The fighter does have a massive advantage in melee. The fighter catches up to the ranger's favored class bonus and then surpasses it, against all enemies and without spending daily use resources. At range the bonus is only 1 less as that should be the fighters second bonus. I honestly think that in the high teens fighters even surpass barbarians in damage output, while having a higher armor class.
A fighter with his best weapon has +9/+11(attack/damage), ranger has +12/12 if min maxed, and barbarian has +8 + 1/2 x enhancement bonus to strength and con(among other things. Courageous weapon quality). The fighter can theoretically have 4 more AC than any other class if he doesn't give up armor training, though many people dig the celestial plate, which requires a +6 dex mod to get the most of out and a +7 and above for the fighter to reach a higher number.(AC tends to be a dump anyway, but that's another conversation.)
A class with only bonus feats as a class feature. Truly complex and hard to understand and use.Uhh, YES. Much, much, much more complex! There are what, 200 combat feats a fighter can take? Something ridiculous like that? Lets say 100.
And there are all those classes that get access to all those feats. Commoner is pretty complex yo! Imagine how wizards feel. Or mystic Theurge. They have to pick a ton of feats and they have a bunch of spells to pick from, every day at that! At least most feats tend to be +1 or less -1's and easy to keep track of and static.
The fighter class isn't complex, but making a good one can be, and trying to shore up weaknesses can be a big part of that.
ok... so you have a stupid wall of feats, but how many of them matter? about half are trap feats (see prone shooter). Of the remaining half, one so many apply to a given fighting style. That limits is down even farther (especially since its not like they try hiding the fighting style. i.e. point blank shot for ranged, TWF for TWFers, IUS for unarmed fighters). So all in all, the choice of feats are actually pretty skimmed down. Add in that alot of feats are in easy to follow chains (Power Attack=>Cleave=>Great Cleave, ect.) so yeah... not that complex....
Furthermore bonus feats have the very curious problem that the more bonus feats you have, the less valuable each additional one is because you're naturally going to pick the best feats first.
The opposite of that. The more feats you have, the more you can pick good ones with prerequisites. Also, instead of choosing between "the good ones," you just take them all. By 10th level, a fighter has more feats than a similarly oriented paladin accumulates in their career.
But we weren't talking specifically about power anyway. MrSin made the statement that a fighter is as complex as a commoner. In fact, they are slightly more complex than a wizard.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
But we weren't talking specifically about power anyway. MrSin made the statement that a fighter is as complex as a commoner. In fact, they are slightly more complex than a wizard.
Hahahaha hahaha hahaha ha hahaha ha ha hahahahaha ha ha.
Ha.
But seriously, that's a laughable claim.
But we weren't talking specifically about power anyway. MrSin made the statement that a fighter is as complex as a commoner. In fact, they are slightly more complex than a wizard.
Wizard: Access to quite a few feats, need to choose spells every day as well as what metamagic, need to decide if today is an adventuring day or if it's time to craft items for the group or if it's time to research more magic, need to decide which of the umpteen million wands I've probably made that I take with me.
Fighter: Access to an amazing number of feats, needs to decide whether or not to bash something or shoot something in combat, has to decide what armor to wear.
The fighter is not even close to being equally complex, and never will be more so.
I like fighters, and in fact can see a lot of ways to make them work outside of combat (they have so many feats for a reason...), but even I have to admit that even when it comes to battle fighters are a pretty simplistic class.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
has to decide what armor to where.
To wear pants or not to wear pants... That is the question!
I'd highly suggest you wear pants personally.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
has to decide what armor to where.To wear pants or not to wear pants... That is the question!
I'd highly suggest you wear pants personally.
And miss out on an armored kilt? Never!
And miss out on an armored kilt? Never!has to decide what armor to where.To wear pants or not to wear pants... That is the question!
I'd highly suggest you wear pants personally.
As a compromise I shall wear both then. Cover all the bases! Besides, skirts can be quiet stylish.
As a compromise I shall wear both then. Cover all the bases! Besides, skirts can be quiet stylish.
But then you miss out on the synergy that kilts have with the acrobatics skill! Combine acrobatics with kilts and you can leave enemies stunned.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
One thing I have personally noticed, Fighters seem to be a lot more fun to build than they are to play. Figuring out the right combination of feat chains to make your character awesome and effective is a lot of fun.
Sadly, once the actual gameplay starts things get a lot less interesting. You end up with a fighter who either full attacks for damage or maybe does the one or two combat maneuvers or other tricks he's invested enough feats into to make them viable against enemies that aren't immune to them.
I hear they do nothing except try and full attack all day in combat and out of combat they dont really have the skills for anything useful (combined with the fact that almost all of their skills use dump stats for modifiers...).
And I hear that ninjas are sweet and do nothing but flip out all day and cut people's heads off with their ninja swords! Now THAT'S REAL ULTIMATE POWER!!
|
fighters are mechamically boring in game. since there is no micromanagement of powers you just do the optimal effect every round, give me swashbuckler panache or gunslinger grit any day of the week over weaker abilities you can just spam and requires little thought.
btw level dipping a couple levels of fighter does not make you a fighter. your flavor is from your main class and your build REQUIRES you to pick fighter levels
Write things down, draw a picture, go looking for awesome fight scenes from movies or anime on Yutube. Get the character in your head before you stat him up.
Problem is, the Fighter class does a piss-poor job of emulating heroes from anime. Or modern western fantasy. Or classic western fantasy. Or Inuit legends, or anything, really.
have you actually tried?The Halfling I mentioned was based on a character from an anime called My Hime. It took 10 or 12 levels or so but I managed to get him to pretty much what I wanted.
So, that's 9 or 11 levels of your character not being able to do what you envisioned him doing. Is that acceptable to you?
...
The fighter is actually at the high end of mechanical complexity. If you were going to try to teach a computer program to build characters, the fighter would be one of the most challenging classes to shop for.
....
If your computer program would find building the figther hard. I an quite sure it would find playing him easyer than every other class.
So ok if building the PC is the fun stuff? Make some Fighters. But if it is playing them go for somthing else. Is that your point?;)
|
4) between weapon training and specialization, the fighter has +7 damage on to every attack easy. Probably more like +9, then strength. Then consider that the fighter is hitting more often so can power attack safely... +7 is significant, but the fighter blows it out of the water. The DR: yup, the paladin wins. Between the flexible weapon and smite, the paladin is a DR negating machine (also, because the paladin's bonus can reach +6 with the bond, he can hit epic DR! Its the only class than can without the new epic rules, I think).
Remeber that fighters can get Penetrating Strike, ignoring 5 DR of a creature other than DR/-. Greater Penetrating Strike ignores 10, 5 of DR/-.
People who like fighters don't find them boring. Some people like to imagine themselves as a powerful, skilled weapon user. The fighter is exactly that. Some players don't like having a ton of special abilities and skills that create more busywork on their character sheet.
Some players find a character as simple and straight-forward as a fighter boring. They want more options and out of combat abilities.
The fighter class is no more inherently boring than any other class. I have a few players that find wizards and clerics boring because once they run out of spells, they don't have anything to do. They don't like sitting out of most combats waiting for an opportunity to use one of their limited spells. They like being involved in every combat. Swinging a weapon is the best way to do that.
The only reason I don't have more players playing fighters is the saves. They don't mind the fighter combat abilities. They like picking feats. They lose interest in the fighter once they start running into will save spells that take you out of combat. Charms, dominates, confusions, sleeps, fascinates, ability draings, and all other manner of debilitating spell-like and supernatural abilities that require a will saving throw. Once they're taken out of a few combats with missing will saves, the fighter class becomes boring due to a major weakness that is difficult to overcome.
Better to play a barbarian or paladin that can dish a ton of damage and not have to deal with the will save weaknesses.
The opposite of that. The more feats you have, the more you can pick good ones with prerequisites. Also, instead of choosing between "the good ones," you just take them all. By 10th level, a fighter has more feats than a similarly oriented paladin accumulates in their career.
Hmm, let's see, I could take 2 more levels of Fighter for 1 feat (and maybe +1 weapon training), or I could take 2 levels of Paladin for Smite Evil 1/day (CHA to attack rolls against one enemy until it dies, basically), Detect Evil at will, immunity to fear, lay on hands, and CHA modifier to all my saves. Or I could take 2 levels of Barbarian and get Rage, fast movement, uncanny dodge, and any 2nd level Rage Power I feel like (maybe Superstition or Reckless Abandon).
Better be one heck of a feat.
That's not to say more than 2 levels of Fighter are never useful; Sometimes in order to make a particular concept or combo work you just have to have a bajillion different feats. Concepts like that will probably be less than impressive compared to what you'd get from other classes though.
The opposite of that. The more feats you have, the more you can pick good ones with prerequisites. Also, instead of choosing between "the good ones," you just take them all. By 10th level, a fighter has more feats than a similarly oriented paladin accumulates in their career.Hmm, let's see, I could take 2 more levels of Fighter for 1 feat (and maybe +1 weapon training), or I could take 2 levels of Paladin for Smite Evil 1/day (CHA to attack rolls against one enemy until it dies, basically), Detect Evil at will, immunity to fear, lay on hands, and CHA modifier to all my saves. Or I could take 2 levels of Barbarian and get Rage, fast movement, uncanny dodge, and any 2nd level Rage Power I feel like (maybe Superstition or Reckless Abandon).
Better be one heck of a feat.
That's not to say more than 2 levels of Fighter are never useful; Sometimes in order to make a particular concept or combo work you just have to have a bajillion different feats. Concepts like that will probably be less than impressive compared to what you'd get from other classes though.
Even a 1 level dip in Alchemist is REALLY really nice. Gets you a Str Mutagen and if you have a 12 Int you get 2 standard action enlarge persons a day. Vivisectionist even gets you 1d6 sneak attack.
I generally have more fun playing a fighter or similar character over a wizard. A lot of the time my wizards end up spending a round of combat doing nothing because I don't want to waste a spell on a trivial encounter, have already cast the spell I wanted too, or don't have a useful spell prepared. Martial characters tend to constantly be working towards whatever the combat goal is, full casters tend to run into moments where they sit on the sidelines more often from my experience. Plus many spells when they flub feel like a wasted turn. At least with a martial character when I miss I either got into position or can go on getting into a better position, or move on to the next attack.
Outside of combat skills, money, or high stats can allow fighters to stay on par with casters in regards to moving the plot forward. Casters can certainly do more things but, the end is the same. Fighters are simple but feel dynamic, other classes with more options can feel more boring because they get bogged down in number games, or they spend a lot of time with prep, or the features are very binary.
Of course boring is a subjective thing. Generally I have more fun when talking is involved so any class can be fun for me, simple ones just mean I can spend less time on picking what to do, and spend more time on picking what to say.
My group has no problem with fighters. There lack of skills mean out of combat can be tricky, but it is not crippling. Fighter do not need any/many skills so the points you have can be put where you think you can have fun.
We have never found the "full casters dominate every thing/other classes are weak/boring" stuff you see a lot of on message boards. Probably playing styles have a lot to do with it. After a "GOD" wizard has sprayed battlefield control spell everywhere, someone still has to put the badies down. Fighter are just as fun to play as anything else if you like them. If you do not then they will suck for you.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The fighter class is no more inherently boring than any other class. I have a few players that find wizards and clerics boring because once they run out of spells, they don't have anything to do. They don't like sitting out of most combats waiting for an opportunity to use one of their limited spells. They like being involved in every combat. Swinging a weapon is the best way to do that.
Which, like fighters, is a case of people not actually bothering to play the character correctly.
Buy a crossbow. Light crossbow with 50 bolts of ammunition is cheap, and gives you combat capability long after you've run out of spells. Combine with a morningstar for melee in case you absolutely need it. The crossbow also allows you to save spells while still managing to deal damage.
Once you get up in levels, replace the crossbow with wands and scrolls you made. If you're carrying around five wands at full charge and a few scrolls for contingencies, you can easily keep casting long after most people would have ran out of magical power, sat down, and died.
The fighter is the same way. If you make an effort to cover your weaknesses, you can actually build a fairly decent character that will last into the upper levels.
I think Nicos and I are saying the same thing, but in different ways. What I was saying is that there are no skill essential to the fighter to function as a class (unlike spellcraft for a wizard) So they can use there 2 skill points in ways which are interesting for the player. I like to use unusual skills with fighters to add depth and help with out of combat roleplaying.
...The fighter is the utterly most mundane class in the game, even rogue can have magic.
When I play a fighter, it's because I don't want to play a spellcaster. There's always the eldritch knight for those that want to be melee-spellcasters (losing a couple BAB is a small price to pay IMO).
What I was saying is that there are no skill essential to the fighter to function as a class (unlike spellcraft for a wizard) So they can use there 2 skill points in ways which are interesting for the player.
The wizard picks up spellcraft to function (which also has some nice uses besides just making the class function). She then has between 5 to 10 or so skill points per level left to spend. That's more than the fighter. High Int also makes a lot of skills even better, whereas Str only applies to climb and swim. Which is part of the problem. While climb and swim may occasionally be useful (though eventually eclipsed by spells and magic items), they aren't really skills you can roleplay. You cannot really use bluff without roleplaying at least some. Climbing is just rolling dice. The fighter likely has to pick up cross-class skills tied to an ability score which is far from their best if she wants to use her skills for out of combat roleplay.
It shouldn't be this way. Characters shouldn't have to contort and go through loops in order to contribute out of combat. Pathfinder is a game largely centered around combat and class design got half of that right: everyone has abilities to let them contribute in combat. The problem is that the other half which should be part of that design principle---everyone having abilities that let them contribute out of combat---is missing from a lot of classes. There shouldn't be a trade-off in class abilities between being effective in combat and being effective out of combat. Fighters shouldn't have few skill points and no class abilities which help them out of combat just because they have "fight" in their name.
...The fighter is the utterly most mundane class in the game, even rogue can have magic.When I play a fighter, it's because I don't want to play a spellcaster. There's always the eldritch knight for those that want to be melee-spellcasters (losing a couple BAB is a small price to pay IMO).
The problem with the supernatural--mundane divide is that mundane abilities and classes face more restrictions than magical or supernatural abilities and classes. A mundane class getting the ability to fly is "unrealistic". Many magical classes can fly.
Really, this double standard needs to be dropped from the design philosophy of Pathfinder. It would help fix a lot of problems. While it exists however, mundane classes are losing out in comparison to magical classes, especially at higher levels. You shouldn't have to play a magical class to be able to do fun and effective things.
Take a look at mythic adventures.
Take a look at mythic adventures.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The fighter is the utterly most mundane class in the game, even rogue can have magic.All the other classes need the crutch of magic or supernatural abilities. The fighter manages perfectly well without any of that just by being a complete f--king badass.
Man this would be awesome if it were true.
Thing is, a Fighter absolutely needs magic in order to do his job. Try playing a high level fighter without magic gear to fix the classes' issues. Or y'know, try to hit an incorporeal creature.
I would LOVE if the Fighter ignored the needs of magic or supernatural abilities through extraordinary means at higher levels. But he doesn't. He needs that Wizard to cast fly on him, give him a magic sword, or tie up the enemy so he can actually do his thing.
The only time Mundane characters shine is when they combat other mundane things.
The fighter is the utterly most mundane class in the game, even rogue can have magic.All the other classes need the crutch of magic or supernatural abilities. The fighter manages perfectly well without any of that just by being a complete f--king badass.
I thought that was the barbarians job?
I like magicalt thigns to be magical and mundane ones to be mundane, something will be wron to me if the fighter suddenly is flying and teleporting.
The fighter isn't flying. She's just being so f&+$ing badass that she can walk on the air. Have you never seen a wuxia film?
I like magicalt thigns to be magical and mundane ones to be mundane, something will be wron to me if the fighter suddenly is flying and teleporting.The fighter isn't flying. She's just being so f+~#ing badass that she can walk on the air. Have you never seen a wuxia film?
Real men don't fly. They kick the air so hard they can jump off it! They conquered the air and when they say move the air listens!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The fighter, at 16th level, with a Fighter only magic item, and blowing 4 of his 11 feats, can get +8/+10 with a single weapon, and +6/+6 with his best weapon group (largely irrelevant). With his second weapon group, he's +5/+5...considerably worse. With his third, +4/+4, etc. With something not in one of his weapon groups, he has no bonuses whatsoever and is no better then a warrior.
The ranger, at that level, can get +8/+8 with any weapon, against any foe, using melee or missile, using one spell. So if it's at range, he's fine. And we haven't gotten into lead blades/gravity bow increasing damage dice.
And yes, it applies to any weapon he can get his hands on.
The paladin can increase his weapon to +5 on demand, make it brilliant, or add Holy/Axiomatic to it for +7 damage per buff, as he likes. And he can smite for +cha/+level on top of all that, for when it's important.
And yes, it applies to any weapons he can get his hands on.
The barbarian seems to fall behind with only +6 on Str...until he uses a rage power to increase it to +8, and then has a Furious/Courageous weapon, for effectively +12 to Str and +2/+2...or +8/+8. Oh, hey, don't forget he can take weapon focus, and if it's a 2h weapon, that's +8/+11.
Furious and Courageous are weapon enhancements, but he's +6/+6 with any melee weapon, and gets the damage on any missile weapon.
I agree on the paladin's weapon bond...which actually makes it even stronger. Once a day for 5 minutes at a time, then 4 times a day for 16 minutes at a time later...it stacks in duration, power, and frequency. How is that not awesome? And the fact remains that it's a perfectly viable move for fighting Neutral creatures, and it's yet one more buff into awesome sauce for taking down the important bad guys. And let's not forget some of the Litany stuff going off at the same time for yet more buffs to hit and damage, shall we?
Anyone can take Penetrating Strike, it's not a fighter exclusive feat. It's noteworthy that nobody bothers to, since they'd rather have the right weapon to punch all DR at higher levels then blow two feats on something that will be useless later on.
The fighter is as good against the minion as he is against the boss...except when he can't use his best weapon against the boss, in which case he takes a sharp tick down.
The ranger is excellent against the minion and awesome against the boss, and may or may not have to spend resources to be that way.
The barbarian is excellent against the minions and awesome against the boss. He just needs to manage his rage rounds to be uber.
The paladin is excellent and situationally awesome against minions, and definitely awesome against the boss to an almost ridiculous extent...and can use group smite to make everyone else awesome against the boss as well.
The fighter is only good if you're figuring his favorite weapon and being able to use it. Outside of that narrow niche, he has definite problems.
==Aelryinth
Another beef I have with the fighter...he's the only PC melee class that doesn't get a buff at level 1.
Fighters rage.
Rangers get a FE.
Paladin can still smite.
Barbs can still rage.
Fighters...don't get weapon spec or groups until later levels.
==Aelryinth
A 20th level commoner has ten feats. A 20th level fighter gains eleven bonus feats. You made the claim that a fighter was as mechanically complex as a commoner. That is not true.The fighter as is about as interesting as a commoner mechanically.They can go very deep into feat chains. Strictly from a mechanics standpoint, they are one of the most complex classes in the game.So can commoners. Commoners are really amazing actually, you can do whatever you want with them! They're a blank slate. I mean, at worst you won't reach the BAB for some of them, but if you wanted that you should've played a warrior.
I'm fairly certain the word used was "interesting", not "complex".
Complexity is not something directly good. Rather I'd say complexity is generally a drawback. Depth is good however, but depth is not synonymous with interesting either.
Being able to use any weapon is nice. But generally every character I have ever seen focused on a few weapons at most to upgrade and specialize in. I mean unless you constantly lose your weapon, or run into better ones all the time why would you be switching weapons so often. The weapons you invested in should be better than almost everything you find once you have got your second weapon focus.
The paladin and ranger can have better attack and damage than a fighter. That said the ranger relies heavily on favoured enemy which is very situational and instant enemy which can be interrupted, counter spelled, and so on. Plus if you run across a foe that is one of your lesser picks you are stuck with the lower bonuses. Even smite can be denied by that armor enchantment, hidden, or non evil foes.
I wonder if this thread will run into builds, cause I totally disagree about the irrelevance of that +6/+6 to the point that I want to build a fighter without WF and WS to see what happenms at level 16.
I think the point was that mostly you will use your primary weapon (say Longsword) where you have +8/+10, so the +6/+6 to other kinds of swords is largely irrelevant. It'd mostly be useful for the more niche builds, like two-handed shield bashers which can use the Weapon Training (Close) for stuff like Armor Spikes and Wushu Darts. So, a benefit, but a quite niche or minor one.