Fighters didn't matter after 11th level?

[Ourph]

In the longest lasting 3.5 game I played in, the party ended up being around 14th level when we quit. IIRC, the party consisted of:

1) Half-Ogre Fighter/Barbarian
2) Human Warlock
3) Dwarf Cleric (heavily min-maxed for melee)
4) Human Rogue/Scout (heavily min-maxed for melee)
5) Human Warmage

Note: There were probably some prestige classes mixed in there, but I can't remember any of them, so I just listed base-classes I was sure about.

If the DM prepped encounters that were balanced for the whole 5 PC party and then one player didn't show up, it heavily depended on which PC was missing from the group as to whether the encounter was still doable.

If the Warlock wasn't there, it wasn't a big deal. Fights might last a couple of rounds longer. We rarely felt it much at all.

If the Rogue/Scout or Fighter/Barb wasn't there, we noticed it, but we could get through the encounters just fine. We spent more healing resources because the front lines were weaker and fights would last a little longer.

If the Cleric or the Warmage didnt' show up, we just didn't play because without them, any encounter designed with the entire party in mind would have been a total PC wipe. Lack of Cleric meant no healing resources during combat, no 3rd spellcaster (for fights where the melee guys couldn't be effective like vs. flying targets or incorporeal monsters) and of course, no buffs. The Warmage usually accounted for about 1/2 of the total damage dealt in any encounter, so losing him basically halved the party's damage output. Any encounter that would challenge the whole 5-person party would have killed an entire 4 PC party which lacked either the Cleric or the Warmage.

On the other hand, any 3 PC party that included both the Cleric and the Warmage plus one of the melee guys could have probably handled at least 1 encounter designed for the entire 5-man party. It would probably be the only encounter they could get through that day, but they would likely have survived it.

So I wouldn't go so far as to say that Fighters and other non-caster types were useless after 11th level, but there is no question in my mind that they played 2nd fiddle to the casters in almost every way (I would argue that this started as early as 5th level actually).

 

[kitsune9]

The Spotlight Interview with Rob Heinsoo at wizards.com has Rob saying this:[Bolding by me.]
Now, I haven’t played a lot of any D&D above 12th level (I’ve played some, just not a lot), so maybe that’s why this statement seems totally off to me.

In my experience, even at levels 9, 10, 11, and 12, I haven’t seen this phenomenon of non-spellcasting classes don’t matter. I’ve seen parties get by without one class or another -- they work around that hole in their party –- but they could do better with adding that class (even fighters). Heck, I’ve seen parties get by without an arcane caster in their number.

As for adventures depending on wizards and clerics – isn’t that a fault of the adventure? I mean, if you have an adventure that only spellcasting can get the PCs through, isn’t that as bad as an adventure where spells don’t work?

I know this complaint about high-level play was around back in AD&D’s day, too. And I can see how it might be true like when an AD&D1 magic-user got to 18th level and could throw around wishes. And fighter hit points slowed down to 2 (or 3?) per level after name level, yet fireballs and such kept getting more powerful with the M-U’s level. But that got toned down in successive editions.

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?

Bullgrit

In my experience from the mods I run or the adventures I played, everyone was needed to round out the party. I never rescheduled a game because of any one player not making it, but at high level, missing a character (whatever class it was) was tough. Anyways, that was my experience. I know with different play styles and modules, I can see how one character can be very central to a session and that without it, it would be TPK-land or at least a very bad situation going to worse.

 

[OchreJelly]

As others have already there are many reasons. Here's some I have experienced:
- A spell system that quickly eclipses the skill system. Even Sean K. Reynolds agreed that the game had a problem with absolute resolutions that could eclipse skills. Why invest in skills like "hide" when invisibility does the job just fine? Why train-up "open locks" when a knock spell makes it a snap?
- The economy of actions quickly goes out the window. I had a player playing a high-level summoner. He was pretty good "tanking" with summons for just about any scenario.
- "Role Bleed over". Druids and CODzillas are often accused of being classes that can do it all, and often better than a class like a fighter or a rogue.

 

[Storminator]

I found that once everyone was high level, mobility became much more important. We tended to have fights all over the castle, or in the center of the battlefield, or in the skies over the city. In those cases having a bunch of iterative attacks is almost worthless. And in those cases where it matters, you have to be crazy to be the first one in because you get to charge, then the other guy gets a full round attack. Then the cleric better have Heal ready.

And there are certainly situations where the melee guys are just along for the ride. We got Teleport chased all over Faerun by the BBEG. The fighter got to dump out all his platinum and yell "I need a teleport scroll!" once the wizard had blown thru his 4 teleports. And he handed the wizard the scroll so he could teleport us again. I got to stand close and hold hands...

Sadly, when our wizard player left the group, I had to retire my monk. I was the only player that could advise our spellcasters after he left, and the monk simply didn't have the character to make me believe it. So I added a mageblade/unfetterered... with a 17th level sorcerer cohort.

PS

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

There were certain ways to keep Fighters (including Fighter "off-shots" like Barbarians/Ranger) relevant. The trick was to spend a lot of spells buffing them.

Of course, that means they weren't at their best without the Cleric and Wizard around, and that hurts a lot. But if you did this, a Fighter will keep mattering even way beyond 11th level. At least in combat.
The situation looks worse outside of combat. The Fighter just doesn't get divinations, illusions or teleportation effects. Flight is somewhat available via magic items.

If the Cleric and Wizard horde for themselves, I think a Fighter or Rogue wouldn't have much to contribute on their own. Without the various defensive and offensive buffs, it's just hard to stay alive long enough to really affect the outcomes of combat.

 

[Henrix]

1. Level 11 is a little low. That's where the decline started, but it didn't kick in until you got to the levels where spells broke too many rules with absolute effects that could only be negated by other spells or items of gear that created spell effects.

Exactly my thought - that's where it begins.

At level 17 almost all important fights are won when the spellcasters cause the BBEG to go bang, not when the fighter has whittled down the opposition.
The fighter is just there to hold off the minions and occupy the BBEG till he fails his saves. The fighter needs the spellslingers to keep him alive through buffs, resistances, dispels, and whatnot.

And it's the spellcasters who get the party to the fight - how else do they go through the lava/to the other plane/the secret hideout you can only teleport or fly to?

 

[The Ghost]

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.

In my current campaign, which is very unoptimized, I cannot imagine a session without any of the current PCs, including the 14th level fighter. We do not employ tactics like scry/buff/teleport simply because we find that boring compared to hopping on a horse and riding across the plains. The latter produces a more interesting game, for us, than the former. YMMV

I have also, recently, played in a high level game with some people I know from my FLGS. This game is highly optimized. Playing a fighter really is a bad choice because Clerics, Druids, and Wizards (and possibly Psions) can do everything a fighter does - and more. It is just not worth playing a fighter.

In my experience, the more an individual gaming group optimizes, the greater the likelyhood of them experiencing problems is.

 

[thecasualoblivion]

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.

In my current campaign, which is very unoptimized, I cannot imagine a session without any of the current PCs, including the 14th level fighter. We do not employ tactics like scry/buff/teleport simply because we find that boring compared to hopping on a horse and riding across the plains. The latter produces a more interesting game, for us, than the former. YMMV

I have also, recently, played in a high level game with some people I know from my FLGS. This game is highly optimized. Playing a fighter really is a bad choice because Clerics, Druids, and Wizards (and possibly Psions) can do everything a fighter does - and more. It is just not worth playing a fighter.

In my experience, the more an individual gaming group optimizes, the greater the likelyhood of them experiencing problems is.

The real tears come from when you combine people from both groups who insist on playing the game different ways(optimized or unoptimized) in the same game. There's were the real disasters stem from. Some of us don't have the luxury of being able to get a stable group of like minded people for our games.

 

[Bullgrit]

OK, it seems that everyone is pointing to scry/buff/teleport or mobility spells in general as the problem -- fighting in the air, planes hopping, etc. If that is the main problem(s), how did this get fixed with D&D4? Surely fighters can't fly (without magic items -- like in D&D3), plane shift, etc. in D&D4?

Are there not still things that a 20th-level D&D4 wizard can do that a non-spellcaster can't do? Fly is still a spell, yes? Invisibility? [I am not familiar with D&D4 enough to know what spells still exist or exactly how they work.]

The fighter is just there to hold off the minions and occupy the BBEG till he fails his saves. The fighter needs the spellslingers to keep him alive through buffs, resistances, dispels, and whatnot.

Doesn't this mean the spellslingers need the fighter to keep the BBEG and minions off them so they can get off their save/die spells? What would happen if that fighter were taken out of the equation? Even if he were replaced with a wizard.

Bullgrit

 

[Storminator]

OK, it seems that everyone is pointing to scry/buff/teleport or mobility spells in general as the problem -- fighting in the air, planes hopping, etc. If that is the main problem(s), how did this get fixed with D&D4? Surely fighters can't fly (without magic items -- like in D&D3), plane shift, etc. in D&D4?

Are there not still things that a 20th-level D&D4 wizard can do that a non-spellcaster can't do? Fly is still a spell, yes? Invisibility? [I am not familiar with D&D4 enough to know what spells still exist or exactly how they work.]

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!

Doesn't this mean the spellslingers need the fighter to keep the BBEG and minions off them so they can get off their save/die spells? What would happen if that fighter were taken out of the equation? Even if he were replaced with a wizard.

Bullgrit

A wizard or cleric or druid could also keep the minions and the BBEG off just as well, if not better. That's essentially the problem. No matter what job you give a high level fighter, a high level W/C/D does it better.

PS