|
I think the fighter’s Armor Training is quite good, and highlights that fighters should be the best at wearing armor, but I’d like to see it applied to shields as well. I don’t think it should be applicable to all shields, but it should perhaps be applied to tower shields, as fighters are the only class that are trained in tower shields, and tower shields have significant penalties and restrictions that make them more akin to armor than shields.
Instead of adding to the tower shield’s shield bonus (+4 is quite enough for a shield, plus cover), perhaps armor training could reduce the tower shield’s penalty to attack rolls. The reduction to armor check penalty and increase to maximum Dexterity bonus would stay the same as for other armor, and would serve to make the tower shield a more attractive option for fighters.
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games
|
I think the fighter’s Armor Training is quite good, and highlights that fighters should be the best at wearing armor, but I’d like to see it applied to shields as well. I don’t think it should be applicable to all shields, but it should perhaps be applied to tower shields, as fighters are the only class that are trained in tower shields, and tower shields have significant penalties and restrictions that make them more akin to armor than shields.
Instead of adding to the tower shield’s shield bonus (+4 is quite enough for a shield, plus cover), perhaps armor training could reduce the tower shield’s penalty to attack rolls. The reduction to armor check penalty and increase to maximum Dexterity bonus would stay the same as for other armor, and would serve to make the tower shield a more attractive option for fighters.
I wouldn't mind capping the armor training based on the armor's own armor bonus to AC. But, that's just my bias vs. light armor = awesome AC...
well it does apply to shield but if you mean both shield and armor at the same time then yes I would like to see this. And adding speed would alos be welcome
|
|
Sword and board needs a boost. It wasn't the most popular armament for soldiers for 3000 years for no reason. The D&D rules should reflect that.
I'll echo sentiments from elsewhere that at a certain point, possibly Level 7, armor training should reduce the speed penalty from medium and then heavy armor (or both at once).
Amen. Full plate RULES, and the rules should reflect its rulership. Pun intended, if you didn't guess.
I'll echo sentiments from elsewhere that at a certain point, possibly Level 7, armor training should reduce the speed penalty from medium and then heavy armor (or both at once).
Amen.
Peace,
tfad
Amen.
Let the heavy armor shine, even if it's not a paladin using it.
Now, just one comment: I use armor as DR in my games, and allow me to say that the Armor Training class ability REALLY shines under this system, since it improves the DR. Also, under this system the shield seems very interesting, since it gives bonus to Ac (what armor does not).
Fighters need a feat early on to make shields = some form of miss chance.
An unavoidable miss chance.
Then as they continue to level up they can continue to chain to get 1) higher miss chance and 2) miss chance against other things.
Imagine the 5th level fighter who has a permanent 20% chance to block any melee or ranged weapon.
Maybe by 10 it can upgrade to all targeted effects.
by 15, to give partial "defense" against AOE attacks.
(imagine if you will the classic fighter hiding behind his shield as the dragon breaths fire.. Sure Rt he's a charcoal brickette but they always survive just singed by the blast...)
Each subsequent level of protection would be another feat, of course.
Maybe:
lv
5- 15% block vs physical
10 15% block vs physical and targeted magic
15 25% block vs physical
20 25% block vs physical and targeted/aoe magic.
Thoughts? Obviously the numbered are just out of my head- comments are welcome. This or some variation on it though would give the "defense" fighters something against the mages and whatnot though.
-S
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games
|
Fighters need a feat early on to make shields = some form of miss chance.
An unavoidable miss chance.Then as they continue to level up they can continue to chain to get 1) higher miss chance and 2) miss chance against other things.
Imagine the 5th level fighter who has a permanent 20% chance to block any melee or ranged weapon.
Maybe by 10 it can upgrade to all targeted effects.
by 15, to give partial "defense" against AOE attacks.
(imagine if you will the classic fighter hiding behind his shield as the dragon breaths fire.. Sure Rt he's a charcoal brickette but they always survive just singed by the blast...)Each subsequent level of protection would be another feat, of course.
Maybe:
lv
5- 15% block vs physical
10 15% block vs physical and targeted magic
15 25% block vs physical
20 25% block vs physical and targeted/aoe magic.Thoughts? Obviously the numbered are just out of my head- comments are welcome. This or some variation on it though would give the "defense" fighters something against the mages and whatnot though.
-S
On first blush, I like the concept. Seems fairly simple at first glance, and simple = good. My reservations are these:
1. If you had a shield and some other effect that gave a miss chance (concealment, invis, blur, displacement, blink, entropic shield), would both miss chances apply separately (2 rolls), both stack together (1 roll), or just the highest chance (1 roll)?
2. Would a shield block only physical effects (i.e., things that cause hp damage), or would it also block nonphysical targeted effects, including:
a. rays (other than hp-damage rays)
b. targeted non-physical spells (enchantments, illusions, etc.)
c. and what about a spell like magic missile, a targeted hp effect (though only vs. creatures, not objects), but one with no attack roll and which always hits
3. Would a shield suffer damage from all of this attack-blocking?
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games
|
I'll agree on both the sword and board boost being necessary, and some reduction at least in medium and heavy armor speed penalties. Heavy armor gave its wearers an absolute superiority over the unarmored, and it should make you tough and dangerous when you're skilled in acting in it. The lightly-armored or unarmored swashbuckler image only came into existence after armor was discarded for other reasons.Sword and board needs a boost. It wasn't the most popular armament for soldiers for 3000 years for no reason. The D&D rules should reflect that.
I'll echo sentiments from elsewhere that at a certain point, possibly Level 7, armor training should reduce the speed penalty from medium and then heavy armor (or both at once).Amen. Full plate RULES, and the rules should reflect its rulership. Pun intended, if you didn't guess.
Count me in the camp of thinking that armor training could and should apply separately to both armor AND shield. The attraction to go sword & board then becomes the double-dip on AC in defensive training.
I would also favor adding shield bonus to CMB defense - you keep trying to disarm the guy or knock him down with a trip or bull rush or get your paws on him for a crushing grapple but he just keeps blocking you with his shield.
|
|
Count me in the camp of thinking that armor training could and should apply separately to both armor AND shield. The attraction to go sword & board then becomes the double-dip on AC in defensive training.
I would also favor adding shield bonus to CMB defense - you keep trying to disarm the guy or knock him down with a trip or bull rush or get your paws on him for a crushing grapple but he just keeps blocking you with his shield.
I agree and the idea of adding the shield to CMB is really great, shields should be very effective in combat of all kinds.
|
|
Fighters need a feat early on to make shields = some form of miss chance.
An unavoidable miss chance.Then as they continue to level up they can continue to chain to get 1) higher miss chance and 2) miss chance against other things.
Imagine the 5th level fighter who has a permanent 20% chance to block any melee or ranged weapon.
Maybe by 10 it can upgrade to all targeted effects.
by 15, to give partial "defense" against AOE attacks.
(imagine if you will the classic fighter hiding behind his shield as the dragon breaths fire.. Sure Rt he's a charcoal brickette but they always survive just singed by the blast...)Each subsequent level of protection would be another feat, of course.
Maybe:
lv
5- 15% block vs physical
10 15% block vs physical and targeted magic
15 25% block vs physical
20 25% block vs physical and targeted/aoe magic.Thoughts? Obviously the numbered are just out of my head- comments are welcome. This or some variation on it though would give the "defense" fighters something against the mages and whatnot though.
-S
The problem I have with this is that overly complicates things, IMO, b adding another roll to make. Every time you roll to hit, you have to roll the miss chance. It's ok (but annoying) to do this on occasion (like when fighting vs. blur or invisibility), but every time a monster rolls to hit the fighter? No thanks. I'd rather just have straight bonuses that are easy to add on and that you don't need to think about in play.
DOn't forget players would have roll the miss chance every time they run into an NPC fighter as well. I don't expect they'd enjoy the hassle either.
|
I'm not sure how I feel about this topic. I'm a bit ambivalent.
I like the idea of moving faster in armor being something that can be trained. I like the idea of armor training increasing the effectiveness of a shield etc.
My main concern is this: idealogically, the paladin is archtyped as the 'knight in shining armor' type and already the paladin is WAY behind the curve in both its ability to attack/hit his opponents, AND way behind the fighter in the AC dept.
Furthermore, considering the paladin has MAD (multiple ability dependency), the fighter will more likely than a paladin have the ability to afford an INT score required to take Combat Expertise, thus making the difference even more grave.
Consider the following:
11th level Fighter vs 11th Level Paladin - both in Full plate, sword and boarder:
Due to Armor training x3, the Full Plate provides AC 11, Tower Shield +4, DEX up to +4,for AC: 29 (no magic or feats) for the fighter. Even with a buckler allowing for much more dmg from Power Attack and Strength, the AC is 26!!!
Due to nothing of the above the paladin has Full Plate, Hvy Shield and Dex of +1 for AC: 22 Thats 7 points of difference in AC. And that is BEFORE we make proposed changes to the shield training to increase it's effectiveness.
For attacks, since the paladin has MAD, his Strength on avg will be about 4 points less than the fighter at that level.
Thus the fighter with Weapon Focus, Greater Weapon Focus, Weapon training +2, and 4 pts higher in Strength, gives the fighter a +6 Advantage already over the paladin.
So - my point is the fighter as is - is already built significantly better in both offense ability and defense than a class that is theoretcially meant to be an imposing force against evil - a knight - a staunch defender - that is signifcantly inferior.
Most of this I understand can and will be discussed at the time in which we discuss "paladins," but I wanted to explain the reasons why although I like the idea of sword and boarders getting some love, and the idea of fighters' armor training can be more diversely beneficial, I'm not completely sold on the need for it - as the gap between the other class(es) is getting more and more significant.
The TIER structure posts that I have seen around that labels the classes on various tiers would have the paladin already a couple of tiers below that of the fighter.
I dont know what would fix that - and needs to be discussed in more depth when we talk about paladins, but I hope the people here are cognizant that any (and all) changes that further buff up the fighters needs to have complementary changes that also buff up other martial characters - especially the paladin.
Robert
I like the idea people have presented about reducing the speed penalty at higher levels of the skill. Makes heavy armor more attractive, I think something needs to be done to make Board and Sword more desireable, even if it's give them some shield bashing special abilities or such.... But I don't think double dipping is a good idea, not at all.
The chance to Dodge all damage from an attack" no... f!@& no.
One thought, though I do NOT think fighters should get DR, I'm sorry that's a Barbarian thing, giving them that on top of the fighter armor bonus' is a tad ridiculous. Rage Powers aren't as good (and are finite on a daily basis) to offset the constant armor bonus, AND getting DR... though, one idea that may work, and make heavier armors more desireable, is have Armor Mastery give 1/- Dr if Light armor(Whether light from material, or from type.. ie, Mithril Chainmail still is only 1dr) 2/- if Medium, and 3/- if Heavy. This, on top of the above mentioned skills of reducing the speed penalty might be good.
Weave
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games
|
I'm not sure how I feel about this topic. I'm a bit ambivalent.
I like the idea of moving faster in armor being something that can be trained. I like the idea of armor training increasing the effectiveness of a shield etc.
My main concern is this: idealogically, the paladin is archtyped as the 'knight in shining armor' type and already the paladin is WAY behind the curve in both its ability to attack/hit his opponents, AND way behind the fighter in the AC dept.
Furthermore, considering the paladin has MAD (multiple ability dependency), the fighter will more likely than a paladin have the ability to afford an INT score required to take Combat Expertise, thus making the difference even more grave.
Consider the following:
11th level Fighter vs 11th Level Paladin - both in Full plate, sword and boarder:
Due to Armor training x3, the Full Plate provides AC 11, Tower Shield +4, DEX up to +4,for AC: 29 (no magic or feats) for the fighter. Even with a buckler allowing for much more dmg from Power Attack and Strength, the AC is 26!!!
Due to nothing of the above the paladin has Full Plate, Hvy Shield and Dex of +1 for AC: 22 Thats 7 points of difference in AC. And that is BEFORE we make proposed changes to the shield training to increase it's effectiveness.
For attacks, since the paladin has MAD, his Strength on avg will be about 4 points less than the fighter at that level.
Thus the fighter with Weapon Focus, Greater Weapon Focus, Weapon training +2, and 4 pts higher in Strength, gives the fighter a +6 Advantage already over the paladin.
So - my point is the fighter as is - is already built significantly better in both offense ability and defense than a class that is theoretcially meant to be an imposing force against evil - a knight - a staunch defender - that is signifcantly inferior.
Most of this I understand can and will be discussed at the time in which we discuss "paladins," but I wanted to explain the reasons why although I like the idea of sword and boarders getting some...
The above is all true, as far as it goes, but it ignores the paladin's "I win" area of defense vs. the fighter: a massive advantage in saving throws (and immunity to one type of take-out effect, fear, and one debuff, disease).
The fighter's achilles heel is magical attacks. The paladin can ignore them or minimize them far more often than the fighter.
Whether that's a balanced answer depends on whom you ask, but it is a big defensive advantage for the paladin as an outgrowth of that MAD and the class abilities that depend on it.
DR 5/- at level 19 is not enough to matter. DR doesn't mean anything once the game gets into higher levels unless it's at least in the mid-teens. Barbarians need a boost in DR, and fighters should get DR with armor training AND armor mastery.
I agree with the shields adding a concealment effect against melee and ranged attacks. When considering if it stacks with displacement or mirror image, for example, well I would say no, because shield blocking is for attacks that would have hit you (roll to hit ac first, if it's a hit roll against shield block chance), whereas mirror image and displacement cause things to miss your body entirely (no reason to reach out and block something that passed by you 5 feet away). Usually spells have a higher % to avoid getting hit than 25%, so you would take the higher % for gameplay reasons.
Also you should be able to "deflect arrows" with a shield, and use a "shield parry" maneuver to intercept melee attacks. Deflect arrows feat should automatially let you deflect 2 normal missiles in a round instead of the 1 normally allowed by deflect arrows.
Shield bonus should add to touch ac as well as defensive CMB.
Shield bash should be an extra attack you can add to any full attack action at full BAB, kind of like flurry of blows. Shields don't do that much damage, and it's easy to rationalize that a SAB fighter hits with his shield once in a round. Or, with a successful melee attack with your weapon, you get an immediate free attack with a shield bash once per round. That would keep the shield bash useful (hey, an extra hit), without overwhelming the extra hits from TWF.
With an appropriate level or feat, shield bashing/shield rushing should add a stun or daze/knockdown attack with a STR based DC. The use of shield bashing is at no penalty to hit, and 2-weapon fighting feats are not requried for fighting with a weapon and shield (a shield strapped to your arm is far easier to maneuver than another sword in the other hand).
|
|
The above is all true, as far as it goes, but it ignores the paladin's "I win" area of defense vs. the fighter: a massive advantage in saving throws (and immunity to one type of take-out effect, fear, and one debuff, disease).
The fighter's achilles heel is magical attacks. The paladin can ignore them or minimize them far more often than the fighter.
Whether that's a balanced answer depends on whom you ask, but it is a big defensive advantage for the paladin as an outgrowth of that MAD and the class abilities that depend on it.
The fighter now has bonus vs fear. Disease is not that debilitating (compared to poison for instance) not to mention that a fighters good fort save and usually good CON is still a good defense against it.
You're right about the magical attacks and saves - I've been playing a paladin since all the playtesting back in Alpha started, and I have to say it really sucks to ONLY time to shine is when a magical spell is cast at me.
I wasnt posting my opposition or opinions because I think the fighter is wrong - I love the fighter as written - I wish I was playing one instead most of the time.....I was posting my concern for continuing to make the gap between the two's martial capacity even more significant if we started double-dipping the armor training to apply towards shields.
As it stands, a paladin cannot stand toe-to-toe with big opponents at all - in comparison, the attacks and AC of a fighter are far superior. Waiting to make a saving throw against a magical attack is not what I consider heroic. Increasing the armor training and weapon training to provide even more ability to hit and defend against opponents will even leave the barbarian and the ranger in the dust, too.
Again, I like the idea, and I think sword and boarders need some love - perhaps done via feats - I just continue to see a bigger and bigger gap being created.
Robert
|
|
Imagine the 5th level fighter who has a permanent 20% chance to block any melee or ranged weapon.
-S
I'm not really a fan of anything that is going to add more dice rolls in combat - especially opposed type rolls. CMB did away with that - and I'm much appreciative.
I think the idea is theoretically very interesting; but complex in its implementation.
Robert
DR 5/- at level 19 is not enough to matter. DR doesn't mean anything once the game gets into higher levels unless it's at least in the mid-teens. Barbarians need a boost in DR, and fighters should get DR with armor training AND armor mastery.
Except when you take into account the Viscious weapon. Which is a great bonus to a weapon, arguably the best, if you have the DR to mitigate most/all of that backlash damage. It's a Barbarian thing, shouldn't be a fighter thing too.
|
If we are adding class abilities, I say keep it simple.
The idea of adding shield bonuses to CMB is a great feat idea. As well, deflecting missiles already exists as a feat.
If we are talking about armor training, there are a number of areas the fighter could improve on the base mechanics of wearing armor
- improving AC
- improving max dex
- reducing armor check penalty
- reducing arcane spell failure
- reducing movement penalties
As well, there are new mechanics that could be used, based on variant ideas on what armor should do, that the SRD doesn't really address
- adding/improving Damage Reduction
- improving Reflex saving throws
- adding temporary hit points
I think if we are talking about improving Armor Training, the only thing I think that should be introduced is reducing the movement penalty for armor. That will encourage fighters, at least, to wear medium and heavy armor. In our playtests, the armor training is a nice bonus, but my fighter kept wearing light armor up to 7th level, because it was still his best option.
I would suggest the following:
Armor Training (Ex): Starting at 3rd level, a fighter gains added protection from the armor he is wearing. Whenever he is wearing armor, he gains an additional +1 armor bonus to his armor class, reduces the armor check penalty by 1 (to a minimum of 0), and increases the maximum Dexterity bonus allowed by his armor by 1. Every four levels thereafter (7th, 11th, and 15th), a fighter gains even more protection, increasing
these bonuses by +1 each time, for a total of +4 to armor class at 15th level, with a –4 reduction to the armor check penalty and a +4 increase to the maximum Dexterity bonus allowed.
Furthermore, movement penalties from armor are reduced by 5 feet at 3rd level, and 10 feet at 7th level.
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games
|
The above is all true, as far as it goes, but it ignores the paladin's "I win" area of defense vs. the fighter: a massive advantage in saving throws (and immunity to one type of take-out effect, fear, and one debuff, disease).
The fighter's achilles heel is magical attacks. The paladin can ignore them or minimize them far more often than the fighter.
Whether that's a balanced answer depends on whom you ask, but it is a big defensive advantage for the paladin as an outgrowth of that MAD and the class abilities that depend on it.
The fighter now has bonus vs fear.
True, but save bonus <> immunity, especially where fighters and Will saves come together.
Disease is not that debilitating (compared to poison for instance) not to mention that a fighters good fort save and usually good CON is still a good defense against it.
Also true. Disease is pretty rare as an attack form, really. It'll come up a few times over the course of a campaign, unless it's an overriding theme in the game (but that is obviously an outlier).
You're right about the magical attacks and saves - I've been playing a paladin since all the playtesting back in Alpha started, and I have to say it really sucks to ONLY time to shine is when a magical spell is cast at me.
True point, although if you combine the paladin's save bonus with evasion and/or mettle (from multiclassing or magic items) it gets to be a pretty sick combo.
When we get to paladin we can talk some more about that, but given the paladin's iconic role as a 'defender' I would actually be in favor of the Pal also getting the armor training benefit as a class feature (and for it to apply to shields AND armor, for a double-dip for S&B types, as the iconic paladin tends to be).
Hey, it's not so hard to imagine. Barb & rogue share uncanny dodge, ranger and rogue and monk share evasion, paladin and cleric share turn undead.
Just make it a shared class feature of Fighter and Paladin, giving them a leg up on clerics and other armor & shield types.
Jason (post #600, apropos of nothing)
Spellcasters get stoneskin and greater stoneskin long before the fighter gets armor mastery or the barbarian's DR gets good. The fighter and barbarian both need a DR boost. Right now, DR is neither a fighter thing nor a barbarian thing; it is a spellcaster thing.
A melee druid or cleric with stoneskin and appropriate size/str/shapeshift buffs running is the best melee character right now, both offensively and defensively. Plus they get better saves.
|
|
If we are adding class abilities, I say keep it simple.
The idea of adding shield bonuses to CMB is a great feat idea. As well, deflecting missiles already exists as a feat.
If we are talking about armor training, there are a number of areas the fighter could improve on the base mechanics of wearing armor
- improving AC
- improving max dex
- reducing armor check penalty
- reducing arcane spell failure
- reducing movement penaltiesAs well, there are new mechanics that could be used, based on variant ideas on what armor should do, that the SRD doesn't really address
- adding/improving Damage Reduction
- improving Reflex saving throws
- adding temporary hit points
You know, Archade, you may have just inspired the best thought that I've had!!!
Take the various abilities you just listed that armor training either already does or can provide and give them as OPTIONS to the fighter so that each time the Armor Training is reached during the fighters career, the player selects what type of advantage it provides.
For instance:
Armor Training (Ex): Starting at 3rd level, a fighter gains added protection from the armor he is wearing. Whenever he is wearing armor, he gains an additional +1 armor bonus to his armor class, reduces the armor check penalty by 1 (to a minimum of 0). Furthermore, the fighter can apply any one of the following:
-5 ft from the movement penalty associated with his armor use
Improve the Max DEX to AC by +1
Add +1 to Reflex saves
Provide Damage reduction 1 / -
Provide the Shield bonus to add to your CMB score to defend against CMB checks
Subtract 10% from Arcane Spell Failure.
Every 4 levels after 3rd, the bonuses to the armor and armor check penalty improve by +1 again, and the fighter may select to either increase a previous benefit, or select a new one to be applied.
Thoughts?
Robert
|
|
You're right about the magical attacks and saves - I've been playing a paladin since all the playtesting back in Alpha started, and I have to say it really sucks to ONLY time to shine is when a magical spell is cast at me.True point, although if you combine the paladin's save bonus with evasion and/or mettle (from multiclassing or magic items) it gets to be a pretty sick combo.
When we get to paladin we can talk some more about that, but given the paladin's iconic role as a 'defender' I would actually be in favor of the Pal also getting the armor training benefit as a class feature (and for it to apply to shields AND armor, for a double-dip for S&B types, as the iconic paladin tends to be).
Hey, it's not so hard to imagine. Barb & rogue share uncanny dodge, ranger and rogue and monk share evasion,...
Yes we'll definitely talk about that later in the paladin thread.
That being said - I dont think its fair now or in any thread to base character design around the idea that the selection of multi-classing or adding a prestige class makes the class all that it should be. The idea is to make the classes the best they can be on their own.
I thought about suggesting both the armor training and mettle in fact as paladin class features.
Thanks for the discussion and look forward to more in that appropriate forum.
While we're talking about fighters - I havent seen our fighter lose too many saves vs fear now - especially since the fighters Bravery is an unnamed bonus and stacks with my Aura of Courage.
Robert
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games
|
You're right about the magical attacks and saves - I've been playing a paladin since all the playtesting back in Alpha started, and I have to say it really sucks to ONLY time to shine is when a magical spell is cast at me.True point, although if you combine the paladin's save bonus with evasion and/or mettle (from multiclassing or magic items) it gets to be a pretty sick combo.
When we get to paladin we can talk some more about that, but given the paladin's iconic role as a 'defender' I would actually be in favor of the Pal also getting the armor training benefit as a class feature (and for it to apply to shields AND armor, for a double-dip for S&B types, as the iconic paladin tends to be).
Hey, it's not so hard to imagine. Barb & rogue share uncanny dodge, ranger and rogue and monk share evasion,...
Yes we'll definitely talk about that later in the paladin thread.
That being said - I dont think its fair now or in any thread to base character design around the idea that the selection of multi-classing or adding a prestige class makes the class all that it should be. The idea is to make the classes the best they can be on their own.
I thought about suggesting both the armor training and mettle in fact as paladin class features.
Thanks for the discussion and look forward to more in that appropriate forum.
While we're talking about fighters - I havent seen our fighter lose too many saves vs fear now - especially since the fighters Bravery is an unnamed bonus and stacks with my Aura of Courage.
Robert
Wait just a minute! I call shenanigans on that one! We don't want to consider the impact of PrCs or equipment, but now you're saying the fighter's bravery is good because the paladin is around to boost his save with aura of courage. I dunno about that, Mr. Plays Fast and Loose... :)
(just kidding - untyped bonuses are the good stuff cuz it stacks with everything!)
|
|
Wait just a minute! I call shenanigans on that one! We don't want to consider the impact of PrCs or equipment, but now you're saying the fighter's bravery is good because the paladin is around to boost his save with aura of courage. I dunno about that, Mr. Plays Fast and Loose... :)
(just kidding - untyped bonuses are the good stuff cuz it stacks with everything!)
Not at all - just indicated that he's double lucky that he has me in the party too.
He's a halfling fighter with Iron Will and a 12 WIS (thanks to a +2 amulet). His save vs Fear is like +17 when he's around me!
It's irritating to see how much better a freakin halfling is to me when we fight side by side with all his feats and armor/weapon training size modifiers!!! I hate that little bastard!!! LOL (just kidding - its all in fun - but the truth is its a grave dispartiy)
Robert
|
|
Spellcasters get stoneskin and greater stoneskin long before the fighter gets armor mastery or the barbarian's DR gets good. The fighter and barbarian both need a DR boost. Right now, DR is neither a fighter thing nor a barbarian thing; it is a spellcaster thing.
A melee druid or cleric with stoneskin and appropriate size/str/shapeshift buffs running is the best melee character right now, both offensively and defensively. Plus they get better saves.
Usually by the time the wizard is casting stoneskin, the fighter in the party has at least some weapon made of adamantite.
Shapeshift of the druid has been reworked by Paizo.
I really dont think the level of disparity is as grave as you're making it sound.
Yes a cleric can fight better most likely with about 6 spells in effect - but he has to cast them all first. Some of them can even be cast on a fighter to make him even more lethal.
Robert
|
|
Spellcasters get stoneskin and greater stoneskin long before the fighter gets armor mastery or the barbarian's DR gets good. The fighter and barbarian both need a DR boost. Right now, DR is neither a fighter thing nor a barbarian thing; it is a spellcaster thing.
A melee druid or cleric with stoneskin and appropriate size/str/shapeshift buffs running is the best melee character right now, both offensively and defensively. Plus they get better saves.
Usually by the time the wizard is casting stoneskin, the fighter in the party has at least some weapon made of adamantite.
Shapeshift of the druid has been reworked by Paizo.
I really dont think the level of disparity is as grave as you're making it sound.
Yes a cleric can fight better most likely with about 6 spells in effect - but he has to cast them all first. Some of them can even be cast on a fighter to make him even more lethal.
Robert
You must not think like that, Robert. You must be selfish in D&D. Only support yourself so you can be better than others.
Seriously, a buffed fighter will always be better at combat than a buffed cleric or a buffed mage. Any person who respects the other players at the table would realize that and give the other PC the boost they need, and save those self-buffing spells when you need to help out.
I'd actually like to see a Fighter with all of the buffs active from his wizard/cleric pals. That would truly be some melee devastation, and would probably put "CoDzilla" to shame in a straight fight.
I just don't get the logic here:
"Well, I can use all of my spells to buff myself and be better than the fighter. Or I could use some spells to buff the fighter, and save others to use against our enemies. Well, since I am selfish I'll leave the fighter to his own devices. I'll just get a bigger share of the loot if he dies. Oh well."
|
|
I'd actually like to see a Fighter with all of the buffs active from his wizard/cleric pals. That would truly be some melee devastation, and would probably put "CoDzilla" to shame in a straight fight.I just don't get the logic here:
"Well, I can use all of my spells to buff myself and be better than the fighter. Or I could use some spells to buff the fighter, and save others to use against our enemies. Well, since I am selfish I'll leave the fighter to his own devices. I'll just get a bigger share of the loot if he dies. Oh well."
Usually in my experiences - the "selfish" mentality that you cite I see more often in organized league type play; as players are forced to think more of a "build" for their own characters - also since they're never sure just what the party dynamics will be each game - since the players change so frequently.
On the other hand, I rarely get involved in that. I'm lucky enough to play with a group of a very good party-oriented players - 4 of them have been players in my campaigns for more than a decade and thus they know how to synergize. With our group we see that kind of team-work you talk about frequently. Its very nice.
And yes, it's unfortunate that its the exception and not the rule of most players.
Robert
|
|
I don't know how I feel about the "double-dip" for armor AND shields, because by 15th level you can have AC 30 with no magic, Dex, or other boosts (+12 full plate, +8 tower shield). That's too much, IMO. And the thoughts about the paladin are interesting, too. True, he's got extra abilities and defenses, but he shouldn't be that far behind the fighter in melee combat.
I still think, however, that something should be done for sword-and-boarders (most likely with some more feats), but especially for the tower shield. Fighters are the only class that have proficiency in tower shield. There should be something that allows them to use it better.
I've really wanted to play a fighter with a tower shield, but it doesn't really seem worth it. I'm playtesting with one right now (at 2nd level), but half the time he drops the shield, because the -2 attack penalty is a killer and I can do better damage two-handed.
But maybe this is just because it's still low-level. Does the penalty for attacking while holding a tower shield become a non-issue at higher levels, or does no one use it because it they never started using it at low levels? What's been your experience with fighters and tower shields?
|
|
I don't know how I feel about the "double-dip" for armor AND shields, because by 15th level you can have AC 30 with no magic, Dex, or other boosts (+12 full plate, +8 tower shield). That's too much, IMO. And the thoughts about the paladin are interesting, too. True, he's got extra abilities and defenses, but he shouldn't be that far behind the fighter in melee combat.
I still think, however, that something should be done for sword-and-boarders (most likely with some more feats), but especially for the tower shield. Fighters are the only class that have proficiency in tower shield. There should be something that allows them to use it better.
I've really wanted to play a fighter with a tower shield, but it doesn't really seem worth it. I'm playtesting with one right now (at 2nd level), but half the time he drops the shield, because the -2 attack penalty is a killer and I can do better damage two-handed.
But maybe this is just because it's still low-level. Does the penalty for attacking while holding a tower shield become a non-issue at higher levels, or does no one use it because it they never started using it at low levels? What's been your experience with fighters and tower shields?
I played a paladin in the last 3.5 game we played that ended earlier this year (about the time the alpha 1 was released). He was 12th level when we finished. I'm playing another one now - in our Alpha/Beta playtesting (Curse of Crimson Throne)
Both are tower shield users.
The penalty became an issue occassionaly, but luckily there was always casters in our group that enjoyed buffing others, so it made up for it.
This was a paladin however; take a fighter instead with weapon focus, and greater WF, and Weapon training, and the penalty becomes a real non-issue.
Now the issue becomes do you want to do more damage with your Power Attack and Strength. Truth be told - in my opinion, the extra two points of AC (and -2 to hit) are no where near as lucrative as the double damage from power attack stacked with 1.5 times str dmg.
For my paladin, the feature that is most used with the tower shield is the full cover. I simply block hallways, doorways etc and put myself in the path, giving the rest of the party time to prep and buff. Its sometimes a bit tedious and certainly not a glamourous role, but I've found that paladins are pretty ineffective martially in most cases, so better to just do what they do best - block with his tower shield and wait for everyone to buff
Robert
|
|
I'm fine with expanding Armor Training to shields. Sword and Board really could use the boost and there is a damage trade off for not using a 2-Handed weapon. I would have it specifically state that the Armor Training does NOT apply to animated shields. Other than that it is no worse than the double dip from magical enhancement.
As for the idea of miss chance from shields, I see a major flaw. Touch Attacks. A shield provides no defense whatsoever against these. Touching your shield counts as touching you.
With regard to adding shields and CMB, if becomes problematic when the opponent is trying to Sunder you shield.
As for reducing the speed penalties of armors, While I can see this for medium armor, I feel the sheer weight of Heavy armor justifies the speed penalty. Of course mithril would make heavy armor treated as medium and eliminate the speed penalty.
I actually think allowing Armor Training with the shield (and having it stack) is going a little overboard. The beta version of Armor Training (which gives a boost to AC, as well as Max Dex) is pretty fine as is -- I have two fighters in my playtest group, and for both it has effectively meant a +2 AC each time they get Armor Training. A greatly appreciated side benefit of that, however, is that they'll actually consider wearing "sub par" armor like banded mail because Armor Training allows them to use their entire Dex bonus.
For shields, I'd like to see a feat that grants a miss chance (based on the type of shield used) but functions only when the shield is held (so no animated shields) and not used to attack. Most of the existing sword-and-board feats in the Beta essentially turn the sword-and-boarder into a two weapon fighter. That's fine, but I'd like to see an option that's more defensive -- and doesn't increase the number of attack rolls each round. I think there also need to be feats for those who favor a simpler fighter. A miss chance that's always active (unless the fighter's flat-footed or something) would be good for that type of player.
I would like to see an addition to Armor Training in the mid-high levels (10-16 or so) that eliminates the speed penalty for heavy or medium armor, however.
IMO the armor training bonus and weapon training bonus have moved fighters too far ahead of rangers and paladins in melee combat ability. I recently had a discussion with one of my more analytical players who effectively said he would be happy to play a ranger or paladin if they had about 80% the melee capability of a fighter due to their other fruit but that they are so far below the fighter now that to play one in the belief that you were playing a fighter type character was just being delusional.
We did an 11th level fighter with greatsword against 3 11th level rangers with longsword and shortsword in straight melee fight - it was close but the fighter won -- if two 11th level rangers cant beat an 11th level fighter it is too much.
I dont have to deal with Barbarians so I cannot comment on them.
Did the rangers get to use their animal companions and other special "rangerish" abilities such as spells or favoured enemy/terrain advantage in the fight? A ranger is not meant to be able to go toe to toe with a fighter, the fighter is meant to be the better fighter. Afterall, isn't that they are called fighters?IMO the armor training bonus and weapon training bonus have moved fighters too far ahead of rangers and paladins in melee combat ability. I recently had a discussion with one of my more analytical players who effectively said he would be happy to play a ranger or paladin if they had about 80% the melee capability of a fighter due to their other fruit but that they are so far below the fighter now that to play one in the belief that you were playing a fighter type character was just being delusional.
We did an 11th level fighter with greatsword against 3 11th level rangers with longsword and shortsword in straight melee fight - it was close but the fighter won -- if two 11th level rangers cant beat an 11th level fighter it is too much.
I dont have to deal with Barbarians so I cannot comment on them.
No they didnt use their animals (which only hit on a 20 because of the armor training) or their favored enemy (terrain doesnt help)but come on 3 times as good without them?
I agree with you that fighters should be better but two 11th level rangers should be able to at least challenge an 11th level fighter in a fight, even if he isnt a favoured enemy, or they should be able to get close.
His point was that he would be happy to play a ranger (melee specialist ie 2 weapon fighter) who was about 75-80% as good in melee combat as a fighter but not one who was about 30-40% as good.
Now I know rangers have all sorts of other fruit but this is just a basic ability to stand and fight, and the armor training and weapon training have widened the gulf to such an extent that Rangers no longer have the ability to stand and fight for any length of time, thus cannot use their groovy lots'a attacks, they just dont have it.