Pathfinder Melee (PF only please.)

[Metahuman1]

Ok, so, I've goofed around a bit here and there with Pathfinder before. I actually have a bias toward 3.5 D&D because thus far my experiance has been that 3.5 D&D has more goodies for melee that don't involve a full spell casting progression as part of the package.


However, I will soon be looking for a game to apply to, with a freind who's even newer to pathfinder then I am. Game will probably lower to mid level optimization to allow for new player learning curve.

And I come to the playground seeking a Melee focused build, using exclusively stuff form Pathfinder SRD, that can be effective in combat, and still have one or two other things to do other then "I Charge and/or Full attack. Again."

So a tier 3 to at most low Tier 2 build would be the goal here.

And outside these parameters, I honestly don't have a preference. If necessary I will break down and build a Druid or Synthesis Summoner, but having some other options, particularly one's that don't suck but at the same time don't have that much game breaking power to throw around casually, would be really, really great.

Thanks of the help playground!

[watchwood]

The obvious choice here is to spend some feats on combat maneuver abilities. Trip and Disarm are both good ways to disable most humanoid opponents, and the Ranger/Paladin classes both offer some handy supplemental tricks.

If he's looking for something with a bit more spell flare, I'd also consider a Magus. It's a powerful class with the right build.

[ThiagoMartell]

Why are you aiming for tier 2? :smallconfused: You actually want to break someone's game?

[Togath]

tier 2 isn't that bad, except for the fullcasters in it, the psionic tier 2 classes are much more balanced

[doko239]

What level is this starting at? That can influence possible builds.

One of my current favorite builds is the "Batman Ninja" build I'm using in PFS. He uses a cestus as his primary weapon, and has the Bludgeoner, Enforcer, Sap Adept, Sap Master and Shatter Defenses feats.

Essentially, any time I make a nonlethal attack vs an opponent, I get to make a free Intimidate check to demoralize (granting Shaken condition) for a number of rounds equal to the damage dealt; When attacking a Shaken opponent, they're considered flat-footed (thus Sneak Attack); and when making a nonlethal sneak attack with a bludgeoning weapon, the sneak attack dice are doubled, then +2 damage added for each die.

At level 8 (the minimum level for all the required feats) this build outputs 1d4+8d6+16+str (average 40 plus str) nonlethal damage per hit, with 2 attacks per round (3 with a ki point), vs anything not immune to sneak attacks, fear, or nonlethal damage.

Now, add Offensive Defense rogue talent on top of that, and every time you hit with the above, you get +8 dodge bonus to AC.

Later, move into the Panther Style feats, and just provoke AOOs all day long.

[Snowbluff]

You want to be Tier 2... and be melee.

Well, Eldritch Knight. KTB. Sorcerer into Eldritch Knight. :smalltongue:

[That_guy_there]

The obvious choice here is to spend some feats on combat maneuver abilities. Trip and Disarm are both good ways to disable most humanoid opponents, and the Ranger/Paladin classes both offer some handy supplemental tricks.


Combat manuevers are great for making a one trick pony go further.

A combination that has been working for me in a small group consisting of a woefully under powered monk and an averagely Optimized Alchemist is the 2-Handed fighter variant (Using an elf). Where level 7 and I've manage to deal nice damage consistantly.

I also had the following feats: Combat Expertise, Step up, Following Step, Improved Disarm, Step up & Strike, as well as WF & WS for the elven curveblade. In higher levels I'm focusing on power attack, Blinding critical, bleeding critical, Greater Disarm, Critical focus, Critical mastery, Vital strike and sheild of swings.

The other thing is that my character has a good charisma and i used my limited skill points for ranks in diplomacy, bluff, and other "face" skills.

I also suggest that you get a Keen sword at your first convienince (Criticals are neccisary to melee builds in my opinion).


Maybe that helps...?

[ThiagoMartell]

tier 2 isn't that bad, except for the fullcasters in it, the psionic tier 2 classes are much more balanced

If you're not breaking games at tier 2, you're not functioning at tier 2 level.

[jaybird]

If you have a good Cha, why not consider 2 levels in Pally for +Cha to saves?

[Eldariel]

Synthetist Summoner is a pretty solid Tier 2ish melee class. It's about a 3.5 Druid except it's either Pet OR Wildshape (obviously you pick the latter) and obviously a far worse spell list.

None of the mundane martial classes really stack up. Thanks to splitting up of combat maneuver feats, in spite of the extra feats they're just as forced to focus as 3.5 versions and PF doesn't have Tactical Feats or Tome of Battle. Most of them can reach Tier 4 but Tier 3 is hard.


Well, two levels of Ranger still buys you Rapid Shot so you can shoot a bow reasonably, then you need 11 levels of Barbarian to gain Pounce (no, apparently PF doesn't want to allow full attacks for melee), add some Fighter & stuff and you can probably get some rudimentary AoO, charger and tripper/bullrusher/whatever setup in place. You could try to work around there.

Magus is a pretty solid Tier 3, I'd say.

[ThiagoMartell]

Plenty of Pathfinder classes get to move and full attack.
Magus gets Bladed Dash (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic/all-spells/b/bladed-dash), which at the level you get it strictly superior to pounce.
Monks, Magi and Synthesist all get Dimensional Dervish (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/general-feats/dimensional-dervish), though can can access it at different levels.
Fighters get the Mobile Fighter archetype (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/core-classes/fighter/archetypes/paizo---fighter-archetypes/mobile-fighter), Barbarians have the option you mentioned, Psychic Warriors (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/psionics-unleashed/classes/psychic-warrior) have Psionic Lion's Charge (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/psionics-unleashed/psionic-powers/p/psionic-lion-s-charge), Soulknives (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/psionics-unleashed/classes/soulknife) have Combat Slide and Improved Furious Charge. I probably missed something.

Personally, I think this is a lot better than 'dip Spirit Lion Totem Barbarian or suck'.

[Eldariel]

Plenty of Pathfinder classes get to move and full attack.
Magus gets Bladed Dash (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic/all-spells/b/bladed-dash), which at the level you get it strictly superior to pounce.
Monks, Magi and Synthesist all get Dimensional Dervish (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/general-feats/dimensional-dervish), though can can access it at different levels.
Fighters get the Mobile Fighter archetype (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/core-classes/fighter/archetypes/paizo---fighter-archetypes/mobile-fighter), Barbarians have the option you mentioned, Psychic Warriors (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/psionics-unleashed/classes/psychic-warrior) have Psionic Lion's Charge (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/psionics-unleashed/psionic-powers/p/psionic-lion-s-charge), Soulknives (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/psionics-unleashed/classes/soulknife) have Combat Slide and Improved Furious Charge. I probably missed something.

Personally, I think this is a lot better than 'dip Spirit Lion Totem Barbarian or suck'.

Really, all of those except Mobile Fighter are spell-likes which you could do it with already, and Mobile Fighter loses its best attack until level 20 which is just...fairly worthless since the first attack is the likeliest to hit and thus the biggest part of your total damage. Dimensional Dervish also costs 3 feats for no good reason.

I just don't see it; instead of being able to get Pounce in 1 level and going about your business, you now need to invest 11-20 levels just to get it and e.g. TWF Rangers are fairly FUBAR'd. So basically, the most essential capability for melee characters, their round one output above level 6, is restricted to very few build options that either require you to have spells/spell-likes or 11+ levels.


Then again, all of that is stupid and melee should just have full attack + movement (would remove about a thousand stupid build restrictions and make melee insanely much more fair to different builds) but going by RAW PF requires even more for that than 3.5 does.

[Boci]

Plenty of Pathfinder classes get to move and full attack.
Magus gets Bladed Dash (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic/all-spells/b/bladed-dash), which at the level you get it strictly superior to pounce.

That's not move and full attack: "You may make a single melee attack at your highest base attack bonus against any one creature you are adjacent to at any point along this 30 feet." its a beefed up spring attack. Even greater bladed dash doesn't allow you to hit the same target multiple times. Both are useful, but not what you appear to be claiming they are.


Personally, I think this is a lot better than 'dip Spirit Lion Totem Barbarian or suck'.

Obligatory: http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=103358

SLTB may be the easiest, but it is far from the only method.

[Metahuman1]

Ok, just to clarify, the Tier 2 comment in the OP was basically in case the consensus became "Well, really, if it's Pathfinder only, your only options are Synthesis Summoner or Wildshaping Druid." And yes, in the case of the latter I'd be doing a lot of holding back so as to not do T-1 game breaking.



I'd MUCH prefer Tier 3 if possible, and T3 mostly Mundane if at all possible.

[ThiagoMartell]

Really, all of those except Mobile Fighter are spell-likes which you could do it with already, and Mobile Fighter loses its best attack until level 20 which is just...fairly worthless since the first attack is the likeliest to hit and thus the biggest part of your total damage. Dimensional Dervish also costs 3 feats for no good reason.
They are not. Combat Slide and Improved Furious Strike are blade skills. The other feats in the Dimensional Dervish tree are also pretty good.


I just don't see it; instead of being able to get Pounce in 1 level and going about your business, you now need to invest 11-20 levels just to get it and e.g. TWF Rangers are fairly FUBAR'd. So basically, the most essential capability for melee characters, their round one output above level 6, is restricted to very few build options that either require you to have spells/spell-likes or 11+ levels.
I don't find anything wrong with pounce being available only at the mid levels. That's the 3.5 environment before Spirit Lion Totem Barbarian, after all.


Then again, all of that is stupid and melee should just have full attack + movement (would remove about a thousand stupid build restrictions and make melee insanely much more fair to different builds) but going by RAW PF requires even more for that than 3.5 does.
It would also mean most monsters slaughter you senseless very very fast. Every monster is a hydra now.


That's not move and full attack: "You may make a single melee attack at your highest base attack bonus against any one creature you are adjacent to at any point along this 30 feet." its a beefed up spring attack. Even greater bladed dash doesn't allow you to hit the same target multiple times. Both are useful, but not what you appear to be claiming they are.
Familiarize yourself with the Magus a bit, then you understand what I meant.


Obligatory: http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=103358

SLTB may be the easiest, but it is far from the only method.
:smallsigh:
The problem is that Spirit Lion Totem Barbarian is so easy to get it overshadows all the other options. That's my whole point. Remove Spirit Lion Totem Barbarian and the 3.5 scene looks pretty much the same as Pathfinder.


Ok, just to clarify, the Tier 2 comment in the OP was basically in case the consensus became "Well, really, if it's Pathfinder only, your only options are Synthesis Summoner or Wildshaping Druid." And yes, in the case of the latter I'd be doing a lot of holding back so as to not do T-1 game breaking.



I'd MUCH prefer Tier 3 if possible, and T3 mostly Mundane if at all possible.

Psychic Warrior, Soulknive, Qigong Hungry Ghost Monk or Synthesist dipping Paladin should work, then.

[Boci]

Familiarize yourself with the Magus a bit, then you understand what I meant.

Or you could just tell me and save me having to pour over a game system that is 90% identical to the one I already know and thus will result in a lot of redundant reading from my part. Can you at least give me a hint?


:smallsigh:
The problem is that Spirit Lion Totem Barbarian is so easy to get it overshadows all the other options. That's my whole point. Remove Spirit Lion Totem Barbarian and the 3.5 scene looks pretty much the same as Pahfinder.

Fair enough. I have had similar thought, delaying it until 2nd or 3rd level, as well as beefing up some of the other options (such as snow tiger berserk granting an extra move equivalent action before a full attack instead of a charge).

[ThiagoMartell]

Or you could just tell me and save me having to pour over a game system that is 90% identical to the one I already know and thus will result in a lot of redundant reading from my part. Can you at least give me a hint?
Fair enough. Magus has 3/4 BAB and with Spell Combat gets to cast a spell + attack (similar to TWF, except his off-hand weapon is a spell). With Bladed Dash, a Magus moves and gets two attacks. At 4th level, when you get Bladed Dash, it's better than pounce in all situations. It continues to be good and comparable to pounce until level 15, when the third attack from BAB comes online. Of course, at that point you already have Greater Bladed Dash.

[Boci]

Fair enough. Magus has 3/4 BAB and with Spell Combat gets to cast a spell + attack (similar to TWF, except his off-hand weapon is a spell). With Bladed Dash, a Magus moves and gets two attacks. At 4th level, when you get Bladed Dash, it's better than pounce in all situations. It continues to be good and comparable to pounce until level 15, when the third attack from BAB comes online. Of course, at that point you already have Greater Bladed Dash.

Fair enough, although unless I'm mistaken you would need to end your movement adjacent to the target to get the extra attack (or be adjacent when you cast the spell), since you can only attack before or after the spell's affect has been resolved, not during. Or maybe you can, its a bit unclear. But even if that is the case, it is still better than pounce as you said.

[Psyren]

So you use Spell Combat to attack + cast Bladed Dash, spell resolves, causing you to move to the other side and attack again? Is that right? (Staying in melee range of the opponent each time.)

If so, me likey.

[ThiagoMartell]

So you use Spell Combat to attack + cast Bladed Dash, spell resolves, causing you to move to the other side and attack again? Is that right? (Staying in melee range of the opponent each time.)

If so, me likey.

You can do that, or you can cast Bladed Dash first, close in with the opponent, hit with the normal attack from Bladed Dash then unleash your full-attack.
Actually, before I said pounce gets better than Bladed Dash at level 15. It doesn't. Spell Combat allows you to full-attack and cast a spell.
You move with less restrictions than charge, don't cause attacks of opportunity for this moment, don't take penalties to AC... and you gain an extra attack on top of all that. Accuracy is lower, though - Spell Combat is -2 to attacks and charge is +2. Still better.
Bladed Dash + Spell Combat = awesome

[Psyren]

PLC for Magi. I approve :smallbiggrin: And best of all, you don't have to cast it defensively since you start the casting away from the foe.

Of course, this is contingent on your DM allowing you to take your "offhand attack" (i.e. cast the spell) first, then full-attack with your main hand after. I don't see anything to prevent that order of operations, but is there an airtight cite by any chance?

[Eldariel]

They are not. Combat Slide and Improved Furious Strike are blade skills. The other feats in the Dimensional Dervish tree are also pretty good.

Perhaps so but it still costs you 3 feats to gain a basic competence.


I don't find anything wrong with pounce being available only at the mid levels. That's the 3.5 environment before Spirit Lion Totem Barbarian, after all.

Which made warriors and all warrior-type creatures incredibly bipolar. Instead they do massive damage in a full attack or pitiful damage in a single attack if they have to move. Which has nonsensical side-effects like making moving away with Tumble and casting as a Standard Action every round dropping a melee's damage to under a half.

Worse, in PF you have to invest 11 levels in a single class to get these abilities, making multiclassing, a supposed strength of the system, fairly difficult.


It would also mean most monsters slaughter you senseless very very fast. Every monster is a hydra now.

No, no, no. Monsters' full attacks are already manageable; AC/Defense and HP scaling is thus that frontliners can take full attacks from the book monsters; not many, but they can take them. That's what they're built around.

If a monster's full attack is too damaging, well, nerf the monster or increase its CR. It's impossible to balance accurately around a scenario where half the time a creature does one-twelfth (imagine Hydra without the Hydra Multiattack Natural Ability for instance) its potential when enemies kite it.


Right now, the system basically says "casters always have full output since their output is Standard Action, archers almost always have full output since the Full Attack can be done at a range, melee have full output ~50% of the time in spite of their full output being the same as everybody else's". That's a faulty assumption that should be abolished, especially since it's inconsistent (standard action is constant throughout levels while full attack scales). Spirit Lion Totem is a bandaid fix but still a fix.

[ThiagoMartell]

Perhaps so but it still costs you 3 feats to gain a basic competence.
This is simply not true, man. "Basic competence?" You can be very relevant without pounce.


Which made warriors and all warrior-type creatures incredibly bipolar. Instead they do massive damage in a full attack or pitiful damage in a single attack if they have to move. Which has nonsensical side-effects like making moving away with Tumble and casting as a Standard Action every round dropping a melee's damage to under a half.
I don't find that nonsensical at all. It means moving around in combat is encouraged, which it should be.


Worse, in PF you have to invest 11 levels in a single class to get these abilities, making multiclassing, a supposed strength of the system, fairly difficult.
PF encourages singleclassing as a design goal. If you are not forces to dip 2-3 classes, I see it as a strenght.


No, no, no. Monsters' full attacks are already manageable; AC/Defense and HP scaling is thus that frontliners can take full attacks from the book monsters; not many, but they can take them. That's what they're built around.
By your logic, frontliners don't need pounce. Just wait for the monsters to attack them, then they get to full-attack. If they can take the hits, moving is not an issue.


If a monster's full attack is too damaging, well, nerf the monster or increase its CR. It's impossible to balance accurately around a scenario where half the time a creature does one-twelfth (imagine Hydra without the Hydra Multiattack Natural Ability for instance) its potential when enemies kite it.
Balance is a lot more than calculating average damage per round. It's harder, but not impossible.



Right now, the system basically says "casters always have full output since their output is Standard Action, archers almost always have full output since the Full Attack can be done at a range, melee have full output ~50% of the time in spite of their full output being the same as everybody else's". That's a faulty assumption that should be abolished, especially since it's inconsistent (standard action is constant throughout levels while full attack scales). Spirit Lion Totem is a bandaid fix but still a fix.
That's less of a balance problem and more you disagreeing with the system's principle. You're ignoring most of the problems casters and archers have (such as attacks of opportunity) because it suits your point. I really don't want to continue this discussion. If you find melee is shafted in Pathfinder, well, too bad, I disagree. I run two Pathfinder games and the melee classes have been doing pretty well so far - much better than they did in 3.5 with much less optimization, btw. I'll just agree to disagree here.


PLC for Magi. I approve :smallbiggrin: And best of all, you don't have to cast it defensively since you start the casting away from the foe.

Of course, this is contingent on your DM allowing you to take your "offhand attack" (i.e. cast the spell) first, then full-attack with your main hand after. I don't see anything to prevent that order of operations, but is there an airtight cite by any chance?

Spell Combat specifically says you can do this. It is airtight. :smallbiggrin:

[Psyren]

Spell Combat specifically says you can do this. It is airtight. :smallbiggrin:

I'm a dope. Completely missed that line.

"A magus can choose to cast the spell first or make the weapon attacks first..."

Very nice combo, and PFS-legal to boot.

[Xerinous]

The Lore Warden (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/core-classes/fighter/archetypes/paizo---fighter-archetypes/lore-warden) archetype for fighters is nice for being able to deal some damage while still having other options. The scaling CMB/CMD bonus for maneuvers is nice, and you're still a fighter, so bonus feats for all the Improved/Greater [Maneuver] feats you will probably want. Also, bonus class skills and skill points.

Granted, you do give up proficiency with medium and heavy armor, as well as shields, so a Dex-based build with Dervish Dance (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/combat-feats/dervish-dance-combat) and Agile Maneuvers (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/combat-feats/agile-maneuvers-combat) might be a good idea.

[Eldariel]

I don't find that nonsensical at all. It means moving around in combat is encouraged, which it should be.

Moving around is specifically discouraged for melee types ('cause then you don't get to full attack) and encouraged as a means to for instance make Two-Weapon Fighting useless (you can't attack with both weapons after movement) and to reduce melees' output for non-melee types.

So the types who should be moving around the most aren't encouraged to move at all while the types who should be standing still at range (archers & casters) can gain benefit from moving especially if melee gets to them, which should be a problematic situation for them (since the payoff for range should be that you provoke if somebody does get to melee with you but since you can just Acrobatics/5' Step away unless the melee has multiple feats invested, that's not a real issue).


PF encourages singleclassing as a design goal. If you are not forces to dip 2-3 classes, I see it as a strenght.

3.X's (including 3.P's) strength is versatility; that both, single-classing and multiclassing are viable. Lacking Pounce makes e.g. TWF Ranger fall off really hard to the point of being unviable around level 6 without multiclassing; you lose 3 of your 4 attacks if you have to move and vs. anything but other melees you'll have to move all the time. In effect, it forces you into the few options that allow you to move and attack if you don't want to compromise your efficiency against anything but melee monsters. This is terrible design.


By your logic, frontliners don't need pounce. Just wait for the monsters to attack them, then they get to full-attack. If they can take the hits, moving is not an issue.

This is an insanely narrow view at the issue. Frontliners vs. frontliners it kinda holds true, yes (which is also a "bug"; whichever side initiates the fight is at a disadvantage since they take the first full attack vs. their single attack, which means it's never advantageous to initiate a melee fight in a 1v1 if you lack Pounce (which is dumb; whoever acts faster loses basically)).

But what about frontliner vs. caster? Caster can negate the 50+% of the frontliner's damage output by simply moving around; the frontliner has no counterplay to this other than stacking up on movement prohibiting feats (and even then, it's fairly easy to accomplish). How much of caster's efficiency can the melee negate? Exactly.

Archer isn't quite as solid since he needs full attacks but still, he gets the first full attack and then 5' steps and full attacks or trades 50% efficiency attacks by Tumbling back and attacking.


Balance is a lot more than calculating average damage per round. It's harder, but not impossible.

Duh? That doesn't mean martial creatures' bipolar balance isn't an issue; some creatures (say Tarrasque) can be TPKs if they get to attack or non-encounters if they get kited (those spines have terrible attack bonus and damage).

How is that good design? A Balor's or a Solar's efficiency remains about the same close up and at a range since they're casters. A bruiser's tho? Falls of dramatically, multiple CR's worth, depending on fighting style. If they could full attack after movement, maybe they'd be slightly dangerous to a strong party while remaining the same difficulty to a bruiser party.


That's less of a balance problem and more you disagreeing with the system's principle. You're ignoring most of the problems casters and archers have (such as attacks of opportunity) because it suits your point.

I'm not ignoring the problems, I'm just not going into them since they're not really relevant to the whole issue at hands. The question is if it's good design that melee needs 11 levels in specific classes for Pounce (or worse, if Pounce should be a mechanic rather that basic design in the first place).

Your considerations...how many times have your creatures ever abused melee's inherent issues? It happens rarely enough since it's metagamey; another reason it doesn't make sense. In real time that's not how melee combat works. So of course it's not prohibitive if you don't play it up but that doesn't mean the design is solid. Pounce also allows full contributions on turn 1; have you had people with and without Pounce in the party at the same time?

[Metahuman1]

The Lore Warden (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/core-classes/fighter/archetypes/paizo---fighter-archetypes/lore-warden) archetype for fighters is nice for being able to deal some damage while still having other options. The scaling CMB/CMD bonus for maneuvers is nice, and you're still a fighter, so bonus feats for all the Improved/Greater [Maneuver] feats you will probably want. Also, bonus class skills and skill points.

Granted, you do give up proficiency with medium and heavy armor, as well as shields, so a Dex-based build with Dervish Dance (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/combat-feats/dervish-dance-combat) and Agile Maneuvers (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/combat-feats/agile-maneuvers-combat) might be a good idea.

Hmmm, I'm curious about this one actually. What do you guys think, put me at T-3's lower end?

Alternatively, how much Synthesist Summoner and how much Paladin do we think would leave them at T-3?

[ThiagoMartell]

Moving around is specifically discouraged for melee types ('cause then you don't get to full attack) and encouraged as a means to for instance make Two-Weapon Fighting useless (you can't attack with both weapons after movement) and to reduce melees' output for non-melee types.
But you avoid suffering a full-attack, which is what I was saying. If you're fighting something three times your size, standing next to it and hitting it until it drops shouldn't be encouraged at all. You have to move around to negate it's full attacks.


So the types who should be moving around the most aren't encouraged to move at all while the types who should be standing still at range (archers & casters) can gain benefit from moving especially if melee gets to them, which should be a problematic situation for them (since the payoff for range should be that you provoke if somebody does get to melee with you but since you can just Acrobatics/5' Step away unless the melee has multiple feats invested, that's not a real issue).
Why do they think they should still at range?! No one should be staying still in a skirmish!


3.X's (including 3.P's) strength is versatility; that both, single-classing and multiclassing are viable. Lacking Pounce makes e.g. TWF Ranger fall off really hard to the point of being unviable around level 6 without multiclassing; you lose 3 of your 4 attacks if you have to move and vs. anything but other melees you'll have to move all the time. In effect, it forces you into the few options that allow you to move and attack if you don't want to compromise your efficiency against anything but melee monsters.
Dude, you're treating your opinion as fact. Multiclassing is viable in Pathfinder, btw - it, in fact, the easiest way to grab pounce (dip Psychic Warrior for Psionic Lion's Charge). It just takes 4 levels instead of 1.

This is terrible design.
It would be, if the designers wanted the system to do what you want it to do. It doesn't seem it is the case.


This is an insanely narrow view at the issue. Frontliners vs. frontliners it kinda holds true, yes (which is also a "bug"; whichever side initiates the fight is at a disadvantage since they take the first full attack vs. their single attack, which means it's never advantageous to initiate a melee fight in a 1v1 if you lack Pounce (which is dumb; whoever acts faster loses basically)).
So if you don't have pounce you loose a few arrows instead of going into melee. What's the problem with that? Why should warrior be forced to draw a sword and swing into battle when they could simply use a different weapon?
Also, Pathfinder has a whole subsystem for 1v1 fights.


But what about frontliner vs. caster? Caster can negate the 50+% of the frontliner's damage output by simply moving around; the frontliner has no counterplay to this other than stacking up on movement prohibiting feats (and even then, it's fairly easy to accomplish). How much of caster's efficiency can the melee negate? Exactly.
Between attacks of opportunity, Step Up and nerfed Concentration? Melee can negate quite a lot.


Archer isn't quite as solid since he needs full attacks but still, he gets the first full attack and then 5' steps and full attacks or trades 50% efficiency attacks by Tumbling back and attacking.
And that is a bad thing because...?


Duh? That doesn't mean martial creatures' bipolar balance isn't an issue; some creatures (say Tarrasque) can be TPKs if they get to attack or non-encounters if they get kited (those spines have terrible attack bonus and damage).
I'm not saying it isn't an issue. I'm saying it wasn't any better in 3.5 and I'm fine with it anyway. I'm saying you're seeing this as simplistic when there are many variables you haven't accounted for. And please, don't patronize me with "duh". I'm treating you respectfully and I'd like to be treated respectfully as well. Just because we disagree it doesn't mean he have to be rude towards each other.


How is that good design? A Balor's or a Solar's efficiency remains about the same close up and at a range since they're casters. A bruiser's tho? Falls of dramatically, multiple CR's worth, depending on fighting style. If they could full attack after movement, maybe they'd be slightly dangerous to a strong party while remaining the same difficulty to a bruiser party.
This is simply not true. There are situations that limit a caster/ranged monster's efficiency as well. Rain, wind, line of sight, they all apply. Unless you're considering limitless flat battlefields with sunny weather and standard illumination all the time, and then you're talking about a very rare situation that I don't think should ever happen in actual play.


I'm not ignoring the problems, I'm just not going into them since they're not really relevant to the whole issue at hands.
No, you're ignoring them because you don't think they are relevant. I just told you I think they are, but once again you took your opinion as fact and dismissed it without it considering my argument.

The question is if it's good design that melee needs 11 levels in specific classes for Pounce (or worse, if Pounce should be a mechanic rather that basic design in the first place).
I think it is good design that you have various options that are basically around the same level of power than a single option that makes them all irrelevant. That is my point. (Here (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/combat-feats/tiger-pounce-combat) are (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/combat-feats/vulpine-pounce-combat) some (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/arg-feats/claw-pounce-combat-catfolk) other (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/combat-feats/hellcat-pounce-combat) options (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/core-classes/druid/archetypes/paizo---druid-archetypes/animal-and-terrain-domains/plains-domain), btw (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/core-classes/monk/archetypes/paizo---monk-archetypes/monk-of-the-four-winds).


Your considerations...how many times have your creatures ever abused melee's inherent issues?
When they were intelligent enough to do it and when the terrain allowed them to. I'd say once per game session, but I'm guessing.

It happens rarely enough since it's metagamey; another reason it doesn't make sense. In real time that's not how melee combat works. So of course it's not prohibitive if you don't play it up but that doesn't mean the design is solid. Pounce also allows full contributions on turn 1; have you had people with and without Pounce in the party at the same time?
In real time you can't cast spells, that hardly makes any difference.
Pounce allows 'full contribution' when you can charge, which is not always.
In one of my games, I have a Magus with Bladed Dash (much better than charge) and a Dragon Style Monk. The Monk regularly outdamages the Magus, even when she attacks only once while the Magus attacks twice. When the Monk gets to full-attack, the Magus is not even close.
In my other game, no one has pounce or any similar ability. They get by just fine.

Hmmm, I'm curious about this one actually. What do you guys think, put me at T-3's lower end?

Alternatively, how much Synthesist Summoner and how much Paladin do we think would leave them at T-3?

I sincerely think you're caring too much about the tiers. Do you have any concept aside from 'melee class'?

[Metahuman1]

Not particularly. I'm just aiming to go in, clobber things, stay alive, keep pace with the rest of the party regardless of what it ends up being, and be able to do something useful outside of combat. Which as near as I can figure is Tier 3.

[ThiagoMartell]

Not particularly. I'm just aiming to go in, clobber things, stay alive, keep pace with the rest of the party regardless of what it ends up being, and be able to do something useful outside of combat. Which as near as I can figure is Tier 3.

What if the party is mostly tier 5?

[Psyren]

What if the party is mostly tier 5?

Then they're screwed anyway and he may as well play whatever :smalltongue:

[ThiagoMartell]

Then they're screwed anyway and he may as well play whatever :smalltongue:

Hahahahaha ^^ I politely disagree, but I'm certain you understood my point anyway.

[Metahuman1]

I know at least one person is planning an Illusion based (But not to the point of excluding all other options mind you.) Sorcerer or Wizard.

So there's at least one T1 or T2 character in the party.


And if the rest of the party is T5, I can just roll up a fighter or a monk in like ten minutes or less depending on the starting level. So that's not a problem for me. It's easy to be bad at something and let he DM baby you, I need help in case it goes the other way.

[Boci]

Accuracy is lower, though - Spell Combat is -2 to attacks and charge is +2. Still better.

True, but a magus would be adding their inteligence modifier to the first attack, which depending on the point buy of the game could break even or even overtake that disadvantage. If f the pouncer has full BAB they will still be in the lead, but then a magus can also use spring attack tactics against a monster with a viscious full attack, so they also will in versatility.

[KnightOfV]

My favorite Melee build- glaive, around 14+ DEX, 18+ STR, Combat Reflexes, and Power Attack is AMAZING at low-mid levels. Fighter or Barbarian to taste. Will out damage most anything else in Pathfinder early levels 1-5, and stays solid for a while after, in my experience. Lunge after 6 lets you poke almost anything, while they have to move/ provoke to come hit you back.

If you fight a lot of ranged/ casters, Step Up feat and a Greatsword is a nice option. Switch between the two styles as needed. Simple, effective, fun.*

OPTIONAL: Dip one level of Rogue and be trained in any skills you ever wanted, plus trap finding.


*fun for me and the groups I've played with anyways...

[Eldariel]

But you avoid suffering a full-attack, which is what I was saying. If you're fighting something three times your size, standing next to it and hitting it until it drops shouldn't be encouraged at all. You have to move around to negate it's full attacks.

This is irrelevant, 'cause it applies to any melee type be it 3 times or ½ your size. Not to mention, melee types are still advantaged if they stay next to the big thing usually far as numbers go.


Why do they think they should still at range?! No one should be staying still in a skirmish!

Well, apparently melee types should.


Dude, you're treating your opinion as fact. Multiclassing is viable in Pathfinder, btw - it, in fact, the easiest way to grab pounce (dip Psychic Warrior for Psionic Lion's Charge). It just takes 4 levels instead of 1.

Of course it's viable, I'm just saying this little detail drastically reduces the number of viable melee builds.


It would be, if the designers wanted the system to do what you want it to do. It doesn't seem it is the case.

The designers...well, let's just say they didn't really think this through.


So if you don't have pounce you loose a few arrows instead of going into melee. What's the problem with that? Why should warrior be forced to draw a sword and swing into battle when they could simply use a different weapon?

Look, you're arguing past my point. My point is that you can't go to melee fight at an equal footing. Which is not how it works logically. You're punished for initiating a fight. This is clearly not how melee combat logically works; you initiate a fight and have an equal chance against an equally skilled opponent.


I'm not saying it isn't an issue. I'm saying it wasn't any better in 3.5 and I'm fine with it anyway. I'm saying you're seeing this as simplistic when there are many variables you haven't accounted for. And please, don't patronize me with "duh". I'm treating you respectfully and I'd like to be treated respectfully as well. Just because we disagree it doesn't mean he have to be rude towards each other.

You consider that patronizing? Sorry. I do feel what you stated was fairly obvious though and thus probably not worth stating. This is the problem I have with this whole discussion overall; I feel you're ignoring my points and drawing tangents that have nothing to do with anything into the discussion over and over. I feel you're not discussing the meat of the matter.


This is simply not true. There are situations that limit a caster/ranged monster's efficiency as well. Rain, wind, line of sight, they all apply. Unless you're considering limitless flat battlefields with sunny weather and standard illumination all the time, and then you're talking about a very rare situation that I don't think should ever happen in actual play.

Those are outside factors tho. Those exist for melee and range alike; foliage, difficult terrain, etc. That's built into those chassises. Same applies to ranged characters being most effective at range and melee characters being most effective in melee. What's not built into those chassises tho is melee characters being inefficient in melee at times.


No, you're ignoring them because you don't think they are relevant. I just told you I think they are, but once again you took your opinion as fact and dismissed it without it considering my argument.

Again, because I feel you're arguing past my points. Yes, those factors exist but they belong to a different duality; there are different similar effects in melee that compensate for those ranged restrictions (melee characters not being able to attack when not in melee is the compensation for being able to restrict ranged characters when you get them in melee).


I think it is good design that you have various options that are basically around the same level of power than a single option that makes them all irrelevant. That is my point. (Here (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/combat-feats/tiger-pounce-combat) are (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/combat-feats/vulpine-pounce-combat) some (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/arg-feats/claw-pounce-combat-catfolk) other (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/combat-feats/hellcat-pounce-combat) options (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/core-classes/druid/archetypes/paizo---druid-archetypes/animal-and-terrain-domains/plains-domain), btw (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/core-classes/monk/archetypes/paizo---monk-archetypes/monk-of-the-four-winds).

But what does that have to do with Pounce being horribly expensive for any chassis without it built in?


In real time you can't cast spells, that hardly makes any difference.

That's not the point again; I'm talking about verisimilitude. Whether you can cast spells in reality has nothing to do with the game's internal logic. Think about a swordfight. Attacks are the chances you have to damage your opponent in a fight. The fact that a standard action melee attack remains constant far as the number of attacks goes but full attack doesn't flies in the face of this.

It also generates a large number of other game mechanical issues, such as melee being encouraged to stand still instead of skirmishing, and the initiator of melee combat being a significant underdog even though he acted "faster" than his opponent and has the initiative. These don't follow the logic that applies to everything else in the game.

Basically, the system breaks the game's internal balance & logic on a fundamental level and while not perfect, easy Pounce is something of fix for the inherent problems this provides.


Pounce allows 'full contribution' when you can charge, which is not always.

Of course. That's why I think the default should be "full attack on standard action" but easy access to pounce is at least a clumsy bandaid fix.

[Psyren]

True, but a magus would be adding their inteligence modifier to the first attack, which depending on the point buy of the game could break even or even overtake that disadvantage.

Or even ALL their attacks (Arcane Accuracy.) And of course they can enhance their weapon as well.

[ThiagoMartell]

Stuff
I told you two posts ago to agree to disagree, so let's just drop this?

Or even ALL their attacks (Arcane Accuracy.) And of course they can enhance their weapon as well.
And with the Spellblade archetype, you can even use TWF.

[Metahuman1]

Ok, in the interests of Simplifying this, let's try locking in on the Synthesist Summoner/Paladin.

Since both classes get mileage out of a solid Cha score, I'm guessing that means Diplomacy ranks and Sense Motive ranks and maybe some cross class bluff and Intimidate would be good for doing a social character for out of combat. What are some good paladin Archatypes to tack onto this that play nice with wanting to be good a fighting and talking, focusing on using Synthesist summoners Eidolon for my combat purposes and perhaps neglecting the worst, most gaming breaking chunks of my casting? (I'm totally ok giving up 9th and even 8th and MAYBE even 7th lvl casting for this build if that helps.)


Cause I could use a hand here since I have little familiarity with Pathfinder Paladin and none what so ever with Synthesist Summoner beyond the fact that summoner's roughly as powerful as a sorcerer if played right and Synthesist is one of if not the best melee options in the game.

[Dusk Eclipse]

Umm if you go summoner you already give up 9ths, 8ths and 7ths.... Summoners only get up to 6th level spells (though some at a lower spell level than normal).

[Metahuman1]

...

Ok, let me try that again. I'm ok losing some of the spell casting since as near as I can tell, that's what pushes the class up to game breaking levels.

What would be a good Archatype and Cut off point for Paladin to throw in on top of Summoner with the above stated build goals in mind?

[Kane0]

As a general rule, summoner does not work well with any other class, it's an all or nothing kind of deal, though synthesis summoner less so.

Paladin is much better than 3.5 though, you will easily be able to keep pace with a decently made Pally.

[grarrrg]

Summoner's have full casting power but only Bard number slots.

Anywho, 2 levels of Paladin for CHA to saves and all the rest into Synthesist is the most powerful option. Archetype doesn't much matter with only 2 levels.
Tank your DEX score and wear Heavy Armor "under" your Eidolon, just in case you lose Form somehow.

[ThiagoMartell]

...

Ok, let me try that again. I'm ok losing some of the spell casting since as near as I can tell, that's what pushes the class up to game breaking levels.

What would be a good Archatype and Cut off point for Paladin to throw in on top of Summoner with the above stated build goals in mind?

I really recommend you familiarize yourself with Synthesist first. The broken thing about Summoner is not it's spells, really - it's action economy abuse. You already lose quite a bit of it with Synthesist. But before anyone helps you, you really should have a more clear idea on what you want to do. My advice is read a bit about Summoner, Synthesist and Eidolons.

[Metahuman1]

Ok, so, I went and read through the entire SRD Entry on Synthesist and Eidolons, and gave the basic summoner table an overveiw along with one or two other archatypes.


So, questions as follows off the top of my head.

1: Can a character have both evolutionist and Synthesist archatypes on one character?

2: Other then fast healing evolution, is there a way to have the Eidolon healed? Cause it seems to only have temp HP as a Synthesist.

3: Is it a really bad idea to just take the slam evolution and make a single attack roll every round for 1 1/2 str, or is that viable?

4: In addition to evolution points form just the basic class, are there feats/Items that allow for improvements to the Eidolon, or barring that, are there feats/Items other then racial benefits that grant more Evolution points? Or to lower the evolution point costs? Or both?

5: When I summon my Eidolon, do I keep my good Will save progression regardless of the Eidolon's base form saving throw progressions?

6: Is there a way to keep my Eidolon summoned but temporarily make it smaller if I take the large/hugh evolutions so that I don't have to leave the bulk of my defenses down if I have to go into enclosed spaces, like inside a building for instance?

Right now, what I want to do is hit things, really, really hard, and be able to just take a massive amount of abuse and still keep coming. Maybe be able to help a bit with moving around, and use my skill ranks to do social interactions so that when it's not time to hit things I have something to contribute. Beyond that, I'm good. I want to be good at a few useful things as stated, not just be able to do everything to the point were I no longer need the party.

[Wagadodo]

1. I don't have my books in front of me so I am not sure. But if either archetype replaces the same class feature you can't take both.

2. The only way to heal your eilodon is with the rejuvantion line of spells that heal the eilodon for 1d10+lvl. A spell tax the say.

3. It is your choice if want to make the slam attack. But if was going to limit self to one attack I would look a melee weapon instead for the crit range.

4. The half elf allows you to get an extra evolution point every for levels for the preferred class bonus. Also the extra evolution feat you can take every 5th level.

5. With the synthesis you always use your base saves just modified by the eilodon's physical scores. So you will save should not change.

6. There the opposite spell to enlarge person. Shrink person would allow to go down a size level without hurting your prowess.

[StreamOfTheSky]

Umm if you go summoner you already give up 9ths, 8ths and 7ths.... Summoners only get up to 6th level spells (though some at a lower spell level than normal).

Some? Try over 75% of their upper level spells are at reduced levels. In many cases, it's more than 1 level reduction, too.

Summoner spell list is giving up some flexibility on actually applying metamagic feats (since you only have 6 levels to adjust spells up to) in return for being able to just buy a ton of regular metamagic rods for spells the other guys need to spend for greater metamagic rods to boost.

Pretty good trade, all in all.

[Arbane]

2. The only way to heal your eilodon is with the rejuvantion line of spells that heal the eilodon for 1d10+lvl. A spell tax the say.


I think regular Cure Whatever Wounds spells will work on the Eidolon, too. And Use Magic Device is on the Summoner skill list...

[Psyren]

I think regular Cure Whatever Wounds spells will work on the Eidolon, too. And Use Magic Device is on the Summoner skill list...

If you have a regular Eidolon, yes. But if you're a Synthesist, these won't work, because the hitpoints of your eidolon are represented by temporary hit points added on top of your own. Cure X and similar can't heal those.

[Dayaz]

I saw it mentioned on the first page, and I felt it needed to be brought up again.

Two-handed Fighter. They're crazy good if you do some mild optimization on them. even without it, they're still pretty good.

I'm playing one in my rl group right now, with a demi-homebrewed race (we just used the race builder book to convert the Half-Orge from the WoW rpg books for Powerful Build), and he's holding perfectly steady with a mostly optimized Arcane Archer and a sling-beast character with two super buffed bird animal companions. In fact, he tends to almost wreck more house than them considering they are both partial casters.

My Optimization for him:
1) Powerful Build racial trait lets me use Large weapons without a penalty
2) 30k dropped on a Ring of Pounce (mostly for my own amusement tbh)
3) Speed enchant on Weapon of Choice.
4) Abuse the Archetype's Backswing ability, which when you do a full round attack (huzzah Pounce and perma-Haste), all attacks after the first one do double strength instead of 1.5
5) Charge into a flank (+4 attack) and power attack for whatevs (I currently sac 3 atk for 12 dmg a swing, hitting 4 times a round and 3 of them are for double str)
6) take the Dodge/Mobility/Spring Attack feats. More ability to not get slapped by AoO is always nice, as is the Battlefield mobility SpAtk offers.
7) Combat Reflexes. Because when you charge into a group and massacre something, then others are going to want to run away. Multiple AoO and the Overhand Chop (same as Backswing but only for a single hit) are pretty nice (I killed like, 6 guys the other night on a lucky charge)

Some other things you could do:
1) Use a Falchion for your 2h wep... yes, it doesn't do the base dmg of a Greatsword, but with either Keen or Improved Critical, you crit on a 15/16-20

[Eldariel]

Some? Try over 75% of their upper level spells are at reduced levels. In many cases, it's more than 1 level reduction, too.

Summoner spell list is giving up some flexibility on actually applying metamagic feats (since you only have 6 levels to adjust spells up to) in return for being able to just buy a ton of regular metamagic rods for spells the other guys need to spend for greater metamagic rods to boost.

Pretty good trade, all in all.

Well, they never get the proper level 9 spells tho so they do lose out vs. full casters. Their list isn't awful still; Maze, Dominate Monster, Greater Planar Binding, Teleportation Circle, etc. There's some 9s in there but there's no Gate/Time Stop/Disjunction or the traditional power spells in general.

[Psyren]

In fact, he tends to almost wreck more house than them considering they are both partial casters.

Just wanted to point out that "wrecking house" was never Fighter's problem, even in 3.5. (Perhaps especially in 3.5, given stuff like Shock Trooper.)


There's some 9s in there but there's no Gate/Time Stop/Disjunction or the traditional power spells in general.

Well, they do get Gate, just not on their spell list. But getting it as an SLA is far more dangerous - they can cast it far more often than an equal-level sorcerer can, and of course do so without verbal or somatic components.

[Metahuman1]

Ok, now here's another question. Do I automatically keep skills in class skills in Pathfinder? If yes, then the dip into Paladin takes care of most of my needs for my social ability's, though I might have to dip something else for bluff and Intimidate. If not, then I could use a trick or two to boost up Sense Motive, Diplomacy, Bluff and Intimidate to the level they'd be at if I was just keeping max ranks in them as class skills.

Since Pathfinder starts me off with a 10 in all my mental scores and I'm gonna tank Dex and won't really need much Str or Con, I'm thinking go Half Elf and make Cha my primary stat, then boost up a good in and maybe improve Wis to a 12 or 13 to use up what remains. That should give me plenty of skill points to spend to make sure I'm up to speed on UMD and Social skills and maybe even can buy a couple of RP ranks in other skills here and there. I'll probably have a pole arm and a bastard sword on the summoner him self's person and wear plate, but that's just in case of emergency. Most of my combat resources are gonna lock in on boosting that Eidolon.

[Psyren]

In PF, class skills and cross class skills cost the same and have the same cap. The only difference is that, if a skill is a class skill for any of your classes and you have at least one point in it, you get a +3 untyped bonus to it. You can do fine pumping any skills you want even without the bonus (i.e. without dipping), but it does make the checks easier to have it.

[Metahuman1]

Alright, well that fixes my skill set problems.

So, right now, I'm thinking Paladin 4/ Synthesist Summoner 16, using half elf for my race. Extra Evolution feat at first level, and after that take the variant channeling, Luck archatype for Paladin so that that way all those channel uses can be used to debuff my enemy's or provide and emergency buff for my allies.

Don't suppose anyone can recommend a good pally Archatype that replaces something that's gonna be useless to me like Aura of Courage that would stack with variant channeling?

[Kira_the_5th]

Slight problem with your plan. You can't take Extra Evolution with a Synthesist. Fused Eidolon doesn't let you apply for things with "Eidolon class feature" as a prereq. I don't know if that was mentioned or not in this thread already, but I just saw it earlier in a thread.

Also, have you checked out the Handbook for Summoners yet? The one here's (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=184592) a pretty good place to start.

[Metahuman1]

Well, I looked at it, and there were some interesting things in it, but none that dealt really with the archatype I'm gonna run. And I get that I'm hurting my power a fair bit with Dipping into Paladin, more so doing it for more then 2 levels, but I'm ok with that as a way to not make other players have to feel like I don't need the rest of the party. I just don't want to do too much so that the rest of the party just ends up feeling like I'm dead weight, or I get too board to play the game cause I can't do stuff at all.

And I'm about 90% certain that the DM will wave the thing on that one feat since I'm already doing other things that will keep the class form being too powerful.