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

[Particle_Man]

Fighters rock in 3.5!

Weapon Specialization now goes to full range for missle weapons. Plus, w. spec. in longbow carries over into mighty composite longbows.

I have a fighter who is going for the "good with sword/good with bow/good saves" route. It is a half-orc so my DM let me take Scent as one of my 1st level feats. Throw in Cleave, Far Shot, 5 feats for sword and five for bow (i. crit, w.focus, i.w.focus, w. spec., i. w. spec), and 3 for each of the +2 save bonuses, and my feats are all used up. I actually need 20 levels of fighter to pull it off.

And this is a fighter that doesn't even go for the fancy tricks. If you want to do that, you have to reassign some feats.

I may be over-planning this. I am only 6th level.

 

[Olgar Shiverstone]

Fighters are lacking for a selection of high level feats with high entry requirements (maybe Complete Warrior will finally fix that), but following the class to higher levels just allows picking up more than one style of fighting.

Look at it this way: the fighter is the only class that has a fully customizable special ability at every-other level. They're great generalists in combat, and great specialists if focused on a particular style of fighting. I don't feel the fighter gives up anything in comparison to the other classes -- the class is more than the sum of its special abilities.

A feat at every level? Way overpowered. The fighter is fine as is. If you want to improve him, just allow access to more feats.

 

[ShadowX]

Fighters are lacking for a selection of high level feats with high entry requirements (maybe Complete Warrior will finally fix that), but following the class to higher levels just allows picking up more than one style of fighting.

Look at it this way: the fighter is the only class that has a fully customizable special ability at every-other level. They're great generalists in combat, and great specialists if focused on a particular style of fighting. I don't feel the fighter gives up anything in comparison to the other classes -- the class is more than the sum of its special abilities.

A feat at every level? Way overpowered. The fighter is fine as is. If you want to improve him, just allow access to more feats.

This sums up my feeling exactly. Though i want to add that not just more feats but higher level feats would be nice. Something that screams perfection of fighting technique.

 

[Staffan]

If you want to improve the fighter, I think the best way of doing so would be to create some more high-level fighting feats. In 3.0 the top-of-the-line fighter feats are Improved Critical (can be taken at 8th level) and Whirlwind Attack (can be taken at 6th level by a single-classed fighter) - and Improved Crit could be taken by anyone with BAB+8.

The top feats seem a bit better in 3.5e - Greater Two-weapon fighting requires BAB +11, Dex 19 and two prerequisite feats; Improved Precise Shot requires BAB +11, Dex 19 and two prerequisites; and Greater Weapon Specialization requires 12 fighter levels and three prerequisite feats, but there's still nothing really nasty. A few feats more after Spring Attack/Whirlwind Attack, Great Cleave, and some actual high-level stuff in the Expertise (I consider Whirlwind to be mainly in the Dodge tree) and Mounted Combat trees would be nice.

 

[Enkhidu]

...He pointed out how all the other melee classes are greatly improved, getting special abilities nearly every level...

I imagine he didn't really "get" that the reason that the Fighter wasn't changed in 3.5 was that it was actually the benchmark that the other full BAB classes were measured against.

The Barb, Ranger, and Pally were improved just to come even with the Fighter...

 

[Valiantheart]

The fighter is a bit stronger than he was in 3E but he is still one of the weaker classes.

He was made stronger in 3.5 by the inclusion of Greater Weapon Focus and Specialization and by the general improvement of several of the existing feats( improved trip, disarm, sunder). However he is still one of the weakest classes for the following reasons:

1. The Fighter is not particularly more effective in combat than the other melee classes. In fact, he is often less effective than the Barbarian. This in and of itself might not be damning, but when you consider he has the weakest skill set in the game, no spells, and absolutely no special abilities combat is the ONLY thing a fighter is supposed to do well.

2. The fighter is the most magical item reliant class in the entire game. A fighter who suddenly finds his gear broken is next to useless. His golfbag of weapons is broken and he wont be able to bypass magic reduction. His magical defenses are laughable. He has no spells to buff himself, transport, or GMW his items. Other classes can also take a big hit from magic item destruction but but they can all still fulfill a vital role.


The Fighter in its current form exists to either provide a few bonus feats for a multiclasser or prepare a character for a prestige class.

Now this opinion is based on what the Fighter has available to him in the 3.5 PHB. Andy from WOTC has specifically said that he will be focusing a lot of effort on getting more mid and high requirement feats in future WOTC. This paradigm shift in feat design will benefit the fighter more than any other class.

 

[Mark Chance]

Re: Why Be a Fighter?

To crush your enemies, see them driven before you, hear the lamentations of the women.

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

 

[Saeviomagy]

1. The Fighter is not particularly more effective in combat than the other melee classes. In fact, he is often less effective than the Barbarian. This in and of itself might not be damning, but when you consider he has the weakest skill set in the game, no spells, and absolutely no special abilities combat is the ONLY thing a fighter is supposed to do well.
[/b]

I'm not seeing how. I mean sure the barbarian gets DR, but that only makes up for his pitiful AC... Rage? Specialisation. etc. Personally I think the barbarian and fighter are much of a muchness, which is a good thing.

2. The fighter is the most magical item reliant class in the entire game. A fighter who suddenly finds his gear broken is next to useless. His golfbag of weapons is broken and he wont be able to bypass magic reduction. His magical defenses are laughable. He has no spells to buff himself, transport, or GMW his items. Other classes can also take a big hit from magic item destruction but but they can all still fulfill a vital role.

Yeah, I forgot that the 3.5th ed barbarian gets flight, invisibility and spell resistance now.

Face it, these are all complaints associated with any of the non-spellcasting classes, and the same for all the secondary casters - bard, paladin, ranger.

The Fighter in its current form exists to either provide a few bonus feats for a multiclasser or prepare a character for a prestige class.

Or produce a well balanced all-round fighter.

People forget about that - everyone seems to want a fighter who JUST hits people with a two-handed weapon, or who JUST fires a bow, or who JUST does mounted combat. I think they miss the point.

 

[Tidus4444]

I usually go either 1 Brb/ 19 Fighter if I'm melee or 10 Fighter/ 10 OOTBI for an archer. Take one level of barb, and take the extra rage feat and you'll be raging almost all day.

 

[Valiantheart]

Yeah, I forgot that the 3.5th ed barbarian gets flight, invisibility and spell resistance now.

No but he does get 5 points of DR, 100 extra hitpoints, 2 more skill points, uncanny dodge, 8 points of strength, +4 will save and extra movement.

Face it, these are all complaints associated with any of the non-spellcasting classes, and the same for all the secondary casters - bard, paladin, ranger.

True but they are most pronounced for the Fighter. Paladin can cast spells on his mundane weapons and armor. The ranger can do the same and cast spells that affect his environment. The barbarian also needs his items but his special abilities are not item dependent.

Or produce a well balanced all-round fighter.

People forget about that - everyone seems to want a fighter who JUST hits people with a two-handed weapon, or who JUST fires a bow, or who JUST does mounted combat. I think they miss the point. [/B]

And here is were the problem lies. Not everybody wants to play a combat generalist. They want a specialist and once they have taken the necessary number of feats to be good in that area they move on to another class that can provde them better goodies.