Flawed's page

Alllllllll the dips.

Don't believe the hype on dips being bad for full casters. Just make sure the dip is worth it to you. Being behind a spell level sucks, but isn't the end of the world and your characters can still easily be good.

Like a full caster dipping heavens oracle to have uber color sprays. Its whatever you build for and what you want your character to be capable of. An armorless cleric would do well with a monk dip for AC, touch AC, a boost on all saves, IUS which can help qualify for style feats if you want em, flurry of blows and then grab the feat to let you flurry your god's favored weapon, and then depending on the archetype there may be more like a sohei getting to act in a surprise round. A free standard action in a surprise round is a good thing.

4 man rogue party. 3 with two weapon fighting, two weapon feint, feint partner, improved feint partner, combat reflexes, coordinated charge, paired opportunist, improved feint, greater feint, and scout archetype. 1 with bandit archetype, moonlight stalker feint, improved feint, greater feint, paired opportunist, feint partner, improved feint partner.

Rogues win initiative or ambush enemies. 3 people coordinated charge an enemy as a standard action in the surprise round dealing 3 sneak attacks. 4th member feints as a swift, move, standard action providing 3 AoOs to each of the 3 members for 9 more attacks at the highest Attack bonus. 12 attacks in a single surprise round all with sneak attack.

If it's still not dead the three begin full attacking with two weapon feint and providing 2 AoOs each with the lone guy doing three feints per round. Three full attacks using two weapon feint are 3-18 attacks with 6 AoOs from that and then 9 more AoOs from the other feints. Totaling 15 AoOs and 3-18 more regular attacks. 33 attacks from 3 people per round is pretty scary. More so when every attack deals sneak attack and a little more than half are at the highest attack bonuses come with a +4 bonus from paired opportunist. Could easily be 21 attacks that only miss on a 1.

Replace rogue with ninja to even greater effect.

Gotta say, from the perspective of my Buff-focused mage I'm prioritizing throwing Greater Heroism on the TWF guy than the 2-hander guy. Ditto anything else with a flat increase to attack and damage, as the TWF guy pays better dividends for my spell slots when he gets to full attack or equal dividends when making a single attack.

And this is the type of comment that shows the validity of tactics through a team effort and not just something that must stand alone on the boards although a TWF is a viable strategy as far as the board representation goes. A single bard in a party and suddenly you could be getting +4 to hit and damage and haste in a single round. Or the buffer cleric with blessing of fervor (and inspire as well if you're an evangelist). Generally someone plays a buffing type in any party, but obviously not always. IME it's every party and sometimes there's more than one.

Moonlight Stalker Feint is very feat intensive to get. If you want anything else with it it's pretty much a fighter deal which was why I mentioned the fighter doing it. A rogue can pull it off too with the right talents and Inquisitors should be able to do it as well.

Teamwork feats all the way.

Combat Reflexes + Improved Feint Partner = free AoO's if you can bluff.

Take a guy with high movement speed and combat patrol and feint everyone in his threatened rage and they all provoke AoO's from him. The more times you can feint per round the more AoO's you can offer. Improved feint = move/standard action feint. Moonlight Stalker Feint = swift/standard action feint. Twinned feint lets you feint twice as a standard action against two opponents you're adjacent to or as a move action if you have Improved Feint. Combine all 3 and you get to feint 4 times a round vs 2 opponents adjacent to you and one feint vs anyone or just 3 feints vs anyone. Grab Paired Opportunists and all AoO's come with a +4 bonus to hit.

@Necro: Pretty sure you are correct in that you get two AoO's One for the spell and one for the ranged touch attack.

You can get iteratives before you actually get iteratives? That seems odd.

Craziness getting your offhand attack before your main hand.

EDIT:I was only posting armor and the odds and ends because someone was asking how a fighter fared. This way its somewhat with respect to WBL.

EDIT2: Shouldn't the last attack of your ranger be +7?

Fighter TWF could have +10 BAB, +4-5 STR with enough DEX and an item to get the DEX higher as needed, +2 Weapon Training, +1 Weapon Focus, +1 Ioun Stone, +2 weapons, +2 gloves and be pushing +20/+20/+15/+15.(Not sure how your ranger is getting a 5th attack).

Its fine and dandy to throw numbers around, but not being in a viable build doesn't really help entirely.

15 pt buy:

STR 20 (14 base +2 racial + 2 levels +2 belt)
DEX 17[18]* (15 base +2 belt)[16 base +2 belt]*
CON 14[16]* (12 base +2 belt)[14 base +2 belt]*
INT 13[10]*
WIS 14 (12 base +2 headband)
CHA 7

*[drop int if no combat expertise or don't want skills and toss it into dex for more defense or con for more hp]*

Dual wielding +2 weapons throw in armor and a few odds and ends for saves and the competence to hit ioun stone.

+10 BAB, +5 STR, +2 Magic, +2 Weapon Training, +1 Ioun Stone, -2 TWF, -3 Power Attack, +2 Weapon Focus-Greater Weapon Focus,

Feats:
Weapon Focus, Greater Weapon Focus, Two Weapon Fighting, Improved TWF, Double Slice, Two Weapon Feint(A means of reducing high dex monsters AC), Power Attack, Insert 3 more feats.

Attacking at: +17/+17/+12/+12

Armor: Full Plate +3, Ring of Protection +1, Amulet of Nat Armor +1, Jingasa of the Fortunate Soldier, Warrior of the Society Trait +1, +3 Dex

AC: 29

A sword and board TWF requires a few more feats to make the shield viable and removes the TWF penalties for it and reduces your costs of enchanting a second weapon while increasing your AC further. Can easily have AC 35+ going Sword and Board by level 10, but you'd be better suited to invest to increase your offensive skills with feats and let the shield do what it does for defense.

Or be a TWF archetype fighter and reduce TWF penalties to 0 with light weapons or to -1 with one handed weapons. Many attacks at a penalty only incurred by your weapon enchantment is almost on par with a THF bonus to hit.

After dex to AC the THF should have at least 2 if not 3 less AC than the TWF who doesn't use a shield. If they use a shield that's a 3 to 7 AC difference by level 10 which means the THF is taking 15-35% more damage than the TWF.

I already have worked it out. Under the current listing of damage and stat array a THF has 101 DPR and the TWF has 90. It's not entirely accurate as an evaluation, but under the current premise the THF wins. I also don't agree with the number posted after mine.

STR 26 = +8 modifier
Power Attack on +20 BAB = -6 to hit +12 to damage
+4 weapon and +3 weapon

I didn't even include the weapons in my post above, but if you did you're using 1d8+24 and 1d8+23 for damage 28.5 and 27.5 average.

vs.

STR 30 = +10 modifier = +15 damage
Power Attack on +20 BAB = -6 to hit +18 to damage
+5 Weapon

2d6+38 = 45 average

This now puts the THF at 113.86 DPR and the TWF at 109.47. Obviously the THF still would have 4 more feats to apply to get further ahead or try to make up for the defensive difference that the TWF has over the THF.

You can't ignore crits though for a damage comparison. Crits are why the TWF will excel in part. Having 7 attacks a round means you will get more crits. Even in your comparison though its only 82 damage vs 92 damage per round which is so ridiculously minimal. It only matters if a creature has hp between 83-92 and then cycles therein, ie. 166-184, 249-276, etc... If it's lower than that then both kill on a single full attack. If it's higher than the range than they each require a second or more attacks. If it falls in that range then the THF is winning under this evaluation. A full build is required for anything proper, but even with just this the difference in damage isn't something drastic, but having a 17+ dex on the TWF vs. the THF means less damage incoming to the TWF so less threat vs. not killing things in one round.

I do think Solo Tactics is amazing and having a pet makes this easier to pull off as well for sure. I just feel like some of them are completely worth it regardless. Like Broken Wing gambit. As long as your strategy is to take on creatures together then you can get a free AoO every round. The more people with it the more AoO's go around. Same with the Improved Feint Partner. It's almost worth building around combat reflexes and this as you can reliably give a lot of AoO's in a single turn. There's even a feat that lets you feint 2 people as a standard action or as a move if you have Improved Feint. Some set ups will be very feat intensive and require a class like fighter or rogue to pull off which I can understand, but you could have a fighter who uses a swift action feint, move action to feint 2 people, standard action to feint 2 people giving 5 AoO's in a single turn or more depending on who's around each creature. This has applications for many caster classes as well if you can spare the skills to be good at feinting and don't mind using a move action to feint. If you can provide 2 AoO's from two decent damage dealers it's worth spending the move action on it and then dropping a spell to clean up. Escape route is almost a no brainer for any melee focused group if you really wanted to wade into the enemy.

Feint partner can also go well with Combat Patrol if the person has enough movement and a reach weapon or natural reach(Monk with a long spear and the Aberrant Eldritch Heritage could hit a 35 foot radius with 90 feet of movement to get around stabbing people that get feinted. Potentially hand out AoO's and move with the guy on patrol as he pushes people around.

So the more I read teamwork feats the more I laugh maniacally at their power. Obviously it seems hard to justify in some builds, but in others it seems too much to not try it out.

Flawed wrote:

Of course there's a good chance of only standard action attacks. There's also a good chance of making a pounce build as a TWF or a Reach + Lunge + Whirlwind attack THF build or however you want to compare like things.

No one is arguing THF does more damage on a standard action attack. The argument is that a TWF will do more damage than a THF on a full attack.

None of this ever changes the other benefits that come with having a higher dex either.

Yes getting pounce is what, 10 levels of barbarian? So when are you taking the fighter levels to get the weapon specialization and other fighter stuff?

11th level mobile fighters get a lesser pounce as you can't charge and then at capstone better than pounce for full attacking as a standard action. 13th level viking fighters get pounce if they take the beast totem route. Unarmed fighters can take Pummeling Charge at level 12, or a level dip of MoMS and get it at level 2. All of them can take fighter feats.

Of course there's a good chance of only standard action attacks. There's also a good chance of making a pounce build as a TWF or a Reach + Lunge + Whirlwind attack THF build or however you want to compare like things.

No one is arguing THF does more damage on a standard action attack. The argument is that a TWF will do more damage than a THF on a full attack.

None of this ever changes the other benefits that come with having a higher dex either.

But that's when all the reality bending things start to happen for everyone else. You can't just say you don't care about the last 10 levels because the first 10 are all that matter. By level 11 a TWF will have 6 attacks a round vs the 3 from the THF which gives you more chances to hit and more chances for criticals.

You also have to take into account that all bonuses are double for the TWF vs the THF as well. Like mentioned on a few feats above there's also Improved Critical and any time you receive any form of buff like a 4000gp ioun stone that bonus means more to a TWF than a THF mechanically. If ever a character makes it off the boards and into a real game there's actually a party that usually has a buffer of some sort in it. AKA the arm in the internet theory sphere. Eventually the minor to hit difference doesn't equate to enough to minimize the damage of the TWF.

You still have to take into account the bonuses you get to defense vs. the THF. Sword and board THF easily hits level+20 AC and gains even more through progression. It doesn't matter if you require one extra round if you know you'll be safe behind your defenses where the THF has to kill it in a round or has a more likely chance of being hit. The same is said of the TWF dual wielding weapons who will have a higher touch and regular AC, reflex saves, initiative, and skill utility and only lower damage until they have the required feats to build. Evading more attacks adds to the better survival.

Level 6 is already going to be 4 attacks vs 2 attacks with 1xSTR to all attacks vs 1.5. It's the same the whole way really.

BAB1-5 : 2 attacks X 1xSTR = 2xSTR vs 1 attack X 1.5xSTR = 1.5xSTR
BAB6-10 : 4 attacks X 1xSTR = 4xSTR vs 2 attacks X 1.5xSTR = 3xSTR
BAB11-15: 6 attacks X 1xSTR = 6xSTR vs 3 attacks X 1.5xSTR = 4.5xSTR
BAB16+ : 7 attacks X 1xSTR = 7xSTR vs 4 attacks X 1.5xSTR = 6xSTR

Trogdar wrote:

Flawed wrote:

stuff

So I'm not sure what I am supposed to get out of that large block of text. It looks like your agreeing with me. You need to invest, at the very least, in items that are some of the most expensive in the game twice in some cases(weapons) and right out the gate you are suffering from, at a glance from your posted numbers, a fifteen percent to hit deficit at most levels. What is the benefit again?

Weapon specialization and Weapon training get factored in twice? Twice the chance of a critical hit? (for that reason I'd seriously consider dual wielding with twin light picks, then throwing on acidic burst ASAP and picking up improved critical the moment it becomes available. Sheer number of attacks would make critting more likely, and those crits are going to HURT!)

Find a team mate that uses butterfly sting who can give you auto crits on your next hit.

@Trogdar: I wasn't agreeing or disagreeing with anyone really. Just a statement of the values you get based on those numbers. A +5 weapon is 50,000gp + masterwork weapon. A +4 and +3 weapon are 32,000gp and 18,000 gp respectively and sum 50,000 gp where the only additional cost is a second masterwork weapon so no more than 500gp or so. They would have all other resources the same minus the feats required for the TWF line. More attacks = more hits = more crits = higher DPR is how the DPR calculation ends up for TWF builds its' just their entire DPR is riding on a full attack where the THF still does more damage on a single standard action attack. And generally its a slightly lower damage until you get enough attacks and bonuses with slightly higher defenses that THF. Sword and Board TWF's can mitigate the penalties and costs of TWF while maintaining level+20 AC most of the time or better as you progress, but lose damage over regular TWF's.

For the main TWF feats (TWF, ITWF, Double Slice) you only require having an 11 dex with a +6 belt, 13 dex with a +4 belt, or 15 wtih a +2 belt to qualify for all the feats you need to be effective. So you should be able to pull this off by spending 3-7 build points and the right item which should also be available by level 6 should you have the BAB and base dex.

The cost for the enchantments on weapons for TWF vs. THF means the THF has a +3 weapon where the TWF has two +2 weapons. A THF with a +5 weapon is a TWF with a +4 and a +3. Or maybe the THF has enough dex to be useful with a bow and has a +4 sword and +3 bow where the TWF has a +4 and +3 sword and no bow or has a weaker bow to go along with their dex due to TWF chain.

Even with the variation in the enhancements, of which is the main cost difference of a TWF to THF build, you can see the results aren't that drastic and really only means the TWF is only slightly behind on enchanting his main weapon while maintaining a good enchantment to be effecting with his offhand weapon.

The only other difference in damage will now be 1.5 strength, the 1.5 power attack per swing, the damage dice of the weapon, and possibly any damage/hit bonus you got from the 3 or 4 feats the TWF had to use to make their build viable. The level 20 THF fighter with 30 str swings his greatsword for 2d6+33 and attacks 4 times a round. The level 20 TWF fighter with 26 str swings his dual longswords for 1d8+20 and attacks 7 times a round.

7 x 1d8+20 = 7d8+140 = 171.5 average

4 x 2d6+33 = 8d6+132 = 160 average

(Obviously not a real DPR calculation as its missing the entire build for to hit/damage)

So depending on the to hit of the character and the CR of the creatures you're fighting a TWF could very well out damage a THF.

Okay a few things;

In this thread we're trying to come up with ways for a fighter to be useful out of combat without moving out of the realm of being a fighter right? From what I gather this means he should be more charismatic, tactical or cunning. So this means that things that are combat oriented are off the table because the fighter can do enough damage and that's not the topic at hand right? Also I feel like I have enough 3pp that handle combat options well enough. I'm also assuming that we are not talking about Paizo and it's decisions because they know how much we complain about these things so they have reasons for not doing anything about it whether we agree with their reasons or not.

Now a fighter does not get as much flak as a cavalier, so my next question is why? From a caster v martial argument it suffers the same problem of not having spells and a bad will save. I'd argue that it has actual abilities as opposed to numerical bonuses that aren't as relevant. Also 4+int skills per level and some 'knightly' class skills like diplomacy helps.

So another question; do we want to sacrifice class features or add class features on top of the fighter?

Define parameters as to what you think the fighter should be able to accomplish that it can't right now and work towards those ends. Just be aware of what it can accomplish already.

Also be aware of archetypes that will do exactly what you want the base fighter to do like more skill points(Lore warden, Tactician), social class skills(Tactician), more roguish skills (CAD), ability to buff others(Tactician, Shielded Fighter), debuff(CAD, Brawler), be a knowledge guy(Lore Warden), Have good DR(Armor Master). If it's more ties to the magical world there's traits/feats/races that grant SLA's to qualify as a magical crafter. An option to gain a familiar which using another feat is just as powerful as any other full casters and can allow you to break action economy using wands. The viking archetype can get rage powers and as such can gain pounce or wings or whatever you want from rage and still has tons of feats as well. Tower Shield Specialist can use a tower shield with no attack penalty and with the right trait get the ACP down to 0. The new mutation warrior and martial master and great options. Two Weapon Warriors can reduce the penalties to TWF to 0 with a light weapon in the offhand or -1 with two one handed weapons.

A fighter never gets to do it all, but they do perform well within their niche. Seems more like people just want a bigger niche.

Flawed, you obviously do not understand what 'affect the narrative' means, because skill points have little to nothing to do with it at all.

But I'll allow Kirth to define it, since he was the person who first recognized the problem for what it was, and put a name to it.

Suffice it to say, out of combat utility and affecting the narrative are very different things, and you seem to have confused them totally. Given the nature of your arguments, I'm not surprised. You seem to seize on tiny little irrelevant points and explode them into major non-applicable arguments.

Kirth, if you might chime in on what 'affecting the narrative' actually entails. Oh, and restrict to 'class abilities', please, because Flawed doesn't understand the Stormwind Fallacy, either.

==Aelryinth

The Stormwind Fallacy, aka the Role player vs Rollplayer Fallacy Just because one optimizes his characters mechanically does not mean that they cannot also role play, and vice versa.

Corollary: Doing one in a game does not preclude, nor infringe upon, the ability to do the other in the same game.

Generalization 1: One is not automatically a worse role player if he optimizes, and vice versa. Generalization 2: A non-optimized character is not automatically role played better than an optimized one, and vice versa.

Proof: These two elements rely on different aspects of a player's gameplay. Optimization factors in to how well one understands the rules and handles synergies to produce a very effective end result. Roleplaying deals with how well a player can act in character and behave as if he was someone else. A person can act while understanding the rules, and can build something powerful while still handling an effective character. There is nothing in the game -- mechanical or otherwise -- restricting one if you participate in the other.

Claiming that an optimizer cannot roleplay (or is participating in a playstyle that isn't supportive of roleplaying) because he is an optimizer, or vice versa, is committing the Stormwind Fallacy.

By playing D&D, you opt in to an agreement of sorts -- the rules describe the world you live in, including yourself. To get the most out of those rules, in the same way you would get the most out of yourself, you must optimize in some respect (and don't look at me funny; you do it already, you just don't like to admit it. You don't need multiclassing or splatbooks to optimize). However, because it is a role-playing game, you also agree to play a role. This is dependent completely on you, and is independent of the rules.

Conclusion: D&D, like it or not, has elements of both optimization AND roleplay in it. Any game that involves rules has optimization, and any role-playing game has roleplay. These are inherent to the game.

They go hand-in-hand in this sort of game. Deal with it. And in the name of all that is good and holy, stop committing the Stormwind Fallacy in the meantime.

So what exactly am I missing about the fallacy you've continually misquoted and misused. I haven't argued that a player cannot optimize and role play.

I also understand exactly what affecting narrative means. Its ones ability to affect a story. Guess what role playing is. Being a fighter doesn't limit this ability. Uses his diplomacy to persuade the King to grant access to the treasury to help rid his realm of monsters? Fighters can do this. Bluff's his way into the enemy base? He can do that one too. Any social skill can affect the story. Any class can take the appropriate feats, traits, skills, stats, race to ensure they can affect the story. Just because he doesn't get fly as a class feature(there's feats that can do it), he can't cast teleport(a fighter could grab craft wondrous items if they have a race with an SLA or take a feat/trait to get one), He gets no spells(like many other martial classes), can't cast invisible(Ring, feats), no innate healing(feats, wands, items, proper defenses), and the list will obviously go on.

It seems more like you're using the fallacy. A fighter can't affect narrative, i.e. role play, because you think he's a sub optimal choice based on your experience of building fighters?

Thanks for all the continued hostility though. This is the 3rd or 4th consecutive post you've now had to resort to personal insults. I'm glad you think you're entitled to discriminate against other posters because you can't win an internet argument.

Bob, first of all, you're doing the classic redirect...all three of them, in fact.

Traits, FC bonus AND stats? Come on, those have nothing to do with class features. Make the same changes to the barbarian and the barb comes out ahead.

People make these considerations because you play a character and not a class. Characters have traits, stats, FC bonus, skills, relationships with NPCs and ability to affect narrative. Claiming a class is broken after a million threads of fighter hate where people post viable functioning builds is arguing under a false pretense. If you want to truly start arguing the value of a class in isolation then you need to start doing so yourself. If stats aren't a viable solution then you have to also remove feats gained by character advancement which have no relationship to class. Seems like not many classes ever get a single feat including barbarians. And fighters even have an archetype where they get feats AND rage powers including the precious beast totem line with pounce and natural armor. Or simply be a mobile fighter and get a full attack action after a single move that increases to a full attack action as a standard action.

This thread is to homebrew a class feature for fighters to have OoC utility. I'm still waiting on a definition of OoC utility that isn't solved by 6-8 skills a level. What's the parameters that must be met to be considered a participant OoC?

Maybe I should start some homebrew threads on why wizards should have all spells and can cast them unlimited times per day with zero restrictions all as free actions because wizards are broken underpowered.

I've seen far too many threads trying to help the fighter while ignoring his features or claiming it's broken while presenting a poorly built character or no proof at all. This has been present on these boards for years.

Lol personal insults. The sign of a solid argument.

I'm baiting? No, I'd just like a civil conversation where people attempt evaluation with the proper methods and not just throw around opinion because you NEED the highest DPR to be considered effective and that they don't have to validate any opinion because they're right or because they think it's the hive mind of the boards that validates something.

So far I've said arcane casters should be heavily restricted and casting spells requires resources a fighter didn't spend. Sooooooooo what's your point?

I know the purpose of a hombrew threads, but unless a valid purpose can be presented whats the point of home brewing? You need a reason to make a change. None have been presented in this thread that can't be overcome through standard WBL, your characters stat array, a class feature, or an archetype.

Choosing to insult and become hostile with someone because they have a different opinion than you isn't a valid approach. I've made no personal insults here. To choose to take offense is your own inference to my words. Some posted their opinion on why fighters are bad and I provided a few stat arrays in this thread and full builds elsewhere that prove a fighter can fly, have good saving throws, many skills, good defenses, and still perform in combat.

I don't get how you can claim that I should make this other bread when you choose to not use a class feature of a class. How are barbarians that can't rage, paladins that can't smite, rangers that can't use spells. If you want to limit a class good for you. If you want to limit a class and then complain that the class is broken and needs a fix then the problem isn't with the class. It's your expectations.

Aaaaaaaaaaand right back to the personal insults again. That's an entire wall of ranting hate. Good for you man. Who cares about the board rules.

Unless you can direct me to the feats animal companion and track I'm not quite sure how you feel your hostility is warranted or backed by a shred of evidence. Nitpicking numbers? From the guy nitpicking numbers... In a game based around.... Numbers?

You don't seem to know what the stormwind fallacy is about. Please take the time to read it instead of trying to insult me in regards to it when no mention of role playing and optimization have been mentioned in my statements.

And yet the fighter still gets more dex to AC while wearing armor than any other class. What aren't you understanding here about what the fighters class feature is?

Lol. A fighter and a rogue standing around in a party. It's a thread about fighters. Why isn't there a fighter standing around.

I've never said "Suck it up, Fighters suck, assign your stats so they suck at their main job, beg the GM for high point buy, and don't play the game until 15th level when you can have this massive int so you can have fewer skill points then the Barb does, still, and be nowhere as good in a fight." So how about not wasting everyone's time with your diatribe and provide some meaningful numbers to validate your claims.

I've made posts showing how most of the claims of how bad a fighter is aren't true and come with bias because people choose to ignore the class features and to minimize the effects of their features because they enhance features present in all classes. And then you have the audacity to claim the class is useless because it's not as good as other classes?

Hypocrite.

Who are you to claim this all encompassing power to decree a class is obsolete when you fail to utilize what the class does and then formulate more unfounded opinions on how the class will now be terrible in combat because of this.

What are your domains and tactics?

No thoughts of going master of many styles and grab a style feat or Sohei and get to act in surprise rounds and you can take riding feats without prerequisite if you happen to have the animal or saurian domains. A dip is fine as long as you don't mind being behind a spell level, but I'd try to get a little more out of my dip than wisdom to AC to make it worth it.

I'm asking why others are saying there's a problem with the fighter when a solution has been provided to most of everyone's complaints. The only complaint that ever surfaces is that "It's not that the fighter is a class that can contribute to a party or you can have fun playing them or if you build it that way then ya it works, but now it can't do something else that had no bearing on the initial question and what it can do it just can't do it as good as everyone else. I don't care about armor training though because I'm only about DPR and utilizing all of your class abilities just isn't worth it and getting 11 bonus feats is just meh because everyone including the fighter also gets 10 regular feats or other martials get at most half as many bonus feats or that every rage power ever created is better than any feat and feats are just feats and weapon training is garbage because it only provides a maximum bonus to a single weapon and I need to use all the weapons so that one less than max you get on your next favorite weapon is just no good because now you can only use a primary weapon really well and a secondary weapon almost as well and I get to just cast this spell an unlimited number of times a day to make every enemy my favored enemy. And bravery is garbage because when do fear effects ever affect you or those useless trade outs from archetypes like Unbreakable that gives you a scaling bonus vs mind affecting effects, but when are fighters ever considered dominate bait."

Its all nonsense. If you ignore a classes features why do you think you get to say a class isn't good and come up with an alternative? Do you ignore spells on a caster or maybe just every second spell level? There has to be reasonable issues with a class that can't be overcome by items with standard WBL, stat array, class features you've decided not to use, or several archetypes.

I'm all for fighters getting a boost in skills or a reinvention. I've already said as much in this thread. I think fighters are fairly boring due to the nature of their design in that you are limited to being good at what your specific skill set will be and tactics through feats. You are more than a one dimensional character though because you will have enough feats to choose from to add another dimension at least. But fighters ARE good at what they do and will perform very well in many different circumstances including many of the complained about ones in this thread. Arguing that items or a race are not a solution is illogical as you play a character and not a class.

This thread is asking for class features to help a fighter participate outside of combat. What more OoC participation do you need than having 6-8 skills per level as listed above in the thread just by class and stats alone? Define OoC participation.

r/4's have the same number of feats as f/4's

Fighter bonus feats: 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20

Ranger bonus feats: 2, 3, 6, 10, 14, 18

What am I missing? A f/4 has more feats than a r/4 and they always do and continue to gain more.

Do you always turn to insults and personal attacks when proven wrong and move the goal posts again and again because you don't like being wrong on the interwebs?

Stormwind Fallacy

Lol. Stormwind Fallacy. It's the cry of the boards. Where did I say you can't optimize if you want to role play or vice versa. I said a fighter doesn't need a class feature to talk to people and develop relationships with NPCs to accomplish things. Sure, this is true of all classes so what's your point. Spells are NOT the only means of affecting narrative. The only fallacy is the argument that spells win all the time.

a buff pretty much every other class can get.

What other classes get it? Where's the validation of your erroneous claims. Everyone gets a dex bonus while in armor. A fighter gets an even bigger one wearing the exact same armor. Not the same thing at all. Other classes don't get this. Stop trying to minimize what a class can do by making false claims.

And for practical purposes, a combat line of feats for the archer is exactly the same as a weapon spec line for the fighter. Except they are not tied to one weapon, and the fighter is (or at the best, one group of weapons). It's the fighter who is not only limited to one fighting style, but one weapon within that style, if they wish to stay relevant.

And yet there's archetypes that trade out weapon training entirely. Sounds legit.

It's because with spell resources, you don't need the rogue, and you don't need the fighter

And by using spell resources to mitigate tasks like climbing, unlocking doors, bypassing any scenario you've now reduced your offensive utility for the day. Or just your ability to affect as many scenario's in a day. That's the balance of a caster class. You don't get to do everything you get to do what you plan for or wait to re-plan if you left slots open which also reduces your ability to have options during any other scenario. Not getting to cast that second fireball because you memorized fly or left a spell slot open in case you needed some other 3rd level utility spell isn't useful if a horde of enemies are closing on you.

But you're also assuming the wizard is an idiot, as well, and doesn't have any defenses.

And you continually assume everyone but the wizard is stupid and no one has any means of dealing with a wizard and the wizard always has every buff possible up. This is always the case of argument on these boards. I'd love to play in your campaigns where no one understands how to deal with magic users.

We all already know the problem, can we drum up some solutions?

Fighter being able to kill stuff is easily solved but what about affecting things without murder?

And solutions have been presented within the current restrictions of the fighter class only to be dismissed because people don't want the fighter to work in its current incarnation. People don't agree about the problems with the fighter or there wouldn't be any protestation.

Some said a fighter lacks skills and a method was provided to have skills and another poster added on to show even more skills. People have said they lack in the save department and several stat arrays have been provided to show a fighter can have good saving throws despite having 2 bad saves. They both affected the fighters ability to perform in combat fairly minimally, but as the fighter wasn't the top dog in the DPR Olympics now its not viable? Fighters aren't meant to be the best at damage. Fighters are a balanced martial combatant. They can perform in a variety of combat styles while wearing whatever armor they want. Their defenses are just as important as their offenses and their class features put onus on stat investment to utilize them. This isn't the case for most other martials. A barbarian has no class feature that says it does better if a stat is higher. He gets rage that boosts his strength. So technically a barbarian could choose a lower strength to boost his con and use more rounds in rage to make up for the lowered strength. Or he maxes his strength and does insane damage as a barb is meant to do while finding other means of beefing up their defenses like beast totem.

Aelryinth wrote:

The areas fighters are weak in:

- Ability to influence events ocurring more than a bowshot away.

- Exploration and intelligence gathering
- Narrative-altering abilities

But who else isn't lacking narrative power like you say next to full casters. Not all magic gives you grandiose narrative power. Narrative power can come from role playing and making bonds with NPCs that will provide future benefits. Influencing people that doesn't have to always do with a diplomacy check if you make friends with someone.

A Wizard and a Cleric are Tier 1 classes.

A Fighter is a Tier 6 class.

I've never seen someone try to debate the validity of the Fighter vs. Wizard and Cleric Tier structure. It's common knowledge.

Low Int nitwits and players relying on the power roll are extreme examples. What is the average example: A Wizard flying round blasting enemies with his Wand of Fire Balls with 50 charges while the fighter character is surrounded by enemies on the ground getting the **** beaten out of him.

Or clock watching while the Wizard and Cleric are crafting magical items.

If you built your fighters with some defensive prowess to go along with their offensive prowess using his built in class features maybe they wouldn't be getting beat up so badly on the ground and would be the rock in the storm.

That wizard flying around also makes a great pin cushion by identifying himself as a threat and singling himself out of combat so anyone with a bow can attack without the need of precise shot.

What's so bad about fighters vs. wizards. Wizards suck. I couldn't even cast spells because I dumped my intelligence on my wizard. Stupid wizards. Not even capable of using their own class features. Reminds me of barbarians who can't do damage well because they have no strength.

the same number of feats.

Rangers get the same number of feats as a fighter? Must have missed that part in the ranger entry. 5 bonus combat feats + endurance does not equal 11 bonus combat feats regardless of rangers being able to ignore prerequisites. Rangers are bound to a single combat style with their feats. A fighter has no such restriction.

A Cleric (or Paladin) can already do this, only more effectively. A Detect Evil spell informs the player of HD, Class level and Caster Level more precisely and can penetrate barriers and can recognize if higher level enemies recently visited an area.

The fighter ability works vs. anyone. Detect evil/chaos/good/ law works vs. the specific description only. Evil/chaos/good/law.

Casting spells requires resources the fighter didn't spend. This reduces the overall effectiveness of a class to have to spend their resources on things like this when their spells provide better effect elsewhere. This is the problem with arguing spells win. Sure they can, but it's better to have used a spell for something more useful and let the fighter use his mundane trick. Much like the rogue picking a lock. Why waste a second level spell slot on knock if the rogue can do it and you can use that second level spell to use a scorching ray/mirror image/blur/anything more useful than knock.

Lol. Don't tell me how to play my game, but I'm going to tell you how to play yours. Oh the hypocrisy.

I'm not a min maxer or an optimizer. I just have the capacity to read a class and understand the mechanics that govern it without trying to force it to be something it isn't and then join the band wagon of people that perpetuate these threads.

You really gotta stop trying to peddle this self entitlement nonsense on me. I have no sense of entitlement. I have a grasp of mechanics that seems to be drastically lacking from those that think a fighter shouldn't be investing in dex more than a barbarian would.

@Flawed,

A barbarian with a Str 10/Dex 10/Con 10 is an extreme example.

Any barbarian build I design and play is worth me playing. You have no right to say otherwise. Self entitlement is toxic, "you can't do this and you can't do that." Different players have different agendas, maybe they want to break the norm and play a charismatic barbarian.

Not every post on this forum needs to be met with harsh criticism.

Politely offering suggestions and the discussion of them is vastly different to telling people what to think or offering absolute solutions.

Generally speaking, the Barbarian class has diverse variations, through archetypes (wearing heavy armour, expert light cavalry) and Gish classes (bloodrager and Skald), which grants them spell-casting ability.

Plus a 20+ history starting in D&D (1e): Unearthed Arcana ending up in Pathfinder CRB.

The spirit of D&D and Pathfinder is using your imagination and getting lost in imaginary worlds. Not extreme min-maxing and its draconian enforcement.

Nothing extreme at all. It's taking a class that's intended to be played as a martial combatant and stating it to be not its main function. This is the point around most fighter builds posted anywhere on these boards. The optimizers became vocal enough to drown out any rational thought of accepting a class with its features and dumping a feature to provide for maximum damage output. If that's the way you choose to play all the power too you. If that's the way you want to play and then complain a class can't keep up then prepare to be met with more comments like these.

I don't need to say otherwise. Your group will say otherwise when you tell them you want to play a class and show up with something that doesn't meet expectations. It's not a game about just you having fun remember and trying some concept that you think is fun could easily ruin someone else's. It's not fun to play a cleric who has to forgo their fun to play heal bot because the barbarian dumped his dex to max his strength. Or the fighter decided to not invest in his class features for the same reason.

This is also why many people say a fighter can do these things all day. A well built fighter will have the AC to evade hits, CMD to defend vs. maneuvers, decent saves to not be dominate bait, enough hit points for staying power and enough offense to get the job done.

All manageable in its current framework.

Fighters come with variety with archetypes as well. Lore wardens can utilize combat maneuvers with ease and come with a boost to skills. Mutation warriors can get mutagens for boosts equivalent to a barbarians rage without most of the negatives. They can also take wings at level 7 for a fly speed. Martial Master gets to trade feats around and grab ones they don't have mid combat. Tactician gains more skills again along with being able to use bonus feats for skill focus and a means of buffing your allies through teamwork feats or mass aid another. A Viking gains rage and rage powers along with a built in debuff as a swift action eventually. They unfortunately lose armor and weapon training, but gain a scaling bonus to your shield bonus granting a +4 by the end. Unbreakable fighters get a scaling bonus to will saves vs mind control in place of bravery, stalwart further reducing the penalties from spells even on a save, gain a means of re-rolling more saves if you need to, more bonus feats (24 feats total), and eventually immunity to mind control which really reduces the overall need to invest in wisdom.

Fighters have plenty of versatility. The only problem is it's mundane versatility and in a game full of magic people aren't happy if you play a class and don't get to play with magic.

And having a monster dex bonus to AC permitted is absolutely useless unless a) you are a Dex-centered fighter and b) you actually have the monster dex.

Not having a monster dex on your fighter is doing the class a disservice. Complaining that a class isn't performing because you ignore a class feature and invest elsewhere is no ones fault but your own.

A suit of Mithral Celestial Plate provides for any class of heavy armor character up to a dex of 25. Exactly why does the average fighter need his class ability if +6 enhancement and +5 Inherent from a starting 13 Dex delivers him to that point?

Because his class abilities are what sets him apart from the other classes? Can't be that hard of a concept to understand that investing in what a class has for features amplifies the features. Not using a feature is crippling your class. This armor also doesn't satisfy the fighter that can get +4 dex more than other classes while wearing equivalent armor.

You also managed to break into optional rules and splat books to try and prove some point. Celestial Plate is not core where Celestial Armor is. Making celestial armor into Mithral requires optional rules from ultimate campaign.

More to the point, starting with a 14 Dex, Celestial Plate will satisfy any martial character until level 17 without using Mithral, assuming no inherents before then.

Won't satisfy a properly built fighter. Let me help you out a little since you like using +5 books that cost almost 1/6th of your total wealth as a level 20.

You get your one skill per level from class, one from favored bonus and if you skip the alt bonus again you get another skill there for the meager 3 per level and would still max dex to AC in Mithral full plate at +7.

So even if the barbarian chooses Mithral breastplate to max dex he is 3 AC from armor behind and 2 on dex. 5 AC that can be covered by beast totem if that's your choice of totem or rage powers.

the fighter has always been the best martial leader of the classes. The experienced soldier and leader of militaries was always the fighter.

The fighter sucks at this role.

The fighter, when placed next to other martial classes in all of the five standard roles of Champion, Guardian, Sentry, Hunter and Soldier, is worse then any other class.

Do you realize the Fighter is the only martial class that doesn't get a damage bonus at level 1?

The fighter has no quasi or full magical ability to fall back on. Yet we are supposed to believe that a man with no magic is less skilled then someone who can wiggle his fingers and solve a problem without having to work hard, or some other brute from a savage background who just goes ape(^&*^ to solve his problems?

The Fighter is not on a par with the other martial classes, and he should be.

======
ANd Flawed, moving the goal posts is another sure sign of a failed argument.

Come on, bringing in the cleric to a discussion of movement speeds? A spellcaster that can whip up spells to solve the problem as they like? All of my examples used the other martial classes because that what I was comparing the fighter with. We don't go near casters.

And having a monster dex bonus to AC permitted is absolutely useless unless a) you are a Dex-centered fighter and b) you actually have the monster dex.

A suit of Mithral Celestial Plate provides for any class of heavy armor character up to a dex of 25. Exactly why does the average fighter need his class ability if +6 enhancement and +5 Inherent from a starting 13 Dex delivers him to that point?

More to the point, starting with a 14 Dex, Celestial Plate will satisfy any martial character until level 17 without using Mithral, assuming no inherents before then.
============================

and Wasted, saying 'Fighters weren't designed with social skills, so suck it up' is not an argument, when every other martial class gets some form of social power, be it from being able to buff those around them or flat out...

You're comparing a fighter to a guy "who can wiggle his fingers and solve a problem without having to work hard" and then you have the gall to turn around and tell me I'm moving goal posts? You're a hypocrite. My comparison was to the interaction of armor in all classes and how the fighter class feature interacts to allow faster movement in armor.

Don't waste my time with your comments of goal posts when you guys have done this non stop all thread.

Half of the arguments presented are circumstantial at best. A barbarian gets pounce? Sure if they take three rage powers to get there. You gained two useless claw attacks and a nice bonus to natural armor. Good job on making up the difference in AC the fighters dex bonus in armor was giving him from his class feature. You can also no longer get wings through the dragon totem, gain a 20% miss chance from spirit totem, or get any bonus from any other totem.

A fighter can also get pounce with unarmed strikes should they choose pummeling charge much like everyone. A fighter also doesn't care about not getting a full attack with his melee weapon because he's smart enough to carry a bow and has enough feats to pull off a switch hitter better than the barb and still has the feats to shore up his weaknesses. Weird what a character can actually do with 21 feats compared to the 10 of most other classes.

After all, there is not a wrong way or a right way, as it can be very subjective.

Of course there is though. You don't build a barbarian with 10 str/dex/con to boost its int/wis/Cha. Every class has an appropriate build design to enhance their class features. Sure deviation in designs can be effective or used to fit a concept, but that doesn't mean you're building appropriate to the class you're playing. If you decide to build a character with no synergy of stats and class features you don't have any right to claim a class isnt worth playing. Your version of the class isn't worth playing and that's where it ends.

Flawed wrote:

How many skills do you need to be good in to have the OoC utility you're asking for? Having combat expertise means you're getting at least 3 per level. Toss in your favored class bonus as a skill for 4 per level and you're at as many as a barb gets. Perception, Sense Motive, Diplomacy, Linguistics. Its not like you need the other skills to be useful in combat. Grab additional traits and make em all class skills if you can spare a trait to not grab a +1 will save and the feat. Find the appropriate item to get a +5 modifier and suddenly you have 4 skills all with out of combat purpose with a +18-20 Modifier. DC 30 Diplomacy, Perception, Sense Motive, Linguistic checks are of some value to a party I'm sure. All at the cost of a feat to gain 4 traits instead of 2 and 3 buy points to get 13 INT.

Add in allies aiding your check and you're pushing 38-40 in a five man party depending on other people's builds.

Throw in 5 buy points, play a human and rock the 6 skill points per level you get.

STR 15+2
DEX 14
CON 14
INT 14
WIS 12
CHA 7

Its really not that hard to have a decent number of skills and a well rounded PC if you're willing to have less than an 18 in a starting stat. If you have a 25 point buy go nuts and grab the 18, but less than that and you're hindering yourself in other aspects.

Not convinced. The build parameters are too confined.

Fighters come in all shapes and sizes, some of them not terribly bright others have unshakable willpower.

Also traits is an optional rule not used by many people (I don't use them in my games) and so including them is really only a theoretical way of looking at out-of-combat issues not a practical one.

The Fighter's limited class skills puts him at a -3 compared to other classes when making Diplomacy or Perception rolls. Leaving the fighter the tax of investing in skill feats to be on par with everyone else.

Last time I checked barbarians weren't that good at diplomacy either. Neither are rangers. But I get it. Let's shift focus one more time because someone presented a means of solving what you wanted. Even if the change was to add 4+INT skills I doubt the people asking for so much change now would be happy with the results and would still be making more threads as to why the fighter is the worst.

This again goes back to wasted's comments of why are you trying to make a fighter a social class when it's not a social class and then complain when a means is given because it'll be 3 behind other classes that have it as a class skill. And then of the 4 typical options only one of them has the skills. Seems like fair comparison.

It's a hard concept I know. That 18 strength is such a sweet spot for 2 handers.... just like 22, 26, 30, and every 4 after that. Its silly to push for an 18 in most point buys because of the investment of points after 15 and 16. And by the end of the game even if you have a 26 strength vs a 30 had you optimized for strength the difference is a +2 to hit and +3 to damage per swing. It's seriously negligible and the effects of putting those buy points into other stats sees a greater benefit overall.

How many skills do you need to be good in to have the OoC utility you're asking for? Having combat expertise means you're getting at least 3 per level. Toss in your favored class bonus as a skill for 4 per level and you're at as many as a barb gets. Perception, Sense Motive, Diplomacy, Linguistics. Its not like you need the other skills to be useful in combat. Grab additional traits and make em all class skills if you can spare a trait to not grab a +1 will save and the feat. Find the appropriate item to get a +5 modifier and suddenly you have 4 skills all with out of combat purpose with a +18-20 Modifier. DC 30 Diplomacy, Perception, Sense Motive, Linguistic checks are of some value to a party I'm sure. All at the cost of a feat to gain 4 traits instead of 2 and 3 buy points to get 13 INT. Play a human and grab a bunch of skill focuses and suddenly you're hitting 36 on a few of your skills.

Add in allies aiding your check from a five man party and you're pushing 38-40 or 44-46 with skills you have skill focus in and depending on other people's builds. Maybe other players like the Halfling Aid another bonus and you get even more. Who know's as a real game scenario hasn't even crept into the vacuum of the boards yet.

Throw in 5 buy points, play a human and rock the 6 skill points per level you get.

STR 15+2
DEX 14
CON 14
INT 14
WIS 12
CHA 7

Its really not that hard to have a decent number of skills and a well rounded PC if you're willing to have less than an 18 in a starting stat. If you have a 25 point buy go nuts and grab the 18, but less than that and you're hindering yourself in other aspects.

It is not htat the fighter is worthless. IMHO (and I think I said it already in this thread) the figther is somehwat "ok", it is just incomplete.

I can agree with this entirely.

But that's the thing. I think the fighter could use a boost to liven the class up some and at the same time I'm content with what the class offers. I still play fighters and have friends who play fighters and they perform fine without some inherent gloom hanging about because I picked some class that some people think is worthless.

Im a person with decades of experience in D&D and I'm saying you guys exaggerate the scope of the discrepancy.

And then when challenged the continual "let's compare stats vs. builds" comes up with more nonsense as each class has different needs based on stats regardless of their intent as melee type. And the whole "sure the fighter can do that facet that this class we were initially comparing to can't do, but not as well as this other class" begins to creep up and suddenly it's not comparison and just people shouting I hate fighter. Good times.

I don't think it would though and from all the arguments no one has said they want the fighter to do more damage than other similar classes. People want their fighters to be less fighters and more renaissance man. The guy who can do everything. All I've seen is that fighters get less skill points per level so they're the worst. Fighters get worse will saves so they're the worst. Fighters don't do as much damage as some optimized barbarian build so they're the worst. If it was just DPR a fighter can post comparable numbers at all levels and then wins at level 20.

A paladin gets 2+INT skills per level and has as much need of int as a fighter if not less, but because the barbarian and ranger get more skills the fighter is the worst... Under this logic everything is the worst compared to a ranger who gets more skills of the martials. A fighter with 13 int for combat expertise gets 1 less skill per level than the 10 int barb. The barb dumps int as is the norm on these boards and suddenly the fighter has MORE OoC utility than the barbarian. Weird how being the worst finds you better than some classes sometimes.

Says you lol. I'd take a slayer over a ranger any day.

Please no hybrid classes. They're already better than most of the preceding classes that are similar.

@Trogdar

So a fighter gaining 11 bonus feats isn't a class feature to help establish your place in the universe, but rage is? Fighters are a certain kind of adventurer. The one that doesn't want to deal with keeping track of rage rounds and wants more feats than they can shake their beat stick at. Why is 11 feats just not worth anything?

The weird thing is that, in a class based game, the fighter is not really a class. What I mean is that no part of the fighter informs the player of their standing in universe. What is the fighter? An adventurer could never be something so limited as that, "I fight".

Is rage somehow different?

Fighters only get the "I fight" action if you choose to dump the stat that governs skills which happen to be the other part of the game when not in combat. You don't get to close your eyes at a theatre and then say a movie sucked because it was just sound effects. If you sacrificed your intelligence to squeeze out the extra two points of damage then maybe you deserve to sit and do nothing until more combat starts.

A well balanced build will have 3-5 skills to get some OoC utility. 2+1-2INT+1 favored bonus. Races can augment your skills further. That's a 3-5 build point. Enough stats have been tossed around this thread to show a fighter can get decent skills while still performing damage duty.

Again though you represent a small portion of the gaming community. You can't claim your opinion is absolute because a few people agree with you when you're just the vocal part of the community. There's guaranteed a large portion of the community that has very little to do with these boards. I haven't heard anything about fighters being fixed in the upcoming new version only that they were redesigning the rogue.

Paizo designers have never said there is a problem with their product and they won't. Their marketing team would see that no negative publicity is given by the design team as it hurts your own product to tell people you made a bad product.

The problems do exist. They're just not as large in scope as people think they are and playing the proper stats for your class and playing to your classes strengths while using resources to shore weaknesses is the way the system works. What the designers have said and will do so again in future products guaranteed is that they did not design a game for optimizers. They created a game with a large variety of options for players to experience fun how they should choose. If everything had to be the most optimized route we can burn most of the pages of our books and just all play wizards.

The Fighter Class is not a social class. Stop trying to make it what is it not meant to be.

This is all I've ever meant by building a class within its limitations.

I don't pick a fighter and say I want to make a social guy with lots of skills and a good will save. As much as I don't pick a bard magician and say I want to be a wizard. You design a character concept. Your character is going to be those things. You pick a class to fit the character. So if you say I want to play a guy who has lots of feats and understands a variety of combat styles, wears heavy armor, and wields a weapon vs unarmed strikes or something you could grab a fighter. You wanted your guy to know so many skills, but not hurt offense too much so you grab a 13-14 intelligence and now you're pulling 3-5 skills a level maybe 6 depending on your race. No it isn't the fighter giving you this 6th skill, it's the character build which includes the fighter class. Maybe it could've worked with another class if you didn't grab a few feats, but that's now straying from what the fighter can provide.

Flawed wrote:

Morzadian wrote:

Flawed wrote:

animemetalhead wrote:

The ONLY use a fighter has for Int is meeting prereqs for Combat Expertise, and a few extra skill points.

"The ONly use a fighter has for Str is meeting prereqs for power attack and a few extra to hit and damage."

I can list off what a stat provides for a class as well.

Every stat has varying levels of necessity based on your class and your build. A fighter struggles with skill points so int has some value to them because of that. It doesn't necessarily mean it has more value than con or strength, but it has value.

I also posted my interpretation on how a fighters stats would be arrayed with str/dex > con/wis > int > cha vs. another poster's version that was the same as a barbarians str > con/dex > wis > int/cha or something like that.

"I can list off what a stat provides for a class as well," this is a fairly condescending comment. It's fairly obvious contributors to this discussion know how stats in the Pathfinder game work without you having to explain it to them.

It's also fairly obvious Animemetalhead is referring to MAD. The fighter class is already lumbered with the dependency of the three physical stats (Str, Dex, Con).

This thread is about ideas that can improve fighter versatility. And removing stat requirements is one way of doing that.

Yes, this thread is about versatility to the fighter class. Maybe the versatility could be coming from your stat array that compliments your class features instead of a need of new class features so you can dump your charisma and intelligence to keep your strength at obscene levels of optimization.

Fighters could use some help as a class. So could players designing balanced PC's.

Why is 3 build points so hard to manage that makes fighters so MAD?

The general consensus on this thread and other threads is that fighters skill points are too low and should be increased from 2 to 4. Now a common house rule, which...

Who does all this recognizing. If it were unanimous I wouldn't be claiming the class isn't as bad off as people make it out to be with a little work. Just because people want to claim that the same work can be done to any class to make it effective doesn't change anything about the fighter. I don't agree that 11 feats isn't worthy of being a class feature. A class with double the feats of most other classes is a good feature.

Sure fighters should be raised to 4+INT skills. I'd rather see all classes that are below 6+ raised to being 6+. It's illogical that in the course of your life you only managed to be capable at 2-4 skills well with a normal intelligence.

I just don't see all the hype that people say about the fighter when I've seen fighters played well without nonsense GMs baby sitting and setting up for players and they are devastating in combat and useful outside of it. The variance of real play vs. online theory crafting creates a vast discrepancy.

We can leave the casters out. Spells imba.

Can't spare the 3 build points and a +4 headband or a rod of lordly might (25000gp) by level 17? The 3 build points could be a problem if you planned to dump charisma, but the money shouldn't be an issue. That gets you limitless wings from the infernal bloodline, +10 fire resistance with a +4 to saves vs. poison, and a touch attack that causes shaken with no save 6 times a day.

3 build points is the difference of a 15 to a 16 strength stat buy. 15 strength with 13 charisma and a headband and you can take Orc or abyssal and get an nherent bonus to strength that scales to +6 with the second feat in the line. Abyssal can then add claws and resist electricity 10 +4 vs poison. Orc can grant a good scalable morale bonus that goes very nice with a trait that extends morale bonuses and the cap of Orc gets you a minute per level enlarge that comes with more large size bonuses to strength.

Rage powers are a class of their own. This still doesn't mean a fighter can't pull off a feat chain faster than the barb or chains unattainable by a barb.

animemetalhead wrote:

Flawed wrote:

Nicos wrote:

Flawed wrote:

2+INT skills per level sucks when int isn't really a big stat for you. Fortunately things like combat expertise exist to a show you that a fighter can do well with a 13+ int

Really? Combat expertise cannot be used in any serious defense of anything.

What are you even talking about?

Combat expertise IS used for defense. That's the point of it. Combat expertise is also a prerequisite for combat maneuvers of which the fighter is capable of using. It requires a 13 intelligence. The end.

I think you misunderstood Nicos there. Combat Expertise is widely regarded as the WORST feat tax in the game and a general waste of design space, locking combat maneuvers (which a fighter should be able to excel at) behind a stat wall that makes no sense. Using it as a 'defense' of high-INT fighters is laughable.

yup.

Yes, I did. My bad, but I wasn't saying combat expertise makes fighters good. I was implying that a feat that gives access to more combat feats has a prerequisite of 13 int and since fighters are capable of performing maneuvers its a little informative that a 13 INT will be common on fighters.

As long as you have river rat nothing else matters.

EDIT: I'd have changed starting stats to:

STR 14+2
DEX 16
CON 12
INT 13(14)
WIS 12
CHA 8(7)

And then added the point for STR 17 at level 4 or even gone DEX 17 to qualify for Improved TWF at level 6 without needing a belt. It's nice to have that extra +1 to hit and damage(And it might actually be for the best for a TWF build), but that extra +1 AC/Reflex saves/initiative/dex skills mean more to me usually. I'm also not huge on TWF builds and prefer sword and board single weapon fighting. No clue what your feats are intended for.

I think my fighter arrays look more like str/dex > con/int/wis > cha more than anything. Aim for a 16 starting in both str/dex +2 from levels into both +6 belt to both and +2 book to both if no other means of inherent bonus is available and you hit str/dex 26 or str28/dex24 if you get a permanent enlarge person which then caps dex in mithral full plate for a fighter.

Again though. None of this matters because you have river rat.

And here comes the caster/martial parade.

Its good though. Now a single domain means fighters class feature means nothing and a +4 suit of armor minimum.

EDIT:

On that note, how am I doing so far?

I'd take the effort to make an evaluation, but I can only guess by the plethora of threads that everyone here has posted in in regards to a fighter it must lack will saves, skill points, comes up short on DPR compared to a barbarian, has 0 OoC utility, stares at sandbags and imagines swinging his beatstick.

Flawed wrote:

animemetalhead wrote:

The ONLY use a fighter has for Int is meeting prereqs for Combat Expertise, and a few extra skill points.

"The ONly use a fighter has for Str is meeting prereqs for power attack and a few extra to hit and damage."

I can list off what a stat provides for a class as well.

Every stat has varying levels of necessity based on your class and your build. A fighter struggles with skill points so int has some value to them because of that. It doesn't necessarily mean it has more value than con or strength, but it has value.

I also posted my interpretation on how a fighters stats would be arrayed with str/dex > con/wis > int > cha vs. another poster's version that was the same as a barbarians str > con/dex > wis > int/cha or something like that.

"I can list off what a stat provides for a class as well," this is a fairly condescending comment. It's fairly obvious contributors to this discussion know how stats in the Pathfinder game work without you having to explain it to them.

It's also fairly obvious Animemetalhead is referring to MAD. The fighter class is already lumbered with the dependency of the three physical stats (Str, Dex, Con).

This thread is about ideas that can improve fighter versatility. And removing stat requirements is one way of doing that.

Yes, this thread is about versatility to the fighter class. Maybe the versatility could be coming from your stat array that compliments your class features instead of a need of new class features so you can dump your charisma and intelligence to keep your strength at obscene levels of optimization.

Fighters could use some help as a class. So could players designing balanced PC's.

Why is 3 build points so hard to manage that makes fighters so MAD?

Flawed is arguing stats as a class comparison. It's a failure on its face. The same stats for different classes will outperform the fighter.

He's arguing fighters are great because they can benefit from wearing adamantine full plate...and move normally. And the barbarian can't, despite the fact adamantine isn't affordable until level 8+, and by then the barb's class features are just as good...and they don't stack.

Not to mention mithral's +2 to AC is generally better then adamantine at ALL levels. It doesn't even stack with the fighter's capstone effect, making it MORE useless as time goes on.

And the fighter doesn't move faster in heavy armor...his REDUCTION IN MOVEMENT goes away. Of course, if you're a dwarf, you get this at level 1.
And the barb is moving 40', the ranger is moving 40', and the paladin might be riding Superhorse. The fighter is slogging along at 30'. Movement bonus, where? Oh, right, and the paladin has a spell which does that for him, too, doesn't he?

Weapon Training is not a buff. It equals rage (used every fight) which equals Favored Enemy. The other stuff is situational...that's buffs. And Weapon Training is inherently limited by the weapon, even moreso if you pursue Weapon Spec.

Armor Training is barely a buff. You can get Armor which does basically everything it does (Celestial, Mithral). And if you don't have the Dex, it does not provide you an AC bonus at all.
Contrast with Greater Magical Vestment, Barkskin, Raging Nat armor and dodge bonuses, and a Monk's + to AC as they level. You don't need an uber stat...you just get the AC!

Godless healing is a general feat, and you can't take it with Fighter bonus feats. Surprise! Barbs can take it, too, and rangers and paladins don't need it. Net benefit to fighter = none. Not to mention it's barely as good as a 1/day Cure Serious Wounds...at level 20. Ugh. Renewed Vigor does the same without a restriction of being below half hit points, and can lead to fast healing!

And did we mention barbs have various ways to punch...

I love all the assumption, hostility, and use of logical fallacies to discredit posters on these boards. I never once said fighters are great. I've said on many occasions in this thread that fighters could use a boost to help them compete with other classes.

I know right? Mithrals bonus to AC is awesome at ALL levels. Unless you have a class feature that is in effect by the time you can even afford a mithral suit of armor and your bonus from dexterity doesn't require you buy a suit of mithral. Weird.

So true man. The reduction in movement goes away. Now. Let's run through the logic here. A fighter has a movement speed of 30 while wearing heavy armor because his reduction in movement has gone away. A cleric has a movement speed of 20 while wearing medium or heavy armor because the reduction in movement has not gone away. The result here is....drum roll please... that the fighter will move faster than any other class while wearing heavy armor. A single race does not invalidate this fact because they get a racial feature that does a similar thing that a fighter class feature does.

Or the fighter uses his many feats to set up a means of getting more movement or a better form of movement? 2 fleet feats and the fighter moves as fast as the barb or the ranger and he still has as many if not more feats. These are such minor and petty differences. Depending on your race(any half race/human/suli) can grab the 2-3 feats required to gain flight. The new archetype fighter can get wings. Any class can grab an eldritch heritage feat chain to get wings just fighters can actually spare the feats and still be combat capable. Why are we still walking?

How can you argue that someone else can get armor training by basically getting celestial or mithral armor? So what happens again when the fighter puts on the celestial or mithral armor? Oh right it gets a more substantial dex to ac bonus than any other class that was wearing said armor.

OMG! OMG! OMG! its a general feat so therefore everyone can take it! So now the barb only has 9 more feats left to the fighters 20. What was the problem again?

Did we mention that a fighter will eventually outdo everyone in DPR based on their crit multiplier alone? I can talk end game scenario's too.

I've also said 3 or 4 times in this thread now that I'm not here to compare other classes to the fighter. I was just stating that fighters are contributing members to any party and can be built to do so. It does not matter that another class can cover some facet of what a fighter does. The fighter's entire chassis is it's combat prowess. Weapon Training + Full BAB and you'll always have a means of hitting. Armor Training + Well balanced stats = Higher regular and touch AC than other classes wearing equivalent armor. The fighter will always have more feats than other classes allowing them to try more feat chains both combat and non combat options. This also includes completing chains quicker than other classes to make your combat style viable faster. A fighter will have more ability in armor than other classes including moving full speed in heavy armor which includes being able to use acrobatics to move without provoking, eventually no penalty to skills in heavy armors, the option to wear adamantine armors and keep a good dex to ac bonus.

None of this is great, it just is what it is.

All that said, the fighter is still able to contribute to any party it joins. Even just going 13 int for combat expertise is 3 skills per level. Grab another 1 from favored bonus for 4/level. That's 4 skills you can contribute with. Choose wisely as to what niche you want to jump into. As your character grows you grab a headband or ioun stone of int with new skills you want to add.

The ONLY use a fighter has for Int is meeting prereqs for Combat Expertise, and a few extra skill points.

"The ONly use a fighter has for Str is meeting prereqs for power attack and a few extra to hit and damage."

I can list off what a stat provides for a class as well.

Every stat has varying levels of necessity based on your class and your build. A fighter struggles with skill points so int has some value to them because of that. It doesn't necessarily mean it has more value than con or strength, but it has value.

I also posted my interpretation on how a fighters stats would be arrayed with str/dex > con/wis > int > cha vs. another poster's version that was the same as a barbarians str > con/dex > wis > int/cha or something like that.