How many 18th level fighters could an 18th level fighter take out

[Aelryinth]

An 18th level Fighter from 1E would kick the arse of a 3.5E.

1) With a +5 ring of protection, the f/18 needs a 2 to save against any and all spell effects. They have the best saves.

2) There is no gold limit on gear. The f/1 can have unlimited amounts of stuff. The key thing is the 3e fighter gets a +6 to Str Girdle. The 1E gets a girdle of Storm Giant Str for +6/+12.

3) Grand Mastery and Double Spec rules were in 1E. So the fighter did, on average, some incredible dmg with weapons. A grandmaster with the longsword is doing d10/2-16 +3/+3 with a speed modifier of 0, and attacking 7/2 ALL THE TIME...not just with full attack actions.

4) Full plate soaked up 2 pts of dmg per die.

5) Archer specs did double dmg at point blank range...and yes, they had strength bows, and arrows and bows stacked for TH and Dmg.

6) Movement? Base was 12", or 120' per round. All the time. That's like 4x as fast as 3E. ANd you could still run. Boots of speed moved that to 240'...smoke any 3E monk alive. And gave you a +2 AC bonus.

7) +6 Weapons were not Epic. There were +6 Vorpal Weapons hanging around.

8) There were no crits in combat...suffered or inflicted. So, the 1E fighter doesn't worry about getting or inflicting crits. Also, no auto misses or auto hits.

9) Ioun stones stacked. Heh..all the way up to 18. You didn't have to be a spellcaster to use spellstoring devices, especially the ioun stones that could store up to 12 levels of spells...

10) Advancement in 1E was SLOW compared to 3E. A level 18 character had massive amounts of more play time and tactical time then a 3E fighter would. Just on experience alone, he should win.


The 3E fighter would be subjected to the equivalent of Spring Attacks by a Boots of Speed wearing 1E fighter using a Hammer of Thunderbolts with Grand Mastery. We're talking a 2-16 Hammer, +15 TH/+24 dmg, that auto stuns those it hits when thrown, and does double dmg when thrown. Attacks would be 7 Attacks every 2 rounds...there are no full attack actions. He'd be trading 1 attack for 3 1/2...and have to move 120' every round to inflict that dmg. Rings of Free Action were easy to come by...no grappling.

Even with superior Hit points, the 3E fighter is toast.


Now, at lower levels, when gear is sooooo much harder to come by, the 3E will probably kick the 1E's tush...although the 1E will still have much better saves.

===Aelryinth

 

[Krug]

Mythusmage: Brill!

 

[mythusmage]

Brill!

Sometimes it just clicks

As the man once told me, "Alan, not only are you weird, you're proud of it."

 

[Hawken]

Okay, for those of you whom love to number crunch, here is a good one. How many 18th level 1st edition AD&D fighters could a 18th level 3.5 fighter take on and still win, most of the time?

In a toe-to-toe fight, a 1st ed 18th Fighter is probably as dangerous or more dangerous than 3.5. Most 1st ed characters at those levels had crazy magic items if not artifacts in their possession and were not limited to cash or items based on their levels. Remember, 1st Ed also had better gear too. If that 1st ed. fighter was wearing a Girdle of Storm Giant Strength, that gave it the exact same strength as an actual Storm Giant, not a whimpy +6. That right there translates into the equivalent of a 39 Strength (+19 to hit, +19 damage). And that Sword of Sharpness was sweet too. I believe it was a 19 or 20 and whoops!, there goes an arm or a leg! No save! Vorpal? Bye bye head, again, no save! Not to mention that 1st ed fighters didn't need feats to do what Spring Attack does. And if they were hasted, their 3 attacks per round turn into 6, not just an extra action on a full attack! If that sword was a +5 Vorpal two handed sword, thats 6 attacks at +42 (18 bab, 19 str, 5 sword), at 2D6+35 damage (+19 str (X1.5 for 2 handed=+28), +5 sword, +2 specialization)! 1st ed fighter's multiple attacks were all as good as the first, they didn't get worse with each extra one. That's 12D6+175hp in one round (assuming no 1s are rolled), and assuming no crits are rolled (thus killing the 3rd ed fighter instantly), that's still enough damage to slaughter the 3rd ed fighter without even having power attack or using an artifact or even some super cool weapon like that Black Razor or Elric's sword Stormbringer or something like that. 3.5 fighter would have to be epic to get gear like that (and ruin the economy of entire countries in the process!), not so in 1st ed. And 1st ed. Rings of Regeneration actually regenerated, not like the crummy ones in 3.5, so the 1st ed fighter could keep on coming

Then, there's the chance that 1st ed fighter has gone out and kicked Orcus' ass and is swinging around his wand which kills anything not as powerful as a demon prince on contact (touch attack), no save. That would make short work of the 3.5 fighter too.

Of course, everything in 1st ed stacked, so that 1st ed fighter could wear a cloak +5, two +5 rings, +5 bracers (I think), and have however many Ioun Stones, so his AC could really outstrip the 3.5 fighters. His AC could easily surpass 40 and that's not even counting a Dex bonus which wouldn't be reduced by his armor. And I think a potion of speed could stack with other Haste items (I may be wrong here), so his 6 attacks turn into 12. But that's just getting silly.

And that's assuming the fighter was human. If it was an elf, that 18th level 3.5 fighter could be dealing with a 1st edition, elven 18th level fighter/mage, fighter/thief or fighter/mage/thief, or a dwarf that's an 18th fighter/cleric! Heh! Even assuming level limits, I'd still take a 12th or 14th fighter/mage against an 18th fighter any day! Remember back in those days, Disintegrate actually did disintegrate stuff and Power Word Kill or Meteor Swarm was something to be afraid of! Or even a fighter/thief! 2D6+35 damage X5 from walking around to the 3.5 fighter's back and backstabbing is just icing on the cake. Now, imagine that 6 times a round! 10D6+175 (from X5 backstab damage), times 6 (for haste) is 60D6+1,050HP in 1 round (again assuming no misses or instant kills!). 1st level fighters didn't draw attacks of opportunity for doing the walk around behind and stab them in the back maneuver. Never mind the fighter/cleric (still an 18th fighter) that could lay a Harm on the 3.5 fighter and reduce him to 1-4hp instantly, or use Destruction or any other surprise.

I'm sure there's plenty I'm forgetting about 1st edition since I haven't played that in so long. This is just what comes to mind.

Maybe the question should be how many 3.5 18th level fighters could a 1st edition fighter take out!

What about other classes too? Monks only got up to 17th, but a 17th monk could take a 3.5 18th fighter. Back then, Quivering Palm was righteous! And the assassin would have just a flat percentage chance of killing that fighter outright--no whimpy 3.5 death attack garbage--just roll the dice and the 3.5 fighter dies instantly, no save. And a Ranger would be even more of a blender since his natural 4 or 5 attacks could be hasted to 8 or 10 and still do close to the same amount of damage as a fighter.

 

[DM-Rocco]

Dang, I just typed up an awesome reply and the computer crashed. I won't try to rewrite it all, too long, but here is the short of it.

If you use magic items, you lose some of the fundamental differences between the characters and the variables are to many. For guide lines you need to use the same items for each creature. If you give the 1.0 a girdle of giants strength you must give the 3.5 one too. If you give the 3.5 adamantine +5 full plate you must give the 1.0 it as well. You can then use the rules for the items as per the version. Don't give either artifacts, that wouldn't be fair to either side and no instant effect items, so that means no hammer of thunderbolts or vorpal swords from 1st edition. That is just an atomatic kill and only proves that you can meta game.

Also, remember that a 1st edition can only have a -10 AC which is the same as a 30 ac in 3.5 while a 3.5 could really get over a 50 or even higher with a lot of the right magical gear, making the 1.0 a test dummy since they could never hit.

Also remember that the hit bonus was different from the damage bonus in 1.0 so a 25 Strength would give you a +7 to hit and a +14 damage and it only stacked with the gaunlets of ogre strength. You then lost your own strength bonus unless you had both, I think away, been a while and I'm not at home to look it up, but pretty sure I'm right on that.

Also, a 3.5 could really wail in a 1.0 by taking a two handed weapon and doing 1 1/2 times bonus damage.

You have to test them toe-to-toe, no hit an run tactics. This isn't about how to best meta game against each other or who would be smart enough to run away and hire a 30th level wizard to take the others out or who would have taken the best items known to man or god and use them against the other. This is about who can take each other in a toe-to-toe contest and how many he could take down using thier own rules from their own versions.

Haste would also be considered an unfair advantage from any addition. The point is to try and get them on equal ground as much as possible and see how the 3.5 feats either fail or completely blow the 1.0 out of the water. If you want to list a reply with haste, then also use the exact same builds and test without haste, just to be fair.

You could use the grandmaster rules from Unearthed Arcana, but I was talking about just the first AD&D rules, no suppliments. However, that would be fair if you wanted to test that, but do it in a toe-to-toe fight.

Really, the only way to truely test them out would be to use the naked versions as posted above and put each other with the same weapon. I was trying to prove how powerful the feats are versus what you get as a 1.0 character. If you want to add magic, add the same magic to the other side but don't be ridiculous. Anyone with a wand of Orcus could of course kill anything with a touch.

So, I have posted naked and equal in all respects, characters and the 3.5 wails on them.

Anyone care to be fair and give them each the same magic items and use feats that compliment the items given and then post a solid reply?

 

[Endur]

If you want to add magic, add the same magic to the other side but don't be ridiculous. Anyone with a wand of Orcus could of course kill anything with a touch.

I think the point was that an 18th level character in 1e probably has the Wand of Orcus or another artifact. Whereas most 18th level characters in 3.5e do not have artifacts.

The reason is that in 1e, play was mostly from 1st to 10th, with over 10 being epic.
Now in 3e, play is from 1st to 20th with over 20 being epic.

Big difference.

 

[Silverleaf]

3.5 fighter would have to be epic to get gear like that

Back in the day, 18th level was epic. You would've had to play the PC for half a decade to get that far.

 

[Hawken]

The gear is different in each edition, but so are the classes. And its a composite of things to compare. If such a battle were to take place, you're not going to have two naked fighters duking it out and see who falls first. Of course the 3.5 character would win, hands down. That wouldn't even be a challenge. No point in even comparing such a thing. The different editions had different dynamics. Gear and spells in 1e trump 3.5e virtually every time. While the 3.5 classes trump their 1e equivalent a majority of the time--not in such cases like Monks, Assassins and Wizards though. But definitely where melee/ranged fighters are concerned.

You're going to have a decked out 1st edition fighter (or fighter/mage, etc.) duking it out against a decked out 3.5 fighter. Besides, your topic doesn't specify "naked" characters toe-to-toe either. And who would do that anyway? 3.5 fighters have more options than a 1e fighter. But a 1e wizard will rule over a 3.5e wizard each and every time--that 1e wizard would be unleashing 9D4+9 magic missiles all over that 3.5 wizard, and that would quickly eat through a 3.5 brooch of shielding; or any other spells that have since been weakened with each successive edition. The factors in the scenario you are proposing (18th fighter 1e vs. 18th fighter 3.5e) is external options vs. inherent options. An 18th fighter in 1e was a bad-ass because of the treasure and gear he acquired. An 18th fighter in 3.5e is a bad-ass because of his feats since he is limited to gear that typically sucks hind by comparison.

If you're talking equal, then everything has to be equal including stats and such. In 1e, an 18 strength is not the same as a 3.5 strength score. Ogres had 18/00, which translates to about 24 or 26 in 3.5. Storm Giants had a 24, which translates to a 39 in 3.5e. If you're going "naked" and "equal", then you have to equalize the variants before you start tossing dice. If you're going to have 2h weapons do 1.5Xstr bonus damage in 3.5, then you have to apply the same to 1e to keep it "equal".

 

[Turanil]

An 18th level Fighter from 1E would kick the arse of a 3.5E.

Even with superior Hit points, the 3E fighter is toast.

Ah, the power of denying (with ludicrous arguments).

Of course the 3.5 fighter kills easily the 1e one. He has more hit points, four attacks instead of 2, a raw BAB better by 1 point, and many feat that chosen right for duel fight would greatly improve his combat abilities. The 3.5 fighter can probably kill two 1e fighters before dying.

 

[Hawken]

Ah, the power of denying (with ludicrous arguments).

Yeah, that's about all I picked up from you on why 3.5e would win over 1e. Aelryinth made plenty of valid points (along with a few I didn't know about). And you didn't do or say anything to disprove them beyond this cop-out of an argument that you can't or have yet to back up. Your own attempt at a 1e character was just a write up of a 3.5e character, not a 1e. There was nothing about that character you made that was 1e except its hit points.

In any case, DMing characters with such an odious amount in magical items is not worth the hassle for me.

The items you gave your "1e" character is hardly odious by any definition of the word. That's even pathetic gear for a 3.5e character. And if it's not worth the hassle for you, then maybe you should be posting on threads with subjects that you have more experience and enjoyment with.

Even DM-Rocco couldn't prove that a 3.5e fighter could beat several 1e fighters by his initial topic. He had to throw in more conditions which would make it barely any different than 3.5e fighter taking on an orc with maybe 8 or 9 levels of Warrior.