I can't say I'm a fan of anything that even FURTHER discourages multiclassing from how Pathfinder is already set up, but to each his own.
Perhaps you got a point.
OK. Back to my first idea. I’ll create two feats. One is for all classes, one is only for fighters.
Fighters still have limited feats.You choose what your fighter specializes in or if you want a really nice chance to prevent something like being grappled then you take close quarters fighting. No fighter build can do it all. The same could be said for every other class. As opposed to the solution of "there is a spell for that" as if casters were not limited on the number of spells they can cast per day.
Spell component pouch may be 5 gp at level one. However, if you are trying to say each one is still only 5 gp at level 8, thats complete b!&%%+@s. As for the rest of the points, I supposed it comes down to different playstyles and pace of campaigns.
The 15 minutes spent preparing more spells is not always going to be there. Not in gritty campaigns anyway.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
That's the rules. The price doesn't magically scale with level, it's a 5 gp pouch full of the components to cast every spell with a non-cost material component.
Yep. The rules also state "except for those components that have a specific cost, divine focuses, and focuses that wouldn’t fit in a pouch."
That rule is up to the dm to implement and define what fits or doesn't fit. Ignoring the that part of the rule is not impossible. If the group prefers it that way then that is how it should be.
Could certainly run it that way and if everyone has fun, more power to you guys. Anyhow, to address the 2nd half of the argument, Blitz asked:
(-Are you not actively challenging spellcasters to pass concentration checks like they should be?
-Are spellcasters NEVER receiving damage from enemies so that they HAVE to make a concentration check?
-Are enemies for some reason not targeting the spellcaster who is obviously a huge threat?
-Are spellcasters not being charged with the task of acquiring their material components?
-Are spellcasters not being targeted by enemy spellcasters?)
The answer to all those qustions is generally not. Hence why the casters have the feeling of being superior and are superior in such games because the ones being challenged the most are the martials. Seen mix of games where the martials and melee are challenged. Also seen games where the melee are targeted alot more. In the case of the latter, you have the mentalisty of "casters are so powerful" and who can blame them for thinking so. Also seen games where the melee actually really shine through over the casters but then again, the game isn't run in a vacuum. A concept which alot of people can't seem to grasp. Same with the dpr issue. I'm over this thread. Not so much because opinions differ but the inability to even consider alternatives is sorely lacking. Enjoy your one dimensional perspective and playstyle in a vacuum.
Yep. The rules also state "except for those components that have a specific cost, divine focuses, and focuses that wouldn’t fit in a pouch."
That rule is up to the dm to implement and define what fits or doesn't fit. Ignoring the that part of the rule is not impossible.
So off the top of your head can you think of any non-costly components that wouldn't fit in the 1/8 cubic ft pouch?
Note, not some cumulative number of items that exceeds the 2 lb "full" weight, since it contains ALL material components, just a single component that would be too large to fit inside the pouch.
It is nice that a fighter never has to worry about a big fat SR.
It is nice that a fighter never has to worry about a big fat SR.
But he does have to worry about DR.
Granted, not as hard to overcome in some cases, but still there.
-Are spellcasters not being charged with the task of acquiring their material components?
Oh god, not that topic again.
For the record, are you just talking about the components/focuses/etc that have a GP cost listed, or are you advocating going back to the old days of 2E where wizards spend half of every game session gathering bat guano and inventory managing instead of actually playing?
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I remember when a friend of mine and I finally managed to get into an mmo that interested us both, he seemed to find unlimited ways to die despite nobody else in the party having any trouble. It wasnt for lack of trying to save him but he always seemed to be in the wrong place doing the wrong thing at the wrong time.
His name was Yohan and while at first I was just taking screenshots because it was funny, after a while it occurred to me that I was kind of making a diary of our adventures out of screenshots of him dead...
When I hit the 4th digit I compiled them into a slideshow for him called 'the thousand deaths of Yohan'
Reading Atarlost's post about Schrodingers fighter reminds me of Yohan, and how funny it would be to have a youtube video of some hapless valiant-but-dim fighter getting killed in imaginative ways with absolutely no way to defend himself, every death a one shot, every death a surprise (no matter how obvious the danger) every 5 seconds or so for 10 minutes...
I cant help but laugh at the thought that every sword swinging valiant musclebound warrior in pathfinder is like this shell shocked agoraphobe who either blindly or knowingly marches into one shot insteadeath at every turn, only to be raised by his party to valiantly stride into the next woodchipper. With the kind of damage that would do to one's psyche, I wouldn't be surprised if nobody wanted to play one.
It is nice that a fighter never has to worry about a big fat SR.
Yeah. They just have to worry about big fat AC, bit fat miss %s, big fat damage reductions, big fat CMDs, big fat CMIs (Combat Maneuver Immunities).
Of course, Barbarians, Paladins, and Rangers have to deal with these things too. The catch is most also have lots of tricks and methods of dealing with them but each is more useful throughout the system.
Barbarians are THE mundane martial class. They can even be so mundane that they're like anti-magic (superstition, spell sunder, eater of magic, sunder enchantment, etc), and they've got 4 + Int modifier skill points and better class skills. Rangers and Paladins bring waaaaaaay more to a party than a Fighter ever will and can fill in the combat role very comfortably. Both also have methods of dealing with lots of those pesky issues martials face.
It all comes down to having options.
Not options during CharGen or during levelUp but during actual play.
And I'm not talking about which weapon to use today but real options. Most of the time during combat the fighter has about 4 options (not all are viable):
1) Hit it in melee
2) Hit it at range
3) Use a combat maneuver
4) use aid another
Out of combat the fighter has more or less two options:
5) Use a skill
6) Use a noncombat feat*
Sometimes he can use options 5 and 6 in combat, too. That's why I didn't start again from 1.
While all those feats the fighter gets make him better at one or more of 1-5 or allow 6 they seldom give him really different options.
Most other classes have the additional options of 7 and 8 while keeping the options 1-6.
Non fighter options:
7) Use a class ability that is not just a bonus to 1-4
8) cast a spell
*some non combat skills really give you access to option 7 but those are rare and often need a big investment. Like eldritch heritage.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Also, something that bugs me is people saying stuff like "Well my fighter does stuff out of combat by being a fighter because I maxed UMD" or some other such nonsense. If the class doesn't contribute to it then it is not the class giving you this option. Anyone - anyone - can take ranks in Use Magic Device and use expensive low level magic stuff with some reliability. This is only evidence that a Fighter needs to go outside his class to function adequately. Nobody comes up shouting "my Ranger is awesome because he has maxed ranks in Use Magic Device to spam wizard spells". Replace Ranger with Barbarian or Paladin. And then if you want to talk UMD, then any class with more skill points to spend or UMD as a class skill is already better at that too.
|
Also, something that bugs me is people saying stuff like "Well my fighter does stuff out of combat by being a fighter because I maxed UMD" or some other such nonsense. If the class doesn't contribute to it then it is not the class giving you this option. Anyone - anyone - can take ranks in Use Magic Device and use expensive low level magic stuff with some reliability. This is only evidence that a Fighter needs to go outside his class to function adequately. Nobody comes up shouting "my Ranger is awesome because he has maxed ranks in Use Magic Device to spam wizard spells". Replace Ranger with Barbarian or Paladin. And then if you want to talk UMD, then any class with more skill points to spend or UMD as a class skill is already better at that too.
Going UMD is just one of the many options that a class can go with. If a fighter takes a trait that gives him UMD as a class skill then it's now a part of the class so he hasn't technically goje outside of the class.
I think you are just upset because the tables have been turned. You don't need a Wizard if someone has a good UMD score and they want to spend most of their money on scrolls and wands. You spouted off about everyone doing what the fighter can do, well UMD and Master Craftsman can do what the wizard does.
The fighter doesn't need to use UMD to make himself fully useful outside of combat, using UMD, along with many other things is just another method of adding more versatility to what he may already have.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Going UMD is just one of the many options that a class can go with.
No, it's one of the many options a CHARACTER can go with. It has nothing to do with class options. A Barbarian has the option to pick between rage powers. Those are options that her class (Barbarian) can go with. Ranger has the option between an animal companion or a different ability. In all cases anyone, including a commoner, can take ranks in Use Magic Device. In these examples all the rivals are better at UMD because Barbarian or Ranger have more skill points and Paladin has more feature synergy.
This is not a class feature.
If a fighter takes a trait that gives him UMD as a class skill then it's now a part of the class so he hasn't technically goje outside of the class.
No because "class skill" is a designation as to whether you get the skill bonus. Traits do not grant Fighters more class skills. They grant a character a class skill. What you are doing is akin to playing a dwarf fighter and declaring Darkvision a fighter class feature.
I think you are just upset because the tables have been turned. You don't need a Wizard if someone has a good UMD score and they want to spend most of their money on scrolls and wands. You spouted off about everyone doing what the fighter can do, well UMD and Master Craftsman can do what the wizard does.
Other than the part where they can't. Anyone who's bothered to read the rules can see this is the case. Firstly these items are damn expensive. Second they cannot ever be crafted by Fighters (Fighters can never craft scrolls, potions, wands, or staffs, no matter what feats they take). They also suffer from being capped at 4th level spells (as is the case for wands), and the caster levels are issues. Also, Master Craftsman SUCKS. You burn a non-bonus feat at 5th level, get no benefit until 7th level at the cost of another feat (the first item creation feat you can take), and then you can only craft a very limited subset of magic items.
If you take Craft Magical Arms and Armor you can't even craft both! You have to CHOOSE between Craft (Weapons) and Craft (Armor). So you can't even work on your own weapons and armor without the help of those pesky classes with options. If you take Craft Wondrous Item then you're lacking hundreds of potential magic items from your potential creation for the same reasons. Craft (Weapons) is going to do diddly for helping you craft a cloak of resistance.
Also, I didn't spout off about everyone doing what the Fighter can do. Don't be a liar. It's not nice. I never said every class could do what the Fighter can do. However a lot of them can and do.
The fighter doesn't need to use UMD to make himself fully useful outside of combat, using UMD, along with many other things is just another method of adding more versatility to what he may already have.
What versatility is that? You haven't shown any versatility that comes from the Fighter. Literally everyone, even those without class levels, can make use of Use Magic Device and Traits and Racial Abilities.
Base abilities ARE class abilities by definition. Arguing that it isn't "class appropriate" for a fighter to take UMD to overcome fighter limitations because "other classes can take UMD" is exactly the same as arguing that it isn't "class appropriate" for a wizard to learn spells because "other classes can cast spells."
It's downright asinine in fact.
|
|
Base abilities ARE class abilities by definition. Arguing that it isn't "class appropriate" for a fighter to take UMD to overcome fighter limitations because "other classes can take UMD" is exactly the same as arguing that it isn't "class appropriate" for a wizard to learn spells because "other classes can cast spells."
It's downright asinine in fact.
It's called grasping at straws when you don't have a leg to stand on.
Base abilities ARE class abilities by definition. Arguing that it isn't "class appropriate" for a fighter to take UMD to overcome fighter limitations because "other classes can take UMD" is exactly the same as arguing that it isn't "class appropriate" for a wizard to learn spells because "other classes can cast spells."
It's downright asinine in fact.
No, because it doesn't come from the class. You don't see us talking about how freaking bloody explosively awesome Rangers are because they can take a trait. And that trait isn't going to do you a bit of good if your GM isn't using traits which aren't default rules to begin with.
It's like someone claiming that Fighters are magical because you're playing a Gnome fighter and have some SLAs. That's just stupid. Anyone who is a gnome has those abilities. It's just as stupid as claiming UMD as a Fighter feature because you spent one of your class-irrelevant traits on a trait. It says nothing for the class. At best it says that if you build in a specific way you can try to polish the turd.
It's called grasping at straws when you don't have a leg to stand on.Base abilities ARE class abilities by definition. Arguing that it isn't "class appropriate" for a fighter to take UMD to overcome fighter limitations because "other classes can take UMD" is exactly the same as arguing that it isn't "class appropriate" for a wizard to learn spells because "other classes can cast spells."
It's downright asinine in fact.
You have to have an argument first before that will happen. An argument that relies on your class rather than Race or Traits.
No, the question is can the character concept be built using this class?
If you are going to argue that it isn't a class ability if other classes can do it, then wizards casting spells is not a class ability because so can sorcerers.
Classes inherit the base abilities so they become abilities of the class.
I keep seeing people say "fighters don't bring UMD to the table".
Funny, I'm a fighter. I come up to the table and sit down. I reach into my bag of abilities. Hey! Look at that! Right there in my bag is the ability to take UMD.
This constant argument that it doesn't count if other classes can to the same thing is argument for pure rhetorical point scoring sake. It has no practical validity since the fighters can do the things that are being discussed.
Inherited base abilities are in play.
But the problem with this argument is that, yes, a fighter can take UMD. But so can any other full BAB class. Just because it's an option available to the character doesn't mean the class is any better. You keep bringing up spells, saying multiple classes get spells, but they get them by virtue of the class. The closest thing fighters get are fighter-only feats, but due to the high level cost on many of these feats, and the fact that many of them have prereqs that are essentially limit the rest of a fighter's options, it's hard to say that the fighter class brings much to the table. Archetypes help, but they don't solve the problem.
Tholomyes, how does it matter that other classes can take UMD? Can other classes take UMD, tumble in plate armor and choose a bunch of fighter only feats?
It matters because those are the classes that are most in competition with the figher, since they most effectively fill the same roles. As I mentioned, Fighter only feats tend to be more resourse intensive than clasd features of other classes, which negates much of their expanded versatility from their extra feats. They simply don't bring as much to the table, in terms of class features, relative to other classes.
Tholomyes, when you show me the ranger build that can max out UMD, tumble in plate armor and choose "greater weapon specialization", then I'll agree with you.
Until then I'm going to say that I can create UMD focused builds with a fighter that YOU CAN'T BUILD with the other classes.
It looks like there are two arguments going on, and both sides are right.
Argument 1) Can a fighter class use his skills to be useful outside of combat.
-- Yes, since he has things like UMD, and can get traits that make stealth or perception a class skill. He can take general feats to boost things. This is by no means saying that other people cannot do the same things as the fighter can. Of course a commoner could take the same traits and feats. But would that commoner then be useful outside of combat, of course they would.
Argument 2) Can a fighter use his unique class abilities to be useful outside combat.
-- The answer is still yes. His access to more feats means he can use some of them to put into skill based general feats that another class maybe could not. However, in this argument, putting points into UMD does not qualify, since that is not inherently based on the fighter class.
Now, for a bonus argument) Can a fighter surpass any other class in outside combat functionality, when both are being optimized for it?
-- The answer is "maybe?" This is the kind of discussion that people are keenly taking on. This probably cannot be solved agreeably to all sides without setting out clear parameters. Picking one aspect to focus on like scouting, and building a level by level comparison would be a good starting place. Then you could pick a secondary thing to focus on, so see maybe who is better at dealing damage while optimized for scouting (or who is better at scouting when optimized for damage). I think everyone could find a lot of cool niches for the fighter class of this was done very extensively, but my own hypothesis is you might end up with results like "no non-caster class can be as good at scouting and using magic devices while maintaining an optimized combat maneuver ability", or something very odd.
Well put John.
I have not once argued that fighters are superior to other full BAB classes for any out of combat purpose.
What I have said is that fighters are completely competent in that role if you want to, and that fighters can do things no other class can do while still fulfilling that out of combat role.
Which is all that matters.
Tholomyes, how does it matter that other classes can take UMD? Can other classes take UMD, tumble in plate armor and choose a bunch of fighter only feats?
Any class that don't get skills?
Skills isn't even a class feature. Any creature, unless mindless, get at least one skill per HD. Even animals get skills.
Being able to add ranks to a skill isn’t something unique the fighter class brings to the table. Its something any class brings to the table, or any creature, unless mindless, brings to the table.
Pardon my crappy English but I hope I get the message across by this:
There is a difference between saying, My fighter brings this to the table and saying the fighter class brings this to the table. Sure it’s cool of you have a fighter with UMD or even more cool if he boost diplomacy, but it isn’t a fighter thing. It’s a character concept thing.
If being able to do stuff no other class can do I guess max UMD, tumble in plate armor and choose a bunch of fighter only feats is enough, then if we remove all fighter bonus feats the class will still brings something to the table and it there will be no need to complait?
Wasn’t it you that posted something about VIABLE options?
Again, classes inherit base abilities. There is no fighter who lacks the ability to choose UMD. To argue that using UMD to achieve a fighter build concept is invalid because other classes can choose UMD is literally the same as saying that using spells to achieve a wizard build is invalid because other classes can use spells.
To argue the rhetorical and semantic points about exactly how skills are derived, or what game rule designation is applied is just rhetorical or semantic dancing. It has no impact whatsoever on what you can actually do with the class. It's just arguing for the sake of arguing.
Getting skills is not a class feature its a HD feature.
BTW, being able to use a divine scroll doesn’t make you a cleric, being able to use a arcane scroll doesn’t make you a wizard.
Well put John.
I have not once argued that fighters are superior to other full BAB classes for any out of combat purpose.
What I have said is that fighters are completely competent in that role if you want to, and that fighters can do things no other class can do while still fulfilling that out of combat role.
Which is all that matters.
Well, I think the main point of contention is how resource-intensive gaining competence in out-of-combat roles is for the Fighter, and if they face unreasonable opportunity costs for it.
If it takes investing a decent number feats and traits to bring the Fighter up to the same out-of-combat level as other martial classes, and the fighter doesn't have anything else that makes up for the gap, then a lot people will say that there's still an issue when it comes to class balance. The fighter has to spend character resources just to be on par with other martial classes.
On a somewhat related point that's not responding to AD's post, one of the more annoying balance ideas I tend to see is balancing in-combat and out-of-combat ability. I'd rather have a character who can fully participate in both sides of the game, rather than being told Fighters only job is to be the best at fighting, so during non-combat fighter players should be okay with not being able to participate very much.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think you guys are being dense on purpose. You jsimply do not want to accept Ashiel's argument, so nothing will convince you he is right.
Unless said trait can only be taken by Fighters, it's not a class feature and has nothing to do with the character's class. In fact, most other classes benefit more from that UMD trait than Fighters.
I do agree that a Fighter can be useful out of combat, I said it before and even posted a few builds to prove my point, but saying "Fighters are useful because they can spend a trait and skill points on UMD/Diplomacy/Whatever" makes no sense at all.
Traits are a bonus, but it's a bonus everyone gets. Fighters are not ahed or behind anyone on that. No matter what class you think is weaker, if you add extra advantages to everyone, then the difference between them is still the same.
If that's the only argument in favor of Fighter being just as versatile as other full BAB classes, then you guys failed to prove your point, because all other martial classes can take the same trait and probably benefit more from it.
Tell you what Tri. We'll get in a campaign together. I'll play my UMD fighter and you can play your UMD commoner.
We'll see which one lasts longest, OK?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Tell you what Tri. We'll get in a campaign together. I'll play my UMD fighter and you can play your UMD commoner.
We'll see which one lasts longest, OK?
You really don't see his point, do you?
No, scratch that...
You really don't want to see his point, do you?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The main problem with fighters is that developers look at all those fancy bonus feats and say, "Hey, let's make a really nice feat for martial characters, but to be realistic we'll hide it behind 2 or 3 prereq feats, it's no big deal, Fighters get a lot of feats anyway."
Tell you what Tri. We'll get in a campaign together. I'll play my UMD fighter and you can play your UMD commoner.
We'll see which one lasts longest, OK?
You really don't see his point, do you?
No, scratch that...
You really don't want to see his point, do you?
I see his point Lemmy. And yours. And all the "it's not a class feature" rhetoriticians.
I think it's a SILLY point.
MY POINT is that we are talking about creating actual characters, not theorycrafting the class system design.
Actual fighter characters can have UMD, and will be far more playable and survivable in actual gaming than a commoner with UMD. Theorycraft all you like about how a commoner could do the same thing out of combat. Then go play an actual campaign with the commoner or admit that it's pointless to argue that the commoner "can do the same thing."
Prerequisites are OK as long as they make you better in what you're trying to accomplish.
Dodge is a good prerequisite for Mobility, because both feats stack and beef up your AC.
Combat Expertise is a bad prerequisite for Improved Trip, because it doesn't help you in your trip attempts.
I see his point Lemmy. And yours. And all the "it's not a class feature" rhetoriticians.
I think it's a SILLY point.
MY POINT is that we are talking about creating actual characters, not theorycrafting the class system design.
Actual fighter characters can have UMD, and will be far more playable and survivable in actual gaming than a commoner with UMD. Theorycraft all you like about how a commoner could do the same thing out of combat. Then go play an actual campaign with the commoner or admit that it's pointless to argue that the commoner "can do the same thing."
And yet we're talking about what the problem with Fighters are. Again, we're dismayed that other martials are basically better. Even with pushing the UMD stuff the best Fighter build I've seen in a little while in one of these discussions still doesn't match a barbarian without it (as in, the barbarian at the same level had better defenses and wasn't even sporting UMD). The argument that you're somehow worthwhile as a class because you can cannibalize huge amounts of gold pieces worth of magic items to function is a pathetic one.
And the argument about the commoner is a fair one. The fighter brings nothing to the table beyond his usual to-hit bonuses that a commoner wouldn't. And he's not even the best at fighting. I'd much rather have a class that was more resilient as a main warrior. If I was going for damage then there are other classes that are better at it (summoners spring to mind or rangers with instant enemy or barbarians with pounce).
Using races and traits to try to hide vulnerabilities is stupid. It's like saying "oh, a sorcerer's poor fortitude save and lower HP doesn't matter because you could play a ghoul-sorcerer using the monsters as PCs rules and be immune to most effects calling for a Fortitude and get a nice HP bonus from the Charisma".
The fact that a better argument than "...and dragons" cannot be made for the class is pretty much damning I think. Except instead of "...and dragons" it's "...and traits!". Oh well, it's still a good dipping / NPC class.
I'd argue that while it isn't a bad feat, Dodge isn't a good prerequisite simply because it's forcing you to burn a feat you might not otherwise take to get one that you do want more.
What if a wizard couldn't learn Summon Monster IV unless he had SM I-III in his spellbook? What if he couldn't cast it unless he had SM I-III prepared for the day first?
What if you did the same with, say, Burning Hands - Scorching Ray - Fireball?
Sure, it would make logical sense, but it would also make those spells a much bigger drain on resources, even if the earlier spells were still something that could be handy, a Wizard may well rather have a Haste or Prot From Evil prepared/known instead.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I understand that you are arguing that no matter what fighter build we can come up with, you claim that you can take some other martial class and do the same role better.
First of all, I'm not convinced that you can.
Second of all, I don't care if you can.
If you are going to use that argument for why fighters "suck" then eventually you're going to have to agree that EVERY class sucks except one. Because eventually one class is going to be "superior" to every other class.
The issue that initially caused all of these multitude of "fighters SUCK" threads was the assertion that... well, fighters SUCK.
From that point onward, every time someone presented a compelling argument that fighters actually did not SUCK at tracking, scouting, magic item use, diplomacy, etc. etc. etc. the goalposts were moved farther and farther until they got to where they are today... which seems to be:
"Fighters are irrelevant because you can do anything they can do slightly better with a different martial class."
Which is a long, long, long, long, LONG way from "fighters SUCK."
In fact we won that argument a long, long, long, long, LONG time ago.
Fighters, in fact, do not SUCK even when put into roles that mean they have to invest in stretching their skills into an unfamiliar area.
They don't SUCK because the game mechanics underlying the class concept are more robust and flexible than most people realize.
If you want to build a martial character who excels at diplomacy, bluff and intimidation, you have choices. Maybe a barbarian would be slightly better in that role. Maybe. But barbarians come with predetermined FLAVOR that I might not want to accept for my martial diplomacy, bluff and intimidation concept. And guess what? Fighters give me the option to create exactly that concept with a flavor I might prefer, and while it MIGHT be possible that a perfectly optimized barbarian might edge my fighter out here or there, my fighter will be more than adequate in the role.
That's the point.
Some of us players don't agonize over the horrible thought that someone, somewhere, might have a character with a slight mechanical edge over ours.