paizo.com Recent Posts in Do Fighters Finally Not Suck?!paizo.com Recent Posts in Do Fighters Finally Not Suck?!2017-05-19T21:35:28Z2017-05-19T21:35:28ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Do Fighters Finally Not Suck?!Arachnofiendhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2ucs1&page=3?Do-Fighters-Finally-Not-Suck#1202017-05-24T01:26:49Z2017-05-24T01:26:49Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Lucas Yew wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Arachnofiend wrote:</div><blockquote> While we're pointing out good 3rd party replacements for the Fighter, the Spheres of Might Conscript is basically what you want from a Fighter (a blank page chassis that you can fill in with most any non-casting concept you want) except really good. This is largely because, unlike having a lot of extra feats, having a lot of extra sphere talents is actually worth a damn. </blockquote><p>I am proud to be a backer for the book! :)
<p>Anyway, last time I checked DDS' forums, I was shocked to see someone who wanted out-of-combat abilities booted out of Spheres of Might, which is exactly the opposite of what I'd like to happen to martials. Wonder why did that person think like that... </blockquote><p>They're a secret wizard, obviously, who feels their party role of "all of the party roles" is threatened.Lucas Yew wrote:Arachnofiend wrote: While we're pointing out good 3rd party replacements for the Fighter, the Spheres of Might Conscript is basically what you want from a Fighter (a blank page chassis that you can fill in with most any non-casting concept you want) except really good. This is largely because, unlike having a lot of extra feats, having a lot of extra sphere talents is actually worth a damn.
I am proud to be a backer for the book! :) Anyway, last time I checked DDS' forums, I...Arachnofiend2017-05-24T01:26:49ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Do Fighters Finally Not Suck?!Lucas Yewhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2ucs1&page=3?Do-Fighters-Finally-Not-Suck#1192017-05-23T13:44:06Z2017-05-23T13:44:06Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Arachnofiend wrote:</div><blockquote> While we're pointing out good 3rd party replacements for the Fighter, the Spheres of Might Conscript is basically what you want from a Fighter (a blank page chassis that you can fill in with most any non-casting concept you want) except really good. This is largely because, unlike having a lot of extra feats, having a lot of extra sphere talents is actually worth a damn. </blockquote><p>I am proud to be a backer for the book! :)
<p>Anyway, last time I checked DDS' forums, I was shocked to see someone who wanted out-of-combat abilities booted out of Spheres of Might, which is exactly the opposite of what I'd like to happen to martials. Wonder why did that person think like that...</p>Arachnofiend wrote:While we're pointing out good 3rd party replacements for the Fighter, the Spheres of Might Conscript is basically what you want from a Fighter (a blank page chassis that you can fill in with most any non-casting concept you want) except really good. This is largely because, unlike having a lot of extra feats, having a lot of extra sphere talents is actually worth a damn.
I am proud to be a backer for the book! :) Anyway, last time I checked DDS' forums, I was shocked to...Lucas Yew2017-05-23T13:44:06ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Do Fighters Finally Not Suck?!TOZ (alias of TriOmegaZero)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2ucs1&page=3?Do-Fighters-Finally-Not-Suck#1182017-08-05T15:49:31Z2017-05-23T08:14:31Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Triune wrote:</div><blockquote>Do Fighters Finally Not Suck?!</blockquote><p>No.Triune wrote:Do Fighters Finally Not Suck?!
No.TOZ (alias of TriOmegaZero)2017-05-23T08:14:31ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Do Fighters Finally Not Suck?!Arachnofiendhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2ucs1&page=3?Do-Fighters-Finally-Not-Suck#1172017-05-23T13:41:11Z2017-05-23T07:02:08Z<p>While we're pointing out good 3rd party replacements for the Fighter, the Spheres of Might Conscript is basically what you want from a Fighter (a blank page chassis that you can fill in with most any non-casting concept you want) except really good. This is largely because, unlike having a lot of extra feats, having a lot of extra sphere talents is actually worth a damn.</p>While we're pointing out good 3rd party replacements for the Fighter, the Spheres of Might Conscript is basically what you want from a Fighter (a blank page chassis that you can fill in with most any non-casting concept you want) except really good. This is largely because, unlike having a lot of extra feats, having a lot of extra sphere talents is actually worth a damn.Arachnofiend2017-05-23T07:02:08ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Do Fighters Finally Not Suck?!Alexander Augunas (Contributor)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2ucs1&page=3?Do-Fighters-Finally-Not-Suck#1162017-05-22T19:49:53Z2017-05-22T19:49:04Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Jonathon Wilder wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Alex Smith 908 wrote:</div><blockquote>I want a fighter to be able to meaningfully contribute mechanically to as many situations as possible. For instance in a diplomatic situation the fighter should still have something to do even if he isn't the star, without having to have invested a huge portion of his resources into it. Alternatively enemies who cannot be fought directly is a fairly common narrative device and the fighter should have means of indirectly fighting them such as combat maneuvers without having to have invested hugely into that specific maneuver.</blockquote>I advise snagging the Everyman Unchained: Fighters. </blockquote><p>Thanks for the shout-out! :DJonathon Wilder wrote:Alex Smith 908 wrote:I want a fighter to be able to meaningfully contribute mechanically to as many situations as possible. For instance in a diplomatic situation the fighter should still have something to do even if he isn't the star, without having to have invested a huge portion of his resources into it. Alternatively enemies who cannot be fought directly is a fairly common narrative device and the fighter should have means of indirectly fighting them such as combat...Alexander Augunas (Contributor)2017-05-22T19:49:04ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Do Fighters Finally Not Suck?!Snowlillyhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2ucs1&page=3?Do-Fighters-Finally-Not-Suck#1152017-05-22T18:36:09Z2017-05-22T18:33:02Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Isonaroc wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Elf Wizard wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Cantriped wrote:</div><blockquote> No they aren't, they cost you a share of the loot...</blockquote>Do Fighters actually survive the entire adventure in your games? </blockquote>Generally yeah. The only class I see consistently die is the rogue. </blockquote><p>That is usually the player.
<p>And I don't have an issue keeping my fighter alive. </p>
<p>Unlike the wizard in our group, who failed his save vs. <i>Destruction</i> week before last ... and even if I had been targeted and (very unlikely) failed his save, it would not have killed my fighter.</p>Isonaroc wrote:Elf Wizard wrote: Cantriped wrote: No they aren't, they cost you a share of the loot...
Do Fighters actually survive the entire adventure in your games? Generally yeah. The only class I see consistently die is the rogue. That is usually the player. And I don't have an issue keeping my fighter alive.
Unlike the wizard in our group, who failed his save vs. Destruction week before last ... and even if I had been targeted and (very unlikely) failed his save, it would not have...Snowlilly2017-05-22T18:33:02ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Do Fighters Finally Not Suck?!Garbage-Tier Waifuhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2ucs1&page=3?Do-Fighters-Finally-Not-Suck#1142017-05-24T00:38:17Z2017-05-21T02:24:05Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Frogsplosion wrote:</div><blockquote> so yeah, item mastery feats aren't combat feats? that kinda makes them worthless. you can't brawler them out either. </blockquote><p>Not as a brawler alone. You need Weapon Training to do it. Advanced Weapon Training is a combat feat, and Item Mastery is an Advanced Weapon Training option. Using that, you can flex into Item Mastery feats. Typically through Barroom Brawler through a fighter, though you can do it with Warrior Spirit and the Training weapon special ability.Frogsplosion wrote:so yeah, item mastery feats aren't combat feats? that kinda makes them worthless. you can't brawler them out either.
Not as a brawler alone. You need Weapon Training to do it. Advanced Weapon Training is a combat feat, and Item Mastery is an Advanced Weapon Training option. Using that, you can flex into Item Mastery feats. Typically through Barroom Brawler through a fighter, though you can do it with Warrior Spirit and the Training weapon special ability.Garbage-Tier Waifu2017-05-21T02:24:05ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Do Fighters Finally Not Suck?!Alex Smith 908https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2ucs1&page=3?Do-Fighters-Finally-Not-Suck#1132017-05-21T04:51:03Z2017-05-21T01:39:36Z<p>Yeah I know hence why I think actually using them as a measuring stick is kinda dumb. I was trying to find the most complex possible example, and all of the others besides Kingmaker that have any degree of interesting design are 3rd party. You were the one who brought them up as an example of standard play.</p>Yeah I know hence why I think actually using them as a measuring stick is kinda dumb. I was trying to find the most complex possible example, and all of the others besides Kingmaker that have any degree of interesting design are 3rd party. You were the one who brought them up as an example of standard play.Alex Smith 9082017-05-21T01:39:36ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Do Fighters Finally Not Suck?!Purple Overkillhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2ucs1&page=3?Do-Fighters-Finally-Not-Suck#1122017-05-20T20:54:21Z2017-05-20T20:54:21Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Alex Smith 908 wrote:</div><blockquote> I'd say the better measure of effectiveness is "does this character usually have an equal part to contribute in Kingmaker or similarly complex adventure path". I want a fighter to be able to meaningfully contribute mechanically to as many situations as possible. For instance in a diplomatic situation the fighter should still have something to do even if he isn't the star, without having to have invested a huge portion of his resources into it. Alternatively enemies who cannot be fought directly is a fairly common narrative device and the fighter should have means of indirectly fighting them such as combat maneuvers without having to have invested hugely into that specific maneuver. </blockquote><p>Sorry, AP and complex? You´re kidding me? You could do each and everyone of them with NPC classes and still do fine. Heck, they´re designed to be played with 12-year-olds.Alex Smith 908 wrote:I'd say the better measure of effectiveness is "does this character usually have an equal part to contribute in Kingmaker or similarly complex adventure path". I want a fighter to be able to meaningfully contribute mechanically to as many situations as possible. For instance in a diplomatic situation the fighter should still have something to do even if he isn't the star, without having to have invested a huge portion of his resources into it. Alternatively enemies who...Purple Overkill2017-05-20T20:54:21ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Do Fighters Finally Not Suck?!Alex Smith 908https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2ucs1&page=3?Do-Fighters-Finally-Not-Suck#1112017-05-20T16:22:46Z2017-05-20T16:22:46Z<p>I'll give it a look</p>I'll give it a lookAlex Smith 9082017-05-20T16:22:46ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Do Fighters Finally Not Suck?!Jonathon Wilder (alias of JonathonWilder)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2ucs1&page=3?Do-Fighters-Finally-Not-Suck#1102017-05-22T19:48:48Z2017-05-20T16:17:24Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Alex Smith 908 wrote:</div><blockquote>I want a fighter to be able to meaningfully contribute mechanically to as many situations as possible. For instance in a diplomatic situation the fighter should still have something to do even if he isn't the star, without having to have invested a huge portion of his resources into it. Alternatively enemies who cannot be fought directly is a fairly common narrative device and the fighter should have means of indirectly fighting them such as combat maneuvers without having to have invested hugely into that specific maneuver.</blockquote><p>I advise snagging the Everyman Unchained: Fighters.Alex Smith 908 wrote:I want a fighter to be able to meaningfully contribute mechanically to as many situations as possible. For instance in a diplomatic situation the fighter should still have something to do even if he isn't the star, without having to have invested a huge portion of his resources into it. Alternatively enemies who cannot be fought directly is a fairly common narrative device and the fighter should have means of indirectly fighting them such as combat maneuvers without...Jonathon Wilder (alias of JonathonWilder)2017-05-20T16:17:24ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Do Fighters Finally Not Suck?!Frogsplosionhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2ucs1&page=3?Do-Fighters-Finally-Not-Suck#1092017-05-20T15:57:41Z2017-05-20T15:57:13Z<p>so yeah, item mastery feats aren't combat feats? that kinda makes them worthless. you can't brawler them out either.</p>so yeah, item mastery feats aren't combat feats? that kinda makes them worthless. you can't brawler them out either.Frogsplosion2017-05-20T15:57:13ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Do Fighters Finally Not Suck?!Alex Smith 908https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2ucs1&page=3?Do-Fighters-Finally-Not-Suck#1082017-05-21T05:13:10Z2017-05-20T14:39:58Z<p>Like I guess what it gets right down to is that a fighter's feats and or abilities should have as much utility for all of a sorcerer's known spells put together for a given level and all of those fighter abilities should scale at least as well as sorcerer spells.</p>Like I guess what it gets right down to is that a fighter's feats and or abilities should have as much utility for all of a sorcerer's known spells put together for a given level and all of those fighter abilities should scale at least as well as sorcerer spells.Alex Smith 9082017-05-20T14:39:58ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Do Fighters Finally Not Suck?!Alex Smith 908https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2ucs1&page=3?Do-Fighters-Finally-Not-Suck#1072017-05-21T05:12:52Z2017-05-20T14:33:25Z<p>I'd say the better measure of effectiveness is "does this character usually have an equal part to contribute in Kingmaker or similarly complex adventure path". I want a fighter to be able to meaningfully contribute mechanically to as many situations as possible. For instance in a diplomatic situation the fighter should still have something to do even if he isn't the star, without having to have invested a huge portion of his resources into it. Alternatively enemies who cannot be fought directly is a fairly common narrative device and the fighter should have means of indirectly fighting them such as combat maneuvers without having to have invested hugely into that specific maneuver.</p>I'd say the better measure of effectiveness is "does this character usually have an equal part to contribute in Kingmaker or similarly complex adventure path". I want a fighter to be able to meaningfully contribute mechanically to as many situations as possible. For instance in a diplomatic situation the fighter should still have something to do even if he isn't the star, without having to have invested a huge portion of his resources into it. Alternatively enemies who cannot be fought...Alex Smith 9082017-05-20T14:33:25ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Do Fighters Finally Not Suck?!Purple Overkillhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2ucs1&page=3?Do-Fighters-Finally-Not-Suck#1062017-05-20T13:43:50Z2017-05-20T13:43:50Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Alex Smith 908 wrote:</div><blockquote> An NPC warrior can do well in Giantslayer as published without modification. That isn't a high hurdle. </blockquote><p>I´ve not said it´s a hurdle, but that it gives the overall boundaries "effectiveness" of things can be measure against instead of talking about them in a vacuum.Alex Smith 908 wrote:An NPC warrior can do well in Giantslayer as published without modification. That isn't a high hurdle.
I´ve not said it´s a hurdle, but that it gives the overall boundaries "effectiveness" of things can be measure against instead of talking about them in a vacuum.Purple Overkill2017-05-20T13:43:50ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Do Fighters Finally Not Suck?!Alex Smith 908https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2ucs1&page=3?Do-Fighters-Finally-Not-Suck#1052017-05-20T13:25:59Z2017-05-20T13:25:59Z<p>An NPC warrior can do well in Giantslayer as published without modification. That isn't a high hurdle.</p>An NPC warrior can do well in Giantslayer as published without modification. That isn't a high hurdle.Alex Smith 9082017-05-20T13:25:59ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Do Fighters Finally Not Suck?!Purple Overkillhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2ucs1&page=3?Do-Fighters-Finally-Not-Suck#1042017-08-21T01:28:32Z2017-05-20T10:32:26Z<p>Talk about the Fighter being "effective" or not is always funny, as people throw in things light "flight" or "plane shift" and never explain how their actual game looks like, but keep it on a purely theoretical level, with weighting "class features" higher than "itemancy".</p>
<p>Me, I use PF only to play APs and that´s it. My comparison point is: Does a Fighter well in Giantslayer as published and not modified by me? And it does.</p>Talk about the Fighter being "effective" or not is always funny, as people throw in things light "flight" or "plane shift" and never explain how their actual game looks like, but keep it on a purely theoretical level, with weighting "class features" higher than "itemancy".
Me, I use PF only to play APs and that´s it. My comparison point is: Does a Fighter well in Giantslayer as published and not modified by me? And it does.Purple Overkill2017-05-20T10:32:26ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Do Fighters Finally Not Suck?!Ryan Freirehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2ucs1&page=3?Do-Fighters-Finally-Not-Suck#1032017-05-20T00:18:14Z2017-05-20T00:18:14Z<p>Huh, apparently some are most arent, telekinetic mastery is. Teleportation isn't. Weird</p>Huh, apparently some are most arent, telekinetic mastery is. Teleportation isn't. WeirdRyan Freire2017-05-20T00:18:14ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Do Fighters Finally Not Suck?!Blackwaltzomegahttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2ucs1&page=3?Do-Fighters-Finally-Not-Suck#1022017-05-19T23:56:21Z2017-05-19T23:56:21Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Ryan Freire wrote:</div><blockquote> <div class="messageboard-quotee">Blackwaltzomega wrote:</div><blockquote></p>
<p>At level 11, when a fighter can have both of these feats, he can cast Dimension door. Once. As a standard action. Handy for out of combat! Relatively useless in combat unless you've gained the power to attack as a swift/move action somehow.
<br />
</blockquote><p>If you're taking item mastery feats you're also taking abundant tactics. They're basically part of the same package.
<p>Edit so its more like 5X a day at 11th. </blockquote><p>Which would be <i>awesome</i> if Dimensional Agility et all and Teleportation Mastery were combat feats.
<p>They aren't. </p>
<p>Abundant tactics doesn't work with any of the feats involved in this combo, or indeed any item mastery feats at all.</p>Ryan Freire wrote:Blackwaltzomega wrote:At level 11, when a fighter can have both of these feats, he can cast Dimension door. Once. As a standard action. Handy for out of combat! Relatively useless in combat unless you've gained the power to attack as a swift/move action somehow.
If you're taking item mastery feats you're also taking abundant tactics. They're basically part of the same package. Edit so its more like 5X a day at 11th. Which would be awesome if Dimensional Agility et all and...Blackwaltzomega2017-05-19T23:56:21ZRe: Forums/Pathfinder First Edition: General Discussion: Do Fighters Finally Not Suck?!Ryan Freirehttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2ucs1&page=3?Do-Fighters-Finally-Not-Suck#1012017-05-19T23:55:00Z2017-05-19T23:54:13Z<div class="messageboard-quotee">Blackwaltzomega wrote:</div><blockquote></p>
<p>At level 11, when a fighter can have both of these feats, he can cast Dimension door. Once. As a standard action. Handy for out of combat! Relatively useless in combat unless you've gained the power to attack as a swift/move action somehow.
<br />
</blockquote><p>If you're taking item mastery feats you're also taking abundant tactics. They're basically part of the same package.
<p>Edit so its more like 5X a day at 11th.</p>Blackwaltzomega wrote:At level 11, when a fighter can have both of these feats, he can cast Dimension door. Once. As a standard action. Handy for out of combat! Relatively useless in combat unless you've gained the power to attack as a swift/move action somehow.
If you're taking item mastery feats you're also taking abundant tactics. They're basically part of the same package. Edit so its more like 5X a day at 11th.Ryan Freire2017-05-19T23:54:13Z