Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="StreamOfTheSky" data-source="post: 5271816" data-attributes="member: 35909">I didn't mind the orb spells.&nbsp; Once I made them Evocations.I really don't like the PF Fighter, it has to be my least favorite re-write of all the classes.&nbsp; Though, Barbarians with their whole &quot;Unconscious?&nbsp; Ok, I die.&quot; thing are a close second.&nbsp; Then there's the monk who gets the ability to ignore Int 13 and Combat Expertise for some combat maneuver feats, but gets left out in the cold in regards to the Greater versions of those feats to make them actually useful...where was I going?Yeah, I like the armor training for more mobility and bravery is ok/meh.&nbsp; But I really hate weapon training.&nbsp; All it does is flip the Ranger the bird.&nbsp; It might actually make the &quot;problem&quot; (well, I don't like it, at least) of a warrior relying on a single type of weapon to the exclusion of all others worse.&nbsp; And all it does is let you marginally beat things over the head better.&nbsp; When I &quot;fixed&quot; the fighter in my houserules (link in sig), I gave them 4 + int skill points with a decent list, I gave them Weapon Aptitude so that if they happen to find a nice heay flail they can attune to it with their feats and sell off the old greataxe.&nbsp; I gave some martial maneuvers and a lot of flexibility in using them.&nbsp; Basically cribbed a bit from ToB.&nbsp; I know Paizo couldn't do that, but they could have done more to add to the Fighter's versatility.&nbsp; I have never seen a properly built full BAB character that had trouble killing things.&nbsp; They fixed something that didn't need fixing and left almost all the issues intact.EDIT: I will give Paizo credit on the feats, though.&nbsp; They made a bunch of fighter only high level feats that were either interesting, powerful, or both.&nbsp; Since bonus feats and fighter exclusive feats ARE a fighter's class features, basically, they did a good job of providing some unique high level class features in that manner.&nbsp; Still hate the class itself.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="StreamOfTheSky, post: 5271816, member: 35909"] I didn't mind the orb spells. Once I made them Evocations. I really don't like the PF Fighter, it has to be my least favorite re-write of all the classes. Though, Barbarians with their whole "Unconscious? Ok, I die." thing are a close second. Then there's the monk who gets the ability to ignore Int 13 and Combat Expertise for some combat maneuver feats, but gets left out in the cold in regards to the Greater versions of those feats to make them actually useful...where was I going? Yeah, I like the armor training for more mobility and bravery is ok/meh. But I really hate weapon training. All it does is flip the Ranger the bird. It might actually make the "problem" (well, I don't like it, at least) of a warrior relying on a single type of weapon to the exclusion of all others worse. And all it does is let you marginally beat things over the head better. When I "fixed" the fighter in my houserules (link in sig), I gave them 4 + int skill points with a decent list, I gave them Weapon Aptitude so that if they happen to find a nice heay flail they can attune to it with their feats and sell off the old greataxe. I gave some martial maneuvers and a lot of flexibility in using them. Basically cribbed a bit from ToB. I know Paizo couldn't do that, but they could have done more to add to the Fighter's versatility. I have never seen a properly built full BAB character that had trouble killing things. They fixed something that didn't need fixing and left almost all the issues intact. EDIT: I will give Paizo credit on the feats, though. They made a bunch of fighter only high level feats that were either interesting, powerful, or both. Since bonus feats and fighter exclusive feats ARE a fighter's class features, basically, they did a good job of providing some unique high level class features in that manner. Still hate the class itself. [/QUOTE]

Verification