Psychic Warrior vs. Fighter

[Scion]

What's wrong with pulling feats from WotC sources? What books are we using for our debate, PHB and XPH only? Instead of parroting someone else, why not make your own arguments and back them up with numbers, so we can compare?

Maybe what we need to do is set up a melee smackdown thread so we can get to the bottom of this.

Nothing is wrong with putting up lots of feats from various sources. But it simply proves my point that you need to have lots of sources for feats to make it useful. Also, I have made many arguements already, all throughout the thread so far.

The character optimization people have already spoken actually, and they have been doing the smackdown types for a great deal of time.

 

[Elder-Basilisk]

The problem with smackdown type characters is that cheesy multiclassing tends to be the order of the day. Why be a fighter 20 when you can be a fighter 4/PsyWar 2/Bbn 2/Exotic Weapon Master 2/Warmind 10? The majority of the advice you'll find on said boards is against straight-class characters. So the fact that Ftr 20 doesn't show up on the smackdown boards other than builds like SnowSavant's gattling tripper doesn't mean that fighter 20 is a non-viable class; it means that it's generally a non-optimized class. Those are different things.

The unique fact about fighter is that it multiclasses extremely well from levels 2-12. Sorceror is usually a class people multiclass out of as soon as possible. Wizard builds sometimes take a few more levels of wizard to get a bonus feat but most wizard builds ditch the wizard class pretty quickly too. The same is true of cleric. Druid, monk, and paladin sometimes show up straight-classed at 20th level but that's more because they have abilities that only show up at high levels and can't be duplicated by prestige classes than because they are viable straight-classed and other core classes aren't. If you want a character that has Quivering Palm, Diamond Soul, Abundant Step, lots of Stunning fists per day and very high unarmed damage, you have to be a single-classed monk. Once you get spell resistance as a monk, it's only worth having if you continue to play a single-classed monk character because otherwise it falls behind the usefulness curve. Wildshape has some stopping points but if you want to get the most out of wildshape (without sacrificing spellcasting), you need to play a druid. Paladins have prestige classes that allow them to advance their mount, their smites, and their lay on hands, but no prestige class that allows all of those abilities to advance. So, if you want to maximize mounted smiting, you've no better choice than to play a Pal 20. All of the classes that show up on the character optimization boards straight-classed show up that way, not because of any inherent power in the class, but rather because they have abilities that require being straight-classed to maximize. The fighter doesn't have any such abilities. Every single abilitiy the fighter gets works just as well for a multiclass fighter as it does for a straight-classed fighter. So, the only thing that can make a straight-classed fighter optimal is feat synergy that is impossible to get without the sheer number of feats that fighters have available to them. (Feat synergy is possible either through feat chains--Dodge+Mobility+Spring Attack--or abilities that work well together--for instance, Jormundsbrod (or however it's spelled)+Power Attack+Cleave+Dodge+Mobility+Spring Attack+Elusive Target+Combat Expertise+Improved Trip, all of which work together quite nicely against multiple opponents).

The question of whether a class is viable is distinct from the question of whether taking it is optimal. Even though I don't know of any Ftr 20 build that is truly optimal, I'm pretty sure I could take a properly equipped fighter and sit down at any table in an RPGA game (or any other game that doesn't both allow and expect builds with Teflammar Shadowlord, Cheaters of Mystra, etc) and not be embarrassed by my inability to contribute in combat in a level-appropriate manner. I might have a boring time if the entire game were delicate negotiations (so no intimidation) and investigation, but I wouldn't be a slouch in terms of combat-power. I've played D&D long enough to see just as many characters inferior to a single classed fighter with NPC feats as are superior to said fighter. A lot of them are even fun and playable in most games.

 

[Thanee]

The same is true of cleric.

That part I cannot really agree with, but it's just a minor thing, really.

While the cleric does not really gain anything special at higher levels (cept for the spellcasting), there are almost no decent cleric PrC, or rather, clerics are about the only class, which have PrC, which work the right way, giving something, but also taking away something.

Therefore straight cleric is often a better choice IMHO.

The question of whether a class is viable is distinct from the question of whether taking it is optimal.

Yep, but I have told him that already...

And why does it make the fighter completely useless, just because it is not the most powerful choice?

There is a big difference between, 'most powerful choice' and 'powerful enough'. As it is they are well under the curve. Some people really like them, sure, but then some people really like the half orc as is.

*shrug*

Bye
Thanee

 

[Thanee]

Nothing is wrong with putting up lots of feats from various sources. But it simply proves my point that you need to have lots of sources for feats to make it useful.

But aren't they there at this point?

So I guess (official sources only, tho) they should be taken into consideration, if we are talking about the overall power of the fighter class.

As I said, comparing PHB only, the fighter wins 100% over the psychic warrior.

Bye
Thanee

 

[Thanee]

Also, the PsyWarr will still spank this build because it has superior tactical capability. Expansion plus strength buffs plus Up the Walls plus Speed of Thought mean that the psywarr can just take AoOs on the falchion fighter and trip him/follow-up attack until he stays down. Those are just a few of the needed buffs. And, they can be manifested as swift or free actions, so the issue of time is an illusion; there's no time needed for the psywarr to activate the most necessary buffs.

Yep, which is IMHO the main "problem", that they can buff too easy.

Taking away Quicken, Schism and Hustle would keep the psychic warrior in check.

But according to Scion, the psychic warrior would then be vastly inferior to a fighter all of a sudden.

Bye
Thanee

 

[Darklone]

I don't agree that barbarians can outlast fighters in taking damage at lower levels (up to level 10). IME, fighters usually had a better AC (of about 3-4 points at least), lesser mobility but nearly the same damage as a raging barbarian... and more damage as a non-raging barbarian. How many guys have different experiences?

 

[Spatula]

Claws of the beast. Level 1 power. 1hour/level duration. Looks like the psychic warrior gets 2 attacks at first level (neither is offhand, no twf penalties)

Bite of the wolf and form of doom Form of doom allows for a great deal of attacks (it adds four itself, and you can use other attacks with it).

I'll give you claws of the beast and bite of the wolf on the multiple attack front, although you'll still never get more than 3 attacks (aside from form of doom) and bite of the wolf is only min/lvl duration (nice damage, though). The other problem is that all of those attacks are natural weapons and the psychic warrior has no way to "enchant" them - there's no natural weapon version of metaphysical weapon. Which means a lower attack bonus (vs using a magic weapon) and an inability to penetrate DR.

Tradeoffs, tradeoffs...

 

[Shazman]

I'll give you that fighters don't have as many options at higher levels than other classes, but they can be quite deadly very quickly at lower levels. Maybe some kind of house rule that let fighters take "epic" feats like overwhelming critical or devastating critical as fighter feats. Just replace the insane abiltiy score and BAB requirements of such feats with fighter level 15 and 18 respectively. Do something similar with some of the other "epic" feats, and a fighter would have something to look forward to after greater weapon specialization.

 

[Patlin]

I'll give you claws of the beast and bite of the wolf on the multiple attack front, although you'll still never get more than 3 attacks (aside from form of doom) and bite of the wolf is only min/lvl duration (nice damage, though). The other problem is that all of those attacks are natural weapons and the psychic warrior has no way to "enchant" them - there's no natural weapon version of metaphysical weapon. Which means a lower attack bonus (vs using a magic weapon) and an inability to penetrate DR.

Don't mean to be rude, but I believe you are wrong on all counts. Bite of the wolf can be used in addition to manufactured weapon attacks, so even without claws of the wolf it can get you up to four attacks. Metaphysical Claw is the name of Metaphysical Weapon's equivalent, and there are several similar psywarrior powers that enhance natural weapon attacks.

Also, while the duration of Bite of the Wolf is short, it is one of the very few psywarrior spells that gains its full benefit with only one power point, needing no augmentation. At high levels, you can cast it a lot! Very efficient.

 

[Scion]

I don't agree that barbarians can outlast fighters in taking damage at lower levels (up to level 10). IME, fighters usually had a better AC (of about 3-4 points at least), lesser mobility but nearly the same damage as a raging barbarian... and more damage as a non-raging barbarian. How many guys have different experiences?

Fighters tend to wear heavier armors, but then the barb can have a higher dex bonus so that makes up for part of the difference.

Also, Barbs will be absorbing some damage (DR #/-) along with being immune to flanking most of the time. That gives them another advantage.

So, with the fighter wearing heavy armor so that their ac is higher, the barb moves twice as fast, is immune to flanking, and absorbs some damage.

Oh, and the barb has listen to help him not be surprised as often. That counts for quite a bit right there.

By spending 3 feats the fighter matches output of the beginning barbs rage, but only for one specific weapon. If the fighter has to keep putting out 3 feats to keep up with a single feat spent by the barb... even the fighter doesnt have that many feats.