|
Hey everyone, I've had the idea for a Roman legionnaire type character, and I want some help on making a build for him. Right now I'm considering going three levels into Phalanx Soldier Fighter and then putting the rest in weapon and shield Skirmisher Ranger. I'd fight as him by taking quick draw and starting at range throwing a pilum or two, then going in with his spear or gladius depending on the range. Any feat recommendations for this build? Any other ideas for a character like this?
|
Phalanx Soldier really doesn't work well for a legionnaire. I'd go straight-up Sword and Board Slayer using a Heavy Shield and Gladius. You could make a case for daring champion cavalier. You don't need the finesse side of it, but the deeds, challenge, and teamwork feats are all great for the concept.
Phalanx was more Spartan style.
yeah romans really liked their short swords and javalins...
Yeah, the roman heavy infantry that we think of were definitely all about using a gladius and shield. Unfortunately, the shield we identify them with are closer to tower shields than heavy shield in appearance, but mechanically they are heavy shields in this game (mostly because they were used to bash).
I would recommend the slayer as well, using the Weapon and Shield Combat Style from Ranger Combat Style selection. Be aware that in this sort of build, your shield is your main weapon.
Maybe tower shield specialist
Maybe tower shield specialist
roman shields aren't mechanically tower shields, they're much to small to block explosions and the like, they also bashed with them.
No, even tower shield specialist is actually still really bad with tower shields.
He spends the first 5 level attempting to negate the penalties of using a tower shield (we he could have just used a heavy shield). The 13th and 16th level abilities are kind of neat, but come on line too late to be relevant. Most games end between 13th and 16th level. Not a great time to finally get your toys. Not to mention he gives up weapon training, which is the one things that actually makes fighters decent.
The other thing to note is that two of the main reasons Roman legions were so effective were (1) teamwork, working together. You don't get legionnaires alone, you get them working beside and protecting each other, and ganging up on the Celtic barbarians with greatswords. (Mechanically, some of this is teamwork feats.) And, (2), they had a disciplined NCO corps and engineers, which made their armies overall much more effective than anyone else's in the period. This doesn't translate terribly well into Pathfinder, unless you assume some sort of class that inspires everyone around them. (Not just bards -- the Romans had trumpeters -- but centurions of some sort, maybe the 3.5 marshal class).
Plus siege engines.
(You can reflect Roman training with teamwork feats and maybe extra warrior/fighter levels, but definitely the legions have discipline above and beyond the level of others -- again, not easy to reflect in an individual tactical miniatures game.)
|
Really - a legionnaire adventurer doesn't make a lot of sense. They were great at unit combat - but they really weren't all that great in a more skirmish type scenario like adventuring.
Actually - that's how Spartacus was so successful. He tricked the roman troopers into going up into mountainous terrain where they couldn't use their phalanx well. (Yes - they did have a phalanx - it's just that the Greek Phalanx was different from the Roman one. The Roman one was a bit looser formation - and had pillums instead of spears. For that matter - the Macedonian Phalanx - what Alexander the Great used - was different from either.) His troops were all gladiators and had been trained for 1v1 combat - and in a skirmish they crushed the legionnaires.
I will say - this thread makes me sad how Pathfinder nerfed the Tower Shield. In 3.5 it was pretty awesome.