| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The stamina/combat tricks section is their big boost. This system grants characters a stamina pool that can be used to boost the effects of any combat feats the character has. Since fighters have more combat feats than any other class, they get the most benefit from this system even if you do not explicitly set it up to favor that class. Also, if you want to tack Combat Expertise or other feats that require intelligence of 13+, the stamina/combat trick system lets you ignore that prerequisite as long as you have at least one stimana point left. So, if you weren't already doing so, you can more easily afford to dump intelligence.
The variant multiclassing system requires you to give up your 3rd, 7th, 11th, 15th, and 19th level feats to gain minor benefits from a secondary class. Again, since fighters have the most feats, they can most easily afford to do this.
The various skill options enable characters to get more bang out of their skill allocations, which means they favor the classes with the fewest skill points. Fighters particularly could use the help here.
|
Also, if you want to tack Combat Expertise or other feats that require intelligence of 13+, the stamina/combat trick system lets you ignore that prerequisite as long as you have at least one stimana point left.
That's interesting. How exactly does it work? You may select combat feats even if lacking the Int prereq, but they (and other feats/effects/abilities that depend on them) will only operate as long as you have at least 1 stamina point remaining?
Also, if you want to tack Combat Expertise or other feats that require intelligence of 13+, the stamina/combat trick system lets you ignore that prerequisite as long as you have at least one stimana point left.That's interesting. How exactly does it work? You may select combat feats even if lacking the Int prereq, but they (and other feats/effects/abilities that depend on them) will only operate as long as you have at least 1 stamina point remaining?
correct
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Note that you have to give up GENERAL feats to multiclass.
You know, the ones that give you non-combat, defensive, or movement options. So if you're going to grab something from another class, they better satisfy those needs!
Overall, I'm unimpressed with the 'stamina fix' for fighters. They needed more non-combat love, not combat love. Yes, the feats needed a boost for fighters. Yes, they needed to ignore stat reqs.
No, they didn't get anything for saving throws, movement options, other defenses, or out of combat versatility, even anti-magic defense.
Just, ugh.
==Aelryinth
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Fighters need a whole mess of general feats to make up for the lack of their class features. Feats that specifically affect movement, skills, or saving throws/defenses. You know, TRAINING.
Or ones that just might enable them to function like a leader of men. You know, fighters leading armies and all that.
==Aelryinth
So whats the general concensus on how to handle Stamina? The way I see it the options are;
1)Ignore it, its too broken or just an added complication to an already complicated game.
2)Everyone gets access to the feat that grants a stamina pool.
3)Fighter gets the stamina pool feat for free, everyone else gets it with a feat.
4) Fighter is the only one that gets it.
Because some of the combat feats are so not for fighters, like style feats, but I think Fighter needs his niche so I'm tempted to go with option #3. Also I use a third party product that has a martial pool that functions and scales very similarly to Stamina so I'm just going to tie those things together. This does mean that anyone with a stamina pool has access to movement buffs/ally buffing/save buffing/AC buffing so I'm also tempted to either go with option #4 or only give Fighters access to the martial pool feats from said third party product.
|
My personal preference:
1. The Combat Stamina feat has an additional prerequisite of "Fighter 1".
2. Only Combat Feats gained with the Fighter's "Bonus Feat" class feature grant the additional Stamina options.
Without #2, you're just encouraging a single level dip in Fighter. With #2, it buffs the entire Fighter class as a whole.
I'm half-tempted to make it a free feat for level 1 Fighters, or possibly a replacement of their 1st Bonus Feat.
I personally will ignore it entirely. The fighter needs non-combat options more then options, and that means an effective re-write of combat and general 'training' feats for him.
I personally consider the stamina pool a bone dropped in front of us, that didn't do the job the fighter needed.
And I'm still annoyed a bit. Gah.
==Aelryinth
Personally, I would just make stamina and skill unlocks automatic and boost the fighter's skill points to 4+int
EDIT: Maybe at the levels rogues normally get a skill unlock, instead increase their skill ranks per level by one.
I will definitely be using the consolidated skills system, which is a huge help to fighters.
With it, I plan on leaving it with 2 skills instead of halving it.
Expertise becomes a really great feat if you use feat synergy and use it to redress some of the fighter's weaknesses.
If you have any of the save boosting feats (i.e. Iron will), you can add your Expertise bonus to your Saves as well as your AC. If you have any of the improved Save feats, you can add your Fighting Defensively bonus to saves as well.
--This is how I fix Fighter feats. Sure, an upgrade, but you acknowledge Fighters need more then combat feats, and combat feats can engage things other then 'hit the opponent a different way'.
Expertise being a quickly scaling bonus makes it VERY useful for such purposes.
A stamina pool that does nothing for the non-combat feats fighter need more then anything simply doesn't interest me much. Likely it's giving fighters benefits they should already have.
And another irritation point: They expressly make it a mechanic any class can use, so there's again nothing unique about it that another class can't simply take as well. Only by restricting it to fighters do you give them something 'unique'...at which point you might as well have just made Fighter only talents/rage powers/Mercies for FIGHTERS ONLY.
Gah.
==Aelryinth
|
I just went through the list of Combat Tricks for fighter's stamina pool... just wow! All combat feats are gaining great options by way of this.
Fighter-only in my game, but I'm wondering if I should grant the feat for free... thoughts?
Finally, I'm hoping we see a Pathfinder Companion book to provide stamina combat tricks for all the setting-specific feats out there!
If it's available as a dip, it's useless. One level, and other classes get the fighter's good stuff.
Another reason I find it annoying. If it was meant to be fighter only, then let it only be able to be taken by having fighter levels, not just 'best when used by.'
Fighters already have 'best when used by' in that they can complete feat chains. It doesn't matter...other classes can either surpass the bonuses gained or don't need them. In some cases, they can get to the end of the chain without taking the stuff in the middle.
Awesome stand alone combat feats that are good...they can take just like the fighter.
Stamina for fighters-only is a patch to a hollow wound, and it leaks already with a one level dip. Just, ugh.
==Aelryinth
I think my final thing is going to be; Free for fighters, everyone else can get it with a feat. As I said before I run this third party product that has a similar system, and will let those be fighter exclusive instead of the other way around. Those tend to shore up a lot of fighter deficiencies that I'd be more comfortable if other classes didn't get access.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I really think that free for fighters, but other classes can take it with a feat is the way to go. It makes thematic sense for monks and some other martial classes to be able to use the stamina tricks, but fighters get more out of thanks to bonus feats and free access to them. And maybe give fighters push the limits free as well.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I personally will ignore it entirely. The fighter needs non-combat options more then options, and that means an effective re-write of combat and general 'training' feats for him.
I personally consider the stamina pool a bone dropped in front of us, that didn't do the job the fighter needed.
And I'm still annoyed a bit. Gah.
==Aelryinth
This reaction baffles me. I get that you're annoyed that they didn't fix the fighter the way you wanted them to fix the fighter. But the stamina system clearly does go at least partway to addressing some of the issues. Even if (according to your own words) it only fixes one or two of something like six seperate problems. The point is that it DOES fix one or two of those six seperate problems. Which is clearly better than zero.
So why would you disdain to use the system, just because it doesn't go far enough? Why not use it as a stepping stone to get closer to where you want to be, and just keep houseruling improvements as you can?
Saying that you won't use it because it only does 20% of what you want it to seems like you'd be doing more harm to yourself than good.
|
|
I really think that free for fighters, but other classes can take it with a feat is the way to go. It makes thematic sense for monks and some other martial classes to be able to use the stamina tricks, but fighters get more out of thanks to bonus feats and free access to them. And maybe give fighters push the limits free as well.
I'm now leaning for fighter only. Period. so a combo of the options given in unchained:
1. Fighters get this feat for free at 1st level
2. Only the combat feats gained when you take a fighter level are eligible (whether they're bonus fighter feats or those gained at 1st, 3rd, 5th etc. As long as it's combat feat and gained as you took a fighter level you're good to go. This to prevent dipping. Combat feats granted by way of hit dice (bugbear, giants, etc.) are not eligible either.
I really think that free for fighters, but other classes can take it with a feat is the way to go. It makes thematic sense for monks and some other martial classes to be able to use the stamina tricks, but fighters get more out of thanks to bonus feats and free access to them. And maybe give fighters push the limits free as well.
Why not unchained Monks and Fighters get it for free? Both need it.
Everyone else (no-unchained monk included) take the feat.
|
|
I'm looking at Fighters only/fighter level feats only as well. Maybe restrict stamina point increases to fighter level BAB only?
And what's with the fighters are inadequate outside of a fight talk? Judicious use of skill points, traits, feats, and equipment can make you a solid contributor to many non-combat situations. You're no bard or rogue by any stretch of the imagination, but absolutely useless? No.
If you dumped all of your mental stats to maximize physical ones, take nothing but combat feats, and sink your one skill point per level into Climb, then yes, you have built your fighter to be useless outside of combat.
Do you really need an 18 in all physical stats to be an effective fighter? If you are trying to "win the DPR race", I guess so. Otherwise, start with something lower and use the level increases and stat boosting equipment to get to where you want. Also, even a 12 in a mental stat can be significant at low level, and give you a solid base to grow on.
Use traits to turn some non-traditional skills into class skills. Never know when your moderate skill can be used to aid Mr. Wizard and push his Knowledge Arcana over the DC needed to gain critical information! Or when the GM calls for a Knowledge Geography check and you are the only one at the table with the skill!
Drop a General feat on skill boosters or Iron Will. Most of the primary fighter builds (barring archery and whip use) are effective after a handful of feats. Use one or two of those 21 (22 if human) feats on something to flesh out your abilities!
Sorry for the rambling rant there. Been a lot of fighter bashing on threads lately. I guess people are getting ready for them to be the new rogue or monk. :-)
I personally will ignore it entirely. The fighter needs non-combat options more then options, and that means an effective re-write of combat and general 'training' feats for him.
I personally consider the stamina pool a bone dropped in front of us, that didn't do the job the fighter needed.
And I'm still annoyed a bit. Gah.
==Aelryinth
This reaction baffles me. I get that you're annoyed that they didn't fix the fighter the way you wanted them to fix the fighter. But the stamina system clearly does go at least partway to addressing some of the issues. Even if (according to your own words) it only fixes one or two of something like six seperate problems. The point is that it DOES fix one or two of those six seperate problems. Which is clearly better than zero.
So why would you disdain to use the system, just because it doesn't go far enough? Why not use it as a stepping stone to get closer to where you want to be, and just keep houseruling improvements as you can?
Saying that you won't use it because it only does 20% of what you want it to seems like you'd be doing more harm to yourself than good.
Because if I make a fix, I go all the way.
This bumping up to a minor degree on combat feats doesn't do the job. Once again, Fighters get nothing unique, and if there's something good, other classes can take it, too.There's nothing uniquely fighterish. Something as dumb as taking one level of fighter gets you all the benefits of a fighter if you then go on into monk or ranger or even rogue, who can all grab combat feats.
Sure, combat feats needed help. But that's something that should have been restricted to fighters.
More importantly, fighters needed non-combat help. This gives them NONE.
If I'm going to use a system, it's going to have both sides integrated, and its not going to be for non-fighters. That's just the way I think. I don't want other classes stealing the fighter's schtick.
==Aelryinth
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm looking at Fighters only/fighter level feats only as well. Maybe restrict stamina point increases to fighter level BAB only?
** spoiler omitted **
Let me get my viewpoint straight here.
Fighters are THE non-magical class in 3E and PF.
Paladins and rangers get spells. Barbarians get Rage which at higher levels is supernatural. Monks get ki pools which replicate spells. Rogues can learn spell like abilities.
Fighters get NO MAGIC.
Fighters are the Olympians of combat. They train, train, train to be what they are. They are the most formally educated and professional of the melee classes.
WHY does a class that has NO MAGIC have fewer skill points then classes that do? (like the ranger?) Seriously? A ranger can solve his problems by waving his fingers. Fighters have no recourse.
Fighters should have more skill points then rangers. Armor proficiencies aren't that important.
Fighters have no magic, and so should be the most learned anti-magical of the classes.
Instead this role is foisted off on the supernatural barbarian.
Fighters spend endless hours drilling movement and skill in armor. Yet their athletic ability is less then that of a base barbarian. They never get a movement rate increase. A Ranger can wave his fingers and get a boost.
Fighters have one good save. ONE. No magic to rely on. No class abilities to boost their saves. No synergy with their gear. They know they are vulnerable to magic, and of the martial classes, they are the most vulnerable despite being the most non-magical.
They can't train to improve their own defenses, even if they want to.
Other classes are better at getting combat feats quickly, especially the good ones, since they ignore pre-reqs and 'skip' feat taxes the fighter must take, so his combat feats edge, isn't. Their class defenses are better then anything a fighter can attain with a general feat.
==================
Sure, fighters are not useless.
What they are, is biased against in the game, looked down on, and relegated to the fact they are the worst at doing their job because they don't have any breadth to in their class abilities. They are basically all offense and maybe AC boosts...and in a magical world, that's wrong and dumb.
Fighters should have the no-magic excellence role. They should be THE class to turn to when fighting casters. They should be wonderfully versatile when facing a foe, and should be highly trained and educated as befits any professional in a world where finger-wavers solve problems, and you can't do it that way.
That's the problem with fighters.
I want AM FIGHTER to be able to look down his nose at AM BARBARIAN, keep up with AM RANGER, and lead better then AM PALADIN has a hope of doing. WHen AM WIZARD trots up with a smirk, he pauses and swallows when seeing AM FIGHTER.
Because its what fighters do.
As it stands now...bah. Stamina pool didn't help with ANY of that.
==+Aelryinth
I have yet to read the stamina system, but my understanding is that fighters don't need to be better at feats, they need to be better at things like defense.
Extraordinary Spell Resistance, Spell Sunder, better saves, these are the true weaknesses of a fighter.
As for out of combat roles, fighters are pretty bland. Slayers are also pretty bland but they have enough choices where the player can create their own flavor based on what they want. The fighter is essentially reduced to an NPC class compared to better options.
Weapon Training is nice, but it really is only one ability that scales, perhaps a better designed fighter will gain more of these things as he progresses in levels and leave the weapon training and armor training off the table.
That, plus 6+ skills per level would put the fighter on the map to be the everyman that people have been complaining they want him to be.
I want to roll with this idea, stay posted for another Marshmallow Class thread.
I have yet to read the stamina system, but my understanding is that fighters don't need to be better at feats, they need to be better at things like defense.
Extraordinary Spell Resistance, Spell Sunder, better saves, these are the true weaknesses of a fighter.
That all could be given via feats the same way the barbarian nice things are given via rage powers.
And yes, 4 skills per level should be the minimum, although 6 would not be crazy taking into account the Slayer.
EDIT: Weren't you opposed to giving fighters more skills?
On principle I don't feel that more skills means better role playing, and when people complain that they cannot enjoy fighters because they cannot role play them due to the lack of out of combat options then it is obvious that more skills won't fix the actual problem that said players have.
Giving them more skills won't fix the fact that people will complain about the fighter not having a role outside of combat, but then again people never complained about the slayer except for the fact that it simultaneously invalidated the rogue and the fighter when it comes to these kinds of role playing.
Short answer: yes, I am against giving all characters more skills for the sake of it, since I do not equate skills to role playing.
Fighters did get strong apparently from what I hear here.
But I also support the side that fighters need more roleplaying class features to be not bland out of combat, without sacrificing combat efficiency.
4 Skill points and Diplomacy as class skill is just a shy starting point suggestion...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This is the link to my original fighter fix.
I think I would take the advancements of the various training types off the table and add different abilities in which would become things like magic resistance, and spell sundering/cancellation.
This was also post ultimate campaign, so those bonuses to Profession Soldier are meant to make the fighter the best at commanding an army. I think tying in something to his class abilities like a pseudo cohort/squire/animal companion or something that allows him to command troops or to establish relations with military would be something flavorful.
I have yet to read the stamina system, but my understanding is that fighters don't need to be better at feats, they need to be better at things like defense.
Extraordinary Spell Resistance, Spell Sunder, better saves, these are the true weaknesses of a fighter.
That all could be given via feats the same way the barbarian nice things are given via rage powers.
And yes, 4 skills per level should be the minimum, although 6 would not be crazy taking into account the Slayer.
EDIT: Weren't you opposed to giving fighters more skills?
On principle I don't feel that more skills means better role playing, and when people complain that they cannot enjoy fighters because they cannot role play them due to the lack of out of combat options then it is obvious that more skills won't fix the actual problem that said players have.
Giving them more skills won't fix the fact that people will complain about the fighter not having a role outside of combat, but then again people never complained about the slayer except for the fact that it simultaneously invalidated the rogue and the fighter when it comes to these kinds of role playing.
Short answer: yes, I am against giving all characters more skills for the sake of it, since I do not equate skills to role playing.
Not sure if understanding your point, or the point the people you are referencing, but when the DM ask for diplomacy/bluff/any of the 10 knowledge skills/sense motive/stealth or whatever check , there is no amount of roleplaying you can do to avoid it.
But whatever, that have been debated in the thread, there is no point to do it again.
Right, and I concede that it's what the people want. I have yet to find it again, but there was a stellar fighter fix out there that included a series of careers that the fighter could choose that functioned like a cavalier'r order and granted different class skills.
And again there is more to role playing than the mechanics, you can role play and have fun doing it even if you aren't the one making the diplomacy checks. It's the reverse Stormwind.
And again there is more to role playing than the mechanics, you can role play and have fun doing it even if you aren't the one making the diplomacy checks. It's the reverse Stormwind.
Well, yes, but since it is a mechanical problem you can't fix it with role playing, and that comes from a guy that very often ignores social skills when DMing.
===================
Returning to the UC fighters, assuming stamina pool are fighter-only, how strong is the fighter compared to a slayer or a suerpstitious/beast totem barbarian?
DO the improvement form the stamina pool is that big that you can spend all your non bonus feat in your saves and skills and not get hurted in combat?
I still haven't gotten a copy of my book - but i'm leaning towards running it as:
• Fighters get it free
• Feat buy in for other classes
The reasoning:
It's not simply a matter of 'fighters get more feats', those extra feats allow you to finish multiple feat lines. Other classes are generally lucky if they finish a *single* feat chain. So even if you give them access to stamina, at the cost of a feat (which they can only spare in some circumstances), you still won't be giving them the levels of stamina usage/options that fighters will get.
This also allows the stamina system to avoid certain speedbumps with feats (like combat expertise), for the cost of a feat, rather than the cost of not-dumping-int: which is not a fighter-only concern.
Still: Burning feats is almost never inconsequential.
If you are willing to get combat expertise and stamina pool on your paladin, to unlock improved trip, or similar, that's a hefty investment.
Just remember also, that not finishing feat lines vs finishing multiple feat lines is a pretty huge deal here:
If you don't flesh out the whole line, you arent going to be using stamina on great cleave, whirlwind attack, etc etc.
Fighters also have more breathing room for feats like mobility, which on many classes cannot be justified due to lack of feats, but is actually a very useful feat: All the edge case feats get brought up by this system, and fighters have a small amount more room for those edge cases.
The other multi-classing (VMC) options in the book attempt to allow a level of multi class without running down your actual class levels, and thus impacting your power level with regards to unlocks etc.
I think if you're going to allow VMC, it makes sense to allow non-fighters stamina access too: as it works upon the same system of burning feats for access to abilities.
Can someone with the book spell out in this thread (with spoilers tag if needed) what the exact math of the stamina pool is, for fighters and non? Is it more combat feats = more stamina? do fighters have any bonus other than an inherent increase of feats available?
I've gotten the impression its based on numbers of combat feats, but most of the math I've seen is people discussing how they would modify the math to suit their own tastes.
|
|
That, plus 6+ skills per level would put the fighter on the map to be the everyman that people have been complaining they want him to be.
the background skills add-on fixes that IMO (2 bonus skill ranks per level; handle animal and sleight of hand are on that list, and those are pretty 'gamey' skills... if you care more about craft, appraise, knowledge nobility or profession, you can go that way too)
|
|
Can someone with the book spell out in this thread (with spoilers tag if needed) what the exact math of the stamina pool is, for fighters and non? Is it more combat feats...
Barbarians never saw this coming. Don't give this stamina thing to barbarians, for the love of ice cream! The beginning of the stamina section strongly suggest this is for fighters, suggesting they should get this as a bonus feat. I recommend you make this stamina thing fighter only, and further restrict it to those feats that are gained via fighter levels (be they ftr bonus feats or those gained at 1st, 3rd, etc. when you got to those levels via fighter) in order to discourage dipping. In essence this can only be abused if viewed as a feat, because in that case a simple Ftr1 dip would reap you the benefits of the whole system. This should be viewed as a fighter vocation... for the long run.
So, how does a paladin with the fatigued mercy do with the stamina system?
|
|
So, how does a paladin with the fatigued mercy do with the stamina system?
paladins should stay away from stamina...
1. because they won't have that many combat feats anyway; and
2. because they will need to take a feat to gain a stamina pool; and
3. because 2 will result in even less combat feats they can take...
Remember: akin to skill unlocks, combat tricks are cool yes, but they do not in themselves exceed the power of taking a feat.... it's ultimately only through the fighter, who has tons of combat feats, that stamina pool will ever have a meaning. The options are not earth shattering, but the fact that a fighter will gain half a dozen, then a dozen, etc. additional little combat options that he will basically be able to do react to a myriad of different situations in vario us ways that will grant him power untold above the more simple 'damage dealers' of the game.
I mean, let me spoil you on the benefits of the stamina system with an example of a normally very taxing feat chain that yields more or less bland results:
or Reflex saving throw, you can spend 5 stamina points to
add your shield’s enhancement bonus as a bonus on the
saving throw.
Shield Slam (Combat): Instead of attempting a free bull
rush when using the Shield Slam feat, you can spend 2
stamina points to attempt a disarm, reposition, trip, or
sunder combat maneuver. This combat maneuver attempt
does not provoke an attack of opportunity from the target.
And the list goes on and on and on... from the simple Dodge feat to the more complex end of chain Spring Attack. Everything is made awesome. But unless you have dozens of feats like the fighter... not entirely critical for say, a paladin, to have...
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
And what's with the fighters are inadequate outside of a fight talk? Judicious use of skill points, traits, feats, and equipment can make you a solid contributor to many non-combat situations. You're no bard or rogue by any stretch of the imagination, but absolutely useless? No.
Sure...but here's the thing: Any other character class other than Fighter would be better at it, given the same allocation of resources.
An Int 14 Human Fighter with two Traits involving skills and the Cosmopolitan Feat is certainly better at out-of-combat stuff than one with Int 7 and no resources invested...but he'd be notably better at such things as any other class in the game with Int 14, those two Traits, and Cosmopolitan. Given that several such Classes are equal or better combatants (even after spending one of their rarer Feats)...this is a problem. A Barbarian, for example, is precisely equal, except for having two more skill points per level, while a Magus has no more skill points, but has access to numerous utility spells and gets more benefit from Int and Int boosting items.
The point isn't that they're useless, the point is that (barring Lore Wardens) they are inferior to, oh, every other possible class you could've played.
If you dumped all of your mental stats to maximize physical ones, take nothing but combat feats, and sink your one skill point per level into Climb, then yes, you have built your fighter to be useless outside of combat.
The thing is, once again, the furthest dumped Fighter remains worse than the furthest dumped member of any other Class. An equally dumped Barbarian is, at 3 skills a level if human, several times better outside of combat.
Do you really need an 18 in all physical stats to be an effective fighter? If you are trying to "win the DPR race", I guess so. Otherwise, start with something lower and use the level increases and stat boosting equipment to get to where you want. Also, even a 12 in a mental stat can be significant at low level, and give you a solid base to grow on.
Sure. But it gives that to everyone...and an Int 12 Fighter is still worse off than an Int 12 Barbarian, Cavalier, or anything else.
Use traits to turn some non-traditional skills into class skills. Never know when your moderate skill can be used to aid Mr. Wizard and push his Knowledge Arcana over the DC needed to gain critical information! Or when the GM calls for a Knowledge Geography check and you are the only one at the table with the skill!
Again, this advice is good, but doesn't help the Fighter class specifically whatsoever. It's equally good advice for a Barbarian and if both take it...the Barbarian winds up notably better off than the Fighter.
Drop a General feat on skill boosters or Iron Will. Most of the primary fighter builds (barring archery and whip use) are effective after a handful of feats. Use one or two of those 21 (22 if human) feats on something to flesh out your abilities!
Sure, except utility Feats don't actually do a lot to make up for Fighter's Class weaknesses. Iron Will is no substitute for a Good Will Save (being a +2 rather than a +6, eventually).
Sorry for the rambling rant there. Been a lot of fighter bashing on threads lately. I guess people are getting ready for them to be the new rogue or monk. :-)
I've seen complaints over Fighters non-combat options for several years.
What about the "anti-caster" (lol) feats the Fighter gets, like Disruptive? If the stamina stuff for those is good it might actually be helpful...
Can someone with the book spell out in this thread (with spoilers tag if needed) what the exact math of the stamina pool is, for fighters and non? Is it more combat feats...** spoiler omitted **
Barbarians never saw this coming. Don't give this stamina thing to barbarians, for the love of ice cream! The beginning of the stamina section strongly suggest this is for fighters, suggesting they should get this as a bonus feat. I recommend you make this stamina thing fighter only, and further restrict it to those feats that are gained via fighter levels (be they ftr bonus feats or those gained at 1st, 3rd, etc. when you got to those levels via fighter) in order to discourage dipping. In essence this can only be abused if viewed as a feat, because in that case a simple Ftr1 dip would reap you the benefits of the whole system. This should be viewed as a fighter vocation... for the long run.
Thanks for the clarification:
I think they've made a good choice using CON for something more than HP, and it even makes sense thematically.
I'd be curious:
Do you believe, if this system were fighter-only, that it solves the power divide issue for fighters (vs barbarian, paladin etc)? are they on-par?
Similarly, would the inability of other martial classes like monk to use this system in conjunction with problematic feats like combat expertise pose an issue for dragging those classes down?
Just remember that the first two levels of fighter are the most dippable levels, so even with your system, a 1-2 dip of fighter will allow you to take up to 3 feats to use stamina with (and you wont need to unlock the system with a feat either, if the 1st level gets stamina free).
Provided you use it carefully, the dip would still be readily available for 'surgical' feat choices :P
I would hazard that you would prefer for the pool to be Fighter Level + CON bonus in that case to keep it fighter-centric?
|
|
yes... fighter level + CON would fix everything as far as I'm concerned... would remove the silliness of frost giants with one level of fighter and a huge stamina pool...
Edit: however I do recognize that they probably used BAB to sell it to the other classes... still, those other classes will have to get the feat to get the pool; it's pretty clear that fighters should not pay for this (the way it's been presented in the section's intro...)
Ah, ONE feat, with a major stamina expenditure, that boosts saves...and only if you're using a shield.
And still inferior to superstitious.
(sighs)
==Aelryinth
I'm planning to make Stamina Brawler, Fighter, Monk use only....