IIt is all about end game. This is the entire point of this thread. Martials are generally better than casters at low levels and the scale shifts as you level. A sorcerer is just as useless at skills as you claim the fighter to be only their skill set is different....
This is the problem. Everyone likes to complain about this stuff and say the fighter can't do these things, but they can. The DCs aren't that hard. Sure some classes can get more skills. Big deal. The fighter does what it needs to if you pay attention and read the rules.
The sorc skill list is weak too, but it is still better than the fighter list. Having UMD, knowledge arcana and spellcraft are better than most anything the fighter has on its list.
The fighter has knowledge dungeoneering and survival. Climb and swim occasionally come up in AP's, but once you can fly climb is nice to have, but not needed. Even without it having a rope makes most climb checks really easy. With swimming a sorcerer won't be taking an ACP, which puts many fighters into the negatives even if they have a skill rank invested. Normally this is resolved by the fighter removing armor at low levels, and they are not generally ambushed on the other side, so it is not a big problem, but the skill list is not on the fighter's side.
What things are people saying the fighter can't do they he can do?<--This is a question to be sure you are really understanding what we are saying.
Just to be clear the fighter will be expect to be able to fight well, if he does these other things. Otherwise the point that the fighter can do his job, and do other things well still stands.
So far nobody has been able to make the fighter do these things and fight well enough to be accepted. If you want to talk and set up general standards then we can discuss that first to avoid moving goal post by either side. It is too easy to say "you just dont know the rules" without a set baseline.
This is just your assumption of how things should work. I know plenty of open sea fishermen that don't know how to swim.
I live on the east coast of the US. Every person I know that goes out on a boat as a job can swim. They might are not Olympic level swimmers, but for someone to be out there, and not be able to swim at a basic level is the exception.
Even people around here that don't go on boats can swim. No, I can't swim, but I don't go to the beach or out on boats either. I am however in the minority.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I was going to say something much meaner about the open sea fishermen he knows to be honest, but lets suffice with saying they have optimized poorly for their profession.
That explains a lot.
You mistake me. I complain about this stuff. You showed that Fighters can kinda sorta do it. I know other classes do it better.
Thats my beef.
It is all about end game. This is the entire point of this thread. Martials are generally better than casters at low levels and the scale shifts as you level. A sorcerer is just as useless at skills as you claim the fighter to be only their skill set is different.Casters being poor at low levels is a myth plain and simple. I even have charts of varying customization. The difference tends to be 1 or 2 hit points between Martials and Martial replacements like a Druid, Cleric or Magus. A Sorcerer can be fantastic at skills with a simple choice of the Sage bloodline. Congratulations, you now have about 5-7 skill points per level.
Climb and Swim ranks are never completely moot. Have you never been attacked while scaling a cliff or fort? A horse in combat is different from just riding a horse.
Don't try to diminish a discussion with flamboyant claims of goal post moving.
This is the problem. Everyone likes to complain about this stuff and say the fighter can't do these things, but they can. The DCs aren't that hard. Sure some classes can get more skills. Big deal. The fighter does what it needs to if you pay attention and read the rules.Do you really think me so inept that I can't read the rules? The rules are specifically why I feel the way I do.
At the end of the day, even the build you posted yourself is paltry compared to other classes.
It doesn't matter that another class can do something better. A wizard casts spells better than a magus. Some class has to be the worst and another has to be the best at any given aspect. Fighters win at feats and armor use.
It's not about casters being poor. It's about martials having more survivability at lower levels.
I have been attacked while climbing. Fortunately when reading the rules this does...
Being better at "feats" isn't really being "better" at anything. Does that actually help Fighter be better then other classes at combat? The answer is no. Skill Use? Again no. Saves? Ahahahahah.... ya no. Armor use? You know who really wins at Armor use? Druids. They get to use fullplate in addition to all the DEX bonus they can muster. (Btw, if you don't know why this is, please consider not continuing this conversation.)
Maybe you should read my posts more carefully since I said that Intimidate was less about being in combat. I mentioned nothing about other skills in that regard.
Last time I checked, climbing a cliff or scaling rigging could immediately result in something bad. E.G falling to your doom.
Martials don't really have more survivability at low levels besides one or two points of health though. AC is actually comparable too.
At the end of the day the portion of a build I posted is functional and effective regardless of another class being able to do them as well. You don't have to be the best to play the game.
No, but ultimately you can say the same thing of NPC classes.
The problem is that martials are not Beowulf or Hercules. They're not even close.
That's what Mythic rules are for.
Casters should be scaled down. As the OP indicated, they have no parallel in fiction or other genre-related material, including most game-fiction tie-ins like D&D & Pathfinder novels & comics.
The solution to the caster:martial disparity isn't to amp everything & power-inflate everything further.
The problem is that martials are not Beowulf or Hercules. They're not even close.That's what Mythic rules are for.
Casters should be scaled down. As the OP indicated, they have no parallel in fiction or other genre-related material, including most game-fiction tie-ins like D&D & Pathfinder novels & comics.
The solution to the caster:martial disparity isn't to amp everything & power-inflate everything further.
Yes because, "I'm able to place my attacks very quickly and precisely" (ie. Add Dex to damage) is the kind of mindblowing power that must be Mythic.
(/sarcasm.)
It's not power inflation btw, since the Fighter and Rogue were never inflated to begin with.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
At the end of the day the portion of a build I posted is functional and effective regardless of another class being able to do them as well. You don't have to be the best to play the game.No, but ultimately you can say the same thing of NPC classes.
CN Medium humanoid (human)
Init +5; Senses Perception +11
--------------------
Defense
--------------------
AC 22, touch 11, flat-footed 21 (+11 armor, +1 Dex)
hp 95 (10d10+40)
Fort +13, Ref +9, Will +10
--------------------
Offense
--------------------
Speed 20 ft.
Melee +1 silversheen greatsword +19/+14 (2d6+10/17-20) and
. . +3 silversheen greatsword +21/+16 (2d6+12/17-20)
Ranged +1 adaptive composite longbow +15/+10 (1d8+7/×3)
--------------------
Statistics
--------------------
Str 22, Dex 16, Con 16, Int 12, Wis 12, Cha 7
Base Atk +10; CMB +17; CMD 29
Feats Combat Reflexes, Furious Focus[APG], Improved Critical (greatsword), Iron Will, Power Attack, Weapon Focus (greatsword)
Traits auspicious tattoo (shoanti), reactionary
Skills Climb +19, Intimidate +11, Perception +11, Swim +19
Languages Common, Draconic
Other Gear +2 full plate, +1 adaptive composite longbow, +1 silversheen greatsword, +3 silversheen greatsword, belt of physical perfection +2, cloak of resistance +3, cracked pale green prism ioun stone (attack), 1,950 gp
--------------------
Special Abilities
--------------------
Combat Reflexes (4 AoO/round) Can make extra attacks of opportunity/rd, and even when flat-footed.
Furious Focus If you are wielding a weapon in two hands, ignore the penalty for your first attack of each turn.
Power Attack -3/+6 You can subtract from your attack roll to add to your damage.
--------------------
DPR: 41.23
DPR (Power Attack): 54.88
I mean, who cares if they are easily outperformed by every other class in the game?
They are obviously balanced, because "balanced" means "anything other than (literally) completely useless". Same logic applies to Fighters, Rogues and vanilla Monks, of course.
In fact... What kind of dirty power-gaming roll-playing munchkin plays a Fighter? Real role-players play Warriors! Fighter players only care about power!
This is just your assumption of how things should work. I know plenty of open sea fishermen that don't know how to swim. You can know how to sail a boat without it being your job. Climbing rigging is as easy as a knotted rope DC 5 solved by taking 10. Crossing a narrow surface 7-11 inches is a DC 10 solved by taking 10. DC 5 for 1-3 feet wide. If you want to play a knight with those 3 skills it's not hard with 2+INT and add on a favored bonus. I'm still not getting what the fighter is lacking because it can do everything you guys have mentioned.A mounted archer raised on the steppe would need Ride and probably Handle Animal and Survival (plains) just to establish their character. A viking should have Swim and Profession (sailor); a pirate should have those and add Acrobatics for getting around in the rigging. A knight needs Ride, Knowledge (nobility), and possibly Diplomacy. Not every fighter wants Intimidate, but it's a pretty iconic skill for any kind of "tough guy" character, and Perception, as noted, is always useful.
yeah, it can do it, when you build for it, not just because it makes sense.
So can all the other classes be exceptional archers AND sword and board combatants like a fighter can with their 21 feats? Still having more feats to spare for whatever other utility they like?
ranger can, because they can still get some free, i'll be it specific feats.
And right back to the typical fighter rogue monk hate that propagates on these boards and all the same faces have come back to preach to each other and enjoy the circle jerk.
Acknowledging the existence of flaws is not hate. It's just... you know... Acknowledging the existence of flaws.
I love my sister, but she's terrible with numbers. The fact that I know she's terrible at it and wouldn't want her help with math-related work doesn't mean I don't love her. It just means I acknowledge and accept the fact that she's terrible with numbers.
Similarly, I love Rogues. However, I accept and acknowledge the fact that their mechanics are horrible. That's not hate, that's just not being a blind fanboy.
The problem is that martials are not Beowulf or Hercules. They're not even close.That's what Mythic rules are for.
Casters should be scaled down. As the OP indicated, they have no parallel in fiction or other genre-related material, including most game-fiction tie-ins like D&D & Pathfinder novels & comics.
The solution to the caster:martial disparity isn't to amp everything & power-inflate everything further.
Casters do have equivalents in literature.
The Belgariad, The Chronicles of Amber, Dr. Strange, Dr. Fate, Mageborn, The Half-Orc series, The Book of the new Sun, ect.
And of course if you branch out into animes the list is endless. (On that not saint seiya martials would not be an issue)
Words on paper. An archer fighter can do more damage than a ranger or Druid. The ranger can use his instant enemy a total of 1 time at level 10 using his wisdom of 16 which is hurting him elsewhere. Maybe 5 times by...Yes it can *do* them. That's not the problem. The problem is that the other classes are *better* at it. Fighting? Druids put you to shame and are full casters. Rangers make you cry and they have way more skills, spells and good save just to make you feel bad. Barbarians wreck your world and break magic with their bare hands while having the kind of saves you wish Bravery gave you. Paladins? Even if their opponent isn't evil they have loads more versatility, self healing, status condition removal, better saves, more skills, spells, and a Horsey or Excaliwannabe just to really drive home the Fighters inferiority. And lets not talk about the Summoner, or the Alchemist, or the Oracle, or...This is just your assumption of how things should work. I know plenty of open sea fishermen that don't know how to swim. You can know how to sail a boat without it being your job. Climbing rigging is as easy as a knotted rope DC 5 solved by taking 10. Crossing a narrow surface 7-11 inches is a DC 10 solved by taking 10. DC 5 for 1-3 feet wide. If you want to play a knight with those 3 skills it's not hard with 2+INT and add on a favored bonus. I'm still not getting what the fighter is lacking because it can do everything you guys have mentioned.A mounted archer raised on the steppe would need Ride and probably Handle Animal and Survival (plains) just to establish their character. A viking should have Swim and Profession (sailor); a pirate should have those and add Acrobatics for getting around in the rigging. A knight needs Ride, Knowledge (nobility), and possibly Diplomacy. Not every fighter wants Intimidate, but it's a pretty iconic skill for any kind of "tough guy" character, and Perception, as noted, is always useful.
It's called a Wand. You buy them. And no, A Druid will definitely out damage your Archer Fighter. And they won't be shut down by Fickle winds. And they can move and full attack. Or move and Vital Strike out a chunk of the sun*. Or move and tell the universe to quit talking while the adults are talking. And then do that last one again as a swift action, because the universe shouldn't talk back. Rangers will also out Archer the Fighter easily. Inquisitors to. And Zen Archer Monks. And...
*Deal enough damage to kill pretty much anything in the books.
It doesn't matter that another class can do something better. A wizard casts spells better than a magus. Some class has to be the worst and another has to be the best at any given aspect. Fighters win at feats and armor use.
You are missing the point. No class is the best at everything. The point with the fighter is that it does not do the other things well enough for many fo us.
It's about martials having more survivability at lower levels.
Not true at all.
At 1st level they can all normally take one hit. At 1st level a crit might kill you, even if you are a barbarian, depending on the weapon being used. By the time you are level 3 you have mirror image which leaves you more likely to not get hit. Not that mage armor and or shield does not give you comparable AC to breastplate. By level 5 you are out of the danger zone in most cases.
At the end of the day the portion of a build I posted is functional and effective regardless of another class being able to do them as well. You don't have to be the best to play the game.
The fighter as is can be "ok" in a game, but just like the rogue another class can do what the fighter does and then do other things. <---That is the point being made.
I have a fighter made up, but I know that other than doing damage he is not bringing much to the table. <----There is nothing wrong with that in this case, but the lack of options the class give you is obvious.
Now I can go into the Lore Warden, but like I said that says nothing about the fighter class as whole.
The problem is that martials are not Beowulf or Hercules. They're not even close.That's what Mythic rules are for.
Casters should be scaled down. As the OP indicated, they have no parallel in fiction or other genre-related material, including most game-fiction tie-ins like D&D & Pathfinder novels & comics.
The solution to the caster:martial disparity isn't to amp everything & power-inflate everything further.
Yes because, "I'm able to place my attacks very quickly and precisely" (ie. Add Dex to damage) is the kind of mindblowing power that must be Mythic.
(/sarcasm.)
It's not power inflation btw, since the Fighter and Rogue were never inflated to begin with.
Save your sarcasm. Hercules is a demigod and Beowulf, with the hyperbolic style of the Norse ballads may as well be one.
Counterbalancing those two examples are my two floor-to-ceiling bookshelves filled with fantasy warriors & rogues that aren't demigods.
The problem is that martials are not Beowulf or Hercules. They're not even close.That's what Mythic rules are for.
Casters should be scaled down. As the OP indicated, they have no parallel in fiction or other genre-related material, including most game-fiction tie-ins like D&D & Pathfinder novels & comics.
The solution to the caster:martial disparity isn't to amp everything & power-inflate everything further.
Yes because, "I'm able to place my attacks very quickly and precisely" (ie. Add Dex to damage) is the kind of mindblowing power that must be Mythic.
(/sarcasm.)
It's not power inflation btw, since the Fighter and Rogue were never inflated to begin with.
Save your sarcasm. Hercules is a demigod and Beowulf, with the hyperbolic style of the Norse ballads may as well be one.
Counterbalancing those two examples are my two floor-to-ceiling bookshelves filled with fantasy warriors & rogues that aren't demigods.
Zeus is only like a level 13 Druid. So... ya.
Spell storing arrows with dispel magic deal with your fickle winds. I do enjoy seeing everyone post this crap repeatedly to counter archers every time they can.
Reread the rules please. And then please come in here and post why you were wrong. Normally I'd get the rule and quote them, but this is just so obviously wrong that it's not worth it.
Words on paper. An archer fighter can do more damage than a ranger or Druid. The ranger can use his instant enemy a total of 1 time at level 10 using his wisdom of 16 which is hurting him elsewhere. Maybe 5 times by level 20. Pearls of power level 3 aren't cheap and suck up WBL. And still it's only good for a single target. Maybe you only fight one monster per encounter.
Paladins don't get more skills. They're more MAD than a fighter and still only get 2+INT.
Barbarians gain less AC unless you're a beast totem which comes back to wraithstrikes "if only a single facet makes you good you're not good."
Fighters still gain better usage of crit builds by stacking penalties.
There are druids who do more damage than Archer Fighters and Ranger builds who do it too. Instant Enemy can be a Wand, Pearls of Power III are 9,000 gp(Not that bad).
Paladins do get skill synergy though. Spells, Charisma based, and continue to pile on the features.
Barbarians can have equivalent AC even without Beast Totem through Armored Hulk.
If the Fighter isn't doing anything particularly good about fulfilling it's concepts, then why should someone play one over another class? It's essentially a waste of text if other classes fit the Fighter's bill better.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Save your sarcasm. Hercules is a demigod and Beowulf, with the hyperbolic style of the Norse ballads may as well be one.
Counterbalancing those two examples are my two floor-to-ceiling bookshelves filled with fantasy warriors & rogues that aren't demigods.
It doesn't matter what they are.
If Beowulf is a demigod with CR 15, then a 15th level Fighter should theoretically be just as powerful as Beowulf, since they have the same CR.
And your books simply star low-level characters. So what?
Flawed the rules say you can not take 10 if you are distracted. You don't have to have someone beside you to not be able to take 10. Being in combat means you can not take 10.
Taking 10
When your character is not in immediate danger or distracted, you may choose to take 10. Instead of rolling 1d20 for the skill check, calculate your result as if you had rolled a 10. For many routine tasks, taking 10 makes them automatically successful. Distractions or threats (such as combat) make it impossible for a character to take 10. In most cases, taking 10 is purely a safety measure—you know (or expect) that an average roll will succeed but fear that a poor roll might fail, so you elect to settle for the average roll (a 10). Taking 10 is especially useful in situations where a particularly high roll wouldn't help.
I am sure someone trying to shoot you in the face is immediate danger, and a threat(combat). You not trying to fight them back does not make it "not combat".
As soon as the fighting begins combat begins.<--That is in the rules.
I think people need to stop giving the mythological gods so much credit. I'd bet on a level 20 Wizard over all (Yes, ALL) of them.
Spell storing arrows with dispel magic deal with your fickle winds. I do enjoy seeing everyone post this crap repeatedly to counter archers every time they can.Reread the rules please. And then please come in here and post why you were wrong. Normally I'd get the rule and quote them, but this is just so obviously wrong that it's not worth it.
Three questions for Anzyr
1) How would the arrows even hit the spell?
2) How is the CL high enough to even dispel the spell?
3) Who is putting the spell in the arrows?
Or does that trick just not even begin to work?
Ugh, I didn't want to explain it. But I guess I have to.... my curse is making me.
Anytime the weapon strikes a creature and the creature takes damage from it, the weapon can immediately cast the spell on that creature as a free action if the wielder desires.
See the problem? That spellstoring arrow is never going to hit the caster of Fickle Winds. And thus never be able to Dispel Magic.
Other classes can't do what the fighter does though. No other class gains 21 feats, armor training, and weapon training. A fighter gets more out of armor than any class. A fighter gets more combat options through feats than any other class.
A Barbarian can wear heavy armor and move full speed, 10 better than feats talents, 10 feats, and Rage which applies to all their weapons and bows(with Adaptive).
Though I'd be more than happy to hear what combat options you're taking. A 10th level Fighter would be pleasant to see as a thought experiment.
Ugh, I didn't want to explain it. But I guess I have to.... my curse is making me.
Anytime the weapon strikes a creature and the creature takes damage from it, the weapon can immediately cast the spell on that creature as a free action if the wielder desires.
See the problem?
Yes I did read that. But someone did think the trick could work, so I thought there might be some sort of work around.
Yes I did read that. But someone did think the trick could work, so I thought there might be some sort of work around.Ugh, I didn't want to explain it. But I guess I have to.... my curse is making me.
Anytime the weapon strikes a creature and the creature takes damage from it, the weapon can immediately cast the spell on that creature as a free action if the wielder desires.
See the problem?
If Flawed has one (other then Fiat obviously) I would be genuinely impressed. And then immediately appropriate it for my own builds.
Anzyr-- Titans are CR 21-22. Zeus defeated an Army of them. Zeus is not level 13.
If the Fighter isn't doing anything particularly good about fulfilling it's concepts, then why should someone play one over another class? It's essentially a waste of text if other classes fit the Fighter's bill better.And this is where the whole thing falls apart. The concept of a fighter is to fight well. It does this, but everyone wants more from it and then cry because they don't want to have a less than 18 strength at level one and dump intelligence.
The problem is and has always been optimizers.
Optimization has nothing to do with it. Other classes fight better. All the Fighter can do okayishly is full attack. The Fighter is actually the least adaptable to combat in the game.
Other classes can't do what the fighter does though. No other class gains 21 feats, armor training, and weapon training. A fighter gets more out of armor than any class. A fighter gets more combat options through feats than any other class.
It doesn't matter that another class can do something better. A wizard casts spells better than a magus. Some class has to be the worst and another has to be the best at any given aspect. Fighters win at feats and armor use.You are missing the point. No class is the best at everything. The point with the fighter is that it does not do the other things well enough for many fo us.
It's about martials having more survivability at lower levels.Not true at all.
At 1st level they can all normally take one hit. At 1st level a crit might kill you, even if you are a barbarian, depending on the weapon being used. By the time you are level 3 you have mirror image which leaves you more likely to not get hit. Not that mage armor and or shield does not give you comparable AC to breastplate. By level 5 you are out of the danger zone in most cases.
At the end of the day the portion of a build I posted is functional and effective regardless of another class being able to do them as well. You don't have to be the best to play the game.The fighter as is can be "ok" in a game, but just like the rogue another class can do what the fighter does and then do other things. <---That is the point being made.
I have a fighter made up, but I know that other than doing damage he is not bringing much to the table. <----There is nothing wrong with that in this case, but the lack of options the class give you is obvious.
Now I can go into the Lore Warden, but like I said that says nothing about the fighter class as whole.
Yes fighters do the most consistent damage, but that by itself is not enough. I am well aware of what they get, but 21 feats don't mean much in an of itself.
And while I know you are trying to say the other classes dont get what the fighter gets that goes for every class.
As for being able to deal damage, and get a decent to high AC the ranger, paladin, and barbarian can all do that. They do enough damage to be a threat, and still have other options. <---That is why the fighter is being given hard time.
Let say our "enough" number is 50 DPR. Let's say the fighter averages 70.
The other classes might pull in at 55 to 60 when not using their class features such as favored enemy or smite. When they do use them they spike up to 90 or 100.
The numbers above are just there to illustrate a point.-->They are passing the "enough" mark and still able to, heal, shutdown magical affects, provide difficult terrain, and so on. That is why hitting things hard is not enough.
|
Words on paper. An archer fighter can do more damage than a ranger or Druid. The ranger can use his instant enemy a total of 1 time at level 10 using his wisdom of 16 which is hurting him elsewhere. Maybe 5 times by level 20. Pearls of power level 3 aren't cheap and suck up WBL. And still it's only good for a single target. Maybe you only fight one monster per encounter.
Paladins don't get more skills. They're more MAD than a fighter and still only get 2+INT.
Barbarians gain less AC unless you're a beast totem which comes back to wraithstrikes "if only a single facet makes you good you're not good."
Fighters still gain better usage of crit builds by stacking penalties.
I'm not incredibly familiar with Rangers or Druids[I don't play them], but I'm pretty sure an archer Ranger will only be behind on a little DPR than an archer fighter, and against his favored enemies[even just his 3rd], will be ahead. As for druids, well, from level 6 on they will be Charge Pouncing with a bunch of natural attacks while wildshaped on most days. Natural Attacks that are all made at full BAB, along with possibly some secondary ones that are made at 2nd. Might not have the same DPR as a focused archer, but will have close, along with an animal friend to help add damage and flanking.
Paladins get the same number of skills, true, and they also get spells, Lay on Hands, Mercies, Immunities, the best saves in the game, and the ability to give allies save buffs. And they get a class feature that actually increases AC[Smite Evil] Fighters get feats, the ability to move faster in heavy armor, and the ability to swing a weapon harder.
Barbarians gain less AC, but more HP and more DR[as in, they get some before level Twenty], the ability to move faster in general, and Rage that gives HP [even if it is Temporary], better attack/damage, save bonuses, etc. and eventually will be usable all day long.
Anzyr-- Titans are CR 21-22. Zeus defeated an Army of them. Zeus is not level 13.
I see very little evidence the Titan he fought are CR 21-22. Maybe I missed the Meteor Swarms when I was reading that though. A 13th Level Druid is absolutely capable of being a swan or a bull, and calling down lightning.