|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
My main concern with "buffing" the Fighter even further is that, as it stands, the Fighter can go toe to toe with the Paladin, Ranger, or Barbarian.
Pathfinder isn't an arena simulator, it's a multidimensional gaming platform. Even assuming the Fighter could take the Paladin, Ranger, or Barbarian in a fight (which hasn't been proven at all), that has almost nothing to do with whether or not he's an equal contribution to the team, when those classes all have better skills, saves, and unique abilities that they contribute to the group.
It does require a greater degree of system mastery to get the mileage out though.
More often then not, applying an equal level of system mastery to another class will result in a greater return on investment.
I one does however, then it isn't something a non-Fighter can match.
Oh? The only build I've ever seen for the Fighter that can consistently outdamage his peer classes still doesn't create a meaningful lead until 20th level when auto-crit confirmation gives him a nice DPR spike.
They usually require a specific feat-intensive build.
Who, Fighters? I agree that that is a major weakness of theirs. I find I much prefer Rangers, Barbarians, and even Vigilantes, whose class features generally work on a wider variety of weapons and are generally superior feats.
Then, to make that even better, would throw the Fighter into a tier unto itself beyond anything any of the Fighter-centric classes can hope to match.
A statement lacking any kind of supporting evidence carries little weight. I've seen and experienced many scenarios that underline the Fighter's weaknesses, as well as scenarios specifically constructed to show the Fighter favorable circumstances to his peers, and the Fighter still typically falls behind. Ashiel's "paladin hell" where a Fighter and Paladin are run through a gamut of constructs, animals, and other non-evil challenges that showed the Paladin is superior at dealing damage and "going all day" is a great reference.
Then there is also the shenanigans that the Fighter's Relic Master archetype can cause.This line, in the Relic Master, can be a game-killer:
"Alternatively, if she is using a magic item with an appropriate spell in its construction requirements, she can use an item mastery feat without it counting against the feat's total uses per day."
I'm not sure how you're coming up with "at will" when the ability has a uses per day cap on it.
This can be seriously problematic if a player is a Pure Fighter, or simply uses a 1 level dip elsewhere to shore up their Fortitude base. Access to the right magical items, and as early as level 4 you can get the ability to dimension door at will. Dispel Magic at will. Flight at will. It can be ridiculous.
See above.
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
HWalsh:
Many Fighter fixes give them almost nothing in the way of enhanced damage output. Or AC.
For one example, one of the most common Fighter fixes I've seen is giving them 4+Int Mod skills per level (and maybe a handful of Class skills), and a Good Will Save.
Or my personal Fighter fix gives the following (in quick summary version):
-Better skills and bonuses to them (Note: 4 + Int Mod, so you need Advanced Weapon Training to equal a Slayer, for example).
-At 4th, the ability to apply Feats like Weapon Focus to an entire weapon group. This is mostly fluff, given the cost of enhancing multiple weapons.
-At 6th the ability to reduce the severity of fear effects.
-At 8th the ability to take 10 foot steps instead of 5 foot steps.
-At 10th Evasion, but for Fortitude Saves (Note: This never comes up).
-At 12th, the sohei thing where they can always act in the surprise round.
-At 14th, they actually get some unique combat stuff (people can't Acrobatics through their threatened squares and allies no longer provide enemies cover).
-At 16th they can tell the BAB and HP of anyone they see (Note: Slayers have a Talent to do the HP part as early as 2nd level).
-At 18th, they get the Kensai 19th level ability where you're never unaware or flat-footed and always roll a 20 on initiative.
Now...not a single one of those gives a bonus to attack, damage, or AC.
Some of the higher level ones in my fix, specifically improve the Fighter's combat abilities indirectly (winning initiative, 10 foot steps, people not being able to avoid your AoO), but not an more than some Paladin spells do.
None of the other fix I mention effects combat prowess much at all (except Will Saves).
Lots of Fighter fixes are like those, adding cool stuff, but not necessarily anything that directly helps the stuff Fighters already do well, just stuff that adds to other areas that they're lacking in.
In short: The point of most Fighter Fixes is to make their weaknesses less glaring, not to add to areas where they are already strong.
*snip*Allow me to "clarify" by "at will" in this specific instance I am referring to being able to use the ability as many times as they would like to without limit. That can become extremely problematic.
-----
I haven't seen Ashiel's appraisal but I'm skeptical based on the fact that I play both Paladins and Fighters frequently. Paladins don't come close to Fighters in pure potential damage output in the mid-game. It just tends that Paladins are much more survivable.
Usually, your average Paladin, is rocking Power Attack and *maybe* for combat around like 10 as far as "damage output increasing" goes. They have plenty of other things to purchase feat-wise like Fey Foundling, Greater Mercy, etc etc.
It does depend on a number of factors, like build, what weapon, things like that. Is the Fighter using Cornugon Smash/Hurtful? What AWT's do they have? What level? What magical items.
Heck, one of my favorites is "Advanced Weapon Training: Versatile Training" which can add skills as not only class skills but as ranks equal to a fighter's BAB.
Now, again, am I saying that a Fighter is perfect? No. Every class has issues. There could be some quality of life tweaks (As I mentioned I'd like to give them all the same benefit of the Weapon Master as far as Bonus Feats to AWT.) certainly...
We go too far though and... Boom... The Fighter becomes a problem.
How is AWT 'fixing' things at mid levels? You get ONE at 5th and don't get another one until 9th. Unless you are a VERY specific archetype, who again is limited to one weapon.
Hwalsh, you are VERY corner-case interpreting how that ability works. I think I can safely say that almost no GM in their right mind will believe that the interpretation is as you are trying to make it seem for the relic master.
Someone contact Ashiel and have him throw up that Paladin Hell story. It was a good read. And YES...Fighters 'all the time' damage IS higher then a paladin. It's his defenses and survivability which are the big, big thing which kills the fighter, with his lack of utility out of combat coming in next to seal the coffin.
NOBODY COMPLAINS ABOUT HOW MUCH DAMAGE THE FIGHTER DOES.
Comparing the fighter's damage to other melee classes is the WRONG argument to make...nobody cares! THe fighter is FINE in DPR! REally! We all believe it!!!
It's everything ELSE that needs to be updated.
==Aelryinth
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
No, its pretty clear that when using an item with the appropriate spell in it, that it doesn't count. The 4 per day is when using one that *doesn't* have it.
Can I use of an argument of absurdity on this? I can just see the Paizo devs: "Okay look guys. At the same time a sorcerer can cast a level 4 spell, let's make a fighter archetype that casts that spell an unlimited times per day! And if they take a series of feats, they can cast a plethora of spells an unlimited times per day! Doesn't sound good enough, so if they multiclass, they can get this level 4 spell at will at the same time sorcerers get level 2 spells." Seriously with such an interpretation you have a personal utility mage that is better at being a mage than any mage....there is no way that's the accurate interpretation.
My main concern with "buffing" the Fighter even further is that, as it stands, the Fighter can go toe to toe with the Paladin, Ranger, or Barbarian.
It does require a greater degree of system mastery to get the mileage out though. I one does however, then it isn't something a non-Fighter can match. They usually require a specific feat-intensive build. Then, to make that even better, would throw the Fighter into a tier unto itself beyond anything any of the Fighter-centric classes can hope to match.
THE HORROR!
More seriously, this would be a problem, but not because it makes the fighter the best at fighting. The actual problem is you have a character in an a) problem solving, b) resource management game who can only solve one kind of problem. It's a hammer compared with a series of different tool boxes. When you need a hammer, great! When you need literally anything else, you're hopeless.
This would be the situation if the fighter was made peerless at combat to the expense of all else. You have a class who has innate tools to solve a single problem in a game about problem solving. And that may be interesting, and it may feel nice for the fighter to have a niche (and that that niche is appropriate), but it's one dimensional and out of place in a game like Pathfinder.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Is This the Ashiel Paladin thing being mentioned?
That's the one. Very entertaining thread to read.
Of course, most entertaining is the back and forth where the Paladin faces actual dungeon encounters, and is decried for being in a paladin favored environment, but the Valley of Paladin Hell is completely fair, and he still does okay.
heh!
And he didn't even use his sword bond.
==Aelryinth
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Why do you disallow Armed Bravery? If that is one of your issues with the class that is one of the fixes to the issue. So, you are saying, they do get access to a good will save progression, you just don't like how it is done.
Well, I'm giving them better than Armed Bravery for free, and they'd get better Will Saves than anyone if you allowed Armed Bravery on top of that...which seems a tad excessive. I also prefer the Ultimate Intrigue Bravery-enhancing Feats, since they can let you give Bravery bonuses to your friends and similar fun stuff.
This I actually do agree with. I don't think any non-Int caster should have 2+Int Mod. Paladins, Fighters, and Clerics unduly suffer from a terminal lack of skills.
Paladins and Clerics at least have better skill lists and spells...Fighters not so much. But yeah.
This is possible as it is, granted it is an AWT that I can never see almost anyone taking. None of my builds have or will. I'd see this less as a "Fighter Thing" and more of a "Feat" but this is already a Human Racial Feat.
Personally, I don't see why this is a human thing. The biggest issue with it is that, especially for TWF users they are encouraged to use the same weapon in each hand. Builds like Longsword and Short Sword, Rapier and Dagger, etc are discouraged because it is almost always better to use two of the same weapon.
I'm aware of the Feat. But given their focus on weapon groups it just seemed fundamentally like a trick all Fighters should have. Also, see my discussion on why there being Feats do so much of this doesn't mean it shouldn't be done.
Doesn't Bravery already somewhat do this by making it less likely for Fear Effects to stick?
Yep, but this adds to it (it reduces Frightened to Shaken or Panicked to Frightened and ignores Shaken, all for anything except stacking purposes). It seemed to me that Fighters should be pretty hard to scare, even by things that don't allow a Save.
You can already get this.
Though I grant, that it requires Combat Expertise, Int 13, and Outslug Style to acquire.
You can absolutely get many of these features as Feats, usually with strict prerequisites and limitations (Outslug Style isn't usable with whatever weapon you want, and is a 3 Feat tree, for example).
But the point is that you shouldn't have to.
Rangers, for example, get a bonus Feat at 2nd and every 4 levels thereafter. They also get two Good Saves, 6 skill points per level, spell casting, and a host of other Class Features. Fighters get 6 more Feats and Heavy Armor. The Ranger's Favored Enemy and Favored Terrain are about on par with Weapon Training and Armor Training (okay, Favored Enemy is a little worse than Weapon Training...it plus spells are way better though), and a good Reflex Save is better than Bravery. So we get all their other Class Features on top of the stuff that makes them on par with Fighters (Even 2 extra skill points more than make up for Heavy Armor, Favored Enemy + Spells make up for Weapon Training + extra Feats, Good Reflex more than makes up for Bravery, Favored Terrain is about on par with Armor Training, and so on).
So...where are the other Features for Fighters? Ones they don't need to spend Feats on and are on par with Evasion, Improved Evasion, Woodland Stride, Hide In Plain Sight, an Animal Companion, and the like? They don't exist.
But they should. Which is rather the point. Now, you could give them such features in a number of ways, even just giving them yet more extra Feats and allowing more purchases of Advanced Weapon Training and Advanced Armor Training more times...but something certainly needs to be done to make up that disparity if Fighter is to be a good Class.
Granted, this would be neat.
I thought so. :)
I thought there was already a way to do this, but if there isn't I don't think that this would be game breaking.
That was my opinion. And there are a few ways to do it, but they're all Class Features, not Feats or anything a single-classed Fighter can get (I don't believe).
I'm not sure about the Acrobatics thing, but I was certain that there is a thing to do the cover one already in the rules.
There is, but see above regarding the fact that Fighters should have abilities they don't have to spend Feats on.
This would be fine. I could see this being part of a knowledge: tactics check.
If it's part of a check anyone can make, the Fighter would need a different ability, or a bonus from such a check nobody else got. Either is a possibility if adding entirely new skills, though. I'd be cool with that, I just haven't as of yet.
That I think is unfair. Giving the Fighter another class's ability earlier than even they get it isn't really cool, especially since you are already granting them the ability to act in a surprise round.
Kensai is an Archetype, not a Class, and Archetypes often either steal from or have their abilities stolen by actual Classes.
And they already get spellcasting, crit-enhancement (on a Magus), and several other neat tricks. Heck, they add their Int and Dex to Initiative starting at 7th, get to pick Fighter-only Feats, and even get Weapon Mastery at 20th. The Archetype already takes so much from the Fighter (while remaining a 6-level caster) that I have no problem with it taking this from the Fighter too in my games.
And the Kensai can use Greater Bladed Dash + a Full Attack when he wins Initiative, attacking aqlmost everyone once and unloading a full attack on one guy. The Fighter...can maybe make a full attack, if he's either lucky or an archer. So the Magus gets much better use of the ability.
Also, 18th level and higher abilities almost never come up, though that isn't the main reason I'm fine with this.
|
|
In order to not lock out archetypes any fighter fix needs to be purely additive. WMH and AMH are kludges and better than nothing, but they're not proper fixes and neither can anything similar.
This, ultimately, is probably the biggest issue with the current Fighter patches. They offer a better exchange rate on his class resources, but he's still working with fewer base resources than his peers. With out a bottom to top revision of the entire chassis, patch solutions are only addressing small pieces of the issues, and are further gated behind splatbook delving.
What is "armed bravery", I can't seem to find it on the prd.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don't get why the discussion about "fixing fighters" is headed towards comparing the bonuses a fighter gets with other classes. I mean, technically speaking, combat efficiency really isn't why the fighter is considered bad, isn't it? It's because fighters are mechanically uninteresting to play.
Why not, instead of trying to figure out where the fighter should be getting his +1s and -1s from, instead discuss more ways for the fighter to utilize his turn?
No matter how many bonuses you give this class, it will always just boil down to:
GM: "So, Bob, it's your turn. What do you do?"
Bob the Fighter: "I attack the goblin closest to me!"
... And that's all it ever will be. There's not enough decision making in the fighter's tactical approach to a given problem, which is the entire problem of the class. Why not try and fix that, instead of just tacking on more bonuses so the fighter can attack better?
Wanna fix the fighter? Add in Spellcasting. Nothing short of that will solve the caster disparity.
Being able to shut spellcasters down would solve a LOT of the disparity.
"Yeah, you can do all those wonderful things. ANd I can kill you basically anytime I want to."
Does wonders for equality.
That would entail things like spell resistance, anti-spellcasting, punching defensive magic, dispels on hits, looking through magical abilities/effects, stopping dimensional hijinks, shutting down fliers, parrying spells, etc.
And we can't have that happening to our spellcasters, can we?
==Aelryinth
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Being able to shut spellcasters down would solve a LOT of the disparity.
"Yeah, you can do all those wonderful things. ANd I can kill you basically anytime I want to."
Does wonders for equality.
That would entail things like spell resistance, anti-spellcasting, punching defensive magic, dispels on hits, looking through magical abilities/effects, stopping dimensional hijinks, shutting down fliers, parrying spells, etc.
And we can't have that happening to our spellcasters, can we?
==Aelryinth
Meh... I think it's much better design and much more fun to make Fighters able to do cool stuff, instead of simply undoing what other classes can do.
I don't mind having options for anti-caster specialization, but it shouldn't be the whole focus of the class... Nor should it be strong enough to completely shut down casters.
I want classes to be similarly effective, not to tip the disparity the other way around.
You could take it as feats...if the feats were consolidated. Seriously, the step up chain is three long, the teleport tactician is multiple feats, each disruptive and spell breaker are more feats, and the latter limited in uses.
a spellcaster can dispel a dozen times a day if they wish. A melee? Lucky if they can do 1-2. Unless you're a high-level barb popping in and out of rage, or something.
So, yeah, those would be a good start! Just grant the whole feat chain as a class ability. They don't have spellcasting...is being good at anti-spellcasting such a crime?
==Aelryinth
I had considered using those feats as the basis for a witch-hunter type class, using the paladin chassis to detect the supernatural and then really upset its day. :)
|
|
My 2 cents: I would like to see an unchained Fighter. But will multiclassing and all the options available, I think you can make an effective fighter character.
The build I am playing around with is an Unchained Rogue: Rake, Scout, Swashbuckler or thug (7-8 levels) and a Fighter: Tactician (12-13 levels).
It gives me some good fighty ability, wiht more skills, and some other options and abilities.
There are a lot of minefields in that regard...First, we have to be honest with ourselves.
What tactical options do Fighters have?
Lots. Depending on the build and focus Fights can be very tactical. Positioning, combat maneuvers, reach weapons, etc. They have options.
They also have access to non-attack feats like call out and antagonize which other classes often don't have the feats to get.
So when we ask for "tactical options" what exactly do we want?
Do you want non-magical spells? Do you want to punch the ground and mimic pit trap? Do you want to twirl your polearm so fast it acts like a propeller and grants you fly? Do you want more skill points? Do you want the ability to call out combat orders to your party and grant them a combat competency bonus similar to a bard.
So, specifically, what is being sought?
It sounds like some people want a spell list. Maybe a limited arcane spell list similar to a Paladin? Using Con as the caster stat?
Personally, I think Fighters are in good shape but I'd love some extra skills per level and some way to...
Lets be honest, when you decide to play a fighter,you have to be aware what you are going to play. The fighter is not a cavalier, or a barbarian or whatever. Those things could be incorporated through archetypes if you really want to. When choosing to play a fighter, you choose to play a man that has a weapon, and has trained how to use it. He's more about skill in combat than anything else. I honestly don't feel very skillful in combat when I pretty much just say "I power attack and five-foot-step every turn." - sure, you can take a reach weapon and trip people and make positioning matter, but I can do the exact same thing with any other martial class, which means that by picking the fighter, I do not gain any new options, and I don't feel inherently different from a barbarian or paladin, except that I can't do any of the cool stuff that is UNIQUE to their class.
You do have "tactical" options which are mostly less effective than simply causing damage to an enemy so that it dies faster. When speaking about tactical approach, I don't mean spells or any such supernatural abilities, because those are simply not what the fighter is initially about. At the very least, allowing the fighter to attack in special ways would be a good start and fit into the flavor of a man at arms relying upon the skill of his sword arm.
Maybe the fighter should have the option of being able to actively defend itself, have an active choice of causing status effects, or some simple mobility options. You know, just about anything that would grant me more decisions to make without being just plain worse than doing damage.
I can honestly say that this actually covers a lot of bases presented in this thread.