Pathfinder 2E Fighter Class Preview For Pathfinder 2nd Edition!

There is precious little as to what a fighter can do *outside* of combat...

 

[Shasarak]

I will, if after playing with the rules as written I feel like shields could use a bit of a boost.

You mean more of a boost then the extra damage reduction that Paizo have already previewed?

 

[Charlaquin]

You mean more of a boost then the extra damage reduction that Paizo have already previewed?

It’s really impossible to accurately evaluate how valuable that damage reduction will be without the context of the rest of the system. I’m speculating that the damage reduction will more or less make up for the fact that the AC bonus costs one of your three actions, but without knowing what else I might use that action on, what the advantages and drawbacks are compared to using a two-handed weapon or two non-shield weapons, and what PC and monster HP and damage looks like, I can’t know for sure how balanced shields will be. That’s why I said I’ll include it in my feedback if I feel like shields need a boost after playtesting the rules as written. Until then it’s all just guesswork with little evidence to inform those guesses.

 

[MoonSong]

One of the other major critiques of 5E is that the so-called "optional" rules for feats and multi-classing are automatically assumed by default unless the DM goes out of their way to gather a group of players who are apathetic on the issue. Most players expect those to be available, and are critical of attempts to play without them.

Pathfinder 2 already looks to be more complex baseline than 5E is under the most extreme of circumstances, and there's no easy way to turn off those options since they're so deeply ingrained into the core class mechanics.

IMO if you want PF to be simpler than 5e, you are barking to the wrong tree. Complex character generation with lots of nuts and bolts is the essence of Pathfinder and something most of PF players want. It's as if you wanted a cat to be doglike, maybe possible, but then you are missing the point of owning cats in the first place.

Not as if I'm actually defending PF, I stopped playing it long ago, it is just too fiddly for me at this point. I'm just in ait and see mode.

If by "supported" you mean "explicitly given permission to do," then you are correct. But I'm playing a role playing game, not a board game. I expect to be able to try things that would logically work, rather than choose from a list of preselected actions. See my previous explanation.

Because a whirlwind attack would really really work in real life? I think I get the point you are trying to make, but you example isn't a good example. I mean I can't think of a single time in fiction -outside of Zelda games- where a whirlwind attack happens. Of course I'm not into that much swashbuckling action fantasy, but I'm not sure it makes sense even in genre. This is not swinging from a chandelier, your situation seems more like a player wanting to munchkinise the game to gain an unwanted advantage.

 

[NaturalZero]

One of the myriad things that eventually drove me away from 3e and PF was the needless math.

I don't want a system where you make 3 attack rolls on your turn, each with a different modifier modifying discrete rolls, and then a completely different modifier number for opportunity attacks. I want more complexity than 5e. I want more mechanical character customization. Having 4 different numbers for attack rolls in ONE ROUND is needless clunky though, in a world where Saga Edition, 5e, and 4e let us just use one number. Give me cool maneuvers. Give me the ability to interrupt monsters attacking my allies. Give me the ability to trip, disarm, ect. Give me the ability to jump without running first or climb instantly. Give me a book with 500 cool things to do that most people can't do. Don't give me a bunch of math porn for no good reason.