Do martial characters really need better things?


Pathfinder First Edition General Discussion

151 to 200 of 1,592 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as a favorite.
bookrat wrote:
I think people's argument that "the fighter is supposed to be gear dependent and that's how you're supposed to shore up the failings" is only a good argument if the fighter had more money to spend on gear than any other class.

It also only really applies if that gear actually really closes the versatility gap which other classes have built in. Given the low durations, DC's or available bonuses magical gear provides it doesn't really make all that much difference.

Trying to duplicate the scouting druid with hour/level earthglide/swim/fly, 10 minute/level blindsight etc with potions and scrolls at minimum caster level is not going to work well and get very expensive if you try for higher caster levels.


the secret fire wrote:
bookrat wrote:
I think people's argument that "the fighter is supposed to be gear dependent and that's how you're supposed to shore up the failings" is only a good argument if the fighter had more money to spend on gear than any other class.
Adjusting WBL by class would be one way to fix game imbalances. It feels quite unnatural and could lead to some serious complaining when it's time to divide loot, but it would be a simple and systematic way to address the martial/caster disparity. Reminds me of the different XP tracks back in AD&D. All in all, not a bad idea, but I'm sure it would be poorly received.
Look up:
hiiamtom wrote:
Just give spell-less classes the automatic bonus progression for free and give them free ranks in UMD equal to their class level. It allows for martials to use the interesting gear out there to enhance their utility without worrying about the big 6 which they are reliant on in a way other classes are not.

Just make the major costs built into the progression and split the in game accumulated wealth evenly like it should be. No narrative issues, just built into the mechanics.

Jiggy is correct that people will still complain about it because so many people playing Pathfinder 15 years after 3e still don't understand WBL is not optional. If you have that GM, then either start your own game or find a new table because they might as well say "there's no point in playing anything but full casters".

andreww wrote:

It also only really applies if that gear actually really closes the versatility gap which other classes have built in. Given the low durations, DC's or available bonuses magical gear provides it doesn't really make all that much difference.

Trying to duplicate the scouting druid with hour/level earthglide/swim/fly, 10 minute/level blindsight etc with potions and scrolls at minimum caster level is not going to work well and get very expensive if you try for higher caster levels.

Since the two things martials need are a way to get in position and a way to defend/retreat from high level encounters, low CL spells work great and don't step on the toes of actual casters. You shouldn't be trying to simply just cast magic like most magic items, but suddenly throwing weapons are not the worst with a blinkback belt and you don't sacrifice the stat. Eventually you will be flying at will, immune to disease, have 20% miss chance, etc.

There are a lot of good magic items in the slots that are basically not available to most players.


The magical equipment to make up for the disparity made me think: "You know, I kind of want there to be some disparity between martials vs casters!"

I'm all for giving martials better things. But I don't want my fighter to be able to replicate everything a caster can do, or vice versa. And casters can, to a large degree, do without the fighter once you hit 5th-6th level or so.


Jiggy wrote:

On the other hand, considering how many threads there are which decry the evils of the "magic-mart" and/or label any significant understanding of the wealth progression system as "player entitlement", I'm afraid you're also right that it would be poorly received.

And that's to say nothing of the headache-inducing narrative issues introduced by any kind of wealth-by-class paradigm. *shudder*

I personally dislike the Magic Mart and it doesn't exist in my games, but I am sensitive to the fact that many people play this way and still want an easy way to address caster/martial imbalance.

Wealth progression is simply part of the CR system. Depriving the characters of expected loot makes the encounters harder, full stop. As long as the GM understands that, fine.


Otherwhere wrote:

The magical equipment to make up for the disparity made me think: "You know, I kind of want there to be some disparity between martials vs casters!"

I'm all for giving martials better things. But I don't want my fighter to be able to replicate everything a caster can do, or vice versa. And casters can, to a large degree, do without the fighter once you hit 5th-6th level or so.

Like andreww points out, magic items still leaves a massive divide between martials and casters, and just give martials some utility.

I like the flavor of a fighter using a magic item or wand or scroll to do something, especially when it is clear it is just an imitation of a wizard.


I think that martials must stand on a different ground that the casters. I honestly think that is impossible to make martials really matter without make them feel very magical (I don't think that Tome of Battle/Path of War is THAT "magic", but is sure the right step in the right direction), or without nerfing the full casters to make the to not invade the niche of the martials.


Since I have not brought it up in this thread yet and I want to be consistent;

Step 1: Allow Stamina from Pathfinder Unchained and give the first feat to the fighter for free. Getting stamina as a class feature not only makes Fighters the most accurate martial in the game but gives him a resource. How you can use those in the feats presented in Pathfinder Unchained are rather conservative and don't solve the problem but that's besides the point. Stamina is just a roundabout way of giving fighters a 'per encounter' resource without full on static preparation like Path of War. That's the key point.

Step 2: Give fighters something to spend stamina on. My go to is The Book of Martial Action and it's sequel, but you can also use Path of War manuevers (There was a thread about it but I can't find it.) or make up a few feats based on the more marially inclined spells. Fighters get bonus combat feats so they have the main advantage in terms of using feats like this without diminishing themselves. A lot of these techniques/maneuvers completely bypasses feat taxes in exchange for stamina so this leaves a lot of room for more feats.

Step 3: Introduce re trainable feats. Introduce a series of three combat feats accessible at BAB +6, +12 and +18 that can be retrained. That way martials can 'prepare' techniques. You can introduce more of these kind of combat feats, or limit them to stamina techniques/maneuvers but the principle is the same. You have a powerful trick that uses a resource that you can swap out.


If you want to use wealth to keep martials relevant, then maybe playing with the costing of certain magical items might help. An example might be drastically reducing the cost of additional effects on armor and weapons such that it is cost effective to get them in addition to the standard bonuses.

It seems like an ugly patch to my mechanical aesthetic though.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Yeah, dropping the cost of weapon enhancements to align with that of armor does help Martials a bit.

It's a very small step in the right direction, but not a bad one.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Otherwhere wrote:

The magical equipment to make up for the disparity made me think: "You know, I kind of want there to be some disparity between martials vs casters!"

I'm all for giving martials better things. But I don't want my fighter to be able to replicate everything a caster can do, or vice versa. And casters can, to a large degree, do without the fighter once you hit 5th-6th level or so.

The simplest way to manage this is to establish separate spheres for what magical and non-magical classes can do.

Right now, magic can do anything. Just...anything. You have a problem? There's a spell for it, sometimes a bizarrely specific one. Heck, conjuring up or turning into a devastating melee combatant, THE THING YOU HAVE MARTIAL CLASSES AROUND FOR, is two entire sub schools of magic you could build a character around, and is BUILT IN as the default assumption for how a druid is supposed to play.

So...things would probably be a little better-divided if there was a greater separation of what classes can do. Less magical capacities to go "oh, I'll just turn into a monster and do the fighting myself" or "oh, I'll just summon 1d4+1 things to hit stuff FOR ME and keep the loot for myself," and more focus on things that could only be done with magic, like long-ranged transport and stuff.

Also, being a martial class means you're an exceptional adventurer who's keeping up with magic-users with sheer athleticism. Wouldn't it kinda make sense if Fighty-type classes just got natural climb and swim speeds after they'd leveled up a few times? Magic's hogging all the alternate forms of movement, even ones the guy who's in impossibly good shape would logically get good at.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

It would also help to give martials (fighters in particular) something like Martial Flexibility as an in class feature rather than a Feat.

And/or to do away with Feat chains and many pre-reqs for things they should just be able to do. If a caster wants to do something in combat, let them spend the Feat on it. A fighter should just be able to do them.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Spheres of Power need to be used to further diminish the gap between Martials and Casters.


kyrt-ryder wrote:

Yeah, dropping the cost of weapon enhancements to align with that of armor does help Martials a bit.

It's a very small step in the right direction, but not a bad one.

I was referring more to the special spell like effects that can be added to magical objects like flight or shape shifting et al. The powers that offer paradigm shifting capabilities are usually tied to wonderous items that conflict with stat boosting equipment and are often priced into uselessness for people who have to buy weapons... Cutting weapon cost in half would help too.


If we are taking truly sweeping changes to the system I would would just play something else.

I want some simple homebrew that works well. So far I have tried:
-You only get combat feats with every BAB increase (meaning fighters get 31 feats, paladins get 20). This worked really well to allow for fighting types to just fight and not worry about being feat taxed constantly. It also makes fighters pretty much useless.
-Using 5e spells and spellcasting. You need to develop spell lists for each class (not that hard to do), or convert some (again, mostly re-fluffing existing); but it was well received. I kept a google doc going for the spells we used, and it made life easy.
-Adjusting WBL. Works wonderfully but feels even more game-y.
-Building custom feats or classes. This was the most work, but taking it one level at a time worked really well and I had the veto rule at any point and could readjust feats and classes when needed. This was the most work, but the most rewarding as it matched the narrative so well. Does not work with beginners.
-Giving martials Mythic path abilities and a mythic pool to work with. It worked fine, but not that well just because Champion and the like are just terribly written. I will be forever mad about Archmage being printed with no irony.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

First off, nobody should have 2+Int for skills. That is like a punishment. The minimum should be 4+Int. This would allow a fighter to get some utility skills as well as flavor skills each level.

I reject the notion that a fighter is just a Warrior on steroids. The concept of an adventurer who has devoted himself not to woodcraft, not to a holy mission, not to his internal fiery rage, but only and exclusively to his skill at fighting is a compelling one. Instead of giving fighters static bonuses to weapon to hit and armor use, and a plethora of feats (many of which have a gatekeeper stat (Int 13) that is of little use to the Fighter otherwise), give the fighter a selection of abilities that can expand his abilities and develop the character's style and idiom. The only existing system I can compare it to would be rogue talents, only good. Abilities unique to fighters. abilities to compensate for the systematic supremacy of two handed weapons.

This one is a duelist. This one a sword and shield fighter. This one fetishizes one weapon in particular. This one is a master of all. This one is fast. This one jumps. This one is nimble. This one is immovable. This one has an impressive physique. This one is covered in intimidating scars. This one has connections all over. This one is a dirty fighter. This one is about criticals. This one is about raw damage output. You want to make some archetypes with supernatural abilities, or just add them to the list? Knock yourself out. Give fighters a bag of tricks to choose from that is exclusive to them.


Metal Sonic wrote:
Spheres of Power need to be used to further diminish the gap between Martials and Casters.

That too. It neatly bypasses almost every broken aspect of spellcasting and honestly sometimes I don't think its so much of a martials doing too little but casters doing too much, often at once.


GoatToucher wrote:
Give fighters a bag of tricks to choose from that is exclusive to them.

This.

Fighters should have schools of combat.

PoW and ToB are in this direction with stances maneuvers and so on.


I need to try spheres of power, I wish it was on the SRD like Psionics or PoW

Both ToB and PoW are great, and about the only true-to-system solution without homebrew. Aegis is another great martial as well (even as someone who doesn't like Psionics).


Otherwhere wrote:


This.

Fighters should have schools of combat.

PoW and ToB are in this direction with stances maneuvers and so on.

100% agree. If the classes of the PoW wasn't so bloated with abilities and pools, I gladly play with them.


Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Rulebook Subscriber

Well apparently must of you agree that the fighter need an unchained version


Otherwhere wrote:
GoatToucher wrote:
Give fighters a bag of tricks to choose from that is exclusive to them.

This.

Fighters should have schools of combat.

PoW and ToB are in this direction with stances maneuvers and so on.

It might be interesting to have a sort of three-tiered system.

Base combat, which we have right now, which is just what your feats and BAB get you.

Schools of combat, which is primarily a fighter thing, which adds some advanced abilities to combat while being simpler than Path of War.

Then the Path of War, for embracing a heavily technique-based combat style.

I also feel like some optional supplements like "heroic powers" for people that want a more epic hero feel to martial abilities might be good, with some things like:
-Fighter being able to take some of his 3.5 goodies like Mage Slayer and Dungeon Crasher as fighter-exclusive feats, and maybe get "Weapon Unlocks" for each weapon group he's trained in like the Rogue gets Skill Unlocks.
-The Rogue learns "super-talents" that blur the line between extraordinary and supernatural, like Stealth Mastery, which allows the rogue to become so good at hiding that even creatures with expanded senses have to roll a percentage dice to get a perception check to notice him while invisible creatures show up as normal, or the power to "steal" or "hack" magical effects and traps for his own benefit.
-Some unrealistic but cool expansions on combat maneuvers, like being able to use a disarm to make a ranged weapon attack against another enemy with the weapon you disarmed, or bull rush people through obstacles and walls to Kool-Aid Man it up.


hiiamtom wrote:

I need to try spheres of power, I wish it was on the SRD like Psionics or PoW

Both ToB and PoW are great, and about the only true-to-system solution without homebrew. Aegis is another great martial as well (even as someone who doesn't like Psionics).

I can almost garauntee that you won't be disappointed with Spheres of Power. Its a new magic system that's easier to learn AND more diverse than spellcasting while being less game breaking by progressing linearly. Plus it has rules for replacing spellcasting altogether without it being painful. It has perfect record of five star reviews and has consistently been on the list of top 10 third party downloads for months. I bought three softcovers for easy transition to replacing spellcasting completely when I need to.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Biztak wrote:
Well apparently must of you agree that the fighter need an unchained version

Not if it follows the Unchained improvements. I'd like it to be improved to the utility level of a Magus or Inquisitor beyond just combat improvements.


Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Rulebook Subscriber

also fighters are not the only martial class, there is the barbarian (king martial?), paladins, rangers , slayer magus, warpriest and cavalier (which in my opinion needs more help than the fighter, its almost as if he was deliberately held back so he that didnt step into the bard toes too much)


2 people marked this as a favorite.

By all logic Rogue is also a martial and in dire need of help of his own. Unchained was a step in the right direction, but only one step in a long journey.


Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Rulebook Subscriber
kyrt-ryder wrote:
By all logic Rogue is also a martial and in dire need of help of his own. Unchained was a step in the right direction, but only one step in a long journey.

i actually loved the unchained rogue i only wish he could chose a second weapon for finesse training much earlier than lvl 11... or maybe ad dex to damage with bow (archetype maybe?)


Blackwaltzomega wrote:
Otherwhere wrote:
GoatToucher wrote:
Give fighters a bag of tricks to choose from that is exclusive to them.

This.

Fighters should have schools of combat.

PoW and ToB are in this direction with stances maneuvers and so on.

It might be interesting to have a sort of three-tiered system.

Base combat, which we have right now, which is just what your feats and BAB get you.

Schools of combat, which is primarily a fighter thing, which adds some advanced abilities to combat while being simpler than Path of War.

Then the Path of War, for embracing a heavily technique-based combat style.

I also feel like some optional supplements like "heroic powers" for people that want a more epic hero feel to martial abilities might be good, with some things like:
-Fighter being able to take some of his 3.5 goodies like Mage Slayer and Dungeon Crasher as fighter-exclusive feats, and maybe get "Weapon Unlocks" for each weapon group he's trained in like the Rogue gets Skill Unlocks.
-The Rogue learns "super-talents" that blur the line between extraordinary and supernatural, like Stealth Mastery, which allows the rogue to become so good at hiding that even creatures with expanded senses have to roll a percentage dice to get a perception check to notice him while invisible creatures show up as normal, or the power to "steal" or "hack" magical effects and traps for his own benefit.
-Some unrealistic but cool expansions on combat maneuvers, like being able to use a disarm to make a ranged weapon attack against another enemy with the weapon you disarmed, or bull rush people through obstacles and walls to Kool-Aid Man it up.

There's one product that I had picked up randomly that has combat schools.

Basically The Combatant is a Fighter-clone that has 4+int skills per level and a good reflex save. Instead of weapon/armor training it gets bonus abilities dependant on how many of a certain style of feats it has. For example if you have 3-5 feats of the archery style, you may ignore up to half your level in circumstance penalties to ranged attacks and stealth becomes a class skill. As you gain more archery feats you get up to 5 more abilities of increasing strength. Some of the feats are on multiple style lists so since you gain 3 martial art styles throughout your levels, you can get a number of extra abilities if you synch them up. The abilities themselves are either obvious numerical bonuses or something amazingly complementary. (like pounce)

Because the Combatant, like the rest of the Glen Taylor classes are unknown and appear to be abandoned, there's no archetype support and the style feat list does not account for non-core feats I had been devising a way to separate the style combat abilities from the class and paste them as a fighter class feature but I got lazy and never got around to finishing it. Think something like that would work or is it too powerful to just tack something like that on to the figher without getting rid of something else?

Another reason why I never finished was that I got Bravery Feats, and Fighter-only feats using the talents from The Talented Fighter, and Fighter Nuances in my third party folder so it seemed unnecessary. Right now my game's fighters can potentially deal 12d6+numbers damage and cripple a creature for life once a round after flying 30 ft I don't need them getting that much more things.


Biztak wrote:

also fighters are not the only martial class, there is the barbarian (king martial?), paladins, rangers , slayer magus, warpriest and cavalier (which in my opinion needs more help than the fighter, its almost as if he was deliberately held back so he that didnt step into the bard toes too much)

There's a mixed bag there. Barbarian seems to be popular for a martial and so does Paladin which is a class that frustrates me for having such limited resources. Rangers have spells, feat tax breaks, and a buttload of skills so I'm not sure how badly it needs help. Same for Warpriest actually. I was playing one over the summer and wrecked face with it and still had my spells to do a few other things, and on top of that has almost as many feats as a fighter if you're a human. I see people talk about how weak it is compared to a cleric but that was so far from my experience. I'd agree with the Cavalier though. Its not normally talked about but it has so many abilities locked into it's mount use that it fails in other aspects. Although I have to admit that small sized cavaliers are a terror, especially when there's more than one.


Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Rulebook Subscriber
Malwing wrote:
Biztak wrote:

also fighters are not the only martial class, there is the barbarian (king martial?), paladins, rangers , slayer magus, warpriest and cavalier (which in my opinion needs more help than the fighter, its almost as if he was deliberately held back so he that didnt step into the bard toes too much)

There's a mixed bag there. Barbarian seems to be popular for a martial and so does Paladin which is a class that frustrates me for having such limited resources. Rangers have spells, feat tax breaks, and a buttload of skills so I'm not sure how badly it needs help. Same for Warpriest actually. I was playing one over the summer and wrecked face with it and still had my spells to do a few other things, and on top of that has almost as many feats as a fighter if you're a human. I see people talk about how weak it is compared to a cleric but that was so far from my experience. I'd agree with the Cavalier though. Its not normally talked about but it has so many abilities locked into it's mount use that it fails in other aspects. Although I have to admit that small sized cavaliers are a terror, especially when there's more than one.

what the cavalier needs in my opinion is to be able to use tactician with any known teamwork feat and for the bonus of banner to apply to all attack rolls not just the ones that are part of a charge


Cavalier only falls apart as a mounted combatant because of the way combat works in the first D of D&D. A camel just fighting at your side is amazing for helping flank and enable more options. It also gets a debuff and a second attack at level 9. With even the bare minimum of archetype options the Cavalier quickly become a good class. Don't forget orders can be pretty good as well.

I don't think it was well designed by any account, but for a "non-magical paladin" it's... OK.

Also, barbarians are only popular because they are effective at all levels at dealing damage. They get tremendous saves, can break spells, etc. You still have to be hemmed into certain builds though to be that effective.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Cavaliers are so poorly designed that Paizo decided to nerf animal companions just to make the class slightly less awful by comparison.

Paizo's game balance 101, people.


For me:

Challenge is essentially 'Smite Anything' so it has what I hate about regular smite, namely that for a defining class feature you can do it to too many targets. I would love for it to be nerfed just so I can use it more often.

Mount. I just hate mandatory pets. Every mounted combat ability gets my scorn because of it as well. I don't want to say it's a badly designed class but I will say that it makes me not want to play Cavalier unless I'm small.

Tactician: See my gripes about Challenge only more so because of all the abilities I think this one is more of a defining class feature, the ability to share abilities. It just doesn't happen enough. Cavalier is often compared to Paladins and I think that's fair because all it's iconic abilities can only be used a few times a day or too few targets a day. At this point its not a matter about how powerful the ability but just the fact that I cant do it too often.

Banner: I agree with Biztak on Banner.

Overall Cavalier can be pretty dangerous but it has reasons that I see it picked less often than Rogue.


Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Rulebook Subscriber
Malwing wrote:

For me:

Challenge is essentially 'Smite Anything' so it has what I hate about regular smite, namely that for a defining class feature you can do it to too many targets. I would love for it to be nerfed just so I can use it more often.

Mount. I just hate mandatory pets. Every mounted combat ability gets my scorn because of it as well. I don't want to say it's a badly designed class but I will say that it makes me not want to play Cavalier unless I'm small.

Tactician: See my gripes about Challenge only more so because of all the abilities I think this one is more of a defining class feature, the ability to share abilities. It just doesn't happen enough. Cavalier is often compared to Paladins and I think that's fair because all it's iconic abilities can only be used a few times a day or too few targets a day. At this point its not a matter about how powerful the ability but just the fact that I cant do it too often.

Banner: I agree with Biztak on Banner.

Overall Cavalier can be pretty dangerous but it has reasons that I see it picked less often than Rogue.

http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/general-feats/chain-challenge

Really helps the amount of challenge per day


Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Rulebook Subscriber

Coordinated Charge plus pouncing barbarians can end adventuring careers


Why is this in the Monster Codex? I have it yeah, but it seems like a HUGE boon to Cavalier players but I'd never find it because I use the Monster Codex as a GM and only really look at it when I have a campaign with a race of creatures that need tiers of mooks and sub-bosses.


Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Rulebook Subscriber
Malwing wrote:
Why is this in the Monster Codex? I have it yeah, but it seems like a HUGE boon to Cavalier players but I'd never find it because I use the Monster Codex as a GM and only really look at it when I have a campaign with a race of creatures that need tiers of mooks and sub-bosses.

the monster codex have some really nice feats, this one and hurtful are my personal favorites


Lemmy wrote:

Cavaliers are so poorly designed that Paizo decided to nerf animal companions just to make the class slightly less awful by comparison.

Paizo's game balance 101, people.

How'd they nerf animal companions?

Shadow Lodge

deinol wrote:

I must say, I think Mythic Adventures did a lot to improve martial characters. I've been using Mythic Vital Strike to be quite effective and able to move and attack. I'm a guardian, so Cage Enemy lets me have true battlefield control. I'm not even particularly optimized, but I'm pulling my weight.

I don't think I'll ever run a non-mythic campaign again. I just wish there were mythic versions of more feats from all the various books beyond mostly Core.

If you allow 3rd party there's this Mythic Hero's Handbook.


I could be mistaken as I haven't examined mythic material very deeply...

...but from what I've read and heard it seems that a great deal of mythic martial stuff is stuff martials should have had to begin with and a great deal of mythic caster stuff is bat shit crazy.


If you use Mythic Path abilities without anything else Mythic related (except the mythic pool) your martials will compete a lot more. When your rogue can be the best at a skill, the fighter can literally strike an enemy and send them flying 50ft, the monk can grapple an enemy and use it to club another, and the halfling swashbuckler can hide underneath a large creature and avoid its attacks... you end up with a lot more interesting characters that stay relevant.

That said, Mythic Adventures is a terrible book and fails at all levels in terms of Paizo not dropping to their knees for casters. Archmage is... indescribably broken. Even Heirophant has limitations. Poor Champion, Guardian, Trickster, and Marshal might as well not be there when casters literally have no weaknesses.


The problem with making the caster do less is that the caster is expected to have certain abilities.

If your cleric has spheres and doesn't take healing your fighter dies.

If your wizard doesn't get teleport at 5th level you can't shop properly. Even a metropolis doesn't consistently carry the gear you need RAW. You need to teleport all over the world and check the randomly available stuff in all the metropoli or the fighter can't get his expected numbers.

You can't feed the hungry by nerfing farmers.

As long as the base setting assumptions include stuff like magic items, planar travel, flying enemies, stat drainers, and so forth nerfing caster versatility breaks things.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Atarlost wrote:
As long as the base setting assumptions include stuff like magic items, planar travel, flying enemies, stat drainers, and so forth nerfing caster versatility breaks things.

Unless some of it is replaced with martial versatility.

Master Smiths who are so badass they make shit magic by forging with fricken' awesome mojo.

Warriors so badass they cut through the veils between dimensions.

Warriors who can leap as high as necessary to deal with anybody flying that's close enough to be a threat.

Warriors that heal so fast and so well they don't need magic to recover. Maybe they can even feed the caster some of their blood to heal the caster's stat drains.

And so forth.


Malwing wrote:
hiiamtom wrote:

I need to try spheres of power, I wish it was on the SRD like Psionics or PoW

Both ToB and PoW are great, and about the only true-to-system solution without homebrew. Aegis is another great martial as well (even as someone who doesn't like Psionics).

I can almost garauntee that you won't be disappointed with Spheres of Power. Its a new magic system that's easier to learn AND more diverse than spellcasting while being less game breaking by progressing linearly. Plus it has rules for replacing spellcasting altogether without it being painful. It has perfect record of five star reviews and has consistently been on the list of top 10 third party downloads for months. I bought three softcovers for easy transition to replacing spellcasting completely when I need to.

Saw your review of it. Now I own a new book.


Atarlost wrote:

The problem with making the caster do less is that the caster is expected to have certain abilities.

If your cleric has spheres and doesn't take healing your fighter dies.

If your wizard doesn't get teleport at 5th level you can't shop properly. Even a metropolis doesn't consistently carry the gear you need RAW. You need to teleport all over the world and check the randomly available stuff in all the metropoli or the fighter can't get his expected numbers.

You can't feed the hungry by nerfing farmers.

As long as the base setting assumptions include stuff like magic items, planar travel, flying enemies, stat drainers, and so forth nerfing caster versatility breaks things.

Spherecasters aren't that needed. Being able to handle flying enemies, healing and such are still easily accessible you just can't do it all and all at once. Also keeping up those assumptions of what caster should be doing just makes the problem persist by escalating the game so you need casters to take mandatory options to make things work. Disregarding that I think the necessity of some things are exaggerated. I've played plenty of games where we were seriously under equipped and still breaking the game. I think normal spellcasting is a bunch of easy answers as opposed to the only answers.


Opuk0 wrote:
How'd they nerf animal companions?

Combat training no longer grants armor proficiency. Cavaliers are the only ones hat get an armored mount from start... But they still suck balls. If you want a martial mounted combatant, you're much better off playing a Paladin or Ranger.

Shadow Lodge

Lemmy wrote:
Opuk0 wrote:
How'd they nerf animal companions?
Combat training no longer grants armor proficiency. Cavaliers are the only ones hat get an armored mount from start... But they still suck balls. If you want a martial mounted combatant, you're much better off playing a Paladin or Ranger.

Oh I did not know that.


Back to the OP’s question, I think that some martials really do need nicer things. I also think that Paizo has begin to supply some nicer things and options for allowing nicer things though.

- Out of Combat Skills: I’ve found Background Skills pretty nice for rounding out my Viking and my goblin. My orc’s DM isn’t allowing them, and that PCs skill ranks seem painfully tight even though he’s a genius in orc terms.
- Mobility: My orc will be able to fly next level due to Mutation Warrior. Various climbing, flying, or swimming mounts should also be available via Eldritch Guardian.
- VMC: A Fighter gets enough bonus feats that giving up some feats to gain some class features seems like it could be appealing.
- Combat Stamina: There are a few neat tricks here.
- Feats: As with VMC, the Fighter’s bonus feats ease the pressure of investing regular feats. Picking up an animal companion via feats might help answer the question of what Rough Riders ride.

Speaking of riding, I never assumed that combat training granted armor proficiency to animal companions. Masterwork studded leather already has no armor check penalty though, and even that often boosts an animal's AC to the point where some DMs might start to complain. Being able to ignore the ACP on your Ride checks should also help the Cavalier with Mounted Combat.

There are already some martial classes which are pretty good at leaping such as Ninjas and Rogues. If there's somebody flying hundreds of feet up shooting arrows or Fireballs I'm not sure that jumping up at them makes a lot of sense though. Thematic concerns aside, I'm not sure if jumping allows you to move faster than your speed, so it might take you a while to get there. Some sort of dimensional movement might make more sense, and while there are a few options for that they're generally magical.

There's another thread about making Master Craftsman (or something like it) a single feat magic weapon and armor crafting solution, and I agree that would probably be a good change.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Devilkiller wrote:
There are already some martial classes which are pretty good at leaping such as Ninjas and Rogues. If there's somebody flying hundreds of feet up shooting arrows or Fireballs I'm not sure that jumping up at them makes a lot of sense though.

It certainly does at levels 13+


1 person marked this as a favorite.
kyrt-ryder wrote:
Devilkiller wrote:
There are already some martial classes which are pretty good at leaping such as Ninjas and Rogues. If there's somebody flying hundreds of feet up shooting arrows or Fireballs I'm not sure that jumping up at them makes a lot of sense though.
It certainly does at levels 13+

Or rather, it makes as much sense as a dude with a sword being in any way comparable to a flying invisible being with fantastic kosmic power(TM).

Fighters are either capable of extraordinary feats and might be able to compete with powerful supernatural beings at higher levels, or they are not capable of said feats and cannot. Either mundanes are inferior to casters, or they are capable of amazing things in order to not be inferior to casters. You kind of need to pick one and stick with it.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Snowblind wrote:
Fighters are either capable of extraordinary feats and might be able to compete with powerful supernatural beings at higher levels, or they are not capable of said feats and cannot. Either mundanes are inferior to casters, or they are capable of amazing things in order to not be inferior to casters. You kind of need to pick one and stick with it.

I for one want to be amazing, especially after level 6.

151 to 200 of 1,592 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / General Discussion / Do martial characters really need better things? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.