having more skill points and a little boost to their saves (Maybe Bravery should work against charm and dominate effects as well).
The problem is that 3.X/PF restricts martials to a very limited scope of choices, and punishes the ones who try to surpass these limits, while casters are constantly rewarded just by virtue of being casters.
Martial feats will often have very high prerequisites and do little more than "add +1 to damage" or some such. Caster feats only require yo to be a caster, and they usually give you powerful and different things to do.
Compare the ever-present Weapon Spec feat chain or Improved Trip to Quicken Spell, Natural Spell or Craft Woundrous Items.
For example, here is a non-human switch-hitter vanilla Fighter build with good Diplomacy, Sense Motive and Intimidate (plus decent Perception). He's rather useful in social situations and is still a threat in combat (and is even capable of pulling off a few cool tricks). And he's not even very optimized.
Half-Elf Fighter 11
LN Medium Humanoid (elf, human)
Init +3; Senses low-light vision; Perception +17
--------------------
Defense
--------------------
AC 28, touch 15, flat-footed 25 (+11 armor, +3 Dex, +2 natural, +2 deflection)
hp 87 (11d10+22)
Fort +13, Ref +10, Will +10 (+3 vs. fear); +2 vs. enchantments
Defensive Abilities bravery +3; Immune sleep; Resist elven immunities
--------------------
Offense
--------------------
Speed 30 ft.
Melee Heavy Shield Bash +17/+12/+7 (1d4+6/x2) and
. . +1 Earth breaker +18/+13/+8 (2d6+10/x3) and
. . +1 Silversheen Longsword +20/+15/+10 (1d8+9/19-20/x2) and
. . +2 Silversheen Falchion +22/+17/+12 (2d4+13/15-20/x2)
Ranged +2 Adaptive Composite longbow (Str +5) +18/+13/+8 (1d8+9/19-20/x3)
Special Attacks weapon training abilities (heavy blades +2, bows +1)
--------------------
Statistics
--------------------
Str 22, Dex 16, Con 14, Int 12, Wis 12, Cha 7
Base Atk +11; CMB +17 (+19 Sundering); CMD 32 (34 vs. Sunder)
Feats Blind-Fight, Combat Reflexes (4 AoO/round), Cornugon Smash, Deadly Aim -3/+6, Improved Critical (Falchion), Improved Sunder, Intimidating Prowess, Iron Will, Point Blank Shot, Power Attack -3/+6, Rapid Shot, Skill Focus (Diplomacy), Weapon Focus (Falchion)
Traits Ease of Faith, Suspicious
Skills Diplomacy +19, Intimidate +18, Perception +17, Sense Motive +16, Survival +1 (+3 to avoid becoming lost)
Languages Common, Draconic, Elven
SQ elf blood
Other Gear +2 Full plate, +1 Heavy steel shield, +1 Earth breaker, +1 Silversheen Longsword, +2 Adaptive Composite longbow (Str +5), +2 Silversheen Falchion, Amulet of natural armor +2, Belt of physical might (Str & Dex +2), Bracers of falcon's aim, Cloak of resistance +4, Ioun stone (clear spindle), Ring of protection +2, Wayfinder (1 @ 0 lbs), 850 GP
--------------------
Special Abilities
--------------------
Blind-Fight Re-roll misses because of concealment, other benefits.
Bravery +3 (Ex) +3 to Will save vs. Fear
Combat Reflexes (4 AoO/round) Can make extra attacks of opportunity/rd, and even when flat-footed.
Cornugon Smash When you damage an opponent with a Power Attack, you may make an immediate Intimidate check as a free action to attempt to demoralize your opponent.
Deadly Aim -3/+6 Trade a penalty to ranged attacks for a bonus to ranged damage.
Elf Blood You are counted as both elven and human for any effect relating to race.
Elven Immunities +2 save bonus vs Enchantments.
Elven Immunities - Sleep You are immune to magic sleep effects.
Improved Sunder You don't provoke attacks of opportunity when sundering.
Ioun stone (clear spindle) Sustains bearer without food or water.
Low-Light Vision See twice as far as a human in low light, distinguishing color and detail.
Point Blank Shot +1 to attack and damage rolls with ranged weapons at up to 30 feet.
Power Attack -3/+6 You can subtract from your attack roll to add to your damage.
Rapid Shot You get an extra attack with ranged weapons. Each attack is at -2.
Wayfinder (1 @ 0 lbs) A small magical device patterned off ancient relics of the Azlanti, a wayfinder is typically made from silver and bears gold accents. With a command word, you can use a wayfinder to shine (as the light spell). The wayfinder also acts as a nonmagical (magnetic) compass, granting you a +2 circumstance bonus on Survival checks to avoid becoming lost. All wayfinders include a small indentation designed to hold a single ioun stone. An ioun stone slotted in this manner grants you its normal benefits (as if it were orbiting your head), but frequently reveals entirely new powers due to the magic of the wayfinder itself (see Seeker of Secrets page 51).
Weapon Training (Blades, Heavy) +2 (Ex) +2 Attack, Damage, CMB, CMD with Heavy Blades
Weapon Training (Bows) +1 (Ex) +1 Attack, Damage, CMB, CMD with Bows
He'll never be the best at those skills, but that can be said about Paladins and Barbarians too. Combat-focused classes shouldn't be the most skilled, they just should be skilled enough.
But then again I could have used those traits to boost his subpar saves, and that +2 Int could have been better spent if he didn't have only 2 skill ranks per level. And that favored class bonus could be used to increase his HP and make him better at his intended role.
Maybe what you want is for the rule that other classes besides fighter being able to take 'combat' feats should be removed. If the argument is that too many other classes can do everything that a fighter can do but the fighter cant 'return the favor' then instead of adding stuff that makes no sense to a fighter you should take stuff away that makes no sense to a non fighter.
Put combat feats squarely in the hands of the fighting man. Full BAB or no combat feats for you. Fighting is the fighting mans job so why is everyone else able to steal his thunder. I know that doesnt solve the other point of this argument which is why cant my fighter be a 'caster'/'healer'/'please god something else but fighter' but you know. We're six pages into this already and I havent heard one good idea about what 'new thing' a fighter should be able to do that isnt 'do what other classes do'.
This argument that there are a+b+c+d+e ways to interact with the game... What we're looking for is a way 'F' (for fighter, nyuk nyuk) that fighters can do that nobody else can.
Nicos, that is not a stock fighter. that is a human tactician built around archery, a forgiving fighting style that carries your weight for you. i'm also not impressed by that strength of 10 or constitution of 12. you even have 2 extremely powerful non core items, a human alternate racial trait and a masterwork tool carrying the weight for you.
what you have proven, is not that a fighter can have decent skills, but that a human archery focused tactician with a few powerful noncore items and a powerful alternate racial trait can have decent skills.
i want to see what happens when you take Race, Archetype and Magical Gear out of the Equation on a separate sidebar.
- The bracers are cheesy i Accept. But the other items are nothing out of ordinary.
- The tactician do not need high con since he would stay far from melee and even if he have to go melee range he would not need a highg str since he have point blank mastter.
- I do not see how the non-core can be and issue. paladins, rangers and particullary barbarian have recieve a lot of love from non core books and nobody complain when they compare classes against fighter. For example Fey foundling, pounce, instant enemy, not to mention invulnerable rager or oath of vengance.
If you want to caompare core against core that is fine but it have to be stated from the begining.
- You can have a character without magic item or archetypes but I do not see how can we talk about fighters without taking the race into account. Just point anohter race and I see what i can do.
well those noncore love sources you mentioned don't drastically change the dynamic of the class as much as a human archery focused tactician does. you say you don't need as much constitution, but your 11th level fighter is unforgivably squishy for it's level. even if it does stay in the back. staying in the back does nothing against archers, most outsiders (at will greater teleport being common among them), and ranged builds of other types, or builds with extremely rapid movement.
|
|
@WPharolin - Respectfully, you showed with the high level wizard you described that you are already hand waving the few risks and costs still part of the system.Respectfully, you haven't demonstrated that anything I did involved any hand waving what-so ever. You claimed earlier that I dismissed the fact that dominate monster could be dangerous while ignoring the fact that dominated ogre magi are not dangerous. You have claimed that getting them to do something outside of their nature would grant them an additional save while neglecting the fact that they are acting within their nature. They were scouts for a group of thugs who only cared about the money. Their loyalty lies in gold. They have been well fed, well taken care of, and well equipped. And they are still just scouts. That said...twice now the oni have made thier saves and once they have all gotten free because of an anti-magic field. That didn't matter because they are ogre magi. They aren't a threat. They are scouts.
So...no I've never hand waved anything.
So it is the nature of Orge Magi to follow forever and ever...
This is my point. If you are telling my the Ogre Magi are following because the gold is good and they are treated well, great. That isn't magic, that is management.
But you aren't. You are allowing the dominate spell to be used as a slavery spell.
Which is your choice, you are GM and it is your game. But it is a loose reading with some handwaving.
I think theres far too much effort being exerted making a class called 'fighter'
We're talking about all full BAB classes. If you would prefer I can say barbarian instead. That said...a class called fighter is kinda dumb. Equally as dumb as a class called Meat Shield or Combatant. Warrior would have been a good name for the class. And then the NPC class could have had a name like soldier or grunt or hell...give them the name fighter. Let players have classes with names that don't subconsciously make them think that only having combat as a schtick is significant enough to justify your existence.
Hulk cant separate your laundry into whites and colors. Hulk can't cast haste. Hulk cant teleport. Hulk smash. Sure he's not the only one that can smash but when the class is called 'fighter' you get two guesses which thing he's good at.
Watchu talkin' bout Willis?? Seriously. The hulk is just the combat form of Bruce Banner who has a genius intellect. And even then if barbarians COULD hulk out, it would solve a lot of problems. Being so strong that you can jump 600 feet and smash through castle walls and rip trees out of thre ground with your hands means you have new applications for your abilities outside of combat.