If you make a character with intent on "being the TANK" through high HPs and a high AC.
Example: Dwarf Fighter(1st), Dwarven Waraxe, Dex 13, Breastplate, Tower Shield, Dodge, Shield Focus, 20 Movement. (The Feats can change, they are in place for a higher AC.)
Monsters start out wanting to beat on you, but...
...now you need to get aggro back.
What is out there to make sure you can grab/maintain aggro from the monsters? High damage is the only thing that I'm aware of and a shield Fighter isn't typically going beat a Caster, Rogue or Barbarian.
I hate to say it but there is no real tank role in Pathfinder/ D&D. Unless you are dishing out some serious damage you will be largely ignored until they've killed everyone else in the party. So your best bet is to focus on feats that let you dish out damage.
|
If you make a character with intent on "being the TANK" through high HPs and a high AC.
Example: Dwarf Fighter(1st), Dwarven Waraxe, Dex 13, Breastplate, Tower Shield, Dodge, Shield Focus, 20 Movement. (The Feats can change, they are in place for a higher AC.)
Monsters start out wanting to beat on you, but...
Miss you repetitively and decide someone else is easier to hit.
Someone else(typically Rogue) wounds the monster for high(er) damage and it turns on them.
Your party runs by you and engages the monster(s) first since you move 20', possibly killing something before you even get into combat. ...now you need to get aggro back.
What is out there to make sure you can grab/maintain aggro from the monsters? High damage is the only thing that I'm aware of and a shield Fighter isn't typically going beat a Caster, Rogue or Barbarian.
Hehe, there is no such thing as aggro in pen and paper games. However, there are feats that allow you to "get the attention" of the bad guys.
The only one that I know that makes an enemy attack you, essentially giving up on the good tactics of destroying the barbarian, rogue, or wizard, is Goad.
Goad
You are skilled at inducing opponents to attack you.
Prerequisites: Cha 13, base attack bonus +1.
Benefit: As a move action, you can goad an opponent that threatens you, has line of sight to you, can hear you, and has an Intelligence of 3 or higher. (The goad is a mind-affecting ability.) When the goaded opponent starts its next turn, if it threatens you and has line of sight to you, it must make a Will saving throw (DC 10 + 1/2 your character level + your Cha modifier). If the opponent fails its save, you are the only creature it can make melee attacks against during this turn. (If it kills you, knocks you unconscious, loses sight of you, or otherwise is unable to make melee attacks against you, it may make any remaining melee attacks against other foes, as normal.) A goaded creature can still cast spells, make ranged attacks, move, or perform other actions normally. The use of this feat restricts only melee attacks.
Outside of getting a fighter with a reach weapon (or lunge as a feat) with combat reflexes, a high dex, and stand still as a feat, (essentially stopping the baddies from going past him), or tripping, there is no real way to stop the DM from making his characters attack the big damage dealers. I could recommend some tactics, but a quick browse through the core rule feats should make them very apparant.
This is not an online game. Aggro is non-existant.
Goad
Where is this from?
Stand still does not work with reach unless you use the version from psionics handbook. PRD/ core book version reads like so:
"When a foe provokes an attack of opportunity due to moving through your adjacent squares"
|
Goad is from PHB2. XPH/SRD Stand Still is about 100000000 times better than PF Stand Still.
The only real area-denial melee characters I've seen in 3e use 3.0/3.5 spiked chains, the Thicket of Blades stance from TOB, or are druids.
I'd argue that point. The other version of Stand Still gives a reflex save DC 10 + damage to resist.
The current version allows no save, just, did I hit? Yes? Okay you're stuck with me. Followed with Step up, you have nailed a running caster's options as he is held fast to the floor.
|
|
No, the PF version is much worse than that. For one, the PF version doesn't play nicely with reach. In fact, if you have a reach weapon, you can't ever use it (barring some secondary non-reach attack form). For another, the PF version requires a CMB/CMD check, in which case you could just trip them without taking that stupid feat.I'd argue that point. The other version of Stand Still gives a reflex save DC 10 + damage to resist.
The current version allows no save, just, did I hit? Yes? Okay you're stuck with me. Followed with Step up, you have nailed a running caster's options as he is held fast to the floor.
Again, debatable. Tripping requires more feats to make worth it, while you get the benefits of weapons on stand still and everything else, without provoking and without sinking at least 2 feats to be competent in doing so. And not playing nicely with reach is just them preventing the spiked chain problem from occurring again. I get you don't like the feat, but its still useful. Also, the CMD on those you'd want to hold in place is probably going to be pretty low in the first place. Wizards didn't have the bab and strength to be nimble in combat last I checked. Fighters are really the only ones other than monks with obscenely high CMD. And while monsters can have ridiculous CMD's its been shown its doable with even a passing effort.
As for maintaining aggro, Knight had that covered with the challenges that forced the enemy to come at you.
Hehe, there is no such thing as aggro in pen and paper games. However, there are feats that allow you to "get the attention" of the bad guys.
Call it what you will, you understood what I meant. While I have experience playing MMOs, I actually have more experience playing D&D. I was just curious as to what the community had to offer for suggestions. 'Goad' sounds like a good possibility since the Fighter will likely be going Paladin and have a decent CHA.
I hate to say it but there is no real tank role in Pathfinder/ D&D. Unless you are dishing out some serious damage you will be largely ignored until they've killed everyone else in the party. So your best bet is to focus on feats that let you dish out damage.
That's really unfortunate, because I'm certain it was brought up in length during beta testing. Don't get me wrong, I'm happy with my 500pg. book, but for all the goodness in it, the only GOOD Fighter seems to STILL be the '2-Handed Fighter'. What good are AC/HP feats if the monsters ignore you and beat your party to death? Not a whole lot. :\
|
Well, it's d20. And in d20, the attack bonus/damage output scales up far quicker than HP/AC does. It's a natural part of the system paradigm, and with few rare exceptions you will always come out better by dealing more damage faster than trying to turtle it. Kill them before they kill you.
That's not something that PFRPG can change, not without re-writing much of the system and kissing Backwards Compatibility goodbye.
As for the aggro, it's much up to the GM. Stupid monsters should go after the one that hurts them the most, which likely means the melee characters. Intelligent foes on the other hand, will know better to take out the healers/casters first while using crowd control to keep the melee at bay, so to speak using MMO lingo.
...now you need to get aggro back.What is out there to make sure you can grab/maintain aggro from the monsters? High damage is the only thing that I'm aware of and a shield Fighter isn't typically going beat a Caster, Rogue or Barbarian.
As I see it the effective "tank" or fighter able to maintain agro needs to be a tactical fighter.
To maintain agro you must be a tactical thread to the enemy throughout the fight. That means you have to sunder, trip, disarm, bull-rush on a regular basis. just going for high damage alone will not do it.
As pointed out by Treantmonk in his WIZ.OP. thread an enemy fights equally well regardless of remaining hp.
If however you can move the enemy around on the table and hinder their ability to attack by neutralizing their weapons, you become a real thread and can maintain agro.
Mix up the full-attacks with combat maneuvers and you have a serious fighter able to threaten enemies on multiple levels. The essence is addaptability. If you can addapt your style to the enemies weaknesses (maneuverability, hp, CMD, reach, spellcasting, etc.) you will be taken seriously.
Well, the fighter can use combat maneuvers to keep the foes from moving about, but since it's pen and paper game I'd use the basic idea of the game - RP
Nobody really can force you to chose targets with basic game mechanics (bar magic), but why?
You want the bear to attack you instead? RP it! Bang your weapon against your shield, wave it menacingly and shout. What about the Knight? Challenge him! Cry your insults at the goblins...
Roll an intimidate or a bluff check against the enemy to look the most threatening. That's why you play with humans, rather than with computers.
|
|
I'll tell you a story about "RP aggro"
It was in the Fortress of Stone Giants...
The party entered the room where a jotunblood giant dwells. Since he could meld into the earth, he made hit-and-run attacks without taking many hits, and his fast healing meant he could recover easily. The party was at loss as to how to drive him out to the surface...
And then the PC Binder began making horrible insults in Giant. He made a stellar Intimidate check and I ruled out that the enemy was so insulted that he surfaced and flew into a blind rage, trying to splat the offender. Consequently, the party was able to cut him to ribbons.
|
As for the aggro, it's much up to the GM. Stupid monsters should go after the one that hurts them the most, which likely means the melee characters. Intelligent foes on the other hand, will know better to take out the healers/casters first while using crowd control to keep the melee at bay, so to speak using MMO lingo.
Exactly.
When I create up NPCs or other monsters, I always try to have their "general" tactical stance thought out before the fight. Certain people will go after clerics first, others might target the mage, and yet others might go after the person being the loudest. As a DM it's our job to make sure that the "aggro" situation makes sense and it appropriate for the fight.
It's the beauty of playing a game with real people other than hoping that an equation will realize that your healing is being outscaled by the damage and automatically causing the bad guys to go after the cleric.
|
Well, the fighter can use combat maneuvers to keep the foes from moving about, but since it's pen and paper game I'd use the basic idea of the game - RP
Nobody really can force you to chose targets with basic game mechanics (bar magic), but why?
You want the bear to attack you instead? RP it! Bang your weapon against your shield, wave it menacingly and shout. What about the Knight? Challenge him! Cry your insults at the goblins...
Roll an intimidate or a bluff check against the enemy to look the most threatening. That's why you play with humans, rather than with computers.
+1
...
Basically, there are no in-game rules which encourage enemies to attack fighters. There are, in fact, many which encourage enemies not to attack fighters. Fortunately, most DMs attack fighters anyways, because it would be sad otherwise.
-Cross
... and in reality there are rules that force you to attack someone in favour of someone else?
|
|
There is no such thing as aggro in PFRPG. The best tactics for a fighter wanting to be "sticky" is to keep on the bad guy, and make them pay for every action they want to use to harass your other party members, so that the action with the least cost is to engage the fighter.
Here are some tips for keeping with an enemy and (hopefully) drawing their fire in PFRPG.
Once you have engaged an enemy (read: are adjacent to it and hopefully attacking it) if it wants to make attacks against others then one of three criteria needs to be met:
1. The target they wish to attack needs to also be adjacent to the mob or otherwise within reach
2. If the target is not with reach then the mob needs to disengage the "tank" to either pursue the target or to make ranged attacks unhindered.
3. The mob is willing to take punishment (or the risk of) in the form of opportunity actions from the "tank" for the ability to target other foes while adjacent to the "tank"
For issue number one: You need to talk to the other players in your group and make sure they understand the idea of using obstructions, formation and positioning, to ensure that the "tank" is usually in between them and the mob.
This is easier to do with ranged combatants. Melee targets who absolutely do not wish to be hit may wish to look at tactics like spring attack or other tactics that make retaliatory strikes a poor choice for the mob. But the main thing the tank needs to do with its positioning is preferably be in an adjacent position to the mob where the mob cannot 5' step and attack his companions.
Things like tripping, disarming, Bull rushing can help with positioning. Sunder can be used as well, just keep in mind you may be breaking treasure ;)
Issue two: You have to stay with your mob if he tries to disengage. The mob has three basic disengage options: Regular movement away from you (which provokes AoO), the 5' step away and ping the other target tactic, and withdrawing.
The PRD has a couple of good feats to address some of the methods of disengagment:
prd:Step Up (Combat)
You can close the distance when a foe tries to move away.
Prerequisite: Base attack bonus +1.
Benefit: Whenever an adjacent foe attempts to take a 5-foot step away from you, you may also make a 5-foot step as an immediate action so long as you end up adjacent to the foe that triggered this ability. If you take this step, you cannot take a 5-foot step during your next turn. If you take an action to move during your next turn, subtract 5 feet from your total movement.
This feat allows you to keep with the 5' step mobs. Because they cannot use other forms of movement in conjunction with a 5' step, then you force them to either withdraw, take AoO from a regular move, or take AoO for any ranged attacks.
prd:Stand Still (Combat)
You can stop foes that try to move past you.
Prerequisites: Combat Reflexes.
Benefit: When a foe provokes an attack of opportunity due to moving through your adjacent squares, you can make a combat maneuver check as your attack of opportunity. If successful, the enemy cannot move for the rest of his turn. An enemy can still take the rest of his action, but cannot move. This feat also applies to any creature that attempts to move from a square that is adjacent to you if such movement provokes an attack of opportunity.
This feat deals with movement generated AoO. Allowing you to "keep the opponent adjacent if they try and use move actions to disengage. Coupled with Step Up, you can easily force a monster use withdraw as its only easy method to disengage.
There is not much you can do to stop a withdraw action other than blind the opponent (blinded opponents may NOT take withdraw actions) which can be accomplished a variety of ways (and it becomes increasingly easier if your spellcaster who does not want the monster to disengage you assists with magic). But if a monster does disengage you just close with it again. If it is faster than you, then it may eat up some of your actions (or it may escape), but every round in which you force it to use withdraw is a round it is not doing anything else to your group, its a round where you can all pelt it and it does nothing in exchange.
As to issue three. Opponents that are willing to take AoO to utilize ranged attacked against other targets... You can take a feat to increase the DC for concentration checks of casters for defensive and one to tag them with an AoO if they fail the check. This is a little more relevant in PFRPG as the checks are more difficult for casters to cast defensively to begin with.
My suggestion is to close with them and try and get them on the group via a trip, or grapple them if you want control, otherwise just try and land hits on them every turn. If it is someone attacking with a ranged weapon, then attempt to disarm them, if its a caster, then you just have to keep on pounding them.
So the tldr version is that there is no 100% effective way to maintain "aggro", but you can very reliably stick to a target and keep pounding them. In many of these cases if your party is working with you, this will end up them not taking many hits at all from said opponent.
love,
malkav
There are two options if you want to play a MMO-style "tank" in D&D, and neither one of them is in the core Pathfinder rules.
First option is the Knight class from PHB2, who has a Knight's Challenge that works very similarly to Taunts in MMOs.
Second option is the Crusader class from the Book of Nine Swords, who has a stance (semi-permanent non-magical buff, basically) that gives any creature threatened by the Crusader who attacks anyone else a -4 to hit (and specifically states that they're aware of that fact).
I've had great success using a Crusader as a tank build in an open, anything-goes game. You won't have near that level of success with the core D&D rules, though.
Sigh, what is sad is not what the monsters do... its the other players.
In a recent game my Fighter Gregor managed to roll high initiative and act first. He claimed a tactical location directly in front of the doorway of the Old Farmhouse we had camped in for the night, and readied an action to begin cutting down any enemies that came near with his greatsword.
On the other PC's turns, they ran past Gregor straight at the enemy...
Sigh, what is sad is not what the monsters do... its the other players.
In a recent game my Fighter Gregor managed to roll high initiative and act first. He claimed a tactical location directly in front of the doorway of the Old Farmhouse we had camped in for the night, and readied an action to begin cutting down any enemies that came near with his greatsword.
On the other PC's turns, they ran past Gregor straight at the enemy...
That is one of the more likely scenarios I'll be looking at since my 2 of my group are considering monks. Being a Dwarf won't help much either, once they get their movement increase. *shrug*
Sigh, what is sad is not what the monsters do... its the other players.
In a recent game my Fighter Gregor managed to roll high initiative and act first. He claimed a tactical location directly in front of the doorway of the Old Farmhouse we had camped in for the night, and readied an action to begin cutting down any enemies that came near with his greatsword.
On the other PC's turns, they ran past Gregor straight at the enemy...
tactics play a huge role. I dont know about you but most of my group knows to stand BEHIND guys like gregor. I my original character, a sorceror was always happy when the local party paladin rushed up to block the doorway. If I were gregor i would have told my allies to stand back, and not allowed them through my square if they failed to do so.
The way the fighter 'tanks' is to block things like doorways or narrow passages. In theory a space as wide as 15ft or 25ft with a reach weapn (along with spiked gauntlets for adjactent enemies) can be 'blocked' by the tank. If your fighting space is wider then that, you need more then one. If you are out in the open you pretty much need to stay close together to protect the squishies hiding in the back hurling their various kinds of death at the enemy.
That is one of the more likely scenarios I'll be looking at since my 2 of my group are considering monks. Being a Dwarf won't help much either, once they get their movement increase. *shrug*
Sounds like the bigger problem here is party cooperation and talking about tactics. If your party mates want to play mobile strikers they aren't going to want to sit bottled up behind your character while you tank. Figure out what everone wants to do and work out some party tactics.
I prefer this stuff to be resolved by thinking minds, i.e. the players and the GM.
The players will decide who they will attack, and so will the enemies (well, the GM will decide for them). No numbers decide that the monster has to attack me, because I pulled 200 more aggro than the wizard.
The decision will be based on different factor, depending on who/what is fighting. It's a mix of "who hurt me most", "who annoyed me most", "who seems most dangerous", "who seems most vulnerable", "who seems most tasty", "whom do I hate most" and other factors.
So you want the enemy to attack you? Make him want to attack you most.
Going to agree with everyone here...
The only game rules that will let you take on the role of "stop enemies from hitting your friends" are crowd control. So if I were to build a character that wanted to do this (and I have, a Fighter type named Gregor as well, weird), I'd make sure to have the following:
1. Reach.
Make a bigger combat footprint. I don't know many crowd control or combat maneuver abilities that can be used with a range weapon, so we are probably looking at a Reach weapon with things like Lunge or Step Up to complete the parcel.
Even if you can't stop the guy, you have a better chance at setting up flanking positions by threatening a larger area.
2. Large.
This improves reach as well, but it also improves things like bonuses to Combat Maneuvers, Strength, etc.
Almost more importantly, beyond the stats of it all... being Big means you are more prominent and can simply get the attention by being imposing.
The rogue rolling around and trying to be unassuming won't be nearly as threatening looking as the 10 foot tall behemoth screaming a battle cry. Sure that Rogue might make a huge hit, but nothing pulls the attention like a giant looming warrior charging at you.
3. Combat Maneuvers.
Trip is obviously the good one. Before they made Stand Still so ineffective, it was a good one to have too, since it was a nice option against larger targets (since it worked off a Reflex save instead of size/strength).
However, don't underestimate things like Bull Rush or Grapple. Bull Rush lets you actually move the target away from your friends, and can even come as a free rider effect if you go the Shield Mastery route.
Grappling can effectively take an enemy out of combat for the rest of your group, so if there's only one "big" threat left, it's a great option as well.
4. Speed.
Nothing's worse than having to say "Man, it would have been great had I been right there... I could have done <X> to prevent that."
So you are a Dwarf. That's fine, you can carry a ton of stuff around without ever being reduced in speed (armor or equipment). Fighters reduce armor penalties, but you could literally have a grand piano on your back without being slowed down (you are now the group's packmule!)
So now it's time to bring up that 20' speed to a more acceptable number.
Longstrider (or boots of striding and springing) gives +10 movement. A level of Barbarian gives a stacking +10 as well, but you'll be limited to Medium armor to maintain it.
Expeditious Retreat gives +30 speed, which helps a lot more. 1 min / level, first level spell for arcane casters. A wand wouldn't be much to ask for the party mage to pop on.
If your DM allows it's creation, you could even get a continuous (or at least a standard action casting) permanent item.
Boots of Speed (or Haste) also gives a nice bonus, but this is getting into the expensive side of things, and comes with a lot of extras. It's good to get, but definitely a higher level item.
.
Other than the above, you'll have to have a frank discussion with your party and see what they want to do.
If you have a couple strikers in your group, then you might want to discuss how best to set up flanking positions. That'll keep your party members close (for when the Strikers get hurt), but they'll probably have acrobatics to roll through enemy spaces to get back behind you when that happens.
In the end, it will depend heavily on how the DM decides to play it. However, being Large+ sized and making the most noise as early as possible will likely get you the attention of any big brutes that aren't smart enough to ignore that and go for the spellcasters instead.
Those are usually the ones that you are set up to handle anyways, so it fits.
I think DnD 4.0 allows for some of these types of actions for their "tank" classes. It's been a while since I read through the PH, but I believe they have abilities that, in essence, make it significantly difficult for an enemy combatant to do anything but attack the person that "taunts" it.
Which is why we don't play 4.0 quite frankly. As a DM I don't want a combat ability to force me into attacking only one player. As a player I wouldn't want a specific enemy forcing me to attack it at the expense of other targets.
I much prefer the RP aspect of combat, and keeping it fluid while at the same time varying tactics to keep it fun and exciting. Making a "tank" in PFRPG means having a group that coordinates together, and uses common sense in how they advance a combat. Even then it can be difficult, but combat should be difficult! *grin*
|
Sigh, what is sad is not what the monsters do... its the other players.
In a recent game my Fighter Gregor managed to roll high initiative and act first. He claimed a tactical location directly in front of the doorway of the Old Farmhouse we had camped in for the night, and readied an action to begin cutting down any enemies that came near with his greatsword.
On the other PC's turns, they ran past Gregor straight at the enemy...
I will first second, third, whatever what everyone is saying here. There are many wasys to do the tank thing, either tactics or crafty character build choices, but there are no hardfast rules to force a creature to attack one over another.
As a side-note - I was that "Gregor" in a campaign once. A couple times I had done just as you iterate here - taken up an ideal defensive position and bottlenecked the creatures towards us, only to have that fall apart from other players making foolish choices, or not paying attention. In such cases I have stood my ground and waited in the doorway entrance. If they need my help badly enough, they'll come back behind me.
Robert
When I DM the players have already learned that the encounters are not to be solved by charging into the open when they have the higher ground ;)
If you make a character with intent on "being the TANK" through high HPs and a high AC.
Example: Dwarf Fighter(1st), Dwarven Waraxe, Dex 13, Breastplate, Tower Shield, Dodge, Shield Focus, 20 Movement. (The Feats can change, they are in place for a higher AC.)
Monsters start out wanting to beat on you, but...
Miss you repetitively and decide someone else is easier to hit.
Someone else(typically Rogue) wounds the monster for high(er) damage and it turns on them.
Your party runs by you and engages the monster(s) first since you move 20', possibly killing something before you even get into combat. ...now you need to get aggro back.
What is out there to make sure you can grab/maintain aggro from the monsters? High damage is the only thing that I'm aware of and a shield Fighter isn't typically going beat a Caster, Rogue or Barbarian.
Heavy flail for nice damage, trips and disarms, lunge to do it from range, dazzling display :) You will be the scarriest guy on the field.
Either that or a quickdraw two weapon fighting bola fighter :) you can just trip everyone every round and be the best battlefield controller(mundane) around. You will want returning bola's
There are many ways a fighter can make sure he isn't ignored. There's much to be said for trips, disarm, flanking and bullrushing. Not to mention positioning, using terrain and making a creature pay for every attack of opportunity it incurs. Shield slam, sunder, etc, etc...
There are many ways a fighter can make sure he isn't ignored. There's much to be said for trips, disarm, flanking and bullrushing. Not to mention positioning, using terrain and making a creature pay for every attack of opportunity it incurs. Shield slam, sunder, etc, etc...And that thing to say is that one of them won't save your party members, pretty much everyone is immune to one of them, one of them is almost completely useless because of the PF nerfs to it, and one of them is fine until flight becomes common.
1) Trip - many of the creatures immune or highly resistant to trip do not have the intelligence to bypass a character standing in front of them.
2) Disarm & sunder - highly circumstantial, but if you apply yourself at it you are a threat to most humanoid enemies (which are pretty common and often the most challenging to fight).
3) Bull Rush - even at high levels when flight becomes more readibly accessible there will be a majority of enemies who cannot fly.
In no way do combat maneuvers solve all your problems, but they remain valuable tricks in the fighters arsenal.
1) Trip - many of the creatures immune or highly resistant to trip do not have the intelligence to bypass a character standing in front of them.Everything with a fly speed.
Just because a creature can fly, has lots of legs, or has no legs does not mean it will attack the parties vulnerable characters first. It depends on intelligence and motivation, and simply putting oneself between the group and the monster can do a lot to incite an attack from the monster. At medium levels and above, the only ones you can COUNT on to have access to fly are in fact the PC party (unless they do not have arcana casters).
3) Bull Rush - even at high levels when flight becomes more readibly accessible there will be a majority of enemies who cannot fly.Go ahead and try and bullrush things. Even if you're super-duper optimized for bullrushing, you're looking at a 25%-ish chance to move them 5'.
Depending on the situation I would be happi with a 25% chance. But I would often use bull rush to control medium sized opponents (as it is meant to) and would probably stand a better chance then that.
But hey, combat maneuvers are not for the feint of heart or for the fickle. Not everyone can get away with it, but that is what separates the tactical fighter from the brutish slugger.
Man in Black, you are arguing a different thing.
These things exist, and do the things you'd want.
Now whether they are "worthwhile" once you hit a certain level, that's an entirely different matter.
Here's how I'd see a Fighter playing his "tank" character.
First level: Try and get a one-trick pony in as quickly as possible. Probably Trip with Reach or something similar.
Low levels: Build up some of the options I presented above. Since it doesn't take much to max out in a particular field (two, maybe three feats), you can probably get a good couple tactics in while you are still useful.
Mid levels (8-12th or so): Better hope you have friends willing to toss you a few spells your way to keep you useful. Fly being a big one. Fly + grapple a winged flier can mean they fall-down-go-boom.. it's just getting that Fighter to have the ability to fly too is the trick.
High levels (starting 13th-15th or so and up): Might be time to just start retraining some choices into pure damage. Because honestly, you are going to be fighting things that your little abilities won't really be able to handle anymore.
If you can get psionics Stand Still feat, you could see a little extra use against certain foes... but really, even having a huge defense and hitpoints won't save you against the nastiness coming up.
Better to try laying down 200 damage in a single round and hope to kill off the target quicker.
That is.. if your Fighter lived this long to begin with. You might be playing a Druid by then.
And if your campaign is even still going by the time you reach 15th level. /sigh
Trip is CMB versus CMD, provokes no AoO because Badguy can't reach
AoO's interrupt. Badguy hasn't quite left the square yet, and can still return his own AoO against a non-improved trip.
1st. I agree that trip is very handy, but it is an Offensive trait and not used during attacks of opportunity. Stand still is used during an attack of opportunity. That makes it much more useful when it is NOT your turn but you are still trying to tank and protect the soft, squishy mage behind you.
PRPG p.201 says:
"You can attempt to trip your opponent in place of a meleeattack."
It does not require an actual action and can therefore be used as an AoO.
I hate to say it but there is no real tank role in Pathfinder/ D&D. Unless you are dishing out some serious damage you will be largely ignored until they've killed everyone else in the party. So your best bet is to focus on feats that let you dish out damage.
See the Knight from PHB II
d12 HD, multiple class features that boost AC, the ability to shield allies and take hits for them, class features that make all threatened squares difficult terrain and jack up the DC to tumble around him, the ability to move at normal speed while wearing medium(later heavy) armor, and the Knight's Challenge: Test of Mettle that forces enemies the make a Will save or they have to fight him.
In d20, it doesn't get much more "Tank-like" than this. All this before any feats are even selected. Heck, this is all by 5th level.
No, they placed a tiny penalty on enemies who rightly ignored such a weak class.
What game are you playing? That sounds like the 4e Fighter, not the 3e Knight. My knight is a BEAST in my campaign. The biggest problem I see a lot of player's who try to run Knight's is that damage is completely secondary. You have to think about tactics the whole time, not just running up and swinging. As a Knight, dealing damage should be the LAST thing on your mind. I took the Full-Defensive action every turn until I got Combat Expertise. Your job is to put a wall up between the monster and the rest of your party. It's not a job for everyone, since most people want to deal damage. But if you're doing the job right, you're the party's best friend(next to the healer).
The Knight I am currently running is only 5th level, and stood up to 6 Assassin Vines. Meanwhile, the party Archer went to town dropping each one from a distance. We were in a narrow corridor, so I was able to contain them by staying put and using a Full-Defensive action.
Agreed.
The Knight class is potent when designed and played correctly as a walking wall... preferably in a party that contains a glut of offensive magic abilities/ or ranged attackers.
I played in a 3.5 game that had 3 players. A Knight, a Fey-Blooded Sorcerer, and my Truenamer. The Knight would put up a defensive wall, my Truenamer would drop a "fast healing" effect on the Knight, and then the Sorcerer and I would unleash ranged/reach weapon attacks and bursts of destructive magic/ truenaming.
A Truenamer? How did the class work in play? I've never played one and I've heard nothin but bad stuff. The mechanics lost me.
A Truenamer? How did the class work in play? I've never played one and I've heard nothin but bad stuff. The mechanics lost me.
I enjoyed it. Activating all your abilities is just a skill check. Once you figure out the basic formula it becomes fairly second nature to figure out the DC's for things. Most of the math can be done ahead of time by the DM as long as they keep your character in mind while setting up.
The "bad" thing about the class is that its abilities are not exactly balanced for higher level play. However, I had a DM who was understanding and "gifted" my character a +10 Truenaming skill item at the appropriate level. We were all able to have plenty of fun. It was an interesting game considering the fact that my character was the primary healer for the group. Each ability has a beneficial use and a offensive use. You have to keep in mind what abilities you use because those that have continuous effects are "tied" up until they run their course... (duration ends) ...because you will not be able to use the flip-side of the ability. You have to think a little tactically. Also, as a your abilities are skill checks... the other party members can actually "aid other" to help you pull off your abilities. So for out of combat healing near the end of the day you might just be able to pull off a few more utterances with the help of your companions when the DC's are pretty sky high. Our group also used the Teamwork Benefits presented in PHB2 and Heroes of Battle and used team rosters to give use a little boost.
See the Knight from PHB II
d12 HD, multiple class features that boost AC, the ability to shield allies and take hits for them, class features that make all threatened squares difficult terrain and jack up the DC to tumble around him, the ability to move at normal speed while wearing medium(later heavy) armor, and the Knight's Challenge: Test of Mettle that forces enemies the make a Will save or they have to fight him.
In d20, it doesn't get much more "Tank-like" than this. All this before any feats are even selected. Heck, this is all by 5th level.
[
The night worked in campains with mostly intelligent enemies, the problem we encountered when we used one, is if the dm put a magical beast or an animal in front of us the knight was pretty much a hyped up warrior.
In most combat-oriented games, the aggro formula is based on the same principle -- attack the most threatening enemy. WoW gives a threat multiplier on virtually all actions. If you heal, attack, or use a special ability, you generate a certain amount of threat against certain monsters. MMOs need a numerical formula for threat because numbers are easy to work with.
In pen and paper games, it still makes the most sense for an NPC to attack the most threatening enemy. If you kill the enemy that threatens you the most -- that is, the enemy that presents the most danger to you -- then there is a better chance that you'll survive. But what defines a threat in PF/D&D? Can a small gnome wizard with a tiny wand be more threatening than a muscular half-orc barbarian with a great axe? Of course! But do the monsters *know* this? Sometimes. It's up to the DM to make judgment calls about how much an enemy understands about the current combat. Most of the time, a half-orc barbarian running up to you is going to be pretty damn threatening. You'd have to be pretty smart, cool, and collected to regard a small gnome wizard as a bigger threat.
As a DM, I have any "professional" force -- like a well-trained army -- know that spellcasters are very dangerous. They keep the front lines running, they disrupt the enemy forces, they inflict area attacks, and they alter the battlefield in their favor. Spellcasters are almost always a primary target for smart or well-trained NPCs/monsters. For less intelligent creatures (the vast majority of monsters), that big half-orc is going to be the biggest threat. This is my general rule, but there can be variations. Particularly cowardly monsters attack the weakest looking enemy first. Some monsters hate elves more than any other creature, so they're the first targets.
In this sense, typically speaking, the big heavy fighter is the biggest threat. There's no need for special mechanics to help the fighter out -- he's already in the crosshairs of most monsters. But against particularly smart monsters, the big heavy fighter isn't going to be effective. That is to be expected. If the fighter wants to be effective against smart monsters, he's going to have to be smart too.
I think Goad is a bad mechanic, and I'm glad they didn't print that feat in PF. It's silly to use "force of will" alone to convince someone that you're the biggest threat. Big muscles, heavy armor, and scary-looking weapons typically threaten more than boasts or words. I can see "duping" an enemy into attacking you, but barring magic or perhaps infamy it seems unlikely that you can convince someone that your threat level is higher than it actually is in 6 seconds or so. The knight challenge is a bit better, but it's still kind of lame. I think the "hit me or be punished" mechanics in 4th edition are probably the best mechanically, but they're typically kind of unnecessary (unless you're fighting the "smart" enemies).
As a DM, you need to roleplay the monster. Figuring out what the monster would do is much easier when you become the monster (:
As a DM, you need to roleplay the monster. Figuring out what the monster would do is much easier when you become the monster (:
Therein lies the challenge. MMO's and other video games have complex mathematical formulas to figure this out. For pen and paper games, there are a lot of other circumstances.
Some of the things that, whether I like it or not, are going to affect which character gets attacked has a lot to do with how the players are playing the game. Will this player get upset? Is it fair? Would the creature really single them out? Is it smart enough to judge the threat, or will it attack whomever is closest?
Then comes the ruling that several other DMs and I go by, when a player is knocked to 0 HP or below, the monster moves on to another target. This somewhat reduces player death, since they usually get a chance to stabilize, or the healer gets to them. In reality, most evil creatures are going to flat out kill the player then move on. When an angry dog attacks, it doesn't walk away as soon as the target hits the ground; it climbs on top and goes for the throat. As a DM, I try to avoid this style of realism, but sometimes it's hard to justify. Thankfully, there are a few types of monsters that it states specifically in their Combat text who they'd attack. There's a type of undead in Faerun that specifically targets clerics and paladins, for example.
IMO, if a player is trying to keep "aggro", then they should make it known to the DM that they are actively trying to get the creatures attention. All mechanics aside, it's the DM who decides which player gets aggro.
Some of the things that, whether I like it or not, are going to affect which character gets attacked has a lot to do with how the players are playing the game. Will this player get upset? Is it fair? Would the creature really single them out? Is it smart enough to judge the threat, or will it attack whomever is closest?
Monsters are always smart enough to judge threat. They just judge stupidly or intelligently. Stupid judgments can range from "whatever is in front of me" to "whoever is hurting me the most". But given no other information, the big armored muscle guy is the biggest threat to most dumb monsters. Why would the wiry elf wearing almost no armor be more threatening? If that elf starts to sneak attack big damage, things can change. A more intelligent threat judgment would be, "drink an invisibility potion, attack the spellcaster while avoiding the big dude", or "harass the enemy melee with trips/disarms/sunders as your teammates kill the enemies".
Then comes the ruling that several other DMs and I go by, when a player is knocked to 0 HP or below, the monster moves on to another target. This somewhat reduces player death, since they usually get a chance to stabilize, or the healer gets to them. In reality, most evil creatures are going to flat out kill the player then move on. When an angry dog attacks, it doesn't walk away as soon as the target hits the ground; it climbs on top and goes for the throat.
If the player is alone (or no one is doing anything), then sure, the dog would go for the throat. If the dog is being damaged by multiple players, it doesn't make sense for the dog to ignore another threat while being killed by it. Most of the time it makes sense for the dog (or anything with a decent Wisdom score) to address the next big threat -- usually who or whatever is actively attacking it with the most effectiveness. This is just a basic level of awareness.
IMO, if a player is trying to keep "aggro", then they should make it known to the DM that they are actively trying to get the creatures attention. All mechanics aside, it's the DM who decides which player gets aggro.
Right, but this can cause the DM to give the false impression that the character is doing something that, in game terms, is doing something effective. This is fine if your DM is an Evil DM, but most try to be fair to the players.
a quickdraw two weapon fighting bola fighter :) you can just trip everyone every round and be the best battlefield controller(mundane) around. You will want returning bola's.
LOL! That is a pretty cool idea, though REALLY low on damage, maybe next time. You would definitely have aggro. We could really use a Boomerang on our list of exotic weapons. :D
---------------------------------
The Whirlwind/Trip route is fun, I did it about a year before Pathfinder released though with a 3.5E Chain Fighter/Ranger themed on Castlevania (Undead Hunter) and the campaign lasted approximately 2 years. So that one is burnt out for me, for now.
---------------------------------
I think I've settled on Weapon Focus(Waraxe) & Dazzling Display. Followed by Intimidating Prowess. The thought was to cause enemies to become shaken(or worse), in a sense providing my party a better AC through enemy penalties; it's not a taunt, but it works. Then either the TWF or Mounted Combat trees from there on out as a Paladin. Thank you to everyone for the suggestions! I'm glad to see the topic is still one of interest in our community.
I think Goad is a bad mechanic, and I'm glad they didn't print that feat in PF...snip... The knight challenge is a bit better, but it's still kind of lame.
I agree.
I think the "hit me or be punished" mechanics in 4th edition are probably the best mechanically, but they're typically kind of unnecessary (unless you're fighting the "smart" enemies).
I know this was the one mechanic my group really liked when we first examined 4E, but it didn't warrant enough response to actually switch systems.
----------------------------
SIDE NOTE: My DM is NOT one of those who is racking up TPKs or purposely running by Fighter-types and attacking only Casters EVERY combat.
The problem, as mentioned above, does really lie in party tactics. I've played with this particular group for 3-4 years now... leading me to request aggro answers for our next campaign. I've wanted to play this character since PFCORE released, I'd really rather not sell out and go 2-handed.
My strategic opinion sometimes gets hastily translated into "Don't play my character, play your own!". Meanwhile I'm left standing in the dust like poor "Gregor". Then you have the DM who is left with little choice but to attack/charge the nearest target(s), good thing the Caster jumped in front of the Fighter to shoot his crossbow. *sigh*