First thoughts: "That's it?"
I was hoping for something that would make combat be awesome and flavorful. Like dangling from chandeliers or leaping through a door firing two guns. Instead I got a load of mostly dull archetypes, a vehicle section that handles like something from Mass Effect and a *beep*load of feats I never really needed and will never probably use. And of course the inescapable Called Shots, which was never a good idea in any system, on any world in any reality.
The book is uninspired, almost dull, taking up a lot of washed out old stuff that could be found smattered around earlier editions, but not really bringing anything new and interesting to the table.
It seems to me that now Paizo has made Ultimate Magic - which was quite inspired and interesting for casters, they had to make Ultimate Combat to balance it out, but they couldn't find anyone at the office who really wanted to do it, so it became a dull chore for everyone involved.
All in all; it's not a book I will grab in hardcopy, but it has some interesting features I'll probably be using from time to time. Such as parts of the gunslinger and firearms rules, a few spells and an archetype or two for the non-caster classes.
Hmm, the recent comments make me disinclined to rush out and buy this.
You should just get the PDF and print the, probably rather small, number of pages you will need from it. Or don't bother printing it and just use it for reference when not playing...
Hmm, the recent comments make me disinclined to rush out and buy this.
Hey, lots of new spells but no new Hunter’s Tricks for the Skirmisher.
But get the PDF. It's worth it.
I'll got the PDF and I'm not sure if I buy the book as well.
Hey, here is an idea.
<snip>
Anyone not liking this?
<Raises hand.>
Sorry. I like the fighter as it stands and archetypes have gone a tremendous way towards allowing diversification of the class. I have no interest in it becoming the "Martial Gestalt" class.
Sorry. I like the fighter as it stands and archetypes have gone a tremendous way towards allowing diversification of the class. I have no interest in it becoming the "Martial Gestalt" class.He's illustrating his point by demonstration. The point is that everyone gets a significant chunk of what makes the fighter "special", because everyone gets feats.
I'm not good with words or wringing condensed so Thanks!
Not exactly sure what the two of you expected from the book. A rewrite of Fighter class? It's called Tome of Battle, you can buy it on Ebay. :)
fighter-only feats?
The one fighter-only feat there is worth more than half of the chapter combined.Not exactly sure what the two of you expected from the book. A rewrite of Fighter class? It's called Tome of Battle, you can buy it on Ebay. :)fighter-only feats?
I'm not sure if I agree. Even so that don't say much since the UC isn't that impressive anyway.
The core book has 2 pages of rage powers.The APG has 4 pages.
The UC has 3 pages.
If the UC had 9 pages of fighter only feats I would shut up.
Considering some of the feat chains and their prereqs, they might as well be "fighter only", because the only people who can grab all of them will be fighters (or any other class with a gaggle of bonus combat feats). Fighters get the most from extra feats in supplement books. Most classes get up to 10 feats, plus a few select bonus feats. Many people won't be making it to level 20, more likely level 16, so really that's 8 feats. The 16th level fighter gets 17 feats with their bonus feats added.
QQ poor fighter, no one made any feats just for you. Instead they just added a bunch of feats that only you will be able to afford.
snark stuff
A fighter spending 3 feats to get anything close to one rage power.
Not cool. Not to mention the feats usually have prereq the rage power doesn't.
Same goes for rogue talents or ranger/paladin spells. No prereq and cost less.
Considering some of the feat chains and their prereqs, they might as well be "fighter only", because the only people who can grab all of them will be fighters
What you describe is a feat tax.
Hey Paldin, what to cast holy sword? It will cost you 3 feats.Edit:
Suprise, surprise. I' not the only one disliking feat chains, Link: FEAT CHAINS - WHY THE HATE?
First thoughts: "That's it?"
I was hoping for something that would make combat be awesome and flavorful. Like dangling from chandeliers or leaping through a door firing two guns. Instead I got a load of mostly dull archetypes, a vehicle section that handles like something from Mass Effect and a *beep*load of feats I never really needed and will never probably use. And of course the inescapable Called Shots, which was never a good idea in any system, on any world in any reality.
The book is uninspired, almost dull, taking up a lot of washed out old stuff that could be found smattered around earlier editions, but not really bringing anything new and interesting to the table.
It seems to me that now Paizo has made Ultimate Magic - which was quite inspired and interesting for casters, they had to make Ultimate Combat to balance it out, but they couldn't find anyone at the office who really wanted to do it, so it became a dull chore for everyone involved.
All in all; it's not a book I will grab in hardcopy, but it has some interesting features I'll probably be using from time to time. Such as parts of the gunslinger and firearms rules, a few spells and an archetype or two for the non-caster classes.
I agree; both the APG and UM have a lot of great flavor that translate into mechanics; UC falls very short in this regard. It doesn't have any interesting addons similar to the other books, and does retread stuff already done in 3.5e.
snark stuffA fighter spending 3 feats to get anything close to one rage power.
Not cool. Not to mention the feats usually have prereq the rage power doesn't.
Same goes for rogue talents or ranger/paladin spells. No prereq and cost less.
Considering some of the feat chains and their prereqs, they might as well be "fighter only", because the only people who can grab all of them will be fightersWhat you describe is a feat tax.
Hey Paldin, what to cast holy sword? It will cost you 3 feats.Edit:
Suprise, surprise. I' not the only one disliking feat chains, Link: FEAT CHAINS - WHY THE HATE?
Oops, forgot the snark tags.
<SNARK>So what your saying is I should make a barbarian and use all my feats to select Extra Rage Power? Interesting ... I guess barbarians are out of the doghouse now, and fighters are back in.</SNARK>
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games
|
snark stuffA fighter spending 3 feats to get anything close to one rage power.
Not cool. Not to mention the feats usually have prereq the rage power doesn't.
Same goes for rogue talents or ranger/paladin spells. No prereq and cost less.
Considering some of the feat chains and their prereqs, they might as well be "fighter only", because the only people who can grab all of them will be fightersWhat you describe is a feat tax.
Hey Paldin, what to cast holy sword? It will cost you 3 feats.Edit:
Suprise, surprise. I' not the only one disliking feat chains, Link: FEAT CHAINS - WHY THE HATE?
Oops, forgot the snark tags.
<SNARK>So what your saying is I should make a barbarian and use all my feats to select Extra Rage Power? Interesting ... I guess barbarians are out of the doghouse now, and fighters are back in.</SNARK>
Ironically, in the Serpent's Skull game I play in, most of my alchemist's feats are going to Extra Discovery.
Ironically, in the Serpent's Skull game I play in, most of my alchemist's feats are going to Extra Discovery.snark stuffA fighter spending 3 feats to get anything close to one rage power.
Not cool. Not to mention the feats usually have prereq the rage power doesn't.
Same goes for rogue talents or ranger/paladin spells. No prereq and cost less.
Considering some of the feat chains and their prereqs, they might as well be "fighter only", because the only people who can grab all of them will be fightersWhat you describe is a feat tax.
Hey Paldin, what to cast holy sword? It will cost you 3 feats.Edit:
Suprise, surprise. I' not the only one disliking feat chains, Link: FEAT CHAINS - WHY THE HATE?
Oops, forgot the snark tags.
<SNARK>So what your saying is I should make a barbarian and use all my feats to select Extra Rage Power? Interesting ... I guess barbarians are out of the doghouse now, and fighters are back in.</SNARK>
Ah, but I am sure that they have escape doghouse or some such on their formulae list :D
I find surprising that people find UM good in flavour. Mind affecting for undeads death effects for undeath, druids summoning aberrations...
Good translation of concept---> mechanic?
Like Flaring Spells?
I can see this: people asked for not too much caster content in UC.
Eh.
Ironically, in the Serpent's Skull game I play in, most of my alchemist's feats are going to Extra Discovery.
Proves my point perfectly
and fighters are back in.</SNARK>
No they never left it. Not in Pathfinder anyway.
And what then would fighter only feats fix about all this? I sincerely doubt it would quiet all the linear-fighter, quadratic-wizard threads.
Fighter only feats just create nonsensical gates to features that could be used by other melee classes. You know what? Fighters should change their bonus feats into a feature called something like "fighter techniques" and have a list like rogues and barbarians, one of which would be "bonus combat feat" that can be taken multiple times. Then they could have features that let them take fighter only stuff without stuffing silly prereqs into the feat system.
I am on the other end of the spectrum here, I never play magic classes so I skipped those right out, and went to the fighter and monk archetypes which are amazing except for missing feats on pg 61.
and I could care less about vehicle stuff, I have never taken a point in ride And I most likely never will.
I loved the new feats, seemed very trip heavy though (I am a grapple kinda guy) but they did do a lot of concepts that I was working on in my mind just not the way I would of done it.
I think the weapons are okay same with the armor basicly there is only so many armor class numbers that you can mix and match and at some point it becomes a flavor issue " I am not wearing full plate I am wearing samurai armor"
I liked the new weapons with all the new abilities that they added on like Deadly, and grapple and such.
the New Combat system IS a dream come true for me I think most of my character types are one on one combat fighters and the call of the cheering crowd is now useful.
Lobolusk:
Can you point me out to some of the trip feats? I only noticed one (which is extremely situational because it only works on a crit). I am currently playing a polearm/trip specialist Fighter, and would love to see more of those types of feats that I may have missed on my read-through of UC.
Personally, the only feat I liked for Fighters was Pin Down.
Thanks!
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
While I love parts of what I've read of the book (from the PDF, c'mon snail mail, get the book in my hands!) I must agree at being a bit disappointed that the caster classes got so much love in this book. I'd have loved to see sections on staging interesting fights (the aforementioned "swinging from chandeliers"), fighting with flair, etc. Maybe that falls too much in the GMG side of things, I don't know. But I can't help but wonder what other cool stuff we could've gotten without so many pages dedicated to a part of the game that, frankly, doesn't need the help in a book dedicated to a part of the game that does.
As for Ninja and Samurai I can't help but feel they may have made excellent archetypes as well -- I'm just not sure they feel meaty enough (as opposed to the Gunslinger, which does) to stand as their own as base classes. Yeah, yeah, alternate base class -- whatever, it is either a base or it isn't. They are given the page count of base but feel closer to an archetype. Though I suppose as replacements to the Cavalier and the Rogue they do make some sense, but UM didn't have Wu-Jen and other replacements. Of course, eliminating both of the alternate classes from UC means that both UC and UM got one true new base class -- so there is some symmetry.
I guess I'd rather have seen a hardcover dedicated to Far Eastern replacements for casters, martial, weapons, monsters, etc. etc. -- get it all in one place like the old Oriental Adventures (and other ones for Arabian, Meso-American, African, and Indian analogs).
That all said, I'm not unhappy with the book. It's just that for us martial lovers I was hoping for a bit more oooomph, or at least not have our "NO FINGER WAGGLERS ALLOWED" clubhouse sign so brazenly ignored.
And what then would fighter only feats fix about all this?
If don't get it by now, you probably never will - no snark intended.
Point is, giving fighters something only they can pick without having to rewrite the rules would be a simple fix.When fighters get feats equal or better than eg the barbarian, the fighter will be a fun class.
Fighter only feats just create nonsensical gates to features that could be used by other melee classes.
No, not if they where fighter-only feat with a level prereq. Just like barbarian rage powers.
You know what? Fighters should change their bonus feats into a feature called something like "fighter techniques" and have a list like rogues and barbarians, one of which would be "bonus combat feat" that can be taken multiple times. Then they could have features that let them take fighter only stuff without stuffing silly prereqs into the feat system.
I wouldn't mind that, but right now it can't be done. It would require a new core rule book.
I don't mind fighter only feats, but just giving them fighter only feats is not really a fix unless the feats themselves are on par with rage power or whatever.
I'm not one of those fighters vs. wizards persons, but when it comes do fighting - killing things - the fighter (with 2 skills per level, no spells, no powers, no SU, SPA, or EX abilities, no buffs, no utility spells, no mercies , no auras , no protective abilities, crappy or at least a mediocre skill list, etc) should be the best class there is when it comes to killing things. It isn't. Seriously, the class is called the fighter. He should be able to co amazing stuff at higher levels. The fighter can waste 3 feats on the vital strike chain because no other class would do such a stupid thing. Certainly not the barbarian who can spend 3 ranger powers getting a boost to natural armor AND pounce.
As I said before. Once you hit level 5 fighter and get you Armor training, weapon training and bravery there is no pint in staying a fighter. Hell, even 3 levels is enough if you want to move at full speed in a mithral fullplate, btw a barb can do that thanks to his +10 to move. A ranger can do that thanks to longstrider.
When alchemist's feats are going to Extra Discovery and When rage powers and rogue talents are more fun or powerful or both it only shows what a boring and weak toolbox the fighter has to play with. at least rangers and Paladins got spells and feats to match their abilities.
UC:
Fighter feat: 1
Paladin spells: 31
Ranger spells: 32
Wizard/ Sorcerer spells: 97
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
UC:
Fighter feat: 1
Paladin spells: 31
Ranger spells: 32
Wizard/ Sorcerer spells: 97
This basically says everything that needed to be said.
This basically says everything that needed to be said.UC:
Fighter feat: 1
Paladin spells: 31
Ranger spells: 32
Wizard/ Sorcerer spells: 97
Oh I am well aware of what side of the debate you fall on.
@Zark
I thought you weren't a fighter vs wizards person? What a fighter gets instead of all those rage powers, etc is the earliest entry possible into whatever feat chain he/she wants. No one gets them as fast as fighters, no once can mix them as well as fighters. NO one I know takes more than one feat chain ever. They usually can't afford it and the game doesn't make it easy. Maybe the game has become skewed and whatever feat chains a fighter mixes are not as good as a barbarian's rage powers (which have their own downside too), but I am extremely dubious of that based just on pounce, as obviously nice as it is.
Alright, i'm back to post seriously.
I'm in more of the "NO FINGER-WAGGLERS" group. Ultimate Magic explicitly said you would only find stuff for spellcasters. Except the monk, cause he's kinda magicky. Then Ultimate Combat came out, which i expected would be the opposite-no full spellcasters, only the pally, ranger, and the cleric. Instead, i saw the martial options buried beneath archetypes for spellcasters, and 'alternate archetypes' for martial classes that didn't feel all that special. (Ninja feels clunky, samurai...wrong? is that the word i'm looking for?) Guns vs touch AC is just kinda grating. always has been.
And why can't fighters get a list of alternate abilities? Think of Players Handbook 2. Wizards got options instead of the usual metamagic/item creation every 5 levels.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
@Zark
I thought you weren't a fighter vs wizards person?
Fighter vs. wizards is still a valid topic to debate, but I don't want to.
What a fighter gets instead of all those rage powers, etc is the earliest entry possible into whatever feat chain he/she wants. No one gets them as fast as fighters,
Most feat chains are based on BAB so I have no idea what you are talking about.
no once can mix them as well as fighters. NO one I know takes more than one feat chain ever. They usually can't afford it and the game doesn't make it easy.
why would they, Their own powers are so much more fun AND/or powerful.
Maybe the game has become skewed and whatever feat chains a fighter mixes are not as good as a barbarian's rage powers (which have their own downside too), but I am extremely dubious of that based just on pounce, as obviously nice as it is.
feat chains are feat taxes. Most chains DON'T let you do anything amazing. It just improves what you already can do. The exception would be the step up feat chain, which - by the way - my bard got.
As for feat chains, check out the spoiler:
from the thread: "feat chains - why the hate?"
My major beef with feat chains is that they play right into the linear martial vs. quadratic caster disparity.
The feat chain system is built so that a character is forced down a path of specialization. They get better and better at one particular thing, and thus keep being left behind in their capacity at versatility.
Meanwhile the spell system is built for every expanding options, and thus they continue to grow in their ability to have a variety of solutions to problems.
In terms of how this plays out in additional content. We get more and more feats to choose from, but because feat selection locks feats in place you become more and more limited in what you can do. However when new spells are released they are just added to the class lists, all of which allows for daily adjustment.
The nature of feats and spells is also different. Feats tend to be an exception to an existing rule, whereas spells tend to be an addition to the rules. Feats tend to not scale, whereas spells do. Feats have very specific prerequisites, particularly with attributes, which if you don't have basically shuts you out of them for the whole life of the character. Meanwhile spells are far more forgiving in terms of their prerequisites. You just need the class, and have high enough in the attribute that goes with that class to get access to a huge number of options, AND that attribute yields even more spells for you. You can't get more feats by just having a high attribute.
Feats have a profound lack of granularity, and due to that what you end up picking for your feats has a huge impact on your character's performance if your a martial character. Spells however, because they can be reset each day, and you can utilize them via magic items means that you can afford to utilize very specialized and situational spells that you'd otherwise be crazy to take as a permanent slot.
The devs have been very specific over the life of 3.x that they want to avoid making magic items that basically give a feat to the character,...
I'm not sure what downside Lay on hands, smite evil, rage, favored enemy, Combat style feat, rogue talents, spells have.
You extremely dubious of that based just on pounce? NINE pages of rage powers and you are dubious?
OK let's see what I'm talking about:
Barb: Clear Mind= reroll once per rage. Can be use at least once per fight and she can take iron will too. (or/and Superstition)
Fighter: Iron will + Improved Iron Will = +2 will and reroll once per day
Barb: Beast Totem chain (3 powers): 1st power: 2 claw attacks, 2nd power: +1 natural armor. +1 for every four levels, 3rd: pounce.
Fighter Vital strike chain (3 feats) : 1st: (Standard action) Roll the weapon’s damage dice attack twice. extra damage dice NOT multiplied on a crit., 2nd Roll the weapon’s damage dice three times, 3rd: Roll the weapon’s damage dice four times
Barb (1 or 2 powers): Knockdown: Once per rage, the barbarian can make a trip attack against one target in place of a melee attack. If successful, the target takes damage equal to the barbarian’s strength modifier and is knocked prone. This does not provoke an attack of opportunity. (Then the hasted barb can just go on hitting the prone target). The barb already got a bonus to CMB due to higher str. A) no need for int 13 so base str will be higher B) rage means at least +4 str. But if he wants to be silly god at this he can pick: Strength Surge = add barb level to CMB or CMD as as an immediate action.
Fighter: 3 feats: Improved trip chain: 3 feats: 1st: Combat Expertise (suck feat) prereq 13 int, 2nd: Improved Trip: do not provoke an AoO when tripping and +2 on trip check and +2 on CMB vs. trip, 3rd: Greater Trip, You can make free attacks on foes that you knock down and +2 bonus on checks made to trip. Trip is still an standard action!
barb: Unexpected Strike (Ex): an AoO against a foe that moves into any square threatened by the barbarian, regardless of whether or not that movement would normally provoke AoO.
Fighter:: No equivalent feat
Barb: (one feat and one rage power): Step up (you know it) + No Escape (Ex): The barbarian can move up to double her normal speed as an immediate action but she can only use this ability when an adjacent foe uses a withdraw action to move away from her. She must end her movement adjacent to the enemy that used the withdraw action. The barbarian provokes attacks of opportunity as normal during this movement. Notice, No Escape has no prereq.
Fighter: (2 feats) Combat Reflexes (you know it), Pin Down: Whenever an opponent you threaten takes a 5-foot step or uses the withdraw action, that opponent provokes an attack of opportunity from you. If the attack hits, you deal no damage, but the targeted creature is prevented from making the move action that granted a 5-foot step or the withdraw action and does not move. Notice: A) Prereq: Combat Reflexes and fighter level 11th, B) The attack MUST hit. This feat is actually rather pointless.
And here are some more examples. I'll ad them in a spoiler since this post is long as it is.
Barb: 2 rage powers: 1st: lesser Hurling Charge - pretty boring, 2nd: Hurling Charge (Ex): While raging and making a charge attack, the barbarian may draw and throw a hurled weapon during her charge, gaining the normal +2 attack roll bonus on the thrown weapon attack as well as on the melee attack at the end of the charge.
Fighter: No equivalent feat.
Barb:: Animal Fury (Ex): While raging, the barbarian gains a bite attack.
Fighter:: No equivalent feat unless you play half-ork. Not playing human means loosing a feat and 1 skill point per level. Fighters don't have many skills.
Barb: Fearless Rage (Ex): While raging, the barbarian is immune to the shaken and frightened conditions.
Fighter: Bravery, but then barbs get a morale bonus on Will saves when raging and he get Indomitable will later on.
Barb : (1 power) : Come and Get Me (Ex): While raging, as a free action the barbarian may leave herself open to attack while preparing devastating counterattacks. Enemies gain a +4 bonus on
attack and damage rolls against the barbarian until the beginning of her next turn, but every attack against the barbarian provokes an attack of opportunity from her, which is resolved prior to resolving each enemy attack. EACH counterattacks is made at FULL BAB.
Fighter: No equivalent feat.
Barb: Elemental Rage (Su): While raging, all of the barbarian’s melee attacks deal an additional 1d6 points of energy damage (acid, cold, electricity, or fire). The type is chosen when the barbarian begins her rage.
Fighter: No equivalent feat
Barb : (1 rage power) Good for What Ails You (Ex): While raging, the barbarian who takes a drink of alcohol may attempt a new saving throw against one of the following conditions that may be affecting her: blinded, confused, dazzled, deafened, exhausted, fatigued, frightened, nauseated, panicked, shaken, or sickened. If she succeeds at the save, the effect is suppressed for the duration of the rage. She also may attempt a new saving throw if poisoned; a successful save counts against those required for a cure, but a failed save has no ill effect.
Fighter: No equivalent feat
Barb : (1 power) Renewed Vigor (Ex): As a standard action, the barbarian can heal herself
Fighter[/b]: No equivalent feat
And if you like the superstition rage power here are two some nice stuff
Favored Class Option human: Barbarian: Add a +1/2 bonus to trap sense or +1/3 to the
bonus from the superstitious rage power.
Barb : (3 powers): Disruptive and Spellbreaker as rage powers. Must have superstition rage power.
Fighter (Two feats): Disruptive and Spellbreaker. Hey, wait. This is a fighter only feat chain.
[b]barb: (2 power): 1st: Superstition (you know. Great saves) 2nd: Witch Hunter (Ex): While raging, the barbarian gains a +1 bonus on damage rolls against creatures possessing spells or spell-like abilities. This damage bonus increases by +1 for every four levels (hey the power scales!)
Fighter:: No equivalent feat chain
In my experience (and I can see that I'm not the only one) it is better at killing things than other martial classes
You are wrong.
The fighter IS that good without using spells, powers, SU, SPA or EX abilities, etc.. because he gets bonuses from pasive abilities and feats.
All classes need magic. Especially fighters.
doesn't have to spent a standard action to cast a spell
A) you can buff BEFORE the fight
B) Quicken spell.
The fighter is the only martial class that doesn't rely in circumstantial abilities
This game is based on circumstantial abilities. Magic is one such thing.
Btw you need more than five fighter levels to get higher bonuses from Weapon Training, you need 8th and 12th level to get attack, damage and shield's AC maximizing feats, 12th and 16th level to get DR ignoring feats (so you can own the barbarian everyday of the week while you wear your own adamantite armor i.e.) and 19th level to get DR 5/- (so you can sell your adamantite armor and buy a mithral armor).
Most games end at level 17 or earlier.
A character with levels 5 fighter + levels 12 barb or levels 5 fighter and a levels 12 Guide is a far better damage dealer and more versatile than any level 17 fighter. The bonus to attack, danmage and the other stuff are just silly compared to a Barb, Guide or paladin.
I'm sorry to be posting this at the end of the thread, it's just that it got huge and I can't read all of it :(
All I wanted to know is if the Rogue got some candy too, and how does it looks ^_^
Underhanded. Rogue talent that let's you deal MAX sneak attack damage with a concealed weapon. They also got HiPS and ranger terrains as talents. Knife master uses daggers but deals d8 sneak attacks (see also Underhanded).
Wow, awesome!
Wow, awesome!
He did get HIPS. but didn't get the ranger's "Camouflage" so he can't hide. Errata is probaly needed or else it's usless.
Help the rogue Hit FAQ in this thread :-)
|
It seems to me that now Paizo has made Ultimate Magic - which was quite inspired and interesting for casters, they had to make Ultimate Combat to balance it out, but they couldn't find anyone at the office who really wanted to do it, so it became a dull chore for everyone involved.All in all; it's not a book I will grab in hardcopy, but it has some interesting features I'll probably be using from time to time. Such as parts of the gunslinger and firearms rules, a few spells and an archetype or two for the non-caster classes.
Wow, I could not be further apart. Ultimate Combat has an excellent write ups for both monk feats, styles, and archetypes. Bards got a lot more goodies in the martial category in archetypes and some good feats as well. The magus got some new and interesting archetypes ranged from extremely offensive oriented (kensai) to the defensive (skirnir).
Barbs got a little more but truthfully most of their issues were fixed in the APG. Rogues got a ki pool, slightly more offensive build (knife master), and access to ninja tricks. The weakest were the cavalier and new inquisitor archetypes.
I will not post too much on the error ridden, poorly formatted book that is UM. The ideas and their execution ("cloistered cleric" / "vow of poverty") left a lot to be desired.
What a fighter gets instead of all those rage powers, etc is the earliest entry possible into whatever feat chain he/she wants. No one gets them as fast as fighters,
Most feat chains are based on BAB so I have no idea what you are talking about.
What I am talking about is that having double the feats slots means that you can buy up a feat chain at the earliest possible points, BAB included. A barbarian or rogue, many times has put off buying a feat chain as fast as a fighter so they can grab other feats. Power attack, dodge, toughness are some constant ones for me.
stuff about barbarian-fighter parity
Actually I think you are right about rage powers, and you have adjusted my understanding of the games essential balance. Barbarians, rogues, rangers who get feat-like a la cart class features may actually have quite a few that are better synergized to them, and are "worth more" than most feats. A barbarian having to have a 13 int to trip people makes no f!+&ing sense whatsoever. So they get a pass on that with a rage power or two.
That still does not mean that a fighter is, on the whole, worse off, just that their bonus feats are not quite as strong as rage powers. And rage powers still have a per day time limit that is part of the calculus. Say what you will about how many rounds the barbarian can be "stealing the show" from the fighter, when he starts to run out of rage rounds, the barbarian is danger of losing almost ALL his class features, and sucking wind for a few minutes.
But more to the point, even though there is this disparity, its not huge, and it wouldn't make me leery of playing one over the other. Certainly not enough to consider one class ineffective compared to the other.
Wow, awesome!He did get HIPS. but didn't get the ranger's "Camouflage" so he can't hide. Errata is probaly needed or else it's usless.
Help the rogue Hit FAQ in this thread :-)
Then try looking in the APG.
Page 130.
And I'm not sure why she can't hide... it specifically states that "She is a master at hiding in that terrain, and while within that terrain, she can use the Stealth skill to hide, even while being observed."
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games
|
Barb (1 or 2 powers): Knockdown: Once per rage, the barbarian can make a trip attack against one target in place of a melee attack. If successful, the target takes damage equal to the barbarian’s strength modifier and is knocked prone. This does not provoke an attack of opportunity. (Then the hasted barb can just go on hitting the prone target). The barb already got a bonus to CMB due to higher str. A) no need for int 13 so base str will be higher B) rage means at least +4 str. But if he wants to be silly god at this he can pick: Strength Surge = add barb level to CMB or CMD as as an immediate action.
Fighter: 3 feats: Improved trip chain: 3 feats: 1st: Combat Expertise (suck feat) prereq 13 int, 2nd: Improved Trip: do not provoke an AoO when tripping and +2 on trip check and +2 on CMB vs. trip, 3rd: Greater Trip, You can make free attacks on foes that you knock down and +2 bonus on checks made to trip. Trip is still an standard action!That bolded part makes me think you are deliberately missing things in order to prove a pre-determined conclusion. Especially considering this little gem in the APG....
Tripping Strike Req. BAB +9, Improved Trip
benefit: attempt a free trip attack on a successful critical hit.Or the many feats from Ultimate Combat that allow you to trade a single attack to perform a combat maneuver.
You don't need a feat like that for trip, because it isn't a standard action. "You can attempt to trip your opponent in place of a melee attack." (PFRPG Core Rulebook p. 201)
While a barbarian is getting one free trip if he hits with his regular attack, with one strength surge per rage, a fighter with a trip build can go trip-AoO with every attack they have each round, every round.
Depends on what you're fighting which one is better.
If it hasn't yet been pointed out -
The problem with fighters is not that they do too little damage. It's that their entire question for a fighter starts at "how much damage do I do?" and then promptly ends there.
Wow, awesome!He did get HIPS. but didn't get the ranger's "Camouflage" so he can't hide. Errata is probaly needed or else it's usless.
Help the rogue Hit FAQ in this thread :-)Then try looking in the APG.
Page 130.
And I'm not sure why she can't hide... it specifically states that "She is a master at hiding in that terrain, and while within that terrain, she can use the Stealth skill to hide, even while being observed."
Yes but she still needs Cover or concealment.
You don't need a feat like that for trip, because it isn't a standard action. "You can attempt to trip your opponent in place of a melee attack." (PFRPG Core Rulebook p. 201)
While a barbarian is getting one free trip if he hits with his regular attack, with one strength surge per rage, a fighter with a trip build can go trip-AoO with every attack they have each round, every round.
Depends on what you're fighting which one is better.
OK, I was wrong o the standard action, but points still stand.
Please read the rest of the post including the spoiler.Trip evey round? Why would they?
Once or twice per fight is usually enough and the prereq doesn't help.
You hit fighters with taxes.
Yes but she still needs Cover or concealment.Wow, awesome!He did get HIPS. but didn't get the ranger's "Camouflage" so he can't hide. Errata is probaly needed or else it's usless.
Help the rogue Hit FAQ in this thread :-)Then try looking in the APG.
Page 130.
And I'm not sure why she can't hide... it specifically states that "She is a master at hiding in that terrain, and while within that terrain, she can use the Stealth skill to hide, even while being observed."
Then use the Camouflage rogue trick. Or I dunno... step into a shadow. Duck behind a tree... not every place is a featureless plain or empty room. It's not terribly hard to get cover or concealment.
Then use the Camouflage rogue trick. Or I dunno... step into a shadow. Duck behind a tree... not every place is a featureless plain or empty room. It's not terribly hard to get cover or concealment.
I have seen you talking about the camouflage rogue talent, but how exactly does having a +4 to stealth (which is what the camouflage talent does) helps you with the currect worded hide in plain sight talent?
Did anyone find the Evangelist completely out of place? This is a cleric archetype in a combat book, that actually makes a cleric worse at combat... say-what?
I have seen you talking about the camouflage rogue talent, but how exactly does having a +4 to stealth (which is what the camouflage talent does) helps you with the currect worded hide in plain sight talent?
Then use the Camouflage rogue trick. Or I dunno... step into a shadow. Duck behind a tree... not every place is a featureless plain or empty room. It's not terribly hard to get cover or concealment.
It doesn't, but complaining that rogues don't have camouflage just isn't true.
However, it's not hard to use hide in plain sight, as long as there is anything like... dim light, trees, hedges, tables, curtains, or something similar.