Fighter vs Warrior pawn?

[Zeraph]

Currently, my pawn is a warrior. Good knockdown, good tanking. Yet, I noticed the attacks are slow that it sometimes charge it's attack into nothingness.

So I wonder will Fighter pawns be more reliable. What do you think of both vocations in terms of damage, knockdown and their ability to take aggro (without getting overwhelmed)?

p.s. my party don't have a mage, the magick archer arisen is the only healing source in addition to consumables.

[XenoEvil]

Fighter pawns are better than warrior pawns in pretty much every way.

[Larco]

Thief. Skullsplitter, Implicate, Plunder, and maybe formless feint or something for the fourth. Much better damage, better survivability via dodge /ff and pretty good knockdown due to the number of attacks they make. Stick the agro aug and a couple of aggro rings on them and theyll hold agro like a champ. Plus you get free ♥♥♥♥. edit - Also consider giving them frosted blades; with your ice attack youll freeze alot of mobs.

If I had to choose warrior vs fighter though, like Xeno says, Id say fighter. Warriors can do some big hits but they whiff too much and they're annoyingly bad at clearing all the trash you encounter on the roads compared to other vocations. The main things Id say is to avoid the actual agro generating abilities (shield bash etc) and the launch pad like ones. Just tell them to charge in.

[gerechterzorn]

Warrior clunky and slow, so fighter.

[rane]

Fighter is an aggro tank, not a DPS. Warrior provides value by not only dealing more damage, but also leaving the enemy more vulnerable to your party's attacks.