Caligastia's page

Will this book include things for the samsaran race? I'm sick of one of my favorite races getting no new material...

One thing I like about this book is how different the koroboruki is from dwarves, including the sanesaram from the jade oath; they really don't feel like variant ( aka how the other Asian-based settings I've seen ) dwarves!! High dex and lower strength make this one quite different. Also, they tend to live in forests, which again seperates them from mountain, hill and underground dwelling dwarves! Is there going to be a koroboruku paragon class?
It also offers a variant kitsune as well as the races which have their own paragon classes from kaidan, map and description of Kaidan and lots of other stuff! You won't regret getting this book!

Ancient might work better as an NPC, as it doesn't seem to offer as much in melee. It's spells seem more suited cast at the beginning of the adventuring day than in the heat of combat. The godaiken just rocks as a character, as does the Mason-like world shaper!!

My book version arrived today! Contained everything the pdf did!! Great purchase!!

Yep; I finally got charged for an order I made in late October! Looking forward to my book arriving!

It's an interesting class; it reminds me of the Celts for some reason. Morgan Le Fay comes to mind. Good class, overall.

I gave a review.

Cool bloodlines. I didn't review this for a while as I don't tend to play sorcerers; if I did, though, I'd be interested in playing one of these.

Do you think the Bounty Hunter, Corsair, and Hunter still hold up now that we have the Slayer?

They hold up. The Hunter from ACG is significantly different from the Hunter in AFoD, Magically emulating animals and having an animal cohort as part.of the class. The Hunter's (AFoD) main competition is the Spell-less Ranger from Kobold press.

Is everyone playing Kirthfinder now? I notice the ol' Fighter thread has gone dead. . . .

There's a product out there called "Rogue Glory" ( costs about $10 for the pdf ) that gives improvements to the Rogue. I've seen Rogue players who give it good reviews!!

Also, look for The Talented Rogue by Super Genius Games for more help.

I'd also like to withdraw the granting of half their skill level to Spellcraft and Knowledge(Arcana) to Wizards. . .

This thread has brought up some quality work for keeping Fighters viable and - heck - *good*. These people should be *PAID*!! ;D

Marthkus wrote:

If you want 4 skill points per level you should play a different class.

The fighter is a specialized class that focus on feats instead of skill, arcane magic, or divine magic.

Here's an idea that may satisfy you, then:

1) Designate skills clearly as either "physical" and "mental." In general, this split already exists and is determined by which ability score the skill is tied to (one of the three physical = automatically a "physical" skill, one of the three mental, automatically a "mental" skill), however Craft skills overlap both categories, as does Perception.

2) Create a Feat that allows Martials to substitute 1 physical ability score of their choice for INT in determining bonus skill points, but only for physical skills (this is thematically similar to a number of feats or abilities that allow people to use X ability score for Y instead of the ability score it is usually tied to).

Naturally they can put their regular 2 skill points/level into any skill (3 if human), either physical or mental.

This is good, except Fighters need the option for a trait designated the Fighter as trained in some other skills, and the ability to raise his skill points from 2 to 4, to keep up with other classes. If the Fighter just wants to worry about combat, he can take a Bonus Combat Feat or perhaps another bonus trait instead of this...

This makes both the people who want skilled Fighters and the combat-only Fighters happy. . .

Well, the class "Anti-Paladin" predates the class name "Blackguard", in any case...for some reason, WoTC changed it. *shrug*

Marthkus wrote:

The same reason rogues are the only ones with 8+int skills per level. Skills are not suppose to be what a fighter needs. Clerics have 2+int per level and no one complains. Clerics fill their role and have a strong core mechanic.

That's because full casting is extremely powerful. Having only 2 skill points sucks for every class (except Wizard and Witches), but when you get an overpowered class feature, that's not much of a problem...

Marthkus wrote:

Those of us against a 4 + int skill/lvl fighter want his core mechanics fixed, not just slapping on more skill points and saves and abilities until its no longer a fighter anymore.

How exactly does getting +2 skill points and better saves makes a Fighter not a Fighter anymore? I'd say it makes them better Fighters. It brings them closer to becoming the elite warrior they're supposed to be.

Aye!! *raises mug* Fighters have to be doing *something* outside of Fighting, and 4+ skill points makes him viable. Of course, his primary concern is *fighting* ( hence the class ), but in those non-combat situations let him hold his own. . .

Ashiel wrote:

IMHO most classes should possess Perception has a class skill just like all classes possess Craft and Profession. Simply because Perception is not a skill but a sense, and is a class skill for all humanoids (and nearly all creatures in fact) and for commoners. People mention ambushes, but Perception is also useful during combat (for dealing with strike-vanishers), to merely perceive at a distance (important when you're archery specialized and you need to see what you're shooting at), etc.

Bluff and Sense Motive seem like good candidates since Bluff is used for a rudimentary combat technique (feinting) and Sense Motive is for anticipating feints.
^ Skill stuff.
=================================================================
Fighters aren't good at fighting. They are good at hitting things with objects, and they are decent at getting hit with objects and being okay with it. However "combat" or "battle" in D&D is a fantastic thing where you routinely are subjected to magical spells, flamethrowers (usually lodged in some critter's mouth), bolts of lightning, noxious gas, a vampire's gaze, the level-draining touch of a wight, have to deal with the read of ogres, the regeneration of trolls, flying manticore with ranged attack tail spikes, succubi that control your stuff, creatures that shroud the battlefield in perpetual darkvision resistant darkness but can see in it and have sneak attack, etc.
Fighters are not good with dealing with most of these things. They have little defense against any of these things. If it doesn't involve beating it with a pointy stick then they are not very useful. They are one of the worst classes in the game at "fighting" because fighting is far, far deeper than To-hit and AC statistics.
Their saving throws are abysmal. In pre-3E, fighters had the best saving throws in the game barring perhaps Paladins (who shared the same progression but got a +2 bonus on saves for being a Paladin). In 3E they took an arrow to the knee and lost their strong defenses

...

Fighters should get high Fortitude saves, and a second high save of the Player's choice, as one Fighter is strong-willed, and another is highly manuveurable...

Porphyrogenitus wrote:

SKR is correct, though: the whole "caster/martial disparity" thing is pushed by people with agendas.

That agenda, of course, is wanting the game to have more balance between classes. Certainly a nefarious enough plot.

Too much focus on a perceived "Balance" is dangerous though. Pathfinder has completely destroyed D&D 4E, a game system that quite concisely exemplifies how boring a perfectly balanced system can be. The "Balance" in Pathfinder isn't measured on a scale of "is everyone exactly as effective in all situations at every level" scale, it's measured over the length and breadth of a 20 level spread between a huge array of challenges. It's also balanced between a wide variety of players and playstyles. Not every player is a min/maxing system master, and sometimes having a class with predominantly static modifiers who perfoms at a consistent level throughout an entire adventuring day/week/month is exactly what a player needs, because it's what they're equipped to handle or in the mood to accomodate. You can have the best built wizard/oracle/cleric in the world and have it still be useless if someone doesn't know how to play it or have the capacity to manage the large pool of resources at their disposal, whereas they may be better suited to a class like the fighter.

I agree that perfect balance can prove boring, but the impression I get from this thread is a lot of people feel that Fighters don't gain enough advantages to make them viable. These are not my words, just that a lot of people say that, and giving underpowered characters some of the perks that the well-powered characters have ( fame, positions of authority, etc. ) would help out these characters. I'm not saying *perfectly* balanced, just certain perks as the character gets higher in level . ..

Fighters being incapable of flight or teleportation doesn't make them unnecessarily flawed, nor does a barbarian's ability to spike higher on damage. The fighter has the ability to consistently deal damage at a higher baseline than most other classes day in and day out, has minimal resource management, and has the ability to explore weapon styles and combinations much earlier than other classes. This often makes them the true "kings of combat" during lower levels of play, and keeps them viable later.
Also, Pathfinder is a team cooperative game. None of these classes exist in a vacuum, and the game is built upon the premise that the various classes will be working together towards their common goals. A...

with my ideal 4

my ideal 5th would be

an inquisitor, bonus points if switch hitter with conversion inquisition. can help with a handful of skills

can engage in melee or ranged combat enough to be a threat

has no need for charisma

can dip a level a trapper ranger for trapfinding to be a good trap dealer if the bard isn't doing so already and the ranger doesn't have it either.

A Ranger is good; She could shoot at a distance arrows/bolts to back up the Fighter, and protect the Wizard. . . .

Also, they have skills much like a Rogue, so there's backup!