Alistair's page

58 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists.


RSS

1 to 50 of 58 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

Ah good point Pygon. Thx.


Precision based damage is always Classfeature extra Damage isn`t it?

Sneakattack for Rogues.
Skirmish for Scouts.
(Favoured Enemy for Rangers. Don`t know for sure)
Elegant Strike für Duelists.
The Classfeature of the Swashbuckler and that kind of stuff.

All those Abilitys wich add Level dependend Extra Damage based on a DEX/INT based Action.

But i look forward to some precise Answer. Mine is surely way squishy *g*

Edit: Ah and additionaly those Features having a Sentence in the description like "Those extra Damage is not multiplied by critical hits"

This is the case for sneak damage and is also by skirmish...


Greater Vital Strike does x4 normal Damage

2W6 (~7) > Twohander = 8W6 (~28 SP)

With Power Attack, Str 22 and +5 Weapon =

2W6 + above Bonus. (~33) > Full Attack > ~132
8W6 + above Bonus. (~54)

3 Feats to do +40% Damage with a Standard Attack.
And just dealing 1/3 of a Full Attack


Just throwing in some Hints.

Dex 19 is the maximum Dexterity needed for Feats
(Impr. Precise Shot and Greater Two Weapon Fighting)

To get Dex higher you could just juse a Belt (of physical x )

With a Full Plate you can use 5 Dex. And with it in Mithral i think it was 7. So a Dex of 24 is a good max, where you get easy with 19 Dex from Basestatistic.

My Advice is (going with PB 15 Pathfinder):

STR 14
DEX 16 +2 Race
CON 10
INT 10
WIS 10
CHA 10

You can shuffle some points from other stats to con if you like.
But remember the favoured class Bonus from choosing Fighter. You can choose 1 HP/Lv. Wich does equal 12 Con.

So you will get later:

STR 18 (4 from Lv)
DEX 19 (1 from Lv)

With a Belt of Physical Perfection +6 you get those:

STR 24
DEX 25
CON 16

Wich is good enough.

It is easy for you to get a decent Armorclass.

10 Base
5-7 Dex
14 Armor
5 Ring
5 Amulet

39-41

With Shield it would be about 46-48.

Additional you will be exeptional viable in Terms of Ranged Combat.

enough STR to go Mighty Composit Longbow.

You probably (with some minor probs) could choose to go ranged AND TWF.

So Feats would be :

Weapon Finesse

Two Weapon Fighting
Impr. Two Weapon Fighting
Greater Two Weapon Fighting
Double Slice.
Two Weapon Rend.

Power Attack.

Weapon Focus (my advice > Kukri)
Greater Weapon Focus
Weapon Specialisation
Greater Weapon Specialisation
Impr. Critical

(because of Kukri Threatrange 15/20)
Critical Focus
Bleeding Critical
Staggering Critical > Stunning Critical
Critical Mastery

Deadly Aim
Point Blankshot
Rapid Shot > Manyshot
Precise Shot > Impr. Precise Shot
Shot on the run

24 Feats so far. and as a Fighter you get 21 (Human 22)

Some more Feats that are nice :

Penetrating Strike > Gr. Penetrating Strike
Fleet
Dodge > Mobility > Spring Attack
Nimble Moves > Acrobatic steps
Disruptive > Spellbreaker

Question is what are your priorities.
Sadly you have to skip some Feats.

With a full Dual Wield build, going for pure Damage its now not a problem at all to keep up with Twohanded Fighters.

But you still need more Feats, more Money and more planning.


ok my fault, seems as if i really worn blinkers.

I like the Idea of the gryphon riders. And it seems that with this sight you can easily build a "LotR Rohan Rider" Style Charakter as a Ranger.

Nice.


I find it quite disturbing to choose "Human" as a Favoured Enemy.

For the most Character Ideas it doesn`t fit in very well.

And the Allignment schould be evil, or at least neutral.

And i can`t imagine a Elf-Ranger wich is best at hunting Humans.

Thats kind of cherry picking.

I would rather like the mechanics of the whole FE improved.

How to justify that you are especially good at hunting Humans?

As a Bounty Hunter or Assassin Style Ranger it`s ok. But all the other Character Ideas can`t come up with a real reason for it.


And i personally can live with the fighter only feats.

I just would rather like them open for all.

What me pinches is the Barbarian. With no question the weakest of the 3 Fighter-Type Classes.

What i hate the most is the Pseudo-Ranger-Style.

I would accept it, if he just gets some more in this style.

3 classskills and trapfsense is a bit silly to qualify him as a hybrid.
(corrected the false image of trapsense for me, thanx)


Krigare wrote:

Drop a barbarians skill points to two, allow then only to rage when in a fight, make uncanny dodge only usable in a fight, make fast movement only usable in a fight, and remove trap sense, and I'll give some credence to the concept of barbarian being a pure offense class.

2 Skillpoints are not that huge impact considering the classskills.

uncanny dodge i don`t that powerfull, surely it`s nice but it`s situational ...

Trap Sense isn`t exclusive anymore, everyone can find traps, he just gets a Bonus on it, wich i cant understand at all.


Dissinger wrote:
Critical Mastery, Greater Shield Specialization, and Spell Breaker are far too hit or miss to see any regular play. Only very narrow builds will even use Greater Shield focus, and I really don't see many Captain America builds.

I wouldn`t say that.

My Paladin would like to take greater shield focus, to close the gap to the fighters (wich are +4 ahead wich almost equalls shield or no shield)

Critical Mastery is a real strong Feat wich is a big deal for 2 Weapon Fighting, wich a Ranger maybe use. So for him it does a lot.

Spellbreaker is a nice feat. Caster are a Problem, why not reduce it a bit?


I don`t like the argument
"Fighters FIGHT and therefore they has to be the best in it"

A Fighter is a Fighter because through his feats he is capable of :

Fighting in every Style he wants, no matter if DW, Ranged, Sword&Board or Two handed weapon. And mostly he can spice those styles up with another feat chain or has the freedom to take a lot of tactical maneuvers.

A Fighter is non restricted. He can wear every armor or shield, and all weapons except the exotic. And he is even capable of ignoring movement penaltys through Armortraining.
> Every other class is quite limited in that case.

A Fighter gets on his self a unique Bonus on Armor wich no class can emulate and he has an innate weapon training wich gives him a bonus above all other classes.

So hes the most VERSATILE and ALL-AROUND Fighter.

No one can compete him at this. It`s no question.

And on top of this he is the only class:

Which can specialize in one kind of weapon
(what he already does at a better version @ weapon training)

Wich can jump around in front of casters that they can`t concentrate
(Disruptive and Spellbreaker)

Wich can use 2! critical Feats together.

wich can Master a Shield (poor Paladins)
(greater shield focus)

wich can ignore Damage reduction at large scale and permanent
(penetrating strike and greater penetrating strike)

____________________________________________________________________

And for a class wich comes along with such great features and options why can`t a class like the barbarian wich focuesses on pure offense not dealing more devastation?


Uh damn it, did take the 5 Ragepowers from a example not lv 20.

But 11 Feats > 10 Ragepowers anyway.

It`s about Feat chains and versatility.

You could go for 2HF and Ranged Combat easily with this.

And the rangepowers, even IF they are quite nice on some situations, are like the rage itselfs all situational.

And like evilash stated to

Permanent Power > Situational / to activate / not lasting.

And therefore they should be lower.

Thats what annoys me about the description about the Barbarian.

He should for getting more into risking his life with lower AC and raging be a bit more devastating.

Let the fighter versatility, acces to multiple feat chains, second best melee damage and more endurance in combats. But let the barbarian carnage his way through the Enemys on expense of his own blood.

Thats just his thing.

If they wanted a barbarian not to be a reckless "all out" dishing the hurt class. Then they shouldn`t give them the rage classfeature and the background.

I Surely can do some builds about 5. 10. 15. and 20. level. then finally the feats are count in and the Fighter went well beyond the barbarian from complete power.

@ Takamonk : Good idea.


@ Kirth you are quite silly.

The Weapon Focus Chain was intended to balance Fighters 3.x

Now they don`t need it anymore. Simply thats it.

To let them be exclusive is just seems bit overdone.

Fighters already got the "i can get them all" advantage from their 21-22 Feat palette.

Even if these 4-6 Feats aren`t Classrestricted they would in an advantage.

And with making them avaiable, Barbarians would likely catch up.

But it seems like the
"i am happy with everything thats thrown in front of my feet"
fractions could not look beyond their own noses.

Just build a fighter lv 20. With the amount of Gold listed, and with a focus on THW-fighting and a lv 20 Barbarian. And then compare them.

And then you will see that the whole! not every tiny advantage on it`s own, i mean the whole class holistically needs a little Juice.

Barbarian is :

Doing less damage (beyond 12.lv it gets worse)
Survives (against melees) way much shorter.
has minimum 7 (or 5 if counting Situational the Flanking in) AC less (without counting in Dex)
has instead of 11! Bonus feats (wich translate to huge advantages)only a 5 Ragepowers ! (wich are at best 3/4 Feats).
All the Power is Situational, Depending on Rage.
And the ON/OFF/ON/OFF Rage functionality is unfortunatly designed.
The Damage reduction is no real advantage because a fighter is getting it too.
And i surely has missed something.

Ah and to make some Tempers cooking:

Barbarians excel in combat, possessing the martial prowess and fortitude to take on foes seemingly far superior to themselves. With rage granting them boldness and daring beyond that of most other warriors, barbarians charge furiously into battle and ruin all who would stand in their way.


I don`t see the logic in "Fighters have weapon training, and need on top of it, the other weapontraining feat chain exclusive too.."


That are special feats wich only those classes can use anyway.

Or would you be happier if your fighter could take extra lay on hands?

But the Weaponfocus/Spec. Chains aren`t only good for fighters.

And no one can really say that no other class than a fighter is capable of perfectioning usage with their favoured weapon...


OK Penetrating Strikem is another Point for you.

I don`t think about flanked this way. You arent always flanked.
I bet you are half the times fighting a Solo Enemy or the rest of the party or the circumstances doesn`t allow the enemy to flank you.

And with the Dex, sure there is no Rule. But with AC highs as 51 with no reasonable problems for Fighters it surely is worth to go dex.

I don`t saying that you only have to go dex, but it`s tactically and powertechnically preferable.


Mistwalker wrote:


At 11th, it is 2/- all the time. If you choose your rage powers to maximize that, it is 5/- when you rage. I would not say that it is a small advantage.

And the feat to bypass 5/- is 16th level, at which point the barbarian could be at 7/-.

Well that no flanking business is worth 2 to AC, bringing the difference down by another 2.

I believe that is a preference of yours. Most, if not all my players take Con over Dex for fighters.

Again, preferences come into play here. No one is forced to take Weapon Focus, it is a personal choice. I have had a player not take weapon focus or specialization for their fighter, as they played them to be a generalist (use anything).

Also, the "on all weapons" is a feature when you are comparing rage vs weapon specialization.

OK the Ragepower for Damage reduction is a viable argument. Got a point.

Since the other ragepowers doesn`t look that nice.

But Penetrating strike i can get with lv 12. and it ignores 5 DR.

Ok the Flanking is surely nice IF you are in a Situation where you normaly would be considered flanked. So and then it`s still a difference if you get a +2 AC or you`re enemy didn`t get a +2 to Hit.
(a flat +2 Ac would be against EVERY Melee Attack)

With the Preference... No it isn`t its a question of effectivness.
1 AC (+1 Touch) +1 Init. , +1 Ref +1 some Skills > 1 HP/lv and +1 Fort

Reducing the Chance to be hit by an Enemy by probably more than 5% (Situational up to 50%) is surely better than be able to take some little more Damage.


Mistwalker wrote:

I am not sure if you are being deliberately misleading or not.

In your example, why is the barbarian in studded leather when they could be in a breastplate? Why did your barbarian and fighter not use the same stats in the same place, that is 16 dex or 14 dex for both?
You seem to have not factored in dex to the ACs of your examples.

Please note that the fighter can only use some of those nifty extra feats on specific weapons, while the barbarian can use their class powers on all weapons (improvised or not).

You don't seem to be taking into consideration the large advantage that being immune to sneak attacks and flanking brings into the equation, nor the damage reduction.

Ok maybe i am taking some things not into account.

But Damage Reduction 1/- at lv 7th. isn`t really great. And when it`s reaching 5/- then there are feats to ignore it.

And the Flanking/Sneak is surely nice, but not getting sneaked isn`t a great advantage to a fighter wich has to be hit first. A Barbarian without! this feat would be a Rogue hack feast. But you are right in that i always forget about it. Surely its a slight advantage.

Right, the armor was my fault then, i had something in mind with medium armor only for expense of some features. But it seems as its not the case. Wich doesnt change so much in AC terms. Difference should stay about 7+

The Ability Scores are just a logical difference.
Not something to make one Class look better.
Barbarian profits more from Con, and Fighter more from Dex.

And with the "on all weapons" surely it might be a advantage in some odd cases. But usually it`s some priority to use a weapon wich best suits your needs. And even a Barbarian should take Weapon Focus.


Quote:
Making Weapon Specialization fighter-only doesn't make the fighter better. "Weapon Specialization" is no better than any other combat feat, especially in

No on its own its not better, and is not making the Barbarian worse.

It`s the combination!

It`s Weapon spec. + Gr. Weapon spec. + Gr. Weapon Focus
(wich are in for free if you count the free feats in)

And in Later games with the Usage of Power Attack it`s all about to Hit!
And +4 Damage translate into 16+ Damage / Round without critical Hits
And Stack with the +4 Damage and Hit from Weapon Training.

And it`s the fact that a Fighter can easily get some different
feat chains in addition to be better combatants with lesser disadvantages than a Barbarian.

The Armor Gap for expample translates later into 10+ lesser Armor for the Barbarian wich lets his HP seem silly.


@ Seeker, i really like versatility of Fighters and the feats on itself are ok. But not IF the Barbarian has nothing to come up with against them.


I will use your listing to show some things.

11th barbarian
1 good save
4 skill points per level
Damage Reduction 2/- (all the time)
Trap Sense +3
Improved Uncanny Dodge (no flanking and no sneak attacks)
Greater Rage for 24 rds per day (+6 str and con)
5 Rage powers (which could increase the damage reduction to 5/-)
6 feats
> +2 HP

2 Abilityscores needed, heavily dependant on Strenght AND Con

11th Fighter
1 good save
2 skill points per level
Bravery +3
Armor Training 3 (no movement penalties to any armor)
Weapon Training 2 (+2 to attack and damage for 1 weapon group, and +1 to another one)
6 bonus feats
6 feats

Going with a 2 Handed Weapon it`s just about Strenght.

And to compare some things. While Raging a Barbarian will get:
(Giving him 18,14,16,10,10,10)
+3 Hit +4 Damage + 2 Willsave -2 Armorclass +33 temp. HP.
Makes him +18/+13/+8 at 2W6+10 Damage each hit.
And gives him about 13 AC with a Studded leather.
With 143 HP

Fighter :
(Giving him 18,16,14,10,10,10 because AC > HP)
Weapon Spez., Gr. Weapon Focus ( are fighter only and for free with the bonus feats as a class features, and he will sure have them as advantage)
+3 to Hit +4 Damage Always
Makes him +18/+13/+8 at 2W6+10 Damage each hit.
And gives him about 22 AC with a Fullplate.
with 87 HP

So its +40% HP against. +40% Armor Class.
And not to forget 4 Feats wicht could translage into a free:
Weapon Focus, Power Attack, Impr. Critical.

Just from Classfeatures i would say the difference at lv 11. isn`t that Huge if you don`t coun`t the 4 Extra Feats in and that the Fighter hasn`t to Rage for it, and the Fighter is lasting much longer even with the lower HP. (And about the Willsave the fighter could take Iron Will)

So i hope you see the difference, at 12th. Level the Damage of the Fighter increases by 2 per Hit and goes in lead.


Yes, thats quite a good idea. Just giving those Feats to other classes. And even then there is a little advantage for the fighter.
He can take a lot more feats, wich doesn`t off-balance things.


Thurgon wrote:
Never been a huge fan of class specific feats. The other classes couldn't benfit near as much as the fighter can from feat trees since the fighter recieves so many bonus feats there shouldn't be a need for exclusive feats. Make more feat trees worth going down and you wouldn't really need exclusive feats.

I like choosing feats, but feat restricitions in favor for Fighters are not really needed anymore, right.

KaeYoss wrote:
Must be preference, because the rules explicitly state that a barbarian can enter a rage several times per encounter. With tireless rage, you can do it basically immediately, and with roused anger, you can do it once (at a high cost). Or get potions of repeated rage (alias potions of lesser restoration).

Maybe it`s personal preferance.

But try to look at it this way:
With Rage there is only On or Off, either you are in rage or you aren`t.

Please tell me that you can imagine a Barbarian getting in Rage with all wich belongs to it, and after 6 secs he just looks normal, only to become raging again... thats quite absurd.

He will look like getting a epileptic-attack or such thing.

Only because it`s mechanicaly managable i don`t think it`s a justified behaviour.

And as you stated yourself, that technic is a huge cut in. You have to buy potions of lesser restoration and stuff till you get to 17th. where its permanent usable.


Why don`t give logic additions to the most expensive feat chain to obtain?

If you choose to fight with a 2handed Weapon you will do the same or even higher Damage, but you don`t have to take 4 Feats Minimum and on top of that you don`t have the Weapon choice problem, half the cost and lesser managing problems (speaking of 2 different weapons with different enchantments) and no attack penalty.

So i really think it`s kind of unfair to give a fighting style such high cost without giving it a little advantage above the Alternatives.

And to be honest, the guys here made some nice feats.
Even if some are a bit to strong for a single feat.

Ah and don`t forget the TWF Feat Chain ist the ONLY Feat Chain wich is getting even WORSE at the end.
Because of the scaling, that the last Bonus Attack is at -15.
A Normal Chain is getting better, and with a 3 feat chain i would assume that the last one is a really big bang for the buck, and not giving me a bonus attack wich will miss 90% of the time.

I think it`s a bit bad designed. I don`t think it would hurt at all if you could charge with a following dual attack (it`s more like "it absolutely has to be that way!")


I just think back, at the times where Barbarians where really the absolute Offensive Guys... "All out style".

And why is it a Problem? He has a lot of HP, but low Armor. And thats OK he does more Damage than all the other Melees but is more vulnerable.

And i don`t think it`s much missing, to bring the Barbarian back on course.

Juicing up the Rage Powers would do it. Let them become more like feats. And not like 1/4 Feats.

Or providing more Bonus from Rage itself would be a good Choice.
8 STR isn`t that much. 4 AB 6 Damage.

Additionally i think it`s kind of weird relying on Rage wich is a temporary Mode of Fighting and then not getting real drive.

Comparing those Lv 20 Special Abilitys like:

Fighter - Weapon Mastery
Bard - Death Performance
Monk - Perfect Self
Paladin - Holy Champion
Ranger - Master Hunter
Rogue - Master Strike
Sorcerer - 9th. Spells + Bloodline Ultimates
Druid - Wildshape at will, 9th Spells
Cleric - 9th Spells
Wizard - 9th Spells

Again its just my opinion. I don`t feel like the barbarian is still like he should be, and like we once knew him.


Uhm i don`t really see the balance that way.

4 Skillpoints vs. 2

Medium Armor -2 AC vs. Heavy +4 AC from Dexmod.

12 HD vs. 10 HD

Good Damage vs. Exzellent Damage

Rage vs. Always better in Combat Situations

Ragepowers + Uncanny Doge vs. 11 Feats and Special Fighter Only`s

So its 4 against 2 for the Fighter.

And the HD isn`t really a + for the Barbarian because it just outweighs his really low AC especially while raging.

And i don`t see that 3 Nature Skills are enough to come along with.

With that Damage Reduction, i don`t see it that powerfull. it starts at 7th lv. thats pretty late for being really nice.
And with 19th. level both, the Fighter AND the Barbarian got 5/-

And to stay at the Armor. It`s also a difference that a Fighter not only has about 20 AC more at 20lv. and can use full movement. His HP will be worth a lot more, even with 2 HP less / Level.

So please don`t miss understand me, but for me it looks like the Barbarian is a little bit weaker in a whole bunch of aspects and the only thing what should make up for it are those 3 Skills and a few minor tricks.

And please don`t come along with those silly "On Off On Off" kind of Rage usage. Thats NOT how rage should be used and is therefore no argument.

A Barbarian will lack in Combat, not by very much, but it`s a evident problem. And he has nothing to really compensate for it.


i am totaly agreeing.

Because of the (on top of the class features) fighter only Feats, fighters are at a great advantage.

And because of this, Barbarians are a bit under powered.
They rely on the Rage, wich isn`t always avaiable and has to be activated, and on top doesn`t give enough power to compete with fighters.

For the purpose of comparing Fighter and Barbarian, simply take the 20th. Lv Power.

Weapon Master : Crits auto confirm, no disarm and +1 on critical Damage multiplier.

Against

Mighty Rage : increases the Rage Bonus for STR and CON +2 and the Willsave +1

...

To compare Rage vs. Fighter features/feats.

Rage = +4 to Hit. 6 Damage and the Willsave Bonus. with a Armor penalty!

Fighter =
Weapon training +4 Hit / Damage
Gr. Weapon Focus +1 Hit
Weapon Spec. + Gr. WS : + 4 Damage
= +5 Hit and + 8 Damage

And this are only the common Feats. Some others like Disruptive or Spellbreaker for example aren`t avaiable either.

And if you are considering that a Fighter has 11! Feats more as a barbarian and the Weapon Mastery than it`s quite unbalanced.
(i don`t count Ragepowers in because they are only some once a rage tricks)

So a complete Combat oriented Build with fighter (exactly the Same Equipment exept for the Armor)

Would Give the Fighter:

- More flexibility and Feat Options.
- Normal Damage is about the same, but with Critical Strikes the Damage went high for Fighters.
- A much higher Armorclass
- Not tied to Rage

Maybe i am over exaggerating but for me it looks like a 20th. Level Fighter is far superior to a Barbarian in Combat terms.

And Rage Powers are a cool class feature, but they are really a lot too weak. I had imagined they would be a bit like the Frenzied Berserker stuff but they are quite useless "+5 to hit for 1 Attack once a Rage"
for Example...

And with the Fighter Only feats some Classes like Paladins (wich i consider as equally defensive) getting a lower AC as Fighters.
I am specificly pointing at Greater Shieldfocus.

Actually it looks like:

If you want to play a strong Combatant then you are always a lot stronger if you use a Fighter for it.

Ranger? no use a dex based fighter.
Barbarian? no use a fighter and give him a 2hander and hes easier and stronger.
Paladin? Only if you are sure the Campaign is about undead or that kind.


so far as i read it, there is NOWHERE a Line with "you have to follow a chosen deity".

And in the Beta-Rulebook there was even a passage like:
"A Paladin can also choose to fight for good itself with not following any particular good"


i fully support neros point of view !

he is exactly pointing it out, how to get along with all the code of conduct problematic.

And Jabor, yes the atonementquest is exactly what i imagined, thats a really cool adventure hook and adds in depth to the character.

Edit: and no jabor has specified it a bit. i think we get it.


Damn it that my english isn`t that well, please excuse if i am hard to understand.

And to stay at the "not so good english" i am not quite sure if i understand everything right you (raven) wrote.

The problem with the handling of deitys is perhaps the same with every religion, it varies in nature from all possible point of views.

I am not sure if i got this right, so there is a spell named "atonement" wich will give him amnesty for his bad deeds ?

Thats a nice roleplaying element.

I appreciate such things. I had somehting like 2 Weeks working in a temple in mind. Depending on the kind of act.


Ah and to give it another point of view.

The Paladin even doesn`t have to devote to a SINGLE Deity.

He can draw his powers from everything thats good and right.

It seems even more than the Power is just imbued in the paladin in everyway. Because with a single deity you could have said "he is giving when need" but with lots of gods in a prayer like "by all thats good and righteous i will smite you evil!" or "by the gods and the power of the holy light" or some more clichè it wouldn`t come from a special named deity.

Any ideas? ^^


I don`t think a god is watching over every little servant all the time.

Then you don`t have to forget about the wisdom of the god.
He will be more patient than the average human-dungeonmaster.

I am really sure that a paladin isn`t that kind of chained to a absolute perfect attitude.

Sure he don`t has to KNOWINGLY commit evil acts.
And if something turns out to be a evil act afterwards he can do penance.

And it`s not like a pally is a warrior and everytime he is using some divine magic he is begging his god and if the god has time he tips with his fingers the back of the paladin.

It`s more like "you devote yourself to this deity and serve her at your best, for this you get the presents of the godess, wich imbue your body.

So it`s like you got those powers tied in your body from first day and you fuel them with your inner strenght and righteousness. And if you are falter then the power is still there until you do something that breaks the requirements wich are necessary to hold the gift in your soul.

So it`s more like "if your heart darkens of your acts of evil it can`t hold the powers of your godess anymore because it is corrupted and weak"

I really doubt that the goddess is "permawatching every servant"

So if a Paladin is overzealous and "forgets" to detect evil, but a "enemy" is showing evil behaviour than it`s a shame, but nothing that will take away his powers, he will, if hes righteous show remorce and do penance for his unthoughtfull act.

As stated in the rules a willingly commited evil act is causing the loss. And for that it should really be discussed detailed if this is necessarily the Paladins fault.

And i am really sure that no one can expect a paladin to run the whole day scanning all "possible threats" for he is not the NSA.

I have the feeling that people only try to find reasons to get rid of pallys or their signature ability. And i think such DMs shouldn`t allow paladins at all if they arent capable of mastering the paladins role nice.


I`d like to throw in that a Fighter is doing not a much less damage with Melee Attacks than a Paladin with Smite Evil on.

The Fighter will have Weapon Spezialisation and Greater Weaponspez.
gives +4 more Damage.
Then he has his Weapon Training.
gives +4 more Damage.

so it`s under normal Smite conditions a +12 Damage per hit.
If all other modificators are the same.
Usually the Paladin lacks in a ability score.

And then you shouldn`t oversee that a Fighter in general has some extra feats wich improve their combat effectivness.

I would say, under normal circumstances a Paladin is 10% behind the Fighter in terms of damage and in the normal Smite battles the Pally is 10% ahead. With the really bad smite against that three subtypes it`s a really glorious Time for the Pally.

But to compare..

A fighter is doing something like 1W8+35 or that kind. All of the time with +5 higher to hit min.

A Paladin does more like 1W8+25 all of the time.

So even while smiting it`s about the fighters Damage with a bit of spice.

And mostly a Paladin is tied to a shield. A Fighter can use Dual Wield or Two-Weapon fighting and doing a great amount of Damage more than the Pally even with smite.


Doesn`t really make a difference.

increasing the players power = lowering the enemys power.

For the buff/debuff question on it`s own.

*Edit: But a Dirgesinger is a nice concept wich would be interessting to play !


Even if stubbornness is preventing some people of seeing as clearly as we do, that the bard is now really powerfull.
I am really astonished about the insights some people given about the class, the motivation spread for new bard players and the enthusiasm of all of you.

Nice thread!


But if someone goes that way, where is the logic to it?

Every class can catch up with other classes in given features if you give them enough money...

If you give the Bard the same amount of gp that a rogue needs to be at least "even" in terms of spell-functionality, a bard could pile up lots of Equipment or UMD-Items for himself too.

The ratio still is the same. A rogue never will be able to cast all the spells a bard can, or be as versatile as a bard.

And what`s important too is the fact, that a rogue cannot emulate classfeatures of a bard and the bardic perfomances.

So it`s a bit crazy to say

"if i buy me a lot of sticks i get a bard! muahaha"

Let`s keep it realistic, i don`t got the experience with magical rods and staffs. What could be a real number of extra spells trough rods a rogue could pile and what would be the cost? (did i mention that those stick`s and rods don`t last for ever? a bards slots do.. so)

Lets say a rogue has enough arms and strenght to carry 20 rods. so he has 20 Spells on his armament. Thats still not the whole bard palette. And on top of it it surely cost a lot and each only serves for a few uses.

Surely a rogue could make up for a bard from time to time, but
ONLY IN TERMS OF NORMAL SPELLS.

And like i said, to be fair, the same amount of gold spent by the rogue would belong to the bard. Who can freely buy anything he wants from that gp, even things that don`t have a decreasing benefit like a headband of alluring charisma or that kind of stuff.

And to say " a rogue can all a bard can, because of staffs" is like saying "a warrior can all that a paladin can, with some potions"


It`s not the point that he dislikes bards, whats annoying me...

It`s the fact that he says "Yumm yumm everything about a bard sucks"
but don`t really bring any valuable arguments for discussion.

furthermore he juses always the "if you bath a rogue in gp then you will see that he is even to a bard... if you like to carry 50 rods/staffs and extra stuff"

Maybe we should really start a petition...

"Give Rogues 200.000GP starting gold to get rid of useless bard-sacks"

just kidding.

only want to be a bit sarcastic.


I don`t really understand what`s your Problem Nathan...

The Spells are good.(2/3 Sorceror + Songs)
The Skills are superb.( Rogue + Classfeatures to push them to awesomeness)
The Fighting is ok. (at least hitting with 3/4 Bab + Buff and low Damage)
Healing is good. ( 2/3 Cleric + Song )
Buffing Songs that can easily augment a melee group to a carnage
Socialize easy because of Cha-based class.

against a Rogue:

Only 1-2 Spells per Feat.
The Skills are generaly even, without the Classfeatures of the Bard.
Fighting is way much better. (Sneak and more Feats)
No Healing on its own.
No Buffing on its own.
Socialize usually nearly the same.
Dirty Classfeatures for Survival and Feats.

So it`s :

Spells + Buffs + Classfeatures

against

More Damage, more Survivability and more Feats.

So it`s easy said:

Bard is more Caster and Support > tendency: Groupchar
Rogue is more Fighter and Survivor > tendency: Solochar

Aye?


Boggle wrote:

well actually a rogue who specializes in umd (use magic device) is amazingly versatile and can massively supplement herself or the party.

Again i still believe more effectively

Regards

That has nothing to say.

Because UMD are both capable of.

And to buy things is no Classfeature. So it`s nothing to use as a argument. Especialy when the Bard with the same amount of Gold spend is much ahead again.

Only compare Classfeatures of Rogue and Bard and nothing from outside wich is avaiable for both.

(btw. i too believe that a rogue with a good list of tools and umd is highly supportive)


I really think a bard is only a joke, if someone is choosing to play a bard and don`t has the wisdom to see ALL Options.

Most i`ve heard of, are arguments like

"Bah, a Bard is a ineffective combatant"

... aye and why? because you wanted him to be like a Fighter, and don`t realised that you aren`t a fighter.

The Classfeatures are not about Melee, simply to see, even for a newcomer. And for that you can fight enough (with Dex, Finesse and the right concept) to get a Enemy of your heels, or to support/rescue a fellow groupmember.

Or the argument "Bards suck, cause they get no fireballs!"
Or the argument "We need a Healer not a silly bard!"

Uhm yeah, but what about controlling 5 Enemys to dealing no damage to the group? ... and on top allowing the group to take them out one by one.

It`s all about creative playstyle. Thinking of alternative and even better ways to deal with situations.

Crowd Control = Healing / Damagereduction.

And the point of view.
Don`t missunderstand the bard then he will give you a good time.


nathan blackmer wrote:

You're also not going to get a DECENT melee bard for the same point spread. The only way to play a bard and be effective has - and will always be due to his hybrid nature - been to focus on a one or two aspects of his abilities. You can't truly BE a jack of all trades as a bard even because you need to spec. Caster/socialite? Cha/Int/Dex. Fighter/Socialite? Str or Dex/Cha/Int? I don't think the fact that the bard is lukewarm on everything necessarily makes him viable in EVERY situation.

I don't see where a rogue couldn't be just as viable.

Besides, Bard and thief were always rogue subclasses....Thief being more combat, bard being more cast. I just don't see bard being a viable combatant. Jack of all trades? You're not even OK at everything, you're poor at most things. The only thing the character excels at is dice rolling based roleplay. He can't, for a SECOND, stand in for combat for anybody other than a wizard or sorceror. He can't cast better then anyone other then a ranger or paladin. Technically, the majority of his spells are available to any rogue with the money to purchase scrolls/spells/wands and the good sense to take Use Magic Item.

and fun has NOTHING to do with anything, you could roleplay the rogue the EXACT same way.

Bard, mechanics wise, is kind of a lame duck.

Thats a bit shortsighted i guess.

I was always a bit sceptical about the bard and the "jack of all trades" kind of approach.

But to give a example.

With a 25 Pointbuy and a Halfling you get what you need to fill all.

18 Dex, 18 Cha and 14 Int. Or for the more Skill oriented 16 Dex 16 Int and 18 Cha.

So as Fighter Style you should always pick weapon finesse or ranged...

Skills... you get tons of it, paired with heavy extra points per Classfeature and the free "i know everything" Bardic Knowledge.
So even a Rogue will NEVER get more out of the skills than a bard can.
(Overall with the Versatile Performance / Take 10 Style Features.)

And the Spells of the Bard, even if they are not Lv 9. Are all in all Unique. You got ALL Buff Spells, nice Healing Spells, Everything what has to do with Illusions and Control. And additionally you shouldn`t forget about the Songs ! they do make up for Lv 7 and 8 Spells easy!
Fascinate/Daze/Fear a whole group of Enemys and later on Kill with a DC 30! Willsave if you go for straight Charisma.

Sozializing is absolutely no problem even with Cha 16...
Fighting is always a bit hard, but hey you get there where the most Solo Rogues get with your Buffs.

So the point is, that the whole concept and all the options that a bard puts on the table gets him in EVERY of his possible Jobs near to a Pure class.

You Hit as a Rogue although the Damage is surely much lower.
You can be easy the socializing leader of a group.
You know even things the DM didn`t know before you made your roll.
You Heal enough to get your group up.
You Control the Battlefield like a specialized Mage/Sorceror.
You can always offer the skill that is needed. And for the Skills you don`t you can push the Pure with the Skill to new hights!
You Buff the Group WHILE doing all this like no one else can.

So in short, you can do everything, some things only half as good as the pures but most of them nearly as good.


The new rule fits in perfect in my opinion.

I feel silly thinking about how "powerfull" my attack should be,
in Roleplay "with -2 or -4" doesn`t make any sense.

It´s more like "Uh you take my pony? i will take you down with my best shot(s)!" so i mean more a yes or no question, rather than a exact self-estimation or such.

Now you additionally got a bit of risk of wether you hit or not, pre PF it was more "ok the Encounter has a AC of 30, then i can spend up to 7 Points in PA without having to roll more than a 5..."

That has nothing in common with a brutal only strengh driven powerblow

I hope it`s understandable ^^

AH and whats even more important ! you have boundaries. So PA isn`t that overpowert anymore. Nothing like "i take 12 in PA with my twohander and get +48 Damage on that roll.." or that kind of things.

After much maths every class is from power sight, really near to the other classes. The Differences are usually balanced through classfeatures and other advantages.


Aelryinth wrote:


when you are doing dmg totals, there is no thing such as a 100% hit or a 0%. You always hit on a 20, and always miss on a 1.

- Thx, overseen it.

Aelryinth wrote:
You can also add up dmg much faster by simply totalling the above (260%, or 2.6 x ) and multiplying it by the average damage/blow.

- I will give it a try next time calculating damage.

Aelryinth wrote:
This is also why all fighters should be working on maximizing their TH numbers. Every single + Th once you are 'no miss except on 1' is +15% on dmg if you get iteratives. Those iteratives hitting is the truest power of the Fighter class.

- Sure, i see. Thats why i think Fighters have the greatest damage potential without any question.

Aelryinth wrote:
You are also mistaken on Full Plate maxing at +5 Dex. Mithral Full Plate maxes at +7, or a 24 Dex. No fighter at that level should be without it, which is a shame. Ideally, they should have adamantine, but their penultimate class ability doesn't stack with adamantine armor!

- Thats true, but for this example it was not that important

(actually i was to lazy to search for the best way)

Aelryinth wrote:

A +6 Enhancement bonus and +5 Inherent bonuses (tomes/wishes) mean a +11 bonus. Starting with a mere 13 Dex, a Fighter can max out his Dex/AC in mithral full plate without putting a single point into Dex.

The Standard Array is 15 Str, 14 Con, 13 Dex, 12 Wis, 10 int and 8 Cha, so that actually fits in neatly.

- Sure but you want to get TWF soon, wich is not working with 13 Dex.

And dealing with builds you should use not a monster array, better use the Point buy (i usually use the 25)
====

Aelryinth wrote:
Also note that the superiority of THW builds is now non-existent.

- Who says that TWF > all ? it`s just a example Fighter with much offensive potential. A Greatsword build surely matches or overcomes the TWF build.

Aelryinth wrote:
A Sword and Board fighter hitting ONCE with a Shield Bash will do roughly equal damage to that. The only advantage for the THW guy is in single attacks, and their advantage is now fixed because of the change to Power Attack. The Sword and Board guy can actually unsling the shield and do all the dmg of the THW guy, -2.5 (longsword vs Greatsword), then pick up the shield and have a glorious AC again.

- Thats not that easy, if you want to build a sword & board build wich does equal damage to a TWF Fighter you have to invest more feats.

But generally it`s true. And for the Dex calculation it makes more Sense to go for it.

Aelryinth wrote:
Archers always look best on offense because they will get full attacks off the most. Thankfully, weapons training means you can be pretty adept at using a bow even if your focus is Sword and/or Board.

- Yeah, the "fullattack option" most of the time is a reason why the ranged varations surely develop a huge damage potential


Ah i have to specify, not against a offensive Fighter build with Ranged Focus, Two weapon fighting or Twohanded Melee.

If anyone will proof my theory wrong i would appreciate it.

But as things go, no one brings in a good build to proof me wrong.


Abraham spalding wrote:
Charisma isn't a particularly important stat for the bard (unless you are trying to make a spell caster out of it)

I wouldn`t say that.

Every Bardic Performance (DC 30 Willsave Deathperformance!) Save is Cha based.
Every Spell DC is Cha based.
All Social Skills are Cha based.

If you try to make a Melee Bard (Ulfen Skald or somethin`)than surely physical Abilitys maybe a better choice.

But i think ranged combat with Dexterity and lots of Spells will get better overall capabilites.


FighterGuy wrote:
Not to mention the fact that I can make something with more AC, more balanced ability scores but does a bit less damage - but hit more often - irregardless it will take me longer than you but I'll take down that bad guy (or this guy) taking less damage myself as well as have better saves and the like to take on otehr party members with other abilities besides being a target for my sword. I won't get into a big numbers game with it on the board but those who know their stuff know what I'm talking about.

And exactly this shows that YOU didn`t understand the whole discussion.

I can do somethin with more AC and more "balanced" Ability scores and less damage by my own. But that wasn`t IN QUESTION. It`s just a example how devilish a TWF Fighter (wich was focused on the raw fighting capabilites, i didn`t plan it full with every aspect)can be.
The Dragon is only a example fight cause he fits CR 20 very well and has high AC.


He had quoted the Stats of my fighter build that you just quoted by yourself.

And this fighter build i have shown here, is JUST the nearly best TWO WEAPON FIGHTING fighter build you will be able to build.

And the build still has potential in terms of gold and/or feat adjustments.

It`s not ME who says "only ONE viable fighter build"

i for myself just wanted to clearify that i am pretty sure that NO Rogue ever will beat a fighter in terms of dished out hurt unless its a absolutley pro rogue situation.

And don`t always come along with "YOUR SAVES ARE BAD" .

You don`t have any great options to get you damn will save up (more than i already offered) without sacrificing lots of offensive potential.

- Iron Will + impr. Iron Will
- maybe a Wisdom +6 Item wich is possible because the Money for the build of me is not fully used.
- Cloak of Resistance (wich is already mentioned too)
- Buffs

So what? will you create a truly good build with 20 Wis ? to each his own. But don`t always try to come along with those "i know it better" rubbsih without giving working expamples.

And to build such a 20th lv Charakter from lv 1. isn`t that bad at all, you just have to (like with every build) crawl the first 3-5 levels wich maybe can be hard.
(our lv1 Dualwield Dwarf who uses my build just rocks even at this level)

And here is no one talking about "bla this guy beats this guy"

It`s just a build, for Dualwielding. Thats IT.

It`s not "wich fighter build can beat the bad black dragon the best"


I interprete it that kind of way:

Spells in it`s written form are not just a few sentences like a poem.
It´s much more than this, it`s dozens of variables, magic runes and much like high mathematics nothing you can remember no matter how often you read it.

Read magic seems to include some basic understanding and is quite easy to memorize.

comparing to a Sorceror:

They got it in their blood, the spells are intuitively cast and then the sorceror can adapt it and reproduce. it`s more like "uh i knew how it felt the first time, i knew where to draw the energy from".

So it`s : Knowledge, Formulas and Preparation against Intuitive sometimes uncontrollable learning by doing.


Oh,then please excuse me, my fault *self-facepalm*

argh just read "Pathfinder Chronicles" ...


Thats not true, simply look @ Dragons Revisited.

There are some nice examples.

I generally use the Blackdragon Seryzilian because he`s exactly CR 20.


Ah to stay at seryzilian, luckily he is not possesing any mindcontrolling spells and even if he would do so, his DC is about 17-20 wich is even with a +13 doable.

1 to 50 of 58 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>