|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The Hybrid Classes are some of the best classes, in my opinion. Well done. Except the Swashbuckler. Everyone point and laugh at the Swashbuckler. Ha(x3)!!!The swash has been given buffs through Deeds of Renown, so it is in a better spot now. You're no longer incapacitated when you can't deal precision dmg and getting Resolve means there's no reliance on charisma for better saves.
The Inigo Montoya deeds!
Thirdly, there is totally a feat that allows advanced training. I'm unclear what you mean by this.What is it?
They have totally unexpected names.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Channeling is really fine. It just requires support like the Shield Other spell.
Thirdly, there is totally a feat that allows advanced training. I'm unclear what you mean by this.What is it?They have totally unexpected names.
Yeah, I guess someone misunderstood and thought you had to trade in the class features to get Advanced Weapon/Armor training, but they can be picked up through feats.
There's little reason to since swapping extra weapon groups is way better than spending the feat, although I guess you would want to pick it up as a feat at level 5.
Same for Armor Training. You probably wont need the extra max dex because you're likely not hitting the max dex to armor unless you're an archer. So just trade that all day long.
But still, feats are an option.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Thirdly, there is totally a feat that allows advanced training. I'm unclear what you mean by this.What is it?They have totally unexpected names.
Yeah, I guess someone misunderstood and thought you had to trade in the class features to get Advanced Weapon/Armor training, but they can be picked up through feats.
There's little reason to since swapping extra weapon groups is way better than spending the feat, although I guess you would want to pick it up as a feat at level 5.
Same for Armor Training. You probably wont need the extra max dex because you're likely not hitting the max dex to armor unless you're an archer. So just trade that all day long.
But still, feats are an option.
Those feats can't be taken unless you have Weapon Training, thus those archetypes that replace it can't have those feats.
Those feats can't be taken unless you have Weapon Training, thus those archetypes that replace it can't have those feats.Thirdly, there is totally a feat that allows advanced training. I'm unclear what you mean by this.What is it?They have totally unexpected names.
Yeah, I guess someone misunderstood and thought you had to trade in the class features to get Advanced Weapon/Armor training, but they can be picked up through feats.
There's little reason to since swapping extra weapon groups is way better than spending the feat, although I guess you would want to pick it up as a feat at level 5.
Same for Armor Training. You probably wont need the extra max dex because you're likely not hitting the max dex to armor unless you're an archer. So just trade that all day long.
But still, feats are an option.
Exactly... and many of the class features obtained with those archetypes... feel like feats. This is why these abilities should replace the bonus feats instead of Armor and Weapon Training.
I agree with archetypes that restrict Weapon Training to specific weapons, but not when it replace them with something different.
That wasnt what you stated though. You said there was no feat that could take advanced training as a bonus feat. You can. There was no added stipulations. Obviously you need to meet prerequisites for any feat.
The catch is that if an archetype replaces Armor/Weapon Training, you cannot TAKE these feats... at all... and you need at least TWO Weapon Training advancements (one for the weapon group, and a second to select your Training). Also, the Fighter CANNOT take those feats to get back Armor/Weapon Training if it lost it to an archetype. I've seen feats and abilities that allows you to get class features BACK if you traded them for archetype abilities.
And again, trading out weapon or armour doesnt lock you out of both, just the one, so my earlier statement is also factual to point out that it's not an absolute as earlier stated, JiCi. You stated trading out one or both means you dont have any option for advanced training, but that's only true if you trade out both. Trading out weapon training still means advanced armour training is an option, and indeed an excellent one.
The reason it's so bad right now is that several Advanced Weapon Training options counterbalance the Fighter's glaring flaws:
* Armed Bravery adds your Bravery bonus to all Will saves, which is poor.* Fighter's Reflexes adds the Weapon Training bous to all Reflex saves, which is poor.
* Focused Weapon (the big one) scales your weapon,s damage like a Warpriest's Sacred Weapon, suddenly making your dagger or unarmed strike less laughable.
Armed Bravery and Fighter's Reflexes could have EASILY being selected as Advanced Armor Training, like any other option where you can substiture a weapon for a suit of armor. Furthermore, Armor Training is rather worthless for the Fighter, since less Armor Check Penalty and more Maximum Dex Bonus aren't gonna make much a difference. Oh, and the Fighter STILL gets the speed improvement, even if you take Advanced Armor Training.
Seriously, I love the Weapon Master's Handbook for what it brought to teh Fighter, but they should have reowrked EVERY SINGLE ARCHETYPE released and make their new class features replace Bonus Feats instead of Training.
You do realize reworking every single archetype because of the content of a side-book is absurd right?
Don't get me wrong, I buff the fighter a bit in my home games but I do not personally have the time or patience to rework every existing archetype, nor could the WMH have fit all those changes. Pages are limited and pricey, yo.
And yes, its unfortunate that the Fighter cannot take archetypes that replace AWT/AAT and then get AWT/AAT from another source. However, thats the world we live in. If you want to sit down and write out changes to all the Fighter's archetypes to make them compatible with AWT/AAT, feel free.
I will agree that the plethora of fighter archetypes that got rid of weapon training for something similar but not the same (and lacking the wording of "functions like weapon training") basically tanked in value after the release of Advanced Weapon Training.
It invalidated many archetypes, because they become strictly inferior. Like they might do some niche stuff that was cool, but the bonus available from AWT are typically so much better at making a well rounded good character.
Now, I don't see this as a big problem in which "fighters need more love" it's just that now all those archetypes that replaced weapon training are now a waste of space.
But there's always been bad archetypes, so I guess it just doesn't bother me.
You do realize reworking every single archetype because of the content of a side-book is absurd right?
Don't get me wrong, I buff the fighter a bit in my home games but I do not personally have the time or patience to rework every existing archetype, nor could the WMH have fit all those changes. Pages are limited and pricey, yo.
And yes, its unfortunate that the Fighter cannot take archetypes that replace AWT/AAT and then get AWT/AAT from another source. However, thats the world we live in. If you want to sit down and write out changes to all the Fighter's archetypes to make them compatible with AWT/AAT, feel free.
I know you can houserule archetypes, but still... even at the very beginning when archetypes were introduced, it felt awkward that Fighters got special abilities IN ADDITION of Bonus Feats, when many of these abilities made feats trivial. The Figter can essentially run out of ideas when it comes to feat selection, so if the archetypes were designed to replace the Bonus Feats and leave the AAT/AWT intact, that would have elevated a LOT of issues.
I will agree that the plethora of fighter archetypes that got rid of weapon training for something similar but not the same (and lacking the wording of "functions like weapon training") basically tanked in value after the release of Advanced Weapon Training.
It invalidated many archetypes, because they become strictly inferior. Like they might do some niche stuff that was cool, but the bonus available from AWT are typically so much better at making a well rounded good character.
Now, I don't see this as a big problem in which "fighters need more love" it's just that now all those archetypes that replaced weapon training are now a waste of space.
Exactly, and the fact that none of the 2 feats AVR mentioned even works with those archetypes.
But there's always been bad archetypes, so I guess it just doesn't bother me.
When 90% of those archetypes are worthless, it tells a lot of about the class...
* Fighter's Reflexes adds the Weapon Training bous to all Reflex saves, which is poor.
Given that the WT bonus won't be more than 2 until 13th level, for the great majority of play this is no better than Lightning Reflexes, which is a mediocre feat in the first place.
Armed Bravery is OK: slightly bigger bonus to something much more important.
Focused Weapon (the big one) scales your weapon,s damage like a Warpriest's Sacred Weapon, suddenly making your dagger or unarmed strike less laughable.
Fair point for builds using daggers or unarmed strikes, but pretty irrelevant for anyone else.
But it's true that it wouldn't have been that hard to put in a note that AAT and AWT could replace certain things that replace AT and WT for archetypes where it applies.
Ultimately, AWT and AAT are an ugly fudge to some very obvious problems (notably poor Will save, too few skills) that had existed since 3e.
* Fighter's Reflexes adds the Weapon Training bous to all Reflex saves, which is poor.Given that the WT bonus won't be more than 2 until 13th level, for the great majority of play this is no better than Lightning Reflexes, which is a mediocre feat in the first place.
Armed Bravery is OK: slightly bigger bonus to something much more important.
Even if WT is essentially a small bonus, it's still a bonus. You go from +6 to Reflex save to +10.
Focused Weapon (the big one) scales your weapon,s damage like a Warpriest's Sacred Weapon, suddenly making your dagger or unarmed strike less laughable.Fair point for builds using daggers or unarmed strikes, but pretty irrelevant for anyone else.
I'd say that any weapon up to 1d8 base damage will benefit from Focused Weapon. That includes the quarterstaff (and other double weapon), the shortspear, gauntlets, the short sword, armor spikes, the rapier, the scimitar, the rapier, the scythe, the dart, the shortbow, the whip (combined with the feats), the garrote, the hand crossbow and the shuriken.
But it's true that it wouldn't have been that hard to put in a note that AAT and AWT could replace certain things that replace AT and WT for archetypes where it applies.
Ultimately, AWT and AAT are an ugly fudge to some very obvious problems (notably poor Will save, too few skills) that had existed since 3e.
I will give props to Paizo to make the Figther slightly better.
and then there's a monk XD
My biggest gripe is that Fast Movement is just downright useless in combat, because you'll NEVER travel 100 ft. per round to smack a target :P HOWEVER, it would have been smarter to make Fast Movement a Ki pool ability, like spending 1 Ki point to get Fast Movement (scaled according to your level) for 1 round per Wisdom modifier.
Maybe with this, there could have been speical powers that trade movement for attack power ;)
Monks probably should have gotten the UnRogue's Dex-to-DMG so they could have been a Dex/Wis class. Freeing up how SAD they are would go a long ways in fixing them from the start with smarter choices made in point buy/character creation/stat allotment.
Fighters have needed a lot of work for a long time. AWT/AAT goes a long ways in helping the Vanilla Fighter, but, as stated, a lot of the archetypes remove all the help they were given... and seldom replace it with something equal. But, it's the Fighter, guys... there are better choices.
Fighters have needed a lot of work for a long time. AWT/AAT goes a long ways in helping the Vanilla Fighter, but, as stated, a lot of the archetypes remove all the help they were given... and seldom replace it with something equal. But, it's the Fighter, guys... there are better choices.
That's like saying "pick the oracle instead of the cleric", "pick the arcanist instead of the wizard/sorcerer" or "pick the investigator instead of the rogue".
No. It's not.
If you want to do the things Fighters do, then be a Fighter... they have never been exciting, just dependable. That is their niche.
Now, if you literally want to do anything else, choices exist.
When you choose to be a Fighter, you are choosing to be something that relies on no tricks. They don't nova. They don't tire or fatigue. As soon as they get their armor on, nothing changes. Ever.
If you want nova-potential, or pools of BS... be something else.
Given that the WT bonus won't be more than 2 until 13th level, for the great majority of play this is no better than Lightning Reflexes, which is a mediocre feat in the first place.
True, normally that's the case. Gloves of Dueling changes this though. Which is also the reason why the Warrior Spirit AWT is completely busted.
**
Focused Weapon (the big one) scales your weapon,s damage like a Warpriest's Sacred Weapon, suddenly making your dagger or unarmed strike less laughable.
It's not that great. Your medium dagger goes from 1d4 to 1d8 at level 5-9 which is +2 dmg. It increases to +3 at level 10-14, and +4.5 at level 15-19. It's a minor benefit even for those builds that use low-dmg weapons.
**
When you choose to be a Fighter, you are choosing to be something that relies on no tricks. They don't nova. They don't tire or fatigue. As soon as they get their armor on, nothing changes. Ever.
If you want nova-potential, or pools of BS... be something else.
I'm gonna play a fighter that is entirely reliant on tricks, pools of BS, limited use per day abilities, and that goes full nova every fight. And you can't stop me.
Focused Weapon (the big one) scales your weapon's damage like a Warpriest's Sacred Weapon, suddenly making your dagger or unarmed strike less laughable.It's not that great. Your medium dagger goes from 1d4 to 1d8 at level 5-9 which is +2 dmg. It increases to +3 at level 10-14, and +4.5 at level 15-19. It's a minor benefit even for those builds that use low-dmg weapons.
How come it's fine for the Warpriest, but not the Fighter?
Regarding the AWT/AAT issue... It seems to me they could've just added a "a Fighter who has an archetype that trades away Weapon Training can use this as a prereq for all feats requiring Weapon Training" to Martial Focus. It already counts as WT for Weapon Mastery feats, after all. I'm guessing there's something similar for armor to cover AAT?
Sure, it's not a great solution - or even a good one - but I think it's better than invalidating all the archetypes.
There should have been a feat to gain [back] Armor/Weapon Training... which you could have THEN select the feats to get AAT/AWT.
I mean, the Alchemist literally have discoveries for regular bombs and regular mutagens that it can select if it doesn't have it. The Fighter should gotten this...
The most popular warpriest archetype loses the sacred weapon damage. So, it's not exactly a popular mechanic for the warpriest either. The scaling damage is fun for some niche builds, but it's the kind of thing that belongs in a talent or an archetype instead of something a class should have been based on.
Yeah, sacred weapon damage is just a so-so ability.
Like it's cool if you get it for free, but not worth paying much for it.
The main problem being that later in the game your damage dice will represent one of the smallest sources of damage contribution compared to everything else.
Wielding a 1d4 weapon vs a 2d6 weapon is 2.5 avg damage vs 7. It's simply a pitiful ROI.
And a lot of times you're going to be using 1d8, 1d10, or even 2d6 weapons instead of low damage die weapons.
Sacred Weapons make weak niche weapons more viable, but at high levels still isn't so important.
How come it's fine for the Warpriest, but not the Fighter?
Was this a genuine question or a rebuttal?
...Sacred Weapon...How come it's fine for the Warpriest, but not the Fighter?
I expect it's really just a sop to worshippers of Pharasma who really think they should use a dagger for RP reasons, or to pile on the obedience and River Rat benefits. But even then it's only +1 until 5th level, and if the character has any meaningful strength or PA they'd do far more damage with a greatsword. Of course there's shields, etc.
Calistrians might do something useful with a whip, too. A fighter could do likewise, but that's a properly niche build.
Honestly, it might be a controversial take but I think Fighters got too much love and it makes the rest of the game worse.
There are a bunch of AWT/AAT options that act like patches for stuff the game doesn't handle well, any martial who tries to explore those features would love to have some of these options... but they're fighter only.
Even Paizo's martial feat design in general feels that way. Having to wait for a campaign to be half over (or longer!) for some builds to come together is obscene... but it also serves as an incentive for Fighters because they're one of the only classes that can actually take these feats fast enough to make some concepts playable.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Honestly, it might be a controversial take but I think Fighters got too much love and it makes the rest of the game worse.
There are a bunch of AWT/AAT options that act like patches for stuff the game doesn't handle well, any martial who tries to explore those features would love to have some of these options... but they're fighter only.
Even Paizo's martial feat design in general feels that way. Having to wait for a campaign to be half over (or longer!) for some builds to come together is obscene... but it also serves as an incentive for Fighters because they're one of the only classes that can actually take these feats fast enough to make some concepts playable.
I also sometimes wish there were a *ton* less feats, and the ones that existed were not such basic meat-and-potatoes abilities that anyone should get (or that you need to function in your role and probably should have gotten as a class ability) or a piddly +1 to this or +2 to that, but actual cool things.
The existence of a class whose 'class ability' is 'get 10 more feats' seems to have only increased the proliferation of hundreds of mostly not terribly flavorful or sexy feats, or long feat chains that other classes can't finish until 12th level or something, when the game is long over for many campaigns.
Fighter... oh boy...
It feels like the other martial and semi-martial classes always have something more special than the Fighter, be the Barbarian's Rage, the Cavalier's Challenge, the Shifter's Aspects, the Ranger's Styles, the Magus's Spells and such.
The problem with Fighter, both for flavor and mechanics, is that it's defined by being undefined. It's a blank slate, its only identity being "a martial".
That's a bad state for a class to be in, because how many potential playstyles a class offers is irrelevant for an actual character, unless it's able to fully compete with more specialized classes in those playstyles - at which point the class is in danger of invalidating those other classes. Naturally, it also has no hang up points for flavor.
Wizard and Cleric actually have the same problem in a way, being blank slate arcane caster and blank slate divine caster, respectively, but of course those two have the benefit of not only having the strongest class feature in the game (prepared full casting), but also getting the best their respective class types have to offer (best respective spell lists).
Fighter falls to the other extreme, being subpar at pretty much everything because their class features are weaker than others. Combat feats are weaker than e.g. Rage Powers for most playstyles, Armor Training is negligible, and Weapon Training is a more restricted version of what others get (which destroys the flavor of "best at using weapens").
Another big issue with the Fighter is that despite what many people think or claim, lacking a daily recource is a weakness, not a strength. Just like how requiring selection allows options to be stronger (what I talked about in my first post), and ability with limited uses is stronger than an always on ability. Being able to go all day long (as long as the others or wands heal you, it's not like Fighter is self-sufficient) is utterly worthless if the other party member's can't do it. In practise, you don't have 20+ rounds of combat per day, and even if you do, it's unlikely all these rounds are equally tough.
How much Warrior Spirit helped the class shows this.
AWT, AAT and the respective feats improved the Fighter a lot, especially with Warrior Spirit and the Training enchantment, but it's still a rough patch up job. Many archetypes don't work (same problem unMonk has, but that's a better made class), and lack of a pounce option ensures that Fighter can never go above mediocre when it comes to melee fighting.
Even Paizo's martial feat design in general feels that way. Having to wait for a campaign to be half over (or longer!) for some builds to come together is obscene...
That's not too much love for Fighters, it's too much worry about Fighters. When WotC remade the classes for 3.0, they apparently were scared that a feat or two were all it took to be good at a combat style, Fighter would somehow be overpowered. And instead of giving the other classes class features that are actually good, they crippled combat feats.
Yes, Paizo should have thrown that horrible design principle of compensating for class's strength with build-in weaknesses out of the window when they made Pathfinder, but since they didn't the Fighter is indeed a class that needs love. A lot of classes should have been made fundamentally different, but that train has left the station long ago.
Archives messed up when listing them so it seems the Deeds of Renown have flown under the radar for most people.
Which is why I linked them on d20pfsrd.com, when I alluded to them in my last post. Which in turn also seems to have flown under the radar for most people. *smirk*
if memory serves during the classic Italian era where it was common, a lot of those dueling had daggers as well.
Just how old are you? o.O
Well, PF1 wasn't "that" ambitious. The intent to was to keep the classes mostly the same for as much backwards compatibility as possible with 3.5. Additions were made and some class abilities were slightly tweaked, but almost everything that was there in 3.5 stayed in PF1. In my opinion, it was the right decision to make as it lead to a good deal of success.
But the fighter probably should have moved towards talents instead of flat bonus feats. Of course, one of those talents could have been for bonus feats for backwards compatibility.
Which in turn also seems to have flown under the radar for most people. *smirk*
See, even when you're talking about them people don't notice! They're cursed, I tell you.
On a side note, I've read the replies regarding Swashbuckler and Deeds of Renown. Am I misreading Resolve, because I'm not seeing how it's THAT great (nice, but not great).
In addition to condition removal, the ability to roll twice on Fortitude/Will saves is about equal to having a +4 Charisma modifier from Charmed Life. This little detail doesn't become very useful unless you challenge the fundamental design intention of Swashbucklers. That Swashbucklers need high charisma. Unlike the Paladin, the Swashbuckler never had enough class features scaling off charisma to make it a worthwhile primary stat. People see their bad saving throws and think pumping charisma for Charmed Life is the solution when doing so is what makes them reliant on Charmed Life in the first place.
Consider the Int-based Inspired Blade archetype. If you trade out Dodging Panache for the Vengeful Heart deed of renown you have zero abilities reliant on charisma and can still spend uses of Charmed Life with Resolve to boost your saving throws. The social aspect is fixed with traits such as Student of Philosophy, and the increased number of skill ranks means you'll actually be better at it than the normal swashbuckler.
But even a normal Swashbuckler may find it wiser to not focus on charisma. A human needs to buy a 14 to increase their Panache pool by one (since the minimum is 1), which is 5-9 PB compared with a dumped stat. If they take the Vengeful Heart deed there's very little incentive for a good charisma score which helps making their build less MAD. Dependency on charisma is a weakness, especially on a martial with bad saving throws.
So in short, Vengeful Heart makes Swashbuckler Dwarves competitive with Swashbuckler Halflings. If not stronger.
Swashbuckler feels like they wanted an additional Charisma-focused melee class, but made them a weaker version of the Paladin. I mean, initially, you could just make a paladin, put them in light armor and a fancy hat, and call them a Swashbuckler. (Just one that might leave the occasional religious pamphlet behind)
Fair - I guess I'm trying to think of what else to give up and both dodging panache and opportune parry and riposte are nice ones to have
They are, and Dodging Panache is nice even without the AC bonus. You can also give up a replacement deed from an archetype as long as you kept Derring-Do.
I'm presuming you're taking feats or items that boost the amount of panache then, or at least an archetype that gives more (like the Inspired Blade)?
Definitely. Extra Panache at least once is for the best, and if you're lucky you've got a +1/4 Panache FCB. Stocking up on four or five Plume of Panache is however quite cheap.
I went with a magic item that grants Bestow Grace on me. That made it worthwhile, IMHO, to keep a good charisma
Lmao, yeah that would make it worthwhile no doubt. If you slap Divine Grace on any martial you'd see a lot more charisma builds coming forward.
There's even an archetype for it!
You call it an archetype, I call it the unchained Swashbuckler!
So in short, Vengeful Heart makes Swashbuckler Dwarves competitive with Swashbuckler Halflings. If not stronger.
I'd say dwarf Swashbucklers were always stronger than halfling Swashbucklers! Who needs Charmed Life when you have Glory of Old and Steel Soul...
I while I think that Swashbucklers and Gunslingers need defining class features (Deeds are like Alchemist Discoveries, cool but not why you play the class compared to say: Bombs/Mutagen). I'm perfectly fine with the Fighter being a mostly blank slate.
Similar to Clerics and Wizards (who were identified by Derk to be largely blank slates but better because of spell lists) the Fighter is just the martial you make of him. AAT and AWT help the dedicated fighter by giving up width for depth in terms of fighter abilities (who fights with more than one weapon catagory anyway? And better armor wearing only helps to a certain extent especially with mithral in play) . The nature of having double the feats of any other character is what makes them interesting to build, much like how having full access to the Wizard/Cleric spell list is what makes those casters interesting to play. You can build seven different Wizards and have them do entirely different things. You can build like 4 different clerics, which is nice.
Swashbuckler and Gunslinger though have nothing outside their deeds and "Ey, you can use X weapon good" which really prevents unique ones from ever existing.
I honestly have zero problems with the fighter as is. Everyone wishes they had more feats and this class is made of them, plus best BAB and almost best HD and the best armour and best weapon choices.
Other classes get free Exotic Weapon Proficiencies, don't need the entire feat tree to be viable and their lack of feats is compensated by good class features and more skills.
Maybe the real issue is not spending the non combat feats to by things that are non combat. Such as extra skill points to shore up lack of skill points. (Although if I was to change ANYTHING in this game it would be to not have even numbered skill plus int for classes. Like a Sorc wouldnt do well with 3 + int because they didnt have to study like wizards for example.) If combat feats are spent to fortify areas in one area of fighting, rather than generalizing, other levels based feats can be used for more varied character strengths.
Fighters don't benefit much from non-combat feats, that's the problem. They are so narrowed in their niche that the rest is practically worthless.
Additionally fighters do enjoy things people arent mentioning, like fighter only feats, and early access, such as weapon specialization and critical feats. They arent JUST feats. The ability to move 30 in plate mail is something most classes would kill for
The Monk can move up to 90 feet per round... but you'll never get a consistent benefit from it. Weapon Specialization is laughable with a measly +2 bonus to damage (and not euqal to your Fighter level). Critical feats are better used for finessable weapons... and rogues are experts at using them.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I while I think that Swashbucklers and Gunslingers need defining class features (Deeds are like Alchemist Discoveries, cool but not why you play the class compared to say: Bombs/Mutagen). I'm perfectly fine with the Fighter being a mostly blank slate.
In an ideal world they would be the same class, take a ‘signature weapon’ at level 1 that grants a relevant feat, and have a list of deeds they could select much like the rogue’s talents. That way you don’t end up with daft builds like a 15th level pure gunslinger who takes an hour to fix a misfire because he has the archetype that looses that specific Deed at Level 1 and can’t ever buy it back...
So in short, Vengeful Heart makes Swashbuckler Dwarves competitive with Swashbuckler Halflings. If not stronger.I'd say dwarf Swashbucklers were always stronger than halfling Swashbucklers! Who needs Charmed Life when you have Glory of Old and Steel Soul...
True true. I took the first cha-penalty race I could think of, but I suppose Goblins would have been the better example.
|
|
In an ideal world they would be the same class, take a ‘signature weapon’ at level 1 that grants a relevant feat, and have a list of deeds they could select much like the rogue’s talents.I while I think that Swashbucklers and Gunslingers need defining class features (Deeds are like Alchemist Discoveries, cool but not why you play the class compared to say: Bombs/Mutagen). I'm perfectly fine with the Fighter being a mostly blank slate.
Agreed, it would be awesome if one could make a crossbow, bow, sling or even thrown weapon 'Gunslinger' or a spear or longsword using 'Swashbuckler.'
...Sacred Weapon...How come it's fine for the Warpriest, but not the Fighter?I expect it's really just a sop to worshippers of Pharasma who really think they should use a dagger for RP reasons, or to pile on the obedience and River Rat benefits.
If you listen closely you can hear the sound of fluff writers sobbing quietly.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Fighters don't need any more help. There, I said it. Can we move on to literally any other class, please.
If this was a thread entitled "let's argue about Fighters" then sure, but it's not...
Can we move on to literally any other class, please.
We could talk about the Spiritualist but that would just be me whining about the worst designed class of them all.
Fair enough. I know I'm being a little acidic in my reply but I'm a little put off by the statement that the class is too niche and spending feats to make them branch out is useless because they are so niche.
I'm happy to move on from all that
I, personally, agree.
If you can't make SOMETHING with ALL those feats AND access to advanced training options... then that is on you, not the class. Fighter is capable of CREATING your own niche, or all but perfecting any other path in exsistence for martial warfare.
Now that that's covered... Gunslinger/Swashbuckler have also been covered...
Does the previous UnChained blanket statement fully address Ninja? Would making it compatitable with UnChained Rogue stuff, and archetypes fix it? I like it for gestalt, but find it wholesomely uninspiring by itself. Like, IS IT actually just an archetype of Rogue? Does it offer enough to even be considered THAT different?
Or how about throwing the dog a bone for 4th level casters? At least give them lots of spells to choose from, or lots of spells per day, or full caster level progression even if you insist on giving them a late start, or maybe their spells all count as one level lower for the sake of determining spell slot "cost" with metamagic feats... something, anything?
I'm guessing no one has mentioned the Paladin, because if it was the wrong kind of loving, it would be another fallen Paladin.
4 level casters aren't exactly hurting. Paladins, Rangers, Bloodragers, Child of Acavna(Sorta), etc are all perfectly functional, well performing classes. Magic is not their main draw, but an ancillary benefit to them.
I agree that Fighters are largely fine now(Insofar as being decent at fighting, they're still the worst class in the game when it comes to out of combat narrative power). It's just kind of a pain to sort through all the garbage to make one good. Generic modular fighting man should have a simpler sleeker design. The fact so many different users have chimed in on the Fighter should pretty obviously point to something being wrong fundamentally.
Bumping Fighters to 6 skill points and changing Weapon Training to Combat Training(I.E +1 to hit/damage). They should also have a class feature that allows them to apply weapon specific feats to all of their weapons.
Good joke, but the paladin already feels in a good place to me. I do wish we had better alignment options for it, but the base paladin is full of flavor and potential.
I'm guessing no one has mentioned the Paladin, because if it was the wrong kind of loving, it would be another fallen Paladin.
My fix for both the Ninja and the Paladin has been to combine them into one class. Full BAB, all good saves, good skills, Lay on Hands/Smite, Ki/Sneak Attack... it's better, but still meh.