What does a Fighter do that a Ranger doesn't?


Pathfinder First Edition General Discussion

101 to 150 of 948 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

Rynjin wrote:
Getting Shield Master at 6th level is part of the reason Rangers spit on the Fighter, it's true.

Every time I go to make a Ranger now I can't not go Shield style. A +5 shield and a +5 weapon for 25,000 gold is just too good to pass up.


And he wears crap armour and has four stats he needs to be good at instead of two or three.

Oh, and the magic material points made earlier assume a certain wealth/level of play. Plate-mail will be available before any armour made from special materials.


strayshift wrote:
And he wears crap armour and has four stats he needs to be good at instead of two or three.

With the Fighter's Will save being what it is it's not like he can dump Wisdom. He's pretty much in the exact same boat as the Ranger except the Ranger gets additional benefits to having his Wisdom decent.


Rynjin wrote:
Getting Shield Master at 6th level is part of the reason Rangers spit on the Fighter, it's true.

That always make me wonder "WTF where they thinking?"


Semi pounce. To my knowledge rangers do not have a way to do this (unless he fight mounted)


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Alexandros Satorum wrote:
Semi pounce. To my knowledge rangers do not have a way to do this (unless he fight mounted)

Which, considering that Rangers can get a mount as a class feature, and have the skill points to invest in handle animal & ride...


Squirrel_Dude wrote:
Alexandros Satorum wrote:
Semi pounce. To my knowledge rangers do not have a way to do this (unless he fight mounted)
Which, considering that Rangers can get a mount as a class feature, and have the skill points to invest in handle animal & ride...

I know.

So lets make the statement mor eprecise. Semi-pounce while unmounted.


Squirrel_Dude wrote:
Alexandros Satorum wrote:
Semi pounce. To my knowledge rangers do not have a way to do this (unless he fight mounted)
Which, considering that Rangers can get a mount as a class feature, and have the skill points to invest in handle animal & ride...

Not to mention early prerequisite-less access to Mounted Skirmisher.


Alexandros Satorum wrote:
So lets make the statement mor eprecise. Semi-pounce while unmounted.

What is "Semi-pounce"?


Squirrel_Dude wrote:
Alexandros Satorum wrote:
So lets make the statement mor eprecise. Semi-pounce while unmounted.
What is "Semi-pounce"?

To move and to attack more than once, but not actually pounce.


Alexandros Satorum wrote:
Squirrel_Dude wrote:
Alexandros Satorum wrote:
So lets make the statement mor eprecise. Semi-pounce while unmounted.
What is "Semi-pounce"?
To move and to attack more than once, but not actually pounce.

Animal Companions can attack, too.


Squirrel_Dude wrote:
Alexandros Satorum wrote:
So lets make the statement mor eprecise. Semi-pounce while unmounted.
What is "Semi-pounce"?

Both Mobile Fighter and Dervish of Dawn get the level 11 ability to combine a move with a full attack by giving up the highest BAB attack. It's kinda like pounce, but a bit worse. Hence semi-pounce.


Squirrel_Dude wrote:
Alexandros Satorum wrote:
Squirrel_Dude wrote:
Alexandros Satorum wrote:
So lets make the statement mor eprecise. Semi-pounce while unmounted.
What is "Semi-pounce"?
To move and to attack more than once, but not actually pounce.
Animal Companions can attack, too.

And a Mobile fighter can have an animal companion too. So,in this realm of posibilities the fighter still can have more attacks.


I have another. Drawves fighter can sunder spells.

Silver Crusade

voska66 wrote:

Tanking is all the fighter does better than any class. I have yet to see a class that can tank up as much as fighter can.

I've saw fighter in my group had an AC of 56 at level 18 going with sword and board two weapon fighting style in mitheral full plate. Took Eldrich heritage feats to get the natural armor using the dragon bloodline with ifrit race and swapped the 5 energy resistance for +4 initiative. Did some good damage too so he was a threat.

I don't know if you've seen an Invulnerable Rager with Improved Stalwart, but that DR and the biggest HD in the game makes Barbs basically the best tank around.

Also while impressive, that build seems quite prone to touch attacks as well as lacking a way to do serious damage. At least in comparison to the DR 20/- Barb who gave up a few feats to be a Wall of Force and still hits like a tank on tank steroids that are also on fire.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Alexandros Satorum wrote:
And a Mobile fighter can have an animal companion too. So,in this realm of possibilities the fighter still can have more attacks.

*checks Mobile fighter archetype*

I... what?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
N. Jolly wrote:
voska66 wrote:

Tanking is all the fighter does better than any class. I have yet to see a class that can tank up as much as fighter can.

I've saw fighter in my group had an AC of 56 at level 18 going with sword and board two weapon fighting style in mitheral full plate. Took Eldrich heritage feats to get the natural armor using the dragon bloodline with ifrit race and swapped the 5 energy resistance for +4 initiative. Did some good damage too so he was a threat.

I don't know if you've seen an Invulnerable Rager with Improved Stalwart, but that DR and the biggest HD in the game makes Barbs basically the best tank around.

Also while impressive, that build seems quite prone to touch attacks as well as lacking a way to do serious damage. At least in comparison to the DR 20/- Barb who gave up a few feats to be a Wall of Force and still hits like a tank on tank steroids that are also on fire.

Throw in Superstition, a race with a favored class bonus to improve it, and a Ring of Evasion and you shrug off just about anything.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Athaleon wrote:


Rangers can two-hand just as well, that's the one style that doesn't have a bunch of pointless feat requirements. Fighters can take the two-hander archetype, but doesn't that give up Armor Training?

Fighters don't need the Two-Hander archetype to be devastating with two-handed weapons.


Squirrel_Dude wrote:
Alexandros Satorum wrote:
And a Mobile fighter can have an animal companion too. So,in this realm of possibilities the fighter still can have more attacks.

*checks Mobile fighter archetype*

I... what?

I assumed he meant Eldritch Heritage into Sylvan bloodline, but does Eldritch Heritage RAW allow you to get powers from a Crossblood line?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
LazarX wrote:
Athaleon wrote:


Rangers can two-hand just as well, that's the one style that doesn't have a bunch of pointless feat requirements. Fighters can take the two-hander archetype, but doesn't that give up Armor Training?

Fighters don't need the Two-Hander archetype to be devastating with two-handed weapons.

No one does. Power Attack and done.


Squirrel_Dude wrote:
Alexandros Satorum wrote:
Squirrel_Dude wrote:
Alexandros Satorum wrote:
So lets make the statement mor eprecise. Semi-pounce while unmounted.
What is "Semi-pounce"?
To move and to attack more than once, but not actually pounce.
Animal Companions can attack, too.

Plus, if you don't jumping through some hoops to meet the pre-requisites, you can use Coordinated Charge to have your animal companion grant you an immediate action charge.


chaoseffect wrote:
Squirrel_Dude wrote:
Alexandros Satorum wrote:
And a Mobile fighter can have an animal companion too. So,in this realm of possibilities the fighter still can have more attacks.

*checks Mobile fighter archetype*

I... what?

I assumed he meant Eldritch Heritage into Sylvan bloodline, but does Eldritch Heritage RAW allow you to get powers from a Crossblood line?

Nature soul + Animall Ally, no cha prerequisite.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
voska66 wrote:

Tanking is all the fighter does better than any class. I have yet to see a class that can tank up as much as fighter can.

I've saw fighter in my group had an AC of 56 at level 18 going with sword and board two weapon fighting style in mitheral full plate. Took Eldrich heritage feats to get the natural armor using the dragon bloodline with ifrit race and swapped the 5 energy resistance for +4 initiative. Did some good damage too so he was a threat.

Sorry man but there is so much more to tanking than a high AC. Paladins can self heal as a swift action, have spells to provoke attacks from others, have much higher saves, are immune to mind controls and give everyone else protection from them. A Paladin is the very definition of the word 'Tank'.


I agree with the posters here. Fighters aren't even all that good at tanking. Why do people think Tank equals "Wow, look at my AC!"
No. Just no. There is a lot more to tanking than that.

Paladins are better tanks.

Compare a B.S. class feature like Bravery to the Paladin's Aura of Courage.

Bravery AKA Fighter Class {Dr. Evil Hands}"Feature"{Dr. Evil Hands}
Starting at 2nd level, a fighter gains a +1 bonus on Will saves against fear. This bonus increases by +1 for every four levels beyond 2nd.

Aura of Courage AKA "FU, Fighter Class Feature!"
At 3rd level, a paladin is IMMUNE TO FEAR (magical or OTHERWISE).
Each ally within 10 feet of her gains a +4 morale bonus (Equivalent to a 14th Level Fighter's Bravery as a RIDER AURA FOR TEAMMATES!)
on saving throws against fear effects. This ability functions only while the paladin is conscious, not if she is unconscious or dead.

Other things the fighter doesn't have

Charisma to Saves and superior Saves
Immunity to Disease. The Fighter would get something awful to help his Fortitude save named something like "Booster Shot" because anything else wouldn't be "realistic."
Aura of Resolve at Level 8 (IMMUNITY to charm spells and SLAs) and a +4 rider to that at Level 17
Spells to heal and hurt enemies
Swift action, relevant healing that removes important status effects like Dazed, Blinded, Nauseated, Fatigued and Staggered.

This is a relic of poor design, a goddawful character class just a mathematical cut above being a Warrior NPC.


Alexandros Satorum wrote:
chaoseffect wrote:
Squirrel_Dude wrote:
Alexandros Satorum wrote:
And a Mobile fighter can have an animal companion too. So,in this realm of possibilities the fighter still can have more attacks.

*checks Mobile fighter archetype*

I... what?

I assumed he meant Eldritch Heritage into Sylvan bloodline, but does Eldritch Heritage RAW allow you to get powers from a Crossblood line?
Nature soul + Animall Ally, no cha prerequisite.

Taking that into account, I'm not aware of any way for Rangers to get a semi-pounce equivalent to that of a mobile fighter.


Well yeah they don't if you specifically cut out the way they have to get one.


chaoseffect wrote:

Throw in Superstition, a race with a favored class bonus to improve it, and a Ring of Evasion and you shrug off just about anything.

Including your teams Prayer spell, healing and so forth. Superstition is a trap on a good team.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
DrDeth wrote:
chaoseffect wrote:

Throw in Superstition, a race with a favored class bonus to improve it, and a Ring of Evasion and you shrug off just about anything.

Including your teams Prayer spell, healing and so forth. Superstition is a trap on a good team.

Hold your action (and thus rage) until after the casters throw their buffs; once they're on, they're on for the duration. Or buff pre-fight, if you have the ability. RE: healing, it doesn't affect non-spell healing, so channeling still works, as does out of combat healing.

Essentially most of the negatives of superstition can be gotten around on a "good team"


3 people marked this as a favorite.
DrDeth wrote:


Including your teams Prayer spell, healing and so forth. Superstition is a trap on a good team.

Saying the best rage power in the game is a trap option does not help your image.

Also, prayer has no save, so you used the worst possible example there


Rage cycle for the win.


SPCDRI wrote:

I agree with the posters here. Fighters aren't even all that good at tanking. Why do people think Tank equals "Wow, look at my AC!"

No. Just no. There is a lot more to tanking than that.

Paladins are better tanks.

Compare a B.S. class feature like Bravery to the Paladin's Aura of Courage.

Bravery AKA Fighter Class {Dr. Evil Hands}"Feature"{Dr. Evil Hands}
Starting at 2nd level, a fighter gains a +1 bonus on Will saves against fear. This bonus increases by +1 for every four levels beyond 2nd.

Aura of Courage AKA "FU, Fighter Class Feature!"
At 3rd level, a paladin is IMMUNE TO FEAR (magical or OTHERWISE).
Each ally within 10 feet of her gains a +4 morale bonus (Equivalent to a 14th Level Fighter's Bravery as a RIDER AURA FOR TEAMMATES!)
on saving throws against fear effects. This ability functions only while the paladin is conscious, not if she is unconscious or dead.

Other things the fighter doesn't have

Charisma to Saves and superior Saves
Immunity to Disease. The Fighter would get something awful to help his Fortitude save named something like "Booster Shot" because anything else wouldn't be "realistic."
Aura of Resolve at Level 8 (IMMUNITY to charm spells and SLAs) and a +4 rider to that at Level 17
Spells to heal and hurt enemies
Swift action, relevant healing that removes important status effects like Dazed, Blinded, Nauseated, Fatigued and Staggered.

This is a relic of poor design, a goddawful character class just a mathematical cut above being a Warrior NPC.

Don't bring paladins into the conversation, this is about what fighters can do but RANGERS cannot. Sure Paladins make better tanks than fighters, and in terms of pure ability to stand in the middle of combat a raging hulk laughs at the 57 AC fighter, but neither of them are rangers. Of course a Ranger can tank pretty well and while evasion, self-healing, self buffing, a companion & a good reflex save mean a ranger arguably can be built with more effectiveness at tanking than a fighter, still a ranger cannot keep up with unbuffed fighter AC.


cnetarian wrote:
Don't bring paladins into the conversation, this is about what fighters can do but RANGERS cannot.

This.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
cnetarian wrote:


Of course a Ranger can tank pretty well and while evasion, self-healing, self buffing, a companion & a good reflex save mean a ranger arguably can be built with more effectiveness at tanking than...

So now that they we are "back on track" so to speak, the Ranger is a better damage soak and tank than the Fighter and to cap it all off, can buff and heal himself and others? Ooh. Talk about gimmick infringement!

Barkskin and other things even threaten the Fighter AC niche.


For some reason....

I'm remembering something- probably a kit- a friend of mine used back in the 2.0 days for fighters...it increased their saves vs. spells, I think he called it superstition or something. Seriously affected their initiative, however. I wonder how that would work alongside stuff like bravery. Hm.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
DrDeth wrote:
chaoseffect wrote:

Throw in Superstition, a race with a favored class bonus to improve it, and a Ring of Evasion and you shrug off just about anything.

Including your teams Prayer spell, healing and so forth. Superstition is a trap on a good team.

Damn, I got beaten to "prayer has no save lol"

More seriously, though, I used to think this before APG, when superstition maxed at a medium-high benefit to saves in return for its penalties (and, incidentally, I played in a highly buff-happy group... like six to one or more in terms of friendly vs hostile magical effects).

Now that you can get ridiculously-high instead of medium-high benefit (basic superstition + favored class + courageous weapon) for little to no increase in the penalty relative to what a Core barbarian suffered, that cost/benefit analysis has shifted a lot I think.

Plus, turning rage on and off has been made a lot easier.

Silver Crusade

3 people marked this as a favorite.
DrDeth wrote:
chaoseffect wrote:

Throw in Superstition, a race with a favored class bonus to improve it, and a Ring of Evasion and you shrug off just about anything.

Including your teams Prayer spell, healing and so forth. Superstition is a trap on a good team.

If you're healing in battle, you're probably not in a good team. Having a character who can make basically every save against any magical effect is far better than most buffs they could receive.

I just...don't understand how anyone could call Supes a trap...like ever.

Liberty's Edge

Yeah, Superstition is potentially very nice.

Additionally, Superstition's downside doesn't apply to Supernatural abilities...which means Lay on Hands and Channel Energy can still heal a Superstitious guy fine, it's only spells which are limited.


N. Jolly wrote:
DrDeth wrote:
chaoseffect wrote:

Throw in Superstition, a race with a favored class bonus to improve it, and a Ring of Evasion and you shrug off just about anything.

Including your teams Prayer spell, healing and so forth. Superstition is a trap on a good team.

If you're healing in battle, you're probably not in a good team. Having a character who can make basically every save against any magical effect is far better than most buffs they could receive.

I just...don't understand how anyone could call Supes a trap...like ever.

generally its people who don't like to play barbs and only see them.played poorly. That's not the only reason but its the most prevalant one in my experience.


N. Jolly wrote:
I just...don't understand how anyone could call Supes a trap...like ever.

It could be a trap before Spell Sunder, human favored class bonuses, etc. Core Rulebook Superstition wasn't the prerequisite for the game's truly most awesome rage power which didn't exist yet (Spell Sunder) as well as several other heavyweight ones, didn't really guarantee success on every save (a 15th level barbarian, my group's current level, would have a +5 to Will saves that didn't stack with his rage's +3, for example, instead of the +12 or more that is available now) and was harder to suspend without ending up fatigued.

So it was possible... four years ago.

Even then it depended on your party and would have only been bad in some cases ("the bard, the transmuter, the buffer cleric, and the barbarian set forth on their adventures...")


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Alexandros Satorum wrote:
cnetarian wrote:
Don't bring paladins into the conversation, this is about what fighters can do but RANGERS cannot.
This.

Except the original guy said Fighters were the best tanks in the game. Not just better tanks than the Ranger.


So, so far we have.

Unmounted Almost-pounce
shatterspell

Perhaps having some feat chains at earlier levles. (like the whole hamatula strike+ greater grapple+ rapid grapple before level 10)

Liberty's Edge

The thing fighters have over rangers - and arguably over basically every other class in the game, with the possible exception of paladins - is that they can quite effectively fulfill their design niche without using anything except their class features. They are supposed to tank or do DPR or somewhere in between - and they get everything they need to do that in their class abilities alone. Meaning that they have their entire "standard" feat supply and however many skill points you feel like giving yours to do... whatever it is you want.

Want to make a wand specialist fighter? No problem - a human can have Cha 8 and still get Dangerously Curious, Magical Aptitude and Skill Focus (UMD) for a total +9 to his roll at 1st level, a 50/50 shot at a wand. And since he's still got his Str 18, Dex 14 and Con 14 (20 pt buy) plus Power Attack, he's got plenty of damage and hit points to take care of business. A ranger, on the other hand, is "supposed" to be good at woodcraft, meaning he has to take Survival, Stealth, Handle Animal and so on - not to mention, of course, using his two racial feats for whatever the groundwork is for his combat style.

My current PFS character is a 5th level fighter. He can make any Knowledge roll with at least a +5 bonus (although his local, arcana and religion are much higher), speaks six languages, can open all but the best locks if he's got a couple minutes to work on them, and he can usually spot and disable most non-magical traps he runs across. Oh, and he also swings at +11 to attack for 1d10+11 damage and a 18-20 crit range. The fact that I can make a character like that, while over there somewhere is Falchion Fred and down the other way is Farshot Fallon... the fighter class is just whatever you feel like making it to be. And a buttkicker besides.

Nota Bene:
None of the foregoing is intended to argue that fighters somehow "win" over the rest of the classes in the game. Please don't try to twist it into that.


Alexandros Satorum wrote:

So, so far we have.

Unmounted Almost-pounce
shatterspell

Perhaps having some feat chains at earlier levles. (like the whole hamatula strike+ greater grapple+ rapid grapple before level 10)

Also, a speed advantage in medium armor at level 3-5, and in heavy armor levels around 7-11 (where mithral heavy armor is still very expensive). Mithral celestial armor, if available (custom item and all that) isn't easily affordable until level 15. And while I think it's reasonable to include wealth into the equation (it's a generic resource just like general feats, and if we exclude generic resources rangers suck in non-custom heavy armor)

Also, a fighter can use acrobatics in medium and heavy armor, something a ranger cannot do ever AFAIK?

And if we disregard equipment (which most people seem to think is a good idea), then the fighter has superior speed in armor at level 3, and at levels 7+.

So yeah, I would say the fighter is significantly better at using armor at most levels;
At levels 1-2, the fighter has proficiency.
At level 3, full speed in medium armor and can use acrobatics in medium armor.
At level 4, the ranger can spend her 1st level spell to match the fighter's speed in medium armor on the ground for one hour, but still cannot use acrobatics in it.
At level 7, fighter has full speed in heavy armor, and at this point the ranger can be assumed to afford a mithral medium armor, and can match the fighter in medium armor usage.
At level 12, the ranger might buy mithral heavy armor, but would need to spend a feat on proficiency. In mithral heavy armor and with longstrider active, she has the same speed as a fighter with heavy armor on the ground, but less speed when flying and cannot tumble.
At level 15, if the item is allowed, the ranger could reasonably get celestial mithral plate and be equal to the fighter in movement in armor.


Ilja wrote:
Alexandros Satorum wrote:

So, so far we have.

Unmounted Almost-pounce
shatterspell

Perhaps having some feat chains at earlier levles. (like the whole hamatula strike+ greater grapple+ rapid grapple before level 10)

Also, a speed advantage in medium armor at level 3-5, and in heavy armor levels around 7-11 (where mithral heavy armor is still very expensive). Mithral celestial armor, if available (custom item and all that) isn't easily affordable until level 15. And while I think it's reasonable to include wealth into the equation (it's a generic resource just like general feats, and if we exclude generic resources rangers suck in non-custom heavy armor)

Also, a fighter can use acrobatics in medium and heavy armor, something a ranger cannot do ever AFAIK?

And if we disregard equipment (which most people seem to think is a good idea), then the fighter has superior speed in armor at level 3, and at levels 7+.

So yeah, I would say the fighter is significantly better at using armor at most levels;
At levels 1-2, the fighter has proficiency.
At level 3, full speed in medium armor and can use acrobatics in medium armor.
At level 4, the ranger can spend her 1st level spell to match the fighter's speed in medium armor on the ground for one hour, but still cannot use acrobatics in it.
At level 7, fighter has full speed in heavy armor, and at this point the ranger can be assumed to afford a mithral medium armor, and can match the fighter in medium armor usage.
At level 12, the ranger might buy mithral heavy armor, but would need to spend a feat on proficiency. In mithral heavy armor and with longstrider active, she has the same speed as a fighter with heavy armor on the ground, but less speed when flying and cannot tumble.
At level 15, if the item is allowed, the ranger could reasonably get celestial mithral plate and be equal to the fighter in movement in armor.

Longstrider + Light armor = barbarian speed.


That said, in my experience rangers blow fighters out of the water when it comes to being interesting.

I do think that Armor Training 1 and 2 are very good abilities (even if you can mimic them by throwing gold and custom items at them). Honestly, AT 1&2 as well as weapon mastery feel like the only "real" class abilities of the vanilla fighter.


master_marshmallow wrote:
Longstrider + Light armor = barbarian speed.

Yes, but that's in light armor. My post was about armor heavier than light.

Longstrider + Medium armor =/= armor training 1, since you cannot tumble in it and if you get a fly or swim speed longstrider doesn't help you.
The same goes for longstrider + mithral heavy armor, naturally.

Hence, "fighters are better than rangers at moving about in armor". I'm mainly talking about core rangers/fighters though, not all the bazillion archetypes.

Not saying this makes up for the glaring holes in the fighter class - but the threads wasn't "who's the nicest class, ranger or fighter" but rather "what can fighters do that ranger's cant". And tumble in medium armor is one of those things.


Ilja wrote:
master_marshmallow wrote:
Longstrider + Light armor = barbarian speed.

Yes, but that's in light armor. My post was about armor heavier than light.

Longstrider + Medium armor =/= armor training 1, since you cannot tumble in it and if you get a fly or swim speed longstrider doesn't help you.
The same goes for longstrider + mithral heavy armor, naturally.

Hence, "fighters are better than rangers at moving about in armor". I'm mainly talking about core rangers/fighters though, not all the bazillion archetypes.

Not saying this makes up for the glaring holes in the fighter class - but the threads wasn't "who's the nicest class, ranger or fighter" but rather "what can fighters do that ranger's cant". And tumble in medium armor is one of those things.

Oh, I'm all in favor of support of the fighter don't get me wrong, but we cannot forget just how good the ranger is.

I would hold it on par with the barbarian and paladin.


master_marshmallow wrote:

Oh, I'm all in favor of support of the fighter don't get me wrong, but we cannot forget just how good the ranger is.

I would hold it on par with the barbarian and paladin.

Yeah, again, I'm not out to compare them as classes - I just wanted to look at the few specific things that fighters actually can do that rangers can't. Rangers have a boatload of cool stuff fighters cannot mimic unless investing a huge amount of generic resources into each, so I think it's nice to point out the few things fighters have that are kind of specific to them.


Ilja wrote:
master_marshmallow wrote:

Oh, I'm all in favor of support of the fighter don't get me wrong, but we cannot forget just how good the ranger is.

I would hold it on par with the barbarian and paladin.
Yeah, again, I'm not out to compare them as classes - I just wanted to look at the few specific things that fighters actually can do that rangers can't. Rangers have a boatload of cool stuff fighters cannot mimic unless investing a huge amount of generic resources into each, so I think it's nice to point out the few things fighters have that are kind of specific to them.

Absolutely. I always like actually being able to complete more than one combat style, as well as having enough feats to actually round out the character.

Weapon and Armor training are cake.

Fighters are simple, and elegant because of it, and I hate that no one seems to appreciate that. Power Gamers be damned!


master_marshmallow wrote:
Absolutely. I always like actually being able to complete more than one combat style, as well as having enough feats to actually round out the character.

With the prerequisite-less bonus feats its actually pretty easy to master multiple fighting styles with Ranger, so I think its iffy to say this is a Fighter win.

I do see your point about having enough feats to be able to blow on non-essentials though; a fighter is really the only class I'd ever consider making a Magic Tails Kitsune with.

101 to 150 of 948 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / General Discussion / What does a Fighter do that a Ranger doesn't? All Messageboards