The return of linear martials and quadratic casters, and how to address it

[Colette Brunel]

The classes seem mostly balanced with one another at 1st level. If anything, the spellcasters (bards, clerics, druids, sorcerers, and wizards) seem somewhat underpowered at 1st level, since they only have a scarce amount of spells per day, and cantrips and powers do not seem especially spectacular on their own.

Level progression, however, makes for linear martials and quadratic spellcasters. Let us start with something minor, and then move on to a major issue. To be clear, I am not worried about martial characters' raw combat power. What I am worried about is their ability to contribute to the noncombat narrative. 7th- and 15th-level skill feats have proven to be horribly disappointing.

As something minor, at 2nd level, where most martials (barbarians, fighters, monks, paladins, and rangers) receive a class feat and a skill feat, spellcasters receive both of those on top of an extra 1st-level spell slot, that is, an extra spell slot of their highest spell level. At 4th, 6th, 8th, 10th, 12th, 14th, 16th, and 18th level, the pattern repeats: on top of everything else a martial would receive, spellcasters gain a spell of their highest spell level. Monks are an exception at 6th, 12th, and 18th with their speed increases, and so are rogues at even-numbered levels with their skill increases, as a rare saving grace; I think that these classes have the right idea in this specific context.

If spellcasters receive the luxury of an extra spell slot of their highest spell level at 2nd, 4th, 6th, 8th, 10th, 12th, 14th, 16th, and 18th level, then martials should receive a similar luxury. (Quick Preparation also happens to hypercharge wizards at 4th level, but that is an extreme outlier even by spellcaster standards.) I am not sure what would be appropriate: maybe extra skill increases, skill feats, or something similar. Monks already have something at 6th, 12th, and 18th, and so do rogues at even-numbered levels; other classes could confer benefits at these levels, and monks and rogues could receive even more at these levels to help improve them further. Ideally, these small benefits should be noncombat-oriented, because martials are good enough at fighting.

As a major issue, the real killer is what happens at 3rd, 5th, 7th, 9th, 11th, 13th, 15th, and 17th level. At these levels, spellcasters receive access to an entirely new level of spells, with which they can not only influence combat in new ways, but alter the narrative and noncombat situations in new ways as well. The flexibility and utility of spellcasting outside of combat encounters cannot be disregarded, even in an edition wherein spellcasting is weaker. No skill feat is ever going to stack up against a sending or a shape stone, for example, and those are common spells. Then we have uncommon spells like raise dead and teleport.

Some of the martial benefits at 3rd, 5th, 7th, 9th, 11th, 13th, 15th, and 17th level are fairly appreciable.
The fighter benefits at 3rd, 7th, 9th, 13th, 15th, and 17th are not bad at all.
Monks improve their speed dramatically at 3rd, Fierce Flurry at 9th is good for damage, Second Path to Perfection at 11th is good for defense, Graceful Mastery and Unarmed Mastery at 13th are good numbers boosts.
Rangers become straight-up better at killing people at 3rd, Evasion at 7th is not bad either, and their 13th- to 17th-level packages are not too shabby either.
As solid as these are, they make the monk and the ranger keep on doing roughly the same thing they were already doing, and unevolving in paradigm; sadly, however, I do not think this can be addressed short of a total combat revamp ala Tome of Battle, Path of War, or D&D 4e. Most of these 3rd-, 5th-, 7th-, 9th-, 11th-, 13th-, 15th-, and 17th-level benefits definitely do not help outside of combat either, meaning that martials cannot keep up with spellcasters' noncombat utility.

Where things really start to go wrong is the utter stinkers among 3rd-, 5th-, 7th-, 9th-, 11th-, 13th-, 15th-, and 17th-level class features.
At 5th level, for example, a fighter gains a rather circumstantial benefit against fear effects. Heavy Armor Mastery at 11th is not of help to a fighter who had eschewed heavy armor and/or a shield, and can you blame them, really, given that heavy armor imposes awful penalties and shields take actions to raise?
At 7th and 15th level, all a monk gains is a +1 bonus to a single saving throw.
The ranger's 5th-, 9th-, and 11th-level class features are also on the poor side, and Wild Stride at 11th is especially egregious given how narrow it is.

In other words, on top of martials needing extra, minor benefits at 2nd, 4th, 6th, 8th, 10th, 12th, 14th, 16th, and 18th level (in the case of the monk and the rogue, on top of what they already receive at those levels), I strongly believe that martials should be given much more powerful and meaningful abilities at 3rd, 5th, 7th, 9th, 11th, 13th, 15th, and 17th level. They should be consistent, too, rather than flip-flopping between solid and awful. I do not know what sort of abilities would be appropriate, but I can definitely say that they should influence the noncombat side of the game; martials are good enough at fighting, and skill feats simply are not enough to stand up to spellcasting utility.

[Quadratic W]

I agree with this, and to summarize the point simply

All classes receive the same base amount of general, ancestry, class, and skill feats. Rogues get some extra skill feats.

The variety within the classes come from their class feats, features, and spellcasting.

Spellcasting is awesome. The class features that other classes receive instead of them are garbage by comparison.

[Xenocrat]

The high level spells actually seem quite bad, I think you need big DPS martials in combat and high skill classes outside of combat to effectively overcome most challenges. The spellcasters aren't going to railroad everything.

[Colette Brunel]

Xenocrat wrote:

The high level spells actually seem quite bad, I think you need big DPS martials in combat and high skill classes outside of combat to effectively overcome most challenges. The spellcasters aren't going to railroad everything.

I do not know; 7th-level spells include the likes of ethereal jaunt, magnificent mansion, plane shift, and retrocognition. All but the last are uncommon though, so maybe Paizo is expecting GMs to carefully restrict spell access? That seems very "mother may I," of course, and we cannot say for sure how it is supposed to work in Doomsday Dawn or Pathfinder Society.

[Xenocrat]

Plane Shift needs to exist to have extraplanar adventures. It is no longer a 5th level spell for Clerics and Psychics, and it no longer has an offensive application. Huge nerf, as it was previously a save or die.

Ethereal Jaunt is a one man infiltration/scouting spell. So are invisibility and some divination. Not a problem.

Retrocognition is a storytelling spell that can't possibly be done via mundane means. It's not a problem.

I can't even understand how anyone could mention Magnificent Mansion in a list of spells that are powerful. It...let's you sleep and eat in comfort?

Look at Possession and Resilient Sphere for some good hard nerfs. And LOL at Dominate.

[Colette Brunel]

As I state in the opening post, to be clear, I am not worried about martial characters' raw combat power. What I am worried about is their ability to contribute to the noncombat narrative.

[Slurmalyst]

I'm generally with Xenocrat.

I think it's a misnomer to call this linear/quadratic when really the "problem" seems to be that martials are better at fighting and casters are better at utility and support. The classic linear/quadratic problem was that late-game casters dominate both in and out of combat.

The classic problem that casting overpowers skill monkeying in the late game might still sort of be here, but maybe in a weaker form. But that problem is really tough to solve entirely without making magic feel weak.

[Colette Brunel]

Could this thread please be moved to the class subforum?

[Makarion]

I think it's a bit early to compare the combat efficacy of spells versus martial powers, but at the very least, it would be nice to give martial starting skills on par with the casters! There's no excuse for a barbarian to have less skills than (for instance) a cleric or druid, in my opinion.

[Madclaw]

Xenocrat wrote:

Look at Possession and Resilient Sphere for some good hard nerfs. And LOL at Dominate.

Dominate got upgraded to a two action cast. Unless you prepared a reaction to disrupt it Dominate is going off in the same round.

[Secret Wizard]

I agree with the assessment some of the Martial features need a review.

That being said, I think you've been spamming the forums with the same type of thread way too much, Colette. Let one discussion go its way before jumping into another discussion on the same topic.

[Ikusias]

@ Secret Wizard
Actually Colette's discussions come from 4chan /Traditional Games/ board and if i recall correctly from some of the most prominent discussions on pathfinder 2nd edition reddit and were ported here as the most appropriate place to convey them to Paizo.

In fact all the criticisms presented have been discussed estensively in other venues and need answers.

As far as the "linear martials vs quadratic spellcasters" argument goes, I've personally felt that, in many campaigns since D&D 3,5 and then their porting to Pathfinder, casters could do too much more compared to non casters just because each spell they obtain is an extra narrative option opposed to the fighter/barbarian/monk of "I hit it harder" progression level after level.

Wizards could outrigth buy or learn from captured grimoires MORE than their class given spells, clerics automatically knew all divine spells not against their alignment and so on, the ones screwed over were clearly all martial classes as they couldn't by RAW get in any way extra feats, proficencies or benefits than what was in their classes.

If anything martials should get more skill and class feats than casters just for the reason that casters need to dedicate most of their time to the study of magic to the detriment of more mundane studies (otherwise the pretty hefty stat investment that the multiclassing to cleric or wizard requires feels wholly unjustified)

[Xenocrat]

Madclaw wrote:

Xenocrat wrote:

Look at Possession and Resilient Sphere for some good hard nerfs. And LOL at Dominate.

Dominate got upgraded to a two action cast. Unless you prepared a reaction to disrupt it Dominate is going off in the same round.

Yes, instead of needing to avail yourself of the many great PF1 defensive spell options (which no longer exist) in order to get off a juiced DC Dominate that is very likely to have the target fail the save and become your days long thrall, you now can easily cast this spell that is much less likely to do anything, will not last for long if it does, and is a level higher.

[AndIMustMask]

Xenocrat wrote:

Madclaw wrote:

Xenocrat wrote:

Look at Possession and Resilient Sphere for some good hard nerfs. And LOL at Dominate.

Dominate got upgraded to a two action cast. Unless you prepared a reaction to disrupt it Dominate is going off in the same round.

Yes, instead of needing to avail yourself of the many great PF1 defensive spell options (which no longer exist) in order to get off a juiced DC Dominate that is very likely to have the target fail the save and become your days long thrall, you now can easily cast this spell that is much less likely to do anything, will not last for long if it does, and is a level higher.

fly and invisibility (with mirror image and blur as runners-up) are by far the some of if not THE best defensive options in pathfinder, as they don't even allow a foe to roll against your defenses in the first place. all of them do in fact exist in 2.0, are obtained very early in one's career, and aren't uncommon spells.

blink is another notable as it's another "remove yourself from the source of damage entirely, no roll needed" option, likewise a common spell.

[Lucas Yew]

They should add unique non-combat features on the odd levels of Martial classes that enhances their narrative capabilities significantly.

And of course, more starting/signature skills for Martials than Casters (on the latter, if it stays in the final book anyway).

[Colette Brunel]

Paizo has already demonstrated a capacity for writing interesting, noncombat-utility-oriented abilities for martial characters in the form of vigilante social talents. Why can these not be reintroduced as skill feats (with reasonable level prerequisites, not being 15th-level to have super-cryptography or super-squeezing skills) and hand these out to martials more frequently, thus making skill feats more powerful and also improving martials' ability to contribute to noncombat situations?

[Witch of Miracles]

Colette Brunel wrote:

Paizo has already demonstrated a capacity for writing interesting, noncombat-utility-oriented abilities for martial characters in the form of vigilante social talents. Why can these not be reintroduced as skill feats (with reasonable level prerequisites, not being 15th-level to have super-cryptography or super-squeezing skills) and hand these out to martials more frequently, thus making skill feats more powerful and also improving martials' ability to contribute to noncombat situations?

Honestly, I got the impression 1e vigilante is why we have so many skill feats in 2e class progression. They saw social talents as something they could evolve into a meaningful choice for each class, and that became skill feats.

[AndIMustMask]

Witch of Miracles wrote:

Colette Brunel wrote:

Paizo has already demonstrated a capacity for writing interesting, noncombat-utility-oriented abilities for martial characters in the form of vigilante social talents. Why can these not be reintroduced as skill feats (with reasonable level prerequisites, not being 15th-level to have super-cryptography or super-squeezing skills) and hand these out to martials more frequently, thus making skill feats more powerful and also improving martials' ability to contribute to noncombat situations?

Honestly, I got the impression 1e vigilante is why we have so many skill feats in 2e class progression. They saw social talents as something they could evolve into a meaningful choice for each class, and that became skill feats.

shaem about it seeming to have jsut shuttered off previously universal skill uses into them, rather than adding new or interesting uses with skill feats.

[Colette Brunel]

You are right about that; skill feats really are cruft most of the time, and it is quite grueling to go through them and select which itty-bitty minor benefit to pick up on a character.

[Zamfield]

I would hazard a proposal to include a progression of optional teamwork feats available to martial classes to provide something useful, interesting, flavorful (martial classes practice teamwork, etc.), and of use out of combat. Giving those out in these gap levels freely, would encourage their use, fit really well into the story of why a party of PCs can prevail over a similar number of same level monsters, and provide some verisimilitude on how a combat grunt picked up helpful non-combat abilities, i.e. training with those classes that excel out of combat.

[N N 959]

Zamfield wrote:

I would hazard a proposal to include a progression of optional teamwork feats available to martial classes to provide something useful, interesting, flavorful (martial classes practice teamwork, etc.), and of use out of combat.

This is a brilliant idea. Only I would give these teamwork feats to the Fighter, Paladin, Barbarian, Ranger, for free and let them do things in combat.

Essentially give them double/triple-up combos that have rider effects. For example:

Near & Far: If two characters with this ability combine to hit an enemy with a ranged attack and a melee attack in the same round the target must make a Fortitude save equal to the damage delivered by both attacks, or be Stunned for 1 round.

Double Whammy If two characters with this ability combine to hit an enemy with the same type of weapon in the same round, the target must make a Reflex save equal to the damage dealt or be disarmed.

And so on. The prereq is both attackers must have the teamwork feat, but they are automatically given to the Fighter and the Fighter subclasses as they level

[Tursic]

If they changed the feat chains into scaling feats, that would help a lot for the martial classes.

[Goldenfoxx]

AndIMustMask wrote:

Xenocrat wrote:

Madclaw wrote:

Xenocrat wrote:

Look at Possession and Resilient Sphere for some good hard nerfs. And LOL at Dominate.

Dominate got upgraded to a two action cast. Unless you prepared a reaction to disrupt it Dominate is going off in the same round.

Yes, instead of needing to avail yourself of the many great PF1 defensive spell options (which no longer exist) in order to get off a juiced DC Dominate that is very likely to have the target fail the save and become your days long thrall, you now can easily cast this spell that is much less likely to do anything, will not last for long if it does, and is a level higher.

fly and invisibility (with mirror image and blur as runners-up) are by far the some of if not THE best defensive options in pathfinder, as they don't even allow a foe to roll against your defenses in the first place. all of them do in fact exist in 2.0, are obtained very early in one's career, and aren't uncommon spells.

blink is another notable as it's another "remove yourself from the source of damage entirely, no roll needed" option, likewise a common spell.

Actually, Invisibility is nice but in order to make it a total defense, you need to spend all of your time successfully sneaking. There are very many ways to become sensed (granted 50% miss rate is still awesome).

Blink, I dont really see as a viable defensive spell. If you could use it as a reaction, maybe... but its just concentrate for random movement. It does allow you to avoid AOO, but with randomness it could land you into a much worse place. All that said, it looks like a fun spell .. and a great way to create stories that end like this "... and then I blinked away from the ogre, right off the cliff"

You are spot on with fly... its why many creatures have a range option. Blur, with its 20% flat roll miss rate is nice. But mirror image is awesome... definitely going in my spell book. Along with Shield, of course.

[Zamfield]

N N 959 wrote:

Zamfield wrote:

I would hazard a proposal to include a progression of optional teamwork feats available to martial classes to provide something useful, interesting, flavorful (martial classes practice teamwork, etc.), and of use out of combat.

This is a brilliant idea. Only I would give these teamwork feats to the Fighter, Paladin, Barbarian, Ranger, for free and let them do things in combat.

Essentially give them double/triple-up combos that have rider effects. For example:

Near & Far: If two characters with this ability combine to hit an enemy with a ranged attack and a melee attack in the same round the target must make a Fortitude save equal to the damage delivered by both attacks, or be Stunned for 1 round.

Double Whammy If two characters with this ability combine to hit an enemy with the same type of weapon in the same round, the target must make a Reflex save equal to the damage dealt or be disarmed.

And so on. The prereq is both attackers must have the teamwork feat, but they are automatically given to the Fighter and the Fighter subclasses as they level

I was thinking of:

good cop, bad cop You hold down a target, while a party member you are cooperating with makes an intimidation check, add a +4 circumstance bonus to that persons roll.

back to you You take a shove action to push a target into reach of a cooperating party member with a readied sneak attack, they get a +2 circumstance bonus to their attack roll and can add one more sneak attack dice if they hit.

no you don't You get a reaction that allows you to bat away an attempt to disrupt a nearby spell casting party member, the spell caster gains a +4 circumstance bonus to AC.

here, hold this Whenever a cooperating party member fails or critically fails a disable device check, reduce the number of success lost by one.

Mostly things that key off of having a cooperative party member without requiring them to have the matching feat, just to be doing something that you can easily assist with using your martial skills.

But your near & far would also be cool if you could gain a reaction that allowed you give a cooperating ranged attacker a +2 circumstance bonus to hit for one of their shots.

I think the pf1 teamwork feats were cool, but impossible to use outside of a dedicated campaign, and this idea was more along the lines of giving martial classes some tools to increase the effectiveness of what other party members were already doing without them needing to do anything different.