In defense of the Fighter

[Fortinbro]

I've seen a LOT of posts on here talking crap about fighters (and Paladins/Blackguards but I'll save that for another rant) lately. Allow me to offer a rebuttal:

From my experience fighter is bad only if you don't know good feats. You get 11! extra feats which can just be an awesome melee toolbox.

I've personally had nothing but a good experience playing a STRAIGHT fighter in a game run by a friend of mine who knows how to optimize fairly well and favors casters and Tome of Battle.

The character in question uses the corpse creature template from Book of Vile Darkness and is essentially a charger/combat brute build using leap attack and a valorous weapon. Sure, she can be a bit of a two or three-trick pony at times, but she usually ends up killing most of the enemies in the fight. She has surprised the DM with her strength more than once. I don't expect her to fill every single role, and that's half of the fun of teamwork.

Two-handed chargers aren't the only viable build either. I've also very much enjoyed playing a spiked chain trip fighter and disarmer a crit-fighter and a shield dual wielding blood-spiked charger in recent memory.

If you want to make fighters more interesting, make every feat and every weapon enchantment count. Also, don't only build them do do as much damage as possible. Think about their weaknesses too and attempt to cover them.You probably have a better chance killing a caster with improved initiative, a ghost touch weapon, and the mage slayer tree than just doing a few more d6 and acting last.

One of my favorite options out there is tactical feats. Each of these gives you three new tricks to play with and build around.

As a disclaimer, I've played casters before and enjoyed them. However, I think melee gets a bad rap that isn't always deserved.

[Perseus]

{Scrubbed}

[Nihilarian]

And casters and initiators still do it better.

[Gavinfoxx]

DRUID
The druid is a true powerhouse of a class due to the sheer versatility and power of its three main class features: wild shaping, spells, and animal companions. Able to function as a tank (or 2 tanks with wild shape and animal companion), summoner, battlefield controller, damage-dealer, scout (both with wildshape and with divinations), and healer, the druid is extremely flexible. -Akalsaris

Cons: - Most prestige classes are traps for the druid, as very few advance the things a druid cares about. Nature's Warrior, Master of Many Forms, and Blighter are all far weaker than straight druid. Planar Shephard is the only PrC that possibly surpasses straight druid, while Moonspeaker and Contemplative both give some things and take away some things.

- Very feat-tight. A druid gets 0 bonus feats and must take Natural Spell at 6th (don't argue this one), so every feat it takes must do a hell of a lot for the build, especially on a non-human. A summoner's feats are practically locked into Spell Focus (Conj), Ashbound/Greenbound, Augment Summoning, Natural Spell, Rapid Spell, and Elemental Summoning, for example.

- Spells are alignment-limited and the druid must have a neutral component to her alignment, which can limit the spell list sometimes, especially for summoning. Neutral (True Neutral) is easily the safest alignment in this regard, completely sidestepping the restrictions.

- Very few worthwhile alternative class features, unlike the wizard or cleric. The Shapeshift Druid is alright, but trades 2 good class features for one mediocre class feature. -Akalsaris

Pros: - The chassis: Druids have medium-high hitpoints, medium BAB, medium skills/level, medium-low armor and weapon proficiencies, and high fort/will saves. All decent, but not particularly strong, though the saves are quite nice.

- Spells: the most powerful tool in a druid's arsenal. First level starts off strong with Entangle, a very long-range battlefield control spell, and only gets better from there on. With a fast spell progression and wisdom based casting, the druid also has dozens of supplements' worth of spells to cherry-pick from, as she can cast any spell on her list with preparation. The ability to spontaneously cast Nature's Ally spells is another strong ability for summoning-focused druids, and can be helpful even to other kinds. Druid spells are typically either utility, battlefield control, or damaging, with a large sprinkling of divinations, healing, and buff spells. The Spell Compendium is notable for nerfing a lot of former druid staples, but introducing a ton of other excellent spells, especially self-buffs.

- Wild Shape: The next most powerful tool a druid has, at its best, wild shape allows a druid to cherry-pick through a dozen sourcebooks for animal forms that are the best answer to any given situation. Even if only limited to the Monster Manual, wild shape gives tremendous flexibility and allows druids of 8th level or higher to completely ignore Str and Dex in character creation, freeing up points for other stats. It also makes the druid's weak armor and weapon proficiencies a non-issue.

- Animal Companion: The linchpin to the druid's power, the animal companion is like having .5 more party members. At low levels it can function as a support tank, and at higher levels it can either be used to provide the party's less awesome members with flight, or it can become a tank in of itself. Dinosaurs especially are good at almost all levels. With 1 or 2 buffs such as a shared Bite of the Wereboar or an Animal Growth spell, the animal companion can easily match the party's fighter in tanking and damage output.

- Other class features: To top it off, the other druid abilities are pretty solid as well. Nature Sense is effectively a +2/+2 skills feat, while Wild Empathy is like a free, albeit limited, Diplomacy score. Venom Immunity is useful for evil druids who want to use poisons, while Timeless Body means that a druid starting at high levels can begin with +3 to all mental stats without the physical drawbacks. -Akalsaris
----------------------------------------
More cons for druids: doesn't (easily) get access to time stop and wish. At this tier it's a consideration. If you're playing gamebreaking characters, not having access to a couple of gamebreaking techniques is significant especially when a lowly sorcerer CAN get those tricks. -Rebel7284


WARBLADE
A note on the Warblade: Warblades are tier 3 only because 9th level spells are better than the rule books and not because the monster manuals are packed full of monsters that can kill them. Being the horseman War is great and all, but it will always be second best to a god. -SorO_Lost


Cons: They don't have ranged attacks and always have to use mithral as their armor's material if they want to use full-plate. That's it. -SorO_Lost

Pros: Warblades are simply the best melee class ever.

Ok to reiterate, Warblades pack a d12 hit dice, full BAB, proficiency with all melee martial weapons, and up to medium armor as their basic class stats meaning they are meant for melee combat. From there things go uphill at a staggering pace.

For one thing they are the smart fighter, none of that 'Thorg smash puppies' stuff fighters do. Warblades get bonuses for having intelligence such as adding their int bonus to reflex saves, crit confirmation, damage rolls when flanking, all those combat maneuvers in the PHB, and finally attack and damage rolls for AOOs. Oh and did I mention they sport 4 skill points per level and can pick up skills like balance,tumble and intimidate?

Another thing to mention is Weapon Aptitude which not only lets you have access to but lets you swap your Weapon Focus chain of feats on the fly. Did you focus on longswords but find this awesome mace? Spend an hour playing with it and poof, instant retraining with no XP cost!

By the 6th level a warblade has improved uncanny dodge and a bonus feat. Later on they will pick up an additional three bonus feats from a limited but useful list. It's kinda like stealing class abilities from the Barbarian and Fighter at the same time.

Then there is the maneuver system the ToB introduced of course, the warblade gets the best recovery mechanic of all the classes. When you run out of maneuvers just attack someone. Yes I said attack them. I mean in a boring no maneuvers used sort of way, but it's the same exact (full) attack actions that you are used to using and the monsters still are. Walk over and beat the every living crap out of something to recover your maneuvers to beat the remaining blood out of them next round. Fun times.

Warblades can choose from any of the unsupernatural style of schools. They are realistic and in your face. They don't care about such things like fire, ghosting people, or purifying the wicked. Keep it simple, the pointy end goes into the foe a dozen times or the sharp edge slices them into pieces. Expect your average warblade to ignore save or die effects, to break battle control effects cast at them, to set the battle field in favorable conditions and exploit it, and to be seen helping the entire party's melee capabilities.

Finally, even those high nosed RPers will love the warblade. Now they have rules and effects backing such stories as 'I leap up and slice the snake's head clean off'. Even the most boring of players will find them selves shouting out the names of their attacks and bragging about how cool their character looks while swinging his sword. No more boring 'I attack..." comments. Ever. Well, unless it's part of a small joke, such as 'I attack... With my Finishing Move after flash stepping behind them and my blade lights up resembling molten lava to burn away their very soul!'. Maneuvers are so flavorful...
-SorO_Lost


FIGHTER
Cons: Feats are inferior to good class features. Rarely can one throw a bucket of feats at an enemy unless they are very strong feats...

... but strong feats can be taken by any other character as well. -Solo
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Note that the Fighter is actually quite high in Tier 5, bordering on Tier 4. But one of the main markers of the low tiers is a lack of flexibility. An archer Fighter is quite good as a damage dealer... not as good as an equivalently optimized Barbarian Charger, but still quite effective. However, that's just about all he is. His class makes him good at dealing damage with arrows, but when the situation calls for something else (i.e. there's not a clear shot, or it's not a combat situation) his class offers him critically few options. The same is true of most other kinds of Fighter... though the class itself can make many builds, any one build is generally either inflexible (due to specializing in just one trick) or ineffective (due to not specializing in that one trick).

A further note about the Fighter is that a lot of his tricks (shooting, charging, tripping) can be accomplished by about level 6-8. That's great when you get your first trick, but if you try to diversify (for example, adding Power Attack, Improved Bull Rush, Shock Trooper, and Leap Attack to an archer build) you're adding another trick that would be good at level 6-8... but now it's level 16. Having two level 6-8 tricks at level 16 is as bad as a caster getting twice as many 4th level spells at 16. It's not nearly as good as getting level appropriate abilities (in that metaphore, 8th level spells). -JaronK

Pros: One of the best non magical damage dealing classes, especially with regards to archery. Though it requires a Barbarian dip to shine as a charger, their feats are useful for that too. Fighters make excellent short dips for many non magic builds. Fighters can also make very effective trippers, though Fighters can't really be effective at all of these at once (Fighters in general can be good trippers, chargers, and archers, but no one Fighter can be great at all of those). Note that the Zhentarium Fighter is clearly Tier 4, mostly due to Imperious Command. -JaronK


I'm just going to leave this here

[GutterFace]

In a world where ToB is banned, Wizards are feeble old men and Clerics are just priests. than yes i have played Fighters in a low magic setting and they do well if you know what you want to build when you start building them.

if your DM lets you take any feat not just a fighter bonus feat (when they gain them) they can end up with a lot of flexibility.

but overall on 'the forum' if they don't cast people tell you to stay away from it.

[Ivanhoe]

Fortinbro, could you specify which 11 feats exactly do think make the fighter worthwhile? (maybe also in combination with the level specific feats)?
Note that they would somehow have to offer a comparable return to level 1-9 spells, or level 1-9 ToB maneuvers/stances or even skills/skill tricks.

[SowZ]

A decent level one spell is about on par, power wise, to a good fighter feat. There's maybe a few fighter feats that at high levels are more like a level two spell. Fighter could give two bonus feats a level and still fall way behind a war blade or wizard. Yeah, if you use your feats well you'll be good at damage and maybe knocking people on their butts. That does not a good class make.

[eggynack]

{Scrub the original, scrub the quote}
Alrighty then. When people say "Fighters blow chunks," and if they don't then I just did, they're not talking in absolute terms, measured in a vacuum. Fighters are fine. They're just worse than most things. They're better than monks, paladins, healers, and just about anything else in tiers 5 and 6 (though healers are probably better with optimization and/or sanctified spells), they're approximately equal to some tier four's when optimized, and they're bad compared to just about anything else. Your fancy fighter can do all the fancy stuff he likes, but he'll still be much worse than any caster worth his slots, especially a druid, and that's all there is to it. I don't know what fighters aren't getting that you seek to give them, because pretty much all of the optimization stuff you mentioned has been discussed to death. It's just irrelevant next to the black hole that is high powered D&D.

[ddude987]

Yes, the fighter is capable of doing certain things well. You can make a fighter, especially dungeoncrasher, do decent damage. However, what else can it do? The reason fighters "suck" is based on optimization and is only compared to an equally optimized higher tier class. Yes, you can choose good feats on fighter, but if you are optimizing fighter, you will have a strictly better character by optimizing a higher tier class.
*sigh* no drive to continue this any further *sigh*

[Gnaeus]

Lets sum this up.

A poorly built fighter is one of the worst characters in the game.

A well built fighter can do good damage, very limited battlefield control, or maybe both at once, depending on build. His class abilities contribute absolutely nothing outside combat. Even in combat, he is very likely to run into situations (enemies who fly, incorporeals, stuff that destroys your weapon, high DR, etc...) where he cannot contribute without very specific magical gear, which he has no way to make for himself.

Can you dispute any of that?

[Dienekes]

I've seen a LOT of posts on here talking crap about fighters (and Paladins/Blackguards but I'll save that for another rant) lately. Allow me to offer a rebuttal:

From my experience fighter is bad only if you don't know good feats. You get 11! extra feats which can just be an awesome melee toolbox.

I've personally had nothing but a good experience playing a STRAIGHT fighter in a game run by a friend of mine who knows how to optimize fairly well and favors casters and Tome of Battle.

The character in question uses the corpse creature template from Book of Vile Darkness and is essentially a charger/combat brute build using leap attack and a valorous weapon. Sure, she can be a bit of a two or three-trick pony at times, but she usually ends up killing most of the enemies in the fight. She has surprised the DM with her strength more than once. I don't expect her to fill every single role, and that's half of the fun of teamwork.

Two-handed chargers aren't the only viable build either. I've also very much enjoyed playing a spiked chain trip fighter and disarmer a crit-fighter and a shield dual wielding blood-spiked charger in recent memory.

If you want to make fighters more interesting, make every feat and every weapon enchantment count. Also, don't only built them do do as much damage as possible. Think about their weaknesses too and attempt to cover them.You probably have a better chance killing a caster with improved initiative, a ghost touch weapon, and the mage slayer tree than just doing a few more d6 and acting last.

One of my favorite options out there is tactical feats. Each of these gives you three new tricks to play with and build around.

As a disclaimer, I've played casters before and enjoyed them. However, I think melee gets a bad rap that isn't always deserved.

That's very nice, I hope you continue to enjoy playing as a fighter for the rest of your gaming experience and have no problems with effectiveness.

However, the bad rap that fighter's get is pretty well deserved, for a certain play style that you do not seem to play at. And that's also fine. But in the hyper optimized play style fighter's fall behind a lot. While, yes, you can do some cool things with 11 feats most classes can do more cool things. For example, count how many spells a wizard can cast? Generally, each one is at least as strong as a feat of the appropriate level. Or since you brought them up, count how many class features and maneuvers the Warblade gets. It's about 30, and he has a better chassis and skills. That's not even getting into defenses, where a fighter falls behind in everything except Fortitude saves and hit points.

This does not mean you're playing wrong or anything at all. But 11 feats isn't all that great in the grand scheme of things when talking about effectiveness at playing the entire game (meaning stealing from people, negotiations, ethereal opponents, mind-controlling magic users, swarms, and a whole lot more). And that's why the fighter gets a bad rap, because it does not compete at all that other stuff nearly as well as other classes. And at it's big thing: combat, there are generally other classes that does it better.

[Chronos]

There's a problem here, but it's not the class itself. If there were enough good feats out there, the Fighter would be just fine. The trick is that you need a lot of them: For the Fighter to be worthwhile at all, you need the 19th-best feat in the game to be worth as much as two levels worth of class features, and for them to be really flexible, you need more like 40 feats that are that good. That's probably not the case right now, but there's no reason it inherently couldn't be.

And yes, every class would have access to any of these feats. Anything a fighter can do, a barbarian or warblade can do too. But a barbarian or warblade can't do everything a fighter can. It's like the difference between the wizard and the sorcerer: Yes, any spell a wizard can learn, a sorcerer can, too, but no sorcerer can learn all the spells a wizard does. Everyone recognizes that this makes a real difference for the wizard; why not for the fighter?

[ddude987]

Also its been proven, or so I've heard (never saw the proof), that every feat in the game cannot raise a character above tier 3. If anyone knows the thread that was discussed in, I would love to see it.

[HammeredWharf]

One of my favorite options out there is tactical feats. Each of these gives you three new tricks to play with and build around.


Most tactical feats are bad, because they give you abilities that only can only be used in certain circumstances and take at least two rounds to activate. The only exceptions that come to mind are Combat Brute and Shock Trooper. Some tactical feats from ToB are great, but they require initiator levels.

[Seerow]

A Fighter bonus feat is literally a second level spell (See: Spell Compendium). And as these things go, it's not even a particularly good one (See: Few people taking the spell anyway). A 20th level Wizard can literally have 30-40 fighter bonus feats if he wants to (hint: He doesn't want to).


Now tell me again how great the Fighter's 11 feats are.

[BowStreetRunner]

There are no such things as bad classes, just bad DMs and players.

The primary purpose of a role-playing game is for the DM and players to have fun. This is accomplished through cooperative effort between the DM and all of the players in the game.

So if someone in the game wants to play a fighter, the DM and all of the players should be able to make it fun to play that fighter. If the cooperative effort of the DM and all of the players, including the one playing the fighter, cannot make playing a fighter fun, then the DM and those players need to rethink things a bit.

Heck, I have seen people play NPC Commoners and have lots of fun.

As for the tier system, it is a useful piece of analysis done by some people who like optimizing high-powered characters. Anyone who feels Tier 1 classes are 'better' than classes in the other tiers is evaluating only one facet of the classes - overall power level - which in no way indicates how fun it will be to play for any given player, only how fun it will be to play for a power gamer.

Usually, when I see someone not having fun in an RPG it is usually because someone at the table is not paying attention. It could be the DM is too focused on what he thinks is fun to realize a player isn't enjoying the game. It could be one of the other players is doing something to spoil the fun. Or it could even be the player himself is sabotaging his own experience in some way. But it's really never about the race or class the player chose to play. This is a Role-Playing Game after all, not a board game or video game.

So go play your fighter and have fun. Meanwhile, let the power gamers put the fighter where he belongs in their tier system and don't worry if it's not as high as you would like it. It's still fun to play and can be powerful enough for many players.

[Hurnn]

I love the fighter but it is a crappy class, anything T3 and higher out shines it and you have to work pretty hard to make it a solid T4 and even then you are a 1 trick pony. Even then some of the other T4 ponies might do it better; barbarian and all the ToB guys warblade, crusader, spellsword (and yes Warblade is t4 not t3, it is still only good at 1 thing.)

Fighter needs more abilities and more skills to be competitive.

[Hiro Protagonest]

Heck, I have seen people play NPC Commoners and have lots of fun.

Commoners are actually the most powerful class in the game. :smallamused:

[Gnaeus]

Also its been proven, or so I've heard (never saw the proof), that every feat in the game cannot raise a character above tier 3. If anyone knows the thread that was discussed in, I would love to see it.

Every feat in the game? No. That includes stuff like leadership and having your own magical fortress and other awesomeness that would be at least T2.

Everything you could take as a fighter feat? Yes. Even then, to hit T3 requires a good ruling on how "every feat" interacts with martial study/stance. Otherwise, it's just a superhigh tier 4.

[Hurnn]

There are no such things as bad classes, just bad DMs and players.

The primary purpose of a role-playing game is for the DM and players to have fun. This is accomplished through cooperative effort between the DM and all of the players in the game.

So if someone in the game wants to play a fighter, the DM and all of the players should be able to make it fun to play that fighter. If the cooperative effort of the DM and all of the players, including the one playing the fighter, cannot make playing a fighter fun, then the DM and those players need to rethink things a bit.

Heck, I have seen people play NPC Commoners and have lots of fun.

As for the tier system, it is a useful piece of analysis done by some people who like optimizing high-powered characters. Anyone who feels Tier 1 classes are 'better' than classes in the other tiers is evaluating only one facet of the classes - overall power level - which in no way indicates how fun it will be to play for any given player, only how fun it will be to play for a power gamer.

Usually, when I see someone not having fun in an RPG it is usually because someone at the table is not paying attention. It could be the DM is too focused on what he thinks is fun to realize a player isn't enjoying the game. It could be one of the other players is doing something to spoil the fun. Or it could even be the player himself is sabotaging his own experience in some way. But it's really never about the race or class the player chose to play. This is a Role-Playing Game after all, not a board game or video game.

So go play your fighter and have fun. Meanwhile, let the power gamers put the fighter where he belongs in their tier system and don't worry if it's not as high as you would like it. It's still fun to play and can be powerful enough for many players.


The problem with your argument is that I could RP a Warblade exactly like a fighter, and be better at what a fighter is supposed to be good at, and have other stuff too.

[BowStreetRunner]

The problem with your argument is that I could RP a Warblade exactly like a fighter, and be better at what a fighter is supposed to be good at, and have other stuff too.

Your point in no way invalidates my argument. The only thing that is important is whether the DM and players have fun. If you would find it more fun to RP a Warblade like a fighter, then that is your preference. The point is simply that the player can choose any race and class that satisfies his preference and still have fun as long as everyone is doing their part.

[Hurnn]

Your point in no way invalidates my argument. The only thing that is important is whether the DM and players have fun. If you would find it more fun to RP a Warblade like a fighter, then that is your preference. The point is simply that the player can choose any race and class that satisfies his preference and still have fun as long as everyone is doing their part.

It kind of does, the fighter is a bad class, there is "LITERALLY" nothing that makes the fighter better or as good as the warblade at what it is supposed to do, and the warblade has more options outside of combat too. Being I took away the RP portion of your argument with my statement, what remains is the mechanical comparison. Which the fighter then fails in.

[Seerow]

Your point in no way invalidates my argument. The only thing that is important is whether the DM and players have fun. If you would find it more fun to RP a Warblade like a fighter, then that is your preference. The point is simply that the player can choose any race and class that satisfies his preference and still have fun as long as everyone is doing their part.

When people are talking about class balance, they are doing so from a mechanical sense. Fighters are an objectively inferior option to take. If you don't care about class balance, of course you can still play a Fighter and have fun. See the thread from a few days ago with the guy saying he had a Monk player with no stat over a 14 (most around 8-10), and the guy was having the most fun in the group despite being worthless in combat.

Mechanical balance does not necessarily translate directly into fun. When people say the Fighter is a bad class they are not saying you are a bad person for enjoying playing a Fighter. They are saying that from a game balance perspective, the Fighter is a terrible option to take. Any player that doesn't care about balance won't care about this, but it doesn't affect the arguments that the Fighter is terrible in the least.

[squiggit]

But it's really never about the race or class the player chose to play.
I have trouble believing you've never ever seen a player make a bad mechanical choice and then feel frustrated because they aren't as effective as the rest of the party.

More importantly though the "it doesn't matter because it's a roleplaying game, play what you find fun" is literally entirely irrelevant to the topic of whether or not fighters are mechanically sound.

[eggynack]

There are no such things as bad classes, just bad DMs and players.

The primary purpose of a role-playing game is for the DM and players to have fun. This is accomplished through cooperative effort between the DM and all of the players in the game.

So if someone in the game wants to play a fighter, the DM and all of the players should be able to make it fun to play that fighter. If the cooperative effort of the DM and all of the players, including the one playing the fighter, cannot make playing a fighter fun, then the DM and those players need to rethink things a bit.

Heck, I have seen people play NPC Commoners and have lots of fun.

As for the tier system, it is a useful piece of analysis done by some people who like optimizing high-powered characters. Anyone who feels Tier 1 classes are 'better' than classes in the other tiers is evaluating only one facet of the classes - overall power level - which in no way indicates how fun it will be to play for any given player, only how fun it will be to play for a power gamer.

Usually, when I see someone not having fun in an RPG it is usually because someone at the table is not paying attention. It could be the DM is too focused on what he thinks is fun to realize a player isn't enjoying the game. It could be one of the other players is doing something to spoil the fun. Or it could even be the player himself is sabotaging his own experience in some way. But it's really never about the race or class the player chose to play. This is a Role-Playing Game after all, not a board game or video game.

So go play your fighter and have fun. Meanwhile, let the power gamers put the fighter where he belongs in their tier system and don't worry if it's not as high as you would like it. It's still fun to play and can be powerful enough for many players.
I think you're constructing a divide here that is somewhat arbitrary, between what high-op folks do and what is done in some normal game. The tier system isn't about some super-optimized game, even if it can be. More often, it's just about how the game's power levels break down under normal mid-op scenarios. People who play normal games should care at least somewhat about this power level stuff, as it makes constructing a balanced and enjoyable game easier.

[Morty]

I have no horse in this race, having given up on 3e D&D a while ago, but I agree that "fun" isn't a word that belongs in such discussions, and as such doesn't bring anything to them. Yes, people can and do enjoy playing Fighters. But enjoying playing a game is essentially unquantifiable. You can't measure having a good time. Game balance is one of the things that can influence it - if your level 13 fighter is sidelined by the wizard who turns enemies to frogs and shuts down entire groups, it's entirely possible that it'll cause you to enjoy the game less. Or you might be fine with it. But even in such a case, saying "I don't care that the fighter is a weak class" isn't an argument that has a place in this discussion, because it's completely outside it. "Fighter isn't a weak class" is such an argument, albeit one that'll be hotly contested.

[Mrc.]

Not everything is about damage in combat. If the party have to sneak into a stronghold, that fighter is dead weight. If they have to placate the two warring factions at the negotiating table, the fighter is a glorified bodyguard at best. I'm not saying that with the right build a fighter can't do these things, but to be able to do so it would have to forsake what it was previously good at. And that flexibility which the fighter lacks is what limits its play-ability.

Yes, you can make the horseman War, and fighter can be an appropriate build. If the world you play in is sufficient to challenge said fighter and adventuring company then there's no problem. That fighter is right where he needs to be. If, however, the world is full of shadesteel golems, the fighter is just a meat shield. Certainly, a heavily optimised T1 class will smoke any encounter that is a decent challenge to the fighter should they so choose. Not really sure there's anything else I can say that hasn't already been mentioned.

Just my thoughts.

[Vanitas]

{Scrub the original, scrub the quote}

Why are you even answering, then? Just to be dismissive, elitist and rude?

[eggynack]

Why are you even answering, then? Just to be dismissive, elitist and rude?
I think he's just saying that this thread has happened on many an occasion, and that it is somewhat tiresome. Seems like a fair claim to make.

[Vanitas]

I think he's just saying that this thread has happened on many an occasion, and that it is somewhat tiresome. Seems like a fair claim to make.

It's also a claim you can make without being dismissive, elitist and rude.

[eggynack]

It's also a claim you can make without being dismissive, elitist and rude.
Meh. There are a lot of these threads. Just way too many. It makes the heart grow weary.

[Vanitas]

Meh. There are a lot of these threads. Just way too many. It makes the heart grow weary.

{Scrubbed}

[Seerow]

{Scrubbed}

[eggynack]

{Scrubbed}

[Namfuak]

{Scrub the original, scrub the quote}

Perhaps you should take your own advice and stop doing to him what you accuse him of doing to others.

I've always felt like the main problem with class balance is that the game doesn't differentiate between adventuring and non-adventuring skills. It would totally be in line with the fighter fluff that he was both physically fit enough to climb walls and jump chasms while also spending his downtime studying a trade or learning about the strategy of warfare. Heck, officers learn to fight before they learn to lead. However, the way the skill point system works basically restricts a character like this and shunts all fighters into "Knows how to fight and nothing else," regardless of how you specialize your feats. A homebrew thought I've always wanted to try would be to split skills up based on whether they were combat or non-combat and give everyone points for both sides.

[Seerow]

I've always felt like the main problem with class balance is that the game doesn't differentiate between adventuring and non-adventuring skills. It would totally be in line with the fighter fluff that he was both physically fit enough to climb walls and jump chasms while also spending his downtime studying a trade or learning about the strategy of warfare. Heck, officers learn to fight before they learn to lead. However, the way the skill point system works basically restricts a character like this and shunts all fighters into "Knows how to fight and nothing else," regardless of how you specialize your feats. A homebrew thought I've always wanted to try would be to split skills up based on whether they were combat or non-combat and give everyone points for both sides.

Thing I've been doing for a while:
-Knowledge, Profession, Craft, and Perform skills are separate from other skills. You get 2+int mod points per level to invest into these.
-The Fighter gets a boost to 8 skill points per level. All other characters with 4th level spells or less get a 100% increase to skill points.
-All characters with 6th level spells or lower get a 50% increase to skill points.
-Characters with 9th level spells get no bonus skill points.
-Any feat or ability that gives extra skill points applies to normal skills, but the player may opt to make it count as twice as many knowledge/profession/craft/perform skill ranks if desired. (So a Human Fighter gets either 9 skill points and 2+int 'fluff' skill points; or 8 skill points and 4+int 'fluff' skill points)



It doesn't fix much in terms of balance, but it lets characters feel a lot more flexible and put ranks into fluff things they'd normally not want to waste points on, which is a victory to me.

[eggynack]

Fancy skill stuff.
This skill stuff seems fancy, as I've indicated, though some of the skill lists probably need to be expanded to accommodate the changes, especially for fighters. A fighter with 10 intelligence will actually be forced to cross-class stuff, particularly because craft was shifted to its own system. I also presume that the 100% increase doesn't apply to the fluff skills, though that's kinda unclear.

[zionpopsickle]

It's also a claim you can make without being dismissive, elitist and rude.

I'm going to lay down an amazing revelation here: sometimes it is appropriate to be 'dismissive, elitist, and rude' when discussing a topic that has been done to the point that there is little new to contribute besides pedantry. This is not a new topic, I have seen threads like this that are 9 or so years old and basically say the same thing minus ToB classes do it better. And people who discuss these kinds of things in their spare time for fun eventually get tired of it. So really, his response was perfectly appropriate because the OP should have done their research in a responsible manner and either presented a new idea or realized that his post was a rehash of nearly decades old arguments.

In reality, the OP was unintentionally being rude, elitist and ignorant.


I think the other big thing that this thread is doing that is tiresome is equating mechanical effectiveness with fun. These two are correlated of course (because being too good/bad is only fun to a point and then becomes really awful) but there isn't a causal connection going either way between them.
To give a personal example, my two favorite archetypes to play are Changeling Wizard (tier 1) and healbot Healer (tier suck). These two are extremely different from each other in mechanical effectiveness and even in their ability to influence the story via roleplay opportunities, they are just two archetypes that I really enjoy playing.

So, nothing about playing a fighter makes it badfunwrong to do so. The fighter is just a mechanically weak class and will often have mechanical problems dealing with the game. If as a playgroup you work hard to smooth over these problems then a fighter is all hunky-dory, as would be any other class. This doesn't make the fighter mechanically good, it just means the players are capable of navigating the rules set in such a way to offset deficiencies in design.

[Namfuak]

Thing I've been doing for a while:
-Knowledge, Profession, Craft, and Perform skills are separate from other skills. You get 2+int mod points per level to invest into these.
-The Fighter gets a boost to 8 skill points per level. All other characters with 4th level spells or less get a 100% increase to skill points.
-All characters with 6th level spells or lower get a 50% increase to skill points.
-Characters with 9th level spells get no bonus skill points.
-Any feat or ability that gives extra skill points applies to normal skills, but the player may opt to make it count as twice as many knowledge/profession/craft/perform skill ranks if desired. (So a Human Fighter gets either 9 skill points and 2+int 'fluff' skill points; or 8 skill points and 4+int 'fluff' skill points)

It doesn't fix much in terms of balance, but it lets characters feel a lot more flexible and put ranks into fluff things they'd normally not want to waste points on, which is a victory to me.

That's a pretty nice fix, it seems to me like most people who play a fighter aren't going to complain so much that the wizard is good at using magic, but are more likely to feel left out (and thus tune out) when they cannot make any real impact outside of combat.

[Fortinbro]

Arguing about what a fighter gets on their own with no gear compared to what a caster gets on their own with no gear is pointless. Generally, if your DM is doing it right, you will have approximately wealth by level. Thus, with magic items assumed to be accessible at some point, I can pretty handily do things like fly or hit ranged targets.

Even at early levels there are things like Javelins which give strength characters range and still do damage based on their strength.

Spells and maneuvers are both resources that can be expended during prolonged combat. Unless hampered by various situations fighters can generally keep doing their thing all day while the casters whine about going back to rest.

I disagree with the notion that in every situation a spell is objectively equal to or better than a feat which you get at the same level. That's nonsense when there are things like saving throws, spell resistance, rings of spell turning and what have you. Everything is situational and there is a counter to everything.

That's cool, you can polymorph the enemy into a frog bro. Let's say you are fighting a boss which is most likely higher level than you and has high saves and AC. He makes his save and you've probably wasted your turn. I can likely get several attempts to hit (or trip or grapple etc) that same boss giving me a higher chance of getting lucky and helping out.

[Togo]

Meh. There are a lot of these threads. Just way too many. It makes the heart grow weary.

To be fair, that's really not a reason to be elitist, dismissive and rude.

The OP's point is sound. Claiming that a fighter is less flexible (and thus lower Tier) than other choices is fair enough, but it's still an entirely viable build in game, and you can have a lot of fun playing it.

Is that really such an awful thing to say?

[TheIronGolem]

Awful? No, of course not. It's not even untrue. But it does miss the point of why the fighter is considered a poorly-designed class.

[Deophaun]

That's cool, you can polymorph the enemy into a frog bro. Let's say you are fighting a boss which is most likely higher level than you and has high saves and AC. He makes his save and you've probably wasted your turn. I can likely get several attempts to hit (or trip or grapple etc) that same boss giving me a higher chance of getting lucky and helping out.
Or, you know, instead of targeting the boss with high saves, they just turn themselves into a cryohydra.

Or they deal a thousand points of damage with a metamagiced orb spell targeting touch AC.

And that's just if the wizard wants to kill the BBEG, instead of taking the BBEG over and gaining control of his entire evil network.

[zlefin]

I think what we need is to add more things to the stickied thread list, or add more links in one of the stickies that covers the issues that have been brought up and addressed thoroughly.

[Fortinbro]

Or, you know, instead of targeting the boss with high saves, they just turn themselves into a cryohydra.

Or they deal a thousand points of damage with a metamagiced orb spell targeting touch AC.

And that's just if the wizard wants to kill the BBEG, instead of taking the BBEG over and gaining control of his entire evil network.

I'm well aware that is a route they can take and there are counters to orbs too but that's not my point.

My argument isn't that casters don't have options, which would be stupid. My argument is that fighters, while yes having less options, can still be built to be effective if done right.

[Seerow]

This skill stuff seems fancy, as I've indicated, though some of the skill lists probably need to be expanded to accommodate the changes, especially for fighters. A fighter with 10 intelligence will actually be forced to cross-class stuff, particularly because craft was shifted to its own system. I also presume that the 100% increase doesn't apply to the fluff skills, though that's kinda unclear.

Sure. In general I don't think Pathfinder's way of handling it is bad (having a class skill is essentially +3 to the skill once you invest a single rank), but if you stick with 3e's system you probably want to do some expanding of skill lists for the classes that are weakest in that area.

And yeah, the +100% increase applies to the normal skillpoints per level. So the Fighter and Barbarian get 8 skill points per level. The Ranger gets 12. The Rogue gets a whopping 16. The Bard gets 9. The Wizard gets 2.

Some of the classes require judgement calls. I could post a list of what I think, but it's kind of wandering off the topic.

[eggynack]

Arguing about what a fighter gets on their own with no gear compared to what a caster gets on their own with no gear is pointless. Generally, if your DM is doing it right, you will have approximately wealth by level. Thus, with magic items assumed to be accessible at some point, I can pretty handily do things like fly or hit ranged targets.

Even at early levels there are things like Javelins which give strength characters range and still do damage based on their strength.

Spells and maneuvers are both resources that can be expended during prolonged combat. Unless hampered by various situations fighters can generally keep doing their thing all day while the casters whine about going back to rest.

I disagree with the notion that in every situation a spell is objectively equal to or better than a feat which you get at the same level. That's nonsense when there are things like saving throws, spell resistance, rings of spell turning and what have you. Everything is situational and there is a counter to everything.

That's cool, you can polymorph the enemy into a frog bro. Let's say you are fighting a boss which is most likely higher level than you and has high saves and AC. He makes his save and you've probably wasted your turn. I can likely get several attempts to hit (or trip or grapple etc) that same boss giving me a higher chance of getting lucky and helping out.
I think you're overemphasizing how easy things are to counter. There are counters for most caster things in the game, but different caster things often demand completely different counters,and those counters are often only available to other casters. Money evens things out a little bit, but it can't come close to matching what casters can do, and it falls even further from matching what casters with WBL can do. As for endurance, it's a factor, but it's not the biggest one, especially when fighters tend to defend against enemies with their face. Casters are the characters most capable of enforcing the 15 minute adventuring day, and a daily spell list can carry you through a good number of encounters.


The OP's point is sound. Claiming that a fighter is less flexible (and thus lower Tier) than other choices is fair enough, but it's still an entirely viable build in game, and you can have a lot of fun playing it.

Is that really such an awful thing to say?
The problem is mostly that he's tossing out a good number of the fallacies that are common to these threads, like ignoring relative comparisons in favor of listing only what fighters can do, I'm also not really sure what fighters are being defended against. They're a low powered class, and folks can have as much fun with them as they like. I'm not really sure who was saying the opposite of that prior to this thread.

Edit:

My argument isn't that casters don't have options, which would be stupid. My argument is that fighters, while yes having less options, can still be built to be effective if done right.
Effective in what context? Effective within what campaign? Effective against what challenges? Even a commoner can be built to be effective if the enemies are easy enough. Saying, "Fighters are effective," is a bit meaningless.

[TheIronGolem]

My argument isn't that casters don't have options, which would be stupid. My argument is that fighters, while yes having less options, can still be built to be effective if done right.

Yes, they can be effective. But they can only be effective in a narrow subset of situations, and even within that subset they're not as effective as the casters. That's the problem. Casters fight better than fighters, and they do everything else better too.

[Togo]

The problem is mostly that he's tossing out a good number of the fallacies that are common to these threads, like ignoring relative comparisons in favor of listing only what fighters can do,

Actually, no, he explicitly mentions that other classes are both more flexible and more powerful.


I'm also not really sure what fighters are being defended against. They're a low powered class, and folks can have as much fun with them as they like. I'm not really sure who was saying the opposite of that prior to this thread.

So... then what were your motivations for taking the time to disagree with him? :smallconfused:

His point was the amount of approbation the fighter class attracts is way out of proportion to the actual problems involved in playing one.

You seem determined to prove him right. :smallamused:

[Venger]

Every feat in the game? No. That includes stuff like leadership and having your own magical fortress and other awesomeness that would be at least T2.

Everything you could take as a fighter feat? Yes. Even then, to hit T3 requires a good ruling on how "every feat" interacts with martial study/stance. Otherwise, it's just a superhigh tier 4.

I remember this thread (and also cannot find it)

it wasn't every feat, though, for precisely that reason. It was every feat without a prerequisite (so your imp inits, etc) that this character took. I believe leadership was excluded (as it often is)


The problem with your argument is that I could RP a Warblade exactly like a fighter, and be better at what a fighter is supposed to be good at, and have other stuff too.

since these threads come up once or twice a week, a shorthand that's been adopted in the community for the logical fallacy that roleplaying and being useful mechanically are inversely proportional is "the stormwind fallacy" named after the person who first made the claim

[Svata]

Fighters aren't considered bad because they can't do anything. They are considered bad because any one fighter can only do one thing. Sure, the amounts of feats gives them a bit of versatility, but eqch build will be taking maybe 2 lines of feats, which lewves him a one-trick pony. And that one trick is damage. Add to that the fact that other classes can do damage better (barbarian) or just as good and have other options as well (Warblade), and you have the reason why they are considered underpowered. That does not make them the worst (lookin at you, CW Samurai), but they aren't good. Doesn't mean they can't be fun to play, just that there exisit better options.

[Starbuck_II]

I've seen a LOT of posts on here talking crap about fighters (and Paladins/Blackguards but I'll save that for another rant) lately. Allow me to offer a rebuttal:

From my experience fighter is bad only if you don't know good feats. You get 11! extra feats which can just be an awesome melee toolbox.

I've personally had nothing but a good experience playing a STRAIGHT fighter in a game run by a friend of mine who knows how to optimize fairly well and favors casters and Tome of Battle.

The character in question uses the corpse creature template from Book of Vile Darkness and is essentially a charger/combat brute build using leap attack and a valorous weapon. Sure, she can be a bit of a two or three-trick pony at times, but she usually ends up killing most of the enemies in the fight. She has surprised the DM with her strength more than once. I don't expect her to fill every single role, and that's half of the fun of teamwork.


So, how much was the character/build the fighter and how much was the template?
Second, it has no LA, so you cheated.
No problem, there are players that swear their Monks are fine because they got amulets of tiger transformation.

[Svata]

Thing I've been doing for a while:
-Knowledge, Profession, Craft, and Perform skills are separate from other skills. You get 2+int mod points per level to invest into these.
-The Fighter gets a boost to 8 skill points per level. All other characters with 4th level spells or less get a 100% increase to skill points.
-All characters with 6th level spells or lower get a 50% increase to skill points.
-Characters with 9th level spells get no bonus skill points.
-Any feat or ability that gives extra skill points applies to normal skills, but the player may opt to make it count as twice as many knowledge/profession/craft/perform skill ranks if desired. (So a Human Fighter gets either 9 skill points and 2+int 'fluff' skill points; or 8 skill points and 4+int 'fluff' skill points)


Where does that leave the factotum, who doesn't cast spells, strictly speaking, but has 7th-level equivalent SLAs? Or artificers and warlocks, for that matter?

[Seerow]

Where does that leave the factotum, who doesn't cast spells, strictly speaking, but has 7th-level equivalent SLAs? Or artificers and warlocks, for that matter?

Like I mentioned in my last post, several classes require judgement calls.

But for my purposes, I call the Factotum and Warlock both equivalent to a 6th level caster (+50%) and Artificers equivalent to a full caster (no bonus).

[Togo]

since these threads come up once or twice a week, a shorthand that's been adopted in the community for the logical fallacy that roleplaying and being useful mechanically are inversely proportional is "the stormwind fallacy" named after the person who first made the claim

Technically speaking the stormwind fallacy is that when someone optimises their character, roleplaying necessarily suffers. That was the point being made on the WOTC boards when Tempest Stormwind introduced it.

The idea that they're inversely proportional is a more interesting one, but isn't a logical fallacy in any sense - there's no particular lack of logic to the idea that someone who concentrates on build choices isn't concentrating on roleplaying, or vice versa. It's just often disputed that it is true.

For maximum irony points, it should be noted that using the Stormwind Fallacy as a shorthand to reject any sort of connection between optimisation and roleplaying is in itself a logical fallacy.

[Philistine]

Arguing about what a fighter gets on their own with no gear compared to what a caster gets on their own with no gear is pointless. Generally, if your DM is doing it right, you will have approximately wealth by level. Thus, with magic items assumed to be accessible at some point, I can pretty handily do things like fly or hit ranged targets.

Even at early levels there are things like Javelins which give strength characters range and still do damage based on their strength.

Spells and maneuvers are both resources that can be expended during prolonged combat. Unless hampered by various situations fighters can generally keep doing their thing all day while the casters whine about going back to rest.

I disagree with the notion that in every situation a spell is objectively equal to or better than a feat which you get at the same level. That's nonsense when there are things like saving throws, spell resistance, rings of spell turning and what have you. Everything is situational and there is a counter to everything.

That's cool, you can polymorph the enemy into a frog bro. Let's say you are fighting a boss which is most likely higher level than you and has high saves and AC. He makes his save and you've probably wasted your turn. I can likely get several attempts to hit (or trip or grapple etc) that same boss giving me a higher chance of getting lucky and helping out.
Please understand this up front: I LIKE playing martial/skilled archetypes. In fact, I vastly prefer them to casters (especially in 3.X, where full casters are essentially given the combined toolkits of every "magic user" in every fantasy story ever). However, time and bitter experience have demonstrated a few home truths about the relationship between magical and non-magical classes in this system. So...

1) You can spend your WBL trying to catch up with the casters' class features, but that's a race you're going to lose - even before the casters start spending their own WBL. Because everyone gets WBL. Casters, too.

2) Maneuvers can be refreshed - freely for the Crusader, trivially for the Warblade, and with rather more effort for the Swordsage (who does, however, get an absolute crap-ton of them to start with). Spells cannot as easily be refreshed, but by level 7 at the latest a well-played caster should basically never run out of spells - by that point spells are powerful enough that you should only need one or two per encounter, and you have enough of them to easily outlast the fighter's limited resource. That's hit points, BTW. Good luck "doing [your] thing all day" after those run out.

3) Disagree all you want. Reality is not contingent upon your acceptance. The fact that a second-level spell exists whose effect is to grant the target any Fighter Feat indicates the relative strengths of the two in practice: at best a Feat is equal to a second-level spell. And your OP says you've been watching similar discussions for some time, so presumably you're already aware of the fact that many spells - and generally the ones rated as most useful - simply do not allow saving throws or spell resistance, or can impede opponents to some extent even after being resisted. Really, this bit in particular seems quite disingenuous.

4) That's cool, you can chip 1d8+4 HP off an enemy's total every round bro. Let's say you are fighting a boss who likely has miss chance, immunity to being grappled, immunity to being tripped, and/or high mobility, AC and/or HP (probably most of these, in fact) to go with his high saves. If you get to make multiple attacks per round at all - which your enemy can and will prevent, unless he expects trading full attacks to hurt you much more than it hurts him - your second and subsequent attacks have a drastically reduced probability of success; and if you can sneak a hit through his defenses, it still won't reduce his efficiency at all unless and until you reduce him to 0 HP or below, so you've effectively wasted your turn. Meanwhile save-or-dies give at least a possibility of straight-up ending the fight, giving the caster a higher chance of doing something that matters and helping out... and as previously mentioned, there are a lot of spells which don't even allow saves, or SR, or "what have you," which pushes the casters' chances of helping out to 100%.

[Brookshw]

In reality, the OP was unintentionally being rude, elitist and ignorant.


That's a bit harsh perhaps. I took his post to be roughly, "yeah, they're not the tops but they have some combat options and can be fun". Fair enough.

[Threadnaught]

I'm sorry for this response, but I really, really, really hate the Fighter Class.


I've seen a LOT of posts on here talking crap about fighters (and Paladins/Blackguards but I'll save that for another rant) lately. Allow me to offer a rebuttal:

From my experience fighter is bad only if you don't know good feats. You get 11! extra feats which can just be an awesome melee toolbox.

No, Bonus Feats aren't interesting Class Features. As much as I dislike Cleric and Paladin for relying on Deities, Religious Orders and Codes of Conduct, at least they get something from the Class besides the laziness that went into creating the Fighter.


Monk is one of my favourite Classes and it's one of the weakest. I like it because, well, look at all the stuff it gets. Yeah sure, okay it gets 3 Bonus Feats and blah blah, but it also gets boosts to Speed every 3 levels, a more powerful Unarmed Strike, Slowfall, short range Teleport, a second stat to AC, Flurry of Blows Misses and Stunning Fist. Maybe they don't synergize well, maybe the full package is a mess, but as a Class it gets far more than a Fighter.
You can replicate taking two levels in Fighter at 1st level, simply take two Flaws. It works for any Class that gets actual Class Features.

[ryu]

I'm sorry for this response, but I really, really, really hate the Fighter Class.



No, Bonus Feats aren't interesting Class Features. As much as I dislike Cleric and Paladin for relying on Deities, Religious Orders and Codes of Conduct, at least they get something from the Class besides the laziness that went into creating the Fighter.


Monk is one of my favourite Classes and it's one of the weakest. I like it because, well, look at all the stuff it gets. Yeah sure, okay it gets 3 Bonus Feats and blah blah, but it also gets boosts to Speed every 3 levels, a more powerful Unarmed Strike, Slowfall, short range Teleport, a second stat to AC, Flurry of Blows Misses and Stunning Fist. Maybe they don't synergize well, maybe the full package is a mess, but as a Class it gets far more than a Fighter.
You can replicate taking two levels in Fighter at 1st level, simply take two Flaws. It works for any Class that gets actual Class Features.

Better than replicates it. Those feats can be almost anything especially if your buld is just using them to free up no prereq stuff you'd have taken anyway.

[Knaight]

Your point in no way invalidates my argument. The only thing that is important is whether the DM and players have fun. If you would find it more fun to RP a Warblade like a fighter, then that is your preference. The point is simply that the player can choose any race and class that satisfies his preference and still have fun as long as everyone is doing their part.


The primary purpose of a role-playing game is for the DM and players to have fun. This is accomplished through cooperative effort between the DM and all of the players in the game.

This logic can be applied to basically any game - provided that the group playing said game is doing things that aren't explicitly part of the game (said cooperative effort) around the game, they can have fun. That the quality of the game can change that is elided here - it is boiled down to whether it is possible at all, and all nuance is just ignored. You're basically framing things so that quality doesn't even exist for games, and it's not that far to take it for something else. For instance:

"The primary purpose of a dinner party is for the host and guests to have fun. This is accomplished through cooperative effort between the host and all of the guests in the dinner party".

This is a completely true statement. It's also a way to sweep criticism under the rug. Sure, the food was all either burnt or undercooked, and the spices used never fit the dish and are in poorly fitting combinations, but the host and guests can still have fun around the food. It's obviously ridiculous in this context; I don't see how the quality of a game or the quality of a mechanical part in a game is somehow different.

[eggynack]

Actually, no, he explicitly mentions that other classes are both more flexible and more powerful.
It doesn't really look like he mentioned that.


So... then what were your motivations for taking the time to disagree with him? :smallconfused:

His point was the amount of approbation the fighter class attracts is way out of proportion to the actual problems involved in playing one.

You seem determined to prove him right. :smallamused:

I said then what I'm saying now. Claiming that fighters are effective is a rather meaningless statement. Also as then, and as now, I'm not really sure what the point of this thread is. I mean, you say that he's saying that fighters attract undeserved hate, but there's not even that much indication of what form that hate takes, or how his claims act against that hate.

[Venger]

Technically speaking the stormwind fallacy is that when someone optimises their character, roleplaying necessarily suffers. That was the point being made on the WOTC boards when Tempest Stormwind introduced it.

The idea that they're inversely proportional is a more interesting one, but isn't a logical fallacy in any sense - there's no particular lack of logic to the idea that someone who concentrates on build choices isn't concentrating on roleplaying, or vice versa. It's just often disputed that it is true.

For maximum irony points, it should be noted that using the Stormwind Fallacy as a shorthand to reject any sort of connection between optimisation and roleplaying is in itself a logical fallacy.

My intent with my post was just to give the name for what was going on in the discussion (of a fighter and warblade RPed the same, the fighter is better RPed because it is a weaker class), which is a perfect example of the stormwind fallacy. warblade is higher tier, so necessarily, it would be RPed worse.

if the fallacy dictates "as optimization levels rise, the quality of RP necessarily diminishes," then that means that they're inversely proportional (as one goes up, the other goes down) since they're not quantifiable, their product doesn't always equal 1 in the classical sense of "inversely proportional," I was just using it informally if that was unclear.

there is a lack of logic to it, it's a complete non sequitor. a character is or isn't mechanically strong. this has no bearing on whether they're roleplayed well, they're two different sets of skills and a person can be at any point on the continuum on either one. being good at one doesn't make you worse at the other.

so you're accusing me of... the fallacy fallacy?

could you clarify whether your last statement is saying you agree with the stormwind fallacy or disagree with it? I don't want to misrepresent you.

even if you do agree with the stormwind fallacy, as you said "when someone optimises, their character, roleplaying necessarily suffers" all I was referring to was the argument that of two identically RPed characters, one mechanically a fighter and one mechanically a warblade, saying that the fighter is RPed better since his class is worse does not make sense. I wasn't trying to argue for or against the stormwind fallacy since it's generally agreed upon at this point that adherents of one side or the other won't change each other's minds.

[OldTrees1]

Wow. This exploded before I even found it.



Fighters can be versatile. A straight classed fighter has in class support* for the following in the same build.

Bluff
Intimidate
Cower Lockdown
Daze Lockdown (Melee and Ranged)
Zone of Control (Trip, Knockback and Standstill)
Flight
Damage

Now while they don't have the popularity of Warblades, they can reach tier 3 rather easily with the above set of abilities.

*Either class features, feats, or freeing up your HD feats

[eggynack]

Now while they don't have the popularity of Warblades, they can reach tier 3 rather easily with the above set of abilities.
How're they getting in-class support for flight? I don't think I've ever heard of something like that, at least not directly. Also, what're you using for daze lockdown?

Edit: That clears it up a little, I suppose. Is it the whole improved flight thing? Also, on a more important note, how early does this stuff come online.

[Dienekes]

Wow. This exploded before I even found it.



Fighters can be versatile. A straight classed fighter has in class support* for the following in the same build.

Bluff
Intimidate
Cower Lockdown
Daze Lockdown (Melee and Ranged)
Zone of Control (Trip, Knockback and Standstill)
Flight
Damage

Now while they don't have the popularity of Warblades, they can reach tier 3 rather easily with the above set of abilities.

*Either class features, feats, or freeing up your HD feats

Sounds like a fun build, may we see it?

Mind you, as written this looks tier 4 to me, but there might be some awesome synergy and effective tricks that this brief list doesn't really demonstrate well.

Also, it'd be helpful to know at what level these abilities become effective. One of the strengths of the Warblade is that you can basically do all of this by level 5 or so (except Bluff, he's a bad liar).

[Hiro Protagonest]

Even if you can do that (cheating for flight by using raptoran or dragonborn; I'd say baseline tiers assume a human, which is good for every class, if any race at all) you'd still be tier 4. Warblades are still argued as tier 4, and they get Leaping Dragon Stance, the Scent stance, and the Blindsense stance, which are reasonable utility. Mountain Hammer is also good for utility.

[OldTrees1]

How're they getting in-class support for flight? I don't think I've ever heard of something like that, at least not directly. Also, what're you using for daze lockdown?

Edit: That clears it up a little, I suppose. Is it the whole improved flight thing? Also, on a more important note, how early does this stuff come online.

Fighter bonus feats can be used to take the melee feats (Power Attack ...) normally taken with HD feats. This class feature opened up HD feats to take things like Dragon Wings feats. (although the build below uses Raptorian instead)

Daze lockdown is via Boomerang Daze (ranged) & Dire Flail Smash (melee) feats


Sounds like a fun build, may we see it?

Mind you, as written this looks tier 4 to me, but there might be some awesome synergy and effective tricks that this brief list doesn't really demonstrate well.

Also, it'd be helpful to know at what level these abilities become effective. One of the strengths of the Warblade is that you can basically do all of this by level 5 or so (except Bluff, he's a bad liar).

I don't have the straight classed fighter build saved since I made a better version with dips (Barbarian for Pounce, Scarlet Corsair for AoE Cower lockdown) but here is a summary:

Build:
Half Minotaur(LA Buy Off) Raptorian Fighter(Exoticist, Zhentarim Soldier) 20
Some of the Feats:
Combat Expertise, Combat Reflexes, Dire Flail Smash, Endurance, Imperious Command, Improved Bullrush, Improved Feint, Improved Sunder, Improved Trip, Knockback, Knock-down, Power Attack, Rapid Shot, Robilar's Gambit, Skill Focus(Intimidate), Staggering Strike, Standstill, Track, Two Weapon Fighting, Weapon Focus

Zone of Control comes online at 1st level. (Combat Reflexes + Standstill)
The skills (Bluff and Intimidate) come online at 3rd level.
Flight comes online at 5th-6th level (via race or feats)
Melee Daze Lockdown takes 4 feats so it can come online at 6th level with a feat to spare (not counting feats used on ZoC)
Cower Lockdown takes 1 feat (Imperious Command) but really comes into its own when Ftr 9 gives it as a swift action.

Since Warblade is best described as Combat tricks & Intimidate, I do not see how it can be Tier 3 and this Fighter not also be Tier 3. (Fighter class in general is still a lower tier though)

[Seerow]

I'm assuming that's the version with dips. Because you don't actually have enough feats to pull off everything you listed as far as I can tell.

[OldTrees1]

I'm assuming that's the version with dips. Because you don't actually have enough feats to pull off everything you listed as far as I can tell.

I copy pasted the feats from the dip version but you can get all those feats and more with 20 levels of fighter.
Ftr 20 gives you 11 Ftr feats & Skill Focus Intimidate
Half Minotaur gave Track
HD and Flaws give 9 more

The full dip build
Half Minotaur(LA Buy Off) Raptorian Barbarian(Spirit Lion Totem, Favored Enemy, Archery Combat Style, Wolf Totem) 2 / Fighter(Exoticist, Zhentarim Soldier) 2 / Swordsage 1 / Fighter +2 / Rogue 1 / Warblade 1 / Scarlet Corsair 5 / Horizon Walker 1 /Fighter +5
Size/Type: Large Humanoid
Hit Dice: 3d12+10d10+7d8+80 (191 hp)
Initiative: +10
Speed: 40ft, Fly 50ft (Average)
Armor Class: 28 (+9 Dex, +2 natural, +3 Shield, +2 Armor)
BAB: +18
Attack:
Full Attack: L/R/L-5/R/L-10/R-5/L-15/Gore
Gore(secondary natural attack 1d8)
Space/Reach: 10ft/10ft
Special: Combat Style(Archery), Corsair's feint (once per 2d4 rounds), Darkvision 60ft, Discipline focus (weapon focus), Extended Intimidation, Favored Enemy (+2 vs Humans), Low-light Vision, Minotaur Cunning, Quick to act +1, Sailor's step +2, Scent, Scourge of the Seas, Sneak Attack +2d6, Spiritual Totem(Lion), Swift Demoralization, Terrain Mastery(Desert), Trapfinding, Unerring Direction, Wolf Totem, Weapon Aptitude, Weapon Familiarity
Saves: Fort +19, Ref +21, Will +12
Abilities: Str 23+5[34], Con 12[18], Dex 17+5[28], Int 10, Wis 8, Cha 15+5[26] (32 point buy)
Skills: Bluff[22] +30, Climb[0] +13, Intimidate[23] +46, Jump[0]+21, Knowledge(Geo)[8] +8, Listen[2] +3, Profession(Sailor)[4] +3, Search[0] +2, Spot[6] +7
Traits/Flaws: Detached, Meager Fortitude, Plucky, Poor Reflexes
Feats: Combat Reflexes, Dire Flail Smash, Endurance, Imperious Command, Improved Bullrush, Improved Feint, Improved Sunder, Improved Trip, Knockback, Knock-down, Power Attack, Rapid Shot, Robilar's Gambit, Skill Focus(Intimidate), Staggering Strike, Standstill, Track, Two Weapon Fighting, Weapon Focus,
ACP: -1
Gear Value: 651,170/760K gp
Gear: +1 Transmuting/+1 Speed Transmuting Dire Flail [18K + 72K + 690gp], +1 Gnome Twist Cloth [1K + 300gp]+1 Animated Heavy Shield [9K + 170gp], Belt of Battle of Str +6 of Con +6 [12K + 36K + 36K gp], Bracers of Opportunity [2.3K gp], Minor Cloak of Displacement of Cha +6 of Resistance +5 [24K + 36K + 25K gp], Gloves of the Balanced Hand of Dex +6 [8K + 36K gp] Dimension Stride Boots[2K], Third Eye Clarity[3K], Blindfold of True Darkness[9K], Ring of Freedom of Movement[40], Ring of Mental Fortitude[110K], 3 Charge staff of Twin Repeat Wish (expended) [81,120gp], 3 Charge staff of Repeat Wish (expended) [79,590 gp] Crystal Mask of Dread [10K]
Manuevers:
SS 1: Child of Shadow[stance], Cloak of Deception, Drain Vitality, Shadow Jaunt, Sapphire Nightmare Blade, Emerald Razor, Mountain Hammer
WB 1: Steel Wind, Iron Heart Surge, Bolstering Voice[stance], White Raven Tactics

[Seerow]

I forgot Flaws and Minotaur's Track. You have 20 feats listed and I only counted 19 available (11 Fighter, 7 hit dice, 1 zhentarim). You're right that you have two feats of wiggle room left to play with for that build.

[QuackParker]

I tend to agree with the original poster. The sheer number of feats a typical fighter receives make them rather flexible in their own way. Sure, a dedicated caster can go from blasting goblins with fireballs one minute to conjuring illusions to turn himself into a busty maiden the next, but that doesn't make the fighter less worth playing.

[eggynack]

I tend to agree with the original poster. The sheer number of feats a typical fighter receives make them rather flexible in their own way. Sure, a dedicated caster can go from blasting goblins with fireballs one minute to conjuring illusions to turn himself into a busty maiden the next, but that doesn't make the fighter less worth playing.
And I'm still not sure what that means. What is the fighter more flexible than? Even a commoner can scrounge together some flexibility, as there are few problems that can't be solved by a combination of infinite chickens and handle animal. The fighter is flexible compared to the warrior. They're inflexible compared to the wizard. They're flexible compared to the monk (usually). They're inflexible compared to the druid. Flexibility, like balance, is relative.

[Dienekes]

Since Warblade is best described as Combat tricks & Intimidate, I do not see how it can be Tier 3 and this Fighter not also be Tier 3. (Fighter class in general is still a lower tier though)

Well, you could describe it like that, but you'd be missing out on why it's tier 3 (and a low tier 3 at that). Warblade also gains blind-sense, better movement in and out of combat, scent, the save replacers, the ability to ignore spell effects, can manipulate initiative scores of those around him, ignore hardness, and actually has some points for skills.

[Hiro Protagonest]

And I'm still not sure what that means. What is the fighter more flexible than? Even a commoner can scrounge together some flexibility, as there are few problems that can't be solved by a combination of infinite chickens and handle animal.

And incarnum feats. There's also that feat that gives you a low-level spell (either one or zero, I forget).

[OldTrees1]

Well, you could describe it like that, but you'd be missing out on why it's tier 3 (and a low tier 3 at that). Warblade also gains blind-sense, better movement in and out of combat, scent, the save replacers, the ability to ignore spell effects, can manipulate initiative scores of those around him, ignore hardness, and actually has some points for skills.

Blind-sense: I'll grant that is hard for a Fighter
Better movement: Flight in and out of combat
Scent: Fair point (Although see Half Minotaur)
Save Replacers: Um, how does this affect Tiers? Tiers are about versatility and competence.
Iron Heart Surge: It is true that IHS costs Ftrs 2 feats and cannot be used as often as Warblade.
White Raven Tactics: So 1 swift action to grant a turn (WRT) vs 1 swift action to deny a turn (Fighter).
Mountain Hammer: 1 fighter feat can get the same use out of Mountain Hammer
Skills: See full Bluff and Intimidate above.

When the qualitative difference between Warblade and Fighter is a couple items out of 20, you really need to question whether specific fighter builds might be able to climb to tier 3.

[Seerow]

Blind-sense: I'll grant that is hard for a Fighter


Fighter can get Blind Sense the same way he gets Mountain Hammer (just requires level 18). For a lower level solution, Combat Awareness grants Blindsense, but only to 5ft, so more limited.

[Dienekes]

Blind-sense: I'll grant that is hard for a Fighter
Better movement: Flight in and out of combat
Scent: Fair point (Although see Half Minotaur)
Save Replacers: Um, how does this affect Tiers? Tiers are about versatility and competence.
Iron Heart Surge: It is true that IHS costs Ftrs 2 feats and cannot be used as often as Warblade.
White Raven Tactics: So 1 swift action to grant a turn (WRT) vs 1 swift action to deny a turn (Fighter).
Mountain Hammer: 1 fighter feat can get the same use out of Mountain Hammer
Skills: See full Bluff and Intimidate above.


Well first off, are we talking just about your build or about the fighter class. Because your build doesn't use IHS, Mountain Hammer, save replacers, or anything you could theoretically get for a feat.

If we're talking just about the fighter class, you don't get the benefits of Raptorian or Half-Minotaur anyway since they have nothing to do with your Fighter levels.

Also all abilities effect tiers a little. If you can get shot down by one spell targeting your Will Save you aren't very competent, that effects your score.


When the qualitative difference between Warblade and Fighter is a couple items out of 20, you really need to question whether specific fighter builds might be able to climb to tier 3.

I don't actually, with enough optimization shenanagans you can get most things to climb up a tier or two. But it's generally pretty hard, and requires juggling a lot of sources to do what another class could have done much easier. I'm just not 100% sure if your build breaks into Tier 3 or not, honestly I'm inclined to say highish tier 4.

[OldTrees1]

Well first off, are we talking just about your build or about the fighter class. Because your build doesn't use IHS, Mountain Hammer, save replacers, or anything you could theoretically get for a feat.

If we're talking just about the fighter class, you don't get the benefits of Raptorian or Half-Minotaur anyway since they have nothing to do with your Fighter levels.

Also all abilities effect tiers a little. If you can get shot down by one spell targeting your Will Save you aren't very competent, that effects your score.



I don't actually, with enough optimization shenanagans you can get most things to climb up a tier or two. But it's generally pretty hard, and requires juggling a lot of sources to do what another class could have done much easier. I'm just not 100% sure if your build breaks into Tier 3 or not, honestly I'm inclined to say highish tier 4.

I was talking about the ceiling for Fighters in general. (The straight fighter linked above has not used all its feats. However it could easily fit in the 3 feats I mentioned in response to your post)

Will Save can be well in hand without save replacers. (So save replacers still don't affect tier)


Capable of doing one thing quite well, while still being useful when that one thing is inappropriate

Yeah I still don't see how there can be any question about it. The build does combat and social interactions quite well and is still useful in mobility situations or dungeons.

In general, I think we need to reevaluate the Fighter class in light of their feat options (including HD feats) and the increased number of quality feats as material was produced. Too often we have dimissed Fighter because feats are "boring class features".

[Philistine]

Yeah I still don't see how there can be any question about it. The build does combat and social interactions quite well and is still useful in mobility situations or dungeons.

In general, I think we need to reevaluate the Fighter class in light of their feat options (including HD feats) and the increased number of quality feats as material was produced. Too often we have dimissed Fighter because feats are "boring class features".

"The Build" isn't really a Fighter build, though, is it? Almost everything worthwhile about it comes either from the race choice or from the eleven levels of dips into six other classes.

Now I'm not anywhere near saying that build is "broken" or "cheesy" - just that if you want to talk about how awesome Fighter levels are and how their Feats can make them T3, you might want to choose an example that actually uses Fighter levels to do it. To add insult to injury, "The Build" as presented would probably work even better as a Half-Minotaur Raptoran Warblade 20.

[Hurnn]

"The Build" isn't really a Fighter build, though, is it? Almost everything worthwhile about it comes either from the race choice or from the eleven levels of dips into six other classes.

Now I'm not anywhere near saying that build is "broken" or "cheesy" - just that if you want to talk about how awesome Fighter levels are and how their Feats can make them T3, you might want to choose an example that actually uses Fighter levels to do it. To add insult to injury, "The Build" as presented would probably work even better as a Half-Minotaur Raptoran Warblade 20.

You forgot the bit where he also had to use an optional rule from UA to buy off his LA just to get that far...... Oh yeah and he takes z soldier at 2 but you actually get it at 3 then never takes it again at 5 and 9 for some unknown reason

[OldTrees1]

"The Build" isn't really a Fighter build, though, is it? Almost everything worthwhile about it comes either from the race choice or from the eleven levels of dips into six other classes.

Now I'm not anywhere near saying that build is "broken" or "cheesy" - just that if you want to talk about how awesome Fighter levels are and how their Feats can make them T3, you might want to choose an example that actually uses Fighter levels to do it. To add insult to injury, "The Build" as presented would probably work even better as a Half-Minotaur Raptoran Warblade 20.


You forgot the bit where he also had to use an optional rule from UA to buy off his LA just to get that far...... Oh yeah and he takes z soldier at 2 but you actually get it at 3 then never takes it again at 5 and 9 for some unknown reason

1) The build in question is Fighter 20. The build in the spoiler was the improved version that used dips. The improved version is not being used as support for fighter (despite needing 9 levels of fighter).
2) I mark all the alterations to a class at the first instance of the class rather than have the build line get really long. I only used Z soldier at 3rd, 5th, and 9th level fighter.
3) Neither the build in the spoiler nor the build that is in question would have worked at all as a warblade. Warblade does not get swift action demoralize and Warblade relies on Strikes like a crutch so it would be antisynergistic with the build premise.

Are those 3 points clear?

@Philistine
You might want to look at the feats. Almost everything worthwhile comes from feats not class features. The ability to target "Will" to shut someone down as a swift action? 1 Ftr class feature and 1 feat. Mastery of ZoC? Large size and 7 feats. Ability to target Fort to shut someone down? 1 Ftr class feature and 5 feats.

[ryu]

1) The build in question is Fighter 20. The build in the spoiler was the improved version that used dips. The improved version is not being used as support for fighter (despite needing 9 levels of fighter).
2) I mark all the alterations to a class at every level of the class rather than have the build line get really long. I only used Z soldier at 3rd, 5th, and 9th level fighter.
3) Neither the build in the spoiler nor the build that is in question would have worked at all as a warblade. Warblade does not get swift action demoralize and Warblade relies on Strikes like a crutch so it would be antisynergistic with the build premise.

Are those 3 points clear?

@Philistine
You might want to look at the feats. Almost everything worthwhile comes from feats not class features. The ability to shut someone down as a swift action? 1 Ftr class feature and 1 feat. Mastery of ZoC? Large size and 7 feats.

No class features are better on a basic level. You want something to shut someone down quickly and with little effort? Spellcasting? You know where you get spellcasting? Class features. Similarly just compare all the maneuvers warblades and other initiators get as class features when they level up to analogous feats designed to poorly mimic them. Class features>feats every day.

[OldTrees1]

No class features are better on a basic level. You want something to shut someone down quickly and with little effort? Spellcasting? You know where you get spellcasting? Class features. Similarly just compare all the maneuvers warblades and other initiators get as class features when they level up to analogous feats designed to poorly mimic them. Class features>feats every day.

You seem to have wandered off into a cornfield to find a strawman.
1) I said that we should not overlook the value that feats give to fighters when we evaluate fighters.
2) Someone mistook which build was in question and erroneously thought the class features of the build were the major contributors to the build.
3) I corrected that mistake by pointing out that both the build in question and the build in the spoiler benefit much more from their feats than from their class features.
4) Your post

Now I find it surprising that you had to reach for spellcasting in order to find something to trump the Imperious Command feat.
Is there a swift action maneuver that can be used every turn to remove the most dangerous enemy? No? Strange.
Similarly is there a move action + strike combo that can make several enemies lose their turns every turn? No? The closest would be one foe? Strange.
I understand the maneuver obsession and ToB classes were a good Tier 3 addition to D&D. However it is unreasonable to allow this obsession to blind us to the options the other classes have.

[ryu]

Actually I don't think you're grasping what I'm arguing about. I wasn't talking about your build. I literally only cared about the statement that feats>class features. Class features are casting, maneuvers, various forms of limited use abilities WotC thought were balanced in their greater power, psionics, the entirety of factotum, and even good old fashioned soul melding, and binding. The most powerful things in the entirety of the system are class features. Most everything that hits tier 3 and above involves pure quality of class features.

[OldTrees1]

Actually I don't think you're grasping what I'm arguing about. I wasn't talking about your build. I literally only cared about the statement that feats>class features.

You repeated the strawman after I gave you the context you were removing. This time I underlined the strawman.

I said that "we should not overlook the contribution feats have" and "feats contribute more than class features for these two builds".

[ryu]

1) The build in question is Fighter 20. The build in the spoiler was the improved version that used dips. The improved version is not being used as support for fighter (despite needing 9 levels of fighter).
2) I mark all the alterations to a class at the first instance of the class rather than have the build line get really long. I only used Z soldier at 3rd, 5th, and 9th level fighter.
3) Neither the build in the spoiler nor the build that is in question would have worked at all as a warblade. Warblade does not get swift action demoralize and Warblade relies on Strikes like a crutch so it would be antisynergistic with the build premise.

Are those 3 points clear?

@Philistine
You might want to look at the feats. Almost everything worthwhile comes from feats not class features. The ability to target "Will" to shut someone down as a swift action? 1 Ftr class feature and 1 feat. Mastery of ZoC? Large size and 7 feats. Ability to target Fort to shut someone down? 1 Ftr class feature and 5 feats.

Bolded for emphasis. Did you or did you not post exactly that? It's not a strawman when it's literally something the other person provably said. Now you can say that that's not how you meant it, that it was ill-phrased, or that you were making a point purely comparing mundane class features to feats. I'd even accept any of those gladly. The fact of the matter though is that you did compare class features as a whole unfavorably to feats.

[Drachasor]

You seem to have wandered off into a cornfield to find a strawman.
1) I said that we should not overlook the value that feats give to fighters when we evaluate fighters.
2) Someone mistook which build was in question and erroneously thought the class features of the build were the major contributors to the build.
3) I corrected that mistake by pointing out that both the build in question and the build in the spoiler benefit much more from their feats than from their class features.
4) Your post

Now I find it surprising that you had to reach for spellcasting in order to find something to trump the Imperious Command feat.
Is there a swift action maneuver that can be used every turn to remove the most dangerous enemy? No? Strange.
Similarly is there a move action + strike combo that can make several enemies lose their turns every turn? No? The closest would be one foe? Strange.
I understand the maneuver obsession and ToB classes were a good Tier 3 addition to D&D. However it is unreasonable to allow this obsession to blind us to the options the other classes have.

From what I saw that combo is something that you don't need a Fighter to have. Further, it isn't hard for higher level enemies to be able to ignore/avoid it. Further, a Warblade 20 is going to be a lot more flexible and be able to t tackle a wider variety of foes than that fighter. Further, why did you post a "fighter" that was full of non-Fighter dips when you could just post the actual Fighter? If you're defending the Fighter, then actually defend it, not Mr. Dipsalot.

Also, the Warblade 20 would be able to do a lot more damage.

So overall, I'm not very impressed by this "defense". The problem with feats is that they are very inflexible. You'd know what is better than all the Fighter feats put together? A Druid's Wildshape. There are a lot of other class abilities that will beat any 2 or 3 feats that aren't spellcasting. I just thought I'd name one that beats all of the Fighter's feats.

Sure some class features suck. However, most features are better than fighter feats. It's not that feats have no value either...it's just that they have less value.

[OldTrees1]

Bolded for emphasis. Did you or did you not post exactly that? It's not a strawman when it's literally something the other person provably said. Now you can say that that's not how you meant it, that it was ill-phrased, or that you were making a point purely comparing mundane class features to feats. I'd even accept any of those gladly. The fact of the matter though is that you did compare class features as a whole unfavorably to feats.

I was parroting the language of the person I was responding to. They used that language to claim that the build was not a good example of feat uses since the class features of the build were doing the heavy lifting. I corrected them by parroting their language and then giving specific examples.

So yes it was a strawman. Now that I have repeated the context for the 3rd time, would you please do me the courtesy of reading the context?

[Vogonjeltz]

And I'm still not sure what that means. What is the fighter more flexible than? Even a commoner can scrounge together some flexibility, as there are few problems that can't be solved by a combination of infinite chickens and handle animal. The fighter is flexible compared to the warrior. They're inflexible compared to the wizard. They're flexible compared to the monk (usually). They're inflexible compared to the druid. Flexibility, like balance, is relative.

Short answer: fighters are more feat flexible than every class that has fewer feats.

[ryu]

Ah so it is an issue of phrasing wherein then. You weren't saying feats>class features. You were saying feats>fighter class features specifically with an actual pure fighter build as reference. Why do I say issue of phrasing? Even your direct opponent wasn't even aware you'd posted a straight fighter.

[Hurnn]

Well since we are so obviously wrong, even though you haven't provided a pure fighter build with all those things, perhaps now is the time to unveil your masterpiece; preferably with level progressions. I for one however have doubts.....

[eggynack]

Short answer: fighters are more feat flexible than every class that has fewer feats.
That honestly might mean even less, given how little "feat flexibility" means with reference to overall flexibility. I could just as easily say that paladins are more smite evil flexible than every class that has less smite evil, and I'd be saying an accurate thing. I'm also not even sure if fighters are more feat flexible than classes with fewer feats, because fighter feats are usually in long chains, and they don't always do all that much. Returning to the fighter versus druid comparison, something like exalted wild shape probably offers more power than any three or four combined fighter feats that you could name. Ultimately, I just don't see anything there in the OP that would tell me to reassess where I have the fighter in my mind, which is somewhere on the cusp of tiers four and five.

[Drachasor]

Hmm, now a Fighter that could change all of his Fighter Bonus Feats as a swift action might get to T3.

Hella hard to play though.

[OldTrees1]

From what I saw that combo is something that you don't need a Fighter to have. Further, it isn't hard for higher level enemies to be able to ignore/avoid it. Further, a Warblade 20 is going to be a lot more flexible and be able to t tackle a wider variety of foes than that fighter. Further, why did you post a "fighter" that was full of non-Fighter dips when you could just post the actual Fighter? If you're defending the Fighter, then actually defend it, not Mr. Dipsalot.

Also, the Warblade 20 would be able to do a lot more damage.

So overall, I'm not very impressed by this "defense". The problem with feats is that they are very inflexible. You'd know what is better than all the Fighter feats put together? A Druid's Wildshape. There are a lot of other class abilities that will beat any 2 or 3 feats that aren't spellcasting. I just thought I'd name one that beats all of the Fighter's feats.

Sure some class features suck. However, most features are better than fighter feats. It's not that feats have no value either...it's just that they have less value.

1) Being able to neutralize opponents with minimal actions and targeting various defenses is not needed but it does help melee contribute at higher levels. Daze and Cower remain relevant against most foes even at higher levels. If they can get past that then they have permission to have a turn.
2) Would Warblade be more flexible? Not by much. You have to find something immune to both Cower and Daze while being as strong as a Titan. Then the Warblade would be able to use ability damage while the Fighter would not. In other combats the Fighter can contribute quite well.
3) Why did I post the version with dips in addition to the summary of the straight fighter?
Someone asked for the straight fighter build. I did not have it saved. So I explained that I had a modified version save, posted a summary of the straight fighter and spoilered the modified version.
4) "Also, the Warblade 20 would be able to do a lot more damage."
So? Seriously why would this matter (assuming it was true)? Only boring melee is ranked by DPS. I thought the point of ToB was to escape boring melee.
5) Wildshape is better than all the fighter feats. Hmm interesting claim. I wonder if it can extend to other combat feats in the list above? Although comparing it to wildshape would put it solidly in Tier 3.

[OldTrees1]

Ah so it is an issue of phrasing wherein then. You weren't saying feats>class features. You were saying feats>fighter class features specifically with an actual pure fighter build as reference. Why do I say issue of phrasing? Even your direct opponent wasn't even aware you'd posted a straight fighter.
Thanks. I am surprised that people seemed to miss it. I will quote myself.


Well since we are so obviously wrong, even though you haven't provided a pure fighter build with all those things, perhaps now is the time to unveil your masterpiece; preferably with level progressions. I for one however have doubts.....

Here is the 2nd post I made in this thread. I am sorry for the confusion caused from its camouflage.


I don't have the straight classed fighter build saved since I made a better version with dips (Barbarian for Pounce, Scarlet Corsair for AoE Cower lockdown) but here is a summary of the straight fighter:

Build:
Half Minotaur(LA Buy Off) Raptorian Fighter(Exoticist, Zhentarim Soldier) 20
Some of the Feats:
Combat Expertise, Combat Reflexes, Dire Flail Smash, Imperious Command, Improved Bullrush, Improved Feint, Improved Sunder, Improved Trip, Knockback, Knock-down, Power Attack, Robilar's Gambit, Skill Focus(Intimidate), Standstill, Track, Two Weapon Fighting, Weapon Focus, Martial Study (Mountain Hammer), Martial Study (Steel Wind), Martial Study (Iron Heart Surge)

Zone of Control comes online at 1st level. (Combat Reflexes + Standstill)
The skills (Bluff and Intimidate) come online at 3rd level.
Flight comes online at 5th-6th level (via race or feats)
Melee Daze Lockdown takes 4 feats so it can come online at 6th level with a feat to spare (not counting feats used on ZoC)
Cower Lockdown takes 1 feat (Imperious Command) but really comes into its own when Ftr 9 gives it as a swift action.


Hmm, now a Fighter that could change all of his Fighter Bonus Feats as a swift action might get to T3.

Hella hard to play though.

Most of the good feats for Fighters are not Fighter bonus feats despite having many as prerequisites. I would suggest expanding the Bonus feat list as part of this suggestion.

[Drachasor]

1) Being able to neutralize opponents with minimal actions and targeting various defenses is not needed but it does help melee contribute at higher levels. Daze and Cower remain relevant against most foes even at higher levels. If they can get past that then they have permission to have a turn.
2) Would Warblade be more flexible? Not by much. You have to find something immune to both Cower and Daze while being as strong as a Titan. Then the Warblade would be able to use ability damage while the Fighter would not. In other combats the Fighter can contribute quite well.
3) Why did I post the version with dips in addition to the summary of the straight fighter?
Someone asked for the straight fighter build. I did not have it saved. So I explained that I had a modified version save, posted a summary of the straight fighter and spoilered the modified version.
4) "Also, the Warblade 20 would be able to do a lot more damage."
So? Seriously why would this matter (assuming it was true)? Only boring melee is ranked by DPS. I thought the point of ToB was to escape boring melee.
5) Wildshape is better than all the fighter feats. Hmm interesting claim. I wonder if it can extend to other combat feats in the list above? Although comparing it to wildshape would put it solidly in Tier 3.

1) Cower is barely relevant, considering it is a Fear Effect. Daze is more useful though as there are fewer protections. That has more to do with Dire Flail Strike than anything else though, to be fair.
2) The Warblade can easily get Dire Flail Smash, which, imho, is the main thing that build has going for it. It can also ignore DR, is more mobile, can have a much easier time getting Dire Flail Smash to work (more attacks if it is built right), has more detection abilities, better skills, etc. Overall it can deal with a lot more types of problems.
3) k.
4) You know who can never take actions? The dead. Unless they are undead, then you just D-E-D them again. A problem with this build is it is still going to have a hard time locking down multiple enemies at once. At that point just killing them is generally better. That's one reason why you see damage-focused builds.
5) Comparing it FAVORABLY to Wilshape puts it in T3. Saying Wildshape is much, much better is saying "there's no way it could exceed T3". And to be more precise, this build isn't T3.


Most of the good feats for Fighters are not Fighter bonus feats despite having many as prerequisites. I would suggest expanding the Bonus feat list as part of this suggestion.

If I were to do this in a game (Fighters switching out all of their Feats as a swift action), then I'd probably do it like this:

1) Feats Known: Fighters have "Feats Known" like Maneuvers or Spells Known. Each Level they add two Feats Known to to their list. These can be any Feat the Fighter qualifies for. If they later learn a Feat that is one of their Feats known, they may replace that Known Feat for another Feat they qualify for. Every level they may replace one Feat Known with another Feat known they qualify for. Known Feats count as prerequisites for other Known or Readied Feats, but not for normal Feats.

2) Readied Feats:At 1st level and every even level thereafter, the Fighter gains a Readied Feat slot. They may ready any Known Feat into a Readied Feat slot. This may be done as a Swift or Move action. If this replaces a previously readied Feat, then they lose access to that feat.

3) Fighter Stance: At 3rd Level and every Odd Level thereafter, the Fighter gains a Fighter Stance. A Stance is a selection of Feats for all of their Readied Feat Slots. Changing a Stance can be done a Swift or Move action.

4) Mo' Skills Yo: Fighters get 4 skill points per level and some more skills...because why not?

Stances make switching a lot easier. And Known Feats makes it a lot easier to handle too. That way you hopefully won't have to flip through all of the rulebooks.

They'd probably need something like the Warblade's ability to switch Weapon-Specific Feats.

Figuring how to handle feats that let you make a choice (like getting a Martial Maneuver) I am not certain on.

[MirddinEmris]

Build:
Half Minotaur(LA Buy Off) Raptorian Fighter(Exoticist, Zhentarim Soldier) 20
Some of the Feats:
Combat Expertise, Combat Reflexes, Dire Flail Smash, Endurance, Imperious Command, Improved Bullrush, Improved Feint, Improved Sunder, Improved Trip, Knockback, Knock-down, Power Attack, Rapid Shot, Robilar's Gambit, Skill Focus(Intimidate), Staggering Strike, Standstill, Track, Two Weapon Fighting, Weapon Focus

Zone of Control comes online at 1st level. (Combat Reflexes + Standstill)
The skills (Bluff and Intimidate) come online at 3rd level.
Flight comes online at 5th-6th level (via race or feats)
Melee Daze Lockdown takes 4 feats so it can come online at 6th level with a feat to spare (not counting feats used on ZoC)
Cower Lockdown takes 1 feat (Imperious Command) but really comes into its own when Ftr 9 gives it as a swift action.

Well, first of all - you can't take Staggering Strike as it requires you to have sneak attack class ability.

Zone of Control can be easily done by Warblade, who also have class feature and maneuvers (and also feat Stormguard Warrior) with great synergy on AoO style. Eternal Blade PrC also gives a access to Devoted Spirit with Thicket of Blades stance (or he can take it as feats earlier than fighter can).

Flight comes not from Fighter, so in this case he has no upper hand on Warblade.

Warblade has Dazing Strike(Fort, daze) and Disrupting Blow(Will, no specific condition, just unable to do anything this round), and they don't require you to full attack enemy with condition of striking with two ends of weapon (because of this you can't "lock" anyone outside your reach). Really need the ability to pounce on this one. Also thanks, didn't know about this feat (Dire Flail Smash) before.

Intimidation can be done by Warblade also with the expense of 5k gp on armor from the same book as Imperious Command which allows you to demoralize as move action and since warblade doesn't have to rely on full attack to make himself viable, it doesn't ruin action economy for him. And you can demoralize only those who you threaten, which also much worse for Fighter (movement ruins full attacks).

It's not only quantity of options, it's also their qualities and availability that matters. For you build the player needs very high system mastery and access to splatbooks (some of them are 3.0 and setting specific), while Warblade can be better with just Core + ToB and less optimization.

And your character will need 15 Dex, 15 int (13 actually, but half-mino has -2 racial) and 15 Cha just to be ably to take all those feats. What are your Str and Con?) And which PB you are using?)

[Jon_Dahl]

Great OP and lots of quality conversation :) Human single-class fighters are close to my heart. In my D&D 3.5 campaign, we have played 103 sessions, and the ONLY character to rise from the 2nd level to 9th has been a single-class human fighter. No wizard, cleric, druid, sorcerer etc. has been so successful. The second best was a human bard, who rose from 2nd to 7th.

[Perseus]

Great OP and lots of quality conversation :) Human single-class fighters are close to my heart. In my D&D 3.5 campaign, we have played 103 sessions, and the ONLY character to rise from the 2nd level to 9th has been a single-class human fighter. No wizard, cleric, druid, sorcerer etc. has been so successful. The second best was a human bard, who rose from 2nd to 7th.

Yes and because I've seen only the Truenamer and Monk get to level 9 in a long term campaign ... They both must be well made classes that don't need to be changed at all for them to work versus the game.

[rmnimoc]

Yes and because I've seen only the Truenamer and Monk get to level 9 in a long term campaign ... They both must be well made classes that don't need to be changed at all for them to work versus the game.

Major points to the guys who were the teammates of the Truenamer and Monk, they must have been martyring themselves every fight to keep those two alive.

[OldTrees1]

1) Cower is barely relevant, considering it is a Fear Effect. Daze is more useful though as there are fewer protections. That has more to do with Dire Flail Strike than anything else though, to be fair.
2) The Warblade can easily get Dire Flail Smash, which, imho, is the main thing that build has going for it. It can also ignore DR, is more mobile, can have a much easier time getting Dire Flail Smash to work (more attacks if it is built right), has more detection abilities, better skills, etc. Overall it can deal with a lot more types of problems.
3) k.
4) You know who can never take actions? The dead. Unless they are undead, then you just D-E-D them again. A problem with this build is it is still going to have a hard time locking down multiple enemies at once. At that point just killing them is generally better. That's one reason why you see damage-focused builds.
5) Comparing it FAVORABLY to Wilshape puts it in T3. Saying Wildshape is much, much better is saying "there's no way it could exceed T3". And to be more precise, this build isn't T3.

2) Does Warblade have the 3 feats (Knockdown) to spare to double their attacks per full attack after the 5 feats for Dire Flail Smash? Can they keep up the number of attacks multiple turns in a row (to keep them dazed)?

4) The pure fighter build can lockdown several opponents (4 is playing it safe) within 10ft with Dire Flail Smash. While the Warblade can take out a worthy foe in a turn or two with a damage focus, the lockdown focus can lockdown and defeat several without invoking the Rocket Tag metagame.


Well, first of all - you can't take Staggering Strike as it requires you to have sneak attack class ability.

Zone of Control can be easily done by Warblade, who also have class feature and maneuvers (and also feat Stormguard Warrior) with great synergy on AoO style. Eternal Blade PrC also gives a access to Devoted Spirit with Thicket of Blades stance (or he can take it as feats earlier than fighter can).

Flight comes not from Fighter, so in this case he has no upper hand on Warblade.

Warblade has Dazing Strike(Fort, daze) and Disrupting Blow(Will, no specific condition, just unable to do anything this round), and they doesn't require to full attack your enemy with condition of striking with two ends of your weapon (because of this you can't "lock" anyone outside your reach). Really need the ability to pounce on this one. Also thanks, didn't know about this feat (Dire Flail Smash) before.

Intimidation can be done by Warblade also with the expense of 5k gp on armor from the same book as Imperious Command which allows you to demoralize as move action and since warblade doesn't have to rely on full attack to make himself viable, it doesn't ruin action economy for him. And you can demoralize only those who you threaten, which also much worse for Fighter (movement ruins full attacks).

It's not only quantity of options, it's also their qualities and availability that matters. For you build the player needs very high system mastery and access to splatbooks (some of them are 3.0 and setting specific), while Warblade can be better with just Core + ToB and less optimization.

And your character will need 15 Dex, 15 int (13 actually, but hlfy-mino has -2 racial) and 15 Cha just to be ably to take all those feats. What are your Str and Con?)

Staggering Strike was a copy paste typo. Thanks for catching it.

Zone of Control is the more advanced AoO combat style. Warblades can do it too but it is feat intensive to upgrade from AoO to ZoC.

Flight was included since Fighter's class features can be used to pick up feats that a Warblade would have to spend HD feats on (Ex: Power Attack, Combat Reflexes). This means the Fighter's class feature opened up some HD feats they can use on feats like Dragon Wings(Raptorian used instead in the build). It is a stretch. (Also I mean to reach not surpass)

Warblade has those two lockdown manuevers. Dire Flail Smash can be done on a standard attack/AoO when combined with the Knock-down feat chain.

Good point about the armor. I had forgotten it existed.

Agreed, system mastery and material access is required to fully utilize the fighter class features. This is why I think people dismiss the fighter as if the options did not exist rather than dismiss the fighter because it is hard to make.

Abilities:
+4 Str, +2 Con, -2 Int
32 point buy
S 18, D 15, Co 10, I 13, W 10, Ch 15
[This is one reason I went Wolf Totem Barbarian in the dip build. No such luck for the straight Ftr]

[Juntao112]

Well since we are so obviously wrong, even though you haven't provided a pure fighter build with all those things, perhaps now is the time to unveil your masterpiece; preferably with level progressions. I for one however have doubts.....

I'm hoping for a cage match.

[OldTrees1]

I'm hoping for a cage match.

I don't want to get into a cage match with Hurnn. I am partially at fault for the relevant post of mine being missed. And Hurnn could easily best me in a cage since I don't lift. :smallbiggrin:

[Drachasor]

2) Does Warblade have the 3 feats (Knockdown) to spare to double their attacks per full attack after the 5 feats for Dire Flail Smash? Can they keep up the number of attacks multiple turns in a row (to keep them dazed)?

4) The pure fighter build can lockdown several opponents (4 is playing it safe) within 10ft with Dire Flail Smash. While the Warblade can take out a worthy foe in a turn or two with a damage focus, the lockdown focus can lockdown and defeat several without invoking the Rocket Tag metagame.

The Warblade would probably go at it a slightly different way as others have indicated. They'd go with multiple maneuvers that do lockdowns and more damage. Raging Mongoose and the like.

And the Fighter only gets double attacks on foes that can be tripped. So that only lasts for one round. It's unlikely the enemies will stand up after that -- they'll just take the -4 to hit and AC.

Hmm, is Knockdown in a 3.5 book or just Sword and Fist? I'm not sure your build is 3.5 compliant.

[OldTrees1]

The Warblade would probably go at it a slightly different way as others have indicated. They'd go with multiple maneuvers that do lockdowns and more damage. Raging Mongoose and the like.

And the Fighter only gets double attacks on foes that can be tripped. So that only lasts for one round. It's unlikely the enemies will stand up after that -- they'll just take the -4 to hit and AC.

Hmm, is Knockdown in a 3.5 book or just Sword and Fist? I'm not sure your build is 3.5 compliant.

Fair points. Is is just me or are the responses sounding more and more like "warblade will do it differently" instead of "warblade does it better"?

Side question: How much versatility do warblades lose when they learn multiple similar manuevers per style in order to be able to use a style for more than 1 turn before refreshing? (Just curiosity, not making an argument)

Knock-down is in the SRD and Deities and Demigods. Besides 3.5 imports 3.0 as you well know.

[MirddinEmris]

Staggering Strike was a copy paste typo. Thanks for catching it.

Zone of Control is the more advanced AoO combat style. Warblades can do it too but it is feat intensive to upgrade from AoO to ZoC.

Flight was included since Fighter's class features can be used to pick up feats that a Warblade would have to spend HD feats on (Ex: Power Attack, Combat Reflexes). This means the Fighter's class feature opened up some HD feats they can use on feats like Dragon Wings(Raptorian used instead in the build). It is a stretch. (Also I mean to reach not surpass)

Warblade has those two lockdown manuevers. Dire Flail Smash can be done on a standard attack/AoO when combined with the Knock-down feat chain.

Good point about the armor. I had forgotten it existed.

Agreed, system mastery and material access is required to fully utilize the fighter class features. This is why I think people dismiss the fighter as if the options did not exist rather than dismiss the fighter because it is hard to make.

Abilities:
+4 Str, +2 Con, -2 Int
32 point buy
S 18, D 15, Co 10, I 13, W 10, Ch 15
[This is one reason I went Wolf Totem Barbarian in the dip build. No such luck for the straight Ftr]

Your fighter has only two feats spent on Zone of Control (you said that it comes online on having two feats), it's not feat intensive (Combat Reflexes is a Bonus Feat for Warblade too). And Warblade is better at his because he has maneuvers, class features and feats to augment this style, and fighter will probably will not have access to them. Also warblade has an Int synergy, so his Int (for Combat Expertise) is not a tzx, but investment.

Warblade in no way has only two lockdown maneuvers. It's only two maneuvers from the top of my mind that work similarly to Dire Flail Smash. Just to show that Warblade can do this without spending 4 feats and in a different ways (can target two saves and enemy can be immune to Daze, bot not to Disrupting blow, since it doesn't bestow a specific condition). Also with Knock-down chain it'll be 7 feats (not counting Combat Reflexes and Standstill) to pull of in a standard action and you still need to successfully attack twice and win a trip check which is worse that just to attack once. It's just too big of an investment for a two tricks (AoO lockdown and Daze lockdown), which Warblade can pull of more effectively and with less investment. And this trick are good for low-mid levels, but starting and late mid levels (or earlier depending on DM) they will start to lose effectiveness, while Warblade can change his low-level maneuvers for a higher level one.

With this level of system mastery you will look at something like Barblade or Eternal Blade, when your fighter still be T4.

Con 10 for a melee warrior is really bad, even Elven Warblade will be tougher than your Fighter)) And you couldn't even pull it off with something like 25 PB

[Drachasor]

Fair points. Is is just me or are the responses sounding more and more like "warblade will do it differently" instead of "warblade does it better"?

Side question: How much versatility do warblades lose when they learn multiple similar manuevers per style in order to be able to use a style for more than 1 turn before refreshing? (Just curiosity, not making an argument)

Knock-down is in the SRD and Deities and Demigods. Besides 3.5 imports 3.0 as you well know.

They don't lose that much. You really don't need to be doing that kind of a lock-down for more than a round or two. That leaves plenty of room for other things, especially since this is a high-end ability.

Also, getting extra attacks if you are using Two-Weapons as a Warblade can almost always be used to make a ton of extra attacks on one person. So this is actually very flexible -- they can get a boost so they get 2 extra attacks per weapon at their highest BAB and they don't need to target different people.

I wouldn't say they do the lockdown better per se. However, they can make it so they get AoO even if the enemy Withdrawals or takes 5-foot steps, so that's rather significant (possible if tumbling is used, but that's up to the DM - imho RAW doesn't say that but that's up others). So they control their zone a lot better.

Which is the main way Warblades do "it" better. They can be great at locking down, and then great at other things too. The Fighter basically just gets to pick one or maybe two types of melee combat to be good at and that's it.

As best I read it, only deities can take Knock-down, but I admit it is a bit unclear.


Deities can obtain the feats described here, in addition to any standard feats.

That's what it says at the top of the section anyhow. But the prerequisites don't seem to indicate that. So it is odd.

[OldTrees1]

Your fighter has only two feats spent on Zone of Control (you said that it comes online on having two feats), it's not feat intensive (Combat Reflexes is a Bonus Feat for Warblade too). And Warblade is better at his because he has maneuvers, class features and feats to augment this style, and fighter will probably will not have access to them. Also warblade has an Int synergy, so his Int (for Combat Expertise) is not a tzx, but investment.

Warblade in no way has only two lockdown maneuvers. It's only two maneuvers from the top of my mind that work similarly to Dire Flail Smash. Just to show that Warblade can do this without spending 4 feats and in a different ways (can target two saves and enemy can be immune to Daze, bot not to Disrupting blow, since it doesn't bestow a specific condition). Also with Knock-down chain it'll be 7 feats (not counting Combat Reflexes and Standstill) to pull of in a standard action and you still need to successfully attack twice and win a trip check which is worse that just to attack once. It's just too big of an investment for a two tricks (AoO lockdown and Daze lockdown), which Warblade can pull of more effectively and with less investment. And this trick are good for low-mid levels, but starting and late mid levels (or earlier depending on DM) they will start to lose effectiveness, while Warblade can change his low-level maneuvers for a higher level one.

With this level of system mastery you will look at something like Barblade or Eternal Blade, when your fighter still be T4.

Con 10 for a melee warrior is really bad, even Elven Warblade will be tougher than your Fighter)) And you couldn't even pull it off with something like 25 PB

ZoC comes online with 2 feats. That does not mean that it stops there. Although you did identify 1 of the 2 additional feat chains (the other is Knockback). Manuevers cannot be used as AoOs and I thought Thicket of Blades was a Crusader only stance so I am confused on how Warblade's class features help ZoC.

Good point about lockdown.
Although that is either a lot of manuevers known to slot into lockdown or a lot of refreshing.
Also Daze Immunity is really rare. I don't think it would lose its edge as you leveled.


They don't lose that much. You really don't need to be doing that kind of a lock-down for more than a round or two. That leaves plenty of room for other things, especially since this is a high-end ability.

Also, getting extra attacks if you are using Two-Weapons as a Warblade can almost always be used to make a ton of extra attacks on one person. So this is actually very flexible -- they can get a boost so they get 2 extra attacks per weapon at their highest BAB and they don't need to target different people.

I wouldn't say they do the lockdown better per se. However, they can make it so they get AoO even if the enemy Withdrawals or takes 5-foot steps, so that's rather significant (possible if tumbling is used, but that's up to the DM - imho RAW doesn't say that but that's up others). So they control their zone a lot better.

Which is the main way Warblades do "it" better. They can be great at locking down, and then great at other things too. The Fighter basically just gets to pick one or maybe two types of melee combat to be good at and that's it.

As best I read it, only deities can take Knock-down, but I admit it is a bit unclear.



That's what it says at the top of the section anyhow. But the prerequisites don't seem to indicate that. So it is odd.

I thought Thicket of Blades was Crusader only.

The feat section in Deities and Demigods is like the feat section in the Monster Manual except the feats are all reprints. Since Knock-down was available to PCs, and since the latest printing of a feat matters, Knock-down is a 3.5 feat.

[Drachasor]

I thought Thicket of Blades was Crusader only.

The feat section in Deities and Demigods is like the feat section in the Monster Manual except the feats are all reprints. Since Knock-down was available to PCs, and since the latest printing of a feat matters, Knock-down is a 3.5 feat.

I don't really remember the 3.0->3.5 rules for feats. I had thought generally 3.0 stuff wasn't ok though. With Monster Feats it doesn't imply only monsters can take them. So there's that oddity. I just thought it was worth mentioning as an oddity.

Thicket is Crusader only, but that just means you either spend two feats to get it or you take 1 level of Crusader after level 8. The dip is pretty cheap.

[OldTrees1]

I don't really remember the 3.0->3.5 rules for feats. I had thought generally 3.0 stuff wasn't ok though. With Monster Feats it doesn't imply only monsters can take them. So there's that oddity. I just thought it was worth mentioning as an oddity.

Thicket is Crusader only, but that just means you either spend two feats to get it or you take 1 level of Crusader after level 8. The dip is pretty cheap.

Just like Fighter can. Although I never found Thicket to be that useful. Knockback, Improved Trip and Standstill seems to be more secure.

[MirddinEmris]

ZoC comes online with 2 feats. That does not mean that it stops there. Although you did identify 1 of the 2 additional feat chains (the other is Knockback). Manuevers cannot be used as AoOs and I thought Thicket of Blades was a Crusader only stance so I am confused on how Warblade's class features help ZoC.

Good point about lockdown.
Although that is either a lot of manuevers known to slot into lockdown or a lot of refreshing.
Also Daze Immunity is really rare. I don't think it would lose its edge as you leveled.

Class feature like having Int in attack and damage for AoO. Benefits of stances and counters can be used out of turn. You can take Thicket of Blades by insvesting feats (earlier than fighter) or taking Eternal Blade PrC (gives you access to Devoted Spirit).

Warblade spent 2 maneuvers of 13 total to do what Fighter spent 4 feats (of total 11) for and do it better and in more versatile way (standard vs full-round, one successful attack vs two, can target different saves). And he can change it for something even better as he levels up. Warblade can refresh his maneuvers by spending swift action following by attack (standard or full), you know, the same thing your fighter does every round.

And dealing more damage definetely counts. If you can't do this, you can't so your job as primary melee.

Warblade has better defenses, like being able to use attack roll instead of AC, ot skill roll instead of save (without auto-failure), or just having Uncanny Dodge to screw with sneak attack dealers. And it's really counts, because Charmed or Dominated Fighter will be useless.

[MirddinEmris]

Just like Fighter can. Although I never found Thicket to be that useful. Knockback, Improved Trip and Standstill seems to be more secure.

Much later than Warblade. And your build doesn't really have space for it, even with two flaws))

[Drachasor]

Just like Fighter can. Although I never found Thicket to be that useful. Knockback, Improved Trip and Standstill seems to be more secure.

A Warblade gets to add his Int to AoO attacks and damage, so they are pretty much certain hits (though AoO are already good at high levels). If you are tripping then that is as good as Standstill.

It might not be that useful if you invest 5+ feats into the same sort of thing. Outside of that it is pretty darn useful. And they actually take damage (unlike with Standstill).

The Warblade here is going to be doing a LOT more damage and have a pretty similar level of control. And if he needs to do something else he can do that too. Overall there's a lot less investment.

Also, you can combine it with Defensive Sweep (http://dndtools.eu/feats/players-handbook-ii--80/defensive-sweep--557/)to guarantee AoO every round.

To cut down on feats you might drop the knockdown feat and just use Improved Trip by itself as a Warblade. Again, overall very similar effect, but more flexible and a lot more damage.

I am sure other people on here have more experience with this than me, however.

[Togo]

"The primary purpose of a dinner party is for the host and guests to have fun. This is accomplished through cooperative effort between the host and all of the guests in the dinner party".

This is a completely true statement. It's also a way to sweep criticism under the rug. Sure, the food was all either burnt or undercooked, and the spices used never fit the dish and are in poorly fitting combinations, but the host and guests can still have fun around the food. It's obviously ridiculous in this context; I don't see how the quality of a game or the quality of a mechanical part in a game is somehow different.

Maybe the mechanical parts of the game aren't a good determinant of quality? Maybe a viable game is possible with a systemically weaker character? Maybe that's even the point of the OP - that a fighter is a perfectly viable class, and that it doesn't deserve the scorn thrown at it, even though it's perfectly possible to savage it in a purely mechanical analysis?




My intent with my post was just to give the name for what was going on in the discussion (of a fighter and warblade RPed the same, the fighter is better RPed because it is a weaker class), which is a perfect example of the stormwind fallacy. warblade is higher tier, so necessarily, it would be RPed worse.

That's cool. My intent was to seperate the name from what you thought was going on.


if the fallacy dictates "as optimization levels rise, the quality of RP necessarily diminishes," then that means that they're inversely proportional (as one goes up, the other goes down...

Sure, but the reverse is not true. Even if there is no necessary connection between the two, they can still be inversely proportional.


a character is or isn't mechanically strong. this has no bearing on whether they're roleplayed well, they're two different sets of skills and a person can be at any point on the continuum on either one. being good at one doesn't make you worse at the other.

And that's the bit I wanted to separate from the Stormwind fallacy. The stormwind, as most of these message board fallacies, get popular because they encapsulate a point that frustrates people. As such they're generally used informally, just as you did. Fair enough.

However, Stormwind doesn't work as an informal fallacy. While it's true to say that the idea that roleplaying must be inverse to build optimisation is fallacious, it's not true to say the same of the idea that roleplaying is often inverse to build optimisation. There are lots of ways this could be sucessfully argued, and even situations where it might be seen as trivially true (you have 5 mins to create an entire character, including build and background. Time spent on build can't be spent on background). You may still decide it's still untrue in general, but it's in no way fallacious reasoning.


so you're accusing me of... the fallacy fallacy?

could you clarify whether your last statement is saying you agree with the stormwind fallacy or disagree with it? I don't want to misrepresent you.

I'm saying that Stormwind in it's pure form is trivial - it's true, but not terribly interesting. And in it's informal form it is fallacious.

It was a highly technical point, and in retrospect a bit of a derail. For that I feel I should apologise. I have a lot of sympathy with what you're actually saying.

[Morty]

The problem with feats is that they're a sharply limited resource. If you spend a few feats to be able to pull off a trick, it might cost you half of your total feat count, even as a fighter, unless you play on level 20 (and if you're a level 20 full fighter, you've got other problems). That's why they can't be really compared to spells or maneuvers. And if you're playing without many splatbooks, your fighter is going to run out of good things to take even before reaching level 20.

[Perseus]

Major points to the guys who were the teammates of the Truenamer and Monk, they must have been martyring themselves every fight to keep those two alive.

They got +100% more XP than the rest of us. We were very low level and yet we were the only ones actually contributing most of the time. The two killed off their mildly optimized characters and said the extra XP wasn't worth it.

[Fortinbro]

Here is the feat progression I've planned for my corpse-creature (base human) fighter Elisha Kryll. I didn't build her as a mage-slayer although I typically do include that tree.

*Death's blessing is from Tome of Horrors books. It lets you use CHA instead of CON for HP.

*Behead is from a D20 Vlad the Impaler book. Basically, when you confirm a crit with a slashing weapon you roll to confirm again and if you do they're decapitated.

1- Death's Blessing*, Improved Initiative, Power Attack
2- Cleave
3- Improved Sunder
4- Great Cleave
5-
6-Leap Attack, Combat Brute
7- Weapon Focus (Greatsword)
8- Weapon Specialization (Greatsword)
9- Greater Weapon Focus (Greatsword)
10- Behead*
11-
12-Greater Weapon Specialization: Greatsword, Improved Critical: Greatsword
13-
14- Daunting Presence
15- Death Master
16- Eviscerator
17-
18- (Staggering Critical, Power Critical: Greatsword)
19-
20-(Power Critical: Greatsword)

[OldTrees1]

Class feature like having Int in attack and damage for AoO. Benefits of stances and counters can be used out of turn. You can take Thicket of Blades by insvesting feats (earlier than fighter) or taking Eternal Blade PrC (gives you access to Devoted Spirit).

Warblade spent 2 maneuvers of 13 total to do what Fighter spent 4 feats (of total 11) for and do it better and in more versatile way (standard vs full-round, one successful attack vs two, can target different saves). And he can change it for something even better as he levels up. Warblade can refresh his maneuvers by spending swift action following by attack (standard or full), you know, the same thing your fighter does every round.

And dealing more damage definetely counts. If you can't do this, you can't so your job as primary melee.

Warblade has better defenses, like being able to use attack roll instead of AC, ot skill roll instead of save (without auto-failure), or just having Uncanny Dodge to screw with sneak attack dealers. And it's really counts, because Charmed or Dominated Fighter will be useless.

I forgot the Int to AoO attacks. Thanks for the reminder.

The Warblade can do it for 2 rounds every 3 rounds in your example. That may be more versatile but 67% repeat-ability is not better.

Dealing enough damage is the role of melee. Dealing more is not necessary and often a distraction.

Fighter can cheaply buy +11 to Will. It has good enough Will.


A Warblade gets to add his Int to AoO attacks and damage, so they are pretty much certain hits (though AoO are already good at high levels). If you are tripping then that is as good as Standstill.

It might not be that useful if you invest 5+ feats into the same sort of thing. Outside of that it is pretty darn useful. And they actually take damage (unlike with Standstill).

The Warblade here is going to be doing a LOT more damage and have a pretty similar level of control. And if he needs to do something else he can do that too. Overall there's a lot less investment.

Also, you can combine it with Defensive Sweep (http://dndtools.eu/feats/players-handbook-ii--80/defensive-sweep--557/)to guarantee AoO every round.

To cut down on feats you might drop the knockdown feat and just use Improved Trip by itself as a Warblade. Again, overall very similar effect, but more flexible and a lot more damage.

I am sure other people on here have more experience with this than me, however.

So since Fighter deals enough damage, can preform with similar levels of skill in their areas of expertise and is still useful outside their area of expertise, can we agree that fighter builds can reach Tier 3 and thus fighter should not be dismissed out of hand?

Best thing about Fighter? It's tactics have 100% repeat-ability compared to the 67% of a Warblade with 2 maneuvers devoted to the style.
Best thing about Warblade? It is designed not to remain in a consistent combat style for several turns in a row.


The problem with feats is that they're a sharply limited resource. If you spend a few feats to be able to pull off a trick, it might cost you half of your total feat count, even as a fighter, unless you play on level 20 (and if you're a level 20 full fighter, you've got other problems). That's why they can't be really compared to spells or maneuvers. And if you're playing without many splatbooks, your fighter is going to run out of good things to take even before reaching level 20.

Whoa. Half you feat count? As a Fighter? Ouch, I tend to see 1/7th to 1/5th of your feat count. However you are right in that it is a sharply limited resource that needs several splatbooks to avoid running out of worthy feats.



@Fortinbro
I do not think that build does a good job of defending Fighter. It looks like a damage focused fighter with a 3rd party feat that acts like the Vorpal enchantment.

[ddude987]

I still think Fighter isn't tier 3, even with the "proper" build. With the build and choices you've been making, it still looks high tier 4. Remember, it is argued Warblade is actually high tier 4.

Tier 4 is good at doing one thing. Fighter is just that, its good at killing things. That's where it stops though.

[eggynack]

Here is the feat progression I've planned for my corpse-creature (base human) fighter Elisha Kryll. I didn't build her as a mage-slayer although I typically do include that tree.

*Death's blessing is from Tome of Horrors books. It lets you use CHA instead of CON for HP.

*Behead is from a D20 Vlad the Impaler book. Basically, when you confirm a crit with a slashing weapon you roll to confirm again and if you do they're decapitated.

1- Death's Blessing*, Improved Initiative, Power Attack
2- Cleave
3- Improved Sunder
4- Great Cleave
5-
6-Leap Attack, Combat Brute
7- Weapon Focus (Greatsword)
8- Weapon Specialization (Greatsword)
9- Greater Weapon Focus (Greatsword)
10- Behead*
11-
12-Greater Weapon Specialization: Greatsword, Improved Critical: Greatsword
13-
14- Daunting Presence
15- Death Master
16- Eviscerator
17-
18- (Staggering Critical, Power Critical: Greatsword)
19-
20-(Power Critical: Greatsword)
This is a whole lot of 3rd party stuff (any amount) and greater weapon specialization here to be considered an effective fighter defense. Also, I'm not entirely sure why you're using a greatsword on a crit fisher build, given its relatively low crit range. Ultimately, I just don't think this build is all that powerful or flexible, especially because you could just skip all this weird stuff that happens on a critical hit, and just assume that the opponent is going to die if you manage one. Or, if you can't just assume that, you should construct your fighter such that you can.

[Nihilarian]

Here is the feat progression I've planned for my corpse-creature (base human) fighter Elisha Kryll. I didn't build her as a mage-slayer although I typically do include that tree.

*Death's blessing is from Tome of Horrors books. It lets you use CHA instead of CON for HP.

*Behead is from a D20 Vlad the Impaler book. Basically, when you confirm a crit with a slashing weapon you roll to confirm again and if you do they're decapitated.

1- Death's Blessing*, Improved Initiative, Power Attack
2- Cleave
3- Improved Sunder
4- Great Cleave
5-
6-Leap Attack, Combat Brute
7- Weapon Focus (Greatsword)
8- Weapon Specialization (Greatsword)
9- Greater Weapon Focus (Greatsword)
10- Behead*
11-
12-Greater Weapon Specialization: Greatsword, Improved Critical: Greatsword
13-
14- Daunting Presence
15- Death Master
16- Eviscerator
17-
18- (Staggering Critical, Power Critical: Greatsword)
19-
20-(Power Critical: Greatsword)
If you're beheading someone on a critical, why do you also need to slow them for one round?

You'd be better off trading a bunch of those critical feats and greater weapon specialization for TWF with scimitars. Or valenar double scimitar so you can go into the Revenant Blade

Also: Don't try to defend the fighter with third party material. It's dumb.

[Morty]

Whoa. Half you feat count? As a Fighter? Ouch, I tend to see 1/7th to 1/5th of your feat count. However you are right in that it is a sharply limited resource that needs several splatbooks to avoid running out of worthy feats.


Like I said, it's only less than half your feat count if you have a level 20 fighter. Below that, which is to say in most non-theoretical games, you'll have a good bit fewer feat slots. The reason ToB is so popular is that it allows a warrior to do a cool trick without spending a feat on it, and its prerequisites.

[Brookshw]

If you're going for crits could I perhaps interest you in the Jovar? Does require a feat of course.

[Vogonjeltz]

That honestly might mean even less, given how little "feat flexibility" means with reference to overall flexibility. I could just as easily say that paladins are more smite evil flexible than every class that has less smite evil, and I'd be saying an accurate thing. I'm also not even sure if fighters are more feat flexible than classes with fewer feats, because fighter feats are usually in long chains, and they don't always do all that much. Returning to the fighter versus druid comparison, something like exalted wild shape probably offers more power than any three or four combined fighter feats that you could name. Ultimately, I just don't see anything there in the OP that would tell me to reassess where I have the fighter in my mind, which is somewhere on the cusp of tiers four and five.

Eggynack, you appear to be misusing the word flexibility to mean: powerful.

That isn't what the word means. It means there are more conceivable variations. Which there are (the number of permutations based on 18 factors is greater than the number of possible variations based on only 7.

*In case it isn't clear, I'm not arguing the Druid has less potential power than the fighter, but I am saying it has less flexibility.

[ddude987]

Eggynack, you appear to be misusing the word flexibility to mean: powerful.

That isn't what the word means. It means there are more conceivable variations. Which there are (the number of permutations based on 18 factors is greater than the number of possible variations based on only 7.

*In case it isn't clear, I'm not arguing the Druid has less potential power than the fighter, but I am saying it has less flexibility.

On the contrary, the tier system in dnd is based around the fact that flexibility in the game makes a class powerful.

[eggynack]

Eggynack, you appear to be misusing the word flexibility to mean: powerful.

That isn't what the word means. It means there are more conceivable variations. Which there are (the number of permutations based on 18 factors is greater than the number of possible variations based on only 7.

*In case it isn't clear, I'm not arguing the Druid has less potential power than the fighter, but I am saying it has less flexibility.
I'm not talking about the base power of the druid here. I'm just talking about power acquisition through the use of feats. While fighters have more feats in total, druids can do far more interesting things with their feats, and that's a form of flexibility all its own. A druid's feats offer more flexibility than a fighter's feats, and I don't really care if you can assign a fighter's feats in more possible combinations. Flexibility isn't about how many various feat lists you can assign to a character, even when it comes to flexibility through feats. It's about how much different stuff you can do.

If "feat flexibility" just means, "This class can have a lot of different feat combinations", then saying that a fighter is feat flexible is utterly pointless. It's really not any kind of fighter defense, because it's nearly impossible to disagree with (though, as fighter feats are often chained, there may be less viable combinations of fighter feats than there are combinations of feats for other classes). Your fighter can splash around in the rhetorical kiddie pool of improved trip and power attack all he wants. I'm going to just be over here, teleporting every round as a free action, gaining access to miss chance, and applying a template to all of my animal forms, such that I get access to all of their Ex abilities, along with a moderately sized buff. I know which class I think is gaining more flexibility through their feats.

[Vogonjeltz]

I'm not talking about the base power of the druid here. I'm just talking about power acquisition through the use of feats. While fighters have more feats in total, druids can do far more interesting things with their feats, and that's a form of flexibility all its own. A druid's feats offer more flexibility than a fighter's feats, and I don't really care if you can assign a fighter's feats in more possible combinations. Flexibility isn't about how many various feat lists you can assign to a character, even when it comes to flexibility through feats. It's about how much different stuff you can do.

If "feat flexibility" just means, "This class can have a lot of different feat combinations", then saying that a fighter is feat flexible is utterly pointless. It's really not any kind of fighter defense, because it's nearly impossible to disagree with (though, as fighter feats are often chained, there may be less viable combinations of fighter feats than there are combinations of feats for other classes). Your fighter can splash around in the rhetorical kiddie pool of improved trip and power attack all he wants. I'm going to just be over here, teleporting every round as a free action, gaining access to miss chance, and applying a template to all of my animal forms, such that I get access to all of their Ex abilities, along with a moderately sized buff. I know which class I think is gaining more flexibility through their feats.

I'm not talking about base power, or even power at all. That's why I said you were misusing the word flexibility, because it isn't about power.

[eggynack]

I'm not talking about base power, or even power at all. That's why I said you were misusing the word flexibility, because it isn't about power.
What does flexibility mean to you? To me, at least, it means that you can adapt to any situation, and do so effectively. Feat flexibility, therefore, would mean the ability to adapt that is derived from feats. So, exalted wild shape, which allows you to spontaneously deal with hidden attackers, summoned creatures, a grapple, an enemy that's on the other side of a wall or BFC, or any number of other things, grants a greater degree of flexibility than, say, improved trip+combat reflexes+power attack, which mostly just lets you hit things with greater efficiency.

[Vogonjeltz]

What does flexibility mean to you? To me, at least, it means that you can adapt to any situation, and do so effectively. Feat flexibility, therefore, would mean the ability to adapt that is derived from feats. So, exalted wild shape, which allows you to spontaneously deal with hidden attackers, summoned creatures, a grapple, an enemy that's on the other side of a wall or BFC, or any number of other things, grants a greater degree of flexibility than, say, improved trip+combat reflexes+power attack, which mostly just lets you hit things with greater efficiency.

If I haven't conveyed what the word flexibility means by this point, I don't think I'm going to be able to.

[eggynack]

If I haven't conveyed what the word flexibility means by this point, I don't think I'm going to be able to.
Alrighty then. I mean, I'm pretty sure that my definition of flexible as indicating the ability to adapt to a number of situations is significantly more meaningful than your definition, which is apparently, "Can combine their abilities in a number of ways," but you must do as your heart commands in all things.

[Flickerdart]

I agree with Eggynack. The druid's fewer feats are vastly more flexible than the fighter's many feats because each one resonates with powerful class features.

On a tactical level, a druid's Natural Spell enables him to cast any spell he has while he's any animal he can turn into. That's a flexible feat, because it lets you combine the thousand-odd druid spells with the few hundred animal forms that are out there. Nothing the fighter has gives him that many options - there are one or two hundred [Fighter] feats, almost all of which only do one thing, and most of the time that one thing isn't even worth doing.

On a build level, the fighter is nailed to feat taxes and feat trees, while everything the druid needs has meagre prerequisites if any. 11 extra feats isn't worth a damn if you need 3-4 just to get one good one.

So please enlighten me about how the fighter is more flexible.

[Nightraiderx]

Warrior is a stronger chasis than the fighter even though it's an NPC class.
I can learn sneak attack and other special NPC feats, has customizable skills, and can take any feat with their bonus feats that they qualify for.

[eggynack]

Warrior is a stronger chasis than the fighter even though it's an NPC class.
I can learn sneak attack and other special NPC feats, has customizable skills, and can take any feat with their bonus feats that they qualify for.
Are you referring to the warrior generic class (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/classes/genericClasses.htm#warrior)? If so, that's not an NPC class. This (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/npcClasses/warrior.htm) is the warrior NPC class.

[Fortinbro]

If you're beheading someone on a critical, why do you also need to slow them for one round?

You'd be better off trading a bunch of those critical feats and greater weapon specialization for TWF with scimitars. Or valenar double scimitar so you can go into the Revenant Blade

Also: Don't try to defend the fighter with third party material. It's dumb.


Behead only works on targets up to one size category bigger. The slowing is for bigger monsters/undead that can survive decap (I have a truedeath crystal) or if I happen to confirm but not confirm again. I use a greatsword because it also allows the two-handed power attacking to be more effective.

[Nightraiderx]

Are you referring to the warrior generic class (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/classes/genericClasses.htm#warrior)? If so, that's not an NPC class. This (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/npcClasses/warrior.htm) is the warrior NPC class.

I might, I might not be, tbh I am not sure and I can't check it until after work.

[Drachasor]

So since Fighter deals enough damage, can preform with similar levels of skill in their areas of expertise and is still useful outside their area of expertise, can we agree that fighter builds can reach Tier 3 and thus fighter should not be dismissed out of hand?

No. Your build doesn't deal nearly enough damage. It sacrifices damage for control. Warblade with a control build doesn't sacrifice damage at all. And it can do a lot of other stuff like ignore DR, have scent, far more mobility, etc, etc.

And I haven't seen anything suggesting your fighter build is very good outside of its pretty narrow range of expertise.

It's not hard to shut down your fighter either -- a Warblade is much harder to shut down.


Best thing about Fighter? It's tactics have 100% repeat-ability compared to the 67% of a Warblade with 2 maneuvers devoted to the style.
Best thing about Warblade? It is designed not to remain in a consistent combat style for several turns in a row..

The best thing about the Warblade is if it has Adaptive Style it can completely change tactics with one full-round action. Without it, it just takes 5 minutes. It can also pick up and master any weapon that is found. And it has more mobility, better defenses, better ability to deal with invisible/hidden enemies, etc, etc.

Your Fighter had to spend a 8+ feats to do something a Warblade can manage with half that number, if that.

Fighters are not flexible. You can build a fighter a number of ways, but once you've built them, they are stuck as they are. That's now how flexibility works. Warblades aren't stuck as they are, since they can switch to different maneuvers for different sorts of enemies. They also have some Int synergy, better skills, and more skill points.

I tend to think Warblades are low T3. They could use some improvement to be solidly in T3. That said, they are a lot more flexible than a Fighter.

[Flickerdart]

Repeatability is a useless quality - your enemies will adapt to your tactics (if only because the game would be boring otherwise). There's also the matter of HP, because you can't repeat anything if you're dead. The only case where it matters is when you're fighting an endless stream of identical weak mooks, but then you might as well go play a video game because you don't need a DM for that.

[Gnaeus]

Hmm, now a Fighter that could change all of his Fighter Bonus Feats as a swift action might get to T3.

Hella hard to play though.

This has been debated before. The problem is that even all the fighter feats put together do not really help him do anything other than decent damage to things he can already hurt. There are only a dozen or so that provide even marginal situational bonuses to skills and other stuff that isn't "I hit it."

I came to the conclusion, in that thread, that Schroedinger's fighter does hit T3, BUT a big part of his utility comes from being able to cherrypick strikes and stances from ToB. The counterargument basically ran that Martial Study only allows for you to pick 2 strikes ever. So, if Schroedingers Fighter can pick any ToB strike at will, then pick 2 different ones on the next round...T3. He is basically a Warblade who trades complete flexibility in his strikes for slower maneuver progression and lower IL. If he can only pick 2 and those never change, T4.

[Nightraiderx]

I just looked at his build and why is he not using a damned Falchion?

This build, I feel offended by it and I usually have fun optimizing fighters.

[Seerow]

Like I said, it's only less than half your feat count if you have a level 20 fighter. Below that, which is to say in most non-theoretical games, you'll have a good bit fewer feat slots. The reason ToB is so popular is that it allows a warrior to do a cool trick without spending a feat on it, and its prerequisites.

Besides this, it's totally possible to blow 12+ feats on a single fighting style. I've only really come to appreciate this since playing E6 (where suddenly I'm spending a lot more time looking for feats to progress with), but I've regularly had characters planned out to 10-20+ feats before needing to go "Okay there's nothing else I can do to improve this combat style further". It's entirely possible to have a fighter with all of his feats dedicated to a single trick, with any other tricks being picked up incidentally.

[Killer Angel]

Behead only works on targets up to one size category bigger. The slowing is for bigger monsters/undead that can survive decap (I have a truedeath crystal) or if I happen to confirm but not confirm again. I use a greatsword because it also allows the two-handed power attacking to be more effective.

the point is: you're using third party material, while you try to improve the only thing you are able to do: Killing.
And this has nothing to do with flexibility or number of options.

[WhamBamSam]

3) Neither the build in the spoiler nor the build that is in question would have worked at all as a warblade. Warblade does not get swift action demoralize and Warblade relies on Strikes like a crutch so it would be antisynergistic with the build premise.Warblade can't do swift action demoralizing completely natively it's true, but with Fearsome Armor you can use Quicksilver Motion or Bounding Assault to take more move actions with which to demoralize (along with the various other things the maneuvers can do in the frequent situations where fear-op is ineffective).

I actually quite like your build. It's the sort of thing I'd try to steer a player towards if they were really obstinate about wanting to be a single classed Fighter. The Tier List acknowledges that Zhentarim Soldier and/or Dungeon Crasher raise the Fighter to T4, so it's really not all that surprising that you can optimize a Zhentarim Soldier into the murky territory of High T4/Low T3 (which I honestly think should be its own tier, since it's pretty clearly different both from low-mid T4 stuff and high T3 stuff with it's Planar Bindings and Action Economy Breaking and whatnot).

I also agree with the others that have been saying a Warblade is pretty clearly outright better.

[Hiro Protagonest]

Great OP and lots of quality conversation :) Human single-class fighters are close to my heart. In my D&D 3.5 campaign, we have played 103 sessions, and the ONLY character to rise from the 2nd level to 9th has been a single-class human fighter. No wizard, cleric, druid, sorcerer etc. has been so successful. The second best was a human bard, who rose from 2nd to 7th.

So the fighter wasn't doing his job then.

[Vogonjeltz]

I agree with Eggynack. The druid's fewer feats are vastly more flexible than the fighter's many feats because each one resonates with powerful class features.

On a tactical level, a druid's Natural Spell enables him to cast any spell he has while he's any animal he can turn into. That's a flexible feat, because it lets you combine the thousand-odd druid spells with the few hundred animal forms that are out there. Nothing the fighter has gives him that many options - there are one or two hundred [Fighter] feats, almost all of which only do one thing, and most of the time that one thing isn't even worth doing.

On a build level, the fighter is nailed to feat taxes and feat trees, while everything the druid needs has meagre prerequisites if any. 11 extra feats isn't worth a damn if you need 3-4 just to get one good one.

So please enlighten me about how the fighter is more flexible.

On a strategic level, seeing as we're discussing feats and not tactics, the fighter chassis has more possible configurations. That is the whole of it. A Druid can focus on being a good caster or a mediocre animal. What the the Druid can't do is take advantage of multiple fighting styles and the feat trees that go with them.

[Gnaeus]

On a strategic level, seeing as we're discussing feats and not tactics, the fighter chassis has more possible configurations. That is the whole of it. A Druid can focus on being a good caster or a mediocre animal. What the the Druid can't do is take advantage of multiple fighting styles and the feat trees that go with them.

Neither can the fighter. Practically, he can take advantage of exactly one of those fighting styles and focus heavily in it to not suck.

The druid, on the other hand, can focus in one of several areas, or can be a generalist (one metamagic feat, a melee combat feat, an item crafting feat, a feat to make his pet better, etc) without reducing his effectiveness in any meaningful level. If the fighter is an archer, he is taking the next feat up his archery chain. The druid can take his feats in any order, whenever he thinks they will be useful to him.

[OldTrees1]

No. Your build doesn't deal nearly enough damage. It sacrifices damage for control. Warblade with a control build doesn't sacrifice damage at all. And it can do a lot of other stuff like ignore DR, have scent, far more mobility, etc, etc.

And I haven't seen anything suggesting your fighter build is very good outside of its pretty narrow range of expertise.


It deals enough damage to handle CR equivalent threats. So Warblade dealing more damage does not change the fact that the Fighter deals sufficient damage.

Its "narrow" range of expertise is: Bluff, Intimidate and melee control
Its use outside of that expertise is: Flight and Scent (from race)
This matches the definition of Tier 3
"Capable of doing one thing quite well, while still being useful when that one thing is inappropriate"
It may be low tier 3 (even lower than Warblade), but it matches the definition.


Repeatability is a useless quality - your enemies will adapt to your tactics (if only because the game would be boring otherwise). There's also the matter of HP, because you can't repeat anything if you're dead. The only case where it matters is when you're fighting an endless stream of identical weak mooks, but then you might as well go play a video game because you don't need a DM for that.

Repeatability is not listed for its optimization value. It was listed because players mechanic and thematic tastes vary. Some, like you, hate repeatability. Some, like me, like repeatability.

[Nihilarian]

On a strategic level, seeing as we're discussing feats and not tactics, the fighter chassis has more possible configurations. That is the whole of it. A Druid can focus on being a good caster or a mediocre animal. What the the Druid can't do is take advantage of multiple fighting styles and the feat trees that go with them.There is no need to choose. Natural Spell let's you play a good caster and a good animal.

[Alabenson]

It deals enough damage to handle CR equivalent threats. So Warblade dealing more damage does not change the fact that the Fighter deals sufficient damage.

Its "narrow" range of expertise is: Bluff, Intimidate and melee control
Its use outside of that expertise is: Flight and Scent (from race)
This matches the definition of Tier 3
"Capable of doing one thing quite well, while still being useful when that one thing is inappropriate"
It may be low tier 3 (even lower than Warblade), but it matches the definition.

The problem with your assessment is that the tier system isn't based on individual builds, but rather the class as a whole. In order to gauge where your fighter would fall on the tier list, you would have to compare it to a Warblade built with the same level of optimization, which likely would be substantially more powerful/versatile. In other words, if a Fighter cannot match a Warblade of equal optimization in power and versatility, then it is not Tier 3.

[Sir Chuckles]

On a strategic level, seeing as we're discussing feats and not tactics, the fighter chassis has more possible configurations. That is the whole of it. A Druid can focus on being a good caster or a mediocre animal. What the the Druid can't do is take advantage of multiple fighting styles and the feat trees that go with them.

Here's the thing:
A Fighter does have all those different option, but he can only use one or two at any given lifetime. They're locked in. At Lv1, there are more possibilities, but once you take Weapon Focus, you now have three more feats that are effectively taken. The Fighter cannot take advantage of multiple fighting styles and their feat trees, because he does not have access to any but the one he took.

The Druid can take advantage of the entire animal kingdom, and then shoot fire, twist dimensions, rule half the natural world, destroy the other half, create an army of awakened shambling mound Ninjas, and be home in time to watch the TV that his Wizard friend invented.

I maintain the statement:
Feats are not class features, and they are no substitute for them.

[Brookshw]

So the fighter wasn't doing his job then.

I was going to call shenanigans for expecting the impossible, but this is d&d where you can get blood from a stone, so I'll just leave this (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0735.html) here instead.

[Gnaeus]

I maintain the statement:
Feats are not class features, and they are no substitute for them.

They COULD be. There are lots of good feats, just most of them aren't on the fighter list.

[OldTrees1]

The problem with your assessment is that the tier system isn't based on individual builds, but rather the class as a whole. In order to gauge where your fighter would fall on the tier list, you would have to compare it to a Warblade built with the same level of optimization, which likely would be substantially more powerful/versatile. In other words, if a Fighter cannot match a Warblade of equal optimization in power and versatility, then it is not Tier 3.

I recognize that the tier system isn't based on individual builds. I am using the this build to show 3 things:
1) Z Soldier Fighter is at least Tier 4 (since the list I saw only recognized dungeoncrasher as Tier 4)
2) Demonstrate the tier boosting impact good feats can have on a class and remind people that feats are what defines Fighters.

Even at the optimization level of the build I was using, a Warblade will not reach Tier 2 (based off the definition) but a Fighter will reach low Tier 3 (based off the definition).

Again the Tier 3 definition is:
"Capable of doing one thing quite well, while still being useful when that one thing is inappropriate"
If something meets these conditions then it is Tier 3 or higher. It does not need to outperform other classes that also meet the conditions. (If that were true then there would only be 1 class per tier)

[Endarire]

In Fortinbro's defense, the Fighter can be used as the basis of a spiffy build, like Hood (http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=2462.0). Yes, it can potentially do lots of damage. Yes, a theoretical Fighter gets a lot of feats, but other classes can get these feats, too. And yes, the viceral image of a Fighter cleaving through his foes (or otherwise dismembering them, reliably) does have a primal appeal. Relying on Fighters is how I got through a lot of 8-bit and 16-bit console RPGs.

Fortinbro: If you enjoy what you're doing, keep at it. I get the vibe that you're new at this, that you enjoy Fighters, and haven't seen/played it/cared about games that are of a much higher optimization level, like a core-only Wizard20 vs. a splatbook-enabled Fighter20 (http://www.minmaxboards.com/index.php?topic=4209.0), or, at the extreme end of the optimization spectrum, The Tippyverse (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=222007). Maybe your GM accounts for intraparty balance and has given you spiffy things other people didn't get. Maybe your partymates aren't playing as if the tier system matters much, and just want a good game. That too is good.

Sometimes, the board speaks truth. Some things are better than others. Some things, however, are more in the theory category than reality. As a Wizard player, I freqeuently banned Enchantment because the school seemed redundant. Then I played a solo Wizard campaign (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=325310) and found charm person (an Enchantment spell) to be one of the best spells at low levels, and charm monster to be pretty spiffy at higher levels.

In a mostly core-only game, I played a Druid, expecting him to just own everything. Well, he didn't (though he still was strong), because the GM's game wasn't typical. My strategies of produce flame hurling didn't normally work, because enemies were surprisingly fire resistant/immune. However, I was able to switch to healing occasionally, as well as focusing on summoning and using my animal companion. If it came to attacking things personally, I used a scimitar or a sling, unreliably. The campaign ran levels 1 to 4, and thus I never got Wild Shape, but my summons were rockin' house and quite versatile. I was able to adapt because my class features (including spells) let me.

If, for example, we encountered a lot of enemies with DR/overcome by weapon type - that is, piercing/slashing/blunt (and we did), then if I were a Fighter who relied on, say, a greatsword, I'd be hurtin' since I couldn't keep up with in the damage department against foes who heavily resisted my slashing damage. I was able to reliably hurt foes due to my wolf's bite attack dealing piercing, slashing, and blunt damage (https://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/glossary&term=Glossary_dnd_naturalweapon&alpha=). In the case of a martial adept (like a Crusader or Warblade), I would be able to deal extra damage via Punishing Stance (Warblade) and probably pick up Sapphire Nightmare Blade (+d6 damage) to overcome that DR. Even if I did 0 damage, then Crusader's Strike and Martial Spirit (Crusader) meant my allies and me would be healthier while we wailed on that foe, took him out, or otherwise dealt with him (including fleeing).

In another campaign, we were around level 10. I played a Wizard with a GM who knew dice rolling tricks and had enemies constantly make their saves. I was annoyed that I couldn't control crowds, but I was relieved I could switch to buffing my party and letting them destroy foes. I also used offensive abilities that didn't require saves, like Pathfinder's telekinesis. Were I a Fighter and rendered useless, I'd need to make another character to contribute.

In my short time playing Fighters, I've realized they're one trick ponies. In a Fighter vs Astral Construct fight (http://www.minmaxboards.com/index.php?topic=461.0), I played the Fighter, and eventually bowed out because the Astral Construct was a disposable, better version of my tricked-out Fighter10 Hood build. (I debatably beat it in an early version, and I know I could've improved my build, but as Lycanthromancer's Astral Construct got more developed in later posts, I just found it not worth it to compete with something with natural invisibility, 60' reach, 6d6+30 damage, and a grapple mod of +50. And my opponent's Psion could just keep churning these out.) And, yeah, there are rules for Astral Construct Power Armor (http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=10279.0).

Fortinbro, consider this: What are your main reasons for wanting to play a Fighter? The board takes a view of, "We'll optimize his character since he came here," and sometmies, "even if it hurts/doesn't make sense/won't work within the given constraints!" If you can determine what about the Fighter class's mechanics and aesthetics appeal so much to you, you'll know better what to seek to get what you want, and we can help you get what you want.

[Gnaeus]

Again the Tier 3 definition is:
"Capable of doing one thing quite well, while still being useful when that one thing is inappropriate"
If something meets these conditions then it is Tier 3 or higher. It does not need to outperform other classes that also meet the conditions. (If that were true then there would only be 1 class per tier)

No. The fighter class STILL does not add anything useful when you haven't rolled initiative. It still does not add anything to help with flight, incorporeal, invisible, etc. It isn't even really good in combat if it isn't well built. The fighter never scratches Tier 3. It isn't even Tier 4 unless it is well optimized.

[eggynack]

On a strategic level, seeing as we're discussing feats and not tactics, the fighter chassis has more possible configurations. That is the whole of it. A Druid can focus on being a good caster or a mediocre animal. What the the Druid can't do is take advantage of multiple fighting styles and the feat trees that go with them.
The fighter might have more configurations, at least on a feat level (because seriously, spells are a thing), but just about all of those configurations of all fighter feats offer less in game flexibility than one or two druid feats. It's like you're saying that a fighter is more flexible than a druid because the fighter can take six feats that each grant a +1 to each ability score, while the druid can only take one feat that grants a +2 to every ability score. The fighter exists in more combinations, but what actual impact does that have on the game at all? If your "flexibility" has no impact on what you do in a game, why should I care about it?

Also, seriously, a druid can be a good caster, a good animal, a second good animal, and random summoned animals, pretty much simultaneously. You're underselling them by a lot. Druids are obviously better than fighters, in most conceivable ways, but what I'm claiming is that the value of all druid feats is worth more than the value of all fighter feats. Ask yourself this: How many feats would a theoretical fighter take to get nothing but the at will free action dimension door ability of exalted wild shape? I suspect that the answer is a lot.

[ddude987]

I recognize that the tier system isn't based on individual builds. I am using the this build to show 3 things:
1) Z Soldier Fighter is at least Tier 4 (since the list I saw only recognized dungeoncrasher as Tier 4)

If you read here (http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?PHPSESSID=5g3emjrmk9u278da9jvi2iiac0&topic=4874.0), it calls out Z fighter along with dungeoncrasher fighter.



2) Demonstrate the tier boosting impact good feats can have on a class and remind people that feats are what defines Fighters.

Even at the optimization level of the build I was using, a Warblade will not reach Tier 2 (based off the definition) but a Fighter will reach low Tier 3 (based off the definition).

But that is incorrect. Feat choice doesn't change the tier of the class, it changes the level of optimization, and by association the tier of the build.

[OldTrees1]

No. The fighter class STILL does not add anything useful when you haven't rolled initiative. It still does not add anything to help with flight, incorporeal, invisible, etc. It isn't even really good in combat if it isn't well built. The fighter never scratches Tier 3. It isn't even Tier 4 unless it is well optimized.

I forget, do you roll initiative before talking to people? I was under the impression that social skills (Bluff and Intimidate) happened outside of initiative.

Flight costs 2 feats. Incorporeal is covered by a magic weapon. Invisibility is covered by scent (either by race or by 2 fighter feats).


If you read here (http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?PHPSESSID=5g3emjrmk9u278da9jvi2iiac0&topic=4874.0), it calls out Z fighter along with dungeoncrasher fighter.


But that is incorrect. Feat choice doesn't change the tier of the class, it changes the level of optimization, and by association the tier of the build.

Strange that it is not listed in the main thread. Thanks though.

I had a typo. I meant to "Demonstrate the tier boosting impact good feats can have on a build and remind people that feats are what defines Fighters"

[Theomniadept]

I'm not understanding where the debate is. This game system has been for the most part cut and dried everywhere and anywhere.

Fighters are a great dip class. They are great prior to prestige classing. This has never been up for debate, but Fortinbro, you need to understand that no amount of roleplaying gives a Fighter more than what he normally gets.

Karnith's Why Each Class Is In Its Tier (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=269440) post explains this in incredible detail based on JaronK's tier system. In JaronK's Tier System for Classes (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=266559) there are three scenarios that are posed that really help explain why Fighter is tier 5 and needs help from other stuff to escape that tier.

Scenario 1: A dragon hides in a trap-filled cave, you gotta kill it. Fighter's dead weight here until the end, in which case he might be able to help. See, those traps aren't going to disarm themselves and the other classes can just do anything they want to get rid of them. Wizard can Greater Floating Disk over the trap triggers and Spell Resistance himself to avoid magical ones. Lower tiered Dread Necromancers can Summon Undead so many times per day that one level 1 spell equates 1 disabled trap. Rogue at tier 4 can disable the traps with his hands.

Now the fighter - if he has another party member who can take care of the above then he sits on his butt. If he doesn't, the best thing he can do is spend 8 gold per mule and send a bunch of suicide mules down the trap-fille dungeon, possibly leaving to go buy more mules.

Now, the dragon itself. Charging damage Fighter can't compete in damage to anything ToB or anything Barbarian. Additionally, any spellcaster with Spectral Hand or Ray Spell to deliver a Shivering Touch spell will 1-shot the dragon. If your fighter is a spiked chain tripper/disarmer, well, hope you enjoy all the benefits of tripping a flying creature, which includes getting killed. Archer fighter might work, but again, with only feats all he can do is shoot a bunch of arrows, whereas prestige classes would allow many more options other than 'roll moar attax'.

Scenario 2: Contacting a leader of an underground resistance group to gain their trust and help overthrow the tyrannical government. This is...just bad. Fighter can do literally nothing here. No talking skills, no info skills, nothing. The most he could do is start working as a simple bodyguard for the leaders until he's murdered enough enemies to go through the ranks, whereas a Bard will walk directly up to the leader and sing him a song titled 'My Performance Skill replaces all my social skills'. Unlike scenario 1, no amount of mules can overcome this hurdle.

Scenario 3: One week to prepare defenses for a city to protect it from an army of orcs. Okay, so the fighter can possibly help dig trenches or build wooden battlements, but without those skill investments (2 + Int may I remind you) he's another lump of useless. In battle a charger will kill a few guys every round, a spiked chain tripper can immobilize over a dozen guys permanently, and an archer can stand on a tower and roll lots of attacks. Contrast all the other classes; just Tier 3 can dominate using illusions, summons, etc. ToB classes are fighters but better, so those classes will do your job better, and even the base Warmage, who gets picked on for only being a pure blaster caster, will outperform the Fighter. That's not even touching on the Wizard shapechanging into a Solar and winning the battle arbitrarily.

Fortinbro, the fighter can be fun when applied in small doses correctly. Lemme tell you I played a fighter, and while at first it's fun to roll max damage on a triple crit multiplier, after a while it's boooooooooorrrrriiiiiiinnnnng. Seriously, I had a Bag of Holding loaded with every mundane item I could think of but in the end my skills were so limited that all I could do was walk into battle and roll attack rolls. As a dwarf I had situational trapfinding without and ranks, which is something a necromancer with a dwarf skeleton could accomplish.

That's not to say you should not play a fighter; if the group consists of a rogue, an archer ranger, and a Healer, you don't want to play Druid and completely outshine them in every way - fighter would be more than appropriate. But no, no amount of roleplaying in any way can make a fighter more than a tier 5. And if the DM has to continually cast DM fiat to keep the fighter relevant, then at what point would those DM fiats be equally as effective on a commoner?

[Threadnaught]

Better than replicates it. Those feats can be almost anything especially if your buld is just using them to free up no prereq stuff you'd have taken anyway.

Did I mention that I really, really, really hate the Fighter Class?

If I wanted to play as a fake Monk, I'd pick Druid, get a Monk's Belt as soon as possible and play as a kung fu bear panda.


Or Wizard, there's a build I'm working on that looks like something out of an anime.

[Flickerdart]

I think an interesting question that affects the uselessness of +11 feats is the design space of feats vs class features.

A class feature (ideally) has identity and exists on a track. Wild Shape is a good example of a class feature - it comes in with some investment into the class, it gets better independently of other build components, and it screams "nature-loving tree hugger" at the top of its lungs.

A feat comes at essentially a random time in a character's career, and is meant to synchronize with existing abilities a character has, to specialize him and distinguish him from his peers. A druid can take feats to specialize in his Wild Shape, or his summoning, or beating dudes up with his face, or beating dudes up with his dog, or turning a dude's face into a dog and then beating up his summons (?). A fighter has nothing for these feats to latch on to except attacking, so all fighter feats become a variation on "you attack." Sometimes they get things like "attack when on a horse" or "attack by pushing" but it's all about this narrow range of offensive actions. There are remarkably few feats that actually let you do a new thing, rather than do an old thing better.

There would be some chance of saving the fighter if he got an iconic ability and then his feats built up on that ability. But the ability the designers decided on was "full attack" and that's just not something special. Zhentarim and Dungeoncrash are ok, but the tasty stuff (Imperious Command for instance) isn't even a [Fighter] feat.

[OldTrees1]

I think an interesting question that affects the uselessness of +11 feats is the design space of feats vs class features.

Good insights.

Since "A feat comes at essentially a random time in a character's career", feats are anchored by their limited balancing mechanics. They have only 2 balancing mechanics of note (prerequisites and scaling).

Scaling is ideal but cannot apply to all feats. Prerequisites (including feat chains) raise the minimum level they take effect. This means the come at an average level with a higher power. Thus the feat can be stronger.

So feats can be designed (with difficulty) such that non Fighter/Generic Warrior warrior classes would have level appropriate feats even at higher levels. These would be in addition to but parallel with their class features. Fighter then would be able to get several level appropriate partial combat styles by sampling several the feats designed for several of the non Fighter warrior classes.

Currently the majority of feats alter existing abilities which explains all fighter feats being a variation on "you attack". To fix this part of the Fighter problem, you would need to produce feats chains that start by granting a new ability that is not merely altering "you attack".

[Flickerdart]

So feats can be designed (with difficulty) such that non Fighter/Generic Warrior warrior classes would have level appropriate feats even at higher levels.
They can be, but they aren't.



Currently the majority of feats alter existing abilities which explains all fighter feats being a variation on "you attack". To fix this part of the Fighter problem, you would need to produce feats chains that start by granting a new ability that is not merely altering "you attack".
This is beyond the scope of what feats in 3.5 were made to do, really. If you are interested in giving new class-specific options from a long list, there are many non-feat ways this has been accomplished much more effectively.

[OldTrees1]

They can be, but they aren't.


This is beyond the scope of what feats in 3.5 were made to do, really. If you are interested in giving new class-specific options from a long list, there are many non-feat ways this has been accomplished much more effectively.

Your post contained both existent and theoretical game theory insight. I jumped off from the theoretical.

[Seerow]

Now, the dragon itself. Charging damage Fighter can't compete in damage to anything ToB or anything Barbarian.

uh... Fighter's got a million problems, but charging damage ain't one. And while I won't bet on a non-pounce Fighter over a Pouncing Barbarian, I'd expect him to match or beat any ToB charger.

[Nihilarian]

uh... Fighter's got a million problems, but charging damage ain't one. And while I won't bet on a non-pounce Fighter over a Pouncing Barbarian, I'd expect him to match or beat any ToB charger.Well, a ToB character built for it can get some pouncey maneuvers (including actual pounce) as well as some really good bonuses to damage, the ability to charge without going in a straight line, and other charging bonuses. I don't think most people specialize in it, though, because they tend to be capable of dealing respectable damage even if they don't.

Having said that, charging damage isn't a problem for fighters.

[ddude987]

uh... Fighter's got a million problems, but charging damage ain't one. And while I won't bet on a non-pounce Fighter over a Pouncing Barbarian, I'd expect him to match or beat any ToB charger.

I got 99 feats but pounce ain't 1

[MirddinEmris]

OldTrees1, your fighter does not have 67% repeatability on this tactics, because it relies on either having a full attack with two successful attacks with both ends of the weapon or same thing but with standard action and successful trip attempt, so in reality your tactics aren't as reliable as warblades'. And unlike fighter warblade isn't locked in the same style (and if you will spam your ability every round, by the time of your third encounter the DM will send enemies immune to your tactics) so he doesn't have to spam same maneuvers every two round and then refresh. He's got 13 of them, or more, and spent only two on doing lockdown better than fighter (more reliable and more versatile), so he will have something to do on the next round for sure. Warblade has other tricks, like buffing his teammates (White Raven) or play with action economy (depending on level and build, he can take 2-4 combat turn between his enemy turns), or have some nice senses and movements (moving/jumping as a swift action), can do stuff outside of his turn besides AoO (plenty of different counters) and the best thing is - you don't need to spent tons of feats from tons of splatbooks for this abilities.

Also Warblade has much more skill points and can do better outside of battle, having Deiplomacy and Intimidate as class skills, while your Fighter have only Intimidate (Bluff is a class skill only for three levels, every other level you will have to spend two sp on one rank, and you have only 3 sp/level). Warblade also has such useful skills as Tumble (can ignore AoO) and Balance, so he doesn't become flat-footed because of 1st level spell or 15gp item. Which means that your Fighter will probably die from the first rogue he'll meet (having no defenses or less hp that dwarven wizard).

Zhentarim soldier + Dungeoncrusher fighter are indeed T4, but only for the level of this ACFs, after level 10 they became T5 again and quite fast. And your Fighter isn't even Dungeoncrusher, having only three no-so-reliable tricks in his sleeve and lacking real damage-dealing ability.

[Lans]

I got 99 feats but pounce ain't 1 A fighter can get pounce from a bonus feat, but I don't remember the prereqs, and I think it was only light weapons. Tiger lodge or something




Zhentarim soldier + Dungeoncrusher fighter are indeed T4, but only for the level of this ACFs, after level 10 they became T5 again and quite fast. And your Fighter isn't even Dungeoncrusher, having only three no-so-reliable tricks in his sleeve and lacking real damage-dealing ability.

You have that wrong. only dungeoncrasher has that clause, a Z fighter is tier 4 flat out

[Flickerdart]

A fighter can get pounce from a bonus feat, but I don't remember the prereqs, and I think it was only light weapons. Tiger lodge or something
Snow Tiger Berserker is not a fighter bonus feat.

[Hiro Protagonest]

A fighter can get pounce from a bonus feat, but I don't remember the prereqs, and I think it was only light weapons. Tiger lodge or something

Lion Tribe Warrior, and it's not as good as actual pounce since you can either full-attack with a single light weapon or attack once with each if you are using two and choose that instead.

Snow Tiger Berserker (which is actually pretty much the exact same thing except with slightly harder prereqs -_-) is slightly better, since its wording is similar but the way it's worded lets you make a full attack when dual-wielding light weapons.

[Vogonjeltz]

Here's the thing:
A Fighter does have all those different option, but he can only use one or two at any given lifetime. They're locked in. At Lv1, there are more possibilities, but once you take Weapon Focus, you now have three more feats that are effectively taken. The Fighter cannot take advantage of multiple fighting styles and their feat trees, because he does not have access to any but the one he took.

The Druid can take advantage of the entire animal kingdom, and then shoot fire, twist dimensions, rule half the natural world, destroy the other half, create an army of awakened shambling mound Ninjas, and be home in time to watch the TV that his Wizard friend invented.

I maintain the statement:
Feats are not class features, and they are no substitute for them.

What is stopping the fighter from retraining as often as they like in their lifetime?

And a fighter has more than enough feats to pick multiple styles and do each of them better than a Druid.

[eggynack]

What is stopping the fighter from retraining as often as they like in their lifetime?
The fact that the retraining rules only let you trade off a single feat, and do so once every level. You can make use of dark chaos shuffle, or psychic reformation, I suppose, but those things aren't infinitely cheap.


And a fighter has more than enough feats to pick multiple styles and do each of them better than a Druid.
Not necessarily, and not all the time. Druids are significantly better than fighters at grappling, for example, because summoning huge monsters bypasses a bunch of the issues with grappling. Also, fleshraker+venomfire lets you do the whole pounce thing with a good amount of efficiency. Druids do quite well in combat, especially when you consider the combination of all of the elements of a druid.

A druid on his lonesome probably can't personally lock down the battlefield as well as a chain tripping fighter, at least without pushing things, but then you get the druid's animal companion involved, and toss a summons out there, and maybe even lay down a spell to improve their abilities, and you're probably doing better than the fighter. Also, most fighter combat styles can be approximated without actually using those styles. I'd probably prefer tossing out a good old fashioned wall of thorns to trying to trip folks. Something like impeding stones provides an even more direct comparison.

[Theomniadept]

What is stopping the fighter from retraining as often as they like in their lifetime?

And a fighter has more than enough feats to pick multiple styles and do each of them better than a Druid.

I'm sorry, but what? Fighter has multiple styles and can do them better than a Druid? How is that even a fair comparison? That's like saying Wizard can't swordfight as well as a Fighter.

But let's compare melee: Fighter can take a bazillion feats (true mathematical measurement). Now please, let us compare the fighter to a Druid.

At level 8 the Druid is able to turn into a Brown Bear with 27 Strength. The fighter, who rolled an 18 for strength wearing a +4 belt (given wealth by level) can have 22. Now let's look at attacks: Fighter can have a whopping 2 given a two handed weapon (the optimal damage dealing build), while the Druid has two claws and a bite. Fighter does 2d6 + 9 per hit, averaging 32 damage per full attack. Druid has two 1d8 + 8 claws and a 2d6 + 4 bite, averaging 36 damage.

This is at level 8, when the Druid can just 'become' bigger than the fighter. This does not factor in any animal companions or any spellcasting. Past this point things only get worse for the fighter.

I mean seriously, you wanna explain how Fighter can beat a Druid taking Frozen Wild Shape? Guarantee a twelve headed cryohydra can out-fighter a Fighter any day.

[Coidzor]

What is stopping the fighter from retraining as often as they like in their lifetime?

And a fighter has more than enough feats to pick multiple styles and do each of them better than a Druid.

Time constraints, the failings of the retraining system, the lack of a good(or, indeed, any) retraining/floating feat/feat switching class feature.

[MirddinEmris]

Retraining is good and all, but if it's available to fighter, than it's available to other character, who can benefit more from it because they have abilities that scales with level, while most tricks from feats are only good at low-early mid levels. What fighter feat combo can be make adequate to something like Time Stand Still + Stormguard warrior + White Raven tactics or Stance of Alacricity+counters or bunch of other maneuver combos?

[Firechanter]

Typically, any one maneuver is better than entire Fighter feat ~chains~.

For example this Dire Flail thingy: opportunity cost is FOUR friggin feats, three of which are pure tax, and then you still have to generate situations where the trick will trigger, and then the target gets a save.

Whereas a Warblade can take, ideally, White Raven Hammer, use any weapon, and needs to hit just once to dish out Stun (which is even stronger than Daze) with *no* save.
Yes it's IL15 but we seem to be looking at endgame anyway. Also, there are lower-level status-affecting maneuvers as well.

[MirddinEmris]

Typically, any one maneuver is better than entire Fighter feat ~chains~.

For example this Dire Flail thingy: opportunity cost is FOUR friggin feats, three of which are pure tax, and then you still have to generate situations where the trick will trigger, and then the target gets a save.

Whereas a Warblade can take, ideally, White Raven Hammer, use any weapon, and needs to hit just once to dish out Stun (which is even stronger than Daze) with *no* save.
Yes it's IL15 but we seem to be looking at endgame anyway. Also, there are lower-level status-affecting maneuvers as well.

Yup. And he can take them earlier and then change to WRH, without reliance on kind DM allowing optional rules.

[Vogonjeltz]

The fact that the retraining rules only let you trade off a single feat, and do so once every level. You can make use of dark chaos shuffle, or psychic reformation, I suppose, but those things aren't infinitely cheap.


Not necessarily, and not all the time. Druids are significantly better than fighters at grappling, for example, because summoning huge monsters bypasses a bunch of the issues with grappling. Also, fleshraker+venomfire lets you do the whole pounce thing with a good amount of efficiency. Druids do quite well in combat, especially when you consider the combination of all of the elements of a druid.

A druid on his lonesome probably can't personally lock down the battlefield as well as a chain tripping fighter, at least without pushing things, but then you get the druid's animal companion involved, and toss a summons out there, and maybe even lay down a spell to improve their abilities, and you're probably doing better than the fighter. Also, most fighter combat styles can be approximated without actually using those styles. I'd probably prefer tossing out a good old fashioned wall of thorns to trying to trip folks. Something like impeding stones provides an even more direct comparison.

You know there's a rebuilding option that can be done as often as desired.

Retraining is just as you go, rebuilding is whenever. The Druid isn't grappling in the example you gave. The Druid doesn't have the feats or BAB to pick up stunning fist tree feats (fiery fist, rapid stunning, extra stunning, pain touch, flying kick, roundabout kick, improved critical, the fighter can also choose weapon focus and it's line for grapples, giving him a higher max grapple. Combine this with some simple magic items and a fighter can easily clear a +70 on his grapple checks; there are even more unarmed combat feats, which the fighter can pick up.

[eggynack]

You know there's a rebuilding option that can be done as often as desired.
If by "as often as desired" means, "Whenever the DM deigns to give you a lengthy rebuilding quest," then yeah, sure. Also, that doesn't really apply to feats, so unless you're planning to trade away fighter levels, which kinda defeats the purpose of this discussion, you're a bit out of luck.

The Druid isn't grappling in the example you gave.
The druid is always grappling in every example I give, if the situation calls for grappling. You spend a fourth level spell slot, and fwoom, sudden giant crocodile, with a +21 grapple mod and improved grab. If I'm pushing things a tiny amount I can pick up augment summoning for a +2 to that grapple mod. If I'm really pushing things, and let's say for the sake of argument that I am, then I can pick up greenbound summoning for a +7 to that grapple mod. That's a +28 at level seven, if I'm just using greenbound, or a +30 if I'm using both. This doesn't use up any long term resources, apart from picking up a feat that's excellent for other purposes, it doesn't use up daily preparation resources, because the creature is spontaneously summoned, and it doesn't even incur the natural action cost of grappling, because those actions are taken up by a creature that isn't you.

The Druid doesn't have the feats or BAB to pick up stunning fist tree feats (fiery fist, rapid stunning, extra stunning, pain touch, flying kick, roundabout kick, improved critical, the fighter can also choose weapon focus and it's line for grapples, giving him a higher max grapple. Combine this with some simple magic items and a fighter can easily clear a +70 on his grapple checks; there are even more unarmed combat feats, which the fighter can pick up.
Those things mostly seem really bad. You know that druids get spells and stuff, and that those spells can lock down enemies really efficiently, right? I don't even really know what you're trying to argue here. Fighters aren't going to end up better than druids, in pretty much any arena.

[Drachasor]

You know there's a rebuilding option that can be done as often as desired.

Retraining is just as you go, rebuilding is whenever. The Druid isn't grappling in the example you gave. The Druid doesn't have the feats or BAB to pick up stunning fist tree feats (fiery fist, rapid stunning, extra stunning, pain touch, flying kick, roundabout kick, improved critical, the fighter can also choose weapon focus and it's line for grapples, giving him a higher max grapple. Combine this with some simple magic items and a fighter can easily clear a +70 on his grapple checks; there are even more unarmed combat feats, which the fighter can pick up.

Any "simple magic items" the Druid can pick up too.

The Fighter, however, is going to have a much harder time getting enough grapple bonuses to match a Druid that is size Huge with a massive strength. And he'll probably have Rake or the like so the Druid grapple does a bunch of extra damage. If the form has Pounce and Improved Grab, the Druid doesn't need to spend one single feat on this. Meanwhile, the Fighter needs to spend a half dozen feats to just begin to catch up (though size changes make this harder).

Of course, the Druid can shut down a bunch of enemies more easily with Wall of Thorns, which can be much, much better than grapple. The Druid himself then just goes after a Wizard or the like. And unlike a Fighter, the Druid can more easily get rid of annoying protections like Free Action which shut grapples down. If he wants to grapple multiple enemies rather than Wall of Thorns, that's what summons are for. And if he's not feeling like it, the Druid can instead do something completely different.

But it is probably possible for a Fighter totally devoted to grappling to beat a Druid that does it ON A WHIM ONE DAY. Heck, and the Druid doesn't even need to use spells to do it, but they could help.

That's just part of why Wildshape >> All the Fighter Bonus Feats put together. It's why the Wildshape Ranger is T3 and otherwise T4.

But to echo what was said earlier, this has a lot more to do with how most feats suck than anything else. If Feats did more to change the game and got better at higher levels, then "feats as a class feature" would be a lot more worthwhile.

[HammeredWharf]

I think the focal point of this argument has been a bit off. Fighters can do nasty things in combat... if they're allowed to. That's the problem. Let's take a normal combat scenario:

You're a level 8 fighter, fighting a bunch of goblins in a dark cave. Your warblade buddy is next to you. Suddenly, Glitterdust from a hidden beguiler. It affects both you and the warblade. Its DC is 10 +2 from spell level +4 from attribute +1 from being unseen and +1 from Spell Focus, for a total of 18. Your warblade buddy says "Oh, a will save? Uhmm, I use Moment of Perfect Mind and roll... 4. So, that's 11 from ranks, 2 from an item and 3 from con for a total of 20. Am I blind?" No, he's not blind and can continue fighting. Your will save is +6, because you get +2 base, +2 from a Cloak of Resistance, +0 from wisdom and +2 from Iron Will, which you could totally take because fighters have unlimited feats and we're being generous. You're likely blind and can go cry in a corner.

Let's keep some facts in mind:
1) This scenario is very likely to happen. Glitterdust is one of the spells you'll probably see more than once in your campaign.
2) The warblade didn't have to spend much on avoiding this effect.
3) The fighter had a feat that helped him. A bad one, sure, but it's more than what the warblade got. He could, theoretically, waste two feats on Steadfast Determination instead, but that'll only give him a point or two to his check. Without crazy template stacking, it's impossible for him to succeed on a roll of 2 like the warblade can.

This is why fighters are T4 or 5. Even in combat, they have a couple of shticks and that's it. Their defenses suck. If they fail a save, they're screwed. Even if that warblade got blinded, he could've easily removed that blindness with an Iron Heart Surge. What does your fighter do when he's blinded? Beg the cleric for for a Remove Blindness the cleric most likely doesn't have prepared? Beg the DM to count his own blindness as a condition that affects the warblade? Try to hit enemies with a 50% miss chance, while moving at half speed and being unable to take AoOs? None of these options sound good.

[eggynack]

But to echo what was said earlier, this has a lot more to do with how most feats suck than anything else. If Feats did more to change the game and got better at higher levels, then "feats as a class feature" would be a lot more worthwhile.
Actually, I think that it has more to do with how most fighter feats suck. As I've noted elsewhere, non-fighter feats can be pretty sweet, especially when they're druid feats. I haven't even gotten into dragon wild shape, companion spellbond, or rashemi elemental summoning yet. If fighters got feats like those, they'd be a whole hell of a lot more formidable.

[Drachasor]

I think the focal point of this argument has been a bit off. Fighters can do nasty things in combat... if they're allowed to. That's the problem. Let's take a normal combat scenario:

You're a level 8 fighter, fighting a bunch of goblins in a dark cave. Your warblade buddy is next to you. Suddenly, Glitterdust from a hidden beguiler. It affects both you and the warblade. Its DC is 10 +2 from spell level +4 from attribute +1 from being unseen and +1 from Spell Focus, for a total of 18. Your warblade buddy says "Oh, a will save? Uhmm, I use Moment of Perfect Mind and roll... 4. So, that's 11 from ranks, 2 from an item and 3 from con for a total of 20. Am I blind?" No, he's not blind and can continue fighting. Your will save is +6, because you get +2 base, +2 from a Cloak of Resistance, +0 from wisdom and +2 from Iron Will, which you could totally take because fighters have unlimited feats and we're being generous. You're likely blind and can go cry in a corner.

This is why fighters are T4 or 5. Even in combat, they have a couple of shticks and that's it. Their saves suck. If they fail a save, they're screwed. Even if that warblade got blinded, he could've easily removed that blindness with an Iron Heart Surge. What does your fighter do when he's blinded? Beg the cleric for for a Remove Blindness the cleric most likely doesn't have prepared? Beg the DM to count his own blindness as a condition that affects the warblade? Try to hit enemies with a 50% miss chance, while moving at half speed and being unable to take AoOs? None of these options sound good.

Spend Feats on Blind-Fighting? Oh wait, he can't do that in combat.

Like I said earlier though, would be kind of cool if he could. Though you still have limited options since most feats suck.

Hmm, what you really need is a Jack Rakan Fighter. You can change all of your feats as a swift action (or a system that roughly does that). Remove the "Fighter Feat" thing and allow the Jack Rakan Fighter to pick any feat he qualifies for as a bonus feat. And...

No Weakpoints: You can treat your Fighter levels as levels in any class for the purpose of meeting feat prerequisites for Fighter bonus feats. For instance a 10th level Fighter could qualify for "Extra Turning" since a 10th level Cleric can Turn Undead. This does not allow you to use any class features of other classes, unless the feat gives you extra uses of that class feature. For any feat that requires some aspect of a class to be available to use, the Fighter treats this aspect as available -- but he this does not grant him the ability to use it. For instance, a Fighter 10 could take "Minor Shapeshift" and would be treated as always having a 5th level Polymorph spell available.

That should be T3 easy.


Actually, I think that it has more to do with how most fighter feats suck. As I've noted elsewhere, non-fighter feats can be pretty sweet, especially when they're druid feats. I haven't even gotten into dragon wild shape, companion spellbond, or rashemi elemental summoning yet. If fighters got feats like those, they'd be a whole hell of a lot more formidable.

Well, mostly those are feats related to spellcasting. So it is more like "caster feats are awesome." Though there are some non-caster feat exceptions.

[Vogonjeltz]

I'm sorry, but what? Fighter has multiple styles and can do them better than a Druid? How is that even a fair comparison? That's like saying Wizard can't swordfight as well as a Fighter.

But let's compare melee: Fighter can take a bazillion feats (true mathematical measurement). Now please, let us compare the fighter to a Druid.

At level 8 the Druid is able to turn into a Brown Bear with 27 Strength. The fighter, who rolled an 18 for strength wearing a +4 belt (given wealth by level) can have 22. Now let's look at attacks: Fighter can have a whopping 2 given a two handed weapon (the optimal damage dealing build), while the Druid has two claws and a bite. Fighter does 2d6 + 9 per hit, averaging 32 damage per full attack. Druid has two 1d8 + 8 claws and a 2d6 + 4 bite, averaging 36 damage.

This is at level 8, when the Druid can just 'become' bigger than the fighter. This does not factor in any animal companions or any spellcasting. Past this point things only get worse for the fighter.

I mean seriously, you wanna explain how Fighter can beat a Druid taking Frozen Wild Shape? Guarantee a twelve headed cryohydra can out-fighter a Fighter any day.

You forgot to include the bonus damage from magic weaponry, so we are looking at 3d6 per hit, plus str bonus, plus power attack, plus weapon spec)

none of this matters if the target is out of range however, bears don't have any ranged attacks, so really if the enemy has better movement the bear deals no damage at all. The fighter on the other hand can pull out a bow and steal deal damage 3 attacks per round with rapid shot, adding str bonus from a composite bow. So even if the quarry is faster it doesn't stop the fighter from engaging at respectable damage.

Cryo-hydras are huge, that isn't possible until level 15. It also doesn't have any of the special qualities: fast healing, darkvision, low light vision, or scent, not the supernatural ability to breath cold. The Druid also has a worse BAB than that cryohydra (by 1) so the attacks are ever so slightly worse (twelve bites at +16 instead of +17)


If by "as often as desired" means, "Whenever the DM deigns to give you a lengthy rebuilding quest," then yeah, sure. Also, that doesn't really apply to feats, so unless you're planning to trade away fighter levels, which kinda defeats the purpose of this discussion, you're a bit out of luck.

The druid is always grappling in every example I give, if the situation calls for grappling. You spend a fourth level spell slot, and fwoom, sudden giant crocodile, with a +21 grapple mod and improved grab. If I'm pushing things a tiny amount I can pick up augment summoning for a +2 to that grapple mod. If I'm really pushing things, and let's say for the sake of argument that I am, then I can pick up greenbound summoning for a +7 to that grapple mod. That's a +28 at level seven, if I'm just using greenbound, or a +30 if I'm using both. This doesn't use up any long term resources, apart from picking up a feat that's excellent for other purposes, it doesn't use up daily preparation resources, because the creature is spontaneously summoned, and it doesn't even incur the natural action cost of grappling, because those actions are taken up by a creature that isn't you.

Those things mostly seem really bad. You know that druids get spells and stuff, and that those spells can lock down enemies really efficiently, right? I don't even really know what you're trying to argue here. Fighters aren't going to end up better than druids, in pretty much any arena.

Playrs can choose to go on a rebuilding quest. The Druid isn't grappling, they are relying on a crutch, which isn't always available. What does the Druid do if they are getting grappled? Wish they were better at it?


Any "simple magic items" the Druid can pick up too.

The Fighter, however, is going to have a much harder time getting enough grapple bonuses to match a Druid that is size Huge with a massive strength. And he'll probably have Rake or the like so the Druid grapple does a bunch of extra damage. If the form has Pounce and Improved Grab, the Druid doesn't need to spend one single feat on this. Meanwhile, the Fighter needs to spend a half dozen feats to just begin to catch up (though size changes make this harder).

Of course, the Druid can shut down a bunch of enemies more easily with Wall of Thorns, which can be much, much better than grapple. The Druid himself then just goes after a Wizard or the like. And unlike a Fighter, the Druid can more easily get rid of annoying protections like Free Action which shut grapples down. If he wants to grapple multiple enemies rather than Wall of Thorns, that's what summons are for. And if he's not feeling like it, the Druid can instead do something completely different.

But it is probably possible for a Fighter totally devoted to grappling to beat a Druid that does it ON A WHIM ONE DAY. Heck, and the Druid doesn't even need to use spells to do it, but they could help.

That's just part of why Wildshape >> All the Fighter Bonus Feats put together. It's why the Wildshape Ranger is T3 and otherwise T4.

But to echo what was said earlier, this has a lot more to do with how most feats suck than anything else. If Feats did more to change the game and got better at higher levels, then "feats as a class feature" would be a lot more worthwhile.

Magic items don't function in wild shape. So really that's just a benefit for the fighter.

*For the war blade example, or the fighter just picks up blind fight and is barely hampered for the measily 4 round duration (assuming a level 4 caster).

[eggynack]

none of this matters if the target is out of range however, bears don't have any ranged attacks, so really if the enemy has better movement the bear deals no damage at all. The fighter on the other hand can pull out a bow and steal deal damage 3 attacks per round with rapid shot, adding str bonus from a composite bow. So even if the quarry is faster it doesn't stop the fighter from engaging at respectable damage.
Archery is admittedly not the druid's area of expertise, but they're still pretty great at range, owing to spell stuff. Also, there's not much that's faster than a druid, if the druid is really trying, so the situation you've presented with a faster than PC enemy isn't going to come up much for them.


Cryo-hydras are huge, that isn't possible until level 15. It also doesn't have any of the special qualities: fast healing, darkvision, low light vision, or scent, not the supernatural ability to breath cold. The Druid also has a worse BAB than that cryohydra (by 1) so the attacks are ever so slightly worse (twelve bites at +16 instead of +17)

You can get it as early as level 11 if you push all of your cash into a wild shape amulet. I'd advise against it, because if you're huge then you should probably just be a dire tortoise, and wild shape amulets are expensive, but it's an option that exists. As for special qualities, you can pick all of them up with a simple casting of enhance wild shape.



Playrs can choose to go on a rebuilding quest.
Even if they can spontaneously do this whenever they want, and I'm somewhat doubtful, it's irrelevant. Rebuilding only applies to ability scores, class, race, and templates. Feats are a function of retraining.

The Druid isn't grappling, they are relying on a crutch, which isn't always available.
What does that even mean? The enemy is grappled. That's really all that matters. They can also become a bear of some type if they really want to grapple themselves.

What does the Druid do if they are getting grappled? Wish they were better at it?

Heart of water? Probably heart of water.


Magic items don't function in wild shape. So really that's just a benefit for the fighter.
Wilding clasps.

[Sir Chuckles]

You know there's a rebuilding option that can be done as often as desired.

Retraining is just as you go, rebuilding is whenever. The Druid isn't grappling in the example you gave. The Druid doesn't have the feats or BAB to pick up stunning fist tree feats (fiery fist, rapid stunning, extra stunning, pain touch, flying kick, roundabout kick, improved critical, the fighter can also choose weapon focus and it's line for grapples, giving him a higher max grapple. Combine this with some simple magic items and a fighter can easily clear a +70 on his grapple checks; there are even more unarmed combat feats, which the fighter can pick up.

7th level Druid casts Freedom of Movement. Immune to grapple. Every single feat you took building up that grapple mod is now 100% useless against him for more than an hour, which is plenty of time for him to kill you.
I normally don't say this, but you appear to very uninformed. Building for that one option so heavily is exactly why the Fighter is low on the tier. He's built up one area very heavily, and a single spell, castable by Rangers, Druids, Wizards, Clerics, Sorcerers, Bards, Healers, Beguilers, even the darn Jester defeats it entirely. And with that little tidbit gone, his other options are hit thing with thing I was using to grapple. Out of combat? Well, he's cheesed out his grapple so much, it's unlikely he has much else to offer.
It's the very definition of T5. Outside of combat, you have 2 skill points, and barely any skills.


Capable of doing only one thing, and not necessarily all that well, or so unfocused that they have trouble mastering anything, and in many types of encounters the character cannot contribute.

I'm not saying you should not play it, Fighters can be fun. Any class has the potential to be fun, and just this last weekend a friend of mine said "The only way to 'win' D&D is to have fun."
But when we're talking about tiers, the Fighter is firmly T5. Variants do bring it up, hence why they're variants.

Power in one area will never be better than equal power in all areas. Note that I said equal, not Jack-of-all-Trades, master of none. Wizards, Druids, ect. can be masters of all areas.

And feat retraining takes time. You on't always have that time. You're making far too many assumptions, and then you have to realize that, at the end of the day, I just Wild Shaped into a Giant Crocodile (or summon one) and cast Animal Growth. It auto-wins a grapple with you, due to size differences.


You forgot to include the bonus damage from magic weaponry, so we are looking at 3d6 per hit, plus str bonus, plus power attack, plus weapon spec)

none of this matters if the target is out of range however, bears don't have any ranged attacks, so really if the enemy has better movement the bear deals no damage at all. The fighter on the other hand can pull out a bow and steal deal damage 3 attacks per round with rapid shot, adding str bonus from a composite bow. So even if the quarry is faster it doesn't stop the fighter from engaging at respectable damage.

Cryo-hydras are huge, that isn't possible until level 15. It also doesn't have any of the special qualities: fast healing, darkvision, low light vision, or scent, not the supernatural ability to breath cold. The Druid also has a worse BAB than that cryohydra (by 1) so the attacks are ever so slightly worse (twelve bites at +16 instead of +17)

Playrs can choose to go on a rebuilding quest. The Druid isn't grappling, they are relying on a crutch, which isn't always available. What does the Druid do if they are getting grappled? Wish they were better at it?

Magic items don't function in wild shape. So really that's just a benefit for the fighter.

1) Druids have magic, meaning yes they do have range while a bear.
2) The Fighter is not always going to have Rapid Shot or the Dex to actually hit things.
3) The Druid could wildshape into something faster.
4) The Fighter, with the Power Attack, could easily miss.
5) The Cyrohydra was not directly linked to the 8th level example.
6) The extra d6+1 from the magic weapon is still only equal to the Bear.
7) So you're saying that you're going to rely on the DM allowing you to complete rebuild your character every instant you want after every combat at any time, anywhere, into anything? That's...bad DMing.
8) If the Druid is being grappled, boom, he's a Bear. With natural attacks that function in the grapple. Doesn't work? He's bigger now. Still didn't work? He's smaller now, with a different animal that has a higher Escape Artist. Or, you know, the fact that his animal companion could join the grapple and win it with him.
9) There are plenty of ways of having magic items function while in Wild Shape.

[Drachasor]

Magic items don't function in wild shape. So really that's just a benefit for the fighter.

Wildling Clasp is just 4k. Also, if you are using anything that can be worn in the form you turn into, then you can take that off first and put it back on later. It does slow things down a bit, which is why the Wildling Clasp is better.

Anyhow, the WC does make things a bit more expensive (though in the long run not much). But the Fighter is already trying to catch up to the Druid here. So overall it isn't that great for the Fighter still.

And again, this is just ONE thing you can do with Wildshape without spending any feats. If you do spend some feats, it gets crazier -- Improved Grab + Improved Grapple means attack -> grapple -> attack for instance.

Swordsaged.

Edit: Also, the Druid can just use a summon and his companion to do grappling for him. But that gets a bit a way from my point that Wildshape >> All Fighter feats. Then again, the fact the Fighter NEEDS magical items to catch up even with all of his feats pretty much proves my point.

[Firechanter]

A little Meta-interjection:
discussions like this often seem to stem from a kind of cognitive dissonance. People think "But I like Fighters! Something I like can't be that bad!" and that's where the tug of war begins.

[Alent]

Hmm, what you really need is a Jack Rakan Fighter.

I always thought Jack Rakan was a magic knight, just like Nagi. I mean, his most famous attack is a spell called Battleship Destroying Sword.

If anything, he's that ToB Initiator PrC that can self-resurrect whenever he feels like with the only rationale being "Because he's Jack Rakan".


none of this matters if the target is out of range however, bears don't have any ranged attacks, so really if the enemy has better movement the bear deals no damage at all. The fighter on the other hand can pull out a bow and steal deal damage 3 attacks per round with rapid shot, adding str bonus from a composite bow. So even if the quarry is faster it doesn't stop the fighter from engaging at respectable damage.

You're ignoring an entire spellbook of solutions here, and assuming the target doesn't have windwall or protection from arrows.


Players can choose to go on a rebuilding quest... a crutch, which isn't always available

This is what you meant to say, right? Because you got druid in your paragraph.

I can't reply fast enough, this thread has too many swordsages in it. @_@

[HammeredWharf]

*For the war blade example, or the fighter just picks up blind fight and is barely hampered for the measily 4 round duration (assuming a level 4 caster).

So, the fighter "just" picks a feat? A feat that was used in none of the example builds in this thread and is generally rare in non-core optimized fighter builds that aren't focused of the Mage Slayer line of feats? Ok, let's assume he has Blind-Fight. He still can't charge, can't AoO, moves at 3/4 speed and misses 1/4 of the time. Let's hope he isn't a charger or a tripper. Assuming the beguiler is a level 4 caster (making the fighter's performance even more pathetic, really) the fighter is crippled with this condition for roughly half of the average D&D fight. Yes, he's screwed.

[Drachasor]

I always thought Jack Rakan was a magic knight, just like Nagi. I mean, his most famous attack is a spell called Battleship Destroying Sword.

If anything, he's that ToB Initiator PrC that can self-resurrect whenever he feels like with the only rationale being "Because he's Jack Rakan".

Yeah, but everyone uses magic in the Negiverse, so I figured the translated Rakan would be a Fighter-type in D&D. I thought the abilities fit the general theme of Rakan anyhow, without being absurd that is. The whole "I can use any Feat, because I'm just that good!"

And he has a perfectly good rational for coming back from being erased from existence. Heroic Willpower. Though, I guess this might be some sort of Iron Heart Surge, though it is impressive to be able to take an action when you don't exist.

To be fair, most of the many swords and whatnot is basically from an artifact.

Though, now that I think about it, Fighters and other martials probably should get more stat boosts or something. That or stat boosts/replacements should be harder for everyone to get.

Anyhow, I think my broader point is that 20th level Fighters should be a lot more like Jack Rakan overall. You can lose the magic (which is kind of secondary to the character as presented). But I think if the 20th Wizard makes you no longer exist, the 20th Fighter should be able to will himself back into reality...at least for a bit. Rip of Sphere of Annihilation open from the inside and that sort of thing. That said, this is probably better done with a more generalized mechanic.

[rmnimoc]

Yeah, but everyone uses magic in the Negiverse, so I figured the translated Rakan would be a Fighter-type in D&D. I thought the abilities fit the general theme of Rakan anyhow, without being absurd that is. The whole "I can use any Feat, because I'm just that good!"

And he has a perfectly good rational for coming back from being erased from existence. Heroic Willpower. Though, I guess this might be some sort of Iron Heart Surge, though it is impressive to be able to take an action when you don't exist.

To be fair, most of the many swords and whatnot is basically from an artifact.

Though, now that I think about it, Fighters and other martials probably should get more stat boosts or something. That or stat boosts/replacements should be harder for everyone to get.

Anyhow, I think my broader point is that 20th level Fighters should be a lot more like Jack Rakan overall. You can lose the magic (which is kind of secondary to the character as presented). But I think if the 20th Wizard makes you no longer exist, the 20th Fighter should be able to will himself back into reality...at least for a bit. Rip of Sphere of Annihilation open from the inside and that sort of thing. That said, this is probably better done with a more generalized mechanic.

I've given it some serious thought, and realized that every character in all fiction got iron heart surge as a free first level feat.

[Vogonjeltz]

Archery is admittedly not the druid's area of expertise, but they're still pretty great at range, owing to spell stuff. Also, there's not much that's faster than a druid, if the druid is really trying, so the situation you've presented with a faster than PC enemy isn't going to come up much for them.


You can get it as early as level 11 if you push all of your cash into a wild shape amulet. I'd advise against it, because if you're huge then you should probably just be a dire tortoise, and wild shape amulets are expensive, but it's an option that exists. As for special qualities, you can pick all of them up with a simple casting of enhance wild shape.


Even if they can spontaneously do this whenever they want, and I'm somewhat doubtful, it's irrelevant. Rebuilding only applies to ability scores, class, race, and templates. Feats are a function of retraining.

What does that even mean? The enemy is grappled. That's really all that matters. They can also become a bear of some type if they really want to grapple themselves.

Heart of water? Probably heart of water.


Wilding clasps.

Fighter bonus feats are class abilities. The meaning of the Druid not grappling is they aren't always going to have a spell to summon a grappler, that's why I mentioned the scenario in which the Druid is grappled.

What does the Druid do if they've been dispelled? Or AMFd? Or they already burned heart of water?


7th level Druid casts Freedom of Movement. Immune to grapple. Every single feat you took building up that grapple mod is now 100% useless against him for more than an hour, which is plenty of time for him to kill you.
I normally don't say this, but you appear to very uninformed. Building for that one option so heavily is exactly why the Fighter is low on the tier. He's built up one area very heavily, and a single spell, castable by Rangers, Druids, Wizards, Clerics, Sorcerers, Bards, Healers, Beguilers, even the darn Jester defeats it entirely. And with that little tidbit gone, his other options are hit thing with thing I was using to grapple. Out of combat? Well, he's cheesed out his grapple so much, it's unlikely he has much else to offer.
It's the very definition of T5. Outside of combat, you have 2 skill points, and barely any skills.

Freedom of movement has a somatic component. It can't be cast in a grapple at all. Furthermore there's no way to know in advance that the opposition will be grappling. And once it has happened, it is too late. Lastly, dispel magic. It's a 3rd level spell and it negates things. Things like magical defenses.

Outside of combat the Fighter isn't really much worse off than the cleric, sorcerer, or anyone else with 2+int who isn't using int as a primary stat (and if the fighter goes combat expertise, they are going to have at least 4/level)



And feat retraining takes time. You on't always have that time. You're making far too many assumptions, and then you have to realize that, at the end of the day, I just Wild Shaped into a Giant Crocodile (or summon one) and cast Animal Growth. It auto-wins a grapple with you, due to size differences.

Casting or wild shaping takes a standard action, that means the Druids round is over (and when did this become head to head instead of comparative?), if they cast its fully vulnerable to interruption, the magic items mentioned earlier can be used to grow the fighter, or he can use a feat to prevent the grapple (or escape from it, remember his grapple check is actually much better, size only auto prevents, it doesn't auto win when attempting to start one. The fighter can also just use his unarmed combat feats to stun, paralyze, nauseate, set the croc on fire, and so forth (or in a pinch, just punch).

And if it comes to it, the fighter still has the ability to move to range and use cover/tight spaces to screw the huge sized monstrosity.



1) Druids have magic, meaning yes they do have range while a bear.
2) The Fighter is not always going to have Rapid Shot or the Dex to actually hit things.
3) The Druid could wildshape into something faster.
4) The Fighter, with the Power Attack, could easily miss.
5) The Cyrohydra was not directly linked to the 8th level example.
6) The extra d6+1 from the magic weapon is still only equal to the Bear.
7) So you're saying that you're going to rely on the DM allowing you to complete rebuild your character every instant you want after every combat at any time, anywhere, into anything? That's...bad DMing.
8) If the Druid is being grappled, boom, he's a Bear. With natural attacks that function in the grapple. Doesn't work? He's bigger now. Still didn't work? He's smaller now, with a different animal that has a higher Escape Artist. Or, you know, the fact that his animal companion could join the grapple and win it with him.
9) There are plenty of ways of having magic items function while in Wild Shape.

1) Spells are much more limited in number than arrows. And the arrows can easily be buffed (quiver of energy). I doubt all the spell slots are attack spells at range.
2) Dex isn't really needed (if this is a fighter going for, mostly unarmed feats he will have a higher wisdom, so zen archery makes sense). With higher BAB comes better chance to hit.
3) but then they've burned 2 standard actions and 2 wild shape uses (out of 3 at level 8!) that seems highly inefficient.
4) maybe the first round, they could adjust.
5) ok
6) I'm pretty sure it is more.
7) no I'm saying if they want to go rebuild, they can. It's not happening day in and day out.
8) requires a DC 20 concentration check, from in a grapple. I know it isn't a spell, but if that doesn't count than the ability can't actually be used. So I'm giving the benefit of the doubt to you.
9) Ok?


Wildling Clasp is just 4k. Also, if you are using anything that can be worn in the form you turn into, then you can take that off first and put it back on later. It does slow things down a bit, which is why the Wildling Clasp is better.

Anyhow, the WC does make things a bit more expensive (though in the long run not much). But the Fighter is already trying to catch up to the Druid here. So overall it isn't that great for the Fighter still.

And again, this is just ONE thing you can do with Wildshape without spending any feats. If you do spend some feats, it gets crazier -- Improved Grab + Improved Grapple means attack -> grapple -> attack for instance.

Swordsaged.

Edit: Also, the Druid can just use a summon and his companion to do grappling for him. But that gets a bit a way from my point that Wildshape >> All Fighter feats. Then again, the fact the Fighter NEEDS magical items to catch up even with all of his feats pretty much proves my point.

4k is a lot of money. That doesn't do anything but make a single other magic item function. A 4k tax runs the Druid out of money, that's a +2 enhancement bonus, or a couple +1 weapons, or a lot of things in the MIC.

I'm not sure why you think the fighter is behind on this front.

[Rejusu]

I'm still amazed that even with more than a decade of analysis on a meta game that's been stagnant for more than half that time these kind of disputes still crop up. But hey, at least it isn't Monk this time.

I'm not sure I can add anything that hasn't been said already so here's a summary:

Feats that augment class features are generally better than those that don't.
Class features are generally stronger than feats.
Except in the case of the fighter where their class features are feats.
A fighters feats allow them to specialise in one or two areas of combat.
Spells or class features allow other classes to specialise in many areas of combat and respecialise at the drop of a hat.
Other classes may not be as flexible as the aforementioned classes but still allow them to do what the fighter has specialised in better than the fighter.
Outside of combat the fighter has nothing going for them at all.
Many of the areas that the fighter can specialise in are rendered useless against many enemies, especially those with a size modifier (bull rush, grapple, trip) or simply rendered useless by environment (can't trip underwater).


Fighters are one of the better tier 5 classes (having a choice in your class features means not getting stuck with crummy ones like the Monk) but still decidedly tier 5. Of course if anyone wants to dispute this there's always the usual option of a duel. Druid vs Fighter might be a little more interesting than Wizard vs Monk. These rarely ever seem to happen though because the mundane player is often reluctant to test their theories. :smallamused:

Jack Rakan clearly iron heart surged away his own lack of existence, because he's Jack Rakan.

[Vogonjeltz]

I'm still amazed that even with more than a decade of analysis on a meta game that's been stagnant for more than half that time these kind of disputes still crop up. But hey, at least it isn't Monk this time.

I'm not sure I can add anything that hasn't been said already so here's a summary:

Feats that augment class features are generally better than those that don't.
Class features are generally stronger than feats.
Except in the case of the fighter where their class features are feats.
A fighters feats allow them to specialise in one or two areas of combat.
Spells or class features allow other classes to specialise in many areas of combat and respecialise at the drop of a hat.
Other classes may not be as flexible as the aforementioned classes but still allow them to do what the fighter has specialised in better than the fighter.
Outside of combat the fighter has nothing going for them at all.
Many of the areas that the fighter can specialise in are rendered useless against many enemies, especially those with a size modifier (bull rush, grapple, trip) or simply rendered useless by environment (can't trip underwater).


Fighters are one of the better tier 5 classes (having a choice in your class features means not getting stuck with crummy ones like the Monk) but still decidedly tier 5. Of course if anyone wants to dispute this there's always the usual option of a duel. Druid vs Fighter might be a little more interesting than Wizard vs Monk. These rarely ever seem to happen though because the mundane player is often reluctant to test their theories. :smallamused:

Jack Rakan clearly iron heart surged away his own lack of existence, because he's Jack Rakan.

How does a duel answer anything? Wouldn't a series of challenges where we examine methods of solution by a quantified fighter and Druid (meaning we know their builds in advance) be more useful?

Examples challenges: break into/out of prison, defeat humanoids, defeat a magical beast, defeat a dragon, defeat a giant, break into a tower to rescue a princess on the top floor, win an alabaster cup.

Valid?

[Drachasor]

Fighter bonus feats are class abilities. The meaning of the Druid not grappling is they aren't always going to have a spell to summon a grappler, that's why I mentioned the scenario in which the Druid is grappled.

That might be true at low levels. At mid to high levels, the Druid is going to be hard-pressed to run out of spells and wildshapes.


What does the Druid do if they've been dispelled? Or AMFd? Or they already burned heart of water?

The Fighter is far, far easier to shut down -- and his magic items are easier to dispel than a Druid's buffs (though granted you can targetted dispel buffs). And you can't dispel Wildshape, so that's always good.

AMF can work, but Wall of Thorns pretty much ends a Fighter (might need to dispel a magic item first though) -- or any number of other magics like Dominate Person. Yes, you can disable what a Druid is doing -- but overall it is far easier to disable the Fighter.


Freedom of movement has a somatic component. It can't be cast in a grapple at all. Furthermore there's no way to know in advance that the opposition will be grappling. And once it has happened, it is too late. Lastly, dispel magic. It's a 3rd level spell and it negates things. Things like magical defenses.

Swift Wildshape gets around such problems for Wildshape -- and it is a really good feat. Freedom of Movement lasts 10 min/level. So that is a LONG time.

And again, Dispel Magic works on the Fighter's equipment a lot more easily than buffs -- and it is easy to buff Caster Level higher.


Outside of combat the Fighter isn't really much worse off than the cleric, sorcerer, or anyone else with 2+int who isn't using int as a primary stat (and if the fighter goes combat expertise, they are going to have at least 4/level)

Not true. Those other classes have better class skills and they have spells that can be very useful out of combat. Fighters have nothing.

Limited spells for utility stuff is only an issue at very low levels. It starts to disappear around level 5 or so.


And if it comes to it, the fighter still has the ability to move to range and use cover/tight spaces to screw the huge sized monstrosity.

There are ways around that. Improved Grab is one. Freedom of Movement can help here too to an extent. Worst case, the Druid just switches tactics -- Nature's Ally, spells, and Wildshape give a ton of options that don't just require being huge.


1) Spells are much more limited in number than arrows. And the arrows can easily be buffed (quiver of energy). I doubt all the spell slots are attack spells at range.

There are so many low-level ways to shut down all arrows it isn't even funny.


4k is a lot of money. That doesn't do anything but make a single other magic item function. A 4k tax runs the Druid out of money, that's a +2 enhancement bonus, or a couple +1 weapons, or a lot of things in the MIC.

I'm not sure why you think the fighter is behind on this front.

The Fighter is behind because he needs to make up for the 30+ Strength of the Druid as well as the Size bonus. If we just assume the Druid is grappling here as opposed to adding in any friends to help (which is easy, he starts with one).

4k is only a notable amount before level 10 or so. That is of course when the Druid has a huge relative advantage -- +10 strength, +4 size bonus on grapple checks. Another +2 with Bulls Strength or the like.

After that it is a tiny additional cost.

Want to compare a Level 8 Druid and a Level 8 Fighter as far as grappling goes? Because that Fighter is going to have to go all-out on grappling (or perhaps use a lot of exotic race options), where as the standard Druid matches him without trying.

Without magic items, the Druid is going to have Pounce, Improved Grab, and a +18 grapple check without trying, or drop pounce for a +20 grapple check. That's just using the SRD.

A Fighter with 18 strength, with a +4 item and +2 from leveling has a 24 strength. So that's a base +15 grapple. This is what I mean by him needing to catch up. Even spending 2 feats (2/5 of his bonus feats at this level) he just has a +19. That about matches the Druid's check -- but the Druid does a lot more damage while grappling, and can buff himself in needed.

[Sir Chuckles]

Fighter bonus feats are class abilities. The meaning of the Druid not grappling is they aren't always going to have a spell to summon a grappler, that's why I mentioned the scenario in which the Druid is grappled.

What does the Druid do if they've been dispelled? Or AMFd? Or they already burned heart of water?

Freedom of movement has a somatic component. It can't be cast in a grapple at all. Furthermore there's no way to know in advance that the opposition will be grappling. And once it has happened, it is too late. Lastly, dispel magic. It's a 3rd level spell and it negates things. Things like magical defenses.

Outside of combat the Fighter isn't really much worse off than the cleric, sorcerer, or anyone else with 2+int who isn't using int as a primary stat (and if the fighter goes combat expertise, they are going to have at least 4/level)

Casting or wild shaping takes a standard action, that means the Druids round is over (and when did this become head to head instead of comparative?), if they cast its fully vulnerable to interruption, the magic items mentioned earlier can be used to grow the fighter, or he can use a feat to prevent the grapple (or escape from it, remember his grapple check is actually much better, size only auto prevents, it doesn't auto win when attempting to start one. The fighter can also just use his unarmed combat feats to stun, paralyze, nauseate, set the croc on fire, and so forth (or in a pinch, just punch).

And if it comes to it, the fighter still has the ability to move to range and use cover/tight spaces to screw the huge sized monstrosity.

1) Spells are much more limited in number than arrows. And the arrows can easily be buffed (quiver of energy). I doubt all the spell slots are attack spells at range.
2) Dex isn't really needed (if this is a fighter going for, mostly unarmed feats he will have a higher wisdom, so zen archery makes sense). With higher BAB comes better chance to hit.
3) but then they've burned 2 standard actions and 2 wild shape uses (out of 3 at level 8!) that seems highly inefficient.
4) maybe the first round, they could adjust.
5) ok
6) I'm pretty sure it is more.
7) no I'm saying if they want to go rebuild, they can. It's not happening day in and day out.
8) requires a DC 20 concentration check, from in a grapple. I know it isn't a spell, but if that doesn't count than the ability can't actually be used. So I'm giving the benefit of the doubt to you.
9) Ok?

4k is a lot of money. That doesn't do anything but make a single other magic item function. A 4k tax runs the Druid out of money, that's a +2 enhancement bonus, or a couple +1 weapons, or a lot of things in the MIC.

I'm not sure why you think the fighter is behind on this front.

1) Druids can use Slings.
2) You just used up a feat for something you might use. You don't have unlimited feats. You have a lot, but you're becoming more and more MAD. And again, you may be able to do that one thing, but that one thing could be done better by a dozen others.
3) They were hypothetical actions.
4) Meaning they're taking the time (and retaliations) to waste their adjustments.
6) It is not. 1d6+1 average is 4. the calculated average in that example is Fighter 32 Bear-Druid 36.
7) No, they can't. It's not guaranteed. A Druid can change what animals he wants to be on a whim, or prepare a different set of spells.
8) Oh no, a DC 20 check on a skill that is keyed off Con on a class with it as a class skill? At Lv8?
9) Let's take a step farther. The Fighter does not have Use Magic Device, and is not always a charisma based character.

4k is not a lot of money. At 8th level, WBL is 27,000gp. 4k is not much, especially considering that the Fighter has a bigger cash tax, needing those magic items to be effective.
And as for an anti-magic field, the Druid can still compete, having a large amount of extraordinary class features, such as immunity to poison and an animal companion. At 7th level, his animal companion could be giant crocodile.

The Fighter is behind in every way imaginable. List one, ONE thing that a Fighter can do that a Druid or Wizard can't do.

[Rejusu]

How does a duel answer anything? Wouldn't a series of challenges where we examine methods of solution by a quantified fighter and Druid (meaning we know their builds in advance) be more useful?

Examples challenges: break into/out of prison, defeat humanoids, defeat a magical beast, defeat a dragon, defeat a giant, break into a tower to rescue a princess on the top floor, win an alabaster cup.

Valid?

A duel is a simple test of comparative power, it answers the question of which is stronger by whoever is left standing afterwards. Of course a series of challenges works too. Probably better really as it would serve to highlight the fighters lack of out of combat utility. You do know that many of those challenges would be trivial for a Druid right?

[Firechanter]

@Prostetnik Vogon Jeltz:

Freedom of movement has a somatic component. It can't be cast in a grapple at all. Furthermore there's no way to know in advance that the opposition will be grappling.

Yeah, because Grappling enemies are totally uncommon and there is hardly anything in the MMs that has Improved Grab.
Seriously, there's such a lot of cuddling going on in 3.X that virtually any spellcaster who has the spell will cast it as soon as it looks like the action is about to start.


Lastly, dispel magic. It's a 3rd level spell and it negates things. Things like magical defenses.


Firstly, Dispel has only a success chance around 50% (give or take), secondly, Casters know that Dispel is a thing and usually take the appropriate countermeasures. Such as a Ring of Counterspells or that FR weapon property that eats specific spells cast at you.


Outside of combat the Fighter isn't really much worse off than the cleric, sorcerer, or anyone else with 2+int who isn't using int as a primary stat

Except a, say, Cleric will still have a full spell progression with access to hundreds and hundreds of spells that can also be used for utility. (Sorcerers not so much, I'll grant you that, but Sorcs often get the short end of the stick in Casterland.)

Just as an anecdote, in my old group we had two Clerics (I played one of them), a Rogue and two Beatsticks (Fighter and poorly skilled Ranger). Whenever an out-of-combat obstacle came up, the Rogue had her skills, the Beatsticks had absolutely nothing at all, and more often than not it was the Clerics who solved the problem by creative application of a spell they had prepared anyway. Not the Rogue and certainly not the Beatsticks.

[Juntao112]

How does a duel answer anything? Wouldn't a series of challenges where we examine methods of solution by a quantified fighter and Druid (meaning we know their builds in advance) be more useful?

Examples challenges: break into/out of prison, defeat humanoids, defeat a magical beast, defeat a dragon, defeat a giant, break into a tower to rescue a princess on the top floor, win an alabaster cup.

Valid?

Challenge accepted. (http://www.myth-weavers.com/sheetview.php?sheetid=690632)

[Alent]

Yeah, but everyone uses magic in the Negiverse, so I figured the translated Rakan would be a Fighter-type in D&D. I thought the abilities fit the general theme of Rakan anyhow, without being absurd that is. The whole "I can use any Feat, because I'm just that good!"

You know, this is probably the first time I've ever thought of the Negiverse as a Tippyverse. :smalleek: It is insanely magic dense, and then there's artifacts basically handing out free magic items that let people pretend to be full wizards... yeah. I'll give you that one hands down.

As for the "I can use any feat" idea, it just feels like bughouse chess to me. I think I like the idea of Fighters getting a free artifact weapon/tool for making a pactio with every caster in the party more than I like the idea of trying to keep straight what all the fighters on the board have this turn.

I do like the idea of "just being that good", but I think in practice it might end up being less Jack Rakan Fighter, more MacGyver Factotum.


And he has a perfectly good rational for coming back from being erased from existence. Heroic Willpower. Though, I guess this might be some sort of Iron Heart Surge, though it is impressive to be able to take an action when you don't exist.

I think you start by using iron heart surge to remove the abnormal condition of not being able to use iron heart surge.

This brings up a question I've always had. Let's say the impossible happens and your party druid dies in combat. Why does he not just plane-shift back, summon a planar ally into his own corpse with that one druid "necromancy" spell, and go right back at the fight, but now with the ghost template?


Though, now that I think about it, Fighters and other martials probably should get more stat boosts or something. That or stat boosts/replacements should be harder for everyone to get.

I keep wondering how to resolve fundamental changes to stats without the houserules not being D20 anymore or making Fighters suffer the Monk/ToB problem of looking absurdly OP on paper but not in practice.

One thing that I do think would be nice was if the improved (grapple/bullrush/etc) feats let you be treated as one size larger for those actions.

[Sir Chuckles]

How does a duel answer anything? Wouldn't a series of challenges where we examine methods of solution by a quantified fighter and Druid (meaning we know their builds in advance) be more useful?

Examples challenges: break into/out of prison, defeat humanoids, defeat a magical beast, defeat a dragon, defeat a giant, break into a tower to rescue a princess on the top floor, win an alabaster cup.

Valid?

Yes, very valid. But here's the thing: You listed a series of mostly combat encounters.
Let's go with the examples close to the ones provided by JaronK himself, when writing the tiers.

Example 1: A dragon in a cave, the cave is deep and has traps.
Example 2: Find/Contact the leader of a criminal organization in a nearby city.
Example 3: Orc army attacking a town, you have a week to prepare.

Let's start with the Fighter.
Example 1:
This is where a Fighter can do well. In part of the encounter. He's a Fighting man. There is a dragon. Unless he's a grappler, tripper, disarmer, sunder-er, or really any special action like that, he can probably handle the fight pretty. Meat shield, damage, he's got it covered. Unless, of course, the dragon moves vertically and he has to rely on range. Or the dragon uses something from his massive spell list with a will save. But ultimately, yeah, he can help fight. Problem: He can't do anything leading up to it. He can't detect traps, he can't trigger the traps or disarm the harmlessly, and he's certainly not going to make stealth rolls. He's better off in the bag of holding.

Example 2:
Again, we same the same. Thugs try to stop you? Thog smash! :thog: Door in the way? Thog smash! City guard asks you to leave the private area? Thog...smash? And then have an entire police force attack? Oooh nooo. Problem: No social skills, except intimidate, which has a poor chance of working unless it's far below an appropriate encounter. It's wildly inappropriate to fight your way through ever encounter here. Nonlethal may work, but if you get arrested you've failed the mission.

Example 3:
Unless the fighter is strongly optimized for Handle Animal, all he'll be doing is building a body count. Maybe he's got ranks in Craft: Blacksmithing, and quickly make some spears and clubs, but thats a maybe.

Now for Druid.
1:
Summoned animals can easily clear the traps or they can burrow around them. The Druid can wildshape into something with stealth skills. The Druid can cast his own spells to dig through the caves. He could use Diplomacy to negotiate. If a fight start, he has a plethora of spells to have prepared. If he's high enough level and fighting the right dragon, he could turn into an elemental and be immune to the dragon's breath attack. He can stack resistances and tap away with an army of extremely powerful raging badgers, or he can blast away and be on equal grounds with the dragon. Or he could swap to a large series of save-or-die and save-and-suck spells. And there's no reason he couldn't prepare heavily, as he could have Scry.

2:
Again, the Druid has a plethora of animals that he could use. Cats, dogs, bats, rats...none are conspicuous. He could BE one. If all else fails, Scry, Animal Messenger, Speak with Plants, Speak with Animals...
If it comes to blows, again, he has an animal army at his beck and call.
And once more, he has skill points. Diplomacy, Listen, and Spot are noticeable absentees from the Fighter's list.

3:
Once more, animal army. Tree army. Given the right spells/feats, magical beast army. He can spend the whole week setting traps. He could Scry&Fry. He can rack up a similar if not better body count. Wall of Thorns. Liveoak. Transport via Plants to be a surprise assassin.

[Rejusu]

You should read UQ holder, the Negiverse has gone even tippier in the years that have passed. There are "magic apps" now. Which so far seem to be wands that waive the UMD requirement.

[Sir Chuckles]

You should read UQ holder, the Negiverse has gone even tippier in the years that have passed. There are "magic apps" now. Which so far seem to be wands that waive the UMD requirement.

I was imagining Magic Missiles out of my Android.

[Nightraiderx]

Only way fighter is going to get any social interaction is through the thug template in unearthed arcana, they get 4+int skill points and urban tracking.

[MirddinEmris]

Only way fighter is going to get any social interaction is through the thug template in unearthed arcana, they get 4+int skill points and urban tracking.

They get 4+int skill points and some class skills, but they don't get urban tacking, they just add it to possible feats to take as bonus. Also they lose first level bonus feat.

[Nightraiderx]

They get 4+int skill points and some class skills, but they don't get urban tacking, they just add it to possible feats to take as bonus. Also they lose first level bonus feat.

Ah I thought it replaced the first level feat, geez way to gouge out I spose.

[Seerow]

They get 4+int skill points and some class skills, but they don't get urban tacking, they just add it to possible feats to take as bonus. Also they lose first level bonus feat.

While normally I'd be pretty happy with an option that lets me pay 1 feat for 2 extra skillpoints per level and an expanded skill list, it only giving you access to things the Fighter should have had for free is kind of sad.

[Segev]

Since this thread seems to have drifted at least a little in the direction all such threads eventually do, I'll go ahead and throw a question at the crowd (since it also never seems to be wholly adequately answered): What would it take to make a fighter have those options?

Not, "what would make him higher-tier?" That may be inherent, somewhat, to the nature of expanding options, but just tackle it from the base question: If the druid or rogue could handle the trap-filled dragon cave as well as actually fight the dragon (or negotiate or what-have-you), what would it take to give the fighter - perhaps the classic knight-in-shining-armor - the capacity to take on this challenge and complete his dragon-slaying quest?

How does the classic fictional-story knight do it?

How do historic or traditional-fiction fighter-types make themselves capable and imposing and anything but a disposable meatshield for the "better" archetypes?

Is it all plot contrivance? Is it something else? In either case, is there a way to insert it into the mechanics of the Fighter?

[Nightraiderx]

The fighter needs more resistances than the other classes, he's the hardened warrior, the battle veteran, it should be represented more than just his high HD and base fort. I would give fighters at least one more good base save.

I saw an interesting fix in which normal fighter feats were improved if the fighter took them and was a certain level, such as weapon focus giving a rider effect based on the type of weapon or making feats improve, like improved trip from a 4th level fighter could have a foe loose his next move action.

I think the fighter needs the 4+skill point and a slightly longer list, survival should've been one for the fighter, something akin to weapon skill as well.

I've always thought skill ranks would be a better sacrifice to learn exotic weapons/armor and the blacksmith skills do more for a fighter than other classes, the dragonmagazine's Master's of the Forge comes to mind.

[Flickerdart]

The fighter needs more resistances than the other classes, he's the hardened warrior, the battle veteran, it should be represented more than just his high HD and base fort. I would give fighters at least one more good base save.
Being more resistant to things isn't doing things, and doesn't really help a character that doesn't do very much.

[MirddinEmris]

The fighter needs more resistances than the other classes, he's the hardened warrior, the battle veteran, it should be represented more than just his high HD and base fort. I would give fighters at least one more good base save.

I saw an interesting fix in which normal fighter feats were improved if the fighter took them and was a certain level, such as weapon focus giving a rider effect based on the type of weapon or making feats improve, like improved trip from a 4th level fighter could have a foe loose his next move action.

I think the fighter needs the 4+skill point and a slightly longer list, survival should've been one for the fighter, something akin to weapon skill as well.

I've always thought skill ranks would be a better sacrifice to learn exotic weapons/armor and the blacksmith skills do more for a fighter than other classes, the dragonmagazine's Master's of the Forge comes to mind.

I would say 6+int sp, for those studying Seven Knightly Arts or being crafty ercenary with a lots of tricks in his sleeve

[Nightraiderx]

Being more resistant to things isn't doing things, and doesn't really help a character that doesn't do very much.

true, another thing I was going to add was stamina points of some sort to do extraordinary feats of physical prowess. And all the fighter's feats can act like the extra feat chameleon has.

[eggynack]

Fighter bonus feats are class abilities. The meaning of the Druid not grappling is they aren't always going to have a spell to summon a grappler, that's why I mentioned the scenario in which the Druid is grappled.
There's usually going to be at least one spell hanging around, and you can pull from most SNA's for good results. Overall though, I far prefer the druid's lot in life in this case, where they sometimes won't be able to grapple because they've run out of relevant slots, to the fighter's lot in life, where they can always grapple in their less powerful way (because they need to continually waste actions to do it). Really, if you take the average fighter and the average druid, I would expect the druid to have access to grappling a much higher percentage of the time, because I rarely see a fighter who chooses to grapple.


What does the Druid do if they've been dispelled? Or AMFd? Or they already burned heart of water?

The item solution was already proposed, where you effectively can't be dispelled, and there are some others. Either exalted or dragon wild shape can trivially remove the druid from this situation, through the blink dog's free action dimension door and tarterian dragon's always on FoM respectively, and regular wild shape can always just make the druid reasonable at grappling. There's also always the perfect defense against being grappled, which is not being grappled. It's a much easier task when you're constantly flying high above the battlefield in desmodu bat form, and outsourcing combat to various spells. As for the odd AMF situation, even then the druid has a massive advantage in an AMF because they have an animal companion to help them out. Gaining an advantage from grappling is much more difficult when a fleshraker is consuming your face while you grapple.


Casting or wild shaping takes a standard action, that means the Druids round is over.
Not necessarily. The mantle of the beast is always a thing, and a pretty sweet one at that.


1) Spells are much more limited in number than arrows. And the arrows can easily be buffed (quiver of energy). I doubt all the spell slots are attack spells at range.
Spells are much more useful and action efficient than even a buffed arrow though, and when any spell slot can instantly become an animal that starts out at least 25 feet away and pushes onward from there, all slots kinda are attack spells at range.


2) Dex isn't really needed (if this is a fighter going for, mostly unarmed feats he will have a higher wisdom, so zen archery makes sense). With higher BAB comes better chance to hit.
You're not necessarily going to have zen archery either though, because you're not necessarily focusing resources on archery. You should probably construct an actual build at some point, on that note.


3) but then they've burned 2 standard actions and 2 wild shape uses (out of 3 at level 8!) that seems highly inefficient.
It's only inefficient if it's not a thing you need to do. You don't need to apply the same solution to the problem every time, and if this is the best one, such is the nature of things. Also, it's only really a single standard action, because you're not using the first wild shape in combat, and it might even be a swift, as noted above.

7) no I'm saying if they want to go rebuild, they can. It's not happening day in and day out.
Rebuild what? What are you rebuilding? Are you becoming a not-fighter? Are you becoming a water orc? I honestly can't see these things substantially impacting flexibility that much.

8) requires a DC 20 concentration check, from in a grapple. I know it isn't a spell, but if that doesn't count than the ability can't actually be used. So I'm giving the benefit of the doubt to you.
It's a supernatural ability. It requires no concentration checks, and it lacks any kind of component.



4k is a lot of money. That doesn't do anything but make a single other magic item function. A 4k tax runs the Druid out of money, that's a +2 enhancement bonus, or a couple +1 weapons, or a lot of things in the MIC.

I'm not sure why you think the fighter is behind on this front.
The fighter is behind because he needs to make up for so much lost ground. How is your fighter flying, for example, or doing anything else on the lists of necessary magic items (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=187851)? Hell, you mentioned +1 weapons, but that's a thing that druids never even really purchase. They can pretty much spend all of their time buying cool stuff, and buy cool stuff they will, whether it's a ring of the beast, a belt of battle, a lesser rod of extend, or some other nifty thing. There is no absolutely essential item for a druid, so they can do as they please with their money.

[MirddinEmris]

Hell, you mentioned +1 weapons, but that's a thing that druids never even really purchase. They can pretty much spend all of their time buying cool stuff, and buy cool stuff they will, whether it's a ring of the beast, a belt of battle, a lesser rod of extend, or some other nifty thing. There is no absolutely essential item for a druid, so they can do as they please with their money.

I'll be damned if that's not true. I remember my times playing Wildshape Range/MoMF and actual Druid and was really surprised by how little gear they actually need. So i ended up bying a lot of cool stuff like Rod of Ropes or that map that automatically draws you surrounding land. And i remember countless times playing fighter or other mundane ranged\melee guy, always thinking what should i spend on what (should i buy this short and noce boost, or should i wait and then buy another +something ability on my main weapon wich i really need?)

[Rejusu]

Is it all plot contrivance? Is it something else? In either case, is there a way to insert it into the mechanics of the Fighter?

The problem with trying to fix the fighter is that it has no mechanics. Or rather it has no unique mechanics. Ask yourself what is the 3.5 fighter? He's feats and nothing else. At least with Monk and Paladin you're given something to work with. The fighter is so generic he may as well be an NPC class. The best fix for the fighter is the warblade, it's pretty much what the fighter should have been.

And to add to Eggynacks comment I can think of a way to accomplish one of the challenges (rescuing the princess from the top of the tower) with no feats, using only one class feature (spellcasting) and butt naked. So yeah.

[HammeredWharf]

Since this thread seems to have drifted at least a little in the direction all such threads eventually do, I'll go ahead and throw a question at the crowd (since it also never seems to be wholly adequately answered): What would it take to make a fighter have those options?

I made a theoretical fighter "fix" a while ago. (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=327872) It's meant to be all the things the fighter of my dreams is, resulting in a T3-ish class. There's a list of goals in the beginning of that thread:

1. Bonus feats are a privilege, not a penalty and not real class features. Also, Weapon Specialization sucks and doesn't work as a gimmick, so this Fighter gets it for free.
2. No new mechanics with extensive lists and no references to non-core materials. This rewrite should be simple and core-only, because Fighter is a simple, core-only class.
3. The fighter is a highly trained, professional soldier. Her abilities should reflect that.
4. The fighter is a capable leader. She should be able to distinguish friend from foe (via Knowledge: Nobility), attend to strategy meetings (via Knowledge: Geography) and know the details of many historical battles (via Knowledge: History).
5. The fighter is a guard. She should have Spot and Listen as class skills.
6. Unlike the Barbarian, the Fighter is a smart soldier, with a variety of special attacks at her disposal. She should benefit from Intelligence
7. The fighter is a class, so there should be something interesting and/or unique about her.
8. Finally, the fighter shouldn't stumble around the battlefield, getting AoO:d constantly.

[Theomniadept]

Fighter bonus feats are class abilities. The meaning of the Druid not grappling is they aren't always going to have a spell to summon a grappler, that's why I mentioned the scenario in which the Druid is grappled.
Grappling is usually very feat intensive for a player. Conversely, grappling has always been sub-par, because the best grapplers are simply larger and stronger, like our friend the Bear Druid, who can initiate grapple from 10 feet away, easily eating any medium sized creature. Plus, it's usually hard to grapple the guy who can either become large enough to beat you, has a large animal helper in the grapple, or can just shrink down and escape artist away, not counting the fact that Freedom of Movement is a Druid spell and they could quite easily cast it before battle. Contrast the fighter - two-handed weapon = no attacking in a grapple. TWF = only light weapon attacks in a grapple.


What does the Druid do if they've been dispelled? Or AMFd? Or they already burned heart of water?
If the Druid has been dispelled it means there's a mage enemy that needs to be bear'd. AMF is such a high level that we can safely assume 12 headed cryohydra is in play, which means that the 12 bites are in an AMF going up against an enemy in an AMF who has no magical buffs, meaning size and number of heads wins out again. Also, Fleshraker Velociraptors still exists in an AMF.



Freedom of movement has a somatic component. It can't be cast in a grapple at all. Furthermore there's no way to know in advance that the opposition will be grappling. And once it has happened, it is too late. Lastly, dispel magic. It's a 3rd level spell and it negates things. Things like magical defenses. How is there no way to know in advance? That's literally the worst assumption that has been made thus far. Druids have lots of Knowledge skills and would easily be able to know that something with superior grappling power like a Kraken would very much like to wrap its tentacles around the party, which is reason enough to assume Freedom of Movement would always be cast prior to needing it. Unless you're going to try and tell me all grapplers have superior stealth capabilities in which case I actually want to see how Fighter manages to survive the same scenario.


Outside of combat the Fighter isn't really much worse off than the cleric, sorcerer, or anyone else with 2+int who isn't using int as a primary stat (and if the fighter goes combat expertise, they are going to have at least 4/level) Now that's just insane. You do realize what skills Fighter possesses, right? Just having 1 skill rank in each of their class skills allows Clerics to cast spells to augment their skill checks by up to a massive +15. Sorcerer might not have skills but can easily solve scenarios with magic because magic is far superior to skill checks and can solve any scenario.

Now please, tell me all the wonderful all-encompassing things Fighter can do with Climb, Craft, Handle Animal, Intimidate, Jump, Ride, and Swim.



Casting or wild shaping takes a standard action, that means the Druids round is over (and when did this become head to head instead of comparative?), if they cast its fully vulnerable to interruption, the magic items mentioned earlier can be used to grow the fighter, or he can use a feat to prevent the grapple (or escape from it, remember his grapple check is actually much better, size only auto prevents, it doesn't auto win when attempting to start one. The fighter can also just use his unarmed combat feats to stun, paralyze, nauseate, set the croc on fire, and so forth (or in a pinch, just punch). Wow. Okay, where to start?

Casting takes a standard action. Hey GitP! Polymorph isn't broken, it takes a standard action to cast, so as long as you kill something before then i can't polymorph. It's okay, the spell is totally balanced.

Think about what you said; Wild Shaping is done on a Druid. Druids prioritize Wisdom and come packaged with Listen and Spot. The Druid can wild shape for one hour per Druid level. It is actually rarer to encounter a non-Wild Shaped Druid/ There is literally no way you can ever justify a Druid not having Wild Shape before a battle starts. Also, no it is not subject to interruption as changing forms does not provoke AoOs, so no, you can't stop it.

Fighter has a better grapple? You do realize each size of difference is going to give our Druid friend a +4 bonus, right? Let's take that nice level 8 example and grapple Fighter into the ground. Fighter has 24 STR from roll + 4th and 8th level increases and the belt of whatever. Improved Grapple + Jotunbrud gives him a grapple check of +23. Not bad, not bad. Druid has a Grapple of +18 from Bear STR, size, and his BAB. Oh wait, what's this? Our Druid friend has Bite of the Wereboar cast, adding +4 STR for a modifier of +20, and a +8 to Natural Armor. Combine with Babau Slime for an additional 1d8 acid damage when grappling. So, the fighter with every possible modifier from specialization is going to have a whopping +3 more than our magic bear with the face of a boar.

But grappling isn't everything right? Damage is important too - which means that in the grapple ManBearPig can use two claws and a bite in addition to the automatic acid damage, and unless your fighter's using a light weapon he will take additional acid damage for punching the acidic ManBearPig.


And if it comes to it, the fighter still has the ability to move to range and use cover/tight spaces to screw the huge sized monstrosity. As has been firmly established repeatedly and unquestionably our magical Druid has magical magic and magical spells to create magical magic effects. Did I mention magic?

Back to level 8 again: Druid spies a Fighter with a bow. Fighter, without Listen or Spot, in typical Fighter fashion, picks his nose. Druid realizes archer Fighter here is hiding in foliage on the opposite side of a large chasm. He approaches in attempts to say hello. Fighter, spying the Druid, attempts to shoot the Druid, and wins initiative due to being given at least some sort of advantage (we'll assume Improved Initiative). Fighter is also mounted and able to move and full attack because feats are free for him. Both his attacks hit from his +1 Composite [8] bow, dealing a total 2d8+36 damage, average 43. Good, he has every advantage here...and loses. Druid Wild Shapes into a Dire Eagle and flies over all the obstacles into the foliage. Now, Fighter, without Spot and Listen, has lost the Druid. Suddenly, a Giant Crocodile appears next to the Fighter, and being Huge sized with 27 Strength attempts to grapple the Fighter. Fighter has all the grappling stuff we mentioned before because hey why not he's some strange gestalt Fighter/Fighter with double the feats. Huge size > Large size (fighter is counted as large due to Jotunbrud), Crocodile bites Fighter, fighter quick draws a magic short sword because feats feats feats, Crocodile continues biting for 2d8+12 every attack, Fighter does 1d6+9, Fighter's max HP off of a 20 CON (18 on a roll + 2 from a belt from wealth by level plus some generous money for magic weapons) is 128 (plus Improved Tougness), crocodile has average 59. Fighter deals average 25 every grappled full attack, crocodile deals 19. After one round of this a Lion not native to this biome appears and suddenly starts grappling with the fighter after clawing him for 7 damage, and the croc bites for 19. The fighter attempts again to kill the Crocodile, who is the larger threat. The fighter tosses feat after feat at the two summoned creatures but ends up taking another 19 damage from the croc and 14 damage from the lion (assuming lion bite misses). Round 3, fighter kills the crocodile but takes 14 damage from the lion and suddenly finds himself taking another 7 as a second lion decides to eat a fighter. He stabs at the first lion and takes a total 28 damage from 4 claws. He kills the first lion, surprised that nothing else decides to attack him, and takes 14 from the second lion. He stabs this lion, takes 14, then stabs it on the next round, killing it.

Exhausted (and by following these average damage numbers), he is at one HP. He looks up from the blood pool on the ground to see a bear. The bear hands him a note that read "I would like to initiate grapple".




1) Spells are much more limited in number than arrows. And the arrows can easily be buffed (quiver of energy). I doubt all the spell slots are attack spells at range.
2) Dex isn't really needed (if this is a fighter going for, mostly unarmed feats he will have a higher wisdom, so zen archery makes sense). With higher BAB comes better chance to hit.
3) but then they've burned 2 standard actions and 2 wild shape uses (out of 3 at level 8!) that seems highly inefficient.
4) maybe the first round, they could adjust.
5) ok
6) I'm pretty sure it is more.
7) no I'm saying if they want to go rebuild, they can. It's not happening day in and day out.
8) requires a DC 20 concentration check, from in a grapple. I know it isn't a spell, but if that doesn't count than the ability can't actually be used. So I'm giving the benefit of the doubt to you.
9) Ok?

Spells are more limited, huh? Last I checked arrows don't summon giant HP sacks with abilities like grappling or magic casting. Also, please tell me how these arrows dispel illusions. Or how firing arrows is more effective than firing Enervation negative levels. Or how firing arrows causes you to teleport to whatever destination you have in mind.

Even given Zen Archery and max rolls you still have two bad saves.

Burned two wild shape uses? Oh noes, I have to expend daily uses of magical stuff to automatically win battles. That's just Wild Shape. We're ignoring Animal Companion and Spellcasting. Just having one of those three abilities would make a great character - Druid has all 3.


4k is a lot of money. That doesn't do anything but make a single other magic item function. A 4k tax runs the Druid out of money, that's a +2 enhancement bonus, or a couple +1 weapons, or a lot of things in the MIC.

Monk's Belt + Wilding clasp + Natural armor of wild shape forms = lol @ full plate fighter. Also, Armbands of Might + Wilding Clasp means that all that grappling stuff I typed before? Completely useless, Druid wins by default.


I'm not sure why you think the fighter is behind on this front. It's not thinking that the fighter's behind, it's knowing the fighter is behind. It's seeing that at your best idea of 'versatility' fighter has to retrain all his feats he has to essentially retrain entire feat trees, which involves 1 retraining session to make them all simple 'take-anytime' feats, then retraining AGAIN to get an entirely different feat tree. Let me remind you this costs 50 gold per feat every single time. Even given all the grappling, two-handed fighting, two-weapon fighting, tripping, disarming, mounted combat feats far beyond what fighter is capable of having at any point in time, he still can't compete with any spellcasters or Tome of Battle classes. Well, I mean he can compete with Paladin and Ranger, his tier 5 buddies with only 4 levels of spells, but against any Tier 3 or higher classes he loses outright.

Please note in every example where the druid won...he had no items. Versus a fighter with more money than normally allotted.

[Juntao112]

Sorcerer might not have skills but can easily solve scenarios with magic because magic is far superior to skill checks and can solve any scenario.
"There are no problems which cannot be solved by judicious use of high explosives."
— British Commando saying, World War 2

[Togo]

It comes down to what is viable as a team.

It's taken as a given that a druid or monk, on their own, can't handle a dragon, so we're looking at a team effort. The question is then what the team's tactics are aimed at. Large sections of the rules assume a straight blow by blow combat, where success involves a combination of the ability to exceed the opponent's AC and do lots of damage. Fighters excel at moving this AC/tohit/damage curve.

There are broadly two ways to kill a dragon. The first is to hit it to deal damage. The second is to disable it or kill it in some non-hp related way.

The basic problem fighters have is that they are specialised in moving the damage curve. If the other party members are doing damage, or buffing the party to have them take less damage, hit more often or do more damage, or debuffing the enemy to either make them easier to hit or poor at fighting, then everything is fine, everyone is contributing and the fighter is often the star of the show.

If on the other hand, you're going for the second tactic, then the fighter is in trouble. Generally the second involves save or die, save or cripple, or similar effects, and the focus is on trying to get the opponent to fail their save. Less commonly there is an attempt to pull out something that the opponent is not designed to counter, such as summoning Allips to kill a Terrasque, or using optimised shivering touch on a dragon. In this case, one of two things happens. Either the tactic is effective, and the combat is over, and the fighter is wasting his time. Or, the tactic fails, and the fighter is now fighting the dragon by himself. Either way, the only contribution he makes is by being a 'meat shield'.

These boards favour an 'optimised' style of play, in which the second tactic is overwhelmingly more common. That's why the fighter is disparaged - because it's intended for use with the first style of play.

If you want the fighter to be useful, you need the first style of play. That means eliminating or cutting down on the second style. The most common way I've seen of doing that is by optimising the monsters appropriately. If your Big Bad is built to maximise his saving throws, for example, then save or die is less likely to work.

Or to repeat exactly what people have been saying on these boards for so long - The fighter can be a perfectly viable character class, but optimisers tend to disparage it as lacking the kinds of features they more often use in practice.

[Brookshw]

"There are no problems which cannot be solved by judicious use of high explosives Animal Husbandry."
— British Commando saying, World War 2 Red Mage, 8 Bit Theater

fixed that for you :smallbiggrin:

[The Insanity]

You should read UQ holder, the Negiverse has gone even tippier in the years that have passed. There are "magic apps" now. Which so far seem to be wands that waive the UMD requirement.
What's UQ? Some kind of sequel/continuation/alternative story/spin-off?

I don't remember, because I read Negima a long time ago, but wasn't it stated that Rakan doesn't use magic?

[eggynack]

Monk's Belt + Wilding clasp + Natural armor of wild shape forms = lol @ full plate fighter. Also, Armbands of Might + Wilding Clasp means that all that grappling stuff I typed before? Completely useless, Druid wins by default.

Don't forget luminous armor+high dexterity of some wild shape forms. A druid can get their AC pretty high up there with minimal investment.

[Forrestfire]

What's UQ? Some kind of sequel/continuation/alternative story/spin-off?

I don't remember, because I read Negima a long time ago, but wasn't it stated that Rakan doesn't use magic?

Totally-not-a-sequel Sequel. It follows another character in the same universe, 80(?) years later.

And Rakan uses a ton of magic. Between passive strength empowerment stuff, energy blasts, superspeed, dispels... He also has excessively high knowledge mods, and can do magic without looking like he does.

For instance:
When Fate's people trapped him in that pocket dimension using their artifact, Rakan immediately figured out what sort of magic it was using, and broke it by introducing a micro-black hole to it, since the space wasn't designed to be able to handle extreme gravity.

Course, he claimed he did it by sheer force of will, but that's just Rakan being Rakan :smalltongue:

[Merellis]

What's UQ? Some kind of sequel/continuation/alternative story/spin-off?

I don't remember, because I read Negima a long time ago, but wasn't it stated that Rakan doesn't use magic?


Broke an Artifact Level illusionary world just by letting loose magic power

Able to use the technique that Evangeline created, not for long, but was able to use that magic power. Also showed him able to cast magic at that point by casting Hellfire Conflaguration so he could absorb it.

All weapons are literally magic from his Pactio card.

He just seems to prefer cutting and beating the crap out of his enemies, but you need to also note that he collects a lot of techniques. Like learning skills from Setsuna's set by looking.

He is a complete and utterly broken character and should not be used in a discussions about fighters because the man has magic, has ki, and has shown to over-power everyone with just the power he can unleash.

And y'know, being able to come back from being erased completely to puch someone.

[Vogonjeltz]

That might be true at low levels. At mid to high levels, the Druid is going to be hard-pressed to run out of spells and wildshapes.

It is true at the level we were both talking about, the Druid can't afford to do what you suggest at that level.


The Fighter is far, far easier to shut down -- and his magic items are easier to dispel than a Druid's buffs (though granted you can targetted dispel buffs). And you can't dispel Wildshape, so that's always good.

Buffs when dispelled are gone forever, the Druid is almost certainly out of whatever spells were removed for the rest of the day. The magic items are at worst disabled for as little as 1 round. The Druid stands to suffer much much more. Being so reliant on magic for defense.


AMF can work, but Wall of Thorns pretty much ends a Fighter (might need to dispel a magic item first though) -- or any number of other magics like Dominate Person. Yes, you can disable what a Druid is doing -- but overall it is far easier to disable the Fighter.

Wall of thorns doesn't do anything an would have the least impact on a fighter of all classes. Dominate Person isn't even on the Druid spell list, and it has no bearing on the challenges listed. Every class with a poor will save progression is at the same risk. One might as well say the Druid is screwed because he only has a d8, or can't wear metal armor, so his wooden gear is going to get set of fire all the time.


Swift Wildshape gets around such problems for Wildshape -- and it is a really good feat. Freedom of Movement lasts 10 min/level. So that is a LONG time.

And again, Dispel Magic works on the Fighter's equipment a lot more easily than buffs -- and it is easy to buff Caster Level higher.

1) it lasts 80 minutes at 8th level, if you cast it and don't engage a grappler in that time frame it is wasted. Again, no way to know this is going to happen. Until it does. 80 minutes is not much time at all.
2) dispel magic is a check against the caster level, fighters are no more vulnerable to this than Druids. Less so because it only shuts off magic items for as little as 1 round.


Not true. Those other classes have better class skills and they have spells that can be very useful out of combat. Fighters have nothing.

Limited spells for utility stuff is only an issue at very low levels. It starts to disappear around level 5 or so.

They may have better class skills depending entirely on the challenge faced. Actually, no they don't. Sorcerer has concentration (only useful to the sorcerer);
Bluff (equal to intimidate, possibly worse depending on the situation); spellcraft (useless for a non caster); and knowledge (arcana) (why does the fighter need this at all? Knowledge skills are Bard specialties, if you really want to know something, go ask them.)

Fighter meanwhile has climb, swim, jump (all important skills when adventuring), ride (useful for combat or looking stylish), and handle animal (actually allows the fighter to train exotic beasts as mounts, which is worth a couple thousand gold instead of buying them pre trained).

When spells are getting dispelled limited spells become much more so.


There are ways around that. Improved Grab is one. Freedom of Movement can help here too to an extent. Worst case, the Druid just switches tactics -- Nature's Ally, spells, and Wildshape give a ton of options that don't just require being huge.

Improved grab is countered by close quarters combat, if the Druid isn't huge he has lost the supposed grapple advantage, and by changing burned a use of wild shape.


There are so many low-level ways to shut down all arrows it isn't even funny.

Prot from arrows is dr magic (easily bypassed); and wind wall is both stationary and brief 1 round/level. Were you thinking of something else? Because neither of those is a very good defense.


The Fighter is behind because he needs to make up for the 30+ Strength of the Druid as well as the Size bonus. If we just assume the Druid is grappling here as opposed to adding in any friends to help (which is easy, he starts with one).

4k is only a notable amount before level 10 or so. That is of course when the Druid has a huge relative advantage -- +10 strength, +4 size bonus on grapple checks. Another +2 with Bulls Strength or the like.

After that it is a tiny additional cost.

Want to compare a Level 8 Druid and a Level 8 Fighter as far as grappling goes? Because that Fighter is going to have to go all-out on grappling (or perhaps use a lot of exotic race options), where as the standard Druid matches him without trying.

Without magic items, the Druid is going to have Pounce, Improved Grab, and a +18 grapple check without trying, or drop pounce for a +20 grapple check. That's just using the SRD.

A Fighter with 18 strength, with a +4 item and +2 from leveling has a 24 strength. So that's a base +15 grapple. This is what I mean by him needing to catch up. Even spending 2 feats (2/5 of his bonus feats at this level) he just has a +19. That about matches the Druid's check -- but the Druid does a lot more damage while grappling, and can buff himself in needed.

A Druid in bear form has 27 str, that's not 30+. Nothing is stoping the Fighter from being enlarged himself, negating any size difference, on top of that the Fighters BAB and feats give a substantial bonus over the Druid. The Druid has to hit with natural weapons while grappling (at a -4), very unlikely on the well armored Fighter. The fighter on the other hand can use spiked armor and gauntlets and armor, at no penalty, dealing a bonus 1d6 damage. Remember, the Druid only has 3 uses if wild shape, so tactically the Fighter is better to withdraw to cover, using ranged options and forcing the Druid to shift out if he wants to engage at all.


1) Druids can use Slings.
2) You just used up a feat for something you might use. You don't have unlimited feats. You have a lot, but you're becoming more and more MAD. And again, you may be able to do that one thing, but that one thing could be done better by a dozen others.
3) They were hypothetical actions.
4) Meaning they're taking the time (and retaliations) to waste their adjustments.
6) It is not. 1d6+1 average is 4. the calculated average in that example is Fighter 32 Bear-Druid 36.
7) No, they can't. It's not guaranteed. A Druid can change what animals he wants to be on a whim, or prepare a different set of spells.
8) Oh no, a DC 20 check on a skill that is keyed off Con on a class with it as a class skill? At Lv8?
9) Let's take a step farther. The Fighter does not have Use Magic Device, and is not always a charisma based character.

1) Slings are the worst ranged option, 1 standard action attack per round at 1d4 + str, move action to reload. It's a weapon of last resort.
2) it's not unlimited no, but it's not as limited as the Druid who can't even get a feat with a BAB requirement until 3rd level.
4) that's only if the competition can even hit them (benefit of having good armor)
6) 4 x 3 attacks is 12, average, and the 2d6+7 is 10, so 42 per round (before power attack)
8) yeah entirely possible to fail when you can't take 10. Druid will maybe pass, maybe not, in which case not only did they waste the wild shape use, and their action, but they're grappled and probably going to take max damage (which is a problem for someone with a d8).
9) And? Most magic items don't require UMD, and neither do potions.


4k is not a lot of money. At 8th level, WBL is 27,000gp. 4k is not much, especially considering that the Fighter has a bigger cash tax, needing those magic items to be effective.
And as for an anti-magic field, the Druid can still compete, having a large amount of extraordinary class features, such as immunity to poison and an animal companion. At 7th level, his animal companion could be giant crocodile.

The Fighter is behind in every way imaginable. List one, ONE thing that a Fighter can do that a Druid or Wizard can't do.

4k really is a lot of money. That's another magic item, or 3. It's two points if armor. Immunity to a sword in ones gut seems more useful than immunity to poison, a pity the Druid doesn't have that instead. The companion could also be a ferret.


A duel is a simple test of comparative power, it answers the question of which is stronger by whoever is left standing afterwards. Of course a series of challenges works too. Probably better really as it would serve to highlight the fighters lack of out of combat utility. You do know that many of those challenges would be trivial for a Druid right?

Combat is 90% of the game, why not tack on: response to impromptu bar room brawl; being laywayed by highwaymen; chasing a someone; and other standard activities? You know, trivial activities for the Fighter.


@Prostetnik Vogon Jeltz:

Yeah, because Grappling enemies are totally uncommon and there is hardly anything in the MMs that has Improved Grab.
Seriously, there's such a lot of cuddling going on in 3.X that virtually any spellcaster who has the spell will cast it as soon as it looks like the action is about to start.

Aw you noticed :) if you're really lucky, I'll read you some of my poetry later.

It was being proposed that the Druid was facing a mundane threat (for some reason a fighter), so I was saying they would have no reason to suspect a grapple. Besides, if he wastes time casting freedom of movement he's not doing anything else. Also, he could be surprised (in which case the spell could be interrupted on his turn); or just late in initiative.


Firstly, Dispel has only a success chance around 50% (give or take), secondly, Casters know that Dispel is a thing and usually take the appropriate countermeasures. Such as a Ring of Counterspells or that FR weapon property that eats specific spells cast at you.

It's based on caster level, so that success rate would seem to be much more variable, unless both effects are at equal level. Sadly the ring costs 4k, which was spent on a wilding clasp to make something function in wild shape. Couldn't speak to the weapon property as I don't play in FR.


Except a, say, Cleric will still have a full spell progression with access to hundreds and hundreds of spells that can also be used for utility. (Sorcerers not so much, I'll grant you that, but Sorcs often get the short end of the stick in Casterland.)

Sure, but they're just as restricted on the skill front. And few players are going to burn spell slots on extremely situational spells.


Just as an anecdote, in my old group we had two Clerics (I played one of them), a Rogue and two Beatsticks (Fighter and poorly skilled Ranger). Whenever an out-of-combat obstacle came up, the Rogue had her skills, the Beatsticks had absolutely nothing at all, and more often than not it was the Clerics who solved the problem by creative application of a spell they had prepared anyway. Not the Rogue and certainly not the Beatsticks.

YMMV? I'm more than a little surprised that the Ranger 4 skill points, unique access to survival, and 3 knowledges was fully unable to contribute. Also: What skills did the fighter invest in? What challenges were faced? I suppose it depends on what the DM presents, but there are creative solutions to all problems.


Yes, very valid. But here's the thing: You listed a series of mostly combat encounters.
Let's go with the examples close to the ones provided by JaronK himself, when writing the tiers.

Example 1: A dragon in a cave, the cave is deep and has traps.
Example 2: Find/Contact the leader of a criminal organization in a nearby city.
Example 3: Orc army attacking a town, you have a week to prepare.

Let's start with the Fighter.
Example 1:
This is where a Fighter can do well. In part of the encounter. He's a Fighting man. There is a dragon. Unless he's a grappler, tripper, disarmer, sunder-er, or really any special action like that, he can probably handle the fight pretty. Meat shield, damage, he's got it covered. Unless, of course, the dragon moves vertically and he has to rely on range. Or the dragon uses something from his massive spell list with a will save. But ultimately, yeah, he can help fight. Problem: He can't do anything leading up to it. He can't detect traps, he can't trigger the traps or disarm the harmlessly, and he's certainly not going to make stealth rolls. He's better off in the bag of holding.

Example 2:
Again, we same the same. Thugs try to stop you? Thog smash! :thog: Door in the way? Thog smash! City guard asks you to leave the private area? Thog...smash? And then have an entire police force attack? Oooh nooo. Problem: No social skills, except intimidate, which has a poor chance of working unless it's far below an appropriate encounter. It's wildly inappropriate to fight your way through ever encounter here. Nonlethal may work, but if you get arrested you've failed the mission.

Example 3:
Unless the fighter is strongly optimized for Handle Animal, all he'll be doing is building a body count. Maybe he's got ranks in Craft: Blacksmithing, and quickly make some spears and clubs, but thats a maybe.

Now for Druid.
1:
Summoned animals can easily clear the traps or they can burrow around them. The Druid can wildshape into something with stealth skills. The Druid can cast his own spells to dig through the caves. He could use Diplomacy to negotiate. If a fight start, he has a plethora of spells to have prepared. If he's high enough level and fighting the right dragon, he could turn into an elemental and be immune to the dragon's breath attack. He can stack resistances and tap away with an army of extremely powerful raging badgers, or he can blast away and be on equal grounds with the dragon. Or he could swap to a large series of save-or-die and save-and-suck spells. And there's no reason he couldn't prepare heavily, as he could have Scry.

2:
Again, the Druid has a plethora of animals that he could use. Cats, dogs, bats, rats...none are conspicuous. He could BE one. If all else fails, Scry, Animal Messenger, Speak with Plants, Speak with Animals...
If it comes to blows, again, he has an animal army at his beck and call.
And once more, he has skill points. Diplomacy, Listen, and Spot are noticeable absentees from the Fighter's list.

3:
Once more, animal army. Tree army. Given the right spells/feats, magical beast army. He can spend the whole week setting traps. He could Scry&Fry. He can rack up a similar if not better body count. Wall of Thorns. Liveoak. Transport via Plants to be a surprise assassin.

2/3 are still combat.

In the first example, set up siege weapons outside the cave entrance, camouflaged and manned by mercenaries. Lure the dragon out, and ambush it for and instant kill. Takes advantage of siege engineer profession and craft skills.

Don't even have to go into the cave, the Dragon has to eat sometime.

Second example, intimidate actually works quite well, though so does just using gather information, take 10. Technically you win even if you don't find anything out at first, because asking questions draws attention, eventually the organization comes to ask you what you want.

Alternative: Find the shakiest person you can, who is also a weasel, and intimidate them if they are unwilling to spill at first. Buy them a drink later to make up for it.

Third example, siege engines, ballistas and so forth. Build a series of ditches with stakes. During the battle the Fighter engages the enemy leader in single combat, and slays him. Alternatively, drop a very large rock on his command tent (with the aforementioned engines) or put a ballista bolt through his torso.

[Theomniadept]

Don't forget luminous armor+high dexterity of some wild shape forms. A druid can get their AC pretty high up there with minimal investment.

You see I didn't even take into account a quarter of the things Druid can do while completely naked that just out-everythings Fighter (and all other tier 5 classes).

Or to repeat exactly what people have been saying on these boards for so long - The fighter can be a perfectly viable character class, but optimisers tend to disparage it as lacking the kinds of features they more often use in practice. Viable can be disagreed upon. If the party is a Wizard, Cleric, and Factotum, then the Fighter is going to feel completely useless because anything he can do the others can do better while stlll fulfilling every combat role.

Fighter still functions as a good dip class for feat-intensive builds, and it's very good when prestige classing into things like Order of the Bow Initiate, given how feat-intensive archery is (or gods forbid Mounted Archery). But it's just that; a base class that cannot stand on its own, whereas Druids, Cerics, Wizards, Sorcerers, Bards, Factotums (Factoti?), Dread Necromancers, Beguilers, Rainbow Servant Warmages, Swordsages, Warblades, Crusaders, and basically anything with spellcasting or some variant automatically plays at a higher power level that Fighter just cannot reach.

[eggynack]

Wall of thorns doesn't do anything an would have the least impact on a fighter of all classes.
How does wall of thorns not do anything? Even a fighter, with, say, 24 strength would only manage to move at all on a roll of 18, and doing so takes a full round action. That's ridiculously impactful.

Dominate Person isn't even on the Druid spell list, and it has no bearing on the challenges listed. Every class with a poor will save progression is at the same risk.
I thought you said this wasn't an arena match.

One might as well say the Druid is screwed because he only has a d8, or can't wear metal armor, so his wooden gear is going to get set of fire all the time.
Those things don't screw the druid at all. The druid is maybe 1 HP+1 HP/level below the fighter on average, and why would he be covered in wooden gear instead of, y'know, leather? Even that is unlikely, given that I prefer the ol' fashioned armorless druid.



Actually, no they don't. Sorcerer has concentration (only useful to the sorcerer);
Good thing the sorcerer is a sorcerer. That was a close one.

Spellcraft (useless for a non caster);
I think you mean useless if you're not either a caster, or facing a caster. Identifying spells is very helpful.

and knowledge (arcana) (why does the fighter need this at all? Knowledge skills are Bard specialties, if you really want to know something, go ask them.)
The fighter needs it to identify the creatures and things that knowledge (arcana) identifies. It feels like you've constructed a weird sour grapes argument. Like, "I didn't want to have knowledges anyway. Hmph."


Fighter meanwhile has climb, swim, jump (all important skills when adventuring), ride (useful for combat or looking stylish)
And all pretty much useless when placed next to the all consuming power of spells. Flight obviates any need for climbing and jumping, and something like heart of water obviates the need for swimming. Druids are obviously even better at this thing.



Improved grab is countered by close quarters combat, if the Druid isn't huge he has lost the supposed grapple advantage, and by changing burned a use of wild shape.
The druid is changing tactics. That means that it no longer wants or needs a grapple advantage, and you don't even necessarily need to change form to change tactics. I also don't know what you mean by improved grab being countered by close quarters combat. It seems kinda not-true.



Prot from arrows is dr magic (easily bypassed); and wind wall is both stationary and brief 1 round/level. Were you thinking of something else? Because neither of those is a very good defense.
Rounds/level is plenty of time to finish an encounter, even at level five when you first get the spell. Druids get a lot of ranged defenses though, from control winds to blizzard to friendly fire, and all three of those are good for things besides protecting you from arrows.



A Druid in bear form has 27 str, that's not 30+.
Depends on the bear. A dire bear, for instance, has 31 strength.

Nothing is stoping the Fighter from being enlarged himself, negating any size difference
What is the fighter using to do this. There are methods, certainly, but you're going to need to actually pick one.

Remember, the Druid only has 3 uses if wild shape, so tactically the Fighter is better to withdraw to cover, using ranged options and forcing the Druid to shift out if he wants to engage at all.

Why would the druid have to shift out if they want to engage? They can just cast spells while being a bear. That's what being a druid is all about.


2) it's not unlimited no, but it's not as limited as the Druid who can't even get a feat with a BAB requirement until 3rd level.
A druid doesn't really want any of those feats. The druid's feat access has very little to do with the fighter's feat access as well, given that the druid has been relying on feats with relative infrequency. Also, I could easily say that the druid is far less limited in feat selection, because they can take casting feats, wild shape feats, animal companion feats, and summoning feats, while fighters cannot.


8) yeah entirely possible to fail when you can't take 10. Druid will maybe pass, maybe not, in which case not only did they waste the wild shape use, and their action, but they're grappled and probably going to take max damage (which is a problem for someone with a d8).
Su abilities still don't have concentration checks.



4k really is a lot of money. That's another magic item, or 3. It's two points if armor. Immunity to a sword in ones gut seems more useful than immunity to poison, a pity the Druid doesn't have that instead. The companion could also be a ferret.
The druid quite possibly has even greater AC than the fighter, between all of the aforementioned druid AC boosters, as well as a few that went unmentioned. Druids are cool like that.


Combat is 90% of the game, why not tack on: response to impromptu bar room brawl; being laywayed by highwaymen; chasing a someone; and other standard activities? You know, trivial activities for the Fighter.
Druids are pretty awesome at that stuff, is the problem. I mean, really, all three problems can technically be solved by becoming a desmodu hunting bat as a swift action (with the mantle), flying into the air, and shooting a wall of thorns at everyone. You might even be able to skip the bat+flight step, depending on the circumstances. Now the brawl has ended, the highwaymen have been immobilized, and the guy I'm chasing can't move anymore.



It's based on caster level, so that success rate would seem to be much more variable, unless both effects are at equal level. Sadly the ring costs 4k, which was spent on a wilding clasp to make something function in wild shape. Couldn't speak to the weapon property as I don't play in FR.
Druids are allowed to buy more than one thing, even with wilding clasps. Hell, I can even get the ring to work without wilding clasps. Pick up a ring of the beast, which is a common druid item that works in a wild shape, toss the ring of counterspells on there for the low low price of 6,000 GP, and there ya go. It's 2,000 more GP than it would otherwise be, which is quite a bit better.



In the first example, set up siege weapons outside the cave entrance, camouflaged and manned by mercenaries. Lure the dragon out, and ambush it for and instant kill. Takes advantage of siege engineer profession and craft skills.

Don't even have to go into the cave, the Dragon has to eat sometime.

Second example, intimidate actually works quite well, though so does just using gather information, take 10. Technically you win even if you don't find anything out at first, because asking questions draws attention, eventually the organization comes to ask you what you want.
These two solutions are somewhat mutually exclusive, as you're using up more skill points than you have picking up some craft skill, cross class profession ranks, and intimidate, as well as cross class gather information. You're not really using your fighter abilities, in other words, and you're making a lot of assumptions thinking that the highly intelligent and spellcasting dragon is going to just waltz out of his cave into a trap without a plan, and that the dragon will just die.


Third example, siege engines, ballistas and so forth. Build a series of ditches with stakes. During the battle the Fighter engages the enemy leader in single combat, and slays him. Alternatively, drop a very large rock on his command tent (with the aforementioned engines) or put a ballista bolt through his torso.
Again, none of this is really stuff that a fighter is good at, apart from maybe the single combat, but I'm even somewhat doubtful on that count. Ask yourself how your plan is significantly better than what a commoner could do, and realize that, for the most part, it is not.

[Theomniadept]

It is true at the level we were both talking about, the Druid can't afford to do what you suggest at that level. Except that he can afford to do whatever he wants at any level.


Buffs when dispelled are gone forever, the Druid is almost certainly out of whatever spells were removed for the rest of the day. The magic items are at worst disabled for as little as 1 round. The Druid stands to suffer much much more. Being so reliant on magic for defense. You are literally just not reading this stuff, are you? He is not reliant on magic for defense, his defenses are fully taken care of by Wild Shape and an Animal Companion. He doesn't buff himself for 5 rounds and then get dispelled, because the best spell options are always offensive in some way, usually battlefield control. Also, please explain exactly how the Fighter can dispel magic, and please explain how the fighter does not suffer the same when his weapons no longer bypass DR or his armor no longer resists energy.



Wall of thorns doesn't do anything an would have the least impact on a fighter of all classes. Dominate Person isn't even on the Druid spell list, and it has no bearing on the challenges listed. Every class with a poor will save progression is at the same risk. One might as well say the Druid is screwed because he only has a d8, or can't wear metal armor, so his wooden gear is going to get set of fire all the time. This is wrong in so many blatantly obvious ways it is painful to read. I can simply surround a fighter with Wall of Thorns and he is 100% immobilized until I deem him worthy of being released. Also, we're not just doing Druid vs. Fighter - Cleric needs a singular spell to flip the Fighter's power switch to 'off'. Also, armor doesn't matter much because AC sucks and if the druid wanted armor badly he could easily afford Dragonhide versions of metal armor, which stacks with his Wild Shape AC bonuses.

Also please tell me how Cleric is not relevant to the challenges listed when cleric can solo a dragon with slightly less ease than a Druid or Wizard.



1) it lasts 80 minutes at 8th level, if you cast it and don't engage a grappler in that time frame it is wasted. Again, no way to know this is going to happen. Until it does. 80 minutes is not much time at all.
2) dispel magic is a check against the caster level, fighters are no more vulnerable to this than Druids. Less so because it only shuts off magic items for as little as 1 round.
1. You assume all spellcasters are stupid and cannot see threats in front of them. With a duration that long they can easily buff before going into a dungeon and not worry about anything. Also, please explain how fighters without Spot or Listen are more likely to know when danger arrives.
2. Except for the fact that without magic items the fighter is subject to low AC, has to go through DR, cannot fly, cannot use obscene strength values - spellcasters can simply cast stuff again.




They may have better class skills depending entirely on the challenge faced. Actually, no they don't. Sorcerer has concentration (only useful to the sorcerer);
Bluff (equal to intimidate, possibly worse depending on the situation); spellcraft (useless for a non caster); and knowledge (arcana) (why does the fighter need this at all? Knowledge skills are Bard specialties, if you really want to know something, go ask them.)

Fighter meanwhile has climb, swim, jump (all important skills when adventuring), ride (useful for combat or looking stylish), and handle animal (actually allows the fighter to train exotic beasts as mounts, which is worth a couple thousand gold instead of buying them pre trained).
And here's where your argument has no validation: Climb, Jump, and Swim are all substituted by spellcasters using methods of flight and the ability to gain waterbreathing/waterwalking. Ride is only for mounted combat builds and yet again loses to flying. Sorcerers can do all this. Even with their limited skill list at least sorcerers can identify magic and have one knowledge - the fighter's biggest enemy is walking into a forest and dying from never being able to leave, whereas Sorcerer with no knowledge in nature or geography can fly away or teleport.


When spells are getting dispelled limited spells become much more so. So tell me again about how a fighter is going to dispel a spellcaster.



Improved grab is countered by close quarters combat, if the Druid isn't huge he has lost the supposed grapple advantage, and by changing burned a use of wild shape. Now I am 100% positive you are new to the system. Improved Grab says if I hit with a claw I get a free action grapple check. As a larger creature I can do this and grapple you with no AoO because you are small fighter man and I am lion. Read my previous massive post to see all the reasons why grapple specialized fighters lose to base animals.



Prot from arrows is dr magic (easily bypassed); and wind wall is both stationary and brief 1 round/level. Were you thinking of something else? Because neither of those is a very good defense. If you are using arrows you are heavily archery specialized. I cast Wind Wall around myself and my animal companion and magic you to death. You try going melee, I bear you to death. GG.



A Druid in bear form has 27 str, that's not 30+. Nothing is stopping the Fighter from being enlarged himself, negating any size difference, on top of that the Fighters BAB and feats give a substantial bonus over the Druid. The Druid has to hit with natural weapons while grappling (at a -4), very unlikely on the well armored Fighter. The fighter on the other hand can use spiked armor and gauntlets and armor, at no penalty, dealing a bonus 1d6 damage. Remember, the Druid only has 3 uses if wild shape, so tactically the Fighter is better to withdraw to cover, using ranged options and forcing the Druid to shift out if he wants to engage at all. And how exactly is the bear not going to hit a well-armored fighter? A +13 to attack with Wild Shape and a single buff spell is enough to hit you enough to kill you. Now, please explain how this bear with a single buff spell has an AC of 23 and your attacks are somehow going to hit. Please explain how fighter man is going to beat both that AND an animal companion at the same time. Or explain how the fighter, as I showed previously, isn't going to completely get bent over by un-augmented summons.




2/3 are still combat.

In the first example, set up siege weapons outside the cave entrance, camouflaged and manned by mercenaries. Lure the dragon out, and ambush it for and instant kill. Takes advantage of siege engineer profession and craft skills.

Don't even have to go into the cave, the Dragon has to eat sometime.

Second example, intimidate actually works quite well, though so does just using gather information, take 10. Technically you win even if you don't find anything out at first, because asking questions draws attention, eventually the organization comes to ask you what you want.

Alternative: Find the shakiest person you can, who is also a weasel, and intimidate them if they are unwilling to spill at first. Buy them a drink later to make up for it.

Third example, siege engines, ballistas and so forth. Build a series of ditches with stakes. During the battle the Fighter engages the enemy leader in single combat, and slays him. Alternatively, drop a very large rock on his command tent (with the aforementioned engines) or put a ballista bolt through his torso.
I'm pretty sure a dragon can take one ballista bolt and some crappy arrows before he begins circle-strafing and automatically dissolves/burns the ballista. And if the dragon has burrow speed? Fighter is dead, no debate at all. Also, I love how your best argument to fighting a dragon is 'moar fietarz'. Sure, if the DM lets you make new fighters in that exact same spot that your old ones die then you might have a chance of killing the dragon.

Fighter intimidating with no charisma means skill point investment in order to accomplish basic things. Also, you sure do make a lot of assumptions because if a guy is going around scaring people into telling him where a resistance group is, then it is way more likely the local authorities are going to find out, and don't you make me explain all the ways spellcasters scan get out of that scenario as opposed to the 'I am eventually going to run out of hitpoints' fighter.

Also, you assume the fighter will kill the enemy leader. How? Leaders don't go into battle (unless you're leader is a victim of natural selection). As was blatantly explained to you, fighter is no better than commoner at this. He is, at best, able to rack up a high killscore but lacks the mobility of magic to go to places of necessity in a battle. Additionally, if the enemy leader is a spellcaster, he is dead.



4k really is a lot of money. That's another magic item, or 3. It's two points if armor. Immunity to a sword in ones gut seems more useful than immunity to poison, a pity the Druid doesn't have that instead. The companion could also be a ferret. No Druid would take a ferret, that's like saying Fighter sux because he uses tiny sized shuriken. As I explained, for 8k the Druid can gain an ADDITIONAL Wisdom modifer to AC to both himself AND his Wild Shape forms. Please learn to read.




Combat is 90% of the game, why not tack on: response to impromptu bar room brawl; being laywayed by highwaymen; chasing a someone; and other standard activities? You know, trivial activities for the Fighter. Except for the fact that every single one of those scenarios is much better handled by spellcasters. Barfight? Calm Emotions. Bandits? Black Tentacles. Chasing someone? How does fighter move faster tha a teleporting Wizard, and how does a fighter discern the target's location without divinations?



It was being proposed that the Druid was facing a mundane threat (for some reason a fighter), so I was saying they would have no reason to suspect a grapple. Besides, if he wastes time casting freedom of movement he's not doing anything else. Also, he could be surprised (in which case the spell could be interrupted on his turn); or just late in initiative. How is immunizing himself against grapple wasting a turn? It is way more likely that drawing a sword is wasting a turn than casting a spell. And once more kid, where is your basis on the fighter automatically winning all initiatives? That's something only spellcasters can do.



It's based on caster level, so that success rate would seem to be much more variable, unless both effects are at equal level. Sadly the ring costs 4k, which was spent on a wilding clasp to make something function in wild shape. Couldn't speak to the weapon property as I don't play in FR. Based on caster level means investing in stuff that raises caster level which means that the spellcaster has only a couple things to worry about. If my only 'weakness' (in that it makes me irritable for a couple rounds) is being dispelled, then please explain how one fighter can survive being grappled, shot at from a distance, entangled, save-or-die targeted, debuffed, and attacked all at once. Spellcasting can accomplish that; fighter can't.



Sure, but they're just as restricted on the skill front. And few players are going to burn spell slots on extremely situational spells. And thus there is such a thing as out-of-combat magic. A spellcaster has enough spells in low to mid levels to afford such simple things especially when they can allow the spellcaster to approach any scenario from the most optimal attack point. Fighter can't learn any useful information, or are you forgetting how intimidate worsens people's opinion of you?



YMMV? I'm more than a little surprised that the Ranger 4 skill points, unique access to survival, and 3 knowledges was fully unable to contribute. Also: What skills did the fighter invest in? What challenges were faced? I suppose it depends on what the DM presents, but there are creative solutions to all problems. And in every single undisputed scenario an average spellcaster can prepare to face said challenge. Fighters can't invest in cross-class skills in 3.5 without insane penalties and even then that only proves my point - other classes do it better and more efficiently.

Vogon, ignoring the points others make is not how you win a debate. Especially when you try and tell them that their point hurts them. Please, tell me in great detail how having magic hurts you when this system is old enough and has been cross-examined by thousands of people to determine the indisputable fact that magic is the most powerful option in the whole game regardless of scenario.

[Firechanter]

Aw you noticed :) if you're really lucky, I'll read you some of my poetry later.

*Cough* Oh really, don't trouble yourself, I mean...


It was being proposed that the Druid was facing a mundane threat (for some reason a fighter), so I was saying they would have no reason to suspect a grapple. Besides, if he wastes time casting freedom of movement he's not doing anything else. Also, he could be surprised (in which case the spell could be interrupted on his turn); or just late in initiative.

Being surprised is rather unlikely, seeing how Fighters tend to clank around in a pile of tin cans and Druids have rather high spot/listen checks.

Anyway, if we are talking about a 1 in 1 situation here (I am sure the caveats have been read already), I honestly don't see the Fighter coming out on top. As the saying goes, "I am a Druid. I have Special Abilities that are more powerful than your entire class." If the Fighter bothers to grapple the Druid _and_ no FoM is active, the Druid's pet will eat the Fighter's face.


It's based on caster level, so that success rate would seem to be much more variable, unless both effects are at equal level.


Which I would generally expect. If the dispeller is of significantly higher level, the first character has decidedly different problems. Besides, wasn't the scenario a 1-on-1 between Fighter and Druid? Who would cast the Dispel?


YMMV? I'm more than a little surprised that the Ranger 4 skill points, unique access to survival, and 3 knowledges was fully unable to contribute.


As I said the Ranger was rather poorly built. Besides, my Cleric was better at Survival than the Ranger, because Travel Domain. Most of his other skills were redundant to the Rogue's, but worse. He didn't really have anything useful.

I don't know what skills the Fighter had taken, but I do remember that at some point (around level 8) we agreed that this character just wasn't cutting it, and the player got to swap out this waste of space for a Druid.

We played mostly published modules. I don't remember their titles. But one typical obstacle was a Macguffin being placed on a pedestal in the centre of a pool that contained something nasty -- maybe acid or a tentacled acid-monster or both; I don't remember exactly. The Rogue tried tossing a line and brachiating across, it ended up in her falling in and barely saving herself, her armour being dissolved. Eventually the Clerics covered the entire pool with a lid of stone by each casting a Wall of Stone. All the while, the two martials just watched and had no idea how they might contribute.

[EugeneVoid]

I want to see the Challenge accepted and done.

I'm putting my money on the fighter.

Tree Line of Sight Tree Tree Tree Tree Tree Tree Tree Tree Tree Tree Tree Tree

[Juntao112]

Nothing is stoping the Fighter from being enlarged himself

Just be careful. Enlargements lasting for four hours or longer may require medical attention.

[Story]

I want to see the Challenge accepted and done.

I'm putting my money on the fighter.


What was your challenge?

[ddude987]

What was your challenge?

I think it was level 8 Druid vs level 8 Fighter.

If this is the case, perhaps we should do several tests in different terrains and conditions. Also, we could do test of spite druid vs fighter.

[Juntao112]

I think it was level 8 Druid vs level 8 Fighter.

If this is the case, perhaps we should do several tests in different terrains and conditions. Also, we could do test of spite druid vs fighter.

My druid. (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=17077887&postcount=200) 32 point buy, standard WBL, Final Destination.

[ryu]

My druid. (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=17077887&postcount=200) 32 point buy, standard WBL, Final Destination.

With or without wave-dashing?

[ddude987]

My druid. (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=17077887&postcount=200) 32 point buy, standard WBL, Final Destination.

Don't you need a wildling clasp per item? Which item is the clasp on? Or have I been misinterpreting wildling clasps for a very long time?


With or without wave-dashing?

No items, fox only

[Juntao112]

Don't you need a wildling clasp per item? Which item is the clasp on? Or have I been misinterpreting wildling clasps for a very long time?

The clasp is on the armor, as most animals can wear necklaces.

[ddude987]

The clasp is on the armor, as most animals can wear necklaces.

So if the animal form can wear the item it doesn't get absorbed even if it doesn't have a clasp :O

[Forrestfire]

No items, fox only

That's unfair! Druids are much better at that :smallwink:

[OldTrees1]

Why are we pitting a Tier 1 class against a Tier 5-4(Z soldier and/or dungeon crasher) class?

I meant I can do my best to create a 8th level Human Fighter and it might pass the challenges but it will not out preform the Druid.

[Alent]

Since this thread seems to have drifted at least a little in the direction all such threads eventually do, I'll go ahead and throw a question at the crowd (since it also never seems to be wholly adequately answered): What would it take to make a fighter have those options?

I prefer this direction of thought, personally. It feels more productive than what the flipside feels like after several dozen iterations:



"I like swords."
"Welcome to CoDzilla."
"I like swords."


Not, "what would make him higher-tier?" That may be inherent, somewhat, to the nature of expanding options, but just tackle it from the base question: If the druid or rogue could handle the trap-filled dragon cave as well as actually fight the dragon (or negotiate or what-have-you), what would it take to give the fighter - perhaps the classic knight-in-shining-armor - the capacity to take on this challenge and complete his dragon-slaying quest?

How does the classic fictional-story knight do it?

How do historic or traditional-fiction fighter-types make themselves capable and imposing and anything but a disposable meatshield for the "better" archetypes?

Is it all plot contrivance? Is it something else? In either case, is there a way to insert it into the mechanics of the Fighter?

I keep wanting to post a 1/3rd finished fighter revamp I've been working on, but the parts that are unfinished are the important ones, so I guess I'll muse over the motivational thoughts.

1) Seerow has the right idea with skills. I think it was earlier in this thread he basically proposed splitting "combat useful" and "non-combat" skills and awarding massive numbers of skill points for each, separately, for mundanes. Skills are pretty much where mundanes HAVE to be fixed. Wizards have spells to do it for them, mundanes need creativity and the option of doing hands on work. Also, every class should have Search/spot/listen.

2) Most core feats, and a disturbing number of splat feats, seem like they should be skill tricks, not feats. Since #1 means we will have an abundance of skills to invest, Skill Tricks can be enhanced and presented as actually useful tools, having a "general tricks" and "class tricks". (the latter being the way to maintain style and flavor separation between Fighter and Rogue.)

These could be used for flavor and balance on par with bard utility magic*, rather than just an underwhelming thing mentioned in complete scoundrel. An example would be using something outside the scope of an illusion to "See through" the illusion. Getting Freedom of Movement as an escape artist check for a number of turns equal to what you beat the DC by. The possibilities go on, and are likely already rule 0'd by good DMs.

I am concerned about a possible negative of trying to codify skill tricks like this, is that some tables might interpret open ended skill checks as being like custom spells and start to say no. I haven't seen enough tables to know if this is or isn't an issue.

* This does not eliminate the balance issue that the Fighter trying to solve a non-combat puzzle can't "make his own dirt" while the wizard can. :smallannoyed:

3) Fighter needs class features that can be emphasized by feats. It does him no good to be Schrodinger's fighter if the base chassis is based on something the tier 1s can steal with a polymorph effect. Not going to muse on what those should be since that's done to death in other places.

Additionally, Most of the fighter ACFs actually need to just go away as the fighter gains class features and options. Good ones like Dungeon Crasher deserve better implementations as part of the base chassis.

4) Many of the repurposed core feats can be given new, interesting, and useful functionality, like Improved Grapple letting you count as a size larger for grappling, and greater improved grappling as 2 sizes larger, and so on. Imagine a dungeoncrasher fighter with enlarge person, improved and greater bull rush being able to bull rush as a gargantuan creature. Probably the only unintended feature of this would be letting Setting Sun Tosser builds throw things way beyond what they could before.

Basically, any feat that is intended to "become a class feature" probably should be a class feature or skill. Anything that's meant to make a class feature better should be a feat.

5) Since the above will drastically diminish the need for feats, cut the Fighter's feat curve a bit. You might end up with a chassis that actually can do overpowered things with feats.

Unsure thought that needs more work: I've always wondered what would happen if you took Grapple and made it a skill. Improved Grab could then be a skill trick.

I do fear that if you go too far in any given direction with these fixes, it might not be D20/3.x anymore.

[eggynack]

I think it was level 8 Druid vs level 8 Fighter.

If this is the case, perhaps we should do several tests in different terrains and conditions. Also, we could do test of spite druid vs fighter.
Well, in that case, I suppose I should put together an 8th level druid, at least a basic one that can be altered later. For feats, it seems to be that the obvious setup should look something like greenbound summoning, natural bond, and natural spell. After that, the next thing to do is racial selection, and as I don't really need any extra feats that occur before wild shape, the choice is probably down to dragonborn desert half-orc, or dragonborn anthropomorphic bat. I'd normally go with the bat, but half-orc seems like it'd be a bit better at higher levels, and it creates a more well rounded character. That's also why I'm not going shifter, by the by, because this should be reasonably representative. Overall, it's a plan that gets significantly more HP than normal, as well as reasonably free augment summoning. I'm incidentally also picking up iron constitution, because it's awesome, and I'll save decisions about skilled city-dweller stuff for skill time.

So, after that, the character needs to be equipped, and has 27,000 GP to do it. I'm going to start with basic and inexpensive stuff, so that means 8,000 GP for a ring of the beast and 3,000 GP for a lesser rod of extend, leaving me with 16,000 GP to work with. Neither item really needs wilding clasps, incidentally, so that's kinda neat. After that, I'm going to go with a ring of counterspelling, which costs 6,000 GP as was detailed earlier, leaving 10,000 GP. I don't have that much money to pick up big things anymore, so the remainder might as well be minor effects. I'll get a wilding clasp, equip it to a chronocharm of the uncaring archmage, and give it a +2 wisdom bonus, per the MIC common magic item rules, which has a combined total cost of 8,500, leaving me with 1,500 GP. Then, I'll pick up a pearl of speech for 600 GP, leaving 900, buy studded leather armor for my fleshraker animal companion, which seems to cost 100 GP, leaving 800 GP, get a unit of golden desert honey, for emergencies, leaving 200 GP, and spend the rest on material component pouches, mundane weaponry/armor, food/drink, and maybe incidental adventuring stuff like rope.

Anyway, that seems like a pretty good start for things, covering most of the overarching build decisions that druids are party to. After that we just need a solid spell list, maybe a skill list, and ability score placements, all of whom require some knowledge of what point buy we're working with. It's a build that's open to change, as it should be, particularly because going anthro bat with a couple of fangshields druid substitution levels might still be better than the half-orc option, but it should serve us well through whatever may come.

[Rejusu]

What's UQ? Some kind of sequel/continuation/alternative story/spin-off?

"UQ Holder" is an indirect sequel. It doesn't pick up where Negima left off but it's set in the future, it has Evangeline in it and Negis grandson is the protagonist. I would go further into why it's so tippy but it involves spoilers for the final arc of Negima.


Or to repeat exactly what people have been saying on these boards for so long - The fighter can be a perfectly viable character class, but optimisers tend to disparage it as lacking the kinds of features they more often use in practice.

What you're essentially saying is that it's only really viable if it's made viable, which means it isn't really viable in the first place. The kind of features used most often in practice? Like class features? Because that's what the Fighter lacks. The problem with Fighter is it brings nothing new or interesting to the table that can't be done by any other class. Every class gets feats, the only thing that sets the Fighter apart is he gets more of them. Fighter just isn't interesting, it's so generic it hurts. It's good for dipping when you're making a melee build, but other than that it's just not fun or interesting enough to be worth a second look.


Buffs when dispelled are gone forever, the Druid is almost certainly out of whatever spells were removed for the rest of the day. The magic items are at worst disabled for as little as 1 round. The Druid stands to suffer much much more. Being so reliant on magic for defense.

The problem with this line of argument is you're trying to argue that the fighter comes out on top if the situation is engineered to be as disadvantageous to the Druid as possible while the Fighter is left unimpeded. On top of being disingenuous it's just wrong to boot. It's like arguing that Aquaman is as good as Batman on a day when the Bat-sub has broken down and there just happens to be some problem underwater.


They may have better class skills depending entirely on the challenge faced. Actually, no they don't. Sorcerer has concentration (only useful to the sorcerer);
Bluff (equal to intimidate, possibly worse depending on the situation); spellcraft (useless for a non caster); and knowledge (arcana) (why does the fighter need this at all? Knowledge skills are Bard specialties, if you really want to know something, go ask them.)

Fighter meanwhile has climb, swim, jump (all important skills when adventuring), ride (useful for combat or looking stylish), and handle animal (actually allows the fighter to train exotic beasts as mounts, which is worth a couple thousand gold instead of buying them pre trained).

Oh wow, Climb, Swim, and Jump. The least relevant skills in the game once flight is on the table (unless you actually need to go under the water, and then your swim skill has no bearing on how long you can hold your breath). Outside of letting the fighter get places how exactly do these offer the fighter any out of combat utility? It's not like he can do anything when he's climbed, swam, or jumped his way to his destination except hit things or jump some more. What's more why are you only considering the skills? You're ignoring that the classes mentioned have all these spells that are largely superior to skills when it comes to out of combat utility.


When spells are getting dispelled limited spells become much more so.

Again this is a non-argument. Most of the fighters tricks are shut down by size, strength, a combination of the two, or any number of special defences. Dispel at most gets rid of some of the Druids buffs, it doesn't do away with the rest of his spells, his wild shape, his animal companion, or his magic items. It's another "Aquaman to the rescue in the rather specific situation that happens to favour him and mildly hinder Batman!".


4k really is a lot of money. That's another magic item, or 3. It's two points if armor. Immunity to a sword in ones gut seems more useful than immunity to poison, a pity the Druid doesn't have that instead. The companion could also be a ferret.

4k would be a lot if the Druid was as dependant on magic items as the fighter was. A lot of what the fighter relies on magic items for (stat boosts, flight, immunities etc) the Druid gets for free. So what if the Druid ends up needing a few 4k clasps, he's still in the black overall.


Combat is 90% of the game, why not tack on: response to impromptu bar room brawl; being laywayed by highwaymen; chasing a someone; and other standard activities? You know, trivial activities for the Fighter.

And even more trivial for the Druid, so exactly how does the fighter come out on top in this? He's useless at the non-combat stuff (the supposed 10% of the game) and not as good at the combat stuff? You're not making a very compelling case for Aquaman here.

But let's consider one of your challenges: the rescuing the princess from the top of the tower. I'm going to illustrate how trivial that is for the Druid. I'm going to use a level 8 Druid in this example but a level 5 Druid could do it just as trivially with a few tweaks to the strategy.

Firstly the day before the rescue attempt the Druid uses Scrying to scope out where the Princess is being held. We can assume the chances of her passing the will save are minimal considering the DC and that it's unlikely the princess is going to have a particularly good save modifier. Even if this step fails it's non-critical and the Druid can use other means to gather information such as speak with animals combined with charm animal.

The next day he uses animal messenger to send a message to the princess to expect rescue at a particular time, this averts her inadvertently raising the alarm when you show up. That night he simply casts air walk on himself and strolls up to the top of the tower. Unless the guards all have darkvision and are watching the skies he's unlikely to be seen. Optionally if he believes it will be necessary (ie if the guards are watching the skies) he can create a distraction in some way. Call lightning to set something on fire (since the lightning comes from the sky no way to see the source), a fog cloud to envelop the guards, instruct some animals or enlarged vermin to attack the front of the tower.

Using stone shape he creates a door in the wall of the tower, he then casts air walk on the princess, and they just stroll right on out. And hey he's solved the encounter without making use of feats, items (magical or mundane, well except paper and pen for the message), and using only one of his class features. Also SRD only spells.

Now it's your turn. What's the fighter going to do that will complete that encounter in a more efficient manner?


In the first example, set up siege weapons outside the cave entrance, camouflaged and manned by mercenaries. Lure the dragon out, and ambush it for and instant kill. Takes advantage of siege engineer profession and craft skills.

Congratulations, you've come up with a solution to the encounter that has nothing to do with being a fighter. A commoner could employ the same strategy. It doesn't serve to prove your point when you're not offering solutions that play to the fighters (*chuckle*) unique strengths. What's more it doesn't contradict the original argument, that the fighter is weak because it has no way of getting to the dragon. If it's only option is to wait for the dragon to come out that only proves its weakness, whether it ends up killing the dragon or not (more likely not too, your siege weapons might get one shot off before they're a charred heap of junk).


Third example, siege engines, ballistas and so forth. Build a series of ditches with stakes. During the battle the Fighter engages the enemy leader in single combat, and slays him. Alternatively, drop a very large rock on his command tent (with the aforementioned engines) or put a ballista bolt through his torso.

Again, a solution that has nothing to do with being a Fighter. It's like Aquaman leading an army of regular soldiers. Sure he can do it, but being Aquaman doesn't help him do it. That's pretty much your argument in a nutshell. The Fighter can take this approach, or that approach, but rarely do any of these strategies have anything to do with his class.

[Brookshw]

Why are we pitting a Tier 1 class against a Tier 5-4(Z soldier and/or dungeon crasher) class?

I meant I can do my best to create a 8th level Human Fighter and it might pass the challenges but it will not out preform the Druid.

Probably because the original argument about wildshape by itself still being better than fighters has drifted to the days of yore (at least for when the thread moved in this direction).

[Theomniadept]

Why are we pitting a Tier 1 class against a Tier 5-4(Z soldier and/or dungeon crasher) class?

I meant I can do my best to create a 8th level Human Fighter and it might pass the challenges but it will not out preform the Druid.

Not quite sure why this has kept going on when the Fighter loses 8 ways to Sunday. I mean I pitched Druid as just a guy who could Fighter better. I didn't even bring up Cleric casting Righteous BecomeBetterFighter or a Wizard casting Summon Fighter V. Heck, I've never even had the pleasure of playing as Druid so when I posed scenarios I didn't even toss any items onto the Druid and a fully decked out fighter could possibly beat druid in the singular aspect of Wild Shaping early on, assuming no aid from the Animal Companion or spellcasting beyond a buff or two.

Don't get me wrong, Fighter's a great dip for a few feats and is actually quite necessary in the mounted archer builds given the horrid amount of feat taxing (Mounted Combat, Mounted Archery, Improved Mounted Archery, Point Blank Shot, Precise Shot, Rapid Shot), but Fighter is good for two, maybe four levels. Afterwards it gains nothing comparable to anything, other than feats that may be necessary to simply do two things, like move and attack.

Even then there are better classes for feat dips; Need Weapon Finesse? Swashbuckler 1 gives you that plus way more skills than ShoutySwim McClimberJump.

[Togo]

What you're essentially saying is that it's only really viable if it's made viable, which means it isn't really viable in the first place.

Nope, I'm saying that it's viable with one playstyle and not with the other. There's nothing to justify the view that one playstyle is some sort of artificial effort.

[Augmental]

The problem with this line of argument is you're trying to argue that the fighter comes out on top if the situation is engineered to be as disadvantageous to the Druid as possible while the Fighter is left unimpeded. On top of being disingenuous it's just wrong to boot. It's like arguing that Aquaman is as good as Batman on a day when the Bat-sub has broken down and there just happens to be some problem underwater.

This looks like a job for the fighter Aquaman! (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/ThisLooksLikeAJobForAquaman)

[OldTrees1]

My druid. (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=17077887&postcount=200) 32 point buy, standard WBL, Final Destination.

My Human fighter. (http://www.myth-weavers.com/sheetview.php?sheetid=811374) 32 point buy, standard WBL, 2 Traits

It probably won't outperform the Druid in any event. But it will probably complete each challenge. (Although I admit that someone could have spent its 7x11 skill points better)

[eggynack]

If we're using 32 PB, my druid is probably running something like 18 wisdom, 16 constitution, and 14 intelligence. There could be some nod to strength and dexterity in a lower level challenge, but even then they're usually going to be 8. After racial and item adjustments, those scores look more like 20 wisdom, 20 constitution, 12 intelligence, 6 dexterity, and 8 strength and charisma. He is most often going to be running around in desmodu bat form, as that form is awesome. As for the skill list, maxing out knowledge (nature), concentration, and spellcraft is a must, and for the other two, I'm going to go with spot and listen. It should be reasonably workable, I think.