| 16 people marked this as a favorite. |
I've just started the writing process, and I want to make sure my formatting and tone work for everyone who wants to read the guide.
I am considering separate pages for the other sections, or simply using a toggle friendly table of contents.
finished class features, skills, and did core and featured races
beginning to organize and sift through feats
Yeah I prefer friendly tone and are you going to do an entry to summarize all the redundant information that keeps getting repeated on the forums?
Good work so far I would say I imagine feat section will take some time.
Sorry, just one typo that gets to me - it's 'motherlode' as in a lode of ore, not 'motherload'.
I'd be more fond of the Versatile Training if it came online sooner. The first few levels are when skills matter most. That said it's a good addition to the system.
Kudos for revisiting a class which needs the explanation now even if it didn't once upon a time.
typos fixed, general feats though E are done
alas, I have a job and can't spend all my life writing.
I would make one major decision to figure out whether you will make a PFS friendly guide or not. That was my choice when I made the UnMonk guide - I went with PFS, because the same guiding principles apply to make a good build in both places, and the only thing that you lose in PFS is the ability to exploit stuff.
haha, but master_marshmallow's fighter is basically dependent on not being PFS legal. ;)
But if he decided to. I'd also cut out Schrodinger's fighter exploit via barroom brawler. I think a safe assumption is not being able to spontaneously grab AWT feat, or at the very least not change which AWT you're getting from the feat in one day.
I like the general attitude of the guide, as you weigh in on (and ever give value to) non-combat options. This is good because as we know every group runs things a little different, and most will put even the fighter into some RP situations.
First, a couple things that aren't actually criticisms. I'm just curious.
-Red, orange, green, blue has always been the standard, to my knowledge anyhow, with purple sometimes tossed in as a better than blue option. Why did you drop orange? It throws me off a bit when I read through.
-Your font size changes in one section. Not a bad thing. I actually prefer the text even 1 point size larger than what the majority of the document is in.
I don't agree with your valuation of some skills.
-Craft is a skill I have spent a few points on over the years for the purpose of justifying my martial guy taking care of his gear, etc. I would drop it down a step. In a campaign where a certain Craft skill is important, you player will know or figure out that it is more important.
-In all my years of playing PF, I have never had to make a Fly check. I understand that you are supposed to from time to time, but it seems to me that most sources of flight available to a fighter will automatically have a bonus built into it.
-I feel the same about Profession as I do about Craft. I played Skull & Shackles and kept Profession (sailor) maxed out for good reason. But that is a specific campaign, and playing in a specific kind of campaign doesn't make the skill useful overall.
-I've never heard of spymster's handbook, but it sounds like it makes Knowledge (local) a great skill. My assumption is that most people aren't familiar with it or don't use it, so perhaps this could drop down a notch.
-I more of less agree with your value of engineering, geography, history, and nobility. However, you should include in your write up of each that they are valued such because they don't have any creature types associated with them.
It looks like you include several 3rd party books in this guide. For the sake of people like me whose groups use only published-on-paper Paizo stuff, could you please list each of them at the beginning of the guide along with a sentance or two about each one?
I like the general attitude of the guide, as you weigh in on (and ever give value to) non-combat options. This is good because as we know every group runs things a little different, and most will put even the fighter into some RP situations.
First, a couple things that aren't actually criticisms. I'm just curious.
-Red, orange, green, blue has always been the standard, to my knowledge anyhow, with purple sometimes tossed in as a better than blue option. Why did you drop orange? It throws me off a bit when I read through.
-Your font size changes in one section. Not a bad thing. I actually prefer the text even 1 point size larger than what the majority of the document is in.I don't agree with your valuation of some skills.
-Craft is a skill I have spent a few points on over the years for the purpose of justifying my martial guy taking care of his gear, etc. I would drop it down a step. In a campaign where a certain Craft skill is important, you player will know or figure out that it is more important.
-In all my years of playing PF, I have never had to make a Fly check. I understand that you are supposed to from time to time, but it seems to me that most sources of flight available to a fighter will automatically have a bonus built into it.
-I feel the same about Profession as I do about Craft. I played Skull & Shackles and kept Profession (sailor) maxed out for good reason. But that is a specific campaign, and playing in a specific kind of campaign doesn't make the skill useful overall.
-I've never heard of spymster's handbook, but it sounds like it makes Knowledge (local) a great skill. My assumption is that most people aren't familiar with it or don't use it, so perhaps this could drop down a notch.-I more of less agree with your value of engineering, geography, history, and nobility. However, you should include in your write up of each that they are valued such because they don't have any creature types associated with them.
It looks like you include several 3rd party books in this guide....
I'll include the bits on knowledge skills, and I'll most likely drop the craft and profession skills to green. I've found orange and red look to similar when sifting through large lists and I wanted all my colors to be easy read.
On my evaluations with rare sources, I'm linking directly to the Paizo store for them and I'm only including Paizo releases. That is one of the main points of the guide.
I'll come up with a way to include notation for PFS options, and I'll be sure to include the gnome corner case, as I expected someone to find one.
Thanks for the input.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
haha, but master_marshmallow's fighter is basically dependent on not being PFS legal. ;)
But if he decided to. I'd also cut out Schrodinger's fighter exploit via barroom brawler. I think a safe assumption is not being able to spontaneously grab AWT feat, or at the very least not change which AWT you're getting from the feat in one day.
PFS isn't the only way to play the game, and I refuse to write an incomplete guide which assumes that you must play by sanctioned rules and not the rules printed in the books.
Barroom Brawler is an interesting case, as the class feature it's based on doesn't have the restriction of forcing you to pick the same feats every time. I'll include a section on that including the relevant FAQs.
I would make one major decision to figure out whether you will make a PFS friendly guide or not. That was my choice when I made the UnMonk guide - I went with PFS, because the same guiding principles apply to make a good build in both places, and the only thing that you lose in PFS is the ability to exploit stuff.
I am purposely treating all the stamina stuff separately, including colored brackets which denote how the option interacts with stamina.
Should I include notation for which options aren't PFS legal? Perhaps a symbol or something with the option's name?
I would make one major decision to figure out whether you will make a PFS friendly guide or not. That was my choice when I made the UnMonk guide - I went with PFS, because the same guiding principles apply to make a good build in both places, and the only thing that you lose in PFS is the ability to exploit stuff.I am purposely treating all the stamina stuff separately, including colored brackets which denote how the option interacts with stamina.
Should I include notation for which options aren't PFS legal? Perhaps a symbol or something with the option's name?
I wouldn't bother making a PFS friendly guide. Its pretty easily summed up as "Most of the things that make Fighters competitive with other martials aren't legal, dont bother"
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I wouldn't bother making a PFS friendly guide. Its pretty easily summed up as "Most of the things that make Fighters competitive with other martials aren't legal, dont bother"I would make one major decision to figure out whether you will make a PFS friendly guide or not. That was my choice when I made the UnMonk guide - I went with PFS, because the same guiding principles apply to make a good build in both places, and the only thing that you lose in PFS is the ability to exploit stuff.I am purposely treating all the stamina stuff separately, including colored brackets which denote how the option interacts with stamina.
Should I include notation for which options aren't PFS legal? Perhaps a symbol or something with the option's name?
I more or less feel the same way.
Finished with general feats, and I'm looking through the racial feats to consider what's worth mentioning, I've brought in a few already.
Staring class feature feats soon-ish.
I need more coffee.....
You could do this PFS if you're wanting to denote things aren't PFS legal.
You could do thisPFSif you're wanting to denote things aren't PFS legal.
That's a good idea, but I will have to go through the multiple options again and double check them all so I'll expect to really only go through the AWT and AAT stuff mainly.
Either that, or I'll include a section at the end which covers what is or isn't allowed.
I'm thinking for traits, I'm only going to include a "best of" section with some of my favorites and the ones which mechanically benefit the class, since there as many traits as there are feats and most of them aren't worth going through.
I think that's a good idea for the traits. There are trait guides and if someone has a trait they want they know about it. You listing which traits work well for fighter is really all they'd care about when reading the guide.
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
If I can make a few comments about formatting here; the 4 color rating system you used here is kind of odd. Most people go either Blue/Green/Yellow/Red or Purple/Blue/Green/Yellow/Red, which made your style seem a bit odd. This is just me being weird about this though, it's better than some of the color guides I've seen (People who use black as a rating make me sad). Also the different for Green and Red description wise isn't really that different, it might help to clarify that since both just say mediocre.
Second, I'd consider putting up a table of contents that's linked to each section, as without it, the guide gets a bit unwieldy. It's hard to find things as it is now, and for a guide like this, keeping it user friendly will really help people, especially with the volume of content which you're dealing with here.
In the roles section, bolding each role would help them stand out, since as they are now, my eyes are just sort of glossing over them, which isn't what you want there. The non combat roles also feel like they could be expanded upon, since each one feels vague and more sounds like just stat placement rather than an actual role. Prefacing this section with 'out of combat role' would help, since the next section denotes the in combat role.
It also looks like you have different fonts and/or text sizes throughout the guide, which feels very jarring when going from section to section. Making things more universal in text/font size will help make for a cleaner looking guide.
I myself prefer organizing feats by book, but I don't think there's a problem with how you have it done, although I would bold feat names myself. Maybe I'm just a fan of bolding things, that's very likely.
Those are the only notes I have now, it looks like a good start, I'd check the guide to the guides to check out a trait guide when you're doing your own, so you don't miss gems like Ancestral Weapon and such.
BTWay, good on ya for putting your name in the guide, it helps make it more identifiable and promotes yourself, always a good decision.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
If I can make a few comments about formatting here; the 4 color rating system you used here is kind of odd. Most people go either Blue/Green/Yellow/Red or Purple/Blue/Green/Yellow/Red, which made your style seem a bit odd. This is just me being weird about this though, it's better than some of the color guides I've seen (People who use black as a rating make me sad). Also the different for Green and Red description wise isn't really that different, it might help to clarify that since both just say mediocre.
Second, I'd consider putting up a table of contents that's linked to each section, as without it, the guide gets a bit unwieldy. It's hard to find things as it is now, and for a guide like this, keeping it user friendly will really help people, especially with the volume of content which you're dealing with here.
In the roles section, bolding each role would help them stand out, since as they are now, my eyes are just sort of glossing over them, which isn't what you want there. The non combat roles also feel like they could be expanded upon, since each one feels vague and more sounds like just stat placement rather than an actual role. Prefacing this section with 'out of combat role' would help, since the next section denotes the in combat role.
It also looks like you have different fonts and/or text sizes throughout the guide, which feels very jarring when going from section to section. Making things more universal in text/font size will help make for a cleaner looking guide.
I myself prefer organizing feats by book, but I don't think there's a problem with how you have it done, although I would bold feat names myself. Maybe I'm just a fan of bolding things, that's very likely.
Those are the only notes I have now, it looks like a good start, I'd check the guide to the guides to check out a trait guide when you're doing your own, so you don't miss gems like Ancestral Weapon and such.
BTWay, good on ya for putting your name in the guide, it helps make it more identifiable and promotes...
Solid advice, and I do plan on going more in depth and editing the roles section once I've sifted though all the options. Since I'm done with most of the out of combat feats, I can now more generally go though the out of combat roles and really cover what the main differences are, though I wanted to stick with three main ones to cover how building a character usually leans towards one of the mental stats being better than the others. I also need to cover more choices in mixing and matching combat roles since I've found some gems that I had no idea existed and make certain choices really awesome (Two-Weapon Grace is a thing! DEX to damage on TWF is a thing!!!!!)
Once the sections have their 'meat and potatoes' done I do plan on adding a table of contents at the beginning of the guide allowing for more ease with navigating it, but I think it would be beneficial to do so in a more outline style table that breaks down the class features into their separate sections, feats into theirs, and so on. I think I'll also include more contents links at the beginning of each section so one could navigate even more easily.
As to the colors, I really want to stay away from orange or yellow as a middle ground option, since most of the time anything that would be orange or yellow is effectively red as far as builds go, this is why I listed red as "mediocre and/or worthless," I'll change that to make it easier to read.
Additionally, orange and red are close to the same color, so scrolling through guides it might be hard to tell the difference and since this is such a long guide I want to avoid that. Bolding will help as well.
Font size changes are temporary, I'm fairly certain that this isn't referring to the titles of sections, but I wanted to make sure that titles of sections and subsection were denoted by size, and that asides and notes about options were intentionally smaller to identify their lack of actual content. If that wasn't blatantly obvious to someone reading it, then I will change it most definitely. I'll likely change that to italics, improve the font/size issue, and switch to 1.5 spacing rather than double for formatting purposes.
Really helpful advice, thanks!
I'll include the bits on knowledge skills, and I'll most likely drop the craft and profession skills to green. I've found orange and red look to similar when sifting through large lists and I wanted all my colors to be easy read.
if you don't care about color standards a better color set is Bright Red, Yellow, Dark green, and blue. This color set up works for the color blind as well, well the most common type of color blind anyway.
(red and green look the same to most colorblind people, so it's best to make their brightness contrast well, also purple may not look that different from bluei)
Yellow is hard to see on a white backdrop, and I already chose a darker green tone for green to make it easier for that reason.
I am also morally opposed to the color orange existing, I do not know why.
Spacing issues came up with trying to go 1.5, so I am going single spaced with double spacing in between entries so each entry or clause is standalone and can be read or skipped easily as the reader sees fit.
I'll probably want help making sure the PFS friendly stuff is noted thoroughly, as I don't know it all off-hand. PFS illegal choices will be striked out.
Hopefully, with the colored brackets and striking out of text, the guide will be complete for anyone reading it who plays in home games, but still user friendly for the many PFS players. That's my goal at least.
General feats are done, and some sections got rewritten and updated, and I went over non combat roles more in depth and gave insight and mechanical reasoning behind my evaluations. Some feedback on the general changes to the format would be appreciated before I go through all the other feats, of which I think there are literally thousands.
I need more coffee.......
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Would you like help in getting a list of PFS illegal stuff? If so would you like it posted here or in a PM?
I'm not a fan of the brackets as they are difficult to notice them being a different color. Maybe a [S] in the color after the option to give the stamina rating?
How about a role for us maneuver monkeys? Maybe call it debuffer because it can be done via crit fishing too??
My main question is: is that a role better covered by another class? I'll be sure to include it, most likely green.
For PFS stuff, a PM works fine, or keep it to this thread. I can work with either, and I appreciate the help a lot, thank you.
I was concerned with the brackets being hard to notice or see, something like [s] could really make it stick out, thanks for the suggestion.
working on the table of contents and editing the overall format, I'm glad this is getting mostly positive feedback.
How about a role for us maneuver monkeys? Maybe call it debuffer because it can be done via crit fishing too??My main question is: is that a role better covered by another class? I'll be sure to include it, most likely green.
For PFS stuff, a PM works fine, or keep it to this thread. I can work with either, and I appreciate the help a lot, thank you.
I was concerned with the brackets being hard to notice or see, something like [s] could really make it stick out, thanks for the suggestion.
working on the table of contents and editing the overall format, I'm glad this is getting mostly positive feedback.
Other classes will likely be better at strict debuffing, but i feel like the existence of Lore Warden coupled with schrodingers fighter really does give Fighter the opportunity to top the charts as king of maneuvers. Not necessarily as in "im supreme at this maneuver" but more in the angle of "by mid level i probably can do a maneuver you're not resistant or immune to where other people have to overspecialize to be effective"
I like that you address the missing orange color in your guide! I also like the color as it appears on my tablet monitor. Maybe you're eyes or monitor are different. It is a little lighter than the other colors, but not bad for just a word or two. In my hunter guide I am working on, I used blue, green, orange, and red but did not use the bright hues you normally see. Mine are slightly darker.
On the subject of colored brackets, even though I found the explanation in house rules I think you should at least refer to it in your color code section.
You put the orc in brackets. Why is that? And you changed his Str bonus to +2.
In your review of feats, many have a cursory mention of what the feat does followed by a thought about it, while others are little more than an incomplete-sentance retort to its effect without even a brief mention of what it does. if prefer the former.
Just a suggestion, to maybe take the stress of dealing with all the feats off your shoulders. Why even discuss the bad ones? A simple disclaimer that feats not talked about are generally niche items or suboptimal would save a lot of space, and a lot of typing for the guide writer.
Also, have you considered maybe reviewing the feat selections in a more modular fashion? Like discussing clusters of related feats that work well together more than the individual feat. I just know from the other thread that the reason you're even doing this is to show ways the fighter can be made to work well and be versatile.
I'll look into reorganizing the stamina stuff later to enforce my decision making.
I do want to organize feats by chain when covering them, but I want to be thorough when considering all of the options, I may drop a lot of the red ones but if I only covered what was worth considering you may not see any of the feats that a casual play might look at. I already skipped a lot of them for the sake of whether or not you even qualify for them.
Orcs do have a +4 STR bonus, it's part of their RP progression (Paragon).
I'll move the section on brackets and strike thrus in the "how to read" section, and I'll probably change the brackets to the [s] that was suggested upthread to make it easier to notice and read.
I have a session to prep for tomorrow, expect more updates next week, hopefully with some serious progress now that I have the basic formatting down.
Thanks to everyone for the suggestions and input, it has been invaluable, expect to be cited in a Special Thanks section once I'm finished.
Yes, I know orcs have a +4 Str. In your guide, it says both +2 and +4. Just trying to help.
Yes, I know orcs have a +4 Str. In your guide, it says both +2 and +4. Just trying to help.
Good catch, thanks!
Is there a chance I might request a link to the guide though another source then Google Doc? My work filters blocks access to such, so I have no way of viewing it.
what kind of forum would work for you?
It'll probably happen once I'm closer to being finished.
I use dropbox, but that seems to require the viewer to make multiple clicks whereas google docs only requires one link. I have no proof, but I think some people are deterred from dropbox docs.
|
master_marshmallow
Hmm, not quite sure yet. Probably a direct link to download as a PDF, as that has worked in the past when I was lucky enough for a member to post such a link.
That is fine, whenever you get closer to finishing it up.
Ciaran Barnes
I can't access Dropbox as well while I am at work.
master_marshmallow
Hmm, not quite sure yet. Probably a direct link to download as a PDF, as that has worked in the past when I was lucky enough for a member to post such a link.That is fine, whenever you get closer to finishing it up.
Ciaran Barnes
I can't access Dropbox as well while I am at work.
When I can call a draft finished (1.0 or whatever) I'll make sure I find a way for someone to download it.
What about the dirty fighting feat?
I agree with this, actually. I think that Dirty Fighting, paired with the Fighter's Tactics AWT and Outflank (assuming they can stack, and I am absolutely hesitant to assume they CAN, because they both say they 'increase to' +4), it could be a really potent method of boosting your CMB. That, and being able to use any CM you want while flanking can be handy if you can't Abundant Tactics or Warrior Spirit the feats for yourself.
Still confused how the training property works with warrior spirit advanced weapon training?
Still confused how the training property works with warrior spirit advanced weapon training?
Basically, you can choose any +1 special ability in place of just adding a +1 if your weapon is already magical or the bonus you apply to the weapon is greater than +1. This includes the Training special ability that is a +1, and grants you a combat feat if you would qualify for it. So you can pick any combat feat you want, and you can slap it onto your weapon. It's basically a lesser Martial Flexibility.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I am also morally opposed to the color orange existing, I do not know why.
but your icon...
As far as warrior spirit goes you might want to also mention being able to add bane and greater bane, as those 2 can add a lot of damage if your fighting a specific type of enemy
there isn't a greater bane weapon enhancement.
I really dont like the idea that you must make your Fighter a drooling moron or uncouth loser.
if the only way a guide will work is by dumping, then IMHO the guide doesnt work.
Maybe you can not recommend dumping but just suggest it as a alternative?
Also "As far as Pathfinder RPG is concerned, the only real way to tank is with a silly feat called Antagonize" is incorrect. Yes, in MMO, there is a role called "tank". the role is not the same as in D&D where the Tank role (which existed before there were MMO games) is a heavily armored high HP guy who can block corridors, and being in front in combat, often get the less tactical foes to hit him first.
You are writing this guide for PF, not for MMOs. The term "tank" doesnt mean the same. What you call "power turtle" is in fact the D&D/PF "tank".
I really dont like the idea that you must make your Fighter a drooling moron or uncouth loser.
if the only way a guide will work is by dumping, then IMHO the guide doesnt work.
Maybe you can not recommend dumping but just suggest it as a alternative?
Also "As far as Pathfinder RPG is concerned, the only real way to tank is with a silly feat called Antagonize" is incorrect. Yes, in MMO, there is a role called "tank". the role is not the same as in D&D where the Tank role (which existed before there were MMO games) is a heavily armored high HP guy who can block corridors, and being in front in combat, often get the less tactical foes to hit him first.
You are writing this guide for PF, not for MMOs. The term "tank" doesnt mean the same. What you call "power turtle" is in fact the D&D/PF "tank".
Keep reading, I've covered attribute versatility in the roles section and in the end of my arrays I suggest using racial modifiers in such a way.
I'm not sure what games you're playing in where the impossible to hit guy is the one the enemies always go after with no way of coercion, but we must play a very different game. The difference the roles is in their description.
If you don't like the guide, use a different one. The arrays are recommendations, you aren't forced to play this way.
I really dont like the idea that you must make your Fighter a drooling moron or uncouth loser.
if the only way a guide will work is by dumping, then IMHO the guide doesnt work.
Maybe you can not recommend dumping but just suggest it as a alternative?
Also "As far as Pathfinder RPG is concerned, the only real way to tank is with a silly feat called Antagonize" is incorrect. Yes, in MMO, there is a role called "tank". the role is not the same as in D&D where the Tank role (which existed before there were MMO games) is a heavily armored high HP guy who can block corridors, and being in front in combat, often get the less tactical foes to hit him first.
You are writing this guide for PF, not for MMOs. The term "tank" doesnt mean the same. What you call "power turtle" is in fact the D&D/PF "tank".
Keep reading, I've covered attribute versatility in the roles section and in the end of my arrays I suggest using racial modifiers in such a way.
I'm not sure what games you're playing in where the impossible to hit guy is the one the enemies always go after with no way of coercion, but we must play a very different game. The difference the roles is in their description.
If you don't like the guide, use a different one. The arrays are recommendations, you aren't forced to play this way.
I saw that.
Where did I say "always go after with no way of coercion"? In a narrow dungeon corridor, they have to get past him. Enemies who arent so smart will hit the front guy first. And with a tiny bit of smarts on the part of your spellcasters* and party, no one will know that they are casters until they start casting. And arguably, with some spells, you need the Spellcraft skill, which few foes have.
In any case, the term "tanking",in D&D doesnt mean 'aggro making the foe attack". It means what you called "Power turtle". And D&D came first, before MMOs.
You asked for advice, not just for validation.
Either take it or dont.
* spells and armor that make you look like armor but arrn't or armour that looks like clothes. Spellcasters can certainly carry weapons- not to mention, there's little to pick from a Cleric of Iodemae and a Paladin of same.
Yes, we know Rincewind wore a pointy hat that said "WIZZARD" on it, but it's not really a such a good idea.