Page 1 of 1

My thoughts on Fighting classes

PostPosted: Sun Dec 16, 2012 3:47 am
by deathknight1728
Ive always liked fighting classes more than ranged weapons when I play a party-based rpg. It was always more fun to think of which class was superior under which circumstances, and there was never a best class, at least not usually.

I would say that after reading the KOTC page, the best fighting class under most categories is a barbarian. The reason why is because in my opinion, the meagre specialization and 2nd spec. just doesn't make up for all the extra benefits you are getting. I have almost no doubts that with all the new races, its going to be a load of fun.

I'd say that for the deadliest warrior, its down to the barbarian (due to freakish strength and insane health+rages), the death knight (sneak attack, same health as fighter, poison and other bonuses) and the paladin (divine favour rocks, and other insane defensive bonuses). The weird thing is that the bard is actually stepping up to becoming a deadly and hardy fighter (10 health per level).

Does anyone else think the barbarian will be the deadliest or is there any other ideas? Keep in mind I'm still a novice at this stuff ;)

Re: My thoughts on Fighting classes

PostPosted: Sun Dec 16, 2012 1:57 pm
by BlueSalamander
The Fighter will be more versatile than the Barbarian, with lots of weapon proficiencies, lots of feats, ability to do two weapon fighting without penalties, and feats to resist magic.

The Psychic Warrior will also be versatile, and possibly as powerful as the barbarian as long as he doesn't exhaust his power points.

The Paladin will not need healing from the cleric like a Fighter or Barbarian would.

Barbarian will be the best to hit enemies with high Armour Class without magic help.

The Rogue, I will allow it to use two weapons (I'm thinking to allow casters to cast while wielding two weapons or a two-handed weapon).

Clerics and especially clerics with melee domains can be good at melee fighting too.

Bard and Death Knight will be more useful through the help they provide to the other party members.

Monks may be good to destroy golems with high DR/- or to grapple spellcasters.

Re: My thoughts on Fighting classes

PostPosted: Sun Dec 16, 2012 3:38 pm
by Tiavals
I think the Barbarian is by far the most boring of the fighting classes, and ultimately the most boring class in the game. I mean, what does it get? Plenty of damage resistance and ability to deal damage. It's too simple. All the other classes get cool things that make playing them very different, usually in a way where you can determine the progress of the class. For Barbarian, you just pick a feat every now and then and it's quite obvious which feats to take. Game mechanically, I don't think the Barbarian is any better than any of the others, but I doubt I'll be choosing a Barbarian for my first 12 characters simply because I can't think of what makes it interesting to play as.

BlueSalamander's list makes it even more obvious. But I suppose it's fine, since there are so many classes in the game, it's not a problem that some aren't as cool as others. :D

Re: My thoughts on Fighting classes

PostPosted: Mon Dec 17, 2012 3:03 am
by deathknight1728
My thoughts are different from most people when it comes to creating a party. I always think of who I want the leader to be. In most cases this is always some kind of warrior class as it makes the most sense to me. Then I think of how I want the other characters to act and how I want them to come together for the team.

I could probably roleplay any of the fighters but for this time, since I never played a Psychic fighter class, thats what I'll be. Either that or a paladin or bard as they sound cool. I wish that I could play a melee ranger but the ranger sucks in this game. I always thought rangers were cooler when they went melee with racial enemies.