| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
It's official guys, fighters no longer suck and we can all stop b*tching.
Magic Tactics toolbox so far has been an outstanding read through.
Looking back at the last few releases, we can see that Paizo has all but completely acknowledged the complaints that we had about the fighter class, and has addressed the lack of class features with genuine modular choices accessible all but exclusively to fighters (and to anyone with effective fighter levels and Weapon/Armor training).
Unchained had the Combat Trick and Stamina System. They went through all the Core releases (the RPG line) and added effects for the fighter exclusive Stamina system for every combat feat. The system itself has many different variants, the main one being that fighters get the intro feat for it for free at first level, and everyone else has to buy into it. It gives fighters their much coveted bonuses other than weapon focus to hit at early levels and gives them a pooled resource.
Weapon Master's Handbook- opened the door for these kinds of mechanics, and ran with it like crazy. Real class features starting at level 5, accessible through a feat every 5 levels. These include options from free skill ranks, to more bonus feats, to unique abilities like drawing a weapon as part of an initiative check without having to be a gunslinger or swashbuckler. There's a ton of threads on this. Remember when Lemmy said we would never see support for the Stamina system ever again? He lied, and they gave us support for almost all the released non Core (or RPG line, if you prefer) combat feats. Also Item Mastery feats and Weapon Mastery feats.
Arcane Anthology gave us the Child of Acavna and Amaznen (which I still can't find on d20pfsrd to link) which was the fighter wrapped up in a half-magus class which filled the design niche for a prepared 4/9 full BAB arcane caster. Thanks to the Stamina System included in Unchained, the class works surprisingly well and actually gives reasons for them to have printed the Combat Tricks for Arcane Strike (increasing it's duration and freeing up your swift action) and Arcane Armor Training (which for a Stamina point, becomes a free action).
Ultimate Intrigue included feats which expand the usage of Bravery as well as a feat which gives them Intimidate maxed out without having to waste skill points (well, 1 skill point).
Armor Master's Handbook gave fighters even more utility, and obviously better defenses. Obtainable DR, better AC, and things to do with Armor Training bonuses that you couldn't do without having a higher DEX. Also the ability to make Magic Armor on your own.
Magic Tactics toolbox finished the deal, as now the fighter has even more options thanks to the ability to now gain Item Mastery feats though Advanced Weapon Training without needing to meet prerequisites (so not wasting ranks on UMD) and Warrior Spirit, meaning he can gain a magical enhancement bonus on his weapon without spending money or needing a spellcaster. (Let's not get into whether or not the Training ability from Inner Sea Intrigue also means the fighter essentially has backdoor access to the Martial Flexibility class feature, but whatever.) Also, as written he can have any weapon enhancement so long as it doesn't exeed his Weapon Training bonus. (In other words, stop b*tching about Ultimate Equipment's errata since they left Gloves of Dueling in tact!)
And that's only what I noticed on my first read through. And it mentions no archetype options.
Discuss?
The Final Fighter Thread
I fixed the fighter ages ago man
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
1) Remove the discussion of an archetype from the wording. A fighter is a no-magic combatant, at least regards spellcasting.
I believe he has to give up weapon and/or armor training for the Child archetype.
2) If all these abilities take feats, they come at expense of his bonus feats. What about all his dead levels, filled with just scaling low level abilities? Every feat he takes for these options is one less for use with Stamina.
3) Yes, these abilities are nice. They are giving the fighter stuff he already should have had, but now making him spend his bonus feats for it, which is giving to Peter while robbing Paul.
4) When the stamina system is core, i.e. included in, say, the iconics, we'll have an official change.
What we should now be able to do is make up a 'standard' Fighter rebuild that incorporates these abilities as the extra things a fighter should have.
==Aelryinth
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This will be far from the last Fighter thread.
Even if Fighters are at a good spot now -and I am not saying they are- there will be contentions about if they are good or terrible.
Personally, the very small problems I had and have with Fighters were not addressed. I believe they should get a single additional class feature revolving around intimidate uses. That would be a great way to give some out and in combat versatility without bogging them down. The other problem I have is their class skill list.
While these are relatively simple complaints, the major problem I had and have is the crux of the matter. Giving Maritals nice feats at higher levels. A lot of the feats out there are raw deals. And as such I would deeply apperciate Fighters and the game more were they not. It seems pointless to buff the Fighter when their biggest class feature, and indeed the game as a whole, will benefit from more good marital focused combat options.
But that's just my opinion. Let's look at reasons others will still hate the Fighter.
1: Maritals suck, Fighters suck. Some people will just hate maritals. And their casting archetype sucks.
2: Stamina System is NOT core to the game. I've been trying to get my group to accept it, no luck as of yet. While optional systems like background skills are AMAZING they aren't if you are Pathfinder Society or whatever else. Personally, I think stamina and background skills should be aggressively pushed by material and offical games and adventure paths. But that doesn't technically change the game.
3: They cannot be highly optimised. A Fighter is designed to be basic, direct, and to the point. They are the perfect generalist. Useless relatively little of the time, but never truly impressive. They will not be winning the optimization olympics anytime soon. They are great for handing a new player who cannot wrap their head around class features yet. Not so much for everyone else.
4: Optimising a Fighter is hard as nails. In contention with my previous statement, even if you can make a great Fighter it goes well, well beyond the skills of most players. You have to know EVERYTHING and do not have strong class features to start you off with.
5: Fighters work better in games without known magic items. Simple point, if you do not know what your weapon of choice will be and cannot plan your build around it Fighters will be better than say dancing dervish magus. Actually, they probably won't be better, but a more favorable comparison.
6: Advance Weapon Training is not all it is hyped up to be. If they steal Vigilante talents then we will be talking. As stands, for a top level build I would only take a few AWTs. It's great, but not enough great ones for every character.
7: That's a lot of material to sort through to make Fighters decent!
Right, he gives up weapon training, which is made up for with Arcane Strike.1) Remove the discussion of an archetype from the wording. A fighter is a no-magic combatant, at least regards spellcasting.
I believe he has to give up weapon and/or armor training for the Child archetype.
2) If all these abilities take feats, they come at expense of his bonus feats. What about all his dead levels, filled with just scaling low level abilities? Every feat he takes for these options is one less for use with Stamina.They do not, the fighter can choose to not select additional Weapon Training groups at 9th level, 13th, or 17th to instead gain Advanced Weapon Training options. He keeps his highest Weapon Training Bonus, and it keeps increasing, often with abilities keyed to that figure. There is also a feat to acquire more of them, available once every 5 fighter levels, for a total of 7 possible options, save for cheese with Barroom Brawler. Advanced Armor Training can be taken in place of an increase in max DEX/reduction in ACP. It is also accessible through a feat, available every three levels.
3) Yes, these abilities are nice. They are giving the fighter stuff he already should have had, but now making him spend his bonus feats for it, which is giving to Peter while robbing Paul.Already disproved above.
4) When the stamina system is core, i.e. included in, say, the iconics, we'll have an official change.
What we should now be able to do is make up a 'standard' Fighter rebuild that incorporates these abilities as the extra things a fighter should have.
==Aelryinth
Why? These are all options available to the CRB fighter, they just aren't printed in the same book. Demanding that Paizo rewrite the CRB for [the 6th?] time to add supplemental material that's already published in other releases just to personally acknowledge them is a bit childish and petulant.
Opinion, not a valid point.This will be far from the last Fighter thread.
Even if Fighters are at a good spot now -and I am not saying they are- there will be contentions about if they are good or terrible.
Personally, the very small problems I had and have with Fighters were not addressed. I believe they should get a single additional class feature revolving around intimidate uses. That would be a great way to give some out and in combat versatility without bogging them down. The other problem I have is their class skill list.
While these are relatively simple complaints, the major problem I had and have is the crux of the matter. Giving Maritals nice feats at higher levels. A lot of the feats out there are raw deals. And as such I would deeply apperciate Fighters and the game more were they not. It seems pointless to buff the Fighter when their biggest class feature, and indeed the game as a whole, will benefit from more good marital focused combat options.
But that's just my opinion. Let's look at reasons others will still hate the Fighter.
1: Maritals suck, Fighters suck. Some people will just hate maritals. And their casting archetype sucks.
2: Stamina System is NOT core to the game. I've been trying to get my group to accept it, no luck as of yet. While optional systems like background skills are AMAZING they aren't if you are Pathfinder Society or whatever else. Personally, I think stamina and background skills should be aggressively pushed by material and offical games and adventure paths. But that doesn't technically change the game.Again, complaining that a material may as well not exist because you choose to play in an environment where it isn't allowed doesn't discredit the material nor prevent it from existing. Not a valid point.
3: They cannot be highly optimised. A Fighter is designed to be basic, direct, and to the point. They are the perfect generalist. Useless relatively little of the time, but never truly impressive. They will not be winning the optimization olympics anytime soon. They are great for handing a new player who cannot wrap their head around class features yet. Not so much for everyone else.So much anecdote, personal bias, and blatantly incorrect conjecture that I don't even think there was a point to this one other than "I disagree with you, here's some rambling." If there was a valid point, it was disguised in your personal opinion of the designers intentions for the class.
4: Optimising a Fighter is hard as nails. In contention with my previous statement, even if you can make a great Fighter it goes well, well beyond the skills of most players. You have to know EVERYTHING and do not have strong class features to start you off with.Very few classes are in great shape at first level. The Stamina System is actually a fix to that, unless you choose to ignore it for the purpose of making a point. I'm not a PFS player, so I don't know if the feat is itself banned in that format? Because even if you have to burn your first bonus feat on it, it's a pretty useful ability to gain bonus to hit.
5: Fighters work better in games without known magic items. Simple point, if you do not know what your weapon of choice will be and cannot plan your build around it Fighters will be better than say dancing dervish magus. Actually, they probably won't be better, but a more favorable comparison.There are multiple options now which allow your Weapon Focus/Specialization/Improved Critccal feats apply to multiple weapons (typically all of them across a Weapon Group), and Warrior's Spirit let's you turn any weapon you touch into a magic weapon, and you can add whatever abilities you want to it, should you have sufficient levels (or Gloves of Dueling). If that choice happens to be Training, you also gain a combat feat that you qualify for. If you don't know what feat you might need, but still want to buff yourself, you can pick Barroom Brawler and spend a move action later in the fight to pick what feat you need. Also keen as early as 5th level, meaning you get improved critical as early as magi or paladins now. 100% invalid point.
6: Advance Weapon Training is not all it is hyped up to be. If they steal Vigilante talents then we will be talking. As stands, for a top level build I would only take a few AWTs. It's great, but not enough great ones for every character.The main vigilante talent that I would want on my fighter is the one that grants a scaling shield bonus on Power Attack. Otherwise I suppose that could be a valid point? It's mostly based on a very vague opinion with no explanation though.
7: That's a lot of material to sort through to make Fighters decent!
And there isn't a lot of material to sort to make other classes work great? Very many classes 'require' a lot of materials combined to gain the best possible builds. Sure, doing so may not be as necessary for something like, the wizard, but then again that complaint boils down to the same thing as point 2, if you choose not to use the materials then you really don't have the right to complain.
One for seven is pretty bad....
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
No, this thread is only the beginning.
Yeah, until the Core Rulebook gets a cleanup and gets rid of that secret jock hatred from its inky pages, these threads won't cease to be reborn from the ashes...
Also, to be fair:
Asserting that a material may as well not exist because you choose to play in an environment where it isn't allowed doesn't discredit the material, nor prevent it from existing.
This is back.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
>>>>>>>>>>>The point.>>>>>>>>>
Opinion, not a valid point.
I think more people would content that's fact over opinion, but my goal was to establish why there would be more fighter threads. A commonly held and very strong opinion by the majority does exactly that.
Again, complaining that a material may as well not exist because you choose to play in an environment where it isn't allowed doesn't discredit the material nor prevent it from existing. Not a valid point.
I CHOOSE to play with it. The others disagreed.
So much anecdote, personal bias, and blatantly incorrect conjecture that I don't even think there was a point to this one other than "I disagree with you, here's some rambling." If there was a valid point, it was disguised in your personal opinion of the designers intentions for the class.
Ya know, just saying "not a valid point" is not a valid argument right? Regardless, personal play experience and design understanding will still affect people making threads and arguments. Even if someone is wrong, they will talk as if they are the final authority on class design who has the last word that ends all debates forever with their infallible logic.
Very few classes are in great shape at first level. The Stamina System is actually a fix to that, unless you choose to ignore it for the purpose of making a point. I'm not a PFS player, so I don't know if the feat is itself banned in that format? Because even if you have to burn your first bonus feat on it, it's a pretty useful ability to gain bonus to hit.
So you are saying that because your home games make the Fighter fine it is for the rest of the player base? Regardless, every other marital class has a DIRECTION at 1st level. The Fighter doesn't suck at 1st level, the discrepancy comes later. Finding that direction and knowing what you want to do is a lot harder for a blank sheet than for one with strong points already doodled in.
There are multiple options now which allow your Weapon Focus/Specialization/Improved Critccal feats apply to multiple weapons (typically all of them across a Weapon Group),
Really? I wasn't aware. I only know of the human and Fighter option. The later of which is VERY slow to scale. It's almost like there is a lot of material to sort through to make Fighters decent. Almost as if that makes it difficult to evaluate them as a whole... Hmmm...
and Warrior's Spirit let's you turn any weapon you touch into a magic weapon, and you can add whatever abilities you want to it, should you have sufficient levels (or Gloves of Dueling). If that choice happens to be Training, you also gain a combat feat that you qualify for. If you don't know what feat you might need, but still want to buff yourself, you can pick Barroom Brawler and spend a move action later in the fight to pick what feat you need. Also keen as early as 5th level, meaning you get improved critical as early as magi or paladins now. 100% invalid point.
I'm not sure having a feat for 1 minute a day is good enough in any word. Not that anything you said has anything to do with my point. My point was about how Fighters tend to go better when you have to scavenge. Features like weapon training are obviously better in those cases as is anything that does grant weapon focus to other things.
Actually, you kinda prove my point. If you are giving your feats across weapon training then clearly it's easier for a Fighter, rather than any other class, to switch weapons on the fly when you find a kinky new sword in random loot games.
The main vigilante talent that I would want on my fighter is the one that grants a scaling shield bonus on Power Attack. Otherwise I suppose that could be a valid point? It's mostly based on a very vague opinion with no explanation though.
Sorry, let me be clearer.
There are about 3-4 AWT (at most) I feel a character needs. Any more than that and you might as well be picking up normal combat feats as they will likely accent your build better.
There are about 10 or so Vigilante talents of the same caliber. Heck, even better. Lethal Grace is basically a better version of Trained Grace that throws in Weapon Finesse for free. Mad Rush is pounce, POUNCE. Normally you have to be a Kitsune for that.
And there isn't a lot of material to sort to make other classes work great? Very many classes 'require' a lot of materials combined to gain the best possible builds. Sure, doing so may not be as necessary for something like, the wizard, but then again that complaint boils down to the same thing as point 2, if you choose not to use the materials then you really don't have the right to complain.
There is needing a few books (or quick web checks) to be good. And then there is having to slog through a bog to make a class even function on a basic level for high level play. I don't think any other class has their "good" stuff spread across so many books! Heck, I would not bat an eye on someone using just Ultimate Intrigue and Core to make a Vigilante that heavily outdoes the Fighter at his own thing.
One for seven is pretty bad....
Kinda like your dissections.
Cool, so the Core Fighter doesn't "suck" if we cater and pander to his every whim by allowing backwater rules sources and optional rules such as Stamina. I could've told you that would happen, and I'll go ahead and tell you that for several people, that's still not enough (myself included) to make the Fighter a more bearable class to play.
The funny thing is, several of those benefits aren't available or even banned in PFS, so in organized play such as PFS, or tables which stick to Core Only or the main RPG hardcover line, they're still pretty crappy. Which is a lot of tables.
The same can be said for every other class that might have this very same treatment; they might have alternate rules systems that make them stronger, or some abilities/features require backwoods sourcebooks (even if they're Paizo products).
I mean, I guess you can say that the Fighter is "fixed," but several people will still disagree, and like any other operation where you close an entry wound (even if the operation is fixing the wound itself, or what have you), those stitches need to come off so that it meshes smoothly, otherwise what you're left with is an ugly patch of skin after sealing what was a very difficult issue to address, one that not a lot of people will find pleasing to the eye.
Also, to be fair:
Asserting that a material may as well not exist because you choose to play in an environment where it isn't allowed doesn't discredit the material, nor prevent it from existing.This is back.
It still exists, and it still helps fix the fighter. There are also a bunch of third party alternate fighter classes that fix the fighter. There are many of these which are free and can be found in these very forums. IME, many groups blanket-ban anything third party even if I can show that it easily within the expected power level of other classes filling similar roles. Many have similar views on unchained. It Exists =/= Everyone can use it. Similarly Synthesist exists, and it is less powerful than the base class. Many disallow it still. Mythic Adventures exists, but very few are willing to run mythic campaigns even with a mythic AP.
However, it seems fighter is on a good path to functionality if history is a guide. CRB Monk was somewhat terrible. Paizo seemingly ignored this for a while and 3pp companies released fixed monks. Then paizo released a bunch of archetypes, feats, and other rules that meant with sufficient system mastery, you could make a reasonably competent monk. Some erratas and FAQs hurt this progression, but overall it was doable with some effort. Then Paizo released Pathfinder Unchained with the Unchained Monk, giving it the real fix it needed all along.
Fighter started out rather mediocre in a lot of places. This was ignored for a while, then Paizo started releasing a bunch of rules comparable to archetypes that now mean fighter can be doable with sufficient system mastery. Some Errata/FAQ hurts this (jingasa nerf, for example) but logically the next step is to release an unchained fighter. The fighter broke at creation, and now has been duct taped back up. Now ir just needs to be replaced with a better version of itself.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Cool, so the Core Fighter doesn't "suck" if we cater and pander to his every whim by allowing backwater rules sources and optional rules such as Stamina. I could've told you that would happen, and I'll go ahead and tell you that for several people, that's still not enough (myself included) to make the Fighter a more bearable class to play.
The funny thing is, several of those benefits aren't available or even banned in PFS, so in organized play such as PFS, or tables which stick to Core Only or the main RPG hardcover line, they're still pretty crappy. Which is a lot of tables.
The same can be said for every other class that might have this very same treatment; they might have alternate rules systems that make them stronger, or some abilities/features require backwoods sourcebooks (even if they're Paizo products).
I mean, I guess you can say that the Fighter is "fixed," but several people will still disagree, and like any other operation where you close an entry wound (even if the operation is fixing the wound itself, or what have you), those stitches need to come off so that it meshes smoothly, otherwise what you're left with is an ugly patch of skin after sealing what was a very difficult issue to address, one that not a lot of people will find pleasing to the eye.
If your table refuses to use fighter fixes that doesn't mean the fighter isn't better. That means your table doesn't want better fighters.
At this one game I played in where half of the spells and most of the bloodlines were banned from play Sorcerers sucked. That doesn't mean Sorcerers need buffs or that the sorcerer is a bad class though. It means that when you ban most of the content that makes a class good it isn't worth playing much at that table.
Because clearly, I stated somewhere in my post that I am at one such table. I'm not. What I said is that these rules are only supplements to the Fighter, and not features hardwired into the class like they should've been since their Core release, especially if we want to make the assumption that Fighters, by themselves, don't suck.
Plus, rules and resources may not be allowed for reasons besides "I hate Fighters." It could range from "I don't like the system, it needlessly bogs down gameplay," to "I don't have that rulebook to implement it into the game," and several of these rules and resources apply to more than just the Fighter, so suggesting that rules are disallowed for the sole purpose of denying a single class is absurd, as it could be any multitude of reasons besides that single one.
If your table refuses to use fighter fixes that doesn't mean the fighter isn't better. That means your table doesn't want better fighters.
At this one game I played in where half of the spells and most of the bloodlines were banned from play Sorcerers sucked. That doesn't mean Sorcerers need buffs or that the sorcerer is a bad class though. It means that when you ban most of the content that makes a class good it isn't worth playing much at that table.
Except you are arguing backwards. Even though they are Paizo materials they are not a core part of the game. They are, for all intents and purposes, house rules.
So, your exact point still stands. If you ban Sorcerer material obviously the class is worse. But that does not make Sorcerer bad. Except it works the same way for allowing Fighter buffs. Obviously if you allow Fighter buffs they are better. But that does not mean the class is good.
Don't get me wrong, they are good changes. But until the game assumes the Fighters get Stamina for free is the correct ruling, which is just ONE of the possible ways to use Stamina's ruleset, then that does not mean they are better.
Heck, I can hold up about any 3P material for Fighters and say it fixes them. Doesn't make that true for the base game.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Right, he gives up weapon training, which is made up for with Arcane Strike.
They do not, the fighter can choose to not select additional Weapon Training groups at 9th level, 13th, or 17th to instead gain Advanced Weapon Training options. He keeps his highest Weapon Training Bonus, and it keeps increasing, often with abilities keyed to that figure. There is also a feat to acquire more of them, available once every 5 fighter levels, for a total of 7 possible options, save for cheese with Barroom Brawler.
Advanced Armor Training can be taken in place of an increase in max DEX/reduction in ACP. It is also accessible through a feat, available every three levels.Already disproved above.
Why? These are all options available to the CRB fighter, they just aren't printed in the same book. Demanding that Paizo rewrite the CRB for [the 6th?] time to add supplemental material that's already published in other releases just to personally acknowledge them is a bit childish and petulant.
I'll ignore the last unkind sentence, because I assume you put it in there because I was disputing your assertion that 'all problems are solved.'
1) No, Arcane Strike is NOT the equal of weapon training. Yes, it works with any weapon. No, it doesn't work with Gloves of Duelling. No, it does NOT provide a bonus to hit...more important then a bonus to damage. No, it is not free...it takes a swift action every round.
You know, those swift actions you might want to spend stamina on.
2) You are making my point for me, not disproving it. To gain benefits he should already have, the fighter has to a) give up his weapon training, so he can suck with even fewer weapons then every other class b) wait until at least 5th level to get his first of these feats, and 9th for his second!!!...(unless he's very specifically a Weapon Master archetype...) and only a few of the feats are any good, being focused on finesse, Thrown Weapn, and light/twf uses.
AWT feats do not have stamina uses. The key AWT feats are...more skills/skill points, and Bravery to Will saves. Things the fighter should already have. The AWT feats COMPETE with the stamina system, they do not COMPLEMENT it.
As I said, robbing Peter to pay Paul.
Barroom Brawler is absolutely laughable. Martial Versatility is a power all fighters should have. Not Brawlers. Once a day? For one feat? that's a mockery of spending a fighter's class features. If it was a Rage Talent, you can bet it would scale with level like a full class feature.
and its stamina use doesn't even let you get more feats or do it more then once a day...it just lets you use it faster. 1/day. Yay.
Also note...Child A&A archetype CANNOT USE AWT feats. Because they don't have weapon training.
3) So instead of getting his class bonus to Dex/AC so he has even the POTENTIAL for great defense, one thing he almost managed to keep on par with other classes, he has to get rid of that as well.
And if you don't have Armor Training? either too expensive or forbidden.
Robbing Peter to pay Paul.
4) First of all, people base discussion on core rules off the core classes. Basing 'fix-its' on archetypes is self-defeating. If the only viable fighter is to play a Child A&A archetype, the fighter isn't fixed...it is horribly, horribly broken.
PFS, love it or hate it, is often used as a standard for 'acceptable play'. Is stamina allowed in PFS? Regardless, it's not a core system, and many DM's simply don't allow it because it isn't core.
Also, it's not a devoted Fighter subsystems. It takes a feat, but anyone can access it. It's not unique, it's just a pool. You have to ARTIFICIALLY restrict it to the fighter.
So, it's not a fighter fix, it's more of a combat feat fix any martial class can access if they want to.
---------
This is the quandry you're immersing yourself in.
Unless the stamina system becomes core and fighter only, it's not a fighter fix, it's a combat feat buff anyone can use. And it's elective, which means no fixing it.
Arcane Strike is so very much not a replacement for Weapon Training's bonuses.
The AWT feats plug some holes for specific combat styles. The most generally useful stuff they do? The fighter should already have. And fighters get TWO of these things before level 10, starting at 5!
5!
Ugh!
Unless they play a specific archetype, again!!!
As for the AAT/AWT feats...do Barbs have to give up uncanny dodge to take a Rage Talent? Their trap sense? Cripple their greater Rage? Reduce their DR?
No?
Then WHY DO FIGHTERS HAVE TO.
The double standard just kills me.
And until they issue an actual Unchained Fighter fix that is accepted as part of core (and will inevitably REPLACE core, because the core fighter sucks so bad), the fighter will continue to be the red-headed step child of the martial set.
Except you are arguing backwards. Even though they are Paizo materials they are not a core part of the game. They are, for all intents and purposes, house rules.Interesting. I've never heard of someone refer to the rules of the game as house rules.
Because that's literally what they are. They are variant rules. No more supported than allowing Kineticists of Porphyra available now on the Paizo store into your games. Even though in theory they are Paizo published rules, some alternate systems *cough*armor as DR*cough* are even less supported than most 3P material.
I would LOVE for them to be the rules of the game. Background skills and stamina should be always on to me. But until they get the Unchained Summoner level of pushing I can't consider them the baseline.
agreed. The Core Rules show what is the essence of the core game. Everything else is an expansion, a pastiche, variant rules.
If Paizo doesn't accept the new rules as core rules, why should anyone else?
They become included house rules, no more, no less.
PFS becomes the testing ground for 'coreness' this way. Because it's fairly conservative and sets a real standard, if it's not included in PFS play, many DM's won't even LOOK at it, rightly deeming there are problems with it found by many other gamers at least as smart as they are.
Paizo needs to change the core fighter. They need to include this variant stuff they've made, and give it to the fighter, not make him SPEND for stuff he should already have.
|
AWT/AAT does not require the fighter to give up anything. They can elect to spend a feat on them, which only fighters can do, or they can choose to not add a second weapon group in order to gain an AWT instead.
These options are full scaling class features that are better than a feat, and are more useful than adding a redundant weapon training group that you have a lower bonus with.
AWT/AAT alone makes fighters playable for me. Especially when you combine them with archetypes.
@ Das Bier: The Rogue has the red-headed step-child title. UCRogue is less so, but it's still a trap, and also not Core.
AWT/AAT does not require the fighter to give up anything. They can elect to spend a feat on them, which only fighters can do, or they can choose to not add a second weapon group in order to gain an AWT instead.
These options are full scaling class features that are better than a feat, and are more useful than adding a redundant weapon training group that you have a lower bonus with.
AWT/AAT alone makes fighters playable for me. Especially when you combine them with archetypes.
IT requires them to give up a feat...and the potential stamina use that comes with it, if you use that. if they want to use it at level 10, they must sacrifice a GENERAL feat. AWT/AAT don't come with stamina uses.
It requires them to give up being nearly as good with bows as with swords. They have to give up a class feature just to qualify for a feat. UNREAL.
It requires them to spend class features to gain bonuses they should already have.
Is it better then what they had? Well, sure. THey actually got a couple good feats to spend on.
It requires them to give up even the potential of being a class with good AC.
They don't require this for Barbarians and Rage Talents, Paladins and Mercies, or Rogues, or ANYONE. So, why do class specific feats punish fighters this way?
@ Das Bier: The Rogue has the red-headed step-child title. UCRogue is less so, but it's still a trap, and also not Core.
The Rogue is the white-haired orphan. he doesn't even qualify to be a step-child.
Has the argument ever been about fighters "sucking?" I thought the argument was that at mid to high levels the casters absolutely dominate the martial classes. I'm sure somewhere someone said, "fighters suck." But I don't think that that's been the baseline argument. The baseline argument is that there is a large disparity in power between full caster classes and martial classes once a certain level is reached.
I genuinely think the fighter has done pretty well in recent times. If I was to make one last change it would be a feat for fighters and possibly Barbarians... something along the lines of:
Feat- Effortless assault
Pre-requisites- Fighter class, BAB +10, Advanced Weapon Training, Dex 15
Effect- through years of training and battle, the character finds that movement and attack become intertwined and as natural as drawing a sword. They can now full attack as a standard action.
Done! :))
That's a combat buff, Harle. While nice, the martials tend to need combat buffs much, much less then utility, movement, defense and recovery.
Doing what harleequin suggests would be a nice help to fighters. Making them a very mobile class in combat, and not left out on the "pounce" train.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This thread makes me laugh over the antics of the peasants that don't use third party material.
#3ppmasterrace
3 pp and house rules and variant rules all fall under the same tree.
None of them are core.
We need a core fix, not the slapdish stuff.
Because not all of us are lucky enough to have a homegroup to even try and convince to allow 3pp.
3 pp and house rules and variant rules all fall under the same tree.
None of them are core.
We need a core fix, not the slapdish stuff.
To be fair, for me at least allowing good 3P feats only really leaves my two minor complaints about Fighter. In a sense simple access to good "class features" might be all holding Core Fighter down. The Fighter itself does not change or get anything, but the game changes to be more beneficial to him.
It all depends on the campaign and playstyle, Rub.
Honestly the only way to fix the fighter is to grab 3pp and houserulesles or just pretend the class doesn't exist. Since Paizo is completely incompetent when it comes to making classes without a lot of spells ad magic work without the caster classes picking up the slack (barbarian excluded) they might as well just remove them from the game and focus content on the remaining classes.
Because not all of us are lucky enough to have a homegroup to even try and convince to allow 3pp.
There's a reason that I used the terms that I used.
PFS is not core. PFS doesn't use all the material. PFS is mostly irrelevant to us.
I'm on mobile so I can't properly respond to everything, but I can say that my fallacy I named after myself is proving to be true repeatedly in this thread.
The argument is not what a fighter can do, it's whether or not the source is allowed. But the fighter options are not being discredited themselves for not fixing the fighter from what I've read so far.
Pretty good start to a thread considering that.
Also, all of the popcorn in the world is not enough, bring candy also.
Barroom Brawler can be combined with fighter's tactics to gain more uses per day, presumably as many times as one has uses of warriors spirit times the number of his weapon training bonus. Once Gloves of Dueling come online, this is going to matter.
Unless of course, barroom brawler (and Martial Flexibility in general) get the Paragon Surge treatment.
PFS is core+. No, it doesn't use all the material. Most glaringly, item creation. It also doesn't use 3pp, and is the standard for House Rule or not House Rule, to a large degree.
But it is a measure, and a testing ground. Discounting it on the boards here is an exercise in futility.
If we include all sources, including 3pp sources, then we are basically into house rules territory and there are no problems with anything, as I'll just GM Fiat them away.
Abundant Tactics, not Fighter's Tactics. I'm not at all sure what warrior's spirit is, it didn't google. What you're proposing is that the fighter uses one of his precious AWT feats to give a non-scaling, underpowered feat half-scaling in terms of uses per day. So it takes two feats, including one that should be a full on class feature level, to make half a class feature.
Riiiiight.
Now, if it works for the abilities that allow you to invoke the metal of your armor, and/or the magic in items, that's actually not bad.
ANd it might be how I'm reading it, but it looks like you have to name the feat when you take Abundant tactics? IF not, perhaps it can be used on multiple feats, which would be quite useful (and worthy of an AWT Feat). Now we just need a list of all the actually useful feats which can be used x/day...and then compare them to class abilities that do the same thing.
I dislike the idea of giving everything pounce. It means there's no real flow to any combat and everything becomes played at one speed: tactical-nuclear. It'd also make features such as brace more or less unusable because you'd more often than not be better off pounce charging. Combat maneuvers fall further behind because they no longer have standard action vs full action advantage. Two weapon fighting or archery pull far ahead of two handed because they all now have very easy & powerful damage application. Natural attacks similarly become even more powerful because ease of application.
I similarly don't expect this to be the end of fighter threads. As a fighter you're still paying your feat class feature to get other class features that on another class would be a core part of the kit (level scaling dr as an example). In addition it doesn't solve the following 2 issues (which I'm addressing in my own massive yet novice rework):
1) feats are boring. They tend to add very little, or only add it once. Take neckbreaker for example. You have a feat part of a chain of 7 that lets you do attribute damage against a pinned or helpless target at the expense of stunning fist uses. This has extremely niche prerequisites (helpless / pinned), behavior that breaks immersion if you think about it (it would take on average 3-4 neck breaks to kill a standard person), and an extremely niche use case (you have a helpless target that you want to probably kill and are not better off with a coup de grace). Or take dodge where you're spending an extremely limited character building resource for a +1.
2) skills are boring. That isn't to say they're not nice to have or indeed that it feels much better than not having skills (not having skills is infuriating) but they don't scale in behavior all that well. I think a vast expansion of the skill unlock system would encourage high skill point characters and make them feel more rewarding. Grant effects similar to current skill unlocks for everyone spending skill points, and then add in extra unlocks achievable via the signature skill feat.
Just a note: TWF will always lag 2hf because of the -2 to hit, the need to spend money on multiple weapons, and the fact you don't get as many attacks with the off hand as you can with the primary.
That -2 to hit is the biggest reason TWF doesn't surpass 2hf.
Archery already outshines both of them, because with archery you can get full attacks on every round.
Feats are boring because they are all over the place in power. Feats should try to be at set levels of power so taking a feat is always an excellent choice. Your examples are showcases for this.
Skills should indeed have measures where X ranks lets you do Y. However, the current system favors BONUSES instead of Ranks. That should be adjusted. Someone with a +10 Competence Ring shouldn't be able to smith as well as someone with 10 Ranks, but by the current rules, they can.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
PFS is core+.Then it doesn't count by your logic...
No, it doesn't use all the material. Most glaringly, item creation. It also doesn't use 3pp, and is the standard for House Rule or not House Rule, to a large degree.
It really isn't though. They don't follow RAW, and they have a large set of not RAW house rules to play by.
But it is a measure, and a testing ground. Discounting it on the boards here is an exercise in futility.
The PFS master race needs to die. It is not the only way to play, stop acting like it is. It has its own separate forum for a reason.
If we include all sources, including 3pp sources, then we are basically into house rules territory and there are no problems with anything, as I'll just GM Fiat them away.
Hyperbole.
Abundant Tactics, not Fighter's Tactics. I'm not at all sure what warrior's spirit is, it didn't google. What you're proposing is that the fighter uses one of his precious AWT feats to give a non-scaling, underpowered feat half-scaling in terms of uses per day. So it takes two feats, including one that should be a full on class feature level, to make half a class feature.
Riiiiight.
/facepalm
What did I just read? Check my grammar, sure I'll give you that I got the name wrong. You win.
AWT doesn't have to come in feats... it has the option to.
Also:
The fighter can forge a spiritual
bond with a weapon that belongs to the associated weapon
group, allowing him to unlock the weapon’s potential. Each
day, he designates one such weapon and gains a number of
points of spiritual energy equal to 1 + his weapon training
bonus. While wielding this weapon, he can spend 1 point of
spiritual energy to grant the weapon an enhancement bonus
equal to his weapon training bonus. Enhancement bonuses
gained by this advanced weapon training option stack with
those of the weapon, to a maximum of +5.
The fighter can also imbue the weapon with any one
weapon special ability with an equivalent enhancement
bonus less than or equal to his maximum bonus by
reducing the granted enhancement bonus by the amount
of the equivalent enhancement bonus. The item must have
an enhancement bonus of at least +1 (from the item itself
or from warrior spirit) to gain a weapon special ability. In
either case, these bonuses last for 1 minute.
If that's not worth a feat or a Weapon Group, then I don't know what is.
For reference:
Popular among those who seek to impersonate skilled
warriors, a training weapon grants one combat feat to the
wielder as long as the weapon is drawn and in hand. The
feat is chosen when this special ability is placed on the
weapon. That feat cannot be used as a prerequisite for any
other feats and functions for the wielder only if she meets
its prerequisites. Once chosen, the feat stored in the weapon
cannot be changed.
Now, if it works for the abilities that allow you to invoke the metal of your armor, and/or the magic in items, that's actually not bad.
ANd it might be how I'm reading it, but it looks like you have to name the feat when you take Abundant tactics? IF not, perhaps it can be used on multiple feats, which would be quite useful (and worthy of an AWT Feat). Now we just need a list of all the actually useful feats which can be used x/day...and then compare them to class abilities that do the same thing.
Essentially, the fighter can use Warrior Spirit to bond with a weapon, granting it an enhancement bonus equal to his Weapon Training Bonus, and as long as at least +1 of it is already an enhancement bonus, then he can pick any weapon enhancement he wants. Training is a weapon enhancement, and he can gain a feat temporarily. He can choose Advanced Weapon Training, so long as he meets the prerequisites. If he does, then he can take Abundant Tactics and use it on Barroom Brawler, which is imo the most obvious choice to use Abundant Tactics with.
The PFS master race needs to die. It is not the only way to play, stop acting like it is. It has its own separate forum for a reason.
One way to look at it is that it has a separate forum.
Another way to look at it is holy smokes it has a whole forum.
Ya know, just saying "not a valid point" is not a valid argument right?
Good thing I never did that, in fact I purposely broke down every point and showed your fallacy, SIX TIMES.
I honestly am not sure how to respond to this, it's like you didn't even read what I posted in response to you and decided to blow your keyboard up at me.
And what's this about actually suggesting that we rewrite the Core?
Really? That's the argument? Not that the options suck, but that you are discrediting the source and literally calling them houserules while praising PFS and claiming that it isn't?
You (plural) exacerbate and embody everything I have ever said about PFS.
Y'know, I'm sensing a lot of frustration from people involved in this thread. Let's mellow out a bit, shall we?
Here's my stance: the recent updates have most certainly made the fighter better. Is it a class on par with other martials now? I think it's gotten a hell of a lot closer. However, the issue comes from having these options spread across a number of books, and a number of them aren't under titles considered "core" to the game. I feel like the only thing people want is to have these new choices more consolidated than what they are and placed into a "core"-line book. Not only would such a book be easier to show a DM and say "I'd like to use options from here" in comparison to giving a GM multiple books, it would also drastically lower the system knowledge and materials needed to build a fighter with these new and great options. Similar to what the goal was for Unchained Monk, to drastically lower the skill floor needed to build a good one.
Ya know, just saying "not a valid point" is not a valid argument right?Good thing I never did that, in fact I purposely broke down every point and showed your fallacy, SIX TIMES.
I honestly am not sure how to respond to this, it's like you didn't even read what I posted in response to you and decided to blow your keyboard up at me.
And what's this about actually suggesting that we rewrite the Core?
Really? That's the argument? Not that the options suck, but that you are discrediting the source and literally calling them houserules while praising PFS and claiming that it isn't?
You (plural) exacerbate and embody everything I have ever said about PFS.
Please refrain from personal attacks. :)
Please refrain from personal attacks. :)Ya know, just saying "not a valid point" is not a valid argument right?Good thing I never did that, in fact I purposely broke down every point and showed your fallacy, SIX TIMES.
I honestly am not sure how to respond to this, it's like you didn't even read what I posted in response to you and decided to blow your keyboard up at me.
And what's this about actually suggesting that we rewrite the Core?
Really? That's the argument? Not that the options suck, but that you are discrediting the source and literally calling them houserules while praising PFS and claiming that it isn't?
You (plural) exacerbate and embody everything I have ever said about PFS.
Not meant to be personal, I'm (intending) to bash PFS, apologies if I never made that clear.
I really doubt this will be the last thread, even if the next thread is a "Why are there no more fighter threads?"
I'd prefer we go back to the "one big fighter thread at a time" phase.
Ideally, we won't need another one.
1) Combat Stamina is an awesome system that fixes a lot of melee problems with an alternate rules set. Know what else does? Mythic rules. A champion can easily have no mobility problems (getting to move as a swift action, getting climb speeds and leap attakcs), abilities to negate challenges traditionally spellcaster-exclusive (like see in darkness or seven league leap). So, is it invalid to complain about mobility issues in combat, simply because one of the core rpg line hardcover books provides optional rules to fix it?
2) Is the fighter good without combat stamina, but with AWT & its armored partner? This is not a PFS geared question, its a question of how essential the alternative rule is to the discussion.