|
*on a battlefield without shenanigans such as poisoning the water supply and so on. Proper use of equipment, one man can fight entire armies by themselves, look at most of the Medal of Honor recipients, several of them defeated armies by themselves, in combat, and a few of them even lived to tell the tale.....no matter how ridiculous it was.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alvin_C._York
Real life boss, takes on an army, captures 132 using a pistol.
*on a battlefield without shenanigans such as poisoning the water supply and so on. Proper use of equipment, one man can fight entire armies by themselves, look at most of the Medal of Honor recipients, several of them defeated armies by themselves, in combat, and a few of them even lived to tell the tale.....no matter how ridiculous it was.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alvin_C._York
Real life boss, takes on an army, captures 132 using a pistol.
Yeah, I know. I wasn't kidding about that. Alvin York isn't the only one, heck he's not even the most well-known, that would be Audie Murphy, who defeated an army from on top of a burning tank. He went on to get addicted to opiates, just so he could drop it cold-turkey through sheer manliness. He also made some movies, that he had to tone down, because no one would believe what he had done.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Tony Stark is either an Expert with Improved Unarmed Strike or an Artificer, with his 'spells' replaced by technology.
He is also the smartest 'straight' human on the planet (he can beat Reed Richards at chess), and he has considerably more social skills then Mr. F. The only person who can truly match his array of skills is the Black Panther, who is technically more then human.
But Tony is also very high level. He's good at fighting because he's high level, not because he's a fighter type. Serious fighter-types in Marvel kick his unarmored ass all the time, but mooks and normal folks? Yeah, he can beat them around, they constantly underestimate his physical ability because of his genius defining him.
He's one of the top ten intellects on the planet, and probably only Mr. F and Doom can rival him in technology. He MAKES most of the stuff Mr. F designs. He knows government, he knows business, he knows people. He has THE best suit of armor on the planet, much as Doom might wish to say otherwise.
Personally, I'd make him an expert with the Crafting feats, and basically unlimited funds. He has the 'batman' edge as far as gear goes...unlimited funds mean unlimited toys.
He's also a major heavy hitter for the Avengers, make no mistake. Being a genius and having a suit that lets you function as a melee tank or archer killer is VERY handy. As for most of the comparisons with mages...he can replicate most of those with tech, or BLOCK them with tech. It generally comes down to the fact that tech is vulnerable to magic, and how good the enemy caster is.
---------------
As for Fighters, I'm amazed no one came up with Captain AMerica, who is basically an idealized Fighter (with all stats at human maximum, 23 or so...or higher, depending on what the super-soldier template gives out). I would call Batman a Ranger (FE: Human highest) more then anything else.
Note there's going to be a breakdown in capability with stats vs the Marvel system, because the 50 ton str range is about Str 60 in d20 terms, and class 100 is about 65.
A 32 Strength allows you to lift 1 ton. Every ten points, x4. Spiderman, if he's in the 15-20 Ton range, has an effective Str of AT LEAST 52.
There's thus a huge range of Strength from 'normal human' to 'more then human' to 'truly superhuman'. But you can't even benchpress a Buick until you have a Str of at least 36!
So, you're not going to see super-hero stuff strengthwise, because stats don't allow it.
On the other hand, tell me what stat is needed for:
The ability to see and dodge bullets (what coord?)
What's the DC of superscience checks?
Does Reed Richards even have an Int score, or just Intellectus of the moment? Hank Pym is the #1 biotech expert on Earth, and Reed could catch up to him if he just devoted a couple days to the science...
What IS Captain America's Charisma score, the greatest leader in the Marvel Universe? He's famous in OTHER GALAXIES. THOR, a Norse GOD, takes orders from him! As does the Submariner, who obeys no other man.
What's Wolverine's Wisdom score? He's over a hundred years old, relies on instinct and guts over intelligence, is EXTREMELY experienced even if his Charisma is base 6 (9 with age mods).
I'm not even going to touch effective Con scores. Captain America basically can't get tired fighting, Wolverine can move around all hacked up (yes, I know he's healing, but still!) and basically every superstrong character in the MU has some level of accelerated and super-effective healing or they'd end up paralyzed from all the superhuman combat they undertake.
Is Doctor Strange high Int, high Cha or high Wis? Because he uses aspects of all three.
etc etc.
==Aelryinth
Captain America is an idealized paladin, he can't heal, but that's because he sold all of his magic off for being able to beat the crap out of people with his bare hands, and considering that he can almost take on Tony Stark in single combat, he was built pretty well. Kind of horrifying to watch really. Yes, Cap will lose that fight, but he will make Tony work for it.
Cap literally doesn't get tired. Except when he was "killed", but that was more mental exhaustion, which is also something Cap doesn't usually get.
Tony is the engineer, he builds the future, which is why he can beat Reed at Chess.
Reed is the explorer, that's why he's capable of some crazy stuff, but it's usually incredibly impractical. Oddly: there is a comic book explorer who is better at it than Reed. Gina Diggers, the main character of Gold Digger. Her idea of a vacation spot is a virtually impenetrable fortress (that technically she wasn't allowed into, but that's never slowed her down before) to everyone else. "Hey, that's my picnic table!" *everyone else in the room turns and stares at her then says:"I'm sorry, what?!" Keep in mind, everyone else in the room, were literal dragons
Hank is the Scientist Supreme, because he does science for the sake of doing science. Which is kind of an odd descriptor since the Sorcerer Supreme doesn't do magic for the sake of doing magic, he does magic to protect the universe.
Actually Wolverine's charisma is very high, the ladies dig the smelly little ape, he commands the X-Men, his force of personality is spectacular, and when he wants you to know he's there, you will know he's there.
Doctor Strange simply has really high stats. Not only is he intelligent, charismatic, and wise (barring the retarded nonsense Bendis has been putting him through, it's painful). Doctor Strange is also an expert (borderline master) martial artist, being the Sorcerer Supreme means you need to be fast, and have a lot of constitution. His lowest stat is strength and it's still nothing to laugh at.
No, Logan's Charisma really is pretty low. He might have an 'animal magnetism' feat, but it only works on fighting women. What he's probably got are some skill ranks and an open mind, and a marked protective instinct towards women even if he's open-minded enough to let them do whatever they want to do.
He's a beer-swilling, foul-mouthed, cigar-smoking, rude, crude badass who is content to be led around rather then lead...he has to be appointed a leader, and he does well because he's got a hundred years of combat expertise. High Charisma would have him SEEKING to be the leader, even unconsciously. His Wisdom and understanding of combat get him drafted into the job. He's still low class at heart and doesn't care what others think of it. Remember, he's never far away from being a berserker!
Cyclops has the Charisma, that's why he's in charge, and why Wolvie defers to him. He's a leader and trained as such.
On Cap: Yeah, I always wonder what the Super Soldier template actually gives.
On Doc Strange: Yes, Wong taught him well. He's like Tony...he can beat up mooks and normal folks pretty well, but a real martial artist will clean his clock. He's got IUS, is all, and he's high level...a +10 BAB is VERY badass when your elite of elite soldiers is +6 BAB. Probably int or wis to damage, too.
==Aelryinth
How about Bane, then? The original, tactical genius one -- not Poison Ivy's man servant.
Bane is Spanish America's evil Batman. He has the partial respect of Ra'as Al Ghul, he's a master chess player (self-taught), a massively powerful combatant even without drugs, built himself up from nothing to become head of a criminal organization, and actually managed to BREAK Batman.
Just stat him up as a very superior human in all regards, and you're good to go.
As for levels? Urban Ranger, again. FE: HUman. It's so much stronger then any other melee class in a humanocentric world.
==Aelryinth
Wolverine doesn't usually lead, because he has issues, and he knows a leader shouldn't have as many issues as he has. He is the leader of the X-Men now (at least one of the teams) ever since he took off to rebuild the school. Wolverine has a history of being a leader, when he was with Weapon X, before they pissed him off one too many times, he was typically the one running the field ops. Plus he finds the idea of being responsible for the death of children abhorrent, though he's not entirely above killing them if they are a threat, he doesn't want the innocent blood on his hands.
Oddly enough, Deadpool (of all people, seriously WTF)draws the line at killing kids, which makes Ultimate Deadpool ironic, as that's all he seems to be willing to do.
But freezing time and creating demi-planes is?Low-tier superheroes anyway. You don't see anyone as the equal of even Iron Man in all of this, even at 20th level, much less someone more powerful.And some of us see that as a problem. In my opinion the non-magical capabilities of Thor (the super hero) line up with what a high level non-epic fighter should be capable of.Thor the Marvel superhero can press 100 tons, 200 tons with his magical belt and 10 times that while berserking that would be the equivalent of lifting 2000 medium cars... that is NOT somthing i would like to see in Pathfinder.
Well, yes, because casters are more powerful than non-casters. Those things are also done by the higher-order individuals in Marvel. Doctor Strange can casually make demi-planes, hell his house is one. Both Superman and Hercules(Marvel) can freeze time.
I think the fighter could also benefit from a slightly larger skill list, like give them 2 skills they can simply pick at first level.
I can't find any record of superman freezing time, though he can travel through it.
Also, I STRONGLY disagree with the philosophy of casters being stronger than non-casters. Casters have the versatility of being able to do almost anything they want, non-casters should be capable of a few limited feats equal to or exceeding those available by spells.
As a result, I see nothing wrong with a level 20 Fighter sundering a mountain in one blow (granted possibly as a Full Round Action special attack xD), for example.
It's not really a philosophy, it's the simple truth, when one type of class is allowed to disregard the laws of physics, while the rest languish with the restrictions of not being able to do anything even remotely similar, then they are clearly less powerful.
Superman can accelerate his superspeed to the point where time is basically frozen, it's just exhausting, so he doesn't usually do it, or think about doing it.
The fighters are not realistic. No one person can take on an entire army, but in the game they can. A level 10 fighter can take on a lot of CR 3 fighters or warriors.
That's a system issue, though.
I was referring to the gaming philosophy BS, not the facts of the game (which are as you say.)
As a side note... couldn't some of Sup's enemies do the same damned thing, so in the long run there's no net gain against those adversaries?
Personally I despise the "casters r god" nonsense.
Not really. The closest we got was Lex Luthor building a time machine out of some detritus (seriously, some of the parts were a can of beans, a banana peel, a bed spring, and a lightbulb)
@Kaeyoss:We've already provided a few examples of people, in real life, who took on armies, and not only lived to tell the tale, but also tended to die of old age.... or plane crashes.
Often when someone goes on about making fighters supernatural on these boards, someone else will rebuke with the idea that fighters should be bound by the laws of the world AKA they should be realistic. But are they really?
I've seen iconic examples of Wizards, Assassins, Rogues, Bards, Barbarians, and Paladins in stories and myths, but I don't think I've ever seen one of a straight fighter. I don't know of any fighting character that wasn't either charismatic, stealthy, or a barbarian.
In real life, what I know of both historical and modern armies is that they are actually trained in many non-combat skills as well. Making them closer to rangers than just fighters. Is there anyone in real life who is only skilled in the use of a single type of weapon?
Recently, I've seen many threads that want to combine rogues and fighters for mechanical reasons, but maybe they should be combined for flavor reasons, maybe call them mercenaries.
In it's place, the Ninja should be left (magic wielding assassin is probably what the rogue should have been).Or perhaps I'm just missing something?
After reading your post, and a number of responses, and your responses to those responses, I agree with you.
It's true that virtually every archtype that has been mentioned would be more appropriately made with some OTHER class. Ranger is probably the most common go-to class for fitting martial characters who do more than beat things with sticks, with Barbarian generally fitting the rest. Likewise, "Fighter" has the same flavor as the "Warrior" NPC-class, in that it's a guy who fights stuff. The only difference is one gets bonus feats and cool abilities, and one is just a perfect base attack and some proficiencies.
For example, even Miyamoto Musashi who is famous for his swordsmanship, is really poorly represented by a Fighter. There is little to suggest that he wore much in the way of armor, for example (something Fighters do or lose out on their abilities). Virtually every other iconic example of a warrior in real life would probably be better suited as a barbarian, ranger, or even bard in some cases (particularly those who are strong leaders and tacticians).
Barbarians make for better Samurai. I realize that might crack the minds of some people who cannot let go of fluff, but it's true. They are amazingly well suited for it (they're tough, fight well, have the skill points for investiture in various noble skills, tend to wear medium or lighter armor while remaining mobile, and rage is excellent for those moments of iconic, gritty determination to fight without fear of death). Barbarians are also generally better for your typical warrior archtypes, since they are equally skilled with multiple weapons, have that gritty fallback, and tend to be pretty tough, all the while moving very well in stuff like chainmail.
Rangers make better elite soldiers. Most are exceptionally skilled in both melee and ranged combat, wear light to medium armor, are competent at tactical maneuvers and espionage, are more likely to spot ambushes and the like, and are often trained for survival. Best yet, even if they dumped Intelligence hardcore (say they were trained as warriors and only as warriors from an early age) they still get at least 4 skill points per level: enough for Perception, Ride, Survival, and a fourth skill of their choice, such as Diplomacy, Intimidate, Knowledge (Any), Perform (any), and so forth. Heck, humans get 5, making it easier!
About the only "archtype" that the Fighter somewhat manages to do better than other classes is the ultimate weapon specialist. Y'know, that guy who mastered the sword/axe/bow/whatever to the highest degree. Thing is, that's a pretty lame archtype, and far from any of the archtypes Fighters are portrayed with. Worse yet, even if you're going for that archtype, they are still pretty much about wearing heavy armor and such; so the wandering swordsman sort of deal, again, isn't much of an option thematically.
Tome of Battle helped fix this in the extreme, but was poorly received by those who felt it stepped on the toes of the existing 3.x core martial characters. However, it helped this problem by giving their version of the "Fighter", the Warblade, several key differences than the core Fighter. The first was 2 more skill points and additional class skills, including some knowledge and social skills. This meant he could still be decent outside of combat. The class also rewards having an above-average Intelligence, as it has several abilities that benefit from it. Finally, it excelled at allowing you to emulate different martial styles with its maneuver system. Mechanically, it made almost any option into a decent option (with Tome of Battle, it really doesn't matter if you're a 2 hander, sword & board, or dual wield, and has nice things for all of those).
======================
Coming at this from another angle, I've played my share of Fighters in my years playing D&D. I've had some that were quite enjoyable. I've also used them to demonstrate that you can make rich, full-characters, with some practical optimization using a Fighter. I don't dislike Fighters.
Truly though, there's little you're going to be able to do as a strait-classed Fighter that wouldn't be better as something else. Fighter is – perhaps sadly - essentially the seasoning for building characters that need a splash more martial ability. The "fighter-dip" is alive and well. It's still one of the best options for grabbing an HP buff, +2 BAB, +3 Fort, 2 bonus feats, and proficiency in nearly everything on God's green earth (that is to say: simple & martial weapons, all armor, and all shields including tower shields). I'd say they're easily right up their with Monks as far as attractive dipping classes go.
Pathfinder has gone a long way to remedy the Fighters skill issues though. With favored class bonuses, you can be assured at least 2 skill points per level regardless of race and Intelligence score, and humans can get 3 per level with a 7 Intelligence. Couple this with the fact there are no cross-class penalties anymore, and you can have a Fighter who is at least proficient in a variety of different specializations (over 20 levels you should be able to toss a few ranks into some pretty random stuff and get decent "take 10" capabilities).
So for the first time, it's actually possible to have a Fighter who isn't a patsy for walking into ambushes, and who might be able to negotiate with an enemy leader, or even investigate a crime scene. Just everyone else does it better. But I guess you're a Fighter, so that's OK, 'cause your concept was "tons of damage and armor class"; and that's OK too. :P
On the direct subject as to realism versus fantasy, Fighters do fall short here. Barbarians, the other "mundane" warrior class can do stuff like heal themselves, grow fangs and claws (or just make use of their existing appendages more violently), ignore stab wounds (go-go gadget damage reduction), and so forth.
Characters enter the realm of the fantastic as early as 5th or 6th level. At this point they can take 10 and laugh at olympic athletes while out-classing them at their own game, wearing armor no less. Exceptionally powerful "mundane" creatures in D&D aren't really all that mundane. For example:
Clear Mind (Ex): A barbarian may reroll a failed Will save. This power is used as an immediate action after the first save is attempted, but before the results are revealed by the GM. The barbarian must take the second result, even if it is worse. A barbarian must be at least 8th level before selecting this power. This power can only be used once per rage.
Fearless Rage (Ex): While raging, the barbarian is immune to the shaken and frightened conditions. A barbarian must be at least 12th level before selecting this rage power.
Guarded Stance (Ex): The barbarian gains a +1 dodge bonus to her Armor Class against melee attacks for a number of rounds equal to the barbarian's current Constitution modifier (minimum 1). This bonus increases by +1 for every 6 levels the barbarian has attained. Activating this ability is a move action that does not provoke an attack of opportunity.
Increased Damage Reduction (Ex): The barbarian's damage reduction increases by 1/—. This increase is always active while the barbarian is raging. A barbarian can select this rage power up to three times. Its effects stack. A barbarian must be at least 8th level before selecting this rage power.
Internal Fortitude (Ex): While raging, the barbarian is immune to the sickened and nauseated conditions. A barbarian must be at least 8th level before selecting this rage power.
Intimidating Glare (Ex): The barbarian can make an Intimidate check against one adjacent foe as a move action. If the barbarian successfully demoralizes her opponent, the foe is shaken for 1d4 rounds + 1 round for every 5 points by which the barbarian's check exceeds the DC.
Knockback (Ex): Once per round, the barbarian can make a bull rush attempt against one target in place of a melee attack. If successful, the target takes damage equal to the barbarian's Strength modifier and is moved back as normal. The barbarian does not need to move with the target if successful. This does not provoke an attack of opportunity.
Low-Light Vision (Ex): The barbarian's senses sharpen and she gains low-light vision while raging.
Mighty Swing (Ex): The barbarian automatically confirms a critical hit. This power is used as an immediate action once a critical threat has been determined. A barbarian must be at least 12th level before selecting this power. This power can only be used once per rage.
Moment of Clarity (Ex): The barbarian does not gain any benefits or take any of the penalties from rage for 1 round. Activating this power is a swift action. This includes the penalty to Armor Class and the restriction on what actions can be performed. This round still counts against her total number of rounds of rage per day. This power can only be used once per rage.
Night Vision (Ex): The barbarian's senses grow incredibly sharp while raging and she gains darkvision 60 feet. A barbarian must have low-light vision as a rage power or a racial trait to select this rage power.
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. This power can only be used once per rage.
Powerful Blow (Ex): The barbarian gains a +1 bonus on a single damage roll. This bonus increases by +1 for every 4 levels the barbarian has attained. This power is used as a swift action before the roll to hit is made. This power can only be used once per rage.
Quick Reflexes (Ex): While raging, the barbarian can make one additional attack of opportunity per round.
Raging Climber (Ex): When raging, the barbarian adds her level as an enhancement bonus on all Climb skill checks.
Raging Leaper (Ex): When raging, the barbarian adds her level as an enhancement bonus on all Acrobatics skill checks made to jump. When making a jump in this way, the barbarian is always considered to have a running start.
Raging Swimmer (Ex): When raging, the barbarian adds her level as an enhancement bonus on all Swim skill checks.
Renewed Vigor (Ex): As a standard action, the barbarian heals 1d8 points of damage + her Constitution modifier. For every four levels the barbarian has attained above 4th, this amount of damage healed increases by 1d8, to a maximum of 5d8 at 20th level. A barbarian must be at least 4th level before selecting this power. This power can be used only once per day and only while raging.
Rolling Dodge (Ex): The barbarian gains a +1 dodge bonus to her Armor Class against ranged attacks for a number of rounds equal to the barbarian's current Constitution modifier (minimum 1). This bonus increases by +1 for every 6 levels the barbarian has attained. Activating this ability is a move action that does not provoke an attack of opportunity.
Roused Anger (Ex): The barbarian may enter a rage even if fatigued. While raging after using this ability, the barbarian is immune to the fatigued condition. Once this rage ends, the barbarian is exhausted for 10 minutes per round spent raging.
Scent (Ex): The barbarian gains the scent ability while raging and can use this ability to locate unseen foes (see Special Abilities for rules on the scent ability).
Strength Surge (Ex): The barbarian adds her barbarian level on one Strength check or combat maneuver check, or to her Combat Maneuver Defense when an opponent attempts a maneuver against her. This power is used as an immediate action. This power can only be used once per rage.
Superstition (Ex): The barbarian gains a +2 morale bonus on saving throws made to resist spells, supernatural abilities, and spell-like abilities. This bonus increases by +1 for every 4 levels the barbarian has attained. While raging, the barbarian cannot be a willing target of any spell and must make saving throws to resist all spells, even those cast by allies.
Surprise Accuracy (Ex): The barbarian gains a +1 morale bonus on one attack roll. This bonus increases by +1 for every 4 levels the barbarian has attained. This power is used as a swift action before the roll to hit is made. This power can only be used once per rage.
Swift Foot (Ex): The barbarian gains a 5-foot enhancement bonus to her speed. This increase is always active while the barbarian is raging. A barbarian can select this rage power up to three times. Its effects stack.
Terrifying Howl (Ex): The barbarian unleashes a terrifying howl as a standard action. All shaken enemies within 30 feet must make a Will save (DC equal to 10 + 1/2 the barbarian's level + the barbarian's Strength modifier) or be panicked for 1d4+1 rounds. Once an enemy has made a save versus terrifying howl (successful or not), it is immune to this power for 24 hours. A barbarian must have the intimidating glare rage power to select this rage power. A barbarian must be at least 8th level before selecting this power.
Unexpected Strike (Ex): The barbarian can make an attack of opportunity against a foe that moves into any square threatened by the barbarian, regardless of whether or not that movement would normally provoke an attack of opportunity. This power can only be used once per rage. A barbarian must be at least 8th level before selecting this power.
Uncanny Dodge (Ex): At 2nd level, a barbarian gains the ability to react to danger before her senses would normally allow her to do so. She cannot be caught flat-footed, even if the attacker is invisible. She still loses her Dexterity bonus to AC if immobilized. A barbarian with this ability can still lose her Dexterity bonus to AC if an opponent successfully uses the feint action against her.
If a barbarian already has uncanny dodge from a different class, she automatically gains improved uncanny dodge (see below) instead.
Trap Sense (Ex): At 3rd level, a barbarian gains a +1 bonus on Reflex saves made to avoid traps and a +1 dodge bonus to AC against attacks made by traps. These bonuses increase by +1 every three barbarian levels thereafter (6th, 9th, 12th, 15th, and 18th level). Trap sense bonuses gained from multiple classes stack.
Improved Uncanny Dodge (Ex): At 5th level and higher, a barbarian can no longer be flanked. This defense denies a rogue the ability to sneak attack the barbarian by flanking her, unless the attacker has at least four more rogue levels than the target has barbarian levels.
If a character already has uncanny dodge (see above) from another class, the levels from the classes that grant uncanny dodge stack to determine the minimum rogue level required to flank the character.
Damage Reduction (Ex): At 7th level, a barbarian gains damage reduction. Subtract 1 from the damage the barbarian takes each time she is dealt damage from a weapon or a natural attack. At 10th level, and every three barbarian levels thereafter (13th, 16th, and 19th level), this damage reduction rises by 1 point. Damage reduction can reduce damage to 0 but not below 0.
Greater Rage (Ex): At 11th level, when a barbarian enters rage, the morale bonus to her Strength and Constitution increases to +6 and the morale bonus on her Will saves increases to +3.
Indomitable Will (Ex): While in rage, a barbarian of 14th level or higher gains a +4 bonus on Will saves to resist enchantment spells. This bonus stacks with all other modifiers, including the morale bonus on Will saves she also receives during her rage.
Tireless Rage (Ex): Starting at 17th level, a barbarian no longer becomes fatigued at the end of her rage.
Mighty Rage (Ex): At 20th level, when a barbarian enters rage, the morale bonus to her Strength and Constitution increases to +8 and the morale bonus on her Will saves increases to +4.
Look at some of the abilities Barbarians get. Some of them are so very far beyond mundane normalcy, but they are all Ex abilities. In D&D terms, that means they are not magical, but the result of the barbarian's pure awesomeness made manifest (or something like that). They don't wink out in an antimagic field, they aren't dispel-able, and so on and so forth. In short, they are wonderful examples of pseudo-magical abilities that aren't.
A sufficiently high level "mundane" should be able to do sufficiently high level things. We're talking guys who can literally deflect bullets with their swords, cross blades with balors while gliding across rivers of lava, or basically doing things that skinny androgynous jRPG characters can do before breakfast. :P
===============================================================
I know people are going to hate to hear it, but Warcraft and World of Warcraft succeeded in this regard. Love it or hate it, the warriors in WoW are actually excellent examples of what high-level characters should be capable of. In WoW, warriors begin with pretty mundane abilities. "Heroic Strike" is basically a swift-action for more damage on a single attack. "Rend" causes a bit of bleed damage for a duration. "Shield bash" is a light damage attack that interrupts spells. Really simple, mundane stuff like that.
Then you get to their high level abilities...
Stuff like "Shield Reflect" where they can literally smash an incoming spell back at a spellcaster. "Bladestorm" where they literally turn into a moving blender with their weapon, inflicting heavy damage to everything around them for a set duration (imagine turning your full-attack into an AoE). "Shattering Throw" is a move where they throw a weapon at a foe and break shields or wards on their foe (imagine if your Fighter slapped a wizard and took out his stoneskin or temporary hit points). "Shockwave" slams the ground in front of the warrior and unleashes a powerful concussive force that damages and stuns all foes in a forward cone. "Titan's Grip" allows the warrior to wield 2-handed weapons in one hand and dual-wield them like light weapons. "Warbringer" is a talent (like a feat) warriors can get that can let them break from snares to charge foes (this would be like getting freedom of movement for 1 round to charge foes, possibly getting out of stuff like entangle or webs in the process). "Shield Slam" is acquired at mid-levels and hits an opponent for heavy damage and removes a buff (hit the spellcaster and possibly dispel a buff is pretty nice), and can remove multiple buffs later on.
They do all of these things while being "mundane". Being silenced doesn't bother them. They have no mana (in fact, their mechanics work more like Pathfinder barbarian rage powers in some ways). They just rock faces with their abilities. Couple this with the option to change stances and equipment as needed (dropping to defensive stance reduces incoming damage by 10% which can allow you to survive certain nova tactics, then swapping to battle stance to hamstring your foe so they cannot escape, then and being able to go into berserker stance to pop recklessness so your next 3 special attacks are auto-criticals) and you have a very versatile and intriguing class to play.
Now before everyone begins complaining about getting my peanut butter in your chocolate (or WoW in your D&D), don't miss the forest for the trees here. The point is, there are definite game-design elements that we can examine to reap some positive influences from. The idea that the 20th level superhuman that fights demons isn't just some guy with a pointy stick that is more accurate with that pointy stick is one such design element.
On the Other Hand: I suppose Warriors in WoW are probably closer to Barbarians in Pathfinder terms. They got cool abilities they fuel with rage, begin wight light and medium armor proficiency and get heavy proficiency much later on, and have a lot of barbarianesque abilities like berserker rage. Oh well, Fighters can't have nice things.
I was referring to the gaming philosophy BS, not the facts of the game (which are as you say.)
As a side note... couldn't some of Sup's enemies do the same damned thing, so in the long run there's no net gain against those adversaries?
Personally I despise the "casters r god" nonsense.
Not really. The closest we got was Lex Luthor building a time machine out of some detritus (seriously, some of the parts were a can of beans, a banana peel, a bed spring, and a lightbulb)
@Kaeyoss:We've already provided a few examples of people, in real life, who took on armies, and not only lived to tell the tale, but also tended to die of old age.... or plane crashes.
Speaking of taking on armies, most characters can do so with a sufficiently high level. I once played a tiefling conjurer/malconvoker who eventually became a half-fiend at very high levels. At 20th level, she was more than capable of soloing an army without resorting to spellcasting. With her bite, claws, armor, damage reductions, base attack (+10 BAB is sucktastic at 20th level but it's damn impressive to the rest of the world), and so forth, she could happily wade into a battalion of soldiers (who would probably be 1st - 6th level warriors). The party's kobold-lich sorcerer would be equally adept at army slaughtering if he desired (but he was generally too busy growing family members in vats). As could the party's abjurer/abjurant champion, who's favorite "staff" was actually an axe. :P
Honestly, level means a lot. I mean a lot a lot. :O
|
Proper use of equipment, one man can fight entire armies by themselves, look at most of the Medal of Honor recipients, several of them defeated armies by themselves, in combat, and a few of them even lived to tell the tale.....no matter how ridiculous it was.Good fighters can do that in real life Wraithstrike, though they tend to use tricks, traps, and shenanigans instead of just a weapon. Naturally there are some exceptions to this.
I think that most soldiers/fighty-types, are a mix of fighter and ranger. Pretty much all of them taking Iron Will at 3rd level, or simply getting it at that level.
They can do what exactly? If you mean take on an army, I was specifically talking about taking on an army in a straight* fight which can't be done in real life.
*on a battlefield without shenanigans such as poisoning the water supply and so on.
I remember one story about a dude that held off an huge amount of men with a machine gun and some very good use of grenades....He ended up killing over 50 guys using up all of his bullets and grenades and either the rest of the group attacking him fled or were killed. He got some sort of medal and I seem to remember he was of Asian decent but in the US forces. Wish I had more info and could be more accurate with it.
I remember one story about a dude that held off an huge amount of men with a machine gun and some very good use of grenades....He ended up killing over 50 guys using up all of his bullets and grenades and either the rest of the group attacking him fled or were killed. He got some sort of medal and I seem to remember he was of Asian decent but in the US forces. Wish I had more info and could be more accurate with it.
Go to Cracked.com, they have tons of those stories.
I'm glad so many people love the Barbarian class, and it is a good class. But I feel most of the examples people have given of characters from fantasy who were fighters were neither Barbarians ("Flail madly and hope you kill them before your momentary rage wears off!") or Rangers ("Focus your killing knowledge on a few foes and lay ambushes whenever possible.") The Fighter archetype - I'm not saying the class meets it 100% - is someone to whom violence is not a berserker rage or a matter of stealth. There are archetypes for whom heavy armor and a simple, scientific knowledge of slaughter are the best fits.
The problem I have with this position is that it's not true. You're pidgeon-holing both the barbarian and the ranger based on what you think they should do, not what they do. See, I noted before that the Barbarian class can be used pretty much as-is to build an iconic japanese samurai. Definitely not your "flail madly and hope you kill them" archtype.
See, the thing is, all that is required to be a great warrior is having a good base attack bonus and a decent feat or two. Let's look at what Barbarians and Rangers get in terms of combat prowess.
Barbarian
At 1st-4th level (the "mundane levels") the Barbarian and Fighter are pretty much on the same footing here, even in combat. Both are probably wearing medium armor (given full plate is prohibitively expensive at this level). Barbarians begin moving 40 ft in light, 30 ft in medium, with fighters moving 30/20, until 4th level where they get 30/30. The barbarian's "rage" isn't something they should even need to go into unless they want to. The majority of the time, their BAB + Strength + Power Attack is sufficient to deal with most foes. A smart barbarian carries a few ranged weapons (slings are wonderful at this level, but a composite bow is great when you have the cash), and probably a shield for when he needs more AC (compliments chain mail well).
Ranger
The ranger meanwhile is back to the same deal. Excels in both melee and ranged combat (switch-hit rangers are very nice), is good in light and medium armor (and can even sleep in them without being fatigued), and has a lot of useful class skills and room for cross-classing other skills when they're comfortable with what they have (a few ranks in survival and you can handle yourself in the wild, so maybe you'll put some of those points into something else at later levels, for example). The ranger excels at the tactical fighter roles.
Both the Barbarian AND Ranger also have Perception, which means they aren't ambush-fodder, and are more likely to excel and noticing enemies at longer distances, just being more keen in general.
The Fighter has to reach about 5th level before he has any major advantages over the Barbarian and Ranger, and that's only with his favorite weapon (weapon focus->specialization->weapon training), and then that's seriously only for hit and damage. Again, Barbarian and Ranger own the Fighter in terms of cool abilities, out of combat usefulness, and ability to fill different archtypes.
Also, aside from the fact that not every warrior who meets the enemy head-on is a berserker, the fighter has an extremely valuable role as a low-mechanics, easy-to-play and easy-to-understand class for new players. I wouldn't defend the fighter just on that basis, but it is one of my top 3 recommendations for people who've never played Pathfinder or its ancestors before.
The problem is that the 3.x Fighters aren't really that great for newbies unless you're going to hold their hand the whole time. It's amazingly easy to make a Fighter that sucks. Pick a few feats that aren't great for your build and you buy a ticket to sucksville. Barbarians and Rangers are pretty hard to screw up given a decent starting package.
I'd say Rangers are probably the best class to learn the game with. Presenting them with a switch-hitter build gives them strong ability in both melee and ranged combat. They also have enough skill points that you can introduce the player to a number of skills and the skill system more readily. They are proficient in light and medium armor and have reasons to try either, making it easy to experience the benefits of each. Finally, at 4th level they get both an animal companion and a handful of prepared spells, which means after they get the basics down, they get to explore how spellcasting works, and how to control a single minion in a controlled environment (and that minion could be a horse or something if they want to try a mount).
Fighters on the other hand just introduce players to a single facet of the game. Hit and damage rolls. Not much else.
I remember one story about a dude that held off an huge amount of men with a machine gun and some very good use of grenades....He ended up killing over 50 guys using up all of his bullets and grenades and either the rest of the group attacking him fled or were killed. He got some sort of medal and I seem to remember he was of Asian decent but in the US forces. Wish I had more info and could be more accurate with it.
He was a Ghurka soldier with the british army's Ghurka division in Afghanistan. I don't remember if it was our embassy or the British one he was guarding i think at one point he also threw the empty machine gun off the roof to try and repel the attack. Another Ghurka in India fought off 30 train robbers and killed 8. With his Kukri, you know THAT Kukri, yea they invented it. They were so good at guerrilla warfare with it the British just made them part of the army because they couldn't pacify them as a colonized population and were tired of loosing men/ having them maimed.
Ohh and of course after all their service in WWII, and beyond to this day they are not guaranteed British citizenship after their tour of duty and receive a lower benefits package than the rest of the British army :(
I'm glad so many people love the Barbarian class, and it is a good class. But I feel most of the examples people have given of characters from fantasy who were fighters were neither Barbarians ("Flail madly and hope you kill them before your momentary rage wears off!") or Rangers ("Focus your killing knowledge on a few foes and lay ambushes whenever possible.") The Fighter archetype - I'm not saying the class meets it 100% - is someone to whom violence is not a berserker rage or a matter of stealth. There are archetypes for whom heavy armor and a simple, scientific knowledge of slaughter are the best fits.
Scientific knowledge... with a class for whom Int is a common dump stat, whose sole benefit from intelligence is more skill points, AND who's primary tactic is the same exact thing over and over again? (Sure you can roleplay it differently, but hitting it with a stick for HP damage is STILL hitting it with a stick for HP damage.)
Hate to tell you this mate, but Warblade does the 'scientific knowledge of slaughter' concept leagues better than the Fighter.
Sadly, so does the Barbarian and Ranger. Fighters have a special knowledge of a weapon (or small subsection of weapons) which lets them hit with those weapons better. That's about as far as their "scientific knowledge of slaughter" goes. It's about as much scientific knowledge of slaughter as taking the Power Attack feat is. :P
If you actually wanted to argue Knowledge, even a Barbarian or Ranger who dump Intelligence like it was toxic still has enough skill points to invest in a few class-skill knowledges like Nature and Dungeoneering, which means they actually might know how to slaughter a wide variety of things (1 rank, +3, -2 Int = +2 modifier at 1st level).
Barbarians aren't about learning how to ascend to some higher awareness of a single weapon. They're about beating up bad-guys with whatever is on hand. A barbarian is the type of hero whose awesomeness comes from himself, not his well-balanced scimitar. Sword, axe, bow, club, fist, it is clobberin' time.
Rangers on the other hand learn to get impressive bonuses versus wide varieties of enemies. At 20th level, a ranger has 5 different types of favored enemies, which should probably include Aberrations, Constructs, Magical Beasts, Outsiders (Evil), and Undead. If he balanced them out, he could have a +4, +4, +4, +4, +2, or specialize more heavily on one or two than the others. Keep in mind that bonus applies to hit and damage, and Bluff, Knowledge, Perception, Sense Motive, and Survival checks against those creature types.
Seriously, there's nothing special for Fighters as far as A) tactical knowledge, B) general combat knowledge, or C) knowledge of your enemies and how to kill them, that the other martial classes aren't equal or better at.
Fighters whack things with sticks. I say this as someone who LIKES Fighters, and rarely plays Barbarians. :P
Fighter is a two-level prestige class with no prerequisites.
:)
*chuckles*
Y'know, playing a multiclass abomination can be pretty interesting actually. Fighter is a fair dip for such as well.
Monk 2 / Fighter 2 / Ranger 2 / Barbarian 2 / Bard 2 / Cleric 2 / Alchemist 2 / Magus 2 / Inquisitor 2 / Cavalier 2
Hp: 106.5 (2d12+6d10+10d8)
BAB: +15/+10/+5
Fort: +24
Refl: +12
Will: +15
Skill Points: 80
Class Skills: All (I think)
Cantrips/Orisons
Spellcasting Access
I don't recommend this build for just anyone, but it can be pretty fun. It's essentially a class-sampler of a lot of different things. In the hands of an experienced player, it is actually very user friendly. Its pros include extreme versatility with skills, fair attack bonus, and excellent durability (its base saving throws are very nice), as well as having a variety of useful abilities including (but not limited to): Rage + 1 power, Uncanny Dodge, Evasion, lots of bonus feats, proficiency in everything, the ability to detect any alignment, lots of 0 level utility spells, access to a wide variety of spells via spell-trigger items, and so forth. Weaknesses include lack of high-level abilities.
Oh man I want to write up a level progression for that character now.
Haha. Nice.
I recommend beginning as a martial class. My recommendation is Barbarian for the first level, because it's a very good foundation. Alternatively, you could go ahead and get the first two monk levels out of the way (shifting away from Lawful by 3rd level), but it depends on which point in your character's story you want him to train as a martial artist.
For the first 6 levels, Barbarian 2 / Monk 2 / Ranger 2 will serve you well. You'll have a +9 Fort, +6 Ref, +3 Will, Uncanny Dodge, and Evasion, as well as unarmed proficiencies, 2 bonus feats, 1 weapon style feat, fast movement, favored enemy, track, and rage. At this point, it's not a bad time to decide between picking up some magic or going for your +6/+1 BAB. If you decide on the BAB, I'd grab 2 levels of Fighter, netting 2 bonus feats, +2 BAB (+7/+2), and Fort +12 in the process. The first magic class I'd advise entering (whether at 7th, 8th, or 9th level) is either bard or cleric (both can use wands to heal people and have some nice 0-level spells, but bard has more skill points, bardic music, and bardic knowledge, so I'd recommend bard).
Alternatively, consider alternating early on. Dipping into at least one of the magic using classes early can get you some nice utility spells, including detect poison, detect magic, prestidigitation, and light. Very handy.
If you look at what would maximize a fighter's stats as a min/maxer, you will end up with a skill-less fighter who only swings their sword.
If you look at other options for getting what you want as a roleplayer, you will end up with a skilled fighter who is only slightly less powerful.
Helaman said it all.
Seriously, there's nothing special for Fighters as far as A) tactical knowledge, B) general combat knowledge, or C) knowledge of your enemies and how to kill them, that the other martial classes aren't equal or better at.
I would have to disagree with this. The number of feats that a fighter can obtain can give him a lot of general knowledge and techniques or he can be more specialized. He won't necessarily know more about a single type of enemy, but his knowledge of overall combat can be better than other classes. It's all going to come down to how you define your fighter's abilities. Maybe the fighter has ranks in Knowledge (dungeoneering) and has taken the Penetrating Strike feat. This is explained by saying that many creatures he knows have damage reduction. He has learned how to bypass this problem.
Seriously, there's nothing special for Fighters as far as A) tactical knowledge, B) general combat knowledge, or C) knowledge of your enemies and how to kill them, that the other martial classes aren't equal or better at.I would have to disagree with this. The number of feats that a fighter can obtain can give him a lot of general knowledge and techniques or he can be more specialized. He won't necessarily know more about a single type of enemy, but his knowledge of overall combat can be better than other classes. It's all going to come down to how you define your fighter's abilities. Maybe the fighter has ranks in Knowledge (dungeoneering) and has taken the Penetrating Strike feat. This is explained by saying that many creatures he knows have damage reduction. He has learned how to bypass this problem.
I'm not really impressed here. All you really need to be good at combat maneuvers and such is a good BAB, a Good Strength, and possibly a good Dexterity (because Weapon Finesse maneuvers can result in some heavy CMB modifiers with the right weapons). There's really only a handful of feats you need to make someone who is versatile with maneuvers, and honestly most of them aren't worth it. Improved Trip isn't very impressive since it has some harsh prerequisites, only provides a +2, and you can generally get around AoOs with reached weapons. Improved Disarm is similar. Improved Grapple isn't terrible, but Barbarians are going to come ahead of Fighters in this regard because they can easily grab a Rage Power that gives benefits to grapples, apply their rage modifiers to the grapple, and so forth. Grappling isn't a good idea for super-specialization though, since by 7th level you will begin to see stuff like freedom of movement becoming more common.
As noted before, a fighter's great for dipping. Hell, Fighter 2 / anything 15 gets you 2 bonus feats and total proficiency in all but exotics. Fighter 4 / anything else gives you the ability to move around at full speed in medium armor (making it a solid dip for both barbarians AND rangers). Fighter 5 / anything else gives you access to Weapon Training I, and with gloves of dueling gives you a +3/+3 with your weapon group and immunizes you versus disarming.
That's a wonderful dip for virtually any martial class who wants to prance around at full speed in mithral plate mail while enjoying their class features (like barbarians and rangers), and the +3/+3 on top of their usual bonuses is pretty sexy too. Hell, you don't even have to miss out on Tireless Rage since a dip into Oracle lets you trade fast movement for immunity to fatigue, allowing you to rage-cycle as early as 9th level, and gives access divine spellcasting and War Sight (War Sight (Su): Whenever you roll for initiative, you can roll twice and take either result. At 7th level, you can always act in the surprise round, but if you fail to notice the ambush, you act last, regardless of your initiative result (you act in the normal order in following rounds). At 11th level, you can roll for initiative three times and take any one of the results.) allowing you to roll twice for Initiative.
So, like I said, Fighter is a great dipping class. Problem with the fighter from an archtype standpoint is they are non-existent in flavor of any sort, and don't lend themselves well to different archtypes that involve more than "Wear armor and hit stuff", which anyone can do.
Also, the Fighter's feat selection is a bit disheartening. See, they eventually get some semi-cool stuff, but most of the Fighter-only feats aren't very good, interesting, or available early on. Deadly Stroke is probably one of my favorites, but it takes a lot of setup and then doesn't do enough to make it worth the investment (it's the last step of a very long feat chain, requires your foe to be suffering one of two status conditions, and then you must use a melee weapon to make a single attack for double damage (as opposed to a full-attack) and inflict some Constitution bleed, which would be cool if the monster isn't already setup to get raeped since it's in melee with you, stunned, and getting pounded on).
Let's not forget the fact that the core game expects 15 point buy. Pathfinder society is a bit more generous with 20 points, but even then you can have some issues being effective while qualifying for different feats with all their requirements. Two-weapon Fighting requires 15 Dex minimum, Combat Expertise is Int 13, Will saves are based on Wisdom, and Strength and Constitution are kinda your main stats.
While Fighters get tons of feats, unless they're going archery or perhaps dual-wielding, then they have an over-abundance. Barbarians and Rangers can cruise comfortably in combat with a handful of feats (after Power Attack everything else is gravy melee-wise, and switch-hitter rangers use their style mastery to spec archery while pulling melee naturally with a 2 hander).
So exactly what is it that Fighters are so good at? How are they so versatile and combat-educated, when it's entirely possible to do be a generalist with their rivals without even investing tons of feats, and being able to contribute outside of combat as well?
Well, I do know some things Fighters are better at. Killing, and killing more. They are so heavily focused on killtastic killing in a very narrow specialization that they rock socks when they're doing it. Fighters, or at the very least Fighter-dips make double-weapon or bow specialists shine. Tons and tons of feats to invest in these very specific styles that are sickeningly awesome (and I think that's great!) when brandished in their full glory. If you want some guy that's going to take an arch-devil apart at the seams in 6.0 seconds, the Fighter is probably your guy.
As for having cool abilities that make them interesting, tactical options, or just fitting different types of archtypes, they pretty much don't.
Other than a Fighter name me a class with an archetype and Feat that allow you to leap from horseback deal your charge damage and pogo back to the saddle.
Other than a Fighter name me a class with an archetype and Feat that allow you to leap from horseback deal your charge damage and pogo back to the saddle.
That's more "wtf" than archetypal. :P
UPDATE!
I did think of an archtype that the Fighter excels pretty well. Mounted archery. The only problem they have is they don't actually get an animal companion, so in some ways a ranger or cavalier might be a bit better in terms of having a guaranteed mount, but they have enough feats to pimp archery and mounted combat, and have both Handle Animal and Ride, which makes them pretty good for huns-style mounted full-attacks.
Hmmm...actually, scratch that. I think ranger is still better. The more I think about it, they get the animal companion for free, the archery stuff for free (leaving them with feats to spec mounted combat adequately as well as Power Attack for lancing folks), and do the lightly armored mounted guy routine better (freedom of movement at higher levels is also a nice buff for your horse).
Err...maybe Fighter 5 / Ranger 15. :D
EDIT: Actually, if you have access to a Pathfinder-ized version of the Animal Cohort feat that is available on the 3.5 web enhancements (essentially it's a feat that would give you an animal companion like a ranger or animal domain druid, as in a bit weaker than a normal animal companion), the Fighter could grab a companion pet making it more viable. ^.^
They were so good at guerrilla warfare with it the British just made them part of the army because they couldn't pacify them as a colonized population and were tired of loosing men/ having them maimed.Ohh and of course after all their service in WWII, and beyond to this day they are not guaranteed British citizenship after their tour of duty and receive a lower benefits package than the rest of the British army :(
The Ghurkas entered British service because they were impressed with the British :) They had been raiding northern India for years. A British officer and some Indian soldiers were sent to deal with it. When the Ghurkas showed the Indian troops ran away. The British officer refused to surrender despite being vastly outnumbered and facing certain death. The Ghurkas decided that they could serve with the British. The British, not being fools hired them. In 1815 iirc. The primary export of Nepal is still Ghurka soldiers, serving in the Royal Army.
The Ghurkas entered British service because they were impressed with the British :) They had been raiding northern India for years. A British officer and some Indian soldiers were sent to deal with it. When the Ghurkas showed the Indian troops ran away. The British officer refused to surrender despite being vastly outnumbered and facing certain death. The Ghurkas decided that they could serve with the British. The British, not being fools hired them. In 1815 iirc. The primary export of Nepal is still Ghurka soldiers, serving in the Royal Army.
They were so good at guerrilla warfare with it the British just made them part of the army because they couldn't pacify them as a colonized population and were tired of loosing men/ having them maimed.Ohh and of course after all their service in WWII, and beyond to this day they are not guaranteed British citizenship after their tour of duty and receive a lower benefits package than the rest of the British army :(
Would you like to JOIN the Gurkas?
On topic, I would like to respond to Ashiel that a fighter isn't really supposed to be special. It's supposed to be a general fighting class. In that respect, it's awesome. Perhaps it could use a bit better feat selection, though.
The Ghurkas entered British service because they were impressed with the British :) They had been raiding northern India for years. A British officer and some Indian soldiers were sent to deal with it. When the Ghurkas showed the Indian troops ran away. The British officer refused to surrender despite being vastly outnumbered and facing certain death. The Ghurkas decided that they could serve with the British. The British, not being fools hired them. In 1815 iirc. The primary export of Nepal is still Ghurka soldiers, serving in the Royal Army.
They were so good at guerrilla warfare with it the British just made them part of the army because they couldn't pacify them as a colonized population and were tired of loosing men/ having them maimed.Ohh and of course after all their service in WWII, and beyond to this day they are not guaranteed British citizenship after their tour of duty and receive a lower benefits package than the rest of the British army :(
Would you like to JOIN the Gurkas?
On topic, I would like to respond to Ashiel that a fighter isn't really supposed to be special. It's supposed to be a general fighting class. In that respect, it's awesome. Perhaps it could use a bit better feat selection, though.
Like I said. I like the Fighter. I noted that it has the exact same flavor as the NPC-warrior class, and honestly beyond its bonus feats and weapon training, it's almost identical.
General fighting class should probably be able to fill multiple archtypes, right? As is, it's a great dipping class to add a splash of feats and flat modifiers. It just kinda sucks at filling out an archtype. Any archtype.
My primary point has been that for virtually anything other than raw mechanical modifiers, other classes fit better, or multiclasses. See, Barbarian can also made a very effective Samurai or Ronin: a vastly different fluff than "frothing berserker". Barbarian can also fill the role of most action heroes. Kind of like the Warblade, or the WoW Warrior, Barbarians are excellent front-line warriors. See, their armor classes are just as good at low levels (prior to full-plate becoming affordable) and can wear medium armor while moving at full speed, and have a variety of useful combat abilities (the never flat-footed means you can happily walk around taking a total defense, giving you a +4 dodge bonus against any ambushes; thanks Spidey-sense!), and junk like that.
Ranger is ideal for any sort of archtype that has anything that requires finesse, guile, and so forth. Sure, he can happily be a woodsman, or he could be a guerrilla soldier, or a scout, or a mounted huns archer, or a clever bounty hunter, or a private investigator, or a highwayman, or a pirate, or...well you get the idea.
The problem you will face is twofold.
1) Originally, there was just Fighting Man and Magic User. Since then, Fighting Man has split into barbarians, paladins, rogues, monks, and rangers. Since then, the Magic User has...stayed exactly where he started, encompassing all. So if you want to make a cool martial hero, you're given half a dozen classes you need to mix and match and bash together. If you want to make a cool magical hero, you get the Wizard, who does just about all.
2) People really like to compare level 5 fighters to level 20 wizards and then point at this and say "See this is how the balance works."
The problem you will face is twofold.
1) Originally, there was just Fighting Man and Magic User. Since then, Fighting Man has split into barbarians, paladins, rogues, monks, and rangers. Since then, the Magic User has...stayed exactly where he started, encompassing all. So if you want to make a cool martial hero, you're given half a dozen classes you need to mix and match and bash together. If you want to make a cool magical hero, you get the Wizard, who does just about all.
I found some rules for OD&D a while back, but it was somewhat incomplete I believe. I'm looking for a complete resource, 'cause there's a part of me that would love to run it just for the heck of it. :P
2) People really like to compare level 5 fighters to level 20 wizards and then point at this and say "See this is how the balance works."
So true. :(
I found some rules for OD&D a while back, but it was somewhat incomplete I believe. I'm looking for a complete resource, 'cause there's a part of me that would love to run it just for the heck of it. :P
Having played it for years (I started in 1974 and didn't convert my game to AD&D -- 1st edition -- until about 1981) I can say that "incomplete" is being polite. The original game called for "house rules" to fill in the blanks; it was pretty much expected. And fun. If you want an OGL derived version of 0E try "Swords and Wizardry". The PDF is available for free online (RPG Now for the original "core rules" PDF) and the hardcopy is pretty inexpensive. The newer version PDF is on Paizo for $9.99 iirc and the hardcopy is $19.99, again iirc. After you play you will see both the advantages and disadvantages of a more rules heavy solution like any version of 3.x.
*edit* As I recall, S&W is the almost identical clone of the original three books of 0E plus the supplements (Greyhawk, Blackmoor, and Eldritch Wizardry). Sorry but it doesn't include "Gods, Demigods and Heroes" (kind of a mythological monster manual -- not really a guide to religion) or "Swords and Spells" (kind of an expanded Chainmail miniature rules). But you can't have everything :)
I'm not really impressed here. All you really need to be good at combat maneuvers and such is a good BAB, a Good Strength, and possibly a good Dexterity (because Weapon Finesse maneuvers can result in some heavy CMB modifiers with the right weapons). There's really only a handful of feats you need to make someone who is versatile with maneuvers, and honestly most of them aren't worth it. Improved Trip isn't very impressive since it has some harsh prerequisites, only provides a +2, and you can generally get around AoOs with reached weapons. Improved Disarm is similar. Improved Grapple isn't terrible, but Barbarians are going to come ahead of Fighters in this regard because they can easily grab a Rage Power that gives benefits to grapples, apply their rage modifiers to the grapple, and so forth. Grappling isn't a good idea for super-specialization though, since by 7th level you will begin to see stuff like freedom of movement becoming more common.
You missed my point. First, there are few classes that can excel at multiple combat maneuvers. The fighter has enough feats to be good at 3 or 4, depending on how much you want him to accomplish. In addition, the fighter can still do other things with his feats. He is very customizable, if the player knows what he's doing.
You may not think that most of the maneuvers are worth it, but I have seen most of them work very well even up to level 20 (where we are at now in my game).
You shouldn't assume that freedom of movement is common at any level. It may be in your games, but again, it's not that way in all games. You are making the assumption that everyone plays the same style of game you do. It's simply not true. In my games, my players don't use it at all. The wizard knows it, but has chosen other things that he has found more useful. No one has invested in rings of freedom of movement because they have found other rings they wanted to invest in instead. That's only going to affect grapples anyway. Tripping can have some great affects. Getting a free attack of opportunity because you tripped someone not only gets you a free attack, but it gives you a +4 to hit because the opponent is prone. If there are others in the area, they can also take their free attack, at +4. If you used Disorienting Maneuver, you get +2 to hit, +4 on your CMB, and it can be used in conjunction with Greater Serpent Lash.
The fighter is about getting the most out of each attack, beyond just some damage. If damage is all you want, that is easily accomplished. If you want style, that takes more work but is definitely within the realm of possibility.
Over the next few days I'll see what I can come up with. I have three long days of work ahead so I won't do much those days. I am confident that it can be done. That is assuming you want to see it. I can even take the time to explain why each feat was chosen from a roleplaying stand point as opposed to a mechanical one.
There is no reason why a player can't explain why his character has the feats he has, through the skills that the character has taken. It's incredibly simple and actually makes sense. I am a firm believer that it should be done with every character as much as possible.
|
stuff about Swords & Wizardry
To piggyback off of this, S&W has three flavors:
WhiteBox is the most minimal, it basically just encompasses the three core books that were sold in the little white (later brown) box.
Core Rules adds in selected rules from the supplments that came out for the original version of the game. This is essentially S&W as the author plays it.
Complete Rules adds most of the rules from those supplements. So it ends up being almost a simplified 1E. This is the version that I prefer, and the closest to Pathfinder (a lot more classes, race and class seperate, etc).
You missed my point. First, there are few classes that can excel at multiple combat maneuvers. The fighter has enough feats to be good at 3 or 4, depending on how much you want him to accomplish. In addition, the fighter can still do other things with his feats. He is very customizable, if the player knows what he's doing.
Well, I think my problem with this view comes from the fact that you're basically just talking about numbers again. Ok, so he grabs Improved Grapple, Improved Trip, and Improved Bull Rush. He now has a +2 to each and doesn't provoke. But what does he do that's kinda special? I mean, we're just looking at new ways to beat something with pointy sticks, and in many cases there are already ways to do so without sampling every feat associated with them (I already pointed out Barbarians get rage powers, reach weapons avoid AoOs, locked gauntlets make disarming near impossible vs similar-level foes, etc). I didn't include sundering 'cause it seems most people don't like using that tactic (personally I love the option to sunder, but it does break stuff).
Anyway, again, I'm really not impressed. The Fighter isn't really doing anything "special". He's just spreading himself thinner, and saying "look what I can do", while the other classes are going "Uh, why do you want to?"
You may not think that most of the maneuvers are worth it, but I have seen most of them work very well even up to level 20 (where we are at now in my game).
I believe maneuvers work great in the right situations. I don't believe that you need to expend feats, barring perhaps improved grapple, to make them viable. Nor do I believe that they are useful often enough to warrant grabbing feats for many of them, especially since most have prerequisites that must be picked up first. Generally BAB + Weapon Bonuses + Strength Modifier + Size Modifier + miscellaneous buffs (like haste) are good enough.
Let me put it another way. The Fighter is giving up all the different roles, out of combat utility, and flavorability, for a handful of "meh" feats. Um, ok. That still makes Barbarian and Ranger superior for the vast majority of concepts, archtypes, and so forth, because they don't even have to invest so much into those things to still be "good" at it, while also having...I dunno...options?
You shouldn't assume that freedom of movement is common at any level. It may be in your games, but again, it's not that way in all games. You are making the assumption that everyone plays the same style of game you do.
No, I'm making a statement that freedom of movement becomes more common past 7th level. Seeing as it's a 4th level spell, which becomes available at 7th level, it makes logical sense that freedom of movement becomes more common at 7th and later levels. The fact that it is an excellent buff and completely invalidates grapples, webs, entangles, hold person, solid fog, and similar effects and can be cast on yourself or others, makes it pretty much a must-have buff for anyone who can prepare it.
That means if you have a 7th level NPC cleric (CR 6), he or she should probably be willing to lay down a freedom of movement at least once, if not twice, and possibly as a support option. Since as levels rise, monsters get more treasure, NPCs get more gear allotments, you are likely to see more folks with stuff like scrolls, wands, and other resources allowing them freedom in some way.
It's not a matter of style. It's a matter of accepting that it exists and unless you ignore it, becomes more and more prevalent as levels rise. Arguing that it is not somehow more of an issue is like arguing that using fire damage on an advanced 16 HD troll with levels in Fighter is somehow not going to have a potion of resist energy or fire-resistance armor, or do something that indicates he wishes to live.
It's simply not true. In my games, my players don't use it at all. The wizard knows it, but has chosen other things that he has found more useful. No one has invested in rings of freedom of movement because they have found other rings they wanted to invest in instead. That's only going to affect grapples anyway. Tripping can have some...
Ok, so in your games your players ignore one of the best protection spells. Hey, y'know, that's a really good way to look at stuff. Let's pretend counters don't exist for stuff, and then talk about how awesome stuff is because it has no counters. 'Cause obviously, people that play and actually use the material of the core game at the levels it comes into play is somehow being too specific and very much making assumptions that shouldn't be made.
Yes, I am being sarcastic, but your post seriously strikes a nerve with me on a logical level. I bet dragons are even more frightening than they normally are, since your party apparently doesn't use buffs. If they don't use freedom of movement, I can only imagine they don't use stuff like protection from evil or resist energy, and probably make a habit of getting roasted quickly over an open breath weapon.
======================================================================
I'm going to calm down and stop shooting your post with my logic-gun. Let's try this a different way.
Show me an archtype. Not a mechanical archtype like "Holy Gun" or "Black Blade Magus", but an actual character archtype. Pick a movie. Pick a tv show. Pick a classical warrior such as the Samurai, Ninja, Spartan, Huns Cavalry, Native Brave, Mercenary, Pirate, Chinese Warlord, and so forth. Hell, pick a legendary figure such as Zhao Yhun, Lu Bu, William Wallace, Robert the Bruce, or Ghenkis Khan. We'll stat a few of 'em out if you like, and discuss how they mechanically represent their archtype.
I'm game if you are.
Having played it for years (I started in 1974 and didn't convert my game to AD&D -- 1st edition -- until about 1981) I can say that "incomplete" is being polite. The original game called for "house rules" to fill in the blanks; it was pretty much expected. And fun. If you want an OGL derived version of 0E try "Swords and Wizardry". The PDF is available for free online (RPG Now for the original "core rules" PDF) and the hardcopy is pretty inexpensive. The newer version PDF is on Paizo for $9.99 iirc and the hardcopy is $19.99, again iirc. After you play you will see both the advantages and disadvantages of a more rules heavy solution like any version of 3.x.
I found some rules for OD&D a while back, but it was somewhat incomplete I believe. I'm looking for a complete resource, 'cause there's a part of me that would love to run it just for the heck of it. :P
Sorry, I didn't mean to say that the system was incomplete, so much as the source was. It was an SRD-like document that was incomplete in areas, but had notes as to what needed to be added here. Unfortunately I lost my link when my computer bottomed up recently.
I've played rule-light RPGs in the past and I have little stomach for them most of the time. I generally feel too much is missing and end up writing out note after note after note of stuff to maintain some level of consistency. This frustration is further compounded by the fact that going from game A to game B can be like picking up a whole new game, with all new rules to memorize. Sure, everyone has house-rules in even 3.x based systems, but you don't usually have to re-learn a group's method for falling damage, lighting conditions, flying, and other stuff that is generally followed.