So, which Warrior class really is the strongest? (3,5)

[Jeivar]

I've already revealed my poor grasp of the subtleties of the D&D system, so I might as well ask for opinions on this one. Which class, core or not, is the overall best in front-line fighting?

[Eldariel]

I've already revealed my poor grasp of the subtleties of the D&D system, so I might as well ask for opinions on this one. Which class, core or not, is the overall best in front-line fighting?

Eh, talking about fighting or fighting without using magic? For fighting, Druid. For fighting without using Magic, Warblade.

[Yuki Akuma]

That really does depend on what you mean. A Fighter is an excellent front-line combatant... it's just that spellcasters can do that and other stuff.

[Sinfire Titan]

Core only? Barbarian.

Outside Core? Crusader/Warblade/Barbarian.


Fighter is a semi-second choice, but those three are the main non-caster front liners. Druids and Clerics can do the job too.

[Djinn_in_Tonic]

Artificer can also do a pretty decent job of mixing it up in melee if you spec him out right.

[AslanCross]

Fighter is severely gimped in a core-only game due to its lack of good feats. Outside core it gets better, but is still second fiddle to the warblade and crusader.

The Fighter can be optimized to achieve insane damage output, but that would be all it can do. Warblade can effectively achieve great damage without even being optimized well. A fighter/warblade multiclass would be an excellent warrior.

The Crusader has actual tanking abilities that increase its survivability.

The Knight is also a good tank, but it's more of a battlefield control tank than an actual "I am invincible" tank. Knight/Crusader multiclass is likely going to be very effective in tanking.

[Doc Roc]

Hail the Barbarian!
Hail the Crusader!
Lay ye laurels at the feet of the most excellent warblade!

I'm also a fan of the swordsage, the druid, the swift hunter scout/ranger, and of course complicated gish builds.

But really, I just love an uber-charger or a good avalanche of blades build with some nasty mobility tricks.

[Korivan]

Duskblads...especially when you can gestalt and Prc to WM. They have a melee heavy spell list, good BAB, and two good saves.

[Deepblue706]

I think that most who refer to the category of "Warrior" are talking about Full BAB classes, also known as "Martial".

Spellcasters can be badass "warriors", sure; but war isn't necessarily their profession.

I believe among Warrior classes, we have:

Barbarian
Crusader
Fighter
Hexblade
Knight
Paladin
Ranger
Samurai
Swashbuckler
Warblade

The Tome of Battle classes are inherently useful, and their abilities tend to be strong. Warblade probably has the number 1 spot.

Prior to ToB, however, I would say the strongest of this group is the Fighter. The weakest could also be Fighter. The variety of feats available can make the class pretty awesome or pretty terrible, so you have to know what you're doing to make the most use out of it. In some cases, he might give a Warblade a run for his money, but the chances of that are not strong. A Fighter could take any single number out of a ranking between 1-10, it just depends on how you use his feats.

Sticking to Core, the Barbarian is likely among the best, due to his increased speed, high damage potential and useful abilities. However, with the PHB2, I'd say he and the Fighter are about even. The Knight has superior team-work skills (what with his defensive stuff), but I'd also say all of his benefits weight fairly equally with these two, as well. Paladins, Rangers and Hexblades have their perks, but overall I'd say they lack punch. Most seem to agree that Swashbuckler is only useful when applied to highly specific builds (usually favoring Rogue), and Samurai needs a 44+ point buy.

If I were to rate their general power, I'd order them like this:

1. Warblade
2. Crusader
3. Barbarian
4. Knight
5. Ranger
6. Paladin
7. Hexblade
8. Swashbuckler
9. Samurai
*. Fighter

*: Somewhere between 3 and 10

Oh, crap, I forgot about Duskblade. Whatever, they're stupid anyway. I'm not going back to write this over for them.

[Draz74]

Technically, out of 3.5 base classes with full BAB, you're also missing the (NPC) Warrior, the Divine Mind, and the Soulborn. But none of those are very good at all anyway.

[Knaight]

Staying to non magical classes, with the exception of martial adepts(as their casting style isn't like the others.
Low optimization-Martial Adept
Mid optimization-Martial Adept, Barbarian
High optimization-Fighter, Barbarian.

Martial adepts are not able to do much against the like of Jack B. Quick at high levels, and there are some fighters optimized for low level that are far beyond them. On the other hand, if a fighter takes dodge, power attack, uses a one handed weapon with a shield, never power attacks beyond a 1:1 ratio, and takes combat expertise when they have a dexterity of 14 or so, with crappy reach, they are going to be totally outclassed by the martial adept.

[Doc Roc]

I disagree. Jack B Quick only functions if he can actually make his AoOs, which a well-built and high end warblade can deny him. It's rough, but I'd consider it a somewhat nearer thing than you make it.

[Draz74]

Martial adepts are not able to do much against the like of Jack B. Quick at high levels,

I dunno about that. Martial adepts can do some pretty munchkin-ly stuff; ever hear of Chuck? Now, the Ubercharger -- yeah, there's no way a martial adept can do that much damage. The martial adept will be more flexible, but slightly less powerful, than a super-optimized Fighter like that.

[Jeivar]

Hmm. "Warblade" is coming up a lot. Is it in Tome of Battle?

[Doc Roc]

Yes, which you basically need.

[Draz74]

Hmm. "Warblade" is coming up a lot. Is it in Tome of Battle?

Yes. It's many people's favorite ToB class because it's totally nonmagical, whereas the other ToB classes have minor access to magical tricks if they so choose.

[Person_Man]

Assuming you don't want another CoDzilla thread:

Core Only: Paladin. Take Leadership and Spirited Charge. Get an awesome Special Mount. Use your Share Spells ability liberally.

Non-Core: Crusader, Warblade, Psychic Warrior, Totemist, and maybe the Knight (who suffers from a few dead levels).

A lot of it depends on what books are allowed, and how much you optimize. It also depends on what your build goals are. Some builds are better at direct damage, others at tanking, others at battlefield control, etc.

[Harperfan7]

Yeah, barbarian if you don't use ToB, Warblade if you do.

[Samb]

This is a useless question because there is no definition of what a warrior is.

You may say it is full BAB and no casting but what should we make of psychic warrior? What about wilder, who's surging euphoria basically gives it full BAB? Both can metamorph into a war troll for super cheese, something that a ToB could only dream about. Personally I would psywar or wilder over any warblade just for schism and metamorph.

Warblade and duskblade are very nice frontliners with some minor rebuffing abilities if you are willing forego some versitility. Duskblades being a Gish class suffers what all Gish base classes suffer from: the fact that a hybrid PrC is much better.

Fighter is widely regarded as one of the weakest classes period and for good reason. I would go so far to say they rank even under divine mind since many mantles provide feat like benefits. Feats are there to compliment and enchance class features something fighters lack.
Barbarians are nice and easy to play but no where near great and their rage progression is way to slow. You enter barbarian as a dip or to enter a PrC, at higher levels it becomes obvious that barbarians have a hard time keeping up.

The main reason this is a silly question is that the bestfrontliner fighter doesn't stick to one base class he will cherry pick the features of all fighting classes until he reaches his ideal. A swashbukler will take 3 in rogue and daring outlaw for the sneak attack damage, a factotum will take 3 in swashbukler for insightful strike, everyone will take one in barbarian for pounce, fighter2/psywar2 is a great way to get 4 feats in four levels, dips into ToB classes for manuvers etc. The best warrior is the best player period.

[Eldariel]

Core Only: Paladin. Take Leadership and Spirited Charge. Get an awesome Special Mount. Use your Share Spells ability liberally.

You mean Barbarian? 'cause if you get Barb a mount via. Leadership, the Rage-bonuses are going to outdo Paladin's very limited Core-casting, leaving Pally only doing more when Smiting (which is few times/day on one attack as opposed to few times/day for one encounter).

More HP definitely helps too.


As for adepts vs. Jack B'Quick, there's a 1st level White Raven maneuver that destroys Jack's entire gameplan (Douse the Flames). Also, fourth level boost does the same (Covering Strike). ToB isn't weak against focused characters, because it can solve individual problems. Versatile problems like casters are what rape it.


Jeivar: I have to repeat my question: Do you want non-magical melee or magical melee? Because the different is totally different for the first and the second.

[Frosty]

Well, you can't switch out maneuvers known during a fight, but if you happen to have access to a few white raven strikes, they are rather nice.

[Eldariel]

Well, you can't switch out maneuvers known during a fight, but if you happen to have access to a few white raven strikes, they are rather nice.

Certainly everyone with even an inkling of White Raven picks up Covering Strike or Douse the Flames. Douse the Flames is the perfect qualification maneuver to pick for White Raven Tactics anyways (if you didn't take Leading the Attack).

[Lycanthromancer]

With proper optimization, psychic warrior does have a serious edge in this particular arena.

It can meet and even exceed the ToB classes for power and flexibility, and can curb-stomp most other classes for usefulness (and possibly exceed even the druid in this role, though it won't be quite as OMGWTFPWNZOR in all the categories that one of The Big Five can, which is as it should be).

It might only have d8 for hit die, medium BAB, and have fewer feats than the fighter, but its power list is quite awesome (and you can dip your toes into the psion/discipline lists, if you so desire...HELLO NURSE METAMORPHOSIS!).

[edit] As insane as it sounds, a well-built psywar can even act as a serious threat to full-casters; even wizards & co, though they're still just a tad behind on the power scale, relatively speaking... [/understatement]

Also, you can pull a The Big Guy is With Me build out of a psion, and kick more arse than just about anyone in melee.

[Indon]

The Generic Warrior class is stronger than the NPC Warrior.

:P

But seriously, 'best front-line fighter' is surprisingly vague in the context of 3.5 D&D. As has been noted, you go to different classes for immense damage than you do for battlefield versatility, and if you wanted a class capable of 'holding a line' then you'd probably end up looking at a different class there, some casters can do front-line fighting with the help of magic and/or potent class features, and so on.

[holywhippet]

It can depend on what you are actually facing. If it's a straight out slugging match like against an ogre then improvements to attack bonuses and damage (like barbarian rage) can make a big difference. If you are facing vampires a class with a bonus to will saves like a paladin will be better.

If you are going toe to toe with a caster like a lich then the monk could be your best bet as they have better touch AC and full progression for will and reflex saves along with evasion etc.

Rangers may fare better when facing their racial enemy.

[FMArthur]

Arcane Swordsage, no contest.

[Eldariel]

It can depend on what you are actually facing. If it's a straight out slugging match like against an ogre then improvements to attack bonuses and damage (like barbarian rage) can make a big difference. If you are facing vampires a class with a bonus to will saves like a paladin will be better.

Both have impressive bonuses to Will-save; Barbarian has Morale-bonuses from Rage, while Paladin has Divine Grace for Charisma.

If you are going toe to toe with a caster like a lich then the monk could be your best bet as they have better touch AC and full progression for will and reflex saves along with evasion etc.

Monks have serious issues actually killing Liches though, since they are very ineffective at range and can't move and attack efficiently, due to being inefficient with a single attack. And Stunning Fist doesn't work on Liches either; at most you force the Lich to True Strike before Enervating/Whatevering you (I'd frankly assume Quickened True Strikes anyways if he's Raying unless he has ~+15 to Ranged Touch already without it to avoid those 3-4 fails). Now, if the Monk has Touch AC above ~40, we're talking some defensive benefits.

Vs. a Lich, a Barbarian is probably your best bet, although no matter your class you're boned if the Lich is of high enough level to achieve Lichdom and plays up to his Int. But yeah, the Barbarian probably has the best chance of dealing lethal damage in case he gets to do a hit (being Mounted would obviously help; a single Spirited Charge can deal lethal, although Barbarian is actually fairly scary with arrows too thanks to Str to Damage). A Paladin with insane stats might actually be even better in this very specific scenario given sufficient number of Smite Evil-uses remaining he can have incredible saves overall, and .

[ericgrau]

I've run a few direct damage duels and barbarians came out a hair above a fighter if he was raging. And far behind if not. At lower levels the difference is greater, but rage is also less frequent. And the fighter can be more versatile by taking extra feats for more than just damage. But a barbarian has uncanny dodge, etc, etc. Likewise I would guess that a smiting buffed paladin is strong whereas an unbuffed one out of smites is weaker and MAD. So really these 3 classes are all pretty close. The one that falls far behind is the ranger, but he's not really a pure warrior; he has other abilities. And as for other core classes I don't even see how they could be mistaken for pure warriors (whether better or worse or on par with the first 3), so I'll stop here.

[holywhippet]

Monks have serious issues actually killing Liches though, since they are very ineffective at range and can't move and attack efficiently, due to being inefficient with a single attack. And Stunning Fist doesn't work on Liches either; at most you force the Lich to True Strike before Enervating/Whatevering you (I'd frankly assume Quickened True Strikes anyways if he's Raying unless he has ~+15 to Ranged Touch already without it to avoid those 3-4 fails). Now, if the Monk has Touch AC above ~40, we're talking some defensive benefits.

Monks have very high base speed and are likely to have high ranks in tumble. That one single attack is only going to be a problem for a single round most likely as they can close the distance very quickly. Say you have a level 10 monk attacking a level 20 lich. At level 10 you can assume the monk might have a natural DEX and WIS of 16, another 4 each from magical enhancements (eg. potions/spells), a +2 from a ring of protection and +2 from being level 10. That's an AC and touch AC of 24.

The lich has a BAB of 10 assuming they were a wizard or sorcerer. Maybe +2 or 3 if they have a decent DEX. That still amount to >50% chance of missing on any given touch attack.

I only used lich as an example. The same applies to wizards and sorcerer types in general.

[AslanCross]

Well, you can't switch out maneuvers known during a fight, but if you happen to have access to a few white raven strikes, they are rather nice.

Adaptive Style.