Sell me: full BAB martials are better martials than martial based casters


Pathfinder First Edition General Discussion

1 to 50 of 65 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

I know the title must seem ridiculous but plz hear me out on what has me confused at this moment. I do not intend to rant or imply this but rather I'm seeking facts, or better than that numbers, for me to get a clear picture of the situation. For the purposes of discussion ill spell out some specifics so we can keep on the rail.

MY CASE: I at this point think that it is possible for a fairly narrow set of casters to be as good as full BAB martials and still have the ability to cast their highest level spells. On top of that they will usually have better saves and so on. A cleric based on strength domain can easily have a strength of 40+ for a prolonged period, a dragon disciple can have more, and a synthesist even more than both. That alone makes them worthwhile frontliners.

THE RULES:

1) the martial and caster must fight the same way. Sword versus sword, axe versus axe, etc. enhancements from class features or clas based feats are allowed, ie judgments, bane, smite, etc.
2) the caster CANNOT cast
3) assume PFS rules on HP gain from levels.
4) caster must meet min stat for casting highest level spells available to him at ur example given.

Edited for errors.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Where do abilities like Frightful Aspect and Bestow Grace of the Champion stand if you don't mind me asking?


Comparisons I'd like to c

1) synthesist based on natural attack versus barb with natural attacks
2) an archeologist/dragon disciple versus fighter from level 1-9.


Just as a side note, Strength Domain's Might of the Gods only adds to strength checks and strength-based skill checks... so it's not as good as you're thinking unless you mean your Cleric is a hurler who uses that strength score to throw a mountain at someone.

You know, that ability could be pretty cool now that I stop to consider it.


Level 1 half-orc Barbarian w/o thought 12 hp + 2 con + 1 fav = 15 hp P.A. + rage = +8/2d4 +9 18-20/x2 ..this doesn't include the bite attack

Your magus probably didn't put much if anything in Con and goes down in 2 rounds.

Why is it in these discussions people immediately go to the ridiculousness of 20th level? How many games EVER make it to 20th level? How LONG does anyone play 20th level? What are most games comprised of? Those first 8 levels where martials are either superior or even.

1-8 comprises usually HALF of the campaign. So the fact that they can't dominate the second half makes them worthless weaksauce? Mr. Wizard says what? "Just wait 6 months till I'm 8th level if I haven't died yet from you protecting me and you'll be sorry!"

Enough of this crap already.


MrSin wrote:
Where do abilities like Frightful Aspect and Bestow Grace of the Champion stand if you don't mind me asking?

I believe those are spells. I do not allow casting. I should but I'm keeping this as martial favorable as I can. Maybe is should specify no polymorph or wild shapes but then druid and, indirectly, the synthesist get hosed. Ill just say no spells.

Lantern Lodge

This is actually an interesting idea here... Hmm...

Perhaps a strength based Magus? A skirnir magus might do well, shield and sword style.


Warpriest of Ragathiel.

Gets full BAB with his Favored Weapon(Bastard Sword so it's no joke) and 6th level Cleric Casting.

Lantern Lodge

Can we have a build to compare against?


MattR1986 wrote:

Level 1 half-orc Barbarian w/o thought 12 hp + 2 con + 1 fav = 15 hp P.A. + rage = +8/2d4 +9 18-20/x2 ..this doesn't include the bite attack

Your magus probably didn't put much if anything in Con and goes down in 2 rounds.

Why is it in these discussions people immediately go to the ridiculousness of 20th level? How many games EVER make it to 20th level? How LONG does anyone play 20th level? What are most games comprised of? Those first 8 levels where martials are either superior or even.

1-8 comprises usually HALF of the campaign. So the fact that they can't dominate the second half makes them worthless weaksauce? Mr. Wizard says what? "Just wait 6 months till I'm 8th level if I haven't died yet from you protecting me and you'll be sorry!"

Enough of this crap already.

Ok a level one a half orc archeologist wielding his great axe, fate favored trait, 20 StR, archeologist luck has +7 to hit and damage without a single feat. So basically if I hit u first I have a 50% chance of knocking u unconscious if not for orc ferocity. And because I'm the same race as u even if u hit me first I'm still goin to hit u. But I still have more skills and casting. And it was at level 1 where everyone goes.

Next?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Renegadeshepherd wrote:
MattR1986 wrote:

Level 1 half-orc Barbarian w/o thought 12 hp + 2 con + 1 fav = 15 hp P.A. + rage = +8/2d4 +9 18-20/x2 ..this doesn't include the bite attack

Your magus probably didn't put much if anything in Con and goes down in 2 rounds.

Why is it in these discussions people immediately go to the ridiculousness of 20th level? How many games EVER make it to 20th level? How LONG does anyone play 20th level? What are most games comprised of? Those first 8 levels where martials are either superior or even.

1-8 comprises usually HALF of the campaign. So the fact that they can't dominate the second half makes them worthless weaksauce? Mr. Wizard says what? "Just wait 6 months till I'm 8th level if I haven't died yet from you protecting me and you'll be sorry!"

Enough of this crap already.

Ok a level one a half orc archeologist wielding his great axe, fate favored trait, 20 StR, archeologist luck has +7 to hit and damage without a single feat. So basically if I hit u first I have a 50% chance of knocking u unconscious if not for orc ferocity. And because I'm the same race as u even if u hit me first I'm still goin to hit u. But I still have more skills and casting. And it was at level 1 where everyone goes.

Next?

Didn't realize this was a PVP thing. How boring.


MrSin wrote:
Where do abilities like Frightful Aspect and Bestow Grace of the Champion stand if you don't mind me asking?

Every time I see these spells I ask myself... What kind of moron designs a spell that gives the caster all the class features of another class?


Scavion wrote:
Renegadeshepherd wrote:
MattR1986 wrote:

Level 1 half-orc Barbarian w/o thought 12 hp + 2 con + 1 fav = 15 hp P.A. + rage = +8/2d4 +9 18-20/x2 ..this doesn't include the bite attack

Your magus probably didn't put much if anything in Con and goes down in 2 rounds.

Why is it in these discussions people immediately go to the ridiculousness of 20th level? How many games EVER make it to 20th level? How LONG does anyone play 20th level? What are most games comprised of? Those first 8 levels where martials are either superior or even.

1-8 comprises usually HALF of the campaign. So the fact that they can't dominate the second half makes them worthless weaksauce? Mr. Wizard says what? "Just wait 6 months till I'm 8th level if I haven't died yet from you protecting me and you'll be sorry!"

Enough of this crap already.

Ok a level one a half orc archeologist wielding his great axe, fate favored trait, 20 StR, archeologist luck has +7 to hit and damage without a single feat. So basically if I hit u first I have a 50% chance of knocking u unconscious if not for orc ferocity. And because I'm the same race as u even if u hit me first I'm still goin to hit u. But I still have more skills and casting. And it was at level 1 where everyone goes.

Next?

Didn't realize this was a PVP thing. How boring.

I may have left that impression but that not it. I wanted to point out that at the lowest level of 1, that barb did not show itself that it could be a superior martial than my example. I'm hoping that when comparing martial apples and caster apples someone can show me that martial apples were better at being apples than caster apples.

Apples being defined as how they fight. Sword and board, natural weapons, TWF, etc


Your 1st level Bard has a 20 in strength? And casting? Are we doing 25 point builds? I'd love to see how he advances with all the dumps needed.

+5 str +2 luck? = +7

9+7 = 16 to knock unconscious w/o ferocity

a greataxe is 1d12 so (1+12)/2 = 6.5 + 7 = 13.5 = not 50% to knock unconscious.

This isn't even accounting the AC difference since Archaeologist can't go above I think light whereas barbarian can get medium so the +8 to +7 becomes worse for you. Guess who is back to the front of the line.


Also didn't include rage which would make HP go up to 17 and with just a 2d6+9 you go down with the minimum 2+9 = 11 unless you have the 8 + toughness (staggered) or toughness + 12 con (1 hp). Either way one more hit pretty much ends you.


MattR1986 wrote:

Your 1st level Bard has a 20 in strength? And casting? Are we doing 25 point builds? I'd love to see how he advances with all the dumps needed.

+5 str +2 luck? = +7

9+7 = 16 to knock unconscious w/o ferocity

a greataxe is 1d12 so (1+12)/2 = 6.5 + 7 = 13.5 = not 50% to knock unconscious.

This isn't even accounting the AC difference since Archaeologist can't go above I think light whereas barbarian can get medium so the +8 to +7 becomes worse for you. Guess who is back to the front of the line.

First it's not 20 pt it's a mirror match. U only need 11 CHA to meet my rules since ur only comparing level 1. Second the AC of ur barb maxes at 10+6+2 for dex (I think u could afford that, be close). But when u rage it's 16 at most. Considering a +7 to attack that's better than 50% but when ur not its a 45%.

The best thing at this point I've seen for the barb is the 50% increase of health. But at this particular level the barb is most probable the favorite due to said health but for this early level the dice is the biggest factor not a build.

Lantern Lodge

A Hasty Skirnir build:
Teifling
STR: 17 DEX: 15 CON: 12 INT: 16 WIS: 11 CHA: 5
1 TWF
3 Quick Draw
5 Power Attack
5 Double Slice
6 EWP: Katana
7 Shield Slam
7 iTWF
9 Improved Bull Rush
11 Critical Focus
*13 Shield Master
*13 Bashing Finish
15 gTWF
17 Bleeding Critical
19 Extra Arcane Pool
19 Extra Arcane Pool

Arcana:
Arcane Accuracy
...

Fighter dips at levels 5 and 6, stat items used for certain feat requirements later on. Katana/quickdraw shield for flavor :)

Level 13 is where the fun really begins, with every critical from the katana allowing an extra hit from the shield, and the shield's defensive enhancement bonus adds to the it's attack and damage. Since the shield is a bonded item, it costs half as much to enchant.

So, level 13 stats (wealth by level of 140,000):
STR: 24 DEX: 19 CON: 12 INT: 20 WIS: 11 CHA: 5

+4 dex/str belt
+4 int headband

26000 for +5 tatami-do, 10 AC
18000 for +5 bashing quickdraw shield (crafting price, thanks to bonded item). Also has +1 corrosive, shocking, frost on it, another 16,000
+1 Flaming Katana 8,000
+2 armor ring
+2 armor amulet
+1 luck AC jingasa
12000 boots of speed

Final weapon set (using arcane pool):
+5 bashing moderate fortification quickdraw shield, with essentially +5 corrosive, shocking, frost.
+1 Flaming Keen Corrosive Shock Katana

HP: 94. AC: 31

Attacks: (using arcane accuracy, haste from boots, and power attack)
11/11/6 for 1d8 + 3d6 + 14 15-20x2
17/17 for 4d6 + 18 x2

For every critical hit from the katana, the shield gets another attack.

Decent, but I was hoping for more... Spells definitely help.


MattR1986 wrote:


Enough of this crap already.

I love these comparisons.

Level 20 doesn't matter because most people don't play there

Low level is most of the game, so even though 10+ is horrible garbage balance it doesn't matter because no one plays it.

I wonder if 10+ was not horrible garbage balance it would get more play


Sorry OP but you are really theorycrafting instead of giving a viable build. Your 11 charisma bard with 20 strength and partial BaB.

And I never said 10+ was horrible garbage and that it was never played. My point is these theorycraft builds are often 20th level and most games go to what? 16th ish IF that so 1-8 is half of the game.

No one ever recognizes that the martials tend to dominate the lower levels, it's Wizard > Fighter at 20th so fighter = sux0rz.

What about the average of balance over the course of the levels? Sure Wizard is the tortoise that "wins the race" but since it isn't a race, who enjoys a lot of spotlight for a good portion of the game? Who still is a viable member of the party and doesn't insta-die to CR equivalent creatures at higher levels? The martials.


MattR1986 wrote:

Sorry OP but you are really theorycrafting instead of giving a viable build. Your 11 charisma bard with 20 strength and partial BaB.

And I never said 10+ was horrible garbage and that it was never played. My point is these theorycraft builds are often 20th level and most games go to what? 16th ish IF that so 1-8 is half of the game.

No one ever recognizes that the martials tend to dominate the lower levels, it's Wizard > Fighter at 20th so fighter = sux0rz.

What about the average of balance over the course of the levels? Sure Wizard is the tortoise that "wins the race" but since it isn't a race, who enjoys a lot of spotlight for a good portion of the game? Who still is a viable member of the party and doesn't insta-die to CR equivalent creatures at higher levels? The martials.

Ur right it's not a race. I would even like to c comparisons at specific levels to find a sweet spot for martials. A barb will CRUSH a bard at level 5 without casting but could the same be said of others like synthesist. I'm searching for the niche of martials. I need a sell...


Since folks want a comparison ill give one.

L5 human cleric crusader of someone who gives negative energy and destruction domain.

LV1 toughness
LV1B channel smite
LV1C heavy armor prof
LV3 power attack
LV5 quick channel
LV5C whatever crusade bonus feat u need

Tactics: quick channel for 2D6 (will save for half), channel smite as swift for same possible damage, the destruction attack at +2 damage plus power attacks effect.

This could be considered subpar since ur channel uses are limited but even so. The ability to add potentially 2D6+2+power attack+strength+weapon damage. Plz make a stronger case from a martial.

Ps: at level 6 the full BAB martial gets another attack but the cleric for example gets a D6 increase to his channels and a +1 from destruction.

Liberty's Edge

Renegadeshepherd wrote:
MattR1986 wrote:

Your 1st level Bard has a 20 in strength? And casting? Are we doing 25 point builds? I'd love to see how he advances with all the dumps needed.

+5 str +2 luck? = +7

9+7 = 16 to knock unconscious w/o ferocity

a greataxe is 1d12 so (1+12)/2 = 6.5 + 7 = 13.5 = not 50% to knock unconscious.

This isn't even accounting the AC difference since Archaeologist can't go above I think light whereas barbarian can get medium so the +8 to +7 becomes worse for you. Guess who is back to the front of the line.

First it's not 20 pt it's a mirror match. U only need 11 CHA to meet my rules since ur only comparing level 1. Second the AC of ur barb maxes at 10+6+2 for dex (I think u could afford that, be close). But when u rage it's 16 at most. Considering a +7 to attack that's better than 50% but when ur not its a 45%.

The best thing at this point I've seen for the barb is the 50% increase of health. But at this particular level the barb is most probable the favorite due to said health but for this early level the dice is the biggest factor not a build.

Are you aware that the 11 charisma archaeologist bard will be capable to keep up his luck bonus only for 4 rounds, independently from his level?

PRD wrote:
He can use this ability for a number of rounds per day equal to 4 + his Charisma modifier.

There is no level variable in the duration of Archaeologist's Luck.

- * -

And just for curiosity, why your barbarian should be a moon?
He see the heavily muscled bard. Think a second, move away, 40 base speed vs. 30, if needed he will take a Withdraw action the first round, then he move again and draw his trusty bow and start peppering the bard with arrows.

Composite longbow vs shortbow, better movement speed, BAB +1 plus dexterity vs BAB +0 + dexterity.

In your comparison there are limitations that hinder teh martial more than the spellcaster. Why the martial can't use his full range of options, included all the martial weapons, the ability to take the BAB feats earlier and so on?


Diego Rossi wrote:
There is no level variable in the duration of Archaeologist's Luck.

Unless he's a half-elf using his alternate favored class bonus.

Liberty's Edge

Lemmy wrote:
Diego Rossi wrote:
There is no level variable in the duration of Archaeologist's Luck.
Unless he's a half-elf using his alternate favored class bonus.

Lemmy, it isn't a level variable. It is spending a resource you get when you raise your level to buy more rounds of Archaeologist's Luck.

Taking the Extra Performance feat or raising the bard charisma has the same effect, but your level don't change the duration of the performance. The additional resources you have spent in it will change that.


Diego Rossi wrote:
Lemmy wrote:
Diego Rossi wrote:
There is no level variable in the duration of Archaeologist's Luck.
Unless he's a half-elf using his alternate favored class bonus.

Lemmy, it isn't a level variable. It is spending a resource you get when you raise your level to buy more rounds of Archaeologist's Luck.

Taking the Extra Performance feat or raising the bard charisma has the same effect, but your level don't change the duration of the performance. The additional resources you have spent in it will change that.

Tsc... I knew I should have added a ";)" at the end of my sentence so that my post didn't seem too serious.

It was nothing more than an observation. I just mentioned it because it does add up to "+1 per level", which is pretty close to a level variable.

(BTW, why the hell does Archaelogist Luck not increase with level? Seems like a oversight for me).

Liberty's Edge

Lemmy wrote:


(BTW, why the hell does Archaelogist Luck not increase with level? Seems like a oversight for me).

It is not an oversight,from the ability creator post:

Russ Taylor wrote:
Aeshuura wrote:

I don't think it has been addressed, but the Archaeologist (Bard Archetype) has an ability called Archaeologist's Luck that is usable for 4+Cha mod rounds per day. Unlike Bardic Music which scales to increase in number of rounds per day with level, this is static, but is kind of like inspire courage and inspire competence only for himself.

I am wondering if this was intentional, as it is a very good ability, or if this was an oversight...

I could always buy the lingering performance and increased performance feats, so it isn't a big deal.

Intentional, but I think it should have been called out better. Lingering performance is a great way to stretch it. In 20/20 hindsight, I'm thinking maybe Cha bonus + 1 round level might have been a better mechanic.


So not an oversight, but a mistake nonetheless. (Personally, I house rule it to be Cha + Bard level, but none of my players decided to play an Archaeologist Bard yet, so it made no difference. :P)


To all, plz forget that I ever addressed the rant of Matt. I've clearly derailed my entire thread because of that post. If u must have an answer to the 4 rounds of performance... It's level 1 comparison and I did it to meet my rules in the OP of meeting min casting and matching the martial.

@Diego: I have no objection to barb using ranged and speed. Just per my rules lets build the bard the same way and let's compare. My concern would be money at level 1. Depending on if u roll for money or what not, both the bard and barb may not have the money for a melee weapon, basic shortbow, and armor. If the barb gets scale mail he saves money and gets better AC but loses his speed advantage. If he fights in light armor he keeps speed and gets his equipment but can't chain shirt or composite shortbow because of money at level 1. And don't forget that the archeologist gets his luck bonus to hit and damage regardless of weapon so ranged actually helps him compared to base barb. I'd still love to c a comparison of builds if ur wiling to make em though.

Now anyone got a martial to compare to my LV5 cleric I posted?

Edited for Diego.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

The problem is that you are giving totally artificial rules.
the bard is using a archetype that will heavily reduce his efficiency, but that is hidden by your rules.
The same equipment limitation do the same.
No discussion about using environment, the barbarian better speed or plenty of other factors.

A Ferrari is faster than an Humvee but that don't make it the better vehicle. It depend on what you need to do.


Without any form of casting I doub anyone have bigger numbers than a superstitious barbarian.


Well... Clerics are a tier 1 class, so it's very possible that they can outperform pretty much any tier 3 class (and no martial class is above that).

That said... Paladins, Rangers and Barbarians are still very solid classes that can consistently contribute in a variety of ways. (I suppose Paladins and Rangers are technically casters as well, but... meh) and can usually outperform a Cleric in physical combat unless said Cleric spends a few rounds buffing himself (or altering the battlefield in his favor).

Combat is not where casters dominate the game (well... They can dominate combat as well, but that usually takes considerable effort and is not the real problem with caster/martial disparity).


Renegadeshepherd wrote:
MrSin wrote:
Where do abilities like Frightful Aspect and Bestow Grace of the Champion stand if you don't mind me asking?
I believe those are spells. I do not allow casting. I should but I'm keeping this as martial favorable as I can. Maybe is should specify no polymorph or wild shapes but then druid and, indirectly, the synthesist get hosed. Ill just say no spells.

Well, powers like Divine Power are what really bring a caster up to a martial imo. Was asking about grace of the champion and frightful aspect because they don't just bring you up, they give you a good number of powers and defenses. Without self buffing you lose a lot of ground.

CWheezy wrote:
I wonder if 10+ was not horrible garbage balance it would get more play

If it matters, when I look at a game like Legends by rule of cool, when I see high level powers I say "Can't wait to get those!" when I look at them in 3.5 I say "That's a lot of dead levels to get there..." and when I look at pathfinder I say "Too bad I'll never reach it". No idea why I see pathfinder that way. I think its because the capstones look out of reach and a lot of the filler is just +1's to what you already have. That said, if it was balanced it'd probably be easier to make adventures for and plan around, and likely you'd see more meat and interesting things(though that's entirely opinion). I have seen people say before on the wizards boards they would play it more if they felt it was more balanced.


Level 5 Warpriest:
Dagon Foerender(20 Ptbuy)
Human Warpriest 5 of Ragathiel
CG Medium humanoid (human)
Init +6; Senses Perception +
--------------------
Defense
--------------------
AC 19, touch 13, flat-footed 15 (+2 Dex, +1 Deflection, +5 Armor)
hp 41 (5d8+15)
Fort +6, Ref +3, Will +6
+2 vs Mind affecting effects and Fear effects
Defensive Abilities
--------------------
Offense
--------------------
Speed 30 ft.
Melee +1 Bastard Sword +9(1d10+6) or +1 Bastard Sword +7(1d10+12)
Ranged +1 Adaptive Longbow +9(1d8+3) or +1 Adaptive Longbow +7(1d8+7)
Warpriest Spells Prepared(CL 5th; Concentration +7)
2nd--Bull's Strength(2), Grace
1st--Divine Favor(4), Remove Fear

--------------------
Statistics
--------------------
Str 14, Dex 14, Con 14, Int 10, Wis 14, Cha 12
Base Atk +3; CMB +5; CMD 18
Feats Weapon Focus(Bastard Sword), Weapon Focus(Longbow), Improved Initiative, Power Attack, Deadly Aim, Quick Draw
Traits Deathtouched, Fate's Favored
Skills Diplomacy +9, Climb +9, Swim +9
Languages Common
Other Gear +1 Bastard Sword, +1 Adaptive Longbow, +1 Chainshirt, Ring of Protection +1, Cloak of Resistance +1
--------------------
Special Abilities
--------------------
Sacred Weapon; Any weapon the Warpriest has weapon focus in is treated as Full BAB when making attacks, +1 Enhancement bonus or +1 Property for 5rnds/per day.
Spontaneous Cure Spells
Fervor(2d6) 3/per day; Expend to use Channel Energy or cast a Warpriest spell as a Swift Action
Blessings(Good and Destruction) 5 uses/per day
Destructive Strikes; Standard action touch, grant or gain +2 morale bonus to damage for 1 minute.
Holy Strike; Standard Action touch weapon, Weapon deals 1d6 extra damage vs Evil creatures.

Threw together a level 5 Warpriest. Seems pretty good. If he has Divine Favor and Bull's Strength up, his Attack rolls go up by +5 and his Damage goes up +6.


Generally speaking if they can do a full attack not a lot out damages a fighter or barbarian. However there is a point the game gets silly why most dps threads focus on lvl 11.


Mojorat wrote:
Generally speaking if they can do a full attack not a lot out damages a fighter or barbarian. However there is a point the game gets silly why most dps threads focus on lvl 11.

Ok I'll take those too. I want to c if the fighter can put out higher numbers of DPS than say a dragon disciple. Ill take any empirical data anyone has.


Lemmy wrote:

Well... Clerics are a tier 1 class, so it's very possible that they can outperform pretty much any tier 3 class (and no martial class is above that).

That said... Paladins, Rangers and Barbarians are still very solid classes that can consistently contribute in a variety of ways. (I suppose Paladins and Rangers are technically casters as well, but... meh) and can usually outperform a Cleric in physical combat unless said Cleric spends a few rounds buffing himself (or altering the battlefield in his favor).

Combat is not where casters dominate the game (well... They can dominate combat as well, but that usually takes considerable effort and is not the real problem with caster/martial disparity).

Guessing inquisitor is tier 2 since it smokes any martial by 5-6th level and is a 2/3rds caster with 3/4 bab and toggling self buffs?


Tier 3, slow spell progression and not a great utility spell list hurts them

Shadow Lodge

FrodoOf9Fingers wrote:
Can we have a build to compare against?

Congrats. You've shown that wizirds remain Schroedinger's cat even when they don't use spells.


Renegadeshepherd wrote:
Mojorat wrote:
Generally speaking if they can do a full attack not a lot out damages a fighter or barbarian. However there is a point the game gets silly why most dps threads focus on lvl 11.
Ok I'll take those too. I want to c if the fighter can put out higher numbers of DPS than say a dragon disciple. Ill take any empirical data anyone has.

Im not good at the theoretical stuff. but look up the DPR olympics i think Falchion Fred Is the model for dps at that level. However, my search Foo is poor. I found numerous references to him but not the specific build.

This thread if you have time to read it

DPR OLYMPICS

If you have time to go through it all it is a good read and give you an idea of what theoretically playable characters can do for dpr around lvl 10.

Falchion Fred is the 'model' 2handed fighter i think without trying to do anything funky.


The fact is your math didn't add up and your dismissive "next" was proven wrong so Mr. Wtfbard didn't pass. I didn't even use a human Barbarian with greatsword to have toughness which would have made Worthless Past 1st level bard even worse.

Using Synthesist for a litmus test against anything is a joke already as it's a broken archetype in addition to many people thinking Summoner in itself is broken. If you want to compare a fighter/barbarian vs. a magus/oracle/cleric/whatever fine, but make sure it's at least legitimate and not a murky math gimp build


The caster can't cast at all or the caster can't cast during combat?


MattR1986 wrote:

The fact is your math didn't add up and your dismissive "next" was proven wrong so Mr. Wtfbard didn't pass. I didn't even use a human Barbarian with greatsword to have toughness which would have made Worthless Past 1st level bard even worse.

Using Synthesist for a litmus test against anything is a joke already as it's a broken archetype in addition to many people thinking Summoner in itself is broken. If you want to compare a fighter/barbarian vs. a magus/oracle/cleric/whatever fine, but make sure it's at least legitimate and not a murky math gimp build

I'm goin to take a page from ur book...

Why this level one crap? U do realize that only a one adventure is played at level 1 right? U do realize that this is where characters are in their infancy right? I'm Matt and I didn't bring my best evidence on my build and I got called out on it. I could've done better :p.
enough on this crap!!!

See this is how u talked in the first post. If u had logically laid out ur case and build as u did in nearly a dozen rebuttals to my calling u out: I would have respected u, ur information, and appreciated ur help. I believe u illustrated over time that the barb is the winner at level 1 save for maybe a synthesist. But as we have spent so much time on this level I'm digressing. Half the posts in here are wasted exchanges between us. Bye Matt.

@bignorsewolf: no casting of spells granted by any caster class. I'd allow racial spell if u got something along those lines.

@mojorat: thanks for the link. Just a casual glancing through has offered more numbers than I got here.

Sczarni

BigNorseWolf wrote:
The caster can't cast at all or the caster can't cast during combat?

If the caster can't cast AT ALL, then why are we even calling it a caster?

I think the idea is that the caster needs to be able to put up better numbers than the non-caster through class abilities that are either "always on", or can be activated with a swift action and therefore don't deny the caster a full-attack.

Saying a Cleric can outDPR a Fighter AFTER casting Divine Power and Enlarge Person doesn't mean much, since in the time it took the Cleric to cast those spells, the Fighter was already full attacking. The combat will be over before the Cleric's buffs allow him to catch up to the Fighter's headstart.

Saying an Inquisitor can outDPR a Fighter with nothing but his Judgments is a much more compelling argument, since there's never really a point where the Inquisitor won't be able to get his Judgment up.


The page from my book was

1) I'm tired of people complaining about martials when they're only looking at very high level (usually 20th) level as you did in your first post and ignoring the importance of martials for half of campaigns. I only used 1st level to illustrate this point.

2) I swear. It happens. We're not 12 here I assume

3) I use my phone as much as the next guy but holy crap please stop talking like a 13 year old girl on AIM chat and use the words "you" and "your" once in a while maybe the respect could potentially go both ways. That and not snotty dismissiveness like "next"

4) My points were laid out pretty clearly and logically regardless of the fact I use "naughty words"

5) You're calling me on my build when it had more weight than your half-baked "bard build" that will obviously fizzle out as worse than anything by a few levels i.e. 20 pt str bard and still casting spells and showing nothing of how those dumps are going to work

6) apparently I didn't bring evidence and yet you just admitted that barb wins level 1 save synthesist. How interdasting. I guess I got called on it and the calling was being correct? Not sure how that works.

7) I would like people to start considering the big picture instead of just the endgame. This post as well as my others weren't an attack on you or your mother. They were directed at a larger group in general.


Silent Saturn wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:
The caster can't cast at all or the caster can't cast during combat?

If the caster can't cast AT ALL, then why are we even calling it a caster?

I think the idea is that the caster needs to be able to put up better numbers than the non-caster through class abilities that are either "always on", or can be activated with a swift action and therefore don't deny the caster a full-attack.

Saying a Cleric can outDPR a Fighter AFTER casting Divine Power and Enlarge Person doesn't mean much, since in the time it took the Cleric to cast those spells, the Fighter was already full attacking. The combat will be over before the Cleric's buffs allow him to catch up to the Fighter's headstart.

Saying an Inquisitor can outDPR a Fighter with nothing but his Judgments is a much more compelling argument, since there's never really a point where the Inquisitor won't be able to get his Judgment up.

As I've stated the point is to c if martials are in fact better at fighting, as they are meant to. And concerning the inquisitor, that is one of the main things I am searching for. Like the archeologist bard the inquisitor at many levels can match the damage of fighters. Having said that I doubt they will match accuracy, health, or base AC. But those casters have better saves and class features that can make the situation interesting. In the end I desire a compelling arguement for martials not sucking.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Silent Saturn wrote:
Saying a Cleric can outDPR a Fighter AFTER casting Divine Power and Enlarge Person doesn't mean much, since in the time it took the Cleric to cast those spells, the Fighter was already full attacking. The combat will be over before the Cleric's buffs allow him to catch up to the Fighter's headstart.

Not entirely true. You can cast spells with quicken or extend, and some buffs last for 1/hour, which last easily all day. 1/10 min, and those are easy to put up before a dungeon and last the entire dungeon. 1/min are great for before combat. 1/round are the incombat ones, and with a really good heads up, like in burst down the door gameplay, that one can be cast before entering combat. Some of those longer length buffs are the most devastating. You can have greater magic weapon, magic vestment, and magic circle against evil all going well before a combat ever begins. With a headsup, you could get frightful presence and archon's aura, and with luck, you can get divine power going on top of all of those. That's pretty devastating, and they all stack with each other.

Results may vary of course, and level changes a lot as to what spells and metamagic are available and what the caster level is for those small variables.


To Matt: the proof was In that although the archeologist at level 1 could match to hit and damage (at least with power attack) that the health difference decidedly made barb better between the two. As paladin has no features to surpass barb it loses at level one, and inquisitor and do not best a +7 to hit and damage at level one. One level down!

Sczarni

MrSin wrote:


Not entirely true. You can cast spells with quicken or extend, and some buffs last for 1/hour, which last easily all day. 1/10 min, and those are easy to put up before a dungeon and last the entire dungeon. 1/min are great for before combat. 1/round are the incombat ones, and with a really good heads up, like in burst down the door gameplay, that one can be cast before entering combat. Some of those longer length buffs are the most devastating. You can have greater magic weapon, magic vestment, and magic circle against evil all going well before a combat ever begins. With a headsup, you could get frightful presence and archon's aura, and with luck, you can get divine power going on top of all of those. That's pretty devastating, and they all stack with each other.

Results may vary of course, and level changes a lot as to what spells and metamagic are available and what the caster level is for those small variables.

Valid points all. But there's also the existence of Dispel Magic and Anti-Magic Field, which I don't believe work on Judgments. Do they?

Plus, not every cleric prepares all the right spells, especially if there's something else specific they think they'll need.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Silent Saturn wrote:
MrSin wrote:


Not entirely true. You can cast spells with quicken or extend, and some buffs last for 1/hour, which last easily all day. 1/10 min, and those are easy to put up before a dungeon and last the entire dungeon. 1/min are great for before combat. 1/round are the incombat ones, and with a really good heads up, like in burst down the door gameplay, that one can be cast before entering combat. Some of those longer length buffs are the most devastating. You can have greater magic weapon, magic vestment, and magic circle against evil all going well before a combat ever begins. With a headsup, you could get frightful presence and archon's aura, and with luck, you can get divine power going on top of all of those. That's pretty devastating, and they all stack with each other.

Results may vary of course, and level changes a lot as to what spells and metamagic are available and what the caster level is for those small variables.

Valid points all. But there's also the existence of Dispel Magic and Anti-Magic Field, which I don't believe work on Judgments. Do they?

Plus, not every cleric prepares all the right spells, especially if there's something else specific they think they'll need.

Dispel Magic targets a single spell. AMZ shuts down way more than just buffs which is hardly an argument against the Cleric.

Any martial is going to be hurting without his equipment which AMZ also blocks. It's also a 6th level Wizard spell so you won't see it before 11th level at most.

A Battle Cleric will have a Divine Favor most certainly atleast 4 times per day. +3 is no joke. Greater Magic Weapon and Magic Vestment last hours per level. Hardly an issue. You cast when you wake up and go run through the dungeon. How often are encounters spaced 7-8 hours apart?


I would say its "common knowledge" that the game begins breaking down with 4th level spells (around 8th level) and starts before that. It's not just straight damage but the breaking down of physics to your whim and the flexibility of spells and just stepping on everyone's toes. Beast shaping to invisibility to ways around healing to blasting to flying/teleporting/passing walls etc. This is why martials hold their own these early levels before someone comes with a build like "Well I teleport and energy drain you for 3 levels before you even get to act". Its going to be hard to beat casters past this point in comparing them.

If you modify the spell lists you can hold this off for a little bit but not that long.

1 to 50 of 65 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / General Discussion / Sell me: full BAB martials are better martials than martial based casters All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.