Remember that anything a monster can do to avoid fighting a summoned huge fiendish monstrous centipede is something they could do to avoid meleeing a dwarven fighter. If summoned monsters aren't effective meat shields then fighters are not either.
At even mid level a Wizard can wander into all encounters benefiting from both false life and bear's endurance. And that taken together makes a Wizard have about two and a half a hit points more than a Fighter of their level.
Fighters seriously are not "tougher" than Wizards in any way.
-Frank
|
I come into this thread a little late so will just comment on a few things randomly
Firstly I read through the post you linked Frank on War at the gaming den and I must say there are some nice ideas in the classes presented.
Remember that raw numeric bonuses require coming in extremely large numbers before they make much of a difference. A 15th level Cleric can wander around with divine power, divine favor, righteous might, spikes, greater magic weapon, weapon of the deity, and bless all on 24/7. That's not even a large pile of her spell slots.
Giving Fighters bonus to-hit, damage, and AC is not an over-all solution to anything. For a Fighter to get he kind of bonuses that would actually let him compete one on one against Clerics he'd leave the monsters distantly in the dust. But he still wouldn't be doing anything interesting or fun.
-Frank
While I agree with you that throwing more numbers is not the answer it is indeed an easy way to make the fighter stronger. As i said earlier I looked through that War thread and there are a number of features like the pack mule and the Active Assault that make for far more interesting ways to improve the fighter.
The problem here is that the design purpose of the spells a cleric can cast is actually intended to be placed on the fighter. A party should be just that, a team working together, however too many people think the way to win a battle is to be the strongest. This is why people hate the bard at low levels because all he does is enhance others with his music.
A great way to fix class envy is to provide abilities that either affect the entire party or abilities that enhance on another's abilities. You wouldn't really need to create a host of new abilities but perhaps tag new features onto existing ones. Spells are already very versatile in this respect but the martial classes do suffer.
Heres what I'm talking about. Fighters provide rogues the ability to move into flank when they make an attack, rogues provide fighters with increased chances to hit when they sneak attack, paladins provide a bonus to the saves of his allies when they lay on hands, rangers grant allies a bonus to survival, listen and spot when they are tracking. rogues provide bonuses to stealth, reflex saves and initiatives while scouting ahead.
Class interaction is sorely missed from the game at the moment, bards, wizards and clerics provide the most interaction with spells and bardic music but more should be done IMHO. 4e seems to have lumped these sorts of abilities into the warlord and cleric classes but really they should be a part of every class.
This brings me to the hijacking CR/EL comments. I agree that there is some logic to breaking down a creature into an equal fight for 1 character but the problem is creatures are more than just stats. They have abilities and skills that make them particularly deadly for certain individuals and only when a balanced group of adventurers get together can they successfully overcome the creature.
An example that I have had a personal experience with would be the Behir. I was playing a trip specialist monk and was pretty much the parties front line. the DM stuck this creature in solely because it is immune to trip, this put my character at an immediate disadvantage because i couldn't rely on the creature being prone to deal my flurry damage. as it turned out I couldn't even hit the thing without a 20 so I stuck myself in its face and went full defensive, while it chomped at me, the rest of the party took it down.
I have not read much of this thread, just the highlights and scanned the rest, but I will say that I agree with Crosswired completely in this thread.
(and as Bulmahn said earlier, please keep it civil.)
While I agree with you that throwing more numbers is not the answer it is indeed an easy way to make the fighter stronger. As i said earlier I looked through that War thread and there are a number of features like the pack mule and the Active Assault that make for far more interesting ways to improve the fighter.
Its an easier way to make the fighter *appear* stronger on paper. Yes, you can attack and take away a chunk of monster's HP. So can the druid's (buffed) animal companion. The druid then has his action, his quickened spell, and his passel of summoned creatures (which if he chose them well, all have spell like abilities of their own). The best the fighter can really hope for is to take the leadership feat and get a full-caster cohort who is two levels lower than he is, but nonetheless far more powerful and effective.
Yeah, its harsh, but thats how badly the game is currently balanced.
The problem here is that the design purpose of the spells a cleric can cast is actually intended to be placed on the fighter. A party should be just that, a team working together, however too many people think the way to win a battle is to be the strongest. This is why people hate the bard at low levels because all he does is enhance others with his music.
Design intent is a tricky thing to argue. Yes, the anecdotes that playtesters share indicates that the designers expected a specific playstyle and the playtesters largely adhered to them. Leaving the huge loopholes for us to deal with as players.
However, things like divine power, which make the cleric more than equal to the fighter, are designed only to be cast on the cleric. Doing something to that spell (and righteous might) would go a long way towards lowering the clerics power. Because along side the extra actions the fullcasters can get, their main problem is they can fill any role. A cleric, druid or wizard can play fighting guy while still being a full caster (and utility guy and healing guy, etc). The fighter is still stuck as fighting guy, and can never do anything else. Even contribute at all when combat isn't going on.
But yes, the way to win a battle is to be the strongest. And by the way 3e has turned out, that means never playing a fighter.
|
There is no way to really "fix" the short of giving him Tome of Battle type maneuvers which are really spells by another name. What most people seem to realize is that the fighter or any other class can't just be singled out as subpar in a vacuum. The fighter is meant to be part of the group. He is not meant to fight creatures alone. Likewise, wizards and clerics aren't meant to spend all of their time and spell slots (and turn attempts) to boost themselves to fight better than the fighter. Every round and spell slot the wizard or cleric spend buffing themselves is a round where they aren't really helping the rest of the party overcome their opponents by buffing the whole party, damaging opponents, or healing people. Clerics, druids, and wizards can devote their resources to being killing machines, but that isn't what the classes are designed to do, and it isn't the way they are usually played, unless the person playing them is selfish or has a poor grasp of teamwork and tactics. The fighter can do his job even at high levels, even if the casters can blow lots of time and spell slots to do it better. They and the whole party are better off if they are doing other things with their actions and spell slots. The fighter isn't as pathetic as most people make him out to be, he just isn't as "flashy' as other classes at high level.
There is no way to really "fix" the short of giving him Tome of Battle type maneuvers which are really spells by another name.
And isn't that kind of the thing about the fighter, that it is a streamlined, simplified, entry level class for new players, or players looking for a simplified play experience? Sure, the fighter gets a lot of feats, but feats are a replacement for class abilities, such as spell casting, and additional class abilities increase class complexity.
The fighter is the most immediately accessible class in the PHB, and the least complex. If the intent is create parity between the classes and flatten out the power curve, then yes, the fighter is going to need a lot of work. If the goal is keep a simple class simple, but add a bit of polish, then the treatment in the alpha doc is a move in the right direction.
IMO, the fighter could use a boost in survivability. He's gotten a bit of a push towards weapon and armor mastery, but needs a few "last man standing" enhancements.
Well, I've always thought that the 3.x Fighter had lost the few "advantages" his previous (Basic D&D / AD&D 2) incarnations had. The "Archery" and "Two-weapons" path are part of the Ranger class, the best Hit Dice is given to the Barbarian. Both the Barbarian and the Paladin share the same BAB progression. Most Characters have now access to the same set of weapons / armor and the "exceptionnal strength score is gone too.
I totally understand that it's main feature is meant to be it's versatility, but the feat selection proposed in the PHB are just not interesting enough and those I've read in the Alpha won't change this feeling. Maybe there should be "trees" like "brawny","sword&shield specialist", "agile" fighter that would build up for 4/5 slots and replace some of the "bonus feats". These feat-like and EX abilities would help make the fighter more of a "class" instead of a feat-mesh.
Furthermore what all characters lack is a mean to be more than a "class". If I want to play a PC who's also a member of the nobility or a mariner or a militia member the current system will not help me do it, forcing me in a role that will not be compatible with my roleplay intentions.
|
I have attempted to convert my Dwarf Warblade into the PF Fighter and notice a few dramatic differences.
1) Due to the loss of maneuvers, my Dwarf is no longer as resilient to spells. He maintained two maneuvers that allowed him to make Concentration checks instead of Will and Ref saves at the cost of other maneuvers and there are no similar options for the PF Fighter. Perhaps some Feat or class ability that allows a fighter to make a 'second wind' attempt using their BAB or some skill check to try to break an undesirable magical effect against will saves or allow Fortitude to just resist something normally allowing a Reflex save. Not something that could be used every round, but something that could be used every 3rd or 4th round or something.
2) The Combat Feats selection is pitiful. In addition, there is nothing similar to Emerald Razor for the PF Fighter. Tying a similar Feat to Power Attack (as you did with Cleave) would make a bit of sense as you are literally trying to crush the person with their own armor, thereby ignoring its usefulness (unless it grants DR).
3) Allow 'retraining' of the PF Fighter benefits. If a fighter had one kind of weapon but later finds a completely different kind of weapon they like better their Fighter abilities penalize them making the choice to change weapons. Giving the Fighter the option to change their class benefits from one weapon type or armor/shield type to another will give the player more flexibility. Perhaps allowing one hour of practice with a new weapon/armor/shield per step of armor/weapon training to prevent characters from trying to change it mid-dungeon crawl.
4) I agree with several previous posters that the sudden DR granted with a particular armor at level 19 is rather silly. Instead, try making it gradual by step of armor training. You only have four levels of armor training available (5 if you change Armor Mastery to Armor Training) so making each grant 2/- per step (especially when tied to training retraining described in my point 3) it can be...
The Warblade isn't supposed to be converted to a Pathfinder Fighter. Therefore it's not going to convert smoothly. The Warblade is a different class, not a variant fighter.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The thing that people seem to forget is that "meatshield duty" is something that can be done with summoned, charmed, or animated monsters.
For a Fighter to be a viable character, he needs to be able to at least compete with the following things:
Level 1
Knock unconscious, blind, or stun 1d6 creatures
Get +20 to an attack
1d4+1 automatic damage at a range
Level 3
Do 4d6 damage as a ranged touch attack
Get DR/10 arrows vs magic
Daze a 6 HD creature
Gain 7 temp HPs after every battle
Level 5
Immune to mind effects
Make 50% spells and attacks miss him
Absorb 60 points of elemental damage with no effect
Level 7
Gain +11 natural armor
DR/10 adamantine (Which is DR/-- in all respects)
Gain complete immunity to spells and attacks in exchange for attacks
Level 9
Hurl creature 90 feet
inflict 1d4 negative levels
Fly 40ft all day
Level 11
Immune to all magic
Creatures can't approach you
See things as they truly are
Level 13
Become ethereal for 13 rounds
Reflect spells
Blind a creature with no save
Level 15
Gain DR/15 admantine and a pile of immunities
make a creature lose all attacks with no save
Pull certain creatures toward you
Level 17
Copy most good powers of any monster
Immune to surprise
Get 1d4+1 rounds of free actions
Ok, these are Wizard spells that might be martial in nature. I'm not even adding Area of Effect spells, utility spells, or awesome spells that give you armies(summons, charms, animates), or the fact that all of those abilities scale with level.
Show me a Fighter that can do any of these things, and I'll be happy because Fighters definitely don't have monopoly on "high HPs" or "high AC" or "raw damage" or "battlefield control."
Show me a Fighter that can do any of these things, and I'll be happy because Fighters definitely don't have monopoly on "high HPs" or "high AC" or "raw damage" or "battlefield control."
Well the Fighter's monopoly on "battle" action is gone since the earliest days of the 3.x edition... If paizo is to stick with a backwards compatibility the only option they have is to create meaningful, fighter-only, feats to make the fighter more attractive. While I'm all for a heavily revised fighter, I doubt it would be feasible without creating a huge balance change in the game.
And to those who think the fighter is the best entry character for new players, just check MMOs; many young players are able to manage playing wizards, thief or any complex class without too much difficulty...
A great deal of what is "broken" about 3.5 spellcasters out-tanking fighters is not a problem in the design of the classes directly, nor is it in the spells available to the casters. The biggest problem is partly in metamagic and more in magic item design.
A fighter as written out-tanks arcanists or clerics; while spells like divine power or blink can crank up a spellcaster to be an adequate substitute on an emergency basis, its not until metamagic like extend spell, still spell, and persistent spell are added that they can do so do so consistently.
Even so, the metamagic balances out reasonably well when you consider the spells a caster has to give up to achieve these effects. While a design that allows a cleric to trade half of his spellcasting ability to be a party's tank might be problematic, its not wholly broken.
Its when you add metamagic ods and other effects that let you circumvent the increased levels of metamagicked spells that things become really bad.
|
|
Well, in MMO's the computer does most of the work for you, so I don't think it's a good comparison. Spellcasters are moe complicated to run and require intimate knowledge of the spells available to their class to be effective. A caster that chooses their spells poorly, or doesn't know what spells are best to use in what situations isn't going to be very helpful to the party. A player playing a fighter just has to know the basic rules of the game and what the feats they currently have do.
Since Frank and others bring up Blink as an alternative that allows a mage to "out-tank" a fighter, let me say it ain't exactly true.
Blink greatly increases an arcanist's survivability, but renders him pretty useless as a tank. It takes more than being able to survive an attack to be a 3.5 tank.
A tank is supposed to protect his teammates. They stand between melee attackers and other party members. The quintessential tactical move of a tank is to ready an intercepting action -- whenever an enemy tries to get past the tank to his other party members, the tank moves to block the attacker and attacks him instead. Other enemies passing too close to the tank usually get a taste of his AoOs for the privilege.
A wizard with Blink on is a crappy defender of anyone but himself. Half the time, melee opponents will charge right through Blinky the Wizard and kill the person standing behind him. Blinky gets to make a melee attack of opportunity, with pathetic wizard BAB and a 20% miss chance to boot.
So if two wizards divvy up duties, one "tanking" with Blink while the other casts traditional wizard offensive spells, the one taking the traditional role is probably toast.
|
Making new players play a class that is not interesting or fun is not a good way to bring new people into the hobby.
I think the class can be easy to play but still offer more options than the 3.5 fighter. I think that the Pathfinder Alpha was a step in the right direction, but it didn't go far enough. All of the classes in the Alpha document are getting a power-up (and some, perhaps, should not) and the fighter can seriously be changed more than any other class and still be 'backwards compatible'. Besides the fact that very few 'BBEGs' are fighters, there is the fact that adding additional abilities is always easy, and nobody is talking about taking anything away from fighters (other than making good feats crappy 'combat feats'), so putting on the extra details should be pretty easy, even 'on the fly'.
Blink greatly increases an arcanist's survivability, but renders him pretty useless as a tank. It takes more than being able to survive an attack to be a 3.5 tank.A tank is supposed to protect his teammates. They stand between melee attackers and other party members.
Are you serious? That doesn't work in D&D. At all.
D&D has no "hate" mechanics. Enemies attack whoever they feel like, and there is really jack all you can do to get them to attack enemies which are not tactically viable choices. The MMORPG "Tank" is not a real role in D&D. Nor should it be.
You justify your existence by killing enemies before they kill your party. And while providing defensive bonuses to your team mates can indeed effectively participate in that by extending the time you have before the enemies destroy you all, if your plan to do this is to get enemies to attack you by playing speed bump, then you are an idiot.
Battlefield control exists. We call it solid fog, summon monster, and slow. We under no circumstances call it "getting hate" because that's something people do in Final Fantasy XI, not D&D. Wizards can keep enemies from getting attacks. Clerics can heal party members thereby negating the effects of enemy attacks. Fighters can't do either of those things. The best they can do is hope that they can con enemies into attacking them instead of a more valuable party member. And frankly they don't have any class features that would actually help them with even that modest and inconsequential goal.
-Frank
|
|
From this thread, it's easy to see that there are varying opinions on the fighter's effectiveness, and what can be done to improve it. I personally believe that I could be quite content to play a Pathfinder fighter as well as a 3.5 Fighter and still have plenty of fun. There is no change that will please everyone and still have the fighter remain backwards compatable and relatively easy to play. Right now, I'm playing a cleric and I have played several DMPC clerics. You know what? I'd rather play a fighter over a cleric any day. Nothing is more boring than having to burn most of your spell slots and actions healing others and yourself. If I actually want to fight good enough to be worth anything, I'd have to spend most of the combat and many valuable spell slots buffing myself. I think I would have a lot more fun playing a Pathfinder cleric than a 3.5 cleric, and I'd rather play a fighter (either version) than either of them.
If I am understanding the general trend of this thread:
Either
1) Fighters are too weak, and need a major power boost so they can be as "uber" as spellcasters,
Or
2) Spellcasters are too powerful, and need to be nerfed hard to "balance" the game.
Neither of which is "backwards compatible" with 3.5, and thus negates the design philosophy of Pathfinder.
So readers are just wasting their time with this thread?
I think one of the biggest problem with the 3E fighter is actually what 3E did to all the non-warrior classes, i.e. increasing their ability to hit. This instantly made the fighter less impressive, and the collection of feats was meant to make up for this, which by the sound of it didn't.
Maybe one fix would be to step up the fighter's acquisition of iterative attacks. Most classes would get their second attack when their BAB hits +6, as normal for 3rd edition, but the fighter would get his when his BAB hits +5.
Something like:
+1
+2
+3
+4
+5/+1
+6/+2
+7/+3
+8/+4
+9/+5/+1
+10/+6/+2
He would still only get four iterative attacks, but he would have more than an equal level ranger, barbarian or paladin.
I think the alpha fighter is pretty good.you can't make em war blade's after all.the fighter needs to stay easy and not uber mage slayer.
|
|
If I am understanding the general trend of this thread:
Either
1) Fighters are too weak, and need a major power boost so they can be as "uber" as spellcasters,
Or
2) Spellcasters are too powerful, and need to be nerfed hard to "balance" the game.
Neither of which is "backwards compatible" with 3.5, and thus negates the design philosophy of Pathfinder.
So readers are just wasting their time with this thread?
That's pretty much what I have been saying a round about way in my last few threads. Realistically, the only things they can change to have the pathfinder fighter remain backwards compatible is to make the weapon groups make more sense, boost the combat feats, and maybe spread out the DR at 19th level in an even spread throughout the 20 levels of the class.
|
|
There is no way to really "fix" the short of giving him Tome of Battle type maneuvers which are really spells by another name.
Which equates, pretty much, to fighter-only feats with a boosted power level. Hmm, might be something to that. ;)
There's room for fighters to be power-boosted, made more "flashy," made more versatile, stay simple for beginning players, and keep the role of team player. The key to this isn't adding in a ton of new class features (though, working on the skill department will help) or making him the uber damage god--it's fixing the oft-neglected class feature that it already has--bonus feats.
If fighter feats actually scaled appropriately and covered more fighting options, techniques and effect, the class would be in fine shape. There are those that suggest that the fighter doesn't need to deal as much damage as wizards, and I simultaneously agree and disagree. The wizard (and sorcerer) should be the kings of long-range, area-effect artillery support. The fighter should be the king of close-in, in-your-face, ripping you apart damage dealing. At 5th level, a fighter shouldn't do 5d6 damage in a 20'-radius burst at up to 600' away. However, he should easily be able to deal 5d6 damage (or more considering the increased limitations) to an opponent (and potentially all adjacent opponents) in melee. A fighter shouldn't be able to sub in the wizard/sorcerer's role, but should be as equally effective in its role as the wizard/sorcerer is in its role.
Blink greatly increases an arcanist's survivability, but renders him pretty useless as a tank. It takes more than being able to survive an attack to be a 3.5 tank.A tank is supposed to protect his teammates. They stand between melee attackers and other party members.
Are you serious? That doesn't work in D&D. At all.
D&D has no "hate" mechanics. Enemies attack whoever they feel like, and there is really jack all you can do to get them to attack enemies which are not tactically viable choices.
I'm serious, and it does work. And it doesn't involve "hate" mechanics (although non-OGL options like the Goad feat or Knight's Challenge do exist and are functionally the same thing). Here is how it works:
The tank (typically a fighter) readies a move action to step into the path of an enemy moving to attack one of the Tank's allies (the "Target"). If in a "chokepoint" 15' wide or less, the tank can ready an attack instead and use a 5' step to block the enemy. The enemy must either stop (ending any move or similar action) or spend a standard action to attempt an overrun (if the enemy is charging, the overrun comes free). An overrun attempt elicits an AoO from the tank. If the enemy stops, he can move again to circle around the tank or can attack the tank, either way using up his available actions.
Barring nonstandard abilities, in every outcome other than a successful overrun as part of a charge, the enemy can't reach striking distance of the target and still have an action available to attack. Whether the target has a higher or lower initiative than the enemy, before the enemy's next action the target can take a withdraw action and avoid getting attacked altogether.
Even if the enemy does get through and manages to get in an attack on the target (such as by having higher initial initiative than the tank or with a successful charge/overrun), on each consecutive round the tank can repeat the readied intercept as long as he is still sufficiently mobile. And while the tank keeps the enemy so occupied, the rest of his party are peppering the enemy with their own attacks and spells.
Thats how you "tank" in 3.5 D&D. No "hate" mechanics involved.
Of course, its useless against ranged attackers and is really only effective against a single enemy, but it demonstrates that a fighter really CAN defend his teammates in a way other than killing the monster first, and that all those defensive feats like Combat Expertise really CAN be more valuable than Power Attack.
|
|
I'm with Frank on this. Assuming that you have a high initiative count and remember to ready the action, the problem is that many classes can simply bypass you. Sure, your readied action to move means that you won't get an attack, and the character simply tumbles around you or uses spring attack to end up near the casters, and you don't even have an attack of opportunity.
Now, you can possibly keep the major enemy threatened so it has to give up full attacks to focus on the casters, but just about everybody is more mobile than the 20'/round fighter in his full plate.
And of course, that assumes you're not fighting a creature that flies, burrows, can walk on walls or ceilings, etc.
The deck is stacked against the fighter, and tanking isn't really a viable option in many combats.
I'm with Frank on this...
I don't see how a spring attack would negate the intercept. A DC25 Tumble would; but relatively few opponents, even at high levels, could pull that off; charging overruns will usually be more reliable.
A tank does not have to be particularly fast to intercept as long as the people he is defending are nearby. He doesn't have to be faster than the enemy, he just needs to be able to move far enough with one move action to place himself in the path taken by the enemy to reach the enemy's target. A wizard standing 10' behind his tank defender is close enough that a 15' move tank will intercept any possible approach by an enemy. Even if that enemy has a 60'+ move.
If the tank loses initiative on the first round, the enemy can make an attack on the target that round... but by carrying the readied action over to the next round, on that and each round after the tank can intercept. The loss of initiative loses him his first round's actions and gives the enemy one free shot. If the target either takes a 5' step or withdraws (for enemies with reach) every time the enemy draws near to provide space for the tank to place himself between enemy and target, it really doesn't matter how fast the enemy is.
The technique doesn't work against flying/swimming/burrowing opponents; much larger opponents can overrun the tank with ease; any of a number of spells, feats, and special abilities could mess it up; and certainly terrain features factor into how feasible intercept tanking is. But, by and large, tanking does work.
|
|
While it is only tangentially related to the rest of the discussion, readying an action is a standard action. So, if the fighter moves to intercept, he cannot attack. He could make an attack of opportunity, but is not guaranteed to do so. The readied action 'interrupts' the action that triggers it, and technically happens before. Even allowing it to happen at some point during, the attacker can adjust his move to continue around the fighter (DC 15 tumble). If the attacker has spring attack, he announces that he is spring attacking the fighter, and even if the fighter does move to intercept, no movement from the attacker will provoke from the fighter.
So, the fighter can stand and take a few hits from a non-mobile enemy that is afraid of taking at attack of opportunity from the fighter.
Don't get me wrong, fighters can do some things. But tanking is almost always a universally bad idea. There are far more creatures that are brutal in melee but don't do well against ranged attacks. For their CR they have better attack bonuses and deal more damage than the fighter. The fighter can bleed all over every opponent, but that hardly seems like a fun way to go through an encounter.
The fighter is everyone's best friend in combat, helping them get off some pretty fun moves, but he doesn't do much or benefit directly from their activities. He provides flanking for the rogue, he provides a distraction for the casters, he provides a small reserve hit point pool for the party with a better than average AC. He has a purpose, but it isn't fun, even in a gritty campaign that focuses on the suffering of the heroes as the major dynamic.
Now, certainly there are times when the fighter might be able to serve as a 'wall' protecting the party, but those times are probably fairly limited in the total number of fights the characters have on their way to 20th level - since many enemies don't have to play with the fighter that way, and even if they don't, a summon Monster spell of the appropriate level (as Frank has pointed out) usually can provide the equivalent of a fighter - a meathshield with a good attack and decent melee damage potential.
I'm with Frank on this...I don't see how a spring attack would negate the intercept. A DC25 Tumble would; but relatively few opponents, even at high levels, could pull that off; charging overruns will usually be more reliable.
A tank does not have to be particularly fast to intercept as long as the people he is defending are nearby. He doesn't have to be faster than the enemy, he just needs to be able to move far enough with one move action to place himself in the path taken by the enemy to reach the enemy's target. A wizard standing 10' behind his tank defender is close enough that a 15' move tank will intercept any possible approach by an enemy. Even if that enemy has a 60'+ move.
If the tank loses initiative on the first round, the enemy can make an attack on the target that round... but by carrying the readied action over to the next round, on that and each round after the tank can intercept. The loss of initiative loses him his first round's actions and gives the enemy one free shot. If the target either takes a 5' step or withdraws (for enemies with reach) every time the enemy draws near to provide space for the tank to place himself between enemy and target, it really doesn't matter how fast the enemy is.
The technique doesn't work against flying/swimming/burrowing opponents; much larger opponents can overrun the tank with ease; any of a number of spells, feats, and special abilities could mess it up; and certainly terrain features factor into how feasible intercept tanking is. But, by and large, tanking does work.
You must be playing with a home-ruled version of the Ready action. By the rules, your Readied action takes place before the action that triggers it.
This means that when the enemy moves or charges, you get a Move first. Then they take their move action and just walk around you or charge a different target.
This is all assuming they don't just ignore you with reach, ranged attacks, spells, supernatural abilities, or the ability to move faster than 30'.
I'd argue further, but I don't think Paizo is willing to redesign the Fighter so that people don't mock him in public.
... readying an action is a standard action. So, if the fighter moves to intercept, he cannot attack.
100% correct, nor did I say otherwise. This is a defensive, not offensive, action.
The readied action 'interrupts' the action that triggers it, and technically happens before.
Not correct. It happens during the opponent's move, just as a readied attack to interrupt a spell happens while the target is casting. The tank's initiative count is what changes to immediately prior to his opponent's. This is why you can do the readied intercept round after round.
Even allowing it to happen at some point during, the attacker can adjust his move to continue around the fighter (DC 15 tumble).
It is not my understanding that you can change the path of a move in response to a readied action, any more than you can change which spell you are casting for the same reason. I just checked and I admit that in about five minutes I couldn't find a RAW that addresses this one way or another, but I do recall reading that stepping into the path of an enemy with a readied action halts their movement. This may have been as long ago as 3.0 since I've been using readied intercepts for a while. If anybody reading can cite to a relevant rule resolving this, I'd appreciate it.
If the attacker has spring attack, he announces that he is spring attacking the fighter, and even if the fighter does move to intercept, no movement from the attacker will provoke from the fighter.)
Even if I'm wrong about altering the path of a move action, and I don't think I am, this one definitely doesn't work. First, even assuming you can change the target of your attack in response to a readied action (which I'm pretty sure you can't), the readied intercept doesn't depend on getting in an AoO. Its a nice bonus to be able to get in a whack at an enemy trying to overrun or walk around you, but the objective is to prevent an attack on your teammate, not get an attack in yourself. Really, this is no different than what a linebacker does in football.
The fighter can bleed all over every opponent, but that hardly seems like a fun way to go through an encounter.
To most players, offensive power is sexier than defense. Deep down, almost everyone in a party wants to be the one who gets in those last few hit points of damage and claim the dead dragon as "his" kill. But I strongly disagree with Frank's assertion that the only way a fighter can justify his existence is with the rate he deals damage. Its a popular and strongly entrenched viewpoint, but I don't think its really true.
What Im hearing is that it works until level 12, maybe. Just like everything else. After that everything has alternate movement types, special abilties, SLAs, reach, or is just plain big enough to occupy the same space about you and not give a rats butt.Its situational, as most things D&D are. I admittedly haven't tested readied intercept at higher levels much, but I think it continues to have use. What amazes me is the amount of effort some players put into working out elaborate exploits using combinations of Force Cage, Acid Fog, Time Stop, Mordenkainen's Dysjunction, and multiple metamagic rods that are just barely possible but incredibly impractical, yet remain adamant that nothing worthwhile can be done without spells.
What amazes me is the amount of effort some players put into working out elaborate exploits using combinations of Force Cage, Acid Fog, Time Stop, Mordenkainen's Dysjunction, and multiple metamagic rods that are just barely possible but incredibly impractical, yet remain adamant that nothing worthwhile can be done without spells.
Lots of decent things can be done at high level without spells. Let's consider our friend the 10th level Halfling Rogue. He has a ring of blink and a pile of acid flasks. He also has Rapid Shot and either Quick Draw, a Handy Haversack, or a DM who is willing to use a literalist interpretation of the Sleight of Hand skill. In any case, he throws 3 flasks of acid per turn as touch attacks that negate your Dex bonus, and with his own substantial Dex, size, unnamed and Racial bonuses he is pretty much going to hit your flat footed touch AC on anything but a natural 1. Each flask does 6d6+1 of acid damage, and if you don't wash yourself off with alcohol it will do damage again next round. It's also considered ongoing damage so it resets Concentration checks to "you are not going to make this."
See that's fairly decent. It's simple, it's effective, it's a huge pile of non-magical energy damage that almost always hits and bypasses SR and DR. It shuts spellcasters down and kills level appropriate enemies with extreme expedience.
---
But Fighters don't do stuff like that. Offense is better than Defense unless defense applies to your entire party in the way that magic circle against Evil does. Intercepting enemies doesn't work. Killing your enemies does.
When people talk about actually effective and contributing non-casters they talk about Rogues and Frenzied Berserkers. They don't talk about Fighters and Paladins. Because at high or even medium levels "standing around in heavy armor" isn't worth anything at all.
-Frank
Remember that raw numeric bonuses require coming in extremely large numbers before they make much of a difference. A 15th level Cleric can wander around with divine power, divine favor, righteous might, spikes, greater magic weapon, weapon of the deity, and bless all on 24/7. That's not even a large pile of her spell slots.
Okay, I'll bite: how does a 15th level cleric keep 1 round/level spells (like righteous might and divine power) and one minute duration spells (like divine favor) on 24/7? I'm not interested in spikes or weapon of the deity, as they aren't SRD spells and therefore inapplicable to a discussion of cleric power in the Pathfinder RPG. Splatbook feats also are generally inapplicable to the discussion--Persistent Spell, for example, has been banned from every campaign I've ever participated in or run.
In a later post in this thread, you also mention a wizard keeping bear's endurance up in every encounter of the day--how's that?
Whether Persistent Spell is banned in your personal games is pretty much completely irrelevant, as it is in the SRD. Divine Abilities and Feats, page 23. No idea why it's there, and I don't care. The fact is that it is in the rules, and so I'm on totally solid ground using it in examples.
-Frank
|
Okay, I'll bite: how does a 15th level cleric keep 1 round/level spells (like righteous might and divine power) and one minute duration spells (like divine favor) on 24/7? I'm not interested in spikes or weapon of the deity, as they aren't SRD spells and therefore inapplicable to a discussion of cleric power in the Pathfinder RPG. Splatbook feats also are generally inapplicable to the discussion--Persistent Spell, for example, has been banned from every campaign I've ever participated in or run.
In a later post in this thread, you also mention a wizard keeping bear's endurance up in every encounter of the day--how's that?
While I've posted above at length about how the Fighter could be made more interesting, more versatile and more competitive, I have noticed also that a fair number of 'Fighters are weaksauce' arguments end up invoking extremely esoteric multi-book crossover madness examples of what a Cleric or Wizard could do if they had Core abilities, a Feat from splatbook X and some broken magic items from sourcebook Y.
There is a valid point, even just using Core, that a Fighter lacks some oomph and ends up being the ugly sister watching everyone else at the dance, but it gets obscured somewhat by the straw men.
Also valid is the point that every splatbook greatly increases the options for spellcasters to find yet another sexy combination that blows everyone's pants off, while, in the vast majority of cases, Fighter players go, 'Ooh, a new Exotic Weapon that I Do Not Want, good thing I paid $40 for this book of how to make Wizards even better at kicking my @$$...'
Whether Persistent Spell is banned in your personal games is pretty much completely irrelevant, as it is in the SRD. Divine Abilities and Feats, page 23. No idea why it's there, and I don't care. The fact is that it is in the rules, and so I'm on totally solid ground using it in examples.
-Frank
You are; it's definitely SRD material. Persistent Spell for the win!
|
|
You are; it's definitely SRD material. Persistent Spell for the win!Whether Persistent Spell is banned in your personal games is pretty much completely irrelevant, as it is in the SRD. Divine Abilities and Feats, page 23. No idea why it's there, and I don't care. The fact is that it is in the rules, and so I'm on totally solid ground using it in examples.
-Frank
And if Nightsticks ever become part of the SRD, any non-Cleric class can just kiss their usefulness goodbye. :)
And if Nightsticks ever become part of the SRD, any non-Cleric class can just kiss their usefulness goodbye. :)
Nightsticks by themselves aren't too bad. Nightsticks plus the Divine Metamagic feat, however, is just the book-crossing killer combo you mentioned.
|
|
Lots of decent things can be done at high level without spells. Let's consider our friend the 10th level Halfling Rogue. He has a ring of blink and a pile of acid flasks. He also has Rapid Shot and either Quick Draw, a Handy Haversack, or a DM who is willing to use a literalist interpretation of the Sleight of Hand skill. In any case, he throws 3 flasks of acid per turn as touch attacks that negate your Dex bonus, and with his own substantial Dex, size, unnamed and Racial bonuses he is pretty much going to hit your flat footed touch AC on anything but a natural 1. Each flask does 6d6+1 of acid damage, and if you don't wash yourself off with alcohol it will do damage again next round. It's also considered ongoing damage so it resets Concentration checks to "you are not going to make this."
While throwing a splash weapon is a normal touch attack, preparing to throw a splash weapon takes a full round action. So the could at best throw two acid flasks in one round (three if he has stored one in a glove of storing), but this would need a few rounds of preparation.
While throwing a splash weapon is a normal touch attack, preparing to throw a splash weapon takes a full round action. So the could at best throw two acid flasks in one round (three if he has stored one in a glove of storing), but this would need a few rounds of preparation.
That only applies to splash weapons that need to be prepared. Specifically oil flasks. Acid flasks are just thrown.
-Frank
I agree that what the fighter needs is not necessarily more "oomph" to his hits but more versatility, it is more impressive that a exploding ball of magical fire be more effective than a "morningstar to the junk" but certainly the morningstar should have more effect than just straight-up damage.
Looking over Frank's suggestions from the "Gaming Den" thread linked earlier then I like the direction it is headed to. It's more flexible and it gives the Fighter the role of a battleground "bully" of a sorts.
However, I think the Fighters role within the group needs to be better defined.
Lets set up an iconic group, say a rogue, wizard, cleric and a fighter. The rogue can disable traps, sneak around, scout ahead and shiv kidneys like it aint nobodies business. The cleric can heal, buff and unleash holy wrath on enemies. The wizard can blast things with magic until they stop moving, raise the remains and have those then chase the other monsters around until it stops being funny.
The Fighter is there to do what exactly? Generally he'll be at the front taking hits and setting up flank attack with the rogue and hitting stuff as best he can. Ofcourse monsters can get past him without "too" much trouble and that spells trouble for the group unless they prepare (making a wall of fire with alchemist fire, high ground, defensive spells etc.).
I want something to be clear before I continue though. I've played the Fighter class alot in its current incarnation. And by no means are my games boring or unsatisfying at all. However, I do realize I'm not going to be the most glorious party member, I try to keep my teammates safe and often do something reckless to spice things up. I love it, I don't want people to misunderstand my comments as "Fighter hate".
But as it is the Fighter isn't particularly suited to his role. Sure he's got great BAB progression and a huge selection of feats that give him flexibility, but he has few inbuilt tools to aid his party.
Ofcourse a well geared fighter can do amazing things. But if the rest of his party is equally well geared they're going to outperform him.
What is the fighters role in a party? Is it to assist the other melee classes? Is it to keep the others safe, to get hit essentially? What tools does he have to attain those goals?
Not really a spoiler, but off-topic
The best party defender I ever played was a Warforged in the Age of Worms setting. He was (is) a Paladin 6/Warforged Juggernaut 5 with Leadership, and his cohort is a Warforged Artificer. With stuff like +2 Admantine plating, Fist of Savarra, +2 Hvy steel shield of Blinding, Flaming armor spikes of Undead bane and stuff like that is how I could keep my party safe. Like this no healing was needed for me and I kept my own buff-bot on hand meaning the rest of the party could be more free in what they did. And since there was always atleast two warforged between the monsters and casters we had plenty of time to react.
Offense is better than Defense unless defense applies to your entire party in the way that magic circle against Evil does. Intercepting enemies doesn't work
Except it does, as I've demonstrated. The only part I'm not completely certain about is whether a character can change his declared movement action's path in response to a readied action. I admit that if I interpreted that incorrectly, you are right and I am wrong. But I've been interpreting it the other way for a couple of years now and nobody has ever cited anything in the RAW that has contradicted my interpretation.
You are; it's definitely SRD material. Persistent Spell for the win!Whether Persistent Spell is banned in your personal games is pretty much completely irrelevant, as it is in the SRD. Divine Abilities and Feats, page 23. No idea why it's there, and I don't care. The fact is that it is in the rules, and so I'm on totally solid ground using it in examples.
-Frank
Frank is correct, but you need a metamagic rod or other effect that cancels metamagic spell level increase to pull it off. Persistent Divine Power is a 10th level spell. I hate that cheese.
I allow Persistent Spell in my games but houserule that nobody can use metamagic in a way that elevates a spell's level beyond the highest level spell he is able to cast, whether or not it actually takes a slot at that level.
I'm in the camp that, sure, if you totally cheese out your character, completely ignore the rest of the party, and use completely unbalanced crap like Persistent Spell, then, sure, a cleric or wizard can be a fighter. Yippee. Is that any fun? (By the way, I didn't see Peristent Spell in the D20 SRD I found on the internet, in the document that I found when I clicked on Feats.)
But, yeah, I totally agree that there is little sense to taking Fighter all the way to 20th level. I mean, with so many fun, cool prestige classes out there, why would anyone stick with one non-spell casting class? And, the only reason to stick with a spell casting class is to not slow down progression.
All the examples of how much damage a wizard can do with spells... Hell no a 5th level fighter shouldn't be able to do 5d6 damamge. Yes his damage is lower, but he can do that all day long. Eventually, a 5th level wizard is going to run out of spells. He can't cast fireball all day long, unless something else you're doing is totally broken.
So, to me, the question is, what do I give the fighter to make it cool to take more than 6 or 8 levels of Fighter. The only answer, without totally ruining backwards compatibility, is what others have suggested, i.e. a ton of really cool higher level feats only available to fighters. I don't know what these would be, but they have to be fun and exciting. But not supernatural. Something that knocks an opponent back and off its feet (like Awesome Blow), something that has a chance to stun or daze the opponent, something that nauseates or sickens an opponent, something that disables an opponent (cutting off a limb) and reduces its number of attacks (if it has multi attack), something that forces an opponent to keep attacking the fighter (intimidate-based). I'm sure others can come up with tons of other cool ideas.
I definitely think the power up wizards are getting with Pathfinder is unnecessary, though.
I agree... and don't think the CR/EL is very difficult to understand, and think its really more easy to balance and encounter!
Four PC X-level should encounter a CR equivalent to their level. So, a 4 7th-level party should envounter 1 x CR 7 creature. If you challenge 1 x 7th-level PC, it should survive when fighting 1 x CR 3 creature or 1 x 3rd-level ennemy. By fighting with the same level of challenge goes against your 4 encounters before needing rest, and is why you're fighter is near death !
Also, the basic fighter is, to my view, perfect because the many feats he gains can create many fighting option. I've played a Tripper Fighter, using feats and improve trip with a flail and shield feats making him nearly untoucheable while tripping !) and a whirlwinding fighter which jump into melee and killing everybody around him !
In my games, fighter is a class that always shine against magic user, since they can hurl fireballs or area spells because the fighter is most of the time in close combat ! (and the rogue is flanking...) Cleric is near for medic when needed.
The Pathfinder Fighter gives armor or weapon bonus that are not useful since most fighter would have magic armor and weapon to help... They hit already most of the time, and depending on armor, the can be very hard to hit (anyway they have enough Hit Points to cover the scratches !)
What I love, is the specialist wizard that will shine a bit more !
While I actually agree with your concerns Frank (and like the way that Pathfinder has tried to make fighters tougher) you keep comparing monsters of a particular CR with characters of the same level. That is not how CR works. A dire bear is a CR 7 monster and so is a EL 7 threat. That's an even challenge for four 7th-level PCs, not a single character of the same level.
Now I know why EL and CR has been ditched by WotC. People still can't understand it properly.
Sorry Frank. :)
|
|
What amazes me is the amount of effort some players put into working out elaborate exploits using combinations of Force Cage, Acid Fog, Time Stop, Mordenkainen's Dysjunction, and multiple metamagic rods that are just barely possible but incredibly impractical, yet remain adamant that nothing worthwhile can be done without spells.Lots of decent things can be done at high level without spells. Let's consider our friend the 10th level Halfling Rogue. He has a ring of blink and a pile of acid flasks. He also has Rapid Shot and either Quick Draw, a Handy Haversack, or a DM who is willing to use a literalist interpretation of the Sleight of Hand skill. In any case, he throws 3 flasks of acid per turn as touch attacks that negate your Dex bonus, and with his own substantial Dex, size, unnamed and Racial bonuses he is pretty much going to hit your flat footed touch AC on anything but a natural 1. Each flask does 6d6+1 of acid damage, and if you don't wash yourself off with alcohol it will do damage again next round. It's also considered ongoing damage so it resets Concentration checks to "you are not going to make this."
See that's fairly decent. It's simple, it's effective, it's a huge pile of non-magical energy damage that almost always hits and bypasses SR and DR. It shuts spellcasters down and kills level appropriate enemies with extreme expedience.
---
But Fighters don't do stuff like that. Offense is better than Defense unless defense applies to your entire party in the way that magic circle against Evil does. Intercepting enemies doesn't work. Killing your enemies does.
When people talk about actually effective and contributing non-casters they talk about Rogues and Frenzied Berserkers. They don't talk about Fighters and Paladins. Because at high or even medium levels "standing around in heavy armor" isn't worth anything at all.
-Frank
That's a nifty trick, but how many people actually do stuff like that in a game? Anyone with enough prep time and bucket loads of gold can come up with some impressive trick to deal with a specific type of encounter. That's not the way the game is really played. Any arguments using extreme examples like this are pointless. In reality, you don't know what's around the corner. You don't know when your next fight will be or what you are going to face next. You can also be pretty sure you aren't guaranteed to have a ring of blinking. Hopefully, your DM is smart enough not to let you use too many broken feats, magic items, and PrC's that had practically no playtesting before WotC shove them ou the door. The best thing you can do to upgrade the fighter while maintaining backwards compatibility is to give him some spectacular high level feats for him to take.
Frank, your own site says that ECL and LA don't work, so why would CR be an appropriate measure for you to use in any discussion?
In third edition rules you literally are assured of getting a Ring of Blink. Specifically. It's the thing you need, and you are expected to trade your other magical loot in as "character wealth" in order to purchase the items you actually need. And while I loathe it, the 3rd edition is created predicated on the idea that people will do that. Heck, Andy Collins said that the whole 3.5 weapon sizing thing was not a problem because player characters "just purchase the weapons they want and need anyway."
So yes. A 10th level Rogue can be certain of having a Ring of Blink in the default assumptions that the game was written under. And yes, I see people play the Blink Rogue + Flasks of various stuff a lot. It's an extremely common, simple, and effective character archetype. You will also want a Wand of gravestrike and a Wand of Golemstrike to activate with UMD under standard rules.
In Pathfinder you don't even need the wands because Sneak Attack works on most constructs and undead.
-Frank