The Main Problem with Fighters


Pathfinder First Edition General Discussion

2,101 to 2,150 of 3,805 << first < prev | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | 43 | 44 | 45 | 46 | 47 | 48 | next > last >>

Marthkus wrote:
Kirth Gersen wrote:
Lies. Filthy filthy lies
I'm a troll, trolling the thread for attention and topic-derailment.

I'm a troll, too!

But I do it for the only good reason to do anything: idiftl.


master_marshmallow wrote:


The problems people have with fighters are more problems with Pathfinder as a whole imo.

Well no, and there is a boatload of evidence for that but yes:

More then anything, the Multi-Class Archetype thread, and multiple class archetypes have shown me just how unbalanced Pathfinder is.

Yet its fixable. The level of Transparency shown, means its much easier too identify the issues and flaws with the system.

Obvious issue is Spellcasting.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
master_marshmallow wrote:
The fighter you want exists, you just can't have 2 cakes and eat them both.

I don't understand why everyone is trying to keep me from eating my cake.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
ujjjjjjjjjj wrote:
Obvious issue is Spellcasting.

Making spell casting suck to fix fighters and other people without spells is the kind of "solution" that would make me play a different game. I can tolerate fighters sucking, but making everything else suck so they suck less in comparison is an awful idea.


MrSin wrote:
master_marshmallow wrote:
The fighter you want exists, you just can't have 2 cakes and eat them both.
I don't understand why everyone is trying to keep me from eating my cake.

It's delicious caek.

You must eat it.


Marthkus wrote:
ujjjjjjjjjj wrote:
Obvious issue is Spellcasting.
Making spell casting suck to fix fighters and other people without spells is the kind of "solution" that would make me play a different game. I can tolerate fighters sucking, but making everything else suck so they suck less in comparison is an awful idea.

Supposedly its easier for a developer to nerf than to buff, but its usually a terrible idea to nerf because the peasants tend to revolt to that.


Marthkus wrote:
ujjjjjjjjjj wrote:
Obvious issue is Spellcasting.
Casters Uber Alles! Everything else can suxorz, for all I care! In fact, I want to dominate them, and if I can't I'll baww and rage-quit!

There, fixed it for you.


master_marshmallow wrote:

So we want fighters to be able to get Perception as a class skill?

I was being facetious before, but maybe we should nix perception as a skill and make it a mechanic thing like concentration, then less people would whine about their favorite class not getting it as a class skill.

I'm fine with fighters as they are, the only thing I would do is open up, or create more content to mirror, some of the lost content from 3.5 that may not be available due to the lack of OGL on it.

Why do fighters need more skills again? What theme do they not cover? The fighter is not a skill intensive class, and that's the beauty of it. Less work to do, and a simpler build. There are archetypes that give you 4+INT/level if you need it that bad. You want survival? UMD? The feat Cosmopolitan exists, the feat Additional Traits exists, you could take skill focus and get the same benefit as having it as a class skill until you get to 10 ranks.

I love combat, too, but there are other times in the game when you need *skills*!! I do thinking making a Combat School for Fighters is a good idea for those who want more for their Fighter; Maybe Fighters could gain bonuses to their Craft skill, learn the Heal skill, maybe pick up Perception. . .

The Combat Style Feats idea was good, just that you should be able to gain the Feat ( without the prerequisites as your character picked this up in past battles. . . ) or trade it in for a normal ( that is, requiring prerequisites ) Feat.


All I've really seen here are people who are whining about the lack of skills and ability to skip prereqs.

IMO Rangers are OP because they can skip prereqs and get things levels sooner than fighters can. A nerf to rangers would be better imo than a buff to fighters.

That said, rather than letting fighters skip feat prereqs, just nixing silly prereqs in the first place would most likely be a better fix.


Well there is SIMPLY NO OTHER OPTION.

Let me give you an example:

Lets say that all casters could only use 1st level spells, however the damage cap for stuff that maxes out at 5 would instead max out at level 20, and saves scaled at =1/2 level.

They would still be incredibly vertisile, and fun too use.

But casters don't just get too use 1st level spells.

Casters don't need too suck.


Arguecat wrote:
Marthkus wrote:
ujjjjjjjjjj wrote:
Obvious issue is Spellcasting.
Casters Uber Alles! Everything else can suxorz, for all I care! In fact, I want to dominate them, and if I can't I'll baww and rage-quit!
Cure people for having fun with unique mechanics that can never be reasonable replicated by hitting things with a sword. Roll dice to hit like a real man!

FTFY


ED-209 wrote:
Marthkus wrote:
Kirth Gersen wrote:
Lies. Filthy filthy lies
I'm a troll, trolling the thread for attention and topic-derailment.

I'm a troll, too!

But I do it for the only good reason to do anything: idiftl.

so we have established that you have no idea what's going on and who your even talking to. thanks now i'll just skim over your posts to make this a quicker read.


ujjjjjjjjjj wrote:

Well there is SIMPLY NO OTHER OPTION.

Let me give you an example:

Lets say that all casters could only use 1st level spells, however the damage cap for stuff that maxes out at 5 would instead max out at level 20, and saves scaled at =1/2 level.

They would still be incredibly vertisile, and fun too use.

But casters don't just get too use 1st level spells.

Casters don't need too suck.

*shudders

You just made me imagine the purgatory that is first-level spells.

Because screw all of those fun and interesting ideas at the higher levels!

My lvl 20 wizard, the greatest the earth has ever known should play like Gandalf in LoTR movies. F That. If pathfinder was suddenly that or at this point a clone of 4th ed (nerf casters into being weird fighters), I would still be playing 3.5


Caligastia wrote:
master_marshmallow wrote:

So we want fighters to be able to get Perception as a class skill?

I was being facetious before, but maybe we should nix perception as a skill and make it a mechanic thing like concentration, then less people would whine about their favorite class not getting it as a class skill.

I'm fine with fighters as they are, the only thing I would do is open up, or create more content to mirror, some of the lost content from 3.5 that may not be available due to the lack of OGL on it.

Why do fighters need more skills again? What theme do they not cover? The fighter is not a skill intensive class, and that's the beauty of it. Less work to do, and a simpler build. There are archetypes that give you 4+INT/level if you need it that bad. You want survival? UMD? The feat Cosmopolitan exists, the feat Additional Traits exists, you could take skill focus and get the same benefit as having it as a class skill until you get to 10 ranks.

I love combat, too, but there are other times in the game when you need *skills*!! I do thinking making a Combat School for Fighters is a good idea for those who want more for their Fighter; Maybe Fighters could gain bonuses to their Craft skill, learn the Heal skill, maybe pick up Perception. . .

The Combat Style Feats idea was good, just that you should be able to gain the Feat ( without the prerequisites as your character picked this up in past battles. . . ) or trade it in for a normal ( that is, requiring prerequisites ) Feat.

What skills does a fighter need?

You aren't the scout, why do you want perception?
You aren't the face, why do you want diplomacy?
You aren't the pokedex, why do you want knowledges?

Fighters get climb and swim so they can traverse harsh terrains, and get armor training so their check penalties don't matter to them.

If you aren't using those skills in your games, maybe the problem is the game you are playing and the fighter not accommodating your play style since you are neglecting an entire aspect of the game in the fighters skill set where rough terrain and use of his high STR actually would matter.

People make the same whiny rants about cavaliers, we want them to do this, not that. We don't do that in our games, therefor the class is awful. It's pure fallacy.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Who needs swim or climb when everyone gets flight?


Marthkus wrote:
Arguecat wrote:
Marthkus wrote:
ujjjjjjjjjj wrote:
Obvious issue is Spellcasting.
Casters Uber Alles! Everything else can suxorz, for all I care! In fact, I want to dominate them, and if I can't I'll baww and rage-quit!
There, fixed it for you.
Trolls trolling trolls, because I have no real argument, especially now that I've revealed the only reason I'm in this thread is to protect caster dominance, Plus, I lack the imagination to think that anything non-caster could do anything beyond hitting things with a sword. So I have nothing positive to contribute whatsoever to any rational discussion of the topic and only want to derail the discussion.

FIFY. ^_^


master_marshmallow wrote:

All I've really seen here are people who are whining about the lack of skills and ability to skip prereqs.

IMO Rangers are OP because they can skip prereqs and get things levels sooner than fighters can. A nerf to rangers would be better imo than a buff to fighters.

That said, rather than letting fighters skip feat prereqs, just nixing silly prereqs in the first place would most likely be a better fix.

Well, after a Fighter's been going on around fighting for a while, he starts to pick up on things, thus the skipping prereqs. It's saying that you learn it from experience. I'd rather build up the Fighter than make other classes worse ( except, of course, when a certain feature simply makes no sense and logically wouldn't fit in a class's repitiore. . .


Marthkus wrote:


*shudders

You just made me imagine the purgatory that is first-level spells.

Because screw all of those fun and interesting ideas at the higher levels!

My lvl 20 wizard, the greatest the earth has ever known should play like Gandalf in LoTR movies. F That. If pathfinder was suddenly that or at this point a clone of 4th ed (nerf casters into being weird fighters), I would still be playing 3.5

I have no idea if your trolling or not. Your just so confusing. Considering Gandalf barely throws any spells around anyway.

Maybe you meant that you wanted more exploding pinecone spells?


ED-209 wrote:
Marthkus wrote:
Arguecat wrote:
Marthkus wrote:
ujjjjjjjjjj wrote:
Obvious issue is Spellcasting.
Casters Uber Alles! Everything else can suxorz, for all I care! In fact, I want to dominate them, and if I can't I'll baww and rage-quit!
There, fixed it for you.
Trolls trolling trolls, because I have no real argument, especially now that I've revealed the only reason I'm in this thread is to protect caster dominance, Plus, I lack the imagination to think that anything non-caster could do anything beyond hitting things with a sword. So I have nothing positive to contribute whatsoever to any rational discussion of the topic and only want to derail the discussion.
I can't read herp derp.

FTFY


+5 Toaster wrote:
ED-209 wrote:
Marthkus wrote:
Kirth Gersen wrote:
Lies. Filthy filthy lies
I'm a troll, trolling the thread for attention and topic-derailment.

I'm a troll, too!

But I do it for the only good reason to do anything: idiftl.

so we have established that you have no idea what's going on and who your even talking to. thanks now i'll just skim over your posts to make this a quicker read.
+5 Toaster wrote:
so we have established that you have no idea what's going on and who your even talking to. thanks now i'll just skim over your posts to make this a quicker read.

Marthkus, on the other hand, was making a great positive contribution there, wasn't he?

Tell me more about what a great positive contribution he made there in replacing Kirth's post with that.


ujjjjjjjjjj wrote:
Marthkus wrote:


*shudders

You just made me imagine the purgatory that is first-level spells.

Because screw all of those fun and interesting ideas at the higher levels!

My lvl 20 wizard, the greatest the earth has ever known should play like Gandalf in LoTR movies. F That. If pathfinder was suddenly that or at this point a clone of 4th ed (nerf casters into being weird fighters), I would still be playing 3.5

I have no idea if your trolling or not. Your just so confusing. Considering Gandalf barely throws any spells around anyway.

Maybe you meant that you wanted more exploding pinecone spells?

You sugested that a possible fun nerf for caster would be to make them all play like Gandalf with barely anything in the way of interesting when it comes to spells.

To which I replied "F That".


Marthkus wrote:
ED-209 wrote:
Marthkus wrote:
Arguecat wrote:
Marthkus wrote:
ujjjjjjjjjj wrote:
Obvious issue is Spellcasting.
Casters Uber Alles! Everything else can suxorz, for all I care! In fact, I want to dominate them, and if I can't I'll baww and rage-quit!
There, fixed it for you.
Trolls trolling trolls, because I have no real argument, especially now that I've revealed the only reason I'm in this thread is to protect caster dominance, Plus, I lack the imagination to think that anything non-caster could do anything beyond hitting things with a sword. So I have nothing positive to contribute whatsoever to any rational discussion of the topic and only want to derail the discussion.
FIFY
I can't make a rational argument, and my only prayer now is provoking a threadlock by derailing the topic severely enough.

FIFY. ^_^


Marthkus wrote:
Who needs swim or climb when everyone gets flight?

Would if a potent magic item is underwater? Would if the time you can use Fly is limited, and your destination is further off?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

We aren't talking about fighters anymore are we...?


5 people marked this as a favorite.
master_marshmallow wrote:

What skills does a fighter need?

You aren't the scout, why do you want perception?
You aren't the face, why do you want diplomacy?
You aren't the pokedex, why do you want knowledges?

Good point...

"You suck at everything, why do you want to be useful?"

Yeah, that makes sense... ¬¬'


I still am; don't know about some people here . . .

Anyhow, I think that Combat Style Feats ( Feats a Fighter learns from experience in combat, thus ignoring prerequisites, with the option to select a regular Feat if he doesn't want any . . . ), two high saving throws, and perks at 8th level or higher ( Henchmen, followers, etc.) are the way to go! There are a lot of people on this thread who are interested in improving Fighters. Don't let a few trolls drag it down . .. .


Lemmy wrote:
master_marshmallow wrote:

What skills does a fighter need?

You aren't the scout, why do you want perception?
You aren't the face, why do you want diplomacy?
You aren't the pokedex, why do you want knowledges?

Good point...

"You suck at everything, why do you want to be useful?"

Yeah, that makes sense... ¬¬'

I guess being able to make it to the top of the cliff by climbing up there to get the secret item that no one else can get to, or swimming across the water, or even into it to get to the secret switch that no one else could because none of us have climb or swim or good STR stats to do it counts as useless?

Again, look at the games you play. If you aren't seeing merit in the skills that the fighter has then you may want to play a different kind of game just to experience it.


master_marshmallow wrote:


I guess being able to make it to the top of the cliff by climbing up there to get the secret item that no one else can get to

How did you know that there was any magic item there at all? How would you notice it unless you had a good perception?

;D


Arguecat wrote:
+5 Toaster wrote:
ED-209 wrote:
Marthkus wrote:
Kirth Gersen wrote:
Lies. Filthy filthy lies
I'm a troll, trolling the thread for attention and topic-derailment.

I'm a troll, too!

But I do it for the only good reason to do anything: idiftl.

so we have established that you have no idea what's going on and who your even talking to. thanks now i'll just skim over your posts to make this a quicker read.
+5 Toaster wrote:
so we have established that you have no idea what's going on and who your even talking to. thanks now i'll just skim over your posts to make this a quicker read.

Marthkus, on the other hand, was making a great positive contribution there, wasn't he?

Tell me more about what a great positive contribution he made there in replacing Kirth's post with that.

well considering they are on the same side of the argument, I took that as humor. ED-209 on the other hand seemed to not be kidding. though maybe he was playing along too, and if so I apologize for my comment. though it might be better directed at you instead.


Lemmy wrote:
master_marshmallow wrote:

What skills does a fighter need?

You aren't the scout, why do you want perception?
You aren't the face, why do you want diplomacy?
You aren't the pokedex, why do you want knowledges?

Good point...

"You suck at everything, why do you want to be useful?"

Yeah, that makes sense... ¬¬'

Man you are started to "get" fighters.

Really there are only a few things that I would want to play a fighter for.

No resource management
Lots of hit points
Unlimited use of ability that allows me to smash things like doors (never could bring myself to do this as a caster)
Incentives the GM to treat you better than all of those hack casters.
High BAB and to-hit rolls
Relevant AC (never build AC on my arcane casters because it takes WAY too much gold to obtain useful AC)
FEATS, GIVE ME FEATS (Then I look at feats and feel sad.)

Aside from the first and the last reason a barbar or paladin does a better job.

So if my character concept is LN, I guess fighter would be ideal then. Or if I didn't feel like playing a holy pally or Rage monster. But these are all RP reasons and have little to do with mechanics.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
ujjjjjjjjjj wrote:
master_marshmallow wrote:


I guess being able to make it to the top of the cliff by climbing up there to get the secret item that no one else can get to

How did you know that there was any magic item there at all? How would you notice it unless you had a good perception?

;D

Rogue rolls perception, "hey there's something up there! I can't get to it."

Fighter says "I got this." Rolls climb, gets it.

You want to be the guy that does the spotting and the finding? You're just being whiny. That's all this thread really is.


master_marshmallow wrote:
Lemmy wrote:
master_marshmallow wrote:

What skills does a fighter need?

You aren't the scout, why do you want perception?
You aren't the face, why do you want diplomacy?
You aren't the pokedex, why do you want knowledges?

Good point...

"You suck at everything, why do you want to be useful?"

Yeah, that makes sense... ¬¬'

I guess being able to make it to the top of the cliff by climbing up there to get the secret item that no one else can get to, or swimming across the water, or even into it to get to the secret switch that no one else could because none of us have climb or swim or good STR stats to do it counts as useless?

Precisely!! ;)


master_marshmallow wrote:
Again, look at the games you play. If you aren't seeing merit in the skills that the fighter has then you may want to play a different kind of game just to experience it.

So... Should I try a fighter out in 4E or should I play a warrior in WoW? I did main one in the latter for a long time...


1 person marked this as a favorite.
master_marshmallow wrote:
Lemmy wrote:
master_marshmallow wrote:

What skills does a fighter need?

You aren't the scout, why do you want perception?
You aren't the face, why do you want diplomacy?
You aren't the pokedex, why do you want knowledges?

Good point...

"You suck at everything, why do you want to be useful?"

Yeah, that makes sense... ¬¬'

I guess being able to make it to the top of the cliff by climbing up there to get the secret item that no one else can get to, or swimming across the water, or even into it to get to the secret switch that no one else could because none of us have climb or swim or good STR stats to do it counts as useless?

Again, look at the games you play. If you aren't seeing merit in the skills that the fighter has then you may want to play a different kind of game just to experience it.

...barbarian, and probably spotted it well before the fighter did.


Climb becomes obsolete at 3rd level, when levitate comes on line.
So your stance is that the fighter class is exactly 2 levels long?
What do I do after that?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
master_marshmallow wrote:


Rogue rolls perception, "hey there's something up there! I can't get to it."
Fighter says "I got this." Rolls climb, gets it.

You want to be the guy that does the spotting and the finding? You're just being whiny. That's all this thread really is.

Now lets get back too reality:

Rouge: "Oh hey a magic item, Il go climb to it too because I have 8+ Skill points too spare!, also fighter you can go polish my boots whilst I do so"

Fighter: "No I can't. Not enough Skill points"

Are you REALY this thick? Are you REALY not trolling? Are you SERIOUS?


master_marshmallow wrote:

I guess being able to make it to the top of the cliff by climbing up there to get the secret item that no one else can get to, or swimming across the water, or even into it to get to the secret switch that no one else could because none of us have climb or swim or good STR stats to do it counts as useless?

Again, look at the games you play. If you aren't seeing merit in the skills that the fighter has then you may want to play a different kind of game just to experience it.

That's not my point. Fighters do stuff, but they don't do enough.

I've seen a whole party almost die because they lacked ranks in Swim. I've seen parties using climb to reach the BBEG's chamber.

I'm not saying Climb and Swim are bad skills. They're useful here and there, but they're not even close to being useful enough to compensate for a total lack of other out of combat abilities.

4 skill points per level and a better list of class skill is the least a guy who spends all this time practicing mundane abilities should get.

I want Fighters to be able to contribute situations where combat is not needed. Don't tell me I want them to be able to do everything, because Rangers are not even close to omnipotent and you don't see me asking for them to have all good saves and 8 skill ranks per level. And Ranger is my favorite class.

Hell, the only class I don't care about is Cavalier. I don't dislike the class, but I don't give a damn about them either... And yet, I'd like to see them buffed. A balanced game is a better game. It's a game more people can enjoy.


is it me or is this thread lockbait?


Aelryinth wrote:

Nobody is ever complaining about a fighter's DPR. Saying fighters are great because they can do consistent damage is totally avoiding the point everyone tries to make about fighters.

I agree here. Fighter DPR is fine.


Kirth Gersen wrote:

Climb becomes obsolete at 3rd level, when levitate comes on line.

So your stance is that the fighter class is exactly 2 levels long?
What do I do after that?

Would if the spellcasters aren't around? With Climb, you can get it *regardless*!


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Kirth Gersen wrote:

Climb becomes obsolete at 3rd level, when levitate comes on line.

So your stance is that the fighter class is exactly 2 levels long?
What do I do after that?

Now be nice. Climb last till lvl 5 for those angled wall challenges that levitate can't solve.

Really though climb serves some use until lvl 10 when flying items become mandatory.

Still 3D terrain is hard to put on a 2D dungeon map. Climb tends to do jack-diddly for me since when I should use it comes up so rarely that burning a spell or two is worth the effort.


Coriat wrote:
Ssalarn wrote:
The fighter has the ability to consistently deal damage at a higher baseline than most other classes day in and day out

Would you be willing to explore the justification of this statement further?

For my own part I have posted before about the lack of consistency I have encountered in dealing damage with my 15th level fighter.

What I have not done is succeeded in getting anyone to explain why why none of the issues I have encountered are relevant to the status of fighters as consistent damage dealers (or, alternately: why I am not ever dealing consistent damage with a supposedly consistent damage dealing class).

I really would lie to see your build, If you do not build your fighter for DPR then his damage outpt woudl not be that good.

If you build a barbarian of other things besides DPR (non TWF sword and borad for example) then you should no be surprised the barbariand do few damage.


+5 Toaster wrote:
master_marshmallow wrote:
Lemmy wrote:
master_marshmallow wrote:

What skills does a fighter need?

You aren't the scout, why do you want perception?
You aren't the face, why do you want diplomacy?
You aren't the pokedex, why do you want knowledges?

Good point...

"You suck at everything, why do you want to be useful?"

Yeah, that makes sense... ¬¬'

I guess being able to make it to the top of the cliff by climbing up there to get the secret item that no one else can get to, or swimming across the water, or even into it to get to the secret switch that no one else could because none of us have climb or swim or good STR stats to do it counts as useless?

Again, look at the games you play. If you aren't seeing merit in the skills that the fighter has then you may want to play a different kind of game just to experience it.

...barbarain, and probably spotted well before the fighter did.

I would take a fighter in combat over a barbarian any day. Give me armor, give me armor training. Weapon spec. evens out with the bonus damage from rage.

The best thing we can do for fighters that we can actually expect to see happen and published by paizo is to see some better fighter only feats that give them more than bigger numbers.
I could care less about skills, that's not why I'm playing a fighter. If you have a problem with it, it's on you and your playstyle.

I am a firm believer that every skill should see use at some point, and if everyone is too busy putting ranks into perception then the DM is only gonna throw perception challenges at you then we have this mindset going around that perception is the only thing that matters. Again it is a fallacy perpetuated by a game style that you want the developers to adapt to, rather than adapting yourself and the complexity of your games. It's sad.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
+5 Toaster wrote:
is it me or is this thread lockbait?

The tone of this thread took a sudden and steep nose dive on this page, yes. Unfortunate but likely reversible if people stop saying things like "you're just being whiny" or making posts which consist of nothing but altering others' posts in clownish ways.

Personally, again... I play a fighter. Who can climb, jump, and swim. All three of those skills are almost entirely useless at 15th level. In fact... I literally cannot think of any time in the last five levels that I overcame any challenge whatsoever, or achieved anything of any game significance that depended on using any of those skills. The challenges our party faces have long since outgrown what one can achieve by mundane climbing or swimming.


Caligastia wrote:
Kirth Gersen wrote:

Climb becomes obsolete at 3rd level, when levitate comes on line.

So your stance is that the fighter class is exactly 2 levels long?
What do I do after that?
Would if the spellcasters aren't around? With Climb, you can get it *regardless*!

Without casters a take 10/20 usually solves it. If your fighting a creature with a climb speed on a wall your usually pretty screwed to begin with aren't you? Of course the fighters 2 skill points per level means he may not actually have enough skill points for climbing whatever.


master_marshmallow wrote:

Why do fighters need more skills again? What theme do they not cover? The fighter is not a skill intensive class, and that's the beauty of it. Less work to do, and a simpler build. There are archetypes that give you 4+INT/level if you need it that bad. You want survival? UMD? The feat Cosmopolitan exists, the feat Additional Traits exists, you could take skill focus and get the same benefit as having it as a class skill until you get to 10 ranks

This is a terrible argument.

The fighter do not need more skill points to fight, but neither the barbarian, the cavalier or the gunslinger, nevertheless those classes have more skill points.


MrSin wrote:
Caligastia wrote:
Kirth Gersen wrote:

Climb becomes obsolete at 3rd level, when levitate comes on line.

So your stance is that the fighter class is exactly 2 levels long?
What do I do after that?
Would if the spellcasters aren't around? With Climb, you can get it *regardless*!
Without casters a take 10/20 usually solves it. If your fighting a creature with a climb speed on a wall your usually pretty screwed to begin with aren't you? Of course the fighters 2 skill points per level means he may not actually have enough skill points for climbing whatever.

Your DM lets you take 20 on a climb check where failing could result in fall damage that could accumulate and possibly kill you? Again, sounds like a problem with your game and not with the mechanics.

Climb checks are used for slopes and other forms of terrain also, it isn't just about going straight up.

Again, if you don't see these skills used in your game, which are the skills that a fighter is better at than anyone else because of armor training, then you gotta look at your game style before you start docking points from the fighters usefulness.

Exploration and handling rough terrain is and should be part of your adventuring experience, and if the DM has to just let you succeed by allowing taking 10 or 20 on things that he shouldn't, then isn't that more of a problem than not having every single character in the group have perception checks so good the DM may as well never hide anything?


+5 Toaster wrote:
is it me or is this thread lockbait?

People are throwing around the T-word a lot, but this thread is months old and refuses to die.

In pathfinder feats kind of suck. More so than they did in 3.5

This being the core concept of the fighter has left him in a bad spot. Any solution to actually fix the fighter has to change how a fighter handles feats. This is no easy tasks and requires almost a complete rewrite of the rules to work, or adding extra text to every feat a long the lines of "Fighters with this feat get X". Which is also very work intensive.

All the other solutions here either make the fighter more like other classes (more skill point, better saves, plot abilities, special techniques that function like magic) or call for a nerfing of non-fighters destroying what makes Pathfinder different from other table tops. Which these solutions are more easy to fit into a post, but do not actually work.

The problem with the fighter is his feats. Adding more feats doesn't help, because they have to be balanced for everyone to use. Fighter only feats tend to be feat intensive to prevent non-fighters from ever wanting them. But burning a lot of your core class feature for one neat trick is usually a let down. Fighter needs better feats or to have feats work differently for him.


master_marshmallow wrote:


What skills does a fighter need?
You aren't the scout, why do you want perception?
You aren't the face, why do you want diplomacy?
You aren't the pokedex, why do you want knowledges?

Wow, just wow. This is like the worst arguement in the entire thread.

Asuming the figher spend his 2 +int skill points in swim, ride, climb acrobatics and perception the answer to your question are:

a)The reason the fighte is not the scout is because he do not have more skill points to invest in stealth. you know, with armor training a fighter could be a good scout in full plate.

b) Te reason the fighter is not the face is because he do not have the skill points to invest in diplomacy and sense motive.

c) The reason the fighter is not a pokedex is because he do not have 4+int skill per level to have 2 knowledges skills.

2,101 to 2,150 of 3,805 << first < prev | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | 43 | 44 | 45 | 46 | 47 | 48 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / General Discussion / The Main Problem with Fighters All Messageboards