Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ketjak" data-source="post: 1146362" data-attributes="member: 1083">Going back to the beginning...This is an opinion. Frank has demonstrated he will not change his opinion, even when confronted with fact and the support for his argument is removed. Enjoy your opinions, Frank.Though Frank has never addressed his misunderstanding of these "rules," his citation of these classes proves the point that Fighters are as versatile as the rest of us claim them to be.Again, I have demonstrated that a Fighter is better at combat than a Ranger at equivalent levels (except 11th and against specialized foes). Frank claims this is not true. OK!I have not demonstrated that a Fighter is better at combat than a Barbarian. However, feat choices make the Fighter more versatile than the Barbarian, and of course the damage bonuses gained by rage don't last as long as the Fighter's bonuses. Because he's winded afterward for most of his career the Barbarian has to use rage only when it's important, whereas the Fighter can have a blast swinging/thrusting/shooting without penalties. And he's doing it on the ground and mounted or at range or tripping or power attacking or...<img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />Sounds balanced. Please keep in mind I haven't performed a mathematical analysis.I just realized Frank says here that the Fighter should have a class skill list large enough to allow for all of those different character concepts. That's a remarkable ignorance of class balance and what makes classes distinct from one another.Yes; the example is either a humanoid with an INT of 12 or a Human with an INT of 8 or 9.A "stupid brute" with lots of skills? Heh heh heh heh. Also, it has been shown that with a decent INT bonus, intelligent skill selection, and non-bonus feat choices, the Fighter can be all of those things. In fact, the very citation Frank uses illustrates that point exactly.Most sailors back in the day could not swim. Aside from that irrelevant historical fact, it is possible to do all those things well enough to survive aboardship. One does not have to max out a skill for it to be useful, and all of those skills can be used untrained, except Profession ().Incorrect, as demonstrated and as Frank cited.The relative attractiveness of Fighters above level 2 is opinion-based. As demonstrated, Frank's opinions will not change. Frank's participation in the argument using all of these points is silly; Frank is not using facts to support any argument that the Fighter is either underpowered in combat or is unbalanced in skills except by showing us multiclass builds or prestige class builds. No single class's relative balance or power or combat can be compared against a multiclass build; that's silly. It's like using the name "Fighter" to describe a multiclass character.Let someone else willing to present facts and data argue this.My illustration of the point was based on your reply. I inferred from your post (my error) that you had performed a similar mathematical analysis. As posted, your point is incorrect. As you further clarified, your point is only partially correct. In this particular case, two characters with an 18 STR and one attack, BAB identical, automatically hitting a target:two +3 short swords - 23.1 damage per roundone +4 greatsword - 22.7 damage per roundThe 2-handed combatant's damage starts outstripping the two-weapon warrior when that all-important second attack comes into play. The TWF needs to spend another feat to keep the damage curve the same, while the 2-handed warrior is happy with his Power Attack (which only gets better against foes that he can hit automatically). LYS, you need to be more clear when you make points. I'll be happy to work with whatever information you present. If you complain about the taste of oranges by saying it's different from apples, though, you're doing no better than Frank. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /></blockquote>

Verification