Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="charlesatan" data-source="post: 3189651" data-attributes="member: 20870">Well we are disgreeing on the count that "the warblade is always better than the fighter". A lot of factors and variables are involved. Levels are just one of those factors.The thing about higher levels is the question of how long the encounter lasts. If it's under three rounds, the WB can easily win the encounter mainly because he can "unload" most of his maneuvers before recharging (and when I'm talking about "unload", I'm only taking about two or three specific 8th/9th-level maneuvers). Once the maneuvers are gone, the Fighter is still consistently dealing his set  damage.No, that line had two elements in it: why melee, and why the greataxe. And he does make a good point, how would a ranged Fighter stand up to a conventional Warblade? The point is, identical comparisons (i.e. same gear, same stat allocation) isn't the best choice for determining effectivity. It's like comparing apples (i.e. the Fighter) and oranges (i.e. the Warblade), even if they're both fruits (i.e. "Fighter"-types).You missed the point of the post. A fully optimized tripping, spiked chain wielding Fighter for example is not reproducable as a Warblade (at least not without multiclassing) simply because a Warblade doesn't have enough feats. A TWF Fighter and a TWF Warblade would be entirely different becacuse the former's damage output will come from feats (i.e. Weapon Specialization), while the latter from maneuvers and stances (i.e. Blood in the Water) becausse a Warblade doesn't have enough feats to take both the TWF tree and the entire Weapon Focus tree.If you missed my point earlier, it's not. the WB has a slightly different power curve from that of a spellcaster: good at early levels, presumably good at later levels. A Ftr is simple to use at early levels, effective in the mid-levels, and honestly not-so-effective at high levels compared to the other classes (i.e. most of the spellcasting classes).Having said that, it's not necessarily a throw-away, no brainer that I'd always pick a WB over a Ftr. If it's feats you want, go Ftr. If what you want is maneuvers, go WB. If you want mobility, I'd say go for WB with White Raven maneuvers or a focused Fighter.If it's a "class imbalance" you're talking about, you ignored my previous post about martial adepts being akin to spellcasters (i.e. damage output not quite there, but still a powerful hike).</blockquote>

Verification