An Illustrated Manual for Inflicting Violence: A Guide to Fightering

[Arkhios]

And adding the new UA Martial Archetypes would be nice. It was good seeing new archetypes not based on combat superiority.

While I do kinda agree with you, I think the general purpose of these guides is to only include material published (and sold) by WotC, not Unearthed Arcana "options on trial", though I guess it might vary from poster to poster.

[ChildofLuthic]

While I do kinda agree with you, I think the general purpose of these guides is to only include material published (and sold) by WotC, not Unearthed Arcana "options on trial", though I guess it might vary from poster to poster.

I mean, it's super useful if your DM is allowing UA. That way you can know if the archetype is ridiculously underpowered and should be avoided, or if it plays differently than the fluff suggests, or if it's really overpowered and you're going to either look like a minmaxer for playing it or possibly have to tone yourself down a bit.

[nmitchell2]

I haven't read through all 153 posts on the thread, but I have seen very little on the Fighter/Barbarian multiclass. The guide itself literally says 'lots of synergy' under Barbarian multiclass and no reasons why. I understand that they might be obvious to most people but come on, it needs to be there.

Mention things like Rage giving resistances to slashing/piercing/bludgeoning damage and Reckless Attack cancelling the -5 to hit from GWM. Mention how Totem Warrior is superior to Berserker and which path to follow in different party compositions(Wolf with 2 or more melee teammates, Bear otherwise). Mention the Half-Orc Champion/Bear-Totem Warrior build as an example of synergy. Explain that Eldritch Knight and Barbarian don't mix because you can't cast spells or maintain concentration while raging.

[EvilAnagram]

I'm just going to update here that I've put all of the Volo's material in, and I've included Garwig's build as Negasonic Spearlord McAwesomesauce. Full credit to Garwig.

I keep forgetting about the Tunnel Fighter, but I'll get around to it.

I haven't read through all 153 posts on the thread, but I have seen very little on the Fighter/Barbarian multiclass. The guide itself literally says 'lots of synergy' under Barbarian multiclass and no reasons why. I understand that they might be obvious to most people but come on, it needs to be there.

Mention things like Rage giving resistances to slashing/piercing/bludgeoning damage and Reckless Attack cancelling the -5 to hit from GWM. Mention how Totem Warrior is superior to Berserker and which path to follow in different party compositions(Wolf with 2 or more melee teammates, Bear otherwise). Mention the Half-Orc Champion/Bear-Totem Warrior build as an example of synergy. Explain that Eldritch Knight and Barbarian don't mix because you can't cast spells or maintain concentration while raging.

I think you're right that I could include some more specific ideas, and I updated the guide with them.


That said, this isn't a multiclassing guide. This is a guide for exploring a single class and introducing people into character optimization. I don't like multiclassing, I don't pretend to have a lot to say on it, and I don't care to dedicate more than a blurb per class to it. PeteNutButter has a solid multiclassing guide that I heartily recommend to anyone that wants to talk multiclassing strategies in-depth.

[kitamura]

Apologies for a slightly necropost, but since Evil has updated this thread a few weeks ago, I'm taking that to mean he's still around and will see this at some point.

[*]Blindness/Deafness*: The effect just isn't that powerful, and you're giving them a save every round.
[*]Blur*: Oh, look, a spell that benefits you just as much as Blindness would, but doesn't have any saves involved. A necessary choice if you don't want to pump Int.

I'm honestly surprised that no one has called you out on this yet. You're either underestimating what Blindness does to a person in this game, or you assumed Blur was better after only reading half of the "blindness" condition.

Benefits of Blur spell:
Enemy has disadvantage to hit you and only you.

This is a good thing... however...

Benefits of inflicting Blindness on a key enemy, using Blindness/Deafness spell:
1) The spell does not require your concentration.
2) Your entire party has advantage to hit the target.
3) The target has disadvantage to hit you and all of your allies with attacks... assuming he even knows where to aim them.
4) The target will have a very hard time properly using a lot spells, if he's a caster. It's a little hard to directly target what you cannot see. Does your DM let you accurately target a space you cannot see with a fireball spell? Better yet, does your DM let you "know" that the creature you want to hit is even inside the radius? A lot of spellcaster NPC's aren't going to be passing the con save against this spell, especially if you gave them disadvantage by striking them at least once last round (or even on this round if you're Haste'd... remember how I said Blindness/Deafness doesn't require concentration?) Even some of the monsters with decent Con scores still have a moderate chance for failure if you give them disadvantage on the save, which is pretty easy for an Eldritch Knight to do. And the ones that lack decent con are just screwed.

This does, of course, require the enemy to rely on vision to hit you, but most enemies are reliant on their sight. And yes, you may get slightly more or slightly less mileage depending on your DM. And deafness is a pretty weak condition. But Blindness as a condition is pretty strong. A spell that inflicts this condition, without even requiring you to concentrate, is even stronger. And being able to freely assign disadvantage on this save is even stronger still. Maybe not "sky blue" strong, but better than red.

[Specter]

Apologies for a slightly necropost, but since Evil has updated this thread a few weeks ago, I'm taking that to mean he's still around and will see this at some point.

I'm honestly surprised that no one has called you out on this yet. You're either underestimating what Blindness does to a person in this game, or you assumed Blur was better after only reading half of the "blindness" condition.

Benefits of Blur spell:
Enemy has disadvantage to hit you and only you.

This is a good thing... however...

Benefits of inflicting Blindness on a key enemy, using Blindness/Deafness spell:
1) The spell does not require your concentration.
2) Your entire party has advantage to hit the target.
3) The target has disadvantage to hit you and all of your allies with attacks... assuming he even knows where to aim them.
4) The target will have a very hard time properly using a lot spells, if he's a caster. It's a little hard to directly target what you cannot see. Does your DM let you accurately target a space you cannot see with a fireball spell? Better yet, does your DM let you "know" that the creature you want to hit is even inside the radius? A lot of spellcaster NPC's aren't going to be passing the con save against this spell, especially if you gave them disadvantage by striking them at least once last round (or even on this round if you're Haste'd... remember how I said Blindness/Deafness doesn't require concentration?) Even some of the monsters with decent Con scores still have a moderate chance for failure if you give them disadvantage on the save, which is pretty easy for an Eldritch Knight to do. And the ones that lack decent con are just screwed.

This does, of course, require the enemy to rely on vision to hit you, but most enemies are reliant on their sight. And yes, you may get slightly more or slightly less mileage depending on your DM. And deafness is a pretty weak condition. But Blindness as a condition is pretty strong. A spell that inflicts this condition, without even requiring you to concentrate, is even stronger. And being able to freely assign disadvantage on this save is even stronger still. Maybe not "sky blue" strong, but better than red.

Eldritch Strike turns many 'never take' spells into 'could take', indeed.

[Asmotherion]

Generally a very good guide.

However, I feel you underestimate two things:

A) For the Eldritch Knight: Blink, IMO should be cyan blue. Not only is it a small-scale teleport as you put it, it's also a 50% chance of getting immune to all damage 'till your next turn. It also takes no Concentration to keep, so you can have it active, together with Mirror Image AND Blur, making you extreamly hard to hit.

B) Warlock Dip should be also Cyan Blue. Hex alone to fill your Concentration slot, which, unless you are an Eldritch Knight, you don't use either way, for Long-Term Extra Damage makes it Worth it. If you count UA, the Hexblade/Fighter multiclass can be a very Dangerous Opponent too. Also, the fact that, as a Fighter, you are proficient with Con saves make Hex even better for you. You also can get a bunsh of usefull things along the Way, such as more Cantrips (including Scag), A perfect Eldritch Blast as a Ranged Option (+Agonising, as long as you have the Charisma to benefit from it) and other Invocations with deffensive or offensive benefits.

[Saggo]

A lot of spellcaster NPC's aren't going to be passing the con save against this spell, especially if you gave them disadvantage by striking them at least once last round

I'm not so sure Eldritch Strike works on an already existing spell, given it says "against a spell you cast before the end of your next turn."

[EvilAnagram]

I'm honestly surprised that no one has called you out on this yet. You're either underestimating what Blindness does to a person in this game, or you assumed Blur was better after only reading half of the "blindness" condition.

Benefits of Blur spell:
Enemy has disadvantage to hit you and only you.

This is a good thing... however...

Benefits of inflicting Blindness on a key enemy, using Blindness/Deafness spell:
1) The spell does not require your concentration.
2) Your entire party has advantage to hit the target.
3) The target has disadvantage to hit you and all of your allies with attacks... assuming he even knows where to aim them.
4) The target will have a very hard time properly using a lot spells, if he's a caster. It's a little hard to directly target what you cannot see. Does your DM let you accurately target a space you cannot see with a fireball spell? Better yet, does your DM let you "know" that the creature you want to hit is even inside the radius? A lot of spellcaster NPC's aren't going to be passing the con save against this spell, especially if you gave them disadvantage by striking them at least once last round (or even on this round if you're Haste'd... remember how I said Blindness/Deafness doesn't require concentration?) Even some of the monsters with decent Con scores still have a moderate chance for failure if you give them disadvantage on the save, which is pretty easy for an Eldritch Knight to do. And the ones that lack decent con are just screwed.

This does, of course, require the enemy to rely on vision to hit you, but most enemies are reliant on their sight. And yes, you may get slightly more or slightly less mileage depending on your DM. And deafness is a pretty weak condition. But Blindness as a condition is pretty strong. A spell that inflicts this condition, without even requiring you to concentrate, is even stronger. And being able to freely assign disadvantage on this save is even stronger still. Maybe not "sky blue" strong, but better than red.

I think you've made quite a few good points, and I don't want to completely take away from them, so I'm just going to provide my own justification for my rating.

The Eldritch Knight is, by far, the most restricted casting class, with the single possible exception of the Arcane Trickster. You get very few spells known, all but four of which are restricted to two schools of magic. Because of this, every spell that an EK takes has to be regularly useful in a wide variety of situations. Blindness/Deafness is, under normal circumstances, a perfectly useful spell. However, for Eldritch Knights it has some major problems:

• It fights for your only non-evocation, non-abjuration second-level spell.
• Other spells competing for that real estate are major defensive buffs.
• It targets Constitution, which means that the biggest, nastiest heavy hitters you really want to blind have the best chance of not being blinded. That limits its usefulness.
• Eldritch Strike isn't an option for two levels after you get to pick Blindness/Deafness
• Saving at the end of each round again limits its effectiveness.

Contrast with Blur, which as you said is much more limited, but happens no matter what and lasts the duration, so long as a Fighter can pass the occasional Con save.

I don't think that Blindness/Deafness is a bad spell. I do, however, think that it's a bad spell for an Eldritch Knight. It's competing with some exceptionally useful spells, and it lacks the major virtue that EK's need from their spells: consistency.

A) For the Eldritch Knight: Blink, IMO should be cyan blue. Not only is it a small-scale teleport as you put it, it's also a 50% chance of getting immune to all damage 'till your next turn. It also takes no Concentration to keep, so you can have it active, together with Mirror Image AND Blur, making you extreamly hard to hit.

It's a great spell, but the randomness and the fact that you only get one 3rd-level non-evocation, non-abjuration hold it back a bit. Also, you can't have Mirror Image and Blur up at the same time. They compete for the same real estate, just like Blink and

B) Warlock Dip should be also Cyan Blue. Hex alone to fill your Concentration slot, which, unless you are an Eldritch Knight, you don't use either way, for Long-Term Extra Damage makes it Worth it. If you count UA, the Hexblade/Fighter multiclass can be a very Dangerous Opponent too. Also, the fact that, as a Fighter, you are proficient with Con saves make Hex even better for you. You also can get a bunsh of usefull things along the Way, such as more Cantrips (including Scag), A perfect Eldritch Blast as a Ranged Option (+Agonising, as long as you have the Charisma to benefit from it) and other Invocations with deffensive or offensive benefits.

That's all fun, but it's nothing you can't get with Magic Initiate, and I don't think it's particularly more valuable than any other caster dip.

[Saggo]

It's a great spell, but the randomness and the fact that you only get one 3rd-level non-evocation, non-abjuration hold it back a bit. Also, you can't have Mirror Image and Blur up at the same time. They compete for the same real estate, just like Blink and

Fairly certain you can get up to 2 3rd level spells at level 13. You get both an additional spell known and your one spell replace.

Not sure I'd use it on Blink though, most Eldritch Knights want to draw attention given a decent Con score. Even my archer EK interposes between our mage back line and the enemies as a second line of defense.

[MeeposFire]

Well I find warlock is perfect if you want to be a warmagic using EK that can work at range. Eldritch blast can be taken by magic initiate but it can never get an attribute to damage which requires 2 levels of warlock. With that and warmagic you get an excellent way to deal damage with spell and weapon. Now granted the best way to use this is to get rogue levels after the warlock levels to improve your single weapon attack and this makes it less a fighter build but I can see why you would want those 2 levels of warlock (melee only does not need the warlock levels due to booming blade).

[MrStabby]

B) Warlock Dip should be also Cyan Blue. Hex alone to fill your Concentration slot, which, unless you are an Eldritch Knight, you don't use either way, for Long-Term Extra Damage makes it Worth it. If you count UA, the Hexblade/Fighter multiclass can be a very Dangerous Opponent too. Also, the fact that, as a Fighter, you are proficient with Con saves make Hex even better for you. You also can get a bunsh of usefull things along the Way, such as more Cantrips (including Scag), A perfect Eldritch Blast as a Ranged Option (+Agonising, as long as you have the Charisma to benefit from it) and other Invocations with deffensive or offensive benefits.

I have to agree with this. Warlock gives the eldritch knight a lot. Firstly more spell slots. A 2 level dip lets you cast your level one spells a lot more times per day if the party gets short rests. Shield 8 times per day makes an EK very tough. If nothing else this more than compensates for the slightly lower Con you might need to get Cha to 13.

Secondly the invocations are simply superb. Things like Devil's sight are very nice for combat and exploration, whilst you can get great out of combat utility from reading all languages or detect magic at will. This is even before considering the extra spells you can pick up.

If you are willing to go 3 levels deep you can pick up a book of ancient secrets to give you superb ritual casting. This also gives you access to a lot of great spells from level 2 which you would struggle to take as an EK. Whilst high Cha enables great stuff like fairy fire, even a low Cha gives a lot of spells of interest to an EK. Hex, misty step, darkness, invisibility, mirror image...

I don't think that Blindness/Deafness is a bad spell. I do, however, think that it's a bad spell for an Eldritch Knight. It's competing with some exceptionally useful spells, and it lacks the major virtue that EK's need from their spells: consistency.

I think you are almost, but not quite right here. Consistency - in terms of always being useful isn't needed. What is needed is to always have a useful action. Niche spells are OK as long as they never overlap with other niche spells and as a whole you have a lot of solutions. This includes non spell actions as well. As a melee EK, for example, I wouldn't take spells that would need a strength save most of the time. Strength saves tend to imobalise people and I can cover that with grappling. Likewise I wouldn't use a spell for single target damage as the attack action covers that need pretty well. My (minor) gripe with blindness is that con saves tend to correlate with good strength saves - so it doesn't really help me with the things I can't shove around.

[visitor]

I'm not so sure Eldritch Strike works on an already existing spell, given it says "against a spell you cast before the end of your next turn."

We were just discussing that here: http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showt...ldritch-Strike

[Shadowflick]

The more I look at it, it seems that Battlemaster has the most front loaded abilities that are powerful then, but tapers off later. The Eldritch Knight starts weak, but gains in power as you level

[Arkhios]

The more I look at it, it seems that Battlemaster has the most front loaded abilities that are powerful then, but tapers off later. The Eldritch Knight starts weak, but gains in power as you level

Personally I'm not so sure about Battle Master getting weaker later, but I have to agree on Eldritch Knight.

Compared to a full wizard, they only lose by 2 x 4th, 2 x 5th, and only a handful of higher level spells and slots in total, but otherwise they have just as many spell slots, and - with appropriate investment - their Spell Save DC's are potentially equal. What they lose in both spells known and spell slots, they more than come up with their other abilities, which aren't bad at all.

[Chunkosaurus]

Personally I'm not so sure about Battle Master getting weaker later, but I have to agree on Eldritch Knight.

Compared to a full wizard, they only lose by 2 x 4th, 2 x 5th, and only a handful of higher level spells and slots in total, but otherwise they have just as many spell slots, and - with appropriate investment - their Spell Save DC's are potentially equal. What they lose in both spells known and spell slots, they more than come up with their other abilities, which aren't bad at all.

Their abilities and spell list do a really good job of enforcing that they are a magical warrior. The synergy is really good with the spellcasting and fighting

[Cimarron_Man]

Hello, thanks for the awesome guide. I'm​ kinda new in 5e so I'm looking for a little bit of advice. I have a Battle Master Fighter about to reach Lv. 4 I took Variant Human and the Shield Master feat upon creation so now I'm deciding between taking a second feat (there are many interesting ones there) or increase one of the ability scores by +2 (currently STR 14, DEX 16, CON 14, INT 10, WIS 12, CHA 8).


What do you think? If I got it correctly the DEX/STR check a creature has to do after a shield shove is against my STR. My aim is to be practical and follow the oat that makes me more efficient in combat.

[EvilAnagram]

Hello, thanks for the awesome guide. I'm​ kinda new in 5e so I'm looking for a little bit of advice. I have a Battle Master Fighter about to reach Lv. 4 I took Variant Human and the Shield Master feat upon creation so now I'm deciding between taking a second feat (there are many interesting ones there) or increase one of the ability scores by +2 (currently STR 14, DEX 16, CON 14, INT 10, WIS 12, CHA 8).


What do you think? If I got it correctly the DEX/STR check a creature has to do after a shield shove is against my STR. My aim is to be practical and follow the oat that makes me more efficient in combat.

One thing I'd say is that your build is not terribly efficient as-is. Usually, you want to focus on one primary ability modifier for all of your attacks and save abilities, but you're split between Strength and Dexterity thanks to your feat choice. I would say that you should probably spend the next two ASIs pumping up your Strength to get the most out of Shield Master and your basic attacks. After that, feats are worth the investment.

[Cimarron_Man]

I would say that you should probably spend the next two ASIs pumping up your Strength to get the most out of Shield Master and your basic attacks. After that, feats are worth the investment.

I forgot to mention my character is using a rapier so i was using DEX to strike but i'm also thinking about what you said about having better chances to pull off the Shield Shove sinces is a check againt my STR. I guess it's a matter of choosing more accurate shoving against better striking power.

[xanderh]

I forgot to mention my character is using a rapier so i was using DEX to strike but i'm also thinking about what you said about having better chances to pull off the Shield Shove sinces is a check againt my STR. I guess it's a matter of choosing more accurate shoving against better striking power.

When using a rapier, you get to choose between DEX and STR. You use the better of your two scores.
Plus, you can always just get a different weapon.

[Arkhios]

When using a rapier, you get to choose between DEX and STR. You use the better of your two scores whichever you want to.
Plus, you can always just get a different weapon.

I'm sorry, but I couldn't resist fixing that for you. Because that's how it is. Absolutely nothing compels you to use better of your two scores. The choice is always yours.

[xanderh]

I'm sorry, but I couldn't resist fixing that for you. Because that's how it is. Absolutely nothing compels you to use better of your two scores. The choice is always yours.

That's just being pedantic for no reason. In play, there's absolutely no reason why you wouldn't use the better score. It's not a real choice,so there's no point in making the distinction.

[Arkhios]

That's just being pedantic for no reason. In play, there's absolutely no reason why you wouldn't use the better score. It's not a real choice,so there's no point in making the distinction.

You said like it was a written rule. Which it isn't. Yes, it was being pedantic, but not for no reason. It was a clarification as to how the rules are written. Rules don't say "you use the better of the two scores" so it is a real choice. No matter which way would be more optimal. Rules don't enforce optimal thinking.

[xanderh]

You said like it was a written rule. Which it isn't. Yes, it was being pedantic, but not for no reason. It was a clarification as to how the rules are written. Rules don't say "you use the better of the two scores" so it is a real choice. No matter which way would be more optimal. Rules don't enforce optimal thinking.

Is there any reason at all, ever, to use the lower of the two scores? Is there a single thing in the game that makes using the lower score not an objectively worse option? If not, it's a false choice, and the rule is effectively "use the higher score".

And why even bother having this conversation? It's pointless. Yes, technically, you're allowed to use the lower of the two scores, but we're in a thread about optimisation, so that option isn't even relevant in the first place.
Why bring it up? Are you just looking to have an argument for no reason?

[MeeposFire]

Well you could be playing a barbarian with a higher, but not much higher , dex score and chooses to use str when using rage or reckless attack but dex in other situations. It would be really niche and more than likely a temporary situation since eventually you will probably either equal out the scores or one will become much higher than the other (or str gets higher period of course).

[Citan]

Is there any reason at all, ever, to use the lower of the two scores? Is there a single thing in the game that makes using the lower score not an objectively worse option? If not, it's a false choice, and the rule is effectively "use the higher score".

And why even bother having this conversation? It's pointless. Yes, technically, you're allowed to use the lower of the two scores, but we're in a thread about optimisation, so that option isn't even relevant in the first place.
Why bring it up? Are you just looking to have an argument for no reason?

I'm sorry but you just got heated because someone corrected you on this, but he did it with good reason.

Yes, there is a very legitimate reason to use "the lower of the two scores" which is precisely the case for the player's question.

He wants his character to be a DEX based Fighter, which is a very fine choice especially for a sword and board warrior: better Initiative, better Dexterity saves, nearly as good AC as a heavy but without stealth disadvantage.

Yet the Shove option is always an Athletics check, which is made by STR.
And since...
a) You can easily compensate a lower ability score through proficiency, and even more in player's case by a single level of Rogue to put Expertise in it,
b) Since yourself can choose DEX when defending against a Grapple/Shove...

There is absolutely no good reason to use ASI on STR bumps unless both considerations hereunder are true...
1) You plan on actually reaching 20th level with this character (which means losing even a single level for multiclass is a very tough choice).
2) You plan on actually using the Shove bonus action + Attack as your bread and butter tactic.
In all other cases, you'd much better spend those ASIs on maximizing DEX, getting a Resilient and other feats.
That actually is optimizing. :=)

[xanderh]

I'm sorry but you just got heated because someone corrected you on this, but he did it with good reason.

Yes, there is a very legitimate reason to use "the lower of the two scores" which is precisely the case for the player's question.

He wants his character to be a DEX based Fighter, which is a very fine choice especially for a sword and board warrior: better Initiative, better Dexterity saves, nearly as good AC as a heavy but without stealth disadvantage.

Yet the Shove option is always an Athletics check, which is made by STR.
And since...
a) You can easily compensate a lower ability score through proficiency, and even more in player's case by a single level of Rogue to put Expertise in it,
b) Since yourself can choose DEX when defending against a Grapple/Shove...

There is absolutely no good reason to use ASI on STR bumps unless both considerations hereunder are true...
1) You plan on actually reaching 20th level with this character (which means losing even a single level for multiclass is a very tough choice).
2) You plan on actually using the Shove bonus action + Attack as your bread and butter tactic.
In all other cases, you'd much better spend those ASIs on maximizing DEX, getting a Resilient and other feats.
That actually is optimizing. :=)

So why would he use the lower score for the attack roll, again?

[Corran]

So why would he use the lower score for the attack roll, again?

It could make a difference if he multiclassed barbarian, as the lowest attack bonus (ie strngth) might be compensated by a better average damage (rage bonus, reckless attack). And he could use dex when not raging/recklessly attacking. But this is an edge case, and the only one I can think of. But it could make a difference in such an edge case.

Also, when dominated by enemies and you have to attack one of your allies, I believe it is within RAW (though very meta) to use the lowest of your str/dex if wielding a finesse weapon, to avoid hurting your allies. Though I could be wrong about how RAW this is (and I am too bored to look up for the rules of dominate spells).

[Arkhios]

So why would he use the lower score for the attack roll, again?

Unless your DM allows you to make an Athletics check with Dexterity every time you use Shove, you're bound by RAW to use Strength. Even if you would normally attack with Dexterity.

And, let's assume he multiclasses into barbarian, and would continue making rapier attacks with Dexterity, he wouldn't get rage's bonus to damage rolls, for example. Rage requires Strength based melee attacks.
As Corran said, in that case, using the lower of your two ability scores (strength) would be more reasonable.

[SharkForce]

Unless your DM allows you to make an Athletics check with Dexterity every time you use Shove, you're bound by RAW to use Strength. Even if you would normally attack with Dexterity.

And, let's assume he multiclasses into barbarian, and would continue making rapier attacks with Dexterity, he wouldn't get rage's bonus to damage rolls, for example. Rage requires Strength based melee attacks.
As Corran said, in that case, using the lower of your two ability scores (strength) would be more reasonable.

that isn't an attack roll, and it has absolutely nothing to do with whether a weapon is finesse or not. in fact, it isn't even using the rapier in any way.

the barbarian example was actually a legitimate reason though, if for some reason you built your babarian with higher dex than strength.

in any event, i'd say buff your dex, and dip rogue at some point. i don't care if you *are* going to reach level 20, fighter doesn't offer nearly enough past level 11 for even a strength-based fighter... for a dex-based fighter, 9 levels of rogue not only offers you superior damage to 9 more levels of fighter (after level 11 in fighter has been reached), it also offers a lot more of just about everything else you could possibly want. taking fighter levels beyond level 11 aren't very good, with the exception of 17 and 20 (and 18 for champions). and those 2 (or three) levels simply aren't good enough to make up for those 7 (or 6) other mediocre levels.

2 levels of rogue can easily give you a lot of value. and, as i said, once you've gotten those first 11 fighter levels, i'd just go the rest of the way in something else (almost anything else, really, but for a dex fighter rogue makes tons of sense) and keep on calling yourself a fighter if a fighter is what you want to be (because rogue as "agile fighter" fits perfectly fine without even refluffing anything, as long as your rogue archetype doesn't do something your fighter would never do).