There are no tanks in Pathfinder. The only thing that would stop the ogre from getting to the sorcerer after the monk moved would be if the monk moved into a choke point. The monk could move and make his attack, but that won't stop the ogre from continuing his move unless the monk takes him down. The monk will also get an attack of opportunity, but that also won't stop the ogre from continuing his move unless the monk takes him down.
The only "aggro" feat is Antagonize.
It sounds like what you want to do in your situation is either use that feat, or Ready an action to trip.
The other feat that you referred to is called Stand Still.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Honestly? Enemies savvy about casters will jump casters as soon as they hear chanting purely because, yes, casters can really mess with encounters.
Unintelligent enemies will react but that is determined purely by the individual monsters. Animals, for example, will probably flat out run from a wave of fire.
In any case I have a couple of things worth reading.
Let's see this.
The MMO concept of "tanking" doesn't exist in Pathfinder, but honestly, it probably should to some degree. Part of the problem with the game is that defense isn't valued much by players because players have no way to specialize in defense while simultaneously assuring themselves that the "bad guys" will attack them. Without a "taunt" mechanic, defense is always secondary to offense, which in turn limits the degree of danger you can throw at your PCs and expect them to succeed.
On the other hand, "taunting" should not be as it is in WoW, where you push a button and the enemy unquestionably assumes you for the rest of the combat. A mechanic should be in place that allows you to keep an enemy's attention in a way that makes sense. The Antagonize feat is a good start, but it suffers from being limited by its design space as a feat. Antagonizing needs a whole rules subsystem devoted to making it work both effectively and believably.
First off, your Sorcerer should not be at level 1. From the HP totals it looks like your Monk and Fighter are level 3; the game plays much better when everyone is at equal levels.
As for your question, if the Monk readies an action to move in front of the Ogre then the Ogre would either have to 1) find a route that does not go through the Monk's square or 2) make an acrobatics check to move through the Monk's square.
If you want to build a character to "tank" you have to really strictly build for it. Pathfinder isn't designed for that type of play; you need a way to force enemies to address you, but investing into defense tends to hurt offense to the point where you're less of a threat. The best tank right now is likely an Aberrant Bloodrager, just put everything into extending your reach and threaten every square on the board.
It's called "roleplaying" -- figure out who your enemies are, what insults they can't bear, and USE THEM.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The best way to actually "tank" funny enough is to not have a lot of ac. If the enemy sees that he cannot hit you because you are running around with 55+ AC, he'll just go hit your friends. Of course that's without counting that some casters would just use touch attacks on armored foes.
There are many other factors coming into play too, like mindless undead would generally just attack the closest creature, unless they are controlled by a necromancer or something. Some monsters personality/behaviors come into play, like a troll doesn't care about his life and would charge like a madman until slain, even if you use fire or acid to stop his regeneration.
It's called "roleplaying" -- figure out who your enemies are, what insults they can't bear, and USE THEM.
This might be just me, but if one guy could only call me bad names and the other guy could turn me into charcoal, I'm going after the real threat. That is what intelligent monsters should do. Less intelligent monsters, sure calling them a snot-eater or something may get them to change targets.
The actually made a chain of feats just for that. Bodyguard, and In Harms Way.
There is no real way to tank but many d6 casters have spells that keep.them from being hit such as invisibility and mirror image. It also helps if other party members such as the barbarian do a lot of damage and block any direct paths to the caster.
|
|
MMO terms??? Oh the horror the horror............
LOL yeah nothing ruffles the TTRPG folk's feathers more than mixing vids with their tabletop. Other than killing immersion at the table I couldnt care less. That said you do have to temper your understanding a bit since TTRPG turn based combat is quite different than your average real time MMO.
Being turn based there is not many ways to interrupt anothers turn. Read up on ready and delay. One thing to remember is that positioning is very important. Make sure to use your environment and foe/ally to your advantage.
You may want to focus on the attacks of opportunity. Take a look at reach weapons. Feats like combat reflexes and combat patrol can help you increase your threat to the enemy. Position yourself where the enemy will be punished for trying to move passed you and to your weaker ally. Casters should learn to use their defensive and controlling spells.
Good luck
It's called "roleplaying" -- figure out who your enemies are, what insults they can't bear, and USE THEM.This might be just me, but if one guy could only call me bad names and the other guy could turn me into charcoal, I'm going after the real threat. That is what intelligent monsters should do. Less intelligent monsters, sure calling them a snot-eater or something may get them to change targets.
More to the point people are probably either shouting insults constantly, or so focused on the whole NOT DYING aspect of combat to tune out the noise.
It's called "roleplaying" -- figure out who your enemies are, what insults they can't bear, and USE THEM.This might be just me, but if one guy could only call me bad names and the other guy could turn me into charcoal, I'm going after the real threat. That is what intelligent monsters should do. Less intelligent monsters, sure calling them a snot-eater or something may get them to change targets.
Sadly, REAL people are not always clear-headed and tactics-oriented. REAL people are affected by well-placed psychological ploys and can be duped, slandered, and overall played.
Well, that's the downside of being a caster. They're squishy. You get some benefits, you get some drawbacks.
What happened to the http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/general-feats/antagonize feat?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yah, Im really aware of the downside, but the idea of being squishy is that in a "co-op" party, theres suposed to be a "Tank" who can "protect" you.
Such a creature does not exist.
The protection of the individual members is the responsibility of everyone.
Melee characters have to ensure that they can deal damage while screening for their other members to punish people attempting to bypass them.
Ranged/caster characters have to help the melee characters by keeping themselves distanced from counter attacks while simultaneously supporting the rest of the group.
Mixed casting characters have to either choose oen of the above or be able to switch between one or the other on the fly.
It's the constant fluctuation and struggle for superior positioning and best actions that ensure the protection of the group, not any individual or there abilities.
Why? Because I really like the idea of a newby adventure on the group joined by veterans.
It's really fun to play. Hard to GM? Yes, but funny and more inmersive.
Because nobody wants to play the rookie. It's not fun for the guy who's being shown up to a ridiculous degree by the other guy. The monsters are either going to be a joke for the veteran to fight, or way too hard for the newbie to be useful.
It works for some systems, such as Savage Worlds or World of Darkness, where the transition from one level to the next is not that big (in those games a level 5 equivalent character can still be killed by a level 1 equivalent), but in Pathfinder the difference between a couple levels worth of power is HUGE.
I'm not saying there's a problem with the system itself, I'm saying that in this system, unlike a few others, there are exponential differences between characters only a couple levels apart. In certain other systems the difference between levels is less dramatic.
Maybe she does enjoy playing the weak one. Maybe she just accepts it. Offer her the chance to be the same level as everyone else she'll take it in a heartbeat is my guess, though.
The MMO concept of "tanking" doesn't exist in Pathfinder, but honestly, it probably should to some degree. Part of the problem with the game is that defense isn't valued much by players because players have no way to specialize in defense while simultaneously assuring themselves that the "bad guys" will attack them. Without a "taunt" mechanic, defense is always secondary to offense, which in turn limits the degree of danger you can throw at your PCs and expect them to succeed.
On the other hand, "taunting" should not be as it is in WoW, where you push a button and the enemy unquestionably assumes you for the rest of the combat. A mechanic should be in place that allows you to keep an enemy's attention in a way that makes sense. The Antagonize feat is a good start, but it suffers from being limited by its design space as a feat. Antagonizing needs a whole rules subsystem devoted to making it work both effectively and believably.
I've tanked hard with a cavalier backed up by cleric protections. We smashed through second darkness that way, as Drow are pi**-poor against tanks. Anything that beefs AC or hp and allows you to soak means you are fulfilling a tank role. Cleric backing fighters is an old instance of tanking in dnd to pf.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Admittedly i have not read the entire thread so i apologize if the following is not entirely relevant or if it has already been addressed.
In D&D there is a ways to "Tank" but it is not one would depict as the norm definition. The ways to "Tank" is primarily through CC and positioning via spells, feats, and the environment it self.
My fighter, level 12, is an archer with the Snap Shot feat chain, Point Blank Master, Pin Down, and the normal slue of archery feats and my friend's Sorcerer, focuses on battle field control spells primarily, have "Tanked" for the party on multiple occasions. 1 of the best examples of this actually happened 2 weeks ago. The party was ambushed in a forest environment scattered with large thick trees on each side of a path used to connect two villages. My friend used a couple casting of wall of stone to funnel the enemies towards a 15ft gap in front of the party. I stood in the dead center of the gap doing what an archer does best being firing upon the enemy as my allies waited with ready actions at each side of me forcing the enemy to close distance to deal with a pesky archer. This also gave my allies an option to retreat behind the wall for cover. The feat choice mentioned above though made it were i have a threat range of 10ft around me while using a bow and provoking no attacks of opportunity when firing a bow with me in melee range along with the ability to stop enemies from taking 5ft steps and withdraw actions. In short sorcerer spells forced enemies to go after a certain target while cutting them off. While the fighter feats forced the enemies to stay in combat with the fighter.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I may echo what Psion-Psycho said, but he's right. If your idea of tanking is protecting your squishies from the bad guys, then without an aggro mechanic you need to either: A) Make your allies unhittable (through buffs, etc.) or B) Prevent the enemy from reaching your allies, or acting at all.
This means that classes with easy access to stuns and short-term crowd control (Command Spell, Sound Burst Spell, etc.) can work quite well, but they tend to have limited resources.
On the other hand, you can substitute ANY attack for certain Combat Maneuvers, specifically trip. This is why the Reach Fighter is usually considered the best party defender (I don't necessarily mean the class Fighter, just any Reach weapon-using martial character).
Let's look at something like a Human Lore Warden archetype Fighter, for example.
With a reach weapon and Armor Spikes (or unarmed strikes if you feel like taking the feat), you threaten a 10' area around yourself. That's pretty big, and can get even bigger if an ally can bump you up to Large size (a 20' area!). In addition, you get Combat Expertise for free (awesome), so you can focus on having high Strength and Dexterity for your maneuvers, which get further boosted by taking obvious feats like Improved Trip and Improved Dirty Trick. These ensure that, while enemies may not FOCUS on you, they sure can't get to anyone else.
There are a number of other ways to do it, some much more effective than I've listed, but my point is that this is the best way to keep your allies safe aside from playing a magical buffer or crowd controller. It's about the closest approximation to a traditional "tank" that you can get.
|
|
Sorecerer needs to stay away from combat. Why? Because she's squishy. Stay away and it won't be a problem. And it makes no sense for a level 1 caster in a higher level party to not have "stay away" as priority #1.
Monk and Fighter needs to make sure the Sorcerer doesn't get into combat. They should occupy the battle field and prevent the enemies from getting to the Sorcerer. If you want any kind of "agro pulling", there is this feat.
And btw, I find the terms "tank"/"agro"/"DPS" to be very offensive (at least use DPR, if at all).
I can think of much more offensive things to say mate. The fact that he/she labels it as it is is fine simply for the fact that it is a term(s) that we all can easily grasp the idea of.
think its funny that after it was stated that the "tank term" was used for easy reference and communication purposes that everyone still needs to make a big deal out of it. saying tank is much easier then saying my high AC High HP character that trys to get hit by all the enemies.I've been playing tabletop games for a long time and have never seen people throw such a fit over such a thing before.
Sadly, REAL people are not always clear-headed and tactics-oriented. REAL people are affected by well-placed psychological ploys and can be duped, slandered, and overall played.It's called "roleplaying" -- figure out who your enemies are, what insults they can't bear, and USE THEM.This might be just me, but if one guy could only call me bad names and the other guy could turn me into charcoal, I'm going after the real threat. That is what intelligent monsters should do. Less intelligent monsters, sure calling them a snot-eater or something may get them to change targets.
Which is why I differentiated between intelligent and less intelligent.
Funny thing is, the best "tank" if you will is probably a CAGM barb with antagonize... low AC, High DR, and more than able to keep people's attention on him (Try and run away? AoO against the movement and he will pounce you. Try and Attack him? AoO....)
If I'm 'offended' by the idea of tanking, it's purely out of the stupidity of it; the whole MMO 'aggro' thing grew out of an alliance of lazyness between developers who didn't want to have to perform a detailed balancing of offensive and defensive abilities for various roles and classes, so that each character could be expected to be responsible for their own survivability... and players who would rather roll along as a cog in a braindead button-mashing machine than deal with complex combat situations.
If there's a way to enhance 'tanking' and 'aggro' in Pathfinder, it's in bringing out feats to further emphasize the ideal that a heavily armed frontliner can't be ignored if the enemy wants to live long enough to accomplish anything. Instead of 'he called be a bad name so I had to attack him, it's 'you want me to run past, and then turn my back on, the guy with a greatsword? Are you crazy?!'
Just because people get offended, doesn't mean you should pay them any mind.
If you know something happens, and you have a term for that thing that people get offended is truly irrelevant.
Players and I have tanked, we have seen it, done it, used it, made it work. I don't care much for mumorpogers. It goes back a long time in dnd and its derivatives, at least back to blocking narrow dungeon corridors with fighting men. :)