D&D 3E/3.5 Why be a Fighter? (3.5)

[krunchyfrogg]

Tenth - Sword-chucks!

I like swords.

 

[Camarath]

That's when the wizard lifts his finger and obliterates the fighter.

Honestly, Barbarian vs. Fighter isn't really applicable, since they are both good at melee. The problem is melee vs. spellcasters, because that's where fighters get shafted. Fighters might be better than barbarians, but wizards trump fighters every day of the week.

Only from a distance

 

[Feaelin]

Just as any cook who can't make a flavorful meal from scratch should hang up his apron, any player who can't make the fighter a flavorful character should hang up his dice bag.
Or at least stick to the more pre-packaged varieties.
If you can make a flavorful meals from scratch but happen to prefer microwave burritos, then more power to you. You're a philistine, but more power to you. [/B]

Hmm. I think I'm in the latter category. But not every time. I heat up frozen burritos because a flavorful meal takes time and effort. I'm lazy! . Fortunately, the wife objects to "our daily burrito", so I'm *cough* "encouraged" *cough* to fix better meals than microwave meals...

To bring this on topic, I figure the same problem applies to the "making the fighter flavorful". It can take more time and effort (or more thought) to make a fighter flavorful, and I'm sure I'm not the only lazy person out there...

I'm inclined to think that every class can become "bland" if the player chooses not to imbue them with flavor, or lets the "stereotype" for the class suck them in. The wizard has a vast (hmm. someone spell repetoire for me!) of spells..how often are the same narrow few selected for the spells you "learn" at level-up? The same with the fighter, you can keep choosing the same feats for every fighter (or even every combat class), or start going in different directions.

My last wizard, I noted that there were very few "water" spells. I decided that he would have "thing" for water spells, and most of his spell choices were driven by that. I did relax my "rule" to extend it to "ice" and was startled to find that many of the spells I ended up selecting were more potent than I had realized. Admittedly, a tough creature with a cold immunity could ruin my day, but that's the way it goes! I imagine we can come up with a foil for every class...that's why adventurers travel in packs...

It's both puzzling and entertaining for me to read this thread. Puzzling, because it would never have occurred to me that the fighter was "weak" or "unplayable". However, the differing points of view (and some of the rhetoric!) has certainly kept me entertained this evening!

 

[Darklone]

With 3rd edition rules, a 6th level warrior with mediocre stats (compared to the players) bashed our groups 5th level halforc barbarian by using Expertise and shield and fighting defensively to survive the raging onslaught.

 

[Feaelin]

Only from a distance

I think these two comments illustrate a real problem with comparing "Class A" to "Class B". Situation changes everything. There are always going to be situations where one class excels over the others. However, in a good campaign, I'd expect varying tactical situations to provide opportunities to every class.

 

[Spatzimaus]

I think these two comments illustrate a real problem with comparing "Class A" to "Class B". Situation changes everything.

There's also a Rock-Paper-Scissors aspect to it.

Fighters/Barbarians beat Rogues/Monks in a one-on-one fight. Seriously, try it.
Rogues and Monks are ideal for beating down caster types.
And, of course, casters are great at taking out the tank types.

So, debates about which type is best are pointless from the start, because you can always find a chain of "I can beat Bob, and he can beat Joe, so I must be better than Joe".

Fighters are a great class, if you intend to go 2 or 4 levels. With splatbooks or the new 3.5E PHB Feats, you can go 12 levels and still have good stuff. Once you get Greater Weapon Specialization, there's not as much reason to stay in the class; on a per-level basis the higher levels of Fighter are WEAKER than the low levels, unlike most other classes. Thankfully, they're great multiclassers and can join PrCs easily.

 

[Particle_Man]

In defence of the 20th level fighter...

Fighters are a great class, if you intend to go 2 or 4 levels. With splatbooks or the new 3.5E PHB Feats, you can go 12 levels and still have good stuff. Once you get Greater Weapon Specialization, there's not as much reason to stay in the class; on a per-level basis the higher levels of Fighter are WEAKER than the low levels, unlike most other classes. Thankfully, they're great multiclassers and can join PrCs easily.

And lo, Sir Jonathan Goodcheese (20th level) proceeded to lay down the smack on Spatzimaus...

By the way, if a fighter uses a Composite Long Bow (Suitably Mighty) and has Far Shot, isn't his range better than that of most magic spells?

 

[Particle_Man]

By the way, I thought of another use for the extra feats of the fighter, beyond 12th level.

The fighter might want to be good at meelee weapons and thrown weapons and long range missle weapons and unarmed combat. If you provide the "fab five" to each of these, and get improved unarmed strike, you have used up 21 of your 19 feats as a human fighter. (The fab five are improved crit., Weapon Focus, Greater Weapon Focus, Weapon Specialization, Greater Weapon Specialization). None of these feats have a stat requirement.

So The fighter has to make a choice between "good feats" at high levels -- I don't see the "Feat drought" that others do. Note, this is BEFORE all the cool maneuver style feats, like Cleave, Improved Trip, Improved Sunder, all that missle weapon goodness, etc.

The only way you could run out of feats is if your fighter only a meelee guy, and your DM never, ever, puts him or her in a situation in which meelee combat is impossible.

 

[reapersaurus]

Thankfully, they're great multiclassers and can join PrCs easily.

Actually, they get dirt for a skill list, so many PrC's are not open to them unless they multiclass with rogues.

This goes back to the 3E-old debate about how WotC unduly limited skills, etc, etc, etc.

 

[Thomas Percy]

Two things about fighter (good and bad):

1. Leadership feat can give you a henchman-spellcaster only two levels lower than core PC wizard or cleric. This cohort can prepare you for a fights with free (not as expensive as potions) spells like 'protection from evil' (good bye half of failed will saves), 'major resistance' or 'bull's str'.

2. Taking any prestige class means resignation of bonus fighter feats. Any prestige class (save a one-weapon-sundered-weaponmaster) is a kind of specialization in something other than fight. Taking a prestige class costs fighter more than no one.