So anyone know why old 3.x feats that helped out fighters towards higher levels haven't been printed in pathfinder? I mean 3.x had feats like shock trooper and leap attack to keep their damage up on charges and made it far easier to get pounce. I wish paizo would give fighters the love they give spellcasters then I'd be more inclined to play either type of classes rather than just focusing on spell casters because they have so much more support. And with all the feats fighters get you kind of run out of options for feats. I mean they could just take all of the feats from PH2 and port them over with maybe some renaming.
Mostly because not all feats were part of books printed under the OGL.
Tactical feats are also something I personally would not like to see in PFRPG as they were the very beginning of what lead to power creep in 3.5.
They could just get the basic concept and use that. Copyright laws have ways of using other people's works and if you change it enough it's legal for you to use. How much changing would be needed I don't know but I do know it is possible. People do it for video games all the time.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Or in your games you could just use the feats because they are by design backwards compatible, instead of taking shots at paizo for not pushing the legal limits on drafting old material for their RPG when the material you want has already been printed in a manner that is already for the most part exactly what you want anyway.
So anyone know why old 3.x feats that helped out fighters towards higher levels haven't been printed in pathfinder? I mean 3.x had feats like shock trooper and leap attack to keep their damage up on charges and made it far easier to get pounce. I wish paizo would give fighters the love they give spellcasters then I'd be more inclined to play either type of classes rather than just focusing on spell casters because they have so much more support. And with all the feats fighters get you kind of run out of options for feats. I mean they could just take all of the feats from PH2 and port them over with maybe some renaming.
Fighters already do more than enough damage. Damage was never the problem a fighter had. Their issues have more to do with them not being able to do much besides fight.
Also, the idea of avoiding 3.5 bloat is a PF focus, so some feats will never be ported over in any form, and some will be folded into class features such as short haft and oversized two weapon fighting. The ability to take a reduction to AC instead of attacks to use power attack can also be done, but it is a not as easy to get as it was in 3.5
If they are trying to avoid the damage creep then why do spell casters have all the support still? Why didn't they lower the caster damage limits or their utility? And it's kind of hard to use 3.x feats when your DM only wants pathfinder material only. And saying fighters do more than enough damage already is like saying the wizard doesn't do enough at level 20. It's quite laughable really.
If they are trying to avoid the damage creep then why do spell casters have all the support still? Why didn't they lower the caster damage limits or their utility? And it's kind of hard to use 3.x feats when your DM only wants pathfinder material only. And saying fighters do more than enough damage already is like saying the wizard doesn't do enough at level 20. It's quite laughable really.
You are missing my point. Your suggestion does not really do any good, and comparing damage to realty bending magic is not even in the same ballpark.
With that said nobody complains about a fighter's damage. They do complain about all the things a fighter can't do. A fighter could do a 1000 hit points at level 10 and people still would not care for the most part. You allow the fighter to have innate battle field control, to disrupt casting more regularly, to actually have an impact on the story in the same way in which magic can and then people will care. Now if people were complaining about the fighter's damage then Paizo might feel more pressure to allow it to do more damage, but for now nobody cares about it so that is another reason why you are unlikely to get the changes you want.
You are missing my point. Your suggestion does not really do any good, and comparing damage to realty bending magic is not even in the same ballpark.
With that said nobody complains about a fighter's damage. They do complain about all the things a fighter can't do. A fighter could do a 1000 hit points at level 10 and people still would not care for the most part. You allow the fighter to have innate battle field control, to disrupt casting more regularly, to actually have an impact on the story in the same way in which magic can and then people will care. Now if people were complaining about the fighter's damage then Paizo might feel more pressure to allow it to do more damage, but for now nobody cares about it so that is another reason why you are unlikely to get the changes you want.
Ok I understand that the fighters utility is lower but how does a fighter consistently do over 100 damage a round at level ten in pathfinder? From what I've seen pathfinder material only doesn't make it possible.
And you can have the fighter fit the battlefield role better than a caster at higher levels and make the casters be more built for utility. It really wouldn't be hard. Time consuming sure but far from hard. I really just want to be able to at least match the wizards damage out put. Pounce is nearly impossible to get anymore except for a couple classes and archetypes. The wizard wouldn't have to move ever and be able to take out almost everything in one round. A fighter not having the utility makes sense. I'm not sure how many athletes are in existence that are nearly as useful as any scientist or doctor. Their shear intellect makes them far more useful especially when older. I just want the fighter to be like an Olympic athlete when out comes to combat compared to a caster.
I really just want to be able to at least match the wizards damage out put.
Wizards aren't usually optimised for damage output. Their real strength is playing the so-called "God Wizard" and completely controlling the battlefield. Fighters can output good raw numbers in terms of damage, but damage-dealing is often a cleanup operation after half the enemy are disabled.
wraithstrike is completely on the money. The real question is not "how do I do more damage?", but "how do I shut down an enemy/control an area/stop casting *and* do damage?".
I really just want to be able to at least match the wizards damage out put.Wizards aren't usually optimised for damage output. Their real strength is playing the so-called "God Wizard" and completely controlling the battlefield. Fighters can output good raw numbers in terms of damage, but damage-dealing is often a cleanup operation after half the enemy are disabled.
wraithstrike is completely on the money. The real question is not "how do I do more damage?", but "how do I shut down an enemy/control an area/stop casting *and* do damage?".
And I still have yet to see how a fighter does 100 damage consistently at level 10 . I would greatly appreciate it if someone explained it to me.
And I still have yet to see how a fighter does 100 damage consistently at level 10 . I would greatly appreciate it if someone explained it to me.I really just want to be able to at least match the wizards damage out put.Wizards aren't usually optimised for damage output. Their real strength is playing the so-called "God Wizard" and completely controlling the battlefield. Fighters can output good raw numbers in terms of damage, but damage-dealing is often a cleanup operation after half the enemy are disabled.
wraithstrike is completely on the money. The real question is not "how do I do more damage?", but "how do I shut down an enemy/control an area/stop casting *and* do damage?".
He didn't say that fighters *DO* 100 damage at level 10, simply that even if they did most people still wouldn't care.
Damage alone is not the most important part of a battle, tactics and control are. Sure you can wade into the enemies and cut them to pieces, but during that time they are hitting you as well. A well-built control character can make sure that the enemies never get to attack, and you can kill them without resistance.Honestly, if I saw a more control-oriented build for Fighters that actually worked out I would be all over that. But as it stands I typically see more use out of Bards and Wizards, with most enemies being held, dominated or compelled to attack their allies.
In my opinion, fighters would still be one dimensional and somewhat mundane even if you quadrupled their damage output. Giving them ways to disable multiple opponents at a time, disrupting spell casting and some skill utility would make them more active in the party.
And to be honest, the tactical feats and stuff from 3.X were pretty clunky and had a heavy feat tax. I really wanted to play a fighter for my first PF character, but just couldn't bring myself to do it. I ended up going Druid and having a ton of fun.
Until the clean up the grapple rules and address the fighter's awesome ::cough:: will save issue, the status quo will not change.
And I still have yet to see how a fighter does 100 damage consistently at level 10 . I would greatly appreciate it if someone explained it to me.I really just want to be able to at least match the wizards damage out put.Wizards aren't usually optimised for damage output. Their real strength is playing the so-called "God Wizard" and completely controlling the battlefield. Fighters can output good raw numbers in terms of damage, but damage-dealing is often a cleanup operation after half the enemy are disabled.
wraithstrike is completely on the money. The real question is not "how do I do more damage?", but "how do I shut down an enemy/control an area/stop casting *and* do damage?".
This was addressed higher up but I remember someone posted some number crunching of average fighter damage. against CR=Lvl a fighers damage was about 85 per round at level 10 and then skyrockets past 100 at level 11. I've done a two weapon crit fiend that went past that at level 11 so it didn't seem farfetched.
Edit: found the link http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2qimg?Numbers-Crunched-The-Baseline-DPR-of-an#1
Was wrong, it jumps from about 50 to over 100 after level 11.
Ok that makes sense. I didn't quite understand 100 at ten but the 150 at 11 is very well explained. And I guess when the math is really laid out for me it also helps. I guess I've never paid attention to my average damage at that level...or any level for that matter.