| 9 people marked this as a favorite. |
Hey gang, you may remember me from the vigilante guide. Well I'm back not only with a fighter guide, but a full on blog and a pledge to write guides for every Pathfinder Second Edition class! Take a look, feel free to follow, and if you really enjoyed it and want to get every guide a month early, I have a Patreon too.
It's not without merit, I'll freely acknowledge that, but that merit is very specific and limited. While they've made it so you're no longer picking a single weapon and sticking with it by default courtesy of the removal of weapon focus, the collapsing of weapon groups and the relative ease of rune transference, but at the same time, most players are proooobably going to be picking a primary weapon and sticking with it. Not to say that they won't have a backup weapon, but said backup weapon probably won't be worth dedicating one of your limited ancestry feats to. Hence, two stars. I'm of the mind only compelling reason to take it over another feat is if you're using an advanced weapon in that group.
I think you miss on the level 13 weapon expertise feats. These are great reasons to not be a human as they allow the fighter to pick a group and also get these weapons as legendary at level 13. You can be an elf fighter and pick a melee weapon group and also get bows at legendary with elven weapon expertise. Or a dwarf and get picks, battleaxes, warhammers and dwarven weapons at legendary with dwarven weapon expertise.
The fighter will get all martial weapons legendary at level 19, but these feats allow more weapons at legendary 6 levels earlier.
I agree, plus you can Retrain at 19th...if the campaign ever gets there.
While the Dwarf one has limited use (though I do have a build that very much can make use of it!), ones like for Elf (or Hobgoblin) are excellent for switch-hitters, which most archers should be in PF2.
Other builds that could use it:
One-hander/Shield/Double Slice
Most gauntlet/one-hander builds
People w/ Shifting Runes who want/need to swap damage types on their main weapon.
I'd also suggest 2WF builds should choose two (or all three) different damage types, which some weapon groups lack.
There is the downside of needing the first feat which is really for getting Advanced or Uncommon Weapons re: Fighters. But on its own, the 13th level feat is worthwhile.
Looks nice! I think you forgot to cover intimidating strike (fighter feat level 2).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
One thing I think needs to be in this guide is to note which feats are flourishes, because you can only ever use 1 flourish feat a turn. For example, a Two-Weapon fighter who multiclassed into Monk cannot use both Flurry of Blows and Two Weapon Flurry in the same turn, because both of those are flourish feats.
For example, a Two-Weapon fighter who multiclassed into Monk cannot use both Flurry of Blows and Two Weapon Flurry in the same turn, because both of those are flourish feats.
Well, Two Weapon Flurry requires weapons, so it wouldn't work with FoB anyways.
Checking it out now! I am just barely into learning 2nd Edition, so for now I'll confine my comments to a proofreading items:
Strength: Change "should till probably have a few points here" to "should still probably have a few points here".
The link for Mountain's Stoutness goes to Tomb-Watcher's Glare.
"Incredibly Investiture" should be "Incredible Investiture".
"Legendary Sneak (***) Good for Sneaky Fighter, naturally for anyone else." -- I think something is missing in the text here.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
For example, a Two-Weapon fighter who multiclassed into Monk cannot use both Flurry of Blows and Two Weapon Flurry in the same turn, because both of those are flourish feats.Well, Two Weapon Flurry requires weapons, so it wouldn't work with FoB anyways.
No, but you can FoB with unarmed strikes even if your hands are occupied, or use monastic weaponry to gain FoB with weapons.
Nice guide! I find it very helpful to read through comprehensive guides like this one when figuring out how to think about a class.
One comment: I'm inclined to think the guide underrates Natural Ambition and Ancient Elf.
Consider Natural Ambition. The guide is absolutely right that a lot of the first level fighter feats don't synergize well. But there are a lot of different combat situations one might end up in, and having one of these feats to help you in those situations is generally more useful (IMO) than what most ancestry feats give you.
Pretty much any melee fighter will end up in situations where they'd benefit from Power Attack, Sudden Charge, or Point-Blank Shot -- the first in cases where you're fighting something with a high resistance to your damage type, the second in cases where you need to cover a fair bit of ground to reach your target, the third against nearby enemies you need to use ranged weapons against (e.g., enemies that are flying and dive-bombing the party, or on the other side of a 20' chasm, or shooting from the balcony above, etc).
None of these are necessary, but they're nice options to have when these kinds of situations arise. And having one those options available seems (IMO) much better than any other 1st level ancestry feat the guide gives two stars to. Compare the option of being able to Power Attack against creatures with resistance to (say) Devil's Advocate, which gives you some mild bonuses when trying to interact with devils, or Courteous Comeback, which allows you to reroll a critically failed diplomacy check 1/month in a community. In most APs there will be at least a couple dozen combats where it'll be useful to have the option to Power Attack, while in most APs Devil's Advocate and Courteous Comeback will never be useful.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
We should be praising this man for the work he put in here, this is brilliant stuff must have taken quite a long time. Very well done sir.
We should be praising this man for the work he put in here, this is brilliant stuff must have taken quite a long time. Very well done sir.
Agreed!
When can we expect a Bard guide? Is it on your radar?
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Looks nice! I think you forgot to cover intimidating strike (fighter feat level 2).
Thank you. I'm setting the 15th of every month as Guide Update Day, so I'll be adding it back in then.
One thing I think needs to be in this guide is to note which feats are flourishes, because you can only ever use 1 flourish feat a turn. For example, a Two-Weapon fighter who multiclassed into Monk cannot use both Flurry of Blows and Two Weapon Flurry in the same turn, because both of those are flourish feats.
So funny story, I actually finished this guide about a month ago, and at that point I hadn't actually looked closely enough at flourishes to realize how impactful they were, so basically every flourish is on my radar for reevaluation. Thanks for the reminder though.
Porridge: I was on the fence to be honest, and will probably be upping Natural Ambition to 3 stars after consideration. Ancient Elf is also under reevaluation but I'm less certain about that, if only because it only applies if you a) have a multiclass you want and b) have a 2nd level class feat you absolutely must have. Either way, the feedback is appreciated.
We should be praising this man for the work he put in here, this is brilliant stuff must have taken quite a long time. Very well done sir.
Aw, stop, you're making me blush. This took me longer than future guides will if only because I now have a template with all the feats listed and hyperlinked already.
When can we expect a Bard guide? Is it on your radar?
The current pipeline is ranger next month and champion in February. For casters in general, those are going to wait until after I've finished the Spells guide I'm working on on the side, which I'm angling to release as the March guide, and bard is probably going to be the first guide after that.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
For casters in general, those are going to wait until after I've finished the Spells guide I'm working on on the side, which I'm angling to release as the March guide, and bard is probably going to be the first guide after that.
I would seriously *love* to see a spells guide. So much has changed with respect to both the efficacy of certain spells, and the role of spells in general, that it’s hard to get a good feel for what spells to focus on.
So looking forward to it!
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
For casters in general, those are going to wait until after I've finished the Spells guide I'm working on on the side, which I'm angling to release as the March guide, and bard is probably going to be the first guide after that.I would seriously *love* to see a spells guide. So much has changed with respect to both the efficacy of certain spells, and the role of spells in general, that it’s hard to get a good feel for what spells to focus on.
So looking forward to it!
Anecdotally, I've been drafting a spell guide for a while now, and it presents a bigger challenge than one might think.
In PF1 spells were fairly discrete and could be looked at in a more isolated way than in PF2. I honestly don't think enough data / rules clarification is out there yet to make a meaningful list.
It's certainly why I've avoid it thus far.
For example, we don't yet really know if Flaming Sphere is one the best damage dealing spells ever printed, or merely "pretty okay".
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
In PF1 spells were fairly discrete and could be looked at in a more isolated way than in PF2. I honestly don't think enough data / rules clarification is out there yet to make a meaningful list.
It's certainly why I've avoid it thus far.
For example, we don't yet really know if Flaming Sphere is one the best damage dealing spells ever printed, or merely "pretty okay".
I'm running into a similar issue, which is why it's a side project for me right now. That being said, it's something that I'm going to run into with casters in general (in fact I did when I wrote a wizard guide for Legendary, and regretted about a quarter of my spell ratings later as the system became more clear), and rather than go through all the same spells over and over again, I think it'll be easier to simply compile all of the spells together and make updates as time goes on and things become more clear.
Count me as someone who appreciates the work you put into it FedoraFerret. I really enjoyed your insights on the Fighter feats in particular.
You can run this up a flagpole and I'll salute it.
|
FedoraFerret,
In case you wanted a (non-standard?) idea with what to do with yourself. I am of the opinion that PF2 lends easily making "Gish" classes straight out of the Core and beyond.
So: What about a Gish Guide?
Premise: Which Classes lend themselves to better Bases, which to better MCDs? Compare / contrast the different Casting MCDs. What Class Feats support different kinds of Gish strategies? How does Tradition impact how a Gish conducts themselves? Which Ancestries are best suited?...
Plus, I think the idea of Class-agnostic guides would pair well with the "traditional" type of Class guide.
Cheers.
Class agnostic guides are part of the plan! After all, there's a finite number of classes in the game and eventually I will run out. Aside from the spells guide and an animal companion guide, though, I want to have all the class guides done first.
Hey there,
So I was going over your guides last night, and while the guides themselves are pretty great, the site overall felt a little hard to navigate. Tough to get from one thing to the next.
I want to reiterate, though, the actual content was aces.
Ghorrin Redblade
So I was going over your guides last night, and while the guides themselves are pretty great, the site overall felt a little hard to navigate. Tough to get from one thing to the next.
I want to reiterate, though, the actual content was aces.
Thanks for the feedback. I've been meaning to put in a table of contents for better navigation and this was the kick in the pants for me to figure out how to, uh, do that.
Minor Comment - The human tattoo ancestry feats can't select Divination Spells (i.e., true strike). Rune lords don't believe in divination.
You are correct about that, I'm putting it in the patch list now. Thanks!
One thing I'd note: Savage Critical is still really good for attacks after the first.
Yes, you'll crit with a 19 on the first attack anyway, but critting on a 19 on the second or third attack should be better than one star.
It's also a nice boost for when you're debuffed.
You're underestimating Additional Lore. For a skill feat, it can make a huge impact on your ability to generate money, and it's great flavorwise too. Did you miss the part where the lore skill's proficiency advances automatically?
I did not. I don't consider spending a feat on a bump to your Earn Income checks worth more than two stars, particularly not when Crafting is a more broadly useful skill for investment and will do the same.
Also, you're seriously underrating Battle Medicine. Did you miss the part where it's a 1-action heal that you can use on yourself, in combat, even with your hands full? It's basically a mini version of Untwisting Iron Buffer.
"Even with your hands full" is contested as to whether that's RAI or not, and personally I fall under "it is not RAI and not how it runs at my table" because how exactly are you meant to be bandaging yourself up with your hands full. As such, unlike Untwisting Iron Buffer, it is useless for basically everyone except archers (who need it less, given they try to live outside of the fray) and einhanders, and gets 2 stars.
One thing I'd note: Savage Critical is still really good for attacks after the first.
Yes, you'll crit with a 19 on the first attack anyway, but critting on a 19 on the second or third attack should be better than one star.
It's also a nice boost for when you're debuffed.
Y'know, I hadn't considered that, but you're right. I'll reevaluate it for the Gods and Magic patch.
I agree with your interpretation of Battle Medicine re: hands, but would also score it higher (especially since Medicine is also a solid way for a Fighter to contribute out of combat since Wisdom is likely being boosted). Or, as you infer, give Battle Medicine two ratings: one for builds that have difficulty getting a free hand and a higher one for builds that have a free hand or get one easily.
Arguably, many of the ratings should have multiple scores depending on one's primary build.
You only have enough skill increases to max out 3 skills. Are you assuming that everyone is just gonna max out Craft? Spending one skill feat to bring a lore skill to legendary is a much, much, much smaller cost than investing your skill ranks to bring Craft to legendary.You're underestimating Additional Lore. For a skill feat, it can make a huge impact on your ability to generate money, and it's great flavorwise too. Did you miss the part where the lore skill's proficiency advances automatically?I did not. I don't consider spending a feat on a bump to your Earn Income checks worth more than two stars, particularly not when Crafting is a more broadly useful skill for investment and will do the same.
I think that's a bit campaign dependent.
In a pirate campaign, it's an awesome investment, Lore: Sailing.In a door-smash hack-n'-slash, not so worthwhile, but I imagine most APs have some Lore that ties directly into the story arc, even if it's just Lore: "AP's Ancient Civilization" or Lore: "AP's country or terrain". Lore can do double duty like that, and in some cases it's great to have many PCs w/ the same Lore for redundancy, what with secret rolling and such.
I agree with your interpretation of Battle Medicine re: hands, but would also score it higher (especially since Medicine is also a solid way for a Fighter to contribute out of combat since Wisdom is likely being boosted). Or, as you infer, give Battle Medicine two ratings: one for builds that have difficulty getting a free hand and a higher one for builds that have a free hand or get one easily.
Arguably, many of the ratings should have multiple scores depending on one's primary build.
I'll reconsider a three star rating. At the end of the day if I try to rate everything for all the different builds and how they apply it'll start getting to be too much imo, but I should keep in mind that two stars is "it's not a great idea but don't let me stop you" or "this is incredibly dependent on the campaign and situations you're in," while three star fits "depends on your build" a lot better.
You only have enough skill increases to max out 3 skills. Are you assuming that everyone is just gonna max out Craft? Spending one skill feat to bring a lore skill to legendary is a much, much, much smaller cost than investing your skill ranks to bring Craft to legendary.
No, I'm assuming that boosting the rank of a lore skill is highly situational and subjective. If you have a lot of downtime, sure, you're increasing the likelihood of a critical success which is more money in your pocket. That puts it in the same category as Legendary Professional and Legendary Performer, which are also two star because it's campaign dependent. Or, as Castilliano said, there's plenty of situations where Sailing Lore or Mountain Lore or [City] Lore would be really helpful, but those are all, again, campaign dependent, and honestly I would consider something along the lines of Untrained Improvisation or another "level to untrained" feat a more generally valuable use of your feats, because that's a lot of Lores you can roll at a decent bonus instead of just the one at a really good bonus.
Once again, Additional Lore is two stars, not one. I'm not saying it's worthless, I'm saying that it's very situational, narrow and dependent on the kind of campaign you're in.
Maybe the star system isn't sufficient for PF2 guides?
If "depends on build" only gets 3 stars, how can a feat transcend that?
Maybe have a base number of stars, w/ bonuses (or even minuses) tied to campaign or build differences? Not sure how that'd play out, maybe something like.
SHIELD BLOCK * (since it's useless if you don't use a shield)
Build +*** (Def.) Since it's so key for most, not all, defensive builds
Campaign n/a
This might even bleed over into skills
CRAFTING: **
Build +** (shield build)
Campaign +* (w/ downtime or repair opportunities)
Just tossing that out there since I think some feats (especially for Fighters) vary from useless to must-have simply due to build choice.
So you don't value Additional Lore because you assume there won't be any downtime opportunities? Where is this assumption coming from?
There's no assumption here. The value of something like Additional Lore scales with the amount of downtime you have. That's a 2 star rating. It's not an awful trap choice, but it doesn't have general "anyone in any campaign can probably benefit from this" value, which is the mark required to reach 3 stars.
Castilliano: I like where you're head is at, but the point is trying to keep it simple. I try to include clarifications or notes of "hey if you're doing this it's more worth it than not" in the commentary but the purpose of the stars is meant to be something quick and easy to reference.
I think Lunging Stance deserves more than one star. The best use of it is with a reach weapon (and combat reflexes) so that you have the largest circle of death this side of the giant barbarian and you're a lot better at using reactions than the barbarian.
It is impossible to have too much reach. If I'm playing a fighter with a polearm, I'd like to threaten people on the moon if possible.
{. . .}
It is impossible to have too much reach. If I'm playing a fighter with a polearm, I'd like to threaten people on the moon if possible.
I guess Pathfinder 2nd Edition doesn't have a Sarissa yet. Tat is when reach gets so unwieldy as to be not worthwhile unless you are in something like a pike square.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It is impossible to have too much reach. If I'm playing a fighter with a polearm, I'd like to threaten people on the moon if possible.
(shakes glaive at moon)
Stupid moon men! I'll get you yet!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
“We know. That’s why we stay up here. To avoid your reach. Also there are Gnomes where you are, and we are just not ready to deal with there <insert not so polite word for poop here>.”
(lowers glaive for a moment)
He does have a point there...
(snaps out of it, eyes moon suspiciously)