Effective Roman type fighter

[Simion]

Hey guys so after several campaigns and GM-ing I have finally decided to try and throw together my original Pathfinder character idea based off an SCA persona. Problem is I'm trying to figure what I should throw in for feats to achieve the character I want while still being a threat in combat and still valuable outside of. I'm going for a Roman centurion/Praetorian type and decided on the fighter/tactician arch. Starting 1st level.

So, Stats:
Stats:
STR-15; DEX-17; CON-16; INT-16; WIS-13; CHA-17

Note:I know STR is low but character is starting 16 going through a "estimated" 14 year(game time) campaign and seemed more...real, I suppose.

Feats: TWF and Shaft and Shield(Cavilers Creed); Later: Point Blank, Far Shot, and Distance thrower (for spear and pilum) power attack, weapon focus(gladius) vital strike and Leadership were others in mind. Possibly coordinated shot/charge and outflank for the team works

Weapons:Plan on sticking with Gladius, spear, and pilum (maybe short bow) along with a heavy wooden shield.

I know with the feats for the spear thrower topped with the need for feats like shield focus, improved bash, and others to make twf effective with a shield I'm drawing him out pretty short. Just looking for what others might recommend or if this may have come up in another thread.

Gratias!

[LoneKnave]

You probably don't want to go TWF and especially don't want to focus on throwing (though pilums are alright backup weapons because of the effect they have on shields, so no hurt in carrying them). PF rewards spreading your feats along multiple weapons really, really poorly.

Phalanx Soldier gets most the benefits of Shaft and Shield and it is first party, and grabs you a bunch of bonus feats. Going more than 3 levels is ill advised in my opinion, but he does get a few cool abilities (too bad they are rather limited). After that, I'd recommend Slayer for this, as they get a good amount of bonus feats that let them make use of the sword&shield (or in this case, spear&shield) combat style effectively.

[Bandw2]

I imagine roman soldiers have a lot of teamwork feats, like shieldwall and such. I also, agree, don't do TWF.

[Mysterious Stranger]

Those stats seem to be way high? If your group rolls for stats don’t waste stats like those on a fighter.

The Praetorians were body guards, so you may want to look at the honor guard cavalier archetype. This would also fit a Centurion better as they were usually nobles instead of commoners. This also gives you not only teamwork feats but the ability to grant them to others. The extra skills and getting the needed social skills is also something that the character will find useful. The order of the loin seems like a good choice and has some useful abilities.

The mount can be ignored for the most part, or see if the GM will let you trade it out for something else.

[Rodinia]

There's no need for Two weapon fighting. Also, the Romans didn't do it.

Why not use a reach weapon? This will drastically increase your damage, perhaps 2x over TWF. Go the Phalanx Soldier route and you can fight spear and shield, like the Roman Hastati.

The Roman heavy infantry stuck to shield and gladius, but auxiliaries used a variety of weapons suited to their purpose. Pathfinders tend to be more Skirmishers (auxiliaries) than Heavies. This frees you up to use whatever weapons seem most practical to your situation, which will probably not include fighting in serried ranks.

[Toirin]

If you are going to stick with the heavy infantry style to emulate, you would also want a tower shield rather than a heavy shield. Heavy Shield and Spear is more Greek fighting style, Tower shield and gladius with the pilum for just before meeting in a shield wall is more the Roman style.

I would second going for cavalier rather than straight fighter for this build as well due to the teamwork feats. Also, you wouldn't need to ignore the mount completely, just for the battles, as Roman nobles typically used horses for mobility around a battlefield and get off and form a wall to actually do battle.

But wow, nice stats!

[Rynjin]

I would swap your Cha and Str, myself, and then if you wanna Sword and Board, grab the bare minimum Feats on it. You're kinda trying to do too much here, I'd trim it down to just Sword/Board and toss in some Teamwork Feats.

Honestly a Cavalier or Slayer (Vanguard) archetype would probably serve you better than a Fighter.

[Dennis Deadsky]

Mysterious Stranger wrote:

Those stats seem to be way high? If your group rolls for stats don’t waste stats like those on a fighter.

Looks like a 56 point build. It does seem a pity to 'waste' such awesomely fine stats on a mere swinger-of-weapons. With attributes like those you could easily play an exotic concept that requires high stats, like altering reality with your mind.

[Nicos]

IMHO, that feat selection is bad all around. Vital strikw with a gladius is useless. Point blank shot and far shot to trwo spears is basically worthless.

Romans did not used full plates so the best thing, IMHO, is to go slayer for the ealier entry to shield master.

[Nicos]

Dennis Deadsky wrote:

With attributes like those you could easily play an exotic concept that requires high stats, like altering reality with your mind.

That pretty much only requires one stat

[Kelazan]

In a fantasy world, I think that an elite infantry such as the Pretorians would not be composed of straight fighters. I imagine them more like some kind of «gish characters» such as magus, warpriest or even bards.

Think about it : bards are proficient with shields and the longsword, and with the arcane duelist archetype, you will be able to cast spell with somatic components using your weapon hand without penalties. It also gives some utility to your high Charisma.

You will be able to fight well, and buff your allies with your commanding presence (aka inspire courage). With stats that high, this kind of battle bard is pretty efficient and your shield and dexterity will negate most of the AC loss related to armor (until you gain medium armor casting at 10th level). You will have a lot more utility outside of combat...and also a lot more option in combat with your spells and performances. The only downside I see is that you will not be proficient with the pillum...but a 1 level dip in fighter can negate this problem.

[Helcack]

For your concept I would suggest not going tactician fighter for base class. Fighter(Lore Warden) 2; Cavalier(Honor Guard+Strategist) 4 with the Order of the Guard becoming a Golden Legionnaire(Prestige Class) for 10 levels after that if you want a Praetorian type character. The other thing I would suggest is going Bard(Arbiter) 3; Cavalier(Standard Bearer) 2 into the Battle Herald(prestige class) for a more commander type deal.