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

[Fedifensor]

For a grand total of +4 to hit. There's no guarantee that high level characters have an entire array of 18's in their stat blocks.

Standard 25-point array is 15,14,13,12,10,8. With a 15 in Dex, and 5 stat bumps over 20 levels, that's a Dex of 20 without magical assistance. Assuming the archer has reasonable equipment for his level, Dex can rise to 24+ easily. Even if the archer wants a high Strength to use with composite bows, an 18+ in both Strength and Dexterity is normal at 20th level when you add in stat bumps and magic items.

Since ride skill has at least one situation where it's opposed by an attack, it never really tops out.

I'm not sure where "at least" comes into play. You can make a Ride check once per round with the Mounted Combat feat, and that's it. With 23 ranks in Ride and a high Dex, the only thing that has a chance of exceeding your Ride check is a warrior-type of your level or higher. In that case, if they want your mount dead, their other three (or more) attacks are going to do the job rather quickly. High-level archers are particularly deadly to mounts.

Wild empathy does not replace handle animal in any way.

It's Diplomacy for animals. This means the animal will be friendly to you. The only thing it doesn't cover is tricks, and I imagine a good reaction from your mount would give a circumstance bonus to learning from you. Also, with the extra skill points from Ranger, it's a lot easier to keep Handle Animal ranks maxed out...rendering the whole argument about Wild Empathy moot.

Sure you've got your fantastic +2hd horse. The fighter SHOULD be running about with some form of advanced magical beast for a mount by now.

So all 20th level fighters ride dragons? That depends on the campaign. Maybe your statement is true in the Forgotten Realms, but not every campaign has fighters with a menagerie in their pocket.

Any SPECIALIST build can be beaten. A generalist won't be.

Er, no. A generalist will be beaten by a specialist in his area. Plus, most fighters are by definition specialists - Weapon Focus and Weapon Specialization make them dependent on a single weapon that can be disarmed or sundered. Weapon Specialization is the only fighter-specific feat chain, which means any fighter without it loses a class-specific ability. It takes 4 feats to get to Greater Weapon Specialization...very, very few people will do that for more than one weapon.

 

[atra2]

Um, there are things you can do....

Actually, the leadership feat seems tailor-made for fighters.

every non-human gets 7 feats. Giving up 1 of those for
gaining (for example) a special mount is a hard choice for a
non-fighter.

By 6th level, the fighter has 4 ftr-only feats to cover his
combat needs (focus, spec, and one of pbs/rapid shot or
power attack/cleave) and can spend one of his normal
feats on leadership, and grab two misc or ftr feats to balance
things out.

By working with the DM, the fighter can perhaps have
something better than just another NPC in the party. With
(assuming cha 10) any 4HD critter to choose from (that his
DM allows) it's very possible for him to get a monster cohort
that outshines whatever 6HD animal the druid has, or 3HD
puppy or mount the ranger has. (Paladin warhorse may be
a little tougher to beat, but close enough)

One could do well advancing in both weapon and mounted
feats simultaneously.

In something like an RPGA Living Campaign (like Living Greyhawk) every serious big damage fighter starts with 2 levels each of barbarian, ranger and fighter (some skip the ranger levels for more ftr) and moves on to one or more prestige classes, often taking Holy Liberator to be immune to most or all of those nasty "will save hose" spells. You're playing Living Everquest, so gaming the system produces these results. no one has stayed in fighter longer than 8 levels, even in 3.0, in LG. (highest campaign chars are level 13-14 now)

But in a home game, you can get way more mileage out of the Leadership feat, even bringing along the lesser henchmen in addition to your cohort monster.

You might have a super-mount, but you might also have a full-blood orc fighter or barbarian who uses the orcish double-axe and has some orcs under his command. Think about the usefulness of several independent darkvision scouts that last longer than 1 round/level. The possibilities are endless.

Every other class gasps in pain at dropping 1/7 of their feat power to take Leadership. The Fighter can take it without blinking.

The fighter does get intimidate as a class skill now. Lots of possibilities. A high-charisma LG fighter should have gone paladin in the first place, but if you are any other alignment....

Actually, I am emboldened by these ideas. It makes me even more confident in a mostly-fighter idea I had: half-elf cleric 1 of (any deity granting magic and war domains) / ftr 18 and maybe retire before picking the last class for level 20

You can use all level 1 cleric and wizard scrolls, all cleric and
wizard wands and probably staves too. You stay in heavy armor,
enjoy free longsword focus (corellon larethian, elven deity) and
do as you like. Make sure to at least use a bow, to take
advantage of low-light vision. extending the 60' lantern vision range to 120' is really nice, not to mention seeing under a
starlit sky as if it were full daylight.

Thanks for this thread. Now I know to give him a good charisma,
max his Intimidate, and take Leadership. Probably worthwhile to give him a good int too, to help alleviate the skill shortage.

 

[Particle_Man]

From out of the mouseholes of Moria he rode...

Just to show you that the Fighter can be good Cheezy fun, I will give you...The Mounted Combat Spiked Chain Fighter! Must be human, since you need all 19 feats.

Sir Jonathan Goodcheese, LG (Could have been a paladin, but realized that Cheeziness was his true calling).

In no particular order:
Power Attack, Cleave, Exotic W. Spiked Chain, W.F. Spiked Chain, G.W.F. Spiked Chain, W.S. Spiked Chain, G.W.S. Spiked Chain, I.Crit. Spiked Chain, Combat Expertise, Improved Trip, Improved Disarm, Combat Reflexes, Dodge, Mobility, Spring Attack, Whirlwind Attack, Mounted Combat, Ride-by Attack, Spirited Charge. (whew!)

You can look up other threads to find out the cheeziness of Improved Trip, Combat Reflexes and Exotic Weapon Spiked Chain. Furthermore, in 3.5 with their mounted combat and facing rules, the number of threatened squares Sir Jonathan Goodcheese gets with his Spiked Chain on his horse (or whatever -- Advanced Iron Golem in the shape of a horse, if you like) should make most hordes of enemies wet themselves.

And you just can't do this without 20, count them 20, levels of fighter.

Bow down before my superior cheeziness!

 

[Wippit Guud]

Re: From out of the mouseholes of Moria he rode...

Bow down before my superior cheeziness!

Actually, it should be "Fall down prone over and over and over and over again to my superior cheeziness."

Improved Trip is just wrong, now. Mind you it's wrong because of standing from prone, not because of teh feat itself.

 

[Voadam]

Re: Re: Why Be a Fighter?

To crush your grapes, see them fermented before you, hear the lusty laughter of the women.

To spend your gold on ale and whores?

 

[Voadam]

Fighters suck because:



b) No buffing. Whereas spellcasters can choose to expend their spells to buff up if they know a big combat is coming up, a fighter can't raise his temporary strength at all.


d) If he gets grappled, then it's up to the party to save him, 'cause the fighter is screwed.

3 - Magic item dependancy. The four issues I just addressed can all be countered or alleviated using magic items, but that also means that if you take away a fighter's magic items, he's virtually useless. He becomes the party torchbearer.

b) as you point out, items such as cheap potions can be used by a fighter to temporarily buff themselves, and a wizard is more likely to cast bull's strength on the fighter than on himself. Many groups cast buffs on the primary combatant instead of on themselves or the weaker characters.

d) close quarters combat from S&F is a fighter bonus feat, and a fighter is more likely than most other classes to spend some feats to be good with a backup light weapon for after they are grappled.

3 I'd rather be a fighter than a wizard or paladin or cleric in an antimagic zone.

 

[Fedifensor]

3 I'd rather be a fighter than a wizard or paladin or cleric in an antimagic zone.

I'd rather be a barbarian...or a monk, for that matter. The fighter loses buff spells, enhancement bonuses from weapons and armor, and all the miscellaneous magic items that make up for their weaknesses. Most of the barbarian and monk special abilities still function in an antimagic zone...including the barbarian's damage reduction!

 

[nute]

First of all, hit points are king. More HP = live longer, plain and simple. This makes the fighter superior to all the other "lower classes".

Second - no magic. Thus, things like SR and Dispel Magic that make everyone else wet their pants don't even apply to you. You don't have to worry about praying or memorizing crap like those weak-sister mages or the prissy little clerics.

Third - You're smarter than the barbarians. They can't even read.

Fourth - Unlike the pompous widdle paladin, you can gang up on helpless opponents, stab folks in the back, and you don't have to give your hard-earned loot to the church!

Fifth - Make the rogue your buddy, and you really don't need anyone else. The cleric, MAYBE, for those times you just need a little pick-me-up. Better to have him make you some potions, so you don't have to put up with his whining on your loot-gathering excursions.

Sixth - Weapon Specialization. Even MORE damage. Damage is King. No, Hit Points are king. Damage is like, duke or something.

Seventh - Regdar could kick any of the other iconics' pansy little butts.

Eighth - Fighters are macho. Rogues are scrawny little Steve Buscemi types, wizards and sorcerers blow over if the wind's too strong, clerics and paladins are all holy and stuff, rangers and barbarians smell like owlbear dookie, monks will bore you with the Tao of THAC0, and bards will spend hours wooing the bar maiden just so that you can walk up and say "So, babe, want to go upstairs and help me shine the guisarme-voulge, eh? By the way, I slew the dragon." Fighters get more tail than a ratcatcher during plague season.

Ninth - All the badasses of classic fantasy? Fighters. Sure, you can make an exception for Conan, but deep down all barbarians WANT to be fighters, they just don't have the brains for it.

Tenth - Sword-chucks!

Inescapable logic, there you go.

 

[KnowTheToe]

In a one on one battle a barbarian will usually come out on top.

I ran several test battles this weekend and it was about 60/40 with the barbarian on top. I used no magic items and the gap widened as the levels increased. I always had the barbarian Rage but did not go up beyond level five in my tests.

But the Barbarian is a one trick pony. The fighter is much much more versatile. The vast amount of feats will allow hime to excel in places the barbarian cannot.

 

[Voadam]

First of all, hit points are king. More HP = live longer, plain and simple. This makes the fighter superior to all the other "lower classes".

Second - no magic. Thus, things like SR and Dispel Magic that make everyone else wet their pants don't even apply to you. You don't have to worry about praying or memorizing crap like those weak-sister mages or the prissy little clerics.

Third - You're smarter than the barbarians. They can't even read.

Fourth - Unlike the pompous widdle paladin, you can gang up on helpless opponents, stab folks in the back, and you don't have to give your hard-earned loot to the church!

Fifth - Make the rogue your buddy, and you really don't need anyone else. The cleric, MAYBE, for those times you just need a little pick-me-up. Better to have him make you some potions, so you don't have to put up with his whining on your loot-gathering excursions.

Sixth - Weapon Specialization. Even MORE damage. Damage is King. No, Hit Points are king. Damage is like, duke or something.

Seventh - Regdar could kick any of the other iconics' pansy little butts.

Eighth - Fighters are macho. Rogues are scrawny little Steve Buscemi types, wizards and sorcerers blow over if the wind's too strong, clerics and paladins are all holy and stuff, rangers and barbarians smell like owlbear dookie, monks will bore you with the Tao of THAC0, and bards will spend hours wooing the bar maiden just so that you can walk up and say "So, babe, want to go upstairs and help me shine the guisarme-voulge, eh? By the way, I slew the dragon." Fighters get more tail than a ratcatcher during plague season.

Ninth - All the badasses of classic fantasy? Fighters. Sure, you can make an exception for Conan, but deep down all barbarians WANT to be fighters, they just don't have the brains for it.

Tenth - Sword-chucks!

Inescapable logic, there you go.

Except for the comparison to barbarians:

Barbarians get more hitpoints. Hail to the king baby!

Barbarians can spend skill points on literacy and still have more left over than the fighter starts out with.

Though they don't get specialization, rage gives the same damage bonus, plus an equal attack bonus and is useable with any melee weapon (plus more with two handed weapons).

Don't get me wrong, I think fighters are just fine for 20 levels, but your points do encourage some barbarian counterpoints.