Boundless Reprisals with Champion Archetype and reaction and Rogue Archetype and Opportune Backstab is an insane combination.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
This difference feels totally unnecessary to me.
Hmm, yes, totally unnecessary. Except, maybe, I dunno, because every class in PF 2 has its own, mostly unique, set of class feats. To, you know, differentiate the classes. Give them their own identity. And things other classes can't simply steal from them.
People tend to make such a fuss about Fighter getting Legendary in weapons when nobody else does, but totally 'forget' to mention that that is basically all Fighters have going for them as their innate damage boost.
So then, why is a Fighter's 'get all the reactions' feat so free-form compared to a Swashbuckler's or Gunslinger's?
Because they are Fighters. The generic 'fighting man class' that offers feats for all combat styles, the class that isn't nailed down to one particular fighting style.
But Swashbucklers and Gunslingers are. They come with a very keen focus one particular fighting style, and their feat selection emphasises that. So yes, their capstone abilities are focused.
If you have a problem with that, you can make viable Swashbucklers and gun users with the Fighter class too. But you don't get to eat your cake and have it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah, any feat level 10+ is meant to be class differentiating, and should be considered part of the class's budget. Comparing them one to another is a waste of time if you're not also looking at each class's total kit.
Now if you can make some directly comparable complete builds and show that the differences in these feats are resulting in some obscene advantage, then you can argue for changes to those feats in particular. Chances are that such builds might have other factors that are bigger concern, or are a lower hanging fruit, and can be addressed more easily than changing those feats though.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
But you don't get to eat your cake and have it.
So it's your assertion that this is fundamentally necessary for balance? That if Gunslingers could use other types of reactions or had more easily usable reactions that they'd break the game, relative to fighters?
I don't really see it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don't really see it.
Break it? No. Because what 'voideternal' already said.
But just copy/pasting class feats instead of giving each class its own identity? That's just lazy.
Oh and yeah, it cuts both ways: If giving Swashbucklers and Gunslingers the Fighter variant doesn't break the game, not giving them the Fighter variant doesn't break it either.
Seriously, it's just feature envy. 'Why can't I have Legendary weapon skills? Because you already get Rage, Hunt Prey and Hunter'S Edge, Sneak Attack and more skills then anybody else except Investigator, and that bugger gets his own set of unique abilities.
Same with full casters whining about not getting past Expert in weapon skills. Dude, you get to rewrite reality, and you b~+%* about being 3 points behind people who don't get to break the laws of physics? Get real.
But it's never enough, is it? No matter how much you have, it must always be more.
Newsflash: This is a game. Which is supposed to be played on a level playing field. So yeah, Fighter gets nice things and he's not required to share his toys. Better learn to appreciate all the damn things that you have that Fighter doesn't get.
For real... :(
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
But just copy/pasting class feats instead of giving each class its own identity? That's just lazy.
That doesn't really track here though, because the feats are already nearly the same thing except in a few minor ways in which some of them are worse.
Not realy sure what the stuff in the middle is supposed to be about, wrong thread though, no one's talking about legendary weapons or rage.
Newsflash: This is a game. Which is supposed to be played on a level playing field.
Kind of undermining your own point here.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Newsflash: This is a game. Which is supposed to be played on a level playing field.Kind of undermining your own point here.
Seriously? The whole point is that Swashbucklers and Gunslingers alike get things in exchange for their narrower focus that other classes don't get.
So they get goodies others don't get. But in return for getting things that emphasise their focus, they pay in versatility.
The Fighter is the King of Versatility. But he doesn't get anything super special like Swashbuckler and Gunslinger do. In return, his 'get all the reactions' feat is super generic, but also super versatile.
But yeah, sure, people having to pay a price to get something is somehow not levelling the playing field...
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Newsflash: This is a game. Which is supposed to be played on a level playing field.Kind of undermining your own point here.Seriously? The whole point is that Swashbucklers and Gunslingers alike get things in exchange for their narrower focus that other classes don't get.
So they get goodies others don't get. But in return for getting things that emphasise their focus, they pay in versatility.
The Fighter is the King of Versatility. But he doesn't get anything super special like Swashbuckler and Gunslinger do. In return, his 'get all the reactions' feat is super generic, but also super versatile.
But yeah, sure, people having to pay a price to get something is somehow not levelling the playing field...
The issue is that what they do special doesn't actually match up that well with what a Fighter just does. Like a Swashbuckler going at full tilt with finishers each turn doesn't even beat a Fighter in terms of DPR.
The Fighter is slightly overtuned and the post CRB classes simply don't match it in terms of raw effectiveness.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
But he doesn't get anything super special like Swashbuckler and Gunslinger do.
There's no super special thing here though. The three characters are paying the same price at the same level for nearly identical options that just happen to be a bit worse for some of them. There's no 'other thing', there's no hidden special benefit. Frankly, it's not the only example of wonky feat balancing in PF2 either.
I wouldn't mind if the Fighter level 20 feat was limited to Fighter reactions (AoO + any Fighter feats) but I also don't think it is worth to "nerf" in errata.
Worth noting that the Swashbuckler and Gunslinger are post-CRB as mentioned above. The design guidelines and limitations change as time goes on. If the Fighter was made now, I think it would look like the other classes.
I wouldn't mind if the Fighter level 20 feat was limited to Fighter reactions (AoO + any Fighter feats) but I also don't think it is worth to "nerf" in errata.
Worth noting that the Swashbuckler and Gunslinger are post-CRB as mentioned above. The design guidelines and limitations change as time goes on. If the Fighter was made now, I think it would look like the other classes.
My gut says that post CRB material isn't actually designed to be weaker than CRB material but that it gets less development and thus tends to get slightly tuned down 'just in case' and that's what makes it weaker and a bit clunky.
I think the fighter deliberately gets better proficiencies and slightly stronger feats because they don't get subclass benefits like every other non-monk class.
Now whether that's overtuning I don't know (it's frankly good if the "newbie class" is pretty strong) but I think that's the intent.
I think the fighter deliberately gets better proficiencies and slightly stronger feats because they don't get subclass benefits like every other non-monk class.
Now whether that's overtuning I don't know (it's frankly good if the "newbie class" is pretty strong) but I think that's the intent.
The issue with the Fighter is that it does great damage, hits more than anybody else, has very good AC, solid saves, and is a beast at using combat maneuvers. Most other martial classes are lucky to get close to them in any of these things and often don't surpass the Fighter even when doing their one unique thing.
My gut says that post CRB material isn't actually designed to be weaker than CRB material but that it gets less development and thus tends to get slightly tuned down 'just in case' and that's what makes it weaker and a bit clunky.I wouldn't mind if the Fighter level 20 feat was limited to Fighter reactions (AoO + any Fighter feats) but I also don't think it is worth to "nerf" in errata.
Worth noting that the Swashbuckler and Gunslinger are post-CRB as mentioned above. The design guidelines and limitations change as time goes on. If the Fighter was made now, I think it would look like the other classes.
I just think that with the history, lessons have been learned. I think feats like Boundless Reprisals would have language more like Preparation that limits the reaction type, just like how quickened (almost) always limits actions to be taken with it.
It isn't so much about weaker vs stronger, but tighter design as everyone gets more familiar with the system.
The issue with the Fighter is that it does great damage, hits more than anybody else, has very good AC, solid saves, and is a beast at using combat maneuvers. Most other martial classes are lucky to get close to them in any of these things and often don't surpass the Fighter even when doing their one unique thing.I think the fighter deliberately gets better proficiencies and slightly stronger feats because they don't get subclass benefits like every other non-monk class.
Now whether that's overtuning I don't know (it's frankly good if the "newbie class" is pretty strong) but I think that's the intent.
Its not that bad. Fighters don't do the best damage per hit. Barbarians, Rangers, Swashbucklers, Investigators, Rogues all have extra damage that the Fighter can't fully get. Yes they Fighter pull ahead probably on their higher critical and hit rate. But the whole thing is very complex.
Yes the Fighters are surpassed when the other classes are doing their one unique thing. Its just that that thing is not always damage, and you have to break it down into subclasses as they have different areas. Example Draconic and Giant Barbarians are about multi target damage, Gymnast Swashbucklers are melee controllers (grapple, trip) etc etcThe main Fighter class feature is the +2 to hit. The Fighters sub class is the extra feats they get. They aren't missing out.
The issue with the Fighter is that it does great damage, hits more than anybody else, has very good AC, solid saves, and is a beast at using combat maneuvers. Most other martial classes are lucky to get close to them in any of these things and often don't surpass the Fighter even when doing their one unique thing.I think the fighter deliberately gets better proficiencies and slightly stronger feats because they don't get subclass benefits like every other non-monk class.
Now whether that's overtuning I don't know (it's frankly good if the "newbie class" is pretty strong) but I think that's the intent.
Its not that bad. Fighters don't do the best damage per hit. Barbarians, Rangers, Swashbucklers, Investigators, Rogues all have extra damage that the Fighter can't fully get. Yes they Fighter pull ahead probably on their higher critical and hit rate. But the whole thing is very complex.
Yes the Fighters are surpassed when the other classes are doing their one unique thing. Its just that that thing is not always damage, and you have to break it down into subclasses as they have different areas. Example Draconic and Giant Barbarians are about multi target damage, Gymnast Swashbucklers are melee controllers (grapple, trip) etc etcThe main Fighter class feature is the +2 to hit. The Fighters sub class is the extra feats they get. They aren't missing out.
At lvl 20 if you make it there, Boundless Reprisals is ridiculous with Champion's Reaction and Opportune Backstab. Toss in a reach weapon and maybe an enlarge, you are straight up attacking all the time at maximum hit roll. Pretty nutty.
Its not that bad. Fighters don't do the best damage per hit. Barbarians, Rangers, Swashbucklers, Investigators, Rogues all have extra damage that the Fighter can't fully get. Yes they Fighter pull ahead probably on their higher critical and hit rate. But the whole thing is very complex.
Fighters don't have the best per hit damage, but with their crazy hit rates they are often top of the damage chart on a damage per round basis against level+ monsters than other classes just because +2 to hit is very powerful. That Barbarian might do well against a foe with weaker AC where they get to lay in two hits instead of a miss and a hit, but the fighter is better in the harder fights.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
"I hit the most often, but other people can and do hit harder" is not an unreasonable place for the fighter to be.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I don't play fighters bc they're boring but I appreciate them as the concrete balance ceiling of combat effectiveness. I think it's a feature not a bug. For my part, I'd rather play a monk or ranger bc they're much more mechanically/thematically interesting than fighters and I haven't seen big enough differences in effectiveness between my PCs and my friends greatsword fighters (he's a one trick pony) to feel put off by that choice.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
"I hit the most often, but other people can and do hit harder" is not an unreasonable place for the fighter to be.
Except that in most cases where it matters the fight turns those extra hits into significantly better DPR than other classes get. It's impressive to nuke somebody as a Barbarian once in a while or land a clutch finisher as a Swashbuckler, but on average the Fighter is more valuable in that same slot. If you were to build a no fun all-optimization party you'd likely end up with a Fighter and a Champion as your front line with no other pairing being even close.
Is anybody going to argue that a Barbarian and a Swashbuckler or a Magus and a Monk are better than the straight Fighter/Champion combo up front?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
"I hit the most often, but other people can and do hit harder" is not an unreasonable place for the fighter to be.Except that in most cases where it matters the fight turns those extra hits into significantly better DPR than other classes get. It's impressive to nuke somebody as a Barbarian once in a while or land a clutch finisher as a Swashbuckler, but on average the Fighter is more valuable in that same slot. If you were to build a no fun all-optimization party you'd likely end up with a Fighter and a Champion as your front line with no other pairing being even close.
Is anybody going to argue that a Barbarian and a Swashbuckler or a Magus and a Monk are better than the straight Fighter/Champion combo up front?
I wouldn't build a party to have no fun bc that defeats the purpose of playing a game. Are you absolutely positive you arent Verdyn on an alt account?
"I hit the most often, but other people can and do hit harder" is not an unreasonable place for the fighter to be.Except that in most cases where it matters the fight turns those extra hits into significantly better DPR than other classes get. It's impressive to nuke somebody as a Barbarian once in a while or land a clutch finisher as a Swashbuckler, but on average the Fighter is more valuable in that same slot. If you were to build a no fun all-optimization party you'd likely end up with a Fighter and a Champion as your front line with no other pairing being even close.
Is anybody going to argue that a Barbarian and a Swashbuckler or a Magus and a Monk are better than the straight Fighter/Champion combo up front?
I should do a test.
The Fighter/Champion Archetype is pretty powerful. I am playing one right now.
Giant Instinct barbarian was also extremely brutal.
I am running a couple of Magus right now. They do some pretty big alpha strikes.
If I were to compare them, the fighter is the master of reaction attacks. I get a lot of play out of AoOs and using reaction attacks.
The barbarian is pretty brutal at just beating something to death on their turn. They hit real hard. Their crits are pretty insane, at least the Giant Instinct Barbarian. They have some rounds that I have not seen a fighter or any martial class really match if using Whirlwind Attack or getting a crit or something. It goes from a big hit to just sheer brutality.
The magus is doing some alpha striking I haven't seen other classes do with a surprising consistency. It is performing very well at low level. We'll see how they hold up as hit points rise.
I wouldn't build a party to have no fun bc that defeats the purpose of playing a game. Are you absolutely positive you arent Verdyn on an alt account?
I used the term no fun, simply because I know people who find optimal to be boring. I don't actually think a party that has a Fighter, Champion, Druid, Cleric, and Bard would be unfun to play; though I do think they'd be close to optimal with very little else being as capable of covering PF2's required niches as well.
So from a strict balance standpoint, I think these are the classes to benchmark against. You need to be a standout in some other field to be on equal footing with any of the five classes above.
I should do a test.
The Fighter/Champion Archetype is pretty powerful. I am playing one right now.
Giant Instinct barbarian was also extremely brutal.
I am running a couple of Magus right now. They do some pretty big alpha strikes.
If I were to compare them, the fighter is the master of reaction attacks. I get a lot of play out of AoOs and using reaction attacks.
The barbarian is pretty brutal at just beating something to death on their turn. They hit real hard. Their crits are pretty insane, at least the Giant Instinct Barbarian. They have some rounds that I have not seen a fighter or any martial class really match if using Whirlwind Attack or getting a crit or something. It goes from a big hit to just sheer brutality.
The magus is doing some alpha striking I haven't seen other classes do with a surprising consistency. It is performing very well at low level. We'll see how they hold up as hit points rise.
I'd be interested in seeing the results of your test, so long as it runs a good sample size.
Like you'd probably need 1,000+ simulated encounters against a couple of archetypicalencounters at each of level-2, level-1, level, etc. to get a proper picture. I suspect that over the long haul the Fighter simply hitting and critting more is worth far more than the flashy plays other classes can make.
I should do a test.
The Fighter/Champion Archetype is pretty powerful. I am playing one right now.
Giant Instinct barbarian was also extremely brutal.
I am running a couple of Magus right now. They do some pretty big alpha strikes.
If I were to compare them, the fighter is the master of reaction attacks. I get a lot of play out of AoOs and using reaction attacks.
The barbarian is pretty brutal at just beating something to death on their turn. They hit real hard. Their crits are pretty insane, at least the Giant Instinct Barbarian. They have some rounds that I have not seen a fighter or any martial class really match if using Whirlwind Attack or getting a crit or something. It goes from a big hit to just sheer brutality.
The magus is doing some alpha striking I haven't seen other classes do with a surprising consistency. It is performing very well at low level. We'll see how they hold up as hit points rise.
I'd be interested in seeing the results of your test, so long as it runs a good sample size.
Like you'd probably need 1,000+ simulated encounters against a couple of archetypicalencounters at each of level-2, level-1, level, etc. to get a proper picture. I suspect that over the long haul the Fighter simply hitting and critting more is worth far more than the flashy plays other classes can make.
It wouldn't really matter because the real game situation is going to be more complex.
Fighters do worse if there is more setup from the rest of the party lower the enemies AC and boosting attack values.
Fighters do worse in resistance scenarios, and yes there are mitigating strategies. Its complex.
Then you have to look at the probabilities of reaction attacks.
The difference is low 5% maybe. So I'm going to play the PC I want. Honestly it get swallowed up by tactics, build choices, the campaign, and just the variability of the dice.
Then ultimately I'm not going to cry foul over a level 20 ability. It is a tiny fraction of the play experience.
At lvl 20 if you make it there, Boundless Reprisals is ridiculous with Champion's Reaction and Opportune Backstab. Toss in a reach weapon and maybe an enlarge, you are straight up attacking all the time at maximum hit roll. Pretty nutty.The issue with the Fighter is that it does great damage, hits more than anybody else, has very good AC, solid saves, and is a beast at using combat maneuvers. Most other martial classes are lucky to get close to them in any of these things and often don't surpass the Fighter even when doing their one unique thing.Its not that bad. Fighters don't do the best damage per hit. Barbarians, Rangers, Swashbucklers, Investigators, Rogues all have extra damage that the Fighter can't fully get. Yes they Fighter pull ahead probably on their higher critical and hit rate. But the whole thing is very complex.
Yes the Fighters are surpassed when the other classes are doing their one unique thing. Its just that that thing is not always damage, and you have to break it down into subclasses as they have different areas. Example Draconic and Giant Barbarians are about multi target damage, Gymnast Swashbucklers are melee controllers (grapple, trip) etc etcThe main Fighter class feature is the +2 to hit. The Fighters sub class is the extra feats they get. They aren't missing out.
... Do I have to remind you what certain other classes can do at lv. 20? This combo requires investment into CHA, which is universally touted as the Fighter dump stat, sacrificing at least half of your own class feats, unless a certain optional rule is in play, and still doesn't hold a candle to the things casters have been up to since about 3 levels ago. And yes, for that kind of investment, the results better damn be impressive.
Also, aren't you overselling this a bit? Attacks of Opportunity all the time? AoO by enemy movement requires the Fighter to keep moving around, eating up at least 1 action every turn. When he still has to stay within 15' of his party if he wants to use Champion reactions. And when he gets attacked himself? With a reach weapon, he won't have a shield (outside of flickmace at least), so getting critically missed won't happen every turn. Maybe not even every fight. At least not against intelligent enemies that don't use 'Attack! Attack! Attack!' as their sole strategy.
Do I have to mention that getting a Shield Block vs. every enemy is also only as good as your shield? Which is apparently made out of cardbord. Or plywood, if you invest into a sturdy one. Might not even be 1 round worth of blocks.
But yeah, Fighter gets to play with some of the other martial's toys, not the other way around. Why? Because Paizo is trying not to make the core classes obsolete. Good on them! And that means no class gets to beat the Fighter at its own game. No. Class.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I should do a test.
The Fighter/Champion Archetype is pretty powerful. I am playing one right now.
Giant Instinct barbarian was also extremely brutal.
I am running a couple of Magus right now. They do some pretty big alpha strikes.
If I were to compare them, the fighter is the master of reaction attacks. I get a lot of play out of AoOs and using reaction attacks.
The barbarian is pretty brutal at just beating something to death on their turn. They hit real hard. Their crits are pretty insane, at least the Giant Instinct Barbarian. They have some rounds that I have not seen a fighter or any martial class really match if using Whirlwind Attack or getting a crit or something. It goes from a big hit to just sheer brutality.
The magus is doing some alpha striking I haven't seen other classes do with a surprising consistency. It is performing very well at low level. We'll see how they hold up as hit points rise.
I'd be interested in seeing the results of your test, so long as it runs a good sample size.
Like you'd probably need 1,000+ simulated encounters against a couple of archetypicalencounters at each of level-2, level-1, level, etc. to get a proper picture. I suspect that over the long haul the Fighter simply hitting and critting more is worth far more than the flashy plays other classes can make.
I don't test this way. I don't think simulations show how the game plays.
I usually track damage for 10 or 20 fights in a group that takes into account buffs, movement, getting grabbed, immunities, and a variety of other factors that affect combat effectiveness.
Combats in tabletop RPGs are too varied for simulations to work well. A simulation might underrate a feat like Sudden Charge which is a high value feat because movement is one of the biggest factors affecting action economy.
How your DM sets up fights or how your party operates affects a lot of combat factors.
I find I obtain better information from tracking damage during gameplay.
At lvl 20 if you make it there, Boundless Reprisals is ridiculous with Champion's Reaction and Opportune Backstab. Toss in a reach weapon and maybe an enlarge, you are straight up attacking all the time at maximum hit roll. Pretty nutty.The issue with the Fighter is that it does great damage, hits more than anybody else, has very good AC, solid saves, and is a beast at using combat maneuvers. Most other martial classes are lucky to get close to them in any of these things and often don't surpass the Fighter even when doing their one unique thing.Its not that bad. Fighters don't do the best damage per hit. Barbarians, Rangers, Swashbucklers, Investigators, Rogues all have extra damage that the Fighter can't fully get. Yes they Fighter pull ahead probably on their higher critical and hit rate. But the whole thing is very complex.
Yes the Fighters are surpassed when the other classes are doing their one unique thing. Its just that that thing is not always damage, and you have to break it down into subclasses as they have different areas. Example Draconic and Giant Barbarians are about multi target damage, Gymnast Swashbucklers are melee controllers (grapple, trip) etc etcThe main Fighter class feature is the +2 to hit. The Fighters sub class is the extra feats they get. They aren't missing out.
... Do I have to remind you what certain other classes can do at lv. 20? This combo requires investment into CHA, which is universally touted as the Fighter dump stat, sacrificing at least half of your own class feats, unless a certain optional rule is in play, and still doesn't hold a candle to the things casters have been up to since about 3 levels ago. And yes, for that kind of investment, the results better damn be impressive.
Also, aren't you overselling this a bit? Attacks of Opportunity all the time? AoO by enemy movement requires the Fighter to keep moving around, eating up at least 1 action...
It's not hard to get a 14 charisma in a game with this many ability boosts.
Staying within 15 feet of a party is not hard. Get a reach weapon with Ranged Reprisal Champion feat and you get a 5 foot step with reach. With Champion's reaction you can get one attack on each enemy turn and with Opportune Backstab you get an attack on each ally turn. It's a lot of attacks.
But like you said, it's level 20. Everyone gets good stuff. But Boundless Reprisals if built for is particularly good.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I can't wait until the whole "Fighter is OP and the meta FORCES people to play them" meme goes the same way as the "Spellcasters are utterly useless and people will only play martials" meme. Additional play continually shows the claims don't hold up.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I can't wait until the whole "Fighter is OP and the meta FORCES people to play them" meme goes the same way as the "Spellcasters are utterly useless and people will only play martials" meme. Additional play continually shows the claims don't hold up.
You do feel pretty strong playing a fighter in PF2.
The +2 accuracy is nice.
But so is Bravery. Frightened is an extremely common condition and being able to outright reduce it by 1 as soon as it hits is a great ability.
Juggernaut is nice too.
Heavy armor with master armor proficiency.
Boosted initiative with a Master perception.
Fighter has a lot going for it. Probably biggest weakness of the fighter is mobility.
You can almost always make a better damage dealer starting with fighter and then taking archetypes.
I don't test this way. I don't think simulations show how the game plays.
I usually track damage for 10 or 20 fights in a group that takes into account buffs, movement, getting grabbed, immunities, and a variety of other factors that affect combat effectiveness.
Combats in tabletop RPGs are too varied for simulations to work well. A simulation might underrate a feat like Sudden Charge which is a high value feat because movement is one of the biggest factors affecting action economy.
How your DM sets up fights or how your party operates affects a lot of combat factors.
I find I obtain better information from tracking...
I get that aspect of things, but 20 fights is a tiny sample size for anything. I will concede that you'd probably need a strategy game AI that understands PF2 and can play both sides well to make a proper large scale test.
I get that aspect of things, but 20 fights is a tiny sample size for anything. I will concede that you'd probably need a strategy game AI that understands PF2 and can play both sides well to make a proper large scale test.I don't test this way. I don't think simulations show how the game plays.
I usually track damage for 10 or 20 fights in a group that takes into account buffs, movement, getting grabbed, immunities, and a variety of other factors that affect combat effectiveness.
Combats in tabletop RPGs are too varied for simulations to work well. A simulation might underrate a feat like Sudden Charge which is a high value feat because movement is one of the biggest factors affecting action economy.
How your DM sets up fights or how your party operates affects a lot of combat factors.
I find I obtain better information from tracking...
20 fights is sufficient. The rules have already been tested using the general math of the game. All you want to see is how things work during game play.
The majority of arguments for or against something are made using ideal circumstances for or against. That is not how the game plays. Nothing is ideal, monsters aren't constructed exactly as the examples, and numbers are affected by modifiers from round to round rather than over the course of a thousand combats.
The druid was an example of a class that outperformed during game play, even though on paper they should not do as well as they do. But having several quality sources of damage tends to add up to a lot of damage over many battles.
20 battles is anywhere from 40 to 80 plus rounds of play times the number of characters in a party. So a 5 person party is 200 to 400 different interactions taken during those rounds. Times the 200 to 400 by the 3 action standard round and you're looking at 600 to 1200 actions taken.
That is a far better simulation than running a computer program over the course of thousand battles against a preconfigured challenge. That may work well enough for a video game using a set encounter. Not so great in a game as dynamic as tabletop RPGs. It's easier and gives you a better look at gameplay.
You could collect data from different games and put that in a program to determine something like average damage. That would give you a better look than a simulation with set values in a constant set of circumstances. But average damage isn't really a great way to rate certain classes or how someone might play them. Average damage mostly works for martials.
It's not hard to get a 14 charisma in a game with this many ability boosts.
Staying within 15 feet of a party is not hard. Get a reach weapon with Ranged Reprisal Champion feat and you get a 5 foot step with reach. With Champion's reaction you can get one attack on each enemy turn and with Opportune Backstab you get an attack on each ally turn. It's a lot of attacks.
But like you said, it's level 20. Everyone gets good stuff. But Boundless Reprisals if built for is particularly good.
Ooops, my bad. I seem to have overlooked how Opportune Backstab is actually working with reactions. I believe I have mixed it up with the Riposte triggering on a crit miss.
So, uh, if Boundless Reprisals gives you a bonus reaction on the enemy's turn, it does not work with Opportune Backstab, now does it. Still need Combat Reflexes for that, so 2 extra attacks max per round.
About the staying in reach thing, that depends on your battlefield. The problem isn't keeping your allies in reach, it is keeping them in reach while moving out of the enemy's reach so that they can't just Step into reach again, or they won't trigger AoAs. Especially tricky if they have reach of their own. And kinda bad when they then turn their attention to someone else. It's certainly good, but a smart enemy might outmaneuver the Fighter still. And cramped quarters put a damper on tactical movement. It's certainly still strong, but hardly overpowered.
"A yes lv 20 feats are class defining". Meanwhile, literally every single caster with a 10th lv spell is getting a feat to add 1 more slot. (The rule text almost copy pasted).
And? What exactly do think there is to mix up with 'Get 1 10th level spell slot'?
The argument that the feats should be unique break down as soon as you see that 60-90% of the feats are literally the same thing with minor changes. But none core classes consistently get the worse end of the deal by needing to jump through hoops for the same effect.
Paizo 100% could had given the fight feat at least to Gunslinger that has the same Legendary proficiency but only guns. But they decided against it for no reason giving how Gunslinger's reactions aren't any better than Fighter's
But it's exactly these 'minor changes' that give each class their own unique quirks on how some mechanics work. And yes, some classes have things 'off-the-rack' that other classes have to work for. That's the point.
So again, a Gunslinger is a special variant of Fighter, as is Swashbuckler. In kinda the same way that the Investigator is a variant Rogue. And the classes play differently. Else, why even bother with creating new classes when they are no different.
Just check out how many classes and prestige classes and variants exist for 3.x & PF 1. And how many of those have unique mechanics. And aren't super under-powered, caster supremacy notwithstanding.
The difference is that the gunslinger and swashbuckler get additional things that change the base bonus given.
A swashbuckler with Parry and Riposte, Impossible Riposte, or Felicitous Riposte gets massive benefits to Riposte that others can't.
A gunslinger with Unshakable Grit, Instant Return, or Pistoler's Retort changes the dynamic of what you have heavily.
What high-level reactions can a fighter get, putting aside those they can add on through archetypes?
Putting the riposte ones aside, because you're kinda paying mid- to high-level feats to do what swashbucklers get by default (and they never get better than that), the other ones are definitely good. I more mean things that you'd be likely to have triggered multiple times in a turn, though. Ripostes are easy to trigger (especially for Parry and Riposte swashbucklers), but how many times in a round do you expect to be targeted by ranged spell attacks (Cut from the Air is more likely here) or have to make Reflex saves against spells?
Just back to the original post
This difference feels totally unnecessary to me.
Maybe it is but it is a design decision Paizo have made. It's hard to argue with those. Go have a look at similar powers and you will find little exceptions. Example Specialized Companion can be chosen 3 times by Druid or Beastmaster but not by a Ranger. Read the different text for the Battle Forms there is no consistancy in the text or the numbers.
This is a feature of the system not a bug.
Putting the riposte ones aside, because you're kinda paying mid- to high-level feats to do what swashbucklers get by default (and they never get better than that), the other ones are definitely good. I more mean things that you'd be likely to have triggered multiple times in a turn, though. Ripostes are easy to trigger (especially for Parry and Riposte swashbucklers), but how many times in a round do you expect to be targeted by ranged spell attacks (Cut from the Air is more likely here) or have to make Reflex saves against spells?Smash from the Air is an upgrade to Cut from the Air. So you can use either one, both happen often enough.
Reflexive Shield affect all reflex saves. Regardless if it's a spell or some other ability. Improved let's you use it on other players, which can be life saving.
Mirror Shield can be done easy vs most enemies. While also having the benefit of using your full attack roll.
Guiding Riposte is a forced relocation. Which can and will shut down enemies attacking your allies. Effectively the opposite of a Champion giving allies a move, also unavailable to Swashbucker.
Again, there's the problem of "needs to be something that you expect to trigger more than 2 times/turn". Quick Shield Block ups you to 2/turn (at level 8), Improved Dueling Riposte is also 2/turn (at level 12).
If you have five enemies lower level than you constantly throwing spell attack rolls at you, Mirror Shield is great to have with Inexhaustible Countermoves, but it's probably not going to come up nearly as much. Meanwhile, compare a swashbuckler with Parry and Riposte and Dual Finisher, who can have a decent chance of two enemies immediately triggering Ripostes (never mind other things).
For an easy reason as to why Swashbuckler shouldn't get it expanded to everything (even everything swashbuckler), consider this combination: Cheat Death + Death Ward, on every enemy turn.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I can't wait until the whole "Fighter is OP and the meta FORCES people to play them" meme goes the same way as the "Spellcasters are utterly useless and people will only play martials" meme. Additional play continually shows the claims don't hold up.
My experience so far has been the opposite. Lots of players have generally slept on the fighter because it lacks in the flashiness of classes like the swashbuckler, then they see them in actual play and that's when people start to resent the class a bit.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Since the default "this is my first game!" character is a human fighter, it's probably reasonable to overtune that sort of thing so that this character is never going to feel weak, helpless, unable to contribute, etc.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Except that in most cases where it matters the fight turns those extra hits into significantly better DPR than other classes get. It's impressive to nuke somebody as a Barbarian once in a while or land a clutch finisher as a Swashbuckler
I refute this, dice entropy has too much of an effect to suggest that fighters matter more often "when it counts".
Their lower static damage modifiers mean they are much more at the whim of dice rolls when they do crit, and vs many higher level foes they aren't even guaranteed their +2 will give enhanced crit odds over other martials, just hit chances, which also come with the afore mentioned issue of averages statistically will take longer to hit when relying on dice average vs static bonuses.They absolutely have an edge on average, btw, just disputing you extrapolation that this somehow means it happens when the party needs it to.
Heck there are more variables at play too including target's remaining health, reactions and damage reduction a foe might have and debuffs that a PC might obtain. The game is far too complex for a +2 to be as game defining as you suggest.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I refute this, dice entropy has too much of an effect to suggest that fighters matter more often "when it counts".
Their lower static damage modifiers mean they are much more at the whim of dice rolls when they do crit
I mean, the swashbuckler has a two-step process on every finisher they land, first gaining panache via a skill check and then landing their strike, both of which are going to be more variable against a tough opponent than the fighter's check. The Barbarian only has one check, but it's still at a -2... which means yeah, the fighter's attacks are going to be more reliable.
It seems flatly incorrect to claim the fighter is the one more at the mercy of "dice entropy" here. That's just not how numbers work.
Maybe you missed where you are spending 2 feats for the +1 shield block and +1 riposte. When the lv 20 feat straight up gives you 1 use per enemy. Aka you can always block the strongest enemy attack with shield block, or riposte the enemy to mess with them. Not to mention any reaction from archetypes (which you are ignoring).Again, there's the problem of "needs to be something that you expect to trigger more than 2 times/turn". Quick Shield Block ups you to 2/turn (at level 8), Improved Dueling Riposte is also 2/turn (at level 12).
If you have five enemies lower level than you constantly throwing spell attack rolls at you, Mirror Shield is great to have with Inexhaustible Countermoves, but it's probably not going to come up nearly as much. Meanwhile, compare a swashbuckler with Parry and Riposte and Dual Finisher, who can have a decent chance of two enemies immediately triggering Ripostes (never mind other things).
For an easy reason as to why Swashbuckler shouldn't get it expanded to everything (even everything swashbuckler), consider this combination: Cheat Death + Death Ward, on every enemy turn.
Again, usage. Yes, you can do that, but it will have limited usage and power in comparison.
Compared especially to what would be Swashbuckler's "you get +2 and Fortune on the first save on every opponent turn".
Also as far as Cheat Death goes:You can't reduce or ignore the doomed condition from Cheating Death.By RAW Death Ward does nothing as you cannot ignore the doomed condition from cheat death.
I'm pretty sure they're intended to do that, as you're still gaining the doomed condition, but not taking the effects of it for 10 minutes. (Note: you'll still need another casting to not die in the time between Death Ward wearing off and the doomed condition, but still worth. Also the minor factor of you instantly dying after a certain point if Death Ward is removed.)