What melee class stands alone without the need of feats and y...
I like rogue bc of the skills,sneak attack, and talents... what stands out for you?
Wow way to think so far out of the box you didnt realize you ended back in the box
I actually think Rogue needs feats more than most. It already dedicates itself to twf and usually weapon finesse.
Barbarian or Ranger would be my pick. Ranger has spellcasting and a furry friend on him and a bunch of feats without prereqs. 6+ skillpoints means you have wiggle room. Barbarian has superstitious for sky high saves, dozens of choices for rage powers, 4+skillpoints can go a long way I think.
And again you are back in the box... are you sure you are not a cat?
2H Barbarian.
What do you need, like Toughness and Power Attack? And you can ignore Toughness if you want.
Ok let me get this straight you knew exactly what I intended with my question and gave a sarcastic answer, then I make a sarcastic response. Then you clarify that you did it intentionally, still not giving an answer to the qai (question as intended) and then get upset that I make another sarcastic comment?
The summoner. It winds up being a meelee class and is often rumored to outshine fighters for as many levels as is typically relevant.
What melee class stands alone without the need of feats and y...
I like rogue bc of the skills,sneak attack, and talents... what stands out for you?
Bur rogues are underwhelming in damage even with sneak attacks and talents...
The 3/4 BAB character that blows the rogue out of the water is the alchemist. Even can get sneak attack on top of variant spell-casting and major self buffs. Its also a better skill monkey.
Druids and clerics don't need feats either, and are much more dangerous than a rogue. IMHO a battle druid or cleric without feats is more dangerous than a battle rogue with feats.
A featless full BAB character is also probably more dangerous than the rogue. Better armor, better HP, hitting more often, using better weapons... it all adds up. Add in class abilities (minor casting and animal companions for the pali and rangers, armor/weapon training for the fighters) and the rogue is just a sad sack of fail. I would almost play a Warrior before I would play a rogue.
In answer to the question, a properly built battle cleric/druid would be my top no feat support melee class. Summoners can hang at that power level for most relevant levels, so add that in there too.
y is this happening?
NO TIME FOR THE 'WH' GUYS I'M POSTING WAY TOO FAST
ZOOOOOOOOOOOOOMMMMMMMMMMMM
Oh and Barbarian.
Rage and Fast Movement are all the better if you take feats out of the equation.
|
Without Feats I would go monk. Simply for the pure number of attacks. And because I feel like saying something nobody else has yet.
for one Ki point: +18/+18/+18/+13/+13/+8/+8/+3 - 8 attacks at full str bonus in a one round: 16d10 + 8x Str damage. No feats used (though monk abilities mimic feats).
Immune to a TON of stuff and SR 30 at level 20. What is not to like?
An attack bonus of +18 at level 20.
|
|
See when I read stands alone without the need of feats, I don't immediatly think that you're unable to count feats given as a class feature...
with that being the case, Gunslinger? Paladin? (insert class without bonus feats as their big points)
Rogues? hosed without feats.
Fighters? likewise
Monks? sorta.