Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Scion" data-source="post: 1707462" data-attributes="member: 5777">you said that the costs dont matter. If you ignore the costs then of course it will look overpowered. But since you ignored the costs then your conclusion is suspect. In this case it is wrong because you ignored them.So when you said that they were free in terms of actions, you did not mean that they were free in terms of actions? Perhaps you should be a bit clearer <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />In the specific case of useing them in combat? Yeah, that is pretty specific.Of course, since you cannot always assume you will know exactly when and where the battle will be, against what, and have time before the battle starts to put up your short term buffs then it would be one of only 2 options.Option 1) before battleOption 2) during battleSo obviously it is easily justifiable to assume they will need to be put up during battle. It is one of only two options and the first can be very rare indeed, which nearly narrows the choices down to one.Because of that only being able to put up a buff every other round (as the free action) is definately rough. Turn 6 to have up the minimum required buffs.Sounds pretty rough really.Of course this has little to nothing to do with the thread at hand, just more attempting to show you that several bad changes equals and ugly mark.So.. he attacked the door.. how is this not combat? I realize you were trying to make a joke, but useing a combat to discuss out of combat.. well <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />Poor guy.. he thinks that his sword is a lock pick. 'I am a rogue! my massive lock pick (adamantine 2-handed sword) will get us through any door, my massive trap finding power (stomping) will find any trap, and my incredible diplomacy (kicking their dead body) will win us the day'Remember that, 'fighters need help' I posted earlier?Still, none of this is helping the topic at hand at all. Very little of that for several posts now.How about you put up some things that make a fighter better than other fighter types? Especially the psychic warrior, most of the discussion about psychic warrior powers and types just arent useful here, they would be more for a seperate thread.You then go on to a lot of different things that also dont really matter for this.The fighter has full BAB, one good save, d10 hd, 11 bonus feats, and 2 skill points.The bonus feats just arent terribly impressive. Feats tend to be up to a certain strength and no higher, even top tier feats suffer from that.So with enough sources of feats a fighter type can pick and choose well enough to simulate being a good class. Without that they fail horribly.I can only assume that those who say that the fighter is so great have no other real fighter types in the party, or the fighter is highly min/maxed whereas the others are very much not so (such as the earlier fighter doing 3x damage the paladin in the battle.. must be a fighter with a very high str with thw and a lot of feat choices vs a paladin with a very low str and a one handed weapon).Psychic warrior is generally better. His base stats are worse (d8 hd, 3/4 bab, one good save, 7 bonus feats, 2 skill points) but he has powers to help make up for it.This gives him more options overall, which is nice. That is why psychic warrior is a better choice.However, at its base the fighter is underpowered. He usually has a couple more minor options in combat (minor in that usually others can do them also, but he does them slightly better.. usually through not provoking aoo.. but getting around the aoo can be handled in other ways), but overall his fighting strength is the same as others. But others have other bonuses that come into play in combat which take them a step up, plus they have out of combat uses.Compare with a ranger. d8 hd, full BAB, 2 good saves, 6 skill points, 4 levels of spells, and a host of special abilities.In order to be the Fighter of the party he should be better than the other fighter types. He is not.Given the choice between the fighter and the psychic warrior the psychic wins every time. Because it can be better when needed and it simply has more flavor.The Fighter doesnt fill any roll for the party that someone else couldnt fill better, as such he doesnt count for much. The iconic party would be much better off with a Barb, Paladin, or Ranger. Possibly even a monk depending on the campaign style.If you want to dump enough feats at the feet of the fighter so that he can simulate being a good class fine. He'll have to go through and pick out as min/maxed a combination as possible to be useful. Generally picking out the strongest feats available (improved trip comes to mind) just to try and keep up.I have yet to see a game where this was not the case. Other people say their experiences differ but fail to say if they actually have anything to compare with. Or if other classes would be able to do the exact same job. If they can then the fighter is just that much worse.More skills, more feats, more options. He just needs more to be a good class. More more more.Someday he might get it.If you wish to discuss the other things in your post feel free to start another thread, this one has been hijacked too much.</blockquote>

Verification