What is the point of the Cavalier?

[Geddy2112]

After some serious looking over of this class, and potentially using it as a build for a character, I have decided that the Cavalier is not just bad, but it is simply useless. Other classes do the same job, but far better. IMO, this class should outright not exist.

The main unique feature is the challenge and order abilities, which are good. Even with these abilities, the Cavalier fails to compare to a mounted druid, mounted ranger, mounted summoner, mounted hunter or even mounted paladin.. All of the other "mounted" classes have 2 good saves and one bad save, except the summoner(and their good save is will vs fortitude of the cavalier). They vary in BAB and hit dice, but it is easy to make any of those a frontliner. All of those classes get spells, which the cavalier lacks. Rangers, paladins and hunters all have martial weapon proficiency, and at least medium armor proficiency. For teamwork feats, the hunter beats the cav dead to rights. The banner is cute, but not a lot at the levels it comes online, and is beaten out by a bard or paladin. So what else am I missing?

None of this would be a problem if the Cavalier offered some unique fluff and backstory elements. However, Cavilers only offer the "mounted soldier" backstory, more or less, while the other classes can incorporate a LOT more. So my question is, what is something the Cavalier has that makes it unique and better than other classes that do the same thing, but better?

[Pex]

I agree Cavalier was a mistake. It would have been better off as an archetype for fighter (named Dragoon, working off fighter features) and paladin, working off paladin's Bonded Mount. Alternatively it could have been a prestige class.

I'm not bothered by the class features but rather you lose too much of them when you can't bring your horse along on the adventure, such as a dungeon crawl or traveling in an inhospitable environment. It would be better as a paladin archetype instead of fighter for this reason since the paladin can summon and dismiss his Bonded Mount as needed.

As an alternative to Cavalier use Samurai and use the Cavalier Orders. You can ignore flavor text if need be. The Teamwork feats are a major component of Cavalier which Samurai lacks. Substitute the minor mount abilities of Samurai for the Teamwork features. You can tweak Samurai further if you want more Teamwork features.

[Kudaku]

Interestingly, I saw a comment on the paizo boards that the Cavalier was the "4th in line" for Pathfinder Unchained. Apparently nobody plays the cavalier. Edit: Ah, found the post (http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2scmf?Unchained-2#50).

I can't help but think that that's at least in part because the mounted combat rules are... Not ideal.

[Extra Anchovies]

The Cavalier definitely needs buffs and probably a full rework; to be honest, I think it should have shown up in Pathfinder Unchained. (ETA: Huh. Didn't know that it was apparently in the running to show up there. I wish it had)

I'm of the opinion that the Cavalier should be a frontline support, handing out teamwork feats and +numbers to allies while soaking hits and contributing to damage. Take the Inspiring Commander (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/base-classes/cavalier/archetypes/rite-publishing---cavalier-archetypes/inspiring-commander) archetype, increase the Inspire Courage scaling to +1/2/3/4/5 at 1/5/9/13/17, give them their mount back, add teamwork feats at levels 5 and 14, and give them some way to target multiple allies with one Aid Another, and you have a pretty good approximation of where I think the Cavalier should be.

[T.G. Oskar]

Judging by the Banner feature, the Challenge feature, and the Teamwork/Order benefits, it's a poor man's Marshal/Knight hybrid. Alternatively, it's an attempt to revamp the old Cavalier class from 1e's Unearthed Arcana.

In 3.5, the Marshal was meant to be a mundane buffer, using passive auras and a single class feature that granted move actions, while focusing on Charisma to an extent. The Marshal suffered from not being an effective martial combatant, with poor BAB despite its choice of weapons and armor. The Knight, on the other hand, had some Mounted Combat abilities, but its specialty was the Knight's Challenge, which worked as a daily resource pool by which the character could gain some benefits, such as a form of aggro, a boost to attack and damage against one enemy, a chance to reroll saving throws against compulsions and eventually the ability to stave off death; as well, it had some terrain control features (Bulwark of Defense, for example) and use of shields. The Knight was a cool concept, but suffered a bit from being too narrow, as it mostly limited you to Lockdown, but it still provided some variety (Sword & Board or Two-Hander, mostly).

Now, when I say "poor man's hybrid", it's because the class has some parallels to both 3.5 classes. The Cavalier's Banner has a parallel with the Marshal's aura, except that you don't get more than one aura at once. On the other hand, the Cavalier has a mount AND a challenge ability, which the Knight can also do. However, the Cavalier is neither a Marshal (it doesn't have enough leadership abilities, unlike a Bard) nor a proper Knight (the Cavalier does represent to an extent the knight archetype, if you consider the medieval concept that knights often served as heavy cavalry, but it doesn't meet any of the 3.5 Knight's class features).

If you notice the class features, everything can be summed in "you're a martial character, you have a mount: have fun!" The Charge class feature is meant to reinforce the use of a mount. The Challenge is mostly to provide the Cavalier with a primary class feature other than the mount, in the (not entirely rare) occasions that you have to fight unmounted. The Banner has some minor features and some basis on the knightly/cavalry concept, but its benefit is TOO specific; providing different banner bonuses based on your Order would have been a greater way to distinguish the Cavalier a bit more, while providing personalized bonuses made for a more leader-like class. The Teamwork feats, combined with the banner, reflect the Marshal's idea of being a "mundane leader" kind of character, but do it badly.

In the end, the Cavalier suffers because its focus is WAY too narrow, whereas its secondary benefits hint to potential to make a very distinctive class (potential that was ignored). The Cavalier could have been Pathfinder's response to the Marshal, but they failed; mostly, because they wanted a mundane class that had a mount without being a Paladin (notwithstanding the fact that they could have simply made an archetype that removed all of the Paladin's supernatural powers and replace them with mundane features).

If you want to make a point on how to play a Cavalier...well, Flagbearer is a good start. Playing a Cavalier as a leader-like character makes for an interesting turn of events. In fact, with a dip in Bard, you can enter into Battle Herald and pursue that path...however, it does imply multiclassing AND entering into a prestige class, which kinda muddles the point. Were you to consider that the Battle Herald could have made an actual class, rather than a Bard/Cavalier "theurge-like" PrC, you might get the point.

[Psyren]

It's basically the 3.5 Knight with a scaling mount built in. It's difficult to optimize but not at all impossible; how many Fighters do you know that can have their horse perch on their shoulder as a hawk, then turn into a dragon?


The Cavalier definitely needs buffs and probably a full rework; to be honest, I think it should have shown up in Pathfinder Unchained. (ETA: Huh. Didn't know that it was apparently in the running to show up there. I wish it had)

In a way it did - it benefits from VMC and Combat Stamina just as much as the Fighter does. Apply those two and it becomes a much easier sell.

[Oberon Kenobi]

I like the Order angle, because it gives you an instant tie in to the setting and an organization you can rely on.

The Mount... I pretty much always take an archetype that gets rid of it, honestly. If for whatever reason I actually want a horse I'll just buy one. Caveat: Beast Rider wants to be cool. If it didn't have that stupid fixed list and just let you pick any companion you want for your mount it would be great.

Giving teamwork feats to your allies is neat, but I think the limitations on it are seriously dumb. I'd rather that just be an always-on thing, and let it apply to any teamwork feats you have instead of just three that you pick over the course of your career.

So... yeah, it's mostly a flavor class. Mind you, I like the flavor, but it definitely needs fixing. I wouldn't call it pointless, though.

[grarrrg]

Well, Horse Master (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/combat-feats/horse-master-combat) is a pretty nice feat.


the Cavalier fails to compare to a ... mounted summoner

In (partial) defense of the Cavalier, comparing ANYTHING to the Summoner is usually going to favor the Summoner (unless it has 9th level spells, then toss-up).


Interestingly, I saw a comment on the paizo boards that the Cavalier was the "4th in line" for Pathfinder Unchained. Apparently nobody plays the cavalier. Edit: Ah, found the post (http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2scmf?Unchained-2#50).

Shouldn't that be 5th in line? There were 4 Unchained Classes.


Giving teamwork feats to your allies is neat, but I think the limitations on it are seriously dumb. I'd rather that just be an always-on thing, and let it apply to any teamwork feats you have instead of just three that you pick over the course of your career.

Reread Master Tactician:
"At 17th level.... Whenever the cavalier uses the tactician ability, he grants any two teamwork feats that he knows. He can select from any of his teamwork feats, not just his bonus feats."

Granted, this doesn't happen until level 17, so it really doesn't help all that much, but it DOES give access to any/all Teamwork feats, not just the 3 bonus ones.

[Molosse]

Can't say I particularly agree with the notion that the Cavalier is a bad class, though of course it could be fairer to say that it's better than a Fighter. Beyond that though, to address the points brought forward in the thread:

IQ) "Other classes do the same job, but better"
IA) The issue with this notion, and the context in which it was given, is that it makes assumptions regarding the Cavalier's build, which due to the Order system, can be massively diverse. So rather than trying to highlight the ways in which a Cavalier can be better than X/Y/Z I'll go ahead and post a few very simple builds, requiring little in the way of "System Mastery" and then people can judge if the Cavalier fails in the areas it builds towards compared to that of other classes.

IIQ) "You lose too much when you don't bring your Mount along"
IIA) Beyond the issue that even when you're not riding your Mount you're bringing along a decently powerful AC, especially if you went for the Charger AC Archetype, I feel that if you're building your Cavalier as a mounted monstrosity and your GM keeps throwing you into tight-corridors and dungeons there's been some miscommunication between yourself and your GM.
However I do understand that, while building a Cav, even if you don't push for mounted combat you are losing out on class features that promote mounted synergy. I'd again argue that this is easily rectified within the choices presented to Cavaliers in the forms of Archetypes and Orders that serve to replace, or push, the direction of the Cavalier away from mounted combat.

IIIQ) "The Cavalier can't function as a front-line support"
IIIA) Ignoring VMC's for the moment which make this job eminently easier, you can absolutely build the Cavalier to function as a front-line support with, again, the use of Archetypes that happily push these builds.
For example: OoDragon (Strategist + Honor Guard), OoShield (Honor Guard), OoLion (Standard Bearer).
Each of those examples provides a decently different experience and all function damn well as a front-line beat-stick who can throw out Martial buffs for days.

Will continue later and throw out those builds, thanks for reading.

[Psyren]

And also for the mounted issue - just be a Small cavalier on a Medium mount, problem solved, you can ride all over the dungeon to your heart's content and keep all your toys. I'd rather ride a wolf or worg anyway just for cool factor myself.

If you aren't indoors all the time though, a mount is very handy, particularly a griffon from Monstrous Mount so it can fly and pounce and you can wield a lance.

VMC-wise, they can get good stuff from Oracle, Sorcerer, Bard, Barbarian and Rogue.

[Ninjaxenomorph]

I prefer cavaliers as a 'knight' class to a paladin, because it seems to make Paladins that much more rare. Cavaliers, and by extension samurai, are a purely martial animal companion class. Some people just don't want to deal with spells, you dig?

Also I've seen an order of the dragon cavalier be he closest vanilla thing to a tank ever. Guy had a stack of cards for his buffs he gave out to everybody.

[Extra Anchovies]

VMC-wise, they can get good stuff from Oracle, Sorcerer, Bard, Barbarian and Rogue.

Also Magus. Even though the 11th level Spellstrike ability is usually a waste, the others are gold - Arcane Pool is crazy on a full BAB class, and there's a number of good utility arcana, especially if the third-party arcana on the PFSRD are available (Rite Publishing has a few that let you get flight (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/base-classes/magus/magus-arcana/rite-publishing---magus-arcana/bounding-step-su), an arcane pool-powered Iron Heart Surge (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/base-classes/magus/magus-arcana/rite-publishing---magus-arcana/overcome-circumstances-su)). Cavalier isn't the strongest choice, because they don't have much incentive to pump Int but it's still a nice choice on them.

[NightbringerGGZ]

I personally see the Cavalier (baseline) as a starting point for much more interesting builds. Many of its core abilities simply aren't very good, but can be traded away through archetypes for much better characters though keeping in mind that you're still fairly low-tier. You can even multi-class out of Cavalier after level 4 and still maintain a fully leveled animal companion thanks to the Horse Master (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/combat-feats/horse-master-combat) feat.

For instance, I prefer playing a Daring Champion cavalier to a Swashbuckler, especially if your GM lets you use pre-errata Crane Wing with the build. For mid and high level play, a Cavalier can use Horse Master to continue advancing his animal companion while moving into Mammoth Rider. I have a halfling PC build makes quite an effective tanking character, which is remarkably difficult to do without 3rd party material. A Luring Musketeer build can also be quite fun.

Also, as others have pointed out, the class benefits from VMC and Stamina rules almost as much as the Fighter does. The trick with the Cavalier is really to ignore the fluff entirely and figure out what you can do with the mechanical abilities.

[Kudaku]

Shouldn't that be 5th in line? There were 4 Unchained Classes.

Indeed, I've apparently mentally blocked out the 'unchained' barbarian.

[Psyren]

Indeed, I've apparently mentally blocked out the 'unchained' barbarian.

My only real disappointment with uBarb was that rage doesn't actually make you stronger anymore. I always liked the image of a barbarian hulking out and ripping a door off its hinges or bending the bars to his antimagic jail cell, and the boost to CMD was nice too.

All the other stuff though - not going from wounded to dying instantly when your rage ends, the stance powers, the Perception bonuses, I'm in favor of. All they really need is a way to switch stances as a free action similar to Combat Style Master.

[Ezekiul]

The teamwork feats in general are pretty weak so having a class with them as a core component doesn't help. Theres only 4-5 worthwhile ones to share with a party out of ~85 or so feats.

[Psyren]

Eh, I wouldn't call them a core component. You only get three, and there are a bunch of archetypes that swap them out if you don't want to use them. (My personal favorite of these is Gendarme, because the bonus feats include a bunch of things you'd select anyway, e.g. Power Attack, Spirited Charge, Mounted Combat, and Ride-by-Attack.)

[Geddy2112]

The Cavalier definitely needs buffs and probably a full rework;
I'm of the opinion that the Cavalier should be a frontline support, handing out teamwork feats and +numbers to allies while soaking hits and contributing to damage. Take the Inspiring Commander (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/base-classes/cavalier/archetypes/rite-publishing---cavalier-archetypes/inspiring-commander) archetype, increase the Inspire Courage scaling to +1/2/3/4/5 at 1/5/9/13/17, give them their mount back, add teamwork feats at levels 5 and 14, and give them some way to target multiple allies with one Aid Another, and you have a pretty good approximation of where I think the Cavalier should be.
I am 100% on board with a cavalier having bard buffing. Inspire courage fits the idea of a heroic knight riding in on a valiant steed.


It's basically the 3.5 Knight with a scaling mount built in. It's difficult to optimize but not at all impossible; how many Fighters do you know that can have their horse perch on their shoulder as a hawk, then turn into a dragon?
In a way it did - it benefits from VMC and Combat Stamina just as much as the Fighter does. Apply those two and it becomes a much easier sell.
Cavalier was on par with fighter; when high water raised all boats it became better? Okay...still won't beat a ranger, hunter, druid, or (maybe)paladin playing the same game.


I like the Order angle, because it gives you an instant tie in to the setting and an organization you can rely on.

The Mount... I pretty much always take an archetype that gets rid of it, honestly. If for whatever reason I actually want a horse I'll just buy one. Caveat: Beast Rider wants to be cool. If it didn't have that stupid fixed list and just let you pick any companion you want for your mount it would be great.

Giving teamwork feats to your allies is neat, but I think the limitations on it are seriously dumb. I'd rather that just be an always-on thing, and let it apply to any teamwork feats you have instead of just three that you pick over the course of your career.

You have to take an archetype to be viable, or throw away your mount and become a swashbuckler/fighter. And you have teamwork feats...woo. I do agree about the orders, and it would have been cool to see fighters/paladins expanded this way. Instead of a separate class.


Well, Horse Master (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/combat-feats/horse-master-combat) is a pretty nice feat
Great. A feat that fixes the fact I have to multiclass out of this garbage class, but I can keep my subpar companion....glad I have to waste a feat on this crap instead of being a hunter/paladin/druid to begin with.


Can't say I particularly agree with the notion that the Cavalier is a bad class, though of course it could be fairer to say that it's better than a Fighter. Beyond that though, to address the points brought forward in the thread:

IQ) "Other classes do the same job, but better"
IA) The issue with this notion, and the context in which it was given, is that it makes assumptions regarding the Cavalier's build, which due to the Order system, can be massively diverse.

IIQ) "You lose too much when you don't bring your Mount along"
IIA) Beyond the issue that even when you're not riding your Mount you're bringing along a decently powerful AC, especially if you went for the Charger AC Archetype, I feel that if you're building your Cavalier as a mounted monstrosity and your GM keeps throwing you into tight-corridors and dungeons there's been some miscommunication between yourself and your GM.
However I do understand that, while building a Cav, even if you don't push for mounted combat you are losing out on class features that promote mounted synergy. I'd again argue that this is easily rectified within the choices presented to Cavaliers in the forms of Archetypes and Orders that serve to replace, or push, the direction of the Cavalier away from mounted combat.

IIIQ) "The Cavalier can't function as a front-line support"
IIIA) Ignoring VMC's for the moment which make this job eminently easier, you can absolutely build the Cavalier to function as a front-line support with, again, the use of Archetypes that happily push these builds.
For example: OoDragon (Strategist + Honor Guard), OoShield (Honor Guard), OoLion (Standard Bearer).
Each of those examples provides a decently different experience and all function damn well as a front-line beat-stick who can throw out Martial buffs for days.

A cavalier is better than a fighter...not saying much there, but I agree. I also agree that I would rather lose a toe than die. Even with the diversity of the orders(which are good) cavaliers can be out shined with ease by other classes doing functionally the same thing. Having to push away from mounted combat or be good without it is equally argument for classes that can do that, but better, but also be good at mounted combat. Buffing frontline is possible, but you will never come close to a caster. Ever.


And also for the mounted issue - just be a Small cavalier on a Medium mount, problem solved, you can ride all over the dungeon to your heart's content and keep all your toys. I'd rather ride a wolf or worg anyway just for cool factor myself.

If you aren't indoors all the time though, a mount is very handy, particularly a griffon from Monstrous Mount so it can fly and pounce and you can wield a lance.

VMC-wise, they can get good stuff from Oracle, Sorcerer, Bard, Barbarian and Rogue.
Small races have always been better riders, and having to VMC to gain cool things that your class needed does not say it is good. It says the Cavalier can be made less bad.


Some people just don't want to deal with spells, you dig?

Also I've seen an order of the dragon cavalier be he closest vanilla thing to a tank ever. Guy had a stack of cards for his buffs he gave out to everybody.
I totally understand not wanting to be a caster, and being able to make one of the best orders be awesome.


Also Magus. Even though the 11th level Spellstrike ability is usually a waste, the others are gold - Arcane Pool is crazy on a full BAB class, and there's a number of good utility arcana, especially if the third-party arcana on the PFSRD are available. Cavalier isn't the strongest choice, because they don't have much incentive to pump Int but it's still a nice choice on them.
Another case of high water raising all boats. A paladin or ranger can benefit from this too.



I personally see the Cavalier (baseline) as a starting point for much more interesting builds. Many of its core abilities simply aren't very good, but can be traded away through archetypes for much better characters though keeping in mind that you're still fairly low-tier. You can even multi-class out of Cavalier after level 4 and still maintain a fully leveled animal companion thanks to the Horse Master (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/combat-feats/horse-master-combat) feat.

For instance, I prefer playing a Daring Champion cavalier to a Swashbuckler, especially if your GM lets you use pre-errata Crane Wing with the build. For mid and high level play, a Cavalier can use Horse Master to continue advancing his animal companion while moving into Mammoth Rider. I have a halfling PC build makes quite an effective tanking character, which is remarkably difficult to do without 3rd party material. A Luring Musketeer build can also be quite fun.

Also, as others have pointed out, the class benefits from VMC and Stamina rules almost as much as the Fighter does. The trick with the Cavalier is really to ignore the fluff entirely and figure out what you can do with the mechanical abilities.
So I have to prestige, multi class or spam archetypes to be effective? And I can gain the same benefits other martial classes get from stamina rules? This hardly justifies the existence of the class. Although mammoth rider is freaking awesome, druids, clerics, rangers and paladins can become one.


Eh, I wouldn't call them a core component. You only get three, and there are a bunch of archetypes that swap them out if you don't want to use them. (My personal favorite of these is Gendarme, because the bonus feats include a bunch of things you'd select anyway, e.g. Power Attack, Spirited Charge, Mounted Combat, and Ride-by-Attack.)
Exactly. If Caveliers are going to be leaders, don't do it by stupid teamwork feats and how to apply them. The concept of a bard hybrid fixes this, but demands a fundemental rework of the class.

I think the Samurai is a somewhat feasable class, because you get the orders, mount, a mounted combat base, banner, and the resiliency points, which add something really unique. The sword saint is also a pretty radical archetype that does not promote more of the same fail class.

[Psyren]

Small races have always been better riders, and having to VMC to gain cool things that your class needed does not say it is good. It says the Cavalier can be made less bad.


I didn't say it was "good." Though I will state for the record that not every class needs to be T3; T4 is a perfectly fine balance point too and I think the Cavalier can get there quite easily with optimization. Unoptimized it's definitely T5 though.

And "making the class less bad" is the definition of optimization. :smalltongue:



Exactly. If Caveliers are going to be leaders, don't do it by stupid teamwork feats and how to apply them. The concept of a bard hybrid fixes this, but demands a fundemental rework of the class.

Nah, you just need VMC Bard and/or Battle Herald and bam, there's your bard hybrid (with no loss of BAB either.)

[Elder_Basilisk]

From a DM perspective, Cavalier works very nicely as a class for aristocratic warriors. It has 4 skill points per level, all of the necessary social skills as class skills, full BAB, and a few leadership abilities. In 3.5, I would have ended up statting a lot of such characters as multiclass aristocrat/fighters or aristocrat/warriors. Cavalier works much more elegantly as a single class alternative.

Cavalier is also very useful for sergeants, and other martial leaders in groups of low-level NPCs. A hobgoblin sergeant in command of a group of fighter (or warrior) 2s isn't very impressive if he's just a fighter 3. Make him a luring cavalier 3 with the volley fire teamwork feat and his group of six hobgoblins gets a lot more deadly as soon as he uses tactician. Give him the standardbearer archetype and that group of orcish barbarian auxiliaries just got more deadly too.

As a player class, it's not terribly exciting to me, but when building NPCs, I find myself wanting to use it all over.

[Anlashok]

You know, out of all the other mounted options you mentioned Cavalier is the only one that isn't a spellcaster.

So it has that going for it.

[Extra Anchovies]

Another case of high water raising all boats. A paladin or ranger can benefit from this too.

Yeah, Cavalier isn't the best chassis for VMC Magus. Slayer probably is - between the Combat Style Feat, Combat Trick, and Feat (added in the ACG errata) talents, they can easily afford to VMC even if they're building for archery, and they've already got a bit of an Int focus.

Cavalier [Bard] into Battle Herald is pretty nice, though, because they eventually get a base Inspire Courage of +7. You can also qualify earlier and get quite a few more rounds/day of IC with the Inspiring Commander archetype.

[NightbringerGGZ]

Cavalier was on par with fighter; when high water raised all boats it became better? Okay...still won't beat a ranger, hunter, druid, or (maybe)paladin playing the same game.

Yep. A non-spellcasting class is less powerful than those with spell casting. Most of the d10 pure martial classes in Pathfinder are actually pretty limited when you look at them.


So I have to prestige, multi class or spam archetypes to be effective? And I can gain the same benefits other martial classes get from stamina rules? This hardly justifies the existence of the class. Although mammoth rider is freaking awesome, druids, clerics, rangers and paladins can become one.

Yep. As I said, the baseline class just doesn't measure up very well on the power curve but it is possible to push the class in several directions that make it T4.


Exactly. If Caveliers are going to be leaders, don't do it by stupid teamwork feats and how to apply them. The concept of a bard hybrid fixes this, but demands a fundemental rework of the class.

This would be a fun class imo. You can do this decently with existing mechanics, but are locked into a very specific build.

[Kudaku]

My only real disappointment with uBarb was that rage doesn't actually make you stronger anymore. I always liked the image of a barbarian hulking out and ripping a door off its hinges or bending the bars to his antimagic jail cell, and the boost to CMD was nice too.

All the other stuff though - not going from wounded to dying instantly when your rage ends, the stance powers, the Perception bonuses, I'm in favor of. All they really need is a way to switch stances as a free action similar to Combat Style Master.

Not dying from rage ending should never have been a thing in the first place, I have no idea how they didn't catch that problem before the CRB was released. That should have been fixed with an 'errata' update. Stance powers are interesting but would work equally fell for the original barbarian. Danger Sense isn't sufficiently different from Trap Sense to make me particularly excited. Some of the updated rage powers like Raging Climber are cool, or rather less dull than the original.

However I was very unhappy with the step away from 1/rage rage powers, especially how they handled Spell Sunder. The beauty of that rage power was the reliability and the utility value of being able to sunder conditions off your allies or take down things like a wall of force. The revised version massively misses the mark. It's I understand they felt rage cycling was an issue but imo they threw the baby out with the bath water. Also an extremely minor pet peeve, but I have no idea why barbarian throwers don't get an attack roll bonus and barbarian archers get zero support from rage.

[Ezekiul]

Exactly. If Caveliers are going to be leaders, don't do it by stupid teamwork feats and how to apply them. The concept of a bard hybrid fixes this, but demands a fundemental rework of the class.

I think the Samurai is a somewhat feasable class, because you get the orders, mount, a mounted combat base, banner, and the resiliency points, which add something really unique. The sword saint is also a pretty radical archetype that does not promote more of the same fail class.

I like the idea that the Cavalier can support in an alternative way, I just feel the alternative mechanic is weak. Buffing/creating better teamwork feats would be a way to fix the "core/unarchetyped" class without requiring a fundamental rework.

I do like bard supports (and they can be really powerful if you can get Dragonfire Inspiration over), but it's in the situation of "if I'm going to trade away all my features to be more like bard features, I'm just going to play a bard."

[Ssalarn]

The teamwork feats in general are pretty weak so having a class with them as a core component doesn't help. Theres only 4-5 worthwhile ones to share with a party out of ~85 or so feats.


I don't agree with this at all. Teamwork feats are some of the best in the game. One of the cavalier's biggest flaws is not getting to share any teamwork he knows until 17th level. Combine that with the fact that the designers don't appear to have taken any effort at all to make teamwork feats sync up with the classes that gain them, and that's where a lot of the cavalier's issues can be found. It's kind of ridiculous that a Cavalier who dips 1 level of Fighter will be so much stronger than a single-classed cavalier, just by virtue of being able to select Coordinated Charge as his Greater Tactician ability. Another good save would have been nice as well, but at least Banner/Greater Banner is better than Bravery.

The cavalier is still one of the best single target damage dealers in the game though, so he's got that going for him. I think the biggest issue is that materials that have come out after him saw some of the issues he had and fixed them, but the base class itself hasn't seen a lot of love since it was first introduced. Plus, they've had FAQs out mangling mounted combat, and with mounted combat being his main schtick, that means he suffers a bit more than other classes. Still, he gets to make two mounted charges a round way earlier than any other character, so that's something.

[Psyren]

I don't agree with this at all. Teamwork feats are some of the best in the game.

Maybe it's because I gave up on them before the ACG came out but I really haven't seen much that was impressive amidst all the chaff. What are your favorites?

And Tactician really should have been a move action instead of a standard to start - giving you something to use your move on while your mount is charging at low levels.


Not dying from rage ending should never have been a thing in the first place, I have no idea how they didn't catch that problem before the CRB was released. That should have been fixed with an 'errata' update. Stance powers are interesting but would work equally fell for the original barbarian. Danger Sense isn't sufficiently different from Trap Sense to make me particularly excited. Some of the updated rage powers like Raging Climber are cool, or rather less dull than the original.

However I was very unhappy with the step away from 1/rage rage powers, especially how they handled Spell Sunder. The beauty of that rage power was the reliability and the utility value of being able to sunder conditions off your allies or take down things like a wall of force. The revised version massively misses the mark. It's I understand they felt rage cycling was an issue but imo they threw the baby out with the bath water. Also an extremely minor pet peeve, but I have no idea why barbarian throwers don't get an attack roll bonus and barbarian archers get zero support from rage.

Revised version of spell sunder? Can you link to it? I'm not seeing it on the PFSRD or in my copy of Unchained.

You can't really "errata" the danger of losing rage at low HP though - it was a function of the rules regarding Con increases, and back when the barbarian was made they weren't trying to rock the boat too much as far as backwards compatibility. I guess you could have thrown in something like they keep the Con boost even while unconscious, but that raises the issue of burning rage rounds while asleep or knocked out.

[Ssalarn]

Maybe it's because I gave up on them before the ACG came out but I really haven't seen much that was impressive amidst all the chaff. What are your favorites?


Broken Wing Gambit

Coordinated Charge

Escape Route

Intercept Charge

Stealth Synergy

Target of Opportunity

Wounded Paw Gambit


Those are some of my personal favorites. Escape Route is particularly fun for Cavaliers, since they basically just stop provoking AoOs for moving while sharing it. Stealth Synergy helps avoid that situation where everyone's sneaking along and then that one guy botches his roll and knocks over a gong, and Intercept Charge is great for defensive maneuvering, especially used in conjunction with Mounted Combat. Target of Opportunity is a "free" attack, and it can be triggered by a wizard's scorching ray just as easily as a ranger's bow shot. Coordinated Charge is one of the best feats available, since you're essentially trading an immediate action for a full round action; since they introduced the FAQ on mounted combat that states that both the rider and the mount have to use a charge action to perform a mounted charge, you can even have the cavalier and his mount trigger charges for each other. Broken Wing Gambit and Wounded Paw Gambit are additional ways to generate extra DPR, though generally I only grab Wounded Paw if I'm playing a Hunter.

There's some others that are super niche but which can be fun in the right circumstances; for example, Ensemble usually isn't that useful, but on a Bard/Cavalier/Battle Herald it lets you re-enact one of those old Scooby Doo era cartoons where everyone busts out their instruments and suddenly a little Versatile Performance and some Diplomancy makes everyone your friend.

[Oberon Kenobi]

I agree, Teamwork Feats are cool. Even if many of them aren't terribly useful (or at least are pretty situational), I find them a lot more interesting than Inspire Courage's +numbers. The selections available at the levels where you're supposed to pick them up for Tactics are pretty bad, though, and as stated it's an absolute travesty that you can't use Tactics with any given Teamwork feat until 17 (thanks for pointing out that you can at least do it then, though).

What I'd like to see is a teamwork feat progression for the Cavalier that's similar to the style feats for the Ranger, or the feat progression for the Monk–you get them early, fairly often, and you get to ignore prerequisites.

I'd also, again as stated, like Tactics to be an always-on ability; the fifteen minute workday thing is seriously past its expiration date, and definitely has no place in a martial class. I'd suggest that you can share one teamwork feat at a time, later growing to two and then three at the levels where you'd normally get Greater and Master Tactician. Swapping between your chosen feat(s) takes the same action as activating Tactician normally would.

Edit: Also, I love Ensemble. You can turn a scene into a musical number at the drop of a hat. :smallbiggrin:

[Kudaku]

Revised version of spell sunder? Can you link to it? I'm not seeing it on the PFSRD or in my copy of Unchained.

The original Spell Sunder (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/core-classes/barbarian/rage-powers/paizo---rage-powers/spell-sunder-su) (which is awesome) is from Ultimate Magic, and not on the approved rage power list for unchained barbarians - they can't take it. Instead they sort of baked the effect of Spell Sunder into Unchained's Witch Hunter.


Witch Hunter (Ex): The barbarian gains a +1 bonus on damage rolls against creatures possessing spells or spell-like abilities. This damage bonus increases by 1 for every 4 levels the barbarian has. In addition, if she confirms a critical hit against a creature affected by an ongoing beneficial spell effect, that effect is suppressed for 1 round (determined randomly if the creature is currently affected by more than one effect). A barbarian must have the superstition rage power to select this rage power.

The original barbarian had a 1/rage "This spell effect is ruining my life and needs to go now" power that could be used to remove buffs from enemies, debuffs off allies, and static obstacles such as a Wall of Force - it is a fantastic rage power. In fact, Spell Sunder is frequently used as an example of the kind of class feature that other martials need in order to keep up in the mid-late game. The version the Unchained Barbarian gets is nowhere near as useful.


You can't really "errata" the danger of losing rage at low HP though - it was a function of the rules regarding Con increases, and back when the barbarian was made they weren't trying to rock the boat too much as far as backwards compatibility. I guess you could have thrown in something like they keep the Con boost even while unconscious, but that raises the issue of burning rage rounds while asleep or knocked out.

You absolutely can. Here's the final paragraph of the Rage writeup:


A barbarian can end her rage as a free action and is fatigued after rage for a number of rounds equal to 2 times the number of rounds spent in the rage. A barbarian cannot enter a new rage while fatigued or exhausted but can otherwise enter rage multiple times during a single encounter or combat. If a barbarian falls unconscious, her rage immediately ends, placing her in peril of death.

Now remove the last sentence, and barbarians don't automatically exit rage when they go unconscious. The design team already kind of did this back in 2010, but in the traditional early-Paizo way instead of fixing the problem itself, they wallpapered over it by publishing additional material. (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/general-feats/raging-vitality)

[Oberon Kenobi]

The original Spell Sunder (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/core-classes/barbarian/rage-powers/paizo---rage-powers/spell-sunder-su) (which is awesome) is from Ultimate Magic, and not on the approved rage power list for unchained barbarians - they can't take it. Instead they sort of baked the effect of Spell Sunder into Unchained's Witch Hunter.Are you sure they can't take Spell Sunder? Sunder Enchantment is on the list of available unaltered Rage Powers, and that has Spell Sunder as a prerequisite. Something doesn't add up there. :smallannoyed:

[Kudaku]

Are you sure they can't take Spell Sunder? Sunder Enchantment is on the list of available unaltered Rage Powers, and that has Spell Sunder as a prerequisite. Something doesn't add up there. :smallannoyed:

I'm about 99% sure that the mistake was that they did not consider that Spell Sunder was a prerequisite for Sunder Enchantment, not that they forgot to include Spell Sunder on the approved list. Pretty much any rage power that was 1/rage is not an option for the Unchained Barbarian. From what I've heard they really wanted to kill rage cycling, so they removed just about any rage power that relied on it.

[Anlashok]

spoilering your post to avoid derailing seems to kind of lose its meaning when that spoiler is the only thing you post.

[Kurald Galain]

Maybe it's because I gave up on them before the ACG came out but I really haven't seen much that was impressive amidst all the chaff. What are your favorites?

Well, the thing is that teamwork feats are good if you have an ability that gives them to others (e.g. hunter tactics) or that let you use them by yourself (e.g. inquisitor tactics). Otherwise it's not all that likely that another PC just happens to have a build that synergizes with the same TW feat as yours, and has the space for it.

Then the best ones are probably precise strike (+1d6 damage), outflank (+2 to hit), and broken wing gambit (extra OAs).

[Kudaku]

spoilering your post to avoid derailing seems to kind of lose its meaning when that spoiler is the only thing you post.

Depends on the length of the spoilered post. A single line with a spoiler box is a heck of a lot better than a A4 page of completely unrelated ranting. :smallwink:

[Pex]

Well, the thing is that teamwork feats are good if you have an ability that gives them to others (e.g. hunter tactics) or that let you use them by yourself (e.g. inquisitor tactics). Otherwise it's not all that likely that another PC just happens to have a build that synergizes with the same TW feat as yours, and has the space for it.

Then the best ones are probably precise strike (+1d6 damage), outflank (+2 to hit), and broken wing gambit (extra OAs).

I think the idea is two or more players purposely pick the same teamwork feats in creating their characters. Their characters could be twins, from the same military regiment, went to the same war college, etc. I don't think they have to be the absolute best option to choose among feats just as long as they're good enough in terms of effectiveness and fun.

[Psyren]

The original Spell Sunder (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/core-classes/barbarian/rage-powers/paizo---rage-powers/spell-sunder-su) (which is awesome) is from Ultimate Magic, and not on the approved rage power list for unchained barbarians - they can't take it.

That's only PFS. In home games you can still take them, they just have to be "reviewed" first. So you can get your old Spell Sunder just fine unless your DM is being harsh.


You absolutely can. Here's the final paragraph of the Rage writeup:


Now remove the last sentence, and barbarians don't automatically exit rage when they go unconscious. The design team already kind of did this back in 2010, but in the traditional early-Paizo way instead of fixing the problem itself, they wallpapered over it by publishing additional material. (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/general-feats/raging-vitality)

Just removing the last sentence is confusing, because you can't take actions while unconscious, and raging is a free action. You would need to add an ability like Raging Vitality gives you, which is a fine use of a feat or could have been made a class feature at X level.


Well, the thing is that teamwork feats are good if you have an ability that gives them to others (e.g. hunter tactics) or that let you use them by yourself (e.g. inquisitor tactics). Otherwise it's not all that likely that another PC just happens to have a build that synergizes with the same TW feat as yours, and has the space for it.

Then the best ones are probably precise strike (+1d6 damage), outflank (+2 to hit), and broken wing gambit (extra OAs).

Exactly. And while some of the ones Ssalarn listed are indeed nice if you have an ability like that, the vast majority suck even if you do. Yeah I know, Sturgeon's Law, but I'd much rather be a Spellbreaker Inquisitor or a Divine Hunter.

[Kudaku]

That's only PFS. In home games you can still take them, they just have to be "reviewed" first. So you can get your old Spell Sunder just fine unless your DM is being harsh.

Not quite how I read it. The text lists all the rage powers from Ultimate Combat that can be used "unaltered". Spell Sunder isn't on that list, which means it's not an option by default unless your GM overturns that with a house rule. That is of course a possibility, but "it ain't broken because I can fix it" is a shaky argument. It's not like they didn't cover the book the rage power was in and the answer is nebulous, the writer specifically printed a list of allowable Ultimate Combat rage powers and didn't include Spell Sunder. Or any other 1/rage rage power, really.


Just removing the last sentence is confusing, because you can't take actions while unconscious, and raging is a free action.

That's... Not correct. It's free action to start or end a rage but "raging" isn't an action, if anything it's closer to a condition. If raging was a free action then it'd automatically end once your turn was up since you can't take free actions outside your turn. Rage remains until you end it on your turn (with a free action), you go unconscious, or until you run out of rage rounds. Though if you still find it confusing I don't have a problem with copying the last two sentences out of Raging Vitality and adding it to the barbarian's rage text. My suggestion was shorter to minimize the layout alterations needed.


Exactly. And while some of the ones Ssalarn listed are indeed nice if you have an ability like that, the vast majority suck even if you do. Yeah I know, Sturgeon's Law, but I'd much rather be a Spellbreaker Inquisitor or a Divine Hunter.

I agree with you, I generally avoid any TW-based class feature like the plague. Path of War has a bug in Herolab where the Warlord has to take a TW feat rather than a combat feat at level 1, so I finally wound up taking Escape Route to help our casters get out of sticky situations. We're level 10 now, I've used Warleader once.

I found the implementation of teamwork feats and TW classes a little contradictory. Ideally you'd balance TW feats around the idea that at least two characters have to take the feat and odds are it won't always be functional so the effect should ideally be as good or better than having two characters take non-TW feats. However you also have classes that are able to benefit from TW feats without suffering the major drawback of TW feats, inquisitors and cavaliers. So do you balance new TW feats around being good enough that the fighter and the rogue both want to pick one up even though they won't always be able to key off one another, or do you balance them around the inquisitor who automatically assumes that everyone else has them or the cavalier who hands them out like candy? SKR sheds some insight on that in a post here (http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2rgoq&page=2?Please-no-more-combat-expertise#58) and here (http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2qdj8&page=13?Hunter-Discussion#620).

[Anlashok]

Wouldn't some line about not being able to be reduced below a certain number of hit points when your rage ends have been sufficient?
Also, yeah, them cavaliers.

I think the cavalier isn't that bad really.

It's definitely hampered by Paizo's ultra conservative design principles when it comes to making martial abilities. Tactician and banner fail to really deliver on a martial leader class.

But orders are cool and between its various archetypes (including samurai) it can cover a lot of concepts effectively and more flavorfully than the fighter. It struggles to do things as well as some of the classes the OP lists, but all of the classes the OP mentioned are spellcasters... and it's not exactly news that magic wins in Pathfinder.

I do wish that Paizo would be less stupid about them. OcA orders are disappointingly conservative and we get silliness like people playing daring champions over swashbucklers somehow convincing paizo to nerf the champion rather than buff a class that nearly everyone thinks underperforms.

But that's Paizo for you and all of that aside I'd say the Cavalier is pretty nice.

[Psyren]

Not quite how I read it. The text lists all the rage powers from Ultimate Combat that can be used "unaltered". Spell Sunder isn't on that list, which means it's not an option by default unless your GM overturns that with a house rule. That is of course a possibility, but "it ain't broken because I can fix it" is a shaky argument. It's not like they didn't cover the book the rage power was in and the answer is nebulous, the writer specifically printed a list of allowable Ultimate Combat rage powers and didn't include Spell Sunder. Or any other 1/rage rage power, really.

No, using it unaltered is not a houserule. Here is the actual text from Unchained.

"Some feats, rage powers, rogue talents, and other rules might not work with the unchained classes, and such rules should be reviewed before being used with the new versions."

That's all you have to do - review them. No altering is required, though the DM can certainly do so, and that would be the houserule.

The only class that explicitly cannot use his old toys is the monk, and even he still gets the qinggong powers and vows.



That's... Not correct. It's free action to start or end a rage but "raging" isn't an action, if anything it's closer to a condition. If raging was a free action then it'd automatically end once your turn was up since you can't take free actions outside your turn. Rage remains until you end it on your turn (with a free action), you go unconscious, or until you run out of rage rounds. Though if you still find it confusing I don't have a problem with copying the last two sentences out of Raging Vitality and adding it to the barbarian's rage text. My suggestion was shorter to minimize the layout alterations needed.

Which is an easy enough change but still runs into the backwards compatibility issue they were trying to avoid in core to begin with. Barbarians worked that way in 3.5, so a feat to patch it was a solid compromise between patching the issue and potentially upsetting the applecart with existing fans and DMs.



I found the implementation of teamwork feats and TW classes a little contradictory. Ideally you'd balance TW feats around the idea that at least two characters have to take the feat and odds are it won't always be functional so the effect should ideally be as good or better than having two characters take non-TW feats. However you also have classes that are able to benefit from TW feats without suffering the major drawback of TW feats, inquisitors and cavaliers. So do you balance new TW feats around being good enough that the fighter and the rogue both want to pick one up even though they won't always be able to key off one another, or do you balance them around the inquisitor who automatically assumes that everyone else has them or the cavalier who hands them out like candy? SKR sheds some insight on that in a post here (http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2rgoq&page=2?Please-no-more-combat-expertise#58) and here (http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2qdj8&page=13?Hunter-Discussion#620).

Yeah, that's a good way to think about them - stealth class features for the cavalier, inquisitor and hunter. But for the latter two I'm still inclined to chuck them because there are much nicer things waiting in the wings. Even when you have an ability like solo tactics after all, some of the feats also depend on your ally performing a certain action or the enemy acting in a certain specific way, whereas something like the Divine Hunter's domain powers or the Preacher's Determination are more or less universally useful.

[Kudaku]

No, using it unaltered is not a houserule. Here is the actual text from Unchained.

"Some feats, rage powers, rogue talents, and other rules might not work with the unchained classes, and such rules should be reviewed before being used with the new versions."

Right, that quote talks about how some feats, talents, and rage powers found in all paizo material, hardcover and softcover, should be reviewed. Since you seem to appreciate precise language, here is the actual text from the rage power sidebar.


The list of barbarian rage powers includes replacements for everything from the Core Rulebook, along with select revised powers based on the rage powers from Pathfinder RPG Advanced Player’s Guide and Pathfinder RPG Ultimate Combat. The following rage powers from the latter two books can be used unaltered.

In the rage power sidebar they're stating specifically that Spell Sunder, and every other rage power that's found in the APG and UC but did not make the list of approved rage powers, should not be used without alteration.


Which is an easy enough change but still runs into the backwards compatibility issue they were trying to avoid in core to begin with. Barbarians worked that way in 3.5, so a feat to patch it was a solid compromise between patching the issue and potentially upsetting the applecart with existing fans and DMs.

That may have been an issue back when the APG released, but I sincerely doubt Paizo's fan base is going to start throwing their toys out of the pram because Paizo made a tiny 3.5-incompatible change that's simultaneously a huge quality of life improvement for barbarians. If anything I'd expect the Paizo boards to be stunned into silence that Paizo did something nice for a 'mundane' class.


Yeah, that's a good way to think about them - stealth class features for the cavalier, inquisitor and hunter. But for the latter two I'm still inclined to chuck them because there are much nicer things waiting in the wings. Even when you have an ability like solo tactics after all, some of the feats also depend on your ally performing a certain action or the enemy acting in a certain specific way, whereas something like the Divine Hunter's domain powers or the Preacher's Determination are more or less universally useful.

I personally would have preferred it if they kept TW feats separate from class features like Solo Tactics. Teamwork feats are an interesting concept, but being able to reduce or negate the investment cost for the feats dilutes the idea and muddies the ideal power level of the feats.

[Psyren]

Right, that quote talks about how some feats, talents, and rage powers found in all paizo material, hardcover and softcover, should be reviewed. Since you seem to appreciate precise language, here is the actual text from the rage power sidebar.



In the rage power sidebar they're stating specifically that Spell Sunder, and every other rage power that's found in the APG and UC but did not make the list of approved rage powers, should not be used without alteration.

I do indeed appreciate precise language: "You can use {list} unaltered" does not in fact mean "you must alter anything not on this list" All owls are birds, but not all birds are owls. Furthermore, "review" and "alter" are not synonyms. The use of "might" invokes caution when using the old rage powers, not a prohibition from doing so.

That prohibition does exist - in PFS, where many other RAW things are prohibited.



That may have been an issue back when the APG released, but I sincerely doubt Paizo's fan base is going to start throwing their toys out of the pram because Paizo made a tiny 3.5-incompatible change that's simultaneously a huge quality of life improvement for barbarians. If anything I'd expect the Paizo boards to be stunned into silence that Paizo did something nice for a 'mundane' class.

I'm just explaining a likely reason they didn't make that change baseline. Even putting the feat compromise aside, clearly they're fine with temp HP now at least.



I personally would have preferred it if they kept TW feats separate from class features like Solo Tactics. Teamwork feats are an interesting concept, but being able to reduce or negate the investment cost for the feats dilutes the idea and muddies the ideal power level of the feats.

I can understand that concern but the idea of their price point being lower for some classes makes sense - not just to spice those classes up, but also as a gateway for the Teamwork feats themselves. A less experienced player who plans to use a Cavalier or Inquisitor is going to be drawn to look through the Teamwork feats in detail; not only because they get some for free, but because they know they'll be able to use them. That sort of low-barrier reward to make a player feel like they are "beating the system" in such a small way is good game design.

[grarrrg]

I can understand that concern but the idea of their price point being lower for some classes makes sense - not just to spice those classes up, but also as a gateway for the Teamwork feats themselves. A less experienced player who plans to use a Cavalier or Inquisitor is going to be drawn to look through the Teamwork feats in detail; not only because they get some for free, but because they know they'll be able to use them. That sort of low-barrier reward to make a player feel like they are "beating the system" in such a small way is good game design.

I'm of the opinion that Paizo gave Cavalier/Inquisitor those abilities to encourage other people to actually take Teamwork feats as well.
In effect, to better "sell the idea" of Teamwork feats.

Yes, Mr. Inquisitor can take and benefit from all the Teamwork feats he wants, and doesn't care if anyone else does.
But Mr. Fighter sees all the fun Mr. Inquisitor is having with Precise Strike and decides he wants in on it too.
Mr. Bard sees the others having fun and says "sure, why not" and jumps in as well.

If it hadn't been for Mr. Inquisitor taking them to benefit himself, then no one else would have likely given Teamwork feats a second thought.

[Psyren]

I'm of the opinion that Paizo gave Cavalier/Inquisitor those abilities to encourage other people to actually take Teamwork feats as well.
In effect, to better "sell the idea" of Teamwork feats.

Yes, Mr. Inquisitor can take and benefit from all the Teamwork feats he wants, and doesn't care if anyone else does.
But Mr. Fighter sees all the fun Mr. Inquisitor is having with Precise Strike and decides he wants in on it too.
Mr. Bard sees the others having fun and says "sure, why not" and jumps in as well.

If it hadn't been for Mr. Inquisitor taking them to benefit himself, then no one else would have likely given Teamwork feats a second thought.

Yep - this is basically what I was getting at. It's a way to encourage players to give these feats a try.

It works particularly well in PFS, where you have no idea who you'll end up alongside, so you aren't punished for joining a table where nobody felt like using them with a pile of dead feats.

[Ezekiul]

Broken Wing Gambit

Coordinated Charge

Escape Route

Intercept Charge

Stealth Synergy

Target of Opportunity

Wounded Paw Gambit


Those are some of my personal favorites. Escape Route is particularly fun for Cavaliers, since they basically just stop provoking AoOs for moving while sharing it. Stealth Synergy helps avoid that situation where everyone's sneaking along and then that one guy botches his roll and knocks over a gong, and Intercept Charge is great for defensive maneuvering, especially used in conjunction with Mounted Combat. Target of Opportunity is a "free" attack, and it can be triggered by a wizard's scorching ray just as easily as a ranger's bow shot. Coordinated Charge is one of the best feats available, since you're essentially trading an immediate action for a full round action; since they introduced the FAQ on mounted combat that states that both the rider and the mount have to use a charge action to perform a mounted charge, you can even have the cavalier and his mount trigger charges for each other. Broken Wing Gambit and Wounded Paw Gambit are additional ways to generate extra DPR, though generally I only grab Wounded Paw if I'm playing a Hunter.

There's some others that are super niche but which can be fun in the right circumstances; for example, Ensemble usually isn't that useful, but on a Bard/Cavalier/Battle Herald it lets you re-enact one of those old Scooby Doo era cartoons where everyone busts out their instruments and suddenly a little Versatile Performance and some Diplomancy makes everyone your friend.

The feats you picked were the worthwhile ones I was thinking about, with the addition of Pack Attack and the you and your companion flank regardless of position one. There are still ~75 other feats that either too situational or too weak to want to spend a feat on.

[Molosse]

Buffing frontline is possible, but you will never come close to a caster. Ever.

Some assumptions within the build before we begin:
I) The Cavalier's Banner will consist of a Heraldic Tabard, going from the line "Small or larger and must be carried or displayed by the Cavalier or his mount to function" from the Banner Class Feature.

Standard Bearer (Bard VMC)

Str: 18 (Level 8: 19) (Level 12: 20)
Dex: 12
Con: 14
Int: 10
Wis: 10
Cha: 13 (Level 4: 14)

Trait: Indomitable Faith
Trait: Reactionary

Order: Order of the Dragon
Favored Class Bonus: +1/4 Banner Bonus

1: Noble Scion (Arts), Power Attack, Tactician Feat: Distracting Charge
2:
3: VMC: Bardic Knowledge
4:
5: Improved Initiative
6: Bonus Feat: Mounted Combat
7: VMC: Bardic Performance (Inspire Courage +1, Inspire Competence +2)
8:
9: Chain Challenge, Tactician Feat: Outflank
10: Retrain Tactician Feat: Coordinated Charge
11: VMC: Versatile Performance
12: Bonus Feat: ?

Noble Scion (Arts) does the following: Grants some extra uses of Bardic Performance to make up for the limited number of uses the VMC Bard gets while also giving Performance as both a Class Skill and a +1 to the Skill, this remains important when one considers that at Level 11 the VMC grants Versatile Performance while the Cavalier does not gain Performance as a Class Skill.

My Mount will be a Horse who grabs the Charger AC Archetype, to benefit from both the Barding Training and the Mini-Challenge.

Finally the build has a damn near perfect first round action economy to provide benefits to both the Cavalier and, most importantly for the focus of this build, his allies at Level 11/12:

OoDragon Challenge: +3/4 to-hit / -2AC for Challenge Target - Circumstance Bonus (Swift Action)
Inspire Courage: +2 to-hit/damage / +2 vs Charm - Competence/Morale Bonus (Move Action)
Banner: +5/6 to-hit on Charge/vs Fear - Morale (Passive)
Strategy (OoD): +2 to AC/Free Move/+2 to-hit - Dodge/Morale (Standard Action)
G. Tactician: Teamwork Feat (Swift Action)
Banner of Solace: +5/6 Temp Hp / +4/5 damage on next attack - Morale (Full-Round/Pre-Combat)

My turn order therefore at Level 11/12 would be:

Pre-Combat -
I) Throw out Banner of Solace. (10 min)

Round 1 -
I) Swift Action to designate Challenge target.
II) Move Action to activate Inspire Courage.
III) Standard Action to activate Strategy and grant any of the mentioned bonus' above, in particular the Horse will utilize the free move to shift 50' upto my Challenge'd target.
IV) Horse now full attacks with 1/2 my Challenge bonus as well as the combined + to-hit from both the OoD Challenge and Demanding Challenge.

Round 2 -
I) Swift Action to active Greater Tactician.
II) Full Attack/Move + Attack away.

Before this point at levels 1-4 I'd simply be a Two-Handed Martial who provides a Teamwork Feat and a slightly stronger Charge bonus.
From 5-7 I'd function as normal for a non-Charge orientated Cavalier
From 8-10 I'd have to choose between Inspire Courage and Strategy depending on the situation.


That's about as good as I can get without spells or third-party support and, I feel, it's fair to say that the closest you'd get to this sort of efficiency would be from a Buffer Cleric using Variant Channeling. Even then I grab Heavy Armour Prof and a higher BaB.

[squiggit]

Wild flanking is kind of nice. Double your power attack or power attack for free at the risk of dealing some small damage to your ally. Better if said ally is tanky.

Some of the feats I don't even know why they're teamwork feats.

Combat medic? I've literally never seen anyone use the heal skill, but if you are taking 10 mid combat and not provoking for doing it is pretty neat... except you can only use it on other medics?

Elemental commixture is kind of cool, but you need two spellcasters, one of whom basically gives up their turn and you should be getting a lot more out of the feat for that.

[Vhaidara]

Only time I've seen people take teamwork feats outside of bonus feats is a couple in pfs who built their characters as partners. The two of them are pretty terrifying (barbarian/Alchemist and Slayer), but let them start flanking and their outflank and precise strikes start coming into play.

[Dondasch]

Elemental commixture is kind of cool, but you need two spellcasters, one of whom basically gives up their turn and you should be getting a lot more out of the feat for that.

Get a Raven Valet Familiar (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/core-classes/wizard/familiar/familiar-archetypes/valet-familiar-archetype), and have it UMD wands (not sure if wands count for the feat though).

Alternatively, trade your familiar for a second Wizard (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/core-classes/wizard/archetypes/paizo---wizard-archetypes/instructor-wizard-archetype) and the ability to take Teamwork feats as your Wizard bonus feats (and share them with your second Wizard).
And yes, that Archetype does give you a Wizard as a class feature.

[Molosse]

Honor Guard

Str: 18 (Level 8: 19) (Level 12: 20)
Dex: 12
Con: 14
Int: 10
Wis: 10
Cha: 13 (Level 4: 14)

Trait: Indomitable Faith
Trait: Helpful

Order: Order of the Guard
Favored Class Bonus: +1 hp

1: Furious Focus, Power Attack, Tactician Feat: Distracting Charge
2:
3: H.Guard: Bodyguard, Combat Reflexes
4:
5: Improved Initiative
6: Bonus Feat: Mounted Combat
7: Chain Challenge
8:
9: Feat: Iron Will , Tactician Feat: Spirit of the Corps
10:
11: Feat: ?
12: Bonus Feat: ?

Not as well thought out as the previous example, but with feats to spare this build relies on protecting a singe individual with some pretty heft AC buffs while utilising both the OoGuards "Close at Hand” ability and challenge modification to continually trigger Spirit of the Corps’s with a scaling morale bonus to Saving Throws, Attack Rolls and Damage Rolls.

Again Chain Challenge, combined with a decent Cha bonus, allows the Challenge ability to be thrown out multiple times during multiple combats per day.

Will throw out the OoLion Standard Bearer on this post when I can remember the damn thing.

[squiggit]

Get a Raven Valet Familiar (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/core-classes/wizard/familiar/familiar-archetypes/valet-familiar-archetype), and have it UMD wands (not sure if wands count for the feat though).

Sadly doesn't work. You need two spells cast and a caster level to take the feat (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/teamwork-feats/elemental-commixture-teamwork).

It's got some cool effects and a nice premise, but I can't really see someone forgoing their standard action for most of them.

[Serafina]

No, a Valet Familiar automatically gets all your Teamwork feats, it does not care about prerequisites. You could also use a Ring of Tactical Precision (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic-items/rings/ring-of-tactical-precision) for the same effect.

You can also do it with some Improved Familiars (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/general-feats/improved-familiar):
A Tidepool Dragon (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/bestiary/monster-listings/dragons/dragon-tidepool) does get a 2nd-level Water spell 4 times per day, and 1st-level Water spell 7 times per day. That's great for enhancing Fireballs and
A Nuglub Gremlin (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/bestiary/monster-listings/fey/gremlins/gremlin-nuglub) gets a 2nd-level Fire spell and a 1st-level Air Spell once per hour, so if you have time between combats that's actually pretty good.

If Spell-Like Abilities work, you can use Mephits.
Air-Mephits come with a 1/day 2nd-level Air spell.
Dust-Mephits get the same.
Earth-Mephits get a 1/day 2nd-level Earth-spell
Fire-Mephits come with both an 1/hour and a 1/day 2nd-level fire spell.
Ice-Mephits come with a 1/day 2nd-level water spell.
Lightning-Mephits come with an 1/hour 1st-level Air spell and a 1/day 3rd-level Air-spell.
Ooze-Mephits come with an 1/hour 2nd-level Earth spell.
Water-Mephits have ironically the same spell and thus an Earth-admixture.

But if you really do want a ton of options and lots of daily uses, your best option (if SLAs work) is to use a Valet Homunculus (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/bestiary/monster-listings/constructs/homunculus) and give it spells as SLAs. That costs 500 gp per daily use for 1st-level spells, 3000 for 2nd-level spells and 7500 for 3rd-level spells. Which is a VERY reasonable price if you consider what can be done with Elemental Commixture.


Elemental Commixture basically has two uses:
- Mix Fire and Water to deal non-lethal damage - that ignores all elemental resistances.
- Mix in secondary spells that do not allow Save-DCs to add nasty riders onto your spells.
Earth/Water and Air/Water knock prone, Air/Earth staggers for several rounds, Air/Fire nauseates and blinds.

Consider your standard Blaster-Wizard, spamming Fireballs.
For the cost of two feats and wands of Elemental Speech (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic/all-spells/e/elemental-speech), that Wizard gains +1 to save DCs and +1 to overcome spell resistance. Against fire-immune enemies, you can ignore their immunity. Against all others, you can instead get a good chance to nauseate and blind them.
And it does work with all the usual tricks, including metamagic - metamagic doesn't raise the spells level, after all, it just increases the spell slot you need.

[Tectorman]

Which is an easy enough change but still runs into the backwards compatibility issue they were trying to avoid in core to begin with. Barbarians worked that way in 3.5, so a feat to patch it was a solid compromise between patching the issue and potentially upsetting the applecart with existing fans and DMs.

I don't know how the 3.5 Barb's text actually went, but I seem to recall it being vague enough that people were wondering what was supposed to happen when a raging Barb went unconscious.

I definitely remember a Sage response to that question indicating that Barbs weren't supposed to be dropping out of rage due to neg hp. "The Sage shudders to think of all the Barbarians dying outright simply because they went unconscious."

Of course, I also remember the Sage and the 3.5 FAQ being as good as flipping a coin ("Just as good odds of being right and just as official"), so take it for what it's worth.

[Pex]

I don't know how the 3.5 Barb's text actually went, but I seem to recall it being vague enough that people were wondering what was supposed to happen when a raging Barb went unconscious.

I definitely remember a Sage response to that question indicating that Barbs weren't supposed to be dropping out of rage due to neg hp. "The Sage shudders to think of all the Barbarians dying outright simply because they went unconscious."

Of course, I also remember the Sage and the 3.5 FAQ being as good as flipping a coin ("Just as good odds of being right and just as official"), so take it for what it's worth.

That's exactly what was happening to our barbarian player. The DM fudged a little, everyone knew and was ok with it, to prevent true death because the player wasn't doing anything wrong. Just because he dropped to below 0 hit points he'd lose his Con and then die. Even the DM was sick of it. He house ruled the hit points gained were temporary hit points so that the barbarian doesn't lose anymore when his Rage Con ends. It would be nearly a year later when Pathfinder Unchained was published and did exactly that. We switched to Unchained barbarian. The player was allowed to grandfather in his barbarian, but he liked Unchained as well and wanted to make changes. Poof, his character is changed no harm, no foul.