The Main Problem with Fighters


Pathfinder First Edition General Discussion

701 to 750 of 3,805 << first < prev | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | next > last >>

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I think the Cavalier/Samurai have enough uniqueness about them that they can stay their own class/alternate. They could do with a 2nd Good save as well but other than that I think they're gold.

IMO if you're going to make Feat chains scale, that should be a universal change, not a class-by-class change.


Zark wrote:

So let’s say fighter did get a boost, 4 skills / level, more class skills, better saves, one feat chain scaling and more fighter feats, some out of combat abilities, what would that do to the Cavalier and samurai?

Why not just roll the fighter and Cavalier into one class and make the samurai a fighter archetype? The Cavalier could be one of many fighter paths.

Some general thoughts:

Paizo should let some feat chains scale for all classes and remove some feat taxes. Combat expertise, weapon finesse and selective channeling, Shadow Strike are just some of them.

Boost what skills can do, as of now the skill monkey concept really don’t work which is hurting classes like the rogue and vanilla bard.

Make the swashbuckler concept possible, it would help dex-fighter , monk, rogue and dex-bard or any player that wants to play a pirate or Zorro kind of character. Create a feat similar to Dervish dance but that applies to any one handed weapon.

If a feat, class or prestige class (like Duelist) demands that you keep your of hand free from weapons or shields, the character should be able to use that hand for something. Abilities like those that the Free Hand Fighter gets comes in to mind.

Remove most fighter archetypes and let people build their own fighter.

Personally except for barbarian and ranger (ANd paladin but as a prestige class) I think every other martial should be buildable using just the core fighter class. I've just really started to look at it Kirthfinder has some really COOL redesigns of classes, especially the fighter. Their fighter is exactly what you are talking about. I don't like some of their changes to spells and casters, but its got great ideas for non casters.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

More than half of the characters in the games I run and play in who are considered "alpha" characters (the ones who define a game, take center stage, and are the most effective) are single-class fighters. true in games from 1st to 17th level. (I haven't had any 17th+ level games in a while). No other class hit the sweet spot of flexible, survivable, and effective anything like as often.

I sometimes wish I could sit in on the games of people who feel fighters are underpowered so i could actually see the problem they are experiencing first hand.


with Weekly William. we have flavor of the month martials inspired by whatever badass warrior build was made the previous campaign.

usually the flavor of the month builds, are nowhere near as good as the martial that they seek to emulate. usually falling apart.

this month's major builds seem to be katana wielding barbarians in mithril kikko beneath darkleaf silken ceremonial robes, martially inclined oracles with full plate and reach polearms, and 2WF fighters built around critical hits, and once pouncing dwarven druid whom was living longer than intended.

the dwarf druid, who joined 2 weeks ago at 9th level in a 10th level party. is intended to die sometime before he reaches 11th. i really wanted to play a pouncing barbarian or urban ranger who fights with tooth and nail. but the group begged for someone who could cast cure spells, so i settled for a dwarf druid. so i could pounce and use cure wands out of combat, turns out weekly william doesn't like druids and is denying the benefit of as many druidic perks as possible.


Dungeon Grrrl wrote:

More than half of the characters in the games I run and play in who are considered "alpha" characters (the ones who define a game, take center stage, and are the most effective) are single-class fighters. true in games from 1st to 17th level. (I haven't had any 17th+ level games in a while). No other class hit the sweet spot of flexible, survivable, and effective anything like as often.

I sometimes wish I could sit in on the games of people who feel fighters are underpowered so i could actually see the problem they are experiencing first hand.

In my games I've thrown in some tough warrior women npcs; with it being very clear, if you mess with them, with their background and what they have been through, they will cause real pain.

They are flexible if you think and prepare to be flexible, quite survivable and effective.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Steven_Evil wrote:
I mean, a paladin gets smite evil as a class ability. Sure, it's a mega damage dealer. But do i want that to be the best thing I have, my defining attribute? With a fighter, I feel like now I can take enough feats to make a character who can swing his sword, fire his bow, use a wand, speak all the languages, convince the shopkeeper that ruby really IS worth a billion gp, and go out and kill stuff. Sure, I may only deal 300 damage when the barbarian is doing 500, but.... so what? Stack the two together against the same monster. When both classes go full attack, the beholder is still dead at the end, even if the barbarian did 500 more damage overkill.

The problem is: the paladin get feats too. Actually, he gets AS MUCH non combat feats as the fighter does. DId you take Skill focus UMD? The paladin did too, and can actually use a lot of items without rolling (Cure Light Wound Wands, for example). Did you get Skill focus Diplomacy? The paladin did too (and he has diplomacy as a class skill, BTW). Did you learn a lot of languages through high intelligence and ranks in Linguistics? The paladin did too.

The paladin gets as much verstaility in out of combat feats than the fighter. Exactly the same feats. The difference, though, is that when you substract points from CON or STR to raise your INT and CHA as a fighter, you are reducing your combat prowess, to increase out of combat versatility. The Paladin, not so much. Because when he raised CHA to have that nice UMD skill and that diplomacy skill, he raised his saving throws too. And his To-hit and AC vs the target of his smite Evil. And the number of swift action heals he can do to himself.

In the end, what the fighter gets is 1 combat feat every two levels, bravery, and armor training/weapon training. That's all. The regular feats are also given to the paladin (or magus, or summoner).

So at lvl 10 the fighter gets 3 features, plus 6 feats. He can use those feats, for example, to raise his Saving throws +2 each. HE gets +3 or so to fear. And the rest, are a bump to his damage.

Let's see what the paladin gets:
Inmunity to fear (quite better than bravery) and +4 to every one near him (so cooperative game ftw)
+ CHA bonus to all saves (much better than 3 feats to improve saves), plus Will as a good save too.
Lay on hands as a swift action on himself, can heal others (cooperative game ftw)
Detect Evil (incredibly usefull ability)
Inmunity to Disease, including supernatural.
Ability to remove conditions in others and himself.
Smite Evil 4x day. Easily as good as all the weapon specialization and weapon training combined.
A horse that has probably more HP and AC than the fighter himself, or the ability to empower his weapon (which close the gap with weapon training), including the ability to make it keen (which erodes the importance of Improved Critical for example)
Inmunity to Charms, and +4 to his teammates.

That's what you have to measure vs 6 combat feats, bravery and weapon and armor training. Because the paladin can get Skill Focus UMD just as easily as your Fighter. HE can get high diplomacy way easier. And he can speak as much languages as your fighter do.

And that's comparing him with a paladin. I could do a Magus or Summoner or Druid instead, which are far better and more flexible. And all of them can take Skill Focus UMD and Skill focus Bluff and a lot of languages too. And actually can use several Magic items wihtout UMD, have UMD as a class skill, have Tongues or Speak with Animal as a spell, can Charm, have some Social skills as class skills, have knowledges, cool abilities, most have a pet that can give the fighter a run for his money, and can walk in the air, summmon storms, be invisible, teleport great distances and summon angels or elementals.


gustavo iglesias wrote:
So at lvl 10 the fighter gets 3 features, plus 6 feats. He can use those feats, for example, to raise his Saving throws +2 each....

Actually Great Fortitude et al are not "combat" feats and thus not allowed to be taken with the fighter feats either.


Coriat wrote:
gustavo iglesias wrote:
So at lvl 10 the fighter gets 3 features, plus 6 feats. He can use those feats, for example, to raise his Saving throws +2 each....
Actually Great Fortitude et al are not "combat" feats and thus not allowed to be taken with the fighter feats either.

You are right. Even worse for the fighter :/

But let's say, to make a comparable example, that the fighter those feats with his regular feats, while taking Wepon Focus, Power attack and Improved critical with his combat feats. The paladin took Weapon focus, Power attack and Imp critical with his regular feats, so he couldn't spend the feats in Great Fortitude, Iron will and lighting reflexes.

In the end, both have 3 combat feats, and the fighter has +2 to his saves. While the Paladin has +CHA to his saves (which will be much more than +2 once he gets headbands of charisma), plus Will as a good save.


Zark wrote:

So let’s say fighter did get a boost, 4 skills / level, more class skills, better saves, one feat chain scaling and more fighter feats, some out of combat abilities, what would that do to the Cavalier and samurai?

Why not just roll the fighter and Cavalier into one class and make the samurai a fighter archetype? The Cavalier could be one of many fighter paths.

In my games, I give Resolve for free to all fighters.

And I agree that Cavalier could be just a fighter archetype.

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

Which, not incidentally, allows the Paladin to get by with an 8 Wis where the fighter has the 8 Cha. The fighter gets to a 12 or 14 Wis for a bonus to his +0 Will save, and the paladin gets a bonus to ALL his saves, including his +1 Will save.

I did a level by level comparison of what the paladin gets and the fighter gets, and its not pretty. I don't think anything of what the paladin gets is unwarranted, given the LG alignment and restrictions of his code, but I do think the fighter should get a lot more...and they should get it through feat synergy.

==Aelryinth


And that's because I was generous and stop the comparison at lvl 10. At lvl 11, the Paladin can spend 2 smite evil as a free action to make everybody in the party to have smite evil. Yes, that include the 3 attack warhorses, the pouncing tiger companion of the druid, the ninja rapidshooting shurikens, and the 6 arm Shiva-like eidolon. At 12, fighter gets double specialization, which I suppose it's cool too.

I'm now honestly curious about those elusive fighters that can Use Magical devices, use bows, swords, convince people that ruby is worth a million gold, be talkative and knowledgeable, and speak a gazillion languages. I'd like to see the exact build. And then rebuild it as a Paladin, a Magus, a Druid and a Synthesist Summoner, to see how it goes.

I bet any of the other 4 classes mentioned can do what the versatile, non-combat marvel fighter can do, and better, while doing as much damage in combat, and being able to cast spells.

Liberty's Edge

I think my last post is an accurate description of how I feel about fighters now. A class that can be used as a support class in every aspect, not just a non combat, or a non social substitute. With more toys, perhaps he can stand on top of the DPR pile again, but for now, I think that he is best served as a "we don't have X ability in the party, but the fighter has Y feat spread, so he can fill in".

Also, when I say that he can do all of these things, I don't mean he can do them just as good as X class. I mean he can do them good enough to kill a baddie from the Bestiary. Maybe not a one shot, maybe not even after a FA, but kill it nonetheless. Perhaps the diplomacy/bluff requires an aid another, perhaps he had to give up X trait to have UMD as a class skill. But it gets covered. I'm not saying he's going to be a beast at any one thing, but a jack of all trades that can do a little of everything.


I understand that. What I say, is that a druid or paladin can get UMD as a class skill through a trait too. A Magus or summoner, don't even need, they have it. And they have better diplomacy, and bluff, and also do enough damage to kill a baddie.

"We don't have X ability, but the fighter has Y feat" is a delusion. Unless "X ability" is a combat related feat, such as power attack, the fighter has exactly zero feats more than a paladin or druid or magus. If your party need, say, Skill focus in Proffesion Sailor because it is a seafaring campaign, yes, the fighter can take it and be a decent sailor. But the Magus can take it too, and be a decent sailor too. And he can take UMD as a class skill for free, so he has a free trait to spend in being a better sailor. Plus he can be invisible, fly, haste the whole party, or use Gust of Wind to move the ship, making the fighter look a joke of sailor in comparison. He is a much better jack of all trades, by a huge margin.

Just make the exercise. Build the fighter, with your favourite non-combat goodies build. Give him Bluff, UMD, Skill focus in Sailor or whatever other important skill for the campaign you feel it's needed. Then delete the word "fighter" from the build, and delete all class features and free feats you take as a fighter. Leave the rest of traits, skills, and non-combat feats as they are. Now slap "magus", or "druid", or "synthesist summoner", or "Paladin" in the blank space for the class, and add the class features for those classes, including spells.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
gustavo iglesias wrote:
The problem is: the paladin get feats too. Actually, he gets AS MUCH non combat feats as the fighter does. DId you take Skill focus UMD? The paladin did too, and can actually use a lot of items without rolling (Cure Light Wound Wands, for example). Did you get Skill focus Diplomacy? The paladin did too (and he has diplomacy as a class skill, BTW). Did you learn a lot of languages through high intelligence and ranks in Linguistics? The paladin did too.

Of course when he does that he's spending out of the same budget that he would be using for taking any combat feats as well. He doesn't get a pool of bonus feats to spend the way the fighter does. So if he wants some of those fighter tricks (the ones he can have, that is), it's going to come at the expense of those general feats.


LazarX wrote:
gustavo iglesias wrote:
The problem is: the paladin get feats too. Actually, he gets AS MUCH non combat feats as the fighter does. DId you take Skill focus UMD? The paladin did too, and can actually use a lot of items without rolling (Cure Light Wound Wands, for example). Did you get Skill focus Diplomacy? The paladin did too (and he has diplomacy as a class skill, BTW). Did you learn a lot of languages through high intelligence and ranks in Linguistics? The paladin did too.
Of course when he does that he's spending out of the same budget that he would be using for taking any combat feats as well. He doesn't get a pool of bonus feats to spend the way the fighter does. So if he wants some of those fighter tricks (the ones he can have, that is), it's going to come at the expense of those general feats.

Of course. But in the levels where the fighter gets combat feats, the paladin also get things. Class features. It's not that when the fighter gets Weapon focus as a free feat, the paladin gets nothing. Fighter gets weapon focus, and the paladin gets Smite Evil.

So in the first level they both got Skill Focus Use Magical Device. The fighter got Weapon focus, and the Paladin gets smite evil, and Detect Evil, plus a second good save, Will. I think the Paladin got the best of the deal.
At second level, the fighter gets power attack, and at third level, he gets Iron Will. In the meanwhile, the Paladin gets to add his Charisma to all saves (Which is one hundred times better than Iron Will), and then gets power attack at third.

Let's make a check at third level:

Fighter got Iron Will, Power Attack, Weapon Focus and Skill focus UMD, plus Bravery (+1 fear saves), and armor training.

The paladin has +Cha to all saves (way better than Iron will), Power attack (just like the fighter), Smite Evil (much better than weapon focus), Skill focus in UMD (just like the fighter), plus he is inmune to Fear (way better than bravery), and gives +4 to fear saves to his teammates, can heal himself like 4 times per day 1d6 as a swift action or a team mate as a standard action, he is inmune to diseases, and can remove a bad condition from a list.

So the paladin is trading Weapon focus and +1 to fear saves, for Smite Evil, Inmunity to disease, inmunity to fear,+4 to save to nearby allies, +cha to saves, good Will saves, Lay on Hands, and Mercy. I don't think it's a bad trade.


Umbranus wrote:
xanthemann wrote:
I personally have always played a fighter. They do have many advantages over other classes. I have browsed through some of this thread and have yet to see anyone mention one of the finer points...they can use virtually any weapon they get their hands on w/o penalty!

Perhaps nobody did mention it because it is just plain wrong?

At level 6 the fighter has weapon training and most fighters have weapon focus and weapon specialization, too. So while he can use many weapons (same as most martial PCs) he has the penalty of losing his weapon training, weapon focus and weapon specialization. Thats +2 to hit and +3 to damage which you lose. I'd call that a penalty.

Lets look at the paladin: They can use the same weapons and while they can take feats that only work with som weapons they will not lose any class abilities for chosing the "wrong" weapon.

You just made a point for the paladin being better than the fighter.

I never said anything about not losing bonuses of favored weapons if they lost them. I said they had the ability to use virtually any weapon w/o penalty...In subsequent books the arsenal they can draw from has grown to include firearms and siege weapons, too. Some other classes may come close, but the fighter is top of the heap when it comes to weapon versatility.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
xanthemann wrote:
I never said anything about not losing bonuses of favored weapons if they lost them. I said they had the ability to use virtually any weapon w/o penalty...In subsequent books the arsenal they can draw from has grown to include firearms and siege weapons, too. Some other classes may come close, but the fighter is top of the heap when it comes to weapon versatility.

Fighter has access to all simple and martial weapons.

That's exactly the same that Barbarians, Rangers, Cavaliers, Paladins and Magus get. And Gunslinger get access to all simple and martial weapons, plus all firearms. Fighters don't get any advantage to that over Paladins or rangers or magus. The fighter has access to all armors and shields, including towers, which make them to have a wider choice that barbarian or rangers, but in weapon proficiency, they have the same.

And as the other poster said you, they actually have a disadventage, as their class features apply to one weapon only. If they have weapon specilization longsword, and weapon training blades, and they find a very nice +3 giant bane warhammer, they lose their class features. The paladin can use Smite Evil just fine, the Barbarian can Rage just fine with a warhammer, and the ranger can use his favored enemy with a warhammer just as he does with a sword, and the cavalier doesn't care which weapon they hold when they challenge. The fighter is, indeed, the martial class more tied to certain kind of weapon. Everybody else can use their features with whatever weapon they find.

Digital Products Assistant

Removed some back and forth and off topic posts.

Liberty's Edge

I agree with both sides of the debate, really. I think fighters can be a perfectly fine stand alone class, perhaps not the best dealing damage but as a jack of all trades type of fellow. I think that if they do you want to be the best in damage, which they need to be, considering the name, then they are going to need more class features.

I just don't believe that there's anything wrong with them, just that their job isn't the same as it used to be anymore. and to fix that we need to comparable class abilities to the barbarian, paladin, and ranger.


So basically,
1) 4 skills per level

2) Make every second bonus feat a prepared feat that functions after an hour of practice in the morning. Only feats that you have prerequisites for.

3) Take fighter only feats and make them function as fighter features attached to general feats? Something like weapon focus turning into improved upon achieving the BaB threshold.

4) take scaling class features and create feats that function as a prefix. Something like a combat feat that alters the effect of bravery so that its effect changes to an untyped bonus to will saves versus spell likes and spells or something. Making a weak class feature more inclusive by spending some of your feats to change its potential... A good example would be channel feats like channel force I guess.

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

That's a good way of doing things. Of course, you then need to adjust some feats some, but that's a different story.

There's ways general melee should be improved, and then ways fighters specifically should be improved.

==Aelryinth


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I'm a big fan of resources. I think Paizo did a good work with them, but I feel they decided to err in the safe side. I would had made every class to have "X points" to spend.
Monks and Ninja have Ki.
Gunsilingers have Grit
Samurai have Resolve.
Paladins have both smite evil and lay on hands.
Magus have arcana pool.
Barbarians have rage.

I would had made the whole number of classes that way, with "cunning" for rogues, "arcane might" for wizards, "faith" for clerics, etc. Fighters, for example, could have some kind of "resolve" or "Grit" or something similar to gunsilngers and samurais. Points that you spend, and let you to be much more durable than the regular warrior or the average thug. Things like "you spend a resolve point and you finish any shaken, sickened, staggered condition, or you reduce a frightned, nauseated, stun condition to shaken, sickened or staggered" would make it to do wonders.

Having resources to spend, and being able to *push* through strong encounters is important. If the class always work at the same level, then it either overkills regular easy encounters, or is unable to face strong, "big boss" encounters. Also, by spending resources you allow the fighters to do things that are interesting (like ignoring fear), instead of bland, boring, and useless "bravery" stuff that give you +1 here and there.

Liberty's Edge

That was one of the only two things I liked about fourth edition d&4. I liked the skill challenges, it felt like it was truly rewarding a rogue our bard for taking skill related feats, and I liked the hero points I think they were called, and how there were things that gave them to you if you did heroic things. It felt like martial characters were rewarded grappling the dragon, or tanking the BBEG so the party could heal after a particularly nasty attack. I incorporate the skill challenges into my PF adventures for really important social encounters, or for really important situations during big battles.

I think your idea would have the same epic feel, Gustavo.


Rynjin wrote:
I think the Cavalier/Samurai have enough uniqueness about them that they can stay their own class/alternate. They could do with a 2nd Good save as well but other than that I think they're gold.

Perhaps you are right, but if the fighter gets a boost I hope Cavalier/Samurai get a boost too.

Any class not getting spells as a class feature should get perception as a class skill and get at least 4 skills per level.
Fighter should get 4 skills per level
Cavalier/Samurai should get six per level or get 4 per level and some mechanics that gives the ride or handle animal for free. Perhaps 4 skills per level and if they add ranks in ride the get a rank for free in handle animal or the other way around.

Edit:
Fighter and Cavalier/Samurai (and probably rogue) should get Combat expertise as a bonus feat, perhaps at level 2.
Getting Combat expertise at level 1 perhaps make more sense, but getting it at level 2 is good to avoid level dips. Level 2 is also a pretty boring anyway.
Create some mechanics that let these classes pick some feats or one feat chain and let them ignor some prereqs. If it where up to me I just remove Combat Expertise from the game.

Give classes that does rely on magic some cool abilities or access to fighter only feats that adds to versatility. A bit like Swift Aid. BTW, really dislike that Swift Aid has Combat Expertise as a prereq.

Fighter and Cavalier/Samurai should get two good saves.

Rynjin wrote:


IMO if you're going to make Feat chains scale, that should be a universal change, not a class-by-class change.

Edit:

True, but I don't think all chains have do scale but some should.
I guess It's a matter of taste.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Zark wrote:
Cavalier/Samurai should get six per level or get 4 per level and some mechanics that gives the ride or handle animal for free. Perhaps 4 skills per level and if they add ranks in ride the get a rank for free in handle animal or the other way around.

6'd be aight, yeah. I don't really care if they get more than 4 though.

Zark wrote:

Edit:

Fighter and Cavalier/Samurai (and probably rogue) should get Combat expertise as a bonus feat, perhaps at level 2.
Getting Combat expertise at level 1 perhaps make more sense, but getting it at level 2 is good to avoid level dips. Level 2 is also a pretty boring anyway.
Create some mechanics that let these classes pick some feats or one feat chain and let them ignor some prereqs. If it where up to me I just remove Combat Expertise from the game.

Give classes that does rely on magic some cool abilities or access to fighter only feats that adds to versatility. A bit like Swift Aid. BTW, really dislike that Swift Aid has Combat Expertise as a prereq.

I really dislike that Combat Expertise exists at all. I've never seen anyone actually USE it, they just get it because martials need to have PhD's in grabbing people or throwing them to the ground apparently.

Swift aid is pretty neat. Had no idea it existed.

Zark wrote:
Fighter and Cavalier/Samurai should get two good saves.

Agreed.

Zark wrote:

True, but I don't think all chains have do scale but some should.

I guess It's a matter of taste.

I don't think all Feat chains should scale, I'm just saying if you have scaling Feat chains it should be "This Feat chain scales" not "This class gets scaling Feat chains".


Everyone that isn't a caster should get two saves. I'd give fighters and cavaliers will and barbarians reflex. I'd lean towards will for rogues since that's the save divinations and illusions use.


I always thought there was a good argument for giving Rogues 3 good saves. They're fast, of course, but they also tend to grow up in squalor or spend a lot of time on the streets (need a strong immune system) and are slippery little liars who probably wouldn't have any trouble shrugging off divinations and such.

Fighters/Cavaliers should definitely get Will. I mean, how cliche is the "Warrior who's so damn stubborn even mind control won't work" schtick by now? You'd think it would've been put in just on principle.


I'd disagree on fort, they don't have the grunt. Fortitude has many dictionary meanings: courage, bearing pain, damage, physically overcoming adversity. It also has a mental component in its meaning, to be mentally resilient which is WILL for dnd. Doesn't quite gel with the rogue.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I dunno. Fortitude has a lot of dictionary meanings but like 90% of all Fort throws in the game are against disease/poison or shrugging off pain, which I think a street rat should be able to do just fine.


A sneak attacker with lowish hit die isn't as tough as a barb or fighter used to dealing it and taking it. Fort works for them, I like the rogue having a weak fort.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Will is a much better save for rogues. They fit better with "Slippery mind" than they do with "Mettle".


3.5 Loyalist wrote:
A sneak attacker with lowish hit die isn't as tough as a barb or fighter used to dealing it and taking it. Fort works for them, I like the rogue having a weak fort.

I dunno... They might not be as tough as a Fighter/Barbarian, but that's already represented by the smaller HD. they should be tough enough to resist poison and stuff or cunning enough to resist mind control.

The fact is that Rogues/Ninjas have absolutely terrible saves. The worst in the game, and no real means of boosting them. They really need some help in that front.

Personally, I'd allow Rogue players to choose a 2nd good save at 1st level and/or allow them to make a Reflex save instead of a Will/Fort save a few times per day. The 2nd option is my favorite, as it's a bit different from the usual "numberical boost to saves".

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
SPCDRI wrote:

I don't understand why Weapon Focus/"Specialization" wasn't just renamed and given to the fighter flat out. That is a big time feat tax.

He IS given that... it's called Weapon and Armor Training as part of the basic class features. If the Fighter actually does take it as a feat, he effectively gets it a bit more than twice in the long run. WEapon Training by itself eventually becomes a +4 to hit and damage. with one group and +3 with a second group, +2 with a third, and +1 with a fourth. Even more, those bonuses go into combat maneuver checks with those weapons as well.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

My problem with Weapon Training (and the Weapon Focus Line) is how much it tends to pidgeonhole fighters into specific weapons/types of weapons.

IMHO the class feature and feats would have been far better off as 'Combat Training' and 'Combat Focus/Combat Specialization' and applied to all weapons equally.

*makes a note to self to add that to my houserules document*


kyrt-ryder wrote:

My problem with Weapon Training (and the Weapon Focus Line) is how much it tends to pidgeonhole fighters into specific weapons/types of weapons.

IMHO the class feature and feats would have been far better off as 'Combat Training' and 'Combat Focus/Combat Specialization' and applied to all weapons equally.

*makes a note to self to add that to my houserules document*

It could be true for most people, but one of my players used the weapon training class feature to become a better ''switch hitter''. He used his feats to specialize in the longbow and he took weapon training ''heavy blades''.


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

There was a 3.0 system that scaled feats by either level or BAB. Has anyone adjusted their Fighter feats to scale using actual Fighter class features? EG: Weapon Specialization having the same bonus as the Bravery bonus?

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Bwang wrote:
There was a 3.0 system that scaled feats by either level or BAB. Has anyone adjusted their Fighter feats to scale using actual Fighter class features? EG: Weapon Specialization having the same bonus as the Bravery bonus?

You might check out the premier issue of Gygax Magazine - I have an article in it called Scaling Combat Feats that might be of particular interest :)

Gygax Magazine Link


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Umbranus wrote:
Zark wrote:

List of fighter feats, as in fighters only. Please inform me if I have missed any feat or if any other class can get access to any of these feats.

1. Pin Down – Fighter only
2. Disrupting Shot – Fighter only
3. Shield Specialization – Cleric Crusader Archetype can pick this one too.
4. Greater Shield Specialization - Cleric Crusader Archetype can pick this one too.
5. Point-Blank Master - Can be taken by Ranger too.
6. Critical Mastery – Fighter only
7. Disruptive – can be taken by Barbarian as a rage power and the ever so popular Arcane Duelist Bard archetype gets this for free.
8. Spellbreaker - Can be taken by Barbarian as a rage power and Arcane Duelist gets this for free.
9. Greater Shield Focus - can be taken by Ranger and the Cleric Crusader Archetype too.
10. Greater Weapon Focus – battle Oracle and the Cleric Crusader Archetype can pick this too.
11. Penetrating Strike- Arcane Duelist gets this for free.
12. Greater Penetrating Strike - Arcane Duelist gets this for free.
13. Weapon Specialization – Cleric Crusader Archetype can pick this too.
14. Greater Weapon Specialization – Cleric Crusader Archetype can pick this too.

Anyone noticed that unlike Barbarian, Ranger and Paladin the fighter hasn’t any abilities that can be activated as a swift action, immediate action or move action. This pretty much means that Barbarian, Ranger and Paladin (and a lot of other classes) get more actions per round than the fighter.

I'm sure I'm still forgetting some but:

Every fighter feat can eventually be taken by the magus and the eldritch knight, too (unless there are some who are too high level as prerequisite)
But the same is true for ways to get rage and rage powers. Yet it shows that no feat is really fighter only.
7) One Inquisition (or could be a domain or both) gives disruptive as bonus feat
13) zen archers get it and everyone with quaterstaff master. The staff magus gets quaterstaff master at 3rd level so he could get weapon spec quaterstaff at 1st level, too. (*or earlier if you manage to get weapon focus quaterstaff)
The reason for the above is as follows: With quaterstaff master you don't need fighter levels for weapon spec quaterstaff. And the prereq is fighter 4th, not fighter and 4th.

I missed one fighter feat.

15. Teleport Tactician

So 15 fighter feats in the 4 main core books (Core, APG, UM, and UC) for a class whose main class feature is feats.

In the same four books we have 32 Metamagic Feats. Feats that the fighter can’t take and feats that are exclusive to classes whose main class feature isn’t feats.

I haven’t even counted Item Creation Feats, Bardic performance feats, Monk feats, Barbarian feats (rage feats),
Channeling feats, Druid/Wildshape feats, Paladin feats (lay on hands, mercies, Smite, Channeling etc), or other class feats or ability feats that fighters can’t pick. Nor have I counted how many rage powers there or even look at how many spells there are in the books.

15 Fighters feats vs 32 Meta magic feats .

DIY class? If you are a caster, but not if you are a fighter (or a rogue).

Let’s see how many fighters feats vs. barbarians rage powers we get is each book and in total.

  • Core rule Book
    rage powers vs. fighter feats:

    9 fighter feats and 28 rage powers

    Squishy Fighter
    1. Critical Mastery
    2. Disruptive
    3. Spellbreaker
    4. Greater Shield Focus
    5. Greater Weapon Focus
    6. Penetrating Strike
    7. Greater Penetrating Strike
    8. Weapon Specialization
    9. Greater Weapon Specialization

    AM BARBARIAN
    1. Animal Fury
    2. Clear Mind
    3. Fearless Rage
    4. Guarded Stance
    5. Increased Damage Reduction
    6. Internal Fortitude
    7. Intimidating Glare
    8. Knockback
    9. Low-Light Vision
    10. Mighty Swing
    11. Moment of Clarity
    12. Night Vision
    13. No Escape
    14. Powerful Blow
    15. Quick Ref lexes
    16. Raging Climber
    17. Raging Leaper
    18. Raging Swimmer
    19. Renewed Vigor
    20. Rolling Dodge
    21. Roused Anger
    22. Scent
    23. Strength Surge
    24. Superstition
    25. Surprise Accuracy
    26. Swift Foot
    27. Terrifying Howl
    28. Unexpected Strike

  • Advanced Player’s Guide
    rage powers vs fighter feats:

    4 fighter feats and 48 rage powers

    Squishy Fighter
    1. Disrupting Shot
    2. Shield Specialization
    3. Greater Shield Specialization
    4. Point-Blank Master

    AM BARBARIAN
    29. Beast Totem
    30. Beast Totem, Greater
    31. Beast Totem, Lesser
    32. Boasting Taunt
    33. Brawler:
    34. Brawler, Greater
    35. Chaos Totem
    36. Chaos Totem, Greater
    37. Chaos Totem, Lesser
    38. Come and Get Me
    39. Disruptive:
    40. Elemental Rage
    41. Elemental Rage, Greater
    42. Elemental Rage, Lesser
    43. Energy Absorption
    44. Energy Eruption
    45. Energy Resistance
    46. Energy Resistance, Greater
    47. Ferocious Mount
    48. Ferocious Mount, Greater
    49. Ferocious Trample
    50. Ferocious Trample, Greater
    51. Fiend Totem
    52. Fiend Totem, Greater
    53. Fiend Totem, Lesser
    54. Flesh Wound
    55. Good for What Ails You
    56. Ground Breaker
    57. Guarded Life
    58. Hurling
    59. Hurling, Greater
    60. Hurling, Lesser
    61. Hurling Charge
    62. Inspire Ferocity
    63. Knockdown:
    64. Liquid Courage
    65. Overbearing Advance
    66. Overbearing Onslaught
    67. Reckless Abandon
    68. Roaring Drunk
    69. Smasher
    70. Spellbreaker:
    71. Spirit Steed
    72. Spirit Totem
    73. Spirit Totem, Greater
    74. Spirit Totem, Lesser
    75. Staggering Drunk
    76. Witch Hunter:

  • Ultimate Combat
    rage powers vs fighter feats:

    2 fighter feats vs. 32 rage powers

    Squishy Fighter
    1. Pin Down
    2. Teleport Tactician

    AM BARBARIAN
    77. Auspicious Mark
    78. Bestial Climber
    79. Bestial Leaper
    80. Bestial Swimmer
    81. Bleeding Blow
    82. Body Bludgeon
    83. Crippling Blow
    84. Deadly Accuracy
    85. Dragon Totem
    86. Dragon Totem Resilience
    87. Dragon Totem Wings
    88. Eater of Magic
    89. Ghost Rager
    90. Ground Breaker, Greater
    91. Guarded Life, Greater
    92. Hive Totem
    93. Hive Totem Resilience
    94. Hive Totem Toxicity
    95. Lethal Accuracy
    96. Perfect Clarity
    97. Primal Scent
    98. Reflexive Dodge
    99. Regenerative Vigor
    100. Renewed Life
    101. Renewed Vitality
    102. Sharpened Accuracy
    103. Spell Sunder
    104. Sprint
    105. Sunder Enchantment
    106. World Serpent Totem
    107. World Serpent Spirit
    108. World Serpent Totem Unity

    And the answer is……
    ……Drum roll…

    15 fighter feats vs.108 rage powers. A lot of the rage powers are far better than a feat. A fair trade? Obviously not.

    Yes, the fighter gets more feats than a barbarian, but the barbarian only needs 5 or 6 feats then she will probably only buy rage powers with the rest of hear feats. Yep, extra rage power comes up again ‘n’ again in various builds so 'more feats than the barbarian' is a moot point.
    AM BARBARIAN would not trade powers for more feats, that’s pretty obvious, since rage powers as a whole are more powerful than feats.

    Fighters are probably the best archers in the game, but a apart from that I’d say at higher levels Fighters generally can’t keep up the other full BAB core classes, even the Samurai is more appealing and it isn't even a core class.


  • 1 person marked this as a favorite.

    Great post Zark. It must have taken a while to do all the research but I think it displays a fine point in the end.


    2 people marked this as a favorite.

    Again, back to my original post that the anti-fighters soundly ignored.

    The problem is NOT the Fighter class.

    The problem is the ever-increasing power creep love being provided for everyone else.

    All the anti-fighter crowd keeps doing is pointing at the results of the ongoing power creep and demanding that the failure for one of the foundation bedrocks of the system to "keep up" is inherent in the construction of the foundation stone. Zark's "Great post" helps display this point pretty well. Even more so when you remember that Pathifinder STARTED as power creep from D&D 3.x.

    The problem is NOT in the foundation stone.

    The problem is in all the cruft that keeps getting tacked onto the system.

    This comes up in EVERY game engine where there has been enough expansion publishing. There's been a lot of expansion publishing for Pathfinder.


    Why not just let Fighters prepare their feats like Wizards prepare spells? I've been wanting to try this for some time...


    2 people marked this as a favorite.
    hustonj wrote:

    Again, back to my original post that the anti-fighters soundly ignored.

    The problem is NOT the Fighter class.

    The problem is the ever-increasing power creep love being provided for everyone else.

    All the anti-fighter crowd keeps doing is pointing at the results of the ongoing power creep and demanding that the failure for one of the foundation bedrocks of the system to "keep up" is inherent in the construction of the foundation stone. Zark's "Great post" helps display this point pretty well. Even more so when you remember that Pathifinder STARTED as power creep from D&D 3.x.

    The problem is NOT in the foundation stone.

    The problem is in all the cruft that keeps getting tacked onto the system.

    This comes up in EVERY game engine where there has been enough expansion publishing. There's been a lot of expansion publishing for Pathfinder.

    First of all it’s not about power, it’s about options. I don’t want more bonus to hit and damage. I want unique options.

    I’ll repeated it again:
    Ashiel wrote:
    "they kind of fail as a generic "build it yourself" class."

    Why:

    • Lack of good fighter feats*.
    • They don’t have any non-hitting-people problem-solving schticks
    • Not self-sufficient.
    • There is nothing exclusive about fighters. They are not sexy, because any class can pick feats and there are no cool fighter feats out there. There is nothing exclusive about fighters. All classes get feats. How many fighter only feats are there vs. Rage powers or paladin spells or Ranger spells or whatever.
    • Feat chains are feat taxes. If they want to be great in something they have to invest in a feat chain. Feat chains are feat taxes and most chains don't let you do anything amazing. It just improves what you already can do.

    Second: it’s amusing you referring to an anti-fighter crowd. I’m not part of a club and I’m sure not anti-fighter.

    Third: Problem isn’t that fighter are less powerful than other classes, but that other classes are more powerful than the fighter? I just find this kind of statement absurd.

    Forth: Power creep? With some exceptions (Summoner etc.) I think Paizo has done a great job of keeping down the power creep. Also there where far more options for the fighter in 3.0 and 3.5 (if you include splat books). Pounce and they could add con mod instead of wis mod to will saves etc. If I’m not wrong the first ed fighter was one of the most powerful classes in the game.


    hustonj wrote:

    Again, back to my original post that the anti-fighters soundly ignored.

    The problem is NOT the Fighter class.

    The problem is the ever-increasing power creep love being provided for everyone else.

    All the anti-fighter crowd keeps doing is pointing at the results of the ongoing power creep and demanding that the failure for one of the foundation bedrocks of the system to "keep up" is inherent in the construction of the foundation stone. Zark's "Great post" helps display this point pretty well. Even more so when you remember that Pathifinder STARTED as power creep from D&D 3.x.

    The problem is NOT in the foundation stone.

    The problem is in all the cruft that keeps getting tacked onto the system.

    This comes up in EVERY game engine where there has been enough expansion publishing. There's been a lot of expansion publishing for Pathfinder.

    One, I disagree with your premise. At the baseline Fighter was always worse than Barbarian and Ranger. None of the new options added a significant amount of power to either class, they just gave them more options.

    Second, if the trend of the game is power creep, why is Fighter the only class that hasn't gotten better, if that were the case? Every other class (well, except Rogue) has benefited from new options, from the Monk to the Sorcerer. Surely, some of the myriad new Feats would have increased the Fighter's power, even if only by accident.

    Unless, of course, the problem is with the base class itself, and is not something that can be fixed by random Feats and such added in books.


    1 person marked this as a favorite.
    hustonj wrote:

    Again, back to my original post that the anti-fighters soundly ignored.

    The problem is NOT the Fighter class.

    The problem is the ever-increasing power creep love being provided for everyone else.

    All the anti-fighter crowd keeps doing is pointing at the results of the ongoing power creep and demanding that the failure for one of the foundation bedrocks of the system to "keep up" is inherent in the construction of the foundation stone. Zark's "Great post" helps display this point pretty well. Even more so when you remember that Pathifinder STARTED as power creep from D&D 3.x.

    The problem is NOT in the foundation stone.

    The problem is in all the cruft that keeps getting tacked onto the system.

    This comes up in EVERY game engine where there has been enough expansion publishing. There's been a lot of expansion publishing for Pathfinder.

    Pathfinder is most definitely not power creep from 3.x. It's only better balanced. ALL martial characters in 3.5 (barring perhaps the Ranger) were horrible, and all the full casters in Pathfinder core are heads and shoulders below the power that they were in 3.5. Suggesting that Pathfinder power-creeped on 3.5 is showing a gross ignorance of both systems at their core.

    The barbarian has not be made significantly stronger due to the additional publications. Instead, the barbarian has diversified and has acquired options and opportunities to shine in ways that she had not before. Unfortunately, the Fighter design in Pathfinder - likely due to constraints preventing them from modifying it greatly - did not become any more diverse than it was (which is to say not very much at all). Instead it got bigger numbers. Now bigger numbers is a definite power creep, but since we were creepin' on a class that was already too weak it was creep in the right direction.

    Now the problem the fighter has is that the Fighter is stupid. See, it's difficult to make feats that are reasonably fighter-only. I know. I've thought about it. See, in the case of classes like Paladins, Rangers, Barbarians, Cavaliers, whatever, they have class features that make them very modular. One can create a Rage power that applys a certain effect under a given condition and bam, new rage power. Pick it or another as desired. Same with things like Spells for the Paladin or Ranger, or even Divine Bond or Hunter's Bond (I mean, if we wanted we could easily trade those abilities).

    Now the problem is that Fighter only has feats. And he has no shtick that makes him anything other than that guy who hits things. Which means that it's difficult to branch out. Most feats that would likely be made fighter-only would probably make more sense being general feats (and probably in a combat style for a ranger no less). The problem is the Fighter is the Warrior NPC class with bigger numbers. He has nothing that is thematically fitting with him that would be suitable as feats that wouldn't be suitable for any other class with the appropriate BAB. Except for weapon specialization-themed stuff, but then we're generally back to bigger numbers (3.5 fighters suffered this problem too, though there was a precious few feats in the PHB II that were pretty cool and good for high level fighters, though most still relied on flat numbers to more things).

    Now we could probably rebuild the fighter with a similar system, except instead of raising his numbers we could try to diversify him a bit more like the barbarian. Instead of spamming feats at him, we could give him something like "martial technique" every even level. Or create a series of "martial techniques" which could be traded for fighter bonus feats. A similar concept to the Tome of Battle: Book of Nine Swords from late 3.5 which effectively replaced the core Barbarian, Fighter, Monk, and Paladin (and rightly so!) with classes that weren't more powerful in numbers but more diverse in options.

    At the moment, in Pathfinder, we have several really strong martial archetypes.

    Heroic Normal = Barbarian
    Skilled Martial = Ranger
    Divine Champion = Paladin

    Where does the fighter fit into this? What is actually the fighter's shtick? What abilities can you give the fighter that wouldn't make sense on literally every other martial who can swing a sword beyond arbitrary numerical increases?

    Silver Crusade

    I've been observing this thread. A lot of good points have been made by both sides of the aisle. So many, in fact, that there's really nothing I can truly contribute to that side of things. However, I do wish to dispel the notion about the summoner's eidolon being 'always on'.

    It isn't. Animal companions and familiars, on the other hand, are. They are persistent in their presence. The eidolon is not.

    The eidolon has to be summoned - whether through ritual (optimal) or through spell (suboptimal). The optimal method takes 1 minute or 10 rounds to perform (unless you're an elf, who can reduce that time down to a round by using their favored class bonus each time they level up to level 9).

    And by summoning the eidolon, they can't use their summon monster ability (the two use the same power). Nor can they summon the eidolon while using the summon monster ability. Summoners, however, can work around this deficiency. They can use the summon monster ability, then use the suboptimal method and cast the 2nd level spell summon eidolon, provided they have it. Likewise they can summon the eidolon, then use the summon monster spells to flood the field, once again provided they have those spells. But even then this only reinforces the point: the ability is not 'always on'.

    I'm not trying to start a flame war with this. I just want to see the discussion continue on its merits. And sometimes to do that, you must dispel certain fallacies. The eidolon as 'always on' is one such fallacy.

    Shadow Lodge

    2 people marked this as a favorite.

    The main problem with the fighter is how he cannot win the game singlehandedly.

    Grand Lodge

    Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
    Rynjin wrote:
    Second, if the trend of the game is power creep, why is Fighter the only class that hasn't gotten better, if that were the case? Every other class (well, except Rogue) has benefited from new options, from the Monk to the Sorcerer. Surely, some of the myriad new Feats would have increased the Fighter's power, even if only by accident.

    The premise is wrong. The Fighter has made vast improvements over his prior incarnation in 3.X, and the Cleric can't freely steal his thunder the way he could back then. He's the only martial who freely moves around in armor, and he has a variety of lockdown tricks.

    So the fighter can't teleport, and can't raise mountains, and he doesn't have out of combat magic tricks. That's not what the character is supposed to be. He' s the mano y mano hero, the one that wizards turn to when they need strong arms and guts.


    Blayde MacRonan wrote:
    I'm not trying to start a flame war with this. I just want to see the discussion continue on its merits. And sometimes to do that, you must dispel certain fallacies. The eidolon as 'always on' is one such fallacy.

    There's nothing that forbid you to summon the eidolon in the first 10 rounds of your first level, and do not unsummon it, EVER.

    That said, the summoner has options to absorb evolutions. Those evolutions (like for example, wings) are always on within himself. Wings > skill focus Climb, in 99.99999999999% of situations.

    Grand Lodge

    Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
    Aelryinth wrote:

    Which, not incidentally, allows the Paladin to get by with an 8 Wis where the fighter has the 8 Cha. The fighter gets to a 12 or 14 Wis for a bonus to his +0 Will save, and the paladin gets a bonus to ALL his saves, including his +1 Will save.

    I did a level by level comparison of what the paladin gets and the fighter gets, and its not pretty. I don't think anything of what the paladin gets is unwarranted, given the LG alignment and restrictions of his code, but I do think the fighter should get a lot more...and they should get it through feat synergy.

    ==Aelryinth

    Did you also make a comparison on how effective those Paladin goodies are when they're not pitted against their special foes?

    Did you also make a comparison on how many Alignment (or call them what they really are Make a Paladin Fail) threads there are on these boards? Did you give the Fighter credit for not bringing that kind of baggage into a group whose players don't want to be stuck with Lancelot?

    All of the Paladin's goodies come with some heavy mandatory baggage on them.


    hustonj wrote:

    Again, back to my original post that the anti-fighters soundly ignored.

    The problem is NOT the Fighter class.

    The problem is the ever-increasing power creep love being provided for everyone else.

    So the problem is not that the fighter is worse, but that everyone else is better?

    O.o

    Quote:

    All the anti-fighter crowd keeps doing is pointing at the results of the ongoing power creep and demanding that the failure for one of the foundation bedrocks of the system to "keep up" is inherent in the construction of the foundation stone. Zark's "Great post" helps display this point pretty well. Even more so when you remember that Pathifinder STARTED as power creep from D&D 3.x.

    The problem is NOT in the foundation stone.

    The problem is in all the cruft that keeps getting tacked onto the system.

    This comes up in EVERY game engine where there has been enough expansion publishing. There's been a lot of expansion publishing for Pathfinder.

    Using CRB alone, Zark's Great Post shows that the Fighter has 9 fighter feats, vs 28 rage powers alone.

    Even without expansion publishing, the fighter falls short in options to the barbarian. We don't include here classes with spells, just to give the fighter a small chance.

    701 to 750 of 3,805 << first < prev | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | next > last >>
    Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / General Discussion / The Main Problem with Fighters All Messageboards