My melee class of choice is actually the fighter because I can sit down with multiple fighter builds, wait and see what the other players choose as their class and then make my decision then. I also like the fact that I can pretty much run all over the place in full plate, get loads of feats, and be able to specialize in my weapons. Normally I play a caster type character but when I do play melee I prefer the fighter. Now the Gunslinger is my next choice and is almost equivalent to the fighter in characterizing it as my favourite melee class.
Which melee class do you prefer and why?
Probably Ranger for general melee, and Paladin for tanking melee, and Anti-Paladin for teamwork melee.
Ranger is just all around superior in most respects to other martial characters, as they get half as many bonus feats as Fighters but don't have to qualify for them and get to jump into high-tier feat trees early, and are excellent switch hitters, and they can specialize or hybridize exceptionally easily (you can easily rock melee, mounted combat, and archery). They have good saving throws (Fort & Reflex), evasion, get an animal companion who either functions for running interference and tag-teaming with you or ensures that you have a renewable mount that levels with you. They rock skill points, allowing you to dip into most anything. They are also very good at stealth and wilderness stuff. Their spells are a large mixture of combat and utility spells, and many of them have overlapping purposes. All in all, just strait up the most versatile martial class. They also function as good backup healers without investment in UMD.
Paladins are the clearly superior tanks. They are tough, wear heavy armor, have swift-action self healing AND status recovery, solid martial capability, immunity to a lot of bad stuff, huge bonuses to saving throws, excellent saves (Fort and Will, arguably the two best saves), a good mixture of combat and healing spells, combined with some utility, and get a few spells that are kinda broken in some of the splatbooks (Bestow Grace is just stupid :P).
Anti-Paladin is like Paladin for the most part, except all his powers are reversed, but that makes him a better team player. He is a spellcaster's best friend, as all of his auras affect people who he is actively in melee with, whereas the Paladin auras require their friends to be near melee with them to be affected. The auras of the antipaladin debuff foes and make them easier to affect with spells, fear effects, and so forth. Their touch of corruption and cruelties are very potent, as they ignore armor and can hit targets with bad effects, and in many cases his own debuffs make them easier to land (immediately aura of cowardice inflicts a -4 penalty to avoiding the shaken condition from their mercy, which inflicts a -2 penalty on everything). They are absolutely gnarly for debuff-bombing enemies before casters put them in the ground.
Aura of Despair (-2 to all saves), Touch of Corruption + Curse Cruelty (-4 to all attacks, saves, and checks), hitting the foe with a -6 to their saving throws, just in time for his ally to drop a flesh to stone or similar. The fact they also get animate dead to use to protect their party member with calcium shields is icing on the cake.
|
My melee class of choice is actually the fighter because I can sit down with multiple fighter builds, wait and see what the other players choose as their class and then make my decision then. I also like the fact that I can pretty much run all over the place in full plate, get loads of feats, and be able to specialize in my weapons. Normally I play a caster type character but when I do play melee I prefer the fighter. Now the Gunslinger is my next choice and is almost equivalent to the fighter in characterizing it as my favourite melee class.
Which melee class do you prefer and why?
Probably Ranger for general melee, and Paladin for tanking melee, and Anti-Paladin for teamwork melee.
Ranger is just all around superior in most respects to other martial characters, as they get half as many bonus feats as Fighters but don't have to qualify for them and get to jump into high-tier feat trees early, and are excellent switch hitters, and they can specialize or hybridize exceptionally easily (you can easily rock melee, mounted combat, and archery). They have good saving throws (Fort & Reflex), evasion, get an animal companion who either functions for running interference and tag-teaming with you or ensures that you have a renewable mount that levels with you. They rock skill points, allowing you to dip into most anything. They are also very good at stealth and wilderness stuff. Their spells are a large mixture of combat and utility spells, and many of them have overlapping purposes. All in all, just strait up the most versatile martial class. They also function as good backup healers without investment in UMD.
Paladins are the clearly superior tanks. They are tough, wear heavy armor, have swift-action self healing AND status recovery, solid martial capability, immunity to a lot of bad stuff, huge bonuses to saving throws, excellent saves (Fort and Will, arguably the two best saves), a good mixture of combat and healing spells, combined with some utility, and get a few spells...
I just wanted to say that you have now encouraged me to build an anti-paladin. I had never looked at them that seriously until now.
Next step, backstory and motivations!
I just wanted to say that you have now encouraged me to build an anti-paladin. I had never looked at them that seriously until now.
Next step, backstory and motivations!
I highly recommend wielding a life-drinker and crafting some armor with death ward on it. Depending on your budget, I'd recommend getting it in x/day, or continuous if you just have money to burn. As casters, you can pickup item creation feats.
Life-drinker inflicts 2 negative levels on every hit (AKA -2 to attacks, saves, and skill checks, and -10 HP) and 6 on a critical (the default life drinker is an axe with a x3 critical, but by reverse engineering you could create different life drinker weapons).
That also opens up becoming a lich. Also, having your character turned into an undead (such as a lich or mummy), you can take antipaladin levels, wield your life drinker, and milk your Charisma pretty solidly for HP and good saves. Mummy gives a +14 Str, DR 5/-, nice Charisma boost, and another aura (an aura that paralyzes, DC 10 + 1/2 total HD + Cha mod). The drawback is Fire vulnerability and your speed drops to 20 ft. However, being mounted or crafting some magic boots of that apply speed or mobility buffs can help with that. Also resist energy, of course.
In such a case, you generally end up as being a very good tank who specializes in debuff-bombing your enemies to soften them up for your casters, monks, or whatever.
If you're going to go about reverse engineering a life drinker also consider slapping conductive on it so that you can channel your touch of corruption through it. Nothing hurts quite like taking two negative levels followed by curse in the same fell swoop.
If you're going to go about reverse engineering a life drinker also consider slapping conductive on it so that you can channel your touch of corruption through it. Nothing hurts quite like taking two negative levels followed by curse in the same fell swoop.
Conductive? I think I've overlooked that one. Which book is it from?
Wizard with all of Tenser's spells. A-hyuck!
Conductive? I think I've overlooked that one. Which book is it from?
It's from the APG. You do have to burn two uses though and the effect can only trigger once per round, but still. That is one hell of a penalty from a single swing.
I have played all the full BAB melee classes. I like each for their specific niches, but I think the paladin fits my playstyle best. Plus...OMG smitiness!
A dervish paladin of serenea. He is unstoppable.
|
Saernrae: The Wal-mart of good aligned gods :).
Paladins are, in fact, amazing; and any opportunity to pump up Cha and get huge mechanical benefits is awesome in my book (I love playing high-Chr characters). There really is no better tank in the game (the dwarven lock-fighter is close). And with smite they can be a highly relevant damage threat as well.
It's from the APG. You do have to burn two uses though and the effect can only trigger once per round, but still. That is one hell of a penalty from a single swing.
Conductive? I think I've overlooked that one. Which book is it from?
Thank you Jak. ^-^
Kind of a cool weapon enhancement. I'm actually rolling a mummy for a game tomorrow using some trait shenanigans I posted on the boards a while back, and I'm planning on going antipaladin with her, and it might be a good thing to add to my wish list.
Conductive is nice. I gave it to a vampire, but I never got to use him. :(
My melee class of choice is actually the fighter because I can sit down with multiple fighter builds, wait and see what the other players choose as their class and then make my decision then. I also like the fact that I can pretty much run all over the place in full plate, get loads of feats, and be able to specialize in my weapons. Normally I play a caster type character but when I do play melee I prefer the fighter. Now the Gunslinger is my next choice and is almost equivalent to the fighter in characterizing it as my favourite melee class.
Which melee class do you prefer and why?
For low to mid-level campaigning, its a Human 2-Handed Fighter with the following build:
1st Weapon Focus: Greatsword, Power Attack, Cleave
2nd Dodge
3rd Mobility
4th Combat Expertise
5th Spring Attack
6th Whirlwind Attack
7th Lunge
I love the ability to make an attack at full BAB against every foe within 10'. At level 11 he takes Dazing Assault which, combined with a Lunging Whirlwind Attack makes him a hell of a crowd control specialist.
For late level gaming, I prefer a Paladin (Oath of Vengeance), one built to take advantage of the Eldritch Heritage feats for the Orcish Bloodline. Some really nice synergy there and having the versatility of almost unlimited healing as a swift action or Smiting Evil at will.
That new samurai archetype that drops the mount for a iajutsu-like ability is pretty interesting to me.
What book is that in?
I don't have that one. Maybe it is on d20pfsrd.
Adding con to AC. The monk player like the FotF also.
|
|
Adding con to AC. The monk player like the FotF also.
Yes sir... I did a Vow of Poverty - Chaos Monk(3.5 alt class) / Barbarian / FOF / Frozen Berserker
with this feat:
Polar Chill [Spelltouched]
You can call forth the cold of the arctic regions, making movement and fighting difficult for the unprepared.
Prerequisite
Exposure to cone of cold or ice storm spell.
Benefit
Once per day, you can make the ground icy in a 20-foot-radius spread around you. Each square in that area becomes covered with ice, so it takes two squares of movement to enter each square, and the DC of Balance and Tumble checks there increases by 5. A DC 10 Balance check is required to run or charge across the ice.
The ice remains for 1 minute or until exposed to fire.
You can't use this feat if you aren't touching the ground, and it doesn't work if the air temperature is above 100 degrees
He was a real piece of work.
|
I don't get this thread or rather most of the replies.
Melee class of choice: Which melee class do you prefer or is it which class works best in melee.
If its which melee class preferable then 99% of all answered are dead wrong, since they are about summoners, clerics, druids, etc.
Melee classes in my words are classes who do NOT use arcane or divine magic hence leaving out pretty much everyone but the monk, fighter, barbarian and rogue (and of course gunslingers, Cavaliers, ninjas and samurais) I might have left one or two out anyway. Of those I love the idea of the cavalier but playing PFS its often dungeon crawls so focusing on "mounting" aint all that cool but over all love the idea of the class. (and it brings memories back to DnD version 1 which is nice too). Monks on the other hand are prob. the coolest for multiclassing so they would have an edge there
if its who one like best in melee, well then the ranged dudes Rangers, Gunslingers, zen monks and ranged spell casters are out of the question. As for who are cool in melee, well magus comes to mind - always loved the idea of bringing "weak" mages into upfront combat. And with Magus you do JUST that.
but thing its party depending when it come down the line...
Not all rangers are ranged combatants.
I don't get this thread or rather most of the replies.
Melee class of choice: Which melee class do you prefer or is it which class works best in melee.
If its which melee class preferable then 99% of all answered are dead wrong, since they are about summoners, clerics, druids, etc.
Maybe you are dead wrong sir...
Melee classes in my words are classes who do NOT use arcane or divine magic hence leaving out pretty much everyone but the monk, fighter, barbarian and rogue (and of course gunslingers, Cavaliers, ninjas and samurais) I might have left one or two out anyway.
What is your criteria? This doesn't sound very accurate at all. Is it just your opinion that a class cannot have options or spellcasting and still be a melee class, or a class that can be a melee class?
There's no logic or reasoning in your incredibly narrow criteria. Most people consider their effectiveness when determining whether a class can suitably melee or not. If you consider their effectiveness, Clerics and Druids are definitely capable of meleeing. Rangers and Paladins rock socks at it.
Fighters are good at melee if all you're looking for is numbers. They are hands down the best meat-grinders in the core game, but are trumped by a summoner's pet in most cases.
Ironically, summoners themselves aren't terrible in melee (having a d8 HD, 3/4 BAB, and buff options), and some even tag-team with their eidolons to maximize their melee effectiveness.
if its who one like best in melee, well then the ranged dudes Rangers, Gunslingers, zen monks and ranged spell casters are out of the question. As for who are cool in melee, well magus comes to mind - always loved the idea of bringing "weak" mages into upfront combat. And with Magus you do JUST that.
If you think Rangers are limited to archery, you need to go back and learn to play. Rangers are heralded for their ability to switch-hit (be filling something with arrows from a distance, only to begin the real slaughter when their foes close to melee). Rangers even get an animal companion that is not terrible at combat, or function as a powerful mount.
===
But seriously, what's your criteria other than "it can't cast spells" and what is your logical reasoning for said restriction, other than your own personal preference, to which you declare everyone else "dead wrong"?
|
|
Instead of trying to "defend" my arguments by picking out bit by bit. I just want to say as for criteria I have been brought up with the early 80ties roleplay games, there were three types basically, Non-spellcaster (melee) spellcasters and semi-spellcasters (ala ranger/paladin).
Noone are arguing that Rangers cant be melee based, heck everyone can. In Rolemaster from ICE in the early days everyone could pick up any weapon and throw themselves into melee.
PF (as being a D20 based system) I kind feel have been more combat orientated that the earlier versions of DnD, this also made everyone more melee orientated and thats why many also spell casters like the summoner actually can been darn good in melee.
Ndar hit the head on the nail with "Melee 'character' vs. melee 'class' I suppose is the argument here" and thats basically what I wanted to say by not getting the answers. No doubt there are many many many cool builds possible in melee based and ranged based combat characters.
As a last note and don't rip my head clean off with this. These are ALL answers mine included based on personal preferences, so by declaring everyone "dead wrong" - simply stats the fact that the thread can be misunderstood whats the intent, so lighten up and stop being so defensive, people me included might come with arguments someone feel are strong but its all about a valid discussion.
Anyway my points are still the same love the Cavalier and feel spellcaster wise magus are neat melee class :-)
Instead of trying to "defend" my arguments by picking out bit by bit. I just want to say as for criteria I have been brought up with the early 80ties roleplay games, there were three types basically, Non-spellcaster (melee) spellcasters and semi-spellcasters (ala ranger/paladin).
Noone are arguing that Rangers cant be melee based, heck everyone can. In Rolemaster from ICE in the early days everyone could pick up any weapon and throw themselves into melee.
PF (as being a D20 based system) I kind feel have been more combat orientated that the earlier versions of DnD, this also made everyone more melee orientated and thats why many also spell casters like the summoner actually can been darn good in melee.
Ndar hit the head on the nail with "Melee 'character' vs. melee 'class' I suppose is the argument here" and thats basically what I wanted to say by not getting the answers. No doubt there are many many many cool builds possible in melee based and ranged based combat characters.
As a last note and don't rip my head clean off with this. These are ALL answers mine included based on personal preferences, so by declaring everyone "dead wrong" - simply stats the fact that the thread can be misunderstood whats the intent, so lighten up and stop being so defensive, people me included might come with arguments someone feel are strong but its all about a valid discussion.
Anyway my points are still the same love the Cavalier and feel spellcaster wise magus are neat melee class :-)
I dunno. I've had excellent success meleeing in the 2E based Baldur's Gate I & II series, set in the Forgotten Realms. Clerics were arguably more amazing once they got up some levels, since they could cast a spell or two and BAM, full BAB, 25 Str and Con, maximum damage on all attacks, etc. Plus they could cast a spell and get a sexy weapon of some sort like a flame blade, spiritual hammer, blah, blah.
Let's not forget their armor and weapon proficiencies. Ok, so you can't use bladed/piercing weapons. That's ok. You still have hammers, maces, and other sweet bludgeoning weapons like that. Slings too. And your minions (they has minions!) suffer no similar restrictions. :P
Now, I know Baldur's Gate I & II isn't the perfect representation of pre-3E, but I've never heard of anyone complaining about how wrong they got it.
|
I don't get this thread or rather most of the replies.
Melee class of choice: Which melee class do you prefer or is it which class works best in melee.
If its which melee class preferable then 99% of all answered are dead wrong, since they are about summoners, clerics, druids, etc.
Melee classes in my words are classes who do NOT use arcane or divine magic hence leaving out pretty much everyone but the monk, fighter, barbarian and rogue (and of course gunslingers, Cavaliers, ninjas and samurais) I might have left one or two out anyway.
WTF? Melee just means close combat. None of this makes any sense whatsoever.
Well I love my 3.5 classes...
Barbarian - 4 / Fist of the Forest - 3 / War Hulk - 10 / Hulking hurler - 3
Nothing like it in the world... a true pain in the *rse for a DM though.
Well, if we're going 3.5. then my all-time favorite character (for RP and all-around @ss;kicking) has got to be my 1/2 Orc Barbarian 1 (whirling Frenzy option)/Warshaper 4/Druid 5+ (Shapeshifter option). Far and away the toughest melee combatant I've ever run AND the ability to cast Summon Nature's Ally, self-buffs and heals and various other spells almost at will. I used to solo adventures with him all the time since the shapeshifting abilities and spellcasting ability gave him non-combat versatility that made a party cumbersome.
@DickovDK, heh, you'd love some of my pure arcane or pure divine melee builds I've done as a GM. I've never done them as a player, but I've thrown a ton of hyped up spellcasters at my party in pure melee battles and some of them have done very well, thank you.
I think your definition is not the common definition of "melee class" since you seem to exclude several classes which have specific archetypes or build options to be excellent melee fighters, such as ranger, druid or even magus.
|
|
Well, if we're going 3.5. then my all-time favorite character (for RP and all-around @ss;kicking) has got to be my 1/2 Orc Barbarian 1 (whirling Frenzy option)/Warshaper 4/Druid 5+ (Shapeshifter option). Far and away the toughest melee combatant I've ever run AND the ability to cast Summon Nature's Ally, self-buffs and heals and various other spells almost at will. I used to solo adventures with him all the time since the shapeshifting abilities and spellcasting ability gave him non-combat versatility that made a party cumbersome.Well I love my 3.5 classes...
Barbarian - 4 / Fist of the Forest - 3 / War Hulk - 10 / Hulking hurler - 3
Nothing like it in the world... a true pain in the *rse for a DM though.
Awe Warshaper... now that 5 levels of Goodness in one nice little package!
|
|
Which melee class do you prefer and why?While I'm loving my Ranger and I really want to try a Paladin (and possibly a Barbarian at some point), I have to agree that it's all about the Fighter.
Forgot to add the reason, which is, of course, options. I love feats and being able to stack 'em up and have multiple tactics really works for me.