|
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
So I picked a wizard at random, in Paizo material. He has none of them, at level 15.
He does cast long-term spells every day...not a one of which can't be dealt with.
|
No you haven't proven anything. The closest ive seen on the build threads are either not class specific(aka any class can use the same build for those extra skill points) or use the human racial to make up the shortcoming.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.
Then you need to learn some Search-Fu.
There have already been plenty of builds out there, all you need to do is look.
|
|
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...
And certain feats and magic items can increase the Will and reflex saves. You don't have to convince anyone of anything because we have already been convinced,, and shown proof, that a fighter can perform just fine outside of combat. Is doing things outside of combat their thing? Not really, unless you specifically build it that way, but don't act like they can't contribute to out of combat situations. They have more than enough feats to spend where they can increase their out of combat abilities. An archer fighter makes a fantastic scout and who cares if his skill ranks aren't huge because you don't need huge numbers to hit the DC's. Kind of like the difference between 700 and 800 points of damage, your kicking ass either way.
No you haven't proven anything. The closest ive seen on the build threads are either not class specific(aka any class can use the same build for those extra skill points) or use the human racial to make up the shortcoming.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.
Then you need to learn some Search-Fu.
There have already been plenty of builds out there, all you need to do is look.
I searched. Didn't find any that did what was asked. Would you like to try for yourself?
So I picked a wizard at random, in Paizo material. He has none of them, at level 15.He does cast long-term spells every day...not a one of which can't be dealt with.
There aren't that many Wizards in Pazo material in the first place that I can think of. The NPC database has, at best, one per CR.
All of them DO assume certain buffs are used before combat however. The Abjurer having "mage armor, mind blank, protection from energy (fire), resist energy (electricity), see invisibility, and stoneskin. She casts telepathic bond on allies." and the Conjurer having "The wizard casts mage armor, magic circle against good, protection from energy (fire), resist energy (electricity), and see invisibility.".
NPC Wizards are more Schrodinger's (Pre-Buffed) Wizard than any other kind.
If there were any Diviners higher than level 9 they'd probably have both.
See, normally this is where I would say monks make great anti-casters but I don't want everybody to yell at me again.
I've seen many casters terrorized by fits of uncontrollable laughter because of monks. Does that count?
Why would any caster have a hard time with monks?
Against any caster that uses Save or Suck type spells the Monk is usually going to make his Save, which makes the spell Suck.
Why would any caster have a hard time with monks?
All good saves and spell resistance, if I had to guess.
|
|
Why would any caster have a hard time with monks?Against any caster that uses Save or Suck type spells the Monk is usually going to make his Save, which makes the spell Suck.
Like the enchanter I played...who was unfortunate enough to encounter the invisible monk, with most of his spells gone.
I almost didn't survive the first round. :(
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...
Yeah, they made a FAQ about it because it's not explicitly stated anywhere in the CRB. Well, at least not in the older editions, I'm not sure about the new ones.
Not everything needs a rule, There is DM for that. Even the rules for stalth are mostly fine if the Dm and the player want the rules to work.Yeah, they made a FAQ about it because it's not explicitly stated anywhere in the CRB. Well, at least not in the older editions, I'm not sure about the new ones.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...
I agree (I even mentioned gravity, which is never stated to work, but we all assume it does anyway), I just found it funny because it seems like a very obvious rule to put in the book.
I'd never let my players go days without sleeping without consequences, nor would I assume my character can do that.
Lasts longer, on their own? Impossible. On paper, a Fighter can last indefinitely (though in practice this is not the case).
Can match? Barbarians and Rangers. To a lesser extent, Paladins (they can roflstomp over about 3 encounters a day but are less effective otherwise).
I'm actually not sure what this thread is for. I don't think anyone has ever said Fighters are bad at fighting.
They're just bad at fighting AND being able to do other stuff.
Depends on how you make the fighter, and possibly your point buy amount (or rolls) I mean if say you are 15 point buy, yes your fighter is going to be a big dumb brute or he's going to be more well rounded and so suck at his job. But, with 20 or even 25 points then IMO a well rounded fighter can shine. You can have a fairly high STR and Dex, and still have a pretty good Int and Charisma to be the party leader. Take a trait that gives you Diplomacy bonuses and put some ranks in it.
As for being well-rounded in combat as the OP said, while that works, I tend to like for my fighters to specialize in a single weapon. Maximizing damage with a single weapon (or two, if you want to go the TWF route) allows you to do insane amounts of damage. IF say you have a greatsword as your weapon and you run into something with DR/slashing? Whoope de doo. You already do such massive damage, that DR is a speed bump. Just means you need to tap the breaks, then you can hit the gas again.
So what happens then if you run into something with DR/Bludgeoning (which your GS doesn't bypass, unlike Slashing...) at even 10 points? That's a good chunk of damage shaved off your Fighter, whether you swap to a bludgeoning weapon (thus losing out on a lot of bonuses you've specced into the Greatsword) or just keep hacking at the guy (losing 10 points of damage a swing HURTS, and as far as I know there's no Clustered Shots equivalent for melee weapons).
And in that high of a Point buy, every class is going to be better than the Fighter by pretty much the exact same amount they already are. That base skill point deficiency is something that holds him back regardless if all other things are equal.
|
|
So what happens then if you run into something with DR/Bludgeoning (which your GS doesn't bypass, unlike Slashing...) at even 10 points? That's a good chunk of damage shaved off your Fighter, whether you swap to a bludgeoning weapon (thus losing out on a lot of bonuses you've specced into the Greatsword) or just keep hacking at the guy (losing 10 points of damage a swing HURTS, and as far as I know there's no Clustered Shots equivalent for melee weapons).
To address your DR thought, yes DR 10 can hurt at low levels. At higher levels, it's not much of a deterent. Barring a few types of DR, most fighters have a high enough plus on their weapon to bypass it. If it happens to be one they can't bypass, they go from 300 points of damage per round to 260. Still enough to kill a lot of things outright at that level.
How high level is that? I know this discussion was with the assumption that you were around level 12 at most. Level 12 is three attacks (4 with Haste), one of which is almost guaranteed to miss. But we'll ignore that. Are you saying you can make a guy at level 12 that consistently swings for ~100 damage a swing? I've only built as high as 10 but I think I'd be hard pressed to do so even with those two extra levels.
And I'm pretty sure magic weapons don't overcome weapon damage DR. The table on DR being overcome by magic weapons just goes +3 bypasses Cold Iron/Silver, +4 does Adamantine, and +5 does Alignment based. No mention of Slashing/Bludgeoning/Piercing.
|
|
How high level is that? I know this discussion was with the assumption that you were around level 12 at most. Level 12 is three attacks (4 with Haste), one of which is almost guaranteed to miss. But we'll ignore that. Are you saying you can make a guy at level 12 that consistently swings for ~100 damage a swing? I've only built as high as 10 but I think I'd be hard pressed to do so even with those two extra levels.
And I'm pretty sure magic weapons don't overcome weapon damage DR. The table on DR being overcome by magic weapons just goes +3 bypasses Cold Iron/Silver, +4 does Adamantine, and +5 does Alignment based. No mention of Slashing/Bludgeoning/Piercing.
I've built plenty of level 20s...and let me tell you, barring some pretty exotic magic, even they have trouble with a consistent 100 points a strike.
I think the most I'd be able to pull is like 2d6+35 maybe? Barring some silly RageLancePounce level of nonsense I don't think I could get much higher than that with any sort of regular kind of stats (26-28 by 10-12).
using 3.5 material such as shock trooper, melee weapon mastery, leap attack and a 1evel dip in lion totem barbarian, and a 30 STR at 20th level i could get with a DC5 acrobatics check and a charge with a +5 greatsword, the specialization line, gloves of dueling
2d6+15+18+18+4+2+2+2+5 or an average of 75 points a swing at +45/40/35/30 and -6 to AC with a DC5 jump check, a full attack on a charge by sacrificing capstone, and that uses 3 3.5 feats and a 3.5 dipping feature from complete champion. in other words, 4 3.5 books are used.
in 3.5, a 20th level half orc ubercharger with the same strength had 6 less to hit and 14 less AC, but dealt 2d6+15+6+5+40+40 or an average of 113 damage a swing before a less conservable rage that could be bought in groups of 3 for a feat.
that is just 20th level
now for a 12th level 3.pp Ubercharger with a greatsword
Human 3.5 Lion Totem Barbarian 1/PF Fighter 11
Strength 26, +3 greatsword
shock trooper, leap attack, melee weapon mastery, gloves of dueling, specialization/chain
+23/18/13 2d6+12+12+12+4+4+3 or 54 Damage a swing, 2d6+47
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I glanced at this a few days ago, but now every time I see it in my focused threads, I think of Taylor Mali's What Teachers Make. I think it would be hilarious if somebody came up with something like that for fighters.
Of course, the thread would be totally derailed by people coming in and saying Wizards or Barbarians or Summoners or whatever are still way better. It would still be great.
|
|
How high level is that? I know this discussion was with the assumption that you were around level 12 at most. Level 12 is three attacks (4 with Haste), one of which is almost guaranteed to miss. But we'll ignore that. Are you saying you can make a guy at level 12 that consistently swings for ~100 damage a swing? I've only built as high as 10 but I think I'd be hard pressed to do so even with those two extra levels.
And I'm pretty sure magic weapons don't overcome weapon damage DR. The table on DR being overcome by magic weapons just goes +3 bypasses Cold Iron/Silver, +4 does Adamantine, and +5 does Alignment based. No mention of Slashing/Bludgeoning/Piercing.
Pardon, I didn't realize there was a level assumption. I was speaking of high level characters (16th-20th) when I said high level. Something I'm seeing at the game I run. The game really does turn into rocket launcher tag at that level.
And are you talking about high pluses not overcoming weapon damage type DR? I would agree to a point - your weapon is going to naturally overcome only one or two of those types. However, that and a high weapon plus is going overcome a lot of DR types. At high level (16th+), the only DR types that are consistently effective are DR/- and DR/epic. Weapon damage type DR does pop up occasionally, but its honestly not a common type, particularly on high CR creatures.
|
|
I glanced at this a few days ago, but now every time I see it in my focused threads, I think of Taylor Mali's What Teachers Make. I think it would be hilarious if somebody came up with something like that for fighters.
Of course, the thread would be totally derailed by people coming in and saying Wizards or Barbarians or Summoners or whatever are still way better. It would still be great.
Thank you SO much. I'd never heard that before. I've always held teachers in such esteem...that rocks so hard. :)
|
|
Let us see what we can do at 12th level, as a top bar. This is off the top of my head so feel free to correct and add.
It is Level 12, so using bestiary guidelines we are going against AC 27 with 160 Hit Points
Start with 20 Str, with a +1 at 4/8/12. We are up to 23 (or 22 with one thrown to an odd number somewhere. We have 108k gold, so we can afford the 36k +6 belt so we are up to 28 or +10
So we start at +22 to hit, two handed doing +15 damage.
Power attack is -4 + 12 so we are up to +27 with +18 to hit.
Feats we have Weapon Specialization and Greater Weapon Specialization (you can take it at 12) so that is another +4, we are at 31.
We needed Weapon focus and Greater weapon focus (8th), so we are now at +20 to hit.
No weapon training is going to be another +2 to hit and damage, so +22 and +33.
And let say we can afford a +4 Weapon, so we are at +26 (hit on anything but a 1) doing +36 damage before we roll dice.
We have used 5 feats, which would be a lot if not for the fact that the fighter had 13 (14 if human) at this level.
I can still use those other 7 feats for other things, I can make sure I'm pretty good ranged, I can take some skill based feats, Iron will...with just 5 feats I'm carrying my weight for damage and I've got nearly 40k left for other stuff (or more if I just go for the +3 sword.) and I can wear heavy armor moving at full speed with 3 less ACP.
And again, this is off the top of my head.
This is probably close to true. Once you determine a wizard's spell load, you don't have to worry about spamcasting like a spontaneous caster has. They are inherently somewhat less abusable...and they have a resource you can give away as loot!
Now, if they get away, THEN we could have a problem as they alter their spell load out.
I can't remember if the BBEG in book 2 of Shattered Star is a wizard or a sorc, but there's a bad guy wizard in every other book of the AP.
Hmm. Not sure about Rise of Runelords, however. Bad guy wizard in the first book?
It might not be 100%, but it's probably at least 80%.
==Aelryinth
|
|
Let us see what we can do at 12th level, as a top bar. This is off the top of my head so feel free to correct and add.
It is Level 12, so using bestiary guidelines we are going against AC 27 with 160 Hit Points
Start with 20 Str, with a +1 at 4/8/12. We are up to 23 (or 22 with one thrown to an odd number somewhere. We have 108k gold, so we can afford the 36k +6 belt so we are up to 28 or +10
So we start at +22 to hit, two handed doing +15 damage.
Power attack is -4 + 12 so we are up to +27 with +18 to hit.
Feats we have Weapon Specialization and Greater Weapon Specialization (you can take it at 12) so that is another +4, we are at 31.
We needed Weapon focus and Greater weapon focus (8th), so we are now at +20 to hit.
No weapon training is going to be another +2 to hit and damage, so +22 and +33.
And let say we can afford a +4 Weapon, so we are at +26 (hit on anything but a 1) doing +36 damage before we roll dice.
We have used 5 feats, which would be a lot if not for the fact that the fighter had 13 (14 if human) at this level.
I can still use those other 7 feats for other things, I can make sure I'm pretty good ranged, I can take some skill based feats, Iron will...with just 5 feats I'm carrying my weight for damage and I've got nearly 40k left for other stuff (or more if I just go for the +3 sword.) and I can wear heavy armor moving at full speed with 3 less ACP.
And again, this is off the top of my head.
Very nice...and an excellent example of why I say that weapon focus and specialization are utterly unnecessary. Useful...but other things may be moreso.
using 3.5 material such as shock trooper, melee weapon mastery, leap attack and a 1evel dip in lion totem barbarian, and a 30 STR at 20th level i could get with a DC5 acrobatics check and a charge with a +5 greatsword, the specialization line, gloves of dueling
2d6+15+18+18+4+2+2+2+5 or an average of 75 points a swing at +45/40/35/30 and -6 to AC with a DC5 jump check, a full attack on a charge by sacrificing capstone, and that uses 3 3.5 feats and a 3.5 dipping feature from complete champion. in other words, 4 3.5 books are used.
in 3.5, a 20th level half orc ubercharger with the same strength had 6 less to hit and 14 less AC, but dealt 2d6+15+6+5+40+40 or an average of 113 damage a swing before a less conservable rage that could be bought in groups of 3 for a feat.
that is just 20th level
now for a 12th level 3.pp Ubercharger with a greatsword
Human 3.5 Lion Totem Barbarian 1/PF Fighter 11
Strength 26, +3 greatsword
shock trooper, leap attack, melee weapon mastery, gloves of dueling, specialization/chain
+23/18/13 2d6+12+12+12+4+4+3 or 54 Damage a swing, 2d6+47
Tch. You forgot the Valorous weapon. Double that number on the charge, girl!
==Aelryinth
Very nice...and an excellent example of why I say that weapon focus and specialization are utterly unnecessary. Useful...but other things may be moreso.
Those two feats are maximizing his damage.
His hit chance is 95/70/45%, for a 210% chance of damage. Without those two feats, his damage drops to 85/60/35, or 180%, costing him 12 dmg. It's going to be hard to find two feats that can give that back.
Now for diversity, yeah, they might be a problem. And they are really only good for the full attack.
==Aelryinth
|
|
Very nice...and an excellent example of why I say that weapon focus and specialization are utterly unnecessary. Useful...but other things may be moreso.Those two feats are maximizing his damage.
His hit chance is 95/70/45%, for a 210% chance of damage. Without those two feats, his damage drops to 85/60/35, or 180%, costing him 12 dmg. It's going to be hard to find two feats that can give that back.
Now for diversity, yeah, they might be a problem. And they are really only good for the full attack.
==Aelryinth
Those four feats can head up the direction of overrun...or combat expertise for a tripper or disarmer (or both)...combat reflexes to combat patrol (oooh, SO nasty)...
I don't say they're bad...just not needed...and yes, it's very possible to do a lot more damage...extra attacks at +32 makes up for 4 points per attack pretty quickly.
|
|
Very nice...and an excellent example of why I say that weapon focus and specialization are utterly unnecessary. Useful...but other things may be moreso.Those two feats are maximizing his damage.
His hit chance is 95/70/45%, for a 210% chance of damage. Without those two feats, his damage drops to 85/60/35, or 180%, costing him 12 dmg. It's going to be hard to find two feats that can give that back.
Now for diversity, yeah, they might be a problem. And they are really only good for the full attack.
==Aelryinth
Those four feats can head up the direction of overrun...or combat expertise for a tripper or disarmer (or both)...combat reflexes to combat patrol (oooh, SO nasty)...
I don't say they're bad...just not needed...and yes, it's very possible to do a lot more damage...extra attacks at +32 makes up for 4 points per attack pretty quickly.
And you have 7 feats left, so you can do both. This is what the Fighter does better than the Barb. It can be a true switch hitter without losing much for either side.
A ranger can also do this very well, thanks to not needed pre-requisites, but they don't get the armor or weapon bonuses.
Not saying the fighter couldn't use some adjustment, just pointing out it can do things.
Fighters are Heroes.
I say this, because one can look at a class in many different ways. It becomes easy to focus on something simple like mechanics; it's more difficult to look beyond that.
A fighter stands in front of the Monster and dukes it out with an impressive weapon. She, or he, rolls big damage and eventually kills the beast. Who doesn't want to roll big damage and see the foe fall, crashing to the ground in front of you?
There is some part of that that every one of us may have wanted to be part of at some time. Someone told me the other day, who was playing a caster--after seeing two fighters "duke it out" with some enemies, "I can't wait to play my fighter now!"
We want to be awesome. Casters are awesome, though there's something to be said for going toe to toe with the enemy from day one.
We have no further to look for reasons people play them than the images of the sword-heroes in popular media. The slick forms of men and women wielding a signature weapon and standing, ruggedly and baddessedly, against the oncoming foe...
That is the fighter. It is a dream of what we want to be.
Paladins can be too, which is an argument for not worrying to much and just having fun.
Isn't that what we're supposed to do?
|
|
Very nice...and an excellent example of why I say that weapon focus and specialization are utterly unnecessary. Useful...but other things may be moreso.Those two feats are maximizing his damage.
His hit chance is 95/70/45%, for a 210% chance of damage. Without those two feats, his damage drops to 85/60/35, or 180%, costing him 12 dmg. It's going to be hard to find two feats that can give that back.
Now for diversity, yeah, they might be a problem. And they are really only good for the full attack.
==Aelryinth
Those four feats can head up the direction of overrun...or combat expertise for a tripper or disarmer (or both)...combat reflexes to combat patrol (oooh, SO nasty)...
I don't say they're bad...just not needed...and yes, it's very possible to do a lot more damage...extra attacks at +32 makes up for 4 points per attack pretty quickly.
And you have 7 feats left, so you can do both. This is what the Fighter does better than the Barb. It can be a true switch hitter without losing much for either side.
A ranger can also do this very well, thanks to not needed pre-requisites, but they don't get the armor or weapon bonuses.
Not saying the fighter couldn't use some adjustment, just pointing out it can do things.
Oh, I don't think the fighter NEEDS adjustment...and I'm not saying those feats are bad...but +32 is fine.
|
|
Fighters are Heroes.
I say this, because one can look at a class in many different ways. It becomes easy to focus on something simple like mechanics; it's more difficult to look beyond that.
A fighter stands in front of the Monster and dukes it out with an impressive weapon. She, or he, rolls big damage and eventually kills the beast. Who doesn't want to roll big damage and see the foe fall, crashing to the ground in front of you?
There is some part of that that every one of us may have wanted to be part of at some time. Someone told me the other day, who was playing a caster--after seeing two fighters "duke it out" with some enemies, "I can't wait to play my fighter now!"
We want to be awesome. Casters are awesome, though there's something to be said for going toe to toe with the enemy from day one.
We have no further to look for reasons people play them than the images of the sword-heroes in popular media. The slick forms of men and women wielding a signature weapon and standing, ruggedly and baddessedly, against the oncoming foe...
That is the fighter. It is a dream of what we want to be.
Paladins can be too, which is an argument for not worrying to much and just having fun.
Isn't that what we're supposed to do?
Works for me. :)
Fighters are Heroes.
I say this, because one can look at a class in many different ways. It becomes easy to focus on something simple like mechanics; it's more difficult to look beyond that.
A fighter stands in front of the Monster and dukes it out with an impressive weapon. She, or he, rolls big damage and eventually kills the beast. Who doesn't want to roll big damage and see the foe fall, crashing to the ground in front of you?
There is some part of that that every one of us may have wanted to be part of at some time. Someone told me the other day, who was playing a caster--after seeing two fighters "duke it out" with some enemies, "I can't wait to play my fighter now!"
We want to be awesome. Casters are awesome, though there's something to be said for going toe to toe with the enemy from day one.
We have no further to look for reasons people play them than the images of the sword-heroes in popular media. The slick forms of men and women wielding a signature weapon and standing, ruggedly and baddessedly, against the oncoming foe...
That is the fighter. It is a dream of what we want to be.
Paladins can be too, which is an argument for not worrying to much and just having fun.
Isn't that what we're supposed to do?
The point. You guys are missing it so hard you're hitting Denmark. I don't even know how.
The only guys talking about casters are the fighter apologists. We're talking about the fact that nearly every other class can do something else besides combat, through skills or spells or whatever.The fighter can stand and fight. Big freaking deal. Everybody can. Nearly every hero from every legend and media is capable of doing something else besides fighting. The fighter, with his meager skill points? Not so much.
|
|
Fighters are Heroes.
I say this, because one can look at a class in many different ways. It becomes easy to focus on something simple like mechanics; it's more difficult to look beyond that.
A fighter stands in front of the Monster and dukes it out with an impressive weapon. She, or he, rolls big damage and eventually kills the beast. Who doesn't want to roll big damage and see the foe fall, crashing to the ground in front of you?
There is some part of that that every one of us may have wanted to be part of at some time. Someone told me the other day, who was playing a caster--after seeing two fighters "duke it out" with some enemies, "I can't wait to play my fighter now!"
We want to be awesome. Casters are awesome, though there's something to be said for going toe to toe with the enemy from day one.
We have no further to look for reasons people play them than the images of the sword-heroes in popular media. The slick forms of men and women wielding a signature weapon and standing, ruggedly and baddessedly, against the oncoming foe...
That is the fighter. It is a dream of what we want to be.
Paladins can be too, which is an argument for not worrying to much and just having fun.
Isn't that what we're supposed to do?
The point. You guys are missing it so hard you're hitting Denmark. I don't even know how.
The only guys talking about casters are the fighter apologists. We're talking about the fact that nearly every other class can do something else besides combat, through skills or spells or whatever.
The fighter can stand and fight. Big freaking deal. Everybody can. Nearly every hero from every legend and media is capable of doing something else besides fighting. The fighter, with his meager skill points? Not so much.
So, in other words, YOU are missing the point of the thread...and I should know. I created it.
Let us see what we can do at 12th level, as a top bar. This is off the top of my head so feel free to correct and add.
It is Level 12, so using bestiary guidelines we are going against AC 27 with 160 Hit Points
Start with 20 Str, with a +1 at 4/8/12. We are up to 23 (or 22 with one thrown to an odd number somewhere. We have 108k gold, so we can afford the 36k +6 belt so we are up to 28 or +10
So we start at +22 to hit, two handed doing +15 damage.
Power attack is -4 + 12 so we are up to +27 with +18 to hit.
Feats we have Weapon Specialization and Greater Weapon Specialization (you can take it at 12) so that is another +4, we are at 31.
We needed Weapon focus and Greater weapon focus (8th), so we are now at +20 to hit.
No weapon training is going to be another +2 to hit and damage, so +22 and +33.
And let say we can afford a +4 Weapon, so we are at +26 (hit on anything but a 1) doing +36 damage before we roll dice.
We have used 5 feats, which would be a lot if not for the fact that the fighter had 13 (14 if human) at this level.
I can still use those other 7 feats for other things, I can make sure I'm pretty good ranged, I can take some skill based feats, Iron will...with just 5 feats I'm carrying my weight for damage and I've got nearly 40k left for other stuff (or more if I just go for the +3 sword.) and I can wear heavy armor moving at full speed with 3 less ACP.
And again, this is off the top of my head.
Off the top of my head, a raging barbarian at the same level, with the same strenght and equipment, needs only Power Attack to get +21 attack and +33 damage. One feat, no rage powers. And where you lose +4 to hit +6 damage if you pick a different weapon, The barbarian loses nothing. And he still has twice more skills than you do. And by level 12 he has enough rage rounds to last enough encounters it's practically like it's always on. And he doesn't have to worry about having spent most of his money without buying armor cause he has DR.
Now THAT is freaking Hero.
So, in other words, YOU are missing the point of the thread...and I should know. I created it.Fighters are Heroes.
I say this, because one can look at a class in many different ways. It becomes easy to focus on something simple like mechanics; it's more difficult to look beyond that.
A fighter stands in front of the Monster and dukes it out with an impressive weapon. She, or he, rolls big damage and eventually kills the beast. Who doesn't want to roll big damage and see the foe fall, crashing to the ground in front of you?
There is some part of that that every one of us may have wanted to be part of at some time. Someone told me the other day, who was playing a caster--after seeing two fighters "duke it out" with some enemies, "I can't wait to play my fighter now!"
We want to be awesome. Casters are awesome, though there's something to be said for going toe to toe with the enemy from day one.
We have no further to look for reasons people play them than the images of the sword-heroes in popular media. The slick forms of men and women wielding a signature weapon and standing, ruggedly and baddessedly, against the oncoming foe...
That is the fighter. It is a dream of what we want to be.
Paladins can be too, which is an argument for not worrying to much and just having fun.
Isn't that what we're supposed to do?
The point. You guys are missing it so hard you're hitting Denmark. I don't even know how.
The only guys talking about casters are the fighter apologists. We're talking about the fact that nearly every other class can do something else besides combat, through skills or spells or whatever.
The fighter can stand and fight. Big freaking deal. Everybody can. Nearly every hero from every legend and media is capable of doing something else besides fighting. The fighter, with his meager skill points? Not so much.
You asked what fighters do. They fight. Nothing else. And they're not even the best. Barbarians are. Vide post above. And they're twice as skilled as fighters to boot.
Maybe the discontent comes from the feeling that the Fighter can be really great in certain situations, but has a harder time generalizing while still remaining great in those certain situations. Not "why can't I beat everyone at everything?!" whining but, "gee, I sure hope we don't come across x, y, z, or anything really besides a, b, and c today." Yes, Rangers and Paladins have to worry about their specific type of target, but they still have plenty they can do otherwise. Gods help the tripper who fights many- or no-legged creatures. If the problem is people specialize and thereby hose their character in most situations, I'd say that you shouldn't design any class with the potential to hose itself.
For my part, I think two more skill points, another good save (or Bravery applying to more than just fear), and the reintroduction of strikes (for all, but Fighters would likely appreciate them the most) would go a long way.
Oh, and the fourth edition blasphemy that conditions like prone, shaken, slowed, etc that you'd get through combat maneuvers apply even if it doesn't immediately make sense that an ooze can be prone. It just means you've forced it to spend a move action recombobulating itself because you pulled part of its jelly out -- jelly that would have been a leg if it had any.
|
|
You asked what fighters do. They fight. Nothing else. And they're not even the best....So, in other words, YOU are missing the point of the thread...and I should know. I created it.Fighters are Heroes.
I say this, because one can look at a class in many different ways. It becomes easy to focus on something simple like mechanics; it's more difficult to look beyond that.
A fighter stands in front of the Monster and dukes it out with an impressive weapon. She, or he, rolls big damage and eventually kills the beast. Who doesn't want to roll big damage and see the foe fall, crashing to the ground in front of you?
There is some part of that that every one of us may have wanted to be part of at some time. Someone told me the other day, who was playing a caster--after seeing two fighters "duke it out" with some enemies, "I can't wait to play my fighter now!"
We want to be awesome. Casters are awesome, though there's something to be said for going toe to toe with the enemy from day one.
We have no further to look for reasons people play them than the images of the sword-heroes in popular media. The slick forms of men and women wielding a signature weapon and standing, ruggedly and baddessedly, against the oncoming foe...
That is the fighter. It is a dream of what we want to be.
Paladins can be too, which is an argument for not worrying to much and just having fun.
Isn't that what we're supposed to do?
The point. You guys are missing it so hard you're hitting Denmark. I don't even know how.
The only guys talking about casters are the fighter apologists. We're talking about the fact that nearly every other class can do something else besides combat, through skills or spells or whatever.
The fighter can stand and fight. Big freaking deal. Everybody can. Nearly every hero from every legend and media is capable of doing something else besides fighting. The fighter, with his meager skill points? Not so much.
Yeah, you missed it.
|
|
Off the top of my head, a raging barbarian at the same level, with the same strenght and equipment, needs only Power Attack to get +21 attack and +33 damage. One feat, no rage powers. And where you lose +4 to hit +6 damage if you pick a different weapon, The barbarian loses nothing. And he still has twice more skills than you do. And by level 12 he has enough rage rounds to last enough encounters it's practically like it's always on. And he doesn't have to worry about having spent most of his money without buying armor cause he has DR.
If you wouldn't mind, post it out as I did. I think you missed a few things.
As to skills, at the same level The Figher will get -3 to ACP, which is functionally a +3 to those skills. They will get a +2 to attack and damage to one series of weapons and a +1 to another series of weapons.
They will have the same movement in heavy armor as the Barbarian in Medium armor.
And they will still have more feats remaining (7, 8 if human) than the Barbarian who took one feat as you say (5, 6 if human).
This isn't saying Barbs are bad. It is saying you are overlooking all the fighter gets.
I haven't seen much that anyone has posted that shows how a standard fighter is actually good at fighting in D&D/Pathfinder (where battle has many non-bashing facets), let alone adventuring in general (the entire point of the game). But then again I haven't actually seen this since this sort of issue was raised back in 3.5 either. It'd be nice to see some evidence from someone (anyone really) that didn't consist of things like pure anecdotal evidence of fighters with extreme point buys or heavy optimization vs poor optimization. The day will likely never come though, and I am sad for it.
But I feel there is a reason that day will never come. See, I don't use anecdotal evidence much on the forums because "I knew a guy" isn't very scientific. It's not that I haven't seen quite literally every instance of what I've said in the forums. It's just I explain those anecdotes with things like mathematics or environmental projections in an attempt to show the why and when parts of the subject.
But in a world where people brag about not reading, I guess I shouldn't really care enough to try. :(