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

[Jeffrie]

Obviously, Dandu is brpcken. You have taught me alot about spell theory (like knowing in advance which saves each spell has). I'd hate to be your DM.

Why be a 3.5 fighter? Because the scenarios described here are not what would happen at my table, or that of most of the campaigns i've been in.
Asking why someone would go 20 lvl fighter core is equal to asking why someone would go 20 anything, and i've rarely seen that happen (yes i know it's quite possible). It's very feasible to add a few levels of something core and get around it; but that's not the point (maybe).

I think the most broken thing in rpg is the players. Players want MORE. More powers, items, treasure, xp, . . .and above all; MORE OPTIONS. In the world of imagination, there is a limit to how much MORE OPTIONS a 'fighter' can conceive. There is NO limit to the amount of options a world full of nerds can think of for a spellcaster.

What happened was, back in the earliest days of DND: the wizard was a first level class and needed spells, at second level he needed more, when they got to medium level the nerds said 'How 'bout one more spell/lvl?' and since a nerd with imagination who wanted MORE OPTIONS was DM, and thought the +full BAB fighter was kickin' butt in a d20 game he said 'yes'. Then they gave a few more options, and the Wizard ended up with x wish spells a day (or whatever). There is no fighter that can stand up to x wish spells a day.

As i said though, when would that happen? Not even in imagination would a 20 lvl fighter have no friends, plan, items, allies, or story. . . By the time he got stuck in an open field with a giant scorpion.. Well why? Why doesn't he see the giant? turn around and go the other way? Why is he alone in a desert? How did he get to 20th and have zero options except walk straight across the desert towards a giant in the distance? He's already most way through a TPK.

Why be a 3.5 fighter? Because in my world elementals are not allowed to walk around downtown in Arabel. Because any spellcaster who isn't careful get's assassinated by another caster who thinks it's his/her way to power. Because folks aren't fools, and a rogue with dispel magic can ruin a spellcasters day. Because rogues can't be trusted, wizards are megalomaniac, clerics are obtusely one sided, druids never talk to anybody and are naive in their goals, and monks don't adventure ('cause if they did they wouldn't be monking). Because sorcerers are one trick ponies and any other caster with a plan can neutralize one. Because your DM would never allow that feat anyway.

Because there is a plot, and in it a fighter will receive an artifact for only fighters that kicks wizard dust, and uses it to polish longswords and plate mail for a +5 unnamed bonus.

I've said this before, and (surprise, surprise) can't remember anyone ever acknowledging that i said it: The easiest way to fix 3.5 (in addition to nerfing a few broken lines of type) is to reduce the max spells/lvl by 2. At levels 1-4 it doesn't change the game at all. At level 5-9 it only slows the casters a bit. At level 10-20 it makes the whole game more playable (ie the DM can build things that will last longer than the wizards whim).
Even then; with bonus spells and domains a 20/caster would get 36 spells/day. IF YOUR DM IS SOFT and really lets you sleep and buff for your entire career that's;

36 spells / 12 hrs = 1 per 20 min. Add that to Items and and Allies and it's already almost too powerful. (in my world you roll a Fort save any night you aren't in a bed, and if that's not enough i will put you on watches, interrupt your sleep, and give you nightmares, that alone will put your fighter on top (wink)). In my world, there are only so many casters, and they all want your magic items; including your spellbook)

Why play a 3.5 fighter? Absolutely no reason (since the casters will never go for lowering their spells/day by two). RPG is about 1000 times more powerful that LOTR. In DND there are 1000 times more casters, and they all have direct connection to a deity who has nothing to do but help them out.

Why 3.5 fighter? Because neither you, me, or our DM is Dandu. ; )

 

[CuRoi]

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.

Alan, meet Stunning Fist, heh.

Seriously though just because a Cleric with Travel domain can pull a Freedom of Movement for a whopping 6 seconds per level doesn't make him immune to a monk.

I admit, its an awesome trick. Most Grappling monsters are very big with high strength and while they would find a Free Moving tin can annoying, they can usually still hammer it like a railroad spike if need be.

I suppose if your campaign is based on WWE and Grapple is the only way to melee then sure, Freedom of Movement is coompletely busted, so just adjust it for your campaign - Rule Zero! : )

 

[StreamOfTheSky]

I'd also like to point out that while the spell itself will repel grapplers, the actual domain power for travel domain should NOT, by RAW. It says it lets you move unimpeded by magical effects as if you were under the effect of freedom of movement. So by RAW, nonmagical impediments will still get ya. I actually like that, because even limited like that, it's still a very nice power, and you can cast the real spell anyway (and if you got caught offguard before you could buff with the spell...tough!).

 

[Dandu]

Obviously, Dandu is brpcken. You have taught me alot about spell theory (like knowing in advance which saves each spell has). I'd hate to be your DM.

Oddly enough, all my DMs have loved me.

 

[Eldritch_Lord]

Obviously, Dandu is brpcken. You have taught me alot about spell theory (like knowing in advance which saves each spell has). I'd hate to be your DM.

Why be a 3.5 fighter? Because the scenarios described here are not what would happen at my table, or that of most of the campaigns i've been in.

So you and your players don't notice the more obvious combinations of abilities? I mean, just looking at the fire seeds example, given "I can turn into something immune to fire" and "I can make things that explode in fire," I'd think most people could figure that one out. Dandu is by no means exceptional in his thinking, no offense to Dandu.

What happened was, back in the earliest days of DND: the wizard was a first level class and needed spells, at second level he needed more, when they got to medium level the nerds said 'How 'bout one more spell/lvl?' and since a nerd with imagination who wanted MORE OPTIONS was DM, and thought the +full BAB fighter was kickin' butt in a d20 game he said 'yes'. Then they gave a few more options, and the Wizard ended up with x wish spells a day (or whatever). There is no fighter that can stand up to x wish spells a day.

What actually happened was that WotC tried to rewrite the game without understanding it much at all; they introduced Concentration checks and 5-foot steps without realizing how much that helped casters avoid being hit in melee, they thought AoOs would let fighters tank; they didn't realize that lowered saves across the board would make SoDs more attractive. Don't ascribe to caster favoritism and nerdiness what can adequately be ascribed by incompetence and lack of playtesting.

Why be a 3.5 fighter? Because in my world elementals are not allowed to walk around downtown in Arabel.

Why would a druid be suicide-bombing people in town? They'd more likely be fighting things out in dungeons, in the wilderness, etc.

Because any spellcaster who isn't careful get's assassinated by another caster who thinks it's his/her way to power.

Casters have better defenses than you give them credit for. Scry-n-die isn't completely effective against people with anticipate teleportation or defenses against scrying, and mundane attacks aren't as effective against rope trick and MMM.

Because folks aren't fools, and a rogue with dispel magic can ruin a spellcasters day.

It's a lot easier for Joe Wizard to boost his CL than it is for Bob Rogue to get a wand or scroll with a high enough CL to dispel his buffs. A CL 10 dispel magic wand takes up 1/5 of a 10th-level character's wealth for a 50/50 dispel chance against an unbuffed caster.

Because rogues can't be trusted, wizards are megalomaniac, clerics are obtusely one sided, druids never talk to anybody and are naive in their goals, and monks don't adventure ('cause if they did they wouldn't be monking).

Yay stereotypes! Do you prohibit monk PCs, require druids to take vows of silence, give rogues penalties when dealing with NPCs, and require clerics to proselytize every session?

Because your DM would never allow that feat anyway.

"I can ban things, therefore they aren't broken" isn't a valid argument.

Because there is a plot, and in it a fighter will receive an artifact for only fighters that kicks wizard dust, and uses it to polish longswords and plate mail for a +5 unnamed bonus.

Ah, I see, so if you show a fighter favoritism and give him a unique item, he'll be on an even footing with casters. Doesn't the fact that you need to do that tell you that there's an imbalance to begin with?

I've said this before, and (surprise, surprise) can't remember anyone ever acknowledging that i said it: The easiest way to fix 3.5 (in addition to nerfing a few broken lines of type) is to reduce the max spells/lvl by 2. At levels 1-4 it doesn't change the game at all. At level 5-9 it only slows the casters a bit. At level 10-20 it makes the whole game more playable (ie the DM can build things that will last longer than the wizards whim).
Even then; with bonus spells and domains a 20/caster would get 36 spells/day.

More than enough spells for a caster to keep doing what he's doing. Even reserving 4 spells for all-day buffs and 16 for out-of-combat utility and miscellaneous uses, that's 4 spells per encounter in an average day, and a wizard only really needs 1 or 2. And that's before wands, staffs, etc.

IF YOUR DM IS SOFT and really lets you sleep and buff for your entire career

Rope Trick. Mordenkainen's Magnificent Mansion. Leomund's Secure Shelter. Heck, even Alarm. Getting a full night's sleep isn't as hard as you'd think.

(in my world you roll a Fort save any night you aren't in a bed, and if that's not enough i will put you on watches, interrupt your sleep, and give you nightmares, that alone will put your fighter on top (wink)).

A Fort save or what? Be fatigued? Be unable to cast spells at all?

Why 3.5 fighter? Because neither you, me, or our DM is Dandu. ; )

Guess what? I have a D&D group of 14 other people plus myself who run two or three games at a time. All of us play things like Dandu--you know, using spells logically, coming up with adequate defenses, that sort of thing. 2/3 of the group had already played before, all in different groups, so it's not as if one of us taught the whole group to play that way; it's a lot more prevalent than you'd think. I don't mean to be demeaning of your playstyle or intelligence, but it really isn't all that hard to look at a caster, look at his spells, and figure out interesting things to do with them.

However, I can still challenge my players, by providing appropriate encounters, playing NPCs intelligently, and so on. The way to deal with 3e is not to say "No, you can't do that" to the casters and "Here, have some new toys" to the fighters. Before you accuse me of it, not I'm not a "caster fanboy" or whatever--I realize 3e is broken and I don't like it. I don't pretend it isn't broken, I just compensate for it.

 

[CuRoi]

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

In the particular instance that comes to mind - absolutely not. The overconfident "I'm Really a Fighter" Cleric was knee deep in trouble and only the fighter could wade in and extract him (without killing him in the process).

Could I build some hypothetical Druid that could be perfect for that particular situation? Sure, I don't see why not.

I freely admit though, in any random circumstance that any class can be equally as effective/more effective than any other class. : )

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 don't buy it, from my experience. As previously mentioned, mileage may vary depending on your camapign and DM style. Casters are also dependent in their own way. Their power is limited to a number of times per day, has ways to be countered, needs a little bit of time to get up and going strong, is subject to durations that smart bad guys can (and should) wait out. Sure, they can do some incredible stuff - its magic, it should be incredible. I don't like the whole 4e "everyone is magical" approach. I prefer there to be a big bang with magic with melee being the "slow but steady" thing.

Offhand, the broken stuff in core seems to be:

Any of those things listed can be altered by the DM if they so choose. Just saying "well these dozen or so spells are broken in my campaign so the fighter sucks because they can't access them" seems a bit silly.

At any rate, my pasted out of context point was a rebuttal to a suggestion by a previous poster that the majority of broken stuff was in the SRD. I simply was arguing that taken in total proportion there is a vastly larger list of "broken" stuff in available supplements than in the SRD. And that "stuff" can produce some completely game breaking things - but the key thing is if and only if the DM allows it and/or does not modify it for their game and style.

Exchanges those problems for a completely new set of problems.

You seem to be pretty imaginative, so fix those perceived problems for your game...or just get another one? Lots of great RPGs out there : )

 

[Dandu]

Any of those things listed can be altered by the DM if they so choose. Just saying "well these dozen or so spells are broken in my campaign so the fighter sucks because they can't access them" seems a bit silly.

At any rate, my pasted out of context point was a rebuttal to a suggestion by a previous poster that the majority of broken stuff was in the SRD. I simply was arguing that taken in total proportion there is a vastly larger list of "broken" stuff in available supplements than in the SRD. And that "stuff" can produce some completely game breaking things - but the key thing is if and only if the DM allows it and/or does not modify it for their game and style.

Two things right off the bat:
1. I never said you could not balance things by changing how they work, but the fact that you have to rebalanced them in the first place means that they are broken as written.

2. It is the general consensus among people in Charop that most of the broken stuff in DnD is in fact in core. This opinion is based on extensive experience.

 

[Jeffrie]

Eldritch Lord, thanks for your response. I want to say how much i've learned from you also.
I assume, despite the detail of your response, that you know that i was only talking about a few possible answers to the OP. I agree with you on nearly every minor detail you countered. {roll=diplomacy}1d20+34{/roll}

Dandu, i'm sure your dms do love you. In fact i'm fairly sure i'd like to play with any of these folks.

I'll try again to say what i mean:
If your people aren't broken, and the question isn't broken, then the story probably works fine.

 

[pawsplay]

Two things right off the bat:
1. I never said you could not balance things by changing how they work, but the fact that you have to rebalanced them in the first place means that they are broken as written.

2. It is the general consensus among people in Charop that most of the broken stuff in DnD is in fact in core. This opinion is based on extensive experience.

Core + nightsticks

 

[pawsplay]

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.

Plus, you can share fire seeds with your friends. Including TWF rogues with Quick Draw.