| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
In general the whole point of having non-casting classes is that they aren't magic.
That's not true though. Every single non-casting class has access to magic in some form or another. Every single non-casting class is expected to have their abilities significantly augmented by magic... and every single non-casting class has blatantly supernatural (if not SU tagged) abilities by higher levels.
Even if you decide that feats, equipment and racial options don't count for whatever reason it's still weird to argue.
I mean monks, rogues, barbarians, ninjas, cavaliers and samurai all have in-class magical options at their disposal (kineticists too though they sort of fit in a different category) and they're all non-casting classes.
So.. what are they then? Should they not exist? Or what? You say the point of non-casting classes is to be nonmagical, but the majority of them (7:5) have magical options innately available to them and all of them are going to be utilizing magic at some point in their career.
Even a Warrior is magical once it reaches high enough level because of his HD.
High level Pathfinder is not about who can use magic it's about how you use magic.
Fighter magic gear is less useful on a wizard. Certain buff spells are more beneficial on certain classes than others.
High level fighters are magic. High level = magic
On the otherhand, if the gear alone is good, you run into the problem that is Punisher.
Garth Ennis Punisher is where Punisher was at his best. Frank Castle as nothing more than a monster with a gun. Pathfinder-wise, he never really grows in levels. This is the E8 story, where he picks bigger targets, but is not a superhero. There is nothing super about being an excessively violent vigilante.
But Frank Castle always becomes terrible when he has to be around real super superheroes. Because they put him into those spandex, give him space guns and he becomes the shooty guy.
Too much abstraction, too broad strokes means that Pathfinder is unable to do fine details.
snip
I would ask if you're joking, but that wouldn't be as fun.
Your point about piercing multiple targets being ridiculous is, again, completely arbitrary. Fighters, not even a Martial Artist Monk, Ranger, Rogue, whatever, Fighters can already do things that would require "strings and CGI." Hilariously enough, the very thing you're complaining about is already easily accomplished with Startoss Style and Ricochet Toss.
Let's stop pretending non-magical = incapable of spectacular and fantastic feats not possible to emulate without CGI or strings . The options already exist in game. They have existed for years. It's been published and sanctioned to be okay with Paizo. If you don't like that, that is perfectly okay, we're all different and imagine different thing for the game's world, but at least acknowledge that all characters being capable of amazing, inhuman feats is the "world" Paizo wanted and created.
My problem though is while I'd love to see the fighter get some cool abilities at higher levels - even non magical - the argument that 'anything not possible in real life is just too much' pretty much kills it.
No one in real life is going to survive a fall from a large distance unless they are lucky (it has happened - so assume anything more than 30 feet roll 100 on a d100 to not be killed). No one in real life can walk through lava and survive. No one in real life can fight a dragon (they don't exist). No one in real life can go attack a grizzly and live - yet a level 15 fighter with a knife can do just that.
At some point there is suspension of disbelief because you are a flipping hero in a fantasy game - one where ghosts and dragons are real and magic is a visceral thing. I don't believe for a second that a real life hero from legend wouldn't use magic to their advantage. In fact most myths incorporate gifts from the gods (magical weapons and armor) or fantastic abilities. This is why arguing about the friction needed to spear 3 people at once seems silly to me. There are games like that - Pathfinder isn't one of them - I think people arguing like that need to find a better system to represent their interests - and likely that system wouldn't even support magic users to begin with.
Wuxia is really magic - that's the difference between a kung fu movie (enter the dragon) vs. a wuxia movie (the seven deadly vipers). Yes I think standing on the end of your sword or climbing arrows as they are shot are over the top. Gimli vs. Legolas for example. That doesn't stop that setting from having magical arrows that can slay a dragon in one hit.
The entire conversation would be better starting at *what* you want a fighter to be able to do at high level that they can't already do. Then derive abilities or rules that allow those types of options.
No one in real life is going to survive a fall from a large distance unless they are lucky (it has happened - so assume anything more than 30 feet roll 100 on a d100 to not be killed). No one in real life can walk through lava and survive. No one in real life can fight a dragon (they don't exist). No one in real life can go attack a grizzly and live - yet a level 15 fighter with a knife can do just that.
If you are talking about HP alone, you gotta remember that HP is completely neutral in this situation. HP is such a broad abstraction that ANY explanation why you avoided death is okay.
The damage lava does to you is not literally burning you. It has a number so it creates a "clock" how long you can stay in this fatal environment until your luck or anything runs out and then you die to lava.
It does not even have to be luck. Hero might be able to jump on conveniently placed rocks to get to safety. Or surfs across the molten gold with a wheelbarrow. Or whatever you want.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
No one in real life is going to survive a fall from a large distance unless they are lucky (it has happened - so assume anything more than 30 feet roll 100 on a d100 to not be killed). No one in real life can walk through lava and survive. No one in real life can fight a dragon (they don't exist). No one in real life can go attack a grizzly and live - yet a level 15 fighter with a knife can do just that.
If you are talking about HP alone, you gotta remember that HP is completely neutral in this situation. HP is such a broad abstraction that ANY explanation why you avoided death is okay.
The damage lava does to you is not literally burning you. It has a number so it creates a "clock" how long you can stay in this fatal environment until your luck or anything runs out and then you die to lava.
It does not even have to be luck. Hero might be able to jump on conveniently placed rocks to get to safety. Or surfs across the molten gold with a wheelbarrow. Or whatever you want.
Or it could be in an anti-magic field and all the gods are dead and he's butt-naked and there's no rocks nearby. He sits in the lava for six seconds, and then is pulled out by a giant eagle, alive and kicking.
HP still works the way it says even if there's no possible explanation. That's just how the world is in this game.
If you are talking about HP alone, you gotta remember that HP is completely neutral in this situation.
Doesn't really work with coupe de grace, where you slice their throat in their sleep and they just get up without any lowering of combat power or difficulty breathing.
If you are talking about HP alone, you gotta remember that HP is completely neutral in this situation.Doesn't really work with coupe de grace, where you slice their throat in their sleep and they just get up without any lowering of combat power or difficulty breathing.
Ok here is the thing.
Due to HP being such an abstraction, the result of the rolls and such dictate what happens, not the other way around.So you got a helpless target and you get to do critical damage. This is not slitting the throat just yet, the target has to actually die to the throat slit for IT TO BECOME a throat slit.
If you just hit them with it and they make the fort save, what does that means? Anything again. Maybe he with some luck rolled to the side in his sleep just in time and you missed? Maybe you woke him up before you could finish it? Maybe you aimed for the heart but missed it?
In the end, pathfinder is easiest to manage if you figure out first the intent (I wanna stab this guy), then check out the rolls, (Ok you can try to stab the guy but not in a way he dies), and then be content with any result you are given (I guess I stab him non-fatally then?).
Ok here is the thing.
Due to HP being such an abstraction, the result of the rolls and such dictate what happens, not the other way around.
So you got a helpless target and you get to do critical damage. This is not slitting the throat just yet, the target has to actually die to the throat slit for IT TO BECOME a throat slit.If you just hit them with it and they make the fort save, what does that means? Anything again. Maybe he with some luck rolled to the side in his sleep just in time and you missed? Maybe you woke him up before you could finish it? Maybe you aimed for the heart but missed it?
In the end, pathfinder is easiest to manage if you figure out first the intent (I wanna stab this guy), then check out the rolls, (Ok you can try to stab the guy but not in a way he dies), and then be content with any result you are given (I guess I stab him non-fatally then?).
So... when an executioner uses his axe on a high level warrior, you just assume the executioner is actually an idiot who doesn't know how to hit a neck that isn't moving?
The rate of successful one-shot executions in that fashion was well below 100%. So, yes. I guess.
I'd imagine it would take less than thirteen tries for some strange reason -.-
|
The rate of successful one-shot executions in that fashion was well below 100%. So, yes. I guess.I'd imagine it would take less than thirteen tries for some strange reason -.-
True. But historically, several blows weren't uncommon. Add in how verging on superhuman the toughness of really high level people is, and more than that seems reasonable.
Remember, the real world maxes out at 6th-8th level at most.
So... when an executioner uses his axe on a high level warrior, you just assume the executioner is actually an idiot who doesn't know how to hit a neck that isn't moving?Ok here is the thing.
Due to HP being such an abstraction, the result of the rolls and such dictate what happens, not the other way around.
So you got a helpless target and you get to do critical damage. This is not slitting the throat just yet, the target has to actually die to the throat slit for IT TO BECOME a throat slit.If you just hit them with it and they make the fort save, what does that means? Anything again. Maybe he with some luck rolled to the side in his sleep just in time and you missed? Maybe you woke him up before you could finish it? Maybe you aimed for the heart but missed it?
In the end, pathfinder is easiest to manage if you figure out first the intent (I wanna stab this guy), then check out the rolls, (Ok you can try to stab the guy but not in a way he dies), and then be content with any result you are given (I guess I stab him non-fatally then?).
That is the rules. But remember, the fort save is there just for that situation. Million HP won't save you if you fail the fort save, so a good chop no matter what kills most anyone. Lvl 15 fighter has what, 11-13 fort save or something? Executioner with his greataxe swings, does on average like let's say something like 20 damage on his crit. DC 30 save-or-die fort save is not easy to pass, 20% chance you live.
That 20% happens? Player can decide some divine interventions for it. Axe handle broke mid swing.
Remember, the real world maxes out at 6th-8th level at most.
That's actually pro-my point...
But still, being higher level doesn't make an executioner less skilled. Your HD does not alter other creatures accuracy.
HP is "the ability to take physical punishment and keep going, and the ability to turn a serious blow into a less serious one." Doing that to having your head cut off is rather "anime".
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Nevermind that some of the suggestions are just weird. How does a fighter's physical fitness make them more likely to roll over in their sleep in an inopportune moment.It bothers me that in a thread about cool things fighters can do (without being anime) that suddenly we're talking about trying to take away the cool things fighters can already do.
The thing is, the heavy abstraction exists to protect any way you want to play the moment. My point is not to say that HP cannot be played as meat points if you wish to do so, my point is that HP is not absolutely meat points. HP is any kind of measure or event that keeps your character alive. It exists to keep important characters alive, PC or NPC.
If you want to use HP as meat points, you can do that. If someone wants to use HP as luck points, they can do that.
There are of course lot of disadvantages to the HP system, but this is not one of them. This is the whole reason for it to exists.
|
|
That's actually pro-my point...
But still, being higher level doesn't make an executioner less skilled. Your HD does not alter other creatures accuracy.
HP is "the ability to take physical punishment and keep going, and the ability to turn a serious blow into a less serious one." Doing that to having your head cut off is rather "anime".
Someone really tough taking a blow to the neck or three and surviving is something that really happened. How is really tough people taking more like 10 ridiculous?
I think it's good to remember that, on a fundamental level, Pathfinder is a cooperative storytelling game. XD HP can be explained in any way that would make sense for the story at that time. It doesn't always have to be the same thing.
Yeah, RAW it is "the ability to take physical punishment and keep going, and the ability to turn a serious blow into a less serious one."
But in my Age of Angel setting it's "the ability to take physical punishment and keep going." and in my Requiem setting it's "the animating force of your body".
How is really tough people taking more like 10 ridiculous?
Considering at that stage they probably wouldn't have a neck anymore... yes?
Something I love about well defined rules is we don't have to depend on some hacks sense of possible.
Something I love about well defined rules is we don't have to depend on some hacks sense of possible.
Who is this post even directed at?
Also.... isn't part of the problem that the people who wrote the "well defined rules" decided that martials shouldn't be able to do anything a guy at a gym couldn't do...?
Something I love about well defined rules is we don't have to depend on some hacks sense of possible.Who is this post even directed at?
Also.... isn't part of the problem that the people who wrote the "well defined rules" decided that martials shouldn't be able to do anything a guy at a gym couldn't do...?
And as it turns out many people still find that stuff wuxia impossible.
And as it turns out many people still find that stuff wuxia impossible.Something I love about well defined rules is we don't have to depend on some hacks sense of possible.Who is this post even directed at?
Also.... isn't part of the problem that the people who wrote the "well defined rules" decided that martials shouldn't be able to do anything a guy at a gym couldn't do...?
I find parkor to be 'wuxia' level impossible - but it happens and is something in reality. That's why I was curious what people actually want a high level fighter to do that they currently can't - just 'make it better but not wuxia' is the tail wagging the dog.
If the answer to all this is 'fight better' - ok that's easy.
Fighter level 10-20:
Each level from 10 on the fighter gets another +1 to attack.
Starting at level 10 and every even level to twenty (10,12,14,16,18,20) the fighter can make one more iterative as part of a standard action.
Done.
This makes the fighter the *best* at attacking and gives them pounce (graduated) - the second is the #1 most requested item for fighters. This seems bland to me and honestly doesn't make the fighter more interesting to play - so I still say - what do you want the fighter to do that it can't do now? Do you want high level cinematic play? Do you want interesting options per round of combat that extend past 'I swing a sword' - is it class options that you want?
My problem is the thread is 'what does a non wuxia high level fighter look like' - The issue is - we already have that in the printed text honestly. Nothing in the core rules fighter is wuxia. So what else do we really want to see from the fighter class - if we can nail that down abilities and such can be made around the concept.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Damage has never been the problem for the fighter, and melees in general.
It IS all the other stuff. Movement options are just a facet of it...defensives are another, and ability to affect the narrative is in there, as well.
==Aelryinth
And as it turns out many people still find that stuff wuxia impossible.
I think you misunderstood what I'm saying... I'm saying according your post "well defined rules is we don't have to depend on some hacks sense of possible".... but we are. We do depend on people for what is possible since they write the those well defined rules your talking about, and they would be considered hacks by you since they stay away from anything that could be considered wuxia 99% of the time.
So "Something I love about well defined rules is we don't have to depend on some hacks sense of possible." doesn't really make sense since.... the well defined rules are pro-Hack's sense of possible.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
And as it turns out many people still find that stuff wuxia impossible.I think you misunderstood what I'm saying... I'm saying according your post "well defined rules is we don't have to depend on some hacks sense of possible".... but we are. We do depend on people for what is possible since they write the those well defined rules your talking about, and they would be considered hacks by you since they stay away from anything that could be considered wuxia 99% of the time.
So "Something I love about well defined rules is we don't have to depend on some hacks sense of possible." doesn't really make sense since.... the well defined rules are pro-Hack's sense of possible.
I can swim in platemail in PF without ever putting a rank in swimming.
I've met plenty of people who think swimming in full plate is too wuxia for D&D.
Heck people post here all the time how in their games they homebrew the rules so that lava auto kills PCs near it.
Sure my PF fighter is not equivalent to a wizard, but at least it has some things going for it that plenty of 5e DMs would throw out and call you a munchkin for thinking you could ever do such a thing.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
None of this below will absolutely fix a fighter at high-level vs. a high-level caster, but it is at least something:
Skills are non-game breaking, and great for getting mundanes a bit of narrative power. However, Fighters really got no love here in the game.
Skills: grant 6 + Int for skills, or at least 4 + Int for skills for the mundanes. Having only 2 on a mundane character is really offensive. Is a fighter spending that much more time working on weapon training and specialization compared to a barbarian, ranger, or others that he can't find the time to learn to Climb + Swim + at least 2 others? Now he can get UMD and Flying for high level use, in addition to Climb + Swim and a couple of others for actual out of combat use.
Perception: every class should have an option to get Perception as a class skill. If you can't spot the spider in its web, or the swarm coming, or oppose a Stealth roll at all effectively, you shouldn't even be an adventuring class. Yeah, I am giving the Cleric, Wizard, Sorceress, etc. Perception in addition to fixing Fighters and Cavaliers.
Class Skills: If not Perception for all, give the Fighter the Sensate's class skills. Acrobatics (Dex), Climb (Str), Craft (Int), Perception (Wis), Profession (Wis), Ride (Dex), Sense Motive (Wis), Survival (Wis), and Swim (Str).
Feats: give 1 or 2 General feats at level one. Now you can get Iron Will or whatever else to help balance out poor saves, or Skill Focus to [partially] remedy the skills issue [so they can at least add Perception]
Pounce: give some feat tree to get Pounce. I don't care if you put in a prerequisite as Fighter level 6 [or higher] (to keep this away from Rangers and Paladins who have enough class features, and to give some benefit to longer term members of the class), and even add prerequisite Acrobatic for balancing it out. The level 20 swordsman has to walk 10 feet, and so now only gets as many attacks as a level 1 commoner that was 30 feet from the monster?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Having only 2 on a mundane character is really offensive.
I know clerics and sorcerers and such don't really need buffs, but in general I think 2+int on classes that don't have a reason to invest heavily in int is really crappy. Like how Pathfinder made d6 the new d4 I'd probably make 4+int the baseline for everything that doesn't have an int focus. So basically everyone except the witch, wizard and arcanist.
The level 20 swordsman has to walk 10 feet, and so now only gets as many attacks as a level 1 commoner that was 30 feet from the monster?
Kind of tangential but one of my least favorite paradigms of d20 is the way martial characters get less mobile the higher your level. A level 1 fighter can move thirty feet per round and do full damage. Then you get your second iterative and you don't want to move, but the extra attack is inaccurate enough that it's not the end of the world and it just gets worse and worse until at some point moving and attacking feels only slightly worse than losing your turn altogether.
It's also weird because of which classes can deal with it and which can't. The fighter's fluffed as a master of arms yet is hilariously helpless if it takes more than a five foot step to engage with an enemy. Perhaps even weirder are that the rogue and swashbuckler struggle so much with this too when they're classes designed specifically to emulate archetype mobile combatants. But that's another topic.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
In the old days, Fighters got:
the best Constitution bonus (they got +1 to +4 while non-warriors got +1 to +2)
the best saves in the game
the best hit die in the game [excluding the ridiculousness of Rangers getting 2d8 at level 1]
the best THACO [BAB] in the game [unchanged, but now shared with a lot more classes]
the best armor and weapons selection in the game
the 2nd best XP chart for leveling up in the game
Full Attack every round
In the old days, Wizards got:
the lesser Constitution bonus (+1 to +2)
the worst hit die in the game (d4)
terrible THACO [BAB] in the game
no ranged touch attacks
the worst XP chart for leveling up in the game
detrimental casting times [besides just summoning]
deservedly protected like an old lady in the early stages, to balance out the high level spells vs. lower martial character power exchange later
Basically yeah the main issues fighters have has nothing to do with damage. Double a fighter's damage and the fighter is simultaneously overpowered and incredibly problematic but not really any improved.
The issues tend to be primarily outside of combat.
** spoiler omitted **
There are two big issues that I see in combat though:
** spoiler omitted **...
Regarding the will save - they've fixed this with the weapon masters toolbox - I realize it's 'another book' - but check out 'armored bravery' - a fighters will save can keep up with the fort save... for example here is a level 20 fighter using that ability I threw together to give you an idea:
Unnamed Hero
Human fighter 20
CG Medium humanoid (human)
Hero Points 1
Init +8; Senses Perception +5
--------------------
Defense
--------------------
AC 48, touch 20, flat-footed 43 (+14 armor, +5 deflection, +5 Dex, +5 natural, +9 shield)
hp 264 (20d10+140)
Fort +25, Ref +19 (+4 bonus vs. area of effect attacks), Will +23 (+5 vs. fear)
Defensive Abilities fortification 75%; DR 5/—
--------------------
Offense
--------------------
Speed 30 ft.
Melee +5 corrosive burst flaming holy adamantine longsword +36/+31/+26/+21 (1d8+20/17-20/×3 plus 1d6 fire plus 2d6 vs. evil plus 1d6 acid) or
. . +5 heavy shield bash +34/+29/+24 (1d4+12) or
. . longsword +35/+30/+25/+20 (1d8+15/17-20/×3)
Special Attacks weapon mastery (longsword), weapon trainings (armed bravery, combat maneuver defense, heavy blades +4, axes +3)
--------------------
Statistics
--------------------
Str 25, Dex 22, Con 22, Int 16, Wis 16, Cha 10
Base Atk +20; CMB +33; CMD 56
Feats Covering Shield, Critical Focus, Devastating Assault, Double Slice, Greater Shield Focus, Greater Two-weapon Fighting, Greater Weapon Focus (longsword), Greater Weapon Specialization (longsword), Improved Critical (longsword), Improved Shield Bash, Improved Two-weapon Fighting, Iron Will, Shield Focus, Shield Master, Shield Slam, Shield Snag, Shield Specialization[APG], Staggering Critical, Two-weapon Fighting, Weapon Focus (longsword), Weapon Specialization (longsword), Weapon Trick (weapon And Shield)
Skills Acrobatics +6, Appraise +5, Bluff +22, Climb +7 (+11 to catch yourself on wall or slope when falling if you have a shield equipped), Diplomacy +22, Disguise +2, Escape Artist +6, Fly +6, Heal +5, Intimidate +2, Perception +5, Ride +6, Sense Motive +25, Stealth +6, Survival +5, Swim +7
Languages Common
SQ armor mastery, armor training 4, hero points, living steel
Other Gear +5 bolstering ghost touch mirrored adamantine full plate, +5 heavy fortification living steel heavy steel shield, +5 corrosive burst flaming holy adamantine longsword, longsword, pale green prism ioun stone, amulet of natural armor +5, belt of physical perfection +6, cloak of resistance +5, flawed pale green prism ioun stone, headband of mental prowess +6 (Int, Wis), ring of protection +5, 150 gp
--------------------
Special Abilities
--------------------
Armed Bravery (+5/+10) (Ex) Add bravery bonus to will save, Intim. DC to demoralize you increases by amount shown.
Armor Mastery (Ex) Gain DR while wearing armor or using a shield.
Armor Training 4 (Ex) Worn armor -4 check penalty, +4 max DEX.
Combat Maneuver Defense (Weapon Training [Blades, Heavy] +4) (Ex) May apply weapon training bonus with chosen group to CMD.
Covering Shield Add your shield's base bonus to reflex saves vs. area of effect attacks.
Critical Focus +4 to confirm critical hits.
Damage Reduction (5/-) You have Damage Reduction against all attacks.
Devastating Assault (DC 27) Full rd: make your normal number of attacks, all at your highest bonus, but only count one hit
Fortification 75% You have a chance to negate critical hits on attacks.
Hero Points Hero Points can be spent at any time to grant a variety of bonuses.
Improved Shield Bash You still get your shield bonus while using Shield Bash.
Living Steel Some trees suck up potent minerals through their roots the same way others draw water from the ground. Though these trees blunt saws and axes used to hew them and shrug off fire, they eventually succumb to time or the elements. When properly harveste
Shield Focus +1 Shield AC
Shield Master No off-hand penalties for shield bashes, add a shield's enhancement bonus to attack rolls.
Shield Slam Shield Bash attack gives a free bull rush on a hit.
Shield Snag Shield Bash: Use atk roll as free disarm attempt.
Shield Specialization (Heavy Shield) You have mastered the use of one type of shield.
Prerequisites: Proficiency with selected shield, Shield Focus, fighter level 4th.
Benefit: Choose one type of shield (buckler, light, heavy, or tower shield). With the selected shie
Staggering Critical (DC 30) Critical hit staggers target
Weapon Mastery (Longsword) (Ex) Chosen weapon always confirms critical threats, and cannot be disarmed.
Weapon Training (Axes) +3 (Ex) +3 Attack, Damage, CMB, CMD with Axes
Weapon Training (Blades, Heavy) +4 (Ex) +4 Attack, Damage, CMB, CMD with Heavy Blades
Weapon Trick (Weapon and Shield) You may perform weapon tricks with the chosen weapon type.
Fort +25, Ref +19 (+4 bonus vs. area of effect attacks), Will +23 (+5 vs. fear)
25 fort - 23 will - while I think that ability should be more a 'core rules' thing - it really does fix the will save.
*edit* and don't look to hard at the skills - I hadn't spent any and had 60 skill points left.
|
None of this below will absolutely fix a fighter at high-level vs. a high-level caster, but it is at least something:
Skills are non-game breaking, and great for getting mundanes a bit of narrative power. However, Fighters really got no love here in the game.
Skills: grant 6 + Int for skills, or at least 4 + Int for skills for the mundanes. Having only 2 on a mundane character is really offensive. Is a fighter spending that much more time working on weapon training and specialization compared to a barbarian, ranger, or others that he can't find the time to learn to Climb + Swim + at least 2 others? Now he can get UMD and Flying for high level use, in addition to Climb + Swim and a couple of others for actual out of combat use.
Perception: every class should have an option to get Perception as a class skill. If you can't spot the spider in its web, or the swarm coming, or oppose a Stealth roll at all effectively, you shouldn't even be an adventuring class. Yeah, I am giving the Cleric, Wizard, Sorceress, etc. Perception in addition to fixing Fighters and Cavaliers.
Class Skills: If not Perception for all, give the Fighter the Sensate's class skills. Acrobatics (Dex), Climb (Str), Craft (Int), Perception (Wis), Profession (Wis), Ride (Dex), Sense Motive (Wis), Survival (Wis), and Swim (Str).
Feats: give 1 or 2 General feats at level one. Now you can get Iron Will or whatever else to help balance out poor saves, or Skill Focus to [partially] remedy the skills issue [so they can at least add Perception]
Pounce: give some feat tree to get Pounce. I don't care if you put in a prerequisite as Fighter level 6 [or higher] (to keep this away from Rangers and Paladins who have enough class features, and to give some benefit to longer term members of the class), and even add prerequisite Acrobatic for balancing it out. The level 20 swordsman has to walk 10 feet, and so now only gets as many attacks as a level 1 commoner that was 30 feet from the monster?
In regards to skills, I say yes. The fighter is indeed spending less time in most instances on skills. The only comparison to real life ancient fighters where this would not fit would be roman legions. Each legionnaire basically functioned as an engineer as roads, forts and defensive embankments were created by soldiers. That being said however, a wizard who has been studying for a big portion of her life before starting out as and adventurer should have more skill points than joe fighter. Wizards start adventuring around are 26, fighters around age 15. Its like saying a high school kid should have as much skill and knowledge as a MBA college grad. No way should that be the case. Wizards should have at least 5+intelligence skill points. Sorcerers should be stuck at 2 like fighters because their talents are more inborn.
I do agree that almost every class should have some basic share skills as an adventurer. Perception, diplomacy, ride & intimidation spring to mind. But only knowledge skills should be restricted as they represent actual book learning or a master/student relationship. Could a fighter learn planar knowledge? Sure, buy skill focus as a feat and he could be the unique fighter that picks up planar lore. Not every Tom, Dick & Harry fighter down at the bar should be conversant in it.
Design Manager
|
*edit* and don't look to hard at the skills - I hadn't spent any and had 60 skill points left.
Which means, in context, that you had enough skill points to be passable in three skills, or display basic competency in 6 but not actually be competitive or performing at a level appropriate facility in any of them. Or a mixture of the 2. 60 only seems like a lot when you don't look at the fact that skilled classes will have over 100 before calculating in class-specific bonuses. Bards and Rogues can both easily exceed 200 effective skill points with base scores in the 40s or higher, and Rangers, Wizards, Alchemists, and others won't be far behind. Even the Cavalier and Barbarian will have almost 1/2 again as many with the same level of (non)investment. And that doesn't even get in to looking at how many skills are completely and utterly eclipsed by magical options at that level, particularly the majority of the skills on the Fighter's class skill list.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Wizards start adventuring around are 26, fighters around age 15. Its like saying a high school kid should have as much skill and knowledge as a MBA college grad. No way should that be the case. Wizards should have at least 5+intelligence skill points. Sorcerers should be stuck at 2 like fighters because their talents are more inborn.
Fighters already don't have the same knowledge skills on their class list though. That's already taken care of. Without feats or traits a fighter will never be able to do what a wizard does in terms of knowledge and aptitude and even with those feats and traits they'll be lagging behind.
The thing is, skills aren't just knowledge. As is a fighter, an athletic adventurer basically by design cannot have the ability to climb, swim, threaten people, keep an eye out for danger and know anything about common enemies he'd fight and ride a horse without being a human and exceptionally smart.
That's just silly.
Also giving Wizards 5+int base skills seems very excessive. They already have a huge bucketload of skills via their int focus.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So the game starts a Fighter at age 15 and a Wizard at 26 - I always forget that. That does make the skill dichotomy sensible, but still quite unfair to the Fighter class. And makes little sense for Elves and Dwarves at 100+ years old.
I would surely use all my skill points at least from levels 1 - 10 when I would finally get Perception up to something that may have a chance to find a Rogue using Stealth with a +20 modifier for being invisible. And the ability to ID the opponents via some Knowledge checks. And the ability to Heal minor scrapes on my own (if the Heal check did even a d4 + level or d4 + Ranks). And being able to Climb, Swim, and Ride in a heavy armor...
I can see not giving an Int-based caster classes any more than 2 + Int since they're going to have a high Int anyway, and we don't need the level 1 Wizard to be a better skill monkey than the Rogue or Bard.
*edit* and don't look to hard at the skills - I hadn't spent any and had 60 skill points left.Which means, in context, that you had enough skill points to be passable in three skills, or display basic competency in 6 but not actually be competitive or performing at a level appropriate facility in any of them. Or a mixture of the 2. 60 only seems like a lot when you don't look at the fact that skilled classes will have over 100 before calculating in class-specific bonuses. Bards and Rogues can both easily exceed 200 effective skill points with base scores in the 40s or higher, and Rangers, Wizards, Alchemists, and others won't be far behind. Even the Cavalier and Barbarian will have almost 1/2 again as many with the same level of (non)investment. And that doesn't even get in to looking at how many skills are completely and utterly eclipsed by magical options at that level, particularly the majority of the skills on the Fighter's class skill list.
What is the point of having a skill in the 40's honestly - never fail skill checks? If you add in a headband you get to 120 skill points - 160 if you take extra skill points (if that is your focus - the fighter can handle 20 less hps much better than say a wizard). What skills do you think should belong on the class list that aren't there - I could see a case for acrobatics and perception, also some knowledge skills.
Almost every skill has a trait that you can take associated with it to make it a class skill - which allows you to pick and choose a bit to round out a character. You loose 20 skill points for not being human - so the skills go from 120/160 to 100/120. Is the problem 'class skills' here or the fighter - or the skill system in general - would the system be better if all classes had the same skill points to spend regardless of what they were? Is it the gulf between classes that is the problem?
An unchained rogue (non human) comes out as 200 skill points - can't really afford to take the hp loss so lets say with headband the rogue will be at 260 effective - a difference over the fighter of 160/120 skill points - almost double.
Does the gulf between one of the most effective skill classes and the fighter - the least effective skill class - represent the biggest frustration? If we gave the fighter the same skill points as the rogue but kept the same class skills would it be fair? Would increasing the class skills but keeping the same skill points be better?
I think it's the combination of less skill points and less class skills that make up the biggest problem here - the fix (I think) is perhaps a mix of the two - give the fighter 40 more skill points and open up say 3 more class skills and you wouldn't feel so far behind.
What is the point of having a skill in the 40's honestly - never fail skill checks?
Opposed checks are a thing, you know. You should always max out your perception because your enemies will get better at stealth (the ones that are supposed to be sneaky at least) as you level.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What is the point of having a skill in the 40's honestly - never fail skill checks?
Opposed skill checks are a thing. If I want to sneak up on you -- or away from you -- I need to beat your Perception skill with my Stealth skill. If I want to fool you, I need to beat your Sense Motive skill with my Bluff skill.
This ends up being another point of C/MD. There are a lot of spells out there that basically give you bonuses to your skill rolls -- invisibility and glibness being two of them. If my bard wants to fool your fighter, I can cast glibness for a +20 bonus against you. All else being equal (e.g., my Charisma is your Wisdom, we have equal ranks, they're both class skills, we both have masterwork equipment, et cetera), this means that I almost certainly beat you. And even if I didn't max out my Charisma or put maximum skill ranks into it, I can still probably beat you with a single spell.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I wouldnt call the Rogue one of the most effective skill classes.
Investigator,Bard, Alchemist, Ranger, Slayer, Inquisitor, and Skald will generally be better at skills than a Rogue.
In...None of this below will absolutely fix a fighter at high-level vs. a high-level caster, but it is at least something:
Skills are non-game breaking, and great for getting mundanes a bit of narrative power. However, Fighters really got no love here in the game.
Skills: grant 6 + Int for skills, or at least 4 + Int for skills for the mundanes. Having only 2 on a mundane character is really offensive. Is a fighter spending that much more time working on weapon training and specialization compared to a barbarian, ranger, or others that he can't find the time to learn to Climb + Swim + at least 2 others? Now he can get UMD and Flying for high level use, in addition to Climb + Swim and a couple of others for actual out of combat use.
Perception: every class should have an option to get Perception as a class skill. If you can't spot the spider in its web, or the swarm coming, or oppose a Stealth roll at all effectively, you shouldn't even be an adventuring class. Yeah, I am giving the Cleric, Wizard, Sorceress, etc. Perception in addition to fixing Fighters and Cavaliers.
Class Skills: If not Perception for all, give the Fighter the Sensate's class skills. Acrobatics (Dex), Climb (Str), Craft (Int), Perception (Wis), Profession (Wis), Ride (Dex), Sense Motive (Wis), Survival (Wis), and Swim (Str).
Feats: give 1 or 2 General feats at level one. Now you can get Iron Will or whatever else to help balance out poor saves, or Skill Focus to [partially] remedy the skills issue [so they can at least add Perception]
Pounce: give some feat tree to get Pounce. I don't care if you put in a prerequisite as Fighter level 6 [or higher] (to keep this away from Rangers and Paladins who have enough class features, and to give some benefit to longer term members of the class), and even add prerequisite Acrobatic for balancing it out. The level 20 swordsman has to walk 10 feet, and so now only gets as many attacks as a level 1 commoner that was 30 feet from the monster?
You are grossly underestimating 2 things.
1) It takes knowledge of how magic works to use magic.
Casters don't have tons of skill points normally because they have to understand magic. You don't have time to master a lot of skills when you are figuring out how to wield magic so easily.
Unless you're a bard, of course. How does that work?
2) WHY would you need tons of skills when you have magic? The need isn't there. If you need something done, CAST A SPELL. The urge and drive to master tons of skills simply should not be there. Stealth? Turn invisible. ride a horse? Why? You can phantom steed or fly. Craft something? Borrow the skills of an int headband and fabricate what you want instantly. Knowledge skills? Summon something up with the right knowledge set and use them. Diplomacy? I've got suggestion and charm and glibness.
I personally would put a skill TAX on casters, forcing them to take certain skills in order to represent the knowledge cost it takes to use magic effectively. So go ahead, give wizards 6 skill points a level...but they need a different skill maxed out to maintain caster levels in their schools of magic. Stupid wizards without the skills, can't cast effectively.
=========
Fighters adn Rogues, as mundane classes, should indeed have more skill points then other classes that can use magic to solve their problems, even lesser casting. Seriously, why would you need Stealth if you have camoflage and other spells to enhance it? There is NO reason for a ranger to have 6 skill points and a fighter not to.
Also, Perception: Anyone can take ranks in Perception. But Perception is not the default skill of the average wizard who keeps his nose in a book all day. It's for the hyper-alert types whose daily life is living and escaping danger. Wizards might enter that world, but they don't live in it. If they want to take ranks in it, fine, but class skill? No.
Fighters, now, live in that world, and should definitely have it. Alertness and ability to see the enemy are hallmarks of combatants.
Paladins? No. They have detect evil. I don't doubt they rely on it and divine grace more then being continuously on edge. Being immune to fear, they just won't have that life-saving drive for just one more edge over the enemy, and put their faith in things other then just more and more training.
==Aelryinth
Aelryinth,
That's the opposite of what I meant.
The Fighters would get boosted to 6 + Int or 4 + Int. Surely not the Wizards who would stay at 2 + Int.
The Fighters for sure would get Perception as a class skill. The others maybe not (after reading your explanation of reliance on Detect Evil for Paladins or using some magic in its place for Wizards), but I could see giving it to all adventurers for simplicity. Players would still have to spend ranks on it to make it useful vs. high level (or invisibility supplemented) Stealth.
I think Aelryinth was replying to the person who quoted you, but the forum automatically cut off most of their post for length.