Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Kolson 04-03-07, 12:27 PM	I just recently picked up a Player's Handbook II, and there are a number of new powerful feats for fighter/types. But the two that really made me take notice are Bounding Assault and Rapid Blitz. Both give you an extra attack when making a spring attack. Bounding assault gives you an extra attack at a -5 attack penalty, and Rapid Blitz gives you one at a -10 penalty (just like with full attacks). This gives you 3 attacks along with the ability to move out of your opponent's reach. Generally a feat is broken if not taking the feat is rediculous. Feats can be powerful, but not significantly more powerful than your other feat choices. This feat tree takes 5 feats (Dodge, Mobility, Spring Attack, Bounding Assault, Rapid Blitz), so even non-human non-fighters can get it with a couple feats to spare for Power Attack / Improved Critical and such. But ANY warrior type that does not take these 5 feats would be significantly less powerful than one who does. If a fighter has a 75% chance of hitting his enemy, then these feats would double his total damage each round. And he would be outside of his enemy's full attack range. That is incredibly more powerful than any other 5 combative feats. How would any fighter/barbarian/etc. beat someone with these 5 feats if he did not take them himself? If the answer is that he cannot, then the feats are definetly broken. But I would definetly like someone to convince me that it isnt, because I have a fighter/rogue that uses spring attack who I would like to give these feats to. :)
PhaedrusXY 04-03-07, 12:36 PM	Are you kidding? How about giving the defender Karmic Strike, or Robliar's Gambit. Now he gets to hit you back every time you hit (or even swing at) him. This also cost fewer feats than you spent, and he still gets to hit you on his normal action. His attacks are also all at his full BAB. Yes, what you described is a good feat combo, but it's hardly the only good feat combo, or even the best. It certainly isn't "must have". The defender could also ready an action to sunder or disarm you, or trip you.
NatchFeral 04-03-07, 12:37 PM	Rapid Blitz requires BAB 18, so how does making 3 attacks while moving stack up against, oh I don't know, Timestop, Shapeshift, or Gate? Relax. Five feats is a hefty entrance for a high level trick, that while nice, is not breaking the game. Besides, there are many ways to defeat or counter a spring-attacker.
Leilond 04-03-07, 12:40 PM	Well this happen if the opponent is so stupid to let the warrior continue the strategy without taking any "counter move" I immagine the standart fighter, with heavy armor... 4 squares movement The DM put the "enemy" 3 squares from the fighter and fire "ranged attacks" to him... the fighter must come near me and make a SINGLE attack, while the enemy will respond with a 5' step and full attack If the enemy has "reach" he can stay 2 square away. If the enamy has reach and has a "large spicked chain" the thinks becomes more and more interesting (3 feat totally wasted in this last situation) Another way to counter that is using wisely "difficult terrains" to prevent fighters to full move 4 squares. I think those feats aren't overpowered at all
tarkin 04-03-07, 12:59 PM	It is a strong build. But not over-powered.
Flan 04-03-07, 01:05 PM	I'd agree it's broken, having to take 5 feats for something thats probably only worth at most 2 needs fixing.
1hitparry 04-03-07, 01:33 PM	Yeah. The Spring Attack Tree is really good, but it's benefits are balanced out by the fact that you have to take several feats to get to it, one of which is near useless (dodge) and the other (mobility) is very limited. Not that +1 or +4 to AC is bad, just I can think of other ways to spend my feats.
Kolson 04-03-07, 03:34 PM	PhaedrusXY, I do remember seeing Roblair's Gambit, but I dont know what the prerequisite feats/skills are (im not at home right now). But it does come from the same book (PHB2) as the new spring attack feats, so it is just as likely broken as Rapid Blitz. I understand that high level wizard/clerics already have spells that make Rapid Blitz seam weak. Maybe a 20th level fighter can do almost full damage to a monster with being hit with a full attack himself, but a cleric of Pelor can heal each of his party members by 210hp in one spell. But the fighter/barbarian/ranger/paladin have been balanced with the feats in the original PHB. The fighter gets 11 bonus feats, while the barbarian gets rage, uncanny dodge, and DR. But as you start making new feats that are this much better than the ones in the PHB, the fighter gets an incredible edge. I think all of the warrior based character classes needed a boost, but by making these incredibly powerful feats with alot of prerequisites you are only really giving power to the fighters. I didnt see alot of feats that required Rage or Favored Enemy that make the barbarians/rangers just as good as fighters can now be. I made a 20th lvl Barbarian & 20th lvl Fighter, and the fighter cleaned house. With his Normal/Greater Weapon Specialization, Greater Weapon Focus, and now Melee Weapon Mastery; the fighter does the same amount of damage as a raging barbarian w/2 handed weapon (+4att/+6dam). And once you add in Weapon Supremacy, and these Spring Attack feats, the fighter barely broke a sweat. Maybe Roblair's Gamble solves the problem, unless it takes a fighter only feat or fighter levels to attain. Hopefully not, because that would be a feat that would give equal footing to barbarians/rangers/etc. But fighters would be able to get it too (and have spring attack). And it still doesnt solve the fact that all 3 of these feats (bounding assault, rapid blitz, roblair's gamble) are incredibly more powerful than anything in the PHB. There are probably quite a few monsters in the Monster Manual that were not balanced against a fighter that can get 3 attacks and move outside of their reach in the same round.
ZiggZagg 04-03-07, 03:45 PM	If I remember correctly, you have to point out more than one target when initiarting the Rabid Blitz and Bounding Assault maneuvers. You don't have to attack all of them, but you must use them in your execution. So, if I am correct, it is very limited to the fact you won't alway have the amount of enemies you need to make it work. One of those tricks that gets less useful later in the fight
Squall255 04-03-07, 03:48 PM	you people act as though the fighter started out as a ballanced class! I find these feats to be pretty well ballanced, and a great aid in rebalancing the fighter. The ranger could use some work, but I've found the barbarian to do fairly well.
DarkRhystar 04-03-07, 04:13 PM	If I remember correctly, you have to point out more than one target when initiarting the Rabid Blitz and Bounding Assault maneuvers. You don't have to attack all of them, but you must use them in your execution. So, if I am correct, it is very limited to the fact you won't alway have the amount of enemies you need to make it work. One of those tricks that gets less useful later in the fight You are misremembering. If you read Bounding Assault, it says you may attack the same foe twice or split your attacks between two foes.
Xeviat-DM 04-03-07, 04:22 PM	The feats aren't overpowered in the slightest. But Rapid Blizt brings up the Greater Two-Weapon Fighting problem; it's worth less than the feat just before it on the prerequisite chain, and that frustrates me. Considering all of the ways you can get a full attack, or a massive damage attack, on a charge now, I have no problem with full attack on a spring attack with limitations for a feat. Sure, you're moving, but if you're doing stuff like that your enemy should start readying actions, disarming, tripping, grappling, or doing something to negate your added mobility.
Aracor 04-03-07, 04:58 PM	Were you using strategy for the barbarian? Just because he's a barbarian doesn't mean he's stupid. Hello, Mr. Move-full attack-move! I have JUST the solution for you: Charge, trip. You now can't take a full attack and get away because your total movement while prone is 5 feet, and it provokes an attack of opportunity. Charge, grapple. What, you can't go anywhere unless you take me with you? Oops. I guess your trick is screwed over. Charge, sunder. No weapon? Well, that's a problem for YOU, isn't it? Mine still works. Don't charge. Throw something at him and then move back out of his movement range. After all, a barbarian is FASTER than a fighter. You force him to charge in order to get in range then, in which case he can't spring attack. If you just charge and attack, YES. You'll get schooled, badly. If you think "Hmmm, charging and attacking isn't working. What ELSE can I do?", then you'll see that it's a good feat chain, but by no means overpowered.
Captain_Kobold 04-03-07, 05:05 PM	Doesn't seem too bad. Spring attack only affects one creature, so if he has friends along, the fighter is still going to get AoO against him. (Unless the other feats change this, but I don't believe they do.) Also, many of the potential opponents at that sort of level will have enough reach to hit you either before or after your spring attack. Still a nasty combination, particularly for a fighter/scout character though.
Vharuck 04-03-07, 05:18 PM	Ready an action to trip the fighter once he comes within reach.
WinDReiN 04-03-07, 05:27 PM	Can you use Bounding Assault if you face a single foe or do you need a another one in order to use it either on both or just one of them? Bounding A. can be used against a single foe, while Rapid Blitz has no such thing in description.
Dheran 04-03-07, 05:50 PM	Yes, Spring Attack is broken, and that has nothing to do with Bounding Assault and Rapid Blitz. It's broken because it's so very poorly worded. In particular: The term "attack action" is never defined in the rules. Reference to "melee weapon" leads to arguments about: unarmed strikes "armed" unarmed strikes natural weapons gauntlets The feat doesn't specify what sort of action is involved in its use. One way of reading it is that the feat grants bonus movement of up to your speed. Having this many items to argue about in a single feat makes it very broken, indeed.
Squall255 04-03-07, 06:42 PM	1:attack action is defined. I don't have the exact reference on hand, but it is a regular attack, or any of the "special" attack options (trip, disarm, sunder) 2:those are all melee attacks with weapons (excluding unarmed strike) 3:It interrupts a move action with a standard action, therefore using both a move and a standard action. Spring attack works like this: begin move action use attack action (attack, sunder, trip, etc.) finish move action. there is nothing that can be read as "bonus" anything
1hitparry 04-03-07, 08:02 PM	Why I think Spring Attack+Bounding Assault is not broken: Comparison of Feat Progression Dodge, Mobility, Spring attack, Bounding Assault, Rapid Blitz (18th level minimum) vs. Power Attack, Combat Reflexes, (Shock Troooper,) Leap attack, Robilar's Gambit, Karmic Strike Spring attack is really good for rogues because it allows them to do the damage they need and get out of trouble, that said they sacrifice TWF for bigger damage and a pure rogue will not get Bounding Assault until 16th level (definitely under powered compared to the 8th level spells a sorcerer gets). Until then, the Rogue is still limited to targeting one enemy at a time. If we're talking about fighers/barbarians, charging builds lead to big damage more reliably. The spring attack tree does lead to bigger damage, however the second attack takes a -5 and the third attack (which you don't get until 18th level, the same level you can take weapon supremacy) has a -10 penalty. Karmic Gambit along with the charger build, on the other hand, leads to the biggest (though at the expense of eating damage like Holloween candy). Granted the Spring attacker will be relatively safer than the charger, but the charger can ultimately dish out more pain. All that damage and you're you're still screwed over by a third level spell: Fly. Oh, and I would generall fear Bounding Assualt less than Dominate, so if anything, it's bringing melee classes up to par with casters. This is by no means meant to be a definitive answer. I just wanted to put out my thoughts and see what other people thought.
kalstrand 04-03-07, 08:27 PM	If you look at the PHB page 139 under the heading Standard Actions the first listing is Attack.
Xan_Kriegor 04-03-07, 09:39 PM	This may be a little naive, but I would think a really good way to counter a fighter with Bounding Assault would be use a monk (with a few levels in fighter or something to meet the BAB requirement) or someone with Bounding Assault and more speed. Another thing is that a fighter using Bounding Assault doesn't mean he is out of his enemies reach. Just use charge, because that way you can move faster to the fighter than he can away from you.
navar100 04-03-07, 10:42 PM	PhaedrusXY, I do remember seeing Roblair's Gambit, but I dont know what the prerequisite feats/skills are (im not at home right now). But it does come from the same book (PHB2) as the new spring attack feats, so it is just as likely broken as Rapid Blitz. I understand that high level wizard/clerics already have spells that make Rapid Blitz seam weak. Maybe a 20th level fighter can do almost full damage to a monster with being hit with a full attack himself, but a cleric of Pelor can heal each of his party members by 210hp in one spell. But the fighter/barbarian/ranger/paladin have been balanced with the feats in the original PHB. The fighter gets 11 bonus feats, while the barbarian gets rage, uncanny dodge, and DR. But as you start making new feats that are this much better than the ones in the PHB, the fighter gets an incredible edge. I think all of the warrior based character classes needed a boost, but by making these incredibly powerful feats with alot of prerequisites you are only really giving power to the fighters. I didnt see alot of feats that required Rage or Favored Enemy that make the barbarians/rangers just as good as fighters can now be. I made a 20th lvl Barbarian & 20th lvl Fighter, and the fighter cleaned house. With his Normal/Greater Weapon Specialization, Greater Weapon Focus, and now Melee Weapon Mastery; the fighter does the same amount of damage as a raging barbarian w/2 handed weapon (+4att/+6dam). And once you add in Weapon Supremacy, and these Spring Attack feats, the fighter barely broke a sweat. Maybe Roblair's Gamble solves the problem, unless it takes a fighter only feat or fighter levels to attain. Hopefully not, because that would be a feat that would give equal footing to barbarians/rangers/etc. But fighters would be able to get it too (and have spring attack). And it still doesnt solve the fact that all 3 of these feats (bounding assault, rapid blitz, roblair's gamble) are incredibly more powerful than anything in the PHB. There are probably quite a few monsters in the Monster Manual that were not balanced against a fighter that can get 3 attacks and move outside of their reach in the same round. Someone complaining the fighter is more powerful than the barbarian? :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: <Note: No insult to the OP intended>
Dheran 04-03-07, 10:55 PM	1:attack action is defined. I don't have the exact reference on hand, but ... You're wrong about that. This simple two-word phrase isn't defined in either the PH glossary or the primary text (the "Combat" chapter). In the rules, the phrase "attack action" occurs mostly following the word "full". The second most common use is in reference as if it were already defined, exactly as in the Spring Attack description. The obvious possiblities meanings of the phrase are: Full attack Standard action attack Bonus attack; e.g., the immediate attack afforded by the Snap Kick feat Attack of opportunity If you have some feat or special class ability that makes any of the above definitions work, you might be able to use them with Spring Attack.2:those are all melee attacks with weapons (excluding unarmed strike) You're jumping to a conclusion, and a minority opinion at that. Q: When the Snap Kick feat mentions "When you make a melee attack with one or more melee weapons" is unarmed strike considered a "melee weapon" for the purposes of activating snap kick? A: Yes indeed, unarmed strike would count. 3:It interrupts a move action with a standard action, therefore using both a move and a standard action. Again, this is an opinion. I'm not saying it's an unreasonable opinion, just that the feat description can be interpreted differently. Thanks for helping to illustrate just how broken Spring Attack really is, Squall. I now return you to your regular programming. (That means, if you want to talk about the ambiguities of the language of Spring Attack, create a new thread. While this does fit the topic name it's not what the OP wanted to discuss.)
Optimator 04-03-07, 11:05 PM	Yes, let's nerf melee fighters for having halfway-decent options in combat.
Kolson 04-03-07, 11:17 PM	Okay, everyone has made good points that Spring Attack can be countered. But the issue isnt really that it can be countered, it is if the feat progression makes a character much better against his standard enemies (usually monsters) than he should be at his level. 1hitparry compares Bounding Assault and Rapid Blitz with Power Attack/Combat Reflexes/Leap Attack/Robilar's Gambit/Karmic Strike. I dont see why you would take both Karmic Strike and Robilar's Gambit, since they both do just about the same thing. From PHB pg137 "[Combat Reflexes] does not let you make more than one attack for a given opportunity", so Karmic Strike and Robilar's Gambit would not give you 2 attacks of opportunites on each attack. So you have a fighter that started at 18 Str, gains +1 Str every 4 levels (+5 total), +3 inherent bonus, and +6 enhancement bonus (32Str +11bonus). We will put that against an Old Red Dragon (CR 20). We will give the Fighter a +5 Holy Great Sword, and give both builds Weapon Focus, Weapon Specialization, and Improved Critical. The 20th level fighter is going to have a +37 (20 BAB + 1 Focus + 5 Weapon + 11 Strength) to hit. Base damage will be 4d6 + 23 (16 Str + 5 Weapon + 2 Specialization) damage, averaging 37 damage per hit. With the dragon being Huge, Robilar's Gambit and/or Karmic Strike are useless. The dragon would basically never attack the fighter within the fighter's threatened area (a 5 ft step could always take them outside the fighter's range). Now that isnt always the case, but in the Monster's Manual only 2 creatures over 15CR are medium or smaller (out of 16 creatures not counting dragons). A high level fighter is probably going to fight more monsters that are Large or bigger than they are going to fight medium or smaller. So while Robilar's Gamble is an amazing ability, it will not be useful that often and rarely be useful against very powerful opponents. Then you have Leap Attack, which is very powerful. An Old Dragon has a 33AC. Optimal Power Attack would be +7, so the fighter would average 61.38 damage when adding the chance for criticals. The Red Dragon is then going to attack the fighter. Lets just say the fighter has a 35 AC (pretty high). Since the fighter did a charge, the dragon will get a full attack with a Bite +36 (19.95) , 2 Claws +34 (24.7), 2 Wings +32 (18.9), 1 Tail Slap +30 (20). That is 83.55 damage. With the Spring Attack fighter would get 3 attacks at +37/+32/+27. That would give 2.65 hits for 98.05 damage. He would get 0.53 criticals, for 15.9 extra damage. This fighter will do 113.95 damage to the dragon. Because this fighter would have some form of magical item to give him extra speed, he would be able to get outside of the dragon's reach. The dragon might be able to get 1 round of full attack, but after that it would just be a charge. Even if the dragon has Power Attack, he would still only get one Bite that would do 24.7 damage to the fighter. So the Rapid Blitz fighter does 86% more damage, and takes 30% of the damage from the dragon. That seams ALOT better than charging, both in damage and defense. Sure the dragon could go out of his way to trip the fighter and/or grapple him, but then he would be taking a whole action to do very minimal damage. He would be better off casting spells or going after the wizards. So this fighter is doing almost double damage with the same number of feats. That is why it seams to be overpowered, because of what you can actually do with it in the field. It is not invincible, but it is alot better than any other feat build.
ff6shadow 04-03-07, 11:20 PM	Another thing he's forgetting is that the Barbarian is perfectly capabe of picking up the Spring Attack line as well. Its less effective than charging, but with the barbarians greater movement its more effective for him that the fighter. Or the fact that the fighter is using 5 feats to equal out the offesnvie bonuses from the barbarians rage. As for the example above, most characters focuses on charging are going to use Shock Trooper. Which means losing all of the BAB into an AC penalty, but still gaining full damage. Second, any reasonably intelligent dragon is going to beat both the charger and the Spring Attacker with ease. First, the fighter needs to make the DC 29 Will save vs. fear. Which will likelyt give the Fighter a -2 to hit. This hurts the Spring Attack more so than the charger. Then the dragon, after suffering at most on of the fighters attack routines, simply usews flight to stay out of the reach of both characters, using his DC 31 Breath weapon for 16d10 (average 88 damage) to wear the fighter down, earning hiself a roasted and crunchy snack. Dragons are intelligenty, and would know better then to engages a heavily armed and armored character in melee. Especially if they survive to become old.
Kolson 04-03-07, 11:33 PM	Someone complaining the fighter is more powerful than the barbarian? :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: <Note: No insult to the OP intended> Oh, until I read the PHB2 I was in complete agreement with you. But once I saw all of these useful feats, I now think that the barbarian is underpowered. The Barbarian only gets 7 feats, while the fighter gets 18 feats. That means that these long feat progressions give the fighter an edge. A fighter can easily get Rapid Blitz and Weapon Supremacy, and I think that is a hell of a lot better than Greater Rage and 5/- DR. For one, a fighter with Medium Adamantine Armor and Armor Specialization gets a 4/- DR anyway. And a fighter with Weapon Focus, Greater Weapon Focus, Weapon Specialization, Greater Weapon Specialization and Melee Weapon Mastery gets a +4att/+6dam, the same that the Barbarian gets when raging (from +8 Str). And the fighter gets it all of the time. And after taking these 5 feats the fighter still have 6 more feats than the Barbarian. Furthurmore, Weapon Supremacy blows anything the Barbarian can get out of the water. An auto-10 on any attack makes a Leap Attack even more powerful. And the other abilities are great also. After a fighter has taken Weapon Focus, Greater Weapon Focus, Weapon Specialization, Greater Weapon Specialization, Melee Weapon Mastery, Weapon Supremacy, Dodge, Mobility, Spring Attack, Bounding Assault, Rapid Blitz; he has the same number of feats as a Barbarian. Is Rage, 5/-DR, +10 movement, Trap Sense and +20 HP actually equal to these 11 feats?
Kolson 04-03-07, 11:35 PM	Yes, let's nerf melee fighters for having halfway-decent options in combat. I do not think that melee warriors need to be nerfed. I think spellcasters (especially clerics) are already far more powerful than warrior types. But these feats give extra power to fighters over the other classes that do not get so many feats. That is the only problem. It isnt about the fighter being too powerful. It is about them being more powerful than other melee classes.
ff6shadow 04-03-07, 11:44 PM	Run the comparisons. +20 HP is equal to one feat. (Improved Toughness) Trap Sense - Roughly equal to one feat situationally. Probably equal to Mobility over all. +10 movement - Worth more than 1 feat. The feat Dash only offers +5 movment, and only in light armor. DR 5/- - Equal to two and a half feats. The feat Roll With It grants DR 2/- that stacks with preexisting DR (I think) and requires 20 Con. Rage - Worth 12 feats. Is the equivalent of Weapon Focus, Weapon Specialization, Greater Weapon Focus, Greater Weapon Specialization, and Melee Weapon Mastery. Also grants the benefits of taking Improved Toughness 4 times, Iron Will twice, and Great Fortitude twice. Rage is an extremely powerful ability just on sheer numbers alone. Also has side benefits such as increased Strength for breaking objects and bonds that aren't shown above. The only benefit you didn't list that the Barbarian gets is the extra skill point each level and extra class skills. Which let the barbarian not worry about carrying food and helps with Pin Pointing invisible enemies (Survival and Listen respectively) Edit: As Haruspex pointed out, I also missed Uncanny DOdge and Improved Uncanny Dodge which tends to negate enemy rogues, and have no feats which duplicate such effects. And of couse Indomitable Will, which makes the barbarian even more resistant to an enemies enchantments.
Haruspex 04-03-07, 11:45 PM	After a fighter has taken Weapon Focus, Greater Weapon Focus, Weapon Specialization, Greater Weapon Specialization, Melee Weapon Mastery, Weapon Supremacy, Dodge, Mobility, Spring Attack, Bounding Assault, Rapid Blitz; he has the same number of feats as a Barbarian. Is Rage, 5/-DR, +10 movement, Trap Sense and +20 HP actually equal to these 11 feats? Don't forget 2 more skill points per level, uncanny dodge, improved uncanny dodge, and indomitable will. PHB II also gives the barbarian Mad Foam Rager, in addition to the rage-specific feats from other sources which the fighter, having no rage, can never take.
theotherdraxen 04-03-07, 11:47 PM	This fighter will do 113.95 damage to the dragon. Shock-trooper/Spirited Charge build requires a total of 6 feats, and can be achieved as early as 6th level (human fighter 6 has 6 feats). At 6th level, he can uber-charge with a 6:1 return on his BAB, all of which can be applied to his AC instead of his attack roll. So, he's far more likely to hit the dragon, and will deal (at 20th level) 120 damage from his charging power attack alone. Add in Leap Attack, and that damage rises (thanks to the Errata) to 240. Add in a +5 lance (1d8 damage, averages 13.5 with spirited charge and no magic at all) with a 32 strength (as you show below) and that's 301.5 damage. He's over-doubled your damage, and ride-by attack carries him smoothly away from immediate danger (although he's not out of present danger if the dragon lived). Also, a fighter can Martial Study his way for either Bounding Assault or Tiger's Pounce from Tome of Battle. Bounding Assault will clear up a lot of charging problems, or if there is a clear path, Tiger's Pounce will double or triple that damage, if he hits (which he's far more likely to do since he's charging). So we can either have a strategically assured charge, or we can have a powerful charge for 600-1,200 damage. On the defense, well, you're far safer being next to a dead dragon than 100 feet from a live dragon.
Kolson 04-03-07, 11:52 PM	Another thing he's forgetting is that the Barbarian is perfectly capabe of picking up the Spring Attack line as well. Its less effective than charging, but with the barbarians greater movement its more effective for him that the fighter. Yes, the barbarian can get the spring attack line, but it takes 71% of his feats (62% if human). A fighter can get the line and still have plenty of feats left for the charging feats too. And the extra speed is good, but not that great. A fighter with magic items can get a decent speed too. Or the fact that the fighter is using 5 feats to equal out the offesnvie bonuses from the barbarians rage. I would say that is pretty good. The fighter gets 11 extra feats, and with only 5 of them they can get all of the offensive bonuses of raging (the best Barbarian ability). And they get it all day. First, the fighter needs to make the DC 29 Will save vs. fear. Which will likelyt give the Fighter a -2 to hit. This hurts the Spring Attack more so than the charger. A good 20th level fighter is going to have various resistance, luck, insight, sacred bonuses to saves; and therefore probably around a +20 Will save. And the effect is fairly minimal for both anyway. But it effects both characters about the same, lowering the charger's damage by 6 because of 2 less power attack. Since the other fighter wasnt using spring attack and was already only missing on a 1 for 2 of its attacks, it only reduced its average damage by 6.45. That is pretty similar. Then the dragon, after suffering at most on of the fighters attack routines, simply usews flight to stay out of the reach of both characters, using his DC 31 Breath weapon for 16d10 (average 88 damage) to wear the fighter down, earning hiself a roasted and crunchy snack. The dragon could do this just as easily to either fighter, so it doesnt change the balancing of the feats. And if the fighter is able to keep the dragon in the air just doing a Breath Attack every few rounds, he is doing his job by letting the wizard fire away with Polar Rays and such.
PhaedrusXY 04-04-07, 12:05 AM	Wow. You know, Kolson you sound lucid and reasonable, but that just makes this entire thing more preposterous. I seriously can't believe you are arguing that high level fighters are too powerful. It's like some kind of sick joke. You should win some kind of award. Biggest balls, or something. :D
Neutronium_Dragon 04-04-07, 12:15 AM	If you visit the various "fighters are underpowered" threads, you'll learn why the PHB2 feats are deliberately made good in great detail. But to sum it up, actual gameplay demonstrated that fighter's bonus feats as set up in the PHB simply did not equal the class abilities of other classes because those class abilities scale up at higher level whereas the fighter is stuck taking feats which do not improve in power at higher level. The end result is that a PHB-only fighter ends up seriously underperforming what the core rules thought he'd be capable of at higher level. By adding higher level feats that are actually equivalent to high level class abilities, this shifts things back towards even for the fighter.
Haruspex 04-04-07, 12:16 AM	I think the he is making a comparison between fighters and other melee classes (specifically, the barbarian). The other classes do get other features which the fighter doesn't get. The ranger and paladin get spells and pets, the barbarian gets rage-improving feats.
Kolson 04-04-07, 12:25 AM	Shock-trooper/Spirited Charge build requires a total of 6 feats, and can be achieved as early as 6th level (human fighter 6 has 6 feats). At 6th level, he can uber-charge with a 6:1 return on his BAB, all of which can be applied to his AC instead of his attack roll. So, he's far more likely to hit the dragon, and will deal (at 20th level) 120 damage from his charging power attack alone. Add in Leap Attack, and that damage rises (thanks to the Errata) to 240. Add in a +5 lance (1d8 damage, averages 13.5 with spirited charge and no magic at all) with a 32 strength (as you show below) and that's 301.5 damage. He's over-doubled your damage, and ride-by attack carries him smoothly away from immediate danger (although he's not out of present danger if the dragon lived). He would not do that much damage, because they do not all multiply that way. First off you have Power Attack, which says "add the same number to all melee damage rolls." So you have damage = (Melee Damage Roll) + (Attack Roll Penalty). Then add that it is a 2 handed weapon, so you have damage = (Melee Damage Roll) + 2 * (Attack Roll Penalty). Then you have Leap Attack, so you have damage = (Melee Damage Roll) + 3 * (Attack Roll Penalty). Then you have spirited charge, which can triple the damage from a lance attack, so you have damage = 3 * (Melee Damage Roll) + 3 * (Attack Roll Penalty). With Shock Trooper's Heedless Charge ability, it becomes damage = 3 * (Melee Damage Roll) + 3 * (Armor Class Penalty). Now first off the fighter is probably not going to have a very great lance, but lets say it is a +3 lance. That gives him (1d8 + 16 Str + 3 Weapon) 23.5 damage standard. So with the last formula, he will do .95 * (3 * 23.5 + 3 * 20) = 123.975 damage. Even if WOTC may have some ambiguous wording, if you really think they wanted warriors to be doing 250 damage from a single melee attack then you really need a DM who is willing to tell a player when he is just being stupid. How fun would any game be when a character can just kill almost any character simply by beating it in initiative and not rolling a 1 to hit (by 8th level)? This fighter is now doing only 9% more damage. But this can only be used in an open field where you can get a mount to. The biggest problem with mounts is that they are very hard to get into most encounters. This fighter build (which actually takes 7 feats) would be much weaker when it is in a fight where its mount has to be left behind. A fighter gets to bring its Spring Attack with him everywhere.
Kolson 04-04-07, 12:45 AM	Wow. You know, Kolson you sound lucid and reasonable, but that just makes this entire thing more preposterous. I seriously can't believe you are arguing that high level fighters are too powerful. It's like some kind of sick joke. You should win some kind of award. Biggest balls, or something. :D I do not think that high level fighters are too powerful. I still think classes like clerics are better based on the fact that they can just heal 800 hp of damage on 4 allies with 1 spell. I only think that they have made the fighters disproportionally good compared to the other melee characters. I havent seen feats for Barbarians/Rangers that are equally powerful. If you visit the various "fighters are underpowered" threads, you'll learn why the PHB2 feats are deliberately made good in great detail ... By adding higher level feats that are actually equivalent to high level class abilities, this shifts things back towards even for the fighter. I agree that was their intent. What I am saying is that I think they have simply tipped the scales in the other direction. And BTW, I am mostly playing devil's advocate. But I have to make an argument to my DM to let me use Bounding Assault and Rapid Blitz, so I want to hear as many different opinions as I can. I am not even completely convinced yet, so how can I go to the DM with these feats yet? I think that even if a Fighter is better than a Barbarian, you should weaken the Fighter but instead you should improve the Barbarian. But my DM might not see it that way. He usually likes to balance arcane classes w/ arcane classes, warrior classes w/ warrior classes, etc.
DarkRhystar 04-04-07, 01:18 AM	What I am saying is that I think they have simply tipped the scales in the other direction. Because moving and hitting someone 3 times a round is really comparable to a Wizard wiggling his finger and killing you instantly.
Kolson 04-04-07, 01:53 AM	Because moving and hitting someone 3 times a round is really comparable to a Wizard wiggling his finger and killing you instantly. I specifically said that I was referring to Fighters vs. warrior classes, not Fighters vs. spellcasting classes. I agree that spellcasting classes are still more powerful. The issue is if the Fighter is more powerful than other warrior-type classes.
navar100 04-04-07, 02:15 AM	Oh, until I read the PHB2 I was in complete agreement with you. But once I saw all of these useful feats, I now think that the barbarian is underpowered. The Barbarian only gets 7 feats, while the fighter gets 18 feats. That means that these long feat progressions give the fighter an edge. A fighter can easily get Rapid Blitz and Weapon Supremacy, and I think that is a hell of a lot better than Greater Rage and 5/- DR. For one, a fighter with Medium Adamantine Armor and Armor Specialization gets a 4/- DR anyway. And a fighter with Weapon Focus, Greater Weapon Focus, Weapon Specialization, Greater Weapon Specialization and Melee Weapon Mastery gets a +4att/+6dam, the same that the Barbarian gets when raging (from +8 Str). And the fighter gets it all of the time. And after taking these 5 feats the fighter still have 6 more feats than the Barbarian. Furthurmore, Weapon Supremacy blows anything the Barbarian can get out of the water. An auto-10 on any attack makes a Leap Attack even more powerful. And the other abilities are great also. After a fighter has taken Weapon Focus, Greater Weapon Focus, Weapon Specialization, Greater Weapon Specialization, Melee Weapon Mastery, Weapon Supremacy, Dodge, Mobility, Spring Attack, Bounding Assault, Rapid Blitz; he has the same number of feats as a Barbarian. Is Rage, 5/-DR, +10 movement, Trap Sense and +20 HP actually equal to these 11 feats? You missed my point, not that it should have been expected for you to get it since you did not participate in the anti-fighter threads. In the anti-fighter threads, some people say (not me) barbarians are far superior even with all the fighter feats. Yours is the rare posting of someone "complaining" the fighter is better than any class, let alone barbarian. The :rofl: was of amusement, not sarcasm.
DarkRhystar 04-04-07, 02:48 AM	I specifically said that I was referring to Fighters vs. warrior classes, not Fighters vs. spellcasting classes. I agree that spellcasting classes are still more powerful. The issue is if the Fighter is more powerful than other warrior-type classes. I suddenly have this mental image of two ants fighting over a piece of food as the shadow of a shoe closes in over them. Funny that. As a side note, it's not the Fighter with these feats one should be worried about. It's the Scout.
Lotus Crane 04-04-07, 03:00 AM	It isnt about the fighter being too powerful. It is about them being more powerful than other melee classes. Not to worry then. Fighters were already weaker than most other melee classes (including melee cleric and druid builds) to begin with. Being able to Rapid Blitz, do the Robilar's Karmic Reflexes combo, and/or get Weapon Mastery + Weapon Supremacy, simply help make fighters (closer to) equal to other melee classes, rather than staying underpowered like they were in the first place. The PHB II helps make people actually consider playing fighter instead of barbarian, since before the barbarian was blatantly superior. I suddenly have this mental image of two ants fighting over a piece of food as the shadow of a shoe closes in over them. Lol. ^_~
Nebo 04-04-07, 03:16 AM	Kolson, you've incorrectly added up the damage on theotherdraxen's charger. Why aren't you multiplying the Power Attack damage with spirited charge? You also seem to have ignored the errata for leap attack. If you're going to correct someone, at least make sure you're right.
BlueFlames 04-04-07, 03:47 AM	With the Spring Attack fighter would get 3 attacks at +37/+32/+27. That would give 2.65 hits for 98.05 damage. He would get 0.53 criticals, for 15.9 extra damage. This fighter will do 113.95 damage to the dragon. Because this fighter would have some form of magical item to give him extra speed, he would be able to get outside of the dragon's reach. The dragon might be able to get 1 round of full attack, but after that it would just be a charge. Even if the dragon has Power Attack, he would still only get one Bite that would do 24.7 damage to the fighter. [Strike that.... Don't try to pull rules off of the top of your head at 2:30am without double checking. A quick check completely washed away the foundation of the first chunk of my argument. The rest, intact below, remains valid.] Of course, if that doesn't balance the encounter out, let's not forget that an Old Red Dragon casts as an eleventh level sorcerer. Dominate Person could really stand to ruin a spring attacker's day. It can also fly and breathe fire. The point here is that, by the time you're up in the levels where Bounding Assault and especially Rapid Blitz come into play, even monsters pulled straight out of the book will have alternate attack options for dealing with the melee tanks. Now that I look at it, Bounding Assault can be taken, at the earliest, by a twelfth level character with good base attack. Ogre Mages are CR8, with a wide array of stomp-the-fighter abilities, including flight and invisibility at will, regeneration (just in case you lost your golf bag full of fire and acid weapons), a longbow (to accompany the flight ability), and a once-a-day Cone of Cold. Like any other character, a rapid-blitzing fighter will have its moment to shine, but without any help, he's also going to have encounters that are hopelessly difficult.
Kolson 04-04-07, 11:03 AM	Kolson, you've incorrectly added up the damage on theotherdraxen's charger. Why aren't you multiplying the Power Attack damage with spirited charge? You also seem to have ignored the errata for leap attack. If you're going to correct someone, at least make sure you're right. I can see how the exact wording for Spirited Charge could lead some players to want to triple the total damage they did that round. It is fairly ambiguous, and is definetly in need of errata. Spirited Charge says "When mounted and using the charge action, you deal double damage with a melee weapon (or triple damage with a lance)." Power Attack says "... you may choose to subtract a number from all melee attack rolls and add the same number to all melee damage rolls. " Both give additional damage on top of the damage you do with a melee weapon. That is why I think it is very fair to say that you should triple the damage you do with the melee weapon, and then add the Power Attack damage. The reason I believe it should be done this way is not because I think the wording is clear, it is because it makes sense. No DM in his right mind (unless he just lets his characters run wild and have characters that kill Balors at level 12) would think it is reasonable for a character to do that much damage with 1 attack. 250.5 average damage (without critical) from one hit is rediculous. Any character trying to do that is trying to break the rules. Maybe not exactly cheating, but close enough. A 20th level wizard would need a 30 Constitution to have an average of 252 hp. Since a standard wizard probably only has around a 22 constitution, he probably has closer to 172 hp. How fun is it if a single character (or even non-epic monster), can do that with a single charge? Remember, anything you can do your DM can also do. And that charge combo can be done by an 8th level fighter. That 8th level fighter probably has a 22 Str and a +1 lance, so he will do 2d6 +12 damage with a standard lance strike. That would be 142 average damage by theotherdraxen's formula. That would kill a 17th level arcane spellcaster in a single strike. I think it is pretty obvious that even if WOTC intended for the entire damage to be multiplied by 3, it was a tragic error on their part. And yes, a single Dominate or Slay Living can kill someone in one round too. But you get a save for that, and it is generally much easier to raise your saves (resistance, luck, insight, sacred, etc.) than for a wizard to raise his DC. There is at least some chance of survival. All the wizard would get from the above attack is the hope that the fighter rolls a 1 to hit. And BTW, I was tired last night so I didnt realize that you cannot do a Leap Attack with a Spirited Charge even if you want to. Leap Attack means you have to jump at them, which you cannot do if you are on your mount. Having your mount jump doesnt count.
Kolson 04-04-07, 11:15 AM	Of course, if that doesn't balance the encounter out, let's not forget that an Old Red Dragon casts as an eleventh level sorcerer. Dominate Person could really stand to ruin a spring attacker's day. It can also fly and breathe fire. The point here is that, by the time you're up in the levels where Bounding Assault and especially Rapid Blitz come into play, even monsters pulled straight out of the book will have alternate attack options for dealing with the melee tanks. Now that I look at it, Bounding Assault can be taken, at the earliest, by a twelfth level character with good base attack. Ogre Mages are CR8, with a wide array of stomp-the-fighter abilities, including flight and invisibility at will, regeneration (just in case you lost your golf bag full of fire and acid weapons), a longbow (to accompany the flight ability), and a once-a-day Cone of Cold. Like any other character, a rapid-blitzing fighter will have its moment to shine, but without any help, he's also going to have encounters that are hopelessly difficult. I have never in these threads said that this combo of feats is unbeatable. I have even explicitely said that I realize monsters can do things to stop it. But a feat / build does not have to be unstoppable to be broken. It just has to be disproportionatly better than what you could do with your fighter without taking this build. All of the things you mentioned to stop the fighter's attacks will also stop the attacks of any other melee warrior. So it doesnt do anything to balance fighters with other melee combatants (such as Barbarians, or even fighters with other builds).
AllisterH 04-04-07, 11:17 AM	Actually, the PHB II feats are the first feats specifically intended for fighters IMO. Even though the fighter is supposedly the "master of feats", many of the best feats in the game previously required having a class ability such as rage, ability to turn etc... The only difference is that now that the fighter can actually do three feat chains/trees whereas everyone is restricted to one. Seems fair to me.
nastynate 04-04-07, 11:44 AM	Most spells require only a standard action, leaving spellcasters free to move about and use their best options simultaneously. A full attack eliminates the possibilty of movement (greater than 5 feet), meaning that melee-based characters are limited to their least effective attack (the standard attack action) if they want the same kind of mobility a spellcaster already has. A standard attack is not equal to a spell. Spring attack, bounding assault, and rapid blitz are a necessary tool for melee-based characters, that enables them to actually move into range to use their abilities without forfeiting all their damage dealing potential; a melee-based character should at the very least be able to engage in melee. This is also why the strike maneuvers from the ToB are so good. Having the option to move and use your class features should not be limited to spellcasters. Somehow the very idea that a fighter has to stand virtually immoble in order to effectively trade blows with the enemy, while a wizard runs all over the battle field casting spells willy-nilly seems absurd to me (especially when those spells are high-level bombs like forcecage, antimagic field, dominate monster, and so forth).
Kolson 04-04-07, 12:39 PM	Spring attack, bounding assault, and rapid blitz are a necessary tool for melee-based characters, that enables them to actually move into range to use their abilities without forfeiting all their damage dealing potential; a melee-based character should at the very least be able to engage in melee. I couldnt agree more. But this feat progression takes 5 feats, something that really only fighters can reasonably take. Sure a barbarian could technically get them, but then he only has 2 feats left (3 if human). If WOTC wanted to un-nerf warrior classes, I think they need to do it with feats that every fighter type (barbarian, ranger, paladin) can use. My entire point for this thread is that these feats given disproportionate power to fighters, but do not boost Barbarian, Paladin, etc. in the same way. I know fighters were underpowered in the past, but that doesnt mean that you should now make them overpowered (when compared to other melee warriors, not when compared to spell casters).
BlueFlames 04-04-07, 03:53 PM	Looking strictly at the melee classes, the general concensus is that Fighters needed the most help. The only way to do that would have been to somehow make a set of feats that scales with added levels, just as class features like Rage, Sneak Attack, etc. get better as characters advance, or to extend feat trees to be worth pursuing for eighteen or twenty levels. While Barbarians and Paladins are certainly less powerful than full casters at twentieth level, they've also proven powerful enough to make people gloss over the Fighter class for anything more than a two- or four-level dip. Yes, bounding assault and rapid blitz are probably intended for fighters, but that's because the barbarians have been out-shining the fighter in melee since the class was introduced. Regarding alternatives, there have been many presented already. Most specifically, there's nothing stopping the fighter following the leaping-power attack path, with weapon specialization, to try to compete with the barbarian for greatest single-hit damage output. That's six feats, if you stick with the fighter class, at least through level twelve (Focus, Greater Focus, Specialization, Greater Specialization, Power Attack, and Leap Attack). Of course, because there's so many options for a fighter's bonus feats, you can also think outside of the melee box. Three feats give you a nifty advantage in a grapple (Improved Unarmed Strike, Improved Grapple, and Power Attack) that lets you essentially hug your enemy until he dies. There's some crazy ranged fighter builds on the Character Optimization boards that could let your fighter shoot an arrow so far that he needs to consider the curvature of the Earth (Oerth?) when aiming. You could opt for a crazy armor class build with Goad and Robilar's Gambit to keep melee opposition away from your party. Point being, while bounding assault and rapid blitz are nice, taking another feat chain is not a sure sign of mental disorder. Since there are alternatives for the fighter and counter-abilities for monsters, I'm really not buying the idea that this feat tree is broken. Now, give me a version that works with Fly-By Attack, and I might be convinced, insofar as dragon encounters will make me want to cry.
Kolson 04-04-07, 05:26 PM	I do want to take a moment to say that I do not necessarily think that I am right and you guys are wrong. I am legitimatly trying to find out who is correct. I am not attacking anyone's opinions, I am just trying to get clarifications. You say that abilities such as Rage, Sneak Attack, etc. get better with new levels and that the Fighter Feats have to be able to keep up. From levels 10 - 14 (5 levels) a Barbarian gets DR 2/-, Greater Rage, Indomitable Will, +1 Rage/Day, Trap Sense +1 and 5 extra hitpoints (over a Fighter). The Greater rage gives the Barbarian a +1att/+1.5damage and a +1 Will, but only 4 times per day. From levels 10 - 14 a Fighter gets 3 Bonus Feats. Now lets just say that these are Melee Weapon Mastery (Slashing), Greater Weapon Specialization and Bounding Assault. To balance the bonuses we have to make some assumptions. We will say that each character fights in 8 encounters a day with an average of 10 rounds per encounter (17 rounds, 15, 13, 11, 9, 7, 5, 3). Each character has a 20 Constitution at 14th level (base 16 at 1st +4 enchancement). If the Barbarian only rages for his 3 toughest battles, and accidentally for 1 quick battle, he is raging for a total of 40 rounds (or half the total rounds). Then we will assume that each fighter spends 20% of the time charging long distance, 50% of the time charging short distances, and 30% of the time getting a full round attack. We will assume he is doing something meaningful on each round of combat (never waiting for healing, trying to get in range to attack, etc). Both fighters have a +8 Str Bonus naturally, use a +4 GreatSword and have Power Attack, Cleave, Leap Attack and Weapon Focus. Their average opponent has a 25 AC. When raging the Barbarian has a +30 to hit (+27 standard). He does 2d6+20 damage (2d6+16 standard). The fighter always has a +29 to hit, and 2d6+22 damage. 20% of the time they both charge. They both put +10 into their Leap Attack. The Barbarian does 50 damage per charge, based on half of them being raged and half of them not raged. The Fighter does 55 damage per charge. 50% of the time the Barbarian charges a short distance. He still puts +10 into Leap Attack, so the Barbarian does 50 damage still. The fighter is able to to Spring Attacks here, so he will get 2 attacks but only put +6 into Power Attack because he wants his second attack to still hit. So the Fighter does 74 damage per Spring Attack. Now they both get to full attack 30% of the time. The Barbarian and Fighter get 3 attacks each, and will both put in 6 point of Power Attack. The Barbarian will do 82 damage per full attack, and the Fighter will do 104 damage per full attack. Not only does the fighter do more damage than the Barbarian even when raging, he does it all day instead of only half of the day. That means the Barbarian is doing 4768 damage per day (80 * (0.7 * 50 + 0.3 * 82)). But the Fighter is doing 6336 damage per day (80 * (0.2 * 55 + 0.5 * 74 + 0.3 * 104)). Sure the Barbarian had DR 4/-, but the Fighter can get DR 4/- with his Adamantine BreastPlate and Armor Specialization. And since the Fighter is spending more time outside of his enemy's reach, he is taking FAR less damage anyway. Sure the Barbarian gets extra hit points when raging, but they are lost after battle so he will still go down. An extra 196 damage per encounter is worth more than an extra 42 hit points per encounter that are going to go away. And since the fighter's spring attack is keeping him out of harms way better than the Barbarian's charging, I think he will be saved from far more than 42 damage per encounter. The extra Will saves are nice too, but we still havent counted on 1 of the bonus Fighter Feats that the Fighter gets over the Barbarian. If the Fighter cares that much about his Will Save he can just take Iron Will. It looks to me like the Fighter is getting better a hell of a lot faster than the Barbarian. Sure raging gets better as they level, but the Barbarian's have nothing to match the powerful high level fighter feats (that I can see anyway). And these are just the middle Fighter/Barbarian levels. It gets even worse once the Fighter gets to 18th-20th and recieves Rapid Blitz and Weapon Supremacy. I still cannot see how a Barbarian can possibly be thought of as being as good as a Fighter. What does a Barbarian have that the Fighter does not? (+10 speed?) And is that as good as Melee Weapon Mastery, the Spring Attack line of feats, or Weapon Supremacy?
Kolson 04-04-07, 05:39 PM	And yes I know that the above Fighter and Barbarian are not going to get to attack every round. They will probably be chasing monsters / waiting for them to become visible / waiting for them to land / etc. But that doesnt affect these calculations, as the Fighter will still be doing his 33% more damage whenever he can attack. If anything these tactics would hurt Barbarians more, because they have less feats in which to diversify their own tactics.
PhaedrusXY 04-04-07, 05:56 PM	I can see how the exact wording for Spirited Charge could lead some players to want to triple the total damage they did that round. It is fairly ambiguous, and is definetly in need of errata. Spirited Charge says "When mounted and using the charge action, you deal double damage with a melee weapon (or triple damage with a lance)." Power Attack says "... you may choose to subtract a number from all melee attack rolls and add the same number to all melee damage rolls. " Both give additional damage on top of the damage you do with a melee weapon. That is why I think it is very fair to say that you should triple the damage you do with the melee weapon, and then add the Power Attack damage.You can think what you want, but you're still wrong. I'm not trying to be a jackass here. I'm sure someone can pull a quote from the FAQ or some such thing to demonstrate this. I don't feel like messing with it. The reason I believe it should be done this way is not because I think the wording is clear, it is because it makes sense. No DM in his right mind (unless he just lets his characters run wild and have characters that kill Balors at level 12) would think it is reasonable for a character to do that much damage with 1 attack. 250.5 average damage (without critical) from one hit is rediculous. Any character trying to do that is trying to break the rules. Maybe not exactly cheating, but close enough.It doesn't matter. It is still legal. Sure, the DM can houserule it otherwise. He can also houserule Shapechange out of the game. A 20th level wizard would need a 30 Constitution to have an average of 252 hp. Since a standard wizard probably only has around a 22 constitution, he probably has closer to 172 hp. How fun is it if a single character (or even non-epic monster), can do that with a single charge? Remember, anything you can do your DM can also do.Please... Like that charger guy would even get near a 20th level wizard. :P And that charge combo can be done by an 8th level fighter. That 8th level fighter probably has a 22 Str and a +1 lance, so he will do 2d6 +12 damage with a standard lance strike. That would be 142 average damage by theotherdraxen's formula. That would kill a 17th level arcane spellcaster in a single strike. I think it is pretty obvious that even if WOTC intended for the entire damage to be multiplied by 3, it was a tragic error on their part.This is true, and alot scarier. He still won't be hitting the 17th level guy, but he'll be cleaning the clocks of any stuff he's likely to face at 8th level. And yes, a single Dominate or Slay Living can kill someone in one round too. But you get a save for that, and it is generally much easier to raise your saves (resistance, luck, insight, sacred, etc.) than for a wizard to raise his DC. There is at least some chance of survival. All the wizard would get from the above attack is the hope that the fighter rolls a 1 to hit.Are you kidding? Never heard of Contingency? Or Mirror Image? If the fighter even lives long enough to get a turn vs. a 20th level spellcaster before he's killed or disabled somehow, he's very lucky. Even if he does get a turn, the odds are that the spellcaster will be wholly unreachable by him by then.
Kolson 04-04-07, 06:48 PM	It doesn't matter. It is still legal. Sure, the DM can houserule it otherwise. He can also houserule Shapechange out of the game. It does matter. I am trying to find out if things are balanced, and pointing out another unbalanced feat does not change things. It just means that they are both unbalanced. Please... Like that charger guy would even get near a 20th level wizard. :P ... He still won't be hitting the 17th level guy, but he'll be cleaning the clocks of any stuff he's likely to face at 8th level. ... Are you kidding? Never heard of Contingency? Or Mirror Image? If the fighter even lives long enough to get a turn vs. a 20th level spellcaster before he's killed or disabled somehow, he's very lucky. Even if he does get a turn, the odds are that the spellcaster will be wholly unreachable by him by then. There are plenty of ways for a fighter get get a round against the 20th level spellcaster with the wizard being unbuffed. He could have teleported into combat, he could have suprised the wizard or he could have had a 1 use Mage's Disjunction item (7650 gp) that he used in a suprise round. Now the fighter just has to roll a higher Initiative. Then you have a dead wizard.
DarkRhystar 04-04-07, 06:57 PM	<stuff> Though it should be assumed, it's best to add the words "intelligently-played" before every reference to spellcaster or Wizard in your post. It's fair enough to say that not everyone plays spellcasters the same way. In fact, there's a TPK topic in another board involving a high level Wizard PC who thought the best way to attack a group of Barbarians was Fire Burst. <stuff> You can say "If the Fighter had X or prepared Y, he'd totally win against that Wizard" and you may have a point and against an intelligently played Wizard you may not. However, if you give both that time to prepare for the fight, the Wizard will win. Period.
AllisterH 04-04-07, 07:34 PM	If WOTC wanted to un-nerf warrior classes, I think they need to do it with feats that every fighter type (barbarian, ranger, paladin) can use. My entire point for this thread is that these feats given disproportionate power to fighters, but do not boost Barbarian, Paladin, etc. in the same way. I know fighters were underpowered in the past, but that doesnt mean that you should now make them overpowered (when compared to other melee warriors, not when compared to spell casters). I disagree with this since quite frankly, the fighter wasn't getting the best feats even though that IS their class ability. Using the index of feats on WOTC's site I see there currently are 10+ feats that require Smite: Class feature of the paladin 10+ feats that require FE: Class feature of the ranger 10+ feats that require Rage: Class ability of the Barbarian 10+ feats that require Sneak atk: Class ability of the Rogue That's not including things like Divine metamagic which paladins get
Mighty_Draco 04-04-07, 07:36 PM	A level 20 half orc Barbarian with improved trip could make short work of that spring attacker. With a str of 34 (18 starting + 5 from levels + 5 from a manual + 6 enhancement), plus 8 rage, he has 40 str. Improved trip bumps his bonus up to +19. That fighter is rolling at a + 11, giving the barbarian a good advantage over the fighter. All he needs to do is ready an action to trip and if he wins, full attack + power attack + great axe + prone fighter = big owies. Also, if you're comparing him to other meleers, a Warblade would kick his pansy spring attacking ***.
BlueFlames 04-04-07, 07:44 PM	In seventh grade, I had a math teacher who gave her class a wonderful piece of advice: Numbers never lie, but liars can still use numbers. (This isn't to say you're maliciously deceptive, but you're using numbers improperly to back up flawed logic.) You're tailoring your examples to favor the spring-attacking fighter, so of course they're going to favor the spring-attacking fighter. To balance the bonuses we have to make some assumptions. We will say that each character fights in 8 encounters a day with an average of 10 rounds per encounter... That's twice as many encounters per day than what the game is balanced for, and you've set them to be longer than most combat encounters typically last. Yes, that will favor a character whose abilities aren't of limited duration. I could disect the rest of the example, but when the assumptions are fundamentally flawed, the rest of the math is really moot. Beyond that, you've also assumed that all combat encounters are melee combat encounters. When bad goes to worse, how does the encounter turn out when your spring-attacking fighter has to take out his backup longbow and compete with a skirmishing scout? I too can tailor an encounter to look mathematically ugly for your fighter, but there is always the general case to consider. You've also assumed that Leap Attack and Spring Attack can be used in combination. In fact, using the Leap Attack feat requires you to make a jumping charge, so you can't Spring Attack. At any rate, saying there's a 2000-damage-per-day advantage, favoring your fighter is nice, but when you sit down and play the game, you'll realize that it's also a load of crap. You're going to have encounters where the monsters can easily counter your fighter, and you're going to have encounters where other melee builds and other character classes will excel. Need to deal huge damage to a single target? Leap attacking barbarian. Need to hit a whole bunch of targets? Rapid blitzing fighter. Fighting at range? Skirmishing scout, shooting on the run. Balance isn't a state where your character can't perform outstandingly well. Balance is a state where other approaches will perform well about as often as your approach does.
PhaedrusXY 04-04-07, 07:54 PM	It does matter. I am trying to find out if things are balanced, and pointing out another unbalanced feat does not change things. It just means that they are both unbalanced.No, I think it just means you either don't understand the rules, or don't really understand the game at high levels. Hence, you don't know what is balanced, and what isn't. Yes, I think high level fighters should be able to one-shot the BBEG. The wizard can do it, the cleric can do it, hell everyone else can do it. So the fighter should have his chance for a "moment of glory" by taking some kick-ass feats, that he may or may not get to use, depending on the situation. There are plenty of ways for a fighter get get a round against the 20th level spellcaster with the wizard being unbuffed. He could have teleported into combat, he could have suprised the wizard or he could have had a 1 use Mage's Disjunction item (7650 gp) that he used in a suprise round. Now the fighter just has to roll a higher Initiative. Then you have a dead wizard.I lost you at "unbuffed 20th level wizard". The only valid point you had was "Mage's Disjunction". Yeah, if the fighter is casting 9th level wizard spells at him, the wizard might be in trouble. The wizard also might have a Contingency against that. If Craft Contingent Spell is in play, the wizard would be wise to load up with a few of them. (So would everyone else.) However, even if it isn't, the wizard can still effectively have two in place, as opposed to most other character's one, by putting one on his familiar. (Dimension Door 1000 feet up if someone starts casting Mage's Disjunction within 100 feet of my presence. And the familiar exercises his option of taking the Mage with him. His other one probably has something to keep him from getting caught in an Antimagic Field.)
primemover003 04-04-07, 08:02 PM	Yeah. The Spring Attack Tree is really good, but it's benefits are balanced out by the fact that you have to take several feats to get to it, one of which is near useless (dodge) and the other (mobility) is very limited. Not that +1 or +4 to AC is bad, just I can think of other ways to spend my feats. Trade Expeditious Dodge from Races of the Wild for Dodge instead for a +2 Dodge bonus to ALL opponents. As a side note, it's not the Fighter with these feats one should be worried about. It's the Scout. Especially when combined with said Expeditious Dodge swap above!!!
DaidojiTaidoru 04-04-07, 08:02 PM	There are plenty of ways for a fighter get get a round against the 20th level spellcaster with the wizard being unbuffed. See this phrase here? This never happens at 20th level. Because any wizard with an Int mod capable of casting high level spells knows to buff. If you aren't sprinkling Diamond Dust in your Cheerios you probably aren't doing it right.
Kolson 04-04-07, 08:16 PM	In seventh grade, I had a math teacher who gave her class a wonderful piece of advice: Numbers never lie, but liars can still use numbers. (This isn't to say you're maliciously deceptive, but you're using numbers improperly to back up flawed logic.) You're tailoring your examples to favor the spring-attacking fighter, so of course they're going to favor the spring-attacking fighter. [8 encounters is] twice as many encounters per day than what the game is balanced for, and you've set them to be longer than most combat encounters typically last [(10 rounds)]. Yes, that will favor a character whose abilities aren't of limited duration. I could disect the rest of the example, but when the assumptions are fundamentally flawed, the rest of the math is really moot. The game is not balanced for 8 encounters. It is balanced for 8 encounters of a CR equal to your level. I have never played in a campaign where we have only fought 4 battles per day, because 20th level characters often fight in CR 16 encounters. Notice that I did put in that a few of those encounters were only 3/5/7 round encounters (fairly short). In battles against intelligent opponents played by an intelligent DM (not just sit there and dice them up), battles often take up to 20 rounds. In my last campaign when I was in high levels I often ran out of my 20 round spells before the encounter was over. And even when the Barbarian is raging, the Fighter still does more damage. It might only be 10% more damage instead of 35%, but it is still more. So I will admit, if you are fighting alot of non-melee battles, or are fighting only a couple battles per day, a Fighter only does around 10% more damage than a Barbarian. Beyond that, you've also assumed that all combat encounters are melee combat encounters. When bad goes to worse, how does the encounter turn out when your spring-attacking fighter has to take out his backup longbow and compete with a skirmishing scout? I too can tailor an encounter to look mathematically ugly for your fighter, but there is always the general case to consider. I did say that I know the combatants will not get to attack every round. But I also pointed out that my imperfect situation actually helps out the Barbarian. When push comes to shove and you have to take out a bow, the Fighter class is more likely to have feats that help him with ranged fighting. And even if he doesnt, they are on equal footing. The 33% more damage still stands. It might only be 500 more damage instead of 2000 more damage, but it will still be 33% more. You've also assumed that Leap Attack and Spring Attack can be used in combination. In fact, using the Leap Attack feat requires you to make a jumping charge, so you can't Spring Attack. I never assumed that. I always multiplied the Fighter's Power Attack by 2 (2 * 6 = 12) instead of 3, which is what Leap Attack would have given him. I only gave him the Leap Attack on those rounds where he is actually charging and not using Spring Attack. Need to deal huge damage to a single target? Leap attacking barbarian. Actually no, a Fighter will do more damage. That charging Barbarian was doing 51.3 damage when raging, and 39.75 when not raging. The Fighter was doing 50.15 damage all of the time. So he is sacrificing a mere 1 average damage for the ability to do 10 more damage all day long. And if he took Improved Critical (which the Barbarian does have enough feats left to take), he would still do more than a raging Barbarian.
BlueFlames 04-04-07, 08:46 PM	In a perfect world, every class and every build will be equally capable in every encounter, every time. Back here, in reality, some situations will favor a fighter; some will favor a rogue, and some will favor a barbarian*. (Incidentally, I'm leaving out casters, since they're clearly in another league and will remain so until the system gets another major overhaul.) * -- ...such as when you need to brute-force your way through a creature's damage reduction. The leap-attacking barbarian does all of his damage in a round in one mighty blow, so DR is subtracted from it once. A rapid-blitzing fighter makes three seperate attacks, meaning the opponent's DR will have three times the effect against the fighter's attack. On the other hand, just play the leap attacking barbarian and the spring attacking fighter in a campaign. If all you're going to do is dismiss counterarguments using contrived examples (i.e. unbuffed wizards), then clearly playing the characters in a real campaign is about the only thing you can do to get a real sense of where the two archetypes stand.
1hitparry 04-04-07, 08:47 PM	Then you have Leap Attack, so you have damage = (Melee Damage Roll) + 3 * (Attack Roll Penalty). Kolson, they changed Leap Attack so your build does more damage than you calculated. Leap attack doesn't "double" your power attack any more, it increases it by "+100%" so now you get a 4:1 power attack ratio! And they my friends and I play, Spirited Charge increases the damage from Power Attack. I guess we treat Power Attack like extra STR damage. In any case, you get bigger damage, at least with the errata. Errata page (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/er/20050803a)
Kolson 04-04-07, 11:13 PM	* -- ...such as when you need to brute-force your way through a creature's damage reduction. The leap-attacking barbarian does all of his damage in a round in one mighty blow, so DR is subtracted from it once. A rapid-blitzing fighter makes three seperate attacks, meaning the opponent's DR will have three times the effect against the fighter's attack. I still do not see why players think that the Barbarian does more damage than the fighter. I have shown so many times that once a Fighter gets Greater Weapon Specialization and Melee Weapon Mastery, the Fighter does more damage in a single Leap Attack. If all you're going to do is dismiss counterarguments using contrived examples (i.e. unbuffed wizards), then clearly playing the characters in a real campaign is about the only thing you can do to get a real sense of where the two archetypes stand. I have not read any valid counter-arguments for how Barbarians stand up to Fighters. Maybe in those first few levels, but as soon as Fighters get a 3-4 feat edge they start to pull away. And once they get Melee Weapon Mastery and Bounding Assault, it isnt even close. The only thing that I have seen that Barbarians are better at is tripping. But most enemies you fight at high levels can hardly be tripped anyway. I have played in many campaigns, a few that have went into epic, and it is very hard to trip NightCrawlers and Wyrm Red Dragons. And spending a whole round tripping a monster instead of doing 100 damage is not useful very often (maybe once every 10 encounters). And if you fail at tripping, it is likely that you might get tripped instead, which makes it even less desireable.
Steidas 04-05-07, 01:34 AM	Kolson, prove your worth. Put a level 10 warrior (so he gets an extra feat) build HERE, with feats. I bet you at least 3 DIFFERENT builds of Barbarian will appear that make MORE damage and are MORE efficient than this Warrior. Too low level for you? Allright, make a 20 level warrior, ALL THE FEATS.
Kolson 04-05-07, 02:06 AM	Okay I will, but it wont be until late tomorrow. Its about 1am where I am, so its time for bed.
Kolson 04-05-07, 02:10 AM	I will post a 10th & 20th level fighter, but it would actually be easier if you just post the Barbarian builds first. Then it would be a simple matter of adding 6 extra Fighter Feats (11 if 20th level) to the same build. Most of the feats you give your Barbarians will probably be available for Fighters too. But the added Weapon Mastery, Weapon Specializations, Weapon Supremacy, etc. are far better than the Barbarian's rage ability.
Aracor 04-05-07, 09:27 AM	Nah, that's contrived. A build for barbarians won't necessarily be the same for fighters. There are a few feats that both use, but generally speaking there are certain feats out there that work better for a fighter than a barbarian, or vice versa. And while I'll admit I'm one of the people who has never agreed that a fighter is 'weak, because all they get is feats', I've got to admit that in general a barbarian can do more damage. The fighter simply has more options that will allow them to be useful in a wider variety of situations.
1hitparry 04-05-07, 09:31 AM	Don't post your builds here. Make a new thread. This has gone from "Is Spring Attack Broken" (to which the answer is "Certainly no more than a caster") to an argument about which is better, a fighter or a barbarian. If you want to carry out that discussion, why not just make a new thread instead of flooding this one? I'm totally sorry about that post. I hadn't visited the classes threads.
ff6shadow 04-05-07, 09:44 AM	Wasn't the point to compare the Spring Attack line , not the Weapon Focus Line to rage? Also, you did't respond to my last post here. http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=11979769&postcount=29
Kolson 04-05-07, 03:27 PM	Okay, as for ff6shadow's comparisons: +20 HP is equal to one feat. (Improved Toughness) Trap Sense - Roughly equal to one feat situationally. Probably equal to Mobility over all. +10 movement - Worth more than 1 feat. The feat Dash only offers +5 movment, and only in light armor. I would agree with everything except the +10 movement being worth more than 1 feat. Dash is a fairly worthless feat unless you are in a world with almost no magic items. I would still say the +10 movement is 1 feat. A very good feat, but not more than 1. DR 5/- - Equal to two and a half feats. The feat Roll With It grants DR 2/- that stacks with preexisting DR (I think) and requires 20 Con. I would agree that this, but remember a Fighter can get up to 5/- DR without the use of any feats. But the Barbarian can increase his later with epic feats, or some non-epic ones if he has feats left over (which he probably wont). Rage - Worth 12 feats. Is the equivalent of Weapon Focus, Weapon Specialization, Greater Weapon Focus, Greater Weapon Specialization, and Melee Weapon Mastery. Also grants the benefits of taking Improved Toughness 4 times, Iron Will twice, and Great Fortitude twice. Rage is an extremely powerful ability just on sheer numbers alone. Also has side benefits such as increased Strength for breaking objects and bonds that aren't shown above. This is a good ability, but nearly worth 12 feats. It takes 5 feats to replicate the offensive, but you get to keep the ability all day. So that may be worth 3 feats. The extra hitpoints go away, so that would be worth more like 2 feats. The extra Will save is nice, but Iron Will is a generally worthless feat unless you are a Fighter with extra feats to throw away. Maybe 1 feat for that. And the Fighter is already going to have a Fort save that only missed on a 1, so the Great Fortitude isnt worth anything. Lets give having that extra strength 1 feat, so we are at 7 feats. Not 12 feats. Give the Uncanny Dodges, plus the skill points (which are easily made up by very cheap items) 1.5 feats, so we are at 14 feats. That is 14 feats, which is greater than the Fighter's 11 feats. But they are spread out amongst various different areas. And the Barbarian does not get to choose them. The fighter can carefully pick his 11 feats. He can make them work well together. And the total power of a class is not necessarily the sum of its parts. If I created a race and gave it a +4 Str & +2 Dex, you would probably have to give it a +1 Level Adjustment. But if I gave it +400 Str & +200 Dex, you cannot just say it is now worth a +100 Level Adjustment. Sure your 110th level character would do +292 Damage per strike and have a 105 AC in no armor, but he would only have about 100 hp. A 110th level fighter might have a DR bigger than this Goliath's hit points would be. My point is that the best way to rate the relative power of the Barbarian and Fighter is to see what they can do against enemies of around their CR. Just trying to compare their abilities to eachother is not going to work.
primemover003 04-05-07, 04:00 PM	Replace Great Fortitude with Steadfast Determination and you easily make up for the Will save bonus.
PhaedrusXY 04-05-07, 04:01 PM	but you get to keep the ability all day. Which really doesn't make one iota of difference 99% of the time. You can't fight all day. Noone can. You run out of hit points, healing spells, and die. And most combats only last a few rounds. I hardly ever see combats where a barbarian's rage runs out. I think I've seen one, to be exact. The fact that Rage is only useable a few times per day, and has a duration, would reduce it's value by about 1 feat, IMO. If you take Extend Rage and Extra Rage, it's as close to all day as you should ever need. I also don't agree that Great Fortitude is useless. A wizard can easily get an insane DC of 34 or more for his high level death spells. It's not something I'd take for a fighter, but it isn't useless.
Lotus Crane 04-05-07, 04:38 PM	My point is that the best way to rate the relative power of the Barbarian and Fighter is to see what they can do against enemies of around their CR. Just trying to compare their abilities to eachother is not going to work. And our point is that barbarians are better at that too. Not just with enemies, but other encounters too. Barbarians can deal with traps better than fighters, barbarians can deal with (most) skill situations better than fighters. And a lot of CR-appropriate enemies' special attacks fail against barbarians (sneak attack, dominate), but work just fine against fighters.
Deus_Proelii 04-11-07, 03:43 PM	This is all very interesting, but upon reading the text of Bounding Assault I find it very ambiguous. Yes, at the end it says you can use both attacks against one opponent or split it between them. But at the front of the Benefit section it states that you designate two foes rather than one. Which brings the question of how often are you going to find two foes both in a position for you to Bounding Assault them? Because even if you can use both attacks against one foe, the entry rather explicitly states you have to target two foes standing close enough to each other to be an eligible target.