What are Cavaliers good for?


Advice

51 to 75 of 75 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Shadow Lodge

It's important to note that any character (usually a fighter) can take the Spirited Charge line of feats and carry a lance to get a similar amount of devastating damage that the cavalier can.

It's being mentioned here more prevalently because the cavalier always has a mount, but it's not restricted to that class.

I'm not more familiar with the cavalier, so there might be something else I'm missing - but discount the feats and the weapon for those arguments.


Technically, you aren't further limited in your actions when Swallowed Whole then you are while Grappled, so you can attack/full attack/cast 'normally' (per Grapple rules). The 'cutting your way out' rule depends on light weapons, but you can just attack the creature normally trying to kill it, with non-light and bludgeoning weapons.

The rule I was thinking of that excludes non-Humanoid creatures from Grapple restrictions that apply to Humanoids is: " Humanoid creatures without two free hands attempting to grapple a foe take a –4 penalty on the combat maneuver roll" but that actually doesn't extend to the no-2handed action rule as I thought, even though they are both related to the number of hands you can use. I am still unclear on the intention of the no-action-using-2hands rule, namely, whether that excludes 2WF (or switching hands/weapons within a normal Full Attack for that matter, or a creature with claws on their hands using both in a normal full attack).


Yes, but investing in Mounted Charge combat becomes more tenuous when you don't have a full level Animal Companion but must rely on Horses with stats that don't hold up at mid-level combat. People already have mentioned the approach of taking 4 (or 5?) levels of Cav to qualify for a Feat allowing you to use total character level for your Mount Animal Companion level, and going Fighter/Barb/whatever from there on. If you can get a more solid mount via Leadership Feat that can change things, but Leadership is not in play in many games, including PFS. I'm sure there are some decent Summoner/Eidolon Spirited Charge builds as well, since it can function similarly as a scaling Mount.


Quandary wrote:
I am still unclear on the intention of the no-action-using-2hands rule, namely, whether that excludes 2WF (or switching hands/weapons within a normal Full Attack for that matter, or a creature with claws on their hands using both in a normal full attack).

Shameless Thread Advertising:
Have a look at this thread where I've tried to decipher the RAI and correct the RAW accordingly.
Shadow Lodge

Back to the OP title of the thread....

...Cavaliers are really good at melee TWF with high-threat weapons, especially at 9th and above with Critical Focus.


Sir Thugsalot wrote:

Back to the OP title of the thread....

...Cavaliers are really good at melee TWF with high-threat weapons, especially at 9th and above with Critical Focus.

The issue with TWF is need high dex, making you mad AND not enough feats leaving no room for maneuvers / intimidate/ teamwork etc.

Dark Archive

666bender wrote:
Sir Thugsalot wrote:

Back to the OP title of the thread....

...Cavaliers are really good at melee TWF with high-threat weapons, especially at 9th and above with Critical Focus.

The issue with TWF is need high dex, making you mad AND not enough feats leaving no room for maneuvers / intimidate/ teamwork etc.

It's not hard to start with a 15 Dexterity, at least with a 20 point-buy. A stat belt or ioun stone gets you up to 17, and you don't need 19 until Greater TWF, which is all in all a terrible feat anyway.


Huntmaster essentially gives you an alternative to a mount. It does limit your Tactician ability to your 'pack', but built properly you can stack a number of teamwork feats that will allow you and your pack to be pretty nasty.

For example, I bumped my alpha dog's (currently my only one) INT to 3 to allow it to take feats, and then both he and I took Escape Route.

Practical upshot? It removes the threat of AoOs when my pet and are I moving together (and I spent a trick specifically so that we can do so) - and then we flank with Tactician-granted Precise Strike.

Essentially I'm building them as a duo 'tank' of sorts; the campaign is rather social heavy, and I've found that I get enough skills to be effective in social settings as well.

All that said, I would love to see the base class redesigned somewhat to focus more on Tactician, thereby making it less of a mounted combatant and more like the 4E Warlord (which can be amazingly fun to play in the right groups).

Paizo Employee Design Manager

Cavaliers are actually a very potent class with lots of flavorful options. That being said.....
They are not always the best class for PFS. Their abilities often require coordinating with a team for maximum effect, and you may play with a different party every night in PFS, making it difficult to maximize the results of some of your Order or Tactician abilities. PFS is also the breeding ground of mount-hating GMs, and you may find yourself painfully without one of your key class features at an inconvenient moment.
Probably one of the best options for PFS is to build a gnome cavalier who attacks primarily from ranged and keeps his lance on hand for those times when cover or spells make his arrows ineffective. Order of the Sword works fantastically for switch hitters, especially low strength ones, since they give bonuses to your charge that compensate for small size and low strength, and your challenge/order bonuses will apply both to your ranged and melee attacks. Consider taking Enfilading Fire as your first Tactician feat and Coordinated Shot for your Greater Tactician feat. Coordinated Shot can even allow you to get in an extra ranged attack in response to the party spellcaster attacking with ranged spells, so this is a great way to keep your damage above and beyond despite a slower feat progression. Since gnomes have spell-like abilities with a caster level equal to their total character level, you can also look at boosting your damage even further with the Arcane Strike feat without any need to multi-class.


My biggest issue with the Cavalier is that all in all, if I wanted to create a medieval knight, I would make a Samurai archetype: Knight and just change the weapons and mounted archery to European style stuff. I just don't see any appeal in a Cavalier compared to that or other martial classes.

Paizo Employee Design Manager

I think in home play, where you can work with your group a bit and figure out what other people are going to be playing, the cavalier can be truly fantastic. In open or PFS play though, the Samurai definitely has a certain appeal over the cavalier though since he replaces the team focused abilities with enhanced durability and whatnot via Resolve.


spectrevk wrote:

I've been curious about the Cavalier class for a while now, and I'm thinking about making one for PFS. But looking at my options, I've been struck with how...let's say...."sub-optimal" they are.

Samurai are essentially the same class with better abilities and better orders. The only thing of worth that you lose out on is Tactician, and what you gain is far, far superior in most situations.

And if you want to be a Tactician, then the Strategist archetype is clearly better, giving up a nearly-useless "Expert Trainer" ability for a second Tactician-like ability. So what is the use of a baseline Cavalier, exactly? I'm leery of a class whose abilities seem oriented around animal training, since they only get one mount to train, and presumably you aren't constantly training your mount anyway. Challenge is...interesting, but Tactician seems extremely limited. The class doesn't seem very focused on doing anything particularly well, and it's not really focused on being a generalist either. Is there some potential here that I'm not seeing?

Cavaliers can swap their mount for a gun and a ranged/melee challenge ability.

Granting tactical feats to the party pretty much guarantees extra hit, damage or attacks which in a party becomes a massive force multiplier.

Paizo Employee Design Manager

Avatar-1 wrote:

It's important to note that any character (usually a fighter) can take the Spirited Charge line of feats and carry a lance to get a similar amount of devastating damage that the cavalier can.

It's being mentioned here more prevalently because the cavalier always has a mount, but it's not restricted to that class.

However, the cavalier gets much larger bonuses to his charge attacks, a full progression mount that's much less likely to need to be replaced after every combat, and eventually his charge multiplier will exceed what any other class can reach through feats. Some of his order abilities also allow him to add additonal modifiers to attack/damage. At 20 th level a cavalier will be gaining twice the charge bonuses and dealing up to 7x damage on a charge (potentially multiplying their challenge, their Strength, the mounts Str, etc.) compared to any other mounted combatants maximum bonus of 5x damage (likely with fewer modifiers getting multiplied). Even if they took no mounted combat feats at all, they'd be doing the same amount of damage as someone who invested in the whole Spirited Charge feat line.

You then get the added bonus of being able to build in virtually any fighting style you need on top of a character who is automatically a powerful mounted combatant.
I personally really like cavaliers for ranged combatants, as mounted archers are one of the most potent martial combatants in the PFS world. With challenge bonuses to attack and damage, and they ability to become a potent force mulitplier with combos like Greater Tactician > Coordinated Shot, they are more than equal to archers with faster feat progression. Then if you bump into a situation where enemy tactics make ranged combat untenable, you can still whip out your lance and fly in to punch in teeth.
And all of that is dropped on a class with 4+Int skills and a much wider array of skill options than their fighter and paladin counterparts.

Scarab Sages

I'm a big fan of Cavaliers (currently playing one in a home campaign) but I will be the first to admit that for me it's mostly about the mounted combat.

There may be a reason for that.

My current cavalier has a 14 Charisma and invests his extra skill points in social skills, so he's the party "face" outside of combat and in combat he provides buffs and otherwise directs combat while stepping in to tank the enemy commanders. This is all apart from the fact that when is IS fighting in the saddle, he is a BEAST.


I actually did a little research on the height of horses, the amount of headroom needed for a seated person, etc. I used a Clydesdale at the upper limit of the breed's normal height range and found that an average person should still be able to ride such a horse under a 10 foot ceiling. On an "average" Clydesdale or a shorter breed of horse clearance would be even less of an issue. As I'd said, if the dungeon had Large humanoid foes it should probably be fit mounted human sized PCs as well.

Regarding the build for the mount, Bodyguard is definitely great for defense. I'm also thinking about a build for a future game where both the PC and animal would take Broken Wing Gambit and Paired Opportunists. Then when an enemy attacks either one of us we can both get an AoO with a +4 bonus to hit. Depending on the situation this might be better than the AC bonus from Bodyguard. It is nice to have options. The main problem I have with Cavaliers is that they don't have many options for healing themselves. That's a failing common to many classes though.


666bender wrote:
I Hate Nickelback wrote:
Yeah, the reason to play cavelier is to like a mounted knight... Welcome to paladin!

paladin are REALLY not that good...

most DM i know throw impossible situations at you (like holding a boy hostage and let you lose-lose situation.
so really fast you lose the paladinhood...

Your GMs suck, man.

But seriously, there's a way out of any situation, and most of them wouldn't cause you to lose your alignment unless both your character's god and the GM are total pricks.

Shadow Lodge

666bender wrote:
Sir Thugsalot wrote:

Back to the OP title of the thread....

...Cavaliers are really good at melee TWF with high-threat weapons, especially at 9th and above with Critical Focus.

The issue with TWF is need high dex, making you mad AND not enough feats leaving no room for maneuvers / intimidate/ teamwork etc.

Agile weapons.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Sir Thugsalot wrote:
666bender wrote:
Sir Thugsalot wrote:

Back to the OP title of the thread....

...Cavaliers are really good at melee TWF with high-threat weapons, especially at 9th and above with Critical Focus.

The issue with TWF is need high dex, making you mad AND not enough feats leaving no room for maneuvers / intimidate/ teamwork etc.
Agile weapons.

I hate building a character around an item


1 person marked this as a favorite.
666bender wrote:
Sir Thugsalot wrote:
666bender wrote:
Sir Thugsalot wrote:

Back to the OP title of the thread....

...Cavaliers are really good at melee TWF with high-threat weapons, especially at 9th and above with Critical Focus.

The issue with TWF is need high dex, making you mad AND not enough feats leaving no room for maneuvers / intimidate/ teamwork etc.
Agile weapons.
I hate building a character around an item

Absolutely agreed.


At least Agile is less ridiculous than Guided, because you can have a Weapon Finesse build from Level 1.
A build optimized around Guided is basically an NPC commoner in melee until they have the WBL to afford Guided.
At that point if they are optimized around WIS then they are using WIS for to-hit, Stunning Fist, Will Saves, and AC.
But perhaps that's why it never was re-released as a PRPG Feat, and left in the bin of wacked 3.5 crunchbloat.


As to the OP, Cavaliers do the job of a Fighter and a Bard when those are not available. If one or both are, the Cavalier makes a great supplement to those characters.

I know people are going to hate for making that statement, but my current campaign, I'm playing a cavalier and our 'tank' is a paladin and we also have a bard. I complement the paladin's combat well and buff when the bard is not capable. Be aware that we are still 1st level and none of our characters have really come into their roles. By 5th level, each player should have what they want out of their character figured out and this is where I believe a character starts to really shine on their own merit.

With that said, haters are gonna hate and that's fine. If you enjoy a class, don't listen to the trolling on how that class is 'broken' or 'sub-optimal'. Same goes for a specific character idea.

EDIT: Formating


Cavalier got full bab, bonus vs BBEG, full armor, full weapon, and like most need to focus on 1-2 fields other than melle . They will shine on those fields and be so-so at best at other fields .

The mounted beast:
Take all the mounted feats
Take the archetype to allow better mounts
Take order of the sword
Most of the time , you can't charge on mount, you stand and power attCk, even without your mount you are ok... With mount on a charge, you are a one hit wonder

Take samurai- and be a fighter with less feats but better panic button vs effects. You'll still posses specilaZe, and fighter only feats like penetration. Take intimidate root, and kill.

Take one manuver and use mount , cooperative manuver, tandem trip can make you 2 very good dua. Stay cavalier for the bonus teamwork and make sure you and mount grab the same feats

Take archetype - honor guard, take order of the dragon. At level 6 take swift aid.
Use tactiction to grant your mount the feat that make every attack vs you provoke, both take bodyguard and grab toughness. You are a great tank, that can boost AC for others (5-6) and th mount can boost you (2) . Enforcer to make opponent even less of a threat, a d allow the DPR kings to do their magic.

Be a buffer that can fight, avoid mount , take 1-4 bard levels, and the prestige that allow chaos be and bard to shine. Buff and attacks, making you a ok warrier.


SAMAS wrote:
666bender wrote:
I Hate Nickelback wrote:
Yeah, the reason to play cavelier is to like a mounted knight... Welcome to paladin!

paladin are REALLY not that good...

most DM i know throw impossible situations at you (like holding a boy hostage and let you lose-lose situation.
so really fast you lose the paladinhood...

Your GMs suck, man.

But seriously, there's a way out of any situation, and most of them wouldn't cause you to lose your alignment unless both your character's god and the GM are total pricks.

Paladins have strict rules .. even on who they can hang around and work with. That can cause issues even in standard adventure paths.

Add to the fact alot of opponents are geniuses, 'total pricks' and EVIL and its really only a bad DM that doesn't play npcs correctly or challenge you in areas other than combat.


Craig Frankum wrote:

As to the OP, Cavaliers do the job of a Fighter and a Bard when those are not available. If one or both are, the Cavalier makes a great supplement to those characters.

I know people are going to hate for making that statement, but my current campaign, I'm playing a cavalier and our 'tank' is a paladin and we also have a bard. I complement the paladin's combat well and buff when the bard is not capable. Be aware that we are still 1st level and none of our characters have really come into their roles. By 5th level, each player should have what they want out of their character figured out and this is where I believe a character starts to really shine on their own merit.

With that said, haters are gonna hate and that's fine. If you enjoy a class, don't listen to the trolling on how that class is 'broken' or 'sub-optimal'. Same goes for a specific character idea.

EDIT: Formating

I did not find this. I just played the crimson throne with a cavalier topping out at 16th level in a large party (ranger archer, summoner with a tank eildon, cleric healer/blaster, 4 armed vivisectionist pouncing alchemist, a bard cohort, a cleric cohort, a barbarian bullywug cohort, and 3 ant things from a deck of many things.

I matched the warriors for damage and exceeded them on my challenges, was a competent party face with bluff, diplomacy and sense motive as class skills, thru my order got re-rolls on failed will saves and so was never a weak willed liability, and could swift action grant tactical feats that allowed us to move about unimpeded by each other and feed from each others attacks. With the occasional pulling foes to engage me and waving a banner to remove others charms and compulsions I was more than any fighter or bard. I easily replaced them both with much to spare in every department.

I had swapped my horse for a gun (low dex) so swapped between an axe and a gun with the gun having the benefit of all the fighter only feats I wanted (comes with the archetype). Everyone liked tactical feats (+4 hit and free attacks) better than any bard music. Never mind my knights pennon or latter the lords banner we chipped in for for a party boost (APG- wonderous items).

Shadow Lodge

666bender wrote:
Sir Thugsalot wrote:
666bender wrote:
Sir Thugsalot wrote:

Back to the OP title of the thread....

...Cavaliers are really good at melee TWF with high-threat weapons, especially at 9th and above with Critical Focus.

The issue with TWF is need high dex, making you mad AND not enough feats leaving no room for maneuvers / intimidate/ teamwork etc.
Agile weapons.
I hate building a character around an item

Hah! Don't ever play a non-caster -- because that's about all of 'em.

51 to 75 of 75 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Advice / What are Cavaliers good for? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.
Recent threads in Advice