Fighter Class Preview

ChibiNyan wrote:

QuidEst wrote:

Mark Seifter wrote:

It's a mathematically useful ability, but not one that is obviously powerful without access to more of the system, and maybe not as impressive for a preview as the other feats in the preview. Its contemporary level 14 feat, Determination, is pretty much the last thing in your example: Your fighter training just lets you shrug off a spell or condition entirely.

Iron Heart Surge returns! Take that, Dying! And you too, “subject to gravity”!

UGH SUNLIGHT IS BLINDING ME! GYAAAAAAAAH!!! *explodes sun*

The sun is not a spell or basic condition. One of our big design goals is to precisely define the game terms we use and then use them to mean the same thing each time. It's something that we worked hard to do and something that even now the editors are helping us to improve even further!

Goes to designer/editor chat and looks at the latest batch coming in right now!

Thank you for this. I think a lot of the confusion that came up in 1E came from using terms inconsistently.

With the "AoO should be for everyone" talk I see, I feel like people tend to forget that it's now only one kind of reaction that can be taken, with Rogues getting free AC/Reflex vs one attack as a kind of "Dodge of Opportunity", Wizards can cast "Shield"... I'm pretty sure they will have lots of option better centered on them than a simple AoO.
I can see many possibilities:
A quick bleed on people careless beside the rogue?
A counterspell from the wizard?
A quick taunt from the bard that distract a foe from its attack toward an ally?
The Paladin doing the shield block for an ally, or redirecting one [Evil] aligned attack to himself.
A sorcerer, using his draconic blood to gain a temporary speed boost letting him move 5ft to evade one attack by using vestigial wings.
Cleric could put a quick prayer to give a +1 on AC to an ally attacked by an enemy of their church.
I could go on, and I'm preeeety sure the Paizo devs have better creativity (or a better idea of what constitute a good mechanic) than me.

Mark Seifter wrote:

ChibiNyan wrote:

QuidEst wrote:

Mark Seifter wrote:

It's a mathematically useful ability, but not one that is obviously powerful without access to more of the system, and maybe not as impressive for a preview as the other feats in the preview. Its contemporary level 14 feat, Determination, is pretty much the last thing in your example: Your fighter training just lets you shrug off a spell or condition entirely.

Iron Heart Surge returns! Take that, Dying! And you too, “subject to gravity”!

UGH SUNLIGHT IS BLINDING ME! GYAAAAAAAAH!!! *explodes sun*

The sun is not a spell or basic condition. One of our big design goals is to precisely define the game terms we use and then use them to mean the same thing each time. It's something that we worked hard to do and something that even now the editors are helping us to improve even further!

Goes to designer/editor chat and looks at the latest batch coming in right now!

Thank you for this. I think a lot of the confusion that came up in 1E came from using terms inconsistently.

I fully agree (I'm looking at you "wielding," but there are certainly others).

Counterspell being a reaction makes sense, and would actually make counterspelling viable.

Counterspelling in 3.5/PF1e is so situational and overly complicated that I've never once seen someone actually do a counterspell.

I would argue you're misrepresenting what most critics of the shield are concerned about (I can only truly speak for myself course, so mild speculation is at play). You're not 'only' giving up that -10 attack, you're giving up every other tactical option as well. Want to Attack, make a guarded step forward and attack again? Alright, but then the shield is not really doing anything. Want to use the shield? Ok, now it eats up that one action, so if you want/need to move on your turn you're down to one attack. And if you use the shield reaction, you can't do AoO's until after your next turn.

There is a reaction you can take to get the AC bonus if you don't want to spend the action to raise shields. Using the reaction means you don't get the Shield Block unless you have a second reaction, though.

Counterspell being a reaction makes sense, and would actually make counterspelling viable.

Counterspelling in 3.5/PF1e is so situational and overly complicated that I've never once seen someone actually do a counterspell.

Never saw it either. Even with a ring of counterspelling. Personally, I would have changed it to lets people use any spell of the same school, preferably of the same level, but I never ended up taking the time to really balance it, and never got any player actually interested in the change, because all that need to be done to actually even get to try is way too much.

Counterspell being a reaction makes sense, and would actually make counterspelling viable.

Counterspelling in 3.5/PF1e is so situational and overly complicated that I've never once seen someone actually do a counterspell.

Yeah, counterspelling is weird in PF1. As you say, it's incredibly situational and overly complicated. On top of that, it feels really unexciting to do it too. But if you actually do it against an encounter where most of the challenge rests in a caster boss? You can wreck that encounter even without any feats or abilities taken to make counterspelling better, particularly if you have a caster level boost (karma prayer bead on my oracle, I'm looking at you; I accidentally turned one of the most notorious PFS scenarios into a cakewalk readying dispel over and over again). So it was the worst of several worlds: super situational, complicated, felt weak, and was actually too strong when its situation came up but in a boring way. Anyway, I can't wait until you guys can check out PF2's counterspell!

graywulfe wrote:

Mark Seifter wrote:

ChibiNyan wrote:

QuidEst wrote:

Mark Seifter wrote:

It's a mathematically useful ability, but not one that is obviously powerful without access to more of the system, and maybe not as impressive for a preview as the other feats in the preview. Its contemporary level 14 feat, Determination, is pretty much the last thing in your example: Your fighter training just lets you shrug off a spell or condition entirely.

Iron Heart Surge returns! Take that, Dying! And you too, “subject to gravity”!

UGH SUNLIGHT IS BLINDING ME! GYAAAAAAAAH!!! *explodes sun*

The sun is not a spell or basic condition. One of our big design goals is to precisely define the game terms we use and then use them to mean the same thing each time. It's something that we worked hard to do and something that even now the editors are helping us to improve even further!

Goes to designer/editor chat and looks at the latest batch coming in right now!

Thank you for this. I think a lot of the confusion that came up in 1E came from using terms inconsistently.

I fully agree (I'm looking at you "wielding," but there are certainly others).

Hoo boy. Yes, please pull down the Book of Nine Swords and peruse it as a way not to do a rule set. Iron Heart Surge was just one of the many problems in that book.

edit: By the way, parts of the mythic book are the same way. For example, consider the Legendary Item ability Undetectable: This grants its bonded user the ability to become utterly undetectable while invisible. While invisible and in physical contact with this item, the bonded creature can't be detected or scryed by any method.

Oy. "any method."

Does this mean somehow their footprints are invisible? I'm about to house rule this one to say you are undetectable, but traces you leave behind are not, it's become quite an issue recently.

The original Pathfinder did a pretty good job of fixing absolutes (3.5e wall of force, I'm looking at you) but over the years that philosophy seems to have gone by the wayside. Be nice to have it back.

I like what we've seen here and believe that our 2e fighter will be much more interesting to play and tactically flexible than his predecessor. My hope is that this new and improved fighter either has a few substantive tricks yet revealed, or (if we're looking at the meat and potatoes), other class abilities have been designed with this class as a "foundational" benchmark. One of the largest problems with the 1e model was that so many martial-based alternatives outperformed the fighter, with the added benefit of those alternatives being more enjoyable to play. Providing fighters abilities comparable to those possessed by their peers might be just the types of incentives required to our base fighter into a more precious (even invaluable) class.

LuZeke wrote:

Counterspell being a reaction makes sense, and would actually make counterspelling viable.

Counterspelling in 3.5/PF1e is so situational and overly complicated that I've never once seen someone actually do a counterspell.

Yeah, counterspelling is weird in PF1. As you say, it's incredibly situational and overly complicated. On top of that, it feels really unexciting to do it too. But if you actually do it against an encounter where most of the challenge rests in a caster boss? You can wreck that encounter even without any feats or abilities taken to make counterspelling better, particularly if you have a caster level boost (karma prayer bead on my oracle, I'm looking at you; I accidentally turned one of the most notorious PFS scenarios into a cakewalk readying dispel over and over again). So it was the worst of several worlds: super situational, complicated, felt weak, and was actually too strong when its situation came up but in a boring way. Anyway, I can't wait until you guys can check out PF2's counterspell!

I still have never made a caster, and I'm really happy with this. :D

Counterspell being a reaction makes sense, and would actually make counterspelling viable.

Counterspelling in 3.5/PF1e is so situational and overly complicated that I've never once seen someone actually do a counterspell.

I've used it lots of times, when fighting a teens level wizard or sorcerer.

I like what we've seen here and believe that our 2e fighter will be much more interesting to play and tactically flexible than his predecessor. My hope is that this new and improved fighter either has a few substantive tricks yet revealed, or (if we're looking at the meat and potatoes), other class abilities have been designed with this class as a "foundational" benchmark. One of the largest problems with the 1e model was that so many martial-based alternatives outperformed the fighter, with the added benefit of those alternatives being more enjoyable to play. Providing fighters abilities comparable to those possessed by their peers might be just the types of incentives required to our base fighter into a more precious (even invaluable) class.

I'm all for making the fighter as fun as possible, but - and this is a more general point - I hope that any mistakes made in the design of the core classes (and in a game as complex as these, this is inevitable) don't get baked in as benchmarks that hold back lessons learned since then. PF1 is a better game than it would otherwise have been for later martial characters being funner and stronger than the fighter baseline, and even better when you bring in 3PP materials that drop that benchmark entirely. Ultimately the job is to be fair to fundamental fantasy character concepts like the mercenary captain or knight, not to the fighter class as such, which is just a vehicle for representing those.

Aratrok wrote:

William Werminster wrote:

Blog wrote:

At 14th level, a fighter can use their shield to protect themself from dragon's breath and fireballs, gaining their shield's bonus to Reflex saves.

Is it me or this sounds like a bit weak sauce for a 14th lvl feature?

At 14th level I'd expect a martial-type character to reflect the fireball back at its caster, plant their shield and create an area the dragon breath just doesn't get to hit at all, blow out the fire like Superman, or absorb the effect with their anti-magic muscles. Something, anything cool enough to fit with what that level is supposed to mean- that they've surpassed mere mortals and are now competing with planar super-beings for stakes like the world. "

It's a mathematically useful ability, but not one that is obviously powerful without access to more of the system, and maybe not as impressive for a preview as the other feats in the preview. Its contemporary level 14 feat, Determination, is pretty much the last thing in your example: Your fighter training just lets you shrug off a spell or condition entirely.

I'm just at a loss as to why this is a level 14 ability at all. It's just so mundane and uninteresting even if the bonus to reflex saves is mechanically worthwhile.

You really have to spend 14 levels training before you realize that it might be a good idea to put the slab of metal on your arm between your face and a ball of fire?

This is something so basic and intuitive that Fighters should be figuring it out at level 1, not level 14.

[...]

I'm just at a loss as to why this is a level 14 ability at all. It's just so mundane and uninteresting even if the bonus to reflex saves is mechanically worthwhile.

You really have to spend 14 levels training before you realize that it might be a good idea to put the slab of metal on your arm between your face and a ball of fire?

This is something so basic and intuitive that Fighters should be figuring it out at level 1, not level 14.

I guess it's not "I should have done that" but more like "YES! Finally I'm able to keep the shield steady enough against the pressure of the energy to block it!"

Honestly I also feel it is not something I expect in a legendary fighter. At 14 I expect something like spell deflect.

For comparison, in 4e shields gave +2 REF to everybody, no feat needed, since level 1. Math is different here, but using a shield to cover from a explosion doesn't sound groundbreaking

Ikos wrote:

I like what we've seen here and believe that our 2e fighter will be much more interesting to play and tactically flexible than his predecessor. My hope is that this new and improved fighter either has a few substantive tricks yet revealed, or (if we're looking at the meat and potatoes), other class abilities have been designed with this class as a "foundational" benchmark. One of the largest problems with the 1e model was that so many martial-based alternatives outperformed the fighter, with the added benefit of those alternatives being more enjoyable to play. Providing fighters abilities comparable to those possessed by their peers might be just the types of incentives required to our base fighter into a more precious (even invaluable) class.

I'm all for making the fighter as fun as possible, but - and this is a more general point - I hope that any mistakes made in the design of the core classes (and in a game as complex as these, this is inevitable) don't get baked in as benchmarks that hold back lessons learned since then. PF1 is a better game than it would otherwise have been for later martial characters being funner and stronger than the fighter baseline, and even better when you bring in 3PP materials that drop that benchmark entirely. Ultimately the job is to be fair to fundamental fantasy character concepts like the mercenary captain or knight, not to the fighter class as such, which is just a vehicle for representing those.

I see your point. Caution cannot understated, nor can the influence of forthcoming inspiration. My hope is that two decades of design experience gleaned from making martial alternatives to this class finally comes home in a fighter, in core, who does not require a crutch to compete with his closest peers, which have yet to view.

Ninja in the Rye wrote:

[...]

I'm just at a loss as to why this is a level 14 ability at all. It's just so mundane and uninteresting even if the bonus to reflex saves is mechanically worthwhile.

You really have to spend 14 levels training before you realize that it might be a good idea to put the slab of metal on your arm between your face and a ball of fire?

This is something so basic and intuitive that Fighters should be figuring it out at level 1, not level 14.

I guess it's not "I should have done that" but more like "YES! Finally I'm able to keep the shield steady enough against the pressure of the energy to block it!"

Also, it's never something you'll see the starting hero/warrior do in fantasy. It's always a feat by grand heroes.

I disagree, great heroes completely block all of the fire damage from the dragon's breath, quite possibly completely shielding their allies/innocents behind them at the same time.

Starting heroes raise their shield against dragon fire, and block some of it while still eating some damage/char (still possibly enough damage to kill them if the dragon is powerful enough), which is exactly what happens when you pass a reflex save against blasts.

The level 1 fighter should be getting Shield to REF.

The level 8-10 Fighter should be getting Shield = all pass are critical successes, and probably the ability to Shield anyone directly behind them from the blast.

The level 14 Fighter should be taking their shield and slapping the fire back in the dragon's face, or redirecting it at the dragon's minions/away from all of their allies.

Elfteiroh wrote:

Ninja in the Rye wrote:

[...]

I'm just at a loss as to why this is a level 14 ability at all. It's just so mundane and uninteresting even if the bonus to reflex saves is mechanically worthwhile.

You really have to spend 14 levels training before you realize that it might be a good idea to put the slab of metal on your arm between your face and a ball of fire?

This is something so basic and intuitive that Fighters should be figuring it out at level 1, not level 14.

I guess it's not "I should have done that" but more like "YES! Finally I'm able to keep the shield steady enough against the pressure of the energy to block it!"

Also, it's never something you'll see the starting hero/warrior do in fantasy. It's always a feat by grand heroes.

I disagree, great heroes completely block all of the fire damage from the dragon's breath, quite possibly completely shielding their allies/innocents behind them at the same time.

Starting heroes raise their shield against dragon fire, and block some of it while still eating some damage/char (still possibly enough damage to kill them if the dragon is powerful enough), which is exactly what happens when you pass a reflex save against blasts.

Unless you pass with a crit in PF2, which clear the whole damages if I remember well. And a +2 could be enough to get you that DC+10 to crit... IF at that level the shield don't give you a bigger bonus, which I doubt, and we could easily change that to a +5 with just a legendary shield, and that +5 make it so much more likely to get that crit. We just don't know enough all the variables to get a good view of this.

Ninja in the Rye wrote:

[...]

I'm just at a loss as to why this is a level 14 ability at all. It's just so mundane and uninteresting even if the bonus to reflex saves is mechanically worthwhile.

You really have to spend 14 levels training before you realize that it might be a good idea to put the slab of metal on your arm between your face and a ball of fire?

This is something so basic and intuitive that Fighters should be figuring it out at level 1, not level 14.

I guess it's not "I should have done that" but more like "YES! Finally I'm able to keep the shield steady enough against the pressure of the energy to block it!"

Also, it's never something you'll see the starting hero/warrior do in fantasy. It's always a feat by grand heroes.

Because starting heroes/warriors are always incompetent buffoons who don't know which end of a sword goes where? (Or in this case, which area the shield is supposed to go?)

I'd rather an ability like this be available starting out, but upgrade as you level, similar to Power Attack as it stands.

Elfteiroh wrote:

Ninja in the Rye wrote:

[...]

I'm just at a loss as to why this is a level 14 ability at all. It's just so mundane and uninteresting even if the bonus to reflex saves is mechanically worthwhile.

You really have to spend 14 levels training before you realize that it might be a good idea to put the slab of metal on your arm between your face and a ball of fire?

This is something so basic and intuitive that Fighters should be figuring it out at level 1, not level 14.

I guess it's not "I should have done that" but more like "YES! Finally I'm able to keep the shield steady enough against the pressure of the energy to block it!"

Also, it's never something you'll see the starting hero/warrior do in fantasy. It's always a feat by grand heroes.

Because starting heroes/warriors are always incompetent buffoons who don't know which end of a sword goes where? (Or in this case, which area the shield is supposed to go?)

I'd rather an ability like this be available starting out, but upgrade as you level, similar to Power Attack as it stands.

Yeah... I added that part afterward, and I realize it's not really a good comment. But still, 1st levels don't usually encounter dragons either. And what we got was referencing mainly a dragon breath... (ok ok, and fire balls...)

To repeat my edit:

I'm of the opinion that Shield to Reflex should be a low level ability (or baked into Shield proficiency since readying a shield costs an action).

At mid levels the shield focused Fighter should be getting some sort of evasion type ability where all successes are crits.

At high levels the Fighter should be gaining the ability to use a reaction to redirect the blast away from their allies/toward their enemies.

Ninja in the Rye wrote:

[...]

I'm just at a loss as to why this is a level 14 ability at all. It's just so mundane and uninteresting even if the bonus to reflex saves is mechanically worthwhile.

You really have to spend 14 levels training before you realize that it might be a good idea to put the slab of metal on your arm between your face and a ball of fire?

This is something so basic and intuitive that Fighters should be figuring it out at level 1, not level 14.

I guess it's not "I should have done that" but more like "YES! Finally I'm able to keep the shield steady enough against the pressure of the energy to block it!"

Also, it's never something you'll see the starting hero/warrior do in fantasy. It's always a feat by grand heroes.

F+%# you Flamelurker!

*shakes fist from behind Purple Flame shield*

Having read through the blog post and all of the previous comments here's my 2 cents.

Likes:

-How tactical and complex fighting seem to be shaping up. You seem to have more things to do than just close on an enemy, attack and then repeat the process. If one-shotting an opponent is not as easy as it is in PF1, then you'll have to think more about what you do next round instead of taking the same line of action over and over again, which is good.
-Power attack. First of all I believe there's been a lot of overeaction to the new feat, one way or another. Some people claim the feat was nerfed and are happy about it ("it's not an automatic choice anymore"), some other people claim it was nerfed and are unhappy about it ("PA in PF1 does more damage and is more consistent!"). Both positions seems baseless at the moment because we don't know enough to determine how good or bad PA will be in the context of the new game system. That said I like how the mechanic works and what it means. This feat forces you to choose between a single strong and accurate attack or several weaker and less accurate ones, which again, seems to add a layer of tactical determination to the system without being needlessly complex.
-Shield Warden: Again, seems fun and gives the fighter a role a a guard for one of his companions. This is something that could not be easily done in PF1 and it seems like you can assume that role by taking 1 single feat (scaling) in PF2.
-The fighter being focused on weapons. The fighter needs focus and uniqueness in order to be a competitive choice with other character types filling similar roles (i.e. "martials").
-The fighter being capable of assuming several different roles in combat and be effective at them.

Dislikes:

-Generally speaking I was expecting more visually impressive stuff. Regardless of how effective some of these new options will or will not be in the new system you can't blame people for feeling like getting shield bonus to reflex saves against AoE attacks by level 14 to be undewhelming. A lvl 14 character is nearing the end of his career,a fighter gets legendary in the use of his chisen weapon by lvl 13. He's supposed to be doing stuff normal human beings should only dream about, and with a feat like this you are telling people a lvl 14 fighter gets better at avoiding damage from fireballs. Yet fireballs are lvl 3 spells avaiable to wizards since 5th level (yes, I'm assuming these things stay consistent in PF2, admittedly). By presenting this ability, gained at that level, you did not help assuage the many concerns people have with the fighter being "kept back" on the power scale while not being able to do "awesome stuff" like other classes can because the fighter "needs to be mundane" (while it's OK for the Barbarian to smash spells out of existance and for the Paladin to selectively gain weapon improvements, let alone casting, for example). I don't know if stuff like "cut from the air" or "smash from the air" will be in PF2, but if it is, those kind of effects could be more appealing than a better chance to avoid AoE damage if you invest a feat and wield a shield. The cool factor alone is simply way higher and will hype pople. Show us how cool the fighter can be in PF2, please.
-Quick reversal: generally speaking being surrounded by enemies was not the norm in PF1. Things may have changed in PF2 but as described Quick Reversal doesn't seem like something that will come up that often. Feats are things you take and get to keep for at least some time, which means choosing a "trap" feat could be a problem. I know PF2 means to make it easier for people to avoid this problem, yet when designing these feats please remember they need to be consistently useful to be picked. If a feat is good or even great once every 10 game sessions it's probably a wasted feat. And if that feat needs several things to happen that the player cannot set up before it can trigger, then the feat just won't work.

Hopes for:

-Make fighters unique and appealing. One should have an hard time choosing between a martial class or another. All should contribute different useful and "cool" things to the game. In the past the fighter had very little "unique" going for him. What he did, most other martials could do better (with the remarkable exception of archery). Things improved with the release of Weapon Master Handbook, Armor Master Handbook and so on though. Keep that lesson in mind, please.
-Don't shy away from making the fighter cool. You want the fighter to focus on his weapons? Then perhaps when he's high level his attunement with weapon could be such that he can project his slashes at a far away enemy, or deflect a spell with his blade, or apply conditions to opponents depending on his weapon type (a blunt weapon could stagger/stun for example, while a piercing weapon could cause bleed damage, and a slashing weapon could apply the dazzled/dazed/blinded conditions...). If the fighter focuses on his bond with weapons and higher character levels mean a character get to be legendary or superhuman, make it so such abilities wow players and make them WANT to spend the time and effort required to reach higher level play as a fighter.

One thing that I think we could explain a bit better is the fact that every character has a breadth of options open to them when it comes to social and out of combat abilities. Some come from classes whose theme and purpose aligns closely with those parts of the game. For those classes, they usually get some additional choices so that they do not feel that they are lacking in combat ability (sacrificing social for combat, or vice versa).

That said, everyone has access to skills, skill feats, and general feats that allow you to tune your character to perform in the way that you want outside of combat (exploration mode and downtime mode). We will be looking at the modes of play on Friday and I am going to sneak in some information on this topic then to give you a sense of what's out there.

This sounds encouraging. I hope that the fighter class (and all martial classes, actually) see a decent amount of access. The fighter class in Pathfinder (First Edition) feels like it got punished in every area except feat access; fighters were skill poor, had to invest in Intelligence just to have better access to skills (at the expense of other Attributes), and because the real benefit they had was in the amount of feats they had, it felt like they got punished by having to use feats that would otherwise keep them on par with other classes on things that would actually grant them narrative utility. Personally, I'd like to see at least one decent narrative utility feature built into the base fighter chassis.

I worry that Fighters won't really have any armor options. Like when you're level X you have to wear armor Y. Will fighters be forced to wear a specific tier of armor to be effective? For example what about a gladiator favoring peicemail though his level should require him to wear full plate? What about fighters from a tropical culture that don't use armor at all?

LuZeke wrote:

Counterspell being a reaction makes sense, and would actually make counterspelling viable.

Counterspelling in 3.5/PF1e is so situational and overly complicated that I've never once seen someone actually do a counterspell.

Yeah, counterspelling is weird in PF1. As you say, it's incredibly situational and overly complicated. On top of that, it feels really unexciting to do it too. But if you actually do it against an encounter where most of the challenge rests in a caster boss? You can wreck that encounter even without any feats or abilities taken to make counterspelling better, particularly if you have a caster level boost (karma prayer bead on my oracle, I'm looking at you; I accidentally turned one of the most notorious PFS scenarios into a cakewalk readying dispel over and over again). So it was the worst of several worlds: super situational, complicated, felt weak, and was actually too strong when its situation came up but in a boring way. Anyway, I can't wait until you guys can check out PF2's counterspell!

3.5 had a feat that made counterspelling interesting, but even than I only used it with NPCs.

Remember that hyperbole and sarcasm do not help encourage productive conversation. A person saying they like something doesn't mean they necessarily think its perfect and a person being concerned doesn't mean they necessarily will hate it.

It is not okay to insult, fight or be dismissive of people who are nervous or upset about the new edition. Conversely, it's not okay to pick on people who are all in on a new edition. There is room in the hobby, and on our messageboards to for people to like different things or variations on a thing.

Try to be gracious in your interpretations of fellow gamers's words here on the forums and help promote a welcoming and respectful atmosphere.

Remember, we are all here because we share a connection over the enjoyment of roleplaying games. Help us foster a welcoming environment on our forums. Thanks.

I really do love all the 'Having to raise my shield is terrible' talk. One way or another using a shield is active. Are you moving your body to get the shield in the right position to block an attack? You are actively thinking about and using it. Are you moving your arm to put your shield in the way of an attack? You are actively thinking about and using it.

What you're describing there is parrying with the shield, which is what the shield block reaction represents. Raising your shield is supposed to represent the passive defense of having your shield covering most of your body, reducing your enemy's target size, and thus granting you an AC boost.

But you don't need to actively move your shield around in any time consuming manner for it to make it harder for the enemy to hit you, because shields already cover most of your body, meaning your enemy has far fewer places he can aim for to hurt you. By having a shield in-between you and your enemy you reduce your enemy's ability to hit you by decreasing how many bits of you are exposed, which is what an AC boost does.

This is even better exemplified against range attacks. You don't "parry" arrows, your shield being in the way means there's less of you to hit, I.E. you have a higher AC.

The only shield you should really need to parry with constantly would be a buckler, since that's all it can do to protect you.

Kiln Norn wrote:

I really do love all the 'Having to raise my shield is terrible' talk. One way or another using a shield is active. Are you moving your body to get the shield in the right position to block an attack? You are actively thinking about and using it. Are you moving your arm to put your shield in the way of an attack? You are actively thinking about and using it.

What you're describing there is parrying with the shield, which is what the shield block reaction represents. Raising your shield is supposed to represent the passive defense of having your shield covering most of your body, reducing your enemy's target size, and thus granting you an AC boost.

But you don't need to actively move your shield around in any time consuming manner for it to make it harder for the enemy to hit you, because shields already cover most of your body, meaning your enemy has far fewer places he can aim for to hurt you. By having a shield in-between you and your enemy you reduce your enemy's ability to hit you by decreasing how many bits of you are exposed, which is what an AC boost does.

This is even better exemplified against range attacks. You don't "parry" arrows, your shield being in the way means there's less of you to hit, I.E. you have a higher AC.

The only shield you should really need to parry with constantly would be a buckler, since that's all it can do to protect you.

Sure, but then you'd not get the AC Boost when flanked then?

Also it's a game, not a simulator.

+5-7 on a fighter reflex save at level 14 could be doubling your save...that seems pretty good to me...

Maybe fighters don't get it earlier because they are busy getting better offensive stuff earlier...?

Charabdos, The Tidal King wrote:

Kiln Norn wrote:

I really do love all the 'Having to raise my shield is terrible' talk. One way or another using a shield is active. Are you moving your body to get the shield in the right position to block an attack? You are actively thinking about and using it. Are you moving your arm to put your shield in the way of an attack? You are actively thinking about and using it.

What you're describing there is parrying with the shield, which is what the shield block reaction represents. Raising your shield is supposed to represent the passive defense of having your shield covering most of your body, reducing your enemy's target size, and thus granting you an AC boost.

But you don't need to actively move your shield around in any time consuming manner for it to make it harder for the enemy to hit you, because shields already cover most of your body, meaning your enemy has far fewer places he can aim for to hurt you. By having a shield in-between you and your enemy you reduce your enemy's ability to hit you by decreasing how many bits of you are exposed, which is what an AC boost does.

This is even better exemplified against range attacks. You don't "parry" arrows, your shield being in the way means there's less of you to hit, I.E. you have a higher AC.

The only shield you should really need to parry with constantly would be a buckler, since that's all it can do to protect you.

Sure, but then you'd not get the AC Boost when flanked then?

Also it's a game, not a simulator.

Games should let you do things that are impossible in real life, not limit things that are possible in real life.

^ you mean like magic??!! :)

Ninja in the Rye wrote:

[...]

I'm just at a loss as to why this is a level 14 ability at all. It's just so mundane and uninteresting even if the bonus to reflex saves is mechanically worthwhile.

You really have to spend 14 levels training before you realize that it might be a good idea to put the slab of metal on your arm between your face and a ball of fire?

This is something so basic and intuitive that Fighters should be figuring it out at level 1, not level 14.

I guess it's not "I should have done that" but more like "YES! Finally I'm able to keep the shield steady enough against the pressure of the energy to block it!"

Also, it's never something you'll see the starting hero/warrior do in fantasy. It's always a feat by grand heroes.

Not true. It's used by the apprentice in Dragonslayer, its used by Eric the Idiot Cavalier in the D&D cartoon, it's honestly used a lot, because it is indeed very basic: shield goes between you and harm.

Hmm. Wonder if the basic shield reaction can be used to block AoE damage? I would consider that an appropriate low-level version of the effect to get for free.

I'm of the opinion that Shield to Reflex should be a low level ability (or baked into Shield proficiency since readying a shield costs an action).

I agree. Adding shield bonus to Ref saves and Ref DC just as a normal part of how shields work would be a nice consolation for the fact that you now have to spend an action on the thing you used to get automatically. Or at least make it something Fighters get for free early on and other Classes can get with a Feat. At level 14, though? It’s not that it isn’t nice to have, it just feels underwhelming for an ability most campaigns probably won’t go long enough for you to even get.

At mid levels the shield focused Fighter should be getting some sort of evasion type ability where all successes are crits.

This seems very strong. I see what you’re getting at, but it might be a bit much.

At high levels the Fighter should be gaining the ability to use a reaction to redirect the blast away from their allies/toward their enemies.

Actually, I think they already get the ability to do this at 6th level. That Shield Warden Feat lets you reduce incoming damage with your shield from your allies, so it makes sense that to be able to use that on AoE damage.

I just don't want the Paladin to change much. It's my favorite class and the PF Paladin is my favorite version of it.

I wonder if Cleave and Great Cleave still exist and how they are used.

All that talk about sword and board from Mark and Michael gave me the impression that maybe Paizo took some inspiration from Dark Souls games for the Fighter, which I think is great, shields really needed some love.

I wonder if Cleave and Great Cleave still exist and how they are used.

If power attack is a fighter feat, then I would bet real money that cleave is a barbarian feat.

Which, now that I think about it like that, makes me really start to wonder how class feats of the more basic variety work with other classes. It's fairly obvious that something like "improved Rage" would be a barbarian feat, but Power Attack seems like something that a lot of classes would want (regardless of whether they can get it at the same time).

Do feats like that get reprinted a bunch of times in a bunch of different spots? Or would something like that be listed only in the class that gets "first access" to it, with tags listing when everyone else can get it? Would a player need to keep an eye on the feats sections of all the other classes to make sure that they aren't missing out on options that would be beneficial to them? Or is something like Power Attack actually a "general feat" with tags listing all the various levels that classes can take it?

Ninja in the Rye wrote:

At mid levels the shield focused Fighter should be getting some sort of evasion type ability where all successes are crits.

This seems very strong. I see what you’re getting at, but it might be a bit much.

Possibly, but I think that as long as Rogues are getting evasion at low levels, fighters getting a more limited version a mid levels seems about right.

Ninja in the Rye wrote:

At high levels the Fighter should be gaining the ability to use a reaction to redirect the blast away from their allies/toward their enemies.

Actually, I think they already get the ability to do this at 6th level. That Shield Warden Feat lets you reduce incoming damage with your shield from your allies, so it makes sense that to be able to use that on AoE damage.

Shield block is, as far as I've seen, directing a hit from an attack to your shield instead of you. I don't think it would work against an area effect that calls for a reflex save.

They mentioned that you can generally expect to be able to take cross-class feats as long as they don't depend on / build on an actual class ability. So even if Power Attack is a "fighter feat" (and we don't know that, there might be a broader "martial feat" section) and Cleave is a "barbarian feat", you can probably get it with other classes just fine.

The question is when, of course. Can you get Power Attack at the same general level as the Fighter, only by spending your general feat on it instead of a class feat? Or if PA is a martial feat, maybe any martial class can spend a class feat on it at the appropriate level. Or maybe feats have defined common standard level tiers like 1-3, 4-6, etc, and you have to wait until the next tier to get a feat out of group.

Too much unknown data atm.

It wouldn't be wholly surprising if some feats are cross-listed on several "class feats" lists. PF1 did this all the time with spells.

Like if/when they reintroduce the "hybrid classes" this is practically inevitable.

Hmmm... I don't know if anyone's mentioned this yet, but to me (whose native language is not English) "battlefield surveyor" sounds like a really confusing name for an ability, especially one such as this. Considering what it does, wouldn't "vigilance" or "alertness" be a more fitting name, since the ability is more about being alert and seems to work just fine outside the battlefield? Or is something "lost in translation" here?

Hmmm... I don't know if anyone's mentioned this yet, but to me (whose native language is not English) "battlefield surveyor" sounds like a really confusing name for an ability, especially one such as this. Considering what it does, wouldn't "vigilance" or "alertness" be a more fitting name, since the ability is more about being alert and seems to work just fine outside the battlefield? Or is something "lost in translation" here?

Nope, nothing is lost in translation. You've successfully detected a fairly clunky and ineloquent use of the English language. I think both of your suggestions would be better, especially because the word "surveyor" happens to also be the name of a profession. I can't help but read the words "battlefield surveyor" and picture a contractor in a hard hat!

One thing that I think we could explain a bit better is the fact that every character has a breadth of options open to them when it comes to social and out of combat abilities.

You and Mark Seifter appear to be presenting different design philosophies.

Planpanther wrote:

TiwazBlackhand wrote:

Also, Normal Fighter Dude, with Master Grade Athletics (so, lvl 7) has literally been said in a blog preview to be able to leap into the air and smash flying foes to the ground.

You can get master proficiency by level 7....yikes.

This particular aerial combo is an ability available exclusively to fighters, and it is available in the level range of master (pre-legendary), but that doesn't mean you can have the whole thing going at a particular level. You'll at least get some anti-aerial options around the time the wizard is first able to fly.

Why should a jump attack be exclusive to a fighter? A fighter is a guy who focuses on martial training, but it is just training. Everything he can do should be theoretically available to everyone. Anything that is closed off to nonfighters should be due to the amount of of feats and proficiencies required.

Only fighters can jump attack is even more arbitrary and ridiculous than only 4th level fighters can specialize in weapons. If I want a ranger that focuses on aerial foes, I can't take them down without splashing into fighter? Why? It reflects poorly for PF2.

Are we sticking with only rogues can disarm magic traps and only rogues can study a trap to bypass it? (Because there is something special about examining something)

You talk like you have options as to how to implement your concept, but you every so often, in even just this thread, you say something that indicates that you are dedicated to artificially attaching generic functions to classes.

I was hoping that Pathfinder 2 would be a system where I would be able to say that my Holy Crusader is a pure Paladin, a Cleric, a pious Fighter/Sorcerer, a pious Monk/Wizard and through options such as spell and feat choices be fairly effective at fighting evil/undead/fiends, but it is looking like PF2 is going to be even worse in this regard than PF1 and 3.5. Give me a reason to play a class that isn't "we took this generic ability that everyone should be able to do and tied it to one class."

i guess, at the 19th level, the option to be legendary at all martial and simple weapon could be exchanged to another stuff? with the 'choose your own capstone power'?

I'm pretty sure a "jump attack" is not in the category of "social and out of combat abilities"... I mean, unless social and out of combat stuff has changed *a lot* from PF1.

It's good that fighters get combat options that other classes don't, since in PF1 everybody got the combat options a fighter got since those were pretty much "feats" and "numerical bonuses". It's also good that everybody gets a bunch of cool stuff for when they are not fighting.

Why should a jump attack be exclusive to a fighter? A fighter is a guy who focuses on martial training, but it is just training. Everything he can do should be theoretically available to everyone. Anything that is closed off to nonfighters should be due to the amount of of feats and proficiencies required.

Only fighters can jump attack is even more arbitrary and ridiculous than only 4th level fighters can specialize in weapons. If I want a ranger that focuses on aerial foes, I can't take them down without splashing into fighter? Why? It reflects poorly for PF2.

Are we sticking with only rogues can disarm magic traps and only rogues can study a trap to bypass it? (Because there is something special about examining something)

You talk like you have options as to how to implement your concept, but you every so often, in even just this thread, you say something that indicates that you are dedicated to artificially attaching generic functions to classes.

I was hoping that Pathfinder 2 would be a system where I would be able to say that my Holy Crusader is a pure Paladin, a Cleric, a pious Fighter/Sorcerer, a pious Monk/Wizard and through options such as spell and feat choices be fairly effective at fighting evil/undead/fiends, but it is looking like PF2 is going to be even worse in this regard than PF1 and 3.5. Give me a reason to play a class that isn't "we took this generic ability that everyone should be able to do and tied it to one class."

As far as I recall the jump attack thing was listed as something you could do with a skill at a master/legend rank not because you were a fighter. Could be wrong but ya, that was what I recall.

As for the Paladin/Cleric/Fighter-sorc/monk-wizard being a holy crusader... why does this system stop you from doing that? In a home game I played a NE wizard that followed Norgorber to the point of living and abiding by the code that his anti-paladin's are supposed to follow. He upheld the tenets, offered sacrifices, abided by everything an absolutely devout follower might do.

If you want to be good at fighting undead/evil/fiends have your character do some research. Seek out weapons and/or spells that work better against your desired enemy and use them. You might not have smite evil but you were never going to get that without a pally dip anyway.

...

It isn't exclusive to the fighter. It is exclusive to that level of proficiency. The fighter gets that level of proficiency for free by level 7, before anyone else would have been able to pump enough skill ranks into it. So it can be open for everyone, just everyone else might have to wait till level 9/11/13 whatever. Which isn't all that different from many PF1 options.

Folks,

I just want to come out and ask everyone in this heated debate to take a step back and breathe. We are all here to make a better game, and while your passion is commendable, please endeavor to prevent it from governing your actions.

As for the issues at hand, we have been working hard to shift some balances around a bit. Making an attack more accurate over the levels of play, while adding some variability and scaling to damage. This gives us more "levers" for design, and will result in a better play experience. The math of the old system, and the way some feats interacted with it caused serious balance issues over the life of the system. We hope to have corrected them, but only a full playtest will give us any indication as to whether or not we have succeeded. We hope you will hold off on judgement until then.

the fact that casters were far to powerful in comparison to non casters caused issues, PA was the one feat that stayed even vaguely competitive, and with these nerfs to...every single thing a fighter does I am not hopeful PA was a bare minimum of scalability and power, not an egregious outlier, a decent if slightly underpowered base line to show how feats should be built in fact. We have yet to see anything that means an intelligent enemy doesn't just flat ignore martials to deal with the actual threats. Lets compare: add a shield to a save and do some damage...or wipe someones mind and take over, create demiplanes, teleport anywhere in the multiverse, freeze time, or throw parts of a star at people...yea not seeing how any of this makes fighters relevant at all, maybe I'm missing something but it still looks like Wolverine vs Zeus.