D&D 3E/3.5 Why be a 3.5 fighter?

[Axel]

Why are people getting so hung-up about the effectiveness of this class versus that, and these choices and so on???! What are you doing, playing D&D like a tabletop wargame tournament? Splitting party treasure by number of monster kills?

Pick a character theme/background/artwork/whatever you like and that fits into the campaign, choose a class that best represents and go for it. Anybody that tells you you're "doing it wrong" is a moron.

Now, nobody likes being the useless moop on a team of supermen so some optimisation (appropriate feat selection, multiclassing as required etc) is necessary, but really, to argue a whole fantasy paradigm (or a class) is useless is ridiculous. Has nobody ever wanted to play a tough-as-nails mercenary? Or a soldier dishonourably discharged for being a coward/drunk/screwing the general's daughter?

 

[Nifft]

1) if the fighter on the leash is Aaaaahnold, he can kill other guys so you can hear the lamentation of the...wait...if it's Jet Li, he can kill the other guys so you can...errr

Conan is a Barbarian, and Jet Li is a Monk.

Fighters in film include the Gimp.

By your post, I thought you meant the companion itself was stronger. Anything with a full spellcaster buff machine is good, doesn't make the thing getting buffed good. In terms of resources, a druid buffs his companion, a wizard buffs the fighter, both are down a spell. D&D's a team game, not a singles matchup. As long as the casters buffing the deignated meat shield, doesn't much matter which meat shield it is.

I did, and I do, which is why I typed the rest of the post you were commenting on.

Heh, I play with high point buy (and usualy dwarf if making a fighter), guess I'm used to high scores. Still, Wolf is basically winning by 1 hp, and only the 1st level, it's barely a win.

Okay, if you change the default rules so that 1st level characters are better than normal, then you can expect your 1st level Fighter to be better than the usual 1st level Fighter.

I'm doing the comparison based on 25 point buy.

Wolf wins, but I think you're overstating the importance of Reflex

Could you show me where I overstate the importance of Reflex?

I don't think spot/listen make that large a difference in combat for melee classes, I'd call this irrelevant for the comparison, mostly. Otherwise...Fighter can talk. Fighter can presumably talk his way out of some fights or garner a surrender.

Spot/listen can give you an extra standard action in surprise fights. That's a lot of fights, so that's potentially a lot of extra standard actions. Moreover, it's a standard action at a time when some people are flat-footed, and therefore easier to hit.

- - -

Anyway, it looks like Wolf was a bad choice for comparison, because it ties with the Fighter in too many ways.

Let's look at the Riding Dog instead.

HP same as wolf.
Saves same as wolf.
Skills same as wolf, with an extra +8 jump and +3 swim.
AC 16 (+2 over wolf).
Attack +3 (without Weapon Focus, +4 with).
Damage 1d6+3 (+2 over wolf).
Trip attack as wolf.
Speed 40 ft. (-10 ft. vs. wolf).

This guy compares quite favorably to our standard 25 point buy 1st level Fighter, and you can own one for the low price of 150 gp.

Cheers, -- N

 

[pawsplay]

Fighter gets 10+con hp; Wolf gets 2d8+4 (13) hp. A Fighter with a 15 Con loses. Advantage: Wolf.

By 1 hit point. Unless the Fighter takes Toughness.

Wolf has AC 14 (touch 12, flat-foot 12). A Fighter might be in scale mail (AC 14), plus a shield or a Dex bonus. Advantage: Fighter.

What about the fighter's Dex bonus?

However, the Wolf can initiate a trip attempt with every hit. This is very good. The best tactic that melee types can hope for is Improved Trip + Combat Reflexes, because standing up provokes an AoO, and you can re-trip on an AoO. The Wolf lacks Combat Reflexes, but he's got the Improved Trip angle covered. A human Fighter could have the required feats at level 1, but none of the others could*. Also, the Fighter's prerequisite feat demands a 13 Int, which is painful for a Fighter, because he has to invest in Str, Con, Dex and Wis already. Finally, the Fighter probably wants a trip weapon like a flail or halberd, which lowers his damage a trifle. Advantage: Wolf.

Wolves are cute and cuddly, and chicks dig them. If you walk around with a Fighter on a leash, you won't get any chicks. Advantage: Wolf.

*) I'm counting Weapon Focus as a requirement, since without it the Fighter would not decisively beat the Wolf's attack bonus.

You just posted that the fighter wins, even without it. The Fighter has a higher Strength.

Standard array: Str 15, Dex 12, Con 14, Int 13, Wis 10, Cha 8. Bog standard fighter, easily qualifies for Comabt Expertise, and meets all our benchmarks. And has a higher AC than you posted above.

They're more evenly matched than I had remembered. Still, the wolf wins on HP, saves, skills, and tactical maneuvers. The ability to charge an archer 100 ft. away is just gravy.

That's some chunky gravy when the archer has already shot you. The wolf may have advantages in Spot and Listen, but I think even a fighter can spot a wolf in 100 feet of open terrain.

 

[Nifft]

By 1 hit point. Unless the Fighter takes Toughness.

If the Fighter takes Toughness, I shall point at him and laugh. He has made a bad decision that will be with him for his whole career.

What about the fighter's Dex bonus?

It's mentioned in the text you quoted.

You just posted that the fighter wins, even without it. The Fighter has a higher Strength.

Standard array: Str 15, Dex 12, Con 14, Int 13, Wis 10, Cha 8. Bog standard fighter, easily qualifies for Comabt Expertise, and meets all our benchmarks. And has a higher AC than you posted above.

Fine stat array choices. Now compare that guy vs. the Riding Dog (Str 15, AC 16).

That's some chunky gravy when the archer has already shot you. The wolf may have advantages in Spot and Listen, but I think even a fighter can spot a wolf in 100 feet of open terrain.

The question isn't whether a Fighter can spot a Wolf at 100 ft., the question is what a Fighter does when an Elf pops out of a bush 100 ft. away and draws his elfy little longbow.

Cheers, -- N

 

[Padreigh]

After following this discussion, I checked my assorted character sheets and charcter concepts and it seems that I never played (or wanted to play) a fighter in all those years. Maybe a level as fighter to get a specific feat or a prestige class or whatever, but never a fighter from 1st level onwards or more than 2 levels of fighter added later on.

I think it was mainly because I consider fighters to be ... well, a bit boring.

I do not doubt their efficiency in combat, but that is about it. Their rather limited skill selection and the fact that Wisdom, Intelligence and Charisma usually take a backseat compared to the physical abilities ensure that they are usually all about fighting (yeah, that is why they are called fighters, I know ) and pretty much suck at everything else.

Paladins are usually not bad at diplomacy, rangers can lead you through the wilderness, Barbarians have better senses ... and since as far as I am concerned it's not all about the fighting, I'd pick almost any other class before picking a fighter.

 

[Nifft]

Nifft, WTF? By your own calculations, Fighter beats Wolf in AC, to-hit and damage, and is -1 in hp. And for melee-types everything else is really a far distant second, and you must know this. Are we there yet?

I'm here for reasoned discussion. You seem to be expecting partisan rhetoric. If my own best analysis causes me to reject my premise, that's fine.

Why are people getting so hung-up about the effectiveness of this class versus that, and these choices and so on???!

I like being good at kicking ass.

Pick a character theme/background/artwork/whatever you like and that fits into the campaign, choose a class that best represents and go for it. Anybody that tells you you're "doing it wrong" is a moron.

THINKING IS FOR MORONS, SHUT UP AND HAVE FUN!
But I--
SHUT UP AND HAVE FUN! ARE YOU HAVING FUN YET?!
Well it--
SHUT UP AND HAVE FUN! ARE YOU HAVING FUN YET?!
...

Now, nobody likes being the useless moop on a team of supermen so some optimisation (appropriate feat selection, multiclassing as required etc) is necessary, but really, to argue a whole fantasy paradigm (or a class) is useless is ridiculous. Has nobody ever wanted to play a tough-as-nails mercenary? Or a soldier dishonourably discharged for being a coward/drunk/screwing the general's daughter?

We all agree that there should be a way to play a melee dude.

It's just that Fighter isn't a good way to model that melee dude. Fortunately there are better options out there, in particular the Tome of Battle (Book of Nine Swords) stuff.

Not all classes are good.

Cheers, -- N

 

[grizzo]

Why are people getting so hung-up about the effectiveness of this class versus that, and these choices and so on???! What are you doing, playing D&D like a tabletop wargame tournament? Splitting party treasure by number of monster kills?

Pick a character theme/background/artwork/whatever you like and that fits into the campaign, choose a class that best represents and go for it. Anybody that tells you you're "doing it wrong" is a moron.

Now, nobody likes being the useless moop on a team of supermen so some optimisation (appropriate feat selection, multiclassing as required etc) is necessary, but really, to argue a whole fantasy paradigm (or a class) is useless is ridiculous. Has nobody ever wanted to play a tough-as-nails mercenary? Or a soldier dishonourably discharged for being a coward/drunk/screwing the general's daughter?

Damn Right! i've been playing that way on sundays foe over 28 year and proud of it..

 

[pawsplay]

Let's build a riding dog emulator.

Dog Boy
Str 15, Dex 12, Con 14, Int 13, Wis 10, Cha 8
Feats: Combat Expertise, Improved Trip, Dodge
Skills: Jump 4 (+2), Listen 2 (+2), Spot 2 (+2), Swim 4 (-2)
Gear: scale mail, halberd, longsword, heavy shield, and javelin
AC 16 (+4 armor, +1 Dex, +1 dodge)

His skills aren't great, but he can easily detect a riding dog on open ground, actually.

If the riding dog wins initiative, charges, and trips, he has a good shot at winning. However, there is only about a 1/8 chance of that happening (and incidentally a 1/32 chance of tripping itself). Otherwise, Dog Boy readies versus a charge (average damage 17). Dog Boy needs only a touch attack to hit with a trip attempt, has a better chance of tripping, has ZERO chance of being tripped, and does more damage with his followup, which is fairly likely to hit a prone riding dog.

In toe to toe combat, he can boost his AC to 21 using a shield and Combat Expertise, being harder to hit while hitting more often, doing more damage. Donning a shield is a move action.

The riding dog is probably toast. And this is a very nearly ideal fight for the riding dog, on its own terms; Dog Boy has no reach and is not a dwarf.

 

[pawsplay]

If the Fighter takes Toughness, I shall point at him and laugh. He has made a bad decision that will be with him for his whole career.

And yet such a miserably suboptimal character is tougher than the allegedly formidable animal companion.

 

[Flatus Maximus]

I'm here for reasoned discussion. You seem to be expecting partisan rhetoric. If my own best analysis causes me to reject my premise, that's fine.

Partisan rhetoric? Whatever gave you that idea? Maybe you confused my post with another....

Anyway, I was just pointing out that your own "reasoned" contribution to the discussion seemed to be undermining your claim regarding Wolf vs. Fighter.