1-Year Anniversary Questions [Archive] - Wizards Community

1-Year Anniversary Questions [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
Slayer_5
10-25-04, 11:01 AM Ive played the game for a year now, and ive seen everything from the VoP monk to the hulking hurler. Ive gotten strength of 30 with core books by level 12, and seen 20 attacks a round with a thri-kreen.

But theres some basic min/maxxy things that i dont know.

Here goes:

What are the "weak classes", from my understanding, its Fighter, Bard, Sorceror, Wilder, Hexblade, Samurai, and Spirit Shaman.

What are the "strong" classes, from my understanding, its wizard, psion and cleric.

How does a Cleric out blast a blaster mage? (I've asked this question several times, but ive never got a good answer outside of flame strike)

How do you get save DC's through the roof? I see save DC's as 10 + stat + spell level, and I see saves as Class Bonus+Stat+Items, and then theres Evasion, slippery mind, and mettle.

Whats the best melee class? It seems like a toss up between cleric, swashbuckler, barbarian, and Wizard.

And finally, would the Ideal Party be a Cleric of Pelor, a Cleric of Olidimarra, Cleric of (war diety) and a cleric of boccob?

Thanks Guys (^_^)

Note: This is WotC, Vanilla only. No FR or Eberron, or ANYTHING 3.0
Slayer_5
10-25-04, 12:56 PM :bump:
charlesatan
10-25-04, 02:44 PM 1) The only really "weak" class is perhaps the bard. And I'm only saying this in a scenario of "if each of the basic classes went head to head against the other classes" or in "self-sustaining" (i.e. adventuring alone). And this factors only combat-ability and not social skills. Of course having said that, the bard is still a good class to pick as a "fifth character" in a party and they're still great characters to have in a party. Just don't leave them out alone too long.

2) Spellcasters in general are powerful because of their acces to spells (and that should say a lot about spells). The cleric is perhaps the most powerful because he has high hit points, armor proficiency, a decent combatant (which can change because of the spells he casts), and has good offensive and defensive spells. Psions are quite versatile when it comes to combat, but they run out of pp too quick (they'll excel in the "one difficult encounter/day" scenario, but will probably suffer if your DM tends to give you several encounters/day). If you chose the right spell lists, a sorcerer can be good for the reasons that the psion is weak, while the wizard can be quite formidable if he knows what he's going to face. Of course you'd also add in the Druid, which can also be fearsome with the proper build.

3) Technically, the "ace" of the cleric is his ability to dish out damage to a single target (compared to the sor/wiz). In that sense, the cleric is more or less superior. But if you mean mass damage (i.e. fireball), the cleric gets away with it with either a) high level spells such as blade barrier, firestorm, flamestrike, or b) from domains, which can be as simple as getting chain lightning from the air domain, to getting access to the spell domain (which gives you access to sor/wiz spells in the form of spells like Anyspell from Forgotten Realms... which takes this option out).

4) There are actually several ways of doing it. It usually involves a combination of feats, magic items (either enhancing the spell or your relevant ability score), prestige classes, and race (such as the gnome's +1 DC modifier to illusion spells).

5) Personally, I find that the "best melee" is a combination of classes, which involves other prestige classes as well (and varies depending on your definition of "best". Some of the better melee builds that I 've seen involve either Gish (melee types with spellcaster levels mixed in), those with Divine Fighter (i.e. Paladin/Blackguard -types) levels, or Barbarian/Frenzied Berserker/Bear Warrior builds. And there's also whether they come in as buffed or not. I mean a cleric with divine favor, divine power, and righteous might is quite formidable compared to a fighter, for example.

6) It actually depends on who comprises the party and on the game. I mean if there's a shortage of healers or if your GM sends hordes of undead, Pelor would probably be a good choice. But if you plan to be a combat-oriented cleri, the war deity would probably be preferred, for example.

Actually, a lot of your questions are already answered in the bulletin board. Just take the time to search for them (the FAQ is a big help), and you can give more details regarding your question so that we can give better answers.
JosephKell
10-25-04, 03:03 PM Not everything you read on the C.O. Board has substance. That mainly being that Clerics are the end all of Classes and that a Sorcerer that drops Evocation Magic is a Crappy Newb's PC.

---------------------------------------------------

Fighters as weak is a misconception based on its "lack of skill points." Fighters have a lot of 'skills' but in D&D 3rd Ed (that is 3.0, 'pi', and 3.5) a Fighter's main 'skills' are called 'Bonus Feats.' In AD&D a Fighter had a lot of Weapon Proficiencies (which could be used for Weapon Specialization) and had very few nonweapon proficiencies (Skills in 3rd Ed). Barbarians rage normally for 5 + their original Constitution modifier. So on average, 7 rounds at level 1 (8 if a Dwarf). Some combats last a lot longer than 7 rounds. I was in one lately that lasted almost 20 (my paladin spent the last 13 of them flat on her back rolling stablization percentile checks made it at -9 hp).

Bards aren't weak either. They are the only PHB Class with Speak Language as a Class Skill, make everyone else better (without sacrificing their own power), can double as front liner easily, has a huge role out of combat, and can play a fiddle while on singing on a tightrope. Actually, I remember watching a Fight Club at a D&D Convention (PolyCon 19 in 2002) where the winner was a level 8 Bard. It was hilarious!

Sorcerers can drop spells almost as often as they draw breath! And since they are spontaneous casters they get more milage out of their spells per day by being able to be ready for a Scorching Ray or an Invisibility Spell. If a Blaster works, it works. No class stacks up to the Sorcerer for Blasting power (except the Warmage from the MiniHB, the Warmage isn't that bad either. Sure it lacks Color Spray, but an 'Oily Burning Hands' can cover most problems).

------------------------------------------------------
Most of the Complete Base (Core? Whatever!) Classes are weird. They are specific variations on a theme, and your first class level is supposed to be sort of loose. My Complete Warrior book starts with the Prestige Class chapter (I now turn to Chapter 3 right when I open the book).

The "Bastard Swordsman" (CW Samurai) is a joke though. It could've been better (like as a Variant Fighter with a different Skill list). And the only reason to use it is for an easy Exotic Weapon Proficiency (Bastard Sword) and the different starting class skills (I just like Diplomacy over Intimidation).

The Hexblade is funky, and the only reason to go past getting Arcane Resistance (or whatever the special is where you get Cha to saves vs spells) is to get Mettle. Then the only reason to go past 3rd is for the curses. If you don't like being an 'anti-bard' don't be a Hexblade.

-------------------------------------------------------

The Ideal Party is a Solid Frontliner that won't quit (i.e. become exhausted from raging), a Cleric that can Turn on a Dime, a Skill Monkey (that can deal with traps), and a Arcane Caster that is capable of dropping big damage spells.

If you want to see 'Vanilla' D&D, go play a Living Greyhawk game and see how many all Cleric Parties there are. In Living Greyhawk they only use the 3 Core Rulebooks and the Complete Series (and until the last Complete Book comes out, the 3.0 Class books, except where a new allowed book overrules it). However, if you play in the Pale (North Cali and Nevada) you will see a lot of Clerics and Paladins of Pholtus because it is a Theocracy (the True Path rules the land). Oh yeah, not one of them has been the Melee Dynemo that the C.O. Board says the Cleric can be.

-------------------------------------------------------

The way to get a Blaster Mage is to either sneak up on them or to have enough hit points to not get killed right off the bat.

A Wizard (or Sorcerer) of the same level as a Fighter has no one spell that can reduce that Fighter to 0 (or below) hp in one spell until like level.. 10 (and even then it relies on luck). (This assumes max starting hp and 5.5 for each extra level.) Fighter 5 has 32 hp (10 + 4*5.5) and a Fireball 5 does 5d6 damage (30 max). And that fighter had a Con of 10. Most Fighters have a Con of 14 or greater. So that would be 42 hp at level 5, and if the Mage got lucky (full damage), he still has an angry Fighter with 12 hit points charging him.

P.S.: Psionics sucks for blasting, the only thing it excels at is buffing (built in Adjustable powers is nice). Having to pay 5 pp for a 3nd level power that does 3d6 damage, then having to pay another 5 pp to do the same damage with a Psionic Fireball (energy burst or whatever) that a Mage does with a 10th level Fireball is sad.
cool hand luke
10-25-04, 03:04 PM add druid to the very top of your most powerful class list.
Khazra Reborn
10-25-04, 03:30 PM What are the "strong" classes, from my understanding, its wizard, psion and cleric.
The artificer is the strongest class IMO. They can do anything :rolleyes:
But its actually true....through there items they can cast any divine or arcane spell while tacking an obscene amount of meta-magic on the end. They can buff (draconic might being my favourite buff, particuarly if you have a marshal in the group), they can melee normally (draconic polymorph + divine favour), unarmed (thornskin, monks belt, monks tatoo, ectoplasmic fist, battle gauntlet), blast (god this search function is rubbish, anyway they unleash horrible spells from wands) & they have the quite rare ability of trapfinding. There the closest to a one character party that exist & are maybe better then the simpler gestalt builds.
sereg
10-25-04, 04:22 PM Fighters as weak is a misconception based on its "lack of skill points." Fighters have a lot of 'skills' but in D&D 3rd Ed (that is 3.0, 'pi', and 3.5) a Fighter's main 'skills' are called 'Bonus Feats.' In AD&D a Fighter had a lot of Weapon Proficiencies (which could be used for Weapon Specialization) and had very few nonweapon proficiencies (Skills in 3rd Ed).

Now just hold on a second here. Fighters are viewed as weak because, they ARE weak. Give me just about any class over one, anyday of the week, any campaign.

You wanna talk 2nd ed AD&D? Fighters started with 3 Non Weapon Proficiencies, and got one every three levels thereafter (no one had a better progression). Wizards and Priests started with 4 (OH WOW ONE MORE), and had the same 1/per 3 level progression. On the other hand, Warrior weapon proficiency's blew the other class's away; and as long as we're on the subject, fighters used to be something other than weak one trick ponies, only good through stupid little "Oh joy i'm better than the cleric at one tiny aspect of the game" like tripping, polymorph shinanigans, or charging.

There is no misconception here. Fighters blow. Barbarians, Rangers, and Paladins are only slightly better. Any game that has Fighter 6 worse than Fighter2/Barbarian2/Paladin2 is a really poorly designed system. Casters don't suffer from this.

Sereg
catharz
10-25-04, 04:40 PM Just two things:

Not everything you read on the C.O. Board has substance. That mainly being that Clerics are the end all of Classes and that a Sorcerer that drops Evocation Magic is a Crappy Newb's PC.

Well, I haven't heard anything on the C.O. boards about sorcerers without evocation being crappy. In fact, as far as I can tell evocation is the only school people on this boards consistantly sacrifice without a tear.

The way to get a Blaster Mage is to either sneak up on them or to have enough hit points to not get killed right off the bat.

A Wizard (or Sorcerer) of the same level as a Fighter has no one spell that can reduce that Fighter to 0 (or below) hp in one spell until like level.. 10 (and even then it relies on luck). (This assumes max starting hp and 5.5 for each extra level.) Fighter 5 has 32 hp (10 + 4*5.5) and a Fireball 5 does 5d6 damage (30 max). And that fighter had a Con of 10. Most Fighters have a Con of 14 or greater. So that would be 42 hp at level 5, and if the Mage got lucky (full damage), he still has an angry Fighter with 12 hit points charging him.

I also haven't seen many posters in the C.O. boards advocating blaster mages when they can use spells like Sleep, Color spray, and Glitterdust. I mean, who cares how many HP the fighter has or how great his AC is when you're targeting his will save?

The only effective blaster mages I know of are artificers, who literally pay a high cost for it, and Arcane tricksters, which aren't as bad as they are sometimes made out to be, but aren't as good as they are sometimes made out to be either.

Other then that I basically agree with you. Although the fighter stuff only really applies in a low-powered campaign. And I realize that you may already know what I've posted and were just using certain examples. If that is the case I'm sorry.

There is no misconception here. Fighters blow. Barbarians, Rangers, and Paladins are only slightly better. Any game that has Fighter 6 worse than Fighter2/Barbarian2/Paladin2 is a really poorly designed system.
I agree here. I'm an advocate of the d12 HD, one feat per level, and 4 skill points fighter. Fighters aren't impossible (as JK stated) but they still aren't good enough.
Casters don't suffer from this.

Sereg
Well, casters suffer from their own muulticlass issue: I can't imagine anyone in their right mind playing a Wizard 2/Cleric 2/Sorcerer 2.
JosephKell
10-26-04, 06:32 PM When I said "drops Evocation Magic" I meant, "drops Evocation Magic on enemies" not "Doesn't use Evocation Magic."

Before I started playing Living Greyhawk, I thought I knew everything about 3.5 D&D. I was sooo wrong.

A few weeks ago I met the player of one of the highest (if not highest) Monk PC's in the Theocracy of the Pale. His first levels weren't Monk, they were Fighter. I also have yet to see a Cleric that is a melee power house in Living Greyhawk (and the Cleric Archer doesn't work because there is no Elf Domain).

The view is a lot different when you see PC's that crawled their way from 1st level up.

P.S.: Fighter 6 is better than Fighter 2/Barbarian 2/Paladin 2. The latter lost its Rage Ability.
sereg
10-26-04, 08:25 PM I had a very similar experience with Living Greyhawk JosephKell, organic/low option characters really changes the game. Especially organic, so many builds are horrible till 12+ (which, is an eternity starting at level 1)

P.S.: Fighter 6 is better than Fighter 2/Barbarian 2/Paladin 2. The latter lost its Rage Ability.

Lol, are we really quibling over this? Paladin2/Fighter2/Barbarian2 to represent his slide from grace into anarchy, you KNOW that you can't argue that Fighter6 is better than, well, anything.

Sereg
JosephKell
10-27-04, 02:05 AM Paladin2/Fighter2/Barbarian2 to represent his slide from grace into anarchy,Okay... so you can justify with story the lose of effectiveness since the no longer Lawful Good PC loses its special Paladin abilities (mainly Detect Evil, Smite Evil, Divine Grace, and Lay on Hands).you KNOW that you can't argue that Fighter6 is better than, well, anything.I thought you hated blanket statements.

And Pure Fighter isn't bad. I thought I established that months ago with my Dwarf Fighter (Didn't even need Dwarven Defender). Fighter is about flexibility.

Fighter is one of the FASTEST ways to PC power. And it isn't even fleeting power like the Barbarian, it is multiple encounter power. The Barbarian can't boast that until level 4 (when it gets another Rage per Day).

And if Fighter is such a weak class, why do so many builds use it?

Fighter 2/Monk X makes for a very solid Monk.

And no one can argue definiatively that any build is better than anything else. You can only try to argue that one thing is better for one role.

FYI: for those that don't know, in Living Greyhawk, you can't take a feat, skill, class, item, spell, or anything outside of the core rulebooks until level 3. So Barbarians can't take Extra Rage at level 1 (not that I've ever seen anyone take anything other than Power Attack or the like at Barbarian 1).
charlesatan
10-27-04, 08:08 AM First off, I'm not saying that Fighter is a totally useless class. But over a 20-class progression (since a number of discussion here take into consideration that you'll use the character over long periods of time rather than just a one-shot session), unless you really need the extra feats, there's usually something more optimal than Fighter 20, like a Fighter 8/Barbarian 12 build, for example. Of course having said that, in general, unless you need the extra feats (which is valuable for some builds, so I'd want to clarify that my "if" is going to occur often), the optimal levels for Fighter are either 4 (for Weapon Specialization), 8 (for Greater Weapon Focus), or 12 (for Greater Weapon Specialization). Other than that, most builds often take Fighter levels for feats (what else is there?), and feats are integral to any character build.

And of course, certain classes require several high ability scores for optimum performance (and Paladins or Monks fall under this category). And JosephKnell, a cleric can probably outdo a Fighter character in Living Greyhawk, provided that a) it's actually a combat-oriented build, and b) the cleric is given time to buff. As you mentioned, it depends on the situation, and it's probably under the "fleeting power" category, but in the defense of the Barbarian, some GMs run only a few encounters per day (some as low as 1 encounter a day), so sometimes, it's not much of an issue.

Lastly, the Fighter is good because it's one of the classes that doesn't have alignment restrictions, and still nabs you a good base attack bonus (and the bonus feat doesn't hurt either).

P.S. Metagame-wise, I wouldn't do a Paladin 2/Fighter 2/Barbarian 2 character (it'll either be a Paladin 4/Fighter 2 or a Barbarian 4/Fighter 2 or a Fighter 4/something 2)

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Slayer_5 10-25-04, 11:01 AM	Ive played the game for a year now, and ive seen everything from the VoP monk to the hulking hurler. Ive gotten strength of 30 with core books by level 12, and seen 20 attacks a round with a thri-kreen. But theres some basic min/maxxy things that i dont know. Here goes: What are the "weak classes", from my understanding, its Fighter, Bard, Sorceror, Wilder, Hexblade, Samurai, and Spirit Shaman. What are the "strong" classes, from my understanding, its wizard, psion and cleric. How does a Cleric out blast a blaster mage? (I've asked this question several times, but ive never got a good answer outside of flame strike) How do you get save DC's through the roof? I see save DC's as 10 + stat + spell level, and I see saves as Class Bonus+Stat+Items, and then theres Evasion, slippery mind, and mettle. Whats the best melee class? It seems like a toss up between cleric, swashbuckler, barbarian, and Wizard. And finally, would the Ideal Party be a Cleric of Pelor, a Cleric of Olidimarra, Cleric of (war diety) and a cleric of boccob? Thanks Guys (^_^) Note: This is WotC, Vanilla only. No FR or Eberron, or ANYTHING 3.0
Slayer_5 10-25-04, 12:56 PM	:bump:
charlesatan 10-25-04, 02:44 PM	1) The only really "weak" class is perhaps the bard. And I'm only saying this in a scenario of "if each of the basic classes went head to head against the other classes" or in "self-sustaining" (i.e. adventuring alone). And this factors only combat-ability and not social skills. Of course having said that, the bard is still a good class to pick as a "fifth character" in a party and they're still great characters to have in a party. Just don't leave them out alone too long. 2) Spellcasters in general are powerful because of their acces to spells (and that should say a lot about spells). The cleric is perhaps the most powerful because he has high hit points, armor proficiency, a decent combatant (which can change because of the spells he casts), and has good offensive and defensive spells. Psions are quite versatile when it comes to combat, but they run out of pp too quick (they'll excel in the "one difficult encounter/day" scenario, but will probably suffer if your DM tends to give you several encounters/day). If you chose the right spell lists, a sorcerer can be good for the reasons that the psion is weak, while the wizard can be quite formidable if he knows what he's going to face. Of course you'd also add in the Druid, which can also be fearsome with the proper build. 3) Technically, the "ace" of the cleric is his ability to dish out damage to a single target (compared to the sor/wiz). In that sense, the cleric is more or less superior. But if you mean mass damage (i.e. fireball), the cleric gets away with it with either a) high level spells such as blade barrier, firestorm, flamestrike, or b) from domains, which can be as simple as getting chain lightning from the air domain, to getting access to the spell domain (which gives you access to sor/wiz spells in the form of spells like Anyspell from Forgotten Realms... which takes this option out). 4) There are actually several ways of doing it. It usually involves a combination of feats, magic items (either enhancing the spell or your relevant ability score), prestige classes, and race (such as the gnome's +1 DC modifier to illusion spells). 5) Personally, I find that the "best melee" is a combination of classes, which involves other prestige classes as well (and varies depending on your definition of "best". Some of the better melee builds that I 've seen involve either Gish (melee types with spellcaster levels mixed in), those with Divine Fighter (i.e. Paladin/Blackguard -types) levels, or Barbarian/Frenzied Berserker/Bear Warrior builds. And there's also whether they come in as buffed or not. I mean a cleric with divine favor, divine power, and righteous might is quite formidable compared to a fighter, for example. 6) It actually depends on who comprises the party and on the game. I mean if there's a shortage of healers or if your GM sends hordes of undead, Pelor would probably be a good choice. But if you plan to be a combat-oriented cleri, the war deity would probably be preferred, for example. Actually, a lot of your questions are already answered in the bulletin board. Just take the time to search for them (the FAQ is a big help), and you can give more details regarding your question so that we can give better answers.
JosephKell 10-25-04, 03:03 PM	Not everything you read on the C.O. Board has substance. That mainly being that Clerics are the end all of Classes and that a Sorcerer that drops Evocation Magic is a Crappy Newb's PC. --------------------------------------------------- Fighters as weak is a misconception based on its "lack of skill points." Fighters have a lot of 'skills' but in D&D 3rd Ed (that is 3.0, 'pi', and 3.5) a Fighter's main 'skills' are called 'Bonus Feats.' In AD&D a Fighter had a lot of Weapon Proficiencies (which could be used for Weapon Specialization) and had very few nonweapon proficiencies (Skills in 3rd Ed). Barbarians rage normally for 5 + their original Constitution modifier. So on average, 7 rounds at level 1 (8 if a Dwarf). Some combats last a lot longer than 7 rounds. I was in one lately that lasted almost 20 (my paladin spent the last 13 of them flat on her back rolling stablization percentile checks made it at -9 hp). Bards aren't weak either. They are the only PHB Class with Speak Language as a Class Skill, make everyone else better (without sacrificing their own power), can double as front liner easily, has a huge role out of combat, and can play a fiddle while on singing on a tightrope. Actually, I remember watching a Fight Club at a D&D Convention (PolyCon 19 in 2002) where the winner was a level 8 Bard. It was hilarious! Sorcerers can drop spells almost as often as they draw breath! And since they are spontaneous casters they get more milage out of their spells per day by being able to be ready for a Scorching Ray or an Invisibility Spell. If a Blaster works, it works. No class stacks up to the Sorcerer for Blasting power (except the Warmage from the MiniHB, the Warmage isn't that bad either. Sure it lacks Color Spray, but an 'Oily Burning Hands' can cover most problems). ------------------------------------------------------ Most of the Complete Base (Core? Whatever!) Classes are weird. They are specific variations on a theme, and your first class level is supposed to be sort of loose. My Complete Warrior book starts with the Prestige Class chapter (I now turn to Chapter 3 right when I open the book). The "Bastard Swordsman" (CW Samurai) is a joke though. It could've been better (like as a Variant Fighter with a different Skill list). And the only reason to use it is for an easy Exotic Weapon Proficiency (Bastard Sword) and the different starting class skills (I just like Diplomacy over Intimidation). The Hexblade is funky, and the only reason to go past getting Arcane Resistance (or whatever the special is where you get Cha to saves vs spells) is to get Mettle. Then the only reason to go past 3rd is for the curses. If you don't like being an 'anti-bard' don't be a Hexblade. ------------------------------------------------------- The Ideal Party is a Solid Frontliner that won't quit (i.e. become exhausted from raging), a Cleric that can Turn on a Dime, a Skill Monkey (that can deal with traps), and a Arcane Caster that is capable of dropping big damage spells. If you want to see 'Vanilla' D&D, go play a Living Greyhawk game and see how many all Cleric Parties there are. In Living Greyhawk they only use the 3 Core Rulebooks and the Complete Series (and until the last Complete Book comes out, the 3.0 Class books, except where a new allowed book overrules it). However, if you play in the Pale (North Cali and Nevada) you will see a lot of Clerics and Paladins of Pholtus because it is a Theocracy (the True Path rules the land). Oh yeah, not one of them has been the Melee Dynemo that the C.O. Board says the Cleric can be. ------------------------------------------------------- The way to get a Blaster Mage is to either sneak up on them or to have enough hit points to not get killed right off the bat. A Wizard (or Sorcerer) of the same level as a Fighter has no one spell that can reduce that Fighter to 0 (or below) hp in one spell until like level.. 10 (and even then it relies on luck). (This assumes max starting hp and 5.5 for each extra level.) Fighter 5 has 32 hp (10 + 4*5.5) and a Fireball 5 does 5d6 damage (30 max). And that fighter had a Con of 10. Most Fighters have a Con of 14 or greater. So that would be 42 hp at level 5, and if the Mage got lucky (full damage), he still has an angry Fighter with 12 hit points charging him. P.S.: Psionics sucks for blasting, the only thing it excels at is buffing (built in Adjustable powers is nice). Having to pay 5 pp for a 3nd level power that does 3d6 damage, then having to pay another 5 pp to do the same damage with a Psionic Fireball (energy burst or whatever) that a Mage does with a 10th level Fireball is sad.
cool hand luke 10-25-04, 03:04 PM	add druid to the very top of your most powerful class list.
Khazra Reborn 10-25-04, 03:30 PM	What are the "strong" classes, from my understanding, its wizard, psion and cleric. The artificer is the strongest class IMO. They can do anything :rolleyes: But its actually true....through there items they can cast any divine or arcane spell while tacking an obscene amount of meta-magic on the end. They can buff (draconic might being my favourite buff, particuarly if you have a marshal in the group), they can melee normally (draconic polymorph + divine favour), unarmed (thornskin, monks belt, monks tatoo, ectoplasmic fist, battle gauntlet), blast (god this search function is rubbish, anyway they unleash horrible spells from wands) & they have the quite rare ability of trapfinding. There the closest to a one character party that exist & are maybe better then the simpler gestalt builds.
sereg 10-25-04, 04:22 PM	Fighters as weak is a misconception based on its "lack of skill points." Fighters have a lot of 'skills' but in D&D 3rd Ed (that is 3.0, 'pi', and 3.5) a Fighter's main 'skills' are called 'Bonus Feats.' In AD&D a Fighter had a lot of Weapon Proficiencies (which could be used for Weapon Specialization) and had very few nonweapon proficiencies (Skills in 3rd Ed). Now just hold on a second here. Fighters are viewed as weak because, they ARE weak. Give me just about any class over one, anyday of the week, any campaign. You wanna talk 2nd ed AD&D? Fighters started with 3 Non Weapon Proficiencies, and got one every three levels thereafter (no one had a better progression). Wizards and Priests started with 4 (OH WOW ONE MORE), and had the same 1/per 3 level progression. On the other hand, Warrior weapon proficiency's blew the other class's away; and as long as we're on the subject, fighters used to be something other than weak one trick ponies, only good through stupid little "Oh joy i'm better than the cleric at one tiny aspect of the game" like tripping, polymorph shinanigans, or charging. There is no misconception here. Fighters blow. Barbarians, Rangers, and Paladins are only slightly better. Any game that has Fighter 6 worse than Fighter2/Barbarian2/Paladin2 is a really poorly designed system. Casters don't suffer from this. Sereg
catharz 10-25-04, 04:40 PM	Just two things: Not everything you read on the C.O. Board has substance. That mainly being that Clerics are the end all of Classes and that a Sorcerer that drops Evocation Magic is a Crappy Newb's PC. Well, I haven't heard anything on the C.O. boards about sorcerers without evocation being crappy. In fact, as far as I can tell evocation is the only school people on this boards consistantly sacrifice without a tear. The way to get a Blaster Mage is to either sneak up on them or to have enough hit points to not get killed right off the bat. A Wizard (or Sorcerer) of the same level as a Fighter has no one spell that can reduce that Fighter to 0 (or below) hp in one spell until like level.. 10 (and even then it relies on luck). (This assumes max starting hp and 5.5 for each extra level.) Fighter 5 has 32 hp (10 + 4*5.5) and a Fireball 5 does 5d6 damage (30 max). And that fighter had a Con of 10. Most Fighters have a Con of 14 or greater. So that would be 42 hp at level 5, and if the Mage got lucky (full damage), he still has an angry Fighter with 12 hit points charging him. I also haven't seen many posters in the C.O. boards advocating blaster mages when they can use spells like Sleep, Color spray, and Glitterdust. I mean, who cares how many HP the fighter has or how great his AC is when you're targeting his will save? The only effective blaster mages I know of are artificers, who literally pay a high cost for it, and Arcane tricksters, which aren't as bad as they are sometimes made out to be, but aren't as good as they are sometimes made out to be either. Other then that I basically agree with you. Although the fighter stuff only really applies in a low-powered campaign. And I realize that you may already know what I've posted and were just using certain examples. If that is the case I'm sorry. There is no misconception here. Fighters blow. Barbarians, Rangers, and Paladins are only slightly better. Any game that has Fighter 6 worse than Fighter2/Barbarian2/Paladin2 is a really poorly designed system. I agree here. I'm an advocate of the d12 HD, one feat per level, and 4 skill points fighter. Fighters aren't impossible (as JK stated) but they still aren't good enough. Casters don't suffer from this. Sereg Well, casters suffer from their own muulticlass issue: I can't imagine anyone in their right mind playing a Wizard 2/Cleric 2/Sorcerer 2.
JosephKell 10-26-04, 06:32 PM	When I said "drops Evocation Magic" I meant, "drops Evocation Magic on enemies" not "Doesn't use Evocation Magic." Before I started playing Living Greyhawk, I thought I knew everything about 3.5 D&D. I was sooo wrong. A few weeks ago I met the player of one of the highest (if not highest) Monk PC's in the Theocracy of the Pale. His first levels weren't Monk, they were Fighter. I also have yet to see a Cleric that is a melee power house in Living Greyhawk (and the Cleric Archer doesn't work because there is no Elf Domain). The view is a lot different when you see PC's that crawled their way from 1st level up. P.S.: Fighter 6 is better than Fighter 2/Barbarian 2/Paladin 2. The latter lost its Rage Ability.
sereg 10-26-04, 08:25 PM	I had a very similar experience with Living Greyhawk JosephKell, organic/low option characters really changes the game. Especially organic, so many builds are horrible till 12+ (which, is an eternity starting at level 1) P.S.: Fighter 6 is better than Fighter 2/Barbarian 2/Paladin 2. The latter lost its Rage Ability. Lol, are we really quibling over this? Paladin2/Fighter2/Barbarian2 to represent his slide from grace into anarchy, you KNOW that you can't argue that Fighter6 is better than, well, anything. Sereg
JosephKell 10-27-04, 02:05 AM	Paladin2/Fighter2/Barbarian2 to represent his slide from grace into anarchy,Okay... so you can justify with story the lose of effectiveness since the no longer Lawful Good PC loses its special Paladin abilities (mainly Detect Evil, Smite Evil, Divine Grace, and Lay on Hands).you KNOW that you can't argue that Fighter6 is better than, well, anything.I thought you hated blanket statements. And Pure Fighter isn't bad. I thought I established that months ago with my Dwarf Fighter (Didn't even need Dwarven Defender). Fighter is about flexibility. Fighter is one of the FASTEST ways to PC power. And it isn't even fleeting power like the Barbarian, it is multiple encounter power. The Barbarian can't boast that until level 4 (when it gets another Rage per Day). And if Fighter is such a weak class, why do so many builds use it? Fighter 2/Monk X makes for a very solid Monk. And no one can argue definiatively that any build is better than anything else. You can only try to argue that one thing is better for one role. FYI: for those that don't know, in Living Greyhawk, you can't take a feat, skill, class, item, spell, or anything outside of the core rulebooks until level 3. So Barbarians can't take Extra Rage at level 1 (not that I've ever seen anyone take anything other than Power Attack or the like at Barbarian 1).
charlesatan 10-27-04, 08:08 AM	First off, I'm not saying that Fighter is a totally useless class. But over a 20-class progression (since a number of discussion here take into consideration that you'll use the character over long periods of time rather than just a one-shot session), unless you really need the extra feats, there's usually something more optimal than Fighter 20, like a Fighter 8/Barbarian 12 build, for example. Of course having said that, in general, unless you need the extra feats (which is valuable for some builds, so I'd want to clarify that my "if" is going to occur often), the optimal levels for Fighter are either 4 (for Weapon Specialization), 8 (for Greater Weapon Focus), or 12 (for Greater Weapon Specialization). Other than that, most builds often take Fighter levels for feats (what else is there?), and feats are integral to any character build. And of course, certain classes require several high ability scores for optimum performance (and Paladins or Monks fall under this category). And JosephKnell, a cleric can probably outdo a Fighter character in Living Greyhawk, provided that a) it's actually a combat-oriented build, and b) the cleric is given time to buff. As you mentioned, it depends on the situation, and it's probably under the "fleeting power" category, but in the defense of the Barbarian, some GMs run only a few encounters per day (some as low as 1 encounter a day), so sometimes, it's not much of an issue. Lastly, the Fighter is good because it's one of the classes that doesn't have alignment restrictions, and still nabs you a good base attack bonus (and the bonus feat doesn't hurt either). P.S. Metagame-wise, I wouldn't do a Paladin 2/Fighter 2/Barbarian 2 character (it'll either be a Paladin 4/Fighter 2 or a Barbarian 4/Fighter 2 or a Fighter 4/something 2)