| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
It's kind of funny how the argument is essentially that it takes a combination of all the other classes to come near to what the fighter can do.
Lolwut
At best, it's been proven that a Fighter can do what other classes do without trying by investing in Feats and a certain archetype, as well as that "Without their main class features being active, many martials are slightly worse than a Fighter".
I'll go ahead and make the argument that UMD overshadows spellcasting. A class with UMD could essentially cast any and all spells. You won't find any spellcasting class that can do that.
There is nothing a spellcaster can do that a class with UMD can't.
Well yeah as long as they've got a balls high level of UMD, an asswagon full of treasure to spend on the items, don't want to casts spells above 4th level more than once, and don't mind having the minimum caster level for most things.
Meanwhile the Ranger is behind in more circumstances since he can't just turn his equalizer on and off at will, but by level 10 he's got +6 to-hit/damage against his main Favored Enemy, beating out the Fighter by about as much as he beats the Barbarian. And it's not a sure thing, granted, but if you know what you're getting into you can pretty well pick your main Favored Enemy as the thing you fight 60% of the time or better.
It does bear mentioning that level 10 is also when the Ranger gets access to the Instant Enemy spell, which adds a bit more freedom to your Favored Enemy bonus. Not to mention a few other nice buffs, like Lead Blades.
|
You made a strawman and defeated it. Congrats.Outside of combat, a commoner is just as good as ANY class.
Too bad that commoner won't survive long in combat.
Really? Can a commoner cast Charm Person without a magic item? Can they Fascinate a crowd? Can they cure a disease? Do they have a chance to detect traps without using an action? Can they magically compel you to tell the truth?
What page are these abilities of the Commoner listed on?
Yes, you could outfit them with magic items that do this, but the Commoner doesn't have a special ability "be outfitted with magic items".
Scroll back up.
Already stated. A commoner, or any PC including the fighter, can replace both the wizard and cleric.
Of course, my fighter carries scrolls of anti-magic. She'll not be impressed by fancy lights and hits things just fine without magic.
Whoa- i thought this thread would have a few builds in it... Aparently not.
|
Here you go: a fighter who can take the rogue's job. It's 20 pt buy, and doesn't even use traits - although doing so would have made it even more effective. Does this count as a fighter who can do something out of combat?
** spoiler omitted **...
So I'm trying to build my Ranger and I've hit a few snags here. First, your Point Buy seems to be a bit too high (with 20 PB the best I could get was a starting array of 14/16/14/10/12/8), and second, you have WAAAAY too many items, unless you're using crafting prices. I hit 63,900 gold with just the +3 Composite Longbow (+2, Boots/Cloak of Elvenkind, my +1 Breastplate, and the Lens of Detection.
Am I missing something?
On the starting array, you're forgetting level boosts, and you're giving your character a higher Con than I did. The starting stats were Str 14, Dex 15 (+2 racial), Con 12, Int 13, Wis 14, Cha 8. Level bumps went to Dex (4th) and Int (8th).
As for the money, +3 composite (+2) longbow is 18600 gp, the halberd is 2310, the boots and cloak are 2500 gp each, the lens is 3500 gp, the gloves are 2500 gp, the +1 mithral full plate is 11500, the belt is 16000 and the headband is 4000. With the thieves' tools, that's a total of 63510 gp, which means I went over by about 500 gp, not counting the "1400 gp in various useful items" because I was rounding stuff off and throwing things together to post the character. Still, that's not using crafting costs and right around what the character at that level should have. I don't know where your numbers are coming from.
I don't really have anything constructive to add to the argument here, but by the title, I WAS expecting to see some builds. P&TY.
It is interesting how everyone looks at the fighter bonus feats as such a big deal.
OK, there are 11 bonus feats on a fighter. That's pretty nice, but it is rather important to remember that a lot of them are practically fixed so you lose freedom there.
Considering it's one of the significant advantages of a fighter in combat, you will not avoid specialization and greater specialization. That eats 4 of the 11 feats.
Then we have the only martial class with absolutely pathetic saves (rangers get 2 good saves, paladins 2 and grace, barbarians get a save bonus from raging, I'm not considering cavaliers). Hence you are inclined to drop feats on save boosts (which is funny since the bonus feats cannot even be used for this).
This means iron will at a minimum, but possibly also improved iron will and lightning reflexes.
Thus we are actually down 5 (or 7) feats just to keep up to snuff.
If you're down 5, you are 1 bonus feat ahead of a ranger (who unarguably has a lot more toys available). If you shore up saves more, you are behind the ranger.
A Paladin will have far better saves, though their damage is smite limited to some degree. A barbarian will have slightly inferior damage, but will have more HP (in rage, which by high level is essentially constant), and better saves, plus a plethora of interesting rage powers (only some of which can be matched by fighters, not many).
Now sure, one can argue that you can make a versatile fighter capable of all manner of non fighty things. Yes, but you give up a chunk of what you are good at to be half baked in that other area. 2 skill points per level and a crappy selection thereof is a killer combination. Throw in lousy saves, and you're really in a bad way.
Honestly, if you just look at archetypes, you can get a clear picture of what the fighter lacks. Most fighter archetypes are pretty weak, and that is for a simple reason. There's just not much to trade away to get nice toys.
This in many ways reminds me of rogue discussions. It's not that rogues are unplayable. It's also not that fighters are unplayable (I like playing fighters myself). It's that both classes lag compared to the alternatives. You can do the same stuff better with other classes (except that the fighter does manage to be king of pure combat numbers offensively, rogues lack any such distinction unless number of skill points is a comparable big deal).
|
|
It is worth noting that this fighter can't ride or use acrobatics,
...
Um, he can do both of those things. Neither is a trained-only skill, both key off of his highest-level ability score and both are affected by an ACP that his class features help him reduce and will eventually ignore. He's probably actually a better rider than a level-equivalent barbarian would be unless the barbarian is intended to be a mounted warrior, since Ride tends to be a skill people skip unless they have cause and Dex isn't a primary stat for barbarians.
Lacking perception is a pretty huge hit. After getting a fighter to 12th in PFS without it, I will never make a character without perception as a class skill again (unless I have a whole lot of other tricks to get me by).
|
|
Lacking perception is a pretty huge hit. After getting a fighter to 12th in PFS without it, I will never make a character without perception as a class skill again (unless I have a whole lot of other tricks to get me by).
Eyes of the eagle are 2500 gp; you can buy them as soon as you could get a +1 sword, so stick with your masterwork weapon for another couple of modules. Take Skill Focus: Perception at 3rd level instead of whatever it was you were going to do then. Congrats, you're now the party trapspotter for most of the levels PFS operates in. You might also consider playing a half-elf, an elf or even (gasp!) a halfling or gnome fighter.
I'm not saying it's not an issue - I am saying that the "other tricks" aren't that hard to come by, and you can manage just fine if you think outside the box just a bit.
He will have a ride and acrobatics skill of 2 in a breast plate not exactly competent.
Yeah, I don't know why anyone cited acrobatics as a fighter schtick when it isn't even a class skill. Given how few skill points a fighter has, it's not like they are inclined to squander skill points on non class skills.
Now ride, sure a fighter can be a great rider. Though I have to say I find the rolling of jump into acrobatics pretty annoying especially since it took it away as a option for fighters.
|
|
He will have a ride and acrobatics skill of 2 in a breast plate not exactly competent.
By what standard? I'll grant you Acrobatics isn't going to be easy, although he can certainly make the attempt (and trust me, when you're hanging out with a cleric who's looking at something like a -7 thanks to armor, shield and Dex penalties, that +2 will look pretty good), but have you looked at the DCs for uses of the Ride skill? He's perfectly adequate without ever spending a skill point. He's not going to win any equestrian events, but he can ride, and even fight if need be, on horseback as he stands.
Yeah, I don't know why anyone cited acrobatics as a fighter schtick when it isn't even a class skill. Given how few skill points a fighter has, it's not like they are inclined to squander skill points on non class skills.
I don't actually think anyone ever "cited Acrobatics as a fighter schtick," but the whole point of this thread is that fighters can "squander" their skill points on anything they feel like, because they have no skill requirements to do their job and lots of feats available to enhance whatever skill choices they feel like making. And for the record? Most of my fighters take Acrobatics. (And Perception, for that matter, which is also not a class skill.) I just like having the option, and I tend to be a lot better at it than almost everyone else at the table, because my maxed-out ranks, even without the class skill bonus, beat the snot out of the cleric and wizard sitting next to me who never dropped a point on it at all.
I'm not saying it's not an issue - I am saying that the "other tricks" aren't that hard to come by, and you can manage just fine if you think outside the box just a bit.
Yes, you can do it. However you are ignoring opportunity cost. That's always what character design (and so many other things in reality) comes down to. What are you giving up to do this? How much better off would you be with either a different class to start with or by letting someone else default to covering that table need.
I'm on my second PFS fighter and will be starting a third shortly. I like the class, and know it well. I also understand the shortcomings(and they are manifest). I don't try to use a hammer to drive a screw when I know a screwdriver is the tool for the job.
|
Ok that's go with a twenty point buy, level 5 human fighter who specializes in archery using focused study.
Traits: Diplomacy/Use Magic Device Class Skill + 1
Str: 14
Dex: 17
Con: 12
Int: 12
Wis: 10
Cha: 14Feats:
Skill Focus (Diplomacy)
Point Blank Shot
Rapid Shot
Weapon Focus (Longbows)
Precise Shot
Weapon Specialization (Longbow)
Point Blank Master (Longbow)Skills:
Diplomacy: 14=5+2+3+1+3
Use Magic: 11=5+2+3+1
Intimidate:10=5+2+3
Perception:5It is worth noting that this fighter can't ride well or tumble well, that he has less skills than an equally intelligent Barbarian, Ranger and Monk and they all would have higher Perception than him perhaps the most important skill in the game.
And anything that targets a Will save makes him soil his plants :)
|
|
Yes, you can do it. However you are ignoring opportunity cost. That's always what character design (and so many other things in reality) comes down to. What are you giving up to do this? How much better off would you be with either a different class to start with or by letting someone else default to covering that table need.
I stated the opportunity cost in the post you're replying to (although you cut it for some reason): 1 feat, which pretty much everyone agrees fighters have to spare, and 2500 gp, which is irrelevant by about 5th level. Trust me, if your fighters are having problems with Perception, it's because you are taking no steps whatsoever to address the matter.
I'm on my second PFS fighter and will be starting a third shortly. I like the class, and know it well. I also understand the shortcomings(and they are manifest). I don't try to use a hammer to drive a screw when I know a screwdriver is the tool for the job.
So your argument here is basically "fighters are pigeonholed because I personally always pigeonhole them." Yeah, I think I'm done here. Back to making more builds!
Whoa- i thought this thread would have a few builds in it... Aparently not.I did post a build on page 2. The haters are too busy proclaiming fighters suck to bother actually looking.
/shrug haters gonna hate no matter what.
I don't really have anything constructive to add to the argument here, but by the title, I WAS expecting to see some builds. P&TY.
There are builds in this thread. The haters are just trying to bury them under meaningless rhetoric.
You can find mine here.
Considering it's one of the significant advantages of a fighter in combat, you will not avoid specialization and greater specialization. That eats 4 of the 11 feats.
None of those feats are essential for a fighter to be effective. They help, certainly, but are not essential.
Even Iron Will being considered "essential" is debatable.
I have concluded that it is pointless to demonstrate the viability of fighter builds because the fighter haters will refuse to accept any build because it is a fighter build and therefore cannot be as good as a barbarian/ranger/whatever.
In the end it simply is not possible to make the horses drink. All you can do is bring them to the water.
Hopefully other lurkers are reading this who might have been thinking fighters can't be competent all around characters who are now more inclined to give them a chance.
I have concluded that it is pointless to demonstrate the viability of fighter builds because the fighter haters will refuse to accept any build because it is a fighter build and therefore cannot be as good as a barbarian/ranger/whatever.
In the end it simply is not possible to make the horses drink. All you can do is bring them to the water.
Hopefully other lurkers are reading this who might have been thinking fighters can't be competent all around characters who are now more inclined to give them a chance.
Hey now, I'm not a hater. Fighters exist, I'm just curious what people are doing with them.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I have concluded that it is pointless to demonstrate the viability of fighter builds because the fighter haters will refuse to accept any build because it is a fighter build and therefore cannot be as good as a barbarian/ranger/whatever.
Quite right. People are so afraid of being proven wrong in a public forum, that they'd rather change the argument and act like it was the original argument all along. It's as if they'd be diminished somehow for not being "perfect" and "right" all of the time.
It serves no other purpose than to cause a good wholesome debate to devolve into a meaningless squabble over nothing of import. They'd rather sink the whole ship than to admit that they were the one that started a leak in the first place.
Fighter's can't do anything out of combat effectively.
Yes they can. *shows proof*
Well, that doesn't matter, because other classes can do more things out of combat than a fighter.
Perhaps, but those classes aren't usually as good at combat as a fighter. There's always gonna be some give and take. *shows proof*
When a fighter invests in noncombat stuff, his combat ability suffers dramatically. This gives other classes an edge.
There's always going to be some give and take to be sure, but a fighter can gain a lot of out of combat ability for minimal investment. It hardly impacts their combat abilities at all. *shows proof*
Yeah, but...
But nothing. All of your assertions have been proven untrue and/or grossly overstated, just admit to it and stop moving the damned goal posts already!
Man this thread is rife with analogies... :P
I love ya and all RD but I haven't seen any of this proof you're mentioning. Even your Fighter Marcello (who's a good fighter as far as Fighters go) is not very impressive. He has some skills, but his combat ability isn't really singing me any songs here, and his saves are pretty horrid. Also, is the build actually standard 15 point buy (I could probably attempt to reverse engineer it but I'm being lazy)?
I love ya and all RD but I haven't seen any of this proof you're mentioning. Even your Fighter Marcello (who's a good fighter as far as Fighters go) is not very impressive. He has some skills, but his combat ability isn't really singing me any songs here, and his saves are pretty horrid. Also, is the build actually standard 15 point buy (I could probably attempt to reverse engineer it but I'm being lazy)?
He's 25-point buy, like all my characters, but I've already shown elsewhere how this could be done enarly as effectively with as little as 15-point buy.
Shall I repost it here for you?
And this character is DAMNED effective. I know because I've played him. The one and only thing that I worry about is his AC, which is a little lower than I'm generally comfortable with, but when it comes to controlling the battlefield, keeping the baddies off his buddies, and putting the hurt on, he does quite well.
You're probably used to seeing all those high damage archers and two-handers and thus have different expectations of what is "song-worthy." Many people forget that you can still be extremely effective without getting to that level of focus.
I know this guy is worth his weight in gold because I've actually played him from level one. He is currently 9th-level in our Carrion Crown game and has since picked up Power Attack (my God that is an amazing feat) as well as Fast Learner (which makes him much more durable and will lead him into some other interesting options later). I've also invested in some gear modifications, such as adding resistance bonuses to saves to his cloak, and getting his boots to double as feather step slippers. At 9th-level, his AC is still lower than I'd like, but that's going to be the next thing I fix.
My friends, optimizers all, think that he is overpowered. He enlarges himself on round one, lures the enemy to him or else charged into their midsts, then he whirlwind attacks, tripping and disarming everyone. After that it's usually just mopping up.
He has yet to fail a trip attack and has proven to be quite good at doing other combat maneuvers even without the appropriate maneuver feats.
In short, he's awesome.
I love ya and all RD but I haven't seen any of this proof you're mentioning. Even your Fighter Marcello (who's a good fighter as far as Fighters go) is not very impressive. He has some skills, but his combat ability isn't really singing me any songs here, and his saves are pretty horrid. Also, is the build actually standard 15 point buy (I could probably attempt to reverse engineer it but I'm being lazy)?
Also, a friend of mine just pointed out that your build is also broken. He has above average HP which implies that you rolled better HP than is standard, or are using some house rules of some sort. The HP of your fighter at 7HD should be 43 base plus 14 Constitution = 57 HP, but your Fighter is sporting an extra 12 HP from no-where (7 of it could be favored class but at first glance it looks like you must have put the favored class bonus into skill points, and you lack Toughness or the like.
So I'm seeing a melee fighter with only 20 AC at 7th level, with what is actually only 58 HP, with a pretty poor flat-footed AC, and terrible saving throws. And it seems all of this on a 25 point buy build when the standard point buy is 15. As much as I like you and your characters, I think that your "fighter" actually does more to illustrate the points of the opposition.
He's 25-point buy, like all my characters, but I've already shown elsewhere how this could be done enarly as effectively with as little as 15-point buy.
Shall I repost it here for you?
Sure if you want.
And this character is DAMNED effective. I know because I've played him. The one and only thing that I worry about is his AC, which is a little lower than I'm generally comfortable with, but when it comes to controlling the battlefield, keeping the baddies off his buddies, and putting the hurt on, he does quite well.
He looks effective at his shtick, but honestly I doubt he'd last very long in one of my games. I tend to play stuff by the books and he looks pretty fragile and seems pretty handicapped vs anything that tripping isn't very useful against.
You're probably used to seeing all those high damage archers and two-handers and thus have different expectations of what is "song-worthy." Many people forget that you can still be extremely effective without getting to that level of focus.
Eh, well, see the thing is I don't usually consider strait kill power as a major factor of efficiency or effectiveness. He looks like a glass cannon to me. His damage is plenty (Power Attack pretty much promises martials good damage) and I like the choice of weapon (flails are pretty awesome). But that AC and those saves make me shudder. He'd easily get removed from a combat by a 3rd level caster waggling their fingers. >.>
I know this guy is worth his weight in gold because I've actually played him from level one. He is currently 9th-level in our Carrion Crown game and has since picked up Power Attack (my God that is an amazing feat) as well as Fast Learner (which makes him much more durable and will lead him into some other interesting options later). I've also invested in some gear modifications, such as adding resistance bonuses to saves to his cloak, and getting his boots to double as feather step slippers. At 9th-level, his AC is still lower than I'd like, but that's going to be the next thing I fix.
A wise decision to be sure. :)
My friends, optimizers all, think that he is overpowered. He enlarges himself on round one, lures the enemy to him or else charged into their midsts, then he whirlwind attacks, tripping and disarming everyone. After that it's usually just mopping up.
Heheh. :)
He has yet to fail a trip attack and has proven to be quite good at doing other combat maneuvers even without the appropriate maneuver feats.
In short, he's awesome.
Indeed.
On a side note, a friend of mine pointed out that enlarging that fighter seems like a horrible idea. I'm kinda inclined to agree. The reach gained is nice, but the AC hit on the already bad AC just makes me think he must spend a lot of time at the healer's office pulling arrows out of his posterior. :P
|
|
Ok that's go with a twenty point buy, level 5 human fighter who specializes in archery using focused study.
Traits: Diplomacy/Use Magic Device Class Skill + 1
Str: 14
Dex: 17
Con: 12
Int: 12
Wis: 10
Cha: 14Feats:
Skill Focus (Diplomacy)
Point Blank Shot
Rapid Shot
Weapon Focus (Longbows)
Precise Shot
Weapon Specialization (Longbow)
Point Blank Master (Longbow)Skills:
Diplomacy: 14=5+2+3+1+3
Use Magic: 11=5+2+3+1
Intimidate:10=5+2+3
Perception:5It is worth noting that this fighter can't ride well or tumble well, that he has less skills than an equally intelligent Barbarian, Ranger and Monk and they all would have higher Perception than him perhaps the most important skill in the game.
Not really because all it takes is one party member to make the DC and he tells everyone else he sees something.
It seems like you didn't try very hard. Where is your gear?
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The Monk has higher saves, higher skills and similar AB.
He also has about 3 points less AC, about 11 fewer hit points and either does 3 points less damage per shot or is at -2 to hit, depending on whether he's using Deadly Aim or not - and you're using a Zen archer to do it, generally agreed to be one of the strongest overall archetypes out there. You are doing a spectacularly bad job of demonstrating a loss of "combat prowess" here.
The point is that whilst Fighters can be good outside of combat they will almost always be inferior to an equally invested non-fighter and they give up quite a bit of combat prowess ( at least in the early levels) to be so.
No, the point, as has been repeated several times, is not to compare the fighter to other classes, it's to point out that fighters can be built quite easily to do things out of combat while maintaining combat effectiveness. Comparisons to other classes are completely irrelevant.
On a side note, a friend of mine pointed out that enlarging that fighter seems like a horrible idea. I'm kinda inclined to agree. The reach gained is nice, but the AC hit on the already bad AC just makes me think he must spend a lot of time at the healer's office pulling arrows out of his posterior. :P
My PF fighter had a cohort with a wand of enlarge (and some other wands) and it was standard operating procedure for my combat reflexes fighter with spiked chain to create a 40' diameter zone of control on the battlefield.
Yeah, he took an AC hit, but he also managed to trip a lot of those dudes trying to whack him, so they didn't get nearly as many hits. One of the main benefits I found from a 15' radius tripper is that he didn't take a whole lot of full attacks since most of his attackers were spending at least a move action standing back up.
However, having said that, yeah, he was a pretty big, juicy target and he did, indeed, spend a good bit of time getting pointy things removed from his hide. But he rarely was knocked unconscious.
I stated the opportunity cost in the post you're replying to (although you cut it for some reason): 1 feat, which pretty much everyone agrees fighters have to spare, and 2500 gp, which is irrelevant by about 5th level. Trust me, if your fighters are having problems with Perception, it's because you are taking no steps whatsoever to address the matter.
You're spending 1/4 of your WBL to try at catch up with another class which which could also spend that and be well ahead. You are also spending a feat, which while nice, is a premium for what you are getting. This was an archer you were talking about, which anyone competent knows is extremely feat heavy. Squandering any feat is a severe price to pay.
And again, you are making foolish assumptions. On my first PFS fighters I lived with a lousy perception (1 rank/level only at high level getting a magic item because there were more important things needed to do my primary job). Since then any fighter will trade a trait to get perception as a class skill. Lacking it is extremely foolish.
So your argument here is basically "fighters are pigeonholed because I personally always pigeonhole them." Yeah, I think I'm done here. Back to making more builds!
Nice job putting incorrect words in my mouth.
No, fighters have design deficiencies and anyone without some kind of agenda can see that. Look here's some basic facts: 2 skill points per level, minimal number of class skills, dearth of out of combat abilities. You have to jury rig a fighter hard to get around that, and the truth is you can do the same sort of thing with another martial class and get more utility in general.
But I know, I'm just a hater that plays lots of fighters because I hate my own characters. That's it. Oh yeah, and because I'm too dumb to know the rules.
But I know, I'm just a hater that plays lots of fighters because I hate my own characters. That's it. Oh yeah, and because I'm too dumb to know the rules.
Well, the good news is that the first step to a solution is admitting the problem. ;-)
I love ya and all RD but I haven't seen any of this proof you're mentioning. Even your Fighter Marcello (who's a good fighter as far as Fighters go) is not very impressive. He has some skills, but his combat ability isn't really singing me any songs here, and his saves are pretty horrid. Also, is the build actually standard 15 point buy (I could probably attempt to reverse engineer it but I'm being lazy)?Also, a friend of mine just pointed out that your build is also broken. He has above average HP which implies that you rolled better HP than is standard, or are using some house rules of some sort. The HP of your fighter at 7HD should be 43 base plus 14 Constitution = 57 HP, but your Fighter is sporting an extra 12 HP from no-where (7 of it could be favored class but at first glance it looks like you must have put the favored class bonus into skill points, and you lack Toughness or the like.
So I'm seeing a melee fighter with only 20 AC at 7th level, with what is actually only 58 HP, with a pretty poor flat-footed AC, and terrible saving throws. And it seems all of this on a 25 point buy build when the standard point buy is 15. As much as I like you and your characters, I think that your "fighter" actually does more to illustrate the points of the opposition.
Yes, he is a little fragile, no doubt about it. I don't see how that supports other peoples' assertions that fighters can't be good in and out of combat since none of said weaknesses are a result of my making him good outside of combat.
For one, I could have had higher AC by choosing a different suit of armor (particularly a metal one), but I stuck with hide because it better fit that shown in his portrait. And yes, I rolled high on his hit points so your point in regards to that is a fair one. So neither of those values should be considered as written.
As to his ability scores, if he were made with 15 point buy, his ability scores would likely have been as follows:
STR 16, DEX 16, CON 12, INT 14, WIS 12, CHA 8
That's a -1 to attack and damage, CMB & CMD, Fortitude saves, and -7 hit points. All of his strengths are still strong and all of the weaknesses you pointed out are still weaknesses. In short, not much has changed. Later on, magical equipment will help to shore up some of those weaknesses and better round him out.
I have concluded that it is pointless to demonstrate the viability of fighter builds because the fighter haters will refuse to accept any build because it is a fighter build and therefore cannot be as good as a barbarian/ranger/whatever.
Good lord is the best you can do to construct an argument label the opponents 'haters' and blow off their points? Really? Why bother then?
Look, the mechanics of the game are right in front of you and they demonstrate why you are clearly wrong. The fighter out of combat utility is matched or exceeded by a commoner. That's a simple fact.
Yes, you can make a versatile fighter build. Booyah. You can make a more versatile build with pretty much any other martial. This demonstrates a deficiency in the design of the fighter. Pointing out that the fighter design has a deficiency is not to hate it.
But I know, I'm just a hater that plays lots of fighters because I hate my own characters. That's it. Oh yeah, and because I'm too dumb to know the rules.Well, the good news is that the first step to a solution is admitting the problem. ;-)
Yes, and showing snark is the first sign that you don't really have an argument.
Yes, and showing snark is the first sign that you don't really have an argument.But I know, I'm just a hater that plays lots of fighters because I hate my own characters. That's it. Oh yeah, and because I'm too dumb to know the rules.Well, the good news is that the first step to a solution is admitting the problem. ;-)
Point of order drbuzzard, your "I'm too dumb to know" comment was "snark" so your own comment here attacks your own argument. Which is fine.
And by the way. I put a smiley face! See, it's right up there in your own quote!
On a side note, a friend of mine pointed out that enlarging that fighter seems like a horrible idea. I'm kinda inclined to agree. The reach gained is nice, but the AC hit on the already bad AC just makes me think he must spend a lot of time at the healer's office pulling arrows out of his posterior. :PMy PF fighter had a cohort with a wand of enlarge (and some other wands) and it was standard operating procedure for my combat reflexes fighter with spiked chain to create a 40' diameter zone of control on the battlefield.
Yeah, he took an AC hit, but he also managed to trip a lot of those dudes trying to whack him, so they didn't get nearly as many hits. One of the main benefits I found from a 15' radius tripper is that he didn't take a whole lot of full attacks since most of his attackers were spending at least a move action standing back up.
However, having said that, yeah, he was a pretty big, juicy target and he did, indeed, spend a good bit of time getting pointy things removed from his hide. But he rarely was knocked unconscious.
I'd rather not get into a discussion about how good something is because...Leadership! No good can come from treading that path. I will say however that these tripper builds are nothing new. They've been around since 3.x and have actually been nerfed in Pathfinder (3.5 Stand Still > Pathfinder's so much), and generally requires your enemies to accept your tactic. Most tripping builds I've seen tend to be gimmicky and very vulnerable to mobile enemies who would rather not run up into melee with the giant martial. :P
Don't get me wrong though. I've never once on these boards said that Fighters are unplayable (in fact, a fighter was the poster child of this thread I started). In fact, I'm probably going to run an NPC-class game for my brother in the near future 'cause he wants to play with NPC classed characters. In the right game with the right people and the right circumstances you can make a lot of stuff look real good. It's just I think most other classes have more to offer and am willing to admit that.
Honestly one of the things that amuses me so much about these threads is the amount of builds that I get to look at and see what other people consider effective. It's really easy to come up with an effective build for most martials and so the fighters that I people post are usually more interesting if they actually work well.
|
|
Yes, and showing snark is the first sign that you don't really have an argument.But I know, I'm just a hater that plays lots of fighters because I hate my own characters. That's it. Oh yeah, and because I'm too dumb to know the rules.Well, the good news is that the first step to a solution is admitting the problem. ;-)
What shows the first sign of not having an argument is when you throw in lines like "what can a fighter do that a commoner can't" and "fighters depend too much on gear".
So I suppose one conclusion that could be reached from reading all through this is that if you were to build highly optimized fighters, barbarians, rangers or other martial classes, and all other things were equal, the fighter MIGHT be a bit behind the other classes in some non-combat areas.
But for any individual build, a decently built fighter will do the job of melee and/or ranged combat just fine and can also do enough social, UMD or other non-combat things to keep them as interesting as you want them to be.
I'm OK with that conclusion.
I suppose from a pure game-design theory perspective I might even agree with the argument that fighters could use some more love from the devs for non-combat versatility. I don't see it as a huge problem since any reasonably built fighter can have more role playing options than the vast majority of gamers will ever utilize, but it would be nice.
Dr. Buzzard. Every claim made by the opposition has been met with evidence and examples showing them to be untrue or highly exaggerated. It doesn't help matters that they have not stuck to their original claim, but have altered it repeatedly.
Also, your new claim that a fighter's non-combat utility (hereafter referred to as just "utility") is outmatched by a simple commoner is not only NOT FACTUAL IN THE SLIGHTEST, but completely laughable! The ONLY things a commoner has to its advantage over a fighter is a different class skill list. Gaining new class skills takes minimal investment, however, generally a feat. Well wouldn't you know it? The fighter has PLENTY OF THOSE.
And yes, you might get more utility out of other PC classes, but they aren't as good at fighting as the fighter, or at least not as consistently good.
|
|
I love ya and all RD but I haven't seen any of this proof you're mentioning. Even your Fighter Marcello (who's a good fighter as far as Fighters go) is not very impressive. He has some skills, but his combat ability isn't really singing me any songs here, and his saves are pretty horrid. Also, is the build actually standard 15 point buy (I could probably attempt to reverse engineer it but I'm being lazy)?
Some people simply refuse to see anything that conflicts with their world view. It is a common problem with society today.
I'd rather not get into a discussion about how good something is because...Leadership! No good can come from treading that path. I will say however that these tripper builds are nothing new. They've been around since 3.x and have actually been nerfed in Pathfinder (3.5 Stand Still > Pathfinder's so much), and generally requires your enemies to accept your tactic. Most tripping builds I've seen tend to be gimmicky and very vulnerable to mobile enemies who would rather not run up into melee with the giant martial. :P
Yeah, it didn't take long for the GM to start throwing flying, floating and multi-legged monsters at us. My first attempt in those cases was to try to grapple, but I rapidly discovered that grapple can become a trap maneuver, some, in fact many, monsters actually benefit from your grappling them.
So by the time we got to the end of his career, he wasn't doing a lot of tripping, but there were still times that enlarging was a good tactic.
Yeah, the cohort with the wand was really more of a concession to the fact that we had a dearth of healing and his role was really more to use CLW wands to heal up the team between combats. But he was there and handy, so my fighter gave him a wand of enlarge.
As with pretty much all of my characters though, his actual mechanics were never as important in his game play than his backstory and quirks. I could have built him a number of ways and to me he would still be the grizzled, divorced, ex-soldier who doted on his bratty daughter...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Caveat: Have not read whole thread
Preemptive Note 1: I like fighters, enjoy playing them, and think they are more versatile than they look.
Preemptive Note 2: I am going to repeat some stuff other people said to an extent but hopefully will put a different perspective.
I think when fighters are criticized for not doing enough outside of combat, the point to take note of is this:
No fighter class ability (not skills, I mean stuff like weapon training, bonus combat feat) enhances anything except combat. This is also true for the majority of fighter archetypes. The only minor exception not already mentioned is bravery, as it's more defensive and could apply out of combat.
BUT this does not mean you can't play a fighter who isn't good at stuff outside of combat.
It just means that the fighter class enables it least of all the martial classes. Barbarians get trap sense and fast movement. Rangers get all KINDS of skill bonuses to things and special skill based abilities. Fighters do not.
Now: how to build a fighter who is good at things outside of combat requires you do take into consideration things that are not immediately apparent.
1: Skills. Yes, fighters do not have a lot of skill points. But fighters also do not necessarily have a designated skill role in concept--this can actually be a good thing. They don't "need" (or are not pressured by tradition or class ability) to put their skill points in any one skill for their class to function. This means they can help fill in niches and also build as they choose. A fighter could go Intimidate to help socially (and can tie in a demoralize build to go back to combat). A fighter is often in our groups the party crafter (we use that skill a lot so it's important). A fighter has Survival, Knowledge (Dungeoneering), and Knowledge (Engineering) as class skills, all useful (engineering may be least used outside of siege engineering depending on the campaign, but my fighter saved our party's life with a Knowledge (engineering) check in City of Golden Death, did not regret spending those points there). A fighter going a combat maneuver approach will need to have an Int of 13 and thus 3 skill ranks a level (4 if human) which can actually go pretty far if spent well.
2: Feats: Because a fighter gets so many combat bonus feats, he's got room--unlike in fact many other classes--to take his normal odd-level feats in skill-based and other non-combat areas.
So it's doable. Sometimes it may depend on player style and preference, but fighters don't just fight, actually--or don't have to. But it is clear from their class abilities the designer wanted you to focus on combat first, skills second, and that just is what it is.
Now, as a side note, I think fighters also make great multiclass options. And I think you can make some very effective and fun well-rounded skill/combat characters by multi-ing a fighter with another class. I know the cool kids don't talk about multiclassing but it's there, it's not unbalanced, and its value for multiclassing I think is a legitimate aspect of why the class can be a good class. I don't think "because you feel you MUST stick with the class through to level 20" is necessarily why a class is good either (it can make it attractive depending on what you're looking for, sure, but I think it's a small factor IMO).