Fighters have many build options, but very few in-game options. If they want to do anything other than hit stuff really hard, they have to invest much more than every other class.
That's why, IMHO, they are very fun to build, but boring to play. Although that's just personal preference, of course.
I've built Diplomatic switch-hitter Fighters without even it even being human. It can be done. But I invested much, much more than I'd have to if I had built a Ranger, Paladin, Gunslinger or even Barbarian.
They also often lack variety in combat. I hate that "I full attack" is almost always the real option fighter have.
Want to trip or disarm someone? Well, you better get this completely useless feat and invest in an attribute that does nothing to you. Then you can buy the appropriate feat. Twice. Because God forbid any of your abilities scale with level.
Want to have some passable social skills? You better be ready to spend 2 traits and give up your favored class bonus. Oh, and you should also invest in that completely irrelevant attribute again, because you lack skill points as well.
Want to really excel with your favorite weapon? Get those 4 really boring feats. Cool, 30% of your class features were spent at the one thing fighters shouldn't need feats to excel, increasing DPR.
Luckly, you deal somewhat more damage than everyone else. And your AC is probably better. Let's hope that's all you need.
What really pains me, is that Fighters could have been so much more. And so easily... Here, let's boost Fighters a bit:
-4 skill points per level.
-Heal and Perception as class skills. Plus two others of the players choice. Selected at her first Fighter level.
- Let Bravery also help against Charm and Compulsion effects.
There. Fighters have much more variety and utility, and they're not even close to being OP and/or overshadowing any other class.
And not one of those things increase DPR or AC.
Of course, this would not solve any of the more serious problems (laqck of mobility and way-too-long feat chains), but it's a nice start.
Sorry for the rant... I got a bit carried away because I really like the class, but I'm underwhelmed by its features.
|
I think the Devs concern is skill creep, which is already kind of happening with the reduction of skills and the increasing number of classes that get lots of skill points.
The fighters lack of skills is somewhat mitigated by their reduction in ACP, but this is the kind of thing that is more overhaul adjust than tweak IMHO.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I disagree about the hitting incorporeals (that is a (Su) not an (Ex) ability).
I dunno... I can easily see it as being (Ex). Lengederary warriors hit incorporeal creaturees not because their sword were enchanted by some wizad, but because said warriors are just that awesome with their swords.
They can put so much force and velocity into their strikes that their sheer power can hurt even the incorporeal. Remember, we are talking about high level mythical warriors (mythical as in: they are like heroes of myth. Not the pointless power creep that Paizo recently released).Fighters definitely need the deflect breath weapon with shield.
Pf and yes 3.5, sometimes is half realistic (here is your armour penalty) but there is so much cool stuff from martial arts and legend that is not in the game. There was a...
Missile shield is like deflect arrow for shielded fighter, and ray shields do the same for rays .
There should be an easy way to obtain evasion with a shield though.
Those are too specific and too restricted. You shouldn't have to specialize in shields just to use them as... well... shields.
Also, deflect arrows is a terrible, terrible feat.
I think the Devs concern is skill creep, which is already kind of happening with the reduction of skills and the increasing number of classes that get lots of skill points.
The fighters lack of skills is somewhat mitigated by their reduction in ACP, but this is the kind of thing that is more overhaul adjust than tweak IMHO.
The ACP reduction barely helps the Fighters. Having lesser ACP (which, BTW, is already a very unnecessary restriction to martials) matters very little you don't have skill points and/or decent class skills for you to actually benefit from it.
It help even less with the Fighter's biggest problem. Lack of out-of-combat utility. Doesn't matter how well the Fighter swims or climbs. He still lacks social skills, Perception, knowledge skills, Stealth, etc...
Obviously, he shouldn't be great at all of that. But he should be good at some of that. Hence, why I suggested adding Perception and other 2 class skills of the player's choice to the list of class skills. Well, and Heal, because so many warriors of fiction have it.
Armor Training is a very interesting class feature, IMHO. I actually like its flavor, and it's pretty useful (due to the increased max Dex bonus to AC. Reduced ACP... Not so much...), but it still is more about inflating Fighters numbers than giving him options.
Deflect arrows is an awesome feat when you need to deflect an arrow, sir!
Yeah, and Sure Graps is an awesome feat when you are falling down near a wall. I still think both of them suck. And suck hard.
Also, let's hope there's only 1 arrow coming in your direction. Luckly, archers rarely make more than 1 attack per round. And they're usually alone, right? Right?
|
|
Deflect arrows is an awesome feat when you need to deflect an arrow, sir!Yeah, and Sure Graps is an awesome feat when you are falling down near a wall. I still think both of them suck. And suck hard.
Also, let's hope there's only 1 arrow coming in your direction. Luckly, archers rarely make more than 1 attack per round. And they're usually alone, right? Right?
At low levels, or against a target that is moving and attacking, there is one arrow from most target.
And regardless, that is one less arrow that could potentially hit me.
Sure grip I'll give you, but I've seen deflect arrows be a very useful feat to have.
Deflect arrows is an awesome feat when you need to deflect an arrow, sir!Yeah, and Sure Graps is an awesome feat when you are falling down near a wall. I still think both of them suck. And suck hard.
Also, let's hope there's only 1 arrow coming in your direction. Luckly, archers rarely make more than 1 attack per round. And they're usually alone, right? Right?
At low levels, or against a target that is moving and attacking, there is one arrow from most target.
And regardless, that is one less arrow that could potentially hit me.
Sure grip I'll give you, but I've seen deflect arrows be a very useful feat to have.
If by "useful" you mean "occasionally helps a little, but does increasingly less as the game progresses", then I'll agree with you.
Why not make something like this:
Deflect Projectile:
Prerequisite: Combar Reflexes
Benefit: You may spend one of your Attacks of Opportunity) to deflect any ranged or touch attack directed at you or an adjacent ally (You must have an Attack of Opportunity left for the round in order to use this feat).
To do so, you must make an attack roll and compare it to the attack roll of the ranged attack. If your final result is higher, then the projectile is deflected.
Ta-daaa... Now you can parry arrows, bullets and touch/ray spells! Or if you think it's too much, separate the "touch attacks" into an Improved version of it.
|
|
Deflecting rays would be broken, unless you want to make it a feat chain.
It isn't something all builds would use (THF, TWF and Sword and board have no use) but it functionally negates one attack a round from anyone using ranged weapons. Generally the first attack, which is the one most likely to hit you.
That ain't bad.
Deflecting rays would be broken, unless you want to make it a feat chain.
It isn't something all builds would use (THF, TWF and Sword and board have no use) but it functionally negates one attack a round from anyone using ranged weapons. Generally the first attack, which is the one most likely to hit you.
That ain't bad.
Not sure if deflecting rays is that good, mostly because casters and caster-like creatures often have so many other offensive spells, but I'll agree that it may merit a new feat.
Combat Reflexes -> Deflect Missiles -> Deflect Rays
A good feat chain, IMO, all three of them are useful, cool, somewhat related and have their efficiency increase with level.
Now, Deflect Arrows is underwhelming from start and becomes more and more useless as time goes by. Specially when we consider things like Rapid Shot and Haste.
Deflect Arrows might be good for a minor class feature, but it's hardly worth a feat, even for a Fighter.
Man, my epic level monk was great at deflecting rays. It was awesome.
I'm not sure if you're being sarcastic or not, but that did remind me of something...
Didn't the Tome of Battle have a maneuver for deflecting touch attacks?If so, that's a precedent for my "Deflect Projectiles" idea! Hah.
|
Man, my epic level monk was great at deflecting rays. It was awesome.I'm not sure if you're being sarcastic or not, but that did remind me of something...
Didn't the Tome of Battle have a maneuver for deflecting touch attacks?
If so, that's a precedent for my "Deflect Projectiles" idea! Hah.
The old Occult Slayer PrC from 3.5 could deflect spells. It was a fantastic "Mage Slayer" PrC, especially when you were a ranger and you took human as your favored enemy.
It sounds like a good feat, particularly because is not guaranteed to succeed.
Deflect Projectile:
Prerequisite: Combar Reflexes
Benefit: You may spend one of your Attacks of Opportunity) to deflect any ranged or touch attack directed at you or an adjacent ally (You must have an Attack of Opportunity left for the round in order to use this feat).
To do so, you must make an attack roll and compare it to the attack roll of the ranged attack. If your final result is higher, then the projectile is deflected.
Thanks, Nicos.
Against an equally skilled archer, it's a 50/50 chance. And you're spending a resource (AoO). Admitedly, a cheap, plentiful and very easily renewable resource, but still, a resource, while the archer is just standing there, full attacking, and using his much less situational feats.Missile shield help you to avoid the two arrow from manyshot. ANd a shield based fighter probably have the AC to have a good change to negate the iteratives.
I don't think you even need it. The second arrow only hits if the first one does, so if you deflect/block the first attack, the extra is blocked as well.
Although it's still useful against archers with Rapid Shot and Hasted.
by the other hand this could just negate the entire routine of the archer. If i am playing an archer and a dude just hit with his sword all my arrows i do not know how I would feel about the DM.It sounds like a good feat, particularly because is not guaranteed to succeed.
Deflect Projectile:
Prerequisite: Combar Reflexes
Benefit: You may spend one of your Attacks of Opportunity) to deflect any ranged or touch attack directed at you or an adjacent ally (You must have an Attack of Opportunity left for the round in order to use this feat).
To do so, you must make an attack roll and compare it to the attack roll of the ranged attack. If your final result is higher, then the projectile is deflected.
Thanks, Nicos.
Against an equally skilled archer, it's a 50/50 chance. And you're spending a resource (AoO). Admitedly, a cheap, plentiful and very easily renewable resource, but still, a resource, while the archer is just standing there, full attacking, and using his much less situational feats.
That's true. Although he most likely has many more attacks per round than you have AoO (at mid/high levels), this would probably be a big problem at low levels.. Maybe giving a penalty (-2? -4?) to the to-hit of AoO used in such way might balance it a bit more.
Anyway, if the occasional enemy can defend from your ranged routine, it's not such a problem. If every enemy has the feat chain, your GM is as much as of a jerk as the one who only puts neutral enemies for on the Paladin's way.
This might make archers value other combat options when standing still and shooting arrows is not a viable alternative...
Options.I'm personally very happy with Barbarians, Bards, Clerics, Druids, Paladins, Rangers, Sorcerers, and Wizards just in the core rules. I find that these parties are balanced enough to make me happy. That only leaves Fighter, Monk, and Rogue lacking.What exactly does the fighter lack again?Whatever your personal preferences are is by your choice so we aren't arguing about that. What you like is what you like.
Now, where we are going to argue is your reasoning you gave. Now if you had said the fighter doesn't present the right kind of options for you then I would have it let go but you are trying to misrepresent the class by stating it lacks options which is untrue and has been proven to you time and time again.
Ever heard the expression "if you throw enough mud at the wall some of it will eventually stick"? Well that's what you keep doing with the fighter argument. You say that a fighter can't do A and someone comes and shows you that they can, then you move on to B and they show you it can etc... Eventually you may find something the class can't do so you tell us "see, I told you the class is lacking".
You tend to ignore facts just to validate your argument.
No. I don't think so. I've never said fighters can't do X unless they can't do X. I have said Fighters are not well set up to handle the rigors of adventuring as well as a Paladin (which I still believe is true) but I've been convinced by one particular Fighter player during such a discussion that it can work.
But when I say that fighters lack options, I legitimately mean that. But why is that? Because Fighters only fight. I realize that sounds like an odd statement, but in an RPG it's a very big deal. It might be a little less debilitating in a game that is played more like a tactical boardgames dungeon crawl "kick in the door" sort of framework, but at the end of the day even in such cases Fighters typically are quite limited in their scope. People comment on fighters being able to specialize in multiple combat styles, but at the end of the day they are still doing the same things that every NPC class or goblin can do, just with bigger numbers.
A Fighter is sitting in the cold throughout the rest of the game. If you build them to seem at all special next to the other martials in the game (in terms of combat prowess), you're going to find yourself lacking pretty heavy in the other parts of the game which include dealing with NPCs, exploration, dealing with traps, solving problems, and so forth.
Also, unlike the other classes, the Fighter doesn't gain options as he gains levels. He actually looses them. This is mostly because - barring archery fighters - he is anchored to the 5 ft. + full-attack to do his business in a game that becomes more and more mobile as the game goes on. By mid levels it's entirely normal for battles to include enemies who can measure their tactical options in miles and more than 4 dimensions (because we also have transdimensional tactics like ethereal jaunt and other forms of incorporeality).
Fighter options tend to revolve around some form of "hit it". Other classes lack this woe. Even Barbarians as mundane as they are get some pretty cool Rage powers that let them do some pretty cool things (and make them better at fighting).
Fighters cannot:
1) Deal effectively with magic (IE - magical obstacles, divinations, etc).
2) Deal effectively with status conditions (confusion, charmed, poisoned, etc).
3) Deal effectively with situations calling for large AoE tactics.
4) Deal effectively with enemies that are difficult to pin down.
5) Deal effectively with terrain and environmental effects.
6) Deal effectively with things like poison, ability damage, and other afflictions (such as removing, preventing, or healing these things).
7) Deal effectively with ambushes (like Stealth and having a good defense while resting). {Though a Fighter can invest several non-Fighter feats into patching this problem.}
Few classes can do all of these things but most classes can do most of these things.
You can say that I claim Fighters can't do X and then someone proves me wrong but you would be wrong. I say nay sir. I've never claimed a fighter cannot do something unless a Fighter cannot do it (though I have often said I'd rather have X vs Fighter in my party because of Y). When I do say a Fighter cannot do something then it is because he cannot.
I mentioned this in another thread- perhaps a feat that while using a shield allows fighters to add their strength bonus to AC as an action. Bracing for impact so to speak.
As for mages. After a disastrous session last night which saw our neutral good mage allow the rest of the party to be killed as a preference to surrender while levitating with protection from normal missiles while lighting up the battle field-- Now lets be clear here--this sixth level mage with a ring of spell storing completely balked a slaver who was a 10th level fighter and this three fourth level fighter sons I have decided.
My campaigns no longer allow the Transmutation School spells.
You can fireball to your hearts content. You can whisper in the wind, trap souls, raise the dead--but you are not going to play fricking superman in my game--I'm GMing fantasy not a superhero comic book campaign. Gandalf doesn't fly. Merlin doesn't fly. Pug doesn't fly. Harry Dresden doesn't fly. Allanon doesn't fly. Thulsa Doom doesn't fly. the Aes Sedai don't fly. Elric doesn't fly. Ningauble and Sheelba do not fly. Obi Wan Kenobi does not fly. Vainamoinen doesn't fly. Harry Potter flies--but with a broom. So no. No more flying wizards in my campaign.
Grrr. Arrgh.
To be fair, that more of a problem with DnD/PF's difficulty in dealing with 3 dimensions than with the Fly spell.
That said... Didn't any of those Fighters have a longbow? By 6th level it's pretty hard to be completely immune to archery.
Also, can he fly all day long? Nope? then let the enemy kill/capture his friends and simply wait for the puny wizard to run out of time/spell. Next time the wizard is in trouble, let the other PCs return the favor.
I don't think Fly is so much of a problem, but if it's really bothering you that much, these are my suggestions:
Instead of outright banning Fly (which might cause some pretty bad situations at higher levels), why not simply raise its level? No longer a 3rd level spell, it could be a 5th or 6th level spell.
Another alternative is reducing its durations from minutes per caster level to round per casters level.
Or, you know, ACTUALLY USE the Fly skill rules. I like Kirthfinder's idea that any flying creature without at least 1 rank in Fly is considered to be flat-footed.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
1)How Fighters Deal Effectively with Magic:
"Hey Wizard?!"
"What?"
"How about you make me a sangwich or I make you eat your spellbook?"
"How dare you, you're going to pay f- where IS my spellbook?!"
*Fighter holds up the spellbook*
"Um...one sandwich coming right up, Mr. Strong and Fair!"
"It's sangwich...and one more thing..."
"What?"
"PURPLE NURPLE!"
"ARRRRGGGGHHHH!"
(This post does not promote or endorse bullying, except when you need a wizard to make you a sangwich.)
|
Is there a feat that would let a fighter add his total shield bonus to any save rolls that is based on an area effect attack (breath weapon, etc)? Maybe as a readied action or..not?
Personally I think the design philosophy of metamagic vs. all other feats needs to change. Either the metamagic feats get toned down to work only on fixed spells or "all the other" crap feats are widened (ex Weapon specialization covering broad weapon groups).
I would like to see the metamagic approach applied to deflect arrows. Something like:
Low level - chance to deflect arrows
Mid level - chance to deflect rays and magical ranged touch attacks
Higher level - aoe save bonus/evasion type of effect while using shield.
All with the same feat.
the Aes Sedai don't fly.
They used to.
I appreciate the comment. I guess I have a problem with one class playing superhero when the rest are grounded. The three dimensional layout is a pain. Long bows in my game world are an exotic. Short bows do d6. 10 points of dr. The point is that this game is so freaking tactical and it always has been. You need this item or this spell or this feat to accomplish. I had slavers with dart crossbows with sedatives and javelins. at 50 feet off the ground there was really no point.
I see. How did he get DR 10/-?
Out of curiosity, why are longbows exotic weapons? Is this a stone age setting? Or in the darklands? (I recently read a PF novel where many underworld natives had never seen a bow).
Unfortunately, bows are maybe the one good ranged weapon in the game. Restricting the access to them will gimp martials pretty bad. Firearms are particullary terrible (except for Gunslingers).
Well, slings still work. And shortbows can also be modified to apply Strength to damage, just like longbows. Their damage die is smaller, but who cares? They do have considerably less range, though.
I have the impression the Fighter Family was too ill prepared for ranged combat. Specially in a world filled with flying fireball-slinging wizards. Even more so considering they are powerful warriors. (Remember, most people are 1st or 2nd level commoners/expert/warriors, even a 4th level Fighter is exceptional the battlefield. A 10th level fighter is something straight out from the legends of old, look at what is considered a CR-equivalent creature in the bestieary: Bone Devils, T-Rex, etc...).
You are right there were options. But i lost my temper by the end. The player who started this session with a b*@~#fest about a co-player taking a round too long to get into the fray last time as someone no watching his back called the slavers bluff not once but three times when he said he would coup de grace the helpless party members. Given a chance to surrender with a knife at your friends neck what does a neutral good player do? Call the bluff? When he actually does it what does the neutral good player do when it happens again?
Sorry, I honestly can barely understand what exactly happened in these events.
Deflect arrows is an awesome feat when you need to deflect an arrow, sir!
Hells yes, pair it with a high ac, and you may become almost missile proof. A great build to counter archer rangers.
Yeaaah, and the first highest attack doesn't matter. Bow bowwww.
I mentioned this in another thread- perhaps a feat that while using a shield allows fighters to add their strength bonus to AC as an action. Bracing for impact so to speak.
As for mages. After a disastrous session last night which saw our neutral good mage allow the rest of the party to be killed as a preference to surrender while levitating with protection from normal missiles while lighting up the battle field-- Now lets be clear here--this sixth level mage with a ring of spell storing completely balked a slaver who was a 10th level fighter and this three fourth level fighter sons I have decided.
My campaigns no longer allow the Transmutation School spells.
You can fireball to your hearts content. You can whisper in the wind, trap souls, raise the dead--but you are not going to play fricking superman in my game--I'm GMing fantasy not a superhero comic book campaign. Gandalf doesn't fly. Merlin doesn't fly. Pug doesn't fly. Harry Dresden doesn't fly. Allanon doesn't fly. Thulsa Doom doesn't fly. the Aes Sedai don't fly. Elric doesn't fly. Ningauble and Sheelba do not fly. Obi Wan Kenobi does not fly. Vainamoinen doesn't fly. Harry Potter flies--but with a broom. So no. No more flying wizards in my campaign.
Grrr. Arrgh.
Quite a good idea, str bonus to ac at the cost of losing some actions, or taking it from attack. Reminds me of bag work in kickboxing.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So... a summary of possible solutions to the Lack-of-Options problem outlined in this thread:
1) Fighters get 4+Int mod skill points / level
2) More class skills for Fighter (Heal and Perception suggested, at minimum)
3) Bravery applies to Charm and Compulsion effects OR give a second "good save" for fighters (probably Wil save)
4) Remove or reduce prereqs for Combat Maneuver feats, or have one prereq for all of them that isn't based on a non-fighter ability score.
5) Eliminate Int requirement for Combat Expertise (i.e. remove the "ability tax" the fighter must pay for this feat)
6) Allow feats to scale into their Greater equivalents with level, rather than by having to spend more feats (i.e. if you have TWF, you get Improved TWF at level X).
Other possibilities (some for rogues too):
- Weapon Finesse bonus applies to Disarm and Dirty Trick combat maneuvers (so high-Dex rogues can still do these high-finesse moves)
- Combat Expertise also gives +4 AC vs. AoOs triggered by combat maneuver attempts, similar to how Mobility works with movement, in addition to its normal effects.
- Give rogues a second good save (I would say Fort, given the rough-and-tumble image of the typical rogue, but whatever suits)
- Allow some feats to be taken twice, and stack (such as Iron Will) or the following:
- Feats that improve saves give +4 to that save, rather than +2 (Greater Fortitude, Lightning Reflexes, Iron Will). This allows non-combat feats to shore up the massive disparity between saves for different character types, at the cost of a feat, thus allowing feats to shore up weaknesses rather than boost strengths (which is more typical).
Nerfing the Casters:
- Reduce durations, or don't allow durations to increase by level in an unlimited fashion (i.e. similar to how Cure Light caps out at +5, cap spell durations at 5 levels above the level when you get that spell).
- Have some spells that imitate other class features give a BONUS to doing that task, rather than automatic success (i.e. knock = +10 Disable, Spider Climb = +10 climb, Invis = +10 stealth instead of +20, etc).
- Don't allow bonus spells slots for high attributes (and don't lynch me for suggesting it). Casters get enough benefit from their primary stat as it is.
My Own Thoughts and Comments
- Knowledge skills never used to exist. Monster stats were gained by hard experience and a "character monster log" rather than "the DM tells you because you made your check". You as DM do not have to give out information you don't want players to have, just because they made a check.
- the DM, being the ultimate arbiter, should be able to design a challenge even for the most powerful caster, while still giving Fighters a chance to shine (and not necessarily in every encounter). Most campaigns can usually be balanced for the party in question by encounter design and what types of magic items are allowed to be created/given as loot/found by each character. I realize this was not the point of the thread, but it speaks to what many are criticising re: the power imbalance.
- If you have players that are truly that intelligent, they probably also want to be challenged, even if their characters are miniature gods. Work with them to create the kind of campaign that suits you and all your players. I bet that people who put the thought into designing severely-OP wizards are having tons of fun (and are probably overcompensating for how squishy they felt at level 1).
- "Classic D&D" has ALWAYS had wizards start weak and end strong, and Fighters start strong and end weaker. This is what you sign up for when playing the game known for years as "D&D". Attempts to change this have radically altered the feel of the game (e.g. 4e). Some of us are okay with the original paradigm.
- Skill checks never used to exist. Mess with skills, change them around, do whatever you need to so that they fit with how you want them to work in your campaign. At this point, I doubt "pathfinder 2" will be released, so unless you want to jump into 5e, welcome to "adding houserules" as the solution.
- This game is designed with a built-in referee, meaning that house rules can be the order of the day. This means that you can guide the game dynamically based on player preferences, player skill levels, and apparent imbalances.
I thank all the contributors to this thread for their thoughts and warnings about imbalances that I may yet encounter, and suggestions about what to do about them. I understand why people want to see these things fixed in the manual, so we will all have a place to look up rules and not have to wade through 1000 forum posts to find the answers to the problems that many of us run into re: balance.
EDIT: A very old suggestion/method to nerf highlevel casters and boost low-level casters is to give every spellcaster "casting energy points" with which to cast spells, instead of spell slots. It costs a number of points equal to the spell level to cast the spell, and the spellcaster gains these points about as quickly as hitpoints (d6+casting attribute / level). You can adjust the #points / level as you see fit, and should probably start at max-roll at first level (i.e. 6+intmod at 1st level, whatever). This method was devised before Sorcerer existed as a class, and is mainly aimed at the Wizard class.
Option: Once the caster is out of casting energy, he can burn hp at double or triple rate to cast more spells (i.e. 9th level spell = 18 or 27 hp).
I mentioned this in another thread- perhaps a feat that while using a shield allows fighters to add their strength bonus to AC as an action. Bracing for impact so to speak.
As for mages. After a disastrous session last night which saw our neutral good mage allow the rest of the party to be killed as a preference to surrender while levitating with protection from normal missiles while lighting up the battle field-- Now lets be clear here--this sixth level mage with a ring of spell storing completely balked a slaver who was a 10th level fighter and this three fourth level fighter sons I have decided.
My campaigns no longer allow the Transmutation School spells.
You can fireball to your hearts content. You can whisper in the wind, trap souls, raise the dead--but you are not going to play fricking superman in my game--I'm GMing fantasy not a superhero comic book campaign. Gandalf doesn't fly. Merlin doesn't fly. Pug doesn't fly. Harry Dresden doesn't fly. Allanon doesn't fly. Thulsa Doom doesn't fly. the Aes Sedai don't fly. Elric doesn't fly. Ningauble and Sheelba do not fly. Obi Wan Kenobi does not fly. Vainamoinen doesn't fly. Harry Potter flies--but with a broom. So no. No more flying wizards in my campaign.
Grrr. Arrgh.
here is how easily you can deal with flight. pick up a composite longbow, if it happens to be magic, you can easily ignore protection from arrows.
all restricting access to the longbow by making it an exotic weapon does is any of the following
- gimp all non-elven martial builds
- force all viable martial characters to play elves
- feat tax any non-elven martial builds to keep up
- reward certain human and half elven alternate racial traits
- encourage a new trend of shortbow builds
- artificially inflate the importance of fly potions and flying mounts
- reward pouncing barbarians even more
- encourage a player to build a clone of AM BARBARIAN
I also wanted to note that mistakes made by a caster are often a lot more punishing than those made by a Fighter. Perhaps this is part of the balance...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Sorry about the lack of blocks on that spells cost post. What's the command for blocks? DOn't think I have ever used them. Can't edit the post after one day.
I can't claim credit for that article. IT was on Enworld, mentioned on a newsletter I get, and I went and copied it and saved it. I should have noted the author to give him credit. I'll see if I can find it and add it to the original, but my search-fu isn't the best.
The point on WHirlwind Attack is excellent. Unless you're a Master Tripper with an awesome success rate, getting in the middle of a bunch of foes so you can get off 6 attacks that don't kill anyone is suicide. This was first driven home to us ten years ago when the brawny fighter with his mercurial greatsword jumped into the middle of a circle of vampire spawn the DM set up carefully for him, and hit every single one of them.
Didn't kill any of them. On their initiative, he got swarmed, drained for 16 points of Con, and died rather emphatically. None of us knew that was going to happen, and nobody ever used Whirlwind again.
==Aelryinth
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Is there a feat that allows you to add your Shield bonus to your Reflex save? Shield Ward in 3.5 allowed that, plus the shield applied for your Touch AC and against grappling/grab attempts.
==Aelryinth
|
|
I just want to go back a moment with regards to Skills.
Why does a fighter need all these other skills when there are other classes that are designed to be better at skills like the Bard and Rogue? This isn't 4th edition where you need a certain number of successes in order to win the challenge.
Here is really what happens in game:
DM: Okay lads, you see a chest in the corner and find out it's locked.
Player 1: "Alright, who's got the highest Open Locks?"
Now each player will look at their sheet and see who has the highest bonus while second place will aid. Now the other three or four will just stand there and wait but that's okay because that's how teamwork works. Same with Diplomacy and any other social skills. When you have a bard or a rogue in the party then generally the other players don't even need to worry about doing skill checks unless it's one of those situations where everyone needs to make it, for example Swim.
Now it's already been proven you can have a skilled fighter so all this talk about lack of out of combat usefulness is b~#!#!+~ but of course some people like to close their eyes and ears so their argument will remain valid in their own mind.
|
|
I just want to go back a moment with regards to Skills.
Why does a fighter need all these other skills when there are other classes that are designed to be better at skills like the Bard and Rogue? This isn't 4th edition where you need a certain number of successes in order to win the challenge.
Here is really what happens in game:
DM: Okay lads, you see a chest in the corner and find out it's locked.
Player 1: "Alright, who's got the highest Open Locks?"
Now each player will look at their sheet and see who has the highest bonus while second place will aid. Now the other three or four will just stand there and wait but that's okay because that's how teamwork works. Same with Diplomacy and any other social skills. When you have a bard or a rogue in the party then generally the other players don't even need to worry about doing skill checks unless it's one of those situations where everyone needs to make it, for example Swim.
Now it's already been proven you can have a skilled fighter so all this talk about lack of out of combat usefulness is b$%@!!## but of course some people like to close their eyes and ears so their argument will remain valid in their own mind.
nobody is talking about outskill the bard or the rogue. One of multiple answer for your question is that it is ludicrous that the most mundane of all classes can not resolve situation doing mundane tricks. It does just not make sense that a soldier train all his youth just to leat how to ride and swim.
Unless you are playing a solo mission or an all fighter party, you don't really need to worry about investing in skills other than ones that effect you personally. Now Perception is a skill that everyone needs but a fighter can still take Skill Focus Perception, with one of his many feats. The only way giving more skill points to fighters is really worth it is if they are given enough skill points to bring them close to the rogue or bard. Anything less is pointless because you have other classes that are just better at most skills.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
LOL. This' shallowsoul's argument:
"Fighters don't need those dumb skills because everyone else can do it better."
There is no problem if any class sucks, as long as it has friends who belong to the more powerful classes...
Yeah, that makes sense... LOL
The others roll to assist, using the rules as appropriate.
|
|
IMO lack of skill points isn't the primary or even a major problem for fighter (though I find any class at 2+int deplorable). Like others have mentioned, it's the lack of options any time the situation cannot be solved by hitting it with a stick. Sure, they can take skills, but so can everyone else, and nearly everyone else gets more of those. What is it that a fighter, and only a fighter, can do to help in those situations? The answer is always nothing.
The barbarian can learn to break spells bare-handed, or fly, or other useful tricks for bypassing obstacles (in or out of combat). The paladin and ranger get a limited selection of spells that can allow them to help with that purpose. The fighter? Nothing. Every single class ability he has is combat-only, and only simple "hit with stick" combat, and is so by design. In fact, every single one of them can be translated to or already are a simple numeric bonus (with the exception of bonus feats, though even many of those can be). Even the bonus feats that aren't simple numeric bonuses are limited by being required to be combat feats, which are (by definition) combat applicable only, and (as a general rule) do not add any real new capabilities.
If they even had some minor options to handle unusual situations that would be fine. Some examples of things that would make fighter more interesting without making them a wizard: ability to damage incorporeal with any weapon as though ghost touch, ability to ignore difficult terrain (there's a feat that does this, but it is NOT a combat feat and costs too many feats IMO), ability to simply shrug off status effects X times per day (good candidates include stunned and paralyzed), have some method of combating magic other than hitting it with a stick (maybe they can get SR like a monk does, for example). Oh, and they should be able to get these *without* having to invest in off-stats (I mean, a caster, barbarian or paladin doesn't, why should a fighter?)
All of these are just examples and would obviously have to come at the expense of some other feature. I would make them "Fighter Talents" that take the place of a bonus combat feat or can be taken as a regular feat much the same way as Arcane Discoveries.
TL;DR - Yes, the fighter is extremely simple and that is by design, but I disagree with that design and would prefer if I could spend my bonus feats on stuff that is more interesting.
Here is really what happens in game:
DM: Okay lads, you see a chest in the corner and find out it's locked.
Player 1: "Alright, who's got the highest Open Locks?"
Now each player will look at their sheet and see who has the highest bonus while second place will aid. Now the other three or four will just stand there and wait but that's okay because that's how teamwork works. Same with Diplomacy and any other social skills. When you have a bard or a rogue in the party then generally the other players don't even need to worry about doing skill checks unless it's one of those situations where everyone needs to make it, for example Swim.
Of course when the Bard/Rogue fails the check by 6 or more...
I have yet to play a game where the Bard/Rogue takes care of every skill check ever and never ever fails one so we need a backup guy.
Now it's already been proven you can have a skilled fighter
...If you sacrifice a large chunk of in-combat efficiency.
so all this talk about lack of out of combat usefulness is b~%%*+~~ but of course some people like to close their eyes and ears so their argument will remain valid in their own mind.
Oh come on now you're just FEEDING me these "Pot, kettle, black" lines.
Actually, the FIghter cannot take Skill Focus with any of his bonus feats, either. So that's a moot argument, too.
==Aelryinth
|
|
IMO lack of skill points isn't the primary or even a major problem for fighter (though I find any class at 2+int deplorable). Like others have mentioned, it's the lack of options any time the situation cannot be solved by hitting it with a stick. Sure, they can take skills, but so can everyone else, and nearly everyone else gets more of those. What is it that a fighter, and only a fighter, can do to help in those situations? The answer is always nothing.
The barbarian can learn to break spells bare-handed, or fly, or other useful tricks for bypassing obstacles (in or out of combat). The paladin and ranger get a limited selection of spells that can allow them to help with that purpose. The fighter? Nothing. Every single class ability he has is combat-only, and only simple "hit with stick" combat, and is so by design. In fact, every single one of them can be translated to or already are a simple numeric bonus (with the exception of bonus feats, though even many of those can be). Even the bonus feats that aren't simple numeric bonuses are limited by being required to be combat feats, which are (by definition) combat applicable only, and (as a general rule) do not add any real new capabilities.
If they even had some minor options to handle unusual situations that would be fine. Some examples of things that would make fighter more interesting without making them a wizard: ability to damage incorporeal with any weapon as though ghost touch, ability to ignore difficult terrain (there's a feat that does this, but it is NOT a combat feat and costs too many feats IMO), ability to simply shrug off status effects X times per day (good candidates include stunned and paralyzed), have some method of combating magic other than hitting it with a stick (maybe they can get SR like a monk does, for example). Oh, and they should be able to get these *without* having to invest in off-stats (I mean, a caster, barbarian or paladin doesn't, why should a fighter?)
All of these are just examples and would obviously have to...
What does everyone else do when Spellcraft and Knowledge Arcana are needed from the Wizard?
What does everyone else do when locks need to be picked?
What does everyone else do when there needs to be a Heal check?
What does everyone else do when a Knowledge Nature check is called for?
There are some classes that over shadow all other classes when it comes to skills. If you have a Bard or Rogue in the party then nobody else really needs to worry about making skill checks.
If you want to build a skilled fighter then go ahead but don't make false claims that a fighter isn't viable outside of combat because he can be but it makes more sense to let a class that has a higher skill rank make the roll. This is one of those cons to being in a group and the way the skill system works.
A fighter is there to fight, that is what he does and that is what he was designed to do.
Increasing it to 4 + Int skill points really doesn't do much more.