FIGHTERS DON'T NEED FIXING

1204 posts / 0 new
Last post
I'm sick and tired of seeing and hearing about all these fighter "fixes". People are complaining that fighters are underpowered or lacking in flavor. The fighter is a master of tactics. He's about battle field control. not just nuking monsters. A fighter's "flavor" comes from his wepon choice and feat selection, not to mention the tactics he uses and most of all..... THE ROLEPLAYER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I might as well add as a side note of how powerful a fighter is, i've played a fighter that, by himself, tanked an advanced great wyrm red dragon... at 20th level, non-gestalt.

Also on casters against fighters argument... take away the fighter's equipment (which so many people say they rely on) and take away the caster's spells (which they do rely on). Now that they are on fairly equal terms...tell me who wins. THE FIGHTER!!!!!!!!!! He'll beat the everliving snot out of the caster, stuff said mucus back up his demon hole, and repeat the process.

In summary, if you think fighter's are broken or otherwise need fixing....take the time to LEARN how to play one.
You don't know what you're talking about.
It's all about preparation.

I correct myself, the advanced great wyrm was as at fighter 22, at 20 it was just a great wyrm.

I do know what I'm talking about.
Also on casters against fighters argument... take away the fighter's equipment (which so many people say they rely on) and take away the caster's spells (which they do rely on). Now that they are on fairly equal terms...tell me who wins. THE FIGHTER!!!!!!!!!! He'll beat the everliving snot out of the caster, stuff said mucus back up his demon hole, and repeat the process.

One: Everyone needs equipment, but Fighters are worth almost nothing without it.
Two: It is easier to take away equipment than all you spells (in fact, very few spells can do that)
Three: Since a caster can buff prior to fighting the Fighter (all day bufss lasts all day hence the name). He doesn't need spells to kick your fighters equipment's butt.
Fourth: Tell me how weak you get without equipment: I think you need to seriously consider that weakness.

In summary, if you think fighter's are broken or otherwise need fixing....take the time to LEARN how to play one.

Or shout insane stuff about how a equipment less Fighter can take on a spell spellcaster.
"If you can't believe in yourself, believe in me who believes in you." and "Go beyond the impossible, and kick reason to the curb" Kamina, from Gurren Lagann
Obvious troll is obvious.

In b4 lock.
With the focus on save-or-die spells most people think fighters are pretty useless at higher levels but i have seen fighters lay out so much smack (grr, dwarven war axes dual weilding halfing) that the might as well have, except no need to worry abou the attempt at a save
...take away the fighter's equipment (which so many people say they rely on) and take away the caster's spells (which they do rely on)

Spells are class features. Like the bonus feats. So take them away as well. Then the barbarian will proceed to beat the snot out of you (even without rage, by virtue of having better skills and hit points).

Cheers, LT.
I'm sorry to disappoint you, but they're going to get fixed.

In one month.

IMAGE(http://www.ludikbazar.com/product_thumb/w/349/h/349/img/DD4%20PLAYERS%20HANDBOOK.jpg)
If the game rules for the fight include full Hit Dice(no rolling, just max) & have a potent stat gen with gear re-enforcing it, the Fighter might have to be worn down a bit first, but otherwise... Power Word Kill. No Save = your dead.


On a sidenote: take away spellcasting and a spell caster is a Commoner with 1 or 2 useless class features. It's hardly an adequate comparison. However, with the right gear class doesn't matter, so... Take away a spell caster's spells & Fighter's equipment, spell caster's got gear & Fighter's got a few character feats. Since lv 20 gear > 18 or 19 character feats, Fighter would still lose. After all, the right gear can make even a Commoner a god.


But I digress. Fighter lacks skills & takes a lot of work to build just to get something that's okay. I've analyzed it many times & I keep coming to the same primary conclusion each time, Fighter needs a good bit of revision.

I love the concept of the customizable warrior that can be shaped into whatever I want, but between the class skills and the low quantity/poor quality class abilities, it's really hard to do with the book Fighter. Hence why most Fighter builds are often 1 to 2 trick ponies that take way too long in the progression of the build to start being very effective & eat up all your character feats in the process.

The limited class skills(worse than Commoner's) kills a lot of your role playing ability(since your only social skill is Intimidate) and your helpfulness as a group protector is out, since you're going to get blindsided way too often(since you can't Spot, Listen, or Sense Motive). Lack of any good skills(& having worse skills points than the freaking Barbarian), really hurts the Fighter a lot more than some people think.

In class abilities, 11 character feats from a limited list does not make for a good combat class(WotC was too lazy to come up with real abilities for the Fighter & the class suffers greatly for it). With only 11 abilities from your class you have no choice but to specialize or suffer from not being good at anything. You have to scavenge through several books for the right feats/variants & pick up a lot of spiffy gear to pick up the slack on your class. Then, you have to deal with the fact that only a handful of builds actually work worth anything.

If you specialize in one to 2 gimmicks or just deal raw damage with no actual variety in what you can do, you might as just write down a few options in case of a few general situations(especially since you have next to no class skills). Then, leave your character sheet & a set of dice for the DM(or someone else) to roll for you, while you go do something more productive with your time.


In summery, if you think Fighter is perfect/fine the way it is, you might want to actually stop & think about what all you should be able to do, but can't. It's not a worthless class. In fact, there are classes that are worse than it(such as Complete Warrior's Samurai). However, the fact remains that against casters or even some of the other warrior guys(such as Warblade or Barbarian for single weapon melee or Ranger for ranged or two-weapon melee), Fighter can't cut it in combat. At the same time, outside of combat, Fighter's crap skills make him about useless.


Here is my latest & greatest Fighter remake. It fixes the skills issue, the hard to build decently issue, the lack of real class features issue, and even helps close the gap between casters & non-casters a bit. At the same time, it still highly customizable. And it does this without forcing Tome of Battle down your throat(although, if it want it, there is a Tome of Battle option within it However, it's optional, not mandatory).

If you can look at that attempt to fix many of Fighter's bad design flaws & honestly tell me that you would rather play Fighter over the remake because Fighter is sheer perfection with no flaws, instead of wanting to play Fighter because you're in love with the class, then you're most likely delusional and there's nothing any of us can say, no facts that could be presented, and no amount of psycho-therapy that change your mind.
I'm sick and tired of seeing and hearing about all these fighter "fixes". People are complaining that fighters are underpowered or lacking in flavor. The fighter is a master of tactics. He's about battle field control. not just nuking monsters. A fighter's "flavor" comes from his wepon choice and feat selection, not to mention the tactics he uses and most of all..... THE ROLEPLAYER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Really?

Rangers, Paladins, Barbarians (and Monks). The other four 'fighter' classes of the PHB. All have thier own flavour. The skilled woodsman, holy liberator and crusader, raging warrior, soulful martial arts master. And all of them, especially the Ranger and Monk, have both flavour and plenty of feats options. Well, the monk is all falvour, but that's besides the point.

I might as well add as a side note of how powerful a fighter is, i've played a fighter that, by himself, tanked an advanced great wyrm red dragon... at 20th level, non-gestalt.

Go into details or nobody is going to take you seriously. Also, if the great wyrm dragon wasn't DMed as if it did have the 26 Int on its profile, it doesn't count.

Also on casters against fighters argument... take away the fighter's equipment (which so many people say they rely on) and take away the caster's spells (which they do rely on). Now that they are on fairly equal terms...tell me who wins. THE FIGHTER!!!!!!!!!! He'll beat the everliving snot out of the caster, stuff said mucus back up his demon hole, and repeat the process.

I fully agree. a fighter can beat a spellcaster withot spells. However, that of course means the fighter just beat a high-level commoner, not a spellcaster.

In summary, if you think fighter's are broken or otherwise need fixing....take the time to LEARN how to play one.

Dungeon crasher? Spiked chain?
Also on casters against fighters argument... take away the fighter's equipment (which so many people say they rely on) and take away the caster's spells (which they do rely on). Now that they are on fairly equal terms...tell me who wins. THE FIGHTER!!!!!!!!!! He'll beat the everliving snot out of the caster, stuff said mucus back up his demon hole, and repeat the process.

Of course, casters have spells to take away all the fighter's gear. Fighters don't have the means to take away a casters spells. So, which of the two above scenarios seems more likely?

In summary, if you think fighter's are broken or otherwise need fixing....take the time to LEARN how to play one.

One of the big problems with the fighter is that the power of his feats don't scale as well as the power of spells at equal level. Sure, some of his feats get stronger, but not enough to close the gap.

Granted, having a well built fighter in a group allied with a couple of casters is a wonderful asset. A strong, Power Attacking fighter can probably out damage a wizard on a single target basis round by round. At that time, the casters use buffs, debuffs, crowd control, and other enabling spells to work with the fighter to do tons of damage. In a coheisive party, a lot of the fighter's weaknesses are masked. In a PVP arena, the fighter gets pwned.
I'm sick and tired of seeing and hearing about all these fighter "fixes". People are complaining that fighters are underpowered or lacking in flavor. The fighter is a master of tactics. He's about battle field control. not just nuking monsters. A fighter's "flavor" comes from his wepon choice and feat selection, not to mention the tactics he uses and most of all..... THE ROLEPLAYER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I might as well add as a side note of how powerful a fighter is, i've played a fighter that, by himself, tanked an advanced great wyrm red dragon... at 20th level, non-gestalt.

Also on casters against fighters argument... take away the fighter's equipment (which so many people say they rely on) and take away the caster's spells (which they do rely on). Now that they are on fairly equal terms...tell me who wins. THE FIGHTER!!!!!!!!!! He'll beat the everliving snot out of the caster, stuff said mucus back up his demon hole, and repeat the process.

In summary, if you think fighter's are broken or otherwise need fixing....take the time to LEARN how to play one.

I think you're absolutely right. Fighters are fine the way they are. I've created some fighter builds that quite honestly can't be stopped by anything BUT save or die spells. And, if built right, a fighter really doesn't need his equipment. Especially when you take the time to buy feats like "Superior Unarmed Strike" and "Rapid Blitz" at later levels. Yes fighters take time to build, but some of my favorite characters have been fighters. To all those that just dismissed this topic without actually considering the power of the fighter, shame on you.
What is this? the previous fighter thread isn't dead yet!

I don't know what you're talking about. any decent fighter has a save or die power: massive damage rule. Laugh all you want with the DC. did you know you could fumble it?

...
what else do I read ... fighters being weak without gear? why would you have a fighter without gear?
- craft check: free quarterstaff. now he's got a two handed weapon ...
- go shocktrooper/leap attack/frenzied beserker (use a feat from savage species if you don't want to take levels barbarian).
- take VoP: (hey, it stills allows a quarterstaff ...)
joink lvl 20 charger build ... for only 0 gp. Heck spellcasters will probably think he's monk ...


Really, as far as I know the reason fighters are disliked because
- people don't know how to build one
- fighter is missing fluff
- people like skills.
Qube's block builder: if you want to create blocks for powers, items and monsters for this forum, but don't know html
Signature in a box
For years, I've lived a double life. In the day, I do my job - I ride the bus, roll up my sleeves with the hoi-polloi. But at night, I live a life of exhilaration, of missed heartbeats and adrenalin. And, if the truth be known a life of dubious virtue. I won't deny it - I've been engaged in violence, even indulged in it. I've maimed and killed adversaries, and not merely in self-defence. I've exhibited disregard for life, limb and property, and savoured every moment. You may not think it, to look of me but I have commanded armies, and conquered worlds. And though in achieving these things I've set morality aside, I have no regrets. For though I've led a double life, at least I can say - I've lived.

3.jpg
D&D Home Page - What Monster Are You? - Stone Gaint

Scipio: And Chihuahuas have definitely improved in the "attacking ankles, yapping, and being generally annoying" environment. Me: OK, am I the only who sees an analogy between forum trolls & Chihuahuas?
Some of my work:
XDMC 19 (silver): A full fledged assassins guild (with stats, skill challenges, ...)link XDMC 14 (Bronze): a one shot campaign for beginning DMs/players. link XDMC 16: Paragon path: the Epitome: being better then all then any one else. link (note: this is balanced) XDMC 25: The Gelatinous Cube mount Guide To Disreality: a collection of houserules - Introduction & table of content
My ego in a box
who am I kidding? my ego would never fit in a box
I like the fighter as is, but unfortunately WotC is horrible at playtesting after initial release which leads to most non-core warrior classes being useless and thus never played or far and away more powerful than the core classes.

The fighter vs. the wizard all comes down to who goes first. If the wizard goes first the fighter either rolls real well on his save or he dies. If the fighter goes first he either rolls really poorly or he successfully grapples the wizard and the fight is over.

The best fix for the fighter is simple, ban any warrior class that's more powerful. That's pretty much everything in the ToB for starters. I also adjust them in my campaigns by taking away heavy armor proficiency and giving them 4 skill points per level. Elimination of class skills (for all classes) and giving every character 2 extra skill points per level that can only be spent on what I call background skills ensures everybody, not just the fighter, has an opportunity to add some depth to their characters.
Really, as far as I know the reason fighters are disliked because
- people don't know how to build one
- fighter is missing fluff
- people like skills.

4) The warblade exists, which makes fighters fun to play again by allowing them options beyond a) attack b) full attack c) power attack.
WE DON'T NEED NO EDUCATION!!!!!

Sorry, I couldn't resist. Regardless, the OP delves off the course right from the start by involving "roleplaying examples" into something that usually amounts just to flat numbers. Don't be a fighter elitist.
Granted, having a well built fighter in a group allied with a couple of casters is a wonderful asset. A strong, Power Attacking fighter can probably out damage a wizard on a single target basis round by round. At that time, the casters use buffs, debuffs, crowd control, and other enabling spells to work with the fighter to do tons of damage.

This often gets forgotten on the boards. Optimization tends to matter more than class.
currently trying to recreate the one-on-one dragon-slaying fighter i boasted about. will post it when i'm done so you can try it yourself.
I'm sick and tired of seeing and hearing about all these fighter "fixes". People are complaining that fighters are underpowered ...

Cool. So as your 17th level fighter gets turned into ground round in my game you can keep chanting "fighter class is great!, fighter class is great!" and so on.
This often gets forgotten on the boards. Optimization tends to matter more than class.

That is true, but to make a fair comparison, you have to assume roughly equal amounts (if optimisation can actually be quantified) of optimisation.
Sigh ...

Every new Fighter thread the anti-Fighters go on a bashing spree with general accusations upon the class and claims the pro-Fighters know nothing. However, once the better debaters of the Fighter defenders join in, they quickly disappear once their rantings are shown the irrelevance they are, leaving one or two willing to continue to battle out the never ending topic. The question is if said debaters will join in this one.

All I can respond right now to the naysayers is to read all the other anti-fighter threads and heed the words of the Better Debaters - Bob, Khan, and Kratch. (No offense Qube :P ) They've proven time and again that Fighters are not the pathetic wimps people keep harping about them.
Support Cedric Diggory, the real Hogwarts Champion!
Of course, casters have spells to take away all the fighter's gear. Fighters don't have the means to take away a casters spells. So, which of the two above scenarios seems more likely?

Look in the magic item compendium. You will find ways for a fighter to take away a spellcasters spells.

And indeed, assuming the fighter goes first, a +1 magebane dispelling greater dispelling binding (with the binding being all thats really needed, but the dispelling helps) impedance shattermantle revaling weapon (a +8 weapon) that hits a caster stops the caster from escaping via teleport, planeshift, or any other magical means, reveals him in a faerie fire, makes him have to make checks in order to cast spells, gets rid of some spell resistance, and has a chance of dispelling every spell currently cast on the mage as per targeted Greater dispel Magic

For lower levels when this can't be afforded, but when the mage can teleport, Binding and any combination of magebane, dispelling and greater dispelling suffice.

On top of that you have the mageslayer feats to get around any magical protection and concealment and stopping the mage from being able to cast defensively.
In the numbers game, Fighter can do alright. No doubt in my mind about that. 6 feats + full-rounding + some gimmick will suffice for that.

In the field of skills, Fighter is pure failure. When Commoner & Barbarian out-skill you and you went to Fighter school, something is wrong.

In the field of unique or fun abilities, Fighter is failure. The Weapon Focus tree is the only thing that's unique to the class(until Warblade that is) & it isn't even that good. It helps with number crunching, but it doesn't help with fun(as opposed to maneuvers which help with number crunching & are, to an extent, fun). To build a Fighter that has a variety of combat options, generally means that you will suck at all of those options.

11 character feats from a special list + 7 or 9 non-restricted character feats(which you have to use directly for you build, instead of other fun things) = lame. It's just not enough abilities to do much. There are some fun variant abilities for Fighter which give it some non-feat options, but some of those need a bit of improvement(such as the ones in PHB 2) and, even with the good ones, it's just not enough stuff.

Even if you ignore the fact that character feats don't add up to be that great(which they don't except in a handful of cheap gimmick examples), you can't deny that there isn't much that Fighter could do that some other class couldn't do themselves, since all Fighter is is character feats.


The class needs not just character feats, but unique abilities(so, it can't just be replaced by someone else with similar feats). The unique abilities don't need to be fixed abilities gained at 'lv x'. The class would need more than just 11 abilities(which really isn't much). Even with new, nifty, potent, and/or fun class features that would be developed for it, Fighter would still have to be fully customizable(I can't stress the importance of this enough). The class also needs a better skill set & more skill points. The class needs more defense options than "I'm a walking tin can." Lastly, Fighter needs to be able to dish out hurt and have more combat options than things like "I attack with power attack" or "I Trip him, then attack". And you need to be able to give your Fighter this with ease.


Now, I did all the above in my Fighter remake. I didn't make it independent of gear, but it is less dependent on the gear, so you can do other things with much of your gear. Highly customizable, harder to screw up, fairly more powerful, more skillful, and only 2 dead lvs. It's definitely one of my finest words.

Well, enough of me being full of myself. The fact is that Fighter has Diehard fans who for whatever reason(s) can't see the flaws of the class. While, at the same time, there are people who see that the class needs help, but none of those people can really agree on what exactly to do about it. These arguments will keep on until they release 4th Edition(which will have its own new & massive flaws to it) and enough people stop caring about 3.5. I don't think 4th Ed will fix as much as people are hoping it will, but I seriously doubt Fighter will just be a handful of character feats and a poor skill set.
Look in the magic item compendium. You will find ways for a fighter to take away a spellcasters spells.

And indeed, assuming the fighter goes first, a +1 magebane dispelling greater dispelling binding (with the binding being all thats really needed, but the dispelling helps) impedance shattermantle revaling weapon (a +8 weapon) that hits a caster stops the caster from escaping via teleport, planeshift, or any other magical means, reveals him in a faerie fire, makes him have to make checks in order to cast spells, gets rid of some spell resistance, and has a chance of dispelling every spell currently cast on the mage as per targeted Greater dispel Magic

Remember, the OP said do it without equipment.
"If you can't believe in yourself, believe in me who believes in you." and "Go beyond the impossible, and kick reason to the curb" Kamina, from Gurren Lagann
The OP also said to do it without the mages spells.
He meant IF you took away the fighters gear, and also took away the mages spells, then the fighter wins.
So without spells or gear, the fighter wins.

With gear and spells, thats a pretty decent way to screw over the mage.
The OP has classic oberoni fallacy, relying on roleplaying and tactics.

The fact is, if I choose a different character, and I roleplay just as nicely, and I use the same tactics, and I consistently outperform the Fighter, then we have a problem. Because roleplay and tactics are based on the player, and so now the only contention point that we have is the CLASS.

I love the Fighter, but I am extremely aware of its flaws. Yes, it's equipment reliant...however, Fighters can leverage equipment to a fantastic level, probably better then any other class. People don't see this as a strength, however.

So, I do consider this a troll post. One person's experience is not matching what multiple people on the board are finding out, and even the designers at WoTC have reluctantly confirmed...Fighters have problems, and its from design and support of the class. A Good RP and Tactician can do a lot with a little...but he can do a lot more with a lot.

===Aelryinth
Fighter vs Warblade analysis http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75882/19573526/Analyzing_the_Fighter_vs_The_Warblade The Lockdown F/20 iconic build http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75882/19856162/A_little_Lock_build_for_you
currently trying to recreate the one-on-one dragon-slaying fighter i boasted about. will post it when i'm done so you can try it yourself.

No one is saying a fighter can't kill a dragon. Fighters are good damage dealers. This is one thing they do fairly well.

I am curious, however, what tactics the DM used for the dragon. Did it cast any spells or did it simply full attack and use its breath weapon every 1d4 rounds?
Yes, it's equipment reliant...however, Fighters can leverage equipment to a fantastic level, probably better then any other class.

I don't know if I'd go that far. Martial characters, yes. Fighters specifically? Nope. Martial characters go nuts with good gear and buffs from the allies. On the other hand, they don't produce any buffs of their own. It's trade-off. In a balanced party, a well-built martial character is at least useful and possible better than another caster.

Going straight fighter doesn't make for a particularly powerful martial character. You want class abilities that fighters don't get, such as the barbarian's pounce. You want maneuvers and stances. A few levels of fighter might be decent, but not much more. Not with all the other options out there.

Your Lockdown build shows one of the few reasons to take a bunch of fighter levels. That double damage ability is nice, but it appears rather late.
I agree with the title but not the rant.

The problem with the fighter is how easy it is to surpass with more specialized builds. The arguement is simply that by taking away the fighter's versatility you should give them more to make up for that. Of course now everyone wanting that type of build uses this more advanced version and points to how weak the fighter is and screams for improvement.

If nothing else the Fighter is a great class to dip into for additional combat feats. Being a base class makes that option potentially painful for XP but if the fighter was a PrC with no painful prereqs you would see a lot of character dipping into it for those feats.
Personally I am a huge fan of warrior classes.

However, at mid or high levels, the fighter simply does not do what it is intended to. They can be far too easily neutralised by casters - Forcecage, Fly, Invisibility, Rock to Mud - are things the fighter struggles to counter. Priests can buff themselves up to make damage-dealers that match the fighter themselves.

Casters have spells for defence (Shield, Fire Shield, Shield of Faith, Sanctuary, Mirror Image), attack (save or die/lose, mass blasting), support (buffs, summoning), battlefield control (wall spells, black tentacles, rock to mud), utility (walls, fabricate, passwall, stone shape, glyphs, fly).

And they can do all this better than the fighter can. At higher levels, being good with weapons just doesn't handle the challenges any more.

EDIT: I am sure there are fighter builds which can bypass Magical Obstacle X (if not Y) but all that proves is that a highly specialised fighter can take on a caster when fighting on terms which heavily favours the fighter. That doesn't make them competitive.
I might as well add as a side note of how powerful a fighter is, i've played a fighter that, by himself, tanked an advanced great wyrm red dragon... at 20th level, non-gestalt.

BS. A properly played Dragon is incredibly difficult to beat. It won't even let you into Melee if it is played right, as it knows you are suited to that simply by looking at what you are carrying.

Also on casters against fighters argument... take away the fighter's equipment (which so many people say they rely on) and take away the caster's spells (which they do rely on). Now that they are on fairly equal terms...tell me who wins. THE FIGHTER!!!!!!!!!! He'll beat the everliving snot out of the caster, stuff said mucus back up his demon hole, and repeat the process.

Ok. You are taking away class features from one side of the fight. You are taking away items on the other, which are not a class feature of any class but the Artificer. Guess what? The Fighter can beat up a Commoner with a good Will save. Anyone can tell you that. That is effectively what you just did. You made a commoner with 5 bonus feats (one of which he doesn't qualify for), a familiar, and good Will saves take on an Unarmed Fighter. News Flash: Cripple Fight!

In summary, if you think fighter's are broken or otherwise need fixing....take the time to LEARN how to play one.

Maybe you need to be put in your place.

THe problem with the Fighter isn't that it is too weak. As a matter of popular opinion, the Fighter is just under the middle of the road if properly optimized. The thing is that what the Fighter is supposed to be doing is something so many other base classes do better.

Name a class that can take damage better than the Fighter. I can name three, right off the bat that do it with Class Features alone.

Name a class that can focus on a style so that only one other character build can equal it. I can name one, and it does it better than the Fighter ever could.

Name a class that has more than 11 Class Features, and less than 9 dead levels. I can name 4, not counting PrCs. And every one of them is in the PHB. And one of them sucks hard.

Now do you understand? It isn't that he is weak. It is that there are better choices than a Fighter for the job.

The OP has classic oberoni fallacy, relying on roleplaying and tactics.

The fact is, if I choose a different character, and I roleplay just as nicely, and I use the same tactics, and I consistently outperform the Fighter, then we have a problem. Because roleplay and tactics are based on the player, and so now the only contention point that we have is the CLASS.

I love the Fighter, but I am extremely aware of its flaws. Yes, it's equipment reliant...however, Fighters can leverage equipment to a fantastic level, probably better then any other class. People don't see this as a strength, however.

So, I do consider this a troll post. One person's experience is not matching what multiple people on the board are finding out, and even the designers at WoTC have reluctantly confirmed...Fighters have problems, and its from design and support of the class. A Good RP and Tactician can do a lot with a little...but he can do a lot more with a lot.

For once, we agree on this. I can only name one class that is more equipment-reliant than the Fighter, and it is the Artificer (and it is considered one of the top 5 classes!).
I love how all the suggestions on how a fighter can take a caster involve expensive hyperspecialization (the aforementioned +8 weapon, several feats, etc).

The caster doesn't require anything special to beat the fighter. His standard tactics for that scenario are more than sufficient for the task, and he is still able to deal with other stuff unlike Mr. One Trick Pony. :P
Oh and Artificers can do truly obscene things with equipment. Imagine one with 6 million gold worth of items, without breaking WBL guidelines (as in the DM didn't give any extra treasure, he just made stuff really freakin' cheap).

When I tried to optimize one, I ended up with an invincible uber character. Hardest part of playing one is not rendering your entire party obsolete. :P
Oh and Artificers can do truly obscene things with equipment. Imagine one with 6 million gold worth of items, without breaking WBL guidelines (as in the DM didn't give any extra treasure, he just made stuff really freakin' cheap).

When I tried to optimize one, I ended up with an invincible uber character. Hardest part of playing one is not rendering your entire party obsolete. :P

I dunno, with all that nice gear the whole party, not just you, should be as kitted out as Iron Man.
I love how all the suggestions on how a fighter can take a caster involve expensive hyperspecialization (the aforementioned +8 weapon, several feats, etc).

The caster doesn't require anything special to beat the fighter. His standard tactics for that scenario are more than sufficient for the task, and he is still able to deal with other stuff unlike Mr. One Trick Pony. :P

So sue me. A fighter needs gear and a wizard needs spells. Of course, casters need gear too, but just not as much as fighters.

And the only way to build a fighter is with hyperspecialization, you can't bring that into account. A fighter taking bad feats is like a wizard taking Combat Reflexes.

(You have to admit the +8 weapon is cool)
I dunno, with all that nice gear the whole party, not just you, should be as kitted out as Iron Man.

I don't care what they say about Wizards. Artificer is the true Batman class.
If Fighter takes bad feats, that purely screws him over because that's all he is, Feats. Unlike Fighter, the average caster doesn't have to spend his feats wisely. So, that's a very bad example.


Remove the class features, then break them down to Hit Dice, Saves, Skills, BAB, and Proficiencies. Fighter beats Wizard no problem. He'll struggle against the Druid & Cleric.

Give back the class features & gear. Fighter is being owned on by casters. More importantly, he's being taken down a few notches by other, better built warrior classes.

Remove casters from the equation. The 10 main warrior classes are Barbarian, Crusader, Fighter, Hexblade, Knight, Paladin, Ranger, Samurai, Swashbuckler, and Warblade. If you were to put them in order of effectiveness in combat, you would find Fighter at number 5, as it is better than Knight, Paladin, Samurai, & Swashbuckler, but overall not as good as Barbarian, Crusader, Ranger, and Warblade.

Remove Warblade & Crusader for awesomeness & pseudo-casting, and Fighter's top in the 3. Remove Ranger, Hexblade, & Paladin for their spell casting(which is crap anyway), and Fighter's #2, right behind Barbarian. Improve the Fighter's skills & up their ability count & it would tie with Barbarian.


Now, return to reality. Fighter's #5 in the Warrior classes. 5th place out of 10 slots is just mediocre. It's not bad, but it does kinda suck. However, it's merely a few very minor tweaks away from good. However...

Now, throw in the casters. You've got to work to compete. If it doesn't go up to 5th lv spells and/or have decent class features, it's basically going to fall behind. Non-casters < casters.

Now, realize that there 20+ classes that use magic(spells, spell-like abilities, or psionics). Even if only half of them were worth anything(which more than that are), that's still 10+ classes your entire genre is weaker than. If you're playing a non-caster & not anywhere near the top of your genre, then where are you actually at in the scheme of things?

Think about that for a bit.
If you were to put them in order of effectiveness in combat, you would find Fighter at number 5, as it is better than Knight, Paladin, Samurai, & Swashbuckler, but overall not as good as Barbarian, Crusader, Ranger, and Warblade.

Ha. Fighters aren't as good overall as paladins. Especially not now that Complete Champion exists. I agree with samurai and swashbuckler. I don't know enough about the knight to say for sure.
If you were to put them in order of effectiveness in combat, you would find Fighter at number 5, as it is better than Knight, Paladin, Samurai, & Swashbuckler, but overall not as good as Barbarian, Crusader, Ranger, and Warblade.



If you say so.
Ha. Fighters aren't as good overall as paladins. Especially not now that Complete Champion exists. I agree with samurai and swashbuckler. I don't know enough about the knight to say for sure.

All the Knight needs is a Special Mount, and it is better than the Fighter.


What's that? Wild Cohort? Ok, now we have our mounted Knight.
All the Knight needs is a Special Mount, and it is better than the Fighter.


What's that? Wild Cohort? Ok, now we have our mounted Knight.

Actually, I would rather play a knight without a mount.

Adamantine Mechanus Gear with nimbleness, to top it off with heavy armour optimisation and greater heavy armour optimisation from races of stone.

And then a mithril Extreme shield with nimbleness along with heavy shield specialisation.
Thats 29 AC alone and DR 3/- (i think thats what it is for heavy adamantine), not including any knight class features and a Dex of 12.

YUMMY.

And a fighter can do everything a knight can with mount and much more.