PDA

View Full Version : Martial Characters, a discussion



Pages : [1] 2

Fortinbras
2009-02-25, 10:48 AM
This thread is intened for discussing builds for martial characters (paladins, fighters, samurai, rangers, barbarians, swashbucklers, and hexblades.) To prevent some of the problems that plauged the last such thread I am going to say that compairing fighters and casters is not allowed. Casters may be more powerful but guess what? Some people still like to play warriors and this thread is for them. Debates about various builds are welcome but please keep them civil. This thread is mainly about optimizing but other ideas about fun warrior characters are welcome too. I think that's about it for rules so let the discussion begin!

Advocate
2009-02-25, 10:53 AM
Obvious question. Does it have to be limited to the ineffective martial characters, or does this topic also include Crusaders, Duskblades, Psychic Warriors, Swordsages, and Warblades? How about the obligatory power dip builds, and gishes? Or how about *insert any other effective martial character I might have missed*?

BRC
2009-02-25, 11:11 AM
Obvious question. Does it have to be limited to the ineffective martial characters, or does this topic also include Crusaders, Duskblades, Psychic Warriors, Swordsages, and Warblades? How about the obligatory power dip builds, and gishes? Or how about *insert any other effective martial character I might have missed*?
Question, Where does the idea come from that Core martial characters are ineffective. I have never seen this, even with high and epic level campaigns (Albeit, without Epic Spellcasting). Consistently in my groups Barbarians, Fighters, Rangers ect have done very well and held their own in combat. Sure, our spellcasters tend not to be Batman, but it's not like they play like idiots.
Really, somebody fill me in, why is the impression given that Melee classes suck in 3.5.
It should be noted that our group uses the 3.0 power attack rule ( it's always a 1 to 1 trade, two-handers don't give you a 2 to 1 trade), and we don't even power attack much.

Swooper
2009-02-25, 11:15 AM
Might want to add a [D&D 3.5]-tag to the topic (edit the first post to change).

Sstoopidtallkid
2009-02-25, 11:29 AM
Question, Where does the idea come from that Core martial characters are ineffective. I have never seen this, even with high and epic level campaigns (Albeit, without Epic Spellcasting). Consistently in my groups Barbarians, Fighters, Rangers ect have done very well and held their own in combat. Sure, our spellcasters tend not to be Batman, but it's not like they play like idiots.
Really, somebody fill me in, why is the impression given that Melee classes suck in 3.5.
It should be noted that our group uses the 3.0 power attack rule ( it's always a 1 to 1 trade, two-handers don't give you a 2 to 1 trade), and we don't even power attack much.Options, self-sufficiency, and raw power.

A well-built Fighter has 2 things he can do. Maybe 3, at high levels. Any situation in which his schticks don't work, he doesn't work. And it is really easy to block the schticks. Dungeoncrashers are useless outside. AoO monsters are useless against agile opponents. Chargers need a straight line and sure footing. Grapplers and Trippers are useless against anything larger than them, which ends up being half the MM. It's really easy to invalidate a melee character.

A well-built Fighter is still dependant on buffs from other characters. I'm not just talking about Haste, either. I'm talking about Fly so that you don't get ignored by the Dragon sitting 20' up and laughing. See Invisible so that the Pixies don't swarm you. All the things that Casters can do themselves, you need them to do for you, but they don't need anything from you. Some of these things can be compensated for by items, but that gets expensive and runs you out of cash for the sword you need to compensate for issue #3.

Look at the MM. Look at the monsters at each level. Then consider how a Fighter could handle one. Most of the time, he simply can't. The Monster has better BAB, HD, and Damage on a full-attack. It has defenses the Fighter can't penetrate, and buffs that the Fighter can't get. It's Stats are higher, and it's may even have spellcasting. The Fighter can't even fight.

Now, there are exceptions. A PsyWar can grapple the Terrasque if he wants to, a Duskblade blows stuff up from levels 3-10, and ToB specializes in getting past defenses. But Standard Barb, Fighter, or Ranger? They get owned by intelligent enemies.

Advocate
2009-02-25, 11:36 AM
Question, Where does the idea come from that Core martial characters are ineffective. I have never seen this, even with high and epic level campaigns (Albeit, without Epic Spellcasting). Consistently in my groups Barbarians, Fighters, Rangers ect have done very well and held their own in combat. Sure, our spellcasters tend not to be Batman, but it's not like they play like idiots.
Really, somebody fill me in, why is the impression given that Melee classes suck in 3.5.
It should be noted that our group uses the 3.0 power attack rule ( it's always a 1 to 1 trade, two-handers don't give you a 2 to 1 trade), and we don't even power attack much.

Referring to classes specifically implies single classed members of that type. Every single one of the core martial classes is extremely front loaded, such that you get at least 80% of the reason to take them in the first two levels. Such are extremely ineffective, to the point of flat out uselessness. Especially when you also nerf them, via 3.0 Power Attack.

Let's see...

Barbarian 1 gives Rage, and Fast Movement (which can be traded for Pounce). The next 19 levels give almost nothing, spread out very thin.

Fighter 1 gives a feat. Fighter 2, and every even level after also gets a feat. Except that most feats are available at low level, so what happens is you're getting the same minor sort of class abilities at level 1 as level 20. Further, since you can take the good feats right off you will do so. Which means not only does the only reason to ever even consider taking the class become rarer after the first two levels, but each 'class feature' becomes weaker, as you are taking progressively lower priority feats. In other words, you're supposed to be improving on a scale that is greater than linear, if not exponential. In reality you are improving on a scale that is less than linear, therefore level appropriate enemies are becoming progressively better than you, and you should stop after two levels.

Monk 1 gives +2 all saves, saves you some cash on a Monk's belt, and gives 1 feat. Monk 2 gives +1 more saves, Evasion, and another feat. The other 18 levels offer nothing of relevance.

Paladin 1 doesn't give much, except for ability to use CLW wands. Paladin 2 however gives Charisma to saves. The rest of the class, especially 6-20 offers one long snoozefest of nothingness.

Ranger 1 doesn't give much, except skills, CLW wands, and maybe Track if you're going into something like Illithid Slayer that requires it. Ranger 2 gives a feat. And... that's about it, unless you're a Swift Hunter.

Now, if you take advantage of this, and power dip around, you might get a character who has a decent one trick, but if that trick is ever negated, the character is negated. And said trick is very easy to counter, such that it is going to happen all the time, by pure accident. Particularly since it doesn't even matter what trick you pick, they're all countered by the same things - enemies getting bigger, with higher Strength scores. This is ignoring the fact most of the things you could do either don't work even if you focus on them, or actually hurt you for focusing on them.

So it sounds like you have some very skewed standards of what qualifies 'doing well'. Not going to bring the casters into it, as they are not the factor. The factor is you scale in a less than linear fashion, thereby making level appropriate enemies progressively better than you, as you are not actually level appropriate.

Edit: Also, thank you STK for covering the points I didn't at the same time.

Darth Stabber
2009-02-25, 11:37 AM
Hate ToB, It says "hey existing melee classes, you won't be needed any more". Besides that, i must say that I prefer playing fighter type guys. There is some elegant about hitting things with metal.
Favorite Classes and PRC's: Fighter, Barbarian, Soulborn, PsiWar, Dread Commando, Totem Rager, and Horizon Walker

Advocate
2009-02-25, 11:43 AM
Hate ToB, It says "hey existing melee classes, you won't be needed any more". Besides that, i must say that I prefer playing fighter type guys. There is some elegant about hitting things with metal.
Favorite Classes and PRC's: Fighter, Barbarian, Soulborn, PsiWar, Dread Commando, Totem Rager, and Horizon Walker

And then the rest of the party turns to Tome of Battle, shrugs, and says 'You're several years late buddy.'

Then the monster swallows the legs poking out of his mouth, belches loudly, and says 'Hey, don't knock my eating habits! They're so easy to catch too!'

The Rogue sighs, and rolls his eyes. 'I lose more trap bait that way.' he says, shaking his head in disappointment.

Sstoopidtallkid
2009-02-25, 11:44 AM
Hate ToB, It says "hey existing melee classes, you won't be needed any more". Besides that, i must say that I prefer playing fighter type guys. There is some elegant about hitting things with metal.That's what ToB does. A Warblade gets Maneuvers such as "Hit things really hard", "Hit things really hard around armor", and "Hit 2 enemies really hard". Have you ever played one, because there's a reason ToB is the most popular splatbook on these boards.

BRC
2009-02-25, 11:46 AM
Options, self-sufficiency, and raw power.

A well-built Fighter has 2 things he can do. Maybe 3, at high levels. Any situation in which his schticks don't work, he doesn't work. And it is really easy to block the schticks. Dungeoncrashers are useless outside. AoO monsters are useless against agile opponents. Chargers need a straight line and sure footing. Grapplers and Trippers are useless against anything larger than them, which ends up being half the MM. It's really easy to invalidate a melee character.

A well-built Fighter is still dependant on buffs from other characters. I'm not just talking about Haste, either. I'm talking about Fly so that you don't get ignored by the Dragon sitting 20' up and laughing. See Invisible so that the Pixies don't swarm you. All the things that Casters can do themselves, you need them to do for you, but they don't need anything from you. Some of these things can be compensated for by items, but that gets expensive and runs you out of cash for the sword you need to compensate for issue #3.

Look at the MM. Look at the monsters at each level. Then consider how a Fighter could handle one. Most of the time, he simply can't. The Monster has better BAB, HD, and Damage on a full-attack. It has defenses the Fighter can't penetrate, and buffs that the Fighter can't get. It's Stats are higher, and it's may even have spellcasting. The Fighter can't even fight.

Now, there are exceptions. A PsyWar can grapple the Terrasque if he wants to, a Duskblade blows stuff up from levels 3-10, and ToB specializes in getting past defenses. But Standard Barb, Fighter, or Ranger? They get owned by intelligent enemies.
Odd, I just havn't noticed that. Maybe my DM has become so good at making sure fighters get to shine that I haven't noticed it. Also, our group is larger than most (We average about seven people per session), so we usually have multiple martial types laying on the hurt, which may be influencing things. Throw in the fact that the campagin I was DMing was almost all humanoid opponents with class levels rather than things from the MM's.


Edit: I admit, considering the general consensus is against my personal experience, that my experience is likely the statistical outlier. Personally, I don't mind it, and find this way more fun than Batman dominating everything.

Sstoopidtallkid
2009-02-25, 11:54 AM
Throw in the fact that the campagin I was DMing was almost all humanoid opponents with class levels rather than things from the MM's.Yeah, Humanoids are the eaasiest opponents for Fighters, especially since you've said you don't face many Batmen. Humanoids are High-wealth(meaning the Fighter can afford more items to cover deficiencies), low size(meaning Tripping/Grappling is still worth a darn), and by their nature only have access to stuff the Fighter does. CoDzilla or PsyWar is still better, but if the casters and the opponents aren't optimized, the Fighter will be at least less deficient.

Kesnit
2009-02-25, 12:15 PM
Edit: I admit, considering the general consensus is against my personal experience, that my experience is likely the statistical outlier. Personally, I don't mind it, and find this way more fun than Batman dominating everything.

You aren't a statistical outlier. Even those who sit around and optimize admit that their overoptimized characters would frequently be banned by DM's.

BRC
2009-02-25, 12:17 PM
Yeah, Humanoids are the eaasiest opponents for Fighters, especially since you've said you don't face many Batmen. Humanoids are High-wealth(meaning the Fighter can afford more items to cover deficiencies), low size(meaning Tripping/Grappling is still worth a darn), and by their nature only have access to stuff the Fighter does. CoDzilla or PsyWar is still better, but if the casters and the opponents aren't optimized, the Fighter will be at least less deficient.
Yeah, the campaign in question was an urban one, so the PC's were mostly fighting enemies who had to follow the same rules they did. Also, most of the time they didn't have a wizard. Alot of people don't show up for every (or even most sessions), but for most adventures they had a Bard, a Cleric (not CoDzilla), a Beguiler, a Ranger, and a Psychic Warrior/Guitar Hero (Pyrokineticist who uses Sonic damage. Primary weapon was a guitar. Our group likes style). The group learned to work fairly well together in a way that wouldn't have worked with a Batman wizard. The Casters would do Crowd Control and buffing while leaving the damage dealing to the Martial types (often boosted with Haste). That's the type of group that allows Martial types to shine. Casters who stick to Blasting and Support work fine with martial types(When the wizard did show up, he basically stuck to fireballs). It's when Casters decide to go Batman that Melee types start becoming useless.
So it's probably not that my group's melee types were better, but that our casters were worse. The end result was that everybody had more fun, and I'm fine with that.

Hmm, I have an urge to write a guide called "Being The Joker, a guide to DMing against Batman", even though I have no experience in the matter...But I'm getting off topic.

Zaq
2009-02-25, 12:20 PM
Advocate started on this, but basically, almost all of the full BAB classes get their class features way, way too slowly. In the design phase, WotC seriously over-valued what full BAB really means, and compensated by giving full-BABers fewer (and worse) class features. The problem is twofold... first, AB (if not BAB) is really, really easy to increase. There are about four hundred ways to get a better attack bonus. From in-combat tricks like charging and flanking, to feats (ranging from the trivial, like Weapon Focus, to the decent), to spells (and powers, mysteries, soulmelds, maneuvers, etc.), to items, magical and otherwise... you're expected to be able to add a ton to your attack bonus if that's your thing. That makes full-BAB classes a lot less special. They get the BAB, sure, but what else? Compared to what most other classes get, precious little, and those other classes usually have other ways of increasing their to-hit chances.

Second, here's the dirty little secret about BAB... it's useless on its own. Really. You need to put something behind it. At low levels (say, 1-3) weapon damage and strength are enough. If you're a Barbarian or have otherwise enormous strength, that might get you to level 5 or 6, though without other tricks your damage will really noticeably lag by then. I don't care if you do have 16+ BAB and can make four swings a round with nothing else, if all you have to put behind that is, say, a Greataxe with 28 STR or so (I just made that number up, but if that's all your damage, it's pitiful at level 16), you simply won't measure up. That's 1d12 + 9 per swing, at four swings, 4d12+36. That's great damage at level 7 or 8, and pathetic at level 16, when you get four swings. (Yes, this is a horrifically unoptimized example. It's meant to be. The point is that BAB ALONE does jack.) This is, of course, why Power Attack is such a staple... it lets you turn BAB into damage (and, in the right builds, at a pretty respectable rate), then rely on your non-base AB to actually hit and hurt things. The problem, of course, is that this is all that most (not all, but depressingly many) full-BAB characters can do to increase their damage. This leads to characters that feel really similar (never a good thing) and that are easily shut down (Can't charge and get your PA multiplier up? Sucks to be you!).

Compare this to the full-BAB classes that people respect. Crusader, Warblade, Duskblade. It's been said that these three classes are the updated versions of paladins, fighters, and hexblades, respectively. See what they have in common? They have something OTHER than their BAB to make them interesting. A duskblade's spells can't compare to those of a sorcerer or even a bard, but they still give him more options than a ranger or a swashbuckler. Maneuvers, likewise, give martial characters more options, which they desperately need. Thematically, it's the same thing... "I hit him, hard!" But there's more to it than just "I full attack, Power Attacking for X." Also, none of those classes have dead levels. They get something interesting at every level, more than just another BAB and maybe another point to their saves. Even if it's not a new class feature, they get another maneuver, or another spell, or something. A 5% better chance to hit something just doesn't measure up to a new spell to bend reality over and make it call you daddy (any full caster), or getting more uses out of your primary class feature (bard, ninja, etc.), or even just another die of damage (rogue, warlock, scout, etc.). But most full BAB classes have a depressingly large number of levels in which WotC said "whaddaya complaining about? You got another BAB, right? Here, look, tell you what, in three levels you can get another use per day out of a class feature you've had basically since square one, but can only use a depressingly small number of times per day. How's that sound?" (What that class feature is varies, but between rages, smites, hexblade's curses, and so on, the pattern is clear.) Or, perhaps, you won't get another use out of a class feature, you'll get an insultingly tiny bonus to it! (Barbarian DR, swashbuckler Dodge or Grace, everything the samurai gets, etc.) Meanwhile, your partymates are getting actual new and useful abilities, or non-trivial increases to their existing ones, and you're left consoling yourself with "well, at least I have full BAB." (This is even worse on martial characters without full BAB, namely the monk and the soulknife... which is why those classes are derided the way they are.)

This is really only a problem because it's so widespread... but think about how often, how reliably this happens to full-BABers. It's clear that WotC believed that full BAB was its own reward, and that martial characters didn't really need any other class features to go with it. This makes martial characters tend to be 1) weaker than their more fully fleshed-out counterparts and 2) depressingly similar, especially at higher levels.

Have you ever looked at the homebrew forums? A really large number of people looked at ToB and said, "hey, maneuvers make things interesting. Why don't we give them to the other boring martial classes to spice them up?" You'll see a lot of "fixed" classes that give maneuver progression to rangers, or hexblades, or even fighters, to make them less homogeneous and more interesting. It's not the only solution, of course, but the fact that it's so common should indicate something. I take that something to be the fact that people want their characters to have options beyond "how much should I Power Attack for?"

It's possible to play a martial character in a friendly group who will work with you and not overshadow you... but once they decide to ramp up the optimization, a RAW fighter, or ranger, or paladin, or swashbuckler, or whatever will almost never be able to catch up, and that's depressing.

Yukitsu
2009-02-25, 12:36 PM
There are three viable martial builds, and they are the same completely regardless of which class you take, and made stronger by mixing and matching.

The first and most common is a charge build. It's got moderate to high feat and gear dependance, and is fairly easy to negate. Rely on your party, or your own tactical thinking to get into position to charge, and when you do so, that's game set match. Unless you roll a 1 to hit or something. Typical uber charge builds are paladins with charging smite, with 2 fighter levels for the feats. It's a viable one because it's one of the few that has a mount durable enough to survive, well, anything. Same goes with the ranger and his animal companion, but he's not the one you want to turn to for this role. Fighters, as always, are good for a pair of levels, or perhaps 4 if you want to hit this really early, but don't bring anything to the table after the crucial feats are accounted for. Barbarians are the best on foot uber chargers, taking pounce and whirling rage for umpteen attacks while charging. All uber chargers are completely gimped by small bits of terrain in there path, or a small cat standing in the square in front of your target.

Th next viable build is a proper lockdown character. Incredibly feat intensive, but not all that money intensive. People say spiked chain, but that's a bit of a waste in my opinion, as a guisarme and spiked armour is cheaper. Typically, you'll be using stand still and an enlarge to insure that anyone that goes near you, or whom you go near get locked down. You can completely block movement in a 20 foot radius around you, which is 25 feet around a point. Monk can be applied to this build, as they can take decisive strike for the extra ability to prevent movement, but this would require a different reach weapon. Barbs add a bit to this, but aren't great. Paladins aren't good at this at all. Rangers can make a funny build that allows them to duel wield spiked chains while doing this. This isn't effective, I'm just pointing it out because it's neat. Note that while fighter is the base for this, either multiclass out or PRC out as soon as you've got what you need. It makes the foundation, other classes make it better. This class of martial warrior is the hardest to gimp over, but is the least capable of finishing anything off on their own.

The last viable martial option is archery. This, like charging, is incredibly easy to gimp over, but it doesn't require many feats, just a ton of money. Rangers and barbarians make good archers, partly because it's not too feat intensive, and largely because archery builds need to start at further ranges, which spot/listen help with. Since it's a money based build, expect the warrior NPC archer to perform comparably if given your gear, and expect to be near helpless without.

Telonius
2009-02-25, 12:41 PM
They get owned by intelligent enemies.

Here is where I think some of the difficulties come in. Let's take just the SRD monsters, CR 10.

Animated Object - INT null.
Brass Dragon - INT 14
Couatl - INT 17
Cryohydra - INT 2
Bebelith - INT 11
Formian Myrmarch - INT 16
Fire Giant - INT 10
Clay Golem - INT null.
Hydra - INT 2
Monstrous Scorpion - INT null.
Guardian Naga - INT 16
Pyrohydra - INT 2
Rakshasa - INT 13
Red Dragon - INT 14
Noble Salamander - INT 16
Silver Dragon - INT 18
White Dragon - INT 10

Of the seventeen monsters at that CR:
6 have INT of 2 or less.
3 have INT of 10 or 11.
3 have INT of 13 or 14
5 have INT of 16+

So a full 35% of the enemies he's likely to be facing are dumb as a box of rocks. Another 17.5% are either on par with the martial character, or aren't as smart if the character has the 13 INT necessary for Combat Expertise (which wouldn't be a totally unreasonable thing to have). Another 17.5% on top of that are barely smarter than the martial character (or are about equal, if Combat Expertise). So about 70% of the enemies won't be able to fight all that much more intelligently than the martial character does.

So yes, the martial characters do get owned by intelligent enemies, no arguments there. But those enemies might be a minority of what they'll be fighting.

Kaiyanwang
2009-02-25, 12:45 PM
ToB:


Me (or my gaming group) didn't need ToB because meleers and casters get along well .

Even if I'm not a ToB fan, this is not an attack to the splatbook, becasue if it resulted as a good solution for a lot of gaming groups, must be a good splatbook.


BTW, even if I explained well why I don't like so much ToB, I want to give it another try, and maybeone of these days i will aks something in a thread to those playgrounders more expert :smallsmile: ).



Now, considering well established that what Stoopidtallkids said is true (in short, if I'm right, at high levels you MUST rely on spellcaster for most challenges), but since I'm one of those melodramatic fools thinking that's nothing wrong in it, I propose an orc fighter, based on a feat from Champions of Ruin that inspired me: Dire Flail Smash.

- If you have suggestions, good, so I'll throw it to my players :smallbiggrin:

- Feel free to open flame throwers, but remember that since maybe I don't play like you play, I could result immune to fire.



Guzzbakk Whazzdamatta. Orc Fighter.

1° Power Attack
1° Two Weapon Fighting
2° Weapon Focus: Dire Flail
3° Sunder
4° Dire Fail Smash (If you hit with bot end of DF, chance to daze)
6° Improved Bull Rush
6° Cleave
8° Leap Attack (PA boost on charge)
9° Combat Brute (tactical)
10° Shock Trooper (tactical)
12° Improved Critical (Dire Flail)
12° Improved Two Weapon Fighting
14° Staggering Critical (crits slow no save)
15° Combat Reflexes
16° Staggering Blow (bludeoning weapons stuns on critical)
18° Robilar's Gambit
18° Two Weapon Pounce
20° Double Hit

Notice that I use weapon groups from UA (Basic, Exotic, Double Exotic, Bows).

A way to insert Dungeoncrasher? Some flaw ideas? Some feat to take before/after? Skill tricks?

Stats at 20: 24,17,14,10,8,6. He's an orc!



Edit: disambigua.

Sstoopidtallkid
2009-02-25, 12:50 PM
So a full 35% of the enemies he's likely to be facing are dumb as a box of rocks. Another 17.5% are either on par with the martial character, or aren't as smart if the character has the 13 INT necessary for Combat Expertise (which wouldn't be a totally unreasonable thing to have). Another 17.5% on top of that are barely smarter than the martial character (or are about equal, if Combat Expertise). So about 70% of the enemies won't be able to fight all that much more intelligently than the martial character does.

So yes, the martial characters do get owned by intelligent enemies, no arguments there. But those enemies might be a minority of what they'll be fighting.I was talking about "played intelligently". Not even beyond their capabilities, just using tactics that wouldn't embarass a pack of wolves(int 2). Target the biggest threat, flank, if the enemy is hard to hit target someone squishy, avoid walls if the enemy likes bouncing you off of them, that sort of thing. Basic stuff that if done, invalidates the Fighter completely.

And not even that, necessarily. Flying enemies who sit back and drop rocks render the Fighter useless at low-mid levels. Any flier should have "avoid the reach of ground targets" as basic tactics, but many of them fight the Fighter on his own terms because to do otherwise makes the meatcan useless.

Keld Denar
2009-02-25, 12:51 PM
Advocate touched on most of my points. Casters get versitility from spells, non-casters get multiclassing. This kinda sucks as the core rules screw multiclassers (xp penalties), as well as standard fearmongering against rampant multiclassing (I suggested a build to a guy, a melee build, and he said "my DM will never let me justify that, it has 3 base classes and 4 prestige classes in 20 levels!"). The problem is, non-casters almost always HAVE to multiclass to get things they need to survive. At higher levels, you NEED some kind of protection against [Mind Affecting]. The easiest ways to get it are 5 levels in Occult Slayer, 4 levels in (Illithid) Slayer, or 3 levels in Holy Liberator (limited version). Otherwise you have a crutch of depending on a caster to provide this for you. You should have some form of reach, or some form of becoming larger so you can defeat the reach of opponents. Easiest way is PsyWar expansion. You should have some form of flight. This usually relies on race (Raptoran or Dragonborn or both) or dependance on costly magical items. You also need personal Haste (past about level 10, who is gonna Haste you? Haste yourself), Freedom of Movement, short range teleportation, some method of seeing or revealing invisible enemies, a method of recovering your wounds between battles, Pounce, and a long list of other sundry things that you just can't get on your own.

The problem with melee is that you need so much to not be negated by 2/3 things in the Monster Manual past level 10 or so. Things you just don't get in Fighter20 or Ranger20 or Paladin20.

Now, you can make up for this by being part caster. Standard wizard gish builds tend to do alright at melee. Why? Because they bring spells to the table that help them do their job. They have access to flight, to Mind Blank, to +save bonuses, to spells that allow them to hit easier (Wraithstrike), to spells that help their defenses (Greater Blink/Greater Mirror Image), and more. And they still fight just as good as a Fighter20, except better. Heck, even semi-casters like Duskblade and Suel Arcanamach are better at it than other melee because they have some spells to keep them from being crippled at mid-high levels. Same with ToB classes. They generally get methods of protecting themselves or doing damage to protected enemies or having Pounce or short range teleportation or whatnot that lessens their reliance on casters and magic items.

Advocate
2009-02-25, 01:05 PM
Long post is LONG. Again.


Yeah, Humanoids are the easiest opponents for Fighters everyone, especially since you've said you don't face many Batmen. Humanoids are High-wealth(meaning the Fighter can afford more items to cover deficiencies), low size(meaning Tripping/Grappling is still worth a darn), and by their nature only have access to stuff the Fighter does. CoDzilla or PsyWar is still better, but if the casters and the opponents aren't optimized, the Fighter will be at least less deficient.

I fixed it for you. Opponents don't get any easier than humanoid beatsticks, who a PC Fighter would probably actually have the advantage against because Money is Power. Especially when discussing beatsticks. And PCs have more wealth, and thus more power than NPCs.


You aren't a statistical outlier. Even those who sit around and optimize admit that their overoptimized characters would frequently be banned by DM's.

Not necessarily. If they're talking about stuff like Wish loops, Persisting 20 spells, and so forth... yeah, probably banned. If it's just practical optimization, like making your spells count as a caster, or being one of the martial characters I mentioned in my first post? Not if he knows what he's doing. And if he doesn't know what he's doing, all he's doing is exasperating the problem by making martial characters even weaker.


Yeah, the campaign in question was an urban one, so the PC's were mostly fighting enemies who had to follow the same rules they did. Also, most of the time they didn't have a wizard. Alot of people don't show up for every (or even most sessions), but for most adventures they had a Bard, a Cleric (not CoDzilla), a Beguiler, a Ranger, and a Psychic Warrior/Guitar Hero (Pyrokineticist who uses Sonic damage. Primary weapon was a guitar. Our group likes style). The group learned to work fairly well together in a way that wouldn't have worked with a Batman wizard. The Casters would do Crowd Control and buffing while leaving the damage dealing to the Martial types (often boosted with Haste). That's the type of group that allows Martial types to shine. Casters who stick to Blasting and Support work fine with martial types(When the wizard did show up, he basically stuck to fireballs). It's when Casters decide to go Batman that Melee types start becoming useless.

You do realize that the above paragraph contradicts itself blatantly several times right? You start by saying 'NPCs follow the same rules' even though they don't, as they have far lower equipment values. Then the contradictions start bouncing, as you rapidly switch from claiming the way the group operated wouldn't work with a Batman, to claiming the group's casters do exactly the same thing a Batman would have been doing so as to be functionally Batmen, to claiming Batman allows martial types to 'shine'. If 'shine' can be defined as 'serve as camp follower, where you go around slitting the throats of crippled opponents on the battlefield' I suppose you're right. You then contradict yourself again by claiming that blasting casters work well with martial types... when all that means is the enemies are unhindered, and tear the martial guy apart in the stat contest. Support is ambiguous, and could just as easily be referring to more Batman tactics so that isn't necessarily another contradiction. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt on that one. Then you switch back to saying Batman makes martial types not work.

So which is it? Are martial characters 'shining' when they are being slaughtered by the non crippled enemies, or are they 'shining' when they slit the throats of opponents that are effectively dead already? It's one or the other. Either Batman makes the Fighter a mook, or the enemies make the Fighter a mook. Choose one.


So it's probably not that my group's melee types were better, but that our casters were worse. The end result was that everybody had more fun, and I'm fine with that.

Hmm, I have an urge to write a guide called "Being The Joker, a guide to DMing against Batman", even though I have no experience in the matter...But I'm getting off topic.

Which means everyone is weak. Except the baseline isn't the guy next to you, it's the guy across from you on the other team.

Also, don't do that. Especially if, as you yourself admit you have no idea what you would be talking about. I suppose if you are intentionally creating a joke guide, like that Monk guide around here somewhere then that is acceptable. But if it's meant to be serious, just don't.


*regarding BAB being overvalued and attack bonus being boostable easily, paraphrased for brevity*

Indeed. Really, 3/4th BAB is the way to go. Even ignoring everything else, that oh so special fourth attack is at... -15. It's D&D's take on the Hail Mary, in that it's really only suitable for use when you're desperate and hoping for a long shot success. Ignoring the fourth attack, the only difference between BAB 11 and BAB 20 is +9 to hit. Which is significant, granted, but quite surmountable. The difference between BAB 15 and BAB 16 is of course far more trivial. Now consider the 3/4th BAB classes that care about hitting things can easily circumvent the penalty for the most part...

Bards don't care about melee.

Clerics and Druids are Clerics and Druids.

Rogues are using touch attacks, possibly with Blink.

I say 'for the most part' because of Monks and their Flurry of Misses. However the issue with Monks isn't just the 3/4th BAB. It's the 3/4th BAB, low attack stat, and expensive or nonexistent enhancement bonus. So in reality, it's more like trying to make a Wizard of the non gish variety melee and not cast spells even for support. If they could get enhancement and relevant damage, and had some more boosts on top of that they would be fine.

Or to summarize the entire issue in one sentence: Cleric vs Paladin, alternately Druid vs Ranger. Excellent illustrations of botching the issue right there.


*regarding BAB alone being useless, and PA being required to back it up*

Indeed again. Also the other part of the power dipping reason. Not only do you need to do it to stay relevant against level appropriate enemies, but they're all about the same anyways, so mixing and matching doesn't even create a fluff issue.


*regarding full BAB classes people respect, dead levels, and real class features*

Personally I'd call the Duskblade an update to gishes in general, so you can play one 1-20. It could certainly be taken as a Hexblade update, but Hexblades actually do some unique things with dips that Duskblades do not. Crusaders do replace Paladins and Warblades do replace Fighters though.

Otherwise I agree.


This is really only a problem because it's so widespread... but think about how often, how reliably this happens to full-BABers. It's clear that WotC believed that full BAB was its own reward, and that martial characters didn't really need any other class features to go with it. This makes martial characters tend to be 1) weaker than their more fully fleshed-out counterparts and 2) depressingly similar, especially at higher levels.

Also, Divine Power. Because WotC felt the need to rub it in.

[quuote]It's possible to play a martial character in a friendly group who will work with you and not overshadow you... but once they decide to ramp up the optimization, a RAW fighter, or ranger, or paladin, or swashbuckler, or whatever will almost never be able to catch up, and that's depressing.[/QUOTE]

Working with you I can see. Overshadowing you? You aren't going to avoid that, unless they have at least as many problems as you do, which means a TPK is imminent. It isn't a matter of the PCs cranking it up, though they certainly can. It's a matter of Can't Catch up just comparing you to the enemies.

About half a dozen posts came up while doing this. I'll just make a new post to cover everyone.

ShneekeyTheLost
2009-02-25, 01:08 PM
Okay, here's where there is a fairly major distinction I would like to make:

A Fighter cannot go toe-to-toe in an arena against a Batman Wizard and Win...

However, unless you plan on doing nothing but arena battles, that doesn't say much about the playability of a melee class.

Personally, I think that any Batman Wizard NEEDS a good beatstick, because so few of Batman Wizard's tricks are actually lethal, merely crippling and debilitating. Most of them depend on having someone else wading in and finishing everything off.

It's one of those "The synergy is massively more powerful than the two separately" situations.

Take, for example, a level 6 party, facing six big nasty but dumb critters. The Wizard casts slow on them, crippling their ability to hurt anyone. The Fighter/Barbarian wades in, with Rage going, and starts carving them up.

They both profit. The Wizard would still get eaten by those six big nasty but dumb critters, even slowed. He would likely run out of damage spells before they go down, and if they aren't humanoid, he doesn't really have any options for making them take each other out. Likewise, the Fighter probably would not be able to take all six of them on simultaneously, or at least would get hurt very badly trying to win. However, as they are slowed, they can only make one attack at him, OR move. If he keeps dancing around, or if he has some tripping ability, he can pretty much negate their ability to hurt him, and take them all out.

So the question isn't "Who is more powerful, casters or tanks", it SHOULD be "How can Casters and their Meatshields work together to take things out that neither one of them alone could".

Having said that, I do prefer the Spiked Chain Gatling Tripper/Ubercharge build. Because the spiked chain is a two-handed weapon, that lets you trip with it, this weapon works well for a nice blend of the two archetypes.

Sstoopidtallkid
2009-02-25, 01:15 PM
Personally, I think that any Batman Wizard NEEDS a good beatstick, because so few of Batman Wizard's tricks are actually lethal, merely crippling and debilitating. Most of them depend on having someone else wading in and finishing everything off.

It's one of those "The synergy is massively more powerful than the two separately" situations.

Take, for example, a level 6 party, facing six big nasty but dumb critters. The Wizard casts slow on them, crippling their ability to hurt anyone. The Fighter/Barbarian wades in, with Rage going, and starts carving them up.
So the question isn't "Who is more powerful, casters or tanks", it SHOULD be "How can Casters and their Meatshields work together to take things out that neither one of them alone could". Fighters and Wizards are Apples and Oranges. It's more accurate to compare Fighters, Barbarians, Rangers, and the other no-trick melee classes to Clerics, Druids, ToBers, Gishes, and the PsyWar. The Wizard needs someone to hit stuff for him, but one of the 2nd class requires a lot less help than one of no-tricks.

Advocate
2009-02-25, 01:33 PM
Yukitsu: Covered the charge part well. A spiked chain is 25 gold, and the polearm and spikes are collectively 59 gold. This disparity increases - drastically once you get into MW weapons, and actual magic weapons. Maybe you meant saving the feat? Because it does do that, however your 'threaten adjacent' is pretty weak, so enemies are still better off just getting inside your reach.

As for the archer... definitely. Massive, specific gear dependencies there. If you have a DM that doesn't realize making the enemies break their own stuff is a stupid move on their part and a douchebag move on his you are so screwed. For starters, you need a Bow of the Wintermoon, which you upgrade repeatedly as needed just so the composite bonus doesn't end up quickly out of date as your Strength improves, which would normally require you to replace the entire bow to fix. Then you get into Seeking, Force, Splitting... Yeah.


*stuff about intelligent enemies*

You are partially missing the point. While 'intelligent enemies' certainly does refer to enemies that possess intelligence, more specifically it refers to those able to use that intelligence. Consider, that the low and non intelligent creatures on that list are going to just move up and attack, because it's the best thing they can do. A few of the smarter ones will do the same thing. Now consider your Fighter, even if he has Int 13 is going to do the same thing, because it's all he can do. So he is not able to actually use his intelligence, because he lacks the tools to do so. He's going to end up doing exactly the same thing as the null Int scorpion, or golem, or whatever.

Now consider that list again. There are quite a few foes on there that are as smart or smarter than this Int 13 Tripper (why else would you take CE?) but, and here is the important part they have far more ability to actually utilize their intelligence. Dragons are dragons. The Rakshasa is a caster. Couatl? Formian? Salamander? Naga? They get the tools too.

You're still stuck in move and attack mode, because it's the only meaningful thing you can do.

Even the ones that are less intelligent still have more tools. Like the Bebelith for example.

To really drive this point home, here is another example, using myself. If I were to express my intelligence in D&D terms, I would have a stat of 16 as that is what IQ 155-164 means. This means I learn incredibly quickly, and then pass on that knowledge to others.

Now, I am in a 20 foot wide room on one side. On the other, some guy is pointing a gun at me. Now, I could try to get the weapon away from him. First though I have to cross 20 feet without getting shot. He's in front of the entrance so I can't run, even if I were fast enough. Unless there is some tool there, that will allow me to defeat this 'encounter' then all the planning in the world isn't going to do any good as I lack the tools to execute my plan. I'm stuck there at gunpoint. I could have an Int of 30, and nothing would change. If I were say... a Wizard, even if I only was a level 1 Wizard then I could have the tools to deal with this, and further those tools would be the direct product of my intellect. Same goes with any other adaptable sort. But without that intelligence is meaningless, as it needs an outlet to be expressed in in order to mean anything.

To Keld: Suel Arcanamechs suck hard. They're like Assassins, except far worse. Someone actually tried to use one in a debate against me, claiming it as a 'caster killer'. That class is about as good at killing casters as the Monk - which is to say, it isn't happening unless there are 'over 9,000' of you, and you bury the caster under your collective dead bodies.


Okay, here's where there is a fairly major distinction I would like to make:

A Fighter cannot go toe-to-toe in an arena against a Batman Wizard and Win...

However, unless you plan on doing nothing but arena battles, that doesn't say much about the playability of a melee class.

No one is claiming this. Though, it is certainly possible the BBEG is a Wizard. it's even an archetype. In which case it plays out just like an 'arena match', except several on one. Come to think of it, just about every time the DM pitches humanoids at you it's an 'arena match', with the only difference being that the DM is running one side.

The rest of your post is... bragging about being a Camp Follower. No comment.

Person_Man
2009-02-25, 01:35 PM
Martial Class power rankings:

1: Scaled: Classes that gain new abilities every level, and their abilities generally scale well. Comparable to full casters if you know what you're doing: Crusader, Warblade, Swordsage, Totemist, Binder, Psychic Warrior.

2: Half Casters: Classes with full BAB and half progression of spells. Paladin, Hexblade, Ranger, Duskblade. Honorable Mention: Knight: Although he lacks spells, he does get awesome special abilities. But he doesn't really get very many of them compared to Scaled classes, and enemies that are immune to Mind Affecting effects are immune to 80% of Knight abilities.

3: Dips: Classes with limited class abilities that scale poorly (or not at all). These classes also feature dead levels, and the abilities that they do have tend to be lumped into the first four levels. Thus they are usually only suitable for for 1-4 level dips: Barbarian, Fighter, Marshal, Swashbuckler, Monks.

4: Garbage: Classes that are so poorly written that they should be avoided entirely unless you really, really know what you're doing: Dragon Shaman, Samurai, Soulborn.

BRC
2009-02-25, 01:40 PM
You do realize that the above paragraph contradicts itself blatantly several times right? You start by saying 'NPCs follow the same rules' even though they don't, as they have far lower equipment values. Then the contradictions start bouncing, as you rapidly switch from claiming the way the group operated wouldn't work with a Batman, to claiming the group's casters do exactly the same thing a Batman would have been doing so as to be functionally Batmen, to claiming Batman allows martial types to 'shine'. If 'shine' can be defined as 'serve as camp follower, where you go around slitting the throats of crippled opponents on the battlefield' I suppose you're right. You then contradict yourself again by claiming that blasting casters work well with martial types... when all that means is the enemies are unhindered, and tear the martial guy apart in the stat contest. Support is ambiguous, and could just as easily be referring to more Batman tactics so that isn't necessarily another contradiction. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt on that one. Then you switch back to saying Batman makes martial types not work.

"Same rules" means "rules are more similar for humanoid NPC's than for monsters", as in, They gain their strength from class levels and items the same way PC's do. So they face the same limitations, unlike, say, a Dragon which can blast like a caster (Breath weapon), hit like a fighter, ect.
I'm defining "Batman" At what point did I say my casters acted like Batman. They did some crowd control, and boosted the Melee types, From what I remember, Batman is mostly about using Save-or-die spell that make Attack Bonuses, HP, AC ect mostly irrelevant. Sure support and crowd control is part of that, but it's not the big focus. Saying Blasters work well with martials is a result of personal experience, where our groups have had no trouble fighting monsters by whittling down their hit points. I don't mean to put words into your mouth, but you seem to say that PC's will get slaughtered by CR-appropriate monsters unless the casters use Save-or-Lose stuff.
Let me explain what i'm talking about here
Standard Issue Martial PC vs Monster, PC loses, but that's because DnD is a team game.
There are three types of caster tactics
Blaster: Martial can't kill the monster faster than the monster can kill it, so the Caster joins in the damage dealing. Example, Fighter charges the bear with his greatsword and smacks it. bear smacks fighter, Wizard shoots bear with a scorching ray, fighter smacks bear with greatsword, bear dies.
Support: Monster will beat the Martial, so you even the playing field either by buffing the Martial or debuffing the Monster, for example: Fighter charges, bear smacks, wizard Hastes fighter, now hasted fighter unleashes a full attack, chopping the bear into smithereens. OR, Fighter charges Bear, Bear smacks fighter, wizard slows bear, fighter smacks bear again, bear tries to smack fighter but misses, fighter smacks bear again and kills it.
Three: Batman
Fighter charges bear, bear smacks fighter, wizard uses magic to put the bear into a coma.
All three tactics work, but the Batman isn't as fun for the fighter, because they didn't really contribute to taking down the bear. Sure he may have dealt damage to it, but that damage had absolutely nothing to do with how the bear was defeated. It should be noted that i'm talking less about what is effective. The third tactic is probably the most effective, but it's not as fun.

Kaiyanwang
2009-02-25, 01:42 PM
Martial Class power rankings:

1: Scaled: Classes that gain new abilities every level, and their abilities generally scale well. Comparable to full casters if you know what you're doing: Crusader, Warblade, Swordsage, Totemist, Binder, Psychic Warrior.

2: Half Casters: Classes with full BAB and half progression of spells. Paladin, Hexblade, Ranger, Duskblade. Honorable Mention: Knight: Although he lacks spells, he does get awesome special abilities. But he doesn't really get very many of them compared to Scaled classes, and enemies that are immune to Mind Affecting effects are immune to 80% of Knight abilities.

3: Dips: Classes with limited class abilities that scale poorly (or not at all). These classes also feature dead levels, and the abilities that they do have tend to be lumped into the first four levels. Thus they are usually only suitable for for 1-4 level dips: Barbarian, Fighter, Marshal, Swashbuckler, Monks.

4: Garbage: Classes that are so poorly written that they should be avoided entirely unless you really, really know what you're doing: Dragon Shaman, Samurai, Soulborn.

OK but the OP asked to talk about paladins, fighters, samurai, rangers, barbarians, swashbucklers, and hexblades, and suggestions about these class. Why we don't do it instead of always repeating the same, maybe undeniable, things?

Draz74
2009-02-25, 01:45 PM
OK but the OP asked to talk about paladins, fighters, samurai, rangers, barbarians, swashbucklers, and hexblades, and suggestions about these class. Why we don't do it instead of always repeating the same, maybe undeniable, things?

Because inevitably some de-railer (often with innocent intentions, like BRC in the third post of this thread) comes along and pushes the topic sideways to discuss the same old undeniable things. :smallwink:

ShneekeyTheLost
2009-02-25, 01:46 PM
No one is claiming this. Though, it is certainly possible the BBEG is a Wizard. it's even an archetype. In which case it plays out just like an 'arena match', except several on one. Come to think of it, just about every time the DM pitches humanoids at you it's an 'arena match', with the only difference being that the DM is running one side.

"No one is claiming this... except I'm just now claiming this..."

Cute. Also inaccurate. Wizard goes off into a wizard's duel with BBEG Wizard while the beatstick closes and pwns. Again, it isn't about who is better, but how they work together to beat something big and nasty.

The rest of your post is... bragging about being a Camp Follower. No comment.

Incorrect. Said nothing about Camp Follower. The word you are looking for is PARTNER.

sonofzeal
2009-02-25, 02:02 PM
first, AB (if not BAB) is really, really easy to increase. There are about four hundred ways to get a better attack bonus. From in-combat tricks like charging and flanking, to feats (ranging from the trivial, like Weapon Focus, to the decent), to spells (and powers, mysteries, soulmelds, maneuvers, etc.), to items, magical and otherwise... you're expected to be able to add a ton to your attack bonus if that's your thing. That makes full-BAB classes a lot less special. They get the BAB, sure, but what else? Compared to what most other classes get, precious little, and those other classes usually have other ways of increasing their to-hit chances.
I highly disagree. AC is easy to raise by any number of methods, but AB almost invariably comes down to BAB + Str/Dex + enhancement. There's a few other bonuses, but most of them are limited +1 and generally not worth it - luckstone (good for other reasons), size (most chars can't squeeze multiple levels, and it hurts melee either way), weapon focus (waste of a feat mostly), and flanking. And almost all magical means of raising AB come back to BAB (Divine Power), Str/Dex (Cat's Grace), or Enhancement (artificer infusions). Those three numbers basically define the range of AB you can expect to have, and all three numbers tend to change very slowly. If my reasonably-built Fighter needs to raise his AB by 5, even temporarily, he's probably completely out of luck.

The only thing that does work is to try and turn melee attacks in to Touch Attacks, or negate a wide swathe of enemy defenses. Brilliant Energy, Emerald Razor, Wraithstrike, gaining Incorporeality, Impaling Weapons, rendering enemies Helpless or Entangled - the best method of landing hits isn't to boost AB, it's to make your AB count for more. And mages get the most techniques for doing this.

Telonius
2009-02-25, 02:04 PM
I was talking about "played intelligently". Not even beyond their capabilities, just using tactics that wouldn't embarass a pack of wolves(int 2). Target the biggest threat, flank, if the enemy is hard to hit target someone squishy, avoid walls if the enemy likes bouncing you off of them, that sort of thing. Basic stuff that if done, invalidates the Fighter completely.

And not even that, necessarily. Flying enemies who sit back and drop rocks render the Fighter useless at low-mid levels. Any flier should have "avoid the reach of ground targets" as basic tactics, but many of them fight the Fighter on his own terms because to do otherwise makes the meatcan useless.

If the martial character just sits there letting things drop rocks on him, or be flanked, or let the monster go someone squishy, then he's being played as though he has null intelligence. Even in those situations, he has options: caltrops, bows, and tanglefoot bags, to take a few examples. They aren't surefire fixes by any means, but it's not as though Fighters have to sit there and get pelted by rocks with no means of reprisal. With Tanglefoot bags, in particular, if the enemy fails its reflex save then it's forced to meet the Fighter on his own terms.

That's not even getting into the various methods a Fighter might have to gain access to flight (potions of Fly are relatively cheap at 750 gp). If the Fighter can't fly in an emergency (using his own items) at level 10, he's doing something wrong.

Advocate
2009-02-25, 02:07 PM
"No one is claiming this... except I'm just now claiming this..."

Cute. Also inaccurate. Wizard goes off into a wizard's duel with BBEG Wizard while the beatstick closes and pwns. Again, it isn't about who is better, but how they work together to beat something big and nasty.


Incorrect. Said nothing about Camp Follower. The word you are looking for is PARTNER.

Your statement is inaccurate. The correct outcome of such things is the PC Wizard, PC Cleric, and whatever other PC casters engage the BBEG. Whoever has the better spells wins. Meanwhile, the Fighter either does nothing, or engages the mooks. Which likely forces him to Benny Hill it around, as he gets overwhelmed and runs like hell, enemies in hot pursuit.

And no. The correct term is camp follower. In addition to the modern uses of the word, back around the times where combat with swords and bows was happening camp followers also entered the battlefield after the actual soldiers were done fighting. Their purpose there, in addition to stealing the loot from the fallen and thus away from the real characters who actually did the fighting is to go around slitting the throats of near dead, crippled opposition that would easily slaughter them otherwise, but are unable to resist the camp follower making their effective death an actual death due to the actions of the real soldiers.

Now, replace a few terms, and you get the following statement. Fighters enter the battlefield after the real classes are done winning the battle, steal loot away from them, and finish off near dead, crippled opposition they could never handle on anything approaching an even level, but that they can finish off because the real characters neutralized the enemies beforehand. Notice how it amounts to the same thing?

The partner is the guy who helped you with the actual FIGHT, not just the lurking opportunist. Cleric? Partner? Psychic Warrior? Partner. Fighter? Camp follower.

BRC: You do not remember correctly. Batman is about the right tool for the job. That does mean save or dies sometimes. It also means save or sucks, buffs, whatever. It never, or almost never means blasting. That's only an 'if you're bored and have nothing better to do' type thing. The Wizard who throws out a Spiked Tentacles to negate the Medium sized enemies followed by a Dominate on the Huge sized big dumb melee brute is being a Batman. The Wizard who uses Maze on the guy with high saves to come back to him later? Batman.

Also, those examples are terrible for the most part.

Oslecamo
2009-02-25, 02:13 PM
And not even that, necessarily. Flying enemies who sit back and drop rocks render the Fighter useless at low-mid levels. Any flier should have "avoid the reach of ground targets" as basic tactics, but many of them fight the Fighter on his own terms because to do otherwise makes the meatcan useless.

And ignoring the fact that the fighter can easily pick a couple ranged combat feats and shoot down the fliers or simply pick up a flying mount trough several easy means, how do the crusader and warblade fare any better against flying enemies with ranged attacks?

Kesnit
2009-02-25, 02:17 PM
Your statement is inaccurate. The correct outcome of such things is the PC Wizard, PC Cleric, and whatever other PC casters engage the BBEG. Whoever has the better spells wins. Meanwhile, the Fighter either does nothing, or engages the mooks. Which likely forces him to Benny Hill it around, as he gets overwhelmed and runs like hell, enemies in hot pursuit.

This thread is for discussing how to make melee classes more useful. If all you are going to do is repeat the endless list of why casters are so much more powerful, please do it elsewhere.

Advocate
2009-02-25, 02:23 PM
I highly disagree. AC is easy to raise by any number of methods, but AB almost invariably comes down to BAB + Str/Dex + enhancement. There's a few other bonuses, but most of them are limited +1 and generally not worth it - luckstone (good for other reasons), size (most chars can't squeeze multiple levels, and it hurts melee either way), weapon focus (waste of a feat mostly), and flanking. And almost all magical means of raising AB come back to BAB (Divine Power), Str/Dex (Cat's Grace), or Enhancement (artificer infusions). Those three numbers basically define the range of AB you can expect to have, and all three numbers tend to change very slowly. If my reasonably-built Fighter needs to raise his AB by 5, even temporarily, he's probably completely out of luck.

The only thing that does work is to try and turn melee attacks in to Touch Attacks, or negate a wide swathe of enemy defenses. Brilliant Energy, Emerald Razor, Wraithstrike, gaining Incorporeality, Impaling Weapons, rendering enemies Helpless or Entangled - the best method of landing hits isn't to boost AB, it's to make your AB count for more. And mages get the most techniques for doing this.

This post is highly inaccurate, and demonstrates a complete lack of understanding on how attack bonus and AC scaling actually work. Compare the costs to obtain different AC values to the amount of cash you have at any given level, then compare this to how attack bonuses measure up at the same level both with no cost at all, and with the typical equipment and its cost. Once you do this, you will understand how (poorly) your AC measures up to enemy attack bonus.

Now do the reverse, comparing your attack bonus both with and without investment to enemy AC. Remember to take into consideration monster abilities, thus for example Balor AC is 39 as they can and will always have Unholy Aura on. Once you do this, you will understand that enemy AC doesn't fare much better against your attacks than your AC fares against its attacks.


If the martial character just sits there letting things drop rocks on him, or be flanked, or let the monster go someone squishy, then he's being played as though he has null intelligence. Even in those situations, he has options: caltrops, bows, and tanglefoot bags, to take a few examples. They aren't surefire fixes by any means, but it's not as though Fighters have to sit there and get pelted by rocks with no means of reprisal. With Tanglefoot bags, in particular, if the enemy fails its reflex save then it's forced to meet the Fighter on his own terms.

That's not even getting into the various methods a Fighter might have to gain access to flight (potions of Fly are relatively cheap at 750 gp). If the Fighter can't fly in an emergency (using his own items) at level 10, he's doing something wrong.

Ok. Except that brings us back to the tools argument. He can't move more than 5 feet in any given round without making himself irrelevant. So he 5' steps, and the flankers 5' step with him. I suppose it might make for a funny dance, but it is completely ineffective at actually preventing that from happening.

Further, what he has are not options. What he has are 'options'. Quotations used, as they are options that are not options, in much the same way 'full attacking yourself' is an option in that you can technically do it, but is more accurately an 'option' in that you would never actually want to do that.

Now. To get specific. Caltrops cost at least one full action, and are only effective at the level range where 'just hitting it' will kill it anyways. Tanglefoot bags are slightly better about this, but are still short range, high action cost. Drinking a fly potion takes at least one full round of actions, which means you're sitting out a third or a half the fight, then spending the next third, or the last half just getting up there, which may or may not actually get you into position.

Bows work at the low levels, only because there is little difference between your melee auto attacks (that you are specializing in) and your ranged auto attacks which you are not at this point. Since you say level 10, you're 5 levels past that point. Feel free to stand there looking busy, but you aren't actually bothering the enemy. Also, you're still stuck in no > 5 foot move mode. If you are specialized in ranged attacks, then the flier isn't a big deal. Of course you can just replace it with wind walls or something, so whatever.

By the way. You get 17k gold between level 10 and level 11. You fight 13.33 fights in this time. Thus, the average share of the treasure for you is 1,275 gold. Which means if you drink a single potion of Fly, that is nearly 60% of your share of the treasure gone. Which, given how little effect it actually had upon the fight...

At lower levels (6-9), this is worse because 750 is a larger share accordingly. At higher levels, you should really be getting the boots, which still require burning the crucial first round just evening the field a little but are sustainable.

Sstoopidtallkid
2009-02-25, 02:31 PM
And ignoring the fact that the fighter can easily pick a couple ranged combat feats and shoot down the fliers or simply pick up a flying mount trough several easy means, how do the crusader and warblade fare any better against flying enemies with ranged attacks?At low levels Flying mounts aren't readily available due to cost. And a Fighter has no reliable damage at range even with a Bow. Meanwhile, some maneuvers still work, meaning the bow isn't plinking away.

Oslecamo
2009-02-25, 02:46 PM
At low levels Flying mounts aren't readily available due to cost. And a Fighter has no reliable damage at range even with a Bow. Meanwhile, some maneuvers still work, meaning the bow isn't plinking away.

Some maneuvers? Wich maneuvers?

Because last time I checked, excluding the swordsage, neither the crusader or the warblade get anything range related at all before mid levels. And even the ranged maneuvers of the swordsage don't go very far, meaning your super tactics monster still easily outranges them, flying a hundred feets on the air while droping rocks.

As for geting flying mount at low levels, find gryffon, handle animal gryffon(fighter skill), profit.

ShneekeyTheLost
2009-02-25, 02:55 PM
Some maneuvers? Wich maneuvers?

Because last time I checked, excluding the swordsage, neither the crusader or the warblade get anything range related at all before mid levels. And even the ranged maneuvers of the swordsage don't go very far, meaning your super tactics monster still easily outranges them, flying a hundred feets on the air while droping rocks.

As for geting flying mount at low levels, find gryffon, handle animal gryffon(fighter skill), profit.

Bloodstorm Blade is enterable after 5 levels, and turns a melee monster into a ranged monster pretty effectively.

Oslecamo
2009-02-25, 03:04 PM
Bloodstorm Blade is enterable after 5 levels, and turns a melee monster into a ranged monster pretty effectively.

You're still outranged. A thrown weapon can be incremanted up to 5 times. Since the throw anything gives a range increment of 10 feets, this means you're not reaching more that 60 feets(and good luck hiting them with a -10 penalty). The super tactic flier is still out of your reach.

Plus, 6th level is when you get leadership, wich can be used to get a flying mount, or your personal caster to make you fly.

But even better, the fighter can take that PRC whitout multiclassing! Where's the other guy's advantage now?

Keld Denar
2009-02-25, 03:05 PM
Meh, Suel Arcanamach isn't GREAT, but its definitely a step up from not having spells. 5th level spells means you get some real gems like Greater Mirror Image, Bite of the X, Fly, Whirling Blade, Invisibility, and whatnot. SA4/AbjChamp5 is a pretty solid 9 level investment as you get 5th level spells and change at the cost of 1 BAB, more so if you also pick up 1 level or Sacred Exorcist for TU to power Divine feats (like Divine Might or Travel Devotion). You are basically a gish, slightly worse than your standard Ftr1/Wiz5/yadda/yadda/yadda whatever, but not by much. There may be things that are better, but you are at least on par with a Duskblade, given that you can pick more utility spells while the Duskblade gets mostly nukes. Granted, the loss of Conjouration really hurts you, but Transmutation + Illusion go a long way if you dip heavily into Spell Compendium, PHBII, and Complete Mage for spells. Its a neat class that falls pretty straight into the middle tier and competes well with Warblades, Duskblades, Swordsages, and Crusaders.

You could certainly do MUCH worse.

Zaq
2009-02-25, 03:11 PM
But even better, the fighter can take that PRC [Bloodstorm Blade] whitout [sic] multiclassing!

Straight-classed fighters can only qualify for Bloodstorm Blade by taking Martial Study and Martial Stance. You're trading your feats (the closest a fighter has to a class feature) for a pale shadow of what a Warblade gets as an actual class feature. You get fewer of them, can use them less often, get them more slowly since your fighter levels only give 1/2 initiator levels, and you're sacrificing the only defining part of being a fighter (that is, having feats). A fighter who spends a feat on Martial Study is worse than a Warblade in every way. How is this considered a point in the Fighter's favor, exactly?

D-naras
2009-02-25, 03:15 PM
Well, i dropped in to say that i really like the Hexblade as a vilain or at least a vilain's henchman. You see i dm almost 90% of the time and i have found that they make nice, durable roadblocks for both mages and fighter types, with their hex leaving a mark (1 hour duration) and absorbing a couple of spells along the way. I find that at lower levels, martial classes like the OP mentioned make for more satisfying encounters, since the last longer and they dont threaten to kill someone or everyone on a bad save (sleep, hold person...).
From a player's perspective I still prefer the archetype of the warrior than that of the spellcaster, because I find that someone using his own strength and wits and brawn to overcome difficulties is much better than someone using borrowed power from a god or book reading or lucky genetics.
Ultimately I find that the way to bring out the best on a martial class is finding the right attitude for the character and sticking to it. Sure a Barbarian 20 is not the most optimized character but still he can be the king of his tribe.

snoopy13a
2009-02-25, 03:20 PM
It is actually easy to see how the fighter loses utility.

Take a look at level 1:

A fighter with 14 strength (say a typical low point buy game) will do 2D6+3 damage if they hit with a greatsword. If he or she attacks with Power Attack and takes the -1 to hit penalty, it comes to 2D6+5.

That means a 14 strength level 1 fighter does around 10 damage normally and 12 with Power Attack.

Let's take a look at other classes, assuming that every level (including the first) of hitpoints is rolled and that characters have 14 Con (again relatively low point buys)

Wizard, Sorc would have around 4.5 hitpoints on average (average roll is a 2.5 and Con bonus of +2) with 6 as around the max

Rogue and other 1d6 hp would have around 5.5 hitpoints on average with 8 around the max

Rangers and other 1d8 hp would have around 6.5 hitpoints with 10 being the max for most

Fighter would have around 7.5 with 12 being the max for most

Barbs would have around 8.5 with 14 being the max.

As you can see, a fighter can bring down most enemies at level 1 with a basic attack. Nor are they limited to full attacks. Moving and attacking works just as well.

A fighter with a reach weapon and combat reflexes at level can serve as a fairly effective tank. Enemies will either have to go around him/her, through them, or pelt them with ranged weapons (and a character with a reach weapon gets an AoO on a charge).

Say the fighter with a reach weapon weapon has 14 Strength, 14 Dex and Combat reflexes. If using a simple glaive, they would 1D10+3 damage, 1d10+5 with Power Attack. This could be used on AoO as well. This is 8.5 damage without power attack and 10.5 with. This character can attack up to three different enemies with combat reflexes and with high enough damage to likely kill most.

Two melee characters with reach weapons and combat reflexes (or even without as which enemy wants to be the sucker to draw a potentially lethel AoO) can essentially prevent most enemies from getting past them (exceptions being those with tumble). This isn't taking into account the tripper build a level 1 human fighter can have with combat reflexes, combat expertise, and improved trip. They would do 2d4+3 damage, 2d4+5 with Power Attack (8-10 on average) with a guisarme and have an opportunity to trip their opponent.

Even a fighter archer is able to do 4.5 damage with a longbow at very long range. Yet, an archer with rapid shot at level 1 can do 9 damage which can bring down most enemies and with luck, bring down two weak enemies.

A wizard could do 3.5 damage with magic missle or could try casting sleep or color spray among others. Sleep takes a full round to work so the enemies can either move out of the way or cause the wizard to lose the spell. Color spray is a short range and relatively small area spell and could have allies in the zone. Of course, the wizard can also do 1d8 damage (4.5) from range with a light crossbow (or use heavy crossbow that takes a turn to reload).



Now lets look at level 5. The fighter still only has one attack.

Let's say the fighter has 15 strength still having a +2 bonus. He/She would do 2d6+3 with a normal attack from a great sword and lets say they invest 3 BAB into Power Attack and would do 2D6+9 then. So, 9 or 16 damage.

Unfortunately, hitpoints have really started to break away at that point.

Your level 5 wizard with 14 Con will have 5d4+10 hitpoints or 22. What was once had a very good chance to bring down an opponent isn't unless one gets a crit.

This level 5 wizard on the other hand, gets access to a 5d6 fireball (21 damage, or 10.5 for those who save reflex) that can affect one's entire party, can Summon Monsters, can cast hold person which immbolizes and renders helpless a character that failing their Will save, or can cast Stinking Cloud, Slow, Haste, etc. Even a weak magic missle is going to do 3d4+3 damage or 10.5 average (and that is a guaranteed hit from 150 feet away)

Your archer fighter is still limited to only two shots but now would have a composite long bow doing 1d8+2 per arrow and can do around 13 damage (which is only 2-3 damage better than the wizard using magic missle, and that is assuming the archer hits twice).

Your reach fighter is doing 2d4+3 or 2d4+9 with a trip weapon or 1d10+2, 1d10+8 with a damage weapon. The attacks of opportunity have gone from potentially lethal for opponents to damaging. A character with d6 hit dice and 14 Con is going to 29 or so hitpoints. The attack will hurt a bit but will not kill them. The trip build is still useful (assuming they are not four-legged or largish creatures).

A mounted fighter who is charging can do quite a bit of damage (1d8+3)X2 or 14 without powerattack and since they get a +2 attack bonus, they could invest more BAB into Power Attack (perhaps all 5 BAB) for (1d8+13)X2 for 35 damage. Yet, the mount may not work in a city or dungeon campaign.

As you can see, a level 1 fighter is generally more effective than a level 5 fighter. As hitpoints increase, the fighter becomes less effective. Add in that a fighter's multiple attacks require that enemies start the round 10' or less away makes it more difficult. Not to mention that the casters become more and more effective as the game progresses.

Anyway, if you want to play a fighter it seems one should play in a low level games such as 1-6 or so. As levels increase, the fighter gets worse.

Advocate
2009-02-25, 03:26 PM
This thread is for discussing how to make melee classes more useful. If all you are going to do is repeat the endless list of why casters are so much more powerful, please do it elsewhere.

Ok. Except that if someone says something blatantly false, I'm going to correct it. About casters or not about casters.


Straight-classed fighters can only qualify for Bloodstorm Blade by taking Martial Study and Martial Stance. You're trading your feats (the closest a fighter has to a class feature) for a pale shadow of what a Warblade gets as an actual class feature. You get fewer of them, can use them less often, get them more slowly since your fighter levels only give 1/2 initiator levels, and you're sacrificing the only defining part of being a fighter (that is, having feats). A fighter who spends a feat on Martial Study is worse than a Warblade in every way. How is this considered a point in the Fighter's favor, exactly?

Win.

And to the other guy: A king at level 20 is a remarkable underachiever at best. Welcome to 10-15 levels ago.

Oslecamo
2009-02-25, 03:27 PM
How is this considered a point in the Fighter's favor, exactly?

You need ONE maneuver. Plus a stance. The fighter sacrifices two bonus feats to get them, hardly a big deal, since the Warblade would also get one new 1st level maneuver at 2nd level.

Yes, you can use the maneuver once per battle? But guess what? The warblade would also have time to use it only once before the battle ending.

And the stance works completely fine whitout limitations on the fighter

How is the fighter worse than the warblade here? He's just as well actually.

Yukitsu
2009-02-25, 03:31 PM
By fifth level, a warblade has a handful of manuevers, and a couple prepared ones, to contrast to the fighter's single one. They get a class feature that adds int to checks as well, have more hit points than the fighter, and have more skill points and skill access. The warblade as well has access to higher level manuevers and stances, compared to the level 1 ones that a fighter is limited to. A comparison here of one guy having level 3 spells, and the other level 1. A fighter has one more feat to compete with all of the previous.

Fawsto
2009-02-25, 03:39 PM
My current group consists on a Rogue, a Warmage, 2 Clerics (1 good (me), 1 evil. For some reason, we work well together), a Druid and a 22 STR Barbarian (Unraged...).


Now, although he does normally hit and causes like, 1d12 + 18 damage points. He normally does that only once or twice every combat, since that outburst of destruction is also normaly followed up by me trying to heal him from sure death after every remaining enemy kicks his ass.


My point is: In the lower levels, every party member is dependent of eachother. It would probably be me the one bleeding and dying if not for the big meat shield I described. But, unfortunatly for him, this is starting to change, and sooner than I'd expect. At level 3. Although he would be able to drop every party member with one hit, and I expect to see such patern for, at least, 3 or 4 more levels, the other party members are growing more and more independent of him. The 2 Clerics are begining to become more and more resilient to combat and able to buff themselves into "better than fighter mode". The Druid will start to summon his beasties to do the meleers work and the Warmage is revealing himself as a good burner. The big bashing monster that our group is proud off is starting to grow independent of him. Sooner or later even the clerics will outdamge him, while doing everything else the cleric does. Ok, a Barbarian has insane ammounts of life. The Cleric and Druid can simply cast Vigor or Greater Vigor to heal themselves during the whole fight. He is dealing obscebe ammounts of damage right now, but, very soon, the Warmage will be doing lots of damage to lots of enemies at one time and the druid will bring many of his friends to the battle, outdamaging even the Warmage, while doing all of his other tricks.



Now, I went very offtopic up there. That's why it is inside a spoiler box.

About increasing the efficiency of the melee troupe. First, they need versatility and durability. They are limited to simply "I Close and Slash" and other variants of the same action. They need something else to do while doing "their thing". ToB is good because it gives us meleers that have tons of options while doing "their thing". ToB helped to cease the lack of versatility and durability of meleers. F. ex.: The ToB Crusader can keep healing himself during the battle while dealing a good ammount of damage at almost no expense of resources. The Fighter, on the other hand, to get a similar benefit, must take about 3 or 4 feats to get fast healing 4, once per encounter. See the problem? The fighter can do almost the same thing by spending feats while the Crusader can spend his feats in things much more important. Hell, the Crusader could get the same Feats and heal a hell bunch of HP per round that would make him almost impossible to beat down, while buffing him out (remember that Crusaders LIKE to take damage!). When we talk about damage, sure, a Leapzilla can deal a ton in a single action. Probably once per fight. Great against single enemies. Wow. A Warblade, while having almost as much HP as a Barbarian, can keep dealing a very decent ammount of damage anytime, anywhere and against any number of enemies.

And More. Most of the non ToB meleers can't do anything outside combat because they don't have the Skill points for it. 2 + int... C'mon... Half of the Fighters, Paladins and Barbarians out there can't even keep a 10 on the Int score. This means about 1 skill point per level. ONE! How a class that does not have any or has half spells is supposed to work at all with 1 skill point per level?

The most painful part of being a meleer outside ToB and other good melee options (PsyWar and etc) is that the character won't have any versatility at all. After that, the character will not have any durability at all. Requiring a handy Cleric to help them. They don't even get UMD, wich would allow the use of Healing and Utility wands. Even if they had UMD, it would be their only skill since they have 2+int per level to deal with it.

Draz74
2009-02-25, 03:47 PM
This thread is intened for discussing builds for martial characters (paladins, fighters, samurai, rangers, barbarians, swashbucklers, and hexblades.) To prevent some of the problems that plauged the last such thread I am going to say that compairing fighters and casters is not allowed. Casters may be more powerful but guess what? Some people still like to play warriors and this thread is for them. Debates about various builds are welcome but please keep them civil. This thread is mainly about optimizing but other ideas about fun warrior characters are welcome too. I think that's about it for rules so let the discussion begin!

OK, in an attempt to re-rail this thread ...

Pureclass Paladins don't suck like they used to. You can make a pretty feasible one with some combination of the following tricks:

Serenity feat: The solution if you're really worried about being MAD. As a DM, I generally wouldn't allow stuff from Dragon Magazine, but I'd allow this one if it fit the character's personality. It's not too overpowered; it's actually a good fix.
Battle Blessing feat: the best Paladin fix every published, all in one feat. When you can freely Quicken all your spells, suddenly Paladin spellcasting is actually a worthy class feature that keeps levels 6-20 from being "dead." Especially if you look for good options in Spell Compendium.
Bless Weapon spell: Once you are casting all your spells as swift actions, this one becomes just awesome. Time to widen your threat range like crazy! Wield a Falchion and take Improved Critical (not Keen; it doesn't stack with Bless Weapon).
Travel Devotion feat: the way to get Pounce without a cheesy (and alignment-problematic) alternate-Barbarian dip. Half-decent for characters even without Turn Undead, it's a great way for the Paladin to put that oft-maligned class feature to good use.
Healing Spirit and Charging Smite: two excellent ACF's for any Paladins who don't want to bother with a Mount.
Wild Cohort feat: a way to still enable mounted combat for a paladin with Healing Spirit or Charging Smite! But it only takes 1 feat to be decent, rather than 16 levels! Spirited Charge is tempting all over again when it can stack with Charging Smite!
Impaling weapon, Heartseeking Amulet, Martial Study (emerald razor) feat: Just three of the many ways to make a few attacks per day as touch attacks, allowing massive Power Attacking.
Elven Courtblade: if you can spare a feat on it, this is like a falchion, except it's piercing and can therefore be an Impaling weapon. And has a slightly higher base damage die, which is nice. If I took this I'd be very tempted to break my "no multiclassing" rule and go into Exotic Weapon Master for three levels, for a further-widened threat range and some other cool tricks.
Divine Might feat: if you can find an extra feat in your arsenal, here's another way to put Turn Undead to great use on your non-Serenity, Power Attack-using Paladin.


If I inexplicably find myself with a bunch of free time here soon, maybe I'll try to put together two decent Paladin builds that, together, take advantage of all of these options.

Harperfan7
2009-02-25, 03:48 PM
Aasimar Monk 3/Paladin 6/Fighter 4/Master Samurai 6

1st - Str 15, Dex 14, Con 10, Int 8, Wis 15, Cha 14
20 - Str 24, Dex 20, Con 16, Int 8, Wis 22, Cha 26

F+27, R+25, W+26 (+28 vs. Enchantments)

1 - Great Fortitude
1 - Stunning Fist/Improved Grapple (optional)
2 - Deflect Arrows/Combat Reflexes (optional)
3 - Bastard Sword Focus (used two handed)
6 - Power Attack
9 - Cleave
10 - Mounted Combat
11 - Mounted Archery
12 - Improved Initiative
12 - Quick Draw
13 - Bastard Sword Specialization
15 - Improved Critical (Bastard Sword)
18 - Improved Sunder

Knowledge (Nobility & Royalty) +3
Listen +12
Spot +12
Tumble +11
Ride +11
Handle Animal +9
Intimidate +14
Jump +11

Belt of Mighty Prowess (Str +6, Con +6), Periapt of Wisdom +6, Cloak of Charisma +6, Book of Charisma +5, +5 Vorpal Adamantine Katana (Bastard Sword), Bracers of Armor +8, Gloves of Dexterity +6, probably a good bow with good arrows, a good flying mount, the rest is up to you to flesh out the build...

+5 Vorpal Adamantine Katana +32/+27/+22/+17
1d10+23 17-20/Death

*Power Attack
+27/+22/+17/+12
1d10+33

This guy is pretty much Samurai Jack...
He's obviously not optimized, but I don't like optimization. The idea is basically a well-balanced melee fighter with good saves and no real failings.

Draz74
2009-02-25, 04:06 PM
This thread is intened for discussing builds for martial characters (paladins, fighters, samurai, rangers, barbarians, swashbucklers, and hexblades.) To prevent some of the problems that plauged the last such thread I am going to say that compairing fighters and casters is not allowed. Casters may be more powerful but guess what? Some people still like to play warriors and this thread is for them. Debates about various builds are welcome but please keep them civil. This thread is mainly about optimizing but other ideas about fun warrior characters are welcome too. I think that's about it for rules so let the discussion begin!

Pureclass Fighters aren't as good as they could be with multiclassing; that's for sure. But they sure have a lot more options than they did in Core Only!

It's fun to see how much you can improve Fighter archetypes with modern splatbooks, even if the resulting builds still aren't terribly competitive without casters to buff them (with e.g. Flight). For example, I came up with this build for the classic "scrappy knight on horseback" (as opposed to the more paladin-friendly "knight in shining armor") idea:

L1: Wild Cohort, Mounted Combat, Ride-By Attack
L2: Spirited Charge
L3: Shield Specialization
L4: Shield Ward
L6: Trample, Cavalry Charger
L8: Improved Shield Bash
L9: Endurance
L10: Agile Shield Fighter
L12: Steadfast Determination, Martial Study (shield block)
L14: Martial Stance (thicket of blades)

And so on. This isn't an optimal build, but for a pure Fighter it's pretty fun. You won't be asking this guy why he chose Sword 'n' Board (er, Lance 'n' Board) rather than two-handed Power Attacking -- he does too many awesome things with his shield. Like threaten the area inside his lance's reach.

Draz74
2009-02-25, 04:11 PM
This thread is intened for discussing builds for martial characters (paladins, fighters, samurai, rangers, barbarians, swashbucklers, and hexblades.) To prevent some of the problems that plauged the last such thread I am going to say that compairing fighters and casters is not allowed. Casters may be more powerful but guess what? Some people still like to play warriors and this thread is for them. Debates about various builds are welcome but please keep them civil. This thread is mainly about optimizing but other ideas about fun warrior characters are welcome too. I think that's about it for rules so let the discussion begin!

Hexblade, with Mearls' Own Fix and the Dark Companion ACF, isn't too shabby. At least when you combine it with some other melee staples.

However, I'm surprised how often I've seen Hexblade recommended as the least-terrible entry class for Dragon Disciple, and yet how rarely I've seen such a build worked out. Anyone want to show off the power of a Hexblade/Dragon Disciple? Multiclassing levels 16-20 however you like is fair game! Make sure you use some Races of the Dragon/Dragon Magic stuff! (Like the Dragon Breath feat, which fixes the most annoying (IMHO) problem with Dragon Disciple ... unfortunately it's still too little too late.)

Swashbucklers: Well, Rogue 4 / Swashbuckler 16 with Daring Outlaw is playable and fun. And don't forget my favorite Evil Elf build, Rogue 2 / Swashbuckler 3 / Assassin 5 / Bladesinger 10 (make sure you look in Spell Compendium for the best Assassin spells). And you can always spice up Swashbuckler with Warblade or Totemist. But my newest question is: How viable can a swashbuckler-archetype character be, using the build Factotum 1 / Swashbucker 3 / Factotum +16? (I guess the last level could be something other than Factotum, but I want Improved Cunning Defense.)

Rangers: Stick with Scout 4 / Ranger 16 with Swift Hunter, and so forth. There, some decent Ranger builds.

Other options? Well, Mounted Archery is definitely underappreciated. I'd like to make a Goblin Dire Eagle Rider Ranger who bombards with nasty arrows from above ... a super-strong Raptoran Fighter/Ranger with a Footbow is an underused idea, too.

Rangers also have some very interesting synergy with Swordsage. I think a Ranger 3 / Swordsage 17 could make a better Dervish than the Dervish. And don't get me started on Gestalt Scout 17 / Ranger 3 // Swordsage 10 / Dervish 10 Swift Hunter builds ... yikes!

Barbarians? Sorry, no new ideas here. Primarily-Barbarian characters have 4 options AFAIK:

suck
cliche Ubercharger strategy, one-trick pony stuff
spice themselves up with Tome of Battle
spice themselves up with Totemist/Totem Rager


Admittedly, Eldariel's recent guide has reminded me that there are probably some other options to explore, via obscure (to me) PrCs. Particularly, I'd be impressed if someone could show me a great Barbarian Grappler build. Use ToB or PsyWarrior dips or whatever if you have to -- I'd love to see a martial build that has a real shot, at mid-levels, of grappling Huge and Gargantuan monsters and winning. Especially if he has some way to shut off Freedom of Movement effects.

Samurai? Ewwww. Why would anyone ever want to play this class? Why not just a Japan-flavored Fighter or Warblade?

That said, at least look up the Samurai 14 / Incarnate 6 build someone wrote up when Magic of Incarnum was new ... it's not super-powerful, but it's an interesting attempt at making an unplayable class semi-viable. But once you put Incarnum into the mix, I'm not sure you're a "martial" character anymore.

Telonius
2009-02-25, 04:32 PM
Ok. Except that brings us back to the tools argument. He can't move more than 5 feet in any given round without making himself irrelevant. So he 5' steps, and the flankers 5' step with him. I suppose it might make for a funny dance, but it is completely ineffective at actually preventing that from happening.

Further, what he has are not options. What he has are 'options'. Quotations used, as they are options that are not options, in much the same way 'full attacking yourself' is an option in that you can technically do it, but is more accurately an 'option' in that you would never actually want to do that.

Now. To get specific. Caltrops cost at least one full action, and are only effective at the level range where 'just hitting it' will kill it anyways. Tanglefoot bags are slightly better about this, but are still short range, high action cost. Drinking a fly potion takes at least one full round of actions, which means you're sitting out a third or a half the fight, then spending the next third, or the last half just getting up there, which may or may not actually get you into position.

Bows work at the low levels, only because there is little difference between your melee auto attacks (that you are specializing in) and your ranged auto attacks which you are not at this point. Since you say level 10, you're 5 levels past that point. Feel free to stand there looking busy, but you aren't actually bothering the enemy. Also, you're still stuck in no > 5 foot move mode. If you are specialized in ranged attacks, then the flier isn't a big deal. Of course you can just replace it with wind walls or something, so whatever.

By the way. You get 17k gold between level 10 and level 11. You fight 13.33 fights in this time. Thus, the average share of the treasure for you is 1,275 gold. Which means if you drink a single potion of Fly, that is nearly 60% of your share of the treasure gone. Which, given how little effect it actually had upon the fight...

At lower levels (6-9), this is worse because 750 is a larger share accordingly. At higher levels, you should really be getting the boots, which still require burning the crucial first round just evening the field a little but are sustainable.

For flankers, there will (obviously) be at least two things attacking him, and only him. If there are only two things attacking the party at once, then they're CR 8, and the Fighter probably won't be able to drop them in a single round. But that would mean that these intelligent flankers will be taking only one full attack and another single attack at the party member best able to withstand HP loss, while the wizard, cleric, and rogue pick them off from a distance (or flank with the Fighter against the enemy, in the Rogue's case). So basically, yes: that is exactly what the Fighter is trying to get them to do. The Knight's "Fighting Challenge" ability is even based around this strategy of drawing fire.

Drinking a potion is a standard action. So is casting Fly, Summoning a monster that can fly, Wild Shaping into a flying creature, or any other method a character might use to get up to the enemy. The Wizard could probably target the creature with a Fireball or an Ice Storm, but what's the Wizard doing preparing spells like that? He's probably casting them from a scroll, which would be 375 or 700gp each. Or, he's casting Magic Missile, which is doing about as much damage as a Mighty Composite Bow would. The healbot might be able to get off a Flame Strike if he has it prepared. The skillmonkey is near-useless. The martial character has about as many "options" as everybody else. Doing anything at all during the first round to the hypothetical out-of-range, rock-throwing flying creature would be difficult for the whole party.

A few exceptions: a Paladin with a Hippogriff mount would probably be able to charge the flying creature in a single round. A Druid already Wild Shaped into a flying creature could do so as well. A flying familiar could deliver a Shocking Grasp. A Warlock with Fell Flight could fly up and maybe do something more-or-less useful. That's about all I can think of.

60% of a single fight's take isn't that bad. Sending the party up against multiple encounters of these flying monkeys would just be silly.

Person_Man
2009-02-25, 04:35 PM
How to optimize martial characters noted by the OP:

Paladins: Take the Mounted Combat feats, and ride your uber mount. Take Leadership or a Mount oriented PrC to improve it. Then head into Divine feats, and put your Turn Undead uses to work. Buy Slippers of Battledancing (DMGII) so that you can use your Cha bonus instead of your Str bonus to attack, and you're set. To improve your spell casting you can take Battle Blessing (Com Champion) to cast Paladin spells as Swift actions, and Sword of the Arcane Order (Champions of Valor) to memorize Wizard spells.

Fighters: You're strongest at low levels, because you can pull off elaborate feat combos before any other class. Leap Attack + Shock Trooper, Karmic Strike, Hold the Line, Knock-Down or Hold the Line or Knockback, etc. You also benefit greatly from Alternate Class features (forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=967118). In particular, Dungeoncrasher, Resolute, and the Zhentarim Figher Substitution Levels are all very useful.

Samurai: Lost cause. At best, you can take feats that are good for any full BAB class - Ancestral Weapon, Shock Trooper, etc. You can also do a passable job with Fear and Demoralize (forums.gleemax.com/wotc_archive/index.php/t-911167), though not as good as other builds.

Ranger: Wildshape Ranger (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/classes/variantCharacterClasses.htm). Can also use Sword of the Arcane Order. Take Favored Enemy Arcanist (Complete Mage) and Favored Enemy Evil (Stalker of Kharash or Harper Paragon) and then improve your Favored enemy with feats like Favored Power Attack, Wise to Your Ways, and Nemesis.

Barbarians: I consider this a 1-4 level class. Head into a PrC ASAP.

Swashbucklers: Daring Outlaw. Otherwise, I'm not a fan of Weapon Finesse based builds, as they tend to be much weaker compared to Str based build.

Hexblade: You have Alter Self and Polymorph to buff yourself and your Familiar via Share Spells. Focus your feats on things that further debuff your enemy, or give you additional opposed checks.

Advocate
2009-02-25, 05:31 PM
+5 Vorpal Adamantine Katana +32/+27/+22/+17
1d10+23 17-20/Death

*Power Attack
+27/+22/+17/+12
1d10+33

This guy is pretty much Samurai Jack...
He's obviously not optimized, but I don't like optimization. The idea is basically a well-balanced melee fighter with good saves and no real failings.

So I guess you don't consider doing such trivial damage so as to make yourself a completely irrelevant turtle, barring the (5% / 20 * number you hit on with your pathetic to hit) chance to actually do something meaningful with your overpriced Vorpal weapon. Yeah, that to hit is very bad. And by very bad, I mean it would have been ok around 5-8 levels ago. Now, you're doing Flurry of Misses with it. And Monk 3? Why? Just. Why.

Draz, Travel Devotion is not Pounce. It is move and full attack, but it is not a charge. Thus it does not work with charge abilities and such. Also, Barbarians are one of the better grapplers, far superior to Monks. Not that that means anything. Casters, including Wizards still do it better, but then if you can dip a caster yourself you can start using Expansion and Grip of Iron and such.

Telonous, what? If they are flanking him, and he 5 foot steps they 5' step and both full attack, so you're still just trading full attacks, only you're shuffling around while doing so.

Also, casters have actual range. And in some cases, the caster flight is just on all day.

Losing 60% of the fight's take, just to be remotely relevant in that fight, on the extremely unlikely chance it both lasts longer than 2-3 rounds, and isn't lasting that long because something is going horribly wrong... that's huge.

snoopy13a
2009-02-25, 05:44 PM
Also, casters have actual range. And in some cases, the caster flight is just on all day.



An unfortunate byproduct of overland flight's hour/level duration. A high level wizard can be assumed to have flight up when they aren't sleeping.

Still, overland flight isn't as powerful in dungeons or indoors. If the ceiling is 10' high, the caster can't fly high enough to get out of range.

Advocate
2009-02-25, 05:59 PM
An unfortunate byproduct of overland flight's hour/level duration. A high level wizard can be assumed to have flight up when they aren't sleeping.

Still, overland flight isn't as powerful in dungeons or indoors. If the ceiling is 10' high, the caster can't fly high enough to get out of range.

Which simply creates closet troll situations. See sig. Of course, if the ceiling is 10 feet high, then you aren't encountering fliers either now are you? Both sides are using other things, such as Greater Blink, (Greater) Mirror Image, Ghostform... to protect themselves. Well, if they can. Poor Fighter.

AslanCross
2009-02-25, 06:08 PM
Hate ToB, It says "hey existing melee classes, you won't be needed any more".

I disagree that ToB makes the existing melee classes irrelevant. If anything it gives more reason to take levels in them.

Warblade synergizes excellently with Fighter and allows you to change your Weapon Focus tree feats on the fly (thereby making them far more useful). It also works great with Barbarian fluff-wise, and can make for excellent synergy for less common builds (Whirling Frenzy Barbarian + Tiger Claw Warblade).

Shadow Hand Swordsage works extremely well with the Rogue, since the Rogue is the most effective source of Sneak Attack progression. Swordsage can only add to that progression at best (via Assassin's Stance).
Swordsage even makes Monk look good. The Unarmed variant stacks with Monk for unarmed strike damage and also can get a lot of mileage out of the Monk's bonus feats. (Improved Grapple + Crushing Weight of the Mountain, for example).

The only "replacement issue" I can really see here is the Crusader replacing the Paladin. The Paladin really has a problem from being front-loaded, and his best offensive ability (Smite) being extremely limited in use. The class's later abilities are all just "you can do X more times," which quite frankly, is not impressive at all.

Still, Paladin gets Divine Grace and a mount (or Charging Smite).

Lastly, since ToB levels stack with half of your non-martial adept levels, taking levels in non-martial adept classes is really not crippling to any build. In fact, most of my ToB builds (PC and NPC) are multiclassed between core melee characters and martial adept classes since doing so adds a very good spread of options.


Besides that, i must say that I prefer playing fighter type guys. There is some elegant about hitting things with metal.
As do I. Isn't that what Warblades do?

Kesnit
2009-02-25, 07:50 PM
Ok. Except that if someone says something blatantly false, I'm going to correct it. About casters or not about casters.

Except that isn't what you're doing. Instead, you're taking every opportunity to say how wonderful casters are.

Draz74
2009-02-25, 09:47 PM
Draz, Travel Devotion is not Pounce. It is move and full attack, but it is not a charge. Thus it does not work with charge abilities and such.
Absolutely correct. But people use "pounce" as a euphemism for "move and full attack by any means" all the time on this Forum.


Also, Barbarians are one of the better grapplers, far superior to Monks. Not that that means anything.

Explain to me how I said anything remotely contrary to this?

It's grappling strategies in general I was questioning, not Barbarians' relative effectiveness at them. I'd like to see someone, anyone* come up with a way to make nonmagical grappling viable (even with a PsyWarrior).

*Out of easily-playable races. Being an Ancient Dragon who casts AMF doesn't count.

sonofzeal
2009-02-25, 11:07 PM
This post is highly inaccurate, and demonstrates a complete lack of understanding on how attack bonus and AC scaling actually work. Compare the costs to obtain different AC values to the amount of cash you have at any given level, then compare this to how attack bonuses measure up at the same level both with no cost at all, and with the typical equipment and its cost. Once you do this, you will understand how (poorly) your AC measures up to enemy attack bonus.

Now do the reverse, comparing your attack bonus both with and without investment to enemy AC. Remember to take into consideration monster abilities, thus for example Balor AC is 39 as they can and will always have Unholy Aura on. Once you do this, you will understand that enemy AC doesn't fare much better against your attacks than your AC fares against its attacks.
Gah. I'm getting tired of dealing with this little bit of "common knowledge". Yes, it tends to work against monsters, who generally have huge AB and horrid AC, but most campaigns I've been in have had a large number of NPC enemies, who follow PC rules. And against NPCs, the situation is reversed. You really think I haven't done the math? Maybe what you're saying is true in some parties, but I've played a lot of D&D at level 1-12, and at those levels raising your AC is not hard at all, while raising your AB is painfully slow.

Case in point - in my current party, at level 12, my Artificer has AC 31, his construct minion has AC 33, the Favoured Soul has AC 31, and the Wizard has AC 29 but may be raising hers higher before next session. This is without sorter-duration buffs that all three of us can lay down with speed; I expect that if we cooperated, we could be hitting AC 40 with a couple rounds. And none of us are in any way "tanks".

So let's say AC 35 as a good standard for someone who's actually trying to optimize for it. What's a PC going to do to hit AC 35, at that level? You've got a +12 BAB tops, maybe a +3 weapon (but most go for a +1-and-goodies), and your relevant attack modifier. Assuming the +3 weapon, to get even parity you'll need a Str/Dex of 30. Possible, but not easy without LA (which reduces BAB) or situational buffs like Righteous Might - but if you really think there's more situational buffs for AB than there are for AC, you may want to take a look through the PHB again. Now, this isn't to say that certain builds can't do it, as obviously a Frenzied Berzerker isn't going to have much trouble here, nor is a Halfling Bloodstorm Blade. But similarly specialized defensive builds exist as well - and I'm willing to bet the world record for loopless AC beats the world record for loopless AB.

What adds to AC? Armor (scales fast), Shield (scales fast), Natural Armor (scales medium), Deflection (scales medium), Dex (scales slow), Size (doesn't usually scale), Dodge (doesn't usually scale), Insight (sporadic), and a giant massive pile of class features (Monk, Swashbuckler, Duelist, Invisible Blade, Deepwarden, Fist of the Forest, Dragonfire Adept, Dwarven Defender, War Mind, Arcane Duelist, Battledancer, Dread Pirate, Knight of the Sacred Seal, Mystic Wonderer, Risen Martyr, Ninja, Factotum, Mantis Mercenary, Forsaker, and I'm sure there's more)

What adds to AB? BAB (generally outside your control), Primary attack stat (scales slow), Size (doesn't usually scale), Enhancement Bonus (scales medium), Insight (sporadic), and a relative paucity of class features (mostly in the form of Smites or other x/day limited resources).

So. A PC who optimized AC can get higher numbers than a PC who optimized AB can reliably hit. A PC who puts even an average investment in AC can make things seriously hard for a PC who isn't a combat-monkey. If all you're fighting is monstrous enemies with no class level or gear then yes you'll have an easy time hitting them, and they'll have an easy time hitting you. But if you're up against Human Blackguards, or Elven Swashbucklers, or Dwarven Warminds, or Drow, or Yuan-Ti, or anyone else who uses gear and class levels, then you'd better be keeping an eye on your AC/AB or you'll be feeling the pain.

(edit - not that it's hard to land hits for a clever character, just that your most reliable method of doing so is to negate your enemy's AC rather than boosting your AB. Flatfooted attacks, touch attacks, and attacks that ignore certain defenses like Brilliant Energy are all admirable ways to land hits. That's not my point. My point is that AB doesn't scale well compared to AC for civilized opponents, and the original "every attack hits, so BAB is irrelevant for beating AC" comment is clearly false in that context.)

ShneekeyTheLost
2009-02-25, 11:07 PM
Absolutely correct. But people use "pounce" as a euphemism for "move and full attack by any means" all the time on this Forum. Much as I dislike having to agree with him, I haven't seen anyone use 'pounce' to mean anything other than 'a method to make a full attack on a charge', generally referring to some kind of Ubercharge build with Leap Attack/Shock Trooper/etc... to maximize damage, which must be specifically charging to get the bonuses for.


Explain to me how I said anything remotely contrary to this?

It's grappling strategies in general I was questioning, not Barbarians' relative effectiveness at them. I'd like to see someone, anyone* come up with a way to make nonmagical grappling viable (even with a PsyWarrior).

*Out of easily-playable races. Being an Ancient Dragon who casts AMF doesn't count.

Bear Warrior can probably beat this, due to both size increases AND massive Str bonuses. Particularly since he also gets the Improved Grap Ex ability from the bear, which states that he gets a free grapple check on a successful hit.

Eldariel
2009-02-26, 03:07 AM
A Grappling-focused Runescarred Berserker using Anti-Magic Field should be able to beat any other class in Grapple (and as long as the race were something like Dragonborn Orc, you'd have the natural Fly-speed). Now the question is how to actually get the target to grapple. At least AMF sidesteps the Freedom of Movement-issue.

ZeroNumerous
2009-02-26, 03:58 AM
Son of Zeal: Lion Totem Whirling Frenzy Barb 5/Bear Warrior 1/Frenzied Berserker 1

End Result: +14 to Strength. Base 18 + 2 item = 34 Strength. To Hit Bonus: +19 before items. Assuming a mere +1 weapon and charging he's hitting you on a 9 or higher. And that's a full five levels below you and optimized very little, on top of disregarding any and all buffing magic he could receive. You are not going to get more than a 40% chance of dodging above level 1 with any reasonable amount of AC stacking.

Satyr
2009-02-26, 05:35 AM
The neglection of heroic characters in a state of inferiority to cowardish spellcasters is one of the most blatant and severe mistakes of D&D, especially because it is som completely unnecessary. The rules include so many ways to limit the oppositions capabilities, cripple them or make them die in new and cruel ways, but none involve weapons, which is like a very own crown of stupid. I mean, people are more hindered by a little spell, but not from a sword in their breastbone or a shattered skull.

The worst is, that there are always enough people who think that this crap is actually a good idea. It is not. a good idea would be to honor those characters who put the most heroic approach into the game, the ones who stay in the frontline and make the heroes work - and bot those who use the fantasy world equivalent to napalm, sarin and date rape drugs.

When I play D&D, I use a specific set of house rules, like probably everyone. I never beleived that every character should be perfectly balanced against each other, but why an obvious sidekick to the true heroes should be so obsessively favored against what i conscider interesting game play or even good taste, is beyond my understanding. The strong focus on the superiority of magic is greatly anti-heroic, and that is one of the worst position a fantasy RPG can come up with.

Neithan
2009-02-26, 06:38 AM
Compare this to the full-BAB classes that people respect. Crusader, Warblade, Duskblade. It's been said that these three classes are the updated versions of paladins, fighters, and hexblades, respectively. See what they have in common? They have something OTHER than their BAB to make them interesting. A duskblade's spells can't compare to those of a sorcerer or even a bard, but they still give him more options than a ranger or a swashbuckler. Maneuvers, likewise, give martial characters more options, which they desperately need. Thematically, it's the same thing... "I hit him, hard!" But there's more to it than just "I full attack, Power Attacking for X."
This made me have an idea:
So Fightrs arn't as good as other classes, because they get allt hose feats, but all those feats are lame stuff like "+2 to damage", "greater chance for critical hits", "+4 when trying to trip" and such. And the +4 to trip actually takes up 2 feats.
But couldn't you simply keep the fighter, barbarian, paladin and ranger, but offer them much more interesting feats? If you get one cool thing per feat, and not one nice thing if you take 3 feats, wouldn't five feats for a level 12 human barbarian make it an actually very intriguing class?
I don't like tome of battle for several reasons, but I think for example you could make most of the stances to regular feats.

Uin
2009-02-26, 06:39 AM
Question:

I am fighting a dragon as a martial character, what is the best way to go about it? I may or may not be part of a group while doing this, but even a martial adept will move, use a maneuver then have to suck on a full-attack afterwords.

What should a martial character do?

Kaiyanwang
2009-02-26, 06:51 AM
Question:

I am fighting a dragon as a martial character, what is the best way to go about it? I may or may not be part of a group while doing this, but even a martial adept will move, use a maneuver then have to suck on a full-attack afterwords.

What should a martial character do?

Well, when you fight a Dragon, the first question would be:

"Where are you fighting the Dragon? And, between Dragon and Adventurers, who decided the terrain, took the initiative (in game terms and not)?"

At high levels, my players relied on spellcasters buffs to improve mobility, or on magic items like hats able to teleport, or mantle with flying and so on (this didn't worked 100% times, however, dragons are smart).

Sometimes, the sorcerer managed to land in someway the dragon, or to send meleers ABOVE the dragon.

Other times, casters had to handle the dragon, while meleers kept at bay Dragon's followers.

Yarram
2009-02-26, 06:53 AM
I have this idea for a fighter based around some kind of anti-magic field producing item. A fighter 4 then/dervish 10/then scout 6 wielding adamant weapons and specialising in sundering could own any magic based characters. Of course he is also wearing a Boots of Teleportation to blink out of scary situations. His only problem would be meat-tanks that can out-damage him, but hey! Thats what parties are for!
So my concept is:
Fighter activates anti-magic field over himself. Fighter goes and sits on the most powerful mage in the area. Fighter smirks because all his enemies use spells that don't affect him, or rely on +5 swords that suddenly become useless against his adamant full-plate.

Kaiyanwang
2009-02-26, 06:56 AM
Fighter activates anti-magic field over himself. Fighter goes and sits on the most powerful mage in the area. Fighter smirks because all his enemies use spells that don't affect him, or rely on +5 swords that suddenly become useless against his adamant full-plate.

You mean with a scroll? Or there is an item?

Kaihaku
2009-02-26, 07:19 AM
This made me have an idea:
So Fightrs arn't as good as other classes, because they get allt hose feats, but all those feats are lame stuff like "+2 to damage", "greater chance for critical hits", "+4 when trying to trip" and such. And the +4 to trip actually takes up 2 feats.
But couldn't you simply keep the fighter, barbarian, paladin and ranger, but offer them much more interesting feats? If you get one cool thing per feat, and not one nice thing if you take 3 feats, wouldn't five feats for a level 12 human barbarian make it an actually very intriguing class?
I don't like tome of battle for several reasons, but I think for example you could make most of the stances to regular feats.

I don't like Tome of Battle because it makes martial characters that work like casters. WotC says outright that maneuvers are like a Warblade's spellbook. It shows a profound lack of imagination. Yes, there's no doubting it's fun and plays smoothly, but it's a modified sorcerer with "melee spells" and a better class progression. I like playing sorcerers so it's not really all that bad of thing but...

I'd have preferred that they had given martial characters something they could do better than casters rather than make the martial characters emulate casters.

Instead, why not martial feats that are actually Feats? Why isn't it viable for a Barbarian rip the arm off a beast and beat it to death with its own arm? Why isn't there a feat that allows a Fighter to attempt a Vorpal blow? Casters and Assassins can force Fort saves vs. Death, why not martial characters? On that note, why can't martial characters force saves vs. suck without going all kungfu? Where are the rules for kicking someone in the crouch or slicing open something's stomach? And why can't they do it like Martial characters? No limits per day, any time. Why can't Fighters parry...like seriously? Even a Swashbuckler can't parry. Why do most Martial feats either suck or only increase damage dealt?

I don't think martial characters should be "better" than casters overall, but when it comes to physically beating the crap out of something...

Oslecamo
2009-02-26, 07:39 AM
You mean with a scroll? Or there is an item?

Anti magic torc. AMF all day long baby! Show the druid how to melee whitout need of buffs.

Kaiyanwang
2009-02-26, 07:55 AM
Anti magic torc. AMF all day long baby! Show the druid how to melee whitout need of buffs.

WOW! Where is AM torch? I completely missed it! (Maybe in the DMG? would be a spectacle :smallredface:)

Lycar
2009-02-26, 08:09 AM
My point is: In the lower levels, every party member is dependent of eachother.

And that is just as it should be, since D&D is supposed to be a game about people from different walks of life, to throw their lot together to become something more then the sum of it's parts, a party of heroes.



About increasing the efficiency of the melee troupe.

>snip<

The ToB Crusader can keep healing himself during the battle while dealing a good ammount of damage at almost no expense of resources. The Fighter, on the other hand, to get a similar benefit, must take about 3 or 4 feats to get fast healing 4, once per encounter. See the problem? The fighter can do almost the same thing by spending feats while the Crusader can spend his feats in things much more important. Hell, the Crusader could get the same Feats and heal a hell bunch of HP per round that would make him almost impossible to beat down, while buffing him out (remember that Crusaders LIKE to take damage!). <snip>

Yes, but to be fair, one has to remember that the Crusader is the chosen of a deity, his toughness comes from divine power. He is much more a paladin or even cleric then a fighter.

Plus, if the Crusader does spend his feats on the Combat Form line of feats, he isn't spending them on something else.

It is a good thing, however, that the fighter at least has the option to get some fast healing (as little good as 20 or 40 HP worth of fast healing at lv. 9 and onward are actually going to do him).


And More. Most of the non ToB meleers can't do anything outside combat because they don't have the Skill points for it. 2 + int... C'mon... Half of the Fighters, Paladins and Barbarians out there can't even keep a 10 on the Int score. This means about 1 skill point per level. ONE! How a class that does not have any or has half spells is supposed to work at all with 1 skill point per level?

Yes, this is a bit sad. But then again, if one really desires to branch out a bit, there is always the rogue dip.

Seriously, I'm all for giving fighters more skill points (and tumble as a class skill, for the DEX builds) but the role of the skill monkey is the rogue's shtick.

Or maybe the bard's. But it won't do to make the fighter step on the toes of the skillmonkeys. We complain about the spellcasters poaching on the fighter's turf with all their DMM'ed Righteous Might cheese and whatnot, now going to do the same thing to the rogue is just bad.

So more skill points to make taking a few cross class ranks here and there viable, yes please.

Inflated skill list: No thanks.



The most painful part of being a meleer outside ToB and other good melee options (PsyWar and etc) is that the character won't have any versatility at all. After that, the character will not have any durability at all. Requiring a handy Cleric to help them. They don't even get UMD, wich would allow the use of Healing and Utility wands. Even if they had UMD, it would be their only skill since they have 2+int per level to deal with it.

Ah but that is the point: The fighter IS NOT SUPPOSED to do everything himself. He is supposed to work within the group.

The problem is not that the fighter requires the aid of the other party member to be viable, the problem is that certain classes don't need the fighter or his ilk to dominate. Which lets the more anti-social types come to the conclusion that fighters are unfit to live and should be cast from the list of playable classes alltogether.

We don't want to go that way.

Unfortunately, the only real solution to that problem would to nerf casters to a point where they would require a melee type or two to stay alive themselves.

But since you get so exponentionally much whining every time you put the words 'caster' and 'nerf' in the same post, it would be much, much easier simple to hand the fighter the tools he needs to become independent form the help (or as some would put it: babysitting/coddling) of his party members.

But then he is just in the same boat as CoDzilla & Co. He is an egoist who doesn't really need to travel with those other berks. He just tolerates their continued existance because they amuse him. Or something.

And that is a bad bad thing for a game that is meant to be played by friends. :smallfrown:

Lycar

Kaihaku
2009-02-26, 08:16 AM
But then he is just in the same boat as CoDzilla & Co. He is an egoist who doesn't really need to travel with those other berks. He just tolerates their continued existance because they amuse him. Or something.

And that is a bad bad thing for a game that is meant to be played by friends. :smallfrown:

True, true. Though, for the most part, class and system imbalances have never greatly hindered games I've played with friends. We aim to have fun regardless and we succeed, even if there's a Wizard and a Monk together in the party. Now, games with acquaintances, friends of friends, and online are a completely different story. :(

Neithan
2009-02-26, 08:21 AM
You can have a lot of fun without ever killing anything yourself. But to have fun, you usually have to feel that you did contribute to the parties success.

Kaihaku
2009-02-26, 08:25 AM
You can have a lot of fun without ever killing anything yourself. But to have fun, you usually have to feel that you did contribute to the parties success.

I agree. But most of the people I'd call friends would allow another friend their moment of glory (even a monk) and opportunity to contribute (even a monk) rather than going on an ego trip showing off how they could do the same thing better (ala how most caster vs all discussions seem to go.) Playing with people who aren't jerks doesn't erase the system imbalances but it makes it possible to have fun in spite of them.

Advocate
2009-02-26, 09:02 AM
Explain to me how I said anything remotely contrary to this?

It's grappling strategies in general I was questioning, not Barbarians' relative effectiveness at them. I'd like to see someone, anyone* come up with a way to make nonmagical grappling viable (even with a PsyWarrior).

*Out of easily-playable races. Being an Ancient Dragon who casts AMF doesn't count.

Simple. I didn't. As they are one of the better grapplers, making them work as such is less of an uphill battle. I recommend some Totemist in there.


Gah. I'm getting tired of dealing with this little bit of "common knowledge". Yes, it tends to work against monsters, who generally have huge AB and horrid AC, but most campaigns I've been in have had a large number of NPC enemies, who follow PC rules. And against NPCs, the situation is reversed. You really think I haven't done the math? Maybe what you're saying is true in some parties, but I've played a lot of D&D at level 1-12, and at those levels raising your AC is not hard at all, while raising your AB is painfully slow.

Lol, what? If you're fighting NPCs, you're fighting low AC enemies. Full stop. AC is purely a factor of cash for humanoids. NPCs don't get much cash. However, many of the ways to boost attack bonus are not cash based. So while you will inherently have an AC of 10 + Dex + Cash, you will inherently have an attack bonus more like +20 or higher + Cash at the same time. Also, it's cheaper to boost offense up, as you don't have to blow half a PC WBL just to get a half assed effect.


*stuff*

...What? I'm not even touching most of that. Just one thing. You do realize that if normal attacks could actually do something besides damage, it would work against you, as enemies are attacking you at least as often as you attack them... and unlike them, you're supposed to last longer than one fight? So all that'd do is make you crippled and useless before the end of the first day. Even if you aren't dead outright.


Question:

I am fighting a dragon as a martial character, what is the best way to go about it? I may or may not be part of a group while doing this, but even a martial adept will move, use a maneuver then have to suck on a full-attack afterwords.

What should a martial character do?

Be a ToB class. Move in, Tumbling as needed, Standard action attack. Swift action to get away, via Sudden Leap or Teleport or something so you can't be full attacked back.

A Psychic Warrior can't manage the move in, do something relevant, and get out bit as he can only use one Swift action for either Hustle or Lion's Charge. If you could find a way around that those could work too.

No one else really has a chance, barring maybe a massively buffed gish.


I have this idea for a fighter based around some kind of anti-magic field producing item. A fighter 4 then/dervish 10/then scout 6 wielding adamant weapons and specialising in sundering could own any magic based characters. Of course he is also wearing a Boots of Teleportation to blink out of scary situations. His only problem would be meat-tanks that can out-damage him, but hey! Thats what parties are for!
So my concept is:
Fighter activates anti-magic field over himself. Fighter goes and sits on the most powerful mage in the area. Fighter smirks because all his enemies use spells that don't affect him, or rely on +5 swords that suddenly become useless against his adamant full-plate.

Reliant on house rules just to exist, only owns himself via destroying his own equipment and preventing himself from flying, or using these teleport boots. Also, he doesn't get to the mage. Mage laughs at him and hurls orbs to exploit his now Wizard level HP and sub Wizard level Fortitude saves, as the AMF boned him hard. Only do this if you want to commit suicide in a roundabout way.

And this thread is getting ridiculous.

Kaiyanwang
2009-02-26, 09:12 AM
And this thread is getting ridiculous.

If you think so, leave it. It's a matter of taste and interest... I found some interesting material in this thread, I found it useful. I can undertstand that is not suitable for you gamestyle, but you are not the only being in universe :smallsmile:

Uin
2009-02-26, 09:14 AM
Be a ToB class. Move in, Tumbling as needed, Standard action attack. Swift action to get away, via Sudden Leap or Teleport or something so you can't be full attacked back.

A Psychic Warrior can't manage the move in, do something relevant, and get out bit as he can only use one Swift action for either Hustle or Lion's Charge. If you could find a way around that those could work too.

No one else really has a chance, barring maybe a massively buffed gish.Putting this into context with Eberron (what I mostly run and play):
Human Warblade/Dragonmark Heir/Blade of Orion with Quickened Dragonmark gets a fair few swift action dimensional leaps.

krossbow
2009-02-26, 09:27 AM
I agree. would allow another friend their moment of glory (even a monk) and opportunity to contribute (even a monk)




Thats kind of the problem with most of the melee classes at high levels. In order to "let them shine" usually you have to hold back and pull your punches intentionally so as to not completely outclass them (Clerics no using any spells, wizards only using low level damage spells, ect.) in which case, its a horribly trivial encounter anyways and smacks of being a kiddie pool.

in any appropriate level encounter, they'll never get their chance to shine truly; their attacks and moves won't be near useful enough to really put a noticable dent in an enemy at the same speed as your allies, and if they hold back so as to not shown up the monk, then the enemy will tear them apart since they're pulling their punches.

Unfortunately, at high levels the normal melee classes turn into glorified cohorts.

Thats why most of us are saying to be a tome of battle character. It lets you shine all on your own; no one "gives" you anything, you take it yourself!

Kaihaku
2009-02-26, 09:42 AM
Thats kind of the problem with most of the melee classes at high levels. In order to "let them shine" usually you have to hold back and pull your punches intentionally so as to not completely outclass them (Clerics no using any spells, wizards only using low level damage spells, ect.) in which case, its a horribly trivial encounter anyways and smacks of being a kiddie pool.

It's not as difficult or contrived as you make out to be, it means instead of buffing himself into Codzilla the Cleric buffs the martial peeps and the Wizard follows 80% of the Batman routine only without the smug jerk attitude. Actually, attitude is most of it from my experience.


in any appropriate level encounter, they'll never get their chance to shine truly; their attacks and moves won't be near useful enough to really put a noticable dent in an enemy at the same speed as your allies, and if they hold back so as to not shown up the monk, then the enemy will tear them apart since they're pulling their punches.

They don't hold back not to show up the Monk, they bolster and support the Monk instead of trying to take the spotlight. It's a teamwork thing. No, it's not optimal and I'm sure it probably could be done faster by a Wizard on his own but we had fun the way we did and, yes, that time I was playing a full caster.


Unfortunately, at high levels the normal melee classes turn into glorified cohorts.

Yes, the system definitely tips that way. Decent attitudes on the parts of players and good roleplaying can balance it out somewhat, but it never completely vanishes, no.


Thats why most of us are saying to be a tome of battle character. It lets you shine all on your own; no one "gives" you anything, you take it yourself!

Yes, that's one solution. As someone else said, a wonderful team of egoists...

I have my own issues with Tome of Battle, personally, but I've already detailed them.

krossbow
2009-02-26, 09:49 AM
It's not as difficult or contrived as you make out to be, it means instead of buffing himself into Codzilla the Cleric buffs the martial peeps and the Wizard follows 80% of the Batman routine only without the smug jerk attitude. Actually, attitude is most of it from my experience.



When righteous might and divine power can be cast on other characters, let me know. Because Self cast spells which CANNOT be spread to other characters are the only reason by CODzilla exists.





They don't hold back not to show up the Monk, they bolster and support the Monk instead of trying to take the spotlight. It's a teamwork thing. No, it's not optimal and I'm sure it probably could be done faster by a Wizard on his own but we had fun the way we did and, yes, that time I was playing a full caster.



Unfortunately, while your giving the monk pep talks and pumping him up with spells, the monsters WILL rape you. Flurry will not cut it in any appropriate right.

Its just the reality of a situation. unless your DM has enemies stare at their shoe laces half the fight, they will tear through your party. I'm not doing this as an anti-monk/fighter thing, its just the SITUATION.




Yes, the system definitely tips that way. Decent attitudes on the parts of players and good roleplaying can balance it out somewhat, but it never completely vanishes, no.



Yes, that's one solution. As someone else said, a wonderful team of egoists...



Unfortunately, no matter how much you "congratulate" someone, it won't cover up issues in combat. Just like how on say, Buffy it was incredibly clear that individuals such as Xander were basically entourage members, at high levels it really becomes clear in fights that basic melee classes are more or less just minions.

Person_Man
2009-02-26, 10:04 AM
Son of Zeal: Lion Totem Whirling Frenzy Barb 5/Bear Warrior 1/Frenzied Berserker 1

End Result: +14 to Strength. Base 18 + 2 item = 34 Strength. To Hit Bonus: +19 before items. Assuming a mere +1 weapon and charging he's hitting you on a 9 or higher. And that's a full five levels below you and optimized very little, on top of disregarding any and all buffing magic he could receive. You are not going to get more than a 40% chance of dodging above level 1 with any reasonable amount of AC stacking.

Turning into a bear replaces the bonuses from Rage or Frenzy with your bear form bonuses. So there's no reason to take Whirling Frenzy or a level of Frenzied Berserker. And Bear Warrior requires +7 BAB for entry. And you can't use magic weapons if you're in bear form using natural attacks.

I think the build you're looking for is something like:

Lion Totem Barbarian 1/Dwarf Paragon 3/Fist of the Forest 1/Deepwarden 2/Bear Warrior 1/Warshaper 3

So when you Rage, you enter your Bear form and get +12 Str, +2 Dex, +10 Con, Fast Healing, Immunity to Crits, improved reach, double Con bonus to AC, and another +4 Dex when you go into your Fist of the Forest Feral Trance (1/day). From there you can go into Nature's Warrior, or take more Bear Warrior.

Kaihaku
2009-02-26, 10:42 AM
When righteous might and divine power can be cast on other characters, let me know. Because Self cast spells which CANNOT be spread to other characters are the only reason by CODzilla exists.

And those are the only two worthwhile buffing spells a cleric can cast?

I meant to imply that there are other viable routes that don't steal the martial spotlight for a Cleric to take than that of CODzilla. I've played divine casters quite a bit and I've always found that there's plenty of room for awesome there without the ego boost of showing up the martial characters.


Unfortunately, while your giving the monk pep talks and pumping him up with spells, the monsters WILL rape you. Flurry will not cut it in any appropriate right.

I think you missed the part where I said I've been there and that didn't happen.

I would take a team working together over a group of individual show-offs trying to one up each other any day; from my personal experience the team of individual show-ups is probably more powerful but the team working together has more fun overall.


Its just the reality of a situation. unless your DM has enemies stare at their shoe laces half the fight, they will tear through your party. I'm not doing this as an anti-monk/fighter thing, its just the SITUATION.

Teamwork doesn't mean going into a situation unprepared or playing stupidly.

It's not THE situation, it's A situation, which certainly happens but is not universal.


Unfortunately, no matter how much you "congratulate" someone, it won't cover up issues in combat. Just like how on say, Buffy it was incredibly clear that individuals such as Xander were basically entourage members, at high levels it really becomes clear in fights that basic melee classes are more or less just minions.

Um... No.

Why? Because it's a roleplaying game. Are the rules out of balance? Without question. The core martial classes got screwed by WotC, I have not claimed otherwise. But unless you're playing with a bunch of jerks you can have fun anyway. It doesn't fix the problems in the system, no, but those problems certainly don't absolutely ruin the game. If it did, no one would have ever enjoyed playing a martial character before Tome of Battle came out.

I've played a Fighter from 1 to 19, definitely the weakest character I've ever played, but I still had fun playing him because I was playing with friends. I got frustrated that the system was so imbalanced and that the other characters were far stronger than me, certainly yes, but it didn't ruin the game for me. I've also played a Barbarian in epic which was vastly outshone by a certain Wizard but I still had made quite an impact regardless. And I've played a Paladin to 17 who was the leader of a group including several full casters and I didn't feel like a minion once.

Unless I am drastically misunderstanding you, you are essentially arguing that it is impossible to feel like part of a team and have fun playing as a high-level martial character without Tome of Battle. Maybe that has been your experience and if so that is valid, but it certainly has not been a universal experience.

Advocate
2009-02-26, 11:05 AM
Putting this into context with Eberron (what I mostly run and play):
Human Warblade/Dragonmark Heir/Blade of Orion with Quickened Dragonmark gets a fair few swift action dimensional leaps.

Sure. I was mainly thinking of the teleport maneuvers, but that works too.


Thats kind of the problem with most of the melee classes at high levels. *snip*

Thank you. I like this guy.


It's not as difficult or contrived as you make out to be, it means instead of buffing himself into Codzilla the Cleric buffs the martial peeps and the Wizard follows 80% of the Batman routine only without the smug jerk attitude. Actually, attitude is most of it from my experience.

The best buffs are self only. So it's not a choice between making the Cleric CoDzilla and making say... a Fighterzilla. It's the choice between Cleric becomes CoDzilla or... Fighter gets Bull's Strength. :smallyuk: That's not even a choice at all - buffs are force multipliers, and thus already better on the better classes... the fact you're stuck with subpar buffs for others just amplifies this. You can multiply awesome by awesome, or you can multiply suck by marginally less suck. Gee, that's a tough one...


They don't hold back not to show up the Monk, they bolster and support the Monk instead of trying to take the spotlight. It's a teamwork thing. No, it's not optimal and I'm sure it probably could be done faster by a Wizard on his own but we had fun the way we did and, yes, that time I was playing a full caster.

See above for why this is just empty words.


Yes, the system definitely tips that way. Decent attitudes on the parts of players and good roleplaying can balance it out somewhat, but it never completely vanishes, no.

Good roleplaying means recognizing that buffs are force multipliers. Which means they might try buffing the Monk, but when they see he still sucks, even with the gifts of the Gods they aren't going to bother in the future. The concept of 'having fun' is a purely metagame one, as the characters likely do not regard continuously risking their lives as fun.

Harperfan7
2009-02-26, 11:16 AM
When I first tried out D&D forums like this, I was surprised how so many people thought fighters and monks sucked while druids and wizards kicked ass. I always felt the opposite was true. I still do. I've given it a lot of thought and come to the conclusion that the classes are only unbalanced if you completely know every little thing about the system. The people I play with honestly haven't even read the PHB all the way through. They don't know all the little secrets and tricks and spell combos and what not. To us, the classes are completly balanced, and the game is fun for everybody.
Another factor is DM responsibility. If the DM is creative, responsible, and has good taste, balance isn't a problem. I think a big part of that is trying to stick to what is believable and realistic (well, relatively anyway).

Leon
2009-02-26, 11:50 AM
This thread is intened for discussing builds for martial characters (paladins, fighters, samurai, rangers, barbarians, swashbucklers, and hexblades.) To prevent some of the problems that plauged the last such thread I am going to say that compairing fighters and casters is not allowed. Casters may be more powerful but guess what? Some people still like to play warriors and this thread is for them. Debates about various builds are welcome but please keep them civil. This thread is mainly about optimizing but other ideas about fun warrior characters are welcome too. I think that's about it for rules so let the discussion begin!

Nice thought but given this Board, its gonna turn out that wrong way in the end and be locked like every other.


My 2cp
Ive played a Ranger to lvl 16 (with a +2LA) with a Archery Focus in a game that had a Generalist Wizard, a Paladin/PrCsomethingSomething and a Druid (later a Diplomatic Rogue), only time i felt useless was in the social combat that my PC had no reason to be involved in - that was the political world that the pally and wiz controlled. (oh and against the same creatures that everyone else was useless against - there were a few of those, you just flee)

For the 1st part of the campaign i didnt even have any magic items (i had some non standard materials such as Obdurium armour) given that where my PC came from was a Anti magic Zone (Think Uluru with a town on top in the middle of the amazon radiating a AMZ for a couple of Km around it)

After getting some magical enhancement to my gear it was even better, the Wizard being a generalist did a fine role as our heal/buffer/support, while the pally focused on massive melee damage
If i did a full attack i averaged 120 damage per round (give or take dpending what the situation was.


Ive also played a Elven Fighter to 10th level, Simple yet Brutal - Great sword at its finest. no uber charge, tripper crasher chain nonsense etc
i recall that the feats i used were: Focus- Greatsword, Spec - Greatsword, Power Attack, imp Sunder, Combat Brute, quick draw, Imp Bull rush, combat expertise
Got to be well know for hitting hard fast and showing no mercy, was the Level headed one in the party

Advocate
2009-02-26, 11:51 AM
When I first tried out D&D forums like this, I was surprised how so many people thought fighters and monks sucked while druids and wizards kicked ass. I always felt the opposite was true. I still do. I've given it a lot of thought and come to the conclusion that the classes are only unbalanced if you completely know every little thing about the system. The people I play with honestly haven't even read the PHB all the way through. They don't know all the little secrets and tricks and spell combos and what not. To us, the classes are completly balanced, and the game is fun for everybody.
Another factor is DM responsibility. If the DM is creative, responsible, and has good taste, balance isn't a problem. I think a big part of that is trying to stick to what is believable and realistic (well, relatively anyway).

Except that... no.

See, it's the people that have read the PHB all the way through and know all the little secrets and tricks that just might be able to make Fighters and Monks remotely relevant. Not good, just remotely relevant.

Druids? All it takes is some new player thinking it would be cool to have a bear/cat/wolf follow you around, while you turn into a bear/cat/wolf and summon more bears/cats/wolves. That is a VERY COMMON thing for new players. I've personally observed it several times, which is to say as many times as I've seen Druids.

Wizards are only slightly more tricky, as all you have to do is realize blasting sucks and you instantly shift from being basically ignorable to being a God. New players will probably try blasting at first, but will catch on pretty quickly.

So, all those empty words you said mean nothing. No, that isn't true, because it's far more likely 'disabling wizard' or 'nature's army druid' qualifies as 'believable' than some power dipped martial class just trying to be at par. This is what happens when you have borked concepts of balance - things break even harder than if you didn't mess with them at all.

If you do know every little thing about the system, there is LESS of an imbalance because the Fighter will be a Warblade and the Wizard will be one of the specialist casters.

kalt
2009-02-26, 12:00 PM
Here is a nice build that I played that was far from weak but like others said still could only do so much.

Race: Elf
Classes: Swashbuckler 3/Fighter 3/Champion of Cerllon Latheron(Sp?) 2/Dervish 10/xxx2
Weapon: Elven Courtblade (A finessable 2 hander that you can still PA)

Summary: The character was downright nasty in almost every regard. He got dex to damage, int to damage, and 1.5 str to damage, while getting his sky high dex to hit along with nice AC. He could dervish dance and just start power attacking like a madman. True he wasn't as good as a caster, but without using ToB was about as good as it gets I think.

kalt
2009-02-26, 12:09 PM
On the note of balance in the game, well ther isn't much of one and that was why 2nd edition had a good idea of classes leveling at different rates. Yes it was cumbersome and slightly obnoxious but it did do a good job at just embracing imbalance.

The real problem with balance isn't so much on a class by class basis but how they interact within a group and largely the experience of the players. If a super experienced player is playing a caster and a newbie is playing a mediocre melee class to begin with (think fighter 20) then that poor newbie is either going to feel useless in most situations or the caster will most likely walk through everything. A druid is the big one I think that just begs to be broken. Once a person finds the feat natural spell new or not the Druid can get ridiculous awful fast.

I've only played a couple characters that really just broke a campaign the malconvoker who could just summon anything to fit a situation and then throw haste on the party and a druid with the well known little buddy the fleshraker, the spell venomfire, and mass snakes swiftness to just make summons all the better and the rest of the party never complained.

Kaiyanwang
2009-02-26, 12:16 PM
When I first tried out D&D forums like this, I was surprised how so many people thought fighters and monks sucked while druids and wizards kicked ass. I always felt the opposite was true. I still do. I've given it a lot of thought and come to the conclusion that the classes are only unbalanced if you completely know every little thing about the system. The people I play with honestly haven't even read the PHB all the way through. They don't know all the little secrets and tricks and spell combos and what not. To us, the classes are completly balanced, and the game is fun for everybody.
Another factor is DM responsibility. If the DM is creative, responsible, and has good taste, balance isn't a problem. I think a big part of that is trying to stick to what is believable and realistic (well, relatively anyway).

I have quite your same feelings about the issue.

I say quite because there are istances in wich magic is an easy solution and not per se, but for the lack of drawbacks. Anyway, as a DM, as my players looked through manuals looking for combos, I went for manuals looking for Shadowland Taint, Purple Rain, as examples of "watch out divine".

More, it seems to me that my players always played fine, and respected my last decisions about issues (maybe whined later to the Pub, but my rule 0 rocks). I say this because seems to me that a lot of "magic abuses" shown in this and other boards sometime lack of in game logic, motivation and the like. Said this, I houserule almost nothing, fine players i have to realize - not to be offending, but I'm grateful of not having some of the people writing in these or in other boards as players :smallbiggrin:

The system is not perfect - actually, is faaaar away from perfection. For my gaming group worked fine because we used rules as a way to describe heroes and villains, not to something to twist and abuse (even if I realize that some rule is akward, or silly, or broken). Even if I appreciate freedom and strange builds, it seems to me that:

- Some builds are mere numbers. See the pouncing barbarian. It's suggested even for PCs that does not fit in anything with a barbarian. But is veery cheesy useful, so..

I don't think that this way of perceive the game is plain wrong. But when one heads in such directions, should remember that maybe some elements seems broken if you don't consider RPG implication and the such.

- The way monsters are played matters. Those who say that monster must be played smart are right, but this is true for smart monsters. Not all monsters are smart. More, the fight could be the main motivation for PLAYERS, but characters and monsters could be driven in or uot combat for other reasons (honor, fear... even lust!).

This argumentation can be even reversed: there are many ways to play smart a monster, and to prepare the environment. And the minions. At least my experience a big bad enemy, a lot of minions and few bad tricks force caster to use divinations, buffs and counter-actions, and so burn slot.

I admit that this point can be countered - if i.e. a divine caster gains taint buffing himself, gains taint even healing the fighter - DM must pay attention, and wisely choose what allow, and the amount of physical and "mystical" obstacles to grant spotlight once for this, and once for that PC.

More, I ask: PC must always be in the same place at the same moment? And magic items cannot help?

I admit that this can be countered saying that MI can be disjoined, and cannot be always at reach, but a wise Dm can handle it. For what it matters, A mage can find himself in a sudden dead magic zone, there is a tree in underdark that spred AMF...a DM can handle it making thesituation annoying or challenging for the group.

-Reading discussion and suggestion about builds leads me to a question: How much cheese (even if cheese can be subjective) DMs allow in general? And how much DMs are considered people to trick instead of peole you work with to have fun?

becasue the more cheese is allowed, I think that more casters grow stronger, even if DMs pay attention to things I listed above.

I admit that maybe i could be cheese-oversensitive :smallwink:

My 2coppers, of course.

Oslecamo
2009-02-26, 12:28 PM
If you do know every little thing about the system, there is LESS of an imbalance because the Fighter will be a Warblade and the Wizard will be one of the specialist casters.

No, they will actually be fighter/barb/warb/crusa/sword/PRC1/PRC2/PRC3, and wizard/PRC1-10.

sonofzeal
2009-02-26, 12:53 PM
Son of Zeal: Lion Totem Whirling Frenzy Barb 5/Bear Warrior 1/Frenzied Berserker 1

End Result: +14 to Strength. Base 18 + 2 item = 34 Strength. To Hit Bonus: +19 before items. Assuming a mere +1 weapon and charging he's hitting you on a 9 or higher. And that's a full five levels below you and optimized very little, on top of disregarding any and all buffing magic he could receive. You are not going to get more than a 40% chance of dodging above level 1 with any reasonable amount of AC stacking.
Yes, and I said that a Frenzied Berzerker can do it. Specifically, he does it through beefing up the only thing that can be beefed up to improve your AB - your Str/Dex. It's an optimized example, and I did talk about that. Do you really think the optimized AC fairs any worse? Do you think I can't make a character this guy will have trouble hitting?


Lol, what? If you're fighting NPCs, you're fighting low AC enemies. Full stop. AC is purely a factor of cash for humanoids. NPCs don't get much cash. However, many of the ways to boost attack bonus are not cash based. So while you will inherently have an AC of 10 + Dex + Cash, you will inherently have an attack bonus more like +20 or higher + Cash at the same time. Also, it's cheaper to boost offense up, as you don't have to blow half a PC WBL just to get a half assed effect.
Dwarven Whirling Frenzy Barbarian 3 / Monk 2 / Fist of the Forest 1 / Deepwarden 2. Throw in Combat Expertise for fun. Huge AC, no real cash investment, still an effective character. Could be a credible threat in the form of a guerilla warrior, striking hard and fast then retreating with his superior speed if necessary.

And seriously, "cheaper to boost offense up"? That's a straight-out lie. Boosting offense with money means enchanting your weapon, and buying items of str/dex boost. For every single +1 AB you get from enchanting your weapon, you could have gotten a further +1 on your armor AND on your shield - double the bonus for the same cost. For every single +1 AB you get from an item to boost your str/dex (meaning +2 on the item itself), you could have gotten a further +1 on your Ring of Protection AND on your Amulet of Natural Armor. Boosting your AC with money costs reliably half as much as boosting your AB by the same amount. And that's without prioritizing into all the myriad other ways that you could be boosting your AC - like mithral on your armor, or gloves of dex, or armor spikes of defending, which can occasionally be cheaper - and for which AB lacks any reasonable equivalent. And that's just in core.

Now, D&D does generally favour offense over defense; your AC isn't a problem if they're all dead. As a result, a lot of people seem to pour gp into offense because they like to see big numbers when they attack, and these characters will often have an AB that's relatively high compared to their AC. That's one playstyle, and that's fine. However, it really is categorically easier by an order of magnitude to raise your AC with gold, over your AB. Even offensively-minded characters have little excuse if they don't have an AC that would be troublesome for their fellow PCs, or for the evil tyrant's hit squad, or the drow assassin tailing them.

Advocate
2009-02-26, 01:04 PM
No, they will actually be fighter/barb/warb/crusa/sword/PRC1/PRC2/PRC3, and wizard/PRC1-10.

Eh, one beatstick is the same as any other for the most part. Also, class lists are a metagame concept.

Kaiyanwang
2009-02-26, 01:09 PM
Barbarian/Monk?:smallconfused:

Chaos Monk from DM?

Advocate
2009-02-26, 01:16 PM
Yes, and I said that a Frenzied Berzerker can do it. Specifically, he does it through beefing up the only thing that can be beefed up to improve your AB - your Str/Dex. It's an optimized example, and I did talk about that. Do you really think the optimized AC fairs any worse? Do you think I can't make a character this guy will have trouble hitting?

{Scrubbed}

Attack bonus is improved by:

BAB.
Stats.
*very long list of buffs*
*multiple feats if you only count the good ones, many feats if you count all of them*

AC is improved by:

Cash. There's also some really bad feats that act as Traps, and some classes that do the same thing.

So, just focusing on worthwhile methods only, your WBL is opposing WBL, spells, and feats.


Dwarven Whirling Frenzy Barbarian 3 / Monk 2 / Fist of the Forest 1 / Deepwarden 2. Throw in Combat Expertise for fun. Huge AC, no real cash investment, still an effective character. Could be a credible threat in the form of a guerilla warrior, striking hard and fast then retreating with his superior speed if necessary.

5' square of difficult terrain turtle. Enemy walks briskly around.


And seriously, "cheaper to boost offense up"? That's a straight-out lie. Boosting offense with money means enchanting your weapon, and buying items of str/dex boost. For every single +1 AB you get from enchanting your weapon, you could have gotten a further +1 on your armor AND on your shield - double the bonus for the same cost. For every single +1 AB you get from an item to boost your str/dex (meaning +2 on the item itself), you could have gotten a further +1 on your Ring of Protection AND on your Amulet of Natural Armor. Boosting your AC with money costs reliably half as much as boosting your AB by the same amount. And that's without prioritizing into all the myriad other ways that you could be boosting your AC - like mithral on your armor, or gloves of dex, or armor spikes of defending, which can occasionally be cheaper - and for which AB lacks any reasonable equivalent. And that's just in core.

{Scrubbed}


Now, D&D does generally favour offense over defense; your AC isn't a problem if they're all dead. As a result, a lot of people seem to pour gp into offense because they like to see big numbers when they attack, and these characters will often have an AB that's relatively high compared to their AC. That's one playstyle, and that's fine. However, it really is categorically easier by an order of magnitude to raise your AC with gold, over your AB. Even offensively-minded characters have little excuse if they don't have an AC that would be troublesome for their fellow PCs, or for the evil tyrant's hit squad, or the drow assassin tailing them.

No, they do it because it is the only way that works. {Scrubbed} Also, Assasins = casters, or ambushers with Wraithstrike. Even if you did have an AC high enough to actually be relevant (note, this requires 70-80, when you cap out at 49) it still doesn't matter in those examples.

Advocate
2009-02-26, 01:18 PM
Barbarian/Monk?:smallconfused:

Easily doable.


Ex-Monks

A monk who becomes nonlawful cannot gain new levels as a monk but retains all monk abilities.

Start Monk, turn non Lawful, start Barbarian. Maybe his monastery burned down and he was forced into the wilds or something. Doesn't really matter, as beatsticks are about the same anyways.

If you meant those two as examples of differences a fluff change makes Barbarians Monks and Monks Barbarians, without changing anything at all mechanics wise. So they're completely interchangeable there too.

Fawsto
2009-02-26, 01:33 PM
Damn it...

I'd really like D&D more if all party members were dependent of eachother. It happens on low levels, ok. But it is usually at mid levels that everybody feels "special" and the game becomes more fun. But it is right here that the problems start to pop. Very Fast.

Let's say that a 4-men party composed of Fighter, Rogue, Cleric and Wizard are faced with a situation where 3 of them are utimatly left almost dead and without any of their healing items (this is just a hypothesis). Consider them mid-level characters.

Whom would you prefer to be left standing? Well, let's say, the obvious choice is the Cleric. A single Mass Lesser Vigor could simply solve this situation on the blink of an eye. Second is the Wizard, who can possibly teleport everybody to the closest temple and beg for help. The third guy is the Rogue, who possibly has enough skills to actually use the Heal skill to save everybody else. The worst option for a last standing man is the Fighter. Why? Because he: A) Has no skills to use. B) Can't cast any healing or utility spells.

What I am trying to sya is this. If you would utimatly need someone in your party to save everybody's ass in a dire situation, your last otpion would be the classic melee brute.

Ok, we can render every caster in the game dependent of a melee to protect them. It would be all too easy. Very easy, indeed. But wait, you are not only not solving the classic melee's problem, but on the top of it, you are making every other class in the game as mediocre as him.

The answer to this problem isn't trying to turn casters into babysitting dependent weaklings, but to give meleers something of versatility and good class features to make them survive on their own if they need. Of course, there is a lot of cheese to casters out there, those have to be dealt with.

Btw, there are 2 reasons why a party exists in DnD. 1) Because it tends to be easier to run an adventure to a party wroking towards a common goal; and 2) Anti-Magic Fields. Now, this was a joke. The second reason is because working together with other people tends to make things easier and less resource expensive.

There is the third reason, of course, but it happens not only in DnD, but in almost all fun activities, is the fact that you normaly have more fun while having fun together with friends.

ZeroNumerous
2009-02-26, 07:02 PM
It's an optimized example, and I did talk about that. Do you really think the optimized AC fairs any worse? Do you think I can't make a character this guy will have trouble hitting?

It's not optimized at all. I didn't even go into Wildshape Ranger, Master of Many Forms, or Warshaper.

EDIT: It was just brought to my attention that I screwed up on the bear warrior part of the build. Should be Barbarian 6/Frenzied Berserker 1/Bear Warrior 1.

Yarram
2009-02-27, 12:09 AM
You mean with a scroll? Or there is an item?

It'd be a custom item: there are directions to make them in the DMG:

Continuous Spell = Spell level x Caster level x 2000
Charges per day = Divide price by (5/x) where x is the number of charges.

Sstoopidtallkid
2009-02-27, 12:32 AM
It'd be a custom item: there are directions to make them in the DMG:

Continuous Spell = Spell level x Caster level x 2000
Charges per day = Divide price by (5/x) where x is the number of charges.You've got, lets say, d10 HD and 26 Con, 270 HP. That's a fairly high amount, but it's a nice high number to prevent people yelling that I didn't go high enough. Better Round 1: Maximized Orb of Acid+Quickened Wind Wall+Overland Fly out of reach(since you can't Fly). You now have 150 HP left. Round 2: Maximized Orb of Cold+Quickened Orb of Acid. You now are at -40 HP. The Wizard has used 3 7th level spells and one 8th level spell. Any of that metamagic could be applied by Rods instead(always a nice investment), but the spells used were basically standard. Orbs are always good for overcoming AMFs and for a bit of Blasting if you run out of other options, and Wind Wall should always be kept at least Scrolled. There's a reason AMF is considered a nerf(it's the spell version of VoP). A character that can't fly is functionally useless at 10th level. Look at the Terrasque strategies. They boil down to:fly out of reach and drop rocks. The manner of the rocks changes, but the core stays the same.

Kaiyanwang
2009-02-27, 04:47 AM
You've got, lets say, d10 HD and 26 Con, 270 HP. That's a fairly high amount, but it's a nice high number to prevent people yelling that I didn't go high enough. Better Round 1: Maximized Orb of Acid+Quickened Wind Wall+Overland Fly out of reach(since you can't Fly). You now have 150 HP left. Round 2: Maximized Orb of Cold+Quickened Orb of Acid. You now are at -40 HP. The Wizard has used 3 7th level spells and one 8th level spell. Any of that metamagic could be applied by Rods instead(always a nice investment), but the spells used were basically standard. Orbs are always good for overcoming AMFs and for a bit of Blasting if you run out of other options, and Wind Wall should always be kept at least Scrolled. There's a reason AMF is considered a nerf(it's the spell version of VoP). A character that can't fly is functionally useless at 10th level. Look at the Terrasque strategies. They boil down to:fly out of reach and drop rocks. The manner of the rocks changes, but the core stays the same.

Yeah, orb spells "are teh broken" (is one of the few spells I houseruled - I gave them Evocation/Conjuration double school instead of Conjuration).

Anyway, even if arcane casters are unbeatable, the item could be useful against divine (but maybe there is something I miss).

Advocate
2009-02-27, 08:29 AM
This custom AMF item? It's been done before. Without going into too much detail, let's just say you really DON'T want to be the guy that claimed an AMF item would actually work.

By the way, it costs 132k gold. You can't afford it at all until level 14 (when it costs 88% of your TOTAL wealth) and can't practically afford it until level 19 (when it costs about 22.7% of your wealth). It also shuts you down completely. Yup, you spent all that gold to turn yourself off.

STK was being extremely generous by the way... 26 Con while inside an AMF? More likely you have about 14-16... which gives you 134 or 154 total HP, aka Wizard level HP. Also, have fun making a save DC at least 25 save without your save boosters. I'd personally use Fire for this. Since you have a +14 save, and can't boost it, coin toss to be Dazed. I know you have no protection against Fire, because you turned yourself off with the AMF. To knock off the other 14 or 34... How about a Lesser Quickened Rod Maximized Lesser Orb? Ya know, just to rub it in by killing you with a 1st level spell?

Orb spells overall are weak. They're still piddly little blasting. However, classes that have turned themselves off completely by falling into the AMF trap are even weaker. Thus, you make yourself a target, and the Wizard scores a bullseye. Yay free XP and loot!

Divine casters can fly too. They can also shoot you up very easily, especially since you turned yourself off.

Kaiyanwang
2009-02-27, 09:41 AM
I was wondering... , throw the torch enveloped with glue, and see the flying wizard fall in the ground?

Not always viable (range, divination) but sometimes could work..

More, IIRC, in epic games there are ways to redirect ranged spells to the casters (monks, psywarriors, warblades, fighters and favored sould should).

Spell reflection couldn't work enough...

krossbow
2009-02-27, 09:47 AM
More, IIRC, in epic games there are ways to redirect ranged spells to the casters (monks, psywarriors, warblades, fighters and favored sould should).



Actually, thats not a bad idea. Could act like Celes's runic ability from Final fantasy (a shame that ability lost its usefulness as the game progressed into ultima times a billion strategy levels)

Advocate
2009-02-27, 09:56 AM
I was wondering... , throw the torch enveloped with glue, and see the flying wizard fall in the ground?

Not always viable (range, divination) but sometimes could work..

More, IIRC, in epic games there are ways to redirect ranged spells to the casters (monks, psywarriors, warblades, fighters and favored sould should).

Spell reflection couldn't work enough...

So, you're throwing an item that costs 132,000 gold around, hoping you hit and not say... throw over a sixth your WBL, minimum away? Also, short range. Now you're just being absurd.

Starbuck_II
2009-02-27, 10:16 AM
So, you're throwing an item that costs 132,000 gold around, hoping you hit and not say... throw over a sixth your WBL, minimum away? Also, short range. Now you're just being absurd.

Wouldn't the best AMF user be a Soulknife since neither their Mind Shield (there is a feat for that) or Mind blade not turn off.
Well, Soulbow would be best, but still.

Save rest of money for Custom AMF item + Wish Scrolls/Tombs.
So nothing turns off in AMF.

Eldariel
2009-02-27, 10:27 AM
Anti-Magic Torc is an official item with 1/day Anti-Magic Field activation from Underdark, weighting in at 25k. That said, getting it next to the caster is next to impossible (and if you manage, you could've just swung him to death regardless) and many casters have Invoke Magic-spell which allows casting another spell in an Anti-Magic Field, some casters have straight immunity to it (Initiate of the Sevenfold Veil, Initiate of Mystra, anything with any effect that blocks Line of Effect) and they're probably flying meaning you'll need extraordinary flight to even theorethically have a chance of getting to them.

And that's before worrying about Contingency, Celerity, Anticipate Teleport (makes getting next to 'em hard), the 9th level Celerity, etc. Overall, if you want to try to kill casters, Anti-Magic Field isn't the way except in some extraordinary circumstances. That said, keeping the Torc around is worthwhile as it can have other handy implications occasionally. That said, 25k is a lot of money to spend on a use-once-per-adventure item.


Best AMF-user is a Barbarian stack with lots of different Rages, natural flying ability and insane speed (along with superhigh Con and Con to everything; means you might actually have a chance to survive, and having Con to Touch AC twice means you can actually force the Wizard to expend a Quickened True Strike halving the pace of you dying to simple damage spells).

Advocate
2009-02-27, 10:43 AM
Wouldn't the best AMF user be a Soulknife since neither their Mind Shield (there is a feat for that) or Mind blade not turn off.
Well, Soulbow would be best, but still.

Save rest of money for Custom AMF item + Wish Scrolls/Tombs.
So nothing turns off in AMF.

Completely ignoring the fact that Soulknives are actually weaker than even Monks as 'has a weapon' is not a class feature, it's just an assumed given for every based character ever...

Make a Will save. If you fail, you're useless. If you pass, you're marginally less useless. Also, you still have low saves, stats, etc.

Also, incorrect Eldariel. The best AMF user is one who is not screwed over by their own spell. That means either being immune to AMF (Initiate of Mystra class feature), or having the AMF not affect you (Extraordinary Spell Aim feat, Archmage's Mastery of Shaping class feature). Naturally, this requires you to be a gish of some sort, which really just means you're beating a caster with a better caster. Either way, line of effect on spells to you are blocked. However, you can still throw orbs through the field, cast spells on yourself, etc just fine. Also, your items still work, so you aren't automatically irrelevant.

Eldariel
2009-02-27, 11:12 AM
Also, incorrect Eldariel.

Obviously I meant the best martial character. Obviously Initiate takes the cake (even over Extraordinary Spell Aim/Archmage/whatever due to the ability to actually have the AMF in effect in your square without adverse effects should you deem that beneficial) when we include full casters in too.

Advocate
2009-02-27, 11:18 AM
Even then. The fact martials can't use it without turning themselves off puts them in the same boat as the casters who can't be immune or avoid it.

Eldariel
2009-02-27, 11:19 AM
Even then. The fact martials can't use it without turning themselves off puts them in the same boat as the casters who can't be immune or avoid it.

There's always the best even in the bad lot. Might not mean much, but it's still there.

Advocate
2009-02-27, 11:23 AM
However, the fact they are turning themselves off means they would have better luck without the AMF, but with save pumping, Ex Flight, etc. Better hope your charge works.

Eldariel
2009-02-27, 11:27 AM
However, the fact they are turning themselves off means they would have better luck without the AMF, but with save pumping, Ex Flight, etc. Better hope your charge works.

Indeed. I'm not advocating the idea of making Barbarians with AMFs as their principal strategy for caster killing (mostly because A: They shouldn't be trying caster-killing and B: Trying to get a caster within 10' radius of you and hope he has nothing for AMF is quite patently the worst plan ever), but they sure as hell beat out Fighters, Soulknives and a bunch of other offered classes in the same idea.

Advocate
2009-02-27, 12:12 PM
Indeed. I'm not advocating the idea of making Barbarians with AMFs as their principal strategy for caster killing (mostly because A: They shouldn't be trying caster-killing and B: Trying to get a caster within 10' radius of you and hope he has nothing for AMF is quite patently the worst plan ever), but they sure as hell beat out Fighters, Soulknives and a bunch of other offered classes in the same idea.

Correct. However, there are a lot of people on the other side of this debate that do not know the difference between 'better than trash' and 'incredibly good'. As such, talking about it is likely to result in some seriously false beliefs regarding where things do and do not stand via willing or unwilling misinterpretation of this conversation. Much like the guy who once tried to pitch a Fighter 7/Suel Arcanamach something at me as a 'caster killer'... he died in one hit, on his own turn, at zero action cost. No, not even an Immediate action. We (as in everyone) do not need to encourage that sort of blatant misinformation spreading.

Fortinbras
2009-02-27, 05:52 PM
Okay it looks like my intuitive rules reguarding casters weren't intuitive. No disscussing casters. This thread is about martial characters because some people like them. It looks like people can't handle a civil debate without calling each other liars so we'll have to cut debates out all together. This thread is now officialy about builds and feats. Talking about tactics using several feats is aloud but other than that no debates. Now are those rules clear?

Yukitsu
2009-02-27, 08:13 PM
To repeat, there are three builds no matter which classes you use. Uber charger, archer and lock down. Others aren't really worth discussing except when in a low powered campaign, and if you're in a low powered campaign, you don't need a guide book to know how to fit in. Or maybe you do, I don't know.

Uber chargers go for spirited charge and shock trooper as fast as possible. If on foot they take pounce from a dip into barbarian and leap attack. Mounted ones take valerous lances and PrC into cavalier.

Archers buy splitting, magebane force composite longbows with aligned and specific metal arrows. Actualy build doesn't really matter.

Lockdown takes a scad of feats to keep people from working right. Pretty much must be large sized during combat to function, otherwise they are owned by tumble.

Sword and board can work, but not if the party is competetive in the sense that they function.

Full attack doesn't work out unless it's added to any of the above save sword and board.

Grappler generally gets pegged down at later levels, and no matter what, you're only dealing with one enemy.

Tripper goes well with lockdown, but is otherwise a minor inconvenience at worst.

Yeah, and that's pretty much all you need to know about martial builds. The classes play startlingly similarly to eachother, so the differences don't really seem worth mentioning to me.

Roland St. Jude
2009-02-27, 08:57 PM
Sheriff of Moddingham: Please keep it civil in here.

Theres
2009-02-27, 11:36 PM
well fortinbras you seem to be goin with the charger and in my campaign (im DMing) you will have more than ample time to charge and gore people with that shocky bastard sword. and you're fellow compatriots (the cleric and paladin) fill the other roles of a party so i see no reason why we should continue discussing this as oskar has the perfect stats for any fighter cept any dex related stuff but who cares you wear full plate

Draz74
2009-02-28, 12:32 AM
To repeat, there are three builds no matter which classes you use. Uber charger, archer and lock down. Others aren't really worth discussing except when in a low powered campaign, and if you're in a low powered campaign, you don't need a guide book to know how to fit in. Or maybe you do, I don't know.

Totally not true. There's such a thing as medium-powered campaigns. They're the best kind!

My Paladin build I mentioned earlier in the thread (well, one of the two):

Level 1 - Human Paragon; Power Attack, Cleave
Level 2 - Paladin
Level 3 - Paladin; Serenity
Level 4 - Paladin
Level 5 - Paladin
Level 6 - Paladin (Healing Spirit ACF); Travel Devotion
Level 7 - Human Paragon; open feat
Level 8 - Paladin
Level 9 - Paladin; Improved Critical
Level 10 - Paladin
Level 11 - Paladin
Level 12 - Paladin; Battle Blessing
Level 13 - Human Paragon
Level 14 - Paladin
Level 15 - Paladin; open feat
Level 16 - Paladin
Level 17 - Paladin
Level 18 - Paladin; open feat
Level 19 - Paladin
Level 20 - Paladin

Wield a Falchion. Buy a Heartseeking Amulet and a bunch of Level 1 Pearls of Power. Make Spot your Paragon skill and max it out; then get all the cool Skill Tricks based on Spot, especially Spot the Weak Point. If Tome of Battle exists in the campaign, buy two Novice Rings of the Diamond Mind (Emerald Razor, Insightful Strike) and keep your Concentration skill high.

Then, go to town with massive Power Attacks that critical 30% of the time (thanks to swift action Bless Weapon)! And use Touch attacks as often as you can pull off to make those Power Attacks really massive. You can probably afford to use Travel Devotion every encounter to make you terribly nimble. Meanwhile, let your Healing Spirit make the rest of the party happy.

You're not terribly MAD, just Str/Con/Wis.

Any suggestions for the 3 open feats? ToB dips? Incarnum dips (and be an Azurin)? Is Awesome Smite worth it? or Extra Smiting? Divine Might, even though it re-opens Charisma dependence? Is there something that lets you channel Turning attempts into more Smites? I was planning on going Exotic Weapons Master (courtblade), but it really doesn't offer too much. Is it worth going Exotic Weapons Master (thinblade or some other 1-H weapon with wide threat range) with Uncanny Blow, and being able to still use a shield with my massive Power Attacking? That would leave only 1 feat for improving Shield capabilities. Hmmm.

Fortinbras
2009-02-28, 12:37 AM
How do you get to do touch attacks?

Draz74
2009-02-28, 12:45 AM
How do you get to do touch attacks?


Heartseeking Amulet (3/day).
Emerald Razor maneuver (1/encounter)(learned either via feat or via Ring of the Diamond Mind).
Spot the Weak Point skill trick (1/encounter, but requires a standard action to activate).
Impaling weapon (3/day)(requires piercing, which is why I'm considering EWP(thinblade or courtblade; only priced as a +1 enhancement).


Of course there are other options. At high levels it probably would be optimal to be using UMD on a Wraithstrike wand.

Yukitsu
2009-02-28, 01:13 AM
Totally not true. There's such a thing as medium-powered campaigns. They're the best kind!


I don't really find that you need guides to make medium builds either, but that may be because I play high casualty games and never use guides.

Advocate
2009-02-28, 12:49 PM
*stuff*

Just one thing. You need Seeking on the bow. Not just for concealment based miss chances (which can be sidestepped via other means) but for Entropic Deflection combo ring users. 13k for 50% miss chance vs ranged, except it isn't concealment or anything so only Seeking bypasses it, and any character who can move more than 10 feet and still be relevant has absolutely no reason not to get the ring, and the Quickness property on their armor which forms the other part of the combo. Otherwise, you hit it dead on.

Neithan
2009-03-08, 02:19 PM
Guilty of again opening this can of worms but...

Just suppose that you're in a game with only PHB classes and feats and no PrCs or other fancy stuff.
What options would there be for a fighter, to be better at his job than just taking more levels of straight fighter?
Cleric probably, because it's a better fighter to begin with, but is the fighter actually poor at anything compared to the other core base classes?

krossbow
2009-03-08, 04:03 PM
Guilty of again opening this can of worms but...

Just suppose that you're in a game with only PHB classes and feats and no PrCs or other fancy stuff.
What options would there be for a fighter, to be better at his job than just taking more levels of straight fighter?
Cleric probably, because it's a better fighter to begin with, but is the fighter actually poor at anything compared to the other core base classes?



Well, if you just want a straight up fighter type character, there are two options:


The best option i'd give you is to go and look at pathfinder's fighter class (http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG). Its free to download, so it doesn't cost you anything to look at.

That being said, the other option is houseruling; which i personally think would be the best choice seeing as how pathfinder's fighter makes him better at fighting humanoids, or large groups of mooks, but not neccecarily large monster.
It may be DM fiat, but basically view the fighter as having magical affinity; Fighter's rely more heavily on magical items than any other class. Finding items that basically are "meant" for him as if by destiny, such as a means to fly and the like will make him keep up.







This is all assuming your DMing however; if your not, then i'd reccomend just going cleric or Druid.

Draz74
2009-03-09, 03:48 AM
Guilty of again opening this can of worms but...

Just suppose that you're in a game with only PHB classes and feats and no PrCs or other fancy stuff.
What options would there be for a fighter, to be better at his job than just taking more levels of straight fighter?
Cleric probably, because it's a better fighter to begin with, but is the fighter actually poor at anything compared to the other core base classes?

Cleric and Druid can both out-melee the Fighter in Core-only.

Ignoring Cleric, Druid, PrCs, and everything in splatbooks (that's a lot of material to neglect, though!), there are many combinations of Fighter, Barbarian, and Ranger that make a stronger warrior-type character than Fighter 20. Barbarian 18 / Fighter 2 is probably the strongest.

sonofzeal
2009-03-09, 02:31 PM
Cleric and Druid can both out-melee the Fighter in Core-only.

Ignoring Cleric, Druid, PrCs, and everything in splatbooks (that's a lot of material to neglect, though!), there are many combinations of Fighter, Barbarian, and Ranger that make a stronger warrior-type character than Fighter 20. Barbarian 18 / Fighter 2 is probably the strongest.
Rage scales so poorly though. I prefer Barbarian 1 / Fighter 2 / Rogue 17, going with Improved Trip. Admittedly, it works a lot better if you can sneak the "Extra Rage" and "Knock-Down" feats in there.

Sstoopidtallkid
2009-03-09, 08:58 PM
Rage scales so poorly though. I prefer Barbarian 1 / Fighter 2 / Rogue 17, going with Improved Trip. Admittedly, it works a lot better if you can sneak the "Extra Rage" and "Knock-Down" feats in there.Why Rogue+Trip? Yes, you get to knock your opponent prone, but doing so is reliant on BAB, which you lose out on. Beyond that, most of the time you only want to lose 4 points of BAB if at all possible, for the iteratives. If you really want to do that, I'd take levels of SA Fighter instead, or better yet, buy a copy of ToB for my DM.

Yukitsu
2009-03-09, 09:39 PM
Trip isn't BAB dependant. It's a touch attack then a flat stat comparison.

It's useful because it allows you to follow up with as many sneak attacks as you want.

horseboy
2009-03-10, 12:42 AM
Question:

I am fighting a dragon as a martial character, what is the best way to go about it? I may or may not be part of a group while doing this, but even a martial adept will move, use a maneuver then have to suck on a full-attack afterwords.

What should a martial character do?
Step 0) Don't play D&D.
Step 1) Grab eog arrow.
Step 2) Give long winded speech about it's ancestry while aiming.
Step 3) One shot dragon.
:smallwink:

Just suppose that you're in a game with only PHB classes and feats and no PrCs or other fancy stuff.
What options would there be for a fighter, to be better at his job than just taking more levels of straight fighter?
Cleric probably, because it's a better fighter to begin with, but is the fighter actually poor at anything compared to the other core base classes?
Fighter Problem #1: A fighter is only mechanically allowed to fight. He doesn't have character development resources to be able to do anything else.
Fighter Problem #2: A fighter's damage doesn't scale as he goes up. Rogues get sneak attack (which has bothered me in every itineration of D&D) Druids can become bigger and meaner critters. Wizards get more impressive spells and clerics, who are already great clanks generally take over the "tank" position better. After all, enemies have a reason to attack him.

tyckspoon
2009-03-10, 01:04 AM
Trip isn't BAB dependant. It's a touch attack then a flat stat comparison.

It's useful because it allows you to follow up with as many sneak attacks as you want.

Except not, because being Prone doesn't mean flat-footed or otherwise denied Dex. It's just a +4 bonus to hit them- very useful for a Power Attacking fighter type, but of no special benefit to a Rogue-centric build (beyond helping your iteratives hit, anyway. You're better off flanking with a more dedicated fightery buddy and letting him do the tripping.)

Frosty
2009-03-10, 01:19 AM
Actually, damage isn't a *huge* problem for fighters. Why? One feat: Power Attack. It's basically the only thing allowing Fighters to deal more damage, thanks to the MYRIAD of ways one can gain more bonuses to hit. Also, Shock Trooper.


To repeat, there are three builds no matter which classes you use. Uber charger, archer and lock down. Others aren't really worth discussing except when in a low powered campaign, and if you're in a low powered campaign, you don't need a guide book to know how to fit in. Or maybe you do, I don't know.

Uber chargers go for spirited charge and shock trooper as fast as possible. If on foot they take pounce from a dip into barbarian and leap attack. Mounted ones take valerous lances and PrC into cavalier.

Archers buy splitting, magebane force composite longbows with aligned and specific metal arrows. Actualy build doesn't really matter.

Lockdown takes a scad of feats to keep people from working right. Pretty much must be large sized during combat to function, otherwise they are owned by tumble.

Sword and board can work, but not if the party is competetive in the sense that they function.

Full attack doesn't work out unless it's added to any of the above save sword and board.

Grappler generally gets pegged down at later levels, and no matter what, you're only dealing with one enemy.

Tripper goes well with lockdown, but is otherwise a minor inconvenience at worst.

Yeah, and that's pretty much all you need to know about martial builds. The classes play startlingly similarly to eachother, so the differences don't really seem worth mentioning to me.

Would you classify a Bloodstorm Blade build as an Archer build? Ranged Greater Insightful Strikes are kinda cool you gotta admit. Also, you can play Billiards or Bowling with your enemies depending on your build.

FatR
2009-03-10, 06:03 AM
Guilty of again opening this can of worms but...

Just suppose that you're in a game with only PHB classes and feats and no PrCs or other fancy stuff.
What options would there be for a fighter, to be better at his job than just taking more levels of straight fighter?
Cleric probably, because it's a better fighter to begin with, but is the fighter actually poor at anything compared to the other core base classes?
Actually the fighter sucks the hardest if only the core is allowed. Charging entirely depends on non-core feats. Archery depends on non-core equipment. Battlefield control is extremely limited with Improved Trip alone. Thanks to lack of good feats, core fighters cannot match monsters numbers-wise and are extremely buff-dependent.

Neithan
2009-03-10, 06:15 AM
Fighter Problem #1: A fighter is only mechanically allowed to fight. He doesn't have character development resources to be able to do anything else.
If people play D&D like that, I think the figher class is the least of their problems.

Playing a fighter, you can do a lot of stuff other than beating stuff with a huge weapon:
- Force a baricaded door open.
- Baricade a door against pursuers.
- Drop heavy stuff down on enemies.
- Drop boiling or burning stuff on enemies.
- Construct simple traps (cut the rope, tree kills you).
- Or defense positions.
- Dig out burried doors or treasure chests.
- Free people, who have been burried by rubble.
- Carry unconscious or wounded friends.
- Capture spellcasters alive and fast.
- Insane horse chases.
- Chase people on foot. (High Con and Endurance)
- Throw people from walls or cliffs.
- Climb up walls and cliffs.
- And pull op party members who can't climb.
- Wrestle down prison guards without weapons.
- Rescue people from drowning.
- Interrogate prisoners.
- Beat up prisoners.
- Handle war dogs.
- Repair broken weapons and armor.
- Disarm enemies. (To have them surrender)
- Be a sniper with a bow.
- Rescue weak characters from a monsters tentacle.

A barbarian can also do all these things, but in addition, he can only find some fruits to eat in the forest.
And a wizard COULD do all these things, if they would have all spells there are prepared. And at best several times, because you might need them again.

FatR
2009-03-10, 06:57 AM
If people play D&D like that, I think the figher class is the least of their problems.

Playing a fighter, you can do a lot of stuff other than beating stuff with a huge weapon:
- Force a baricaded door open.
Everyone can do that.


- Baricade a door against pursuers.
Rarely does matter past level 6 (at most), as number of enemies who do not care about physical obstacles or can easily cut through solid stone grows with CR.


- Drop heavy stuff down on enemies.
Highly situational.


- Drop boiling or burning stuff on enemies.
Does irrelevant damage.


- Construct simple traps (cut the rope, tree kills you).
Except, they won't work as they are too easy to notice and will do puny damage if they will work.


- Or defense positions.
Which also stop to matter after level 6 or so.


- Dig out burried doors or treasure chests.
Everyone can do that.


- Free people, who have been burried by rubble.
Everyone can do that.


- Carry unconscious or wounded friends.
Most real characters can make them stop being unconscious instead.


- Capture spellcasters alive and fast.
Uh, good luck with that. You'll need an a ton of it.


- Insane horse chases.
Highly situational. Fall under "doing damage" category.


- Chase people on foot. (High Con and Endurance)
Everyone can do that. Great many characters can do it far better thanks to spells, shapeshifting and higher base speed.


- Throw people from walls or cliffs.
Highly situational. Works poorly or does not work at all against great many enemies, including most of the really dangerous ones.


- Climb up walls and cliffs.
And casters can freaking fly.


- And pull op party members who can't climb.
While carrying another party members on their backs, if need be.


- Wrestle down prison guards without weapons.
Veeeery highly situational. If enemies were competent enough to actually catch your band of killing machines, you need some rather contrived circumstances to escape.


- Rescue people from drowning.
Highly situational. And almost everyone can do that. And drowning is not a threat to high-level characters.


- Interrogate prisoners.
Usually, poorly (you cannot allow high Cha).


- Beat up prisoners.
Anyone can do that.


- Handle war dogs.
Irrelevant past about level 6.


- Repair broken weapons and armor.
Irrelevant past about level 6 (fighters cannot repair magical stuff).


- Disarm enemies. (To have them surrender)
Except most of the really dangerous ones as they tend to not use weapons. Also, a really cheap equipment piece negates this.


- Be a sniper with a bow.
Does not matter past about level 5, as your damage becomes insignificant. Unless you sink almost all your money into a magical bow with a very precise combination of special properties.


- Rescue weak characters from a monsters tentacle.
You can't do that. Your grapple modifier blows when compared to that of mid-high CR grappling monsters.

And, by the way, how many points must you put in Int to have enough skill points to even attempt all of this?

ThorFluff
2009-03-10, 07:50 AM
Fighters can do something few other classes can, if built properly.
Deal Improportionate amount of damage and almost certain to hit.

How?
Fighter 5 /Frenzied Berzerker 10/ Ranger 1 /Figher 4

Powerattack
Leap Attack
Shock Trooper
Supreme powerattack (Frenzied Berzerker)
Frenzy (Frenzied Berzerker)
Favored Enemy (Whatever Big baddie you want to hurt)
Favored Powerattack

Your Fighter has at lvl 20, lets say 22 base str and a +6 belt, 28, and then in a frenzy +10 to str. For a total Modifier of +14.
He uses a Greatsword (Non magical, lets keep it simple here)

He charges, Full powerattack, takes it all to AC. He is going to have + 36 on his to hit roll.
So probably hits just about anything. Then the damage.
The sword will do on average 7 damage, + 21 from his str + 420 from powerattack (3/bab from leapattack, 4/bab from supreme powerattack x3 from favored power attack)

So 448 damage on average. Lets say he used a scythe in stead, 445 damage on average, but on a crit 1780.

Id' like to see what can take that level of damage and live to tell the tale.

And this is just one of many many powerful builds.

Neithan
2009-03-10, 08:00 AM
*everything*
You see, it highly depends on how you play the game. It's the same thing that bards can suck or be awsome.

The Glyphstone
2009-03-10, 08:35 AM
Fighters can do something few other classes can, if built properly.
Deal Improportionate amount of damage and almost certain to hit.

How?
Fighter 5 /Frenzied Berzerker 10/ Ranger 1 /Figher 4

Powerattack
Leap Attack
Shock Trooper
Supreme powerattack (Frenzied Berzerker)
Frenzy (Frenzied Berzerker)
Favored Enemy (Whatever Big baddie you want to hurt)
Favored Powerattack

Your Fighter has at lvl 20, lets say 22 base str and a +6 belt, 28, and then in a frenzy +10 to str. For a total Modifier of +14.
He uses a Greatsword (Non magical, lets keep it simple here)

He charges, Full powerattack, takes it all to AC. He is going to have + 36 on his to hit roll.
So probably hits just about anything. Then the damage.
The sword will do on average 7 damage, + 21 from his str + 420 from powerattack (3/bab from leapattack, 4/bab from supreme powerattack x3 from favored power attack)

So 448 damage on average. Lets say he used a scythe in stead, 445 damage on average, but on a crit 1780.

Id' like to see what can take that level of damage and live to tell the tale.

And this is just one of many many powerful builds.

One of a very small handful of powerful builds - the Ubercharger is well known, yes, as one of the few ways melee characters can compete with casters at high levels.

As an aside...I was totally expecting FB to have Rage as a prerequisite, and very surprised to find it doesn't.

Rad
2009-03-10, 09:19 AM
You see, it highly depends on how you play the game. It's the same thing that bards can suck or be awsome.

Of course you can do it. The question is more wether the system supports you doing that or you have to work against the system to have your campaign work like that.

Zen Master
2009-03-10, 09:42 AM
This sort of discussion seems impossible without a lot of predefined parameters. For instance, as I read through the thread, everyone who posts about how awesome casters are and how they totally obliterate martial classes seem to assume they have at least 20 levels to play with, free access to spending their WBL as they see fit, and free access to all books ever published.

Now - reading the above, they will all think: OMG, this nab doesn't know that levels, gear and splatbooks are the only way to even slightly level the playing field to accomodate the martial classes.

And in reply I can state: Without all the things I mentioned above, casters are pathetically weak. Unless of course I choose to give them free time in which to buff, in which case they do attain some level of awesomeness - which is as it should be.

All of this, only to say: Defining the parameters is necessary for there to be any validity to this discussion. Because the game I play simply isn't the same one as some of the others in this thread. The powerlevel they attain never happens in my games, never. Nor do the imbalances.

ThorFluff
2009-03-10, 09:44 AM
One of a very small handful of powerful builds - the Ubercharger is well known, yes, as one of the few ways melee characters can compete with casters at high levels.

As an aside...I was totally expecting FB to have Rage as a prerequisite, and very surprised to find it doesn't.

It doesn't though i might have been mistaken, because it does seem to need Intimidating Rage, which in its turn require Rage or Frenzy ability. But Just throw in a level of Barbarian in there, or play a a Gnoll, that gets frenzy as a racial ability.

FatR
2009-03-10, 10:19 AM
This sort of discussion seems impossible without a lot of predefined parameters. For instance, as I read through the thread, everyone who posts about how awesome casters are and how they totally obliterate martial classes seem to assume they have at least 20 levels to play with, free access to spending their WBL as they see fit, and free access to all books ever published.

Now - reading the above, they will all think: OMG, this nab doesn't know that levels, gear and splatbooks are the only way to even slightly level the playing field to accomodate the martial classes.

And in reply I can state: Without all the things I mentioned above, casters are pathetically weak. Unless of course I choose to give them free time in which to buff, in which case they do attain some level of awesomeness - which is as it should be.
It is probably possible to make a statement that is further from truth, but only through some deliberate effort. In reality, it is martial types who need Magic-Marts to pick exact items they need (because most workable builds depend or hugely benefit from using either one specific weapon or specific weapon properties) and it is martial types who are pathetically weak without free access to the supplements. Yes casters benefit from supplements too, but in core only wizards still have a ton of save-or-loses, BC spells and ways to outright rape the game, starting with polymorph; clerics still can fight about as well as fighters (and then better) and this is, in fact, easier, because there is almost no good feats or good spells for full BAB casting classes in the core, and there is too few good prestiges to power up through level dipping; and druids still have fighter as a class feature + full spellcasting. Core melees? They start steadily falling behind even straightforward melee brutes from level 3, when they meet their first ogres (and an ogre is not that awesome for a CR 3 enemy, just look at the dire wolf statblock, then remember, that a 3rd level fighter is supposed to fight equally with one of these things and cry). It only becomes worse from here.

Keld Denar
2009-03-10, 10:23 AM
Mr ThorFluff, your build is missing one critical thing. Fighter is an even leveled class. You should NEVER take an odd level of it...ever! Sub in a level of Barbarian. Rage stacks with Frenzy, and if you use the CChamp sub, you get pounce. Regardless, that odd level of fighter does next to nothing for you, and optimially should be something else.

This is melee optimization on a basic level. Fighter is an even leveled class (typically no longer than 2-6 levels long).

FatR
2009-03-10, 10:34 AM
I think that Frenzied Berserkers and uberchargers in general are mostly good for setting theoretical records of damage anyway. They are lethal but easily shut down, and because they are so lethal, there is a great chance that your DM will shut you down in important fights, so that you won't kill his BBEG in a single hit. I would probably made a Swift Hunter if asked to create a melee character for a game right now.

Zen Master
2009-03-10, 10:36 AM
It is probably possible to make a statement that is further from truth, but only through some deliberate effort. In reality, it is martial types who need Magic-Marts to pick exact items they need (because most workable builds depend or hugely benefit from using either one specific weapon or specific weapon properties) and it is martial types who are pathetically weak without free access to the supplements. Yes casters benefit from supplements too, but in core only wizards still have a ton of save-or-loses, BC spells and ways to outright rape the game, starting with polymorph; clerics still can fight about as well as fighters (and then better) and this is, in fact, easier, because there is almost no good feats or good spells for full BAB casting classes in the core, and there is too few good prestiges to power up through level dipping; and druids still have fighter as a class feature + full spellcasting. Core melees? They start steadily falling behind even straightforward melee brutes from level 3, when they meet their first ogres (and an ogre is not that awesome for a CR 3 enemy, just look at the dire wolf statblock, then remember, that a 3rd level fighter is supposed to fight equally with one of these things and cry). It only becomes worse from here.

What you would consider a workable build would never feature in one of my games - neither casters or martials. I honestly doubt you can come up with a character concept that is core only, not level 20, and not based on any magic items except those that I choose to give you as GM.

But if you can, I can guarantee you, a fighter playing in the same campaign would be your equal in some situations, your superior in others, and inferior in others again.

FatR
2009-03-10, 10:53 AM
What you would consider a workable build would never feature in one of my games - neither casters or martials. I honestly doubt you can come up with a character concept that is core only, not level 20, and not based on any magic items except those that I choose to give you as GM.

But if you can, I can guarantee you, a fighter playing in the same campaign would be your equal in some situations, your superior in others, and inferior in others again.
In other words, you arbitrarily gimp characters that do not fit your arbirtary standards of what they should look like (which apparently include not taking item crafting feats). Also, to completely and utterly outshine a figther in a core only game that doesn't gimp me arbitrarily (by giving tons and tons of magical bling to the fighter or whatever) I don't need neither builds nor items. Nor levels above 6th-7th. All I need is to pick a druid, live long enough to get wild shape (and I'm rather formidable even before that, thanks to my BC spells and my animal companion, that isn't so much worse in a fight than a core fighter even at level 1, but is easily replaceable), pick Natural Spell, the rest falls in place by itself. Alternatively, I can be a conjurer wizard that actually uses **** like Polymorph and Lesser Planar Binding to some small part of its maximum potential from level 7 and is mighty before that moment of triumph as well, thanks to his BC (Grease, Glitterdust, Web, Slow - most of the best offensive low-level wizard spells are in the core, actually). Yeah, a fat chance of keeping up with these guys at levels 7+ you have, Mr. Core-only figher.

Sstoopidtallkid
2009-03-10, 11:01 AM
What you would consider a workable build would never feature in one of my games - neither casters or martials. I honestly doubt you can come up with a character concept that is core only, not level 20, and not based on any magic items except those that I choose to give you as GM.Druid 1. Ignores gear, has a War-trained Riding Dog AC, prepares Obscuring Mist, Magic Fang, and Entangle. I'm now superior to the Fighter in all situations.

Zen Master
2009-03-10, 11:24 AM
In other words, you arbitrarily gimp characters that do not fit your arbirtary standards of what they should look like (which apparently include not taking item crafting feats). Also, to completely and utterly outshine a figther in a core only game that doesn't gimp me arbitrarily (by giving tons and tons of magical bling to the fighter or whatever) I don't need neither builds nor items. Nor levels above 6th-7th. All I need is to pick a druid, live long enough to get wild shape (and I'm rather formidable even before that, thanks to my BC spells and my animal companion, that isn't so much worse in a fight than a core fighter even at level 1, but is easily replaceable), pick Natural Spell, the rest falls in place by itself. Alternatively, I can be a conjurer wizard that actually uses **** like Polymorph and Lesser Planar Binding to some small part of its maximum potential from level 7 and is mighty before that moment of triumph as well, thanks to his BC (Grease, Glitterdust, Web, Slow - most of the best offensive low-level wizard spells are in the core, actually). Yeah, a fat chance of keeping up with these guys at levels 7+ you have, Mr. Core-only figher.

People can take all the item creation feats they want. No where does it say that I have to simply issue any items the players points and fulfills the criteria for. Basically, players aren't even entitled to know about those items.

So they can make stuff - if they can find the materials, recipes and so on.

I don't see any spells available to a druid in core that a fighter cannot easily compete with. The companion is a very significant buff for druids at low levels - but not nearly enough to outshine a fighter, who can in princple kill druid and companion with a single cleave.

But you're entirely missing the point.

You are making assumptions

I, too, make assumptions.

Because our assumptions are so very, very far removed from each other, we cannot be said to play the same game.

Which is the point I'm making.

Please don't waste your time trying to convince me your caster is far better than my fighter. It will never happen - and I'm not here to tell you the fighter is better than the caster.

I'm here to tell you we don't play the same game. Therefore the whole speach about parameters.

Zen Master
2009-03-10, 11:27 AM
Druid 1. Ignores gear, has a War-trained Riding Dog AC, prepares Obscuring Mist, Magic Fang, and Entangle. I'm now superior to the Fighter in all situations.

I honestly doubt you can come up with a build that is ..... remember that bit?

I accept obscuring mist, magic fang and entangle. Sure you can have a dog - I'd personally recommend you think again.

The three spells are good - provided you get to cast them. An assumption you may make - in return, I'll assume you die before that.

But druid is strong. That much I will not argue. I can still make a martial character that will beat the druid five times out of ten.

In my games. With my assumptions, my parameters.

Draz74
2009-03-10, 11:48 AM
I honestly doubt you can come up with a build that is ..... remember that bit?

I accept obscuring mist, magic fang and entangle. Sure you can have a dog - I'd personally recommend you think again.

The three spells are good - provided you get to cast them. An assumption you may make - in return, I'll assume you die before that.

But druid is strong. That much I will not argue. I can still make a martial character that will beat the druid five times out of ten.

In my games. With my assumptions, my parameters.

You're right -- you're not playing the same game as everyone else. I concede your point.

Specifically, you're playing a very warped, twisted game compared to what the D&D rulebooks present. Which is fine, if you and your group have fun with it.

I am curious why you don't think the dog is a good choice, though.

JellyPooga
2009-03-10, 11:57 AM
One thing I've always found somewhat amusing about the "Fighters are big piles of steaming..." arguments, is that they inevetably revolve around one-trick-pony 'build' on the part of the Fighter (or Barbarian or what-have-you) vs. these 'Batman Wizards' and 'CoDzilla' builds that are as good as they are because of their high degree of versatility. Where does it say that Warrior builds must be one-trick? Why can't you have a Fighter that, gods forbid, has a Greatsword and a Bow. Why is he completely nullified when his most effective method of attack is no longer effective? A 20th level Wizard who has cast all his 9th level spells isn't completely useless, so why is an "ubercharger" (or whatever) seen as being a waste of space when he has another method of attack (albeit a less effective one)?

What I'd like to see is a Fighter build that is versatile; a 'Batman Fighter' to mirror the 'Batman Wizard'. A build that has an answer to any given situation, not just one super-damage-trick that can be easily circumnavigated. I'll cook up my own Batman Fighter later tonight (when I have time...I'm on a clock at the moment!), but I'd like to see others' attempts too!

Zen Master
2009-03-10, 12:03 PM
Specifically, you're playing a very warped, twisted game compared to what the D&D rulebooks present.

No - I play exactly by the books. I just don't read the rules the same way you do. I'll be honest though, and say I have no doubt whatever my view represents the very great majority of players.

The dog tho? You want a dog: http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/dog.htm

Be my guest (the one on the left is the one available to you).

I'm sure you mean the other dog. The one that's trained for combat, and is a mount for small races. You cannot have that. For various reasons, prime among them because it doesn't exist. Small races ride wolves, or goats. Hell, some ride bats or lizards. There's even races that ride sharks. Not on land, tho.

As GM, that distinction is mine to make. But grab the wolf, it's a fine companion.

Sstoopidtallkid
2009-03-10, 12:21 PM
No - I play exactly by the books. I just don't read the rules the same way you do. I'll be honest though, and say I have no doubt whatever my view represents the very great majority of players.

The dog tho? You want a dog: http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/dog.htm

Be my guest (the one on the left is the one available to you).

I'm sure you mean the other dog. The one that's trained for combat, and is a mount for small races. You cannot have that. For various reasons, prime among them because it doesn't exist. Small races ride wolves, or goats. Hell, some ride bats or lizards. There's even races that ride sharks. Not on land, tho.

As GM, that distinction is mine to make. But grab the wolf, it's a fine companion.I could accept a Wolf or Standard Dog and my point would still stand, but really? You have to ban a CR 1 creature just to make your point stand? Oberoni has no place in these discussions.

Rad
2009-03-10, 12:33 PM
I'm sure you mean the other dog. The one that's trained for combat, and is a mount for small races. You cannot have that. For various reasons, prime among them because it doesn't exist. Small races ride wolves, or goats. Hell, some ride bats or lizards. There's even races that ride sharks. Not on land, tho.
The rules list both the riding dog and the dog explicitly as available companions. In your campaigns you can change them, but while discussing the rules on a forum people usually assume that the usual rules are being followed.
On a similar note a character that has an item creation feat does not need a "recipe": what does the feat consist in if not the knowledge of how to make the items?


As GM, that distinction is mine to make. But grab the wolf, it's a fine companion.
In your group this is fine. Here none of us is a DM (or a player). We're all posters.

If I interpret what you want to say correctly, I think that saying "Hey, I have these house rules in my campaign that work great for solving the issue" would get much better emotional responses here.

You are not alone in this as many people here use very different house rules. Most known on these boards are several class rewrites, restrictions on spells available (celerity, polymorph), how two weapon fighting works, multiclassing XP penalty, LA buyoff, basic things like replacing the d20 rolls with other random generators (like 2d10 or 3d6) or disposing of the XP system altogether and many more.
Only, there is an unspoken rule that everybody will talk about the rules as they are written in the books in the discussions about the game mechanics and will present their house rules as such when they want to talk about them.

Draz74
2009-03-10, 12:34 PM
No - I play exactly by the books. I just don't read the rules the same way you do. I'll be honest though, and say I have no doubt whatever my view represents the very great majority of players.
Even the parts I bolded? You seriously think an assumption that a typical level 1 full caster will get killed before he can cast any spell in combat reflects the great majority of D&D players? :smallconfused:


I'm sure you mean the other dog. The one that's trained for combat, and is a mount for small races. You cannot have that. For various reasons, prime among them because it doesn't exist. Small races ride wolves, or goats. Hell, some ride bats or lizards. There's even races that ride sharks. Not on land, tho.

As GM, that distinction is mine to make.

The rules flat-out say that a Druid can select said animal -- a riding dog -- as his companion at Level 1. So what you're doing is very clearly in the realm of a houserule, not an interpretation or reading of the rules or "exactly by the books" as you claim.

Don't get me wrong; that's fine to do (I ban some very popular monsters in my homebrew campaign settings, because they just don't exist in these worlds). But it totally undermines a lot of the stuff you're claiming on this thread: that low-level Druids by the rules cannot beat a Fighter in melee; that the vast majority of players have the same perspective on the game that you have; and that you play "exactly by the books."

Kaiyanwang
2009-03-10, 12:37 PM
No - I play exactly by the books. I just don't read the rules the same way you do. I'll be honest though, and say I have no doubt whatever my view represents the very great majority of players.


I don't know if my view represent the one of a large amount of players, but in my games,

- maybe because the builds considered decent in this or in other boards are not banned by me (the DM) but considered plain silly by the players...

- maybe because the amount and the nature of magic item is carefully considered...

- maybe because players help each others, because in real are friends...

- maybe because magic in my campaing is consideret a gif of gods or a powerful mysterious force, as well has some drawbacks in some instances, and it's use is never abused...

- maybe because my players are imaginative and resourceful, so is difficult one feel useless...

- maybe because i challenge them always in a different way through different strategies and different times a day....

-Maybe because I'M a DM with a IQ of at least 40...

I feel very comfortable with D&D and my experience is similar to yours. Sometimes rocks the caster, sometimes the rogue, and sometime meleers charge happy wreaking havoc.

If this is by mi ignorance, or I'm in a state of grace, dunno. But I feel fine :smallsmile:

FatR
2009-03-10, 12:54 PM
People can take all the item creation feats they want. No where does it say that I have to simply issue any items the players points and fulfills the criteria for. Basically, players aren't even entitled to know about those items.
So they can make stuff - if they can find the materials, recipes and so on.
This is a houserule. In DnD 3.X, I just need to set some GP and XP on fire and bingo - a brand new magic item! You might think that this is stupid. This position actually has merit. But this is not how the actual game works so seriously stop using houserules intended to downpower casters as a proof that casters aren't overpowered.


I don't see any spells available to a druid in core that a fighter cannot easily compete with.
How about... Entangle? Sure, it is situational, but it controls battlefield better than a core fighter ever can. How about... Summon Nature's Ally? Can a fighter summon expendable scouts/trapfinders or swamp battlefields with mooks? How about... Plant Growth? Also situational, but also auto-wins a whole category of encounters (by the way, the only common category where the core fighter can hope to contribute) when it works. That's only the first three levels of spells, before power of the full casters skyrockets and that's not counting healing/recovery spells, that actually make a druid capable of endurance dungeon runs (as opposed to a fighter, who entirely and completely depends on others for healing/negating bad stuff) or party-supporting utilities, where a druid obviously blows a fighter so far out of the water with stuff like Spider Climb and Water Breathing that it is not even funny.


The companion is a very significant buff for druids at low levels - but not nearly enough to outshine a fighter, who can in princple kill druid and companion with a single cleave.
You're confusing theoretical possibility with statistical probability.


But you're entirely missing the point.
You are making assumptions
I, too, make assumptions.
My assumptions are rules as written (minus infinite loops and maybe 2-3 potential campaign-busters, like Gate, PAO or Astral Projection if we talk about actual games and not the ways to own DnD). Your assumptions are your houserules. Why, again, are you confusing people, saying that DnD does not work as it obviously does, if you himself had decided to houserule it?

Zen Master
2009-03-10, 01:01 PM
I could accept a Wolf or Standard Dog and my point would still stand, but really? You have to ban a CR 1 creature just to make your point stand? Oberoni has no place in these discussions.

I consider the riding dog stupid - not because it it's stats, but because I don't want my npc's (or pc's, but they have thus far never shown the inclination) to ride dogs.

It's a flavour thing. I don't give a damn if you like it or not. Like I said - you can have the wolf, the stats are all but identical.

And the fighter can still kill both with a cleave. And I can still guarantee you, out of ten fights, five will go to each, on average.

Now I know you don't like it. Can you explain to me why? Can you tell me, why it should not be so? ... Do you actively seek, want, the imbalance?

tyckspoon
2009-03-10, 01:06 PM
I consider the riding dog stupid - not because it it's stats, but because I don't want my npc's (or pc's, but they have thus far never shown the inclination) to ride dogs.


It's just a combat-trained dog. Doesn't have to be a mount. Nobody in your worlds raise guard dogs? War dogs? Hunting dogs, especially for animals like boars? All of those could use the Riding Dog stats and would be a perfectly functional source for a Riding Dog companion.

Woodsman
2009-03-10, 01:06 PM
Hey, FatR, here's some meaningless words for fighters:

-Antimagic field
-Spell resistance
-Rod of absorption
-Rod of negation

Draz74
2009-03-10, 01:13 PM
Hey, FatR, here's some meaningless words for fighters:

-Antimagic field
-Spell resistance
-Rod of absorption
-Rod of negation

Your Fighters don't use magic items? :smallconfused: How do they deal with Incorporeals, for one thing?

FatR
2009-03-10, 01:14 PM
One thing I've always found somewhat amusing about the "Fighters are big piles of steaming..." arguments, is that they inevetably revolve around one-trick-pony 'build' on the part of the Fighter (or Barbarian or what-have-you) vs. these 'Batman Wizards' and 'CoDzilla' builds that are as good as they are because of their high degree of versatility.
Yes. They have a high degree of versatility. And melees haven't. Because casters can reinvent themselves each morning. And melees can't. Even as a fighter you can achieve any degree of versatility only at the expense of power, because you either use an obviously weak alternative once your single primary tactics is neutralized, or spread your limited amount of feats (and money for items) to cover two separate tricks (unless we play core-only, in this case you have feats to spare, but have about 3-5 good feats to choose from, so you're unlikely to have either). Other full BAB classes are even worse off, because they don't have that much feats.

Sstoopidtallkid
2009-03-10, 01:15 PM
I consider the riding dog stupid - not because it it's stats, but because I don't want my npc's (or pc's, but they have thus far never shown the inclination) to ride dogs.

It's a flavour thing. I don't give a damn if you like it or not. Like I said - you can have the wolf, the stats are all but identical.Actually, a Riding Dog is simply a Collie or a Huskie with a bit of special training. There's no reason anyone has to ride it for a Riding Dog to exsist.
Now I know you don't like it. Can you explain to me why? Can you tell me, why it should not be so? ... Do you actively seek, want, the imbalance?Look, I understand that it is possible to houserule the game to be balanced. That's not the point here. The point is that the game, as-written, is unbalanced, and since no rules beyond the RAW are universal, that's what we discuss.
And the fighter can still kill both with a cleave. And I can still guarantee you, out of ten fights, five will go to each, on average.No, they really won't. To kill the Riding Dog, the Fighter has to deal 13 damage. To kill the Fighter, the Druid has to cast Entangle and own a Sling. Or flank with the AC and use a Club(run the numbers, the Riding Dog with a +2 to-hit from flanking has a 50/50 shot before the Druid takes any actions).

Woodsman
2009-03-10, 01:17 PM
Your Fighters don't use magic items? :smallconfused: How do they deal with Incorporeals, for one thing?

I'm trying to make a point.

Zen Master
2009-03-10, 01:20 PM
You seriously think an assumption that a typical level 1 full caster will get killed before he can cast any spell in combat reflects the great majority of D&D players?

Yes.

Here's what I think. This is based in part on knowledge of the rules, part on experience, part on logic.

The class means less than who has the option to chose. The spells are fine - what were they, entangle, obsrucing mist and magic fang - but they will do little if the opponent is the one who choses when and where to fight.

In many cases, the fight will go to who ever gets initiative. In low levels, casters especially can find that the fight isn't long enough for them to ever do anything.

About the dog. As GM, I decide the game world. If some random table states druids can chose an animal that does not exist in the game world - they bloody well cannot chose it. It doesn't go any further than that.

And the same goes for magic items. First off - players should stay out of the DMG. If they stray in there - well, I still decide what exists and what doesn't. Furthermore, since time out of memory, creating magic items has included an optional bit about special materials - which it no longer does. That is true. But that's really not the point - the point is that as GM I control the magic items in play. How I do it is irrelevant.

Draz74
2009-03-10, 01:22 PM
I'm trying to make a point.

Yeah, I know, I was just being overly sarcastic in countering your point, sorry. (Namely, I was saying that even Fighters are quite reliant on magic, so anti-magic as a whole doesn't help much with class balance.)

Btw, if I had a nickel for every time AMF has been brought up in the name of class balance, I'd be wealthy. And it doesn't ever do any good.

Besides the fact that most DMs just don't use AMF much because it makes the game absolutely boring for nonoptimized casters, optimized casters have come up with more ways to defeat AMFs than you can shake a stick at, so it still doesn't really cause balance.

Zen Master
2009-03-10, 01:23 PM
No, they really won't.

Yes - they really will. Like I said, opportunity means more than class. Initiative means more than class. And I don't have to kill the dog - I just need to kill the druid. The dog then becomes irrelevant. Or you could argue - if I let you decide whether the dog fights on without it's master - that some out of those ten fights would be ties, with both characters dead.

Zen Master
2009-03-10, 01:28 PM
It's just a combat-trained dog. Doesn't have to be a mount. Nobody in your worlds raise guard dogs? War dogs? Hunting dogs, especially for animals like boars? All of those could use the Riding Dog stats and would be a perfectly functional source for a Riding Dog companion.

There are dogs in my world. They are dogs. If they happen to be vicious attack dogs reared on blood and newborns for years on end - they are still dogs. Not Riding Dogs, not Hunting Dogs. Just dogs.

Had I wanted a larger, more dangerous dog, I might invent the Dire Dog. But it hasn't come up - and I doubt it ever will. Dogs aren't interesting enough for me to work with.

Should there at one point be a Dire Dog in my campaign, a druid would be allowed to befriend it as his level increased. Other animals would be better choices.

Sstoopidtallkid
2009-03-10, 01:37 PM
Yes.

Here's what I think. This is based in part on knowledge of the rules, part on experience, part on logic.

The class means less than who has the option to chose. The spells are fine - what were they, entangle, obsrucing mist and magic fang - but they will do little if the opponent is the one who choses when and where to fight.

In many cases, the fight will go to who ever gets initiative. In low levels, casters especially can find that the fight isn't long enough for them to ever do anything.Druids Wizards, and Fighters(other than bow-Fighters) have the same Init mod at low levels, and the Druid wins at higher ones. But the Druid probably goes first, due to Readied Actions and Spot/Listen as a class skill.
About the dog. As GM, I decide the game world. If some random table states druids can chose an animal that does not exist in the game world - they bloody well cannot chose it. It doesn't go any further than that.And in my world they do exist. Houserules have no place in this discussion, because they are not universal.
And the same goes for magic items. First off - players should stay out of the DMG. If they stray in there - well, I still decide what exists and what doesn't. Furthermore, since time out of memory, creating magic items has included an optional bit about special materials - which it no longer does. That is true. But that's really not the point - the point is that as GM I control the magic items in play. How I do it is irrelevant.But again, if a caster took item creation feats, he did so because he had the reasonable expectation that he would be able to create items. Houseruling to nerf casters is not the same as "the game is balanced".

Draz74
2009-03-10, 01:38 PM
Yes.

Postulate 1: The vast majority of players assume that casters typically get killed before launching their first spell.
Postulate 2: The point of playing caster classes is to cast spells.
Postulate 3: If you can't do the thing you intended your character to do, at all, the game will not be fun.
Postulate 4: People will not play the game in a way that is not fun.

Conclusion: Nobody except a small fragment of wacko players (represented so well on these Forums) would ever play any sort of Wizard, Sorcerer, Cleric, or Druid.

... Sorry, I'm absolutely positive this conclusion is terribly false, and that the cause of this incorrect conclusion is that your Postulate #1 is similarly extremely wrong.

Judging by what I knew of D&D long before I ever visited these Forums or knew that casters were stronger than other characters, back when I was a normal, casual, occasional D&D player: I was pretty aware already that Wizards, Druids, and so on were reasonably popular character classes. Because everyone generally assumed that casters generally will be successful in casting some spells before the DM kills them off. :smalltongue:


The class means less than who has the option to chose. The spells are fine - what were they, entangle, obsrucing mist and magic fang - but they will do little if the opponent is the one who choses when and where to fight.
In the (extremely rare?) case that monsters or NPCs are preparing specifically to fight the PCs, and manage to set up a successful ambush, yes, they may be able to prevent the effectiveness of certain spells (e.g. Entangle in a battlefield with no ambient flora).

Though I'm having trouble figuring out what they'd do to prevent the other two spells, without a buttload of specialized resources like a Gem of Seeing or something ... hmmm.

One might argue, though, that if the mere possibility of spellcasting is causing enemies to be this careful about when and where they fight, perhaps that is enough evidence already that spellcasting is overpowered, even if the casters never get to cast anything ...


In many cases, the fight will go to who ever gets initiative. In low levels, casters especially can find that the fight isn't long enough for them to ever do anything.
That's very contrary to my experience, but I suppose I'd have to take a poll to make sure that my experience is normal ... but then, so would you.


About the dog. As GM, I decide the game world. If some random table states druids can chose an animal that does not exist in the game world - they bloody well cannot chose it. It doesn't go any further than that.
OK, let's try this again, since you apparently didn't understand when Rad and Sstoopidtallkid explained it.

You are not my GM. Therefore, arguments based on your House Rules have NO weight in a discussion with me about game balance -- unless you are putting them in the form of, "I suggest that you try these house rules; they may improve the balance of your game." You are not. You are saying the game is in the form of your house rules (and that they are not even house rules because you are playing "exactly by the books") and that anyone who doesn't play with them is playing D&D wrong.


And the same goes for magic items. First off - players should stay out of the DMG.
A sentiment with some merit, but difficult to resolve with game rules about how players starting a game at non-1 levels are supposed to use the Wealth By Level guidelines to generate their starting equipment.


If they stray in there - well, I still decide what exists and what doesn't.
In your game, yes. In public discussions of game balance, no.


Furthermore, since time out of memory,
Which is another way of saying "in older editions of D&D, whose rules no longer apply except in the form of house rules."

hamishspence
2009-03-10, 01:40 PM
I don't see much of a problem with stattting out different varieties of dog. An Attack dog would be rather different than a terrier.

Silver Marches had a variant dog- the Moonshae Moorhound.

the Halfling Outrider pic in Complete Warrior makes the dog look like a mastiff or bull-mastiff.

FatR
2009-03-10, 02:42 PM
Hey, FatR, here's some meaningless words for fighters:

-Antimagic field
-Spell resistance
-Rod of absorption
-Rod of negation
A custom item with antimagic field that activates as a free action will cost a freaking ton of money (maybe literally), making it unfeasible until very high levels. By using this a fighter gambles his life on ability to kill the target caster in a single round, otherwise he will surely die/lose before his next action, thanks to uber animal companion/some Conjuration spell. To even attempt this he needs to get in close range, which isn't exactly easy against wizards.

There is no way whatsoever to get a viable amounts of spell resistance for a core meleeist. Not really sure about non-core. Besides, many of the already-formidable spells, such as Stinking Cloud and Acid Fog, ignore it.

Rod of absorbtion also isn't exactly cheap. It doesn't work against area effects (say "hi" to Acid Fog again). Out of core, it also does nothing to Orbs of, if I read their effect correctly. Yeah, Conjuration kicks ass, doesn't it?

So even a wizard, who depends on magic attacks the most can easily get past the two defenses named above. With spells he's quite likely to use by default, in fact. CoDzillas are defined by their ability to demolish their opponents with physical attacks, so they don't care.

And rod of negation hurts melees more than anyone else. It also requires spending action to produce an effect that is not likely to reduce an opponent's ability to kick ass by that much, unless he completely depends on his weapon or something (casters do not).

Keld Denar
2009-03-10, 02:43 PM
What I'd like to see is a Fighter build that is versatile; a 'Batman Fighter' to mirror the 'Batman Wizard'. A build that has an answer to any given situation, not just one super-damage-trick that can be easily circumnavigated. I'll cook up my own Batman Fighter later tonight (when I have time...I'm on a clock at the moment!), but I'd like to see others' attempts too!

The problem is, there is a certain rigidity asociated with a fighter. His main class features, his feats and class abilities gained by multiclassing, are fixed. Rigid. They don't change. You take Weapon Focus: Kama, you better well be using a Kama or you are ignoring 2 whole levels worth of class features. And there are a lot of things you can do. You can be a charger, or a tripper, or a bullrusher, or a AoO monster, or whatever. But you have a finite number of feats, class abilities, and cash to actualize these types. If you focus on one, you might have some synergy with another, but for a complete other, you'll be crap. And you can't ever change that. You can't wake up one morning, open a book, read for about an hour, and completely change around all your stats, feats, and class abilities. If you want to be a tripper, you should have Improved Trip. That requires either a 13 int or 2 levels of Barbarian and an alt class feature. If you didn't build your character right and asign your int to be 13, or if you got Uncanny Dodge or you plain ol' don't want to take Barb levels, you can't be a tripper. And if you focus on tripping, you can still charge, but your charge attacks won't be as good as a character who took Leap Attack instead of Combat Reflexes or Shocktrooper instead of Improved Trip. Now, you could grab all of those feats, but then you are leaving out still more feats that help you do whatever you want on a moments notice. And gear. Money is finite too. If you are a charger, you probably drop cash on a Valourous weapon to multiply your charge damage. If you are a tripper, you probably spend cash on Sweeping or Whirling. Again, you could go and buy both, but then maybe you can't afford your +con item or your flight item.

When resources are limited, you need to alocate them carefully. If you spread yourself too thin, you won't be good enough at anything to be competative. Thats why melee typically specialize in one thing, so that one thing remains viable as much as possible.

Casters have the luxury of picking different spells to do different things. A wizard can wake up one morning a blaster, and another a BCer. Even a sorc has more flexibility than a meleer, because if he wants to change his focus, he can in 1-2 levels, while most meleers build their whole lives to do one-two things. Casters gear tends to focus on making their spells more effective, regardless of what those spells do. There is more synergy amongst gear. A wizard with a Lesser MM Rod of Empower can use it on a Fireball, or on a Ray of Enfeeblement to be a blaster or debuffer respectively. Melee don't have as much luxury.

Its sad, but thems the rules and thems the facts.

horseboy
2009-03-10, 03:33 PM
Frosty, they said core only, that means no Shock Trooper. Without Shock Trooper you can't reliably PA for full and still hit. So in core only yeah, fighters have a damage problem. Add ST and it does help bring fighter damage up in line.

You see, it highly depends on how you play the game. It's the same thing that bards can suck or be awsome.
Except he's still not good outside of fighting. He can't sneak past a guard. He can't spot his hand in front of his face, metaphorically if not literally. When the rogue is lying through his teeth to the popo and they turn to the fighter and say "Is this true?" the party is screwed. He can't tell when someone is lying to him. Heck he can't interact positively with society at all thanks to a dump stat. Knowledge skills get even sillier since you're not even allowed to roll. Even though he's a fighting man, he still has no way of understanding who's army that is in the valley with the giant banner of a lion's head. He is always lost. He has no idea what's trying to eat his face whether it's a bear or a dragon. It's annoying being relegated to Krillian or Ma-Ti status thanks to the rules. There to prove just how bad the BBEG is, only there because you're buddies with the Big Guy. Have to have the whole plot written around you to provide relevance. :smallyuk:
What I'd like to see is a Fighter build that is versatile; a 'Batman Fighter' to mirror the 'Batman Wizard'. A build that has an answer to any given situation, not just one super-damage-trick that can be easily circumnavigated. I'll cook up my own Batman Fighter later tonight (when I have time...I'm on a clock at the moment!), but I'd like to see others' attempts too!Fighter doesn't have enough resources. If they focus everything they have they might be able to pull off "decent" at one thing. Trying to divide that amongst multiple situations and you're going to suck at everything real bad real quick.

JellyPooga
2009-03-10, 03:45 PM
Yes. They have a high degree of versatility. And melees haven't. Because casters can reinvent themselves each morning. And melees can't. Even as a fighter you can achieve any degree of versatility only at the expense of power, because you either use an obviously weak alternative once your single primary tactics is neutralized, or spread your limited amount of feats (and money for items) to cover two separate tricks (unless we play core-only, in this case you have feats to spare, but have about 3-5 good feats to choose from, so you're unlikely to have either). Other full BAB classes are even worse off, because they don't have that much feats.

Since my last post, I've been having a think. What's the going rate for 1-turn damage output for one of these one-trick fighter builds? Would somewhere in the region of 10xCharacter Level be a reasonable ball-park figure (I know it won't be accurate for every single level, but on average)? If so, just having had a quick flick through the Monster Manual, with the exception of the "big-nasties" like dragons, titans, etc, I can't see anything in there that (HP-wise) such a build couldn't drop in 2 turns going by a Character Level = Challenge Rating comparison...given that CR is supposed to be judged for a 4-PC team, that's not too shabby. So if, for instance, we reduce that ball-park figure to 2.5xCharacter Level to diversify the build and allow it to handle more situations, this guy can still drop an encounter designed for 4 people his level in under a minute (10 rounds) and also has the advantage of being much more difficult to 'nullify'.

Anyway...that was just some random thinking on the subject, so I'm not sure of the figures. Anyway, here's a sample 'Batman Fighter' by the numbers:

Human Fighter 20
{table]Level|Feats|
1|Improved Initiative, Improved Unarmed Strike, Quick Draw|
2|Power Attack|
3|Point Blank Shot|
4|Superior Unarmed Strike|
5| - |
6|Rapid Shot, Blind-Fight|
7| - |
8|Manyshot|
9|Greater Manyshot|
10|Close-Quarters Fighting|
11| - |
12|Mage Slayer, Leap Attack|
13| - |
14|Pierce Magical Concealment|
15|Snap Kick|
16|Roundabout Kick|
17| - |
18|Two Weapon Fighting, Oversized TWF|
19| - |
20|Improved TWF|[/table]

Levels 1-4: Improved Initiative allows you to pre-empt casters from casting a nasty save-or-lose spell and Unarmed feats means you're never without a weapon. Power Attack and PBS are staples of melee and allow you to use both melee and ranged weaponry well. Quick Draw allows you to use thrown weapons much more effectively (important because a dagger is easier to conceal than a bow and arrows and you never know when you might need a ranged weapon).

Levels 5-10: Rapid/Many shot improves ranged capabilities (Manyshot is especially useful because you can ready an action to perform a Manyshot...good vs. casters). Blind-Fight and Close-Quarters Fighting appear here because you're starting to encounter much more invisible and grapple-tastic enemies.

11-16: This is when casters start to really shine, so Mage-Slayer and Pierce Magical Concealment appear to combat that. Leap Attack improves your damage output and Snap/Roundabout Kick improves your Unarmed capabilities further as well as increasing your attacks per round.

17-20: Improved/Two Weapon Fighting might seem an odd choice to take at this juncture, but with both you're rocking 7 melee attacks on a full attack (4 iterative +2 from TWF +1 Snap Kick), each of which gains 1:1 ratio on Power Attacks because of Oversized TWF. Not a huge number of attacks, but fairly respectable. Having TWF also allows you to take advantage of the myriad one-handed weapons being thrown at you by the GM as treasure.

By not taking any weapon specific feats, you're not disadvantaged by having your favourite weapon stolen/sundered/whatever. By taking feats that improve both melee and ranged, you're effective both up close and at range...flight is no defence. Unarmed ability means you're never without a weapon (good for bar-room brawls!) and that you can tote a Reach weapon and still get attacks up-close (with which, as well as Mage-Slayer, you can really put the smack-down on casters once you've got close).

As far as skills go, this was never going to be a strong point, but Jump is a must and Climb is a close second. Once they get high enough, Skill Tricks (if being used) are probably a more worthwhile investment than more ranks. Cross-Class skills might be worth investing in, especially Tumble and Sleight of Hand (the former for battlefield movement, the latter for tricks with light weapons)

For Ability Scores, Strength is primary, followed closely by Dex and Con. Cha, Wis and Int can go hang (in that order) for all this build cares, but ensuring they're not too low (preferably no less than 10) means that you can legitimately use good tactics.

A Ranseur is the primary melee weapon (Piercing, Reach, Disarm) and Composite Longbow for primary ranged. Dagger makes a good seconday weapon for both because of its concealability factor, but a Flail (Bludgeoning, Trip), Longsword (Slashing) and a Shield (for defence) would certainly not go amiss (and just about stays within the limit of believable carrying capacity!).

Anyways, I'm probably going to be told that this is a terrible build, but as far as I'm concerned, with appropriate WBL I think this dude can contribute more to a party than being something of a 5th wheel. Sure he's not rockin' Time Stop or anything, but he's got the ability to go all day every day, come rain or shine. His high HP means he can just wade into the thick of combat and wail on his foes to kingdom come. If he's running low on the ol' HP, then he can pull his bow and bump them off at his lesiure from a cliff-top or what-have-you (or bump them off from off their cliff-top as the case may be).

Zen Master
2009-03-10, 03:55 PM
Druids Wizards, and Fighters(other than bow-Fighters) have the same Init mod at low levels, and the Druid wins at higher ones. But the Druid probably goes first, due to Readied Actions and Spot/Listen as a class skill. And in my world they do exist. Houserules have no place in this discussion, because they are not universal.But again, if a caster took item creation feats, he did so because he had the reasonable expectation that he would be able to create items. Houseruling to nerf casters is not the same as "the game is balanced".

The druid doesn't have any justifiable reason to expect a readied action. The the fighter isn't a fighter - he is a martial character (even if I used fighter in the example).

I do not care what you think has a place in this discussion - your enterpretation of the rules is not universal. It is also the moostest of points, because the dog is utterly insignificant, there are lots of all but identical animal companions.

Anyone who takes item creation feats in my game gets to create items. They will often be extremely powerful. Only you never get to point in the DMG and say 'I want that'. Hence, I stay in control - but the players get what they want.

Really - it's all concensus based.

Zen Master
2009-03-10, 04:05 PM
In the (extremely rare?) case that monsters or NPCs are preparing specifically to fight the PCs, and manage to set up a successful ambush, yes, they may be able to prevent the effectiveness of certain spells (e.g. Entangle in a battlefield with no ambient flora).

Though I'm having trouble figuring out what they'd do to prevent the other two spells, without a buttload of specialized resources like a Gem of Seeing or something ... hmmm.

One might argue, though, that if the mere possibility of spellcasting is causing enemies to be this careful about when and where they fight, perhaps that is enough evidence already that spellcasting is overpowered, even if the casters never get to cast anything ...


That's very contrary to my experience, but I suppose I'd have to take a poll to make sure that my experience is normal ... but then, so would you.


OK, let's try this again, since you apparently didn't understand when Rad and Sstoopidtallkid explained it.

You are not my GM. Therefore, arguments based on your House Rules have NO weight in a discussion with me about game balance -- unless you are putting them in the form of, "I suggest that you try these house rules; they may improve the balance of your game." You are not. You are saying the game is in the form of your house rules (and that they are not even house rules because you are playing "exactly by the books") and that anyone who doesn't play with them is playing D&D wrong.


A sentiment with some merit, but difficult to resolve with game rules about how players starting a game at non-1 levels are supposed to use the Wealth By Level guidelines to generate their starting equipment.


In your game, yes. In public discussions of game balance, no.


Which is another way of saying "in older editions of D&D, whose rules no longer apply except in the form of house rules."

Geez ... ok, I'm going to try to answer this.

In fact, the first part of your post didn't make any sense - so I'm not going to attempt to answer that part.

Now: You argue that npc's and monsters should be sufficiently lacking in intellect and skill to surprise the pc's or to plan ahead. Well - I beg to differ. Play that way if it pleases you.

Then you ... seem to think casters who die on their first turn get much use from what spells they might have planned on casting on rounds 2 and 3.

Then you repeat irrelevant stuff about house rules. I don't really have any. Unless you refer to the riding dog. Which is irrelevant.

Then you mention game balance. That's not the issue here. We're not talking game balance. If you go back, and read, then you will realise what I'm trying to say. I don't care what it is you think I'm trying to say - and I will not answer statements based on your mistakes.

Keld Denar
2009-03-10, 04:16 PM
So...melee characters you play hang around readying actions? What are you readying for? You have to have conditions to ready.

And I don't know how things work with you. I don't care what your house rules are. The way things work on this forum is that you base arguements around the only commonality we have around here, namedly RAW (Rules as Written). Otherwise you are just stating opinions, which is fine if you declare it as an opinion, but has no place in an arguement.

What you are doing is akin to 2 people argueing about their fruit. Someone poses the arguement "Apples are better because they contain more vitamins which promote health" to which you counter; "I like oranges, I eat oranges all the time, so oranges are better". Whether or not you like oranges or not is not part of the debate, its not relevant. Likewise saying "fighters are strong and versitile and always beat druids and wizards because I like fighters and I make sure they are always balanced in my games" doesn't make it a fact. You can state that opinion, and state how you DM and how you feel that makes fighters more viable and fun, but that doesn't change the way things are written in the only common ground we all use to some degree.

Does this make sense? Basically, you can't have an arguement without some kind of common platform from which to argue from. The commonly agreed upon platform to debate from around here is RAW, because its the only thing that is constant. Everything else is a houserule or a bias or an opinion, but not a fact.

EDIT:
And it would be advisable to control your posts. I'd advise you to take a quick read through the forum rules, and construct your arguements without any inciteful or baiting statements. This forum has a pretty strict CoC and very active mods. We are keeping things civil, please respect that.

krossbow
2009-03-10, 06:23 PM
In my games. With my assumptions, my parameters.



So basically, when you personally gimp casters, fighters win. Thats really not an argument; thats like saying you wrote a fan fic in which krillin beat up goku and then got the chicks. Just because you arbitrarily say something does not mean that the rules go along with you.



Going by Rules alone, fighters get their butts handed to them hard. Druids can do it from level 1 in core, no splatbooks. Clerics can do it once they get good self buff spells. Any caster with grease can make your fighter looks like an idiot, and god forbid you fight an optimized low level wizard with sleep spells and a scythe for coup de graces.



I would also like to point out that druids are not exactly fragile flowers; they have a d8 hit die which is hardly that much worse than a fighter's. If a druid's getting taken out in a single round before he can do anything, the fighter is completely and totally boned; its literally an impossible situation for him to win unless these uber monsters inexplicably have no hp or run away giggling after taking down a caster, never to be seen again.

Draz74
2009-03-10, 09:03 PM
Geez ... ok, I'm going to try to answer this.

In fact, the first part of your post didn't make any sense - so I'm not going to attempt to answer that part.
It was a little trick called "reductio ad absurdum" by logicians, philosophers, mathematicians, and debate teams. I took something you said, followed it to its logical conclusion, and used the absurdity of the conclusion to demonstrate that your statement was incorrect.


Now: You argue that npc's and monsters should be sufficiently lacking in intellect and skill to surprise the pc's or to plan ahead. Well - I beg to differ. Play that way if it pleases you.
Sort of. I don't think that NPCs and monsters should be smart enough to plan ahead and surprise PCs:

(1) every stinking battle, which is what you implied with your "Druid will die before he gets to cast any of the three spells you named" statement.
(2) with enough specific knowledge to counter individual spells that the PCs have prepared.

Yes, ambushes and prepared NPCs should definitely happen sometimes. But not enough to keep casters from ever, you know, casting.


Then you ... seem to think casters who die on their first turn get much use from what spells they might have planned on casting on rounds 2 and 3.
I do not understand how I implied any such thing.


Then you repeat irrelevant stuff about house rules. I don't really have any. Unless you refer to the riding dog. Which is irrelevant.
I was mostly referring to the riding dog. Which is indeed pretty irrelevant in the larger picture of the game. But the way you argued about it before, you weren't saying "it was irrelevant," you were saying "you should all take my riding dog rule into consideration when you discuss Level 1 Druid vs. Fighter battles."


Then you mention game balance. That's not the issue here. We're not talking game balance. If you go back, and read, then you will realise what I'm trying to say. I don't care what it is you think I'm trying to say - and I will not answer statements based on your mistakes.

Sorry, whatever point you're actually trying to make, you've wandered into a debate about game balance. If nothing else, with your statement that your Fighter can beat the Druid 5/10 times.

tyckspoon
2009-03-10, 11:52 PM
A Very Long Post

Hmm. If you absolutely are stuck with the negative conditions of taking 20 levels of Fighter and having everything you use be randomly generated I suppose this would be a tolerable way to go. Although I'd probably still focus more on two-handed fighting than two-weapon fighting, as you are more likely to get given a single good weapon than a pair to fight with. It would also reduce your stat dependencies a little bit... but those are going to be pretty harsh as long as you want to be equally good at both bows and melee weapons. You could try using throwing weapons and taking Brutal Throw, but getting a decent set of throwing weapons for a Rapid Shot full attack routine is even more unlikely than three decent weapons (2 melee and a bow. 4 weapons if you count arrows.)

General improvement: There has to be something better than Greater Manyshot for this concept. The biggest benefit of Greater Manyshot is using precision damage on each shot, and you don't seem to have any. There is something to be said for not being subject to blowing four arrows on one bad attack roll, but I'm not certain that's enough of a benefit on its own to justify the feat. Especially since you've placed it at level 9, where you could take a general feat instead of a Fighter bonus feat.

Fortinbras
2009-03-10, 11:53 PM
to rerail this thread.

I just got ToB!!!

After twelve fighter levels I am taking a martial adept dip.

I want some advice. So far my character has been an ubercharger, though I'm looking to branch out.

Draz74
2009-03-11, 12:22 AM
to rerail this thread.

I just got ToB!!!

After twelve fighter levels I am taking a martial adept dip.

I want some advice. So far my character has been an ubercharger, though I'm looking to branch out.

OOOOH! :smallbiggrin:

Well, what are your Fighter's (or party's) weaknesses? So we can figure out which ToB class is able to shore them up best.

streakster
2009-03-11, 12:24 AM
to rerail this thread.

I just got ToB!!!

After twelve fighter levels I am taking a martial adept dip.

I want some advice. So far my character has been an ubercharger, though I'm looking to branch out.

Yes, yes, yes! You are gonna have so much fun! More info, please!

Fortinbras
2009-03-11, 12:29 AM
we don't really have an arcane caster or a skill monkey. I'm mainly looking at improving melee anyway though because other players come and go and our party makeup changes a lot. I've more or less decided on warblade but i could use a little help deciding on maneuvers and stances. I am playing a dwarf with full plate and all high stats except for dex which is a twelve. i favor a bastard sword. Since I have mainly ubercharger feats i was looking for things that were good for situations were charging is unfeasable. Thanks.

Draz74
2009-03-11, 01:52 AM
Good info. How are your saves? How high is your Jump skill? A shield in the other hand to go with that bastard sword? What's come the closest to getting you killed -- the lowered AC after a Shock Trooper charge? Spells? If the party is lacking in arcane and skillmonkey stuff, are they pretty melee-heavy?

Zen Master
2009-03-11, 03:25 AM
The way things work on this forum is that you base arguements around the only commonality we have around here, namedly RAW (Rules as Written).

Says who? You?

RAW is interpretation. I play by RAW, but interpret the rules differently than you do. RAW gets progressivly more confused the more different authors you invite to mess it up - which is why any smart GM would sort the mess out for himself.

But basically, I have so few house rules it's barely worth mentioning.

Zen Master
2009-03-11, 03:28 AM
So basically, when you personally gimp casters, fighters win.

I don't. I control the wealth and the availability of magic items. That's the GM's job (among other things).

Zen Master
2009-03-11, 03:30 AM
It was a little trick called "reductio ad absurdum" by logicians, philosophers, mathematicians, and debate teams.

It may have been intended that way.

horseboy
2009-03-11, 03:40 AM
Anyways, I'm probably going to be told that this is a terrible build, but as far as I'm concerned, with appropriate WBL I think this dude can contribute more to a party than being something of a 5th wheel. Sure he's not rockin' Time Stop or anything, but he's got the ability to go all day every day, come rain or shine. His high HP means he can just wade into the thick of combat and wail on his foes to kingdom come. If he's running low on the ol' HP, then he can pull his bow and bump them off at his lesiure from a cliff-top or what-have-you (or bump them off from off their cliff-top as the case may be).
Yeah, that would be terribly bad. He's not even decent at anything. You REALLY think he's going to be able to survive 10 rounds of exchanging full attacks with ANYTHING, let alone something CR appropriate?
Just as an average, it varies by level/weapon/build, but just for this character to Peg into the average of the damage even a rogue would do you'd have to increase the amount you power attack each level by 2. So, no, you're bringing piddly damage.
You have squat battlefield control. If you do piddly damage and have squat battlefield control, why is something with an int over 10 going to attack you so you can utilize your "kingdom come" amount of hp?
Do you have anything outside of combat this character is good for? Jumping...oookay.
If you want to be a versatile martial core character go with ranger. You'll get three of those archery feats for "free". A mithral breastplate means you don't need any other type of armour. Then you can not only go ahead and have those archery feats, and a wolf for trip attacking battlefield control. Skill points enough and class skills that you can actually bring something of use to the party outside of combat. Between your Bow of Uber and quivers of what's-her-name you pick up a wand of CLW for if you're the last one standing. Dip some rogue or scout for bonus damage dice. Boom! Far more useful to a party than the fighter you propose. Is it enough? Well, that's for the campaign to decide.

FatR
2009-03-11, 05:14 AM
JellyPooga. First of all, a character has CR equal to his level, therefore he is supposed to be able to win roughly 50% of battles when placed against random opponents of his CR. For a fighter of two-digit level this often means killing them in one charge, because he might not get a second chance.
Why? Because your assumption that a fight with equal-CR creatures can last 10 rounds is eminently incorrect. In my experience, fights of similar length are only possible when an opponent is deliberately built for stalling, with iron defense, but inadequate offense, and/or someone is enormously unlucky. Both such creatures and such situations are rare. In practice, a monster of appropriate CR will require about 2-4 rounds (depending on how good a monster is) to kill your fighter even at low-mid levels. At high levels it is more like 1-3 rounds, because you won't be able to maintain your AC as a credible defense. That's only going by HP damage, before the consequences of having a huge gaping hole in your fighter's defenses where his Will save is or not having an anti-grapple measures before level 10 come into play. If you don't believe me, run calculations by yourself, even using stock monsters from MM1. Better yet, try to test this character against some encounters from published adventures. I highly doubt, that he can overcome some CR 6-7 stuff from, say, Savage Tide even at level 10.
In other worlds, if your fighter need a 10 rounds to drop an equal-CR opponent, your damage is completely inadequate. Even a single target-attacking melee brute stands a good chance of killing the whole party of four characters like this fighter, even though a party of four should curbstomp such threat. Your fighter isn't even good at wiping out mook hordes (no Cleave/Great Cleave, arrow damage is going to be piddly).
Also, no, your fighter don't have an ability to go all day every day. Don't fool yourself. He can go on just as long as his HPs last (see above). And compared to high-CR monsters, he has no mobility whatsoever, so, please, stop daydreaming about falling back to ranged combat, if melee is to lethal for him (and it is).

Kaiyanwang
2009-03-11, 05:22 AM
Your Fighters don't use magic items? :smallconfused: How do they deal with Incorporeals, for one thing?

Jaded Weapons.

JellyPooga
2009-03-11, 06:01 AM
@Horseboy: I purposely wanted to avoid Ranger (and Paladin, for that matter) because they can cast spells...that would be defeating the point of a versatile martial only character, but otherwise, yes, I'd tend to agree with you that a Ranger would make a far better example of versatility (more skills, spells, animal companion).

@Fatr: Your Character Level = Your Challenge Rating, but an appropriate encounter is not a single character vs a creature with CR equal to his Character Level. An appropriate encounter is 4 characters vs a CR equal to their level. Therefore a single character vs. a creature with a CR equal to his Character Level should actually lose much more often than he wins because he's way out of his depth. At level 10, to use your example, the sort of challenges he should be encountering will be around CR 6-8, as a solo adventurer. I'm not talking about a one-shot wonder encounter of the kind where a Wizard nova's all his spells to win, I'm talking here, about the average kind of encounters you could expect to face in an adventure. Under these circumstances, I believe this build to be able to hold his own. Don't knock arrow damage either...a single shot from a Bow has the potential for the equivalent of +19 worth of magical enhancements (+10 from the Bow and +9 from the Arrow...the +1 Enhancement bonus obviously not stacking)...that's a lot no matter who you are.

I'm not claiming that this dude is as powerful as Batman Wizard or CoDzilla, he's clearly not and never will be because he doesn't have anywhere near the versatility of being able to completely change his abilities every day. However, what I am claiming is that he could be a contributing member of an adventuring party instead of the pile of steaming everyone thinks a Fighter has to be.

Neithan
2009-03-11, 06:53 AM
You see, it highly depends on how you play the game. It's the same thing that bards can suck or be awsome.

Except he's still not good outside of fighting. He can't sneak past a guard. He can't spot his hand in front of his face, metaphorically if not literally. When the rogue is lying through his teeth to the popo and they turn to the fighter and say "Is this true?" the party is screwed. He can't tell when someone is lying to him. Heck he can't interact positively with society at all thanks to a dump stat. Knowledge skills get even sillier since you're not even allowed to roll. Even though he's a fighting man, he still has no way of understanding who's army that is in the valley with the giant banner of a lion's head. He is always lost. He has no idea what's trying to eat his face whether it's a bear or a dragon. It's annoying being relegated to Krillian or Ma-Ti status thanks to the rules. There to prove just how bad the BBEG is, only there because you're buddies with the Big Guy. Have to have the whole plot written around you to provide relevance. :smallyuk: Fighter doesn't have enough resources. If they focus everything they have they might be able to pull off "decent" at one thing. Trying to divide that amongst multiple situations and you're going to suck at everything real bad real quick.
And I still stand to my statement. ;)

If you play only with the characters stats, then you do that. But I don't see why to do anything except combat at all.

Fortinbras
2009-03-11, 09:27 AM
Fort:16
Reflex:7
Will:10

Party is melee heavy.

Bastard sword is mainly two handed, i know slightly sub optimal compaired to a greatsword, but only slightly.

Jump is +8

The closest I've come to getting killed is when the DM misenturpreted the rules regaurding a skeleton's DR.

Oslecamo
2009-03-11, 09:29 AM
If you want to be a versatile martial core character go with ranger. You'll get three of those archery feats for "free". A mithral breastplate means you don't need any other type of armour.
Then you can not only go ahead and have those archery feats, and a wolf for trip attacking battlefield control. Skill points enough and class skills that you can actually bring something of use to the party outside of combat. Between your Bow of Uber and quivers of what's-her-name you pick up a wand of CLW for if you're the last one standing.

Two words:handle animal. Fighter class skill. Get your own army of wolves. Or purple wurms. Yes, you can do it by RAW, check arms and equipment guide. You don't need spot or listen, let your free guard pet do it. You don't need heavy battlefield control, let your trained minions do it. You don't need mobility, let your mount carry you. And all of them were acquired by the fighter's own capacity.

Nobody complains when the wizard brings his army of mind raped monsters. Why do you complain so much when the fighter does it?



Dip some rogue or scout for bonus damage dice. Boom! Far more useful to a party than the fighter you propose. Is it enough? Well, that's for the campaign to decide.

Ooohhh, so to prove the ranger is superior you go and multiclass into rogue. Great way to make your point. Why isn't the fighter allowed to multiclass also again?

streakster
2009-03-11, 10:18 AM
we don't really have an arcane caster or a skill monkey. I'm mainly looking at improving melee anyway though because other players come and go and our party makeup changes a lot. I've more or less decided on warblade but i could use a little help deciding on maneuvers and stances. I am playing a dwarf with full plate and all high stats except for dex which is a twelve. i favor a bastard sword. Since I have mainly ubercharger feats i was looking for things that were good for situations were charging is unfeasable. Thanks.

Hey! Good info! Let's see here...

For maneuvers, might I suggest looking at Diamond Mind? Your Bastard Sword is a discipline weapon for it, and it has some nifty save replacers (you can patch up that will save of yours). Also offers a lovely set of gem-themed strikes you could use when not charging, and since you said you like to charge, check out the Bounding Assault. Charge in a straight line? Why? :smallsmile: In addition, high-level maneuvers and stances grant extra actions - very nice. I'd recommend boosting your concentration checks if you go heavy into this style - buy a third eye of concentrate or something at the very least.

Stone Dragon offers the drool-worthy Mountain Hammer line of strikes - more damage, you can tell DR to shove off, and the prereqs are nothing. You have to be on ground to use them, though, so if you're in an aerial or aquatic campaign, move along.

Iron Heart offers the Iron Heart Surge. Very very nice, but talk it over with your DM first. This was poorly written, and so can do things it shouldn't and can't do things it should - ie, it probably wasn't meant to be able to end the sun or gravity. A lifesaver if it's used as it should be, though. Other than that, never really used this style much.

White Raven is great if you love your party. If you have charge-capable meleers, Leading the Charge is awesome. The rest of the maneuvers help out your allies with bonuses, extra actions, etc. Very very nice discipline.

I don't use Tiger Claw much - never really had a high enough Jump skill, and never dual wielded. Can't help here.

Remember to look at other disciplines too - with a feat you can grab from other lists.

I'm sure others can be of more help, just thought I'd throw in my 2cp.

Draz74
2009-03-11, 11:28 AM
Party is melee heavy.

This means that White Raven will be the best for you to focus on -- though picking and choosing a few other gems from other disciplines is still a great option, of course.

Since I assume your Concentration check, like any Fighter's, is crap, I don't think you should bother with most stuff from Diamond Mind, like the save-boosters or Ruby Nightmare Blade. But there are some great DMind options that have nothing to do with Concentration:

- Bounding Assault, like Streakster said, is awesome for a charger. It's like "Charge, but with all restrictions removed." No -2 AC, no move-in-a-straight-line, none of that stuff; but still lets you move double your speed and attack with a +2 bonus, and still explicitly counts as a "charge" for your other abilities (e.g. Pounce).
- Emerald Razor is great for when you can't charge. Just clobber the brute next to you with a full power attack blow, and you'll probably still hit because you only have to beat his Touch AC.

Unfortunately, there's not a great choice for you to "break into" the discipline to meet these maneuvers' prerequisites ...

Your first dip in Warblade will let you pick higher-level maneuvers as long as you meet their prerequisites, but your first stance technically still has to be Level 1. The best choice for that stance is indeed probably Leading the Charge, especially if you can use it with a Pounce ability like an ubercharger should. Bolstering Voice is also lovely though, unless your party buffer is already throwing around a lot of morale bonuses.

On the off chance you're not already able to Pounce, go for the Pouncing Charge maneuver ASAP! But it will require Initiator Level 9 and some prerequisite maneuvers, so it may take you a while to get. Unless you're going for this, I wouldn't do much with Tiger Claw, which is mostly good for three things (crits, TWF, and insane Jumping; your Jump isn't awesome, your threat range isn't awesome, and you don't TWF.) The Level 1 maneuver Sudden Leap might be an exception, though. It might be extremely handy for setting up a charge where you wouldn't have been able to use one otherwise. Very handy. But also has a prerequisite. So to get into Tiger Claw at all, you'll have to take a lame maneuver, probably Claw at the Moon, and put more ranks in Jump.

Besides Iron Heart Surge (which is indeed a good choice if your DM is willing to adjudicate it), Iron Heart offers the lovely Wall of Blades and the credible Lightning Recovery for your entertainment ...

I'm rambling. :smallsmile: Too many good choices.

Artanis
2009-03-11, 11:42 AM
Says who? You?
Says the fact that it is the only possible common ground upon which to compare things.



RAW gets progressivly more confused the more different authors you invite to mess it up - which is why any smart GM would sort the mess out for himself.
RAW stands for Rules As Written. That means it's the ink that WotC puts on the page. By definition it is NOT interpretation.

Your assessment of how well (or for that matter, whether) the rules work is interpretation.
Your assessment of the effect that having multiple authors has on the usability of the RAW is interpretation.
Your assessment of what a "smart GM" would change is interpretation.
Your assessment of what house rules are helpful is interpretation.

The words on the page, however, are NOT interpretation.


RAW is interpretation. I play by RAW, but interpret the rules differently than you do.

...

But basically, I have so few house rules it's barely worth mentioning.
If you use house rules, then you do not play by RAW. You use rules that WotC has not personally put on paper with ink or on errata with X Y Z RGB. It does not matter how few or how minor those house rules are, they are still house rules. Thus, by definition, you do not play by RAW.

Kaiyanwang
2009-03-11, 12:32 PM
Two words:handle animal. Fighter class skill. Get your own army of wolves. Or purple wurms. Yes, you can do it by RAW, check arms and equipment guide. You don't need spot or listen, let your free guard pet do it. You don't need heavy battlefield control, let your trained minions do it. You don't need mobility, let your mount carry you. And all of them were acquired by the fighter's own capacity.


Yeah! A player of mine trained 4 kinds of wurms at epic (he was Fighter 40, believe it or not).

And since he was not a rival but a friend of the Wizard, the wurms were polymorphed in little birds to lessen the amount of food to nourish them.

They used them in sieges and similar situations that didn't need.. we can say... delicacy :smallwink:

streakster
2009-03-11, 12:55 PM
Since I assume your Concentration check, like any Fighter's, is crap, I don't think you should bother with most stuff from Diamond Mind, like the save-boosters or Ruby Nightmare Blade. But there are some great DMind options that have nothing to do with Concentration:

- Bounding Assault, like Streakster said, is awesome for a charger. It's like "Charge, but with all restrictions removed." No -2 AC, no move-in-a-straight-line, none of that stuff; but still lets you move double your speed and attack with a +2 bonus, and still explicitly counts as a "charge" for your other abilities (e.g. Pounce).
- Emerald Razor is great for when you can't charge. Just clobber the brute next to you with a full power attack blow, and you'll probably still hit because you only have to beat his Touch AC.

Unfortunately, there's not a great choice for you to "break into" the discipline to meet these maneuvers' prerequisites ...



Bah. Thanks, Draz. I'm too fond of Diamond Mind, clouded my judgement. Yeah, unless you have an uncharacteristically good Concentration score or some way to get it high fast, not that great. And getting in's a pain too then, like Draz says - of all the 0 prereqs, really only Stance of Clarity, Rapid Counter, and Diamond Defense don't need concentration checks. Yeah, I'd go with White Raven too.

FatR
2009-03-11, 01:17 PM
@Fatr: Your Character Level = Your Challenge Rating, but an appropriate encounter is not a single character vs a creature with CR equal to his Character Level. An appropriate encounter is 4 characters vs a CR equal to their level.
Dead wrong. I'm really tired of people who do not even understand how CR works. Really how can you even write that, knowing that Character Level = Your Challenge Rating. Let's put how things really are in this way:

CR = party level = curbstomp battle (spending 20% of resources is enough and victory is practically guaranteed).

CR = character level (or party level +4) = real battle (the fate of the game hangs in balance!).


However, what I am claiming is that he could be a contributing member of an adventuring party instead of the pile of steaming everyone thinks a Fighter has to be.
He couldn't. Most published adventures will wipe him out quite soon even if enemies are played completely as written (i.e., deliberately stupidly).

Lycar
2009-03-11, 01:41 PM
Dead wrong. I'm really tired of people who do not even understand how CR works. Really how can you even write that, knowing that Character Level = Your Challenge Rating. Let's put how things really are in this way:

CR = party level = curbstomp battle (spending 20% of resources is enough and victory is practically guaranteed).

CR = character level (or party level +4) = real battle (the fate of the game hangs in balance!).

Uh what? That is exactly what he said!

Party of 4 lv 10 vs. encounter CR 10 = expected attrition of 20%.
Party of 4 lv 10 vs. encounter CR 14 = cointosss/real chance for TPK.

Therefore, a SINGLE lv 10 character facing a CR 10 encounter is in about the same situation as the lv 10 PARTY against a CR 14 encounter.

Or in other words: The so-called 'adequate' encounter for a SINGLE character would have to be about CR 6-8 to amount to a roundabout 20% attrition rate.

Lycar

Fawsto
2009-03-11, 01:59 PM
@ JellyPooga.

If a a level 10 standard party (4 members) finds a CR 10 monster, every party member is suposed to spend 1/4 of their resources to get past it. A level 10 Fighter, or Wizard, or Druid, or any class around fighting the same CR 10 monster should be able to defeat it by spending 4/4 of their resources. This means that every class should have a 50% of chance to defeat every enemy or chalenge from an appropriate CR level.

Resources, if you allow me to name it, are: HP, Spells, Magic Items, Special Abilities and every other resource that a chracter can dispose of immediately in a given moment.

So, to make my point, please, get a level 10 fighter (optimize as much as you want) with WBL and pitch it against 5 different creatures with CR 10 from the MM1. Use only 1 fighter all the times (the same build and same equipment) and make the battle happen in the creature's enviroment (where almost every encounter occurs). Use only 3.5 core. See how many times he wins. I suggest these monsters: A Bebilith, Any one of the CR 10 Hydras, a Rakshasa, a Fire Giant and Coutl. You may choose any other creature if you desire, just make sure to run those creatures as they are intended to.

I think that your fighter will hardly win any of those encounters. But since I cannot show empyrical proof, I will not hold it against you.

However, I want valid proof of everything you are stating in the fighter's behalf or any other class. As I like to say, if you cannot prove a fact you are professing, it has no value in a discussion. In this forum, while we are discussing game mechanics, the only valid proof is the common interpretation of the RAW.


@ Neithan

Unfortunately we are discussing game mechanics (tell me if I am wrong), and by RAW we are required to make skill checks to interact with NPCs. By RAW you can't simply go there and roleplay your diplomacy without rolling a dice, the same principle applies to why you cannot go there and discribe how you hit the monster without making an attack roll.

Sure, it would be much easier for a resourceful and intelligent player to simply use his talking abilities to succeed in outside combat situations with his Fighter or other Core meleer. However, we are required to remember that the skills a Player owns are not the same his character's does. So, while you, as a Player could talk your way out of the Jail after comiting a crime in plain sight of a Cop (just to show some extremes) your Fighter with Int 10, Cha 10 and no Bluff/Diplomacy skill can't.

Fighters, for instance, can't afford any of the interaction skill besides "Intimidate" which, most of times, result in the STARTING of a conflict in the place of avoiding one. If he has the skills for that, which he normaly has not.


@ Oslecamo

If you have the required skills and can afford the time to find and train those creatures, go for it. Now, just remember that it will require a massive degree of effort for the Fighter to bring an army of creatures to play, while it is much easier for the Wizard to do this in a more effective way.


@ Fortinbras

Good, something else to discuss. I liked the initiative.

IMO, I'd go Warblade: d12 HD, manouvers, good class features, if your character has high int he can profit even more from the class. Go Diamond Mind, as stated earlier. It has some very good stances, some charging related manouvers and good strikes like emerald razor (that allow you to PA for good measure), the nifty nightmare blades (I love them) and the Insightful strike (great for the times when your are disarmed).

You could also go Crusader if you want resilience at all costs. Also White Raven is very good among a melee heavy group.


@ Acromos

hummm... perhaps the common sense? I mean, if you were to start a discussion at a forum, would you like to see people discussing it in 10 diferent lenguages that you can't understand? It is the same thing with RAW, it is the only common lengauge in which we can properly discuss rules.


Guys, please, let's stick to the facts, ok? Stuff we can prove with the rules (RAW), ok?

JellyPooga
2009-03-11, 03:44 PM
Before I start, I implore you to look at the first line of my sig and bear it in mind as you read. :smallwink:


@ JellyPooga.

If a a level 10 standard party (4 members) finds a CR 10 monster, every party member is suposed to spend 1/4 of their resources to get past it. A level 10 Fighter, or Wizard, or Druid, or any class around fighting the same CR 10 monster should be able to defeat it by spending 4/4 of their resources. This means that every class should have a 50% of chance to defeat every enemy or chalenge from an appropriate CR level.

Resources, if you allow me to name it, are: HP, Spells, Magic Items, Special Abilities and every other resource that a chracter can dispose of immediately in a given moment.

I hate to be a stickler, but if a Fighter uses 4/4 of his daily resources (i.e.HP) HE'S DEAD (well, disabled, but that's as near as dammit). In normal gameplay this event is avoided by the healer using his resources to avert this fact, but if a Fighters only daily resource is HP and he uses all of them then he has lost. He shouldn't have a 50/50 chance at all. In theory, it should entirely depend on whether he has a higher Initiative than his foe because if he's an equal CR to his foe, then the foe should also use all his resources. If both must use all their resources, then it is the one that goes first that wins. So by this argument, all a Fighter should need is an Initiative somewhere in the stratosphere in order win what you call an approprate encounter...barely. This is clearly not the case.


So, to make my point, please, get a level 10 fighter (optimize as much as you want) with WBL and pitch it against 5 different creatures with CR 10 from the MM1. Use only 1 fighter all the times (the same build and same equipment) and make the battle happen in the creature's enviroment (where almost every encounter occurs). Use only 3.5 core. See how many times he wins. I suggest these monsters: A Bebilith, Any one of the CR 10 Hydras, a Rakshasa, a Fire Giant and Coutl. You may choose any other creature if you desire, just make sure to run those creatures as they are intended to.

I think that your fighter will hardly win any of those encounters. But since I cannot show empyrical proof, I will not hold it against you.

I'll admit to not having actually run sample encounters of this sort but the only 'fair' way to do so easily would be to use completely average rolls (e.g. alternating results of 10 and 11 on any given d20 roll). Under these circumstances, several things that dpend on random chance (critical hits, for example) simply will not occur, negating a large part of many builds. It would also be fairly easy to modify your build to account for the 'average dice' (e.g. Improved Critical would be off the list) but either way would produce fallacious results. The only truly fair way to run these encounters would be to run them several thousands, perhaps even millions of times in order to account for every single different die result possible. This is obviously not an option without a fair amount of programming knowledge (which I do not have, incidentally).


However, I want valid proof of everything you are stating in the fighter's behalf or any other class. As I like to say, if you cannot prove a fact you are professing, it has no value in a discussion. In this forum, while we are discussing game mechanics, the only valid proof is the common interpretation of the RAW.

If you read my posts, I do not claim any facts with regards to the effectiveness of a Fighter. I claim beliefs. These are my opinions, not empirical knowledge (and I challenge anyone that claims to have truly empirical knowledge, unclouded by opinion, on these matters). The statement that opinion has no place in discussion is simply ignorance. Without opinions, there would be no discussion at all. Common interpretation is not neccesarily the true interpretation either. Pi is commonly interpreted to be 3.14 rather than to 5 or more decimal places. Which figure is more true?

Having said all that, I cannot claim to know that my proposed build will be effective...I have neither used it in a real game or in a theoretical 'arena match'. It is only my opinion that in a table-top game of Dungeons and Dragons, going by the Rules As Written, my proposed build will be more than just a 5th wheel and might even (the gods forbid) be able to contribute at any given level of play. The purpose of my exercise was to create a Fighter that could adapt to circumstance rather than rely on a single 'trick' or 'combo' in the hopes that it might, perhaps, prove more effective in an actual game than the one-trick-pony builds that are the focus of optimisers.

edit: PS - Thanks for backing me up there Lycar...I appear to be up against a wall here!

horseboy
2009-03-11, 03:53 PM
Two words:handle animal. Fighter class skill.And the druid and the ranger. And what they handle is smarter, stronger, more hardy, and harder to hit. Not to mention only a free action to command them.
Get your own army of wolves. Or purple wurms. Wolves, who die the first AoE that hits the party because they don't have evasion. Then you've got to spend another two months rearing the next batch and another month training them. Granted, I don't know the maturation rate of a purple wurms, but given their size, I'm thinking it's measured in years. Meh, I suppose it gives the fighter something to do while everybody else makes magic items and learns new ways to spank reality and make it like it.
Yes, you can do it by RAW, check arms and equipment guide.
NTY. 3.x mechanics are so bad I refused to buy all of core, let alone the 80 bajillion splat books they shoveled out.
You don't need spot or listen, let your free guard pet do it. Which will never be as good as the rangers. Let alone when he goes all Ranger of the Gnarley and has his skills magnified to the point of being able to non magically see invisible enemies 30' away before he picks up the dice.

You don't need heavy battlefield control, let your trained minions do it. You don't need mobility, let your mount carry you. And all of them were acquired by the fighter's own capacity. All of which die horribly after about level 6. Right around the time the non-optimized fighter really starts struggling.

Nobody complains when the wizard brings his army of mind raped monsters. Why do you complain so much when the fighter does it?Well, technically it's the clerics of WeJas with the army of monsters, or druids. Hey, if you don't mind catching a PF from the GM, power to ya.


Ooohhh, so to prove the ranger is superior you go and multiclass into rogue. Great way to make your point. Why isn't the fighter allowed to multiclass also again?*shrug* Ask the guy who built the fighter I was replying to. Heck a tree level rogue dip so they qualify for that touch attack feat makes even monks better.

Yukitsu
2009-03-11, 04:11 PM
Meh. For anyone to take a build in a theory board, you would need to tell us your to hit value, your average damage per hit, and your AC and saves at the very least. It's preferable that you also include stat array, items and how often you hit an average opponent at whatever level is chosen. Given this builds heavy reliance on money, I would have to say that it would do poorly in any category that you didn't push money into. For instance, you require 3 weapon enchantments. Typically, a weapon costs around 200 000, so 3 optimal weapons is your entire wealth by level. More reasonably, you can have 3 crummy weapons, and some other gear, but again, this character isn't going to be doing all that much with any weapon set.

Assume base 16 in strength and dex to help out with versatility, ending with 24 and 24. Assume as well +5 weapons. You have 20 from Base attack bonus, 7 from your stat, and 5 from your weapon. That's a +30 to hit, as all your weapons have a -2 penalty to get more attacks.

Now take your typical level 20 encounter. A Balor. They have an AC of 39, so you can expect 2-3 attacks to hit from your flurry of two weapon fighting. Assuming again, typical workins, you'll deal 4.5+7+5 damage from all this. About 16.5. So in a given round, expect from 33 to 49.5 damage. This is rather trivial.

The numbers are almost exactly the same with a bow, meaning that this option isn't really any better.

Obviously I'm missing stuff, but that's why for purposes of showing something you think might be effective, you have to go into more detail. Otherwise people will just point out weaknesses that could be covered for, had you gone into more detail.

Fawsto
2009-03-12, 02:24 PM
Wall of Text, beware.


I hate to be a stickler, but if a Fighter uses 4/4 of his daily resources (i.e.HP) HE'S DEAD (well, disabled, but that's as near as dammit). In normal gameplay this event is avoided by the healer using his resources to avert this fact, but if a Fighters only daily resource is HP and he uses all of them then he has lost. He shouldn't have a 50/50 chance at all. In theory, it should entirely depend on whether he has a higher Initiative than his foe because if he's an equal CR to his foe, then the foe should also use all his resources. If both must use all their resources, then it is the one that goes first that wins. So by this argument, all a Fighter should need is an Initiative somewhere in the stratosphere in order win what you call an approprate encounter...barely. This is clearly not the case.


You did not get my point.

Let's see if I can explain it better... What CR is a level 10 Fighter? If you consider nifty magical items above the WBL, 12, maybe 13. If ruled by WBL and using "Human" as the race, the Fighter will have a CR of 10. What this means?

It means that any battle between two level 10 Fighters, equally optimized and with equal WBL, would be resolved by casuality. Simply because both Fighters would have to rely on all of their resources to fight the other one.

What I am trying to say is that, while a Fighter can, well, fight toe to toe with other Fighters of equal level (and CR) they cannot and do not have the slightly chance to: A) Deal with any kind of full casters, after a given level (Usualy after level 8, I guess); B) Deal with any of the "Brute" type monsters, or any other kind of monster of the same CR; C) Deal with any encounter of the appropriate DC that does not involve combat, for example Traps.

There is an enourmous disparity between the classes. When I told you to try to imagine those fights with a level 10 Fighter and a level 10 Druid to battle against CR 10 monsters I should had included, as enemies, a level 10 Druid and a level 10 Fighter, also I should have pitched those characters against CR 10 situations to see who would survive better.

What I was trying to prove is that the Fighter can't really do what he was supposed to. All his resources are subpar in comparisson to the resources of the creatures he should be defeating. But while those creatures are supposed to be killed or defeated in the course of the adventure, the Fighter, who is supposed to survive, will, almost 90% of the times, not.

Remember that a CR 10 monster is also bound to the same rules the level 10 party is. The CR 10 monster should be able to, by using 4/4 of his resources, be able to make the party expend 1/4 of their resources.

You know what is 1/4 of the resources of a 4-men party? One Fighter or One Wizard or One Cleric or One Rogue, or, at least, it is how it was supposed to be. This means that if the Cleric, Wizard and Rogue simply stand still doing nothing and not calling the, let's say, Fire Giant, attacks, the Fighter should, in a 50/50 chance basis, be able to defeat the Fire Giant allone, because both the Giant and the Fighter will be using equal amounts of resources of equal importance (CR 10 and Fighter level 10).

However, the Fighter will probably never win. His resources, though deemed to be equal to the Wizard's when WotC designed the classes, are subpar. He would require a big dose of luck to succeed.

I am saying probably because I can not prove it empyrically. I am just confident on my words because I have a whole bunch of threads backing me up saying that the Fighter would indeed suffer in a situation like this. The other threads that say the opposite have already been disqualified by the arguments of people far more skilled than I am.



If you read my posts, I do not claim any facts with regards to the effectiveness of a Fighter. I claim beliefs. These are my opinions, not empirical knowledge (and I challenge anyone that claims to have truly empirical knowledge, unclouded by opinion, on these matters). The statement that opinion has no place in discussion is simply ignorance. Without opinions, there would be no discussion at all. Common interpretation is not neccesarily the true interpretation either. Pi is commonly interpreted to be 3.14 rather than to 5 or more decimal places. Which figure is more true?

Of course Opinions are the basis of discussions. I never said otherwise. When I said
However, I want valid proof of everything you are stating in the fighter's behalf or any other class. As I like to say, if you cannot prove a fact you are professing, it has no value in a discussion. In this forum, while we are discussing game mechanics, the only valid proof is the common interpretation of the RAW. , I was intending to state that, if you were to ever run those tests, I'd like to see valid proof of them. Just that.

Also, I like the back up facts with proofs. When I can't I will point out that. However Facts and Opinions are not the same things. You are free, I am free, Joe at the Hotdog stand is free, to express whatever opinions we might have about a given topic. However, again, we are supposed, as rational men, to back up whatever facts we are professing with proofs, or we are risking that no one will care for what we are saying.

My intention is not to attack your character build, but to attack the class itself. The Fighter as it is, together with the Paladin, the Monk, the Barbarian and even the Ranger are not cool the way they are right now. They can't bring their resources to match the prowess of the Full Casters.

The objective of this thread is to discuss this, and that is what I am doing. I hope, when I join a discussion like this, to improve those classes as much as we can. But, and this is my opinion, there are people out there who are still trying to convince everybody that Fighters and Co. are fine like they are, and to my eyes, those people are wrong, and my efforts are to prove them that, so they can turn their efforts to something more important.

Now, I am not saying I am right or that those people are wrong. I am just expressing my beliefs and my motivations. Just that.

Please, do not feel backed into a wall. It is much better to feel that you are sitting by the table, discussing rationaly with rational people in the pursuit of a given objective. Also, notice that I am also a versatility fan. Your build is much more appealing to me than "one trickers" out there.

Fortinbras
2009-03-12, 06:39 PM
The point of this thread is to discuse builds for martial characters. General theoretical discussion was requested to be kept to a minimum because of the pointless and heated debates that it was constantly sparking.

Now, is there anything to be said for taking Steel Wind instead of pouncing charge? What is a good Diamond mind manuever to qualify for emrald razor?

What are the best stonedragon manuevers?

What is a good entry to tigerclaw?

Draz74
2009-03-12, 07:05 PM
Now, is there anything to be said for taking Steel Wind instead of pouncing charge?
Not at your level. Steel Wind is decent at lower levels, especially if your DM doesn't particularly throw a lot of solo monsters at you. But by Level 13 it's ancient history. If anything, Mithral Tornado is an upgrade to Steel Wind, and a very viable choice if you don't want to have to enter Tiger Claw.


What is a good Diamond mind manuever to qualify for emrald razor?
Unless you're planning to bump your Concentration check up a lot, I think you'll have to wait until you have the initiator level to pick up Rapid Counter. Which you can do at Level 15 if you're a Fighter 12/Warblade 3 at that point.

If you're not planning to go that far, you could just take a useless Diamond Mind option (that's based on a Concentration check) and never use it. Once you get through the entry, it's easy to find lots of good Diamond Mind options beyond Emerald Razor.


What are the best stonedragon manuevers?
At levels 3-5, Mountain Hammer is awesome, but it doesn't scale well. Its upgrades are ok, but they have prerequisites, and overcoming DR becomes easier and easier to do without maneuvers anyway.

The big problem with Stone Dragon in general is the "connected to the ground" restriction. See if your DM will nix that, because high-level games tend to involve a lot of flying and you don't want to learn any Stone Dragon if you think you might fly ... ever.

Other good Stone Dragons are Charging Minotaur, Irresistible Mountain Strike, Colossus Strike, Adamantine Bones, and Mountain Tombstone Strike.


What is a good entry to tigerclaw?

Tiger Claw only has three entry maneuvers (Wolf Fang Strike, Rabid Wolf Strike, Claw at the Moon) and they all have drawbacks and scale poorly. So you'll just have to eat one of them and rarely (if ever) Ready it. Claw at the Moon may be the least terrible option.

streakster
2009-03-12, 07:29 PM
The big problem with Stone Dragon in general is the "connected to the ground" restriction. See if your DM will nix that, because high-level games tend to involve a lot of flying and you don't want to learn any Stone Dragon if you think you might fly ... ever.

There's always the "fill your boots with dirt" trick. Most DM's will (rightly) nix that though.

Fortinbras
2009-03-16, 08:54 PM
Okay, so if I retrain two fighter levels for warblade and take the Martial study feat I can get these manuevers and stances. Claw at the moon, sudden leap, wall of blades moment of perfect mind emerald razor, and leading the charge as my stance.

i have 8 skill points to apply, 2 from int modifier, 2 from warblade 1 (I already spent 2 before I retrained the level,) and 4 from warblade 2.

I'm trying to decide where to put the skill points; concentration (for perfect mind,) or tumble (to avoid Aoo's from sudden leap.)

Nothing is set in stone yet so advice would be helpful (I'm thinking maybye I shouldn't take martial study yet and get blood in the water stance istead of claw at the moon and leading the charge. I'm shooting to qualifty for pouncing charge by next level)

Deepblue706
2009-03-16, 10:23 PM
What I am trying to say is that, while a Fighter can, well, fight toe to toe with other Fighters of equal level (and CR) they cannot and do not have the slightly chance to: A) Deal with any kind of full casters, after a given level (Usualy after level 8, I guess); B) Deal with any of the "Brute" type monsters, or any other kind of monster of the same CR; C) Deal with any encounter of the appropriate DC that does not involve combat, for example Traps.

There is an enourmous disparity between the classes. When I told you to try to imagine those fights with a level 10 Fighter and a level 10 Druid to battle against CR 10 monsters I should had included, as enemies, a level 10 Druid and a level 10 Fighter, also I should have pitched those characters against CR 10 situations to see who would survive better.

What I was trying to prove is that the Fighter can't really do what he was supposed to. All his resources are subpar in comparisson to the resources of the creatures he should be defeating. But while those creatures are supposed to be killed or defeated in the course of the adventure, the Fighter, who is supposed to survive, will, almost 90% of the times, not.

Remember that a CR 10 monster is also bound to the same rules the level 10 party is. The CR 10 monster should be able to, by using 4/4 of his resources, be able to make the party expend 1/4 of their resources.

You know what is 1/4 of the resources of a 4-men party? One Fighter or One Wizard or One Cleric or One Rogue, or, at least, it is how it was supposed to be. This means that if the Cleric, Wizard and Rogue simply stand still doing nothing and not calling the, let's say, Fire Giant, attacks, the Fighter should, in a 50/50 chance basis, be able to defeat the Fire Giant allone, because both the Giant and the Fighter will be using equal amounts of resources of equal importance (CR 10 and Fighter level 10).

However, the Fighter will probably never win. His resources, though deemed to be equal to the Wizard's when WotC designed the classes, are subpar. He would require a big dose of luck to succeed.



I think this is a flawed way of looking at the system, since all original base classes were made with the philosophy of co-dependence. Just because Wizards happen to have the capability of kicking ass alone - due to mishaps that resulted from efforts to make sure they play an important role in combat and not get bored - it doesn't mean that you should balance everything according to their potential power.

Also, a 10th Fighter can kick a Fire Giant's ass. Sunder his sword, which is by default mundane (just large-sized). If you have Close-Quarters Fighting, grappling is no longer a reliable option for the Giant, either. He can then make slam attacks on the Fighter...and that's about it.

Alternatively, you can get a mount and ride around. You can even get a flying mount. Lance or Bow works. An armored giant has a 30ft move speed. Not in an open area? Bring a war-trained riding-dog, and drink a potion of Reduce Person.

But, that is a terrible example of play, because the Fighter is based on an older philosophy of balance, where he depends on allies for buffs, and tries to make the best of those resources spent on him by being the guy with the highest natural attack bonus, and greatest access to combative abilities (trip, sunder, grapple, etc).



I am saying probably because I can not prove it empyrically. I am just confident on my words because I have a whole bunch of threads backing me up saying that the Fighter would indeed suffer in a situation like this. The other threads that say the opposite have already been disqualified by the arguments of people far more skilled than I am.


I can't recall the last time I've actually seen any real arguments. For the most part it's "Fighters suck, duh". And, whenever I try to make an argument that they aren't absolutely terrible (if still weaker), it's just met with dismissive remarks instead of actual rebuttals.



My intention is not to attack your character build, but to attack the class itself. The Fighter as it is, together with the Paladin, the Monk, the Barbarian and even the Ranger are not cool the way they are right now. They can't bring their resources to match the prowess of the Full Casters.

Full Casters only get out of hand when the DM doesn't know how to control it. I suppose failure to control them is not entirely a flaw of a DM because RAW fails to do much to give much way of devising CR, and it provides no basis of time (the ultimate enemy of casters) as a challenge.



The objective of this thread is to discuss this, and that is what I am doing. I hope, when I join a discussion like this, to improve those classes as much as we can. But, and this is my opinion, there are people out there who are still trying to convince everybody that Fighters and Co. are fine like they are, and to my eyes, those people are wrong, and my efforts are to prove them that, so they can turn their efforts to something more important.


I believe part of the problem lies in determining what the definition of "fine" is, for the power of a class. Sticking with CR (with encounters ranging from moderate (equal) to very challenging difficulty) and regular WBL, I think that all of the classes exist "well-enough" in just about any campaign I want to run. "Well-enough" being powerful enough to not have to be obsessive about any supposed weaknesses to have a good time.

Although, I admit I impose time limits and don't provide easy recon, which renders Wizards not "overpowered" but instead "that guy the rest of the party likes to have along because he can do something different". And in over eight years of gaming, I can't recall ever having a player who complained about his inability to contribute. I may just be a statistical outlier, but considering the relationship between a caster's power and time, I don't think my results are purely based upon chance.

Sstoopidtallkid
2009-03-16, 10:56 PM
I think this is a flawed way of looking at the system, since all original base classes were made with the philosophy of co-dependence. Just because Wizards happen to have the capability of kicking ass alone - due to mishaps that resulted from efforts to make sure they play an important role in combat and not get bored - it doesn't mean that you should balance everything according to their potential power. But that doesn't mean the Fighter is good, just that he can mooch and be good. A Core party with a Druid, Cleric, Wizard, and Rogue has 3 characters able to improve each other and 1 character that needs buffs besides his own. It also has one extra character. A party with a Fighter instead of a Druid has 2 characters that can buff and 2 that need buffs. That's a considerable drop in overal party power.
Also, a 10th Fighter can kick a Fire Giant's ass. Sunder his sword, which is by default mundane (just large-sized). If you have Close-Quarters Fighting, grappling is no longer a reliable option for the Giant, either. He can then make slam attacks on the Fighter...and that's about it.You're looking at needing to beat a 28+1d20 attack roll to Sunder. Your base is probably 10(BAB)+2(GMW)+7(Str)+2(Charge) and maybe a few miscilanious bonuses. Not a great chance, and you just burned a turn attmpting. Now he full-attacks. You take 75 damage. With a +4 Con, you have 24 HP left. At this point a gust of wind can kill you, let alone 2 slams. If the Giant had half-way decent feats, you'd really be screwed.
Alternatively, you can get a mount and ride around. You can even get a flying mount. Lance or Bow works. An armored giant has a 30ft move speed. Not in an open area? Bring a war-trained riding-dog, and drink a potion of Reduce Person. Skirmishing is almost impossible in most cases. You need a 60' move speed just to outrun his charge. Even then, a single round of running can catch up, and actually boosts his AC. If you want to fly, be my guest. In the Giant's enviroment, he throws rocks at 4d6+10. Not the best damage or AB, but you and your mount both lack AC due to the lack of armor, and the mount probably has terrible HP, too.
But, that is a terrible example of play, because the Fighter is based on an older philosophy of balance, where he depends on allies for buffs, and tries to make the best of those resources spent on him by being the guy with the highest natural attack bonus, and greatest access to combative abilities (trip, sunder, grapple, etc).WotC greatly overvalued AB(3 points at level 10 doesn't matter much, and 5 points at 20 isn't even worth mentioning). Then they gave a Fighter access to combative abilities which mostly suck. Sunder will make your friends kill you long before you run into a Hydra, Grapple and Trip are both based on Size and Str, the abilities that enemies have far in excess of PCs. There's a reason the best grapplers are WuJen, PsyWars, and Druids, not Monks or Fighters.
Full Casters only get out of hand when the DM doesn't know how to control it. I suppose failure to control them is not entirely a flaw of a DM because RAW fails to do much to give much way of devising CR, and it provides no basis of time (the ultimate enemy of casters) as a challenge.Time is not an enemy of Casters. Time is an enemy of meleers. Take the aforementioned Fire Giant. He can on a charge take out more than a quarter of a Fighter's health. In a Full Attack, he can take out 3/4ths of it. How exactly do you plan to recover from that? A Cleric can cure you of the full-attack, yes, but at the cost of 3 4th level slots. He only gets so many of those. If you were a Druid, you could heal yourself, or better yet, have cast Entangle and never been damaged at all.

Edit:Close-Quarters Fighting is a waste of a feat. You can't take an AoO on someone outside your reach, as the Giant is likely to be.

krossbow
2009-03-16, 11:03 PM
Also, a 10th Fighter can kick a Fire Giant's ass. Sunder his sword, which is by default mundane (just large-sized). If you have Close-Quarters Fighting, grappling is no longer a reliable option for the Giant, either. He can then make slam attacks on the Fighter...and that's about it.




oh lord.... so much lol.

just lol.

emeraldstreak
2009-03-16, 11:08 PM
wha?

any optimized character can kill monster of equal CR

ppl who dont understand this dont belong to balance threads

Sstoopidtallkid
2009-03-16, 11:16 PM
wha?

any optimized character can kill monster of equal CR

ppl who dont understand this dont belong to balance threadsBut is the amount of cheese required viable in a normal campaign? Of the viable Fighter builds out there, pretty much the only option for killing a Giant is an Ubercharger. maybe a Dungeoncrasher. Anything else, even a mundane "charger", probably dies or is dropped to extremely low health. You either kill it in one round, or it full-attacks you to Oblivion. Whereas any caster can toss one 4th level spell and then walk away. Heck, a 2nd level spell will do it(Grease).

Deepblue706
2009-03-16, 11:28 PM
But that doesn't mean the Fighter is good, just that he can mooch and be good. A Core party with a Druid, Cleric, Wizard, and Rogue has 3 characters able to improve each other and 1 character that needs buffs besides his own. It also has one extra character. A party with a Fighter instead of a Druid has 2 characters that can buff and 2 that need buffs. That's a considerable drop in overal party power.


I don't recall making the assertion that the Fighter is good.



You're looking at needing to beat a 28+1d20 attack roll to Sunder. Your base is probably 10(BAB)+2(GMW)+7(Str)+2(Charge) and maybe a few miscilanious bonuses. Not a great chance, and you just burned a turn attmpting. Now he full-attacks. You take 75 damage. With a +4 Con, you have 24 HP left. At this point a gust of wind can kill you, let alone 2 slams. If the Giant had half-way decent feats, you'd really be screwed.

Yes, if I only had the modifiers you're suggesting, it's not a good idea. Get a mage to cast Enlarge Person on you, with permanency. Or a continuous magical item (4000gp, well within your budget). With natural STR 20 (+5 to check), a Bull's STR (+2 to check), Improved Sunder (+4), two hands on your weapon (+4), large sized (+4), large sized STR bonus (+1), GMW (+2) and charge (+2), and BAB (+10) gets you: 34+1d20. Additionally, you can improve your chances with other bonuses that range from Weapon Focus to a Bard's Inspire Courage.

Also, you can't say all three of his attacks are going to hit you more times than not, unless you're neglecting your defense. And if that's the case, you may as well just be putting everything into just ubercharging, and reducing your game's combat to initiative rolls (I hear it's fun).



Skirmishing is almost impossible in most cases. You need a 60' move speed just to outrun his charge. Even then, a single round of running can catch up, and actually boosts his AC. If you want to fly, be my guest. In the Giant's enviroment, he throws rocks at 4d6+10. Not the best damage or AB, but you and your mount both lack AC due to the lack of armor, and the mount probably has terrible HP, too.


Skirmishing impossible? That's something that varies from game to game. There's nothing in RAW that says you need to be in a cave all of the time.

Any horse for a medium sized character will outrun the giant. Also, a flat 4d6+10 from a rock is inaccurate, because 2d6 of that is fire and can be mitigated by protection spells. Additionally, Mounted Combat lets you make ride checks for the mount's AC once/round, which is easily boosted. +10 to attack is nothing if you're serious about using a mount.



WotC greatly overvalued AB(3 points at level 10 doesn't matter much, and 5 points at 20 isn't even worth mentioning). Then they gave a Fighter access to combative abilities which mostly suck. Sunder will make your friends kill you long before you run into a Hydra, Grapple and Trip are both based on Size and Str, the abilities that enemies have far in excess of PCs. There's a reason the best grapplers are WuJen, PsyWars, and Druids, not Monks or Fighters.

I agree WotC overvalued AB. And they could have made a fighter's options better. But in the very description of fighters, they are dismissed from being the best at anything. They're specifically noted to have a variety of tactics; although I think, like the Monk and Bard, how a lack of any real specialized abilities render the class overall somewhat weak (of course, the Bard can redeem himself for having magic, but, I think you agree others do selective jobs of his better).



Time is not an enemy of Casters. Time is an enemy of meleers. Take the aforementioned Fire Giant. He can on a charge take out more than a quarter of a Fighter's health. In a Full Attack, he can take out 3/4ths of it. How exactly do you plan to recover from that? A Cleric can cure you of the full-attack, yes, but at the cost of 3 4th level slots. He only gets so many of those. If you were a Druid, you could heal yourself, or better yet, have cast Entangle and never been damaged at all.


What if the Fire Giant charged at the Wizard?

When I'm talking about time, it's not initiative order. I'm talking about knowing what you're fighting beforehand. The Fighter has no awareness skills to depend on, so he can run into some trouble this way; but the class isn't made to fight equal CR enemies on his lonesome, he's meant to be a tool of casters to make more efficient use of spell slots (ie Fighter to Fighterdoken with nothing more than a "Jump" spell). He has friends, they help out, they win.

Anyone can lose initiative; that's not the point of the time discussion. The point of the time discussion is to note how much more powerful a Wizard is if he can constantly rely on teleporting to safety and scrying from the other side of the world without any hinderance. If you have 16 hours to do something, then the Wizard can't rest more than once (8 hours rest + 1 hour preparation), and cannot abuse his information-gathering and safety-net powers; and therefore becomes more reliant on the success of other party members.

krossbow
2009-03-16, 11:41 PM
What if the Fire Giant charged at the Wizard?

he's meant to be a tool of casters to make more efficient use of spell slots (ie Fighter to Fighterdoken with nothing more than a "Jump" spell)





The wizard would have numerous magical defenses that kick the ever loving **** out of armor.


The issue is that he ISN'T a more effecient use of his spell slots. He's WAY better off using them on either A. Cleric, B. Druid, Or C. Save or die spell.

There's just no question.

Deepblue706
2009-03-16, 11:50 PM
The wizard would have numerous magical defenses that kick the ever loving **** out of armor.


The issue is that he ISN'T a more effecient use of his spell slots. He's WAY better off using them on either A. Cleric, B. Druid, Or C. Save or die spell.

There's just no question.

Numerous magical defenses? When he lost initiative? If you hadn't noticed, I specifically noted that the information of a coming fight is what makes the wizard so powerful. What did you think I was referring to? If he doesn't know there's a Giant on him until he's right there, he won't have many defenses up, aside from hour/level duration spells.

Way better off buffing the Cleric, who didn't invest in Power Attack to Bull Rush to Shock Trooper, with Cleave, Great Cleave, Combat Brute and Leap Attack? Jump on a Fighter with those feats essentially becomes a level 1 kill-everything-within-reach-ball. Thus Fighterdoken. It's nice in mountains and ravines.

The Cleric and Druid should be doing things other than dealing with enemies in plain melee combat. And save-or-dies aren't exactly 100% reliable.

woodenbandman
2009-03-16, 11:54 PM
It's not as difficult or contrived as you make out to be, it means instead of buffing himself into Codzilla the Cleric buffs the martial peeps and the Wizard follows 80% of the Batman routine only without the smug jerk attitude. Actually, attitude is most of it from my experience.



They don't hold back not to show up the Monk, they bolster and support the Monk instead of trying to take the spotlight. It's a teamwork thing. No, it's not optimal and I'm sure it probably could be done faster by a Wizard on his own but we had fun the way we did and, yes, that time I was playing a full caster.


So you have made a concession that monks are weaker than clerics and wizards.

You then suggest that a player who wants to play a cleric or wizard, presumably because they want to be powerful, should stop being powerful in order to help the player who decided to play a sucky monk not be so bad for a little while? Why not just tell that guy that he has to play a Swordsage?

What if I want to play my cleric as, i dunno, a guy who smites evil in the name of his god, rather than a guy whose heart explodes with overwhelming sadness every time he sees a comrade failing to fight in combat, and feels compelled to help said comrade?

I'm not sayin' that nobody should ever get buffed, I'm SAYIN' that the fighter isn't worth buffing. I'm SAYING that a cleric is a better fighter than the fighter will ever be, and the wizard, if he's smart (protip: he is) will buff the cleric.

Cleric = fighter. It's official now. Whenever you want to reference a character with fighting skill, use the euphemism "cleric."

Deepblue706
2009-03-17, 12:01 AM
So you have made a concession that monks are weaker than clerics and wizards.

You then suggest that a player who wants to play a cleric or wizard, presumably because they want to be powerful, should stop being powerful in order to help the player who decided to play a sucky monk not be so bad for a little while? Why not just tell that guy that he has to play a Swordsage?

You shouldn't tell other players what classes they can play based on preconceptions of a class. Maybe they just like the class. Only a DM can determine what is appropriate for a campaign. No amount of optimization will make you -at all- any less at the mercy of the DM.



I'm not sayin' that nobody should ever get buffed, I'm SAYIN' that the fighter isn't worth buffing. I'm SAYING that a cleric is a better fighter than the fighter will ever be, and the wizard, if he's smart (protip: he is) will buff the cleric.

Cleric = fighter. It's official now. Whenever you want to reference a character with fighting skill, use the euphemism "cleric."

I liked how you used "Protip" there. It makes you seem more authoritative. "It's official now", too. I should try that sometime.

Cleric is only better than the Fighter under his ideal circumstances. And under ideal circumstances, nobody should be playing anything other than a Wizard. So, a Wizard should only be buffing his fellow Wizards.

krossbow
2009-03-17, 12:03 AM
Numerous magical defenses? When he lost initiative? If you hadn't noticed, I specifically noted that the information of a coming fight is what makes the wizard so powerful



Alter self. Either into a cherubim elf for permanent flight, or into something with high natural armor, like a troglidyte (+6 natural armor + either bracers of armor or mage armor kicks the crap out of a fighter's armor).

Quickened grease. Free action. charging giant is on his ass.

Quickened anyting really.


with 6th level spells, overland flight. Its going to be up nigh permanently. Or contingency.



Cleric is only better than the Fighter under his ideal circumstances.


His "ideal" circumstances involve casting a single spell, righteous might. God help you if you use righteous might and other spells, such as divine power or splat book buffs.



A better example is a druid. Sorry, there is NO non-ideal circumstance for a druid to kick ass in a fight once they get the ability to turn into a bear.

Deepblue706
2009-03-17, 12:20 AM
Alter self. Either into a cherubim elf for permanent flight, or into something with high natural armor, like a troglidyte (+6 natural armor + either bracers of armor or mage armor kicks the crap out of a fighter's armor).

That doesn't matter. Your AC will not be high enough to prevent a +22 attack bonus from getting through and smacking you up. And again, I'm not saying a Fighter is better than a Wizard. I'm saying many of the problems that groups encounter with full-casters being too powerful are lessened when the Wizard doesn't have unlimited time to prepare. And if success completely hinged on ONLY the Wizard, then it probably wasn't a balanced encounter to begin with.



Quickened grease. Free action. charging giant is on his ass.


If you go before him, sure. Why not.



Quickened anyting really.


Like Feather-Fall?



with 6th level spells, overland flight. Its going to be up nigh permanently. Or contingency.

Overland Flight isn't available until level 11. We were talking about a CR 10 giant. If you like, we can start sending flying enemies at the Wizard. That's fun too.

Also, what if you have to go indoors? Flight won't help you much.

Furthermore, if a DM allows abuse of contingency for it to ruin balance, then he or she is probably not up to the task of interpretting many rules at all; in which case the game will suck regardless.

Deepblue706
2009-03-17, 12:34 AM
His "ideal" circumstances involve casting a single spell, righteous might. God help you if you use divine power AND righteous might.

What a surprise. Round/level spells. Yes, they're powerful, but that costs so many resources that you may as well just let the Fighter fight, because a Cleric's spells can be better applied, and the Fighter has more feats than the Cleric anyway.



A better example is a druid. Sorry, there is NO non-ideal circumstance for a druid to kick ass in a fight once they get the ability to turn into a bear.

Bear? Okay, at 8th level you can use Wild Shape to become a large creature. Let's assume it's a Polar Bear. Druids can kick a lot of ass like this. But do it better than a level 8 Fighter with bear form alone? Maybe if he's the sort to take toughness three times. Again, feats are going to define the Fighter's use. All he needs is Spirited Charge (3 feat tree) to significantly outdamage the Druid. Hell, if you want to do it in dungeons, be a Halfling. You'll still get the same effect. The Druid can reach a nearly-as-good effect at use of his powers, or he can transform into something that might give him better defenses. I think defenses would be wiser, since his spells can do more than most damage-boosting forms at this level.

krossbow
2009-03-17, 12:43 AM
What a surprise. Round/level spells. Yes, they're powerful, but that costs so many resources that you may as well just let the Fighter fight, because a Cleric's spells can be better applied, and the Fighter has more feats than the Cleric anyway.




Divine metamagic. quickened or persistent.



Next... What are you smoking? A bear druid with pounce is going to kick the ever loving bejeezus out of a fighter. Full attack charging works on everything, while a fighter will not be able to use his one trick pony ubercharge on every creature in the game.
Not to mention, thanks to its greater size, the druid will always be better than the fighter at combat control,, as the disparity just gets greater as the game goes along.

Ifni
2009-03-17, 01:23 AM
I have not read the whole thread. Reading the OP though, they wanted builds for martial characters... so here's a simple build I played L1-16 in Living Greyhawk with reasonable success (no deaths, no failed missions, and was quite noteworthy in the region by the time he retired). He played through the LG adaptations of Red Hand of Doom and Expedition to the Demonweb Pits. He was reliably doing 200+ damage / round by L12, and cracked 1000 damage in one round at L15. (It involved A Thousand Cuts and the associated free Great Cleave, Greatreach Bracers, a room full of overconfident bodaks and dread wraiths, and decent luck with crits.) More typically, at L15 he was doing 70ish damage per swing, and usually hitting with either all attacks or all but one, and critting 1-2 attacks out of four (crit and autoconfirm vs evil on a roll of 15+), so 350ish damage/round. I can do more damage with a pouncecharger, of course, even given Living Greyhawk book restrictions, but dervish is less vulnerable to a counterattack and harder to neutralize. (That said, I also played a dire-bat-riding fighter/druid lance-pouncer in LG, and she wasn't nearly as crippled by circumstance as people imagine. It's actually amazing how often you can charge in dungeoncrawls if you have Perfect flight.)

Race: Wood Elf
28pt buy stats: Str 18 Dex 16 Con 12 Int 12 Wis 8 Cha 8

L1: Ranger - Track (B), Weapon Focus (Falchion)
L2: Barbarian
L3: Fighter - Expeditious Dodge (RotW), Mobility
L4: Fighter - Combat Expertise, +1 Int
L5: Barbarian
L6: Dervish (CW) - Power Attack
L7: Dervish
L8: Dervish - Spring Attack, +1 Str
L9: Dervish - Acrobatic Strike (PHB2)
L10: Dervish
L11: Dervish
L12: Dervish - Improved Critical (Falchion), +1 Str
L13: Dervish
L14: Dervish
L15: Dervish - Leadership

Comments:The reason for the Ranger level was skills - skill retraining rules in Living Greyhawk let him remain quite good at Spot, Listen, Search and Survival up to the highest levels. This was partly a Living Greyhawk consideration: when your tables are entirely random, and some scenarios require someone in the party to be able to track in order to complete the mission, it's good to have Survival + Track. (Similarly, high Search is good in LG even without trapfinding, especially on an elf with automatic Secret Door Detection, because you can't rely on having a rogue.) If I had access to some of the ACFs for Ranger/Fighter/Barbarian, I would take them - Drow Fighter from DotU is great for this build, Trapfinding Ranger is decent as well IF you can use skill retraining (else the dervish levels kill your skills).
Barbarian is mostly in there for the fast movement, for rage at low levels, and for backstory reasons. You could substitute something else.
Leadership, again, was a Living-Greyhawk-centric decision. By the time he got to L15 it was near the campaign's end and I was playing on a lot of four-person tables, and being able to guarantee divine+arcane+melee was very helpful (cohort was a wizard/warweaver with Arcane Disciple). Earlier in his career most of my tables were full, which in LG meant you couldn't bring cohorts.

Probably-more-optimal human build (I was under pressure to play a non-human):

Race: Human
28pt buy stats: Str 16 Dex 14 Con 14 Int 14 Wis 8 Cha 8

L1: Barbarian - Weapon Focus (Falchion), Power Attack
L2: Fighter - Expeditious Dodge (RotW)
L3: Fighter - Mobility, Combat Expertise
L4: Fighter - +1 Str
L5: Fighter - Weapon Specialization (Falchion)
L6: Dervish - Elusive Target (CW), or feat of choice
L7: Dervish
L8: Dervish - Spring Attack, +1 Str
L9: Dervish - Melee Weapon Mastery (Slashing) (PHB2)
L10: Dervish
L11: Dervish
L12: Dervish - Acrobatic Strike (PHB2) or Improved Critical (Falchion)
L13: Dervish
L14: Dervish
L15: Dervish - Slashing Flurry (PHB2), or whatever feat you didn't take at L12

Skills are worse, AC is a bit lower (as is Str half the time), Con is higher. Melee damage is better. Would be nice to get MWM + Acrobatic Strike + Imp Crit earlier - Imp Crit is a very good feat for this build. Acrobatic Strike drops in priority if your GM rules it can only apply to one attack per target per round.

In both cases, the build works by being a bruiser with high Strength and a two-handed weapon at low levels. Str 18 + weapon focus with a two-handed weapon makes you very effective in the baby levels, and you have Rage for one big fight per day (if you're playing with retraining rules, consider taking Extra Rage early and retraining it later). If you're playing the elf build, by L5 you'll be starting to miss Power Attack, but before then you'll be doing pretty well just based on Strength (since full power attacking at L5 usually means missing... Shocktrooper doesn't ever come online until L6).

At higher levels, you dance in, slice things up, and dance away where they can't get to you. This character is NOT a tank: it doesn't always work well if they try to stand toe-to-toe with the monsters, although sometimes it's necessary of course. Buy items carefully to cover your weaknesses - if you can use the MIC that helps a LOT. Buffs from friendly casters are great, but don't rely on them. Make sure you can beat all types of DR, and that you have defences against common means of neutralizing meleers (e.g. you need a way to fly, a way to ignore battlefield control, and ways to ignore or remove debuffs and conditions). Your contribution to fights is to kill monsters quickly, and you're not contributing anything if you're stuck in Solid Fog, or on the ground while everyone else is flying. Your AC can be a strength (both your AC and touch AC tend to get rather high), but the air barrier is your best defence: don't let monsters full attack you. Don't sacrifice offence to defence unless things are going badly and you need to buy time: sacking your attack bonus into PA and killing the monster more quickly will usually be a better defence than sacking the same attack bonus into Combat Expertise. Understand how PA works, and get an idea of where the optimal values are - they are higher than the norm, as you have a lot of bonuses to attack that don't come from Strength. Exploit every source of attack bonuses you can find - dance in and out of flanks, if you can fly make sure you get the higher ground bonus, and remember Acrobatic Strike once you have it. Power Attack is the source of most of your damage.

Your priorities for items are Boots of Speed as soon as you can possibly get them (they tend to roughly double damage output in the mid-levels), a +1 weapon, and the best Str-booster you can afford. At higher levels you want a Ring of Freedom of Movement, unless you are sure you can get a caster to give you FoM all the time. If you can get a swift-action flight item (e.g. Winged Vest from the MIC), do so - you MUST have a way to fly if needed, carry potions if you can't get anything better, but the Winged Vest or a similar item is best. Dex and Con boosters are eventually required too of course, as are the usual save items, and skill-boosters are always nice. It's often worth investing in some scrolls of Remove Fear and Protection from Evil and handing them to the cleric in the baby levels: your Will save is pretty pathetic for a long time.

Enchanting your weapon, while always useful, isn't actually as big a priority as other items. Your feats/stats/class levels already give you pretty serious offence - your cash should mostly go to ensuring you stay in the fight, after you get Boots of Speed, a decent Str-booster, and ensure you can beat any DR you're likely to encounter. The character did just fine with a +1 adamantine falchion up to L15, when he finally caved and paid to upgrade it to +1 Vicious Holy. (By that point, he was usually adventuring with casters who were happy to stick GMW on it - if the table had no PC casters, there was usually space for him to bring his cohort.) In the meantime, he'd been using an Angelhelm and Ghostblight and Quicksilver capsules to cover the lack of other enchantments. That said, if you can get the pre-MIC version of Maiming (MH I think?), do so. 1d4 crits are very nice when you crit on 15-20 (although Maiming probably doesn't work with the Sacred Scabbard, which I was using to autoconfirm crits on evil creatures).

Of course, he carried cold iron, silver, bludgeoning and piercing backup weapons starting at L1. (He was horrified in his first adventure when we faced a horde of skeletons and it turned out he was the ONLY PC who'd bothered to write "Club" on their character sheet. "They grow on TREES!")

There are other dervish builds - this one was designed to get into dervish as fast as possible, because Living Greyhawk only went to L15 and I wanted to finish the PrC. Adding Scout levels delays entry (because you lose BAB), and encourages you to pursue TWF, which I'd already had enough of (I'd played two TWF characters before this one), but can be quite potent with Swift Hunter + Improved Skirmish. As always, given more books, you can make the character stronger, but I thought it might be interesting to show a character who was actually played for fifteen levels in a fairly restrictive environment with random parties, and random item access, so you can't rely on getting the perfect item or the perfect buff combination unless you can supply the buffs yourself. Within the Living Greyhawk campaign, he seemed to hold his own, relative to other PCs - I never felt overshadowed (except once in RHOD when I couldn't roll above a 3 for six hours straight), I collected more than my share of "Okay, explain to me how you get those numbers" requests from DMs, and my parties generally beat up EL = party level +3-5 encounters pretty efficiently.

The character's actual significant items at L15 were:
- +1 Holy Vicious Adamantine Falchion (enchanted with GMW) with Greater Truedeath Crystal and Triple Weapon Capsule Retainer (Quicksilver x3, was Ghostblight before I got the Greater Truedeath Crystal, or when GMW was unavailable)
- MW Cold Iron Falchion with Least Crystal of Return (usually got enchanted with GMW)
- +1 Deathward Daylight Mithral Breastplate with Least Ironward Diamond (Living Greyhawk had a lot of shadowblending creatures near the end, and I didn't manage to find any good armor crystals)
- Boots of Speed (he had Anklets of Translocation as well, in case he needed to get out of a forcecage, but usually wore the Boots)
- Sacred Scabbard (for swift-action Bless Weapon, i.e. autoconfirm crits vs evil on 15-20)
- Ring of Freedom of Movement
- Ring of Entropic Deflection
- Greatreach Bracers
- Angelhelm (which is what allowed him to beat DR/good for all those levels before upgrading his weapon to Holy - the spell-like abilities also helped a few times)
- Cloak of Elemental Protection
- Vest of Resistance +4
- Amulet of Health +4
- Belt of Giant Strength +6
- Gloves of Dexterity +4 (used to wear Brute Gauntlets)
- Bag of Holding Type I
- Third Eye Clarity (used to wear Eyes of the Eagle in this slot, before finding the Third Eye)
- Sphere of Awakening
- Lens of Detection

Consumables (at time of retirement):
- Wand of CLW (basic LG rule: everyone contributes to the cost of healing)
- Wand of Benign Transposition (hand off to caster, they can often find something fun to do with it - we used it to rescue a dignitary once, the marilith assassin was REALLY upset that every time she tried to attack her target he got replaced with a high-AC adventurer)
- 5 spare Ghostblight capsules, 2 spare quicksilver capsules
- Cold iron arrows x20, silver arrows x20 (left over from low levels)
- Potions of CLW, Lesser Restoration (for fixing Ray of Enfeeblement), and Fly
- Oils of Align Weapon (Chaotic, Lawful), Bless Weapon
- Elixir of Mirror Image (special item from RHOD)
- Scrolls of Spider Climb, Remove Fear x2, Magic Weapon, Protection from Evil, Enlarge Person (mostly left over from low levels)

He also had a Rod of Leadership and the Cha-boosting ioun stone, because he needed a better Leadership score. In a normal party, this is probably not the best character to take Leadership :smallwink:

This is all just based on what I remember, and he retired about six months ago, so I may have forgotten some things.

Deepblue706
2009-03-17, 02:11 AM
Divine metamagic. quickened or persistent.

Next... What are you smoking? A bear druid with pounce is going to kick the ever loving bejeezus out of a fighter. Full attack charging works on everything, while a fighter will not be able to use his one trick pony ubercharge on every creature in the game.
Not to mention, thanks to its greater size, the druid will always be better than the fighter at combat control,, as the disparity just gets greater as the game goes along.

What am I smoking?

That kind of commentary isn't fit for this kind of discussion. Neither was your previous derisive comment of "just lol".

Your average damage as a Polar Bear, at level 8 -on a full attack- is going to be in the range of 35 damage. Assuming all three attacks hit. That's not amazing. Druids have better things to do. And Large Size is not hard for a Fighter to get. Potions of Enlarge Person are 250gp. It's not until a Druid gets to Huge that he can oversize the Fighter; at which point the Fighter can fly with magical goods (meaning just about everyone can be fighting mid-air) and sizes will become less meaningful. And if you're indoors, Huge can easily be too big to fit.

Also, I didn't advertise the Fighter to be at the pinnacle of crowd control.

Persistent uses a slot 6 levels higher than normal, which then turns into six uses of Turn Undead. You can do 3+ CHA MOD turns each day. You'll need very high stats to abuse this, the likes of which the game doesn't handle well anyway. That, or you can blow multiple feats on Extra Turning instead of something that your party will actually find more useful.

Quickened is easier to use, but it still doesn't even matter, because you're still spending spells on something the Fighter requires less help to do efficiently. And you're not getting that much potential power over the Fighter, because while he can't make use of Divine Power and Righteous Might, those use Enhancement and Size bonuses respectively, which do not stack with themselves (and thus Clerics won't gain much from that help to begin with). That means no Bull's Strength or Enlarge Person, which are lower-level spells which do nearly the same job for offensive purposes.

Now, I'm sure you have some snarky rebuttal, but since I expect it to come with an overwhelming degree of haughtiness I expect further conversation on the matter pointless. So, don't make any further attempts to draw out some kind of overly-emotional response from me, because I won't respond to any more of it.

emeraldstreak
2009-03-17, 03:21 AM
Like Feather-Fall?


Don't ever bring Feather-Fall in caster v fighter discussion on this board.

krossbow
2009-03-17, 03:24 AM
Persistent righteous might is all you need to beat the fighter. all day larger size, damage reduction, Strength, ect., with no monetary costs.


there's absolutely nothing the fighter can do to compare at that point; and frankly, if one extra turn undead feat gives you the resources to totally outclass all mundane melee its hardly "Burning a feat".




Secondly, your forgetting that druids can ALSO power attack + Leap attack. With pounce that means your getting massive damage multipliers on all those attacks.

Counting the druid without feats such as power attack is akin to counting the fighter with just autoattack.


ADDITIONALLY, once the bear has pounced on the poor slobs head it gets to grapple them for free, and begin to maul them at its leasure.

JellyPooga
2009-03-17, 03:41 AM
Secondly, your forgetting that druids can ALSO power attack + Leap attack. With pounce that means your getting massive damage multipliers on all those attacks.

Counting the druid without feats such as power attack is akin to counting the fighter with just autoattack.

That means every single ONE of those attacks the bear is hitting with is doing massive amounts of damage.


ADDITIONALLY, once the bear has pounced on the poor slobs head it gets to grapple them for free, and begin to maul them at its leasure.

1) Where are you getting Pounce from?
2) Assuming lvl.8 (when you can Wild Shape into a Polar Bear and is, incidentally, the first level you get Large size at all from Wild Shape), you're attacking with a +13 AB (BAB +6, Str +7). That's not exactly out of reach for a Fighter (+8 BAB, Str +5) and the fighter can do it for more than 8 hours a day...add the fact that a Fighter gets far easier access to magic items that increase AB than the Druid does for his Natural Attacks and the Fighter gets more to play with from Power Attack.
3) Sure a Druid can take Power Attack, but he's using 1/7th of his Feat resources. A Fighter taking Power Attack is only using 1/18th of his Feat resource. A Druid would have to consider well that they really need PA.
3a) Jump isn't a Druid class skill, so Leap Attack isn't an easy option for them.
4) Aforementioned Close-Quarters Fighting Feat (+a reach weapon) really does negate Grapple-tastic critters like bears a lot.
5) (from a previous post) Alter Self + Mage armour isn't that much better than wearing a suit of full-plate armour, if at all. The Mage route (using your example) gives you +10 AC for an hour or so a day, Full-Plate gives you +9 all day long, without magical enhancement. Go figure.

emeraldstreak
2009-03-17, 03:45 AM
5) (from a previous post) Alter Self + Mage armour isn't that much better than wearing a suit of full-plate armour, if at all. The Mage route (using your example) gives you +10 AC for an hour or so a day, Full-Plate gives you +9 all day long, without magical enhancement. Go figure.

If Persist is in the argument, so is Dwarven Ancestor.

lord_khaine
2009-03-17, 03:53 AM
Quickened grease. Free action. charging giant is on his ass.

Quickened anyting really.


this really wouldnt work unless you actualy readied an action to cast as soon as the giant charges (remember even if its quickend you can only cast it in your own turn).

FatR
2009-03-17, 07:25 AM
Numerous magical defenses? When he lost initiative?
Yes of course. Greater Mage Armor + Alter Self (troglodyte) + MCoPFE = +14 AC, available by level 5, for 10 min./level (i.e., unless you deal with monster-light, trap-heavy big dungeon, party is quite likely to run out of magical healing and retreat to rest before your buffs expire). You also buff your party as a side effect. More AC-improving spells can be added with levels. A wizard, particulalrly if he has decent Dex, can actually have AC that protects him well from level-appropriate enemies, unlike a fighter.

krossbow
2009-03-17, 08:26 AM
1) Where are you getting Pounce from?



Lion's pounce, the feat. Druids have extra wildshapes by level 10, as 10 hours is far more than enough time to stay wildshaped for a day.

Alternatively, he can always turn into a tiger. However, i was assuming the feat lion's pounce, due to the polar bear example.


1)
2) Assuming lvl.8 (when you can Wild Shape into a Polar Bear and is, incidentally, the first level you get Large size at all from Wild Shape), you're attacking with a +13 AB (BAB +6, Str +7). That's not exactly out of reach for a Fighter (+8 BAB, Str +5) and the fighter can do it for more than 8 hours a day...add the fact that a Fighter gets far easier access to magic items that increase AB than the Druid does for his Natural Attacks and the Fighter gets more to play with from Power Attack.


We're assuming level 10, as stated as the specifics by the previous poster.

Furthermore, its incredibly easy to have items crafted for your bear form. All it takes is a getting extra large belts, bracelets, ect. Hell, if the party wizard is doing weapons for the party, there's no reason to not be able to have it special made.

Secondly, ways to boost his AB mean squat when the druid has 28 strength in polar bear form, boosting his chance to hit to equal, if not better, levels than a fighter; and it only gets better.


1)
3) Sure a Druid can take Power Attack, but he's using 1/7th of his Feat resources. A Fighter taking Power Attack is only using 1/18th of his Feat resource. A Druid would have to consider well that they really need PA.
3a) Jump isn't a Druid class skill, so Leap Attack isn't an easy option for them.


Doesn't matter if that thats all the druid needs. a couple feats won't break the druid if he only needs them to wreak havoc


1)
4) Aforementioned Close-Quarters Fighting Feat (+a reach weapon) really
does negate Grapple-tastic critters like bears a lot.


The druid will be grappling his opponents, NOT the fighter we're comparing him to; this is a comparison of how the druid helps the party in melee, not a duel between the two. And most opponents the party encounters will not have that feat, unless your sending armies of fighters at the party; at which point, after they gets over laughing, the party can tear them to pieces (hell, one wizard spell at can handle massive numbers of fighters).




1)
5) (from a previous post) Alter Self + Mage armour isn't that much better than wearing a suit of full-plate armour, if at all. The Mage route (using your example) gives you +10 AC for an hour or so a day, Full-Plate gives you +9 all day long, without magical enhancement. Go figure.


Except for the fact that full plate comes with a load of drawbacks, such as speed, dexterity, and armor check penalties. And this is monetarily free.

Kaiyanwang
2009-03-17, 08:51 AM
Not to be offending, But this thing of the Druid shaped all the day always seemed strange to me. Several times you have to interact wiht PCs and NPCs and you have to shift back, unless you think that the only thing to do in the wilderness is mangle everything you see.

And this does not seem to me the point of the Druid.

JellyPooga
2009-03-17, 09:04 AM
Lion's pounce, the feat. Druids have extra wildshapes by level 10, as 10 hours is far more than enough time to stay wildshaped for a day.

Lions Pounce requires the expenditure of a Wild Shape use, if I'm not mistaken and at level 10 you've only got 4 uses per day. 1 of those has to go on taking your bear form (or what-have-you), which means you're only getting 3 Pounces a day. Depending on how difficult the encounters you're facing are, I'm guessing that's only going to be good for a one, maybe two, encounters a day...tops.


We're assuming level 10, as stated as the specifics by the previous poster.

O.k. assuming Level 10 (and Polar Bear Wild Shape for the Druid):

Druid - BAB: +7, Str: +8 = +15 AB
Fighter - BAB: +10, Str: +5 = +15 AB


Furthermore, its incredibly easy to have items crafted for your bear form. All it takes is a getting extra large belts, bracelets, ect. Hell, if the party wizard is doing weapons for the party, there's no reason to not be able to have it special made.

Secondly, ways to boost his AB mean squat when the druid has 28 strength, boosting his chance to hit to equal, if not better, levels than a fighter; and it only gets better.

True, you can get bear-shaped magic items, but they're only useful when you're actually in bear-shape. If you later decide that you want to be, for example, rhino-shaped or t-rex shaped, you're not using a lot of those same magic items (at least if I'm DM), which means that you'll have to get a lot more gear than the Fighter who can use all his gear all the time.

Whilst, yes, the Druid has an equal chance to hit without magic items as the Fighter at this level (as demonstrated above), both the Druid and Fighter can benefit from worn magic items that improve AB (girdle of giant strength, etc.), but the Druid loses out of Weapon AB. Even a Masterwork blade gives the Fighter an advantage (albeit small). Sure you can pull out Magic Fang, but that's got a limited duration and you might want to use the spell slot for something else. Or you could get an Amulet of Mighty Fists (or whatever it's called), but then the Fighter has the advantage of being able to use his 'neck' slot for something else. In addition to this, the Fighter is also more likely to be using feats like Weapon Focus, which further increase his AB.



Except for the fact that full plate comes with a load of drawbacks, such as speed, dexterity, and armor check penalties. And this is monetarily free.

Sure the full-plate has drawbacks, but it is also enchantable to provide better AC as well as other abilities (fortification, ghost touch, etc.) and at level 10, you can bet your bottom dollar that the Fighter has invested some money into that suit of armour.


Yes of course. Greater Mage Armor + Alter Self (troglodyte) + MCoPFE = +14 AC, available by level 5, for 10 min./level.

At level 5, that's not even an hours worth of +14 AC. That's not a whole lot and certainly not enough to last a days worth of adventuring, during which you might lose initiative or get ambushed. It also drops to +12 vs Neutral or Good opponents or against traps. Mithral Full Plate (+8 Armour +3 Dex) and a Heavy Shield (+2 Shield) gives you +13 AC before you add magical enhancements. Even if you are ambushed or lose initiative this only goes down to +10.

tyckspoon
2009-03-17, 09:40 AM
True, you can get bear-shaped magic items, but they're only useful when you're actually in bear-shape. If you later decide that you want to be, for example, rhino-shaped or t-rex shaped, you're not using a lot of those same magic items (at least if I'm DM), which means that you'll have to get a lot more gear than the Fighter who can use all his gear all the time.


Wondrous items re-size or are widely adjustable and only have to be worn on the closest available analogue body slot to work (I think there is an example in the Draconomicon of dragons using Belt items on their tails, for instance, and Beholders can wear rings and the like on their eyestalks) Which is to say that you don't actually need special Bear-sized items or tiger-items or any of that nonsense. You just need to remember to take them off before wildshaping so they don't meld, then put them back on if you're in a shape with dextrous hands or get a trusty party member/your Wood Wose to put them back on you. The downside is that your items will proceed to meld again anyways if you have to change forms for something. The solution is of course piles and piles of cash; once you get to a high enough level you start setting aside a half or a quarter of what you make for large supplies of Wilding Clasps, which save you the trouble of worrying about it at all.

FatR
2009-03-17, 09:42 AM
At level 5, that's not even an hours worth of +14 AC.
And why do you need hours, again? You just don't. The only situations when this remotely matters are ambushes during travel and going through large monster-light, trap-heavy dungeons. Even then, in latter case, all you need is some adventuring discipline to make your buffs last longer than party's HP. This is not theory, by the way, this is actual dungeon crawl experience.


That's not a whole lot and certainly not enough to last a days worth of adventuring, during which you might lose initiative or get ambushed.
Losing initiative or ambushes do not matter, because you aren't going anywhere without your buffs anyway. As about attacks on a resting party, they screw fighters harder than anyone, because donning armor takes a lot of time, as opposed to 2-3 rounds of buffing.


It also drops to +12 vs Neutral or Good opponents or against traps. Mithral Full Plate (+8 Armour +3 Dex) and a Heavy Shield (+2 Shield) gives you +13 AC before you add magical enhancements. Even if you are ambushed or lose initiative this only goes down to +10.
First, even mundane Mythral Full Plate is really freaking expensive. In fact, you cannot afford it at level 5, period. Second, if you have +3 Dex, that's +17 AC for wizards. Third, Mythral Full Plate screws your mobility. Fourth, using any sort of non-animated shield completely destroys offensive potential of core melees. Buffs, on the other hand, are free and even provide you with extra benefits.
Oh, and how many published adventures mix evil and non-evil opponents regularly?

Fortinbras
2009-03-17, 09:52 AM
wha?

any optimized character can kill monster of equal CR

ppl who dont understand this dont belong to balance threads

This is not a balance thread. It is not a thread for discussing why casters are better than fighters. In fact I would be very happy if the words Druid, Cleric, Wizard, Sorcerer, and caster were kept to a minimum. Some people like martial characters and this thread is for them. Some people like to say how lousy martial characters are and this thread is not for them. This thread is about efective martial builds, tactics, feat trees, ect.

In this case the word martial means uses weapons and such as their primary means of attack.

JellyPooga
2009-03-17, 11:02 AM
I've often wondered about getting as many ability scores as possible to weapon damage. Int is fairly straightforward with Swashbuckler 3 and Dex is available through Champion of CL but those two classes don't mesh well due to armour foci (CoCLs abilities favour heavy/medium armour, where Swash abilities don't work in greater than light). That's about as far as I get. Any suggestions? I ask mainly because I like playing melee characters with very high Dex, usually a high Int and often above average Cha (i.e. dashing duellist types :smallbiggrin:), but have yet to reach a satisfactory build.

Fixer
2009-03-17, 11:21 AM
At higher levels, you NEED some kind of protection against [Mind Affecting]. The easiest ways to get it are 5 levels in Occult Slayer, 4 levels in (Illithid) Slayer, or 3 levels in Holy Liberator (limited version).The feat: Shape Soulmeld (Planar Ward) also helps vs. Mind Control, although confusion will still mess you up.

Fixer
2009-03-17, 12:18 PM
JellyPooga. First of all, a character has CR equal to his level, therefore he is supposed to be able to win roughly 50% of battles when placed against random opponents of his CR.Where does this come from?

CR is based on a party of 4, and it is expected they use 25% of their resources to win (IIRC, I don't have my DMG handy, someone give me better numbers if you can). By the rules, if you increase the number of opponents of a particular CR by double, you increase its CR by 2. Going in reverse, it is reasonable to calculate that if you halve the number of players, the CR of the encounter also goes up by two (a stretch, but not unfair).

So, a single character of any level facing a single opponent of the same CR is essentially fighting an encounter with a CR four higher than themselves. A PC Fighter level 1 fighting a NPC Fighter level 1 would essentially be a CR 5 encounter in terms of difficulty (although only a CR 1 in the sense of XP), which means there is a high likelihood that that character is going to die. There is no 50/50 chance involved unless you consider "he might or might not die" a 50/50 chance. In all likelihood, that fighter won't survive the encounter, or will use up enough of his resources (HP mostly) to be completely ineffective after this battle.

Fortinbras
2009-03-17, 02:34 PM
Okay, so if I retrain two fighter levels for warblade and take the Martial study feat I can get these manuevers and stances. Claw at the moon, sudden leap, wall of blades moment of perfect mind emerald razor, and leading the charge as my stance.

i have 8 skill points to apply, 2 from int modifier, 2 from warblade 1 (I already spent 2 before I retrained the level,) and 4 from warblade 2.

I'm trying to decide where to put the skill points; concentration (for perfect mind,) or tumble (to avoid Aoo's from sudden leap.)

Nothing is set in stone yet so advice would be helpful (I'm thinking maybye I shouldn't take martial study yet and get blood in the water stance istead of claw at the moon and leading the charge. I'm shooting to qualifty for pouncing charge by next level)

On the other hand is there anything to be said for taking levels in swordsage instead of warblade? It actually seems better.

Draz74
2009-03-18, 09:06 PM
Where does this come from?
From the rules about how much XP you get for beating NPCs.


CR is based on a party of 4, and it is expected they use 25% of their resources to win (IIRC, I don't have my DMG handy, someone give me better numbers if you can).
Yes.


By the rules, if you increase the number of opponents of a particular CR by double, you increase its CR by 2.
Disfunctional rule, but yes.


Going in reverse, it is reasonable to calculate that if you halve the number of players, the CR of the encounter also goes up by two (a stretch, but not unfair).
No, no, no. The CR does not change. CR is not a function of number of characters in party (or any other variable based on the party composition).

2 PCs vs. a CR 7 critter should be about as difficult as 4 PCs vs. a CR 9 critter, yes. (In theory.) That's what you're thinking. But the way you described it is totally wrong. If you have 4 PCs vs. a CR 7 critter, and then you take away 2 of the PCs, you have not made the critter CR 9. It is still CR 7. It's just that CR 7 is harder for a small party than for a big party.


So, a single character of any level facing a single opponent of the same CR is essentially fighting an encounter with a CR four higher than themselves. A PC Fighter level 1 fighting a NPC Fighter level 1 would essentially be a CR 5 encounter in terms of difficulty (although only a CR 1 in the sense of XP), which means there is a high likelihood that that character is going to die.
No, it's still a CR 1 challenge, both for XP and for how likely the PC is to win. It's just that a CR 1 challenge is a nasty, dangerous thing for a Level 1 PC without a party.


There is no 50/50 chance involved unless you consider "he might or might not die" a 50/50 chance.
I ... think that's exactly what "50/50 chance" was intended to imply, yes.


On the other hand is there anything to be said for taking levels in swordsage instead of warblade? It actually seems better.

Sorry, I lost track of all that you're planning on, but I can at least respond to this: Warblade and Swordsage are actually very close in power. I've seen about equal opinions both ways about which is stronger.

Swordsage gets a lot more maneuvers and stances, and a bigger selection, but the Warblade has a better recovery method and better class features. (In fact, Swordsage recovery sucks enough that Adaptive Style is pretty much a required feat -- though maybe not so much when you already have a fair amount of Fighter levels.) In addition, access to Iron Heart is nothing to sneeze at.

Overall from what you've said of your character, I'd tentatively say Warblade suits him better than Swordsage. But you'll do OK either way.

Deepblue706
2009-03-18, 10:17 PM
Persistent righteous might is all you need to beat the fighter. all day larger size, damage reduction, Strength, ect., with no monetary costs.

It has no monetary cost, but a very high feat cost; Extend Spell, Persistent Spell, Divine Metamagic, Extra Turning. And you can't even begin to make the fullest of your increased strength until you get Power Attack. You might get most of these feats, if not all, eventually, anyway; but you'll probably wait a long time (as there are better choices at lower levels), and by then it'll probably be insignificant.

Because, what are you getting? All-day +4 STR is nice, but that will hardly put a fighter's own score to shame. Just how high is the point buy here that the Cleric can afford high WIS, decent CHA and enough DEX and CON to survive that he really has that much STR? The only thing this spell really does for the Cleric is grant him a large size, and make him a little tougher to kill. Righteous Might is certainly a nice option, but I'm not convinced it's really that amazing.



Secondly, your forgetting that druids can ALSO power attack + Leap attack. With pounce that means your getting massive damage multipliers on all those attacks.

ADDITIONALLY, once the bear has pounced on the poor slobs head it gets to grapple them for free, and begin to maul them at its leasure.


Sure they can power attack and leap attack (assuming he can afford base STR 13+...not always a sure thing); but their lower BAB limits the use, and the fact that they're relying on multiple attacks to dish out everything will make their overall success statistically lesser. You're only getting 2:1 trades on these power attacks (if you're successfully making a 10ft horizontal jump into the enemy's space on a charge), and you're exposing yourself to counterattack....which is bad, because your AC probably won't be very good at this point.

The Druid would need to invest more feats than it's really worth for him to get the full use out of pounce (Lion's Pounce being a feat that, as Jelly Pooga points out, is drawing on your Wild Shapes). He should probably do something better, like cast spells.

Improved Grab is a neat perk, sure. But again: he should probably rely on what spells he has at his disposal, than look for excuses to use this.

Deepblue706
2009-03-18, 11:18 PM
I've spent plenty of time derailing this thread, so I'll try to get things back on-track with issues of my own about "martial" characters.

I've always wanted to make a plain Fighter. 1-20. Just to screw with people. I've been toying around with a few feat progressions, and I'd like to know what those interested in playing martial characters think of this character, when accompanied by a Bard, Druid, Factotum and Sorcerer, all of intermediate gaming experience:

Race: Human

28 Pt buy:
STR 18
DEX 12
CON 12
INT 12
WIS 8
CHA 8

Skills:

Jump
Climb
Tumble (cc)
Balance (cc)

Feats:
1: Power Attack
1F: Cleave
1H: Weapon Focus: Morningstar
2F: Improved Bull Rush
3: Close-Quarters Fighting (CWar)
4F: Weapon Specialization: Morningstar
6: Three Mountains (CWar)
6F: Shock Trooper (CWar)
8F: Melee Weapon Mastery: Bludgeoning (PHB2)
9: Brutal Strike (PHB2)
10F: Greater Weapon Focus: Morningstar
12: Leap Attack (CAdv)
12F: Greater Weapon Specialization: Morningstar
14F: Blind-Fight
15: Combat Acrobat (PHB2)
16F: Great Cleave
18: Weapon Supremacy: Morningstar (PHB2)
18F: Quick Draw
20F: Giantbane (CWar)

In Play: Charge attacks are obviously a big thing for this character, but he can also make use of Shock Trooper's Domino-Rush maneuver, allowing for a fair means of tripping bunched-up opponents. However, in cases where success is deemed unlikely, a full power attack will dish out some hurt; to anyone within reach. Sadly, the Morningstar is not a reach weapon, but qualifies for Three Mountains, which prompts fort saves vs 'nauseated' after two successful hits in one round. Brutal Strike also adds fort saves vs 'sickened' on every single hit, and the Focus tree obviously helps with accuracy on attacks.

Tumble allows him to move about the battlefield without provoking AoOs, and also helps to qualify him for Combat Acrobat and Giantbane, at late levels. Eventually, he can ignore difficult terrain, and essentially ignore effects that would make him fall prone. Other defenses include Close-Quarters Fighting, which helps him against grapples (even if initiated with Improved Grab) and Blind-Fight, which aids against enemies with concealment. Weapon Supremacy itself will prevent him from being disarmed, and his very-high attack bonus will make sunder attempts on him very difficult to pull off.

Of course, this Fighter is lacking Wisdom, making Will Saves his chief flaw. However, I'm willing to accept that, because the party would fight a grand variety of enemies (so it's not often an issue). Furthermore, this fighter would also put some investiture into defenses (like Cloak of Resistance). His allies also have no problem aiding him with spells like Protection from Evil, to prevent domination, etc.

Giantbane is only taken because it lets him keep up with really big creatures, like Dragons, by leaping onto them Shadow-of-The-Colossus-Style. Unfortunately, it requires a lot of magical boosts to actually beat a dragon's grapple check to make it work reliably, but it's hella fun.

Quick Draw was chosen primarily because I wasn't sure what to include there, but I recognize its use in that one weapon will seldom be enough to deal with all of your enemies, and passing on a full attack because a new weapon needs to be drawn is disappointing.

Edit: Although, I suppose I could drop Quick Draw and move feats around to get Able Learner at level 1, which would help with Balance and Tumble, alleviating the need for an INT above 10 (which is usually pointless if you're not going for Trip-Fighting). The extra two attribute points could be put into DEX, CON or WIS, all of which benefitting the Fighter in improving. However, since a difference of 1 on Will Saves will probably not make a difference, I think I would sooner choose DEX, as it would boost half of the character's skills, improve Reflex Saves, AC and initiative. Although those extra HPs in improving CON would be nice...

tyckspoon
2009-03-19, 02:08 AM
Because, what are you getting? All-day +4 STR is nice, but that will hardly put a fighter's own score to shame. Just how high is the point buy here that the Cleric can afford high WIS, decent CHA and enough DEX and CON to survive that he really has that much STR? The only thing this spell really does for the Cleric is grant him a large size, and make him a little tougher to kill. Righteous Might is certainly a nice option, but I'm not convinced it's really that amazing.


A Cleric going the melee-buffzilla route doesn't need high Wis, just enough to qualify for whatever his current highest spell level is. 15, at the most- that'll get him up to 19 from normal stat bumps just before level 9 spells actually show up. He can get by on lower if he can count on having at least a +2 Wis item, which he should. High Cha is nice, but not required; you can buy turn attempts much more cheaply than you can get them by raising your stats even without Nightstick abuse (and if you want to do it stat-wise, putting an Eagle's Splendor on will give you a nice quick +2 turn attempts for nothing other than a 2nd-level slot.) Make it a 12, that'll do well enough. Dex certainly doesn't need to be all that high; Clerics are a heavy-armor wearing class, which means the highest it cares about it usually 12/16. Could be left at 8 if really needed, but I would prefer having at least no penalty. Con is just as high as for anybody else who has other attributes that need buying.. probably 14, maybe 16 with racial boost/particularly high point-buy. So make it three stats in the mid-high range for Str/Wis/Con, with Dex and Cha being just modest and Int being dumped. That's only one more high-ish stat than a Fighter.. I'm pretty sure this fits into 32 point buy easily by making use of the 8 points saved through not taking an 18 Wis like a casting-focused Cleric would.

Deepblue706
2009-03-19, 12:12 PM
A Cleric going the melee-buffzilla route doesn't need high Wis, just enough to qualify for whatever his current highest spell level is. 15, at the most- that'll get him up to 19 from normal stat bumps just before level 9 spells actually show up. He can get by on lower if he can count on having at least a +2 Wis item, which he should. High Cha is nice, but not required; you can buy turn attempts much more cheaply than you can get them by raising your stats even without Nightstick abuse (and if you want to do it stat-wise, putting an Eagle's Splendor on will give you a nice quick +2 turn attempts for nothing other than a 2nd-level slot.) Make it a 12, that'll do well enough. Dex certainly doesn't need to be all that high; Clerics are a heavy-armor wearing class, which means the highest it cares about it usually 12/16. Could be left at 8 if really needed, but I would prefer having at least no penalty. Con is just as high as for anybody else who has other attributes that need buying.. probably 14, maybe 16 with racial boost/particularly high point-buy. So make it three stats in the mid-high range for Str/Wis/Con, with Dex and Cha being just modest and Int being dumped. That's only one more high-ish stat than a Fighter.. I'm pretty sure this fits into 32 point buy easily by making use of the 8 points saved through not taking an 18 Wis like a casting-focused Cleric would.

Using your provisions, perhaps we can assume this to be our 32pt Melee-Cleric:

STR 16
DEX 12
CON 14
INT 8
WIS 15
CHA 12

He begins play with 4 turning attempts each day.

The earliest the Cleric can get Righteous Might is level 9. Supposing this character is human, he has five feats. He can afford himself Empower Spell, Divine Metamagic, Persistent Spell, Extra Turning, and Power Attack. He needs Extra Turning because you need to use 7 turning attempts (1+the number by which the metamagic feat would increase the level of the spell in question; in this case, 6). I'm afraid the +2 from Eagle's Splendor just isn't enough; and since it won't stack with a CHA-boosting item (enhancement bonus), there really isn't much a point for this Cleric to bother with it.

Using Divine Metamagic to Persist Righteous Might, he's also using one of his two level 5 spells allowed for the day. It's not until level 13 (when he has 7th level spells) that this ceases to significantly tax him (since his comparably low WIS means he has few bonus spells). But at that point, the Fighter can blow 4k on an item of Continuous Enlarge Person, and still have over 100k of his WBL available.

Since this cleric is boosting WIS and is likely to have a WIS item, the chances of his STR being much higher at level 9 than what he began with are slim. His STR will become, in effect, 20, if we assume the above is all true. A Fighter at this level, starting with 18 STR, will probably have 22 at this point (+2 level-up, +2 item), and have more feats that rely on his STR; granting him superior benefits of strength anyway.

It's not until the Cleric adds Divine Power into the equation that his STR will be above the Fighter's, but it doesn't change the fact that the Cleric doesn't have the feats necessary to reap the full benefits of high STR. His attacks become viable and deal significant damage, but he's investing more than the endeavor is really worth. The Fighter can do comparable damage and can buy feats that grant him a diversified array of tactics, whereas anytime the Cleric wants to attempt something in melee aside from dealing direct damage, he'll be provoking AoOs. Furthermore, Divine Power is a Round/Level spell, and since he's burning so many of his turning attempts on Persistant Righteous Might, he won't be able to exploit this superior STR for a long time. And by the time he can Quicken Divine Power AND Persist Righteous Might, the Fighter's own STR would have increased from level-ups, and essentially equal-out anyway (or be compensated by Focus and Specialization).

But, this doesn't equal-out their use in melee, and a Cleric who does this is not simply a Fighter+Spells; as again, he lacks the non-magic options available to a Fighter, meaning there will still be differences in how they play out in-game. Furthermore, the Cleric won't be able to rely on his lower DCs to cast at enemies if this game's monsters match the PC's appropriate level of power. Essentially, you're trading in a percentage of your capability to cast Save-or-Suck and Save-or-Lose spells, as well as several feats for Direct Damage.

I think the idea that a Cleric can do this much is certainly neat, as it lets him hurt stuff well-enough to fill in if the regular Fighter is incapacitated, or just needs a helping hand in the fray; but I still believe a Cleric should be sticking more to spells to maintain diversity between PCs, which I believe is good on both grounds of fun and overall efficiency.

Fortinbras
2009-03-20, 07:03 PM
Previous posts having been burried under mountains of derailment I'm starting over.

My character is a 11 Dwarven fighter and I'm taking some warblade levels.

What do people think are good manuevers/stances?

He uses a bastard sword in both hands.

Abilities are as follows
Str: 18
Dex: 12
Con: 18
Int: 14
Wis:14
Cha: 14

Right now, for the first three levels I'm think of taking; Perfect mind, wall of blades, emeral razor and blood in the water as a stace. Next level I want to take pouncing charge most of the rest of Iron heart and diamond mind look good after that.

Concentration: 12

What do people think, specific suggestions would be helpfull.
What do people think?