I guess some people just feel that in order to not suck you have to have spells,that's not my feelings at all..I'll take a dwarven ax and shield fighter or an Elven two weapon dagger fighter or a Half-orc greatsword fighter and play the hell out of them...have a great night gaming and probably save the mages but a few times while I'm at it, but thats just me.
Its the same argument that gets remade a million times its best to just ignore it and play the game the way that works best for you IMO.
Plus theres a metamagic that lets you use mind affecting stuff on undeadWhy wouldn't he be? Specialization does not stop you from casting other spells...also in an all undead campaign their would still be towns would their not? Still opportunities to use your enchantment abilities to increase your parties standing and ability. The character is what you make it. Period.This is like saying that a Wizard specializing in Enchantment against an all undead campaign is useful too.This, I just don't get this...Fighters are as awesome as you make them
Fighters are already weak. Having to waste their class features to get what others get for free makes no sense.
So you can control the people around you to throw at the oncoming Horde? That's.....helpful I guess?
But the fact is that you actively have to work at making fighters worth a damn and pray that the DM is cool with you grabbing every single option from every single supplement in the hopes of achieving that mediocrity. OR just play another class that's flat out better...
I just don't get any of this, maybe it's because I've played with the same people for years and our character's are not just created to run one campaign and then done? Or maybe because we do more than just hack & slash like a video game? All I know is that I have played every core class multiple ways and never had a problem being relevant in a group. Some of these people talk about character creation like they are trying to win the game????
EDIT: it's weird that you talk about hack and slash as something bad, since that's basically the only thing fighter are good for. In all the other roles they are surpassed by other classes, other classes that also do the hack and slash quite well.
Yeah, 2+Int skills/level, a fairly poor class skill list, and no non-combat class features leads to a class with very limited options outside of stabbing things.
Of course, how a group plays the game can make a pretty big difference. I've certainly seen groups where the player's real-world charisma and knowledge matters a lot more than what's written down on the character sheet, and if the group plays that way the fighter doesn't feel their lack of skill points nearly as much.
By the same token, how much the caster's side of the disparity kicks in really depends on having a player who knows how to tap into the class's full potential. I've seen more than one player running a full caster who just waded into melee without any buffs even at high levels, and had to be reminded several times that their character actually had a spell list.
Plus theres a metamagic that lets you use mind affecting stuff on undead
The AP I am currently running, the local min/max guy built a psychic so he could control everything. He can even affect undead.
The first three books, over half the encounters were either vermin or constructs.
<--- Still laughing as we move into book 4. No constructs or vermin, but full of traps.
Yeah, 2+Int skills/level, a fairly poor class skill list, and no non-combat class features leads to a class with very limited options outside of stabbing things.EDIT: it's weird that you talk about hack and slash as something bad, since that's basically the only thing fighter are good for. In all the other roles they are surpassed by other classes, other classes that also do the hack and slash quite well.
A human lore warden with 7+ skills per level, all intelligence based skills as class skills and traits letting him cherry-pick additional skills.
Yea, my fighter never does anything out of combat.
Except scount, find and disable traps, act as the party face, etc.
The fighter is what the player makes of it. Nothing more, nothing less. The class even has options to make all saves good - options most other classes lack.
I find arguments about source book requirements to be redundant. If this was in a vacuum of 'CRB only' then obviously the fighter is terrible because everyone knows wizards are absolutely invincible with just CRB content. If this is also in the vacuum of all rulebooks, then again, wizard wins out because they still have all the CRB content and they were only made stronger through more options. But that's not what everyone plays. When the vast majority of content is freely available online within a week or so of release (assuming the sites that upload it are able to keep up, AoN guy being the exception here because I know he has some medical problems right now), you have what are effectively patches for each class constantly. If you use limited content, then the class will never get stronger than what was grandfathered from previous editions and will always be static.
The end result is that if you can't access this content, then you are playing an entirely different game then the people are using it and you can't compare the two. The biggest example we are talking about right in this thread is how AWT and AAT are the patches for fighter. If that's not open to you, the fighter is an entirely different class.
I just don't get any of this, maybe it's because I've played with the same people for years and our character's are not just created to run one campaign and then done? Or maybe because we do more than just hack & slash like a video game? All I know is that I have played every core class multiple ways and never had a problem being relevant in a group. Some of these people talk about character creation like they are trying to win the game????Of course, playstyles are important for balance problems to be noticed, it shouldn't be a surprise. I've played with several group and most definitely noticed them.
The thing there are classes that does well in every kind of play style, while others classes are fine sometimes but are left to bite the dust if the style of game changes.
And please don't go to the "my group and I are playing correctly while the otehrs are rollplayers that only want to win the game" or stuff like that.
EDIT: it's weird that you talk about hack and slash as something bad, since that's basically the only thing fighter are good for. In all the other roles they are surpassed by other classes, other classes that also do the hack and slash quite well.
I'm not saying hack and slash is bad, I'm just saying that characters exist outside of adventures as well. Some of the best times I've had have been during "down time" RPing with other members of the group or NPC's. My point is that a Character doesn't have to be an adventure dominant skill monkey/spell slinging Lord of all things to have value. You get a good DM and a couple of good players together that play off each other well and it doesn't matter what the numbers are, your going to have a good time. And I never was implying that what we do is right and what others do is wrong.. only stating that from personal experience I've never had an issue with any of the core classes being "weak".
I'm not saying hack and slash is bad, I'm just saying that characters exist outside of adventures as well. Some of the best times I've had have been during "down time" RPing with other members of the group or NPC's. My point is that a Character doesn't have to be an adventure dominant skill monkey/spell slinging Lord of all things to have value. You get a good DM and a couple of good players together that play off each other well and it doesn't matter what the numbers are, your going to have a good time. And I never was implying that what we do is right and what others do is wrong.. only stating that from personal experience I've never had an issue with any of the core classes being "weak".
But that's meaningless when discussing system balance. You're describing a time where an optimized character is no different from a nonoptimized one (where the fighter compares evenly to other classes) because you're not using the system. What class any character is at that point is unimportant other than for aesthetics because your not using the class' abilities (or exploiting lackthereof). That doesn't make such situations not fun, but you can't use such to claim that there isn't a discrepancy.
I'm not saying hack and slash is bad, I'm just saying that characters exist outside of adventures as well. Some of the best times I've had have been during "down time" RPing with other members of the group or NPC's. My point is that a Character doesn't have to be an adventure dominant skill monkey/spell slinging Lord of all things to have value. You get a good DM and a couple of good players together that play off each other well and it doesn't matter what the numbers are, your going to have a good time. And I never was implying that what we do is right and what others do is wrong.. only stating that from personal experience I've never had an issue with any of the core classes being "weak".
What you are saying is good and all that but have nothing to do with the mechanical/rule-wise aspect of the fighter class, so it should not be hard to understand that is not relevant.
I mean, "we just have some RP good time around!", is great,in fact I somewhat prefer that kind of games, but it doesn't have any measure of how strong or versatile a class is.
Fighter and a bard are talking.
F "good fight, lets celebrate, I'll go buy drinks"
B "no need, I can create ale for the party!"
F "That's great, well I'll see if they have some musicians for the party"
B "no need, I can create self playing musical instruments"
F "Lets pull a prank on that guy and swap his bread for cheese and hope he doesn't notice."
B "no need, I can change the flavor of his bread from here to cheese."
the bard is better at RP times. Because it can do any RP a fighter can do, plus.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
It doesn't help that the fighter gets no "fun" skills. How was he going to steal the bread? The Stealth he doesn't have? The Bluff he doesn't have? The Sleight of Hand he doesn't have? A caster at least has spells to make up for (and render obsolete) those skills. A fighter has nothing.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
It doesn't help that the fighter gets no "fun" skills. How was he going to steal the bread? The Stealth he doesn't have? The Bluff he doesn't have? The Sleight of Hand he doesn't have? A caster at least has spells to make up for (and render obsolete) those skills. A fighter has nothing.
He has Intimidate! He uses it with the Charisma he doesn't have.
I'd recommend the Fighter solve all his social woes by challenging people to duels, but he will probably lose those fights.