| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
If all you're interested in is people agreeing with you, then by all means. In the meantime, I'm not interested in playing DBZ-style martials (not to say there's anything wrong with DBZ).
You do seem to be interested in a game where martials are just sidekicks to the casters. That's fine if it suits your taste.
However I wouldn't mind if a martial were at least on the same playing field rather than a few divisions lower at high level. I've played enough high level stuff to know that while yes, martials do get to run up and hit things hard, they do it in a context in which they rely on magical buffs to be relevant, and magical controls so the enemies are rendered into fluff, not to mention the magic which heals their booboos and removes the status effects rendering them into putty.
I generally don't like to run casters because I've got a pretty high level of system mastery, and honestly with a full caster at high level, breaking the game is much easier than trying not to.
I don't think anyone is saying they want to be able to fly and shoot energy beams or have glowing blond hair.
They just want to be able to do amazing things. When the wizard sends his fireball why can't the fighter cut it in half and have the swirling inferno form around him? Leaving him unharmed. Or run up a wall and flip off it to end up behind his opponent?
The wizard can wipe out an army with one spell...great! That's what they should be able to do. But why can't the fighter be found wiping the blood off his face whilst sitting on a pile of bodies of that same army. BY HIMSELF.
Y'know, how many Martial vs Wizard topics are going to be posted per day? Disguised or not.
A wizard has a limited amount of spells per day. Meaning the fighter or whatever shines when doing 5+ encounters, versus a wizard. That's the main draw in martial over magical. Sure, the wizard can call death from the sky a limited amount of times per day. A fighter can power-attack cleave all day every day.
Wizard - Bottle Rocket
Fighter - Engine
They do what they were designed to do. Other systems have things in place to make them more similar to each-other. Such-as 4e, which essentially makes wizards and fighter have powers that have similar effects.
Also I should note that most campaigns don't go past level 11. Most also don't have PvP. So going toe to toe with an optimized player wizard solo is silly and usually just goes to whoever has the initiative.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I like the idea of making martials more dangerous against magic users. Mechanically, maybe it could work something like this:
Stronger defenses won't solve the problem of not having enough options. The problem isn't that a high level wizard will easily win in PvP with a high level fighter. The problem is that the high level wizard gets to teleport, bind demons, turn foes to stone, call meteors from the sky, etc. while the high level fighter gets to hit things with a magical metal stick.
Really, between combat maneuvers, feats, various kinds of weaponry and uses of intimidation, I feel like martials have plenty to do. I think it would be enough to make them stronger against a competent magic user, so that even the evil arch mage would need to keep some strong fighters around for protection. Make it easier for the martials to do what they're already good at, and there's no need for jumping seven miles and the destructo disk.Why have fighters when you have summon monster for a creature that is at least as good in a fight?
Because most summoner monster spells aren't permanent and can't wield magical weapons.
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
Because most summoner monster spells aren't permanent and can't wield magical weapons.
Your argument for the status quo is that martials are better than summons because of their equipment. That's actually a good argument that something is seriously wrong.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Because most summoner monster spells aren't permanent and can't wield magical weapons.Your argument for the status quo is that martials are better than summons because of their equipment. That's actually a good argument that something is seriously wrong.
I like the idea that fighters are better than summons because of their DURATION. Really?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I like the idea that fighters are better than summons because of their DURATION. Really?
Quick! No one talk about eidolons! That might make the fighter cry.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Y'know, how many Martial vs Wizard topics are going to be posted per day? Disguised or not.
A wizard has a limited amount of spells per day. Meaning the fighter or whatever shines when doing 5+ encounters, versus a wizard. That's the main draw in martial over magical. Sure, the wizard can call death from the sky a limited amount of times per day. A fighter can power-attack cleave all day every day.
Wizard - Bottle Rocket
Fighter - EngineThey do what they were designed to do. Other systems have things in place to make them more similar to each-other. Such-as 4e, which essentially makes wizards and fighter have powers that have similar effects.
Also I should note that most campaigns don't go past level 11. Most also don't have PvP. So going toe to toe with an optimized player wizard solo is silly and usually just goes to whoever has the initiative.
1)A wizard has effectively unlimited spells, once you get to a certain level. I have rarely seen a high level caster who is actually concerned with saving resources, because they might run out. Moreover, where a Fighter can Full-attack Power-attack all day, that's really all they can do. A Wizard has options. Even more than just power, that's a big thing I dislike about casters vs martials.
2) Just because casters are designed to obsolete martials at higher levels doesn't mean that's good design. It just means that a lot of people are stuck with stuff like E6 or just pretending the level chart ends at 12th level. At least in my experience, part of the reason most campaigns don't go past level 11 is that that's when caster-martial disparity becomes so egregious.
3)One class being better than another isn't about PVP. It's about being able to shine in all aspects of the game. In combat, out of combat, anywhere else. And it's not like they even have to realistically worry about running out of spells.
I like the idea that fighters are better than summons because of their DURATION. Really?
Heh. Haha. Ha...
ha...
ouch :(
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
A fighter can power-attack cleave all day every day.
Send that Fighter out without any healing or buff spells.
I bet he doesn't last all day.
My alchemist recently made 200 healing potions.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A wizard has a limited amount of spells per day. Meaning the fighter or whatever shines when doing 5+ encounters, versus a wizard. That's the main draw in martial over magical. Sure, the wizard can call death from the sky a limited amount of times per day. A fighter can power-attack cleave all day every day.
Kirth made a post for this, and I figure I will use it for its intended purpose (skip to 6).
Not to mention all the other things that can go wrong over an adventuring day other than hit point damage. Like Str damage, or status conditions, or negative levels.
All of which are more likely to fall on the guy getting up in the monster's face.
A fighter can power-attack cleave all day every day.Send that Fighter out without any healing or buff spells.
I bet he doesn't last all day.
You say that as if relying on other characters is a bad thing. This is a group game. A fighter shouldn't be able to do everything on his own. Relying on allies to heal and buff is not a demerit.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
You say that as if relying on other characters is a bad thing. This is a group game. A fighter shouldn't be able to do everything on his one. Relying on allies to heal and buff is not a demerit.A fighter can power-attack cleave all day every day.Send that Fighter out without any healing or buff spells.
I bet he doesn't last all day.
I agree with this... partly. It is a fair point in and of itself.
All too often, though, I see it used to support the "fighters do their thing all day every day" stuff, and that's wrong, at least in every table I've played at in 3.x or Pathfinder. Fighter overload of negative conditions or running out of healing for them has more often been the cause of breaking for the day than the arcanists running out of magic has been.
Most martial classes can deal with it.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
You say that as if relying on other characters is a bad thing. This is a group game.
Yes, it is a group game. That's the problem with fighters: they don't contribute anything back to the group. They can't heal, they can't buff, they can't fly or teleport the party around.
They don't contribute "anything"? Really? Sure, they can't heal or buff, but they can fight pretty well. Since when is that not contributing?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
They don't contribute "anything"? Really? Sure, they can't heal or buff, but they can fight pretty well. Since when is that not contributing?
There are few classes in the game that cannot fight just as well or better.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
They don't contribute "anything"? Really? Sure, they can't heal or buff, but they can fight pretty well. Since when is that not contributing?
Excluding NPC classes such as the rogue, every class can fight. The fighter only gets to claim that as their contribution if their ability to fight is significantly above and beyond other classes. Unfortunately, they are overshadowed even here. Fighters aren't the undisputed masters of combat in Pathfinder.
Okay. Fighters are worthless and everyone should play wizards/paladins. Understood.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Okay. Fighters are worthless and everyone should play wizards/paladins. Understood.
Bards and druids are also acceptable options.
Well, the question is how to overcome this perceived imbalance. While I agree there's a problem, I don't agree with the idea that there's no thematically appropriate way to narrow the gap.
I also don't think there is no thematically appropriate way to narrow the gap.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Okay. Fighters are worthless and everyone should play wizards/paladins. Understood.Bards and druids are also acceptable options.
Alchemist, summoner, cleric, ranger, magus, summoner, ninja...
Basically every class except rogue, monk, fighter*
*may also include cavaliers, gunslingers, and samurai. I do not have enough data on these classes.
I'd say gunslingers are still effective at high level, if rather one dimensional(not fighter level, but not too far off).
I don't really think Cavalier or Samurai are appreciably better than fighters. Of course I may be wrong as I am no great expert on those builds, but I've never seen anything which really screamed high tier about them.
The only way to thematically close the gap is with magic items/artifacts.
Example: Thor, most of his cool magic comes from items (in the movies)
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Well, what do you propose?
The problems with martials can be nicely divided into problems in combat and problems out of combat. Out of combat, martials tend to lack useful utility abilities. The spell sunder rage power is a good example of what there should be more of. Along the same lines, one suggestion I saw somewhere on the internet for improving the rogue was to let rogues use disable device on all active spell effects, not just magical traps. But there needs to be more and it shouldn't be so resource-heavy for martials to pick them up.
In combat, I think a lot of the problems can also be traced to how expensive it is to specialize in one style of martial combat. Combat maneuvers are an obvious offender here. If you want to play a character that's good at tripping, you have to waste a feat on a tax you wouldn't have picked up otherwise (Combat Expertise). This also requires a tax from your point-buy because...? Then you can pick up Improved Trip, which lets you make trip attempts without provoking an AoO. Then, when your BAB reaches +6, you can grab Greater Trip and get something actually new added to your trip. Even with all this investment, you still aren't allowed to trip Huge or larger creatures. Why does this cost so much? Having one feat per level still isn't enough to specialize in too many combat styles. Even feats that allow you to do something new---like pre-erratum Crane Style---are costly to pick up.
I don't claim that this completely solves the issue, but I think it helps. If martial characters can afford to be good at melee combat, ranged combat, and combat maneuvers all at the same time, that's a good thing. There should still be more options available (like Antagonize, but not implemented stupidly), but it's a start.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
...Im going to try to pull this fight down and try to make it productive again, Im not benefitting atleast from these past few contributions...
I feel like melee folks should be varied in what they can do. Fighters should be versatile in combat to adjust to whatever they face. Perhaps the more the are in a particular fight the better they can improve certain thing. "As they fight a specific opponent they can learn their opponents fighting style and counter it". At least this is 1 flavor of the fighter I would like to see.
A Monk is near magic in what they can do. Light as a feather, they can ignore some of physics, but they cannot bend it like a wizard can.
A ranger is the hunter. They can lay traps down quickly, extra sensory abilities.
As I write this I think Martials should have more versatility in general. At least that is what I would like to see more of.
I feel like melee folks should be varied in what they can do. Fighters should be versatile in combat to adjust to whatever they face. Perhaps the more the are in a particular fight the better they can improve certain thing. "As they fight a specific opponent they can learn their opponents fighting style and counter it". At least this is 1 flavor of the fighter I would like to see.
Having now played a brawler for a while in a PbP, while I like their adaptability via martial maneuvers, I can say the limited mechanic the system provided is really inadequate. Feats are simply not so great that they should be so limited in deployment from an adaptive pool.
So what I'm saying, if you did give fighters an adaptive feat ability, don't make it suck like martial maneuvers.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
So just to reiterate, please dont debate casters vs martials here. Casters are not the point of comparison. I am not here to debate power. I am asking what should martial characters be able to do.
Things I've heard so far:
1. Greater mobility
2. Be mobile without significant sacrifice in offense
3. Be more effective at combat maneuvers even at higher levels where CMDs can get very high
4. Make combat manuevers more fundamental to the martial game space with less investment on the part of the characters.
5. Be better able to disrupt and resist magic
6. Be able to make even sub par weaons (like the crossbow) into death machines.
7. Be better able to protect your allies from threats (tanking).
8. Swashbucklers who kiss the girl, swing across the ballroom on a rope, then drop a chandelier behind them on the hapless guards.
9. Barbarians who shun armor in favor of showing off their pectoral muscles, yet soak up thousands of sword-stabs without breaking a sweat.
10. (Non-magical) bards who escape a room full of guards by reducing them to laughter with a single joke.
11. Pirates who duel with pistol and cutlass, in the middle of a hurricane, on high seas, while effortlessly balancing on a ridiculously thin yardarm.
12. Ne'er-do-well lovers who, discovered in the king's daughter chambers (with a very happy-looking king's daughter), disguise themselves as handmaidens and sneak out.
13. Ne'er-do-well lovers who, discovered in the king's son's chambers (with a very happy-looking king's son) effortlessly fight off guards with rapiers and bon mots.
14. Skilled duellists who defeat entire armies solely by disarming a general, then smiling at the remaining forces arrayed against them.
15. Greater versatility in martial characters preferably without dramatic investment of character resources.
16. Monks who sort of break the rules of physics and are kind of magical (i think crouching tiger here, walking on leaves and water and such)
17. Fighters who can counter enemy combatants, and gain an advantage due to experience, or training.
Good ideas so far guys, what else?
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Following up on my previous post, I have some house rules I use in my games as an attempt at giving martials a relative boost. A significant part of them are changes to feats. Some feats were removed and are just options available to anyone. You don't need to spend a feat to do more damage at the expense of accuracy (Power Attack and Deadly Aim). Unarmed strike is now considered a martial weapon and you don't have to spend an extra feat for the proficiency. Combat Expertise is how fighting defensively works. You don't have to spend a feat on exotic weapon proficiency any more (or martial weapon proficiency for that matter); every even BAB, you get a free proficiency. Weapon Finesse is just a property of weapons now.
Some feats were combined together into a single feat. Dodge and Mobility are combined and Point-blank Shot and Precise Shot are combined. Two-weapon Fighting, Improved Two-weapon Fighting, Greater Two-weapon Fighting, and Double Slice are one feat now. I'm not sure if I went far enough there, though. All the combat maneuver feats were collapsed into a single feat which has no prerequisites. Lightning Reflexes and Improved Lightning Reflexes were combined, as were the other save-boosting feats.
I would like to do something to try to fix the remaining problems with combat maneuvers---defense still scales much faster than offense. I removed the asinine size limitations, but that's really not enough. Unfortunately, the problems here seem to be deeper.
For my part at an actual answer to the question...
I'd like them not to be so gear dependant.
Someone posted about how the fighter doesn't really have a lot of weapon switching options because of the cost of getting that many sufficiently magical weapons.
I'd like them to be the source of the power, not their stuff.
A fighter who's just as likely to win with the sword he snatched from the dead skeleton as with the +17 Headcutter of Ultimate Headcutting (and no Jiggy, I can't provide a PRD link to that).
again, please no mechanics, I want concepts here.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Well, what do you propose?The problems with martials can be nicely divided into problems in combat and problems out of combat. Out of combat, martials tend to lack useful utility abilities. The spell sunder rage power is a good example of what there should be more of. Along the same lines, one suggestion I saw somewhere on the internet for improving the rogue was to let rogues use disable device on all active spell effects, not just magical traps. But there needs to be more and it shouldn't be so resource-heavy for martials to pick them up.
In combat, I think a lot of the problems can also be traced to how expensive it is to specialize in one style of martial combat. Combat maneuvers are an obvious offender here. If you want to play a character that's good at tripping, you have to waste a feat on a tax you wouldn't have picked up otherwise (Combat Expertise). This also requires a tax from your point-buy because...? Then you can pick up Improved Trip, which lets you make trip attempts without provoking an AoO. Then, when your BAB reaches +6, you can grab Greater Trip and get something actually new added to your trip. Even with all this investment, you still aren't allowed to trip Huge or larger creatures. Why does this cost so much? Having one feat per level still isn't enough to specialize in too many combat styles. Even feats that allow you to do something new---like pre-erratum Crane Style---are costly to pick up.
I don't claim that this completely solves the issue, but I think it helps. If martial characters can afford to be good at melee combat, ranged combat, and combat maneuvers all at the same time, that's a good thing. There should still be more options available (like Antagonize, but not implemented stupidly), but it's a start.
Being less conservative with things like that does feel like the low-hanging fruit of giving martial classes a hand. I'd like to think that the sorts of things represented by the combat maneuvers aren't too outlandish for most people's sense of verisimilitude, but they're still things that require extensive investment for a character to even be adequate at.
I sort of wish they'd just cut the Gordian knot and pull the Int 13 requirement off of all of that stuff. It's not a comprehensive solution for martial classes in general, of course, but it's a pretty big albatross around the neck of that corner of the game rules. The designers know this, which is why there's so many character options that go out of their way to very specifically let your circumvent that unfortunate bit of rules design. I appreciate where the Int 13 requirement's heart is - it gives classes that otherwise dump Int hard a reason to consider it - but it plays out pretty poorly in practice. It's also weird from a flavor perspective; you have to be more intelligent than most of the population in order to be able to trip somebody without being a total boob about it, and no matter how good you are at fighting, you're still going to be sort of inept at tripping people? It's also wearisome because it's not like it's a systemic philosophy that specialist options require substantial investment in dump stats; Augment Summoning doesn't require 13 Strength.