lvl 1 eventually going stalwart defender for pFs
has 13 hp at lvl 1 20 AC with nothing magical yet
I will probably take one or the other at 3rd, probably get Weaon focus at 2
he is focused on defense
so what would you take first dodge or toughness?
Doesn't strike me as a particularly big deal, I'd suggest Toughness because it's front-loaded, and will help you stay standing if an orc gets a lucky greataxe crit or something.
Toughness, as it always applies versus damaging effects.
AC in general is irrelevant in many cases, such as versus spells with saves for half. Dodge, further, is AC which doesn't even always apply.
As well, I'd think long and hard before taking dodge at all. Iron Will will likely do more to keep you in fighting shape, and if you focus on AC, you'll be relegating enemies to needing a 20 to hit you before too long even without dodge.
Toughness, because it pays up front.
Definitely Toughness.
Also dodge seems to run counter to what a stalwart defender does. Stay in one place and take abuse.
The dodge line opens up things like Mobility and Spring Attack.
Just pointing out it's a feat that leads to other feats that seem counter to the SDs concept, maybe there are other feats that might grant you an AC bonus and also lead to other feats that mesh better with your character concept.
Perhaps Combat Expertise which allows you to trade + to hit for AC and also opens up a lot of other good feats for fighter characters.
Don't forget antagonize, for when mobs will start ignoring you, and going for your softer partners.
If his GM allows Antagonize. That's probably the most banned feat in PF.
dodge is a prereq for stalwart defender, but thanks for the advice! I will do that
If his GM allows Antagonize. That's probably the most banned feat in PF.Not after the errata/FAQ.
Didn't they just raise the DC? I thought people still considered it pretty broken?
o i lan to take iron will as well, what i am trying to figure out it what order to knock out the pre reqs which are endurance dodge and toughness
Didn't they just raise the DC? I thought people still considered it pretty broken?If his GM allows Antagonize. That's probably the most banned feat in PF.Not after the errata/FAQ.
This is getting pretty off topic from the OP, but as a DM I don't see what all the fuss is about Antagonize. The Intimidate version of the feat is fairly powerful, but it's certainly not game breaking.
You spend a standard action (and possibly a swift / immediate action as well) to POSSIBLY force 1 creature to target you with hostile attacks for 1 round. If your target can't effectively get to you for an attack, it doesn't work. Essentially it allows you to re-direct an enemy's attacks for 1 round. Again, that can be fairly powerful, but it's certainly not game-breaking. What's more, you can only try it once per enemy, succeed or fail. What's the problem with it?
Didn't they just raise the DC? I thought people still considered it pretty broken?If his GM allows Antagonize. That's probably the most banned feat in PF.Not after the errata/FAQ.This is getting pretty off topic from the OP, but as a DM I don't see what all the fuss is about Antagonize. The Intimidate version of the feat is fairly powerful, but it's certainly not game breaking.
You spend a standard action (and possibly a swift / immediate action as well) to POSSIBLY force 1 creature to target you with hostile attacks for 1 round. If your target can't effectively get to you for an attack, it doesn't work. Essentially it allows you to re-direct an enemy's attacks for 1 round. Again, that can be fairly powerful, but it's certainly not game-breaking. What's more, you can only try it once per enemy, succeed or fail. What's the problem with it?
The problem was as originally written, it forced spellcasters to run screaming headlong into melee range and swipe at the BSF with their puny dagger.
Yeah sorry for the derail OP.
On topic,
Toughness
Then Dodge
Endurance last
Because toughness doesn't just give you 1 HP per level, it gives you three right now. Awesome for first level survivability.
The problem was as originally written, it forced spellcasters to run screaming headlong into melee range and swipe at the BSF with their puny dagger.
LMAO. I was not aware of this... at least Paizo is good about amending their mistakes.
Yup, it was rediculous.
But even with errata, I don't mind players having it to give them an "Agro" mechanic of sorts, but I don't think I will have any NpC's using it vs players when I DM. Sometimes taking control of characters away from players is not fun.
Also casting my vote for Toughness. It's a feat that's worth taking at any point in a character's career, but it gets that little extra oomph at first.
Yup, it was rediculous.
But even with errata, I don't mind players having it to give them an "Agro" mechanic of sorts, but I don't think I will have any NpC's using it vs players when I DM. Sometimes taking control of characters away from players is not fun.
Usually as a DM, I tend to just take standard feats for standard NPCs anyway (weapon focus, spell focus, power attack, etc), unless it's a boss / significant NPC.
That being said, I personally wouldn't think twice about giving the feat to an NPC, depending on the NPC's character. Antagonize (now) doesn't completely take control away from a PC - it just redirects their actions. They can still choose HOW they want to attack, etc. Plus, the enemy just wasted his standard action to SLIGHTLY manipulate a PC. If you think about it, this is FAR less severe than, say, Hold Person / Hold Monster. With Antagonize, the player at least has SOME control, and it only lasts for 1 round.
If I were a PC, I'd much rather have my enemy "force" me to attack him than being zapped for half my HP with lightning... or being paralyzed... or being bitten and swallowed... etc. Looking at it that way, being Antagonized doesn't seem bad at all. :p
Toughness is a weak feat at the best of times. +1 HP per level? That is barely a buffer at all. Dodge makes it 5% less likely you will get hit and not need HP at all.
AND since it's a requirement for Stalwart defender anyways, it's sort of a no brainer...
Toughness is a weak feat at the best of times. +1 HP per level? That is barely a buffer at all. Dodge makes it 5% less likely you will get hit and not need HP at all.
AND since it's a requirement for Stalwart defender anyways, it's sort of a no brainer...
At level 1, going from 13 hp to 16 hp is a ~23% increase in damage you can take without going unconscious.
As for dodge, eventually big AC characters will only be hit on a 20 anyways. +1 additional AC generally reduces your chance to be hit by 0% most of the time once you've hit that point, and 5% some of the time (when flanked or such).
If the badguy is only +15 to hit, 35 AC and 36 AC are almost identically effective.
Dodge likely will end up being a dead feat taken entirely for the prereq, IMO. Toughness diminishes, but it will always contribute.
Toughness is a weak feat at the best of times. +1 HP per level? That is barely a buffer at all. Dodge makes it 5% less likely you will get hit and not need HP at all.
AND since it's a requirement for Stalwart defender anyways, it's sort of a no brainer...
Toughness and Dodge are BOTH required for Stalwart Defender, and the OP's question was which one to take at level 1. Toughness gives 3 HP at level 1, which is why everyone is suggesting to take it first.
But I will say another cool thing about Dodge is that it also increases your CMD by 1 too, since you can add any Dodge bonus you have to it.
EDIT: This is sort of off topic, but this is also why a Ring of Protection is so good in Pathfinder... not only does it increase your AC, including flat-footed and touch AC, but it also increases your CMD.
3 Hp while spiffy isn't that big a deal in the long run. Take the HP instead of skill point for favored class and you've got yourself Toughness right there.
To KrispyXIV, if your opponent has a +15 to hit, they most likely are going to be able to do 3 damage anyways so your point that it pays off vs missing entirely seems moot?
It's not the big bads that AC is helpful against, it's the little guys that wear you down.
If you can get to where things ONLY hit you on a 20 that reduces the chances you get hit to 5%. The only way to get up to that point is by improving your AC. Dodge does this.
3 Hp while spiffy isn't that big a deal in the long run. Take the HP instead of skill point for favored class and you've got yourself Toughness right there.
To KrispyXIV, if your opponent has a +15 to hit, they most likely are going to be able to do 3 damage anyways so your point that it pays off vs missing entirely seems moot?
It's not the big bads that AC is helpful against, it's the little guys that wear you down.
If you can get to where things ONLY hit you on a 20 that reduces the chances you get hit to 5%. The only way to get up to that point is by improving your AC. Dodge does this.
Toughness, in the long run is not a big bonus. At level 1-2, it's huge. But it will always contribute, and my experience is that it's contribution is about equivalent to being able to take a single hit more than someone without toughness (though dice of course, make this vary from case to case).
But unlike dodge, it's not conditional.
Also, unlike dodge, hit points are hard to increase. You either get more Con (very difficult, as only one item generally improves it), or you take toughness.
AC, on the other hand, is cheap and comes from a ton of sources. Using a feat (which can get you rare, hard to duplicate benefits) for AC feels like a waste. Feats are best spent on things you can't improve simply by spending a little gold.
And if you focus on AC, it's not hard to get to a point where you're 4-5 points above where even bosses need 20's to hit you. Luckily, bosses generally have other ways of attacking that don't involve AC.
Finding Haleen is not allowed in PFS, also it's hilariously overpowered for a trait.
Since traits are described as "Half-Feats" having them provide a feat seems a little broken...
Toughness, in the long run is not a big bonus. At level 1-2, it's huge. But it will always contribute, and my experience is that it's contribution is about equivalent to being able to take a single hit more than someone without toughness (though dice of course, make this vary from case to case).
But unlike dodge, it's not conditional.
Also, unlike dodge, hit points are hard to increase. You either get more Con (very difficult, as only one item generally improves it), or you take toughness.
AC, on the other hand, is cheap and comes from a ton of sources. Using a feat (which can get you rare, hard to duplicate benefits) for AC feels like a waste. Feats are best spent on things you can't improve simply by spending a little gold.
And if you focus on AC, it's not hard to get to a point where you're 4-5 points above where even bosses need 20's to hit you. Luckily, bosses generally have other ways of attacking that don't involve AC.
I guess we're both missing the point. Apparently this Prestige class requires both feats?
I'd prefer to be hit less than get 3 HP. At low levels (not with enemies getting +15 to hit mind you) a +1 to AC vs low level opponents can be a life saver.
yep it needs both, and actually, i already selected my level 1 feats.
i could take dodge at 2 and toughness at 3
but since my str is only 14 i was planning on taking weapon focus at 2, but i could do dodge at 2 (combat feat) toughness at 3, weapon focus at 4 and then pick up endurance at either 5 or 7 (need BAB 7 for the class)