|
How does, say, giving the fighter a good will save, access to some better class skills (lets say perception, acrobatics and stealth) and 4+Int skill points per level make them so horribly complex that people who just want to hit things will be overwhelmed by the sheer variety of options that they will immediately stop playing.
Bearing in mind of course that this is a group of people who enjoy playing a class whose main feature requires you to look through a menu of quite literally hundreds of different feats.
Not to mention the fact that the changes mentioned are almost entirely reactive in nature and do not change the combat dynamic at all.
About 6th level. Beast Totem gives you an AC comparable to that of a Fighter in Full-Plate whilst you're in a Breastplate. A Barbarian can also use a shield perfectly fine.Considering a Barbarian can get an AC higher than Fighters, have DR, and have much much more HP than Fighters, I think your Barbarians may have a problem with Reckless Abandon looking so good.A Fighter's ability to be always on is negligible(Not to mention false since his presence drains more party resources than mostI would argue that this is not the case.
1) You do not neccesarily know when to nova. The fight seemed scary then you nova but in fact the fight was easy and you lost resources. The fight seems to be easy and 3 rounds later you realize how dangerous it reaslly is.
2) In my experience the barbarian drain just more resources than fighters. Particularly healing.
At what level is that AC higher than fighters?, And I am not talking about reclkes abandon.
Barbarian also have a lot of hps and in my experience they rely on them to not get killed and that make them need more healing.
Totally untrue.
Dawnflower dervish bard tops out at +8/8, +10/10 with a courageous weapon.Interesting. Can you show a build?There's no build, that's just what the archetype does. It doubles the inspire courage bonus, but it is only applied to himself (so the +4/4 becomes +8/8)
Those are just numbers in vacuum that tells little on the actual figthing prowess of the archetype.
You are now comparing specific builds. Yes, if the fighter goes DEX focused he can actually get up to really high AC. But if the fighter goes DEX based he'll also suck major donkey balls. Armor training isn't worth crap because you need to have way too high DEX for most fighters to realistically benefit from it.
Incorrect at some many levels.
Then he literally gets no bonus AC from armor training (as mithral fullplate max dex bonus is already at least +3).
WHy he wants mithral full plate? Those are 10 K that he do not need to spend thanks to armor training. Take those 10 K and buy a Ioun stone + way finder to rise your defense agaisnt domination, then another Ioun stone to have a +1 to all saves and you still have mor than 1 K for other things.
|
|
WHy he wants mithral full plate? Those are 10 K that he do not need to spend thanks to armor training. Take those 10 K and buy a Ioun stone + way finder to rise your defense agaisnt domination, then another Ioun stone to have a +1 to all saves and you still have mor than 1 K for other things.
I've brought this up before, but listing splat book items that Paizo has intentionally avoided adding to their core line as evidence that a class is fine as is, is not good justification. It's like saying the Rogue is a great pet-based class because Carnivalist.
Be honest at least in your argument which is "The Fighter isn't as well-rounded as any of the other classes, but I don't care and I don't want him to be". Don't pretend he's perfectly well balanced when you know enough about game design to know that he isn't.
+1.
it is like "I dislike the class but everyone else have to like the class because the devs say it is a grealy designed class".
I've brought this up before, but listing splat book items that Paizo has intentionally avoided adding to their core line as evidence that a class is fine as is, is not good justification. It's like saying the Rogue is a great pet-based class because Carnivalist.
WHy he wants mithral full plate? Those are 10 K that he do not need to spend thanks to armor training. Take those 10 K and buy a Ioun stone + way finder to rise your defense agaisnt domination, then another Ioun stone to have a +1 to all saves and you still have mor than 1 K for other things.
Because Mithral celestial full plate are never ever taked into consideration in these kind of threads?
|
|
Because Mithral celestial full plate are never ever taked into consideration in these kind of threads?I've brought this up before, but listing splat book items that Paizo has intentionally avoided adding to their core line as evidence that a class is fine as is, is not good justification. It's like saying the Rogue is a great pet-based class because Carnivalist.
WHy he wants mithral full plate? Those are 10 K that he do not need to spend thanks to armor training. Take those 10 K and buy a Ioun stone + way finder to rise your defense agaisnt domination, then another Ioun stone to have a +1 to all saves and you still have mor than 1 K for other things.
I'm really not trying to be snarky when I say this: Mithral and Celestial are core options. They're in the hardcover books (in fact, they're both in the CRB). Wayfinders and a lot of the associated ioun stones are from a 5 year old book that's been superceded in print at least 3 times.
My personal opinion is that if you're talking class balance, it's probably best to use materials and references you could find on Paizo's PRD where they've collected everything they believe deserves to be part of their core product line. The fact that Wayfinders have been around for half a decade and Paizo has not seen fit to include them in any of their core books, not even Ultimate Equipment, says to me that not even Paizo takes those into account when determining balance or options.
I'm really not trying to be snarky when I say this: Mithral and Celestial are core options.
The ceelstial full plate is not core but from an AP.
I'm really not trying to be snarky when I say this: Mithral and Celestial are core options.The ceelstial full plate is not core but from an AP.
Pathfinder 11: Skeletons of Scarwall. Copyright 2008, Paizo Publishing LLC. Author: Greg A. Vaughan
Or better known as the CRB.
Who needs better than +3 anyways?
Fighters have feats to expand into those areas.
They generally don't. Things like Iron Will and Lightning Reflexes are not bonus fighter feats. Likewise, Fighters cannot take feats to grant themselves energy resistances, immunity to poisons, heal their own ability damage, heal themselves, etc. But because I'm interested in fair and honest discussion, I'm welcoming you to show me the Combat feats that do.
I don't see how a combination of sword and fort save can't handle mold.
Brown mold is CR 2. You can't harm it effectively without access to cold magic. It deals cold damage each round that you're near it and grows rapidly if exposed to fire within 5 ft (which means that you can get in trouble if you walk near it with a torch or similar). There are other molds that are poisonous, and a good saving throw bonus is nice but not perfect. Rangers on the other hand can solve both of these issues with class features they get access to at 4th level and early access to with 25 gp.
Traps are what the skill monkeys are for.
You have to actively search for traps and it's difficult to do when combat breaks out. Even if you're not a skill monkey you are very vulnerable to traps. Traps placed intelligently and used intelligently are frequently like monsters in their own right during encounters (such as hidden pit traps between the PC and the enemies.
Surprise attacks from enemies is exactly where the Fighters AC comes in handy.
Only as long as the attack is targeting your flat-footed AC (which is no better than any other martial's in that case because you're still flat-footed so "Dexterity grows on trees in Fighter land" arguments don't even fly there. Of course, given the fact their defenses are weak, it's exceptionally easy to exploit their vulnerabilities.
For example, in several of my games my party has been ambushed by kobolds or goblins (go figure, they're small races with high Dexterity scores and see in the dark). Getting ambushed by a few alchemist fires during the surprise round is kind of a pain.
Alternatively, getting roflstomped by some sneaky spellcaster (which is pretty easy I might add) such as a drow mage of some sort.
Blind-fight for smoke, HP for breath weapons, bravery for fear, and on and on.
Blind-fight is a great feat. I take it on almost all of my characters. Breath weapons can do more than damage, though Fighter's don't have more HP than any other martial, though other martials have things that help defend against things like breath weapons (Paladins have better saves, Barbarians have Superstitious, Rangers have great Reflex saves, evasion, and possibly resist energy). Bravery is one of the worst class features in the game.
Can other martials meet these challenges better? Sure. But maybe that isn't a good thing. Maybe the fighter handles all these situations just fine and its the other classes that are being gratuitous and unbalanced. In a PVE game it's more important how classes balance to the encounters not each other.
Yeah...and the other 3 core martials fit very well with the other classes. Barbarian, Bard, Cleric, Druid, Paladin, Ranger, Sorcerer, and Wizard all look great in a party together. Fighter, Rogue, and Monk are the odd ones out.
By logical deduction it is the latter three that are the problem.
Yeah...and the other 3 core martials fit very well with the other classes. Barbarian, Bard, Cleric, Druid, Paladin, Ranger, Sorcerer, and Wizard all look great in a party together. Fighter, Rogue, and Monk are the odd ones out.
By logical deduction it is the latter three that are the problem.
I forgot that fighters were fullcasters and skillmonkeys!
Really though. Only the barbar and the paladin are problems. The ranger is at most par in dungeon combat ability to the fighter.
NOTE: I'm not getting into anything, but dungeon combat.
|
|
I'm really not trying to be snarky when I say this: Mithral and Celestial are core options.The ceelstial full plate is not core but from an AP.
Ah, my mistake then, I wasn't aware that "Celestial Mithral Full-plate" was a specific item from an AP. I would make the same argument on that side as well. An item from a 6 year old AP does not make a good discussion point for whether a class is or is not balanced.
I just think it is stupid that these pissing matches so often hinge on having very specific gear to make up for weaknesses and amplify strengths to "prove" a point. The classes usability should never hinge on a couple peices of specific gear.
Agreed. Any time the argument reaches "Well x is better than y because of course x is going to have z" you aren't talking about class design, you're talking about item design.
Ah, my mistake then, I wasn't aware that "Celestial Mithral Full-plate" was a specific item from an AP. I would make the same argument on that side as well. An item from a 6 year old AP does not make a good balance point for whether a class is or is not balanced.I'm really not trying to be snarky when I say this: Mithral and Celestial are core options.The ceelstial full plate is not core but from an AP.
Fine, then we are on the same boat.
So, the fighter that do not spend money in mithral for his full plate still have 10 K that can be spent in other things, without thinking too much when the pally buy the mithral full plate the fighter buys a +3 full plate for just more AC and still more mobility.
|
|
Yep, or if you use a very odd combo (one that would not organically come into being in the game world) that a class is too powerful so it needs cut backBut that combo then does not need a cut back?
Why!?
He's saying that statements that (for example) the Barbarian as a class is too powerful because Superstition and Beast Totem is flawed thinking. It's not the class that's too powerful, it's that particular combo (I'm not actually making a statement either way on Superstitious and Beast Totem, just using it as an example).
You shouldn't be calling for the Barbarian to be nerfed, you should be addressing the specific items that you believe cause an issue, and discussing how those compare to the other options available at the same level or for the same amount of investment.
I forgot that fighters were fullcasters and skillmonkeys!Yeah...and the other 3 core martials fit very well with the other classes. Barbarian, Bard, Cleric, Druid, Paladin, Ranger, Sorcerer, and Wizard all look great in a party together. Fighter, Rogue, and Monk are the odd ones out.
By logical deduction it is the latter three that are the problem.
They aren't fullcasters and skill monkeys, but neither are the Barbarian and Paladin (Ranger is kind of a skill-monkey). But as you said this is a PvE game, not a PvP game (okay, it's actually really more of a PvP game than people want to admit since NPCs use the same classes as PCs pretty often and the same mechanics unlike in games like WoW, but...), and those classes fit well with those other characters.
Ranger + Bard + Cleric + Wizard = awesome party, no joke.
Paladin + Bard + Druid + Sorcerer = awesome party, no joke.
Barbarian + Ranger + Cleric + Bard = awesome party, no joke.
Etc.
Bases are covered. You have a competent martial that does well in a multitude of environments, can often contribute things outside of combat and brings more resources to the party.
Really though. Only the barbar and the paladin are problems. The ranger is at most par in dungeon combat ability to the fighter.
This is something you are asserting as a fact. I'm skeptical. The Barbarian, Ranger, and Paladin are all very well balanced against each other, with strong pros and cons to each of them. None of them seem overpowered / underpowered to me in the least.
NOTE: I'm not getting into anything, but dungeon combat.
So you're insisting that Fighters aren't underpowered and that the other classes are overpowered because you assert that Fighters are good in an incredibly narrow subset of possible scenarios?
Really? O_o
So you're insisting that Fighters aren't underpowered and that the other classes are overpowered because you assert that Fighters are good in an incredibly narrow subset of possible scenarios?
Really? O_o
Who says I'm making a general statement about fighters being balanced?
I'm just saying that they are more than enough for dungeon combat. Other martials doing an even better job, so much so as to make the fighter comparatively suck would be the problem not the fighter. No martial should be out fighting the fighter in dungeon combat by virtue of how much a fighter already wrecks dungeon combat. Anything more that is unbalancing. Buffing the fighter to those levels only furthers the problem.
I'm not getting into anything, but dungeon combat.You're also not actually defining what "dungeon combat" means. When asked for what a "dungeon" means in your use, you defined it as being "cramped", but when asked about a number of possible environments that someone else would call dungeons, you agreed, despite said environments explicitly being spacious, which by definition makes them not cramped.
They weren't all that spacious as far as I knew, or they came with their own concerns that reduced the viability of the space.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
[...] a fighter already wrecks dungeon combat.
Prove it. For the love of Pelor, PROVE IT.
So you're insisting that Fighters aren't underpowered and that the other classes are overpowered because you assert that Fighters are good in an incredibly narrow subset of possible scenarios?
Really? O_o
Who says I'm making a general statement about fighters being balanced?
I'm just saying that they are more than enough for dungeon combat.
I disagree, but I'll put that aside for right now.
Other martials doing an even better job, so much so as to make the fighter comparatively suck would be the problem not the fighter.
No. The other martials do a better job at it than the Fighter, but not a better job at it than each other. The Fighter is odd man out in this case. Your assertion that the problem is with the rest of the martials who are balanced with each other.
That makes about as much sense as saying "We have this team of Soccer players. Most of them are really good at soccer. One of them is not very good. Clearly the problem is not the one who is sub-par, it is the ones setting the par".
Given that the game runs very well with core monsters and such plus those classes that aren't underpowered, I'm skeptical.
No martial should be out fighting the fighter in dungeon combat by virtue of how much a fighter already wrecks dungeon combat. Anything more that is unbalancing. Buffing the fighter to those levels only furthers the problem.
I still haven't seen you give any reasons why they wreck in combat. I think Fighters are pretty bad at combat. You've mentioned the Cleave feat (which isn't very good at all) but not much else.
You keep saying these things but I just don't believe you yet. Please provide some examples. I'm not asking for full builds, just a simple explanation for what makes Fighters so amazing at dungeon combat, because dungeon combat can be one of the most difficult places to engage in combat and where crowd-control tactics are strongest.
[...] a fighter already wrecks dungeon combat.Prove it. For the love of Pelor, PROVE IT.
This is difficult. It is more apt to create examples of common situations where they would fail as others have tried.
Step into my position. I haven't conceived yet of dungeon combat situations where the fighter falters and doesn't just wreck everything.
1 |Toughness, Intimidating Prowess, Combat Reflexes
2 |Bravery, Power Attack
3 |Armor training, Cleave
4 |Great Cleave
5 |Weapon training(Blades, Heavy), Blind-Fight
6 |Bravery, Lunge
7 |Armor training, Iron Will
8 |Quick Draw
9 |Weapon training(Thrown), Step Up
10|Bravery, Vital Strike
11|Armor training, Improved Vital Strike
12|Strike Back
13|Weapon training(Bows), Improved Iron Will
14|Bravery, Stand Still
15|Armor training, Deadly Aim
16|Greater Vital Strike
17|Weapon training(Close), Disruptive
18|Bravery, Spellbreaker
19|Armor mastery, Great Fortitude
20|weapon mastery(GS), Improved Critical(GS)
You keep saying these things but I just don't believe you yet. Please provide some examples. I'm not asking for full builds, just a simple explanation for what makes Fighters so amazing at dungeon combat, because dungeon combat can be one of the most difficult places to engage in combat and where crowd-control tactics are strongest.
Bring forth these situations, so that I may also learn of them.
Positive proof by my is difficult, because the whole point of me saying dungeon combat, is that I am not trying to make claims in a vacuum.
Now, what in the fighter's class abilities helps it avoid being beaten be having acid breathed at it every 1d4 rounds by something flying just out of reach?The ability to shoot 2 arrows a round in return?
Good answer. :P
Though I'd be a bit surprised fighting a green dragon in a dungeon (generally I'd expect to see them in their ecological locations such as forests and lakes). Perhaps if the dungeon included an underground lake that led into a forest or something. *ponders*
If I was said green dragon in a dungeon situation (tight locations, twists and turns, etc) that was suitable for a green dragon (includes waterways, lots of underground plant growth such as roots, moss, mold, etc, I'd probably open with a breath weapon and then move away (40 ft. speed) through the most twisting path I can take (to prevent them charging at me and locking me in combat), then make for my aquatic area where I can wreck their faces.
A more amusing dragon for a dungeon encounter IMHO is a white dragon (same CR) in an icy dungeon. Their ability to burrow, swim, fly, sculpt ice, and move around icy areas like xenomorphs is pretty awesome for a dungeon-dweller.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
[...] a fighter already wrecks dungeon combat.Prove it. For the love of Pelor, PROVE IT.This is difficult. It is more apt to create examples of common situations where they would fail as others have tried.
Spoiler:Human Fighter || 18 14 14 10 10 10 || Intimidate, Profession(engineer), Climb, Survival, Swim; Perception, Knowledge(dungeoneering, engineering)|| Resilient(+1 fort saves), Indomitable Faith(+1 Will)
1 |Toughness, Intimidating Prowess, Combat Reflexes
2 |Bravery, Power Attack
3 |Armor training, Cleave
4 |Great Cleave
5 |Weapon training(Blades, Heavy), Blind-Fight
6 |Bravery, Lunge
7 |Armor training, Iron Will
8 |Quick Draw
9 |Weapon training(Thrown), Step Up
10|Bravery, Vital Strike
11|Armor training, Improved Vital Strike
12|Strike Back
13|Weapon training(Bows), Improved Iron Will
14|Bravery, Stand Still
15|Armor training, Deadly Aim
16|Greater Vital Strike
17|Weapon training(Close), Disruptive
18|Bravery, Spellbreaker
19|Armor mastery, Great Fortitude
20|weapon mastery(GS), Improved Critical(GS)
You're part of the way there. Now show how this build "wrecks" at dungeon combat.
Step into my position. I haven't conceived yet of dungeon combat situations where the fighter falters and doesn't just wreck everything.
You can't say "fighters wreck at dungeon combat," but then tell us that they only wreck at dungeon combat because you can't think of any situations in which they do not wreck.
That's almost a tautology. You're defining "wreck at combat" as "I can't think of a situation in which wrecking is not possible, therefore it must wreck at combat."
When I ask you, or anyone else for that matter, to prove something they are stating is true, I mean to show examples, and/or provide evidence that, you know, proves what you're stating. A build doesn't do that. You have to put the principles behind that build and the mechanics inherent to it into practice. In this case, put them into practice in dungeon combat and show how they wreck.
Now, that you can't imagine a situation in which a fighter does not wreck in dungeon combat implies that you can imagine one or more situations in which the fighter does wreck in combat. So why don't we start with those situations?
You keep saying these things but I just don't believe you yet. Please provide some examples. I'm not asking for full builds, just a simple explanation for what makes Fighters so amazing at dungeon combat, because dungeon combat can be one of the most difficult places to engage in combat and where crowd-control tactics are strongest.Positive proof by my is difficult, because the whole point of me saying dungeon combat, is that I am not trying to make claims in a vacuum.
I'm running a game thing right now, but do you think you can elaborate on what "dungeon combat" is so I can make sure my examples are appropriate to the conversation when I post them later?
I'm running a game thing right now, but do you think you can elaborate on what "dungeon combat" is so I can make sure my examples are appropriate to the conversation when I post them later?You keep saying these things but I just don't believe you yet. Please provide some examples. I'm not asking for full builds, just a simple explanation for what makes Fighters so amazing at dungeon combat, because dungeon combat can be one of the most difficult places to engage in combat and where crowd-control tactics are strongest.Positive proof by my is difficult, because the whole point of me saying dungeon combat, is that I am not trying to make claims in a vacuum.
If you are running an AP, then dungeon combat can stem from there.
If not, let's start with something broad. If you as a GM would put it on a map of 5ft by 5ft squares and know how tall the ceiling is, then it is probably dungeon combat.
Let's see where that takes us.