D&D 3E/3.5 Why be a 3.5 fighter?

[pawsplay]

Interjection: Even though this is a thread about 3.5 Fighters, how did the 2e Fighters stack up against the same issues of powerful monsters and other far more outright versatile classes? I'd like a sense of how far the 3.5 tiers are from how things originally operated in the preceding edition.

Fighters had the worst saves, across the board, but a good THAC0 and hit points. They didn't really have much going for them. However, at name level, they could squeeze out a few more hit points per level, and they could specialize in a weapon. Since monsters got straight d8s for hit points, the fighter was a superior defender until very high levels, and with casters having access to fewer spells, it was not a given that a wizard could create monsters. Contrary to what has been said, I have seen pure fighters, for the simple reason they could generate large numbers of hit points and a good THAC0. Also, without significant magic, they were likely to outstrip other characters in AC pretty quickly.

Compared to the paladin, ranger, or barbarian, the fighter was decidedly weaker. In fact, being forced to become a non-specializing fighter was a common punishment for failing to meet alignment or code requirements of a class. The fighter's only graces were twofold: low entrance requirements, and a slightly faster advancement rate, meaning they might from time to time be a level ahead of the more formidable classes.

If you used the full range of kits and optional proficiencies, the fighter began to approach something of the form you saw in 3.0: More options, higher numbers, more versatility, tactical advantages. Unfortunately, the final 3e design either (depending on viewpoint) undershot compared to other classes or suffered from overly generous abilities given to other classes or both. For comparison, in 2e, wizards did not get extra spells per day for high Int, started with one 1st level per day, and had to roll to learn the spells they wanted, and clerics spells only went to 7th level. Also, fighters received generous followers and strongholds, a facet of high-level play which was largely stripped from 3e.

 

[CuRoi]

The Druid and the battle Cleric might just return the favor. That Fighter guy is a selfish bastard who never buffs or heals -anyone-.

Sure...but its not in the job description : ) The fighter takes the worst of it while keeping the cleric and druid free to cast spells, etc. The fighter is supposed to be the front line guy - buffing and healing aren't within their capability so I don't understand the thinking here. How is engaging something toe to toe so the Cleric can stand in the back and cast their spells selfish?

If you are saying that the Cleric and Druid can go toe to toe while the fighter can't stand back and buff, on that I'd agree. But that only works to an extent. I can think of more than a few times in my games where the fighter has had to rush in to save the "Im really a fighter" cleric/druid/wizard when spells expire, get dispelled, or an enemy simply finds ways to wait out durations.

This is a common misconception. The Fighter doesn't suck because of supplements. The Fighter sucks because it comes after Barbarian, Cleric and Druid. There's nothing "sudden" about the Fighter sucking. It's sucked from day one.

On supplements, I freely admit, I don't have a full grasp of what they do or don't do for the fighter. I have played almost exclusively with the core rules for quite sometime and haven't seen a huge problem with the class. I still feel if everyone is playing as a team and not trying to create some sort of individual stand-alone PC, the fighter is a force to be reckoned with and a necessary part of a group.

Most of the powerful game-changing spells aren't from supplements. They're right in the PHB. You don't need to go poring through obscure books to find gate or shapechange.

I'd agree that there are -some- extremely powerful game-changing spells and feats in the SRD. I think "Most" is an extreme overstatement given the wealth of non-SRD material out there. While I focus on SRD material I do allow material from supplements in my camapigns after review. "Most" of the unbalanced stuff which players want to use seems to come from these other sources.

That last bit of your post is puzzling. Are you saying that Fighters don't suck because they can be thrown away and replaced by something that doesn't suck?

Heh, a bit of sarcasm. I was just saying that there are plenty of cases where the stalwart fighter is going to be the go-to guy. (The same could be said for any other class of course.)

As for whether or not I am saying pure melee capability trumps magic or is even equivalent, I've got to go with the apples and oranges statement. Pure spellcasting classes are for obvious reasons more flexible than a pure melee class. Its to be expected. Is it truly a "weakness" of the Fighter class? Generally, IMO, no. Magic is its own beast in the system and needs careful adjudication by the DM. I hardly feel it makes the Fighter obsolete though.

If you feel strongly that it does, I might suggest there is a new version of the game that presumably addresses these problems. : )

 

[Dandu]

If you are saying that the Cleric and Druid can go toe to toe while the fighter can't stand back and buff, on that I'd agree. But that only works to an extent. I can think of more than a few times in my games where the fighter has had to rush in to save the "Im really a fighter" cleric/druid/wizard when spells expire, get dispelled, or an enemy simply finds ways to wait out durations.

Here's a question: Would not another class (say, another druid) have been equally as effective/more effective in saving the other person?

I still feel if everyone is playing as a team and not trying to create some sort of individual stand-alone PC, the fighter is a force to be reckoned with and a necessary part of a group.

The fact that a fighter cannot stand by himself to the same degree as many other classes is seen as a weakness because it entails dependency, in which case the question arises of whether it's better to have someone who does not depend on other members of the party to function effectively or not.

I'd agree that there are -some- extremely powerful game-changing spells and feats in the SRD. I think "Most" is an extreme overstatement given the wealth of non-SRD material out there. While I focus on SRD material I do allow material from supplements in my camapigns after review. "Most" of the unbalanced stuff which players want to use seems to come from these other sources.

Offhand, the broken stuff in core seems to be:
Glitterdust (arguably just too good for its level instead of broken)
Alter Self (arguably just too good for its level instead of broken)
Polymoprh (arguably just too good for its level instead of broken)
Solid Fog
Black Tentacles (At the level you get it; usefulness quickly deteriorates)
Enervation
Planar Binding (all 3 of them)
Magic Jar
Contact Other Plane
Contingency
Simulacrum
Polymorph Any Object
Gate
Time Stop
Shapechange
Freedom of Movement
Divine Power
Planar Ally
Fire Seeds
Holy Word and friends

Honestly, I'm probably leaving a few things out.

If you feel strongly that it does, I might suggest there is a new version of the game that presumably addresses these problems. : )

Exchanges those problems for a completely new set of problems.

 

[pawsplay]

The fact that a fighter cannot stand by himself to the same degree as many other classes is seen as a weakness because it entails dependency, in which case the question arises of whether it's better to have someone who does not depend on other members of the party to function effectively or not.

Although the fighter, as I have noted, is somewhat underbuilt, I think it gets picked on. Is a paladin so much more self-sufficient?

Furthermore, every class has its weaknesses. Wizards have to expend significant spell resources to deal with grapples; sorcerers must expend significant spell knowledge. Clerics are potentially quite powerful, but can be slow starters if they get debuffed and are feat-starved. Rogues have problems with amorphous opponents and heavy-hitters; against a dragon, a rogue is effective, but very, very "dependent" on other PCs for defense.

Offhand, the broken stuff in core seems to be:
Glitterdust (arguably just too good for its level instead of broken)
Alter Self (arguably just too good for its level instead of broken)
Polymoprh (arguably just too good for its level instead of broken)

Simply raising each of those a spell level is probably a decent adjustment. Glitterdust is extremely useful, but at rounds/level, is just under what I would call broken.

I largely agree with the rest of your list.

Freedom of Movement

This should probably be rounds/level, with the minutes/level version possibly being an alternate casting of freedom.

 

[Alexander123]

Just one question Dandu, you included freedom of movement as a broken spell, can you explain what is broken about it? I can understand the others but I couldn't figure out how this would be a broken spell. Thanks.

 

[Dandu]

Although the fighter, as I have noted, is somewhat underbuilt, I think it gets picked on. Is a paladin so much more self-sufficient?

The fighter is not being compared to a paladin in my post as far as I am aware of.

Just one question Dandu, you included freedom of movement as a broken spell, can you explain what is broken about it? I can understand the others but I couldn't figure out how this would be a broken spell. Thanks.

Meet Guan Lin. He is a monk. He likes to grapple. He has chosen Improved Grapple as his 1st level monk bonus feat. He has maxed out his strength stat at first level. He has invested heavily in grappling feats, strength, and items.

Meet Alan. Alan is a cleric of a god of Travel. Alan makes Guan Lin cry at night because Alan is completely immune to Guan Lin's kung fu by virtue of a single 4th level spell. Many monsters presumably feel the same way if their attacks involve grappling, or their abilities involve impeding movement in some way.

You should not be able to auto-win against a wide swath of enemies with a single 4th level spell.

 

[StreamOfTheSky]

Absolutely, Paladin, Ranger, Barbarian, Monk, Rogue, and Fighter all are pretty bad. The first two have spellcasting, so with enough splatbooks, they have hope, though the base classes themselves remain bland. I really hate how it's always "fighters are weak" instead of "noncasters are weak." Because I really do think saying it enough online makes it "true" and then you see DMs with houserules vastly helping the fighter but doing nothing for say...the monk. Because it's "fighters" who are the iconic underpowered class, right?

/rant

Meet Alan. Alan is a cleric of a god of Travel. Alan makes Guan Lin cry at night because Alan is completely immune to Guan Lin's kung fu by virtue of a single 4th level spell. Many monsters presumably feel the same way if their attacks involve grappling, or their abilities involve impeding movement in some way.

You should not be able to auto-win against a wide swath of enemies with a single 4th level spell.

That said, I shed no tears for grapple, because when it does work, it so utterly shuts down so many various classes (casters, archers 2H weapon users, skirmishers, rogues...) it's disgustingly overpowered. And the reason Freedom of Movement is necessary isn't Guan Lin. It's Rex the T-Rex and all the other monsters with grapple modifiers worth double their CR or more because of sheer HD, size, and str, that are effectively unbeatable at it.

Out of curiousity, why is Fire Seeds broken? I thought direct damage spells suck?

 

[Dandu]

The Holy Berry Bomb version can produce quite spectacular effects if you carry use it as a trap or carry it on yourself coupled with some form of energy immunity.

My eyes may be deceiving me, but it also seems to have a duration of "until used", which would mean you can keep quite a few of them on hand.

 

[StreamOfTheSky]

The Holy Berry Bomb version can produce quite spectacular effects if you carry use it as a trap or carry it on yourself coupled with some form of energy immunity.

My eyes may be deceiving me, but it also seems to have a duration of "until used", which would mean you can keep quite a few of them on hand.

"Duration: 10 min./level or until used "

That means it lasts X minutes unless you use them sooner.

The holly bombs... 8d8+88 at CL 11 is pretty good, I admit. It doesn't scale very well, but at the level you get it that's pretty impressive. Notably, even the slightest fire resistance completely ruins the effectiveness, as even measely fire res 5 turns it into 8d8 +48. Still, they need to be placed or kamikaze'd, and if you're going that route, why not just use Explosive Runes instead? Those actually do last forever (until triggered), are half the spell level, are basically unresistable damage, and give NO save if adjacent to where the runes go off. Just saying, still don't see why fire seeds is considered so good. Don't actually expect many DMs to let you horde explosive runes and unleash them all at once.

 

[Dandu]

Ah, I see. The duration's shorter than I imagined.

That being said, it's still pretty easy to just get a few berry bombs at the start of, say, a dungeoncrawl, carry them around for a few hours as a fire elemental until conflict happens, and blow people up with great justice.

You can do similar things with Explosive Runes - aside from using your person as a delivery mechanism, in which case you end up hurting yourself far more than the enemy - which probably means I should have included it as well.

Along with anything else with a permanent duration. Like Wall of Iron and Glyphs.