Fighter feats: 4th ed Powers or actual feats?


Classes


I'm looking at the fighter feats and I can't tell if I'm looking at genuine feats or 4th ed powers disguised as feats.

Can a 2nd level fighter power attack and intimidating strike with the same attack? Or are these distinct at-will powers that you have to choose to use one or the other?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Paizo Charter Superscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

Both feats are activities that take 2 actions. You cannot use both of them with the same attack. This is similar to how in first edition Vital Strike and Cleave are both standard actions and cannot be used with the same attack, for example.

Also: they are not powers. I know you're using the word in the D&D4 way, but in the Pathfinder Playtest that term has another meaning. Powers are special spells that are cast with spell points, not spell slots, for example a cleric's Channel Energy.


7 people marked this as a favorite.

Everything looks like 4th ed things to John, it's a shame he can't get rid of that bias.
And, as Zaister points out, it clearly shows 2 actions for each feat-use. They're just like combat feats in PF1e or 3.x, but I guess those are 4th ed-like too...

Lantern Lodge

6 people marked this as a favorite.
GentleGiant wrote:

Everything looks like 4th ed things to John, it's a shame he can't get rid of that bias.

To be fair most of the playtest books scream a weird 4E/5E Hybrid to me.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Ronin_Knight wrote:
GentleGiant wrote:

Everything looks like 4th ed things to John, it's a shame he can't get rid of that bias.

To be fair most of the playtest books scream a weird 4E/5E Hybrid to me.

Agreed.


5 people marked this as a favorite.

I'm more disapointed in that nobody else gets combat feats now.


Greylurker wrote:
I'm more disapointed in that nobody else gets combat feats now.

Advanced Maneuver, pg. 280.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Renchard wrote:
Greylurker wrote:
I'm more disapointed in that nobody else gets combat feats now.
Advanced Maneuver, pg. 280.

So you need to multiclass as a fighter. It's bad,


Fallyrion Dunegrién wrote:
Renchard wrote:
Greylurker wrote:
I'm more disapointed in that nobody else gets combat feats now.
Advanced Maneuver, pg. 280.
So you need to multiclass as a fighter. It's bad,

Incorrect. It's good.


5 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

The more I think about it the worse it feels to not have combat feats everyone can take and making Fighters "Combat Feats the Class" even more than in 1E.

None of the Fighter Class Feats are interesting, cool, unique class abilities. They're literally just combat feats, most of which we've seen before.

Now if you want to Power Attack as a cleric, you need to be a fighter/cleric?

None of the other class feats had this problem, they all seemed pretty thematically appropriate from what I could tell.

They need to turn basically all the Fighter Class Feats back into Combat Feats anyone can take, let Fighters select them with their Class Feats, and add interesting, unique Fighter-y Class Feats to flesh out their list a bit more.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
WatersLethe wrote:

The more I think about it the worse it feels to not have combat feats everyone can take and making Fighters "Combat Feats the Class" even more than in 1E.

None of the Fighter Class Feats are interesting, cool, unique class abilities. They're literally just combat feats, most of which we've seen before.

Now if you want to Power Attack as a cleric, you need to be a fighter/cleric?

None of the other class feats had this problem, they all seemed pretty thematically appropriate from what I could tell.

They need to turn basically all the Fighter Class Feats back into Combat Feats anyone can take, let Fighters select them with their Class Feats, and add interesting, unique Fighter-y Class Feats to flesh out their list a bit more.

Cleave is locked to Barbarian 6, and only during rage.


Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
WatersLethe wrote:
They need to turn basically all the Fighter Class Feats back into Combat Feats anyone can take, let Fighters select them with their Class Feats, and add interesting, unique Fighter-y Class Feats to flesh out their list a bit more.

So Advanced Armor and Weapon Training.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Renchard wrote:
Greylurker wrote:
I'm more disapointed in that nobody else gets combat feats now.
Advanced Maneuver, pg. 280.

Provided you don't mind using 2 other feats first...


Kirtri wrote:
Renchard wrote:
Greylurker wrote:
I'm more disapointed in that nobody else gets combat feats now.
Advanced Maneuver, pg. 280.
Provided you don't mind using 2 other feats first...

Both of which you provide you a benefit.

The fundamental issue here is, if feats for combat become general feats, what do you give to the fighter? Where else can his identity lie?


Renchard wrote:
Kirtri wrote:
Renchard wrote:
Greylurker wrote:
I'm more disapointed in that nobody else gets combat feats now.
Advanced Maneuver, pg. 280.
Provided you don't mind using 2 other feats first...

Both of which you provide you a benefit.

The fundamental issue here is, if feats for combat become general feats, what do you give to the fighter? Where else can his identity lie?

In the cool Adv Weapon/Armor Training stuff he could get by the end of 1st Ed? Also in getting to Legendary in more weapons/armor.

(thinking of why does the fighter get very little buffs for light armor? My poor dex fighter....)


I'm ambivalent about this issue. I do think having the fighter's identity built around it's mastery of weapons and armor is a good idea, but at the same time, I think I will miss general combat feats.

That being said, I do like most of what I'm seeing with the fighter, and while some of the feats might have a 4e "power" vibe to them (not that I disliked 4e), the way they interact with the action economy makes them feel more organic. I think it looks like a fun setup, but I'll see how I feel in play before deciding on it one way or another.

My biggest complaint is that the fighter is shoe-horned into being a heavy armor specialist. I don't think it's the worst thing ever, but I'd rather see fighters be equally competent in all armor types, or at least be able to choose which type they focus on, as with weapon types.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Renchard wrote:
Fallyrion Dunegrién wrote:
Renchard wrote:
Greylurker wrote:
I'm more disapointed in that nobody else gets combat feats now.
Advanced Maneuver, pg. 280.
So you need to multiclass as a fighter. It's bad,
Incorrect. It's good.

Fighters can't have things that others have to spend lots of resources to get? Like Renchard, I think it's overdue, myself.


I'm fine with that but only if my fighter can actually get dex to damage with finesse weapons, currently that seems locked entirely behind taking Rogue as your primary class which is a huge bummer.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Copying some ideas from the other thread. Ideas based around playing up Fighter's concept as tough, flexible, martial experts, at home on the battle field.

Fighter feats I'd like to see:

1. Add weapon traits to your weapon on the fly
2. Mess with number of required and free hands (Spear and Shield fighter, etc)
3. Turn actions into reactions
4. Bonuses to Medicine use in combat
5. Spend a reaction to cancel an enemy's reaction
6. Copy an enemy's feat
7. Gain improvement to all saves when raising a shield

+

8. Quickly repair shield dents and damaged equipment
9. Increase benefit of flanking
10. Ignore armor check penalties, or reduce by strength
11. Display of martial prowess to gain bonus to intimidate or perform
12. Regain resonance after landing a kill
13. The literal ability to cut through a spell


WatersLethe wrote:
flexible, martial experts

If by "flexible" you mean "can do one or two different styles of combat and be half as good at them as a specialist." Then sure.

Take a look at my (admittedly cursory) analysis over in this thread.


Zaister wrote:
Both feats are activities that take 2 actions. You cannot use both of them with the same attack. This is similar to how in first edition Vital Strike and Cleave are both standard actions and cannot be used with the same attack, for example.

Awesome. Totally makes sense. Can you please point me to a 1st or 2nd level fighter feat that functions like PF1e Weapon Focus, Power Attack, Combat Expertise in that I could takes these feats and they would modify the same attack? Just so I can help tell the difference (and also I'm trying to build a dwarf fighter).

Zaister wrote:
Also: they are not powers. I know you're using the word in the D&D4 way, but in the Pathfinder Playtest that term has another meaning. Powers are special spells that are cast with spell points, not spell slots, for example a cleric's Channel Energy.

Sure. I'll use at-will special attacks to help avoid confusion and knee jerk reactions from posters.

At the moment the earliest feats I can see that can be combined (ignoring the feats that simply improve a special attack and only improve that single special attack) is Agile Grace at 10th level (not including stances which are mutually exclusive with other stances)? That's a lot of levels to spend on gaining and improving at-will special attacks before you finally get a feat that can be used on the same attack as another feat.

I just want to be a fighter that has a single type of attack he has invested in and can use action after action, round after round without ignoring half my fighter feats.

Thanks to everyone who responded in a constructive way.


PF2 Fighter's Certain Strike (LV10) class feat is just a pathfinderized version of the the 4e Fighter's Reaping Strike (LV1) at-will power.

So am I supposed to think that the power level in Pathfinder is lower, more akin to 5e? But then why make a +1/level? To think the power level is greater than Bounded Accuracy 5e, mor akin to 4e?

Unfortunately what I can see is that Paizo didn't knew what to aim and shoot at every corner/concept.


Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I guess this is the right place to say this, but I'm just really disappointed with how the open/press system was implemented. In the class preview it made it sound like Fighters would be able to enact different stances and styles based on their chosen fighting style and unleash specialized devastating combos, like in something like Soul Calibur. You're rewarded for specialization with more oomph and pizzazz, but if you go for a more even spread you have more (probably weaker) options available. I guess kind of like a Weapon Training system that opens up attack options instead of giving bonuses to attack/damage.

Instead it's more like being that one kid who only plays as Nightmare and spams the headbutt. Because of how the feats are structured you're basically forced to specialize in specific chains, because not doing so gimps you or at least gives the impression that it gimps you due to the specific level restrictions placed on the feats.

Plus not everything builds into a specific open/press combo, so you'd have to build either for a combo's existence or for a specific build. That point is probably less of a valid complaint though since it can be rectified with just more content.


Fallyrion Dunegrién wrote:
Ronin_Knight wrote:
GentleGiant wrote:

Everything looks like 4th ed things to John, it's a shame he can't get rid of that bias.

To be fair most of the playtest books scream a weird 4E/5E Hybrid to me.
Agreed.

If you haven't had a chance to peruse 13th Age and/or Shadow of the Demon Lord, I would highly recommend a look at those. Age has some similar trappings for abilities (powers, feats, and +level modifier) and Shadow has done a good job of emulating the "choices matter throughout the career [life, if you're lucky] of the character".

Liberty's Edge

Fallyrion Dunegrién wrote:
Ronin_Knight wrote:
GentleGiant wrote:

Everything looks like 4th ed things to John, it's a shame he can't get rid of that bias.

To be fair most of the playtest books scream a weird 4E/5E Hybrid to me.
Agreed.

Agreed considering 2 of the lead designers worked on 4E.

Community / Forums / Archive / Pathfinder / Playtests & Prerelease Discussions / Pathfinder Playtest / Player Rules / Classes / Fighter feats: 4th ed Powers or actual feats? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.