| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
If you have to break the fundamental rules concerning character levels in order to balance your class, that should be a sign you wrote a poorly designed class.
It's too common I criticize someone's class as having too strong of a 1st level, and their response involves a rant that throws the entire multiclassing system under the bus in order to defend their design. This isn't how a game designer should think.
But it is how Paizo has been designing classes since the APG.
Look at the Alchemist: Alchemy, bomb 1d6, brew potion, mutagen, and throw anything; at first level.
Two free feats, one of which is an Item Creation feat that he doesn't even technically qualify for, a damage option, and a way to buff himself. Plus two good saves and 4+INT skills on a class with IN as a primary ability.
Look at the Cavalier: Challenge 1/day, mount, order, and tactician. That's a free horse, an order which grants class skills and abilities, an alignment free smite, and a free teamwork feat, plus the ability to give your entire party the same teamwork feat.
Look at the Gunslinger: he gets a free gun, proficiency with all guns, plus Gunsmithing, and three deeds which are essentially the same thing as feats or spells, whichever you feel like comparing them to.
If paizo really had designed all the core classes the same way we would see a lot more classes like our fighter fixes. This is mostly because paizo reads what we post on the forums about classes being weak/strong. That's basically what led to the Unchained release in the first place, the talk about the legacy issue affecting the game's design.
Don't even get me started on point buy.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If you have to break the fundamental rules concerning character levels in order to balance your class, that should be a sign you wrote a poorly designed class.
It's too common I criticize someone's class as having too strong of a 1st level, and their response involves a rant that throws the entire multiclassing system under the bus in order to defend their design. This isn't how a game designer should think.
But it is how Paizo has been designing classes since the APG.
Look at the Alchemist: Alchemy, bomb 1d6, brew potion, mutagen, and throw anything; at first level.
Two free feats, one of which is an Item Creation feat that he doesn't even technically qualify for, a damage option, and a way to buff himself. Plus two good saves and 4+INT skills on a class with IN as a primary ability.Look at the Cavalier: Challenge 1/day, mount, order, and tactician. That's a free horse, an order which grants class skills and abilities, an alignment free smite, and a free teamwork feat, plus the ability to give your entire party the same teamwork feat.
Look at the Gunslinger: he gets a free gun, proficiency with all guns, plus Gunsmithing, and three deeds which are essentially the same thing as feats or spells, whichever you feel like comparing them to.
Eh... No. You kinda have a point with the alchemist, but Cavaliers and Gunslingers, really?
That mount is a 1 HD fodder-cannon without class progression. And a 1st level Challenge 1/day is irrelevant by 4th level. Teamwork feats are also pretty terrible...
Gunslingers are only worthy anything if you stick with it 5 levels (and barely worth sticking with it past that). Without Gun Training, firearms are the absolutely worst weapons in the game. To the point where you need to dedicate a whole class just to make anything other than horribly underpowered.
That said, IMHO, if a class rewards players for sticking with it, it really doesn't matter if they are a strong dip. See Clerics. A dip into the class gets you 2 domains, minor spell casting, armor proficiency, possibly exotic weapon proficiency and a boost to the two most important saves in the game... But no one says they are just a dip class, since their class features (i.e.: spells) are awesome enough that sticking with the class is a great idea.
Your criticism is rooted in a potential for dip abuse. Several people have pointed out that a lot of vanilla classes have given a lot more at 1st level than what a vanilla fighter does.If you have to break the fundamental rules concerning character levels in order to balance your class, that should be a sign you wrote a poorly designed class.
It's too common I criticize someone's class as having too strong of a 1st level, and their response involves a rant that throws the entire multiclassing system under the bus in order to defend their design. This isn't how a game designer should think.
+1
Again, stop taking what I'm saying out of context. Seriously.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
It's too common I criticize someone's class as having too strong of a 1st level, and their response involves a rant that throws the entire multiclassing system under the bus in order to defend their design. This isn't how a game designer should think.
Honest question: do you similarly feel that Paizo has thrown the entire multiclassing system under the bus, with all of the hybrid classes?
I view it as them finally admitting that the 3.0/3.5/PF multiclassing system does not work. In 3.0/3.5, they tried to patch it with prestige classes like Eldritch Knight. Paizo uses hybrid base classes instead.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Again, stop taking what I'm saying out of context. Seriously.
So far everyone reading the post has unanimously gotten the same thing out of it. If you meant something different "in context," please just explain what you actually meant.
UNCHAINED FIGHTER ** spoiler omitted **...
Lolwut?
This Figher blows every other class out of the water. No martial can even compare, and even spell casters wouldn't be able to stop it with all the immunities and bonuses it's getting.You would have to rebuild every class to be on-par with this power-monstrosity. ;)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
UNCHAINED FIGHTER ** spoiler omitted **...Lolwut?
This Figher blows every other class out of the water. No martial can even compare, and even spell casters wouldn't be able to stop it with all the immunities and bonuses it's getting.
You would have to rebuild every class to be on-par with this power-monstrosity. ;)
Rebuild other martials? Sure. But the fighter's finally able to adventure with the full casters after 10th level. And the full casters still wouldn't need buffing; they're already gods.
Look, we can pick design points, and as long as all the classes are more or less equally capable at a given level, it's all good.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Hey, who's to say that scrawny wizard wasn't putting in time learning how to wear armor and swing a mighty swing a sword while he was learning how to cast magic. I think proficiency is supposed to represent the bare minimum experience you need to perform competently with an item. Enough so that it doesn't hamper you to wield it.
And Lemmy kudos. You made a fighter that makes teamwork feats actually good along with a superhero archetype. I expect a shonen-themed monk next?
Because then he'd have weapon and armor profs at level 1, NOT a free spellbook and a bunch of cantrips, a free rank in Spellcraft, and several spells already IN that spellbook that he already learned.
If he was learning something other then magic, he'd start with something other then magic.
I REALLY hate how spellcasters get all these free passes on learning non-magical skills, as if spellcasting was something that took no time, effort or training at all.
==Aelryinth
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
UNCHAINED FIGHTER ** spoiler omitted **...Lolwut?
This Figher blows every other class out of the water. No martial can even compare, and even spell casters wouldn't be able to stop it with all the immunities and bonuses it's getting.
You would have to rebuild every class to be on-par with this power-monstrosity. ;)
Barbs with superstition and Paladins will still end up with better saves.
Still can't make magic items. Still can't USE many common magic items, like wands, without UMD.
Still no real healing ability.
The immunities are something a paladin can deal with by level 3, and fix for OTHER PEOPLE. The fighter gets to wait until 10th+ and gets immunity for himself alone.
And except for the fear, they are fort save effects, anyways.
Blows every other martial out of the water? I don't think so in the slightest. He finally DOES get some battlefield command, and that's really nice, however.
==Aelryinth
I REALLY hate how spellcasters get all these free passes on learning non-magical skills, as if spellcasting was something that took no time, effort or training at all.
The problem is that it only takes as much training as the story says it takes. We have no real world analogue to base how easy or hard it is to pick up beginner spellcasting.
And obviously, a PC can pick up proficiency in all martial weapons and learn to wear armor comfortably in one day by picking a new class.
:P
Unless you give the level 1 rules teeth.
You DID notice that Paizo PrC's no longer grant armor and weapon profs, right? Just like they don't 'start' a spellcasting progression. If you don't have it, tough luck.
==Aelryinth
Again, stop taking what I'm saying out of context. Seriously.So far everyone reading the post has unanimously gotten the same thing out of it. If you meant something different "in context," please just explain what you actually meant.
Hm, Ah, yes, I misread something Lemmy and Aelryinth said. My earlier post...
If you have to break the fundamental rules concerning character levels in order to balance your class, that should be a sign you wrote a poorly designed class.
It's too common I criticize someone's class as having too strong of a 1st level, and their response involves a rant that throws the entire multiclassing system under the bus in order to defend their design. This isn't how a game designer should think.
Oh and Darksol, you might want to reword the Bonus feat combat art so that you can ignore one ability score or feat requirement but not BAB requirements. Those are there mainly so that PCs aren't pulling off Improved Critical at level 2. Usually classes that gain the benefits of such feats earlier are specialized like the Swashbuckler.
Also the ability to ignore one requirement can be problematic for feats like Furious Focus, which specifically modifies the use of a prerequisite feat.
Also more Combat Arts
Razor Wind - As a standard action, the fighter can spend 2 stamina to make a ranged attack with a slashing melee weapon he's trained with. This ranged attack deals his weapon's damage die in slashing force damage. The fighter can only select this art at level 8 or higher.
I suppose that I could put in other clauses regarding that. It never occurred to me that people could just pick Improved Critical at level 2. While I personally don't have a problem with it, primarily because it doesn't extremely matter at the endgame, it does give them a level of power that they shouldn't have in the earlygame.
There was a question about that regarding a Qinggong Monk archetype which provided the Step Up and Strike feat. I already provided that by RAW, you would have to possess the feat in order to make use of the bonus one you received. This is something that is demonstrated in the rules currently, and falls into the disrepute of Racial Heritage (Kobold), which is technically not a valid choice for Racial Heritage, and Tail Terror, where, although you qualify for the feat, you cannot make use of the feat until you have the other components needed to make it work. I'm not saying that it should work that way, I'm just saying it's a matter of following the RAW of abilities. Unless you dumped Intelligence to 1, you wouldn't take a feat that does nothing for you.
As for the Combat Art, I'm not convinced that I should implement it. Although I should implement more specialization choices, this sort of thing is already demonstrated in abilities such as Forceful Vault (which I need to alter slightly), Insolent Gibe, and some others, where if you don't put points in Acrobatics (or can't make use of it because no Armor Training), or Intimidate, then they aren't such useful abilities for the given build.
I should implement more synergistic Combat Arts, though. And I think I can help solve that situation.
Here's a couple of some synergizing Combat Arts, let me know what you think:
Frenzied Swings: The fighter makes a single attack much more deadly. When the fighter is performing the attack action or the charge action, he may spend 1 Stamina to make two more attacks at the same bonuses he would receive if he were making a single attack, or 2 Stamina to perform this ability on one single attack (such as an attack of opportunity). This Combat Art can only be used on attacks against enemies to deal hit point damage. Each extra attack is calculated the same as the original attack for determining bonuses to hit and damage, and cannot be deviated in any way from the original attack (such as by using a different weapon, substituting a combat maneuver, etc). A fighter must be 6th level before selecting this Combat Art.
Cleaving Throw: The fighter may utilize a single one-handed or two-handed non-projectile weapon to throw in a straight line, assaulting all enemies in its path. The fighter may spend 1 Stamina as a full-round action to make a single thrown ranged attack against all enemies in the line of effect, using his Strength modifier instead of his Dexterity modifier to attack rolls, resolving all attacks in order, starting from the fighter’s space to the end of the weapon’s range increments. The fighter uses the weapon’s normal range, if any, or a default of 10 feet, whichever is higher. In either case, the weapon can only go as far as 5 range increments (for example, a shortspear can only affect enemies within 100 feet), in which case it falls to the floor in an adjacent space at the end of its trajectory. This attack ignores concealment and cover from creatures, though cover and concealment from objects and structures apply normally. A fighter must be 4th level before selecting this Combat Art.
It's too common I criticize someone's class as having too strong of a 1st level, and their response involves a rant that throws the entire multiclassing system under the bus in order to defend their design. This isn't how a game designer should think.Honest question: do you similarly feel that Paizo has thrown the entire multiclassing system under the bus, with all of the hybrid classes?
I view it as them finally admitting that the 3.0/3.5/PF multiclassing system does not work. In 3.0/3.5, they tried to patch it with prestige classes like Eldritch Knight. Paizo uses hybrid base classes instead.
Assuming you're asking this question in good faith, I do not consider the hybrid classes as a detriment to the multiclass system. And it's certainly not "throwing it under the bus" the way I described earlier -- a different matter entirely.
The hybrid classes have class features unique enough to stand on their own. Even the worst offender of "feature poaching" (the shaman) still brings something cool and interesting to the table.
Paizo never introduced hybrid classes with the mindset of replacing multiclassing. Hybrid classes are tools. Archetypes, multiclassing, variant multiciassing, and hybrid classes are all tools for creating a character concept. In fact, several of the ACG classes are popular for multiclassing with. I've seen several combinations of slayer, swashbuckler, and brawler with classes from other books.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Um, they 100% introduced hybrid classes with the idea of killing multiclassing.
In the play test you couldn't take any levels of your parent classes.
Um, they 100% introduced hybrid classes with the idea of killing multiclassing.
In the play test you couldn't take any levels of your parent classes.
That's because hybrid classes were originally considered a special type of alternate class. Even so, that's not evidence of Paizo intending to nix multiclassing.
So your argument is to basically make Fighters into Spellcasters.Maybe you could point out where in Kirthfinder Kirth gave the fighter spellcasting? I read the whole thing and I don't see any fighters casting spells. It sounds like that isn't his argument:|
You took my statement too literal. He said that Fighters should be able to contribute just as much and as well as Full Spellcasters.
Full Spellcasters have some of the most powerful and gamebreaking things published. Sno-Cone Wish Machines, Plane Shifting, etc., things that are certainly not justifiable, mechanics or otherwise, to give to Fighters as well without saying "Why aren't they Spellcasters?"
Giving Fighters more and better options is a step in the right and proper direction, and that's exactly what I'm doing with my Unchained Fighter; Combat Arts are not much different than Paladin Auras/Immunities, Barbarian Rage Powers, Ranger Favored Enemy/Terrain, etc. This is a mechanic that the Fighter lacks to stay on par with how strong (and unique) these other Martial classes are. On top of that, some of his Capstones and General Abilities just plain suck compared to the others.
Whereas giving Fighters the same exact power as the likes of Wizards and Clerics/Oracles and other Full Spellcasters is where the line needs to be drawn. I'm not interested in creating another "Fighter who is actually supposed to be more powerful than a Wizard" class like everyone else is. There's no benefit to that, nor would there be a purpose other than to demonstrate that the Fighter class can just be converted into a Full Spellcaster. That's not the point of this exercise. The point of this exercise is to provide the Fighter with unique versatility and utility that no other class can emulate. The ability to counter without requiring Combat Reflexes, the ability to rest without needing a magic item to maintain your awareness, the ability to live no matter how much hit point damage you take, are all signs and factors to how my Fighter can emulate effects that no other class can.
Here's couple of combat art ideas that might be less anime-y.
Dodging Roll – as an immediate action, the fighter can spend 1 point of stamina to add half his fighter level to a reflex saving throw. If the fighter has the Lightning Reflexes feat, he can spend an additional point to add the benefits of Evasion to the result of his save. The fighter must declare whether or not he spends an extra point before he makes his roll.
Crab Hammer – on a successful attack made with a bludgeoning melee weapon, the fighter can spend 1 point of stamina to inflict a -2 penalty to a creature’s natural armor bonus for 1 round. Consecutive hits and uses may increase this duration by 1 round, to a maximum of 5 rounds. If an enemy does not possess natural armor, they are not an eligible target for this Combat Art.
Oh and a feat idea
Well Fed (Ex)
Prerequisite: Stamina Pool Class feature.
Once a day, the fighter may consume food to restore his stamina by 1d4. This ability cannot be used to restore more than her maximum amount of stamina points. The fighter may not use this ability if she is sickened or fatigued. This ability does not work with food that’s rotten, poisoned, corrupted, or otherwise tampered with.
Hmmm, I do like the concept of these Combat Arts, but let's try this spin on it:
Hunker Down: The fighter knows to take the brunt of destructive elements head-on. When the fighter makes a Reflex Saving Throw, he may spend 1 Stamina to substitute his Dexterity bonus for his Strength bonus for his Reflex Saving Throw, 2 Stamina to add half of his fighter levels to his Saving Throw, and 3 Stamina to act as if he possesses the Evasion class feature for this Saving Throw. These costs are additive, and must be spent before the Saving Throw is made. A fighter must be 6th level before selecting this Combat Art.
Overpower: The fighter's zealous assaults create an opening in an enemy's defenses. When the fighter successfully hits an enemy, he may spend 1 Stamina for the target to suffer an additional -2 penalty to AC for 1 round. Consecutive hits and uses may increase this duration by 1 round, to a maximum of 5 rounds. Each hit causes an additional -2 penalty to AC; this penalty cannot exceed a target's Armor Bonus (with a minimum -2 penalty on consecutive hits).
Here's another one I came up with that will synergize with the feat idea you helped me create:
Bind Wound: The fighter has learned to properly bandage his injuries. The fighter adds Heal to his class skills. Once per day, the Fighter may patch himself up with a Heal check to treat Deadly Wounds over the course of 1 minute. He may spend 1 Stamina to provide an insight bonus equal to his Fighter level to the Heal check. A successful Heal check heals 1D4+1 hit points per Fighter level he possesses, with an additional +1 for every 5 points over the DC. A failed check means no result (though he may try again immediately after, as this does not count towards his use per day). The fighter can successfully use this Combat Art again after he rests for 8 hours. These hours need not be consecutive.
As for the feat, I'd rather not bog it down with mundane subjects as food. Unless it's a survival horror-type Pathfinder game, most GMs will handwave it.
It'd be easier to treat it as such:
Second Wind
Even when you are worn and winded, your resolve perseveres beyond flesh wounds.
Prerequisites: Stamina class feature
Benefit: If you are affected by an effect that restores hit points, you may reduce the healing received by 50% to restore Stamina equal to the effect's caster level or user's hit dice, whichever is higher. This restoration cannot restore Stamina higher than your maximum.
I'm not sure why rangers and two weapons became a thing, but you certainly expect them to be awesome with a bow.
I always assumed it was Drizzt, Ranger, but IIRC you can count on one hand the number of times he used a bow on one hand and have fingers left over.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Drizzt used two weapons and had an intelligent animal as a magic item, not a class ability. The rest of his abilities were mostly racial based (whatever stealth he had, etc).
Honestly, I felt he was better represented as a Fighter, considering how descriptive his training and combat technique was.
Actually, now that I think about it, I seem to recall an rpg-lite-adventure game for xbox or something that had Drizzt as an unlockable playable character. Think it was a Baldur's Gate adventure game (diablo style vs the original RPG-focused versions on PC).
They had him listed as a Fighter, or at least gave him fighter-like advancement.
Drizzt was never really treated as a Ranger in the novels. Rangers have spellcasting, and the only spells he ever used were basically his racial ones. He just had the ability to track and live out of doors.
In the NPC guides, they flat out give him weapon spec and the ability to outright kill lower level creatures on a hit. Nothing is made of his anti-giant ability (during 1E and 2E) or favored enemies (during 3E).
His training was basically drow fighter with stealth skills. That's it. He was just incredibly high level (16th or so), so he dominated the rest of whatever party he was with. Contrast Wulfgar starting at 6th level in the first novel, and Bruenor being 10th, Regis being 6th, and Cattie=Brie being 4th.
He was never an optimized character, except he was so much higher level then everyone else. That was the solution for 'drow are powerful' in FR...make them higher level then all their enemies, that explains everything.
Technically speaking, with a 19 str and 18 Con, Wulfgar at 11th level with 2 attacks from his hammer would have utterly obliterated the 1e Drizzt in 2-3 rounds. Drizzt had a 15 str and no damage bonus except weapon spec, and only got decent weapons in later novels (he was using MAYBE +1 weapons in the 1st book, and acquired a frost brand scimitar during it).
TWF didn't become an iconic part of the ranger until 2E, when it became part of the core fighting style in the PH. However, 2wf was available to anyone with high enough Dex, no training required.
In short, the gaming stats for Drizzt didn't match his deadliness in the novels unless you introduce a bunch of parry mechanics and criticals...and then take into account the fact he was 5-10 levels higher then everyone else.
==Aelryinth
Drizzt used two weapons and had an intelligent animal as a magic item, not a class ability. The rest of his abilities were mostly racial based (whatever stealth he had, etc).
Honestly, I felt he was better represented as a Fighter, considering how descriptive his training and combat technique was.Actually, now that I think about it, I seem to recall an rpg-lite-adventure game for xbox or something that had Drizzt as an unlockable playable character. Think it was a Baldur's Gate adventure game (diablo style vs the original RPG-focused versions on PC).
They had him listed as a Fighter, or at least gave him fighter-like advancement.
Demon Stone had Drizzt playable for a specific level, it's available on GOG
Drizzt was never really treated as a Ranger in the novels. Rangers have spellcasting, and the only spells he ever used were basically his racial ones. He just had the ability to track and live out of doors.
In the NPC guides, they flat out give him weapon spec and the ability to outright kill lower level creatures on a hit. Nothing is made of his anti-giant ability (during 1E and 2E) or favored enemies (during 3E).
His training was basically drow fighter with stealth skills. That's it. He was just incredibly high level (16th or so), so he dominated the rest of whatever party he was with. Contrast Wulfgar starting at 6th level in the first novel, and Bruenor being 10th, Regis being 6th, and Cattie=Brie being 4th.
He was never an optimized character, except he was so much higher level then everyone else. That was the solution for 'drow are powerful' in FR...make them higher level then all their enemies, that explains everything.
Technically speaking, with a 19 str and 18 Con, Wulfgar at 11th level with 2 attacks from his hammer would have utterly obliterated the 1e Drizzt in 2-3 rounds. Drizzt had a 15 str and no damage bonus except weapon spec, and only got decent weapons in later novels (he was using MAYBE +1 weapons in the 1st book, and acquired a frost brand scimitar during it).
TWF didn't become an iconic part of the ranger until 2E, when it became part of the core fighting style in the PH. However, 2wf was available to anyone with high enough Dex, no training required.
In short, the gaming stats for Drizzt didn't match his deadliness in the novels unless you introduce a bunch of parry mechanics and criticals...and then take into account the fact he was 5-10 levels higher then everyone else.
==Aelryinth
You're right, but I was saying, that due to his popularity and the fact that Salvatore couldn't go three pages without calling him a ranger, is why the dual wielding rules were included
Drizzt dual wields because Drow were allowed to get a 20 Dex when introduced in the 1e Unearthed Arcana boxed set, and could reach a higher level as rangers then fighters.
20 Dex let you dual wield with no penalty. So, why not?
Hells, I was in high school, and the first drow character I made...was a dual wielding ranger/m-u/druid. Because that was the power gamer. And a good year before Drizzt was born, too.
So, eh. It was a power gamer build. He just needed to give Drizzt gauntlets of ogre power, and THEN you had a powerful character. As it was, by 10th level WUlfgar would have taken over the party.
==Aelryinth
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Okay, so I obsessed with making the Fighter not suck so much that I made my own concept of an unchained fighter. To be honest though, I kind of feel like I stole some ideas from DarkSol and Lemmy, so maybe I need some pointers. I did reference both of their concepts a little for inspiration I tried to put enough of my spin to keep things original. Key word there is tried.
I tried to make techniques (i.e. fighter talents) for both combat and narrative utility. The list is still unfinished.
Good artists borrow ideas. Great artists steal them. Have no shame, sir.
Signed, an idea thief
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Check out this fighter, from Frank and K's Races of War. Notice that he gets versatility in and out of combat, battlefield control, the ability to protect allies without any kind of lame "aggro" thing, and the ability to craft magic items.
The Fighter (Hit Die: d10)
Good Saves: Fort, Ref, Will
BAB: Full, iterative attack penalty capped at -5
1st Weapons Training, Combat Focus
2nd Bonus Feat
3rd Problem Solver, Pack Mule
4th Bonus Feat
5th Logistics Mastery, Active Assault
6th Bonus Feat
7th Forge Lore, Improved Delay
8th Bonus Feat
9th Foil Action
10th Bonus Feat
11th Lunging Attacks
12th Bonus Feat
13th Array of Stunts
14th Bonus Feat
15th Greater Combat Focus
16th Bonus Feat
17th Improved Foil Action
18th Bonus Feat
19th Intense Focus, Supreme Combat Focus
20th Bonus Feat
Class Skills (Skill Points: 6 + Int modifier per level):
Acrobatics (Dex), Bluff (Cha), Climb (Str), Craft (Int), Diplomacy (Cha), Escape Artist (Dex), Handle Animal (Cha), Intimidate (Cha), Knowledge (all skills, taken individually) (Int), Perception (Wis), Profession (Wis), Ride (Dex), Sense Motive (Wis), Stealth (Dex), Survival (Wis), Swim (Str), Tumble (Dex), Use Rope (Dex).
Weapon and Armor Proficiency: Fighters are proficient with all simple and martial weapons. Fighters are proficient with light, medium, and heavy armor, and with shields and great shields.
Combat Focus (Ex): A fighter is at his best when the chips are down and everything is going to Baator in a handbasket. When the world is on fire, a fighter keeps his head better than anyone. If the fighter is in a situation that is stressful and/or dangerous enough that he would normally be unable to "take 10" on skill checks, he may spend a swift action to gain Combat Focus. A Fighter may end his Combat Focus at any time to reroll any die roll he makes, and if not used it ends on its own after a number of rounds equal to his Base Attack Bonus.
Bonus Feat: The Fighters gets a Combat feat every even-numbered class level. If Races of War (3.5e Sourcebook) material is not being used, one could substitute Fighter Bonus Feats.
Pack Mule (Ex): Fighters are used to long journeys with a heavy pack and the use of a wide variety of weaponry and equipment. A 3rd level Fighter suffers no penalties for carrying a medium load, and may retrieve stored items from his person without provoking an attack of opportunity.
Problem Solver (Ex):A Fighter of 3rd level can draw upon his intense and diverse training to respond to almost any situation. As a Swift action, he may choose any [Combat] feat he meets the prerequisites for and use it for a number of rounds equal to his base attack bonus. This ability may be used once per hour.
Logistics Mastery (Ex):Fighters are excellent and efficient logisticians. When a Fighter reaches 5th level, he gains a bonus to his Command Rating equal to one third his Fighter Level.
Active Assault (Ex):A 5th level Fighter can flawlessly place himself where he is most needed in combat. He may take a 5 foot step as an immediate action. This is in addition to any other movement he takes during his turn, even another 5 foot step.
Forge Lore (Ex): A 7th level Fighter can produce magical weapons and equipment as if he had a Caster Level equal to his ranks in Craft.
Improved Delay (Ex): A Fighter of 7th level may delay his action in one round without compromising his Initiative in the next round. In addition, a Fighter may interrupt another action with his delayed action like it was a readied action (though he does not have to announce his intentions before hand).
Foil Action (Ex): A 9th level Fighter may attempt to monkeywrench any action an opponent is taking. The Fighter may throw sand into a beholder's eye, bat aside a key spell component, or strike a weapon hand with a thrown object, but the result is the same: the opponent's action is wasted, and any spell slots, limited ability uses, or the like used to power it are expended. A Fighter must be within 30 feet of his opponent to use this ability, and must hit with a touch attack or ranged touch attack. Using Foil Action is an Immediate action. A Fighter may not wait until an action is partially completed before deciding to attempt to foil the action, but must instead attempt to foil an action as it is declared. Note that this means that a Fighter may not foil a Full Attack (because it is not declared until after it has already begun), nor may he foil a move or charge action that began out of range.
At 17th level, Foil Action may be used at up to 60 feet.
Lunging Attacks (Ex): The battlefield is an extremely dangerous place, and 11th level Fighters are expected to hold off Elder Elementals, Hezrous, and Hamatulas. Fighters of this level may add 5 feet to the reach of any of their weapons
Array of Stunts (Ex): A 13th level Fighter may take one extra Immediate Action between his turns without sacrificing a Swift action during his next turn.
Greater Combat Focus (Ex): At 15th level, a Fighter may voluntarily expend his Combat Focus as a non-action to suppress any status effect or ongoing spell effect on himself for his Base Attack Bonus in rounds.
Intense Focus (Ex): A 19th level Fighter may take an extra Swift Action each round (in addition to the extra Immediate Action he can take from Array of Stunts).
Supreme Combat Focus (Ex): A 19th level Fighter may expend his Combat Focus as a non-action to take 20 on any die roll. He must elect to use Supreme Combat Focus before rolling the die.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Cool. I've added more techniques to the list so please read and tell me what you guys think.
Anyways, my thoughts on the unchained fighter are that he must have versatility and staying power. I believe the fighter should start out as an above average specimen at first level but grows to increasingly super human the closer he gets to epic level. I also wanted to make it so the unchained fighter flexible. If you choose to take different type of Combat Training to mix and match, that should be as equally a valid choice as sticking to one type throughout.
With techniques, I wanted them to be themed around conscious skills and honed instincts. I carefully avoided any words that invoke the image of a berserker (ironic considering who I chose for the picture). Yes some of them were "poached" from the chained fighter archetypes so to speak, but there was precedent for that in the Unchained source book. The Unchained Monk allows you to add Ki Powers from the Qi Gong Monk list.
On your table of fighter abilities, remove all mention of powers that simply improve by level. It's like saying "FIreball 5d6, Fireball 6d6, Fireball 7d6".
I.e. things that are supposed to scale by level are NOT class features, they scale by level. Only if something new is given out (full speed in heavy armor), should mention of a class feature be noted.
This means delete all "Bravery +2 to +5" mentions, and simply mention it scales by level. Delete Weapon Training and armor training mentions beyond the first one unless they actually grant more then just another numeric bonus improvement (i.e. Armor training 3 and 4)
Put all Technique mentions into a separate list, just like you would put spellcaster spell progression. Mention it only the first level, and that he gains one every other level.
You will then notice you've a LOT of spaces that need filling up. FILL THEM UP. You've got room now for true versatility, leadership, saves, skills, movement and so forth options, now that you've removed the obstacles preventing you from seeing what the class automatically gets.
I saw no class features or techniques with recovery options, or any form of healing. The only immunity he gets is to fear, and at 19th? WTF? That's a level 2 immunity. The morale bonus is nice, but that's like a level 6-8 thing.
Fer Chrissake, just take the DR 5/- from the armor capstone and spread it out over armor training, please. I don't know why people think that should be a capstone ability.
==Aelryinth
The criticism is a bit excessive, especially when you consider how other similar classes from Paizo are designed.
The Ranger, one of the more standardized martial classes, says when you get Favored Enemies, Terrain, Combat Style Feats, etc. every time they increase, or grant a new option. This is reflected in classes like the Slayer with their Talents, Barbarians with their Rage Powers, Paladins with their Smite Evil uses/day, etc.
And these classes are the epitomy of the Martials, because they are: Full BAB. Decent to powerful saving throws. Intrinsic class features. Efficient. Synergistic. You name a positive thing, chances are those classes possess it.
The funny thing is? These same classes that, according to you, have all of these "blank spaces", are idealisms that the Fighter and Rogue classes should emulate, because what they are now is silly.
You might as well banish all martials if the concept of leveling up means you get something new every time. Improvements to existing options aren't as bad as you make it out to be; the Spells class feature is perhaps the most guilty culprit of an existing option being an improvement every time you level, without having to invest into it to make it extremely useful, and is perhaps the entire foundation for why Magic is so damn powerful, because it scales automatically, and it's an option that improves every single level you have with it.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I agree with the notion that you should get something new instead of just a numerical increase far more often than not.
When all you get is a "now your +2 becomes a +3!", leveling up becomes boring and the class ends up underpowered. If you don't want to give something every level, then at very f&#$ing least, make sure the "nothing but a +1" levels coincide with the levels where the character gets a feat (i.e.: odd levels).
Clerics are incredibly boring to plan and build because they don't get anything half their levels. And they are full casters! Martial classes don't even get spell slots to fill with new abilities.
I agree with the notion that you should get something new instead of just a numerical increase far more often than not.
When all you get is a "now your +2 becomes a +3!", leveling up becomes boring and the class ends up underpowered. If you don't want to give something every level, then at very f+~!ing least, make sure the "nothing but a +1" levels coincide with the levels where the character gets a feat (i.e.: odd levels).
Clerics are incredibly boring to plan and build because they don't get anything half their levels. And they are full casters! Martial classes don't even get spell slots to fill with new abilities.
Then that's something that needs to be addressed with how Paizo designs classes. Should numerical value increases really be relevant to a class feature? The counter argument to that would be a class feature that says "I have a +500 to hit when I'm smoking the ganja."
Numerical Values are relevant to a class feature. Look at Smite Evil and Lay On Hand uses/day, those aren't really cool or interesting, but the base mechanic is. Look at Rage Powers with 1/Rage or 1/Round abilities, look at Favored Enemy and Terrain, look at Sneak Attack. These are features that are determined by numerical values, and it is because of these values increasing, that these classes remain effective in combat.
This is the same argument behind "Courageous Property wasn't really good for Barbarians anyway," a +1-+3 bonus to Strength and Constitution and Will Saves is a nice boost, and any sane person would deny not wanting to make use of it. Numerical Values matter just as much as the class feature they're a part of.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Then that's something that needs to be addressed with how Paizo designs classes. Should numerical value increases really be relevant to a class feature? The counter argument to that would be a class feature that says "I have a +500 to hit when I'm smoking the ganja."
Numerical Values are relevant to a class feature. Look at Smite Evil and Lay On Hand uses/day, those aren't really cool or interesting, but the base mechanic is. Look at Rage Powers with 1/Rage or 1/Round abilities, look at Favored Enemy and Terrain, look at Sneak Attack. These are features that are determined by numerical values, and it is because of these values increasing, that these classes remain effective in combat.
This is the same argument behind "Courageous Property wasn't really good for Barbarians anyway," a +1-+3 bonus to Strength and Constitution and Will Saves is a nice boost, and any sane person would deny not wanting to make use of it. Numerical Values matter just as much as the class feature they're a part of.
It's not that numerical bonuses aren't useful, it's only that A- They are boring. B- They are overvalued in class design.
Now, getting something every level doesn't mean getting something major every level. Something minor, but useful and/or fun already goes a long way to make the player enjoy leveling up .
Notice that while simply getting another use of Smite Evil is boring, more often than not, that additional use comes coupled with something more interesting (usually a new spell level, which opens a whole new fan of possibilities).
Only at 16th and 19th level you don't get anything else... And at very least, at 16th level you get your 4th iterative attack and at 19th you get a new feat . None of those are anything to write home about, but they at least are something.
That mount is a 1 HD fodder-cannon without class progression...
But an animal companion can't have 1 HD...
That mount is a 1 HD fodder-cannon without class progression...But an animal companion can't have 1 HD...
I believe you got the point I was making.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
The criticism is a bit excessive, especially when you consider how other similar classes from Paizo are designed.
The Ranger, one of the more standardized martial classes, says when you get Favored Enemies, Terrain, Combat Style Feats, etc. every time they increase, or grant a new option. This is reflected in classes like the Slayer with their Talents, Barbarians with their Rage Powers, Paladins with their Smite Evil uses/day, etc.
And these classes are the epitomy of the Martials, because they are: Full BAB. Decent to powerful saving throws. Intrinsic class features. Efficient. Synergistic. You name a positive thing, chances are those classes possess it.
The funny thing is? These same classes that, according to you, have all of these "blank spaces", are idealisms that the Fighter and Rogue classes should emulate, because what they are now is silly.
You might as well banish all martials if the concept of leveling up means you get something new every time. Improvements to existing options aren't as bad as you make it out to be; the Spells class feature is perhaps the most guilty culprit of an existing option being an improvement every time you level, without having to invest into it to make it extremely useful, and is perhaps the entire foundation for why Magic is so damn powerful, because it scales automatically, and it's an option that improves every single level you have with it.
Rangers don't get an improvement to Favored Enemy/Terrain - they get a new terrain or enemy, and ALLOCATE where that bonus goes.
Fighters can get a secondary group, but the bonus just goes up lockstep, and the new group is basically unimportant.
The 3rd and 4th are basically beyond mentioning.
Why don't they have the boost for Guide or ANimal Companion on the main table? Because it just elevates by level.
Why aren't spells on the main table? Because seeing the benefits of spells and as they level would make it obvious their benefits.
Why isn't the ability to use spell trigger devices spelled out as a benefit? It's huge, and it applies at level 1. It's actually an invisible feat all by itself.
Now Smites/day, correct, might not be spelled out. However, Smites elevate in TH/DMG and in frequency! Huge, huge. They are effectively just like spells. feats tend to be fixed benefits. Effectively, you can boost Smites with levels, with stats, and with feats...incredibly powerful. So each smite being called out is actually QUITE appropriate, given how powerful each is. In essence, each Smite is being treated like a spell, and given proper attention for its power.
And it's odd that Animal Companion/Mount isn't featured as a bonus on the main paladin schema, but weapon bond IS...when they are tradeoffs of the same power, no?
Rage Powers are much stronger then feats, scaling and powerful. They are being treated much like spells, too. Just like Smites, they can be raised by Stats, by Feats, and by levels...so they are essentially variant spells, not static things like feats are!
You'll find that rangers, paladins and barbs have far fewer 'empty spaces' then fighters do, simply because of all the 'spell table' things that are happening in addition as they level.
Fighters don't have ANY of that. Very few feats scale much, and certainly don't scale off of stats, level and other feats. So if rangers and paladins get to move their spellcasting to the side, fighters should as well, and stop treating '+1's'' as viable class features to an existing mechanic. That's like calling out every class level of a spellcaster as 'caster level +1"...inane.
When you start presenting fighter tables like you would a spellcaster's tables, you start seeing how far behind they really are.
==Aelryinth
I agree with the notion that you should get something new instead of just a numerical increase far more often than not.
When all you get is a "now your +2 becomes a +3!", leveling up becomes boring and the class ends up underpowered. If you don't want to give something every level, then at very f+~!ing least, make sure the "nothing but a +1" levels coincide with the levels where the character gets a feat (i.e.: odd levels).
Clerics are incredibly boring to plan and build because they don't get anything half their levels. And they are full casters! Martial classes don't even get spell slots to fill with new abilities.
Then that's something that needs to be addressed with how Paizo designs classes. Should numerical value increases really be relevant to a class feature? The counter argument to that would be a class feature that says "I have a +500 to hit when I'm smoking the ganja."
Numerical Values are relevant to a class feature. Look at Smite Evil and Lay On Hand uses/day, those aren't really cool or interesting, but the base mechanic is. Look at Rage Powers with 1/Rage or 1/Round abilities, look at Favored Enemy and Terrain, look at Sneak Attack. These are features that are determined by numerical values, and it is because of these values increasing, that these classes remain effective in combat.
This is the same argument behind "Courageous Property wasn't really good for Barbarians anyway," a +1-+3 bonus to Strength and Constitution and Will Saves is a nice boost, and any sane person would deny not wanting to make use of it. Numerical Values matter just as much as the class feature they're a part of.
It is interesting that you point out Rage Powers, Smite, and Favored Enemy/Terrain.
These all elevate by levels. Since they are affected by Stats, they also elevate by stats, AND by levels. And they all have feats which give you more of them, or additional mechanics tied to them, so they are all modified by stats.
In short, these abilities are just like having more spells. Smite Evil especially, but Rage Powers are basically Su and even SP abilities operating off a mana pool. They are much stronger then grit or panache abilities, in addition.
You can't say the same with Weapon and Armor Training, which, at least until the weapon master book, had NOTHING that worked off of them.
Saying Armor and Weapon training improving by +1 means you should be screaming out every caster level increase for Rangers and Paladins is a Class feature. Feh.
==Aelryinth
If a +1 or a +2 to something is so damn insignificant, then why bother having Enhancement Bonuses on weapons or armor? Why bother with getting increased statistics or levels, if all they are is a damn number on a sheet, and not an option that you can actually use for the game? Hell, why even use numbers for this game in the first place if increasing or decreasing a given numerical value is apparently such a misguided concept for a class feature?
It's stuff like this that invalidates the purpose of Martials, because they are essentially a numbers game. If a numbers game is a futile effort, then why even have Martials in the game, if the increase or decrease of numbers apparently has no purpose?
Good job, you've practically killed the game by saying the scaling of numbers is absolutely worthless.
Good job, you've practically killed the game by saying the scaling of numbers is absolutely worthless.
Considering that most of the time numbers just allow you to stay at the same level as monsters of your ECL ? Yes, they are "worthless" and don't bring much to the table. But without them you won't be able to do anything effectively.
If +1 to STR or some other ability score really changed how character can act in a game world it would have been meaningful bonus but right now it is just about not getting left behind.
For example you can look at Mutants and Masterminds where you can throw enemies for hundreds of meters if your strength is high enough.
So then why bother implementing levels and improvements if the only reason to increase statistics is just because others do to? Screw having levels 2-20. In fact, just screw having levels in general. Pick a class, get the features, and play a numberless game.
I better see Paizo make a Pathfinder for Dummies optional rule now.
So then why bother implementing levels and improvements if the only reason to increase statistics is just because others do to? Screw having levels 2-20. In fact, just screw having levels in general. Pick a class, get the features, and play a numberless game.
I better see Paizo make a Pathfinder for Dummies optional rule now.
Possible, but as with any similar attempt will need complete overhaul of the base system. Too much work.
Though what I'm trying to say is that number creep should never be a class feature in itself unless such things have some other interesting side effects - and in Pathfinder they rarely have them without a ton of feats.
If everything that +1 per level (or item) achieves is keeping parity with opponents than this +1 should be a part of general level progression and not a "class feature".