Massive Damage and Time (RAW Question)

[Obese Halfling]

So, here's a silly thing that will inevitably be a question in our group this week. Maybe you guys could give me your opinions on it before that discussion takes place.

Page 129 of the PHB states:

"If you ever sustain a single attack deals 50 points of damage or more and it doesn’t kill you outright, you must make a DC 15*Fortitude save. If this*saving throw*fails, you die regardless of your current hit points. If you take 50 points of damage or more from multiple attacks, no one of which dealt 50 or more points of damage itself, the massive damage rule does not apply."

Now, if an Extended Creeping Cold deals more than 50 damage over 6 rounds, is it a single attack? And, would the Massive Damage rule then apply?

[JNAProductions]

First off: Does your table even use this rule? Because, at higher levels, that basically reads as "Roll a d20 every time you take a hit. On a 1, you die."

Second off, while the RAW might be read in a way that supports Creeping Cold triggering the save, I would rule no. It has to be 50 points of damage in one instance-a single attack that inflicts Damage Over Time won't procc it, unless each instance of damage is 50+.

[Venger]

This is a variant rule. It's dumb and bad and no one uses it. You shouldn't either. Past level 6 or so, everything will trigger it and like anything of this ilk, it disproportionately punishes pcs.

No, that's 6 attacks.

[RNightstalker]

I think you answered your own question to close. Can a single attack last over six rounds? No.

[heavyfuel]

By RAW, I agree that it should - in fact - trigger. It is a single attack.

But since the damage is dealt over many rounds, I believe it strongly goes against the spirit of the rule (aka, RAI)


This is a variant rule. It's dumb and bad and no one uses it.

It might be dumb and bad, but variant it's not.

[Yael]

This is a variant rule.

It is not a variant rule, it's actually a core rule from the PHB.

Edit: Oh what? I guess I was late.

[Crake]

This is a variant rule.


It might be dumb and bad, but variant it's not.


It is not a variant rule, it's actually a core rule from the PHB.

It is in fact both a core rule, and a variant rule.... in 3.5 and pathfinder respectively.

Personally, I don't actually see that many 50+ damage hits going out beyond greataxe crits, even in my level 12+ games, so unless you're optimizing heavily for damage, it doesn't actually come up THAT often. As an example, a CR11 cloud giant hits for 4d6+18 damage per attack, which averages at 32 damage per hit, and maximises for 42 damage, so barring a crit or power attacking, it's not even CAPABLE of hitting massive damage.

Meanwhile a CR20 balor can hit everyone for 20d6 fire damage with fire storm (once per day), which averages at 70 damage, 35 if you pass, but lets be honest, who's going into a balor fight without fire resistance, so that's -30 from the energy resistance spell unless the balor pops an aoe greater dispel and gets lucky to remove energy resistance over whatever other buffs you have. And his melee hits only hit for 2d6+8, so even with a maximum power attack of +/-20, he's only hitting for 40 damage on a non-crit.

So yeah, people claiming that "everything at high levels hits for 50+ damage per attack", you're objectively wrong.

[Venger]

It is in fact both a core rule, and a variant rule.... in 3.5 and pathfinder respectively.

Personally, I don't actually see that many 50+ damage hits going out beyond greataxe crits, even in my level 12+ games, so unless you're optimizing heavily for damage, it doesn't actually come up THAT often. As an example, a CR11 cloud giant hits for 4d6+18 damage per attack, which averages at 32 damage per hit, and maximises for 42 damage, so barring a crit or power attacking, it's not even CAPABLE of hitting massive damage.

Meanwhile a CR20 balor can hit everyone for 20d6 fire damage with fire storm (once per day), which averages at 70 damage, 35 if you pass, but lets be honest, who's going into a balor fight without fire resistance, so that's -30 from the energy resistance spell unless the balor pops an aoe greater dispel and gets lucky to remove energy resistance over whatever other buffs you have. And his melee hits only hit for 2d6+8, so even with a maximum power attack of +/-20, he's only hitting for 40 damage on a non-crit.

So yeah, people claiming that "everything at high levels hits for 50+ damage per attack", you're objectively wrong.

Do you play in an extremely low-op group?

Even if your caster throws out complete garbage like d6/lvl damage spells, that's 42 base damage on average without taking into account anything that boosts it. You'll be rolling 50+ damage quite often.

The most bare bones melee character in fact, automatically deals 50 damage
(base damage medium greatsword: 7 7
two handed str bonus assuming 18 str: 6 7+6=13
full ba at lvl 12, double for power attack: 24 13+24=37
leap attack: 12 37+12=49
+1 weapon: 1 50

that's not even with any buffs on or with an item that boosts strength. everything at even mid levels hits for 50+ damage every attack, it is you who is objectively and mathematically wrong.

having every creature roll a save for every attack will kill at least one pc every session because players roll most of the dice. it's a bad rule for the same reason fumble tables are, and that's why no one actually uses it, like multiclass xp or encumberance

[Crake]

Do you play in an extremely low-op group?

Even if your caster throws out complete garbage like d6/lvl damage spells, that's 42 base damage on average without taking into account anything that boosts it. You'll be rolling 50+ damage quite often.

The most bare bones melee character in fact, automatically deals 50 damage
(base damage medium greatsword: 7 7
two handed str bonus assuming 18 str: 6 7+6=13
full ba at lvl 12, double for power attack: 24 13+24=37
leap attack: 12 37+12=49
+1 weapon: 1 50

that's not even with any buffs on or with an item that boosts strength. everything at even mid levels hits for 50+ damage every attack, it is you who is objectively and mathematically wrong.

having every creature roll a save for every attack will kill at least one pc every session because players roll most of the dice. it's a bad rule for the same reason fumble tables are, and that's why no one actually uses it.

Well, firstly, the majority of the games I'm playing in atm are pathfinder, so power attack doesn't work that way. At level 12, it's -4/+12 if you're two handing, and no leap attack, so the average hit is more like, 6.5(greataxe average)+12(PA)+7(20str)+2-3(weapon enhancement)+3(unchained barbarian greater rage), which comes out to 30.5-31.5 damage per hit. And yeah, mages can throw out 12d6 attacks (though it's more efficient to throw out lower level spells that cap at 10d6, our magus is using intensified shocking grasps for example), but even they don't average above 50, and the more D6s you throw in, the more likely it will land at the middle of the bell-curve, not to mention many enemies have resistances, and a decent number will pass their saves.

All in all, you haven't done much to convince me that people throw out 50+ damage attacks every time they hit. On the other hand, if you are throwing out 50+ damage attacks at level 6 like you claim, then you are vastly outpacing the HP of the monsters you're fighting, and likewise your own HP, so you're essentially playing rocket tag with your DM. A 14 con fighter at level 6 has, on average, 49hp, or 55 with 16 con, so if you're pumping out 50+ damage, and expecting the monsters to do the same, you're both dropping in one or two hits anyway. Unless what you MEANT to say is that the players are dealing 50+ damage per attack, in which case the argument that "it disproportionately punishes the players" falls apart, because the players aren't getting consistently hit with 50+ damage attacks.

[Venger]

Well, firstly, the majority of the games I'm playing in atm are pathfinder, so power attack doesn't work that way. At level 12, it's -4/+12 if you're two handing, and no leap attack, so the average hit is more like, 6.5(greataxe average)+12(PA)+7(20str)+2-3(weapon enhancement)+3(unchained barbarian greater rage), which comes out to 30.5-31.5 damage per hit. And yeah, mages can throw out 12d6 attacks (though it's more efficient to throw out lower level spells that cap at 10d6, our magus is using intensified shocking grasps for example), but even they don't average above 50, and the more D6s you throw in, the more likely it will land at the middle of the bell-curve, not to mention many enemies have resistances, and a decent number will pass their saves.

All in all, you haven't done much to convince me that people throw out 50+ damage attacks every time they hit. On the other hand, if you are throwing out 50+ damage attacks at level 6 like you claim, then you are vastly outpacing the HP of the monsters you're fighting, and likewise your own HP, so you're essentially playing rocket tag with your DM. A 14 con fighter at level 6 has, on average, 49hp, or 55 with 16 con, so if you're pumping out 50+ damage, and expecting the monsters to do the same, you're both dropping in one or two hits anyway. Unless what you MEANT to say is that the players are dealing 50+ damage per attack, in which case the argument that "it disproportionately punishes the players" falls apart, because the players aren't getting consistently hit with 50+ damage attacks.

This thread isn't tagged with pf, so the question is asking about 3.5 rules.

Those things may well be true in pf, but we're not talking about pf.

Actual pcs will do things like boost their cl or have sources of bonus damage (if they're choosing to blast) The point is even without that, they still average 42 damage, so will roll over that half the time and often do more than 50 damage.

If you can't follow along, even with me showing you my work, there's not much I can do to help you

I used level 12, like you said in your own example. At 12, if you're awake during chargen, you should be dealing 50 damage pretty much all the time.

It's a well known fact that midlvl dnd devolves into rocket tag. That happens no matter what anyone does.

Monsters are stronger than pcs. That's why you need 4 or so pcs for an on-target challenge. They deal more damage than pcs do.

A typical encounter for a lvl 12 party, a cr 13 beholder, which they might encounter twice a day, can whip out 22d6 (or 77 on average) damage. Lo and behold, 77 > 50. Even if you survive the damage, you'll need to save vs your beloved massive damage rule.

It's not an argument that things like massive damage, wounds, and fumbles disproportionately punish pcs. Again, it's a mathematical fact, because pcs exist for the whole game, while monsters just exist for the encounter. Players are indeed being hit by 50+ damage attacks if you're playing at a normal level of difficulty.

[Crake]

This thread isn't tagged with pf, so the question is asking about 3.5 rules.

Those things may well be true in pf, but we're not talking about pf.

Well, I mean, you also called it a variant rule, despite it being a variant rule in pathfinder only, so...


Actual pcs will do things like boost their cl or have sources of bonus damage (if they're choosing to blast) The point is even without that, they still average 42 damage, so will roll over that half the time and often do more than 50 damage.

Well, considering your claim was "Past level 6 or so, everything will trigger it", but you're showing me instead examples of level 12 where it's only occasionally triggering it...


If you can't follow along, even with me showing you my work, there's not much I can do to help you

... then I can't follow along because well, your examples don't match your claim.


I used level 12, like you said in your own example. At 12, if you're awake during chargen, you should be dealing 50 damage pretty much all the time.

Not everyone builds shock trooper glass cannon chargers though. Taking -12 to hit is gonna result in a lot of misses, resulting in it likely being LESS lethal even with the 5% chance to fail the save, and if you're using shock trooper, then your AC goes to the dumps and you're just inciting 50+ damage power attacks where they wouldn't have happened in the first place, and as I said, not everyone wants to build characters that leave themselves wide open after their initial attack. On the other hand, even at level 6 with full power attack, leap attack shock trooper, you're not pulling 50+ damage.

A more reasonable example would be a martial initiator, say, using ancient mountain hammer, which would hit for 14d6 plus extra, but again, even then, it's not EVERY attack that the initiator would use ancient mountain hammer, short of an idiot crusader, which is a particularly niche build that, again, not everyone would want to play.


It's a well known fact that midlvl dnd devolves into rocket tag. That happens no matter what anyone does.

That's entirely not true. Mid level dnd devolves into rocket tag if you let it.


Monsters are stronger than pcs. That's why you need 4 or so pcs for an on-target challenge. They deal more damage than pcs do.

Not according to you they don't, since you seem to believe that the majority of players should be doing 50+ damage every hit from level 6 onward.


A typical encounter for a lvl 12 party, a cr 13 beholder, which they might encounter twice a day, can whip out 22d6 (or 77 on average) damage. Lo and behold, 77 > 50. Even if you survive the damage, you'll need to save vs your beloved massive damage rule.

Considering that a beholder has no less than 2 other save or dies, and at least, 4 other save or sucks... and that it can only use 3 eyebeams in any given 90 degree arc, I don't think having to add an extra save on an attack that will likely never be used is really an issue. After all, if you fail your save vs the disintegrate, when it could have just finger of deathed or flesh to stoned you instead, you should already be dead. Add in the fact that the DC of the save is a measly 17 for a CR13 enemy, it's pretty much expected that you'll pass the save and reduce the damage to a laughable 5d6. 3 con, 4 base, 6 resistance for a wizard at level 13, while literally anyone with at least 1 level of good fort should be passing on anything greater than a 1 anyway.


It's not an argument that things like massive damage, wounds, and fumbles disproportionately punish pcs. Again, it's a mathematical fact, because pcs exist for the whole game, while monsters just exist for the encounter. Players are indeed being hit by 50+ damage attacks if you're playing at a normal level of difficulty.

Look, I agree that it disproportionately punishes PCs, if the 50+ damage hits are occuring at equal rates, what I disagree with is the frequency that people are claiming 50+ damage hits actually occur at, and especially the level at which they begin to occur at. Short of damaging spells (which would be replaced with save or dies at any mid-to-high op tables anyway), which if you save you wouldn't go over the damage threshold, and if you failed you would be dead anyway were they a save or die, and again, are definitely not every attack, most monsters attack more for multiple small hits, or a few moderate hits, and none off the top of my head average single, 50+ damage regular attacks, even a titan, about the heaviest consistent hitter you can pull out of MM1, averages below 50 without power attacking, and needs to power attack for -4 to average above 50. Considering it's CR21, it likely wouldn't be able to afford a power attack with it's +37/+32/+27/+22 attack routine unless it's target has particularly poor AC, say, if they were to be shock troopering all their AC away.

Now of course, they also have fire storm and chain lightning at will, but that comes with the same issue that the balor had, if players are going into battle with a titan, and not bringing the appropriate resistances, or the means to cast them in a timely manner, then, well, he may as well be hitting you with hold monster and coup de gracing you, after dispelling your mind blank.

[Venger]

Not everyone builds shock trooper glass cannon chargers though. Taking -12 to hit is gonna result in a lot of misses, resulting in it likely being LESS lethal even with the 5% chance to fail the save, and if you're using shock trooper, then your AC goes to the dumps and you're just inciting 50+ damage power attacks where they wouldn't have happened in the first place, and as I said, not everyone wants to build characters that leave themselves wide open after their initial attack. On the other hand, even at level 6 with full power attack, leap attack shock trooper, you're not pulling 50+ damage.
If you are aspiring to basic competence as a melee character, yes, I'm going to take it as a given that you're using full power attack when calculating your normal damage output and that you have shock trooper, same as I assumed you're hitting monsters with a sword and not a pillow. Anyone who actually uses power attack uses shock trooper, it's disingenuous to pretend otherwise. The penalty to your ac doesn't matter because you've killed the monster, and even if there are multiple monsters, you don't care, because like all normal characters (aside from those who optimize AC, like abjurant champions, for example) you've invested in miss chance instead.


A more reasonable example would be a martial initiator, say, using ancient mountain hammer, which would hit for 14d6 plus extra, but again, even then, it's not EVERY attack that the initiator would use ancient mountain hammer, short of an idiot crusader, which is a particularly niche build that, again, not everyone would want to play.
Certainly. I think that's a fine example. I just used fighter/wizard for simplicity and easy math. In a similar fashion, a wizard or sorcerer or whatever can't shoot direct damage spells indefinitely, but like elder mountain hammer, it's an example of typical output in a round of combat.


That's entirely not true. Mid level dnd devolves into rocket tag if you let it.
ok? I'm not really sure what you're trying to prove with this. How, past, let's stick to level 12 or so, when pcs and monsters start gaining access to sods like flesh to stone, does a gm not "let" the game turn into rocket tag? ban all sods? say no one is allowed to deal more than x damage per hit? I don't really think this is a fixable problem


Look, I agree that it disproportionately punishes PCs, if the 50+ damage hits are occuring at equal rates,
In that instance, please excuse me. I thought you disagreed.


what I disagree with is the frequency that people are claiming 50+ damage hits actually occur at, and especially the level at which they begin to occur at. Short of damaging spells (which would be replaced with save or dies at any mid-to-high op tables anyway),
oh, I see. so you're saying a typical caster doesn't deal 50+ damage on a typical round because he's casting cloudkill or whatever instead? that's certainly true.

I used a basic hp inflicting damage spell in the example because sods don't trigger massive damage in the same way.


which if you save you wouldn't go over the damage threshold, and if you failed you would be dead anyway were they a save or die, and again, are definitely not every attack, most monsters attack more for multiple small hits, or a few moderate hits, and none off the top of my head average single, 50+ damage regular attacks, even a titan, about the heaviest consistent hitter you can pull out of MM1, averages below 50 without power attacking, and needs to power attack for -4 to average above 50. Considering it's CR21, it likely wouldn't be able to afford a power attack with it's +37/+32/+27/+22 attack routine unless it's target has particularly poor AC, say, if they were to be shock troopering all their AC away.
you're right in that typical brute monsters tend to spread out their attack routines like lions rather than chunk it up in one attack like a t-rex. I was more thinking of monsters with spells or slas, such as the beholder or ethergaunt or whatever, because spells usually deal more damage, since out of the book brute monsters are usually not optimized for melee combat, since the tools to do so often require class levels, gear, and specific feats they don't tend to have


Now of course, they also have fire storm and chain lightning at will, but that comes with the same issue that the balor had, if players are going into battle with a titan, and not bringing the appropriate resistances, or the means to cast them in a timely manner, then, well, he may as well be hitting you with hold monster and coup de gracing you, after dispelling your mind blank.
again, that's certainly true, but I was just talking about how common it is for a monster to go over 50 damage with a single attack. you can indeed mitigate it with defenses like resist/immunity, and they can too, which will reduce the total number of instances that trigger massive damage.

with those mitigating circumstances in play, maybe it won't be every round, but I think it's fair to say someone is going to trigger it every combat, and even if it's not completely game-breaking, it's annoying. either you have to rez pcs or you're kind of anticlimactically finishing the fight with a cool monster with a lot of powers like a balor with just one hit.

thanks for explaining, I think I basically agree with you

[Crake]

again, that's certainly true, but I was just talking about how common it is for a monster to go over 50 damage with a single attack. you can indeed mitigate it with defenses like resist/immunity, and they can too, which will reduce the total number of instances that trigger massive damage.

with those mitigating circumstances in play, maybe it won't be every round, but I think it's fair to say someone is going to trigger it every combat, and even if it's not completely game-breaking, it's annoying. either you have to rez pcs or you're kind of anticlimactically finishing the fight with a cool monster with a lot of powers like a balor with just one hit.

thanks for explaining, I think I basically agree with you

I think a lot of our difference comes in typical levels of play, most of the games I run/play in don't usually go above level 12-15, and spend the majority of their time around the level 4-10 range. Generally, most monsters in that range won't go over 50 damage in a single hit, even with a critical, except for some of the bigger single hitting brutes, but the players can still get those triple damage greataxe crits that will hit in the 60-80 damage range, so in that kind of play range, i've noticed players (melee players specifically) are the only ones who ever tend to get 50+ damage hits in, and I think the idea of a barbarian raging and whomping an enemy, even if it's a boss, so hard that he just dies from shock (medical shock I mean), that's about the equivilent of giving them a chance at experiencing a vorpal blade when they're unlikely to ever have that experience. That's basically my reasoning as to why I don't think it's such a bad idea.

As a side note, my point about games not devolving into rocket tag unless you let them, was more on the onus of the players, rather than the DM enforcing anything in particular. Like, if you start building shock trooper chargers, you're forcing your DM to either a) let combat become a meaningless joke, or b) respond with more difficult fights, or ones that invalidate your character's abilities. If you didn't build a shock trooper though, and isntead something that did smaller, more consistent hits, then the DM wouldn't need to respond in such a way.

[Ashtagon]

Do you play in an extremely low-op group?

Even if your caster throws out complete garbage like d6/lvl damage spells, that's 42 base damage on average without taking into account anything that boosts it. You'll be rolling 50+ damage quite often.

The most bare bones melee character in fact, automatically deals 50 damage
(base damage medium greatsword: 7 7
two handed str bonus assuming 18 str: 6 7+6=13
full ba at lvl 12, double for power attack: 24 13+24=37
leap attack: 12 37+12=49
+1 weapon: 1 50

that's not even with any buffs on or with an item that boosts strength. everything at even mid levels hits for 50+ damage every attack, it is you who is objectively and mathematically wrong.

having every creature roll a save for every attack will kill at least one pc every session because players roll most of the dice. it's a bad rule for the same reason fumble tables are, and that's why no one actually uses it, like multiclass xp or encumberance

If a L12 fighter is throwing all his BAB into damage, how likely is he to actually hit level-appropriate enemies?

[DeTess]

I think part of the disconnect between Venger and some of the other posters is that Venger plays fairly high-OP games where the DM builds his enemies as PC's and uses the same fairly high OP tricks, therefore creating low-level fights where all sides do enormous amounts of damage. This way of building encounter is most likely necessary to properly challenge a high-OP group. On the other hand, there are plenty of people that use the monster manual mostly as-is for their encounters and have low to mid-OP players, and most monsters in the books don't have such hard-hitting attacks.


If a L12 fighter is throwing all his BAB into damage, how likely is he to actually hit level-appropriate enemies?
the shocktrooper feat, probably.

[Ashtagon]

I think part of the disconnect between Venger and some of the other posters is that Venger plays fairly high-OP games where the DM builds his enemies as PC's and uses the same fairly high OP tricks, therefore creating low-level fights where all sides do enormous amounts of damage. This way of building encounter is most likely necessary to properly challenge a high-OP group. On the other hand, there are plenty of people that use the monster manual mostly as-is for their encounters and have low to mid-OP players, and most monsters in the books don't have such hard-hitting attacks.


the shocktrooper feat, probably.

Assuming that's the Complete Warrior feat, I don't see how that helps the lack of attack bonus problem; it just gives an option to dump attack into AC instead of damage.

[ayvango]

This is a variant rule. It's dumb and bad and no one uses it.

That rule is integrated in game mechanics to a degree. Other rules and magic items provides means to protect against the massive damage.

[heavyfuel]

Assuming that's the Complete Warrior feat, I don't see how that helps the lack of attack bonus problem; it just gives an option to dump attack into AC instead of damage.

Read the feat again. You dump AC instead of attack. This means that, when charging, you can take a -12 penalty to AC and gain a +24 bonus to damage without losing a single point of attack bonus.

[ayvango]

it's a bad rule for the same reason fumble tables are, and that's why no one actually uses it, like multiclass xp or encumberance

I see what wrong with multiclass xp. But what about encumberance? Encumberance creates a good edge for optimizing your character. You pay for an item not only with your gold but your space. Two-dimensional optimization is always more interesting then single one.

[ayvango]

a wizard or sorcerer or whatever can't shoot direct damage spells indefinitely
If you are talking about NPC sorcerer or wizard then it would shoot direct damage effectively indefinitely, since NPC are doomed to live short and die spectacularly. So it has about 5 rounds to live and much more slots to spend.

[Venger]

That rule is integrated in game mechanics to a degree. Other rules and magic items provides means to protect against the massive damage.
aside from when it makes a big list, like undead immunities, what magic items specifically prevent death from massive damage? I can't think of any.

I see what wrong with multiclass xp. But what about encumberance? Encumberance creates a good edge for optimizing your character. You pay for an item not only with your gold but your space. Two-dimensional optimization is always more interesting then single one.

oh, there's nothing wrong with it game balance wise. it's just tedious to keep track of. even from low levels, it's trivial to have a mule, and once you can afford a bag of holding, there's no logical reason to ever think about it again. as long as everyone's not toting around adamantine doors as a matter of course, in my experience, most people ignore it as long as you're not getting to weird with it. again, asking everyone how many bags of flour they're caring doesn't serve to make the game more fun, so most people don't seem to do it

[False God]

Math fights aside...

My group actually uses a variant of this rule with the bar at 25% of HP, which means our level 1 characters die even faster but at higher levels it's fairly inconsequential. The DM does allow buying out of it with those feats from Kingdoms of Kalamar though. It's mostly become an obnoxious feat tax, though I admit to really liking the capstone feat "Tough as Nails" and watching monsters literally break their claws when they hit.

[ayvango]

aside from when it makes a big list, like undead immunities, what magic items specifically prevent death from massive damage? I can't think of any.
Me neither. Talisman of Undying Fortitude is what had went to my head first and the item exactly provides bunch of undead immunities.



oh, there's nothing wrong with it game balance wise. it's just tedious to keep track of. even from low levels, it's trivial to have a mule, and once you can afford a bag of holding, there's no logical reason to ever think about it again. as long as everyone's not toting around adamantine doors as a matter of course, in my experience, most people ignore it as long as you're not getting to weird with it. again, asking everyone how many bags of flour they're caring doesn't serve to make the game more fun, so most people don't seem to do it

I think about encumbrance the same way as a wizard's component pouch. While you have it on you all the minor bookkeeping could be put aside. But the item itself provides vulnerability. It could be sundered. Same goes for bag of holding. It like component pouch for encumbrance. The same logic applies to mules, except it could be destroyed more easily. And even considering bag of holding, some players tends to carry insane amount of load. Two of mine was enthusiastic to wield light weapon weighting 64 pounds. I had to point them at some math and common sense.

On the 1st-3rd levels encumbrance is a major part of game. Later its role diminishes. Like role of traveling and random encounters diminishes after teleport become freely available. Or climb become irrelevant after obtaining some fly method. Should all high-level campaign irrelevant staff be ruled off? I doubt. It would be fair to introduce high level characters with their own share of troubles instead of those left behind in the earlier levels. But I could not imagine how to do that consistently.

[heavyfuel]

I've seen the rule being implemented as "Massive damage is either 50 damage or half your HP, whichever number is higher" Works pretty well and doesn't mean you need to roll Fort vs massive damage on every attack at high levels.


My group actually uses a variant of this rule with the bar at 25% of HP, which means our level 1 characters die even faster but at higher levels it's fairly inconsequential.

Holy crap! That makes low level even more rocket tag! A single wound could kill you. Does anyone in your group play anything other than Archers? I can't see a melee character surviving long with this rule in place.

[Godskook]

So, here's a silly thing that will inevitably be a question in our group this week. Maybe you guys could give me your opinions on it before that discussion takes place.

Page 129 of the PHB states:

"If you ever sustain a single attack deals 50 points of damage or more and it doesn’t kill you outright, you must make a DC 15*Fortitude save. If this*saving throw*fails, you die regardless of your current hit points. If you take 50 points of damage or more from multiple attacks, no one of which dealt 50 or more points of damage itself, the massive damage rule does not apply."

Now, if an Extended Creeping Cold deals more than 50 damage over 6 rounds, is it a single attack? And, would the Massive Damage rule then apply?

It's not an attack.

Attack is technical, and it's not an attack if an attack roll isn't made(barring some auto-hit rule exception).


The most bare bones melee character in fact, automatically deals 50 damage
(base damage medium greatsword: 7 7
two handed str bonus assuming 18 str: 6 7+6=13
full ba at lvl 12, double for power attack: 24 13+24=37
leap attack: 12 37+12=49
+1 weapon: 1 50

Leap Attack isn't "bare bones" except among optimizers(like us). And neither is the shock trooper I presume you're using to justify blowing away 12 points of attack bonus. At least, not among "real life groups", which is the context your comment was made in.

[Venger]

Leap Attack isn't "bare bones" except among optimizers(like us). And neither is the shock trooper I presume you're using to justify blowing away 12 points of attack bonus. At least, not among "real life groups", which is the context your comment was made in.

If you say so. Do people really take power attack without shock trooper? I took it as a given the same way I assumed the wizard has a high enough int to cast spells.

[heavyfuel]

If you say so. Do people really take power attack without shock trooper?

Sure we do. I've had a Gish that used PA+Wraith Strike that had no need for ST. Another character made extensive use of Spring Attack's reading from the Premium PHB - which allows for any attack action, likely including a Full-attack action, assuming you have a move action to spare - to hit and run. Run Move in, full attack for decent damage, move out. Can't use ST if it's not a charge.

I think that in 10+ years of 3.5, I've only had two players use Shock Trooper, and only one of which also had leap attack and pounce.

[Venger]

Sure we do. I've had a Gish that used PA+Wraith Strike that had no need for ST. Another character made extensive use of Spring Attack's reading from the Premium PHB - which allows for any attack action, likely including a Full-attack action, assuming you have a move action to spare - to hit and run. Run Move in, full attack for decent damage, move out. Can't use ST if it's not a charge.

I think that in 10+ years of 3.5, I've only had two players use Shock Trooper, and only one of which also had leap attack and pounce.

Well, sure, because he was a gish and not a basic melee brute who can only do stuff by dealing hp damage. he took power attack and spring attack? weird.

[heavyfuel]

he took power attack and spring attack? weird.

Yup. He had just enough Dex to qualify for Spring Attack but was a Str focused character. Move action in, full-attack spring attack, move out. He was basically immune to full-attacks unless the enemy could also move and full-attack.

[Biggus]

I think part of the disconnect between Venger and some of the other posters is that Venger plays fairly high-OP games where the DM builds his enemies as PC's and uses the same fairly high OP tricks, therefore creating low-level fights where all sides do enormous amounts of damage. This way of building encounter is most likely necessary to properly challenge a high-OP group. On the other hand, there are plenty of people that use the monster manual mostly as-is for their encounters and have low to mid-OP players, and most monsters in the books don't have such hard-hitting attacks.

Yeah, I think Venger's idea of what "extremely low-op" means is quite a lot different to mine.


I see what wrong with multiclass xp. But what about encumberance? Encumberance creates a good edge for optimizing your character. You pay for an item not only with your gold but your space. Two-dimensional optimization is always more interesting then single one.

I don't bother counting item weights for high-strength characters unless they try to carry something really heavy, but I do for low-strength ones. It's about the only cost for dumping your strength if you're intending to avoid melee, so if you've min-maxed it down to 6, you should be ready to take the consequences. Yes, you can have a pack animal, but there are places you can't take them, and they're vulnerable in combat. Even a bag of holding (minimum weight 15lbs) is not trivial for someone who can only carry 20lbs as a light load.


I've seen the rule being implemented as "Massive damage is either 50 damage or half your HP, whichever number is higher" Works pretty well and doesn't mean you need to roll Fort vs massive damage on every attack at high levels.


I like that idea, I might adopt it for my games. I've been using the HD-based version from UA, but that's a lot simpler and means that high-HP creatures aren't affected except on *really* massive damage.

[Godskook]

If you say so. Do people really take power attack without shock trooper? I took it as a given the same way I assumed the wizard has a high enough int to cast spells.

Among optimizers, yes, not gen-pop. Hell, it was not even uncommon to see players come here asking how to optimize in a core or SRD only 3.5 game, back when I watched this forum a lot. Assuming 2 different splat books as "bare bones" for normal people is...weird.

[Crake]

If you say so. Do people really take power attack without shock trooper? I took it as a given the same way I assumed the wizard has a high enough int to cast spells.

At my table, when we used to play 3.5, it wasn't uncommon at all for players to use only a few points of power attack here and there when enemies had particularly poor AC and they could afford a little bit of extra damage in exchange for accuracy. Or in a situation where a small, but mostly guaranteed hit would mean they're likely to be knocked out the next round, but a large, but uncertain hit would mean they will survive the next turn, thus they take the risk

[False God]

Holy crap! That makes low level even more rocket tag! A single wound could kill you. Does anyone in your group play anything other than Archers? I can't see a melee character surviving long with this rule in place.

Actually, it makes melee and humans in higher demand, since we can take Undying and Shock Resistant (as either a human-anything or a anything-fighter) to buy out of having to deal with the checks.

Being an archer doesn't really help much, since if we run into a half-dozen goblins at least one of them is an archer too.

To be fair, the monsters run under the same rules. A lot of them drop with one hit dealing even minimal damage.

I didn't like the rule at first, but now I'm pretty cool with it. So I DM with a compromise, 50 damage or 25%, whichever is greater, triggers the system shock check.

[ayvango]

Actually, it makes melee and humans in higher demand, since we can take Undying and Shock Resistant (as either a human-anything or a anything-fighter) to buy out of having to deal with the checks.

Being an archer doesn't really help much, since if we run into a half-dozen goblins at least one of them is an archer too.

To be fair, the monsters run under the same rules. A lot of them drop with one hit dealing even minimal damage.

I didn't like the rule at first, but now I'm pretty cool with it. So I DM with a compromise, 50 damage or 25%, whichever is greater, triggers the system shock check.
If I was on your shoes I would made system shock DC scaling depends on the damaged creature HD. Fort save DC = 10 + 1/2*HD. It would be 10 for 1st level characters and 20 for 20-th level characters.

[False God]

If I was on your shoes I would made system shock DC scaling depends on the damaged creature HD. Fort save DC = 10 + 1/2*HD. It would be 10 for 1st level characters and 20 for 20-th level characters.

Well I can't speak to the reasoning of the DM who uses the flat 25% rule, but in my case when I use 50 as a minimum bar, we don't really have to deal with it until about 10th level or so. For monsters I really don't care if they drop easy, I can always throw more of them at my players. By that point the DC 15 is somewhere between a 25 and 50% chance for most characters.

We're only mild optimizers, so it really doesn't come up much when I DM.

[darkdragoon]

Among optimizers, yes, not gen-pop. Hell, it was not even uncommon to see players come here asking how to optimize in a core or SRD only 3.5 game, back when I watched this forum a lot. Assuming 2 different splat books as "bare bones" for normal people is...weird.

Core and Completes is an oft touted "what's a good amount of books to allow"

I'd also hope the general population can type "feat combos 3.5" or such into a browser.

[Godskook]

Core and Completes is an oft touted "what's a good amount of books to allow"

By some of us, yes. We're a minority group of D&D experts. We're not representative of the general population of D&D players. You have to be a pretty high engagement player to even have -access- to the full number of completes.


I'd also hope the general population can type "feat combos 3.5" or such into a browser.

They "can", yes, but "would" they? No.

[darkdragoon]

By some of us, yes. We're a minority group of D&D experts. We're not representative of the general population of D&D players. You have to be a pretty high engagement player to even have -access- to the full number of completes.

True in the general sense but effectively useless.

For the latter, no, not really.

https://www.dmsguild.com/product/51630/Complete-Adventurer-35

Now, if you insist on paper and in good condition it might be pricey.

I arbitrarily decide to not play with anybody who arbitrarily doesn't like certain books "just because"

[Crake]

True in the general sense but effectively useless.

For the latter, no, not really.

https://www.dmsguild.com/product/51630/Complete-Adventurer-35

Now, if you insist on paper and in good condition it might be pricey.

I arbitrarily decide to not play with anybody who arbitrarily doesn't like certain books "just because"

Yes, but you and your table aren't necessarily representative of the average table. Just because you are aware of, and know where to find material, doesn't mean that others do, or that they will even think to go looking in the first place, simply playing with what they have on hand because it's worked fine so far, so why bother?

[pabelfly]

I think Power Attack, Improved Bull Rush, Leap Attack and Shock Trooper is pretty mild optimization for a power-attacking melee character. It's a well-known and widely-used combination of feats, prereqs are easy to meet for a full-BAB melee character. My personal experience is that anyone at our table that uses Power Attack also has those three other feats if they can.

[Psyren]

It's definitely not a variant rule - it's also found in Rules Compendium pg. 72.

With that said, I definitely think it should be one. And even if it is used, I don't think the intent was for a spell that takes multiple rounds to deal the damage to trigger it.

[Crake]

I think Power Attack, Improved Bull Rush, Leap Attack and Shock Trooper is pretty mild optimization for a power-attacking melee character. It's a well-known and widely-used combination of feats on these boards, prereqs are easy to meet for a full-BAB melee character. My personal experience is that anyone at our table that uses Power Attack also has those three other feats if they can.

Fixed that for you. But honestly, not everyone likes being a glass cannon with their characters. Just because you can add +18 damage to your attacks at the expense of -8 AC (remember charge gives -2 AC as well), doesn't mean you should, and from my experience, none of my players have any interest in having a blazing giant sign of "kill me now" after finishing off an enemy. Shock trooper, to me, seems like one of those things that's great in theory, and especially great against single big brutes that you can expediently take down in a single round, but outside of a few specific use cases like that, is actually really not condusive to long term character survivability. If you're, for example, fighting 6 Ogres at level 6, what would amount to a tough, but not overwhelming encounter, and you charge in to nuke one of them down in a single hit, they're then gonna all turn around and absolutely clobber you.

That's also not to mention the fact that after your first attack, you then need to spend a round lining yourself up for another charge, so all you really end up doing is frontloading your damage unless you invest even more resources into something like sudden leap (1/encounter unless you're a martial initiator) or travel devotion (1 combat/day unless you find some way to get turns).

[pabelfly]

Fixed that for you.

Most of the players at the table I play/do occasional DMing on use it for melee characters. I can only really go by personal experience here.


But honestly, not everyone likes being a glass cannon with their characters. Just because you can add +18 damage to your attacks at the expense of -8 AC (remember charge gives -2 AC as well), doesn't mean you should, and from my experience, none of my players have any interest in having a blazing giant sign of "kill me now" after finishing off an enemy. Shock trooper, to me, seems like one of those things that's great in theory, and especially great against single big brutes that you can expediently take down in a single round, but outside of a few specific use cases like that, is actually really not condusive to long term character survivability. If you're, for example, fighting 6 Ogres at level 6, what would amount to a tough, but not overwhelming encounter, and you charge in to nuke one of them down in a single hit, they're then gonna all turn around and absolutely clobber you.

That's also not to mention the fact that after your first attack, you then need to spend a round lining yourself up for another charge, so all you really end up doing is frontloading your damage unless you invest even more resources into something like sudden leap (1/encounter unless you're a martial initiator) or travel devotion (1 combat/day unless you find some way to get turns).

Having low AC is a good reason why you have high hitpoints when you're using Shock Trooper. And having them attack you is a lot better than the ogres concentrating their attacks on the players who don't have that much HP.

Charging can be ruined by not having even ground to charge, sure, but that's true of any other power attacker whether you have Shock Trooper or not. If they've all decided to attack you in the last turn, like your example says, then they're next to you and uneven ground is not a problem. Time to decide if you need to heal or can try to take down another enemy. If there isn't anyone next to you, you still have full health and have lost nothing from your last charge while managing to make the rest of the battle easier on the rest of the party.

[Crake]

Having low AC is a good reason why you have high hitpoints when you're using Shock Trooper. And having them attack you is a lot better than the ogres concentrating their attacks on the players who don't have that much HP.

There's a limit to how high you can reasonably get your HP, and taking 5 practically guarnateed hits from 5 ogres, averaging about 80 damage (more if THEY decide to power attack thanks to your hilariously reduced AC), in this level 6 encounter, it would almost certainly be better to take SIX 50/50 chances to be hit (averaging 3 hits per round) and take two turns to kill that first ogre instead. This of course becomes also so much worse if you miss on your attack, as you not only miss out on all your frontloaded damage, but you've also left yourself completely open for no return. It's a classic "all your eggs in one basket" situation.


Charging can be ruined by not having even ground to charge, sure, but that's true of any other power attacker whether you have Shock Trooper or not. If they've all decided to attack you in the last turn, like your example says, then they're next to you and uneven ground is not a problem. Time to decide if you need to heal or can try to take down another enemy. If there isn't anyone next to you, you still have full health and have lost nothing from your last charge while managing to make the rest of the battle easier on the rest of the party.

Bolded part is just objectively not true though. Power attackers aren't obligated to charge like shock troopers are. If the ground is uneven, a normal power attacker could just move in and attack normally. Of course, given, a shock trooper could as well, but the idea would be that in such a circumstance their extra feats are completely wasted. Ultimately, the fact remains that shock trooper isn't actually one of those "So good you should always pick it" feats. It's an option, and contributes toward a certain playstyle, but it's not an objectively "best" pick that only filthy casuals wouldn't pick.

What it does do however, in the context of this thread's discussion, is contribute to a degree of rocket tag between player and DM, that results in far more frequent massive damage rolls that seem to inflate people's opinion on just how often such rolls are made.

[pabelfly]

There's a limit to how high you can reasonably get your HP, and taking 5 practically guarnateed hits from 5 ogres, averaging about 80 damage (more if THEY decide to power attack thanks to your hilariously reduced AC), in this level 6 encounter, it would almost certainly be better to take SIX 50/50 chances to be hit (averaging 3 hits per round) and take two turns to kill that first ogre instead. This of course becomes also so much worse if you miss on your attack, as you not only miss out on all your frontloaded damage, but you've also left yourself completely open for no return. It's a classic "all your eggs in one basket" situation.



Bolded part is just objectively not true though. Power attackers aren't obligated to charge like shock troopers are. If the ground is uneven, a normal power attacker could just move in and attack normally. Of course, given, a shock trooper could as well, but the idea would be that in such a circumstance their extra feats are completely wasted. Ultimately, the fact remains that shock trooper isn't actually one of those "So good you should always pick it" feats. It's an option, and contributes toward a certain playstyle, but it's not an objectively "best" pick that only filthy casuals wouldn't pick.

What it does do however, in the context of this thread's discussion, is contribute to a degree of rocket tag between player and DM, that results in far more frequent massive damage rolls that seem to inflate people's opinion on just how often such rolls are made.

I don't know why your theoretical situation has assumed that there are no other party members doing anything in this situation and have no influence on what's going on. It's just one melee guy who charges in, probably instakills one of his enemies, and then has five Ogres that don't take damage from anyone else or have other problems or targets. Is the guy with shock trooper not going to have a good time if all the other enemies gang up on him? Sure, but that's true of nearly any character.

[Crake]

I don't know why your theoretical situation has assumed that there are no other party members doing anything in this situation and have no influence on what's going on. It's just one melee guy who charges in, probably instakills one of his enemies, and then has five Ogres that don't take damage from anyone else or have other problems or targets. Is the guy with shock trooper not going to have a good time if all the other enemies gang up on him? Sure, but that's true of nearly any character.

Except he's asking to be ganged up on, and specifically making himself incredibly vulnerable in the process. So yeah, anyone would be quite bad off when getting ganged up on, and it's generally speaking going to be the fighter who does so by being on the front line, but doing that while also making yourself vulnerable is a recipie for disaster, regardless of what the rest of the party do.

[LordBlades]

Fixed that for you. But honestly, not everyone likes being a glass cannon with their characters. Just because you can add +18 damage to your attacks at the expense of -8 AC (remember charge gives -2 AC as well), doesn't mean you should, and from my experience, none of my players have any interest in having a blazing giant sign of "kill me now" after finishing off an enemy. Shock trooper, to me, seems like one of those things that's great in theory, and especially great against single big brutes that you can expediently take down in a single round, but outside of a few specific use cases like that, is actually really not condusive to long term character survivability. If you're, for example, fighting 6 Ogres at level 6, what would amount to a tough, but not overwhelming encounter, and you charge in to nuke one of them down in a single hit, they're then gonna all turn around and absolutely clobber you.

That's also not to mention the fact that after your first attack, you then need to spend a round lining yourself up for another charge, so all you really end up doing is frontloading your damage unless you invest even more resources into something like sudden leap (1/encounter unless you're a martial initiator) or travel devotion (1 combat/day unless you find some way to get turns).

Why Shock Trooper is largely a no-brainer in high optimization games is because, as a non-caster with a two-handed weapons you lack the means for your AC to keep up. Past mid levels stuff is going to hit you fairly often. A 6th level Barbarian with a 14 Dex, +1 Breastplate, +1 Ring of Protection and +1 Amulet of Natural Armor has an AC of 19, going to 17 when Raging and 15 when also Charging. Many level appropriate mosters can hit those numbers with ease (Dire Bear is CR 7 and attacks at +19, Ettin is CR 6 and attacks at +12, Hill Giant is CR 7 and attacks at +16, Girallon is CR6 and attacks at +12 to give just a few examples of melee brutes from MM1). As such Shock Trooper usually means you trade off a bit of defense (the difference between being hit 80% of the time and being hit 95% of the time isn't huge) for a whole lot of offense.

Of course, there are also cases where you shouldn't blindly charge in the middle of the enemies. Your described example, where you are fighting 6 ogres and there's no way for your team to prevent all of the remaining 5 ogres from gaining up on you is probably one such case.

EDIT: also, as a side note, if in a fight the enemies are trying to gang up and kill the fighter instead of the casters, that's a good thing, not a bad one :)

[AvatarVecna]

Yeah I can imagine that groups not playing mid-op aren't gonna run into this problem constantly, but it's certainly going to come up not infrequently. Less so on the PC side of the screen, depending on charop level, but on the DM side...well, I know dragons range all over CR-wise, and when played like giant monsters rather than tough casters are relatively appropriate for their CR, so they'd probably be an...approximate gauge for this kinda thing?

Well looking across the core dragons, assuming they don't buff up, not a single one has a natural attack that will force a save vs massive damage on a hit. Furthermore, all but the largest dragons aren't even capable of forcing such a save on a crit, and even those are only with a critical bite (although the oldest few dragons of each species are capable of forcing a save on a crit bite, so type doesn't affect that, just age). Mind you, this is assuming the dragon didn't take and isn't using power attack, which is more likely as their BAB and Str skyrocket. Sorcerer buffs can also throw things off, depending on how many splats your DMs tend to dive into for that kinda thing, but we're assuming non-caster dragons for the moment because that's 1) lower-op, 2) more appropriate for their CR, and 3) easier to calc. Figuring out the average DPR for all the various buffs dragons can cast would take a lot longer, and since the obvious buff of Greater Magic Fang isn't on their list of options it's mostly a moot point anyway.

However, the big way most dragons will force saves is via their breath weapons, which can be used once every 1d4 rounds and can deal out quite a bit of damage on a failed save. Here's the dragons by CR where their breath weapon can force a save:

Black: Ancient+ (CR 19+, 20d4+)
Blue: Adult+ (CR 14+, 12d8+)
Green: Old+ (CR 18+, 16d6+)
Red: Young Adult+ (CR 13+, 10d10+)
White: - (even great wyrm doesn't deal enough to force a save on average)
Brass: - (even great wyrm doesn't deal enough to force a save on average)
Bronze: Old+ (CR 19+, 16d6+)
Copper: Ancient+ (CR 22+, 20d4+)
Gold: Young Adult+ (CR 14+, 10d10+)
Silver: Adult+ (CR 15+, 12d8+)

I guess you could maybe face dragons of 1-3 age categories lower who at least have a not-insignificant chance of forcing a massive damage save, which would at least allow white and brass to join the party, but these are the ages/CRs where it becomes a better than 50% chance that a failed Ref save means you need to make a follow-up Fort save or die. And naturally, the lowest CR you'd face this possibility is with Red dragons, the iconic and most likely for most adventurers to face.

[AvatarVecna]

On the PC side of the screen, it's kinda gonna vary with charop level, but generally I'd expect options like this to kick in for them in the late-teens as well to the point where forcing saves happens more frequently for them, even at lower-op levels.

Human Fighter 12 is looking at 12 feats. That's probably Power Attack/Cleave/Great Cleave, WF/WS/GWF/GWS/Imp Crit/MWM for her weapon, and three more floating feats, but honestly getting that far in that feat tree is enough? So with a nice +3 greatsword and...let's say Str 22 for lvl 12? We're looking at three attacks (well, four with haste?) dealing 2d6+18 17-20/x2, without accounting for possible PA? But 4d6+36 averages at 50, so crits have a 50% chance of forcing a save even without PA...so assuming a touch of PA (let's say...-2/+4?), that's now 4d6+44 (https://anydice.com/program/16d36) on crits, with just a -2 PA. At four attacks a round in a lot of combats, with 17-20, that's probably a crit once per 5 attacks...but crits have to be confirmed, so that's maybe once every other round after accounting for failed threats? That's not too shabby for a mid-level fighter with a (by forum standards) pretty garbage build.

Sorcerer/Wizard 12 doesn't require nearly so much description of their mechanics to explain how they might be forcing saves like this frequently. Disintegrate deals 24d6 if it hits, which is plenty. Empowered Fireball deals 15d6 which will force saves just slightly more often than not, while Maximized Fireball will just deal 60 straight-up. Yeah, this is using their 5th/6th lvl slots for blasting spells, but that's basically what you need to do for your blasts to be viable? High-level slots for direct combat, lower-level slots for support/utility. I guess there's other metamagic BS you could start pulling to get some more serious damage but it doesn't need to get complicated or go outside core to find blasting damage sufficient to force saves. Honestly the fireball is better because it doesn't require a successful attack and failed save to deal the damage, just the save, and it affects an area rather than a single target.

Rogue 12 is having a harder time at lower-op levels: +2 keen rapier, 6d6 SA, and craven means 1d8+6d6+14 with 15-20/x2, so with two attacks per round you're maybe getting a confirmed crit every other round and looking at 2d8+6d6+28, average 58. Getting it more frequently is possible via ToB (Shadow Hand with that shadow stance for SA means 1d8+8d6+20, avg 52.5) or TWF (dual-wielding keen kukris for four attacks a round, getting a confirmed crit every round maybe?), but that's a good deal more optimal than this, and once every other turn is where the fighter is as well, so +2 keen rapier with craven is...good enough?

Monk 12 is probably looking at...let's say Str 18 after item buffs, with +2 fists somehow? Throw in monk's belt, superior unarmed strike, and greater mighty wallop from a friend, and he's looking at...8d8+6? Average 42 damage, and with a bit of work on attack bonuses, that's four chances a round? That's about a 50/50 chance of rolling high enough to force a save, which gets us to that "once every other round" level we got the rogue and fighter to, so that's fine?

Barbarian doesn't have the feat support fighter does, but honestly barely needs it. Even without uberpouncing. Str 26 post-rage, +2 keen greataxe. With no power attack, we're looking at 1d12+14, or 3d12+42 on a crit. At four attacks per round with Haste, that's a pretty solid chance at a confirmed crit every other round, which will average 61.5 damage.

[Crake]

Why Shock Trooper is largely a no-brainer in high optimization games is because, as a non-caster with a two-handed weapons you lack the means for your AC to keep up. Past mid levels stuff is going to hit you fairly often. A 6th level Barbarian with a 14 Dex, +1 Breastplate, +1 Ring of Protection and +1 Amulet of Natural Armor has an AC of 19, going to 17 when Raging and 15 when also Charging. Many level appropriate mosters can hit those numbers with ease (Dire Bear is CR 7 and attacks at +19, Ettin is CR 6 and attacks at +12, Hill Giant is CR 7 and attacks at +16, Girallon is CR6 and attacks at +12 to give just a few examples of melee brutes from MM1). As such Shock Trooper usually means you trade off a bit of defense (the difference between being hit 80% of the time and being hit 95% of the time isn't huge) for a whole lot of offense.

Of course, there are also cases where you shouldn't blindly charge in the middle of the enemies. Your described example, where you are fighting 6 ogres and there's no way for your team to prevent all of the remaining 5 ogres from gaining up on you is probably one such case.

EDIT: also, as a side note, if in a fight the enemies are trying to gang up and kill the fighter instead of the casters, that's a good thing, not a bad one :)

+1 elven darkleaf sectioned plate gives you +9 AC, and +2 max dex bonus, while being considered medium armor, for only 6000gp, and a +1 buckler is a little over 1000gp, those two items alone give you 22 AC. Replace one of your 3 extra feats for shock troopering with improved buckler defense and you'll keep that buckler AC bonus even while attacking with that hand. It's also worth noting that that ettin you were talking about ALSO has power attack, so by making yourself completely vulnerable by dropping to (with your set up) 9 AC, you're giving them a free +4 damage on 4 attacks without even needing to try worrying about hitting you.

On the other hand, taking whirling frenzy over rage grants you more AC while raging instead of less, so with MY set up, you're looking at 24AC before any buffs from the party cleric/druid. That same ettin would need a 10 on the dice to hit you with it's first attacks, and 15 on it's second attacks, while also dealing less damage, due to not being able to get free power attacks. A simple protection from X spell from the wizard would bring you up to 26 AC against the appropriate enemy, shield of faith at that level would give +3, so 27 in general, or barkskin again for +3, if you manage to snag both, that's a tasty 30 AC for about half your wbl, and a 1st and 2nd level spell, at which point now that ettin is hitting you on an 18. Getting decent AC really isn't as hard as people seem to make it out to be.

[LordBlades]

+1 elven darkleaf sectioned plate gives you +9 AC, and +2 max dex bonus, while being considered medium armor, for only 6000gp, and a +1 buckler is a little over 1000gp, those two items alone give you 22 AC. Replace one of your 3 extra feats for shock troopering with improved buckler defense and you'll keep that buckler AC bonus even while attacking with that hand. It's also worth noting that that ettin you were talking about ALSO has power attack, so by making yourself completely vulnerable by dropping to (with your set up) 9 AC, you're giving them a free +4 damage on 4 attacks without even needing to try worrying about hitting you.

On the other hand, taking whirling frenzy over rage grants you more AC while raging instead of less, so with MY set up, you're looking at 24AC before any buffs from the party cleric/druid. That same ettin would need a 10 on the dice to hit you with it's first attacks, and 15 on it's second attacks, while also dealing less damage, due to not being able to get free power attacks. A simple protection from X spell from the wizard would bring you up to 26 AC against the appropriate enemy, shield of faith at that level would give +3, so 27 in general, or barkskin again for +3, if you manage to snag both, that's a tasty 30 AC for about half your wbl, and a 1st and 2nd level spell, at which point now that ettin is hitting you on an 18. Getting decent AC really isn't as hard as people seem to make it out to be.

Fair point about Whriling Frenzy. Regarding the rest though, at that point you have however spent more than half your WBL (13.000 gp) on defensive items only related to AC and you only got 6000 more to spend on offense, saves and utility. Hardly an ideal situation and at this point I'd. You're also relying on casters spending their actions and spell slots to buff you instead of doing something more useful (BFC or buffing themselves).

[Crake]

Fair point about Whriling Frenzy. Regarding the rest though, at that point you have however spent more than half your WBL (13.000 gp) on defensive items only related to AC and you only got 6000 more to spend on offense, saves and utility. Hardly an ideal situation and at this point I'd. You're also relying on casters spending their actions and spell slots to buff you instead of doing something more useful (BFC or buffing themselves).

Well, your set up wasn't spending significantly less than mine, 5k vs 7k, and in either case, you're not affording anything more than a +1 weapon and +2 strength item, so all you're REALLY giving up is a few utility items, but even then, you can just drop the buckler, armor, or even both to masterwork if it really means that much to you, though i'd say the extra cost is definitely worth it. Also, at 24 AC before buffs, you're hardly relying on casters, not to mention that, lets be honest, the casters aren't exactly going to be spending 1st and 2nd level spells on BFC, they'll be spending their top spells, assuming they have bfc in the first place, clerics don't exactly have a huge array of BFC, let alone as 1st level spells, so they're not exactly losing much, and neither do druids really at 2nd level.

[LordBlades]

Also, at 24 AC before buffs, you're hardly relying on casters, not to mention that, lets be honest, the casters aren't exactly going to be spending 1st and 2nd level spells on BFC, they'll be spending their top spells, assuming they have bfc in the first place, clerics don't exactly have a huge array of BFC, let alone as 1st level spells, so they're not exactly losing much, and neither do druids really at 2nd level.

I was talking about BFC or buffing themselves. Clerics don't really come into their own as melee monsters until level 7, but why would a Druid cast Barkskin on you instead of on himself in a high optimization game for example? A pair of Fleshrakers with Barkskin and Venomfire (Druid and Animal Companion sharing spells) can cause way more mayhem than a single melee non-caster.

[Crake]

I was talking about BFC or buffing themselves. Clerics don't really come into their own as melee monsters until level 7, but why would a Druid cast Barkskin on you instead of on himself in a high optimization game for example? A pair of Fleshrakers with Barkskin and Venomfire (Druid and Animal Companion sharing spells) can cause way more mayhem than a single melee non-caster.

First off, ew, venonfire. If we're talking about rocket tag, that spell is hands down one of the most egregious offenders. Secondly, the druid casting barkskin on himself does not make it impossible to cast on the fighter as well, likewise for the cleric casting shield of faith.

[LordBlades]

First off, ew, venonfire. If we're talking about rocket tag, that spell is hands down one of the most egregious offenders. Secondly, the druid casting barkskin on himself does not make it impossible to cast on the fighter as well, likewise for the cleric casting shield of faith.

Since we were talking about Shock Trooper I was assuming we were discussing rocket tag already. A pouncing charger with Shock Trooper kills everything it can charge and hit quite reliably, which, in my view, puts it firmly into rocket tag territory.

Going back to the buffing discussion. At level 6, the cleric would have 4 1st level slots and the druid 4 2nd level slots. Buffing both yourself and the fighter means spending 50% of their spell slots of that level on a si gle spell. Since one of the main powers of casters is versatility, I wouldn't lock so many slots on an AC buff, although the druid might have an easier time doing it as he has a ton of versatility with SNA, which he can cast instead of a Barkskin if the need arises.

[Crake]

Since we were talking about Shock Trooper I was assuming we were discussing rocket tag already. A pouncing charger with Shock Trooper kills everything it can charge and hit quite reliably, which, in my view, puts it firmly into rocket tag territory.

This discussion spawned from someone mentioning that the game devolves into rocket tag by mid levels, to which my response was that it only does so if you let it, by specifically taking rocket tag options, and that rocket tag options are not at all "requirements" for playing at a decent optimization level, as all they do is incite a response from the DM, making combat less about tactics and decision making and making it more about the roll of the dice to see who goes first and nukes the other side.


Going back to the buffing discussion. At level 6, the cleric would have 4 1st level slots and the druid 4 2nd level slots. Buffing both yourself and the fighter means spending 50% of their spell slots of that level on a si gle spell. Since one of the main powers of casters is versatility, I wouldn't lock so many slots on an AC buff, although the druid might have an easier time doing it as he has a ton of versatility with SNA, which he can cast instead of a Barkskin if the need arises.

There's not exactly a hell of a lot of versatility to be had in 1st level cleric spells, and I think a spell that has near universal application for combat (the primary time to be casting spells in most cases) is a pretty good candidate for being prepared.

[Godskook]

For the latter, no, not really.

https://www.dmsguild.com/product/51630/Complete-Adventurer-35

Now, if you insist on paper and in good condition it might be pricey.

That doesn't counter my position. Yes, there's ways of getting your hands on pdfs. You still have to be a pretty high engagement player to even have -access- to the full number of completes. $15 is a lot of money for most people.

[darkdragoon]

Yes, but you and your table aren't necessarily representative of the average table. Just because you are aware of, and know where to find material, doesn't mean that others do, or that they will even think to go looking in the first place, simply playing with what they have on hand because it's worked fine so far, so why bother?

Actually from what I gather most of the regulars probably have better resources than I do. I'm really at that point of "if I can do it, you can too" with most of my interests and co-workers.

To the second point, the problem with not looking or maintaining is that a lot of these could very well die off and be lost, especially with an overall move to more disposable forms of Internet discussion.

[AvatarVecna]

Without getting too far into discussions of accessing books on the internet, I'd also like to point out that, for any given group of people, they only *really* need one person to have a book for it to be available to the group as a whole. That doesn't eliminate the cost to entry by any means, but it does mitigate it a bit.

Part of the reason "Core+completes" is generally a good assumption without getting too dumster-divey is because those are the most common books to buy specifically for their focus on role more than anything else. If you were having to prune a books list based on what you really wanted for a campaign, you'd probably ditch setting-specific books for settings you're not using, followed by It's Cold/Wet/Hot Outside books, followed by...probably planar stuff (Planar Handbook, Fiend Folios, BoVD/BoED, etc), then the superfluous Monster Manuals, then Races Of series, then Complete series, at which point you just have Core. Complete gets cut out last because it's got a good assortment of classes, PrCs, feats, spells, and items pertaining to particular common party roles. Is everyone going to have Completes, of course not, probably not even most people. But if you were placing odds on how likely people are to have a particular book, the Completes are gonna score higher due to early printing and relatively versatile content.

[LordBlades]

This discussion spawned from someone mentioning that the game devolves into rocket tag by mid levels, to which my response was that it only does so if you let it, by specifically taking rocket tag options, and that rocket tag options are not at all "requirements" for playing at a decent optimization level, as all they do is incite a response from the DM, making combat less about tactics and decision making and making it more about the roll of the dice to see who goes first and nukes the other side.

You likely have a point for non-casters, as there are some options that could qualify as both 'decently optimized' and not be rocket tag, but for casters, if you optimize, the game does almost inevitably turns into rocket tag past mid levels. As a caster, you pretty much have two non-rocket tag options: non-optimized blasting or buffer. The moment you start to optimize your blasting or start to focus on battlefield control, you quickly enter rocket tag territory, because now you have given yourself the means to end encounters in 1 round.

Also, in my experience, rocket tag can be quite tactical too (more tactical than low optimization 'I hit him with my sword again for 1d8 damage' play in any case). Usually, it won't be so much of a one sided affair, if both sides play smart. The way high optimization all-casters battles go in my experience is something like this: Some of team A goes first, casts some spells, incapacitates some of team B (the rest are out of range, are immune, make their saves etc.). Then some of the still alive&kicking team B goes, and also gets the chance to retaliate at team A. After one or two passes it's pretty clear who won, but the first 1-2 rounds are key, and very fun, IMO at least.

I won't disagree however that the most tactical play is likely somewhere around optimized tier 3, both in-combat and out-of-combat: you have enough power and versatility so you can try to tackle most problems, but you don't have the instant answer to them most Tier 1 and 2 have.


There's not exactly a hell of a lot of versatility to be had in 1st level cleric spells, and I think a spell that has near universal application for combat (the primary time to be casting spells in most cases) is a pretty good candidate for being prepared.

Shield of Faith is something definitely worth preparing. What I'm pondering is whether it's worth preparing twice (to buff both the Cleric and Fighter). It's more a matter of personal preference than accepted optimization theory, but I find that casters work better without duplicating spells (you gain more options) except very special circumstances (I'd duplicate too good to be true for their level spells like Polymorph, and I'd also duplicate spells if the character is heavily focused in that area, like Summon Monster on a Malconvoker).