Hello there!
I am fairly new to Pathfinder 2e and I am looking for a little bit of advice for the first character I plan to play in a longer campaign. We're going to play Age of Ashes (no spoilers, please!) and I want to play a human fighter, because human fighter has been my go-to option to get into new games and systems since the 90s. And with this character, I want to see what the martial of all martials in PF2e is all about and test its flexibility, as well as effectiveness.
My current idea is a "Bastard with a sword" kind of character. Relatively high Charisma for intimidation (and other CHA-related skills) purposes, focus on hitting stuff and Athletics shenanigans.
I plan to start out with the following feats:
- Intimidating Glare (from my Dragon Scholar campaign background)
- Fleet (from being a Versatile Human)
- Sudden Charge (Class feat)
- Snagging Strike (from Natural Ambition ancestry feat)
On level 2 i was planning to take Combat Grab next and then continue along this general line. I want to fight dirty! Shoving people around, tripping them, insulting and intimidating enemies and being a general menace. My first thought was to use the Bastard Sword and switch hands as I see fit to make use of the "one hand free" feats and still use the sword as my main weapon, while two-handing it for the big bonkage. I planned to add a gauntlet and/or a spiked gauntlet into the mix, mainly for damage variety purposes, without having to constantly switch weapons... and the thought of just hitting someone in the face with a plate gauntlet fits perfectly with the character I have in mind!
So a few questions for the more experienced folk here:
The 1-2 hands for the bastard sword feels like a natural pick for the character I have in mind (using feats like Snagging Strike and Combat Grab as a core of my build), but is it actually like that in play or should I go for a different weapon? And would the mixture of "bastard sword + gauntlet + spiked gauntlet" work as I would hope? It is a bit confusing to me because "gauntlet" speaks of "a pair" while "spiked gauntlet" speaks of "a gauntlet" - how does that work with runes, for example? Would I have to add runes to the gauntlet and spiked gauntlet seperately or do they count as a pair for rune purposes?
The other main weapon I had in mind instead of a bastard sword was a flail for that Trip trait - would I have trouble using maneuvers like Trip without a weapon with said trait?
Also, what are some general pitfalls or "trap choices" (i. e. stuff that sounds awesome, but doesn't work out in actual play, stuff like that)? Or things to look out for, like skill feats or general feats that would underline and broaden the character's main foci in meaningful ways? I already have stuff in mind like Titan Wrestler, for example, but there are about a million feats in PF2e...
Looking forward to your inputs!
Never had the exact bastard sword plus gauntlet combo but in one group I had a fighter that used reach weapons plus gauntlet and that was very effective. The brawling group giving slow 1 makes it a great debuff weapon and they built it as such (adding a fear rune and a grievous one) and the gauntlet role was to be used when a crit chance was high to remove actions on the other side and the other weapon was for pure damage and control. If you want the 3 weapons to work, all 3 are separate and need their own runes. Which was an upside for the fighter of our party as their main weapon had runes for damages and versatility (like flaming and shifting) and debuff runes on the gauntlet. The fundamental runes are take care of with the basic version of Doubling rings ( https://2e.aonprd.com/Equipment.aspx?ID=3079 ). In your case, technically if your DM is ok with it, you could take two doubling rings and put a gold and iron ring on both hand and put the fundamental rings on the bastard sword. That way if you put it in one hand, the gauntlet in the other will get its runes. That way you can switch between 2 handed sword, and sword plus either gauntlet. Personally I would probably stick with a single gauntlet though as good property runes are not cheap.
Maneuvers themselves are an incredibly mixed bag. Trip is universally fantastic, grapple was bad until they released the remastered hellknight (chain) and shove is only really good in parties built around exploiting it. The less said about disarm, the better.
Still, nothing wrong with empty hand fighter. Grab your bastard sword, pick up dual-handed assault at 4, wear a buckler and gauntlet on your off hand and have at it.
Thank you for the answers already!
The Doubling Rings thing is interesting, I will keep that in mind!
Adding a buckler into the mix is also a great idea, since I want to focus on versatility and just throw a lot of spaghetti at the wall and see what sticks!
So, if I understand it correctly, nothing stops me from using the buckler (with the Raise Shield action), while still keeping open the possibility to use the gauntlet to smack someone in the face. Or do those two aspects conflict with each other somehow?
Looks like I'm gonna be a poor boy when I have to manage 2-3 weapons plus buckler plus armor and whatever else, rune-wise. :D
Doubling Rings handle most of the extra cost while the buckler works fine w/o runes; the +1 AC (and Shield Block, even if only for a little h.p.) is worth the action until your class feats give you enough options to use up all of your actions productively (plus you have Intimidating Glare). Dual-Handed Assault will be a solid Flourish bread n' butter feat while Combat Grab is a solid Press feat (assuming you want to take the hits for you party & lock down your enemy). This routine (plus movement abilities or ones that help you contribute in ranged battles at least minimally) can carry you into high levels though you'll want a second Press feat for when you don't want to grab (or already have) and since they're so strong.
Later on, figure out which Stance you'd like to complement this and pick up bonus Reactions too (that being one of a Fighter's (many) strong facets) i.e. an extra Reactive Strike.
Essentially, when looking at a class, look at what vocabulary is reiterated and those will be tied to abilities the class excels at (among other things).
|
3 people marked this as a favorite.
|
I don't know what Gestalt is talking about. Grapple is generally considered pretty good (although Combat Grab at level 2 means you only do it directly sparingly). Making an enemy off-guard and forcing them to escape if they want to charge your squishy backline is great.
Having played a similar build in organized play, I quite enjoyed it.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber
From a party composition perspective: If you have multiple folks who can lay out damage, then doing the maneuvers to get bad guys into a better position is worth it. If you are the primary damage dealer and others are going on the buff/debuff side, then I would let them spend the action to set the bad guy up and you focus on the damage.
The general build you laid out is good. Dual-handed assault is good for the action compression - it lets a 2-action (grip and strike) be done as 1-action and still allows you to do all the fun stuff that requires an open-hand. It does have the flourish trait which means you can only do it once each round. So, if you get into a spot where you plan to keep both hands on the sword and just wail on something, it is better for that fight to spend the action to put it on the sword, then you can keep swinging two-handed until you need to let go as a free action.
I have a Fighter built with Snagging Strike, Combat Grab & Dual-Handed Assault, just as you describe. The problem is that if you start with Snagging Strike, you will follow up with Combat Grab _or_ Dual-Handed Assault. As either attack would be your 2nd attack and would have MAP applied.
As you say you are new to the game, MAP=Multiple Action Penalty. Which means your first attack is normal, your second attack is -5 to the die roll, and the third is -10. Sorry if you already know this.
The result of MAP is that you wouldn't normally attack three times, you'd try to find something more effective to do. Inimidating Glare is a fine choice for this.
So... Snagging Strike, then Combat Grab (which is a PRESS action. Can't be your first attack). Or Dual-Handed Assault, then Combat Grab.
Some people retrain Combat Grab to Lunge when the get Dual-Handed Assault. Others just go to Slam Down (also 4th level) and retrain to Lunge. The theory is that if you only have one action to attack, you use Combat Grab. If you have two, then Slam Down.
Edit: Remember that Dual-Handed Assault is a FLOURISH action, which means it can only be used once per turn.
Squark wrote: I don't know what Gestalt is talking about. Grapple is generally considered pretty good (although Combat Grab at level 2 means you only do it directly sparingly). Making an enemy off-guard and forcing them to escape if they want to charge your squishy backline is great.
Having played a similar build in organized play, I quite enjoyed it.
Enemies don't typically have much incentive to break a grapple. They can just dump all their actions into you and make you ask if it was worth it. Or worse, they have some special action and can attempt to escape with effectively no penalty because they don't care about MAP and the escape doesn't even trigger various reaction attacks.
Contrast trip. Prone adds a -2 to attacks and attempting to stand up triggers reactive strike and others.
However, restrained is a fantastic condition. Hellknight giving a metastrike that restrains on a success is amazing.
BishopMcQ wrote: From a party composition perspective: If you have multiple folks who can lay out damage, then doing the maneuvers to get bad guys into a better position is worth it. If you are the primary damage dealer and others are going on the buff/debuff side, then I would let them spend the action to set the bad guy up and you focus on the damage.
The general build you laid out is good. Dual-handed assault is good for the action compression - it lets a 2-action (grip and strike) be done as 1-action and still allows you to do all the fun stuff that requires an open-hand. It does have the flourish trait which means you can only do it once each round. So, if you get into a spot where you plan to keep both hands on the sword and just wail on something, it is better for that fight to spend the action to put it on the sword, then you can keep swinging two-handed until you need to let go as a free action.
I am not yet sure how the party composition will work out. I. e. who will fill which "role". I do have a lot of experience with other systems and we did an introductory adventure for PF2e but i am by no means well-versed in it. That's why I want to keep it fluid and dynamic - I don't have a specific build from the get-go in mind, I want to adjust along the course of the campaign. My idea right now is this Athletics-Demoralize-HitThemWithAStick type character, but I am not against developing him in a more aggressive or a more defensive/supportive role.
Dual-handed assault I also have my eye on, when we get to fourth level. But who knows, what will happen until then.
Lyndor Steelbreast wrote: I have a Fighter built with Snagging Strike, Combat Grab & Dual-Handed Assault, just as you describe. The problem is that if you start with Snagging Strike, you will follow up with Combat Grab _or_ Dual-Handed Assault. As either attack would be your 2nd attack and would have MAP applied.
As you say you are new to the game, MAP=Multiple Action Penalty. Which means your first attack is normal, your second attack is -5 to the die roll, and the third is -10. Sorry if you already know this.
The result of MAP is that you wouldn't normally attack three times, you'd try to find something more effective to do. Inimidating Glare is a fine choice for this.
So... Snagging Strike, then Combat Grab (which is a PRESS action. Can't be your first attack). Or Dual-Handed Assault, then Combat Grab.
Some people retrain Combat Grab to Lunge when the get Dual-Handed Assault. Others just go to Slam Down (also 4th level) and retrain to Lunge. The theory is that if you only have one action to attack, you use Combat Grab. If you have two, then Slam Down.
Edit: Remember that Dual-Handed Assault is a FLOURISH action, which means it can only be used once per turn.
Thank you for the explanation, but I already try to keep that MAP in mind - it is a new system for me though, so I still need to actively keep track of that when I think about tactics.
I am wary of taking too many feats that require actions. In the sense of "I only have 3 actions per turn, but I keep taking feats that require actions...". I will see how it works out when we start playing (which will still take a few weeks, most likely).
Is retraining an optional rule or do I need to spend any resources to do that? I severely dislike the feeling of being "stuck" with a lower level choice that was right at that time, but that has become useless after a while.
Find_a_Hones wrote: Is retraining an optional rule or do I need to spend any resources to do that? I severely dislike the feeling of being "stuck" with a lower level choice that was right at that time, but that has become useless after a while. The game has retraining as a default, not the exception. Though a GM has to know this and give downtime to a party. You don't need resorces, but GM could demand to find a trainer and payment for them in the story. I'd mostly not do that and simply allow only spending downtime, but GMs are different.
Thanks for the info concerning retraining!
I have a question about how the feats interact with MAP.
If I am level 2 and took Combat Grab:
I use my first 2 actions for a Sudden Charge and hit with my Bastard Sword (two-handed). Then I want to use Combat Grab (since it has the Press trait I need to have attacked beforehand) as my third action. Do I have to use my Bastard Sword (using a free action to let go with one hand from the sword) for that second attack, since I need to have a hand free? Or could I do the Combat Grab attack using my Gauntlet, so I could profit from the Agile trait and thus have a lessened MAP? Or would that conflict with the "having a hand free" part?
As long as you have the hand for it, you can attack with any weapon available to you. So you can change your grip as a free action and then use your gauntlet. Your gauntlet has the Free-Hand trait, so it counts as a free hand despite also being a weapon.
I don't have a lot to say mechanically, but I just want to say I adore your character concept! A "bully fighter" that uses dirty tricks, intimidation, tripping, and good old fashioned violence together makes for such a fun and dynamic version of a Human Fighter.
gesalt wrote: Squark wrote: I don't know what Gestalt is talking about. Grapple is generally considered pretty good (although Combat Grab at level 2 means you only do it directly sparingly). Making an enemy off-guard and forcing them to escape if they want to charge your squishy backline is great.
Having played a similar build in organized play, I quite enjoyed it.
Enemies don't typically have much incentive to break a grapple. They can just dump all their actions into you and make you ask if it was worth it. Grapple makes sense if you have ranged allies who aren't benefitting from flanking on their attacks. Grapple makes sense if you have a more defensively minded character. Grapple makes sense if your enemy is very mobile.
But the most comon case is probably a party with lots of offensive melee, and then you don't really have to use grapple. It can still be helpful if the GM focuses fire on the most hurt PC.
BotBrain wrote: As long as you have the hand for it, you can attack with any weapon available to you. So you can change your grip as a free action and then use your gauntlet. Your gauntlet has the Free-Hand trait, so it counts as a free hand despite also being a weapon. Free-Hand
Source Player Core pg. 282
This weapon doesn’t take up your hand, usually because it is built into your armor. A free-hand weapon can’t be Disarmed. You can use the hand covered by your free-hand weapon to wield other items, perform manipulate actions, and so on. You can’t attack with a free-hand weapon if you’re wielding anything in that hand or otherwise using that hand. When you’re not wielding anything and not otherwise using the hand, you can use abilities that require you to have a hand free as well as those that require you to be wielding a weapon in that hand. Each of your hands can have only one free-hand weapon on it.
See the bold part. In this case, I am using that hand for attacking. Combat Grab says "Make a melee strike while keeping one hand free". So it kind of sounds to me like I am using the gauntlet hand for "keeping one hand free", so I can not use the gauntlet hand for attacking. Or am I misreading something here? I am pretty sure this would come up in play, so I want to understand the interaction between these two specific aspects correctly.
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
Justnobodyfqwl wrote: I don't have a lot to say mechanically, but I just want to say I adore your character concept! A "bully fighter" that uses dirty tricks, intimidation, tripping, and good old fashioned violence together makes for such a fun and dynamic version of a Human Fighter. Thank you very much! I mainly wanted to explore the flexibility of the fighter in this new system, so a "free form fighter" who uses anything at his disposal seemed to fit the bill pretty well, instead of a "warrior who mastered a single weapon" kind of thing.
I have in mind characters like Bronn, from Game of Thrones, Conan the Barbarian or even a little bit of Jarlaxle (though he is arguably more of a Rogue/Swashbuckler kind of guy).
Find_a_Hones wrote: See the bold part. In this case, I am using that hand for attacking. Combat Grab says "Make a melee strike while keeping one hand free". So it kind of sounds to me like I am using the gauntlet hand for "keeping one hand free", so I can not use the gauntlet hand for attacking. Or am I misreading something here? I am pretty sure this would come up in play, so I want to understand the interaction between these two specific aspects correctly. Yes, makes sense. "While keeping one hand free" makes very little room for arguments: it must be different hands. One hand to attack and one hand to grab. If they somehow separated them, firstly you would have to be able to attack and then to have a free hand, it could've worked. But they want it simultaneously.
P.S. Wow, an interesting effect of delayed editing...
Errenor wrote: Find_a_Hones wrote: See the bold part. In this case, I am using that hand for attacking. Combat Grab says "Make a melee strike while keeping one hand free". So it kind of sounds to me like I am using the gauntlet hand for "keeping one hand free", so I can not use the gauntlet hand for attacking. Or am I misreading something here? I am pretty sure this would come up in play, so I want to understand the interaction between these two specific aspects correctly. Yes, makes sense. "While keeping one hand free" makes very little room for arguments: it must be different hands. One hand to attack and one hand to grab. If they somehow separated, firstly you have to be able to attack and then to have a free hand, it could've worked. But they want it simultaneously. If you release one hand and attack with it for Combat Grab, does it still count as having a hand free ?
The Raven Black wrote: Errenor wrote: Find_a_Hones wrote: See the bold part. In this case, I am using that hand for attacking. Combat Grab says "Make a melee strike while keeping one hand free". So it kind of sounds to me like I am using the gauntlet hand for "keeping one hand free", so I can not use the gauntlet hand for attacking. Or am I misreading something here? I am pretty sure this would come up in play, so I want to understand the interaction between these two specific aspects correctly. Yes, makes sense. "While keeping one hand free" makes very little room for arguments: it must be different hands. One hand to attack and one hand to grab. If they somehow separated, firstly you have to be able to attack and then to have a free hand, it could've worked. But they want it simultaneously. If you release one hand and attack with it for Combat Grab, does it still count as having a hand free ? "When you’re not wielding anything and not otherwise using the hand, you can use abilities that require you to have a hand free". When you attack with a hand, you are definitely using the hand, so it doesn't count as free hand. If it doesn't count, "while keeping one hand free" is not satisfied (well, unless your second hand is also free). So, no.
Ah, that's for free-hand weapons, but "it also doesn’t take up a hand, though a fist or other grasping appendage generally works like a free-hand weapon". And it makes sense anyway.
But you could attack with a 'Fist' with your foot, have only one hand free and satisfy the requirement :)
You cannot attack w/ the free-hand weapon in the hand you need to be free to use Combat Grab as it's not free in that instance (IMO). But you can attack w/ the bastard sword one-handed, doing +2 dam/die for -1 attack (non-Agile w/ MAP).
I prefer the bastard sword (or perhaps katana since you're a Fighter who's more likely to get the Deadly damage and it grants Piercing too). Those are among the best w/ Dual-Weapon Assault, but there's an argument to be made for an Agile weapon (especially one with a good crit spec effect like hammer or flail) if you're enjoying Combat Grab or other Press Attacks (esp. Dazing Blow, which suits the thuggery of this PC).
As noted above by another, the value of either strategy leans on the composition of the party/overall strategy. For example, if you have a Cleric w/ a Healing Font, Combat Grab is a good way to get all that damage focused on one PC, making in-combat healing more efficient. If your party doesn't provide much in-combat healing though, it's dangerous (though perhaps least dangerous if protecting squishier allies).
Alright, thanks for the clarifications! So the Combat Grab attack would need to be made with the bastard sword, to satisfy the "free hand" requirement. Got it.
A katana is a neat idea, but I think I prefer the bastard sword. I kind of want my character to have the corny catchphrase "I'm just a bastard with a sword!". :D
The composition of the party will most likely have me on the frontline, only supported by a Commander. The rest will probably keep their distance (most likely the "backline" will be composed of a Kineticist, a Druid and a Ranger, but not all are 100% decided, yet).
Ahh I see i misunderstood what you meant. Yes, if you're grabbing someone that hand isn't free for attacking. I thought you were just asking if you could attack with it generally and also use it for grabbing separately.
Find_a_Hones wrote: I kind of want my character to have the corny catchphrase "I'm just a bastard with a sword!". :D Which is neat by the way
Gestalt said, above, that Trip is better than Grab. Generally speaking this is correct.
However, trying to Trip someone is an action. Trying to Grab someone is an action. But look at the overall sequencing...
Attack someone, one action. Then try to trip them; second action at -5.
Grab is the same two actions with MAP on the second.
Combat Grab: one action. Attack and if you hit, the target is grabbed. That is excellent action economy! That's effectively two attacks for one action. This is balanced out by the fact that Combat Grab is a Press action; it has to be done as a second attack at -5.
Slam Down: two actions. Attack someone, and if you hit you can try Trip them; both attacks are 0 MAP. Any succeeding attack is at -10.
Lyndor Steelbreast wrote: Gestalt said, above, that Trip is better than Grab. Generally speaking this is correct.
However, trying to Trip someone is an action. Trying to Grab someone is an action. But look at the overall sequencing...
Attack someone, one action. Then try to trip them; second action at -5.
Grab is the same two actions with MAP on the second.
Combat Grab: one action. Attack and if you hit, the target is grabbed. That is excellent action economy! That's effectively two attacks for one action. This is balanced out by the fact that Combat Grab is a Press action; it has to be done as a second attack at -5.
Slam Down: two actions. Attack someone, and if you hit you can try Trip them; both attacks are 0 MAP. Any succeeding attack is at -10.
A few things here.
The first is that you're neglecting the MAPless reactive strike (multiple if there are multiple melee PCs) if they try to stand up or crawl away.
The second is that if they decide not to stand up, that's just permanent off guard and a permanent debuff to their own attacks. This also ties into action economy as the grappler must maintain the grapple with actions while a tripped target stays tripped indefinitely.
The third is that slam down is actually kinda bad. Iirc you mathematically have better outcomes with manual trip into strike as far as making sure you have something occur.
Another question has come up for me. A player told us that he will be able to have us all "raise the shield" with his commander, which will take our reaction. If I want to do that (depends on the situation, since it would mean I couldn't use my Reactive Strike, for example), how does this work in the case for this specific character?
If, at the end of my round, I have both hands on my bastard sword and his turn comes up, he uses said action and I want to raise a shield, can I use a free action, outside of my turn, to let go of the bastard sword with the buckler hand and then use my reaction to raise my shield?
Free Action states: "Free actions don't require you to spend any of your three single actions or your reaction. A free action might have a trigger like a reaction does. If so, you can use it just like a reaction—even if it's not your turn. However, you can use only one free action per trigger, so if you have multiple free actions with the same trigger, you have to decide which to use. If a free action doesn't have a trigger, you use it like a single action, just without spending any of your actions for the turn."
See the bold part.
Or do I not "qualify" for his raise a shield command, since in the moment when he commands us, I don't have a free hand and thus I am not able to take his command to raise my shield?
In short:
Can I, when commanded like that, use a free action to let go with one hand from my bastard sword, to then use my reaction to raise my shield?
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
Find_a_Hones wrote: Or do I not "qualify" for his raise a shield command, since in the moment when he commands us, I don't have a free hand and thus I am not able to take his command to raise my shield?
In short:
Can I, when commanded like that, use a free action to let go with one hand from my bastard sword, to then use my reaction to raise my shield?
No.
Raise a Shield Requirements You are wielding a shield.
You do not.
Nothing in tactics in general or this specific one changes that.
In particular it doesn't change that Release doesn't have a trigger and so is 'on your turn' action.
And even if it did only this, it still wouldn't work as it would require two actions on one trigger which is forbidden.
The tactic itself must allow it explicitly for it to work. Which it doesn't.
But you can Release a hand at the end of your turn for free.
Thank you for the clarification! I already had the feeling that it wouldn't work, but I wasn't sure about all the interactions with wielding or not wielding, free action, hand economy, etc. in this case.
As Errenor mentioned above, if you know beforehand that the Commander will give you the Raise a shield reaction, you can always release one hand at the end of your turn so that you will be able to use your buckler then.
|
