I don't think you have to worry too much about a wizard or a sorcerer using it unless they have a ring of freedom of movement.So only the single most common magic ring at mid to high levels if you are a caster, or frankly, anyone else given how monster CMB outpaces most peoples CMD. Pretty much just Teleport Specialists and certain Clerics dont need it.If your DM allows a 40,000 gp ring to be a common item, then he or she isn't doing a good job of keeping things balanced.
You guys are painting a picture like a wizard or sorcerer can just do anything they want with no fear of failure or repercussion. And let's not forget how long it actually takes a wizard or sorcerer to reach the level where they can perform the kind of amazing feats people are mentioning.
Seriously, out of all the combat encounters I've run, wizards and sorcerers have indeed shined at high level, but kind of stand there twiddling their thumbs at low level after they cast a couple of spells.
Think about your own combat encounters, when your party ran into a group of enemies with an obvious spell-caster among them... Your party's archer ALWAYS (if they are smart) readies an attack on the spell-caster for when "he attempts to cast a spell". Spells are not always automatic in combat encounters unless there is a contingency or you cast them in advance of the combat encounter, and even then the more potent spells only last for a number of rounds, not minutes or hours, so they would fizzle out before a potential combat encounter began.
I just haven't had the same experience where a wizard or sorcerer dominates every combat encounter as people here are suggesting. It simply doesn't happen until your PCs reach high levels in your campaign, and even then I fail to see how other character classes would feel left out in their roles. If that's the case, the DM is designing the encounters poorly.
Ranged attackers are pretty much useless against casters what with Wind Wall, Fickle Winds, Winds of Vengeance. Also, many very good buff spells have long durations and can be expected to be up for the entirety of an adventure. If the wizards you play with aren't handing the GM a sheet of their buffs before adventuring, this may be an issue with the system mastery of the wizards you play. (Also seriously, a 5th level caster shouldn't run out of spells during an average adventuring day.)
Warblades refreshed ALL manuvers with either a normal attack routine or standing there for one round, not one maneuver.
Adaptive Style's power is that it changed your maneuvers READIED, allowing you to adapt to changing circumstances.
Spell Resistance wouldn't be a pain to deal with if there was, say, a feat that allowed you to fail your Spell Resistance at will, like you can fail a saving throw.
==Aelryinth
Martials need better Will saves period. Options?:
In 3.5 there was also the diamond mind discipline which had maneuvers that let you use concentration in place of a saving throw as an immediate action. Warlock gave a bonus equal to its casting stat to one save it could change each morning which an invocation. Personally I liked the both of those.
Ranged attackers are pretty much useless against casters what with Wind Wall, Fickle Winds, Winds of Vengeance. Also, many very good buff spells have long durations and can be expected to be up for the entirety of an adventure. If the wizards you play with aren't handing the GM a sheet of their buffs before adventuring, this may be an issue with the system mastery of the wizards you play. (Also seriously, a 5th level caster shouldn't run out of spells during an average adventuring day.)
Provided the caster can use these spells, has them up beforehand, and the enemy has no way to maneuver around the limits of the spell OR remove the buff. In other words, if the enemy decides to simply give up and never be prepared for the party. Yes, in those instances, ranged attacks really are useless.
Also, precisely what constitutes an 'average adventuring day' makes that last statement iffy, at best. Duration from encounter to encounter varies too.| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Martials need better Will saves period. Options?:In 3.5 there was also the diamond mind discipline which had maneuvers that let you use concentration in place of a saving throw as an immediate action. Warlock gave a bonus equal to its casting stat to one save it could change each morning which an invocation. Personally I liked the both of those.
The Diamond Mind saves were probably the greatest thing about the Martial Adepts.
In effect, there were saying "I choose to make this saving throw." That's an awesome ability. And when they got the 8th level one at 15th which gave a bonus equal to their IL to a save, that meant they could handle two of the same saves per round.
Totally awesome. With Iron Heart Surge for condition removal and Wall of Blades for Touch AC, the SM Saves formed the solid cornerstone of the Warblade's defenses. And they were all available by level 5.
==Aelryinth
What should martial characters be able to do?Take move actions?
+1
and..
At least 4 skills per level if it is a mundane class.
make skills matter at higher levels. as SKR once put it:
"I'm all in favor of analyzing the game, drawing a line at level X, and saying, "real Earth humans don't get past level X, and therefore beyond level X (and skill rank X) you can start to do things that Earth people would consider superhuman, impossible, or even magical," even with a nonmagical class like fighter or rogue."
I don't really get where all this "martial characters aren't good enough" crap comes from.
To me spell-casters, especially arcane ones, aren't overly powerful until they reach somewhere around level 11 or 12. That's when they start getting into the really good spells imo.
Spell-casters have to wait until a specific situation presents itself to use their spells as well.
They have to work their way up in level before they really start to shine. A fighter, compared to wizards and sorcerers, shines from 1st level to high-mid level. After that, the wizard or sorcerer start to surpass the fighter in what they can do in certain situations, but they still never really outshine fighters in pure combat (aside from being able to cast a handful of high level spells...but then they have blown their wad).
To me, one thing a warrior class character can always do to a wizard or sorcerer is grapple them. Grappling a spell-caster is a sure-fire way to achieve victory. This is just one example of the weaknesses spell-casting classes have. They don't have the durability of warriors, can't fight in melee, suffer terribly from being grappled, etc.
I think the character classes are balanced enough as it is. Taking away weaknesses will only lead to taking away weaknesses of other classes as well.
This is a myth. Casters from the getgo get an encounter ender in the form of Color Spray and Sleep. The DC at 1st level mind you can be as high as DC 18 with a good Charisma.
Grappling doesn't work if you can't touch them if they're flying/displaced/invisible/force bubbled/you're blocked by a wall of force. Grapple also doesn't work period when theres effects like Freedom of Movement that are auto success against it. Freedom of Movement is very common past 7th level.
You have to ask your Arcane Casters not to break your game open like the fragile egg it is. They're one of the few classes where any amount of clever building can smash open your game and let them take it...
Best way to shut down a caster is with readied ranged weapon. They cast you hit them with vital strike ranged attack. Had a ranger in a game do that to great success against casters. There are only a few ways to defeat this and not every caster has access to those spells or has them prepared.
Martials need better Will saves period. Options?:
1 - 3.5's Steadfast Determination feat where you use your Con Bonus and not Wisdom for Will Saves...required Endurance as a prerequite I believe...going from memory here
2 - Maybe a feat chain that gives you Spell resistance...Lesser and Greater Spell resistance, Level +5 or +10 SR
3 - Maybe iron Will Scales with level?...+2, then +4 at level 10
4- Feats that allow use of 1st level spells a number of times per day, have a BAB prereq, example BAB +6 one 1st 3/Day, BAB 11 - one 2nd 3/Day, BAB 16 one 3rd 3/dayjust my 2 cents
Martial class do have good will saves just some don't. I have Barbarian in RotRL that has 25 save vs spells. I have +3 from Rage, +5 from superstitious, +4 from indomitable will, +4 from Wisdom, +4 cloak of resistance on base 5 save at 17th level. I'm not complaining about my will save. My reflex save on the other hand, kind of wishing I had taken rolling dodge & reflexive dodge to the dodge bonus to reflex save.
.
Martial class do have good will saves just some don't.
Well, more specifically, only one full BAB class has a good will save progress, and that's the paladin. Paladin's divine grace and Barbarian's superstitious rage power both supercharge that. Fighter, Cavalier, and Ranger don't get anything like that though.
The issue with Martials having good will saves, is that under that idea, who wouldn't have good will saves? I can get on board with Fighter and/or Rogue, but most spellcasters have good will, by virtue of it being the mental save.
While I'm not a big fan of the concept of splitting Will into two stats, one governed by CHA, which focuses on Charm, Domination and fear effects, and the other by WIS, which covers the rest of Will saves, I think it could help here. Martials, by and large, would get the former, while casters, primarily, would get the latter. Of course, this wouldn't be a hard and fast rule, but more in that, thematically, the breakdown works in that Martials are usually the ones who you see standing courageous in the face of immense odds and can break mental control by force of will. Though this is mostly because Martials are usually the main characters, but it's still it's a common factor.
Weapon and armor mastery don't make up for that?Power Attack and Combat Maneuver Feats got nerfed. I wouldn't say that martials got more powerful.
As an example, Improved Trip gave +4 to Trip attempts as well as a Free Action melee attack back in 3.5e, you know.
They do make up for it and more... if you're going for straight damage fighter, rather than tripper fighter. Obviously ;)
That said, straight damage lost a lot of options too compared to what once was in later 3.5. Which is not entirely a fair comparison, since late 3.5 was a bigger edition than Pathfinder is now, with a lot more options, period.
The funniest damage "fighter" was the Binder from Magic of Incarnum when you combined it with the Vow of Poverty Feat from Book of Exalted Deeds.
Can't have expensive things? No problem! I can just spontantiously create mo own gear, have all the benefits from them, AND still have my VoP abilities. Oh! and I am a Con Based "caster" so my HP total makes Barbs cry.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
My biggest disparity I see is that if I'm a wizard, I'm guaranteed that every level I get to pick two different spells that allow me to do something amazing. Save-or-Suck, Save-or-Die, straight up kill.
Edit: Also I can make a move action and still toss that spell...at range...and usually hit multiple targets...Fighters often times can't.
Fighters get one feat. Most of the time not that useful.
Fighters can use this feat over and over...if the situation allows, (cleave being an example, the bad guys have to be standing next to each other, and you must hit to make it work)
Wizards can use this new spell several times a day if they choose (sorcerers especially can) it can always be useful in some way...if you decide to use a fireball on one BBEG it still does Leveld6 damage.
As a fighter, the above mentioned feat, cleave, doesn't help you at all with that BBEG.
The fireball can kill several people at once if their are multiple enemies.
Greater Cleave could kill several people at once. But they have to be standing next to each other.
There is a disparity. One level should not make that much of a difference in the power of something. And if I can get 4 super powered spells every 2 levels, and a fighter gets 2 feats between worthless and occasionally, somewhat useful...A disparity.
If I only get one feat a level as a fighter, it should at least be as useful and versatile as ONE spell can be. After all, most adventuring days rarely end with a wizard being completely run out of spells. At least in most adventures, and in most cases where it is not forced by a GM.
If say I at 2nd level could get a sweeping blow that attacks everything in a 15ft cone with a swipe of my blade...then I have a pretty good ability. It doesn't scale number of dice damage with level, I have to make a to hit on every target...but sounds a bit like a 1st level spell I know called Burning Hands. Maybe I can attach Trip to it too as I level...like metamagic feats work...
I guess what I'm saying is that the ONE feat a fighter gets each level should be at potentially as good as ONE of the TWO spells a wizard gets each level. Period. If it's not...then there is an issue.
I think Feats should be giving special style attacks...like Whirlwind Attack or Spring Attack do...and the CMB attacks, Trip, Disarm, Sunder...so on...should be able to be stacked on them...as you gain those abilities...like Metamagic feats can be stacked. And one feat should be at least as good as one spell. And in some manner...scale or get better with levels. Either area effect increases...or being able to add different Metacombat feats on top of it...Then things would be better. Maybe not perfect...but I feel it's a good start to try to make things better.
|
@shade of red
ok... i agree with the idea of double standards on feats v spells, but i hate that you tried to choose cleave as your base of example when whirlwind is a fighters fireball, lunge+whirlwind+enlarge person is a better threat sphere then a fireball. built correctly, a fighter can out damage a mage in this regard.
a tenth level mage (no metamagic) will deal about 40 damage with a fireball, and has a chance to halve that damage due to a saving throw.
a tenth level fighter with a glave-gusarme glaive can deal over 45-50 points (non crit) against a 25 foot radius. and stunning assult at 15th makes him have a "dazing fireball".
now a mage can better buff this number as you can see with a crossblooded Evoker. the point remains that a fighter can actually deal a good amount of damage.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Except that the fighter can only deal damage. The Wizard can shrink lakes and lava in his off time, or catch a snooze in extra-dimensional space, or reshape the terrain, or make the craft skill look stupid, or play 20 questions with the universe, or put his stupid high skill points to use, or...
|
|
Except that the fighter can only deal damage. The Wizard can shrink lakes and lava in his off time, or catch a snooze in extra-dimensional space, or reshape the terrain, or make the craft skill look stupid, or play 20 questions with the universe, or put his stupid high skill points to use, or...
this is not true at all... i can use UMD to do anything your a mage can do, well assuming i have an int/wis/cha score high enough.
and i will argue that a fighter can do much much much more then just deal damage.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Except that the fighter can only deal damage. The Wizard can shrink lakes and lava in his off time, or catch a snooze in extra-dimensional space, or reshape the terrain, or make the craft skill look stupid, or play 20 questions with the universe, or put his stupid high skill points to use, or...this is not true at all... i can use UMD to do anything your a mage can do, well assuming i have an int/wis/cha score high enough.
and i will argue that a fighter can do much much much more then just deal damage.
Ok.. but then you can't fight as well, which is the only you were contributing and you still are spending your WBL to imitate what the Wizard can do for free leaving the Wizard with more WBL (and thus more combat effective) then you.
And sure the Fighter can do things other then damage... it just can't do them well without sacrificing their only niche.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
in my opinion the fighter class and wizard classes should counter each other. fighter should be a pure mundane anti magic class, while wizzard should not have a high amount of physical damage options.
what really pissed me off is when they gave barbarians anti caster options like spell sunder and access to fighter only anti caster feats. those should be fighter only feats, period. if fighters were givent the ability to dispelling strike, spell sunder (at will) and have powerful anticasting feats (beyond just spellbreaker) then i would argue that fighters were a truly viable option for endgame. as it stands though barbarians are just so much better for taking down literally everything past level 9.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
My personal feelings on martial classes for Pathfinder:
Path of War.
Aside from that, I feel that martial characters should be able to:
1. inflict status conditions on attacks without the use of feat trees or equipment. Blind, stun, daze, suffocate, ability drain, et cetera, as class and archetype features.
2. Replicate magical effects without automatically being "magical." I wrote an essay on this issue over a year ago on rpg.net.
3. Gain access to alternate forms of mobility and movement and sensory abilities. You can jump so good you might as well be flying, like the protagonist from a Wuxia movie. You can turn any rope, pulley system, or grappling link into an efficient means of climbing (as well as making ranged attacks against flying opponents). Swim through the ocean and hold your breath for long periods like Cu Chulainn of myth. You can "listen to the air" and gain blindsense/blindsight. Your lunging attacks grant an increase to your melee reach. Also, the ability to move and full attack would be a nice touch.
4. More class skills, more skill points. You usually don't have magic, you need to be talented at a lot of stuff!
5. Means of shutting down magical effects such as Wind Wall (which invalidates most ranged attacks), invisibility and incorporealness (which can easily invalidate martial's main option of damage), and teleportation (which allows easy escapes and puts significant distance between them and the martials). Also, bonus against mind-affecting effects to avoid the common "mental dominater" enemy (without a Cloak of Resistance and a Good Will save, you can effectively be controlled for the entire combat with dominate spells).
6. Allow options to retrain (switch out) feats. A preparation-based spellcaster who makes a poor choice in spells (their primary feature)can simply wait for the next day to pray or buy some scrolls/spellbook access. A character who picks the wrong feat has to wait 2 levels usually to get another one, and are stuck with their bad choice.
On another note, the spellcasters of 3.X/Pathfinder are at their most powerful in comparison to other Editions, lacking much of the restrictions of the others. Taking primary spellcasters down a notch can contribute to eliminating Linear Fighters Quadratic Wizards.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
@shade of red
ok... i agree with the idea of double standards on feats v spells, but i hate that you tried to choose cleave as your base of example when whirlwind is a fighters fireball, lunge+whirlwind+enlarge person is a better threat sphere then a fireball. built correctly, a fighter can out damage a mage in this regard.
a tenth level mage (no metamagic) will deal about 40 damage with a fireball, and has a chance to halve that damage due to a saving throw.
a tenth level fighter with a glave-gusarme glaive can deal over 45-50 points (non crit) against a 25 foot radius. and stunning assult at 15th makes him have a "dazing fireball".
now a mage can better buff this number as you can see with a crossblooded Evoker. the point remains that a fighter can actually deal a good amount of damage.
Let me clarify my points using your post as an example...
I chose Greater Cleave, because you can get that level 4, fireball arrives at level 5. Greater Cleave uses 3 feats. Or in my example...3 spells. Now actually...one of those spells (Cleave) is basically overwritten by another (Greater Cleave) meaning I spent 3 spells...to get 2. Power Attack and Greater Cleave. Whereas Fireball is a single spell. Or Burning Hands if you like...which you get at 1st level.
Using Lunge+Whirlwind+enlarge person....First of all I'm removing Enlarge Person...my point is that is not a feat...it's a spell and part of my issue. Enlarge person grants you reach...and +damage and +Str for a -2 dex -1 AC and -1 Attack...A 1st Level Spell. One Spell. Can last a minimum of 6 rounds or attacks.
Lunge is on activation, gives you reach and -2 AC. Better. But also a feat I can only get at 6th Level. There is a disparity here. It is better than Enlarge Person...but also comes FIVE levels later.
Now back to Lunge+Whirlwind...honestly...I was trying to say that Whirlwind and Spring Attack are good examples of what feats should do. So thank you for supporting that Whirlwind Attack is a good feat and Cleave is not. Even if getting this combo you are talking about takes to at least 6th level to get. And if my whacking something with a longsword ever is equal to 6d6 damage to everyone in a 40 ft diameter that I set off up to 640 ft away...well you tell me how I can get that damage out of it...let alone the range. I know they get a saving throw for half damage...but I also have to roll to hit or they take no damage.
I honestly see no way that you can deal 45-50 points of damage using whirlwind to every target. You do realize you get one attack at each target right?
Anyway...I ABSOLUTELY AGREE THAT WHIRLWIND ATTACK CAN BE PRETTY AWESOME.
Why isn't Cleave even close to that? Greater Cleave is 3 feats received at Level 4...one of which basically disappears into thin air because Greater Cleave overwrites Cleave.
Just Whirlwind attack...without Lunge...is 5 feats...at least none of those overwrite the previous ones...but 5 feats...at level 4. To get part of something awesome. TWO LEVELS later...I can finish your combo.
Your example of Stunning Attack...also...really...at level 16 (Not 15th...prereq is +16 BAB) before I can get this? This is 8 feats in. I also take -5 to hit. A 25% reduction in ability to make this work. Save is 10+BAB...26. Not bad. But not very good at 16th level either. Still 8 spells/feats for one fireball...a repeatable one...but it will not do as much as 16d6 fireball to each creature. This is a 6th level slot for a fireball meaning 3 castings min without bonus spells. Or using their spell focus. Or taking feats/traits that make it lower level and then the casting increases at least to 4. 3 times...how many do you think you really need in an adventuring day? 3 is plenty...and you probably have at least 2 more castings of it from int and spell focus. So now we are talking 5. More than enough usually. 56 damage dealt...saves to deal with...probably a saving throw of at least 21. (10 +3 (SL) +10 (Int)) And most likely more...AND you can stand up to 640ft away, not in the center of all the angry people...AND you can cast it twice legally...AND it isn't a full round action and you can move if you only do it once.
Also...a dazing fireball is good for just about any mage tossing one. Seriously. Don't tell me that for me to be comparable...or god forbid...slightly better than a Wizard...I have to make my fighter using a certain weapon and a certain build. Whereas a Wizard uses one feat and one spell...gets nearly the same effect. A fighter has to take EIGHT feats. 8. And it's a full round action.
NOW I TYPED ALL THIS NOT TO SAY WHIRLWIND IS TO WEAK AND SHOULD BE BUFFED. I typed all this to say Whirlwind Attack+Lunge+Stunning Assault...is actually good. This feels like what martials should seriously have. Maybe a little earlier...maybe for less than 8 feats...but it is probably the best example of what martial classes should be able to get. Seriously.
And it is the ONLY one I can think of. I like the feel of Spring Attack, I think it is a good one for flavor AND utility, and it is used by me to move to where I hope everyone will stay close to for one round so I can lunge whirlwind. Because it's a full round action.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Except that the fighter can only deal damage. The Wizard can shrink lakes and lava in his off time, or catch a snooze in extra-dimensional space, or reshape the terrain, or make the craft skill look stupid, or play 20 questions with the universe, or put his stupid high skill points to use, or...
+1
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Not this:
** spoiler omitted **
If I wanted to play the Hulk, I'd play another game. I'm sure there's some sort of comic book superhero tabletop RPG out there somewhere...
The easiest solution in the world: don't take the ability. I like to have it, thank you
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Agreed, if some people *want* to shackle their martial character to reality (and thus be completely ineffective past level 6), then that's fine. Just don't take the options that you feel violate your sense of what's "normal". For the rest of us, let us have options that don't violate our sense of "normal" and then everyone can have their own sense of "normal". Sure our characters will be better then yours, but at least everyone involved had a choice.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Also...Mages (Wizards, Sorcs, etc...) are considered not very good if all they do is dump damage...yet are really good at dumping damage. And also are EXTREMELY good at debuffing or buffing.
Martials are not this. They are not that good at dumping damage...because of taking a full attack means you can't move. Wizards can do their big bad blast twice in a round if they quicken one...or use a rod...and then walk away a bit farther so they can try to do it again next round.
Martials can trip, disarm, sunder, etc...but wizards can do the same...do it at range and usually with an area attack. Also what wizards do typically last longer than what martials can do.
At 3rd level, a wizard can toppling spell magic missile and knock prone two people...pretty damn well too. A fighter can't do this. And the wizard is at range. This is just one example.
Metamagic feats have no tiers...usually no prereqs...(I can think of two off the top of my head...and usually no one takes them...Thanatopic and Threnodic)...but Fighter feats do.
There is a disparity...and fighters are okay at what they do...but any day you want to put 5 fighters on the field vs 5 wizards of equal level...the fighters are going to lose. I will grant that if you are looking at Level 1 fighters and Wizards...fighters have the advantage...this goes away at about 5th level though...so 5th through 20th...wizards will win the large majority. I can think of no way to make it work...wizards have battlefield control, status effects, mobility more than fighters...it is despicable. Fighters have status effects...most of their best attacks are full round actions so no mobility...
Disparity. That is my problem. Take the feat trees away...or shorter and smaller. No feat should overwrite the feat you took earlier. (Cleave, Great Cleave...etc) in those cases get rid of the first one no Cleave...just Great Cleave.
If a Level 10 fighter is a CR10 and a Level 10 wizard is a CR10...then it should come out at about 50% every time. It doesn't. Make it closer to 50%. I'd settle for 40%-60% with wizard on top at level 20...but it's not even close right now. That's my issue.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Part of the problem is scale: RPG's have evolved into single-group problem-solvers, which is fine, since this is an adventure game after all. In a more realistic sense, that warrior would be attracting other fighting men to him. He would become a leader. He would become a lord and perhaps a king. He would begin affecting the world around not because he's got a magic sword and magic armor and is "Xth level" but because he's demonstrated great courage and strength and endurance.
The common people tend to respect that sort of thing. And once the common people look up to MARTIAL CHARACTERS AS HEROES they begin to elevate that person and that hero has a power that casters can't duplicate. Leadership feat be damned: commoners and nobles and rulers aren't going to see casters in the same light. It's human nature.
But getting back to my original point; if we can change rpg's to reflect not just a tavern--->overland trip--->30x30room with monster--->BBEG--->magic mart--->tavern, but instead see the martial character as a man-at-arms, leader and great hero then we can start playing rpg's on a larger scale (like Kingmaker).
On a larger scale, casters can start using spells like Dream, and Geas (and all those others you just save a scroll for) to solve large-scale and expanded time-scale problems, while martials, as lords of the land, rule over their domains, whatever that may be.
So... you want Casters to be gods, while fighters get to be kings. Quite frankly, the guy who can tell reality to make him a sandwich is the one I'm going to listen to, not sure why you think people would look up to Joe McFighter, when Steve McWizard is the one with the power. Look if you *want* your fighters to be less effective Owly that's fine. Just let those us who want them to be actually worth their level have abilities that we consider "normal" at higher levels. You can continue to shackle your Fighters to reality by just not taking those abilities, and we can be actually effective. Sure your character won't be as mechanically good, but at least you are choosing to be ineffective and thus everyone wins.
Anzyr, your argument is a semantic one, and one you make too often. You also use False Dichotomy and No True Scotsman.
What I'm talking about is making the game better by getting everyone to think outside-of-the-box of the usual game parameters. How do adventurers solve problems? What sort of conflicts make up an adventure? How do wizards compare to warriors in the arena of conflict? My argument is that casters can solve many immediate problems by being able to bend reality (as you are so fond of reminding us), while warriors rule the land and move the hearts and minds of the people. An expanded role-playing-game would allow for "big picture" thinking, with martial rulers acting as monarchs and heroes, while casters are the powers behind the thrones.
Enough with the "five martials facing five wizards will lose" nonsense. This isn't WoW PvP.
Martials would appeal to the general populace...cause hey...I might be able to buy a sword! But they don't get this reality bending weird stuff that wizards do.
And yeah I'm religious...I pray to the god of plants so my crops grow and the god of travel when I have to take my crops to market...but...that guy with a sword...I mean I have an axe I chop wood with...and a bow I shoot wolves with to keep them from eating my sheep...that's the guy I can relate too...not that guy chatting with imps and thinking he is better than me and stuff. That guy is weird...and probably has relations with demons...I'm just saying...I've hear some weird stuff coming from his big glowing tower...think he's compensating and so forth...
Anzyr, your argument is a semantic one, and one you make too often. You also use False Dichotomy and No True Scotsman.
What I'm talking about is making the game better by getting everyone to think outside-of-the-box of the usual game parameters. How do adventurers solve problems? What sort of conflicts make up an adventure? How do wizards compare to warriors in the arena of conflict? My argument is that casters can solve many immediate problems by being able to bend reality (as you are so fond of reminding us), while warriors rule the land and move the hearts and minds of the people. An expanded role-playing-game would allow for "big picture" thinking, with martial rulers acting as monarchs and heroes, while casters are the powers behind the thrones.
Enough with the "five martials facing five wizards will lose" nonsense. This isn't WoW PvP.
No my argument is not the semantic one, considering that its one that has actual consequences regarding the mechanics that the game runs on. Your argument proposes that rather then change any mechanics, we just need to like... think outside the box man (ie. semantics, no mechanics *poet!*). No, we need a foundation that we can build an effective house on. If we get such a foundation, we can build a house and you can keep your box. And I promise no one will force heating and showers on you. Promise.
lol, build a foundation for your reason man! (reminds me of Descartes)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Anzyr, your argument is a semantic one, and one you make too often. You also use False Dichotomy and No True Scotsman.
What I'm talking about is making the game better by getting everyone to think outside-of-the-box of the usual game parameters. How do adventurers solve problems? What sort of conflicts make up an adventure? How do wizards compare to warriors in the arena of conflict? My argument is that casters can solve many immediate problems by being able to bend reality (as you are so fond of reminding us), while warriors rule the land and move the hearts and minds of the people. An expanded role-playing-game would allow for "big picture" thinking, with martial rulers acting as monarchs and heroes, while casters are the powers behind the thrones.
Enough with the "five martials facing five wizards will lose" nonsense. This isn't WoW PvP.
I'm the one who said five martials facing five wizards will lose. It's true. Have a party of 5 wizards fight an equal number of 5 fighters or equal CR and watch the carnage. The result will be wizards selling a bunch of magic armor and weapons.
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
I have often been called the Pathfinder Descartes (not really!). So a foundation for my reason:
As the system is presently, any who doesn't have some casting ability falls off tremendously as soon lets say 7th level, because many players insist that these classes cannot do anything that they determine to be "magical" or "supernatural". This holds them back significantly after level 6, when the casting classes can use Fly to tell gravity to go kiting, when they can use necromantic energy to make dead corpses move again, when they can make stone bend and twist, when they can create walls out of thin air, when they can call creatures from beyond reality to serve their whims, and when they can cast long duration spells that protect them from harm.
In a level system, the 10th level member of Class X should be a decent match against a 10th level member of Class Y. The CR system reinforces this by assigning two members of different classes an equal CR rating. However, because the casters can literally tell reality to shove off, the martials who people insist be "realistic" have no defense. How would a mixed martial artist in our world respond to an enemy who could hurl fire, fly, ensnare minds, shatter objects, and create illusions? Simple... they'd lose a fight against that enemy, badly.
The problem is that an 8th level martial has no place in our reality. They can survive falls that would kill us, dunk in lava and live, with invested skills they can beat our athletes and they can defeat our martial artists with ease. And thats at 8th level! A 10th level Fighter is something completely alien to our reality, yet we insist on shackling them to our rules. In a world of magic, where monks draw on ki and dragons fly in the sky, a martial being able to run vertically up a wall, to move so fast they can't be seen, to break stone walls with a single strike, to sense enemies from the change in air flow, to cut spells out of the air, and to shrug off magical effects may be impossible in our reality, but we aren't operating in that anymore.
And these are the kind of effects that we need to help the martials stay on par with casters so that Level 10 Fighter and Level 10 Wizard are equally threatening encounters.
If these abilties were added, those of us who *want* to stay on par with casters and don't consider any of things "unrealistic" for a 10th level Fighter will have options that will let us do that. Those who want to shackle themselves to our 1-6 level reality can continue to do so. It's win win for everyone, because now if you choose to be ineffective, you actually know that your choosing that.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
But getting back to my original point; if we can change rpg's to reflect not just a tavern--->overland trip--->30x30room with monster--->BBEG--->magic mart--->tavern, but instead see the martial character as a man-at-arms, leader and great hero then we can start playing rpg's on a larger scale (like Kingmaker).
Alternatively, shrink it down and think more about the dungeoneering and then add the kingmaker stuff after. Owning a kingdom and having followers is pretty awesome, but doesn't quiet do much to actually balance the fighter and wizard next to each other. It can also enforce a type of narrative for the game forcing the stories to play out so you do eventually have a keep, and that some classes arbitrarily don't. On the other hand, if you think about two guys next to eachother, its much much easier to balance. You don't have god standing next to a mortal, you have two(hopefully more!) competent adventurers with skills of their own and their own different styles of play. Then again, you can always just throw balance out the window for narrative, but that's not so hot for some games.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So some people get 6 levels and others get 14? No thanks. How about epic levels that extend the game? Better yet, how about a module you lay on top of the game to make it more epic like mythic? Modular is a better answer here.
How does this solve the problem? No seriously... how? If people want 6 levels they can take abilities that are only level 6, the rest of us would like our level 14 abilities please. The problem is that the disparity between martials and casters grows very wide long before level 14... why would your solution to help martials come after the caster are making their demiplanes? Your answer is no answer. My answer is modular... if some people only want level 1-6 martial abilities, they can take 1-6 martial abilties. I just want some 6-10, 11-15 and 16-20 abilties which sounds pretty modular to me.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Martial characters should be able to more powerfully affect the narrative.
- Paladins should be able to convince even the morally bankrupt to fight for mutual survival.
- Rangers should have a natural rapport with animals.
- Monks should be able to sense the life force of others.
- Barbarians should be unstoppable forces during cinematic mass battle.
- Fighters should be skilled soldiers trained in the art of war.
- Rogues should be able to find clues and dig up information that mages can't even attempt.
- Cavaliers should be able to use their words as weapons to discredit their enemies.
- Gunslingers should be able to make that crazy trick shot at impossible range.
- Every legendary hero should be the topic of stories and songs.
- Every legendary hero should make enemies terrified by their presence.
- Every legendary hero should be able to attract the attention of their deity.
- Every legendary hero should be able to become an immortal part of the world at level 20.
Many of these can become part of your character's story because the GM allows it, but defined abilities give players a guarantee of what their character is capable of and allows martial character to consistently affect the story like casters. I've posted mechanics for the ideas listed above in the part II thread.
TL;DR
Narrative power is where martial characters hurt the most. I came up with ideas of how they could affect the story and posted them in the part II thread.
"Fun" is kind of subjective in general. There's at least half a dozen goals people have when people play the game, and which one is more prevalent changes from person to person. Many changes to the core game are going to make things less fun for one person and more fun for another due simply to player preference. Some might say that wizards getting some spells removed would be less fun, but perhaps those spells weren't actually fun in the first place, or the presence of those spells made things less fun for the non-wizards. Taking things away from people doesn't always mean ruining their fun.I'm not anti-fun, I'm just like, "Man, if you're going to warp the fabric of the universe or something, i think that should be, like, at least a full round action or something."Heh.
A high level martial is far more visually impressive than a caster (except perhaps an evoker).Maybe than a caster who hasn't cast anything.
If they have? Well, tell that to Frightful Aspect. Or Form of the Dragon. Or Sunburst. Or Storm of Vengeance. Or Rift of Ruin, or Wall of Lava, or Phantasmal Revenge, or Plague Storm, or Giant Shape.
Or just good old Summon Monster. It's pretty visually impressive to call forth a gargantuan beast in the midst of battle.
Etc, etc, etc. There's far, far too many spells with badass visual effects to keep listing them all.
When the martial cuts down those gargantuan creatuers in less than six seconds, that is equally, if not more, impressive.
Raith Shadar, using your examples of what you say martials can do, here is a suggestion of two things a high-level fighter doesn't have that it could have that would fulfil those claims:
Impressive Physique
You have such a stature people tremble and flee before you.
Prerequisites: BaB +11, Intimidating Prowess.
Benefit: Anyone that sees you must make a will saving throw (DC 10 + your BAB) or be affected. If their hit dice is 5 or less they are panicked. If their hit dice is less than half of yours but more than 5 they are frightened. If their hit dice is more than half your base attack bonus they are shaken. The effect lasts for one minute. A successful save means they are immune to the effect for one minute.Leveler of Armies
Your swings are so mighty hordes of enemies fall before you.
Prerequisites: BaB +11, Great Cleave
Benefit: Whenever you make a cleave attack, you roll the attack roll as normal. Anyone within ten times your threat range with an AC equal or lower to your rolled attack takes damage equal to your weapon's base damage plus your strength modifier.Now, these are just examples of the _kind_ of power high-level martials could have, and similar to what you seemed to believe they had.
I don't say they can do it. I've run the game where they did it.
A two-hander fighter is as impressive a damage dealer as there is. When the guy is enlarged with with lunge, stunning assault, and whirlwind attack, he can level giant armies to the point no one can attack him until they are all laying dead around him.
The two-hander fighter had Intimidating Prowess (the feat that gives strength on Intimidate). He had a +30 or 40 intimidate. He intimidate giant kings, demons, dragons, and all manner of incredible powerful creatures with a glare.
This two-hander fighter was known as The General. He lead the armies in the kingdom. He would get the most out of his people with a glare. Whenever someone stood up to the army, he moved to that location and laid down the law.
The barbarian (also a martial) is also impressive.
Martials in the game do what martials are supposed to do. This whole idea they should be able to take on a prepared wizard in straight up combat is not something I support or ever will. If a fighter shows up on the field against an equal or close to equal level wizard thinking to take him on in an open battle, he deserves to die or become enslaved. That is what would happen if some warrior without an artifact weapon helping him decided to take on a powerful wizard face to face in a book.
Everyone keeps on bringing up Conan. In the Conan books he was usually sneaking into wizard places and catching them off guard. That's one of the reasons I think fighters should have more skills. Warriors should be more versatile in their ability to use Stealth and perceive enemies. How would a martial survive if he didn't at least have the keenest senses in the game and a diverse skill set for survival? Makes no sense.
As far as what martials do, they don't need feats of the kind you listed. There's no reason to be hitting things 50 feet from where they are. They can carve them up round by round 10 or 15 per round. WIth feats like Great Cleave, Whirlwind Attack, and Improved Cleaving Finish, anything standing nearby will die quite fast. Rinse and repeat every six seconds.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
So you like playing with level 1-6 abilities on your martials... that's fine Raith Shadar, some of us would like 8+ abilities so we can have a proper foundation. I get that a box is good enough for you because you like martials roughing it, but some of us want that heating and showers that the casters get, since they keep telling us that we have the same income level.
Of course Conan shouldn't... he's only level 6... clearly Thulsa Doom and Thoth-Amon are higher leveled... 10 at least. Now Blake, Ruby or Yang versus Thulsa Doom... that seems more like a fair fight to me. And hey Ruby even has appropriate WBL what with her magic weapon, cloak of resistance, and of course a combat skirt. See how more balanced that fight because the people involved are the same level and have appropriate items? It works much better then trying to send masterwork axe level 6 barbarian against level 10+ caster.
So you like playing with level 1-6 abilities on your martials... that's fine Raith Shadar, some of us would like 8+ abilities so we can have a proper foundation. I get that a box is good enough for you because you like martials roughing it, but some of us want that heating and showers that the casters get, since they keep telling us that we have the same income level.
Stunning Assault is a lvl 16 ability. Buidling feat chains generally take longer than lvl 6 though the pre-reqs are lower. Some of the feats like Power Attack scale
You do realize that fighters get high level class abilities as well?
There is no save against Intimidate. Why should I have a problem with a no save ability that can cause someone to be shaken?
You sound like you don't play many high level games. Martials do have high level powers through weapons and magic items. Every martial I know has access to a flight item. Generally they wear some pretty nifty armor with some nice abilities that add useful abilities. Their weapons are pretty awesome.
You seem to be attempting to tie everything to feats. The combination of feats, class abilities, and magic items are very impressive and allow characters to do quite a bit.
Now you expect to have as much flexibility as wizards or clerics? You can switch out abilities that do what they can do on a daily basis and use them with no limit? While at the same time having limitless physical damage that exceeds what a caster can do?
Or you going to make the claim that your standard caster can do as much damage as a martial? Which I know from experience is a complete and utter fabrication.
Martials can do a lot. The majority of my players prefer martials or martial hybrids. It doesn't bother them a bit that they can't beat a wizard in one on one combat if he is prepared to stop them. They are quite happy with the 200+ point crits and being able to do something every single round without losing a resource. It's fun for them.
Why you feel deprived I have no idea. The martials in the groups I run are satisfied. They rarely have trouble defeating enemies.
Enlarge person grants you reach...and +damage and +Str for a -2 dex -1 AC and -1 Attack...A 1st Level Spell. One Spell. Can last a minimum of 6 rounds or attacks.
Lunge is on activation, gives you reach and -2 AC. Better. But also a feat I can only get at 6th Level. There is a disparity here. It is better than Enlarge Person...but also comes FIVE levels later.
Enlarge Person is far better than Lunge, because it lasts all round over (and also gives you increased weapon damage). This means you get an AoO for any non-reach enemies trying to attack you in melee, as they close to you.
For a medium-sized human fighter with 18 strength and a greatsword, enlarge person gives:
+1d6+1 damage, -1 init, -2 AC, +2CMB, +1 CMD, 5ft of reach for the full round.
Lunge gives:
5ft of reach on your turn, -2 AC for the full round.
Lunge is worse by far.
A two-hander fighter is as impressive a damage dealer as there is. When the guy is enlarged with with lunge, stunning assault, and whirlwind attack, he can level giant armies to the point no one can attack him until they are all laying dead around him.
Uhm... You know this thing called ranged attacks? And that whirlwind attack is a full-round action, allowing him to take only a 5ft step if he wants to use the attack? Yeah, he's effective at stopping an army of idiots who keeps going to stand next to him round after round. A 20ft radius isn't that hard to clear when your opponent has to either only make a single attack or only move 5 ft per round. And unless the enlarge is from a caster, the enemy armys low-to-mid-level casters will just dispel all the fighters buffs. Then you have about 400 bolts per round at you, while the melee enemies just back off a bit. 400 bolts average 20 hits per round even from 1st level commoners with crossbows, so that's 20d8 average per round. That will kill the martial long before he can clear out the whole army.
Meanwhile, a high-level wizard actually COULD take out a an army of thousands, through invisible flying mind blank and summoning creatures suitable for massive bombardment and dispelling (shadow demons, lantern archons etc)Or was the win by DM Fiat rather than mechanics? Nothing wrong with DM Fiat and I use it all the time, but saying martials can level armies because the DM chose to have the soldiers act really stupid or just flee at the sight of danger isn't really an argument in a discussion of how martials are mechanically limited. Of course a GM can tailor the campaign to benefit the martial outside of what they are mechanically entitled to while not giving the same benefits to the caster, but I'd prefer if martials actually had inate abilities of some kind that enabled these things.
The two-hander fighter had Intimidating Prowess (the feat that gives strength on Intimidate). He had a +30 or 40 intimidate. He intimidate giant kings, demons, dragons, and all manner of incredible powerful creatures with a glare.
Yeah, he could make a pit fiend take a -2 penalty to some stuff for about three rounds on average (if the modifier was +40 that is; the DC is 40 so on average will beat with 10) as a standard action. That's... kind of useful I guess.
Also note that a decent intimidate modifier is available for anyone, it's not something uniquely martial. A sorcerer can take intimidating prowess and turn into a Huge dragon, and assuming a +10 cha (which is low at that point) will have not only a +45 intimidate bonus (20 ranks + 3 class + 10 cha + 8 str + 4 size) vs the pit fiend, but also a DC 28 Frightful Presence, which means it will be affected by fear twice and if it fails the save vs FP, it will be frightened (and thus flee). A wizard would only have a +35 intimidate but also have the frightful aura.So yeah, the martial can be quite decent at scaring a single person at a time. Woopiedoo.
This two-hander fighter was known as The General. He lead the armies in the kingdom. He would get the most out of his people with a glare. Whenever someone stood up to the army, he moved to that location and laid down the law.
How is this tied to him being a martial?
Martials in the game do what martials are supposed to do. This whole idea they should be able to take on a prepared wizard in straight up combat is not something I support or ever will.
The issue though, is that mechanically, the wizard is by far better at everything that isn't a straight up fight; more skills, more options for building an army (through summons, animate dead, having to put less gold towards magic items etc), more magical support (duh), better intel, better sneaking (kind of hard to beat mind blank invisibility), better mobility, etc etc etc.
If martials actually had class-based kingdom-running powers I might have agreed with you, but currently, they don't at all. If you want to raise an army, you go to the guys with animate dead, planar binding etc. If you want to run a kingdom, whispering wind, teleport and commune all are more useful than hitting stuff with a stick.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Stunning Assault is a lvl 16 ability. Buidling feat chains generally take longer than lvl 6 though the pre-reqs are lower. Some of the feats like Power Attack scale
I believe the point was that at 16th level you could do what other classes could do at 6th level (stunning).
You do realize that fighters get high level class abilities as well?
Which are generally just "hit stuff harder with a sword" or weak enough to be low-level caster abilities. Exceptions exist (esp in the barbarian), but generally, high-level martial abilities add exactly no narrative power. Like, a level 10+ rogue can get the ability to pay only 75% of the price on mechanical traps... Meanwhile a caster can pick up CWI at 3rd level (or depending on class/bloodline etc get it as a bonus feat) to pay only 50% of the price on magical traps as well as about half the magic item chapter.
High level rogue and fighter abilities are about as good as low-level spells.
There is no save against Intimidate. Why should I have a problem with a no save ability that can cause someone to be shaken?
It's not a martial ability though. Anyone can take skills. Also, unless you invest quite heavily it's a standard action single target and generally has a quite low duration if the enemy is dangerous. Compare to Enervate which gives about as large penalty but on greater range, longer duration, and about as much chance of failure.
You sound like you don't play many high level games.
I don't anymore, and M/C disp and martials being so limited is one of the main reasons. I have done previously though, and I think you'll find plenty of people here with loads of high-level experience saying similar things about the M/C disp. Not to put words in anyones mouth, but I'd guess Kirth and Ashiel could both have something to say about it.
Martials do have high level powers through weapons and magic items. Every martial I know has access to a flight item.
Martials can get access to low level powers at high levels. Flight is a low-level ability and long-duration flight (with retained functionality) a mid-level ability.
Generally they wear some pretty nifty armor with some nice abilities that add useful abilities. Their weapons are pretty awesome.
Again, good at hitting stuff with a stick if they can reach it. That's not what people have issue with.
Now you expect to have as much flexibility as wizards or clerics? You can switch out abilities that do what they can do on a daily basis and use them with no limit? While at the same time having limitless physical damage that exceeds what a caster can do?
Actually, I believe the top damage dealers in bursts are high-level casters, but I might be wrong. But it's not even about flexibility. A wizard is flexible in that one day she might create a demiplane, the next she might teleport to the other side of the earth, the day after that she might summon a few solar. The issue isn't that fighters can't switch from day to day. It's that they can do none of these things, and nothing that comes close to comparing in terms of how it affects the campaign.
So far, all examples you've come with of martials with narrative power have nothing at all to do with their class or them being martial.
Or you going to make the claim that your standard caster can do as much damage as a martial? Which I know from experience is a complete and utter fabrication.
I suspect many casters that make even a little bit of investment in damage can match the damage output of a monk or rogue. With a bit heavier investment they might beat a fighter or ranger. Beating a smiting paladin archer or a highly optimized barbarian would require a lot of optimization though, but I don't think it's impossible (I saw 600 damage for a caster somewhere around here, but I have no source unfortunately).
Martials can do a lot.
So far all your examples have been "hit stuff" or do stuff anyone can do.
They are quite happy with the 200+ point crits and being able to do something every single round without losing a resource. It's fun for them.
Martials spend the most important resource in the game, every round: Actions. And they tend to require them even more than casters, which can contribute more with less actions.
Why you feel deprived I have...
A two-hander fighter is as impressive a damage dealer as there is. When the guy is enlarged with with lunge, stunning assault, and whirlwind attack, he can level giant armies to the point no one can attack him until they are all laying dead around him.Uhm... You know this thing called ranged attacks? And that whirlwind attack is a full-round action, allowing him to take only a 5ft step if he wants to use the attack? Yeah, he's effective at stopping an army of idiots who keeps going to stand next to him round after round. A 20ft radius isn't that hard to clear when your opponent has to either only make a single attack or only move 5 ft per round. And unless the enlarge is from a caster, the enemy armys low-to-mid-level casters will just dispel all the fighters buffs. Then you have about 400 bolts per round at you, while the melee enemies just back off a bit. 400 bolts average 20 hits per round even from 1st level commoners with crossbows, so that's 20d8 average per round. That will kill the martial long before he can clear out the whole army.
Meanwhile, a high-level wizard actually COULD take out a an army of thousands, through invisible flying mind blank and summoning creatures suitable for massive bombardment and dispelling (shadow demons, lantern archons etc)Or was the win by DM Fiat rather than mechanics? Nothing wrong with DM Fiat and I use it all the time, but saying martials can level armies because the DM chose to have the soldiers act really stupid or just flee at the sight of danger isn't really an argument in a discussion of how martials are mechanically limited. Of course a GM can tailor the campaign to benefit the martial outside of what they are mechanically entitled to while not giving the same benefits to the caster, but I'd prefer if martials actually had inate abilities of some kind that enabled these things.
The two-hander fighter had Intimidating Prowess (the feat that gives strength on Intimidate). He had a +30 or 40 intimidate. He...
Um...do you realize giants don't have the great to hit roll against an armored opponent. If they are separated, he flies to each one and kills them one at a time using them as cover.
GM Fiat? Giants aren't the most intelligent creatures. What exactly were you expecting them to do? They engaged him. He cut them down in hand to hand combat. GM Fiat had nothing to do with it. Do you play giants as these master tacticians spreading out in battle to perfectly surround the fighter as they assume the smaller warrior can beat them? I don't play them that way. He certainly isn't set up to be easily hit by ranged attacking giants.
Why would a summoned creature have a better chance? They don't do as much damage as the two-hander fighter, nowhere near as much.
Soldiers acting stupidly? What were their options? Run away? They couldn't stand within this 15 foot reach as he smashed them all.
Whirlwind Attack enlarged with Lunge allows him to hit everything within 15 feet.
You sound like you don't have much experience with the high level game. You think a fighter is that lacking in resources at high level? They aren't. He will pick his battlefield. Show up with potions or rings that allow him to do things like fly, haste himself, and move around the field whacking giants out if they want to spread out and try to do him in with ranged attacks.
The fighters I run with don't stand there like idiots either. They are far stronger than the common giant at high level. They are far better equipped. They come in ready to whack giants out. They spread out and used ranged attacks, they die slower, but they still die.
The difference for me is martials do what martials are supposed to do. A pure fighter is a master at weapons. Does the fighter accomplish this type of character? Yes, it does.
Martials are supposed to hit stuff. Every time I've seen martials do something in stories, it is with weapons, mundane fighting techniques, or magic items. They have this in abundance.
You want anime fighters with special super hero powers? That is available in other game systems.
The fantasy books I've ready fit fine with the Pathfinder game. The archetypes fit the story and type with some buffs.
I see more of the problems with the high level game having to do with encounter design rather than the caster/martial disparity. I design with the story in mind. I design encounters to make my players feel heroic. The reality is even the wizard is weak if I design encounters to make him so. Why would it be any different for martials? You design an encounter with the idea of fighting a party, not this encounter where the wizard shows up and ends the encounter.
That's all I hear. It isn't my experience that the wizard constantly ends encounters. He has power and can do a lot of stuff. He isn't able to do all this stuff on the fly. His spells don't always work. He will go rounds failing to be effective while the martials are teeing off.
I don't get the complaining. The fighter is the fighter. If you want someone with spells or other ability types, maybe choose a barbarian or magus. Don't try to tell me these two classes are weak.
Why all the wizard envy? It's a team game. Wizard cannot wander around alone. He'll die just like anyone else because he'll eventually run into an opponent that can end him.
Um...do you realize giants don't have the great to hit roll against an armored opponent. If they are separated, he flies to each one and kills them one at a time using them as cover.
Oh, figured it was "an army that is giant" rather than "an army of giants". How many where they?
Also, you don't need great to hit roll when you are an _army_. Even if you only hit on a natural 20, that's gotta be quite a few hits per round.
GM Fiat? Giants aren't the most intelligent creatures. What exactly were you expecting them to do? They engaged him.
The dumbest core true giants has an intelligence of 6 and a wisdom of 10; just a tad bit more stupid than many PC's are. And are famous for _throwing rocks_.
Their tactics are like this:
"Hill giants prefer to fight from high, rocky outcroppings, where they can pelt opponents with rocks and boulders while limiting the risk to themselves. Hill giants love to make overrun attacks against smaller creatures when they first join battle. Thereafter, they stand fast and swing away with their massive clubs. "
An enlarged fighter is not smaller than them, so they stay back and pelt with boulders. Even if it's just 200 of them (which is very small to call an "army") that's an average of 10d8+100 damage each round. How did the fighter survive?
All the other standard giants seem to be of about average human intellect, except a few of the newer ones published in later bestiaries (cave giant of the top of my head). But you have to agree, if the reason the fighter had a chance was because the GM picked the most stupid giant race that they could find and then had them disregard the rock-throwing they're so famous for, then that doesn't speak to the martial's strength at all and is so extremely circumstantial (and again, not tied to the martial being a martial).
Do you play giants as these master tacticians spreading out in battle to perfectly surround the fighter as they assume the smaller warrior can beat them?
Being a warlike race, they should have at least as good grasp of tactics as humans of similar intellect. They are a bit less logical and calculating than humans but equally intuitious and wise. And unless these where storm giants or similar, the fighter was not smaller. You claimed he was enlarged.
Why would a summoned creature have a better chance? They don't do as much damage as the two-hander fighter, nowhere near as much.
I assumed it was a large army of standard humanoids. A fighter can kill only a few per round, regardless of how weak they are, unless they act incredibly stupid. Summoning ~5 lantern archons per round means your damage increases exponentially every round. Or shadow demons, because they are so versatile - they can dispel enemy mages protections, use telekinesis to either throw about a bunch of common soldiers or launch projectiles at commanders. Now, against an army of giants the situation is a bit different and early mid-level spells like Confusion would reign supreme against their crappy will save. Unlike the fighter, the caster doesn't have to be close to the action nor would her position be as easily identified (even an invisible fighter will be easy to notice as soon as it starts killing).
Soldiers acting stupidly? What were their options? Run away? They couldn't stand within this 15 foot reach as he smashed them all.
Uhm... Yes? If you can't handle the threat in melee, retreat. Especially when they only need to retreat like 10 ft per round to nerf the martial to the ground. Reducing the martial from 15 attacks per round to just one or three while peppering with hundreds of bolts (or rocks in this case) is very much the tactic you'd use.
The fighters I run with don't stand there like idiots either. They are far stronger than the common giant at high level. They are far better equipped. They come in ready to whack giants out.
Of course a high-level martial is far stronger than a common giant, otherwise the situation would have been catastrophical. You didn't claim this was a giant though, you claimed it was an army of giants. And apparently they just charged in, ignoring both basic tactics and their listed prefered tactics. Dying slower is key for the giants as that means they can throw more rocks per round. Even basic hill giants do 1d8+10 per rock that hits, so with a small army/large warband of 200 giants the fighter would eat an average of 145 damage per round, or 95 if he had DR 5/-. Then "dying in 150 rounds instead of 10 rounds" is very very important, and when it's as easy as "move back a bit" there's no reason at all not to do it.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The difference for me is martials do what martials are supposed to do. A pure fighter is a master at weapons. Does the fighter accomplish this type of character? Yes, it does.
The issue is that that isn't a 20 level concept. It's more like a 7 level concept. If you want a 20 level "master at weapons" it needs to be able to do stuff like shoot an arrow that breaches the barriers between planes to strike a demon lord in her castle.
Martials are supposed to hit stuff. Every time I've seen martials do something in stories, it is with weapons, mundane fighting techniques, or magic items. They have this in abundance.
Oh. I've seen martials in stories catch a hind so fast it outruns an arrow and rerouting two major rivers in a single day in order to clean a divine stable. Even the ancient greeks had that kind of stories.
The fantasy books I've ready fit fine with the Pathfinder game.
Can you give any examples in which the martials are like pathfinder martials and the spellcasters are like pathfinder spellcasters, and the world is NOT exclusively ruled by spellcasters?
I see more of the problems with the high level game having to do with encounter design rather than the caster/martial disparity. I design with the story in mind. I design encounters to make my players feel heroic. The reality is even the wizard is weak if I design encounters to make him so. Why would it be any different for martials? You design an encounter with the idea of fighting a party, not this encounter where the wizard shows up and ends the encounter.
The issue is that challenging the caster is a much larger work than challenging the martial, in the mechanical system we have. Yeah, you can implement soft house rules and it can work better but that doesn't say much about the system as such.
But it's not so much that casters can end encounters in a single round (though that is also an issue) but that they can simply bypass encounters unless the encounters are specifically designed with loads of arbitrary limitations to prevent them from bypassing them.
And frankly, some classes require much more customization of encounters than others. Take a standard AP and run through it first with a party of rogue/fighter/monk/cavalier, then with a party of master summoner/wizard/druid/battle oracle. Test NOT changing the encounters to tailor them to the party, and NOT adding house rules or arbitrary limitations that are not written into the AP. You'll see one party struggle enormously, while one party having more or less a breeze. And there's a large difference in kind too - the martial party will have to strictly follow the plotline as it is shown and take the most obvious route, meanwhile the caster party can bypass a lot of steps through divination, conjuration and transmutation spells.
If you want someone with spells or other ability types, maybe choose a barbarian or magus. Don't try to tell me these two classes are weak.
The magus is fine. The barbarian is fine at low and mid levels, but at levels 13+ it's lack of narrative power starts showing again.
Wizard cannot wander around alone. He'll die just like anyone else because he'll eventually run into an opponent that can end him.
Actually, a high-level wizard using a ring of invisibility, a permanent arcane sight and mind blank is pretty much impossible to kill unless the wizard seeks out combat, simply because you pretty much can't detect it well enough to hurt it in any way.