To me, a tank is something that's heavily armored and durable, possibly at the expense of offense.
What's a tank's role in Pathfinder? To stand near the front in melee, I suppose; that's not useful in some situations, of course. In Car Wars, a box of armor with a peashooter was pretty awesome, though.
|
What's a tank's role in Pathfinder? To stand near the front in melee, I suppose; that's not useful in some situations, of course.So, to stand in the way of melee foes and force them to fight him due to AOOs and blocked movement?
Antagonize + Stand Still + Pin Down. I'd add Tripping Strike and Combat Patrol for a good measure.
What's a tank's role in Pathfinder? To stand near the front in melee, I suppose; that's not useful in some situations, of course.So, to stand in the way of melee foes and force them to fight him due to AOOs and blocked movement?
Forcing enemies to fight you one possibility, but not a requirement to be considered a "tank", in my book. Then again, I'm not an MMO guy.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
To me its good AC/HP, decent saves, and the ability to constantly threaten the enemy when they try to get at the squishy bits of the party (the casters). The problem is the relative lack of ways to force the enemy to attack the "tank".
Paladin has dealt with this a little via a bunch of spells designed to force enemies to consider them before others or suffer, so that's a tank.
Antagonize can work for other classes, but ultimately your damage really needs to be significant enough so the DM considers whether or not he wants to eat your attacks while hitting you or your friends. If you can do enough damage to give the dm pause, can survive a few hits from a CR appropriate enemy, and have a decent chance of making saving throws, I'd say that makes you a tank.
What does "tank" mean to you, in Pathfinder?
Nothing
What is tank's goal in a fight?
I pressume that since in MMOs, which may not have invented the term but is now most synonymous with it, that people mean that they protect other party members. It's hard to tell since people also seem to think high HP and AC means tank too even if he doesn't protect his allies.
How does it accomplish that goal?
I always assumed that AoOs, Grapples, Bull Rushes, Trips, and other maneuvers were the tanks go to method of protection since otherwise, the martial characters have no way of actually protecting anything at all. Quizzically, this also fits the bill of the commonly accepted definition of 'controller'. And in fact, it would seem that plopping down a slow spell or something does the job of a "tank" better than the classes that usually are associated with the position.
Do you feel that your definition of "tank" is something that can be effectively accomplished in PF? Why or why not?
No. I think the concept of party roles is irredeemable. Everyone should have their time to shine, but that doesn't require that the party all diversify into compartmentalized roles. For example, count how many members of the JLA and JSA share certain abilities and fighting styles. Its quite a lot.
Do any of the answers to these questions change at low or high levels, and why (not)?
I don't think so.
Does the term have any meaning out of combat?
Not in my opinion.
|
|
Antagonize + Stand Still + Pin Down. I'd add Tripping Strike and Combat Patrol for a good measure.So a tank focuses on abilities that trap enemies in poor fighting conditions/positions?
And is this how you think a tank should play, or how you think that a tank can be made to be effective in PF? (Something I need to add to the OP.)
My (vague, not all MMO ideas translate to pnp obviously) idea is that it's a guy who:
a) can force opponents to engage him (Antagonize does that ATM, let's hope the nerf won't cripple this feature completely)
b) once they engage him, can prevent them from moving away to engage other targets (Stand Still and Pin Down)
Tripping Strike synergizes nicely, as it can screw enemy mobility even more, while Combat Patrol allows you to react to incoming threats by repositioning yourself out of your turn.
I figure other people can just speak for themselves, especially since the term is so loosely defined outside of an MMO context. I don't see these questions as having right or wrong answers, simply the meaning that people already have.
I wasn't trying to speak for people or to suggest that there was a right or wrong answer. My reason for saying what I did was to demonstrate that I have never heard a definition of the word put forth in regards to a TTRPG that I find particularly useful.
|
Tanks should be tough, heavily armored, mobile, and heavily armed. They should be able to hit like trucks and be able to take those hits back. The best simulation of this I've seen is in Hero System, mostly by what are called "bricks". TVtropes.com has 3 types listed, only 2 of which are mutually exclusive, the flying brick, lighting bruiser, and mighty glacier.
The Lightning Bruiser fits the tank definition best, they are tough, fast, hard to hurt, and when they hit, only things and people who are well into being superhuman can survive their strikes, be it at ranged or melee.
The Mighty Glacier doesn't quite fit it so well, as they aren't very fast, but they do tend to be basically unstoppable, so that could count as a type of speed in it's own right.
The flying brick is a mighty glacier or lightning bruiser that can fly. The closest we have to this in real life is probably the A-10, carries lots of firepower, moves fairly fast all things told, flies, and is notoriously difficult to knock out of the sky. The P-47 (the A-10s spiritual predecessor) was also notoriously difficult to gun down and was nicknamed Juggernaut, most fighters could empty their guns into one of these, and never kill it.
I think the paladin fits it best, in terms of MMO and real life, they tend to be fairly fast, either wearing mithral medium armor, or riding on horseback, they tend to have high ACs, lots of Hp, ridiculously good saves, and they can hit hard -before- they smite you. They also draw lots of attention, because, you know, "beacon of all that is good" on the battlefield? Kinda gonna get you shot/stabbed/lit on fire. Also, because it takes a lot to down a paladin, they self-repair.
|
Opinions differ in a party regarding what and who is a tank.
For a Fighter the tank is the lifesaver warrior that controls the opponents due to his maneuvers and tactics in order to keep safe his allies.
For a wizard similarly the tank is someone that will prevent harm from himself and his allies but when feeling bored will just blast the enemies to cinders like a real tank.
For a cleric a tank is his number one client, sturdy enough to handle the beating and trustworthy enough to keep the beating away from the cleric.
For the rogue a tank is a good wall to hide behind, a partner to flank with a victim and keep the victim occupied with him instead of the rogue and of course a tank is the best confirmation test for the trap he tried to disable a second ago.
For the Paladin a tank is the ultimate form of goodness and justice, an unstoppable force that will not fall no matter the odds, will not stop to spread the virtues he represents.
A force that will withstand and overcome any evil that tries to mess with his idea of how the world should be.
Of course opinions regarding what is a tank differ even among monsters.
Goblins think that tanks are Long-shanks in a barrel with pointy spikes.
Drow think that tanks are easy targets.
Zombies think that tanks are... brains?
Dragons think that tanks are canned food.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think the concept of tank in pathfinder is possible. You just need to be able to do 2 things.
1. Protect your allies from harm. This can be done a lot of ways, combat manuvers, AoOs, Antagonize, etc. Anything that either keeps the enemies away from your allies, or makes them focus on your instead.
2. Survive. You need to be better able to survive doing your job. That can be high HP/AC, or it can be preventing enemies from attacking via manuvers and mobility. This is especially important in light of pathfinders low healing environment.
RPG situations are more dynamic than MMOs, generally.
Consider the nature of an ambush. If you don't know when a fight is going to start, it behooves you to survive that first round if you want to participate at all. In this case, it can pay to have a character built for defense rather than offense.
A dead bodyguard is a useless bodyguard.
It's very very different from the MMO version of the defensive principle, mainly because the context of the encounter is so much larger.
If you play a highly tactical game where you don't worry much about the way encounters open (a totally valid style of course) I can see why all of the emphasis would be placed on offense. If you're more into looking at your character as a person with a survival instinct and a bit of cowardice, then it doesn't matter so much that the big monster doesn't want to attack you.
Big gun, strong offense, thick armor, strong defense.
The reason for this is simple. This isn't an MMO, the dm controls the enemies and they are often going to behave rationally (or at least according to some pattern). For instance I once had a player play heavily armored gnome who had an absurd AC but did like 1d6-2 damage on an attack. Any enemy with a 5int ignored him outright, and even unintelligent enemies eventually would learn and look for less tasty targets.
A 'tank' or as i like to call them 'bsf' is there to get in the thick of things and stay there, so squishies can hide in the back, and semi squishies can get in and out of combat as needed. They need to be durable (good ac/hp/defensive abilities) and they need to hit hard. You can ignore the gnome tin can with the toothpick, but when the fighter cuts a slice out of you with a greatsword, you have to pay attention. And thats the idea.
RPG situations are more dynamic than MMOs, generally.
Consider the nature of an ambush. If you don't know when a fight is going to start, it behooves you to survive that first round if you want to participate at all. In this case, it can pay to have a character built for defense rather than offense.
A dead bodyguard is a useless bodyguard.
It's very very different from the MMO version of the defensive principle, mainly because the context of the encounter is so much larger.
If you play a highly tactical game where you don't worry much about the way encounters open (a totally valid style of course) I can see why all of the emphasis would be placed on offense. If you're more into looking at your character as a person with a survival instinct and a bit of cowardice, then it doesn't matter so much that the big monster doesn't want to attack you.
Part of the emphasis on offense is because you are playing against intelligent foes. If I have a billion AC, 2 billion hit points, and hit once a round for 1 damage, a smart foe is going to realize I am not a threat, and they will just ignore me. Even worse, my enemies are not going to care if the provoke an AoO from mee, and they will just run past me with impunity.
If you are a tank, you need a way to keep foes away from your allies. That can be via manuvers(think tripping with a reach polearm), taunting(like antagonize), or just by being a threat(dealing damage). If you hit hard enough, enemies are going to have to deal with you.
A great example of a high damage tank is the 2 hand pally. You AC is meh, but you have the ability to survive via Lay on Hand as a swift action. With a 2-handed weapon, you are putting out enough damage that most foes will think twice about provoking AoOs or ignoring you.
|
|
There have been tanks in D&D for ages, but it doesn't have the exact meaning as in MMO. Heavily armored and high hit points, such as the "Dwarven Defender", personify the traditional D&D tank.
It's only recently (4e and latest PF splatbooks) that tanks have been given the ability to mark, designate, antagonize, etc to tie up foes as they move closer to the MMO meaning.
In my opinion you aren't a tank if you aren't carrying some form of BFG (Big __ Gun). You got to be able to hurt things -- that's what tanks do -- they're impervious to being hurt and deal out hurt in spectacular fashion.
They are allow to have other weaknesses that are shored up by the other 'troops' (after all real tanks have plenty of weaknesses) but they've got to be hard to hit and deal hard hits.
There have been tanks in D&D for ages, but it doesn't have the exact meaning as in MMO. Heavily armored and high hit points, such as the "Dwarven Defender", personify the traditional D&D tank.
This is the picture I most often get when i'm trying to think of a pnp tank. Heavy on the defense, HP and armor, but with some hurt options as well to keep enemies from just avoiding you as often as possible.
I'm currently playing something tank-like. Shielded Fighter archetype. We have a barbarian in the party, so he out HPs me, but I'm spreading the AC bonuses around like crazy and it's actually quite useful. As long as I stay near other party members, it's AC bonus for at least one other person and mine is starting to get crazy with no magic stuff at all yet. It's actually been a good use of Combat Expertise as well (surprisingly).
In my opinion you aren't a tank if you aren't carrying some form of BFG (Big __ Gun). You got to be able to hurt things -- that's what tanks do -- they're impervious to being hurt and deal out hurt in spectacular fashion.
They are allow to have other weaknesses that are shored up by the other 'troops' (after all real tanks have plenty of weaknesses) but they've got to be hard to hit and deal hard hits.
I don't think a BFG is required, but you must have some way of making your enemies percieve you as a threat. A fighter using something like a falchard or a meteor hammer(reach + trip) who is specialized in being able to trip opponents who try to move through his threatened area could tank in a sense without doing any damage. Have the wizard throw enlarge person on them, and they can block a 30 foot wide choke point. Even in an open field, enemies will have to go the long way around them to avoid getting tripped.
|
|
I don't think a BFG is required, but you must have some way of making your enemies percieve you as a threat. A fighter using something like a falchard or a meteor hammer(reach + trip) who is specialized in being able to trip opponents who try to move through his threatened area could tank in a sense without doing any damage. Have the wizard throw enlarge person on them, and they can block a 30 foot wide choke point. Even in an open field, enemies will have to go the long way around them to avoid getting tripped.
I disagree, especially with Monkey Style (allows you to fight on the ground with no penalties), more importantly I disagree with your opinion on the BFG part. Real tanks need big guns, makes them priority targets, keeps some guns off the troops.
Speaking theoretically, the tank's (as a party game term) main function is to prevent less resilient party members from being hurt, usually by forcing them to attack him instead. That is the main thing, not that he is hard to hit or does a lot of damage; these are the means, not the end.
Dealing damage isn't important to the role per se; it only valuable inasmuch as it makes the tank a threat on his own, and thus forces enemies to attack him. If the tank had other options to do that, they'd work as well - but the role is usually played by warrior-esque characters with little or no magic abilities. Likewise for survivability; it is important as the tank can't do his job while unconscious, and usually because his job involves being attacked - and likely hit - by enemies. If he can do it with light armor and mediocre HP pool, he'd still be a tank.
Note that a "tank" character can also cover some of the other iconic roles. A paladin can be a tank first, but also provide healing or other support. Likewise, a fighter with 2-handed weapon can be the main tank, but also the main damage dealer.
I don't think a BFG is required, but you must have some way of making your enemies percieve you as a threat. A fighter using something like a falchard or a meteor hammer(reach + trip) who is specialized in being able to trip opponents who try to move through his threatened area could tank in a sense without doing any damage. Have the wizard throw enlarge person on them, and they can block a 30 foot wide choke point. Even in an open field, enemies will have to go the long way around them to avoid getting tripped.In my opinion you aren't a tank if you aren't carrying some form of BFG (Big __ Gun). You got to be able to hurt things -- that's what tanks do -- they're impervious to being hurt and deal out hurt in spectacular fashion.
They are allow to have other weaknesses that are shored up by the other 'troops' (after all real tanks have plenty of weaknesses) but they've got to be hard to hit and deal hard hits.
I disagree with this. I think it is a major trap in the game to think that triping or hindering an opponent with stand still and the like is a valid contribution for a combat character (or tank). You aren't doing your job, and you are not providing a target, just an obstacle. The enemy is going to try and go around you not target you. After all you go around obstacles, you dont try and kill them.
You also bring the enemy no closer to defeat, and for the most part you have to spend constant focus (actions) to keep up your hinderence. You also get increasingly diminishing returns as you go up in level and it is harder and harder to do these things to enemies. As much fun as it is to trip or hinder your enemy as a melee character, if you arent also able to do significant damage, you are not a tank, you are a 5th party member.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
When someone mentions that they hate firearms in fantasy and then proceeds to discuss tactics using the MMO vernacular "tank", I have a good long laugh. I love irony.
A party tank works mostly by providing a square foes can't move through, and a small area around themselves that foes don't want to move through because of the aoo.
Enlarge person makes the square you occupy larger, and greatly increases your range and gives a significant damage boost.
Trip is one of the best ways to stop enemy movement.
I disagree with this. I think it is a major trap in the game to think that triping or hindering an opponent with stand still and the like is a valid contribution for a combat character (or tank). You aren't doing your job, and you are not providing a target, just an obstacle. The enemy is going to try and go around you not target you. After all you go around obstacles, you dont try and kill them.
That, while true, is imo irrelevant to what constitutes the archetype "tank". It's a simplified, theoretical type of character - the defender. That might not be "enough" in a competitive game - just as simple healing or skill support might not be considered enough. A well-built character usually transcends a simple role.
I disagree with this. I think it is a major trap in the game to think that triping or hindering an opponent with stand still and the like is a valid contribution for a combat character (or tank). You aren't doing your job, and you are not providing a target, just an obstacle. The enemy is going to try and go around you not target you. After all you go around obstacles, you dont try and kill them.That, while true, is imo irrelevant to what constitutes the archetype "tank". It's a simplified, theoretical type of character - the defender. That might not be "enough" in a competitive game - just as simple healing or skill support might not be considered enough. A well-built character usually transcends a simple role.
While that is partially true a tank isn't simply something that absorbs abuse and provides no other function -- that's an APC, a tank blows stuff up and hard.
If you can't hurt things then you aren't a tank -- at best your an armored personnel carrier -- you provide cover for those that are doing the work... and a note about APCs -- generally they are poor at doing this too, since they are the size of a tank but have less armor blow up easier and have no weaponry to compare to the tank.
My working definition of a tank is a party member to reduces the enemies effectiveness by being the focus of attacks. This requires two things, some reason for the enemy to focus on the tank and some way of mitigating the enemy's effectiveness when they focus on the tank.
The tank would need to have at least one item from each category (more is better though) to really be effective as a tank.
Enemy Focus
-----------
1 - Melee Damage
The prototypical way of keeping an enemy focused on your tank is to stand in its way and do enough damage that it stays focused on you. Works best when combines with a party of range combatants and fighting a single enemy.
2 - Feats/Abilities
Some feats and abilities can cause an enemy to focus on your character. Antagonize is a good example but as it can only be used once a day on a creature and has a short duration, it can't be counted on alone.
3 - Combat Maneuvers
Trips, grapples, and other maneuvers can prevent an enemy from moving where it wants to go. It's best option then is to attack you to get you to stop.
4 - Other
Some combination of the above or ways I haven't thought of to get the enemies attention like compelling spells, summons, etc. etc.
Mitigation
----------
The goal with mitigation is to make sure the enemies attacks are not as effective as they would be if they were focused on someone else.
1 - High AC
If you get hit less you take less damage and use less of the parties resources. If you are the hardest to hit in the party, then each attack at you is that much less damage the party takes as a whole. High AC can be gained a variety of ways, most often in combination/stacking of types.
2 - High HP
The idea is that if you have lots of HP it takes more hits to kill you. You have enough to make it through the fight and you can still be healed. My least favorite because you are still using party resources to heal, so total time adventuring each day is cut down.
3 - Damage Mitigation
Typically this will be getting as high a DR as possible. If you take less damage from a hit than someone else does than each hit against you counts as that much less than if they hit your friends.
4 - Mobility/Avoidance
Not being where you can be hit. Things like tripping with a reach weapon can often you put you out of range to be hit. Tough to rely on this strategy but beautiful when it works since you take no damage and don't have to worry about getting hit if they can't swing.
--------------------
Anyway... those are my ideas. Obviously the more of them a tank can do at once the better off they are, but only one from each category would qualify one for the tank role.
Additionally, while the tank is a great role in the party, it is not strictly necessary. I would however, ask a party who is not planning on having someone fill the tank role how they are dealing with that situation and then happily let them deal with it.
Also, if a tank does his job well you have less and less need to in combat healing. This means more actions spent on dealing damage, the quicker the enemy goes down and therefor the less damage (attrition to party resources) they can do. In general I think this makes in combat healing a poor choice for a party and healing is a good ability but not one that should be focused on.
Sean Mahoney
While that is partially true a tank isn't simply something that absorbs abuse and provides no other function -- that's an APC, a tank blows stuff up and hard.
IMO I think taking the name "tank" too literally doesn't do the role it is referring to justice. Doing damage is a method of keeping focus... not a primary job of the tank... the party as a whole needs to put out significant damage but not necessarily the tank (though it sure doesn't hurt if they do as well).
Sean Mahoney
|
|
While that is partially true a tank isn't simply something that absorbs abuse and provides no other function -- that's an APC, a tank blows stuff up and hard.IMO I think taking the name "tank" too literally doesn't do the role it is referring to justice. Doing damage is a method of keeping focus... not a primary job of the tank... the party as a whole needs to put out significant damage but not necessarily the tank (though it sure doesn't hurt if they do as well).
Sean Mahoney
I disagree, what a lot of people call a "tank" in roleplaying games and MMOs, is what I call a "meat shield". A tank is a fast-moving, heavily armored monstrosity, with a lot of firepower. The original tank was basically a bunch of guns on tracks with some armor slapped on. The important bit is the amount of firepower it had while being mobile and safe to operate..... even if they weren't very safe and they tended to break down originally. Currently it's supposed to be something fast, tough, and most importantly very heavily armed. Boasting firepower only matched or surpassed by artillery and planes.
|
|
The original tank was basically a bunch of guns on tracks with some armor slapped on. The important bit is the amount of firepower it had while being mobile and safe to operate..... even if they weren't very safe and they tended to break down originally. Currently it's supposed to be something fast, tough, and most importantly very heavily armed. Boasting firepower only matched or surpassed by artillery and planes.
The original (WWI) tank was a farm tractor with lots of armor. It was slow and armanent (a couple of machine guns) was an afterthought.
I disagree with this. I think it is a major trap in the game to think that triping or hindering an opponent with stand still and the like is a valid contribution for a combat character (or tank). You aren't doing your job, and you are not providing a target, just an obstacle. The enemy is going to try and go around you not target you. After all you go around obstacles, you dont try and kill them.That, while true, is imo irrelevant to what constitutes the archetype "tank". It's a simplified, theoretical type of character - the defender. That might not be "enough" in a competitive game - just as simple healing or skill support might not be considered enough. A well-built character usually transcends a simple role.
And the defender has to have offense as well or he's not actually contributing to defense. The 'control' aspects available to melee characters are not sufficient to contribute in and of themselves. They are neat tricks, but they are so low key that they cannot be a primary focus or your character is wasting their actions.
And the defender has to have offense as well or he's not actually contributing to defense. The 'control' aspects available to melee characters are not sufficient to contribute in and of themselves. They are neat tricks, but they are so low key that they cannot be a primary focus or your character is wasting their actions.I disagree with this. I think it is a major trap in the game to think that triping or hindering an opponent with stand still and the like is a valid contribution for a combat character (or tank). You aren't doing your job, and you are not providing a target, just an obstacle. The enemy is going to try and go around you not target you. After all you go around obstacles, you dont try and kill them.That, while true, is imo irrelevant to what constitutes the archetype "tank". It's a simplified, theoretical type of character - the defender. That might not be "enough" in a competitive game - just as simple healing or skill support might not be considered enough. A well-built character usually transcends a simple role.
Don't confuse filling a role in a party with pulling your weight in a party. All a defender needs to do is defend. That is why they are called a defender.
Now, that being said, if all you do in a party is prevent others from taking damage, then it is very likely you are not pulling your weight. A cleric who only casts healing spells is also very likely not pulling their weight in the party either, but that doesn't make them any less of a healer.
|
|
The original (WWI) tank was a farm tractor with lots of armor. It was slow and armanent (a couple of machine guns) was an afterthought.
I disagree. So do the history books
Primary
armament Male: Two 6 pdr QF or 6 pdr 6 cwt QF
Female: Four .303 Vickers machine guns
Secondary
armament Male: Four .303 in Hotchkiss Machine Guns
Female: Two .303 in Hotchkiss machine guns
2 six-pounder guns and four Hotchkiss Machine Guns steaming across the battlefield is quite a bit of firepower back in those times.... actually, that's quite a bit of firepower these days all things told, without a counter to that, it's basically an unstoppable juggernaut, with enough firepower to destroy entire companies. Right until it breaks down.
I don't think a BFG is required, but you must have some way of making your enemies percieve you as a threat. A fighter using something like a falchard or a meteor hammer(reach + trip) who is specialized in being able to trip opponents who try to move through his threatened area could tank in a sense without doing any damage. Have the wizard throw enlarge person on them, and they can block a 30 foot wide choke point. Even in an open field, enemies will have to go the long way around them to avoid getting tripped.In my opinion you aren't a tank if you aren't carrying some form of BFG (Big __ Gun). You got to be able to hurt things -- that's what tanks do -- they're impervious to being hurt and deal out hurt in spectacular fashion.
They are allow to have other weaknesses that are shored up by the other 'troops' (after all real tanks have plenty of weaknesses) but they've got to be hard to hit and deal hard hits.
I disagree with this. I think it is a major trap in the game to think that triping or hindering an opponent with stand still and the like is a valid contribution for a combat character (or tank). You aren't doing your job, and you are not providing a target, just an obstacle. The enemy is going to try and go around you not target you. After all you go around obstacles, you dont try and kill them.
You also bring the enemy no closer to defeat, and for the most part you have to spend constant focus (actions) to keep up your hinderence. You also get increasingly diminishing returns as you go up in level and it is harder and harder to do these things to enemies. As much fun as it is to trip or hinder your enemy as a melee character, if you arent also able to do significant damage, you are not a tank, you are a 5th party member.
Depends on the situation. If I am defending a 20 foot wide hallway with a tripping reach weapon. Every round 4 enemies try to move past me, and I trip them all with AoOs, then my entire party moves 20 feet back, and the enemies have to run past me again. In that situation, the enemy cannot get to the squishy wizard hiding behind me, thus they have no choice but to deal with me.
If you can make it impossible for the enemy to go around you, then they MUST deal with you. Sometimes the easiest way to deal with some obstacles is to smash them down. Also remember that most combats only last 3-5 rounds. If the enemy has to spend 2 rounds to get past me, then I have reduced the damage the rest my party took by 40% in a 5 round battle.
I am not saying this is an optimal way to tank, because all you need is to face a creature that is hard or impossible to trip, and it all falls apart, but it is a way to defend your party and force the enemy to focus on you without dealing massive amounts of damage. Having a BFG is probably the best way of forcing enemies to deal with you, but it is not the only way.
A great tank has multiple way of forcing enemies to focus on them be it damage, combat manuvers, antagonize, etc. Ideally, your tripping tank would be getting follow up attacks from improved trip as well as getting AoOs when their enemies stand up after being tripped and the attacks would hit hard enough to make the enemies respect the tank.
TLDR: Just because you are not a great tank doesn't mean you are not a tank.
What does "tank" mean to you, in Pathfinder?The guy I target first in combat.
Usually. But the smart opponents go after the wizards and druid first. If they're really smart they go after the druid first.
Unless, of course, the wizard starts spouting his mouth off about how he's going to take out all the opponents in one round. Then he dies. Not that this happened in my last game, of course.
That cut down the game distracting blathering a bit :)
Successful Troll invites you to read more carefully. ;)
Now, that being said, if all you do in a party is prevent others from taking damage, then it is very likely you are not pulling your weight. A cleric who only casts healing spells is also very likely not pulling their weight in the party either, but that doesn't make them any less of a healer.
This really depends on the rest of the party and how it synergizes as a party. If this character can keep the opponents from doing damage but does little damage himself AND the rest of the party is just laying out damage... then the party works very well and he is most definitely pulling his weight.
If too many people in the party are not laying out damage though, then a tank who is not laying out damage is a problem... but it is a problem of party synergy NOT with the tank inherently. He just isn't the right tool for the job in that case.
A group with a pure controller wizard, a defensive/low damage tank, a heal bot and a skills only monkey isn't one that communicated when coming up with their party. But a defensive/low damage tank, blaster arcanist, inquisitor archer and cleric made for laying waste in combat could be in real good shape as a party.
Party synergy is NOT the job of any one person they all need to talk. Nor is a party that expects everyone to be focused on damage output the requirement. A good party can be made several ways.
Sean Mahoney
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The "holy trinity" of MMOs (tank/heal/dps) is an abstraction that allows that sort of game to be played. It's really nothing more than a glorified version of Plants vs. Zombies.
An MMO tank (which is what I mean in this post when I use the word tank) is the high AC/HP guy with taunt. His job is to make sure enemies are always focusing on him and ignoring everyone else. This is impractical in Pathfinder, because enemies, being roleplayed by the GM, are far smarter than AI. There is simply no way to replicate this role, and if there was, it would require a dedicated healer.
Contrary to what many people are saying in this thread, the role of the tank is not to deal lots of damage. That is the role of damage dealers. The tank trades damage for survivability. This is another reason why this role is impractical in Pathfinder. Pumping up your defenses in this game is sub-optimal, primarily because there is simply no way to force enemies to target you. (Sure you can antagonize one guy for one round, but that is nothing like pulling a whole room and holding them all while the rest of the party cuts them down and the healer spends every round preventing your death.)
The tank is nothing without the healer. This creates a problem in Pathfinder, because in-combat healing is sub-optimal, and out-of-combat healing can be accomplished with wands (providing your party is willing to spend the gold). In fact, generally the best use of your character in combat is to simply pump out as much damage as you can, or do things that allow the rest of your party to increase their damage by at least your contribution.
While a wand is as good as a healer, a controller (or even just a strategy) is as good as a tank. In a melee heavy group, a single trip can decimate an enemy. In a ranged group, entangle can be similarly devastating.
I would ammend the MMO "trinity" to a P&P "duology" of controller/striker. The job of a controller can be fulfilled with spells, combat maneuvers, good strategy and good defense. "Tank" in a Pathfinder context would then mean the defensive aspect of the controller role. The guy who can occupy an enemy or two and take their hits without dying before combat is over.
I know what a tank does in an MMO, but Pathfinder doesn't (IMO effectively) allow that, so I was curious what other people meant by it.
To more specifically answer your question, I think people mean the Fighter, Paladin or Barbarian of the party, and not much beyond that.
You asked, I answered.
|
|
The original (WWI) tank was a farm tractor with lots of armor. It was slow and armanent (a couple of machine guns) was an afterthought.I disagree. So do the history books
Primary
armament Male: Two 6 pdr QF or 6 pdr 6 cwt QF
Female: Four .303 Vickers machine guns
Secondary
armament Male: Four .303 in Hotchkiss Machine Guns
Female: Two .303 in Hotchkiss machine guns
2 six-pounder guns and four Hotchkiss Machine Guns steaming across the battlefield is quite a bit of firepower back in those times.... actually, that's quite a bit of firepower these days all things told, without a counter to that, it's basically an unstoppable juggernaut, with enough firepower to destroy entire companies. Right until it breaks down.
Male and Female tanks? Is that where little tanks come from?
The Royal Horse Artillery was using 6 pdr guns in the age of Napoleon (ca. 1800).