Swashbuckler Build... halp

[jordan.k93]

I usually do not give a hell about trying to power build or anything really, I just go with what makes sense with my character and is generally fun.

However my Lvl 3 Swashbuckler is currently in a game where the DM is bloody hardcore, a group of 4 level 3/4 party members just went up against a group of Formians including a Foreman and we all nearly wiped.

It is REALLY fun being on a knife edge constantly, but I don't like my characters to die, SO I'm gonna ask for help to make an effective character.

Attributes (3d6, plus a +1 from a deck of many things) ((LUCKY AS HELL)):

STR: 10
DEX: 16
CON: 10
INT: 15
WIS: 8
CHA: 13

Feats:
Weapon Finesse (Free)
Two Weapon Fighting
Two Weapon Defense
Insightful Strike (Free)
Weapon Focus: Rapier

I considered splashing Rogue for Evasion/Sneak Attack, but my character is an honorable lower born noble, I can't justify it to myself in RP terms as to why he's an expert in stabbing people in the back, he's too right and proper for all that.

[Flickerdart]

Two-weapon fighting without a source of bonus damage. No wonder you're dying. My advice: ditch the TWF, and start taking Warblade levels from here on out to maximize the use of that Intelligence.

[Yorrin]

I considered splashing Rogue for Evasion/Sneak Attack, but my character is an honorable lower born noble, I can't justify it to myself in RP terms as to why he's an expert in stabbing people in the back, he's too right and proper for all that.

Splashing Rogue is indeed generally considered the best way to go with Swashbuckler, especially using the Daring Outlaw feat from Complete Scoundrel to make the two classes stack for various things. You'd prolly want 4 Rogue levels on that sort of build. Also, Sneak Attack doesn't mean backstabbing. It means hitting in a vulnerable spot. Just think of it as knowing anatomy well enough to go for the kidneys if they're exposed and such like that. There is nothing "underhanded" or "dishonorable" about it, despite the stereotype.

Another route you could go would be Factotum. About three levels sounds right for you. You'd get Int to physical skill checks, which would help with tumbling and the like, and a 1st level spell to use on Sleep or True Strike or whatever you thought you needed that day. If you like it enough you could take it all the way to 8th level for free standard actions.

Option 3, if ToB is allowed, would be to pick up something like Warblade. Your character sounds like he'd appreciate the Iron Heart and Diamond Mind schools of martial maneuvers, and it would move you up a tier or two in terms of effectiveness as well as giving you simply more things to do in combat.

[Nihilarian]

Definitely Daring Outlaw. 3 levels of rogue with the Penetrating Strike ACF (dungeonscape), then back into Swashbuckler.

If you don't want Daring Outlaw, Swashbuckler 3 is a good place to get out of the class. Either a Warblade or some sort of Gish would be perfect.

[nedz]

Improved Buckler Defence ( Complete Warrior p100 ) is a lot better than Two Weapon Defence — unfortunately they don't stack.

Can you not consider sneak damage to be precision strikes rather than anything under hand ? It would help.

[Vhaidara]

I considered splashing Rogue for Evasion/Sneak Attack, but my character is an honorable lower born noble, I can't justify it to myself in RP terms as to why he's an expert in stabbing people in the back, he's too right and proper for all that.

Rogue isn't necessarily backstabbing. It's taking advantage of a distracted opponent. So feinting, then striking from the other side. Or striking as they defend themselves from your ally (flanking). Ask your DM about swapping Knowledge(local) for Knowledge(nobility and royalty). Pick up Diplomacy, Sense Motive, Spot, Listen, Tumble, Knowledge(N&R), Balance, Jump, and maybe Bluff (5 ranks for synergy to Diplomacy). There, you have a nobleman rogue.

[Fouredged Sword]

Warblade will give you punch you will feel very suddenly. Swashbuckler 3 / warblade 17 is a fine build.

Rogue will be non-ToB, and kick in hard at level 6 with daring outlaw. I suggest craven as well, for added bang for your SA buck, but RP seems to be restricting your choices.

Another option is go for spellcasting. You won't hit 9ths with a gish build, but 8th level spells are still great!

Swashbuckler 3 / Fighter 1 / wizard 1 / Spellsword 1 / Abjurant Champion 5 / Eldrich knight X will do wonders for your surviveability. Remember to cast luminous armor to boos your AC. If you can't get light armor down to ASF 10%, you are not trying.

[kpumphre]

Exotic weapon spiked chain, weapon finess and insightful strike will work with it

[Ravens_cry]

You could go thug (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/classes/variantCharacterClasses.htm#fighterVariantThug) sneak attack fighter (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/classes/variantCharacterClasses.htm#fighter) if you want to keep your BAB up while getting sneak attack. Your skill points will be the same too, which is nice for simplicity sake.

[RedMage125]

Are you going for the Duelist Prestige Class? You could have a nearly unhittable character by the time you hit level 13 (or 14 if you mixed rogue in), if you fight defensively.

Swashbuckler 3/Rogue 4
Feats should include Dodge, Mobility, and Daring Outlaw.

Then go Duelist for all 10 levels before finishing up with a return to Swashbuckler (or Warblade, I never use ToB, and know precious little about that class). Duelist adds INT to AC, and at level 7 adds Duelist Class Level to AC when fighting defensively. You already get INT to damage as a Swashbuckler.

Deadly Defense is another necessary feat in this build, since your character will always be fighting defensively. The -4 to hit is worth it for the +10 to AC (and touch AC, since it's a dodge bonus). Since you'll have Uncanny Dodge, you don't lose DEX bonus to AC (and, by extension, INT bonus from Duelist). And Deadly Defense gives you an additional +1d6 damage when fighting defensively.

If you invest in a headband of INT, Gloves of DEX, Ring of Protection, Amulet of Natural Armor, Bracers of Armor, you AC will be astronomical.

It can be improved even further with a defensive dagger in your off-hand, with all the bonus going towards AC. Just never attack with it, or you lose a lot of bonuses from Duelist (which says you cannot carry a shield or ATTACK with an offhand weapon, does not say you may not CARRY an off-hand weapon).

A Swash6/Rogue4/Duelist10 can have an AC in the 70s or higher. Not counting the additional +8 to AC against AoOs or the +3 against your "dodge buddy" (Dodge bonuses stack with themselves, remember). Such a character has a 5d6 Sneak Attack, does 4d6 +STR+INT+magic modifier from weapon damage to anything that can be critically hit.

The most important thing to remember is that all of your AC is mobility-based, and anything that makes you lose your DEX modifier makes you lose most of the other ones, too. Which is why you have Uncanny Dodge, to keep from losing those bonuses when flat-footed, and I suggest a Ring of Freedom of Movement as soon as possible, so you can never be paralyzed or restrained, either.

[RedMage125]

If you can't get light armor down to ASF 10%, you are not trying.

If you've got the cash you can make a suit of Breastplate that a non-proficient character can wear with no panalties (including ASF). The penalty for wearing armor with which you are not proficient is to take the Armor Check Panalty to your attack rolls.

Mithril Breastplate, spend the extra 250 gp for Thistledown Lining (Races of the Wild, lowers ASF by 5%).

Make it magic (+1 minimum), then add the Twilight and Nimbleness special qualities (both worth effective +1 each).

Voila! You have armor that does not restrict speed, has a ACP of 0 and ASF of 0%. The full-caster wizard or sorcerer can wear without penalty.

Gross abuse of the rules, but technically legal.

[ArcaneGlyph]

Make sure to use the ACF from PHB2 for the two weapon defense for free.

[Flickerdart]

Are you going for the Duelist Prestige Class? You could have a nearly unhittable character by the time you hit level 13 (or 14 if you mixed rogue in), if you fight defensively.
At the cost of being able to do anything offensively. Repeat after me: Turtling is not an effective tactic. Turtling is not an effective tactic. Turtling is not an effective tactic.

[Eldest]

I considered splashing Rogue for Evasion/Sneak Attack, but my character is an honorable lower born noble, I can't justify it to myself in RP terms as to why he's an expert in stabbing people in the back, he's too right and proper for all that.

You're not backstabbing, you're striking them when they're vulnerable. If you are playing a knight-chivalry type that will give honorable combat and let somebody recover from a disabling effect, then don't go rogue for RP reasons. Otherwise, it's a way to fence well. Three levels of rogue with the aforementioned Daring Outlaw feat, and then look at either continuing swashbuckler or going to warblade.

[gorfnab]

These may be of use:
Swashbuckler Handbook (http://www.minmaxboards.com/index.php?topic=10768.0)
Rogue Handbook (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=8711233)

2 levels of Swordsage, the second level taken sometime after level 6 in a build, is great in a Swashbuckler build. Assassin Stance and the Shadowblade feat work nicely with Swashbuckler.

Here is a Swashbuckler build I came up with awhile ago.

Human or Strongheart Halfling
1. Cobra Strike (UA) Decisive Strike (PHBII) Monk - Carmendine Monk (CoV), Combat Expertise, B: Dodge
2. Cobra Strike (UA) Monk - B: Mobility
3. Swashbuckler - Deadly Defense (CS), B: Weapon Finesse
4. Swashbuckler
5. Swashbuckler
6. Thief Acrobat - Combat Reflexes
7. Thief Acrobat
8. Thief Acrobat
9. Thief Acrobat - Einhander (PHBII)
10. Thief Acrobat
11. Warblade
12. Warblade or Duelist - Ironheart Aura (ToB)
13. Duelist
14. Duelist
15. Duelist - Robilar's Gambit (PHBII)
16. Duelist
17. Duelist
18. Duelist - Stormgaurd Warrior (ToB)
19. Duelist
20. Duelist

The Monk and Swashbuckler levels (levels 1 through 5) can be switched around to taste. I personally like Swash 1/ Monk 2/ Swash 2. Switch Deadly Defense feat to 1st level and Carmendine Monk feat to 3rd level.

Levels 10 through 12 can be rearranged depending on your needs. The current setup gives you Improved Evasion and Uncanny Dodge at these levels. However if you don't need Improved Evasion take one less level of Thief Acrobat and move the first level of Warblade to level 10. If you don't need Uncanny Dodge don't take the 2nd level of Warblade and instead go into Duelist a level early. If you don't need either abilities take Warblade at level 10 and enter Duelist at level 11.

If flaws are available pick up EWP: Broadblade Shortsword (CAdv, pre-errata version if possible) or Versatile Unarmed Strike (PHBII) and Snap Kick (ToB) (may need to rearrange later feats). If traits are available pick up Cautious (UA).

Items:
Vest of Defense (MIC)
Bracers of Blocking (Dragon 322)
Broadblade Shortsword (CAdv) (if flaws are allowed and pre-errata version if possible) or Rapier with the Defensive Surge (MIC) enhancement.

[RedMage125]

At the cost of being able to do anything offensively. Repeat after me: Turtling is not an effective tactic. Turtling is not an effective tactic. Turtling is not an effective tactic.

A Swashbuckler6/Rogue4/Duelist10 has a BAB of 19/14/9/4, And should have a +5 weapon in main hand, a Dex modifier of +8 (after magic item considerations) AT A MINIMUM. The -4 to attack, which is traded in for +10 to AC and +1d6 to damage in my suggested build, should not be that significant a loss in the to-hit field. And this is a HIGHLY MOBILE tank, in fact, this character should be darting across the battlefield, intentionally provoking AoOs, since his AC is actually an additional 8 points higher against them. Combat Reflexes is an uncommon feat for monsters, so this character could provoke (what is likely) a monster's only AoO, thus allowing the rest of the party freedom to maneuver however they like around said creature. Such as the actual party rogue getting into a flanking position, so both of them can get Sneak Attack.

Also, almost forgot to add a Greater Truedeath Crystal to the main hand weapon when I was discussing gear for the build, so that it can still deal 4d6+STR+INT+magic weapon mod against undead. And Sneak Attack, if he flanks

[Icewraith]

A Swashbuckler6/Rogue4/Duelist10 has a BAB of 19/14/9/4, And should have a +5 weapon in main hand, a Dex modifier of +8 (after magic item considerations) AT A MINIMUM. The -4 to attack, which is traded in for +10 to AC and +1d6 to damage in my suggested build, should not be that significant a loss in the to-hit field. And this is a HIGHLY MOBILE tank, in fact, this character should be darting across the battlefield, intentionally provoking AoOs, since his AC is actually an additional 8 points higher against them. Combat Reflexes is an uncommon feat for monsters, so this character could provoke (what is likely) a monster's only AoO, thus allowing the rest of the party freedom to maneuver however they like around said creature. Such as the actual party rogue getting into a flanking position, so both of them can get Sneak Attack.

Also, almost forgot to add a Greater Truedeath Crystal to the main hand weapon when I was discussing gear for the build, so that it can still deal 4d6+STR+INT+magic weapon mod against undead. And Sneak Attack, if he flanks

You... you do realize +4d6 bonus damage is miserable for 20th level, and AC is trivial past about level 6-9? Your "highly mobile tank" presents no threat to most monsters, and so there's no reason for them to try and kill him first (which is what tanking is all about) unless there's no-one else around.

Anyone who really cares about avoiding AoOs should be able to manage some ranks in tumble to make the DC 15 check to move at half speed. Duelist is bad. Really bad.

A full daring outlaw build should be getting full rogue sneak attack on both weapons whenever he flanks, half damage on anything crit immune that's not immune to flanking. That and warblade are excellent choices.

[RedMage125]

You... you do realize +4d6 bonus damage is miserable for 20th level, and AC is trivial past about level 6-9? Your "highly mobile tank" presents no threat to most monsters, and so there's no reason for them to try and kill him first (which is what tanking is all about) unless there's no-one else around.
AC and touch AC are "trivial" past levels 6-9? Shenanigans. That is not a factual statement, and there is no objective, empirical way you could prove it to be so. I've personally seen Duelists in action up to level 17 (in a game in which I was a player), and I've DMed groups as high as 18 myself, and I have never seen AC become completely trivial. Any monster or NPC making physical attacks are going to target AC.


Anyone who really cares about avoiding AoOs should be able to manage some ranks in tumble to make the DC 15 check to move at half speed. Duelist is bad. Really bad.
And this build has no need to move at half speed, even with a DC 25 Tumble check. Furthermore, you completely missed the point. The point is that he WANTS to trigger AoOs for his party members. And any party member in armor heavier than Light armor will not be able to Tumble past opponents to avoid AoOs. So the Party Rogue should be fine, but there may be more melee members of the party.


A full daring outlaw build should be getting full rogue sneak attack on both weapons whenever he flanks, half damage on anything crit immune that's not immune to flanking. That and warblade are excellent choices.
I'm not very familiar with the Warblade, I never really use the ToB. There was a huge power creep towards the end of 3.5e, and I dislike all the base classes from the PHB2, ToB and ToM. I don't usually permit them at my table. But I've never had any complaints in that regard, either. I suppose if someone was really insistent that they wanted to play something from one of those books, I'd give it a second chance.

[Flickerdart]

A Swashbuckler6/Rogue4/Duelist10 has a BAB of 19/14/9/4, And should have a +5 weapon in main hand, a Dex modifier of +8 (after magic item considerations) AT A MINIMUM. The -4 to attack, which is traded in for +10 to AC and +1d6 to damage in my suggested build, should not be that significant a loss in the to-hit field. And this is a HIGHLY MOBILE tank, in fact, this character should be darting across the battlefield, intentionally provoking AoOs, since his AC is actually an additional 8 points higher against them. Combat Reflexes is an uncommon feat for monsters, so this character could provoke (what is likely) a monster's only AoO, thus allowing the rest of the party freedom to maneuver however they like around said creature. Such as the actual party rogue getting into a flanking position, so both of them can get Sneak Attack.

Also, almost forgot to add a Greater Truedeath Crystal to the main hand weapon when I was discussing gear for the build, so that it can still deal 4d6+STR+INT+magic weapon mod against undead. And Sneak Attack, if he flanks
Ok. 19 BAB, +8 Dexterity, +5 weapon, -4 for having a bad plan. That's a +31 to hit. Only one attack, because apparently your battle plan is running around and assuming enemies will waste their AoOs on bothering with you.

And you hit for 4d6+..oh hello there, MAD...maybe +6 for each STR and INT because I'm being generous. And +5 for the weapon. So that's an average of 14+12+5=31 damage.

That's miserable. It will take you 9 rounds to kill a balor, a squishy Outsider (assuming you can penetrate its DR somehow, 18 rounds otherwise). Against other CR20s...dragons hover around the 450HP mark, for instance. What are you going to do against CR21+ threats, which are supposed to actually be challenging? A big fat load of nothing.

[Nihilarian]

I'm not very familiar with the Warblade, I never really use the ToB. There was a huge power creep towards the end of 3.5e, and I dislike all the base classes from the PHB2, ToB and ToM. I don't usually permit them at my table. But I've never had any complaints in that regard, either. I suppose if someone was really insistent that they wanted to play something from one of those books, I'd give it a second chance.I'll give you that Tome of Battle classes are largely better than any other melee (this is a good thing, by the way), but... PHBII? Tome of Magic?

Shadowcaster and Beguiler are both much more limited than the core wizard. I'm not very familiar with Binder, but by all accounts I've heard it's a fun and flavorful class that isn't too powerful. Dragon Shaman and Knight both bring interesting mechanics to the table even though they're ultimately not very strong.

the only problematic classes I can think of are the Truenamer and the Duskblade. The Truenamer is simply broken (as in, it doesn't work right) and the Duskblade is only powerful if you're comparing it to classes like the Fighter or Duelist. It's around the same power level as the ToB classes.

If you think the Duelist and Fighter are where the balance needs to be, that's fine. You probably play in a fairly low power game. Other people (like the OP, who's DM is "bloody hardcore") like to or need to play higher power games. In games where casters want to flex their muscles without overshadowing melee too much, Tome of Battle and the Duskblade are fantastic. If the casters don't mind holding back (or there aren't any) and the DM is very forgiving, they might be overkill. But as the OP stated, this isn't that kind of game.

[Icewraith]

AC and touch AC are "trivial" past levels 6-9? Shenanigans. That is not a factual statement, and there is no objective, empirical way you could prove it to be so. I've personally seen Duelists in action up to level 17 (in a game in which I was a player), and I've DMed groups as high as 18 myself, and I have never seen AC become completely trivial. Any monster or NPC making physical attacks are going to target AC.

And this build has no need to move at half speed, even with a DC 25 Tumble check. Furthermore, you completely missed the point. The point is that he WANTS to trigger AoOs for his party members. And any party member in armor heavier than Light armor will not be able to Tumble past opponents to avoid AoOs. So the Party Rogue should be fine, but there may be more melee members of the party.

I'm not very familiar with the Warblade, I never really use the ToB. There was a huge power creep towards the end of 3.5e, and I dislike all the base classes from the PHB2, ToB and ToM. I don't usually permit them at my table. But I've never had any complaints in that regard, either. I suppose if someone was really insistent that they wanted to play something from one of those books, I'd give it a second chance.

(1) Because of the way monster hit dice and size adjustments work with CR, at mid to high levels monsters that actually care about doing melee damage usually have very high to-hit numbers, and if your DM's monsters can't hit your AC he will simply build them so they can. Getting into a stats arms race with the dm is never a good thing, and it means that your party members who aren't optimizing for AC will get creamed since many heavy hitters carry power attack. Even if your AC is so ridiculous it can't be hit by anything CR appropriate your DM will just attack your buddies and hit you with saving throw effects. How's your will save looking?

(2) If you want to be way better at not getting hit, you stack miss chances instead of AC. No matter how high the monster's attack rolls get you can negate half of its damage using miss chances.

(3) This guy doesn't need to take AoOs for the party because anyone who wants to be in melee combat is either built to take hits or has access to tumble (or polymorph/alter self/wild shape). DC 15/25 is trivial for the party members to make even at moderate level. I should say at most tables- maybe if your table runs really low-op this is actually a thing. Furthermore, there's only 4 people in the party so they're probably running something vaguely resembling arcane caster/divine caster/glass cannon (and skillmonkey)/melee, where this guy is the melee.

(3a) Because of the way having a reasonable dex bonus interacts with AC and touch AC, most of the armors people care about being in are light. At moderate levels a mithral breastplate or chain shirt are probably the best armors you can be wearing. Anyone who is actually running around in plate is sporting d10 hit dice or better (or is a cleric) and should be able to take a hit or two.

If his character is looking to go the "awesome/master swordsman" archetype Warblade is an outstanding, practically must have choice. I can't think of a non-magical class that does it better. It's certainly not overpowered, because even a core wizard still has twenty ways to knock you into next week, but it is significantly more flexible (and fun IMO) than most other melee classes.

[RedMage125]

Ok. 19 BAB, +8 Dexterity, +5 weapon, -4 for having a bad plan. That's a +31 to hit. Only one attack, because apparently your battle plan is running around and assuming enemies will waste their AoOs on bothering with you.
No, once your allies are in position, you can stay still, and get multiple attacks. Especially if you're flanking with the party rogue, you get Sneak Attack on top of that.
The battle plan only involves more running around if you NEED to soak up the AoOs from enemies. Obviously if it's not necessary, you will not do it.


And you hit for 4d6+..oh hello there, MAD...maybe +6 for each STR and INT because I'm being generous. And +5 for the weapon. So that's an average of 14+12+5=31 damage.
I didn't invest much in STR at all, really. When I built and equipped a level 20 version of this character to see the numbers, his total non-magically modified STR was 10. I had the gear to get him an Ioun Stone for a +2 to STR, but his INT mod was +10. So it was a +16 to damage rolls.
Then there's Sneak Attack, which is an extra 5d6 or 17.5 damage. With 4 attacks (not assuming a friendly Haste Spell or Boots of Speed), at a total attack bonus that's still Higher than a level 20 rogue. So 48.5 damage (using your damage calculation, 52.5 with mine), up to 5 times per round, with Haste.


That's miserable. It will take you 9 rounds to kill a balor, a squishy Outsider (assuming you can penetrate its DR somehow, 18 rounds otherwise). Against other CR20s...dragons hover around the 450HP mark, for instance. What are you going to do against CR21+ threats, which are supposed to actually be challenging? A big fat load of nothing.
First off, why would you assume that this character is fighting a Balor by himself? Where is his party? And if he DID fight a Balor by himself, he'd be pretty much immune to any melee attack said Balor could muster, since his touch AC is almost as high as his regular AC. He'd wear it down by attrition.

You seem to be automatically assuming that the person playing this character MUST be stupid and make poor combat decisions, not adapt to a changing combat scenario, and be fighting by himself, all in order to make your point about how "inferior" my suggestion is. You must be REALLY personally invested in me being wrong to feel better about this discussion.

Look, bottom line, this is a COMPETENT melee combatant who's abiltiy to avoid being hit makes him last longer in combat. It's also built using only PHB, DMG, Complete series, and Magic Item Compendium, so it's valid in games where DM's flat-out disallow certain books (which is what I was working with when I came up with this).

[Metahuman1]

Here's what I'd do. Dip a level of Spirit Lion Totem Barbarian for Pounce, a level of Cleric for Knowledge devotion and travel devotion, and maybe a level of something else useful. Bard might be good with the right work, Fighter's nice for a feat, Unarmed Swordsage can enable TWF with your main weapon and an Unarmed strike and gives extra maneuvers and a freebee weapons focus + Initiative Bonus, Crusader gives you a small but inexhaustible maneuver pool. Pick one.

Then take straight Warblade levels for the rest of the game.

Now, boost your knowledge checks, grab a couple of reliquary Holy Symbols, and get an at will or persistent Item of Persist Blade (Spell Compendium, does 1d4 force damage a round if you can make an attack roll at it's rather pitiful bonus, but the important part is it flanks with you automatically.), that let's you get your bonus damage on. That should set you up with Double Int mod per hit.


Lastly, invest in one of two feat chains. Either go for Karmatic Strike + Combat Reflexes + Robilars Gambit + Double Strike and get triple your Int mod up to four times every time your attacked in Melee, or the Mage Slayer line and shut down casters HARD and be a much better threat to anything that uses magic, which will be more and more common the higher level you are.

[RedMage125]

I'll give you that Tome of Battle classes are largely better than any other melee (this is a good thing, by the way), but... PHBII? Tome of Magic?

Shadowcaster and Beguiler are both much more limited than the core wizard. I'm not very familiar with Binder, but by all accounts I've heard it's a fun and flavorful class that isn't too powerful. Dragon Shaman and Knight both bring interesting mechanics to the table even though they're ultimately not very strong.

the only problematic classes I can think of are the Truenamer and the Duskblade. The Truenamer is simply broken (as in, it doesn't work right) and the Duskblade is only powerful if you're comparing it to classes like the Fighter or Duelist. It's around the same power level as the ToB classes.

If you think the Duelist and Fighter are where the balance needs to be, that's fine. You probably play in a fairly low power game. Other people (like the OP, who's DM is "bloody hardcore") like to or need to play higher power games. In games where casters want to flex their muscles without overshadowing melee too much, Tome of Battle and the Duskblade are fantastic. If the casters don't mind holding back (or there aren't any) and the DM is very forgiving, they might be overkill. But as the OP stated, this isn't that kind of game.
I'm sorry, that was 2 different lines of thought. "Power Creep" and "I don't like the classes in those books". I apologize for being unclear on that.

I like a lot of the other material in the PHB2 (such as the feat trees that gave incentive to stay a single-classed Fighter). And I do acknowledge that the Knight's Challenge was an interesting mechanic (and, in retrospect, a taste of things to come).

But the Beguiler, Dragon Shaman, and some of the other classes just don't resonate with me as having a strong identity in terms of fantasy archetypes. I dislike them as a personal preference. Which is simply expressing an opinion.

A class I dislike because of game balance would be the Warmage. Casting in Medium Armor (Heavy with a feat), spontaneous access to an entire class spell list that includes just about every damage-dealing arcane or divine spell in the game (and able to be expanded with a handful of feats), free spontaneous metamagic...no...just no.

I have never considered the games I play in to be "low power". I know I don't care about Optimizing to the same level as some other people. You know, the kind of people who say "dread necromancer is a class that is exactly 8 levels long, this is not an opinion, but a fact" or "x class is inferior because it's tier 5 and should not ever be played". I'm pretty good at optimizing with the choices that I've been given, but I by no means insits on squeezing every last iota of advantage through sheer number-crunching because I have some kind of driving need to "win" at D&D. I don't agree with the anti-optimizers who think that a character "must" have subpar choices to be roleplayed well, either (see: Stormwind Fallacy). But I will occasionally make choices based more on in-characetr reasoning and choices over a more optimal one. Last time I played a 3.5e Wizard, I ended up choosing Fabricate as one of my new spells when levelling because I wanted to restore a destroyed shrine to Mystra (FR game, I believe it was a pre-published module he was running). Ended up getting a lot of use out of that spell, actually. Turned out to be a good choice.

In fact, to be honest, as a DM, I prefer to run 4e. It's WAY easier on the DM. As a player, I prefer 3.5. But I DM'd 3rd edition from 2000-2009 on a regular basis, and have run a few 3.5e games since, most of which lasted at least a few months. When I DM 3.5e, I usually alow for rolled ability scores, as does every 3.5e DM I've played with. Most (including me) are pretty generous with allowing re-rolls of low ability scores. Anything that results in stats over an average of 32 points worth of point buy is "high-powered", right?. So while I don't play "high-op", I'd say I play (and run) more of a "mid-op" game.

Wow...got off topic there. Sorry. But yes, I know very little about the ToB classes. I heard they were OP, but I never picked up the book. I could probably get it on PDF, if I were so inclined.

[RedMage125]

(1) Because of the way monster hit dice and size adjustments work with CR, at mid to high levels monsters that actually care about doing melee damage usually have very high to-hit numbers, and if your DM's monsters can't hit your AC he will simply build them so they can. Getting into a stats arms race with the dm is never a good thing, and it means that your party members who aren't optimizing for AC will get creamed since many heavy hitters carry power attack. Even if your AC is so ridiculous it can't be hit by anything CR appropriate your DM will just attack your buddies and hit you with saving throw effects. How's your will save looking?
Eh. No man is an island. Everyone has drawbacks and weaknesses. I'm not the kind of person who considers a character "inferior" if he isn't invulnerable. Yes, this character has some drawbacks. But his Fort save is okay, Ref save is great (and Evasion), and AC and touch AC are awesome. His Will save is about average for a level 20 fighter type, and no SR.
Your DM shoudl not be getting into an arms race with his characters at all. D&D is not about "DM vs players", and anyone who claims otherwise is wrong. D&D is a cooperative game. The DM is playing, too, and most people who play are sitting down with a group of friends to have some fun. If a DM is looking to challenge a character like this, spellcasters are certainly a good way to go. I suggested a Ring of Freedom of Movement, but if said duelist has not yet acquired one, paralysis would render just about all his nifty defenses moot.
And as for your DM just "attacking your buddies", this may not be 4e with Defender classes, but ignoring the melee guy with the sharp pointy bits isn't always a great option. If the duelist is in melee with a dragon, for example, and the dragon gives up attacking in favor of using it's actions to defensively cast spells on the whole party, then the melee types need only ready actions to disrupt spellcasting, something a lot of people tend to forget is always an option.


(2) If you want to be way better at not getting hit, you stack miss chances instead of AC. No matter how high the monster's attack rolls get you can negate half of its damage using miss chances.
Just about everything that grants miss chance is magical, and can be dispelled or suppressed. So there's ways around every solution.


(3) This guy doesn't need to take AoOs for the party because anyone who wants to be in melee combat is either built to take hits or has access to tumble (or polymorph/alter self/wild shape). DC 15/25 is trivial for the party members to make even at moderate level. I should say at most tables- maybe if your table runs really low-op this is actually a thing. Furthermore, there's only 4 people in the party so they're probably running something vaguely resembling arcane caster/divine caster/glass cannon (and skillmonkey)/melee, where this guy is the melee.
I've actually never played with a group as small as 4. Always been 5 or 6. And yes, DC 15/25 is pretty trivial...for a DEX based character who has Tumble as a class skill. The wizard who took a few cross-class ranks and has a DEX of 14 (16 maybe)...not so much. But even for the melee cleric in heavy armor, why risk a hit if you don't have to?
Think of it like Chess: If you can make a monster use its actions the way YOU want them to, who's in control of that battlefield? If drawing AoOs to yourself is YOUR plan, and not the monster's, then when the monsters used its only opportunity action on you, you win, allwoing the rest of your pieces (party members) to get into a preferred postion without any drawback. Even if the monsyter realizes the futility of attackingthe duelist and goes to switch targets, he must now contend with a melee type in his face while he tries to attack someone else, which can hamper the monster. The way I look at it, even if I can't get the monster to attack ME (which I am fine with), if I can prevent it from executing its own attack plan the way it wants to, I am still effectively defending my friends to the best of my ability.


(3a) Because of the way having a reasonable dex bonus interacts with AC and touch AC, most of the armors people care about being in are light. At moderate levels a mithral breastplate or chain shirt are probably the best armors you can be wearing. Anyone who is actually running around in plate is sporting d10 hit dice or better (or is a cleric) and should be able to take a hit or two.
Why take a hit or move at half speed if you don't need to?


If his character is looking to go the "awesome/master swordsman" archetype Warblade is an outstanding, practically must have choice. I can't think of a non-magical class that does it better. It's certainly not overpowered, because even a core wizard still has twenty ways to knock you into next week, but it is significantly more flexible (and fun IMO) than most other melee classes.
I am sayign nothing bad about the Warblade. To do so would be ignorant, because I know next to nothing about the class. You could very well be right. I built this character without ever even THINKING about the ToB.

[Flickerdart]

You seem to be automatically assuming that the person playing this character MUST be stupid and make poor combat decisions, not adapt to a changing combat scenario, and be fighting by himself, all in order to make your point about how "inferior" my suggestion is. You must be REALLY personally invested in me being wrong to feel better about this discussion.

Ah, personal attacks. Thanks for telling me that talking to you is fruitless. G'day mate.

[Nihilarian]

Warmage thoughtsThe warmage are usually not a problem either. Blasting is not an "optimal" choice in the first place (however fun it can be to nuke things :smallsmile:), so a few minor abilities at the expense of the vast library of Wizard spells (including better blasting spells, I'm sure) tends to be a bad trade. The Sudden Metamagic feats are metamagic feats and as such can be taken by the Wizard for free, if he wants them. Or he can spend them on better things.

Having said that, if the warmage takes certain classes (Mage of the Arcane Order, IIRC) and expand his spell list the warmage could end up a problem, same as the wizard and sorcerer.I can understand not liking certain classes for flavor reasons, and I'm not going to begrudge you for playing in a mid-op game. But the OP has apparently found himself in a high-op game and you need to realize that your experiences in mid-op aren't likely to be helpful to him.

I absolutely recommend at least checking Tome of Battle. It might be overkill in your campaigns where the duelist is a viable class, however.

[Icewraith]

Isn't Lion Totem Barbarian in Complete champion? If you're trying to build a competent melee combatant how could you neglect the ability to move and full attack in the same round? (Granted it may not have been out when you made the build, but otherwise...).

Your third and fourth iterative attacks are unlikely to hit, especially if you're taking to-hit penalties to boost your AC. Even when hasted you only get two attacks at your best BAB whereas if you weren't a duelist and allowed to dual-wield you could get three, plus an additional one at -5 if you took improved TWF (don't go any further than that though).

If a dm, especially a killer dm, is going to throw a heavy-hitting melee type at a party he takes the highest AC he can expect to need to hit in combat, subtracts whatever number he thinks he should be able to hit you on (15-16 if he's being generous), and then makes sure his monster has enough attack bonus, strength, and to-hit bonuses to hit you when he rolls that. (Significantly) Optimizing AC is detrimental to the rest of your party because now he'll hit the rest of your party on a 2. His monster has even less reason to swing on you instead of the squishy wizard that can reshape reality at will because you're not doing much in the way of damage, and he doesn't have to blow his AoO on you if he wants to save it to stop a caster from getting out of his (usually extended) reach. All of your other defenses are weaker because you're devoting your gear to optimizing your AC.

That duelist character would probably be great in the mindless undead or constructs (or else you have to swap out weapon crystals in combat when you get ambushed), animals, and stupid opponents only campaign but a smart opponent (played by a killer DM) isn't going to swing on targets that don't present a significant threat unless the monster has no better choice.

Your damage output matters because it's usually far more efficient for your spellcasters to buff you and debuff the enemy instead of burning through the absurd chunks of HP beefy monsters can get with direct damage spells. If your fellow players trust in your "tankiness" and play the glass cannon and arcane and divine caster roles they'll hit another problem- namely, your damage output is mostly precision damage which is what a lot of rogueish glass cannon builds rely on! Anything immune to critical hits (undead, oozes, constructs, plants, swarms, elementals, anything with a +1 heavy fortification buckler or buffed with the heart of X line of spells) is going to ruin your day or at least force you and your glass cannon to lose a round swapping out your weapon crystals while it does its thing on the casters.

At level 20 against a killer DM you'll have a hard time finding opponents that are not, by default or by DM using buffs/equipment, immune to precision damage.

I'll tell you where that character is likely to be perfectly suited for though. He would make one of the best mind flayer single gladitorial combat thralls ever, at least until he runs into something that's crit immune or has DR since he probably won't be able to keep his magical gear while fighting for his master in the arena.

But his boostable item-independant AC and touch AC would be a great asset fighting the sort of large, easily mind-controlled gladiator-slaves that mind flayers tend to use as meat shields. They have no other choice but to swing on him and usually have few supernatural attacks (or they'd have a better will save). Unfortunately this is assuming he doesn't just get mind blasted (you lose your dodge bonuses when stunned etc so grapple is back on the table) or dominated (if you have a ring of freedom of movement) and eaten because of his absurdly high int score and low will save.

[Telonius]

I considered splashing Rogue for Evasion/Sneak Attack, but my character is an honorable lower born noble, I can't justify it to myself in RP terms as to why he's an expert in stabbing people in the back, he's too right and proper for all that.

I'd advise you to take a look at the Einhander feat from PHB2, and look at the Off-Hand Swap ability. I'm not advising you to take the feat, just to read it and see if that's the sort of thing that your character would do, if he didn't focus on two-weapon fighting. It's cinematic, it's the sort of thing that honorable duelists do ... and it is perfectly represented mechanically, if you have bonus damage from Sneak Attack to combine with the free Feint.

If a single-weapon duelist can do that, why would your double-weapon guy not want to attack a distracted opponent?

[Kennisiou]

Forget blasting being suboptimal, Warmage is also just not a good class for it. Sorceror, Wizard, Psion, Wilder, and at some levels even Druid outperform it at blasting. I've also been told Shugenja and Wu Jen make better blasters than Warmage, but I've never seen anyone build those classes as blasters and can see no obvious reason for it to be true on their spell lists/class features, so take those two with a grain of salt.

Seriously. Warmage is a class built around a suboptimal strategy that doesn't even manage to outperform the generalists at performing that strategy. The classes that can do more and stronger things are still better at blasting than the warmage. The class, even more than the healer imo, which at least gets a rad companion and access to exalted spells, is just kind of a strikeout on all counts.

[Icewraith]

Eh. No man is an island. Everyone has drawbacks and weaknesses. I'm not the kind of person who considers a character "inferior" if he isn't invulnerable. Yes, this character has some drawbacks. But his Fort save is okay, Ref save is great (and Evasion), and AC and touch AC are awesome. His Will save is about average for a level 20 fighter type, and no SR.
Your DM shoudl not be getting into an arms race with his characters at all. D&D is not about "DM vs players", and anyone who claims otherwise is wrong. D&D is a cooperative game. The DM is playing, too, and most people who play are sitting down with a group of friends to have some fun. If a DM is looking to challenge a character like this, spellcasters are certainly a good way to go. I suggested a Ring of Freedom of Movement, but if said duelist has not yet acquired one, paralysis would render just about all his nifty defenses moot.
And as for your DM just "attacking your buddies", this may not be 4e with Defender classes, but ignoring the melee guy with the sharp pointy bits isn't always a great option. If the duelist is in melee with a dragon, for example, and the dragon gives up attacking in favor of using it's actions to defensively cast spells on the whole party, then the melee types need only ready actions to disrupt spellcasting, something a lot of people tend to forget is always an option.

Just about everything that grants miss chance is magical, and can be dispelled or suppressed. So there's ways around every solution.

I've actually never played with a group as small as 4. Always been 5 or 6. And yes, DC 15/25 is pretty trivial...for a DEX based character who has Tumble as a class skill. The wizard who took a few cross-class ranks and has a DEX of 14 (16 maybe)...not so much. But even for the melee cleric in heavy armor, why risk a hit if you don't have to?
Think of it like Chess: If you can make a monster use its actions the way YOU want them to, who's in control of that battlefield? If drawing AoOs to yourself is YOUR plan, and not the monster's, then when the monsters used its only opportunity action on you, you win, allwoing the rest of your pieces (party members) to get into a preferred postion without any drawback. Even if the monsyter realizes the futility of attackingthe duelist and goes to switch targets, he must now contend with a melee type in his face while he tries to attack someone else, which can hamper the monster. The way I look at it, even if I can't get the monster to attack ME (which I am fine with), if I can prevent it from executing its own attack plan the way it wants to, I am still effectively defending my friends to the best of my ability.

Why take a hit or move at half speed if you don't need to?

I am sayign nothing bad about the Warblade. To do so would be ignorant, because I know next to nothing about the class. You could very well be right. I built this character without ever even THINKING about the ToB.

The DM here is actively trying to kill the party. If the players don't play well and effectively their characters will die. It's a valid style of play and can be very fun and exciting once everyone gets used to it. Furthermore the game gets boring for any dm if his monsters never hit anything or at least impede the players, building on "why turtling is bad".

Armor argument was pointing out how uncommon it is to have a character who can't tumble due to armor restrictions. Again, anyone who cares about AoOs from movement already has tumble or other ways to deal with it. If the wizard is in melee and can't 5-foot step out of it then you, the supposed tank of the team, screwed up (tanking is a very difficult concept to achieve effectively in 3.5, at least without Tome of Battle-also the wizard screwed up too) and failed to protect your party mates. There's also stuff like greater mirror image, wings of cover if he's a sorcerer, benign transposition, casting defensively, invisibility... spellcasters usually have something to deal with that situation.

The dragon argument is silly. If a dragon is in melee and doesn't want to be it can fly or jump away, maybe provoke an AoO (can you hit its AC reliably while keeping your defenses up?), and still get its spell off. Or take a 5-foot step out of your reach depending on the terrain and positioning. Dragons are smart. If a fighter-type runs up to him and doesn't immediately start hacking away, what does it think he's doing? It also could just breathe on him, although it knows well prepared parties may have buffed the fighterish type with energy resistance/immunity. If it tries something and it doesn't work it has plenty of other options. At best you might get a round of the dragon whiffing on you before he ginsus your rogueish flanker buddy and then flies over to deal with the casters and ignores you. And you didn't do anything because you readied to disrupt spellcasting on a dragon instead of just stabbing it. It's a tad ridiculous, but a truly prepared DM can also give the DRAGON ranks in tumble-even with a notoriously bad Dex they have plenty of hit dice and a very high INT.

And this is assuming that a killer DM actually threw a big single monster at a party of adventurers in 3.5. Experienced DMs learn quickly that single monsters tend to disintegrate due to action economy imbalance unless they're tremendously buffed to the point of probably killing the party, and so provide their dragons and liches etc. with combat-capable guards and servants and use a slightly smaller dragon than they would otherwise.

Also, combat reflexes is an uncommon feat on base monsters. (Big) Dragons usually don't have any dex worth a damn so it's true there, but other big things (often giants) with reach that can manage a +1 or +2 dex it's a standard package with improved trip if the dm is actively trying to kill the party.

Warlbade wasn't at you, just speaking generally there. Give it a try if you can, it's lovely. Just remember for purposes of future conversations on this site, your D&D experience will be, based on your statements, compared to many (but certainly not all) posters, "low-op", so please be careful about doling out build advice. Especially to anyone starting the thread off with the worry that his dm nearly killed off the party last session.

[RedMage125]

Ah, personal attacks. Thanks for telling me that talking to you is fruitless. G'day mate.
Oh, we're playing martyr now?

Before you accuse anyone of Argumentum Ad Hominem, are you familiar with Argumentum Ad Misiricordium? That is: Appeal to Sympathy?

"Oh, look, everyone! Hs's attacking me! Poor me! Don't listen to him!"

Before we engage in that, why don't we examine your own debate tactics?

Ok. 19 BAB, +8 Dexterity, +5 weapon, -4 for having a bad plan. That's a +31 to hit. Only one attack, because apparently your battle plan is running around and assuming enemies will waste their AoOs on bothering with you.
So you start with a dismissive statement. Then you follow with your justification for it, based solely off assuming that I am going to blindly follow one action repeated, not adapting to the flow of battle, incapable of doing anything else, and clearly too stupid to make a good tactical choice in combat.

Your demonstrated low opinion of what I may or may be capable of is extremely offensive, it boils down to you calling ME stupid, and your point hinges on me operating on that level of stupidity.


And you hit for 4d6+..oh hello there, MAD...maybe +6 for each STR and INT because I'm being generous. And +5 for the weapon. So that's an average of 14+12+5=31 damage.
A sarcastic expression of surprise in order to highlight something you intend to denigrate is neither mature nor fallacy-free debating. It makes it seem as if you are more interested in making me feel stupid/foolish as opposed to calmly and cooly highlighting a perceived flaw in the presentation.
Which is followed by a sarcastic expression of false generosity, implying that the only meager merit you intend to recognize in my suggestion exists merely at the whim of YOUR "generosity", for which I should apprently be grateful?


That's miserable. It will take you 9 rounds to kill a balor, a squishy Outsider (assuming you can penetrate its DR somehow, 18 rounds otherwise). Against other CR20s...dragons hover around the 450HP mark, for instance. What are you going to do against CR21+ threats, which are supposed to actually be challenging? A big fat load of nothing.
Another derisive and dismissive statement to open this paragraph.
And then another assumption that I would not have access to any means of adapting or overcoming a challenge, despite the numerous ways a party can work together to bypass enemy DR.
And then a spurious rhetorical question in a superior tone.
Finishing with another rude dismissal.

What what I said a personal attack? Yes, partially (the part about saying how invested you must be, certainly), but I can at least cop to what I have done. But maybe I was just a little sick and tired of YOUR baseless attacks on me. It doesn't excuse an ad hominem attack on my part, but the fact that you have done so makes your cry of "oh no, he's attacking me personally" more than a bit hypocritical on your part.

By the way, pointing out that so much of what you said hinges on ASSUMING that I'm some kind of moron incapable of adapting to a changing battlefield environment is not a personal attack, it's an attack on your argument.

MY perception of your attacks on me is just as valid as your perception of my personal attack on you. I find the way you debate INCREDIBLY personally offensive, and you should, at the very least, take some responsibility for that.

So, what's it going to be? Do you continue to debate as you have, completely absolving yourself of any responsibility for the way YOU debate? Or do you accept that you, too, were highly offensive? In which case, I apologize for my own personal attack and we can perhaps go forward with a more level-headed debate like mature adults?

[RedMage125]

The DM here is actively trying to kill the party. If the players don't play well and effectively their characters will die. It's a valid style of play and can be very fun and exciting once everyone gets used to it. Furthermore the game gets boring for any dm if his monsters never hit anything or at least impede the players, building on "why turtling is bad".
Well, you are right about that. I have precious little expertise in the arena of a game where the DM is actively trying to kill party members. Namely because if that's the goal, why doesn't he drop creatures beyond the party's abiltiy to fight on them? Or have Earthquakes or rockslides. Or a Vile cleric a mile away cast Apocalypse From The Sky (BoVD), which the players could do nothing about? On a fundamental level, I do not understand the "trying to kill the party" mentality of a DM. Have I killed characters as a DM? Yes, and proudly. I track skulls on my DM's Screen when I do, I'm pretty proud of them. But I'm not actively trying. I'm not bending the rules to keep them alive, either.

And yes, a DM whose monsters never hit anything can be boring. The only time I've actually seen a duelist of this type in game was in a game wherin I was a player, and the party got up to about level 17. The duelist was diffcult, but not impossible to hit, namely because a character levelled up to 20 doesn't necessarily have all the exact magic item build choices of a character CREATED at 20, where you get to optimize and get EXACTLY what you want.


Armor argument was pointing out how uncommon it is to have a character who can't tumble due to armor restrictions. Again, anyone who cares about AoOs from movement already has tumble or other ways to deal with it. If the wizard is in melee and can't 5-foot step out of it then you, the supposed tank of the team, screwed up (tanking is a very difficult concept to achieve effectively in 3.5, at least without Tome of Battle-also the wizard screwed up too) and failed to protect your party mates. There's also stuff like greater mirror image, wings of cover if he's a sorcerer, benign transposition, casting defensively, invisibility... spellcasters usually have something to deal with that situation.I know there are other means to avoid/absorb AoOs. I'm not saying you're wrong. My point is: why bother if you don't need to? A level 20 Rogue-type(unless he has SKill Mastery in Tumble) can still fail a DC25 Tumble check if he rolls a 1. A level 20 Cleric in Full plate could get hit by a crit on that AoO and take more damage than he expected. It's low-risk vs Zero risk. And that's just one thing I was highlighting about the build.

And yes, spellcasters have a number of means to avoid attacks. Dimension Door is a good one, too. It only has verbal components, and is an awesome way to escape a grapple.
Side story:My last wizard ended up in an encounter in a tomb with some kind of wraith variant I have never seen before. It was incorporeal (of course), but also had Spell Resistance up the wazoo, and a +20 deflection modifier to AC, so it's AC and touch AC were like 32. Its attack did INTELLIGENCE DRAIN. Not damage, drain. My spells that didn't alow SR frequently required attack rolls. My spells that were auto-hit allowed for SR, even the Force ones. But I tried, right up until the thing targetted me. I got lucky and the DM rolled like a 2 or something on the die, and it missed with its attack, but I was now in melee with it. My turn came up, and I looked over my spell/scroll/wand list. I had very little to contribute to this fight. And I had the most to lose. I rolled Concentration to cast defensively and made it. DM says "whatcha casting?" My reply: "DImension Door". He looks at the battle mat. "You going to the other side of the room?" I shook my head. "Nope. Max range. I am leaving the DUNGEON." He laughed for a second and then realized I was serious. I used my turns on the subsequent round to walk back. Arrived a round or two after everyone else finally killed it. My fellow party members were a little peeved, but in retrospect, none of the other players were actually mad at me. They realized I was right in that I was going to be at zero effectiveness and had the most to lose from being hit by him.


The dragon argument is silly. If a dragon is in melee and doesn't want to be it can fly or jump away, maybe provoke an AoO (can you hit its AC reliably while keeping your defenses up?), and still get its spell off. Or take a 5-foot step out of your reach depending on the terrain and positioning. Dragons are smart. If a fighter-type runs up to him and doesn't immediately start hacking away, what does it think he's doing? It also could just breathe on him, although it knows well prepared parties may have buffed the fighterish type with energy resistance/immunity. If it tries something and it doesn't work it has plenty of other options. At best you might get a round of the dragon whiffing on you before he ginsus your rogueish flanker buddy and then flies over to deal with the casters and ignores you. And you didn't do anything because you readied to disrupt spellcasting on a dragon instead of just stabbing it. It's a tad ridiculous, but a truly prepared DM can also give the DRAGON ranks in tumble-even with a notoriously bad Dex they have plenty of hit dice and a very high INT.
I never said this character was somekind of 100% fool-proof end-all-be-all of characters. An intelligent monster presents challenges and constantly requires one to change tactics against it as it adapts to yours.


And this is assuming that a killer DM actually threw a big single monster at a party of adventurers in 3.5. Experienced DMs learn quickly that single monsters tend to disintegrate due to action economy imbalance unless they're tremendously buffed to the point of probably killing the party, and so provide their dragons and liches etc. with combat-capable guards and servants and use a slightly smaller dragon than they would otherwise.
Again, I never assume a killer DM.
And yes, I also noticed the problems with single monsters and have pointed that to any number of my friends as a flaw of Dragon fights in 3.5e. I once ran a level 15 or 16 party against a Red Dragon...I think it might have been Ancient? I don't recall. Gargantuan, at any rate. Party smoke checked it.
This is in an spolier block because I don't want to be edition warring, but that's one of the things I find more satifying about DMing 4e. Dragon Fights. WAYYYYY better in 4e. The action economy is specifically addressed. Dragons get so many out-of turn actions, as well as a second "minor turn" in which they can get an additional standard action each round, AND 2 action points to spend in a combat encounter. Love it.


Also, combat reflexes is an uncommon feat on base monsters. (Big) Dragons usually don't have any dex worth a damn so it's true there, but other big things (often giants) with reach that can manage a +1 or +2 dex it's a standard package with improved trip if the dm is actively trying to kill the party.Yes, and I've occasionally done things like that against my players. Combat Reflexes is useful for anyone with a reach weapon regardless of DEX, because you can make AoOs flat-footed. But you only get ADDITIONAL ones if your mod is +2 or higher. You are also limited to one AoO per creature's turn, so if you don't stop their movement, they're still in your face. That's where the trip comes in, of course. Improved Trip is a great feat (possibly a little overpowered compared to its counterparts), but I've seen a lot of people who misuse/misunderstand it. I've seen people claim that since standing up provokes an AoO, they can trip them with THAT AoO. Which is untrue, because AoOs occur BEFORE the triggering action, and you can't trip someone who's already prone. And even if you could, they could still use the rest of their turn to continue standing up, and nothing you can do about it, because even if you get 4 AoOs in a round, you can't take all 4 on one guy's turn.

Still a good combo, just often horribly misconstrued as being even more OP.



Warlbade wasn't at you, just speaking generally there. Give it a try if you can, it's lovely.
Maybe I should. I have a buddy who has it on PDF, I can check his out next time I'm on watch in the barracks.


Just remember for purposes of future conversations on this site, your D&D experience will be, based on your statements, compared to many (but certainly not all) posters, "low-op", so please be careful about doling out build advice. Especially to anyone starting the thread off with the worry that his dm nearly killed off the party last session.
How is that a thing? I've been on the D&D forums over at WotC for over 10 years. I still poke into the 3.5e forums, even after 4e came out. Of course there are optimizers there, but it's hardly the default assumption for everyone. Is the GitP community just made up solely of Optimizers? I refuse to believe that such is the case.
I kind of find the "low op" tag a bit offensive, especially given this suggested build's pros. I'll take "mid op" maybe, especially given the material that I never touch that's considered higher-tier of optimization. But "low op" to me rings of the kinds of people who insist that "optimizers can't roleplay" or "my character makes anti-optimal decisions and that makes me a better roleplayer" or things like that. I certainly don't feel that way, by the way. I think those people are equally ridiculous. Just because someone makes an optimal character doesn't mean they are a "rollplayer" instead of a "roleplayer". But the "low op" tag just feels...dirty to me.

Edit: Spoiler blocks work better when you don't misspell "spoiler"

[Icewraith]

Well, you are right about that. I have precious little expertise in the arena of a game where the DM is actively trying to kill party members. Namely because if that's the goal, why doesn't he drop creatures beyond the party's abiltiy to fight on them? Or have Earthquakes or rockslides. Or a Vile cleric a mile away cast Apocalypse From The Sky (BoVD), which the players could do nothing about? On a fundamental level, I do not understand the "trying to kill the party" mentality of a DM. Have I killed characters as a DM? Yes, and proudly. I track skulls on my DM's Screen when I do, I'm pretty proud of them. But I'm not actively trying. I'm not bending the rules to keep them alive, either.


(snip)
I never said this character was somekind of 100% fool-proof end-all-be-all of characters. An intelligent monster presents challenges and constantly requires one to change tactics against it as it adapts to yours.

Again, I never assume a killer DM.
(snip)

Yes, and I've occasionally done things like that against my players. Combat Reflexes is useful for anyone with a reach weapon regardless of DEX, because you can make AoOs flat-footed. But you only get ADDITIONAL ones if your mod is +2 or higher. You are also limited to one AoO per creature's turn, so if you don't stop their movement, they're still in your face. That's where the trip comes in, of course. Improved Trip is a great feat (possibly a little overpowered compared to its counterparts), but I've seen a lot of people who misuse/misunderstand it. I've seen people claim that since standing up provokes an AoO, they can trip them with THAT AoO. Which is untrue, because AoOs occur BEFORE the triggering action, and you can't trip someone who's already prone. And even if you could, they could still use the rest of their turn to continue standing up, and nothing you can do about it, because even if you get 4 AoOs in a round, you can't take all 4 on one guy's turn.

Still a good combo, just often horribly misconstrued as being even more OP.

(snip)

How is that a thing? I've been on the D&D forums over at WotC for over 10 years. I still poke into the 3.5e forums, even after 4e came out. Of course there are optimizers there, but it's hardly the default assumption for everyone. Is the GitP community just made up solely of Optimizers? I refuse to believe that such is the case.
I kind of find the "low op" tag a bit offensive, especially given this suggested build's pros. I'll take "mid op" maybe, especially given the material that I never touch that's considered higher-tier of optimization. But "low op" to me rings of the kinds of people who insist that "optimizers can't roleplay" or "my character makes anti-optimal decisions and that makes me a better roleplayer" or things like that. I certainly don't feel that way, by the way. I think those people are equally ridiculous. Just because someone makes an optimal character doesn't mean they are a "rollplayer" instead of a "roleplayer". But the "low op" tag just feels...dirty to me.
Edit: Spoiler blocks work better when you don't misspell "spoiler"

Let me rephrase. The point of a hardcore or "killer" dm isn't to easily kill the PCs, it's to force the players to play extremely well and make the best use of their resources. Most of the stuff you're mentioning is "jerk" dming, autokills and the like.

"Trying to challenge" the party you do a lot of CR, maybe CR+1 encounters, stay away from monsters that are notoriously powerful from their CR, and so forth. You play fair.

"Trying to kill the party" the whole point is the players have a chance if they're clever and lucky. We're talking very difficult encounters with monsters smart enough to buff and use their own strategies against the PCs, environmental conditions, minions, and advanced tactics at the END of a fairly nasty dungeon slog. You use nasty underhanded tricks as long as they're not TO and the players have some sort of chance to avoid them. Basically you do your damndest, within the limits (but accounting for the failings) of the CR system, to kill the party.

The character you presented would, for the previously stated reasons, (probably) be a hindrance to the party - especially in the type of campaign the OP is apparently in. A moderately optimized barbarian can reliably kick out the sort of damage your level 20 build is capable of (assuming your best attacks land and no sneak attack) in the level 5-10 range (IIRC, YMMV on "moderately optimized") against a wider variety of monsters because power attack doesn't care about crit immunity. Part of his combat schtick is to soak AoOs for his party members who should be able to handle them in their own ways without issue. The other part of his combat schtick is likely to cause an arms race with the dm and make it more likely other party members will die.

Tripping: Your trip argument is setting off alarm bells, but I can't look them up atm. AoO's don't take place "before the action" they "interrupt" the action- they can't take place "before" the action because at the time the offending character wasn't provoking an AoO. You can provoke multiple AoOs from a single opponent if you take multiple actions that aren't classified as movement, and I believe standing up from prone is indeed one of those. In 3.5 AoOs are tracked by action, not turn. For example, you could move out of a threatened square not using a 5-foot step. That provokes unless you tumble. If you then attempt to cast a spell within the same opponent's reach and don't cast defensively you will provoke another AoO. However, once you've taken the first AoO you have your full speed's worth of movement to get out of dodge because you can't trigger more than one AoO off the same move.

Normally I wouldn't be ragging on you like this, but the OP is here asking for help because his DM is playing rough, and you're taking him down some paths that are, from an optimization standpoint, bad or traps. Everyone's table is different- mine started out as VERY low-op because nobody knew what they were doing but the optimization level increased over time. I recently rebuilt one of my old characters at full cheese to see what it looked like and what I could do with it. Assuming the build you posted was indeed what you thought a "good" build was and representative of the sort of build that occurs at your table then I must inform you that you are probably in the low-op pool.

There's no shame in your whole table not conforming to a certain optimization standard- some people don't want to run things at full power, or don't have time to follow the rules exactly, or just want to make attack rolls, or they want to really relax, or they don't like some of the shenanigans that goes on at higher optimization levels. Also we're ALL low op compared to Tippy, so there's that. However, we have at least some information about the OP's table and his character concept. You're not "doing it wrong" at your table, but if he listens to your first few posts you won't be doing him any favors (presumably) at his.