We just started Council of Theives. We're playing PFRPG core only.
We have a rogue (dwarf), cleric (gnome) and wizard (gnome), so we're reasonably balanced.
However the rogue has charisma 5, so the cleric and I (the fighter) are picking up the slack for the charisma skills.
I've put together a human fighter with:
Str 16
Dex 14
Con 14
Int 13
Wis 10
Cha 12
Feats are:
Combat Expertise
Improved Trip
Weapon Focus Flail
Skills:
Perform (Acting) - which we are pretty sure will prove useful at some point
Bluff
Intimidate
Survival
I have campaign traits that give Perform (Acting), and Bluff as class skills with a +1 trait bonus. I also got 300gp.
So my guy uses a flail and shield so he can trip, but also have a good AC to make up for his lack luster constitution.
Going forward these are the feats I was thinking of taking:
2 power attack
3 step up
4 weapon specialization flail
5 combat reflexes
6 greater trip
7 disruptve
8 greater weapon focus flail
9 iron will
10 spell breaker
11 greater iron will
12 greater weapon specialization flail
Odds are the campaign will end after level 12.
Only some of our opponents will be tripable, so I thought that power attack and the weapon feats would give him reasonable hitting power (1d8 and a x2 crit isn't anything to write home about). The step up, disruptive, and spellbreaker feats would give devils a reason they couldn't just ignore him and go after the squishy wizard. And given his lousy will, the iron will tree might keep him from getting completely screwed over...
I've never done a tripping character before, and we had a lot of fun with it when we encountered some humaniods. The rogue really enjoyed smashing enemies while they were prone.
Does my feat plan seem reasonable?
Eric Mason 37 wrote: We just started Council of Theives. We're playing PFRPG core only.
We have a rogue (dwarf), cleric (gnome) and wizard (gnome), so we're reasonably balanced.
...
Does my feat plan seem reasonable?
I think it appears to be a sound enough build.
I would probably try to put cleave and vital strike in there somewhere though.
The Grandfather wrote: I think it appears to be a sound enough build.
I would probably try to put cleave and vital strike in there somewhere though.
Thanks :)
I'd thought about vital strike, but since moving and attacking in the same round doesn't happen as frequently at the higher levels, and I'll be wanting to trip when they're humanoid, it didn't seem as appealing. If I didn't have improved trip, it would definitely be on my list!
I've been leary of cleave since it now requires the opponents to be adjacent to each other. Maybe it's just our group, but our foes tend to keep themselves spaced out.
Have you had good experiences with cleave in play?
Thanks again.
Eric Mason 37 wrote:
I'd thought about vital strike, but since moving and attacking in the same round doesn't happen as frequently at the higher levels, and I'll be wanting to trip when they're humanoid, it didn't seem as appealing. If I didn't have improved trip, it would definitely be on my list!
I think it really depends on your Gm and the campaign you play.
If you are mainly moving in cramped dungeons with little posibility of movement, full-attacks clearly dominate the game.
If, however, you play in open spaces and the enemies you meet are more dynamic and move around tactically (offen taking advantage of better reach, you will find yourself making a lot of standard action attacks.
Eric Mason 37 wrote: I've been leary of cleave since it now requires the opponents to be adjacent to each other. Maybe it's just our group, but our foes tend to keep themselves spaced out.
Have you had good experiences with cleave in play?
Tactical movement can do a lot to make enemies move adjecent to each other. Remember that opponents standing diagonal to each other (touching corners) are also adjacent.
As a GM I have mainly used cleave with monsters, but this far it has worked very well.
To a tactically minded fighter (like Zak) I think cleave and great cleave are still good options.
Quote: So my guy uses a flail and shield so he can trip, but also have a good AC to make up for his lack luster constitution. Erk. The only reason to use a non-animated shield is because you've got some super-duper AC boosting edge that pushes you up towards unhittable territory (highly unlikely in a PF core game) or because you're going for that goofy TWF/shield bash build. 2-3 AC just isn't worth it on its own, for what you give up. (You're generally losing about 5-6 damage per attack, just from lower weapon damage, x1 str mod, and lower Power Attack.)
With that in mind, your best bet is a scythe, followed by a halberd, followed by a heavy flail.
Quote: The rogue really enjoyed smashing enemies while they were prone. He does understand that they're not flat-footed while prone, correct?
Truthfully, I would give up the shield and go with heavy flail. It's better for tripping, better for Power attack, has a better crit range and really all you are getting from the shield is a couple of AC (maybe 4-6 by 12th level). One feat will make you last longer in battle, Toughness.
I think you will be happier as the only damage dealer that way.
If you decide later that you need AC sometimes, buy a wand of shield and get wizzo to buff you before entering rooms.
Fake Healer wrote: If you decide later that you need AC sometimes, buy a wand of shield and get wizzo to buff you before entering rooms. Shield is personal range.
A Man In Black wrote: Fake Healer wrote: If you decide later that you need AC sometimes, buy a wand of shield and get wizzo to buff you before entering rooms. Shield is personal range. OK so Shield of Faith wand then.
Fake Healer wrote:
OK so Shield of Faith wand then.
Deflection bonus, while still useful, doesn't stack with Rings of Protection and still leaves you a shild bonus to fill for some cheap AC. Perhaps a Ring of Force Shield. Back to your Wand of Shield with a UMD check (Could be painful but may be worth it since he has some Cha going.)
The other option is to spend 9k (more than the ring of force shield but a better AC by 1) for a +1 Animated shield...that only operates for 4 rounds then can not animate for another 4. Choices, Choices.
Personally if you were going the 2-handed route I would look at the ring. Costs marginally less than the animated shield, none of the pain of on/off.
The Grandfather wrote:
I think it really depends on your Gm and the campaign you play.
If you are mainly moving in cramped dungeons with little posibility of movement, full-attacks clearly dominate the game.
If, however, you play in open spaces and the enemies you meet are more dynamic and move around tactically (offen taking advantage of better reach, you will find yourself making a lot of standard action attacks.
I just finished off a 3.5 game with a level 23 barbarian, and most of our higher level combats were against single monsters, or pairs. Once I made contact with them, it was full attack land for multiple rounds. (Or there were the fights where I couldn't make contact, and had to shoot a bow for something to do.)
Then factoring in that I'd only want to be vital striking if they were non-bipedal (at which point I'll be tripping), and I don't see it being as worth while as say disruptive, which would give me something usefull that while circumstantial, doesn't require an action that I might want to do something else with.
The Grandfather wrote: Tactical movement can do a lot to make enemies move adjecent to each other. Remember that opponents standing diagonal to each other (touching corners) are also adjacent.
As a GM I have mainly used cleave with monsters, but this far it has worked very well.
To a tactically minded fighter (like Zak) I think cleave and great cleave are still good options.
I'm probably biased from my years fighting low numbers of big creatures :)
A Man In Black wrote:
Erk. The only reason to use a non-animated shield is because you've got some super-duper AC boosting edge that pushes you up towards unhittable territory (highly unlikely in a PF core game) or because you're going for that goofy TWF/shield bash build. 2-3 AC just isn't worth it on its own, for what you give up. (You're generally losing about 5-6 damage per attack, just from lower weapon damage, x1 str mod, and lower Power Attack.)
He's in play now, so I can't go back and change my feats. He's got weapon focus flail.
At the moment it is -2 damage for +2 AC. By level 12 it should be about -3 or -4 damage for about 4 AC, and it would jump slightly when we run into something with crappy AC, for an additional 4 damge difference.
He's a MAD character, with high annoyance potential. I forsee many creatures ganging up on him... Which is good, since they won't be ganging up on the wizard.
A Man In Black wrote:
With that in mind, your best bet is a scythe, followed by a halberd, followed by a heavy flail.
I'll never, ever use a scythe. My ability to suspend disbelief has limits, and that one is just too damn silly ;)
A Man In Black wrote:
He does understand that they're not flat-footed while prone, correct?
The effective +4 to hit is very useful.
Eric Mason 37 wrote: At the moment it is -2 damage for +2 AC. By level 12 it should be about -3 or -4 damage for about 4 AC, and it would jump slightly when we run into something with crappy AC, for an additional 4 damge difference. Actually, at level 12, you will lose 1 damage from the inferior weapon, 2 damage from str, and 4 damage from power attack, and that's with no buffs, no damage multipliers, and only a +2 str item. That's seven damage for 3-4 AC.
Quote: I'll never, ever use a scythe. My ability to suspend disbelief has limits, and that one is just too damn silly ;) Well, okay, that's why I listed three weapons that do what you want to do.
Eric Mason 37 wrote: We just started Council of Theives. We're playing PFRPG core only.
We have a rogue (dwarf), cleric (gnome) and wizard (gnome), so we're reasonably balanced.
However the rogue has charisma 5, so the cleric and I (the fighter) are picking up the slack for the charisma skills.
I've put together a human fighter with:
Str 16
Dex 14
Con 14
Int 13
Wis 10
Cha 12
Feats are:
Combat Expertise
Improved Trip
Weapon Focus Flail
Skills:
Perform (Acting) - which we are pretty sure will prove useful at some point
Bluff
Intimidate
Survival
I have campaign traits that give Perform (Acting), and Bluff as class skills with a +1 trait bonus. I also got 300gp.
So my guy uses a flail and shield so he can trip, but also have a good AC to make up for his lack luster constitution.
Going forward these are the feats I was thinking of taking:
2 power attack
3 step up
4 weapon specialization flail
5 combat reflexes
6 greater trip
7 disruptve
8 greater weapon focus flail
9 iron will
10 spell breaker
11 greater iron will
12 greater weapon specialization flail
Odds are the campaign will end after level 12.
Only some of our opponents will be tripable, so I thought that power attack and the weapon feats would give him reasonable hitting power (1d8 and a x2 crit isn't anything to write home about). The step up, disruptive, and spellbreaker feats would give devils a reason they couldn't just ignore him and go after the squishy wizard. And given his lousy will, the iron will tree might keep him from getting completely screwed over...
I've never done a tripping character before, and we had a lot of fun with it when we encountered some humaniods. The rogue really enjoyed smashing enemies while they were prone.
Does my feat plan seem reasonable?
If your DM will allow it improved buckler defense will let you use a 2-handed weapon and sitll have a shield. Looks like a pretty good defensive build. I would consider with your low skill points/lvl as a fighter considering bluff or intimidate instead of both. UMD would be nice for self-buffing,though potions are a good alternative, & perception is nice since you want to be a threat to stealthy opponents so they don't sneak up behind you and assassinate the party wizard :) With the new armor training acrobatics is also a good option for a fighter to tumble past less threatening opponents that the cleric/wizard can handle.
Recent threads in General Discussion
|
