Best knight class?

[Fatal Rose]

Ok I have a few books that feature the knight class, all seem interesting yet very different at times. I was wondering which is overall the best and which one matches the flavor of knight I'm looking for. I'll list the knights and books they are within below...

Mongoose publishing power classes: knight

Adventuring classes a fistful of denarii: knight

Dungeons and dragons players handbook 2: knight

Legends of excalibur: knight

So which knight is the best?

The flavor I'm going for is a knightly swordmaster, specializing in a great sword and not being a damage taking tank.

[Venger]

Ok I have a few books that feature the knight class, all seem interesting yet very different at times. I was wondering which is overall the best and which one matches the flavor of knight I'm looking for. I'll list the knights and books they are within below...

Mongoose publishing power classes: knight

Adventuring classes a fistful of denarii: knight

Dungeons and dragons players handbook 2: knight

Legends of excalibur: knight

So which knight is the best?

The flavor I'm going for is a knightly swordmaster, specializing in a great sword and not being a damage taking tank.
since this is the 3.5 forum, I think you're mostly gonna get responses about PHB2's knight. it's a pretty bad class, but person man wrote a great handbook (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?109429-3-5-Person-Man-s-Knight-Handbook) about how to play one effectively.

as far as the others, I'm afraid I can't say, myself, but you might have better luck in the other systems (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?60-Older-D-amp-D-AD-amp-D-and-Other-Systems) board.

[Greenish]

Warblade...

[Amphetryon]

Warblade...

Crusader would be my preference.

[Red Fel]

Crusader would be my preference.

Fact is, Crusader doesn't have to tank (and the OP doesn't want him to), but he can, and he's pretty good at it. But yes, Crusader and Warblade are both quite capable of the "swordmaster in shining armor" angle.

Now, OP, the first question is: Are you attached to the class name of Knight, or the concept of a Knight? There are a hundred and one ways to do a trained warrior in shining armor. In 3.5 alone, you have Fighters, Paladins, Samurai, Crusaders, Warblades, Knights, Clerics, and several dozen other options. Any one of them can be called a knight - the class name is simply a label for the mechanics involved. You could be Sir Ufric, Knight of the Furious Blade, a Barbarian, if you really wanted.

So what do you want?

[Dusk Eclipse]

I'd go with Wardenr myself

[Gwazi Magnum]

If you're just a Knight who serves their King/Lady I can easily see a Fighter build working well, just see if the DM will let you add Diplomacy & Knowledge (Royalty & Nobility) as a class skill.

If you're looking to be more like say King Arthur or Lancelot, a highly noble, honest and fair knight I'd lean towards a Paladin. But play them for as just say having high moral standards rather than say "Smite tigh evil!" and re fluff the smite evil power as say a cool sword trick, and the lay on hands as providing inspiration to your fellow brother in arms to keep going, special mount being a whistle to call your mount from nearby. Probably should also grab a variant to make the Paladin a spell-less kind, or get really creative in re-skinning all the spells to represent some kind of leadership or amazing sword trick.

[weckar]

Venger, afaik this board is as good a place as any to discuss 3rd party materials for the 3.5 game.

That said, in my opinion the best 'Knight' is the PF cavalier with the battle master archetype (archetyping over the horse abilities). Not entirely 3.5 (and even 3rd party for PF) but I has a lot of fun with it.

[EisenKreutzer]

It's not called "knight," but the Warder from Pathfinders Path of War is an excelent knight class.

I'm also a fan of the Cavalier Pathfinder core class, which pulls off the "knight in shining armor" schtick fairly well.

[Venger]

Venger, afaik this board is as good a place as any to discuss 3rd party materials for the 3.5 game.

That said, in my opinion the best 'Knight' is the PF cavalier with the battle master archetype (archetyping over the horse abilities). Not entirely 3.5 (and even 3rd party for PF) but I has a lot of fun with it.

my mistake. I didn't recognize those other titles, so didn't know they were 3rd party 3.5 things.

[Fatal Rose]

Which book has the battle master archetype? We all play pathfinder and many of us want to be knights due to GOT. None of is want to be a mounted warrior.

[weckar]

'The Genius Guide to Martial Archetypes' by SGG if I'm not mistaken.

[Fatal Rose]

Knights are staples of fantasy fiction. I'm surprised theirs not a quality traditional knight sword fighter class.

[Red Fel]

Knights are staples of fantasy fiction. I'm surprised theirs not a quality traditional knight sword fighter class.

I think you're missing what others have been saying: There are many. They're just not all called "knight." You want the swordsman with brilliant weapon mastery and flourish? Warblade. You want the shining warrior with an indomitable spirit who lives to protect others? Crusader. You want the paragon of virtue who rides on a magical beast and wields holy justice? Paladin. You want the honorable warrior whose honor demands that he challenge others to just duels? Knight. You want the loyal swordsman vassal of a great lord? Samurai. You want the trained warrior, master of weapons and armor? Fighter.You want me to go on?

[Troacctid]

Paladins are designed to match the classic "knight" trope.

[Venger]

Knights are staples of fantasy fiction. I'm surprised theirs not a quality traditional knight sword fighter class.

you can have any class fluffed/RPed as a knight. they don't even need to be melee brutes.

[Gwendol]

Further to that, the traditional knight is a mounted warrior in armor that is not well represented within the rules of D&D combat.

[Vhaidara]

I think you're missing what others have been saying: There are many. They're just not all called "knight." You want the swordsman with brilliant weapon mastery and flourish? Warlord. You want the shining warrior with an indomitable spirit who lives to protect others? Warder. You want the paragon of virtue who rides on a magical beast and wields holy justice? Paladin. You want the honorable warrior whose honor demands that he challenge others to just duels? Cavalier. You want the loyal swordsman vassal of a great lord? Samurai. You want the trained warrior, master of weapons and armor? Fighter.You want me to go on?

Fixed that for you, since he's using PF.

[Red Fel]

Fixed that for you, since he's using PF.

Thanks. I got thrown off by the mention in the OP of PHB II.

[Fatal Rose]

I think you're missing what others have been saying: There are many. They're just not all called "knight." You want the swordsman with brilliant weapon mastery and flourish? Warblade. You want the shining warrior with an indomitable spirit who lives to protect others? Crusader. You want the paragon of virtue who rides on a magical beast and wields holy justice? Paladin. You want the honorable warrior whose honor demands that he challenge others to just duels? Knight. You want the loyal swordsman vassal of a great lord? Samurai. You want the trained warrior, master of weapons and armor? Fighter.You want me to go on?

I get what you're saying. I don't mean to be so annoying.

Just saying it would be nice to have said knight class prepared with all the fluff and what not. I will for sure check out all the stuff you mentioned.

[Troacctid]

I get what you're saying. I don't mean to be so annoying.

Just saying it would be nice to have said knight class prepared with all the fluff and what not. I will for sure check out all the stuff you mentioned.

As I said, that's the Paladin, AKA Knight in Shining Armor.

[Nihilarian]

I get what you're saying. I don't mean to be so annoying.

Just saying it would be nice to have said knight class prepared with all the fluff and what not. I will for sure check out all the stuff you mentioned.Worth mentioning is that the PF Cavalier and Samurai both have archetypes that drop the mounted stuff. I think the Daring Champion archetype is probably better than the Swashbuckler class.

[SciChronic]

I get what you're saying. I don't mean to be so annoying.

Just saying it would be nice to have said knight class prepared with all the fluff and what not. I will for sure check out all the stuff you mentioned.

there's so many takes on what a "Knight" is, and having a one size fits all is against everything that 3.5 (and therefore PF) was vs. 2nd ed, and that was massive customization.

[LTwerewolf]

Knight 3 (phbII)
Crusader 17 (tob)

Make sure to take thicket of blades, better with reach (so if you can be large size, that would be better). Now you're a heavy damage, heavy armored juggernaut that people can't get anywhere near without being punished. Combat reflexes also recommended.

[Thurbane]

The PHB2 Knight is a bit...meh. Love the concept, but it's abilities are a little limited, and it takes a fair bit of op-fu to make it work well.

The Knight also has one of the worst skill sets of any base class. In my own games, I'm tempted to give them 4 skill points/level, and throw most of the Aristocrat skills on there as well.

I own Legends of Excalibur, so I'll have a read over their Knight again and see how it stacks up...

[Greenish]

The Knight also has one of the worst skill sets of any base class. In my own games, I'm tempted to give them 4 skill points/level, and throw most of the Aristocrat skills on there as well.OA Samurai has 4+Int skills and the relevant class skills for a knight. Might copy those, or just use OA samurai, though it is rather meh.

[Fatal Rose]

What about the green ronin cavalier? I remember it had an option to not go the mounted warrior route.

Also has anyone checked out the knight in a fistful of denarii adventuring classes for pathfinder? It's a third party supplement.

[Fatal Rose]

Ok I plan on playing a knight and seeing how it is, I'm going to honestly try to figure this out. Might eventually make a homebrew based on an amalgam of all the classes mentioned. One that's balanced yet powerful and fun to play.

[Fatal Rose]

I finally sat down and looked through ToB and POW. ToB is 3.5, can it work in pathfinder? Does it require too much customization?

I'm really digging the combat options available in both, would it be useless to make both POW/ToB available for my PCs? Some of my veteran players so both books are horribly imbalanced.

Thoughts?

[aleucard]

It's been suggested to at least try splicing 3.5 and PF in a single game since the latter first existed. For the ToB, I'd say that the amount of porting you'd need to do is likely limited to translating things like skill lists and mentions of the standard combat maneuvers. If they're not able to keep pace as-is, I'd be VERY surprised.

Tell the grognards to at least try it first. The only lens in which that book can be viewed as overpowered is if you think the standard set by the Fighter is where it should be. Tell them to visit this page, (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?269440-Why-Each-Class-Is-In-Its-Tier-(Rescued-from-MinMax)) maybe they'll get the idea. The overall placement of things on the tiers list has not changed all that much from 3.5 to PF.

Just as a personal thing though; I'd suggest that you try to nudge your players away from taking multiple base initiator classes. That can bog down the combat almost as quickly as a minionmancer can if not in experienced and knowledgeable hands.

[Troacctid]

Are you familiar with the tier system? If your desired balance point is Tier 3, then ToB/PoW classes are very well balanced. If your balance point is Tier 5, they'll look overpowered.

The general agreement is that all the ToB classes are T3 or, at worst, very high T4. I'm not well-versed in Pathfinder tiers, but I believe the PoW classes are similarly placed. They are very good at combat, and they have a smattering of noncombat abilities, so they can really carry the party in a fight and still contribute in other situations. However, they don't have the exponentially-scaling power of a full caster, and they can never do anything game-breakingly powerful--mostly they just toss a bunch of dice around and/or tank really well.

In a PF game, I wouldn't bother to port ToB unless my players specifically asked for it; PoW covers everything pretty well. The conversion isn't too difficult, but it's a complicated enough subsystem to learn with just one book involved--no need to throw a second one into the mix and make it even more confusing. I'd say only use both books if your players are already comfortable with the material.

If you do have initiators in your game, you should put extra care into designing combat encounters; make sure they are being challenged. Enemies should have enough HP to compensate for the increased damage potential of your PCs, and there should be opportunities for clever tactics and formations to shine. Don't make combats so short that there's never a need to recover maneuvers--short combats are fine, but there should be some long ones mixed in too when the occasion is appropriately dramatic. Familiarize yourself with the maneuvers your players have available and keep them in mind when designing encounters--think about what approach they're likely to take, and how the monsters might respond.

[Talya]

OA Samurai has 4+Int skills and the relevant class skills for a knight. Might copy those, or just use OA samurai, though it is rather meh.


OA Samurai is one of the better 1 level dips (and not a horrible 2 level dip) in the game for a melee character, if you don't mind using a katana/bastard sword and/or a wakazashi/shortsword. The 4 skill points/level, high will and fortitude saves, and ancestral daisho class feature (which advances based on CHARACTER level, not class level), and Iajutsu Focus as a class skill, are amazing for a short dip.

Going in longer than 2 (which gives you a bonus feat from a fairly limited list - if you need something on it, it's not bad) is a bad idea.

[Blackhawk748]

OA Samurai is one of the better 1 level dips (and not a horrible 2 level dip) in the game for a melee character, if you don't mind using a katana/bastard sword and/or a wakazashi/shortsword. The 4 skill points/level, high will and fortitude saves, and ancestral daisho class feature (which advances based on CHARACTER level, not class level), and Iajutsu Focus as a class skill, are amazing for a short dip.

Going in longer than 2 (which gives you a bonus feat from a fairly limited list - if you need something on it, it's not bad) is a bad idea.

I second OA Samurai, its the Fighter, with a weird feat list and better skills. Ive actually played one until lvl 5, which is when the campaign died.

Now the PhB2 Knight isn't terrible, its pretty much WoTCs first attempt at making a tank and they did succeed, Test of Mettle is nice, if not dip friendly. The primary issue is that once you start Knight your better off staying in it, maybe dip a lvl or 2 or crusader for the self healing. This is because all of your challenges save DCs are based on your Knight lvl not character level, and since no PrC increases Knight level, well your hosed. Also their capstone is sweet, but its copied by a Druid feat, Boars Ferocity :smallfurious:, which does it better (and drives me nuts)

As for PF the Samurai has the Sword Saint Archetype which is a Iaijutsu user, and is actually pretty good.

[atemu1234]

Your best bet in 3.5? Mounted Combat Fighter build, pledged to a Lord. You get fired? You could technically qualify for the ronin prestige class.

[Sian]

or maybe take a look at the previous Zinc Saucier which were about emulating PHB2 Knight without actually using said class.

http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?370235-Zinc-Saucier-XXVIII-Chivalry-is-not-dead!

Limited to first party 3/3.5e through so porting to PF might take a bit of elbow grease

[Ssalarn]

Are you familiar with the tier system? If your desired balance point is Tier 3, then ToB/PoW classes are very well balanced. If your balance point is Tier 5, they'll look overpowered.

The general agreement is that all the ToB classes are T3 or, at worst, very high T4. I'm not well-versed in Pathfinder tiers, but I believe the PoW classes are similarly placed. They are very good at combat, and they have a smattering of noncombat abilities, so they can really carry the party in a fight and still contribute in other situations. However, they don't have the exponentially-scaling power of a full caster, and they can never do anything game-breakingly powerful--mostly they just toss a bunch of dice around and/or tank really well.

In a PF game, I wouldn't bother to port ToB unless my players specifically asked for it; PoW covers everything pretty well. The conversion isn't too difficult, but it's a complicated enough subsystem to learn with just one book involved--no need to throw a second one into the mix and make it even more confusing. I'd say only use both books if your players are already comfortable with the material.

If you do have initiators in your game, you should put extra care into designing combat encounters; make sure they are being challenged. Enemies should have enough HP to compensate for the increased damage potential of your PCs, and there should be opportunities for clever tactics and formations to shine. Don't make combats so short that there's never a need to recover maneuvers--short combats are fine, but there should be some long ones mixed in too when the occasion is appropriately dramatic. Familiarize yourself with the maneuvers your players have available and keep them in mind when designing encounters--think about what approach they're likely to take, and how the monsters might respond.

Agreed that you probably don't need to convert ToB. You can, and Path of War is intended to complement, not override, ToB, but the conversion is fairly extensive and not entirely necessary when Warder and Warlord both have all the tools necessary to cover the shining knight archetype.

There's also a class called the Battle Lord in Amora Games' Liber Influxis that does the educated officer schtick; it's a bit like a Pathfinderized version of 3.5's Marshall with a lot more options and specializations added on.