Untouchable Tank Build

[BenTheJester]

I found what I think might be a neat combo.

So you all know about the Polearm Master+Sentinel combo right? You threaten 10ft radius, enemy comes in, gets smacked and has to stop right there.

Well what if the enemy you're facing had to enter your threatened zone every turn? Well he'd just focus on someone else.

But, what if you would incite interest in attacking you?

This is doable at level 6 by playing a Variant Human Paladin 2/Warlock 2 (and having 2 additionnal level in either Warlock of Paladin to get that extra Feat)

So what you do is cast Compelled Duel on an enemy. Enemy now pretty much has to attack you. He enters your threatened area. You smack him with a Polearm and stop him in his track. It's now your turn again. You use your Eldritch Blast empowered by your Repelling Blast Invocation, pushing the enemy back 10ft.

Alternatively, this can be done with a Valor Bard 14/Warlock 2, giving you an attack as a bonus action when you use Eldritch Blast.

Any thoughts on that?

[GWJ_DanyBoy]

Seems to work as far as I can tell, but it's just you and the enemy. No one can assist you, so you're limited to enemies you could conceivably solo, who only have melee attacks. Which is a bit limited considering the amount of resources you've put into making this happen.

[Giant2005]

The strategy works fine but only if there is only a single enemy.
I find a better Tank to be a Beastmaster/Cleric combination. Mounted Combat + Sanctuary means you are extremely tough to hit. The enemy needs to beat both your AC and a Wisdom save to hit and because it is your companion doing the attacking, the character can devote all of his resources into boosting his AC and spell DC.

[CrusaderJoe]

Potential issues...

Enemies with polearms, reach, range attacks that use a save, and swarms.

Any half decent DM that wants to challenge you won't have a hard time.

[Myzz]

works really well if your DM lets you do the Staff PM cheese (so you can have a shield in one hand and Staff in other), but need Warcaster to cast EB.

As the others mentioned, your only 'Untouchable' by one guy who is melee and doesnt have some ranged attack.

AC 18, 20 w/shield, 22 w/shield +shield of Faith, 23 w/shield+SoF+Defense Fighting style

Alternatively instead of using a polearm

Defensive Duelist Feat:
AC = 25+ Plate(18) w/shield(2) + Defense Fighting Style(1) + SoF(2) + Proficiency Bonus (Defensive Duelist, min=2)

Def Duelist does require using a Finesse weapon (not necessarily using it Dex based) and only applies to 1 melee attack that you must use your reaction against, AND you have to have a min Dex of 13. But your MAX AC = 29 vs 1 attack, all other attacks your AC is a meager 23 when SoF is up, and a paltry 21 when its not! Throw in Heavy Armor Master and your taking 3 damage off each non magical hit as well.

[CrusaderJoe]

works really well if your DM lets you do the Staff PM cheese (so you can have a shield in one hand and Staff in other), but need Warcaster to cast EB.

As the others mentioned, your only 'Untouchable' by one guy who is melee and doesnt have some ranged attack.

AC 18, 20 w/shield, 22 w/shield +shield of Faith, 23 w/shield+SoF+Defense Fighting style

Alternatively instead of using a polearm

Defensive Duelist Feat:
AC = 25+ Plate(18) w/shield(2) + Defense Fighting Style(1) + SoF(2) + Proficiency Bonus (Defensive Duelist, min=2)

Def Duelist does require using a Finesse weapon (not necessarily using it Dex based) and only applies to 1 melee attack that you must use your reaction against, AND you have to have a min Dex of 13. But your MAX AC = 29 vs 1 attack, all other attacks your AC is a meager 23 when SoF is up, and a paltry 21 when its not! Throw in Heavy Armor Master and your taking 3 damage off each non magical hit as well.


Using the quarterstaff doesn't make you untouchable though, quarterstaffs are not reach weapons and you will be stopping them within 5' of you.

[Gwendol]

You could homebrew the 3.5 knight Test of Mettle. That would fit the bill nicely.

[calebrus]

Using the quarterstaff doesn't make you untouchable though, quarterstaffs are not reach weapons and you will be stopping them within 5' of you.

Technically that's true of everyone, including polearm masters.
As a medium creature, you have a reach of five feet.
Polearm master allows you to attack a creature that enters your reach (which, as a medium creature, is still five feet).
A weapon with the reach property doesn't change your reach to ten feet. It adds five feet you your reach when you attack with it.
While the enemy is engaging, you aren't attacking. So your reach is five feet.
By the RAW, the PM attack granted by an enemy entering your reach happens when he steps adjacent to you.

Obviously many DMs will not enforce this strict RAW interpretation, but it is certainly worth noting that the RAW is written as such, because some DMs will play it that way.

As written, the PM Master feat's OA happens when the creature steps adjacent to you, regardless of whether that polearm has the reach property or not.

[MustacheFart]

I also want to throw out there bear totem barbarian. It is in my opinion and actual experience, that they make the best tank as described in this thread. Their resistance to almost all damage at level 3 is incomparable.

You can also do the polearm master/sentinel trick with them as well.

If there is more than one enemy and there most likely will be, you're still in a very good position.

Trust I am currently playing one in a HOTDQ campaign with a total of 8 players. I've went down once...against the half dragon champ at level 1, a nigh unbeatable fight. I've since never come close to going down. I've seen party members go down and even die though. Oh and I now wear the skull of that half dragon champ on my shoulder.

[Chen]

Using the quarterstaff doesn't make you untouchable though, quarterstaffs are not reach weapons and you will be stopping them within 5' of you.

I think by RAW you can use the quarterstaff to trigger polearm master and then use Warcaster to use EB (with repelling blast) as your OA. I can't imagine that's how polearm master was intended to work though.

[calebrus]

I think by RAW you can use the quarterstaff to trigger polearm master and then use Warcaster to use EB (with repelling blast) as your OA. I can't imagine that's how polearm master was intended to work though.

It was not intended that way.
It has been confirmed that the intention is that you must make the PM OA with the polearm that procs it.
It doesn't give you a flat ability. It gives you an ability with one of the three weapons listed.

[CrusaderJoe]

Not untouchable by any means but one of my favorite tanks is Barbarian (Bear) 4/Paladin (Veangance) 16.

You could grab a two handed weapon and still be a tank if you want.

Your best AC would be 20 (15 medium armor + 2 Dex + 2 shield + 1 defense style) as you will want to boost Str and Cha you won't really be relying on Dex/Con.

Normal attack or nova will both be decent and you will have tons of defensive abilities. Anyone that does touch you will certainly regret it.

Reckless attack will certainly be nice for landing strikes in order to smite.

[BenTheJester]

Untouchable was an euphemism, with the limit of a single reaction per turn, it's quite hard to be untouchable. Even as a Wizard.

I also just noticed that the 7th level Paladin of Vengeance ability allows you to to move as part of your OA, meaning you don't even need Warlock levels. Just attack, move back, wait for the OA and move back again.


Seems to work as far as I can tell, but it's just you and the enemy. No one can assist you, so you're limited to enemies you could conceivably solo, who only have melee attacks. Which is a bit limited considering the amount of resources you've put into making this happen.

You can be assisted, your target can be attacked, it's you who can't attack others.

About "the amont of ressources I've put", it's not like this character is a one-trick pony. Paladin is a solid class from there, and a single additional Warlock level gives you a powerful familiar.

This technique just adds a powerful option to be a tank.


The strategy works fine but only if there is only a single enemy.
I find a better Tank to be a Beastmaster/Cleric combination. Mounted Combat + Sanctuary means you are extremely tough to hit. The enemy needs to beat both your AC and a Wisdom save to hit and because it is your companion doing the attacking, the character can devote all of his resources into boosting his AC and spell DC.

Wow, that's an interesting concept.


It was not intended that way.
It has been confirmed that the intention is that you must make the PM OA with the polearm that procs it.
It doesn't give you a flat ability. It gives you an ability with one of the three weapons listed.

Where was it confirmed that it was not intended this way. The RAW are 100% clear that it gives you an OA, they don't say you have to make it with the polearm. Compare that to the Sentinel feat that explicitly states that you have to attack to benefit from it.

[calebrus]

Where was it confirmed that it was not intended this way. The RAW are 100% clear that it gives you an OA, they don't say you have to make it with the polearm. Compare that to the Sentinel feat that explicitly states that you have to attack to benefit from it.

http://www.sageadvice.eu/2014/09/16/polearm-caster/

Josh Smith
Do Polearm Master and War Caster combine to allow a magic user to make a spell opportunity attack when they enter reach?

Mike Mearls
No - polearm master applies only if you use the weapons it lists to make the attack

[CrusaderJoe]

http://www.sageadvice.eu/2014/09/16/polearm-caster/

Josh Smith
Do Polearm Master and War Caster combine to allow a magic user to make a spell opportunity attack when they enter reach?

Mike Mearls
No - polearm master applies only if you use the weapons it lists to make the attack

Mike Mearles doesn't matter and is not someone you should listen to. Really only Crawford's tweet responses count. Mearles may not intended for it to work that way but Crawford (head rules hancho) might have intended for it to work.

[calebrus]

Mike Mearles doesn't matter and is not someone you should listen to.

People keep saying that, but it just isn't true.
We're not talking about RAW here, we're talking about Intention. And the Lead Designer's voice can absolutely with 100% certainty be listened to with regards to intent.
You can play a pure RAW game if you want to, but when the Lead Designer says that something was not intended, then that thing was not intended. Period.

[CrusaderJoe]

People keep saying that, but it just isn't true.
We're not talking about RAW here, we're talking about Intention. And the Lead Designer's voice can absolutely with 100% certainty be listened to with regards to intent.
You can play a pure RAW game if you want to, but when the Lead Designer says that something was not intended, then that thing was not intended. Period.

Mearles have already said that his tweets are not the official source for rules. Doesn't matter what you are talking about, RAW or Intent, MM isn't an official source. Mike may have said it isn't intended but he may not know what was intended by the head rules guy.

He may be the lead designer but that doesn't mean he knows what the lead rules Dev intended. Its like my boss's boss doesn't always know what my boss intended when he told me to do something.

[calebrus]

Mearles have already said that his tweets are not the official source for rules. Doesn't matter what you are talking about, RAW or Intent, MM isn't an official source.

Crawford makes the calls on what will officially be allowed, ie: RAW.
Any designer's clarification on RAI is perfectly adequate, whether the lawyers like it or not.
You can't hide behind Crawford where RAI is concerned.

[CrusaderJoe]

Crawford makes the calls on what will officially be allowed, ie: RAW.
Any designer's clarification on RAI is perfectly adequate, whether the lawyers like it or not.
You can't hide behind Crawford where RAI is concerned.

Except Mearles has said that Crawford out ranks him and his tweets are how he would rule it at his own table. Mearles may not actually know the intended use, but Crawford (being directly over the specific rules) would know the intended.

Using Mearles just doesn't work, for any issue, because he has already said so himself. What is intended is part of the rules and explains the RAW, Crawford is the defacto head guy for that.

Mearles may not have intended it to work but if Crawford says otherwise then it is otherwise. If Crawfrd has weighed in on it then qe dont know what was intended by the head defacto rules guys, juat oerhaps his boss who may not know what the manager or group intended on a specofic item.

Again with this example... It is like my if my boss told me to do something and I ask my boss's boss for what my boss intended. My boss may not have intended what his boss says. Going off my boss's boss may screw things up because the regional guy just doesn't know the small stuff that my boss would know.

[Jacob.Tyr]

Sheesh, guys. Mearles tells you how he'd rule things. Full Stop. He isn't omnipotent, omniscient, nor your DM. Your DM tells you how things work in your game. Ask them.

I'd allow spells if you invest two feats into it. I can see why others wouldn't, and if it seemed absurd I'd cut it out and allow a rebuild. Play the game before you flip tables over what your magic elf can do or cannot do.

[campskully]

In light of this Mearls or not ruling it worth mentioning that these men are professionals. They constantly collaborate to make a seamless product that can be sold without flaw. They run ideas back and forth and every person involved decided upon a set of rules. If one guy knows it, they all do.

[Mellack]

You can be assisted, your target can be attacked, it's you who can't attack others.



Not if you are using Compelled Duel to keep them on you. Quote"the spell ends if you attack any other creature, if you cast a spell that targets a hostile creature other than the target, if a creature friendly to you damages the target or casts a harmful spell on it, or if you end your turn more than 30 feet away from the target." Add in that they can take a Wis save each turn to move away and this seems less than ideal.

[CrusaderJoe]

In light of this Mearls or not ruling it worth mentioning that these men are professionals. They constantly collaborate to make a seamless product that can be sold without flaw. They run ideas back and forth and every person involved decided upon a set of rules. If one guy knows it, they all do.

This might be the funniest thing I've ever read on giantitp. Not against you, just the thought of them actually being as you described is down right halarious.

Especially since they have been known to directly tweet out responses that conflict with each other, which is why Mearles said Crawford is the go to guy. Also the idea that 5e is sold without flaw, the paladin spell list alone shows this ain't true.

[calebrus]

Especially since they have been known to directly tweet out responses that conflict with each other, which is why Mearles said Crawford is the go to guy.

Yes, he did say that.


Mearles have already said that his tweets are not the official source for rules.

Yes, he said that also. But the fact is that none of what's on thesageadvice is official, because thesageadvice isn't an official source. None of what's on twitter is official, because twitter isn't an official source.
Which is why:

Mike Mearles doesn't matter and is not someone you should listen to. Really only Crawford's tweet responses count.
.... is simply wrong. And it's particularly wrong in regards to RAI discussions.
Crawford's word is law for what is officially allowed and supported. Crawford's word is law for the RAW. Crawford's word is not the be-all-end-all for the RAI. In discussions about the RAI, Crawford's word holds no more weight than any of the others on the design team. And some would argue that where the RAI is concerned, Crawford's word is actually weaker than Mearls' word is, as (a) Mearls is a Lead, and (b) Crawford's rulings *always* favor RAW over RAI (because that's Crawford's job).

Quote: Jeremy Crawford:
"RAW. “Rules as written”—that’s what RAW stands for. When I dwell on the RAW interpretation of a rule, I’m studying what the text says in context, without regard to the designers’ intent. The text is forced to stand on its own.
Whenever I consider a rule, I start with this perspective; it’s important for me to see what you see, not what I wished we’d published or thought we published."

Crawford always starts there. He always takes the RAW angle first and foremost. And he actively avoids questions regarding Intent in most cases. So he is certainly not the one to go to for RAI questions, because that's not how he answers questions.

[TheDeadlyShoe]

Uh, how come noone is mentioning that you have to reliably hit twice a turn in order for this to work? Even against a single enemy, it is pretty likely that you will miss either the Sentinel or EB attacks. Especially since the obvious thing to do if move-0'd is to Dodge.

It actually seems more applicable to a situation with three or more enemies to me, since you are reasonably likely to limit the number of enemies that can engage you in a single turn.

[Oscredwin]

Uh, how come noone is mentioning that you have to reliably hit twice a turn in order for this to work? Even against a single enemy, it is pretty likely that you will miss either the Sentinel or EB attacks. Especially since the obvious thing to do if move-0'd is to Dodge.

It actually seems more applicable to a situation with three or more enemies to me, since you are reasonably likely to limit the number of enemies that can engage you in a single turn.

Good point. This isn't 3.X where you could reliably hit on a 2.

[CrusaderJoe]

Good point. This isn't 3.X where you could reliably hit on a 2.

Monsters have relatively low ACs, even the upper CR dragons don't always get more than 19 AC. By that time you will have a +9 (+3 mod + 6 prof) to +11(+5 mod + 6 prof) on attack rolls.

You have a 50% shot at hitting the 19 on the low end there and a greater than 50% shot of hitting if you focused on your attack stat. Add in all the ways to get advantage and you won't be missing that often.

On other creatures you can reliably hit on a 2, do note that they use bounded accuracy so that those hordes of goblins (AC 11 or whatever) are still used against you at high levels, just more of them. On a roll of 2 you can now hit them when you are higher level.

You may not survive the encounter due to how many there are... But a 2 will get you there.

I'm also assuming no magic items as the game does.


Edit: at lower levels the attack roll is way more swingy since the d20 vastly outweighs (prof + stat) but later on it balances out better.

[Chronos]

Another issue: Compelled Duel doesn't actually compel a duel. Your target can still attack anyone they choose. Their only limitation is that if they attack anyone else, they have disadvantage. But attacking the party wizard at disadvantage might still give them a better chance of landing an attack than attacking the guy dressed in a tin can. Or, for that matter, they might use spells, a breath weapon, or other offensive actions that don't require an attack roll.