It's not well liked by a lot of people who have played the game either. They get tired of every class being primarily limited to one of an extremely limited number (4) of limited play styles.
Enough with the edition wars. Hashing out the problems with Pathfinder is enough.
If your position is that "any attempt to make a fighter more versatile automatically turns the game into a 4e clone," you're going to have to provide some evidence for that assertion OTHER than 4e itself -- you'd need to point to one of these supposed clones.
I don't think he's weaker, just too narrowly focused. There's too much of doing the same thing you did last round.
Agreed, to some extent -- I didn't say he was weaker, I said he was less effective. I'd go so far as to put it in the Prof's terms and say he loses the ability to influence the ongoing story anywhere near the way the casters do.
I kind of think that any attempt to make the fighter more versatile turns them into a different class.
Someone who is focused on doing amazing things with a single weapons is a kensai,
someone who is an unstoppable force on the battlefield is a barbarian,
someone who has turned there body into a finely tuned weapon is a monk,
someone who is a master of quick thinking and using tools is a rogue.
And I think that the fact that a fighter isn't very versatile is a bad thing. So I wonder if there is any more room for a vanilla fighter.
If your position is that "any attempt to make a fighter more versatile automatically turns the game into a 4e clone," you're going to have to provide some evidence for that assertion OTHER than 4e itself -- you'd need to point to one of these supposed clones.No, that's not my point. My point is that making fighters more like wizards - with the same scale of powers and the same opportunity costs - reduces the diversity of play styles and this kind of reduction of play styles is something that a lot of people don't like (as evidenced by the rejection of another game system).
The question is whether or not its the powers or their content that limits the style of play. For instance, tome of battle had 3 kinds of manuevers. Stances were all or most of the time, many current feats. Counters were reactionary, and strikes were single use attacks, these all represent a potential for different play styles. So I think it is a fair question as to whether or not the fact that you use powers that are similar to spells will reduce available play styles or what those powers do will be the thing that reduces play styles.
I kind of think that any attempt to make the fighter more versatile turns them into a different class.
Someone who is focused on doing amazing things with a single weapons is a kensai,
someone who is an unstoppable force on the battlefield is a barbarian, someone who has turned there body into a finely tuned weapon is a monk, someone who is a master of quick thinking and using tools is a rogue.And I think that the fact that a fighter isn't very versatile is a bad thing. So I wonder if there is any more room for a vanilla fighter.
What about being able to use a multitude of weapons and being able to use any weapon effectively?
What about being able to use a multitude of weapons and being able to use any weapon effectively?I kind of think that any attempt to make the fighter more versatile turns them into a different class.
Someone who is focused on doing amazing things with a single weapons is a kensai,
someone who is an unstoppable force on the battlefield is a barbarian, someone who has turned there body into a finely tuned weapon is a monk, someone who is a master of quick thinking and using tools is a rogue.And I think that the fact that a fighter isn't very versatile is a bad thing. So I wonder if there is any more room for a vanilla fighter.
Magus, Paladin, Ranger and Barbarian's all do that. And then they do other cool things too.
And I don't mean to discount Cavalier's, I just know nothing of the class, so I don't mention it.
No, that's not my point. My point is that making fighters more like wizards - with the same scale of powers and the same opportunity costs - reduces the diversity of play styles and this kind of reduction of play styles is something that a lot of people don't like (as evidenced by the rejection of another game system).
OK, I get it now. Thanks.
Personally, I dislike an x/day mechanic for fighters, as does my group.
Regarding types of abilities, I'd like to see MORE niche protection, maybe (these aren't well thought-out; I'm thinking out loud, as it were):
I'm thinking of a scenario like "OK, we need Bobbo the Bard to ferret out the location of the ruins using his lore, and to spread rumors and misinformation so people don't find out what we're up to. And we need McStealthy to locate and disarm the deadly boobytraps and find the secret passages once we're there. And we need Chongo the Barbarian to kill the hordes of ravening guardian monsters so we can get the treasure, and Clive the Cleric to keep him from dying and to protect us all from the evil death-curse. And we need Fred the Fighter's ships to get the treaure back to the mainland and his army to stop the pirates and robber barons from getting it all before we can spend it! Without any one of these key team members, the entire plan fails!"
I kind of think that any attempt to make the fighter more versatile turns them into a different class.
Someone who is focused on doing amazing things with a single weapons is a kensai,
someone who is an unstoppable force on the battlefield is a barbarian,
someone who has turned there body into a finely tuned weapon is a monk,
someone who is a master of quick thinking and using tools is a rogue.And I think that the fact that a fighter isn't very versatile is a bad thing. So I wonder if there is any more room for a vanilla fighter.
What about someone who is a bit of all those, PLUS master of certain facets of combat?
I think of iron-age versions of, for example, Foreign Legion elite, or Green Berets.
I kind of think that any attempt to make the fighter more versatile turns them into a different class.
Someone who is focused on doing amazing things with a single weapons is a kensai,
someone who is an unstoppable force on the battlefield is a barbarian,
someone who has turned there body into a finely tuned weapon is a monk,
someone who is a master of quick thinking and using tools is a rogue.And I think that the fact that a fighter isn't very versatile is a bad thing. So I wonder if there is any more room for a vanilla fighter.
What about someone who is a bit of all those, PLUS master of certain facets of combat?
I think of iron-age versions of, for example, Foreign Legion elite, or Green Berets.
That seems awfully close to a Ranger.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I want to reiterate that I am not talking about combat. There is a reason that the superman-batman comparison wasn't just about them punching dudes.
I am talking about narrative power. Moreso, I'm talking about why the question in this thread is an incomplete one - the question that needs to be asked is "What should high-level characters be able to do?" and from there extrapolate what high level non-casters should be able to do and what high level casters should not be able to do.
Um.. i've played every edition of this game since 1st. I don't know what games you were playing but 1st and 2nd edition the classes were not balanced against each other level for level. No way, no when, no how.
That was why when your wizard was 5th level the rogue was already 7th. The different xp tables where there for a reason. So I don't know what you are talking about.
Well yes, previous editions were (theoretically) balanced around EXP rather then levels. When 3e brought levels into uniform, it became the new tier set of balance.
And the classes to a degree were balanced against each other narratively speaking. Spellcasting was a hell of a lot harder. Fighters had a lot more fighter-specific things. Even when you skip past combat-based power that fighters have lost since 2e, Leadership wasn't a feat, it was a fighters only thing. They got a stronghold. Thieves got a thieves guild. Rangers - not druids - got animal companions. Wizards? Wizards got to sit forever alone inside a tower.
( Druids got to play The Highlander with each other )
But even beyond that, there was more. See, there was no wealth per level guidelines. And an offshoot of that was that classes did not all have the same number of magical items. The big catch is that many magical items were fighters only, with thieves coming in second place. And wizards couldn't just poop out magic items, either. In other words, fighters had the narrative power of "magical items" to counteract wizards having the narrative power of "magic in of itself."
Once more, I'm not talking about combat. For god's sake, for a group of people that howl about certain other games being "too combat intensive" I swear it's the only thing these forums can talk about sometimes.
So, again. I ask: what should high-level characters be able to do? Because until we get that answer, we're going to drive in circles.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
That seems awfully close to a Ranger.What about someone who is a bit of all those, PLUS master of certain facets of combat?
I think of iron-age versions of, for example, Foreign Legion elite, or Green Berets.
I agree, and it's hard to articulate what I mean, except... well let me try it this way.
Military
The ranger is the elite combatant out there, using guerrilla tactics, harassing or assassinating enemy forces. An intangible and deadly force in the wilderness.
The fighter is the elite combatant on the battlements, formulating battle plans over the maps, organizing troops, setting up fortifications, leading the siege, or charging into battle as a renowned, elite shocktrooper; the guy who has all the deadliest moves and the most skill. He's highly educated (in martial matters) and trained to be the best.
So maybe I mean that the Fighter is akin to the officers and specialists.
Monster Mashing
The fighter's out there applying their background of military and/or warrior guild training. They're like the guys who read the Art of War and live their lives by it.
Unlike Rangers, who focus on a handful of terrain or creature types, fighters would have learned a broader and often lateral approach to things; instead of the Ranger's creature-based surgical precision, the fighter uses one of many methods, depending on where they trained and in what; CMB-attacks, specialized weapons or gear, or combat stances, or in-combat trickery can be applied. The fighter would have a virtual toolbox of skills, methods and tricks, and more than enough skill to use them all.
Also, Rangers are more minimalist, more spartan in regards to their gear (so as to be self-sufficient in the wild), where a Fighter is truly the product of civilization, industry and technology. However, they not only train in using all "the toys" (weapons, armor, siege, special gear), but they also know the counter-moves to such things when not equipped. Their training would teach them the weaknesses of spellcasters, spells, and the more well known monsters, and how to counter or exploit them - to train as an elite warrior is to train them to win against all the kinds of threats they may face. That includes more than just other soldiers.
I hope that expressed it better.
I know this is a different game than 3.5 is/was but here is an extrapolation I made of the ranger on the dicefreaks forum and what it would be like at level 40 with new abilities and powers. Perhaps this isn't the best example but it definitely shows things that could be done without casting spells, even tho its not legit by 3.5 or paizo standards.
Enjoy!
Epic Ranger
21
22 Combat style feat, Supreme Bond
23 5th favored terrain
24 Supreme Quarry
25 6th favored enemy
26 Combat style feat, Combat Style Mastery
27
28 6th favored terrain, Master of the Wild
29
30 7th favored enemy, combat style feat, Master of the Hunt
31
32 Master of the Favored
33 7th favored terrain
34 combat style feat
35 8th favored enemy
36 Combat Style Sumpremacy
37
38 8th favored terrain, combat style feat, Favored Plane
39
40 9th favored enemy, Supreme Favor
Combat Style Feats (Ex): An epic ranger can choose from the following epic level feats for his combat style bonus feats, in addition to the ones already available (feats not up yet)
22nd lvl: Supreme Bond: The Ranger’s Hunter’s Bond improves. If she chose the Companion Bond, she can now grant half of her Favored Enemy bonus against a single target to any ally that can see or hear her, regardless of range. At 24th, 27th, and 30th level she can grant the bonus against one additional target, to a maximum of 5 targets at level 30. Alternately, the Ranger can instead allow allies within 30ft of her who can see or hear her to benefit from her Woodland Stride and Pass Without Trace abilities. If she instead chose to have an Animal Companion, her effective Druid level becomes equal to her Ranger level for determining the strengthof her animal companion. At 26th level her animal companion gains either the Advanced or Giant simple template. This choice must be madeat 26th level and cannot be changed, though the Ranger may make a different choice if she later gains a different companion. Finally, the Ranger may have one additional animal companion. However, her effective Druid level is considered to be half her Ranger level when determining the strengthand abilities of this companion.
24th lvl: Supreme Quarry: The Ranger can now have a number of Quarries equal to her Wisdom modifier. Any weapon she wields is considered to have the Bane and Keen special property against if her Quarry is also one of her Favored Enemies.
26th lvl: Combat Style Mastery: A Ranger that chose Archery as her combat style treats all nonmagical arrows she fires as if they had a +1 enhancement bonus. If the Ranger already has Enhance Arrow class feature, her arrows are instead treated as if having a +2 enhancement bonus. A Ranger who chose the Two Weapon Fighting combat style no longer takes any penalty when fighting with two weapons in each hand. When using a Full-Attack action, she may makethesame number of attacks with her off-hand as with her main hand.
*New*28th lvl: Master of the Wild: The Ranger is no longer affected by the natural weather and environmental hazards of her Favored Terrain (blizzards, quick sand, etc). Also, while in her favored terrain, she gains Improved Evasion.
30th lvl: Master of the Hunt: While trackinga Quarry, the Ranger can increase her movement speed to match that of her target (if it is better). If the Ranger witnesses her Quarry teleport she can make a Survival or Knowledge (Planes) check (possibly opposed by the caster's caster level) to know what plane the caster is on and their general distance and direction. While within her favored terrain and dealing with her favored enemy, any weapon the Ranger wields is considered to have the Dread special property.
*New*32nd lvl: Master of Terrain: While within one of her favored terrains, the Ranger is constantly under the affect of a nondetection spell unless she chooses to reveal herself. The Ranger has become attuned to her Favored Terrain and does not need to eat, sleep, breathe or age naturally while in her Favored Terrain. The Ranger can also use the Sense Motive skill in conjunction with tracking a Favored Enemy on your Favored Terrain. The only features of Sense Motive that are available for this use is Hunch and Sense Enchantment. Hunch will only be able to tell you if you are following an impostor while Sense Enchantment functions normally.
*New*34th lvl: Master of the Favored: While fighting one of her favored enemies, the Ranger automatically bypasses Epic DR and weapon immunities of the type she is using (Slashing/Piercing for melee, Piercing for ranged. Note: This type changes if the type of weapon can deal different or multiple types of damage [ie: a arrow dealing bludgeoning]).
36th lvl: Combat Style Supremacy: A Ranger that chose Archery as her combat style treats all nonmagical arrows she fires as if they had a +2 enhancement bonus. If the Ranger already hasthe Enhance Arrow class feature, her arrows are instead treated as if having a +3 enhancement bonus. A Ranger who chose the Two Weapon Fighting combat style is treated as if having the Whirlwind Attack and Two-Weapon Rend feats, even if she does not meet the prerequisites. If she already has Whirlwind Attack, she can make one more attack against every opponent within reach when she uses the feat.
38th lvl: Favored Plane: The Ranger chooses a plane of existence (usually the Material Plane). In relation to that plane, the Ranger cannot fail a Knowledge (Geography) or Knowledge (Planes) check and receives two checks or saving throws against affects that would deceive her (such as illusions), taking the better of the two rolls. While on that plane, the Ranger may use the bonus granted by her highest Favored Enemy and Favored Terrain against all foes and terrains (unless her actualbonus would be higher, these are counted seperatly [ie: your highest).
*New*40th lvl: Supreme Favor: You know what your enemy looks for when fighting you, as such, you've found ways to hide yourself in their presence. Creatures on your Favored Enemy list cannot detect your presence using any nonmagical sensory method (including scent, hearing, tremorsense, blindsense, sight and the like). This effect lasts until you attack and resumeswhen combat is over. If a ally is one of the creatures on your Favored Enemy list, you can choose to have him be able to detect your presence. While on your favored plane and in your favored terrain, you gain one immunity of your choice by being in perfect harmony with all that surrounds you from the table below. This immunity can be chosen as a free action. Your senses of tracking have significantly been enhanced as well, over the years you have tracked goblins to dragons and now you can track them to the ends of the oceans. When you track an enemy and they are on your favored terrain andin your favored plane, you are able to track whena creature has teleported in the area (You can see traces of their teleport and tell exactly when they have done so by your Hit Die in hours [ie: a 40th level Ranger will be able to tell if someone teleported in this area in the last 40 hours]), you can also tell where they teleported from or to as they leave a almost insignificant trace of the area/plane they went to/came from by makinga successful Knowledge (Planes) check. Finally, you will be able to tell what direction they were headed even if they made no contact with any substance that would leave a mark (ie: which way a flying creature went).
Favored Terrain Immunities: Cold Fire Sonic Acid Electricity Holy Unholy
I also made a Favored Soul in this style. If anyone is interested I can post it a bit later
** spoiler omitted **...
These are all things my homebrew ranger class can do before 20th level. Nondetection, tracking across planes, following a teleport, and find the path are all logical extensions of tracking -- even more so becuase I removed the latter from spells lists, making it a ranger-only thing.
Terrain mastery and planar terrains likewise.Hell, I'm not even sure why the Horizon Walker is a prestige class, rather than a list of abilities for all rangers of level 10+.
|
-Substitute cleric abilities but personal basis only. In my playing experience, the time a fighter shone is when they had a dedicated cleric behind them using their turns to buff, heal, remove debuffs. The fighter should have some lower tier, preparation based methods to get these benefits to keep shining.
- Remove the utility from buffing spellcaster
And then? Protest because the spellcaster never do anything useful for the fighter and only think about himself?
If the spellcaster don't have any reason to spend action or spells buffing the fighter they will simply spend those action and spells attacking the enemy or use them to buff themselves.
You get more competition for the fighter instead of collaboration from the other playes.
Unconvinced it si a good idea.
I really like what’s been written about ‘staving off’ save or suck spells. This would be great. We need to be wary of the action economy here as well – the key point is to let the Fighter keep on shining, if only for 1d2 rounds before he succumbs to that Dominate spell.At that point you can tranquilly remove dominate as a spell (at least against PC and NPC with class levels). Sawing throw +1d2 round before the spell take effect if the ST is failed mean dead spellcaster.
Don't be surprised if it end with the spellcaster conjuring hordes of monsters to attack the fighter while keeping beyond the horizon to avoid being reduced to a pincushion by the archer.
I think the benefit of the person playing a fighter not having to walk away from the table when they inevitably fail that Will save against anything outweighs the risk of clerics becoming blasters, especially seeing as Paizo seems to have done a decent job at not giving clerics holy fireballs.
Off course, the 'stave off' effect should only be once a day or treated like a hero point - success is not guaranteed. I think the rules are already going down this path.
The summoning issue is a good one, but with the proper feats and AC investment (which fighters are meant to be good at as it stands), it's not that big an issue.
---
If we're working off fictional characters for the idea of 'I want the fighter to be like XX from YY' then that's good because that gives us a starting point of abiltiies to write in. For any of these examples, they're not meant to be Batman or Superman. I'm getting confused why superheroes keep being brought up.
I agree with Aelrynth. If a fighter wants anti magic options, they have to take a archetype or prestige. It shouldn't be like that - it should be feat based, including one anti-magic exclusive fighter feat that is 'too good not to take'.
I am pro exclusive fighter feats.
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games
|
You should look up the Heroic Defiance and Heroic Recovery feats in the APG (p. 162) for an example of feats that can do what is asked here - delay or remove conditions.
The unbreakable fighter archetype (UC p. 49) gets both as bonus feats at 5th and 9th level, as well as additional uses per day of both.
I think non-casters are mostly fine as they are, though they could do with a few more non-combat abilities. The caster/non-caster dichotomy seems to be huge in theory, but I have found it to be less of an issue in actual game-play than the discussions on these boards seem to suggest.
Having said that, I would, nonetheless, agree that there is some disparity between casters and non-casters and it mostly manifests out of combat. In my group the gap is not very prominent, but to what extent it comes to the fore depends, to a great extent, on the nature of the campaign and the style of play of the group.
I would say that drastically increasing the things non-casters can do is the wrong approach to take. Giving them a couple of new abilities would be fine, but I don't want to essentially turn them into casters in everything but name.
A decent solution, I would say, would be to limit the what individual casters can do. The best way to do this would not be to remove or gut spells, but simply to limit caster access to fewer types of magic.
Let's take arcane magic as an example. It is subdivided into eight schools of magic, so I will use them as a baseline:
Abjuration
Conjuration
Divination
Enchantment
Evocation
Illusion
Necromancy
Transmutation
Having access to all of these schools enables a high level wizard to pick spells to do almost anything. A more game-friendly solution might be if every wizard had to pick only four schools of magic to have access to. He would than only be able to cast spells from the four chosen schools, though there could potentially be feats/prestige classes/archetypes/other options to allow some limited access to spells from other schools.
Such restriction could also be thematic, conceptual and flavorful - for example a 'Dark Wizard' might be built with Necromancy, Conjuration, Enchantment and Transmutation, while a 'Light Wizard' might chose Abjuration, Divination, Evocation and Illusion.
The same principle could apply to other casting classes. Sorcerers, for example, might get a choice of two schools of magic and additional two might be granted by their bloodline. Needless to say, the same notions would also be applied to divine/nature/other (e.g. psionic) casters.
This approach would preserve the power of magic and enable it to do just about anything (like it currently can), but no single caster could claim that kind of flexibility.
|
I don't mind the fighter-exclusive stuff, I just wish that they weren't put down as actual feats and instead were listed as Fighter Talents with the note that you can use a bonus feat for a fighter talent instead. That way I don't get this stuff in the feat list making me go "Oo- Aw, nevermind... :("
|
|
You should look up the Heroic Defiance and Heroic Recovery feats in the APG (p. 162) for an example of feats that can do what is asked here - delay or remove conditions.
The unbreakable fighter archetype (UC p. 49) gets both as bonus feats at 5th and 9th level, as well as additional uses per day of both.
They are good feats, but the feat tax is restrictive. I think there's a view that Diehard is a suicide feat and Endurance is for steeds.
Also, these are focused towards Fort saves - something that fighters already have as a strong suit.I was seeing something like this.
---
Enchantment Shrug:
FTR lvl 5th, CHA10
You rely on your tried and true arms and armour in more than just melee.
Once a day, when you fail a will save against a spell effect, you can use an immediate action to drain your magical weapon and magical armour of +1 enhancement for 1D10 rounds to ignore the effect. The +1 enhancement removal can remove enchantments such as 'flaming', 'cold' or for armour 'fire resistance', 'ghost touch'. For example, a fighter using 'Enchantment Shrug' to ignore a failed charm spell would have their +2 sword and +2 fullplate become +1 for 1d10 rounds.
A fighter cannot use the Enchantment Shrug if they are not equipped with a magical weapon and armour when they are hit by the spell.
---
Hit the Sparkles:
FTR lvl 7th, CHA10
Following painful yet necessary martial training, you have perfected the art of hitting spells in mid flight.
If you are equipped with a weapon with a +3 enhancement or higher, you may elect to spend an Attack of Opportunity against any ray spell targeted at you.
The ray in mid flight has an AC of 10 + enemy caster level + spell level + the caster's spellcasting stat modifier. For instance, a 5th level sorceror with 18 charisma fires a Scorching Ray. The AC for the ray is 21 (10+5+4+2)
You can use this ability equal to half your character level per day. A failure to hit the spell counts as a use of the ability.
---
These are horribly rough and the charisma (or intelligence conversely) requirement could cause some misery but the idea is there. Easy way for ALL fighters to fight magic. There could be a feat chain for a 'Hit the Sparkles' happy fighter that could even hit a 'one subject' spell that doesn't require an attack roll. This would require godly perception.
You've come across a good idea, but you need to take it further. In 3.5, there were three classes, the Dread Necromancer, Warmage, and Beguiler, that were restricted to a single school, but knew every spell in it and could cast spontaneously from them. Wizards should be like that. You should choose your specialization, and then know all spells from that school. Right there you have reduced spellcasters from tier 1 godliness to high tier 3 manageableness.I think non-casters are mostly fine as they are, though they could do with a few more non-combat abilities. The caster/non-caster dichotomy seems to be huge in theory, but I have found it to be less of an issue in actual game-play than the discussions on these boards seem to suggest.
Having said that, I would, nonetheless, agree that there is some disparity between casters and non-casters and it mostly manifests out of combat. In my group the gap is not very prominent, but to what extent it comes to the fore depends, to a great extent, on the nature of the campaign and the style of play of the group.
I would say that drastically increasing the things non-casters can do is the wrong approach to take. Giving them a couple of new abilities would be fine, but I don't want to essentially turn them into casters in everything but name.
A decent solution, I would say, would be to limit the what individual casters can do. The best way to do this would not be to remove or gut spells, but simply to limit caster access to fewer types of magic.
Let's take arcane magic as an example. It is subdivided into eight schools of magic, so I will use them as a baseline:
Abjuration
Conjuration
Divination
Enchantment
Evocation
Illusion
Necromancy
TransmutationHaving access to all of these schools enables a high level wizard to pick spells to do almost anything. A more game-friendly solution might be if every wizard had to pick only four schools of magic to have access to. He would than only be able to cast spells from the four chosen schools, though there could potentially be feats/prestige classes/archetypes/other options to allow some limited access to spells from other schools.
Such restriction could also be thematic, conceptual and flavorful - for example a 'Dark Wizard' might be built with Necromancy, Conjuration, Enchantment and Transmutation, while a 'Light Wizard' might chose Abjuration, Divination, Evocation and Illusion.
The same principle could apply to other casting classes. Sorcerers...
Yes, if I were designing a game from scratch (which I am actually doing, but we are talking about Pathfinder here, I would make each casting class specialized in an area of magic that might be about as broad as a school. The 3.5E classes you mention are good examples of how it can be done. My idea above tries to at least partially apply this principle to classes that already exist in Pathfinder, but yes, if I had a free reign, I would go even further with it.
Telling people to play a fighter that completely gimps his offense (the Unbreakable) to get defensive abilities that ALL FIGHTERS SHOULD HAVE, makes no sense.
Fighters are the master of armor. Why can't they stack Adamantine armor DR? And improve it? While the Barb gets it unilaterally?
Fighters are the masters of weapons. Why then is Greater Weapon Spec, 4 feats, less effective then Weapon Mastery I, which takes a whole class of weapons to +4/+4?
Why is Expertise, a Combat feat, less effective then a Rage Power that grants scaling Nat AC?
Why do any and all Rage powers become available to Barbs at certain levels, but Fighters must qualify for pre-reqs?
Why do Monks not have to qualify for their bonus feats?
Why are a Fighter's main class abilities, bonus feats, worth 1/2 to 1/4 of other classes class abilities?
Why do do most of a Fighter's abilities not scale with level? (Bonus feats, armor mastery)
Why are a Fighter's class abilities dependent on having the gear or stats to make use of them (i.e. you need at least a 20 Dex to max out the benefit of Armor Mastery! A monk needs...nothing.)
Why can so many of the fighter's abilities be subbed for with some cash? (Mithral armor takes care of FOUR class abilities...Armor Training I, II, and Armor Mastery I and II)
Of all the melee classes, why does the most highly trained one, the Fighter, have by far the worst defenses?
Why is the most highly trained melee class so grokking useless out of combat? Soldiers tend to be very highly trained at a lot of things to maximize downtime.
Why does the idea of a class without magic being resistant to or immune to magic never work out?
Why is the idea of challenges that can only be removed by melee combat or use of non-magical skills curdle the toes, but the idea of things that can only be overcome by magic seem logical?
Why is the idea that items essential to the function of a Melee class cost so damn much, but the items essential to most casters are virtually free? (Melees need items, casters need spells)
Why can casters cast all their spells and move, and melees can't use all their attacks and move?
Why don't Melees gain bonuses for high prime ability scores like spellcasters do? I'd like more feats for my high str Fighter, like a Wizard gets extra spells, thanks.
Why are wizards and clerics able to easily get as many or more HP/level then the Fighter?
Why is putting Walls around castles to keep out armies of fighters okay, but putting walls of anti-magic around something to keep out spellcasters not?
---------------------------
These are the problems with a fighter. Pick one and solve it, and you'll start fixing the problems with fighters.
The fact that Weapon Training is more powerful then four feats was an observation that really sticks in my craw. That, and that other classes can take bonus feats they don't qualify for, while the Fighter has to.
That's just wrong.
----------------
The fighter should get more use out of armor then anyone, not just need a higher ability score to make use of a class ability.
The fighter should get more use out of weapons then anyone,and not be hampered by making a choice later in his career. Is a paladin less effective smiting something else? A Ranger can cast instant enemy. A barbarian gets strong and doesn't care. A fighter gets less effective with new weapons as he levels, and has no recourse.
The fighter should be THE master of feats. he should leverage feats like nobody else. Not class abilities, not skills, not spells...the fighter should take feats and RUN WITH THEM.
The fighter does none of these things.
Here's a magic item for you all to address the kind of feat flexibility a fighter needs.
Amulet of Swords to Plowshares
This is an ivory pendant inscribed with the phrase, "Beating Plowshares into Swords."
These amulets are designed to maximize a warrior's usefulness outside of combat. They take a day to attune to any warrior who puts one on. At the beginning of a day, the wearer may target a number of Combat feats equal to the level of the amulet (1-9) and swap them out for non-fighting General feats, or Item Creation feats. he must still meet the requirements of the feats to use them.
Once an amulet is used, and a swap is made, that Combat feat may only be swapped for that General feat for that person going forwards. Using a different Amulet does not change this relationship. Lesser amulets affect the same feats always, you must increase the power of an amulet to include new feats.
Example: Valeros wears a level 4 Amulet of Swords to Plowshares. He attunes the amulet to his Greater Weapon Specialization tree, swapping it out for Skill Focus (Smithing), Magical Craftsman, Create Magic Arms and Armor, and Create Wondrous Item. On days where he is not adventuring, he uses the amulet to allow him to be productive making magical items and gear for himself.
If he wanted to add TWF, GTWF, and TWF Defense, he would need a level 7 Amulet, because any succeeding amulets would target feats he has already attuned. But he could swap out those feats for Alertness, Eagle-Eyed, and Skill Focus (Perception), giving him a solid +17 bonus to his Perception skill at 10th+.
If an amulet is removed, its effects reverse themselves over the course of one hour. It will take a full day to reattune the amulet for usage again.
There are reputed to be reverse amulets that convert General Feats into combat feats for use by non-combatants like Nobles and wealthy Experts if they must attend combat. These work identically in the opposite direction, but the wearer must still qualify for the feats being swapped in.
COnstruction: Any Skill Focus feat, any Item Creation feat + Create Wondrous Item.
Cost: As Pearl of Power (1-9 feats instead of spell levels)
|
|
-Substitute cleric abilities but personal basis only. In my playing experience, the time a fighter shone is when they had a dedicated cleric behind them using their turns to buff, heal, remove debuffs. The fighter should have some lower tier, preparation based methods to get these benefits to keep shining.
- Remove the utility from buffing spellcaster
And then? Protest because the spellcaster never do anything useful for the fighter and only think about himself?
If the spellcaster don't have any reason to spend action or spells buffing the fighter they will simply spend those action and spells attacking the enemy or use them to buff themselves.
You get more competition for the fighter instead of collaboration from the other playes.
Unconvinced it is a good idea.
I really like what’s been written about ‘staving off’ save or suck spells. This would be great. We need to be wary of the action economy here as well – the key point is to let the Fighter keep on shining, if only for 1d2 rounds before he succumbs to that Dominate spell.At that point you can tranquilly remove dominate as a spell (at least against PC and NPC with class levels). Sawing throw +1d2 round before the spell take effect if the ST is failed mean dead spellcaster.
Don't be surprised if it end with the spellcaster conjuring hordes of monsters to attack the fighter while keeping beyond the horizon to avoid being reduced to a pincushion by the archer.
I think the benefit of the person playing a fighter not having to walk away from the table when they inevitably fail that Will save against anything outweighs the risk of clerics becoming blasters, especially seeing as Paizo seems to have done a decent job at not giving clerics holy fireballs.
Off course, the 'stave off' effect should only be once a day or treated like a hero point - success is not guaranteed. I think the rules are already going down this path.
The...
a) It is not cleric becoming blasters, it is cleric taking the Codzilla road, long term bluff to cleric, short term bluff to cleric, combo bluff to cleric. Now I am as good as a fighter or better.
If I don't get to be on par to the fighter I am useless.Great life.
b) Why the fighter is going away from the table?
No one care enough about him to cast a dispel magic? He care so little about the party that he never need to reroll his save 8at +2)?
His saving throw bonus with a +2 is so bad that he never has a chance to save?
Sorry,, but when I get this kind of comment my impression is that the fighter has a starting wisdom of 7 and never cared about trying to improve his saving throw.
A simple "Protection from evil/chaos/law/good" will offer wonderful protection if cast before the domination attempt and a rerolled save if cast after the domination:
Protection from Evil
Second, the subject immediately receives another saving throw (if one was allowed to begin with) against any spells or effects that possess or exercise mental control over the creature (including enchantment [charm] effects and enchantment [compulsion] effects). This saving throw is made with a +2 morale bonus, using the same DC as the original effect. If successful, such effects are suppressed for the duration of this spell. The effects resume when the duration of this spell expires.
While under the effects of this spell, the target is immune to any new attempts to possess or exercise mental control over the target. This spell does not expel a controlling life force (such as a ghost or spellcaster using magic jar), but it does prevent them from controlling the target. This second effect only functions against spells and effects created by evil creatures or objects, subject to GM discretion.
It is a first level spell with a range of touch, so it can be made in a potion. 1 minute of invulnerability from domination for 50 gp if the fighter "guess" the enemy alignment.
Magic circle against evil (or whatever) and you will get the same protection for 10 minutes/level for all people within 10' from the touched creatures, included the dominated fighter sent to attack the party.
The infamous Pathfinder+clear spindle combo (4.500 gp) and you get constant Protection from evil.
---
I think that a lot of people is still trying to play as if this was 2nd and earlier editions, where the fighter didn't needed to bother about using magic beside his pieces of steel.At most he needed a few potions.
At that time wands were a fairly rare items, treasured as the charges would be consumed and finding a new wand wasn't guaranteed.
Nowadays you squeeze all the charges of a wand very fast as it is simply a tool that you can easily replace.
It is the same thing for several expendable magic items.
I am sure it will grate the nerves of a lot of people, but UMD is almost mandatory at this stage of the game if you don't want to depend from friendly spellcasters.
Even with charisma 10 and no class bonus after a few levels it will become possible to use low level wands. A faled roll at most mean that the wand will not work for you for 24 hours (and only if it is a natural one). So you can have wand of protection from evil whose charges cost only 25 g and at level 5 activate it with 4 tries (15+). At level 10 it will activate 505 of the time.
Same thing for a wand of See invisible (at a cost of 150 gp/use). That invisible wizard isn't so much of a problem now, yes?
And so on.
Sure, you will have to spend money on consumables, but that is the basis of the idea of WBL. Generally 1/3 of your wealth should be expendables.
If your companions aren't willing to buff you or are incapable to do that, you should get the option in your hands.
|
|
You've come across a good idea, but you need to take it further. In 3.5, there were three classes, the Dread Necromancer, Warmage, and Beguiler, that were restricted to a single school, but knew every spell in it and could cast spontaneously from them. Wizards should be like that. You should choose your specialization, and then know all spells from that school. Right there you have reduced spellcasters from tier 1 godliness to high tier 3 manageableness.
I have recently ended a campaign with a beguiler. That class is horribly broken if you use the spells that came with the class.
start rant
Limited? Where? Beside against undead and construct he is extremely powerful.
He can't teleport but has shadow walk.
He can chose to cast what he prefer between a large list of enchantment and illusion spells, plus a few others, If I recall exactly he has more than 100 spells know and available on his fingertips as soon as he get to level 9 spells. A wizard should work to get that many spells in his spellbook and can memorize only a very small subset of that list every day.
Hesitate: Level 3
Subject can take no action other than move and defend. Attacking subject ends spell. Subject can attempt save each turn
And at 9th level he can cast it 6 times plus int bonus?
Overwhelm level 6
ST: will negate
With a touch, you deal nonlethal damage to the subject equal to the creature’s current hit point total.
Instantaneously staggered if he fail his ST and at 1 HP from going down.
Balanced? Where?
/rant
Please don't use the Beguiler as a example of a balanced class.
The warmage is the opposite: weak. He is a blaster mage in a age when blaster mages are becoming less and less powerful.
No, that's not my point. My point is that making fighters more like wizards - with the same scale of powers and the same opportunity costs - reduces the diversity of play styles and this kind of reduction of play styles is something that a lot of people don't like (as evidenced by the rejection of another game system).OK, I get it now. Thanks.
Personally, I dislike an x/day mechanic for fighters, as does my group.
Regarding types of abilities, I'd like to see MORE niche protection, maybe (these aren't well thought-out; I'm thinking out loud, as it were):
What if traps were exceptionally deadly, and no one but a rogue could detect, disarm, or circumvent them? (i.e., there would be no trap-finding spells, and magic traps would be immune to detect magic, dispel magic, etc.)?
What if wizards' ability to cast in combat was virtually nonexistent, forcing them into the role of advisor/diviner/crafter/buffer?
What if there were advanced rules for politics and armies that prevented a simple planar binding spell from being better than an army? And if only the fighter got an army/navy/kingdom, as a class feature instead of a feat? I'm thinking of a scenario like "OK, we need Bobbo the Bard to ferret out the location of the ruins using his lore, and to spread rumors and misinformation so people don't find out what we're up to. And we need McStealthy to locate and disarm the deadly boobytraps and find the secret passages once we're there. And we need Chongo the Barbarian to kill the hordes of ravening guardian monsters so we can get the treasure, and Clive the Cleric to keep him from dying and to protect us all from the evil death-curse. And we need Fred the Fighter's ships to get the treaure back to the mainland and his army to stop the pirates and robber barons from getting it all before we can spend it! Without any one of these key team members, the entire plan fails!"
Its hard to express how much I dont want to see this happen. I want to see LESS NICHE nonsense and a wider variety of abilities for EVERYONE. This would require such specific challenges from a dm that there would be almost no options for storytelling in an adventure.
In addition if someone HAD to be a specific class to solve a certain kind of problem published adventures would no longer be possible. Think about this carefully for a moment. How can an AP account for the idea that if the party has a rogue, a trap can be dealt with, if the party doesnt have a rogue, half the party dies? How can it deal with, if the party has a fighter there is a nation backing up the party, and if they dont have a fighter they dont? There is literally no way to write a published story for that.
Heck, my group would literally have to stop playing. We have a large group but because we have varied lives and schedules, there is no gaurantee any particular player will be at every session. But if you NEED a specific class to overcome a specific challenge, even if there is one in the party, if he isn't there that day, the challenge is impossible.
I like the trend of classes becoming more flexible and the fact that no specific class is required anymore. It means people can play what they want not what the party has to have. I really dont think the answer to this is to bring things back to fighter thief mage cleric. I think we are better off expanding the capability of non-martial characters not reinforcing that lack of variety.
Fighter are not limited. Depends on how you choose the feats (and skills), and if you spend your money only on weapon and armor.
Fighter are not limited. Depends on how you choose the feats (and skills), and if you spend your money only on weapon and armor.
Fighters do indeed have limits. All you have to do is look at their class abilities.
They can take COMBAT feats as bonuses. Not so useful out of combat. Said feats being worth 1/2 to 1/4 of a real class ability.
They get weapon and armor training bonuses.
And...that's it. That's EXTREMELY limiting. Your argument comes down to "If anyone has unlimited gold, there's no limit."
What you are suggesting is things ANY CLASS 'must' do to equal the load. By that standard, every class should UMD. Great, fighters get crap for hp, and Cha and Int are dump stats. so they'll generally suck at that, too.
Except...most caster classes DON'T have to take UMD. They have spells, natch, and access to healing. Sure, the wizard might...but he's got high INT and skill points to spare if he needs them.
referring to general feats to try and solve the fighter's problems is not a critique of the class.
===Aelryinth
I removed a post. Name-calling is bad.
Also, flag it and move on.
Here's my offering.
== Fighter Mod ==
4 Skill ranks
Add class skills of Acrobatics and Know History
Add the following abilities to the existing fighter class.
Combat Generalist: At levels 5, 7, 9, 11, 13, 15, 17 and 19 select a bonus feat from {Combat Expertise, Dodge, Power Attack, Critical Focus, Mounted Combat, Point Blank Shot, Two-Weapon fighting, Weapon Focus, Skill Focus - Professional Soldier, Improved Unarmed Strike}. The fighter need not meet the prerequisites for these feats.
Student of War: Formal training in tactics which borders on the philosophical. A fighter can make a Profession - Soldier check (or Wisdom check if untrained), against DC 10, to drill troops and design fortifications. Every participant in the drills and/or fortification can add a +1 competence bonus to hit, or cover bonus to AC, for the duration of the next combat. It takes one hour to complete the drills or fortifications. The AC bonus is provided by immobile fortifications. Thus, the AC bonus only applies to setting up an area for defense (or ambush).
The student of war can extend the preparations, increase the DC, and increase the benefit. For every 5 higher the DC, another hour can be invested giving an additional +1. These hours need not be consecutive, so a high level Fighter can split long hours of drills or fortification up among multiple days before a coming conflict. Note that the fighter need not be present in the actual combat, for this bonus to take effect. However, the fighter must be part of the drill/fortification process. The bonuses can be mixed, and need not all be AC or to-hit.
Siege Engineer: Starting at level 4, a fighter adds 1/4 his Fighter level to any check to use a siege weapon, or hit bonus when using siege weapons.
Student of Combat: A fighter can assess a combatant (a standard action) to gauge their prowess. If the combatant makes any attacks during that round, the fighter can determine Base Attack Bonus and CMB of the creature. If the combatant is attacked (but not flat-footed), the entire profile of the creature's CMD and AC become known, including standard, touch, and flat-footed AC. Whether or not any attacks are made or received, the fighter also estimate the creature's current/maximum hitpoint ratio (full, 90%, half, 3/4 and so on).
Starting at level 8, a Fighter can add their fighter level as a bonus on all knowledge checks to gauge a creature's weaknesses and abilities.
Keep in mind that extra damage isn't the problem, nor really the CMD/CMB stuff. The biggest stuff is versatility out of combat, and making each class ability worth it.
Example: Feat (Weapon Focus)
You pick a select weapon. You gain a +1 bonus to hit with that weapon type.
If this feat is taken as a Fighter Bonus feat, it is called Weapon Specialization. You gain either a +1 bonus to hit, or your weapon training bonus with this weapon is doubled.
---This hits at level 5, takes the place of and is superior to the weapon spec tree, saving feats and working with class benefits.
Weapon Training: You gain +1 TH/DMG with a group of weapons. Every four levels, your bonus increases by +1, and you may select a new group of weapons you are trained with.
----This now keeps your weapon training in pace with a barbarian. You can now actually afford to specialize in multiple weapons!
Armor Training: If you are wearing armor or carrying a shield, you gain a +1 bonus to your AC. This bonus increases by +1 every four levels, to a maximum of +4 AC.
===This now makes your bonus to AC INDEPENDENT of your ability scores. Equivalent to a monk.
Armor Mastery I: Your medium armor is treated as light armor. Any non-magical bonuses you gain from armor are increased by +1 (i.e. Masterwork armor is -2 on skill checks, Mithral grants +3 Dex, Adamantine is +1 DR).
Armor Mastery II: Your Heavy armor is treated as light armor when worn. Non-magical bonuses are increased by +2 (-3 for masterwork, +4 dex for mithral, +2 DR for adamantine). Your DR from armor stacks with any DR from the fighter class or combat feats.
So IF you have monster Dex, you can wear mithral and get the same benefit. But you also get a scaling benefit from adamantine.
-------------
At levels 1,3,5 and every odd level, the Fighter gains a General Feat. This feat may be spent on Save buffing or condition resisting feats, Item Creation feats (like magical craftsman/ create arms/armor), and Skill buffing feats (Skill Affinity, Focus, Training, Knowledge, etc), as well as HP buffing feats. Any bonuses gained from these feats increase by his Weapon Training Bonus.
===A Fighter/10 With Skill Focus-Percept, Skill Training (Percept (always class skill, +2 to+4), Alertness (+4) has effectively a +23 bonus to spot over his skill ranks, just from being so damn good at training and feats. If he takes Skill Focus (Smithing), Craftsman (+2 (4) to Craft checks), and Skill training (Smith), he can get a +20 bonus to his Craft checks and is better at making magical arms and armor then an archmage...and has the General Feats to spend on Magical Craftsman and Create Magic Arms and Armor.
if you're going to give the fighter half strength class abilities, then you need to give him TWICE AS MANY.
Iron Will: You gain a +2 to Will Saves.
If taken as a Fighter bonus General Feat, this bonus doubles at level 10, and if you have Bravery, you are immune to fear. (This effectively works out to a Strong Will Save progression when combined with his Weapon Training Bonus).
Toughness: If taken as Fighter General bonus feat, you gain double the number of hit points per Fighter level, and if you use your Favored Class benefit for more hit points, you gain +2 Hit points on each Fighter level from each use. (no add'l benefit from Weapon Training)
====================================================
Expertise: Int 13, you gain a +1 to AC when you are armed with a melee weapon or as the PF feat (pick).
If taken as a Fighter bonus feat, you may waive the Intelligence requirement. You gain a scaling bonus to your Armor class equal to your weapon training bonus when you fight defensively or use total defense. Select a number of combat maneuvers equal to your intelligence bonus (minimum 1). You gain a bonus with those maneuvers equal to your weapon training bonus + Intelligence bonus (min 0 Int), and do not provoke AoO when you attempt them.
If you have a weapons with a special manuver feature (disarm, trip, etc), you get a +2 bonus to those manuvers when using those weapons.
Now, you reward intelligence, and have a scaling bonus on all fronts, and you are an expert with weapons that reward manuver usage.
Feat Pool (Combat): Fighter/5 or BAB+5 & Wis:15 Select 3 Combat feats. At the beginning of the day, you may swap in or out any one of those feats into the same slot. You must qualify for all the feats. You may only take this feat once.
IF taken as a Fighter bonus Combat feat, you may waive the Wisdom requirement. Your pool is equal to 2 + your weapon training bonus (increasing by level).
If taken as a Fighter bonus General Feat, you may instead choose the same number of bonus General Feats.
This feat may be taken by a Fighter once for each pool. The second time taken, the Fighter level requirement is F/9.
===This grants a Fighter some feat flexibility. Swap in and out different weapon focuses as you need them, swap Perception in the field out for smithing at home. This lets you 'change up' your fighter for war, and for peace, too.
Two Weapon Fighting: If taken as a Fighter Bonus Feat, you gain extra attacks at F/6, f/11 and F/16 with your off hand weapons, and you may ignore all dexterity requirements for this feat.
Power Attack: If taken as a Fighter Bonus Feat, you may ignore the strength requirement (you can use it with a 3 Str if need be), and the first attack in any round you make with Power Attack has no penalty. If you have Weapon Finesse, you may use this with Light Weapons.
Combat Reflexes: If taken as a Fighter bonus feat, you may ignore the Dexterity requirement. Your number of AoO allowed increases by your Weapon Training bonus.
Vital Strike: If taken as a Fighter Bonus feat, at ftr/11 the damage from the attack triples. At f/16, the damage quadruples. You may combine a vital strike with other attacks that also deal single attacks and require a single attack action or standard action (such as a charge). If used as part of an action that delivers multiple attacks, such as a Cleave or Whirlwind, the extra damage only applies to the first attack.
=====================
Fighter bonus feats are CLASS ABILITIES. They should be as strong as any other class ability. The whole weapon spec TREE is less effective then WEAPON TRAINING I, or a barbarian's rage. that's ridiculous cost-wise.
There should be a clear differentiation between feats a Fighter takes with class abilties, and feats just anyone can take. First, like a monk, he should waive most pre-reqs. Second, the feats should scale. Feats he takes with his character feats don't get this bonus, so you have to draw a line.
Second, he should be able to leverage feats for usage outside of combat. That means giving him more feats that are ONLY useful outside of melee combat, which are general feats, AND giving him a selection of feats that he can swap in and out as need be to deal with normal situations. (if you give more open feats, he'll just take more combat feats).
Condensing down feats that he takes with his Fighter Bonus feats basically just increases the value of the Fighter Bonus feat to a real class ability.
Tying bonuses to Weapon Training increases the value of Fighter levels and scales the feats.
Granting scaling general feats means fighters leverage feats like nobody else does.
=========
Now, to figure out how to make the Rogue master of skills...
===Aelryinth
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
The funniest thing about Expertise is that you only need 11 Intelligence to cast level 1 spells.
Fighting: now harder then bending reality.
The funniest thing about Expertise is that you only need 11 Intelligence to cast level 1 spells.
Fighting: now harder then bending reality.
That IS funny.
Hmm. Rogues: +1 to all class skills for every 4 ranks in those skills?
Really, to fix the rogue, you need to fix what a skill RANK means. As it is, it's just a +bonus modifier, no different then anything else except when you're qualifying for a feat. In no other circumstance is ranks important.
I find it personally irritating when a +20 percept toy is just as effective as 20 Ranks in Perception. No mechanical difference.
I'm thinking all Rogues should get bonuses to their class skills as they get higher levels and ranks, which no other classes get...and not just 'Rogue Talents'. Indeed, many Rogue Talents should just be folded into Skill benefits.
===Aelryinth
Fighter are not limited. Depends on how you choose the feats (and skills), and if you spend your money only on weapon and armor.Fighters do indeed have limits. All you have to do is look at their class abilities.
They can take COMBAT feats as bonuses. Not so useful out of combat. Said feats being worth 1/2 to 1/4 of a real class ability.
They get weapon and armor training bonuses.
And...that's it. That's EXTREMELY limiting. Your argument comes down to "If anyone has unlimited gold, there's no limit."
What you are suggesting is things ANY CLASS 'must' do to equal the load. By that standard, every class should UMD. Great, fighters get crap for hp, and Cha and Int are dump stats. so they'll generally suck at that, too.
Except...most caster classes DON'T have to take UMD. They have spells, natch, and access to healing. Sure, the wizard might...but he's got high INT and skill points to spare if he needs them.
referring to general feats to try and solve the fighter's problems is not a critique of the class.
===Aelryinth
The things that you need to play outside combat are just 1 or two skills, and don't need to be capped. In combat you can use a various maneuvers, do a lot of damage, and this is the warrior job. If you want to do something different, maybe you should take another class (or some archetype) or multiclassing. Warrior can benefits from level from other classes more than other.
The problem that fighters can have is that some feats are nerfed, it's true. Cleave, vital strike for sure. Fix the feats if you want.
I answered to your question, maybe I should repost. Non combat play is done in two way: with social skills, and with pure roleplay.
So you can take some social skill (if you don't, it your fault), or play without it. I have a barbarian now, and he has not bluff or diplomacy, but I speak in social situations. Like a barbarian. This is roleplay. You don't do always what you are good for, and you can put your party in some dire situations (this is called character personality).
Speaking about "powers", ok, now everyone can take leadership, but... what is a narrative power? Wizard have spell that can be narrative, but warrior have talents. If a wizard is famous for what he can do, the warrior should be also, but you have to create a personality around the character. It's not all hit and damage, but how you do it, who you fought, why you did it, etc. There are not narrative or non narrative power, it's a player responsability to turn a simple dice roll in a narrative game, this is roleplay.
If you can be more specific about what you mean for narrative power maybe I can answer better. What's the narrative power of the party wizard, for example?
|
I actually think the solution to this problem isn't to make the martial characters more insanely powerful, it's to make the spellcasters LESS insanely powerful. Unfortunately that's a solution that would have to wait until a second edition, if Paizo were to agree with my hypothesis. Unfortunately, I'm not really sure they agree...after all, a significant portion of Ultimate Combat was devoted to spells.
Boom.Really, to fix the rogue, you need to fix what a skill RANK means. As it is, it's just a +bonus modifier, no different then anything else except when you're qualifying for a feat. In no other circumstance is ranks important.
I find it personally irritating when a +20 percept toy is just as effective as 20 Ranks in Perception. No mechanical difference.
I'm thinking all Rogues should get bonuses to their class skills as they get higher levels and ranks, which no other classes get...and not just 'Rogue Talents'. Indeed, many Rogue Talents should just be folded into Skill benefits.
===Aelryinth
Though designed for 4e the ideas it is based on including skill talents could likely be ported into Pathfinder.
( Have to use google cache as the wiki is currently down )
|
|
-Make Fighters master of all things battle- not just the master of hitting things with a weapon hard. How about making "Fighter Level Checks" to learn about the tactics a group of enemies may make? This wouldn't work against some wild animals, but a good Fighter should be able to make inferences about what kind of strategy and tactics a disciplined group of enemies will be making based on things like their formation and gear.
Actually my paladin is making great use of this skill right now its actually pretty decent but would require the fighter to spec a bit into int for it to be massively useful.
https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=gmail&attid=0.1&thid=123 241103e1f4558&mt=application/pdf&url=https://mail.google.com/mail/? ui%3D2%26ik%3D3c579d2686%26view%3Datt%26th%3D123241103e1f4558%26attid%3D0.1 %26disp%3Dsafe%26realattid%3Df_fyg00unu0%26zw&sig=AHIEtbS-HinD9UtZMQhpR KVQ_uRdzb73hg&pli=1
sorry for the massive link
Its hard to express how much I dont want to see this happen. I want to see LESS NICHE nonsense and a wider variety of abilities for EVERYONE.
What people want in a game, then, is sometimes at absolute odds with what others want. Right now, we have a situation in which spells can do anything at all, and fighters can only swing weapons. Personally, that really annoys me.
But if I talk about expanding options for fighters, everyone and their brother jumps up and says, "If they can do more than swing weapons, it's automatically 4e/the Apocalypse/the end of the world/Armageddon/Ragnarok/badwrongnofun."
On the other hand, if I talk about limiting the breadth of ability for spells, the other half of the audience yells, "No niches! Everyone needs to be able to do everything!"
So the two camps cancel each other out and leave us with the status quo, in which spells can do everything, and no one else can.
Its hard to express how much I dont want to see this happen. I want to see LESS NICHE nonsense and a wider variety of abilities for EVERYONE.What people want in a game, then, is sometimes at absolute odds with what others want. Right now, we have a situation in which spells can do anything at all, and fighters can only swing weapons. Personally, that really annoys me.
But if I talk about expanding options for fighters, everyone and their brother jumps up and says, "If they can do more than swing weapons, it's automatically 4e/the Apocalypse/the end of the world/Armageddon/Ragnarok/badwrongnofun."
On the other hand, if I talk about limiting the breadth of ability for spells, the other half of the audience yells, "No niches! Everyone needs to be able to do everything!"
So the two camps cancel each other out and leave us with the status quo, in which spells can do everything, and no one else can.
I am not sure that there are so many people in Column A anymore. I think it is just a matter of how to go about doing it. I think most agree that something needs to be done to expand their options, just not how to go about it. That is where (hopefully) brilliant game designers step in, but we'll have to see. In the mean time, I will keep cracking open tome of battle until someone shows me something better.
And while i dont think everyone needs to be able to do everything, I do think strict niche protection is bad for the game because of how much it limits options. And for me, a lack of options means a lack of game more or less.
I answered to your question, maybe I should repost. Non combat play is done in two way: with social skills, and with pure roleplay.
So you can take some social skill (if you don't, it your fault), or play without it. I have a barbarian now, and he has not bluff or diplomacy, but I speak in social situations. Like a barbarian. This is roleplay. You don't do always what you are good for, and you can put your party in some dire situations (this is called character personality).Speaking about "powers", ok, now everyone can take leadership, but... what is a narrative power? Wizard have spell that can be narrative, but warrior have talents. If a wizard is famous for what he can do, the warrior should be also, but you have to create a personality around the character. It's not all hit and damage, but how you do it, who you fought, why you did it, etc. There are not narrative or non narrative power, it's a player responsability to turn a simple dice roll in a narrative game, this is roleplay.
If you can be more specific about what you mean for narrative power maybe I can answer better. What's the narrative power of the party wizard, for example?
I would take narrative power to mean being able to take over the story to some degree. Rather than reacting to events in the world, the wizard can now become the shaper of events within the world.
Scrying and Teleportation are both good examples of powers that give you narrative control. Rather than just stumbling up to the BBEG fortress and just busting down the door and fighting, instead the party, driven by the spellcasters, can start to do intelligence gathering ahead of time. Prodigious use of scrying, divination, etc from afar gives you important information.
Then you teleport in, bypassing the fortresses defenses, surprising the BBEG, and then the party piles on him and leaves him paste.
Sure, there are defenses against these things, but the spellcasters have a huge range of spells that provide all sorts of answers to...
A warrior can lead an army or a small group with some siege engine. He can take stealth, or some stuffs to enter that castle. A warrior can also buy a teleport. You can do this things, but you need a bit of roleplay because fighter is a martial melee class... this is his role. Take the cad archetype, if you want to do something different.
Even the mage, after he entered the castle, need the martial support. If not, this adventure is not right for the party level.Plain fighter + no social skill is a character made just for damage and fight. Someone sacrifice damage, some other armor class, or HP, to have more option. Even a mage with teleport and scry sacrifice some of his dmg power (for the day).