The Paladin is the pillar of faith and protection of the weak. The Fighter is the vaunted weaponmaster and lord of melee combat. The Barbarian's ferocity is unmatched, and his power is enough to defeat even the most powerful ogres. The Ranger and his swirling dual blades mean sure death for most enemies. The Rogue's unseen ability to kill fast and repeatedly is unheard of because of his secrecy. The Monk's concentration and belief in himself make him unbeatable by most.
But which of these IS the most powerfull all-around character? Which of these could take on most situations by himself and win? All kinds of equipment, races and stats but they must all be singleclassed.. So, what is the most powerful melee character?

Definately the Paladin, pretty much matches the fighter in melee, but with a limited spellcasting ability. As a drow you get natural spell resistance, also, when you get the carosmyr/ caro-sumat (Cant remember which is IWD, and I know there spelled wrong) and the major magic resistance it gives, plus get yourself neds lucky-nucky, both loops of tymora, and an awsome AC, and you pretty much never miss with major Magic/ Melee resistance. On top of all that you get limited clerical buffs that make the paladin all the more awsome.

So, paladin all the way.

Yep, paladins roxorz. The Cera Sumat is the sword that you are looking for. Yea, a paladin is good with all the luck items, but I think they are better used by a mage. Hit a maximum on every horrid wilting... :D

Monks are also awesome as decoys, though when I build them there is little room for strength. Still, a monk has awesome AC, and can stand in the middle of a crowd while a friendly mage uses him as a centerpoint for a fireball. Buncha fried barbarians, one untouched deep gnome monk.

I myself find the rogue superior to paladin. His backstab is one of my favorite abilities in the game, and the after effects like Hamstring and Arterial Strike are superb. Envenom Weapon is very useful too. The paladin has Intimidation and Concentration, whereas the rogue has Intimidate, Bluff, Diplomacy, Use Magic Device, Disable Device, Hide... I can see a situation:
Paladin walks slowly through the dark corridor, his holy weapon ready in his right, the tower shield in the other hand. "Come out, face me like a man!"
Behind him, a flash of metal, a sound of flesh being cut and footsteps moving away. The Paladin turns around only to be stopped by the pain in his leg. He tries to walk, but finds it too hard to do so at any decent speed. He decides to lean against a wall, to avoid any further attacks at his back. He is loosing blood, he realises. After curing himself of the immediate wounds, he tries to continue his search of this thieving fiend.
Now at this point, the paladin has lost 1d6 Constitution and 1 Strength, is bleeding and is moving at half speed. His damage is negated by his Lay on Hands, but he is still at a penalty of combat effectiveness. The rogue is yet unharmed, hidden, and unless the paladin casts See Invisibility, will continue to use the tactics against him. If we have a 450hp Paladin, originally, and a 240hp Rogue, after the Paladin loses from 30-90 maximum health, starts bleeding and uses up his Lay on Hands he starts searching for the rogue. Even if he doesn't get stabbed again, the Rogue's AC with the Brilliant Shortsword +5 and Expertise are high enough to avoud being hit by the Paladin atleast every third attack or so, he hits the Paladin every time, as the Paladin's Dodge and Dexterity bonuses will most likely amount to 15 AC, but not more. If the rogue hits for 15 damage with every hit, and the paladin hits for 40 with every hit(let's say the Rogue is Chaotic Evil), the Rogue still deals more damage within a round if the paladin hits only 2 out of 4 strikes. And by adding Use Magic Device into the mix, the Rogue's options quintiple. After a few Lower Resistance scrolls(if the Paladin has 57 Spell Resistance), the guy can basically toy with the pally with spells. Sure, the paladin has some wildly impressive saves, but some spells don't allow them. Summons, for instance. Since the Rogue is no Spellcaster, he gets no penalties from Tenser's Transformation, making him as good a fighter as the Paladin.
In a no-holds-barred fight, the only melee characters I can see beating a Rogue everytime they fight are Barbarians and Monks. Both have speed, the Monk has a superhigh natural AC, and the Barbarian has Rage.
...
Damn, I should have made this a Poll.
So, my vote goes out to Rogue. Monks close second.

I agree that a rogue can beat a paladin in a 1v1 fight, but I think a paladin is more effective agains the enemy than a rogue is. A single class rogue (Which I have very little experience with [img]smile.gif[/img] ) can make a nice impact at the beginning of a fight, possibly taking out a key enemy or crippling a mage, but the paladin is the one who hold the line and deals the heavy damage to the enemy tanks.

I guess it depends on your style of play. My style is a paladin and a cleric holding the line against enemy melee units, while my bombers rain holy hell on the enemy with massive AOE spells. BoB, you prefer (from what you've said about that melee party back in the day), to have a first strike of a rogue and a monk, followed up with your warriors. Either strategy works well, IMO.

I'd also like to say that I actually think the plain fighter is the WORST single class option. They get +2 to damage, but extra feats isn't too much help, and they lack spells and special abilities. After my first n00bish game, I have never used a fighter for more than 4 levels in a character.

Well, every now and then, I give Fighter a second chance. And I regret it. The feats might be fun for a while, but you can only become a master of so many weapons before it's boring. And the saves-boosting feats are nice, but don't really have a huge effect, not when compared to the Paladin's Charisma, or a Barbarian's Rage.
True, in a mass fight, a Paladin would have better survivability than a Rogue and his poor d6 hit points. But he'd go down with a bang [img]tongue.gif[/img]

Well, most melee characters bite single-classed [img]tongue.gif[/img] (Except for Monk and Barbarian)

Well, power comes in different forms. What are we measuring? Sheer ability to deal damage? Skills and class characteristics enabling combat survival? Ability to protect spellcasters? Ability to kill spellcasters?

All that said, I favour the monk. A monk with protection items and appropriate spell buffs has nearly unhittable AC in normal mode, allowing other characters to take up any slack in damage dealing. Combined with the evasion, saving throws, and (eventual) immunity to disease and poison, the high AC makes it the best tank for avoiding damage.

I also like the very high speed and other characteristics that make a monk perfect for taking out enemy casters and archers - stunning blow, rate of unarmed attacks, etc - spell resistance is a great bonus.

Deep Gnome Monk, nothing is better. When playing my solo DGM, I had no issues wading through the baddies. And w/ the spell restience so high, you don't have to worry about taking mages out from the get-go. Plus, he's got the hide ability, that to me makes him the best melee character.