| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
...
The fact that the only buffs you can all think of are: Haste and Heroism tells you enough.
Casters have tons of self buffs: Battle forms, a lot of long duration buffs (Mage Armor, False Life, Longstrider), circumstancial buffs (True Seeing, True Strike (which is for casters and not martial, True Strike + Strike deals less damage than Strike + Strike)). You see an issue where there's none.
Secrets of Magic was not a book about magic or helping casters. It was a book about PF2 gishes. There is no PF2 book that actually helps caster classes.
...
Well, you have a strong point of view. I play mostly casters (and not martial supporters), and I don't have much issue playing them. And stating that Secrets of Magic is not for casters is a bit of a stretch.| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
A multiclass MC is great for versatility.Generally agree, though on the subject of proficiency and non-buff spells, I do think the way the system is set up creates an unfortunate disincentive to push MC spellcasters into certain specific archetypes that I think ultimately end up being a little unfortunate in terms of allowing a player to be expressive.
It creates that sort of awkward dichotomy the posters above have talked about and while it's an inevitable outcome of the system Paizo is created, it's not super great.
I think it is a little unfortunate that there are a number of ways in which it is easier to make a character a better caster by MCing into another casting class, rather than taking class feats within the class.
Even if the attribute doesn't match up, if the magical tradition does, then cantrips that target saves, or utility cantrips with your MC class can free up your cantrips with your main class. Then you start getting the spell casting feats and there are not a lot of level 4 spell caster feats that are going to give you anywhere near the equivalent of 3 additional spells per day.
This is not true for every caster, but I casters with caster archetypes almost as much as I see casters taking their own class feats. Wizard/arcane sorcerer, Wizard/witch, Divine Sorcerer/Oracle are all builds I have seen a fair bit of.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
It's another place where casters and martials are designed differently, where martials get more of their power budget in unique class feats and features while casters its more in spells and spell selection, similar to 1e.
I don't think we will agree on that much. Casters get a lot of their power budget in class features and feats. If you remove all the class features of the Druid, Oracle or Bard, you remove half of their efficiency. But some casters have more power in their spells, a bit like a Fighter having just a generic +2 to hit and no other class feature.
Also, when it comes to feats, most of my martials are heavily MCed when my casters are not much in comparison. So I think it's really a question of taste.
It's another place where casters and martials are designed differently, where martials get more of their power budget in unique class feats and features while casters its more in spells and spell selection, similar to 1e.I don't think we will agree on that much. Casters get a lot of their power budget in class features and feats. If you remove all the class features of the Druid, Oracle or Bard, you remove half of their efficiency. But some casters have more power in their spells, a bit like a Fighter having just a generic +2 to hit and no other class feature.
Also, when it comes to feats, most of my martials are heavily MCed when my casters are not much in comparison. So I think it's really a question of taste.
Wizard and Fighter class feats with a few exceptions mostly suck. You can make a good member of those classes by only taking a couple of class feats.
Sorcerer, Druid, Barbarian, Rogue have got lots of really important class feats that you really want to take.
I don't think it is a martial/caster issue at all.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don't think it is a martial/caster issue at all.
Exactly, it's a question of power budget allocation for each class. Swashbuckler is the class with the strongest feats, in my opinion. Alchemist, has a few tax feats and extremely bad feats otherwise.
It also strongly depends on your build. My Rogue won't take more than a couple of class feats, but there's low support for ranged Rogues.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm hoping for more archetypes like elementalist, shadow caster, captivator, and spell trickster in the future to help casters tailor their magic. Those, IMO, gave casters options with their spells akin to martials having options with their fighting styles through focused dedications like mauler, dual weapon fighter, duelist, and archer. With archetypes like the ones added in SoM and Grand Bazaar, im fine with some casters having less attractive class feats.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Your bia towards martials is very big.
Take true strike, which SuperBidi said it's bad for martials as it s less damage then 2 strikes. I mentioned that one is great vs high AC bosses, where say a Fighter might choose to use True Strike into Sudden Charge or Power Attack for 1 big guaranteed hit. Works even better with any of the Fighter's "when you hit do stuff" feats. Same thing with True Sight, where the martial gets a lot more usage out of being able to see through illusions.
So, no, True Strike is mostly useless to martials. It's a buff for casters.
You also considered Haste as a martial-oriented spell when it's as useful to a caster.
The only martial-oriented spells are those increasing to hit rolls, so mostly Heroism and Inspire Courage.
I don't know if you have played casters much in this edition, but I can tell you that they are not doomed to be martial supporters and that lots of buffs are very nice to them. The only buffs that are lacking are buffs to DCs (but you have debuffs for that).
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Power attack + furios focus is not the classic martial, though.
It's an example build, one that was supposed to show the strength of True Strike. There are numerous other builds that will show the exact same thing: True Strike is not worth it on a martial. Whatever build you come up with you'll need convoluted situations just to hit the +10% damage mark.
I think that true strike is an excellent spell for either caster and martial classes
I think it's better to state the truth: Gaining less than 10% damage in the "best case scenario" is not excellent, it's mostly useless. Many people read these boards and I think it's better to relay clear information than to say that True Strike is "excellent on martials" when it's not.
On the other hand, this is the effect of True Strike on a spell. 50% extra damage in the most basic case (same level enemy with High AC), the third action you have spent can hardly be used on anything as good as True Strike. True Strike is definitely made for casters and not for martials.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
spellstrike
Just a quick note: I speak about martials. For gishes, True Strike is in general both far cheaper to get and can bear better results. Given the complexity of Spellstrike (as there are so many different spells to add to it) I won't give a definitive answer on the effects of True Strike but I agree that it should be higher than for martials.
I am not sure if you are talking about meta builds or not, though the example of "furious strike with -5MAP + strike" suggests me the former.
I don't know what you call meta build. I just state that if you take Power Attack, taking Furious Focus is the basic next step: They are a chain of feats. Taking one without the other would be weird.
Out of our 3-4 rolls per evening ( 1 per combat, assuming 4 fights ), the true strike was definitely gamechanging.
I won't disprove experience compared to theorycrafting as both are equally important. But it would be interesting to know what gave you the feeling that True Strike is so strong. Because from pure damage output, True Strike is hardly strong. But combats are not only about damage output, so maybe there were others factors to it.
Also, you should add all the times where True Strike has failed and how it affected the fight. It's easy to be biased by only thinking about the successes. Also, as you haven't tried with True Strike, it's hard to determine if True Strike has been the key to success or if striking twice would have lead to the same result.As a side note, if your goal is to "hit once", then True Strike is better than multiple attacks. If your GM gives you the monsters HPs or at least tell you when a monster is close to death, it can have a direct effect on True Strike efficiency around your table.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I do agree that you take both of them if you want to rely on power attack, but my considerations were towards the fact a fighter has +2 hit compared to any other martial.
I just posted what build Temperans was speaking about: "I mentioned that one is great vs high AC bosses, where say a Fighter might choose to use True Strike into Sudden Charge or Power Attack for 1 big guaranteed hit."
I didn't choose anything, just modeled what we were speaking about to show that True Strike is not really strong on a martial.Being able to use true strike ( or hero points, talking about the eldritch archer. It's the same since it could have been a ranged magus instead. The point was to talk about "landing an attack" ) turned many failures into success.
No, it's not the same, because you can't use True Strike on Eldritch Shot. And Maguses are gishes, which doesn't fall into the "martial" category.
So, it looks like your experience revolves around gishes more than martials? Even if it's true that your Paladin is technically a martial, so it looks like you may have found one of the very rare builds where True Strike bears actual results.Also, I'll never say that True Strike is useless, utterly bad or whatever. I graphed what Temperans was speaking about as a counterpoint to him considering that most buffs are more useful to martials than casters. In the case of True Strike, it's way better on a caster than a martial.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Hero points are the thing that really make true strike on a martial build not especially worth it. True strike has to be spent in advance and may do nothing for the attack. A fighter getting enough castings of True strike to be better than just using hero points when they miss on big swings in important moments requires a lot of investment.
The key for my enjoyment with characters has been to avoid siloing myself into a routine, with casters or with Martials.
My level 10 goblin cleric Shadowdancer uses stealth, a bow, and spells, but can also goblin song to debuff will for our wizard when necessary, all on top of being an exceptional healer with 0 feat investment into healing. Clerics don't need to specialize in healing because they are so good at it on their own, and you don't want one super specialized healer in your party and no secondary healers because it creates too much of an obvious weak point.
My level 8 Elven Maul Fighter has sudden charge, Brutish Shove, Knockdown attack, swipe, and blind fight. Occasionally I have used knockdown attack and critted on the attack roll, wasting an action, but mostly, I only use knockdown on boss fights where even my crit chance is only around 5-10% and with a master athletics, my fighter has a pretty high success rate on making sure that a boss is prone next to 2 AoO. Against lower level enemies I often use sweep and end up critting, knocking 2 enemies prone, but sometimes our wizard is throwing down a lot of battlefield control options and I have more fun sudden charging to move 70ft and get an attack in, then using brutish shove with only a -5 to set up the wizard. And blind fighting lets the wizard throw down fog spells and make for a cloud of death. The character has a weak spot in ranged attacks, but it is not that weak a spot because javelins got the job done at early levels and now our wizard can cast fly. We haven't got to use it yet, but knockdown with fly feels like it is going to be a lot of fun.
I haven't played many spontaneous casters yet, but I will admit that with prepared casters, it feels awesome when you have useful spells prepared that change the whole balance of an encounter when you cast them, but sometimes you end up memorizing those same spells again over and over again hoping to repeat it and end up with a lot of useless spells when you end up going in a completely different direction. I have wildly underestimated the value of investing gold into lots and lots of scrolls on my cleric and I end up with no good spells to cast far too often as a result. My advice to my former self would be never spend money on armor upgrades for a cleric. Buy wands and scrolls and use spells and allies to make attacking you not worth it for enemies. Concealment and hiding are absolutely worth actions in PF2.
Martial classes have martial proficiency ( or higher ) with weapons.
That's it.
If you want to consider the eldritch archer ( or a class using eldritch shot ), the magus or even the summoner different, it's a choice of yours.lvl 13 master weapon procificency? You are a martial class.
The eldritch archer using a reroll with a hero point is the same as a magus using a reroll with true strike ( apart from the conceal part ) when it comes to odds and what does it mean to "roll twice" a single big hit.
There's really no difference.
When I compare the efficiency of True Strike between martials and casters, I don't expect Hero Points, Eldritch Shot and Maguses to be part of the conversation.
And when you speak about Hero Points, I start to question your experience. When you speak about 3-4 rolls per session, you speak of 3-4 True Striked rolls per session? Or are there Hero Points rolls in the middle?| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The reroll effect is the same ( True strike lets you keep the highest result, indeed, but the hero point can be expended only on a failure rather than before knowing the roll outcome ).
Not at all. First, as you point out, the reroll from Hero Point happens when you already know you fail your roll. 60% of your attacks are hits and don't ask for a reroll. But if you used True Strike, you just wasted it. So Hero Points are 250% better than True Strike just because of that.
And then, True Strike costs an action. My whole reasoning about True Strike is that you can replace the action used on True Strike by another action bearing similar effects.So, no, Hero Points and True strike have not much in common. If True Strike was a free action used after knowing the result of the roll, I'd definitely have a very different point of view on its efficiency.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
The only time I personally find true strike worth it on a martial is if I need to negate some concealment, or in really niche cases like I'm a melee martial with magus dedication, and I REALLY want my 1/battle spellstrike to land.
In the former though, just use a cat's eye elixir, same action cost to use, but it lasts the whole fight
| 9 people marked this as a favorite. |
(Maybe the True Stike chats need its own thread?)
To revert to Original topic, here is a few reason (amongst many) why I believe classes need more in class options:
-Witches only have 3 Intermediate Curse & 2 Advanced (not counting the Rare one), that's very low for something supposed to be that central to the Class (Their late levels feats, apart from classic caster ones & flavour ones revolves around Hexes)
-Domains are now being used for Archetypes (which is a great use of material to save word count), but as a result a big thing supposed to be specific to Cleric, is now more widely accessible. Give something else to Clerics! (I'd love Doctrine specific Focus spells!)
And there is probably a lot more examples that could be brought forward!
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
(Maybe the True Stike chats need its own thread?)
To revert to Original topic, here is a few reason (amongst many) why I believe classes need more in class options:
-Witches only have 3 Intermediate Curse & 2 Advanced (not counting the Rare one), that's very low for something supposed to be that central to the Class (Their late levels feats, apart from classic caster ones & flavour ones revolves around Hexes)
-Domains are now being used for Archetypes (which is a great use of material to save word count), but as a result a big thing supposed to be specific to Cleric, is now more widely accessible. Give something else to Clerics! (I'd love Doctrine specific Focus spells!)
And there is probably a lot more examples that could be brought forward!
+1 on true strike
Yeah, witches and oracles, being focus spell based casters, should be getting new options as time goes on. I feel witches have it worse off at the moment, but both classes definitely have major thematic gaps; witch really wants you to either curse people or blast them, and orcale does not yet have a dreams mystery (a very common form of prophecy and divination, in but irl cultures and fantasy media), as well as a water or stone one (again, things that were commonly use to divine the future), and many of the og 1e mysteries.
Clerics could probably want doctine specific focus spells, and they might even be a good way to address issues of expectations. I feel cloistered could get a divine intervention type spell, and warpriest could get like a self targeting buff that makes them about as good as a wild shape druid in combat
I feel magus wants a gun/crossbow hybrid study, with a conflux spell that reload their gun with a bullet and some other minor effect (since most intial Conflux Spells are two numdane actions + recharge spellstrike). Starlit span works fine for mag weapons, but not great for reload weapons
Summoner also definitely want more eidolon options and evolutions that grant special options, like, idk, power attack. I love the summoner on theme, but the play looks kinda eh and generic atm
| 14 people marked this as a favorite. |
Another niche that can, I think it should, be explored are the Wizard's Schools. They need feats that require certain schools. The arcane schools are something more unique to Wizards and having feats tied to them seem like a great venue to expand the class into more unique territory.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Another niche that can, I think it should, be explored are the Wizard's Schools. They need feats that require certain schools. The arcane schools are something more unique to Wizards and having feats tied to them seem like a great venue to expand the class into more unique territory.
Once again I'll pitch school archetypes where respective wizards are auto qualified for poaching the feats without needing the dedication. More archetypes AND more class feats. Two birds, one stone.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It's another place where casters and martials are designed differently, where martials get more of their power budget in unique class feats and features while casters its more in spells and spell selection, similar to 1e.I don't think we will agree on that much. Casters get a lot of their power budget in class features and feats. If you remove all the class features of the Druid, Oracle or Bard, you remove half of their efficiency. But some casters have more power in their spells, a bit like a Fighter having just a generic +2 to hit and no other class feature.
Also, when it comes to feats, most of my martials are heavily MCed when my casters are not much in comparison. So I think it's really a question of taste.Wizard and Fighter class feats with a few exceptions mostly suck. You can make a good member of those classes by only taking a couple of class feats.
Sorcerer, Druid, Barbarian, Rogue have got lots of really important class feats that you really want to take.
I don't think it is a martial/caster issue at all.
Fighter class feats mostly suck? What?
Fighter has some of the best feats in the game, I can name a lot of good fighter feats
1 - Double Slice, Sudden Charge, Reactive Shield
2 - Combat Grab, Dueling Parry
4 - Dualhanded Assault, Everstand Strike
6 - Dazing Blow, Shatter Defenses
8 - Blind-Fight, Quick Shield Block
10 - Improved Knockdown, Combat Reflexes
12 - Dueling Dance, Paragon Guard, Improved Dueling Riposte
14 - Determination
20 - Boundless Reprisals
Wizard feats, yeah no argument there, they suck.
Monk, Bard and Fighter probably have the best feats. Swashbuckler has good feats but a lot feel necessary to its functionality.
Fighter class feats mostly suck? What?Fighter has some of the best feats in the game, I can name a lot of good fighter feats
From that list I'll concede that these are good
1 - Double Slice, Sudden ChargeMaybe Knockdown.
10 Combat Reflexes
20 - Boundless Reprisals
Nothing with a press trait is good. Once a day is not that good for Determination. Combat Reflexes is great as is the appropriate free action to parry or raise your shield for your fighting style. Many of the feats are specific to your fighting style and you only need one. Boundless Reprisals is broken but so are a lot of things at level 20.
But there is still stacks of space there especially when you consider that Fighters get two extra feats. I'm mostly wanting feats from other classes as a Fighter.
|
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Fighter class feats mostly suck? What?Fighter has some of the best feats in the game, I can name a lot of good fighter feats
From that list I'll concede that these are good
1 - Double Slice, Sudden Charge
Maybe Knockdown.
10 Combat Reflexes
20 - Boundless ReprisalsNothing with a press trait is good. Once a day is not that good for Determination. Combat Reflexes is great as is the appropriate free action to parry or raise your shield for your fighting style. Many of the feats are specific to your fighting style and you only need one. Boundless Reprisals is broken but so are a lot of things at level 20.
But there is still stacks of space there especially when you consider that Fighters get two extra feats. I'm mostly wanting feats from other classes as a Fighter.
A single press is a strict upgrade over a vanilla second strike, and Combat Grab *can* be quite useful when dealing with pesky monsters that have a bunch more speed than you and kite, or after you main action trip/improved knockdown. The accuracy isn’t always great - especially against bosses, but it can be pretty reasonable at 40-50%.
Of course you’re not gonna take both the shield line and dueling line, but the extra reactions are good and 1 action for +2 AC for the entire encounter is a pretty good “capstone” for that line. The initial feats aren’t amazing, granted.
One a day kind of sucks on determination, but when you need it you really need it. So many nasty effects at those levels that determination straight uo lets you remove. It’s insurance more than anything - you got your save as good as you could, you have a defensive buff, you got a bad result, rerolled and still got a bad result - determination.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Fighter class feats mostly suck? What?Fighter has some of the best feats in the game, I can name a lot of good fighter feats
From that list I'll concede that these are good
1 - Double Slice, Sudden Charge
Maybe Knockdown.
10 Combat Reflexes
20 - Boundless ReprisalsNothing with a press trait is good. Once a day is not that good for Determination. Combat Reflexes is great as is the appropriate free action to parry or raise your shield for your fighting style. Many of the feats are specific to your fighting style and you only need one. Boundless Reprisals is broken but so are a lot of things at level 20.
But there is still stacks of space there especially when you consider that Fighters get two extra feats. I'm mostly wanting feats from other classes as a Fighter.
I think it is not uncommon for players to have the belief that they only need one 2 action activity feat in their combat style, and that repeating that over and over again is the best course of action, but a lot of times the tactical flexibility offered by fighter feats lets you really dominate different kinds of encounters. You have to factor in crit specializations of weapons to what some feats do because fighters crit. A lot. My fighter rarely goes more than 4 rounds without a crit. A feet like swipe, to use against multiple enemies isn’t about the damage nearly as much as it is about having a good chance of getting a critical hit against 2 enemies with one swing. With a sword, that really isn’t usually that important, but with a maul it is awesome and a lot of other weapons make it fun too. I think some players think of it as the “Ax feat” but I find just more damage to be one of the more boring critical effects. The fighter feats are fun with how much they interact with specific weapons and weapon traits. It makes for a lot of tactical nuance. I struggle to find nearly as much tactical nuance with champion feats or Barbarian feats. Many classes have feats that feel just too mandatory and passive to fun new activities.
I back up Gortle on Press attacks. What makes them bad is the -5 to MAP you have when using them. Paying a feat to improve a secondary attack is not great.
For fighting styles, Gortle didn't say they are bad, just that you choose one, take the feats, and that's it. Fighters feats are mostly improvement of your one fighting style, there are tons of holes to take Dedication feats.
Swashbuckler has good feats but a lot feel necessary to its functionality.
One for All: Best Aid in the game.
Derring-Do or why the Gymnast is the best Grappler/Tripper in the game.Guardian's Shield: Annoying for hand setup reasons, but +2 circumstance bonus to AC to all your allies within reach.
Dueling Dance: No MAP reposition.
Antagonize: Awesome if you have a few Attacks of Opportunity in the party.
These feats are good whatever style you choose. Actually, they are awesome on a caster, which makes Swashbuckler Dedication very interesting to anyone with Charisma as main attribute.
| 9 people marked this as a favorite. |
I back up Gortle on Press attacks. What makes them bad is the -5 to MAP you have when using them. Paying a feat to improve a secondary attack is not great.
For fighting styles, Gortle didn't say they are bad, just that you choose one, take the feats, and that's it. Fighters feats are mostly improvement of your one fighting style, there are tons of holes to take Dedication feats.
I mean, a Fighter who does Snagging Strike > Combat Grab is hitting the Press with the same accuracy as a Barbarian or Ranger's first hit on neutral with a -1 (-5 +2 from being a Fighter +2 from flat-footed). Would you say the first Strike of a frightened 1 Barbarian is so bad you wouldn't bother with it? I certainly wouldn't. And the riders on some of these presses like Combat Grab, Dazing Blow and Shatter defenses are incredibly powerful.
I mean, a Fighter who does Snagging Strike > Combat Grab is hitting the Press with the same accuracy as a Barbarian or Ranger's first hit on neutral with a -1 (-5 +2 from being a Fighter +2 from flat-footed). Would you say the first Strike of a frightened 1 Barbarian is so bad you wouldn't bother with it? I certainly wouldn't. And the riders on some of these presses like Combat Grab, Dazing Blow and Shatter defenses are incredibly powerful.I back up Gortle on Press attacks. What makes them bad is the -5 to MAP you have when using them. Paying a feat to improve a secondary attack is not great.
For fighting styles, Gortle didn't say they are bad, just that you choose one, take the feats, and that's it. Fighters feats are mostly improvement of your one fighting style, there are tons of holes to take Dedication feats.
My player's fighter hits pretty reasonably well with her second hits. Both brutish shove and extracting strike keep her damage reasonably high. She does use a sweep weapon and specilizes herself in controlling multiple foes, but I would absolutely not sell her first MAP short
I mean, a Fighter who does Snagging Strike > Combat Grab
Your example is telling. Who would take Combat Grab when there is Snagging Strike available? I know I won't.
That's why I say they are bad. Not because they are useless and should never be considered, but because they are considered once you have taken the good and important feats.
I think the fighter can be pretty good at playing reach games with lunging stance, combat reflexes, and like a boarding pike. It's not the 20' reach that giant barbs can get but you're more accurate on your AoOs and you get to make more of them.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
I mean, a Fighter who does Snagging Strike > Combat GrabYour example is telling. Who would take Combat Grab when there is Snagging Strike available? I know I won't.
That's why I say they are bad. Not because they are useless and should never be considered, but because they are considered once you have taken the good and important feats.
Um... what? Snagging Strike and Combat Grab are different feats with different purposes, though? Snagging Strike is a good opener and it provides a mild amount of team support, but it's not hard control in any way. Combat Grab inflicts actual Grabbed; it puts the enemy in a situation where moving costs more actions, their entire offensive potential for that turn and it might even fail as a whole if they don't manage to Escape. You can Trip, Improved Knockdown or follow up a critical hit with a Hammer or Flail with Combat Grab to force the enemy to Escape unless they want to stay Prone and eat all the related penalties. You can use it as a setup for Wrestler feats like Suplex (if they don't Escape, again with all the related losses of doing so, next round you Suplex them for essentially a Trip that loses you no damage compared to your normal Strike routine). How is that comparable to Snagging Strike in any way or form? If anything, having both is great because they complement one another.
Shatter Defenses, for example, is a great followup to any Intimidation Fighter build. If an enemy closes to you, you can Demoralize > Strike > Shatter, or Intimidating Strike > Shatter, to do damage, debuff the enemy for your team and yourself and also protect yourself by reducing their attack. You even can do like my group's unarmed Fighter who, in a Demoralize > Snagging Strike > Shatter combo, can bring an adjacent enemy from a neutral position to taking damage, being frightened, flat flooted and unable to remove either condition. Add in a Fearsome rune or Dread Marshal Stance to make this combo useable any time you crit on your first attack if you wish.
I think you might just be acting a little uncreative with your action combinations, if I'm being honest.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I back up Gortle on Press attacks. What makes them bad is the -5 to MAP you have when using them. Paying a feat to improve a secondary attack is not great.
Don't really get this train of thought. You're not a Swashbuckler or Investigator where your whole combat routine centers around one ability. You're going to make second attacks a lot as a fighter.
Yeah, getting to sudden charge and then brutish shove is about 5 actions packed into 3. Using brutish shove after a swipe or a knock down isn't that valuable at -10, but even then, if I am just going to make a 3rd attack anyway, getting a free push with it is better than nothing.
Um... what? Snagging Strike and Combat Grab are different feats with different purposes, though? Snagging Strike is a good opener and it provides a mild amount of team support, but it's not hard control in any way. Combat Grab inflicts actual Grabbed; it puts the enemy in a situation where moving costs more actions, their entire offensive potential for that turn and it might even fail as a whole if they don't manage to Escape. You can Trip, Improved Knockdown or follow up a critical hit with a Hammer or Flail with Combat Grab to force the enemy to Escape unless they want to stay Prone and eat all the related penalties. You can use it as a setup for Wrestler feats like Suplex (if they don't Escape, again with all the related losses of doing so, next round you Suplex them for essentially a Trip that loses you no damage compared to your normal Strike routine). How is that comparable to Snagging Strike in any way or form? If anything, having both is great because they complement one another.
Well, I'll answer you in detail to explain you why none of these cases seem interesting to me.
You can Trip
Trip + Grapple. I've thought about it with a Derring-Do Swashbuckler. It's funny but not much efficient as both conditions don't really stack (both give the Flat-Footed condition, both limit mobility).
Improved Knockdown
We are speaking of 3 feats and you need 3 actions (not that common at all). And when the enemy takes 2 attacks and is Prone, I don't feel that giving the Grapple condition on top of that is anywhere close to necessary.
a critical hit with a Hammer or Flail
So, the enemy took a critical + at least a normal hit and is Prone. I'll be grappling a corpse at that stage.
You can use it as a setup for Wrestler feats like Suplex
That's a build for fun, not for efficiency.
Demoralize > Strike > Shatter, or Intimidating Strike > Shatter
I need 3 actions and to succeed at 2 checks in a raw. Also, I won't benefit from Shatter at all.
How is that comparable to Snagging Strike in any way or form?
Because if you really want to Grapple, then you have the Grapple action which is not a Press action and as such will lead to more successes than Combat Grab (way more actually because you target Fortitude which is low in both spellcasters and archers). And if you don't care much about grappling the enemy per se but about the Flat-Footed debuff that Grapple carries then Snagging Strike is more interesting (and lower level).
Don't really get this train of thought. You're not a Swashbuckler or Investigator where your whole combat routine centers around one ability. You're going to make second attacks a lot as a fighter.
And nothing forces me to use a Press action on this one. I can use Snagging Strike on my second attack. You need Press actions to be really better than non Press actions for them to be worth a feat. And I find that they are just not good enough.
Also, Press actions tend to be "combo" actions. Most of dmerceless examples all consider that I'm succeeding at a bunch of checks in a raw to get the best out of the Press actions. But when my dice are on fire, I don't need much feats as the damage I'm dealing is certainly already taking care of the enemy.The "when the stars are aligned" actions are not desirable ones for me. I far prefer the "when the dice hate me" actions, I feel that they save my skin far more often.
I think the motivation for Press feats is simple. You're often going to make that second attack anyway, might as well get something nice from it too.
Yes and that is fine. When I say not that good, its a relative statement and a preference. Yes they do have their uses.
But mostly they are pretty minor improvements. You are at -5. So its not a great scenario. Maybe I can squeeze in one.
Typically I prefer the two action powers that count as two attacks for MAP anyway.
I also have a bit of a slant toward big weapons as a fighter and away from agile builds.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Monk is the one who has gotten the most support with multiple books giving them feats and options.
That's probably because the monk is set up to be the clearinghouse for the entire set of wuxia fantasies which covers much more creative terrain than basically any other class.
I feel that the top end power in the combat system is in getting the extra attacks available from reaction attacks. Thats always going to be better if you have a bigger weapon.
Agile attacks are always trading off damage and I'm reluctant to do that.
Yes I do see how they stack up.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
It does take a lot for classes to overcome how awesomely powerful having great accuracy with a D12 weapon can be, especially when you get to pair it with one or more strong reaction based attacks. That is why the maul is my favorite fighter weapon, even over reach, those critical effects make for such interesting diversity with weapon choice. PF2 has really nailed that.
While I think that spell casting in PF2 is fine, I don't think spells have anything yet to capture the fun and nuance of pairing weapons with interesting abilities. It is hard to do with spells though because they get so gonzo at higher levels that an ability that works really well with a level 1 spell is going to get out of control with a level 9 spell.
I think the motivation for Press feats is simple. You're often going to make that second attack anyway, might as well get something nice from it too.Yes and that is fine. When I say not that good, its a relative statement and a preference. Yes they do have their uses.
But mostly they are pretty minor improvements. You are at -5. So its not a great scenario. Maybe I can squeeze in one.
Typically I prefer the two action powers that count as two attacks for MAP anyway.
I also have a bit of a slant toward big weapons as a fighter and away from agile builds.
The only press attacks I've seen to be worth it are brutal shove for playing the spacing game and certain strike in a barb archetype build that stacks a lot of flat damage and leads with a hasted attack. Dual flurry might be worth it in a well built party that can buff the fighter to the moon so they end up double slicing at +7ish and flurrying at -3 or +1 with agile feats.
In a two-handed weapon build I'd probably only take the shove until IKD came online or else just stack witch or sorc feats for extra buffs.
That said, how can you not like paragon guard? Slap on a spellguard shield and you have +2 to all saves vs magic for an entire combat for 1 action. If you went fake champion build you probably have a free shield block every turn with a shield ally sturdy shield, a free AoO and a champion reaction and your full 3 actions every turn.