| Author |
 Topic  |
|
SomeDude
Acolyte
USA
23 Posts |
 Posted - 14 May 2005 : 06:28:25
|
I started a new topic for this (taken from the favorite class pole) because I would like to keep it Fighter-specific.
Why is it that so many people (some of the better players I've seen) seem to favor the Fighter class? I hope it's not because most typical adventures end up with a "find the bag guy and kill them" overall theme. D&D (and FR especially) has so much more to offer than "how many different feat combinations can I take to better hack and slash?" Why not look at all the different spells a SOR/WIZ can learn every other level than the feats a FTR learns at the same rate?
I'm not trying to put down Fighter. Every balanced party should have good fighter-type class (FTR/BBN/RGR) to stay ballanced, but is this just most peoples favorite roll in a balanced party or what?
|
This is the highest my post count has ever been. |
|
|
Jindael
Senior Scribe
USA
357 Posts |
Posted - 14 May 2005 : 06:50:03
|
If you reverse your question:
Why Wizard? Why not look at all the different options a Fighter can have with their feat progression at every other level rather than spells which increase at the same progression and are mostly just escalating ways of blowing stuff up?
It’s all about concept, what you have in mind for the idea of a character.
(Except of course, wizards actually grow more powerful, and Fighters can basically just pick from the same list of feats at 15the level that they could at 1st. )
|
"You don't have a Soul. You are a Soul. You have a body."
-- C.S. Lewis |
 |
|
|
Vorn Feykril
Acolyte
USA
2 Posts |
Posted - 14 May 2005 : 08:07:14
|
| Fighter in a lot of cases is the more diverse class, in a lot of cases you can go in the most directions with this class because fighter typically mixes better with other classes. |
|
|
|
Shadovar
Senior Scribe
785 Posts |
Posted - 14 May 2005 : 08:52:48
|
| in the games, most threats require a melee fighter to handle them quickly and efficiently. Though mage class is fine but against a large horde of enemies, I rather go for the fighter class, quick and efficient. |
We have fostered trust, recruited loyalty, and gathered the faithful. We have trained thousands. Our legions can cover the land, fill the sky and travel through the darkness. We can hunt any and all that would deny our heritage. Now is our time, now is the time of the Dark Reign(Rain) of the Empire of Shadows.
- High Prince Telemont Tanthul, Lord Shadow
In a speech given to the citizens of Shade Enclave
At the celebration of the Shinantra Battle victory when he revealed that he was THE Lord Shadow of legend. |
|
|
|
Bendal
Seeker
USA
54 Posts |
Posted - 14 May 2005 : 14:12:17
|
In my new PC group I'm DM'ing, there were two rangers, a monk, a druid, a rogue and a cleric/wizard. They quickly realized they needed another fighter-type after one of the ranger players left the game, and one of the PC's decided to run a basic fighter. She felt that the extra feats allowed her to develop the character better than having another ranger with his limitations on armor and reduced feat numbers, and didn't want to play a paladin with his alignment restrictions.
IMO it is important to have at least one fighter in each party, someone who can go toe-to-toe with the worst of the bad guys and come out of the fight victorious.
Of course, wearing all that heavy (and expensive) plate mail when fighting on a barge in the middle of the Surbrin River isn't always the smartest thing to do either... |
|
|
|
Reefy
Senior Scribe
United Kingdom
892 Posts |
Posted - 14 May 2005 : 14:58:33
|
| I honestly couldn't tell you. It strikes me as a bit of an odd question and could apply to nay class. In general, people like fighters because, well, they like the fighting part of it and getting into melee. It's an incredibly open class because you can design pretty much any concept around it. And if we're talking in terms of game abilities, the feat system in 3.X has helped no end. I very much doubt I'd have ever played a fighter under 2E but they do have more options to make them interesting in 3E that weren't there before in game terms. It also depends what kind of game you're playing, and there's sometimes just the cool factor in that being the hard-as-nails dwarf fighter who goes toe to toe with a dragon has got to be good fun. In short though, the reasons are probably the same as for any class - they like the abilities the class has, they like the concept of the class or they have a certain character in mind when they choose the class. |
Life is either daring adventure or nothing. |
|
|
|
Kaladorm
Master of Realmslore
United Kingdom
1176 Posts |
Posted - 14 May 2005 : 15:09:53
|
| Feats do allow you to customise a character greatly, when it comes to a fighter his feats and equipment define him almost as much as a wizards spells do (diviner, enchanter, conjurer. Defender, dextrous twin weapon fighter, Lasher, etc) |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36804 Posts |
Posted - 14 May 2005 : 15:34:47
|
I like fighters the most because there's just something about the concept of swinging a sword that appeals to me.  |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen! |
|
|
|
VEDSICA
Senior Scribe
USA
466 Posts |
Posted - 14 May 2005 : 16:17:30
|
| I think that you can't go wrong with a fighter.Pick up sword,swing sword,cut head off with sword.Well it's not that easy,but you get the picture.I like some hacking and slashing every once in a while. |
LIFE,BIRTH,BLOOD,DOOM---THE HOLE IN THE GROUND IS COMING ROUND SOON----BLS |
|
|
|
jebeddo
Seeker
Canada
69 Posts |
Posted - 14 May 2005 : 16:42:26
|
| On a related note, fighters are not ahead anymore, now it's down to the cleric and the ranger...and no one voted for barbarians or sorcerers for some reason. |
"Only half-orcs rush in where devas fear to tread." |
|
|
|
jebeddo
Seeker
Canada
69 Posts |
Posted - 14 May 2005 : 16:44:08
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
I like fighters the most because there's just something about the concept of swinging a sword that appeals to me.
Really? I always thought you were someone who favored rogues more than fighters. |
"Only half-orcs rush in where devas fear to tread." |
|
|
|
Lady_Silverwing
Acolyte
26 Posts |
Posted - 14 May 2005 : 16:49:00
|
Please answer the following question.
22. There's nothing more exciting than:
a. the full moon at midnight.
b. the thrill of victory.
c. answering this question.
d. hand-to-hand combat with a thousand cannibals. <--- The correct and only answer 
Fighter- it allows for active hand to hand combat, and a better chance to live while doing it ;o) It should also be one of the most popular, because it's one of the most popular trades in such a world. I think that there were statistics on how many mages should actually be walking Faerun =" I could be just losing it, though. But the point is, not eveyone has the mad dex to pull off being all sneaky, and not everyone's got the talent for a mage. But any Joe can swing a pointy stick.
Not to say it doesn't need it's own finesse/skill set, but it's easier to be trained for this. And alot less expensive than being a mage and needing spell components. |
-Ryissa Silverwing
Wanna roleplay? Join the crew at..:
Sandhrune's D&D Board (Munchkin Policy: let the crucifixion begin! <= With a policy like that, how can you resist?) Join the adventures today! |
|
|
|
jebeddo
Seeker
Canada
69 Posts |
Posted - 14 May 2005 : 16:53:15
|
quote:
Originally posted by Lady_Silverwing
Please answer the following question.
Fighter- it allows for active hand to hand combat, and a better chance to live while doing it ;o) It should also be one of the most popular, because it's one of the most popular trades in such a world. I think that there were statistics on how many mages should actually be walking Faerun =" I could be just losing it, though. But the point is, not eveyone has the mad dex to pull off being all sneaky, and not everyone's got the talent for a mage. But any Joe can swing a pointy stick.
Not to say it doesn't need it's own finesse/skill set, but it's easier to be trained for this. And alot less expensive than being a mage and needing spell components.
Well, no. Those people wouldn't exactly be fighters, they should belong to the warrior class, I think. |
"Only half-orcs rush in where devas fear to tread." |
|
|
|
Lady_Silverwing
Acolyte
26 Posts |
Posted - 14 May 2005 : 16:54:55
|
| Aye, perhaps I should rephrase then? The fighter is the bard of the warrior classes. |
-Ryissa Silverwing
Wanna roleplay? Join the crew at..:
Sandhrune's D&D Board (Munchkin Policy: let the crucifixion begin! <= With a policy like that, how can you resist?) Join the adventures today! |
|
|
|
Kentinal
Great Reader
4688 Posts |
Posted - 14 May 2005 : 17:03:17
|
quote:
Originally posted by jebeddo
On a related note, fighters are not ahead anymore, now it's down to the cleric and the ranger...and no one voted for barbarians or sorcerers for some reason.
Considering the very low numbers of votes one should not be surprised that the lead would change. Perhaps in time Sor and Barb will get a vote, Bard was not running at all for a time.
The Cleric and Ranger both have Fighter features built within them.
The Cleric a Tin Can though not as good as a Fighter with ability to repair damage.
The ranger is a special type of Fighte that often has a fighting companion that can often stand two to two with a Fighter (If companion is not a fighter the Frighter will win most of the time because of Tin Can feature). |
"Small beings can have small wisdom," the dragon said. "And small wise beings are better than small fools. Listen: Wisdom is caring for afterwards."
"Caring for afterwards ...? Ker repeated this without understanding.
"After action, afterwards," the dragon said. "Choose the afterwards first, then the action. Fools choose action first."
"Judgement" copyright 2003 by Elizabeth Moon |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36804 Posts |
Posted - 14 May 2005 : 17:59:15
|
quote:
Originally posted by jebeddo
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
I like fighters the most because there's just something about the concept of swinging a sword that appeals to me.
Really? I always thought you were someone who favored rogues more than fighters.
I do like rogues, but the larcenous aspect of them bugs me a bit. However, I do have to admit that one of my all-time favorite PCs was a swashbuckler thief (2E thief kit). I had a lot of fun with him, and he had a lot of my mischievous and whimsical nature. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen! |
|
|
|
Kaladorm
Master of Realmslore
United Kingdom
1176 Posts |
Posted - 14 May 2005 : 19:40:44
|
Bah Bards are rubbish in 3E.
Not enough versatility with their music unless you take a prestige class, medium skill progression (better with 3.5e, thank goodness they changed it to 6+int).
They're supposed to be the jack of all trades I know but their one distinctive ability is toned down and not had enough emphasis put on it. |
|
|
|
Kaladorm
Master of Realmslore
United Kingdom
1176 Posts |
Posted - 14 May 2005 : 19:42:05
|
and Bards were better off with the mages spell list.
Gave you more of a feeling like they were 'dabblers' in everything rather than obvious spellcasters |
|
|
|
khorne
Master of Realmslore
Finland
1073 Posts |
Posted - 14 May 2005 : 21:29:30
|
| I like monks above all others. |
If I were a ranger, I would pick NDA for my favorite enemy |
|
|
|
Lina
Senior Scribe
Australia
469 Posts |
Posted - 15 May 2005 : 03:10:39
|
A fighter is a good class to begin with because it's easier to survive during battles during the early stages and you don't have to use hit and run tactics that often. They are more favourable for beginners as it is simpler leveling up fighters.
For wizard and cleric classes, it is more difficult to start off with as you only have limited number of lower level spells and have to rely heavily on others to keep you alive during battles. |
“Darkness beyond twilight, crimson beyond blood that flows! Buried in the flow of time. In thy great name. I pledge myself to darkness. All the fools who stand in our way shall be destroyed…by the power you and I possess! DRAGON SLAVE!!!”
"Thieves? Ah, such an ugly word... look upon them as the most honest sort of merchant."
-Oglar the Thieflord |
|
|
|
SomeDude
Acolyte
USA
23 Posts |
Posted - 15 May 2005 : 03:52:51
|
Thank you for your opinions.
In our gaming group it seem like if we don't use part of a session to activly put together a balanced party we always seem to end up heavy on the melee end (A: "So what did you end up making for the game tonight?" B: "A human fighter" A: "Hey, me too!" C: "Not me, I made a dwarven fighter." etc...) I guess partly I was just curious if some of the most respected gamers I know but don't get a chance to play with (ie you people) seem to run into the same thing. I suppose I could have just asked that question in the first place, but now I don't have to bother with the follow up "Why is that?" question, and that's what I was going for anyway.
Thanks again. |
This is the highest my post count has ever been. |
Edited by - SomeDude on 15 May 2005 03:55:02 |
|
|
|
Bendal
Seeker
USA
54 Posts |
Posted - 15 May 2005 : 13:41:24
|
Part of the reason why fighters are so popular as characters is because they are simpler to play. See target; attack target. No need to decide which spell to use, how it would affect the target, or anyone else. Very straightforward and to the point (so to speak).
It's also a self reliance type of thing. If the party has only one or two upright characters left after a melee, and one of them is a fighter or fighter-type, then the party has a decent chance to get somewhere safe where everyone can heal.
Last night, in fact, my PC's fought two back to back melees with an orc raiding party that kept sending in reinforcements before they could heal up. When everything was done, only the wizard/cleric and a ranger were left standing out of six (fighter, druid, rogue, ranger, wizard/cleric, monk/sorceror), and the W/C had no spells left. After a few healing potions were drunk by the two fighters, they felt well enough to not retreat to a safer location. |
|
|
|
Krafus
Learned Scribe
246 Posts |
Posted - 15 May 2005 : 13:43:44
|
At lower levels, fighters tend to have more hit points than all other classes but barbarians, which can make players feel safer. At higher levels, fighters don't have to think about dozens of spells when going into combat.
And all those feats... yum. |
|
|
|
Fletcher
Learned Scribe
USA
299 Posts |
Posted - 16 May 2005 : 15:56:28
|
There is also the fact that when you go into a small town/village the fighter is who everyone looks at. He has the shiny armor and shiny sword. He tends to be the big guy on the big horse with the most scars. Depending on how your fighter looks and acts he also tends to be the scariest guy to townsfolk. And that can be fun too.
The wizard is some skinny/geeky, pasty guy with a book who dabbles in realms beyond their understanding.
The rogue tends to be watched carefully by all of the townsfolk for a variety of reasons. Protect their sons/daughters and goods.
The cleric is respected as a man of the cloth. But there is a distancing between villagers and someone who converses with the gods.
The ranger is a woodsman and a known entity.
Sorcs are similar to wizards in that they deal with energies that defy understanding.
The bard is the only person who can attract the same positive attention as the fighter. |
Run faster! The Kobolds are catching up! |
|
|
|
Antareana
Seeker
Germany
59 Posts |
Posted - 17 May 2005 : 02:15:40
|
Maybe because Fighters are THE archetypes of Heroes and Adventurers. Fighters are fun, Fighters are tough, Fighters do talk the way they want (and I've seen so many with a slightly macho-ish tone) and Fighters are cool ;) at least many people do think that way. Oh yes and Fighters are easy to play, even if you didn't choose the optimum feats.
But in my group I've recognized a whole different tendency: everyone wants to be the mage. especially in an evil group. Because they want to play THE mastermind, I think.
So in most cases the "everybody wants to play this-" class completely depends on the group and the style of the DM - even if I think Fighters and Mages are the most favored (because of the stories and legends around that classes) |
It is all just a past and future secret
|
|
|
|
Xysma
Master of Realmslore
USA
1089 Posts |
Posted - 18 May 2005 : 14:52:31
|
In my group, I'm the only one who ever plays a fighter (I'm also the only one who ever plays a human, but that's a different thread). The guys laugh at me and call me a "power-gamer" simply because I know how to make a fighter that can more than carry the whole group. Fighters are much more than just "meat shields." A sword swinging adventurer is the bread and butter of fantasy literature, it only makes sense that fighters would be a popular class. Just like Regdar acts as the "leader" of the iconic characters, fighters fall into that role well.
Every character should be much more than their feats and ability stats. I make all of my players write at least a page of history before I'll let them play a character. The character's history, where she came from, why he adventures, what motivates him, these are the important things in character creation, everything else is just mechanics. |
War to slay, not to fight long and glorious.
Aermhar of the Tangletrees
Year of the Hooded Falcon
Xysma's Gallery
Guide to the Tomes and Tales of the Realms download from Candlekeep
Anthologies and Tales Overviews
Check out my custom action figures, hand-painted miniatures, gaming products, and other stuff on eBay.
|
|
|
|
Lashan
Learned Scribe
USA
235 Posts |
Posted - 20 May 2005 : 21:52:45
|
| There is almost always something to do in each encounter for a fighter. In many combat situations, clerics, rogues, and even mages have to sit on the sideline every once in a while (or more often). Fighters always have something to do and are usually in the exciting part of the encounter. The wizard will have to spend three rounds to get into a spot where he can cast that one spell in a maximized way. The fighter is rushing in, 5ft stepping, and going for that flank. |
|
|
|
costaran
Acolyte
Turkey
17 Posts |
Posted - 24 May 2005 : 16:28:41
|
| Battle, combat ground, armies, instruments of death, armors... Being in action, especially in melee, is always fun in a well prepared D&D game. You can test your abilities with the help of your weapon against the foes "phisically". A fighter with a variety of characteristics (from a vegabond to a king of a new found society) is a very attractive class for the players. Feats make him/her stronger in almost any combat ability (a hammer blow cracking your bone or a defender and an opportunist; even a sniper archer!) or make the fighter versatile on different ways. You can also keep the pace up with other players in roleplaying by using the non-combatant abilities such as charisma or intelligence. also it is easier (or sometimes harder preferably) to claim a weapon, an armor, and a shield than researching a spell so it is better to take a 5-foot step and make a full attack! |
"From death comes life, and there is always another morning to turn a setback into a success." - The Morninglord |
|
|
|
Asgetrion
Master of Realmslore
Finland
1564 Posts |
Posted - 24 May 2005 : 20:41:48
|
I think it is very important to have a fighter in any party. Although
sometimes it feels that the role of the fighter in 3X edition is to "take the hits" on the front line 
It is true that spellcasters generally have a lot higher AC, better saving throws, and even a higher initiative bonus (at least wizards do - with proper spells). Still someone just has to "hold the line" - even for high-level parties (while wizards and clerics can cast those deadly spells that finish off the foes).
I admit that playing a "pure" fighter with no other classes may be frustrating at times - especially if you have a low will save bonus and you run screaming away at the sight of a dragon, for example.
I only wish that there would proper prestige classes for a neutral Waterdhavian nobleman fighter (who is specialized in greatsword) ... *sigh*
|
"What am I doing today? Ask me tomorrow - I can be sure of giving you the right answer then."
-- Askarran of Selgaunt, Master Sage, speaking to a curious merchant, Year of the Helm |
|
|
|
KnightErrantJR
Great Reader
USA
5402 Posts |
Posted - 24 May 2005 : 20:52:03
|
I think in a way the fighter is the everyman and the touchstone character too. They may get over the top abilities eventually, but they never use magic or truly supernatural abilities. They are kind of a window to what the "average" person in the more fantastical realms would see, experiance, and feel.
I have always loved to have at least one human fighter/rogue/swashbuckler/scout in the party so that there always is a person that knows what its like for the "average" person, one that never really touches the supernatural even if they experience it their whole career. |
|
|
|
KnightErrantJR
Great Reader
USA
5402 Posts |
Posted - 24 May 2005 : 20:53:23
|
| It occurs to me . . . in the 3.5 world I should point out that I did not mean ONE character with all of those classes, but rather one character that sticks to one or a combination of those classes rather than classes that give them supernatural or magical abilities . . . |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
Why Fighter?
