Why don't fighters / rogues / etc get "epic" at high levels?


Pathfinder First Edition General Discussion

351 to 400 of 574 << first < prev | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | next > last >>

Yeah, that was what I was trying to allude to when I was referring to changing the core skill assumptions at tier two. Basically, at this tier, casters get access to things like wish and simulacrum (or whatever broken ass spell you feel like naming) but as a direct consequence, all of the non characters can do things like charm people with diplomacy with high skill ranks and no one has two bad saves.

Shadow Lodge

I could definitely go for some more powerful higher-level skill uses, though it's more because of this issue:

Avh wrote:
Skill DC are way too high for some things (perception from a distance and jump come to my mind pretty easily), or stop at very low DC for other (swim, most knowledge, ride, heal, sense motive for anything not opposed, craft, fly, survival except for tracking, ...)

For many non-opposed skills the highest DCs are around 20, meaning that once you have a +10 you run into diminishing returns, especially compared to spells which are now plentiful and can do most/all the stuff you used to do with skills much easier.

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

Keep in mind those Epic DC's are there assuming the ability to take Epic Skill Focus AND make Epic level +Competence magic items (+20 to +30). +50 to a skill check before other modifiers VERY quickly gets DC's into the reachable range.

I'd also like to point out that all high jumpers and world record contenders thereof take running starts for their jumps...they are converting horizontal momentum to vertical as part of the jump.

But...you can't make Epic uses for skills until you differentiate between skill ranks and skill bonus, which are very different things, but not something Paizo does.

==Aelryinth

Shadow Lodge

I don't think that this thread is suggesting epic skills as in 3.5 Epic Level Handbook, DC 50-100. Rather, it's about adding more things that skills can do at levels 10-20 that feel epic. For example, by making an effective DC 35 Perception check, you can hear a bow being drawn next to your bed while you are asleep.

It's true that it's hard to implement high-level skill use without keeping track of ranks - here's a good illustration of why. This is probably why Trogdar suggested adding an additional rules set for high level skill use apart from from the current skills / skill system.

Tome of Prowess did this for 3.5, but it has a few problems IMO, including making number of skill ranks solely determined by how much or little magic your class has. This is intended as a balancing factor, but it means number of non-magic skills are divorced from concept. My monk has about 4-6 skills that make sense for the character, and half of the 10 skill points Tome of Prowess gives would just be spent for the sake of spending them. My druid on the other hand needed more than 4 skill points to accurately reflect her non-magical expertise, and in this system there's no way to spend resources (in my druid's case a high Int score and favoured class bonus) to reflect that.


Marthkus wrote:
Ssalarn wrote:
Marthkus wrote:


Even though for the fighter feats are twice as good since they only cost half as much.

This is not an accurate equivalency.

Feats are exactly as good for the Fighter as they are for anyone else, he just gets more of them (rarely does this actually mean twice as many since most classes get at least a few bonus feats).

Now, if feats actually provided benefits equivalent to what other classes were getting instead of feats, we wouldn't have all of these conversations going.

Similarly, if Fighters could do something with a weapon different than what someone else could do, the "that's not a class feature" argument wouldn't keep coming up.

Feats are half the opportunity cost for a fighter so they are twice as good for him, provided you can get good use out of all your feats.

More feats like Blind-Fight would be nice.

Indeed. I take Blind-Fight on most of my PCs. Here's a list of feats I like to have on Martials.

Blind-Fight (most of the time, including casters)
Improved Initiative (sometimes)
Iron Will (sometimes)
Lightning Reflexes (sometimes)
Power Attack
Deadly Aim
Craft Wonrdrous Item (any casting martial)
Craft Magic Arms & Armor (any casting martial)
Extra Rage Power (barbarians only, though maybe with Skald)
Dazing Assault (full-BAB only)
Quick Draw (sometimes)
Natural Spell (druids only)
Unsanctioned Knowledge (paladins only)
Fey Foundling (paladins only)

That's like...14 feats total, and most characters couldn't take all of them anyway (unless you're some sort of multiclass abomination between barbarian, druid, paladin). Most of these feats aren't even feats Fighters could take. Most of the other stuff (IG - improved *maneuver*) generally falls off in usefulness or I'll have class features that let me do it better when the need arises or just demand more than I'm willing to pay in prerequisites.


chaoseffect wrote:
Marthkus wrote:
kyrt-ryder wrote:
Quote:
Having an ability be it's own resource is silly though.
You mean like all the X per day abilities in Pathfinder?

I don't like those, but per day is more acceptable than per "time I can take a breather"

Sleeping is significant enough to recharge spell casting.

I don't see anything wrong with an ability needing minor rest before it can be used again, but I hate the ambiguity of "once per encounter." If it said something like "you may use this ability any number of times, but require a x minute period of rest where you are not actively engaged in combat in between uses" it wouldn't bother me at all.

Dreamscarred's version defines the /encounter thing very well, putting a nail in the coffin of this complaint.


@OP: because paizo thinks that the mountain cleave law is unfair for casters.

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
KestrelZ wrote:


This leaves the age old power graph of D&D / Pathfinder. At low levels the martial PCs must protect the weaker mages in the group, outshining them in combat. At high levels, mages alter reality and hopefully protect the martials that once protected them.

Is it fair? That's up to debate. Yet it tends to be far more common to have low level play than high level. So odds are, the martial characters would shine longer and more often than mages.

I hate this mentality that Martians are defenseless at level 10+. One I built a fighter who other then weapons and armor, and the generic 6 magic items was able to solo a valor at 17. He doesn't need anyone to protect him in combat. Is he the pinnacle of DPR? No but I'm not narrow minded in my character building.

Now it would have been cool if I had something more to do in combat, like named strikes or attacks the combined maneuvers and conditions, because we was kinda Boeing with his, move hit, move hit, move hit, move hit, combat style.

If you can understand what autocorrect butchered, I'm typing on my phone


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I don't really want to see fighters performing incredible feats of strength like cleaving mountains or ripping giant trees out of the ground. I'd rather see fighters showing epic acrobatics/tactics/marksmanship. Skill based badassness, IOW, with the flexibility to stay relevant at any level, even if they do fall way behind other classes in straight DPR. Put another way, I don't want high level fighters to be like the Hulk, I want them to be like Batman or Captain America.

Shadow Lodge

@Artimas moonstar, fighter have access to spell sunder now it's a s$#~ty version that you can do once per day, but it's there.

And I think a lore warden fighter grappling a colossal dragon may get moans and grones from you fellow players, but a 200lb human pinning a 20,000 ton dragon it about as far from reality as you can get, but it's a legal option in the rules.

I think adding more "vital strike" style standard attacks that have great secondary effects woul be a step in the right direction, although slightly anime-ish


TheSideKick wrote:
KestrelZ wrote:


This leaves the age old power graph of D&D / Pathfinder. At low levels the martial PCs must protect the weaker mages in the group, outshining them in combat. At high levels, mages alter reality and hopefully protect the martials that once protected them.

Is it fair? That's up to debate. Yet it tends to be far more common to have low level play than high level. So odds are, the martial characters would shine longer and more often than mages.

I hate this mentality that Martians are defenseless at level 10+. One I built a fighter who other then weapons and armor, and the generic 6 magic items was able to solo a valor at 17. He doesn't need anyone to protect him in combat. Is he the pinnacle of DPR? No but I'm not narrow minded in my character building.

Now it would have been cool if I had something more to do in combat, like named strikes or attacks the combined maneuvers and conditions, because we was kinda Boeing with his, move hit, move hit, move hit, move hit, combat style.

If you can understand what autocorrect butchered, I'm typing on my phone

So how did he handle the Balor moving faster than him and hitting him with his at-will DC 27 Dominate Monster?

Or being smacked by a bit of damage (at level 17 it wouldn't really take much to knock him below that 151 HP threshold. The guy hits 4 times at 2d6+25 a hit and really only needs to do 50-60 damage to you) and then a Power Word: Stun, to then be finished off later?

Shadow Lodge

When you don't focus on DPR you can do great things with a fighter


@Robin, er, TheSideKick; Really? That's um.. Nifty, I guess? Doesn't change the fact that they still can't do it as much as a barbarian though xD.

Personally, grappling the dragon is the LEAST I want to see a high level martial do. I want to see a high level martial stop the dragon's attack by grabbing it by the teeth, and flipping it over. I wanna see him leap from a tower, grab it in mid air, and body-slam it from mid-air. Just to name a FEW of the things a martial should be doing.

I doubt PF would ever pull this off, given how the d20 system is designed. I doubt Paizo is willing to host a grillin' party, with the d20 sacred cows mysteriously missing ("This steak tastes odd, kind of... Sacred?"), in any case. Seems like plenty of people around here are still worshiping at the idols of old school d20, given some of the fear and anger I've seen in the reactions of the Technology guide and the like.

Ah well. Basically martials just need a bit more than 'I get up next to it. I full attack and kill it'. Not as obvious with non-fighters, but they've got that problem too, just not as glaringly.


TheSideKick wrote:
When you don't focus on DPR you can do great things with a fighter

That's vague and unhelpful.

By that I must assume you don't have a real answer for the question presented.


Rynjin wrote:
TheSideKick wrote:
KestrelZ wrote:


This leaves the age old power graph of D&D / Pathfinder. At low levels the martial PCs must protect the weaker mages in the group, outshining them in combat. At high levels, mages alter reality and hopefully protect the martials that once protected them.

Is it fair? That's up to debate. Yet it tends to be far more common to have low level play than high level. So odds are, the martial characters would shine longer and more often than mages.

I hate this mentality that Martians are defenseless at level 10+. One I built a fighter who other then weapons and armor, and the generic 6 magic items was able to solo a valor at 17. He doesn't need anyone to protect him in combat. Is he the pinnacle of DPR? No but I'm not narrow minded in my character building.

Now it would have been cool if I had something more to do in combat, like named strikes or attacks the combined maneuvers and conditions, because we was kinda Boeing with his, move hit, move hit, move hit, move hit, combat style.

If you can understand what autocorrect butchered, I'm typing on my phone

So how did he handle the Balor moving faster than him and hitting him with his at-will DC 27 Dominate Monster?

Or being smacked by a bit of damage (at level 17 it wouldn't really take much to knock him below that 151 HP threshold. The guy hits 4 times at 2d6+25 a hit and really only needs to do 50-60 damage to you) and then a Power Word: Stun, to then be finished off later?

When the balor started to lose, why didn't he just Greater Teleport away and send his minions to finish the job? According to the Bestiary: "A balor typically commands vast legions of demons..."


Reach weapon?


Pathfinder Lost Omens Subscriber

I'm just saying the least a level 20 fighter should be able to do is jump at the dragon, grapple it, cut it's wings off, and then use said wings to glide safely back to the ground.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
TheSideKick wrote:
When you don't focus on DPR you can do great things with a fighter

Classic poor choice of words. Literally no one here cares about DPR. In fact, its literally the one thing most people agree the Fighter can do well. Not as well as some others, but well enough. The problem is literally everything else.


I think Martial is just fine, the problems are the fact that there should be many martial only magical items that can be stronger than magic. There should be some spell breaking sword that can end or even return range touch attack spells. There should be items that allow the wearer to be immune to certain effect such as mind-control. There are some boots of blank strike? Once per turn, wearing can blank and appear towards a target as a move action. Also, where are some magical items that allow rogue to stealth like master ninja and undetectable even by magic? Mask of the master ninja or something? Those will make any martial look cool. How about anti casting daggers? Whoeven got hit by the dagger must make a will saves agaisnt the damage from that single attack or he can not cast any spell for one round. (Which I think is fair for they can still use their magical items as long as they are not scrolls.)

Scarab Sages

Anzyr wrote:
TheSideKick wrote:
When you don't focus on DPR you can do great things with a fighter
Classic poor choice of words. Literally no one here cares about DPR. In fact, its literally the one thing most people agree the Fighter can do well. Not as well as some others, but well enough. The problem is literally everything else.

Not if you shift your focus from DPR to other areas. A fighter can be nearly as good at battlefield control as a wizard.


Artanthos wrote:
Not if you shift your focus from DPR to other areas. A fighter can be nearly as good at battlefield control as a wizard.

No, they really cant.

Also still waiting for those three feat chains which give the fighter full attacks on a move.

Scarab Sages

andreww wrote:
Artanthos wrote:
Not if you shift your focus from DPR to other areas. A fighter can be nearly as good at battlefield control as a wizard.

No, they really cant.

Also still waiting for those three feat chains which give the fighter full attacks on a move.

I gave you two.

Take it or leave it.


Artanthos wrote:


A fully geared high level fighter hits on a 2+ on their second, or even third iterative.

Only against monsters which don't have concealment, mirror image, or superior movement. Which basically means those that aren't pc-classed casters, dragons, demons, devils, celestials, a bunch of magical beasts, a bunch of other outsiders, and some more stuff.

For example, an old red dragon will have displacement, greater invisibility and haste active, and read a scroll of mirror image and mage armor from it's 96k treasure horde, so you're looking at a creature with 250 ft. move speed, several ranged attacks, improved invisibility, ~75% miss chance due to mirror image, 50% miss chance from displacement, and a 41 AC.
Depending on whether the GM considers the dragon's flight to be magical or not in nature, it can also cast Alter Self to become, say, a gnome, which would raise the AC to 47 but limit it to it's magical attacks to kill or soften up the fighter.

So even if you have a good to-hit, that only goes so far against any monster with magical capabilities.


TheSideKick wrote:
The balor is taken out of the air with hamatula strike + bow.

Seriously? You really think Hamatula strike works with a bow?

You shoot someone with an arrow and suddenly you're both grappling?

I'll grant that the literal text of the feat might not deny it, but if you tried it in my game I'd laugh at you. Even RAW, I'd argue that an arrow is not a weapon, but ammunition, so it doesn't apply.


TheSideKick wrote:

the degree of assumptions made in your counter post makes me laugh. The balor is taken out of the air with hamatula strike + bow. Then once he's grounded then you work towards getting him in melee. Once that's been accomplished you us combat patrol, lunge, pin down, stand still, and teleport tactician to lock the valor down. Assuming you are able to afford a polymorph effect to increase you size you can prevent any damage and force aoos when the valor try's to do anything. No you don't sword and board you use a buckler and reach weapon to keep the valor at bay and reflect spells back at the balor.

Playing a dwarf is a viable option for a fighter so I don't see why you view that as a not pick for you "I'm gunna prove you wrong" skepticism. A base 4 to will saves is a very good option for a class that is weak against will spells. Steel soul knocks that up 2 more with iron will and improved makes you have a base 8 before any magic or class features. That's how you laugh at a dc 27 to resist dominate.

Hamatula Strike is for grappling after hitting with a piercing weapon. While I applaud the idea, somehow I don't think shooting a balor in the face with an arrow a hundred feet away is then going to let you reel him in. Reason being the feat specifically says "success means the opponent is impaled on your weapon". Arrows are ammunition, not weapons.


You can't Hamatula Strike with a bow. Applying even a smidgen of common sense will reveal that much (how is he Grappled by it? How are YOU Grappled by it? "Grappling" him with a bow doesn't magically transport him across the intervening space to you.).

Everything after that is pretty much irrelevant with that in mind.

And my bad on the sword and board thing, I just figured you were spending Feats on Missile Shield so you could actually USE it (which it can't be with a buckler). Silly me for assuming you would intelligently allocate your Feats I guess, I can see why that made you laugh.

"Assuming you can afford a Polymorph effect" negates the "I'm only using the Big Six items and nothing else" clause there too.

The reason I mentioned the saves is because it IS niche. Unlike many other racial abilities, Feats, etc. you can ONLY be a dwarf for that (Racial Heritage on a Human, Half-Elf, Half-Orc, or Scion of Humanity Aasimar won't work since it also requires the Hardy racial trait). So that is literally the only way you can get your saves that high.

I didn't say it was bad, just overly reliant on a racial option (much like I would call out a build proving a point based on something like the Aasimar's +1/2 to an Oracle Revelation as being the reason why Oracle is better than X...no, that's just a reason why an AASIMAR Oracle is better than X).

The sad part is even with that you've only buffed it to a +16 (+5 Cloak, +5 level, +2 Dwarf, +2 Steel Soul, +2 Iron Will. Not sure where you're getting "Base 8 before magic or class features". Steel Soul REPLACES Hardy with a +4, not adds onto, and Improved Iron Will doesn't give an additional +2...though it really should), so you have a less than 50% chance of passing the save.

I hardly call that "laughing at" the DC 27 Dominate.

And even if you do get him on the ground...you haven't locked the Balor down. He's Large size, and has a Reach weapon of his own. He matches and/or exceeds your Reach in many cases that aren't "I Combat Patrol and hope he doesn't just decide to stand there and murder me".

Plus this:

Quote:
you use a buckler and reach weapon to keep the valor at bay and reflect spells back at the balor.

Just baffles me. You have ZERO way of reflecting spells. Like, at all. Is that how you think Missile Shield works? Because I can assure you, it does not. And even if it did, it doesn't work with a buckler.

You may be thinking of Ray Shield, which lets you deflect Ray spells, but you A.) Don't have it B.) Still can't use it with a buckler C.) Still can't reflect them back at the Balor and D.) The Balor doesn't use any Ray spells for you to deflect in the first place.

In short, there are so many holes in this idea that I could be forgiven for confusing it with a piece of cheesecloth.

There ARE builds that could probably solo a Balor (see: Any well built Archer, probably. Especially a Mounted Archer if you could get a mount that doesn't suck ass).

This...is not one of them. It relies on too many "creative" interpretations of rules, or outright misconceptions to work.

Dark Archive

Dominate is a 1 round cast. I would not be too concerned with it. Its the blasphemy that takes most people out.

Paizo Glitterati Robot

Removed a couple posts and the replies to them/quoting them. Personal attacks are not cool here.


mmmmm....so meaty

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
TheSideKick wrote:
When you don't focus on DPR you can do great things with a fighter

...and are incredibly taxed when trying to do so.

Seriously, want to do something thematically cool like manage to swing your sword in a circle and swipe at all the enemies around you Zelda style? Well, you need 5 feats[dodge, mobility, combat expertise, spring attack, whirlwind attack] for that, have 2 ability score prerequisites, have to spend your full turn doing that, and after all that, you still aren't doing something as good as a full attack[unless you can't full attack]. Want to do something awesome like bounce magic off of you? that costs you 3 feats, and requires you to use a specific item[shield]. Want to be the master of hitting things until they die? Even that gets a feat tax for fighters. Weapon Focus, Greater, Weapon Specialization, Greater, Power Attack, and optional Furious Focus. Number crunch this with gloves of dueling at various levels, and the fighter wins out on a few points of damage at a few levels if you compare him to similar classes[Barbarian is the most common]. They have a feat tax they have to take if they want to do what there class is designed to do by core, and they still rely on magic items.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I'd just want more feats that let fighters do more things rather than making them better at what they've been already doing at first level. Where's the feat that lets me rip a demon's arm off with my bare hands?


Artanthos wrote:
andreww wrote:
Artanthos wrote:
Not if you shift your focus from DPR to other areas. A fighter can be nearly as good at battlefield control as a wizard.

No, they really cant.

Also still waiting for those three feat chains which give the fighter full attacks on a move.

I gave you two.

Take it or leave it.

Nope, you provided one terrible one which requires you to ride around on an animal that will die at the first sign of trouble.

At this point you are just making stuff up.


Rynjin wrote:

You can't Hamatula Strike with a bow. Applying even a smidgen of common sense will reveal that much (how is he Grappled by it? How are YOU Grappled by it? "Grappling" him with a bow doesn't magically transport him across the intervening space to you.).

This is why you use an Harpoon. Ahab for the win!

Spoiler:
Half-Elf
Guide 7/ Weapon master 3
Lawful evil
=== Stats ===
Str 20 (22),Dex 12,con 14,Int 10,Wis 14, Cha 8
=== Defense ===
AC: 21 (+8 armor, +1 dex, +1 def, +1 nat)
Hp: 89 (10d10+30)
CMD: 28 (32 against grapple)

=== Saves ===
Fort +13
Ref +10
Will +9
=== Attacks ===

Melee
+2 Silvershenn Harpoon: +19/+11 ( 1d8+19 20/x3)

Ranged
+2 Silvershenn Harpoon: +19 ( 1d8+10 20/x3)

CMB: +16 (+27 with hamatula strike)

=== Traits===
Strong Arm, Supple Wrist
+1 will
=== Feats and talents===
1. Improved unarmed strike, exotic weapon proficiency (Harpoon)
2. Power attack
3. Endurance, Iron will
4.
5. Improved grapple
6. Furious focus
7. Hamatula strike
8. Two handed thrower
9. Greater grapple, hamatula grasp
10.
=== Skills ===
Stealth +13, Perception +17, Acrobatics +13, UMD +9, Survival +15, Knowlege (nature) +11, Swim +9, climb +9.
=== Special ===
Ranger focus +4 (3/day)
Terrain bond
Track
Wild emphaty
Woodland stride
Favored terrain (Forest, plains)
Weapon training 1 (harpoon)
=== Gear ===
+2 Mithral breastplate
Belt of Mighty Hurling
+2 Silversheen Duelgin FG Harpoon
+3 Cloack of resistance
+1 Ring of protection
+1 Amulet of natural armor
=== Spells ===

Lvl 1
Resist Energy
longstrider

Lvl 2
Wind wall

The idea of this build is grapple people from distance (using hamatula strike) and then move them as a free action

+"If you successfully grapple a creature that is not adjacent to you, move that creature to an adjacent open space (if no space is available, your grapple fails). "

Sadly the harpoon have really low range increment (Strong Arm, Supple Wrist help just a little bit with it) and far shot is to feat intensive for the build.


8 people marked this as a favorite.
Anzyr wrote:
TheSideKick wrote:
When you don't focus on DPR you can do great things with a fighter
Classic poor choice of words. Literally no one here cares about DPR. In fact, its literally the one thing most people agree the Fighter can do well. Not as well as some others, but well enough. The problem is literally everything else.

"DPR" seems to seems to frequently be used as a meaningless buzzword by the Paizo Defense Force to use in order to dismiss any and all criticism of Pathfinder's divinely inspired perfection.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
TheSideKick wrote:
When you don't focus on DPR you can do great things with a fighter

Not really... You can spend your resources and lose out on fighting efficiency to try and be like a pally, ranger, or barb (when it comes to survivability, mauverability, and OOC flexibility) But then you are STILL behind them AND you lose out on the ONE THING you are actually good at...

If you spend your feats to try and improve your out of combat options and cover up your weaknesses, then you will end up looking like a worse version of everyone else... in all respects...

Pretty much the fighter is kind of pigeon-holed into HAVE to focus on DPR... because if you try and do anything else, you may as well have been a Paladin/Barbarian/Ranger/Slayer/Samurai/Cavalier...


Chengar Qordath wrote:
Anzyr wrote:
TheSideKick wrote:
When you don't focus on DPR you can do great things with a fighter
Classic poor choice of words. Literally no one here cares about DPR. In fact, its literally the one thing most people agree the Fighter can do well. Not as well as some others, but well enough. The problem is literally everything else.
"DPR" seems to seems to frequently be used as a meaningless buzzword by the Paizo Defense Force to use in order to dismiss any and all criticism of Pathfinder's divinely inspired perfection.

Why can't I favorite this multiple times?

Paizo Glitterati Robot

Removed another post and the replies to it. Let's dial back the hostility here.

351 to 400 of 574 << first < prev | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / General Discussion / Why don't fighters / rogues / etc get "epic" at high levels? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.