Speaking as a fighter player, I heavily disagree with the “hit all the time” thing. However it’s mainly because of my dice luck. I’m the person who has seven different d20s, and never rolled over an 8 in an entire session.😂
@@queenannsrevenge100 last night, my friend rolled at least 4 nat 1s. 😂 I felt bad so i gave her advantage on her last roll which decided the outcome of the encounter.
From my limited experience with Pathfinder 2e, the fighter's power comes from being able to crit 10% more than other characters on average, not so much from hitting more often. You really feel it when your fighter has a Deadly or Fatal weapon
@@LightPink Let's say you and your group are fighting an AC 17 monster. Your rogue has a +7 to hit, which means they hit on a 10 or higher and crit on a nat 20 (5% crit range). The fighter has a +9 to hit, which means they hit on an 8 or higher and crit on an 18 or higher (15% crit range). That's a 10% higher chance to crit over the other martials, with the exception of the gunslinger who also gets expert proficiency at level 1 (tho only with crossbows and firearms)
@@maidofheart2000 that's actually a 200% higher chance to crit over other martials in that example, which I think is the what was meant by "math is wrong". They are 10 percentage points more likely, but how much of an impact that has depends on how easy the creature is to crit in the first place.
I'd say the math is not wrong, but more importantly your language is correct. If we're describing the crit range on a d20, Fighter has two additional results for a crit, an additional 10% of attacks will crit. Probably the most important piece of information here. While you can compare the relative chances of a fighter and a rogue in ratios to each other, when someone starts describing percent increases on a percent change, that gets awkward. If there's a situation where a Rogue has a 20% crit range and a Fighter has a 30% crit range, I think it'd be less clear to describe this as a Fighter having a 50% higher crit chance than the Rogue. While in some sense that'd be correct, I think it'd be more confusing, since there's no 50% chance of anything here. There's a 20% and a 30%, and the difference is best described as 10%. A big part of why I think 10% is the best description is that describing the relative crit chances depends on Armor Class. The relative chances will differ at 17 AC and at 15 AC, but 10% remains 10%.
Can't wait to see you dig deeper into this. Speaking as the Cleric regularly keeping my group's Fighter off the floor, they're very potent, but by no means all-powerful. It should also be said that Fighters are only more accurate than everyone else until 5th level, and then after that only with one chosen category of weapons (exceptions kick in at 19th). I'll never deny that the Fighter is very strong (GMed for one, playing alongside another), but the extra +2 to hit is where the conversation starts, not where it stops.
I understand the sentiment, but Fighter in 4e was pretty damn good; it's really JUST those two examples where the fighter really suffers (as someone who still loved my fighters in 5e, I speak from many and varied experiences)
Fighters are good at……wait for it…….fighting. Why is this controversial? They’re lackluster at virtually everything else, so no, they’re not OP. They’re focused on their martial prowess.
Looking forward to this one! I know you've mentioned your PF vids aren't doing as great, but I love getting to the end and seeing that the math really is tight. I'll watch every PF vid you put out, probably multiple times.
Keep Critical Specialization in mind when looking at potential Fighter brokenness. Critting an enemy for triple digit damage is fun, critting an enemy for the same damage and dropping them prone with no save is ridiculous. Fighters full potential is when their MAP is 0 to get more crit effects, and Fighter has many ways to ignore MAP.
@@luizfelipe1911 Multiple-Attacks Penalty. Basically in PF2e, everyone gets 3 actions to do with as they please (and almost everything no matter how minor requires one) and any action you take that has the attack trait (such as Strikes, Trips, Grabs, etc) contributes to your Multiple-Attacks Penalty, which reduces the results of your D20 rolls for further Attack Trait Actions by 5. This stacks.
@@ikaros4464 thanks! I'm learning PF2e for a campaing, I gonna play a Gunslinger Way of Spellshot, don't know much about abbreviations, so thank you ^^
Hi @Colby, I love your videos, they are well made, well thought thru, well edited but i have a proposal to fix something that has been bugging me from the first time i came across your vids about 2 years ago: When you crunch numbers, adding damage on damage reports, I feel severe lack of visual aid (explicitly writing the numbers on screen). I have to focus on the numbers, adding them with you which results in loss of immersion in your soothing voice presentation. Hopefully you will read my comment or I might repost it sometime again. (obviously talking about full-length videos of D&D or other tabletops:) Food for thought:) Cheers!
Looking forward to the video! Having just completed GM:ing the beginner box we had a fighter, rogue, gunslinger and a wizard and felt like at lvl 1 the rogue felt easely as the highest damaging character in the group. Will see how it continues when we start the Abomination Vault this weekend :D
In the BB games I've been in & GMed the characters who dealt the most damage were flurry rangers followed closely by monks. That probably falls off at later levels but just being able to consistently make two attacks with one action is massive.
Finally Pathfinder 2e. The thing is, you can't really min/max in 2e since the math is so tight. 5e is more loose on the math and has many optimal/broken choices that are more powerful than other. In 2e, you can't really make a character in a vacuum and call it a day. You need to take the party composition into account and build around what is missing. In pathfinder, team play is way more important during combat, not only positioning but your choice of actions has more impact. You can be built for support only and be the MVP of many battle. For example, the freehand fighter dish out less damage than a two-hander but bring so much utilities. Medicine, grapple, trip, shove, interact with the environment, administer a potion ... and the feats are so useful too (flatfoot an opponent against everyone, even against ranged and spell attack roll? Snagging Strike yes please). I'm kind of sad you'll make a single 2e video a month but I understand 5e is your money maker. For future pathfinder 2e video, you should focus more on the support aspect of your build instead of damage per round. DPR isn't as important in 2e. What does your character bring to the group? Is it raw damage and critical fishing? yes it can be! is it supportive spells? Illusion? Deception? Healing? Summon? Mounted combat? Move type/speed? Jumping from trees to trees? Killing undeads? Use the Aid action on your group with diplomacy? Speak tons of language? Copycat a anime/video game character? Become a wrestler and restrain a dragon on the ground? So many possibilities in 2e :) I love your 2e videos and the way you talk. So relaxing and fun to watch. You seem like such a good guy to hang around. I'll wait for your next 2e video every month!
Actually this Min/Max Mindset shouldnt be used in a TTRPG at all...its Roleplaying and not "How can i become the strongest Character ever" if you min/max have in your mind, you always will play similar Characters with no real personality or quality Roleplay expierence
@@Gubbykahn Interesting statement, I would like to argue with that! :) In my opinion, the big question "is it a problem to min-max a character?" has only one answere: it depends. First it depends on the system: Without going into dnd-shaming min-max in pf2 is overwhelmingly different than min-maxing in dnd, because you can't brake or solve the game in pf2 no matter how strong your character is. To be fair, what considered min-max in pf2 is just a way to show what you are good at. You're the dude, who can heal realy well, or you can rip the enemy's head off wizh your bear hands (pun intended) as an animal instinct barbarian. But no matter how strong I am, the math of the game won't going to brake if all my character building choices are legal. In fact, if I attack a boss level monster, I have all the buffs on me, and the enemy has all it's debuffs I still going to need to roll a 7-8+ to be able to hit my enemy. Than it depends on the genre. It's way different to min-max in a tactical heroic fantasy game, where the player characters are normaly intended to be larger than life super heroes, who can stop unomaginable Armageddons everyday, but it's terrible to min-max characters in a personal horror game, like vampire the masqurade (where by the way realy easy to make mechanicly gamebrakingly broken characters). It just ruins the game. Of course, you can say, that you want to play a dnd/pf2 with second class b list non-heroes, and it could be fun, but that's not the original intent of these games.
Snagging strike might be the most underrated feat in the game. Having any ranged character in your party (especially a gunslinger) makes fighter a tantalizing pick for this feat alone.
I do think out of all core classes in PF2, fighter might benefit the most from the Free Archetype variant. The fighter’s class chassis is really strong, and they usually have an impactful, powerful feat to choose whenever they get a new class feat. The rules normally would require you skip some of those good feats for dedication and archetype feats if you wanted to go into Rogue or Barbarian or something, but Free Archetype let’s you have the strong Fighter chassis, the strong fighter feats, AND an archetype on top of all that. I really think in this case, even though people usually say there’s not much of a noticeable difference in power when applying the Free Archetype variant rule, there is here.
Gunslingers also get that plus 2, but only with guns and crossbows. Guns have low standard damage and extra high crit damage, so maybe that is why no one complains about them.
Looking forward to this one. Since we decided we would eventually start a PF game I've wanted to build a Fighter since it seemed much better at letting me get the concept I wanted than in D&D, so I think I have a pretty good idea of how I want to do it, but it will be great to see what you come up iwith. Seems like a different style of character just judging from the name but there might be a few cool tricks to pick up :D
What makes fighters actually super good to me, aside from the obvious math advantage, is the level 1 attack of opportunity. Whenever as a caster I have a fighter in my party I make it my objective to have them use that (essentially) bonus no MAP attack as much as possible through spells like command agitate grease and the likes, other classes have to wait for later class feats or have more restrictive versions of attack of opportunity which aren't as easy to take advantage of. Fighter is also great for new players joining an expirienced group, their feats are pretty straightforward to pick up, you essentially got the two handed feat progression, the archery feat progression, the weapon and shield progression and so on, and their inherit numerical advantage makes it so the player is still useful even if not playing at maximum efficiency. I'm curious to see what you did with the twf fighter, is it gonna be a strenght based warhammer + light hammer? Dex with double dogslicers? Whip and Pick to trip and crit? Can't wait for it 😄
Nobody can deny that the Fighter hits often, and hits hard. +2 to hit is also +2 to possibly crit in PF2e. It can specialize into any number of niche specialties in battle; sword n board, duelist, 2-hander, archer, what have you. When it comes to fighting, the Fighter is the best consistent hitter with good sustained damage AND good odds at critting. But it goes all in on combat. Out of combat, they're not the swiss army knife that a ROgue is or a magical toolbox like a Wizard.
Subscribing for the PF2e videos! I'm a new GM so probably wont be using the builds but at least I can figure out what my players might be able to do ;)
I love this mobile dwarf running around and smashing things (even if they aren’t always #1 on damage) Kind of reminds me of Poppy from league of legends
My answer is yes, a little. So, in a system where most of the rules and the majority of class feats and spells regard combat, along with being in an era where combat and character arcs are the default setting in d20: Fighter is just a little broken in PF2, as it’s a very combat focused game. Here’s why I think that: 1. They have a strict mathematical advantage over almost every other class in the game. They crit more often, they miss less, and their aid checks are more effective. 2. They do not pay any kind of mechanical cost for this advantage. Barbarians gotta spend an action to Rage. Rangers gotta spend an action to Hunt Prey(most of the time). Magus’s gotta recharge their Spellstrike. The Fighter just gets to be amazing in combat for no cost. 3. They aren’t locked out of certain feats due to subclasses. Though, there are clear feat trees. Now, at high level play, late game, I believe the other classes catch up and the fighter isn’t quite as ahead as everyone else as in the lower levels. Partially because the feats start cannibalising each other, and because using aid for some of the other classes attacks gets insane. That being said, I think they’re only a *little* broken, not to the point that it negatively impacts the game. Also, things like flavor and “roleplay potential” aren’t factors in my argument, as that’s all subjective. I’m talking that they are strictly better from a mechanical perspective in terms of the math, in a game where combat is clearly the focus.
Ironically enough, Gunslingers also have this same niche benefit, albeit with ranged weapons of a specific type. And arguably so, are even more deadly than fighters are at base rates. If a fighter crits with an average d8 weapon, their damage is still fairly comparable to the rest of the party damage wise, just with a bit more spike potential. A gunslinger on the other hand does more low end damage on average, but has massive potential to be very swingy with their crit values. This isn't to say that fighters aren't considered OP compared to other martial based classes, but more that they aren't the only ones to be considered. Besides, what else exactly is a fighter uniquely good at other than fighting? Personally, I say let them have the Legendary potential training. Fighters gonna fight!
Fantastic video. Thank you for this clear answer. Fighters are OP in Pathfinder and that can be used to break the other PF2 classes as well. Awesome - clear as glass! Thank you for clearing that up.
I feel fighters outshine a few melee classes depending on how they are built and the play-by-play decision making. Barbarians for example can be punished very hard for sub-optimal choices at character creation or if they don't manage their rage correctly, while fighters are very hard to mess up even for first time players.
It isn't just the plus 2, although that is pretty huge given how tight the math is in PF2E. Its that fighters have, mechanically, every advantage available. Great proficiency progression for their weapons, armor, and perception; access to all weapons and armor, some of the very best class feats, perhaps the best engagement with the 3 action economy in the game, not needing any riders to just do what they do (no stance, rage, hunt prey type action taxes or spell slots resource limiters) in addition to being able to hit and crit much more reliably. Critting more often is the most powerful thing in Pathfinder. In a game where everything is tightly constrained and mathematically precise, crits are about the only break out mechanic, and critical hits are insanely powerful, both in terms of raw damage, and in some very potent weapon critical specializations. So taken all together, the fighter is absolutely OP, and sits comfortably at the top of the class heirarchy. It is the measuring stick in Pathfinder, with other classes being rated well the closer in performance to the fighter they can get. From a purely mechanical stand point, I would contend there is very little reason to play anything but fighters and rogues in PF2E, fighters for the above reasons, rogues because on top of being very competent in combat, they are capable of being very good/excellent at everything else outside of combat as well.
Yay PF2E content ! The fighter do get some nice juice out of his proficiencies and access to bith crit and armor specialization. And the usual drawback of the classfrom previous editions (making an attack is the only thing to do, few skills, Dex better for AC and init, etc...) got erased by the overhaul of the system. Meaning you can do decent things out of combat too! So is the fighter OP ? Prob' not, but he's a bit ahead of the curve for sure. And he's a good frame for lots of things. I hope other classes will be bumped a little (including barb) to catch up while they remaster.
I’m not too experienced in PF2 to know the answer yet, but I wonder if a similar thing applies to Champion to an extent too. Not so much that they have an extra +2 to hit compared to everyone else, but that they always have a +2 to AC compared to everyone else. Do they feel OP tanking wise? Unfortunately that’s a bit harder to measure Do people not say this about Gunslinger too? They match fighter progression afaik, though they are obviously limited to guns
People do say it about the Champion but its less about their AC and more about how awesome their defensive reaction is. A liberator in my group for example saved the barbarian from a 36 damage crit with their reaction (as it caused the barbarian to step 5ft away, negating the targetting.)
It's not just that Fighters fall outside the normal bonus curve. It's the fact that crits are more than twice as good as a normal hit (between Critical Specialization, Deadly/Fatal, resistances, etc). Then, when you get to the levels where you can expect to crit your Aid checks regularly, and you stack all your buffs and debuffs properly (Fear, Flat Footed, Heroism/Inspire Courage, Aid), where other classes might crit on a 13, the Fighter will crit on an 11. At that point you're looking at an average dpr more than 30% higher than other classes do at base. Oh, and unlike Gunslingers Fighters are less MAD and have fewer action taxes and are much less dependent on Deadly/Fatal. And sure, other classes have sources of bonus damage like Barbarian Rage damage, Sneak Attack dice, Magus spell strikes, and Thaumaturges ensuring Weakness on everything... but the more optimized your party is, the more the Fighter outperforms these other compensatory features (not to mention Fighters being able to gain partial access to some of these sources of bonus damage (or somehow even worse, True Strike) via Archetypes). I'm not sure the Fighter will really shine on the spreadsheet, which can't account for the force multipliers that truly make the Fighter terrifying. Like, on paper, at base as the spreadsheet would show it, the Barbarian looks like it does more damage than the Fighter. But optimizers know that that's an illusion when you really take teamwork into consideration.
I think a lot of the "complaining" is more a joke about how it feels at the table, but some people misinterpret that and perpetuate the idea as though it is actually true.
Fighters are crit machines, and have early access to a very powerful reaction. Haven't played one yet, but I've played alongside a few, and it's always a blast for the party, but at early levels the GM sometimes never gets to participate in combat beyond moving into position to die. Bards and Fighters are definitely the most over-tuned classes in the system, but that's not necessarily a bad thing. I see it as a ceiling that other classes can be safetly elevated to with future content. Hopefully the new player core takes the opportunity to really fine tune the classes that need it (looking at you witch).
If your party is doing a good job of buffing your strikers and debuffing your enemies, then proportionally the fighter's +2 matters less while the flat damage boosts of classes like the barbarian benefit more from being helped with hitting.
I used to think this and their extra feats were a problem but PF2 emphasizes team work and combat utility. The fighter cashes the check that the other classes write.
I feel like people are just shocked that a FIGHTER of all classes is not only finally a viable choice that doesn't get outpaced by full casters and 3/4 casters in the dpr department but also is fun to play beyond just full round attacking and *maybe* using a combat feat assuming the enemy isn't effectively immune to it. It's also made more visible with the overall nerfs to casters 2e saw. Not saying it's bad to nerf what was clearly too powerful but imo they did go a few % too far in some places.
PF2e players are a little too obsessed with numbers. I recently did a live play, and most of our level 1 characters did not have a +4 in one stat. I was kinda surprised on the feedback I got that we were an underpowered group. We all had +3s, and sometimes two of them, but not having that +4 was some kind of terrible thing. BTW, our group did fine with +3, but maybe at later levels I will regret it. Who knows.
Would I say Fighters are OP? Not really, they are just really good at fighting. Also, check out gunslinger, it's got the fighters +2 math but with guns and fancy things you can do with guns!
Fighter with the Martial Artist Archetype.... we thought monks were great, but is the fighter with the martial artist archetype once again a better monk?
The fighter is a bit overtuned, but thats fine. It's meant to be the simple but strong class that anyone can pick up and be effective with. My main issue with the fighter isn't that it's powerful but that the fighter should be just as good at all weapons but Attack of Opportunity(AoO) make you heavily incentivized to use melee weapons. AoOs also incentivize using reach weapons over anything else because the chance for your AoO to trigger is way higher if you have reach. Paizo has explicitly mentioned the fighter getting more support for other types of setups in the remaster though. I haven't really heard the "best rogue is a fighter with a rogue dedication" line of thought, but I would say that the rogues skills make them far more useful outside of combat. Playing a fighter can feel like you're just waiting until initiative is rolled because you don't have much to do outside of combat that is specific to your class. Fighter really is just a better barbarian though lol. But that's less so due to Fighter's strength as it is Barbarian's weakness.
Fighters aren't OP. But that +2 gives Fighters a ton of flexibility. A Fighter with a starting Strength of 14 hits just as often at level as any other martial with a strength of 18, by level 20, they'll be at +1 over other martials. A fighter with a 10 in strength eventually hits par with other martial that have an 18 at start. This makes Fighters incredibly versatile. Want to start with 16 in Intelligence? Sure, you'll still be incredibly effective in combat, plus you're proficient in 3 more skills. Cool. My favorite, due to MAP, is making every fighter implausiblly sexy with a high Charisma. Great for speccing into intimidation, which doesn't just add +1 to hit for me, but for the whole party.
Watch the full character build here! ruclips.net/video/pikcK6q3zZE/видео.html
"I'm a PF2e Fighter. I crit more often than I miss."
Nonat1s
Speaking as a fighter player, I heavily disagree with the “hit all the time” thing. However it’s mainly because of my dice luck. I’m the person who has seven different d20s, and never rolled over an 8 in an entire session.😂
@@queenannsrevenge100 last night, my friend rolled at least 4 nat 1s. 😂 I felt bad so i gave her advantage on her last roll which decided the outcome of the encounter.
Always enjoying the pathfinder videos. Glad you’re still making them.
From my limited experience with Pathfinder 2e, the fighter's power comes from being able to crit 10% more than other characters on average, not so much from hitting more often. You really feel it when your fighter has a Deadly or Fatal weapon
You're math is wrong but I understand your point
@@LightPink Let's say you and your group are fighting an AC 17 monster. Your rogue has a +7 to hit, which means they hit on a 10 or higher and crit on a nat 20 (5% crit range). The fighter has a +9 to hit, which means they hit on an 8 or higher and crit on an 18 or higher (15% crit range). That's a 10% higher chance to crit over the other martials, with the exception of the gunslinger who also gets expert proficiency at level 1 (tho only with crossbows and firearms)
@@maidofheart2000 that's actually a 200% higher chance to crit over other martials in that example, which I think is the what was meant by "math is wrong". They are 10 percentage points more likely, but how much of an impact that has depends on how easy the creature is to crit in the first place.
@kwagmeijer26 ok, that makes sense. I should probably get some sleep before trying to do math next time lol
I'd say the math is not wrong, but more importantly your language is correct.
If we're describing the crit range on a d20, Fighter has two additional results for a crit, an additional 10% of attacks will crit. Probably the most important piece of information here. While you can compare the relative chances of a fighter and a rogue in ratios to each other, when someone starts describing percent increases on a percent change, that gets awkward. If there's a situation where a Rogue has a 20% crit range and a Fighter has a 30% crit range, I think it'd be less clear to describe this as a Fighter having a 50% higher crit chance than the Rogue. While in some sense that'd be correct, I think it'd be more confusing, since there's no 50% chance of anything here. There's a 20% and a 30%, and the difference is best described as 10%. A big part of why I think 10% is the best description is that describing the relative crit chances depends on Armor Class. The relative chances will differ at 17 AC and at 15 AC, but 10% remains 10%.
I’ve really enjoyed the PF2E content as a person who loves the system. I know it’s not doing as good as the 5E system but I watch all the videos!
same here!
I'm more interested in the Pathfinder videos. After my first Pathfinder game I haven't looked at D&D again.
Can't wait to see you dig deeper into this. Speaking as the Cleric regularly keeping my group's Fighter off the floor, they're very potent, but by no means all-powerful.
It should also be said that Fighters are only more accurate than everyone else until 5th level, and then after that only with one chosen category of weapons (exceptions kick in at 19th). I'll never deny that the Fighter is very strong (GMed for one, playing alongside another), but the extra +2 to hit is where the conversation starts, not where it stops.
Considering how much the fighter has suffered in 3.5 to 5e, i love the pf2e fighter being considered 'op'.
I understand the sentiment, but Fighter in 4e was pretty damn good; it's really JUST those two examples where the fighter really suffers (as someone who still loved my fighters in 5e, I speak from many and varied experiences)
yep fighter in 4e was so good. arguably the best defender - off striker in the system. had a blast playing as one
Love the irony
Fighters are good at……wait for it…….fighting. Why is this controversial?
They’re lackluster at virtually everything else, so no, they’re not OP. They’re focused on their martial prowess.
Yeah I used to play 5e and my fighter was only good as a pin cushion and grappling lol. Play 2e and I crit both enemy monsters in my first session.
I'm very intrigued and look forward to seeing what the spreadsheets say.
Looking forward to this one! I know you've mentioned your PF vids aren't doing as great, but I love getting to the end and seeing that the math really is tight. I'll watch every PF vid you put out, probably multiple times.
Keep Critical Specialization in mind when looking at potential Fighter brokenness. Critting an enemy for triple digit damage is fun, critting an enemy for the same damage and dropping them prone with no save is ridiculous. Fighters full potential is when their MAP is 0 to get more crit effects, and Fighter has many ways to ignore MAP.
And then when they attempt to stand, you attack them again, crit them again, and knock them back down.
What is MAP?
@@luizfelipe1911 Multiple-Attacks Penalty. Basically in PF2e, everyone gets 3 actions to do with as they please (and almost everything no matter how minor requires one) and any action you take that has the attack trait (such as Strikes, Trips, Grabs, etc) contributes to your Multiple-Attacks Penalty, which reduces the results of your D20 rolls for further Attack Trait Actions by 5. This stacks.
@@ikaros4464 thanks! I'm learning PF2e for a campaing, I gonna play a Gunslinger Way of Spellshot, don't know much about abbreviations, so thank you ^^
Love seeing you making more PF2 videos! These will always be my favorite ones. They help a lot as I’m feeling around the system too
Hi @Colby, I love your videos, they are well made, well thought thru, well edited but i have a proposal to fix something that has been bugging me from the first time i came across your vids about 2 years ago:
When you crunch numbers, adding damage on damage reports, I feel severe lack of visual aid (explicitly writing the numbers on screen). I have to focus on the numbers, adding them with you which results in loss of immersion in your soothing voice presentation.
Hopefully you will read my comment or I might repost it sometime again. (obviously talking about full-length videos of D&D or other tabletops:)
Food for thought:) Cheers!
Looking forward to the video! Having just completed GM:ing the beginner box we had a fighter, rogue, gunslinger and a wizard and felt like at lvl 1 the rogue felt easely as the highest damaging character in the group. Will see how it continues when we start the Abomination Vault this weekend :D
In the BB games I've been in & GMed the characters who dealt the most damage were flurry rangers followed closely by monks. That probably falls off at later levels but just being able to consistently make two attacks with one action is massive.
I understand the need to focus more on D&D 5e due to the analytics, but really glad you are still giving PF2e some love.
Finally Pathfinder 2e. The thing is, you can't really min/max in 2e since the math is so tight. 5e is more loose on the math and has many optimal/broken choices that are more powerful than other. In 2e, you can't really make a character in a vacuum and call it a day. You need to take the party composition into account and build around what is missing. In pathfinder, team play is way more important during combat, not only positioning but your choice of actions has more impact. You can be built for support only and be the MVP of many battle. For example, the freehand fighter dish out less damage than a two-hander but bring so much utilities. Medicine, grapple, trip, shove, interact with the environment, administer a potion ... and the feats are so useful too (flatfoot an opponent against everyone, even against ranged and spell attack roll? Snagging Strike yes please).
I'm kind of sad you'll make a single 2e video a month but I understand 5e is your money maker. For future pathfinder 2e video, you should focus more on the support aspect of your build instead of damage per round. DPR isn't as important in 2e.
What does your character bring to the group? Is it raw damage and critical fishing? yes it can be! is it supportive spells? Illusion? Deception? Healing? Summon? Mounted combat? Move type/speed? Jumping from trees to trees? Killing undeads? Use the Aid action on your group with diplomacy? Speak tons of language? Copycat a anime/video game character? Become a wrestler and restrain a dragon on the ground? So many possibilities in 2e :)
I love your 2e videos and the way you talk. So relaxing and fun to watch. You seem like such a good guy to hang around. I'll wait for your next 2e video every month!
Actually this Min/Max Mindset shouldnt be used in a TTRPG at all...its Roleplaying and not "How can i become the strongest Character ever" if you min/max have in your mind, you always will play similar Characters with no real personality or quality Roleplay expierence
@@Gubbykahn Are you new here? Because minmaxing is the entire point of this channel.
@@Gubbykahn Interesting statement, I would like to argue with that! :)
In my opinion, the big question "is it a problem to min-max a character?" has only one answere: it depends.
First it depends on the system:
Without going into dnd-shaming min-max in pf2 is overwhelmingly different than min-maxing in dnd, because you can't brake or solve the game in pf2 no matter how strong your character is. To be fair, what considered min-max in pf2 is just a way to show what you are good at. You're the dude, who can heal realy well, or you can rip the enemy's head off wizh your bear hands (pun intended) as an animal instinct barbarian. But no matter how strong I am, the math of the game won't going to brake if all my character building choices are legal. In fact, if I attack a boss level monster, I have all the buffs on me, and the enemy has all it's debuffs I still going to need to roll a 7-8+ to be able to hit my enemy.
Than it depends on the genre. It's way different to min-max in a tactical heroic fantasy game, where the player characters are normaly intended to be larger than life super heroes, who can stop unomaginable Armageddons everyday, but it's terrible to min-max characters in a personal horror game, like vampire the masqurade (where by the way realy easy to make mechanicly gamebrakingly broken characters). It just ruins the game. Of course, you can say, that you want to play a dnd/pf2 with second class b list non-heroes, and it could be fun, but that's not the original intent of these games.
Snagging strike might be the most underrated feat in the game. Having any ranged character in your party (especially a gunslinger) makes fighter a tantalizing pick for this feat alone.
@@Gubbykahn This argument is almost 2 decades old at this point. Look up the stormwind fallacy.
I do think out of all core classes in PF2, fighter might benefit the most from the Free Archetype variant. The fighter’s class chassis is really strong, and they usually have an impactful, powerful feat to choose whenever they get a new class feat.
The rules normally would require you skip some of those good feats for dedication and archetype feats if you wanted to go into Rogue or Barbarian or something, but Free Archetype let’s you have the strong Fighter chassis, the strong fighter feats, AND an archetype on top of all that. I really think in this case, even though people usually say there’s not much of a noticeable difference in power when applying the Free Archetype variant rule, there is here.
I must say. the new quality of the sound and pitcher is just amazing , I loved you last swords bard build. thanks for the content, rock on
Me a few days ago: Did you give up on pathfinder builds?
D4: We’re gonna do the math.
Me now: I need popcorn. Popcorn!!!
Hell yeah, go Royals! Also thanks for continuing the PF2e content!
I was scrolling for another Royals comment!!!
Gunslingers also get that plus 2, but only with guns and crossbows. Guns have low standard damage and extra high crit damage, so maybe that is why no one complains about them.
Looking forward to this one. Since we decided we would eventually start a PF game I've wanted to build a Fighter since it seemed much better at letting me get the concept I wanted than in D&D, so I think I have a pretty good idea of how I want to do it, but it will be great to see what you come up iwith. Seems like a different style of character just judging from the name but there might be a few cool tricks to pick up :D
What makes fighters actually super good to me, aside from the obvious math advantage, is the level 1 attack of opportunity. Whenever as a caster I have a fighter in my party I make it my objective to have them use that (essentially) bonus no MAP attack as much as possible through spells like command agitate grease and the likes, other classes have to wait for later class feats or have more restrictive versions of attack of opportunity which aren't as easy to take advantage of.
Fighter is also great for new players joining an expirienced group, their feats are pretty straightforward to pick up, you essentially got the two handed feat progression, the archery feat progression, the weapon and shield progression and so on, and their inherit numerical advantage makes it so the player is still useful even if not playing at maximum efficiency.
I'm curious to see what you did with the twf fighter, is it gonna be a strenght based warhammer + light hammer? Dex with double dogslicers? Whip and Pick to trip and crit? Can't wait for it 😄
I'm excited to see what you put together!
Looking forward to seeing this!
Nobody can deny that the Fighter hits often, and hits hard. +2 to hit is also +2 to possibly crit in PF2e. It can specialize into any number of niche specialties in battle; sword n board, duelist, 2-hander, archer, what have you. When it comes to fighting, the Fighter is the best consistent hitter with good sustained damage AND good odds at critting. But it goes all in on combat. Out of combat, they're not the swiss army knife that a ROgue is or a magical toolbox like a Wizard.
Really interested to see your findings!
Subscribing for the PF2e videos! I'm a new GM so probably wont be using the builds but at least I can figure out what my players might be able to do ;)
I love this mobile dwarf running around and smashing things (even if they aren’t always #1 on damage)
Kind of reminds me of Poppy from league of legends
Gunslingers have this feature too! The class that i most liked was those guys with guns :D
Are fighters OP?
Short answer: No
Long answer: Nope
... powered?
My answer is yes, a little.
So, in a system where most of the rules and the majority of class feats and spells regard combat, along with being in an era where combat and character arcs are the default setting in d20:
Fighter is just a little broken in PF2, as it’s a very combat focused game. Here’s why I think that:
1. They have a strict mathematical advantage over almost every other class in the game. They crit more often, they miss less, and their aid checks are more effective.
2. They do not pay any kind of mechanical cost for this advantage. Barbarians gotta spend an action to Rage. Rangers gotta spend an action to Hunt Prey(most of the time). Magus’s gotta recharge their Spellstrike.
The Fighter just gets to be amazing in combat for no cost.
3. They aren’t locked out of certain feats due to subclasses. Though, there are clear feat trees.
Now, at high level play, late game, I believe the other classes catch up and the fighter isn’t quite as ahead as everyone else as in the lower levels. Partially because the feats start cannibalising each other, and because using aid for some of the other classes attacks gets insane.
That being said, I think they’re only a *little* broken, not to the point that it negatively impacts the game.
Also, things like flavor and “roleplay potential” aren’t factors in my argument, as that’s all subjective. I’m talking that they are strictly better from a mechanical perspective in terms of the math, in a game where combat is clearly the focus.
Looking forward to the build and more PF2e content.
I'm here for the Pathfinder content.
Ironically enough, Gunslingers also have this same niche benefit, albeit with ranged weapons of a specific type. And arguably so, are even more deadly than fighters are at base rates. If a fighter crits with an average d8 weapon, their damage is still fairly comparable to the rest of the party damage wise, just with a bit more spike potential. A gunslinger on the other hand does more low end damage on average, but has massive potential to be very swingy with their crit values. This isn't to say that fighters aren't considered OP compared to other martial based classes, but more that they aren't the only ones to be considered. Besides, what else exactly is a fighter uniquely good at other than fighting? Personally, I say let them have the Legendary potential training. Fighters gonna fight!
Woo, pathfinder, love this game, love these videos
Woooo new PF video! I eagerly await these. I'm so DONE with 5e and 6e.
Fantastic video. Thank you for this clear answer. Fighters are OP in Pathfinder and that can be used to break the other PF2 classes as well. Awesome - clear as glass! Thank you for clearing that up.
Fighters are the Beasts and Gunslingers are the Monsters :O
Looking forward to it!
> Are Fighters *Really* OP in Pathfinder 2e?
I sincerly hope so, I play one! ;)
Power Attack build incoming!
I feel fighters outshine a few melee classes depending on how they are built and the play-by-play decision making. Barbarians for example can be punished very hard for sub-optimal choices at character creation or if they don't manage their rage correctly, while fighters are very hard to mess up even for first time players.
Any chance you gonna do another Pathfinder Build? I get it, Baldurs Gate3 and DnD will probably draw the larger crowd, but it's been 4 Months
It isn't just the plus 2, although that is pretty huge given how tight the math is in PF2E. Its that fighters have, mechanically, every advantage available. Great proficiency progression for their weapons, armor, and perception; access to all weapons and armor, some of the very best class feats, perhaps the best engagement with the 3 action economy in the game, not needing any riders to just do what they do (no stance, rage, hunt prey type action taxes or spell slots resource limiters) in addition to being able to hit and crit much more reliably. Critting more often is the most powerful thing in Pathfinder. In a game where everything is tightly constrained and mathematically precise, crits are about the only break out mechanic, and critical hits are insanely powerful, both in terms of raw damage, and in some very potent weapon critical specializations. So taken all together, the fighter is absolutely OP, and sits comfortably at the top of the class heirarchy. It is the measuring stick in Pathfinder, with other classes being rated well the closer in performance to the fighter they can get.
From a purely mechanical stand point, I would contend there is very little reason to play anything but fighters and rogues in PF2E, fighters for the above reasons, rogues because on top of being very competent in combat, they are capable of being very good/excellent at everything else outside of combat as well.
Had to check the calendar to see if it was Tuesday 😂
Yay PF2E content !
The fighter do get some nice juice out of his proficiencies and access to bith crit and armor specialization.
And the usual drawback of the classfrom previous editions (making an attack is the only thing to do, few skills, Dex better for AC and init, etc...) got erased by the overhaul of the system.
Meaning you can do decent things out of combat too!
So is the fighter OP ? Prob' not, but he's a bit ahead of the curve for sure.
And he's a good frame for lots of things.
I hope other classes will be bumped a little (including barb) to catch up while they remaster.
Holding out hope that the next PF2 video will be a caster (especially a blaster or controller) rather than another martial or gish build.
I’m not too experienced in PF2 to know the answer yet, but I wonder if a similar thing applies to Champion to an extent too. Not so much that they have an extra +2 to hit compared to everyone else, but that they always have a +2 to AC compared to everyone else. Do they feel OP tanking wise? Unfortunately that’s a bit harder to measure
Do people not say this about Gunslinger too? They match fighter progression afaik, though they are obviously limited to guns
People do say it about the Champion but its less about their AC and more about how awesome their defensive reaction is. A liberator in my group for example saved the barbarian from a 36 damage crit with their reaction (as it caused the barbarian to step 5ft away, negating the targetting.)
Yeeessss. I'm just about to start up a new fighter.... Here's hoping it's a fighter with a barbarian subtype!
>.>
@@DnDDeepDive ***Yussssss***
It's not just that Fighters fall outside the normal bonus curve. It's the fact that crits are more than twice as good as a normal hit (between Critical Specialization, Deadly/Fatal, resistances, etc).
Then, when you get to the levels where you can expect to crit your Aid checks regularly, and you stack all your buffs and debuffs properly (Fear, Flat Footed, Heroism/Inspire Courage, Aid), where other classes might crit on a 13, the Fighter will crit on an 11. At that point you're looking at an average dpr more than 30% higher than other classes do at base. Oh, and unlike Gunslingers Fighters are less MAD and have fewer action taxes and are much less dependent on Deadly/Fatal.
And sure, other classes have sources of bonus damage like Barbarian Rage damage, Sneak Attack dice, Magus spell strikes, and Thaumaturges ensuring Weakness on everything... but the more optimized your party is, the more the Fighter outperforms these other compensatory features (not to mention Fighters being able to gain partial access to some of these sources of bonus damage (or somehow even worse, True Strike) via Archetypes).
I'm not sure the Fighter will really shine on the spreadsheet, which can't account for the force multipliers that truly make the Fighter terrifying. Like, on paper, at base as the spreadsheet would show it, the Barbarian looks like it does more damage than the Fighter. But optimizers know that that's an illusion when you really take teamwork into consideration.
I think a lot of the "complaining" is more a joke about how it feels at the table, but some people misinterpret that and perpetuate the idea as though it is actually true.
Fighters are crit machines, and have early access to a very powerful reaction. Haven't played one yet, but I've played alongside a few, and it's always a blast for the party, but at early levels the GM sometimes never gets to participate in combat beyond moving into position to die.
Bards and Fighters are definitely the most over-tuned classes in the system, but that's not necessarily a bad thing. I see it as a ceiling that other classes can be safetly elevated to with future content. Hopefully the new player core takes the opportunity to really fine tune the classes that need it (looking at you witch).
I have a fighter in my PF2e game..... He is the reason most encounters are set to Moderate or Severe. Also!! Please more Pathfinder content!!!
What a Cliffhanger!
This is going to be really good 😁
Nice royals shirt! I’m a KC native!
I’m excited for this one.
If your party is doing a good job of buffing your strikers and debuffing your enemies, then proportionally the fighter's +2 matters less while the flat damage boosts of classes like the barbarian benefit more from being helped with hitting.
Woo cant wait
I used to think this and their extra feats were a problem but PF2 emphasizes team work and combat utility. The fighter cashes the check that the other classes write.
Pleeeeeerees make more pathfinder 2e videos
Pathfinder!!
You should do a giant instinct Barbarian two hander build.
With a reach weapon too
I'm intrigued!
More pathfinder 2e! HORRAY!
Did you do something with the lighting? You're more... orange than i remember.
Ha ha yeah - I think the blue background is doing weird things to my skin! Gonna have to remember that in the future.
I play a bard in PF2. The party's fighter loves me :)
In my opinion, if you're going to have a class dedicated to fighting, then it makes sense that they should dominate the in the realm of combat.
I feel like people are just shocked that a FIGHTER of all classes is not only finally a viable choice that doesn't get outpaced by full casters and 3/4 casters in the dpr department but also is fun to play beyond just full round attacking and *maybe* using a combat feat assuming the enemy isn't effectively immune to it. It's also made more visible with the overall nerfs to casters 2e saw. Not saying it's bad to nerf what was clearly too powerful but imo they did go a few % too far in some places.
Most of the fighter's feats have the press trait, which means most of their damaging feats have a -5 to hit.
PF2e players are a little too obsessed with numbers. I recently did a live play, and most of our level 1 characters did not have a +4 in one stat. I was kinda surprised on the feedback I got that we were an underpowered group. We all had +3s, and sometimes two of them, but not having that +4 was some kind of terrible thing. BTW, our group did fine with +3, but maybe at later levels I will regret it. Who knows.
You should do a full on blaster pf2e build
Fighters. Heh.
*Laughs in Magus.*
Where's the rest of this clip.... 😩
If hitting things is the sole purpose of your existence, you're better be good at it.
Would I say Fighters are OP? Not really, they are just really good at fighting.
Also, check out gunslinger, it's got the fighters +2 math but with guns and fancy things you can do with guns!
Seeing how Pathfinder 2E still has some old holdovers from the 3.X era of D&D, a single +2 in a combat with a lot of math can make or break a roll.
I would say only OP if its compared to another martial. Alot of casters have that extra +2 as well.
I'd say they're a bit OP in combat, but that's balance by not being great in other areas.
Failed upload? Seems like just the opening for the analysis? If not, needs a lead out
It's just his usual teaser for the upcoming build. It does end pretty abruptly though.
Fighter with the Martial Artist Archetype.... we thought monks were great, but is the fighter with the martial artist archetype once again a better monk?
Tbf, they're called "fighters", they should be the best at fighting
You going to need to define "most" here
Because even on Reddit, I don't see it
The best rogue is a fighter with the rogue archetype?? Yeah right. My rogue will take that challenge.
The fighter is a bit overtuned, but thats fine. It's meant to be the simple but strong class that anyone can pick up and be effective with. My main issue with the fighter isn't that it's powerful but that the fighter should be just as good at all weapons but Attack of Opportunity(AoO) make you heavily incentivized to use melee weapons. AoOs also incentivize using reach weapons over anything else because the chance for your AoO to trigger is way higher if you have reach. Paizo has explicitly mentioned the fighter getting more support for other types of setups in the remaster though.
I haven't really heard the "best rogue is a fighter with a rogue dedication" line of thought, but I would say that the rogues skills make them far more useful outside of combat. Playing a fighter can feel like you're just waiting until initiative is rolled because you don't have much to do outside of combat that is specific to your class. Fighter really is just a better barbarian though lol. But that's less so due to Fighter's strength as it is Barbarian's weakness.
I've heard the "best class X is a fighter with class X archetype" when free archetype is brought up but that's it.
God forbid fighters be the best at fighting.
Fighters are not broken, no. Math is.
Wait is this video meant to only be a minute ish long?
Yup. Full character build out tomorrow.
Oh trackin, can't wait to see it!
Was this video supposed to only be 1 minute long?
Is this video only supposed to be a minute long?
Aye - full build out tomorrow :)
@@DnDDeepDive Sorry...I should have read the description box before I commented lol. Looking forward to the full video!
Fighters aren't OP. But that +2 gives Fighters a ton of flexibility. A Fighter with a starting Strength of 14 hits just as often at level as any other martial with a strength of 18, by level 20, they'll be at +1 over other martials.
A fighter with a 10 in strength eventually hits par with other martial that have an 18 at start.
This makes Fighters incredibly versatile. Want to start with 16 in Intelligence? Sure, you'll still be incredibly effective in combat, plus you're proficient in 3 more skills. Cool.
My favorite, due to MAP, is making every fighter implausiblly sexy with a high Charisma. Great for speccing into intimidation, which doesn't just add +1 to hit for me, but for the whole party.
play pf1 with 3 action