What makes Dwarven Defender bad?

[NineThePuma]

... Aside from the crippling lack of options, I mean. Like, really. Regale me with stories of why it's absolutely horrible, and where it's problems are.

Mostly so that when my player gets to be level 5 and asks to look at the PrCs available (which I said would be limited to a list that happened to include it by mistake, and he got it into his head that it would be SO COOL to be a dwarf Tank) it doesn't suck horribly.

And yes, he's a relatively newbie player.

[Zonugal]

It offers very few reasons, being a stationary melee-based prestige class option, for an enemy to not simply walk around them during a battle.

[Rei_Jin]

It really depends on how you qualify for it, and what weapons/armor you use with it. A Gold Dwarf Paladin 3/Knight 3/Fighter 2/Dwarven Defender X who uses a Spiked Chain and has a good DM who allows them to use alternate feats to qualify for the class (Dodge, really? For a PrC that can't move? Endurance, so he can NOT run all day? Toughness, for those awesome 3hp) can actually be pretty good at their job.

For feat requirements to enter the class, I would recommend it be changed to Improved Toughness, Heavy Armor Optimization (RoS, P141), Battlehardened (RoS, P137) to actually be more in keeping with what a Dwarven Defender is. And by making the required feats to gain admission not basically a complete nerf, the class is far more viable.

[Xefas]

What makes Dwarven Defender bad?
Walking briskly away.

[Tvtyrant]

In core it can actually be useful with a compound bow to do lots of damage, and you don't have to move.

[Gorgondantess]

Walking briskly away.

Pretty much sums it up.[/thread]

[Coidzor]

How about another question. What does it actually *give* in exchange for its limitation of not being able to influence the battlefield at all?

[Psyren]

In core it can actually be useful with a compound bow to do lots of damage, and you don't have to move.

Damage perhaps, but you're still limited by the bow's rating, none of your class abilities will help your arrows land and it gets no bonus feats to help you. Not to mention archery sucks in core.


How about another question. What does it actually *give* in exchange for its limitation of not being able to influence the battlefield at all?

It does make you tough; so if you're alone, last dwarf standing or enemies have no choice but to attack you it can be effective. Such situations are unfortunately rare since D&D is a team-based game.

And since WotC already fixed this class (Deepstone Sentinel), there's no reason to spend much time on it.

[Zonugal]

Man I love the Deepstone Sentinel so much.

So very much.

[Cerlis]

why would it be a problem if the enemy can walk around you if you are concerned about enemies that want to kill you? Most enemies out there are melee types. animals, goblin warriors and big magical beasts :smallconfused:

I understand its very limited but the main knee-jerk reaction answer seems a little fallacious

[Kantolin]

Immovability is a major drawback.

Every time I've seen one, however, people simply remained themselves physically near the dwarven defender or perhaps with the DD and another frontliner (or perhaps summons) between them and the opponents. The occasional enemy who manuevers around the DD results in us going to the other side again, or our casters (Well, me) using them amidst their battlefield control.

Sadly, it seems that most people's groups have their dwarven defender wear a sign over their head notifying all enemies to run away from them, and they are never full attacked by anything. Everything instead runs around them, and the party doesn't take advantage of this. ^_^

Realistically, immovability is indeed a major drawback though - there are times where you have to break stance and move.

Hanging out near the party tank is one way of helping that, the tank being a Knight (Or possibly crusader) can help as well by denying 5ft steps, and if they are willing to provoke AOOs to go through the dwarf... then provoke AOOs as well and require them to keep doing that by walking around the dwarf. ^_^ I did a good job with using regroup and other low level teleports to blink people such that they'd have to again go near the dwarf.

Another good option is for the dwarf to gain a large size, perhaps with someone enlarging him or enlarging himself (Cleric, Psychic Warrior). A trip-monkey that is huge via enlargement can tolerate not moving.

So you can work around it. It's not the best class even if you do these things, but being immobile isn't as big of a deal as people seem to mention.

Granted, that may just be in the games I play... we're distinctly very low-optimization, after all.

[Rei_Jin]

The issue is that D&D is a party play game, not a solo game. By the monsters walking around you and not giving you the ability to attack them, you've just become a super useless tank. You may as well not be there, because your allies can't count on you to do anything but take up space.

[Cerlis]

unless i dont remember correctly, defensive stance is the onlything they cant use while moving, so its just for those times when you ARE going to be attacked and DONT need to move.

Further, unless you are fighing people who know exactly what your entire party can do either by having faced yall alot or metagame knowledge. I know there are plenty of smart humanoid monsters who know to take out the spellcasters or the small halfing in leather armor and avoid the Only one who looks like he can survive in a fight (unless the wizard does something to defend himself and the rogue hides, thus making it the one on one fight we are saying isnt happening) but for most orc tribes, grey renders, ogres and the like its pretty much "Hey its a squishy, me smash squishy, me get close squishy" and then they fight and the party kills him.

Just as a barbarian is useful in combat outside of rage, so should a dwarven defender be outside of his stance. People also talk about how ranged rogue isnt that good and you really want TWF for maximum SNeak attacks per round......which requires standing still (in any pounceless build)

So really i see saying Dwarven defender is weak because you cant move is like saying A Wizard is weak because of antimagic fields. Defensive stance twiddling your thumbs in a Anti magic field are not all they can do, further one shouldnt expect this tactic that trumps their power to be there all the time, or even most of the time.

Dwarven defender IS limited and the person in question should probably go another route if they want to. but it doesnt suck as much as everyone is making it seem :smallconfused:

[IthroZada]

When taken in context, a Dwarven Defender (minus the bad feats) isn't so bad. In dwarf culture they would be defending tunnels, which means there is no way to get past them except for through them. But in a campaign, you won't be guarding tunnels 24/7, so most of its abilities are wasted. Therefore, it makes for a much better NPC class to use against your players.

It's mechanics work for the flavor, but not for the ever mobile adventurer.

[Zonugal]

I might say it is a bold claim to compare an anti-magic zone to basic movement.

One is a rarity in most games (and commonly seen as a very cheap ploy by the DM) while the other is a fundamental element of combat & the tactics held inside it.

[Kantolin]

Use disguise! Make your wizard look like he's in full plate! Make the dwarf look like he's wearing robes and a pointy hat!

Or just actually put the dwarf in a robe and a pointy hat and put the armour underneath.

...or make the dwarf look like a steak. ^_^ That'll make a lot of monsters happy.

[Thespianus]

Man I love the Deepstone Sentinel so much.

So very much.

Just puzzles me why they gave it a D10 hit die. Doesn't matter much, just seems a bit odd for that kind of character.

[Zonugal]

Just puzzles me why they gave it a D10 hit die. Doesn't matter much, just seems a bit odd for that kind of character.

Doesn't the Crusader have s d10 hit die? Maybe they wan't to establish some sort of consistency with their, ideal, entry?

Who knows...

[Thespianus]

Doesn't the Crusader have s d10 hit die? Maybe they wan't to establish some sort of consistency with their, ideal, entry?

Who knows...

Yeah, I suppose. The D10 of the Crusader doesn't make much sense to me either, but hey... Who, indeed, knows...

[Hunter Killer]

I think it is possible to make the Dwarven Defender not so bad with some creative optimization. It's still not even close to the best option, but with the right choices at least it doesn't flat suck out loud.

I think their main problem is, as has been prettymuch been stated several times before, their lack of battlefield control. They don't have anything that screams at the monsters "HEY! ATTACK ME!"

Knight can help with that using the Test of Mettle ability, but you need to also take Goad (because Test isn't going to be especially helpful when you're facing a group of low level mooks; Goad will allow you to at least convince a few of said mooks to attack you).

Stand Still + Combat Reflexes can also help, although you're not going to get much out of the extra DEX required (Unless you can get a hold of Mithril Full Plate). Basically rush up, Defensive Stance, and Stand Still anyone that tries to move away.

Reach weapons are necessary. Someone pointed out the Spiked Chain... Yeah, the Defender wants that. Especially if you're going the Knight route (Bulwark of Defense and a large threatened area help prevent the "I walk around" strategy).

Feats are a huge thing for Defenders... Flaws are necessary, and a 2-level Fighter dip might not be out of the question. Swapping required feats is ideal if it is allowed (Improved Toughness, Heavy Armor Optimization, Battle Hardened, as mentioned, are fair and balanced as feat taxes without being completely useless).

Lastly... I'd avoid Tripping. Tripping is good, but it kind of misses the point of the Defender. If you're knocking your opponent down so he can't hit you, then there's not much point in being the wall of steel and meat. Plus, there's much better classes for trip optimization.

[kardar233]

This reminds me why I homebrewed a "taunt" feature for my games. Basically, you make an Intimidate check that follows the same rules as a Feint, and instead of them being FF for your next attack they have to use all offensive abilities or attacks on you for (Compared check success/2) rounds. This also allows for multi-target "taunting" by using multi-target Intimidate shenanigans, and gives a reason to play a CW Samurai.

[Amphetryon]

Just as a barbarian is useful in combat outside of rage, so should a dwarven defender be outside of his stance. People also talk about how ranged rogue isnt that good and you really want TWF for maximum SNeak attacks per round......which requires standing still (in any pounceless build)

Given the number of ways to gain pounce (http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75882/19871954/Lists_of_Stuff&post_num=4#338421594) (scroll down a bit), "any pounceless build" seems a deliberate and curious choice for limiting the rogue, whose main shtick is often already limited in the number of valid targets it hits.

[Cerlis]

I might say it is a bold claim to compare an anti-magic zone to basic movement.

One is a rarity in most games (and commonly seen as a very cheap ploy by the DM) while the other is a fundamental element of combat & the tactics held inside it.


A) Dwarven defenders arent trees, they can move and they do move. they just have an advantage in encounters where they can stay still.

B) indeed, a dwarven defender has an advantage because a caster has to remove himself from the situation in order to cast spells, while a DD can still attack and defend in a fight where he has to constantly stay moving.

Its a Use per day ability, he's not suppose to be using it all the time, only when its advantageous.

Like i said, there is some wild notion that a Dwarven defender is immobile all the time while every single monster in the game does nothing but prance around outside of melee range and only use ranged attacks and spells.

A majority of monsters are going to close in on the dwarven defender unless the DM expressely decides to cheese the Defender or there is a unhappy coincedence, same as a DM throwing antimagic fields in to nerf a caster.

Point is, its only a problem if the game is designed to screw with the dwarven defender or you get really unlucky (and the same can be said for rogues as well combat wise, unless they take that ACF penetrating strike)


Given the number of ways to gain pounce (scroll down a bit), "any pounceless build" seems a deliberate and curious choice for limiting the rogue, whose main shtick is often already limited in the number of valid targets it hits.

:smallconfused: The way the game is designed is for the rogue's sneak attack damage to make up for his defensive strategies having low damage (skirmishing resulting in one attack per round ect) and giving him a advantage whenever he can have his way with an enemy (flanking, or stunned opponents).

This isnt some crazy universe where everyone pics cookie cutter builds, nor that anyone needs to, nor is it a universe where everyone is skirmishing.

The notion you have to move to be effective is bollox and the notion that a Dwarven defender is useless unless he stands still is bollox.

[Big Fau]

A) Dwarven defenders arent trees, they can move and they do move. they just have an advantage in encounters where they can stay still.

Said "Advantage" is an inferior Rage variant for Lawful characters. In a Core-only environment, you have 3 choices to go to before DD if you want Strength boosters (Barbarian, Druid, and Polymorph).


B) indeed, a dwarven defender has an advantage because a caster has to remove himself from the situation in order to cast spells, while a DD can still attack and defend in a fight where he has to constantly stay moving.

What? If the DD ever has to use a Move action more than twice during an encounter, he cannot use his DS during that encounter without it ending prematurely. All an opponent has to do to screw him over is use the Withdraw action or take an AoO and the DD is going to sit there until his stance ends.

It also penalizes you for using it until level 14. Actually, it penalizes you every time you use it because you can't move more than 5ft/round when using it.


Its a Use per day ability, he's not suppose to be using it all the time, only when its advantageous.

The only situations where it is advantageous are in tight, narrow corridors. This situation only occurs in hallways, where a Web spell is superior and where any other melee class can hold the line just as well (since the bonuses provided by DS are incredibly minor).


Like i said, there is some wild notion that a Dwarven defender is immobile all the time while every single monster in the game does nothing but prance around outside of melee range and only use ranged attacks and spells.

That ability is the advertised draw of the class. The Devs actually expected people to want to use it!


A majority of monsters are going to close in on the dwarven defender unless the DM expressely decides to cheese the Defender or there is a unhappy coincedence, same as a DM throwing antimagic fields in to nerf a caster.

How many monsters with an Int score above 13 are tactically inclined to attack the guy in full plate over the guy who isn't wearing armor?


Point is, its only a problem if the game is designed to screw with the dwarven defender or you get really unlucky (and the same can be said for rogues as well combat wise, unless they take that ACF penetrating strike)

Take a look through the premade modules. How many encounters take place in a narrow hallway where the DD's stance is going to work reliably? I can name one (Voyage of the Golden Dragon) and even that one only has a few such encounters.


This isnt some crazy universe where everyone pics cookie cutter builds, nor that anyone needs to, nor is it a universe where everyone is skirmishing.

That's just it, they don't have to Skirmish! All they need to do is have a melee reach of 15ft and a 5ft step every round and the DD cannot get into melee once the stance goes up. The hallway scenario? It renders the DD worthless if the enemy decides to use the Withdraw action to fall back into a more open area, wasting the DD's stance.


The notion you have to move to be effective is bollox and the notion that a Dwarven defender is useless unless he stands still is bollox.

Once again, the Devs expected players who were taking levels in the class to actually use the stance. The PrC offers nothing that you can't get elsewhere. The good Will saves? You could have spent your prerequisite feats on feats that improve your Will save instead. The DR? 3 points is largely irrelevant at the levels you get it. The d12 HD? Knight, Warblade, and Barbarian all have that. The Full BAB? Straight Fighter provides it.

Fact: Stone Dragon and it's PrC (Deepstone Sentinel) are mechanically superior to the Dwarven Defender PrC.




Oh, and for those rare occasions where you can actually use the stance and have it be relevant? Getting Bull Rushed will end it and screw you out of a daily use, and that tactic is fairly common.

[Aquillion]

In core it can actually be useful with a compound bow to do lots of damage, and you don't have to move.
It's usable in core-only is because there are so few other options, especially for lawful fighter-type characters who don't want to use magic. It still sucks, though.

[BobVosh]

Walking briskly away.

Ker-sigged.

I would like to point out one other thing other than walking away, provided you aren't using reach and size enlargements or even if you are and they are big enough to still have better, they can just smack you from out of your reach. You can do nothing but take it.

[Darrin]

Immovability is a major drawback.


...which is easily fixed with a 500 GP magic item: Talisman of the Disk (MIC p. 188). Or 750 GP for a wand of benign transposition.

Starting with Knight as a base class gives you some options to try and draw aggro, as does the Goad feat, but mechanics-wise they're not exactly strong tactical options.

Throw in some invisibility, reach weapon, and a size increase or two, and "walk around the short guy" becomes a little more interesting.

[Big Fau]

...which is easily fixed with a 500 GP magic item: Talisman of the Disk (MIC p. 188). Or 750 GP for a wand of benign transposition.

Starting with Knight as a base class gives you some options to try and draw aggro, as does the Goad feat, but mechanics-wise they're not exactly strong tactical options.

Throw in some invisibility, reach weapon, and a size increase or two, and "walk around the short guy" becomes a little more interesting.


While in a defensive stance, a defender cannot use skills or abilities that would require him to shift his position.

Sorry, but no. Teleportation counts as an ability that shifts your position.

[Psyren]

why would it be a problem if the enemy can walk around you if you are concerned about enemies that want to kill you? Most enemies out there are melee types. animals, goblin warriors and big magical beasts :smallconfused:

I understand its very limited but the main knee-jerk reaction answer seems a little fallacious

Because if the entire party dies, it doesn't matter if the monsters can't kill you too; you've already failed as a tank. And chances are, you can't rez any of them either, or even carry everyone's body back to someone who can.

And that's just the straightforward objective of "monsters are trying to kill the party." It could be something worse, like a race against time to save someone, or escorting an crucial NPC in the open; or the enemies in question could have ranged attacks/spells and simply be able to shoot around you. Even a scenario suited to the Defender, e.g. "guard this location" can be trouble if the area is large or has multiple points of entry.



Another good option is for the dwarf to gain a large size, perhaps with someone enlarging him or enlarging himself (Cleric, Psychic Warrior). A trip-monkey that is huge via enlargement can tolerate not moving.

Thing is: if you're a cleric/psywar, you have no reason at all to take this class.

Str/Con bonuses? Check.
Bonuses to AC/saves? Check.
Temporary HP? Check.
Damage Reduction? Check.

And all that plus things like size increases, hiding allies, creating obstacles on the battlefield to funnel enemies towards you etc; abilities that DwDs simply don't get.

[RandomNPC]

I know it's been said, but Dwarven Defender is made for defending tunnels and hallways. Bring it up with your DM, have the party find a reason to break into a dwarven fortress and run into a group of these guys with some ranged support, I find it likely that the party will look for a way around the defensive point instead of through.

[Yuki Akuma]

The very fact that a core PrC requires non-core options to make it viable proves it's not a good PrC.

PrCs should be able to exist in a vacuum.

[Psyren]

I know it's been said, but Dwarven Defender is made for defending tunnels and hallways. Bring it up with your DM, have the party find a reason to break into a dwarven fortress and run into a group of these guys with some ranged support, I find it likely that the party will look for a way around the defensive point instead of through.

Or just Cloudkill the ranged support (lolrangeddwarves) and if the DwDs the cloud flowed over are still alive, start pelting them with your slings; plenty of rocks in a dwarven fortress I'm sure.

[DeltaEmil]

The imagery of the Dwarven Defender is a lone dwarven badass guarding a narrow pass or bridge, while hundreds of goblinoid and orcish raiders are on the other side, wanting to get in and butcher and loot all they want.
The Dwarven Defender cleaves through the advancing masses, throwing them to the side, and the horde must climb over their fallen camerades to reach the immovable wall of steel.

In practice, level-appropriate monsters can easily slaughter the lone Dwarven Defender (more damage, or they have bigger reach), or have ranged/magical attacks like a gaze that targets your will save or does something like save-or-suck/die/go-away, and nobody cares about 1-HD-mooks, because they would need a natural 20 to hit you anyway and aren't level-appropriate, making them extremely boring fights.

tl;dr:

Dwarven Defenders suck against anything that is level-appropriate. Anything that lower makes for a boring fight, and only then does the Dwarven Defender rock...

[Eldariel]

In Core, DD is indeed "good" for Fighter 'cause Fighter stops gaining (the few ****ty) class features on level 12 so might as well take good Will-saves, small AC-bonus, Uncanny Dodge and some late DR. It's almost like taking levels in Barbarian!

Of course, there are better Core-only non-casters (Dragon Disciple is also better Core-way to gain Strength-bonuses as long as you stick to under 10 levels) and then there are Core-only casters.


And yeah, getting good Will-saves, small AC-bonuses, Uncanny Dodge & DR for 3 terrible feats and 10 levels just isn't the best trade ever. If you can't use Defensive Stance (as you can't because it's not designed for game-use), it's a terrible PRC (though still better than Core Fighter levels 13-20...but that's saying quite a bit about Core Fighter).

[mucco]

As far as DMG PrCs go, the DD isn't nearly the worst one. Sure, it's bad, but not terribad. Ok, aside from the feat requirements, maybe. Thing is, we want to analyze it from a core and non-core perspective.

In core, it's almost strictly better than a straight fighter. It loses five feats and gains DR 6/-, +4 AC, Improved Uncanny Dodge. Try getting those three with core feats. Plus, it's full BAB and high Will, and has a situational ability that's pretty darn useful (everyone on this forum seems to think that all enemies of a DD metagame and stay exactly 15 ft. away from him exactly when they know he enters his stance. That's just unreasonable and griefing). A fighter with this is arguably on par with a straight barbarian in terms of usefulness. Still Tier 5, mind you, like the core Barb (try sending them to the Big T!).

Keep in mind there is one core object that, in my opinion, allows the DD to move without losing his stance, and that is the Carpet of Flying.

Non core: behold the ubercharger, the Warblade, even the Binder. Everything explodes, and especially the DMG PrCs. Though, the DD is still one of the PrCs that can still work to some extent (compare to Eldritch Knight, Dragon Disciple, Duelist, Shadowdancer after level 1... those are just plain sad). In non-core, the number of ways possible for moving while in the stance increases greatly - starting with all the short-range teleportation spells which someone else can use to move the DD around, without him losing the stance.

It's... viable. Not strong, of course. But saying a Warblade is stronger is like saying a Wizard is stronger. It depends on your optimization level and on what you want to play, but this class is not unplayable like some people say. It does require some friendly ruling and playing by the DM, but every game does.

[TheRinni]

He wants to play a Tank, so have him take the only Tanking Feat in the game: Goad. By sacrificing a movement action (which he won't be using anyway) he can taunt an opponent into only attacking him.

This solves the problem of enemies just walking around him. And, while it's not a perfect solution (he'll have to put some ability points in charisma, and opponents with high will saves might not be effected) it's one of the few ways to effectively tank in D&D.

[FMArthur]

One minor gripe I have about it is that the tools it needs to be able to defend its one position at all are scattered over 10 levels, so there's no way you could actually use Defensive Stance in optimal conditions (ie defending a narrow space from a horde) and survive that until many levels in. You can't make 5ft steps and your DR laughable/- doesn't kick in until far too late.

Those things would have been good to have at the outset; even DR 6/- is not enough for him to stand in his hallway for long without continuous outside support at ECL 8 (DD 1st level). Fast Healing up to the HP total you entered the Stance with would not have been out of line even in core, given the restrictions of the stance. DR bahaha/- and baby steps should have been features of Defensive Stance at first level, and then the bonuses should have scaled from there to become actually worthwhile.

[NineThePuma]

Well, to be fair to the Dwarven Defender, when Races of Stone rolled out it added a LOT of nifty goodies that made Dwarves much more "stand still" capable.

I think, to me, the first problem with it is Prerequisites. I'll probably cut the BAB to +5, and swap the feats a bit (As Rei Jin mentioned; however, drop Improved Toughness in favor of Stone Power).

The next step is, naturally, Defensive stance. I'll alter it so that it isn't a "/day" ability, and is instead a "if you move no further than 5 ft this round, you gain the benefits."

Then, of course, a Stone Dragon/Iron Heart themed maneuver progression resembling the progression of the Eternal Blade.

Make the DR show up earlier (level 2-ish?) scale faster (every 4 levels, so 2/6/10) and be bigger ((4/8/12)/- sound right?). Maybe some sort of fast healing, though I'm not sold on it.

Thoughts?

[FMArthur]

Stone Dragon stances are already the entire class, aren't they?

[NineThePuma]

I don't THINK so?

[Eldariel]

Non core: behold the ubercharger, the Warblade, even the Binder. Everything explodes, and especially the DMG PrCs. Though, the DD is still one of the PrCs that can still work to some extent (compare to Eldritch Knight, Dragon Disciple, Duelist, Shadowdancer after level 1... those are just plain sad). In non-core, the number of ways possible for moving while in the stance increases greatly - starting with all the short-range teleportation spells which someone else can use to move the DD around, without him losing the stance.

Moving the DD around via teleportation requires someone else's actions. That's just poor action economics; if he didn't use Defensive Stance he could just move himself without wasting other peoples' precious actions for the job.

And your evaluations of the other PRCs are kinda off: Eldritch Knight is more than fine outside Core; it's still the go-to finish for Gishes after the 5 levels of Abjurant Champion, beating out Knight Phantom. Also, Dragon Disciple is way more viable than Dwarven Defender, as it actually gains some physical ability increases and some useful class features. Not to mention, it actually combines rather well with 10-level casting classes like Suel Arcanamach.

Duelist is the bottom of the barrel and Shadow Dancer is really bad, but so is Dwarven Defender. 3 useless feats. A primary class feature that's terrible. Secondary class features that about amount to secondaries from Barbarian while lacking Rage. And really, you call it metagaming that the enemies with Int over 10 try to avoid the slow, heavily armored warrior and go for the more offensively powerful, less protected party members? That's playing the monsters up to their Int. Of course you ignore the defenders and go for the artillery given the opportunity (and Dwarven Defender gives any opponents it might face plenty of opportunities).

And no, everything doesn't require "favorable DM rulings" and "DM dumbing down enemies for the character"; that's what higher tier classes are good for and that's what PC Dwarven Defender fails spectacularly at. DM doesn't need to worry about what the party can or can't do; the party will handle itself and DM can make the world as the world makes sense, not a world that has to conform to the players' capabilities because they can't handle it otherwise.


He wants to play a Tank, so have him take the only Tanking Feat in the game: Goad. By sacrificing a movement action (which he won't be using anyway) he can taunt an opponent into only attacking him.

This solves the problem of enemies just walking around him. And, while it's not a perfect solution (he'll have to put some ability points in charisma, and opponents with high will saves might not be effected) it's one of the few ways to effectively tank in D&D.

You need your move actions to full attack. Also, Goad is very limited in what it works against and Dwarves have Charisma-penalty. Instead, consider Crusader from Tome of Battle; Devoted Spirit and White Raven are full of means to make it unwise to focus anyone but the frontliner (and ways to stop enemies from slipping past in the first place).

[Crow]

Dwarven defender works great if you fight where dwarves are likely to be fighting, like tunnels and crap.

Unfortunately, adventures have a little more variation than that. Makes a great NPC prestige class though.

[Eldariel]

Dwarven defender works great if you fight where dwarves are likely to be fighting, like tunnels and crap.

Unfortunately, adventures have a little more variation than that. Makes a great NPC prestige class though.

I wouldn't say "great"; the prerequisites are still idiotic, Defensive Stance being limited on /day doesn't really make sense and the class can be entered so late that very few NPCs can have a meaningful number of levels in it (it's level 8 entry). It certainly works better for NPCs than PCs though.

[FMArthur]

Dwarven defender works great if you fight where dwarves are likely to be fighting, like tunnels and crap.

Unfortunately, adventures have a little more variation than that. Makes a great NPC prestige class though.

...except that it doesn't really give you much even for meeting its conditions. A Dwarven Defender is simply not the powerful bulwark of corridor-blockage that it was designed to be. You couldn't even guard a narrow pass against low-level threats without being 10th level (ECL 17). Its awfulness compared to other options may lead you to believe that it is just overly specialized and focuses its power in a situational area, but sadly this is just not the case: it has no power at all.

[Cieyrin]

Well, to be fair to the Dwarven Defender, when Races of Stone rolled out it added a LOT of nifty goodies that made Dwarves much more "stand still" capable.

I think, to me, the first problem with it is Prerequisites. I'll probably cut the BAB to +5, and swap the feats a bit (As Rei Jin mentioned; however, drop Improved Toughness in favor of Stone Power).

The next step is, naturally, Defensive stance. I'll alter it so that it isn't a "/day" ability, and is instead a "if you move no further than 5 ft this round, you gain the benefits."

Then, of course, a Stone Dragon/Iron Heart themed maneuver progression resembling the progression of the Eternal Blade.

Make the DR show up earlier (level 2-ish?) scale faster (every 4 levels, so 2/6/10) and be bigger ((4/8/12)/- sound right?). Maybe some sort of fast healing, though I'm not sold on it.

Thoughts?

I don't think we need to inject it with ToB to make it viable. Deepstone Sentinal already does that and, honestly, Stone Dragon isn't known for its stances. Maybe if you use Endarire's Stone Dragon redux but that's something else entirely.

I think if you want to change the move restriction to move no more than half speed. Mobile Fortress is a stupid ability, as 5' steps are hardly 'mobile'. Also grab some stuff from the Tattooed Monk's Mountain tattoo, specifically the immunity to Bull Rush and Trips, which Defensive Stance should have had from the get-go. Also change the resistance bonus to an unnamed bonus, b/c it's stupid that it shouldn't stack with a Cloak or Vest on a defensive character.

Also having the Stance advance like rage, at least to Greater for +6/+3 somewhere in the mid to late in the class, would be excellent. That epic feat should have come down with Mobile Fortress in the transition, it really should have.

Also, screw spiked chains, Dwarven Defenders got another gods-send from Races of Stone: Dwarven War Pike. Thanks to Complete Warrior, you just switch your racial familiarity from the Urgrosh to the War Pike and save yourself the feat. Pick up Short Haft and you got a pretty good Dwarven tank without looking silly with a poorly designed spike festooned length of steel links.

Hope that helps a bit. :smallsmile:

[NineThePuma]

Maybe if you use Endarire's Stone Dragon redux but that's something else entirely.

There are people who don't? :smalleek:


What epic feat are you referring to?

[Draz74]

As far as DMG PrCs go, the DD isn't nearly the worst one. Sure, it's bad, but not terribad. Ok, aside from the feat requirements, maybe.

Only because it's got the Duelist to compete with. Even in a Core Melee environment, it's far worse than a straight Barbarian.

[NineThePuma]

I thought Duelist was a joke. I have since fixed it by having it eat the Swashbuckler completely, and giving it (legasp) precision damage that multiplies on a crit.

[Cieyrin]

What epic feat are you referring to?

Bulwark of Defense (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/epic/feats.htm#bulwarkOfDefense). Why it didn't make the leap like Mighty Rage (which I don't see that often, honestly, except for Barbarians with Furious weapons...), I have no idea. Apparently downgrading one epic feat per class was enough for WotC. *rolls eyes*

[NineThePuma]

Oooh... Yeah, I'll be lowering that a chunk.

[ericgrau]

The main drawback is a class feature that you don't need to use and may be cancelled at any time as a free action.

The stats it gives are pretty good - HD, saves, BAB, AC - and if you use a reach weapon and/or fight in close quarters then the ability becomes uber. Some minor AC optimization and he can't be hit while still dishing out melee's normal boatload of damage. Position squishies behind him in the hallway so he's the only choice to engage. Just don't use that ability outside of that situation and the PrC becomes good most of the time, and epic a small portion of the time. Close quarters such as dungeons are surprisingly common campaign settings in this game, go figure.

[Rei_Jin]

Well, to be fair to the Dwarven Defender, when Races of Stone rolled out it added a LOT of nifty goodies that made Dwarves much more "stand still" capable.

I think, to me, the first problem with it is Prerequisites. I'll probably cut the BAB to +5, and swap the feats a bit (As Rei Jin mentioned; however, drop Improved Toughness in favor of Stone Power).

The next step is, naturally, Defensive stance. I'll alter it so that it isn't a "/day" ability, and is instead a "if you move no further than 5 ft this round, you gain the benefits."

Then, of course, a Stone Dragon/Iron Heart themed maneuver progression resembling the progression of the Eternal Blade.

Make the DR show up earlier (level 2-ish?) scale faster (every 4 levels, so 2/6/10) and be bigger ((4/8/12)/- sound right?). Maybe some sort of fast healing, though I'm not sold on it.

Thoughts?

Hum.... the change to Defensive Stance is good, maybe make it specifically a Stone Dragon stance so that you don't have a cross-over of stances.

Perhaps for the DR, have it gained at 1st level and every three levels thereafter (4,7,10) and have it grant 2/-, then increase by 2 points every 3 levels, to a max of 8/- at level 10. This DR is doubled when in Defensive Stance, to a maximum of 16/-. That way, your Defensive Stance is useful on top of the other bonuses it gives you, and it makes your class features work together more.

[Zonugal]

Well, to be fair to the Dwarven Defender, when Races of Stone rolled out it added a LOT of nifty goodies that made Dwarves much more "stand still" capable.

I think, to me, the first problem with it is Prerequisites. I'll probably cut the BAB to +5, and swap the feats a bit (As Rei Jin mentioned; however, drop Improved Toughness in favor of Stone Power).

The next step is, naturally, Defensive stance. I'll alter it so that it isn't a "/day" ability, and is instead a "if you move no further than 5 ft this round, you gain the benefits."

Then, of course, a Stone Dragon/Iron Heart themed maneuver progression resembling the progression of the Eternal Blade.

Make the DR show up earlier (level 2-ish?) scale faster (every 4 levels, so 2/6/10) and be bigger ((4/8/12)/- sound right?). Maybe some sort of fast healing, though I'm not sold on it.

Thoughts?

But... But we already have the Deepstone Sentinel, why don't we just use that prc?

[Rei_Jin]

That's like saying "we have the swordsage, why would you play a monk?"

Sometimes, people just want to do something because they like it, not because they think it's the best mechanical option.

[TroubleBrewing]

That's like saying "we have guns, why would you throw rocks?"

Sometimes, people just want to do something because they like it, not because they think it's the best mechanical option.

The above makes about as much sense as the original version.

[Rei_Jin]

Grey, try to be a bit more civil please. Someone asked a question, I gave a response that is based in reality and in the environment of a game, not in a theoretical optimization environment.

Yes, Swordsage is mechanically superior to the Monk class. I'm not saying that it's not. I'm saying that some people just like the Monk, and there is nothing wrong with that.

[TroubleBrewing]

Yes, Swordsage is mechanically superior to the Monk class. I'm not saying that it's not. I'm saying that some people just like the Monk, and there is nothing wrong with that.

And I disagree. It's not just that it's mechanically inferior; it doesn't even feel like what it's meant to model (effective martial artist-type character).

The same goes for Samurai, Ninja, and especially for the OP's question. How does one "defend" when the enemies laugh at you and run past you? The class is equivalent to the Maginot Line. Expensive, full of metal, and utterly ineffective at doing what it was supposed to be doing: Defending.

The Deepstone Sentinel does this better in every way. I'm with Zonugal here, and you're free to disagree. Why play something ineffective when there is an identical-in-every-way version that doesn't suck horribly?

[Zonugal]

That's like saying "we have the swordsage, why would you play a monk?"

Sometimes, people just want to do something because they like it, not because they think it's the best mechanical option.

Not really. It would be more akin to re-building the monk to look like the swordsage (which begs the question why not just go with the swordsage, which isn't a homebrewed creation?)

Trying to re-construct the dwarven defender into a tome of battle prestige class focused on dwarves being as steady & enduring as a mountain seems rather odd when there is a tome of battle prestige class already built which focuses on dwarves being as steady & enduring as a mountain.

[Taelas]

Have the dwarf take his first level in Commoner along with the Delicious flaw, and the drawbacks disappear (except for the feat requirement). :smallamused: Just don't fight anything with Swallow Whole.

[TheCountAlucard]

which begs the questionNo, it doesn't. Really, it doesn't. You can look this up if you like (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Begging_the_question). It raises the question, but doesn't beg it.

[Cieyrin]

Why don't we have our ToB Defender focus more on Iron Heart over Stone Dragon, as it's already been pointed out quite a few times that Deepstone Sentinal already fills that role. Bloodstorm Blade, while nice for what it does, doesn't really exemplify Iron Heart since it doesn't advance maneuvers, so we have the perfect opportunity to fill that gap.

Have Defensive Stance as an Iron Heart stance that replaces an Iron Heart stance you're already in seems like the closest fit. I like having the stance increase DR. Perhaps back it up to 5 levels, so that there are two branches of dwarven defending, the Iron Heart and the Stone Dragon. With that, just focus on Iron Heart and I think it should work reasonably well. :smallsmile:

[Zonugal]

Why don't we have our ToB Defender focus more on Iron Heart over Stone Dragon, as it's already been pointed out quite a few times that Deepstone Sentinal already fills that role. Bloodstorm Blade, while nice for what it does, doesn't really exemplify Iron Heart since it doesn't advance maneuvers, so we have the perfect opportunity to fill that gap.

Have Defensive Stance as an Iron Heart stance that replaces an Iron Heart stance you're already in seems like the closest fit. I like having the stance increase DR. Perhaps back it up to 5 levels, so that there are two branches of dwarven defending, the Iron Heart and the Stone Dragon. With that, just focus on Iron Heart and I think it should work reasonably well. :smallsmile:

I think Iron Heart works pretty well as it includes a lot of terrific maneuvers focused on throwing off ill-effects, healing and in general creating a whirlwind around the character. You'll still have to address, be it in a limited manner, the problem concerning ranged combat though.


No, it doesn't. Really, it doesn't. You can look this up if you like (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Begging_the_question). It raises the question, but doesn't beg it.

Pshh.. Fallacies... Pshh.. Aristotle... Bah!

[TheCountAlucard]

Pshh.. Fallacies... Pshh.. Aristotle... Bah!Speaking of which, Lewis Lovhaug has been cruising for a talking-to for quite a while now. :smallsigh:

[NineThePuma]

You guys have misunderstood Defensive Stance.

It is NOT a stance in the ToB sense. It is instead an ability that activates whenever you stop moving for a round.


Hum.... the change to Defensive Stance is good, maybe make it specifically a Stone Dragon stance so that you don't have a cross-over of stances.

Perhaps for the DR, have it gained at 1st level and every three levels thereafter (4,7,10) and have it grant 2/-, then increase by 2 points every 3 levels, to a max of 8/- at level 10. This DR is doubled when in Defensive Stance, to a maximum of 16/-. That way, your Defensive Stance is useful on top of the other bonuses it gives you, and it makes your class features work together more.Oooh, DR that enhances... Good catch. Should I make it stack?


But... But we already have the Deepstone Sentinel, why don't we just use that prc?Cause it's 5 levels, the mechanics and imagery are stupid to me, and it doesn't mesh well with the revised Stone Dragon.


The above makes about as much sense as the original version.Because when I throw rocks, more than one person dies. (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=126346)


And I disagree. It's not just that it's mechanically inferior; it doesn't even feel like what it's meant to model (effective martial artist-type character).

The same goes for Samurai, Ninja, and especially for the OP's question. How does one "defend" when the enemies laugh at you and run past you? The class is equivalent to the Maginot Line. Expensive, full of metal, and utterly ineffective at doing what it was supposed to be doing: Defending.

The Deepstone Sentinel does this better in every way. I'm with Zonugal here, and you're free to disagree. Why play something ineffective when there is an identical-in-every-way version that doesn't suck horribly?Samurai. (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=143018) Ninja. (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=127673) and because the mechanics of the Deepstone Sentinel feel stupid to me.

[Rei_Jin]

Oooh, DR that enhances... Good catch. Should I make it stack?

Well... my thoughts are that the way you would word it, is that the Dwarven Defender gains 2/- DR at level 1 and every 3 levels thereafter, it increases by 2. When a Defender enters his Defensive Stance, his DR from this class feature is doubled.

DR 16/- is a big feature (in the realm of uberchargers it is nothing, but compared to the 6/- it had, it's massive) and so making it work this way, you're rewarding the character for using his abilities together.

Synergy, that's the key.

[TroubleBrewing]

@Nine: I appreciate the links, and it's always nice to see the fixes, but it's not really relevant to the discussion.

I've gotten four links to Monk fixes today alone. Most of them pretty good, too.

[NineThePuma]

My point is that you say "why be X when Y is better?" and my response is "because I made X awesome enough to hold up with Y."

[TroubleBrewing]

Then you're not comparing X to Y anymore. You're comparing X to Z. :smallamused:

[Philistine]

My point is that you say "why be X when Y is better?" and my response is "because I made X awesome enough to hold up with Y."

Of course, homebrew is the category of material most likely to be banned in play. So for the great majority of games, it probably won't matter.

[NineThePuma]

Technically I'm comparing Z to Y and saying Z = Y. X doesn't make it into my games at all, honestly. T.G. gets to replace my stuff almost at will, and I tend to patch problems I think are arising before they arise.

Hence, when my Dwarven Tank decides that he wants to go DD, I suddenly have to scramble to fill in holes on why it sucks. :smallwink:

Edit: Yeah, but it's my game, so the point does, as a matter of fact, matter. If only in this specific instance.

[TroubleBrewing]

Technically I'm comparing Z to Y and saying Z = Y. X doesn't make it into my games at all, honestly. T.G. gets to replace my stuff almost at will, and I tend to patch problems I think are arising before they arise.

Rather than use the established method of substituting good classes for bad ones with the same flavor, you make fixes to the bad classes?

If that's the result you're looking for, power to you. I find most homebrew to be unnecessary amounts of work, simply because chances are, the class you're looking for is already there. Shneeky had a thread about this a little while back.



Edit: Yeah, but it's my game, so the point does, as a matter of fact, matter. If only in this specific instance.

In this instance, yeah. And you're right in this instance. But in the context of 3.5 as a whole... Not so much. Still. The monk fix was good.

[NineThePuma]

Still. The monk fix was good.

T.G. Oskar is a god among homebrewers, IMO.


As to Shneeky's thread, I think you're referring to his "we can build it" and that's actually less of a "build me something good" and more of a "Give me some sort of flavor concept and I'll build you something that fits it."

[TroubleBrewing]

As to Shneeky's thread, I think you're referring to his "we can build it" and that's actually less of a "build me something good" and more of a "Give me some sort of flavor concept and I'll build you something that fits it."

That was half of my point. If it's specific flavor that you're looking for, go digging and you'll find it.

The second half of my point was that given an initial starting point, optimization can occur within the bounds set by the flavor.

Wow, this has gotten... What is the opposite of "off topic"? This IS the topic of the OP, but at its very root.

[NineThePuma]

Eh.

I consider the thread 'complete' because I found what I wanted in it.

And again, Deepstone Sentinel is weird to me, so I don't use or allow it. x3

[Cerlis]

*comments made in quote in italics and bold for ease of reply*


Said "Advantage" is an inferior Rage variant for Lawful characters. In a Core-only environment, you have 3 choices to go to before DD if you want Strength boosters (Barbarian, Druid, and Polymorph).

not sure the point of this. Its only inferior if you take the context of the ability being used in a way its not intended. its only inferior to rage cus you cant move, and you arent intended to move. So getting on an ability for being something its not is just weird. if its the strength thing, you dont need a super high strength score to be effective. again its basically a fighter who if forced to stay in one spot and defend, actually gains an advantage.



What? If the DD ever has to use a Move action more than twice during an encounter, he cannot use his DS during that encounter without it ending prematurely. All an opponent has to do to screw him over is use the Withdraw action or take an AoO and the DD is going to sit there until his stance ends.

It also penalizes you for using it until level 14. Actually, it penalizes you every time you use it because you can't move more than 5ft/round when using it.

thats why you dont use it in a mobile fight. But if a horde of goblins charge you or a big scary monster decides to go mono e mono with you use it. Knowing when to use certian abilities is the most basic form of tactics in DnD. Again, Defensive STance is just an optional ability you can use when the situation is right.



The only situations where it is advantageous are in tight, narrow corridors. This situation only occurs in hallways, where a Web spell is superior and where any other melee class can hold the line just as well (since the bonuses provided by DS are incredibly minor).

Tight narrow corridors are the halmark of DUNGEONS and dragons. The Web spell comment reminds me of all the "Why be anything else when you can be a wizard" talk. And if any other melee class can hold the line then a dwarven defender is just as good at those, but in the situation in which you have to hold the line he gains an advantage. SO he's doing exactly as inteded, being a normal melee class with defensive advantages.



That ability is the advertised draw of the class. The Devs actually expected people to want to use it!
and they will use it when it makes sense too. My dwarven defender wouldnt use defensive stance in a high mobility fight anymore than a wizard would cast fireball on a golem.


How many monsters with an Int score above 13 are tactically inclined to attack the guy in full plate over the guy who isn't wearing armor?

First, most monsters arent that smart. Most monsters are magical beasts, abberations or animals that arent that smart. and indeed any smart creatures are usually allied with melee mooks who they send to distract the melee people while they take care of the casters. which falls exactly into what a dwarven defender whats. But either way, a dwarven defender is going to face more barberous animals and monsters who will attack almost mindlessly until someone else pisses them off enough than a Ranger is going to face his favored enemy, or a paladin is going to face undead.



Take a look through the premade modules. How many encounters take place in a narrow hallway where the DD's stance is going to work reliably? I can name one (Voyage of the Golden Dragon) and even that one only has a few such encounters.

Temple of the Yuan-ti is the only one iv'e played and it had plenty of small rooms and tight hallways. And i cant speak for the entire dnd fanbase like you are, but i can say the impression i get is most campaigns end up with some information gathering and traveling that leads to enclosed spaces in a dungeon or building.


That's just it, they don't have to Skirmish! All they need to do is have a melee reach of 15ft and a 5ft step every round and the DD cannot get into melee once the stance goes up. The hallway scenario? It renders the DD worthless if the enemy decides to use the Withdraw action to fall back into a more open area, wasting the DD's stance.

"oh NO! he's using a defensive stance, we better use a full round action to use the withdraw action and go behind the corner and ready an action to attack the PCs when they move into your line of sight on their initiative.". And how often are they going to face monsters that big that are smart enough to fight tactifully. and further as i already said, if its a fight in which DS isnt effective, then they dont use it and fight like a fighter with a defensive pinch



Once again, the Devs expected players who were taking levels in the class to actually use the stance. The PrC offers nothing that you can't get elsewhere. The good Will saves? You could have spent your prerequisite feats on feats that improve your Will save instead. The DR? 3 points is largely irrelevant at the levels you get it. The d12 HD? Knight, Warblade, and Barbarian all have that. The Full BAB? Straight Fighter provides it.

Fact: Stone Dragon and it's PrC (Deepstone Sentinel) are mechanically superior to the Dwarven Defender PrC.


yes, they can use the stance and they will, when it makes sense too. It doesnt make sense for a barbarian with his medium armor to use his rage and charge into a large group of enemies with high attack power and damage ability. You can mindlessly use it but the general premise of per day abilities is use em in the right situations. And yes the PrC is weak, its in the freaking DMG for Raistlin's sake! In a situation in which you are only using core the Knight and Warblade dont exist the DR is awesome (anyone knows that any damage reduction is good, expessially if your a defender) and one of the talks against melee classes like fighter is the low will save makes them easily enchantable, so dont knock the will save. in a place where you arent limited to core you can actually get use all those options available to help you. FOr instance that dodge? why not gain that dodge feat from ToB so in fights where you have to move you actually gain an advantage. i know of at least one other dodge replacement feat as well.
heck you could take a dip in warblade to gain a stance and maneuver or two and suddenly become far superior to a barbarian or fighter. Further, yes Deep stone Sentinel is better, cus it was made more recently , in the book that "fixed" melee. Woopdedo. But just because its worse by comparison, doesnt mean the Dwarven defender isnt working as intended.

Oh, and for those rare occasions where you can actually use the stance and have it be relevant? Getting Bull Rushed will end it and screw you out of a daily use, and that tactic is fairly common.

luckily you are a dwarf with stability and a strength based class with high base attack bonus. if they succeed they succeed, but it should only happen on BBEG of monsters you really shouldnt use your stance on anyways.,

[Psyren]

*comments made in quote in italics and bold for ease of reply*

This actually makes you harder to reply to, because everything in the quote box - including your own replies to Big Fau - must be manually copy-pasted into the next post.

@ your point below:


thats why you dont use it in a mobile fight. But if a horde of goblins charge you or a big scary monster decides to go mono e mono with you use it. Knowing when to use certian abilities is the most basic form of tactics in DnD. Again, Defensive STance is just an optional ability you can use when the situation is right.

If you're not using it, why are you a Dwarven Defender? Better to be something with more utility.

It's not that the PrC gives you multiple tools and you have to know which one to use; it gives you one tool, which may not apply to your situation at all, and in return you burn three feats on chaff while also giving up the benefits of your base class, plus the opportunity cost of better PrCs.

Compare DS to rage, which grants similar benefits, but can be used in stationary or mobile fights with equal effectiveness.

[Zale]

First, most monsters arent that smart. Most monsters are magical beasts, abberations or animals that arent that smart. and indeed any smart creatures are usually allied with melee mooks who they send to distract the melee people while they take care of the casters. which falls exactly into what a dwarven defender whats. But either way, a dwarven defender is going to face more barberous animals and monsters who will attack almost mindlessly until someone else pisses them off enough than a Ranger is going to face his favored enemy, or a paladin is going to face undead.


Erm.. There are plenty of aberrations that are very smart. :smallconfused:

[TroubleBrewing]

[/B]
Erm.. There are plenty of aberrations that are very smart. :smallconfused:

Ditto for outsiders. And humanoids. And certain constructs. And dragons. Even some plants.

Basically, mindless undead, vermin, animals, and most constructs will fall for the schtick of the DD.

Prrreeeettty narrow spectrum. Most critters will just laugh and avoid him.

[Taelas]

[/B]

Erm.. There are plenty of aberrations that are very smart. :smallconfused:

Mind flayers and Beholders are the classic aberrations, and they are plenty smart.

[Eldariel]

Ditto for outsiders. And humanoids. And certain constructs. And dragons. Even some plants.

Basically, mindless undead, vermin, animals, and most constructs will fall for the schtick of the DD.

Prrreeeettty narrow spectrum. Most critters will just laugh and avoid him.

Anything more than 1 category larger than the Defender is going to attack him from outside his Reach anyways making his Defensive Stance look really dumb (though if they're dumb enough to attack him he's still doing his job of taking hits so nobody else has to). And for obvious reasons it's not very useful against Swarms. And some Mindless Undead are Incorporeal against which DD is very unlike to have meaningful AC even in Defensive Stance (heavily armored, shield-wielding character with low Dex needs more than +4 Dodge-bonus to get past the "all by 1 hits" on Touch AC). And of course, if the enemy attacks with spell-likes or supernatural abilities instead of AC-targeting attacks, DD's abilities are useless (though they at least have a good Will-save)

Basically, if DD didn't have any feat prerequisites to enter it'd be fairly good in a Coreish environment simply because you'd get a little for nothing. But with 3 ****ty feats, DD is terrible; you trade 3 feats for Uncanny Dodge, Improved Uncanny Dodge, Damage Reduction and Trap Sense. Basically, Barbarian does it better; it gets all of those without trading in a single feat. Of course, given how terrible Core-classes are in general when it comes to actually giving stuff, DD measures up reasonably to non-casters simply on the back of them not getting meaningful class features on the levels you trade for DD.

This is especially true for Fighter, but anyone who claims there are more than 12 levels in Core Fighter is lying to you (and those 12 levels are fairly terrible as well) so yeah, Fighter -> DD is better than NPC Warrior (which is basically what Fighter 13-20 is, well, with a higher HD) but that's not saying much. That isn't "good", that's "awful". Hell, even Core has a better option: Dragon Disciple (and it's another awful one). Sure, it loses some BAB but it gains strength increases to compensate and performs just fine. And it gains similar AC increases and HD while gaining superior class features. Barbarian X/Fighter 2/Sorc 2/Dragon Disciple 4-9 eclipses basically all Dwarven Defender-based builds in Core.


Quick Analysis of Dwarven Defender.

Costs
- 3 feats
- 10 Levels (on high level)

Gains (Red = Irrelevant, Green = Minor but useful, Blue = Major class feature)
- Uncanny Dodge
- Improved Uncanny Dodge
- Trap Sense
- Damage Reduction
- AC Bonus
- Defensive Stance

Defensive Stance and AC bonus are the big class features. Everything else is incidental. Now, far as gaining those two class features, 3 feats is a fair price; it's hard enough to find 3 feats in Core that grant you +4 Dodge-bonus to AC, let alone anything more than that. Add to that 10 levels though and it gets iffy; 10 levels in Barbarian has no entry requirement feats and would get you Rage, same random trash and Fast Movement instead. 10 levels in Dragon Disciple would get you 3 less BAB, but again no feat costs, and way, way more utility. 10 levels in any spellcaster class would make you godlike by comparison (Contact Other Plane, Teleport, Polymorph, Righteous Might, whatever; casters get good stuff by 5th level).

Basically, 10 levels + 3 feats is obviously worth less than 4 Dodge-bonus to AC. Now, the question becomes is Defensive Stance enough to make up for the difference. And the big issue is, that ability is so situational that it's practically only useful against creatures that don't really pose a threat to you anyways (mindless creatures are really vulnerable to Illusions, flight, and tactical thinking in general; there's a reason Human is the dominant macro-level species on Earth currently).

Mind, if a campaign is focused in tunnels it could be useful more often especially if the Dwarf were Large or Huge but those things really don't go well hand-in-hand; generally tunnels contain shallow enough areas that Large creatures have trouble fitting through and have to squeeze so you'd basically need to come up with a size increase and burrow speed.

[Ksheep]

Here's my take on the matter: DD works great in choke points. Everywhere else, not so much. However, he's perfectly useful in a dungeon crawl, where you have lots of corridors. Even if the encounters DON'T take place in them, there's a very simple tactic to make him effective.

1. Open door
2. See monsters
3. Defensive stance in doorway
4. Have ranged and magic attack around you.

Now, you are offering partial/full cover to the squishies, and the enemies HAVE to go through you to get to them... unless they can teleport or burrow.

The only downside is the uses/day bit of Defensive stance. If that was fixed, it would probably be fairly effective in such encounters. Also, feat choice could be better.

[FMArthur]

I'm sorry to say that that is just not the case. DD's conditions for getting his abilities get all the attention because they suck extra bad in most situations, but in absolutely ideal circumstances for making use of DD features and showcasing its strengths, they are nothing short of embarrassing.

Monsters might walk past you if you're not threatening, but if you can force them to attack you, you have no amazing talent for surviving it. +4 AC and DR 6/- mean nothing to CR-appropriate monsters by the time that comes online - even pure melee brutes. A Dwarven Defender will get utterly devoured in standstill melee combat, figuratively (and sometimes literally) speaking.

Maybe you could be door plug against a swarm of minimal-levelled kobolds at your ECL 17, but only if they wield certain weak weapons.

[Big Fau]

Now, you are offering partial/full cover to the squishies, and the enemies HAVE to go through you to get to them... unless they can teleport or burrow.

The only downside is the uses/day bit of Defensive stance. If that was fixed, it would probably be fairly effective in such encounters. Also, feat choice could be better.

You also provide cover to the enemies from your ranged allies.

[TroubleBrewing]

You also provide cover to the enemies from your ranged allies.

Yeah, but you'd provide the same cover if you were dead, or filled with sand.

Saying "I'm as useful as a corpse or a sack of sand!" doesn't seem like a selling point to me.

[OracleofWuffing]

Saying "I'm as useful as a corpse or a sack of sand!" doesn't seem like a selling point to me.
Well, you can animate corpses, and there is a Sand Shaper prestige class... :smalltongue:

[TroubleBrewing]

Well, you can animate corpses, and there is a Sand Shaper prestige class... :smalltongue:

Could it just be possible that we've found a prestige class that is LESS than useless?

[Telonius]

My take on Dwarven Defender: it's a decent upgrade for a Fighter, in a core only game.

The really key thing: ignore the "Defensive Stance" ability, and compare the rest to what additional Fighter levels would give you.

Trap Sense. DR 6/-. Improved Uncanny Dodge. +4 Dodge bonus to AC. A Will save that will be 4 higher than the Fighter's. Average +10 HP over the Fighter. Tower Shield proficiency. (Class doesn't include the usual "but not tower shields" disclaimer when it says shield proficiency).

Can you figure out five Core Fighter feats (that the Fighter will not have already taken by level 10) that can get you something better than that collection of abilities?

[TroubleBrewing]

My take on Dwarven Defender: it's a decent upgrade for a Fighter, in a core only game.

The really key thing: ignore the "Defensive Stance" ability, and compare the rest to what additional Fighter levels would give you.

Trap Sense. DR 6/-. Improved Uncanny Dodge. +4 Dodge bonus to AC. A Will save that will be 4 higher than the Fighter's. Average +10 HP over the Fighter.

Can you figure out five Core Fighter feats (that the Fighter will not have already taken by level 10) that can get you something better than that collection of abilities?

Barbarian levels? :smallconfused: Check Eldariels post for a cost-benefit analysis of the DD. I think you're missing some stuff.

[Telonius]

Barbarian levels? :smallconfused: Check Eldariels post for a cost-benefit analysis of the DD. I think you're missing some stuff.

EDIT Nevermind

EDIT again:
The Barbarian route isn't for everybody. Assuming you start off with a Lawful character, it might not even be possible, depending on the DM.

[Big Fau]

Could it just be possible that we've found a prestige class that is LESS than useless?

Sand Shaper is actually very good as a 1 level dip for a Sorcerer. And Shapesand is stupidly broken if used properly.

[TroubleBrewing]

Sand Shaper is actually very good as a 1 level dip for a Sorcerer. And Shapesand is stupidly broken if used properly.

I was actually referring to the Dwarven Defender, as apparently even the bag of sand and the corpse have additional utility. :smalltongue:

[Eldariel]

The Barbarian route isn't for everybody. Assuming you start off with a Lawful character, it might not even be possible, depending on the DM.

Unfortunately. That said, paying 3 feats and 10 levels for couple of Barbarian's class features just strikes me as dumb. Then again, we're talking about playing a barely-Tier 5 character in a game that goes above level 10, so I guess we're not worried about doing something dumb. But yeah, DD is better than Fighter past level 12 (probably even before then) but that's really 'cause Fighter gets absolutely jack **** on those levels.

Core has like ~9-10 feats worth taking and Fighter will have all of them like level 9 (well, obviously Fighter's gonna pick up Weapon Spec, Greater and Greater Spec 'cause those are his "class features"). So yeah, DD beats the absolute nothing you get as Fighter 13+ when on a shell with excess feats (high-level Fighter) but ehh...how much is that really saying?

For the record, the feats I'd consider worth taking in Core for martial types:
(- Leadership) [if allowed, obviously]
- Power Attack
- Combat Expertise -> Improved Trip
- Combat Reflexes
- Mounted Combat -> Ride-By Attack -> Spirited Charge
- Improved Initiative
- Exotic Weapon Proficiency: Spiked Chain
(- Weapon Focus) [the first come the last; it's the 9th/10th feat]
(- Rapid Shot) [can dip 2 levels of Ranger in basically any build for it; all you need for optimal Core archery - basically never worth going PBS -> Rapid tho]

Improved Grapple and Stunning Fist have some niché uses (Stunning Fist mostly for Druids, Improved Grapple can be decent on Barbarians in some niché scenarios) but unfortunately the easiest way to get them requires losing BAB.

[sonofzeal]

I like the Dwarven Defender and I'm not afraid to admit it. From the point of view of a Dwarf Fighter it's a reasonably attractive option, especially in a Core-Only or an otherwise book-limited campaign. It's certainly not great, but I think it's entirely reasonable and rather underrated.

First off, the static bonuses are nice even when you're not in stance. Good Will is a lifesaver on a Fighter, or even better - a failed Will save vs Dominate can be a TPK scenario, and beatsticks are usually the prime target. Uncanny Dodge and DR are always nice, and there's few enough sources of either for the Fighter. And a static AC boost with d12 HD is a flat-out upgrade on a Fighter who's run out of important feats, which is a pretty common occurrence. None of this is huge, but does mean that a Fighter10/DD10 is potentially superior to a Fighter20 even without ever using Defensive Stance.

Second, Defensive Stance is not a liability. Period. No matter how much people like to joke as if it was, the simple fact is you don't have to use it unless it's advantageous in that situation. Let me repeat that: you don't have to use it unless it's advantageous in that situation. And you're not trapped in it either as the penalty for breaking it is nominal. Barbarians have to put up with fatigue (-2 str and dex, can't run or charge), or get pushed all the way to Exhaustion if already fatigued (-6 str and dex, half move speed). Dwarven Defenders only get a -2 non-stacking penalty to strength. So if the situation changes, they can break stance easily as a free action.

Third, Defensive Stance is better than many people claim. The thing is, most people seem to assume a DD is going sword-and-board, while the rules say nothing about enforcing or even encouraging that. A reach weapon is far superior; Guisarme and Armor Spikes are a good combo here. Getting your trip attacks, AoO's on advancing enemies, and covering a wider swathe of the battlefield all makes Stance more attractive. And the untyped boost to Strength from Stance is excellent for a tripper, and entirely makes up for the potential penalty for breaking stance if you had to move earlier in the fight. Finally, while people dig on AC being useless at high levels, that's never been the case in any campaign I've been in, and it's doubly useful if you're fighting NPCs rather than Monsters. And the DD's boosted AC increases their Touch AC too, which is invaluable against several of the nastier no-save-just-lose effects out there. Split Ray Enervation might not be the sure bet you think it is.

The only real thing that keeps the DD down in my books is the horrendous entry feats. There's options outside of Core to pick up replacements, or get them on the cheap, but it's still a who's-who of terrible Core feats. All I can say is that a Core-only or Book-limited Fighter will often end up resorting to these feats anyway. And they do open you up to some other decent options too.

[Eldariel]

All I can say is that a Core-only or Book-limited Fighter will often end up resorting to these feats anyway. And they do open you up to some other decent options too.

But really, why would anyone ever play a high level Core straight Fighter? I've had a friend who played a straight Core Dwarven Defender and as soon as he realized he's stopped accumulating class features and that his offense caps out at Greater Weapon Specialization, he kinda got depressed with both the classes while wistfully looking at casters gaining new spells. Yes, this was our first 3.5 campaign, and no, we didn't know better. Let's just say the experience sucked (I was playing Elf Fighter/Wizard with unfortunate emphasis on Fighter) and provoked me to learn the system.

Just the fact that Core Fighter doesn't have class features after level 12 should be a huge, huge warning sign to even the newest player in the game to just not do it. And yeah, the Will-save is an absolute lifesaver; this is why I like Barbarian/Sorc/Dragon Disciple, 'cause you actually get a Will-save competitive with non-Wis focused spellcasters (Sorc 2/Disciple 4 = +7 Will-save, which combined with the potential +3 Morale from Greater Rage and your normal Resistance-bonuses and stats and off-progression from your other classes leaves you with 11+Rage+Items&Stats which is almost the same as someone with a good progression). Can't understate that.

My only beef with the Defender is that it just doesn't really get enough without additional multiclassing, and that it comes so late you'll have plenty of chance to get mindraped a hundred times before then already. Barbarian at least has Rage to throw some resistance even on the low levels. Fighter gets...Iron Will as a normal feat?

[sonofzeal]

But really, why would anyone ever play a high level Core straight Fighter? I've had a friend who played a straight Core Dwarven Defender and as soon as he realized he's stopped accumulating class features and that his offense caps out at Greater Weapon Specialization, he kinda got depressed with both the classes while wistfully looking at casters gaining new spells. Yes, this was our first 3.5 campaign, and no, we didn't know better. Let's just say the experience sucked (I was playing Elf Fighter/Wizard with unfortunate emphasis on Fighter) and provoked me to learn the system.

Just the fact that Core Fighter doesn't have class features after level 12 should be a huge, huge warning sign to even the newest player in the game to just not do it. And yeah, the Will-save is an absolute lifesaver; this is why I like Barbarian/Sorc/Dragon Disciple, 'cause you actually get a Will-save competitive with non-Wis focused spellcasters (Sorc 2/Disciple 4 = +7 Will-save, which combined with the potential +3 Morale from Greater Rage and your normal Resistance-bonuses and stats and off-progression from your other classes leaves you with 11+Rage+Items&Stats which is almost the same as someone with a good progression). Can't understate that.

My only beef with the Defender is that it just doesn't really get enough without additional multiclassing, and that it comes so late you'll have plenty of chance to get mindraped a hundred times before then already. Barbarian at least has Rage to throw some resistance even on the low levels. Fighter gets...Iron Will as a normal feat?
Most of what you mention here are critical flaws in the Fighter class, not DD. And I'm fully on board with Fighter-hate, especally in Core games.

I'm a little biased though. My second continuing character was a LE Dwarven Fighter using a Flail, and I found DD was a good option for me. I split it with Deepwarden and alternated between the two, and that seemed to work pretty well for me. I never felt weak compared to the rest of the party, and I ended up being the official party trapsman after successfully disarming a Prismatic Wall with my face and living to tell about it. I didn't do the most damage, but I was useful throughout the campaign.

[Gnaeus]

Further, unless you are fighing people who know exactly what your entire party can do either by having faced yall alot or metagame knowledge. I know there are plenty of smart humanoid monsters who know to take out the spellcasters or the small halfing in leather armor and avoid the Only one who looks like he can survive in a fight (unless the wizard does something to defend himself and the rogue hides, thus making it the one on one fight we are saying isnt happening) but for most orc tribes, grey renders, ogres and the like its pretty much "Hey its a squishy, me smash squishy, me get close squishy" and then they fight and the party kills him.



First, most monsters arent that smart. Most monsters are magical beasts, abberations or animals that arent that smart. and indeed any smart creatures are usually allied with melee mooks who they send to distract the melee people while they take care of the casters. which falls exactly into what a dwarven defender whats. But either way, a dwarven defender is going to face more barberous animals and monsters who will attack almost mindlessly until someone else pisses them off enough than a Ranger is going to face his favored enemy, or a paladin is going to face undead.

Here is the problem. Most of those monsters you are talking about (animals, Orc Tribes, Ogres, stupid abberations) are clustered around the low levels. If DD was a base class, not a PRC, it would actually be pretty cool until about level 8-10. Unfortunately, you can't ENTER DD until level 8, by which time most of the monsters you are designed to fight (unintelligent animals, stupid humanoids) are already no longer threats. When you look at the CR 10-20 monsters, the only ones that the DD threatens are meleers without special movement abilities, and there are fewer of those at every level. There are only a handful of things that fall into that category at CR 15+, and most of those (like Big T), will just EAT the DD. The designers just didn't set up many monsters who are appropriate for DD to fight at the right level range.