Pathfinder 2E Martials > Casters

[Hoffmand]

You sound like a person who would enjoy the Dungeon Crawl Classic RPG system

I do very much.

 

[dave2008]

Barbarians are great for single melee opponents; having two would be overkill.

I don't know that I will ever understand this mind set. Plus, you can never have too many barbarians

 

[CapnZapp]

At least when you're running the first two installments of the official Adventure Path Extinction Curse (levels 1-8), the Wizard feels entirely superfluous, while strong martials rule the day. There are few to no mass combats requiring area spells, and no instances where magic specifically makes a difference.

That is, I see zero reason why not have a second Barbarian (or Fighter etc) if your group finds them dealing impressive DPS.

The idea a second character of the same class will be excessive or overkill somehow just isn't true. Easily 90% of the challenge in this AP is killing monsters; if you do that well, you have a place in the AP.

Besides, there are a lot of variety in how you kill monsters even within a single class. And other aspects, like who masters Medicine and who takes on Thievery, is not very class-dependant.

Tl;Dr: I see no reason why a party of three Barbarians and one battle medic (a Cleric perhaps) couldn't do just as well as a party with more varied martials.

Sure, them Barbarians might not want to be the group's face, but the Cleric can easily assume this role without sacrificing in-combat healing and affliction-removal outside of it. Speccing the Cleric as a warpriest is certainly not worthwhile; casters simply deal way less damage than martials anyhow.

 

[Celtavian]

At least when you're running the first two installments of the official Adventure Path Extinction Curse (levels 1-8), the Wizard feels entirely superfluous, while strong martials rule the day. There are few to no mass combats requiring area spells, and no instances where magic specifically makes a difference.

That is, I see zero reason why not have a second Barbarian (or Fighter etc) if your group finds them dealing impressive DPS.

The idea a second character of the same class will be excessive or overkill somehow just isn't true. Easily 90% of the challenge in this AP is killing monsters; if you do that well, you have a place in the AP.

Besides, there are a lot of variety in how you kill monsters even within a single class. And other aspects, like who masters Medicine and who takes on Thievery, is not very class-dependant.

Tl;Dr: I see no reason why a party of three Barbarians and one battle medic (a Cleric perhaps) couldn't do just as well as a party with more varied martials.

Sure, them Barbarians might not want to be the group's face, but the Cleric can easily assume this role without sacrificing in-combat healing and affliction-removal outside of it. Speccing the Cleric as a warpriest is certainly not worthwhile; casters simply deal way less damage than martials anyhow.

Why am I having a such a bad time with my barbarian? He gets hit so often with the -1 AC and medium armor. What are the barbarians in your group doing differently? Did they go more Dex and Con focus than Str? Are the barbarians in your campaign tearing it up? The champion seems much more durable. And the Ranger archer dealing damage from range seems to do better a lot of the time. Maybe it is unlucky rolls.

 

[Kaodi]

I definitely prefer to cast heroism on our barbarian rather my myself. He is both our damage dealer and prime damage soaker. I could wish I could prepare true strike. Calistria was a great roleplaying choice for my elven bow cleric but all of her mechanical options have been useless so far.

I think if I were to play another archer I would make sure I did not have to be the cleric, go with fighter, and pick up Mobile Shot Stance at 8 so I could, as Zapp has noted before, be another warm body on the front lines soaking damage.

 

[CapnZapp]

Why am I having a such a bad time with my barbarian? He gets hit so often with the -1 AC and medium armor. What are the barbarians in your group doing differently? Did they go more Dex and Con focus than Str? Are the barbarians in your campaign tearing it up? The champion seems much more durable. And the Ranger archer dealing damage from range seems to do better a lot of the time. Maybe it is unlucky rolls.

If you have a martial that stays at range, that just means the monsters are that much more likely to target you instead.

And it's a natural instinct for many GMs to play the monsters "smart" which in this case means "avoiding the hard target", the Champion.

If so, your party might be imbalanced in the area of sharing incoming damage.

I strongly believe every martial must take on the very essential task of: soaking (or negating*) damage.
*) it's almost impossible to build a character that doesn't take damage. The monsters are simply too dangerous.

If the fourth character is a squishie I can definitely understand your pain - not only do you compare your defense with the best defender of the game, you don't get much help in the most important task either: causing damage. After all, when all monsters are dead, you don't need a high AC...


Champions and ranged fighters have both considerably lower DPS than you do. Your allies need to, at a minimum, realize it is in their interest to keep you standing to output your impressive DPS even though it means inconveniencing themselves.

In contrast, the five-man party I'm GMing feature one barbarian, one fighter, one ranger - all melee warriors. The barbarian might take a bit more damage than the other two, but is also doing huge amounts of damage herself. If she's at risk of going down, she can rely on two allies to step up.

And of course, the impressive healing power of the Cleric. (Only the fifth character, a Wizard, feels like it is playing in junior league)

My suggestion would be to have the archer character understand the necessity to stay close to enemies and divert some of the damage you're currently soaking onto his or her own body.

After all, in a game with "free" healing, taking damage is not a problem. Only taking too much damage in too short time is.

Bottom line is: it might not be entirely your fault your character is taking so much damage...!

Regards

 

[FrozenNorth]

In contrast, the five-man party I'm GMing feature one barbarian, one fighter, one ranger - all melee warriors. The barbarian might take a bit more damage than the other two, but is also doing huge amounts of damage herself. If she's at risk of going down, she can rely on two allies to step up.

And of course, the impressive healing power of the Cleric. (Only the fifth character, a Wizard, feels like it is playing in junior league)

Thanks for the play-by-play. It really seems that group composition and tendency to work together is a massive factor in PF2.

By contrast, our frontline is made up of a Champion (OK, besides the fact that she never uses her reaction) and a Mutagen Alchemist.

Mid-line is the melee-rogue and the Dex-based archer who fights with a 2-handed sword in melee.

Backline is Undead Sorcerer and Illusionist Wizard (Warped Terrain is exceptionally useless).

I’m pretty sure our DM is both not optimising monster tactics and fudging rolls to keep us alive.

 

[Kaodi]

This probably sounds crazy but when you say your wizard is playing in junior league I kinda want to play one to see for myself, .

If you are that one hobgoblin who is like, "Screw those other guys," and becomes a wizard I suppose you might have the most solid base for a wizard with +2 Dex, +2 Con, +2 Int, -2 Wis and the Hobgoblin Weapon Familiarity feat, use a bow and Bespell Weapon. So you always have an offensive third action and can take a hit or two due to reasonable hp.

 

[FrozenNorth]

If you are that one hobgoblin who is like, "Screw those other guys," and becomes a wizard I suppose you might have the most solid base for a wizard with +2 Dex, +2 Con, +2 Int, -2 Wis and the Hobgoblin Weapon Familiarity feat, use a bow and Bespell Weapon. So you always have an offensive third action and can take a hit or two due to reasonable hp.

MIght be doable, but it still sucks somewhat when your concept is “fey trickster” and the obvious use of your third action is “let me grab a bow and skewer a b*****”.

 

[Kaodi]

We just hit level 9 in the campaign I am in so I might do it like this. Despite being evoker I might try to focus mostly only my bonus spells on direct damage dealing.

The Hobgoblin Heretic
male elfbane hobgoblin tinker spell substitution evoker wizard 9, neutral
str 10 dex 18 con 16 int 19 wis 12 cha 10
feats
ancestral - alchemical scholar, hobgoblin weapon discipline, hobgoblin lore
background - specialty crafting/bookmaking
class - reach spell, widen spell, bespell weapon, spell penetration, advanced school spell
skill - alchemical crafting, magical shorthand, magical crafting, impeccable crafter
general - toughness, improved initiative
skills
trained - athletics, engineering lore, hobgoblin lore, intimidate, medicine, nature, occultism, religion, society, stealth
expert -
master - arcana, crafting