Fighters didn't matter after 11th level?

[Runestar]

Exactly. The SRD explicitly mentions that you can't sneak attack "EXTREMITIES (arms and legs) so how exactly does a halfling sneak attack say a Cloud Giant when he can't even reach the giant's ankle bone? I've found that most people do't even realize this rule exists

I feel it is not so much that we are unaware of its existence, but more that we are unsure of how literally we should interpret (much less enforce) this rule. Nothing in the rules specifically spells out that we are unable to sneak attack another foe which is XX size categories smaller or larger than ourselves. That particular excerpt seems more of an afterthought, as the designers evidently failed to address just how this should be implemented in game terms. Usually, I just assume the players in question will find some way of reaching those vitals (for example, since combat is assumed to be happening simultaneously on all fronts despite the turn-based sequence, the rogue could have sidestepped the giant's slam, while at the same time dealing a counterattack to its wrist).

Since sneak attack essentially means that you are aiming at a foe's vitals (pretty much the same concept as scoring a critical), if a halfling fighter can crit a tarrasque with a melee attack, there is no reason why a halfling rogue cannot sneak attack that same tarrasque. Worse comes to worst, you can say that he was aiming at its sole or something (I believe there should be some vital arteries at the bottom of its feet somewhere).

Also consider that a colossal greatsword is probably even bigger than a small PC (akin to trying to swap a cockroach with a rolled up newspaper), yet the colossal foe wielding it can apparently still aim accurately for the halfling's vitals (in game terms, there is nothing stopping a colossal npc from dealing sneak attack to a halfling, so long as the requirements are met).

 

[Hussar]

I ran an extended d20 revised game. The Soldier was clearly more powerful in combat than a Jedi.

Just out of curiosity Pawsplay, whenever an example is made on these boards, do you EVER fall in line with it? Every example in this thread, you've stated how this never happens in your games. How do you and your group manage to be so unique every single time?

Example: Fighters get left behind.
Pawsplay: Never in my games, the fighters were always the best.

Example: Jedi were head and shoulders better than every other class in d20 Star Wars.
Pawsplay: Nope, you could have soldiers equal to Jedi.

On and on. One wonders how you manage it. How you manage to have a pretty much diametrically opposed experience to just about every example given on a point you disagree with.

 

[pawsplay]

Just out of curiosity Pawsplay, whenever an example is made on these boards, do you EVER fall in line with it? Every example in this thread, you've stated how this never happens in your games. How do you and your group manage to be so unique every single time?

Example: Fighters get left behind.
Pawsplay: Never in my games, the fighters were always the best.

Example: Jedi were head and shoulders better than every other class in d20 Star Wars.
Pawsplay: Nope, you could have soldiers equal to Jedi.

On and on. One wonders how you manage it. How you manage to have a pretty much diametrically opposed experience to just about every example given on a point you disagree with.

Naturally, I disagree with your observation. Obviously, I would have less to say, and you would have even less reason to remember, the times when I have stated simple agreement with others. I think what is memorable to you is my willingness to continue to discuss something until either opinions change or the discussion becomes logically exhausted. You could claim I was being contrary, but I would simply reply that for whatever reason, my experiences are what they are, and I have happily supplied examples.

Perhaps it is that many people are inclined to believe their positions are both natural and obvious, and consequently overstate their case, which then causes others, such as myself, to offer our differing opinions. If what I had to say was diametrically opposed to the vast majority of people, it seems plausible that more people would gradually join the argument in order to argue against my point. But in fact, it is usually the same people who continue to argue the original point. My conclusion is that it is likely a substantial minority of people agree with me much of the time.

 

[dnddays]

Round 1 -- Fight!

It's true that fighters didn't really matter after 11th level, certainly by 18th. And depending on the edition, rogues (thieves) didn't either.

There was the classic 1st edition combat start: harm + magic missile. Or, the occasional change of pace: maze + blade barrier + prismatic wall + bigby's crushing hand + mordenkainen's sword or Power Word: Kill/Holy Word/Creeping Doom.

That didn't change much in 2nd edition, but in 3rd edition it became all about polymorph self and righteous might and whatnot. By mid-level, having a wizard start the battle with polymorph self into a 10HD Hyrda (10 attacks per turn at 1d10 damage) or something and easily outpace the damage output of our melee guys was really annoying. And look out when players gain access to quickened empowered maximized twin sonic-substitution fireballs or epic level nonsense (crown of vermin anyone?).

Having been a frequent reader and contibuter to the Wizard's Character Optimization Board and witnessing the horrors of builds like 'Pun Pun', I don't see how anyone can argue that fighters or other non-spell casters weren't all but worthless beyond a certain point. Sure, as a DM, I can constantly put your party in magic dead areas or have you fight an inordinate amount of magic-immune or magic-resistant creatures. But at what point does it become akin to a 4-H Participation Ribbon? At what point does trying to 'include' the melee guys became patronizing? As DM, I shouldn't have to rearrange my adventure's premise and story to correct an inherent and critical flaw in the D&D game.

A man walks into a doctors office and says: "Doc, it hurts when I do this?" The doctor responds: "Then don't do that."

I shouldn't have to rob Peter of his abilities to make things fun for Paul. Not to say I didn't do that back in the day. I did. But it's not my job as the DM to repair the game's foundation, it's the job of the game designers. Which is why I think 4e is a vast improvement over the old design. It may not be perfect, but no one has cast a quickened maximized fireball followed by a polymorph self into a Hydra for ten attacks yet.

 

[dnddays]

To pawsplay:

The first magic item any wizard made in my game was a minor cloak of displacement. The major cloak of displacement would soon follow. That will neutralize 20% or 50% of your fighter's attacks. That doesn't take into account the 2nd-level mirror image which might follow the command for the magic item. Followed by the trusty polymorph self into a either a hydra or an ooze or a mind flayer to extract your brain killing you instantly should the wizard stun you long enough. My money is always on the wizard unless you can drop him in round one before his turn, and even in most optimized builds your fighter probably can't -- although a rogue might. An optimized spiked chain rogue is the proverbial nuts.

 

[pawsplay]

Having been a frequent reader and contibuter to the Wizard's Character Optimization Board and witnessing the horrors of builds like 'Pun Pun', I don't see how anyone can argue that fighters or other non-spell casters weren't all but worthless beyond a certain point.

I wouldn't compare Pun-Pun with anything. Or are you also going to argue that kobolds make other characters worthless?

 

[Starbuck_II]

To pawsplay:

The first magic item any wizard made in my game was a minor cloak of displacement. The major cloak of displacement would soon follow. That will neutralize 20% or 50% of your fighter's attacks. That doesn't take into account the 2nd-level mirror image which might follow the command for the magic item. Followed by the trusty polymorph self into a either a hydra or an ooze or a mind flayer to extract your brain killing you instantly should the wizard stun you long enough. My money is always on the wizard unless you can drop him in round one before his turn, and even in most optimized builds your fighter probably can't -- although a rogue might. An optimized spiked chain rogue is the proverbial nuts.

I understand the minor cloak. It is a passive always on cloak.

But the major one is like boots of speed: only so many rounds (not needed to be one after each other).

 

[Ariosto]

In older versions, Wizards were openly touted as among the most powerful types in the game. Whether that means fighters "don't matter" depends on how one plays the game.

MUs really start to cramp fighters' style when they go from serving as the "artillery" to taking over the main battle-line role. Even then, a central factor in the equation is how important that is in the whole scheme of a campaign. To judge from posts in this thread, it has become overwhelmingly the central concern in 3E.

In an old-style game, MUs tend to die like flies -- due in no small part to the machinations of rival MUs. Power draws power in opposition; "Pot that MU!" is a familiar cry from PCs and monsters alike. It's obviously easier to get high-level characters when one has less frequent need to start over by rolling up low-level ones. If one has multiple PCs in a campaign, that difference can be magnified: two Lords and their hosts may be able to beat one Wizard and his minions.

That strategic aspect of play makes a difference! Fighters and Clerics get a leg up in recruiting men at arms. (The Cleric really gets an "assist" in establishing a stronghold, but at that point the Fighter is overtaking him in other ways.) "You and what army?" is a different kind of question when it has an answer, and not having an army of one's own can be inconvenient.

(High-level fighters in older editions excel at cutting swathes through armies of normal men. MU spells harming multiple subjects tend to be "overkill" in that department, generally to a degree depending on depth of formation. They have a limited number of uses, taking considerable time to recover in AD&D. The combat power of fighters is more of an always-on, at-will effect. Shape Change is pretty awesome, but it does nothing to help an MU's hit points.)

Availability of magic items is another factor changed in 3E, and along with others it seems to me to favor spell-casters. This may not be widely representative, but in my experience non-spell-casters as 3E PCs are extremely rare. A character might start as a fighting type, and remain that primarily, but nearly always would add some levels in a magical class along the way.

That it's a role-playing game is something not to overlook. If the standard is raw power, then lower-level characters of any type "don't matter" when there are characters of 12th or higher level in the campaign. Non-humans and Thieves originated as clearly less powerful types in the long run, yet they appealed to many players. Likewise, the role of a fighting man is qualitatively different from that of a magician. The development of character and accumulation of biography over time are key elements of the game's appeal, and of the desire to play one persona over another.

When one is stuck always playing a character in "THE Party," it's easy to get overshadowed. Referring to that video clip, the BMX Bandit's problem is that he's joined at the hip to the Angel Summoner. Conan the Cimmerian might not be so exciting either, if he were always tagging along with Pelias the sorcerer.

The game in its larger shape changed, and more particular rules did not change quite in accordance (although the designers clearly devoted considerable thought to the new view of "balance").

 

[insanogeddon]

HoHum

Couple things make little sense to me...

I cannot understand how people claim that fighters are unthreatening dunces only good as meat shields YET also hold they have little ability at damaging/changing outcomes.

As its pretty easy to get to casters (fly/teleport/run/tumble or 20 othe ways and items). I actually love both casters and warriors but one never is so much better as oft claimed but never proven in front of a fair DM.


Surely either they:
ARE good at changing out comes and thus are targeted fulfilling their apparently sponge/meat shield only role.
Or (as people claim) they
Aren’t good at changing out comes and thus are never targeted and ignored making them horrible sponge/meat shields better replaced by a bard with a blowgun.

Or the DM is being v.v.v nice and playing self-loathing enemies.

If the infantry are mere slow/unmanuverable/poor damage etc etc they serve NO protection for artillery, it’s a no brainer.

So if your experiences are that fighters are sluggish, un-manuverable, combat unchanging nobodies.. yet their still attacked over the ‘mega power casters’ that surely indicates favouritism and your in a pretty easy/caster friendly/biased world.

A system fixing this with handcuffs like 4ed. does not indicate a system problem so much as a way its played problem. Each have their perks. Personally I am utterly against innately balanced systems where wit/strategy/cause and effect are not required. If I wanted to play such a balanced game I would get 2 dice, a cup (to balance), a friend and sit in a 5x5 room rolling, highest roll wins. Not really what I look for in a hobby really, I have better ways to waste time. Tho seriously even dice if you have to YELL out what happens it can be entertaining e.g: roll a 8 and yell I use my super meggazord defenestrating strike, friend rolls a 10 YELLS I use my sonic beta blocker and channel your power into my emancipating strike decombobulating your jubbilys etc add the brews and I recon you have yourself a game more balanced, fun and role playing conducive than most.

ROLE playing isn’t about rolling, nor balance, supprisingly to some it isn’t about ROLES either. That’s why 3.5 is still kicking despite its vile horrendous mistakes.

Warriors (including rogues) always could flex within their role to other areas when casters are linear tracked trains relying on spells to flex, when casters are making all those scrolls, and fonts, and items warriors can spend that time among the people helping, making friends unless the DM jibs them. Warriors can dip or get enogh feats that you can cover all avanues (I always like having a 14 wis and ‘zen shot’ to cover the low dex on str builds and the will save with ‘iron will’ or now with PH 2, endurance and ‘steadfast determination’ for con to will saves. Granted a wizard COULD, just like a lawyer COULD spend 3 weeks in a bar and be mates with everyone and get perks but they have better things to do, and a focus they have to stick to to win their little race that warriors often upset with actual wit and inventive suprise head clubbings. Just cause a cleric ‘could’ take blind fighting is moot unless he takes its irrelevant. Also there is no substitute to political power for TIME spent being activising... rogues and warriors have this time. High level while 30 days are spent adding to spell books and making scrolls that’s 30 days more political power a fighter can get. I don’t care if your chr is 10 and you have diplomacy +1 as we all know once you have friends these things don’t matter.. and that is the core of support and strength non-casters can build far better than casters. Ignore the extra time and you may as well ignore the ability of casters to make scrolls.

Further because warriors solutions to problems aren’t as linear as ‘I cast a1 for a, b1 for b, c1 for c’ etc they get to use their mind, experiment, struggle, outwit, grow, invent solutions and that is often what real fun in games comes down to, little moments of being a smarty pants, and spell a1 for problem a is just a illusory version of REALLY dealing with a problem with quick wit and earning the victory, building value and not being easily replaced by a simplistic computer program that can play a wizard better than most players could hope.

If you ignore that you can ready to 5ft step and attack or think that some delayed fireballs bothers a no doubt fire resistant 2-300 HP warrior, or summoned monsters can be made to grapple against all instinct despite the rules etc then yes casters rule at high level. But that’s the same as having a caster with no components in a silent antimagic zone in a tornado balanced on his head!

I have never played the newest star wars edition. The old one I have many a time. Jedi attract trouble. It’s a story oriented game. If your want tho and are poxed by unfeeling jedi they go down. If your playing a unimaginative, uncreative game fighting on a baseball diamond martial arts and grappling builds still mow them down, the 2 gun munchkins can as well. If your playing a story base: politicians can pay to get things done (including said grappling kneck crackers) never mind the techies with wit (all the force nuking powers in the world won’t save the lille jedi whos ship says it has oxygen and doesn’t, whose engines blow, whose seals erode, whose warp jump gets them cannoned into a gravity well etc etc Even by cannon few really went the jedi straight on, just like freedom fighters/terrorists don’t take the military head on. Why would one play any different unless your suicidal and in that case having a stomach full of explosives never hurts for when the jedi cuts you down.)

As with wonderful fantasy stories (like v in oots) realistically a lot of the amazing magic co-inky-dinks ain’t happening and if it does the narrator/dm etc etc is cutting you some SERIOUS breaks (I am against giving comic examples of my point but to follow suit: in oots belkars little effort as the “sexy shoeless god of war” no.610 to 611. could have easily had a dragon added to the mix to be ganked, and he had no level bumping/know all spells/buoyed by 3 planes of evil shenanigans going. Even in 617 celia a mere air sprite looks to be epicly able if the story fits). Same goes for the pun/pun mention... SERIOUS CHEESE, look on the boards and the real danger is the chargers/master throwers/hulking hurlers as they don’t rely on unusual books/accepted settings and could be slipped past a DM....

What further baffles me is its often the same people saying “fighters are worthless and needless” that also argue in other areas “Book of 9 swords” classes are balanced and NOT severe power creep......

Dubious at best to hold views that conflict. Which one is it?

Its like those that believe in feng shu/chi/ki/shakras/spirit/auras/spirit guides/energy flow etc etc (not that I am judging those beliefs in the slightest). My bafflement and amusement comes form when those that hold said beliefs tend to have a whole bunch of traditional tattoos and a bucket load of piercings as if shoving foreign OR/and man made stuff thru your body or under your skin wouldn’t throw of the ‘natural balanced holistic energies’ something cronic, never mind I doubt spirits would be cool with stealing their traditional family markings tied to their souls/ancestors/gods and popping ink under the skin so the plagiarised designs appear... they would probably view it as heresy/abomination to be punished.

I have always got the no tatt/piercing spiritual types and the pierced/tatted/abomination nihilistic no spirit types but the combo.... bemusing!



PS: As for ‘magic jar’ it “You do need line of effect from the jar to the creatures.” To go to and from the jar once your in... often overlooked and nasty with walls/dispel etc etc as my Ecclectic Learning (and choose necro spells PH2) War Mage/Pale Master found out.

 

[dnddays]

Couple things make little sense to me...

I cannot understand how people claim that fighters are unthreatening dunces only good as meat shields YET also hold they have little ability at damaging/changing outcomes.

As its pretty easy to get to casters (fly/teleport/run/tumble or 20 othe ways and items). I actually love both casters and warriors but one never is so much better as oft claimed but never proven in front of a fair DM.


Surely either they:
ARE good at changing out comes and thus are targeted fulfilling their apparently sponge/meat shield only role.
Or (as people claim) they
Aren’t good at changing out comes and thus are never targeted and ignored making them horrible sponge/meat shields better replaced by a bard with a blowgun.

Or the DM is being v.v.v nice and playing self-loathing enemies.

If the infantry are mere slow/unmanuverable/poor damage etc etc they serve NO protection for artillery, it’s a no brainer.

So if your experiences are that fighters are sluggish, un-manuverable, combat unchanging nobodies.. yet their still attacked over the ‘mega power casters’ that surely indicates favouritism and your in a pretty easy/caster friendly/biased world.

A system fixing this with handcuffs like 4ed. does not indicate a system problem so much as a way its played problem. Each have their perks. Personally I am utterly against innately balanced systems where wit/strategy/cause and effect are not required. If I wanted to play such a balanced game I would get 2 dice, a cup (to balance), a friend and sit in a 5x5 room rolling, highest roll wins. Not really what I look for in a hobby really, I have better ways to waste time. Tho seriously even dice if you have to YELL out what happens it can be entertaining e.g: roll a 8 and yell I use my super meggazord defenestrating strike, friend rolls a 10 YELLS I use my sonic beta blocker and channel your power into my emancipating strike decombobulating your jubbilys etc add the brews and I recon you have yourself a game more balanced, fun and role playing conducive than most.

ROLE playing isn’t about rolling, nor balance, supprisingly to some it isn’t about ROLES either. That’s why 3.5 is still kicking despite its vile horrendous mistakes.

Warriors (including rogues) always could flex within their role to other areas when casters are linear tracked trains relying on spells to flex, when casters are making all those scrolls, and fonts, and items warriors can spend that time among the people helping, making friends unless the DM jibs them. Warriors can dip or get enogh feats that you can cover all avanues (I always like having a 14 wis and ‘zen shot’ to cover the low dex on str builds and the will save with ‘iron will’ or now with PH 2, endurance and ‘steadfast determination’ for con to will saves. Granted a wizard COULD, just like a lawyer COULD spend 3 weeks in a bar and be mates with everyone and get perks but they have better things to do, and a focus they have to stick to to win their little race that warriors often upset with actual wit and inventive suprise head clubbings. Just cause a cleric ‘could’ take blind fighting is moot unless he takes its irrelevant. Also there is no substitute to political power for TIME spent being activising... rogues and warriors have this time. High level while 30 days are spent adding to spell books and making scrolls that’s 30 days more political power a fighter can get. I don’t care if your chr is 10 and you have diplomacy +1 as we all know once you have friends these things don’t matter.. and that is the core of support and strength non-casters can build far better than casters. Ignore the extra time and you may as well ignore the ability of casters to make scrolls.

Further because warriors solutions to problems aren’t as linear as ‘I cast a1 for a, b1 for b, c1 for c’ etc they get to use their mind, experiment, struggle, outwit, grow, invent solutions and that is often what real fun in games comes down to, little moments of being a smarty pants, and spell a1 for problem a is just a illusory version of REALLY dealing with a problem with quick wit and earning the victory, building value and not being easily replaced by a simplistic computer program that can play a wizard better than most players could hope.

If you ignore that you can ready to 5ft step and attack or think that some delayed fireballs bothers a no doubt fire resistant 2-300 HP warrior, or summoned monsters can be made to grapple against all instinct despite the rules etc then yes casters rule at high level. But that’s the same as having a caster with no components in a silent antimagic zone in a tornado balanced on his head!

I have never played the newest star wars edition. The old one I have many a time. Jedi attract trouble. It’s a story oriented game. If your want tho and are poxed by unfeeling jedi they go down. If your playing a unimaginative, uncreative game fighting on a baseball diamond martial arts and grappling builds still mow them down, the 2 gun munchkins can as well. If your playing a story base: politicians can pay to get things done (including said grappling kneck crackers) never mind the techies with wit (all the force nuking powers in the world won’t save the lille jedi whos ship says it has oxygen and doesn’t, whose engines blow, whose seals erode, whose warp jump gets them cannoned into a gravity well etc etc Even by cannon few really went the jedi straight on, just like freedom fighters/terrorists don’t take the military head on. Why would one play any different unless your suicidal and in that case having a stomach full of explosives never hurts for when the jedi cuts you down.)

As with wonderful fantasy stories (like v in oots) realistically a lot of the amazing magic co-inky-dinks ain’t happening and if it does the narrator/dm etc etc is cutting you some SERIOUS breaks (I am against giving comic examples of my point but to follow suit: in oots belkars little effort as the “sexy shoeless god of war” no.610 to 611. could have easily had a dragon added to the mix to be ganked, and he had no level bumping/know all spells/buoyed by 3 planes of evil shenanigans going. Even in 617 celia a mere air sprite looks to be epicly able if the story fits). Same goes for the pun/pun mention... SERIOUS CHEESE, look on the boards and the real danger is the chargers/master throwers/hulking hurlers as they don’t rely on unusual books/accepted settings and could be slipped past a DM....

What further baffles me is its often the same people saying “fighters are worthless and needless” that also argue in other areas “Book of 9 swords” classes are balanced and NOT severe power creep......

Dubious at best to hold views that conflict. Which one is it?

Its like those that believe in feng shu/chi/ki/shakras/spirit/auras/spirit guides/energy flow etc etc (not that I am judging those beliefs in the slightest). My bafflement and amusement comes form when those that hold said beliefs tend to have a whole bunch of traditional tattoos and a bucket load of piercings as if shoving foreign OR/and man made stuff thru your body or under your skin wouldn’t throw of the ‘natural balanced holistic energies’ something cronic, never mind I doubt spirits would be cool with stealing their traditional family markings tied to their souls/ancestors/gods and popping ink under the skin so the plagiarised designs appear... they would probably view it as heresy/abomination to be punished.

I have always got the no tatt/piercing spiritual types and the pierced/tatted/abomination nihilistic no spirit types but the combo.... bemusing!



PS: As for ‘magic jar’ it “You do need line of effect from the jar to the creatures.” To go to and from the jar once your in... often overlooked and nasty with walls/dispel etc etc as my Ecclectic Learning (and choose necro spells PH2) War Mage/Pale Master found out.

What?