| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The problem, inherent to this argument, is that people equate martial with mundane, which is a steamy crock of meadow muffins.We don't compare them to our world, we compare them to freaking SpellCasters.
What he means is that people tend to look at "mundane" options and think "That isn't possible in the real world, therefore no," where on the other hand magic is given free reign to do whatever the hell it wants because "it's magic!" So martials get shackled to what is possible for normal people in the real world and casters get to fly around shooting laser beams out of their eyes. Hence, the extreme martial caster disparity.
There are magical martials in the system already. The question is, what do you do with the mundane ones? Being mundane is their "thing". Delete like Legend did, or redefine.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The Fighter never had a real niche, either mechanically or fluff-wise, so removing it wholesale would change exactly nothing.
This is going to sound counter intuitive, but not having a niche is the fighter's niche, both mechanically and in terms of flavor. It's supposed to be generic in mechanics and flavor so that the player is completely free to tinker around with it as they see fit. It also makes them very good as a way to add basic combat prowess and feats to an NPC (like what sorcerers used to be with magic).
That's not to say that the class isn't without problems, but that's mostly because feats are a complete mess. There are far too many feat chains where the pattern seems to be Good --> Junk --> Junk --> Good, the vast majority of fighter-only feats aren't worth having the 7 to 16 levels of no real class abilities, and most feats just add more numeric bonuses to the pile of numeric bonuses that the class already gets.
|
The problem, inherent to this argument, is that people equate martial with mundane, which is a steamy crock of meadow muffins.
If people stopped with the false dichotomy, we would not have the problem.
Su and Ex deserve far more love than they get.
Mundane martials are the ones that need the help. Spellcasting martials (Paladin, Ranger, Bloodrager and the various 3/4 BAB 6th level spellcasters with a martial leaning like the Inquisitor) are pretty much fine. They're not as versatile, but they can contribute to most things, if not everything. And that's the sweet spot.
Being able to solve every problem by yourself (as full spellcasters can) is bad for the game, ESPECIALLY for a team-based game.
this is why i like settings that explain why you have a PC class by them having something special about them, like in endless legends all the heroes have dust, even the martials.
wow, I guess I play a different game than all of you. I see pure spell casters as getting the raw deal and need improvement (Wizard and Cleric most of all). yet, pure fighter types are pretty much over the top in terms of power.
wow, I guess I play a different game than all of you. I see pure spell casters as getting the raw deal and need improvement (Wizard and Cleric most of all). yet, pure fighter types are pretty much over the top in terms of power.
What level are you playing at?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What level are you playing at?wow, I guess I play a different game than all of you. I see pure spell casters as getting the raw deal and need improvement (Wizard and Cleric most of all). yet, pure fighter types are pretty much over the top in terms of power.
Level 0, maybe. Certainly not level 1, where a Wizard can end an otherwise deadly at this level mob encounter in a single round with Color Spray.
Level 0, maybe. Certainly not level 1, where a Wizard can end an otherwise deadly at this level mob encounter in a single round with Color Spray.What level are you playing at?wow, I guess I play a different game than all of you. I see pure spell casters as getting the raw deal and need improvement (Wizard and Cleric most of all). yet, pure fighter types are pretty much over the top in terms of power.
"MY EYES!"
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
A few fixes I'm sure already mentioned elsewhere in this thread:
Full Attack now Standard Action
Casters already get to cast spells as a standard action from level 1 to level 20. These spells scale in level, while allowing them to retain their move actions without drastically losing efficiency. Giving a scaling attack action to martials, at the very least, will allow for more avenues in combat while still retaining peak effectiveness.
EDIT: Not just a regular standard action either. You should be able to make any of your attacks before, after, or even during a move. "I slash the goblin in front of me before moving to help my friend by attacking the troll. Along the way I quickdraw my dagger and throw it at the harpy" should not be a ludicrous statement to make. Archers can already do something like this, so expanding it for other combat styles shouldn't be a major change.
Skills that compete with Spells
If you put enough ranks in Stelath, you should damn well be able to disappear on a dime. As it stands now, the level 1 Wizard with Vanish is better at hiding than a level 20 Rogue without gear to help him, and the wizard can do it anywhere, anytime, with any audience. The Level 20 Rogue needs to get people to look away before he can jump behind a bush. This is wrong.
Similarly, stuff like Acrobatics should be buffed to be much, much better than it currently is. Jumping up Mountains or even jumping on Air should be possible with enough ranks in the skill. Knowledge skills could give you bonuses against enemies you successfully identify, whether that's AC, attack/damage rolls or even spell DC, all should possible with a high enough check. Which brings me to my next point.
Combine all Knowledge skills into one
As it stands, there are 10 different knowledge skills, which makes it downright impossible for non-INT based classes to be knowledgable at certain fields. The entire thing is nothing but a huge skill sink unless you can keep up with it. Turning it to one major knowledge skill would allow for easier access to intelligent martial classes, which would mean more narrative power.
Skills now equilibrated with BAB
If you're an arcane caster, then chances are the thing you've studied the most isn't basic survival skills or diplomantic abilities, the thing you;ve studied most of all is Magic, and as you gain power it is a constant thing you have to learn. This would reflect that. It would also give martials more narrative power in a system where skills are almost as valued as spells.
Classes gain bonuses on thematic skills
As a wizard at level 1 would still likely be pretty studious, it makes sense that he'll have picked up some intrinsic knowledge skills along the way. As such, Wizards would gain a bonus equal to their class level on Knowledge and Spellcraft skills. Similarly, Bards would get bonuses to Diplomacy and Bluff, and just for good measure, Rogues would be the only people to get bonuses to Perception (and Disable Device).
Doing so would also allow us to raise the DC for certain skills, to steer certain classes towards them more easily, but still making it possible for other classes to eventually reach them with enough investment.
Combat Maneuvers now grouped into one, now also a skill
Combat Maneuvers as they are now are pretty worthless because they require too much effort for too little return. You can spend 5 feats on being the best tripper in the world, but when something comes by that you can't trip, your character is suddenly worthless. By grouping all combat maneuvers into one, characters can put ranks into the skill and simply describe what combat maneuver they are pulling off, and if they want, what the effect of the maneuver is. This should allow for some more esoteric gaming, and once more put narrative power into the hands of the martial player. Fighters, of course, would gain a bonus equal to their level on this particular skill.
Every class has some method of dealing with magic
For a set number of times per day that starts at 1 from level 10 but increases up to 3-5 at higher levels, a character can activate one type of anti-magic ability. This can work differently for every character. Wizards and sorcerers could get Immediate action counterspelling. Clerics and oracles get some form of Divine Intervention. A Rogue goes undetected by the spell. A Fighter parries the spell with his weapon or shield. A Barbarian of course, Sunders the spell (arguably a nerf for the Barbarian, but that seems to be what the Paizo team wants given Unchained). Last but not least:
Make Counterspelling easier
Not immediate action easy, but essentially everyone gains the benefit of Improved Counterspell. In fact, you need only expend a spell one level higher from the same school to counter a spell. Different schools must be 2 levels higher. Still need to ready an action, though. That way it's easier, but not by much.
What do you guys think?
Skills now equilibrated with BAB
what if the wizard is a swamp hermit or something? just saying.
what if the wizard is a swamp hermit or something? just saying.
Skills now equilibrated with BAB
He spends his time in a hut learning voodoo.
Also, to clarify, it should probably be something like BAB * previous base skill ranks to determine your skills. This way, your skill ranks scale as you level, but scale even more as full bab class, since they don't have to do things as time intensive as studying how to bend the universe over their knee.
EDIT: That said, I do think it would be a good idea to let players get a bonus on 1 skill of their choosing, to help with roleplay differentiation. The only problem of course, is that everyone would choose Perception.
But hopefully, if other skills become viable, Perception won't become the obvious choice. That said, I had another idea I forgot to put up there:
Perception = Initiative
High level characters should have better initiative than lower level characters. Rogues get the highest if their thematic skill is Perception. Aside form that though, the new Perception I purpose would probably just give more mundane abilities compared to the buffed skills (i.e. bonus on Sense Motive/other skill checks)
This is only a tiny, tiny fix, but what if you only got half your Intelligence mod to skill points? The Wizard would need an incredible 34 Intelligence to have the same amount of skill points as an Int 10 Rogue, as opposed to the highly achievable 22 it is now. I would probably combine this with raising Fighter skill points to 6 and Paladin to 4.
What if Int was a non-factor to skill points, and the stat got Charisma-fied? Give everyone +2 skill points to compensate, give some classes that should have more skill points more.
This is only a tiny, tiny fix, but what if you only got half your Intelligence mod to skill points? The Wizard would need an incredible 34 Intelligence to have the same amount of skill points as an Int 10 Rogue, as opposed to the highly achievable 22 it is now. I would probably combine this with raising Fighter skill points to 6 and Paladin to 4.
That hurts other INT based classes that aren't the wizard. Remember, a wizard doesn't need skills at all, he has spells. Skills are just extra gravy to add insult to injury.
What if Int was a non-factor to skill points, and the stat got Charisma-fied? Give everyone +2 skill points to compensate, give some classes that should have more skill points more.
That would just switch over the problem from wizards to sorcerers and oracles. Then INT becomes the dumpstat.
In both cases, I think a buffed skill system would benefit from skills being related to BAB, to show the time and effort that magic takes.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A few fixes I'm sure already mentioned elsewhere in this thread:
Full Attack now Standard Action
Skills that compete with Spells
Combine all Knowledge skills into one
Skills now equilibrated with BAB
Classes gain bonuses on thematic skills
Combat Maneuvers now grouped into one, now also a skill
Every class has some method of dealing with magic
Make Counterspelling easier
1) Unless you draw a clear line between classes get full attacks and monsters, this involves huge rewrites of the monster balance system.
3.5 is precisely defined on this scale of 'just look at BAB and you now know iteratives.'In all honesty, multiple attacks should be an ability of martial classes. Spellcasters should not even get them, similar to 1 and 2e. They are the single strongest indicator of martial ability.
Balance would be much easier to simply remove multiple attacks from full caster classes entirely, and nerf partial casters down to 2 at best. They aren't actually giving up all that much, since they never hit with iteratives anyways.
And that way, you don't have to mess with monsters.
Then, simply define how many attacks you get by class levels. Make multiple iterative attacks a class feature, not an outgrowth of BAB.
2)First, you have to nerf spells that compete with skills. Seriously.
Two, you have to have them overlap, not complement. Stealth and invisibility should not stack. that removes a ton of problems. Sure, at low levels the mage is good. But invisibility past levels 6-10 isn't going to match stealth.
More skills, not less, mean lots of skill points is useful.
Access to skills by class, and not just wide open, makes a class skill list as valuable as a class spell list.
In other words, treat skill points and class skills as something valuable, not something to be given away.
The worst thing for the rogue is that everyone got access to his skills. That killed him more effectively then lousy melee damage.
IF skills were also valuable, the rogue's value would rise in tandem.
3) Note that Knowledge (all) exists as Bardic Knowledge bonus, FWIW.
I don't have a problem with lots of knowledge skills. I just have a problem with how few classes can access them, and how limited their usefulness is. Mostly, they are about monster ID, and you can make a case that ANY adventurer should be interested in MOnster ID.
So, I think the knowledge skills should be redefined in accordance with a profession skill or two, and Monster ID be a skill of its own.
4) SKILL-based classes, that don't use magic, can gain bonuses on thematic skills.
Those classes that DO use magic can use magic or their high mental stats to do the same.
i.e. if youa re a spellcaster, skills are NOT that precious to you. You can a) buff to them or b) summon something with the appropriate skill. You don't NEED to focus on them like a skill class.
In any event, if the skill class gets the buff, it should be a defined buff, like competence, so you can't double and triple stack the stuff. i.e. it should be like having a magic buff you don't pay for, and that a caster can't double up on.
5) It's less important that Combat Manuvers all be accessible with a skill (they are, it's called high BAB), then that the ones you want and have automatically scale.
The best way to do this is simply to fold them into the Expertise skill.
As one of the abilities of Expertise, you gain one Improved Combat Manuver per point of Expertise, and your expertise bonus applies to that maneuver and defending against that maneuver.
So, you'll eventually end up with 5 Imp Combat manuvers of your choice, all of them at +5.
And tellingly, as part of a Feat called EXPERTISE at combat!.
6) Skills don't equilibriate with fighting ability. They equilibriate with LACK of fighting ability, and LACK of spellcasting ability. They are leg 3 of the 3 way triangle.
Ergo, the best skilled person should of average combat skill and NO spellcasting ability. The Rogue and Expert are perfect for this. The Bard, not so much. A no spell bard? Definitely.
7) Definitely. But Anti-magic has always been poo-pooed by PF, on the theory that it craps on casters, who are supposed to be fun, and having magic is supposed to be better then not having magic.
Having classes with NO intrinsic magic be better at anti-magic is a huge leap, but one that should be taken.
There are remarkably few RPG's that don't have an anti-caster option of some sort in the system, but PF is one of them.
8) Counterspelling should indeed be easier, but the 'spell level hgiher' is a waste of space. Enemy casters are often higher level then PC's, and so countering the best spells of the enemy tends to be difficult at best.
It would be easier to give Dispel Magic a bonus when counterspelling, and going back to the old dispel that got rid of ALL magic in the area of effect, instead of just one spell. In other words, giving Dispel teeth to chew makes an existing effect the counterspell you need/want.
==Aelryinth
This is only a tiny, tiny fix, but what if you only got half your Intelligence mod to skill points? The Wizard would need an incredible 34 Intelligence to have the same amount of skill points as an Int 10 Rogue, as opposed to the highly achievable 22 it is now. I would probably combine this with raising Fighter skill points to 6 and Paladin to 4.That hurts other INT based classes that aren't the wizard. Remember, a wizard doesn't need skills at all, he has spells. Skills are just extra gravy to add insult to injury.
The other int-based classes are also casters. The Investigator certainly doesn't need any more help in the skills department.
Plus, the Wizard is still a better caster than a Sorcerer. Now he doesn't have a skill edge over them in addition to getting his spells early.
The Fighter fights, as opposed to the other classes.The Fighter never had a real niche, either mechanically or fluff-wise, so removing it wholesale would change exactly nothing.
Hey now, Fighter fills the "I really need to cram in another couple combat feats into my -insert not Fighter class here- build and I guess a little boost to fortitude and BAB would be cool too" niche quite well. It's one of the best dips in the game, only slightly behind Monk, for a lot of classes.
I guess that's a rather dubious distinction though.
The Fighter fights alright, but in the most generic way possible...
The Cavalier, Samurai and Paladin are focused on mounted combat, the Ranger, Ninja, Investigator and Rogue are focused on stealth, the Barbarian, Warpriest, Inquisitor and Magus are focused on using special powers (rage powers and spells), the Monk and Brawler are focused on unarmed combat, the Gunslinger and Alchemist are focused on ranged combat.
The Fighter is decent at everything but also is great at none. It lacks a set of features that gets players to WANT to play a Fighter.
The Fighter doesn't need feats, it needs features, such as:
- A Vital Strike-like ability to deal your weapon damage times your level, once per day per 5 levels
- Ignoring COMPLETELY the speed reduction and armor check penalties for armors and shields
- Weapon Training focusing on ONE weapon; no Fighter is gonna use 4 different weapons from 4 different groups.
- Bravery being adding your level to Will saves against fear and mind-affecting effects, not 1 per 4 levels.
- Perception as a class skill
The Fighter fights, as opposed to the other classes.The Fighter never had a real niche, either mechanically or fluff-wise, so removing it wholesale would change exactly nothing.
Hey now, Fighter fills the "I really need to cram in another couple combat feats into my -insert not Fighter class here- build and I guess a little boost to fortitude and BAB would be cool too" niche quite well. It's one of the best dips in the game, only slightly behind Monk, for a lot of classes.
I guess that's a rather dubious distinction though.
The Fighter fights alright, but in the most generic way possible...
The Cavalier, Samurai and Paladin are focused on mounted combat, the Ranger, Ninja, Investigator and Rogue are focused on stealth, the Barbarian, Warpriest, Inquisitor and Magus are focused on using special powers (rage powers and spells), the Monk and Brawler are focused on unarmed combat, the Gunslinger and Alchemist are focused on ranged combat.
The Fighter is decent at everything but also is great at none. It lacks a set of features that gets players to WANT to play a Fighter.
The Fighter doesn't need feats, it needs features, such as:
- A Vital Strike-like ability to deal your weapon damage times your level, once per day per 5 levels
- Ignoring COMPLETELY the speed reduction and armor check penalties for armors and shields
- Weapon Training focusing on ONE weapon; no Fighter is gonna use 4 different weapons from 4 different groups.
- Bravery being adding your level to Will saves against fear and mind-affecting effects, not 1 per 4 levels.
- Perception as a class skill
- More skill points
Since Climb is being discussed, perhaps anecdotal evidence from this week's session may provide insight.
The party features Barbarian, Kineticist, Bard, and Alchemist, all level 4.
There was a cliff that needed to be climbed, requiring 5 (DC 20)climb checks to finish.
My Barbarian excitedly hopped up on the wall, ahead of the party.
I made all 5 climb checks, and was able to hop around cheering while the rest of the party fiddled around with climber's kits and took a few dangerous falls before finally climbing up to meet me.
Their magic did them no good.
I took a huge risk by climbing up myself without support, sure. But it felt incredibly rewarding to have made a series of difficult checks, by myself.
In a separate campaign, I was in a similar situation, but was playing a witch.
I levitated myself up the cliff, involving no checks, and felt no sense of accomplishment whatsoever.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
However, a sense of accomplishment is not what is really being discussed. It's about legitimate impact within the world, and how a class system can help balance that out. In fact, Soilent, that really is just a simple demonstration of the problem: even at low levels, a spellcaster can completely negate a significant challenge, and as a class feature no less.
Like you seem to, I play (not entirely by choice) almost exclusively in low-magic, low-level worlds. The gaming focus really is, at this point, casters supporting heroic fighters and their ilk. But that's before significant summoning magic, and with a lot of nerfs placed on casters.
But let's scale it down all the way to level one. The party is summoned to the queen to assist in some task, and the PCs would like to influence themselves favorably within the kingdom. The swashbuckler attempts a diplomacy check and some excellent roleplaying to curry favor with the queen. The wizard, however, finds this to be somewhat of a nuisance, and drops sow thought. The playable environment could be hugely impacted by that, and there's pretty few repercussions for it. To achieve a remotely similar idea, you have to look at something like the Kitsune rogue talent chain allowing you to insert information without being identified, requiring multiple bluff checks and multiple class features. Nevermind the racial restriction . . .
The fact is that, rapidly, it becomes apparent that casters affect the scope of the game, with whatever degree of effort, infinitely more than the fighter does. Not as an extension of roleplaying, but simply as a product of being a caster.
And while in the similar but not quite the same thread about 'nice things', there is the suggestion of Badass Powers and the like, I don't think it is a terrible idea to grant abilities we might not think to drop on something as simple as a Fighter. But most fighters we think of, the kind that can slay something like a minotaur and make off with its loot, are not simple soldiers anymore. Whether or not its magic, those characters are exceeding humanity, and that is a concept that should be embraced by Pathfinder, and, like with classes like the alchemist, should be capitalized on creatively.
One of my favorite homebrewed mechanics for a fighter was to grant them Heroics, things that identify them to their enemies, to the population, and noticeably separate them from common soldiers. One such example came with a fair bit of flavor, so bear with me:
The fighter, having given so many souls to death and having prevented so many other souls from reaching it, becomes branded by death and thereby linked to the Boneyard. While this might prompt fear, awe, or anything else, the connection of the fighter to the Boneyard allows him to summon a creature to test his valor (a random creature of a CR equal to his character level +1): if he can defeat it, he may return a soul from the Boneyard (as per Raise Dead, then Resurrection, then True Resurrection, with the CRs scaling over time).
Things like that A) Impact the world B) Diversify characters beyond combat styles, which people like Barbarians and Fighters should be mastering anyway and C) Creates massive flavor for the character as well as the world that can be capitalized on by the DM. And while some people may consider that faux-magic, the simple fact is that a lot of Dev resources have been poured into magic as the only superhuman resource of the universe, and thereby thinking in its mechanical terms, if not necessarily its flavor, is pretty necessary.
I really try to look at epic tales and things like that to get an idea of what Fighters and other heroes should be capable of. And one of the most important things in fantasy worlds is to remember that everyone should bend reality to an extent for the sake of the narrative. It doesn't make sense to bring down a dragon with a single well-placed arrow, especially in RPG terms. It doesn't make sense to fight your way through hell to retrieve a lost love, or other such things common in Greek tales and other epics. But I don't think wizards and other casters get to not make sense in a fantasy role playing game.
I can see some spells at least (Fireball comes to mind), where the time to cast would decrease with the caster's level.Hmmmmm.
Here we are, looking for ways to bring martial characters up to near the level of world-breaking awesomeness that spellcasters enjoy, and here you come along and suggest letting spellcasters automatically learn how to cast their spells as swift (or free?) actions without spending a feat or raising the caster level, or even finding/buying/making a rod to to it more easily but limited times? You're basically giving them unlimited Quicken metamagic rods that don't even require a free hand?
Even if that is only on some spells, well, it's a huge leap in power for the spellcasters. I don't know if there is another thread out there trying to balance the classes by adding power to spellcasters, but it sure isn't this one.
You are putting a few too many words in my mouth. What I meant is that when the caster first learns Fireball, it would be a Full-Round Action. A few levels later, it drops to a Standard Action(like it is now).
Now, maybe the Cantrips/Orisions and some of the Level 1 spells could be made swift actions when you hit high levels, maybe some level 2 stuff, but it wouldn't go further than that.
Primarily, which spells should be what type of action(and which should get easier to cast) would be determined by their effect, not just level. Spells that cause massive permanent changes or can end or shut down an encounter in one go should start as Full Round Actions, while most attack spells, particularly those without areas of effect, could remain Standard Actions.
This is only a tiny, tiny fix, but what if you only got half your Intelligence mod to skill points? The Wizard would need an incredible 34 Intelligence to have the same amount of skill points as an Int 10 Rogue, as opposed to the highly achievable 22 it is now. I would probably combine this with raising Fighter skill points to 6 and Paladin to 4.
I'd like to add 1/2 int + 1/2 any other stat of choice that is not int. Add before rounding down.
My fixes would be class specific:
Not a complete list, just ideas.
fighter:
- Double strength bonus for things other than damage and to hit rolls. "That huge boulder is blocking the bath? No need for magic if you have muscles!"
- Add 1/2 level to one profession like soldier, sailor, driver, stable master
Rogue:
- Increase his max skill ranks by 1/2 level. This doesn't give him more skill points but he can be more specialized, having higher ranks.
- Give him slow fall
Ranger
- Can secure a campsite giving party members bonuses when defending the camp. This should take 30min and give a scaling circumstance bonus to attack, AC, saves as well as to perception checks.
I'm giving Fighters Martial Flexibility at first level as an in class feature.
(I have to consider whether I'd give it to all martial classes and archetypes, but clearly the Fighter base class should have that freedom of abilities on the fly.)
Raltus, it's been fifteen years since 3.0 came out. If they haven't fixed Fighters and Rogues since then, it can't be done. It's long past the time to bury both classes and just let them rest, already.
The transition from 3.5 to Pathfinder was by its very nature very conservative. The Developers were limited in how far they could take the rules revisions without the 3.5 base they were catering to not switching over. And remember Tome of Battle was itself a controversial book in the player base, which would have also played into the revision process.
Basically a lot of the rogue/fighter and caster/martial issues are legacy problems inherited from 3.5, that just couldn't be dealt with easily
So I think the statement that "Fighters and Rogues" can't be fixed isn't accurate (Although Unchained Rogue seems to actually fix most of the rogue issues I thought?).
Since Climb is being discussed, perhaps anecdotal evidence from this week's session may provide insight.
The party features Barbarian, Kineticist, Bard, and Alchemist, all level 4.
There was a cliff that needed to be climbed, requiring 5 (DC 20)climb checks to finish.
My Barbarian excitedly hopped up on the wall, ahead of the party.
I made all 5 climb checks, and was able to hop around cheering while the rest of the party fiddled around with climber's kits and took a few dangerous falls before finally climbing up to meet me.
Their magic did them no good.
I took a huge risk by climbing up myself without support, sure. But it felt incredibly rewarding to have made a series of difficult checks, by myself.
In a separate campaign, I was in a similar situation, but was playing a witch.
I levitated myself up the cliff, involving no checks, and felt no sense of accomplishment whatsoever.
Climb is still an important skill at level 4, it's only later when 2nd level spells are cheap that it becomes completely irrelevant.
|
|
Raltus, it's been fifteen years since 3.0 came out. If they haven't fixed Fighters and Rogues since then, it can't be done. It's long past the time to bury both classes and just let them rest, already.
The transition from 3.5 to Pathfinder was by its very nature very conservative. The Developers were limited in how far they could take the rules revisions without the 3.5 base they were catering to not switching over. And remember Tome of Battle was itself a controversial book in the player base, which would have also played into the revision process.
Basically a lot of the rogue/fighter and caster/martial issues are legacy problems inherited from 3.5, that just couldn't be dealt with easily
So I think the statement that "Fighters and Rogues" can't be fixed isn't accurate (Although Unchained Rogue seems to actually fix most of the rogue issues I thought?).
The Unchained Rogue is a start, but it doesn't do enough. The Rogue is still on the low end of T4, where he is betwee nokay and decent at his shtick and not so good at anything else.
Paizo would have to revise one of its core design principles before real meaningful change could be made: that at-will abilities are valued unreasonably more than per-day abilities, to the point that most at-will abilities are absolute garbage. There are a few exceptions to this, but the Playtest Kineticist is the picture of it in action: they could cast what was effectively a mediocre blast spell all day long, and were horrendously weak because of it.
Allowing Rogues to Sneak Attack more often and more effectively was a nice change, but it still doesn't change the fact that other classes muscle in on his territory super hard. Either through Trapfinding as a class feature/possible trait, or through spells circumventing the need for his new Skill Unlocks.
The Unchained Rogue has fewer real issues than the Fighter does, but that doesn't mean he's not still in a pretty lame place.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
This is only a tiny, tiny fix, but what if you only got half your Intelligence mod to skill points? The Wizard would need an incredible 34 Intelligence to have the same amount of skill points as an Int 10 Rogue, as opposed to the highly achievable 22 it is now. I would probably combine this with raising Fighter skill points to 6 and Paladin to 4.I'd like to add 1/2 int + 1/2 any other stat of choice that is not int. Add before rounding down.
I'd rather see the thematic part of the wizard's skills tied directly to their spellcasting.
For example, wizards are supposed to be smart and knowledgeable. What if that was tied to their ability to learn/cast spells?
Ergo, a Wizard is required to have as many ranks in Knowledge skills as he has spell levels, in as many knowledge skills as he has spell levels. He draws from this wide pool of knowledge to understand his spells and gain his free spells per levels. IF he does not meet this restriction, he cannot access his highest tiers of spells.
It also forces him to be either extremely smart or put most, if not all of his skill points into Knowledge skills. he's book smart because he's required to BE book smart.
Contrast with the sorcerer, who won't have any of these int based requirements at all. However, requiring them to maintain maximum ranks in the skill associated with their bloodline would also make sense, further tying them to their theme.
You could do the same thing by tying skills to domains and forcing clerics to have maximum ranks in those skills. Suddenly dumb clerics aren't a thing, because it would impact their spellcasting. Or maybe they are, and that dumb cleric with his 1 skill point a level only has access to one domain!
--This is the kind of stuff that casters don't have to put up with...pre-reqs. They should have to suffer under such things just like other classes do.
==Aelryinth
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This is only a tiny, tiny fix, but what if you only got half your Intelligence mod to skill points? The Wizard would need an incredible 34 Intelligence to have the same amount of skill points as an Int 10 Rogue, as opposed to the highly achievable 22 it is now. I would probably combine this with raising Fighter skill points to 6 and Paladin to 4.I'd like to add 1/2 int + 1/2 any other stat of choice that is not int. Add before rounding down.I'd rather see the thematic part of the wizard's skills tied directly to their spellcasting.
For example, wizards are supposed to be smart and knowledgeable. What if that was tied to their ability to learn/cast spells?
Ergo, a Wizard is required to have as many ranks in Knowledge skills as he has spell levels, in as many knowledge skills as he has spell levels. He draws from this wide pool of knowledge to understand his spells and gain his free spells per levels. IF he does not meet this restriction, he cannot access his highest tiers of spells.
It also forces him to be either extremely smart or put most, if not all of his skill points into Knowledge skills. he's book smart because he's required to BE book smart.
Contrast with the sorcerer, who won't have any of these int based requirements at all. However, requiring them to maintain maximum ranks in the skill associated with their bloodline would also make sense, further tying them to their theme.
You could do the same thing by tying skills to domains and forcing clerics to have maximum ranks in those skills. Suddenly dumb clerics aren't a thing, because it would impact their spellcasting. Or maybe they are, and that dumb cleric with his 1 skill point a level only has access to one domain!
--This is the kind of stuff that casters don't have to put up with...pre-reqs. They should have to suffer under such things just like other classes do.
==Aelryinth
imagine if you used (unchained) limited magic but with overclocking requiring a skill for each of the schools of magic.
actually replace spellcraft with a knowledge of each school of magic.
imagine if you used (unchained) limited magic but with overclocking requiring a skill for each of the schools of magic.
actually replace spellcraft with a knowledge of each school of magic.
It's getting a little off topic, but I really like this idea. Have Spell-casters take Ranks in Schools of Magic.
I always felt Spell-crafting should be used to help you craft spells!
imagine if you used (unchained) limited magic but with overclocking requiring a skill for each of the schools of magic.
actually replace spellcraft with a knowledge of each school of magic.
It's getting a little off topic, but I really like this idea. Have Spell-casters take Ranks in Schools of Magic.
I always felt Spell-crafting should be used to help you craft spells!
If we were to do this, I would probably recommend somewhat decreasing the number of spell schools. Maybe combine transmutation and conjuration or transmutation and magic item creation, illusion and enchantment, etc.
Maybe just make spell casting/counterspelling and other important facets of being a mage skills. It works pretty well in Shadowrun.
imagine if you used (unchained) limited magic but with overclocking requiring a skill for each of the schools of magic.
actually replace spellcraft with a knowledge of each school of magic.
It's getting a little off topic, but I really like this idea. Have Spell-casters take Ranks in Schools of Magic.
I always felt Spell-crafting should be used to help you craft spells!
If we were to do this, I would probably recommend somewhat decreasing the number of spell schools. Maybe combine transmutation and conjuration or transmutation and magic item creation, illusion and enchantment, etc.
Maybe just make spell casting/counterspelling and other important facets of being a mage skills. It works pretty well in Shadowrun.
nah, just let them not need skills in their chosen school, opposition schools take a -10 to checks, and then remove the spell slot penalty.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Well, Bandw, that basically comes down to 'let's limit the spell list for casters', which means going back to the 1e paradigm.
In 1e, the number of spells a wizard could learn per level was absolutely fixed by his intelligence. There was a minimum number, and there was a maximum. It took a 19 Intelligence, which you couldn't roll, and couldn't age into, only gain via magic, to have unlimited ability to learn any/all wizard spells.
At 18 Int, the maximum for the human race, you could learn 18 spells of each spell level.
Which, if you think about it, is probably more then you really NEED to know.
But also, it once again ignored pre-reqs. You didn't need to learn a 1st and 2nd level fire spell to learn fireball, etc, going up the list. No pre-reqs, pick and choose as you like.
But, yeah, associating skills with schools of magic is by far from a bad idea.
Necromancy - Profession (Embalming). Alternatively, Heal skill for White Necromancers.
COnjuration - knowledge (the planes) for summoning outer planar stuff. For inner planar stuff, Knowledge (geography)
For shapechanging magic, Heal - gots to know what makes things tick to turn into them.
For divination, Profession (soothsayer), (librarian), or something similar, preferably focused on their style of divination.
For evocation, Knowledge (engineering). For, like, physics.
For illusion, Sleight of Hand or Perform (stage magic, or acting)
For enchant/charm, Bluff (as the spell is all about creating false feelings). Alternatively, Profession (politician) or Perform (rhetoric).
For Abjuration, Perception or Sense Motive, to see the danger coming.
For transmutation, Knowledge (Nature). Got to know how things are before you go about changing them.
A genius wizard would be someone who actually is smart enough to master the side professions and so understand all the magic.
But that game is not Pathfinder, although it would make for a nice story.
==Aelryinth
If you want and interesting way to creating casting trees and cool way to flavor it, look at the 3.5 Shadowcaster from Tome of Magic....
If you want and interesting way to creating casting trees and cool way to flavor it, look at the 3.5 Shadowcaster from Tome of Magic....
i don't buy or look at 3.5 stuff, so elaborate
If you want and interesting way to creating casting trees and cool way to flavor it, look at the 3.5 Shadowcaster from Tome of Magic....i don't buy or look at 3.5 stuff, so elaborate
Well first, the casting is broken up into 3 level "trees". The idea is that Shadow Magic is so conplex, in order to learn the more advanced spells, you learn basic concepts from lower spells. So in order to learn a level 3 spell, you needed to learn a given level 2 and level 1 spell. In order to learn a level 6 spell you needed to know the pre req 5 and 4 spell. In order to learn a level 5 spell you needed to learn the pre req level 4 spell.
The cool thing also is that each of the spells are seperated into Minor, Least, major, and grand spells (minor-0, least -1-3, major 4-6, grand 7-9). As you level you become more proficient with lower tier spells. (Oh they dont have access to learn as much as they want. They has a spells known list). When you level you are not just given certain spell levels to pick from. Instead you are given so many spells to.pick each level. You can choose to specialize and go for the highest tier spells (3,6,9) or you can diversify and have a lot of lower tier abilities.
Oh and you dont have a spells per day chart. Instead eacH spell starts at i believe 1/day as a an arcane spell, then moves to 2/day as Sp, then 3/day as Su as you essentially get "comfortable" with the spell.
That was more or less the shadow caster stick. It was disparaged for being Underpowered though due to being compared to traditional vancian casters but i like the system
If you want and interesting way to creating casting trees and cool way to flavor it, look at the 3.5 Shadowcaster from Tome of Magic....i don't buy or look at 3.5 stuff, so elaborateWell first, the casting is broken up into 3 level "trees". The idea is that Shadow Magic is so conplex, in order to learn the more advanced spells, you learn basic concepts from lower spells. So in order to learn a level 3 spell, you needed to learn a given level 2 and level 1 spell. In order to learn a level 6 spell you needed to know the pre req 5 and 4 spell. In order to learn a level 5 spell you needed to learn the pre req level 4 spell.
The cool thing also is that each of the spells are seperated into Minor, Least, major, and grand spells (minor-0, least -1-3, major 4-6, grand 7-9). As you level you become more proficient with lower tier spells. (Oh they dont have access to learn as much as they want. They has a spells known list). When you level you are not just given certain spell levels to pick from. Instead you are given so many spells to.pick each level. You can choose to specialize and go for the highest tier spells (3,6,9) or you can diversify and have a lot of lower tier abilities.
Oh and you dont have a spells per day chart. Instead eacH spell starts at i believe 1/day as a an arcane spell, then moves to 2/day as Sp, then 3/day as Su as you essentially get "comfortable" with the spell.
That was more or less the shadow caster stick. It was disparaged for being Underpowered though due to being compared to traditional vancian casters but i like the system
The Binder class from that book was SICK, and very very complicated to someone unfamiliar with it... :D
I think people rather missed the point of what I was saying, with my climb example.
I think people rather missed the point of what I was saying, with my climb example.
If you mean the fact that you had more fun making a climb check than you did using levitation ... good for you?
Fun is entirely in the eye of the beholder. I'd personally enjoy casting a spell more than making climb checks.
|
|
Yeah, rolling climb checks isn't fun, because you can make two rolls in a row easily, and then bam, you're tumbling down the mountain to possible dismemberment or death. I'd rather something that I can guarantee will work. Which is the problem. The spellcaster has access to things that mean he doesn't need to worry about failure, while the non-spellcaster always has a chance to fail until he's spent a decent amount of his character resources (skill points, feats and/or gold) into counteracting the problem.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
^But it's not necessarily a bad thing that a martial character might need the spell-caster's magic to overcome some obstacles, such as flying up a cliff side that he might otherwise fall from if he tried to climb it.
It's having magic overcome almost all the obstacles while the fighter just waits to hit things that's the problem.
Having special "martial only" feats that do more than just add to damage would help. Being able to deflect a targeted spell with his sword, for instance, a few times a day. (Though I hate the "limited uses/day" thing, but - well - I guess that's "balance"?)