The Main Problem with Fighters


Pathfinder First Edition General Discussion

51 to 100 of 3,805 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

the biggest thing about fighters that makes them under powered is that they are reliant on gear, and require more wealth be invested in them than other classes

in campaigns where your PCs are all selfish jerks, playing a fighter is very difficult because not only will you not have good gear, but your wizard cares more about shooting fireballs everywhere and stealing your kills than throwing you a buff, and as fa as he's concerned, you never earn your share of the loot anyway because he kills all the things anyway, making it even more difficult to play a fighter in that kind of setting


"Stealing your kills"? Haven't heard that at an RPG table in like, ever I don't think. In our group if a wizard wasted spells killing something that was going to go down anyway, the rest of the group would be all over him for wasting resources.

If the fighter relies on gear, but has it, he's not underpowered. Wizard players will be quick to point out that at high levels they rely on gear to keep their spell's balanced with the magic defenses.

Every class relies on gear. Yeah fighters "need it" more than wizards, but I've yet to play in any game where they don't get what they need.


Adamantine Dragon wrote:

"Stealing your kills"? Haven't heard that at an RPG table in like, ever I don't think. In our group if a wizard wasted spells killing something that was going to go down anyway, the rest of the group would be all over him for wasting resources.

If the fighter relies on gear, but has it, he's not underpowered. Wizard players will be quick to point out that at high levels they rely on gear to keep their spell's balanced with the magic defenses.

Every class relies on gear. Yeah fighters "need it" more than wizards, but I've yet to play in any game where they don't get what they need.

i would love to play at your table, mine is very difficult to get a decent sense of enjoyment from because everyone is so used to the mechanic of your characters worth is defined by how much stuff he kills, and we constantly fight over gear and wealth

we did at one point, collaborate our funds together, but once the guy who's character was holding it spent it all on himself we stopped doing it, and we now fight over loot and gold, and while interesting role play wise, is very unproductive, and un-fun when you try and play anything that isnt a CN selfish jerk who might feel bad about killing people sometimes

i have yet to play at a table where we have a team that actually works together and splits wealth fairly... its kind of sad


2 people marked this as a favorite.

because the fighter has no spells of his own, he is actually a bigger drain on party resources than one would realize.

while everyone is limited on HP, the fighter, not only cannot cast any spells, but with a trait and a feat, he won't be using his own cure wands till post 10th level. no, he requires the spellcaster to use his wand upon him for him.

and a fighter is barely any better than a summoned monster. more HP and AC, yes, but summons are so freaking expendable it is crazy. have you not seen the level of expendabilty a summoned creature possesses?

9th level fighters aren't as expendable as 5th level slots. and the 5th level slot isn't too far behind.


Have you considered talking to the DM about maybe running a patron that receives all the loot and then equips the party according to their performance and acquisitions?

Possibly with a magical bag of teleporting into the patron's vault if need be.


DM is unsure about how to handle it, he is considering having separate loot piles for each of our characters so we all get equal WBL

tho, for the sake of flavor and story i dislike that, but i understand the necessity of punishing selfishness

i did have plans of bailing out on my LG paladin in favor of a female antipaladin whose role was to seduce and trick every other character into thinking she was interested in them, and then getting all of their stuff for free

but on topic, fighters require more investments to make themselves more viable in combat, as far as damage is concerned, now, i think it might be worth looking into to see a fighter use his bonus feats to optimize combat maneuvers and create optimal combat situations

we had a fighter take on this role before, and it really made me question the superiority of DPR based mind sets in builds, that said, he would still have to be secondary to your BDF for the party, and thus ineligible for the topic of discussion here

personally, i think fighters should be able to scale more attack/damage from weapon focus feats and weapon specialization feats, scaled by base attack, similar to power attack

giving them more options with more weapons is a good start


1 person marked this as a favorite.

There are soooo many threads on how to build a fighter correctly.

1. Don't tank will saves
2. Have a ranged option
3. Don't tank int.

Any good fighter will cover all 3 of these.
My favorite is a orc bloodline twf/'thrower which I have a few threads on.

Good skills, awesome tracking, survival and intimidate.
Can use wands, scrolls
DPR machine via twf and lockdown feats
High AC
Great thrower
Good will save
and TOUCH OF RAGE as a swift action for 1+1d4 rounds to insta kill anything within 30ft.

This is just ONE example.


kyrt-ryder wrote:

Have you considered talking to the DM about maybe running a patron that receives all the loot and then equips the party according to their performance and acquisitions?

Possibly with a magical bag of teleporting into the patron's vault if need be.

the patron idea sounds interesting. though in such a game with Weekly William, 2 highly specific players would recieve the majority of the upgrades (dale and seth), and others (like myself, aaron, and andrew). would be literally begging to get gear.

if underperformance meant more gear to compensate. i think it would be a good idea. the wealthy characters would be the weaklings with the crutches.

i'm not the king of optimizers, but weekly william doesn't like my fairly standard builds and calls them cheese, for doing things, a character of that level should be doing.

he tried to argue that a large animal companion would raise the party APL, despite being a class feature of the druid, a familiar or cohort doesn't raise it, nor does a summon. why should an animal companion or trained animal?

he doesn't seem to want to accept, that level 9 characters can drop CR11 foes in one full attack. with only mediocre optimization. in fact, he seems to try to aleviate this with APL+6-8 fights for a 10 person party (12 person adjustment made on the fly for the jaguar and counting the wereshark barbarian as 2 people). the party has neither a full healer nor a full arcanist nor sneak.

in an attempt to beef up the power of his monsters, he fails to realize, he is dealing with a party of a witch, a bard, 8 melee martials, and 2 pets. one a familiar with a wand of magic missile, the other a large jaguar. well, we have to let the jaguar free because we cannot take it on the ship. because it is too big, and because of a DM ruling that jaguars hate water (they are the most water loving felines out there).


So... it boils down to Wizards have the capacity to tank 3 stats (and can choose to downplay their choice of constitution or dexterity a little bit on an especially low point buy) while the only stat Fighters can afford to sacrifice is Charisma...

Wonderful. (Granted, this hits every class other than Primary Arcane Casters to some degree, but the beatsticks tend to suffer the most.)

EDIT: Hey Lumi, it's been a while since I've seen you on MSN, did you change IMs or something?


kyrt-ryder wrote:

So... it boils down to Wizards have the capacity to tank 3 stats (and can choose to downplay their choice of constitution or dexterity a little bit on an especially low point buy) while the only stat Fighters can afford to sacrifice is Charisma...

Wonderful. (Granted, this hits every class other than Primary Arcane Casters to some degree, but the beatsticks tend to suffer the most.)

EDIT: Hey Lumi, it's been a while since I've seen you on MSN, did you change IMs or something?

i just haven't been on MSN.


I just remembered this board has PM's now, so consider this derail concluded. (And please check your private messages Lumi)


Lumiere Dawnbringer wrote:
kyrt-ryder wrote:

Have you considered talking to the DM about maybe running a patron that receives all the loot and then equips the party according to their performance and acquisitions?

Possibly with a magical bag of teleporting into the patron's vault if need be.

the patron idea sounds interesting. though in such a game with Weekly William, 2 highly specific players would recieve the majority of the upgrades (dale and seth), and others (like myself, aaron, and andrew). would be literally begging to get gear.

if underperformance meant more gear to compensate. i think it would be a good idea. the wealthy characters would be the weaklings with the crutches.

i'm not the king of optimizers, but weekly william doesn't like my fairly standard builds and calls them cheese, for doing things, a character of that level should be doing.

he tried to argue that a large animal companion would raise the party APL, despite being a class feature of the druid, a familiar or cohort doesn't raise it, nor does a summon. why should an animal companion or trained animal?

he doesn't seem to want to accept, that level 9 characters can drop CR11 foes in one full attack. with only mediocre optimization. in fact, he seems to try to aleviate this with APL+6-8 fights for a 10 person party (12 person adjustment made on the fly for the jaguar and counting the wereshark barbarian as 2 people). the party has neither a full healer nor a full arcanist nor sneak.

in an attempt to beef up the power of his monsters, he fails to realize, he is dealing with a party of a witch, a bard, 8 melee martials, and 2 pets. one a familiar with a wand of magic missile, the other a large jaguar. well, we have to let the jaguar free because we cannot take it on the ship. because it is too big, and because of a DM ruling that jaguars hate water (they are the most water loving felines out there).

Why are you still playing this game? I've seen other people mention it like it's something people should be aware of so it must be a PBP or some sort of online thing so it's not that you're constrained by geography.

Scarab Sages

4 people marked this as a favorite.

Don't gimme the "God Wizardz r teh koolest!" garbage.

Fact is, the best way to win a fight against a monster/enemy is to make it dead.

"Battle field control" and all helps

But at the end of the day, hitting it with something that does damage is the way to win.

Fighters do it better more consistently than ANY. OTHER. CLASS.

All day, errday.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Bomanz wrote:

Don't gimme the "God Wizardz r teh koolest!" garbage.

Fact is, the best way to win a fight against a monster/enemy is to make it dead.

"Battle field control" and all helps

But at the end of the day, hitting it with something that does damage is the way to win.

Fighters do it better more consistently than ANY. OTHER. CLASS.

All day, errday.

I'd say Barbarians and Rangers to a lesser extent (lack of "consistency" since it's somewhat dependent on Favored Enemy, though they REALLY outstrip Fighters there) still outdo a Fighter in the "Kill them dead" department.

Though the fact that a Fighter can actually afford to use a Combat Maneuver is a point in their favor.

Whose bright idea was it to make Combat Maneuver proficiency the equivalent of Golarion's PhD anyway?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Fighters don't do it all day. They do it until the cleric or wizard runs low on spells. Then they go home with the rest of the group or the go on alone and die like chumps.

Now paladins, they actually reduce the stress on the cleric and with the right rage powers barbarians can reduce the stress on the wizard because pouncers need less anvil.


Fighters and Paladins, unlike Rangers and Barbarians, can have a crazy high AC while keeping a decent DPR. That's a plus in a low- to mid-level campaing. There's also the synthesist, but, well, what does the synthesist can't do?


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Maerimydra wrote:
There's also the synthesist, but, well, what does the synthesist can't do?

Walk down the street without a mob forming to lynch the abomination?


8 people marked this as a favorite.

The main "problems" I'm seeing here are the complaints of people who believe fighters are less powerful than optimized builds of other classes, or than full casters.

My response: Who cares? The optimization crowd obsessed with DPR, 1-round rocket tag combats, and being the most powerful character in the game is only one small segment of the gaming community, and I've heard their opinions (over and over again) and they are welcome to them. They have precious little connection to the reality of the way every group I've played with over the last 35 years plays the game.

Key and only important question for me: Is a fighter character fun to play?

Answer: YMMV. Fighters aren't for everyone. I rarely play one actually, but every now and then it's fun to just be big and bad and go medieval on your opponents.

Bottom line: This is a game we play for fun (at least most of us, I occasionally wonder about some posters). Each and every class and option within those classes is awesome in its own way if the person playing it is having fun doing so, and so are the other people at the table.


Atarlost wrote:


Walk down the street without a mob forming to lynch the abomination?

At which point self defense is never considered an evil act and SPLAT. All those lovely little low level npc's, all over the place.

Sovereign Court

7 people marked this as a favorite.

Eh. I think the only thing really necessary to fix the fighter is to give him a few more class skills and 4+Int skill points per level. The fighter is good enough in combat (different than the other martials, but good in his own way), but out of combat he runs low on skills to participate.


Ascalaphus wrote:
Eh. I think the only thing really necessary to fix the fighter is to give him a few more class skills and 4+Int skill points per level. The fighter is good enough in combat (different than the other martials, but good in his own way), but out of combat he runs low on skills to participate.

I tottaly agree with that.


Add a good will save to that Ascalaphus and you just might be on to something.


Thomas Long 175 wrote:
Atarlost wrote:


Walk down the street without a mob forming to lynch the abomination?
At which point self defense is never considered an evil act and SPLAT. All those lovely little low level npc's, all over the place.

A man who walked into a jewish neighborhood wearing a nazi officers uniform and a holstered gun might be seem a little less threatening than when the Guyver strolls on into the poor little village with his bioboosted armor.


One point to consider: Fighters can be designed to be 'simple' for players who do not want to keep track of complicated characters. Newbie character? give them a simple fighter build without many options.

For those of us that do not like simple fighters are still great because of the number of combat options. Personally, I love them. Will I play a fighter 'over' another class? No. I play whichever concept I feel like playing at the time and can have fun playing any core class.

- Gauss

Sovereign Court

kyrt-ryder wrote:
Add a good will save to that Ascalaphus and you just might be on to something.

Maybe.. fighters could already take the Iron Will feat for that, they do have a bit more room in their feat selection. Skill points is what they really lack.

And I think they deserve Diplomacy as a class skill (officers, knights) as well as Geography, History and Nobility knowledges. Maybe even Heal, since that's a lot of battlefield medicine.

I'm not saying every fighter should be taking those skills; but they can be appropriate for very normal fighter concepts, so they should be class skills. After all, the rogue (for example) doesn't have only those skills as class skills that EVERY rogue would have.


Expecting a Fighter to take a specific feat when his primary feature is "lots of flexibility in feats" seems like bad game design to me.

Besides, even with a good will save, the melee guy is the classical target for compulsion spells (and typically has the personality most shamed by failing to save against fear effects) and could always benefit from MORE will save bonus if he chose to invest in Iron Will on top of having a good save in-class.

Sovereign Court

Hmm, then I'd rather reskin Bravery to also protect against Compulsion and Charm. Keep in mind that Will saves are also against some non-mind-affecting things like Slow and Glitterdust, and spells like Color Spray that are meant to shut down dumb hitters.

So then it'd be "you can shut me down, but you can't turn me against my own". That makes sense to me; fighters should be more reliable than barbarians when it comes to not turning on the party, but instead Rage actually hinders such chicanery.


I could live with that change. Convert Bravery to "Resolute" and grant the bonus against Fear Effects, Demoralize(Intimidate), Charms and Compulsions.


Brian Bachman wrote:

The main "problems" I'm seeing here are the complaints of people who believe fighters are less powerful than optimized builds of other classes, or than full casters.

My response: Who cares? The optimization crowd obsessed with DPR, 1-round rocket tag combats, and being the most powerful character in the game is only one small segment of the gaming community, and I've heard their opinions (over and over again) and they are welcome to them. They have precious little connection to the reality of the way every group I've played with over the last 35 years plays the game.

Key and only important question for me: Is a fighter character fun to play?

Answer: YMMV. Fighters aren't for everyone. I rarely play one actually, but every now and then it's fun to just be big and bad and go medieval on your opponents.

Bottom line: This is a game we play for fun (at least most of us, I occasionally wonder about some posters). Each and every class and option within those classes is awesome in its own way if the person playing it is having fun doing so, and so are the other people at the table.

The most optimized DPR build(excluding summoners and highly specific stuff like smite evil) is to full round attack with a two handed weapon with power attack and weapon focus.

This is also a very common build. Its one a fighter can do just as well as any other martial.

The issue is that other classes have better contributions outside of DPR. Paladins have healing and much better saves. Rangers have more skill points, better saves and powers/spells.


Gauss wrote:

One point to consider: Fighters can be designed to be 'simple' for players who do not want to keep track of complicated characters. Newbie character? give them a simple fighter build without many options.

For those of us that do not like simple fighters are still great because of the number of combat options. Personally, I love them. Will I play a fighter 'over' another class? No. I play whichever concept I feel like playing at the time and can have fun playing any core class.

- Gauss

I disagree with giving a fighter to a newbie. While yes, it will be simple. A newbie should be playing a character that gives him a taste of everything. With a fighter, the newbie has very little to do outside of combat. He may find it very boring if he wants to do skill challenges or have more options than hitting it with his sword(at lower levels this is all he will be doing).


kyrt-ryder wrote:

Expecting a Fighter to take a specific feat when his primary feature is "lots of flexibility in feats" seems like bad game design to me.

Besides, even with a good will save, the melee guy is the classical target for compulsion spells (and typically has the personality most shamed by failing to save against fear effects) and could always benefit from MORE will save bonus if he chose to invest in Iron Will on top of having a good save in-class.

Fighters are much less feat flexible than people think. They have a line of fighter only feats they should take(weapon specialization and greater weapon focus) and can only use one weapon that works with these feats. They also need iron will.

An 11th level fighter has 3 more feats than a ranger, but he is spending two of them boosting weapon hit and damage and the last one boosting saves. Granted, he has the option of not taking these feats, but they are better than anything else he can take.


johnlocke90 wrote:
Brian Bachman wrote:

The main "problems" I'm seeing here are the complaints of people who believe fighters are less powerful than optimized builds of other classes, or than full casters.

My response: Who cares? The optimization crowd obsessed with DPR, 1-round rocket tag combats, and being the most powerful character in the game is only one small segment of the gaming community, and I've heard their opinions (over and over again) and they are welcome to them. They have precious little connection to the reality of the way every group I've played with over the last 35 years plays the game.

Key and only important question for me: Is a fighter character fun to play?

Answer: YMMV. Fighters aren't for everyone. I rarely play one actually, but every now and then it's fun to just be big and bad and go medieval on your opponents.

Bottom line: This is a game we play for fun (at least most of us, I occasionally wonder about some posters). Each and every class and option within those classes is awesome in its own way if the person playing it is having fun doing so, and so are the other people at the table.

The most optimized DPR build(excluding summoners and highly specific stuff like smite evil) is to full round attack with a two handed weapon with power attack and weapon focus.

This is also a very common build. Its one a fighter can do just as well as any other martial.

The issue is that other classes have better contributions outside of DPR. Paladins have healing and much better saves. Rangers have more skill points, better saves and powers/spells.

Wrong they don't get pounce which is very useful for a two hand fighter build. Though I hate to point out that ranged builds as a whole do consistently more damage per round and can deal with flying opponents.

Silver Crusade

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Adamantine Dragon wrote:

They make these amazing things called bows... Maybe they could be useful against flying enemies...

Or so I hear. Mostly I just throw my helmet at them.

Or he chugs that Potion of Fly he bought or maybe, just maybe, the wizard uses a little teamwork and casts Fly on the fighter so he can fly up to the enemy.

Silver Crusade

master_marshmallow wrote:

the biggest thing about fighters that makes them under powered is that they are reliant on gear, and require more wealth be invested in them than other classes

in campaigns where your PCs are all selfish jerks, playing a fighter is very difficult because not only will you not have good gear, but your wizard cares more about shooting fireballs everywhere and stealing your kills than throwing you a buff, and as fa as he's concerned, you never earn your share of the loot anyway because he kills all the things anyway, making it even more difficult to play a fighter in that kind of setting

The fighter has always relied on gear so what's your point?

The fact of the matter is, the fighter's contribution to the team is valuable and never lacking. It does the job it was meant to do perfectly and you can't go wrong there.

Silver Crusade

Lumiere Dawnbringer wrote:

because the fighter has no spells of his own, he is actually a bigger drain on party resources than one would realize.

while everyone is limited on HP, the fighter, not only cannot cast any spells, but with a trait and a feat, he won't be using his own cure wands till post 10th level. no, he requires the spellcaster to use his wand upon him for him.

and a fighter is barely any better than a summoned monster. more HP and AC, yes, but summons are so freaking expendable it is crazy. have you not seen the level of expendabilty a summoned creature possesses?

9th level fighters aren't as expendable as 5th level slots. and the 5th level slot isn't too far behind.

That's what clerics, potions and wands of cure light wounds are for. What else were you planning on spending the party's collected "group fund" on?

You do realize it is a healers job to do that crazy thing known as healing.

It's a hell of a lot easier to heal the fighter than it is to raise the Wizard.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
master_marshmallow wrote:

the biggest thing about fighters that makes them under powered is that they are reliant on gear, and require more wealth be invested in them than other classes

in campaigns where your PCs are all selfish jerks, playing a fighter is very difficult because not only will you not have good gear, but your wizard cares more about shooting fireballs everywhere and stealing your kills than throwing you a buff, and as fa as he's concerned, you never earn your share of the loot anyway because he kills all the things anyway, making it even more difficult to play a fighter in that kind of setting

So a wizard without his gear (spellbook) is awesome? Take away a fighters weapon he has like 4 others. Take away a spellbook for a wizard and it aint pretty. Thats if u have a dm diabolical enuff to steal someones spellbook AND the player dont ward it against theft

Silver Crusade

I would actually like to see a Profession open up skills for a PC. Let's say the fighter took Soldier as his profession, after say 2 ranks he could choose from a list of skills such as Heal pr Perception to add to his class skills.


Can't really complain about fighters myself as I've played a couple of fighters & had a great time with both, but I've got a buddy currently in a campaign who gets a bit bummed sometimes because the Summoner's...... whatchamacallit (Can't remember the name!) consistently over shadows him in combat situations.


shallowsoul wrote:
Adamantine Dragon wrote:

They make these amazing things called bows... Maybe they could be useful against flying enemies...

Or so I hear. Mostly I just throw my helmet at them.

Or he chugs that Potion of Fly he bought or maybe, just maybe, the wizard uses a little teamwork and casts Fly on the fighter so he can fly up to the enemy.

Chugging potions of fly is borderline braindead until excessively high levels. At 750 gp a pop and lasting only 5 minutes (IE - one combat), that's a heck of a lot of gold to be drinking. I'm with AD on this one. Arrows are cheap.

Quote:
That's what clerics, potions and wands of cure light wounds are for. What else were you planning on spending the party's collected "group fund" on?

Not wasting resources is a good start. Clerics are better if they don't have to heal frequently, channel energy is very underwhelming, and the fighter offers nothing to the pool of party resources other than the ability to hit things, whereas Paladins and Rangers actually increase party longevity.

Quote:
I would actually like to see a Profession open up skills for a PC. Let's say the fighter took Soldier as his profession, after say 2 ranks he could choose from a list of skills such as Heal pr Perception to add to his class skills.

So your answer to addressing the fighter's skill issue is force him to sacrifice his already limited pool of skill points on skills that are essentially useless to merely gain the opportunity to have another skill be a class skill? Gross.

JoeCargo wrote:
So a wizard without his gear (spellbook) is awesome? Take away a fighters weapon he has like 4 others. Take away a spellbook for a wizard and it aint pretty. Thats if u have a dm diabolical enuff to steal someones spellbook AND the player dont ward it against theft

I'm playing a wizard->cleric->mystic theurge (not the most optimal but it fits the character) right now in a campaign. Just recently made it to 2nd level (as of last session). I've filled 1/4th of my starting spellbook. I've already got plans to procure additional books for more spells and some books for traveling purposes and backups. Theft is rarely a concern because I do not keep such books in places where they can be stolen (Slight of Hand has its limits, especially upon 3rd level when I'll be able to comfortably booby-trap my spellbook) and at higher levels my main books will be in a scry-proof location.


Cleric of Caffeine wrote:
Can't really complain about fighters myself as I've played a couple of fighters & had a great time with both, but I've got a buddy currently in a campaign who gets a bit bummed sometimes because the Summoner's...... whatchamacallit (Can't remember the name!) consistently over shadows him in combat situations.

I think its important to note that any class is viable in the right campaign and that even if you are suboptimal, its still completely playable. If you are a fighter in a party with a wizard and a rogue, then you will contribute plenty. Heck, you could play an NPC warrior class in that group and still contribute because nobody else has taken your role.

The issue is when someone else in your party plays something that is flat out better. For instance, a 2H ranger with an animal companion or a 2H barbarian with pounce versus a 2H fighter.


My problem with fighters is that two of them dealt over 1000 points of damage to AC 50+ at 15th level, in a couple rounds. It makes it fairly difficult to have meaningful melee threats without suping them up beyond expectations as a result.


Kain Darkwind wrote:
My problem with fighters is that two of them dealt over 1000 points of damage to AC 50+ at 15th level, in a couple rounds. It makes it fairly difficult to have meaningful melee threats without suping them up beyond expectations as a result.

High level play turns into rocket tag with many classes. At this point, the wizard/sorcerer can one shot enemies with save or sucks.

Fighters aren't hard to beat(a lot of high level monsters have save or suck will save auras). The hard part is creating a challenging, fun encounter.


It seems to me that in every campaign I've been in that Fighters are just fine as long as the player can think creatively. They can be as fun or as boring as the player makes them.

Incidentally as far as healing goes a paladin with shield other is a front line fighter's best friend.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

The main problem with the core class Fighter has very little to do with the Fighter class.

It lies instead in variations of a single external issue: power creep through continued publication.

First, the ongoing and ever-expanding list of Base Classes (and, yes, I'm old school enough that I consider everything beyond the core 4 class concepts to be part of this expansion), and the on-going failure to actually balance out the effectiveness of the new classes compared to the 4 core class concepts.

Second, the ongoing and ever-expanding list of Feats that can be selected. In order to have Feats to include in the next book (to help sell it), Feats are being reduced in scope and effectiveness. The Whip Mastery Feats, for example. There was already a Feat to allow you to take Ranged attacks without provoking AoOs. Noting that this feat applies to Whip Attacks would have been simple, kept the system more concise and consistent, and completely failed to provide something new and shiny to help sell that next book. Improved Whip Mastery, Snap Shot, and Improved Snap Shot are all basically the same Feat, broken into different pieces and over-specialized in order to be able to create different Feat chains that can be marketed directly to different groups of players. Such similar Feats in the core of the system don't explicitly require specific weapons, they apply to any weapon which could benefit that the character has Weapon Focus for (and you may note that Weapon Focus IS a requisite for all 3 of those Feats).

Third, the ongoing and ever-expanding CMB option list, that the rules require independent and explicit specialization in each option, even as more are created again and again. This is an area where the Fighter class should REALLY shine, but the attempt to simplify the rules to CMB and CMD was effectively destroyed by the inconsistent definitions and action types required for different types of CMB activation, let alone the grossly mis-leading, overly-simplified representation of how to calculate the CMB and CMD scores for a given character.

Fourth, the ongoing and ever-expanding spell lists for the spell casting classes. Every book which contains spells needs to have at least a few spells in it which those players will want to use more than the spells they already have access to, in order to help drive the sale of books. This means that every book which has spells in it, has a few which power creep the capability of the spell casting classes at multiple points in the power progression.

Now, that is NOT an all inclusive list, not by any means. But the Fighter Class, as one of the truly core 4 classes, has no inherent problems. The Cleric, Fighter, Rogue, and Wizard each have good strengths and weaknesses which are best balanced by having the full set of core classes represented. Declaring one of the foundation stones of the player part of the system declared unworkable says more about player perceptions than it does about the system depending on the existence of that stone.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
JoeCargo wrote:
master_marshmallow wrote:

the biggest thing about fighters that makes them under powered is that they are reliant on gear, and require more wealth be invested in them than other classes

in campaigns where your PCs are all selfish jerks, playing a fighter is very difficult because not only will you not have good gear, but your wizard cares more about shooting fireballs everywhere and stealing your kills than throwing you a buff, and as fa as he's concerned, you never earn your share of the loot anyway because he kills all the things anyway, making it even more difficult to play a fighter in that kind of setting

So a wizard without his gear (spellbook) is awesome? Take away a fighters weapon he has like 4 others. Take away a spellbook for a wizard and it aint pretty. Thats if u have a dm diabolical enuff to steal someones spellbook AND the player dont ward it against theft

i meant something more along the lines of the fighter needing more WBL allocations because he has no abilities beyond the physical, and needs to invest more into his weapons and armor, where someone like a paladin wouldnt need it as bad because he has bonded weapon and smite

its not about what you take away, its about what you give them in the first place, if a fighter doesnt get any gp for decent gear and gets wrecked all the time in a campaign, he isnt that fun to play

not to mention that you still need that belt of physical betterness

then, the argument about fighting enemies in the air is that a fighter who specializes in a melee weapon is never going to be as good as he is with ranged weapons, unless we either eliminate the need for some feats, or condense them


To me the fighters "gimmick" thier "thing" is that they do that damage, on a regular basis, while heavily armored, and they are still doing cartwheels around the field while anybody else in thier gear would be struggling to hustle. That and they can specialize in literrally any combat style they want and once you get enough levels under you, speccing out 2-3 styles isn't out of the realms of possibility.

In short, the fighters "thing" is armor training along with getting a feat EVERY level.

Asta
PSY


johnlocke90 wrote:
Kain Darkwind wrote:
My problem with fighters is that two of them dealt over 1000 points of damage to AC 50+ at 15th level, in a couple rounds. It makes it fairly difficult to have meaningful melee threats without suping them up beyond expectations as a result.

High level play turns into rocket tag with many classes. At this point, the wizard/sorcerer can one shot enemies with save or sucks.

Fighters aren't hard to beat(a lot of high level monsters have save or suck will save auras). The hard part is creating a challenging, fun encounter.

The encounter wasn't rocket tag, it stood up to the 1000+ damage through a combination of damage reduction and other damage reducing abilities. Neither the wizard nor the sorcerer in the party was able to one shot it at all. And will saves along with debuffs to save bonuses were employed, and the fighters still will saved through it.

The issue there is that it happened at all...pretty much keeps me from using the tarrasque out of the book, for example. Makes pretty much any NPC either dog meat or a walking treasure trove of even more unbalancing abilities.

I can deal with it, it isn't impossible, but it definitely makes encounter design tougher when one class can deal out so much damage in a single go. To me, that's the problem with fighters.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I don't think that fighter's skill limits are terribly troublesome, but getting more class skills and more skill points per level works too.

After reading this thread and the other humongous thread on the same subject (and probably a dozen others through the years) I'll tell you what I think is wrong with the fighter.

What's wrong with the fighter is the assertion that I see over and over and over again that a class has to be better at something than every other class or that class is worthless.

I not only don't agree with that, I don't understand it. If you took that logic to its ultimate conclusion you would eventually reduce the game to four classes. Maybe even three.

I haven't played a lot of classes in PF so far since we only converted from 3.5 about two years ago. But so far every class I've played has been perfectly playable and each had their benefits. I enjoyed playing my fighter thoroughly. He was in no way underpowered in a group consisting of a cleric, sorcerer and rogue. He did not use more cash nor more resources than any other character. His job in combat was to be the big brawny guy who tied up the enemy and made them go through him to get to the spellcasters. He did that job well. Outside of combat he had social skills and did a fine job being the party negotiator and "face". Yes, in a group that included a sorcerer he still was the primary contact point for the party. He did not have many skills with more than one or two ranks, but he had a lot of usable skills, and with his cohort, "guidance", aid another from the rest of the team and, on occasion, buffs to help, he successfully used skills a lot.

I suppose this is going to sound harsh, but a whole lot of this fighter hate comes across to me as "I don't want to have to accept less than the absolute highest possible chance of success for whatever I do, and I don't want to have to learn how to build and play characters that go beyond the most basic stereotypes for the class, so fighters suck."


Kain Darkwind wrote:
I can deal with it, it isn't impossible, but it definitely makes encounter design tougher when one class can deal out so much damage in a single go. To me, that's the problem with fighters.

Or rather, that's the nature of combat classes. While the wizards are reshaping reality and making it their *****, combat classes ****ing butcher things (or at least that's how it's supposed to work, doesn't always pan out in practice.)


3 people marked this as a favorite.

@AD: it's not only about wanting to be better at SOMETHING but about getting nice things. And having something that sets you apart.
And the only thing special about the fighter is that he can do what he does consistently over a longer time. Which, in most cases, is irrelevant be cause the group will not go on when their ressources are spent because they want to let the fighter shine. No, they come back when they all can do their stuff.

The fighter gets a feat at every level. That's cool. But it is not "wow! I've been waiting for that for X levels." And if there is a feat like that everyone and their brother can take the exact same feat, too.

There are those "fighter only" feats which only fighters and several archetypes can take. And what do they do? Are they cool? No, they add a little more to your big numbers.

What the fighters really needs is something else that feats every few levels. Like delete every second fighter bonus feat (level 2, 8, 12)and give him something else instead. A list of special abilities similar to rogue talents or discoveries and the like that only the fighter can get and that is cool (it doesn't have to be OP but it needs to be something nice)

Ideas for Fighter Powers:

-Arcane tricks: gets a CL equal to half his fighter level that lets him qualify for crafting feats and arcane strike
-Shrug it off: As a free action the fighter gets fast healing 1 for one minute. He can use that for a number of times equal to half his fighter level. If he is brought below 0 hp while still having a use left it automaticaly activates.
-Kill what you fear: When you fail a will save against a fear effect you react as if you had been sucessfully targeted by antagonize instead, attacking the source of this fear effect for as long as it lasts.
- Weapon expert: You can use feats that require a special weapon size (light, onehanded or twohanded) wich weapons one size larger or smaller. This applies to shield of swings, weapon finesse and the like.
- Combat training: Take a fighter bonus feat instead

Those are just what came in mind and are not in any way tested for balance. Again: they are meant to help the fighter have something that makes him feel special.

51 to 100 of 3,805 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / General Discussion / The Main Problem with Fighters All Messageboards