| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I like the fighter. And I like stamina, ABP, and many of the PFS illegal AAT and AWT. That doesn't suddenly make those options available to me to use. If stamina was PFS legal only for fighters then I'd probably feel the fighter was in a more okay spot, still low tier, but in an okay spot.
But until fixes are easily and readily available for most tables it's hardly worthy of being called a "fix" since 3pp and houserules have fixed the fighter in basically as numerous tables.
You've never proven the corner cases wrong under the limited circumstances we're saying to use and that this issues are arising in. Sure in the super open sacred geometry and leadership and crafting okay games your fighter is quite good.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I am considering joining a mostly CORE campaign.
How would you build a fighter, mostly CORE, and make them skill-viable, non-human, and not an archer (picture front-liner)?
You may or may not agree
F3R4
SDancer 3
Then back to fighter
2 handed sword or elven curve blade
Pa, Iron Will, Dod, Spring attack, Skfoc- stealth
Rt WF, fast stealth
Fbonus - CLE, Mobility
Mainly, skills, ability to hit, the shadow breaks most things, Hide in plain sight, etc.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I am considering joining a mostly CORE campaign.
How would you build a fighter, mostly CORE, and make them skill-viable, non-human, and not an archer (picture front-liner)?
You may or may not agree
F3
R4
SDancer 3Then back to fighter
2 handed sword or elven curve blade
Pa, Iron Will, Dod, Spring attack, Skfoc- stealth
Rt WF, fast stealth
Fbonus - CLE, MobilityMainly, skills, ability to hit, the shadow breaks most things, Hide in plain sight, etc.
Is there any benefit from F3 over R7?
That's it guys, the secret to a good core fighter is to not take any levels of fighter!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So, I started trying to make a version that did have proper WBL, but it appears your PB is off as well, it's either 16 or 18 or you spent your ability score improvements in some area that I don't understand. if I don't include ability score bonuses, the PB is 21.20 pt buy; starting stats, after racial mods:
17
15
14
13
10
84th +1 str
8th +1 dexI get a lot of people accusing me of using 21 point builds. I don't, it is more efficient to start with odd stats.
Some of her favored class bonuses went into skills.
I put all FCB into skills and came 2 short when trying to match listed values. I'm using herolab so I know I didn't miscount.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Ha! You've just fallen into my trap, and used the Fallacy fallacy Fallacy!Can of Worms fallacyThird party exists and has fixes. Choosing to not use it doesn't mean it doesn't exist. I could own and completely understand Every 3pp book, but if the GM doesn't approve of the source and material then it does me no good that I understand all these systems that fix classes.
The only advantage Paizo books has is that by being "official" they are more likely to be allowed than 3pp. But even then, there are things that are often banned. Words of power "fixes" a lot of issues, but with no further support and hardly any approval to play in games it isn't a fix.
So just because a solution exists, if it's not a main or popularly used subsystem or unbanned option, doesn't mean it's a viable fix to the problem.
you just did my favorite fallacy
you brought up a logical fallacy and then did not explain where the logical fault was, using it as if it's existence is all the proof you need. In fact, this isn't even a slippery slope fallacy, he's saying that you can't assume all material exists/is in use, at any given time, which is logically sound.
he's saying that because something exists, does not mean it can, or is, being used.
I won't lie the irony was partly intended.
I however, can point out something is a fallacy if they're trying to use it for argumentative short hand.
Can of Worms fallacyThird party exists and has fixes. Choosing to not use it doesn't mean it doesn't exist. I could own and completely understand Every 3pp book, but if the GM doesn't approve of the source and material then it does me no good that I understand all these systems that fix classes.
The only advantage Paizo books has is that by being "official" they are more likely to be allowed than 3pp. But even then, there are things that are often banned. Words of power "fixes" a lot of issues, but with no further support and hardly any approval to play in games it isn't a fix.
So just because a solution exists, if it's not a main or popularly used subsystem or unbanned option, doesn't mean it's a viable fix to the problem.
you just did my favorite fallacy
you brought up a logical fallacy and then did not explain where the logical fault was, using it as if it's existence is all the proof you need. In fact, this isn't even a slippery slope fallacy, he's saying that you can't assume all material exists/is in use, at any given time, which is logically sound.
he's saying that because something exists, does not mean it can, or is, being used.
Enough, you're making the exact same case over and over again.
We get it, you don't like fighters. You don't like the optional rules designed for them.
You're allowed to not like it. We've had this thread a million times and I've proven your corner cases wrong repeatedly. YOUR problem with the fighter is not everyone else's.
Assuming that people do or don't use the systems doesn't prove anything, but they do exist and they are from official Paizo material. In the first page I was the one who said the real problem with fighters was the fact that its fixes came from supplemental materials, so if you're just frustrated...
I have no problem with them, i just don't get to play with them, and frankly it's easier to just play an inquisitor than try to make a case for a special fighter.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What I've learned from this thread is: PFS doesn't like martial characters.
I actually didn't learn that here.
I like the fighter. And I like stamina, ABP, and many of the PFS illegal AAT and AWT. That doesn't suddenly make those options available to me to use. If stamina was PFS legal only for fighters then I'd probably feel the fighter was in a more okay spot, still low tier, but in an okay spot.
This is a problem with PFS, and not the fighter class itself.
I personally don't see how Stamina even helps the fighter that much, it's only real benefit seems to be "Better at combat!"... which isn't really a problem with the fighter in my mind, the problem's that he can only do combat. Fixes that just make the fighter better at combat always sound like a waste of space and time.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I personally don't see how Stamina even helps the fighter that much, it's only real benefit seems to be "Better at combat!"... which isn't really a problem with the fighter in my mind, the problem's that he can only do combat. Fixes that just make the fighter better at combat always sound like a waste of space and time.
It also gets rid of the INT prerequisite for combat feats, giving fighters much needed options and less MAD.
Tactician and Lore Warden are not options in this case.
Hey! Grr. >:I
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It also gets rid of the INT prerequisite for combat feats, giving fighters much needed options and less MAD.
tbh, 13 int isn't much especially since most fighter's I've seen ended up wanting a +1 int modifier just so they can have 4 skill points per level (since they generally used their FCB on skills).
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Fighters should get the following:
IUS > For free. If you can't fight with your fists, you can't call yourself a fighter.
STR+DEX > Fighters should be able to chose what to use for Ranged Combat. If they have more STR (which is usually the idea) they should be able to use it for their bows for Attack Bonus.
Why? Because otherwise you suck at ranged combat, when you're supposed to excel at it.
Figthers should not have an option to use DEX to damage, because that is rare and could be used for Dips in builds and can screw things.
WFocus and WSpec + Exotic Prof for free for all weapons: fighters should be able to fight with whatever they want.
Style Feats > they should get the chain for free at certain levels, maybe every 2-3. Ofc prerequisites are nothing for someone who dedicated his life to fighting (except BAB). This will give the fighter versatility in combat. Maybe they can adopt a more protective role in certain fights, for example when the enemy is flying.
Power Attack+Combat Expertise should be free for fighters, as well as all Combat Maneuvers feats. It's kinda stupid you can't bulrush without provoking, fighters should be able to do this without a feat.
If you take all of this, yes, the Fighter still faces the same issues, but you have a lot more of free room to dedicate to skill focus, additional traits.
I'm also on the side of granting at least 4 SP to fighters, and granting them automatic ranks to certain skills points:
-Ride
-Intimidate
-Climb
-Swim
These 4 skills are kinda basic. Fighters are trained in Mounted Combat (sorta, they just get the ranks, no bonus feats).
They can intimidate, after all they're wading into combat with a stick in a world full of people hurling fireballs.
Climb+Swim > entire life of living in medium armor and training.
These leaves 4 Skills Points that you can pour into more social oriented character (Diplomacy/Bluff) and other stuffs.
This will barely put it on par with the Rogue, who gets 8 from the start. Wizard will already be rocking 6 (2+4).
We could add Perception with no worries as well.
All of this might seem loaded, but for someone who doesn't gain a single class feature that is special/out of this world, it's pretty balanced, specially when Spells get into the mix.
I mean, a druid can reincarnate at level 5 if she dies and can do so again after a week, and again and again.
It is in my opinion that basic feats should be automatically granted, marking a huge difference compared to other classes that also get class features.
I don't understand the "trading feats and features for things other classes get for free". Like, isn't that a basic function of how the game mechanics are set up? Archaeologist trades bard stuff for rogue stuff, Ascetic Fist trades kineticist stuff for monk stuff, Spellslinger trades wizard stuff for gunslinger stuff, Daring Champion trades cavalier stuff for swashbuckler stuff, etc.
A basic strength of PFRPG itself is that the game is set up to allow you to trade things you don't like for things you want. The problem the fighter has is that most of its strengths are somewhat generic (feats, numerical bonuses, etc.) so you can't completely deny those things to other classes, but even when you give the fighter something other classes can't easily access (e.g. AWT) people kvetch that it's impractical for non-fighters to get that.
The biggest problem for the "fixes" of the fighter now are that the otherwise best archetypes give away Advanced weapon training and armor training rather than bonus feats.
|
|
Odd direction, my last table was 5 martials and a bard, we sailed through.your dm probably wasn't following the tradition of target the bard 1st so he cant boost the martials that any intelligent enemies should doTheir table probably didn't go past level 12.
If it did, MeriDoc, I would be very intrigued to hear tales of play at those levels.
PFS, level 3-7 (I was 5). Half skill based mod, fights were relatively easy. One guy had a hunter, one had a cavalier...I was a rogue 3 fighter 2.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A quicker, dirtier, and easier fix would be to give Combat Expertise to all Fighters at L1 without a minimum Intelligence requirement (to make up for the Ranger getting fighting styles without a minimum Dex) as a start?
That would get rid of at least one inane 'feat tax' and open up the ability for Fighters to work on what they want a bit more, maybe?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A Fighter who
1) is built with great optimization skill,
Nope, never said that
2) with access to options from every book,
2b) including specifically WMH, and
3) has access to optional subsystems such as stamina,
This is all one thing really, and I already said in the first f*cking page that this was the problem with the class. First page, me. I said it.
4) is not (necessarily) problematically weak.
This is demonstrably true.
5) THEREFORE, Fighter is a fine class, no problems.
That's your argument. Most of us are disagreeing with you on 5), because premises 1-3 are shaky.
Never said 1, 2-3 are the same thing.
The problem with the fighter is that its options are spread out, and also apparently banned in PFS which makes the PFS master race not believe anything I say about the merits of the systems.
Stamina really isn't that hard to learn, for instance do you use the Unchained Rogue? It's like skill unlocks, but for combat feats with a resource pool.
But for real, I'll respond if someone has an actual question for me, but I'm done spamming the thread with personal attacks and rebuttals.
You can still use the martial flexibility option, fighter archetype. Im planning an Ifrit (maybe Oread) based on it...
Although I may kick in a pair of brawler levels.
Which PFS-legal archetype is that?
And what's the benefit of brawler if you can't use half the abilities while wearing anything heavier than light armor?
Why are we so concerned about PFS itt?
I'm actually asking, it's not like everyone plays PFS, not even a majority of the player base does.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Why are we so concerned about PFS itt?
I'm actually asking, it's not like everyone plays PFS, not even a majority of the player base does.
As was also pointed out earlier in this thread far more eloquently than I can parse at the moment, PFS is a good 'benchmark' for what campaigns accept/don't accept.
But in my particular case?
Because I REALLY want to play a TWF Tengu in PFS (that's what my -1 was initially) but the way the rules are set up at the moment they just Do Not Work For That.
EDIT: In addition, I am PFS #145296. I have seen numbers in the mid-200K range, possibly even the 300K range.
That means that if those numbers are unique to a given player, that is a *significant* number of people who play PFS.
Why are we so concerned about PFS itt?
I'm actually asking, it's not like everyone plays PFS, not even a majority of the player base does.
As was also pointed out earlier in this thread far more eloquently than I can parse at the moment, PFS is a good 'benchmark' for what campaigns accept/don't accept.
But in my particular case?
Because I REALLY want to play a TWF Tengu in PFS (that's what my -1 was initially) but the way the rules are set up at the moment they just Do Not Work For That.
EDIT: In addition, I am PFS #145296. I have seen numbers in the mid-200K range, possibly even the 300K range.
That means that if those numbers are unique to a given player, that is a *significant* number of people who play PFS.
You either need to run the archetype that let's you use two weapons as a standard action, or take Double Slice, Improved Vital Strike, and Weapon Trick.
I feel like if we're going to complain about PFS's problems, it needs to be done in the PFS forum. PFS is not the entirety of the PFRPG, and it is in no way a baseline for what is or isn't expected at anything other than PFS. Sure they have a lot of players registered, that doesn't mean they all play. It has a separate forum and a separate facebook for a reason.
I feel if a class should be viable for play it should be viable from the book it is printed in, and PFS play is equally valid for PFRPG as is any of a number of home campaigns.
Attempting to separate rather than unite as a community is against the mission statement of these boards.
What I've learned from this thread is: PFS doesn't like martial characters.
I actually didn't learn that here.
I don't play PFS. at all.
I dispute the idea that PFS is any kind of benchmark for what an average campaign is like. Dispute it pretty strongly actually.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm saying PFS because the rules are clear on what's legal and what's not and everyone can easily find it.
But I've haven't seen stamina mentioned in threads outside of
master_marshmallow saying they use it and it helps the fighter. I'd love to use it in a home game. But no GMs in my area allow stamina and if I'm the GM none of the players want stamina. So regardless of PFS or not, Stamina isn't part of the game.
Not all GMs allow all splat books. And I personally in a home game would limit training so that you couldn't get it with a special ability as my fix to what I see is a broken loophole in a splat book.
ABP is a little more commonly mentioned on the boards, but from it's mentioning, no where near the main way the game is played. And again, no one in my area.
but your "fixed fighter" without stamina and without the ability to spontaneously grab AWT feat is SEVERELY less "fixed"
Plus your fixed fighter is still pretty much only fixed at higher levels. lv1-5 is fairly untouched by the fixes, and 5-9 only sees a free AWT at the last level. So the complaint that the fixes are too late to really feel good is a valid complaint about the current fixes.
The fighter's main problem is his poor diplomacy and thus his bad reputation which has even started fights if you can believe it on the internet of all places!
Fighters are also guilty of run on sentences.
I personally don't see how Stamina even helps the fighter that much, it's only real benefit seems to be "Better at combat!"... which isn't really a problem with the fighter in my mind, the problem's that he can only do combat. Fixes that just make the fighter better at combat always sound like a waste of space and time.I disagree. The Fighter's problem isn't that he's only good at combat (hint: he's not). It's that he's not good enough at combat to justify not being good at anything else. And I don't mean him not having big enough numbers (although they would be nice too). I mean that he's not versatile in combat. Combat isn't just one thing. There's many ways to do combat and a good Fighter should be effective at at least a couple at the same time, with minimal optimization.
I disagree with you saying fighters aren't good at fighting. DPR olympics usually involve a lot of fighter levels. they survive by killing things before they can react usually.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Why are we so concerned about PFS itt?
I'm actually asking, it's not like everyone plays PFS, not even a majority of the player base does.
As was also pointed out earlier in this thread far more eloquently than I can parse at the moment, PFS is a good 'benchmark' for what campaigns accept/don't accept.
But in my particular case?
Because I REALLY want to play a TWF Tengu in PFS (that's what my -1 was initially) but the way the rules are set up at the moment they just Do Not Work For That.
EDIT: In addition, I am PFS #145296. I have seen numbers in the mid-200K range, possibly even the 300K range.
That means that if those numbers are unique to a given player, that is a *significant* number of people who play PFS.
You either need to run the archetype that let's you use two weapons as a standard action, or take Double Slice, Improved Vital Strike, and Weapon Trick.
I feel like if we're going to complain about PFS's problems, it needs to be done in the PFS forum. PFS is not the entirety of the PFRPG, and it is in no way a baseline for what is or isn't expected at anything other than PFS. Sure they have a lot of players registered, that doesn't mean they all play. It has a separate forum and a separate facebook for a reason.
OR you just let weapon training make up the difference when TWFing... just apply that double loving of weapon training, pop on some duelist gloves and woo. I seriously consider flat fighter and ranger the only ones capable of TWFing properly, but that's because of their flat damage bonuses, maybe unchained barbar too, but i haven't worked with them yet.
*it's at this point that BandW2 has gotten annoyed that people are saying fighters are bad at fighting, when really they're just bad at gaining the narrative power capable of taking down a nationstate.
Fighting is far more than dpr.
it's not really
people need to use readied actions and the like more often, also step up and strike line is(should be anyway) a common thing. also I mean fighters are the ones ones really capable of consistently 1 rounding CR+3 across all levels.