Why ever take fighter?


Advice

101 to 150 of 152 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>

Pendagast wrote:

Fighters are better at mass combat.

Arm chairing you are looking at one on one fighting.

They also last a lot longer and deal better with low rolls… a swashbuckler poops out early when nothing amazing happens (meaning no crits etc)

A fighter can hold a doorway against multiple enemies while the party prepares/escapes/heals.

The swashbuckler is so busy jumping around anything and everything can just run by him.

A fighter is more party cohesive.

If given the opportunity, and ALL skills are covered, I don't need to worry about casting, or disabling device etc.

Ill pick fighter almost every time.
(although I do like barbarian and occasionally paladin… holy guide looks particularly attractive)

I'm not really taking a stance for the Swashbuckler or Fighter, but this post is very strange and does not seem to be fueled by any sort of understand of what the Swashbuckler actually does.

It goes by the misunderstanding that Swashbucklers are mobile. They are not. They abide by the stand-still-and-full-attack ideal as much as most other martials.

Also, attempting to explain the Fighter as versatile is not the best ideas. The Fighter is good at only one thing: doing damage. There is a reason why they are considered weak, because this is the only thing they can be good at.

The Fighter is not more party cohesive. It offers nothing to the party but damage, and any other martials, Swashbucklers included, can fill this role and still contribute more (though how much more depends on the class).


Sgt Arpin wrote:
TarkXT wrote:
Sgt Arpin wrote:
What would "anything else melee" be?

Reach fighting.

Two handed fighting.

Two Weapon Fighting.

Natural Weapon fighting.

This question has been answered before.

Why do that things? The swash does better damage without that.

To be fair you did ask what would the things be that a fighter could do better unless you misunderstood what the other poster was saying. Then they gave you a list of things the fighter can do better. They were no suggesting you do it with a swashbuckler.

---------------------------------------------------------------
I think a two handed or weaponmaster archetype is hard to outdamage The fighter also only has to shore up a will save. The swashbuckler has to shore up a will save and a fort save, which to most are the more important saves.

I still think the swashbuckler is the better overall class, but that does not make it always better.


Sgt Arpin wrote:
Pendagast wrote:

Fighters are better at mass combat.

Arm chairing you are looking at one on one fighting.

They also last a lot longer and deal better with low rolls… a swashbuckler poops out early when nothing amazing happens (meaning no crits etc)

A fighter can hold a doorway against multiple enemies while the party prepares/escapes/heals.

The swashbuckler is so busy jumping around anything and everything can just run by him.

A fighter is more party cohesive.

If given the opportunity, and ALL skills are covered, I don't need to worry about casting, or disabling device etc.

Ill pick fighter almost every time.
(although I do like barbarian and occasionally paladin… holy guide looks particularly attractive)

Why can't a swash do this too?

''have you tired it?

taking a swash and blocking the door?
holding off the hordes?

No. he sides steps 5 feet to get out of the way… he bounces around all over the place, he has astoundingly bad AC if flatfooted.

Why doesn't the swash do it? because he doesn't do it.


Lyra Amary wrote:


Also, attempting to explain the Fighter as versatile is not the best ideas. The Fighter is good at only one thing: doing damage. There is a reason why they are considered weak, because this is the only thing they can be good at.

True, but not my point. Sure, outside of combat the fighter is like a moose on broadway, but in combat the fighter is a class that can master many style. It's quite easy for a 2-handed figther to get some archery feat for these pesky flying thing, and shine more thant the barbarian who just rage on the ground because the monster are not in reach.... or in the actual case, the swatch butler who don't really have good mechanics to go ''outside of his box in combat''.


Bandw2 wrote:
so you can stealth and swim in heavy armor. why does no one remember this.

Acrobatics to avoid AoO from movement while wearing full plate, too.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Sgt Arpin wrote:
TarkXT wrote:
Sgt Arpin wrote:
What would "anything else melee" be?

Reach fighting.

Two handed fighting.

Two Weapon Fighting.

Natural Weapon fighting.

This question has been answered before.

Why do that things? The swash does better damage without that.

Cause I think like a Romulan and implode vulcan.

You only care about damage.

The thinking here is that melee is all about numbers. I know that it's more about actions and versatility.

Swashbucklers can be a little versatile through judicious use of panache. But, I can grab two archetypes and get all the damage and versatility I could ask for.


wraithstrike wrote:


I think a two handed or weaponmaster archetype is hard to outdamage The fighter also only has to shore up a will save. The swashbuckler has to shore up a will save and a fort save, which to most are the more important saves.

I still think the swashbuckler is the better overall class, but that does not make it always better.

I am curious, though. Why do people think that Reflex saves are unimportant? I get that when it was just the Core Rulebook, failing Reflex saves tends to only do damage, rather disabling you like a Fort or Will save might do.

But with additional books, there are more spells requiring Reflex saves that failing causes severe consequences. This is even more true with the existence of Dazing Spell, which turns any spell, including Reflex saves into save-or-suck spells.

I get that Swashbucklers are bad at saves, but they are the same as Fighters in terms of base saves: one good save and two bad ones. But the Swashbuckler has Charmed Life to bolsters their saves a bit. Yeah, it's terrible, it's limited, it sucks hard. But it's still something compared to basically the nothing that the Fighter gets.


Sgt Arpin wrote:
Let's be clear here. I don't think the swash is better. I think they both have their merits. I'm trying to find someone to make a compelling argument to my group as to (other than sheet flavor) why they should take a fighter over a swashbuckler when I'm standing toe to toe with a bad guy.

Not every group plays the game the same way so anything we name may not matter to your group.

How about you post a build of a swashbuckler at level 11 and tells us why it should be chosen over a fighter, then we can have something to go by that supports your argument. One problem is also that you asked "why ever take a fighter..". Most people will translate that as "why should I take a fighter..". What you should have done was given examples of how your group played, and what you value in the game.

just as a correction: Elementals, oozes, incoporeal creatures not just ghost would be immune to the precision damage from the swashbuckler.


Saigo Takamori wrote:
Lyra Amary wrote:


Also, attempting to explain the Fighter as versatile is not the best ideas. The Fighter is good at only one thing: doing damage. There is a reason why they are considered weak, because this is the only thing they can be good at.

True, but not my point. Sure, outside of combat the fighter is like a moose on broadway, but in combat the fighter is a class that can master many style. It's quite easy for a 2-handed figther to get some archery feat for these pesky flying thing, and shine more thant the barbarian who just rage on the ground because the monster are not in reach.... or in the actual case, the swatch butler who don't really have good mechanics to go ''outside of his box in combat''.

Why would be be flat footed? He has evasion ant uncanny dodge and improved uncanny dodge. Have you tried it?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Eltacolibre wrote:

Not everybody wants to play people dancing around with swords...some just like swinging their big swords and be done with it. I have a friend who enjoys playing dex fighter and enjoyed it when Swashbuckler was released.

Swashbuckler is pretty cool...but frankly I will never ever play a dex based class for personal preference really. I prefer brute strength or spellcasting but that's just me.

Using a bastard sword or katana might be big enough for some people. And the dancing around part is not necessary. You can easily play a guy wielding a bastard sword who's standing still most of the time until he strikes or someone attacks him. That's when he dodges just far enough to not get hit.

But to OP: I'd play a slayer over a fighter or swashbuckler most of the time. Except maybe for a dip.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pendagast wrote:

have you tired it?

taking a swash and blocking the door?
holding off the hordes?

No. he sides steps 5 feet to get out of the way… he bounces around all over the place, he has astoundingly bad AC if flatfooted.

Why doesn't the swash do it? because he doesn't do it.

Uhh... What?

The Swashbuckler is not forced to 5ft.-step away or bounce around (in fact, it's pretty bad at the mobility department... Like every other martial class).

And how is a Fighter more party cohesive than... Well... Anything?

Swashbucklers can have pretty high damage and AC... They just fail to live up to their class concept. The only significant advantage that Fighters have over them is their Fort save, which is generally far more important than Reflex.


Lyra Amary wrote:


I am curious, though. Why do people think that Reflex saves are unimportant?

I never said that. I said it is the least important of the 3. That is because with a d10 character you will likely have a decent amount of hit point and failing a reflex save will not normally end your character or take it out of the fight via other methods. Now if you fail 2 or 3 reflex saves you might be in trouble.

Quote:

But with additional books, there are more spells requiring Reflex saves that failing causes severe consequences. This is even more true with the existence of Dazing Spell, which turns any spell, including Reflex saves into save-or-suck spells.

Dazing spell may or may not be picked up so it is situational, and even that requires a will save in order to daze you. I can just as easily counter with the the party could have energy resistance, but the conversation is easier without assuming who might have what.

Quote:


I get that Swashbucklers are bad at saves, but they are the same as Fighters in terms of base saves: one good save and two bad ones. But the Swashbuckler has Charmed Life to bolsters their saves a bit. Yeah, it's terrible, it's limited, it sucks hard. But it's still something compared to basically the nothing that the Fighter gets.

Charmed life depends on the swashbuckler pushing another stat, and it is limited in uses per day. You can get a fighter to a decent will save, even if you don't use a dwarf. Well actually you can do it with a swashbuckler also, but it requires more effort, and someone with less optimization skills won't do it. The fighter being easier to shore up might have the advantage here, depending on how long the adventuring day is for your group.


Saigo Takamori wrote:
Lyra Amary wrote:


Also, attempting to explain the Fighter as versatile is not the best ideas. The Fighter is good at only one thing: doing damage. There is a reason why they are considered weak, because this is the only thing they can be good at.

True, but not my point. Sure, outside of combat the fighter is like a moose on broadway, but in combat the fighter is a class that can master many style. It's quite easy for a 2-handed figther to get some archery feat for these pesky flying thing, and shine more thant the barbarian who just rage on the ground because the monster are not in reach.... or in the actual case, the swatch butler who don't really have good mechanics to go ''outside of his box in combat''.

Why would a barbarian not have a bow? That sounds like a player problem to me, not a class problem. Now the fighter will be better with the bow most likely, but that is differently than the barbarian doing nothing because he did not get one.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

Full disclosure; I'd play a ranger over both.


wraithstrike wrote:
Saigo Takamori wrote:
Lyra Amary wrote:


Also, attempting to explain the Fighter as versatile is not the best ideas. The Fighter is good at only one thing: doing damage. There is a reason why they are considered weak, because this is the only thing they can be good at.

True, but not my point. Sure, outside of combat the fighter is like a moose on broadway, but in combat the fighter is a class that can master many style. It's quite easy for a 2-handed figther to get some archery feat for these pesky flying thing, and shine more thant the barbarian who just rage on the ground because the monster are not in reach.... or in the actual case, the swatch butler who don't really have good mechanics to go ''outside of his box in combat''.

Why would a barbarian not have a bow? That sounds like a player problem to me, not a class problem. Now the fighter will be better with the bow most likely, but that is differently than the barbarian doing nothing because he did not get one.

Sure, he may have a bow, and probably should. But the chances are that he will not have any feat in that, while the fighter can easily get the Point blank/Precise/rapid combo, and probably more. Chances are, the fighter will do far better than the barbarian with a bow, and that was my point.


wraithstrike wrote:


I never said that. I said it is the least important of the 3. That is because with a d10 character you will likely have a decent amount of hit point and failing a reflex save will not normally end your character or take it out of the fight via other methods. Now if you fail 2 or 3 reflex saves you might be in trouble.

Dazing spell may or may not be picked up so it is situational, and even that requires a will save in order to daze you. I can just as easily counter with the the party could have energy resistance, but the conversation is easier without assuming who might have what.

Fair enough. Although to clear it up, Dazing Spell relies on the original save of the spell. Failing that causes you to be dazed in addition to spell's original effects. It's only if the spell does not already have a save that it defaults to forcing Will saves.

wraithstrike wrote:


Charmed life depends on the swashbuckler pushing another stat, and it is limited in uses per day. You can get a fighter to a decent will save, even if you don't use a dwarf. Well actually you can do it with a swashbuckler also, but it requires more effort, and someone with less optimization skills won't do it. The fighter being easier to shore up might have the advantage here, depending on how long the adventuring day is for your group.

How does the Fighter get a decent Will save in ways that the Swashbuckler doesn't? I may be missing something, but outside of the very limited Bravery, Fighters do not have class-unique ways to boost their saves.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Umbranus wrote:
Eltacolibre wrote:

Not everybody wants to play people dancing around with swords...some just like swinging their big swords and be done with it. I have a friend who enjoys playing dex fighter and enjoyed it when Swashbuckler was released.

Swashbuckler is pretty cool...but frankly I will never ever play a dex based class for personal preference really. I prefer brute strength or spellcasting but that's just me.

Using a bastard sword or katana might be big enough for some people. And the dancing around part is not necessary. You can easily play a guy wielding a bastard sword who's standing still most of the time until he strikes or someone attacks him. That's when he dodges just far enough to not get hit.

But to OP: I'd play a slayer over a fighter or swashbuckler most of the time. Except maybe for a dip.

I love my swashbuckler characters. I haven't been able to wait for the class to come out. I'm usually a more finesse type player, rogues, ranged rangers, mostly elves, but I've never had a martial class quite fit the bill. Now I do. One thing to take away from this debate (trying to keep it friendly, looking at you Seranov) is that the more classes and archetypes we come out with, the more danger we are in our pushing or legacy iconic classes out of their roles. I think fighter is the class in most jeopardy of this.


wraithstrike wrote:
Saigo Takamori wrote:
Lyra Amary wrote:
Also, attempting to explain the Fighter as versatile is not the best ideas. The Fighter is good at only one thing: doing damage. There is a reason why they are considered weak, because this is the only thing they can be good at.
True, but not my point. Sure, outside of combat the fighter is like a moose on broadway, but in combat the fighter is a class that can master many style. It's quite easy for a 2-handed fighter to get some archery feat for these pesky flying thing, and shine more than the barbarian who just rage on the ground because the monster are not in reach.... or in the actual case, the swatch butler who don't really have good mechanics to go ''outside of his box in combat''.
Why would a barbarian not have a bow? That sounds like a player problem to me, not a class problem. Now the fighter will be better with the bow most likely, but that is differently than the barbarian doing nothing because he did not get one.

In fact, adaptive bows make Barbarians pretty good archers, and that enhancement only costs 1000gp. Hell! Keeping a +1 Adaptive Furious bow as secondary weapon is pretty easy by mid levels. When it comes to feats, Deadly Aim is usually enough for a switch-hitter Barbarian, but he could take Urban Barbarian and be even better at it.

Admittedly, Fighters do make better switch-hitters, but that doesn't mean Barbarians can't deal with flying enemies. Honestly, I've never seen any decent martial character who didn't carry a ranged weapon...


Saigo Takamori wrote:
wraithstrike wrote:
Saigo Takamori wrote:
Lyra Amary wrote:


Also, attempting to explain the Fighter as versatile is not the best ideas. The Fighter is good at only one thing: doing damage. There is a reason why they are considered weak, because this is the only thing they can be good at.

True, but not my point. Sure, outside of combat the fighter is like a moose on broadway, but in combat the fighter is a class that can master many style. It's quite easy for a 2-handed figther to get some archery feat for these pesky flying thing, and shine more thant the barbarian who just rage on the ground because the monster are not in reach.... or in the actual case, the swatch butler who don't really have good mechanics to go ''outside of his box in combat''.

Why would a barbarian not have a bow? That sounds like a player problem to me, not a class problem. Now the fighter will be better with the bow most likely, but that is differently than the barbarian doing nothing because he did not get one.
Sure, he may have a bow, and probably should. But the chances are that he will not have any feat in that, while the fighter can easily get the Point blank/Precise/rapid combo, and probably more. Chances are, the fighter will do far better than the barbarian with a bow, and that was my point.

ok. yeah I agree that most barbarians don't pick up bow feats.

Barbarian:Hey, mr caster hit me with a fly spell so I can go up there and hit somebody else.

That is how it is the games I GM anyway. :)


Saigo Takamori wrote:
Sure, he may have a bow, and probably should. But the chances are that he will not have any feat in that, while the fighter can easily get the Point blank/Precise/rapid combo, and probably more. Chances are, the fighter will do far better than the barbarian with a bow, and that was my point.

This is actually incorrect. It is quite easy to have a Barbarian that is good at archery. In fact, it is probably easier than a Fighter. All you need is Reckless Abandon, an Adaptive bow and Deadly Aim.


Flawed wrote:
Bandw2 wrote:
so you can stealth and swim in heavy armor. why does no one remember this.
Acrobatics to avoid AoO from movement while wearing full plate, too.

Characters with Dex as their primary stat, Acrobatics as a class skill, and zero Armor Check Penalty still struggle to pass those Acrobatics checks because monster CMD is so high. The Fighter with 14 Dex and say, -4 Armor Check Penalty (improved from -6, BFD) is not going to be passing those checks.

Back of the envelope:

Source on average monster CMD

Let's even give the Fighter a trait to make Acrobatics a class skill with a +1 trait bonus (+20% chance of success). Let's also say the Fighter is burning half of his base skill ranks on Acrobatics.

At level 1:
Rogue: +8 (+4 Dex, +1 Skill Rank, +3 Class Skill)
Fighter: +3 (+2 Dex, +1 Skill Rank, +3 Class Skill, +1 Trait Bonus, -4 Armor Check Penalty from Scale Mail)

Median monster CMD: 13

Rogue has an 80% chance of success
Fighter has a 55% chance of success

-------------------------------------------------------------------

At level 7:

Rogue: +16 (+6 Dex, +7 Skill Rank, +3 Class Skill)
Fighter: +12 (+2 Dex, +7 Skill Rank, +3 Class Skill, +1 Trait Bonus, -1 Armor Check Penalty from Mithril Full Plate + Armor Training. Note: At level 7 the armor would take up half his WBL before enhancement)

Median monster CMD: 26

Rogue has a 55% chance of success
Fighter has a 35% chance of success

-------------------------------------------------------------------

At level 11:

Rogue: +22 (+8 Dex, +11 Skill Rank, +3 Class Skill)
Fighter: +18 (+3 Dex, +11 Skill Rank, +3 Class Skill, +1 Trait Bonus, no more Armor Check Penalty)

Median monster CMD: 34

Rogue has a 45% chance of success
Fighter has a 25% chance of success

-------------------------------------------------------------------

At level 15:

Rogue: +28 (+10 Dex, +15 Skill Rank, +3 Class Skill)
Fighter: +23 (+4 Dex, +15 Skill Rank, +3 Class Skill, +1 Trait Bonus)

Median monster CMD: 42

Rogue has a 35% chance of success
Fighter has a 10% chance of success

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Pretty bleak, even if you factor in Skill Focus: Before level 10 it increases the chance of success by 15%, after level 10 it adds 30%.


Sgt Arpin wrote:
Saigo Takamori wrote:
Lyra Amary wrote:


Also, attempting to explain the Fighter as versatile is not the best ideas. The Fighter is good at only one thing: doing damage. There is a reason why they are considered weak, because this is the only thing they can be good at.

True, but not my point. Sure, outside of combat the fighter is like a moose on broadway, but in combat the fighter is a class that can master many style. It's quite easy for a 2-handed figther to get some archery feat for these pesky flying thing, and shine more thant the barbarian who just rage on the ground because the monster are not in reach.... or in the actual case, the swatch butler who don't really have good mechanics to go ''outside of his box in combat''.

Why would be be flat footed? He has evasion ant uncanny dodge and improved uncanny dodge. Have you tried it?

There are many reason why a character may not be able to move (easily), it has happened regularly during the last few play session.

What levels are you talking about, you're trying to macguffin in any and all abilities of the class at any one time.

This is starting to turn into a "my wizard can cast this spell" discussion


Lyra Amary wrote:
Saigo Takamori wrote:
Sure, he may have a bow, and probably should. But the chances are that he will not have any feat in that, while the fighter can easily get the Point blank/Precise/rapid combo, and probably more. Chances are, the fighter will do far better than the barbarian with a bow, and that was my point.
This is actually incorrect. It is quite easy to have a Barbarian that is good at archery. In fact, it is probably easier than a Fighter. All you need is Reckless Abandon, an Adaptive bow and Deadly Aim.

You may need more than that. You may need precise shot to ignore shooting into melee IF there is another melee guy in your party that would be in the way, but other than that all that matters are attack bonuses.

Neither a melee focused archer or barbarian is likely to have much dex so it should be about even. The fighter might have an edge if he took weapon training in archery, but it is not a huge gap.

Coincidentally most non-archer fighters don't take archery feats either in my experience so it is likely a wash in real play.


Lyra Amary wrote:
I may be missing something, but outside of the very limited Bravery, Fighters do not have class-unique ways to boost their saves.

Feat. It's really easy for a fighter to get some ''save boosting feat'' early.


Pendagast wrote:
Sgt Arpin wrote:
Saigo Takamori wrote:
Lyra Amary wrote:


Also, attempting to explain the Fighter as versatile is not the best ideas. The Fighter is good at only one thing: doing damage. There is a reason why they are considered weak, because this is the only thing they can be good at.

True, but not my point. Sure, outside of combat the fighter is like a moose on broadway, but in combat the fighter is a class that can master many style. It's quite easy for a 2-handed figther to get some archery feat for these pesky flying thing, and shine more thant the barbarian who just rage on the ground because the monster are not in reach.... or in the actual case, the swatch butler who don't really have good mechanics to go ''outside of his box in combat''.

Why would be be flat footed? He has evasion ant uncanny dodge and improved uncanny dodge. Have you tried it?

There are many reason why a character may not be able to move (easily), it has happened regularly during the last few play session.

What levels are you talking about, you're trying to macguffin in any and all abilities of the class at any one time.

This is starting to turn into a "my wizard can cast this spell" discussion

That is why I said for him(the OP) to post a build. You know how these discussion go. Every time someone bring up X then the perfect solution is always in place. An actual build helps take care of that.


wraithstrike wrote:

You may need more than that. You may need precise shot to ignore shooting into melee IF there is another melee guy in your party that would be in the way, but other than that all that matters are attack bonuses.

Neither a melee focused archer or barbarian is likely to have much dex so it should be about even. The fighter might have an edge if he took weapon training in archery, but it is not a huge gap.

Coincidentally most non-archer fighters don't take archery feats either in my experience so it is likely a wash in real play.

Ah, i neglected Precise Shot because I assumed that if one guy could hit an enemy in melee, so could you.

In terms of attack bonuses, the Barbarian can get some really nice ones using Reckless Abandon. The downside of it that ability is negligible since you're attacking from range. I also figured that the Barbarian can afford one or two archery feats if they were so inclined; unlike the Fighter, the Barbarian has few feats that must be taken, so they're pretty free in terms of what feats they wish to take, despite their small feat pool.

My main concern about Fighters is that a fair portion of their damage comes from feats that specifically affect a single weapon. Switching out of that weapon to a secondary weapon will cause a hit in power more than what other classes would be affected by.

Though to be honest, if you want to switch hit, Rangers are better than either class anyways.

Saigo Takamori wrote:
Feat. It's really easy for a fighter to get some ''save boosting feat'' early.

And what, exactly, is preventing a Swashbuckler from doing the same? What pressing options is the Swashbuckler forced to take that prevents them from taking such feats?

Also, note that I said class-unique options. There are no feats, to my knowledge, that are Fighter only that boost saves.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pendagast wrote:
Sgt Arpin wrote:
Saigo Takamori wrote:
Lyra Amary wrote:


Also, attempting to explain the Fighter as versatile is not the best ideas. The Fighter is good at only one thing: doing damage. There is a reason why they are considered weak, because this is the only thing they can be good at.

True, but not my point. Sure, outside of combat the fighter is like a moose on broadway, but in combat the fighter is a class that can master many style. It's quite easy for a 2-handed figther to get some archery feat for these pesky flying thing, and shine more thant the barbarian who just rage on the ground because the monster are not in reach.... or in the actual case, the swatch butler who don't really have good mechanics to go ''outside of his box in combat''.

Why would be be flat footed? He has evasion ant uncanny dodge and improved uncanny dodge. Have you tried it?

There are many reason why a character may not be able to move (easily), it has happened regularly during the last few play session.

What levels are you talking about, you're trying to macguffin in any and all abilities of the class at any one time.

This is starting to turn into a "my wizard can cast this spell" discussion

Were not talking about "at what level". Were talking about what the classes can and can't do.

For instance, there is no debate here whether a level 1 2 handed fighter would out damage a level 1 swasbuckler. Of course he would.


Lyra Amary wrote:


Saigo Takamori wrote:
Feat. It's really easy for a fighter to get some ''save boosting feat'' early.
And what, exactly, is preventing a Swashbuckler from doing the same? What pressing options is the Swashbuckler forced to take that prevents them from taking such feats?

He can do that, sure. But let's face it: a human Swatchbutler will have 4 feat at level 4, a human fighter will have 6. Chances are, the fighter will get spare feat for Iron will, toughness (...) sooner than the Swatchbutler. It's not much, I know, but it's an advantage. And the extra feat are a ''unique class advantage''.


Saigo Takamori wrote:
Lyra Amary wrote:


Saigo Takamori wrote:
Feat. It's really easy for a fighter to get some ''save boosting feat'' early.
And what, exactly, is preventing a Swashbuckler from doing the same? What pressing options is the Swashbuckler forced to take that prevents them from taking such feats?
He can do that, sure. But let's face it: a Swatchbutler human will have 4 feat at level 4, a fighter human will have 6. Chances are, the fighter will get spare feat for Iron will, toughness (...) sooner than the Swatchbutler. It's not much, I know, but it's an advantage.

Unless he chose a combat style with onerous feat chains.


Athaleon wrote:
Saigo Takamori wrote:
Lyra Amary wrote:


Saigo Takamori wrote:
Feat. It's really easy for a fighter to get some ''save boosting feat'' early.
And what, exactly, is preventing a Swashbuckler from doing the same? What pressing options is the Swashbuckler forced to take that prevents them from taking such feats?
He can do that, sure. But let's face it: a Swatchbutler human will have 4 feat at level 4, a fighter human will have 6. Chances are, the fighter will get spare feat for Iron will, toughness (...) sooner than the Swatchbutler. It's not much, I know, but it's an advantage.
Unless he chose a combat style with onerous feat chains.

That's why I said ''chances''. Sure, if he want to do whirlwind attack, he will not get those feat. But a classic two handed weapon fighter will probably get 3 ''support feat'' at level 6 (and I'm pretty sure an fighter archer will do better than the swatch in DPR...)


Saigo Takamori wrote:
Lyra Amary wrote:


Saigo Takamori wrote:
Feat. It's really easy for a fighter to get some ''save boosting feat'' early.
And what, exactly, is preventing a Swashbuckler from doing the same? What pressing options is the Swashbuckler forced to take that prevents them from taking such feats?
He can do that, sure. But let's face it: a human Swatchbutler will have 4 feat at level 4, a human fighter will have 6. Chances are, the fighter will get spare feat for Iron will, toughness (...) sooner than the Swatchbutler. It's not much, I know, but it's an advantage. And the extra feat are a ''unique class advantage''.

In practice the extra feats that the Fighter has are not as numerous as expected. They are forced to go down the Weapon Focus, Weapon Specialization line. Without these feats, the Fighter loses out to rival martials in terms damage. Since damage is all the Fighter excels at, it should be clear why this is to be avoided.

Saigo Takamori wrote:
That's why I said ''chances''. Sure, if he want to do whirlwind attack, he will not get those feat. But a classic two handed weapon fighter will probably get 3 ''support feat'' at level 6 (and I'm pretty sure an fighter archer will do better than the swatch in DPR...)

I haven't run numbers to compare. But the Swashbuckler still can add their Precise Strike damage to ranged attacks, so their ranged DPR should be no slouch if they pack a few javelins or something.


Lyra Amary wrote:
Saigo Takamori wrote:
Lyra Amary wrote:


Saigo Takamori wrote:
Feat. It's really easy for a fighter to get some ''save boosting feat'' early.
And what, exactly, is preventing a Swashbuckler from doing the same? What pressing options is the Swashbuckler forced to take that prevents them from taking such feats?
He can do that, sure. But let's face it: a human Swatchbutler will have 4 feat at level 4, a human fighter will have 6. Chances are, the fighter will get spare feat for Iron will, toughness (...) sooner than the Swatchbutler. It's not much, I know, but it's an advantage. And the extra feat are a ''unique class advantage''.
In practice the extra feats that the Fighter has are not as numerous as expected. They are forced to go down the Weapon Focus, Weapon Specialization line. Without these feats, the Fighter loses out to rival martials in terms damage. Since damage is all the Fighter excels at, it should be clear why this is to be avoided.

its 4 feats, he get 11 bonus feat (and the swatchbutler also need those feat). I don't really see how it should be avoided. Heck, I think that it's far more important for a fighter to get Iron will than weapon focus...

And for the precision damage on ranged attack:
« At 3rd level, while she has at least 1 panache point, a swashbuckler gains the ability to strike precisely with a light or one-handed piercing melee weapon»

?


4 people marked this as a favorite.

Unbiased viewpoint:

The fighter does more damage until I see proof otherwise. On the flipside the swashbuckleris not that far behind and it has a comparable AC to a fighter with a shield so between the AC and parry and riposte it "should" get hit less.

Well you can push the fighter's AC. That is true, but if the fighter goes sword and board it loses the damage race.

Yeah the swash has evasion, but barring dazing spell which is really doing the heavy lifting, a d10 class will normally be okay failing the save. If the caster is specializing in evocation then you are in trouble because you will likely fail the save and even half of 250+ damage a round will hurt.

The swashbuckler has more skills. No argument here.

The fighter can master more than one way to fight, and still be decent at another such as archery thanks to extra feats and weapon mastery. True

Basically if you compare the core swashbuckler and the core fighter, the swashbuckler is the better class all around. However the fighter has enough archetypes that if you want to focus on something it can pull ahead in that area, but not for one weapon fighting. The lore warden as an example is good with combat maneuver abilities. If you combine it with the archetype that can change out feats every day then you can ready for a lot of situations if you plan it well.

However being better than the fighter is not really an accomplishment, and I still prefer the slayer, barbarian, and ranger over both classes, and I have not even played the slayer yet. I have however built a slayer and a swashbuckler.

Basically the people in your group will have to find reason to play a fighter. There are no blanket ones I can think of to always choose a fighter because there are several ways to play a fighter, and until the swashbuckler gets more archetype there are only so many ways to play a slayer.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
wraithstrike wrote:
Jon Otaguro 428 wrote:

Having played a high level swashbuckler, a fighter can't match the AC of a swashbuckler (shield bonus from buckler, and dodge bonus from nimble).

So a swashbuckler has higher AC, more skill points, more abilities (uncanny dodge, evasion, immune sunder, disarm) and better saves than a fighter.

Can't? What is the highest AC a swashbuckler can get at level 11(because playing to 20 is not common)

WBL 82000

Celestial Armor (22.4k) AC+9
Belt of Dex +4 (16k) Dex 24 (+7)
Buckler +2 (4.15k) (+3)
Ring of Protection +1 (2k)
Amulet of Natural Armor +1 (2k)
Jingasa of Fortunate Soldier (5k) +2 with fate's favor
Nimble +3 dodge to AC
Dodge Feat +1 AC

10+9+7+3+1+1+2++3+1=37

Using around 51k for AC; leaves around 31k for a weapon and cloak and other stuff. If you needed more money you could always change the belt to +2 dropping the AC by 1.

The level 15 swashbuckler I was playing had an AC of 46


Jon Otaguro 428 wrote:
wraithstrike wrote:
Jon Otaguro 428 wrote:

Having played a high level swashbuckler, a fighter can't match the AC of a swashbuckler (shield bonus from buckler, and dodge bonus from nimble).

So a swashbuckler has higher AC, more skill points, more abilities (uncanny dodge, evasion, immune sunder, disarm) and better saves than a fighter.

Can't? What is the highest AC a swashbuckler can get at level 11(because playing to 20 is not common)

WBL 82000

Celestial Armor (22.4k) AC+9
Belt of Dex +4 (16k) Dex 24 (+7)
Buckler +2 (4.15k) (+3)
Ring of Protection +1 (2k)
Amulet of Natural Armor +1 (2k)
Jingasa of Fortunate Soldier (5k) +2 with fate's favor
Nimble +3 dodge to AC
Dodge Feat +1 AC

10+9+7+3+1+1+2++3+1=37

Using around 51k for AC; leaves around 31k for a weapon and cloak and other stuff. If you needed more money you could always change the belt to +2 dropping the AC by 1.

The level 15 swashbuckler I was playing had an AC of 46

Not bad I have seen a fighter hit 35 at that level in a real game so it seems the swashbuckler is ahead. Now I wonder how much damage I would drop on my build if I went for AC like that. I might try it later on.


The thing is if you look at the bonuses of the items I purchased, it's not overboard. The main purchase is really the celestial armor.


Well a Fighter has better combat options now than a Swashbuckler. Martial Master Lore Warden or Mutation Warrior is leaps ahead of Swashbuckler versatility.

A Fort Save is infinitely better than a Reflex save.

Fighters easily do more damage with Archery.
Fighters are better at maneuvers.
Till past 12th level, a Fighter deals more damage and maintains a better AC. If he's an Archer or Two-Handed Archetype Fighter, he deals more damage forever.


Jon Otaguro 428 wrote:
The thing is if you look at the bonuses of the items I purchased, it's not overboard. The main purchase is really the celestial armor.

It's completely out of line with the WBL guidelines, so yes, it really is overboard. I could match that AC easily or exceed it with a Fighter using the same amount of gold


More back-of-the-envelope damage calculations. For ease of calculation the Fighter uses a Falchion throughout, and the Swashbuckler always gets Precise Strike. The Swashbuckler went Weapon Focus / Slashing Grace at level 1, and the Fighter took Power Attack / Weapon Focus at level 1. The Swashbuckler is opting not to use Power Attack (though it would be a DPR increase), so that he can keep as high an attack bonus as possible for Opportune Parry.

Bad Wrong Theorycrafting:

Level 1:

2H Fighter Attack Bonus: +5 (+1 BAB, +4 Str, -1 Power Attack, +1 Weapon Focus)
2H Fighter Damage: 14 (2d4 +6 Str, +3 Power Attack)

Swashbuckler Attack Bonus: +6 (+1 BAB, +4 Dex, +1 Weapon Focus)
Swashbuckler Damage: 7.5 (1d6 +4 Dex)

Median monster AC: 14
Fighter DPR: 9.66
Swashbuckler DPR: 5.61

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Level 5:

2H Fighter Attack Bonus: +11 (+5 BAB, +5 Str, +1 Weapon Focus, +1 Weapon Training, +1 Enhancement, -2 Power Attack)
2H Fighter Damage: 22 (2d4 +7 Str, +1 Weapon Training, +1 Enhancement, +2 Weapon Specialization, +6 Power Attack)

Swashbuckler Attack Bonus: +13 (+5 BAB, +5 Dex, +1 Weapon Focus, +1 Weapon Training, +1 Enhancement)
Swashbuckler Damage: 17.5 (1d6 +5 Dex, +1 Weapon Training, +1 Enhancement, +2 Weapon Specialization, +5 Precise Strike)

Median monster AC: 18
Fighter DPR: 17.71 (single), 29.1 (full)
Swashbuckler DPR: 17 (single), 28.69 (full)

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Level 9:

2H Fighter Attack Bonus: +19 (+9 BAB, +7 Str, +2 Weapon Training, +2 Enhancement, +1 Weapon Focus, +1 Greater Weapon Focus, -3 Power Attack)
2H Fighter Damage: 30 (2d4 +10 Str, +2 Weapon Training, +2 Enhancement, +2 Weapon Specialization, +9 Power Attack)

Swashbuckler Attack Bonus: +22 (+9 BAB, +7 Dex, +1 Weapon Focus, +2 Weapon Training, +2 Enhancement, +1 Greater Weapon Focus)
Swashbuckler Damage: 25.5 (1d6 +7 Dex, +2 Weapon Training, +2 Enhancement, +9 Precise Strike, +2 Weapon Specialization)

Median monster AC: 23
Fighter DPR: 33.15 (single), 56.55 (full)
Swashbuckler DPR: 28.93 (single), 50.24 (full)

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Dex to damage OP nerf now pl0x


Scavion wrote:
Jon Otaguro 428 wrote:
The thing is if you look at the bonuses of the items I purchased, it's not overboard. The main purchase is really the celestial armor.
It's completely out of line with the WBL guidelines, so yes, it really is overboard. I could match that AC easily or exceed it with a Fighter using the same amount of gold

I am sure you could, but it would be difficult without using a shield. The point I was making is that a swashbuckler could easily get to that point without contorting the character.

I think you would be hard pressed to find support that a 11th level character owning celestial armor is completely out of line with WBL.


Jon Otaguro 428 wrote:


I am sure you could, but it would be difficult without using a shield. The point I was making is that a swashbuckler could easily get to that point without contorting the character.

I think you would be hard pressed to find support that a 11th level character owning celestial armor is completely out of line with WBL.

Not at all, to either of your statements. Keeping AC up is simply a system mastery exercise.

Gamemastering wrote:
Characters should spend no more than half their total wealth on any single item. For a balanced approach, PCs that are built after 1st level should spend no more than 25% of their wealth on weapons, 25% on armor and protective devices, 25% on other magic items, 15% on disposable items like potions, scrolls, and wands, and 10% on ordinary gear and coins.

The armor is alone a fourth of your WBL. The rest of the protective devices easily push that over.


Scavion wrote:
Jon Otaguro 428 wrote:


I am sure you could, but it would be difficult without using a shield. The point I was making is that a swashbuckler could easily get to that point without contorting the character.

I think you would be hard pressed to find support that a 11th level character owning celestial armor is completely out of line with WBL.

Not at all, to either of your statements. Keeping AC up is simply a system mastery exercise.

Gamemastering wrote:
Characters should spend no more than half their total wealth on any single item. For a balanced approach, PCs that are built after 1st level should spend no more than 25% of their wealth on weapons, 25% on armor and protective devices, 25% on other magic items, 15% on disposable items like potions, scrolls, and wands, and 10% on ordinary gear and coins.

Dude, that's a guideline. I don't know of anyone that considers that a hard rule.

I don't want to continue this argument. I wasn't addressing you to begin with. I simply made the point that because swashbucklers use shields and have nimble, their AC should be higher than a fighter (which most people seem to think is synonymous with a character using a 2H weapon)


Jon Otaguro 428 wrote:
The thing is if you look at the bonuses of the items I purchased, it's not overboard. The main purchase is really the celestial armor.

Celestial armor is over 25% of WBL.

Gamemastery chapter:

CRB wrote:
PCs that are built after 1st level should spend no more than 25% of their wealth on weapons, 25% on armor and protective devices, ...


Jon Otaguro 428 wrote:
Scavion wrote:
Jon Otaguro 428 wrote:


I am sure you could, but it would be difficult without using a shield. The point I was making is that a swashbuckler could easily get to that point without contorting the character.

I think you would be hard pressed to find support that a 11th level character owning celestial armor is completely out of line with WBL.

Not at all, to either of your statements. Keeping AC up is simply a system mastery exercise.

Gamemastering wrote:
Characters should spend no more than half their total wealth on any single item. For a balanced approach, PCs that are built after 1st level should spend no more than 25% of their wealth on weapons, 25% on armor and protective devices, 25% on other magic items, 15% on disposable items like potions, scrolls, and wands, and 10% on ordinary gear and coins.
Dude, that's a guideline. I don't know of anyone that considers that a hard rule.

I agree it is not a hard rule, but it is still out of line. Personally I don't mind if it is in a game. I think it was just brought up because you said it was not out of line, but I guess you meant you did not go over WBL.


Jon Otaguro 428 wrote:
Scavion wrote:
Jon Otaguro 428 wrote:


I am sure you could, but it would be difficult without using a shield. The point I was making is that a swashbuckler could easily get to that point without contorting the character.

I think you would be hard pressed to find support that a 11th level character owning celestial armor is completely out of line with WBL.

Not at all, to either of your statements. Keeping AC up is simply a system mastery exercise.

Gamemastering wrote:
Characters should spend no more than half their total wealth on any single item. For a balanced approach, PCs that are built after 1st level should spend no more than 25% of their wealth on weapons, 25% on armor and protective devices, 25% on other magic items, 15% on disposable items like potions, scrolls, and wands, and 10% on ordinary gear and coins.
Dude, that's a guideline. I don't know of anyone that considers that a hard rule.

An interesting response. You said "I think you would be hard pressed to find support that a 11th level character owning celestial armor is completely out of line with WBL."

I showed you exactly where it is said that that is generally the case.

It doesn't matter whether it's a hard rule or not. You posted a Swashbuckler who spent more than 50% of his wealth on AC. That isn't indicative of whether Fighters or Swashbucklers have better AC. Just that you spent a larger portion than normal on AC.


Athaleon wrote:

More back-of-the-envelope damage calculations. For ease of calculation the Fighter uses a Falchion throughout, and the Swashbuckler always gets Precise Strike. The Swashbuckler went Weapon Focus / Slashing Grace at level 1, and the Fighter took Power Attack / Weapon Focus at level 1. The Swashbuckler is opting not to use Power Attack (though it would be a DPR increase), so that he can keep as high an attack bonus as possible for Opportune Parry.

** spoiler omitted **...

I gave my swashbuckler power attack, and I never thought about the affect on parrying. It is not a bad strategy to not use power attack in certain cases however.


Scavion wrote:
Jon Otaguro 428 wrote:
Scavion wrote:
Jon Otaguro 428 wrote:


I am sure you could, but it would be difficult without using a shield. The point I was making is that a swashbuckler could easily get to that point without contorting the character.

I think you would be hard pressed to find support that a 11th level character owning celestial armor is completely out of line with WBL.

Not at all, to either of your statements. Keeping AC up is simply a system mastery exercise.

Gamemastering wrote:
Characters should spend no more than half their total wealth on any single item. For a balanced approach, PCs that are built after 1st level should spend no more than 25% of their wealth on weapons, 25% on armor and protective devices, 25% on other magic items, 15% on disposable items like potions, scrolls, and wands, and 10% on ordinary gear and coins.
Dude, that's a guideline. I don't know of anyone that considers that a hard rule.

An interesting response. You said "I think you would be hard pressed to find support that a 11th level character owning celestial armor is completely out of line with WBL."

I showed you exactly where it is said that that is generally the case.

It doesn't matter whether it's a hard rule or not. You posted a Swashbuckler who spent more than 50% of his wealth on AC. That isn't indicative of whether Fighters or Swashbucklers have better AC. Just that you spent a larger portion than normal on AC.

If you notice, 16k of that amount was for a +4 dex item which is actually more of an offensive item than defensive. You are nitpicking. I posted equipment for a character I would play; not just posting equipment and feats to get the highest AC.


Sgt Arpin wrote:

Why would you ever take fighter over swashbuckler? Their damage is harder to get. You seem to be pigeon holed into 2 handed weapons to keep up with a swashbuckler in damage. Your main stat is less useful than a swash's main stat.

General arguments for comparing both classes, GO!

Because fighter's are awesome at fighting.. What's not to get?


wraithstrike wrote:
Athaleon wrote:

More back-of-the-envelope damage calculations. For ease of calculation the Fighter uses a Falchion throughout, and the Swashbuckler always gets Precise Strike. The Swashbuckler went Weapon Focus / Slashing Grace at level 1, and the Fighter took Power Attack / Weapon Focus at level 1. The Swashbuckler is opting not to use Power Attack (though it would be a DPR increase), so that he can keep as high an attack bonus as possible for Opportune Parry.

** spoiler omitted **...

I gave my swashbuckler power attack, and I never thought about the affect on parrying. It is not a bad strategy to not use power attack in certain cases however.

I took power attack. It helps a lot when you fight ghosts and other incorporeal creatures (which really hurts swashbuckler damage).


Jon Otaguro 428 wrote:
Scavion wrote:
Jon Otaguro 428 wrote:
Scavion wrote:
Jon Otaguro 428 wrote:


I am sure you could, but it would be difficult without using a shield. The point I was making is that a swashbuckler could easily get to that point without contorting the character.

I think you would be hard pressed to find support that a 11th level character owning celestial armor is completely out of line with WBL.

Not at all, to either of your statements. Keeping AC up is simply a system mastery exercise.

Gamemastering wrote:
Characters should spend no more than half their total wealth on any single item. For a balanced approach, PCs that are built after 1st level should spend no more than 25% of their wealth on weapons, 25% on armor and protective devices, 25% on other magic items, 15% on disposable items like potions, scrolls, and wands, and 10% on ordinary gear and coins.
Dude, that's a guideline. I don't know of anyone that considers that a hard rule.

An interesting response. You said "I think you would be hard pressed to find support that a 11th level character owning celestial armor is completely out of line with WBL."

I showed you exactly where it is said that that is generally the case.

It doesn't matter whether it's a hard rule or not. You posted a Swashbuckler who spent more than 50% of his wealth on AC. That isn't indicative of whether Fighters or Swashbucklers have better AC. Just that you spent a larger portion than normal on AC.

If you notice, 16k of that amount was for a +4 dex item which is actually more of an offensive item than defensive. You are nitpicking. I posted equipment for a character I would play; not just posting equipment and feats to get the highest AC.

I didn't account for your Belt. It's still about 13k over. Without that it's an AC of 30.

I'm not nitpicking. Just pointing out that your character isn't indicative of a disparity in AC between Fighters and Swashbucklers.

101 to 150 of 152 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Advice / Why ever take fighter? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.