| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
All this talk of martials and new martial stuff inspired me to build a bunch of fighters at all levels using unchained automatic bonus progression.
So lets see what I get:
Level 1 Fighter
Level 4 Fighter
Level 8 Fighter
Level 12 Fighter
Level 16 Fighter
Level 20 Fighter
Folder in case other links are bad
OK so unchained automatic bonus progression slows down how fast I would purchase big 6 items if I was optimizing WBL, but I feel the progression more falls in line with what campaigns give you.
It seems like your ranged options fall off very fast without weapon training to boost the to-hit.
I really liked filling out your slots with cool items rather than big 6.
I could see playing this fighter in a more casual groups, but if my character is really expected to contribute, all this just doesn't compare to most caster builds I could throw together in the fraction of the time.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I agree that it doesn't match casters...but if you're trying for that, why are you using Fighter?
Slayers and Barbarians are both better options. I mean, Fighter isn't nearly as bad as it once was with the advent of Advanced Weapon Training...but it's still definitely an uphill battle to make it work right.
If 4 level casters count, pretty much all of them are better options, too.
I have a soft spot for fighters.
Edit: Though I really doubt that a slayer or ubarbar is much or any better.
Glorious -> Marvelous/Magnificent
Glorious -> Marvelous/Magnificent
This is an update to my favorite played character of all time. He had to respec to a better class after level 10 and that always bugged me.
Edit: also alliteration can suck it.
Glorious -> Marvelous/MagnificentThis is an update to my favorite played character of all time. He had to respec to a better class after level 10 and that always bugged me.
Edit: also alliteration can suck it.
Get on ma lvl bro!
But yeah, just had to comment; that was all
|
|
I have a soft spot for fighters.
Edit: Though I really doubt that a slayer or ubarbar is much or any better.
Well, Slayer has 6 skills per level out of the box without needing the investment in AWT. And then gets bonuses to a lot of them...making it one of the best skill characters in the game, actually (it's almost up there with Investigators). That plus a somewhat better offense (everything that build has except Gloves of Dueling, which it replaces with Lenses of the Predator's Gaze and Sneak Attack too), an equal number of Feats up through 12th level, and a number of ancillary benefits like Hide In Plain Sight and Evasion.
It does give up some AC, and likely some Will Save for Reflex Save, but it's much better at, y'know, non-combat stuff, while being solid in combat.
Alternatively, he could give a bit of skill stuff and a couple of Feats early on and go Vanguard for huge Initiative bonuses and some pretty decent party-buffing stuff against specific targets. That'd require some more Int, but it'd work well to grant some more good options if done properly.
And Barbarian has all sorts of options. Even an Unchained Barbarian going without Spell sunder can have Pounce and Saves higher than a Paladin. Plus some other useful tricks like sky-high DR.
Do it then
I think a Mutation Warrior with Barbarian VMC could be hella fun. In class flight, hulking out with mutagen and rage...
I have a soft spot for fighters.
Edit: Though I really doubt that a slayer or ubarbar is much or any better.
Well, Slayer has 6 skills per level out of the box without needing the investment in AWT. And then gets bonuses to a lot of them...making it one of the best skill characters in the game, actually (it's almost up there with Investigators). That plus a somewhat better offense (everything that build has except Gloves of Dueling, which it replaces with Lenses of the Predator's Gaze and Sneak Attack too), an equal number of Feats up through 12th level, and a number of ancillary benefits like Hide In Plain Sight and Evasion.
But Lenses are a limited item (10/day): Gloves are continuous.
Granted you should not need more than 10 rounds, but still.
True enough. I never said the substitution was perfect. Just close enough to make them very viable in combat and much more interesting and useful in other ways.But Lenses are a limited item (10/day): Gloves are continuous.
Granted you should not need more than 10 rounds, but still.
Demonstrate that. I got 5 levels you can compare your character too.
|
|
Demonstrate that. I got 5 levels you can compare your character too.
I specifically asked you for more details on what you want. I can't do a build that you'll think is better until I know what you feel the shortfalls of your current build are.
So what do you want that the current build doesn't deliver?
Demonstrate that. I got 5 levels you can compare your character too.I specifically asked you for more details on what you want. I can't do a build that you'll think is better until I know what you feel the shortfalls of your current build are.
So what do you want that the current build doesn't deliver?
I want to see one of two builds:
1. Parody+, mimic what this build can do but better with another class. Replace this like you could an unchained rogue with bard or inquisitor or investigator. Edit: but you know slayer or ubarbar like you claimed is better.
2. Some as remotely useful as a summon focused caster. The shortfalls I see of this build are general caster v martial problems. My casual full caster builds are just worth so much more to the party than optimized Fighter, rogue, or monk builds.
|
|
I want to see one of two builds:
1. Parody+, mimic what this build can do but better with another class. Replace this like you could an unchained rogue with bard or inquisitor or investigator.
I'll have something for you tomorrow-ish. I'm running a game tonight and sorta lack the time.
2. Some as remotely useful as a summon focused caster. The shortfalls I see of this build are general caster v martial problems. My casual full caster builds are just worth so much more to the party than optimized Fighter, rogue, or monk builds.
Well, see, that's like the least specific request in the history of requests. I mean 'valuable to the party'? I can manage that by my definitions, but I have no idea what yours are and it really varies from person to person.
I mean, I can make a build that's good at skills, buffing, and UMD, doesn't eat any more party healing than a Wizard or other non-healer, and so on...and it still won't actually be as versatile as a full caster with summons because nothing is. Nor will they have the raw power of a full caster, because nothing does...
So what are you looking for exactly in terms of 'what's valuable to the party'?
Also, how valuable a particular character is really depends on party composition. If you lack a Cleric or other healer, nothing is as valuable as getting one. If your party is a Cleric, Druid, and Oracle...that's a much lower priority. So what party do you want to be more valuable in?
I don't expect 2 to be doable. Most 6th casting classes fail let alone mundanes.
|
|
I don't expect 2 to be doable. Most 6th casting classes fail let alone mundanes.
Well, it fails on being 'as versatile' not on being useful. A lot of party's benefit more from a martial than yet another full caster. So what does everyone else in your group play that you feel obligated to do a full caster?
I don't expect 2 to be doable. Most 6th casting classes fail let alone mundanes.Well, it fails on being 'as versatile' not on being useful. A lot of party's benefit more from a martial than yet another full caster. So what does everyone else in your group play that you feel obligated to do a full caster?
The question is more "as useful" not is it useful. Even a crb rogue is useful. More useful than no character. The group comp is irrelevant. The campaign itself is hard, thus I brought a fullcaster.
Look you can try to make the parody+ build. My friends and I will look at it and decide if it measures up. You would have to really blow this fighter out of the water to make a slayer or ubarbar that's more desired than a fullcaster
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The question is more "as useful" not is it useful. Even a crb rogue is useful. More useful than no character. The group comp is irrelevant. The campaign itself is hard, thus I brought a fullcaster.
Usefulness depends on context.
For example, utility spells are often not useful if duplicated, so if you have a Wizard and a Cleric, additional utility spells are largely pointless in many cases.
On the other hand, if there are a lot of group buffs getting thrown out (say you've got a Bard, or Evangelist Cleric of Iomedae, or whatever), then the martial chassis suddenly becomes notably more valuable since them having buff spells of their own is superfluous.
So, if you have an Evangelist Cleric, Wizard, and Master Summoner as the three existing characters in a party a Slayer (or even Fighter) with skills and ability to personally inflict large quantities of raw damage might be significantly more valuable than yet another full caster duplicating the existing players abilities and efforts.
Look you can try to make the parody+ build. My friends and I will look at it and decide if it measures up. You would have to really blow this fighter out of the water to make a slayer or ubarbar that's more desired than a fullcaster
Again, if you lack full casters, nothing in the world is better. If you have plenty of them...that's another matter.
So, if you have an Evangelist Cleric, Wizard, and Master Summoner as the three existing characters in a party a Slayer (or even Fighter) with skills and ability to personally inflict large quantities of raw damage might be significantly more valuable than yet another full caster duplicating the existing players abilities and efforts.
Strongly disagree, another Master summoner is the better contributor and that isn't even a fullcaster in the truest sense of the word. The master summoner already in the group handles first round meat walling. No need for martials in that group.
When it comes to full caster vs not a full caster. It really doesn't matter what the group comp is, another full caster is the better addition. All that changes is what full caster you bring.
|
|
Strongly disagree, another Master summoner is the better contributor and that isn't even a fullcaster in the truest sense of the word. The master summoner already in the group handles first round meat walling. No need for martials in that group.
Even buffed, Summons never, and I mean never, get to the point of frightening offense a full BAB class gets to with the same buffs.
The highest un-buffed attack a summon has at 10th level is +15 or so (before Power Attack, and including Augment Summoning). At the same level, a Slayer has something on the order of +22. Assuming Vanguard, that can be +26 with flanking (due to Outflank), and he can give all the summons a +6 additional that no full caster can duplicate. That's...quite a bit better than a couple more minions.
When it comes to full caster vs not a full caster. It really doesn't matter what the group comp is, another full caster is the better addition. All that changes is what full caster you bring.
If you include Wild Shaping Druids, this is probably technically true. But in the party above, a full martial will do about as well as the Druid. A Paladin or Barbarian will likely do better.
And being as valuable as a full caster is all you wanted, right?
YOu are forgetting that there are summons that can pounce, and that get a LOT of attacks, and that can smite.
When you start adding them all up, it becomes quite impressive. Especially since multiple natural attacks are often much better then iteratives.
Seriously, that's how the Eidolon beats fighters of the same level. Great stats, build them with multiple attacks, and -2/-5 on all 5 attacks is not the same as +0/-5/-10.
Add to the fact you don't have to HEAL a summons, you can just let it go away, and so you don't have to spend time and energy getting rid of negative conditions, etc, and yeah, summons can be REMARKABLY effective.
==Aelryinth
|
|
I'm not saying summons aren't effective. They are. I'm saying that, if you already have a Master Summoner...maybe you're better off with someone with a slightly more hefty offense than another Master Summoner.
Summons are great, but they aren't exactly a perfect replacement for a dedicated PC melee combatant (who can easily have Smite or Pounce as well).
Only paladins will have the smite.
Basically only barbs will have the pounce, and at higher level.
Fighters, no...unless you want a wimpy version of it from a specific archetype.
Any celestial animal can get smite evil, and any feline summons, one of the most popular, can get pounce (and potentially 5 attacks).
so, ehhhh. Not having to heal them afterwards is just a bonus.
Oh, and the reason why archers are strong is because they get to full attack. Full Stop. An archer can get a full attack off any round he isn't meleed. That's the numerical same thing as a fighter pouncing on demand, and why archers rock.
==Aelryinth
Best 4th man for that Party is a Hunter with a Big Cat animal companions.
Harder to kill than the Paladin, more damage than the Barbarian, and a very awesome supportive spell list.
|
|
Best 4th man for that Party is a Hunter with a Big Cat animal companions.
Harder to kill than the Paladin, more damage than the Barbarian, and a very awesome supportive spell list.
Very possibly, Hunters are amazing. But the argument was whether a martial could be better than a Full Caster...and that seems a situation where one could. Especially an archer, actually.
Nothing is quite as amazing at evaporating enemies as an Archer true.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
We're veering too far into caster v martial when I'm more interested in martial v martial. Let's see what a Fighter is supposed to do compared with what they can do.
"Some take up arms for glory, wealth, or revenge. Others do battle to prove themselves, to protect others, or because they know nothing else. Still others learn the ways of weaponcraft to hone their bodies in battle and prove their mettle in the forge of war." Oh that's easy. Anyone can do this.
"Lords of the battlefield, fighters are a disparate lot, training with many weapons or just one, perfecting the uses of armor, learning the fighting techniques of exotic masters, and studying the art of combat, all to shape themselves into living weapons." OK every fighter delivers on that concept.
"Far more than mere thugs, these skilled warriors reveal the true deadliness of their weapons," OK weapon training.
"turning hunks of metal into arms capable of taming kingdoms, slaughtering monsters, and rousing the hearts of armies." I think advance weapon training and the social skills it provides helps with this.
"Soldiers, knights, hunters, and artists of war, fighters are unparalleled champions, and woe to those who dare stand against them." Well yes standing against a fighter is a bad idea, most successful foes run around casting spells.
"Role: Fighters excel at combat—defeating their enemies," Depends what excel means...
"controlling the flow of battle," Great Cleave, Lunge, Dazing Assault, and Pin down is a combination of hard and soft CC that is fairly effective.
"and surviving such sorties themselves." Armed Bravery, Fighter's Reflexes, Toughness, Armor Training, Defensive weapon training, Weapon sacrifice. Yeah decent stuff for this.
"While their specific weapons and methods grant them a wide variety of tactics, few can match fighters for sheer battle prowess." Oh now here is the point of contention. Can only few match Fighter Battle prowess?
So for the most part the fighter now delivers on what it promises. When it comes to martial v martial that should be good enough.
|
|
So, here's the basic build:
Str 18 Dex 14 Con 14 Int 12 Wis 12 Cha 7
Traits: Student of Philosophy, Affable,
Favored Class bonuses added to 1/6 of a Slayer Talent starting at 2nd level. HP before that (and at 20th).
Skills:
Bluff
Diplomacy
Intimidate
Knowledge (Local)
Perception
Sense Motive
Stealth
Survival
With headband equivalent, eventually Fly and two other skills as well (Ride and Climb if you really want).
By high levels, he'll have a base of +5 to almost all of them, and thus (stats aside) still be way better than the Fighter at all of them.
Feats:
1: Toughness, Intimidating Prowess
2: Power attack (Combat style)
3: Combat Reflexes
4: Weapon Focus
5: Iron Will
6: Cleave (Combat Style)
7: Lunge (Combat Trick), Blind Fight,
8: Terrain Mastery (whichever version you spend the most time in)
9: Martial Focus (Heavy Blades)
10: Great Cleave (Combat Style)
11: Cut From The Air
12: Smash From The Air (Feat)
13: Dazing Assault, Evasion
14: Opportunist
15: Heavy Armor Proficiency
16: Slayer Camouflage
17: Antagonize
18: Assassinate
19: Improved Iron Will, Hunter's Surprise
20: Woodland Stride
Items more or less as you list save having Lenses of the Predator's Gaze rather than Gloves of Dueling.
Assuming the same stat-ups as you level. AC is a bit lower (until Mithral Full Plate kicks in at high levels), but Studied Target applies to all weapons, so his ranged options are better, the skills are quite a bit better IMO, and it has several tricks that the Fighter version just doesn't. Great Cleave takes a while to kick in, and Pin Down isn't an option...but Sneak Attack is and adds very respectable damage when it kicks in. He also gets Hide In Plain Sight, Evasion, an extra attack a turn from Opportunist and several other bonuses at high levels.
At low levels, the main bonus is the skills, which are flatly better, since he can use Studied Target for skill bonuses, and has more per level starting at 1st. This only gets better as he goes up in level, too. They're a superb tracker, too, which is nice I suppose.
At any particular level above 5th or so, its offense is probably a bit less good than the Fighter's by a very little when not flanking, and better when flanking. Defensively, it's a bit worse all the way up due to lack of heavy armor and armor training, but I think the skill advantages make up for that, and they eventually get Mithral Full Plate and do fine. They could grab UMD and get better AC with a Wand of Shield, too, if that's available...and by level 8 at that. He does have a few less HP no matter what, but only a few.
It's maybe not quite as good a build in combat, but that's debatable, and it's much better outside it.
I think level 12 would be a good place to stat this slayer up. I want to see how the numbers really breakdown without having to build the character myself.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Okay, 12th level version:
Strength: 25 LG Human Fighter level 12
Dexterity: 14 HP: 113 ||4+ lvl*10(6+Feat+Con+1Fav)
Constitution: 14 Damage: 0
Intelligence: 16
Wisdom: 12 Movement: 30ft
Charisma: 7 Initiative: +2
Passive Defense
Fort: +13 || 8 + 2 Con + 3 Res
Ref: +13 || 8 + 2 Dex + 3 Res
Will: +10 || 4 + 1 Wis + 3 Res + 2 Feat
AC: 23/27 || 10 + 8 Armor + 2 Dex + 1 Nat + 2 Def + 0/4 Shield
CMD: 33 || 10 + 12 BAB + 2 Dex + 7 Str + 2 Def
Offense
BAB: +12 CMB: +21/25 || 12 BAB + 7 Str + 2 Enh + 3 Studied Target +1 Weapon Focus (those last two are conditional)
Weapons: Great Cleave, Lunge
Greatsword +25 2d6+16 19-20 x2
PA +21 2d6+28 19-20 x2
Longbow +18 1d8+10 100ft x3
Reactions: Smash from the Air
Powers:
Haste 10/10 rounds, Lenses of the Predator's Gaze 10/10 round
Skills: Ranks lvl*5(6+int+human)
Intimidate 20 || 3 + 12 Rank -2 Cha + 7 Str
Perception 16 || 3 + 12 Rank + 1 Wis
Climb 6 || 0 + 0 Rank + 7 Str - 1 Armor
Swim 6 || 0 + 0 Rank + 7 Str - 1 Armor
Survival 16 || 3 + 12 Rank + 1 Wis
Diplomacy 10/15 || 0 + 12 Rank - 2 Cha/+ 3 Int
Bluff 13/18 || 3 + 12 Rank - 2 Cha/+ 3 Int
Ride 16 || 3 + 12 Rank + 2 Dex - 1 Armor
Local 18 || 3 + 12 Rank + 3 Int
Sense Motive 16 || 3 + 12 Rank + 1 Wis
Stealth 16 || 3 + 12 Rank + 2 Dex -1 Armor
Use Magic Device 15 || 0 + 12 Rank + 3 Int
+3 to almost all when using Studied Target (so basically always for social skills...+16/21 on Bluff, for example), +6 more to tracking with Survival.
Class Features: Studied Target +3 (Swift Action, 3 Targets), Sneak Attack +4d6, Swift Tracker, Terrain Mastery (One of your choice...yet more skill bonuses when it applies),
Feats:
Toughness, Intimidating Prowess, Combat Reflexes, Power Attack, Cleave, Great Cleave, Lunge, Iron Will, Blind-Fight, Cut from the Air, Smash from the Air, Weapon Focus, Martial Focus (Heavy Blades),
Equipment: 100g - misc (Cost 53.9k)
Adamantine Greatsword, Mithral Breastplate (+6, +5dex, -1), MW Composite(7) Longbow, arrows(60), Traveler's Outfit,
Roc Mount(Combat Trained)
Ring(1):
Ring(2):
Belt:
Body:
Chest:
Eyes: Lenses of the Predator's Gaze
Feet: Boots of Speed
Hands:
Headband:
Neck: Everwake Amulet
Shoulders:
Wrists:
Slotless:
Backpack
Bedroll
Flint and Steel
Grappling Hook
50ft Hemp Rope
10 Torches
5 Wetstone
10 days trail rations
Belt Pouch
Waterskin
Wand of shield (50 charges)
Wand of enlarge person (50 charges)
Automatic Bonus Progression
Resistance +3, Armor attunement +2, Mithral Breastplate, weapon attunement +2 Adamantine Greatsword, Deflection +2, Mental prowess +4 (Int), Physical prowess +4 (str), toughening +1
Traits are Student of Philosophy and Pragmatic Activator.
The attack routine above doesn't count the Lenses. So +1 attack and damage there. They also don't count Enlarge Person.
If you could put that in a Google doc,my friends could read it easier. I can parse it just fine.
In
"BAB: +12 CMB: +25 || 12 BAB + 7 Str + 2 Enh + 4 WT "
What does WT stand for?
Also can I get a breakdown for "Greatsword +25 2d6+16 19-20 x2 " showing where the +atk and +dmg come from?
I do not know what martial focus is, I'll just assume your use of it is legit.
Fighter has greater, health, AC, and saves. Yes you do have a higher reflex saves, but at the cost of lower will. I value will as higher priority than ref. You have a 20% greater chance to take half damage. It helps compensate for lower health. Your wand of shield last one minute, that is basically a combat buff which would be a waste of actions (and would fail a good chunk of the time). Your AC is worse except for situational ambushes. Raw survival power goes to the fighter.
Slayer has barely inferior damage. This goes up when sneak attack works. Your bow damage is much stronger. Raw offense goes to slayer.
When it comes to CC the fighter has pindown and better to-hit against enemies not marked. In Soft CC the fighter has the edge, but neither is doing a great job at CC.
Skills: Slayer has worse intimidation. Perception is equal (Slayer gets a bonus on already seen targets), Slayer has worse climb, Slayer has better swim, Slayer has better survival, Fighter has better diplomacy, Slayer has better bluff, Slayer has better ride, Fighter has better engineering, Fighter has better dungeoneering.
Slayer non-parady bonus includes: Sense motive, local, Stealth, and Use magic device.
I would call the slayer skills stronger, but they failed to provide parody+.
Conclusion: Slayer to fighter
Defense: -
Offense: +
Utility: +
Provide parody or better ability?
Defense: No
Offense: Yes
Utility: No
Your slayer has to play very differently to get the most out of his utility. Kick-in-the-door Fighter-man, he is not. And if he played that way he would have worse utility.
|
|
I do not know what martial focus is, I'll just assume your use of it is legit.
Fighter has greater, health, AC, and saves. Yes you do have a higher reflex saves, but at the cost of lower will. I value will as higher priority than ref. You have a 20% greater chance to take half damage. It helps compensate for lower health. Your wand of shield last one minute, that is basically a combat buff which would be a waste of actions (and would fail a good chunk of the time). Your AC is worse except for situational ambushes. Raw survival power goes to the fighter.
I freely admitted this, actually. Though they get Evasion next level, which is helpful. And ambushes stop being nearly as situational when you have maxed out Stealth. this guy can sneak ahead, scout, put up shield, then charge in with the rest of the PCs.
Slayer has barely inferior damage. This goes up when sneak attack works. Your bow damage is much stronger. Raw offense goes to slayer.
Indeed.
Though, actually, his damage is identical in melee. Not counting sneak attack. I had it listed as a point less, but that was an error.
When it comes to CC the fighter has pindown and better to-hit against enemies not marked. In Soft CC the fighter has the edge, but neither is doing a great job at CC.
'Unmarked' opponents almost might as well not exist. He can study 3 foes a round as a Swift Action and has no other uses for Swift Actions.
Skills: Slayer has worse intimidation. Perception is equal (Slayer gets a bonus on already seen targets), Slayer has worse climb, Slayer has better swim, Slayer has better survival, Fighter has better diplomacy, Slayer has better bluff, Slayer has better ride, Fighter has better engineering, Fighter has better dungeoneering.
Uh...the Slayer is better at Diplomacy and Intimidate. Over 90% of the time. Because of Studied Target giving a +3 all the time in social situations. I specifically noted this below skills. It's important. Have a look at what Studied Target does, it's skill effects are what make this build better at skills. and they do.
Engineering, meanwhile, is basically a worthless skill barring some very specific builds, and you could get Dungeoneering instead of Local (or instead of another skill) if you wanted pretty readily.
Slayer non-parady bonus includes: Sense motive, local, Stealth, and Use magic device.
I would call the slayer skills stronger, but they failed to provide parody+.Conclusion: Slayer to fighter
Defense: -
Offense: +
Utility: +Provide parody or better ability?
Defense: No
Offense: Yes
Utility: NoYour slayer has to play very differently to get the most out of his utility. Kick-in-the-door Fighter-man, he is not. And if he played that way he would have worse utility.
Not especially. You could ditch Stealth for Dungeoneering and do okay. Though AC would remain lower in that case. If you really want a direct parody, do that, drop Pragmatic Activator for Indomitable Faith (for +11 Will), and drop UMD for Climb. Then he loses Engineering for Local and 2 Will for 4 Reflex, but is otherise much closer to being identical.
That build is notablyt worse, though. what with Climb being utterly superfluous when you have a flying mount and UMD being great.
And I specifically noted, like 8 times, that the AC would be lower. Everything else would just be better. I think I delivered on that.
Of the social skills, study target only boost bluff.
Your melee math was wrong. You added weapon focus to damage.
Sneaky man is not what this fighter is. Being able to do it is cool, but needing it for things like AC and utility is not.
Engineering is the best knowledge skill.
Offense was better. Utility was a mix bag of some good some worse. I gave overall ability to the slayer. Defense was worse by every metric. Sure you get evasion next level, but the fighter gets defensive weapon training and antagonize in addition to maybe a ring of evasion. I picked level 12 because this is when the slayer should have the greatest advantage over the fighter.
Given the cost of a ring of evasion, the fighter ain't gonna have one by level 12, either.
Still nice to know he might actually be able to get his Reflex save high enough for it to be useful.
==Aelryinth
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Of the social skills, study target only boost bluff.
Actually, with stalker it boost Intimidate too. I was mistaken regarding Diplomacy, sorry. That's the only skill it's worse at, though, and even then only on gathering information.
Your melee math was wrong. You added weapon focus to damage.
No, that's one of the things Martial Focus does. My math's solid.
Sneaky man is not what this fighter is. Being able to do it is cool, but needing it for things like AC and utility is not.
I just noted you could scrap that element and do fine.
Engineering is the best knowledge skill.
How so?
Offense was better. Utility was a mix bag of some good some worse. I gave overall ability to the slayer. Defense was worse by every metric. Sure you get evasion next level, but the fighter gets defensive weapon training and antagonize in addition to maybe a ring of evasion. I picked level 12 because this is when the slayer should have the greatest advantage over the fighter.
Uh...the very best it does is 8th level, where the Fighter still lacks skills and Gloves of Dueling and the Slayer is firing on all cylinders by then. It does notably better on utility (like an order of magnitude better) all through 1st-8th.
And a lot of its cool stuff starts kicking in at 13-15. 12th level is basically the worst option for the Slayer shining, actually.
And yeah, the defense is a bit worse. I've said that several times. It was part of the damn pitch.
You said AC would be worse not health, AC, and saves.
8th is too low level for me to care. Also the lower the level the more damming the AC difference.
|
|
You said AC would be worse not health, AC, and saves.
I'd say Saves are on par. Yeah, lower Will is worse than higher Reflex...but the Reflex is higher than the Will is lower. +4 Reflex is about on par with +2 Will (assuming you forego UMD).
And HP are a whole 11 less at 12th level, and can be equal casually if you're foregoing Stealth. since then you can ditch Favored Terrain and rearrange some of the high level Talents and just take FC in HP like the Fighter does.
If HP and Saves are really more important to you than the vast utility advantages that giving up a little of them provides, you can certainly up them. But given that utility is what you were complaining about, I sorta assumed you'd prefer to focus on that.
8th is too low level for me to care. Also the lower the level the more damming the AC difference.
Okay, 16th then. They're better there, too. Heck, at 15th is where the AC advantage almost vanishes.
Might as well go level 20.
I can now share my friends thoughts. 2/3 say the slayer is the better character or is debatably the better character. One thought the slayer gimped himself by trying to be a fighter, all agreed. None called the slayer the worse character.
All thought the slayer failed to be the fighter plus more stuff. All felt that claim was not defendable even those who felt that the slayer was the stronger character.
I agree with the statement that attempting to do what a Fighter could do as a Slayer is not a realistic goal. I'd say a Paladin, Cavalier, Samurai, or Barbarian would make a better Fighter replacement assuming you didn't attempt a 1:1 transition and instead were just trying to emulate the "big guy who takes hits and deals damage."
I would rather have the Slayer on my party than the fighter, that's for sure though.
|
|
I can now share my friends thoughts. 2/3 say the slayer is the better character or is debatably the better character. One thought the slayer gimped himself by trying to be a fighter, all agreed. None called the slayer the worse character.
That's pretty much all I was saying.
All thought the slayer failed to be the fighter plus more stuff. All felt that claim was not defendable even those who felt that the slayer was the stronger character.
I never made this claim. I said it'd be better, that's all. Heck, my very first post specifically lined out every difference there would be (lower AC, less Will Save, more Reflex Save, etc.).
I mean, I tried to make it as close as possible, since that's what you said you wanted...but I never said it would be superior in every way. I said it would be comparable in combat, and better outside it.
I think it is.
I would rather play the fighter. But I would rather have the slayer in my party.
I would also want a slayer to cover both the rogue and fighter roles rather than try for complete parody. That would give the party a rogue and a round one meat shield. Let a cha caster cover social skills.
But that's my main problem with the fighter. If I added +10 to his AC, Saves, to-hit, and damage, I'd still rather have a druid in the party. It's because I don't value the fighter's role all that much from a tactical or strategic perspective. Advance weapon training boosted both his defenses and utility such that he is a more well rounded character. But that only brought him up to a point that he competes with competent mundanes like ubarbars, slayers, urogues, cavaliers and gunslingers.
In a lower optimization party I think that someone playing a Slayer as they would play a traditional "Rogue" with a 2 weapon fighting build+skill optimized would make for an overall stronger party than the player doing that with a Rogue.
In a higher op party I think a Slayer using Ranger combat style for Sword and Board would make the Fighter look like a combat chump (Kukri+Heavy Shield and early access/prereq ignoring to some awesome feats). Alternatively a higher op party would likely enjoy the company of a smartly played Unchained Rogue capable of using his sneak attack debuffs to great effect.