If the Fighter class doesn't make the best Fighter, what does?

[Mars Ultor]

It's generally accepted that the Fighter has a lot of issues and doesn't keep up with the other classes. If you were building a 10th-level character who was the party's main melee fighter how would you do it? Core classes and races, no alternate class features or abilities, but most feats and prestige classes (except those in setting specific books). Please don't include special equipment and magic items, just the PC itself.

[pabelfly]

It's generally accepted that the Fighter has a lot of issues and doesn't keep up with the other classes. If you were building a 10th-level character who was the party's main melee fighter how would you do it? Core classes and races, no alternate class features or abilities, but most feats and prestige classes (except those in setting specific books). Please don't include special equipment and magic items, just the PC itself.

Any particular combat style you're after?

[Paragon]

Divine Power Cleric.
Add Persistent spell and divine metamagic.

All legal, all ridiculing any melee

[Kurald Galain]

If you were building a 10th-level character who was the party's main melee fighter how would you do it?
I'd go with Paladin, because you get excellent saving throws, minor spellcasting support, and smite evil. Pathfinder's Paladin is even better at this.

[H_H_F_F]

No ACFs, no base classes outside core? Hmm. A couple of questions:
Is it a 10th level 1-shot, or do you want the build to be able to progress well up to level 20?
Is Dragon Magazine appropriate material? How about web-exclusive content?
How magic tolerant are you? Do you want to be a caster who can be a melee beast, as little magic as possible, or something in between?
What power level should we strive for? Fighter+? Kill any level-appropriate opponent in one charge? Somewhere in between?
What's the rest of the party up to?

[NichG]

It's generally accepted that the Fighter has a lot of issues and doesn't keep up with the other classes. If you were building a 10th-level character who was the party's main melee fighter how would you do it? Core classes and races, no alternate class features or abilities, but most feats and prestige classes (except those in setting specific books). Please don't include special equipment and magic items, just the PC itself.

Well, straight classed Swordsage or Warblade, but you said core...

So in core, probably I have to go with straight-classed Cleric.

[Mars Ultor]

Any particular combat style you're after?

We have a two-weapon style Ranger, I'm open to anything else.

[Mars Ultor]

I'd go with Paladin, because you get excellent saving throws, minor spellcasting support, and smite evil. Pathfinder's Paladin is even better at this.

We're playing 3.5 and I'm currently a straight 10th-level Human Paladin, but the Halfling Ranger 9/Rogue 1 has become the primary fighter and my PC doesn't do a fraction of his damage. I don't need to top his character, but the casters are crushing it and so is the Ranger and my character doesn't do anything but make saving throws.

[Mars Ultor]

No ACFs, no base classes outside core? Hmm. A couple of questions:
Is it a 10th level 1-shot, or do you want the build to be able to progress well up to level 20?
Is Dragon Magazine appropriate material? How about web-exclusive content?
How magic tolerant are you? Do you want to be a caster who can be a melee beast, as little magic as possible, or something in between?
What power level should we strive for? Fighter+? Kill any level-appropriate opponent in one charge? Somewhere in between?
What's the rest of the party up to?

No Dragon or web stuff.

I don't know that we'll reach 20th, but it's an on-going campaign since 1st level. Currently the party is a Cleric, a Bard, a Rogue, a Ranger 9/Rogue 1, and my PC, a Paladin. I had a straight Fighter who was killed, he had high stats and could trip, but that was losing its effectiveness. This character is more mediocre, and while the high saves are nice, he doesn't do anything else.

My primary goal is being a competent melee fighter. I'm okay with magic but I don't want to spend a few rounds having to buff myself before each fight. The Ranger has become the primary fighter, my PC doesn't seem to contribute much during combat and is always on the verge of death, it's only a matter of time.

[MaxiDuRaritry]

Druid gives you a fighter++++ and 3/4 of a fighter (with the ability to buff it into a fighter++).

Natural Spell is the only part of the build that's absolutely necessary, along with the biggest, strongest animal companion you can manage. For the rest, go nuts.

[Quertus]

We're playing 3.5 and I'm currently a straight 10th-level Human Paladin, but the Halfling Ranger 9/Rogue 1 has become the primary fighter and my PC doesn't do a fraction of his damage. I don't need to top his character, but the casters are crushing it and so is the Ranger and my character doesn't do anything but make saving throws.

Core base classes? “Deal damage”? Hmmm…

First, I’d optimize race. Whether that’s half-Ogre, half-Minotaur, anthropomorphic whatever, incarnate Warforged, or just Bone Wild Elf. LA buy-off if possible.

Then I’d find a schtick I liked, like “spiked chain trip BFC” or “spiked chain reach flank with myself sneak attack” or “übercharger” or “mounted charge” or “DMM Persist Cleric is best Fighter” or “infinite crit fisher” or “eat level drain” or “2-weapon sneak attack” or “flurry of sneak attack” or “all the natural weapon attack sneak attacks” or “I drop a mountain, everyone dies” or “I don’t fight - my undead do” or “I don’t fight, my constructs / Mount / cohort / former enemies do”.

Pick classes to work with race and schtick, round out to not be useless when primary schtick doesn’t apply.

How effective each combination is depends a bit on the GM, and what content they throw at you. Invest heavily in Great Cleave, but you’re always fighting a single foe? Wasted build resources. Invest in mounted charge and a war rhino, but it’s allays flying opponents or difficult terrain? Wasted build resources.

IMO, one of the most universally useful builds is “I sneak attack with myself chain tripper”, complete with cheese for passable ranged attacks, but sadly it sounds like Thug is off the table.

So, what we can build blind, that you can best adapt to an unknown GM? I guess I’ll echo “play a caster”, as it’s hard to go wrong with a LA-buyoff Half-Ogre (0+2-2) Cleric 10 using DMM Persist to try to be a Fighter… or to Persist other spells if that doesn’t work out for you.

Trying to pretend to be a Fighter while playing an anthropomorphic bat would be hard, but it’d probably be hilarious!

But balance to the table. Build something stronger or weaker per the specifics of the party you’re in.

[Mars Ultor]

Divine Power Cleric.
Add Persistent spell and divine metamagic.

All legal, all ridiculing any melee

I've heard of the all-day Divine Power Cleric, but how exactly would that build work?

[Quertus]

I've heard of the all-day Divine Power Cleric, but how exactly would that build work?

Feats: Extend Spell, Persist Spell, DMM (Divine Metamagic) Persist

Iirc, persisting Divine Power just gets your full BAB, and a +4 enhancement bonus to strength. People must be playing really highly suboptimal Fighters for that to be sufficient to be “better Fighter”.

Unless you can cheese out more than one persistent buff per day, and the GM doesn’t Dispel those buffs, a well-built Fighter is better.

[Venger]

You take extend spell, persistent spell, and divine metamagic (persistent spell) then cast persistent divine power, consuming the requisite number of turn/rebuke attempts. Much like druid, there is nothing else specific it requires and you can spend your other feat slots however you want; it's not a resource intensive thing to do and doesn't limit you to any particular build.


Feats: Extend Spell, Persist Spell, DMM (Divine Metamagic) Persist

Iirc, persisting Divine Power just gets your full BAB, and a +4 enhancement bonus to strength. People must be playing really highly suboptimal Fighters for that to be sufficient to be “better Fighter”.

Unless you can cheese out more than one persistent buff per day, and the GM doesn’t Dispel those buffs, a well-built Fighter is better.

It's +6, not +4. Cleric also has 9th level spells, that's why it's better than fighter.

[Mars Ultor]

Core base classes? “Deal damage”? Hmmm…

So, what we can build blind, that you can best adapt to an unknown GM? I guess I’ll echo “play a caster”, as it’s hard to go wrong with a LA-buyoff Half-Ogre (0+2-2) Cleric 10 using DMM Persist to try to be a Fighter… or to Persist other spells if that doesn’t work out for you.

Trying to pretend to be a Fighter while playing an anthropomorphic bat would be hard, but it’d probably be hilarious!

But balance to the table. Build something stronger or weaker per the specifics of the party you’re in.

Just core races, so while I might be able to take Jotunbrod, Half-Ogre, Warforged, or Man-Bat isn't allowed. Persistent Cleric is an option, but I'm not sure how that build would work. Right now the best melee fighter is a Halfing Ranger 9/Rogue 1 with keen weapons, my Paladin just looks heroic and make saving throws.

[tyckspoon]

I've heard of the all-day Divine Power Cleric, but how exactly would that build work?

Get feats: Extend Spell (prereq), Persistent Spell, Divine Metamagic: Persistent Spell. Divine Metamagic allows you to spend Turn Undead usages instead of spell slot adjustments for the selected metamagic.

Acquire as many Turn Undeads as you can (there are a number of ways to try to achieve this, most of which are considered some variety of cheesy. It is possible the only ones your DM will be happy with are the straightforward methods of increasing Charisma and actually taking the Extra Turning feat.)

Spend your Turn Undead uses to Persist as many of the really nice Personal-only short term buffs as you can afford to.

If you don't want to go with the gish/burning spells to fight route, the most straightforward damage tech is probably charging - there are a number of fairly easy to access things that increase damage on a charge. For a fairly basic example:

Be a Half-Orc or full Orc.
Take feat: Headlong Rush (you trigger an Attack of Opportunity from anything that can reach you while you're charging. In exchange, your charge deals double damage.)
Cast Rhino's Rush (naturally Swift action spell, charge deals double damage. Pal/Ranger 1.)
If you have space to use a mount: Charge using a lance for ... double damage. Plus a reach weapon, which can help reduce the risk from using Headlong Rush.

Damage is subject to D&D's not-actually-doubling math, so you end up dealing x4 damage - one strike dealing damage equivalent to a normal high-level full attack, with the charge bonus to-hit. Also works very well with any kind of 'next hit' or 'one attack' bonuses to hit or to damage (like.. Smite, for example) and the only permanent build resource it requires is a feat and your race selection.

[Kurald Galain]

the Halfling Ranger 9/Rogue 1 has become the primary fighter and my PC doesn't do a fraction of his damage.

It may help to know what exactly this ranger is doing to outdamage you?

[tyckspoon]

It may help to know what exactly this ranger is doing to outdamage you?

Flanking with him and using two-weapon fighting to Sneak Attack stuff a lot, I bet >.>

[H_H_F_F]

I wouldn't go for persistomancy at this table. If a ranger 9 (with no ACFs) is competitive, I think persist cleric is probably too powerful for your table.

Have you considered Master of Many forms, from Complete Adventurer? It's a lot of book keeping, but it's extremely flexible, can make for a very competent melee, and you can easily adjust your power level by picking forms that suit your table's level of optimization.

I also think it's legit one if the most fun and diverse classes in the game.

You would go Druid 5/ MoMF 5. With core races only, probably Human, Dwarf or Gnome.

If your DM would be willing to budge on alternative class features, you could also go for wild shape ranger from Unearthed Arcana instead. I'd suggest urban companion to take care of the alertness prereq, but it's both an ACF and web-exclusive, so it's definitely out.

[Mars Ultor]

You take extend spell, persistent spell, and divine metamagic (persistent spell) then cast persistent divine power, consuming the requisite number of turn/rebuke attempts. Much like druid, there is nothing else specific it requires and you can spend your other feat slots however you want; it's not a resource intensive thing to do and doesn't limit you to any particular build.



It's +6, not +4. Cleric also has 9th level spells, that's why it's better than fighter.

It's +6 to Strength score, that's +3 modifier to attack/damage. Figure the character has a base Strength of 12-13 (+1) or 14-15 (+2), his Strength damage would be +4 or +5. My PC is doing that now and it pales in comparison to the Ranger.

As I understand it, it's four feats: Extend Spell, Persistent Spell, Divine Metamagic, and Extra Turning, that's all his feats unless he's human.

[MaxiDuRaritry]

You could always abuse the crap out of monk (https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?285801-Tippy-s-Terrifically-Terrible-Trial/page25&p=15474863#post15474863).

[tyckspoon]

As I understand it, it's four feats: Extend Spell, Persistent Spell, Divine Metamagic, and Extra Turning, that's all his feats unless he's human.

The capability is usually extended by using additonal build resources to get more turning abilities - taking domain selections or prestige classes that give additional turning pools which can qualify for fueling Divine feats (and usually double dip Extra Turning), using methods to gain additional feats that can be fed into more instances of Extra Turning, spending wealth to outright buy additional Turn Undead usages in a couple of ways.. it's more impressive in a more permissive environment - the description you've given sounds like your DM would probably be kind of leery of what it takes to fully optimize this.

So yes, Divine Power alone is not super impressive (although if you're doing this you'd probably do a stat arrangement that favors Strength more to start.) Divine Power + Divine Favor + Righteous Might gets pretty nice, at least from a raw numbers arrangement, and that is almost certainly not the most efficient set of spells - it's just the Core ones that serve the purpose of 'make the Cleric temporarily able to hang with the Fighter' and start getting a bit silly if you just have them on all the time instead.

[Mars Ultor]

It may help to know what exactly this ranger is doing to outdamage you?

Two-weapon fighting and Sneak Attack. I think he's got Improved Critical for his main weapon and a Keen weapon in the other hand (I know they don't stack). He's getting four attacks a round and the bonus 1d6 to each one.

He's got Weapon Finesse, doesn't have Power Attack, and usually hits two or three times per round, often with a Critical thrown in.

[Mars Ultor]

I wouldn't go for persistomancy at this table. If a ranger 9 (with no ACFs) is competitive, I think persist cleric is probably too powerful for your table.

Have you considered Master of Many forms, from Complete Adventurer?

I think one of the guys had that in an another campaign, I couldn't understand how his character worked and he was very secretive. There was a lot of bookkeeping involved, but I'll think about it. Thank you for the suggestion.

[Mars Ultor]

You could always abuse the crap out of monk (https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?285801-Tippy-s-Terrifically-Terrible-Trial/page25&p=15474863#post15474863).

This DM doesn't allow Monks or Sorcerers and some other stuff. I get the feeling someone else abused those classes in the past.

[H_H_F_F]

If you're looking for something less complex (and therefor more limited), psychic warrior is fun and could do fine. Alternatively, Psion + Slayer.

This is only helpful if SRD counts as core at your table, of course.

By the way: how does the DM feel about non-core templates, or level adjustment?

[Mars Ultor]

Divine Power + Divine Favor + Righteous Might gets pretty nice, at least from a raw numbers arrangement, and that is almost certainly not the most efficient set of spells - it's just the Core ones that serve the purpose of 'make the Cleric temporarily able to hang with the Fighter' and start getting a bit silly if you just have them on all the time instead.

Magic items that give additional Turn Undead probably aren't available. If I'm human and take Extra Turning twice, and cast Eagle's Splendor, that's probably about 15 or 16 Turn Undeads.

Divine Power needs 7, cast Divine Favor as a 5th-level spell, that's 3 more. I couldn't do Righteous Might. Or I could do Divine Power and Righteous Might, but not Divine Favor.

I'm wondering if I'd be better off with a Barbarian who has Leap Attack or something. Maybe eight levels of Barbarian mixed with a level or two of Fighter so I can get a couple more Feats.

[NichG]

It's +6 to Strength score, that's +3 modifier to attack/damage. Figure the character has a base Strength of 12-13 (+1) or 14-15 (+2), his Strength damage would be +4 or +5. My PC is doing that now and it pales in comparison to the Ranger.

As I understand it, it's four feats: Extend Spell, Persistent Spell, Divine Metamagic, and Extra Turning, that's all his feats unless he's human.

If you go Charisma-based, you don't need the Extra Turning feat. In general Cha-based can be really nice for subsequent growth and buffing purposes, and would let you cross into Paladin (getting Cha to attack via Smite and Cha to saves) or Bard (getting Cha to attack for ~1 minute bard level times per day via Snowflake Wardance). Or, though this costs a lot of feats and you'd probably want to dip Fighter just to get there fast enough, you could grab five levels of Iajutsu Master to get Strike from the Void and add up to 9 times your Cha mod to damage against a flatfooted opponent. Obviously not by Lv10 though.

[bekeleven]

Have you considered Master of Many forms, from Complete Adventurer? It's a lot of book keeping, but it's extremely flexible, can make for a very competent melee, and you can easily adjust your power level by picking forms that suit your table's level of optimization.

I also think it's legit one if the most fun and diverse classes in the game.

You would go Druid 5/ MoMF 5. With core races only, probably Human, Dwarf or Gnome.

If your DM would be willing to budge on alternative class features, you could also go for wild shape ranger from Unearthed Arcana instead. I'd suggest urban companion to take care of the alertness prereq, but it's both an ACF and web-exclusive, so it's definitely out.100% agreed, it's my favorite flavor of beatstick and one of the most fun classes in the game. There's definitely a difficulty hump to get over w.r.t the alternate form rules, and lord knows I've made some tools for my personal aid in the past (writing down STR, DEX, CON, natural attack patterns, special attacks, SQ and immunities, etc. on a speadsheet).

[Quertus]

It's +6, not +4. Cleric also has 9th level spells, that's why it's better than fighter.

Ah, thanks. To my mind, it’s “set your strength to 18”, because that’s what the 3.0 version does.


Two-weapon fighting and Sneak Attack. I think he's got Improved Critical for his main weapon and a Keen weapon in the other hand (I know they don't stack). He's getting four attacks a round and the bonus 1d6 to each one.

He's got Weapon Finesse, doesn't have Power Attack, and usually hits two or three times per round, often with a Critical thrown in.

Um… say, d6 Weapon damage, d6 SA, +1 weapon, +1-2 from strength… 2 hits, one x2 crit… that’s… 7d6+9(ish) = 33.5 damage per round. That’s the target that you…don’t need to beat, but just want to come close(r) to?

A good (mounted) charging build (ie, what I expect from most Paladin PCs) would have… at least 16 + 4 (item) + 2(level) = 22 strength by level 10. So, +7 damage bonus with a +1 Lance (+10 if you insist you’re wielding it 2-handed…). Even just charging for x3 damage, that’s 3 dice +21 on a charge (+30 with both hands). Pretty trivial to get in the same general range as your R&R 2wf bud here (albeit “0 damage” happens if you miss, unless your Mount is also charging).

So… if you’re a Paladin, and you’re not doing mounted charges whenever possible, what are you doing?

[Soranar]

guessing your paladin is really unoptimized

assuming 32 pts buy

STR 26 (main stat, 18 base +2 from levels +6 from magic item)
DEX 8 (enough with full plate, eventually you get a +4 to DEX)
CON 12
INT 8 (you just need ride)
WIS 10 (eventually you can get a magic item to cast spells but core spells are meh)
CHA 16

ideally you'd want a belt of magnificence eventually but I don't know if that's core

mount:

You can get an alternate mount by level 7 +, the rhinoceros (this rule is in the DMG) costs you 2 effective levels of paladin for your mount's abilities and it's totally worth it. Even without rhino's rush (not a core paladin spell) it still deals a massive amount of damage on a charge.

your feats:

just a standard mounted charger build

mounted combat, ride-by attack, spirited charge, power attack, divine might or aim for shock trooper next

if you wield your lance 2 handed

you deal 1d8 + 12 (STR 2 handed) x3 (mounted charge + spirited charge) = 49.5

-if you're facing something easy to hit, remove 10 BAB to get +60 damage
-if you're facing something evil, smite it for +30 damage

a CR 10 encounter would mean you either drop a minion every turn or you deal half the damage of the creature you're facing on a charge even with DR assuming you don't kill it outright too

as for your rhino, it deals 4d6 +24 damage on a charge

even if you're not charging you still deal 1d8+12 damage per attack while your rhino deals 2d6+12 damage

[Biggus]

This DM doesn't allow Monks or Sorcerers and some other stuff. I get the feeling someone else abused those classes in the past.

If you're looking for something that can do decent damage but is definitely non-abusive, a multiclass Barbarian/Fighter is probably the simplest option. Barbarian 6/Fighter 4 gets you both rage and Weapon Specialisation, and requires very few good ability scores: you can dump Int and Cha completely, put a few points into Dex and Wis and all the rest into Str and Con. Take the Melee Weapon Mastery feat form Players Handbook 2 for another +2 to attack and damage, and the Reckless Rage feat from Races of Stone to increase the strength of your rage.

You will definitely want Power Attack and a two-handed weapon.

This isn't a super-strong build, but in a relatively unoptimized party it should do just fine.

Alternatively, there's the Frenzied Berserker prestige class from Complete Adventurer which gives huge bonuses to damage, but there's a danger of attacking your allies if the combat ends before your frenzy does (as will often happen). There are ways round that though; for example the spell Calm Emotions.

[pabelfly]

If you're looking for something that can do decent damage but is definitely non-abusive, a multiclass Barbarian/Fighter is probably the simplest option. Barbarian 6/Fighter 4 gets you both rage and Weapon Specialisation, and requires very few good ability scores: you can dump Int and Cha completely, put a few points into Dex and Wis and all the rest into Str and Con. Take the Melee Weapon Mastery feat form Players Handbook 2 for another +2 to attack and damage, and the Reckless Rage feat from Races of Stone to increase the strength of your rage.

You will definitely want Power Attack and a two-handed weapon.

This isn't a super-strong build, but in a relatively unoptimized party it should do just fine.

Alternatively, there's the Frenzied Berserker prestige class from Complete Adventurer which gives huge bonuses to damage, but there's a danger of attacking your allies if the combat ends before your frenzy does (as will often happen). There are ways round that though; for example the spell Calm Emotions.

I'm a fan of dipping Barbarian and combining with Fighter, but I'd do Barbarian 1/Fighter X. You still get Rage but you get more Fighter feats, and there are only minimal benefits from Barbarian once you get Rage. I'd also suggest using a spare feat or two to pick up "Extra Rage" so you can get the bonuses from Rage all day.

[Biggus]

I'm a fan of dipping Barbarian and combining with Fighter, but I'd do Barbarian 1/Fighter X. You still get Rage but you get more Fighter feats, and there are only minimal benefits from Barbarian once you get Rage. I'd also suggest using a spare feat or two to pick up "Extra Rage" so you can get the bonuses from Rage all day.

I think minimal is overstating it a little. But you're right, like all the martial classes in the PHB Barbarian is front-loaded. If the UA Paladin variants were on the table, I'd have been half-tempted to suggest Fighter 2/Barbarian 2/Monk 2/Ranger 2/Paladin of Freedom 2.

[Mars Ultor]

So… if you’re a Paladin, and you’re not doing mounted charges whenever possible, what are you doing?

I'm charging on horseback (actually Pegasus back) outdoors, but the overwhelming majority of the time the adventures are indoors or underground.

[Mars Ultor]

guessing your paladin is really unoptimized

assuming 32 pts buy

mount:

You can get an alternate mount by level 7 +, the rhinoceros (this rule is in the DMG) costs you 2 effective levels of paladin for your mount's abilities and it's totally worth it. Even without rhino's rush (not a core paladin spell) it still deals a massive amount of damage on a charge.

your feats:

just a standard mounted charger build

mounted combat, ride-by attack, spirited charge, power attack, divine might or aim for shock trooper next

if you wield your lance 2 handed

a CR 10 encounter would mean you either drop a minion every turn or you deal half the damage of the creature you're facing on a charge even with DR assuming you don't kill it outright too



We rolled for ability scores, I had two fifteens, one went to Strength, the other to Charisma. They're both 16 now.

Magic Items are limited, I've got a bunch of Bull's Strength potions, but no permanent Strength items.

The mount is a pegasus, mostly for campaign reasons. It's not the absolute best, but I like it. I have the mounted combat feats and do well outdoors, but we're mostly inside where I can't use my mount.

[Mars Ultor]

If you're looking for something that can do decent damage but is definitely non-abusive, a multiclass Barbarian/Fighter is probably the simplest option. Barbarian 6/Fighter 4 gets you both rage and Weapon Specialisation,

This isn't a super-strong build, but in a relatively unoptimized party it should do just fine.

This is probably the way I'll go, it's simple and the Metamagic Cleric seems too much and not enough at the same time. I wasn't aware of the Weapon Mastery Feat, that sounds useful. Thanks for the suggestions.

[pabelfly]

I think minimal is overstating it a little. But you're right, like all the martial classes in the PHB Barbarian is front-loaded. If the UA Paladin variants were on the table, I'd have been half-tempted to suggest Fighter 2/Barbarian 2/Monk 2/Ranger 2/Paladin of Freedom 2.

That build is ugly and beautiful all at the same time.

[Mars Ultor]

I'm a fan of dipping Barbarian and combining with Fighter, but I'd do Barbarian 1/Fighter X. You still get Rage but you get more Fighter feats, and there are only minimal benefits from Barbarian once you get Rage. I'd also suggest using a spare feat or two to pick up "Extra Rage" so you can get the bonuses from Rage all day.

Improved Uncanny Dodge at 5th level would be useful, but that's a lot to invest when I could be getting feats instead. The Extra Rage feat is good, thanks for the suggestion.

[pabelfly]

Improved Uncanny Dodge at 5th level would be useful, but that's a lot to invest when I could be getting feats instead. The Extra Rage feat is good, thanks for the suggestion.

No problem, hope you have fun with your character.

[MultitudeMan]

If you don't think it'll be treading on the other Ranger's toes, you could use the Horizon Tripper (https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?80415-The-Horizon-Tripper-(Core-Melee-Build)) build. You get BFC, lots of skills, and at level 11, you get nearly-at-will Dimension Door :smallcool: .

[H_H_F_F]

Magic items are limited... is Vow of Poverty on the table? I'd assume no, but it'd make you mucj more competitive if the table is significantly under wbl.

And again, are templates fair play, or do they count as non-core races?

[Fizban]

I'm charging on horseback (actually Pegasus back) outdoors, but the overwhelming majority of the time the adventures are indoors or underground.
Where are your Paladin spells? You've made no mention of them at all. Spell Compendium has combat tricks for Paladins, primarily Rhino's Rush, which would let you get the same charge effect indoors.


[barbarian fighter]
Barb 2/Fighter X, get all the frontloaded barbarian features, take Extra Rage once, maybe twice if you really need it, Spec/Mastery/Greater Spec, Blind Fight because it's nearly the only way to address miss chances, you're fine. Improved Uncanny Dodge only matters against like one monster in MM1 and a couple more elsewhere- unless of course your DM is using nothing but classed NPCs instead of monsters.

1 Extra Rage (total 3/day)
3 Extra Rage (total 5/day)
F1 Weapon Focus
(4) F2 Blind Fight
6
F4
(8) F6 Weapon Specialization
9 Weapon Mastery
(10) F8 Improved Crit

Two feats open, no human, plenty enough room if you want to join the cult of Power Attack even up to basic Ubercharge, or take TWF yourself. And since Mastery applies to a wide range of weapons (and at +2/+2 those weapons are equivalent [actually better] than previous Focus/Spec), you're still not actually locked to one weapon at that point, able to switch between two-hand/shield/dual wield as gear permits.

Greatsword, no PA raging no magic: 2d6+4+7 =~ 18 per hit, way more attack bonus so your -5 iterative should be just fine, for 36 on a full attack. Trade some base damage by going scimitar+shield primary, still 12.5 per hit and with higher crit chance. I wouldn't really recommend competing on TWF with someone loading multiple bonus damage tracks, but dual kukri crit fishing is still possible.


If you really want to cut into their damage, assuming the reason they're always flanking is because your character is there, you switch to a ranged build. All those Str and feat bonuses work just fine on a bow, plus you really can just full attack anything in line of sight. Dropping Improved Crit, there's room for PBS, Precise, and Rapid, drop an Extra Rage and there's room for Manyshot.



I would also question what it is you're fighting, since all these no-shield light armor characters supposedly being the the standard of damage when "AC is useless" and thus they should be dying to any melee monster, doesn't make sense. The game only turns into a dps contest when people are allowed and encouraged to stand there and dps. And this guy is apparently critting a bunch through TWF penalties, when people complain that Fighters can't even hit monster AC (but everyone else somehow does automatically of course)? See speculation re: classed NPCs.

Honestly, I'd expect the Ranger's damage to be coming from Favored Enemy where the DM only ever uses their favored enemies. Combine that with crits and a dash of sneak attack and yeah, that's something you can't match normally. Because the DM is in that situation just letting them have it it- two abilities which are meant to be situational damage which are instead always on should have a predictable outcome. Meanwhile the Paladin is getting hosed by a series of missions where their most basic damage option isn't allowed. Fair. :smallsigh:

Also no one's mentioned energy buffs I don't think, but at 10th level those are another easily resisted/potentially always on set of d6's.

[Rakaydos]

Isnt Druid a classic "melee fullcaster"? With summons, it can revive the AD&D Fighter's "I have an army now" ability, without the messy logistics that were AD&D's bread and butter, while still having combat wildshape.

[pabelfly]

Further suggestions:

Check out the Sugliin weapon from Frostburn. Since you don't have Pounce or an equivalent, getting 2d8 on your single attack each turn after a charge is pretty solid, even if you have to take a -4 if you choose not to have an Exotic Weapon Proficiency feat. The downside of this is you don't get multiple attacks when you don't have to move. You can fix that by taking Exotic Weapon Proficiency (Sugliin) and the Sugliin Mastery Feat, but I'd question if it was worth taking two feats to wield.

I'd also check out Powerful Charge and Greater Powerful Charge, which would add 2d6 to your charge attack damage as a medium character. You won't get the damage outside of a charge attack though.

[Quertus]

We rolled for ability scores, I had two fifteens, one went to Strength, the other to Charisma. They're both 16 now.

Magic Items are limited, I've got a bunch of Bull's Strength potions, but no permanent Strength items.

The mount is a pegasus, mostly for campaign reasons. It's not the absolute best, but I like it. I have the mounted combat feats and do well outdoors, but we're mostly inside where I can't use my mount.


This DM doesn't allow Monks or Sorcerers and some other stuff. I get the feeling someone else abused those classes in the past.

Low wealth 3e, GM has banned Monk (!) and Sorcerer as OP, GM will crush the strong but not buff the weak? This… has all the makings of a horror story.

If you ever get another GM, and come to realize what you’ve lived through, the Playground will be here for you.

Until then… look, you don’t play a Fighter under a low-wealth GM who doesn’t have your back. You also don’t play a “Fighter” when you don’t have full splat support. “Linear Fighter, Quadratic Wizard” isn’t as bad as some Playgrounders claim, but “low wealth Fighter”? That simply can’t keep up without very specific builds (the type that will get the poor under-performing Monk class banned).

If you were never leveling again past level 10? Maybe. Maybe then we’d have a nice, static target to try to hit, and could build you a low-wealth Fighter that was competitive.

But in this scenario, possibly going to 20th (or epic)? Yeah, no. I’m afraid I’ve got to pull the classic Playground card, and respond to “how do I build a Fighter to…” with “play a Wizard”.

Because low wealth, ban-happy GM who doesn’t give underperforming Fighter a GM pity artifact? I don’t think you’ll be happy otherwise. I know I wouldn’t be.

[H_H_F_F]

Low wealth 3e, GM has banned Monk (!) and Sorcerer as OP, GM will crush the strong but not buff the weak? This… has all the makings of a horror story.

If you ever get another GM, and come to realize what you’ve lived through, the Playground will be here for you.

Until then… look, you don’t play a Fighter under a low-wealth GM who doesn’t have your back. You also don’t play a “Fighter” when you don’t have full splat support. “Linear Fighter, Quadratic Wizard” isn’t as bad as some Playgrounders claim, but “low wealth Fighter”? That simply can’t keep up without very specific builds (the type that will get the poor under-performing Monk class banned).

If you were never leveling again past level 10? Maybe. Maybe then we’d have a nice, static target to try to hit, and could build you a low-wealth Fighter that was competitive.

But in this scenario, possibly going to 20th (or epic)? Yeah, no. I’m afraid I’ve got to pull the classic Playground card, and respond to “how do I build a Fighter to…” with “play a Wizard”.

Because low wealth, ban-happy GM who doesn’t give underperforming Fighter a GM pity artifact? I don’t think you’ll be happy otherwise. I know I wouldn’t be.

Keep in mind that this is a low op table. I refuse to believe that the GM has banned monk while the casters are planar binding their way to power.

I again suggest Vow of Poverty, if allowed. I'd say VoP MoMF can be adjusted to balance with a table quite easily, and can stay relevant to 20 in any table that isn't very high op (which this obviously isn't).

[Mars Ultor]

Magic items are limited... is Vow of Poverty on the table? I'd assume no, but it'd make you mucj more competitive if the table is significantly under wbl.

And again, are templates fair play, or do they count as non-core races?

No templates, I'm not sure about Vow of Poverty.

[MaxiDuRaritry]

If it's low wealth and you're intent on playing a muggle, how about Ancestral Relic + Item Familiar + Leadership (for a fiend of possession cohort or something) + Wild Cohort (for a mount) to ensure you get enough magic/WBL to function? I wouldn't suggest it in most other circumstances (other than high op, of course), but 'muggle in a low wealth campaign' is a viable circumstance, I think.

Could be a reason to lean into fighter, since you'll need feats.

[Metastachydium]

Further suggestions:

Check out the Sugliin weapon from Frostburn. Since you don't have Pounce or an equivalent, getting 2d8 on your single attack each turn after a charge is pretty solid, even if you have to take a -4 if you choose not to have an Exotic Weapon Proficiency feat. The downside of this is you don't get multiple attacks when you don't have to move. You can fix that by taking Exotic Weapon Proficiency (Sugliin) and the Sugliin Mastery Feat, but I'd question if it was worth taking two feats to wield.

I have a better suggestion on the "crazy stupid weapon dealing a lot of damage" front! It's a thing whereof I always wanted to try a variant: be a TempestCAdv. With warmacesCW, in the plural. It's a straightforward Fighter 6/Tempest 4 build that eats up all your feats (stupid Dodge line!) and requires that you pump your DEX up to 17 (stupid TWF line!), but taking Oversized TWF at 6th level alongside ITWF and Two-Wepon Pounce at 9th level, you get a beefy dude who can charge and then hit something with two stupidly big maces (for 1d12 bludgeoning damage from each) taking no penalty to hit for fighting with two weapons (because Tempest). When not charging, you also still get four attacks for a total of up to 4d12+(3×STR) points of damage and still with no penalty to hit.

[Mars Ultor]

If you don't think it'll be treading on the other Ranger's toes, you could use the Horizon Tripper (https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?80415-The-Horizon-Tripper-(Core-Melee-Build)) build. You get BFC, lots of skills, and at level 11, you get nearly-at-will Dimension Door :smallcool: .

That's pretty amazing. There's nothing that won't be allowed and it doesn't rely on magic item to make it work. Thank you.

[Quertus]

Keep in mind that this is a low op table. I refuse to believe that the GM has banned monk while the casters are planar binding their way to power.

I again suggest Vow of Poverty, if allowed. I'd say VoP MoMF can be adjusted to balance with a table quite easily, and can stay relevant to 20 in any table that isn't very high op (which this obviously isn't).

Sure. If the GM has banned Monk, low-OP is almost certainly true! But “everyone else at the table is doing fine; ‘everyone else‘ is a bunch of casters in a low wealth 3e game (and one muggle with a viable strategy I don’t want to copy), help me build a Fighter that can keep up with no splat support under a ban-happy GM who already banned Monk as OP”? That doesn’t ring any warning bells?

The OP knows enough to make a charging Paladin (and give them a flying Mount no less!), but not enough to make them with an adequate secondary schtick (btw, OP, were you aware that most of your adventures would occur where the Mount couldn’t go when you made the character, or did the GM suddenly change what y’all were doing when you made the replacement character?).

It’ll be really hard to give the OP advice that lets them tailor the character to match the unknown power level of the rest of the party over the next 5-15 levels. It’ll be really hard to teach them enough to build such a character themselves.

But it’s really easy to play a tier 1 caster, and change your load out from day to day, to Balance to the Table on the fly.

That said, yes, VoP, Weapon of Legacy, etc, have built-in scaling that might be appropriate to this environment.

Much better than wasting combat rounds chugging potions.

[Mars Ultor]

Where are your Paladin spells? You've made no mention of them at all. Spell Compendium has combat tricks for Paladins, primarily Rhino's Rush, which would let you get the same charge effect indoors.


Barb 2/Fighter X, get all the frontloaded barbarian features, take Extra Rage once, maybe twice if you really need it, Spec/Mastery/Greater Spec, Blind Fight because it's nearly the only way to address miss chances, you're fine. Improved Uncanny Dodge only matters against like one monster in MM1 and a couple more elsewhere- unless of course your DM is using nothing but classed NPCs instead of monsters.


Two feats open, no human, plenty enough room if you want to join the cult of Power Attack even up to basic Ubercharge, or take TWF yourself. And since Mastery applies to a wide range of weapons (and at +2/+2 those weapons are equivalent [actually better] than previous Focus/Spec), you're still not actually locked to one weapon at that point, able to switch between two-hand/shield/dual wield as gear permits.


If you really want to cut into their damage, assuming the reason they're always flanking is because your character is there, you switch to a ranged build.


I would also question what it is you're fighting, since all these no-shield light armor characters supposedly being the the standard of damage when "AC is useless" and thus they should be dying to any melee monster, doesn't make sense. The game only turns into a dps contest when people are allowed and encouraged to stand there and dps. And this guy is apparently critting a bunch through TWF penalties, when people complain that Fighters can't even hit monster AC (but everyone else somehow does automatically of course)? See speculation re: classed NPCs.

Honestly, I'd expect the Ranger's damage to be coming from Favored Enemy where the DM only ever uses their favored enemies. Combine that with crits and a dash of sneak attack and yeah, that's something you can't match normally. Because the DM is in that situation just letting them have it it- two abilities which are meant to be situational damage which are instead always on should have a predictable outcome. Meanwhile the Paladin is getting hosed by a series of missions where their most basic damage option isn't allowed. Fair. :smallsigh:

Also no one's mentioned energy buffs I don't think, but at 10th level those are another easily resisted/potentially always on set of d6's.


I typically use Silverbeard because my AC isn't great (some armors aren't allowed because of campaign setting) and Rhino's Rush. Rhino's Rush is good, especially when combined with Smite Evil, but it's only once.

The Barbarian/Fighter combo sounds good. I'm going to think it through and see which levels give me what I'd like. The Mastery feat would be useful in that magic weapons aren't typically for sale, they're just what the party comes across. Being able to use any slashing weapon would be a benefit.

The majority of the time the villains are NPCs with class levels, them having feats and using basic tactics is pretty common.

I'm not looking to out due the Ranger or restrict him. It's that my character is assumed to be the primary fighter, but armor is limited and I do good damage for only one attack. The character is good when we're role-playing but feels useless in combat. Except for Strength and Charisma, which are 16s, his other ability scores are around 10. That's part of it, too. I've been much luckier and had more options in the past.

I don't know what "DPS" means. I really don't understand how the Ranger is so effective, although I suspect some of it is the personal dynamics within the group. I've known these guys for years, but some of them go back decades and I feel that plays in part in what allowances are made during character creation.

As far as the Ranger getting favored enemies and my Paladin's mount being of limited use, I think it's just how this campaign worked out. A Pegasus would have been extremely useful last campaign, which is what led me to make that choice this time.

What are energy buffs?

[Mars Ultor]

Further suggestions:

Check out the Sugliin weapon from Frostburn.

I'd also check out Powerful Charge and Greater Powerful Charge, which would add 2d6 to your charge attack damage as a medium character. You won't get the damage outside of a charge attack though.


I'd be surprised if Frostburn is allowed.

I was not familiar with those charge feats, I'll check them out. Thanks.

[Mars Ultor]

Low wealth 3e, GM has banned Monk (!) and Sorcerer as OP, GM will crush the strong but not buff the weak? This… has all the makings of a horror story.

If you ever get another GM, and come to realize what you’ve lived through, the Playground will be here for you.

Until then… look, you don’t play a Fighter under a low-wealth GM who doesn’t have your back.


I moved when I got married and left the guys I originally played with. I played D&D with people on and off over the years, but then had kids and other things going on. Then I ran into an old friend who'd moved out to where I live and hed mentioned that he plays D&D with a local group, I joined them.

It's a good fit for the most part, but there are some recurring issues. My first PC with them (and 3.5) was a Fighter who got killed very quickly. They helped me make him and suggested feats like Exotic Weapon Proficiency: Bastard Sword. After my PC's death I started looking online and saw what poor choices I'd been recommended. There's a view of the game they have which I think doesn't matches the reality of the rules.

I'm not against low-magic campaigns, I run one myself using the E6 rules, but that doesn't work when the martial PCs have campaign restrictions in regards to equipment and magic items but every spell is available for the casters.

The role-playing aspect is really good though, and they are good guys, it's just a fundamental disagreement in how some things work. Part of my frustration this time is that I really don't understand how the Ranger is so effective, something doesn't make sense to me.

[Mars Ultor]

Keep in mind that this is a low op table. I refuse to believe that the GM has banned monk while the casters are planar binding their way to power.

I again suggest Vow of Poverty, if allowed. I'd say VoP MoMF can be adjusted to balance with a table quite easily, and can stay relevant to 20 in any table that isn't very high op (which this obviously isn't).

The DM doesn't think Monk is overpowered, I get the sense a former player found ways to abuse things and the DM associates that with that class.

A big part of the issue, as I see it, is that this group has been together for years and they all see things the same way. Somebody played a Paladin once and everyone like it, so Paladins are obviously a powerful class. Someone had a Druid that only cast Entangle and shied away from combat, so Druids are not that great a class.

The more I think about what's happening now is that the Ranger's player is doing something I don't understand. I suspect that player (who's an honest guy) is doing something wrong and that's skewing things. Maybe he doesn't understand how critical hits work or something, but something doesn't add up.

[Mars Ultor]

If it's low wealth and you're intent on playing a muggle, how about Ancestral Relic + Item Familiar + Leadership (for a fiend of possession cohort or something) + Wild Cohort (for a mount) to ensure you get enough magic/WBL to function? I wouldn't suggest it in most other circumstances (other than high op, of course), but 'muggle in a low wealth campaign' is a viable circumstance, I think.

Could be a reason to lean into fighter, since you'll need feats.

I'm not sure these things would be allowed, but I'll look into it. Thanks.

[pabelfly]

The more I think about what's happening now is that the Ranger's player is doing something I don't understand. I suspect that player (who's an honest guy) is doing something wrong and that's skewing things. Maybe he doesn't understand how critical hits work or something, but something doesn't add up.

How much damage is the Ranger doing each turn?That would give us a good ballpark to optimize to.

[Mars Ultor]

Sure. If the GM has banned Monk, low-OP is almost certainly true! But “everyone else at the table is doing fine; ‘everyone else‘ is a bunch of casters in a low wealth 3e game (and one muggle with a viable strategy I don’t want to copy), help me build a Fighter that can keep up with no splat support under a ban-happy GM who already banned Monk as OP”? That doesn’t ring any warning bells?

The OP knows enough to make a charging Paladin (and give them a flying Mount no less!), but not enough to make them with an adequate secondary schtick (btw, OP, were you aware that most of your adventures would occur where the Mount couldn’t go when you made the character, or did the GM suddenly change what y’all were doing when you made the replacement character?).

It’ll be really hard to give the OP advice that lets them tailor the character to match the unknown power level of the rest of the party over the next 5-15 levels. It’ll be really hard to teach them enough to build such a character themselves.

But it’s really easy to play a tier 1 caster, and change your load out from day to day, to Balance to the Table on the fly.

That said, yes, VoP, Weapon of Legacy, etc, have built-in scaling that might be appropriate to this environment.

Much better than wasting combat rounds chugging potions.


Prior campaigns had a lot more outdoorsy stuff. We used to play in person but various circumstances forced us to play online, I think that led to a different approach from the DM. There was also some confusion (on everyone's part) early on about how flying combat worked, I think that contributed to things as well.

"The Druid and the Wizard are doing okay, it must be something you're doing," is the prevailing view. I think Paladin and some of the other classes work fine early on, but now we're approaching the point where even the heal-bot Cleric is doing 10d6 and the my character's damage is still based on Power Attack and a +1 sword.

[Mars Ultor]

Isnt Druid a classic "melee fullcaster"? With summons, it can revive the AD&D Fighter's "I have an army now" ability, without the messy logistics that were AD&D's bread and butter, while still having combat wildshape.

My preference is to play a melee character, I'm not a fan of Druids and the metamagicked Cleric to Fighter doesn't appeal to me either.

[Soranar]

Prior campaigns had a lot more outdoorsy stuff. We used to play in person but various circumstances forced us to play online, I think that led to a different approach from the DM. There was also some confusion (on everyone's part) early on about how flying combat worked, I think that contributed to things as well.

"The Druid and the Wizard are doing okay, it must be something you're doing," is the prevailing view. I think Paladin and some of the other classes work fine early on, but now we're approaching the point where even the heal-bot Cleric is doing 10d6 and the my character's damage is still based on Power Attack and a +1 sword.

Core martial classes need magic items to stay relevant, it's just that simple really. If you're level 10 and you're not respecting wealth by level rules then you're going to struggle a lot. Especially if you rolled your stats on top of it.

From what you're saying your DM isn't even allowing core magic item so... good luck with that. Most advice will come down to : play a tier 1 class and call it a day.

The crit fisher ranger should be having more problems too: crit immune creatures are legion at that CR and not having good saves should be an issue.

[Mars Ultor]

I have a better suggestion on the "crazy stupid weapon dealing a lot of damage" front! It's a thing whereof I always wanted to try a variant: be a TempestCAdv. With warmacesCW, in the plural. It's a straightforward Fighter 6/Tempest 4 build that eats up all your feats (stupid Dodge line!) and requires that you pump your DEX up to 17 (stupid TWF line!), but taking Oversized TWF at 6th level alongside ITWF and Two-Wepon Pounce at 9th level, you get a beefy dude who can charge and then hit something with two stupidly big maces (for 1d12 bludgeoning damage from each) taking no penalty to hit for fighting with two weapons (because Tempest). When not charging, you also still get four attacks for a total of up to 4d12+(3×STR) points of damage and still with no penalty to hit.

I'm not familiar with that, but I'll take a look. Even though the notion of wasting a feat on Dodge sickens me, thanks for the suggestion.

[tyckspoon]

The more I think about what's happening now is that the Ranger's player is doing something I don't understand. I suspect that player (who's an honest guy) is doing something wrong and that's skewing things. Maybe he doesn't understand how critical hits work or something, but something doesn't add up.

Common misconceptions and/or houserules related to critical hits include 'all critical threats automatically hit' (not correct, only a natural 20 roll automatically hits. If you have an extended crit range, you still have to hit the target AC in order to hit even if you roll inside your crit range) and 'crit threats are all crits, you don't have to roll to confirm.' Either or both of those could be making their Improved Crit/Keen bonuses much more effective than they should be. Rolled stats can also potentially mean his character is Just Better in a raw numbers sense. If his player has been with the group for a longer period of time there may also be some favoritism/historical benefit the player is getting in equipment - I would not be surprised if he has a couple of fairly nice magical weapons that he 'earned in play' that you aren't allowed to match because you weren't there for that quest, for example.. but that's me being cynical.


Frankly you are probably in the best possible situation to play a straight Fighter if you want to give that another try - just needs better feat selection. And, very critically, the ability to select feats from outside of Core without too many restrictions. Core Fighter options suck. But in low op environments you can get stuff that will let your basic numbers pretty much keep up. And dealing with primarily classed humanoid NPC opponents means most of the combat maneuvers are in play, because weapon users care about being Disarmed, classed spellcasters can have their important accessible items Sundered (NPC casters always Cast Defensively and act like they don't care about you standing next to them? Ready an action to break their holy symbol or material component pouch when they get it out to cast instead) and humanoid enemies tend to be fairly easy to Trip without the massive size and Strength bonuses monstrous foes often get.

So if you went raw Fighter, at level 10 you'd have.. lessee. 6 Fighter Bonus Feats.
Weapon Focus - Weapon Specialization - Piercing Weapon Mastery.
Improved Shield Bash - Shield Charge - Shield Slam. (Shield Charge and Shield Slam are in Complete Warrior.)
3 normal feats from leveling. Stats permitting, let's drop in
Combat Expertise - Improved Trip.
1 free feat selection remaining. If you go with being Human you could do Barb 2/Fight 8 instead - lose 1 Fighter Bonus in trade for the human bonus feat so that evens out, and your last general feat is probably Extra Rage. If not, probably want to pick up Power Attack on general principles, or if you didn't have the stats for Combat Expertise + Trip you might look at:
Shield Specialization (Shield AC increased by 1. Kinda terrible, but prereq for:) Agile Shield Fighter (when you TWF using a shield bash, your penalty is -2/-2 instead of the normal penalties. Basically lets you TWF with one-handed weapons at only light weapon penalties, doesn't have the Dex requirements of the normal TWF feat, but with the restriction that your offhand weapon must be a shield.)

Grab.. whatever piercing weapon you think will be pretty common in your campaign to make your weapon focus + weapon spec. It's nice if you can consistently make use of this and eventually manage to get a magical version of this weapon, but not required - those are mostly feat taxes to get the Weapon Mastery. Get a Spiked Heavy Shield (this is - mandatory - for this to work, even if you never find or can convince your DM to let you purchase or have made a magical version. You may need to lean on having somebody hit it with Magic Weapon spells. Heck, make this your Focus/Specialization weapon if you want, although you will need to be ready to deal with the inevitable Kingdom Hearts Goofy references.)

So what does all this do? When you charge somebody, you can hit them with your shield (benefiting from at least Piercing Weapon Mastery.) If you do, you get a free trip attempt. You also force a Fortitude save against being Dazed. If you successfully trip them, you get a bonus attack from Improved Trip. And if you successfully dazed them, you negate their next turn, so when your turn rolls around again you're standing next to a prone target (IE, +4 to hit against them) and can unload a full attack.

[Mars Ultor]

Core martial classes need magic items to stay relevant, it's just that simple really. If you're level 10 and you're not respecting wealth by level rules then you're going to struggle a lot. Especially if you rolled your stats on top of it.

From what you're saying your DM isn't even allowing core magic item so... good luck with that. Most advice will come down to : play a tier 1 class and call it a day.

The crit fisher ranger should be having more problems too: crit immune creatures are legion at that CR and not having good saves should be an issue.


WBL is ignored, that's something I regularly complain about. The DM doesn't see the casters needing magic items, why would the other PCs?

Something has to be wrong with the Ranger, he shouldn't be that effective. There's a problem somewhere. At least once a game the Ranger does something and I start thinking, "What? How is that happening?" I don't know what's going on.

[Mars Ultor]

Common misconceptions and/or houserules related to critical hits include 'all critical threats automatically hit' (not correct, only a natural 20 roll automatically hits. If you have an extended crit range, you still have to hit the target AC in order to hit even if you roll inside your crit range) and 'crit threats are all crits, you don't have to roll to confirm.' Either or both of those could be making their Improved Crit/Keen bonuses much more effective than they should be. Rolled stats can also potentially mean his character is Just Better in a raw numbers sense. If his player has been with the group for a longer period of time there may also be some favoritism/historical benefit the player is getting in equipment - I would not be surprised if he has a couple of fairly nice magical weapons that he 'earned in play' that you aren't allowed to match because you weren't there for that quest, for example.. but that's me being cynical.


I agree with every single think in the first paragraph. The player never really learned the system, I'm more and more convinced he's doing Critical hits wrong. His PC has outstanding rolls, I rolled uncharacteristically poorly. It's obvious there's some favoritism--a player who moved away used to complain about it all the time when I'd drive him home. And I missed a bunch of sessions due to various kid stuff and illness, my PC missed out on treasure and experience.

The good thing about being cynical is that you're either right or pleasantly surprised.

I had a tripping Fighter at one point, he was pretty effective early on and then I multiclassed into Rogue and got the additional damage and skills, still my favorite PC. Your build sounds really good. Now i'll sort of be disappointed if my Paladin doesn't die.

What are your thoughts on the Combat Brute feat?

[H_H_F_F]

WBL is ignored, that's something I regularly complain about. The DM doesn't see the casters needing magic items, why would the other PCs?

Seriously, check if Vow of Poverty is allowed. It's in Book of Exalted deeds. It's very good in extremely low-money campaigns, but it's also very restrictive and very thematic, so your DM might allow it anyway.


Something has to be wrong with the Ranger, he shouldn't be that effective. There's a problem somewhere. At least once a game the Ranger does something and I start thinking, "What? How is that happening?" I don't know what's going on.

I'd suggest communication. Have a 1 on 1 talk with the ranger, and tell him you think something might be wrong with his numbers. Ask if he'd like some help with that, don't force him into it. Sit down and run through a combat scenario. Check if he doubles extra damage dice on a crit, auto-confirms, whatever. Make sure there are no established house rules on the matter.



What are your thoughts on the Combat Brute feat?

It's a great feat. Momentum swing takes the day. But that's true if you can afford to power attack with high numbers. If you're facing high AC enemies without proper wbl support, it might not be viable. If AC of enemies is low, absolutely take it. Also good if you're fighting classed NPCs with mundane equipment a lot (which can happen in low magic settings) - cleaving sunder is absolutely brutal in that case.


On a general note, pay attention to the fact that you're getting suggestions here from all over the optimization spectrum. Make sure you're not under/over shooting your party's power level.

One more option that I think could do well is War Mind. It's focused, easy to use, and hard to really screw up. You might have some issues with the prereqs, though, given that you don't have access to classes outside core. But you could do Paladin, and take hidden talent at 1 and knowledge devotion at 3. Look into it.



Also, as a note, you can quote multiple posts in one post with the little "+ next to the normal quote button. Could help to avoid double-posting so much.

[Quertus]

I moved when I got married and left the guys I originally played with. I played D&D with people on and off over the years, but then had kids and other things going on. Then I ran into an old friend who'd moved out to where I live and hed mentioned that he plays D&D with a local group, I joined them.

It's a good fit for the most part, but there are some recurring issues. My first PC with them (and 3.5) was a Fighter who got killed very quickly. They helped me make him and suggested feats like Exotic Weapon Proficiency: Bastard Sword. After my PC's death I started looking online and saw what poor choices I'd been recommended. There's a view of the game they have which I think doesn't matches the reality of the rules.

I'm not against low-magic campaigns, I run one myself using the E6 rules, but that doesn't work when the martial PCs have campaign restrictions in regards to equipment and magic items but every spell is available for the casters.

The role-playing aspect is really good though, and they are good guys, it's just a fundamental disagreement in how some things work. Part of my frustration this time is that I really don't understand how the Ranger is so effective, something doesn't make sense to me.

Oh, yeah, I’m not opposed to the concept of “low wealth” on principle. Just… like you said, it seems the game isn’t what they think it is, and such ignorance is a poor position from which to me making such fundamental changes as “low wealth”.

Fighter have a hard time of it to begin with, but “low wealth” and “core only” are both huge obstacles to the class individually; together, it’s… “it’s a trap!”.

TWF sneak attack is, IMO, the go-to way to deal lots of damage easily in 3e. So it’s not surprising to me that a low wealth Rogue would be king of damage.

That said, you haven’t given us numbers - was my ~33 damage estimate even close?

Also… you played the Fighter who died in this campaign, right? Would the Pegasus have been useful for those first 9 levels (or however many levels the Fighter survived)?

[Fizban]

I typically use Silverbeard because my AC isn't great (some armors aren't allowed because of campaign setting) and Rhino's Rush. Rhino's Rush is good, especially when combined with Smite Evil, but it's only once.
So, more nerfs to your character specifically, got it. That's going to screw with a Fighter or Barbarian too- you're supposed to have Full Plate. AC does not scale with level, it scales with gear, and you're playing a class that expects heavy armor and not being allowed standard armors, while the Ranger is playing a build that apparently matches this "setting" perfectly.

The charitable thing would be to assume that no, it's just a well-designed setting where Monks and Full Plate don't make sense. The cynical reading is that the DM's reliance on NPCs (with very limited attack bonus) means that they need to reduce standard armor class even further, and banned the class that looks like it has (but in truth does not) good AC even without armor.

It is the DM's job, even stated directly in the magic item section, to make sure the PCs get the items they need to do their jobs. Your character does not have the items they need, because the DM has apparently banned some amount of the normal heavy armor, without replacement or refund.


The Barbarian/Fighter combo sounds good. I'm going to think it through and see which levels give me what I'd like. The Mastery feat would be useful in that magic weapons aren't typically for sale, they're just what the party comes across. Being able to use any slashing weapon would be a benefit.
Indeed- though you are of course still best with the weapon that has Specialization since they stack. This is where you have to metagame what sorts of weapons the DM has appear (usually one presumes Longsword is the most common, but who knows?)


The majority of the time the villains are NPCs with class levels, them having feats and using basic tactics is pretty common.
So your foes are either glass canons or just plain weaker than the monsters you're supposed to be fighting. I find this is a common occurance in "low magic (item)" campaigns, where the only reason the party is able to function is because essentially the entire CR systerm and monster manual has been thrown out- right up until the DM finally brings out a boss monster and suddenly nothing works. Then, charitably they feel that monsters should be extra-lethal because they're monsters, or cynically they're surprised and confused when the game for which they threw out all the balancing mechanics suddenly reveals its unbalance when a monster shows up.

On the bright side, if enemy NPC AC is terrible, that might mean you can Power Attack without needing tricks to offset the penalties. Just keeping your AC, while a total +3 attack from Focus/Spec/Mastery gives you much more accuracy.

I'm not looking to out due the Ranger or restrict him. It's that my character is assumed to be the primary fighter, but armor is limited and I do good damage for only one attack. The character is good when we're role-playing but feels useless in combat. Except for Strength and Charisma, which are 16s, his other ability scores are around 10. That's part of it, too. I've been much luckier and had more options in the past.
Which again- there is no "primary fighter," but there is an expected "tank," or "meatshield," and the ability to tank has been nerfed by armor restrictions.


I don't know what "DPS" means. I really don't understand how the Ranger is so effective, although I suspect some of it is the personal dynamics within the group. I've known these guys for years, but some of them go back decades and I feel that plays in part in what allowances are made during character creation.

As far as the Ranger getting favored enemies and my Paladin's mount being of limited use, I think it's just how this campaign worked out. A Pegasus would have been extremely useful last campaign, which is what led me to make that choice this time.
DPS stands for Damage Per Second, and is the general term borrowed from MMOs and other RPGs for how fast you can deal damage. There is a hugely common misconception that there is a party role of "DPS," essentially created out of nothing because people. . . want to DPS. This is what you really mean when you say you're thought of as the "primary fighter" but can't deal enough damage. But actually, every player likes dealing damage, and all PCs are supposed to contribute. You should not feel bad that your character deals less damage as long as it's not too much less damage, and you're performing your main role.

But the Paladin's main role is meatshield (as are all heavy-armor melee combat characters), standing between the rest of the group and the enemies because they can survive attacks that the others cannot. But this role has been removed because you don't actually have the armor the game requires for it, while the Dex-focused light armor ranger who is supposed to be squishy probably has as much or more AC than you. There is no gap in AC between characters, so your role is gone, which means the only thing separating your characters is how much damage you deal, and they deal more, so you feel bad.

This is why little things people like to pretend don't matter, like AC gaps and party roles, matter.


What are energy buffs?
I was referring to Flaming/Frost/etc permanent magical weapons (which means buffs was actually the wrong word, since there are also buff spells which add energy damage).


It's a good fit for the most part, but there are some recurring issues. My first PC with them (and 3.5) was a Fighter who got killed very quickly. They helped me make him and suggested feats like Exotic Weapon Proficiency: Bastard Sword. After my PC's death I started looking online and saw what poor choices I'd been recommended. There's a view of the game they have which I think doesn't matches the reality of the rules.
Which is unsurprising given that they mostly fight NPCs. Though there absolutely is plenty of room to have a game where EWP: Bastard Sword is a fine choice, I doubt this group is much aware at allof the situation they've built, and why it favors the Ranger and punishes a Paladin. They probably just think Ranger is a strong class.


Part of my frustration this time is that I really don't understand how the Ranger is so effective, something doesn't make sense to me.
With the DM limiting armor and using foes that are always vulnerable to sneak attack while having even lower AC than the party, I seriously doubt the Ranger's build is something that "just happened." They've built something that meshes perfectly with the game it's being run in, not relying on heavy armor that's been banned and leaning on TWF which would not be good enough against enemies with real armor class.

And I'm still suspicious of Favored Enemy- are you sure "no alternate class features" is really applying to everyone? Because there's an ACF that lets Rangers change favored enemy to an "enemy organization," letting them get their damage against. . . basically every enemy at all times if the DM has you fighting an "organization." Which if you're fighting mostly classed NPCs, sounds pretty likely. And if they are, you might as well give up because you're not beating that without char-op tricks that are going to stand out enough to get insta-banned.

And of course, there's the Ranger's own combat trick spells. They have Rhino's Rush too, for some reason, and Blades of Fire (+1d8 on each attack for a round), Lion's Charge (full attack on a charge), Swift Haste (extra attack in one round), and Fell the Greatest Foe (about tied for strongest damage buff in the game, but not relevant if you're fighting Medium sized-humanoids, unless the Ranger is Small). They don't have any more spell slots than you. . . unless they do, because where you need Str and Con and Wis and Cha, and also Dex because your armor sucks, they're using a Finesse build that doesn't need Str and they have no use for Cha. Which means there's a good chance they have more Wis than you: you said Rhino's Rush is only once, but you only need 14 Wis to get bonus slots for 1st and 2nd level spell, so that's two of each per day. Particularly when there are rolled stat which, as tyckspoon has used the phrase I'm so fond of, mean they're probably Just Better than you.

Or, maybe the Ranger really isn't getting favored "organization" or using their spells, or anything complicated at all, and it's just basline TWF with 1d6 sneak attack and a Keen weapon vs classed humanoids that don't even have standard heavy armor, while they have magic weapons that your new characters don't.

Because with a "low magic (item)" setting where you only find what you find, I would expect new characters are showing up with nothing at all, somehow. So if the Ranger has been there since the beginning, they probably have a bunch of items you don't, in addition to being Just Better, and in a "setting" that perfectly matches them while stripping away the relevance of other melee characters.


I'm not against low-magic campaigns, I run one myself using the E6 rules, but that doesn't work when the martial PCs have campaign restrictions in regards to equipment and magic items but every spell is available for the casters.
And while I'm usually not one to advocate for it, if it turns out this a "low magic, and also low armor, basically anything that's not this ranger build sucks, and. . ." then yeah it might be time to just give up and go caster. Except you can't play the easier to run Sorcerer, or draw a Warmage, and a Wizard spamming Sleep/Glitterdust/Web/Stinking Cloud at enemies so that. . . the Ranger can walk up and kill them? Isn't really an upgrade.


WBL is ignored, that's something I regularly complain about. The DM doesn't see the casters needing magic items, why would the other PCs?
Or you could just give up. If the game is not being run in a way that lets you have fun, don't play the game. "Casters don't need magic items why should you" ought to be a massive "red flag" when it comes to system understanding.


I'd suggest communication. Have a 1 on 1 talk with the ranger, and tell him you think something might be wrong with his numbers. Ask if he'd like some help with that, don't force him into it. Sit down and run through a combat scenario. Check if he doubles extra damage dice on a crit, auto-confirms, whatever. Make sure there are no established house rules on the matter.
In theory, but I doubt someone who's dealing the most damage in the party is going to think their numbers could be off, and if you did get them to agree to it they definitely won't be happy if you point out they've been breaking the rules. On the other hand, if their Ranger build is the only thing that works, you could try getting access/"advice" under the guise of wanting to make your own version.

I'd suggest talking to the DM about basic armor functionality, but they're also probably 100% convinced their "setting" is perfectly fine. The most important fix would be to get the game switched over to monster-fighting and magic items (also known as Dungeons and Dragons), but getting the DM to change their entire style isn't going to happen either, particularly when you say you've already complained about ignoring WBL and been ignored.

This group has their own little microcosm, as you say they've been playing together for ages, and you're not going to be able to fix that.

[H_H_F_F]

To voice something a bit more optimistic than a lot of what's been said: I think party balance, fun and engagement can all still be achieved in a game that breaks system expectations.

I think you should assume good faith: I've ran games where the PCs had to be in light armor because of setting reasons, with "you get what you find" as the rule and enemies mostly being classed NPCs. Granted, I didn't let players run around as full casters in that game, because that'd break it. It worked out great - it was a 5-20 campaign over 3 years or so, and everyone involved had a great time.

For more suggestions: if you feel like high-AC would be a game changer for you, consider going for 1 level Fist of the Forest (Complete Champion) and 2 of Deepwarden (Races of Stone). It's very feat-intensive, especially without ACFs, but it gets Ac 10+2*Con. If you can pimp Con you'd get very good numbers. Works great with Barbarian, making your AC go up instead of Down when you rage. Again though, very feat intensive. Could work if Flaws are on the table.

In fact, if flaws are in the table, and WBL is really bad, you could go for Forsaker from masters of the wild on top of everything else. A Dwarf Barb 1/ Forsaker 6/ Deepwarden 2/ Fist of the Forest 1 is doable with 2 flaws. Starting with Con 16, and then +4 from dwarf and levels, +6 from forsaker... you'd have +8 Con, +10 when raging. That's an AC of 34, 38 when raging. You'll have Damage reduction 7 on top of that, and full BaB.

This build sucks, but it might be fun in the context of this campaign. Go for steadfast determination at 12.

You'd still be very unimpressive offensively, but you'd be able to throw yourself at anything, which could be fun.

[Endarire]

Druid. Druid, Druid, Druid, Druid, Druid.

With a side of Martial Adepts, Psychic Warriors, and melee Clerics.

[Biggus]

My preference is to play a melee character, I'm not a fan of Druids and the metamagicked Cleric to Fighter doesn't appeal to me either.

You play what you want to play. There are a lot of people on these boards who insist you're an idiot if you don't play a full caster. That may be the case in the kinds of games they play, but it isn't in any of the ones I've ever played in. In the game I'm running now the strongest character is a multiclass Barbarian/Fighter, and while it's far from high-op it's higher-op than the campaign you're in from what you've said.

Edit: to clarify, I'm not saying "you should take my advice and play a Barbarian/Fighter". The tripper builds others have suggested work very well. I'm just saying "if you don't play an optimized full caster you're going to be useless and not have any fun" is not true in most actual games.

[smetzger]

Barbarian with maybe some Fighter levels. Barbarians have more skill points than a Fighter so, more opportunities to do things outside of straight up combat

Two handed sword or great axe with power attack. You will do ample damage while raging. Make sure your highest stat is Strength and just keep boosting it as much as possible.
You could also max out Intimidate skill and take Intimidating Rage and Imperious Command feats

[Anthrowhale]

Have you considered a Sorcadin style build? For a low-magic setting where you want to melee, it seems reasonably solid and simple.

Maybe something like: Paladin 2/Sorcerer 4/Spellsword 1/Abjurant Champion 3

Maximize your Charisma, have a decent Constitution, Dexterity, and Strength. Use a Mithril Chain Shirt + Dastana + Chahar-Aina combo for a +6 armor bonus.

Spells Known are:
4. Polymorph //see forms here (https://minmaxforum.com/index.php?topic=519.0).
3. Greater Mighty Wallop. //Wield heavy damage blunt weapons like warhammers or maces
3. Greater Magic Weapon //Penetrate DR/magic
2. Wraithstrike // spells are a touch attack for 1 round, swift cast
2. Heroics //Pick up any fighter bonus feat.
2. Alter Self //Crucian gives natural armor +8
1. Shield // Shield bonus +7, swift cast
1. Protection from Evil //swift cast
1. Nerveskitter //go first
1. Blockade //swift BFC
1. Swift Expeditious Retreat //swift move

Next level:
4. Greater Luminous Armor // massive armor class
3. Girallon's Blessing // double your arms

For feats, something like:
Human: ?? (maybe two-weapon fighting)
1. Combat Reflexes
3. Power Attack
6. Combat Casting
9. Practiced Spellcaster

Polymorph provides you physical stats in combat. Between Abjurant Champion buffing AC and Paladin buffing saves your are pretty robust.

For example, if you Polymorph into a Cave Troll, your AC is 10(base)+11(natural)+7(shield). You can charge and power attack with warhammers dealing 3d6+11 damage using wraith strike and power attack to amplify damage more while having a chance to daze when you hit.

[MaxiDuRaritry]

Have you considered a Sorcadin style build? For a low-magic setting where you want to melee, it seems reasonably solid and simple. No sorcerers (or monks) allowed, sadly.

[Mars Ultor]

That said, you haven’t given us numbers - was my ~33 damage estimate even close?

Also… you played the Fighter who died in this campaign, right? Would the Pegasus have been useful for those first 9 levels (or however many levels the Fighter survived)?

The Fighter died early on, 2nd level. That was my fault, poor decision making. I . The Pegasus is occasionally useful, but mounted combat opportunities have been lacking.

If my Paladin uses his potion of Bull's Strength he's doing about twelve points if he attacks once in a round, if he drops his shield and uses two hands on his sword it's about eighteen or so. That's assuming no spells or Smite Evil. My preference would be to fight two handed and get double the Power Attack bonus, but my AC is 17 without a shield (20 with). Silverbeard adds +2 to AC if I use it.

The Ranger seems to be doing about eighteen if he attacks once with both weapons in a round. If he uses all four attacks he's always doing almost forty points of damage. He also seems to hit more often than I do, I often feel he's doing at least double the Paladin's damage, sometimes triple.

[Drelua]

No sorcerers (or monks) allowed, sadly.

I was reading this whole thread wondering why no one was suggesting Sorcadin, then I get to the last two posts. Dangit. Don't know how it didn't connect when I read that Sorcerer was banned. I was going to suggest asking to retrain your current character to that, but I guess that's out. Sounds like someone has to have a talk with your group about sample sizes, one broken character doesn't say anything about the class. From the sounds of it, most of this forum could get literally any class banned from this table. Not that Sorcerers can't easily be OP, but they're maybe the weakest full casting class in core.

Then again, might be better off just getting your Paladin killed so you can roll better stats anyway. Should be easy enough, just do something stupid, er, I mean, heroic. Like try to fight on top of a building, that mistake got one of my Paladins killed. "Roll acrobatics," or "roll balance" in 3.5, can be a very scary phrase for Paladins.

[Mars Ultor]

Swift Haste is a definite possibility, that would explain a lot.

I'm usually reasonably happy playing, I'm used to casters dominating the game, but I feel like I'm contributing and my character is effective. There's also role-playing, which I like, and the DM is a teacher, his campaigns are always well researched and interesting.

There's always a minor level of frustration because I think the system has a lot of issues and you can accidentally make an effective character simply by choosing the right class, but a Fighter can't be a basic knight without cross-classing skills.

This campaign just aggravates me because I feel as if my character is constantly deprived of a major class feature, has bad stats, doesn't contribute much in combat, and I seem to spend half my time using potions and spells to make myself effective while the Ranger simply strolls into melee and does at least twice my best damage.

[Mars Ultor]

Then again, might be better off just getting your Paladin killed so you can roll better stats anyway. Should be easy enough, just do something stupid, er, I mean, heroic. Like try to fight on top of a building, that mistake got one of my Paladins killed. "Roll acrobatics," or "roll balance" in 3.5, can be a very scary phrase for Paladins.


I think this thread got away from me. I was initially asking about creating a good fighter, considering the Fighter class isn't that great, but it turned into me complaining about the current campaign.

But several people have pointed out that a few levels of Barbarian in combination with Fighter can solve some problems.

[tyckspoon]

The Ranger seems to be doing about eighteen if he attacks once with both weapons in a round. If he uses all four attacks he's always doing almost forty points of damage. He also seems to hit more often than I do, I often feel he's doing at least double the Paladin's damage, sometimes triple.

He really shouldn't be hitting more than you, although some mix of being allowed to have nicer weapons, potentially better stats, and possibly just outright misusing rules could easily explain why (or just making more attempts, as he probably swings at least two more times a round compared to you.)

If you want to stick with Paladin, probably the best thing to look into would be the various feats that can make your Turn Undead pool into a reliable combat resource instead of a bad niche ability. These are the Domain Devotion feats (mostly Complete Champion) and the Divine feats, found in.. various places, but most of them are bad so there's really only a couple you would care about.

Devotion feats give you a 1/day ability themed around various, well, domains. You can get additional uses of the ability by selecting the feat multiple times, or by expending Turn Undead uses. Law and Protection are pretty in-character for the archetypal Paladin, and also happen to be pretty good feats! Law in particular - for 1 minute (so generally the important duration of a combat) you can add a Sacred bonus (ie stacks with.. most everything) to either your AC or your attack roll. Starts at +3, increases to +5 and +7 at certain levels.
.. although from what you've described of your table I suspect this might just get banned, as this is a -sizable- bonus, especially when you aren't reliably getting the other things that should be getting your to-hits and/or AC up.

The Divine feats you would likely want to look at would be:
Divine Might - has been mentioned before. Really straightforward, adds Charisma to damage for 1 round.
Retrieve Spell - this is a gem I wasn't aware of before. Spend Turn Undeads to refresh a spell slot. For a full caster, this is kind of underwhelming; they get a bunch of low level slots and don't usually need to use them very much, and for higher level slots it'll run out TUs really quickly. But Paladins are terminally low on spell slots, will usually want to cast at least one first or second level spell every fight if they can, and especially because you can't just go buy a necklace's worth of Pearls of Power.. 2 Turn Undeads to get your Silverbeard or Divine Favor or Rhino's Rush back seems like a pretty good deal (costs 1 + spell level of the slot to be recharged.)

[Max Caysey]

It's generally accepted that the Fighter has a lot of issues and doesn't keep up with the other classes. If you were building a 10th-level character who was the party's main melee fighter how would you do it? Core classes and races, no alternate class features or abilities, but most feats and prestige classes (except those in setting specific books). Please don't include special equipment and magic items, just the PC itself.

I would think that a great sword wielding fighter cleric would be some of the most potent things in core only! Expand that, and you have all sorts of pounce barbarians, bear warrior/ fist of the forest, crit fishers, tripper and more…

[Fizban]

The Ranger seems to be doing about eighteen if he attacks once with both weapons in a round. If he uses all four attacks he's always doing almost forty points of damage. He also seems to hit more often than I do, I often feel he's doing at least double the Paladin's damage, sometimes triple.
With d6 weapon and d6 sneak attack that's ~7 per weapon, only needing +2-3 to hit the totals you're seeing. If both weapons are even just +1 and they have 12+ Str, that would do it, no favored enemy required.

Meanwhile if you're fighting classed humanoid enemies with normal stats (no more than a 15 or 16) non-magical gear and no better than Medium armor, their AC would top at maybe 16, or 18 with shield, 20 with maxed Dex, and far less if they're in armor weaker than Chainmail. The Ranger has one less BAB than you but, as discussed, they only need Dex so their Dex is probably higher than your Str- and since they're always going for flanking sneak attacks, they're getting +2 attack (offsetting the TWF penalty) while you're probably moving into position first and attacking without that +2. I expect they're attacking at something like +14/+14/+9/+9, which against AC 16 is going to wreck face- and since they're rolling more often the rare bad rolls don't stick out nearly as much as yours do, and they have four chances to fish a crit each round.

(Edit: You also mentioned turns where they only make two attacks, which is not normally how TWF works- unless they're using Two-Weapon Pounce, which would let them charge and get two attacks. Which, if you include the sneak attack means you could basically read this as moving and making "an" attack at 4d6+6*. Because you're not using TWF, you can't get the (much more reasonable) feat-based "pounce" options, and because ACFs aren't allowed, you can't use the (so broken I banned it) common suggestion of Spirit Lion Totem Barbarian. So once again, there's something your character just isn't allowed to do that the TWF build is.

*Obviously it's actually two rolls and you have to move in a straight line, but you get the idea.
A Fighter could try to match this without using TWF, instead using Spring Attack/Bounding Assault to get an extra attack when moving, but Bounding Assault requires BAB +11 and you also need Dodge and Mobility first. A decently heavy addition, but still easily workable. . . at 12th, since Fighter bonuses are on even levels and it requires BAB 11+ [you could desync Fighter with another level of something, but I wouldn't say Barb 3, Pal 1, or Rgr 1 are worth it, and Rogue 1 reduces BAB so you'd still be waiting to 12th]

Spring Attack would also have the benefit that enemies no longer get to stand there and full attack you, and again have a side result where you're not standing still to grant flanking anymore.)

You mentioned the DM's use of feats- it's also possible some of these foes have say, Dodge, and have declared the "primary melee fighter" as their Dodge target. Negatively speculating even further, it's possible foes see you coming and fight defensively or activate Combat Expertise but they don't for the Ranger for some reason- and then if your DM understood those options incorrectly, say had them apply to your approach but then turns them off because "flanking," creating an even bigger gap. I think it's most likely just that your misses stick out way more, while you probably engage the higher AC targets, with a lower starting bonus and no +2 from flanking on your first turn.


Swift Haste is a definite possibility, that would explain a lot.
I suggested it, but I think less so- you'd be more likely to notice if they were taking extra attacks suddenly, Blades of Fire is worth more damage, and based on the damage numbers you've given neither is required.

Speaking of which- you can also just get in on the sneak attack yourself. If you never fight things that are immune, there's no reason not to. Paladins are not prohibited from stabbing (bad) people in the back, and you're not gaining very much from your Paladin features anyway: a mount that rarely matters and a Smite that even if you took Extra Smiting will never compare to Rage or Sneak Attack. This can be applied to the Barb/Fighter/etc build as well of course, taking 1-3 levels later on so that you can cram all 8 skill points into just a couple skills while gaining 2d6 Sneak Attack for only a single point of BAB (it will be interesting to see if the Ranger takes more Rogue themselves).


a Fighter can't be a basic knight without cross-classing skills.
I believe it was asked before, but define "Knight." If what you want is mechanical tanking ability and you're allowed wide access to feats, crack open Drow of the Underdark for a pair of feats that should have been in PHB2 to finish fixing the Fighter: Constant Guardian and Dutiful Guardian, which let you designate a nearby ally and switch places with them outside your turn.

If what you mean is a bunch of social skills- well those shouldn't be required anyway, but like I just said, sprinkle in some Rogue levels. Rogues get all the skills and a giant pile of points at each level and you can afford up to four at the cost of only -1 BAB. Fighter doesn't natively have a ton of stuff, but neither do most martial classes. The true martial artist, in DnD as in real life, learns from multiple "classes" if they want to be the best. A "Knight" is just guy who fights and has social status, while the only difference between a "rogue" and a "courtier" is that the rogue has training and presumably rougish-good-looks.


This campaign just aggravates me because I feel as if my character is constantly deprived of a major class feature, has bad stats, doesn't contribute much in combat, and I seem to spend half my time using potions and spells to make myself effective while the Ranger simply strolls into melee and does at least twice my best damage.
All of which is perfectly valid and are things the DM should be listening to and finding ways to deal with.

[pabelfly]

I would think that a great sword wielding fighter cleric would be some of the most potent things in core only! Expand that, and you have all sorts of pounce barbarians, bear warrior/ fist of the forest, crit fishers, tripper and more…

The Pounce Barbarian isn't from Core though, and TC can't use alternate class features.

[Drelua]

I think this thread got away from me. I was initially asking about creating a good fighter, considering the Fighter class isn't that great, but it turned into me complaining about the current campaign.

But several people have pointed out that a few levels of Barbarian in combination with Fighter can solve some problems.

I get that, I'm just saying it's very easy to find an honourable death as a Paladin. Especially in 3.5, there's a reason I didn't play one until I switched to PF. It's not a perfect group, but I'm from a small town so I know options can be limited. As long as you're having fun, it's probably worthwhile. In a game like this, I might just ask to retire the character, it's not unreasonable to think that if your character isn't contributing to the group, they might decide it's for the better for everyone if they part ways. Then you can make a character you'll have more fun with. As someone that loves monks, I know how it can feel not to be contributing.

I just get a bit annoyed with arbitrary bans, sounds like they make a habit of not thinking things through which can lead to a lot of unfair rulings. Like banning the weakest class in the PHB. Like, you're not missing much there, I just worry about the judgment of the person that does that, which can be a very important thing in a GM. I've played with quite a few people that have been gaming since the 70s or 80s, most of them are a lot of fun but there's a lot of ideas that can get carried over from older editions, even though they're no longer remotely accurate. But as I type this, I realize that you just said they've been playing together for decades, which could mean just 3.x. And, now I feel old.

[Max Caysey]

The Pounce Barbarian isn't from Core though, and TC can't use alternate class features.

Indeed, that’s why I started with saying that in core I would guess a fighter/cleric mix would be the best. 4 levels of fighter yields Weapon specialization and opens for weapon mastery. Great sword is the best two-ha fed weapon in core damage wise IIRC… cleric opens both very good buffs and healing!

However I haven’t played “core only” since back when they were the only books released for 3.0!

[Asmotherion]

Probably a Warblade or Swordsage tbh.

[pabelfly]

Indeed, that’s why I started with saying that in core I would guess a fighter/cleric mix would be the best. 4 levels of fighter yields Weapon specialization and opens for weapon mastery. Great sword is the best two-ha fed weapon in core damage wise IIRC… cleric opens both very good buffs and healing!

However I haven’t played “core only” since back when they were the only books released for 3.0!

Dipping a level of Cleric for Turn Undead and getting the Travel Devotion feat isn't a bad idea either. Would mean that you'd get a full attack off every turn.

[Anthrowhale]

No sorcerers (or monks) allowed, sadly.
Huh.

The persistent spell cleric remains solid given all the constraints then.

A less-ideal alternative to a Sorcadin is a wizard based approach. Something like: Paladin 2/Transformation Specialist wizard 4/Spellsword 1/Abjurant Champion 3

[Mars Ultor]

I believe it was asked before, but define "Knight."

If what you mean is a bunch of social skills- well those shouldn't be required anyway, but like I just said, sprinkle in some Rogue levels. Rogues get all the skills and a giant pile of points at each level and you can afford up to four at the cost of only -1 BAB. Fighter doesn't natively have a ton of stuff, but neither do most martial classes. The true martial artist, in DnD as in real life, learns from multiple "classes" if they want to be the best. A "Knight" is just guy who fights and has social status, while the only difference between a "rogue" and a "courtier" is that the rogue has training and presumably rougish-good-looks.


A knight would have Knowledge: Nobility and Royalty, and perhaps History. Or perhaps someone wants to play a Viking-like character, Profession: Sailor is a cross-class skill. The most basic Fighters have to multi-class or spend their minimal skill points on cross-class skills. You'd also think in a world full of monsters people who make their living fighting would have some knowledge of the various creatures, but that's also not possible for a straight Fighter.

One of the guys in the campaign says the same thing you did, just take a couple levels of Rogue, but that's a solution to problem that shouldn't exist. You can't play a basic, iconic Fighter without being a class that's not Fighter.

[pabelfly]

A knight would have Knowledge: Nobility and Royalty, and perhaps History. Or perhaps someone wants to play a Viking-like character, Profession: Sailor is a cross-class skill. The most basic Fighters have to multi-class or spend their minimal skill points on cross-class skills. You'd also think in a world full of monsters people who make their living fighting would have some knowledge of the various creatures, but that's also not possible for a straight Fighter.

One of the guys in the campaign says the same thing you did, just take a couple levels of Rogue, but that's a solution to problem that shouldn't exist. You can't play a basic, iconic Fighter without being a class that's not Fighter.

Ideally you have a feat combo that let's you have some spare level up feats so you can pick up some non-combat feats. Admittedly this is extremely hard for more feat-intensive styles, but for a simpler power attack build you should hopefully manage a spare feat or two by level 10.

[MultitudeMan]

A knight would have Knowledge: Nobility and Royalty, and perhaps History. Or perhaps someone wants to play a Viking-like character, Profession: Sailor is a cross-class skill. The most basic Fighters have to multi-class or spend their minimal skill points on cross-class skills. You'd also think in a world full of monsters people who make their living fighting would have some knowledge of the various creatures, but that's also not possible for a straight Fighter.

One of the guys in the campaign says the same thing you did, just take a couple levels of Rogue, but that's a solution to problem that shouldn't exist. You can't play a basic, iconic Fighter without being a class that's not Fighter.

Perhaps what you're looking for on this point is the generic Warrior class, from Unearthed Arcana, as you can pick any 6 skills as class skills.

[Fizban]

A knight would have Knowledge: Nobility and Royalty, and perhaps History. Or perhaps someone wants to play a Viking-like character, Profession: Sailor is a cross-class skill. The most basic Fighters have to multi-class or spend their minimal skill points on cross-class skills. You'd also think in a world full of monsters people who make their living fighting would have some knowledge of the various creatures, but that's also not possible for a straight Fighter.

One of the guys in the campaign says the same thing you did, just take a couple levels of Rogue, but that's a solution to problem that shouldn't exist. You can't play a basic, iconic Fighter without being a class that's not Fighter.


Perhaps what you're looking for on this point is the generic Warrior class, from Unearthed Arcana, as you can pick any 6 skills as class skills.
I disagree that a "Knight" is simply a Fighter (they would most likely be an Aristocrat, possibly even Warrior), but regardless, one can always find "iconic" examples of plenty of things that aren't possible with RAW classes, particularly when some aren't being allowed. If you want anything to be generically possible, then as mentioned, there's already an "official" example of making everything generic. These are all things to work out with the DM, preferably before game starts, but of course it sounds like you joined a game in progress, one which has its own long-established ideas of how things work.

If you want to play in their game, run their way, you may have to make your Knight their way. And since their way of dipping Rogue is already one of the ways you can power up your next character. . .

[JNAProductions]

A Fighter doesn't even make a decent guard, let alone a good soldier.
Listen and Spot are cross-class skills, and Wisdom isn't a primary stat.

Fighters can be pretty good at making things dead-and that's about it.

[MaxiDuRaritry]

Fighters can be pretty good at making things dead-and that's about it.So long as "things" are not very big, very small, very mobile, very magical, very smart, very exotic, etc, etc, etc...

[bean illus]

So long as "things" are not very big, very small, very mobile, very magical, very smart, very exotic, etc, etc, etc...

That is just absolutely hilarious. I'm stunned (https://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/SRD:Stunned).