Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Alpha_Nerd 10-05-06, 12:59 PM	Ok, so I've got a character kinda worked out but I've got 2 options for him and I was looking for some input. The basic theme of the character is to be able to completely negate the need for DEX and still use two dwarven waraxes. I am getting around the dex requirement for the feats by taking 6 levels of rangers, and I'm getting around the fact that I'll have no dex in light armor by picking up 2 levels of Deepwarden. The character's AC isn't going to be something to brag about, but it won't be terrible, and I am also picking up 1 level of Exotic Weapon Master so I can power attack while using two weapons and make it worth while. Here are the 2 possible builds. STR 18 DEX 8 CON 17 INT 8 WIS 12 CHA 8 1 Ranger 1: Weapon Focus: Dwarven Waraxe Fav Enemy: Evil Outsider 2 Ranger 2: TWF From Combat Style 3 Ranger 3: Oversized Two-Weapon Fighting 4 Ranger 4 5 Ranger 5: Fav Enemy: Humanoid (Human) 6 Ranger 6: ITWF Power Attack 7 Deepwarden 1 8 Deepwarden 2 9 Exotic Weapon Master 1: Uncanny Blow, True Believer 10 Pious Templar 1 11 Pious Templar 2 12 Pious Templar 3 13 Pious Templar 4 Levels 10-15 are still in the air, and I figure I will just wait until then to figure it out. Or I could go this build, which makes life a little easier in the beginning levels but pushes back the secondary off-hand attack until 11th 1 Ranger 1: Weapon Focus: Dwarven Waraxe, Fav Enemy: Evil Outsider 2 Fighter 1: Power Attack 3 Ranger 2: TWF, Oversized TWF 4 Ranger 3 5 Fighter 2: Close-Quarters Combat 6 Deepwarden 1: Improved Favored Enemy 7 Deepwarden 2 8 Exotic Weapon Master 1 9 Ranger 4 True Believer 10 Ranger 5 11 Ranger 6 12 Pious Templar 1 Imp Toughness? 13 Pious Templar 2 14 Pious Templar 3 15 Pious Templar 4 Feat, Fighter Feat Which of these 2 builds do you guys think would do better off, and also if you have any suggestions please throw em my way.
amnuxoll 10-05-06, 01:14 PM	It's a great build in either case. My gut instinct is to go with the second build because I'm a big fan of making the fun of playing a PC high in as many levels as possible. However, neither build is really suboptimal and the first build gets you ranger spells at a time when they may actually be useful. So, my final vote is for build #1. For the roleplaying bit, you've *got* to do something to playup this PCs inherent clumsiness and yet still being able to toss those big axes around. I just can't think of what.
trollbill 10-05-06, 03:14 PM	You know, if I ever write a core mod it's going to have Arrows of Pious Templer Slaying. That ought to kill off half of each LG party right there. :evillaugh
Oogar 10-05-06, 04:30 PM	You know, if I ever write a core mod it's going to have Arrows of Pious Templer Slaying. That ought to kill off half of each LG party right there. :evillaugh Nah, most PTs have great Fort saves =)
SgtHulka 10-05-06, 04:45 PM	I've got a very similar build to your option #1 and am currently level 3 (power attack, track, favored enemy: human, two-weapon fighting, endurance, over-sized two-weapon fighting). I'm curious -- what are you gaining from Exotic Weapon Master Uncanny Blow? I thought that was only helpful with two-handed weapons, not two-weapon fighting? And what are you gaining from Pious Templar? (I'm thinking of going back to straight ranger after Deepwarden because I think I made a "mistake" and went with 14 Wisdom and I figure I might as well take advantage of it by working my way up to 4th level Ranger spells...but I'm always interested in alternatives). One thing as a warning is that until Deepwarden your armor class is definitely an issue. Now, at level 3, I've broken down and bought a heavy spiked shield for the +2 to my AC, and when I two-weapon fight I just use the shield. Even though I've got 30 hit points thanks to my con, the fact that I'm a front-line fighter (with crappy ranged attacks -- Dex 8) means I'm taking huge damage constantly and that 30 hit points goes very, very fast. I'm also sucking up the party resources on healing big time. Plus, I've noticed a lot of big crit weapons in years 5 and 6, so with a low Armor Class we clumsy dwarven rangers are definitely vulnerable to the odd x4 scythe or pick. My dwarf's AC at third level is only 16, 14 when two-weapon fighting, and that's after a 2k investment already in a ring of protection. Plus, I'm loathe to spend good money on a Amulet of Natural Armor, since it will have to be replaced eventually by an amulet of health to take advantage of the last point of "dex" bonus available to a mithril breastplate. Before third level and my oversized two-weapon fighting allowed me to use the heavy spiked shield, I was definitely "feeling it" with a lowly 14 armor class (chain shirt, -1 dex, buckler). There were a couple of tough fights where things were definitely touch-and-go. So, anyway, especially with a con of 17, be prepared to be a little careful for your first three levels at least.
Alpha_Nerd 10-05-06, 10:42 PM	Uncanny Blow makes your Waraxes Power Attack as if you are using them as a 2-hander. As for the AC, In my first build I pick up Heavy armor proficiency at level 2, so I'll pick up some half or full plate and just sword and board it until deepwarden. With power attack I should still be able to do decent damage until 7th level when It goes bananas. Also Pious Templar is just something nice to finish with. Mettle is helpful, and I guess the extra +2 dmg at 15th is something. Also the fighter feat replaces the feat for true believer kinda
Iswald 10-05-06, 10:58 PM	Uncanny Blow makes your Waraxes Power Attack as if you are using them as a 2-hander. You'll see a lot of table variation on this.
Alpha_Nerd 10-05-06, 11:47 PM	I don't see why there will be table variation, it's pretty clear cut. The first sentence mentions while wielding a one-handed exotic weapon in two hands. By wielding it in two hands it is already treated as two-handed for purposes of determining the bonus damage from power attack so the second sentence would be redundant unless it was meant as a second ability from the exotic weapon stunt. Do you by chance know of any threads concerning this ruling that a wizards admin as posted in?
SgtHulka 10-06-06, 12:31 AM	As for the AC, In my first build I pick up Heavy armor proficiency at level 2, so I'll pick up some half or full plate and just sword and board it until deepwarden. Yeah, you'll be fine then. Your hit points will be outstanding, and your armor class won't be pathetic.
Sieylianna 10-06-06, 08:09 AM	I don't see why there will be table variation, it's pretty clear cut. The first sentence mentions while wielding a one-handed exotic weapon in two hands. By wielding it in two hands it is already treated as two-handed for purposes of determining the bonus damage from power attack so the second sentence would be redundant unless it was meant as a second ability from the exotic weapon stunt. Do you by chance know of any threads concerning this ruling that a wizards admin as posted in? You would be surprised by the table variation. This has come up on multiple lists with no resolution. I would not build a character around it. Ed
Reylance 10-06-06, 11:48 AM	Because Uncanny Blow, if interpreted that way, is bah-roken. I suspect the wording on that special ability may be traced back to 3.0, when power attacking with a two-handed weapon offered only 1x damage.
Timlagor 10-10-06, 08:25 AM	It's not clear cut ...well there are two clear camps on the issue. I wouldn't build around it (even if I thought it was legitimate) without checking with local DMs first. You certainly shouldn't argue it at the table because DMs are very unlikely to change their minds on it. You ought to ask DMs when you sit down if you do try this (and some may be extremely annoyed if you try to do it without asking).
clik_ml 10-10-06, 11:16 AM	I'd at least have the book or a copy of the uncanny blow page available so you can show it to the DM if they wish to rule against you. Some folks might be mislead by the folks who keep claiming it is illegal and broken, without having ever read it. At least offer informed decisions. To the DMs who will get annoyed, they will need to get over it because it is a legitimate ruling. There are only two reasons for the writers to have included the power attack sentence. They either were restating how power attack works two-handed for giggles (either because they wanted to be very thorough, or because they had no idea that power attack already worked that way two-handed), or they were stating an aspect of the weapon trick that only works in conjunction with another feat. Heck, it's possible they just threw in the extra sentence reminding us how power attack works to fill in the space next to the picture, not realizing it was going to create a fuss. For the DMs who hate on Uncanny Blow granting a power attack trick, you just don't use that aspect for that mod. It's a pain, but not a mortal wound to any build. The 2:1 power attack isn't broken unless you grant that THF is broken also, since you don't even need to spend a feat to THF. It just goes a bit towards making TWFing actually useful for the feat expenditures it requires (which is a task in itself).
Mommy was an Orc 10-10-06, 12:31 PM	To the DMs who will get annoyed, they will need to get over it because it is a legitimate ruling. I think that needs to be emphasized - it is not a self-evident ruling to make. Any ruling that involves simply tossing a sentence out the window has to be explained. For the DMs who hate on Uncanny Blow granting a power attack trick, you just don't use that aspect for that mod. It's a pain, but not a mortal wound to any build. The 2:1 power attack isn't broken unless you grant that THF is broken also, since you don't even need to spend a feat to THF. It just goes a bit towards making TWFing actually useful for the feat expenditures it requires (which is a task in itself). That's not quite true - there are ways of breaking it that are a bit on the nasty side, but all of those involve very high APL characters and things that are broken in and of themselves. Example: Ranger 3/Fighter 2/Wildrunner 6/Exotic Weapon Master 1: 1: Ranger 1 - Power Attack, Track 2: Ranger 2 - TWF 3: Fighter 1 - EWP: Elven Thinblade, OTWF 4: Fighter 2 - WF: Elven Thinblade 5: Ranger 3 - Endurance 6: Wildrunner 1 - ITWF 7: Wildrunner 2 8: Exotic Weapon Master 1 9: Wildrunner 3 - Improved Bullrush 10: Wildrunner 4 11: Wildrunner 5 12: Wildrunner 6 - Shock Trooper, Pounce But what's breaking it is the level 12 things, not the Uncanny Blow.
clik_ml 10-10-06, 03:18 PM	Exactly. For that pounce build the character would definitely prefer to have the extra power attack ratio whilst TWFing- it's a pain to do without, but not crippling. He could just pounce using THF and forgoe the extra 2 TWF attacks and still yield significant damage.
Timlagor 10-11-06, 05:18 PM	To the DMs who will get annoyed, they will need to get over it because it is a legitimate ruling. Errr... You seem rather confused as to who makes the decisions on these things. The DM decides how it works and you are going to have to accept that a substantial proportion of DMs will not let you get 2:1 PA one-handed. Whether we are right to make that ruling makes no difference. Furthermore you aren't going achieve anything by arguing with such a ruling (aside from aggravation all round).
clik_ml 10-11-06, 05:52 PM	Errr... You seem rather confused as to who makes the decisions on these things. The DM decides how it works and you are going to have to accept that a substantial proportion of DMs will not let you get 2:1 PA one-handed. Whether we are right to make that ruling makes no difference. Furthermore you aren't going achieve anything by arguing with such a ruling (aside from aggravation all round). I'm sorry, there is a misunderstanding here. I am saying the DM is free to rule against it and it ends right there for that adventure. And yes, you should bring to their attention what you want to try before you do it. In fact before the adventure even starts would be a good time to show the passage and gauge the DM's interpretation on that class ability, but we're human and sometimes we forget to do things. And if that happens and the DM later realizes what you are doing, and they get "extremely annoyed", then they should simply make their ruling and get over it and move on. Unless I as a judge can tell the player was intentionally trying to slip one past me then I'd let it slide as an accident. Heck, many players likely won't even realize that there is another side to the coin there and it's silly to be extremely annoyed with them as though they were doing something unsporting.
Reylance 10-12-06, 08:11 AM	To the DMs who will get annoyed, they will need to get over it because it is a legitimate ruling. There are only two reasons for the writers to have included the power attack sentence. They either were restating how power attack works two-handed for giggles (either because they wanted to be very thorough, or because they had no idea that power attack already worked that way two-handed), or they were stating an aspect of the weapon trick that only works in conjunction with another feat. Or, as I suggested, that part of the sentence was added in error. I don't have my books in front of me, but isn't it worded as one sentence? It would be clear to me if the ability was written: "You add double your Strength bonus to damage when attacking with a one-handed exotic weapon in two hands. When using the Power Attack feat with a one-handed exotic weapon, you add twice the number subtracted from your attack rolls to your damage rolls."
Iswald 10-12-06, 09:44 AM	The paragraph on uncanny blow has two sentences. The first is about 2x str damage. The second is about power attack.