| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
yeah, that portion was a reply to Talek and Luna. No reason to give a Wizard tons of skill points. They are stressing their brains learning spells so they don't NEED to have skill points.
==Aelryinth
Would this be fixing Fighters, or stealing too much from other characters functions?
d12 hit points. Now surely the Fighter could more solidly use their FCB to get skills.
saves option 1: 2 or 3 good saves. Now they can use initial feats and traits for more than just filling in a bad chart.
saves option 2: Change class ability Bravery to choice of Iron Will or Lightning Reflexes.
saves option 3: add 1 or 2 general or other feats early; recommendation for Iron Will or Lightning Reflexes.
Full Attack every round. Just because. They only get 1 attack until level 6 anyway (unless TWF when they get a piddly damage offhand or terrible to hit chances). Then you don't need to orchestrate a Diablo 2 Leap Attack or some lion's Pounce. Not sure about this for other martials, or just fighter only.
Casting option 1: use an equivalent of the Rogue Talents to get a couple of spells.
Casting option 2: let fighters grab multiclassing or VMC to get some spells [but with some lesser penalty as compared to RAW]
Casting option 3: just requiring multiclassing or VMC to get some spells [as per RAW]
Consolidating combat feat trees. This would help all martials, and particularly fighters.
Use Weapon Groups instead of single weapons for Feats and class abilities.
Stamina [or some other pool system], but PFS and PFS Core legal.
I know some of these options get spread across 3pp or various splatbooks, or steps on Warpriest/Magus, but really unchain the fighter a bit more deliberately, in a hardcover, and make it PFS legal.
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.
Note that a no stats - no race rogue is still on top. Also note that the wizard has the same skill ups as a fighter - 2+int per level - the only difference between them is the wizard focus's on INT. Bards focus on INT as well which is why they *feel* like they are better off than a rogue.
What I find interesting is the fact that you think the Inquisitor is a better skill monkey even though they don't focus on Int. From the list above it looks more like the problem here is skill points reliant on INT, along with a poor showing for the fighter - push the fighter up into the 80-100 skill point range and they'll feel way more like a Ranger.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You can't look at pure skill points though.
Bard has fewer skill points than Rogue, but versatile performance is a pretty powerful skill multiplier. So is bardic knowledge.
Investigator gets fewer skill points, but has a partial int focus and inspiration which are tremendously powerful.
Inquisitor doesn't focus on int, but they do get monster lore, stern gaze, track and a good number of inquisitions provide interesting skill options.
Also, of course, magic. Which is a big help.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Skill bonus is more important than number of skills.
Also Investigators and Alchemists would have more skill points. Inquisitor may only have 6 skills maxed out, but significantly higher bonuses than what the Rogue has maxed.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
bard = 120 skill points prior to int and or other items.
inquisitor is 120 skill points.
Investigator = 120
Alchemist = 80
Ranger = 120
Skald = 80
Rogue = 160
Fighter = 40
Wizard = 40 Note that a no stats - no race rogue is still on top. Also note that the wizard has the same skill ups as a fighter - 2+int per level - the only difference between them is the wizard focus's on INT. Bards focus on INT as well which is why they *feel* like they are better off than a rogue.
Skalds and Bards get Versatile Performance, which, even not counting the Performance itself makes those numbers a lot better (200+ for an optimal Bard, 140+ for the Skald).
But ranks are actually the least of it. They let you have more skills, not be good at them. A Bard gets to use Charisma on non-Cha skills and gets a flat bonus to knowledge skills. An Investigator adds +1d6 on top of their skill ranks, eventually in all skills and for free. Slayer adds a scaling bonus maxing at +5 to a total of 7 skills plus all the Knowledges
And then there are all the spells that give as much as +20 to particular skill check.
What I find interesting is the fact that you think the Inquisitor is a better skill monkey even though they don't focus on Int. From the list above it looks more like the problem here is skill points reliant on INT, along with a poor showing for the fighter - push the fighter up into the 80-100 skill point range and they'll feel way more like a Ranger.
Well, Inquisitor specifically gets to add their Wisdom to most Knowledge checks and +1/2 level to Intimidate and Sense Motive, making you legitimately better at those skills than anyone else of the same level. Oh, and then there's the Conversion Inquisition, which makes all social skills Wisdom based.
Those are the kind of skill advantages that make a Class good at skills, not simply having lots of ranks.
Not that having lots of ranks doesn't help, mind you...
You can't look at pure skill points though.
Bard has fewer skill points than Rogue, but versatile performance is a pretty powerful skill multiplier. So is bardic knowledge.
Investigator gets fewer skill points, but has a partial int focus and inspiration which are tremendously powerful.
Inquisitor doesn't focus on int, but they do get monster lore, stern gaze, track and a good number of inquisitions provide interesting skill options.
Also, of course, magic. Which is a big help.
Those are big features of the classes in question though - and perhaps I'm 100% ignorant but I don't see many people saying that a bard *shouldn't* be a better face than a fighter. So (staying to the spirit of the thread) ignoring spells to keep this 'non-wuxia' what do you think would be a better way to help the fighter out here.
What do you think is the right approach - I personally don't want every class to be great at every skill - and outside of the bard perhaps the rest go overboard, but the fighter is too weak in this area so where do we take them, how many skills should a fighter be able to get '40+' at to be considered less clunky?
I'd argue a sample ability would look like this: "A fighter can make a single bluff, sense motive, diplomacy, or intimidate check by using an attack roll as a morale bonus, this uses the attack roll" - although this language is clunky the idea being you can sub an attack (what you are best at) to be really good at another thing. Would that work without restructuring the entire skill set?
I think the easy answer is to decide what you consider a good baseline suite of skills for an archetypal fighter and give them enough skill points to accomplish that with a bit of flexibility one way or the other.
Should the fighter be good at climbing? Swimming? Threatening people? Should an archetypal fighter know about more common enemies like orcs? Should they be good at spotting trouble?
Figure out what that is, subtract how much int you think they should reasonably have and you've got a good idea IMHO of how many skill points they should have.
As for going overboard. Rangers have 6 skill points a level and I don't think I've ever seen one step on the toes of a rogue or bard or wizard or remember hearing anyone ever complain about a ranger doing that.
Those are big features of the classes in question though - and perhaps I'm 100% ignorant but I don't see many people saying that a bard *shouldn't* be a better face than a fighter. So (staying to the spirit of the thread) ignoring spells to keep this 'non-wuxia' what do you think would be a better way to help the fighter out here.
more skill points
more class skills
class features that let you focus on a skill or boost it (like versatile performance?)
I would go with number 3. I think it's reasonable that fighters would be among the best in the game at Strength-based skills, and bonuses to those skills would help ensure that. I would also, however, like to point out that skills will not address C/MD (or the posed challenge) very well, unless there's something one can do with fifteen ranks in climb that a wizard can't simply trivialize with levitate. Otherwise, we're just rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic.
So while I like the idea of a Really Intimidating Fighter, I still think we need to address the issue of "Fred the fighter is so intimidating that...." and supply an appropriate punch line.
|
|
So while I like the idea of a Really Intimidating Fighter, I still think we need to address the issue of "Fred the fighter is so intimidating that...." and supply an appropriate punch line.
Reducing the Skill Rank Requirements for Skill Unlocks by 5 and giving some to most Martial Classes free of charge is a good start on this. At 15th level, with Intimidate, that'd allow a pretty good chance of forcing most foes to Cowering if they fail a DC 25 Will Save, and if they succeed they're still Shaken. With a broad interpretation and Dazzling Display they can do this as an area effect.
That's pretty respectable as an at-will ability at that level.
I would also, however, like to point out that skills will not address C/MD (or the posed challenge) very well, unless there's something one can do with fifteen ranks in climb that a wizard can't simply trivialize with levitate. Otherwise, we're just rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic.
So while I like the idea of a Really Intimidating Fighter, I still think we need to address the issue of "Fred the fighter is so intimidating that...." and supply an appropriate punch line.
What is the issue with C/MD that needs to be addressed?
As to levitate - is non-wuxia also mean that all magical gear is tossed out the window? Is this true for the wizard also - only class abilities and non magical gear allowed? Because there are way to use a net to bring down a wizard that is floating (especially if he doesn't have any magical gear) and if gear is allowed you toss a pair of winged boots on the fighter and go to town. The levitating wizard is only really an issue because it trivializes climb - just like teleport trivializes horses and overland travel.
Spells and magic items trivialize skills - that's 100% true and no change you can make to the fighter as a class will ever change that - so I submit that's not even worth arguing about - because it would require a re-work of roughly 3/4 of the game (spells, skills, and magical items).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What is the issue with C/MD that needs to be addressed?I would also, however, like to point out that skills will not address C/MD (or the posed challenge) very well, unless there's something one can do with fifteen ranks in climb that a wizard can't simply trivialize with levitate. Otherwise, we're just rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic.
So while I like the idea of a Really Intimidating Fighter, I still think we need to address the issue of "Fred the fighter is so intimidating that...." and supply an appropriate punch line.
The fact that casters can still overshadow martials without even trying.
As to levitate - is non-wuxia also mean that all magical gear is tossed out the window?
For this challenge, yes.
More generally, allowing magic gear biases the playing field even more towards the wizard. Wizards generally have the same amount of money to spend but don't need to spend nearly as much money on weapons and armor (1/3 of the "big six") and their spells, scrolls, and wands are generally very cheap. Furthermore, they can usually get crafting feats to reduce the amount of money they spend on their magic items by 50%, essentially getting twice as much bang for buck.
Basically, C/MD is a problem without magical gear. With magical gear, the problem is actually made worse.
Spells and magic items trivialize skills...
... unless there's something class-specific (such as a rogue's ability to disarm magical traps) that cannot easily be trivialized by spells.
... which is why I said that we needed class features to support the skills.
... unless there's something class-specific (such as a rogue's ability to disarm magical traps) that cannot easily be trivialized by spells.
... which is why I said that we needed class features to support the skills.
Actually magic is the only answer to 'magical traps' outside of a rogue (or bard with the right trait).
Dispel magic works just fine on those in case you didn't know. There is *no* skill that isn't made redundant or trivial by magic. No class is picked on any more than another by this however. That is just a symptom of the entire game. This thread is about the fighter.
The fighter is not made worse *more* than the ranger, monk, rogue, ninja, paladin, etc. by magic making skills trivial, it actually affects all classes (even the wizard - all their knowledge skills and they are one upped by a single legend lore case by a cleric).
Absolutely skills won't solve the problem, but it will at the very least eliminate some of the worst things about the fighter's chassis.
I also disagree with any suggestion that includes things like a rouge's trapfinding. Trapfinding is a horrible ability because it encourages tokenism. You don't want tokenism. You want to bring a fighter to a group because they contribute something amazing to the party, not because they're the only ones who can deal with something and therefore even if they never participate ever outside of that one thing they're at least semi mandatory.
If you want a great example of magic screwing over a Rogue look no further than a 1st level spell Alarm.
RAW its not a trap and cannot be bypassed by a rogue at all, it wont show up to perception check (so trap-finding and trap-spotter are worthless) and cannot be disarmed with disable device. The only way to deal with it would be to detect it with detect magic and dispel it.
That single 1st level spell makes his stealth skill totally moot. Trying to slip undetected into the enemies lair? Whoops too bad they know someones breaking in. Too bad he's not a caster with detect magic, dispel magic and, invisibility.
The inconsistent handling of the hitpoint abstraction is a failing of the game system, not something to emulate or use to justify more bad mechanics.
Where did I suggest bad mechanics should be created?
Absolutely skills won't solve the problem, but it will at the very least eliminate some of the worst things about the fighter's chassis.
I also disagree with any suggestion that includes things like a rouge's trapfinding. Trapfinding is a horrible ability because it encourages tokenism. You don't want tokenism. You want to bring a fighter to a group because they contribute something amazing to the party, not because they're the only ones who can deal with something and therefore even if they never participate ever outside of that one thing they're at least semi mandatory.
Would you agree with my own assement that the issues the fighter faces in terms of group utility start 'roughly' around level 10 and onward? I don't see the fighter class having a problem with identity until roughly then.
Would you agree with my own assement that the issues the fighter faces in terms of group utility start 'roughly' around level 10 and onward? I don't see the fighter class having a problem with identity until roughly then.
I'd say first level when it comes to the topic of "group utility".
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Would you agree with my own assement that the issues the fighter faces in terms of group utility start 'roughly' around level 10 and onward?
I would not. I'd say it starts much earlier, around level 6, when the casters start getting seriously encounter-ending spells as well as the low-level utility spells that make the fighter useless out of combat.
|
yeah, that portion was a reply to Talek and Luna. No reason to give a Wizard tons of skill points. They are stressing their brains learning spells so they don't NEED to have skill points.
==Aelryinth
Why? Because you are biased against wizards? It makes far more sense for a wizard to have a ton of skills than a fighter. Wizards deal in academia. Most people in academia have a far greater selection of skills than others in a profession that does not require much learning. I imagine a wizard would need mathematics, alchemy, chemistry, writing, literature, poetry, all the various knowledges, etc. That training requires a lot of skills. What is the fighter doing in his time? Drinking at the bar? Bards are meant to be dabblers, rogues only get a ton of skills because their class features were made into skills. No, a rogue stealthing should be found by Joe fighter because he has perception as a skill. The rogue should be able to pull off ninja like stealth. Rangers are in my mind much more like special forces. Trained in hit & run and guerilla tactics. It makes sense that they get perception due to ambushing prey and looking out for ambushes. Fighters should not get to ruin everyone one else's perk. Rogues should hands down beat fighters in stealth vs detection scenarios.
Would you agree with my own assement that the issues the fighter faces in terms of group utility start 'roughly' around level 10 and onward? I don't see the fighter class having a problem with identity until roughly then.I'd say first level when it comes to the topic of "group utility".
I couldn't agree with that at all - you are supposed to hit 4-5 encounters in a day, a wizard is stuck with cantrips or risks his crappy AC and hit points for 2-3 of those per day. A fighter is bringing as much to the table at low levels as any other martial character, and face skills are all at their weakest with the difference between a class skill and a non class skill being a whopping +3 - yes it's a good boost but a fighter can play a face at low level pretty well *if needed*.
Even at level six a caster isn't tossing out encounter ending spells the entire day - and if they are bringing spells that trivialize skills even less so. There isn't a single class that I'd say 'brings it to the table' at level one. I could get on board with the level 6 suggestion because that's when multiattack kicks in - and also when major class elements start to come together for most classes.
At will detect magic and read magic, plus identify of an entire hoard starts to become really useful in my group at level 5 or 6, whereas the fighter may use climb or swim or such about once a session. Rangers and Rogues in my group at least have Stealth to do some scouting ahead.
Add in the 3 or so fireball and lightning bolt, and a couple 3d4+3 unerring magic missiles, and the blaster may already doing more damage than the fighter all day (and it looks even worse if there is DR on the monster).
Against a big monster with good saves/resists, or a number of them with spread across an area, and hey, we may get Hasted :)
|
|
Would this be fixing Fighters, or stealing too much from other characters functions?
d12 hit points. Now surely the Fighter could more solidly use their FCB to get skills.
saves option 1: 2 or 3 good saves. Now they can use initial feats and traits for more than just filling in a bad chart.
saves option 2: Change class ability Bravery to choice of Iron Will or Lightning Reflexes.
saves option 3: add 1 or 2 general or other feats early; recommendation for Iron Will or Lightning Reflexes.
Full Attack every round. Just because. They only get 1 attack until level 6 anyway (unless TWF when they get a piddly damage offhand or terrible to hit chances). Then you don't need to orchestrate a Diablo 2 Leap Attack or some lion's Pounce. Not sure about this for other martials, or just fighter only.
Casting option 1: use an equivalent of the Rogue Talents to get a couple of spells.
Casting option 2: let fighters grab multiclassing or VMC to get some spells [but with some lesser penalty as compared to RAW]
Casting option 3: just requiring multiclassing or VMC to get some spells [as per RAW]
Consolidating combat feat trees. This would help all martials, and particularly fighters.
Use Weapon Groups instead of single weapons for Feats and class abilities.
Stamina [or some other pool system], but PFS and PFS Core legal.
I know some of these options get spread across 3pp or various splatbooks, or steps on Warpriest/Magus, but really unchain the fighter a bit more deliberately, in a hardcover, and make it PFS legal.
Replies
1)No - Barbarians get more health due to being in inferior armor with an armor penalty on top of it due to a class ability. Fighters do not need extra health.2)No - The save system as current is the worst aspect of 3E/Pathfinder. Saves should revert to the old AD&D/Basic system of set saves with categories. These saves are difficult to make at low level and pretty easy at high level. The reason 9th level spells were so overpowered was because you had to make a save vs spells at about an 6-9 range without magical gear enhancements or spell bonuses. If you rolled a 2, bad things happen.
3)Do not allow the full attack everyone round as a standard rule. It really is in there to save PC's from monsters with multiple attacks. (See giants as a good example) There are optional rules in pathfinder such as mythic rules which allow martial classes charges and movement while still using a full attack option. Those are fine because a martial character has to use a surge which acts as a resource modifier.
4)Using weapon groups as a benefit for feats is a good idea. We do it because mythic adventures allows that depending on paths and mythic feats. It should be a standard feature for fighters as they are masters at combat.
5)Stamina pool is a good idea as long as it does not grant fighters "spells". Buffing effects and damage reduction I could care less about. Fighters suddenly casting lightning bolts or teleporting would not be good in my book. If you really want that kind of magic play a caster. Stop trying to hog all the glory at the gaming table.
Why? Because you are biased against wizards? It makes far more sense for a wizard to have a ton of skills than a fighter. Wizards deal in academia. Most people in academia have a far greater selection of skills than others in a profession that does not require much learning. I imagine a wizard would need mathematics, alchemy, chemistry, writing, literature, poetry, all the various knowledges, etc. That training requires a lot of skills. What is the fighter doing in his time? Drinking at the bar? Bards are meant to be dabblers, rogues only get a ton of skills because their class features were made into skills. No, a rogue stealthing should be found by Joe fighter because he has perception as a skill. The rogue should be able to pull off ninja like stealth. Rangers are in my mind much more like special forces. Trained in hit & run and guerilla tactics. It makes sense that they get perception due to ambushing prey and looking out for ambushes. Fighters should not get to ruin everyone one else's perk. Rogues should hands down beat fighters in stealth vs detection scenarios.yeah, that portion was a reply to Talek and Luna. No reason to give a Wizard tons of skill points. They are stressing their brains learning spells so they don't NEED to have skill points.
==Aelryinth
Wizards are academians studying EIGHT DIFFERENT WAYS OF BENDING REALITY.
And you're giving them more skills ON TOP of that? Why?Why does a wizard need skills? he has no NEED for them. HE has magic. Magic does everything skill wise and more. HE should get better at magic, because it will solve all his skill problems better and better. Investing in skill points is about as fruitful as investing in BAB for a wizard. He doesn't need them, he doesn't have to use them for anything, and magic does it better.
As for Fighters vs Rogues for Perception: Rangers should have perception, sure, but you know what? Rangers don't stand guard duty. That's a fightery thing. Sentry, sentineal and guard duties are standard fightery things, not rangery things. Rangers tend to go roving.
So fighters actually use perception for seeing those attempting to pass, inspecting people and cargo, and so forth. Fighters have way more need of that then a ranger, its just in a different context, more human/social then rural/beastial in nature.
Rangers basically need survival. The reason you don't hear complaints about rangers is because their uberness at skills is directly related to their favored enemies, and favored terrain. Plus, the classic skills of a ranger eat up almost all their default skill points. Stealth, Perception, Survival, Wild Empathy, Knowledge (Nature) - that's a 'default' load out for a classic ranger mold, leaving them little flexibility.
And if it's not their favored terrain, rangers in armor don't sneak much better then fighters, due to the ACP.
==Aelryinth
Would this be fixing Fighters, or stealing too much from other characters functions?
d12 hit points. Now surely the Fighter could more solidly use their FCB to get skills.
saves option 1: 2 or 3 good saves. Now they can use initial feats and traits for more than just filling in a bad chart.
saves option 2: Change class ability Bravery to choice of Iron Will or Lightning Reflexes.
saves option 3: add 1 or 2 general or other feats early; recommendation for Iron Will or Lightning Reflexes.
Full Attack every round. Just because. They only get 1 attack until level 6 anyway (unless TWF when they get a piddly damage offhand or terrible to hit chances). Then you don't need to orchestrate a Diablo 2 Leap Attack or some lion's Pounce. Not sure about this for other martials, or just fighter only.
Casting option 1: use an equivalent of the Rogue Talents to get a couple of spells.
Casting option 2: let fighters grab multiclassing or VMC to get some spells [but with some lesser penalty as compared to RAW]
Casting option 3: just requiring multiclassing or VMC to get some spells [as per RAW]
Consolidating combat feat trees. This would help all martials, and particularly fighters.
Use Weapon Groups instead of single weapons for Feats and class abilities.
Stamina [or some other pool system], but PFS and PFS Core legal.
I know some of these options get spread across 3pp or various splatbooks, or steps on Warpriest/Magus, but really unchain the fighter a bit more deliberately, in a hardcover, and make it PFS legal.
When I did my fighter rebuild, I just looked at number of class features, included spells in that comparison, and assigned accordingly.
Mundane fighters ended up with a combat feat and a training feat at EVERY level. It was the only way to generate enough Feat-Equivalents to keep them even with spellcasters. Training feats are any feat that affects saves, skills or movement.
I changed Bravery to Resolve, and Bravery is one of its subset abilities. First thing it did is every time you get a point, you pick another class skill, and you get full ranks in it. This keeps the very modular nature of the fighter intact...YOU get to pick the class skills as you level. So the fighter ends up with 7 pts/level, more then the ranger, and with the class skills YOU want him to have.
Many feats interact with the fighter's class ability. FOr instance, Iron Will improves by +1 per point of Resolve. Take the feat, you get a Good Will save out of it. Lightning Reflexes improves by armor training, and Great Fortitude by Weapon Training.
If a fighter takes a training feat that modifies a skill, that skill becomes a class skill. Resolve, WT and AT all modify skills, giving the fighter some real skill at certain skills that can be crazily built up with training feats if they choose to do so.
He also has the option to build up his armor and weapons for virtually no cost simply be engaging in combat with them. IF other classes can get cost savings on magic items, the fighter should, too. He also uses gear more effectively then others...a Fighter with a +4 Str belt can treat it as a +6 belt, for instance, saving him money.
Lastly, the shtick for Fighters is training. They can retrain feats every level, and they get double the benefits from optional training and favored class benefits. So, a fighter training for more hit points gets 2 hp per training, or does it in half the time. Likewise, they get 2 FC benefits when they level, instead of one.
Nobody trains like fighters do, because training is all they CAN do. So they do it. they can train NPC's in half the time of other classes, too.
Barbs wench and brawl.
Rangers hunt and follow the land.
Paladins pray and smite.
Fighters train and fight!
At higher levels, Fighters gain a bonus on skill checks against people lower level then them, and/or if they have a higher BAB. Martial combat starts influencing social combat!
Lots of ways to do this, and the most important is to give the fighter enough class abilities to compete with a spell caster. If you don't, then you're just not solving the problem.
==Aelryinth
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Why? Because you are biased against wizards? It makes far more sense for a wizard to have a ton of skills than a fighter. Wizards deal in academia. Most people in academia have a far greater selection of skills than others in a profession that does not require much learning. I imagine a wizard would need mathematics, alchemy, chemistry, writing, literature, poetry, all the various knowledges, etc. That training requires a lot of skills. What is the fighter doing in his time? Drinking at the bar? Bards are meant to be dabblers, rogues only get a ton of skills because their class features were made into skills. No, a rogue stealthing should be found by Joe fighter because he has perception as a skill. The rogue should be able to pull off ninja like stealth. Rangers are in my mind much more like special forces. Trained in hit & run and guerilla tactics. It makes sense that they get perception due to ambushing prey and looking out for ambushes. Fighters should not get to ruin everyone one else's perk. Rogues should hands down beat fighters in stealth vs detection scenarios.yeah, that portion was a reply to Talek and Luna. No reason to give a Wizard tons of skill points. They are stressing their brains learning spells so they don't NEED to have skill points.
==Aelryinth
Please, explain to me why the Wizard can be better at Acrobatics with less opportunity cost than the Fighter when the Wizard is annulling most of the uses of Acrobatics with Spider Climb or Fly.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Wizards deal in academia. Most people in academia have a far greater selection of skills than others in a profession that does not require much learning.
Within their field of specialty. A master of the arcane studies will know a lot more about magical esoterica, spells and mystical creatures than a farmer. I don't think anyone disagreed with that.
But the wizard knowing more about farming than the farmer simply because he's... in college? Knowing more about how to defend his home from orc raids when he's locked up in a tower without any serious threat to his health ever?
That's a significantly less compelling argument.
What is the fighter doing in his time? Drinking at the bar?
Well, logically it seems like if the wizard is studying magic the fighter is training and studying combat tactics.
You open your post with this:
Why? Because you are biased against wizards?
But then the entire thrust of your discussion seems to be "Fighters should be bad at everything because they're just dumb fighters".
I couldn't agree with that at all - you are supposed to hit 4-5 encounters in a day, a wizard is stuck with cantrips or risks his crappy AC and hit points for 2-3 of those per day. A fighter is bringing as much to the table at low levels as any other martial character, and face skills are all at their weakest with the difference between a class skill and a non class skill being a whopping +3 - yes it's a good boost but a fighter can play a face at low level pretty well *if needed*.
Even at level six a caster isn't tossing out encounter ending spells the entire day - and if they are bringing spells that trivialize skills even less so. There isn't a single class that I'd say 'brings it to the table' at level one. I could get on board with the level 6 suggestion because that's when multiattack kicks in - and also when major class elements start to come together for most classes.
Fighters bring as much to the table when it comes to "group utility" as a warrior. They have horrible skills, they can't really be a good face, since they lack intelligence/charisma/skill points from class/no face related class skills. All the while, other classes have out of combat powers/skills/spells.
Well, logically it seems like if the wizard is studying magic the fighter is training and studying combat tactics.
What are you talking about? How do fighters train to any benefit? And how does that help the group or assist in adventuring or anything at all?
Fundamentally, without even thinking about knowledge at all, a fighter cannot be good at swimming, climbing and riding a horse without an above average intellect. That's pretty damn silly.
Now if you want your fighter to be agile, know about orcs and bandits and be able to keep an eye out for danger too? You need as much int as a wizard to pull that off.
What are you talking about? How do fighters train to any benefit? And how does that help the group or assist in adventuring or anything at all?
The line of discussion was less about actual mechanics and more about fluff. He's arguing that wizards should have 5+int skill points per level and fighters should be the same or worse than they are now because wizards are busy training in their academy before they hit level 1 and all fighters do is get drunk.
I'm simply saying I don't really see how that follows and that "Fighters are just dumb drunks" is not, in my mind, a compelling argument against improving the class or a good reason that they should be bad at everything, which was the argument being made.
Fighters I build now have 6+int skill points by level 9.
Fundamentally, without even thinking about knowledge at all, a fighter cannot be good at swimming, climbing and riding a horse without an above average intellect. That's pretty damn silly.
Now if you want your fighter to be agile, know about orcs and bandits and be able to keep an eye out for danger too? You need as much int as a wizard to pull that off.
In Unchained they had those skill groups, a good idea implemented worse than how other systems have done it.
It could had gone long way.
I think all melee fighters should be able to use Opportune Parry and Riposte from the swashbuckler. They should all be skillful enough to make someone think twice about hitting them (or trying to).
Then again, I like active defenses in an RPG. Too bad the Swashie is the only one that gets the chance.
Fighter//Rogue is a closer to what a fighter or rogue should have been. Two saves, adequate skill points, feats to take advantage of the combat system, bonus damage to make up for the strength of bows in the system, and some interesting talents to get some specialization.
It's still not what I think a warrior in a high-magic world would look like, but if you insist on a no-magic-no-supernatural fighter that gestalt is about what a generic fighting man should look like.
This, of course, raises the question of what a HEROIC fighting man should look like if he's still restricted to no magic and no supernatural abilities. Which of course is the point of this thread.
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Can we think of examples of such characters? Martials competing on par with casters in a high magic setting? Preferably in Western lit?
I've often cited Pecos Bill and his ability to lasso a tornado. Amusingly, I've sometimes been told that clearly it MUST have been a magic lasso because a person can't actually do that.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Can we think of examples of such characters? Martials competing on par with casters in a high magic setting? Preferably in Western lit?I've often cited Pecos Bill and his ability to lasso a tornado. Amusingly, I've sometimes been told that clearly it MUST have been a magic lasso because a person can't actually do that.
John Henry mining as fast as a steam drill?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
There are no snakes outside Japan, so that's obviously too anime!
Can we think of examples of such characters? Casters quickly and easily doing the impossible and breaking reality in a high magic setting outside the DnD inspired novels and tales? Preferably in Western lit?
It's a double standard to ask for heroic martials who compete with Pathfinder casters in western lit because Pathfinder casters [i]don't exist in Western lit.[i] Well they sorta do. They're the gods in Greek myth, nigh unbeatable villains like Sauron, ect.
Pathfinder (well 3.5) took the caster of western mythology and cranked them up to 111, so asking for example martials in mythology who are even cranked up to 11 is not gonna happen.