Martialmasters's page

I really enjoy the concept of this class. My issue becomes in how it goes at the table.

Every table I've played at has either the GM sighing over the million questions that get asked in attempt to gain a lead and keep it applicable to future encounters yet unknown. Or they don't allow them because of how much this can slow down a session.

That's not to say the general impact at the table when other players feel like your slowing things down or taking up too much of the time.

Basically in a game that's gone above and beyond in many ways to codify and create rules. Investigator sticks out like a sore thumb.

So how do you codify it? How do you change it to work smoothly in a party without the constant "GM may I?" Situation.

I think one issue is das being so tied to persue a lead. Why does the investigator need them to be subject of a lead to devise a stratagem? They are basically analyzing their opponent for an opening or weakness. Let it be that, maybe give them a to hit bonus or something else when they are subject of their lead.

Das and therefore the classes precision damage being tied to a once an attack per round option is fine. But that option needs to be more consistent then

Also making it a fortune effect makes little sense
Your observation and strategy is not divine guidance or luck.

I wish I could say I had great ideas on this. So instead I ask you all. How would you run, interpret, or change this class to smooth it out.

I'm kinda hopeful on the changes

I like a lot of barbarian. But the fact that when you can't rage you can't use majority of your class feats and features.

It's not fun when a rogue can't use it's sneak attack but that's monster design, not being knocked out by a lucky crit the round before

My only hope is they do not get Master strikes without a heavy cost to their versatility

I still think wizard is better than witch unless your only interest is pet and doing the same 1 action patron effect every turn

I prefer having more options.

But then I also insist flexible caster archetype is more than worth the cost. Given I've played both versions for cleric as well as wizard and it feels miles better to me than a sorcerer.

I just wanted to say. Today I learned paizo created infinite.

I honestly thought it was a place for people to vent their grievances with the system by fixing what isn't broken or breaking what wasn't good enough for them.

As you can see, the few infinite pieces I purchased I was not incredibly impressed with. But I get I'm probably not their target audience.

Still, cool to finally learn it was paizo itself that created it.

As for the orc stuff. What I've gathered from reading it

Infinite is infinite

Orc is orc

Is there a reason why infinites license cannot be just... Done away with and have it be under soley the orc? I am sure there is, but I am not smart enough for it

Some people play pf2e, others play heavily home brewed amalgamations then think their play state is relevant to feedback.

Martialmasters wrote:

The more I read of my remaster book, the more I think wizard will be more than fine.

Sure, some people might not like it mechanically, some might find it boring. But objectively I can't think of them as weak at all.

Between being and to cast 4 spells a day at level 1, and a once a fight focus spell. It's a strong beginning chassis of spell use only really rivaled by cleric, who has more slots but less options with them

Both conceal and energy ablation are great general picks

Bespell strikes is still there for those that want that decent third action no map strike

Linked focus is there and is great, even moreso for unified theory

Spell protection array is useful one action for any magical oriented encounter

Convincing illusion no longer has a feat tax

Explosive arrival for general summons is honestly really good.

Summon a creature that can cast heal... It blows up on arrival and heals you.. I'll take that

Knowledge is power might require a critical rk but giving that kind of -1 swing for a minute at no other cost is great.

They might be general "spell guy" but they are good at it

Why do you consider Conceal and Energy Ablation great general picks? Or Convincing Illusion?

You have one reaction for Convincing Illusion. An opponent can use multiple seek actions to see through your illusion. The chance to counter saves or Perception is only for a save to disbelieve your illusion and not for a damaging effect. It's a very narrow ability.

I don't consider those feats having much value because the would be dead feats most of the time.

Energy ablation possibly

Other two, you are having a creativity problem in my opinion. If the opponent is making multiple seek actions a round your GM is meta gaming or you made a very clunky illusion.

Don't get me wrong they could have done more with the schools. But what you describe is boring/bland. Wich is subjective. It's like when people tell me fighter is bland because no subclass, even though that's probably my favorite thing about them. They are the premier striker. Wizard is the premier spells guy.

The more I read of my remaster book, the more I think wizard will be more than fine.

Sure, some people might not like it mechanically, some might find it boring. But objectively I can't think of them as weak at all.

Between being and to cast 4 spells a day at level 1, and a once a fight focus spell. It's a strong beginning chassis of spell use only really rivaled by cleric, who has more slots but less options with them

Both conceal and energy ablation are great general picks

Bespell strikes is still there for those that want that decent third action no map strike

Linked focus is there and is great, even moreso for unified theory

Spell protection array is useful one action for any magical oriented encounter

Convincing illusion no longer has a feat tax

Explosive arrival for general summons is honestly really good.

Summon a creature that can cast heal... It blows up on arrival and heals you.. I'll take that

Knowledge is power might require a critical rk but giving that kind of -1 swing for a minute at no other cost is great.

They might be general "spell guy" but they are good at it

I hope the domain spell archetype is good. I've lost a fair bit of interest in the class without them. Every build I tried ended up using them. And I found the high highs and low lows too detract from my enjoyment.

Martialmasters wrote:

Yes you should design your encounters to highlight different players and classes strengths and weaknesses.

That's the Hallmark of a good GM

Not needing to do that is the Hallmark of a balanced RPG.

This game is very balanced but it isn't perfect. Part of moving the power back to the GM means you as the GM take more responsibility as well.

Kineticist gets light armor by default

Yes you should design your encounters to highlight different players and classes strengths and weaknesses.

That's the Hallmark of a good GM

Tbh this sounds like a your table problem/preference firelion.

And I already know you've applied 5e style casting to your tables Wich extremely warps your feedback

Given that there's players who like both, maybe one way Paizo can go in the future is to have (one or more) caster classes that allow the choice, i.e. as subclasses.

Though hearing metalmasters' request for a prepared cha caster, I suspect that the player base will complain until Paizo delivers the ability to select any combination of [Tradition] + [main Attribute] + [Spontaneous/Prepared] + [Feat progression]...which, honestly, they could do in a future edition. But that would be more of a "buy" system than a "class" system.

I'd settle for a cha prepared caster lol. Love Cha. But all the cha classes are spontaneous

A martial can indeed invest skill points and multiple feats to do what a single spell/scroll can

Sounds about right. But that's not versatility. That's specialization. The wizard can just pick a different spell.

Hey players, Happy Equinox.

As you’re discussing the remaster changes, kindly be aware that the remaster reflects the rules we are using going forward, but that no content is being banned at your tables. We need to publish what we need to publish for the legal health and safety of our company—and we’re adding improvements to the game along the way. But nothing we’re printing should be considered a subtraction from the game you love. All the options will still be in the System Reference Document at Archives of Nethys.

The Remaster Project is a process. We’re going to be remastering Pathfinder at least into Gen Con 2024 with Player Core 2. And that doesn’t even address the errata that our design team may consider for every rule published after the Advanced Player’s Guide.

In short, a blended OGL/ORC experience should be expected for many months. And we’re never, we can’t, put an end date on what you play at your tables. We’re not coming to your home and taking away your older books. We want you to keep using everything you’ve purchased. As always, we’re trying to deliver to you the best deep character customization options in the industry.

Adventures Ahead!

This is fair. Potentially means I'll ask my GM if when playing a wizard, if I can just use old spell traditions instead of schools so i don't have to constantly bug stuff with debates on what spell should be included in x school because I don't have enough options.

Unicore wrote:

The spell substitution wizard only needs a party that is willing to do things like “observe the parameter of the enemy base for 30 minutes,” and then has versatility that spontaneous casters can only dream of.

Not really (about the last part). You need to add Universalist school to compete with a Sorcerer in terms of versatility. And you need to play really well as otherwise you'll still be behind. You seem to completely overlook Spontaneous casters' versatility.

Martialmasters wrote:

I've played one

Out of curiosity, up to what level? Because the Spontaneous casters' versatility really comes into play when you start having a few Signature spells, so at mid level.

Level 8. For my signature didn't give me enough options and I hated level ups because the way non signature spells work for them (having to learn the higher level version)

Not to mention one of the most defining items for casters, staves,I really didn't enjoy mechanically with spontaneous casters

If the DM at the time doesn't like giving information about upcoming encounters with proper investigation. Or the other players refuse to do so. I vastly prefer the actual play or the flexible caster archetype vs a spontaneous caster.

1 action to either do more damage or force enemy movement is tactically interesting and good

Just wish it was level 8

I really want a prepared charisma spell caster

That's pretty boring for me personally and I'd rather play a martial at that point.

But what I hated was how they interact with staves and how they learn new spells

I've played one

I hated every level up

In my experience, suddenly not dying when a +3 boss is on me because I cast mirror image while my dragon throat weakness proccing manifold missiles is out damaging the fighter... And the rest of the party is working on keeping me alive/beating it's ass because I'm the only one reliably damaging it

Honestly mirror image just needs to save me for that round and it's worth it

I don't agree with the idea they spontaneous is the one with more versatility. It has more spell slot versatility, not more spell versatility.

I dislike spontaneous casters TBH. I find them limiting. I dislike how they interact with new spells. Signature spells are too limited. I hate how they interact with staves.

Prepared casting can be punishing at times. But a flexible wizard with substitution thesis is amazing. I get a bigger list of options than signature spells that grows with me. I like how I interact with equipment. It's my preferred play style whenever possible

If you look at it on paper it sounds terrible. In actual play it's amazing. It hits my sweet spot between prepared versatility and spontaneous ease of use.

Dark_Schneider wrote:

Deriven Firelion wrote:

For some reason wizard players seem to forget how good skills are in PF2, which also obviates the need to use spells for these other things.

Given this is a group game, there is little need for the wizard to switch to something else. Why would the party wait? Why? If they can just go in and don't need the wizard to change his spell load, why wait?

There is zero reason why my group would need the wizard to be a super spy, a sniper, or change their role. They would just be trying to step on the toes of another class that does what they're trying to do better rather than working within the group to make the whole group operate better.

This idea of a wizard switching spells and suddenly being better than some class with a focused stat and specific skills built up is a false theory. That was true in PF1. It isn't true in PF2. It's better to work with your group and make them better by building a character that synergizes with the group rather than tries to be everything while you expect the other group members to stand around twiddling their thumbs.

Does your group really stand there and wait for you to change out spells to accomplish some task someone in the group should be able to do better than you? Is the group built badly? Are they all fighters with a cleric and you're the only versatile caster who can do anything with skills or a ranged weapon?

For that the Wizard has some options, like Flexible spellcasting, Staff Nexus thesis if using one, the change spell thesis, or scroll savant. Some of them delegates on items some spells that you could or not require eventually so don't want to prepare or add to your Collection.

In addition as Int based it reinforces the "how good skills are in PF2", as it gets extra skills and languages compared to others like Charisma casters.

They don't get extra skills because all of those Cha based classes get a ton of free skills. If not outright "you get all lores at Expert for just a feat"....

Just wanted to say, flexible casting is amazing unless your GM hands you the encounter lists every day

shocking grasp thunderstrike being a save spell really gonna peeve the magi.

Oh dang, that's a good point actually

I overall like the wizard

It was never the strongest option

Now with other classes getting buffs and, so far my the looks the wizard getting a nerf. That sucks. They will still be playable.

The issue with the wizard was both , vague theme and some options just being a lot better

Blending and substitution are better then meta magic, familiar and staff almost every time.

Low level feats were meh.

Until remaster, there was strong argument for non universalist wizards because they had a large number of spells to choose from, some had decent focus spells though not great.

Even if the focus spells are better in the remaster, if I have to sit through dead bonus slots that don't scale well, I'm just going to play the universalist, or another class.

Overall I'm disheartened. The class will remain playable, but I liked the wider selection of spells. I love paizo but they've repeatedly shown they prioritize narrative over balance when it comes to something being mechanically weak. So I'm fully expecting the school spell options to be, for the most part, narrative instead of good in the long run.

Personally I don't want to be level 10 with 3 dead slots I'll never use.

This also limits the usefulness of flexible caster archetype, one of my favorites, because I could select good spells for those bonus slots to bolster me.

Maybe paizo will prove me wrong, but my hopes in this specific subtext of their design habits, I'm not hopeful

Martialmasters wrote:

But if that extra spell slot isn't of much value anymore due to lack of good options I'm honestly not sure what I'd do

It seems that Generalist won't be changed much and so remains a viable option. Free re-cast from 3 free options is still better then one additional niche slot.

I never liked it much as I liked having those extra slots

But it might become the default play by most...

6th level spell shape (metamagic) feat that for 1 action you get +2 to your next spell attack before the end of that round useable only on spells at least 1 or 2 ranks below your maximum.

Fixes the problem nicely, its a feat that comes online when it starts being relevant (the gap between 5 and 7), remains relevant all game, balanced in that you can't use your maximum damage potential spells with it for those worried about the off chance of an extreme damage spike.

True strike is better than this and it's trivial to get so many that you'll never run out.

Yes I believe it was a mistake for this spell to either..

Exist at all

Or

Not be on every classes spell list

Martialmasters wrote:

shroudb wrote:

Narrow schools could also mean that it's more easy for a low level feat that reads something along the lines of "pick a second school" siilar to Order explorer or multimuse bards and etc.

Not sure if this exists or not, but I think that it's still early to say if the class as a whole is nerfed.

It probably is, but I've been holding it in for well over a month now and I was going to explode after reading the preview if I didn't uncork a bit

A feat like that would be nice, though still results to me in a nerfed feeling since I have to spend a feat to hopefully gain similar results to current wizard

We've seen the complete list of wizard fears by name already. Only two if them are unknown at this pointamd neither of them spends like it'll add a second curriculum.

It's still possible they added something loke that to one of the old feats, of course. Or they might have made it a class feature at level 9-ish maybe? Universalist could get something else instead.

But honestly, I'm not holding my breath. Wizard focus spells have always been more filler than something you spend your turn on and of all the focus spell using classes, the wizard has by far the worst focus progression.

I'm frankly not sure if I'd play a wizard over an arcane Witch. The new rune patron is also as well, but the new witch feats shown so far might make up for it.

Overall I have negative interest in familiars and positive interest in a 4th spell slot per level

But if that extra spell slot isn't of much value anymore due to lack of good options I'm honestly not sure what I'd do

Probably just make a 4th cleric I guess

My issue is without kinetic activation I'm really struggling to find something to purchase personally.

I could get the medicine skill baton but I hate the fact it's a held item, and I have no interest really in any other skills.

Easl wrote:

That last part is important. Balance is as much about GMing as rules. GMs should be considering the types of PCs in their game when designing scenes, adventures, campaigns, and balancing by ensuring the scenes you incorporate take into account the PC's capabilities. Got an investigator? Include investigation. Got a swashbuckler? Include scenery they can swing on, slide under, etc. Well okay, those are easy peasy, everyone knows that, right? But then why is this one so hard for some folks to grok: Got a wizard? Include tomes, puzzles that require lore and INT checks, spells as loot. Mobs that can be really hard to kill with single attacks but much easier with AoE's

The pressure to build a one-dimensional combat cannon comes from playing lots of scenes where one-dimensional combat cannons are important. And where do those scenes come from? From us. Not the game rules. Some APs excepted - but even with those, it is kinda understood by the player base and the industry that the GM is going to modify scenes in response to different play group capabilities and interests.

So Calliope and others, I agree with y'all about wizard being cool mostly as is. I'm looking forward to the remaster tweaks, but won't be at all upset if they don't get some bonus blaster treatment.

As for the single target magic action, there's always witch hexes for casters to take the archetype. 1a's from other archetypes your wizard takes. At higher levels when you can burn [top-1] spell slots as support, there's single action magic missile. Scrolls of 1-action spells. Though I'd have little problem with a 'Wand of...

Any class that relies on the GM making changes to support them is a bad design unless they are compensated in baseline power with the expectation that many tables won't support them well.

Then, that is every class. Every single one is heavily item/gear dependant and if not given those options by the GM you will have a bad time

Varthanna wrote:

How on earth is this worth a level 14 feat. Not exactly building hype with this.

1 action for a rank level x d6 damage that can be done at range an unlimited amount of times. I think 14 is about right. At least they didn't make it level 16 competing against the obvious effortless concentration choice.

I think the feat looks interesting myself. This is also not bad if you combine it with Trip. Let's say your martial trips the target in the burst area, then it has multiple choices to make with actions. Get up and move out of the area using 2 actions to move or use one action to stand up and attack or get blown up.

It's situationally useful. Not bad for a 1 action feat. I'd prefer it be a free feat for some battle magic type of school, but we'll see what it all looks like.

I think they could have started it at level y6 or 8 with 1d6 and have it scale up to 3d6 by level 14, personally

Aside from this reply, on the topic of the wizard overall. This preview doesn't do much for me. The new feat is cool. I like the concept of schools.

But so far this still reads as a nerf to the wizard overall from pre remaster, with casters getting buffs to their kits (cleric being the obvious one right now, and they were already considered great classes) this makes it feel potentially even worse when compared to other classes.

I'm still hopeful, just worried. Not for wizard being unplayable, just for them to be worse and feel less rewarding (the wider breadth of options for the bonus slot, it felt rewarding to pick good spells for that, with the remaster I'm worried about having nothing but bad options at certain levels that won't scale well

Honestly, I don't see how they'll get any weaker by these changes. Wizard has always been the caster class that gets a lot of cool spell feats.

While I'm no where near as hyperbolic as problem... It's about a loss of versatility we no gain in power that we've really seen.

Paizo very clearly views versatility as power, so to reduce that versatility and not, from current perspective, give them more power, just comes off as them being overall worse.

Narrow schools could also mean that it's more easy for a low level feat that reads something along the lines of "pick a second school" siilar to Order explorer or multimuse bards and etc.

Not sure if this exists or not, but I think that it's still early to say if the class as a whole is nerfed.

It probably is, but I've been holding it in for well over a month now and I was going to explode after reading the preview if I didn't uncork a bit

A feat like that would be nice, though still results to me in a nerfed feeling since I have to spend a feat to hopefully gain similar results to current wizard

I've been holding in this feeling/worry that wizard is going to be essentially nerfed from it's current state.

I keep telling myself, wait for remaster to come out.

Then the preview happened and I'm really struggling to contain myself so I thought I'd let out my worries here and you all can either salve them or irritate them lol.

I like schools, but they are so limited I feel like that extra spell slot has become... disappointing. Those slots you'd often choose spells that remain useful even at low spell slots

With the much more narrow scope of options with the schools changes, I fear we can no longer do this, resulting in spell slots that become very nearly dead weight as I level.

Combine this with what seems to be like next to no mechanical changes to the class. I worry they will... Just be worse.

We haven't seen focus spell changes or possibly any good new low level feats.

I'm not knocking play at high level but the feat shown is for level 14. While interesting I'm in agreement with others that is could have been much lower.

I don't think they will be unplayable, and maybe I'm biased, but wizard seemed good but not particularly strong already unless your DM is very very generous to knowledge of what you will be facing regularly.

I'll still play them, just very sad the preview actually made me more worried about the class, instead of hyped.

Martialmasters wrote:

Being able to self heal is great. It's still niche because someone else could have healed you (I'm aware that this treads a little too close to the idea of one relying on the support character).

I mean honestly because it uses dice instead of a flat number there is a chance you're going to need healing even after you use it.

And it's equivalent of single action heal. Still good. But yeah

For me it's pretty easy

Spontaneous

Prepared

That's pretty much it. Everything else is just the extra they bolted onto the class

I see magus as a martial with limited baseline prepared casting and summoner as a double body of each type that uses limited baseline spontaneous casting.

YuriP wrote:

For some reason the class gives me a image of a Fate's hero (from Fate's games/animes) too (probably because they are based on legends) and there's some sort of heroic figures that are based on high dexterity.

It's because fate as a similar view of hero's where their power comes from feats and legendary objects associated with them. The naming convention is also very similar for the abilities and they reference allot of the same heroes.I wonder if we will get any of the fate memes with exemplar such as archers rarely actually using bows, every swordsmen inexplicably being a blonde haired women and having a guy with a spear every adventure who gets betrayed and dies.

Any way on the topic of dex and strength. Exemplar is maybe the class to really mix up weapons and do things like allowing dex to add to damage or do things like wield two handed weapons in one hand or one handed weapons in two hands for extra damage. Part of the class is about making unique legendary ikons so maybe they should also have unique fighting style with unique properties like chuchulain throwing a spear with his foot. The humble strikes ability could also maybe use the ability to add a weapon trait to simple weapon in addition to increasing the damage dice because simple weapons are also often behind in traits as well as damage.

A feat that does something like let you add dex as precision damage instead of strength on a finesse weapon seems like a solid idea. It's also possibly a good idea for the gaze as sharp as steel which needs something to replace it's reactive strike feature that is both redundant and incompatible with the ranged weapons many people will want to use with it.

I was against thief getting Dex to damage

I'm still not a fan of it

So I'm very much not for more classes getting it.

I think the Exemplar makes sense as a STR or DEX + CHA martial, since most of the inspirations for the class are people with BIG PERSONALITIES.

I just think it should also be relevant to exemplars outside of domain spells, since your action economy is stressed as is I don't personally see the domain spells as that attractive.

I see the domain spells as MORE attractive because if this

Otherwise I need to just use barrows or constantly shift into things like gleaming blade

I thought an effect where you keep your immanence effect for one round after you transcend would be cool

But others it's the design of (largely) the transcend effects of most body and worn ikons

They are either niche or weak or both

Being able to self heal is great. It's still niche because someone else could have healed you (I'm aware that this treads a little too close to the idea of one relying on the support character).

Victors transcendence is very powerful but still niche.

In order to create a character that will reliably transcendence and not shift, you need generally useful abilities that are useful enough to warrant using them over shifting back to *stronger double slice*

Even if shift just let you move half your speed it would be a million times better

Btw the whole "pick from a select list" is literally just the Occultist. Which got around the issue by letting you pick the spells you wanted from the chosen school(s) of magic.

I only played 1e once really but from your brief description that sounds rather broken to have completely unrestricted cherry picking from all the spell traditions

Martialmasters wrote:

I dunno the martial created here looks like it will be pretty bad at several things

Then improve it or make another suggestion.

My suggestion is the notion that they can't do everything

They can barely go 3 things at a remotely optimal level

Martialmasters wrote:

3-Body Problem wrote:

Crouza wrote:

Why not just implement it in the same way as the Elementalist archetype, where it narrows the pool of spells you can cast in exchange for giving you more feats directly tailored to your thematic caster idea? Making a class with its own spell list just seems like the same thing, but with more paperwork.

The Elementalist archetype just doesn't get the job done. It's too narrow for too little reward and doesn't feel well-designed.

It's very well designed and delivers on the flavor

Issue is it's not more powerful and that shows what people really want

It seems you're in the minority on this one. Most people seem to feel that restricting themselves and getting little but flavor back means the design has failed.

I don't really subscribe to Reddit

I honestly have little opinion on this

If in pf3 it was less balance forward or less customizable I'd probably not pick it up

Captain Morgan wrote:

JiCi wrote:

The fighter may be balanced, but I feel like it's missing unique class features to differenciate it from other martial classes.

Some will be quick to defend the Legendary proficiencies, but... what else?

Part of the point of the fighter is to not have unique class features. It is a Tabula Rasa that is mechanically flexible enough to focus on almost any style of martial combat, and lacks any flavor which might clash with your own vision. It is the vanilla ice cream of classes. Some people like it on its own, but it also the best base to build a Sunday off of... where things like the barbarian are more like Chocolate Cookie Dough you eat straight out of the pint container.

This has always sounded like Fighter should be an NPC class to me.

At this point my primary gripe with all four of the classes--fighter and monk in particular--is how tired their designs look when compared to fresher class packages being tested for both Pathfinder and Starfinder. Fortunately (and as always), this is a pain point that experience GMs can ameliorate through the application of house rules.

Very curious as to which classes you view as the fresher package

Because pretty much every martial after core I have disliked mechanically because of those packages

To my mind a specialist mage is fine. But you do need to drastically reduce their versatility and that means limiting what spells they know, Wich then further limits the future proofing potential of the class.

So it would need to be the size of the kineticist practically or be just generally extremely limiting Wich will make some people upset regardless.

Damage specialist, issue, lots of spells do damage on top of incredible effect riders... So, remove the riders in exchange for a damage or DC or accuracy bump?

Maybe a meta magic?, "I just want to do damage" you expend a spell slot, you do bludgeoning damage as you distill the spells potential into raw damage. .

My issue is I struggle to imagine it see a satisfactory way to introduce such a specialization that

1- people generally like

2- isn't a massive power increase

And taking damage for power is never a good design

Crouza wrote:

Why not just implement it in the same way as the Elementalist archetype, where it narrows the pool of spells you can cast in exchange for giving you more feats directly tailored to your thematic caster idea? Making a class with its own spell list just seems like the same thing, but with more paperwork.

The Elementalist archetype just doesn't get the job done. It's too narrow for too little reward and doesn't feel well-designed.

It's very well designed and delivers on the flavor

Issue is it's not more powerful and that shows what people really want

Faemeister wrote:

That's where I believe a considerable part of their class identity lies besides simply being the best at hitting things: feat selection and customization.

If a fighter's identiy is "having none", I don't call this an improvement...

What's the fighter's equivalent of a barbarian's rage, a monk's ki powers, a magus's spell, a ranger's edge, a rogue's sneak attack and rackets, a gunslinger's way, a swashbuckler's style or a champion's cause?

Let the game have options that can appeal to everyone

Fighters and monks are my favorite martials in this game because I'm not forced into a subclass or archetype and their action economy is lean without forced action taxes like reload, gaining panache, recharging spell strike, etc

You can take feats to give yourself such effects but they are not forced upon me

Don't make the classes less fun for others just because you don't like what many currently enjoy about it please