Role of fighter?

[Bill Gates' Son]

 

You underestimate Defender talent.

Paladin can't keep 5 enemies on himself.

 

And a fighter can't survive keeping 5 enemies that would be a threat to the rest of the party on themself.

 

Nor is their much point to doing so, unless you literally only have a single frontliner.

 

 

It's not just about surviving, but it's about controlling the enemy and locking them in place.  Locking that many enemies it places is great for me since I like to use a lot of AoE CC spells.

[Ruminate]

Before 2.0, my preferred frontline tanks consisted of a fighter and a paladin. After 2.0, my preferred frontline tanks consists of two paladins.

 

Even if the fighter's Defender was buffed again, i'd still prefer two paladins for the new Immolation ability, post-buff double auras, and 4x Lay on Hands. (frees up the priest to cast other spells like Circle of Protection, which doesn't stack with Vigorous Defense, or knockdown groups of enemies for 10-20 seconds with a single Repulse Seal)

 

Fighters need a niche. +2 engagements isn't enough of a niche.

Edited September 6, 2015 by Ruminate

[Judicator]

 

 

You underestimate Defender talent.

Paladin can't keep 5 enemies on himself.

 

And a fighter can't survive keeping 5 enemies that would be a threat to the rest of the party on themself.

 

Nor is their much point to doing so, unless you literally only have a single frontliner.

 

 

It's not just about surviving, but it's about controlling the enemy and locking them in place.  Locking that many enemies it places is great for me since I like to use a lot of AoE CC spells.

 

Meh, enemies post 2.0 have a nack for disengaging and making a beeline for your spellcasters.

[Darkpriest]

 

 

 

You underestimate Defender talent.

Paladin can't keep 5 enemies on himself.

 

And a fighter can't survive keeping 5 enemies that would be a threat to the rest of the party on themself.

 

Nor is their much point to doing so, unless you literally only have a single frontliner.

 

 

It's not just about surviving, but it's about controlling the enemy and locking them in place.  Locking that many enemies it places is great for me since I like to use a lot of AoE CC spells.

 

Meh, enemies post 2.0 have a nack for disengaging and making a beeline for your spellcasters.

 

 

This i can agree on, on hard and up they seem to disregard the engagement a bit too much. On normal it works well.

[curryinahurry]

Disengagement seems to have been weakened since the beta.  I think the old disengagement was an almost automatic crit...which caused a lot of complaining from the beta community (at least one group). As a compromise, maybe a less punitive but still meaningful damaging effect could be attached to disengagement...to bypass DR or confer a status effect like Hobbled.   Hobbled (or slowed) for a base 3 sec would be a good trade-off now that I think about it.

Edited September 7, 2015 by curryinahurry

[KDubya]

 

 

You underestimate Defender talent.

Paladin can't keep 5 enemies on himself.

 

And a fighter can't survive keeping 5 enemies that would be a threat to the rest of the party on themself.

 

Nor is their much point to doing so, unless you literally only have a single frontliner.

 

 

It's not just about surviving, but it's about controlling the enemy and locking them in place.  Locking that many enemies it places is great for me since I like to use a lot of AoE CC spells.

 

 

 

But you don't lock them on to your Fighter, you just engage them. The enemies have the choice to eat a disengagement attack and go where ever they please unless they are physically blocked from doing so. If you are in a doorway engagement does not matter as no one can get past you in the first place. In a big open area the enemies can eat the disengagement attack and go hit your wizard. Or if your Fighter gets stunned, prone or a few other CC effects he loses all engagement locks and the enemies can run around without penalty.

 

 

 

 

 

Before 2.0, my preferred frontline tanks consisted of a fighter and a paladin. After 2.0, my preferred frontline tanks consists of two paladins.

 

Even if the fighter's Defender was buffed again, i'd still prefer two paladins for the new Immolation ability, post-buff double auras, and 4x Lay on Hands. (frees up the priest to cast other spells like Circle of Protection, which doesn't stack with Vigorous Defense, or knockdown groups of enemies for 10-20 seconds with a single Repulse Seal)

 

Fighters need a niche. +2 engagements isn't enough of a niche.

 

I am with you on the dual Paladin approach. I'm doing a Kind Wayfarer on kill pally on PotD who'll have Eder and Pellegrina tanking in front while I use a pike or swap to hammer and shield when I need to help hold the front line. Two auras (accuracy and the DR), four lay on hands, four reinforcing exhortations, it is going to be awesome. Won't be bringing the priest along. Going to see if I make Eder dual wield Sabres he can do more damage and be kept alive with the multiple Paladin buffs.

 

My plan would probably work better if I went with two tanky type Paladins instead of trying some sort of on-kill. If need be there is always re-spec.

 

 

 

 

 

Disengagement seems to have been weakened since the beta.  I think the old disengagement was an almost automatic crit...which caused a lot of complaining from the beta community (at least one group). As a compromise, maybe a less punitive but still meaningful damaging effect could be attached to disengagement...to bypass DR or confer a status effect like Hobbled.   Hobbled (or slowed) for a base 3 sec would be a good trade-off now that I think about it.

 

 

Maybe this is an area where Fighters can get there niche, being the best dis-engager counter-attacker. Give Defender some large accuracy and damage buff that applies to a dis-engagement attack. Make it +30% - 50% so that it would be noticeable since it will be fairly limited in its application. Then a fighter with a reach weapon could cover a large area of the battlefield and enforce a "dis-engage at your own risk" type policy.

 

It would make Fighters more of a battlefield tactician which could be their theme.

 

Another general issue with Fighters is their limited choices for abilities, especially at the early levels. Some abilities are only available at higher levels when they'd make for more interesting builds if they could be taken earlier. For example, at level 3 you can take Defender, Confident AIm, the starting ability you did not take, or the universally condemned Guardian. Why not let you take weapon specialization, or Armored Grace, or Into the Fray? Even taking unbroken for a self rez would not be game breaking as an early ability since you get a second chance item with Eder and how often is your Fighter getting knocked out anyway?

[Bill Gates' Son]

 

 

 

You underestimate Defender talent.

Paladin can't keep 5 enemies on himself.

 

And a fighter can't survive keeping 5 enemies that would be a threat to the rest of the party on themself.

 

Nor is their much point to doing so, unless you literally only have a single frontliner.

 

 

It's not just about surviving, but it's about controlling the enemy and locking them in place.  Locking that many enemies it places is great for me since I like to use a lot of AoE CC spells.

 

Meh, enemies post 2.0 have a nack for disengaging and making a beeline for your spellcasters.

 

 

Then they'll eat a nasty disengagement attack.  Unlike other people, I actually try to get a healthy balance of deflection and accuracy on my tanks so they can actually hit people.

 

As for my spell casters, considering I always build them as non squishy melee/spell caster hybrids anyway, they're never that far from the front lines anyway.

Edited September 7, 2015 by Bill Gates' Son

[curryinahurry]

 

Maybe this is an area where Fighters can get there niche, being the best dis-engager counter-attacker. Give Defender some large accuracy and damage buff that applies to a dis-engagement attack. Make it +30% - 50% so that it would be noticeable since it will be fairly limited in its application. Then a fighter with a reach weapon could cover a large area of the battlefield and enforce a "dis-engage at your own risk" type policy.

 

It would make Fighters more of a battlefield tactician which could be their theme.

 

 

That's a good way too give the class of fighter as a defender a hook, I agree.  However it's done, it's the type of niche that could scale or have add-on talents like debuffing or status effects.

 

The other thing I think fighters should get, in way of defining the class is an additional mastery in weapon style (2h, sword & shield, etc.).  They should also get a high level ability that becomes accessible in the weapon style mastery they have chosen.  This would reinforce the martial aspect of fighters while allowing for more offensive/ defensive prowess.  This was actually something that was discussed when these abilities were first announced in updates and there were quite a few good suggestions around the concept.

[Quantics]

I've just steamrolled through the main game+expansion using a fighter on hard. 

 

Basically using a variant of this build by AndreaColombo:

http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/80748-buildpreview-lady-of-pain/

 

I adjusted the gear to use more of the loot found in the expansion+soulbound weapons (also didn't want to sacrifice Eder to get a Might bonus), but this is a DPS machine. 

 

I got more crits/damage than anyone in my party. 

 

Also, I never used Defender.

Edited September 7, 2015 by Quantics

[Njall]

I've just steamrolled through the main game+expansion using a fighter on hard. 

 

Basically using a variant of this build by AndreaColombo:

http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/80748-buildpreview-lady-of-pain/

 

I adjusted the gear to use more of the loot found in the expansion+soulbound weapons (also didn't want to sacrifice Eder to get a Might bonus), but this is a DPS machine. 

 

I got more crits/damage than anyone in my party. 

 

Also, I never used Defender.

...yeah, so? Don't get me wrong, that's a nice build, and nobody's saying that you can't finish the game ( or even steamroll it!) with a fighter. 

However, the meat and potato of the build is the interaction between shod-in-faith, the Sanguine plate and a stellar might score...you can do that with just about any class, and you can easily replace the weapon mastery chain with the rogue and hunter's MC talents in order to hit just as hard with the opener.

In melee, unless I misunderstand how the damage multipliers stack,  you'll end up dealing 100%+60%(might)+20%(savage attack)+15%(TWS)+45%(weapon)=240% weapon damage instead of  265%, but you'll either hit a bunch of enemies instead of just one as a  barbarian or attack way faster and your damage will go up as you take damage if you play as a monk. 

Edited September 7, 2015 by Njall

[KDubya]

I've just steamrolled through the main game+expansion using a fighter on hard. 

 

Basically using a variant of this build by AndreaColombo:

http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/80748-buildpreview-lady-of-pain/

 

I adjusted the gear to use more of the loot found in the expansion+soulbound weapons (also didn't want to sacrifice Eder to get a Might bonus), but this is a DPS machine. 

 

I got more crits/damage than anyone in my party. 

 

Also, I never used Defender.

 

 

On hard everyone can steamroll, especially with good gear.

 

No one is saying that Fighters are worthless or that they can't be used to complete the game. People are identifying real structural issues with Fighters and in comparison to the other classes they are found wanting.

 

Previously there was a lot of discussion about issues with Paladins and Rangers. Both have since been altered in balance patches and both are now viable and fun to use. We'd like a similar treatment for Fighters.

[Judicator]

 

 

 

 

You underestimate Defender talent.

Paladin can't keep 5 enemies on himself.

 

And a fighter can't survive keeping 5 enemies that would be a threat to the rest of the party on themself.

 

Nor is their much point to doing so, unless you literally only have a single frontliner.

 

 

It's not just about surviving, but it's about controlling the enemy and locking them in place.  Locking that many enemies it places is great for me since I like to use a lot of AoE CC spells.

 

Meh, enemies post 2.0 have a nack for disengaging and making a beeline for your spellcasters.

 

 

Then they'll eat a nasty disengagement attack.  Unlike other people, I actually try to get a healthy balance of deflection and accuracy on my tanks so they can actually hit people.

 

As for my spell casters, considering I always build them as non squishy melee/spell caster hybrids anyway, they're never that far from the front lines anyway.

 

Yeah, they'll eat a whooping 20 dmg. That'll teach 'em.

[Brimsurfer]

Seems like OP wants to get fighters buffed, but there is no need..........fighter is already among the ace classes of the game.

Edited September 7, 2015 by Brimsurfer

[Njall]

Seems like OP wants to get fighters buffed, but there is no need..........fighter is already among the ace classes of the game.

 

Nope. 

[Brimsurfer]

 

Seems like OP wants to get fighters buffed, but there is no need..........fighter is already among the ace classes of the game.

 

Nope. 

 

Yes.

[Elric Galad]

 

 

 

 

Seems like OP wants to get fighters buffed, but there is no need..........fighter is already among the ace classes of the game.

Nope.

Yes.

Njall has been arguing for quite a lot of time on this thread and others linked to the same topic.

 

Don't come without arguing and expect a long and detailed answer.

[Njall]

 

 

Seems like OP wants to get fighters buffed, but there is no need..........fighter is already among the ace classes of the game.

 

Nope.

Yes.

Another well articulated and compelling argument, I see.

Now I'm convinced, you're undoubtely right.

Presto, someone lock the thread! I think in light of your contribution, everyone clearly agrees that this thread no longer serves any purpose.*

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

*warning, the above might contain sarcasm.

 

Edit: less snarky answer. Dude, at least do take the time to motivate your stance. Read the thread and counter some of the points the other posters actually bothered to make.

Really, it's like three pages long...there's not so much catching up to do.

Edited September 7, 2015 by Njall

[grockj]

I have 2 fighters in the party I'm rocking right now on Hard, one full tank spec one two hander with some reasonable toughening though much more damage focused. Both fighters have 3 knock downs, one with clear out (the 2H user). I find that the tank is definitely good, but the 2H keeps up in damage no problem and I have a stacked Rogue in my party - definitely *not* MORE damage than the Rogue if you're just looking at strict output, but if staying power is factored in the damage consistency is huge. Having 6 knock downs per encounter is massive CC even without it being AoE; most things get steamrolled on Hard. If my front line gets broken or I'm surprised from a flank, the extra metal in the party is great, especially with those bonus knock downs to break engagement on a squishy so they can back up a few yards out of harm's way. Importantly, having things knocked down all the time prevents a large amount of Health attrition and keeps me gaming longer without having to drop camp or run back to an inn.

[KDubya]

Pretty much all the posters saying Fighters are fine as they currently are, are playing on Hard level. Not trying to be insulting or anything but I'd like to hear from PotD vets who say that Fighters are fine as is. 

 

My first play through was on hard with a two handed estoc wielding Fighter who took all the damage dealing talents and abilities. I had Eder with shield and sabre and even had another fighter dual wielding flails with Defender. My three fighter frontline face tanked everything, no buffing, no food, hell I didn't even scout. Enter the room and see what happens. If things went bad the three fighters could all self rez and get back at it. Based on my experiences on Hard I thought Fighters were the cat's meow.

 

Onto PotD with a rogue main and a hired merc fighter with Eder. The fighter dumped his intellect into his resolve, pumped might and perception and the rest into dex. Wielding estocs with Defender he could tank good enough for long enough while putting out big damage hits consistently. All my Fighter experience and theories were coming together just as envisioned. The Fighter was no simple meatsack with a hatchet but a durable hard hitting Sherman Tank.

 

Now with the overall, and needed, deflection downgrade and the over-reaching changes to Defender, a Fighter can't stand on the frontline without a shield and put the wood to the enemy as he could before. With a good enchanted shield he is as good defensively as he was before with a two hander or dual wielding but his offensive output is much smaller.

 

This is where the issue lies. If you need to be super defensive a Paladin is clearly better. If you need to be a durable frontline  combatant the Monk is clearly better, he's as or more durable with a fist and a shield and has more offense when swapping to dual fists.

 

Having different choices to achieve similar goals is a good thing for class balance and design. Both Rogues and Rangers are viable ranged damage dealers who achieve their mission via different paths. One with sneak attacks, one with modals and a pet. Fighter's need something to set them apart from the rest. They're not broken unplayable, they just come up short when compared to others.

 

My suggestions are:

 

1.) Have the passive regen scale with level.

 

2.) Add a bonus to accuracy and/or damage to disengagement attacks when running Defender.

 

3.) Change Clear Cut, the cone knockdown, from per rest to per encounter.

 

4.) Move weapon specialty from an ability to a talent

 

5.) Increase weapon mastery from +10% to having an accuracy buff as well, graze>hit, more damage or something.

 

6.) Add something to Wary Defender like reduced duration debuffs/status effects or something. As is its just not that good.

 

7.) (Not sure on how this would balance but)  Have some Fighter abilities be available automatically at certain levels. At level 4 they get vigorous defense, at level 8 they get armored grace, at level 12 they get unbroked. In DnD Fighters got bonus feats so maybe something similar here would be good.

[Pelmaleon]

I'm playing on PotD and the fighter is fine as is. I spec'd him to be pure tank and he is a wonderful tank. I find it quite silly how people cherry pick SO MANY ABILITIES while discussing the pros/cons of a fighter vs paladin for durability; they just choose not to talk about so many of the amazing fighter ones. Anyway, I accessed the White Marches at level 5 with Monk Main, Eder, Durance, Kana, Hiravias, and Aloth (currently level 7), and while the fights are tough, my fighter still survives very well. The harder the fight, the more spells I have my Priest throw on him.

 

But if we are talking relative strength, I do believe that Fighters, Rangers, and Chanters are currently the weakest classes right now in PotD, so some minor buffs would be nice I suppose.

 

Edit: But seeing as it is not a multiplayer game, it's not the end of the world if they don't get buffs. In all honesty, I'd rather the devs work on creating new, unique, and fun talents/spells/items and add them to the game than balance something that doesn't matter as much regarding the amount of fun had in a single-player game.

 

Edit2: I did want to add that enemies on PotD generally have insanely high fortitude, so it makes the fighter MUCH less fun to use because his crowd control abilities will not work very often. So maybe they should make something that scales the amount of added accuracy of those abilities with the fighter's might. I think that would be a cool feature.

Edited September 8, 2015 by Pelmaleon

[curryinahurry]

^  The whole point behind balancing is that something that is trivial for your enjoyment of the game may be very important to someone else. 

 

Also, building new 'fun' talents are sometimes dependent on whether earlier talents in a style or progression are worth taking; defender + wary defender is the most talked about in this thread, but we can also look at weapon spec./ mastery and weapon style as well (which is currently a one off but could be the basis for its own mastery/ talent).  That is sort of the point behind this whole thread, the fact that with tuning to other classes and the nerf to defender, the fighter's role has  become a bit nebulous in party composition.  It seems a good time to make adjustments.

[AndreaColombo]

4.) Move weapon specialty from an ability to a talent

 

Why?

 

I would do the exact opposite: Weapon Mastery (and perhaps even Bonus Knock Down) from talents to abilities.

 

The reason is that most Fighter abilities are defensive or not particularly useful, to the point that I can basically pick the last one or two in my build at random, safe in the knowledge they'll make no difference.

 

Talents, on the other hand, still have a bunch fighting for the last slot when I play Fighters (which is always, pretty much): Bonus Knock Down, Interrupting Blows, Quick Switch, Marksman, Penetrating Shot, Weapon Mastery, any of the defensive ones like Unstoppable etc., or even the the one that improves recovery.

[KDubya]

I'm playing on PotD and the fighter is fine as is. I spec'd him to be pure tank and he is a wonderful tank. I find it quite silly how people cherry pick SO MANY ABILITIES while discussing the pros/cons of a fighter vs paladin for durability; they just choose not to talk about so many of the amazing fighter ones. Anyway, I accessed the White Marches at level 5 with Monk Main, Eder, Durance, Kana, Hiravias, and Aloth (currently level 7), and while the fights are tough, my fighter still survives very well. The harder the fight, the more spells I have my Priest throw on him.

 

But if we are talking relative strength, I do believe that Fighters, Rangers, and Chanters are currently the weakest classes right now in PotD, so some minor buffs would be nice I suppose.

 

Edit: But seeing as it is not a multiplayer game, it's not the end of the world if they don't get buffs. In all honesty, I'd rather the devs work on creating new, unique, and fun talents/spells/items and add them to the game than balance something that doesn't matter as much regarding the amount of fun had in a single-player game.

 

Edit2: I did want to add that enemies on PotD generally have insanely high fortitude, so it makes the fighter MUCH less fun to use because his crowd control abilities will not work very often. So maybe they should make something that scales the amount of added accuracy of those abilities with the fighter's might. I think that would be a cool feature.

 

 

No one, or at least I'm not, is saying that Fighters are broken, just that they don't have much of a niche.  Also balance is just as important in a single player game as in multiplayer.

 

Eder is going to be used, firstly because he is a great character and secondly because there are only two possible frontline melee story companions to take with you and Pellegrinas stats are a bit wonky while Eder's high might and con are pretty much were you'd choose them to be if you had the choice.

 

In your party you have the main Monk and Eder on the front lines, maybe Kana in plate as another melee, Durance to keep everyone alive and Hirvias and Aloth to blast away from the back. Your Eder's job is to not die, hold the attention of the enemies and any damage done is just gravy, basically a better pet or summon.

 

 If there were no story companions would you choose a fighter, a paladin or another monk to be your second frontline melee?

 

And what are in your opinion the amazing Fighter abilities that no one brings up? What is the sine qua non of the Fighter?

[Certus]

IMHO Fighter would really benefit from more talents, one talent per level as well as one ability every two as it is now. I am not sure if it would be OP but it would really set them apart and would be fun building them.

[AndreaColombo]

And what are in your opinion the amazing Fighter abilities that no one brings up? What is the sine qua non of the Fighter?

 

Can't say these are necessarily sine-qua-non, but the abilities I would dearly miss if I played another class are Knock Down, Armored Grace, and the Specialization/Mastery chain. Sundering Blows is also pretty sweet (even though I still have to figure out what the icon is meant to represent.)

Edited September 8, 2015 by AndreaColombo