Fighters didn't matter after 11th level?

[Rechan]

Regarding Bullgrit's question of how 4e handles the spell effect arms race:

It mostly doesn't exist anymore. Absolute effects have been significantly altered or eliminated. Most shut-down powers are short term, or have multiple solutions.

Although it is there at a small level.

Sleep is a nasty, nasty spell.

Fortunately even if the bad guy(s) fail all saves, there's at least a single round for them to do something.

 

[Runestar]

My impression of the fighter at higher lvs is that it lacks options. I have little problem optimizing it for damage, but that is pretty much all it is good for. Anything else is a bye.

Stuck in a forcecage/maze?
Target of a will-save effect?
Difficult terrain? Sucks to have your mobility stymied by a blade of grass.
Lack of tanking capabilities (so you can't actually hold off the enemy dragon and force it to want to attack you over the squishier mage).
Reliance on full attack (so anytime I am forced to move, my damage output drops dramatically).

Basically just look at a warblade (doesn't even have to be all that optimized). It is everything the fighter should have been, and simply highlights its shortcomings.

Wizard/Cleric/Druid isn't the problem, it's a problem with the player. It's a problem that has and will be in every game since the dawn of time until the end of time. You can't pin it on edition.

Problem is - I don't think I even need to go out of my way to optimize a spellcaster or abuse rules loopholes just to make it overpowered. The nature of the class automatically does it for me. If anything, I would actually need to really play it at just a mere fraction of its true capabilities just to keep it balanced (which to me, is even more difficult than playing a class to the most of its abilities).

Conversely, I doubt I can break the fighter however hard I try. But I would need to be constantly playing him at 100% efficiency just to contribute effectively (hopefully). Anything less...

 

[pawsplay]

In my campaign, at 12th level, the fighter type was very important. The campaign is currently 16th-17th level, and the players have pondered some of the problems of not having one for the past couple of levels. As it is, the dwarven scout often tanks. If you play in my campaign, and your group does not have a fighter or some other kind of meat shield, you will experience pain and possibly death.

I don't know why other people's campaigns are different, but when we game, NPCs and monsters are likely to get right in the wizard's face. Dragons bite, grapple, and breathe on whatever they can reach. Some opponents have significant spell resistance.

It's true, at various times, a duskblade, a paladin, and a barbarian have stood in for an honest to goodness fighter. I don't know why a fighter would feel they would be missing out. The biggest problem with fighters is that people often view them as beater-noob-speedbump characters, when in fact, fighters generally have similarly complex tactical options to a wizard.

As far as I can tell, the only place a fighter really seems like a bit of a dork is when it comes to noncombat logistics. Lacking face skills, scouting, travel spells, and curative powers, they are mostly relegated to tending animals, intimidating things, or perhaps subbing in for a missing role (for instance, Regdar the diplomat).

 

[Bullgrit]

Fly is a 16th level spell in 4e... and it's the same level as Greater Invisibility. So you can have one of those, not both. Inviso lasts for 1 round.

Plane shifting can be done by a fighter that spends a couple of feats, as is teleporting (the same 2 feats gets you both!). For 3 feats the fighter can plane shift, teleport, AND fly!

. . . what? Are you serious? My first thought on this is that you're pulling my leg.

I have the D&D4 PH, and I've looked through it at the low-level stuff (up to around level 6-8). I'll have to look through it in more detail up to the higher levels.

OK, I just looked through the D&D4 PH. The invisibilities can last longer than 1 round, and I didn't see feats that let a fighter plane shift, teleport, or fly. So you must just be joshing me.

Bullgrit

 

[Kishin]

In my campaign, at 12th level, the fighter type was very important. The campaign is currently 16th-17th level, and the players have pondered some of the problems of not having one for the past couple of levels. As it is, the dwarven scout often tanks. If you play in my campaign, and your group does not have a fighter or some other kind of meat shield, you will experience pain and possibly death.

I don't know why other people's campaigns are different, but when we game, NPCs and monsters are likely to get right in the wizard's face. Dragons bite, grapple, and breathe on whatever they can reach. Some opponents have significant spell resistance.

Except that:

a) Meat shields have no way to be 'sticky' in 3.5E. That dragon can just wander right by the fighter, so his presence is invalid anyway.

b) Nothing will get near a well-played wizard. Particularly with Celerity. Their exist strategies are numerous. Nor will Spell Resistance matter when you have things like Assay Spell Resistance.

 

[rgard]

<SNIP> or perhaps subbing in for a missing role (for instance, Regdar the diplomat).

my first chuckle in this thread! Thanks.

 

[Runestar]

a) Meat shields have no way to be 'sticky' in 3.5E. That dragon can just wander right by the fighter, so his presence is invalid anyway.

This.

And for a little bit of fun, let me share an excerpt with you.

Another really funny party was Fighter, Wizard, Wizard, Nymph. Both of the wizards focused on control spells, with one favoring summons and the other favoring defensive stuff. Basically, this party was the exact opposite (even though the fighter in this party was one of the fighers in the other party) of the other. They simply did not so any damage, instead completely looking up the fight with stunning gaze, acid fog, wall of ________, trips, summoned elementals, etc. while slowly chipping the opponent away. Every combat took a long time to resolve, but usually it was a forgone conclusion early on. The opponents would get separated and stalled while the fighter individually pounded them. For a powerful single opponent would be subjected to repeated save-or-abilities from behind barriers of spell created obstacles and the fighter. Probably the most "professional" party I'd ever been in, from the perspective that they always were able to solve every encounter they faced with a clear, efficient strategy that was often ad-libbed and always effective.

But, seriously, the second party absolutely controlled combats. I remember one encounter involved them getting surrounded and ambushed by a group of Gythanki bandits on a barren stretch of an unfamiliar plane with the only terrain feature being the Mercenary and Pacifist Sphinx that they were riding who decided to take a nap when the action started. Being surrounded by enemies (two of which had ninja levels which we all know are deadly against wizards who haven't got detect invisible up!) would seem to be a tricky encounter, especially with no walls to use blocking out enemies. But the party quickly readjusted to the situation, rushed one side of the fight, disabling as many as possible before covering themselves with solid fog to prevent retaliation. The enemies wanted to avoid clumping together, so they kept spread apart while the party "fog cloud jumped" attacking one or two at a time before going after another. At one point in the fight every single Gith was stunned, held or tripped and there was at least 8 of them. In fact, the party only ended up killing one of them when the Nymph cdged one of the held opponents. She felt really guilty about that, particularly her player after I mercilessly added three minutes of gory details to the "Merciless display of cruelty". Good times.

It also helped convinve me that the game is less fun with two wizards, because you really, really always have a solution to every problem as a standard action, even when both wizards are intentionally limiting their spell lists for thematic and balance concerns.

 

[JiffyPopTart]

So, since I’ve apparently missed this situation in the higher levels of D&D3, can someone give me examples of adventures or situations where non-spellcasting classes didn’t matter? Or where a wizard and cleric could get by perfectly well without a fighter-type?

OK....here is what happened in our group in our Age of Worms 3.5e campaign.

In the lower teen levels, the rogue was our scout (he was a rogue/shadowwhatever so he was really stealthy) and detrapper.

As we gained higher levels...the only traps left were magical in nature. The party warlock who could detect magic and dispel magic at will became the detrapper as he could do it from a distance with no danger to the party.

As we gained higher levels...the rogue was still really stealthy, but my Warmage/Earth Elemental Adept could travel through dirt and rock at will, and have Greater Invisibility (the invisibility that works on just about everything and lasted a long ltime) and was even better at scouting than the rogue.

The rogue became totally useless towards the end of the campaign with some of the higher level magical abilities we gained.

DS

 

[Wormwood]

Bingo.

Wizard/Cleric/Druid isn't the problem, it's a problem with the player.

The player who picks the class which dominates the game.

And in my experience, that player wasn't playing a Fighter, Monk, Ranger, Rogue, Barbarian, Paladin or Bard.

 

[Vegepygmy]

Like a lot of the "problems" that exist in 3.5e, the fighter sucking after level 11 is really dependent on how your group happens to game.

And that's all there is to it.

As a practical matter, no two D&D groups play the game the same. Most don't even play by the same rules (not even the ones that think they're playing it RAW). And few people even realize how their house rules and style preferences alter the experience of playing the game, so they come to absurd conclusions like "3E is broken."

No particular "problem with 3E" was univerally experienced, whether it's "fighters suck at high level," or "CoDzilla," or the "15-minute adventuring day." The system just allowed those problems to occur for those people whose play-style led them to it.