Pathfinder 1E Pathfinder Sneak Peeks (Old thread)

[ProfessorCirno]

Personally, the fact that he uses a crossbow gives me a glimmer of hope that they added something to make Ranged Weapons That Aren't Bows worthwhile.

 

[nightwyrm]

Personally, the fact that he uses a crossbow gives me a glimmer of hope that they added something to make Ranged Weapons That Aren't Bows worthwhile.

I heard that the preview characters are mechanically built to fit their preview character art, which is why the ranger uses a crossbow and the fighter uses TWF. So I wouldn't put too much stock into thinking that they improved crossbows a lot...

Don't know if it's 100% reliable, but it'd explain a lot...

 

[Hunter In Darkness]

Seems rapid reload my allow you to use a crossbow as a full attack.

 

[Jefe Bergenstein]

No what your seeing is a Chang in how they did previews. The fighter was the first. They got alot of hell from him. So they go more in dept and show stuff off more now.

The fighter is fine. Unless you hated 3.5 fighter's. Many rules changed and a stat block just can't show that. The fighter gets ability, but like a wizard and his spells a fighter has his feats. a 4th level fighter get's 15 feats, 16 if human. And his pewview was showing off his feat, and his ability to move 30 feet in medium armor among other things

His preview mostly showed that fighters are still second class citizens. The fact that you have to eat a feat and are even then still unable to overcome the flawed full attack design is problematic.

If a caster can move and cast a spell, the fighter should be able to move and use all their attacks.

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

If a caster can move and cast a spell, the fighter should be able to move and use all their attacks.

Should dragons be able to move and use all their attacks? How about trolls and giants?

Move + Full Attack sounds just peachy until the monsters are doing it to you.

 

[Hunter In Darkness]

His preview mostly showed that fighters are still second class citizens. The fact that you have to eat a feat and are even then still unable to overcome the flawed full attack design is problematic.

Eat one of 15 feats for an always on ablity. Humm not seeing an issue here. It also showed vital strike and improved vital strike had been changed along with a host of over things I cant recall off hand.

A fighter's power lies in his feats. Asking to show a fighter's ablitys and power with out feats is like asking to show a wizards power without spells


Now the preview could have been better for folks who dont fallow pathfinder very close but you cant really see how things changed from a statblock. You need to see the combat rules an the spell changes and a slew of other changes before you can really say there is no "fix"

 

[Kishin]

His preview mostly showed that fighters are still second class citizens. The fact that you have to eat a feat and are even then still unable to overcome the flawed full attack design is problematic.

If a caster can move and cast a spell, the fighter should be able to move and use all their attacks.

I don't think that design paradigm will ever be changed, simply because it would have moved Pathfinder too far from 3.5E to do so.

Also, everything will always be a second class citizen to a caster in 3.5E and variants, unless you get into nerfing the casters.

 

[ProfessorCirno]

I don't think that design paradigm will ever be changed, simply because it would have moved Pathfinder too far from 3.5E to do so.

Also, everything will always be a second class citizen to a caster in 3.5E and variants, unless you get into nerfing the casters.

Ah, I see we're talking about theoretical D&D where the caster dominates the entire game, something I've seen only on message boards.

 

[Keefe the Thief]

Ah, I see we're talking about theoretical D&D where the caster dominates the entire game, something I've seen only on message boards.

Lucky, lucky you.

 

[Runestar]

Would it be too problematic to come up with a melee version of manyshot? You can make a full attack as a standard action, but face cumulative penalties for each additional attack.

Should dragons be able to move and use all their attacks? How about trolls and giants?

Move + Full Attack sounds just peachy until the monsters are doing it to you.

I already gave quite a number of monsters in my 3e games the ability to move and still simulate the equivalent of a full attack (eg: pounce, bounding assault, tome of battle classes/maneuvers, belt of battle).

It does make melee a decent alternative to casting spells (and if you noticed, the favoured tactic for many high lv monsters is to combine flyby attack with SLAs, because as you noted, move+1 crummy attack for pathetic damage just does not cut it past mid lvs).