What's wrong with the fighter


Pathfinder First Edition General Discussion

51 to 100 of 1,354 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

To those mentioning the fighter fixes... yes, they exist but in a hodge podge of archetypes across books, often time mutually exclusive of each other; ie if your archetype traded out bravery for some way to boost skills or maneuverability than you cant fix your will save. And if your archetype altered or replaced weapon training than you cant access AWT talents. The advanced weapon and armor training themselves come online very late game to start patching up holes in class abilities any ways.


My Self wrote:

Fun fact: a 1st level Magus or a 4th level Paladin can put on heavy armor by themselves as a standard action by spending a spell slot. (For the Magus, it costs 35 gp, once)

Less fun fact: a 7th level Fighter can put on heavy armor by themselves over the course of 2 minutes if they invest their Armor Training into it. Without it, they cannot fully put on heavy armor at all.

Of course, you could buy wands, but it's definitely much more investment than, say, a squire. Or having your Paladin friend help you into armor.

wait, how can the paladin do that? i dont see it on the base class, is it an archetype thing?

EDIT: oh, its a spell... you should have said "by casting a spell". just expending a spell slot would be different, and kind of a big deal for a prepared caster

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Ridiculon wrote:
wait, how can the paladin do that? i dont see it on the base class, is it an archetype thing?

Spell.

Silver Crusade

5 people marked this as a favorite.

Count me aboard the people who don't think this 'marshmallow fallacy' is a thing.

Fighters being broken at base without anything mechanically interesting about them unless you add in softcovers (hardcovers do them no real favors) is a huge problem, and the lack of an (official since EMG just put out the Unchained Fighter) unchained fighter isn't helping.

The fighter's options are just too scattered and not as good as other people's, and that's a problem with both the base class and everything that's been in supporting books except for WMH.


John Mechalas wrote:
An unsolved problem with the fighter, though, is that your AC doesn't scale. You are on the front line, in melee, dealing heavy damage but eventually you are going up against monsters making attack rolls in the 30's. Literally everything hits you. You end up needing healing every few rounds. So you have one thing you can do, and that one thing literally gets you pounded constantly.

To compound the problem, not only does your AC not scale, but to get the really high AC it will probably again be circumstantial. Touch attacks largely obviate high AC builds because your armor and natural armor don't count.

Of course, by that point you're probably too busy failing saving throws for negated "high AC" to really be an issue.


N. Jolly wrote:

Count me aboard the people who don't think this 'marshmallow fallacy' is a thing.

Fighters being broken at base without anything mechanically interesting about them unless you add in softcovers (hardcovers do them no real favors) is a huge problem, and the lack of an (official since EMG just put out the Unchained Fighter) unchained fighter isn't helping.

The fighter's options are just too scattered and not as good as other people's, and that's a problem with both the base class and everything that's been in supporting books except for WMH.

Scattered, yes.

Not as good as others: subjective to demonstrably incorrect.

The Fallacy I coined to have a short hand way of saying "these options exist whether or not they are considered optimal"

I guess I can type that in every single time from now on if it'll get people to stay on topic.


master_marshmallow wrote:
N. Jolly wrote:

Count me aboard the people who don't think this 'marshmallow fallacy' is a thing.

Fighters being broken at base without anything mechanically interesting about them unless you add in softcovers (hardcovers do them no real favors) is a huge problem, and the lack of an (official since EMG just put out the Unchained Fighter) unchained fighter isn't helping.

The fighter's options are just too scattered and not as good as other people's, and that's a problem with both the base class and everything that's been in supporting books except for WMH.

Scattered, yes.

Not as good as others: subjective to demonstrably incorrect.

The Fallacy I coined to have a short hand way of saying "these options exist whether or not they are considered optimal"

I guess I can type that in every single time from now on if it'll get people to stay on topic.

Me wrote:

Look man, even if your self-titled fallacy exists, it will never catch on the way you use it because pointing out a fallacy cannot be the whole of the argument. Because that is a fallacy too. You need a better argument than pointing to the ocean when someone says they're thirsty. Yes they could do that, but it's entirely unhelpful when other people are walking around getting delicious frozen lemonade.

Edit: My point is that you are also dragging things in unhelpful directions too.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

TBQH, I think the big problem with your fallacy is simply this- it seems incredibly vain to name a fallacy after yourself, especially when you are the only one using it.

That is going to rub people the wrong way.

Plus, I really do think you should type out that definition, because shorthand only works if everyone involved understands it, and I at least was confused what you were actually referring to.


master_marshmallow wrote:
You're comparing non core barbarian options to core only fighters. Not really fair.

I mentioned the fighter can have other options if they take an archetype that trades out one of their three things. The paladin and the barbarian were both without archetype considerations. The fighter has access to non-core feats in the same way the barbarian I mentioned could use non-core rage powers, but I don't on the whole see that making a huge difference as said non-core combat feats almost universally still boil down to "use metal stick to kill enemy."

Quote:
Item mastery is accessible through AWT with no ranks in UMD required.

I'm rather curious how you came to that conclusion, actually.

Magic Tactics Toolbox wrote:
Item Mastery: The fighter gains an item mastery feat as a bonus feat, which functions with any magic weapon he wields, even if the magic weapon does not meet the feat's normal requirements. He must meet all of the feat's prerequisites.

So no, actually, he can't. Item Mastery allows you to "cheat" on the feat you choose by letting you use your magic weapon as the item in question. You still have to meet the feat's prerequisites, including base fort save and UMD ranks.

Quote:
In the other thread I already mentioned the fighter's ability to backdoor his way into having Martial Flexibility by combining Abundant Tactics with Barroom Brawler, and being able to nab any skill he wants at max ranks on the fly, or any of the Item Mastery options is definitely up there.

Abundant Tactics+Barroom Brawler is a useful combination, but I feel like you are once more misreading some of the things Advanced Weapon Training (Combat) allows you to do.

Weapon Master's Handbook wrote:

Benefit: Select one advanced weapon training option, applying it to one fighter weapon group you have already selected with the weapon training class feature.

Special: This feat can be taken more than once, but at most once per 5 fighter levels.

So you cannot take take this feat and then take Versatile Training with a weapon group you did not previously acquire Weapon Training in. You likely have two to four specific skills on tap with this combination, depending on how many AWTs you've acquired, not "any skill you want." Also, if you took AWT at level 5 as a feat, as you presumably must to get Abundant Tactics to start this show, you cannot use this combination until level 10. If you took AWT again at level 10, as most people would, you cannot use this combination again until level 15, and so on. Using it to snag an Item Mastery for your weapon is legitimate, however, lest you think I am moving the goalposts. It is useful in that respect.

Quote:
As for full attacks, again I mention that Item Mastery is available as an AWT option, opening up the Dimensional Dervish chain (requires a conjuration item- the bag of holding or handy haversack qualifies easily).

OK, so let's go through this a bit.

As previously established, you must meet Teleportation Mastery's prerequisites to take it with AWT, so let's say that's your level 9 pick.

The dimensional line of feats are not combat feats, so you take Dimensional Agility at level 11, Dimensional Assault at level 13, and at level 15, we're all set with Dimensional Dervish. Magnificent! Now we can dimensionally pounce two times a day!

...This seems somewhat less cool than the Barbarian's ability to do so for as long as they have rage left at level 10 and the Druid's ability to shift into something that can pounce for hours at a time at level 6.

And before you say "Abundant Tactics!" No, because nothing in this combination is a combat feat.

I like the idea of the Dimensional Dervish line, but nothing I have seen contradicts my view that it looks a lot cooler than it actually is. Before the quick runner shirt nerf, you could get similar results for 1000 GP and zero feats.

Quote:
Flight is accessible through either Item Mastery or Master Armorer (either with Celestial Armor or Celestial Plate, did it get reprinted officially in CotCT?).

Master Armorer is actually quite nice. I don't dispute that. Just as I imagine you will not dispute that the power to turn downtime and gold into a useful item it is not a counterpoint to my earlier argument that too many of the things the fighter can do that are not "use stick to kill man" are a function of their WBL and not their class.

Quote:
Improved Bravery is a feat in Intrigue which lets Bravery apply to all mind affecting Will saves (so most of them).

I already mentioned Bravery was fixed if you pay the feat taxes for it, so I'm not sure why you're getting on my case about this. Since you are, however, I will point out that Improved Bravery is at level 20 putting the fighter on the same will save as a magus with 9 wisdom, so really unless you also took Inspiring Bravery to share that bonus with your friends it is a lot better than your original atrocious will save but still not something to write home about. It's certainly not something cool you can do that is not a function of your WBL, which is my goalpost.

Quote:
I feel like every case I make gets dismissed by moving the goal post.

Am I moving goalposts when you don't actually address what my problem was in the first place? Your argument appears to primarily be that Item Mastery Feats are pretty keen, which I'm not arguing with.


Blackwaltzomega wrote:
master_marshmallow wrote:
You're comparing non core barbarian options to core only fighters. Not really fair.

I mentioned the fighter can have other options if they take an archetype that trades out one of their three things. The paladin and the barbarian were both without archetype considerations. The fighter has access to non-core feats in the same way the barbarian I mentioned could use non-core rage powers, but I don't on the whole see that making a huge difference as said non-core combat feats almost universally still boil down to "use metal stick to kill enemy."

Quote:
Item mastery is accessible through AWT with no ranks in UMD required.

I'm rather curious how you came to that conclusion, actually.

Magic Tactics Toolbox wrote:
Item Mastery: The fighter gains an item mastery feat as a bonus feat, which functions with any magic weapon he wields, even if the magic weapon does not meet the feat's normal requirements. He must meet all of the feat's prerequisites.

So no, actually, he can't. Item Mastery allows you to "cheat" on the feat you choose by letting you use your magic weapon as the item in question. You still have to meet the feat's prerequisites, including base fort save and UMD ranks.

Quote:
In the other thread I already mentioned the fighter's ability to backdoor his way into having Martial Flexibility by combining Abundant Tactics with Barroom Brawler, and being able to nab any skill he wants at max ranks on the fly, or any of the Item Mastery options is definitely up there.

Abundant Tactics+Barroom Brawler is a useful combination, but I feel like you are once more misreading some of the things Advanced Weapon Training (Combat) allows you to do.

Weapon Master's Handbook wrote:

Benefit: Select one advanced weapon training option, applying it to one fighter weapon group you have already selected with the weapon training class feature.

Special: This feat can be taken more than once, but at most
...

Looks like I did misread it, it allows you to use your weapon instead of a different magic item, that was the workaround it offers. With Warrior Spirit you can cherry pick item abilities and with Abundant Tactics/Barroom Brawler you can choose item mastery and get whatever item mastery you need on the fly, up to 1+Weapon Training times per day.

However:

Versatile Training wrote:
Once the skills have been selected, they cannot be changed and the fighter can immediately retrain all of his skill ranks in the selected skills at no additional cost in money or time.

^this line here allows a fighter to use said tactic to 'choose' a skill he already has and retrain it instantly. You can pick something you already expect to have maxed out, like perception or something and get any skill you need on the fly for the duration.

Downtime and WBL are comparable for every class, Master Armorer gets rid of the fighter's necessity for anyone else to do it which was cited as one of its main problems.

As for the Marshmallow Fallacy thing, I only brought it up because in "The Main Problem with Fighters" there was a long discussion about fighters not getting 4+INT skills, and that term was coined by me when people kept shutting down that the Tactician fighter existed because it was unpopular. That was literally years ago and it's been used several times since then when comparing different options. We're really dwelling on it and it's not even pertinent to the discussion since the only reason I brought it up is because this exact discussion (fighters) was the reason I made it in the first place. Choose to use the word or not, doesn't change the fact that you now know what it is. I'm going to continue to use it, as is my right and my choice because it is a valid concept even if you want to attack me for it. Personally, I love the Tactician fighter because it gets 4+INT skills, can still use medium armor at full speed, and still gets Weapon Training so it can access AWT and AAT still while having more skills and uses out of the bonus feats (with Skill Focus and Teamwork feats being available) but that's my opinion and not really important to this dead horse of a thread.

Also, Weapon Training is considered 4 different class features as is Armor Training. This was clarified by the Dev team when AWT came out which is why certain fighter archetypes can trade it out one iteration at a time, even though sometimes it's traded out entirely. It also makes the Sash of the War Champion really confusing when it comes to interacting with AAT, but that's neither here nor there. There was a thread on it.


8 people marked this as a favorite.

I don't know why should a fallacy is even being discussed in this thread since this isn't a discussion on whether options for a concept exist, but that those options are pretty crappy compared to what other classes have.


master_marshmallow wrote:
Blackwaltzomega wrote:
SheepishEidolon wrote:

Part of the problem is the strong start, in my opinion. Few classes offer you such a high AC and (often) instakill on hit at level 1. And players come up with the idea it will continue this way. No, it does not, and that's a good thing. Combat shouldn't be a one-man-show. However, it's harsh for a fighter player to be a superstar first and then slowly diminish.

When I am play one of my beloved rogues, I don't have this problem. Level 1 is as harsh as any level, I have to pay attention, be creative and focus on solutions, not on problems. Class features don't get the job done? Ok, let's ask my fellow players. They can't help me either? Maybe I need an item for it. There is none? Ok, I try to roleplay my way out it. Doesn't work? I retreat for now.

There are solutions for every problem the fighter has / is supposed to have. They are not free, true. But if you look closely, other classes don't get their features for free, also - there is always some opportunity cost.

Even for fighters level 1 is a crapshoot. Playing at level 1 is pretty terrible because usually one 18-20 from one of those random orcs you're fighting and you're just as dead as the squishies.

So it's not such a great time then, and that is more or less as good as it gets for the fighters because unlike the other classes aside from the numbers involved your class levels will not be doing anything at level 20 that's all that different from what you could do at level 1. You hit something with your big metal stick until it dies. Everything you can do that is not about hitting things with metal sticks tends to be a function of your WBL instead of your class levels, which seems wrong to me.

At level 1, the fighter, paladin, and barbarian attack for good damage.

At level 20, before factoring in magical items, the barbarian can fly, gain climb and swim speeds, destroy spell effects, absorb elemental energy and spit it back at the enemy as a breath weapon, regenerate

...

actually all those barbarian options are options for core barbarians


Milo v3 wrote:
I don't know why should a fallacy is even being discussed in this thread since this isn't a discussion on whether options for a concept exist, but that those options are pretty crappy compared to what other classes have.

Because the premise behind his 'fallacy', and one of the main reasons it makes most people roll their eyes, is that it doesn't matter whether or not options are good or efficient, only whether or not they exist.

A fighter can have ten skill points per level. It doesn't matter that it requires you to burn a lot of options. It doesn't matter that it doesn't happen until most campaigns have already ended. Nothing matters except that in some niche scenario it can be done and since it can be done, all complaints about fighters and skill points are supposedly invalid.

Which is why it's a pretty useless point, because it actively seeks to disregard circumstances and playability.


swoosh wrote:
Milo v3 wrote:
I don't know why should a fallacy is even being discussed in this thread since this isn't a discussion on whether options for a concept exist, but that those options are pretty crappy compared to what other classes have.

Because the premise behind his 'fallacy', and one of the main reasons it makes most people roll their eyes, is that it doesn't matter whether or not options are good or efficient, only whether or not they exist.

A fighter can have ten skill points per level. It doesn't matter that it requires you to burn a lot of options. It doesn't matter that it doesn't happen until most campaigns have already ended. Nothing matters except that in some niche scenario it can be done and since it can be done, all complaints about fighters and skill points are supposedly invalid.

Which is why it's a pretty useless point, because it actively seeks to disregard circumstances and playability.

Clearly you are missing the context of the original premise.

Strawman aside, I never once mentioned using all your resources on anything. Originally all I did was mention the Tactician fighter had 4+ skills.


Warrior spirit is a huge buff to damage for the fighter. Without it, fighters are worse than most other martials. With it, the fighter can surpass other martials. As such, I would never play a fighter in PFS, where it isn't allowed.


marshmallow wrote:
^this line here allows a fighter to use said tactic to 'choose' a skill he already has and retrain it instantly. You can pick something you already expect to have maxed out, like perception or something and get any skill you need on the fly for the duration.

Isn't this a one time gimmick then? Once you've retrained the skills that taking the feat allowed you to retrain, they're stuck there. Unless of course you can take advanced training for the skill you retrained into, but then you've gained no benefit over just doing that in the first place.

I dislike versatile training. It's a gimmicky feat that destroys natural character progression in the name of solving a problem without saying "Fine, the fighter gets 4 skill points per level" (which would not destroy character progression). I dislike the hoops a fighter must jump through to be effective and versatile. I dislike the hard limits placed on the chassis in the name of flavor. Yes, someone who trains with one weapon over another should be more skilled with the former, but when that is represented mechanically as "is as good as others are when wielding chosen weapon, and worse otherwise" that kind of fails at achieving the character vision doesn't it? See all those "choose a weapon you have weapon focus with" feats? What if they applied to all of the fighter's chosen weapon groups naturally (yes I know there's a feat for that)? What if subsequent weapon groups were at full strength instead of partial strength? What if a fighter could take one of those "choose a weapon" feats instead of an additional weapon group when they got another rank of Weapon Training? What if they could take a feat to expand their selected weapon groups? Now a weapon master and a master of all weapons both exist as options.

So much in the weapon / armor master's handbook feels like it could have just been built in options, or been a part of the system without having to make absurd feats (what if BAB was worked into the AC calculation so cut from the air didn't have to be a thing, and the fighter's combat AC scaled naturally with CR instead of relying on the magic-mart?). So many class features seem like they could work well for a fighter but are stolen by another class (what if the fighter had the Paladin's aura of courage, or a similar ability in place of the disappointment that is bravery?) but that would require effectively a new edition, and I suppose I'm into wishlisting in a thread on what issues exist with the fighter currently. Suffice to say, the fighter was designed to focus on a solution to all problems (fighting), while other classes were designed to use a subsystem to solve any kind of problem (spells, skills, rage powers). In a game all about solving problems, you need to design for the latter, and even just giving the chassis 4 (or 6 ideally) skill points per level would accomplish most of that in-so-far as skills can compete with spells.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Derklord wrote:


John Mechalas wrote:
I played a straight fighter in our last campaign. I even stayed mostly with Core, making a dip into the APG only for two feats (Following Step and Step Up and Strike). He could only do one thing, but he did that thing really, really well: massive, reliable damage.
How does a core fighter do massive, reliable damage? Or do you only count rounds where you can full attack?

Greatsword, critical focus feat, weapon focus, weapon specialization, high strength, and typical magic items for your level. Even at 6th level my min damage was 13, average damage was 18, and I was critting pretty frequently thanks to the 20% threat range and a nice attack bonus. Add Power Attack for another +2. It was reliable damage when you hit, which was more often than not, and yes, full attacks helped significantly. Being hasted by the spell caster helped even more.

But it's a limited build. Game mechanics-wise, it's the only thing I was good at.


18 is a drop in the bucket at level 6


kyrt-ryder wrote:
18 is a drop in the bucket at level 6

i 2nd that last fighter i made did an average of 31 damage per hit with an average of 93 on a crit at level 5


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Lady-J wrote:
kyrt-ryder wrote:
18 is a drop in the bucket at level 6
i 2nd that last fighter i made did an average of 31 damage per hit with an average of 93 on a crit at level 5

Keep in mind this was Core fighter with (at the time) Core only feats. According to my notes this was a STR of 20 and a +1 greatsword. I also wasn't optimizing at the time (I was still new to PF). But an average of 18 is fine at this level when you have 3 attacks thanks to haste and two crits every encounter.


Ranishe wrote:
marshmallow wrote:
^this line here allows a fighter to use said tactic to 'choose' a skill he already has and retrain it instantly. You can pick something you already expect to have maxed out, like perception or something and get any skill you need on the fly for the duration.

Isn't this a one time gimmick then? Once you've retrained the skills that taking the feat allowed you to retrain, they're stuck there. Unless of course you can take advanced training for the skill you retrained into, but then you've gained no benefit over just doing that in the first place.

I dislike versatile training. It's a gimmicky feat that destroys natural character progression in the name of solving a problem without saying "Fine, the fighter gets 4 skill points per level" (which would not destroy character progression). I dislike the hoops a fighter must jump through to be effective and versatile. I dislike the hard limits placed on the chassis in the name of flavor. Yes, someone who trains with one weapon over another should be more skilled with the former, but when that is represented mechanically as "is as good as others are when wielding chosen weapon, and worse otherwise" that kind of fails at achieving the character vision doesn't it? See all those "choose a weapon you have weapon focus with" feats? What if they applied to all of the fighter's chosen weapon groups naturally (yes I know there's a feat for that)? What if subsequent weapon groups were at full strength instead of partial strength? What if a fighter could take one of those "choose a weapon" feats instead of an additional weapon group when they got another rank of Weapon Training? What if they could take a feat to expand their selected weapon groups? Now a weapon master and a master of all weapons both exist as options.

So much in the weapon / armor master's handbook feels like it could have just been built in options, or been a part of the system without having to make absurd feats (what if BAB was worked into the AC calculation so cut from...

It lasts for the duration of the ability, usually one minute, which is long enough to get most skill checks done that you would use it on, knowledge checks, climbing/swimming, and other things that you just want to be able to roll for.

Once the duration expires your skills go back to normal.

It's something unique that only the fighter (and I guess anything that counts their levels as fighter levels and has access to Weapon Training) can do.

You get into some game design craft here that doesn't really affect this edition of the game. Fighters really aren't concerned with damage or AC. Full round attacks have been covered in a lot of different ways, either with feats (which most people agree is worth spending your feats on) or with optional rules systems. I'm a big fan of the revised action system, but again not the topic.

I'll 100% agree that I would love to see the AWT and AAT options in the core book (or at least a core release so they're OGL compatible). The main problem with fighters is that, they're options which make the class function comparably to the other classes are too spread out. BUT they now have those options which is a step in the right direction.

Narrative power is something they gained very recently and in roundabout ways, that's true. The reason I even participate in threads like this is to help people be more aware of it because it is such a convoluted system to do so, I've never meant to imply otherwise, apologies if it seems that way.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens Subscriber
master_marshmallow wrote:
Wei Ji the Learner wrote:
master_marshmallow wrote:

This post gives me cancer.

What do you mean "don't count"?

I mean seriously what do you mean? What about Advanced Weapon/Armor Training which combined give you MORE skills than a rogue at max?

Also, how is the system skill based? Skills are one facet of the game.

** spoiler omitted **

Advanced Weapon/Armor Training requires *time* to come 'on-line', and they are very situational type items that require a focus that if required of a caster or the like would be viewed as 'too crippling'.

While every other class is able to spread out, perhaps have a dozen skills they're 'okay-good' at, the Fighter as CRB is... not that great, and most of the archetypes do nothing to address that.

The only one that does that I'm aware of, trades out Medium AND Heavy armor proficiency for two skill points that must be used on knowledge skills per level.

Only in very rare cases with such a handicap can a straight fighter contribute out of combat.

This is my observation based on builds I've seen and play I've both witnessed and done myself.

Well, to be fair I coined the Marshmallow Fallacy in a fighter thread on this very subject and I brought up the Tactician Fighter who gets 4+skills per level without that restriction. Also Lore Warden allows any INT based skill, not just knowledges.

3rd/5th level is not that high to gain access to said abilities, even if you have to spend feats to get there. That's when 3rd and 4th level spells come online for a wizard, which is when most of their builds 'come online' as well.

You're going to need to substantiate how more classes can spread out, because you seem to be starting with a conclusion and not following it up with much more than 'because I think this way'.

If your argument is CRB, we've already addressed that as being the only real problem with fighters.

I'll need more than an anecdote before I simply concede to this view point.

1. it's called the marshmellow fallacy because your the only one who calls it a fallacy. your reasoning "well it exists" is actually a irrelevant conclusion Fallacy. you're, yes, proving an option exists, however we don't contest that conclusion, we contest on it being an actual competative choice.

2. you can't get them before fourth, and that is if you get a specific archetype that limits you to basically only ever using a single weapon and forgetting about armor training. beyond that it's 5th, which is halfway through the 2nd book of most APs.

3. 5th is also the level that wizard's get fireball and fly

4. the thing is, they shouldn't have to trade anything for 4 skill points.


Bandw2 wrote:
master_marshmallow wrote:
Wei Ji the Learner wrote:
master_marshmallow wrote:

This post gives me cancer.

What do you mean "don't count"?

I mean seriously what do you mean? What about Advanced Weapon/Armor Training which combined give you MORE skills than a rogue at max?

Also, how is the system skill based? Skills are one facet of the game.

** spoiler omitted **

Advanced Weapon/Armor Training requires *time* to come 'on-line', and they are very situational type items that require a focus that if required of a caster or the like would be viewed as 'too crippling'.

While every other class is able to spread out, perhaps have a dozen skills they're 'okay-good' at, the Fighter as CRB is... not that great, and most of the archetypes do nothing to address that.

The only one that does that I'm aware of, trades out Medium AND Heavy armor proficiency for two skill points that must be used on knowledge skills per level.

Only in very rare cases with such a handicap can a straight fighter contribute out of combat.

This is my observation based on builds I've seen and play I've both witnessed and done myself.

Well, to be fair I coined the Marshmallow Fallacy in a fighter thread on this very subject and I brought up the Tactician Fighter who gets 4+skills per level without that restriction. Also Lore Warden allows any INT based skill, not just knowledges.

3rd/5th level is not that high to gain access to said abilities, even if you have to spend feats to get there. That's when 3rd and 4th level spells come online for a wizard, which is when most of their builds 'come online' as well.

You're going to need to substantiate how more classes can spread out, because you seem to be starting with a conclusion and not following it up with much more than 'because I think this way'.

If your argument is CRB, we've already addressed that as being the only real problem with fighters.

I'll need more than an anecdote before I simply concede to this view

...

So we're only talking about fighters before 5th level? Good to know.

Wizards are a different animal, and have a multitude of threads talking about why they're problematic at all. Hell, most people call out all full casters as being problematic for that reason.

I'm not sure what you're trying to say....


I still maintain that WMH type stuff is nowhere near enough for what the fighter needs, simply because it's so limited compared to things like creating planes, sculpting the environment, teleporting between planets, being able to create armies, turning deserts into jungles, bringing back the dead, walking around on the sun, etc.


Milo v3 wrote:
I still maintain that WMH type stuff is nowhere near enough for what the fighter needs, simply because it's so limited compared to things like creating planes, sculpting the environment, teleporting between planets, being able to create armies, turning deserts into jungles, bringing back the dead, walking around on the sun, etc.

That's not a problem exclusive to fighters though, that's more or less a problem with full casters. Problems that go that deep are system based, not class based.

'Balance at all costs' should not be the goal. Comparable power for similar role holding classes is fair, but trying to say that a fighter needs to be able to do all the things a wizard can do is going to be fruitless.


As I keep saying If you wanted an unchained fighter all you really need to do is
1. bump up their skill amounts by 2 so 4/per or 6/per for some archetypes
2. give them a pounce maneuver at an appropriate level.
3. This one is tricky the skill system needs to be improved a bit for higher levels to allow greater actions with skill check something like a 60 foot leap with a dc 30 and etc.
4. use the weapon and armor training stuff
5. I allow the master craftsman feat to be usable with just the craft skill no other item creation feats required. Example: So you have skill craft weapons and the master craftsman feat and you can use it to make all magic weapons (this is the only one I use for my games)

I don't do this cause I don't have the problems in my game that you guys address I think its my style of running that minimalizes it. Enough people believe it to be true that I recognize for their games that it is.

So let me say if it is a problem you guys are running into I think my rules above will help if your not experiencing these problems then why bother changing anything.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
master_marshmallow wrote:

That's not a problem exclusive to fighters though, that's more or less a problem with full casters. Problems that go that deep are system based, not class based.

'Balance at all costs' should not be the goal. Comparable power for similar role holding classes is fair, but trying to say that a fighter needs to be able to do all the things a wizard can do is going to be fruitless.

Not saying they need to do all the things a wizard can do. I'm saying they should be able to do things of the same scale or at least impressiveness as what a fullcaster can do. And yes, it's not exclusive to fighter, though I think the problem is worst with Fighter (and fighter hybrids).


Milo v3 wrote:
master_marshmallow wrote:

That's not a problem exclusive to fighters though, that's more or less a problem with full casters. Problems that go that deep are system based, not class based.

'Balance at all costs' should not be the goal. Comparable power for similar role holding classes is fair, but trying to say that a fighter needs to be able to do all the things a wizard can do is going to be fruitless.

Not saying they need to do all the things a wizard can do. I'm saying they should be able to do things of the same scale or at least impressiveness as what a fullcaster can do. And yes, it's not exclusive to fighter, though I think the problem is worst with Fighter (and fighter hybrids).

Hate to say it, but you might want to look at other systems that make martials better and casters worse like 5e.

Fighters are the only full noncasting class (save for archetypes that give up partial spellcasting) that can make their own magic armor and weapons (via Master Armorer and Warrior Spirit, respectively) so I'm not sure why fighters are the worst at it.


Pathfinder Lost Omens Subscriber
master_marshmallow wrote:

So we're only talking about fighters before 5th level? Good to know.

Wizards are a different animal, and have a multitude of threads talking about why they're problematic at all. Hell, most people call out all full casters as being problematic for that reason.

I'm not sure what you're trying to say....

first line is a strawman, it was posted in the context of abilities being competitive, so i compared when it was gained with other abilities at the same level. for something supposed to fix it's narrative weakness, it pales in comparison to casters and several other classes I might add. Paladin's have their own, casting by this level, even if it is pretty weak(narratively) and combat focused.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
master_marshmallow wrote:
Didn't we have this thread already?

Yes we did!

Do I have to index this one, too? Show of hands for "yes"?


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens Subscriber

*throws a pile of dismembered hands at KC*


Bandw2 wrote:
master_marshmallow wrote:

So we're only talking about fighters before 5th level? Good to know.

Wizards are a different animal, and have a multitude of threads talking about why they're problematic at all. Hell, most people call out all full casters as being problematic for that reason.

I'm not sure what you're trying to say....

first line is a strawman, it was posted in the context of abilities being competitive, so i compared when it was gained with other abilities at the same level. for something supposed to fix it's narrative weakness, it pales in comparison to casters and several other classes I might add. Paladin's have their own, casting by this level, even if it is pretty weak(narratively) and combat focused.

It's really not though, you literally brought up low level fighters.

Paladins have their own issues, of which low skill points and narrative power at this level are pretty much the same. Very few 1st level spells on the paladin list are going to on their own invalidate the fighter. People don't usually complain about the paladin skills though because they have so many other issues. Do you have any specific examples that I'm not thinking of? The one that let's you LoH as an immediate action is the only one I can think of.

Smite improves to-hit by a lot, but there's also Stamina for that (though it's from a splatbook which may or may not count depending on whether it's convenient for the argument being made).

Divine Grace helps a lot with defenses, and they have good will saves from the start, so on that ground you're not wrong.

That said, this game isn't a competition, nor should it be. It's not an MMO or a CCG. Wanting them to be comparable is a fair request, and it's true that the fighter doesn't shine until later than the paladin does, but the paladin is a very front loaded class all things considered. One could make the case that makes the fighter better by design, even though conversely the point that the paladin has better defenses can be something to compare to all the other classes including rangers, slayers, brawlers, and barbarians. This isn't a fighter only problem.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Bandw2 wrote:
*throws a pile of dismembered hands at KC*

*examines* Yup. Yup. Was definitely a caster that gathered these. A fighter wouldn't be able to dismember more than maybe five peasants in a minute, tops.


Pathfinder Lost Omens Subscriber

1. if we talk about higher level fighters, okay... he has 2 weapon mastery things now, and oh wait... the wizard's on the moon, damn it wizard, stop writing your name in moon rocks.

2. paladins have slightly less problems narratively but that's by design (screams internally) as shown by them being forced to be good all the time, so it;s 1 not percieved as much of a problem, 2 it's not a "popular" a concept as a fighter so it gets less attention. It's basically a really good poster child for trying to get them sword wielders up there in utility.

3. I... don't even look at stamina anymore when looking into making a fighter. not only is it a splat book, but it's not an archetype, it's like a set of optional rules that no GM really wants to go through just so you can play your fighter slightly more unique.

4. k, I agree that this statement is factually correct as well.

5. it is a competition, in that these classes are competing for my play time. (also, just personal note: if you think the paladin is front loaded you should look at that spell list a bit more. the spell list is the only thing that ever makes me even look at a paladin, so many good spells all divine and i get free heavy prof.)


Eh I give up these threads are always more so about complaining and arguing then anything constructive about how to alleviate a problem.


Pathfinder Lost Omens Subscriber
Vidmaster7 wrote:
Eh I give up these threads are always more so about complaining and arguing then anything constructive about how to alleviate a problem.

i've made stuff that I think you've read before, but I mostly don't want to alleviate the symptoms, for the purposes of discussion, so that the disease itself gets cured.


master_marshmallow wrote:
Milo v3 wrote:
master_marshmallow wrote:

That's not a problem exclusive to fighters though, that's more or less a problem with full casters. Problems that go that deep are system based, not class based.

'Balance at all costs' should not be the goal. Comparable power for similar role holding classes is fair, but trying to say that a fighter needs to be able to do all the things a wizard can do is going to be fruitless.

Not saying they need to do all the things a wizard can do. I'm saying they should be able to do things of the same scale or at least impressiveness as what a fullcaster can do. And yes, it's not exclusive to fighter, though I think the problem is worst with Fighter (and fighter hybrids).

Hate to say it, but you might want to look at other systems that make martials better and casters worse like 5e.

Fighters are the only full noncasting class (save for archetypes that give up partial spellcasting) that can make their own magic armor and weapons (via Master Armorer and Warrior Spirit, respectively) so I'm not sure why fighters are the worst at it.

any martial can craft magic gear with master craftman and craft arms and armor and craft wonderous items which are 3 feats significantly better than the two you listed


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Kobold Cleaver wrote:
Bandw2 wrote:
*throws a pile of dismembered hands at KC*
*examines* Yup. Yup. Was definitely a caster that gathered these. A fighter wouldn't be able to dismember more than maybe five peasants in a minute, tops.

you sir have not seen my fighters lol


Lady-J wrote:
master_marshmallow wrote:
Milo v3 wrote:
master_marshmallow wrote:

That's not a problem exclusive to fighters though, that's more or less a problem with full casters. Problems that go that deep are system based, not class based.

'Balance at all costs' should not be the goal. Comparable power for similar role holding classes is fair, but trying to say that a fighter needs to be able to do all the things a wizard can do is going to be fruitless.

Not saying they need to do all the things a wizard can do. I'm saying they should be able to do things of the same scale or at least impressiveness as what a fullcaster can do. And yes, it's not exclusive to fighter, though I think the problem is worst with Fighter (and fighter hybrids).

Hate to say it, but you might want to look at other systems that make martials better and casters worse like 5e.

Fighters are the only full noncasting class (save for archetypes that give up partial spellcasting) that can make their own magic armor and weapons (via Master Armorer and Warrior Spirit, respectively) so I'm not sure why fighters are the worst at it.

any martial can craft magic gear with master craftman and craft arms and armor and craft wonderous items which are 3 feats significantly better than the two you listed

This is actually not true, in "Why don't all fighters take Master Crafstman?" we learned that Master Crafstman itself can only be taken once and it is tied exclusively to the skill chosen with the feat. Even if you take Craft Wondrous item you can only make magic items that can be physically crafted with your chosen skill. Profession (tailor) was singled out as the best choice for the most breadth of options.


master_marshmallow wrote:
Lady-J wrote:
master_marshmallow wrote:
Milo v3 wrote:
master_marshmallow wrote:

That's not a problem exclusive to fighters though, that's more or less a problem with full casters. Problems that go that deep are system based, not class based.

'Balance at all costs' should not be the goal. Comparable power for similar role holding classes is fair, but trying to say that a fighter needs to be able to do all the things a wizard can do is going to be fruitless.

Not saying they need to do all the things a wizard can do. I'm saying they should be able to do things of the same scale or at least impressiveness as what a fullcaster can do. And yes, it's not exclusive to fighter, though I think the problem is worst with Fighter (and fighter hybrids).

Hate to say it, but you might want to look at other systems that make martials better and casters worse like 5e.

Fighters are the only full noncasting class (save for archetypes that give up partial spellcasting) that can make their own magic armor and weapons (via Master Armorer and Warrior Spirit, respectively) so I'm not sure why fighters are the worst at it.

any martial can craft magic gear with master craftman and craft arms and armor and craft wonderous items which are 3 feats significantly better than the two you listed
This is actually not true, in "Why don't all fighters take Master Crafstman?" we learned that Master Crafstman itself can only be taken once and it is tied exclusively to the skill chosen with the feat. Even if you take Craft Wondrous item you can only make magic items that can be physically crafted with your chosen skill. Profession (tailor) was singled out as the best choice for the most breadth of options.

yes but even if you had some silly crafting skill like craft boat you can still use said craft boat check to craft your magic items.


Pathfinder Lost Omens Subscriber
Lady-J wrote:
Kobold Cleaver wrote:
Bandw2 wrote:
*throws a pile of dismembered hands at KC*
*examines* Yup. Yup. Was definitely a caster that gathered these. A fighter wouldn't be able to dismember more than maybe five peasants in a minute, tops.
you sir have not seen my fighters lol

I keep my severed hands in a timeless demi-plane, where do you keep yours where you can get them in a minute? (looks at wrists stubs)

damn it, Lady J not again.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Lady-J wrote:
Kobold Cleaver wrote:
Bandw2 wrote:
*throws a pile of dismembered hands at KC*
*examines* Yup. Yup. Was definitely a caster that gathered these. A fighter wouldn't be able to dismember more than maybe five peasants in a minute, tops.
you sir have not seen my fighters lol

In fairness, an archer fighter can get more, as long as there aren't lots of walls to hide behind.

The peasants scatter. The melee fighter can only kill one person every round by running each one down. If he's on a flat plain, he can't even kill that many—they get to run, and so he'll kill about one every other round, tops. :P


1 person marked this as a favorite.

The Elemental Plane of Hands, home of the Handwitch.

Creepy place.


Pathfinder Lost Omens Subscriber
Lady-J wrote:
master_marshmallow wrote:
Lady-J wrote:
master_marshmallow wrote:
Milo v3 wrote:
master_marshmallow wrote:

That's not a problem exclusive to fighters though, that's more or less a problem with full casters. Problems that go that deep are system based, not class based.

'Balance at all costs' should not be the goal. Comparable power for similar role holding classes is fair, but trying to say that a fighter needs to be able to do all the things a wizard can do is going to be fruitless.

Not saying they need to do all the things a wizard can do. I'm saying they should be able to do things of the same scale or at least impressiveness as what a fullcaster can do. And yes, it's not exclusive to fighter, though I think the problem is worst with Fighter (and fighter hybrids).

Hate to say it, but you might want to look at other systems that make martials better and casters worse like 5e.

Fighters are the only full noncasting class (save for archetypes that give up partial spellcasting) that can make their own magic armor and weapons (via Master Armorer and Warrior Spirit, respectively) so I'm not sure why fighters are the worst at it.

any martial can craft magic gear with master craftman and craft arms and armor and craft wonderous items which are 3 feats significantly better than the two you listed
This is actually not true, in "Why don't all fighters take Master Crafstman?" we learned that Master Crafstman itself can only be taken once and it is tied exclusively to the skill chosen with the feat. Even if you take Craft Wondrous item you can only make magic items that can be physically crafted with your chosen skill. Profession (tailor) was singled out as the best choice for the most breadth of options.
yes but even if you had some silly crafting skill like craft boat you can still use said craft boat check to craft your magic items.

read it again, slowly and carefully.

damn thing is a huge paragraph...


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Bandw2 wrote:
Vidmaster7 wrote:
Eh I give up these threads are always more so about complaining and arguing then anything constructive about how to alleviate a problem.
i've made stuff that I think you've read before, but I mostly don't want to alleviate the symptoms, for the purposes of discussion, so that the disease itself gets cured.

Ah so now I see the core. The thing is not everyone has or thinks of the issue as a problem. Now I freely admit that I can see where your coming from. I can see the issue being a problem for some games. Some people want the martial classes to do things like jump to the moon or cleave mountains in half but some people want the martial classes to feel more down to earth. Some people play with wizards that somehow (still not sure on this one) always have the right spell or the time to prepare it or create a golem or use their magic in some overpowering way and some do not. Some people have wizards that help the party instead of help themselves. Its all play-styles and some play-styles make the fighter seem so much worse. So much so that the argument gets repeated endlessly.

I think a few minor tweeks is enough but maybe my play-style is so far from yours that I can't perceive the depth that this bothers you. I am also one of the people that don't want martial classes doing ridiculous off the wall stuff. That does not include impressive physical feats mind you. I just don't want to see things like cutting a rift into another dimension with pure strength without some sort of magical assistance. I think that kind of thing should be for other sort of classes like a magus.
Now I think the fighter should be great at mundane things like Diplomacy acrobatics leading people perception that sort of thing. leave magic to the magic-users. if You feel differently and that is ok. I want there to be something for you too Maybe there should be two martial classes fantastical and mundane.

I think a lot of the argument I keep seeing are play-style clashes. If we can just all accept that people all play differently and that is ok it might help us understand each others side. Now I know you bandw2 have already made options to fix your problems with it. If your request is for Paizo to do something official about it I can respect that. There needs to be enough of an outcry for it to justify it I suppose so your motivated to push the issue hard. So is the other side because they don't want to see their baseline class changed into something they don't want. So really what is the way to make everyone happy? There is some that will not come around to your way of thinking no matter what you say and that is why we keep seeing this same argument over and over again.
I know one of the first things I happened across in the thread was someone asking question on how to help their fighter and like 3 posters said play a different class that to me was rude condescending and unhelpful. That is the kind of stuff we don't need. Just as on the other side people saying that your problem of fighter being sub-par is made up or trying to work to an agenda other then the obvious is unhelpful. I know there is a middle ground somewhere just have to find it.
Ok this post is long enough sorry for word dump. (edited for spelling and etc)


Pathfinder Lost Omens Subscriber

so down the earth that at level 20 you can kill demon lords single handedly, but not jump to the 2nd story of a building.

as for the always right spell... scrolls, what do you think they spend WBL on? it's scrolls of aboleth lung and air bubble


2nd story that is like what 20 feet yeah sure no problem.


Please read again i said not to include impressive physical feats heck i said a 60 foot jump would not be outside of that. heck at 20. 150 feet could be reasonable but not jumping to the moon.


Pathfinder Lost Omens Subscriber
Vidmaster7 wrote:
2nd story that is like what 20 feet yeah sure no problem.

DC is 80. 160 if you don't get 10 feet of running start.


Bandw2 wrote:
Lady-J wrote:
yes but even if you had some silly crafting skill like craft boat you can still use said craft boat check to craft your magic items.

read it again, slowly and carefully.

damn thing is a huge paragraph...

yes it says Choose one Craft or Profession skill in which you possess at least 5 ranks. You receive a +2 bonus on your chosen Craft or Profession skill. Ranks in your chosen skill count as your caster level for the purposes of qualifying for the Craft Magic Arms and Armor and Craft Wondrous Item feats.You can create magic items using these feats, substituting your ranks in the chosen skill for your total caster level. You must use the chosen skill for the check to create the item. The DC to create the item still increases for any necessary spell requirements (see the magic item creation rules in Magic Items). You cannot use this feat to create any spell-trigger or spell-activation item.

any craft or profession will do which is why this is actually really good for alchemists as they can use craft alchemy to make magic items

51 to 100 of 1,354 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / General Discussion / What's wrong with the fighter All Messageboards