Oh no LOW level spells. The things that even monks fail saves to at the levels those things are common.Paralize person, slow, confusion, suggestion, glitterdust, etc come to my mind.Well the first 3 are generally fort saves, the last one is mitigated by blind-fight and is normally a fort save.As a fighter you r main contribution in a fight is to kill things.
If you are stuned, paralized, staggered, blinded you are not killing things.
Except that even at mid levels the fighter is STILL failing saves vs hold person...
Whether its boring and whether the flavor text is correct don't actually correlate with one another.Then I'll reiterate. If the class description doesn't do it for you, then the fighter is not for you. That is not a problem with the fighter or their flavor.None of that shows how the mechanics fail to deliver on the flavor.Okay, but there's probably a reason for that. Like me not trying to do that.
I never had a problem with the flavor, but I always did with what it delivered. Its just... numbers. Boring.Not interested in arguing flavor text. Doesn't actually talk about whether a class is boring or not. Its really another discussion altogether. Do I think they could be less boring? Oh yeah, definitely. In a number of ways.
If the flavor text is not boring and the mechanics fit the flavor text, then the class isn't boring.
If the mechanics bore you, but fit the flavor text, then you find the flavor boring. Perhaps "Lord of Battle" is not your cup of tea.
So low level spell can take the wis 8 fighter
I don't recommend wis 8 fighters for anyone except half-elf fighter enthusiast (which in retrospect could take skill focus intimidate and drop cha a little instead).
Hard to be a lord of battle when you're babbling incoherently because you failed a save versus confusion.
Oh no LOW level spells. The things that even monks fail saves to at the levels those things are common.Except that even at mid levels the fighter is STILL failing saves vs hold person...
Oh boo hoo. Casters can CC the fighter. Well that's a good thing, because if they didn't the fight would be over after round 2.
Just play an Dwarf Fighter (Unbreakable) if you want to resist spells better. Getting endurance, diehard, and steel soul at first level pretty much sets you up for being a very durable fighter. If that is not enough just take two traits for your will save and fort save.
With an array like:
STR 16, DEX 14, CON 14, INT 12, WIS 14, CHA 7
and saves like:
FORT +5, REF +2, WILL +3 (+4 Vs Spells and Spell-Like Abilities)
Plus with 12 INT you still have 5 skill points without having to cannibalize your wisdom score.
At 2nd level and every four their after an unbreakable fighter gets a +1 bonus to will saves up to a maximum of +5 at Level 18. At Level 20 they become immune to mind-affecting effects.
Hard to be a lord of battle when you're babbling incoherently because you failed a save versus confusion.
01–25 Act normally
26–50 Do nothing but babble incoherently51–75 Deal 1d8 points of damage + Str modifier to self with item in hand
76–100 Attack nearest creature (for this purpose, a familiar counts as part of the subject's self)
and your not nearly as intimidating as the giant raging monstrosity that is literally cleaving spells (which would have some DRASTIC effects on morale since spells are often viewed as the awesome and strong defenses that protect from everything in the mind of the simple soldier).
Mechanically, the fighter is no more inspiring than a magus. Heck, he is less inspiring than a Barb or Paladin because he has NOTHING special about him. The effect of seeing a hulking, raging barbarian smashing through forces, or the paladin glowing with rightous light has a much stronger effect on morale than anything.
If the flavor text is not boring and the mechanics fit the flavor text, then the class isn't boring.
If the mechanics bore you, but fit the flavor text, then you find the flavor boring. Perhaps "Lord of Battle" is not your cup of tea.
That's not how that works.
** spoiler omitted **
The problem I have with that is the low cha. It's fine if you want to play Gimli though.
And monsters? And you are jumping to "fighter make their saves" to "is good that fighter failed their saves".Oh boo hoo. Casters can CC the fighter. Well that's a good thing, because if they didn't the fight would be over after round 2.Oh no LOW level spells. The things that even monks fail saves to at the levels those things are common.Except that even at mid levels the fighter is STILL failing saves vs hold person...
Key word was CAN. Monster SLAs tend to have lower DCs than caster BBEGS.
Fighters are the purest form of military might outside of the Warrior npc class. The class was made to fill out all possibilities of a military outfit.
In a world with magic, you're going to want magic users in your military. Divination spells for intelligence, magical healing for obvious reasons, evocation spells for obvious reasons, illusions for misdirection, necromancy and summoning to enlarge your army, etc.
So what's the relevance of military might to fighters?
Hard to be a lord of battle when you're babbling incoherently because you failed a save versus confusion.01–25 Act normally
26–50 Do nothing but babble incoherently
51–75 Deal 1d8 points of damage + Str modifier to self with item in hand
76–100 Attack nearest creature (for this purpose, a familiar counts as part of the subject's self)
So your point is that instead of babbling incoherently, the fighter might be hitting herself or her allies with her axe? So lord. Such battle.
and your not nearly as intimidating as the giant raging monstrosity that is literally cleaving spells (which would have some DRASTIC effects on morale since spells are often viewed as the awesome and strong defenses that protect from everything in the mind of the simple soldier).
Mechanically, the fighter is no more inspiring than a magus. Heck, he is less inspiring than a Barb or Paladin because he has NOTHING special about him. The effect of seeing a hulking, raging barbarian smashing through forces, or the paladin glowing with rightous light has a much stronger effect on morale than anything.
Only if the barbar also took intimidating prowess and didn't dump Cha too much.
The fighter is special because of his skills with weapons and armor and sheer number of feats. That's all they need to be special.
Fighters are the purest form of military might outside of the Warrior npc class. The class was made to fill out all possibilities of a military outfit.In a world with magic, you're going to want magic users in your military. Divination spells for intelligence, magical healing for obvious reasons, evocation spells for obvious reasons, illusions for misdirection, necromancy and summoning to enlarge your army, etc.
So what's the relevance of military might to fighters?
So your point is that instead of babbling incoherently, the fighter might be hitting herself or her allies with her axe? So lord. Such battle.Hard to be a lord of battle when you're babbling incoherently because you failed a save versus confusion.01–25 Act normally
26–50 Do nothing but babble incoherently
51–75 Deal 1d8 points of damage + Str modifier to self with item in hand
76–100 Attack nearest creature (for this purpose, a familiar counts as part of the subject's self)
After reading the "How does my wizard kill a dragon thread" you really begin to see the utility in being able to buff up the fighter and letting him go on a rampage.
That's not how that works.If the flavor text is not boring and the mechanics fit the flavor text, then the class isn't boring.
If the mechanics bore you, but fit the flavor text, then you find the flavor boring. Perhaps "Lord of Battle" is not your cup of tea.
Do let me inside your mind. Here is what I am seeing from you.
I like the idea of being a Lord of Battle.
I feel like the mechanics of the fighter fit this (assumed)
I find the mechanics boring, so that even though I am a Lord of Battle, I do it in such a way as too bore me.
To which I would respond with
1 |
Toughness, Intimidating Prowess
Combat Reflexes
2 |Bravery
Power Attack
3 |Armor training
Cleave
4 |
Great Cleave
5 |Weapon training(Blades, Heavy)
Blind-Fight
6 |Bravery
Lunge
7 |Armor training
Iron Will
8 |
Quick Draw
9 |Weapon training(Bows)
Point-Blank Shot
10|Bravery
Rapid Shot
11|Armor training
Deadly Aim
12|
Far Shot
13|Weapon training(Spears)
Leadership
14|Bravery
Mounted Combat
15|Armor training
Mounted Archery
16|
Ride-By Attack
17|Weapon training(Close)
Spirited Charge
18|Bravery
Trample
19|Armor mastery
Improved Iron Will
20|weapon mastery(GS)
Improved Critical(GS)
Mythic Feats: Power Attack, Rapid Shot, Mounted Combat, Toughness, Deadly Aim
Mythic Path Abilities: Longevity, Impossible Speed, Fleet Warrior, Precision, Precision, Precision, Limitless Range, Crusader, Shatter Spells, Farwalker
After reading the "How does my wizard kill a dragon thread" you really begin to see the utility in being able to buff up the fighter and letting him go on a rampage.
So you're saying fighters are effective if everyone else blows a bunch of spell slots to buff them?
I can see why fighters are "capable of taming kingdoms, slaughtering monsters, and rousing the hearts of armies". If I were the hearts of an army and I saw the fighter kill a dragon because the cleric and wizard each spent a half-dozen spell slots buffing the fighter (and debuffing the dragon...), I would be so roused.
and your not nearly as intimidating as the giant raging monstrosity that is literally cleaving spells (which would have some DRASTIC effects on morale since spells are often viewed as the awesome and strong defenses that protect from everything in the mind of the simple soldier).
Mechanically, the fighter is no more inspiring than a magus. Heck, he is less inspiring than a Barb or Paladin because he has NOTHING special about him. The effect of seeing a hulking, raging barbarian smashing through forces, or the paladin glowing with rightous light has a much stronger effect on morale than anything.
Only if the barbar also took intimidating prowess and didn't dump Cha too much.
The fighter is special because of his skills with weapons and armor and sheer number of feats. That's all they need to be special.
Except his ability with swords and armor have little effect on morale. He is pretty good, ok. But even he can be laid low for the same things that effect all the other mundane soldiers.
After reading the "How does my wizard kill a dragon thread" you really begin to see the utility in being able to buff up the fighter and letting him go on a rampage.So you're saying fighters are effective if everyone else blows a bunch of spell slots to buff them?
I can see why fighters are "capable of taming kingdoms, slaughtering monsters, and rousing the hearts of armies". If I were the hearts of an army and I saw the fighter kill a dragon because the cleric and wizard each spent a half-dozen spell slots buffing the fighter (and debuffing the dragon...), I would be so roused.
See as the fighter, you're the one that actually does the killing. For people who see this as "clean up work" that's there prerogative.
Except his ability with swords and armor have little effect on morale. He is pretty good, ok. But even he can be laid low for the same things that effect all the other mundane soldiers.and your not nearly as intimidating as the giant raging monstrosity that is literally cleaving spells (which would have some DRASTIC effects on morale since spells are often viewed as the awesome and strong defenses that protect from everything in the mind of the simple soldier).
Mechanically, the fighter is no more inspiring than a magus. Heck, he is less inspiring than a Barb or Paladin because he has NOTHING special about him. The effect of seeing a hulking, raging barbarian smashing through forces, or the paladin glowing with rightous light has a much stronger effect on morale than anything.
Only if the barbar also took intimidating prowess and didn't dump Cha too much.
The fighter is special because of his skills with weapons and armor and sheer number of feats. That's all they need to be special.
Nothing in the fighter description talks about morale. As the fighter you tend to kill the big bad eating up the army, which in turn can be morale boosting.
Nothing in the fighter description talks about morale. As the fighter you tend to kill the big bad eating up the army, which in turn can be morale boosting.Except his ability with swords and armor have little effect on morale. He is pretty good, ok. But even he can be laid low for the same things that effect all the other mundane soldiers.and your not nearly as intimidating as the giant raging monstrosity that is literally cleaving spells (which would have some DRASTIC effects on morale since spells are often viewed as the awesome and strong defenses that protect from everything in the mind of the simple soldier).
Mechanically, the fighter is no more inspiring than a magus. Heck, he is less inspiring than a Barb or Paladin because he has NOTHING special about him. The effect of seeing a hulking, raging barbarian smashing through forces, or the paladin glowing with rightous light has a much stronger effect on morale than anything.
Only if the barbar also took intimidating prowess and didn't dump Cha too much.
The fighter is special because of his skills with weapons and armor and sheer number of feats. That's all they need to be special.
Only because the others give you the role to do it. If there was one big bad evil guy targetting a city or something, a few high level wizards (or a wizard and cleric) would clear it up jsut as well. And the fighter is worse at clearing away that evil dragon than say a Paladin (who can rouse his allies hearts agains the fear aura of the dragon) or the Barb (who will just rip him to shreds faster than you can Peanut Butter)
That's not how that works.If the flavor text is not boring and the mechanics fit the flavor text, then the class isn't boring.
If the mechanics bore you, but fit the flavor text, then you find the flavor boring. Perhaps "Lord of Battle" is not your cup of tea.
Do let me inside your mind. Here is what I am seeing from you.
I like the idea of being a Lord of Battle.
I feel like the mechanics of the fighter fit this (assumed)
I find the mechanics boring, so that even though I am a Lord of Battle, I do it in such a way as too bore me.
Right, I like the idea of being a lord of battle, but I also think the fighter is boring. I also think you could make a more fun lord of battle. I can make a really sexy slogan or sales pitch, the product can fit that in lots of ways too! Doesn't make the product sexy. Like your build! Its still boring to me even if you think its a lord of battle. Its still a guy who's options are "I full attack!" which I think is boring and monotonous. I also think lord of battle is vague enough you could make a more interesting lord of battle, and easily so. One with things like options and battle tactics and the ability to do more of what the description says they can do.
Again, nothing about the description saves the fighter from being boring mechanically or not. Its those mechanics that define it, not the flavor text.
Only because the others give you the role to do it. If there was one big bad evil guy targetting a city or something, a few high level wizards (or a wizard and cleric) would clear it up jsut as well. And the fighter is worse at clearing away that evil dragon than say a Paladin (who can rouse his allies hearts agains the fear aura of the dragon) or the Barb (who will just rip him to shreds faster than you can Peanut Butter)Nothing in the fighter description talks about morale. As the fighter you tend to kill the big bad eating up the army, which in turn can be morale boosting.Except his ability with swords and armor have little effect on morale. He is pretty good, ok. But even he can be laid low for the same things that effect all the other mundane soldiers.and your not nearly as intimidating as the giant raging monstrosity that is literally cleaving spells (which would have some DRASTIC effects on morale since spells are often viewed as the awesome and strong defenses that protect from everything in the mind of the simple soldier).
Mechanically, the fighter is no more inspiring than a magus. Heck, he is less inspiring than a Barb or Paladin because he has NOTHING special about him. The effect of seeing a hulking, raging barbarian smashing through forces, or the paladin glowing with rightous light has a much stronger effect on morale than anything.
Only if the barbar also took intimidating prowess and didn't dump Cha too much.
The fighter is special because of his skills with weapons and armor and sheer number of feats. That's all they need to be special.
Look after playing a rogue my standard of "Good Class" is now "playable and works as advertised". Paladins have their RP restrictions and barbarians are wonky with there superstition problem (too good not to take, makes you kind'of a loner). Neither class sits particularly well for me when it comes to playing the game in an actual group.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
See as the fighter, you're the one that actually does the killing. For people who see this as "clean up work" that's there prerogative.
That's what I'm saying. The hearts of armies hear about the flashy bit of killing the dragon. They don't hear about the divinations cast to find the dragon. Or the teleport spell used to get to the dragon's general vicinity. Or the diplomacizing to convince the local villagers to talk about their dragon overlord who demands tribute. Or the raise dead spell used on the fighter when the first attempt to kill the dragon failed. Or the hide from undead spell used to get past the zombie hydra guarding the secret entrance to the dragon's cave. The hearts of armies don't hear about the baleful polymorph that turned a kobold sorcerer into an adorable kitten. They don't hear about the plane shift spells cast to retrieve the fighter after she failed a save versus the violet part of a prismatic spray. They don't hear about the dispel magic used to remove the insanity from the blue part (an 8 followed by a 6 and a 7 is quite nasty). They don't hear about the rope trick cast to ensure a safe night's rest. They don't hear about the buffs cast on the fighter and the debuffs cast on the dragon. They don't hear about the wall of force that blocked a legion of kobolds from coming to the dragon's defense. They don't hear about the greater forbid action that stopped the kobolds already in the dragon's throne room from attacking.
The hearts of armies do hear about the bard performing to give the fighter a boost, but that's only because they heard about the whole story from said bard.
Look after playing a rogue my standard of "Good Class" is now "playable and works as advertised". Paladins have their RP restrictions and barbarians are wonky with there superstition problem (too good not to take, makes you kind'of a loner). Neither class sits particularly well for me when it comes to playing...
That explains quite a lot - we're evaluating the fighter with different standards. The fighter does "work as advertised" in that he's a fighter, he fights, the fighter is a competent combatant.
That doesn't keep it from being underwhelming both in and out of combat compared to the other classes.
That's not how that works.If the flavor text is not boring and the mechanics fit the flavor text, then the class isn't boring.
If the mechanics bore you, but fit the flavor text, then you find the flavor boring. Perhaps "Lord of Battle" is not your cup of tea.
Do let me inside your mind. Here is what I am seeing from you.
I like the idea of being a Lord of Battle.
I feel like the mechanics of the fighter fit this (assumed)
I find the mechanics boring, so that even though I am a Lord of Battle, I do it in such a way as too bore me.Right, I like the idea of being a lord of battle, but I also think the fighter is boring. I also think you could make a more fun lord of battle. I can make a really sexy slogan or sales pitch, the product can fit that in lots of ways too! Doesn't make the product sexy. Like your build! Its still boring to me even if you think its a lord of battle. Its still a guy who's options are "I full attack!" which I think is boring and monotonous. I also think lord of battle is vague enough you could make a more interesting lord of battle, and easily so. One with things like options and battle tactics and the ability to do more of what the description says they can do.
Again, nothing about the description saves the fighter from being boring mechanically or not. Its those mechanics that define it, not the flavor text.
"I full attack" is the motto of all martials. If you say "well the barbar rages and the paladin can smite" that is still basically "I full attack". That's pretty much what every non-caster does. Fighters at least can be like "I cleave", "I lunge", "I have combat reflexes", "Power attack!", "Rapid shot", "Deadly Aim","Spirited Charge", "Trample", "Quick draw!".
You're a viable character after weapon training. It's up to your feat selection to make yourself feel interested.
The hearts of armies do hear about the bard performing to give the fighter a boost, but that's only because they heard about the whole story from said bard.
:)
This is why I'm of the camp that casters are mainly support.
That doesn't keep it from being underwhelming both in and out of combat compared to the other classes.
Eeeeh. I find that in our actual campaign we are wishing someone played a fighter.
That's not how that works.If the flavor text is not boring and the mechanics fit the flavor text, then the class isn't boring.
If the mechanics bore you, but fit the flavor text, then you find the flavor boring. Perhaps "Lord of Battle" is not your cup of tea.
Do let me inside your mind. Here is what I am seeing from you.
I like the idea of being a Lord of Battle.
I feel like the mechanics of the fighter fit this (assumed)
I find the mechanics boring, so that even though I am a Lord of Battle, I do it in such a way as too bore me.Right, I like the idea of being a lord of battle, but I also think the fighter is boring. I also think you could make a more fun lord of battle. I can make a really sexy slogan or sales pitch, the product can fit that in lots of ways too! Doesn't make the product sexy. Like your build! Its still boring to me even if you think its a lord of battle. Its still a guy who's options are "I full attack!" which I think is boring and monotonous. I also think lord of battle is vague enough you could make a more interesting lord of battle, and easily so. One with things like options and battle tactics and the ability to do more of what the description says they can do.
Again, nothing about the description saves the fighter from being boring mechanically or not. Its those mechanics that define it, not the flavor text.
"I full attack" is the motto of all martials. If you say "well the barbar rages and the paladin can smite" that is still basically "I full attack". That's pretty much what every non-caster does. Fighters at least can be like "I cleave", "I lunge", "I have combat reflexes", "Power attack!", "Rapid shot", "Deadly Aim","Spirited Charge", "Trample", "Quick draw!".
You're a viable character after weapon training. It's up to your feat selection to make yourself feel interested.
How are ya trampling?
EVERY melee tends to get power attack so that point is moot.
Combat Reflexes is not limited to fighters at all (oh and CAGM barb has it too...)
Rapid Shot is again... not limited to fighters (any ranged martial has it...)
Deadly Aim is power attack for range guys... so again nothing new.
Spirited CHarge is better with the Cavalier...
So again... what can the fighter do that everyone can't again?
"I full attack" is the motto of all martials. If you say "well the barbar rages and the paladin can smite" that is still basically "I full attack". That's pretty much what every non-caster does. Fighters at least can be like "I cleave", "I lunge", "I have combat reflexes", "Power attack!", "Rapid shot", "Deadly Aim","Spirited Charge", "Trample", "Quick draw!".
Fighters have all those feats yeah, but so does everyone else...
Anyways, I have a low opinion of all martials for that exact reason actually. However some are more interesting than others. Fighters are at the bottom, few skill points and all they get is feats and nearly every single one is one that another person can get. My paladin is probably going to take full attack, but he also has the option to cast lay on hands, cast spells, etc. My ranger also gets a bond, spells, etc. My barbarian also gets whatever rage powers I wanted to take with him and a number of those give options. My wizard gets a ton of spells to choose from and can one round encounters and problems and can do all sorts of crazy tricks he changes on the day to day. My 3.5 warblade smashes through walls with ease, has a once per round super save ability, and uses maneuvers for all sorts of crazy things and he can still full attack when I want/need to.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
How are ya trampling?
EVERY melee tends to get power attack so that point is moot.
Combat Reflexes is not limited to fighters at all (oh and CAGM barb has it too...)
Rapid Shot is again... not limited to fighters (any ranged martial has it...)
Deadly Aim is power attack for range guys... so again nothing new.
Spirited CHarge is better with the Cavalier...
So again... what can the fighter do that everyone can't again?
The fighter does it all at once, while everyone else has to choose between 1-2 combat styles.
"I full attack" is the motto of all martials. If you say "well the barbar rages and the paladin can smite" that is still basically "I full attack". That's pretty much what every non-caster does. Fighters at least can be like "I cleave", "I lunge", "I have combat reflexes", "Power attack!", "Rapid shot", "Deadly Aim","Spirited Charge", "Trample", "Quick draw!".Fighters have all those feats yeah, but so does everyone else...
Not at the same time they don't.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So again... what can the fighter do that everyone can't again?
The fighter can get buffed by the spellcasters in the party!
Oh wait, everyone can do that.
The fighter does it all at once, while everyone else has to choose between 1-2 combat styles.How are ya trampling?
EVERY melee tends to get power attack so that point is moot.
Combat Reflexes is not limited to fighters at all (oh and CAGM barb has it too...)
Rapid Shot is again... not limited to fighters (any ranged martial has it...)
Deadly Aim is power attack for range guys... so again nothing new.
Spirited CHarge is better with the Cavalier...
So again... what can the fighter do that everyone can't again?
the fighter is gonna be piss poor at everything...
Not at the same time they don't."I full attack" is the motto of all martials. If you say "well the barbar rages and the paladin can smite" that is still basically "I full attack". That's pretty much what every non-caster does. Fighters at least can be like "I cleave", "I lunge", "I have combat reflexes", "Power attack!", "Rapid shot", "Deadly Aim","Spirited Charge", "Trample", "Quick draw!".Fighters have all those feats yeah, but so does everyone else...
Right, but how does that solve their problem of "I full attack!"? How does that make them fun and interesting? Usually you don't even need that many feats too.
Anyways, I have a low opinion of all martials for that exact reason actually. However some are more interesting than others. Fighters are at the bottom, few skill points and all they get is feats and nearly every single one is one that another person can get. My paladin is probably going to take full attack, but he also has the option to cast lay on hands, cast spells, etc. My ranger also gets a bond, spells, etc. My barbarian also gets whatever rage powers I wanted to take with him and a number of those give options. My wizard gets a ton of spells to choose from and can one round encounters and problems and can do all sorts of crazy tricks he changes on the day to day. My 3.5 warblade smashes through walls with ease, has a once per round super save ability, and uses maneuvers for all sorts of crazy things and he can still full attack when I want/need to.
And for those of us who find the ranger too squishy, the barbar too cheezy (RAGELANCEPOUNCE), and paladin RP restrictions to be unpalatable, the fighters simple but elegant class design is great!
The fighter does it all at once, while everyone else has to choose between 1-2 combat styles.If they do it all at once, including the mounted combat thing, they are sucking.
Nope. Not true
The fighter does it all at once, while everyone else has to choose between 1-2 combat styles.the fighter is gonna be piss poor at everything...
You really under-estimate weapon training. You're already the at the top of melee combat with power attack and weapon training(heavy blades) as your first group.
At which point you have 21 other feats to use.
Anyways, I have a low opinion of all martials for that exact reason actually. However some are more interesting than others. Fighters are at the bottom, few skill points and all they get is feats and nearly every single one is one that another person can get. My paladin is probably going to take full attack, but he also has the option to cast lay on hands, cast spells, etc. My ranger also gets a bond, spells, etc. My barbarian also gets whatever rage powers I wanted to take with him and a number of those give options. My wizard gets a ton of spells to choose from and can one round encounters and problems and can do all sorts of crazy tricks he changes on the day to day. My 3.5 warblade smashes through walls with ease, has a once per round super save ability, and uses maneuvers for all sorts of crazy things and he can still full attack when I want/need to.And for those of us who find the ranger too squishy, the barbar too cheezy (RAGELANCEPOUNCE), and paladin RP restrictions to be unpalatable, the fighters simple but elegant class design is great!
Then don't build a RAGELANCEPOUNCE barb... funny thing about the barb, almost ALL his rage powers are pretty good.
*Huff*
It still comes down to a matter of personal taste when playing a Fighter. If you find it boring, then its not for you. Not everyone likes the cleric, not everyone wants to be a wizard, not everyone wants to be a savage-brute called barbarian, etc, etc, etc.
I personally find classes like Shaman, Wizard, and Cleric to be fairly boring class, but that is my own personal taste. If their is an evil me from a parallel universe, his thoughts would be the opposite in that he found classes like the Fighter, Paladin, or Barbarian to be quite frankly boring.
And for those of us who find the ranger too squishy, the barbar too cheezy (RAGELANCEPOUNCE), and paladin RP restrictions to be unpalatable, the fighters simple but elegant class design is great!
They are only as cheezy and Squishy as you make of them.
Still doesn't tell me how the fighters aren't boring either.
Then don't build a RAGELANCEPOUNCE barb... funny thing about the barb, almost ALL his rage powers are pretty good.
There's a lot of good rage powers, more than enough to build several distinct and interesting barbarians. But there's also a lot of bad options. Low-light vision (but only when raging)? Getting a single extra attack of opportunity per round? Raging swimmer? Healing a few d8 + Con as a standard action in the middle of rage (but only once per day)? I think it's a bit much to say almost all rage powers are pretty good.
The fighter does it all at once, while everyone else has to choose between 1-2 combat styles.the fighter is gonna be piss poor at everything...You really under-estimate weapon training. You're already the at the top of melee combat with power attack and weapon training(heavy blades) as your first group.
At which point you have 21 other feats to use.
Really? Weapon training will give you a +4 by lvl 19. A raging barb will get +6 Str at lvl 11 (or +8 at lvl 20) which will give him a +3(+4) bonus to hit and damage (more if using a 2 hander). Additionally, the barbarian gets this with EVERY MELEE WEAPON HE WIELDS, where as the fighter will only get teh +4 TO ONE WEAPON GROUP. This actually puts the barbarian ABOVE the fighter in regards to bonus in melee. Also, the Barb pretty much have Bravery+ as well. The Will bonus at lvl 20 for the barb is +4 to ALL will saves where as the Fighter will only get a +5 to saves vs fear effects. Armor training is nice, but with DR/- and a larger HD and the built in Con buff (at lvl 20 getting +8 con is 80 free HP right there) gives the barb plenty of defense (especially if you build a CAGM type barb where you will kill them before they can really hit you anyway).
As for the feats, that is a poor comparison to the barb also. It is kinda telling when alot of barbs use their feats for EXTRA RAGE POWERS.
Then don't build a RAGELANCEPOUNCE barb... funny thing about the barb, almost ALL his rage powers are pretty good.There's a lot of good rage powers, more than enough to build several distinct and interesting barbarians. But there's also a lot of bad options. Low-light vision (but only when raging)? Getting a single extra attack of opportunity per round? Raging swimmer? Healing a few d8 + Con as a standard action in the middle of rage (but only once per day)? I think it's a bit much to say almost all rage powers are pretty good.
I forgot about hte low-light vision one xD. Ok, it was an exaggeration xD but there are PLENTY of very good ones to make many different distinct builds.
I forgot about hte low-light vision one xD. Ok, it was an exaggeration xD but there are PLENTY of very good ones to make many different distinct builds.
I'd forgotten about it too. Raging swimmer is usually what pops to my mind when useless rage powers are mentioned. I only saw the low-light vision one because I opened up my CRB to see what there was.
It still comes down to a matter of personal taste when playing a Fighter. If you find it boring, then its not for you. Not everyone likes the cleric, not everyone wants to be a wizard, not everyone wants to be a savage-brute called barbarian, etc, etc, etc.
I personally find classes like Shaman, Wizard, and Cleric to be fairly boring class, but that is my own personal taste. If their is an evil me from a parallel universe, his thoughts would be the opposite in that he found classes like the Fighter, Paladin, or Barbarian to be quite frankly boring.
I don't think you should paint it as a caster versus martial thing. Most of this thread has been comparing the fighter to other martial classes, not to casters. Further, it's mostly been about flavor, not fluff. The complaint is that mechanically, fighters don't have enough to do. No amount of flavor can fix that.