|
Hey all! Possibly going to be playing a tank barbarian for a game coming up, and wanted to make him as tanky as I could, with minimal loss in his offensive capacity, after some initial looking, I've come down two different approaches.
We are starting at level 1, with a 20 pt buy.
the first is an Invulnerable Rager archetyped barb, making use of Stalwart/imp. Stalwart and combat expertise. (making use of threatening defender trait)
the rough estimate of the level progression would be-
1-4 barb
level 5- unbreakable fighter, picking up stalwart as the level 5 feat
barb rest of the way.
At level 5, this gives me DR4/-, increased by 1 every 2 levels, with an additional +1 along the way due combat expertise.
at level 11, DR would jump to 13 (5 from barb levels, 6 from CE+Imp. Stalwart)
Note, this build still makes use of Power attack, whose negatives to hit are offset by reckless abandon.
The 2nd build involves using the unchained barbarian with armored hulk archetype, using all barb levels.
AC at level 4-6 would hopefully be around 25, give or take, if everything goes as planned, 10 armor, 1 def, 1 NA, 1 Dodge, 2 guarded stance, and possibly 2-3 from a shield, and or another 2 from combat expertise. Giving a total possible of 30 AC should going defensive be needed. However, this is at the cost of some damage (due to either not Power attacking, missing, and/or not two-handing)
This one feels like it scales slightly worse, quickly running out of ways to increase AC outside of Magic items/enhancements. The positive is that it may be stronger early on, and more survivable than the Invuln Rager who will likely be hit by anything more than a strong breeze during the mid levels.
Any thoughts or potentially other ideas (long as they don't deviate too much) are welcome.
Stalwart and Improved Stalwart are traps. You need to do damage to win a combat, and you need to hit to do damage. Fighting defensively hurts a lot. Offense in Pathfinder is overwhelmingly better than defense- that's just how the math plays out. Depending on what kind of weapon you're swinging, Power Attack might not do much for you.
If someone misses you, they do 0 damage every time. If someone hits and you've got DR, they may or may not do damage. Focus on AC more than DR, and leave some room for your own attacks to connect. Stalwart isn't necessary- go for in with heavy armor and swing away. With all that other stuff (magic items, dodge, natural armor if you've got beast totem) your AC will still be fine. If you really want DR, take Heavy Armor Proficiency and use Invulnerable Rager anyways (you lose fast movement, but that bonus isn't game breaking).
Personally I like slapping on debuffs as a means of keeping yourself a bit safer. Barbarian rage powers can help with intimidate, dirty trick, trip, grappling or even disarm, and any of those can reduce the offensive abilities of enemies.
The problem with the invulnerable rager is that while it works you can feel safe, but when it goes bad it can go very bad indeed. Getting hit more often means more critical threats and more of those crit threats confirmed. DR 4 may subtract a noticeable amount of damage normally but it's nothing against crits, and eventually you're going to get 2+ crits in rapid succession where you can't do anything after the first and before you drop, hard.
The Invulnerable Rager is a freebie, not something you should necessarily build around; you're trading out Uncanny Dodge, which unless you're an Urban Barbarian you don't care about having, in exchange for a small but consistent defensive boost. Just treat it as part of the basic Barbarian package, it's not really intended for "tanking".
This isn't a perfect answer, but you might want to consider blood rager. My advice would actually be opposed to Avr's and I would e slapping on a few pre-fight buffs like displacement. Additionally, on how your DM rules infernal/celestial healing's interaction with fast healing, you can stack con and just fast heal away the pain. AC is a meme. You either need a ton as you get value per point the higher your AC is, or completely forgo it and find another way to taking attacks too often, like stealth, concealment, or a long ranger weapon.
In general I prefer Armored hulk to the Feat/DR monster IR. Lets me focus on con and strength, and I can semi-dump dexterity.
|
|
The idea behind stalwart was just for the extra DR.
So it scales even more with the invulnerable rager DR. As I said, its strongest once I get imp. Stalwart, and unbreakable fighter gives me both endurance and diehard for the one dip.
All this aside, the only extra feats I need for this build is combat expertise, and the two stalwart feats. The rest are still going to be cornugoun smash/combat reflexes/PA/etc. So I'm still making use of debuffs, but with reckless abandon I'd likely still be getting hit anyway.
I considered the bloodrager, but, this time around, I'm not sure I want any magic with him this time around, I know thats technically "gimping" him, but thats why I came around asking for thoughts and ideas here haha. Thanks for the input and any more thoughts are welcome.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Vicious damage is untyped damage, which bypasses all DR, including a barbarian's normally impenetrable DR.
|
Untyped damage does NOT penetrate DR, not sure where you’re getting that from.
There are Paizo-written scenarios featuring Invulnerable rangers with vicious weapons that explicitly state that because of their high DR the damage from vicious does not hurt them.
Edit: to clarify, spells and SLAs that do untyped damage (like from Burst of Radiance) do bypass DR. But weapon enchantments are not spells or SLAs.
"Spells and effects that do untyped damage are pretty rare in Pathfinder, since these spells are quite powerful since their damage can't be stopped by any form of immunity, resistance, or damage reduction." — James Jacobs
"The numerical part of a creature's damage reduction (or DR) is the amount of damage the creature ignores from normal attacks."
This is not a normal attack. DR only stops physical damage. This damage has no type at all, thus it isn't physical, thus it's not stopped by DR/-. Falling damage is likewise untyped, and is likewise not subject to DR. Weird, but that's what the rules pan out to. I'm sure that there are scenarios where invulnerable ragers take advantage of their DR with Vicious weapons, but those scenarios are in error.
|
|
With that same logic the 2d6 damage from the receiving end of vicious would also bypass an enemy’s DR, as would the bonus damage from bane.
I respect James’ input on the matter but there’s a huge difference between a weapon enchantment or hitting the ground and a spell. In what world could you justify hitting the ground hard NOT physical damage?
Untyped damage is not listed as a means of overcoming DR. In the DR rules it only states that spells, spell-like abilities, and energy attacks can bypass any DR. Ergo, untyped damage does not bypass DR.
With that same logic, it would. And indeed, it does. So does bane and so does smite evil (although bypassing DR is part of smite evil's package).
Untyped damage is not said to be physical OR energy (Although if you want to be extra RAW, vicious weapons create "energy"). It does say that spells, spell-like abilities, and energy attacks bypass it- it doesn't say that those are the ONLY things that bypass it. You can't tell what this damage is, so the ability that only applies to physical attacks doesn't work. DR never works against anything that's not a physical attack, and vicious damage is not stated to be physical.
Why are a magical enchantment and a magical spell so different in your mind? They deal the same damage type: untyped. I don't see why you're arguing for one and not the other. There's no vicious damage and horrid wilting/flame strike damage. Only untyped, the type all three deal, which is never resisted.
Falling damage is untyped, so unless you rule it as bludgeoning damage (I would), yeah. It bypasses and that makes no sense. It was just a funny example I used. My James Jacob quoting isn't really a true example either (James isn't a universal font of truth) but if you do choose to use his ruling, he says that *effects* that deal untyped damage bypass DR. This is definitely an effect.
One type that this doesn't apply to is precision damage. That isn't written as having a type, but deals the same damage as the weapon dealing it. I'm guessing that this is because it's nonmagical and represents finding a weak spot rather than some magic enchantment. Precision damage is a condition, not a type, therefore it adds the same damage type as the base weapon. It's like a ranger's favored enemy bonus or a slayer's studied target. Conditional. Power attack, favored enemy, etc add to a weapon's damage roll. Vicious weapons don't add to the damage roll. The energy itself is what deals the damage, not the weapon. It says as much in the entry for vicious weapons.
Ignoring the off topic argument...
I am going to approach the issue from another perspective. I would say heavy armor or not depends more on how the rest of the group will play.
Last time I played a heavily armored tank, many of the group consistently ran past me and started the fights so far ahead, that it sometimes took me 2 rounds to get to the fight. Then there were a few occasions that they retreated and I basically was stuck surrendering.
However, I've also played in a group were the bulk of the damage was done by an archer and evoker that were quite happy to hide behind the tank.
Same in my group. Most of the damage is dealt by an inquisitor who's quite squishy- the tank cleric deals almost none. The paladin has a high AC, though, and he deals good damage as well.
Barbarians don't make great AC-based tanks because rage drops them by 2 points. The trade off is that you'll always have better damage because... well, rage.
Maybe my logic is broken, but I just use combat expertise to get AC while raging. Basically trading the +X to hit for AC and a lil extra damage, at high enough levels and high enough AC, I would actually say this is a better net gain until maybe post 16/17, where things have ridiculous AC and +X to hit, but I also haven't bothered to play past 11th level yet, so who knows. Oh, and before someone snide comes along, yes I understand playing the offensive is statistically more effective, but is it as flavorful? No. Also I don't want to start a dumpster fire on this poor person's thread, so DM/make a thread if you have an opinion to voice regarding effectiveness vs. flavor. Thanks.
Everytime I've played a barbarian I relied on all out offense to try to keep enemies focused on me. Some DR to mitigate the damage. And an acceptance of the fact that I'm going to be hit and dealt damage.
No tank is taking 0 damage. And if you AC is high enough to reach the point where attacks always miss you, there is a good chance that enemies will ignore you because you'll be so invested in defense that you offense will be greatly diminished. So it can be counter productive to keeping the focus on you to create a very high AC character.
I always just relied on after combat healing, bringing 2 or 3 wands of CLW with me and making sure we had someone in the group that could use them reliably. Remember, you fight just as well at 1 hp as you do at full. You just need to avoid dropping out of rage. Hopefully you have Raging Vitality.
Lots of con and lots of strength. You just face tank the whole thing.
I realize that this isn't what you asked for, just my experience for what was effective.
Personally I think Armored Hulk is a bad idea because you're still not going to have a high enough AC just by getting heavy armor. You have to build around having high AC, which barbarian simply isn't a great chassis for.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
For "tanking" i prefer:
Aberrant bloodrager for reach shenanigans + combat patrol
or
Fighter with some armor mastery choices and adamantite armor that gives comparable dr as IR as you level.
I agree with Ryan, the easiest way to become a tank is to become a gigantic reach monster. The way you tank in Pathfinder is not to become unkillable, but instead to force your enemies into attacking you.
Even without setting up a combat patrol, you can have 25ft reach as fast as level 4. I prefer to be an Abyssal Bloodrager as it allows you to Enlarge for free upon raging, an Aberrant Bloodrager needs to reach level 11 before it can Enlarge for free. This is important because Enlarge Person has a casting time of 1 whole round. Meanwhile, long arm has a casting time of 1 standard and gives the Abyssal Bloodrager the same reach as an Aberrant. The one extra move action you get per combat allows you to move into position with your gigantic polearm. The trade is that Aberrant gives better defensive powers but I really like that move action to position in the first round of combat.
Initiative is rolled, your turn comes up and you rage. You grow to size Large, and then cast long arm. Longarm doesn't sadly double the reach again so we cap out at 25ft for our reach. We move into a position to shelter all our allies as if we had a 15ft aura, trying to keep them within 3-4 squares (3 is better as at 4 they can get 5ft'd). Also, a Lucerne Hammer hits for 3d6 at this point and since you can hit enemies 25ft in the air you pretty much prevent melee combat from happening near you.
|
|
I'll comment on the whole "you must do damage enough damage to be a threat"
Who determines that? The GM? Who determines what any enemy will do? The GM. You can do all the damage in the world, but if your AC is high enough to make attacking you a 5% chance, he will still ignore you if he so wishes. Personally, When I GM, I rarely move enemies away from the "front line" that were engaged. Why would an intelligent creature risk itself harm? This of course, changes in certain situations. But its something I stick to. Allies may rush around the "front skirmish" but, the player playing the sword and board fighter that isn't power gamed still gets to hold 2-3 folk at bay, and take little damage doing it. And I dare to say those GMs that power/meta game are GMing wrong. You aren't trying to beat them, you are trying to give an enjoyable experience to all. If a player wants to play a SnB tank, then cater, at least some, to them. Now then, that aside let me comment on my original reason for posting. (Note, the above is assuming there is only 1, or 2, front line fighters, if the entire group are front liners, then they need to be able to fend for themselves anyway)
The intent for this character is to deal damage, firstly, however, I do not wish to play the dumb barbarian trading blows with whatever it is standing in front of him, that can go down due to a few bad rolls. I am, and always do, look for the best way to keep myself, and hopefully by extension, the party alive.**(see below for another tangent on this topic) **
Now, this is to say, I'm not looking to abuse reach, I will make use of it, and it certainly is a proponent of going for the DR build, due to being enlarged giving an inherent -2 AC(usually). But I want my character to be able to stand toe to toe with a large, deadly, creature, and be able to kill it, without great risk to themselves, and without being a money sink to the party. This means making the enemy hurt less, or making them miss, much more often. Yes, magic and the like still poses a problem, and threat, seeing how enemies can unload their entire repertoire on you without fear of more encounters, but there are only few ways to deal with that, and are things I must contend with, whether or not I choose DR or AC, or AC with some DR. As the MAJORITY of damage, will come from physical attacks. As such, I wished to get peoples thoughts on which they thought better, DR or AC. Which I have, and would like to continue to do so. I don't need them to be unkillable or unhittable, though being unhittable for most blokes is certainly a great way to keep himself and his team alive. I want my character to be able to take a lot of hits, whether that meand ignoring most of the damage, or causing them to miss most of their attacks. And I want to do it within the theme and concept of the character IE no magic, no "ancient or powerful bloodline" etc. Though I do appreciate people putting in their input.
**tangent-
I cannot tell you how mant times I have saved the party, by being unkillable, while still posing at least some threat. In many a game, I have had the "offense over defense" player be dropped two rounds in, after killing 1, or 2 enemies. Or none, if he is unlucky and rolls poorly, meanwhile the enemies can roll a 5 and still hit him. This was over the course of levels 2-13, on separate campaigns through similar levels. On more than one occasion, we won the fights because I was nigh unhittable, usually due to use of combat expertise, or spell buffs. Mind you, its not that I was doing no damage, on average, I did about 6-12 less damage than the "kill it first" characters did per hit, and hit just about as often (varied from 1-3 lower to hit across the course of the campaigns) there were times when they stood out, yes, a crit here, several one shotting AoOs on mooks here, or if we were fighting enemies with a lot of blast spells or SLA and me and mr. Hit hard took about the same damage, but I was always steady, hard to hit, and annoying as hell, and on the campaign where I played a SnB paladin, hard as hell to kill. This was even with an enlarged reach fighter build with the 15-20ft reach. Doesn't help you none when the enemy has a 10-30ft reach. Or by god, if your party has no healing. Because god forbid someone do in combat healing (which is itself another tangent) or be a healer/support character. The point is, hitting hard, especially at med-low teen levels, is far from the "best" way to avoid damage.
I agree with Ryan, the easiest way to become a tank is to become a gigantic reach monster. The way you tank in Pathfinder is not to become unkillable, but instead to force your enemies into attacking you.
Even without setting up a combat patrol, you can have 25ft reach as fast as level 4. I prefer to be an Abyssal Bloodrager as it allows you to Enlarge for free upon raging, an Aberrant Bloodrager needs to reach level 11 before it can Enlarge for free. This is important because Enlarge Person has a casting time of 1 whole round. Meanwhile, long arm has a casting time of 1 standard and gives the Abyssal Bloodrager the same reach as an Aberrant. The one extra move action you get per combat allows you to move into position with your gigantic polearm. The trade is that Aberrant gives better defensive powers but I really like that move action to position in the first round of combat.
I generally build it to take advantage of the staggering critical from the aberrant. Staggered mobs don't effective much.
Which is better of AC or DR is going to come down to what kind of enemies you will be fighting the most:
Fighting BIG boss that does a humongous amount of damage per shot? Even Invulnerable Rager's DR won't help much, although it is going to be hard to get AC high enough to deflect enough hits from that boss to keep from going down fast anyway.
Fighting a horde of Zerglings little enemies that give you the Death of 1000 cuts? By RAW, high AC will never stop ALL of them, but high DR will.
Fighting enemies that target Touch AC? Depends upon whether you can get your Touch AC up like you could get your general AC up -- if not, then DR would be better against Touch Attacks that just do damage, but the problem is that a lot of Touch Attacks don't just do damage, but instead do something really nasty that isn't impeded by DR, such as poison or some nasty spell or supernatural effect (the latter including but not limited to ability damage/drain and energy drain). And that means:
Fighting Gunslingers? Although high Touch AC would be good, high DR might be the way to go.
Fighting Shadows or spellcasters? Crank that Touch AC through the roof and/or get Ghost Touch Armor (if you can).
TL;DR at the bottom!
Everytime I've played a barbarian I relied on all out offense to try to keep enemies focused on me. Some DR to mitigate the damage. And an acceptance of the fact that I'm going to be hit and dealt damage.
No tank is taking 0 damage. And if you AC is high enough to reach the point where attacks always miss you, there is a good chance that enemies will ignore you because you'll be so invested in defense that you offense will be greatly diminished. So it can be counter productive to keeping the focus on you to create a very high AC character.
I always just relied on after combat healing, bringing 2 or 3 wands of CLW with me and making sure we had someone in the group that could use them reliably. Remember, you fight just as well at 1 hp as you do at full. You just need to avoid dropping out of rage. Hopefully you have Raging Vitality.
Lots of con and lots of strength. You just face tank the whole thing.
I realize that this isn't what you asked for, just my experience for what was effective.
Personally I think Armored Hulk is a bad idea because you're still not going to have a high enough AC just by getting heavy armor. You have to build around having high AC, which barbarian simply isn't a great chassis for.
My experience playing an IR barbarian was exactly this. You face check everything and just beat your foes until they stops hitting you back. I used a lucerne hammer with combat reflexes just to add to the damage I was throwing out. With lunge and pounce, there wasn't a whole lot I couldn't melt off the map and a lot of our foes had to take an AoO if they wanted to come fight me. It's effective, but not without it's weaknesses. Which leads us to...
Ignoring the off topic argument...
I am going to approach the issue from another perspective. I would say heavy armor or not depends more on how the rest of the group will play.
Last time I played a heavily armored tank, many of the group consistently ran past me and started the fights so far ahead, that it sometimes took me 2 rounds to get to the fight. Then there were a few occasions that they retreated and I basically was stuck surrendering.
However, I've also played in a group were the bulk of the damage was done by an archer and evoker that were quite happy to hide behind the tank.
Frankly, I think this should be one of the most important parts of your decision. RDA has already talked about it from a heavy armor perspective, so I'll talk about it from the IR barbarian perspective (at least IME). The Achilles Heal of the IR barbarian is HP. You will always take damage. Every turn of every battle, you lose HP. Sure, you have BOATLOADS of HP, but that means you need something to put that HP back. The higher up you go, the more likely you'll be fighting something with lots of hard hitting attacks. If you don't have a character dedicated to keeping you up, there will be fights you can't just tank through. CLW wands cut it for a while, but there were definitely fights that shield other and the heal spell were the only way our sorry asses made it through!
I'd see what your party is bringing to the table and then decide (either choice is going to be validated by their choices anyways!). Highly mobile characters? Might not be the best for a heavy armor tank. Nobody can keep you up in those clutch moments? A heavy armor tank might be the way to go.
________
TL;DR: Both heavy armor and DR have serious weaknesses that only the party can compensate for. See what your party is able to do, then choose a frontliner that fits.
I like defense in layers. I like to get a Miss Chance if I can. I like high AC due to a combination of Dex and Armoer (and other stuff like Ring of Protection). I like getting DR. I like Fast Healing. I can't usually get quite all of that, but I like to try.Which is better of AC or DR is going to come down to what kind of enemies you will be fighting the most:
Fighting BIG boss that does a humongous amount of damage per shot? Even Invulnerable Rager's DR won't help much, although it is going to be hard to get AC high enough to deflect enough hits from that boss to keep from going down fast anyway.
Fighting a horde of
Zerglingslittle enemies that give you the Death of 1000 cuts? By RAW, high AC will never stop ALL of them, but high DR will.Fighting enemies that target Touch AC? Depends upon whether you can get your Touch AC up like you could get your general AC up -- if not, then DR would be better against Touch Attacks that just do damage, but the problem is that a lot of Touch Attacks don't just do damage, but instead do something really nasty that isn't impeded by DR, such as poison or some nasty spell or supernatural effect (the latter including but not limited to ability damage/drain and energy drain). And that means:
Fighting Gunslingers? Although high Touch AC would be good, high DR might be the way to go.
Fighting Shadows or spellcasters? Crank that Touch AC through the roof and/or get Ghost Touch Armor (if you can).
Thats kind of why i prefer the fighter, with 2 advanced armors he can do the dr AND the high plate ac
I'll comment on the whole "you must do damage enough damage to be a threat"
Who determines that? The GM? Who determines what any enemy will do? The GM. You can do all the damage in the world, but if your AC is high enough to make attacking you a 5% chance, he will still ignore you if he so wishes. Personally, When I GM, I rarely move enemies away from the "front line" that were engaged. Why would an intelligent creature risk itself harm? This of course, changes in certain situations. But its something I stick to. Allies may rush around the "front skirmish" but, the player playing the sword and board fighter that isn't power gamed still gets to hold 2-3 folk at bay, and take little damage doing it. And I dare to say those GMs that power/meta game are GMing wrong. You aren't trying to beat them, you are trying to give an enjoyable experience to all. If a player wants to play a SnB tank, then cater, at least some, to them. Now then, that aside let me comment on my original reason for posting. (Note, the above is assuming there is only 1, or 2, front line fighters, if the entire group are front liners, then they need to be able to fend for themselves anyway)
The intent for this character is to deal damage, firstly, however, I do not wish to play the dumb barbarian trading blows with whatever it is standing in front of him, that can go down due to a few bad rolls. I am, and always do, look for the best way to keep myself, and hopefully by extension, the party alive.**(see below for another tangent on this topic) **
Now, this is to say, I'm not looking to abuse reach, I will make use of it, and it certainly is a proponent of going for the DR build, due to being enlarged giving an inherent -2 AC(usually). But I want my character to be able to stand toe to toe with a large, deadly, creature, and be able to kill it, without great risk to themselves, and without being a money sink to the party. This means making the enemy hurt less, or making them miss, much more often. Yes, magic and the like...
Different people play different ways.
My group has the players and the NPCs approach combat basically the same way.
1) Full casters are typically the biggest threat. Take them out first, if you can.
2) Partial casters can still do some crazy stuff, watch for what tactics they use.
3) Martials are generally only going to attack your HP. They're the "least threatening" but can't be ignored. They can typically take someone down in 1 or 2 rounds of full attacks.
4) Turtles - If they're not doing something offensive they're just the last to die.
This absolutely extends on both sides assuming intelligent reasonable enemies. Now sure animals or crazy enemies might just attack the closest thing. But generally speaking we give intelligent enemies the same sort of strategy that our group would use in approaching enemies.
Magic represent the biggest potential threat in Pathfinder. And enemies who aren't doing offensive things represent the least.
|
|
Yes, my argument is that
1. You can and should cater, ateast somewhat, to your players, if one wants a SnB character, let him fight 1-3 enemies at a time. If you invalidate a character concept as a GM. That is your fault, blame the system all you want, final say is you.
2. Enemies will not always have 100% info in a fight, and why would they willingly risk themselves harm in AoOs to try and move around a scary dude with a sword? Especially when they have allies that can threaten the others. Sure, if things start going south because of sniper snitchzel ranger in the back 3 rounds in, have the guy try to move past, run away if you must, but thats still 3 rounds it took him assess the flow of the fight, and come to that decision.
3. What is the definition of "offensive action"? Attacking? Doing an ill defined amount of damage set by the GM? Tripping/disarming enemies? If a turtle spends all his attacks tripping/moving/etc the enemies, and putting them in bad situations/causing them to take a lot of AoOs, is that still offensive?
Do you account for emotions? Such as anger? Anger that they can't seem to hit this guy? Anger that they keep getting tripped up by this one dude?
Magic is far from the most dangerous thing, save perhaps high levels when you gain access to a lot of SoS spells, at which point the game system can start falling apart in other ways.
Up to that point, magic is not as dangerous, as it is inconvenience and a deny tool. Fireball can hurt a bit, but it won't hurt as much as a SnB character will over the course of 3-4 rounds.
Note, magic is certainly powerful, I won't deny that, but it is not dangerous usually because it will kill you, but because it can put you in bad positions, deny you advantages, put you at disadvantages, etc.
Most 2/3 casters use magic to enahnce their damage dealing as well.
If damage is your standard for danger, pure magic casters, barring the odd exception, should never be your primary target.
I simply disagree with your point of view because as players playing their characters we're still capable of reasoning and making decision on what we view is the most effective means. We can argue about which tactics are actually most effective, but if a group of people generally agree "this is most effective" then the NPCs should probably be able to reach the same conclusion.
Also, based on my previous post you should actually notice that I put HP damage as the least important thing.
Casters are dangerous because the change the terrain of the battlefield.
A single spell can remove a character from a combat, like Hold Person. That is why they're so dangerous. And the versatility of spell casters means they can do virtually anything. And that is what makes them so dangerous.
Did they prepare a bunch of summoning spells? Did they prepare a bunch of buffs and debuffs? Did they prepare save or die/suck?
Damage is in fact the least scary thing you can, aside from doing virtually nothing like a turtle. A defensive melee character isn't threatening if you stay out of its reach.
|
|
Sure, the caster can potentially do almost anything, but in reality likely has 1 or 2 things he has planned. Maybe with an outlier or 2 incase of X. They can't prepare everything. They can't even prepare most things well until level 13ish+
My main point has seemed to elude you however, which is that as the GM it falls on you to make the game a fun experience for everyone, invalidating a character design someone wishes to play because you feel it is "not threatening enough", "too hard to hit", or "doesn't have magic" is ridiculous. Are you going to tell me that your NPCs run past the two-handed barbarian and ignore him constantly trying to get to the wizard? After all, the wizard is their prime target. What if they have a wizard themselves and need to protect him?
My point is that you shouldn't invalidate a character design simply because you don't think it is "right". If you want to continue the discussion, I may set up a different thread for it.
I disagree that it's ridiculous.
To me its someone coming to the table thinking they can play an MMO tank and pull all the agro and force all the enemies to attack them. That's not how the game works.
Now someone should definitely explain to the player that what they're planning wont work before they go down the road. But if they insist on going down it I'm not going to have all the enemy suddenly focus on them because of it.
You say you don't think it's unreasonable to have 2 or 3 enemies focus on the character, but when a combat may only have 4 enemies it is. Or a boss fight which often has only 1 (though this is purely bad encounter building).
Yes, I've had NPCs run past a barbarian thinking "He can't make multiple attacks of opportunity, one of us will get by beat down the caster who is casting a summon spell" (that was identified by an NPC caster).
I've also had some characters who were cowardly and didn't fight as a team. There isn't a one size fights all answer. The exact tactics of enemies will vary. Some monsters have tactics written up. Some monsters are very low int.
But if the Order of the Stick is facing the Linear Guild, they're going to employ the same sort of tactics the party would. Which at my table absolutely includes ignoring the turtle.
At most I might have 1 enemy engage the turtle, assuming I have multiple NPCs in the party to do so.
Edit: For what its worth the default rule at the my table is NPCs attack the person that did the "scariest" thing. Scariest can mean a lot of things. Casting crazy spells, dealing the most melee damage, turning someone into a pincushion with arrows. But definitely doesn't include the slow guy standing in the back with a reach weapon that isn't actually threatening anyone.
But again, there is no one size fits all rule.
At the very least what's going to happen will depend on the composition of the parties. Do the NPCs mostly consist of ranged attackers? They're absolutely going to focus on high priority targets and avoid melee combatants where possible. Heck, depending on how many there are they might ready attacks to disrupt PC spell casting attempts while pincushioning other ranged attackers.
I can imagine a group of mounted archers in an open field with a flying wizard. If they encounter a player group that is a cleric, wizard, fighter, and rogue they're going to kite the party and focus on killing the wizard first and then the cleric.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I also support Claxon here, its not that a turtle is a bad idea (high defenses can be their own reward, they let you take increased risks) but Pathfinder is a game where you have limited resources. The more resources you invest into becoming unkillable, the fewer resources you have available to do everything else.
.
The point I'm trying to make here is not that being a hardened glacier of a wo/man is just the first step. The second step is answering the question "Now what?"
I'm reminded of a Samurai that I had recently in one of my games, her Armor Class and HP were absurd and together with Resolve she was terribly difficult to take down with other effects. Still, enemies were able to mostly ignore here because her chance to hit them was quite low for a full BAB character of her level. The reason for this was her low starting strength (only a 14 in a 20 point buy) and the fact that she was using Weapon Trick (Choke Up) to wield a polearm in one hand. This reduced her chance to hit by another two, so that even though she was built to be an AoO machine she couldn't hit anything when she attacked.
Fortunately, the armor master's handbook came out during the campaign and she was able to retrain into Shield Brace which fixed her low accuracy issues. Now she was able to actually hit things pretty reliably. However, she still hadn't answered the question of "Now What?" as everyone in the party was able to hit things fairly reliably. She didn't do enough damage to instantly slay anything that ran through her AoO, so enemies were able to tank a blow in exchange for rushing down our casters. She needed something more, and thats where Stand Still came into play.
Stand Still allowed her to actually play as a Tank, forcing her enemies to stop within her zone of threat and interact with her for at least one round. Together with reach, and a spiked wooden shield, she was able to force foes into fighting her because it was very difficult to get completely outside her range. Even a withdraw didn't do it.
Here, she had finally answered the question of "Now What?" Her high defenses now served a purpose, because she was able to force enemies to behave and interact with her as she intended. Thats what you need to do Rorek, you need to answer the question "I'm very hard to kill, but now what?"
In response to most of the above theorycrafters, I'll submit my own experiences playing the Invulnerable Rager class. I played one near exclusively for Pathfinder Society, and it rocked out quite hard in damn near every scenario I played.
For example, at 5th level we fought the skeleton of an undead dragon. Being a mindless creature, it showed no tactics and would simply attack the closest living target. So, I walked up to it, hunkered down with Stalwart and Total Defense, and simply ate every attack it threw at me. The combat lasted 15 rounds, letting us conserve resources by whittling away at the creature using cheap ranged attacks, and in total it cost me two charges of a cure light wounds wand to restore the lost hit points afterwards.
The basics of the build I used are below the spoiler, due to length.
Alternate Racial Traits: Mystic, Dusksight
Class: Barbarian
Archetype: Invulnerable Rager
Stats (20 Point Buy)
Str: 15 +2 Racial
Dex: 14
Con: 14
Int: 13
Wis: 12
Cha: 8
Favored Class: Barbarian
Favored Class Bonus: +1/3 to the bonus from the superstition rage power each level
Traits: Hermean Paragon, Fate's Favored
Feats: Endurance (Shaman's Apprentice), Diehard (1st)
2nd
Rage Power: Superstition
3rd
Feats: Combat Expertise
4th
Rage Power: Reckless Abandon
+1 Strength
5th
Feat: Stalwart
6th
Rage Power: Witch Hunter
7th
Feat: Power Attack
8th
Rage Power: Spell Sunder
+1 Intelligence
9th
Feat: Additional Traits (Pragmatic Activator, Underlying Principles)
10th
Rage Power: Eater of Magic
11th
Feat: Improved Stalwart
12th
Rage Power: Strength Surge
+1 Strength
Here's an example of what the build looks like at 12th level.
The cornerstone of this build is rage cycling through use of Allnight. In combination with Superstition, Witch Hunter and Spell Sunder, it lets our combatant Sunder through most defensive spells and maintain extremely high saving throws, with a free action reroll on failed saving throws using Eater of Magic.
Pre-fight buffs are consuming Allnight and a potion of Fly, then using Haste from boots and entering a rage as a free action. Beyond that, strategy revolves around closing to melee with the enemy as quickly as possible in order to bring the pain before they have time to cast too many spells, cycling a rage as a free action whenever possible.
Offensively the focus is on melee damage to put the enemy down, and the greatsword attack sequence isn't counting Reckless Abandon or Haste to improve the attack bonus. Against extremely high AC enemies, the strategy would be to target any spells boosting defences by using the opening bonus Haste attack to perform a Strength Surge Spell Sunder (usually +37 with Haste and Reckless Abandon vs. DC 25 + CL to dispel, ignoring any miss chance caused by a spell or spell-like ability) against an ongoing effect on the target, dispelling things like Mirror Image, Barkskin or Shield of Faith. Note this provokes an attack of opportunity from the enemy, as the build does not include the Improved Sunder feat. Assuming free actions to cycle rage can occur between iterative attacks, this can possibly strip the opponent of multiple spells per round of full attacks, though many GMs limit free action rage cycling to once per round.
Defenses include strong saving throws against magic including rerolls (once per rage using Eater of Magic, once per day with +4 Luck using Lucky Horseshoe) on failed saves, generous amounts of hit points, and the option to use Combat Expertise with Improved Stalwart to increase the DR from 6/- to 14/- at the expense of -4 to hit. If Strength Surge is unused during the current rage, it can be used defensively to add +12 to CMD vs. a single combat maneuver instead. All favored class bonuses have been put towards increasing the saving throw bonus of Superstition via human heritage. There's just enough ranks in Use Magic Device to activate wands on anything but a natural 1, and skills already include the skill penalty of Allnight and ACP. Scrolls are a riskier proposition, but available if required, mainly to counter invisible or stealthed opponents.
Half-Orc barbarian (Invulnerable Rager) 12 (Advanced Player's Guide)
N Medium humanoid (human, orc)
Init +10; Senses low-light vision, darkvision 60 ft.; Perception +16
--------------------
Defense
--------------------
AC 20, touch 11, flat-footed 17 (+9 armor, +3 Dex, -2 rage)
hp 161 (12d12+72)
Fort +22, Ref +14, Will +17; +9 vs. spells and spell-like and supernatural abilities, +4 and one size larger to resist effects of wind
Defensive Abilities invulnerability, extreme endurance (hot); DR 6/-; Resist fire 3
--------------------
Offense
--------------------
Speed 40 ft., fly 60 ft. (good)
Melee +1 furious greatsword +20/+15/+10 (2d6+27/19-20)
These numbers assume rage and power attack are active. It does not include attack bonuses from haste or reckless abandon, or damage bonuses from witch hunter.
Special Attacks greater rage (29 rounds/day), rage powers (reckless abandon +4, superstition +9, witch hunter +4, spell sunder, strength surge +12, eater of magic)
--------------------
Statistics
--------------------
Str 27, Dex 16, Con 22, Int 14, Wis 16, Cha 8
Base Atk +12; CMB +20; CMD 31 (41 vs. disarm)
Feats endurance, diehard, combat expertise, stalwart, power attack, additional traits, improved stalwart
Traits fate's favored, hermean paragon (steaming sea), underlying principles, pragmatic activator
Skills Acrobatics +16, Fly +18, Intimidate +12, Perception +16, Spellcraft +12, Use Magic Device +18
Languages Common, Orc, Abyssal
SQ fast movement, orc blood, sacred tattoo [ARG], shaman's apprentice[ARG], dusksight[BoS]
Consumables potion of enlarge person, potion of feather step, potion of protection from evil, potion of remove fear, potion of remove sickness, potion of touch of the sea, potion of countless eyes, potion of displacement, potion of fly x3, potion of haste, potion of heroism, potion of gaseous form, potion of good hope, potion of protection from energy: fire, potion of remove blindness/deafness, scroll of glitterdust x5, scroll of mirror image x5, scroll of see invisibility x5, scroll of invisibility purge x2, scroll of wind wall x2, wand of divine favor, wand of lead blades, wand of faerie fire, wand of long arm, wand of obscuring mist, wand of shield
Weapons and armor +1 furious greatsword, +3 mithral breastplate
Other gear belt of physical perfection +2, headband of inspired wisdom +4, boots of speed, cloak of resistance +4, cracked magenta prism ioun stone (UMD), cracked pale green prism ioun stone (attack), cracked pale green prism ioun stone (saves), cracked dusty rose prism ioun stone, goz mask[ISWG], lesser talisman of freedom[OA], lesser talisman of danger sense[OA], lesser talisman of warrior's courage[OA], lucky horseshoe[OA], pathfinder's kit, locked gauntlet, weapon cord, spring-loaded wrist sheath, allnight