| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Nope. Because he wants everyone to have fun. If one guy solves challenges all by himself, the others will be just frustrated watchers.
But they *chose* to be frustrated watchers by intentionally picking classes that have a range of options. Hammering down the people that picked classes that have a variety of options so they wouldn't have to be frustrated watchers doesn't fix the problem.
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
Pathfinder, however, is a game in which the fighter often doesn't get to engage at all unless the wizard ignores his own best chance of success in favor of instead helping to keep the fighter in the game. That is not a team game.Fly upgrades an (in this situation) useless fighter to one who can reliably do at least one attack per round.
Fly upgrades an already strong caster to one who can pursue his opponent a bit better (after all, many spells are ranged and don't care about height).
So what's the better deal for the party?
You're making the wrong comparison. The wizard didn't wake up in the morning and go "Oh, look, I have Fly prepared. I wish I could have picked my own spells, but since I didn't, I guess I'd better figure out the best person to put it on."
No, the wizard woke up in the morning with an empty spell slot, and had to decide whether to fill it with a spell that will let the fighter participate, or to fill it with a different spell altogether.
"So what's the better deal for the party?" The higher in level you go, the more often the answer is to pick a spell that does more than buffing the fighter with the same slot would.
I love team play. Cooperative games offer something special. But when the only way to get there is to have my supernaturally-intelligent wizard make deliberately poor decisions about how he's going to prepare for life-and-death situations, that breaks my immersion and soils the narrative.
I don't want to have to choose between teamwork and roleplay. I want both.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
The fighter is a horrible team player...
He is literally a resource sink and gives nothing in return. Compare him to the paladin who can heal status conditions, the barbarian who needs very little aid and cam destroy magical effects to save the wizards dispel for something bigger, the ranger who has a plethora of skills, tracking ability, and spells. The fighter is simply a sink that doesnt help the party. If you want a REAL team player, look at the inquisitor or bard. They can melee pretty well AND they buff people
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Whether or not martials need better things I think that casters could stand a few nerfs. For instance, the "encounter-deciding spell" which Casual Viking mentioned is something which I find kind of boring and sometimes dispiriting.
The Witch (or whoever) uses an SoL spell or power. Then the DM rolls a d20 and either the enemy is effectively vanquished or nothing at all happens. The caster either robs me of the fun of fighting the enemy or fails to provide any meaningful support as I fight the enemy with one less PC making a meaningful contribution. Sometimes SoL spam ensues and it is a race to see which competing track (HP Damage vs SoL). I think it would be great if more spells and powers had their results averaged towards the center with successful saves often still imposing some negatives and failed saves not necessarily taking the foe out of the fight (at least not for long)
Obviously that would be a downgrade to the power of casters, and I suppose some people might object that a Fighter who gets off a full attack could still "easily" take an enemy out in one round, but defenses against that are certainly possible, and it isn't like casters don't have damage dealing options too (summoning in particular)
I think I've probably played more levels as a Bard than any other class, but I haven't found my recent excursion into Fighter and Barbarian particularly unrewarding (other than the low Will of one of my 3 PCs getting hit repeatedly). As I recall, Bards don't have a built in method to fly either. My last one rode a Sylvan Sorcerer's animal companion (which often had Overland Flight on it). He was pretty decent with a bow too almost by accident (Inspire Courage + Good Hope helps a lot)
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
You cannot blame people for picking weak classes if they had certain character fantasy in mind at the start of the game.
Neither do not villanize people who enjoy the power fantasy of a powerful wizard with all of his tools aka spells.
Blame the system for causing friction in the first place.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
You cannot blame people for picking weak classes if they had certain character fantasy in mind at the start of the game.
Neither do not villanize people who enjoy the power fantasy of a powerful wizard with all of his tools aka spells.
Blame the system for causing friction in the first place.
Well of course you blame the system, but then you blame the player. If someone sat down and said "My character concept can only contribute in these limited circumstances." They don't then get to complain about not being able to contribute outside of those narrow circumstances.
If you're planning to punish a player for playing his character then it's definitely not a game I want to be in.
You'd be surprised. My players do foolish stuff all the time, up to putting sensitive body parts into unknown magical liquid. Sometimes they struggle a bit for it, but they always get away with it - at level 6 nobody died yet. I don't teach them how to play, since figuring it out by themselves is way more fun for them. And I enjoy watching and supporting their creative playstyles.
'Teaching them teamwork' is a final resort, when the power difference becomes too large and talks don't work. It wasn't necessary yet, and given they enjoy teamwork, I doubt it ever will be.
Why not just give more toys to those that are struggling, then?
Happened last session. ;o)
But they *chose* to be frustrated watchers by intentionally picking classes that have a range of options.
I don't think they are totally aware of the consequences of their class choice at level 1. Even if they know the classes well, they probably don't know the campaign (and GM habits). For instance, in a campaign with many easily available magic items (e.g. Winged Boots) a fighter catches up in versatility while keeping his strengths.
"So what's the better deal for the party?" The higher in level you go, the more often the answer is to pick a spell that does more than buffing the fighter with the same slot would.
Ok, so the root of the problem is the relatively weak fighter who is not worth the buff, from a rational perspective. That weakness should be addressed anyway - with available items, encounter design, build advice or houserules. Then the buff might become the better decision automagically. Depending on situation of course - wouldn't want the wizard completely in the buff bot slot.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Ok, so the root of the problem is the relatively weak fighter who is not worth the buff, from a rational perspective. That weakness should be addressed anyway - with available items, encounter design, build advice or houserules. Then the buff might become the better decision automagically. Depending on situation of course - wouldn't want the wizard completely in the buff bot slot.
I don't think those are the right solutions. I think fixing the problem with better class design and better combat rules is better than an ever-growing tumor of house rules and GM pity. But redesign requires skills that the current designer stable doesn't have, and risks alienating the fanbase.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
And you know what? That's exactly what some players want and like. There's like three dozen classes now. Why can't just one- ONE! be the plain vanilla killing machine that a good number of players want to play?
You are definitely correct that plenty of folks want to play that character type. It's a good idea for the game to enable that character type.
The problem is, "the plain vanilla killing machine" is actually a broader skill set than the fighter has.
As long as the fighter has his favored weapon and the enemy is obliging enough to be vulnerable to it then the fighter will indeed seem to be like the "vanilla killing machine".
But as soon as anything about the situation is more troublesome than a little DR, suddenly the fighter is useless (sometimes figuratively, sometimes literally, depending on the complication). The "vanilla killing machine," especially if that's his sole niche, should still have at least a reasonably strong capacity for killin' even when the stars don't align for him.
The fighter fails in this regard.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
"So what's the better deal for the party?" The higher in level you go, the more often the answer is to pick a spell that does more than buffing the fighter with the same slot would.Ok, so the root of the problem is the relatively weak fighter who is not worth the buff, from a rational perspective. That weakness should be addressed anyway - with available items, encounter design, build advice or houserules.
Isn't that pretty much the point of the topic? That there's an issue that needs addressing in one way or another?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don't think those are the right solutions. I think fixing the problem with better class design and better combat rules is better than an ever-growing tumor of house rules and GM pity. But redesign requires skills that the current designer stable doesn't have, and risks alienating the fanbase.
I wouldn't call it pity to correct injustice. But even if it needs pity to ensure fun: So be it.
Anyway, in my opinion, the fighter got several bones lately. While Unchained had no 'Unchained Fighter', it introduced VMC (feat costs are easier to handle for fighters), Combat Stamina (with the explicit statement 'if you want, it's fighter only') and an alternative action economy. Melee Tactics didn't hurt either, and who knows, Weaponmaster's Handbook might help too.
I think fighters can be quite interesting in combat. Forget specialization (Weapon Focus etc.), switch between different options like two-handed / one-handed plus shield / ranged / maneuvers as needed. Quick Draw supports that playstyle well. And you could take any fancy (nonexotic) weapon your group finds, no more need to wait for the next good version of 'your' weapon type. Improved Unarmed Strike and Improvised Weapon Mastery make you even more versatile. Vital Strike etc. makes you less dependant on full attacks - it works with any weapon and adds relatively more if you don't have weapon specialization.
Yes, you do less damage than a specialized fighter as long as his style works. But when it stops working (e.g. melee vs. flying opponent), you can still do something useful.
If that's not enough, add traits (especially these giving you additional class skills), an unusual race (e.g. for Gnomish Magic) or a solid Cha / Int score. Yup, it comes at a price - but sometimes a price is worth it.
Isn't that pretty much the point of the topic? That there's an issue that needs addressing in one way or another?
I don't know whether it's a general issue. Some people here keep saying that very emphatically. Others disagree, but they are less vocal and seem less eager to dive into long discussions.
If it becomes an issue at my table, I will address it. Preferably with the help of Paizo material, but if that's not a given, it can be done without it.
Pathfinder, however, is a game in which the fighter often doesn't get to engage at all unless the wizard ignores his own best chance of success in favor of instead helping to keep the fighter in the game. That is not a team game.Fly upgrades an (in this situation) useless fighter to one who can reliably do at least one attack per round.
Fly upgrades an already strong caster to one who can pursue his opponent a bit better (after all, many spells are ranged and don't care about height).
So what's the better deal for the party?You're making the wrong comparison. The wizard didn't wake up in the morning and go "Oh, look, I have Fly prepared. I wish I could have picked my own spells, but since I didn't, I guess I'd better figure out the best person to put it on."
No, the wizard woke up in the morning with an empty spell slot, and had to decide whether to fill it with a spell that will let the fighter participate, or to fill it with a different spell altogether.
"So what's the better deal for the party?" The higher in level you go, the more often the answer is to pick a spell that does more than buffing the fighter with the same slot would.
I love team play. Cooperative games offer something special. But when the only way to get there is to have my supernaturally-intelligent wizard make deliberately poor decisions about how he's going to prepare for life-and-death situations, that breaks my immersion and soils the narrative.
I don't want to have to choose between teamwork and roleplay. I want both.
Yeah. And think beyond spell slot preparation-- after all, that wizard may want flight prepared to put him out of reach of melee threats.
But if they encounter a flying threat, the other resource the wizard needs to juggle is action economy. Sure, he COULD cast fly on the fighter, who then needs to wait until his turn comes up on the initiative, probably only gets 1 hit off on their first round, gets to full attack next round if they are lucky...
Meanwhile the wizard could have killed the enemy with a lightning bolt, or blinded it, stunned it and knocked it out of the air... with the same action he would have used to cast fly. He doesn't need to cast fly on himself in the first place.
This has the added benefit of keeping his big dumb meat shield close by, so if the DM springs an ambush the wizard is safer.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
First Martial are pretty much about gear at higher levels. At 10 level and higher your fighter should have a golf bag full of weapons and have as many potions as Bevo has wine. So if that dragon is out of melee range just grab your bow of speed and your dragon slaying arrows. Problem solved.
Also best way to counter Arcane caster is is don't play intelligent bad guys as if they never heard of magic, which many GM seem to do , and have your bad guys bring their own casters or monster that have spell like abilities. I tend to run lots of Drow/cultist as villains. And if your arcane/Martial don't co operate , well my monster do and a group of Arcane/Martial working as A TEAM will defeat a more powerful group which do not co operate as a team. An Arcane running by themselves after a retreating Drow Priestess is going to have a messy death. Or if an evil Wizard cast haste on his gargoyle minion and orders him to attack the squishy types in the back rank , your fighter better be ready and able to intercept.
| 9 people marked this as a favorite. |
Do martial characters really need better things?
Short Answer: Yes
Long Answer: Yeeeeeeeeeeeeeees
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
While you should let them play it, don't babysit them and force everyone else to create conditions where they can participate. Because then you're not letting others play their characters.
Well of course you blame the system, but then you blame the player. If someone sat down and said "My character concept can only contribute in these limited circumstances." They don't then get to complain about not being able to contribute outside of those narrow circumstances.
Bullshit. Bad GM creates situations that are prohibitive to players and their character fantasies, and if even a good GM cannot avoid it, then the ruleset itself is busted. "Fighter cannot fight because of x" is just as unfair as "Wizard is not allowed to wiz because sudden anti-magic field".
I would buy your idea if Paizo came out openly and wrote to the corebook "Avoid these character ideas, we never intended them to be well represented by this ruleset" and then a list. But no, they print options for players that both ignite passionate ideas while then trapping the player. "I want to play The Knight" is about as a basic idea as "I want to play The Wizard". Oh, not to mention Rogue, that is another classic motif in fantasy.
Roleplaying is not a game you can win. There is no real win condition. Even the idea of somekind of checks and balances system where characters are "given turns" to shine is subtly awful, because you punish/reward players to get around the system. See, I agree with you two with that excluding others so one player can play is bad, but that APPLIES TO BOTH SIDES. Yet how come to you, hamstringing the martial is justified just because it was naturally done by the system?
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
The difference is that there are plenty of situations where the fighter has to deal with being ineffective and a lot less where the caster has to deal with being ineffective.
"situations where the fighter has to deal with being ineffective" happen all the time just by opening the Bestiary, and "situations where the caster has to deal with being ineffective" mostly have to be carefully engineered by the adventure writer.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
That's the problem though. If a class with flaws needs magic items, feats or a particular build to be useful. While other classes can get by without it. Is not exactly a resounding endorsement to myself at least at the class being useful. That's what some don't understand I think.
It's like Rogues the only way to survive doing sneak attack damage consistently. Is to either use a certain build, ranged sneak attack or a kind DM who has the enemies ignore the Rogue stabbing them in the back. Once again is not going to want me take or tell others to use a Rogue.
It's all too easy to blame the player. Which I find a copout imo. As a a player I should not have to bend over backwards to make a class work because it was poorly designed by the devs. Try selling a brand new car with problems. Then when the problems are pointed out. Tell them "yeah so what. You know basic mechanics don't you. It's not my problem if you don't. Nor is it my fault if you lack the skills needed to fix the car. Your just not trying hard enough".
Fly upgrades an (in this situation) useless fighter to one who can reliably do at least one attack per round.This is being very overlooked. A Fighter, a well built one, can be tremendously effective with only one attack per round.
I'm just so sick of the fighter whining, and I do play martials. There are all kinds of ways for a fighter to easily shore up his or her weaknesses.
"My Fighter can't fly on his own!"
At 12th level?
"Take winged boots!"
I don't wanna depend on any magical items!"Take elritch heritage."
I don't wanna have to use any feats on things that shore up my character weaknesses!Really? Do you just want everything handed to you? When I play a Wizard I make sure to spend a feat or two in things that shore up the fact that a melee getting up in my face can wreck my day. You don't see mages complain about having to take combat casting.
Make sure you have a Charisma of 15 after magical items. (Really this ain't hard by level 12)
Skill Focus Healing
Eldritch Heritage - Celestial
Improved Edlritch Hertitage - CelestialLevel 12 you can now shoot (at least) 5 times a day an anti-evil beam that does 1d4+5 damage. (And can heal good creatures, granted, this isn't much but...)
Level 12 you can also fly for 10 minutes per day, 60 ft of movement, with good maneuverability.
You have 12 (13 if human) feats at this point. You can sack the 3. That is WHY you have so many feats.
You are massively underestating the amount it costs you. Fighters normally dump Charisma hard
15 charisma requires one of the following
15 Charisma on the point buy (11 points)
13 charisma on the point buy+ Cha headband+2 (7 points)
11 Charisma on the point buy+ Cha headband +4(5 points)
9 Charisma on the point buy+ Cha headband +6(3 points)
For the headband, fighters are desperate enough for extra will to pick up a wisdom booster, so they need to get a dual stat booster or an ioun stone, which are much more expensive.
11 points for the 15 charisma is not really feasible. For 13 charisma, 7 points is the equivalent of 18-20 Str, so the entire thing is costing you the 18000 to take a +4 belt to a +6 belt and compensate for the loss of point buy points plus another 6k to add charisma to a +2 wis headband, or 8k for a +2 charisma ioun stone. And this gets even more expensive as you level up, because Winged boots are a much more reasonable purchase than 24-26k, and that's ignoring the fact that this costs you 3 feats as well (oh, and you got a bonus to heal and a ray that is barely worth the space on your sheet...yay?).
Also, 3 non-combat feats and a high buy of what is normally a dump stat is not "easily shore(ing) up his or her weaknesses". It's a serious investment that costs the fighter a painful amount, and it is the sort of thing that goes well into the realm of "heavy char-op". It's possible to get around the problems that fighters have, but it requires a pile of char-op tricks. 3 feats on Eldritch Heritage and a bag of Quick Runner's Shirts is one option (humans and aasimar are probably better off getting Angel Wings instead, since it doesn't need Cha and for a human costs the same amount of feats). Triple archetyping and ghetto pouncing with that charge teamwork feat and a mauler familiar is another. These are all freakishly extreme options, and it isn't reasonable to expect every fighter to be part outsider or a monstrous alchemy mutated brute with a pet battlehawk. The class should just work without extreme optimization. Not to mention the fact that some GMs would take issue to growing Angelic wings without having a good RP reason (I personally wouldn't, but much less extreme build choices have been criticized on these boards for lacking roleplay justification, so it's a legitimate concern).
|
|
Again I see your point. Saying that all it takes to make the Fighter viable. Is taking a certain mix of feats and items. Is not really selling a person on the class IMO. If anything it highlights the flaws. Not to mention your assuming every DM will allow Eldritch Heritage. Every DM allows every and all items. Even then rathet take Iron Will as a feat. Or a long sword. Rather than waste a feG taking double sword. As well ignoring that not every player wants to jump through hoops to make a class viable.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Fighters can be fun to play, but the really do need better things, because they get almost NOTHING that is unique.
The monk abilities are unique, and tailored for the class.
Even the lowly rogue gets a huge list of neat stuff to choose from as they level...
Combat feats let you hit things with your pointy/slashy thing is slightly different ways, wow.
I'm tempted to gestalt Fighter and Rogue, and then slap fast heal on top of that somehow.
THAT is a class that I think could compare to, at least, Bard.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
We are not discussing plots, we are discussing mechanics. You can make all that with a Commoner.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
We are not discussing plots, we are discussing mechanics. You can make all that with a Commoner.
Now THERE is a class that needs some love. Who in their right mind would play a class with NO magic abilities at all...
oh.
Houserule Bravery into being a flat bonus to Will Saves, modify Weapon Training to apply to all weapons equally and combine Armor Mastery's DR 5 as a scaling bonus starting from level 3 [and make it stack with Adamantine should the Fighter choose Adamantine over Mithral] and change Armor Training's bonus from increasing Max Dex on Armor into granting a Dodge Bonus to AC in all circumstances, and you've got a pretty ok class. Still far less flexible than many, but powerful enough that the character can actually afford to buy more flexibility with their resources [or focus on raw power if that's their thing.]
I made some similar changes, and add the option to every morning let the fighter retrain ALL his bonus feats if he can train for 1 hour.
I made some similar changes, and add the option to every morning let the fighter retrain ALL his bonus feats if he can train for 1 hour.
Houserule Bravery into being a flat bonus to Will Saves, modify Weapon Training to apply to all weapons equally and combine Armor Mastery's DR 5 as a scaling bonus starting from level 3 [and make it stack with Adamantine should the Fighter choose Adamantine over Mithral] and change Armor Training's bonus from increasing Max Dex on Armor into granting a Dodge Bonus to AC in all circumstances, and you've got a pretty ok class. Still far less flexible than many, but powerful enough that the character can actually afford to buy more flexibility with their resources [or focus on raw power if that's their thing.]
I do like the idea of making feats like Focus/Specialization apply to all weapons...
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
...
Houserule Bravery into being a flat bonus to Will Saves...
Just as a minor thing, I would give the class a strong Will save before touching bravery. The reason being that a lot of archetypes swap bravery out, and upgrading Will to a strong save is strictly better for both the core fighter and all archetypes, including the ones that swap bravery out.
I must say, I think Mythic Adventures did a lot to improve martial characters. I've been using Mythic Vital Strike to be quite effective and able to move and attack. I'm a guardian, so Cage Enemy lets me have true battlefield control. I'm not even particularly optimized, but I'm pulling my weight.
I don't think I'll ever run a non-mythic campaign again. I just wish there were mythic versions of more feats from all the various books beyond mostly Core.
@DrDeth - I basically agree with much of what you said, but I'd honestly like to know more about why people feel martial classes aren't satisfactory outside of combat. It seems to me like anybody can put some ranks into social skills and participate in roleplaying, and that's how most of the out of combat time in my groups is spent. Maybe other people have some different experiences which can help me understand the problem though.
Well, if you dump Int (as suggested in several Guides) and get a racial subtype that dumps the extra Skp/lvl, and spend your level all on HP or something, then @ 1 Skp/lvl, you dont have much, then if you dump CHA (as also suggested), well, see you have no social skills. (sarcasm) Obviously, this is because the devs designed the class poorly, not because of your choices. (end sarcasm)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I do like the idea of making feats like Focus/Specialization apply to all weapons...I made some similar changes, and add the option to every morning let the fighter retrain ALL his bonus feats if he can train for 1 hour.
Houserule Bravery into being a flat bonus to Will Saves, modify Weapon Training to apply to all weapons equally and combine Armor Mastery's DR 5 as a scaling bonus starting from level 3 [and make it stack with Adamantine should the Fighter choose Adamantine over Mithral] and change Armor Training's bonus from increasing Max Dex on Armor into granting a Dodge Bonus to AC in all circumstances, and you've got a pretty ok class. Still far less flexible than many, but powerful enough that the character can actually afford to buy more flexibility with their resources [or focus on raw power if that's their thing.]
That's a bit much, don't you think? It's hardly focusing or specializing at that point, plus it's less a feat choice and more an 'obviously you MUST take this because it blows everything else out of the water'. Pathfinder has too many "plus this number to this specific thing" options as it is.
Having Weapon Focus and Weapon Specialization work with an entire fighter weapon group would be better. We could then add in some other features that scale with level. The feats should provide simple, cool, and decently power combat boons. Things like being able to reroll a natural 1 so many times a day, or getting the ability to ignore an attack of opportunity made when using that weapon once a round, or being able to auto-roll maximum damage in some cases. Honestly, ALL the fighter feats could probably do with this treatment.