Why Dungeoncrasher?

[OldTrees1]

Dungeon Crasher gives the following per lost
+5 on break checks
+2 defenses (AC and Saves) vs Traps
Damage on bullrushing opponents into obstacles


Why is it suggested so frequently?
Is it the bonus to breaking objects?
Is it the improved defenses vs only traps?
Is it the "more damage" optimization trap (mere damage will not get you past tier 4)?

[MadGreenSon]

I usually suggest it just because the whole concept of crashing through doors,walls,etc. sounds like lots of fun and Fighters generally suck anyway.

Last time someone played a Fighter in one of my games I let him have Dungeoncrasher and Zhent Fighter. He was much happier with that than the default, and he PrC'd out at 9th and never looked back.

And he Intimidated, Demoralized and Bull-Rushed his way through the world.

The other players thought the bull-rush thing was so cool they would set up things just for him to crash enemies into, when they could have been actually fighting themselves.

It's just good fun.

[Seerow]

Dungeon Crasher gives the following per lost
+5 on break checks
+2 defenses (AC and Saves) vs Traps
Damage on bullrushing opponents into obstacles


Why is it suggested so frequently?
Is it the bonus to breaking objects?
Is it the improved defenses vs only traps?
Is it the "more damage" optimization trap (mere damage will not get you past tier 4)?

The damage on bullrush is the main draw. It lets a battlefield control Fighter deal damage while manipulating his opponent's position. If you go for the Knockback route, it's just raw bonus damage far in excess of what you'd get from any other 2-3 feats you might choose instead.

The bonus to break checks and against traps is a nice side perk that comes alongside it.

[DeltaEmil]

It's a little bit of everything, with the increased defenses against traps being the least important of all three things.

The Dungeoncrasher ability that gives +5 bonus on Breaking checks allows a Fighter to better participate in stuff outside of combat. The bull rushing damage adds a tactical maneuver to the Fighter's fighting abilities which deals damage and positions enemies, and if you're playing in a group that considers the ground as a valid object you can bull rush an enemy into (helps if you're flying), then the damage can become quite brutal, especially with a character that has the Knockback feat that bull rushes an opponent several times into the ground.

[Fouredged Sword]

Fighters get lots of feats. The ability to trade 2 of those feats for something nobody else has is nice. It gives you a reason not to just go barbarian with flaws.

[OldTrees1]

So it can be ignored if you already do enough damage and have more interesting feat options (like Knockback and Imperious Command).

[docnessuno]

Is it the "more damage" optimization trap (mere damage will not get you past tier 4)?

And that's why DC fighter is considered Tier 4 (while the fighter is Tier 5)

It's also very fun to play, and gives some very interesting tactical option with the right feat combination (IE: Bullrushing one enemy, into another, into another, into a wall, proning all of them).

[killem2]

Dungeon Crasher gives the following per lost
+5 on break checks
+2 defenses (AC and Saves) vs Traps
Damage on bullrushing opponents into obstacles


Why is it suggested so frequently?
Is it the bonus to breaking objects?
Is it the improved defenses vs only traps?
Is it the "more damage" optimization trap (mere damage will not get you past tier 4)?

I like how you leave out the numerical values on the damage part as if it is insignificant.

4d6 + twice your strength bonus @ level 2
8d6 + triple your strength bonus @ level 6

That is before you get into the fact it's stuck on a fighter variant (full BAB d10 hp), knock back feats, size increasing shenanigans, and reach weapons.

It's a great addition to a battlefield controller. As far as tiers I don't give a crap about those. They are a useless tool.

[Person_Man]

To agree with and expand upon killem2's post:

The damage from Dungeoncrasher is quite high for ECL 6ish. (Though it becomes far less impressive once a mid-high level Power Attack combo kicks in).

Bull Rush in general is a very useful special attack for a variety of purposes, especially when combined with Shock Trooper, which adds the ability to knock enemies Prone and steer them to the left or right.

Bull Rush (and most special attacks) is very easy to optimize by increasing your actual or effective size (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=7081777).

Knockback Feat (Races of Stone, requires Powerful Build or Large+ size) gives you the option of a free Bull Rush whenever you Power Attack an enemy, in addition to the effects of your normal attack. Also, you do not move with an enemy when you use this Feat on them (you knock them back away from you). This makes it extremely powerful when used with attacks of opportunity. Enemy moves towards you, you hit them, you Bull Rush them away from you preventing them from getting close enough to hit you, and if you can knock them into a wall you deal a lot of damage from Dungeoncrasher. And if you can attack an enemy that's next to a wall, you can use Dungeoncrasher against them once for each attack you make against them.

It's generally easy to Bull Rush a creature into a wall in most dungeons. And if you have to, you can fly directly above an enemy and Bull Rush them into the floor.

Check out Flaming Homer (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=4108954&postcount=22) or the King of Pong (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=5897646).

Fighters is a popular class, but has few potent options besides Dungeoncrasher.

[OldTrees1]

Why would Dungeoncrasher get the credit for what Knockback does? Dungeoncrasher merely adds more damage to an already free on hit bullrush. If your goal for martial characters is Tier 4 then that is fine and dandy, but why would Tier 4 (rather than Tier 3) be the goal for martial characters?

[Thiyr]

I think it's less that it's not enough, so much as its among the best unique options available for a fighter. As you mentioned, knockback isn't exactly fighter-unique, but it's also not an outright requirement for dungeoncrashing either, just a really solid combo. Dungeoncrasher on its own is a quick and easy way to get damage to a fighter, it gives a fighting style that pretty much no other class can really do, and it doesn't take terribly much investment to make it a major build-focus. In the realm of "things fighters can do", it's pretty much at the top end of suggestions for that reason. Otherwise, why play a fighter when anyone else can do it better?

Edit: And as an addendum, it is the only thing that personally allows me to consider making use of bullrushing as anything more than an extremely niche situational tool. Normally bullrushing only really matters in those odd situations where terrain makes it worthwhile, and rarely am I actually fighting near cliffs/traps/hazards. pushing people around vs actually doing something else useful isn't really a contest. When pushing people around is achieving tangible progress on getting things done, though, it becomes a lot more tolerable as something to consume my actions with.

[Ironsides]

I like how you leave out the numerical values on the damage part as if it is insignificant.

4d6 + twice your strength bonus @ level 2
8d6 + triple your strength bonus @ level 6

That is before you get into the fact it's stuck on a fighter variant (full BAB d10 hp), knock back feats, size increasing shenanigans, and reach weapons.

It's a great addition to a battlefield controller. As far as tiers I don't give a crap about those. They are a useless tool.

I think that this feat also depends on the build. I am looking at Dungeoncrasher for a Half-Minotaur War Hulk/Hulking Hurler. War hulk gives +20 Str over 10 levels so the triple damage @ level 6 is looking good.

[Cloud]

Just to echo what everyone has said, it's mostly why not Dungeoncrasher, as you really don't have that many options. It's certainly better than just more feats.

On tiers I'd actually say that fighter is already borderline tier 5/4, and that Dungeoncrasher with knockback and everything makes it tier 4...up to level 6. After that I'd say it slips back into tier 5. But hey, better than nothing I guess.

[TheIronGolem]

If your goal for martial characters is Tier 4 then that is fine and dandy, but why would Tier 4 (rather than Tier 3) be the goal for martial characters?

Probably because Tier 3 isn't attainable by Fighters without using homebrew or taking caster levels. Dungeoncrasher is a popular suggestion because it's a way to 1) break out of Tier 5, 2) remain a Fighter, and 3) stay in the realm of published material to which most players can be assumed to have access.

[Nerd-o-rama]

There are way better options than Dungeoncrasher Fighter, but if you're going to play a Fighter, Dungeoncrasher is probably the best option, at least for early damage.

[Grod_The_Giant]

Why would Dungeoncrasher get the credit for what Knockback does? Dungeoncrasher merely adds more damage to an already free on hit bullrush. If your goal for martial characters is Tier 4 then that is fine and dandy, but why would Tier 4 (rather than Tier 3) be the goal for martial characters?
Because it's official material from a not particularly obscure source. Meanwhile, you're not getting the fighter into T3 without homebrew.

[Rejusu]

Why would Dungeoncrasher get the credit for what Knockback does? Dungeoncrasher merely adds more damage to an already free on hit bullrush. If your goal for martial characters is Tier 4 then that is fine and dandy, but why would Tier 4 (rather than Tier 3) be the goal for martial characters?

I'm not even sure what question you're trying to ask with this thread. It isn't about hitting any sort of goal, it's about making the best out of what you've got. If life gives you fighters, make dungeon crashers. The fact is what you get from Dungeoncrasher is worth more than the couple of feats it costs. As already mentioned it also combines well with a lot of feats like Shock Trooper and Knockback. Yes you can take these on a non DC fighter, but it's not nearly as effective a build without Dungeoncrasher to complement it.

Problem is it's only a reason to take 4-5 more levels in Fighter beyond the standard 1-2 level dip. Little point staying in it after level 6.

Anyway I'm going to turn the question on its head. Why NOT Dungeoncrasher? What two feats do you think would serve better than it and make for a more effective build? Keeping in mind the fighter still has his other nine bonus feats + his base feats to play with. What can he do with 11 bonus feats that he can't do with 9?

[OldTrees1]

I'm not even sure what question you're trying to ask with this thread. It isn't about hitting any sort of goal, it's about making the best out of what you've got. If life gives you fighters, make dungeon crashers. The fact is what you get from Dungeoncrasher is worth more than the couple of feats it costs. As already mentioned it also combines well with a lot of feats like Shock Trooper and Knockback. Yes you can take these on a non DC fighter, but it's not nearly as effective a build without Dungeoncrasher to complement it.

Problem is it's only a reason to take 4-5 more levels in Fighter beyond the standard 1-2 level dip. Little point staying in it after level 6.

Anyway I'm going to turn the question on its head. Why NOT Dungeoncrasher? What two feats do you think would serve better than it and make for a more effective build? Keeping in mind the fighter still has his other nine bonus feats + his base feats to play with. What can he do with 11 bonus feats that he can't do with 9?

Since Dungeon Crasher only adds damage, it does not affect the effectiveness of a build that already dealt sufficient damage and had Knockback.

Yes Ftr 20 has loads of feats, but most fighters are not ECL 20 and often they take a prestige class/dip other classes. With that in mind, there is frequently a situation where 2 more feats allows the fighter to add either versatility (say dropping flyers out of the sky) or add dungeoncrasher damage. Since the majority of criticism about Fighter is that it is Tier 5 (4 with Z Soldier/Thug), I would have suspected advise to favor versatility over excessive damage. (Excessive since you deal more than enough damage without dungeoncrasher)

[Haldir]

Since the majority of criticism about Fighter is that it is Tier 5 (4 with Z Soldier/Thug), I would have suspected advise to favor versatility over excessive damage. (Excessive since you deal more than enough damage without dungeoncrasher)

If you get more damage from Dungeoncrasher, you need not spend so many resources getting damage in other ways. Extra damage from Dungeoncrasher in the build might save you from having to splurge on weapon enhancements, allowing you to buy some other magic item which DOES allow you to be versatile.

Mr. Burlew wrote the book it is from. We all love Mr. Burlew. We love the things from Mr. Burlew's books.

Honestly, if you're taking Fighter to 6, there is simply nothing better you can do with those feats (like, nothing, really) when compared to the Dungeoncrasher variant. Anything else you might want to do in this game can be done easily without going anywhere near Fighter 6.

So really, the recommendation for Dungeoncrasher is more like "DO NOT TAKE FIGHTER PAST 2. But if you do, use Dungeoncrasher."

[Rubik]

And that's why DC fighter is considered Tier 4 (while the fighter is Tier 5)

It's also very fun to play, and gives some very interesting tactical option with the right feat combination (IE: Bullrushing one enemy, into another, into another, into a wall, proning all of them).(Including the wall.)

[docnessuno]

Since Dungeon Crasher only adds damage, it does not affect the effectiveness of a build that already dealt sufficient damage and had Knockback.

Yes Ftr 20 has loads of feats, but most fighters are not ECL 20 and often they take a prestige class/dip other classes. With that in mind, there is frequently a situation where 2 more feats allows the fighter to add either versatility (say dropping flyers out of the sky) or add dungeoncrasher damage. Since the majority of criticism about Fighter is that it is Tier 5 (4 with Z Soldier/Thug), I would have suspected advise to favor versatility over excessive damage. (Excessive since you deal more than enough damage without dungeoncrasher)

So, level 6 Goliath fighter, 28 PB, 2 Flaws

Unbuffed stats: Str 20, Dex 12, Con 16, int 14, Wis 10, Cha 8

Feats:
Flaw: Combat expertise
Flaw: Power attack
1: Cleave
1: Improved bull rush
3: Knockback
4: Improved trip
6: Shock trooper

Tactics:
Attack or full attack.
Hit opponent A deal damage, Knockback him into opponent B (Can bullrush diagonally), dealing 8d6+15.
Trip both opponents (Shock trooper), get a free attack on both, thanks to improved trip.
If you hit, deal damage to both, Knockback both into opponent D and E, (or onto each other, or into walls), dealing 8d6+15.
Rinse and repeat for each tripped enemy.
Drop a cleave for good measure.

Can you do it without dungeoncrasher? Yes
Is there any better 2 feats investments than 8d6+15 damage multiple times in a turn? No

Let's see an ECL 7 (6 if LA buyback is in play) build, that includes at least 5 levels of fighter, that competes.

[HunterOfJello]

Bullrushing + Damage may not seem amazing at first glance (the damage isn't even all that much), but it actually is once you gain some experience in the game.

Bullrush is one of the only ways that a Fighter can manipulate the position of an opponent, which is an impressive thing to do. Unfortunately, default Bullrush doesn't do any damage so a Fighter must choose between doing damage or moving an opponent if they don't have dungeoncrasher.

Dungeoncrasher is a game changer for Fighters who want to be able to contribute to a party with more than just damage and tripping. It allows them to do some nice damage for their level as well as move opponents around on the battlefield at the same time. This can be a very effective combo and makes Bullrushing a far more enjoyable combat action to use.

~~~

As a side note, ToB has a 1st level maneuver that lets an initiator Bullrush as a charge and do damage if they move the target back at all. Lots of people overlook it, but it is also a really great choice for a fighter to spend a feat on.

[Rubik]

Since Dungeon Crasher only adds damage, it does not affect the effectiveness of a build that already dealt sufficient damage and had Knockback.While it's true that it "only adds damage," the damage that it adds opens up bull-rushing as an effective strategy, as opposed to the standard "charge attack/full attack/trip" roster, because bull-rushing is rarely useful otherwise.

[edit] Dungeoncrash'd!

[OldTrees1]

While it's true that it "only adds damage," the damage that it adds opens up bull-rushing as an effective strategy, as opposed to the standard "charge attack/full attack/trip" roster, because bull-rushing is rarely useful otherwise.

[edit] Dungeoncrash'd!

Hm. Many have credited Dungeoncrasher for what Knockback brings to the table. However you are the only/one of the few that tried to justify the credit. Thank you for that.

Personally I think Stop Them + Move Them is an obvious combo for a tripper. However I have found that combo is not immediately obvious and requires large size/powerful build. This is a convincing justification for the advise.

[Thiyr]

I do notice that you keep going back to the "doing more than enough damage" idea, and I think that might be another thing. How is the fighter doing their damage?

To clarify, it seems you're coming at this from the angle "What would dungeoncrashing add to a preexisting fighter build". And from that perspective, it really isn't that worthwhile. You're not likely to have a whole lot of stuff to support it specifically in most situations, so if your build is already doing enough damage (which is about all a fighter CAN do most of the time), it isn't terribly appealing.

But if you come at it from the perspective of "I want to play a fighter, but don't know how I want to build it", or "I want to be effective while using Bull Rushing", Dungeoncrasher is an interesting path to choose. Yes, a fighter can pick up leap attack, shock trooper, a valorous lance, and go to town. But dungeoncrasher opens up an alternative if you DON'T want to do that as your source for damage.

As for the versatility point, two feats can make a difference. I won't deny that. But it seems to me that there are a few choices. Either you're taking a small amount of fighter levels or a large amount of them. If its a large amount, then you are either swimming in feats you can't spend, or you're still super feat starved. If the former, losing two doesn't matter (and can give you some direction in how to build your character). The latter, you are probably doing a specific build (most likely something like jack b quick), at which point you're not considering dungeoncrasher as you've already got everything planned and accounted for.

If you're taking a small number of fighter levels, either you're taking a 1-2 level dip, or a 6 level dip. The former might be because you need more feats. If so, you are probably doing it with something specific in mind, and won't be considering dungeoncrasher. If 6, odds are you're _going for dungeoncrasher as the centerpiece of your build_ and don't care about the feats. Either way, same result as above.

In short, dungeoncrasher is good at what it does, that is to say turning bull rush into damage. Is it for every fighter ever in the history of everything forever? No, of course not. As an ACF, it's less like Dominant Ideal (which you should always take forever as an ardent), and more like the Combat Wizard (Good when you want to take advantage of it, but certainly common situations you don't want to use it during)

tl;dr: It's a good ACF, but it doesn't fit every build. It's the entree of a build, not the spices.

edit: wham, bam, ninja'd ma'am.

[Biffoniacus_Furiou]

Tactics:
Attack or full attack.
Hit opponent A deal damage, Knockback him into opponent B (Can bullrush diagonally), dealing 8d6+15.
Trip both opponents (Shock trooper), get a free attack on both, thanks to improved trip.
If you hit, deal damage to both, Knockback both into opponent D and E, (or onto each other, or into walls), dealing 8d6+15.
Rinse and repeat for each tripped enemy.
Drop a cleave for good measure.

Can you do it without dungeoncrasher? Yes
Is there any better 2 feats investments than 8d6+15 damage multiple times in a turn? No

Let's see an ECL 7 (6 if LA buyback is in play) build, that includes at least 5 levels of fighter, that competes.

Creatures are not solid obstacles, so you do not deal Dungeoncrasher damage when bull rushing one creature into another creature.
"If you force an opponent to move into a wall or other solid object..."
Maybe if you were bull rushing them into an iron golem you could deal dungeoncrasher damage, because that would be an obstacle as solid and unyielding as a wall. A typical humanoid opponent, even an armored one, who gets knocked over by the guy you bull rushed into him, is not a "solid object" and will not permit you to deal dungeoncrasher damage.

Edit: Furthermore, it specifically only allows you to deal dungeoncrasher damage when you bull rush them "into a wall or other solid object" and in this game, an object and a creature are never the same thing. A creature would not qualify as an object of any kind, especially not a solid one, and would never permit you to deal dungeoncrasher damage for bull rushing someone into them, barring a house rule.

[Kraken]

It also depends on the means which the character uses to already be doing enough damage. Charging, for instance, while an effective method of dishing out damage, is limited in that it requires you to charge. If you can't charge, dungeoncrashing is a very solid backup. And conveniently, improved bull rush is a pre req for shock trooper, so including both elements in one build isn't hard at all. Knockback is usable in a much more limited number of builds due to the large or goliath requirement (or any of the few other powerful build races if your DM is nice, but none are ECL 0), so while it's relevant here, I think it's being trumpeted more than it needs to be, due to the limited circumstances in which it will actually see play.

[T.G. Oskar]

Instead of looking at it just by the damage perspective (it is a nice amount of damage, done while moving, and lets you do a bit of crowd control as well), look at its other benefits.

Breaking doors and obstacles is something that very few people do, but when they do, it's great. You get a +5 at first, and then a whopping +10, on what's essentially an ability check. If you have a good Strength, you'll pull this more than 50% of the time, because usually the Strength checks to break a door range between 17 to 28 (save for special materials and stone, which have ridiculous DCs between 38 to 50. A good wooden door by 2nd level will be busted, generally, on a result of 10 or higher (the +5 bonus, and at least a Strength modifier of +2), and a strong wooden door or treasure chest (the kind of thing that usually have locks and are a pain to bust) can be broken on a result of 16 or higher. At 6th level, these checks succeed on a result of 5 and 11, respectively. These are the kinds of obstacles that a "kick in the door" kind of Fighter loves to bypass, and makes the Fighter feel more than just a combatant. Apparently, it also helps to break traps, which makes it step on the Rogue's toes whenever you don't have them, and since they can also survive traps somewhat easier (with the Trap Sense-esque effect), that means they won't die if they're reckless enough to confront the trap.

Why would this be important? If you're lacking a trapbuster and need someone to open doors, the Fighter can actually take that job. With some (hefty) bonuses to Strength, you can even break walls and doors made out of adamantine, instead of relying on your single Mountain Hammer blow to attempt and break that wall. Just saying "the Fighter can do more than just fight" is enough for some people. The added damage and making Bull Rush a viable tactic? Icing on the cake. This is partially the reason why it merits getting up a Tier: it does one thing very well (fighting, since you can deal very heavy damage and minor CC through bull rush and devote most of your resources to it), and some other things relatively well (break doors or walls, survive traps) just by going through class features. It's certainly low Tier 4/upper Tier 5, but it's much better than a Fighter with two additional feats but that can't do much else but fight.

[GoodbyeSoberDay]

The perfect is the enemy of the good.
-Voltaire

It's a bunch of damage and a little utility, for essentially three feats (two traded away, one for Knockback). Certain feat-intensive builds won't take it, but otherwise it's a good-to-great trade for a fighter.

Will it make them T3? No. Will it make the fighter better at what he does? Generally speaking, yes.

[Loreweaver15]

You also seem to be conflating "Not excellent" with "not worth playing". This is, after all, a roleplaying game, and starting from "this is the class I want to use" means that "well, you shouldn't be using that" isn't a helpful answer :P

[OldTrees1]

You also seem to be conflating "Not excellent" with "not worth playing". This is, after all, a roleplaying game, and starting from "this is the class I want to use" means that "well, you shouldn't be using that" isn't a helpful answer :P

I am going to take a stab in the dark and assume you were replying to me (the OP).

I was conflating "Not excellent" with "Not worth suggesting for Fighters in exclusion of the alternatives". Honestly I think it is reasonable to conflate/combine those two.

However there have been a few good points that convinced me that dungeon crasher is sometimes excellent relative to the excellent feat options fighters can find.

[MadGreenSon]

Let me reiterate: Dungeoncrasher is fun.

Fun for a player, fun for the party, fun for the DM and the person watching the game. Knocking enemies around is fun in an almost childlike way.

The party Wizard and Druid were summoning barriers like it was pinball for the Fighter to do his thing, it was just a lot of fun.

You're never gonna get OMGDOOM! levels of damage/battlefield control out of a Fighter. But you can have a lot of fun.

[Vhaidara]

Let me reiterate: Dungeoncrasher is fun.

Fun for a player, fun for the party, fun for the DM and the person watching the game. Knocking enemies around is fun in an almost childlike way.

The party Wizard and Druid were summoning barriers like it was pinball for the Fighter to do his thing, it was just a lot of fun.

You're never gonna get OMGDOOM! levels of damage/battlefield control out of a Fighter. But you can have a lot of fun.

I actually have an ubercharger backup in a campaign with a tunesmith. We've decided if it comes time to use it and get to 9th level spells, he'll start making me runes of Quickened Wall of Stone.

So I smash someone into a wall, then charge the next guy and summon a wall behind them to splat them on.

[Sir Chuckles]

I actually have an ubercharger backup in a campaign with a tunesmith. We've decided if it comes time to use it and get to 9th level spells, he'll start making me runes of Quickened Wall of Stone.

So I smash someone into a wall, then charge the next guy and summon a wall behind them to splat them on.

"HaHA! You're weakness Sir WallSmash! An open field!"
*Quickened Wall of Stone*
"...well th-"
*broken spine*

[MadGreenSon]

I actually have an ubercharger backup in a campaign with a tunesmith. We've decided if it comes time to use it and get to 9th level spells, he'll start making me runes of Quickened Wall of Stone.

So I smash someone into a wall, then charge the next guy and summon a wall behind them to splat them on.

Hah! That's awesome! Even better if you can apply the damage done to the target to the wall too so you can bust through like a deranged, bloodthirsty Kool-Aid Man.

"Oooooh YEAH!":smallbiggrin:

[Lonely Tylenol]

I actually have an ubercharger backup in a campaign with a tunesmith. We've decided if it comes time to use it and get to 9th level spells, he'll start making me runes of Quickened Wall of Stone.

So I smash someone into a wall, then charge the next guy and summon a wall behind them to splat them on.

There's a 1st-level spell called Blockade which creates a 5'x5' block of solid wood which, if I recall, can be cast as a swift action. Meaning you could cast it yourself with a dip, or cheaply at-will with a custom magic item (if allowed).

[Sir Chuckles]

There's a 1st-level spell called Blockade which creates a 5'x5' block of solid wood which, if I recall, can be cast as a swift action. Meaning you could cast it yourself with a dip, or cheaply at-will with a custom magic item (if allowed).

In all honestly, I've seen that spell many times, but only know have noticed what its true purpose was.

[Rubik]

In all honestly, I've seen that spell many times, but only know have noticed what its true purpose was.

The best way to use it is to stand adjacent to your enemy (on a side of his space, rather than on a corner), create the block on one of the other non-corner adjacent sides, then 5' step to the opposite side and go.

[Rejusu]

Since Dungeon Crasher only adds damage, it does not affect the effectiveness of a build that already dealt sufficient damage and had Knockback.

Yes Ftr 20 has loads of feats, but most fighters are not ECL 20 and often they take a prestige class/dip other classes. With that in mind, there is frequently a situation where 2 more feats allows the fighter to add either versatility (say dropping flyers out of the sky) or add dungeoncrasher damage. Since the majority of criticism about Fighter is that it is Tier 5 (4 with Z Soldier/Thug), I would have suspected advise to favor versatility over excessive damage. (Excessive since you deal more than enough damage without dungeoncrasher)

You can't really determine whether a given fighter is dealing "sufficient" damage because it depends on the fighter and what he's fighting. The general rule of thumb is that unless you do enough damage to turn anything you fight into a fine red mist in a single round there's always room for more damage in a build.

And I'm not asking for a vague answer. I want you to name some specific feats that would provide a level 6 fighter more damage or more versatility than Dungeoncrasher does. Also as pointed out already DC does add more than just damage.

[OldTrees1]

You can't really determine whether a given fighter is dealing "sufficient" damage because it depends on the fighter and what he's fighting. The general rule of thumb is that unless you do enough damage to turn anything you fight into a fine red mist in a single round there's always room for more damage in a build.

And I'm not asking for a vague answer. I want you to name some specific feats that would provide a level 6 fighter more damage or more versatility than Dungeoncrasher does. Also as pointed out already DC does add more than just damage.

Sufficient damage is the amount of damage per turn that a fighter needs to deal to contribute. Reducing anything you fight to a fine red mist in a single round is excessive damage since it wastes your free defenses.


Hit point Trends:
Average HP from CR 0-15: HP scale very linearly in this region at about 12.5 HP per CR.
Average HP from CR 15-66: HP scale linearly (I can't tell you the chi-squared of the fit without additional data) at about a rate of 49.6 HP per CR minus 647.

Since you are assumed to be in a party of 4 and a reasonable combat is 5 rounds, expected damage of 12.5 * (L+3) / 5 / 4 is sufficient damage for an average PC. If the PCs are relegating damage dealing to the martial character then this increases. Dealing as much damage as the rest of the party combined should be sufficient in those cases 12.5 * (L+3) / 5 / 2

So sufficient damage at 6th level with division of labor would be 12.5 * 9 / 5 / 2 = 11.25 estimated damage per turn.
2 attacks that average at 50% accuracy that each deal 2d6+6+1+4 damage is 9 estimated damage per turn. If you had an average accuracy of 70% then that increases to 12.6 expected damage. This can be met without significant investment.

So the 6th level fighter could have
Power Attack, Improved Bullrush, Knockback, Combat Expertise, Improved Trip, Knock-down (more than 2 attacks per turn), Combat Reflexes
Estimated damage: both primary attacks[2d6+11] have ~50% average accuracy, both secondary attacks[2d6+11] have ~25% average accuracy. Total: 27 expected damage (more than enough)

or

Power Attack, Improved Bullrush, Knockback, Combat Expertise, Combat Reflexes & Dungeoncrasher
Estimated damage: both primary attacks[2d6+11] have ~50% average accuracy, both secondary attacks[4d6+8] have ~50% average accuracy. Total: 40 expected damage (more than enough)

So the non dungeoncrasher fighter does more than sufficient damage and has one more combat trick than the dungeoncrasher fighter. The dungeoncrasher fighter does more than sufficient damage.

[Seerow]

Since you are assumed to be in a party of 4 and a reasonable combat is 5 rounds, expected damage of 12.5 * (L+3) / 5 / 4 is sufficient damage for an average PC.

According to this formula a level 6 character is perfectly acceptable dealing 5.6 damage per round. A level 12 character should be doing 9.3 damage per round.

I'm pretty sure most people would call that utterly unacceptable. Seriously, by that metric a level 1 character with a two handed weapon and 18 strength can be dealing damage appropriate for an 18th level character. A level 1 barbarian is somewhere around epic. That's so blatantly absurd as to be a completely useless metric.

[OldTrees1]

According to this formula a level 6 character is perfectly acceptable dealing 5.6 damage per round. A level 12 character should be doing 9.3 damage per round.

I'm pretty sure most people would call that utterly unacceptable. Seriously, by that metric a level 1 character with a two handed weapon and 18 strength can be dealing damage appropriate for an 18th level character. A level 1 barbarian is somewhere around epic. That's so blatantly absurd as to be a completely useless metric.

1) You did keep reading right? The formula I used was twice that (the fighter dealing as much damage as their 3 party members combined)
2) You did account for less than 100% accuracy right? No, you obviously didn't.
3) Using optimization by the numbers is a superior metric than "more damage is strictly better". You might have noticed I used the average stats of a CR+3 encounter as the basis for the calculation.
4) You will notice that there is an hp spike after CR 15. The formula I used was for CR 1-15.

In conclusion, don't make strawmen.

[Deophaun]

Reducing anything you fight to a fine red mist in a single round is excessive damage since it wastes your free defenses.
Huh? That makes no sense. I don't even know what "free defenses" a fighter gets, aside from that provided by a good offense (which you seem to be arguing against).

Anyway, have you ever heard of "rocket tag?" At higher levels, if you aren't reducing your enemies to fine mist in 1 or 2 rounds, someone in your party is dead. Possibly more.

[Shinken]

Why would Dungeoncrasher get the credit for what Knockback does? Dungeoncrasher merely adds more damage to an already free on hit bullrush. If your goal for martial characters is Tier 4 then that is fine and dandy, but why would Tier 4 (rather than Tier 3) be the goal for martial characters?

Who decided tier 3 is the goal for anyone, really? :smallconfused:
That should be a table-by-table issue instead of a broad generalization, IMHO.

[Seerow]

1) You did keep reading right? The formula I used was twice that (the fighter dealing as much damage as their 3 party members)
2) You did account for less than 100% accuracy right? No, you obviously didn't.
3) Using optimization by the numbers is a superior metric than "more damage is strictly better".
4) You will notice that there is an hp spike after CR 15. The formula I used was for CR 1-15.

Even after accounting for accuracy, a level 12 character dealing 9 damage per round is abysmal (averaging between 15 and 18 damage with a single attack per round, depending on accuracy). Like to the point where I'd expect a commoner who decided to try his hand at bludgeoning monsters to death with his bare hands to deal more damage.

As for splitting the damage requirements among the party, yes I ignored that. Because if the other characters aren't dealing damage, or buffing self/others to deal more damage, chances are they're doing something more efficient than dealing damage, in which case the fighter's damage (and most likely his entire contribution) is negligible. Does anybody care that the Fighter killed the monster with hp damage 5 rounds after the Wizard made it so it couldn't attack?

No. In a game where you have monsters being disabled like that, the Fighter needs to be able to one round at the very least a monster of CR-2 (so at level 12 be capable of dealing an average of 125 damage) if he wants to be effective. Because failing to do so means his entire job is just mopping up enemies after they're already out of the fight. The other alternative is all party members are contributing evenly to damage (either by damaging themselves or buffing), in which case those numbers are as absurdly low as I indicated.

Basically in a low op everyone's blasting group you can get away with very low damage, to the point where the damage from a standard greatsword is considered sufficient throughout all play, and a sword and board fighter is a valid contributer. In a mid op group where other characters are playing effectively, damage requirements for the people who care about dealing damage shoot up dramatically, because if they don't, they never contribute anything actually useful to the fight.



Of course this also fails to take into account other considerations (DR, Miss Chance, Fast Healing, etc), that make the requirements get higher. But either way, the general gist of the formula you presented is wrong, and gives a bad idea of what a character should be capable of for anything but the lowest op games possible.

[Aliek]

So you want to tell me that dealing quite a decent amount of extra damage for 2 feats isn't worth it because you're dealing more than enough damage?

It should be remembered: Dead enemies aren't a threat. If you can get a bit more AC so as to not get hit one more time per battle? Well, if you kill an enemy one turn sooner you're just as good.

[Loreweaver15]

http://stream1.gifsoup.com/view5/2837510/michael-jackson-eating-popcorn-o.gif

ten characters!

[Shinken]

So you want to tell me that dealing quite a decent amount of extra damage for 2 feats isn't worth it because you're dealing more than enough damage?

It should be remembered: Dead enemies aren't a threat. If you can get a bit more AC so as to not get hit one more time per battle? Well, if you kill an enemy one turn sooner you're just as good.

By his reasoning, Power Attack is a really crappy feat as well.

[OldTrees1]

http://stream1.gifsoup.com/view5/2837510/michael-jackson-eating-popcorn-o.gif

ten characters!

While I would like to continue this discussion, I do not appreciate the hostile tone in this thread.
Why did this forum get less mature in the 3 years I was away?

[DeltaEmil]

While I would like to continue this discussion, I do not appreciate the hostile tone in this thread.
Why did this forum get less mature in the 3 years I was away?Just report the poster if you think the post was in a hostile tone.

[docnessuno]

While I would like to continue this discussion, I do not appreciate the hostile tone in this thread.
Why did this forum get less mature in the 3 years I was away?

Possibly because in those 3 years we already saw quite a number of people pretending to be right despite providing no evidence past "this is how i thing the game should be played".

[Loreweaver15]

While I would like to continue this discussion, I do not appreciate the hostile tone in this thread.
Why did this forum get less mature in the 3 years I was away?

I'm not trying to be hostile, sorry. I just really like math and optimization threads! They're really interesting, and heated discussions are always popcorn-worthy.

I didn't mean to offend you, I'm sorry.

[Seerow]

While I would like to continue this discussion, I do not appreciate the hostile tone in this thread.
Why did this forum get less mature in the 3 years I was away?

What hostile tone are you referring to? Flow of thread:

You ask why Dungeoncrasher is considered good.
People give you the answer.
You disagree that damage matters, make claim about how much damage a character should deal.
People disagree with your claims.

I'm not sure why reasoned disagreement is being portrayed as hostility here.

[Nihilarian]

While I would like to continue this discussion, I do not appreciate the hostile tone in this thread.
Why did this forum get less mature in the 3 years I was away?Hey man. Let a fellow enjoy his popcorn in peace. We don't snack-shame here.

[Elderand]

What hostile tone are you referring to? Flow of thread:

You ask why Dungeoncrasher is considered good.
People give you the answer.
You disagree that damage matters, make claim about how much damage a character should deal.
People disagree with your claims.

I'm not sure why reasoned disagreement is being portrayed as hostility here.

At first, I was rather hostile to this whole agree to disagree thing. It stank of "everyone's opinion is equaly valid".

Now I look back on it as good times since more and more often people will not even agree to disagree anymore and will simply resort to name calling whenever things don't go their way.

[HaikenEdge]

Hey man. Let a fellow enjoy his popcorn in peace. We don't snack-shame here.

Would it have been better if it was this picture of Scarlet Johansson eating popcorn instead?

http://i19.photobucket.com/albums/b185/HaikenEdge/Uploading/junk/GIFtastic/Reaction%20Shots/167278.gif~original

I mean, all I'm getting from either gif is "I'm going to enjoy watching this discussion."

[Rejusu]

Sufficient damage is the amount of damage per turn that a fighter needs to deal to contribute. Reducing anything you fight to a fine red mist in a single round is excessive damage since it wastes your free defenses.

What free defences? And haven't you heard that the best defence is a good offence? The most damage a fine red mist can do to you is if you accidentally inhale too much of it. Doing significantly more damage than you need to drop an enemy in a single attack is excessive, anything less than that however means there's a justification for additional damage. I don't know how you expect to convince anyone that killing enemies quickly is somehow a bad thing.



So sufficient damage at 6th level with division of labor would be 12.5 * 9 / 5 / 2 = 11.25 estimated damage per turn.
2 attacks that average at 50% accuracy that each deal 2d6+6+1+4 damage is 9 estimated damage per turn. If you had an average accuracy of 70% then that increases to 12.6 expected damage. This can be met without significant investment.

I thought this was an adventuring party, not the communist party. I wasn't aware encounters were about meeting quotas. The problem you're assuming all members of the party are doing damage and they're all doing roughly equal damage. This is almost never the case.


So the 6th level fighter could have
Power Attack, Improved Bullrush, Knockback, Combat Expertise, Improved Trip, Knock-down (more than 2 attacks per turn), Combat Reflexes
Estimated damage: both primary attacks[2d6+11] have ~50% average accuracy, both secondary attacks[2d6+11] have ~25% average accuracy. Total: 27 expected damage (more than enough)

or

Power Attack, Improved Bullrush, Knockback, Combat Expertise, Combat Reflexes & Dungeoncrasher
Estimated damage: both primary attacks[2d6+11] have ~50% average accuracy, both secondary attacks[4d6+8] have ~50% average accuracy. Total: 40 expected damage (more than enough)

So the non dungeoncrasher fighter does more than sufficient damage and has one more combat trick than the dungeoncrasher fighter. The dungeoncrasher fighter does more than sufficient damage.

If you don't post more about this hypothetical fighter other than his feats you're largely pulling numbers out of thin air. What is this fighters strength bonus? What power attack modifier is he using? But even without that information I can tell that there's some major errors.

Where are you getting the number of attacks from for a start? You refer to "both primary attacks" and "both secondary attacks" for both which implies four attacks. This isn't the case for either fighter. Assuming you're in a position to full attack you have two attacks which each give a free trip attempt if you hit, you then get one free attack from improved trip. You can then bullrush them if you like (no damage). So that's three attacks.

The second fighter gets the same number of attacks only replace the damage from improved trip with the damage from dungeon crasher. Which you've listed incorrectly as it should actually be 8d6 +15 (I think your build has +4 as the strength modifier but a Goliath fighter should have 20str minimum, 16 base plus four racial). Combat reflexes should also be replaced by shock trooper as it provides far more utility, such as being able to trip.

Also not taken into account is that improved trip damage requires a successful trip and a successful attack roll. Dungeon crasher damage merely requires a successful bull rush and a wall. Plus because of knock back you add your power attack modifier to your bull rush check, you don't get that with knockdown.

So if you swap reflexes for shock trooper you have two fighters who can do two tricks (tripping and bull rushing) only one does more damage and is better at bull rushing and can trip multiple targets thanks to shock trooper. But even if you swap reflexes on the other build for shock trooper it still doesn't have the advantage.

Combat reflexes isn't really worthwhile on either build. If you're going to qualify for Knockback or Knockdown you're taking a race with a dexterity penalty. And since you need 13 int for expertise and a good strength score you don't really have much to invest into dex unless you sacrifice your con. At most you're going to get one extra AoO, two if you really hurt your other important stats.

Let's put it this way. The cost of dealing good damage with tripping is the same as dealing damage with bull rushing: two feats. Improved trip and Knockdown. Only dungeon crasher does more damage and adds more utility.

I asked you to give me an example of two feats that provided more effectiveness than DC does. These feats don't do that and so aren't good examples.

[Seerow]

Combat reflexes isn't really worthwhile on either build. If you're going to qualify for Knockback or Knockdown you're taking a race with a dexterity penalty. And since you need 13 int for expertise and a good strength score you don't really have much to invest into dex unless you sacrifice your con. At most you're going to get one extra AoO, two if you really hurt your other important stats.


Disagree with this. Combat Reflexes is key for either build. You want to get into the thick of things and force enemies to provoke AoOs from any possible action and use that to get more attacks to maneuver and/or damage them. Without combat reflexes, you're a beatstick, but one that is mostly ignorable.

I've seen arguments that dexterity is in fact more important than strength for an optimized battlefield control meleer, and I don't doubt it personally.

[OldTrees1]

What hostile tone are you referring to? Flow of thread:

History
Everything is summarized, you can see both the increase in hostility near the end and see the quality posts thoughout (but concentrated in the first half)
Post 1: Opening Post with the question "Why DC was recommended so frequently?".
Post 2-23: Various reasoned posts. Some credited DC for the merits of Bullrush without giving support but it was capped with a post that did give reasons.
Post 24: I agreeing with the consensus so far "DC is a good option but not the only good option for those slots".
Posts 25-29: Some rules discussion and more of the 2-23 quality moving into tangets
Posts 30-31: A misunderstanding being cleared up
Posts 32-38: More tangets

Post 39: A valid question/argument against the concept of "sufficient damage"
Post 40: A multipart description of sufficient damage using "optimization by the numbers" data. (including a math error on my part DC is 8d6+3Str so it would be closer to 60 estimated damage per round)
Post 41:
Not reading the entire post
Creating a strawman flawed is several aspects
Demanding I agree without providing evidence
Post 42: Making Post 41 aware of their actions
Post 43:
Misunderstanding that fighters have hp (a free defense) that is useless if they optimize damage to the point that they end the combat on their turn before anyone else (including their party) can act.
"Anyway, have you ever heard of 'rocket tag?'"
Misreading the context (high level being mentioned)
Post 44: Reasonably correcting me on my poor choice of words.
Post 45:
Continuing to not read the post they did not read.
Continuing to intentionally misrepresent the damage threshold I was suggesting.
Use of hyperbole to further construct a strawman.
Claiming the non fighters would not deal damage and then not counting their contributions. Either this was doublethink or it was intentionally being fallacious.
Ended with a reasoned critique (the equation ignored DR/Fast Healing and Miss Chance since it just used the hp statistic.)
Post 46:
A misunderstanding/misreading (I said that "dealing enough damage was reason DC was not necessary. Thus the feats can be spend on more versatility if desired.")
Post 47: Use of the "Let's watch the majority ridicule this idiot".gif
Post 48: "By his reasoning, Power Attack is a really crappy feat as well."
Failure to read previous post and implied Ad hominem.


Also somewhere in there the stawman "Why do people take DC?" replaced my actual initial (and answered) question "Why is DC recommended so frequently?".

So yes there has been a rapid decline in both the maturity and a rapid increase in the hostility of the posts since post 41.

Good day, good bye.

[Rubik]

Would it have been better if it was this picture of Scarlet Johansson eating popcorn instead?

http://i19.photobucket.com/albums/b185/HaikenEdge/Uploading/junk/GIFtastic/Reaction%20Shots/167278.gif~original

I mean, all I'm getting from either gif is "I'm going to enjoy watching this discussion."At least she's munching with her mouth closed.

I really don't like seeing people's food while it's being eaten.

[EugeneVoid]

My Signature

[MesiDoomstalker]

Hah! That's awesome! Even better if you can apply the damage done to the target to the wall too so you can bust through like a deranged, bloodthirsty Kool-Aid Man.

"Oooooh YEAH!":smallbiggrin:

If I'm not mistaken, Dungeoncrasher does damage both to the target and the firm stone wall you just made a stone angel in. I mean, its the basis of this tactic (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0808.html).

[Shinken]

I can't even see the gif from post #47, but from what I understand people talking about, it's someone eating pop corn.
As far as I'm aware, that does not mean what the OP thinks it means.

[Seerow]

Post 40: A multipart description of sufficient damage using "optimization by the numbers" data.
Post 41:
Not reading the entire post
Creating a strawman flawed is several aspects
Demanding I agree without providing evidence

The post there was exaggerated, but it doesn't change that the expectations of damage you provided are laughably low, as was expanded upon by later posts.

And I did read your whole post, I just disagreed with your reasoning for doubling the Fighter's expected damage output. Because if the other characters aren't doing damage, they're most likely dropping spells to keep enemies out of the fight entirely, making damage superfluous. I explained this in the followup post.

Post 42: Making Post 41 aware of their actions

Post 43:
Misunderstanding that fighters have hp (a free defense) that is useless if they optimize damage to the point that they end the combat on their turn before anyone else (including their party) can act.

The 'more hp' is a pretty weak defense as far as such things go. It's noticeable, but 2hp per level above average is pretty minor. Especially compared to the defenses the Fighter really has no access to that others do.

This poster was correctly pointing out that against a real threat, you don't want the fight to drag out. Pink misting the entire combat in one round is over the top, but so is letting the fight against a CR+3 enemy drag out 5 rounds. If the enemy is a stock enemy with a high offensive focus, 5 rounds means losing party members. Seriously compare a 4th level party against a CR7 Giant. Do you think they'll survive if that Giant lives and attacks the party for a whole 5 rounds?




Post 45:
Continuing to not read the post they did not read.
Continuing to intentionally misrepresent the damage threshold I was suggesting.
Use of hyperbole to further construct a strawman.
Claiming the non fighters would not deal damage and then not counting their contributions. Either this was doublethink or it was intentionally being fallacious.
Ended with a reasoned critique (the equation ignored DR/Fast Healing and Miss Chance since it just used the hp statistic.)

And you accuse me of not reading your posts?

1) The damage threshold you were suggesting assumes a party of 4 attacking the target. When you doubled it by saying half the party isn't bothering to deal damage, the only reasonable explanation is they are using spells that take enemies out of the fight. If you have only a single enemy (as in your CR+3 example), this means it's a race between who takes the enemy down first, a failed save or damage from the party.

In a low op game, the failed save is most likely happening first, which DOES make the damage irrelevant. Which is why I switched gears to talking about taking out a lower CR enemy, since you're more likely to run into a number of them. So while the Wizard takes out a guy, the Fighter takes one out too.

In a high op game, the failed save and death by damage will both happen on round one even against a high CR enemy. In these games, enemies tend to be optimized more defensively, and have lots of minions (either gained through abilities to avoid boosting CR, or otherwise and it just ends up being a high CR effective encounter).

2) In what way did I not count the non-fighter's contributions? I was saying if they're not dealing damage (which was your claim, to justify boosting the required damage for a Fighter), then they are instead using spells/abilities that aren't doing damage. This is tautological. And if they are not dealing damage, it is because they are doing things better than dealing damage. Save or Lose effects come online at level 1. If a Wizard is using these effects, then any enemy he is attacking doesn't care about the hp damage the fighter is dealing, unless the damage the fighter is dealing is enough to take him out in one round, two at the most.

If they're doing something else, like buffing/debuffing, that's still contributing to either damage or the save or lose, and would be accounted for. If the Cleric puts an AC debuff on the enemy, and the fighter and rogue deal more damage as a result, this counts as damage the cleric dealt. If you have a Bard singing, the damage gain from that is attributed to the bard. If someone is debuffing saves to help the Wizard land spells, that counts as efficacy of the save or lose things, which means the fighter needs to deal still more damage to keep up.




Basically, my second post was taking into account what the rest of the party was doing. Which is exactly what you are saying I was ignoring in trying to claim I was making a strawman.

Or more simply, if the party is relegating damage to the Fighter, and expecting him to deal as much damage as the rest of the party combined, what do you believe the rest of the party is actually doing? If me assuming they are doing things like taking an enemy out of the fight in a round is falacious, and assuming they are contributing to damage and thus lowering the base fighter's output to what I originally described, what exactly is the party doing? You are trying to somehow finagle it so that the Fighter deals enough damage to kill a monster in 5 rounds while the rest of the party contributes nothing, and at the same time accusing ME of ignoring the party. Just... what?

[Nihilarian]

I had not seen anything but mild disagreement until you called a popcorn gif hostile.

[Coidzor]

I was conflating "Not excellent" with "Not worth suggesting for Fighters in exclusion of the alternatives".

So... When does that happen, again? :smallconfused: Or are you just not counting suggestions to PrC or multiclass out after X or Y levels of Fighter?

[Gwendol]

Bullrushing seems to be an overlooked strategy. It is really useful, and moreso when combined with DC fighter. Knockback is great because you get to bullrush "for free" when hitting an enemy hard enough.
Shocktrooper is also a great addition for obvious reasons. If you plan on taking more than two fighter levels and plan on being a heavy hitter, there is no reason not to go take the ACF.

[Seerow]

Bullrushing seems to be an overlooked strategy. It is really useful, and moreso when combined with DC fighter. Knockback is great because you get to bullrush "for free" when hitting an enemy hard enough.

Shocktrooper is also a great addition for obvious reasons. If you plan on taking more than two fighter levels and plan on being a heavy hitter, there is no reason not to go take the ACF.

Bullrushing itself is a pretty 'meh' strategy. Pushing an enemy into a position 99 times out of 100 is worse than doing something to bring yourself closer to victory.

Bullrushing with Knockback is a great strategy, because it lets you reposition enemies favorably without sacrificing anything. It is a fantastic feat, and if more were on its level the game would be much more interesting.

Dungeoncrashing is what takes Knockback from a great Barbarian strategy, and makes it into a great Fighter strategy. Basically a Barbarian could be a solid controller with Imp Bullrush+Knockback. Dungeoncrasher is great because it is unique to fighters and makes one strategy better for them than anyone else.

Dungeoncrasher can also work decently without Knockback. You lose some efficacy, but 8d6+3x str per attack is enough to be comparable with power attackers through low-mid levels.


Also yeah, Shocktrooper is great for the Dungeoncrasher, especially one focused on area control.

[Rejusu]

Disagree with this. Combat Reflexes is key for either build. You want to get into the thick of things and force enemies to provoke AoOs from any possible action and use that to get more attacks to maneuver and/or damage them. Without combat reflexes, you're a beatstick, but one that is mostly ignorable.

I've seen arguments that dexterity is in fact more important than strength for an optimized battlefield control meleer, and I don't doubt it personally.

But I don't think either is an optimized melee battlefield controller. Furthermore battlefield control isn't one of melees strengths to start with so they're already on the back foot. I'm not downplaying the usefulness of combat reflexes, but I don't think it complements either of these builds particularly well (though the first build could make it work a bit better if its other feats were switched around a bit). I just think you could get more mileage doing things inside your turn than trying to operate outside of it.

Besides without reach (which neither of these builds seems to have) AoOs are rendered ineffectual by the 5ft step. Swap one of the other feats in the first build for Spiked Chain proficiency and I might consider leaving Combat Reflexes in there.

Also I'd like to see someone ignore a beatstick that sends them flying into a wall for a ton of damage. I still wouldn't say Dungeon crashing is a great "Fighter" strategy just because it's unique to fighters. It's only unique to the first 6 levels after all, so at most turns your 2 level fighter dip into a 6 level dip. The other 14 levels will still probably be Barbarian, or some PrC, or anything other than Fighter.

Speaking of DC builds though I once saw a hilarious build that used dungeoncrasher and a spell/power that allowed them to make ranged bull rushs. I also think the character was a ghost. It was basically a poltergeist build.

[Rubik]

Besides without reach (which neither of these builds seems to have) AoOs are rendered ineffectual by the 5ft step. Swap one of the other feats in the first build for Spiked Chain proficiency and I might consider leaving Combat Reflexes in there.Or do something a bit more intelligent and not waste a feat on the spiked chain? Guisarmes are much better for not wasting a feat, and since you can pair them with cheap gauntlets (spiked or otherwise), you don't waste that feat while still retaining your ability to attack adjacent creatures. Then use that otherwise wasted feat on Combat Reflexes.

[DigoDragon]

One of my players loves to play fighters and loves to charge into battle. Dungeoncrasher became her best friend. She's flustered many spellcasters by keeping them on a first-name basis with the floor. :smallbiggrin:

So yeah, +1 vote to the "Its a fun concept to play" category.

[Keld Denar]

Or do something a bit more intelligent and not waste a feat on the spiked chain? Guisarmes are much better for not wasting a feat, and since you can pair them with cheap gauntlets (spiked or otherwise), you don't waste that feat while still retaining your ability to attack adjacent creatures. Then use that otherwise wasted feat on Combat Reflexes.

Depends on what you control with and your average size category. If you are controlling primarily with Stand Still, a Spiked Chain is superior. Stand Still DCs are based on damage. Its hard to get DCs over 20 with just 1d6+Str+1 or so. That's like, DC 12 or so. You don't get 1.5x Str or Power Attack or whatever other bonuses your primary weapon might have. Also, you have to chose on your turn to threaten close or threaten far. Taking a hand off your Guisarme is a free action, true, but you can only do free actions on your turn. You can't take your hand off your weapon to punch someone on their turn, which is where most AoOs happen. This isn't a large concern, however, if you are not large. If you are, your adjacent dead zone increases to 10'. Foes can literally run circles around you for all the good you can do. You can't Power Attack with a gauntlet or Armor Spikes, so that removes Knockback as a control option, and neither of those weapons are special Tripping weapons either.

For pure control, you can't top the Chain. It has the best return on investment of nearly any other control feat printed in terms of how you utilize the other control abilities you have.

[Rejusu]

Or do something a bit more intelligent and not waste a feat on the spiked chain? Guisarmes are much better for not wasting a feat, and since you can pair them with cheap gauntlets (spiked or otherwise), you don't waste that feat while still retaining your ability to attack adjacent creatures. Then use that otherwise wasted feat on Combat Reflexes.

No instead you waste a lot of potential damage since your gauntlet attack will be far far weaker and maybe even ineffectual after a point. A spiked chain is also finesse-able if you want to pile on the Dex. Besides going by RAW you can't switch out of turn (even if you argue that you can let go with one hand, rather than dropping the weapon completely, as a free action you can only take free actions during your turn) so if an enemy moves inside the deadzone of your guisarme you can't make your AoOs. It may hurt that spiked chain costs a feat, but it doesn't mean it's not an intelligent choice. There are benefits to using it over the combo you've suggested.

[Rubik]

Unless I'm mistaken, dropping one hand from your weapon is a free action.

[Coidzor]

Depends on what you control with and your average size category. If you are controlling primarily with Stand Still, a Spiked Chain is superior. Stand Still DCs are based on damage. Its hard to get DCs over 20 with just 1d6+Str+1 or so. That's like, DC 12 or so. You don't get 1.5x Str or Power Attack or whatever other bonuses your primary weapon might have. Also, you have to chose on your turn to threaten close or threaten far. Taking a hand off your Guisarme is a free action, true, but you can only do free actions on your turn. You can't take your hand off your weapon to punch someone on their turn, which is where most AoOs happen. This isn't a large concern, however, if you are not large. If you are, your adjacent dead zone increases to 10'. Foes can literally run circles around you for all the good you can do. You can't Power Attack with a gauntlet or Armor Spikes, so that removes Knockback as a control option, and neither of those weapons are special Tripping weapons either.

For pure control, you can't top the Chain. It has the best return on investment of nearly any other control feat printed in terms of how you utilize the other control abilities you have.

Where are you getting 1d6 from? :smallconfused: A Medium creature's Guisarme and Spiked Chain are both 2d4, and a spiked gauntlet is 1d4. A Small Creature's Spiked Chain and Guisarme are both 1d6 though, but then it's not a difference between the two weapons.

Good point about PA and Knockback and tripping though.

[Keld Denar]

1d6 is medium creature Armor Spikes damage. If they are inside of your control donut, you have to use your backup weapon, the Spikes, which do not afford much control.

[Coidzor]

1d6 is medium creature Armor Spikes damage. If they are inside of your control donut, you have to use your backup weapon, the Spikes, which do not afford much control.

d'oh. I was just thinking that I hadn't seen armor spikes mentioned too. ouch. :smallredface:

[Rejusu]

Unless I'm mistaken, dropping one hand from your weapon is a free action.

Unless I'm mistaken you can only take a free action on your turn.

[Deophaun]

HP is hardly a "free defense" when so many SoDs bypass it completely. And I was unaware level 6 was high-level play.

Besides without reach (which neither of these builds seems to have) AoOs are rendered ineffectual by the 5ft step. Swap one of the other feats in the first build for Spiked Chain proficiency and I might consider leaving Combat Reflexes in there.
Which is why, after level 6, you start taking levels in Crusader and grab Thicket of Blades at level 2. But that just serves to highlight your second paragraph, which I cannot disagree with; Dungeoncrasher is still a 6-level class.

[animewatcha]

DM: Before you stands an immense door of <insert super powered metal here >.

Rogue: *checks door for traps* Dang it. *find multiple traps of super DC on door* This could take some time.

Party wizard and/or cleric: *attempting to think of something that will help without taking up resources* ( Fancy door usually means BBEG or similar mob behind said door and they need their spells for it )

Player of the fighter : What kinda walls are surrounding this door?

DM : Stone...?!?!

Fighter : *dungeoncrashes a section of the wall around the door to bypass it and the traps *

DM: Really? *astonished at the player(s) *

Player of the fighter : You could go into description of room right now or I can do it to the rest of the wall around the door. We proceed to leave this place, taking the door AND it's traps, turn them into cash, upgrade ourselves to high hell, and return here prepared for the apocalypse.

DM : ... * proceeds to start going on about the contents of the room while adjusting for the viewpoint of hole in wall instead of the door *

[MadGreenSon]

DM : Stone...?!?!

Fighter : *dungeoncrashes a section of the wall around the door to bypass it and the traps *

DM: Really? *astonished at the player(s) *

Player of the fighter : You could go into description of room right now or I can do it to the rest of the wall around the door. We proceed to leave this place, taking the door AND it's traps, turn them into cash, upgrade ourselves to high hell, and return here prepared for the apocalypse.

DM : ... * proceeds to start going on about the contents of the room while adjusting for the viewpoint of hole in wall instead of the door *

Oooooohhhh YEAH! :smallbiggrin:

I live for moments that my players do stuff like this.

[Rakaydos]

Does Dungeoncrashing ignore hardness? If not, is there a way to get it to?

[Seerow]

Does Dungeoncrashing ignore hardness? If not, is there a way to get it to?

Bullrush people that are made out of adamantine?

[animewatcha]

Does Dungeoncrashing ignore hardness? If not, is there a way to get it to?

There is a feat of sense weakness. Or if you are allowed to 'test the material' with a Transmuting weapon ( the 1 round later ignore DR enchantment ) then use the weapon in bullrushery. Still though, 8d6 is gonna take care of the hardness. Let alone adding in the strength bonus.

[Fouredged Sword]

There was a thread I started a while back that explored the concept of a character strong enough to hit the break DC for a 5ft thick unworked stone wall. It was glorious. It ended up being a fighter 6 / barbarian 2 / X something or other with incarnum and planer touchstone for the strength domain.

When raging he could, as a standard action, take 10 and push any listed wall over, removing a 10ftx10ft section of the wall. The way the rules worked meant that a 10ft thick wall was just two walls back to back. This means he could tunnel 5ft every round, leaving a 10ftx10ft tunnel behind him, by shear ACT OF STRENGTH WITH HIS BARE HANDS!

[MadGreenSon]

This means he could tunnel 5ft every round, leaving a 10ftx10ft tunnel behind him, by shear ACT OF STRENGTH WITH HIS BARE HANDS!

YES! And they say the magic has gone out of hitting things!

I want this build! I'll name him John Henry and have be a random encounter/ natural hazard who can pop up anywhere!

[Fouredged Sword]

Ok, I am trying to remember it, but I think it went something like this

Feral water orc half-minotaur half-ogre. Stats focused on strength.

18 base + 4 orc + 12 half minotaur + 4 for half ogre + X feral (AFB right now, 4 I think) + 20 for Warhulk + 5 for levels

I think you end up with a strength of 67 that increases to 71 when under 20hp and boosted to 77 with an +stat item, and 82 with a +5 tome, for a +36 strength check bonus. Your goal is a DC of 65, so +55 and taking 10. More than half way there.

Dungeon Crasher Fighter 6 / Barbarian (berzerker) 4 / Warhulk 10

Now destructive rage is triggered by the berzerker rage without a duration when at low HP, so that can be a near constant +8 if you are willing to be low HP. Dungeoncrasher grants a flat +10. Now we are at 54.

Then you take the feat shape soulmeld (sphinx claws) and the extra essence feat enough times to put 4 essence into it. This grants you a +5 to strength checks, getting you to 59, allowing you to break the wall on a roll of 6.

If you can raise your score by 6 more, you can drop the rage, allowing you to be at full HP when doing this.

Stonefoot stance will give you another +2, pushing the envelope to 61, and I think we pettered out there.