Stalwart Defender


Pathfinder First Edition General Discussion


Was considering this class until I realized the inability to move whilst maintaining defensive stance.

For a "tank" character to be immobile seems laughable, but then again I haven't played one. Though, it seems to me though that without the ability to move about, you would quickly become out maneuvered by foes, and thus fail in your role.


Detect Magic wrote:

Was considering this class until I realized the inability to move whilst maintaining defensive stance.

For a "tank" character to be immobile seems laughable, but then again I haven't played one. Though, it seems to me though that without the ability to move about, you would quickly become out maneuvered by foes, and thus fail in your role.

Not in a 15' hallway!


Detect Magic wrote:

Was considering this class until I realized the inability to move whilst maintaining defensive stance.

For a "tank" character to be immobile seems laughable, but then again I haven't played one. Though, it seems to me though that without the ability to move about, you would quickly become out maneuvered by foes, and thus fail in your role.

As previously stated, consider the small rooms common in paizo campaigns. I think you can find a lot of use for a defender. Or you can just make him an archer and stand still and full attack.


Or you can place him on a floating disk. Of course that party wizard moves him against his defender's will :D


Seems incredibly circumstantial and thus wasteful for such a commitment (loss of feats if one goes full fighter).

Mobility and control are two things the "tank" character needs which I see lacking in the class.


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Zmar wrote:
Or you can place him on a floating disk. Of course that party wizard moves him against his defender's will :D

Actually, the rules say that the Defensive stance ends, whether he moves by himself or someone else forces him to.

thusly, he quite literally HAS to stay put, no way around it.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

There are loopholes. The biggest of which is the Combat Patrol feat and the Step Up chain. The specifics of the Stalwart Defender ability specifies beginning and ending in the same square over your turn. When it's not your turn, you can move all you want and still retain your bonuses.

Cheesy? Maybe. Legal? Yes. Your GM might houserule that it doesn't work since it sort of breaks the intent of the "guy that holds his ground" motif of the PrC.


The problem with the Stalwart Defender is the same with all the other legacy PrCs - they sucked in 3.5 and wern't updated comparatively so suck even more,


Don't melee -- the stalwart defender makes an excellent archer. Basically the one man equivalent of the machine gun nest.


Karjak Rustscale wrote:
Zmar wrote:
Or you can place him on a floating disk. Of course that party wizard moves him against his defender's will :D

Actually, the rules say that the Defensive stance ends, whether he moves by himself or someone else forces him to.

thusly, he quite literally HAS to stay put, no way around it.

Not at all, as the stance can be initiated on a moving vehicle provided that the defender doesn't control the vehicle. It could be a wagon that happens to be controled by someone else and the disc could be the same thing. Depends on he interpretation.

PRD wrote:
While in a defensive stance, a stalwart defender cannot willingly move from his current position through any means (including normal movement, riding a mount, teleportation, or willingly allowing allies to carry him). If he enters a defensive stance while on a moving vehicle he does not control (such as a wagon or ship), he can maintain the stance even if the vehicle moves. If the stalwart defender moves under his own power as a result of an enemy's successful use of the Bluff skill or an enchantment spell, his stance ends.


I think the Stalwart Defender is getting a pretty bad rap here.

Hes more than just his stance. The class can be used for its other benefits, and it gets several: full BAB, d12 HD, two good saves (including will saves), very nice damage reduction, an AC boost, improved uncanny dodge, heavy armor and tower shield proficiency, and Perception and Sense Motive as class skills. I've seen very successful builds utilize these benefits.

The stance is just gravy and is very powerful in the right situations. Particularly when taking a 'bodyguard' type of role, such as protecting a caster who is dishing out the damage. Or when getting swarmed by lots of enemies. Or when stuck in a tight spot and you can't move much anyways, such as being grappled or entangled.

I'll grant that the entrance requirements are stiff. But PF has made two of the feats much better than the 3.5 version. Dodge and Toughness and solid choices for fighter types, whereas in 3.5 they were definitely subpar.

I'll also grant that since the power of the base classes has been upped in PF vs. 3.5, this makes the Defender a bit weaker. Stepping out of say the fighter class into the Defender class has more of a cost now than before, as you would lose more than just bonus feats, such as weapon training and armor training (or the benefits of a fighter archetype progression.) Also, the changes to the skill system make having Perception and Sense Motive as class skills less beneficial, although its still nice to have. And the change to the saving throw progression for PRCs is less beneficial as well.

Still though, the class offers some benefits that can't be achieved through feats alone. Compare ten levels of SD with ten levels of fighter. The five feats you give up are probably comparable with the benefits of damage reduction, increased AC, increased hitpoints, increased will save, and improved uncanny dodge. That leaves comparing the stance and its powers with the weapon training, armor training, and bravery benefits of the fighter. Probably a fair trade there.

So its not a bad class if you don't look at it as just its stance.

Shadow Lodge

I'd like to try playing a monk of the Sacred Mountain/Stalward Defender one day. The class abilities seem like a good mix. It requires a dip into an armored class, but otherwise there's a lot of synergy. Stacking AC bonus, good saves, more hp and full bab are all things that monks can do with.

The only problem is literally survival, since monks are the most magic-item dependant class in the game. If bracers of armor, belts of dex and headbands of wisdom all are available, this could really work out. Otherwise it is only a thought excercise.


Or, you could take three levels of Paladin and Mercy (swift action) out of the Fatigued condition if you have to move, then reset when you get to your new position :)

GNOME


James Harms wrote:
Detect Magic wrote:

Was considering this class until I realized the inability to move whilst maintaining defensive stance.

For a "tank" character to be immobile seems laughable, but then again I haven't played one. Though, it seems to me though that without the ability to move about, you would quickly become out maneuvered by foes, and thus fail in your role.

Not in a 15' hallway!

If you have a reach weapon, make that a 25' hallway.

If you're enlarged and have a reach weapon, make that a 35' hallway.
Add lunge to make that 45' (although you would need combat patrol to threaten the outside edge.

Even if there's space to get around your 45' radius of death, most enemies won't know to use it. Those that do know to avoid getting within a stone's throw of you would need to use 200' of movement to get all the way around you to the opposite side! That should give your range-attacking buddies plenty of time to mow them down.

Dwarves. They're short, but some of them have extremely long arms!


So what's the expected Dex on this 35' armed man?


Abraham spalding wrote:
Don't melee -- the stalwart defender makes an excellent archer. Basically the one man equivalent of the machine gun nest.

Thats pretty Cool


Cartigan wrote:
So what's the expected Dex on this 35' armed man?

Why would that matter? The ability to attack anyone within 35' of you is not dexterity dependent.

If you're assuming that this should be used with an AOO build, that's certainly one way to go. I just want access to the bonuses of defensive stance, while still being able to hit my enemies.
+2 dodge bonus to AC
+4 morale bonus to his Strength
+4 morale bonus to Constitution
+2 morale bonus on Will saves

Even if you're not a Stalwart Defender, the ability to melee enemies from far away increases your opportunities for full round attacks.

Shadow Lodge

Blueluck wrote:
Cartigan wrote:
So what's the expected Dex on this 35' armed man?
Why would that matter? The ability to attack anyone within 35' of you is not dexterity dependent.

Combat Reflexes. You want a higher Dex if you want to make more than one AoO a round. Having a huge threatened area isn't all that good when you can only hit one orc/drow/whatever...


Possible houserule:
As a move action, a defender can move 5 feet (assuming their normal speed is at least 15 ft) and maintain their stance.

Mobile Defense (Ex): ... as a move action the defender can move up to half their speed and maintain their stance.

What do you think?


Dragonborn3 wrote:
Blueluck wrote:
Cartigan wrote:
So what's the expected Dex on this 35' armed man?
Why would that matter? The ability to attack anyone within 35' of you is not dexterity dependent.
Combat Reflexes. You want a higher Dex if you want to make more than one AoO a round. Having a huge threatened area isn't all that good when you can only hit one orc/drow/whatever...

Even without combat reflexes, reach is a useful way to avoid moving. Imagine you had 1000 foot reach. How often would you get full attacks? All the time, because you would never need to move into position.

As I said, if you want to make this into a AOO build with combat reflexes, you can.


or you can always play a barbarian / stalwart defender to have both mobility attack and defensive power as the situation requires, though I don't know if it would be efficient.


Blueluck wrote:
Dragonborn3 wrote:
Blueluck wrote:
Cartigan wrote:
So what's the expected Dex on this 35' armed man?
Why would that matter? The ability to attack anyone within 35' of you is not dexterity dependent.
Combat Reflexes. You want a higher Dex if you want to make more than one AoO a round. Having a huge threatened area isn't all that good when you can only hit one orc/drow/whatever...

Even without combat reflexes, reach is a useful way to avoid moving. Imagine you had 1000 foot reach. How often would you get full attacks? All the time, because you would never need to move into position.

As I said, if you want to make this into a AOO build with combat reflexes, you can.

If you can't stop everyone from moving past you, you aren't an affective blockade.

RPG Superstar 2013 Top 16

I thought a scorpion whip would be a nifty addition to a stalwart defender. Yay for 15 foot reach (with Quickdraw to draw the Longsword or whatever when the baddie hits 5' range). By the time you get to having a +6 belt of Str, you can have something in the nature of 1d4+14 or so (maybe 22 Str, +6 Str enhance, +3 weapon, +4 Str from defensive stance). Not crazy powerful, but fun and effective.


The 5 foot step should be possible sooner if not from the start, maybe allow a single move in exchange for a round of stance duration later.
As is I probably would just apply it to NPC's, while not terrible it is just too limited use for PCs imo


Remco Sommeling wrote:

The 5 foot step should be possible sooner if not from the start, maybe allow a single move in exchange for a round of stance duration later.

As is I probably would just apply it to NPC's, while not terrible it is just too limited use for PCs imo

Another Option For The List:

Nix the fatigue after the stance. Require a full round between new stances.


Rory wrote:
Remco Sommeling wrote:

The 5 foot step should be possible sooner if not from the start, maybe allow a single move in exchange for a round of stance duration later.

As is I probably would just apply it to NPC's, while not terrible it is just too limited use for PCs imo

Another Option For The List:

Nix the fatigue after the stance. Require a full round between new stances.

I havent really read up on Defender very well, I hope it is not prone to as much wax on/wax off stance abuse as the rage powers are.

Otherwise it is a fine ability, but it should probably have a level requirement.


One of the nice changes to Stalwart Defender in Pathfinder is that the DR stacks with adamantine armor. A 10th level Stalwart Defender Dwarf in adamantine full plate has a DR 8/- and is not slowed down by the armor at all.

The Defensive Stance should only be used if you are sure you can stay effective without moving. Once in your stance there are defensive powers that keep you from moving (Bulwark, Fearless Defense, Immobile) and some that prevent people from moving past you (Bulwark, Halting Blow, Intercept, Unexpected Strike).


Slight necro here, but I wanted to ask a question. The Defensive Stance ability states that "If the stalward defender moves under his own power as a result of an enemy's successful use of the Bluff skill...his stance ends." I'm not familar with this use of Bluff. I know it can be used with Feint, but that doesn't cause movement. What is this referring to?

Dark Archive

ZappoHisbane wrote:
Slight necro here, but I wanted to ask a question. The Defensive Stance ability states that "If the stalward defender moves under his own power as a result of an enemy's successful use of the Bluff skill...his stance ends." I'm not familar with this use of Bluff. I know it can be used with Feint, but that doesn't cause movement. What is this referring to?

So, to answer your question within the 5 year timespan allowed for such things (what's that? five *second* rule? hey look a distraction!) there is no part of the bluff skill that allows you to force another character to move. What it can do, however, is tell a lie convincingly. One that might encourage the defender to break stance of their own accord. I can only assume this is what they were talking about, since the only other option is using "suggest a course of action" to encourage the stalwart defender move, believing it to be their own decision rather than one you spent a minute talking them around to. However, not that last part again about this taking a minute, possibly more. That's a minimum of 10 rounds of combat.

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / General Discussion / Stalwart Defender All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.
Recent threads in General Discussion