So which is best? I know fighter can get 4 stars in a weapon but the others can't, does that have a big effect? I know both Rangers and Paladins get priest spells at a certain level, and Paladins start with lay on hands (useful at low levels) detect evil (pretty useless from what I can make out) and protection from evil (pretty good) and rangers have charm animal (pretty useless) they can all get 18/?? for strength...so what are the advantages of each and which would you go for and why?

thanks!

The benefits of being able to get more than 2 points of proficiency in a weapon are reduced in Baldurs Gate 2, so I wouldn't worry about it. I don't think a fighter would ever be worth it, at least not without a dual/multiclass. So I really don't have much more to say there. Rangers are good, and their favoured enemy can be helpful if you make a good choice (helps to know what enemies you most likely will have trouble against). In Baldurs Gate 2 it all of its kits are useful and serve different purposes (archer, stalker, beast master). Charm animal is pretty useless, especially once you get it for a spell. They do get a few useful spells that they share with druids, and if you dual class a ranger into a cleric you will get both cleric and druid spells. Paladin's are also quite powerful, particularly in BG2. I prefer the inquisitor for their dispel magic, but undead hunter and cavalier are both solid classes as well. I guess it really depends on what you are looking for in a melee character.

In Baldur's Gate those classes reach only level 8, so only rangers would get 1 level 1 spells which won't help much.
The ranger's stealth ability can be very useful, especially if you play solo.
The paladin's lay hands can heal more HP than any potion at high level and the saving throw bonus helps surviving.

For normal party games I prefer the fighter, mastery in 2 weapons is better than specialization in 3, the +2 to hit and +1 to damage do make a difference and you can choose dwarf for +5 in the important saving throws.

If we're talking about BG1, it doesn't really matter... fighter will be the best killer, paladin will have a bit of healing ability, and the ranger will be able to hide in shadows without backstab. Pretty equal. The low level cleric spells that paladins and rangers get COULD make the difference, but they really don't, since it's a pain casting the buffs before a battle and it really isn't necessary anyway.

In terms of power, what it comes down to is the kits. For BG2. The ranger kits are pretty dull in my opinion, aside from the archer maybe.

Fighter has the berserker kit with the special ability that makes the fighter immune to just about everything at the cost of not being able to specialize in ranged weapons. Very powerful.

The paladin has the anti-mage kit inquisitor, with an almost overpowered level dispel magic special ability. Almost as powerful, and definitely useful. However he lacks killing power and his special ability is only useful against magic using enemies. It will also dispel beneficial effects from party members.

In conclusion, if I had to choose of all the fighter/ranger/paladin kits I'd pick the fighter kit berserker.

I apologize if this post seems incoherent, I am too tired to correct possible mistakes right now.

If we are talking BG1, I don't suppose it matters too much. All three get the 18/**, all get good HP and all can wear plate. Probably fighter, for the extra proficiency. You have a large variety of NPC's that can fill whatever roles your party needs, so you can play as whatever.

If we are talking BG2 and ToB, things get more complicated. If it was me, I'd go either Archer or Kensai. Both get +1 to hit and damage every 3 levels, which really adds up. Many find the fact that Kensai fighters can't wear any armor too big a draw back, but I work around it for that damage! Archer rangers can't wear heavier than studded leather, but that's almost a bonus since wearing heavier blocks you from using stealth. They also can't specialize in melee, but why would you want to when you can rain death from a distance?

Berserker fighters are also quite good, they can become temporarily immune to just about everything, which is very useful. They are also a more straightforward fighter than the kensai. And the Inquisitor's dispel magic, true seeing and access to a supremely bad ass paladin only sword makes them very powerful too. Reason I don't opt for them? There are NPC's of both.

I am also fond of the Fighter/thief multiclass. They are about as good at fighting as paladins or rangers, but instead of low level healing and whatnot, they have thief skills. Their improved Thac0 makes backstabbing easier and their improved hit points mean they aren't sitting ducks after leaving shadows. Not to mention the things that become possible in ToB...

If you don't mind dualclassing, probably my favorite of all time is Ranger>Cleric.