Peenicks's page

Organized Play Member. 8 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 1 Organized Play character.


Katina Davis wrote:
Example card images added!

No plans to release a PDF version of these to use per se for Roll20?

No PDF of the cards? That's a shame, I'd love to use them for online play.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Thread unlocked I see. :D

Alright, so to continue the discussion.

After playing a little bit more after the closing of the thread, another issue I saw is that the Fighter does not get enough feats to compete with everyone else. And they still feel so small in comparison to what others get.

Why must a combat grab, be a press? This makes no sense at all. Why not do it at the start of the attack? I'll never understand why are these limitations here to someone who feels so limited already.

At 5th level, in comparison to what a wizard can do, vs what a fighter can do.

A Wizard has a couple of spells to choose from each doing something else..

The Fighter has only 3 feats which already feel limiting, with negative penalties. (this is not quadratic lizard, linear gizard talk about DPS)

Instead, why not increase the amount of feats the fighter gets? To have more things to do in combat, so you don't feel so *linear* in your choice of specialization.

DM_Blake wrote:

All this discussion about strapping shields to forearms and having a FREE hand is completely irrelevant.

Shields just don't work that way. They never have.

Bucklers are HELD in the hand like a weapon. Never strapped.

Targe sheilds have a pair of "enarmes", one of which was often adjustable (to fit larger or smaller forearms (e.g. Popeye the Sailor Man) or fit over armor pieces (bracers, if worn). The other enarme was gripped in the hand.

Larger shields often had a rigid handle instead of a leather strap. This is held in the hand and helps keep the larger shield in the correct orientation.

Yes, it's possible to HOLD things with the shield hand. The leather enarme is fairly flat and leaves the thumb and fingers free for grasping even while the palm is held held in place by the enarme.

Note that if you wanted to simply slide the shield farther up your arm so that BOTH enarmes were on your forearm, leaving your hand completely free, then the shield would flop around on your arm. When you lifted it up to block, instead of orienting vertically like you want, it would be flopping at some weird angle with it's face pointing downward. Any blow to the top or bottom of the the shield would wrench it around your arm.

This is because your arm is not flat. It's round. The only way to keep your shield straight up-and-down (oriented vertically) is to have that enarme held flat against your flat palm.

Also, it is never possible to WIELD weapons with any of these shields. Any kind of swing you would make with a 2h sword, spear, axe, or polearm would put your shield out of position - it wouldn't defend you at all. Worse, the bulk of the shield would make your attack inaccurate. So you sacrifice accuracy and get no defense for it. Nobody would ever do this.

Everybody who used shields in battle always chose a weapon that they could wield in one hand. The only notable exception was the pike (or sarissa) which was thrust with the weapon hand and guided by the shield hand. In this case, it's just a...

So let's say, because it is like this. Would a Fighter be able to pull off feats like Combat Grab, regardless?

The deal isn't to make it realistic. Give the fighter tools only available to him. Per se the critical specialization is fine But let's say he can target creatures and their weak spots better. You don't need to have it realistic.

He currently has some tidbits, but is outclassed in terms of what he can do opposed to other classes.

Fighter D&D 5E is just horrendous in my opinion. He has some tiny tricks up his sleeve which are clearly outclassed by the barbarian and the monk in terms of melee.

I'd say the fighter in Pathfinder 2E is good only about 1/3. He has a decent and good start based on what tools he has available right now.

But he needs to be more versatile then that. He doesn't only know a couple of pre-defined skills. There is a plethora of different fighting styles available, and cherrypicking doesn't do it much glory.

The critical specialization is fine. Only what's your chance that you can score a critical strike in Pathfinder 2E? Very low. The effects of the critical strikes are good, but let's say you can apply them all the time. Suddenly the Fighter which can make targets flat footed all the time, bleeding etc is more threataning and gives him a wider pool of weapon usage to reap the effects.

I'll try the following changes since I'll be playing with Yoogee next Sunday:
- Shield no longer takes a hand free.
- Critical specializations can be applied when you normally hit.

And see how this works. :D

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Brother Fen wrote:
No one can wield a sword in their shield arm. That's like complaining that you can't fire a bow with your toes.

You're clearly not reading the point that you don't hold a shield, rather it's on your arm. Your hand is still free.

Most of the people above, like to cling to one point which is the DPS. Forget the DPS. Look at the other points.

Better yet. LOOK AT THIS

YooGee the Kodiak DM wrote:

Hi everyone.

I am playing the fighter in Peenicks's campaign. He was either sick of my ceaseless ranting or perhaps found some of my points worthy enough to indulge in writing this.

The issues with the fighter class are multitudinous, and they aren't at all new (according to my current research into the mechanics of several D&D editions, possibly excluding the 4th I still need to compare and contrast).

I will preface this with an addendum: I don't claim to know everything there is to know about the fighter class neither in PF 2nd edition or D&D. I DM a 5e campaign and have previously only dabbled in tabletops.
But (and this is a big one), I have 7 years of body training, 2 years of Japanese Jiu-jutsu, and boxing/mma experience. I know the difference between a physically apt and trained individual vs. an average Joe. I am also well read on HEMA techniques. This is not to stroke my ego, merely to lend some credentials that may give me a better insight into how a fighter should be designed mechanically.


I believe that the root of the problem(s) is in the absolute lack of understanding of how medieval combat used to work, and how those techniques would be applied and built upon in a fantasy setting where magic and mythical creatures are involved. Too much time has been spent balancing the caveats of spells, not enough on the weapons. Yes, the tools of the fighter need more work. Consider them the Fighter's spellbook if it makes it easier. Because of this, the fighter is, for all intents and purposes, misunderstood as a class.

"Fight" is their name. They feel at home on a battlefield, they are a cerebral class during a battle despite not being spellcasters. Their understanding of the weapons they wield turn them into an extension of their own bodies. It should be on par with the wizard and his knowledge of the arcane. Sounds too radical? Well, imagine how smart and trained you'd have to be to have a chance against someone who can sling spells at you. If you consider that you'd be the underdog, then you might as well try to sling spells yourself. They should be adaptive, perhaps more so than the other classes. They don't have the overwhelming strength of the barbarian, nor the ambush skills of the rogue, nor the holy magic of clerics and paladins, nor the reality bending capabilities of sorcerers and wizards. So what DO (should) they have?

How about instead of critical hits applying a certain effect on the attacked target, you get a specific skill that

So here are my current problems, specifically, with the fighter class in PF2.

1. Not being able to attack with the longsword whilst holding it with two hands if I have a shield in one hand. This may sound stupid when you don't know how people used shields. Shields in medieval times were mostly *strapped* to the arm. If you were ever winded by a strike in the body you know that not even heightened adrenaline helps the body retain absolute composure. Your hand "forgets" to hold the shield, you drop it, bon voyage to the afterlife. This type of a shield doesn't leave much in the way of offensive capabilities with it, but some consider it a better version than the center-grip shield. With the shield being strapped you needn't always hold it. A two-handed attack is quite possible while still holding your shield, in fact, it is preferable to swing it that way in certain conditions since the shield still protects you while you strike. Whoever made that restriction has no idea what they're restricting.

2. Medium armor constraints in acrobatics or god-forbid - movement. This is high-quality b*&&$!## for anyone that has trained anything passionately. 10 kg of added weight is nothing to scoff at, but the key thing is - it. is. spread. out. over. your. entire. body. I know of people, regular people, who wear chainmail shirts underneath normal clothing to protect themselves against being stabbed in rough neighborhoods. Its barely visible underneath a blouse. They have claimed that after a month they don't even feel it. I don't find that hard to believe. Ok, certain acrobatic checks need to get harder, just if the armor goes past the knees, below the character's center of balance. But movement speed, seriously? On a trained m&#@$&$+!#&$? Give me a break, please. And yes, I realize it "gets better" once you hit a certain level, but I don't see how someone's mind can handle learning and channeling numerous spells each day, whilst it takes longer for a body's physiology longer to adapt to added weight. It makes no sense for the 1st level fighter to not already possess this aptitude.

3. NO VERSATILITY. I can harp about this for an eon. And it is so easily fixable it perplexes me why they haven't tried to balance it. The fighter deserves way better in the way of options. And here's how we give the class what it needs - the aforementioned weapons. Instead of critically hitting to achieve a weapon's extra trait, how about you give smaller bonuses in the form of different options when the fighter becomes better versed with the weapon.

Example: Longsword. Trained: + to hit. Expert: Chance to parry/ added AC. Master: Roll to disarm. Legendary: Counter attack. This is just off the top of my head. Some weapons could allow for bleed effects, others for dismembering or disabling body parts. It will allow for so much versatility while still keeping the class strictly martial. You will finally have a use for having expert status on all weapons, many of them will serve you well in different situations, as they historically did. If you think it is over powered nerf the damage. But its versatility that the class sorely lacks.

Here's why I'm in such a ranting mood on the topic. The druid in the party can deal fire, lighting, positive and negative damage, on top of the slashing damage provided by the scimitar she wields. That's versatile. I can do slashing (longsword), and bludgeoning (shield). If a fighter wants to do magic damage then the only way to do it is through wielding magical weapons. Because this off-balances things in the druids favor the aforementioned weapon traits will make up for it.

And Edge93, I don't know how far you've progressed with your fighter, but at level 5 I feel underpowered as hell compared to the druid. She can deal a lot more damage, whilst not having to move into range, whilst having similar AC, whilst not being encumbered by armor, whilst having enormous versatility, whilst being able to have the additional output of damage from her pet. The flavor text Peenicks mentions is an outright lie. Why a taunt mechanic in a form of a shout/battlecry still hasn't been implemented is infuriatingly confusing. At the very least it would allow the class to have a protection role without DM fiat.

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Edge93 wrote:

First off, on the DPS note, if you're playing a tank you probably won't have the best DPS, 1 handed weapons are naturally better than 2-handed. I'm not sure though how the rest of the party is out-DPSing you unless they are all using 2-handed weapons. Fighters in my experience are top-notch DPS due to having the best accuracy in the game.

As for lacking versatility-wise, I'm not sure where that's from either. In my experience the Fighter feats can give you a really cool variety of options that let you pull different tricks in combat.

As for tanking, yeah, there's a bit of issue though. Attack of Opportunity helps give you some area control but really as it stands now making a tank work falls partly to the GM as a responsibility. There is no aggro mechanic, but the GM chapter of the rulebook recommends that GMs consider allowing players to taunt monsters for aggro and such when appropriate as it can make for a better story feel to battles. And Fighters are honestly plenty capable of making themselves a significant threat, which should draw enemy attention, whereas in PF1 tanky Fighters couldn't really do that.

Also having critical specialization effects proc on a regular hit would probably be pretty broken. Some of those abilities are seriously strong.

Sorry Fighter isn't working great for you, I'm curious what leads to your issues as they don't match up with my own experience.

Let's ignore the DPS for a moment there, what tricks are there?

Intimidating Strike? Combat Grab? Double Shot? Most of the good ones, require 1 free hand, which is occupied by the shield. At no point there is something, which consists the shield apart form Reactive Shield. Abilities like Twin Parry Should be reactions because you usually parry as a reaction not, as an action.

Most of the tools which a fighter knows to combat problems are way at the end of the leveling tree. Level 14 has knockdown per se. But do you realize how long that is until you get those?

Most of the other tricks are moving things, and let's face it. They are very situational.

RazarTuk wrote:
Don't take PA. It's a trap. If you have any level of potency rune on your weapon, it's a straight downgrade. I forget the name of it, but the feat that lets you ignore your second strike for MAP if it misses is much better.

Now that I think about it, good point. :D

PossibleCabbage wrote:

So two things- a taunt mechanic is singularly inappropriate for a tabletop roleplaying game IMO, since one of the core assumptions of the genre is that we assume PCs and NPCs are individuals with minds who are free to make decisions based on the circumstances they find themselves in. While certainly antagonists make bad decisions as befits their characterization all the time, something like "I will stop attacking the person next to me in order to run over to the heavily armed person and attack them" simply stretches credulity.

Another thing though, D&D/PF has never really supported the fantasy of "I am an impenetrable wall of defense, nothing can harm me." Even the tankiest characters you could build in previous editions could only survive a few more hits than everybody else. Defense simply is not very strong in D20 games, and I don't think it can be without switching to a completely different system. So don't even try to "tank" - your defense is simply a measure of how long your offense lasts in a fight.

This is the point of realism where it gets really wonky. If you cut someone, he starts bleeding by default. Why don't most weapons have a bleeding value. We can add realism to this as much as we want. A simple taunt ability which would only be usuable let's say, once or twice per encounter like Spell Points for Fighters would be simple enough to mitigate all of the above problems.

Pen & Paper RPG's which go along the lines of D&D/Pathfinder, have a long history of Fighters being the single most s#%#tiest class ever. Literally why bother with some tiny mechanics that don't do anything when you can just be a Barbarian, Rogue, literally anything else.

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Hello, I want to talk about the fighter and how weak it feels when it competes in terms of DPS towards other classes and it feels weak, in terms of what it can do, apart from attack and the occasional shield block to defend a friendly character. I will be speaking about 10th level.

The first issue I have come upon is the flavor text of the fighter:

"During combat, you stand between allies and enemies if you’re a melee fighter. You draw fire and deal out major damage with unmatched accuracy. Your ability to attack foes who move away lets you punish those who try to get past you. If you’re a ranged fighter, you deliver precise shots from a distance. It’s likely you’ll benefit from spells from spellcasting allies to make you tougher, faster, or better at attacking."

The thing is, there is no ability which allows you to draw fire, and I am clearly out DPS'ed by other classes. There's literally no Taunt ability which allows me to shield my allies. The Coerce ability works if I speak for 1 minute but I'm sure enemies won't wait for me to finish my emotional speech.

Sure the DM might decide that since I go first enemies would attack me, but other than that in an ambush I can't make my enemies draw the fire to me.

There is no incentive for me to play as a Fighter with a sword and a shield dishing out massive damage, where clearly the damage is not there.

Sure, I can take Power Attack, and the damage would seldom increase when I mix it with Forceful weapons such as the Scimitar and the Orc NeckSplitter. But that would be 5d8 at most,

Now that's only DPS wise.

Versatility wise, the class is lacking. If you look at fighters throughout they can complete combat feats which others aren't able to do normally. Their weapon training would allow them to do much more and clearly with the critical specialization that was the intention.

But it is still lacking. I still would need to roll a critical hit against a creature which means going over it's AC or rolling a 20 which is hard however you look at it. I would allow the fighters to use the critical specialization without having them hit a Critical at any case.

I would love to hear what other people think. :D