I have not yet begun to actually playtest Pathfinder (having just discovered it yesterday), but as I page through the classes section I'm finding myself simultaneously pleased and unnerved with the revised base classes. For the most part, I'm loving the redesign. However, there was one particularly worrisome ability I saw when I came over to the Fighter. The ability in question is the Pathfinder Fighter's capstone ability, Weapon Mastery.
Now, with the stated purpose that Pathfinder is meant to bring Core in line with splatbook material, I hold no bars here - Weapon Mastery is far too powerful as written. The only comparable ability that I could find was the Blessed weapon property from MIC (and the bless weapon spell from the PHB), and Blessed only works 3/day and only against evil enemies and does not operate in conjunction with any other crit-related abilities or effects; the bless weapon spell similarly functions only against evil creatures and not in conjunction with other crit-related abilities. So, as written, Weapon Mastery is already superior in every way to these powerful but strictly limited abilities.
Coupled with the increased critical hit multiplier, Weapon Mastery just seems excessive. Not only do you auto-confirm on everything, but you also do more damage when you do so. If my group elects to switch to Pathfinder, I'm already going to be nerfing Weapon Mastery. So, how about this - what if Weapon Mastery instead simply gave the increased critical multiplier? A nice ability, but not as insanely powerful as guaranteed critical hits that can be coupled with other critical abilities (unlike existing effects).
Welcome, Josh.
In response to your concerns, I look at it this way: when compared with a 20th-level wizard's ability to gate in a solar or something to do all his fighting for him (all day), the fighter capstone ability sort of comes back into focus.
Thanks for the welcome.
Although the power of a Fighter relative to an equivalent level spellcaster is generally lacking, I have to wonder if these same comparisons hold true in Pathfinder. With the boosts in effectiveness that Fighters have received - both in feat selections and class abilities - a fighter is capable of higher damage and higher hit probability than before. Although a spellcaster can summon an outsider to do their bidding, it takes time that the Fighter can use to pummel on an opponent. As the Fighter does so, the Fighter (if they have a Keen weapon or Improved Critical - I have difficulty imagining a respectable mid-to-high level Fighter without either) has anywhere from a 10-25% chance of auto-critting per attack. Coupled with higher damage output as a baseline and with an even higher critical multiplier then before, it just seems like Fighters represent an even larger wild-card then spellcasters in Pathfinder, particularly if they have the opportunity to make a full attack.
That may not be a bad thing, but I should think that casters should be taken down a notch rather than granting Fighters the option to become the Insanoflex :)
I kind of agree with your assessment, but unfortunately, wizards got a big boost in Pathfinder, rather than a nerf. And for all their new bells and whistles, the 3e fighter's main areas of weakness haven't been addressed:
1. Inability to disrupt spellcasting;
2. Inability to intercept enemies;
3. Inability to resist hold person, etc.;
4. Inability to inflict more than a scratch against stronger monsters with a hit (or even a full attack).
Also, combat maneuvers are now much harder for them to perform successfully, improved trip gives no free attack, and Power Attack is riskier and more limited.
I kind of agree with your assessment, but unfortunately, wizards got a big boost in Pathfinder, rather than a nerf. And for all their new bells and whistles, the 3e fighter's main areas of weakness haven't been addressed:
1. Inability to disrupt spellcasting;
2. Inability to intercept enemies;
3. Inability to resist hold person, etc.;
4. Inability to inflict more than a scratch against stronger monsters with a hit (or even a full attack).Also, combat maneuvers are now much harder for them to perform successfully, improved trip gives no free attack, and Power Attack is riskier and more limited.
That's a shame. A cursory glance at the feats available plus Fighter class features makes them look like they should be complete powerhouses even before accounting for Weapon Mastery, particularly with a two-handed weapon.
Edit: I did a quick-and-dirty build of a Fighter using a Falchion. Assuming that this Fighter specs into heavy blades at their earliest convenience, by 20th level this modest build has the following attack / damage output (assuming a starting Str of 16 and grabbing both a +5 weapon and a +6 Str item - I'm not even factoring in ability score increases by level gain). This fighter would pick up Weapon Focus, Weapon Spec, Greater Weapon Spec, Power Attack, and Improved Critical - these are the only feats I will assume.
Attack:
+20 BAB + 5 Fighter + 5 Weapon + 3 base Str + 3 enhanced Str + 1 Focus
+37 total (+31 when Power Attacking)
Critical Threat 15-20 (25% chance; auto-confirm threats)
Damage:
2d4 base damage + 5 Fighter + 5 Weapon + 9 combined base/enhanced Str + 2 Weapon Spec + 2 Greater Weapon Spec
2d4+23 per hit (2d4+29 when Power Attacking) [25-31/hit or 31-37/hit]
6d4+69 per crit (6d4+87 when Power Attacking) [75-93/crit or 93-111/crit]
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the strongest direct-damage spell in Pathfinder I'm aware of caps at 40d6 (40-240 damage) at 20th level and requires a standard action to inflict once.
If our lousy build Fighter is fighting opponents that other members of the party can also hit with regular attacks, the Fighter should hit with at least two attacks per round. This means that, at a minimum, our fighter should be inflicting 62 damage/round before DR, etc. Not even close to the average damage of a single disintegrate, *but* our Fighter has a 25% chance with each attack to automatically inflict a minimum of 75 damage with a single strike. Said Fighter also has a 6.25% chance per round to threaten two crits, auto-confirming for a minimum combined total of 150 damage (and as much as 222 if Power Attacking). Assuming they only hit twice.
Our Fighter might not have the artillery power of a single disintegrate, but (s)he can keep doing it round after round, and with the auto-confirmation can be coupled with other damage increases (burst enhancements, speed, etc) to outpace even that rather large spell-damage burst.
Again, I'm not certain if this necessitates changes, but with a half-arsed build a Fighter can almost match the damage output of a caster chucking disintegrates every round without ever having to confirm a critical threat. As I said, this raises a flag with me, I just thought I'd put some numbers down to demonstrate the source of my concern.
Since Pathfinder Fighters are essentially getting a 5/4 BAB with their favorite weapons and free damage bonuses, coupling these already-noteworthy boosts with even larger burst damage capability just seems to give Fighters a little too much edge. Imagine a scythe-Fighter - only a 10% chance to auto-crit, but doing so for well over 100 damage per crit at a minimum. Just replacing Falchion stats with Scythe stats gives a crit damage range of 125-155 (10d4+115) without Power Attacking. Although I recognize that Fighters are already capable of significant damage output, much of it relies on a certain balance with critical hits. Critical hits themselves rely heavily on the confirmation mechanic to keep them from continually lopsiding a game. Removing that step means that critical hits will occur much, much, MUCH more often (my math is not good enough to provide a proof of this, but it's a lot) and when combined with inserted damage and attack bonuses it again just seems a little excessive.
As Kirth wrote, this doesn't change other issues with the Fighter - they are just as susceptible to status effects and save-or-die shennanigans, but in a DPS race I have a hard time seeing new Fighters losing to... well, anyone.