Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Gondoras 03-27-06, 07:20 PM	I took several years off from D&D and got back into it a couple months ago. After getting caught up on most of the research that I missed, I've come to the conclusion that Fighters might as well be considered a dead class. Why? Because every class seems to have been modified to make Fighters pretty much useless. Sure, you get the extra feats, but what's the point when you get destroyed on skills? On top of that, Fighters normally take a penalty on their checks due to their heavy armor. Sure, you get a d10 for hit points at new levels, but what's the point if those can be evened out with one blow. Rogues have always been seen as thieves. Great lockpicking skills, great at stealing, great at sneaking around and hiding.... that should be the end of it.... now it seems that a sneak attack does the same (if not more) than a fighter can do in a single attack and if they have Crippling Strike, the fight is basically over before it starts. At a higher level, they can even counter attack once per round, which makes them superior in head on fighting. Why would a class be stacked like this? If they wanted to be a good fighter, they should take classes in Fighter. If they just want to disable traps, pick locks and other cool "rogue" things, then they should focus on the rogue aspect. Basically, this class has become a Rogue 20/ Fighter 15 and the only downfall is the lack of bonus feats, but it's evened out with the insane amount of skill points. Rangers get a class ability choice at level 2 that gives them the ability to dual wield or Archery and continue to gain advances to these skills as they level (free bonus feats?) They also get quite a few skill points at each level, so they can hold their own against a fighter until help arrives, unless they've worn them down with the long range attacks to the point that they can take them down pretty easily (they actually have the same bonuses in melee as fighters, get favored enemies, animal companion, and at level 17, a Half orc can use the Hide in Plain Sight ability to hide in a Dwarven Fighter's shadow............another fair fight) Actually, I'll stop there with the different classes, because you probably get the point. I didn't mention all of the free Class abilities that they gain at each level, because the list is pretty long for almost every class except for Fighters. For some reason Fighters get way too much credit for the amount of feats they receive, but class abilities and skills put them on the short end by a huge amount. I believe this class should be like a Ranger where they have a choice at an early level of which direction they'd like to go. For now, the only way to do this is to Multi-class, but if a Rogue 20 has the combat ability of a fighter15 that can still Multiclass, why doesn't everyone start as a rogue and branch out? The Dwarven Axemaster PrC that was created here gave me some reason to be a fighter, but I'm looking for a little justice. Someone please make a Fighter the best fighter. (keep in mind that if a rogue wanted to, he could complete a couple fighter trees like Great Cleave, Greater TWF, or to intrigue you new race of rogues a little further, Whirlwind Attack.) Let me make a Hector or Achilles from Troy. Let me make Maximus from Gladiator. Let me make the bad dude off of The Scorpion King. Just allow fighters to do what they do best......fight.....(I don't think an increase in skill points is out of the line either.) They could be expanded to Bare Handed Fighters (no spells like monks, though,) Two Weapon Fighters (without Attack penalty,) etc. Just something to make it worthy to be a Fighter in a campaign. I'm not looking for them to start as PrC's, but they should be able to mop the floor with any other character in a heads up/face to face matchup where they're just trading dice rolls of attack. Sorry, just had to rant for a bit. If there are any suggestions to help, great. I like the ideas from the Ultimate Fighter thread, but not being able to take special abilities until the 11th level keeps them from taking a PrC for the most part and even without that, my DM thinks they're too strong......... everybody hates a fighter :weep:
strumbleduck 03-27-06, 08:16 PM	Sure, you get the extra feats, but what's the point when you get destroyed on skills? It's a fighter. Skills aren't very useful in combat -- feats are. On top of that, Fighters normally take a penalty on their checks due to their heavy armor. Uh, only on a few checks. And your average fighter doesn't really need to be moving silently. now it seems that a sneak attack does the same (if not more) than a fighter can do in a single attack and if they have Crippling Strike, the fight is basically over before it starts. At a higher level, they can even counter attack once per round, which makes them superior in head on fighting. Rogues aren't nearly as good as fighters at straight combat, although admittedly the best thing to do in most cases is to bail for a prestige class. Take a look at the CO boards for some good fighting character builds -- very few of them involve levels of rogue. Rangers get a class ability choice at level 2 that gives them the ability to dual wield or Archery and continue to gain advances to these skills as they level (free bonus feats?) I think you're just underestimating the power of well-chosen feats (and perhaps overestimating the usefulness of skills). A straight ranger's combat ability pales in comparison to that of a fighter. Someone please make a Fighter the best fighter. (keep in mind that if a rogue wanted to, he could complete a couple fighter trees like Great Cleave, Greater TWF, or to intrigue you new race of rogues a little further, Whirlwind Attack.) See the "Single-Class Builds thread" on the CO boards.
Almast 03-27-06, 08:24 PM	Whirlwind attack would be a horrible feat for a rogue. They'd have to have every one of their targets flanked, or otherwise TWFing (a staple rogue tree) or Spring Attack (the other tree). While I agree that a fighter isn't on par with the paladin, a fighter is always going to be able to out fight an equal level rogue or ranger, especially in 1v1. Really, the best thing to do are get better feats; I recommend Monte Cook's Arcana Evolved for a place to get some nifty fighter-only feats, or Iron Heroes (by Mike Mearls, written before he was hired by WotC). Iron Heroes will need SOME conversion, since it's a book about an almost no-magic world, but the easiest thing to do is make the feats in that fighter only (and follow the rule for conversion in the back of the book.) The fighter, as a class, has no problem; simply the feats it gets later on aren't enough to compare. IH will fix that problem (and most of your CoDzillas and wizards might cry foul from those things).
Gondoras 03-27-06, 08:44 PM	on skill checks, I wasn't considering a (CC) skill, even swim, jump, and climb have neg's to the rolls. Battle shouldn't be the only focus on a fighter. A higher number of skills wouldn't necessarily go to (CC's,) but to keep up with everyone else that has access to basically the same skills.....or to different Crafts to help make masterwork armor and weapons. I wasn't trying to say that rogues were better fighters completely (they max out at 15/10/5,) but those attack bonuses do seem pretty high for a character that benefits highly from skills that definitely could aid them in combat and that sneak attack with Crippling Strike scares the heck out of me. I'll check out the build threads, but I've looked at several combinations of feats and most seem to be attainable by rogues and TWF rangers. If they found something I didn't, great, but I'm not really certain that they'll have something I'll drool over. Thanks for the input and I'll let you know if my dreams have come true with fighters :D
Gondoras 03-27-06, 08:52 PM	Whirlwind attack would be a horrible feat for a rogue. They'd have to have every one of their targets flanked, or otherwise TWFing (a staple rogue tree) or Spring Attack (the other tree). Really, the best thing to do are get better feats; I recommend Monte Cook's Arcana Evolved for a place to get some nifty fighter-only feats, or Iron Heroes (by Mike Mearls, written before he was hired by WotC). Iron Heroes will need SOME conversion, since it's a book about an almost no-magic world, but the easiest thing to do is make the feats in that fighter only (and follow the rule for conversion in the back of the book.) The fighter, as a class, has no problem; simply the feats it gets later on aren't enough to compare. IH will fix that problem (and most of your CoDzillas and wizards might cry foul from those things). Yeah, I was just throwing out examples of major feat trees that other classes could obtain, even though it would be out of the ordinary for them. I'll have to check out those books. I was definitely looking for some fighter-only feats, so it sounds great. Thank you for the input
shadowfox628 03-27-06, 09:07 PM	Fighters are very useful. As stated before, Fighters specialize in combat, where skills aren't important. Skills is the main reason (from my experience) that Rogues even exist. Sure, Rogues have Sneak Attack, but they're limited in uses, and, believe me, Rogue's aren't great in combat. Rangers are also centered with their choices. They make a choices early on, and they can't change that. Fighters have many options avalible to them, and can be great at both melee and ranged combat. You're underestimating Fighters.
Jherid 03-27-06, 09:08 PM	One of a fighters best (and only, really) strengths is their flexibility. All those feats can give you lots of options on the battlefield. Someone hiding behind a big shield? Sunder it. A flanking rogue about to stab you hard next round? Disarm his daggers. Flying wizard? Quickdraw that bow and rapid shot him. Got tripped? Luckily you had room to pick up the prone fighting feat last level. A wonderful build made up by Snow Savant (considered one of the best straight fighter builds in fact) shows this: http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=163005 Granted, fighters have mostly been reduced to a two level dip class, but with some know-how you can still make em work.
Cadfan 03-27-06, 09:12 PM	If you use expansion books, you can make a very powerful fighter. It just takes a bit more effort. Consider: Human Fighter 1: Weapon Focus Greatsword, Power Attack, Improved Sunder 2: Cleave 3: Iron Will 4: Weapon Specialization Greatsword 6: Heavy Armor Optimization, Combat Brute 8: Improved Weapon Focus Greatsword 9: Greater Heavy Armor Optimization Armor check penalty in magical platemail is -2 instead of -5. Fighters actually have an ok skill list, its just that the armor check messes them up, so this frees our fighter up to climb, jump, swim, ride as he pleases. Damage output is pretty high. Get adamantine plate and an adamantine greatsword, and off you go. Not much can defeat this in combat without munchkinning- I consider this to be a pretty standard power level build. You can make similarly decent builds for reach weapons, riding, tripping, lots of things. Just takes a bit more research and effort.
JMalone 03-27-06, 09:13 PM	Battle shouldn't be the only focus on a fighter. Welcome to Cluesville, population: you. Look at the name of the class. Fighter. I.e. one who is going to be fighting a lot. But I digress. I'm not "hip" and up to date on all the new crazy tricks you youngins are doing nowadays with all of this; quite frankly, I didn't update to 3.5 until a little while ago. But from my little experience with the core system, a well-made fighter is probably the single-class warrior you could field for general monster-clean up and adventuring. You mentioned something about skills and how Fighters don't have them in large numbers. That is for a reason, Holmes. Again, I mention the name of the class. When you picked Fighter, you picked it so you could Min-Max it so you can pick up a 6 foot, 60 lb. slab of metal and destroy things. You did it for the Cleave Tree, combined with Whirlwind and whatever latest broken Feat selection you guys are playing with. You didn't do it so Hairy McWarrior could have 15 ranks in Profession (Smacktard), Perform (Mime), and Craft (Best Selling Novels about the exploits of the party). Secondly, that skill-check penalty only affects you while wearing that Gimp Suit +4. You should have known that limitation before hand and planned for it. Dude, if it really bothers you, take the stuff off or get a wizard/cleric to cover for you. I imagine Cats Grace, Silence, and a number of other spells can cover for you if you screw up. Thirdly, you said that a rogue or ranger could totally destroy a Fighter in a fight. Maybe if you did some poor Feat selection (such as picking Skill Focus 10 times, hint hint hint), but a Fighter with the right feats could beat those enemies. Sure, the Rogue could sap a fighter's strength with the Crippling Strike, and the Ranger could have selected Favored Enemy (Stupid Meatshields), but who cares? You have Improved Critical, Weapon Specialization, and all those other feats for powering up you and your oversized Freudian Sword. Make them hurt.
Gondoras 03-27-06, 11:51 PM	hehe, that's some great stuff there. I guess that's where I'm screwing up. I consider the barbarian class to be the big "HULK SMASH" kind of guy figure the fighter should be a bit more finesse and wise. Guess they're a little closer than I figured. I did manage to whine to my DM enough to allow me to take a PrC that he hasn't heard of, if I choose.....main reason is because I kind of broke my character at the start... STR- 16 DEX- 17 CON- 16 INT- 10 WIS- 9 CHA- 6 This is the result after taking a Duergar race, so the -4 to CHA hurt pretty bad. For some reason I began with the idea of TWF and going with fighter 14/ranger 6. After I leveled my ranger class, I realized that I screwed up..... This guy could've been pretty devastating as a Rogue, but since it's action said action done, I'm pretty much stuck with it. From the way it looks, he can still be a pretty nasty fighter, so I appreciate the help. The PrC that I talked the DM into letting me use was the Dwarven Axemaster that's located on this page at: http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=57320&page=1&pp=30 Though I've seen the benefits of using a Greatsword, this class takes using a GreatAxe to a different level. After working for a couple days on creating a stud fighter with this PrC, I'll have to place it to you guys whether or not the PrC at Fighter 9/Ranger 1/ Dwarven Axemaster 10 would be better or not than going Fighter 19/ Ranger 1 with the superstar feats that are presented within this site. Since a Duergar already has Invisibility as a racial feat, I was also trying to either create or find a PrC for Duergars that would get him Improved Invisibility or whatever that lets him attack without losing his invisibility. One on one, it might not be that great, but in a party of 4, an enemy may ignore a spiked chain tagging him to attack someone he could see. If he does come after the invisible man, he'd have know idea how badly he screwed up :D Ok, time to research more. Let me know what you think, though. If I can turn this character around after messing it up that early, wow. I'd definitely bow to this site every time I came here. Thanks for everything....everyone. Gondoras, the fighter that may be decent, yet. :)
Gondoras 03-28-06, 12:20 AM	I guess I could give a bit more info. I'm already a Fighter 2/Ranger 1. Initially, I was looking TWF and thought the idea of an animal companion (Like Maximus's wolf) and favored enemies would be cool, but research changes things.....I blame it on rust, but it'd be great if I could turn him around. My current feats are: Power Attack, Improved Initiative, Dodge (another initial messup,) and Combat Reflexes. I love the idea of tripping and hitting and since I'd have the Enlarge feat and Invisibility as racial abilities, that would probably make the Gatling Gun Tripper even more rediculous. I actually forgot the great benefits of tripping, but this character may hold some surprises before it's all over.
serow_#R 03-28-06, 12:29 AM	hehe, that's some great stuff there. I guess that's where I'm screwing up. I consider the barbarian class to be the big "HULK SMASH" kind of guy figure the fighter should be a bit more finesse and wise. Guess they're a little closer than I figured. hmm i rmbr in 1 of the salvatore novels, during the fight between the orc and drizzt, it puts it as something like raw ferocity vs a tactical mind. so yeah, being a fighter is tough but very rewarding, especially if your party is about team-play and backing you up. :)
Tristan 03-28-06, 03:08 AM	usually, in all the campagins i've been in, Fighters are always high damage dealers the party can always count on. Sure, the spellcaster might get in one or two good fireballs, but thats it. When in trouble the fighter is the backbone of the situation.
Gondoras 03-28-06, 01:35 PM	ok, I changed my plan around. Plenty of feats around today that I haven't seen before that are definitely more important than the couple extra points of damage that the Weapon Specialization tree offers. Basically with the INT 10 stat, I'll need to dump bonuses at 4,8, and 12 into intelligence, then go 16 and 20 into Strength. So, here's what I'm looking at, since the DM is letting me use Dwarven Axemaster as a PrC from this site. 1- Dodge, Power Attack 2- Improved Initiative 3- Combat Reflexes 4- none At this point I'm a Fighter 3/Ranger 1....so here's where I attempt to correct it. 5- Weapon Focus (Greataxe) 6- Weapon Focus (either Throwing axe or Dwarven Waraxe depending if I change back to TWF) 7- Axe Master(+1 damage to axes),Axe Toss (+5') Going until I complete Axemaster PrC 8- Purposeful power (extra attacks given up and get bonus damage of # of attacks lost * strength), 9- Axe Toss (+10'), Cleave 10- Monkeygrip 11- Deep Cuts (attacks armor and does damage with remaing dmg points if armor is destroyed) 12- Axe tossing (15'), Combat Expertise 13- GrandMaster (axes wielded w/ damage of 1 size higher (great axe 1d12 becomes 3d6 or with monkeygrip, looking at 4d6 or 5d6 w/ -2 modifier!!!) 14- Karmic Strike 15- Axe Toss (20'), Deft Opportunity 16- Headsman (cuts opponents head off with natural 20) back to fighter 17- Great Cleave 18- Lightning Reflexes 19- Double Hit 20- Go ahead and take a second level in Ranger to get TWF, or possibly pick up a Rogue level for fun just to see a sneak attack with a 5d6 damage + 1d6. lol Probably only 1 blank level for a guy that's still just a fighter.....Not bad at all. Sure, he may not be able to handle a Red Dragon by himself, but that's why we travel in groups :D You think they'd let me get away with calling it a Duergar Axemaster and changing the ranged weapon stuff to 2 feats and Improved invisibility 1/day? nah, didn't think so, lol.
Gondoras 03-28-06, 02:37 PM	BTW, I realize this isn't the ideal way to get the most out of this PrC, or character, but after breaking him, I don't think it's a bad patchup. I'll probably go with a Light or Medium Armor to take advantage of his Dex to AC. I've never used Monkeygrip before, so I'm just curious as to how his damage will come out. On top of that, I think using a larger weapon would allow for the Improved Trip to be useful (instead of using a less damaging weapon.) Apart from that, my excitement towards this character has improved to an extreme amount. I'd still like to reroll him with the 4d6 take away 1, but I think this will do. Quick question, though.....If I got my hands on a headband of intellect, would that bonus go towards the ability to use feats? I have always been under the impression that it goes off of your base stats, so I'd still need to dump 3 into my intelligence, but if it does......that'd change my feat progression pretty drastically, since I could pump the bonuses into Strength.... just trying to figure out every angle Thanks again for all the help, everyone. It's definitely appreciated and even if I still manage to mess this character up, this site has helped out my knowledge of the game greatly.
BloodBought 03-28-06, 03:02 PM	my understanding is that enhancement bonuses will qualify you for feats, but if for any reason you lose that enhancement bonus then you lose the ability to use any feats that you took as a result of the higher Int.
Gondoras 03-28-06, 03:36 PM	yeah, the party I'm with probably won't let me hold onto it very long, either. Rogues, Wizards, and Rangers that could either steal, bluff, intimidate or anything else to get the helm from me.....and without much of a Will save or sense motive skill, they wouldn't have to do much to take it off my hands.... unless the Necromancer that I'm basically a bodyguard for would rather having a more intelligent traveling companion....in that case, he'd be able to hold onto it longer...Plus, I still wouldn't be a threat to the Necromancer (couple levels higher than me and we'll be in a position for most of the campaign where we'll need each other.....as soon as he doesn't need me, he could break my character again by taking it from me before he dumped me.) Or, I could dump into Int anyway and get some of those skill points I've been complaining about for the last couple days. :D I figure if the DM is going to give a halfling a magic item to give him the darkvision he'll need to travel with the Necromancer and I, it shouldn't be too much to ask to be able to find a Helm of Intellect +2,+4 or +6 somewhere along the way. Even though my character doesn't have a neg on Int, I'm playing him as being fairly stupid. A red dragon attacked the town we were in, and the Necromancer told me to go kill the dragon (I'm level 3 right now.) The dragon was doing flyby's and hitting the town with fire, but my brave little Duergar ran with all his might, jumped up as high as he could and swung his axe at the dragon......yeah, he missed and ended up hitting himself with the axe on the way down..... the DM was nice enough to give me a lessened attack penalty for good character play and humor. But, at the rate he's going, he'll end up getting the party killed if he doesn't wise up a little more. Quote the Duergar, "YAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY"
Senevri 03-28-06, 04:44 PM	<post-and-run> ...Looking at Troy, Achilles is _clearly_ a Rogue... most likely not a pure one, though... However, - He uses a short sword. - He uses Spring attack and Feint to get in hits to weak spots (ie what SA is nowadays. ) Arguably, he could have been a Duelist, though... Fighter _is_ generally considered a weak class these days - although, many a build is made better by few levels of Fighter --- especially Rogue. A recent build in CO boards declared a Fighter12/Rogue9 the optimal melee damage dealer. (okay, so it was Fighter13, but an uneven Fighter level? Blasphemy!) These days there's that Greater Specialization thing, which is one reason to look at Fighter 12 -- however, it is the counterpart of the Sorcerer in many ways --- there's no reason what-so-ever at all to stick to the class at higher levels. Of course, Core Only it's not so bad, especially if one wants to avoid multiclassing penalties.
Gondoras 03-28-06, 05:55 PM	well, as far as one on one battle, I guess I'll give you Achilles as a Rogue, but he definitely needed some fighter thrown onto him due to the ability to kill a wave of enemies in a short time frame. Mind you, that a Fighter with high Dex can use the Spring attack as well as the other feats pretty well. Using a short sword was most likely due to complying with his Weapon Finesse feat. I'd say that he was a fighter that didn't focus on Con, since he was only actually hit a couple times total. Probably didn't focus on Str, either, since he rarely carried anything other than his sword, shield, and armor. Not a complete rogue, not your typical fighter....which was kind of my intention with this Duergar...problem is that I took that level of Ranger. Shoot, I just realized how broken my character may be. If a Duergar's Favored Class is a Rogue, I really can't make his fighting high without suffering XP penalties from the Ranger 1..... Time to completely rebuild this character again. :mad:
Nom 03-28-06, 08:12 PM	One on one, crippling strike isn't that impressive. Remember, you need to make a successful sneak attack to gain the extra damage. Even in the worst case scenario (rogue within 30 ft. wins initiative and full attacks with a bow) the fighter wont lose more than a couple of points, assuming he is wearing heavy armour and thus doesn't care that much about being denied Dex to AC. Crippling strike excels when you get the opportunity to skirmish. In contrast, a rogue that tries to go toe-to-toe (necessary if you want to kill something quickly or stop it getting past you) will end up as so much mush. High Dex might help protect you from getting hit, but if you are hit a d6 HD isn't that impressive for survivability.
Lina_Inverse 03-29-06, 02:24 AM	Ask yourself a question. What do skills have to do with going into a dungeon, killing monsters, and takeing there stuff. You need...locking picking and trap detection. which happens to be the purpose of the rogue. The ranger needs skills to track, and ambush. A fighter doesnt need skills at all.
Shaggy_Shaggs 03-29-06, 03:41 AM	...problem is that I took that level of Ranger. Shoot, I just realized how broken my character may be. If a Duergar's Favored Class is a Rogue, I really can't make his fighting high without suffering XP penalties from the Ranger 1..... Time to completely rebuild this character again. :mad: You're not dead in the water yet, and there may be a way to get rid of that Ranger level, if it was your most recent level gained. You're level 3. Wights are CR 3, so it would be reasonable to run into one. Wights also have an energy drain attack that can give you negative levels. If Ranger was your most recent level, ask your DM if he can throw you a bone and give you a wight. Let yourself get hit (only once, then back the heck off so you don't get killed), and intentionally fail the saving throw against the negative level 24 hours later. The last level you gained will drop off, and when you regain it via xp you don't have to take it in the same class you lost.
Fiery Avenger 03-29-06, 03:27 PM	If you dislike the fighter, I can't think of a way to make it better - I personally like the fighter, and if we're trading around builds that take advantage of the Fighter's combative abilities - let's try this broken little number: So long as you have no GP restrictions on first level characters, at first level a Human Fighter can have Tower Shield Profficiency, EWP (Bastard Sword), and Monkey Grip. Take Full Plate, you have 22 AC without any Dexterity Mod. If you have a decent Strength Score (like 15 or 16) then you swing your 2d8 Large Bastard Sword with one hand at a +1 or +2 attack bonus. Even if you don't hit, you have the AC to be able to last a lot longer than your opponent, and eventually hit him with that 2d8 bad-boy you're swinging.
Jherid 03-29-06, 06:39 PM	Except Monkey Grip sucks... Take your bastard sword example, the average damage for a medium one is 5, the average for a large is 8. That's two points of extra damage on average, with you taking a -2 to hit. Instead of wasting a feat on Monkey Grip you could instead take Power Attack and (by level 2 at least) power attack for 2 which would would give you, guess what, two extra points of damage while taking a -2 to hit.
Fiery Avenger 03-29-06, 06:59 PM	Hrm. I had never looked at it that way, that's a very good point. I shall have to keep that in mind the next time I bring it up at the table. Oh well, even with the Power Attack, the build is still quite effective, considering you are a first level character with high AC and high damage output.
taradusis 04-16-06, 03:03 AM	So,have you re-intregrated as a player character?Tried any of the old success stratagies-Party kitty-cash in empties-kill the leader/break their morale? -and so forth?
kelvinaw273 04-16-06, 07:06 AM	Fighters, to my mind, are tough. They have the 2nd best hit points, best BAB and to top it off, stacks upon stacks of FEATS! If you take the right feats, the fighter becomes unstopable - and he has staying power! A wizard can take down anything with the right spells - once. A fighter can down a foe, and another, and another. The only thing he needs is a bit of healing now and again.
Ryusage 04-16-06, 01:29 PM	does anyone notice a pattern here? everyone keeps saying: "if you take the right feats, the fighter is great! now... let's take a look at his feat selection... Oh my, monkey grip, dodge, lightning reflexes and improved initiative... A fighter is the kind of guy who can take tons of damage and keep on kicking. Dodge isn't necessary, lightning reflexes is next to pointless (as is monkey grip), and improved initiative shouldn't matter unless you're fighting an experienced rogue (who should have the feat as well). you have to be careful with a fighter, because feat selection decides what kind of combatant he is going to be... You took Power Attack and you left that tree there.. I ask you, how often do you remember that feat long enough to use it? and how much would it help anyway? the only times I take Power Attack is when I'm looking into improved sunder, improved overrun, etc. the fighter isn't broken. Your feat selection is. This is an example of someone playing a good class badly. In my group we would call the offender a :censored: :turkey: :D
Surgo 04-16-06, 04:06 PM	you have to be careful with a fighter, because feat selection decides what kind of combatant he is going to be... You took Power Attack and you left that tree there.. I ask you, how often do you remember that feat long enough to use it? and how much would it help anyway? the only times I take Power Attack is when I'm looking into improved sunder, improved overrun, etc. I agree with most of your post, but take exception to this. Power Attack is great whether you go for the tree or not, and is practically a required feat as levels start to increase.
Clawhound 04-17-06, 11:43 AM	Here's the main powers of a fighter: #1. Tower shield, and Combat Expertise. #2. Hitpoints. #3. Full Attack Action That's about it. Tanks need all the AC and the Hit Points that they can get. Full Plate +1, +9, 3,500gp Tower Shield +1, +5, 2,000gp Ring +1, +1, 2,000gp Amulet of Natural Armor, +1, 2,000gp Combat Expertise, +5 Defensive Fighting, +2 So for only 9,000gp (est), you can hit an AC of 33, within wealth, at level 5. Fighter get access to DIRT CHEAP defenses. (Mind you, the fighter also gets a horrid To-Hit penalty for doing this. FYI. Nothing is free.)
Necropolitan 04-17-06, 02:35 PM	I played a Fighter clean and through from level 5 to level 36 and I must say, he never EVER once was outclassed by the party Ranger, Rouge or Wizard. After hitting Fighter Level 20, I only THEN branched out with Ten levels of Barbarian, and six levels of Legendary Dreadnaught. Figther's just take alot more thought in assigning feats then a Ranger or Rouge, which are pretty much just taking feats to support your class abilites. Rekk, the fighter afore mentioned, maxed out his critical abilites, with the Improved through Devastating Critcal abilites, and weapon-specialized with a Fullblade (I suppose a Large Greatsword in 3.5) with a critical of 17-20/DEATH. Fighter's may get the short end of the speical ability stick, but good tempus almighty you can make them insane engines of mass destruction with careful choices of the massive amount of feats they get.
malignor 04-17-06, 02:59 PM	I find the backbone of any good fighter is to pick a feat tree, compliment it with the right equipment & weapons, and synergize, synergize, synergize. Here are some SRD builds. The Mounted Fighter - Lance and (later) ShortBow 1: Mounted Combat, Weapon Focus - Lance, Combat Reflexes 2: Ride-By-Attack 3: Power Attack 4: Spirited Charge 6: Weapon Spec - Lance, Leadership (get a mount as a cohort) 8: Improved Crit - Lance 9: Mounted Archery 10: Greater WF - Lance 12: Greater WS - Lance, Point Blank Shot 14: Quickdraw 15: Precise Shot 16: Rapid Shot 18: Manyshot, Improved Precise Shot 20: Improved Sunder Equipment: Lance, of course, and likely armor spikes or spiked gauntlets (if they get too close). Heaviest armor available, large shield. Also a mighty composite shortbow. Steed is the best he can get until he can get a level 6 cohort, which is when he switches to a Pegasus. As level 10 cohorts, griffons are available as cohort steeds. As level 16 cohorts, very young Gold Dragons are available as cohort steeds. Good steeds for purchase are hippogriffs and spider eaters if available, or the standard heavy warhorse. Weapons & armor naturally get masterworked, special materials and magical enhancements as he levels. Mounted with a lance this guy is absolutely disgusting for damage output. x3 damage with a lance of a spirited charge, has +2 to hit and +4 damage before the multiplier, and crits x3 on a 19-20. On outdoor/war campaigns this guy is a terror on the battlefield. Plus if he goes for the flying steeds his mounted archery really shines. Notice I didn't do the weapon focus tree for ranged weapons... the special shot-feats were better in my eyes, as it allows this guy to double as an archer in a pinch. Even if this guy get dismounted or goes where his steed cannot, combat reflexes, power attack and the archery feats are all still useful. Likely as a footman he would use a bow, and polearm for reach (to make the most of his feats). I suggest a guisarme for the +2 to trip, which can't be countered if they can't reach him. One note. In my gaming group, we allow any reach polearm with piercing damage to count as a "lance". Before the classic jousting lance was around, a lance meant just any old spear... but the big thing about mounted lances is the reach and the charging impale. Thus this guy would, in my games, switch out "lance" feats with Longspear, or even Ranseur equivalents. The "Woodpecker" Fighter - paired light picks 1: Weapon Focus - Light Pick, Two-Weapon Fighting, Two Weapon Defense 2: Weapon Finesse 3: Power Attack 4: Weapon Spec - Light Pick 6: Combat Reflexes, Improved TWF 8: Improved Crit - Light Pick 9: Greater WF - Light Pick 10: Dodge 12: Greater TWF, Greater WS - Light Pick 14: Mobility 15: Spring Attack 16: Cleave 18: Great Cleave, Improved Initiative 20: Improved Bull Rush Equipment: Paired Light Picks (1d4, x4 crit), light or medium armor. This guy has a bit of a hard time at first, only having alot of little attacks. Then he reaches level 8, and that improved crit gets rather terrifying. 19-20/x4 crit... and with so many attacks, the chances are pretty good of doing 4d4+8+2STR at least once a round (just under 10%, and by level 8 has 4 attacks per round via TWF... By level 16 his attacks/round are maxed out with 7 attacks/round, 14/14/9/9/4/4/-1 at 1d4+4/19-20x4, plus ability and enhancement modifiers). The spring attack and cleave lines are just there to give more options in combat (and power attack is a waste in this case). Honestly, this guy would be great for going into the Duellist PrC or taking a few levels of rogue. The Down & Out Fighter - Guisarme & Armor Spikes 1: Weapon Focus - Guisarme, Combat Expertise, Combat Reflexes 2: Improved Trip 3: Power Attack 4: Weapon Spec - Guisarme 6: Weapon Focus - Armor Spikes, TWF 8: Improved Crit - Guisarme 9: Greater WF - Guisarme 10: Improved Crit - Armor Spikes 12: Weapon Spec - Armor Spikes, Greater WS - Guisarme 14: Improved Unarmed Attack 15: Improved Grapple 16: Cleave 18: Great Cleave, Greater Weapon Focus - Armor Spikes 20: Greater Weapon Spec - Armor Spikes Equipment: Guisarme (2d4 slash, reach, x3 crit, +2 trip), Spiked Armor (1d6 piercing, light, main or offhand, use in grapple) This is one of my faves. He's a tripping machine (+6 to trip from feat & weapon choice) and, if things get tight, he can become a grappling monster too. The spring attack (with improved trip and reach) are useful, and being able to cleave evens the odds against numerous foes. The TWF I snuck in there lets him engage close and far foes at -4, mixing up armor spikes and guisarme attacks. Speaking of the guisarme, you'll note my love for Improved Crit on this too ... 19-20 x3 on a 2d4 slasher. Terrific for going wild on all your prone foes.
Dochenor 04-17-06, 06:28 PM	At first i was going to come out with guns blazing about how great fighters can be if played correctly. Now, i see no point. You guys did a great job explaining the ONE great thing about fighter. FEATS!!!! Pick the right feats and watch the body-count just add up.
Solidcobra 04-18-06, 01:20 AM	Well...it's all about what you expect from the class. If you expect your fighter to jump around like an anime ninja on crack and instant-kill every enemy in sight...then you will be disappointed. If you expect to be able to stand there all day and deal your 2d6+X damage per hit, along with a myriad of different combat options depending on the situation, then you're going to be glad. Fighters aren't super-wicked damagedealers. Neither are monks. You won't do as much damage as the highest spell level of the party nuker. What you will do, however, is have lasting power until every single hit point is burned up (and with a sword of wrathful healing, that is a lot of HP to hit down), while the nuker has lost almost all his power by the time he's down to magic missiles. All that said...fighters are better off going with a prestige class at some point. This limits versatility, but increases power. Either way, a fighter is a very...durable character. He is never completely useless, but he will rarely make the group go "wow" and take the spotlight.
Duvanok 04-18-06, 01:32 AM	Feats do make a difference, especially when Greater Wp focus, Wp specialization, and Greater Wp specialization are limited to those with appropriate fighter levels. When you spend all your time specializing with various weapons, it makes sense that you don't have a lot of skill knowledge. Never underestimate a fighter who has dumped all his skill points into jump. One of the coolest things I have seen in a game is a half-orc fighter (wearing full plate) that jumped a 20 foot ravine to plant his greataxe in the head of bugbear who had just cut the rope bridge. The bugbear was as surprised as I was.
Kursk 04-18-06, 01:58 AM	I took several years off from D&D and got back into it a couple months ago. After getting caught up on most of the research that I missed, I've come to the conclusion that Fighters might as well be considered a dead class. Why? Because every class seems to have been modified to make Fighters pretty much useless. :weep: Yeah, when they evened out the XP/level needed it screwed the thief & fighter. I just revamped the fighter a bit and cut out some of the "fighting" abilities of non-fighter classes to even it up again.
Forgember 05-06-06, 01:53 PM	Here's the main powers of a fighter: #1. Tower shield, and Combat Expertise. #2. Hitpoints. #3. Full Attack Action That's about it. Tanks need all the AC and the Hit Points that they can get. Full Plate +1, +9, 3,500gp Tower Shield +1, +5, 2,000gp Ring +1, +1, 2,000gp Amulet of Natural Armor, +1, 2,000gp Combat Expertise, +5 Defensive Fighting, +2 So for only 9,000gp (est), you can hit an AC of 33, within wealth, at level 5. Fighter get access to DIRT CHEAP defenses. (Mind you, the fighter also gets a horrid To-Hit penalty for doing this. FYI. Nothing is free.) Could take an Extream Shield (Races of Stone) instead of the tower shield and not have that nasty -2 attack penalty in melee, AC would still be a 32. Also I always take Tumble cross classed as a fighter, level 7 that Defensive Fighting bonus will be a +3.
Tristan 05-06-06, 02:38 PM	3 symbols P H 2 end of discussion. no backtalk ...reallly stop reading my post :mad:
Arem_K 05-07-06, 02:37 AM	While I think you are right that fighters aren't that hot, you have a lot of mistaken assumptions in your argument. A rogue can't outfight a good fighter. They have skills instead. Rangers generally don't beat fighters in melee either, since two weapon fighting is the weakest path (Don't believe me, ask the char opt boards, they can explain it better than I can.) Your feat selection is really bad. Don't feel bad about it though. The things that look good and really work are very different. Most fighters get their damage from power attack, because generally your ability to hit stuff scales up faster than enemy AC. Malignor's builds look pretty good, though I would swap spirited charge and power attack, since spirited charge doubles you damage and power attack only can add plus six damage for a bab penalty of three at this point. You know, from your style it seems like you would be happier with a barbarian, which is generally considered to be better than fighter.
EyeontheMountain 05-07-06, 03:12 AM	I find I ahve to agree with the OP, though hopefully the PHBII will help a bit, but loss of skills and such just makes the fighter a sub sub par class. I'm sorry but to my mind the fighter has the following problems 1. Chain shirts are so good Only -4 AC off full plate, and so good with dex, and you will never miss the 4 AC. Plus all the light-armor-only feats and abilities. I mean realistically there are only two armors in DnD for non-druids, chain shirts (mithril, of course) and Full plate. 2. Hit points. Only 1 point per level above a cleric and a ranger. WOO-HOO. Totally miniscule. Andthe trade off is pretty good, saves, skills, and abilities for a minor drop in hit points? Sign me up. 3. BAB Fighters at level 20 are just as good as that pesky ranger or druid, and only 5 back from the cleric (who matches him with a Divine power) "Hi, I'm a mastr warrior, and I have equal BAB with almost everyone." 4. Feats are not enough. A ranger or barbarian effectively gets a feat every level with class abilities, sure some are sub-par, but then again the Fighter doesn't get a feat half the time. The fighter needs serious new abilities, and the ability to attack a lot more than a two-weaponfighting rouge or a simple ranger. I've always thought Fighters should get a new BAB (counting for everything (Attacks,m Prestige class prerequisites) every 3 levels or so. A 26 BAB at 20th level is a significant increase. My.02 cents
SoldierOfFortune187 05-07-06, 03:26 AM	All the above comments are very good, but the cold hard truth is if you don't like toe-to-toe fighting, nothing is going to convince you that a class who is built with that possibility in mind is good. Feats, feats, oh my god feats, how do I love thee? More feats = more customizable character = a happier, brighter me! Take your fancy prestige classes to get your obscure little abilities that are good in this or that situation, I [the fighter] am good in the situations I choose to be good in. Everything has its check and balance in a game such as this. If it doesn't, your DM isn't trying very hard. The need to have -someone- capable of taking the brunt of damage while dishing out at least appreciable numbers themselves continues to be useful from level 1 into infinite. Nowhere else in the party is a better friend than the tride and true fighter. You are a ready target for any sort of buffing your cleric can provide, you stand between the frail wizard and the enemy's full-round attack action, you set up a rogue precious sneak attack through flanking. Why oh why wouldn't every single person on your team not want to keep you alive? Their jobs are easier and more effective with your continued existence. It might be odd to think of Fighters as a 'support' role, being that they are typically on the front lines, but everything that you do makes everything your team does better.
Kursk 05-07-06, 06:28 PM	[QUOTE=I'm sorry but to my mind the fighter has the following problems 1. Chain shirts are so good Only -4 AC off full plate, and so good with dex, and you will never miss the 4 AC. Plus all the light-armor-only feats and abilities. I mean realistically there are only two armors in DnD for non-druids, chain shirts (mithril, of course) and Full plate. 2. Hit points. Only 1 point per level above a cleric and a ranger. WOO-HOO. Totally miniscule. Andthe trade off is pretty good, saves, skills, and abilities for a minor drop in hit points? Sign me up. The fighter needs serious new abilities, and the ability to attack a lot more than a two-weaponfighting rouge or a simple ranger. [/QUOTE] I agree. I have made a new type of armour with much higher AC that a fighter (only) has prof with, as well as an auto feat allowing no max AC/dex with this armour. Not enough, but a start so that a fighter can be a better fighter (in all aspects of melee) than non-fighter classes. Another point that I haven't seen mentioned or it is then it's quickly buried is that in 1st & 2nd ed, every other class (except for thief) took more XP to level than a fighter. This was to reflect the FACT that those classes were more powerful. So the fighter got doubly screwed in 3X.
starfire311 05-08-06, 09:56 AM	I agree. I have made a new type of armour with much higher AC that a fighter (only) has prof with, as well as an auto feat allowing no max AC/dex with this armour. Not enough, but a start so that a fighter can be a better fighter (in all aspects of melee) than non-fighter classes. Another point that I haven't seen mentioned or it is then it's quickly buried is that in 1st & 2nd ed, every other class (except for thief) took more XP to level than a fighter. This was to reflect the FACT that those classes were more powerful. So the fighter got doubly screwed in 3X. Fighter is also a lot stronger than in 1st or 2nd edition, while wizard is essentially the same as it was. The problem I see is that all the classes are basically balanced. You don't look at a class as a profession anymore... you need more Skill points pick up a level in ranger or rogue, you want nice feat for combat pick up a level in fighter. Your character is not your class anymore, your character can be anything, you just use class choices to represent that. fighter is generally not optimal at higher than level 4, thankfully we have multiclassing to even it.... but you know what else aint optimal at higher levels barbarian, Bard, Cleric, Druid, Paladin, Ranger, Rogue, Sorceror, Wizard. You can make any of them work, but the more you advance in them, the less optimal your character becomes. For the msot part an equal level single class character will lose to an equal level fighter in single mundane combat. Granted the barbarian can give him a run for his money... but the fighter still bests the paly and the ranger. They have other tricks that may allow them to surpass the fighter in usefulness.
Gargs454 05-08-06, 10:44 AM	My experience with fighters to date is that early on they tend to outclass the other classes for the most part, but at later levels they can be easily outclassed by some, if not all, of the other classes. Plain and simple, the fighter is there to be a meatshield. Most likely, a 20th level wizard will quickly torch a fighter, but at 3rd level, the wizard is likely to be in trouble. Perhaps more than the other classes, a fighter definitely should expect to take a dip in a PrC or another core class along the way. Most of the time, the feats (while huge early on) will start to run out of steam at later levels. Keep in mind though, that fighter is just as integral to the survival of a party as the cleric and wizard and rogue. A wizard (particularly early on) can't do much if there's nobody to get in the way of the charging enemies. A rogue will be toasted if there is not a fighter to help him flank (and to draw the attention of the enemy). Even the cleric needs to be able to step back and cast spells which is hard to do when being beat on. The fighter may not have as many jaw dropping moments as the other classes, but the other classes can't get to those jaw dropping moments without the fighter. In the end, it just depends on what you want from your character.
solbergb 05-08-06, 12:50 PM	does anyone notice a pattern here? everyone keeps saying: "if you take the right feats, the fighter is great! now... let's take a look at his feat selection... Oh my, monkey grip, dodge, lightning reflexes and improved initiative... Yeah. That's roughly the equivalent of a sorcerer whose first four noncantrip spells are: true strike, reduce person, expeditious retreat and cat's grace. They don't add up to anything that you can actually use effectively in combat, although they help marginally in staying alive. They don't work well with the class abilities, and they have no synergy together. My sorc example could hit really well with a crossbow, but a crossbow doesn't do enough damage to be worth that much spell support. Likewise, you have two purely defensive feats ( but not strong feats...+1 to AC and +2 to reflex save isn't a big deal at level 4). Improved init is only useful if you gain an advantage by going first (rogue) or can devastate the opposition with one action (some kinds of higher level spellcasters). Monkey grip is an attack feat, but one that hurts you at low levels (-2 to hit to get +1 to +3.5 in damage is usually a bad tradeoff until you start to hit reliably). So...four marginal feats, and worse, four that don't work together. Somebody who has evasion or who wants prone attack might get combat reflexes. Dodge is usually part of a path to a higher level feat, such as spring attack. Monkey grip is usually taken AFTER many other damage increasing feats, as a way to pile a bit more on. The problem isn't the class. It's the fact that, like sorcerer, it is an unforgiving class if you make bad choices during levelup. For folks unfamliliar with the system, prep caster classes like cleric and wizard are nearly impossible to screw up with feat choices, and classes packed with class abilities such as Monk tend to insulate you somewhat from bad choices (but not as much as a class where most power comes from spells that you'll have no matter what choices you make). It's an irony of D&D 3.x that the classes easiest to play are least forgiving to build mistakes, and the classes hardest to play are the most forgiving.
Nom 05-08-06, 09:02 PM	It's an irony of D&D 3.x that the classes easiest to play are least forgiving to build mistakes, and the classes hardest to play are the most forgiving.I don't think it's irony at all. The issue is when the "design decisions" are made. Sorcerers and fighters make them at level-up (including creation). Prepared casters make them every "morning". Monks make them at character creation. In a campaign environment, I think the barbarian and ranger are easier to play than the fighter or paladin, since they typically have fewer "tricks" to playing them well. Fighter is especially tricky if you have a lot of not-always-on feats (ie not Weapon Focus or Weapon Finesse), since you need to know when to use them and how to set up the situation to take advantage of them.
Kursk 05-09-06, 12:16 AM	Fighter is also a lot stronger than in 1st or 2nd edition, while wizard is essentially the same as it was. Um, no. Wizards can now cast spells even if injured. They can cast without components. They can do touch spells without AoO. I could go on but won't. Too many "power ups" over 1st & 2nd ed to type here. fighter is generally not optimal at higher than level 4, thankfully we have multiclassing to even it.... but you know what else aint optimal at higher levels barbarian, Bard, Cleric, Druid, Paladin, Ranger, Rogue, Sorceror, Wizard. I'm talking about Fighters, not barbarian, bard, etc. So, this comment is irrelevant. Stick to the topic. For the msot part an equal level single class character will lose to an equal level fighter in single mundane combat. Granted the barbarian can give him a run for his money... but the fighter still bests the paly and the ranger. They have other tricks that may allow them to surpass the fighter in usefulness. Again, irrelevant to what I said. I didn't say the Paladin or Ranger got weaker or stronger. I said they level faster now in relation to the fighter. So all being equal the fighter got weaker.
loaba 05-09-06, 12:25 AM	Overall, the lowly Fighter did kinda get the shaft in 3.5. Sure he's got some good points, but there so many PrC's now that give away all his goodies or they allow other classes to even the playing field with him. For me, I think it wouldn't be a bad idea at all to give the single-class Fighter, in addition to his Bonus feats, the entire Weapon Focus tree for free (at the appropriate levels of course). That's 4 Feats that every 12th level fighter will always have. I imagine it would be pretty brutal.
allenchan 05-09-06, 12:29 AM	From what I've seen, the phb2 is taking steps to add that zest back to the fighter, and for this I am greatful.
loaba 05-09-06, 12:50 AM	From what I've seen, the phb2 is taking steps to add that zest back to the fighter, and for this I am greatful. Just read the excerpt on the new Knight class - sign me up, please.
Norsesmithy 05-09-06, 01:20 AM	I keep Hearing about how a wizard can out dammage a fighter with maximized extended quickened silenced delayed burst fireballs or some such, but what are your Dms doing that a wizard can last the first 30 rounds of a fight burning so much of a nonrenewable resource on a single (group) of opponents? The melee classes have staying power. A fighter can deal the same (large) amount of damage every round for all eternity. It is like saying that archers are underpowered, in the games I am in every charector that can carries a bow. Does combat start at thirty feet? My Dm has initiated combat at 300 Squares! (House rule that Large creatures got x1.5 range with ranged weapons.) If the fighter feels under powered to you, your Dm is fighting stupid. There should be an enemy sorc dispelling your fireballs and if that makes you regret being a mage, the enemy sorc should throw his own. You need force equivilancy. If there is no enemy caster, the team with the mage will shred the opposition just as if the party had no melee monkey the enemy fighter would destroy the wizard with multiple attacks and AoOs a round. Feeling bad that the rouge gets sneak attack every turn because you help him to flank? That damage is half yours. By the way, Why do your opponents let themselves get flanked? If your teamates out do the fighter, your fights are not long enough, and your opponents (or Dm) are too stupid. (We have a lot of charector deaths, my level 14 Paladin is the only surviving original charector.)
Archangel62 05-09-06, 01:21 AM	As a 2nd ed veteran I'd argue that the fighter got a bit of a boost if for no other reason than now it is possible for them to get decent weapons to start out. Also, specialization doesn't lose other weapon proficiencies. The wizard got pummeled with the nerf bat, don't believe me check out how many spells had a ceiling lower than the wizards caster level. Also many spells worked differently, some much more powerful. 3-3.5 aren't necessarily better or worse, just different from 2nd ed.
starfire311 05-09-06, 10:45 AM	Um, no. Wizards can now cast spells even if injured. They can cast without components. They can do touch spells without AoO. I could go on but won't. Too many "power ups" over 1st & 2nd ed to type here. Huh, there were no AoO period in 1st or 2nd ed. If they cast while near enemy they must make a concentration check to even try now, if they fail they dont cast the spell, previously they could just go ahead and cast it. Sure wizards got a few power-ups, every class did... but fighters and rogues got the biggest power ups... fighters got 11 class abilities and rogues got the much more useful than backstab, sneak attack. If you just look at the 4 core classes IMO... rogues got the biggest boost, then fighters, then wizards, then clerics. the reason I put wizard over lceric is cause they get 4 feats, but spont casting cure spells could easily put cleric ahead of Wizard. fighter is generally not optimal at higher than level 4, thankfully we have multiclassing to even it.... but you know what else aint optimal at higher levels barbarian, Bard, Cleric, Druid, Paladin, Ranger, Rogue, Sorceror, Wizard. I'm talking about Fighters, not barbarian, bard, etc. So, this comment is irrelevant. Stick to the topic. so you are trying to evaluate the power of fighters in a vacuum, without comparing them to other classes... brilliant. I brought up the other classes... actually icase you werent paying attention I brought up every other class... to point out that they all suck at higher levels. Even the vaunted druid aint that great at higher levels when compared to what can be done with PrCs. For the msot part an equal level single class character will lose to an equal level fighter in single mundane combat. Granted the barbarian can give him a run for his money... but the fighter still bests the paly and the ranger. They have other tricks that may allow them to surpass the fighter in usefulness Again, irrelevant to what I said. I didn't say the Paladin or Ranger got weaker or stronger. I said they level faster now in relation to the fighter. So all being equal the fighter got weaker. perhaps not relevant to you but definatly relevant to the topic of fighters being weak... fighter can do one thing and can do it better than and more constantly than any other class they fight, and they are really good at it.
Clawhound 05-09-06, 12:06 PM	I find I ahve to agree with the OP, though hopefully the PHBII will help a bit, but loss of skills and such just makes the fighter a sub sub par class. I'm sorry but to my mind the fighter has the following problems 1. Chain shirts are so good Only -4 AC off full plate, and so good with dex, and you will never miss the 4 AC. Plus all the light-armor-only feats and abilities. I mean realistically there are only two armors in DnD for non-druids, chain shirts (mithril, of course) and Full plate. 2. Hit points. Only 1 point per level above a cleric and a ranger. WOO-HOO. Totally miniscule. Andthe trade off is pretty good, saves, skills, and abilities for a minor drop in hit points? Sign me up. 3. BAB Fighters at level 20 are just as good as that pesky ranger or druid, and only 5 back from the cleric (who matches him with a Divine power) "Hi, I'm a mastr warrior, and I have equal BAB with almost everyone." 4. Feats are not enough. A ranger or barbarian effectively gets a feat every level with class abilities, sure some are sub-par, but then again the Fighter doesn't get a feat half the time. 1. A +/- in AC is the different between getting hit 1/3 of the time or 1/2 the time. That a big difference. 2. Fighters concentrate on Strength, Con, Dex, usually in that order. In my estimation, it should be Con, Strength, Dex. By 10th level, those few extra hit points now mean 10-30 more hitpoints than anyone else. 3. In theory, this sounds good. In practice, you never want your cleric on point unless you have another cleric. If you want another cleric for "more healing", you may as well buy wands of curing, and instead make an expert at melee with more raw HP and better BAB. 4. The fighter feats do need a little work. I think that the fighter class is a good class, but not a great class.
Morrowner 05-09-06, 04:15 PM	Here is my two bits... Strength is paramount for a Fighter,speed kills. If just once a day you manage to get in one more hit and deal more damage on average you are shortening the rounds of punishment you take. Another 2 damage a hit and another 2d6+14 a day doesn't seem like a lot but it usually is just enough to make the opponent keel over. I'd rather do that than eat another full attack from a beasty, even if it does mean I have 20 less hit points than the con fighter. Not to say that meatshielding isn't valid, depending on character concept and party needs it certainly can be effective. Its been my experience that the Dwarven con fighter doesn't have diddly on the Human or Half-Orc strength fighter. YMMV. The fighter is very good as is. With a little bit of the old "But Pete, shouldn't the Fighter get the Focus and Specialization trees for free? You're not making Bob blow feats on Sneak Attack dice, are you?" they blow Barbarians out of the water. Races of Stone has given the Fighter a lot, too. Floating Extreme Shields and Greater Heavy Optimized Adamantine Full plate is the bomb. AC 40+ and DR 3- is the bomb at the mids.
Ryusage 05-09-06, 07:18 PM	IMHO, the fighter is underpowered. But this can easily be fixed! Simply give it a d12 HD. Problem solved :D
Archangel62 05-10-06, 12:28 AM	The Fighter got a nice boost in PHB2, I just got it today and the combat style feats alone were amazing, the ability to gain fast healing 4 during encounters was pretty damn cool.
a_psh 05-10-06, 02:25 AM	If you just look at the 4 core classes IMO... rogues got the biggest boost, then fighters, then wizards, then clerics. the reason I put wizard over lceric is cause they get 4 feats, but spont casting cure spells could easily put cleric ahead of Wizard.Definitely rogue, cleric, fighter, wizard, in my opinion: rogues are now good at alot of things rather than just stealing crap, and are basically colossally improved in every way; clerics get 9th-level spells (used to top out at 7), multiple attacks (makes them worlds closer to a fighter in terms of combat potential), and the ability to memorize stuff other than cure spells; fighter bonus feats really make them awesome and fun; the main wizard improvement is metamagic, which is mostly notable because it lets them nova. ... In my experience running several D&D campaigns of different levels, it's always warrior-y characters (no one's played a single-class fighter, however) that pack the most damage. While I've seen arcanists burn themselves out and do amazing things a few times, it's ultimately folks with levels in fighter, ranger, or psychic warrior that end up doing the most damage round-for-round. A mage is more noteworthy for his battlefield control powers than his direct damage abilities: 9 times out of 10, using a wall of fire to herd the enemies into a corner is much more important than blasting them with cone of cold. It should be noted that a truly focused offensively optimized melee combatant gives up some defense and vice versa, of course.
mlund 05-10-06, 05:13 PM	Fighters can do some awful, awful things if you build them right. Admittedly, they tend to play better as NPC thugs than flexible dungeoneering adventurers, but they sure can smash people. I'm not exactly sure how thrilled the average melee player would be to engage in a fight with a 4th level Human Fighter sporting: Power Attack, Dodge, Combat Expertise, Kharmic Strike, Combat Reflexes, Cleave on a Warhorse whose maxed out ranks in Ride. 28 point buy: Str 16 Dex 14 Con 14 Int 14 Wis 8 Cha 8 He's still got all the basic vulnerabilities of a Fighter though. Will-based crowd-control can school him. But in a straight-up brawl against other Melee types? Ick, this guy is mean. Great Sword and a full Power Attack to start out with, then AoO for each time someone hits him. Duel-wielding Rangers and Flanking Rogues cry, and that's before he follows up with his own round where he swings and his mount start making its Full Attack. Ouch, man. Just ouch. You've got to resort to some dirty pool in melee against this guy, like Sundering his Saddle Strap and then Tripping him into next week, or working your Improved Disarm Mojo to make him powerless - which are things that basically Fighters and Monks can pull off, while Rogues and Rangers lack the necessary feats. - Marty Lund
Belldandy 05-10-06, 05:46 PM	There are a few things I notice about fighters: 1. Bloody good for roleplaying. Why? As they all look the same except for feats, so in order to differentiate between them, you have to expand them somewhat. 2. Fighters are MEANT to be seen. They are meant to provide the straight forward distraction and danger of the group. To allow rogues to flank. To protect the sorcerers and wizards to allow them to do their craft, and to give the clerics a reason to heal! (hehehe) The problem is, fighters DON'T have the best HP, barbarians do. BUT they can have armour in heavier varieties. Hmm so can clerics...and they can heal themselves. I mean what DO fighters get? Feats? Well a few. Not THAT many. I have been considering remaking the class with 3feats/4 levels or the like. Feats. Well they are nice, but... I mean... instead of spells? or abilities that no one not of your class or PRC can get? As for the "focus and specialisation" ??? pants! I mean if you take those 4 feats, you're left with 2,6,10,14,16,18,20 so 7 feats, and +2 to hit, +4 damage, with ONE WEAPON ONLY. Now this would be good for a PRC (But not unlike some) and yet... it's over 20 levels! Fighter is currently a dip class. However as I've seen, with some clever feat combos, you can make some interesting things going on. But as the tricks start to properly work, bigger and stronger things, clerics and wizards with polymorphing and buffs, can beat you up something good. So a fighter? Not so good. I want to make a fighter a FEARED opponent, but at the moment, you just can't. edit: I did play a 4th level fighter and he kicked a lot of booty. I now want to play another one. Halberds my friend. And killing dragons with a crit! Yeah baby! It's all about the roleplay.
Lord_Canius 05-10-06, 06:03 PM	Fighter? Weak? HA!! Suck on this. An Orc Fighter with one Flaw (Unearthed Arcana) at 6th level, with 3 specific feats; Two Weapon Fighting, Oversized Two Weapon Fighting, and Exotic Weapon Proficiency (Fullblade). Any other feats are your choice. Get weak little wizard man to enhance the two masterwork Fullblades you bought to give them the balanced special ability. An ugly hairy whirlwind of enourmous blades. 'Nuff said.
Kresalak 05-10-06, 06:41 PM	That might not completely suck, except you can't use a fullblade in one hand. Oversize Two-Weapon Fighting just reduces the penalty in using one-handed weapons. At least you didn't suggest Monkey Grip...
Jherid 05-10-06, 07:14 PM	I wonder if most people even read the Monkey Grip feat, seems they just think "Hey! Bigger...BETTER!"
Lord_Canius 05-10-06, 07:25 PM	Fullblades cannot be weilded in one hand by medium creatures, yes, but what does the balanced special quality in the Arms and Equipment Guide say? You'll have to read it yourself, because Arms and Equipment isn't SRD, but I have made my point.
Kresalak 05-10-06, 07:45 PM	Last I checked, didn't it allow you to use a weapon one size category larger than yourself as if it was one size category smaller? But regardless, it's still a horrible choice. A fighter using two shortswords would be far more deadly, since he can use Weapon Specialization for bonus damage, and spend his sword enhancements on elemental abilities for more bonus damage. And that is inferior to a fighter using a greatsword and armor spikes as the off-hand weapon.
Lord_Canius 05-10-06, 07:54 PM	And that is inferior to a fighter using a greatsword and armor spikes as the off-hand weapon. But which is scarier, the guy with the spikey armor and glowing sword, or the guy with regular armor and two really big swords? Big swords is my bet. And yes, the double Greatblade build is not exactly the strongest, but you can't deny that it is effective! (Also, saying that the character spends all his/her money to enhance his/her Greatblades ONCE is foolish and unreasonable. And whats to stop him/her from using Weapon Focus? I don't exactly understand your point of view or your reasoning. I would much appreciate you explaining it to me.)
Archangel62 05-11-06, 02:18 AM	Well, I think he means that as short swords are both light weapons and thus the penalties are low if not gone. The dual fullblade thing is impossible unless large size, and at that point you'd better have great stats. TWF can be great, but you need multiple good stats and are probably best off to prestige.
Belldandy 05-11-06, 07:54 AM	And fighters are DAMN good at killing humanoids, and things a little bigger or a little smaller. But against the very big (not so sure about the very small?) They are screwed. Fighters rely on strength (to which bigger things will easily beat them) Feats to trip and grapple, (bigger things have the strength AND the size) Fighters can disarm (which most animals and MONSTERS have natural attacks) At the low levels, you're likely taking on goblins and the like. But a fighter and a dragon? (true they ARE the easiest to fight, at least the easiest to build a DRAGONSLAYER, but still... ) Dragon eats the fighter. Actually unless people play Archer characters, very few have bows. (prefering the big sword option) And what IS the point of two weapon fighting? Have you SEEN the dex needed for those feats!? Strength and con. Str and Con. Still in a city adventure like, or small dungeons, I can see fighters still being useful. But a lot of GMs at higher levels uethe monsters rather then advanced characters - as opponents, and so the place opens up. In a squeezed dungeon, fly spells aren't as good. Fighters can THEN hold their own. I'm going to keep them in dungeons. Much more fair.
Morrowner 05-11-06, 09:10 AM	But a fighter usually has some ranged back ups like a mighty bow or a few returning Javelins if they have crap dexterity. They also get pumped up quite a bit by their friends, too. Always have a Freedom of Movement up! Nothing worse than Bite, Snatch, Breath Attack and drop for fistfuld6.
Belldandy 05-11-06, 09:21 AM	is it me, or do fighters seem like dependants after the first few levels. Fighters are bottom weighted, they get good stuff and fast at the low levels, then... a dribble of feats. if it worked out they got a feat EVERY level they would be much more fun to play. level Feats: 1*,2,3,4,6*,8,9,10,12*,14,15,16,18*,20 No feats: 5,7,11,13,17,19 I guess they do sort of. But as they get NOTHING else. How about 6 more feats? :D
Clawhound 05-11-06, 12:04 PM	Fighters aren't screwed. The problem with the class is that the combat system, generally, is better thought out and harder to break than the spell system. Fighter feats are also better thought out. That makes it harder for fighters to find loopholes or synergies. (In other words, the other classes are more broken.) What fighters need are those damage burst weapons, magical items, and other nifty things to keep up. However, too many fighters don't get such things because these items don't seem that important to most DM's.
mlund 05-11-06, 02:57 PM	Even at higher levels, the Fighter still has a lot to work with. He simply needs to expand his tactical options through his equipment and make sure he has a diverse number of well-developed advantages vs. a variety of opponents. Yes, there are a lot of critters out there that don't care about Disarm or Trip. Those feat-chains are short though, so you'll have plenty of other feats to work with. Almost every Feat scheme has something it is bad against. Karmic Strike doesn't work well against Ranged Attacks. Cleave doesn't work well against One Big Monster. It goes on and on. But at higher levels the Fighter has an expansive bag of tricks with something for every kind of foe. His Mighty Composite Longbow with a quiver full of specialty arrows is helpful against foes he can't reach. His Boots of Flying, Arcane Caster's Fly spell, or flying Steed helps limit those situations too. His Magical Adamantine Great Sword is ready to crush those who oppose him, with his back up Alchemical Silver and Cold Iron weapons on his belt. He's got some effective Melee feats, and he's dipped in to the Complete Warrior to gain some enhanced Ranged Attack Feats as well. While the Fighter may not always be the leading producer of damage in a scenario (that usually goes to Arcane Artillery at higher levels) he can produce a credible threat against almost anything in a variety of conditions. And if you tailor your adventures specifically around humanoid monster threats, the Fighter's combat style can grow more powerful as he specializes tactics against these types of foes. - Marty Lund
Kresalak 05-11-06, 04:06 PM	But which is scarier, the guy with the spikey armor and glowing sword, or the guy with regular armor and two really big swords? Big swords is my bet. And yes, the double Greatblade build is not exactly the strongest, but you can't deny that it is effective! My reasoning is thus. You have spent 2 feats (EWP, Oversize TWF) and an enhancement for both weapons to be able to use a Fullblade with only the normal penalties for TWF. You do 2d8+1xStr and 2d8+.5xStr in damage, which is not very good. To make TWF worthwhile, you need sources of bonus damage. The fighter with Weapon Specialization gets +2 damage per hit, and with that weapon enhancement he can get Flaming. He now does 2d6+2 per hit, equal to the fullblade. But he also has Weapon Focus, meaning, with identical resource expenditure, the shortsword fighter has come out +1 AB ahead. Shortswords are also easier to come by than Fullblades.
Morrowner 05-11-06, 05:18 PM	What if he spent EWP on Mercurial Greatswords? 3d6 damage versus 1d6+1d6+2 That is nearly 2 points of damage in the Large Mercurial Greatsword's favor. Furthermore, not every creature is hurt by fire, a lot of other creatures have at least Fire Resistance 5. That 1d6 isn't going to accomplish much against creatures with resistance and it will do absolutely nothing against those immune to fire. Another point: The Mercurial Greatsword is 4X on a crit, the Shortsword is only 19-20/2x. When the Orc gets a crit with those Mercurial Greatswords there goes the neighborhood.
loaba 05-11-06, 09:11 PM	What fighters need are those damage burst weapons, magical items, and other nifty things to keep up. However, too many fighters don't get such things because these items don't seem that important to most DM's. This is a very important point indeed. Fighters, more than any of the other classes, need the high-dollar offensive toys if they are to have any hope at all at higher levels. And yes, many is the DM who feels like the toys have no place in their game. About Dex-fighters. If you take the appropriate feats and select your stats wisely, the dex-monkey should hit just as often as his STR-bound counterpart and should have just as many hitpoints and should have a higher AC to boot. Just gimme that Mithral Chain Shirt +X and a pair of Gloves of Dexterity, please.
scienceman47 05-12-06, 02:12 AM	Be sure to check out PHB II, its got some mighty good additions. fighter only 18 level feat comes to mind.
Archangel62 05-20-06, 04:02 AM	Also the combat form feats can give you a boost and a half in terms of available power and tactics. The retraining stuff is cool too.
Kresalak 05-20-06, 11:15 AM	Yeah, the PHBII has done wonders for the fighter. A Str based TWFer still sucks (uber MAD), but you can now find honest, workable attempts at fighter 20 on the CO boards. Did I mention that these seem to be worth playing? Players Handbook II is the best book I've bought since Tome of Magic.
Archangel62 05-21-06, 12:37 AM	Yeah, the PHBII has done wonders for the fighter. A Str based TWFer still sucks (uber MAD), but you can now find honest, workable attempts at fighter 20 on the CO boards. Did I mention that these seem to be worth playing? Players Handbook II is the best book I've bought since Tome of Magic. I'd have to say the same, I buy product fairly heavily (I'm the usual DM mostly because others won't, can't, or are afraid of my knowledge and my library aiding myself AND a party.) And the PHB2 has given me some great ideas for opponents, new quests to toss in, and the retraining rules make a few of the houserules that I have easier to quantify.