Why all the Fighter hate?


Pathfinder First Edition General Discussion

1,001 to 1,050 of 1,672 << first < prev | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | next > last >>
Liberty's Edge

TarkXT wrote:
Mergy wrote:
Ciretose, you're right, a fighter doesn't need wisdom. He'll just kill the rest of his party without it.

This. As a GM I get excited when the wizar casts enlarge person, haste, and a number of buffs that make him a terror on the field. Why? Because behind the next door is an enchanter with Dominate Person. I think the party has gone out of its way at least three times to prevent themselves from getting utterly annihilated by the buffed out 8 wis fighter.

For a class that really needs saves killing your will save is a really silly idea.

The comment is being moved from the context.

The root of the discussion of this point was toward the statement made that the Ranger could have a higher Dex than the fighter, and therefore be equal in AC. My question was how, considering the ranger was more MAD than the fighter.

This statement remains true. Both benefit from wisdom, as both have low will saves. Rangers additionally use wisdom for spells, and don't have as many feats as fighters to burn on things like the iron will chain.

The point was not that fighters can dump wisdom, they shouldn't. The point was that Rangers need it even more, and therefore don't automatically have a higher Dex without sacrificing points elsewhere.

Liberty's Edge

Since I haven't taken a side, I'll go ahead and do so.

Barbarians are great at dealing and soaking damage. They are more mobile than fighters and tougher than rangers. Barbarians are awesome.

Fighters are great at dealing damage and soaking attacks. They have better armor than barbarians and rangers and can be more versatile on the battlefield. Fighters are awesome.

Rangers are good at dealing damage and good at soaking attacks. Whatever the lack in the two above factors compared to Barbarians and Fighters they make up for with skills and utility. Rangers are awesome.

Etc...etc...etc...


At level 9 dominate person comes into play, a wizard with an INT score of 24 and spell focus and greater spell focus will have a DC of 24 a fighter of the same level can get a will save of +13 (15 against enchantments) without getting a wisdom boosting item or having above 12 starting wisdom. The fighter has a better than half chance of saving the first try. The fighter will also get another attempt to break free with a +2 bonus if commanded to do something against their nature such as attack their party or maybe even drop your weapon or stand still could be enough to trigger that new save. The DC could be higher, make the wizard level 14 and heighten it twice The DC is now 26 and the fighter still has a decent chance of passing, this is higher than most DC's for CR 13 creatures.

The fighter has been equipped with a cloak of resistance +4 ,+2 full plate, +1 composite long bow (5), +1 Falchion, duelling gloves, a ring of protection +1, and a belt of giant strength +2. That's 25 GP over the suggested WBL so if an item needs to be removed it'll be the ring.

The fighter is a half elf alternate racial trait dual minded and has the following stat line 20 point buy STR 20, DEX 18, CON 14, INT 7, WIS 13, CHA 7

Traits: defender of the society, indomitable faith

Feats: iron will, point blank shot, rapid shot, precise shot, deadly aim, power attack, weapon focus long bow, weapon focus falchion, weapon specialization falchion, greater weapon focus long bow.

AC 26, HP 81 (max first average after favoured class bonus hp)
Saves: Fort 12 Ref 11 Will 13 (15 enchantments)
Falchion +20/+15 2d4+14 (18/x2) with PA +17/+12 2d4+23
Long Bow +19/+14 1d8+6 (20/3) With RS +17/+17/+12 With DA +16/+11 1d8+12 With both DA and RS +14/+14/+9 (+1 to hit and damage within 30)
Skills: Perception 12
Speed 30ft.

So a rough idea of how a switch hitter fighter can do at 9. I picked this level since dominate person gets bandied about a lot as crippling fighters and the spell should be common now also I went with a switch hitter build since it is often cited as a good build for a ranger. If anyone wants to post some other builds for comparison using full BAB classes maybe we can get an idea as to how the fighter fairs. I haven't gone for any sort of utility in this build other than being able to attack flying opponents. I personally don't believe the fighter has much value in utility roles however that doesn't make me dislike the class if that's why other people dislike fighters I can't argue. I think the reason why people like the class is that it performs it's one role very well.


redliska wrote:
Level 9 dominate person comes into play a wizard with an INT score of 24 and spell focus and greater spell focus the DC will be 24 a fighter of the same level can get a will save of +13 (15 against enchantments) without getting a wisdom boosting item or having above 12 starting wisdom. The fighter has a better than half chance of saving the first try. The fighter will also get another attempt to break free with a +2 bonus if commanded to do something against their nature such as attack their party or maybe even drop your weapon or stand still could be enough to trigger that new save. The DC could be higher, make the wizard level 14 and heighten it twice The DC is now 26 and the fighter still has a decent chance of passing and is higher than most DC's of CR 13 creatures.

Succubi are CR 7 creatures. They have charm monster and dominate person at DC 22 and 24 respectively, and charm monster is at-will. You could see one of these badgirls as early as 4th level, just going by the encounter rules.

But at 9th level, a Fighter has a +3 Will. Iron Will makes +5. A +4 cloak of resistance is the strongest you can outright buy in the core game, and is 16,000 gp; which is more than 1/3rd the Fighter's WBL at 9th. That brings him to +9. At this point, the 9th level Fighter has less than 50% chance to successfully save against the succubi's charm monster. So you need a 14 Wisdom to reach +11, which would give you a 50% chance to save against the now low-CR creature.

Quote:
The fighter has been equipped with a cloak of resistance +4 ,+2 full plate, +1 composite long bow (5), +1 Falchion, duelling gloves, a ring of protection +1, and a belt of giant strength +2. That's 25 GP over the suggested WBL so if an item needs to be removed it'll be the ring.

So we've invested all of that, going over WBL (my calculation of your WBL was about 47,900 gp, which is actually almost 2000 gp over WBL), and you still hit a less than 50% chance to not end up as a CR 7 enemies' thrall. Good show, good shows. You have convinced me, even more, that Fighters are indeed in need of Wisdom.

Quote:

The fighter is a half elf alternate racial trait dual minded and has the following stat line 20 point buy STR 20, DEX 18, CON 14, INT 7, WIS 13, CHA 7

Traits: defender of the society, indomitable faith

And of course, now we end up with special races, alternate racial traits, and optional traits. None of which have anything to do with the Fighter itself or apply to Fighters in general; and 2 of the 3 things you call out here aren't even assuredly applicable, because they're not core. Lots of people, especially those looking for a simpler game or those who have just started, are core-only or core+bestiary.

=================================

The ranger is in the same boat. His Will save is kinda balls, and he doesn't get a +2 to +4 bonus while Raging like the Barbarian does, but he gets more out of having a good Wisdom bonus. Not only does he get the +1 to +2 to Will saves, but he also gets spell-casting, and it is tied to several of his skills (such as Perception and Survival), and so on and so forth.

So, if the Ranger and the Fighter have the same Wisdom, then the Ranger is at an advantage. The Ranger can afford a lower Dexterity because he can still qualify for stuff like Many Shot without the Dex 17 requirement.

As for rangers having decent ACs, most of my Rangers have about a 14-15 Dexterity, Strength priority, Wisdom a close third. I generally begin play wearing chainmail (+6 AC, +2 maximum Dexterity) which is immediately 18 AC. Then I'll get a shield (+2 AC) for 20. A Fighter with a 17 Dexterity at 1st level cannot afford a Breastplate, so he has the exact same AC as me at 1st level.

Now at 2nd-4th, he's probably managed a Breastplate, as have I (because I want a breastplate too, 'cause my Dex isn't staying at +2, and it has a lower check penalty). He now has +1 AC over me. At 4th level, his Armor Training doesn't mean anything t his AC, because his Dex doesn't rise. However, he should be in some full-plate soonish. Point for the Fighter.

The thing is is, as levels rise, AC generally becomes difficult to keep relevant. In fact, AC is good at all levels, but isn't a super-good defense at any level, because of stuff like touch-attacks. Also, at higher levels, having a minor cloak of displacement is your best bet at reducing incoming damage (you avoid 1 out of 5 incoming attacks, and are immune to sneak attack). AC also doesn't protect you from elemental attacks, where you need effects like resist energy, or from combat maneuvers like a dragon's Snatch or a kraken's Grab.

And if you start with that 16-17 Dexterity, you have to pay for it elsewhere. Having a Str 18, Dex 14, Con 13, Int 7, Wis 14, Cha 7 is alright for me at low levels. I can deal with that. I'll be sporting stats of about Str 32 (+11), Dex 28 (+9), Con 24 (+7), Int 18 (+4), Wis 26 (+8), and Cha 18 (+4) by 20th level. I could have also swapped Dex for Con to get more Hp (another +90 Hp doesn't sound like a bad deal actually).


Murderous command is a first level spell and if you cast that on a fighter that does damage it can still drop a party member. Also cloaks of resistence are nice.

Also waht is the ranger animal companion's will save is antoher thing to worry about.


doctor_wu wrote:


Also waht is the ranger animal companion's will save is antoher thing to worry about.

Less worrisome then the fighter and barbarian. There aren't nearly as many spells that can affect animals the same way as people. And those that do exist aren't generally used very often.

Plus, as a cruel aside it's a lot easier to replace Wolfie#35 then the fighter who failed his will save. Again.


I was wrong on the armor cost so lower the enchantment Falchion +1 2375, Long Bow Composite +1 2900, Belt of Giant Strength 4000, Ring of Protection +1 2000, full plate +1 2650, Gloves of Dueling 15000, Cloak of Resistance +4 16000, and thats 1000 left over.

AC is still decent saves haven't been effected and as to the spending over 1 third gold on a single item the core rule book only says you shouldn't spend half your gold on a single item. And as to your succubus DC 24 is still less than half chance and if it wants to make the fighter do anything against its nature the fighter gets to save again with a +2 bonus, charm gives a +5 bonus to the save if used in combat, if you can make a ranger with a better chance at passing these saves that is still a viable switch hitter post a build.

As to race selection it makes the most sense same with traits Instant enemy is from the APG if you wish to restrict this discussion to core only that's fine by me I can post another build. If you want to play a ranger with 20 charisma and 12 strength and 12 dexterity it doesn't mean the class is bad if the character is not effective. I could have made a dwarf fighter with a better save but I didn't want to sacrifice strength. Rangers have the same base will progression as a fighter so they need to mitigate the same weakness. Using your succubus example the ranger can be in much worse shape than the fighter if they ignore said trait and racial features.

So yes the fighters AC is 1 point lower I would still love to see how a ranger compares.


Ashiel wrote:
So we've invested all of that, going over WBL (my calculation of your WBL was about 47,900 gp, which is actually almost 2000 gp over WBL), and you still hit a less than 50% chance to not end up as a CR 7 enemies' thrall. Good show, good shows. You have convinced me, even more, that Fighters are indeed in need of Wisdom.

At that level the fighter will save (asuming wis 10 an iron will)almost as much as the wizard, witch, and ranger (assuming 14 wis to the ranger). and will save more that the cavalier, rogue, ninja, gunslinger.

So is not a fighers problem.


Nicos wrote:
Ashiel wrote:
So we've invested all of that, going over WBL (my calculation of your WBL was about 47,900 gp, which is actually almost 2000 gp over WBL), and you still hit a less than 50% chance to not end up as a CR 7 enemies' thrall. Good show, good shows. You have convinced me, even more, that Fighters are indeed in need of Wisdom.

At that level the fighter will save (asuming wis 10 an iron will)almost as much as the wizard, witch, and ranger (assuming 14 wis to the ranger). and will save more that the cavalier, rogue, ninja, gunslinger.

So is not a fighers problem.

Now prove it. Redliska and Ashiel have been kind enough to show the math. Where's yours?


TarkXT wrote:
Nicos wrote:
Ashiel wrote:
So we've invested all of that, going over WBL (my calculation of your WBL was about 47,900 gp, which is actually almost 2000 gp over WBL), and you still hit a less than 50% chance to not end up as a CR 7 enemies' thrall. Good show, good shows. You have convinced me, even more, that Fighters are indeed in need of Wisdom.

At that level the fighter will save (asuming wis 10 an iron will)almost as much as the wizard, witch, and ranger (assuming 14 wis to the ranger). and will save more that the cavalier, rogue, ninja, gunslinger.

So is not a fighers problem.

Now prove it. Redliska and Ashiel have been kind enough to show the math. Where's yours?

Fighter 9 :+ 3(base) + 2 iron will=+5

ranger 9: Base+ 3 + 2(wis)=+5
wizard,with 9. Base+ 6=+6
Gunslinger 9: base +3 +2 (wis)=+5
rogue,ninja, cavalier: base +3=+3

of course everyone can take iron will or buy a higher wis but I am just comparing standar builds

wizards and witches normally do not have hig wis, at the beginning gunslinger are feat starveved, rogues and ninjas are feat starved, iron will is very standar for a fighter. I really do not about cavaliers.

Bards and Sorceres tend to dump wis so they will have a slighty inferionr will save.

Agains, I am talking about standar buils that i see in this forum.


And in that level wizards, witches, sorcerer and bards will have a hard time against feeblemind

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

As people pointed out above, using Wis as a MAD argument on the ranger is generally not wise. (heh)

A Ranger needs 14 wis to be able to cast all his spells, and doesn't get 4th level spells until level 10ish. At that level, 4k for a +2 Wis buffer is totally viable, and likely the fighter with a weak will save is doing the same, and they are both likely starting at 12.

As for physical buffing items: you just equip the ranger and fighter the same, they both need fighting stats.

==Aelryinth


Nicos wrote:
Ashiel wrote:
So we've invested all of that, going over WBL (my calculation of your WBL was about 47,900 gp, which is actually almost 2000 gp over WBL), and you still hit a less than 50% chance to not end up as a CR 7 enemies' thrall. Good show, good shows. You have convinced me, even more, that Fighters are indeed in need of Wisdom.

At that level the fighter will save (asuming wis 10 an iron will)almost as much as the wizard, witch, and ranger (assuming 14 wis to the ranger). and will save more that the cavalier, rogue, ninja, gunslinger.

So is not a fighers problem.

At low levels especially, the extra +10% for a 14 Wisdom is especially important. There are tons of very nasty effects that can occur from levels 1-5, including (but not limited to) being knocked unconscious (adepts who sleep bomb can easily attack in groups of 3-6 without being considered a particularly nasty encounter, and can sleep spam). Stuff like glitterdust, colorspray, and command are also big ones. If you can't make a Will save, sanctuary means you are useless.

So a Fighter without some Wisdom is asking to sit out of combat a lot if that combat doesn't consist of purely brute enemies. Unlike other classes, the Fighter does not possess other defensive capabilities that significantly make up for these weaknesses (rangers can resist elemental damage, ignore grappling, improve their AC, etc; paladins are just covered in protective abilities, barbarians get special defenses while raging; etc).


Ashiel wrote:
Nicos wrote:
Ashiel wrote:
So we've invested all of that, going over WBL (my calculation of your WBL was about 47,900 gp, which is actually almost 2000 gp over WBL), and you still hit a less than 50% chance to not end up as a CR 7 enemies' thrall. Good show, good shows. You have convinced me, even more, that Fighters are indeed in need of Wisdom.

At that level the fighter will save (asuming wis 10 an iron will)almost as much as the wizard, witch, and ranger (assuming 14 wis to the ranger). and will save more that the cavalier, rogue, ninja, gunslinger.

So is not a fighers problem.

At low levels especially, the extra +10% for a 14 Wisdom is especially important. There are tons of very nasty effects that can occur from levels 1-5, including (but not limited to) being knocked unconscious (adepts who sleep bomb can easily attack in groups of 3-6 without being considered a particularly nasty encounter, and can sleep spam). Stuff like glitterdust, colorspray, and command are also big ones. If you can't make a Will save, sanctuary means you are useless.

So a Fighter without some Wisdom is asking to sit out of combat a lot if that combat doesn't consist of purely brute enemies. Unlike other classes, the Fighter does not possess other defensive capabilities that significantly make up for these weaknesses (rangers can resist elemental damage, ignore grappling, improve their AC, etc; paladins are just covered in protective abilities, barbarians get special defenses while raging; etc).

well, my fighters allwasy take iron will at 3rd level, but yeah paladins, rangers and barbarian will have better chance to make thier saves.

Not the same for the gunslinge, cavalier, rogue, ninja and alchemist, even the "i dump wisdom" bards will have problem.

So if itis not a fighter only problem can we move on?


Nicos wrote:


Not the same for the gunslinge, cavalier, rogue, ninja and alchemist, even the "i dump wisdom" bards will have problem.

So if itis not a fighter only problem can we move on?

Gunslingers use Wisdom for grit so they're up there with rangers in that regard. Cavalier are also dependant on order. Dragon cavaliers will likely have a higher wisdom since they get survival and perception on their list and dont rely on charisma. Sword cavaliers basically get ironwill at second level.

Beyond that theres plenty of circumstantial saves here and there for the cavalier. The rogues and ninjas can get slipperymind which lets them reroll said saves.


Samurai get resolve wihch limited times per day let them reroll saves. Oh and the divine order of the tome cavaliers use wis as well.

Druids and clerics have good will saves as need wis +good save.


Nicos wrote:

well, my fighters allwasy take iron will at 3rd level, but yeah paladins, rangers and barbarian will have better chance to make thier saves.

Not the same for the gunslinge, cavalier, rogue, ninja and alchemist, even the "i dump wisdom" bards will have problem.

So if itis not a fighter only problem can we move on?

Just so that we're clear, I wasn't addressing the Wisdom thing on the basis of "lawlz yer will save suxors!", but noting that Fighters and Rangers have very similar ability score requirements; and yet any way you slice it, Rangers are less MAD.

We've already seen that a Ranger with a 7 Intelligence has the same amount of skills as a Fighter with 14 Intelligence. Many people on the "Fighter is awesome, no problems here" side have said that if you're not putting a 14 in Intelligence, you're doing it wrong, and that means Fighters have skill points.

Meanwhile, Fighters need a crapload of Dexterity to qualify for dual wielding or archery options, or to get the most out of their Armor Training ability early on.

Yet still, Fighters need Strength whether they are melee or ranged.

Further still, Fighters are just like other classes in needing Wisdom for their poor Will saves, and possibly some skills (definitely need it for Perception); and is especially true because their defenses in general are lacking, beyond simple AC.

So that basically leaves Charisma as the only stat a Fighter doesn't need. Pretty much the definition of Multi-Ability-Dependent.

Now Rangers need much of the same, but can support more skill points on less, have better Reflex saves. They get more benefit out of the Wisdom they would already be using. They can afford to raise Dexterity to very high levels later rather than sooner, because their Combat Style allows them to get the really sweet stuff like Improved Precise Shot and Manyshot without meeting the super-Dex requirements. This leaves them to having solid values in Strength, Dexterity, and Constitution far more easily; which also ensures they are solid front-liners.

This is of course being in addition to their various defensive and battlefield control options, the ability to heal the party with happy-sticks, the ability to annoy people with entangle wands (just throwing that out there because it's funny), and basically having lots of sweet class features.

A ranger can comfortably support 16, 14, 13, 7, 14, 7 before racial mods, and literally be no worse off than the Fighter. In some cases, he is actually superior to the Fighter even with these scores. Slap the same stats on a Fighter, and he is considered the failure of Fighters everywhere, by some of the "Fighters have skills, you're building them wrong!" crowd.

Silver Crusade

I will say this, the fighter is actually an ever changing class as new combat feats come out.


shallowsoul wrote:
I will say this, the fighter is actually an ever changing class as new combat feats come out.

No they're not. Only future Fighters change. If you've got a 14th level Fighter, a new feat coming out doesn't mean anything unless your GM allows you to rebuild your character. Likewise, there are few feats I've seen that are Fighter only. Last but not least, this doesn't really favor the Fighter at all, because . . .


Well you can retrain Bonus Feats. Not many classes can do such things to their core features...

Liberty's Edge

redliska wrote:
At level 9 dominate person comes into play...

Hello Schrödinger's Wizard!

One problem people overlook with this spell. Two actually

Casting Time 1 round
Range Close

So if you spend a full round action within close range of a fighter casting a spell with verbal and somatic components and they don't disrupt you...

But back to the actual original context of the comment prior to the threadjack...

Someone said the Ranger's AC was just as high since they would have a higher Dex. I was wondering how this was something to be assumed since Rangers are more dependent on having more skills high than the Fighter.

This seems to have been lost in the ongoing side quest to not actually talk about the topic, so I thought I might bring it back.

Silver Crusade

Ashiel wrote:
shallowsoul wrote:
I will say this, the fighter is actually an ever changing class as new combat feats come out.
No they're not. Only future Fighters change. If you've got a 14th level Fighter, a new feat coming out doesn't mean anything unless your GM allows you to rebuild your character. Likewise, there are few feats I've seen that are Fighter only. Last but not least, this doesn't really favor the Fighter at all, because . . .

Never said anything about fighter's that are already built. The more combat feats that emerge the more builds the fighter gains. Stop trying to downplay the fighter any chance you get. You really need to look before you leap. Now every 4 levels after 4th the fighter can swap out feats for new ones. Actually a 14th level fighter could change a feat 4 levels later. Stop trying to to setup these intentional fighter debunk scenarios. "Oh well at 14th level the fighter blah blah blah..." You are starting to sound a bit desperate to be honest.


Back to the topic of will saves A ranger gets 3rd level spells at 10 bare minimum 13 wis means you still have no spells though since ranger 3rd level spells per day are 0, you need a minimum 16 to get the bonus spell. Having a 16 wisdom is nice but it isn't necessary if you want to have decent will saves, if you want to have good will saves then yes at that level you will probably want a 16+ wisdom.

However investing in a wisdom of that score reduces your other abilities. Item wise a headband of inspired wisdom +4 costs 16,000 the same as a cloak of resistance +4 if you want both thats over half your wealth. if you intend to start with a 14 thats 5 points a quarter of your available points for 20 point buy unless you have a racial bonus to wisdom and you will still need to pick up a headband +2 although it is much more affordable at 4,000. If you go with a natural 16 thats 10 points half your available total. If you start with 13 you will still need a +4 headband unless you invest a stat increase into your wisdom. You could start with a 12 and increase it twice with ability increases and purchase a +2 headband but those stat increases could have gone to increase another ability possibly an 18 to a 20.

The rangers will save 10th level with a 16 Wisdom and +4 cloak is +10 still behind the 9th level fighter I posted unless the ranger invests further their will save situation isn't looking so good that CR 7 succubus is very much an issue.

So what should a level 9 ranger look like though. We are only touching on a few aspects of a complete build. Can the ranger match the fighter in combat and still maintain its advantage in utility, if the fighter fares better than the ranger in combat to a noticeable degree then I don't think the fighter has an issue, the class trades versatility for focus and any dislike of the class is a matter of taste. What about a barbarian build, in what areas does it exceed the fighter in what areas does the fighter exceed it.

I think Ciretose was right in that we will find that a barbarian will be better in certain situations than either a fighter or ranger just as the fighter and ranger will have their own advantages over the others. If the party composition is such that other members already cover the non combat roles successfully a fighter could be the best option.

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Let me ask a simple question here that some people tend to generally ignore. What has happened to team play and what good are buffs when we try to debunk certain classes because they can't do it all? Spell buffs are there to actually help those classes that may not do well in certain areas. I would tell the cleric to hit my fighter with a simple Protection from Evil spell which gives him a +2 morale bonus to all his saves verses enchantment type spells, or even have him posses a Wand of Protection from Evil.

Liberty's Edge

Ashiel wrote:
We've already seen that a Ranger with a 7 Intelligence has the same amount of skills as a Fighter with 14 Intelligence.

I honestly wonder sometimes if you are being serious.

The argument goes from "Rangers are awesome because they have skills to do things out of combat" to "Rangers don't need skills to be awesome!"

It's like Lucy's football for Charlie Brown on psychotropics.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
shallowsoul wrote:
Let me ask a simple question here that some people tend to generally ignore. What has happened to team play and what good are buffs when we try to debunk certain classes because they can't do it all? Spell buffs are there to actually help those classes that may not do well in certain areas. I would tell the cleric to hit my fighter with a simple Protection from Evil spell which gives my a +2 morale bonus to all my saves verses enchantment type spells, or even have my fighter posses a Wand of Protection from Evil.

It always comes down to this.

The customization of fighters allows them to fill roles very easily. They can't fill all roles, but neither can any other class at any real level of effectiveness.

Are fighters the most versatile class. No. Are they really good at filling specific roles. Yes. Can they use the extra feats they get to further shore up party weaknesses. Yes.

Which for me makes them a good class.


Dominate person is a possibility just like any other mind affecting effect, however my point was a fighter with 12-13 wisdom can be built in such a way as to make the save more likely than not and if they fail can break free easily. I have seen the argument that the fighter is a liability to the party and likely to kill them because of this one spell presented several times. This situation applies to several other classes as well and is often ignored.

Liberty's Edge

redliska wrote:
Dominate person is a possibility just like any other mind affecting effect, however my point was a fighter with 12-13 wisdom can be built in such a way as to make the save more likely than not and if they fail can break free easily. I have seen the argument that the fighter is a liability to the party and likely to kill them because of this one spell presented several times. This situation applies to several other classes as well and is often ignored.

And my point is all of this is beside the point since the context of the comment was if a Ranger needed anything less than a Fighter did and I think we all agree a Ranger needs Wisdom either more or at least as much as a fighter.

Rangers are not designed to be as durable as fighters or barbarians, but it's cool because they have more skills and other great features.

It's called balance.


redliska wrote:
however my point was a fighter with 12-13 wisdom can be built in such a way as to make the save more likely than not and if they fail can break free easily. I have seen the argument that the fighter is a liability to the party and likely to kill them because of this one spell presented several times. This situation applies to several other classes as well and is often ignored.

+1

Silver Crusade

redliska wrote:
Dominate person is a possibility just like any other mind affecting effect, however my point was a fighter with 12-13 wisdom can be built in such a way as to make the save more likely than not and if they fail can break free easily. I have seen the argument that the fighter is a liability to the party and likely to kill them because of this one spell presented several times. This situation applies to several other classes as well and is often ignored.

What's cool about the fighter is you can wait until everyone else has decided on what they are going to play and based off of that, a person can build their fighter to suit the party. If you have a Bard and/or a Cleric then you generally know you are going to have buffs coming your way so you won't really need to focus on certain aspects because that cleric is going to help you in those areas you didn't focus on.


ciretose wrote:
Ashiel wrote:
We've already seen that a Ranger with a 7 Intelligence has the same amount of skills as a Fighter with 14 Intelligence.

I honestly wonder sometimes if you are being serious.

The argument goes from "Rangers are awesome because they have skills to do things out of combat" to "Rangers don't need skills to be awesome!"

It's like Lucy's football for Charlie Brown on psychotropics.

Totally serious, my friend.

The Ranger has 6 + Int modifier skills. Even with a -2 Int, the Ranger has 4 / level skill points. That matches a Fighter with a 14 Intelligence, or a Barbarian with a 10 Intelligence. The Ranger's skills (both diversity and point value) are seriously in his favor on this one; as if given the same point value, the Ranger can accept slower skill growth because he has some to spare.

At 1st level, the Ranger can pull enough for Survival, Perception, Stealth, and Knowledge (Nature). Next level, drop a few more points. By 4th level, dump about 4 points into Handle Animal. At 6th and 7th, max Spellcraft for +9 Spellcraft, etc, etc, etc.

So there's less dependency. If you can support a 10 Intelligence, great, that's convenient and awesome for you. If you can't, no sweat, you're a ranger, you're guaranteed at least 4 (as if being a Fighter level with 14 Int).

But, I've noted Rangers are awesome for more than just skills. Rangers can more easily support skills and have a wider breadth than Fighters, yes; but they are also more versatile all the way around (bringing more to the table and to combat due to their diverse spell selection and problem solving potential).

Liberty's Edge

Ashiel wrote:


But, I've noted Rangers are awesome for more than just skills. Rangers can more easily support skills and have a wider breadth than Fighters, yes; but they are also more versatile all the way around (bringing more to the table and to combat due to their diverse spell selection and problem solving potential).

Yes, but you've now created Schrödinger's Ranger.

If a Ranger is more skilled, it will not be able to dump Int.
If it is able to cast a wide variety of spells, it will not be able to dump Wisdom
If it is able to have a competitive AC, it can't dump Dex.
If it is able to deal damage it can't dump strength.
And by the nature of combat style they are going to focus on a combat style.

They can be good at lots of things, they aren't great at tanking relative to Fighters and Barbarians in the same way they aren't as skillful as Rogues.

Don't get me wrong, I personally prefer to play a ranger. I don't like tanking and I like being a skill monkey. Sacrificing some damage for extra skills, flexibility and mobility is something I like. I am a monk lover, after all.

But a fighter is going to consistently do more damage with more weapons with a higher AC unless you nerf some aspect of what makes a ranger a ranger, and even then the fighter will still probably out damage and out AC you with a few feats to spare for other things.


shallowsoul wrote:
redliska wrote:
Dominate person is a possibility just like any other mind affecting effect, however my point was a fighter with 12-13 wisdom can be built in such a way as to make the save more likely than not and if they fail can break free easily. I have seen the argument that the fighter is a liability to the party and likely to kill them because of this one spell presented several times. This situation applies to several other classes as well and is often ignored.
What's cool about the fighter is you can wait until everyone else has decided on what they are going to play and based off of that, a person can build their fighter to suit the party. If you have a Bard and/or a Cleric then you generally know you are going to have buffs coming your way so you won't really need to focus on certain aspects because that cleric is going to help you in those areas you didn't focus on.

There's a lot of times our group has members who decide at the last minute what character they are going to play. Other times, particularly in my online games, you get potluck party pretty frequently.

Then again, technically, any class can be made to compliment their party, and vice versa. Why is it that the Fighter is the one who gets the credit for being "cool"?


Do you hear that, Auris? He's a monk lover.


Yeah, but he likes to play rangers!

Scarab Sages

HA! Owned.


:/


ciretose wrote:
Ashiel wrote:


But, I've noted Rangers are awesome for more than just skills. Rangers can more easily support skills and have a wider breadth than Fighters, yes; but they are also more versatile all the way around (bringing more to the table and to combat due to their diverse spell selection and problem solving potential).

Yes, but you've now created Schrödinger's Ranger.

If a Ranger is more skilled, it will not be able to dump Int.

No, no, no...

A Ranger can dump Int because it is more skilled. Notice that Bob and I think Khry-what's-his-name (or maybe it was Shallowsoul, I forget) emphasized that a good Fighter must have a 14 Intelligence, so that it can sustain some skill points. A Ranger can totally tank Intelligence like it's going out of style and still match said Fighter in skill points, while also having a larger variety of class skills (allowing him to comfortably dip points). He can also afford to have a modest survival, since the DC for common survival stuff is low, and he gets +1/2 his level for tracking.

Now if a Ranger has an equal Int, then the Ranger pulls further ahead; but it's actually the ranger's superior skills that give him this flexibility.

I'm looking at what the pro-Fighter group is saying, and apparently you need good Str, Dex, Con (you wanna live), Int (so you have skills), and Wis (you wanna live). Worse yet, he needs high stats in Dexterity if he wants to be a competent archer, and high stats in Strength to take advantage of 1.5 strength mods in melee.

The Ranger has a little bit more room to play with.

Quote:
If it is able to cast a wide variety of spells, it will not be able to dump Wisdom

I never suggested the Ranger dump Wisdom. I actually said neither the Fighter, nor Ranger (nor Barbarian for that matter) can afford to dump Wisdom. I did not that the Ranger gets more out of Wisdom that Fighters do. I commented that Wisdom is something both of them needs, and should not dump. I recommended a 14 here (or at least a 12).

Quote:
If it is able to have a competitive AC, it can't dump Dex.

You never "dump dex", but there's a difference between being able to support a hard feat group with a fair Dex, as opposed to dumping it completely. Again, I recommend a 14 Dex, maybe 15, depending on your build and race, but 14 is usually solid. That gets you an 18 AC at 1st level with chainmail (leaving 25 gp over to buy weapons, shield, and adventuring gear with, which is plenty).

Having the absolute best AC possible is nice, but often leaves you lacking in other areas. At low levels, where AC is especially critical, there is little difference between the Ranger and Fighter, and both can get nearly unhittable ACs through fighting defensively and/or total defensing when needed, if you need to tank for a bit.

At high levels, you will have all the Dexterity you need to max your armor. Beginning with a 14 Dex, you can hit +9 modifiers by 20th, which is more than needed for celestial armor's +8 maximum Dexterity, so the Ranger will have plenty. The critical difference is in the early levels, where you will want stuff like Manyshot, and the Ranger doesn't need to be stressing where he's getting the points from.

Quote:

If it is able to deal damage it can't dump strength.

And by the nature of combat style they are going to focus on a combat style.

I tend to feel like building rangers like Aragorn leads to them being the most effective; at least core rangers. Get a nice sexy strength like 16 or 18 (with +2 racial) and grab a 2-hander for melee, and ranged weapons for range. At low levels, wield a sling to capitalize on your strength (1d3+3 is better than 1d8+0 in my opinion, and is free), and swap to a composite bow later, when it becomes cost effective to do so.

Quote:
They can be good at lots of things, they aren't great at tanking relative to Fighters and Barbarians in the same way they aren't as skillful as Rogues.

It depends on how you do it. They can support really nice ACs in the beginning of the game, and decent ones at higher levels, whereas at higher levels having a well rounded defense is more attractive than just having a high AC, and Rangers bring more to that well-rounded bit (a Fighter could hit +14 armor with a +8 maximum Dexterity, which is only 3 points higher than a ranger in celestial armor). Only a 3 point difference in actual AC, but the Ranger can react to more problems.

Quote:
Don't get me wrong, I personally prefer to play a ranger. I don't like tanking and I like being a skill monkey. Sacrificing some damage for extra skills, flexibility and mobility is something I like. I am a monk lover, after all.

Fair enough.

Quote:

But a fighter is going to consistently do more damage with more weapons with a higher AC unless you nerf some aspect of what makes a ranger a ranger, and even then the fighter will still probably out damage and out AC you with a few feats to spare for other things.

I should note that I've consistently said that Fighters are best at dealing damage. In fact, the biggest reason I like playing Fighters is because of what sick-nasty archers and dual wielders they can be (full TWF + trimmings with double weapons = sick, full archery = sick). My problem is that combat is faaaaaaar more than just +hit and +damage. Even in video games like Baldur's Gate I & II, combat is more than just +hit and +damage.

So my beef with the Fighter is I think it fails more or less all the way around, but fails more obviously in certain areas than others. Out of combat, it's nigh non-existent. Inside combat, well I find it lacking, since there's a lot more to combat in D&D/PF than just having a higher +X than the other guys.

Liberty's Edge

Ashiel wrote:

The Ranger has a little bit more room to play with.

To play with to what end? In the land of ever moving goalposts and ever changing builds, let's just do this.

Let's go level by level.

1st level a fighter has one more feat than your first level ranger and heavy armor proficiency.

In exchange for that extra feat and heavy armor proficiency you get a +2 reflex, track, wild empathy, a favored enemy and 4 more skill points.

At 2nd level both classes get a feat, the fighter gets bravery and the ranger gets 4 more skill points.

At 3rd level the fighter gets armor training, so 9 points of skill penalties are lessened. The ranger gets his 4 extra skill points, endurance and a favored terrain.

At 4th the fighter pulls two feats (one of which is likely weapon specialization which the ranger can't get) ahead while the ranger gets hunters bond and the 4 skill points. The ranger may get a spell, depending on what you did with wisdom, which of course effects what you didn't do elsewhere.

At 5th the fighter gets Weapon Training, meaning he will now have a higher attack and damage than the ranger, possibly by as much as 3 per hit. The ranger gets a 2nd favored enemy and 4 skill points and one first level spell.

At 6th both get a feat and ranger gets 4 skill points.

at 7th the fighter gets another reduction in penalty to 9 skills, the ranger gets woodland stride and maybe a 2nd level spell, depending on wisdom.

Where exactly is the ranger pulling ahead here? He does less damage which seems a fair trade off for the skills, and otherwise...meh.

Maybe post the uber ranger the fighter can't compete with? I'm fairly sure I can match damage output and have feats to spare for versatility.

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

Kindly note also that Ranger-the-crafter with an Int penalty is going to be even worse at making all those magic items with his caster level penalty, too!

And as I pointed out earlier in the thread, Rangers are basically EXPECTED to have a wide set of skills, to DO THEIR JOB. That expectation is not on a fighter. A fighter can select their skills to complement the party.

==Aelryinth


Ashiel wrote:
Just so that we're clear, I wasn't addressing the Wisdom thing on the basis of "lawlz yer will save suxors!", but noting that Fighters and Rangers have very similar ability score requirements; and yet any way you slice it, Rangers are less MAD.

Not true. This is entirely concept based. Some fighter builds will require much less ability investment than some ranger builds. Blanket statements like this are easily refuted with a single example. You're a good enough gamer to be able to see that. I would actually argue that they are about the same overall.

Quote:
We've already seen that a Ranger with a 7 Intelligence has the same amount of skills as a Fighter with 14 Intelligence. Many people on the "Fighter is awesome, no problems here" side have said that if you're not putting a 14 in Intelligence, you're doing it wrong, and that means Fighters have skill points.

Never was said at all at any point in this thread. We have said that if you want skills you need to invest in ways to get them. Intelligence is one way. There are others. This is a classic strawman argument. No one has ever made this claim in this thread. Arguing against it is folly.

Quote:
Meanwhile, Fighters need a crapload of Dexterity to qualify for dual wielding or archery options, or to get the most out of their Armor Training ability early on.

Mostly true. They do need good Dexterity but they don't need a crapload. I'm not a believer that you need to have every single two-weapon fighting feat or every archery feat to be great with those concepts.

Quote:
Yet still, Fighters need Strength whether they are melee or ranged.

Certainly helps, but it doesn't need to be maxed out either.

Quote:
Further still, Fighters are just like other classes in needing Wisdom for their poor Will saves, and possibly some skills (definitely need it for Perception); and is especially true because their defenses in general are lacking, beyond simple AC.

This is one reason why I generally put a 12 or 13 in Wisdom. I don't always, but it is common for me to do this.

Quote:
So that basically leaves Charisma as the only stat a Fighter doesn't need. Pretty much the definition of Multi-Ability-Dependent.

Depending on the build, but I do tend to dump Charisma most often because it is the easiest to overcome with feats, racial abilities, traits, and skill points. For the most part, Charisma provides little to no benefit to the fighter class, including most archetypes (I didn't look through them all but I can't think of one off the top of my head that needs it).

Quote:
Now Rangers need much of the same, but can support more skill points on less, have better Reflex saves. They get more benefit out of the Wisdom they would already be using. They can afford to raise Dexterity to very high levels later rather than sooner, because their Combat Style allows them to get the really sweet stuff like Improved Precise Shot and Manyshot without meeting the super-Dex requirements. This leaves them to having solid values in Strength, Dexterity, and Constitution far more easily; which also ensures they are solid front-liners.

They will still want a high Dexterity and a high Strength for attack and damage rolls, just like the fighter. Wisdom can be raised slowly, and they really only need a 14. With being limited to light and medium armors, they will want a higher Dexterity or Constitution otherwise they will be killed easily. As was pointed out, the max Dex bonus from armor only matters if your Dex is high enough to make it matter. If you only have a +2 from Dex, having a max of +4 from your armor is the same as having only a max of +2. So if the ranger has decent Strength, Dexterity, and Constitution, along with a decent Wisdom, he's much closer to slightly above average than being superior.

Quote:
This is of course being in addition to their various defensive and battlefield control options, the ability to heal the party with happy-sticks, the ability to annoy people with entangle wands (just throwing that out there because it's funny), and basically having lots of sweet class features.

Their class features don't come in all at once. They can use wands, but that cuts into their WBL. If they are 2-weapon fighters, that can be harsh. They will need defensive magic as well since they are limited in their armor choices.

Quote:
A ranger can comfortably support 16, 14, 13, 7, 14, 7 before racial mods, and literally be no worse off than the Fighter. In some cases, he is actually superior to the Fighter even with these scores. Slap the same stats on a Fighter, and he is considered the failure of Fighters everywhere, by some of the "Fighters have skills, you're building them wrong!" crowd.

I have a huge problem as both a player and GM with 2 dump stats. I don't care if it's allowed by the rules. It's getting Gump-ish and I have a huge problem with it. You will notice that I never have more than one and that's simply because I use the elite array. I always use the elite array in these discussions so that it's consistent and easy to see what I've done. It's also only 15 point buy which means that I have to work just a little harder to make sure that the character can handle CR-level equivalent encounters. I want to make sure I never get accused of dumping too much. Having been in too many discussions with 15-pb wizards with 3 dump stats, I have been attuned to more rounded builds.

As for the "you're building them wrong," you are only building them wrong if you are claiming that they suck at something they were never meant to be good at in the first place. If you scream that the two-handed fighter sucks with two-weapons because he dumped his Dex, then you are building it wrong. That's the problem with these discussions, the concept is always vague and therefore easy to argue against. If you pin down a concept, I can probably build to it. Some are much easier than others (mounts for fighters suck without Leadership for example).

I've been very busy working on my campaign but I have been very tempted to put up a fighter build that dumped Constitution just to prove that it can be done and still be effective. I may try to work on it later. The point would be to prove that certain stats aren't required and we can move past the MAD arguments.


Bob_Loblaw wrote:
Ashiel wrote:
Just so that we're clear, I wasn't addressing the Wisdom thing on the basis of "lawlz yer will save suxors!", but noting that Fighters and Rangers have very similar ability score requirements; and yet any way you slice it, Rangers are less MAD.

Not true. This is entirely concept based. Some fighter builds will require much less ability investment than some ranger builds. Blanket statements like this are easily refuted with a single example. You're a good enough gamer to be able to see that. I would actually argue that they are about the same overall.

Quote:
We've already seen that a Ranger with a 7 Intelligence has the same amount of skills as a Fighter with 14 Intelligence. Many people on the "Fighter is awesome, no problems here" side have said that if you're not putting a 14 in Intelligence, you're doing it wrong, and that means Fighters have skill points.

Never was said at all at any point in this thread. We have said that if you want skills you need to invest in ways to get them. Intelligence is one way. There are others. This is a classic strawman argument. No one has ever made this claim in this thread. Arguing against it is folly.

Quote:
Meanwhile, Fighters need a crapload of Dexterity to qualify for dual wielding or archery options, or to get the most out of their Armor Training ability early on.

Mostly true. They do need good Dexterity but they don't need a crapload. I'm not a believer that you need to have every single two-weapon fighting feat or every archery feat to be great with those concepts.

Quote:
Yet still, Fighters need Strength whether they are melee or ranged.

Certainly helps, but it doesn't need to be maxed out either.

Quote:
Further still, Fighters are just like other classes in needing Wisdom for their poor Will saves, and possibly some skills (definitely need it for Perception); and is especially true because their defenses in general are lacking, beyond simple AC.
This is one reason why I generally put a 12...

Yes but rangers have enough skill points to take craft (strawman)


Aelryinth wrote:

Kindly note also that Ranger-the-crafter with an Int penalty is going to be even worse at making all those magic items with his caster level penalty, too!

And as I pointed out earlier in the thread, Rangers are basically EXPECTED to have a wide set of skills, to DO THEIR JOB. That expectation is not on a fighter. A fighter can select their skills to complement the party.

==Aelryinth

And once again, skills are easy to buff. That ranger with the Int penalty still has a net bonus to spellcraft equal to his level +2. The DC to craft items is 5 + CL, with a +5 to the DC for each requirement you don't meet. Not a biggie. At 7th level, you have a +9 to your Spellcraft from your skills alone. You can also craft magic items to give yourself a bonus to Spellcraft. Masterwork tools can give a bonus to Spellcraft as well. Even with a 7 Int, you can take 10 and create a wide variety of items with relative ease. As you gain levels, you can produce items that supplement your Spellcraft checks, or your Intelligence, or both. By 20th, your Ranger can enjoy a nice 18 Int after your party's wizard does some of his mojo around 13th level to get you a +5 to your stats.

Bob_Loblaw wrote:
I have a huge problem as both a player and GM with 2 dump stats. I don't care if it's allowed by the rules. It's getting Gump-ish and I have a huge problem with it.

Not my problem. Ability scores are so varied that it doesn't matter much. It only matters mechanically. Personally, as a player AND a GM, I like dump stats. I think it makes for more believable characters. Have you ever watched Dollhouse by chance? Topher, the genius of the show, comments that everyone who excels is overcompensating for something else.

I don't really care that you think 7 is kind of low. You're a sentient, rational, thinking being at 3 Intelligence. It also has no effect roleplay wise beyond the effects that are obvious. 7 Intelligence could represent some sort of learning disability, or it might represent your severely under-educated status. Or it might be because you lack the attention or patience to make use of your Intelligence. Ability scores are ability scores. They mean different things to different people for different reasons.

Quote:
You will notice that I never have more than one and that's simply because I use the elite array. I always use the elite array in these discussions so that it's consistent and easy to see what I've done. It's also only 15 point buy which means that I have to work just a little harder to make sure that the character can handle CR-level equivalent encounters. I want to make sure I never get accused of dumping too much. Having been in too many discussions with 15-pb wizards with 3 dump stats, I have been attuned to more rounded builds.

That's peachy, but I couldn't give two coppers. I don't really care if somebody accuses you of dumping too much, or too little, or whatever. You have your stats, I have mine, and everyone can act like grownups and play the game. If I did my stats legally, by the rules, and you came over and told me that you didn't like my stats, I'd tell you what you could do with 'em.


Ashiel wrote:
Bob_Loblaw wrote:
I have a huge problem as both a player and GM with 2 dump stats. I don't care if it's allowed by the rules. It's getting Gump-ish and I have a huge problem with it.
Not my problem. Ability scores are so varied that it doesn't matter much. It only matters mechanically. Personally, as a player AND a GM, I like dump stats. I think it makes for more believable characters. Have you ever watched Dollhouse by chance? Topher, the genius of the show, comments that everyone who excels is overcompensating for something else.

There is a difference between having one handicap and having multiple handicaps. 7 is the lowest point buy an adventurer should start with. If you are starting with several 7's, you are getting into the world of the munchkin and pretending that it's role playing. Once in a while is one thing. However, these discussions make it sound like it's the standard. I would like to know how many people actually play with multiple dump stats. I doubt that it happens often.

Quote:
I don't really care that you think 7 is kind of low. You're a sentient, rational, thinking being at 3 Intelligence. It also has no effect roleplay wise beyond the effects that are obvious. 7 Intelligence could represent some sort of learning disability, or it might represent your severely under-educated status. Or it might be because you lack the attention or patience to make use of your Intelligence. Ability scores are ability scores. They mean different things to different people for different reasons.

I didn't argue anything about any particular stat. I argued about having multiple dump stats. Perhaps my term "Gump-ish" was what led you to believe that I was arguing about Intelligence. That was not my intent.

Quote:
That's peachy, but I couldn't give two coppers. I don't really care if somebody accuses you of dumping too much, or too little, or whatever. You have your stats, I have mine, and everyone can act like grownups and play the game. If I did my stats legally, by the rules, and you came over and told me that you didn't like my stats, I'd tell you what you could do with 'em.

A few things that are really important to note:

1) As the GM, I can place limitations on expectations for characters in my games. If someone came to me with multiple dump stats, they better have a very good reason that. They are called dump stats for a reason. The term is intentionally negative.

2) If any of my players came to me with the attitude of telling me what I could do with them, they would be told one time only that they are not welcome in my group. I don't have time for antagonistic players. It wouldn't be the first time I kicked someone from the group for being a jerk. I would hope that it would be the last.

3) I told you why I prefer to use the elite array, not that you should use it. I have found it less likely to be a point of contention because it is something that everyone can use in equal value. You might notice that nearly every NPC and monster is based on one the stat arrays with racial and HD adjustments. That's not a coincidence.


I am taking the test with a character I am playing in SOP that is almost level ten. I am going to take the test at level 10
Half-Elf Beast master Ranger 2/Weapon master Fighter 3/ Cleric (Travel & Defense) 3/ Barbarian 2 have boosts of striding & spring, so speed 60ft.

Opening a Locked Wooden Door

Sunder it with my adamantine great sword full attack

Opening a Locked and trapped wooden door

Spot the trap with Maxed Perception, and sunder the trap first if possible. If not cut through the wall.

Opening a locked and trapped nigh unbreakable door(with and without nighunbreakable wall)

Sunder through the wall with my adamantine great sword. If I am not cutting through then I Vital strike and take the adamantine wall section as treasure since that is most likely what it is made of, and thank the DM for the loot. :)

Getting out of a 30ft. dirt pit.

Grapple hook with silk rope I keep on my belt. :)

Getting out of a 30ft. slippery ice pit.

Grapple hook with silk rope I keep on my belt. :)

Getting over a wall of force 10ft high without a ceiling? 15ft high? With a ceiling?

10ft. Jump over it with my +40 acrobatics, 20ft. Jump up and grab the top and then flip or climb over. For the last one I would sunder through the wall next to the wall of force or if no wall just run around it.

Crossing a 10ft., 20ft. and 30 ft. wide canyon

Jump over the canyon or use a rope and grapping hook to get across.

Crossing Lava

Jump and Resist Energy Fire.

Being in Lava

Get out now! I will most likely survive one round if I fall in with my 95hp with average damage of 70 points per a round if I am under the lava.

Killing an invisible enemy.

Use my perception of +15 to find the target, move to a doorway or hall way, Spread Powder on the floor and watch for foot prints. At level 11 I will be picking up Blind-fight and Improved Blind-fight.
Killing a burrowing enemy
Ready vital strike for when I see it.

Killing a teleporting enemy.

Use Total Defense until the target is within 60ft. or 120ft. charge lane, and attack.

Killing an enemy with an unbeatable high AC but low touch AC

If in armor use lunge and Sunder it’s armor with my adamantine great sword. Use Divine Favor to boost my attack, use my scabbard of vigor to increase my attack by 2 for 3 rounds, get flank, trip the enemy using my mwk guisarme trip it, move action put it away, 5-ft step, and use quick draw to get out a mwk great sword from one of my scabbards of vigor. I also have acid which I can use with Vital strike. My base attack with my great sword is +18. In one round I can boost that to +22 add flank and a prone enemy my effective plus to hit is +28. Add bless and rage for anther +3 so plus effectively a +31 at level 10 if any of my allies use aid other it can go higher.

Moving through natural hindering terrain.

Jump over it.

Moving through unnatural hindering terrain

Jump over it and use acrobatics and total defense.

Being underwater

Hold breath and the 1st level spell air bubble which is good for air born poisons as well.

Being on a precarious footing (edge of cliff, along tree branches, etc.)
I have an acrobatics +23

A rampaging lynch mob without dealing any HP damage

How about non-lethal damage I only have to take a -4 to hit that is still +14 and they will only be hitting me on a 20 most likely. I could just out run them with my spend of 60ft. or jump to the roofs.

Being left with an improvised weapon.

Disarm an enemy to take their weapon, and find my weapons.

Being tripped, disarmed, grappled, sundered.

CMD of 30. Stand back up. I have about 20 weapons, and quick draw.

Magical effects on other party members.

Bless and air bubble that’s it.

Magical effects on the terrain(think Black tentacles, entangle and other things that can't be broken down, assume you can't just walk around it).

I would jump over it. I clear 12ft. if I take 10 and can cover 50ft.

Magical effects on himself that hinder him (assume failed save).

I am out of luck and hope a party member can do something about it.


Bob_Loblaw wrote:


There is a difference between having one handicap and having multiple handicaps. 7 is the lowest point buy an adventurer should start with. If you are starting with several 7's, you are getting into the world of the munchkin and pretending that it's role playing. Once in a while is one thing. However, these discussions make it sound like it's the standard. I would like to know how many people actually play with multiple dump stats. I doubt that it happens often.

I'm pretty sure that if I was to stat myself as a D&D character, I'd be a commoner with 3 point buy, dumping Wisdom and Charisma, emphasis Intelligence, average Strength and Constitution, and perhaps slightly above average Dexterity.

Your average wizard I would expect to have a 7 Str and 7 Cha, what with them literally personifying the know it all bookworm.

Ranger? Int 7 / Cha 7 makes absolute sense. Likely not formally educated, and Rangers are known for being loners. In fact, most any martially oriented character makes sense with a dumped Charisma, because they fit right in with other low Charisma guys all buddy-buddy, but are offensive to your less brutish folks (I live with a lot of Marines and quite honestly they don't know when to keep their mouths shut in front of certain people, or recognize that there is a time and a place for racist joke #2354565, and it's not in front of kids >:o ).

Quote:
Quote:
I don't really care that you think 7 is kind of low. You're a sentient, rational, thinking being at 3 Intelligence. It also has no effect roleplay wise beyond the effects that are obvious. 7 Intelligence could represent some sort of learning disability, or it might represent your severely under-educated status. Or it might be because you lack the attention or patience to make use of your Intelligence. Ability scores are ability scores. They mean different things to different people for different reasons.
I didn't argue anything about any particular stat. I argued about having multiple dump stats. Perhaps my term "Gump-ish" was what led you to believe that I was arguing about Intelligence. That was not my intent.

Actually, yes, I did think you meant Intelligence because of the Gump comment. Just so that we're clear, I'm just saying that we all have our personal preferences. You might not like dump stats, somebody else doesn't like elves, or whatever, but that has no bearing in this discussion. The game assumes 15 PB, and I was addressing it based on the standard 15 PB rules. I posted a variety of solid ranger arrays that didn't involve dumping two stats (most dumped Charisma because it does very little for Rangers), but some did. Why? To make a point.

What is that point? Rangers can hose their Int and still match a 14 Int Fighter for skill points. Hence, why the ranger's skill-monkeying class features help him remain skill relevant even if his stats are against him, whereas Fighters have to expend 1/3rd of their points just to reach 14 Int, the Ranger can gain 4 points and still match him.


Quote:
And as I pointed out earlier in the thread, Rangers are basically EXPECTED to have a wide set of skills, to DO THEIR JOB. That expectation is not on a fighter. A fighter can select their skills to complement the party.

What's stopping the ranger from doing the same?

Quote:
Mostly true. They do need good Dexterity but they don't need a crapload. I'm not a believer that you need to have every single two-weapon fighting feat or every archery feat to be great with those concepts.

I'd like to single this out for a moment and basically call it out for the truth that it is.

It seems like every time a sourcebook comes out there's always a new "must have" feat for certain combat styles. Sometimes this is true. Most of the time however I get the feeling a lot of feat starvation arguments are coming from people who believe that you must have these feats to be a competitive person in that style. And yet this is often far from the truth. I've gone for years without ever needing Snap Shot, or Pirahna Strike, or whatever flavor of the month feat gets dumped in my lap as the next biggest thing.

But anyway, I digress. Carry on.

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

Ashiel, saying "I can acquire magic items to overcome my lack of Intelligence and skill points" is an argument any class can use, including the fighter. It's the same as the fighter buying a +2 Int headband to craft with, and so invalid on the same level.

==Aelryinth


Ashiel, I'm trying to follow your ranger build so I can see everything that's happening. You mentioned that you would build him like Aragorn and take a 2-handed weapon. Earlier you said that you would give your ranger a shield for a +2 bonus to AC. Since that's not a buckler, how are you using both?

Lantern Lodge

TarkXT wrote:


It seems like every time a sourcebook comes out there's always a new "must have" feat for certain combat styles. Sometimes this is true. Most of the time however I get the feeling a lot of feat starvation arguments are coming from people who believe that you must have these feats to be a competitive person in that style. And yet this is often far from the truth. I've gone for years without ever needing Snap Shot, or Pirahna Strike, or whatever flavor of the month feat gets dumped in my lap as the next biggest thing.

But anyway, I digress. Carry on.

How to replace snap shot:

snap shot merely lets you threaten with a bow. this does 2 things, allow archery rogues to flank, and archers to take attacks of oppurtunity. both of these functions can be replaced by a spiked gauntlet, brass knuckles, or the improved unarmed strike feat

and close combat shot can be replaced by taking a 5 foot step

Why Pirahna strike is a trap:

Pirahna strike looks good on paper, it gives power attack to people who dump strength and wish to take weapon finesse. this feat appeals to a small subset of niche martial builds that due to choices they made cannot afford the requisite strength.

here is my solution, a high dexterity is overrated, having played a shadow hand swordsage, i realized how painful using dexterity to compensate strength is. you effectively place your eggs in a single basket, making specific debuffs worse against you. and you open the gate to fancy but poor fighting styles, like dual wielding. if you want to deal some damage, you are better off investing in strength and picking up a 2handed reach weapon alongside a spiked gauntlet. a 14 dexterity is all you really need as a base unless you an archer. belts, though a high gold expenditure, are easier (and cheaper) to utilize than wasted build points. physical perfection is fine. you get your main bonus a little slower, but you will be better all around.

if you honestly want to play a martial and deal damage. invest in strength and take power attack. even with a 14, that is better than a 7. you can now actually wear that armor you want so bad, carry some extra gear, improve some skills, more easily resist a grapple, and have a little extra static damage that will help you even if you do use finesse.

2weapon fighting is an impractical style, even if you are a rogue. the bonus damage from sneak attack is difficult to set up and the damage of dual wielding is heavily lost when you move more than 5 feet.

focusing on strength and using a 2handed weapon has the following benefits

1. less damage lost when moving
2. more benefit from quintessential buffs like haste
3. less time spent resolving your turn, which contributes to faster combat.
4. less feat expenditure
5. no -2 penalty to get your damage.
6. even with sneak attack, the damage from strength and power attack should be competitive with the average sneak attack damage from your offhand, even when you factor the above benefits plus the benefit of going through DR less often per round.

the Disadvantages of being small or having a low strength:

Halflings and Gnomes. i'll give a basic outline of thier shortcomings

Small size in pathfinder is assumed to come with 3 major penalties intended to penalize small martials. these penalties are

1. reduced strength. you can carry a little more of the small stuff. but your reduced strength penalizes more than just to hit and damage rolls. it penalizes CMD, combined with small size, expect grapple to be a frequent obstacle. reduced strength also hinders the benefits of 2handed weapons. which are the only true way to deal level appropriate damage short of a few niche gimmicks.

2. reduced size, CMD is weaker, weapons deal less damage, a reduced speed is frequently attached. weapon finesse and pirahna strike look interesting. why? you will never get enough strength to be viable, but you can suck less by using these patches. you still lag behind the guy with a 2hander.

3. reduced speed. this is more painful to replace than most give credit for. more turns spent closing in to engage. less turns spent making full attacks. harder time running away. catching up usually requires expenditures that leave you drastically behind in some resource. multiclassing barbarian means you are a level behind in your role. taking fleet means you are as far behind as the amount of feats you wasted. using spells means you are behind on other functions, focusing on archery is going to be difficult due to your strength penalty.

it's better to just stick with a medium character.

1,001 to 1,050 of 1,672 << first < prev | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / General Discussion / Why all the Fighter hate? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.