What if it were martials who all had strong will saves and casters who were compulsion fodder? Right now every caster except the ranger has a strong will save. Let's strip those from the weak willed people who succumb to the temptation of arcane magic addiction and give them to the resolute guardians of normalcy. The god botherers can keep theirs because making them all dump intelligence is insulting enough. Making them also weak willed is bad business. We've finally mostly gotten away from the stigma of Dark Dungeons.
Universally crappy saves is probably a better weak spot for arcane casters than incompetent BAB anyways. There's no reason an adventuring wizard should be worse at combat than an accountant, lawyer, jeweler, or other NPC expert. Of course there's no reason a farmer should be worse either and a great many reasons they should be better unless commoner is intended to be for disarmed serfs and slaves only while free yeomen would be experts or warriors.
Chris Lambertz wrote: Removed an unhelpful post. This was pretty unnecessary. 3500 posts of back and forth watching people bash each other for preference is necessary? This isn't a healthy discussion.
|
2 people marked this as a favorite.
|
Khrysaor wrote: Chris Lambertz wrote: Removed an unhelpful post. This was pretty unnecessary. 3500 posts of back and forth watching people bash each other for preference is necessary? This isn't a healthy discussion. Posting in thread where people are passionately discussing a game they love in an attempt to make it better and minimizing their thoughts and concerns with terms like "preference" is necessary? This isn't a healthy contribution to this discussion.
Back on topic, Ashiel's got a strong point. Relative to other classes, the fighter is at his peak at first level. HP and defenses of CR appropriate monsters scale faster than a fighter's ability to hit and do damage. So, without other narrative power, the fighter does get weaker as he grows, relative to the challenges he faces.
Eirikrautha wrote:
Back on topic, Ashiel's got a strong point. Relative to other classes, the fighter is at his peak at first level. HP and defenses of CR appropriate monsters scale faster than a fighter's ability to hit and do damage. So, without other narrative power, the fighter does get weaker as he grows, relative to the challenges he faces.
I disagree heavily!
This is just theory craft that actually doesn't happen in a real game. Fighter's are consistent damage dealers while other classes rely on certain circumstances (Favoured Enemy, Evil, 5 minute work day).
Eirikrautha wrote:
Back on topic, Ashiel's got a strong point. Relative to other classes, the fighter is at his peak at first level. HP and defenses of CR appropriate monsters scale faster than a fighter's ability to hit and do damage. So, without other narrative power, the fighter does get weaker as he grows, relative to the challenges he faces.
I agree with the above. IMO the cause (and maybe the main problem with fighters at this point) is that, from edition to edition, casters have gotten incremental increases in power and survivability which the fighter hasn't. Wizard spell acquisition, for instance, is now controlled completely by the player, beyond the GM's choice of what supplemental material to include, whereas in AD&D you had to roll for each spell, and if you failed you could just never ever learn that spell.
I don't mean this as LFQW (because I'm not talking about character advancement but changes in class design) but at this point I think you'd have to modify the other classes as much as the fighter itself to level the playing field. For example, I think the fighter is severely undercut by barbarians having a larger hit die to start with and getting a Con bump while raging. (Okay, maybe not severely, but you get my point.) I'm not against incremental increases; Having a house cat capable of killing a first level magic-user and thief in a single round in AD&D was just silly, but I absolutely think any increases should be applied evenly to the all the classes, and it really seems like fighters have gotten the least over the various redesigns throughout the years.
Hitdice wrote: Eirikrautha wrote:
Back on topic, Ashiel's got a strong point. Relative to other classes, the fighter is at his peak at first level. HP and defenses of CR appropriate monsters scale faster than a fighter's ability to hit and do damage. So, without other narrative power, the fighter does get weaker as he grows, relative to the challenges he faces.
I agree with the above. IMO the cause (and maybe the main problem with fighters at this point) is that, from edition to edition, casters have gotten incremental increases in power and survivability which the fighter hasn't. Wizard spell acquisition, for instance, is now controlled completely by the player, beyond the GM's choice of what supplemental material to include, whereas in AD&D you had to roll for each spell, and if you failed you could just never ever learn that spell.
I don't mean this as LFQW (because I'm not talking about character advancement but changes in class design) but at this point I think you'd have to modify the other classes as much as the fighter itself to level the playing field. For example, I think the fighter is severely undercut by barbarians having a larger hit die to start with and getting a Con bump while raging. (Okay, maybe not severely, but you get my point.) I'm not against incremental increases; Having a house cat capable of killing a first level magic-user and thief in a single round in AD&D was just silly, but I absolutely think any increases should be applied evenly to the all the classes, and it really seems like fighters have gotten the least over the various redesigns throughout the years. The problem with this is the poster is trying to compare the power of a fighter and the power of a wizard when what really should be looked at is the fighter compared to the creatures he will be fighting.
But if the fighter and wizard are fighting the same creatures, shouldn't they be equally effective, at least over the course of the play session, if not encounter by encounter?
Addendum to my post above: I also think that 3E's standardization of xp advancement, and PF's doing away with XP costs for magic item creation, are a piece of the puzzle.
shallowsoul wrote: The problem with this is the poster is trying to compare the power of a fighter and the power of a wizard when what really should be looked at is the fighter compared to the creatures he will be fighting. Given how many BBEGs in APs are full casters, the comparison is valid for them, too. And how many high-level BBEGs are human fighters? That's pretty telling, too.
|
3 people marked this as a favorite.
|
shallowsoul wrote: Eirikrautha wrote:
Back on topic, Ashiel's got a strong point. Relative to other classes, the fighter is at his peak at first level. HP and defenses of CR appropriate monsters scale faster than a fighter's ability to hit and do damage. So, without other narrative power, the fighter does get weaker as he grows, relative to the challenges he faces.
I disagree heavily!
This is just theory craft that actually doesn't happen in a real game. Fighter's are consistent damage dealers while other classes rely on certain circumstances (Favoured Enemy, Evil, 5 minute work day). You forgot 5 minute work day because the fighter ran out of hit points faster then the other classes. (Because barbs have more and DR, rangers and paladins can heal themselves).
==Aelryinth
I wonder if perhaps this is an issue slightly related to Paizo's approach to maintaining a single class and progressing through to level 20?
I find that fighters are one of the best 'basic chassis' for a martial characters going - but the three I have played have all been planned to multi-class (2 Handed Fighter/Armoured Hulk Barbarian, 2 Weapon Fighter/Master of Many Styles & Weapon Master/Dervish of Dawn). All the characters have been mainly fighters but have grabbed levels in other classes to open up feat/power choices (rage/combat styles/self-buff spells). All of these characters have been effective in their combat role.
So is there a problem as such? Yes, and no. Yes that to access a lot of powers you have to multi-class and no, in that their access to a huge number of feats means that you have huge flexibility of design and can just about any type of fighter you want - if only they had some mechanism to enable access to powers without multi-classing.
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
I love playing fighters because I like playing a tank. But I will admit, depending on how one plans to build the melee PC, other classes might be a better choice. A 2 weapon fighter in medium armor is better off as a full ranger (more skills along with other bonuses). But fights can be built to be very lethal in their own right.
Speaking of flexibility of design (this is as much game design as fighters, forgive the derail) given the customization possible with bonus feats and multiclassing (including prestige classes, I guess) I never really understood why 3E didn't just make other martial class features into fighter only feats, so a barbarian is a fighter with all the rage feats, the (AD&D) cavalier is a fighter with all the mounted combat feats, and a ranger is a fighter with all the outdoor survival feats.
Not that having only one martial character class would have done anything to balance the fighter, exactly. Hell, maybe I'm just talking about a D20 Modern type class advancement, or the generic class from Unearthed Arcana.
|
2 people marked this as a favorite.
|
shallowsoul wrote: Eirikrautha wrote:
Back on topic, Ashiel's got a strong point. Relative to other classes, the fighter is at his peak at first level. HP and defenses of CR appropriate monsters scale faster than a fighter's ability to hit and do damage. So, without other narrative power, the fighter does get weaker as he grows, relative to the challenges he faces.
I disagree heavily!
This is just theory craft that actually doesn't happen in a real game. Fighter's are consistent damage dealers while other classes rely on certain circumstances (Favoured Enemy, Evil, 5 minute work day). Lets take these items in order shall we.
Favored Enemy: This one is the most legitimate 'limited circumstance' you've provided, but it neglects the Ranger's other qualities, such as 2 strong saves, having an in-class reason to invest somewhat in wisdom (meaning for the same price as a Fighter trying to mitigate his poor save, the Ranger gets more benefit), 6 skill points per level, bypassing prerequisites on bonus feats, and and an animal companion.
Evil: Paladins fight evil. That's their thing. Sometimes they fight non-evil sure, but if a Paladin spends an entire adventuring day fighting non-evil, it was either a '5 minute workday' or there was probably something wrong with the adventure design. That aside, Paladins have Lay on Hands (which is swift on themselves), Spells, the ability to customize their weapon's magic, and the best saves in the game.
5 minute work day I disagree heavily!
This is just theory craft that actually doesn't happen in a real game. Fighters are consistent damage takers while other classes rely on options unavailable to the Fighter and in far greater supply than the Fighter's hit points. In a real game- beyond level 2- the Fighter CAUSES the 5 minute work day, when every other class would have been ready to go had they not been carrying his sorry butt.
Dead horses? heres my bat, go swing it:
Fighter fix in my games:
Set skillpoints to 4/level.
Replace Bravery with Iron will.
Grant entire chain of Vital strike for free at appropriate levels.
Easy, simple and doesnt break the game entirely.
.
On the note of the game outgrowin Fighters as they level, this problem was fixed with Weapon training, the extra Attack bonus helps keep pace with quickly growing Ac lessening the fighters heavy reliance on magic items to bridge the same gap.
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
Eirikrautha wrote:
Posting in thread where people are passionately discussing a game they love in an attempt to make it better and minimizing their thoughts and concerns with terms like "preference" is necessary? This isn't a healthy contribution to this discussion.
Back on topic, Ashiel's got a strong point. Relative to other classes, the fighter is at his peak at first level. HP and defenses of CR appropriate monsters scale faster than a fighter's ability to hit and do damage. So, without other narrative power, the fighter does get weaker as he grows, relative to the challenges he faces.
Since when is the term preference minimizing someone's thoughts. You believe the class is one way and others believe it isn't. It's preference. Thanks for confirming the bash fest though.
As to Ashiels comment though, fighters are not their best at level 1 with continual diminishing value. Here's the appropriate table for comparison. A CR 1 creature is an appropriate challenge for a party or level 1s and not a lone character.
In the course of 20.5 CR:
the average AC of monsters increases by 25. Across 20 levels a fighters BAB increases by 19, gains +4 from weapon training, and 5 stat points to increase your attack stat another +2 minimum. A boost of 25 overall. This doesn't include your +6 Str belt, gloves of dueling, +5 weapon which is another 10 on top before any other player starts buffing you.
Fighter gains more bonus than enemies for a good challenge for a party.
The average attack increases by 29. A high starting AC for PCs at level one is usually 21, but more likely an 18 or 19 with a breastplate, heavy shield, and a small dex bonus. At level 20 a fighter can have AC in the 50s. There's builds posted on these forums. Even just 50 is a 29 point increase which matches the attack increase.
Fighter gains a bonus on par with the enemies for a good challenge for a party.
The average damage increases by 116. A fighter with 14 con putting the level bonus into hp averages 8.5 a level or 161.5 hp. Throw in a con boosting item, stat boosts if you don't want to be so high damage, toughness, any other means you can find for throwing in more hp and the ratio will be slightly less than the number of hits you could take at level 1.
Fighters hp to hit ratio is slightly less vs monsters that are a good challenge for a party.
There's an average 360 hp increase to the 370 max. Check the DPR Olympics to see what fighters are capable of in a round and note how impressive it is. Again a level 20 fighter is not meant to be a match for a CR 20 creature. It's a good challenge for a party of level 20s.
Fighters damage keeps up with hp increase for a good challenge for a party.
Ability DCs go up average of 16 points. Your good saves go up 10 your bad up 6. Add in the cloak of resistance +5 and a feat/other item and you've surpassed the increase with your good save and come up short on your bad saves. Bad saves are bad saves. Take a feat or two (fighters get lots of these), traits to boost them, other items that give luck/sacred/profane bonuses.
Fighters gain a bonus equal or greater on good saves and subpar close to equal with investment on bad saves for a good challenge for a party.
How about we stop throwing around arbitrary statements and use the games mechanics to be a measurement of how each class functions and the fact that the game expects you to be in a party of 3-4 players. The vacuum of the forums is rarely a good telling of class function. Few people do a proper analysis.
tsuruki wrote: On the note of the game outgrowin Fighters as they level, this problem was fixed with Weapon training, the extra Attack bonus helps keep pace with quickly growing Ac lessening the fighters heavy reliance on magic items to bridge the same gap. Not so sure about that myself. They still benefit and enjoy magic items and may need them to keep up with their peers, who also have ways to achieve full BAB+, and the game itself still requires magic items to handle challenges because no combat feat, or any non racial feat really, grants flight. At best the fighter is a little more consistent than some of his peers, but the lack of utility in turn can bite him in the butt and defeat that entirely in some cases.
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
Weapon Training is nice, but A: it limits the Fighter's options at the same time that it's improving his math, and B: until +5 it's at best playing catch up to Rage.
kyrt-ryder wrote: Weapon Training is nice, but A: it limits the Fighter's options at the same time that it's improving his math, and B: until +5 it's at best playing catch up to Rage. Weapon training limits options? Who plays a character and continually changes their weapon category? Players use a main weapon, a back up weapon, and a ranged weapon. That's only 3 categories potentially unless your back up is in e same as your main. Weapon training groups are large and sure they're diminishing values per group but you get enough to make your choices worthwhile.
Rage comes with reduced AC, fatigued after use until you can rage cycle, reduced skill use while raging. Weapon training provides nothing but bonuses.
kyrt-ryder wrote: Weapon Training is nice, but A: it limits the Fighter's options at the same time that it's improving his math, and B: until +5 it's at best playing catch up to Rage. A furious Courageous weapon makes sure the barbarian is easily on par. Almost every fighter grabs duelist gloves though. The math varies a bit with feats and magic items and weapon style. Example, A fighter gets his full +5/+5 out of TWF, and a barbarian gets more out of THF because he gets strength in a half. The difference though is likely going to be minor, at roughly +11(+5attack/+5damage) strength from rage with courageous furious vs. +8attack/+10damage for fighter with all the weapon focus feats and duelist gloves vs. Other notable things are a ranger with +12/+12(+14/14 if you get another +2 for some reason) with quarry and favored enemy(swift enemy), and a paladin's smite is as good as his charisma and does a whole number of things depending on his archetype and by endgame its not too difficult to get a +6 or +11 potential bonus(inherent from books/wish+enhancement).
Khrysaor wrote: Rage comes with reduced AC, fatigued after use until you can rage cycle, reduced skill use while raging. Weapon training provides nothing but bonuses. Because many of those skills are useful while raging, barbarians don't usually grab a bonus to their natural armor through beast totem, and fatigued comes up all the time because I love stopping rage in combat because reasons?
Weapon training reduces options because after you get it you don't have much of a reason to use any other weapon. Luckily this is a game that didn't give you a reason to use anything but the weapon you spent all your money on anyway, though you might occasionally pull out a ranged weapon or something. A barbarian is just as good with his weapon, his backup weapon, his ranged weapon, a stick he picked up(club) that ranseur that dropped, and even gets a bonus to an improvised weapon. The fighter... gets only bonuses to things he puts in weapon training for, which is likely his main weapon, his ranged weapon, maybe a backup weapon, and... and for some reason some weapons aren't even on the list of weapon groups, but that's another conversation altogether about the games lack of flexibility in just using core rules we don't need to get into probably.
MrSin wrote: Khrysaor wrote: Rage comes with reduced AC, fatigued after use until you can rage cycle, reduced skill use while raging. Weapon training provides nothing but bonuses. Because many of those skills are useful while raging, barbarians don't usually grab a bonus to their natural armor through beast totem, and fatigued comes up all the time because I love stopping rage in combat because reasons?
Weapon training reduces options because after you get it you don't have much of a reason to use any other weapon. Luckily this is a game that didn't give you a reason to use anything but the weapon you spent all your money on anyway, though you might occasionally pull out a ranged weapon or something. A barbarian is just as good with his weapon, his backup weapon, his ranged weapon, a stick he picked up(club) that ranseur that dropped, and even gets a bonus to an improvised weapon. The fighter... gets only bonuses to things he puts in weapon training for, which is likely his main weapon, his ranged weapon, maybe a backup weapon, and... and for some reason some weapons aren't even on the list of weapon groups, but that's another conversation altogether about the games lack of flexibility in just using core rules we don't need to get into probably. Taking another means of regaining AC doesn't alter the fact that rage reduces AC. A fighter has bonus feats to take dodge, shield focus, iron hide, any other combat feat that boosts AC. Weapon training doesn't reduce AC.
Rage can also be stopped by a calm emotions spell or simply running out of your limited number of rounds per day. Combats last roughly 3 rounds maybe 4. This lets you have rage for two combats and could leave you fatigued easily.
You argue the triviality of certain skills in combat and retort with weapon training limiting options through not wanting to use another weapon. This is moot.
Khrysaor wrote:
Weapon training limits options? Who plays a character and continually changes their weapon category?
That's circular. A fighter doesn't change his weapon category because he can't because the game punishes him for trying to be versatile.
You get CON+4 rage rounds at first level.
You'll almost never run out. So much so, that there's literally no reason for any fighter to not grab 2 levels of barb. Ignoring fatigue is a joke, and calm emotions gives you a will save, so good luck landing that on a raging barb.
Khrysaor wrote: Taking another means of regaining AC doesn't alter the fact that rage reduces AC. A fighter has bonus feats to take dodge, shield focus, iron hide, any other combat feat that boosts AC. Weapon training doesn't reduce AC. Who said weapon training reduces it or that I was saying you don't lose AC from raging? I was just saying most barbarians take beast totem, which gives more AC than shield focus, dodge, and iron hide combined because its a scaling bonus(starting at 2, up to +6). Beast totem is easily the most powerful option for a barbarian, so its not exactly outlandish that a barbarian might have it to get pounce. Natural armor isn't really common on PCs either, so its really likely to stack.
Khrysaor wrote: Rage can also be stopped by a calm emotions spell or simply running out of your limited number of rounds per day. Combats last roughly 3 rounds maybe 4. This lets you have rage for two combats and could leave you fatigued easily. You tend to have so much rage that you really don't run out, especially at later levels, and starting at 5(when you finally get weapon training +1), you should have Con+12 rounds of rage. That's a lot of partying, and could hit a point where its pretty much all day effectively easy(4x4 rounds =16, and you only get more as you level). Personally I'd rather just kill someone than cast calm emotions. Barbarians tend to have some of the most powerful saves in the game with superstitious, and they even get a second save sometimes, so its not exactly safe to try and force them out of it with a saving throw. There are also several ways to just ignore or go on through the fatigue. I'm pretty sure all these things have been said before in this thread though.
Khrysaor wrote: You argue the triviality of certain skills in combat and retort with weapon training limiting options through not wanting to use another weapon. This is moot. I haven't argued against skills usefulness or said that weapon training is actually limiting. I actually agreed with you about weapon training being limited. I would say that knowledge could be used before you rage though, and that the time to use diplomacy or bluff is over, and that you probably aren't feinting.
|
2 people marked this as a favorite.
|
swoosh wrote: Khrysaor wrote:
Weapon training limits options? Who plays a character and continually changes their weapon category?
That's circular. A fighter doesn't change his weapon category because he can't because the game punishes him for trying to be versatile. "Who plays a character and continually changes their weapon category?"
This applies to every class. You design characters with a build. You take feats like weapon focus because you only ever use one main weapon. You invest in your weapons enchantment because you only ever use one main weapon. Your feats, traits, class abilities are all tailored to a concept. You don't choose to be a swordsman and then start wielding an axe because it has a higher enchantment. This is what meta munchkins do. Your character would not do these things so why would anyone role play it that way? Unless you're specifically going for a concept of someone who uses any weapon and in this case the fighter may not be your optimal choice.
Or you choose a warrior/mercenary/soldier type...
and use a weapon appropriate to the battle. An Axe for this, a Spear for that, a Sword for that, a Bow for that, a Hammer for that.
LoneKnave wrote: You get CON+4 rage rounds at first level.
You'll almost never run out. So much so, that there's literally no reason for any fighter to not grab 2 levels of barb. Ignoring fatigue is a joke, and calm emotions gives you a will save, so good luck landing that on a raging barb.
Your primary stat is strength so your con will be a whopping 16 probably. 7 rounds of rage at first level lasting for a total of 2.3 combats a day with an average of 3 rounds each. Creatures with intelligence won't just stand toe to toe with a barbarian. They'll kite him or run and make him waste rounds. It's very easy to run out of rounds of rage in the early levels.
Khrysaor wrote: LoneKnave wrote: You get CON+4 rage rounds at first level.
You'll almost never run out. So much so, that there's literally no reason for any fighter to not grab 2 levels of barb. Ignoring fatigue is a joke, and calm emotions gives you a will save, so good luck landing that on a raging barb.
Your primary stat is strength so your con will be a whopping 16 probably. 7 rounds of rage at first level lasting for a total of 2.3 combats a day with an average of 3 rounds each. Creatures with intelligence won't just stand toe to toe with a barbarian. They'll kite him or run and make him waste rounds. It's very easy to run out of rounds of rage in the early levels. That's not really a valid argument. Only at level 1-3 is running out of Rage rounds a real concern. And even then, that 16 CON is going to go up and up with magic items. Pretty difficult to run circles around someone who can charge *and* full attack as well. Did I mention Barbarians get move speeds boosts in class? Cause the totally do.
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
Khrysaor wrote:
That's circular. A fighter doesn't change his weapon category because he can't because the game punishes him for trying to be versatile.
"Who plays a character and continually changes their weapon category?"
This applies to every class. You design characters with a build. You take feats like weapon focus because you only ever use one main weapon. Yes, because every time you want to use a new weapon you need a new feat tree and new enchants. It's cost prohibitive. You're repeating my point back to me.
Quote: You don't choose to be a swordsman and then start wielding an axe because it has a higher enchantment. This is what meta munchkins do. Er. No. A "meta munchkin" only uses one weapon because changing weapons is extremely cost prohibitlve
Quote: Your character would not do these things so why would anyone role play it that way? You've never heard of a "weaponmaster"? It's not exactly an uncommon fantasy concept.
Quote: Creatures with intelligence won't just stand toe to toe with a barbarian. They'll kite him or run and make him waste rounds Yes. Run away from the guy with fast movement and pounce.
Khrysaor wrote: Your primary stat is strength so your con will be a whopping 16 probably. 7 rounds of rage at first level lasting for a total of 2.3 combats a day with an average of 3 rounds each. Creatures with intelligence won't just stand toe to toe with a barbarian. They'll kite him or run and make him waste rounds. It's very easy to run out of rounds of rage in the early levels. How do you exactly kite a barbarian when at low levels he has only 1 attack anyaway, and has 10 feet improved movement speed? And at high levels he will simply not run out of rage. And he doesn't even have to start raging until he is right in your face.
kyrt-ryder wrote: Or you choose a warrior/mercenary/soldier type...
and use a weapon appropriate to the battle. An Axe for this, a Spear for that, a Sword for that, a Bow for that, a Hammer for that.
In what part of history or fantasy had warriors or soldier types doing this? Soldiers were trained in a few combat options with most being specialists in one field or another. Each group supported by another with a different specialty. Even iconic mercenaries from literature were specialists in the weapon they used.
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
swoosh wrote: many words with failed quotations. You might want to take a closer look at the weapon master archetype or look into weapon masters. They were masters of A weapon not all weapons.
Hungarian hussars often used 2 swords, a saber for fighting unarmored opponents and an estoic (or some similar "stabbing" sword) against opponents with armor, not to mention their pistols/corssbows, depending on the period.
Samurai were using lances, spears, swords, bows, and later, guns.
That's just off the top of my head.
LoneKnave wrote: Hungarian hussars often used 2 swords, a saber for fighting unarmored opponents and an estoic (or some similar "stabbing" sword) against opponents with armor, not to mention their pistols/corssbows, depending on the period.
Samurai were using lances, spears, swords, bows, and later, guns.
That's just off the top of my head.
So a main weapon, a back up weapon, and a ranged weapon like I've been saying. Thanks for doing the applicable reading.
Khrysaor wrote: swoosh wrote: many words with failed quotations. You might want to take a closer look at the weapon master archetype or look into weapon masters. They were masters of A weapon not all weapons. He wasn't talking about the weapon master archtype, he was talking about people who were a master of many weapons, which happens to exist in literature and other forms of media.
Khrysaor wrote: the average AC of monsters increases by 25. Fighter gains more bonus than enemies for a good challenge for a party. The average attack increases by 29. Fighter gains a bonus on par with the enemies for a good challenge for a party. [etc.] And if your entire campaign consists of monsters lining up on the ground in front of you waiting to be full attacked, one after another, with nothing else, the fighter is awesome. But if there's anything else -- nonstandard combat, or a domination spell, or anything at all outside of combat -- your fighter has zero ability to participate. That, to me, is his problem. Not his DPR or whatever, but the fact that he sits out large portions of the game while the rest of the party gets to play.
|
2 people marked this as a favorite.
|
Khrysaor wrote: Samurai never used guns. Actually some did. In fact firearm and cannon warefare was pretty popular for a time if I remember right.
That said, sometimes its best not to involve realism in conversations like this.
Kirth Gersen wrote: Khrysaor wrote: the average AC of monsters increases by 25. Fighter gains more bonus than enemies for a good challenge for a party. The average attack increases by 29. Fighter gains a bonus on par with the enemies for a good challenge for a party. [etc.] And if your entire campaign consists of monsters lining up on the ground in front of you waiting to be full attacked, one after another, with nothing else, the fighter is awesome. But if there's anything else -- nonstandard combat, or a domination spell, or anything at all outside of combat -- your fighter has zero ability to participate. That, to me, is his problem. Not his DPR or whatever, but the fact that he sits out large portions of the game while the rest of the party gets to play. Wizards are useful in an anti magic field? Vs creatures with magic immunity? Barbarians excel against flying opponents? Is any class useful when dominated? Or useful when pushed to participate outside of their general function? What skills did you want your fighter to have? He gets 2+INT a level. Give him 12 INT and use your level bonus for skills. Now you have 4 per level. Take traits to make skills class skills. Use a standard feat to boost a skill with all your many bonus feats to combat.
I'm not seeing any argument in this entire thread that's not applicable in some way to every other class. Don't use all your build points to max out your strength. Leave it at 14 or 15+2 and use those other 3-5 build points more effectively. I see it too often that you NEED an 18 starting stat to be relevant. This is an outright lie and propagates all the sensationalism on these boards.
MrSin wrote: Khrysaor wrote: Samurai never used guns. Actually some did. In fact firearm and cannon warefare was pretty popular for a time if I remember right.
That said, sometimes its best not to involve realism in conversations like this. Good job Wikipedia.
Wikipedia nothing, haven't you people read Lone Wolf and Cub? :P
MrSin wrote: A barbarian is just as good with his weapon, his backup weapon, his ranged weapon, a stick he picked up(club) that ranseur that dropped, and even gets a bonus to an improvised weapon. Not surehow that is conciliated with the furius corageous weapon of the lst post. Not to mention his ranged weapond o not benefit from str bonus to hit.
|
2 people marked this as a favorite.
|
Khrysaor wrote: I'm not seeing any argument in this entire thread that's not applicable in some way to every other class. Don't use all your build points to max out your strength. Leave it at 14 or 15+2 and use those other 3-5 build points more effectively. I see it too often that you NEED an 18 starting stat to be relevant. This is an outright lie and propagates all the sensationalism on these boards. No one said anything against raising your intelligence, but that does come with a cost, and fighter doesn't exactly scream "hi guys, I work well with a good intelligence!" because tbh he doesn't have any class features that key off of it, and he would appreciate a good wisdom too to make sure he isn't dominate bait.
There is something to be said however of a class who sole purpose is combat and fails to do things outside of combat and in combat lacks options to deal with problems beyond whacking it with a stick. 2+ skill points doesn't go very far.
Imo, baseline skill points should be something reasonable. If you think you have to raise your intellect beyond 10 on a class that isn't int based(where your expectation is to be high int), play a certain race, or pump favored class into skill points to make it reasonable then that might mean there's a problem. Exacerbated by his lack of skill points.
Almost all missile troops ever carried melee weapons. All lancers ever carried other melee weapons because lances are fundamentally disposable. Persian and Byzantine cavalry used archery and lances along with a close melee weapon. Professional pikemen would carry a shorter weapon as well, though conscripts might not. Knights would often have a sword for fighting unarmored opponents and something like a mace or pick for fighting armored opponents. Renaissance fighting masters would teach a variety of distinct weapons used in dueling.
|
2 people marked this as a favorite.
|
Khrysaor wrote: Wizards are useful in an anti magic field? That's an entirely fair response if wizards in anti-magic fields come up as often as a fighter being in a non combat situation or a situation where his lack of combat utility makes him useless.
Nicos wrote: MrSin wrote: A barbarian is just as good with his weapon, his backup weapon, his ranged weapon, a stick he picked up(club) that ranseur that dropped, and even gets a bonus to an improvised weapon. Not surehow that is conciliated with the furius corageous weapon of the lst post. Not to mention his ranged weapond o not benefit from str bonus to hit. Nope, but it will give him a bonus to damage! Adaptable bows aren't the least common things in the world for a backup weapon either.
MrSin wrote: He wasn't talking about the weapon master archtype, he was talking about people who were a master of many weapons, which happens to exist in literature and other forms of media. Like Kousaka Shigure, Prodigy of Weapons.
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
Khrysaor wrote: Wizards are useful ... Vs creatures with magic immunity? I do not know how many creatures with magic inmunities are there, but wizard at least totally destroy golem encounters.
Khrysaor wrote: kyrt-ryder wrote: Or you choose a warrior/mercenary/soldier type...
and use a weapon appropriate to the battle. An Axe for this, a Spear for that, a Sword for that, a Bow for that, a Hammer for that.
In what part of history or fantasy had warriors or soldier types doing this? I can't speak to history, but I could name numerous weapon masters in fantasy who 'specialize' in EVERYTHING.
From Wuxia kung fu masters equally skilled in the use of a pair of chopsticks as a staff as a sword as a spear as their fist as a meteor hammer, all the way to Garret Jax of Shannara.
EDIT: yeah, Shigure from Kenichi is another excellent example.
MrSin wrote:
Nicos wrote: MrSin wrote: A barbarian is just as good with his weapon, his backup weapon, his ranged weapon, a stick he picked up(club) that ranseur that dropped, and even gets a bonus to an improvised weapon. Not surehow that is conciliated with the furius corageous weapon of the lst post. Not to mention his ranged weapond o not benefit from str bonus to hit. Nope, but it will give him a bonus to damage! Adaptable bows aren't the least common things in the world for a backup weapon either.
So he is not that good with his ranged back up weapon. Anf if the barbarian have a furious corageous weapon the barbarian will certaily dnot want to change it forsomething else most of the times.
|
