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

[Saeviomagy]

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.

Of course he's making a fair tradeoff there. Like I said, you're unlikely to have ALL high stats. If you can say "well, I can get away with a lower dex", then you're boosting con and survivability. Hell, you could even put that 24+ into strength, and look at a strength bow (which are now unlimited in the amount of bonus they can have)

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.

Opposed checks are the standard mechanic for comparing two individuals performance at something. I can think of any number of situations where a gm might call for an opposed ride check.

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.

The ride check is an opposed roll means that 23 ranks could potentially be outdone by someone with +3 to hit.
IF you have a regular horse, it will get smacked down by an archer. Which is why any character who's really into mounted combat doesn't ride a normal off-the-rack horse, and that means they need to train something else.

It's Diplomacy for animals. This means the animal will be friendly to you.

Do your friends regularly carry you around on their backs all day? Would you expect to be able to use a "helpful" NPC as a mount? Would you expect said NPC would immediately pick up the art of responding quickly to your control?

No. Didn't think so. If it's in handle animal, and you don't have handle animal, you can't do it.

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.

Which still doesn't help you if you have no ranks. Handle animal is ALMOST a trained-only skill.

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.

You're the one who started out comparing apples to oranges.

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.

I don't know about you, but my 3.5 SRD has rules for prices and training of the following creatures in the MM:
Giant eagle
Griffon
Hippogriff
Howler
Giant Owl
Pegasus
Spider eater

Furthermore, handle animal specifies any creature with an int of 1 or 2 may be trained using the skill, albeit at a penalty of +5 to the DC. That gives you quite a wide range of possible mounts.

Any DM who says "no - horses only" is, quite frankly, being an ass.

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.

Sure, if a fighter specialises in a weapon, he's a specialist. Did that really need saying? However he's not nearly as much a specialist as most of your PrC's. If you're only willing to pursue one tree of feats, then of course you're going to run out of things to spend your feats on. Just like if you don't see a point in combat feats at all, you're not going to want to play any of the combat classes.

Fighter = combat generalist. Noone else does combat generalist as well as he.

 

[Creamsteak]

I don't think the question, "Why be a fighter" is even remotely justified. There are tons of reasons to be a fighter...

However, taking a fighter to level 20 seems a bit weak. After 20th level it's not a bad choice, since only the Epic Fighter levels will get you an extra feat every other level. It's that gap where a fighter gains feats at level 14, 16, 18, and 20 that seems weak to me. I'd rather get 8 levels in Barbarian, Ranger, Rogue, or something else at that point. That would cost me my ability to choose so many epic feats though... so I'd probably stay fighter...

That's the only thing stuck in my mind... why aren't there any BAB +14-18 req feats, and the only +15 req feat I can remember is Greater Two Weapon Fighting...

 

[Valiantheart]

That's the only thing stuck in my mind... why aren't there any BAB +14-18 req feats, and the only +15 req feat I can remember is Greater Two Weapon Fighting...

I think those are coming soon. Got my fingers crossed for Complete Warrior.

 

[Fedifensor]

For reference however:

Ftr 5: Str 16, Dex 13, Con 14, Int 13:
HP: 44; AC 25 (+2 fullplate, +1 tower shield); Atk +8 (1d8+5 +1 warhammer); BAB +5; Grapple +8
Feats: Weapon Focus: warhammer, weapon specialization: warhammer, expertise, power attack, cleave, sunder.

Bbn 5: Str 17, Dex 14, Con 14, int 10
HP: 50 (60 raging); AC 19 (+1 chain shirt, +1 ring protection, +1 amulet natural armor); Atk +9 (2d6+5 +1 greatsword) or +11 (2d6+8 +1 greatsword while raging)
Feats: Weapon Focus: Greatsword, Power Attack, Cleave

Now, what kind of moron must the barbarian be to engage the fighter in melee? He's got a 40' move versus the fighter's 15', and the fighter can't use a bow since he's got a frickin' DOOR on his arm.

Barbarian backs up, draws his masterwork composite longbow (+3 Strength bonus), and fires at the fighter. Then it's just a matter of whittling the fighter down with arrows that do 1d8+3 per hit.

For that matter, why fight the fighter at all? He's got the hit points to survive a round of combat, so even if the fighter is guarding a choke point, the barbarian can take the hit from the attack of opportunity and outdistance the fighter within two rounds.

Contrived tests are all well and good, but they don't match up well with actual game situations. A 15' move means your fighter is only a concern if he's blocking a 5' wide passageway, or if the barbarian has been specifically hired to kill him. Otherwise, the barbarian will just run rings around the walking tank.

 

[Nasma]

the barbarian will just run rings around the walking tank.

By that logic, the only ability that matters is movement rate.

 

[Cedric]

I don't see any reason at all to advance in the primary melee classes without multi-classing...with the possible exception of Paladin (and even then...eh).

But Fighter, Barbarian, Ranger...I'd never advance to 20th in those without at least once or twice grabbing a level of something else.

I keep wanting to play a character who's progress to 20th is barb3, rngr 3, rog 3, soc 3, ftr 8.

But to answer the question...the 3.5 fighter rules.

Cedric

 

[TiQuinn]

Fighters are constantly changing and potentially getting more powerful. It happens every time someone creates a new feat.

 

[TiQuinn]

By that logic, the only ability that matters is movement rate.

It also assumes that a barbarian is going to be using missile weapons...or even intelligent tactics for that matter!

 

[drnuncheon]

two weapon fighters may either use a dancing shield or a light shield with the TWF and Two Weapon Defense feats for the same AC

Two-weapon defense provides a shield bonus, and thus does not stack with actual use of a shield.

Now, if fighters had feat choices that required 18 or 20 levels of fighter (Ultimate Weapon Focus, Ultimate Weapon Specialization), then I'd see the usefulness of a single-classed fighter at high levels.

Well...they should have altered the requirements for Epic Weapon Specialization. Right now, you can have WS and EWS with only 4 levels of fighter - and without GWS. Huh?

 

[Wippit Guud]

OTOH, as I never experienced in 2nd edition, now the fighters (and all characters) have been straight jacked by the skill system to be incompetent in everything besides riding, climbing and jumping. In 2nd edition, a fighter could be a great leader or woodsman by using secondary skills (for all their shortcomings), but now thats almost impossible; a fighter makes a lousy leader now, as he/she is gullible (no Sense motive) and unable to communicate well with the masses (no Diplomacy), two problems that werent so appearent before.

I have to disagree completely with this. First off, on the obvious level, they have more choices than ride, climb, and jump - intimidate is a prime example of this.

Secondly, if you already have a high strength, that already gives you +3 in climb and jump, why sink points into it if you don't want to? Chances are you have a rogue in the party with +10 to climb, and spellcasters available to make jump near pointless.

Looking for flavor. Lets take a basic fighter build: 15 Str, 12 Dex, 15 Con, 12 Int, 10 Wis, 10 Cha. Bring him to level 5. That gives 24 points to work with. (also assume human for this stuff, brings it to 29 points)

The Woodsman:
2 ranks hide (4 points)
2 ranks in handle animal (2 points)
2 ranks move silently (4 points)
3 ranks in listen (6 points)
3 ranks is spot (6 points)
3 ranks in survival (6 points)
Feats: Alertness, Quick-Draw, Track, Two-weapon style, Weapon focus(hand axe), Weapon Specilization(hand axe)

The Leader
4 ranks in diplomacy (8 points)
4 ranks in sense motive (8 points)
3 ranks in intimidate (3 points)
2 ranks in ride (2 points)
8 ranks in profession(war leader) (8 points) - See Cry Havoc by Mahavoc press
Feats: Negotiator, Mounted Combat, Ride-by attack, spirited charge, weapon focus(long sword), Weapon Specilization(long sword) - and at 6th take leadership

Just remember, you won't be as good outside fo comabt as other characters, but they probably won't be as good during combat