yeah, that is the part tha annoy me the most.And the most incomprehensible too... Why would the guy who focus only on mundane skills not have any skills at all? Why did the devs think 2 skill points is enough for any class other than Wizards and Witches?
Funny thing is... Rangers are smart enough to max 6 different skills and still have time to learn how to cast spells.
Barbarians and Gunslingers are not that smart... But they still get 4 skill points per level. Twice as many as Fighters...
Apparently, being proficient with heavy armor takes a lot of training! Well, except Cavaliers and Samurais also get 4 skill ranks per level. So do Oracles of Battle.
So... Maybe Fighters and Paladins are inherently stupid?
Well, Paladins at least learn spell-casting, so there is that.
Yeah... Fighters are the dumbest guys around.
I already explained why the sentence is there. You can accept it or not. I guarantee you will not get past any GM I have ever met. I also know it will not fly at a PFS table.Funny thing. I've played paladins at PFS. I have used it on neutral foes. i didnt' get AC I didn't get attack or damage. I did bypass DR though.
I am aghast that a judge would let this sort of silliness fly. I know that around here it would not. In fact, you would be laughed at openly for trying.
But the wording really is that bad, such that it could fly if a rules lawyer pushed their case.
In the interest of clarity, I have flagged your initial post which states this for FAQ. I would like to see the staff come here and end this.
I await a FAQ response. It's not worth discussing it at this point any further.
I'm discussing this in good fun because a lot of the time I find what some of the rules state humorous.
Heh... I find it particularly funny how...
1- You can heal a dying friend back to 0 HP by drowning him.
and
2- Inivisibility helps you to hide from blind enemies in a dark room.
The fact that there is no written penalty for never ever sleeping is also pretty silly. Well, at least there are implied penalties if we look hard enough...
Then again, there are no rules for gravity either, but we all assume it's there anyway.
I await a FAQ response. It's not worth discussing it at this point any further.I'm not sure if you're angry or not. You lack the expletives and capitals that usually denote anger and yet your wording suggests you find this distasteful.
I'm not mad or trying to be mean. I'm discussing this in good fun because a lot of the time I find what some of the rules state humorous.
I'm not mad. I just find the interpretation to be ridiculous, though I can see how one can use that poor wording to derive the conclusion. I want a FAQ ruling so that Smite Evil actually pertains specifically to evil.
This is a case much like where there is no specific wording that you can't do anything when you are dead. Hence, you can get up and fight while dead. Only common sense prevents such a silly reading.
The fact that there is no written penalty for never ever sleeping is also pretty silly. Well, at least there are implied penalties if we look hard enough...
PFS doesn't use RAI. You don't interpret. It's supposed to be straight up RAW and by pure RAW I showed him the ability said target was completely irrelevant for that line. The fighter and I that were scuffling for a bit of PVP abruptly decided he no longer wanted to PVP. :PI am aghast that a judge would let this sort of silliness fly. I know that around here it would not. In fact, you would be laughed at openly for trying.
But the wording really is that bad, such that it could fly if a rules lawyer pushed their case.
In the interest of clarity, I have flagged your initial post which states this for FAQ. I would like to see the staff come here and end this.
Here's the RAW for your case. Suppose I didn't need to FAQ it when I just needed to read the next paragraph.
If the paladin targets a creature that is not evil, the smite is wasted with no effect.
Bypassing DR counts as an effect. So no dice.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Thog am needing his beauty sleep to perform at best.
You were saying?.
Some characters could sleep forever...and still not get enough. Just sayin'.
Thog am needing his beauty sleep to perform at best.
You were saying?.
Really I'm just excited I have figured out the whole "link" thing. Plus I had remembered reading that a day or two ago.
Stuff
I don't know if that was supposed to be a slam on me or fighters or whatever but I quit reading as soon as you quoted the dictionary.
I don't know if that was supposed to be a slam on me or fighters or whatever but I quit reading as soon as you quoted the dictionary.*Gasp* did she really say that? OH NO SHE DIDN'T! *SNAP*
Thank you guys sorry if I'm being a bit off. You're entertaining and I really haven't stopped vommiting on and off for half an hour to an hour. Lol I'm so light headed it isn't funny. Thanks for the laughs :D
Was it something I said?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
StuffI don't know if that was supposed to be a slam on me or fighters or whatever but I quit reading as soon as you quoted the dictionary.
"You attempted to use logic to prove a point, therefore I am going to dismiss you and ignore your post."
|
|
"You attempted to use logic to prove a point, therefore I am going to dismiss you and ignore your post."StuffI don't know if that was supposed to be a slam on me or fighters or whatever but I quit reading as soon as you quoted the dictionary.
A point that we understand as a failure due to actual experience in the game. :p
"You attempted to use logic to prove a point, therefore I am going to dismiss you and ignore your post."A point that we understand as a failure due to actual experience in the game. :p
If you disagree, by all means provide your evidence. My experience (and a cursory reading of the bestiary, a requirement to run a game) tells me that more happens in fights at every level from 1st to 20th than attack rolls against AC.
|
|
If you disagree, by all means provide your evidence. My experience (and a cursory reading of the bestiary, a requirement to run a game) tells me that more happens in fights at every level from 1st to 20th than attack rolls against AC."You attempted to use logic to prove a point, therefore I am going to dismiss you and ignore your post."A point that we understand as a failure due to actual experience in the game. :p
Let us pick an AP we have all played or read and go encounter by encounter.
|
|
If you disagree, by all means provide your evidence. My experience (and a cursory reading of the bestiary, a requirement to run a game) tells me that more happens in fights at every level from 1st to 20th than attack rolls against AC."You attempted to use logic to prove a point, therefore I am going to dismiss you and ignore your post."A point that we understand as a failure due to actual experience in the game. :p
There's a whole thread on here where one guy is trying to figure out what he can do because the fighter archer (not one of the top fighter builds at all) is ripping most encounters up before the other PCs can hardly even react.
"No, fighters can't fight", he said, as he stared at the mound of dead bodies the fighter left behind.
As I said. Fighters are pretty good at killing stuff. But almost every class is good at killing stuff. They're not even the kings of killing stuff. But fighting is something they are not good at. And if a fighter is constantly solving problems merely by killing everything then my instincts tell me that the battles are probably very similar with little variation, probably few if any tactics used by the NPCs, and probably ignoring large swaths of the bestiary.
Link to thread?
|
|
As I said. Fighters are pretty good at killing stuff. But almost every class is good at killing stuff. They're not even the kings of killing stuff. But fighting is something they are not good at. And if a fighter is constantly solving problems merely by killing everything then my instincts tell me that the battles are probably very similar with little variation, probably few if any tactics used by the NPCs, and probably ignoring large swaths of the bestiary.
Link to thread?
http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2pplc?When-one-character-is-better-than-the-res t
There's a whole thread on here where one guy is trying to figure out what he can do because the fighter archer (not one of the top fighter builds at all) is ripping most encounters up before the other PCs can hardly even react."No, fighters can't fight", he said, as he stared at the mound of dead bodies the fighter left behind.
Except that you are leaving out the part where the rest of the party is low-op, and the fighter is high-op. The antipaladin should be able to wreck just as much s*@+ in physical fighting as the fighter, depending on how many good creatures they encounter. And if I'm not mistaken (can't find the thread right no), he's playing with a Sorcerer as well. He's at a high enough level that the Sorcerer can outright end combat encounters without a second thought, as well as social encounters and environmental encounters. Yes, a well-optimized fighter can kill something pretty well if he has his favoured weapon type on him, but an equally opped ranger can match or beat him. As can a Divine Hunter Paladin. And then the Archer and Paladin can go and do something else.
But yes, a fighter can do a lot of damage if he gets opped for it. But he's a glass cannon if he gets targetted with anything that attacks something other than his AC. And he's not much use elsewhere either. If you're in a combat-heavy campaign, the fighter is going to shine a little bit more, but if you start adding more and more social/roleplaying/skill challenges to the campaign, the fighter is going to be more of a hinderance than anything else.
Edit: it was a sorcerer, not a wizard
|
|
There's a whole thread on here where one guy is trying to figure out what he can do because the fighter archer (not one of the top fighter builds at all) is ripping most encounters up before the other PCs can hardly even react."No, fighters can't fight", he said, as he stared at the mound of dead bodies the fighter left behind.
Except that you are leaving out the part where the rest of the party is low-op, and the fighter is high-op. The antipaladin should be able to wreck just as much s!&# in physical fighting as the fighter, depending on how many good creatures they encounter. And if I'm not mistaken (can't find the thread right no), he's playing with a Sorcerer as well. He's at a high enough level that the Sorcerer can outright end combat encounters without a second thought, as well as social encounters and environmental encounters. Yes, a well-optimized fighter can kill something pretty well if he has his favoured weapon type on him, but an equally opped ranger can match or beat him. As can a Divine Hunter Paladin. And then the Archer and Paladin can go and do something else.
But yes, a fighter can do a lot of damage if he gets opped for it. But he's a glass cannon if he gets targetted with anything that attacks something other than his AC. And he's not much use elsewhere either. If you're in a combat-heavy campaign, the fighter is going to shine a little bit more, but if you start adding more and more social/roleplaying/skill challenges to the campaign, the fighter is going to be more of a hinderance than anything else.
Edit: it was a sorcerer, not a wizard
The point is...and it refutes one of the few things I did read in the post, as it was in nice bold letters...fighters do. not. suck. at fighting.
Many of us have too much in-game experience with fighters to believe it, no matter how big and bold the letters are.
|
Here's the RAW for your case. Suppose I didn't need to FAQ it when I just needed to read the next paragraph.
If the paladin targets a creature that is not evil, the smite is wasted with no effect.
Bypassing DR counts as an effect. So no dice.
and yet we've specifically already noted that it states it doesn't matter if they're evil or not for the purpose of that effect. At that point all you can claim is that RAW contradicts itself.
No dice? BLASPHEMY! MWAHAHAHA (I love blasphemy :D )
Not really. "Regardless of the target" refers to the previous sentence, where additional modifiers are placed if the target is an outsider with the evil subtype, an evil-aligned dragon, or an undead creature. Not including that phrase could lead to confusion that only those three types of creatures had their DR bypassed.
The point is...and it refutes one of the few things I did read in the post, as it was in nice bold letters...fighters do. not. suck. at fighting.
Many of us have too much in-game experience with fighters to believe it, no matter how big and bold the letters are.
Nobody is saying that they suck at fighting in overall comparison to the rest of the game. However, there are other classes that can fight just as well as the fighter- and sometimes better- AND survive longer in combat AND operate outside of combat in skill and social challenges.
Sure, the fighter is better in physical combat than the sorcerer, or the wizard. But they can use their own resources to end a combat faster than a fighter can. And heaven forbid if a fighter ever goes up against one- one charm person spell and he's murdering the rest of the party, or is stunned for the combat, or is continuously on fire, because his saves suck and can't compete against a wizard's DCs.
|
|
The point is...and it refutes one of the few things I did read in the post, as it was in nice bold letters...fighters do. not. suck. at fighting.
Many of us have too much in-game experience with fighters to believe it, no matter how big and bold the letters are.
Nobody is saying that they suck at fighting in overall comparison to the rest of the game. However, there are other classes that can fight just as well as the fighter- and sometimes better- AND survive longer in combat AND operate outside of combat in skill and social challenges.
Sure, the fighter is better in physical combat than the sorcerer, or the wizard. But they can use their own resources to end a combat faster than a fighter can. And heaven forbid if a fighter ever goes up against one- one charm person spell and he's murdering the rest of the party, or is stunned for the combat, or is continuously on fire, because his saves suck and can't compete against a wizard's DCs.
People keep posting very specific builds of paladins that fight longer (because they heal themselves a lot)...but don't, on the whole, outfight fighters. I even know tactics that will nullify most spellcasting...I've played. Seriously, what's that wizard going to do when every time he starts to cast, he sprouts an arrow?
I truly find it sad that every fight assumes that the wizard comes in with 3-4 spells cast as a standard to prove the fighter sucks.
Pretty pathetic.
http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2pplc?When-one-character-is-better-than-the-res t
Note that that thread exists because of a silly houserule that allows for a combination of rolled stats AND point buy, and the other characters not investing in the SLIGHTEST in combat efficacy.
The Archer in question only needs his Weapon Training with Gloves of Dueling (+2), Weapon Specialization (+2), a +1 Adaptive Bow (+1), Deadly Aim (+6) and his whopping 24 Str (+7) and he's already up to what, +18 of the "massive" +21 he has?
I even know tactics that will nullify most spellcasting...I've played. Seriously, what's that wizard going to do when every time he starts to cast, he sprouts an arrow?
What's the Fighter gonna do if every time he tries to move or swing his sword he gets Dominated or something?
We can go round and round with readied actions all day long if that's the game you wanna play.
Quite a boring game, but you can do it I'm sure.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
People keep posting very specific builds of paladins that fight longer (because they heal themselves a lot)...but don't, on the whole, outfight fighters. I even know tactics that will nullify most spellcasting...I've played. Seriously, what's that wizard going to do when every time he starts to cast, he sprouts an arrow?I truly find it sad that every fight assumes that the wizard comes in with 3-4 spells cast as a standard to prove the fighter sucks.
Pretty pathetic.
Have you ever looked at the wizard/sorcerer spell list? It's kinda loaded with standard action spells that can trivialize or remove most threats.
|
The paladin needs those three and charisma. Well, not necessarily needs, just really likes ;) . Int is just as useful, considering that there are some pretty nice skills on the paladin skill list, so the only difference is wisdom, which the fighter values for the save and the paladin doesn't need as much. The ranger wants to have good stats in the physical abilities (more or less) and wisdom, too, so I'd say the fighter is among the less ability-intensive martial types*.
Paladin also starts with 4 skill points instead of 2. Effectively 4 more INT for skills.
On a slightly funnier note, just for giggles.
Regardless of the target, smite evil attacks automatically bypass any DR the creature might possess.aka. even if it isn't evil, smite still autobypasses DR.
Aelrynth you are correct on the deflection bonus. But seriously a 16 and buying a +6 item by level 20 is twinking? That right there is a +6 to AC, how can that even remotely be considered twinking.
You can't target a non-evil target with Smite Evil an the "regardless of target" is referring to these "the evil subtype, an evil-aligned dragon, or an undead creature". Those are the targets it is talking about.
You can't use it to by pass the DR of any creature.
|
|
Have you ever looked at the wizard/sorcerer spell list? It's kinda loaded with standard action spells that can trivialize or remove most threats.
People keep posting very specific builds of paladins that fight longer (because they heal themselves a lot)...but don't, on the whole, outfight fighters. I even know tactics that will nullify most spellcasting...I've played. Seriously, what's that wizard going to do when every time he starts to cast, he sprouts an arrow?I truly find it sad that every fight assumes that the wizard comes in with 3-4 spells cast as a standard to prove the fighter sucks.
Pretty pathetic.
Looked at them? I've played them. I've also played fighters who loved fighting squishy spellcasters.
|
|
The fighter doesn't have to prove anything in what it can do out of combat. Once again, we have already been given builds that show fighters can function just fine out of combat and still keep their excellent combat skills.
Maybe the problem isn't with the fighter but some of your expectations, maybe they are set too high and then again, there are some here that gripe about the fighter and yet won't accept any of the builds that have been presented. Almost like they just want to keep the argument going just to argue.
Looked at them? I've played them. I've also played fighters who loved fighting squishy spellcasters.
I've found that between Con as 2nd highest score and a slew of amazing defensive spells like mirror image (MASSIVELY buffed in pathfinder! "thanks, paizo!" - wizards the world over) and a bevvy of miss % spells, spellcasters are very much not that squishy at all. If you can even reach them with their flight, teleporting, putting up walls or summons, etc...
We can do a test run vs my Sorcerer if you want. He's level 8 but I can bump him up a couple if you're building for 10. He's a blasty casty but I think he could give you a bit of a challenge. We'd have to find some way to sort out the stat disparity though, since he has rolled stats. Only buffing he does is to cast Mage Armor first thing every morning.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Looked at them? I've played them. I've also played fighters who loved fighting squishy spellcasters.Have you ever looked at the wizard/sorcerer spell list? It's kinda loaded with standard action spells that can trivialize or remove most threats.
People keep posting very specific builds of paladins that fight longer (because they heal themselves a lot)...but don't, on the whole, outfight fighters. I even know tactics that will nullify most spellcasting...I've played. Seriously, what's that wizard going to do when every time he starts to cast, he sprouts an arrow?I truly find it sad that every fight assumes that the wizard comes in with 3-4 spells cast as a standard to prove the fighter sucks.
Pretty pathetic.
F%&* this, I'm obviously not going to convince you that Fighters need help outside of combat. I've never argued that Fighter's couldn't deal damage, just that they had s!*!ty will and reflex saves, which get more important as levels go up. They don't have a niche, as the one that they're supposed to have is also filled in by a paladin and the ranger. They got nerfed severely in 3.X, and many of us want to see them better than just the big stupid fighter that can only fight and nothing else.
What we're asking is for the fighter to get better in just a few ways:
1) picking up basically anything and being a total badass with it, rather than just his chosen weapon type. Easiest fix, just give the weapon training/weapon mastery bonuses to all weapons, rather than just 1 group.
2) Give him better saves somehow, so he doesn't get dominated by a stiff breeze. Maybe make all his saves based off of his strength modifier.
3) Give the fighter something to do outside of combat. Don't just give him more skill points, give him the ability to radiate an aura of badassery that makes people want to listen to him. Make it so that people treat him as if their attitute was two steps higher or some such. Give the fighter the ability to influence the narrative.
These are just suggestions that I've made without much thought, but I don't think that they'd overpower the fighter in any way. It would just make him a better badass.
I would actually like more "fighter only" feats and would like if they could choose a weapon group for weapon specific feats. I disagree on the "aura of bad(censored)ery" but would say an intimidating fighter is remarkably easy to make.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Fighter only feats may as well just be fighter class features when you think about it.
|
|
Looked at them? I've played them. I've also played fighters who loved fighting squishy spellcasters.I've found that between Con as 2nd highest score and a slew of amazing defensive spells like mirror image (MASSIVELY buffed in pathfinder! "thanks, paizo!" - wizards the world over) and a bevvy of miss % spells, spellcasters are very much not that squishy at all. If you can even reach them with their flight, teleporting, putting up walls or summons, etc...
See? Caster already has spells cast, and initiative hasn't even been rolled. Surprise? That's impossible. They're omniscient.
The paladin needs those three and charisma. Well, not necessarily needs, just really likes ;) . Int is just as useful, considering that there are some pretty nice skills on the paladin skill list, so the only difference is wisdom, which the fighter values for the save and the paladin doesn't need as much. The ranger wants to have good stats in the physical abilities (more or less) and wisdom, too, so I'd say the fighter is among the less ability-intensive martial types*.
Paladin also starts with 4 skill points instead of 2. Effectively 4 more INT for skills.
On a slightly funnier note, just for giggles.
Regardless of the target, smite evil attacks automatically bypass any DR the creature might possess.aka. even if it isn't evil, smite still autobypasses DR.
Aelrynth you are correct on the deflection bonus. But seriously a 16 and buying a +6 item by level 20 is twinking? That right there is a +6 to AC, how can that even remotely be considered twinking.
A 26 isn't twinking. A 26 is EXPECTED. Note that's a +8. Where's that put you in relation to your Ring of Protection +5? Uh, huh, +3 higher.
When I say serious twinkage I mean starting with Cha as your highest stat, pumping it, buying a book +5 and slapping on the Cha headband so you're walking around with a 30+ and rocking a +10 to +13 deflection bonus that makes a Ring of Prot grovel in shame.
==Aelryinth
See? Caster already has spells cast, and initiative hasn't even been rolled. Surprise? That's impossible. They're omniscient.Looked at them? I've played them. I've also played fighters who loved fighting squishy spellcasters.I've found that between Con as 2nd highest score and a slew of amazing defensive spells like mirror image (MASSIVELY buffed in pathfinder! "thanks, paizo!" - wizards the world over) and a bevvy of miss % spells, spellcasters are very much not that squishy at all. If you can even reach them with their flight, teleporting, putting up walls or summons, etc...
I will note that at higher levels it does become pretty hard, what with Foresight and all, and Contingency auto-casting certainly doesn't help.
==Aelryinth