Tanky/take damage

[killingfish]

from experience now i understand that in 3.5 devoted defender and crusader are probably the best things to do when it comes to helping your group and to become a great wall. i was just wondering if anyone has any other ideas, almost all books are ok,
The only thing i have is my characters background which causes him to fight and protect the people he loves. Being the reason for devoted defender so i can take there damage.

[turbo164]

Crusader is pretty solid, away from books at the moment so I don't remember what all Devoted Defender does, but off the top of my head:

*Dwarven Defender (DMG) is a "tank" in terms of keeping himself alive, but is best suited for narrow tunnels where enemies can't just walk around him (at least until the mobile stance at level 8 iirc?). Helps if your allies can play Ring Around The Dwarf with whatever is chasing them :P

*The Knight (PHB2) has the rare ability to prevent enemy Tumble as well as 5 foot step, can boost armor and saves of nearby allies.

*Spiked Chain tripper can be worked into many builds to help create a "you shall not pass" zone based on your reach.

*Custom activated item of Shield Other (PHB) can give you a way to share damage if you can't reach it through class features.

*Marshal, Dragon Shaman, and Draconic Aura feat can boost some offensive/defensive stats of the allies you're trying to protect.

[Amphetryon]

Accessing the Psicrystal 'Share Pain Trick' is a pretty solid option for soaking damage, particularly if you're also manifesting Vigor.

The biggest reason Crusader is better than Devoted Defender (and most other options) at Tanking is that it encourages foes to actually attack you; all the defenses in the world are useless for a Tank if she cannot force the enemy to engage her in combat.

[sleepyphoenixx]

The main requirement to becoming a tank in D&D isn't tanking damage, it's preventing enemy movement/actions. That's why lockdown builds are so popular for melee characters.

Combat Reflexes, Improved Trip and a reach weapon are probably the most basic framework for that kind of build. You can build on that with the Thicket of Blades stance, Knock-down, Stand Still, Defensive Sweep, Mageslayer and stuff like that, but the basic idea remains "threaten a big area and punish enemies for doing stuff you don't like in that area, and if possible prevent it altogether". Anything that lets you threaten a bigger area, get AoO's for more stuff enemies do and do worse things to enemies when you hit them is good.

Tripped enemies don't charge at the mage behind you (and provoke another AoO for standing up). Spellcasters don't cast when you hit them in the face with a spiked chain as soon as they open their mouth (or rather they lose the spell and the action, which is even better). You get the idea. Not only do you prevent your allies from taking damage (or worse, because spells), you also don't take any of that yourself.

That's a far better plan than bumping up your HP and hoping you survive whatever your enemies dish out, because all it takes is a failed save and you won't - no matter how tough you are.

[OldTrees1]

The biggest reason Crusader is better than Devoted Defender (and most other options) at Tanking is that it encourages foes to actually attack you; all the defenses in the world are useless for a Tank if she cannot force the enemy to engage her in combat.

Um, Devoted Defender 2(from Sword and Fist) gives more reason for the opponent to attack you(rather than your ally) than Crusader does.

Anyone attacking a Crusader's charge suffers a -4 attack penalty.
Anyone attacking a Devoted Defender's charge suffers an attack (limited by AoOs so 1+Dex with Combat Reflexes) and switches targets to attack the Devoted Defender instead (unlimited).

[Amphetryon]

Um, Devoted Defender(from Sword and Fist) gives more reason for the opponent to attack you(rather than your ally) than Crusader does.

Anyone attacking a Crusader's charge suffers a -4 attack penalty.
Anyone attacking a Devoted Defender's charge suffers an attack (limited by AoOs so 1+Dex with Combat Reflexes) and switches targets to attack the Devoted Defender instead (unlimited).

Sword and Fist is 3.0; OP specified 3.5 version.

[OldTrees1]

Sword and Fist is 3.0; OP specified 3.5 version.

Where was there a 3.5 version other than the 3.0 version from Sword and Fist? I presume the Devoted Defender in the OP refers to either the S&F PrC or an adaptation of it(since I do not recall a 3.5 reprint).

[Amphetryon]

Where was there a 3.5 version other than the 3.0 version from Sword and Fist?

Ask the OP for the source used; it may be 3rd party, or a language difference, or one we both know and are simply not recalling.

[OldTrees1]

Ask the OP for the source used; it may be 3rd party, or a language difference, or one we both know and are simply not recalling.

Or, it could be using 3.5 to refer to D&D 3rd edition(common shorthand we both know of).

But since you do not know of another version of it, my initial response to your undervaluation of the class is still relevant.

[sleepyphoenixx]

Um, Devoted Defender 2(from Sword and Fist) gives more reason for the opponent to attack you(rather than your ally) than Crusader does.

Anyone attacking a Crusader's charge suffers a -4 attack penalty.
Anyone attacking a Devoted Defender's charge suffers an attack (limited by AoOs so 1+Dex with Combat Reflexes) and switches targets to attack the Devoted Defender instead (unlimited).

But since you do not know of another version of it, my initial response to your undervaluation of the class is still relevant.

Spending two crap feats (and points in skills that are likely cross-class) to get attacked in place of an ally is bad enough. Having to be within 5ft of him is worse.
The AoO from Defensive Strike is similarly limited to adjacent opponents, meaning that you don't benefit from reach at all ( and you may be adjacent to your ally or an enemy that attacks him, but you're unlikely to be both unless they're large).
Deflect Attack is also limited to being adjacent to your ally and to 1/round.

All of that also means that, if you're protecting people who actually need it, you're likely to stand around like an idiot during your turn doing nothing because you can't move away from your charge, who probably doesn't want to be in melee range of the enemy.
That all those abilities are also limited to 1 ally per encounter just adds insult to injury.

TL:DR? I don't really see how you can undervalue the class. It sucks. You waste 2 feats on getting hit in place of 1 ally that you can't move away from, while not benefiting from your reach at all. A proper lockdown build would have gotten the AoO before the enemy even made their attack against the ally. And you want to spend 10 levels on that? I'd rather take fighter levels, at least you can build on your strengths with those bonus feats.

Crusaders on the other hand are hilariously superior just by the value of their maneuvers. Comparing a first level stance against a PrC that takes 2 crap feats and adds less than the base class is pointless. Thicket of Blades alone is worth more than 10 levels of Devoted Defender. The other class features are just icing on the cake, and things like save bonuses, Mettle and rerolls are actually stuff that improves your survival chances.

[Amphetryon]

But since you do not know of another version of it, my initial response to your undervaluation of the class is still relevant.
Saying that Crusader is generally the superior Tank, without mentioning Devoted Defender's abilities at all, is not my "undervaluation of the class" by any rational metric I know of.

[OldTrees1]

Saying that Crusader is generally the superior Tank, without mentioning Devoted Defender's abilities at all, is not my "undervaluation of the class" by any rational metric I know of.

The following statement of yours is the example of explicitly undervaluing the Devoted Defender's abilities via the statement being oblivious to the Devoted Defender's ability to encourage foes to actually attack you(which it does better than Crusader) as detailed in its 1st and 2nd level class features(2/3rds of it class features).

The biggest reason Crusader is better than Devoted Defender at Tanking is that it encourages foes to actually attack you
My response was to detail the agro abilities of both classes("-4 on attacks" vs "provoke and attack me instead"). Pointing out these valuable features of one of the classes the OP mentioned in the OP is relevant.


@sleepyphoenix
While the 5ft range is a limitation, it grants a greater defensive buff to your allies than that 1st level stance(to which I made the comparison since I was comparing the Devoted Defender 2 not the Devoted Defender 10 or Devoted Defender 100). One would normally combine it with anther class (like the other class mentioned in the OP).

[Lhurgyof]

I have to agree with the Knight suggestion (PHBII). It's one of the few classes that can force opponents to attack them instead of allies. The Goad feat is also worth mentioning, as it does much the same.

[sleepyphoenixx]

@sleepyphoenix
While the 5ft range is a limitation, it grants a greater defensive buff to your allies than that 1st level stance(to which I made the comparison since I was comparing the Devoted Defender 2 not the Devoted Defender 10 or Devoted Defender 100). One would normally combine it with anther class (like the other class mentioned in the OP).

That's still not a good comparison. You get Iron Guard's Glare at level 1. Devoted Defender 2 happens at ECL 7 at the earliest. You should compare it to 3rd and 4th level maneuvers at a minimum, or what you get out of your 6th and 7th level of Crusader along with 2 feats instead of taking DD if you want to be fair about it.

And it doesn't encourage enemies to attack you at all. It prevents them from attacking one of your allies (as long as you're right next to them). With the caveat that you take the attack instead, instead of preventing it outright. That's not what i'd call a defensive buff. (I call it crap, but i already mentioned that).
It would be bad even without the 5ft range. A melee class belongs on the frontline. The charge presumably does not. That's not a limitation, that's outright crippling for a melee build.

I just can't see how someone can suggest Devoted Defender as a valid option for someone wanting to play a tanking melee build. It's nearly useless at best and outright counterproductive to what your build should be doing at worst, which is standing in melee and keeping the enemies away from your charge, not in 10ft range of him.

[OldTrees1]

I don't recall them printing any higher level "encourage foes to attack me over my ally" maneuver/stances so asking for such a comparison is rather unfortunate isn't it? (not to mention that it costs more than 2 levels to get those so a benefit/cost analysis will be different than the ECL vs ECL analysis)


And it doesn't encourage enemies to attack you at all. It prevents them from attacking one of your allies (as long as you're right next to them). With the caveat that you take the attack instead, instead of preventing it outright. That's not what i'd call a defensive buff. (I call it crap, but i already mentioned that).

"Attack me" or "Attack my charge -> Nope, Attack me and I hit you". The first option is strictly better for the foe and thus they rationally choose the first option. (cough cough) Encouraging them to attack you instead of attempting and failing to attack your ally.

But if you prefer giving a mere ~20% miss chance to your charge(-4 on a d20), then that is your preference.

As for combat positioning, being able to prevent your charge from being hit actually frees up your combat positioning since it means your charge can safely stand next to you rather than having to hide behind your zone of battlefield control. But I can understand how that flies in the face of 3rd edition tanking tradition.

[Twurps]

If protecting your charge means 'standing around and doing nothing' it actually means you're doing something right, as apparently nobody has had the guts/opportunity to come near your charge and disturb his superior offensive spellcasting. In addition: I tend to find myself either in a small corridor, which I can easily block without having to move far away from my party, Or I'm in a wide open space, where enemies spread out, and charging ahead means at least one of them is going to circle round and make short work of the glass cannon I wanted to protect.

And whilst I appreciate Devoted defender 2 comes online at ECL7 at the earliest, it still only takes 2 levels in your build. Nothing is keeping you from starting with 5 levels of either crusader or knight, and have the best of both worlds.

The feat prereq remains underwhelming, granted. Though weapon focus (any) comes for free with a number of dips that are generally beneficial to a build like this anyway. Cleric and/or Swordsage come to mind.

Having said that: If I ever were to build a tank. It would be Cleric/crusader going into RKV. Full round battlefield control which provides healing, whilst having a ton of swift actions for Cleric buffs and save-replacing maneuvers? Yes please!

[sleepyphoenixx]

I don't recall them printing any higher level "encourage foes to attack me over my ally" maneuver/stances so asking for such a comparison is rather unfortunate isn't it? (not to mention that it costs more than 2 levels to get those so a benefit/cost analysis will be different than the ECL vs ECL analysis)

As for combat positioning, being able to prevent your charge from being hit actually frees up your combat positioning since it means your charge can safely stand next to you rather than having to hide behind your zone of battlefield control. But I can understand how that flies in the face of 3rd edition tanking tradition.
You don't need to encourage foes to attack you over your allies. You just need to prevent your allies from being attacked. Taking the hit yourself instead is unnecessary and counterproductive, because it costs you resources to heal that you didn't actually need to spend.
In D&D it's also extremely dangerous, because there's plenty of attacks that will kill you outright no matter your hp or armor.

And it's still not a good idea for the squishy to stand in melee range. All it takes is one bull rush or similar positioning maneuver or spell on either of you, and suddenly he's standing in full-attack range of a big melee monster without protection. Since he also gains no benefit from doing so he's still better off outside of melee range.

If protecting your charge means 'standing around and doing nothing' it actually means you're doing something right,

No, it means you're wasting your turn. Action economy is everything. While you stand around doing nothing your enemy uses his actions to kill off your other allies, with you contributing absolutely nothing to their defense. Or he casts spells, uses a breath weapon or other AoE or does something else that hurts your party. All of which could have been prevented if you had gotten in his face and tripped him when he provoked an AoO.