TBH, ANY class, right down to the new ones in ACG, works for a villain... EXCEPT the Fighter.
I'm sorry, but the Fighter just doesn't scream "BBEG" to me. All the other classes have something related to their backstory that can lead to being a villain.
Barbarian, Bloodrager and Skald: your typical tribal leader/warchief
Bard, Rogue, Brawler and Swashbuckler: your typical gang/thug/guild leader
Cleric, Paladin, Monk, Inquisitor, Oracle, Shaman and Warpriest: your typical religious leader
Druid and Witch: your typical witch doctor
Ranger, Gunslinger, Ninja, Hunter, Investigator and Slayer: your typical assassin/bounty hnter
Sorcerer, Wizard, Alchemist, Summoner, Magus and Arcanist: your typical evil wizard/arcane spellcaster
Cavalier and Samurai: your typical warlord/commander
and then there's:
Fighter: your typical soldier/sellsword/mercenary/guy who just knows how to wield a weapon and that he's pretty forgettable... kinda lacking here...
Look, the ONLY way to make the Fighter a good villain is if you're just about to face the master gladiator, similar to the Black Duke. However, the Fighter lacks any kind of ability that define him as a villain. The only thing that could define the Fighter as a good villain is the weapon he wields, but again, so can have any of the martial classes.
My opinion though...
Fighter could certainly work for an evil General(*) (or evil former General who became usurping monarch, or leader of a military junta, or something like that). Evil General isn't exclusively a profession for the Fighter, but this certainly would work.
After all, if a Commoner can be the Ultimate Evil(**), a Fighter should be able to do it too.
(*)Or, depending upon how much of a Banana Republic we're talking about, even a lower-ranked military officer who takes over similarly. Earth has at least one Twentieth Century example of a Colonel that did this, and some other infamous dictators also started at low ranks in the military . . . .
(**)Yes, even Ned Flanders can be The Devil.
Fighter could certainly work for an evil General(*) (or evil former General who became usurping monarch, or leader of a military junta, or something like that). Evil General isn't exclusively a profession for the Fighter, but this certainly would work.
After all, if a Commoner can be the Ultimate Evil(**), a Fighter should be able to do it too.
The main problems I have are the context and the abilities. A General can be a Fighter, but would have a much better impact if he was a Cavalier instead in terms of abilities and gameplay.
Sure, your Fighter can be a bodyguard, but the one he's guarding surely is the main villain.
A mercenary? Not you take in account that the one who hired him might be the real villain.
A Fighter is basically a weapon master... without any ability that make him threatening outside of his gear. Sunder your villainous Fighter's weapon... and he's pretty much screwed. Do the same with a Cavalier however, and he can rally his allies to help him out.
I feel like there's no sense of threat for a Fighter. Everything is related to his weapon(s) of choice.
Give him the maneuver system from Tome of Battle in addition of everything the Fighter already has. Now we'll be talking.
"Ooooh, so THAT's how you got your position."
Right now, a villainous Fighter is typically the grand champion of a tournament, known for his gruesome kills and intimidating presence... but even then, his stable master is probably worse than him.
The main problems I have are the context and the abilities. A General can be a Fighter, but would have a much better impact if he was a Cavalier instead in terms of abilities and gameplay.Sure, your Fighter can be a bodyguard, but the one he's guarding surely is the main villain.
Fighter isn't restricted to being a bodyguard, expecially certain archetypes made for other purposes, such as Tactician, which is made for being a military commander (up to and including General). Since "A tactician may choose Skill Focus or any teamwork feat, in addition to Combat Feats, as bonus feats" and gets 4 + IntMod Skill ranks and adds more Class Skills and later on gets the Cavalier's Tactician ability, the Tactician Fighter has the potential do this job quite well. Lore Warden gets an honorable mention for additional Skill ranks and even more additional Class Skills, but doesn't have the Tactician ability.
A mercenary? Not you take in account that the one who hired him might be the real villain.
Mercenary isn't the main villain, but has a decent upgrade path to main villain.
A Fighter is basically a weapon master... without any ability that make him threatening outside of his gear. Sunder your villainous Fighter's weapon... and he's pretty much screwed. Do the same with a Cavalier however, and he can rally his allies to help him out.
A Fighter can have a few safety mechanisms to guard against this -- Improved Unarmed Strike, Catch Off-Guard, or just Quick Draw another weapon; rallying allies also works, just not with the bonuses (unless we're talking about a Tactician Fighter).
Also, a Viking Fighter fits with being the leader of a (potentially very large) Viking tribe (which will likely be fighting alongside).
I feel like there's no sense of threat for a Fighter. Everything is related to his weapon(s) of choice.
And social position, and potentially some other abilities.
Give him the maneuver system from Tome of Battle in addition of everything the Fighter already has. Now we'll be talking."Ooooh, so THAT's how you got your position."
Right now, a villainous Fighter is typically the grand champion of a tournament, known for his gruesome kills and intimidating presence... but even then, his stable master is probably worse than him.
Even in the case of grand champion of the tournament, we have an upgrade path -- it is possible for for the Fighter to have been the grand champion, but the Fighter then killed the former stable master and became the new stable master.
Even in the case of grand champion of the tournament, we have an upgrade path -- it is possible for for the Fighter to have been the grand champion, but the Fighter then killed the former stable master and became the new stable master.
True, that's the ONLY sure-fire path for a Fighter I can think of without it being overshadowed by another class and/or archetype.
Basically, if most fighters are soldiers, then why aren't the Tactican archetype's abilities given to all as a regular abilities?
Either I'm missing a piece of the puzzle here... or I'm not seeing the Fighter in the right way.
I'd say the Fighter needs to be a certain kind of villian, requiring Traits to give him elements that the base class is missing.
Important things to remember about villians is that they are more then the sum of their mechanics. A villianous fighter might use his combat prowess, but also use social skills that he has trained up, long reach plans, alliances with magical allies, etc.
Even someone as simple as; Fighter with high bluff, quick draw, twohanded weapon and power attack. Imagine that Greatsword fighter was a trusted advisor of the king, and at the right opportunity, he pulls regicide out of nowhere. Add to that, he has formulated a plan and political coup, and now commands the kingdom. When the PCS come to nuke him, he's the legal leader, and now has Politics Armor. If they try anyway? He's got his allies, and formulated a defense against the PCs.
(Most people seem to forget that Fighters are to be considered the 'Trained' Combatant, who can learn manuvers in combinations and depth that no one else can. As such, I imagine that they should be intelligent. Int 8 Fighter makes me cry inside)
Despite all my above blurting however; I believe that Divine inspired characters make the best villians because religion can be an incredible force, even for non-magical people, and the intervention of a god is always climactic.
{. . .}
Basically, if most fighters are soldiers, then why aren't the Tactican archetype's abilities given to all as a regular abilities?
I would certainly like for the Class Features including Archetype alternative Class Features to be made a-la-carte so that you could combine them with more flexibility, as Feats, or in the case of scaling Class Features, as something bigger (could be a Feat Chain if you give the Fighter a way of picking up Feat Chains wholesale, which seems like a good idea for higher Fighter Levels anyway).
Either I'm missing a piece of the puzzle here... or I'm not seeing the Fighter in the right way.
Ask the first question again, and then think Private compared to Officer.