So I'm guessing that with the Sorcerer VMC we can't use the Wildblooded bloodlines or archetypes in general?Pretty much. Variant Multi-classing is very much how multi-classing worked in 4th Edition. You're not really getting the second class, just some pieces of the chassis.
Orc bloodline it is then.
I quite enjoy the blank slate nature of the fighter, though I admit that I'd basically never play the class without an archetype for a firmer niche. Basically, the only thing I actually dislike about the class aside from how underwhelming bravery is (especially next to aura of courage) is the skill points and arguably the prior lack of the stamina system's greater tactical decision making. Different strokes, I guess.
So what do people wants out of fighter? Like seriously? Do people wants fighter to have all good saves + Evasion+ Still Mind+ Full Bab + Self-buffs special ability + rogue talents + ranger combat styles + Studied target + 8+int skills per level+ being good at social and intellectual situations all at the same time?
I mean, I do understand all the complaints but like do people really want to not rely on anybody and be good at everything? is that the end goal?
Who said that exactly? I said the fighter needs:
1.Thematical focus, abilities that are only his own. His main thing cannot just be "he gets a lot of feats".
2. Be the best at what he does: fighting. You are sacrificing flexibility and width of role when choosing a fighter. It's a very real sacrifice that needs to be compensated with depth and focus on what he can actually do best and currently other classes fight as well or better than the fighter.
Yes, that would be the case IF your premise were true, and I don't agree it is, for the reason the fighter's problem (IMO) is not only mechanical, what's more concerning is that the fighter has NOTHING unique to itself, and no, "more feats" doesn't translate as "more unique", on the contrary the class is BUILT with many feats in mind as you are forced to follow certain "feat trees".
Fighter shines at realizing concepts, particularly real-world ones. If a player comes to the table, and they want to play a hoplite, or use the tactics of a Roman soldier, or they really like a particular weapon, Fighter is going to beat out the other classes (unless the weapon is a dagger). And as far as unique stuff is concerned, I've been very happy with some of the recent archetypes. Mutation Warrior gets you a d10 combat alchemist. Eldritch Guardian allows you to wreck your enemies with a familiar, and get better will saves to boot.
With martial maneuvers, Fighters are now more flexible combatants. With VMC, Fighters now allow you to play a combat version of any other class. With background skills, they don't hurt for personality as much.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Fighters, with Weapon Training, are able to fight well and fight consistently where other classes tend to have similar/greater/lesser bonuses only situationally. I agree, the fighter could use two more skill points. But, with everything else (Stamina, combat tricks, background skills) that is included in Unchained, I'd play a fighter (a straight fighter) in a heartbeat.
MA
Let's try this again.
Just wondering with the leveling items (don't remember the name) are there any cool weapons included in it?
I said the fighter needs:
1.Thematical focus, abilities that are only his own. His main thing cannot just be "he gets a lot of feats".
So why not use a portion of the rules aimed at fighters and give them, and only them, this stamina resource pool. It's got a short rest mechanic recharge (meaning it can be used all day), is a power up (is it enough? Who knows. I'd suspect reading the book won't be enough to judge and yourself) and is unique to the fighter.
Let's try this again.
Just wondering with the leveling items (don't remember the name) are there any cool weapons included in it?
There aren't many scaling items included in Pathfinder Unchained, in fact there are only 2 armors, 1 shield, and 5 weapons. The weapons are the legacy arrow (which I like), multimetal mace, sacred avenger (scaling holy avenger), spear of the huntmaster (meh, personally), and the thirsting blade (freaking awesome dagger with an 18-20 crit range, base).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Must...resist...plugging...3pp
The Fighter IS the best at fighting, though. If you're looking for a class that outputs lots of damage with minimal investment, you're looking for the Fighter. Every other class needs to invest resources and (in the case of casters who have to buff themselves) opportunity costs to come close to Fighter-tier damage.
Barbarians have to Rage, Rangers need to be fighting their favored enemy, and Cavaliers can only challenge a limited number of times per day.
What does a Fighter need to do to "do the fight good"? Nothing. The fighter, with nothing but a weapon of choice, is more capable at fighting than the Barbarian who doesn't rage and the Paladin who can't smite.
As far as a thematic focus, it's the precise lack of thematic focus which makes the Fighter an excellent class (conceptually, anyway). It has an easy learning curve, tons of customization options, and is generally useful in every combat scenario. Paladins Smite, Barbarians Rage, and the Fighter fights. And he fights REAL good.
I hate to derail further, but....I just don't understand the argument of "the fighter needs something unique to it." No class has anything unique to it.
For example, the alchemist. There are brawler & fighter archetypes that get mutagin & a rogue talent that gets you bombs.
Animal companions & familiars can be obtained by literally anyone willing to invest in the feats.
Smite evil? There's a prestige class for that.
And that's only the first few examples that spring to mind.
In any case I am superexcited for this book. I may by the odf while I wait for my print copy to come in.
Must...resist...plugging...3pp
Why not? I haven't gotten the book yet and I already know of three different products that I use that interact well with the systems inside and these new rules are supposedly not going to be followed up on in the near future so that's just some built in updates already around with 3pp.
So why not use a portion of the rules aimed at fighters and give them, and only them, this stamina resource pool. It's got a short rest mechanic recharge (meaning it can be used all day), is a power up (is it enough? Who knows. I'd suspect reading the book won't be enough to judge and yourself) and is unique to the fighter.I said the fighter needs:
1.Thematical focus, abilities that are only his own. His main thing cannot just be "he gets a lot of feats".
I can do that, of course, but at that point I can just completely house rule the class as well. Because it requires me, as the GM to use the optional rules suggested in PU and then rule for them only to apply to fighters. And if I'm not the GM but the player I'd have to ask my GM to do the same. Like it or not part of the reason we want books is we can cite them and they give an "official feel" to what we do. PU is completely optional and to get the new rules to apply only to the fighter would really be forcing things to get a feel of artificial uniqueness.
The Fighter IS the best at fighting, though. If you're looking for a class that outputs lots of damage with minimal investment, you're looking for the Fighter. Every other class needs to invest resources and (in the case of casters who have to buff themselves) opportunity costs to come close to Fighter-tier damage.
Barbarians have to Rage, Rangers need to be fighting their favored enemy, and Cavaliers can only challenge a limited number of times per day.
What does a Fighter need to do to "do the fight good"? Nothing. The fighter, with nothing but a weapon of choice, is more capable at fighting than the Barbarian who doesn't rage and the Paladin who can't smite.
As far as a thematic focus, it's the precise lack of thematic focus which makes the Fighter an excellent class (conceptually, anyway). It has an easy learning curve, tons of customization options, and is generally useful in every combat scenario. Paladins Smite, Barbarians Rage, and the Fighter fights. And he fights REAL good.
If what you are claiming is the fighter is less situational than rangers and paladins we can agree on that, although it's pretty rare for a game not to have a major focus on evil opponents, and the ranger 1st favored enemy is generally chosen with the most common type of opponents in mind. As for the barbarian rage tends to last quite long these days. And a fighter that decides to specialize in some combat manuevers suffers the same: good luck sundering your opponent's weapons and armor when all the GM throws at you are naked abberrations for example.
That said for what you claim to be relevant the game would need to work in a different way than it does. Sure, the fighter is consistent, but when the "resources" you are talking about run low players usually stop and camp. Sure, the GM can decide to press them if he's willing to risk a TPK, and in those cases, when the barbarian cannot rage anymore, the paladin cannot smite and the ranger is not faced with one of its favored enemies, then he can even shine, to the risk of not being able to save the group because he's not all that great. So you see, the supposed "consistency" of the fighter is a myth. Sure, it's hypotetically true but it's rare for a game to develop situations where the players think it would have been better to take a fighter instead of a barbarian who has more utility, better damage when raging and better mobility (expecially with pounce), a ranger with tons of utility and a much wider scope and usually better damage when faced against one of its favored enemies and spells, a paladin who can easily be the "face" of the team, smite evil and lay on hands, cast spells and gain magical powers for his weapons. What I'm saying is that the fighter "consistency" rarely comes into play unless the GM accounts for it (and if he does he risks a TPK... trust me I've tried), when it matters other classes fight as well or better than the fighter ad bring a lot more on the table in every other situation.I hate to derail further, but....I just don't understand the argument of "the fighter needs something unique to it." No class has anything unique to it.
For example, the alchemist. There are brawler & fighter archetypes that get mutagin & a rogue talent that gets you bombs.
Animal companions & familiars can be obtained by literally anyone willing to invest in the feats.
Smite evil? There's a prestige class for that.
And that's only the first few examples that spring to mind.
In any case I am superexcited for this book. I may by the odf while I wait for my print copy to come in.
Really? So classess like Paladin or Barbarian are not unique because some obscure prestige class can smite evil or because a cleric with destruction domain can access rage?
The fact is the "uniqueness" of the fighter comes from what EVERYONE CAN DO not just some very rare archetypes... The fighter gets feats, everyone does. Yes, he gets more feats but usually ends up having to take certain ones for efficency and the one you want for customization force you into certain feat trees. And again you may very well have a fighter that trips and disarms if you fancy it and a paladin that trips OR disarms and also does his thing. So no, under the current rules there's nothing unique about the fighter, unless you want to cite bravery, armor training or weapon training.
Must...resist...plugging...3ppWhy not? I haven't gotten the book yet and I already know of three different products that I use that interact well with the systems inside and these new rules are supposedly not going to be followed up on in the near future so that's just some built in updates already around with 3pp.
lets leave it up to fate then
edit: super low role....well if you are looking for unique fighter features, then try Fighter Nuances!
So no, under the current rules there's nothing unique about the fighter, unless you want to cite bravery, armor training or weapon training.
At least one archetype, the Myrmidarch Magus, gets partial armor and weapon training, so even those aren't unique.
So no, under the current rules there's nothing unique about the fighter, unless you want to cite bravery, armor training or weapon training.At least one archetype, the Myrmidarch Magus, gets partial armor and weapon training, so even those aren't unique.
Well from that perspective Wizard aren't unique either...
familiar? Fighters can get that...
cast spells? Witch, Bard, Sorcerer, etc.
Lots of skills? Alchemist, rogue, etc.
Arcane school? Nope other classes can take that too...
Right now I'm trying to think of any class that has a unique ability... the only thing I can think of is a paladin's smite. Pretty much any other class has abilities that are shared or stolen by other classes and/or archetypes.
Warpriest gets smite with an archetype. Only spell combat and ferver are as far as i know is exclusive abilities.
So no, under the current rules there's nothing unique about the fighter, unless you want to cite bravery, armor training or weapon training.At least one archetype, the Myrmidarch Magus, gets partial armor and weapon training, so even those aren't unique.Well from that perspective Wizard aren't unique either...
familiar? Fighters can get that...
cast spells? Witch, Bard, Sorcerer, etc.
Lots of skills? Alchemist, rogue, etc.
Arcane school? Nope other classes can take that too...
Right now I'm trying to think of any class that has a unique ability... the only thing I can think of is a paladin's smite. Pretty much any other class has abilities that are shared or stolen by other classes and/or archetypes.
There are a few unique abilities. For example, no one but a Magus gets spell combat. But it seems to me that archetypes, hybrid classes, the various "amateur" feats, and now options like variant multi-classing have been breaking down the walls separating the original classes, I like this trend. It has enabled me to try out a lot of character concepts that would have been impossible (or ineffective) in the past.
Edit: Partially ninja'd by Christos. :)
Would anyone mind sharing the sorcerer VMC progression? Can't seem to find anything about it anywhere on the boards :)
So no, under the current rules there's nothing unique about the fighter, unless you want to cite bravery, armor training or weapon training.At least one archetype, the Myrmidarch Magus, gets partial armor and weapon training, so even those aren't unique.Well from that perspective Wizard aren't unique either...
familiar? Fighters can get that...
cast spells? Witch, Bard, Sorcerer, etc.
Lots of skills? Alchemist, rogue, etc.
Arcane school? Nope other classes can take that too...
Right now I'm trying to think of any class that has a unique ability... the only thing I can think of is a paladin's smite. Pretty much any other class has abilities that are shared or stolen by other classes and/or archetypes.
There are a few unique abilities. For example, no one but a Magus gets spell combat. But it seems to me that archetypes, hybrid classes, the various "amateur" feats, and now options like variant multi-classing have been breaking down the walls separating the original classes, I like this trend. It has enabled me to try out a lot of character concepts that would have been impossible (or ineffective) in the past.
Edit: Partially ninja'd by Christos. :)
+1. I think I think the thing I love the most about Pathfinder is the customization. :)
Would anyone mind sharing the sorcerer VMC progression? Can't seem to find anything about it anywhere on the boards :)1- Pick a Bloodline
3- First Level Bloodline Power
7- Third Level Bloodline Power
11- Bloodline Feat or Eschew Materials
15- Ninth Level Bloodline Power
19- Fifteenth Level Bloodline PowerThere really isn't much more to it than that.
Do you get the bloodline arcana at 1st level?
Do you get the bloodline arcana at 1st level?Would anyone mind sharing the sorcerer VMC progression? Can't seem to find anything about it anywhere on the boards :)1- Pick a Bloodline
3- First Level Bloodline Power
7- Third Level Bloodline Power
11- Bloodline Feat or Eschew Materials
15- Ninth Level Bloodline Power
19- Fifteenth Level Bloodline PowerThere really isn't much more to it than that.
nope
Interesting. Elsewhere on the boards, someone reported that the Arcana was part of the package.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The previews will never be perfect, as people try to read through and absorb all the cool stuff and get it back to you as fast as they can. That said, the previews have been overall fairly accurate this time. Given that the subject matter (alternate systems) is trickier to begin with, I take that as a good sign that we've managed to explain things in a straightforward-enough manner to make them easy to grok on one quick read-through, which is one of our goals in making the writing more accessible!
The previews will never be perfect, as people try to read through and absorb all the cool stuff and get it back to you as fast as they can. That said, the previews have been overall fairly accurate this time. Given that the subject matter (alternate systems) is trickier to begin with, I take that as a good sign that we've managed to explain things in a straightforward-enough manner to make them easy to grok on one quick read-through, which is one of our goals in making the writing more accessible!
I agree that is a good sign. And I have to say that the previews from subscribers have made me way more excited about the content of this book than I was before. I haven't played a Rogue since they were called Thieves, but this new version has got my attention.
Interesting. Elsewhere on the boards, someone reported that the Arcana was part of the package.
yep just double checked too be sure, probably be too good anyways(although it would've been fun).
Fighter only feats for bypassing DR
penetrating strike actually, but i see what you are saying, and i actually addressed a few of those with my fighter nuances.
Does the "please don't quote preview text" rule also extend to reviews? I'm writing a review of Unchained at the moment, but I'm referring to and describing the various rules systems rather extensively. I'd hate for the review to be deleted.
Does the "please don't quote preview text" rule also extend to reviews? I'm writing a review of Unchained at the moment, but I describing and referring to the various systems rather extensively and I'd hate for the review to be deleted.
I highly doubt we will remove any reviews. We'd prefer that it didn't directly quote all the rules in its body yet (perhaps edit that in on the 29th?), but even so, you should be OK.
Does the "please don't quote preview text" rule also extend to reviews? I'm writing a review of Unchained at the moment, but I describing and referring to the various systems rather extensively and I'd hate for the review to be deleted.I highly doubt we will remove any reviews. We'd prefer that it didn't directly quote all the rules in its body yet (perhaps edit that in on the 29th?), but even so, you should be OK.
Great! I didn't know you could edit reviews after they've been published, that makes my life a lot easier. My write-up of Chapter 1 should be done today. :)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I can do that, of course, but at that point I can just completely house rule the class as well.
Well yes. You can also use the optional rule that changes the Rogue. Or at that point you can also just houserule the Rogue.
Because it requires me, as the GM to use the optional rules suggested in PU and then rule for them only to apply to fighters.
Only applying the stamina resource pool to fighters is one of the rules in Pathfinder Unchained (according to those who have it). So yes, in the book full of optional rules, you will need to apply one of those optional rules. Your complaint has gone from "This book doesn't have something that is only for fighters" to "This book has something unique only to fighters. But I don't like that there's optional rules that allow other classes to gain access to it as well." Not everyone wants something unique to fighters. So Paizo produced optional rules to appeal to those who want something unique to fighters. But they also produced optional rules to appeal to those who don't want to give the fighter something unique.
And if I'm not the GM but the player I'd have to ask my GM to do the same. Like it or not part of the reason we want books is we can cite them and they give an "official feel" to what we do.
If your group values giving something unique to the fighter, they will use one of the rules as printed in Pathfinder Unchained (assuming I've understood what people have said regarding the stamina resource pool).If your group doesn't value giving something unique to fighters, then they won't use the rule that does give something unique to the fighter. Demanding that Paizo did not produce additional optional rules to give other classes the stamina pool resource is to demand that Paizo print rules that appeal to you to try to force people to play like you. Thankfully Paizo didn't do that and decided to appeal to you, as well as other people who may not have your preferences.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Since quoting is unwelcome... the Empty Body Monk ki power seems to be missing a level requirement unless that is somehow assumed from the caster level...
That is the only error that really affects stuff in any of the four classes that I currently know about. I asked Jason and it should be level 18.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Really? So classess like Paladin or Barbarian are not unique because some obscure prestige class can smite evil or because a cleric with destruction domain can access rage?
...Yeah, pretty much, I guess. But isn't that your argument? The fighter is the only class that gets feats EVERY level (baring archetype replacements), but since every class gets feats, that's not "unique enough"? I'm not trying to be snarky or insult you, I am genially confused as to what you want for the fighter. To me, it is coming off as "Everyone gets feats, so the fighter is not unique. Other classes can get rage, but that doesn't count so barbarians are still unique."
Heck, going with the rage/barbarian example, I once played in a party with a viking fighter, and I kept forgetting he was a fighter. He played it just like the stereotypical barbarian, raging and power attacking everything. Granted, that's mostly on me for being absent minded, but it seems like an easy mistake to make.
|
That is the only error that really affects stuff in any of the four classes that I currently know about. I asked Jason and it should be level 18.Since quoting is unwelcome... the Empty Body Monk ki power seems to be missing a level requirement unless that is somehow assumed from the caster level...
Thank you for the quick answer, level 18 feels right for that power.
And while I am quite happy about the fact, that the classes aren't split over several pages, the lack of an "extra ki power" feat quite surprises me, since most of those 1 power per 2 level abilities get one (magus arcana, discoveries, rage powers).
How are the chances of getting something like this in a future product?
That is the only error that really affects stuff in any of the four classes that I currently know about. I asked Jason and it should be level 18.Since quoting is unwelcome... the Empty Body Monk ki power seems to be missing a level requirement unless that is somehow assumed from the caster level...
Thank you for the quick answer, level 18 feels right for that power.
And while I am quite happy about the fact, that the classes aren't split over several pages, the lack of an "extra ki power" feat quite surprises me, since most of those 1 power per 2 level abilities get one (magus arcana, discoveries, rage powers).
How are the chances of getting something like this in a future product?
Also Extra Ninja Trick >.> <.<
Great! I didn't know you could edit reviews after they've been published, that makes my life a lot easier. My write-up of Chapter 1 should be done today. :)Does the "please don't quote preview text" rule also extend to reviews? I'm writing a review of Unchained at the moment, but I describing and referring to the various systems rather extensively and I'd hate for the review to be deleted.I highly doubt we will remove any reviews. We'd prefer that it didn't directly quote all the rules in its body yet (perhaps edit that in on the 29th?), but even so, you should be OK.
My chapter 1 review is up! Follow me in the coming days, as I add the next chapters, then repeatedly butt heads with the word count limit, and then inevitably give up by chapter ~4.
=D
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Really? So classess like Paladin or Barbarian are not unique because some obscure prestige class can smite evil or because a cleric with destruction domain can access rage?...Yeah, pretty much, I guess. But isn't that your argument? The fighter is the only class that gets feats EVERY level (baring archetype replacements), but since every class gets feats, that's not "unique enough"? I'm not trying to be snarky or insult you, I am genially confused as to what you want for the fighter. To me, it is coming off as "Everyone gets feats, so the fighter is not unique. Other classes can get rage, but that doesn't count so barbarians are still unique."
Heck, going with the rage/barbarian example, I once played in a party with a viking fighter, and I kept forgetting he was a fighter. He played it just like the stereotypical barbarian, raging and power attacking everything. Granted, that's mostly on me for being absent minded, but it seems like an easy mistake to make.
My argument is that it takes more than an archetype or a prestige class to take away the feeling of uniqueness from a class, because that's rare enough not to matter.
But if a class is built around "getting more feats" and everyone can get feats everyone can do exaclty what you do, enche you are not unique at all.Let's say you have a fighter, a barbarian and a paladin: the fighter can get trip AND disarm feat trees completed, while the pally and barb could only get one of those feat trees completed (assuming they don't want to be completely suboptimal). Sure the fighter can do both, but is that "unique"? Is that really useful? Does it compare with being able to trip OR disarm AND have things like lay on hands or rage?
@ John Lynch 106: But the book does NOT have something that's "fighter only". The book has a set of optional rules that, as written, can be applied to any class, and THEN they SUGGEST the GM should CONSIDER giving them to the fighter only. That's not "giving something unique to the fighter" it's giving something to everyone and then ask people to house rule an optional rule in order to "give something nice" only to fighters.
On the other hand the writers took the time to present a full optional rewrite for 4 other classes 3 of which were in much less need of alternate rules than the fighter (barbarian/monk/summoner).